The Sun.
London, England, 1847-09-30 00:00:00

THE COMMISSIONER OF CITY POLICE AND THE LATE

ELECTIONS OF MARYLEBONE AND COLCHESTER.

iec e
evidence i in respect
dtmuea
npkfa
eodetol
upon
f
Alderman COPELAND rose, pursuant to notice, to
cthoendlautcetiloifarythieebCono
move that the Court do take into consideration the
Commissioner
aonfdPothl
Marylebone election,mi
before the select committee of the Court of Common
ctitnCtiholooemehui
snisn apologyucidbti jult committee
ceynt
.rt
feool
ralmtteiaaowklnleobtui ogl
edrt
tthiblaeeei
nparot
etl
statementseiccon police
iioeo fcntt
ehodfe
tCh his
reflectingai tty
b h.
reeHthhear
tmanagementhose ofst a
ttehme e
nCityts werepolice,
proved
thatd i n
to
bea
correct, although the report of the committee was
not such as he expected would have arisen from the
investigation. It would also be recollected that the
inquiry caused such a feeling in the Court of Common
Council as to occasion the rejection of a motion for
increasing the salary of the Commissioner. Believing
that the Chief Magistrate would call the attention of
the Court to the evidence taken before the committee,
he had abstained from making any stir in the matter
for some time, but finding that the subject had
dropped, he determined to give the notice to which he
now requested their attention, and he was the more
ale Jueglsiature Ilan,. Lake cognizauee Vi Luc itr..o ~. •
the committee, the evidence in which represented that
stolen property and duplicates of stolen property
were given, with the sanction of the Commissioner, as
a reward to the officers. He should next call the at-
tention of the Court to the Police Act, which distinctly
stated that the sole and undivided services of the police
commissioner were to be devoted to the duties of the
office, and that the commissioner should not take, nor
attempt to take a seat in Parliament. It was clear, from
the clause in that Act, that the citizens of London had
an unquestionable claim upon Mr. Harvey's exclusive
exertions, and that he could not be a candidate without
giving up his place. It was clear that the duty of the
Commissioner could not be performed while he was
seeking another occupation. But how did that posi-
tion correspond with what appeared in the public
journals in the accounts of his attempts to obtain a
seat for Colchester, which he afterwards, for some
reason or other, declined ? How was it reconcilable
with his efforts at Marylebone, where he even under-
went the ordeal of the ballot, and assured the electors
in the most solemn manner that he would, if elected,
resign his office of Commissioner ? Here was un-
deniable ground of complaint. By such conduct Mr.
1 Harvey had made himself amenable in heavy penal-
ties, independently of his responsibility to the Court,
from the head of which he was bound to obtain per-
mission
before he undertook to go to Colchester to
assist in the election of Mr. Hardcastle after he had
given up the representation of that place in his own
person. Who could be for a moment blamed for ac-
cusing the corporation of London of jobbing and other
misconduct, when their Commissioner went to assist a
candidate for Parliamentary honours, and pledged him-
self to give up his own office upon being raised to a simi-
lar station? He (Alderman Copeland) had told an un-
varnished tale. He cared not whether the question
was, or was not, taken up by the Court. All he de-
sired to do was, to secure himself from imputation if
a Parliamentary inquiry should take place. He could
say, that whatever might occur, he was blameless. He
called upon his brother aldermen to take up the ques-
tion; and if they did not, and should afterwards have
cause to regret their supineness, they must not cast
any part of the censure which would be cast upon
them on his shoulders. The disinclination of the
Commissioner to be guided or influenced by anything
which fell from the Court was evident from the fact
that, although the impropriety of the employment of
policemen by the Commissioner as domestic servants
was strongly alluded to in the report of the com-
mittee, a policeman named Brett was actually at that
very,moment in his service, at a salary of 223. per
week. Alderman Copeland concluded by expressing
his wish either that the subject he considered by the
Court, or referred to a select committee to consider
and report upon it.
Alderman SIDNEY admitted that there were cir-
cumstances in the transactions alluded to by Alder-
manthe j
llst Copelandiee tot deservinghe c ot
n nii
sosfi
oinneqruti
or ys
a;
ybtuht
aht e
the m ucsot
Court
ot
of Aldermen had decided by a considerable majority
(13 to 3) that he was under paid, and that his salary
ought to be raised from 8001. to 1,0001. a year, al.
though most of the very charges now brought
against him by Alderman Copeland had been inves-
tigated by the members. In a Committee of the
tCaokmenmoionlaeo.unsciloa decisiondoubtthat
dtoeeitshe
ion samew effect
asnegatihvaedd
by a large majority in the Court of Common Coun-
cil ; but then the charges against him were pro-
nounced to be completely frivolous ; and in the Court
of Aldermen the accusations were considered equally
groundless and untenable. As to the Commissioner's
extraordinary conduct at Marylebone, he did not
mean at all to apologize for that most singular eccen-
tricity. The public had already pretty intelligibly
decided upon the merits of that course ; but with
regard to the charges which Alderman Copeland had
repeated, the two Courts had already determined
that they were remarkable for nothing but their
weakness.
Alderman FARM:MOTHER thought it odd that Al-
derman Sidney should leave the charges unanswered,
and consider that he had done all that was necessary
in saying that the Commissioner's salary was not
sufficiently large. The Court of Common Council
thought, and so it appeared from the sequel Mr.
llarvey thought too, that 8001. a year was enough,
for he preferred the office of Commissioner with that
salary to a seat in Parliament without any salary at
all.—(A laugh.) He admired the Commissioner's
judgment as exhibited in that decision. He did not
see how so serious a matter as the subject before the
Court really was could be passed over slightly. It
was to be considered that Alderman Copeland had
introduced fresh charges, and certainly when public
officers were accused it was indispensable for the ends
of justice that the accusations should be openly made,
and that opportunities should be afforded for answer-
, ing those accusations as openly.—(Hear, hear.) Let
r the Commissioner appear before the Court of Alder-
men ; and if he succeeded in proving that he was
wrongly accused, let him enjoy the triumph, and look