The Sun.
London, England, 1853-11-23 00:00:00

CORPORATIOIV OF LONDON.

(From the Times of Friday.)

Cud bono 1" is the thought that will press itself upon
the attention of any disinterested observer who brings him-
self to the consideration of the London Corporation. What
is the good of the Lord Mayor? What is the good of the
Aldermen ? of the Common Councilmen ? of the Common-
hall ? of the Guilds ? of the Fellowship Porters 9 of the
metage-men ?of Gog and Magog and of Temple-bar ?
The city of London, properly so called, occupies about a
square mile of ground, which is situated in the very heart
of the metropolis, of which it forms an inconsiderablesptart,
find
and we it encumbered with an anomalous
on
which might have done very well in the thetimeojfun.
Plan-
tagenets, but has now become flat, stale, effete, and
alto-
gether unprofitable. In order to make out the case against
the city, it is not in the least necessary to establish the
validity of those charges of corruption and mal-admini
tratine which have been deposed to by the various p
wit-
nessesbefore the Commission. The truth is, that the onus
,of the proof lies rather upon the Corporation. Let the
members of this body render up an account of their stew-
ardship, and show that they have administered the vast
funds at their disposal without favour, without stint,
without nepotism, without deception. There are certain
plain municipal duties to be discharged which must be
discharged by somebody or other. The question is,
whether the present machinery is the best which could be
contrived for the purpose. The police force of the city must
be maintained in a state of efficient organisation ; justice
must be administered at the police-offices ; sewerage, drain-
age, lighting, paving operations, BLc„ must be carried on ;
beyond this, what? We by no means pretend to have
exhausted the ordinary catalogue of municipal duties, but
surely these are the principal heads. When we pass on,
we find it strongly asserted on the one side, and faintly,
or not at all, denied on the other, that the corporation of
London enjoys the usufruct of large revenues, arising
partly from estates, partly from tolls and rates, and pro-
bably from many other sources. It is, no doubt, necessary
that these revenues should be administered for the public
benefit by somebody or other, after all objectionable tolls
and levies have been abolished. Nor would the duty of
the administrators be confined simply to the management
of estates and the collection of revenue ; when these ques-
tions are disposed of, that of expenditure remains. There
is a large sum of money forthcoming every year, which
might without imprudence, and should in fairness, be ap
plied, first to the relief of the citizens from any undue
levies to which they may be exposed in contradistinction
to the inhabitants of other municipal boroughs throughout
the country ; and next to the improvement of the city, to
the construction of bridges, to the opening of new streets,
to the important objects of sewerage and drainage before
alluded to, to the establishment and maintenance of
schools for the benefit of the families of citizens, and other
institutions. There is really no scheme of predetermined
confiscation present to the mind of the most determined
city reformer. To borrow a Parliamentary phrase, what
we want is an " enabling bill." We want to see the
affairs of the city placed in the hands of the citizens,
and that they shall no longer be left in the
power of a few knots of obscure retail tradesmen.
Let us have a constituency and an administrative body
which shall sympathise with the progress and intelligence
of the age, and not a mere set of impostors, who call them-
selves exclusively citizens of London, and mismanage the
municipal affairs. Let us get rid at once and for ever of
the ridiculous gewgaws and vulgar display, which render
the very name of the London Corporation a fitter subject
for the caricaturist and squib-writer than for any more
serious discussion. There can surely be no great difficulty
in deciding whether questions of police, of magisterial
functions, and of sewerage within the city can be solved
with greater economy and efficiency by corporation officers,
or by amalgamation with more general boards of adminis-
tration. Beyond this, the inquiry at present in progress
before the commissioners is rather pointed at debits and
credits—the amount of the city revenues, and how it is
disposed of. We cannot suppose that any difficulty will be
found in fixing some simple test of citizenship which will
admit all bona fide citizens to those privileges to which
they are rightly entitled, or in the construction of a suit-
able hierarchy of officers for the future administration of
the corporate funds. Surely a scheme of this kind is no
novelty to our statesmen ; one of the simplest sort has
already been found efficient in our corporate towns. We
have not far to search for precedents.
The inquiry before the commissioners is proceeding, and
every day brings to light new disclosures. Mr. Mills
came forward to complain of the manner in which the
duties of the shrievalty were imposed upon unoffending
citizens who had no mind to such an infliction, while
others were perfectly willing to undertake it. Mr.
Mills and various members of family had been fined
sums varying from COOL to 4001. in order to escape from
the nuisance. When the system of annoyance had proved
so intolerable that men were exasperated into an organiza-
tion for getting rid of it altogether, the Corporation clinched
the nail by determining that the fines should be allowed to
accumulate in the hands of the Chamberlain, and that the
proceeds should be applied to charitable objects—thus per-
petuating the evil. Mr. J. D. Powles, the Chairman of
the London Dock Company, represented to the Commis-
sioners that the City Navigation Committee consisted of 40
persons, not one of whom had the slightest acquaintance
with the subject upon which he was called to legislate.
He added that, with the exception of Alderman Thomp-
son, there was not a single merchant in the Corporation of
London, and that the mercantile interests of London, as
distinguished from the retail interests, were not repre-
sented in that body. Mr. J. A. Elliot, a member of the
Common Council, was examined, and stated that, in nis
opinion, the administration of justice by the Aldermen
was most defective. He objected to the presence of the
committing magistrates at the Central Criminal Court and
at Quarter Sessions, and mentioned certain scandals which
had taken place in consequence of the administration of
justice by Aldermen. The city police, too, it appears,
costs about twice as much as it should in fairness. The
precise expense is set at 40,0001. per annum—that of the
general London police at 400,0001.—but then the city is
to London as Ito 20. Each of the police-courts of London
costa 2,000/. per annum ; each of the city police-courts 2,5001.,
and the magistrates are unpaid. Wo must, however, pass over
minor matters to come to the evidence of Mr. Beunoch. That
gentleman, among other things, let the Commission a little
into the secret of " committees." It appears that every
member is elected for four years, and after two years any
one is eligible to the chair. The great point for any can-
didate for that honour is, that he should be constant in
his attendance upon the nocturnal tavern-meetings of the
committee. That is the sine qua non. General incom-
tence is the next recommendation; for, if the civic
pe
llogberries see any trace of knowledge about tho aspirant,
they set him clown at once for a had, designing man. The
tavern bills are paid out of the city funds without audit ;
if a surplus remains, it is voted to the chairman, in the
form of a testimonial in plate. Mr. Bennoch tells us that
the groat object of desire with the civic magnates is to be
put upon the Navigation Committee, because that body
is the peculiar consumer of whitebait at Blackwall or
Greenwich. There is one point in Mr. Bennoch's evidence
which should be quoted in illustration of a most scanda-
lous practice—scandalous to the practisors, but yet more
scandalous to the recipients—with which the Corporation
has been charged. " I know," said Mr. Bennoch, " that
under a loose general resolution that the committee should
ascertain the best means of giving publicity to the pro-
ceedings of the Corporation, large sums were being
paid for newspapers which no one required. Whenever
an article appeared iu favour of the Corporation, that
paper was purchased, and distributed freely— ' but I
never found yet that, when there was an article
against the Corporation, the paper was purchased. We
omit a sentence with reference to Smithfield-mar-
ket, of which we will presently speak, to mention that Mr.
Labouchere pressed the witness very closely upon this
point, and said—" Do you mean that money was
sent with
articles to the newspapers to secure their insertion ?" Mr.
Bennoch replied—" I believe the object was that the news-
paper authorities might be induced to allow the articles to
appear as paragraphs, instead of as advertisements."
But let us pass on to the evidence of Mr. Sheriff Wallis
—and surely no man is in a better position to know the
truth of facts. According to this gentleman, very great
corruption prevails in the city elections, more especially in
those of aldermen, chamberlain, sheriffs, and Lord Mayor.
He had known as much as 10,0001. spent to obtain a lucra-
tive office worth between 2,0001. and 3,0001. a-year. There
is no great venality connected with the election to the office
of common councilman, simply because the post is not an
object of ambition. Mr. Wallis particularised instances.
In two contests for the office of Lord Mayor which had
come under his notice, as much as 15,0001. had been spent.
He told the commissioners, moreover, that he had been per-
-1 sonally engaged in every contest for the office of chamber-
lain since he had been an agent, and he had known as much
as 10,0001. spent to obtain the appointment. Then, again,
aldermen subscribe to secure the return of aldermen. In
one instance, to Mr. Wallis's knowledge, 1,9001- had been
so subscribed for thepurpose of corrupting the constitueuncyt
such as it is. We might continue our notes of this kir
ownd ei
evidence, but enough has been given to exhanst ouFrom
space and the patience of our readers for one d
all that the witnesses have stated, does it app
liar re ve-
Corporaton
of London is entitled to any peen
i eathe
ar
that
ranee, if it can be proved that the institution_ is a.n_en,cum-
brance—not a benefit—to the city and the 14.111gclow

( From the Times of Monday.)
One of the most curious and useful works which could
be given to the world by a student of
iti our le
of al
l literature
would be a thorough and complete edon
characters which have from time to time been granted to
the city of London. It would not only be necessary to
give the texts of the charters, but in a series of well di-
gested notes to mark the shortcomings of the civic
autho-
rities. Their obligations should have gone land in hand
with their privileges, but we have every reason to
suppose, that while the privileges have been treated
favoured children, the obligations have been sufferedt as
o i
lag sadly behind. Of immunities, rights, freedoms
leges, ho., we have heard a great deal,, privi- I
even
when the aldermen made their annualroundafterwards
e nfrom
e thevisit d theays
twenty great leaden conduits, and hunted
eatendar shart.e
before dinner, and a fox after it, in the fields
Giles. Coal dues, metage dues,i and tolls have been very
strenuously enforced, and if so much as a little finger was
laid upon the city privileges, London has heard of it in
very significant language ; but of the services which the
corporation was hound to render in return to the kernel of
the metropolis we kilow 110 Lune than of Masonic secrets.