Committee on the Bill take the sense of the efficiency of the militia, or in some the House on the question. SIR JOHN SHELLEY said, he wished to call attention to one clause of the Bill. They all agreed, he thought, that the Volunteer force should be a real Volunteer force that nothing should be done that should in any way militate against the feelings of those who believed they were devoting themselves and their time, which was money, to the service of the country. Up to that time every Volunteer corps had framed its own regulations, and then submitted them for the approval of the Secretary of State; but by the operation of the Bill under discussion those rules would, so far as he understood, emanate in future from the Secretary of State in the first instance, which was a very different thing. The alteration was one which he did not think it would be well to introduce, as he believed that a stereotyped set of regulations would be very unpopular among the Volun teers. other way. Bill read 2o, and committed for Monday next. THAMES EMBANKMENT (NORTH SIDE) MR. CRAWFORD said, he rose to move as an Amendment— "That the Bill be re-committed to the Select Committee, with Instruction to take into con- COLONEL DUNNE said, he could not agree that individual corps should have the formation of their rules and regulations. On the contrary, he was of opinion that the Government acted wisely in proposing to have a code drawn up for the guidance of the Volunteers. He, for one, had always until the month of July 1872. Those looked upon those corps as constituting a dues were levied on wine and coals; but most valuable force. He did not, however, inasmuch as the produce of the former was look upon efficiency in drill as the great very small in amount, he would confine object. The great object was numbers. his explanation to the coal dues. The first They had sown the dragon's teeth, which charge was a duty of 4d., representing the would shoot up in arms if the country were old metage duty enjoyed by the Corporainvaded. Instead of 150,000 men, he tion from time immemorial, and confirmed should like to see a million men enrolled as by a charter of James I.-a duty always Volunteers. It was important that the considered and held by the Corporation as House should know what was to be the cost their property for public purposes. The of the force, and what time of drill was to be second was a duty of 8d., levied under required. He had heard officers of cavalry various Acts of Parliament for the purpose corps complain that the thirty days required of effecting public improvements in the of them was too much and comparing it metropolis; and the last was a duty of with the attendance required from Militia 1d., levied for the purpose of building or Yeomanry corps, it did seem too much. the Coal Exchange and for other obHe was also anxious to know whether Vo-jects. The two last duties, amounting to lunteer corps were to be subject to mili-9d. a ton, formed the fund out of which tary law at all times, or only when they the whole cost of the Thames Embankwere called out in case of invasion; and what was to be the rule as to the command when Volunteers and regular troops were serving together. He entirely agreed with the remarks which had been made by the hon. and gallant Member for Roscommon. and contended that if the Government thought that the people of Ireland were unfit to be trusted with arms, they ought to give them some equivalent by increasing ment was to be paid. The ratepayers of the metropolis and their representatives had uniformly opposed every attempt to provide funds for public improvements by direct taxation. That being the case, it was clear, that if the whole of the funds constituting the improvement fund of the metropolis were appropriated for the period contemplated by the Bills before the House-being until July 1872 - there could be no hope of any great public | other works to which it might be applied; improvement being executed during that but the Corporation replied that the money time, except those defined in the Bills in was the property of the City. It might, question. Concurrent with the Bill before in fact, be spent in building a new Manthe House was another Bill to continue for sion House or an obelisk, or in any other a further period of ten years from 1872 way they pleased. It was not specifically to 1882, the wine and coal duties. appropriated by Act of Parliament to pubUnder those Bills-the fourpenny duty lie improvements within the City, and being reserved for the improvement of therefore, in making the proposal, they Holborn Hill-in addition to the million really offered to give £350,000 for the authorized to be laid out on the Embank- privilege of constructing the street themment, £650,000 was to be appropriated selves. If that offer were refused, and the for the purposes of a new street to be street made altogether at the cost of the made from Blackfriars Bridge to the 9d. coal duty, the result would be that Mansion House, and a further sum of there would be no fund for twenty years by £580,000 was to be set aside for the means of which any great public improveembankment of the south side of the ment could be carried out. No doubt many Thames, if the Bill with that object great improvements were wanted in the passed into a law. It thus appeared that metropolis outside the City; and as there a sum of £2,230,000 was already ap- were seven metropolitan constituencies, the propriated for public purposes out of the £350,000 would give £50,000 to each of whole amount raised by the coal duty for them to dispose of. Under these circumthe next twenty years. Therefore, unless stances, he expected that metropolitan Memthe House was prepared to levy fresh bers would support his proposal. There taxes on the inhabitants of the metropolis, were bridges to be bought, bridges to be there was no chance of any other public built, and innumerable new streets to be improvements being carried out. The made. With regard to the City and the Corporation of the City of London, in Metropolitan Board of Works, he did not that state of things, entertaining a very wish to set the one against the other, but natural jealousy and dislike to the intro- he would appeal to past experience. It duction of the Metropolitan Board of was a fact that, with very few exceptions, Works within the boundaries of the City, almost all the improvements in the metromade to the Select Committee which sat polis for years past had been effected by upstairs a proposal which had been sub- the City of London out of revenues placed mitted previously to the Chief Commis- at their disposal by Parliament; and in no sioner of Works. Their proposal was, single instance that he was aware of had that they should be permitted to use the the estimates for those works been exfourpenny duty for the purposes of the ceeded. The reason was, that the works street, and that they should defray the were carried on under the superintendence residue of the expense of the street out of of a Committee consisting of a great numtheir own corporate funds. The Committee ber of Members who lived in the City, and did not adopt the proposition, but reported knew the value of property there, and who the Bill in the form in which it left the brought to bear an amount of experience House, that is, providing that the street and knowledge which prevented any jobs should be made by the Metropolitan Board or misappropriation of money. On the other of Works at a net cost of £650,000. The hand, what had the Metropolitan Board of Corporation then submitted a proposal to Works done? He had no intention of disthe Commissioners of Works, to the effect paraging them, but he would say that they that they would undertake to construct had not the experience of the Corporation out of their own corporate resources the street at a cost of £650,000, provided they received a contribution from the 9d. coal tax to the extent of £300,000. In other words, they said they would make a present of £350,000 to the metropolis at large, if they were allowed to make the street. The Chief Commissioner answered that proposition by stating, that if such a sum were available for improvements in the City, there were plenty of at all events, within the limits of the City. Besides, they were already engaged in the execution of very large works-the Thames embankment and other important undertakings. For some years they had been making a new street through the Borough, but it was in a very incomplete state; and though the new communication between St. Martin's Lane and Covent Garden was opened, it was unfinished, and the accounts respecting it had not been closed. He therefore begged respectfully that they had such resources, he said to suggest, that as far as the public in- he was delighted to hear it, that they terests were concerned, they would be more ought by all means to be encouraged in effectually promoted by intrusting the con- spending them in improving and beautifying struction of the new street to the corpora- the streets in the City, and that he was tion. The proposition of the corporation the last person to interfere in the slightwas, in brief, this :-The Bill empowered est degree with proposals of that kind; but the Metropolitan Board of Works to make he added, "Do tell me what these corpothe street at a cost of £650,000, which rate resources are?" Yet up to that time was to come out of the 9d. coal duty, the information he had received on the and the Corporation said they would do it point was very obscure. From their lanfor £300,000, taking the other sum of guage it might be supposed that they £350,000 out of their own resources. He meant the 4d. coal duty by the corporate asked the House to refer back the Bill to resources; but so far from that duty bethe Select Committee, in order that they longing to the Corporation, it had only might examine into that proposal; and if been granted to them by Act of Parlia the Committee were satisfied that the Cor- ment until 1872. Probably, at the expiporation were able to construct the street, ration of the Act, they would assert an he believed he had shown that on public ancient right to levy 4d. on every chaldron grounds they ought to be intrusted with of coals; but with that they had nothing the execution of that great work which to do. They were dealing with the actual was entirely within the precincts of the continuance tax of 4d. per ton, which, he City. could not admit, formed, in any proper sense, a part of the corporate resources. not give any money whatever out of the It was quite clear that the City could extension of the 4d. tax from 1872 to 1882, because, with the assent of the Committee, he had inserted in a Bill which stood on the orders for a second reading, a provision by which that money was to devoted to raising the valley of Holborn Hill. He had been assured, by a deputation from the City of London, that that Amendment proposed, To leave out from the word "That" to the end of the Question, in order to add the words "the Bill be re-committed to the Select Committee, with Instruction to take into consideration certain Proposals made by the Corporation of the City of London to Her Majesty's First Commissioner of Works since the date of the Report of the Select Committee," -instead thereof. Question proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Question." MR. COWPER said, the question was one of considerable importance as regarded the practice of the House. It was very undesirable to encourage Motions to re-commit Bills without serious and substantial grounds, and he did not think it had been the practice of the House to re-commit Bills without its being shown either that the Committee had not adequately or satisfactorily discharged their duty, or that some new facts of real importance had come to light since the close of their labours. He was glad to hear that no objection was made to the Committee, for they had listened with the greatest attention for six days to the evidence brought before them, the Corporation and the Commissioners of Sewers for the City being the only opposing parties. Ile understood the hon. Member to say that the Corporation were willing to make a present of £350,000 out of their corporate resources for the honour of making the street. When he was informed work would cost £300,000; and if the City borrowed money on the above security for the purpose of raising Holborn Hill, none would be left for making the proposed street. He trusted that the hon. Members opposite, who were about to address the House on behalf of the City, would explain what the Corporation meant by offering to make this street out of the corporate funds He admitted, that if the City made a serious proposal to expend funds on public improvements, which had hitherto been devoted to pageantry and other less important purposes, it would be entitled to serious consideration; but, at the same time, he contended this was not a case to go back to a Select Committee. It involved a principle which could be much better discussed in a Committee of the Whole House. Being a hybrid Bill, the measure had been carefully inquired into and sifted. It went before the Private Bill Committee in order that all persons whose interests were affected by it might be fully heard, and he considered that any question of principle which was raised could be much of Works as much represented the City as it did the rest of the metropolis, and it would be quite contrary to the principles of self-government and the principle that representation should go with taxation, if they took away from the representatives of the whole metropolis the expenditure of the 9d. duty, and gave it only to the City of London, which was only one district of the metropolis. The 4d. duty would still be administered by the City for the purposes specified in the Continuance Act, for Parliament had wisely reserved to itself the discretion to say in each instance when these duties were renewed to what particular purpose they should be devoted. He did not believe that the researches of a second Committee would be more successful than those of the first in discovering where this £350,000 was to come from. He had himself asked Mr. Scott, the City Chamberlain, whether the City had any money at its disposal for this object besides the 4d. duty. Mr. Scott explained that there was in hand a borrowed sum of £350,000; and he suggested, that until that money became due, it might be applied to this purpose. It was, however, never represented that this floating balance would be permanently available for the work. A letter was sent from the Office of Works in March last, asking the corporate authorities, if they had any fund available, to give it in evidence. No such information was, however, granted, and it was clear there was some delusion somewhere. Before the Motion was entertained, some new fact ought to be put clearly before the Committee; but he thought that up to that time the hon. Member for the City had made out no case whatever, for the hon. Gentleman merely used the vague phrase that corporate resources were to supply the £350,000. By referring to the printed correspondence, it would be seen. that the only thing to be expected, if the Corporation should be intrusted with the execution of these works, would be a postponement of a great improvement to an indefinite period; and he should be sorry if anything happened to create delay in the opening of the new thoroughfare between the West End and the City. He therefore should oppose the Amendment. better decided in a Committee of the House | bers had a share in the expenditure of the than in a Select Committee upstairs. If money. Therefore the Metropolitan Board the required sum of £350,000 was to come out of the coal tax, the offer of the City was not an offer to raise and pay the money, but only to expend it. No doubt the Corporation or other body would like to have the power of spending £350,000, and be ready to take it out of their neighbours' pockets for that purpose; but if the House listened to that proposal, and taking that sum from the Metropolitan Board of Works, gave it to the City, it would lend itself to a retrograde movement. When the Government had to consider the measures for continuing the taxes on coal, they made a distinction between the 4d. and the other taxes. The question of these coal duties was of the greatest importance, because they formed the fund out of which all the improvements in the metropolis had been, or were likely to be made, and the House said that they ought to be economized and distributed in the wisest and most efficient way. The 4d. tax was, by the Continuance Act of 1861, committed for a limited time to the care of the City, and the 9d. tax formed into a separate fund for the Thames Embankment and other metropolitan improvements. That last fund, it was decided, should be expended by the Metropolitan Board of Works. The reasons were obvious. The 9d. duty was intended to be spent on improvements for the benefit of the whole metropolis, such as this great thoroughfare between the east and west of London, and therefore it was proposed that the Metropolitan Board, which had been created since the last Continuance Act, should be intrusted with the expenditure of the money, instead of the corporation, and the City became subordinate to that board. He knew that was not a palatable phrase to the Corporation, but it expressed the provisions of an Act of Parliament. The Metropolis Local Management Act made them subordinate to the Metropolitan Board of Works It declared that the metropolis should include the City, and the members of the Metropolitan Board comprised three representatives from the City. How, then, could the corporation say they were independent and superior to the Board, when they were themselves represented upon it? They could not have it both ways. If they asserted their THE LORD MAYOR (Mr. Alderman supremacy over the Metropolitan Board, ROSE) said, that the Corporation of the ought they not to withdraw their three City of London felt, that if the Bill passed Members? At present, those three Mem-in its then shape, it would be one of the most fatal Acts to be found in the history to a Select Committee, there would be of that body. The funds out of which the abundant evidence to prove that all that improvement was to be paid for were to was proposed on the part of the Corporabe collected in the City, and then it was tion could be effectually carried out. Some proposed that those funds should be hand-time ago a body in some measure akin to ed over to a foreign body for expenditure the Metropolitan Board of Works-namely, on those works. Such a proposition would, the Commissioners of Clerkenwell-were if carried, be destructive to the independ-appointed to make a new street in connecence of the Corporation. The right hon. Gentleman had spoken of the shadowy character of the funds referred to by the Corporation in their offer. But how stood the credit of the City of London ? Had not, he would ask, every undertaking of the Corporation, in a pecuniary point of view, been most honourably carried out? In the formation of new streets the Corporation had exhibited a marked contrast with the body to which the right hon. Gentleman was anxious to intrust his new work; for the former had always completed them within the estimate, while the latter had executed them largely in excess of the estimate. According to the Bill, £650,000, furnished by the ninepenny coal duty, was to be appropriated to the construction of a street from Blackfriars Bridge to the Mansion House, whereas the Corporation of the City of London were ready to execute the work if they received £300,000. The funds promised by the City of London had been spoken of as being uncertain; but surely the character of the Corporation ought to stand them in some stead in such a matter. The right hon. Gentleman desired to see the source of the funds, but he had no right to ask for that information. The City was a great corpora tion, and had hitherto done its work honestly and successfully; and if the Corporation could show that large sums were ready to be appropriated for the formation of the new street, and if, in addition, they were willing to give their bond that the work should be completed within a given time, the right hon. Gentleman had no right to attempt to exert an inquisitorial power and try to obtain information respecting the private property of the Corporation. The Corporation were ready to agree, that if they did not complete the work within the stipulated time, the matter should be taken out of their hands, and placed in the hands of others. MR. NORRIS said, he could assure the right hon. Gentleman that the fund of which the hon. Member (Mr. Crawford) had spoken was no ghost, but an existing reality; and that if the Bill were referred tion with Farringdon Street, but they altogether failed to do so. The works stood still for a time, and were then taken up by the Corporation of London. In the progress of that work the Corporation of London invested somewhere about £300,000 in the purchase of a vast district of dilapidated property. Before they had an opportunity of turning that property to any account, some enterprising men devised the Metropolitan Railway. That undertaking was struggling with commercial difficulties, and the Corporation, seeing an opportunity of improving their property, advanced £200,000 in the purchase of shares, which they had since sold at a profit; while their property round about the Metropolitan Railway had become greatly augmented in value. From these two sources the Corporation could readily derive funds sufficient to meet their share of the expense for constructing the new street. The Corporation also possessed freehold and other property to the extent of perhaps £250,000 a year, which, after deducting certain charges upon it, left an income of £80,000 or £100,000 a year, which was now appropriated to promoting public works in the City, encouraging charities and building schools. Sooner than allow of the intervention of a body of men who were created, as it were, but yesterday, and whose authority to come within their territory they had a right to question, the Corporation were willing to divert from its legitimate channel a large portion of that £80,000 or £100,000, to go in aid of the making of the new street. Within the last century the Corporation of London had expended out of its independent resources two millions of money, and had been the means of laying out for public purposes a sum amounting to nearly £3,000,000, making nearly five millions of money which had passed through the hands of that great public body. If the right hon. Gentleman dare not trust the Corporation of London, how was it possible he could have any confidence in that body which he seemed so much to favour by the course which he took with respect to this measure? He hoped the House would see |