The Sun.
London, England, 1865-01-20 00:00:00

THE ROYAL RECEPTION COMMITTEE.

At the time of reappointing this committee, •
Mr. FULLER said the medal commemorative of the visit
of the Prince and Princess of Wales to the city would be
shortly delivered to the present members of the Court of
Common Council, and that they would not be delivered to
any of those who were members of the Court at the time
the royal visit was paid but who had since ceased to form
part of the corporation.
Mr. ROWE thought this a strange resolution on the part
of the Reception Committee, because as well might they
give a medal to a raw recruit who had never been in an en-
gagement as give one to a member of the Court who was
not in the Council at the period of the Royal visit. (A
laugh.) '
Mr. FULLER said the resolution of the committee would
be adhered to, for the number of the medals ordered cor-
responded exactly with the number of the members of the
Council, and not ono more a ould be forwarded. Mori:Over,
when the medal was struck the die would be handed over
to the Town Clerk to be placed among similar articles in the
Guildhall.

FIRE AT THE COAL EXCHANGE.

Mr. Deputy BONE said that no doubt the members would
be anxious to know something of the fire which had taken
place the night before at the Coal Exchange. (H ear, hear.)
He happened to be there at the time it broke out, and he
remained until it was extinguished. A report had been
made by Mr. J. R. Scott, the clerk and registrar, to the
effect that the fire had originated in a sleeping room at the
top of the Exchange, in the occupation of a Mrs. Gardner,
who kept the refreshment department in the building, but
that how it,was occasioned could not be ascertained. There
was destruction caused to one large room, serious damage
to two others, damage also to the ceilings of three offices,
and to the committee room, and a portion of the glass roof
was also damaged. The estimate of the damage was that
it would not exceed £550, and the building was insured to
the extent of £20,000. (Hear, hear.)
RAILWAY SCHEMES IN ST. SEPULCHRE'S PARISH.
A petition was presented from the inhabitants of the
parish of St. Sepulchre, in public meeting assembled, pray-
ing the Court to oppose the London, Chatham, and Dover
Railway Company, and the London, Chatham, and Dover
Railway and London and South-Western Railway Com-
panies Bills in Parliament, and setting forth that, if the
schemes of these companies were carried out in St. Sepul-
chre's parish, 200 houses there would be destroyed.
Mr. H. L. TAYLOR moved that this petition be ordered to
lie upon the table, and stated it seemed unaccountably
strange to him that the rich parish of St. Sepulchre should
ask the Court to do what ought to be done by the parishioners
themselves. He called upon the corporation to recollect
that they had squandered thousands of pounds last year by
acceding to applications of this description. If now again
they were to oppose railway bills in Parliament to what
would it lead, and where would the expense end? If once
they retained counsel they would have to employ them, and
then, at the end of the session, the particulars of :all the
charges would be furnished. Farringdon Ward always
wanted everything they could obtain ; but the time had
arrived when they should be told that if they wanted to op-
pose railway schemes they must do so out of their own
pockets. If any real interference with the city were
threatened, then let the Council show themselves ; but let
them not, at the bidding of St. Sepulchre's, which would
involve an outlay of thousands of pounds. If this petition
were received how could other parishes be prevented from
making similar applications ? He had no doubt that the
committee of last year regretted the enormous expense in-
curred in fighting the Parliamentary battles, and he was
anxious that no other committee should be placed in a simi-
lar dilemma this year.
Mr. STEWART reminded the Court that they had opposed
the railway schemes last year at the earnest request of the
bankers and merchants of London, who came before the
natural custodians of the rights of the city, which the cor-
poration were, and asked that they should do so. He hoped
the parishioners of St. Sepulchre would at all events be now
treated with respect.
Mr. HARTRIDGE said there was nothing too hot or too
heavy for the London, Chatham, and Dover Company to
undertake, and that the petition ought in fairness to be sent
to a committee to consider and report.
Mr. LAWLEY was in favour of the reception of the peti-
tion, believing that the Court ought always to be approach-
able by any of their fellow-citizens who had a grievance to
complain of.
Mr. Deputy SCAMELL also supported it ; and
After some discussion, in which Mr. Deputy Lott, Mr.
Deputy De Jersey, and Mr: Philipps took part, the petition
was referred to the Law and Parliamentary Committee.