The Sun.
London, England, 1863-04-22 00:00:00

ansatd
foserveortahleraldperlaniceens. andlt o,rthaesr functionaries
sat
to know that there would be a compact body to pro-
tect the privileges of the citiaens, (Hear, hear.) To
show what sort of opposition the City had been accustomed
to bring to bear, he need only refer the house to the evidence
of Mr. Rogers, given before the commission he had alluded
to. Tbat gentleman stated that when Lord Melbourne in-
troduced the bill of 1838, the City petitioned the house, but
the Minister of the day was silent. They then addressed the
Throne, but though they received a gracious answer, they
knew well it meant nothing. They then planted their town
clerk in Palace-yard, and instructed him to communicate
and, if possible, to co-operate with every corporation in the
kingdom, with a view to defeat the measure. That sort of
tactics, however, might be repeated too often and persevered
in too long. All he should ask of the house was whether
they thought it for the safety and welfare of the metropolis
that the present state of things should continue ? With one
exception, the corporation had successfully resisted every
attempt at reform or improvement. That, exception was the
removal of Smithfield Market, to which, nevertheless, there
had been great opposition. Much as the munificence and
hospitality of the City of London were to be admired, he
thought the events of last March clearly showed that some
change was necessary, and under those circumstances he
had felt it his duty to bring in the bill. It had first occurred
to him that the required object might be attained by the
Secretary of State having power given hini, to send the
police into the City; but on reflection it seemed that colli-
sions of authority might occur, which would be vary incon-
venient. He therefore submitted the bill in its present form,
and would not name a very early day for the second read-
ing, so that it might be well and carefully considered.
Mr. CRAWFORD said it was a very unusual thing to
oppose the introduction of a bill, especially when brought
in by a member of the Government. He would be pre-
pared to discuss the general principle of the bill on the
motion for the second reading, when he would feel it his
duty to move that it be road a second time on that day six
months. He would do no more on the present occasion
than express a hope that they wouldjhave a full discussion,
and he had no fear of the result.
Mr. Alderman SIDNEY referred to the statement of the
Home Secretary, and asked how it came to pass, if the re-
ports quoted by the right hon. gentleman had been hostile
to the introduction of a police force for the City, that after
the production of such reports the police force should be
established in the City as it now existed ? That force had
been established in 1839, and he thought it was the best
answer which could be given to the reports brought forward
by the right hon. gentleman as the groundwork of his bil:.
He could not help expressing great surprise that, after 24
years, the authorities of the City of London should be put
on the defensive with respect to the internal government of
their city. He was desirous of knowing the grounds upon
which municipal rights were to be taken from the City, and
he was also desirous of putting persons upon their guard,
lest they should suppose that this bill would affect the City
of London only. There was another great objection to the
bill, and it was this, that it would entail additional expense
upon the ratepayers ; for while one-fourth of the cost of the
police of the metropolitan districts was paid ow, of the Con-
solidated Fund, the City paid the entire cost of its police. But
under this bill the whole cost of the police would be thrown
upon the ratepayers. (Hear, hear.) Much stress was laid
upon the statement that the population of the City was only
112,000; but it was altogether a mistake to estimate the
population of the City by the number of persons who slept in
it. There was every reason to believe that half a million of
people did business in the City daily ; but in whatever way
they estimated the population, the fact remained that the
property of the City of London was threefold greater than
the property of any district of the metropolis of the same
extent. The hon. gentleman next adverted to several
Royal and civic processions which had taken place in
ancient times in the City of London, and charged the
Home Secretary with the whole blame of the unfortunate
occurrence of the 7th of May for not permitting the Lord
Mayor and his brethren to form in the Borough, and pre-
cede the Royal procession the entire way. The right hon.
gentleman the Home Secretary had referred to the demon-
stration in the City ; but he (Mr. Alderman Sidney) could
not help thinking the present bill was an unworthy return
for that demonstz ation. (Hear.) The streets of London were
peculiarly inappropriate for illuminations, yet millions of
people paraded them that night. It was to be regretted that
several deaths occurred through some panic; and Govern-
ment were much to blame in allowing the illuminations.
The Metropolitan Police were unable to carry out their in-
structions ; and why, he asked, had no inquiry taken place
into their conduct. (Hear.) A more lamentable failure of the
carrying out of the regulations adopted by the Metropolitan
Commissioner of Police had never occurred than on that
night. That no lives were lost was a perfect miracle ; and
that miracle arose from the fact that the carriages could not
move in the streets. (Loud laughter.) If the right hon.
gentleman were successful in carrying this measure, its pro-
visions must be extended to all large municipal towns,
which would be inconsistent with the principle of local self-
government. The bill was mischievous and uncalled for,
and contrary to the constitution of the country. (Hear.)
The LORD MAYOR said a more unconstitutional pro-
position had never been brought forward. A police was
essentially a local force, and he fearlessly asserted that the
City police were in every respect very superior to the Me-
tropolitan force. Robberies accompanied with violence
in the daytime were of frequent occurrence in the me-
tropolitan districts, but it was not the case in the City.
Indeed, if they were to occur with any frequency within
the City, the head of the police force would speedily be dis-
missed, and replaced by a more efficient and competent
person. the City police were in a most efficient state. A
record was kept by them of every person who passed
through the City daily—(hear, hear, and laughter)—and
there was scarcely a thief that was not known to them
and his haunts well ascertained. He instanced the captures
of notorious commercial criminals, that had of late years
been apprehended in the city and brought to justice, and
had received their due amount of punishment. He urged
that if the question of precedence in the Royal procession
had been ceded to the corporation nothing would have
occurred to mar the successful termination of the day's pro-
ceedings. He considered it was ungrateful on the part of
the Government that, after the corporation of London had
expended a large sum of money, and given that which no
other city in the world could give, their local self-govern.
ment should be attacked. (Hear,) The proposal, if carried

cent meetings that the Home Secretary would be made to
pay a heavy penalty for having introduced the bill, and that
it would be better for the lame of an hon. and gallant mem-
ber if he had died thirty years ago. (Laughter.) He could
only say for himself that he was not intimidated by the
threats of the hon. member for Stafford at the next election,
even though he should bring his men in armo it with him.
Mr. BOVILL said the sentiments expressed by thenoble
lord presented a strong contrast to the course pursued by
her Majesty's Government; for if ever there was a time
when generosity should be shown to the City of London, it
was the present. The bill would be met with the strongest
resistance, and he only hoped the right hon. baronet would
act upon the suggestion he had thrown out that he would
not propose the second reading for a long time, and that he
would save save the hon. member for the City the necessity
of moving that the bill be read a second time that day six
months by postponing the second reading for six
months. (Hear, hear, and laughter.) There were many
persons who did not approve of having the Metro-
politan police under the authority of a Minister of
the Crown; and the right hon. gentleman who introduced
this measure was unable to state one ordinary instance in
which the City police had failed in their duty. The 7th of
March was an exceptional occasion, and it was not just in
the Government, who were largely responsible for the ar-
rangements which took place, to fix the whole blame upon
the corporation. The best proof that the bill was not de-
sired by the people of the metropolis was that not a single
petition ia its favour was presented. (Hear, hear.) If this
bill passed into a law, there were nothing to prevent the
Home Secretary from coming down next session with a hl)`
for appointing paid magistrates, and superseding the LoH
Mayor and aldermen. The hon, and learned gentlemen en-
tered at some length into a variety of arguments to prove
the efficiency of the City police; the confidence that is re-
posed in them by the owners of immense property ; the great
tact and ingenuity exhibited by them in pursuing fraudulent
bankrupts and in apprehending runaway debtors, and con-
cluded by saying he would reserve further opposition until
a future stage. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. HIBBERT oppposed the bill as being another at-
tempt at centralisation. He thought it would be better if
some arrangement were made, giving the Secretary of State
power, without the requisition of the Lord Mayor, to send
metropolitan police into the City in cases of emergency.
Mr. AYRTON said he felt sure the house had not failed
to observe the wide difference there was between the corpo-
ration of London and the City. They were two things, per-
fectly distinct from one another. The hon. member for the
City of London had expi essed an opinion on the question
different from that expressed by members of the corporation
who did not represent the City, and that, he said, was a re-
markable index of the true character of the question, which
he should be able more fully to explain when the question
had to be further debated, 'He felt certain that when it
came on for more serious discussion practical considera-
tions would prevail over that array of the reminiscences of
the past in which the corporation had indulged. (Hear.)
He was a strenuous supporter of local self-government and
greatly opposed to centralisation ; and if he thought that
this bill contemplated the semblance of an invasion of that
principle, he would have opposed it at that stage. (Hear,
hear.) After due consideration and deliberation he had
come to the conclusion that his views with reference to a
general administration of the affairs of the metropolis by
one body were wrong and impracticable; but he believed it
was desirable and expedient that there should be but one
police administration. He criticised and condemned the
conduct of the corporation on questions of great importance,
and said that the proposed alteration was essentially of a
local character, and had nothing in common with other cor-
porations, districts, and police jurisdictions--(hear)—and
the only way in which he could account for the course pur-
sued by the City in reference to this bill was that they could
practise on small corporate towns delusions which had no
foundation in fact. (Hear, hear.) The more the question
bwas a
pdpi sr ce
eu st
asteedd,
by
hye t mh
eo r
inhabitantse h e
of i ttsh re el I e
tmr
eepr
ei tlsi w;o
aunl
dd
that they would fully understand that whatever police force
was good enough for them was good enough for those who
live in the City of London, (Hear, hear.) The corporation
of London would be acting wore in accordance with their
charter, and in support of the liberty of the subject, if they
ceased their objections to these useful and necessary altera-
tions, and assisted hon. members to carry them into effect.
Sir H. STRACEY considered that the Home Secretary
was the person who was really responsible for the state of
the City on the 7th March. The proposed change, he con-
sidered, would place too much power in the hands of the
Commissioner of Police, and make a kind of Fouche of him.
(Hear, hear.) He objected to the proposed interference
with the rights and privileges of the corporation, and he

should oppose the bill.
Mr. Sergeant PIGOTT differed from the opinion that
this bill would at all interfere with the local self-government
of corporations. It was a bill to place under one manage.

merit the police of one town. (Hear, hear.)

Sir H. BRUCE said it was a most inopportune moment
For bringing in this bill. Ha could not see how the house

could pass such a measure without a most unpleasant feel
ing springing up between the City and the Royal family.

Sir J. SHELLEY would have much more confidence in

the devotion of the corporation of the City of London to the

principle of local self-government if, upon past occasions
when opportunity offered for the principle being extended
to other divisions of the metropolis, the corporation had
come forward to advocate such extension—but they had
never done anything of the kind. As soon as their own
privileges were secured, they were silent with i espect to
those of others. (Hear.) Putting aside the question of
patronage—and every one knew that it lay at the bottom
of the whole controversy—no one would be found contend-

ing that, as far as the inefficiency of the police was con-
cerned, that efficiency could not be much promoted by a
union of the two forces under one head. What they ought
to have was one great municipality for the whole of Lon-
don ; and then, of course, there would follow, as the natural
consequences, one police for the metropolis at large.
(Rear, hear.)
Sir G. GREY, in reply, declared that no one could be
more sensible than he was of the exceeding loyalty of the
demonstration made by tha City of London, on the ocoa-
sion of the entry of the Prince and Princess of Wales. It
had been his gratifying duty to express to the Lord Mayor,
on the part of her Majesty, the deep sense which her Ma-
jesty entertained of the loyalty displayed on the occasion.
But one could not help seeing that, out of respect for
such conduct on the part of the corporation, the Govern.
ment ought not to be debarred from the introduction of a
measure which was demanded by public convenience. He
had not stated that this bill was proposed without any
reference to the events of March 7th. What he
had said was that it had not been proposed
mainly or exclusively in consequence of those events.
And with regard to those events, he must say that the cor-
poration ought to have known that great crowds were likely
to be attracted into the City, as well by the decorations of
London-bridge and elsewhere as by the civic procession,
and therefore precautionary measures ought to have been
taken beforehand to guard against such occurrences as
actually took place. Indeed, he might remind the Lord
Mayor that, from the beginning to the end of the commu-

would he the adoption of the foreign police system, and
would be the means of placing a force of 10,000 armed men
at the disposal of the Home Secretary. He would resist
the proposed measure throughout its stages. (Hear.)
Mr. NORRIS opposed the motion for the introduction
of the bill. The hon. member laid before the house certain
statistical information which he alleged had an important
bearing upcn the subject. The average cost of the city po-
lice was £79 Is. 7d. per man, while that of the Metropolitan
police was £7B 3s. 2d., the cost of the county constabulary
being £7B 10s. ; so that the difference of cost between the
City and the Metropolitan police, as to which so much had

been heard, was under 19s. per man. And then, although
the resident population of the City might only amount to
112,000, it was a fact that nearly 1,000,000 of people retired
from the City each evening to sleep in the country, who
left property behind them to an enormous amount in charge

nications between them, it was clearly understood that her
Majesty's sanction was also given to the proposed arrange-
ments on the condition that the most effectual means should
be taken by the City authorities for the preservation of
order. Assurances were given that such means would be

_
of the City police.
Sir G. BOWYER, as an independent member, was de-
termineol to offer the bill every opposition ; indeed, he could

have wished that it was consistent with etiquette to reject

Laken, but he was sorry to say that they were not fulfilled

so obnoxious a proposal even at that early stage. With re-

What he found fault with was that there was no directing

Bard to the inconveniences at the late procession, he be-

head, no controlling authority, to supervise the arrange

lieved they were chiefly owing to her Majesty's Govern-
ment, in having confined the chief portion of the proces-

ments in the City on that great occasion, and to produce
unity and harmony of action. There were no doubt great

sion to the City itself. This caused everybody to crowd to
that part of the town. Had it been properly distributed be-

crowds in the City; but, as every one knew, there were
great crowds along the whole line of the procession, to the
westward of Temple-bar, and yet there the most complete
order was kept, owing to the admirable arrangements of
Sir Richard Mayne. He felt confident if the City police
had likewise been under the coatrol of Sir Richard Mayne,
that equal order would have been kept to the eastward of
Temple-bar. (Hear, hear.)
Leave was then given to introduce the bill.
LAND DRAINAGE.
Mr. BRUCE obtained leave to introduce a bill to con-
firm certain provisional orders under the Land Drainage
Act (1861),

tween the Bricklayer's Arms and the Great Western Rail-
way Station, there would have been comparatively no pres-

sure at any point. Instead of that, however, owing to the
restrictions imposed by the Government, the procession be-
yond Temple Bar consisted of nothing but six carriages and
a few soldiers. (Hear.) He would ask the house, and even
the Government themselves, whether a large portion of the
blame did not belong to the Government for all that had

recently occurred, and afterwards ha would ask whether

,hat was a good reason for their bringing forward a bill

of pains and penalties like the present, which he should

most certainly oppose. The bill, too, was extremely ill-
timed, after the City of London had recently done all they
_ _

could to show their loyalty and love for the Pi incess and
the Prince of Wales, both by munificent presents and by
the grand reception prepared for them.
Lord A. PAGET thought that up to that time the City
of London had certainly had the best of it, and ho should be
sorry to interrupt the harmony ; but he must say, he did

_ .
not think the bill had been brought forward in consequence
of what had occurred on the memorable 7th of March.

He should much regret that anything which had occurred
that day should lead to the House of Commons being
made the battle-field of a contest with the corporation,
because, no doubt, the reception then given had been most
magnificent. He was quite certain that it had been very
gratifying to the Prince and Princess of Wales, to the
Royal personages who accompanied them, and to our be•
loved Queen herself, whose long and unsullied reign had
doubtless more than all called forth that splendid reception.
(Hear.) It was not for him to be the exponent of her Ma-
jesty's feelings, but he was proud to say he ha I served her
for 20 of the best years of his life, ant he knew that no
one could appreciate better than her Majesty the univer-
sal sympathy that had been shown to her, and the loyalty
of her people. (Hear, hear.) He should be sorry to inter-
fere with the privileges of the City. Their hospitality had
become famous throughout the world. He had himself

verywas he that the police
• cod however,
(Laughter.) So convinced, mighto fstaeyn e:vpo eurl ide n cperde
ta nhd
m he
frhoomp e denjoying
o tiht
again
he
ain.
uofndthere
all handed over to the
o
other way, he would prefer to see it
onem e t
sr
uo pp: lriisn ot
eungdhetn,
cfeb,r: t
ht haat
,publicc
osue
lcdu
notri ty ,
bteo
dboenpel ascne
any
City than under two different heads. He found
hfreomwhtohlee
be
nt ut
iere bookforeefu, furnished by
wereby theonl
only
t 72 y that
men
left
tt
to
of
kGeoeBpptol ice, the
distance from London Bridge to Temple-bar. And, as he
said on a former occasion, the non-occurrence of a serious
accident was due more to the good humour of the people
than the goud management of the City. The hon. member
for Stafford (Mr. Alderman Sidney) had threatened them
all with the terrors of the next election if they voted for this
, bill. It was said by some members of the corporation at re-

Tilt SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY EVENING, APRIL 22, Ha

HEALTH OF LONDON.

(From the Registrar-General's Weekly Return)

The deaths in London in the week that ended on
Saturday were 1,437. This number shows a decrease
on that of the previous week, which was 1,610, but
is still unusually high for the middle of April. The
average number of deaths obtained from the re-
turns of a week in each of the last ten years cor-
responding with last week, and corrected for an
increasing population, is 1,283. The excess in the
present return therefore amounts to 154.
The deaths of old people were clearly less nu-
merous last week than those contained in many
previous returns. In the last week of February the
total deaths were 1,440, an amount which is almost
the same as that which is now returned, while the
proportions at different ages vary in a considerable
degree. The deaths under 20 years of age have
risen from 712 in that week to 766 in last week, and
those Oyears and upwards have decreased from
313 to 222.. The complaints which chiefly attack
children appear to prevail more. Small-pox was
fatal in 42 cases in the last week of Feb., but in
the present return the number is 62 ; measles has
increased from 36 to 56; scarlatina from 68 to 86;
whooping-cough from 54 to 71. The deaths from
typhus were 67 last week.
Eighteen of the 62 cases of small-pox occurred
at 20 years of age, and upwards. This disease
caused 5 deaths in the subdistrict of St. John,
Westminster, and 5 in Poplar. Measles was re-
turned in 5 cases in the sub-district of St. James,
Bermoadsey, 4 in St. Peter, Walworth, and 8 in
Chelsea. Scarlatina numbered ten deaths in Isling-
ton, 4 in Limehouse, 6 in St. Peter, Walworth.

A domestic servant (female), aged 29 years, died
at 64, Star-street, Paddington, from " chloroform
administered for an operation." (Inquest.) The
widow of a bricklayer, aged 78 years, was found dead
on the 10th inst. at 47, Little George-street, Somers-
town, from " exhaustion from want of the common
necessaries of life." (Inquest.) An apprentice sea-
man, aged 16 years, died without medical attend-
ance from " sea sickness and nervous fever."
Of six nonagenariim widows whose deaths are
recorded, two had attained the ages respectively of
95 and 96 years.

Last week the births of 1,052 boys and 1,028
girls, in all 2,080 children, were registered in Lon-
don. In the ten corresponding weeks of the years
1853-62 the average number (corrected) is 1,977.
At the Royal Observatory, Greenwich, the mean
height of the barometer in the week was 29.877 in.
The reading was 29.74 in. on Sunday, and rose to
30.13 in. on Saturday. The mean temperature of
the air in the week was 50.6 deg., which is 4.9
deg. above the average of the same week in
43 years (as determined by Mr Glaisher). The mean
daily temperature was above the average through-
out the week. The lowest night temperature was
36.8 deg., which occurred on Tuesday and Wednes-
day. The highest day temperature was 67.7 deg.,
on Thursday. The difference between the mean
dewpoint temperature and air temperature was 5.8
deg. The mean degree of humidity of the air was
81, complete saturation being represented by 100.
The wind blew generally from the north-east. The
amount of rain was only 0.02 in. The mean of the
highest temperatures of the Thames was 54.3 deg.;
the mean of the lowest 52.3 deg.