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.