The Sun.
London, England, 1859-07-01 00:00:00

COURT a

,OUNCIL.

Yesterday a Court was held for the despatr'
public business. of
TIM METROPOLITAN RAILWAY;

The Chairman of the Improvemen4 Committee
brought up a report for sealing a, deed of agree
meat under arrangements mad with respect to the
Metropolitan Railway. It stated that the commit-
tee, upon a reference made to them to carry out a
decision of the Court upon a memorial of the Metro-
politan Railway Company in April last ;nad devoted
themselves to the performance of 4:nen.' duty, and
had found that some details of the arrangements
entered into might be carried out by a deed of set-
tlement, while others would require the introduc-
tion of clauses into the bill of the Metropolitan Rail-
way COmpany, now before Parliament. The
committee had ascertained from a deputation of
the Metropolitan Itailway Company that there
appeared to be no chance of inducing the Great
Northern Railway Company to take up the
shares for which it was originally sup-
posed they would subscribe, and that instead
of a capital of £950,000 the Metropolitan Rail-
way Company would therefore only be able to raise
£850,000, with which amount of capital the depu-
tation had asked the committee, on behalf of the
Corporation, to subscribe the same sum which they
had undertaken to do when it was intended that
the share capital should be £950,000. The com-
mittee being satisfied upon this head, and having
secured as a return for their assent that an improved
communication should be made between the Metro-
politan Cattle-market and the Great Northern Rail-
way, had prepared the clauses of an agreement, to
which they recommended: that the seal of the Cor-
poration should be now affixed.
Mr. FRY asked whether the terms of the agree-
ment were contained in the report.
Mr. Deputy BOWER, the chairman of the Im-
provement Committee, said the whole terms of the
agreement were contained in a former report which
had been agreed to by two-thirds of the Corpora-
tion, and they would not have to expend a single
penny or take a single share more than was then
contemplated. (Hear.) As was well known, doubts
had always been entertained as to whether the
Great Northern Railway would subscribe the
£175,000 set down for them, and which would make
up a total share capital of £950,000, of which that
Court had already agreed to find £200,000. It was
now found that the company could not raise that
amount, because the Great Northern Company had
declined to take their shares, although, when it was
found that the undertaking was to be carried out,
they would probably be anxious to aid in its
execution. The Metropolitan Company, finding
themselves unable to raise more than £850,000,
had asked that Corporation to consent to carry out
the undertaking with that amount. The committee
had taken every pains to ascertain whether there
was any security that the company would be able
to raise the smaller sum, and he (the chairman) was
in a position to say that there was scarcely a doubt
upon the subject, for he had received assurances to
that effect from the chairman and secretary, and
other gentlemen connected with the company.
Still, the committee had told the deputation that
if they kept faith in regard to their agreement,
while the company kept faith only partially with
regard to the amount of their capital, the company
ought to give them some commensurate advantage.
It was suggested that this advantage should be an
improved communication between the new Metro-
politan Cattle-market and the Great Northern
Railway, and the result was that that company
had undertaken to put clauses in their bill for a
siding, and bringing a separate line into each of
the three lairs belonging to the market. This
would bring an addition to all the other advan-
tages which the line would confer upon the City,
and the additional value which it would confer
upon the property of the Corporation, and, while
the company would thus reduce their capital from
£950,000 to £850,000, the change in the plan
would be worth £lOO,OOO to the Corporation.
(Hear, hear.) The chairman then moved that the
Court should agree with the committee in their
report.
Mr. H. L. TAYLOR said he felt bound to oppose
the motion, as he regarded the whole scheme to be
neither more nor less than an abortion—an
ephemeral undertaking that would never be carried
out. He also objected because there was nothing
in the plan calculated to insure a communication
between Victoria-street and the New Cattle-mar-
ket, since the communication which they had
offered to effect could only be carried out with the
consent of the Great Northern Company, which
consent never would be obtained. He therefore
hoped the Corporation would have nothing to do
with the scheme.

Mr. MORRIS, M.P., said that if the bill- passed
with the proposed clauses in it there could be no
doubt as to the power of the Metropolitan Com-
pany to effect a junction with the Great Northern
line, and even if the bill passed without these
clauses, when the Metropolitan Railway was con-
structed the company, under the Railways Conso-
lidated Act, would have power to make the siding
with or without the consent of the Great Northern
Company. The fact was, that hitherto the Great
NOrthern Company had refused to take the
£175,000 of shares because they thought the
scheme would give the Great Western an advan-
tage by bringing that railway into direct commu-
nication with the centre of the city. When once
it became evident that the undertaking would• be
carried out, however, he had no doubt that the
Great Northern would be glad enough to establish
a communication between the two lines at their own
expense.
Mr. FRY would give no opposition to the mo-
tion, although be could not clearly see how the
City could advantageously invest £200,000 in such
a scheme.
After some further discussion, the motion was
agreed to by an overwhelming majority, and the
deeds of agreement were then formally sealed.

THIS nArs MARKETS.

SUR.HE

GUILDFORD.

June 30.

(Before G. Best, Esq., and a Benehof Magistrates.
APPLICATION FOR A SPIRIT LICENSE TO THE LON
DON-BRIDGE TAVERN.-IMPORTANT DECISION.-

J. WALLIS V. THE JUSTICES OF THE NEWINGTON

DIVISION.

This was an appeal against the decision of the
magistrates attending the petty sessions for the
Newington Division, for not granting appellant a
victualler's licence.

Mr. Bodkin, with whom was Mr. Robinson, were
counsel for the appellant; Mr. Knapp and Mr.
Garth were for the respondents.
Mr. Bodkin, on the part of the appellant, stated
this was a most extraordinary case. Ever since the
year 1833, at which time the house for which they

were endeavouring to obtain a spirit licence was in
the possession of the appellant's father, had they
been refused that privilege by the magistrates of
the locality. About that time, either in 1833 or
1834, the appellant's father applied to the Newing-
ton magistrates for a license for the London-
. _

bridge 'Tavern, now better known L.."
house," but, probably owing to some feeling, on the
part of tbi Bench, for there could have been very
little cause for their decision, they declined to
grant the application. Year after year, during the
life of the appellant's father, had they applied to
the same Bench continuously, and had on every
occasion been refused. Upon four different occa-
sions, Mr. Wallis had appealed against the magis-
trates' decision at the quarter sessions, but he was
there equally unsuccessful, so that at last, wearied
out with repeated disappointments, death relieved
him of his struggles. His son, the present appel-
lant, then became possessed of the house in ques-
tion, and he also became heir to the hereditary
hostility which had been displayed towards his
father in reference to the licence. He had, however,

- - -
since his accession to the property, endeavoured to
obtain that which his father was so often refused,
but his exertions had been attended with like results,
and as to what could be the causes that influenced the

worthyjustices in coming to their decision, not a few

conjectures had been hazarded. The applicant's
character was, as had been admitted by the counsel
on the other side, free from the slightest reproach ;
the house afforded every accommodation, and the

necessity for granting this license was unive,
acknowledged by persons of all positions in so
both in the locality and out of it. Travellers to and
from the different railway stations which abounded
in that important neighbourhood had constantly
complained that nothing beyond the usual liquor
to be obtained at a common beer-house could be had
at the London-bridge Tavern, owing to the want
of a spirit licence. The publicans of the locality
offered not the slightest opposition to the granting
of a licence, for the applicant's house was so situate
that it would not in any way interfere with their
privileges. The learned counsel then concluded by
hoping that he should have the pleasure of receiv-
ing from this Court that licence which for so many
years past the appellant had been refused.
The learned gentleman then called a number of
highly-respectable witnesses in support of the ap-
pellant's application, including the rectors of St.
Olave's parish (the Rev. T. P. Sproule), who testi-
fied as to the requirement for a licensed house at
that spot, and to the high character borne by Mr.
Wallis.

Mr. Robinson afterward summed up the appel-
lant's case, remarking that he could not conceive
what answer could be given by his learned friends
on the other side to the overwhelming case they
had made out.

Mr. Knapp, in reply, said, clever as had been the
management of this case by his learned friend, it
would, he thought, have been as well if he had ab-
stained from making any insinuations of what had
probably acted upon the minds of the magistrates
in refusing the application for this licence, the more
especially as he had not proved anything of the
kind. The objections the justices had for not granting
this licence were these, and they had always been
the same. They contended that this house was only
suitable for a gin-palace, as the accommodation it
possessed had not been shown to be anything of the
kind required for a hotel. The only question,
therefore, the magistrates had to decide was, is this
house in a good position for a gin-palace ? And the
magistrates had always decided that it was not.
Again, the Court of Quarter Sessions had on four
occasions held that the magistrates were right in
refusing the license to this house, first, because it
was not in a good position for a gin-palace ; and
secondly, that to be used as an hostelry, it did not
possess the accommodation necessary for such a place
of public resort. The argument that the house was
near the railway termini, and was a convenience to
persons travelling by the trains had been used before,
but still the necessity of another licensed house had
not been proved to the satisfaction of the magis-
trates. The traffic in that neighbourhood, no doubt,
was increased very much, but so also was the num-
ber of licensed houses in that part of London. The
fact of such an increase in the traffic might show
the necessity for granting another license in that
locality if the house for which it was sought pos-
sessed the requisite accommodation. There was no
doubt a house of the kind opened wherever a large
traffic existed would have a-great deal of custom,
but that was not the question. What they had to
consider was, whether this license was required for
the accommodation of the public. It appeared to
him that the magistrates had acted right and upon
a wise discretion when they said that this was an
inconvenient house, inconvenient in its position and
in its construction.
The Magistrates on the Bench having consulted
for about ten minutes,
The Chairman said he hoped the parties would
believe that the magistrates had treated this

question entirely as anew one, and as one coming
before them for the first time, without any
knowledge of the antecedents whatever of what
had guided the justices below in deciding upon not
granting the licence, except from what had been
there stated that day. In another court in which
he (the chairman) presided, he generally, endea-
voured to prevent the magistrates from giving any
reason for granting or refusing such applications.
It appeared, however, to the magistrates that
day that the requirements for the license were
fully shown, and they were, therefore, inclined to
grant the appellant the licence. They did so be- ,
cause they thought this house possessed accommo-
dation for the public quite sufficient, and because it
was kept by a highly-respectable man, who was
in every way fit to be trusted with a spirit licence ;
also, feeling that the apprehended obstruction to
the thoroughfare would nnt be allowed, and that no
inconvenience, but on the contrary benefit, could
accrue to the public by the granting of this licence.
As he had before said, the Bench, from the testi-
mony given that day, thought that the necessity
had been proved, and that the public had a right
to ask at their hands for this licence. Since the
last appeal there must have been a great increase
in the traffic, and consequently in the wants of the
public, therefore the Court thought they should be
only doing justice to the appellant and to the pub-
lic by reversing the decision of the magistrates,
and by granting to Mr. Wallis the licence he ap-
plied for.
Licence granted.
This decision, was received with loud cheering
by the spectators in a crowded court, but which
ebullition of feeling the officers on duty immediately
endeavoured to suppress.

THE FRENCH GENERALS AT

SOLFERINO.

.
A letter in a contemporary says—" As a friend
of one of the French generals killed at the battle of
Solferino by the Paris correspondent of the Horn-
ing Star, I trust you will find room in your next
number for the few lines I now take the liberty of
addressing you.
" I am aware of the difficulties experienced by
correspondents in obtaining correct information ;
I am aware also that it requires much goodat judg-
ment and long experience in the appreciion of
public rumours ; but I am at the same time certain
that all conscientious and impartial correspondents
never give as facts on dits, and hesitate before
wounding the feelings of relatives and friends on
mere cafe rumours. The correspondent of your
colleague says : Niel is dead. araguay dliit.
Hers seems to have been struck down by a cannon
ball, and died without a word or exclamation.
Leboeuf is also amongst the slain.'
" This correspondent then kills two other FrenCh
General Niel
generals, whose names. he evidently does not know.
Describing the last interview between
word
passed
bet the Emperor he says :---, Not
between them, but the Emperor took from his neck
the token of a Marshal of France (?) and laid it
warrior's bosom:
correspondentalso tells us that
upon the dying
' The same
11
cauld had been taken Gaston de la Rochefo
pri-
soner by the .Austrians. Francis
thankful to him for this Joseph will be
which he will now learn for
important information,
6, My object in writing the first time.
the friends of the i ing this letter is to assure
are in perfect healt killed French generals that they
and spirits, and that they will
give the A --ustr.
meeting." lams this certitude at their next
.

We
have reason to believe that Lord Spencer
has been appointed Groom of the Stole, and Lord Waterpark
Lo rd in 'Waiting to the Prince Consort.
Her Majesty will receive the Address of Convo-
cation at Buckingham. Palace, on Monday next, at three
o'clock.
The Journal de la Corse states that upwards of
1,000 Austrian prisoners are to be sent to Bastia, Calvi, and
Bonifacio. Aja,ccio is to receive some of the wounded of
the array of Italy.