The Sun.
London, England, 1854-01-19 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, THURSDAY EVENI,N,GI JANUARY 19, 1854,

the other duty. I believe the corporation considers the
4d. duty as its. property.
Mr. Tyrrell—lt always has been so considered.
The Chairman--And yet that duty is contributed to
by the whole metropolis for 20 miles round.
Mr. Tyrrell—Yes.
The Chairman—l believe your general rule is to watch
any bill in Parliament which you think will unduly in-
fluence the rights and privileges of the corporation ?
Mr. Tyrrell—lt is.
The Chairman—And I believe you pursued that course
with respect to the Charitable Trusts Btll ?
Mr. Tyrrell—No ; the corporation did not oppose the
passing of the Charitable Trusts Bill, nor did it apply to
have any alteration made in it. It is not true that I
applied to have a clause introduced into this bill. The
Lord Chancellor, it is true, of his own accord made a
distinction as to jurisdiction (in the 38th clause) between
charities under 301. a year in the City and the same
class of charities outside of the City. Charities of 301.
and under were to be subject to the county courts in
other parts of the country, but in the City the bill pro-
vided that they should be subject to the Court of Chan-
cery in the ordinary way. That was a distinction which
the City neither asked for nor suggested.
Mr. C. Lewis—But was it made because it was known
that it would be aceeptable to the City ?
Mr. Tyrrell—Not that lam aware of. The ordinary
course pursued when the City wishes to oppose or pro-
mote a bill in Parliament, is to endeavour to see mem-
bers of the House of Commons, and prepare statements
t ) be laid before them, as well as to get up petitions. As
Remembrancer of the City, I am entitled to a seat be-
hind the Sergeant of the House of Commons, which gives
me access to members of Parliament in a very conve-
nient manner.
Mr. C. Lewis—Can you tell us the cases in which as
Remembrancer you have had clauses introduced into
general acts of Parliament saving the rights and customs
of the city ?
Mr. Tyrrell—l have here a list of all cases of that kind
which have occurred during the last ten years. The first
case is the Small Debts Act ; the next is the Health of
Towns Act of 1848, from which the city of London ap-
plied to be exempted, because it thought the powers in
question could be advantageously exercised by the Com-
missioners of Sewers within the City. The next was
the Metropolitan Sewers' Act, from which the City was
exempted. The City next procured exemption from the
Common Lodging-houses Act, because the City Commis-
sioners of Sewers had more extensive powers for the
same object. Next, there was the Smoke Prevention
Act, with respect to which the City had greater. powers
in its own Sewers Act. These were the whole of the
cases of this kind during ten years, and it was therefore
untrue that the City was in the constant habit of un-
duly slipping in clauses into general acts for the exemp-
tion of the city from their operation. Clauses are in-
serted into private bills with regard to the navigation of
the river, and also into dock and railway aets, to save
the City's tolls and dues. The principle on which these
provisions proceed is the maintenance of the existing
rights of the City ; and there is no disposition whatever
on the part of the corporation to set up a separate sys-
tem of legislation for the City, and to exclude it from
the operation of general acts. They only wish to pre-
serve within their own hands the management of matters
which they have conducted for many years for the ad-
vantage of the citizens. The average annual cost of the
yearly entertainment at Guildhall is 2,0001., which is
contributed in equal moieties, one by the Lord Mayor
and the other by the sheriffs. Besides this, there is an
average annual charge of 2001. for the cost of the pro-
cession, which is paid out of the corporation funds. The
cost of the procession last year amounted to 480/_, as
there was a revival of some of the ancient show. Pro-
fessional actors used to be employed to play a part in
the procession. Formerly the corporation kept its own
poet, but it does not maintain the office now.
The Chairman—lt has been stated that money was
spent by the corporation in giving dinners to members
of Parliament who had supported its own views with
regard to Smithfield-market. Is that true ?
Mr. Tyrrell—That is quite a misstatement. The only
sum expended is 141. 175., the usual allowance paid to
the sheriffs when they go to present a petition to Parlia-
ment.

At thiA stage of the proceedings the commission ad-
journed till next day.

The Royal Commission sat again yesterday, in the
Privy Council Chamber, Downing-street. Commis-
sioners present—the Right Hon. H. Labouchere (chair.
man), Sir John Patteson, and Mr. Cornewall Lewis.
The first witness examined at this sitting was
The Right Hon. J. Stuart Wortley, recorder of the
city of London, who stated :—I have been Recorder for
the city of London since Sept., 1850. My salary is
3,0001. a-year. I have also some trifling fees. I receive
six guineas annually from the sheriffs for presenting
them to the Cursitor Baron, and 21. 6s. Bd. for attending
the conservancy courts. My salary is understood to
include all legal advice given by me to the corpora-
tion, with the exception of those cases in which I have
to consult with counsel unconnected with the corpo-
ration, in which case I receive certain fees, an account
of which will be laid before the commissioners by the
town clerk. In 1852 those fees amounted to about
150 guineas ; but that is not a fair criterion of their
average annual value, because in 1851 I received but
16 guineas, and in 1853 only 15 guineas. In point
of fact, the occasions are very few in which I have
to consult with other counsel on behalf of the corpo-
radon.

The Chairman Are you debarred from private
practice by your office as Recorder ?
Mr. Wortley—Not by any specific condition ; but I
am practically debarred from practising in Westminster-
hall by the nature of my duties as Recorder. I have,
indeed, been retained in one or more peerage cases in
the House of Lords, where it was considered important
that the counsel who had begun the case should proceed
with it; but with that exception, and certain arbitration
cases with which I was acquainted, I have not carried
on private practice.
The Chairman—What is the nature of your duties ?
Mr. Wortley—l will now state them generally ; but
I can furnish the commissioners on another day with the
reports of committees of the Court of Common Council
and the Court of Aldermen on the subject of my office
at the time of my appointment. I am the chief legal
adviser of the corporation, and am expected to give ad-
vice on all matters within the province of the corpora-
tion. I attend the Lord Mayor on all state occasions,
and read addresses to the Crown, and you have the in-
stance by this inquiry, at which, although not within
the scope of my ordinary duties, I act as the mouthpiece
of the corporation before this commission. I sit on the
right hand of the Lord Mayor in the Courts of Aldermen
and of Common Council. I put the questions there for
the Lord Mayer, and assist him in deciding matters of
order. I am expected also to assist the committees.
The Chairman—The last commission stated that you
act in the corporation in an analogous manner to the
Speaker of the House of Commons.
Mr. Wortley—That is a graceful way of putting the
matter ; but I execute the formal part of the Speaker's
duty in putting the question in the form that I think
right, unless I am corrected by the Court. I am one of
the commissioners under the Central Criminal Court
Act, and am considered the chief judge, I believe, of
that court, with the exception, of course, of her Ma-
jesty's judges, who only attend it occasionally ; and I
am expected, in every instance, to charge the grand jury.
Besides that, I have to attend as assessor to the magis-
trates, in court of quarter sessions, both of London and
Southwark, but that is chiefly a matter of form, the
jurisdiction having become effete. I nominally attend
the Court of Hustings, which is now almost obsolete. I
also attend the Lord ?Mayor's Court, which sits every
month of the year except one, and on the constitution
of that court, the improvements which have been in-
troduced into it, their operation, and the custom of
foreign attachment which appertains to it, I should be
glad to have an opportunity, at a future time, of
giving information to the commissioners. I am like-
wise a justice of the peace within the City, but prac-
tically I am not applied to in that capacity, except
on important occasions. I am also ex officio a mem-
ber of some bodies connected with the corporation,
such as the Irish Society ; but being so only ex
officio, I have not thought it right to interfere with that
society. I am also ex ojicio a member of the City Com-
mission of Sewers, the object of my being so in either of
these cases being that in the event of any point of law
arising they may have the benefit of my advice. This
completes the summary of my duties.
The Chairman —Having you any general control over
the legal business of the City ?
Mr. Wortley—None.
Mr. Chairman—You do not regulate the proceedings
of the Solicitor for the City ?
Mr. Wortley-_I do not ; but sometimes there is a
tion
speciof the cou rt. al reference to me and the City solicitor by resolu-
Sir J. Patteson--It has been said that the aldermen
consult with the judges at the trials in
the Central
Criminal Court in the same way as the judges consult
together in the Court of Queen's Bench /
Mr. Wortley—l have never known the aldermen to
interfere with the trial of a case, nor volunteer to inter-
fere on the question of a sentence being passed ; but I
confess that I have frequently derived great assistance
by occasionally consulting the aldermen on the bench
with me as to the extent of punishment which ought to
be inflicted ; and cases of commercial fraud have been
more perfectly elucidated to my mind by consulting with
the aldermen. It is, however, an entire misrepresenta-
tion to say that they improperly interfere.
Mr. C. Lewis—One of the duties of the Recorder is
to certify the customs of the City by word of mouth.
Can you explain how that practice is carried out ?
Mr. Wortley—The manner in which it is done is this,
and I have done it in two recent instances—once in the
Rolls Court, and another time in the Court of Queen's
Beech.n A certiorari is issued from the court in which
ase is pending, and in which the question has been
raised as to the existence of a custom of the City, calling
upon the Lord. Mayor and aldermen to certify to that
Court whether such a custom exists in the City, and
what is its nature. The matter is then brought before
the Court of Aldermen as the executive body of the cor-
poration, who refer it, by resolutiop, to the Recorder,
in order that he may consult the other officers, if neces-
sary, and search the precedents, and then report there-
upon.
If no doubt exists on the subject, I report to
the Court of Aldermen what I believe to be the custom.
If there be any doubt entertained by me with regard
to it, it is the practice for me to name a day which
meets the convenience of the litigant parties, who,
having been allowed full access to all the documents
in the custody of the corporation, attend by counsel
before me and state what are the precedents on which
they rely, and what is the construction they place
'Pon those precedents. There was a very difficult case

is the Rolls Court respecting the distribution of a free- I
man's property, which in the City follows a different rule i
from-the statutory distribution, and arguments by coun-
sel were conducted before me during part of two days,
involving a difficult question of mixed law and fact ; the
difficulty being to put a proper interpretation on a for-
mer construction of a custom. In that case I certified
by word of mouth in the Rolls Court, and in the other
case I certified in the Court of Queen's Bench. The
mode is analogous to what I have seen adopted by the
Speaker of the House of Commons when he reports to
the House, by word of mouth, her Majesty's speech, and
says that for convenience he has obtained a copy of it.
In the same way I certify the customs of the City, and
state that, for convenience sake, I hold in my band a
parchment, with the certificate in writing.
Mr. C. Lewis—ln fact, then, certifying a custom of
the City by word of mouth involves the preparation of a
written statement ?

Mr. Wortley—lt is so. The Recorder asserts his
right to certify orally, but he hands in a written state-
ment.

Mr. C. Lewis—Do you see any objection to giving
the public full access to the records, to ascertain what is
the law and custom of the City ?
Mr. Wortley—l see no objection to giving the fullest
access to the public generally to the records of the cor-
poration, for ordinary purposes, historical and otherwise;
but I can hardly go so far as to say that I would permit
the public to inspect the. charters and titles of the cor-
poration on a question with resard to which litigation
is going on at the time. This is a question which I
know the commissioners have pressed upon the wit-
nesses, and 1 should be very sorry to give a very definite
opinion upon it. No doubt, it might in some cases be a
matter of complaint if litigants had not every facility for
ascertaining what are the grounds of the City's claim.
Without going so far as those who say that the City is
in the same position as the lord of a manor with regard
to his private property, I apprehend it is no different
position from that of a corporation having the manage-
ment of a charitable trust ; and if, after some centuries
have elapsed, a person were to rise up and dispute the
validity of a charity trust, it would be a grave question
whether the trustees should, in the first instance, lay
its documents before the party, to enable him to take
technical objections on points of form. I believe, in a
case in which the corporation of Hull, in a Chancery
suit, produced its title deeds, and the suit went against
them, Lord Eldon rebuked them for pursuing the course
they had done.
Mr. C. Lewis—The right of the City may be as good
as that of the trustees of a charity ; but when so exten-
sive a right as that of levying metage dues between
Yantlet Creek and Staines is involved, and the action
is brought by the City, the question is, whether the de-
fendants ought not to bei nformed of the nature of the
public instrument on which the City found its claim ?
Mr. Wortley—The corporation differs from the trus-
tees of a charity, inasmuch as it is a body established for
the benefit of the whole community, whereas the charity
is established for a specific purpose ; but I cannot other-
wise distinguish their position in litigation between them
and other parties. I believe that in the very case to
which this question more particularly refers—that of the
Messrs. Combe and Delafield—every fair statement has
been made by the corporation of what is the nature of
the title on which it relies ; and all that I understand
has been refused is the actual production of the docu-
ments. I have had no personal knowledge of the case
of Combe and Delafield beyond this, that during the
last three years, I believe, the case has been hung up by
the consent of both parties, and that an anxiety is felt
that some arrangement should be come to, in order to
get rid of all difficulty on the subject. At the same
time, the corporation had acted under the advice of
independent and eminent counsel ; and if it had acted
otherwise, and in the face of counsel's advice had rashly
disclosed what it was not bound by law to disclose, and
thereby imperilled the just rights of the citizens, it
would have incurred a very grave responsibility to its
constituents. At the same time, I do not believe that any
information of a substantial nature has been refused to
the defendants. I may also mention that the decision of
Lord Abinger, and the decision of Vice-Chancellor
Bruce, with regard to the obligation of the City to dis-
close its charters to a litigant party, are decisions of a
conflicting nature, and directly opposed to each other.
With respect to the dispute with the Crown respecting
the right to the soil and bed of the River Thames, I
would state that negotiations had been going on for a
long period on that subject, and the City was anxious
on public grounds, as well as for its own interests, to
arrive, if possible, at some settlement with the Govern-
ment. The corporation had thought the course pur-
sued by the Crown in not proceeding by writ of intru-
sion, in the ordinary and natural way, was certainly
most harsh and arbitrary, even admitting it to be jus-
tified by strict law. I regret that Mr. Pemberton, the
solicitor to the Board of Inland Revenue, did not inform
the commissioners that the City has been long endea-
vouring to effect an amicable settlement, because that
gentleman's evidence would make it appear that the
City has been actuated by a contentious and litigious
spirit, although the truth is, the corporation has shown
a very different disposition from that. After the nego-
tiations to which I have referred had been conducted for
some time, in 1847 a bill was introduced into Parliament
embodying the result of them ; and this bill recited
in its preamble that the Crown on the one hand and
the corporation on the other were willing to forego their
respective claims, and transfer them to a board of con-
servancy. This bill was, however, defeated, because it
was sought to establish a mixed board for the manage-
ment of the conservancy and soil of the river. Subse-
quently, ftirther negotiations were carried on between
the Government and the corporation, in which I took
part on the one hand, and Lord Seymour, the Commis-
sioner of Woods, on the other. The corporation were
at that time willing that the Crown should have the
abstract right to the soil and bed of the river, provided
that the City obtained the control of such part of the
soil and bed as was necessary for the efficient conservancy
of the navigable stream ; the revenues arising from the
river to be devoted to the improvement of the river itself
and its banks. A charter was drawn up with the view
of carrying out this arrangement, and I was put in com-
munication with Sir William Page Wood, the then
Solicitor-General, on the subject. The negotiations
were, however, interrupted by the changes which took
place in the Government, but the matter was brought
under the consideration of the present Ministry. The
Government was of opinion that no charter could be
granted without the consent of Parliament, and
without compensation being given to the land reve-
nues of the Crown. A correspondence is now going
on on that subject, and the City has expressed its wil-
lingness to agree to a bill being introduced, as I am sure
it would receive the sanction of Parliament. The matter
has lately been referred to the Hon. Charles Gore, one
of the Commissioners of Public Works, and I have little
doubt it will be brought to a satisfactory termination.
The basis of the arrangement is that, if the corporation
gives up its right to the soil and bed of the river, it shall
be allowed to continue its full powers of conservancy as
at present enjoyed and exercised.

Mr. Charles Pearson, City solicitor, was next exa-
mined. He said—l have held my present office for
fifteen years. The salary is 2,0001. a-year, subject to
deductions for salaries of clerks, and all other office ex-
penses, which amount to 700/. a-year ; but then there
are certain emoluments, in the shape of costs in actions,
which I receive under act of Parliament, and which make
up my net income to 1,750/. per annum. These emolu-
ments are variable in amount, but my average yearly
salary from all sources is 1,750/. lam excluded from
private practice as a solicitor by reason of my con-
nection with the corporation. My functions and duties
are to advise the corporation and all its committees and
commissions on any question of law, to conduct all
its suits and prosecutions, and generally to advise
on other matters, when specially called on for
that purpose. I receive directions to institute
or conduct suits from the Court of Common Council
through a committee, and I am in constant com-
munication with such committee on all matters
connected with the action. I am instructed to lay
cases before counsel of the highest eminence—the At-
torney-General or the Solicitor-General and upon
their advice suits are instituted. These cases are pre-
pared by me, and read to the committee before being
submitted to counsel. There are legal members on the
committee. The committee decides upon the general
policy of entering into the suit, but the conduct of it is
regulated by the advice of counsel.

The Chairman—Do you not think that there ought to
be•some one lawyer of eminence who should be generally
responsible for the policy of commencing suits on the
part of the corporation ?
Mr. Pearson—l think the judgment of the committee
is generally very good, and that the advice of their
officers is generally very cautious, sound, and prudent ;
and Ido not know that they could escape from the
difficulties in which they are sometimes placed by any
other course which they could adopt. In the year
1823, when I was myself a member of the corpora-
to], and before I held my present office, I brought
in and carried through the Common Council a bill to
gmlually reduce and ultimately abolish the fellowship
of porters, if the exigencies of trade required it, with-
oat allowing them to acquire any claim to compen-
sation. That act has been carried into effect ever
since that period ; 3,500 porters were admitted under
this arrangement ; and the number with whom it
is necessary to deal on the subject of compensation
has now been reduced to between 600 and 700. Messrs.
Combe and Delafield refused to employ the porters,
whereupon the porters commenced an action in 1835
against those gentlemen, and asked the corporation to
consent, to allow them to use its name in the suit. The
corporation consented, and the defendants filed a bill of
discovery, requiring the corporation to produce its docu-
ments. The corporation having made its answer to this
bill of discovery, the Messrs. Combe and Delafield ob-
tained something from that answer which led them to
ask for a still further discovery, and they accordingly
amended their bill so as to make it more comprehensive.
It is a frequent practice for one party to a suit, wheal he
has succeeded in drawing out something from the answer
of his antagonists, to make that disclosure the ground
for attempting to draw out still further information as
to the adversary's case ; and the effect of amending a
bill of discovery implies that the previous bill was not
sufficiently comprehensive. The Messrs. Combo and
Delafield went on filing sucee: sive bills of discovery, and
the corporation put in answers to them. In 1839, the
corporation, on its own sccount, also commenced a sister
suit against the Messrs. Combo and Co. for its inetage
dues. Lord Abinger decided that the corporation
was not bound to produce its documents ; but
Vice-Chancellor Knight Bruce decided that it was
so bound. The corporation, therefore, appealed to the
Lord Chancellor (Lord Lyndhurst) in January, 1843,
and the Lord Chancellor, after taking three years to
consider his judgment, in January, 1846, pronounced a
decision simply affirming the decision of Vice.-Chancellor
Knight Bruce, without assigning any reasons for his
judgment. After this the corporation were, advised by
Sir Richard Bothell to carry this judgment up to the

%. ~,

House of Lords for revision, and there it now remains.
The following was a statement of the reasons on which
the Solicitor-General based his advice to the corpora-
tion to appeal to the House of Lords :
"THE MAYOR, &C., OF LONDON, &C., AS APPELLANTS-

COMES AND ANOTHER RESPONDENTS.
" REASONS.

" First.—Because the principle upon which a court of
equity gives a plaintiff who files a bill of discovery an in-
spection of the documents admitted by the defendant's
answer to be in his possession requires the plaintiff to
state in his bill that such documents are material to prove
the case which he has made in his bill, and an admission
by the defendent that such documents do relate to the case
so stated in the bill ; but in the present case no such state-
ment is made by tho bill of the respondents, nor can any
such admission bo found in the answers of the appellants.
" Second.—Because a plaintiff in equity, in a discovery
suit, is not entitled to inspect documents in the defend-
ant's possession, merely upon the ground that they may
possibly, upon inspection, be found to aid his defence, by
discovering some defect in the title of his adversary; which
ground, however, is the foundation of the order appealed
from.

" Third.—Because it plainly appears, as the appellants
submit, upon tho bill of the respondents, that such bill
has not been filed for the purpose of obtaining proof of
any substantive defence, but rather in the hope of finding
defects in the title of the appellants, the corporatior. of
London.

" Fourth.—Because (except in cases where the plaintiff
has a direct interest, by virtue of some trust or contract,
in the documents in a defendant's possession) the plaintiff
must show, from the admissions in the answer, that he
could require the defendant to set out the admitted docu-
ments ; he must prove, from the answer affirmatively, his
title to the discovery, and cannot claim production on the
ground that the answer does not disprove his interest in the
documents, or does not negative the possibility of his hav-
ing an interest in them.
" Fifth.—Because the documents mentioned or referred
to in the order of the 9th day of June, 1842, are the evi-
dence, on material parts of the evidence, for the appellants,
the Corporation of London, of the existence of their right
of metage, and of its exercise for centuries past.
" Sixth.—Because the order appealed from, if mire-
versed, is an authority for the position that a defendant
may file a bill of discovery and compel his opponen' to
produce the whole of the documentary evidence on which
he relies, unless such opponent pledges his oath that no
part of such documentary evidence can in any manner
tend to sustain the opposition to his demand which it is
conceived greatly exceeds the just limits of the right to
discovery in equity, and will be most prejudicial by en-
couraging parties to contest rights founded on long estab-
lished usage, in the hope or upon the speculation that
some latent objection may be discovered by which, upon
technical grounds, such rights may be defeated.

1‘ RICHARD BETHELL.
" HENRY RANDELL."
It should be remembered that these disputes commenced
eighteen years ago, when the profession was more dis-
posed to encourage litigation than it is at present ; and
the corporation has now arrived at a period when, in
accordance with the advancing'spirit of the age, it would
not attempt to enforce its right in a case like this. I
dare say the Messrs. Combe and Co. are perfectly satis-
fied at the matter having been hung over as it has been,
as if the case had been decided against them they would
have had to pay metage dues to the amount of 7001. or
8001. a year ; whilst, on the other hand, the corporation
could only obtain the assertion of a barren right which it
would probably not seek to exercise. The triumph of
the corporation would therefore be a very fruitless one,
and I dare say if any one would now enter a stet pro-
cessus, both parties would be very well satisfied. The
town clerk has already informed you that the corpora-
tion has been in negotiation with the corn trade, and
intends, with their concurrence, next session to introduce
a bill into Parliament to place the metage dues upon a
new basis. The witness then described the origin of
the suit between the Crown and the corporation as to
the right to the soil and bed of the river. He said that
the corporation had had the river inspected by eminent
engineers, whose report recommended certain important
improvements, and particularly the removal of the
shoals. The plan, it was estimated, would cost 60,0001.
in its execution, and the corporation was about to re-
move the shoals, when Mr. Leigh Pemberton, solicitor
to the Commissioners of Inland Revenue, applied to the
City for a copy of the engineer's report—a step which
was shortly afterwards followed by the filing of an infor-
mation on the part of the Crown, with the view of
taking away from the corporation, not the conservancy,
but the soil and bed of the river, as a source of profit.
This course of proceeding the corporation resisted. I
consider that the right of the City is grounded upon
prescription, and is also recognised by charter. The
charter of Richard 111. says that the City shall have
preserved to it all its rights by land and by water. Now,
the City could have no other rights by water except as
connected with the Thames ; and we consider that this
charter, in connection with contemporaneous history,
must be construed as recognising the rights which the
corporation exercised over the Thames at the time the
charter was granted. Then, again, the charter of Henry
VI. recognises the right of the corporation to all the
common soil in the city of London, and in the water of
the Thames within the franchise of the City. Now,
contemporaneous history, and the records in the City
repertories, show that the franchise of the City extended
from Yantlet Creek to Staines, being represented in the
immemorial conservancy. I hold that the City is
morally, and perhaps legally, bound to apply the
revenues derived from the soil and bed of the river to
the improvement of the river ; and such is the advice
I have always given to the corporation. I think the
interests of. the City and the interests of the rest of
the metropolis are inseparable and identical. I cannot
conceive any c9nfiict arising between the interests
of the City and those of the rest of the metro
polis. When the revenues of the City are applied to
street improvements, they aro applied for the benefit not
only of the City, but for the convenience of the 200,000
persons residing outside of its limits, who come into it
every day for business purposes. The various plans for
street improvements now contemplated by the corpora-
tion, for the general accommodation of the metropolitan
public, will require an outlay of about two millions.
The growing feeling of the corporation is not what it
formerly used to be, when the motto was, " The
City for the citizens ;" but it now is "The City for the
world."

Mr. C. Lewis—ln deciding on the opposition to be
offered to a bill in Parliament, would the City take an
enlarged view of the general interests of the metropolis,
or would it specially Consider the interests of its con-
stituents and of the members of the Common Council?

Mr. Pearson—l think the corporation would consider
its first duty to be to its constituents ; but it would not
permit that to operate to an extent which would be pre-
judicial to other interests. With regard to the prosecu-
tions instituted by the corporation to induce parties to
take up their freedom, the object of them was to in-
crease the number of the constituents, and not to pro-
duce revenue, and nothing could have been conducted
in a more fair and kindly spirit than those proceedings,
the end desired being simply to try a legal question.
The ehairnian—Are you aware of the case of Mr.
Henry Gray, who stated before this commission that he
prosecuted a gang of swindlers carrying on business in
the city of London, and succeeded in obtaining a con-
viction against them; and that having been involved in
very heavy expenses in the prosecution, he applied to
the corporation for a portion of the estreats of one of the
prisoners, who had absconded, but the corporation
refused to accede to his application ?
Mr. Pearson—l have read that statement. The fact
is that 100 years ago these estreats were carried over to
the sheriff's as a part of their income, and that practice
still continues. lam sure that, during the last 10 years,
the sheriffs have not derived, on an average, so much as
1001. a-year from this source.

The Chairman—But the prosecution having been
undertaken by Mr. Gray, for public benefit, the expense
of it to a poor man was very onerous, and was it not a
great hardship to refuse him a portion of the entreats ?

Mr. Pearson—Many things a hundred years old would
now be considered a hardship ; but I believe the corro-
ration would not wish to retain them in the present dsy.
The Chairman—Yes, but the City maintains this
Practice at present, and has already disposed of the case
by refusing Mr. Gray's claim.

• r Mr. Pearson—i have no doubt that may be so. There
was a subscription raised to defray Mr. Gray's costs,
to which the corporation gave 501. out of its own funds ;
and while the estreats belonged to the sheriffs, the corpo-
ration could not very well have handed a part of them to
Mr. Gray. I may mention, however, that a committee
has been sitting on the sheriffs' allowances, and I believe
it is contemplated to give the sheriffs a fixed money pay-
ment, instead of leaving them to depend on such casual
sources. With regardlto Billingsgate-market, Ido not
consider the rent and stallage dues levied in the market
by the corporation at all inconsistent with the provisions
of the act of Parliament declaring that Billingsgate shall
be a free market. The City levies its rents by prescrip-
tion, and my advice to the corporation has been, that
although it has laid out 30,000/. on the improvement
of the market, it should not increase the rents and stal-
lage to an extent that would repay this outlay. As City
Solicitor, I often perform the duties of a public prose-
cutor in the City, and great benefit has resulted from
that proceeding. It is my duty to defend actions
brought against individual aldermen for supposed ille-
gality in the discharge of their duty. If I receive an
order from a single alderman, I feel that that authorises
me to commence proceedings, but if the case is one that
admits of delay, I report the matter to the Court of Al-
dermen and wait for instructions. This practice may be ob-
jectionable in the abstract, as being liable to abuse; but I
do not believe that there has been any abuse. I considei
the aldermen have acted as a body with great impartiality
—and I have not known any case in which they have
been influenced to prosecute by political considerations.
The Right Hon. J. Stuart Wortley here said that he
wished to state that during the three years that he had
held the office of Recorder of London various instances
had come before him in which prosecutions had been in-
stituted by the aldermen ; and he could bear out the
testimony of the City Solicitor thus far, that in no single
case had he known a prosecution to be commenced by
the aldermen which was of a political character. Every
case which had come before him had been one in which
i it was greatly for the benefit of the public that it should
have been taken up by the City magistrates ; and, in
fact, their taking up these cases prevented the possibi-
lity of collusion, and caused a vigorous prosecution to be
instituted where, from the poverty of the parties, or
from other circumstances, the offenders might have been
suffered to escape. lie (Mr. Wortley) had been asked
by the commissioners with regard to the conduct of the
aldGrinen on the bench, and he might therefore take that
opportunity of saying, with ree-ard to the general exer.
case of the aldermen's magisterial functions, that as far
as a criminal judge could form his opinion from the
cases which came before him, the decisions of the City
magistrates would bear an advantageous comparison
with the decisions of any other class of magistrates, and
prove that they performed their duties with great ad-
vantage to the public.
-The commissioners then adjourned the inquiry till i
o-day•
•
4

4t19

• -yr...s49.Vr'

11113TRO.POLITAN AND GENERAL FREE-

HOLD LAND SOCIETY.

Last night, the second annual meeting of the share-
holders in the Metropolitan and General Freehold Land
Society was held at the London Tavern, Bishopsgate-
street.

On the motion of Mr. BODDY, seconded by Mr. ASH-
WELL, the chair was taken by H. B. Sheridan, EN.,
one of the directors of the Times Fire Insurance Company.

The CHAIRMAN, in opening the proceedings of the
evening, said the first thing to be done was to call upon
the secretary to read the report.
Mr. WHIT; the secretary, then read the report, as
follows :

" Your committee have much pleasure in laying before
you the second annual report of their proceedings. They
feel the highest gratification in adverting to the extensive
nature of the operations of this society during the past
year—to the pre-eminent success and approbation that
have attended those operations—to the steady and certain
progress of the society—and to its present highly satisfac-
tory and promising position. During the past year your
committee have worked out two large estates, thereby
offering to allottees property of the value of 18,000/., six-
teen thousand pounds worth of such property having been
taken up by them with the greatest readiness and avidity;
and your committee consider themselves justified in taking
this fact as conclusive evidence, that the estates so
allotted were of the kind and character proposed to be
obtained by this society, as best adapted to the
requirements of the shareholders, and also, that the mode
of working them out and allotting them, were both suit-
able and judicious, and in perfect harmony with their
views. In referring to the progress of the Society, your
Committee feel the greatest pleasure in stating that the
share list has considerably more than doubled itself since
the last annual meeting, and this not by any eccentric or
uncertain impulse, but by a gradual and regular augmen-
tation, leading to the reasonable inference that it will prove
both continu.d and permanent. Your committee state to
you with the greatest confidence, that the Metropolitan
and Genoa-al Freehold Land Society stands upon a firm and
solid basis—with no bad estate nor oppressive incumbrance
to hamper it—but, it has two first class estates in hand f, r
allotment this year. It has carefully revised rules, suited
to its enlarged capacity and growth, and the experience of
the past two years to guide it. And your Committee, re-
ferring to the undeviating and energetic manner in which
this society has pursued the " even tenor of its way," and
the peaceful and respectful attention given by shareholders
at 'all public meetings to its business, and consequently to
their own interests, they venture to predict that the future
of the Metropolitan and General Freehold Land Society
must be brilliant indeed, and of such a nature as shall entitle
it to the respect, consideration, and support of the com-
munity at large."

The society has opened an account for the deposit of
small sums at interest, and 1,2121. is. 7d. has been
lodged in that department during the last few months.
The CHAIRMAN said—Gentlemen, you have heard the
report, and as this meeting has assembled for a business
purpose, we had better transact that business as expe-
ditiously as possible. He thought the statement just
read would satisfy every shareholder that there had been
great unanimity, vigour, and good sense in carrying out
the proceedings of the past year to so satisfactory a con-
clusion. The society was greatly increasing ; indeed,
he believed that institutions of this description were des-
tined to develop the giant resources of this great country.
He had nothing further to address to them, but again
begged to congratulate the meeting on the satisfactory
position of the society, both in a commercial and finan-
cial point of view.
Mr. HIND then rose, and said be had much pleasure
in moving the adoption of the report that had just been
submitted to the meeting ; and although on such an
occasion as the present he feared he might be somewhat
invading the privilege of those who, being in office, and
by position, more fitted by ability, and better qualified
to address so numerous a meeting ; yet he could not
allow the present opportunity, or a statement like that
they bad had the pleasure to hear of the position of the
Metropolitan and General Freehold Land Society,
to go forth to the world unaccompanied with an
expression of approval and commendation, as he was
sure it justly deserved. He would be pardoned for con-
fining the few remarks he had to make to the subject in
question, and to that alone, although there were many
matters connected with the affairs of the society, and
the great principles which it expressed, on which he could
dwell with pleasure, and perhaps with profit. He had,
therefore, only to point out to the meeting the successful
and rapidly improving position of the society, the division
among its members of two beautiful estates—estates
which he had no hesitation in saying were equal, if not su-
perior, to anyyet purchased by any other society—and the
premiums that the fortunate possessors of allotments on
them would realise, if they 'should feel disposed to sell
them ; and without trespassing
.further upon their time
and patience, he would not detain the meeting from the
consummation of the duty and pleasure of adopting the
report that had been submitted to them that evening.
He would, therefore, 'move that the report, with the
statement of accounts just read, be adopted. (Cheers.)
M. HUTH had great pleasure in seconding the propo-
sition of Mr, Hind.
The adoption of the report was then put to the meet-
ing and carried unanimously.
The CHMRMAN said the next thing the shareholders
had to do was the electing of the committee for the
present year.
The bal!oting then commenced, and at its termination
The CHAIRMAN said the scrutineers had now finished
their laboars; the whole of the committee of the past
year had been re-elected, which he thought was but
an act of justice, considering the great exertions they
had made on behalf of the society. (Cheers.) He
wQnld call upon the secretary to read the names.
-The SECRETARY read the names of the gentlemen
elected, viz., Messrs. Boddy, Buckle, Philps, Anhwei],
Feltham, West, Richmond, Cook W., Cook F., Stratton,
Mathieson, Cocks, Talbot, Kennard, Ponder, Lenard,
Bousfield, APKenzie, the old committee ; Messrs.
Hind, Turner, Hunter, West, Easton, and Finch, new
members.

A vote of thanks having been given to the members of
the late committee,
Mr. PHILPS congratulated the meeting on the re-elec-
tion of the old committee. He felt sure that a more
painstaking and hardworking body of gentlemen could
not be found ; early and late, in season and out of season,
had they been fuund at their posts. He had seen them
up to their elbows in ink, and their knees in mud, with
but one object in view—the furthering the interests of the
society. (Cheers.) He expected much benefit would arise
from the infusion of the new blood, and if the efforts of
the committee were but followed by the shareholders,
the Metropolitan and General Freehold Land Society
would stand without an equal. (Cheers.)
A SHAREHOLDER; in very high terms, proposed a vote
of thanks to their energetic and assiduous secretary, Mr.
White.

Mr. PHILPS had very great pleasure in seconding the
motion.

Mr. WHITE returned thanks, and said he felt extremely
flattered at the compliment that had been paid to him.
All he could say in return was that his utmost exertions
and endeavours would be directed towards the extension
of the society. (Cheers.)
Thanks were then voted to the chairman, and the pro-
ceedings, having been of the most harmonious nature,
terminated.

THE ELECTRO-MAGNETIC RAILWAY

SIGNALS.

Yesterday a number of gentlemen assembled at the
London Tavern, at a private meeting, on the invitation
of Messrs. Ogan and Goddard, a legal firm, who have
an interest in Tyers' patent railway signals, to receive
an explanation of the principles of the invention, and to
witness some experiments by means of working models
illustrative of its efficiency in preventing the collision of
trains, and to that extent decreasing the danger of rail-
way travelling. The Lord Mayor presided.
From the explanation of Mr. Tyers, the inventor, it
appears that the station signal, which is worked by
means of the electro-magnets, the wheels of the engine
or train as they pass over the line at a given point- say
the entrance to a station—pressing upon a treddle, which,
uniting under ground with a coil or line of copper wire,
completes the voltaic current, and, acting upon the indi-
cators at .the last station passed and the nearest onward,
one gives in the one case the notice "Line clear," and in the
other "A train on the line," at the same time striking a bell
to call the attention of the person in charge. In con-
nection with this is another signal, also worked by a
voltaic battery, for communicating with a train while in
motion between stations. At a sufficient distance from
the station, say one or two miles, parallel bars are laid
down, which, by the pressure of the wheels while passing
over them, are made, at the option of the person in charge
at the station, the entrance to a tunnel, or other place
where an impediment may arise, to complete an electric
current between the point of danger and an indicator
fixed on the top of the engine of the train, warning the
engine driver to shut off his steam, and by sounding the
break whistle, which it does at the same instant, gives
notice to the guard to put on the break.o The expense
of the station signals Mr. Tyers stated would not be
more than from 501. to 701. per set, exclusive of the
wire, and of the engine or train signals, abort 101. or 121.
each. He also added that the former had been fir some
months in successful operation at one of the South-
Eastern stations, and the other upon one of the engines
of the Brighton Company.

CURRIERS' BENEVOLENT INSTITUTION.—The sixth anni-
versary dinner in aid of the above charitable institution
was held yesterday, at the London Tavern, Mr. Alder-
man and Sheriff Wire presiding. The dinner was very
fully attended, and the subscriptions showed a gratify-
ing increase. The chairman, in proposing the toast of
the evening, eloquently traced the progress of the insti-
tution to its present flourishing condition. The object
of the society was to give pensions to the aged or de-
cayed members of the curriers' trade, and to build an
asylum as soon as the accumulation of the funds per-
mitted. Last year they had added 1501. to the funds,
and had elected three pensioners. But there was still
much to be done, and there was at present on their
book an applicant who was nearly 90 years old. He
trusted, therefore, that there would be nqslackening in
the exertions of the subscribers. A collection was then
made, which added nearly 200/. to the funds of the
charity.
[A DVEILTISE3I ENT. ]—A LIEUTENANT OF DRAGOONS
CURED OF RHE UMATISM BY HOLLOWAY'S OINTMENT
AND PILLS.—This officer, who is in the Dutch army,
states that Holloway's Pills and Ointment have cured
him of rheumatism, which appeared to be incurable, as
neither sea-bathing, vapour-baths, nor preparations vaunted
as sure remedies, did him any good, and the treatment of
the doctor, after several months' trial, was without suc-
cess. At this juncture he commenced taking these Pills.
and rubbing the Ointment into the complaining parts
twice a day, which effectually cured him in the course of
six weeks. The truth of this statement can be vouched for
by Mr. J. B. Stratman, of Bois-le-Duc.—Sold by all drug-
gists ; and at Professor Holloway's establishment, 244,
Strand, London.