The Sun.
London, England, 1862-01-22 00:00:00

COURT OF.ALILERIEN.

Yesterday a Court of Aldermen was held at
Guildhall, the Lord Mayor acting as chairman.
There was a numerous attendance of alderman. The
sheriffs reported that the number of prisoners at pre-
sent in the gaol of Newgate was 95 ; in the Debtors'
Prison,Whitecross-street, 91; and in Holloway ge.ol
365. Alderman and Col. Wilson presented a petition
from the gas meter manufacturers of London, pray-
ing the Court to take steps to resist the alleged en-
croachment of the Metropolitan Board of Works on
their trading interests as a body. He said the peti-
tion, with one exception, was signed by every meter
manufacturer of the city of London. It appeared
that by an act of last session the Metropolitan
Board claimed the right of stamping all meters in
the metropolis, but meter manufacturers, with one
exception, preferred that they should be stamped in
the city, and had expressed an opinion that the act
referred to did not include the city. The officers of
the Corporation had been in communication with
the Government on the subject, and the Lord
Mayor had received a reply, which he asked to have
read. This communication contained the written
opinion of the Attorney and Solicitor-General to
the effect that the Act 24 and 25 Vic., cap. 79, did
not transfer the powers of the city to the Metropo-
litan Board of Works. The petition was referred to
the General Purposes Committee. Mr. Alderman
Sidney, M.P., presented a petition from the inha-
bitants and traders of St. Mary-at-Hall and others
in the ward of Billingsgate, relative to the destruc-
tion to the traffic in that locality occasioned by fish
carts and barrows. This petition also, after some
discussion, was referred to the General Purposes
Committee, with instructions to take the opinion
of the Recorder as to the powers vested in the city
authorities for the regulation of the traffic. Mr.
Alderman Finnis presented a petition of certain
sworn brokers of the city of London, praying that
the admission of brokers by that Court might be
discontinued, together with the rules and regula-
tions now established. The petitioners maintained
that the rules were not only obsolete, but deroga-
tory to the city, and were condemned by the Royal
Commissioners in 1854. The petition was referred
to a committee to inquire generally into the whole
matter, and to report thereon. Mr. Alderman Sid-
ney then presented a petition, signed by a very
large number of sworn brokers and members of
the Stock Exchange, praying for an abolition of
the annual rent payable in respect of the office of
broker: The petition having been read, the Lord
Mayor said that, if he was right, that Court
could not deal with the revenues of the city ;
and he, therefore, put it to the worthy
alderman whether it would be wise to take
any course in reference to the matter. Mr. Al-
derman Copeland had no objection to this question
being mooted in the Court of Common Council, but
the Court of Aldermen certainly had no power
whatever to remit the tax. Mr, Alderman Sidney,
on the other hand, contended that the Court of
Aldermen, by an act of Edward 1., had power to
deal with the question independently olthe Court
of Common Council. The Lord Mayor again ex-
pressed his conviction that a question of revenue
could not be entertained by that Court. Mr. Alder-
man Sidney insisted that he was quite in order, and
from what he knew of the petitioners he believed
that if their memorial was rejected, instead of going
to the Court of Common Council they would go to
the House of Commons. He should take the sense
of the Court upon the question, and therefore moved
that the petition be referred to the General Pur-
poses Committee, to consider and report thereon.
Sir Henry Muggeridge secondbd the motion. The
Recorder expressed an opinion that the Court of
Aldermen had no power to deal with the revenues;
but it was open to the Court to do as they pleased
with the petition. Mr. Alderman Challis moved
as an amendment, "That the petition be received."
Upon a show of hands there appeared for the amend-
ment, 8 ; against it, 7. Whereupon a division was
demanded, when nine voted for and nine against
the amendment. The Lord Mayor then gave his
casting vote in favour of the amendment, which was
agreed to as an original motion. Mr. Alderman
Finnis moved that the petition be referred to the
General Purposes Committee, to which several alder-
men objected as being irregsiar. It was,
put to the Court, and lost by a large majority. The
Gaol Committee reported that they had considered
the duties end emoluments of the office of Governor
of the Debtors' Prison, Whitecross •street, and re-
commended that the salary be £2OO per annum, with
certain conditions. The report was agreed to, and
referred back to the committee to select candidates
for the office, and also to consider what altermi3lis
were necessary to be made in the gaol in consequence
of the diminished number of prisoners. Several re-
ports from the General Purposes Committee of an
unimportant character were brought up and agreed

to: Mr. Alderman Sidney moved " That it be re-
ferred to a committee of the whole Court to consider
as to the expediency of continuing the imposition
of the annual tax known as brokers' rents upon the
sworn brokers of this city, and likewise as to the
control exercised by this Court in relation to such
brokers, and to report thereon." Mr. Alderman
Copeland asked Mr. Alderman Sidney not to per-
sist in his motion. Mr. Alderman Sidney declined
to give way. Mr. Alderman Copeland then desired
that the Court should be counted, and, there not
being a sufficient number present, the proceedings
abruptly terminated.