THE NEW CITY OF LONDON. T HE Royal Commission appointed to
inquire how London could be best made into one city, has issued a Report entirely in favour of unification, and against the plan of breaking London up into thirteen separate and independent municipalities. If, and when, the Report is adopted, and adopted it is almost certain to be, for the whole tendency of events is in its favour, the " city of London" will cease to be a phrase which has to be explained away and limited to a single square mile out of that vast concourse of houses called London on the map. Instead, the three words will bear their natural sense and import, and when people talk of the city of London, they will mean London, just as when they talk of the city of Edin- burgh they mean Edinburgh. This is the broad result of the Report. London is to have a municipal and urban organi- sation which will spread over the whole town. You may call this, if you like, the amalgamation of the City and the County Council, or unification, or again, the absorption of the Corporation ; but perhaps the most • accurate, logical, and intelligible way of expressing the proposed change is to say that the existing Corporation is to be first reformed, and then spread over the whole Metropolis. This is the first recommendation. The next is that the present adminis- trative subdivisions are not only to be maintained, but to be created sub-municipalities, each with its own Mayor and Corporation. The third important fact about the Report is the implied recommendation that London, as the capital, is to be made an exception to other municipal bodies, and is not to be allowed the control of the local police force. These three great recom- mendations of the Report are, we hold, not only sound and practical in themselves, but in exact consonance with public opinion. We believe they express the better opinion of moderate men of all parties in regard to the London problem. If the Report is acted upon, London will get the form of municipal organisation which the people of this country consider their huge capital ought to have.
Perhaps the best way of making our readers under- stand the scope of the Report is to describe London as it will be when the recommendations of the Commissioners have been carried into effect. To begin with, the whole Metropolitan area will be incorporated under the name of "the Mayor and Commonalty and Citizens of London," —the historic designation of the Corporation of London. The Mayor's title will of course be as before, " The Right Hon. the Lord Mayor of London." He will be entitled to all the honours, dignities, and privileges of his predecessors in office. Remember, they will be his pre- decessors, for the office will not be a new one, but only the old one enlarged and reformed. He will be entitled to have the sword of state and the cap of maintenance borne before him, and will take the oaths and assume his office with all the accustomed pageantry. The Lord Mayor will, however, be elected by the City Council just as in other cities. He need not previously be a member of the Council. All Londoners will be eligible. After election, he will pre- side at the Council if, and when, present ; but it will not be necessary for him to attend. Hence, if it should be thought convenient and suitable, it will be possible to elect a. Lord Mayor to act purely as a constitutional monarch, and to attend to the ceremonial rather than to the practical side of the office. The City Council, which is to elect the Lord Mayor, and in whose hands the practical work of administration will be placed, will virtually be the same body as the present County Council, with the exception that " the old City," as it is to be called, will send a larger number of members than at present. Next, London will have a great permanent official answering to the Town Clerk in other municipalities, who will not be subject to election or to party influences, but will stand entirely outside them. Besides this, the picturesque body of officers, such as the Remembrancer, Chamberlain, and so on, will be maintained either in a practical or else an honorary form. Lastly, the historic buildings of the City, the Mansion 'House and the Guildhall, will of course belong to London as a whole. So much for the organisation of London, considered as one city. Below this will be the sub-municipalities, each with its own Council and Mayor. The most im- portant of these would naturally be " the Old City." These municipal bodies will, as a rule, occupy the areas now occupied by the vestries. The functions of Local Govern- ment will be divided between the central and the branch municipalities very much as they are now. The City of London, that is, will look after the things which affect the whole town,'while the sub-municipalities will look after their local affairs. This is the natural and the reason- able arrangement. It is, however, greatly to be hoped that when the Report comes to be acted upon, it will be made perfectly clear that London is not a federation, but a homogeneous town with certain local duties delegated for purposes of convenience to elected local bodies. That is, Westminster and St. Pancras must not be allowed to occupy mutatis mutandie the position of the American States, and declare themselves autonomous and sovereign, except in respect of the things declared by law to be in the juris- diction of the London City Council. The City Council should most clearly be entrusted with the right and power to see that the sub-municipalities do their duty in regard to their local affairs. If Westminster or St.. Pancras should try to say, " May not we do what we will with our own ? " if admonished for waste or inefficiency, the City Council should be able to reply, " Only when you do with your own what you ought to do. When you misuse your local powers, we have a statutory right to make you act properly." In other words, the City Council should be given the power of supervision. The sub-municipalities should be, as it were, harnessed to do special work in their localities ; but the central body should be given a tight hold of the reins and a whip to be used if necessary. The giving of this power of supervision to the City Council would improve both it and the sub-municipalities. In the first place, it would be an enormous check on cor- ruption. Next, it would prevent the silly squabbling and consequent waste which is always liable to break out between conterminous local authorities. If the City Council saw Westminster and Chelsea making fools of themselves over some petty dispute, or wasting thousands of pounds for want of a little co-operation, they should be able to intervene and put things straight. By all means let the local authorities do the actual work, but let the central body have the power to call them to account.
Though the Report is so satisfactory, so moderate, and so acceptable to all but the fanatics of the old City, those who are anxious to see London fitted with a Government worthy of her traditions, cannot help feeling that, under present circumstances, it may be a long time before Parliament can take the matter up and give effect to the Report. The Government has hitherto looked upon the subject as a highly contentious one, and is, therefore, prima facie disinclined to touch it. But is it really contentious There is nothing in the proposals of the Report that any Unionist, Liberal, or Conservative need object to. Indeed, the scheme is eminently conservative. Why, then, should not the Unionists make the Government a square offer on the subject ? Let them propose that next Session, instead of being made barren by a party fight of the usual kind, should be devoted to the careful consideration and framing of a Bill for the reform of London Government. If that offer were made, it could hardly be refused by the present Government. The London Radical is no doubt a very patient creature, and has taken a great deal of kicks and cold water from the present Administration. Yet even in his case there is a limit of endurance. If such a chance for giving London the great reform she needs and asks for were missed, the Government would find their position very much weakened in the Metropolis. To refuse such an offer would break up the Liberal party. We sincerely trust the Unionist leaders will consider the advisability of seriously and openly putting forward the suggestion we have made. After all, London has a right to some little scrap of this Parliament's time. Ireland has had the whole of one Session and the half of another. Surely she will not grudge London a couple of months.
Previous page
