LONDON CORPORATION BILL. (Hansard, 15 March 1852)

§ SIR JAMES DUKE
moved the Second Reading of this Bill.

§ MR. HUME
said, he could not but express his surprise that a measure of such importance to the public should have been introduced as a Private Bill. He did not mean to say one word in disparagement of the measure, for, if he were correctly informed, its operation would be to greatly enlarge the municipal franchise in the City of London, and to relieve the inhabitants of taxation, to which they were now annually subject to the amount of 6,000l. a year; but he objected to the principle of introducing a Bill of such a character as a private measure.

§ MR. W. WILLIAMS
said, he took the same view. The Bill was, no doubt, a salutary measure, and not undeserving the support of the House; but it was to be wished that it had been introduced as a public, rather than as a private Bill.

§ SIR JAMES DUKE
said, that the Bill had been introduced on petition, and by the Corporation itself; the Standing Orders of the House required that it should be treated as a Private Bill. The Corporation of London had come forward spontaneously to reform itself, and it ill became any one in that House who called himself a Reformer to impede or discourage such a proceeding. The Bill proposed to increase the number of municipal voters from 6,000 or 7,000 to something like 20,000, conceding to every man who had any thing resembling a rating in the City of London the right of voting for all ward officers, as well as for the chief magistrate, the sheriffs, and the chamberlain. It also proposed to curtail the period for polling at municipal elections from fourteen days to one day, and to abolish the obligation on a man proposing 1036 to enter into trade in the City of London to take out his freedom. Another important provision of the Bill was that whereby all fines and fees on public vehicles passing through the City were abolished. By this abolition, the Corporation would surrender a revenue of 6,000l. a year, to which they were at present legally entitled. He hoped the House would not hesitate to sanction the principle of such a measure. It would be easy to remedy all minor objections in Committee.

§ MR. ROEBUCK
said, he approved of the Bill, judging of it by the statement of the hon. Baronet who had last spoke; but he concurred in the opinion that it ought to have been introduced as a public measure, If such a Bill were to be treated as "private," he should beg to ask the right hon. Gentleman in the chair, how a public Bill was to be distinguished from a private one?

§ MR. SPEAKER
said, that it could not be questioned that the Bill was, according to the Standing Orders, a Private Bill, inasmuch as it was brought forward by a corporate body; but the House did not lose its authority over it on that account. The Bill would be referred to a Select Committee, and when that Committee had sent down their Report, it would be competent for any Member to propose that the Report be referred to the consideration of a Committee of the whole House.

§ SIR DE LACY EVANS
thought it was of importance that a sound discrimination should be exercised in the selection of the Members to serve on the Committee which was to take such an important Bill into consideration.