The Sun.
London, England, 1847-03-26 00:00:00

SUN,

COURT OF COMMON COUNCIL.
Yesterday a Court was held for the dispatch of
business.

CITY OF LONDON CORPORATION REFORM.
Deputy PEACOCK brought up the report of the Com-
mittee of Privileges of the whole Court " for power to
prepare a Bill for effecting certain reforms in the Corpo-
ration of the City of London."
The report stated as follows:—" We again proceeded
in the further consideration of the matter referred to us,
and this Court having on the 16th of March been
pleased to agree with our report then presented, in
which we stated we were of opinion the Corporation
required some reform, which could only be effected by
the aid of Parliament ; and being now of opinion that a
Bill should be forthwith prepared for effecting certain
reforms ; accordingly we recommend that we may be
empowered to prepare the same Bill."
Upon the motion that the Court agree with the report
and that it be referred back to the committee to prepare
the Bill

Sir PETER LAURIE said he considered the proposition
to prepare a Bill for Parliament most extraordinary
and injudicious in the present position of the Court.—
(Hear, hear, and No, no.) They had submitted a
series of propositions to the law officers, with a view of
ascertaining the rights and powers of the Court, and the
opinion of those officers as to the course best calculated
to promote the welfare of the corporation, and without
waiting for the advice considered so necessary they were
for starting at once into Parliament. He called that a
periodical tit.—(Loud cries of " It is no and " hear,
bear.") There were three parties in this Court ; one a
very small one, which supported the hazardous course
which the Lord Mayor had been advised to adopt ; an-
other, also, he thought a small section, which desired,
under any circumstances, to go to Parliament ; and a
third, to whicn ho belonged, and which considered that
the corporation possessed powers by which all reform
that was necessary could be easily accomplished.—
(Cries of " Hear." and "No, no.") At the same time
he would say, that if the motion, unreasonable as irwas,
were passed, he should not think it worth while to oppose
it, but reserve his opposition, when the advocates
of an application to Parliament should agree upon the
form of a Bill. Many were anxious to go to Parliament,
but • very few of that number knew what they were
to ask Parliament to give them, and he believed that in
the attempt to frame their Bill, the Committee would
fall to pieces from internal disagreement. In 1835, came
on the first attack of that fit, when the Court tried to
render the Aldermen subject to periodical election, but
was defeated by a majority of 63 to 38. In 1838, upon a
similar experiment, the application to Parliament was
negatived by 59 to 45; and in 1843, the orators who
looked upon the victory as secure, found they were again
mistaken, although they wished to go to Parliament for
exactly the same thing which they at the present mo-
ment seemed disposed to apply for. Indeed, all the
Committee would have to do in applying to Parliament
was to get up an old report and alter its date, and the
result would be just what it was in 1843, when the pre-
posed bill was negatived by a majority of 185 to 54. He
snould strenuously oppose the proposition to submit
their privileges to Parliament, and he knew he
could reckon on the support of a very large majority of
the Court of Common Council, who agreed with him
that it would be madness to ask Parliament to interfere
with them, especially when by the charter of Edward
the Third they had the power of ordaining new laws
and customs to meet the wants and exigencies of the
times.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. ASHURST—AII was smothered by the Aldermen
upon the occasions to which you refer, Sir Peter.
Sir PETER LAURIE said there was no doubt as to in-
herent power in these charters, if these charters were
understood.—(Cries of "Oh, oh," and "Hear, hear.")
If lie was not mistaken, the Court would understand
them in less than one month, and it would be seen that
the opiniOn he had given so frequently was based upon
the most substantial grounds.
Mr. KING said the state of the Corporation at the
period quoted by Sir Peter Laurie was very different
from its present condition. At the several periods
alluded to, there was a rabid faction in the Court, dis-
p med to destroy the Corporation, root and branch.
The present movement was an effusion, not of a party,
but of the whole of the representatives of the Wards.—
(Hear, hear, and applause.) They either were, or
they were not, a deliberative body, and if they claimed
to be such, were they to submit to the dictation of one
man, and to be told by him that they should not discuss
any subject which he did not think meet for their con-
sideratio❑ ?—(Hear, hear.) Was it to be said that the
time was never to come at which some change should
be made in the constituency ? that the great majority
of the respectable men in the wards should be excluded
from the power of voting ? He did not think the Court
would any longer endure the exercise of such authority
as the present Lord Mayor had shown so great an in-
clination to wield, and for the purpose of checking the
continuance of such evils as they had all lately wit-
nessed, he should adopt Parliament as the only medium
through which their constituency could obtain that to
which they were entitled.
Doctor LYNCH said they had affirmed the principle
that Parliament must be applied to in order that some
reform might be effected from _a source hostile to the
corrupt influence of the Corporation itself.—(Hear,
hear, and expressions of disapprobation.) It. was a gross
blunder, and it was excessive fully to believe that the
Court of Aldermen would for a moment consent to re-
form itself, or that any improvement could be accom-
plished in such a body without application to Parlia-
ment. Whatever powers were inherent in the Corpora-
tion as to the accomplishment of changes for the benefi-
of the citizens of London, it would be absurd to expect
any advantage from the co operation of the Court of
Aldermen, that monster ea il to which it was most
necessary to apply an immediate remedy. There were
other evils for which the application of the Parliamen-
tary medicine would be necessary, but the Court of
Aldermen stood at the head of all that was bad in
the Corporation of London. (No, no, and Yes,
yes.) It was said that a reconciliation was
about to take place between the two Courts. That was
exactly what the constituency apprehended most.—(A
laugh.) He feared that event himself, for he knew that
such a reform as would sprinerom such a reconciliation
would be delusive and ridiculous.

Mr. LA URENCE said that Mr. King, in denying the
sincerity cf those who formed the committee for the
consideration of former measures of reform, exhibited '
his own insincerity on the present occasion, for as to the
past, that g,ntleman had proved himself to be the
decided enemy to any proposition calculated to benefit
his fellow citizens.—(Hear. hear, and laughter.) What-
ever the feelings of the majority had been as to the pro-
priety of applying to Parliament, from the apprehension
of an interference injurious to the corporation, they
were now determined to peril all rather than submit to
endure, what they had in the present Mayorality been
subjected to, any longer.—(Loud cheers.) It was said
the Corporation had the power to reform itself. Why,
then, had they not made the effort ? In fact, it would
be absurd to hope for the co-operation of the Court of
Aldermen when they had a Lord Mayor acting in such
a manner.--(Hear, hear.) The Lord Mayor was car-
rying out the wishes of the Court of Aldermen in riding
rough-shod over the Court of Common Council.—
(Hear, hear, and No, no.) Was there any man, of spirit
among the Court of Common Council who would hear
such degradation ?—(Cheers, and loud cries of " No.")
It was said—" But look at what you will lose if you go
to Parliament ? "—(Hear, hear.) But he would ask—
Will the Aldermen loss nothing ? Will they not be
clipped ?—(Cheers.) They knew it.. Did they
really object to the Qualification Bill? They carsd
nothing about it until they learned that it would le
followed by the more important measure of checking
their own expenditure of the City cash. Without ap-
plication to Parliament, the Court bad nothing to ex-
pect but a repetition of what had already occurred ; but
if an application to Parliament would cause the screw
to be put upon the Court of Common Council, Parlia-
ment would see the necessity of screwing up the Court
of Aldermen proportionately.—(Cheers.)
Mr. R. TAYLOR advocated the report vigorously. He
objected to the argument of Sir P. Laurin that because
they had failed before, they were always to be frustrated,
and he reminded them of the alderman of the days of
George 1., when fifteen meinbers of the Court of Alder-
men had gone to Parliament, and succeeded in obtain•
ing an Act which comprehended the most flagrant
violation of the rights and privileges of the Court of
Common Council.—(Hear, hear.) Why should not the
Court of Common Council apply to the present Parlia-
ment for the repeal of that obvious measure ? Would
any one say that the evils which had been forced upon
them by Parliament, could be removed without the aid.
of Parliament.—(Hear, hear.) The difficulties in which
they were placed, bad been aggravated by the decisiod
against them in the court of law, with respect to the-
wholesale dealers, and an appeal to Parliament was the
only means which appeared to him to be likely to render
any service.
Sir C. MARSHALL had thought that all angry feeling
between the Courts was dying away.—(Loud cries of
" No, no.") He was confident that this Court would be
laughed at if they determined upon going to Parliament
before they received the report of the seven gentlemen
they had deputed to confer with the Court of Aldermen.
Deputy STEVENS said the object was to propose a bill
for Parliament, but not to go to Parliament without the
consent of the Court.
Mr. ASHURST said the Court of Aldermen showed the
greatest promptitude in forming the Common Council,
when it proposed to diminish the number of the repre-
sentatives there, or to cause any other essential altera•
tion in that body; but the moment a word was uttered
about making any charges in their own powers, nothing
could be more inconsistent. Mr. Ashurat then proceeded
to argue with much force upon the necessity of going to
Parliament.
Alderman COPELAND said be should support the
motion, having always been of opinion that the differ-
ences between the two Courts could not be settled with-
out the aid of the Legislature.
Several other members spoke in favour of the report,
amongst whom were Mr. Anderton, Mr. T. H. Hall,
Mr. Cash, and Deputy Peacock. It was opposed by
Mr. Godson. To the arguments used the public have
been for some time accustomed.
Ultimately the report was agreed to by a very great
majority. The proceedings of the day certainly gave
very little hope of the reconciliation spoken of at the
commencement of the discussion; of the determination of
the Court of Common Council to go to parliament,