The Sun.
London, England, 1857-05-15 00:00:00

SIR WILLIAM MAGNAY.

The following is a summary of the proceedings
which took at the Court of Common Council on
Thursday, the 7th inst., and which were concluded
yesterday, upon the discussion of the following
motion, which was submitted to the Court by Mr.
Blake :
" That this Court has learned with astonishment and re-
gret that by a decree of the Court of Appeal of Brussels,
dated 27th February, 1857, Sir William Magnay, baronet,
an alderman and magistrate of this city, has been adjudg-
ed by default guilty of fraud, and condemned to three
years' imprisonment and a fine of 3,000 f.
" That this Court has learned from its law officers with
equal astonishment and regret that the London Corpora-
tion Act, 1849, 12th and 13th of Victoria, cap. 94, framed
with the especial view of securing the purity of this cor-
poration, by declaring any of its members disqualified who
shall be convicted of fraud, is in this case inoperative, be-
cause the conviecion has been by a foreign Court.
" That Sir William Magnay not having taken any steps
for the revocation of the judgment against him, this Court
feels bound to express its opinion that be ought no longer
to occupy the posi►tion of an alderman of this city, and to
request that he will relinquish that office."
Mr. BESLEY seconded the motion.

Mr. J. J. MILLARD proposed an amendment to
the effect,
" That it is repugnant to the law and usages of this
country in the ca,o rf a British-born subject resident in
England to uphold the sentence of a foreign criminal court,
simply because it is a judgment, and thereby to abrogate
the right of inquiry into the circumstances, more especially
as regards a Belgian judgment, under which it may have
been obtained. That the judgment by default in question
was Riven on the public prosecutor's appeal against ono of
acquittal from charges which had been previously ignored
by two successive tribunals, which acquittal had been
gained notwithstanding that the evidence on the part of
the prosecution had been procured by the arrest of one of
the defendants in violation of an authorised assurance of
safety ; and for these, and other reasons, this Court is not
bound to express its opinion that Sir William Afe,gnay
ought no longer to occupy the position of an alderman of
this city."
_ _ _ _ _

Mr. ANDERTON said he had pleasure in seconding
the amendment, which he trusted the Court would
unanimously adopt. He contended that if any
parties were aggrieved it was the shareholders, and
it rested with them to institute proceedings against
the directors if they thought proper to do so. He
believed Sir W. Magnay to be perfectly innocent
of the charges made against him.
Sir IV. MAGNAY said he was prepared to justify
his conduct before any competent tribunal, and was
ready to submit to its decision. He had been
charged with having, in conjunction with Mr. Mas-
terman, abs racted 58,0007. from the funds of the
Great Luxembourg Railway Company. It had
been stated by the Belgian Attorney-General that
when questioned upon the subject they at once
admitted that no French party was in exiAence,
and that the money bad been lost by a private
speculation of their own. A grosser, a more foil,
a more libellous insinuation had never been made.
He held in his hand letters from the parties to
whom the advances were made, showing in the
most incontestable manner that the transaction
was a regular and proper one—whether a judicious
one or not he was not going to say; but there was
a party—a most responsible and a most influential
party—in Paris for whom Vie shares were pur-
chased, and that Mr. Masterman was no more than
the agent in the matter. He was prepared to prove,
if time were given him, that not only was the
transaction a bona fide one, but that it was one,
under the circumstances of the case, which was
most justifiable, and which would have been most
advantageous for the company itself bad it been
carried out.

At this state of the proceedings the discussion
was adjourned.
Yesterday the Court again met, when the dis-
cwsion was resumed by Mr. De Jersey, who, at
the conclusion of a lengthened addres, expressed
himself strongly in favour of the original motion.

After short discussion Mr. Millard's amendment
was yut, and lost by a large majority.

T. FRY then moved as a further amend-
ment,
" That it be referred to a special committee to examine
into the nature and truth of the charges brought against
Sir William Magnay in the Belgian courts, on which
judgment by default has been pronounced, and to report
to this Court to what extent those charges, if true, affect
his moral character, and whether in consequence it has
become necessary that he should be called upon to resign
his gown as alderman of this city."

Mr. Ross seconded the amendment, which was
put and carried.
Upon a division being called for, there appeared,
For the affirmative 39
For the negative
Mr. T. PARKER-I beg to ask whether Sir W.
Magnay has voted in favour of the amendment.
Mr. WoODTHORPE—Yes.

Mr. NORRIS (one of the tellers)—As the num-
bers are equal, I beg to ask your lordship whether
you vote or not.

- The LORD MAYOR—I shall certainly vote for the
inquiry. (Loud cheers.)
The amendment was consequently carried by the
casting vote of the Lord Mayor.
The original motion of Mr. Blake was negatived
by a majority of 1.
A committee, consisting of Mr. Alderman Cubitt,
_ _ _

Sir J. Musgrove, and a commoner selected from
each ward, was then appointed to institute an in-
veAigaticn •in accordance with the terms of Mr.
Fry's amendment.