The Sun.
London, England, 1850-01-31 00:00:00

CITY COMMISSIONERS OF SEWERS.
On Tuesday, at Guildhall, the weekly meeting of the
City Commissioners of Sewers took place. Soon after
twelve o'clock Mr. Deputy Peacock took the chair.
The minutes of the last meeting having been read
and confirmed, and other formal business disposed of,
a memorial from the City of London Gas Company
was presented and read, in which that company stated
their willingness to supply gas at the rate of 4.t. per
1,000 cubic feet—(Hear, hear)—and at the rates of
3s. 61. and 3s. per 1,000 cubic feet, provided such a
reduction could be effected consistently with their
being able to make a dividend of 10 per cent. to their
shareholders.—(A laugh.) The memorialists further
stated that if any doubts were entertained of their
sincerity in these offers, they were perfectly ready to
enter into any security that might be deemed neces-
sary for the purpose of giving to the Court the fullest
assurance that the objects which they proposed to ac-
complish would be fully carried out; and, in this
respect, that they were prepared to submit themselves
to the direction of the Court.
Mr. TAYLOR observed, it was only fair that any-
thing intended to be done upon this subject should
be made a public act. As regarded the old company,
he was bound to express his entire confidence in the
high honour of the gentlemen who conducted its
affairs. The company bad done what a public body
in such a case might fairly be expected to do; they
not only reduced their demand to 4s. per 1,000 cubic
feet, but they had expressed their willingness to sup-
ply gas at the rate of 3s. 6d., and even 3s.
Mr. CONDER moved that the memorial just received
from the City of London Gas Company be entered
upon the minutes of the Court.
Mr. YOUNG seconded the motion.
Mr. STEVENS observed, that such a proposition
might be all very well, but who ever expected to see
gas for 3s. or even 3s. 6d. per 1,000 feet from the old
company, when they remembered that the memorial
did not even promise that until after the company
should have been able to pay 10 per cent. to their
shareholders ? They could never hope to get gas
from that company at a lower rate than 45., and even
such a boon as that would never have been granted to
the public if it had not been fur the Central Gas Con-
sumers' Company.
Mr. LOTT said that the memorial just presented
was a pleasing record to place upon their minutes—it
was a great point gained that they were in future to
have gas at the rate of 4s. per 1,000 cubic feet.
Mr. BLAKE would be sorry if it went forth to the
public that the memorial then received had induced
them to rescind their former resolution. The conces-
sion now made to the public of a reduction to 4s. per
1,000 feet would never have been made but for the
course taken in starting a rival company. Doubtless
steam-boats and omnibuses took their passengers
frequently for prices scarcely remunerative, but the
Court which he then addressed could not have taken
any other course than that which it had pursued ;
and, though the old company had come forward and
made offers, he felt that they could not desert the
new company, after it had been induced to invest its
capital in the undertaking.
Mr. ELLIOTT thought they ought to meet the old
company with courtesy, and with something like the
outward show of justice. The old company had
yielded to pressure from without ; they had given
way before the power of the Corporation of London,
and he thought that their terms ought to be accepted.
The character of the old company stood high—that
of their chairman stood at least as high as the chair-
man of the new company ; but the old company did
not ask them to rest the question upon character
alone, they were perfectly ready to give any security
that might be required ; they demanded nothing but
ordinary trust, and were willing to give ordinary
security.
The CHAIRMAN reminded the Court that the only
question before them was whether or not they would
enter the memorial on their minutes.
Mr. PERKINS moved, as an amendment, that the
memorial be laid upon the table, and denied that the
power of the Corporation had been used for the pur-
pose of putting down the old company.
Mr. HARRISON observed it had been insinuated
that the new company never had intended to lay
down pipes, or to go to any expense whatever, and
that they merely got, up this agitation for the purpose
of reducing the prices of the old company. He
begged to say that there was not the least founda-
tion fur any such statement—contracts had been en-
tered into by the new company for the execution of
all its works—they did mean to proceed with those
works, and there was every reason to believe that
they would be executed much more cheaply than was
at first anticipated.
Mr. Alderman LAWRENCE wished the Court to bear
in mind that the new company could not lay down
their pipes as they had at first proposed to do, namely,
during the night.
Mr. HARRISON asserted that they could do so.
The motion for entering the memorial on the
minutes was then put and agreed to.
Mr. TY RRELL (the solicitor to the Court) then
rose for the purpose of calling their attention to the
draught of deed which they were about to enter into
with the new company. According to the covenant
of the proposed deed, all the mains and pipes were in
the first instance to be laid down during the night,
and, if a❑ Act of Parliament were to be obtained on
the subject, it was quite clear that the more material
parts of the deed must be introduced as clauses in
the Act, especially those provisions which had refer-
ence to the paying up of capital.
The Secretary was then called upon to read the
resolutions on which the draught of the deed was
founded.

Mr. TAYLOR said, that from the arrangements there
provided, it was evident that the mains and the pipes
were all to be laid down at night, and the pavements
closed during the daytime.
Mr. Alderman LAWRENCE considered that the
question was as to the additional works ; the original
laying down of the mains was provided for.
Mr. HARRISON contended that it would be impos-
sible for them to prevent the carrying on of addi-
tional works during the day, for how otherwise could
they meet the ill effects of accidental occurrences ?
Stopping the escapes of gas could not be delayed till
night.
Mr. HARDWICKE, the solicitor to the new company,
stated that the first laying down would in all cases
take place at night.
Mr. ELLIOTT cautioned the Court not to let them.
selves be entrapped into an expensive bargain ; and
he likewise recommended them to take care how
they allowed the streets to be opened at all times,
a danger to which, by the arrangements with the
new company, they were very likely to be exposed.
Mr. TYRRELL, referring to the draught of the deed,
took notice that the words were such as would bind
the company not to lay any original mains or pipes
except during the hours of the night.
Mr. HARRISON was quite ready to state that the
original laying of the mains was to take place at
night; what he objected to was confining the com-
pany to the hours of night whenever they might have
occasion to put down substituted mains. The whole
question was one as to the construction of their origi-
nal resolution.
Mr. Alderman SIDNEY thought that they ought not
to encourage a third rival company.
Mr. HARRISON moved a resolution to the effect, that
the original laying down of mains now and in future
should take place at night, which having been seconded
by several commissioners,
Mr. Alderman LAWRENCE said that such a propo-
sition went to alter the substance of the original re-
solution, and that there ought to be notice of such a
motion.
The CHAIRMAN considered that it was merely
putting a certain interpretation on their resolutions.
The motion was then put and agreed to.
Mr. TYRRELL desired to know whether or not it
was the wish of the Court to bind the new company
to use their best endeavours to secure the passing of
a Bill that should contain clauses embodying the
covenants of the deed, but it seemed the opinion of
many commissioners present that they had better
wait till the Bill came before the House of Commons.
Mr. Alderman SIDNEY was anxious that, the Court
should not do anything that could make them appear
to be partizans of either company. If the new com-
pany did not render those covenants the main feature
of their Bill, then the Court ought to oppose that Bill.
Mr. PEWTRESS did not doubt that the company
would use their best endeavours to introduce clauses
in the Bill carrying out the covenants contained in the
draught of deed.
Mr. TAYLOR was opposed to placing on the records
of the Court any statement on the subject. It might
be understood that the company were to use their best
endeavours for the proper framing of their Bill in
Parliament.
It was then agreed that Mr. Tyrrell was to act upon
this suggestion.
In reply to questions put by members of the Court,
Mr. HARDWICKE, the solicitor for the company,
stated that before they proceeded with any works in
the City there would be 75,000/. of their capital paid
forTh thes
wasfulfilment
the
offe r
whichof their
covenantsd
up—thus making property to that amount responsible
ae. with the Court.
t hey m
Air. Alderman LAWRENCE said that capital might
be expended at Bow or at St. Pancras but ;it would
be no security to the city. Further, the contractors
might constitute the main body of the shareholdes.
It would, he thought, be a much better guarantee if
10,000/., 15,000/., or 20,0001. were paid into the
Bank of England.
Mr. Alderman SIDNEY observed, that their soli-
.

citor wanted to know whether the capital of the new
company was to be 150,0001. or 250,0001. There
were, it was stated, 25,000 shares of IC/, and only
13,000/. had yet been taken, the contractors them-
selves being large holders.
Mr. PEWTRESS stated, that if the company pro-
ceeded as they had reason to expect, they would en-
large their capital from 150,000/. to 250,0001, and
be enabled to give gas, first for 45., and then for as. I
the 1,000 clibic feet,