The Press. TUESDAY JANUARY 22, 1895. THE L.C.C.

Press, Volume LII, Issue 9008, 22 January 1895, Page 4

The Press. TUESDAY JANUARY 22, 1895. THE L.C.C.

We bope that it ia nob necessary to explain that the LC.C. is hob a Cricket Club, but the very Progressive and Radical organisation that governs all modem London, and is jusfc now aspiring to include under ice power the old city as well. The history of the London County Council is a very significant sign of the times. The Local Government Act of 188*8 was passed at a crisis in the. history of London when everyone was disgusted with the inability of the old corpora tion to manage the affairs of the vastly overgrown capital iv a satisfactory way. Most people seized eagerly on the promise and the assumption that the new Council woulld be aon-policica

in its sympathies and in its action. The result was a ( triumph for the principles represented by Mr. Sydney Wkbb and the Fabian Society in the so-called London programme "The Radicals voted for i none but Radicals, while the Conservatives stayed away or voted for a veetry politician, who ie nearly always a fUdical, from a not unuatural uotion! that the County Council was only a magnified veatry " Aβ a matter of fact, less than 50 per cent, of the electorate voted, and the result was the appointment of the body which Lord has declared to* be vowed, body aud soul, to Collectivism," which is fast becom ing the polite uacne for Socialism. The Radical sympathies of the Council were confirmed even more strongly by the late elections, at which eighty-four " Progressive" and thirty-four ,! Moderate" members were returned. The leader of the Conservatives has lately expressed his opiuion that " while the L.C.C. contained men of great ability and great judgment, it contained much too large a proportion of the people who are principally moved by their special limited fanatical views, and by their partisan and class antipathies." And there is too much reason to fear that; this judgmenc is in the main correct. It cannoo be denied that the London County Council, in endeavouring to carry out the "programme." has done , valuable work for the capital. Our readers hardly nesd to be told our opinion of the . attempts made to " municipalise " everything—gas, water, markets, tramways, dooks, the River Thames. But the work attempted by the London Improvements Bill and the Streets Act for the clearing away of obstructions and the widening of thoroughfares; the construction of asylums, bridges and the Blackwall Tunnel; and, above all, the work of the Parks and Open Spacee Committee in adding during j four years no less than IOGO acres to the ground reserved for the enjoyment and health of the publio; this work constitutes a record to which the supporters of the new regime may well point with pride. But, at the same time, to anyone who j observes the methods and objects of the Council, there are many obvious omens of danger.

Those who are disposed to be critical have always complained of two characteristics of the Councillors ; as a rule they have had little experience of the business with which they have to deal; and, almost] as a necessary result of this, they have been, persuaded they can reform everything off-hand. Lord Kosaßsar, according to his detractors made a coronet and natural wit conceal absolute ignorance of the duties of his position. Sir John Lubbock, who succeeded him as Chairman, "knows something of everything except the parochial government of the metropolis." .And, uufortunately, three of tbe moat) experienced members of the Council have worked themselves literally to death within the last four years. Without well-trained leaders the-Council certainly was inclined to run wild. They began* by abolishing the ' coal dv ies, so as to illustrate "'the great Radical doctrine thab indirect taxation is morally "wicked add economically un•sGuud.' ,, We cannot disouaa the'abstract question now ; but the Council seemed quite surprised to discover that to supply the deficiency—about) half a J million—at least 3d in the £ must be added to the rates. It was not) so much the increased rating as the way in which the deficit) was treated —as an absolutely unforeseen contingency— that might suggest a need for j greater caution. A still more J dangerous step was initiated with the famous Betterment scheme. llt was intended to tax half the inI crease in property- values caused by I improvements made by the Council. After much discussion in Parliament,, it was conclusively, shown that) the Council had not examined the details, nor the statistics, nor the expenses of their scheme; and that the old system of recoupment—buying up extra land to Bell [at the appreciated value—was more economical and feasible. But the Council has refused to go on with improvements till the betterment principle is accepted. And so, as it has been said, " London must wait for new etreets until the Legislature adopts a method of taxation which ie is hoped will injure the landlords." And this is the outcome of a system thab was to be satisfactory because it was to be non-political.

■ But the Council is not satisfied, with even the present wide scope, of its powers. There is great excitement over the report of the Unification Commission which was appointed* in 1893 to decide upon the Government of London. The suggestion' is to include the old city—still governed by the Corporation—ln the new London ruled by the L.C.C. \ It most be allowed that there is something very anomalous in the position of this small Central London with its 670 acres of area and 14,000 inhabitants, governed by its own municipal authorities, while it is surrounded by the new city of 75,000 acres and over .four -millions of people, who obey a different ruling power. And the Radical cry, of course, is that the majority are being constantly sacrificed to the Conservatism and the greed of the older organisation. The. report prepared by Mr. Leonabd Courtney, the convert to bi-metallism, has met with high praise. It seeks to merge the powers of the old bity corporations with those of the L.C.C. ; and this had beeudeolared by Fbbdbbic Harbison to, be. a " solution of the municipal problem so complete and so obvious that it cannot belong delayed/ However, Lord Sausbuby and his friends look upon it as an attempt made by the.Radicals to despoil their social and political enemies. The chief dangers to which the scheme is liable are easily pointed out. The enormous size of such a municipality of five million citizens would make it very probable that the central interests would be most largely considered to {he neglect of the suburban. And in any cage the control, of such complicated and such immensely valuable interests, would render the governing body peculiarly, open,' to political_ influence* especially as the movement has already taken a strongly partisan form. The destruction of the historic and patriotic, associations of the old city may also etand for something! oven in a pfoaiio age/ fiat there are already unfortunate signs

of the evils to which all popular Governments are exposed. "The determination of the Council to rale supreme in all its departments has seriously crippled that most important department) of the public service, the Fire Brigade. The Vigorous efforts made by the Council to gain control of the police pointß to a danger which has already overtaken the American Democracy to its bitter sorrow. The charge of municipal corruption ma<ie iv connection with the journal London, the organ of tbe Council, has a very sinister souud. No large executive body can hope to be immaculate or infallible; bud it seems as if the London County Council, iv grasping at excessive power, and striving for impracticable reforms, were likely to insure a minimum of working efficiency and to afford vast opportunities for political corruption.