View report page

20
Government had not yet introduced their measure or indicated its
character or scope, it was deemed imprudent to deal with the question
till that event had taken place.
The promised Bill was introduced by the Rt. Hon. A. J. Balfour,
M.P., First Lord of the Treasury, into the House of Commons on the
23rd February, 1899. Prints of the Bill were issued on the 1st
March, and on the 3rd of that month, a Special Committee of the
Vestry considered the measure, when a large number of recommendations
were made to the Vestry.
At the Vestry Meeting held on the 7th March, a resolution was
passed strongly disapproving of the Bill on the grounds that it did not
simplify the administration, that it did not provide for further relief
of Local Taxation and that it destroyed many valuable Authorities at
present doing excellent administrative work in all parts of London.
The Vestry also adopted the following recommendations of the Committee:—
1.—"That in the opinion of the Vestry, the London Government Bill should
not be passed into Law, unless the areas of the whole of the proposed
Metropolitan Boroughs are included in the first Schedule to the Bill."
2.—"That as far as possible the areas of the new Boroughs should be fixed on
the lines of the Poor Law Unions."
3.—"That in the opinion of the Vestry, the constitution of Aldermen as part
of the new Councils is contrary to the principle of direct representation,
and should be eliminated from the Bill."
4- "That the number of Councillors assigned to each of the Wards of the
new Boroughs should be based upon the population, and not on the
rateable value."
That it should be made clear in the Bill that women are eligible to sit
upon, and to hold any office upon the Council.
6.- That it should be provided in the Bill, that the jurisdiction of the City
Coiporation and its officials over the ancient Borough of Southwark
should be entirely abolished.
7.-Thatin the case of borrowing powers being transferred to the new
Councils, the sanction of the London County Council should still be
required instead of that of the Local Government Board as provided in
the Bill.
8. That theVestry express its disapproval of the provisions contained in
Clauses 5 and 8 of the Bill relating to the transfer by the Local Govern-