And to the new Authority was transferred the powers, duties, and liabilities of the Metropolitan Board of Works; and to those were added functions much wider and more extensive than those of that Board. The Act also conferred upon the Council the power of appointing a Medical Officer of Health for the County, and additional powers of making bye-laws. It did not, however, materially interfere with the Vestries and District Boards, nor did it alter their relation to the Central Authority. Practically it left them untouched. The Council was to consist of 137 members, of whom 118 were to be elected triennially by direct election in the various metropolitan constituencies, and 19 to be elected by the Council itself as Aldermen. Finally, the Act set a limit to the existence of the Metropolitan Board of Works. While the Bill was going through Parliament the Royal Commission had been pursuing its inquiry into the allegations made against that Board, and had ascertained that several of the officials had been carrying on-- "... A nefarious course of proceeding by which they had been able to obtain for themselves large sums of money out of dealings with the Board's land." And that-- "... Two of the members of the Board in the architectural profession had availed themselves of their representative position to make personal profit out of some of the business which came before them." Under the growing disfavour with which public authorities were regarded who were only indirectly elected, and so not amenable to the influence or control of the electorate, it is improbable that the existence of the Metropolitan Board of Works would have been much prolonged. But it was an unfortunate ending to a great public body which had done really great service to London. Its own final words[169] may be quoted in its defence:-- "It has been a source of pain and sorrow to the Board that, at the close of thirty-three years' administration of the local affairs of London, which has been attended with at least some measure of success, and in the course of which the Board has carried out some of the greatest works of public utility of which any city can boast, its good name has during the last year of its existence been sullied by iniquitous proceedings of which, though carried on in its midst, its members as a body were entirely without knowledge. It is some satisfaction to remember, however, that a body of Commissioners, who in a judicial spirit made the most searching inquiry into the Board's proceedings, were able, while exposing the wrong-doings which were revealed to them, and justly distributing the blame, to speak of the Board, as they do in their report, in the following terms:--