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

HOUSE OF LORDS.—Last Evening.
The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the woolsack at
the usual hour.

PETITIONS.

The Marquis of NORMANBY said he had a notice on the
paper to present a petition from the Rev. Alfred Bishop,
on Monday, the 27th April, in reference to the petitioner's
son, now undergoing imprisonment in the fortress of Alex-
andria, but he wished to postpone its presentation until
Monday, the 4th of May.
Lord HARRO WBY presented a petition against the sale
of intoxicating liquors on Sunday.
Lord STANLEY of ALDERLEY :presented a petition
to the same effect.

LOCAL GOVERNMENT.
Lord STANLEY of ALDEttLEY moved the second
reading of the Local Government Act Amendment Bill.
14)rd CHELMSFORD weald not oppose the second
reading of the bill, but comment upon one or two points
in it,

A short discussion then took place, in which Lord Redes•
dale, Lord Egerton of Tatton, and Lord Stanley o
Alderiey joined, the bill was r, ad.

METROPOLITAN RAILWAY SCHEMES.
Lord KINNAIRD, in the place of Lord. Ebury, moved for
a copy of the report upon metropolitan railway schemes
made to the Metropolitan Board of Works by their engineer;
and that the same be referred to the select committee now
sitting upon those undertakings.
The house rose at twenty-five minutes past five.

HOUSE OF COMMONS—Last Evening,
The SPEAKER took the chair at four o'clock.
THIRD READINGS.

The following bills were read a third time and passed :
Busby Railway, Ely Valley Extension Railway, Furness
Railway Company and Barrow Harbour Commissioners,
London and South-Western Railway, and Whitehaven,
Cleator, and Egremont Railway,
SECOND READINGS.
The following bills were read a second time :—Edin-
burgh Water, and Greenock and Wemyss Bay Railway,
The Rusthall Manor Bill Was considered and ordered to
be read a third time.

LONDON AND SOUTH WESTERN BILL.
On the motion of Mr. R. MILLS the third reading of this
bill was postponed until to-morrow.

PETITIONS,
By Sir J. DUKE and Mr. NORRIS, from wards in the City
of Loudon, against the amalgamation of the City with the
Metropolitan police; Col. Snas, from thsWorking Men's
Temperance Society of Aberdeen, against the sale of in-
toxicating liquors on the Sabbath ; Mr. BLACK, from
Edinburgh, in favour of the independence of Poland ;
Mr. J. N. POWELL, from Gloucester, against the Writs
Prohibition Bill; Mr. WHITE, from Brighton, in favour of
the Innkeepers' Liability Bill ; Lord J. IVlA.Nrizas, from
Lutterworth, Derbyshire, to the like effect.
LORD CHANCELLOR'S BENEFICES.
On the motion of Mr. HADFIELD, a return of the names of
the several benefices in the gift of the Lord Chancellor of the
value of £3OO a year or under, the number of the population
of each parish or place according to the census of 1861, and
the yearly income of each such benefice during each of the
last five years, was ordered.

AU. YNOOTH.
Mr. WHALLEY gave notice of his intention this day
month to move, in a committee of the whole house, that the
annual grant to Maynooth be repealed. (Cheers and
laug.)

THE TAX ON INCOMES.
Mr. ROEBUCK gave notice of his intention, when the
Chancellor of the Exchequer's proposition with respect to
the income tax was next before the house, to move a reso-
lution to the effect that the tax on precarious should be
lower than that on permanent incomes. (Hear, hear.)
DONATIONS AND BEQUESTS (IRELAND).
Mr. HASSARD gave notice that on a future day he
should call attention to the state of the law with respect to
donations and bequests in Ireland, and propose that the
laws relating to them be assimilated to that in force in Eng-
land.

PRISONS MINISTERS BILL.
Sir L. PALK gave notice of his intention to propose an
amendment to clause 3.
INDIA—SIAM.
In reply to Sir J. HAY,
Sir C. WOOD said there was no objection on the part
of the Secretary to the Admiralty, the Secretary of State
for India, and the Under Secretary of State for Foreign
Affairs, to lay all the available eorrespondence on the
table of the house.

BRILLpARLT A NIPNT :of revenue, and because these was a large number
of per-
sons whose connection with those lands made them directly
interested in the prudent management of then,. Those
lands formed the subject of a compact with the crown, who,
in return for the civil list, had made over to the public the
net revenue of the property, after paying the cost of their
management, The system under which the lands were
administered was one strictly defined by law. This pro-
perty had been always admininistered by commissioners
appointed for that purpose. The union of Woods and
Works had proved upon experiment to be a failure, and
was abandoned in the year 1851, When the two offices
were separated. The act for effecting this separation
became law in 1851, and the Prime Minister of
the day, when introducing the nteasnre, stated that
it was intended to remedy certain evils which had
arisen under the joint system. The evils were chiefly
these ; that large and expensive public works were under-
taken, which cost more than was convenient to propose
for the sanction of Parliament, and the requisite funds had
to be provided by casting the cost upon the Crown lands,
thereby having the effect of lessening the revenue de-
rived from them, and of keeping the particulars from the
public view. The best proof that could be given of the
management of those lands under the new system was
the sustained and progressive value of them; for it appeared
that they had increased from £301,000 in 1851 to £370,000
in 1862. The conselidatfon of the Crown property had been
carried out to the advantage of the Crown by the difference
between £ll,OOO and £27,000 annually. The expenditure
had not increased, for the gross receipts had increased pari
passu with the expenditure. He examined the different
large items of expenditure, which he said were outlays bene-
ficial to the property. If this were private property, instead
of spending the annual income, as was now the case, the
owner would rather borrow money and charge the estate
with an annuity for the advance ; but inasinuel as the civil
list and Crown lands would always be arranged on the bases
on which they now stand, it was a matter of indifference
whether the advances were from the revenue of the country
or whether they used the Crown property, as in either case
they would receive a fair interest on the outlay. He referred
to the acreage of the Crown lands, part of which had been
enclosed and planted with oaks, in consequence of the fears
that were entertained some time since that there would be a
scarcity of timber for the Royal Navy, and was now a source
of profit over expenditure. He defended the expenditure of
the office, and in conclusion urged that a committee of in-
quiry was unnecessary, and that it was undesirable to re-
unite the Office of Woods and Forests with the Office of
Works. Full and satisfactory accounts of the departments
were annually presented to Parliament.
Mr. CAIRD said that, having perused Mr. Gore's report,
he was of opinion that a great improvement had taken place
in the improvement of the Crown estates, highly satisfac-
tory to the public, It was impossible to expect that the
Crown lands could be as beneficially managed as private
property.
The motion was then negatived without a division,
THE AMALGAMATION OF THE CITY AND THE
METROPOLITAN POLICE.
Sir G. GREY rose to ask leave to introduce a bill for
the amalgamation of the City of London and the Metro-
politan police. The motion was by no means a new one,
nor was it one which ought to be made without a great deal
of consideration ; but the fact was that both commissions
and committees had frequently reported on the subject, and
with a remarkable unanimity of opinion; and no doubt that
unanimity of opinion originated in the very limited area
over which the corporation of the City of London exercised
jurisdiction, when the area of that jurisdiction was put in
comparison with the boundaries of the metropolis at large.
And he was anxious to say, at the outset, that his present
proposal was not founded mainly upon the proceedings of
the 7th of March last. It was not a penal measure, directed
against the City of London on account of any misconduct
imputed to them upon that occasion ; although the events
of that day showed, undoubtedly, a great want of order,
and great mismanagement, as well as a very inadequate
appreciation on the part of the City authorities of the emer-
gency that was likely to arise. They showed, moreover,
an over• confidence on the part of the corporation in their
own means of maintaining order, and that the conclusions
of the commissions and the committees to which he had just
adverted were not founded upon a merely imaginary theory.
And having before him the conclusions of those commis-
sions and committees, he must say that if the motion of the
hon. and gallant member for Westminster (Sir De L. Evans)
had been brought forward, it would have been impossible
for him to have dissented from it. Under those circum-
stances, the best course for the Government to take was to
deal at once with the subject by bill, rather than await the
decision of the house upon an abstract resolution. The dif-
ference between the corporation of the City of London and
other corporations were very clearly pointed out by the com-
missioners of 1853, and none of the commissioners, he
might remark, were men likely to disregard popular rights.
At the same time it was due to the City of London that he
should call attention to the opinion of the commissioners—
namely, that, while they drew a comparison between the
corporation of the City of London and other corporations
before the passing of the Municipal Corporation Act, they
thought that the great defect inherent in those other cor-
porations—namely of power and authority being vested ex.
•
elusively in a few—did not exist in the corporation of the
City of London, which had been distinguished at all times
by the predominance of the popular element. (Hear, hear.)
For that no doubt the corporation of London was entitled to
credit. Before the passing of the Municipal Corporation
Act, the corporations of Liverpcol, Bristol, and several other
ancient corporations, were to a certain extent similarly cir-
cumstanced as the corporation of London, in regard of the
comparatively limited area of their respective towns, over
which they exercised jurisdiction. However, by the Muni-
cipal Corporation Act, a change was effected in their boun-
daries,
although none was brought about in those of the
City of London. Now, it appeared from returns before the
Corporation Commission of 1853 that at that date the popu•
lation of the City of London was 125,158; while, by the
last census, it appeared that the population had diminished
to 112,063. On the other hand, the population of the sur-
rounding districts within the control of the metropolitan
police was not less than 3,110,654 ; and while the area of
the City was between 11 and 11 square miles, that of the
surrounding districts under the metropolitan police was 700
square miles. And here he might observe that it was quite
impossible that the proposals applicable to the City of Lon-
don could be applied with any show of reason to other cor-
porations. The corporation of London was once the corpo-
ration of the whole metropolis ; but now-a-days the area of
the metropolis had far outgrown the limits of the City, so
that the corporation of London was simply an anomaly.
The City was not included in the Police Bill introduced by
Sir Robert Peel in 1829, because it was admitted that the
watchmen of the City were more efficient than the watch-
men outside its walls ; while, at the same time, it was de-
clai ed that the bill of 1829 was only an experiment. But
the commission of 1837 having raised the question how far
an amalgamation of the City and Metropolitan police was
desirable, in the following year a committee of that house,
which included Sir R. Peel and Mr. Hume, was appointed
to investigate the subject, and the result of their delibera-
tions was a decided and a unanimous report in favour of 1
amalgamation. That was in 1838, up to which time no step
had been taken for the improvement of the City police ; but,
after the report of the commissioners of 1838, a bill was in-
troduced for the establishment of the City police on the
same footing as the Metropolitan. The bill for the improve..
ment of the police force had been brought in by Lord John
Russell, and contained 19 special clauses for the separation
of the City police; but ultimately the bill was passed with
those 10 clauses struck out. On the day, however, on which
the bill received the Royal assent, another bill embodying
those 10 clauses had been carried. Then came the City
commission of 1854. The police question was expressly re-
ferred to that commission, and they examined a large num-
ber of official and other important witnesses, amongst whom
was the late able Commissioner of the City Police, Mr.
Daniel Whittle Harvey. The commissioners in their report
came to the conclusion that the preponderance of evidence
was greatly in favour of the two forces not being kept sepa-
rate. These inquiries resulted in the same opinion being
expressed; and the weight of authority in favour of a mea-
sure proposed to that house had seldom, if ever, been ex-
ceeded. Mr. Harvey's evidence, though given under a na..
tural restraint,went throughout to show the inconvenience,
if not the absurdity, of the existing system. It appeared
that the diAinctions Were so curiously made,that sometimes
One side of a street would be in the City jurisdiction and
the other side in the Metropolitan, and in one case a
certain spot was in one jurisdiction at high water, and
in the other at low water. Those, however, were
but minor inconveniences. He was bound to say,
that since the establishment of the City police the two
bodies had worked together on a perfectly good un-
derstanding. That harmony, however, might have been
of the head largely oeting to judicious choicecommissioners.
That harmony might not always prevail,s a
collision oc-
curequally good selec.
I
tions might not always be made, and
should
could
City,
cur it would be a very serious matter. (Hear.)
the number of the men was so small, that they
I n
the
not
concentrated on a particular spot without leaving other
er
points unprotected. That remark did not apply
__
Metropolitan force. On the 7th of March the City police
were almost lost in the crowds of people, and many persons
in the City never saw a policeman the whole day. In the
Metropolitan Police Act there was power to send the police
into the City of London, if the Lord Mayor so requested ;
but if—as on the 7th of March—no such request were made,
then the Metropolitan police could not enter the City. He
meant no reflection on the Lord Mayor on that account. It
only went to show that a man who held office merely for a
year was not so likely to understand what ought to be done
on such an occasion as one of longer experience. He might
be asked, " Why was that bill brought in now ?" His answer
was that the natural result of the evidence was that an ami-
cable union of the two forces was desirable. With regard to
personal communication with the City officials, he had
always been entertained in the beat and most courteous man-
ner, and he trusted the City gentlemen, when they visited
him, had left with a similar impression. Still, whenever
the Government had brought forward any measure calcu-
lated in the least degree to touch their privileges, their com-
bined power of resistance was something remarkable.
(Hear and laughter.) It was a very singular fact that a body
so wealthy and hospitable as the corporation of London
should so steadily oppose a measure of improvement.
There were now in the house four members of Parliament
For the City, besides which there were the Lord Mayor