The Sun.
London, England, 1847-01-12 00:00:00

COURT OF ALDERMEN.

Yesterday being Plough Monday,- a Court was held
for receiving the presentments of the several ward in-
quests, and for swearing in the constables.
The Foreman of Bishopsgate ward made a present-
ment in which there was reference to a number of non-
freemen, who ccrried on trades to the prejudice of the
freemen. He begged to call the attention of the Court
to that fact, which in his opinion, was an inroad upon
the constitution of the city of London. Several years
ago he had paid between 301. and 40/. for his freedom,
and if parties were allowed to carry on trades in the
City without having submitted to that process, the in-
terest and principal were his property, instead of being
converted to the use of the Corporation. The subject
of complaint was one of a very serious nature, for it was
excessively hard that the man next door to a freeman
should derive all the advantages of a citizen without hav-
ing contributed anything whatever as a counterpoise.
The LORD MAYOR said the subject was under the
consideration of the Court, and would certainly receive
their most attentive consideration.

The Foreman of the Inquest of Coleman-street ward,
in making a presentment, begged to be informed whether
the duty of an inquest-man was a compulsory duty?
He made the inquiry, because all the inquest of the ward
he represented had to do was to go about begging for the
poor, and he thought that office might be transferred to
persons who had not their various occupations to at-
tend to.

The LORD MAYOR—It is a compulsory duty certainly.
Alderman WiLsoN said if the foreman would read the
charge, he would find that the inquest had a very im-
portant duty to perform, and that there was nothing at
all about begging in it.
The Foreman—We are tired of going to the top of
stories of houses for nothing, and would rather pay to be
excused the performance of a duty which is, after all, a
mere nullity. A gentleman has refused to serve on
the inquest, what are we to do about him?
Alderman Witsoar said that in his ward a gentleman
who refused to serve had been ordered to be prosecuted
by the City solicitor, and he soon afterwards came for-
ward and offered to pay the penalty incurred, and.to
serve n(,xt year.
The LORD MAYOR, having learned the name of the
recusant, stated that he should be summoned, and if an
adequate explanation was not made, the necessary pro-
ceedings would be adopted..
The Foreman of Cripplegate-Within Ward made a
presentment complaining that non •freemen carried on
business in that ward.

Alderman CHALLIS (the Alderman of the ward) said
there were an hundred people keeping shops in that
ward who would hare Toted at the last election, but they
were not free.

Another Member of the Court said if that was the
case there would be no constituents at all.

THE COMMON COUNCIL RETURN OF FARRINGDON WITHOUT
WARD.

The Foreman of the Farringdon Without Ward made
presentment, to which was annexed a petition against
the return of Messrs. Lyas and Obbard as Common
Councilmen for that ward, upon the ground that they
were not qualified as resident householders. The peti-
tion stated that the two persons whose names ought to
have been returned were Mr. Harding and Mr. Carpenter,
and prayed that Counsel might be heard before the
Court upon the subject.
Referred to the next Court, and intimation was given
that due notice of the day on which the appeal should be
heard would be given to the parties interested.