THE CORPORATION AS IT IS.
The Municipal Constitution--Lord Mayor--Aldermen--Court of Common
Council--Citizens--The Livery Companies--Sheriffs--Law Courts--Public
Charities--Conservancy of the Thames--Metage Dues.
In the preceding hasty sketch it has been attempted to trace the rise
of London from being the bazaar to a Roman camp to its present
position as the capital of the commercial world. It is now worth while
to glance at the nature of the municipal institutions through which it
has attained such a proud ascendancy.*
* The authority chiefly consulted for the following statements is
Pulling's "Practical Treatise on the Laws, Customs, Usages, and
Regulations of the City and Port of London."
Strictly speaking, London cannot be said to possess any original
charter, or specific definition of its rights and franchises. Those
conferred since the Conquest, without exception, allude directly or
indirectly to preceding documents of a similar nature. In fact the
customs and usages of the City grew out of the ancient Saxon
institutions, grafted, as they were, on the Roman municipal stock.
The City of London represents a county, and as such is divided into
hundreds, called wards; each having its own wardmote, presided over by
its own alderman. The Lord Mayor, the Court of Aldermen, and the
Court of Common Council, together with the incorporated guilds which
elect the civic magistrates, form the municipal constitution.
In ancient times the chief civic magistrate was styled the Reve,
or Portreve, but in 1207 John changed this title to that of Mayor.
The appellation of Lord was first prefixed in the fourth charter of
Edward III., when the honour of having gold or silver maces borne
before him was conferred on the "Lord Mayor," who ranked moreover as
an earl. His duties are multiplex and ubiquitous. In his own person
he represents all the rights and privileges of the Corporation. He is
said to hold the same relation to the City as the Crown does to the
rest of the kingdom. He is chief butler at the coronation of the
sovereign, lord-lieutenant of the county of London, clerk of the
markets, gauger of wine and oil, meter of coals and grain, salt and
fruit, conservator of the Thames, admiral of the port, justice of gaol
delivery for Newgate, chairman of every committee he attends, and
subject to many other burdens. The election of Lord Mayor takes place
on the 29th September, when the livery usually nominate the two senior
aldermen who have not passed the chair; of these the senior is generally
chosen by the Court of Aldermen. The chain of office is then placed
round his neck, and he himself presented to the Lord Chancellor.
He does not, however, immediately enter upon his important duties,
but remains in a chrysalis form, under the title of Lord Mayor elect,
until the 8th of November, when he takes the oath of office, at the
Guildhall, and on the following day is presented to the Barons of the
Exchequer, at Westminster, for the confirmation of the Crown.
The annual salary is 8,000 pounds, which rarely suffices to meet the
incessant demands on the Lord Mayor's charity and hospitality.
He is expected to contribute to every charitable institution within
his jurisdiction, and to a great many beyond it, and to head every
subscription for praiseworthy purposes. His private alms also amount
to a very large sum, and his hospitality is proverbial.
He represents, in short, the best phase of the old feudal baron,
or rather of the Saxon eorl, exercising a paternal and beneficient
supervision over all who reside within the limits of his authority.
The Aldermen.
Among the Anglo-Saxons the title of alderman was regarded as one of
the most honourable distinctions to which a freeman could aspire.
After a time, however, it was conferred with somewhat too liberal
courtesy on nearly every individual vested with authority.
The presidents of district guilds were especially known by this
designation, which they afterwards monopolized when the guilds became
raised into wards or hundreds of the city. The aldermen then partially
recovered their former dignity, and in the charter of Henry I. are
mentioned as barons. The position and authority of an alderman, though
they have much declined since the olden times, are still a reasonable
object of ambition. He is a justice of the peace, as well as the
presiding officer of his ward, and, by virtue of his office, a member
of the Court of Common Council; but it is rather in their collective
than their individual capacity that their power and usefulness are
most conspicuous. Independently of their judicial duties, the Court of
Aldermen constitute the executive department of the Corporation; with
them rests the cognizance of the return of every civic officer elected
at a wardmote court, and also of the election of common-councillors.
They swear in brokers and other officers, and investigate the validity
of claims to civic freedom. For the proper discharge of these and
similar duties, they are singularly adapted through their local
knowledge, which is likewise of material service to her Majesty's
judges at the Central Criminal Court. This circumstance further
renders them most efficient as city magistrates,--far more so,
indeed, than any police or stipendiary magistrate could ever hope to be.
Personally acquainted with the inhabitants of their respective
wards, they are in a position to obtain peculiar and authentic
information as to the characters, habits, and motives of witnesses,
accusers, and accused. Their devotion to public business is wholly
disinterested, for there are no pecuniary emoluments attached to the
office, which has truly little to recommend it, save as being a sphere
of active utility, and as a gratifying token of the good-will of one's
fellow-citizens. The proper style of the Court is the "Court of the
Mayor and Aldermen in the Inner Chamber." It consists of the Lord
Mayor or his deputy--an alderman who has passed the chair--and not
less than twelve other aldermen. The proceedings of the Court are
entered in journals called "Repertories," which are kept in the
muniment-room. The Recorder, the Steward of Southwark, the Clerk to
the Lord Mayor, the keepers, governors, chaplains, and surgeons of the
different prisons, and other officers of the Corporation, are elected
by this Court, which, for assiduity, intelligence, and
incorruptibility, yields to no body of men in the kingdom.
Court of Common Council.
But however distinguished may be the civic position, however great the
moral influence, of the Lord Mayor and the Court of Aldermen, the
controlling power is, after all, centred in the Common Council. At a
very remote period the freemen of the City were accustomed to meet in
general assembly, and to act as one body. As their numbers increased,
the many inconveniences of such a mode of proceeding soon became
manifest; and so early as the reign of the first Edward
representatives began to be chosen from each ward for the despatch of
real business. At first the guilds, or trading companies, claimed the
right of election as their exclusive privilege, and consequently
excited the jealousy of the mass of the inhabitants. It was therefore
arranged that the men of each guild or "mystery" should choose their
own delegates from among themselves, and this was the more easily
accomplished, as at that time each craft occupied a separate quarter,
as is still the custom in the East. This arrangement, however, was of
brief duration, and a more permanent settlement was effected in the
reign of Richard II. It was then agreed that every ward should
annually elect four of the most efficient persons in the ward to sit
in the Common Council for the following year, and whose names should
be presented to the mayor --that high functionary being charged to
accept no more than eight members of any one "mystery" for the whole
city. As the wards varied in extent and population, it was further
agreed that the larger wards should return six councillors, and the
smaller four or two, according to their sufficiency. The number of the
Common Council was then fixed at 96 members, but gradually increased
to the present number of 206, who are chosen as follows:-
Bassishaw and Lime Street each return 4; Dowgate, Candlewick,
Cordwainers, Cornhill, Queenhithe, Vintry, and Walbrook, 6; Bread
Street, Bridge, Billingsgate, Broad Street, Cheap, Coleman Street,
Cripplegate Within, and Cripplegate Without, Tower, Langbourn, Castle
Baynard, Aldersgate, Aldgate, and Portsoken, 8; Bishopsgate and
Farringdon-within, 14; and Farringdon-without, 16. These true
representatives of the citizens constitute the Court of Common
Council, under the style and title of "Court of the Lord Mayor,
Aldermen, and Commoners of the City of London in Common Council
assembled." It requires the presence of the Lord Mayor, or his
deputy--an alderman who has passed the chair--two aldermen and
thirty-eight common councilmen, to make a quorum. There are usually
twelve ordinary meetings in the year, and on an average thirteen
extraordinary meetings, convened for special purposes by a requisition
to the Lord Mayor signed by seven members. The proceedings are
conducted as nearly as possible according to the routine of the House
of Commons, and embrace a vast variety of subjects of local and
sometimes national importance. The Court has a double function
--legislative and executive. In the former capacity it enacts by-laws
for the better government of the Corporation, in conformity with
immemorial usage confirmed by 15 Edward III., and again more recently
and fully by the Municipal Corporations Act. The charter of Edward III.
authorizes the mayor and aldermen, with the assent of the commonalty,
"where any customs theretofore used and obtained proved hard or
defective, or any matters newly arising within the City needed
amendment, and no remedy had been previously provided, to apply and
ordain a convenient remedy, as often as it should seem expedient; so
that the same were agreeable to good faith and reason, for the common
advantage of the citizens, and other liege subjects sojourning with
them, and useful to king and people." Vested with such powers as
these, the Corporation of London are clearly competent to introduce
whatever reforms circumstances may render desirable. As practical men
of business, the Court of Common Council may fairly be supposed to be
the best judges as to the nature of the amendments to be made, and the
right time of making them. Persons engaged in commercial pursuits are
not usually obstructive, or opposed to useful innovations. On the
contrary, being wedded to no theories, they are constantly impelled to
change, and to act upon each emergency as it arises. The past history
of the City of London is one long illustration of this position,--it
is an uninterrupted series of reforms, many of them rather beneficial
to the nation at large than to the Corporation itself. On what grounds,
then, is it justifiable to supersede this salutary internal action of
the Corporation, and to exercise the arbitrary power of the
legislature to enforce crude and inapplicable innovations?
This interference with the self-government of the City is, in fact,
a vote of censure on the duly elected representatives of the citizens,
with whom the majority of the citizens themselves are, however,
perfectly satisfied. But, in truth, that "self-government" is the
head and front of their offence, for is it not a stumbling-block to
ministerial and oligarchical influence? In addition to the power of
enacting by-laws, the Common Council superintend the disposal of the
funds of the Corporation; and without their previous consent no larger
sum than 100 pounds can be paid for any purpose whatsoever.
Their executive functions are also considerable. Upon this court
depends the responsibility of electing the common serjeant, the town
clerk, the two judges, and officers of the Sheriffs' Court, the clerk
of the peace, the coroner, the remembrancer, the commissioner of the
city police, and various other officers of inferior note and standing.
The Citizens.
The "complete" citizen may be defined as a ten-pound householder,
paying scot and bearing lot. The freedom of the City is not, however,
attainable by simple residence. It is to be acquired only by three
modes--by patrimony, by apprenticeship, or by redemption. A royal
charter, even, is insufficient to make the grantee free of the City.
The freedom of the City is not confined to the male sex. Freewomen
are called free sisters, but cannot transmit their freedom, which is,
moreover, suspended during coverture. Freedom by service is acquired
by a seven years' apprenticeship to a freeman or freewoman, the
indenture being enrolled at the Chamberlain's office within twelve
months of its execution. The apprentice need not necessarily be
articled to a member of any guild, fraternity, or trading company, but
he must not be the son of an alien. Freedom by redemption, or
purchase, is of a threefold nature:--1st. It may take the form of a
fine for any breach of the apprenticeship indentures; 2nd. It is
often bestowed as an honorary distinction on individuals eminent for
their public services; and 3rd. Admission to the freedom of the City
is by presentment by persons entitled to confer that privilege. It is
imperative on all persons elected to a corporate office, or "occupying
premises and carrying on any trade, business, or profession, within
the City and its liberties," to become free of the City. This is done
by the payment of the fees of the officers and of 5 pounds to the
Corporation. The advantages of the freedom, though not so great in
the present day as in ancient times, are still considerable. Besides
being a bond of union and mutual protection, it entitles its possessor
to a vote at the elections of the aldermen and the common council of
the ward. Only freemen can act as brokers, or, indeed, carry on any
trade within the boundaries of the City.
The Companies.
As the City of London waxed mighty and opulent, proportionate was the
increase of the wealth and importance of its component parts. The
humble guilds or crafts gradually developed themselves into large and
influential trading companies, to belong to which was deemed an honour
not beneath the consideration of royalty. Edward III., for instance,
did not disdain to be enrolled in the Worshipful Company of Linen
Armourers, now Merchant Tailors; and his example was followed by his
successor, Richard II. The example, indeed, was contagious, for in the
reign of the latter monarch the company in question could boast of the
fellowship of four royal dukes, ten earls, ten barons, and five
bishops. The custom has come down to our own times, and the proudest
names in the aristocracy are recorded in the books of the City
companies. The presidents of these crafts or mysteries were styled
Wardens, who were assisted by a small number of delegates of the guild
in presenting to the City Chamberlain all defaults against the rules
and ordinances of the mystery. These companies were not all equally
regarded by either the sovereign or the citizens. Towards the close of
the reign of Edward II. the more important companies separated from
the less wealthy; and this distinction was soon so far recognized,
that precedency was given to the following twelve companies:-
1. Mercers; 2. Grocers; 3. Drapers; 4. Fishmongers; 5. Goldsmiths;
6. Skinners; 7. Merchant Tailors; 8. Haberdashers; 9. Salters; 10.
Ironmongers; 11. Vintners; 12. Cloth workers. In these companies the
freemen from early times have been of two classes; the upper, entitled
to wear the "livery" or uniform of the company; and the lower,
consisting mostly of workmen. The representatives of the companies
were chosen from the former, and are mentioned in the charters as
probi homines. In the fifteenth year of Edward IV. the Common Council
enacted, that the masters, wardens, and probi homines of the several
mysteries should repair to the Guildhall in their last liveries, for
the purpose of electing the Lord Mayor, sheriffs, and other civic
officers; and that the members of the Common Council should be the
only other persons present. This court now consists of the Lord Mayor
or his deputy--an alderman who has passed the chair--four aldermen,
and the liverymen of the companies who are also freemen. Their office
is to elect the Lord Mayor, sheriffs, chamberlain, bridge-master, and
auditors of the City and Bridge-house accounts, and the four ale-conners.
The official style of the court is, "A Meeting or Assembly of the Mayor,
Aldermen, and Liverymen of the several Companies of the City of London
in Common Hall assembled." The franchise is confined to liverymen of a
year's standing, who have paid their livery fines in full, without
receiving any drawback or allowance. The mode of proceeding is by a
show of hands, but a poll may be demanded by any of the candidates, or
by two electors.
The Sheriffs.
The office of Sheriff has somewhat fallen from its ancient "high
estate." According to Stow, they were formerly "the mayor's eyes,
seeing and supporting part of the case, which the person of the mayor
is not alone sufficient to bear." In olden times the sheriffs were
always conjoined with the mayor and aldermen in proclamations
requiring them to preserve the peace of the City. From a very remote
period the right of electing these officers belonged to the citizens,
and later charters acknowledge and confirm the privilege. Henry I.
granted to them to hold Middlesex to farm, for 300 pounds a year, and
to appoint their own sheriff; while the second charter of John confirms
to them the sheriffwick of London and Middlesex at the rent or farm of
300 pounds, "blank sterling money," and declares that they "shall make
amongst themselves sheriffs whom they will, and remove them when they
will." In those times this was a very important privilege, for the
sheriff, or shire-reve, as the king's bailiff, was possessed of
extraordinary powers, which he usually exercised in a very corrupt and
oppressive manner. The sheriffs of London are the sheriff of
Middlesex; in the former capacity they are addressed in the plural, in
the latter in the singular. Though shorn of its beams, the office of
Sheriff is still a highly honourable one, nor are the duties light or
unimportant which devolve upon these functionaries. The honour,
moreover, is as costly as it is onerous; not only do the sheriffs
receive no salary, but they are conventionally expected to disburse
several thousand pounds in charities and hospitality. The inspection
of the city gaols occupies no small portion of their time, nor do they
enjoy much intermission from the incessant demands for eleemosynary
aid. That an office so costly and troublesome should be an object of
competition, is certainly a striking proof of the disinterested and
patriotic spirit of the citizens of London.
The Law Courts.
With characteristic love of fair play, our ancestors laid it down as a
leading principle, that "justice should be administered at every man's
own door, in the presence of his neighbours." It is, indeed, a primary
element of good government, that the dispensation of justice should be
prompt and inexpensive, and without favour of persons. With the
exception of the City of London, however, and a few other privileged
places, the local tribunals were gradually superseded through the
centralizing action of the superior courts. But even in London the
civic franchises have been seriously diminished through the ruling of
those courts that the privilege claimed by the citizens to be sued
only before their own local tribunals is confined to real, and does
not extend to transitory actions.
The highest court of civic judicature was the Hustings Court, so
called from the Saxon word hustings, signifying the "house of things,"
or causes. It was presided over by the Lord Mayor and Sheriffs, but
the proceedings were actually conducted, and judgment pronounced, by
the Recorder. All real and mixed cases, saving ejectment, fell within
the province of this court, which was held at Guildhall on every
alternate Tuesday. This court, however, though not formally abolished,
does not now sit, and all the business formerly transacted at it is
transferred to the Lord Mayor Court and the City Small Debts Court.
In ancient times, the registration of deeds, wills, and titles to land,
belonged also to this court, and the record in the Hustings of a sale
or purchase of lands was deemed a sufficient voucher. It has been
suggested that, as the necessity of a proper system of registration of
the sale or mortgage of real property is becoming daily more evident,
the machinery for accomplishing that purpose is afforded by the Court
of Hustings, so far, at least, as the City is concerned. Practically,
the most important court, however, at the present day, is the Lord
Mayor's Court, or Court of Aldermen of the Outer Chamber. As in the
Hustings Court, the actual judge is the Recorder, though the Lord
Mayor and Aldermen are supposed to preside. In some respects, this
court is one of equity, with the advantage over the Court of Chancery
of being at the same time more expeditious, quite as equitable, and
far less expensive. As a court of common law, it takes cognizance of
all personal and mixed actions, without exception, and in its
operations and bearings is altogether a striking example of the
benefits incidental to local self-government. The Sheriffs' Court of
the City of London for the recovery of small debts is also admirably
adapted to the requirements of a free commercial people, and is of
inestimable value to the small tradesmen of London.
Public Charities.
The monastic institutions in Roman Catholic countries provide for, and
thereby foster, a large amount of idle and reckless habits. Previous
to the Reformation, this was certainly the case in England. Not only
the sick, the maimed, and the accidentally necessitous were fed and
clothed,--the same indiscriminating charity was extended to those far
less worthy of the sympathy of their fellow-creatures. On the
suppression of conventual establishments, it would have fared badly
with the deserving poor in London had not the Corporation stepped
forward to help them. At present, the princely sum of 10,000 pounds
is annually disbursed from the corporate funds in contributions to
various hospitals, asylums, schools, dispensaries, and local
charities; but even this large sum of money would be inadequate to the
purpose, were it not supplemented by the individual munificence of the
citizens. The Lord Mayor, the Sheriffs, the Aldermen, and the other
civic dignitaries vie with one another in an open-handed liberality,
which asks no other condition than that the recipient shall actually
stand in need of aid, and be worthy of relief and assistance. It is
much to be feared, however, that with the declining influence of the
Corporation, the stream of private charity will also dry up.
The continued payment of the 10,000 pounds a year may, indeed, be
secured by Act of Parliament; but no Act of Parliament can alter human
nature. Proud of their position as the chosen delegates and
representatives of their fellow-citizens, among whom they and their
fathers have lived for generations, the City potentates have, of their
abundance, contributed lavishly and without stint to every local
institution deserving of sympathy and support. And not only these,
but the livery companies likewise have given lordly amounts to
charitable establishments both within and without the City liberties,
and have founded schools in many distant parts of the kingdom.
But if the Corporation is to be "reformed" after the manner of
Sir George Grey and his coadjutors--if the esprit de corps, which is
now so beneficially and beneficently exhibited, is to be suppressed,
what reasonable hope remains that men who have been arbitrarily
deprived of all real interest in City matters will still devote their
time, their energies, and their fortunes to purposes which only
remunerate them with toil, anxiety, and personal discomfort?
The inevitable tendency of the proposed Bill is to reduce the entire
administration of the City to a dull, heartless routine. Step by step
the continental system of home government is being insinuated into
this hitherto free country. Yet a few years of unchecked progress in
that direction, and it will be proposed to appoint crown officers to
preside over county and town, city and borough. The approaches to
absolute power, under the less alarming title of centralization,
though insidious, have long been apparent to all who study the
workings of system-mongers. Unless a vigorous stand be now made
against these continued encroachments of ministerial and oligarchical
influence, the middle classes will, ere long, have to content
themselves with being literally a "nation of shopkeepers," without any
object of honourable ambition in view, without any hope of obtaining
distinction and eminence in the annals of their country, and reduced
to the one narrow pursuit of "making money." Are the free burgesses of
London prepared thus to sacrifice their birthright to gratify the whim
or envy of a Whig ex-minister?
Conservancy of the Thames.
To the disciples of the modern doctrine that ancient charters were
given only to be abolished, and parliamentary statutes enacted only to
be repealed, it is idle to state that the first charter of James I.
acknowledged that the conservation of the water of the Thames had been
held time out of mind by the mayor and commonalty. Those, however, who
still reverence the ancient landmarks, and regard with respect the
honest feelings and manly wisdom of their ancestors, will not treat so
lightly claims derived from immemorial usage and prescriptive right.
>From time, then, "whereof the memory of man runneth not to the
contrary," the conservancy of the Thames has been one of the duties
and privileges of the mayoralty of the City of London. The
jurisdiction of the Thames conservator extends from Staines Bridge to
Yendall or Yenleet, and from Colemouth Creek to Cockham Wood in the
Medway, including every bank, shore, and wharf within those limits.
The duties of the office are to remove all wears and other
obstructions, to prevent the construction of piers or wharfs
calculated to impede the navigation of the river, to protect the
fisheries, and generally to take care that neither the channel nor the
banks suffer injury through the malice or heedlessness of individuals,
or from accidental causes. This department of the corporate
administration is at present intrusted to the Navigation Committee,
annually selected from the Court of Common Council, who make
periodical excursions on the river, and judge with their own eyes as
to what is desirable to be done or avoided. No doubt these functions
could be discharged by a government officer, the friend or relative of
a man of parliamentary influence, and equally without doubt this
consideration is likely to carry more weight in the House of Commons
than any claims derived from immemorial usage and centuries of
beneficial operation.
The Metage Dues.
The same charter of James I. which confirmed the ancient right of the
mayor and commonalty of London to the conservation of the water of the
Thames, declares that the citizens are equally, and on the same
grounds, entitled to exercise the office of measuring all coals,
cereals, fruits, vegetables, salt, and other merchandise sold by
measure, brought to the port of London. In the beginning, this
privilege arose out of the necessity of ascertaining the exact
quantity of these articles actually imported into the City, in order
fairly to collect the king's customs. It has since been found mutually
beneficial to all parties that all measurable goods should be meted
out by sworn meters, carefully selected for their responsible duties,
and over whom is maintained a constant and jealous supervision. The
Court of Common Council appoint ten "corn-meters in trust," who are
placed over 150 deputy meters, chosen by the Corn and Coal and Finance
Committee, and sworn in the Lord Mayor's Court to do their duty
without fear or favour. There are also a few other officers connected
with this very important branch of the civic regulations as to trade,
to whom, however, it is unnecessary further to allude than as an
illustration of the useful and practical precautions adopted by the
Corporation to secure strict fairness of dealing between buyer and
seller. The fruit-meters are four in number, who appoint their own
deputies, and are equally bound to impartiality. There are likewise
twenty-one deputy oyster-meters, one salt-meter and several deputies,
and a fruit-shifter and a salt-shifter. It is now proposed to deprive
the Corporation of the funds realized by these metage dues. The
principle of free trade is to be carried out to an extent that will
exclude honesty as an essential ingredient in commercial transactions.
Everything, we are told, finds its own level. Every man is the best
guardian of his own interests. Neither seller nor buyer will submit
to be wronged by the other. It is contrary to the modern system of
trade to interfere between dealers and purchasers; they are quite
competent to take care of themselves, and are quite ready to dispense
with the intervention of a third party. Besides, there is no
necessity to do away with sworn meters, payable by the job according
to a fixed scale. The only alteration that is required is the
confiscation of the right of the Corporation to derive any profit from
their labours. This doctrine of confiscation is a convenient one, but
it is somewhat inconsistent with the outcry that has so recently been
raised because Lord Canning was supposed to have confiscated the
rights of certain farmers of the revenue in India; for that is the
exact position of a talookdar. Now the Corporation farms, and has
from time out of mind farmed, the revenue arising from these various
sources. The sovereign is the seignior of the City, and therefore
entitled in the first instance to all customs, duties, revenues, and
imposts levied within its precincts. But on various grounds, and by
various means,--such as petition, purchase, composition, and
extraordinary services--the citizens of London have at various times
obtained the remission or enjoyment of these different sources of
income. The metage dues are therefore as much their property as an
hereditary estate is that of its acknowledged proprietor. Their title
to these dues is of considerably longer standing than that of his
Grace the Duke of Bedford to Woburn Abbey, and those of so many lay
impropriators of church property. If royal charters and Acts of
Parliament are of no greater value than waste paper, there is of
course nothing more to be said on the subject. There is nothing,
then, to oppose as a barrier to any act of spoliation. Blackstone,
indeed, says that Parliament is omnipotent to bind or to loose, and
competent to annul charters and to repeal its own statutes. It is
certainly no new thing for Parliament to stultify itself, but it is
also certain that the Legislature will better consult its reputation
by occasionally repressing its eagerness to cancel the proceedings of
its predecessors, and by abstaining from too frequent indulgence in
acts of confiscation.
The coal duties, however, demand a fuller consideration than any other
department of City finance. The first charter of Richard II. confirmed
to the Corporation of London "the custody" of the persons and property
of all orphans. According to ancient custom, the citizens could
dispose by will of only one-third of their personal estate, the
remaining two-thirds being paid into the Court of Orphans in trust for
their children. A very large sum of money was at times thus invested,
to the no small advantage of all parties concerned in the arrangement.
But in the seventeenth century the Corporation became involved in debt
to this fund, and to private individuals, to the extent of
three-quarters of a million sterling. This state of bankruptcy was by
no means the result of imprudence or ostentatious extravagance.
During the Rebellion the City had been despoiled by both parties under
various pretexts. After the Restoration the great fire consumed a vast
amount of city property and necessitated a ruinous outlay in the
reconstruction of entire streets. To this was added the shutting up of
the Exchequer by Charles II., and the seizure of the charter when the
City refused any longer to provide the means for his selfish and
disgraceful prodigality. A better era, however, was inaugurated by the
accession of William and Mary, in the fifth and sixth of whose reign
an Act was passed for raising what was called an "Orphans' Fund."
The estates of the Corporation were charged with the annual payment of
8,000 pounds towards the liquidation of their debt, and for the same
purpose a duty of 2,000 pounds a year on the personal property of the
citizens was paid till 1795. To meet these heavy charges a duty of
fourpence per chaldron was levied on coals and culm imported into
London, and also an additional duty of sixpence per chaldron for fifty
years. By this means the debt of 750,000 pounds was finally
discharged in 1782, but another debt had been contracted by the
Corporation being called upon to contribute to public improvements
beyond the just limits of their jurisdiction. By the year 1823 no
less a sum than 846,300 pounds had been expended in this manner out of
the Orphans' Fund, and in the l0th of George IV. a further sum of
1,000,000 pounds was charged upon the fund to defray the expenses for
improving the approaches to London Bridge. Under William IV., however,
the coal duties were fixed at one shilling per ton in lieu of metage,
and an additional one penny per ton was allowed for the expenses of
the market. This statute extends to a circle measured by a radius of
twenty miles from the General Post-office, and up to the present time
has been productive of much good to the general interests of the
entire metropolis. A duty upon coals is naturally unpopular, and it
would be difficult to devise one that was otherwise. It is always
easy to raise a popular clamour against taxes that press upon matters
of first necessity, but in what other way is the public exchequer to
be replenished? It will not suffice to tax objects of luxury alone,
and with regard to the coal duty it is very improbable that the poor
would benefit in the slightest degree by its repeal. The utmost
reduction in the price of coals that could be expected, would be a
little more than a halfpenny per hundredweight, and this difference is
far more likely to find its way into the pocket of the vender than
into that of the needy purchaser. There is, moreover, another
trifling consideration to be taken into account before the abolition
of these duties be decided upon. Relying on the respect usually paid
to property in this country, and confiding in the good faith of the
House of Commons, the Corporation have mortgaged these duties in order
to raise a very large sum of money. It was not for any purposes of
civic ostentation, or indeed for any purely civic object, that they
were induced to incur this heavy obligation. Cannon Street, the Model
Prison at Holloway, the admirable improvements and enlargements of the
Gaol of Newgate, attest the disinterested application of the funds
thus obtained. But how is faith to be kept with their creditors, if
their property be snatched from their hands, and with it all means of
making repayment? If the Legislature deem it just and expedient to
deprive the Corporation of one of their chief sources of revenue, they
are bound to release them from all obligations incurred through the
possession of those sources. It is not disputed that the Corporation
were justified in raising money upon these securities. If, therefore,
the securities be arbitrarily confiscated by Parliament, it is to
Parliament alone that the holders of those securities must look for
redress. But whence are funds to be obtained for future improvements?
It would be well if the "faithful Commons" would take the trouble to
find a satisfactory answer to this obvious inquiry before they finally
decide on ruining the City of London.