Star.
London, England, 1820-05-25 00:00:00

CC,rillON COL .VCIL.

A Meetirg of the Court of Common Council was
held yesterday, at Guildhall, for the purpose of con-
sidering a motion, of which Alderman WAITIIMAN
Lad given notice, resphting the office of Receiver
of the Orphans' Dues. After sore preliminary busi-
ness had Leen disi.osed of,
Tbe Lulu M.tvou stated to the Court, that he had
received from Liam Curtis certain l'a;ers on
the subject which was about to be discussed, and
proposed that thee documents should be real.
Alderman WAITIIMAN observed, that this was a
novel proceeding, quite contrary to the practice of
the Court. In his motion, there was nothing of a
_personal nature against any individual. If it had
been shewn that, ci.her on account of bad health, •
absence from town, or any other unavoidable cause,
a Member of the Court was prevented from attend-,
Lrg, then a written communication from that inoivi-
dual might be received ; but as that was not the
case in the present instance, and as they were bound
to believe•that the Honourable Baronet voluntarily
ahsented himself, he thought the Court could not
listen to such a communication as that which it was
now proposed to read. _ _

Mr. li'. SMITH thought, that as this communica-
tion was not a Petition, but merely a statement on
the subject which was about to be discussed, it would
not be proper for the Court to receive it, as such a
course would tend to prejudge the question, before
they had heard the statement of the worthy Alderman.
Mr. IVII.I.IANIS also opposed the reading of this
Faper, and said, that though the proposal fur sub-
mitting it to the Court came from the Lord Mayor,
he had the courage to declare that such a course
would be extremely improper. if any Member oil
the Court chose to read these statements as a part of
his speech, it was competent for him to do so ; but
it would not be regular to hear them before the dis-
cussion had taken place.
After some farther observations, the motion for
reading these Papers was withdrawn.
Alderman WA ITIINIA N then proceeded to state the
grounds of his motion. He regretted the absence of
the individual who was chiefly concerned with the
subject of his motion, and stated his intention to
steer clear of every personal imputation. But, at
the same time, if any individuals were necessarily
implicated in the transactie,as to which it was his
duty to advert, the fault was ant his. The fact was,
that, till sery lately, hardly an individual of the
Corporation knew anything at all about the Or-
phans' Fund, and therefore, whatever invidious re-
marks might be made on the manner in which the
Funds of `the Corporation had been managed, no-
thing at all could apply to that Court, for the ma-
nagement of this Fund was exclusively with the
Court of Aldermen, and the Corporation of London
knew nothing either of the management of the Fund,
or of the nature and extent of the balances in hand.
About eight or nine years since, a Committee of the
House of Commons had investigated these Funds,
and had made a very able Report thereon. He did
not wish the business to rest upon his statement, but
should chiefly rest his authority upon the Report of
that Committee. It appeared that, from immemo-
rial custom, the Court of Aldermen was a Court of
Record for the care and government of the Orphans;
the Lord Mayor and Aldermen were invested with
the care and custody of all Orphan Children while
under age; they had the sole management of the
estates of deceased Freemen, and could compel the
Executors of the deceased to vest their property in
the Chamber. It was therefore a matter of obliga-
tion, and not of choke. In the reigns of James I.
and Charles I. large Funds had accumulated in the
Chamber, which in the periods of public calamity
that followed, were so entirely lost to the Corpora-
tion and their creditors, that they were compelled
to declare their incapacity to pay to the Orphans
either the principal or the interest of their debts. Iu
the year 1689, and subsequently, they presented Pe-
tition; to Parliament for an Act to enable them to
raise Funds for the discharge of these debts. It was
not till the sth and 6th of William and Mary that.
they were enabled to obtain an Act to raise money
for this purpose. This Act, after levying a per-
manent Tax of £lO,OOO a-year upon the Citizens,
also empowered them to levy a Tax of 101 per
chaldron upon all Coals brought into the port of
London, and which constituted this Orphans' Fund.
The amount of the Orphans' debt was £747,472;
and this Fund being insufficient to defray the interest,
it was further increased to £90,000. Another Act
passed 21st George 11. for the further relief of the
Orphans, and by this Act the surpluses that had ac-
crued, together with all future surpluses that might
accrue, atter discharging interest, were ordered to
be applied for the reduction of the principal of the.
eeht. After this, various Acts of Parliament had
paiied, authorizing the Corpornion of London to
rase large sums of money, amounting to £784,000,
and for continuing the Orphans' Fund for the dis-
charge of these sums. Tire Commlttee of the House
of Cemmisns, after investigating all the transactions
ef the Corporation of London,. gave them full credit
far the propriety of their conduct in the management
of these public works, and also declared, " That all
the details, both of receipt and expenditure, are kept
with an accuracy, and checked with a vigilance which
reflect honour upon all who have had any part in the
superintendence of this Fund." This the worthy Al-
derman remarked, had been quoted by the present
Eezeiver (Sir William Curtis) in approbation of his
conduct ; but it must be seen that it had no reference
v-hatever to him, or to the office of the Receiver; and
e-en if it did refer to the office, it could not apply to
him, as the Report had been made several years back,
end very s.;an after his appointment to the office.—
The Committee toudenined, in the strongest terms,
the practice of retaining balances in hand. By the
above Act the surpluses were ordered to be applied,
on giving six months notice to the creditors, to the
Foidation of the debt; but the Chamber, under the
conti out and management of the Court of Aldermen,
:titer the half-yearly receipts had been paid in, gave
six months notice of the payment, leaving the said
balances during ail that time in hand; and the
Leport cf the House of Commons stated, that " It
appears from the next account from the Chamberlain's
Office, and of the state of the balances in that office,
that in each of the four quarters in the last five
Teas; a balance, on an average, of £20,000 has re-
stained unapprepriated in the hands of the said ,

' Chamberlain, or his sub-accountants—a practice
which your Committee consider .prejudicial to the
progress of the liquidation of the debt, and the less
1 warrantable as it seems calculated to afford an in-
I direct advantage to some one or more persons charged
with the management of the receipts and expendi-
ture of the Fund, who, in their opinion, if not fairly
compensated by the salary and per centage annually
charged in the account, amounting to nearly 1:1,000,
should be remunerated by direct charges appearing
in the account of the said Funds." Here, then, was
the strongest condemnation of the practice of retain-
ing such balances. He did imagine that this lair
balance did include the balance in the hands of Sir
William Curtis, the receiver; bu't upon investigation
he found that was not the case, and it did not appear
by the Report that a knowledge of the balance in
his hands ever came under the view of the. Commit-
tee of the House of Commons. It appeared, then,
that in addition to the above balance of '20,0001.
L which, he believed, had since been increased to
50,0001. in the Chamberlain's hands, a balance also
remained in the hands of the receiver, . Sir William
Curtis, which averaged, during the last nine years,
upwards of 11,7001. There was also in his hands a
further balance of between 2,000/. and 3,0001. upon
the coal-metage duty ; and it appeared that this esti-
mate was made from the end of each month/whereas
the money being paid in weekly, would increase
those balances 1,5001. more, making in the receiver's
hands upwards of 15,0001. and altogether, he be-
lieved, with the amount in the Chamber, there was
a balance of 40,0001. unappropriated. Nor were
these the only balances, for another Alderman, Sir
John Earner, who was Collector of the Orphans'
Duty on Wine, had also in hand a balance of 1,0001.
`The balance in the hands of the present receiver
would, in ten years, at compound interest, realize
10,0001. in twenty years it would realize 30,0001.
and had all the balances been applied, from the cem-
menceinent, they would long since have paid off the
Orphans' debt, and all. the sums berrowed on that
Fund. Having stated these facts in a manner which,
he trusted, would be plain to the understanding of
a child twelve years old, he should now take notice
of the kind of defence which had been set up for
this practice. It had been said that there was a
great deal of trouble in the coll&tion, and a great
deal of risk, for which the receiver gave security—
to which he had one pl'ain answer to give, that Mr.
Drummer, who had an office worth GOO/. per annum
under the Corporation, did all this duty for 1001.
a-year. Mr. Drummer collected this money on one
particular day each week, and paid the same on that
very day into the haudsof the receiver; and, as the
weekly amount was something under 1,0001. this
was all the trouble and all the risk that were incur-
red. Sir William Curtis then received an allowance
of 1501. per annum, and all these immense balances
in hand, for the trouble of receiving 1,000/. once
a-week, and making one payment in the month into
the Chamber. It had also been said, that other
Aldermen had had the like appointments. This had
certainly been the case ever since the year 1752 ;
but fcr the last twenty-five years, since the office
had undergone a new regulation, the receiver had
been relieved from the risk and the trouble, and
during that period, up to the appointment of the
present receiver, they had never retained more than
two months' balances in hind. The present receiver
had uniformly retained three months' collection in
hand till he (Alderman Waithman) had brought this
subject before the notice of the Public, since which
time it had been reduced to two months' collection.
He had confined himself in these observations to a
statement of facts, and he did not know that he had
anything more to say; but he submitted it to the
Court, whether these practices ought to be conti-
nued, especially in the present embarrassed state of
the funds of the Corporation, when they were con-
stantly under the necessity of borrowing money.—
It might, indeed, be said, that the Corporation had
no controul over this fund, and that it remained with
the Court of Aldermen. He had used his endeavours
in that Court, but had not beer, able to find even a
seconder ; but they had, on the contrary, come to the
resolution that there could not be a better or more
useful mode of collection—(A laugh). He did hope,
however, that the inquiries of this Court would lead
to a different result, and that they might be fortunate
in their discoveries. So long as the Court of Alder-
men acted as the guardians of this fund, they might
say that this Court had nothing to do with- the mat-
ter; but when the Corporation applied Parliament
for grants of £150,000 on the security of the Orphans'
Fund, the Corporation by that act had an interest in
the protection of the Fund ; they were in some degree
responsible for its preservation, and had a right to go
to apply to Parliament to enable them to dispose of
it in a proper manner. Upwards of a yeai had now
elapsed since he first gave notice of a motion oa this
subject in another Court, and, of whatever motives
he might have been accused, it was evident that he
had taken up the question long before such motives
could have existed. A printed paper on the table of
the House of Commons had first given him insight
into the matter ; and, seeing that abuse existed, he
had thought it his duty, as a Representative of the
City, to -bring the subject before that Court and the
Public, and he trusted that his Lordship would be
actuated by similar feelings. He knew of no objec-
tion that could be urged against the motion which
he was about to submit, unless it was that the ques-
tion did not fall within the jurisdiction of the Court.
It might, at all events, be worth while to refer it to
a Committee, to inquire whether his statements were
correct, and whether a better plan could not be de-
vised for the receipt and management of the Funds?
The worthy Alderman concluded, amid loud and
general cheers, by proposing the following motion :

" That it be referred to the Committee for General Purposes
to inquire into the nature and duties of the Office of Collector
and Receiver of the Orphans' Dues and Metage Duties on Coals,
with the allowance for the collection of the same ; together with
au account of all balances retained in his hands, and the mannes
in which the said dues have been paid into the Chamber; and
to consider whether any butter or more beneficial mode of col-
lecting and pafiag the said dues may be adopted; and to report
to the Court thereon ; also, that it be referred to the said Com-
mittee to make like inquiries, and to report, respecting the
Orphans' Duty oa Wine."
Mr. WILLtAms seconded the motion, and highly
commended the candour with which the worthy Al-
derman had stated the case; It was a matter of the
deepest regret that this question had been so long
neglected. Ile believed that the thing would Lever

be pat an end to, ”. lless this Court put an end to it
and he would a,k, why the Aldermen ought to look
to such rewards when they accepted their office?—
Let those who looked for them retire, and it would
be seen that there would be others who would corne
forward, actuated by more liberal motives.
Mr. Di xolg concurred in the motion ;.as did Messrs.
GRIFFITHS and OLDHAM.

Mr. JAMES, in also giving it his support, :bought
it would be much more to the honour of the Alder-
men, that no such office was held by one of their
body, and that, instead of balances being left in hand,
the Court ought to grant salaries.
Mr. FAVELL regretted the absence of the Honour-
able Baronet, as that individual had attacked him.
openly on the hustings, and had asked him bow he
" dared" to say so and so of him ? " Nov," said
Mr. Favell, " had he been here, I would have to-day
shewn him, that '
I dared do all Becomes an honest man!'
And I should have therefore dared to ask the Baronet,
why he had used such epithets in allusion to me?"—
The worthy Gentleman then recapitulated the state-
ment he had formerly made in the Court of Common
Council, as to the refusal of the loan of E5OOO at five
per cent. by Sir William Curtis, though that Baronet
had such large balances in his hands.
Mr. 'l'. N. WILLIAMS thanhd the worthy Alder-
man for bringing this motion forward so candidly
and dispassionately, and hoped the Court would
never see Sir William Curtis there again, unless he
came to defend himself. lie was ji.s,.ifieJ in saving
so, after the vote of censure so recently passed on
the Baronet.

Mr. JACKS 'highly commended the manner in
which the motion had been bwt:i_-.1 t e:/, and 'ave it
'his support.

Aft-ei a :lon reply from Mr. Alderman WAITII.
MAN, it was unanimously agreed to.
The Court adjourned at lour o'cicck.

LAIV INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, MAY 24.
CLAYTON V. POPE.

This was an action by the plaintiff, as occupier of
a set of chambers, No. 3, Lincoln's Inn New-square,
against the defendant, an Overseer of the Poor, in the
Liberty of the Rolls, to try whether those chambers
were situate in the Liberty of the Rolls, or in the
Parish of St. Dunstan in the West, and thereby to
ascertain whether the plaintiff was liable to pay '1
towards the support of the Puor in the Rolls Liberty.
As is usual in cases of this description, a mass of '
documentary evidence, consisting of grants, leases,
descriptions, rate-books, &c. were put in; and parole
evidence, as to the boundaries of the Parish and the
Liberties, and to prove customs, were called on each
side. The case occupied the attention of the Court
and Jury for upwards of four hours ; as it was one
in which the interests of the Benchers in Lincoln's
Inn were concerned, it excited the attention of the
Bar to a more than usual degree. After a most im-
partial summing up on the part of the LORD CIIIEP
JusrlcE, the Jury found a verdict for the defendant,
thereby establishing the liability of the plaintiff to
pay the rate for the 'Liberty of the Rolls.