The Sun.
London, England, 1853-11-12 00:00:00

CITY OF LUND( )N COMMISSION.

The Royal Commissioner .s met again at twelve o'clock,
yesterday, in the Privy Council Chamber, Downing-
street, and continued the prosecution of their inquiry
into the state of the city corporation. Commissioners
present :—Right Hon. Mr. Labouchere (who presides),
Sir John Patteson, and Mr. Cornewall Lewis. The
first witness examined at this sitting was
Mr. Alexander Pulling, barrister-at law, of the Inner
Temple, who stated that he was the author of a treatise
upon the laws and usages of the city of London.
The Chairman—We are anxious to have the benefit of
your evidence on the subject which has been referred to
us, because we are aware that you have paid special at-
tention to it.
Mr. Pulling—l am desirous of stating at the outset
that I have been reluctant to attend here to give evi-
dence, except upon the compulsory process of this Court,
for I felt that having been engaged in several City cases
there ought not to attach to me the imputation of dis-
losing matters known to me under professional con-
fidence.
The Chairman- -The Commissioners are quite willing
to receive your evidence with the limitations and re-
strictions which you yourself place upon it. Have you
turned your attention to the state of the corporation of
the city of London, not merely as a lawyer, but more
generally in regard to any defects which may exist in
the present system, or to any remedies which it may be
desirable to apply for them ?
Mr. Pulling—My attention has been more particu-
larly directed to the law and constitution of the city of
London, and to the existing rights and franchises of the
corporation, than to the moral or political bearings of
the question. I have certainly noticed defects in it in
the course of my professional engagements as a lawyer,
and these I will point out to the commission, but my
opinion as a reformer will be of very little value.
The Chairman—Can you inform us as to the relations
between the corporation of the City and the State ?
Mr. Pulling—No doubt, looking at the ancient char-
ters, the corporation, or rather the body politic, the
citizens of London, stood once in a very important posi-
tion as regards the State—a position which it would be
impossible that, at the present day, it could at all stand.
It has been a question whether in the time of the Anglo-
Saxons it was not in a degree independent of the Crown.
It had a palatinate power of a very extensive character.
The only remains of its ancient power and influence with
the State are the ceremonial observances with regard to
the office of Lord Mayor, the sitting of the members for
the City in Parliament, and in the presentation of ipeti-
tions. Formerly, the corporation exercised a powerful
influence in the choice of the Sovereign, and historians
have related that some kings have lost their crown by
opposing the city of London ; whilst others, again, have
gained the crown by the support of the citizens. In
the struggle between the rival houses of York and Lan-
caster we know, for instance, that great influence was
exercised by the City in the choice of the Sovereign. As
far back even as the reign of Athelstan there was a com-
pact made between the " reeves " or governors of the
City and the State. After the Norman conquest, Wil-
liam the Conqueror confirmed (but without specifying)
the whole of the franchises and peculiar rights of the
City then in existence, and which were handed down
from the remotest ages. Other charters followed, be-
tween the time of William the Conqueror and that of
Richard 1., confirming all the ancient customs of the
City, which were also sanctioned by both houses of Par-
liament. Magna Charts contained a memorable instance
of this confirmation. On each of these occasions the
City paid large sums of money to the Crown ; and, in
addition to that, it was in the habit of lending very large
sums to the Government for State purposes. This is
evident from the fact that even before the Conquest
11,0001. out of the sum of 83,0001. levied on the
whole kingdom was paid by the city of London.
These levies, I believe, were made from the whole
body of citizens ; but there could be no doubt that
the loans were made by the body politic, the folk-
mote of the City, or by whatever name the assembly
was called. I cannot attribute to the City any direct
political influence on the State later than the time of
Henry VII., although it had, no doubt, a moral influence;
at all events, if did not form part of the machinery'
of the Government. We know, however, that it enjoyed
—at a period much later than the time of the civil wars
—great political influence ; and possibly, even at the
present day, it does enjoy some undue, or at least more
than ordinary, political influence ; but I do not find,
from the records of the corporation, that it has had any
more direct influence on the movements of the State
than any other part of the country. In the centuries
to which I have alluded a very important trust was held
by the Lord Mayor, and is still held by him ; for the
Lord Mayor is a member of the Privy Council.
Mr. C. Lewis —ls the Lord Mayor a member of the
Privy Council on any other occasion but one, viz.,
when the Privy Council assemble on the demise of the
Crown ?

Mr. Pulling—lt has always been contended that h
is a ineinher of the .Privy Council.
Mr. C. Lewis--Are you aware of his ever having been
summoned on any other occasion than the one I. have

mentioned ?
Mr. Pulling—ln ancient times I apprehend that he
was. At the coronation of the Sovereign the Lord
Mayor receives a golden tankard, and he also claims to
act as chief butler at the coronation banquets, which in
ancient times was considered a great City privilege,
and used to be insisted upon as a right. This right is
still asserted, but I am not aware whether, practically,
the Lord Mayor took any part in the last coronation.
Sir J. Patteson —ls there any trace of the Lord Mayor
having been made a Privy Councillor?
Mr. Pulling—l do not know.
Sir J. Patteson—ls he ever sworn in ?
Mr. Pulling—l believe not. It is said that he is the
only member of the Privy Council whose character as
such continues uninterrupted by the demise of the e-
vereign, and thus differ from all othe'r members, who
require to he sworn in. There are other ceremonies at
which the Lord Mayor has asserted his rights. At the
proclamation of the Sovereign, for instance ; he re-
ceives the announcement of the new accession to the
throne at Temple-bar. It is still usual that on all great
State occasions, when the Sovereign is in ill health, or
when any member of the Royal Family is deceased, for
the Secretary of State to communicate with the Lord
Mayor; but, except as a mere matter of ceremony, I be-
lieve the corporation of the City of London has
now no
legal influence on the Government of the State beyond
any other corporation in the country.
The Chairman—Have you any observations to address
to the Commission in regard to the relations of the cor-
poration to the trade of the metropolis ?
Mr. Pulling—l have. On that subject the earliest
charters belonging to the City show that the corporation
(which at that time was composed of all the citizens of
London) had the exclusive right to and control over the
entire trade of the City. There is a law of Ethelred 11.
with regard to the customs to be paid by foreign mer-
chants, together with a provision that they shall not
forestall the markets from the burghers of London. That
showed an entire control to have been enjoyed by the
corporation over the trade at that early period, and this
control was subsequently made the subject of charters.
Exclusive rights of trading were enjoyed by the citizens.
Every resident was compelled to be free, and the citi-
zens chiefly consisted of resident merchants. A custom
prevailed of seizing foreign bought and foreign sold
goods, which custom is said to date from time immemo-
rial. The contest in these times was not between differ-
ent classes of native inhabitants, but between citizens and
foreign or alien merchants. The corporation had the
right of exclusive trading, and no foreigner was allowed
to sell to any citizen, unless it was done in the public
markets, or in what were called " markets ouvertes.''
The city of London was certainly less liberal to alien
merchants than other parts of the kingdom. In the reign
of Henry IV. the acts passed in favour of foreign mer-
oha nts expressly excepted the exclusive trading privileges
of the city of [London. At the present moment,
the !ily regulations with regard to exclusive trading
practically , enforced by the City are enforced against
brokers, publicans,
are not and retail dealers generally. They
and
daFainst the wholesale dealers. The
legal right
of seizingexists,whether
foreign bought and foreign sold
goods in the City
bat now wwhlioelsesdaoiremoarntr.etThaile
right to require all trader,
to take up their freedom before being allowed to trade,
also exists in law now, but
it lies dormant as regards
wholesale dealers.
The Chairman—Do the exclusive trading privileges
mpeargtrsounds as those
claimed by the City rest on the sa-
fßth,e country
privileges which prevailed in other
abolished
Act
until they were repealed by the Municipli
Mr. Pulling--The exclusive privileges
the Municipal Reform Act in other boroughs rested upon
by
mmemorial custom, and those now belonging the
City rest upon charters.
The Chairman—But the exclusive privileges of the
city of London may be dealt with at the discretion of
the Legislature, in the same manner that the same pri.
',lieges were dealt with by the Municipal Reform Act.
Mr. Pulling—Precisely so ; and I must say, to the
honour of the city authorities, that in the bill which
they introduced into Parliament last session, they pro-
., posed to abolish these privileges.
The Chairman—Go to the next point, if you please.
Ur. Pulling—The regulation* and conservancy of the

river Thames is vested in the corporation. In the an-
cient charters (such as that of Henry VI.), conferring
the powers of conservancy, those powers are chiefly con-
fined to the preservation of the fish in the river, and for
this purpose there was a water-bailiff appointed, whose
office still survives. The City also possessed the power
of removing weirs impeding the navigation of the river ;
but I am not aware of the corporation's ever dealing
with the great stream of the Thames below London-
bridge. There is a case now pending in the Court of
Chancery between the Crown and the Corporation of
London as to the right of the corporation to the conser-
vancy of the Thames, and that action involves the whole
question of the rights of the City on that subject. With
regard to the trade of London, the rights of the corpora-
tion extended to the exaction of tolls at a very early
period. The City, no doubt, expended moneys in the
erection of quays, wharves, and landing places for the
port of London in ancient times, and it also obtained the
privilege of levying tolls on merchandise in consideration
of advances made to the Crown. These tolls extend to
corn, roots, and fruits of every kind. A charter of
James the First gives the City the power of levying tolls
and imposing metage on all the articles above stated
brought within the limits of the port of London. The
question now at issue in the Court of Chancery is whether
these rights of the corporation apply to the limits of the
City proper or to what is called the port of London, in-
cluding both banks of the Thames between Yanleete
Creek and Staines. The metage of corn and coal is com-
pulsory, and the claims of the fellowship of City porters
to land such goods are co-extensive with the City's right
as to metage. The office of a City meter is very valuable.
The metage and porterage claims have been resisted
by the Messrs. Combe and Delafield. The charges of
the City porters and meters are much higher than they
would be if these exclusive privileges were done away
with. The exclusive privileges claimed by the City
engender a vast amount of litigation ; and when it is
remembered that there are 700 local acts in the metro-
polis, and 100 charters, and nearly as many customs
which can be woke up from their slumbers by any ad-
venturous lawyer at any moment, how injurious it is
to allow obsolete customs to exist, and conflicting laws
to remain unconsolidated, can easily be conceived. I
have certainly experienced very great difficulty in ob-
taining access professionally to the records of the City,
in order to authenticate any custom or charter, popular
copies of which are already before the public, and the
contents of which the legal profession suppose them-
selves to be familiar with. When any portion of the
pnblic feels itself aggrieved with regard to the claims of
the City to metage and porterage, and desire to be
allowed to inspect the documents upon which the City
authorities ground their claims, they are denied per-
mission to examine them, and in fact the corporation
practically treats its charters authorising it to place
these imposts upon the trade of the port as if they were
title deeds of a private proprietor to his own estate.
The course which the City has pursued with regard to
the application of Messrs. Combe and Delafield to be
allowed to inspect the City documents, is such as would
have ruined a small firm before the first bill of discovery
could be finally decided in the House of Lords.
The Chairman—Will you be good enough to go to
the next point ?
Mr. Pulling—A great many of the charters of the
livery companies extend over a distance of seven miles,
and in other cases twent-one miles from the City ; and,
indeed, in the case ofthe tobacco-pipe makers, they extend
all over England. In Edward the Third's reign the City
obtained a grant of the whole of Southwark ; and an
ordinance of the Court of Common Council subse-
quently constituted Southwark into a ward, called
Bridge-ward "Without. At that time there were houses
situated on London-bridge, and in the course of
time the application of the municipal system of the city
to Southwark fell into disuetude, and the ward of
Bridge-without was considered only to include the houses
at the bridge foot. The senior alderman came to be ap-
pointed an alderman for the ward of Bridge-without,
without being elected. Southwark was never thoroughly
assimilated to the City. The reason for that might be
that there was a legal difficulty as to how far the rights
of the City over Southwark extended. Perhaps, it
might have been thought that the City's jurisdiction over
it extended to certain purposes, but not to others. How-
ever, that legal difficulty might have been easily over-
come, because the City was constantly applying to Par-
liament for new acts, and an act could easily have been
obtained for this purpose also.
Mr. C. Lewis—Was not Southwark poorer in ancient
times than it is now, as compared with the City ?
Mr. Pulling—Yes.
Mr. C. Lewis—Do you not think it is more probable
that the poverty of Southwark was the reason why the
City did not completely incorporate Southwark into its
municipal system, rather than any legal difficulty with
regard to the nature of its jurisdiction over Southwark ?
Mr. Pulling—l cannot say ;it might have been so,
and, as I have said, the legal difficulty could easily have
been set aside if the corporation had chosen to go to
Parliament for the purpose. The best course now to be
pursued, with regard not only to Southwark, but also
t 4, all the other parliamentary boroughs of the metropo-
lis, would, in my opinion, be to incorporate each of
them separately, and give them all distinct municipal
institutions.
The Chairman—Proceed to any observations you may
wish to make with regard to the constitution of the cor

poration.
Mr. Pulling—The corporation of London is different
from any other corporation in the kingdom, because it
has no governing charter, and there is no act of Parlia-
ment which has really defined what its constitution is.
The ancient charters always speak of the mayor and com-
monalty as composing the corporation. The office of
mayor may be traced as far back as the reign of King John.
In pleading their privileges, the corporation now adopt
the style of " the mayor, commonalty, and citizens,"
and declare that they have been a corporation from time
immemorial.
Mr. C. Lewis—ls there no charter declaring that
there shall be a mayor, aldermen, and common council
of the City, having certain powers ?
Mr. Pulling—There is no charter or act which ex-
pressly says so, but there is a charter which confers cer-
tain powers on aldermen, and certain powers which can
only be exercised by the Common Council, and certain
powers also which can only be exercised by the Mayor,
Aldermen, and Common Council ; but there is no
charter which constitutes or creates them a corporation.
It is in the reign of Edward 11. or Edward 111. that
the first mention is made of aldermen. The corporation
of London being the citizens of London assembled in
various courts and having various governors, there are
also certain laws which regulate the qualification of citi-
zens to preside at certain courts, and one law (which has
been certified in the Court of Westminster) is that before a
person cin become a citizen of London he must be free
of one of the trading companies ; and therefore it has
always appeared to me that these companies form in-
tegral parts of the corporation. The Court of Common
Council is qualified to perform any act of legislation
or administration which is within the competence of
the corporation, with the exception of the elections at
common-hall and the functions of a judicial nature. The
Court of Aldermen claim control over the elections by a
certain custom. In the case of Mr. Scales, the Court of
Aldermen opposed him on the ground that, like the
late Lord. Mayor, he was a butcher. Mr. Scales was
three times returned by the ward, and three times re-
jected by the Court of Aldermen, and then the alder-
men claimed the right of electing an alderman them-
selves ; and that act of the Court of Aldermen was
held to be justified by custom. That custom is very ob-
jectionable. The Lord Mayor must be an alderman,
and must also have been sheriff. I do not think any
great evil Would arise from diminishing the dignity of the
office of alderman. I do not believe the aldermen are very
popular is the city of London ; and I think that many
of their powers may be taken away, as not being essen-
tial to the good government of the City. They are elected
practically for life, and they are not subject to the con-
trol of the citizens ; and no question is ever brought
before the Court of Common Council without having
been first considered in the Court of Aldermen, which

generally meets the day before the Court of Common

Council. The Coup of Aldermen claim the right to ex-

elude the public from their proceedings, and often exer-

cise it. They elect certain Officers, and have a power of

voting► away money from the City purse, such as in

granting pensions, and in ordering prosecutions. There

is a certain limit imposed by the Court of Common

Council on the right of the Court of Aldermen in voting

away the public funds. The common seal of the cor-

poration can only be affixed by the Court of Common
Council, and no expense can be incurred by the Court

of Aldermen in opposing bills in Parliament by petition.

The real abuse is in the power of the Court of Aldermen
to institute prosecutions. They discharge the functions
of a public prosecutor out of the City funds. They
select their cases, and sometimes they prosecute a man
for political reasons where a strong feeling has been
shown.

Mr. C. Lewis—Do you think the decision of the com-
mitting magistrate would weigh with his brother alder-
men in ordering prosecutions ?
Mr. Pulling-_I do. The aldermen are thrown very
much together. I know that in many eases prosecutions
have been very properly instituted, and the aldermen
are considered as the guardians of public morals ; but I
cbcidedly object to the principle of allowing them to

institute prosecutions. The office of sheriff is almost I
entirely ceremonial, and the under-sheriffs are generally
permanent officers. With regard to the Court of Com-
mon Council, that court is the great council of the City.
It possesses extensive legislative powers, and has the
entire control of the funds of the City, with the excep-
tion of the votes above named, which are made by the
aldermen. The Lord Mayor, on his locum tenens, and
two aldermen, are necessary to constitute a Court of
Common Council, and the court is adjourned by the
Lord Mayor taking up his mace and walking out. If
a Lord Mayor were to abuse his power of adjourning
the Court of Common Council, by preventing the
sittings of the court, I apprehend that a mandamus
from the Court of Queen's Bench would compel him
to enable the court to meet. With the exception of
this power of the Lord Mayor, and the regulation re-
quiring the presence of two aldermen, I think the Court
of
.Common Council is a very free body. I conceive
that the number of its members ought to be reduced,
The privilege of the aldermen to meet and consider ques-
tions intended to be subsequently brought before the
Court of Common Council in no way fetters or restricts
the right of any member of the latter court to introduce

any subject.
Mr. C. Lewis—Then the previous discussion of ques-
tions by the Court of Aldermen has not the effect of a
veto as against the Court of Common Council ?
Mr. Pulling—No, it is merely deliberative.
The Chairman—Proceed now to the subject of the
common hall.
Mr. Pulling—The livery are the higher class of mem-
bers of the guilds or companies ; and there are several
companies which exist without livery, such as the Water-
men's Company and others, which have never been ad-
mitted to the freedom of the City. The Court of Com-
mon Hall elects the Lord Mayor, the Sheriffs, and the
Chamberlain. It is a very numerously attended court,
composed of persons who are members of the livery
companies, and many non-residents. A great crowding
and confusion arises at the meetings, and many persons
are introduced who are not liverymen, but they are ad-
mitted by the want of proper regulations, and they often
pass as liverymen, and create that uproar which is so
constantly witnessed at the City elections. The cor-
poration might easily have remedied these evils by a
proper system of registration.
The Chairman—Will you proceed next to the subject
of the paid officers of the corporation ?
Mr. Pulling--It appears to me that the paid officers
of the corporation are very numerous indeed. There
are certainly among them gentlemen of very great intel-
ligence and worth, but, looking at the limited size of the
City as compared with the rest of the metropolis, I think
the number of the officers has been multiplied unneces-
sarily. At the same time, I believe that many of the
officers are extremely efficient, and their services would
be very useful if extended over a much larger area.
Looking at the great number of different boards for
paving, sewerage, &c., throughout the metropolis, I
regard the conflict of powers between the different offi-
cers as a very serious inconvenience. It is said that
there are upwards of 100 different boards in the metro•
polls.

Mr. C. Lewis—Surely there are a great many more
than 100 separate boards in all London
Mr. Pulling—l cannot be positive as to the exact
number ; but I know that it is very large. The corpora-
tion have four or five different classes of officers for al-
most every department of municipal government. In
the legal department there are the Recorder and the
Common Sergeant, the ancient duties of whose offices
have almost entirely fallen into disuetude. The Recorder
sits as
,a judge at the Old Bailey and other courts, but be
rarely acts in the ancient and distinctive capacity of his
office—viz., as a recorder of the custom of the City.
The Recorder only appears in 'Westminster-hall on such
rare occasions as when the Lord Mayor is sworn in, for
the purpose of certifying the customs of the City. His
judicial functions nearly absorb the whole of his time,
and the same also is the case with the Common Sergeant
who hears compensation cases in the Lord Mayor's
Court. Then there is the judge of the Sheriffs' Court,
which is a tribunal of the nature of a small debts court.
The City Solicitor is engaged with the prosecutions on
behealf of the corporation, and the City Retnembrancer
is entrusted with the care of the Parliamentary business
of the corporation. The Comptroller is charged with
the conveyancing department, and then there is also the
Town Clerk, who is not a solicitor at present, although
that officer used to be a solictor also ; so that the cor-
poration has three, and formerly it had four, different
gentlemen, attorneys, and solicitors, acting as its legal
agents. The Town Clerk attends, all' the corporate meet-
ings, has the custody of the records, and has to take care
of the whole routine business of the corporation and of
the various committees which are constantly sitting.

Mr. C. Lewis—Then the Town Clerk must be the
most active legal officer of the corporation ?
Mr. Pulling—l suppose ho must be.

Mr. C. Lewis—Do you think it falls within the legal
powers of the corporation of any other place to apply a
portion of its funds in opposing bills in Parliament, such,
for instance, as a bill for constructing a railway ?
Mr. Pulling—l should think not.
The Chairman—Suppose the railway should affect the
property of the corporation ?
Mr. Pulling—Then I think it would not be illegal for
the corporation to defend its rights in that way.
Mr. C. Lewis—But I am supposing the introduction
of entirely new legislation, say to open a railway or a
canal at a distance of ten or twenty miles from a
borough, and that the property of the corporation of
that borough would not be affected by the project, or, at
all events, would only be indirectly affected—would it in
that case be a legitimate application of its funds to go
to expense to op pose such a measure in Parliament '?

Mr. Pulling-La suppose a corporation would have a
general right to protect its own interests, and the ques-
tion must always depend entirely upon whether the pro-
perty of the corporation is likely to be affected.
Mr. C. Lewis—You say that the number of the paid
officers of the corporation is too numerous—is it your
opinion that offices have been multiplied for the sake of
creating additional patronage, or that they have been
increased by the gradual complication of the affairs of
the co rporation necessitating a larger staff ?
Mr. Pulling—l believe that many of the evils which
exist have arisen from the want of system, and from not
legislating in accordance with altered circumstances, and
not from any corrupt or improper motive on the part of
the members of the corporation, or any desire to find
places for their favourites or friends,
_ _

The Chairman--Your objection is that the system has
been allowed to become too complicated ?
Mr. Fulling—l think it has.

At this stage of Mr. Pulling's examination the corn•
missioners adjourned the inquiry till Tuesday next.

RAILWAY TRAFFIC RETURNS.

TRAFFIC RETURNS FOR THE PAST WEEK.