The Sun.
London, England, 1856-04-02 00:00:00

LONDON, WEI)N ES JAY EVENING, APRIL 2, 1856.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS—(YrsTnr.DAY),
The LORD CIINNCELLOR took his seat on the wool•
sack at five o'clock.

Lord MONTEAGLE moved for a copy of the ha-
lancesheet of puhlic expenditure and receipts for the
last year, up to the 31st of March last.—Agreed to.
EArl ST. GERMANS gave notice that, in conse-
quence of the day originally fixed for the second reaiing
of the bill to legalise the marrying with a deceased
wife's sister not being convenient for the attendance of
several right rev. prelates, he should postpone the se-
cond reading of the bill till Thursday, the 17th.

__ •
THE FALL OF KARS.
The Earl of MALMESBURY had hoped that some
of the members of her Majesty's Government would be
prepared to make some announcement upon the result
of the late Conferenoe at Paris. As, however, it ap-
peared that no such announcement was then to-be-made,
he wished to ask a question of therioble'marquis-oppo•
site, in reference to a notice he had given of his inten-
tion to call the attention of the house, on- an early dav,
to the capitulation of Kars. As, however, it would
be most inconvenient to discus such an import tnt
que tion in the absence of the noble earl,
the Secretary of Foreign Affairs, he wished to know
when it was likely that the noble earl would be in his
place in the house?

_ .
The 11I,.rqois of LANSDOWNE Paid he did not think
it was necessary, after what had occurred in another
place upon the subject alreadv.--:- Kuu,..*ll).v,
wax° any as to the signing of the treaty of
peace. In reply to the question put by the
noble earl on the suhjec% of his motion in rela-
tion to the fall of Kars, he believed that his
noble friend would be detained for some days longer in
Paris in consequential discussions arising out of the late
treaty. It was the wish of his noble friend to return to
his Wane in that, house as quickly as possible, and he
had no d )übt that his allseric.:i would be of very short
duration.

0

it." (Hear.) The hon. gentleman then referred to the
Manner in with the Treasury advanced the salaries of
tiic=e judges, pssing over excellent men, who felt it a slat.
• on their charster. It was not the difference of pay
these gentlemo valued, but their reputation, and he
' (Mr. Roebucli charged the Under Secretary of the
Treasury, whold the dirty work of the Government, with
' I passing over 1111 Falkner, an estimable and learned gen-
' Comae, from pritinal reasons. There was another case of
the working ofihis act. The county court clerks were
usually appointel by the judges, but Mr. Morris, who
was clerk of thecounty courts in Glarnorganshire, and
a political ages; in that district, wishing to retire, ob-
tained the appoiltmeiat of his successor from the trea-
sury, and wher afterward* it was proposed to divide
the districts, th clerk objected, saykg he had pur-
chased his appontment of Mr. Morris. (Hear, hear.)
He asked for an .xplanation of this. (Hear, bear.) If
they demanded be service of men of high reputation
they ought to pa} them well ; but he was met with the
remark " Oh, weca.n get plenty of men well up to the
mark for less mosey." Yes, but by the same rule he
(Mr. Roebuck) solid say that he could get plenty of men
in that house up b the mark and capable of discharging
the duties of the hon. member for Westbury quite as
well as he.did for half the amount he was paid. (Hear,
and laeghter.) The same objection • was raised
by the Lord Chancellor to the increase of these
a laries, and his (\lr. R )elmck's) argument applied
equally to the Lord Chancellor, that plenty of legal
gentlemen could be found cioable of discharging his
duties for 1— ""'",,-.7- (Laughter.) He conteroeu ttitt
• tie maximum sum gavi,4l to 4
ud• too
rrAiet, hor all of therniii-t • *Ocr-7,...1a,1---to place them
above the anxieties and meaunesses of the world, to
enable them to hold that position in society they ought
to hold. (Hear )
Lord STANLEY seconded the motion, and in doim;
so ent,,red fully inio the history of he establishment of
the County Courts and the appointment of the judges,
and referred to the number of cases each of them heard
annually, and the number of miles they had to travel,
which gave but a slight idea of the am mat of labour
they had to perform. He contended that there was a
great constitutional principle involved in having the
salaries of these judges fixed by Parliament, and not de-
pendenit upon the caprice of the Treasury. Holding
that opinion, and holding also that 1,500/. was rot too
large a salary for the duties involved in it, he cordially
a conded the motion.

Sir G. GREY deeply regretted the personal attacks
which bad been made with so much bitterness upon Mr.
Wilson -by Mr, Roebuck. Leaving his hon. friend to
answer these attacks, which he had no doubt of his abi-
lity to do, he rose to explain what course the Govern-
ment had taken on the sulject. He bad always been
in favour of a uniform salary, and when the courts were
first instituted, he fixed a uniform salary of 1,000/. Af-
t-rwards, when the right hon. gentlemen opposite were
in office, the present system was adopted by Parliament.
Owing to the great comp'aints which had lately, arid
very naturally, been made by the judges, the subject
had been fully considered by the Government, and they
had determined, in the bill now before the House of
Lords, that the salaries of the judges should be fixed ;
that, saving existing interests, those salaries should in
every case be reduced to 1.2001. a-year. At the seine
time, as this bill would come to this house for discus-
sion, when the question of salaries could be considered
with greater advantage than at ',resent, he hoped the
house would not pledge itself now to the higher salary
of 1,5001. He concluded by [coring the previous
question.

- Mr. MORRIS defended the conduct of his namesake,
11 who had been attacked by Mr. Riebuck.
Mr. WILSON remarked that although the whole of
Mr. Roebuck's speech had assumed much of the com-
plexion of a personal grievance, that learned gentleman
had given him no intimation of the course of argument
he intended to pursue. Nevertheless, he was prepared
to give so clear and simple an explanation that Mr. Roe-
buck would finl that ho had " taken nothing " by his
motion. Mr. Wilson then proceeded to explain that at
the time the selection particolarly referred to by Mr.
R shuck was made, all the county court judges preferred
their claims to the maximum salary of 1,5001. The re-
pre,entations so made were most anxiously con,idered
by Mr. Glylstone and himself, and they took the bet
advic t which c mid be obtained as to the principle up• n
which the additional salary should be conferred. The
principle fixed upon was the amount of work which de-
volve ! upon the re-pective ju lges In the selections
ma le there could be no favouritism, inasmuch as the
names of the persons were not appended to their repre-
sentations ; awl with the exception of one name—that
~f a gentleman whose claims stood out paramount—he
(Mr Wilson) knew nothing of who the respective claim-
ants were. The whole matter was arranged through
the instrument ility of numburs. Mr. Wilson also re-
ferred t ) subsequent transiictione, and claimed also as
f, them c _mimeo -extrtx-tttton aunt the charge of
favourites;,, or partialitY•

Sir J. PAKINGTON recommended Mr. Roebuck,
er what had fallen from Sir George Grey, not to press
his motion.

After a few words from Sir G. PECHELL,
Mr. MALINS also urged that the motion should be
withdrawn, at the same time ho hoped the uniform
salary would ultimat,ly be fixed at 1,5001. a year.
Mr. GLADSTONE hoped the question would not be
deemed as foreclosed by statements which had fallen
from Mr. Matins and other members. He hoped the
question of sa!a'y, and the reconstruction of the duties
of the county court judge,, would be held as " open
questions." Mr. Gladstone repudiated the imputations
thrown out against the Treasury by Mr. Roebuck. He
chelishud the hope that that learned gentleman would
withdraw his charges a,ainst Mr. Wilson.
Mr. DISRAELI held that Mr. Wilson bad satisfac-
torily answered the charge brought against him by Mr.
Roebuck. He also urged the house not to pledge itself
now to 1,5001. or any other sum as the sa'ary for the
county court juidges. The great question to which the
house must shortly address itself was the reduction of
the public expenditure in all its branches ; and, there-
fore, he hoped they would not pledge themselves now
to give high salaries.

Mr. ROEBUCK then withdrew his motion.
POOR-LAW REMOVAL BILL.

Mr. BOUYERIE moved for leave to bring in a bill
to amend the law for removal of po,r persons
chargeable i❑ England who have been in other part,
of the Queen's dominions. At present, he stated
that Irish and Scotch paupers %Vele sent from his
country to certain ports, where they were shovelled Put,
and no further care was taken of them. In place of this,
he propoFel that the same precautions should be taken
with Irish and Scotch paupers as were now taken with
English paupers previous to removal, and that when re-
moved they should be taken direct to the workhouse
where they were chargeable.

Mr. NVILLIANIS Faid it was impossible to obtain
information from the Irish paupers as to what parish
they were chargeab'e.

After some conversation, in which Mr. Vincent Scully,
Sir W. Jelliffe, Mr. Floyer, and Mr. Baines took part,
the bill was ordered to be brought in.
REFORM OF THE CORPORATION OF LONDON.
Sir G. GREY, in moving for leave to bring in a bill for
the better regulation of the City of London, hoped it would
be hardly necessary for him to say that her Majesty's Go-
vernment approached the subject with no unfriendly feel-
ings towards that great body which would be affected by
the provisions of the bill ho sought leave to introduce. On
the contrary, they felt that that body, from its antiquity,
its connection with the metropolis of this great country, its
historical associations, and the great services it had ren-
dered at various poriols to the cause of civil and religions
liberty, was entitled to respect and consideration. The ob-
ject of this measure, and he trusted its effect, would be in
nowise to diminish the importance or to lessen the dignity
of the corporation of London ; but he hoped, by remov-
ing the defects which might exist in its constitution,
or in the administration of its affairs, and by bring-
ing it more in harmony with the spirit of recent legis-
lation with respect to municipal institutions, to in-
crease its usefulness, to strengthen its influence and
efficiency, and to render it bet ter able to fulfil all those
great objects for which it was originally designed. In deal-
ing with this question, Parliament had the advantage of
two elaborate and careful inquiries. One w is that con-
ducted by the commissioners appointed in 183' to inquire
into the municipal institutions of the country, and which
in 1837 made a distinct and separate report on the City of
London. The other was that conducted by the commission-
ers appointed in 1851, for the express purpose of inquiiing
into the existing state of the corporation ; and the bill
which he should move for leave to introduce was mainly
foundei upon the recommendation of that commission.
The commissioners in 1853 were his right hon. friends the
present Secretary of State for the Colonies and the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer, together with a very distinguished
and learned gentleman who for many years occupied a seat
on the judicial bench with equal credit to himself and ad-
vantage to the public interests, but who had retired from
that situation in consequence of a physical infirmity, retain-
ing, however, in the fullest degree all his high mental and
intellectual powers. That gentleman, at the request of the
Government, had afforded the public the assistance of his
great learning and knowledge as a member of the commis-
sion—he referred to Sir John Patteson. (Cheers.) It was
right to state that the commissioners had placed on record
at the beginning of their report their testimony to the
readiness which had been evinced by all the authorities of
the City to give them the fullest information in their
power, and to faci'itate the inquiries with which they had
been entrusted :—" We think it right," said the commis-
sioners, " to state that we found the utmost readiness in all
quarter to assist us in the execution of your Majesty's cam-
.nission, by the communication of facts and suggestions.
This readiness was manifested not only by independent
witnesses who were unconnected with the corporation, but
also by the governing members of the corporation, and by
its officers, all of whom willingly came forward.to describe
their several duties, and to state the facts respectively falling
ender their cognisance." He (:--sir G. Grey) believed that
the authorities of the City would be ready to entertain the
bill which he should have the honour to introduce in the
same spirit as that in which they had met the inquiry
placed in the bands of the commissioners. He did not
dresutne to anticipate that they would give their ready
tcquiescence to all the proposals contained in this bill, but
ee believed they would meet them fairly, dispassionately
end with an earnest desire to remedy any defects 'which
night exist in the constitution of the corporation, and tt
render it, more efficient for the purposes for which it wse.
I,4psigned. (Cheers.) The commissioners added at the tend
of the rep6rt; ‘f lire desire to state that "although we hive

found much which in onr judgment calla for amendment,
yet we have discovered nothing which can affect iujuri-
ourly the honour and integrity of the officers to whom the
aff die of phis Feat corporation have been confided." The
commissioners in 1833 referred in the first instance to the
report of the commission in 1837, for a description of the
actual constitution of the governing body iu the City of
L 'laden. The comn.iesion recommended that no legisla-
tive measures ehoulii be adopted by Parliament, for they
said that h remedy for many of the defects thst existed
might be applied by the Common Council itself. In the
last report f. reference was made to various acts which had
been pa=ned since the date of the previous report, and also
to various changes which had been male by the Common
Council in order to carry into effect several improve-
ments ; but the commissioners stated tbat no substantial
or systematic reform had-been made since 1837. With re-
gard to the recommendations they offered, the commis-
sioners stated they had taken the leading provisions of the
Corporations Act as their guide, making, of course, due
allowance for those circumstances which distinguished
Louden from every other municipal corporation. They
stated that the objects of the Municipal Reform Act were
two—first, to reform the constitution of the existing mu-
nicipal bodies, and secondly, to enlarge their boundaries.
The commissioners gave at great length, and with much
clearness, their reasons for not recommending that the
corporations should be extended to the whole metropolis,
following thus out the provisions of the Municipal Reform
Art; but it Would not be necessary to quote that portion
of their report, inasmuch as Parliament had already ex•
p reset its opinion on the subject by passing the Metropolis
Local Management, Act of last year. With regard to the
constitution of the corporation it weir rieht to notice an
importaut oissinctiou oetween net ot the City of Loreree
and of every other corporation. The commissioners of
1835 stated in their first report that—" The most common
and most striking defect in the constitution of the munici-
pal core rations of England and Wales, is that the corpo-
rate bodies exist independently of the communities among
which they are found. The corporations look upon them-
selves, and are considered by the inhabitants, as separate
and exclusive bodies; they have powers and privileges
within the towns and cities from which they are named,
but in most places all identity of interest between the cor-
porations and the inhabitants has disappeared." The com-
missioners of 1853 went on to say—" From the defect de-
scribed in this passage the Corporation of London has for
many years been exempt. The manner in which the Com-
mon Council is elected has produced to a great extent at
identity of interests between the governing municipal
body and the existing municipal community, and has se-
cured to the latter a council representing their general opi-
nions and feelings." (Hear, hear.) The right hon. hart.
then-stated, from the report of the commissioners of 1837,
what was the existing constitution of the City corporation,
the number of aldermen, common councillors, &c., with
the powers of the three courts. The bill which he should
ask leave to lay on the table was founded mainly, though
not exclusively, on the recommendations of the COMMiA-
-Bioners. Its general scope was—first, to reform the con-
stitution of the City corporation and its jurisdiction •,
secondly, to abolish certain customs now in force which
were injurious to trade and commerce, and which had
been abolished in other corporations; and thirdly, to
divest the corporate body of anomalous powers, some of
which in the opinion of the commissioners should cease
altogether, and some of which should be transferred. The
main, governing body would remain as it now was—
namely, composed of the mayor, aldermen, and common
councillors, the lord mayor and aldermen being members
of the latter body; but= the number and constitution of
the several parts it was proposed materially to alter. In
the first instance, the commissioners recommended that the
number of wards, at present 26, should be reduced to 16 ;
and this would be proposed by the bill. It 'also proposed
to render these wards more nearly equal in area and popu-
lation. It was proposed that one alderman and five com-
mon councillors should be elected by each of the 16 wards
—making the total number 96, instead of 232. He believed
that 64 was the largest number of any council eleute 1 under
the Municipal Corporations Act; and the co ow! or one's
had expressed a very decided opinion that the existing
number in the City of London was too large, and ought to
he materially reduced. An important change was pro-
posed as to the aldermen. At present they were elected
T life ; it was proposed that they should be elected for six
years only, one-half of them going out at the end of each
three years. He propose(' that the common councilmen
should be elected annually, their qualification to be ttni
same as in other municipal corporations, namely, the pore
session of real or personal estate worth 1,0001., or an annual
rating of 301., the existing qualification of freedom of the
City, now required, being dispensed with. A material
alteration would also be proposed in the constituency by
which the common council was elected. The voter at pre-
sent mast not only occupy a tenement in the ward rated
at 101., but he muet also be a freeman of the City, and on
the Parliamentary register of the City, which made it ne-
cessary that he should reside within 7 miles. The commis-
sioners observed that this condition of residence was un-
fitted to the peculiar an:i special circumstances of the City,
and they proposed to dispense with it. The bill also pro-
posed that no condition of residence should he attached to
the qualification of the voter in these ward election,
and that the condition of freedom of the City should
also be dispensed with, which had the. effect of
narrowing the constituency without improving its
character. The fray, rh i a II roiyustri ara. I wi
part of the (Ail itseir not long age, and
,ono ©J o
tbefOre Parliament in the form of a bill, but-which
was opposed by the livery companies and rejected. The
commissioners proposed that the common council with re-
Sneed numbers, and with the constituency he had stated,
should he entrusted with the election of all the superioi
paid officers of the corporation. This was also in accord-
ance with the schemseof the Municipal Corporations Act,
as applicable to other corporatiens. The commissioners re-
commended, and the bill proposed, that the lord mayor,
sheriffs, recorder, and other officers now elected in the
court of common hall or the (loud of Aldermen should be
elected by the Common Council;. and it was further pro-
posed that the choice of lord mayor should no longer be
restricted, as it was at present, to aldermen who had
passed the office of sheriff, or even touldermen at all, or
to members of the Common Council, but that every person
eligible to be elected common councilman should also be
eligible to be elected lord mayor: ~(Hear.) The commis-
sioners thought that oppertuniti would thus be afforded
for electing persons of commercial eminence and influence.
It was proposed that the qualification of sheriff should be
altered, and should be the same as the qualification for com-
mon -councillor. The commissioners further recommended
material alterations in the election of auditors. At present
there were four ; they were elected by the common council,
and held office for two years. The bill proposed that three
auditors should be annually elected from persons qualified
to be common councillors, by persons qualified to vote for
common councillors; but no common councilman was to be
elected an auditor. Provision was also made for auditing
the accounts twice a year, and for their transmission to the
Secretary of State. It was also proposed to extend the
provisions of the Municipal Corporations Act, with regard
to the charging or alienation of property, to the City of
London. As to the court of Aldermen, it was proposed
by the commissioners, and the bill carried that recommen-
dation into effect, that the court of Aldermen, as distinct
from a magisterial court, should be abolished, and
its powers transferred altogether to the common council.
With regard to the courts of the City the bill w- uld sub-
stantially carry into effect the recommendations of the com-
rnissiouers. The Court of Hustings, they said, was prac-
tically obsolete, and could be made available for no good
purpose. That court would be abolished. The Lord
Mayor's Court and the Sheriffs' Court would be consoli-
dated into one court. The appeal to the Court of St. Mar-
tin-le-Grand would be abolished • that court was seldom
called into existence, and this could only be done by appli-
cation to the Court of Chancery. Its jurisdiction would be
traesferred to the courts at Westminster; the appeal would
in fact be the same as that from the county courts. The
bill further prOvided, in accordance with the recommen-
dations of the commissioners, that the Recorder should
be the sole judge of the Lord Mayor's Court, instead of
sitting as the Lord Mayor's assessor. With regard to the
Central Criminal Court, the Lord isfryor and aldermen
would cease to form an essential part of that court. He
now approached a most important subject, one on which
the bill was founded mainly on the _ recommenda-
tions of the recent commissioners. They propo-ed that the
principle established by the Municipal Reform Act—that
notwithstanding any custom or bye-law to the contrary,
any person might keep a shop for the sale of wares and mer-
chandise, should be extended to the City of London. In
this recommendation the Common Council had themselves
expressed their concurrence. Therefore the bill proposed
to abolish all exclusive rights of trading—all rights of pro-
hibiting persons, not freemen, from carryingon business in
the City. Other rights were proposed to be abolished, as re-
commended by the commissioners. First, was the right of
metage of grain, fruit, wares, and merchandise bought in-
to the City of London. These rights were exercised by
usage, conferred by &charter of Jetties I. This metage was
not confined to articles landed within the limits of the
City, but extended ro all goods landed on both si /ea of
the River, from Staines, in Middlesex. to Yantlett Creek.
This right of the City had been disputed, and a snit had
beeen instituted ; but it never came to an actual deci-
sion, something in the nature of a compromise having
taken place. The bill proposed in addition to abolish the
monopoly of the porterage of coals and other articles exer-
cised by fellowship porters ; also all street tolls on carts
not belonging to freemen. (Hear.) Here again the City
had been beforehand with Parliament in wishing to abolish
the right, the Common Council having recommended its
abolition. It was further proposed to repeal the enactment
requiring brokers to be admitted, and to pay certain fees
to the corporation ; also the restriction on the grant by the
Crown of any market within seven milesof the City. These
were all the rights which it was proposed to abolish which
interfered with trade; and looking at the spirit of recent
legislation, looking at other municipal corporations—at
the great advantage which must be derived by all persons
trading in the City of London from the abolition of these
rights —lookiag at the spirit evinced by the City itself not
to insist upon these rights, but to abandon such of them as
were felt to be onerous—he anticipated the ready acqui-
escence of Parliament in the measure he proposed. Certain
rights which existed as between the City of London and
the borough of Senthwark would also be regulated, as re-
commended by the commissioners. There was one matter
of great importance connected with the dues levied by the
City, which no doubt presented considerable difficulty, the
duty on coals. (Hear, hear.) There were three of these
duties—one at 4d. a ton, which would continue at that
rate till 1868, and then revert to 4d. a chaldron, in which
form it was a permanent duty, having been granted in ex-
change for some claim which the corporation abandoned.
That duty was Very heavily charged ; for the City, while
collecting these duties, had appropriated them mainly to
metropolitan improvements, not confined to the limits of
the City, bat extending over the area of ti, metropolis;
they had shown no disposition to make an improper use of
the duties levied by them on coals. But the result was that
this 4d. duty was now charged for the Cannon-street im-
provement to the extent of 580,0001., besides compensations
and allowances to coal- meters of 70,0001. The second was
an Bd. duty, the net proceeds of which in 1852 were about
113,0004 ; and this sum, with an an annual payment of
115,0001., constituted the fund denominated the London
Bridge Approaches Fund. The duty was not a permanent
;me ; it would expire in. 1862 ; and it was calculated that
before that_ time the charges now existing upon it would
be-paid off by the proceeds of that duty. There remained
the penny duty, making in all 13d. per ton upon coals.
The net; proceeds of the penny duty in 1852 were 14,0001.
all of which .was payable, to metropolitan itnprovelpmete:
This duty would
__oleo min 1862, la sowiteriq those
_ _
• r _

[PRICE 4D. STAMPED SD•

duties, one material fact was to be borne in mind ; they
were riot levied merely on coal brou;ht into the City of
London, but on an area very far beyand it, over a dis-
trict extending 20 miles from the General Post Office
—a district larger than that (of the metropolitan police,
of the Registrar-General, or of the Postmaster-General,
and whose inhabitants derived no direct benefit what.
ever from the tax. The commissioners recommended
that these duties should be taken altogether from the
City of London, and placed in the hinds of the Metro•
politan Board of Works, to be by them applied to
same general purposes as the City had applied them to,
subject, however, to the existing charges upon there. In
dealing with this subject, Government had come to the
conclusion that the transfer from the corporation to another
00,1 y would leave untouched the great grievanceof the im-
position of this- tax upon leered:is who derived no direct
benefit whatever from it. It should also be remembered
that in sanctioning the appointment of the Metropolitan
Board of Works, Parliament had gi yen that board the power
of raising rates for the purpose of executing works within
the metropolis. What the Government proposed was this
—to allow the 81 and then. rate to expire, us they would
do it) 185 t, when the charges upon them would be paid off;
and with regard to the CI. duty, to levy it only for a suffi-
cient time to pay off the charge of 580,0901., and the ether
quell slime, and then allow it also to expire. (Hear.)
He would next advert to the conservancy of the Thames.
The conservancy of the river was now placed in the
hands of the corporation, from the bridge at Staines to
he junction of the Thames with the Medway. It was
proposed by the bill, in accordance with the reconiteenda-
Lion of the commissioners, to place the conservancy of the
river in a board consisting of the First Lord of the Admi-
ralty. the President of the Board of Veade. one of the
Commissioners. of Woosla_ anal _gee Deputy-Master of the
Trinity House, with power to employ persons under them
who would be competent to superintend the conservancy
of the river. No not revenue was derived by the corpora-
tion from the rights of conservancy which they exercised.
A. question was at issue between the City and the Crown
with regard to rights along the banks and shores of the
river; but the corporation themselves stated that those
rights were wholly independent of the exercise of their
right of conservancy. The suit was approaching a ter-
mination ; and it was not proposed by the bill to touch
~hose rights. If the City succeeded in the suit it would
he left in possession of those rights and that property, just
a- if this bill had not passed. All that was proposed
to be transferred in the conservanoy of the river was
those tolls and dues which wore not collected by the
City as a source of revenue to themselves, but for the pur-
pose of meeting the expenditure of the conservancy itself.
The bill further proposed to abolish the exclusive rights of
the Company of Watermen from Staines to Yantlett Creek,
which prohibited persons not duly qualified from plying
fur hire on the river. He would next advert to the police.
Here the Government had determined not to act upon the
recommendations of the commissioners—not from any
doubt as to the general expediency of those recommenda-
tions or the correctness of the authority upon which they
were founded, but from considerations which he would
shortly state. The commissioners recommended that the
City police should be incorporated with the metropolitan
police, on the ground of efficiency and economy. If there
was no police in the City at that moment, no doubt it
would be right for Parliament to adopt that recommenda-
tion, and not to except sortie portion of the metropolitan
district from a general management which was applic-
able to the whole district. There was no doubt an
anomaly in a small district having a separate control
over its police ; but the anomaly applied rather to the
existence of a municipal corporation in that limited area
than to what might be considered as the almost necessary
consequence of the existence of such a corporation—the
possession of those powers with regard to a police force
which it was proposed to leave in the hands of the City of
London. (Hear.) If this were a now claim on the part
of the City there would be no ground for it ; but by an
act passed in 1839 a very efficient body of police was estab-
lished by authority of Parliament, under the control of
the City, and under the direction of a very able commis-
sioner ; and though he slid not say that no inconveniences
had arisen from the existence of the City police as distinct
from the metropolitan police, he would say that there had
been none of a serious character. There had been harmony
and co-operation between the City and the metropolitan
police—between the Government and the authorities of the
City of Loudon ; there had been a. readiness at all times on
the part of the City authorities to listen to suggestions as to
the employment of the police ; and whenever it had been
thought necessary to strengthen their numbers in the City
by adding reinforcements from the metropolitan police that
had been readily acquiesced in by the City authorities.
Admitting, therefore, iu theory, that it w arid be better to
have the police under one control—still, as they left,
within those narrow limits, a corporation of great dig-
eity and importance, and of very large powers, it would
require a strong case of practical inconvenieuce—stronger
than any that had yet arisen—to induce them to l ays the
corporation of the City of London in a position in which no
corporation was left—namely, without any police whatever.
The bill, therefore, did not prop's,' any alteration in the
City police; it would be left in the position in which it now
stood, but this would be no precedent for granting the con•
trol of their own police in other districts within the metro-
polis. The greatest inconvenience-'would arise from brelk
ing up the police into small bodies under different. autho-
rities. The position of those districts. was a..) totally dif-
sereu,...... el„, a. 0,;„ or.,London, which had
exercised its powers most efficiently, V•et the one formed
no precedent whatever for the claim of the other--a claim
which the Government could not for a moment entertain.
['here was one other point on which the recommendations
of the commissioilers were not strictly adopted. So long
as the aldermen were elected for life there could be no ob-
jection to their acting as magistrates during the whole
oeriod of their tenure of office • and, generally speaking,
their duties had been extremely well and efficiently per-
formed. But when their term of office was reduced trots

life t. a short period of years, and they were made eligible,
as was proposed by the bill, for re-election, there was a
;rest objection to allowing the office of magistrate to be in
necessary connection with such a tenure of office us alder-
man. In no instance was it recognised, save in a very ex-
ceptional one of the mayor of a corporation, who was a
magistrate during his year of office and the following year.
The commissioners of 1e37 did not contemplate the reten-
don by the aldermen of magisterial du ties for they pro-
posed that the City should be empowered to apply, as other
corporations had power to do, for the appointment of sti-
pendiary magistrates to exercise that jurisdiction. If this
was done, and one or more police magistrates were ap•
pointed, it was anticipated that aldermen would retire from
the discharge of police duties, and confine themselves to
what might be called civic duties. But it was not quite
safe to leave the question in that pesition. The City of
London might not think it right to apply for police magis-
trates ; or if they did, and such magistrates were ap-
peieted, the aldermen might not be inclined to retire from
the exercise of their functions. After full consideration,
therefore, ho proposed that the aldermen of the City of
London should be magistrates only for the discharge of
civic business ; and that the City should be thrown into
the metropolitan police districts, for the purposes of police
magistrates, though not of police—(hear, hear)—:hat a
new district should ho created, consisting of the City, or
that the City should be divided amongst the contiguous
districts, so that the criminal jut indiction should be exer-
cised by the stipmdiary magistrates as it was throughout
the metropolitan district. The aldermen would be placed
by this arrangement precisely ou the same footing as were
the magistrates of Middlesex, who were excluded from
criminal jurisdiction in the metropolitan districts, but who
performed, with great advantage to the inhabitants of Mid-
dlesex, duties relating to the care of prisons, asylums,
bridges. &c.,—duties which no doubt would be performed
with equal satisfaction by the aldermen of London. On one
other subject the recommendations of the commissioners
were not carried into effect—the Irish Society. The subject
was one which required much attention before a satik.ctory
arrangement could be proposed. It did not necessarily form
part of the present bill, maul would, therefore, be reserved for
future consideration. He had now stated tho principal pro-
of the bill. which he should ask leave to introduce ;
and be was sure it would receive the di p ssionate and ca'm
coons teratiou of the house. He anticipattol, from communi-
cations. he hard had with gentlemen connected with the
City, that it would ha met by them in a spirit that would
insure a fair consideration of its different proposals. Ho
proposed to give ample time for this, because he had felt
it his duty to refuse a request made to him by some gentle-
men of the City to see the bill before it was brought in.
(Hear.) With the di-position which he hoped the City
would evince—with the disposition which he doubted not
would be entertained by Parliament to give a fair and dis-
passionate consideration to the whole of its provisions--
with all that attention that was due to the importance of
the subject—he trusted that the result would be to give
greater efficiency to the corpor .tian, to strengthen s in-
fluence, and to increase its usefulness. He would conchs le
by expressing his hope that the anticipations of the com-
missioners themselves would he fully realised—namely,
that the changes in the constitution of the corporation
which they have intimated, and which are founded upon
the recognised policy f the country, will piece this corpo-
ration upon a more solid and eularge.l basis, and that the
corporation will continue, under an amended system, to
possess abundant means, not
only of public usefulness, but
also exercising decent hospitality. (Cheers and laughter.)
Sir J. DUKE dint not anticipate that the corporation of
London would throw any unnecessery opposition in the
way of the measure, but he thought sufficient time shout I
be given for its consideration before the second reading.
With that view he begged to ask the right hon, baronet
when he proposed to read it a second time. One part of
the statement of the right hon. baronet was not, he
thought, characterised by his usual frankness. With refe-
rence to the coal duties, he had stated that they were re-
ceived by the corporation of London, whereas of the 19.1 d.
charged, only 4d. went to their account, they receiving the
rest as trustees for the Government. He wished to know
whether the corporation would have the appointment of the
police magistrates?
Mr. WILLIAMS considered that the bill, if passed,
would be of the greatest benefit to the citizens of London,
and that it would render the corporation second only in
importance to Parliament as far as the City was concerned.
Very great praise was due to the commissioners for the
care and ability with which their report was drawn up,
and for the great pains they took ininvestigating theaffairs
of the corporation, which thought itself too strong for Par-
liament, and boasted that if the House of Lords interfered
with it the hereditary portion of the Legislature would
place itself in a position of imminent danger. As a citizen
of London he thanked the right hon. baronet for adopting
the excellent suggestions of the commissioners in the
framing of the bill.
Mr. MASTERMAN did net wish to raise any discussion
at the present stage of the measure. No doubt it would
be anxiously watched by the corporation, and he was there-
fore of opinion that ample time should be given to examine
its provisions before the second reading.
Sir G. GREY said that the bill would be brought in and
read a first thee that evening. He did not wish to press it
forward with undue haste, but at the seine time would not
consent to postpone it to any period which might endanger
its passing this session. Ho should propose the 21st for
the second reading, which would allow an interval of three
weeks to elapse, which he considered would afford ample
time for the consideration of its provisions. He was afraid
of wearying the house by reading a very long and clear ac-
count given by the commissioners respecting the coal duties,
but certainly thought that lie had read that part which
stated that the City received them to the extent stated as
trustees for the Government.
Leave was then giveit to bring in the bill.
O>3 the motion of Dir. WILSON, it Wall otionc), that a