Northern Times. — Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1859-08-04 00:00:00

MONETARY AND COMMERCIAL. WENNESDAY EVENING, The sales of Cotton today were about 6,000 bales, of which 500 were on speculation and 500 for export. The market closed heavily at about previous prices. For American descriptions the tendency is indirectly for a decline. The total sales since Thursday last are 30;000 bales, and the imports same, period about 15,000 bales. The Liverpool Share Market has been somewhat firmer to-day, particularly for Dovers, which have again been in good demand. London Stock continues weak. The tone at the close was good. We quote Caledonian, 821, to 824 ; Chester and Holyhead, 49 to 50; Eastern Counties, 11,i to 111: East Lanca shire, 93 3 , to 944 ; Great Northern, 1021 to 1031; Great Western, 581 59 ; Lancashire and Yorkshire, 94 941 ' • London and North-western Mt 931; Man chester, Sheffield, and Lincoln, 351 sd •354 ; Midland -Stock, 1033,- 104. The market for the : public Funds and Securities ;opened' at an advance of 1, per cent. to-day, but sales followed, and a relapse took place; and at the close, prices were about tht same as quoted yesterday. Consols are 944 to 95 for Money, and 96 for the Account. The New Threes are 95g- to 951. The London Railway Share Market -was dull to-day, and very little business was done in an y h o r t , the leading Stocks. F renc h Shares were rat easier. We' quote :—East Lan cashire, 931-, 4i e , Lancashire and -Yorkshire, 942; London andicor th- Western, 931,,1 • Midland, 1031, 4. The Corn Trade remains in a very quiet and _in active state. Business go in g forward is restricted, and there is no change to notice in prices. In the General Produce Markets we do not notice much change ; the general demand for the leading articles of consumption is moderate, and them • a lt era tion to quote in prices. The traffic receipts of the London and North-West ern Railway Company last week were £75,297, being an increase of-4. 1 ;2,873 on the corresponding week last year. The traffic returns of the C-rand Trunk Railway of Canada, for the week 'ending July 16, were £8,096, being an increase of _X497, when compared with the returns of the corresponding week of last year. The following are the exports of Coal from the port of Liverpool, in June and July, 1859, to all ports :—June 71,548 tons ; July, 85,504 tons ; in cluding—Cannel : June, 15,875 tons ; July, .15,910 tons. Coke: June, 1,716 tons; July, 1,270 tons. Patent Fuel: June, 30 tons ;..July, 1,500 tons. The following appeared in apart of our imisieSsion of yesterday : (Froth the Daily News City Article.) TUESDAY. EVENING.—The amount of the coming .demand for the Indian Loan being smaller than was expected, in some quarters the speculators who had sold in anticipation e of the loan, have to-day shown a desire to buy back. There were also a few bond fide purchases apparently withheld during the _last few days pending the production .t:d the Indian Budget. Consols being further strengthened by news of a consider able rise on the Paris Bourse advanced a per cent., and closes with steadiness. an other departments of the Stock Exchange .business was languid, _and prices sustained no alteration of striking importance. the supply has semi The Money Market is raw,. climilished during the last few days at monied establishments take the best bi 25 - per cent 14 from regular,o: tomers only. In most instances 21 per cent. is asked, ,and more if the bills have more than 60 days to run. The de mand at the Ba n k t o -d ay was consequently ratner active. (From the Times City „Article) TUESDAY EvENniG.—The English Funds opened at 2.11 advanCe of - a, and subsequently experienced a further frac tional improvement, which, however, was not maintained. The 'market was again supported by better accounts from the Paris Bourse, and by the fact of some Australian gold having been taken -to the Bank of England. A tendency provement in the Continental e•Aehanges al so h a d a favourable influence. The demand for money continues aetive, and there ha again been an increase in the applications at the Bank YlNEglrMrchaug c 6,urnin, same as last post. About £33,000 of the Australian gold sent into the Bank to-day. A large sum Was the Continent. lately arrived was Iso taken for MANCHESTER SHARE MARKET, AUGUST 3 Great Northern, 102;' Midlands, 94g. LONDON CORN MARKET, Avcapyr 3 , . Weather splendid. Arrivals. of all grain moderate ; bare attendance at market, and little or no business done in wheat. Barley quiet. Oats fair sale at last Monday's prices. Flour no alteration, LIVERPOOL PRODUCE MARKET.—AvousT 3 We have no'change to notice in Sugar ; 50 hhds. grain Demerara, have been sold ex pay, price not reported, and 4,000 bags Mauritius, to anave, at 395. 6d.'per cwt. Of Molasses, about 1,000 I puncheons, lying in London, have been recently sold, deliverable here, at 165...9d. for Cuba Muscovado, 14s. 6d . for D emerara , 15s. for Trinidad, 15s. 6d. for St. itts, and 14s. 3d. per cwt. for St. Lucia. Nothing has occurred in Ruth or Coffee. • ' 6,200 bags.old Necransie.Rice are reported at:7s. 9d, and 500 tons afloat, open charter, price not transpired. At the public sales this morning, 900 bags Cutch were disposed of chiefly at 285., a small lot of Shmoac at 6s. 3d. per cwt., 70 tons Savanilla Fustic at £5 2s. 6d. to £5 Os., 50 tons African Black Ebony, all faults, at £l2 10s. to £l3, and 120 tons Barwood at £3 ss. per ton, cx qnay. Wd have also to notice 100 bags Pimento, at 3d. per lb LIVERPOOL COTTON MARKET.—AucrusT 3. There has been a flat market for Cotton. to-day, without quotable change. The sales, including 70 Pernambuco, at 81d. to 9f i d.; 70 Bahia, 7-z-d. to 8d..; '23 Maranham, 84d. to 9d. 280 Egyptian, lad. to 100. ; and 400 Surat, 60. to 54d., are reported 6,000 bales, of which 1,000 are on speculation and for export. LONDON TALLOW MARKET The market is firm. Town tallow cash; Petersburg Y.C. on the spot, 55 tember, 555. to 555. 3d. ; October to December; 56s separately, 565. 6d. A.UGUST 3 is quoted LONDON PRODUCE MARKET, 2s. nett Aigust to Sep- —AuGusT 3 Sugar : The market continues dull, at yesterday's prices. Coffee': Prices have been irregular, yet a full amount of business done. Middling to. good 'middling Plantation Ceylon, 695. to 765. ; Native Ceylon ' good ordinary picked, 565. 6d-. to 595. 6d. ; Costa Rica, 70s. 6d. to 755: 6d. Tea : The market is very firm, although inactive. Rice-sold in public sale at a shade lower prices. Dacca, at 9a. 6d. to 9s. 9d. ; Rangoon sold at 9s. 6d. ; Nairanza Arracan, at 9s. 9d. • Cotten is steady ; no sales reported. Pimento, fair quality, sold at 31d. per lb. Saltpetre remains out of demand. Rum dull in demand, and sales are difficult to be made at last week's prices. Cochineal remains steady. Markets generally continue dull. LONDON MINING MARBET.--AuGusT 3. In the Mining market to-day, shares in East Wheal Russell have recovered to 10. There have also been a ',umber- of transactions in shares in Wheal Clifford, Lady Bertha, Wheal Trelawney, Wheal Margaret, and Unity 'lines. In the Stock: Exchange, East Bassett shares are i_narked 176 and 177, ex div. ; Wheal Margaret, 661 ; ..c_Tteridge Consols, 10s. ; Vale of Towey, 12s. 6d. ;' and W h al 'rr elawiley, 26 1 , ex div. Fortuna Mining sh 4 a , res have been dealt in at 2, 3 , and at 15s. Foreign descriptions generally are. very Ingle:l.ll4a SALFORD CATTLE MARKET,—AuGysT 3. The slippy to-day consisted of 1,507 beasts, 11,662 she 9 and lambs, and 104 c a l ves. There was a moderate demand, at ditto the 6d. annexed prices : — Beat beef, 6d. to 7d, ; middling 74.4. ; ewes,' 4d. , to;64d. ; to Old.; lamb cows, 4d. to sp. • best wedd e r s , 61d. to to 7d. per lb. s , ea. to 71d.; c a l ves , sd. GLASOW.OORN MAltlitT '' .—Auoucyr3 At our market to-d a y Wheat met w Fr a with littlulncliryi closed dull at the prices of this day week, ,land ur b r i ngs prices in retail, owing to a cessation in 811 other descriptions were rather cheaper. There N ve l.T eiv es7 buyers of Barley, and prices were rath6r alu e of - Beans and Peas were unchanged. Oats difficult to sell at a seduction of 6d. per 2401b8, Oatmeal 10, per 1944 cheaper. LIVERPOOL TOWN COIL NCIL Yesterday, the monthly meeting *if _the Tom m Covrnal was held in the Town-hall ; William:Preston, E: xl., mayor, presiding. FINANCE COMMIXTES. The proceedings of this committee :container I the follow ing recommendations :—Recommentlation to authorise the removal of the statue of King George 111. fri ma its present situation in London-road, to the platform opi hosite the new Library and Museum, and the erection of a ie Wellington, Column in Monument-place, London-road; recommenda rteec o h m e m erectedenda<tion that an advertisement be issued for a co mpetent person t as ion au to at adopt the t t h h e e p sa la la n ryo and f el 3 e o v o at.rn r o all f n a u w ni a 1, ; on the south side of the new line of strec t, Shaw's-brow,' and the enclosure of the land in the Old Ha pnarket ; recom mendation to purchase a slip of_ laud, cont aining about 250 to the northward .01 laud belonging to the i n Smithdown-lane, at the pri .ce of los. a yard; corporation, recommendation ' recomme ndation to purchase from Mrs.: Payne and others, for the sum of £1,050, the leasehold int , :rest in premises, Park-lane; by order, letter from the hoi aorary secretary of the Liverpool Law Society, enelosing rep ort as to the neces sity of the appointment of, an _additional stipendiary magis trate, the consideration of which was pc istponed at _the last monthly council. The-committee reported that, having considered the re quest of the Dock Board, that the corpc ,ration should bear a portion of the expense.of altering th e present landing stages on the Liverpool side of the river , for the purpose- of could d di n n e g t facilityg r r e e c a em teL ne r h es u o t l e r te ed, tli t ie ha tt objecthey d in eco ll u ea rre vY il to cont : ai out of the funds of the corporation. A letter was received from Sir George. C. Lewis, confirm ing provisionally the present. -schedule c .1 fees for the -clerk of the peace ; and stating that it would notd lal be a visa e fix permanently a schedule of fees unt it the report of the commissioners of inquiry on this subject: was received. Mr. STEWART moved the confirmation. of the first s,pecial resolution on the notice paper, in refere nee to the removal of the statue of King George. - 111. The motion was seconded by Mr. Sam tuel Holme. Mr. Alderman Panann said, though ► a member of the Finance Committee, he differed from the opinion of that committee. In the year .1822, the h ►yal inhabitants of Liverpool subgeribed a large- sum of m oney to erect, upon that elevated and desirable • situation in London-road, the monument of King George 111. That site was granted by the council :of the day. He did contend, and appealed to the town-clerk, whether that council had any right to supersede and do away with the actions of their predecessors in council assembled. There was a glorious feeling of loyalty in those days,,which, he had no doubt, existed at present ; but he did hope the council would not sanction the recoutmendation.:He moved that the matter be referred back to the Finance Committee. Mr. BENNETT seconded Mr. Parker's amendment. He looked ;upon this monumeirt in its present position as sacred as that in a church-yard, and thought it should not he removed 'without strong ; grounds. , It had been stated that the monument had already -been removed from St. George's square. That was not correct.; it never was erected there. He not only objected to the monument being removed, but also to its being placed on the platform proposed, as the time was rapidly approaching when a highway bridge would have to be erected there, which wad involve the second removal of the statue of King George 111., and thus be handed about much to the disgust of the loyal people of Liverpool. He had no doubt many people would be glad to see the head of King George 111. taken off, and the head of John Bright substituted. (Cries of "oh, oh.") Mr. SAMUEL HOLME : A Bright idea. (Laughter.) Mr. BeirNzrr thought the statue ought not to be removed without muckbetter reasons than those Adduced. Mr. SAmugr, HOLMES said he lead :listened in vain for anything like argument in favoer of the amendment. He wished the gentlemen supporting it had as much argument as loyalty. To pax up loyalty with the removal of the site of the statue of, George 111. showed that the gentlemen were very short of argument. If anything could be t'one by referring this matter back to the Finance Committee, he would have no objection ; but the matter had already been considered by them, and some difficulty had:been found in obtaining a site for : tbe Wellington monument, as it required for its base thirty-one square feet : and to place it at the bottom of Bold-strut, or at the top of Lord-street, was out of the question ; for if they took thirty-one square feet, which would be required for the base, it would stop up the thoroughfare. It was,suggested that it should be placed on the site of the old Islington-square market ; but it was resolved by the committee that it should not be placed there, 11E7: Re Ptßg i piake ' d i tlie ir srate o oPkin v g P ae‘z f rg: glhe vicinity of the new library and museum, it would be in the centre of the town, and on a site where everybody would see,it: it was very little seen at present. Mr. RYLEY said, on a former occasion there was a majority of the council against the removal of the statue in London-road, and he hoped :the council would not that day sanction'it Mr. PicroN said, if the .statue was to be removed, he quite agreed with Mr. Holme that a better site could not-be found for it than the one proposed. But.there were several reasons as to the propriety of not removing it. There was something offensive in removing, the site of a monument that had stood for some forty years, that it should be swept away to give place to another monument. He thought such a proceeding would lay them open to high censure, and would do away w ith all idea of peru.spunce in such things in future. Re thought it would be setting 0. gad precedent. It appeared to him that the way the Wellington cone..l++,, had acted, with reference to the erection of a monument to the great here of their country, was in wretched bad taste, and opposed.to, all principles of good sense, in proposing to place, on the top of a column fifty feet high, a statue whose features they would be obliged to use a spy-glass to ascer- tain, on' account of the height. This had met with a great deal of public animadversion ; and if that -committee would persist in this design, which was condemned by almost every person who was generally considered as an authority on the subject, he would say, let them find a site for themselves. In regard to the great point, as to the style of the ornament that would be best adapted to the memory of the great hero, he thought that.council being called upon to find a site, had I some ground to take the matter up, even as regards taste. Mr: CHARLES Tuiusts said the Wellington Monument had been subscribed to with the express avowal that a column should be raised. No objection was made to this by the subscribers at the time. It was a question upon which people differed, but it must be remembered that there were a great many columns in the country with statues on the top. lie did not agree with Mr. Picton that it was no part of the business of, the council, to find a site for Allis monument. He thought this rather ungradous. Mr. JtrrEnv said he would .ask whether the couttca were competent to interfere with a site once granted in • • such a case as this. Mr. Alderman COOPER said the site for the statue of King George 111. was granted first in Great George square, and preparation was made for its being erected there. Mr. STEWAR.T hoped it would be remembered that it was - his duty to move in the council any resolution come to by the committee. lie had abstained from offering any opinion on the subject under discussion.. He thought it was fairly open td the remarks which had been made. lie would say for himself, and he hoped he was not doing any-, thing inconsistent with his duty as chairman of the Finance Committee, that he regretted very much indeed, that a site could not be found for the Wellington Monu ment which would not have involved the removal of the statue of King George 111. He would, not mix up with the politics of King George the third, or that respect for him, nor did he agree with Mr. Cooper that the council were competent to remove the site from Great George-square. It was his duty to move the confirmation of the resolution, which had been carried by a large majority of the Finance Committee, but he would have the eouncil to deal with it as they thought fit. It was very desirable that a distinct site should be ob tained, if pdisible, for the Wellington column. He did not quite agree with his friend, Mr. nolme, that it was not pos sible that because they chose to make their base thirty feet square that a site could not be obtained. It was very large, and might be very handsome ; but, if a site could not be found for so large a basis, the committee could narrow the dimensioni. (Hear, hear.) The amendment was then put, and carried by a majority of 22 to 19. Mr. STEWART moved the adoption of the next recommen dation, in reference to advertising for a competent person as auditor., The.naotion was seconded by Mr. Samuel llOlme Mr. ' JEFFERY suggested that, an audit committee should be appointed, as well, to look after the accounts of the cor poration, who would "ne responsible to the council. • Mr. 31,9zrxy.considered £3OO was not a sufficient salary f6r a competent person as auditor. 'Mr. p, HoLME said it was thought by the committee better to eominene With £300 . ; mid if the person appointed proved on efficient; officer, they could. iiii - ir • Pay) the salary. „Appli eation9'had been received fron.ReTsoAs:gt:c9nsiderable perfenc ,c'bja it was thougl?tibeft4rf . !•lA:9AYPrtitqq - - • Mr: RiLEY thought it would be more wise to say at once that they would give £4OO, as they would then be more likely to get a more efficient person to DU the office. NORTHERN DAILY TIMES. Mr. MOZLEY moved as an amendtnentihat the salary be £4OO. The-motion was seconded by Mr. Bennett. Mr. -TICTON thought they ought tote very careful in beginning with high salaries, for their tendency v ►as always to rise,- never to fall. (Hear, hear.) Mr. STEAnis said the duties were net-so onero us as some members of the council seemed to think. The as sistanee of clerks-was given in the performance of the duties I, Mr. CRAB. TURNER hoped Mr. Maxley would withdraw the amendment, and leave the matter - in the ha .rids of the committee. This £3OO a-year was not the on ly expense entailed with reference to the audit. Mr. SIIIEL and Mr. TOBIN expressed their o pinion that £3OO was not sufficient, and would likely debar competent persons from applying for the situation. '.After some remarks from Mr. Stewart, Mr. MOZLEY withdrew his amendment, and the resolu tion was carried. Mr. STEWART moved that the third recomn lendation be confirmed, which was confirmed. He then moved the adoption of the fourth recommendation, and stated that they had purchased, some eight or nine years ugo, a piece N of :land Smithdown-lane, containing about 3,000 yards, atlss. a yard. There was a slip ofland between that land and the street, and the owner had offered to sell it at the same price as they had paid for the -other. By purchasing this strip, it would very, much enhance the value of that already in the possession of the corporation. This recom mendation, as well as the one following, was confirmed. Mr. STEWART, in moving the confirmation of the general proceedings, said he had one or two matters to mention, and with reference to the new table of fees that had been submitted to the Home Secretary for approval. These tables had been confirmed for ,three months only, as there was a committee sitting that would investigate the whole matter. The Town Clerk had intimated to the Clerk of the Sessions - that these tables had been received, and would therefore be in use. In reference to a request from Mr. Banner, that they would close up an intended street at the Orphan Asylum, as it would separate the new asylum for•infants from the others already built, the committee did not object to doing the matter if they could, but the re was a l ega l objection which they could not get over. The corporation had been asked through the committee - to contribute to making an improve ment in the Landing-stage, so as to enable carts and car riages to go across without unloading, .or the horses being taken out. He believed the estimated cost was £70,000. The committee had thought fit to object-to the application. The landing-stages were the property of the Mersey Docks and:Harbour Board ; and though he thought it a practicable scheme, he expressed not only what he 'believed to be the opinion of the committee, but his own :personal opinion, that those should pay for the improvement that would make use , of it. Mr,,Alderman HOLME seconded the motion for the con firmation of the proceedings. CUARLES TURNER said he was very sorry that the committee had formed any such resolution. It was quite true that the new Landing-stage was transferred to the Dock Board, but the bridges and other matters had to be put into an efficient state. The bridges at the New Landing-stage were too short, and he had no doubt that would be remedied. The question of conveyance of loaded carts and carriages from one side of the river to the other was brought before the- Mersey Board by. the Birkenhead Commissioners. The board thought it was a very proper subject for their considera tion; and if any improvement were made in the bridges they as well make the desired improvement, but the Finance Committee did not consider it a question affecting the public generally. He, however, held that what might be considered a highway across the river was of equal con venience to either side. What the Birkenhead Commis sioners had in view was to allow the people to take goods across without unloading their carts ; in fact, to make it as convenient. to drive from Liverpool to Cheshire as to any other place. When the matter was mentioned at the Dock Board it was thought that it would be a matter of great , convenience, -and.a great source of profit to tradesmen of Liverpool as well as to the people of Cheshire, as they would not 'be inconvenienced in transferring their goods from one side of the river to another. As to whether it would be of any benefit to the Dock Board, it would be seen that large quantities of, goods could be sent in barges to ships on the other side. The people generally would be benefitted by such an arrangement. It seemed strange to him that the Dock Board should be bound to provide means for carrying the produce of Cheshire to the Liver pool markets. Mr. PARKER thought it unfair to ask tho corporation to subscribe. The Birkenhead Comraisbiolltil b found is would suit them very well, and they, left it with the Me rse y oard tn ntwm Ilc had never heard a more one-sided argument than that of the chairman of the Mersey Board.. He told them that the Mersey Board took the bridges, and that the bridges were too short, but they were not to be driven to anything by intimidation. He hoped the couneil.would, agree with the Finance . Co mmittee. Mr. GREAVES said he would ask the liberty of judging for himself in the matter. He had hoped that the chairman of the committee would have told them how much they were asked to contribute ; but, as it stood, he did not know whether it was £lOO or £70,000 that was asked. Mr• TURNER : There is no amount stated. Mr. GREAVES went on to say, that he was sorry to find that it was thought the Mersey Board and the Corporation y=op facilities should et§h-dhioduld not be knowtaiwl had two interests, as he thought the interest of the one was that of the other, and of the public at large. That matter, however, could not be said to be of any interest to the Dock aq they were interested in traffic by water. The chairman or t, that n w n a lc , had v t m o ge ad aza good the to be a fax er°thlerYtthere'-Z ;ed or a toll levied. He thought it would be well ,to r the matter to stand over for another council, so that the members of the council might have time to think of facilities the matter. Mr. Alderman iloustu said it was their duty to support the docks, because in doing so they were stamping every bit of property in Liverpool with additional value. The cor porationtdun hs Landing-stage eout of h been at theteh funds expense boroug of ; b constructingutthey h the north norbeenth deprived of from £60,000 to £70,000 a-year by the Dock Board getting possession of their property. The corpora tion could not make a subscription to the docks without levying a rate on the, whole of the ratepayers of Liver pool. If the chairman of the pock Board had, gone to the council with some proposal, such as the fillip up ct a soostdhowe shouldd ioud.ld anything,u o e t pz t a h 7 y i 6i n n, o k vooynt t poh h ear, f odta t ph(nlime i i wasdttrraido,tthatnaeor orrlf. up of the George's Dock Basin, they might have acceded to the eewt wouldoeo:fs o u uts e phe s pde t 0, corporation the suppose that ar a sa corporationtt iih would ITehefoLuanaddtinogb-est4veerywashtehae tagns 0 , O n o O it Liverpool. the Dock Board, as the corporation had been obliged to give it up by act of Parliament. The ferries wereiprivate property, and as well might the corporation be asked to contribute to the improvement of the one as the other. (Hear, hear.) He thought that the duty of the corpora tion terminated at the, edge of the quay, and he considered it unjust that the property of the corporation should be given to the Dock Boaril : he would not, therefore, be a party to afford facilities for these who ought to be taxed for the use of them. They had no right to levy a tax on the shopkeepers of Liverpool. If the thing was to be carried out, let there be such a toll levied as would remu nerate the board and the commissioners on the other side of the river, but the corporation, had nothing to do with it., Mr. ToBIN said, had the resolution been come to on the ground that the corporation had no funds, and that they would support it only they did not think it justifiable to levy a rate for the purpose, he could have understood the matter. But there appeared, to him that 'there was a prin ciple involved, and a fallacious one. They bad heard that the facilities would not be for the public advantage from both Mr. Parker and Mr. Holme. Mr. Holme appeared to think that the landowners of Cheshire would be the only persons benefitted. As a member of the Council and of the Dock Board, he would not ea) , a •word in favour of the pro ject unless he thought it would be of the greatest advantage to the constituency which they represented. It was not a qaestion as to the amount of benefit, but whether they would be benefitted at all, and they had refused to contribute one farthing,. On the east, on the south, and.on the north sides of the town everything had been done that could be done to giie the people good roads to and from the town, and he could not for the life of him see why that which had been found to be advantageous on those sides of the town, should be said to be injurious op the west side. He could see no difference between the value of the money of Prescot and that of Bir kenhead. Were it a question of dock traffic he would not for a moment say that the corporation ought to contribute. It" 'ought to be remembered that, though the corporation should have gotten a larger sum , of money for the dock dues, the corporation took great pains to have their objec tion carried out. As regarded the argument that the question before them was in favour of the landowners, if it , waS.foand to be advantageous to have a good thoroughfare all round the town, it did ,not appe ar to him to make any difference whether it were the land of Lord . Sefton.or that of the Marquissf •Salisbtxry, , B eca use. one gentleman owned, laud on the one side of the water, and another on the other side, that was no reason that they should close the thorough., fare. Mr. Holme had said it would still further Nook up the • atreets by the carts of hay ail& the other produce of the country, but the same argument would apply to the north or any of the other sides.-.orthe town. He believed it -would be a very great advantage to Liverpool to have the chief produce of Cheshire in: the markets. After some fur •ther remarks Mr. Tobin resumed his seat. Mr. Alderman COOPER differed in his opinion from Mr. Tobin, and hoped the council would have the good sense not to accede to a request.. that would have the effect of charging the people of Liverpool with a high rate for the benefit of the people of Cheshire. (Hear, hear.) Mr. JEFFERY said he was sorry he had not come pre pared to speak on the subject. The question had been dis cussed by Mr. Tobin ; and the question was, would the corporation subscribe to - a scheme that was to benefit the inhabitants of Liverpool? The Finance Committee had given the negative to the -request. He did not doubt that there would be a mutuaLbenefit to Liverpool and Cheshire. He then went on to say.that he could not understand why there should be a meansof conveyance adopted for the free carriage of goods across the river, seeing . that passengers were charged for crossing. He was set right, however, by Mr. Turner remarking that it was not a question of free traffic, but merely as a•eonvenient mode of carrying goods across the river. Mr. Jeffery then wished to know who were:to be the recipients of the toll, in case of its being charged. Jf the council were to be the recipients, the question then would be, how far it would be wise to enter into the investment ; but, on the other hand, if the Mersey Board and the Bir kenhead Commissioners were to receive the profits, it *as for them to do the work. He thought the Finance Committee had come to a right conclusion. He went on to spent- of Sir James Graham's bill, relating to dock revenue. He asked the chairman of the Mersey Board whether or not he had said that he would give the ratepayers of Liverpool as little as possible of that revenue. Mr. TURNER : I never said anything of the kind ; Mr. Jeffery is altogether wrong in his statement. Mr. JEFFERY went in to accuse Mr. Turner of ineonsis tency in opposing the bill, :2nd asked why the council op posed the re-election of Mr. Turner; when the Mayor inter posed, by telling Mr. Jeffery that he was going too far. Mr. JEFFERY, however, continued, amid cries of " Order,"_ " Chair." &c. Aft er t ouc hi ng a great many matters he' -asked Mr. Turne r w h e th er or not he - was a member of, the Birkenhead Dock Committee, and attended in his' place, and afterwards, on leaving the committee, he had not gone to the Dock Board and filed an opposition to the bill then before the House of Commons ? He (Mr. Jeffery) happened , to be in London at that time, and Mr. Gladstone was th ere also. They accidentally heard of the opposition, and went to the house and entered their protest against the opposition, on the ground that it did not represent the views of the merchants of Liver pool. • Ile met, the deputation, and told them that if they did not withdraw their opposition, he would protest against it at the bar of the House of Lords. In conse quence of that the opposition was withdrawn. Mr. TURNER, in reply to Mr. Jeffery, said that he had mixed some truth with a great deal of error; but with reference to his statement about his appearing at the bar of the House of Lords, it was all fudge, for he would not be heard at ,the bar, of the House. It was the most absurd thing for him to suppose that any threat of his was the consequence of the opposition being withdrawn. The oppo sition had-been offered in consequence of several matters in the bill which did not at all affect the corporation, but in reality to some clau ses th a t th e b oard objected to, and when they considered if it would be worth while to throw the bill over to the next session, in conseq uence o f t h ese clauses, the opposition was withdrawn. He certainly never contem plated the spoliation of the corporation property. He thought the attack upon him by Mr, Jeffery was the most unprovoked that had ever been heard of. With reference to the opposi tion of his being re-elected chairman of the board, he- said it was in consequence of some persons who had not known his conduct at the board. Mr. BOLD said, that if it had not been for the course some gentlemen of that council pursued, it was his firm belief, as well as the belief of those gentlemen in London, who were very good judges in matters of this sort, that the cor poration would have received a much larger sum than they did receive. For gentlemen to talk about going before the bar of the House of Lords to be heard upon an authority of that sort, they all knew what sort of a thing it was ; but for to charge the chairman of the Dock Board, or the Dock Committee, as Mr. Jeffery had done, he thought was per fectly derogatory to the dignity of the council. Mr. JEFFERY said he took it from the statement of Mr. Turner, that there was not a shadow of truth in what he had stated ; as it was a question of veracity, he would ask the council to appoint a committee, before whom he was prepared to verify his statement. Mr. TURNER said he stated that there was not shadow of o, oie accusation which Mr. J effery maae. The Dock Committee and himself individually, supported the corporation by every means in their power to obtain the fairest compensation possible, and the opposition was with drawn from a desire to do that which was most for the benefit of the town. _ _ Mr. PjRKER rose to put some questions to Mr. Jeffery, as to who were the parties who objected to the bill, but was called to order by the Mayor. Mr. AfOZLEY called the. attention of the. • council to the subject before.them. It was .a matter of deep regret to him, as he was sure it had been to many gentlemen in that room, to watch the course that had been adopted on this qUestion, and the dis Order that had followed. The question before them was whether. they should confirm the recommendation of the Finance Committee. He never should have calculated that out of the argument of Mr. Tobin charges should have been raised on one side or the other, and, that recrimination of the description they had heard should have taken place, anu Weetoiwit the su inn s . He hoped, a b ft e e v r b c a o d ol sai ce n d d ei t a b ti a o t u t , the Mr. SzEw.A.nis said he was sorry to find that such a hot discussion had ensued on the subject before them. He should not attempt to go through the whole of the matters. He thought the best way always was to deal with a subject as they found it. He found the docks and quays in the hands of the Dock Board. He exceedingly regretted that Mr. Grcaves, who usually spoke so candidly, should at all think that the Finance Committee had been actuated by any feeling of jealousy or op _position ' or anything but the highest feelings to the Mersey Docks and Harbour Board. He could spe oun ak6focril generally, that t y and, ia he t they tho wouldught b he could very dull uldna answer for the not to see that the prosperity of the town depended übpodesoint.he (Hear, br.) good, faeiar,andßuuntibfoe was uniform action uo ionlosfs to the understandtwogreat why they were open to a charge of opposition because they did not concur with any proposition the Dock Board might. make. If the matter was of no consequence to the Dock Board, as had been stated, why come to them at all ? If the corporation was to be benefitted 9 per cent. by the improve ment, then, for goodness sake,.let the council judge for the public. _ _ _ Mr. JEFFERY asked a question as to what position the council stood in relation to St. James's Cemetery. Mr. STEWART said that £26,304 was obtained for the es tablishment of . St. James's Cemetery, out of which amount ail parties were entitled to derive in revenue a sum not exceeding 6 per cent., and the corporation stcod in the same' position as he and other parties stood who had lent money to the -concern. Mr. SHELL said that the corporation had lent a sum of 47,100. In 1841, it was arranged that the debt should be changed into shares, so that they should be changed into the same position as other shareholders. It was afterwards ascertained that the concern was not paying, a n d th ere f ore taking shares w as littl e b etter than giving up their claim. The subject then dropped. Mr. SAMUEL HOLME drew the attention of the council to a memorial from the Liverpool Law Society, asking the council to consider the propriety of appointing a second stipendiary magistrate. He said it imposed upon the coun cil a subject of very great importance ; and although that council would refuse no sacrifice for the purpose of having the law duly administered, the proposition which came be fore them was one .that eould not be sustained, and one which he took the liberty of moving that the council do not agree to. It involved a pecuniary consideration, but that was the last ground upon which he would argue it. He contended that the council were vigilant and zealous on the point of administration of justice, and he believed the work of the Law Society' was somewhat the work of supererogation. And although they would gladly attend to any suggestion coming from a body of gentlemen of such great intelligence, he certainly thought the council might have been safely left to deal with the question. He took it that the society-was established for other objects than inter fering with the duty of the' council ; and he hoped these gentlemen would not take any umbrage if he said the coun cil was fit to manage their own business. Perhaps the council would appoint a committee for the purpose of hearing what the members of the Law Society had to . say on the subjeet, some _of..whom he had been in contersation with, and who did not seem to know anything about it.. , They all knew how easy it was to get a number of gentlemen together, and come to such a reso lution as that before them. He would give a return of the business done in their courts. He found that, taking the ar nu r mr mbea*of as ei c ld a i: aaju d di o c f a 6 te ,o d o ;i l p .e o l n during andiug the year 58 misdemeat l o B =4: and 16,004 drunken cases, making a total of 22,000 in round numbers. magistrates,numbers.l i He then took o w k er t e h: in business messabeeforethe honorary period, I 13,192 doik and town informations, '3,146 common assaults, and 187 cases such as weights acd measures, and miscella neous informations ; 197 cases -ef seamen's wages, and cases arising out of the marine act; 120 cases of burial and friendly soeisdes ; informations under the building act, &c.; 213 cases--of bastardy, making a total of 17,055 cases dis posed of by-the honorary magistrates. They would thus see that a very large amount of business was disposed of by the lay magistrates ; and it was for the council and the town -to say whether that business was done in a way satisfactory to the Inhabitants. He did not think the time had arrived when a second stipendiary magistrate was required. It might be necessary - when the town would be required to be divided into two districts. The -cases upon which the lay magistrates had to adjudicate, required a very small amount of legal knowledge; good, , plain, common sense, with a knowledge of the world, was all that was required to enable a lay magistrate to form a correct judgment. The cases where a knowledge of the law was abso lutely required were very few ; he thought he was not wrong in stating that not more than 20 or 30 of such cases came before them in a week ; and, if there was any doubt in the minds of the magistrates, they had their clerks, who were well paid to give their legal opinion, which was competent for their purpose, and as the last resource they could go to Mr. Mansfield, who was always willing to assist them. In most of these cases the lay magistrates were just as compe tent te deal with as the highest functionary who graced the bench, and there was a practical knowledge brought to bear on mercantile cases which would be wanting in the young or the old barrister from the dry studrof the law. if they would appoint a second stipendiary magistrate they would ignore the lay ma g i s t rates altogether. He quoted a letter from Mr. Stuart W or tl ey, bearing high testimony to the lay magistrates in and about London, whom it was stated would bear advantageous comparison with any other magistrates jai the city; and Mr. Holme contended that the magistrates in Liverpool were not inferior to those in London. It was stated that the lay magistrates differed in their deci sions. To that he would answer, there was nearly always a difference in the form and circumstances of cases. Lawyers differed, judges differed, and juries differed ; the members of that council differed—(laughter) —and it was impossible to get a uniformity of opinion until they had a uniformity of cases coming before them. There were few appeals from the deci sionsof the lay magistrates; and when any were brought, they were,generally unsuccessful. He concluded by saying that he was not prepared to add another thousand a-year to the burden of the community, believing that the time had not arrived to render the appointment necessary ; and he therefore moved that, in the opinion of that council, the appointment of a second stipendiary magistrate was not at all necessary. Mr. RyLET seconded the motion. Mr. Avisox said he was sorry to hear Mr. Holme's re marks in reference to the Liverpool Law Society. He would say on behalf of that society that they wished to approach the council with every respect. That society was formed not only to make suggestions to that council, but also to the authorities in London, and even to the Lord Chancellor him self, and he could say that on many occasions they suggested measures which had been productive of great,good. It was not from a personal interest that they presented this memorial, but from a feeling that it would be f or th e b ene fi t o f t h e public. He mo ve d that a special committee be appointed to consider the subject. Mr. RIDLEY seconded the amendment. Mr. .PARKER said he had no faith in a lawyer's advice when it was given gratis. There was no memorial from the town or from the magistrates on this subject; and, he thought, they might just thank those gentlemen for their trouble in the matter, and let the subject drop. Mr. AvisoN said he would withdraw his amendment when the question was about to be put to the vote. . Mr. Horain insisted on the question being . put to the vote, which was accordin g ly d one , an d the original motion was carried without a dissentient,--Mr. Avison and Mr. Ridley having voted against the amendment. The Council. then adjourned - till that day week, - at eleven o'clock. LrVERPOOL POLICE COURT.-YESTERDAT. (BEFORE MR. MANSFIELD.) ASSAULT ON A POLICEMAN.—POIke-OffiCET 660 charged a respectable-looking man named Ogan, with having as saulted him on the previous night, in Banastre-street. From the evidence of the officer in question, as well as that of 451, it appeared that the prisoner was very violent. He had been in a public-house previously, and threw an empty bottle at the landlady. When he came out of the holm. big , uuttuul, was most mtmerame, consequently the officer con sidered it his duty to speak to him upon the impropriety of it. He attacked the office; and, after kicking him, made attempts to bite him with his teeth. Mr. Bluck was for the defence, and contended, on the part of the prisoner, that the story of the policeman from beginning to end was a tissue of inaccuracies. Had the man been left alone by officer 660, nothing would have occurred. Ike addressed the court at some length in his behalf, and took occasion to say, " God help the poor unfortunate man that gets in a police man's grip." "He," said Mr. Bluck, "is shown little mercy, and no compassion." Several witnesses were called by Mr. Bluck, who deposed that Ogan did nothing until the police interfered. Mr. Mansfield, however, thinking otherwise, ordered the p r i sone r t o pay a fi ne of 405., , or to be imprisoned for a month. , A WARNING TO NOTORIOUS VAGRANTS. Five ill-looking and disreputable characters (one man and four girls), were, charged by Mr. Henry Usher, of Ken- Mr. Usher said the parTh es in the docii"we - rti4 riit b illwii%: congregating near his house in a field adjoining, and when he told them to leave, the man, whose name was Wilson, and one of the girls, named Reilly (these two appeared to be the ringleaders of all the wretched characters who assembled), would use the most disusting . epithets towards him, and had repeatedly said, "We'll rip you open." Mr. Mans field : Are you aware of what course of life the prisoners follow ? Mr. Usher : They are a lot of prostitutes, your worship, and my life and property are not safe where they are. Mr. Mansfield, addressing - the prisoner, said : It is my duty, to protect life and property; and as Mr. Usher, who appears to be a very respectable man, has been grossly insulted by you, and not only so, bid threatened, you, Wilson, must find security in £lO to keep' the peace towards him ; and the same rule must apply to the girl Reilly. The other three prisoners, who appeared' to have taken no part in the outrage. were discharged. A CAUTION TO ONE MR. DUNIVILLE.A than, apparently respectable, named William Dumville, charged Eleanor Holmes, a prostitute, with having assaulted him on Tuesday morning, at one o'clock, by stabbing him with some sharp instrument above the left eye. The prisoner, in defence, a rather well-looking female, said that the prosecutor came up to her at the hour mentioned, in Tyrer-street, and took most improper liberties with her. She was an entire stranger to him, and denied having been - guilty of the crime laid to. her charge. The case having been fully heard, Mr. Mansfield said it did not appear to him that there was the slightest evidence against the prisoner ; that was evident by the statement she 'made i::: open court, one not very creditable to the prosecutor. In exposing the conduct of the prosecutor, she was doing so in self-defence ; and it was anything but creditable for him to be found in the streets at that hour of the morning. The . girl's state ment of the liberties taken by. the prosecutor justified him (Mr. Mansfield) in the remarks he had thought it his duty to make. He should therefore discharge the girl, on the grounds he had stated. THE CHARGE AGAINST A PAWNBROKER.—In this case, the further hearing, at the, request of Mr. Deighton, bar rister, was again postponed until this day . (Thursday). Mr. , Clough said that a report had appeared in the newspapers which was contrary to the fact. He (Mr: Clough, had stated distinctly that Mr. Batten, secretary to theawn brokers' Association, did not recognise the prisone r i n th e capacity of a pawnbroker; but that, Woods himself wishing to have an advocate, he was willing to become responsible for the fee, thinking that perhaps Woods might not have the means to employ an advocate. That' had been carried further, and had almost involved the whole. association. Mn Bluck : I never stated anything about the asso -1 ciation. Mr. Mansfield : I should be sorry if the association were in any way grieved by any remarks made, yester day. It is not the first time I haie felt it my duty to gab that Ido not believe there is a more ,respectable body in town. lam quite sure they would not do any-' thing wrong or amiss, or take th e slightest part with any body who is supposed to be involved ; and what they have 'done upon this occasion is perfectly right and fair. Mr. Gluck : I never said anything more than that I 'was em ployed by Mr. Batten on coming into court. Mr. Batten and Mr..Clough were in conversation at the time, and. Mr. Batten wished him to go down and see Mr. Woods. At , the time I was about proceeding to Mr. Woods's, I saw him in the dock, and then Mr, Clough had commenced a speech: Mr. Clough said the matter was rather important to the association, and he was very , glad it had been set right by his - worship. Mr. Batten said lie was most anxious that the matter should be put forward in its proper light to the public, and what had just now fallen from his worship, so high and so impartial an authority, was quite sufficient. The subject then dropped. AUGUST 4, 1859. COURT OP CHANCERY.--A - cousT 2. (BEFORE - VICE - CHANCELLOR SIR R. T. BINDERSLEY.) Zit/GRES Y. 'THE CHESTER AND ROLYHEAD RAILWAY Co3l'- PANT ARID THE LONDON AND, NORTH.-WESTRuN RAILWAY COMPAITY This was a motion for an injunction to restrain the de fendants, their agents, and workmen, from interfering with, or preventing the plaintiff, his agents, and workmen from. making a railway under these circumstances :—The plaintiff is the owner of large estates in Flint and Denbighshire, a great part of which abut on the Irish Sea, or St. Georges Channel, extending also for a considerable distance inland.. The, river Foryd falls into the Irish Sea, near the town of Rhyl, where there is a steamboat pier,. and from which steamers run to Liverpool, Rhyl being a small watering place. The Chester and Holyhead Railway runs from the' Chester and Birkenhead Junction to Holyhead, passing, - through the parish of Abergele, where lands belonging to: the plaintiff and abutting upon the town Of Rhyl are situate. By the 334th section of that Act . (7th and Bth Victoria, cap -66), it is enacted, "That whereas the line of railway s kirts the estuary of the Dee and St. George's Channel, between the cities of Chester and Bangor, which will have the effect of obstructing the free watercourse and the traffic between the lands on the banks of the estuary and the sea, and so de priving such lands of their advantage of position as respects the estuary and channels ; and whereas the said lands abound with coal and other minerals arid stone, suitable for quarries, which l a tt er i n some instances belong to persons not the owners of the surface of such lands, and are well situated for the erection of works and other purposes of commerce ; and it is desirable to give facilities of access between the said lands and the sea, and from the lands and th e sea on the lower or sea s id e t o th e said line of railway to parts inland,. be it therefore enacted that nothing herein contained shall extend to prevent the owner or owners, lessee or-lessees, occupier or occupiers for the time being of any lands, tene— ments, hereditaments, buildings, warehouses, manufactories, works, coal and other mines, minerals, or quarries, lying near to or adjoining the said railway, and in parts-adjacent, at any future time or times, and from time to time here-- after as occasion may require, from making any rail- - way, tram, or other , roads, ways, approaches, or watercourses, across the said railway hereby authorised• to' be made, se' that any such railways, tramroads, and other roads, ap proaches, and watercourses in'every instance be taken above - or below such line of railway, and to use such railways, tramroadi, or other roads, ways, approaches, or wate rcour ses for the henefit of themselv es an d all and every other person and persons to whom they or any of them may from time to' time give leave, and in such way and for such p urposes as t h e y or anyof them may require, so that any such railway, tram road, roadway, approach, or watercourse do no injury to, and do not prevent, the free passage over, upon, and along the said railway hereby authorized to be made by the-said com pany, and so that all the works connected with the passing" thereof over, or under the said railway be done under the superintendence and to the satigfaetion of the engineer for the time being of the said company and according to plans to be approved by him ; and the said company shall not be entitled to demand, have, or receive any tonnage or com pensation whatsoever, for the making of such way or the passing of any goods, persons, horses, carts, and carriages, mines, minerals, goods, merchandise, or other matters or things along any such railway, tramroad, way, or approach, or compensation for any watercourse so to be made across the said line of railway hereby authorized to be made." The Chester and Holyhead Railway having been constructed, bisected a fa rm b e l ong i ng to the plaintiff, so that all communication from the inland side of the line to-- those on the seaward side was thereby Cut off, the only com— munication being by' means of a farm road passing under the line. The plaintiff being desirous of making a railway under the powers conferred upon him by the 334th section• as above, on the 21st of March last communicated with Mr. J. 0. Binger, the general manager, by letter, through his (plaintiff's) solicitors, Messrs. Humberston, Helps, and Parker, upon which a correspondence took place, in which the plaintiff averred that he intended to use the line for general commerce, and the result was that the company re-- fused to consent to allow the railway to be made unless the object of it was explicitly stated. Plans were then pro posed, and consent to make the line refused by the defend ants ; but the plaintiff gave notice that he intended on the 15th of July to commence the works. To this notice a letter was returned, stating 'that the attempt to proceed with such works would be resisted. On the 15th,, however, the works were. commenced, and proceeded for four days without molestation, when, on the 20th, Mr. Redworth Lee, the engineer of the Chester and Holyhead Company, gave personal natio° to the workmen that if they did not immediately cease they would be forcibly ejected. The workmen therefore ceased, but resumed on the two following days, but on th e 24th were forcibly ejected by Mr. Lee, Mr Richard Montagu Preston, and other persons, merely by requesting them to clear off, which they did. In 1858 the Chester and Holyhead Railway was amalgamated with the London and North-western Railway Company, with certain restrictions as to votes. The London and North-western Railway Company 'likewise denied the right of the plaintiff to proceed with his works. The plaintiff' then filed this bill, stating the above facts, and. praying a declaration that he had a right under the 334th section of the 7th and Bth Victoria, cap 65, to make the rail Way as he proposed, and to restrain the defendants by injunction from preventing him from so doing. The plaintiff had agreed with the Vale o f Cl wy d R a i lway, but that agreement' was not a part of the case. • The contention on, the part of the defendants was, that the 334th section related only to private rights, and did not authorise tho making of a railway, as was proposed, for the use of the public. The whole . purpose of the Legislatu r e, tion of the lams' of b Adak. 00443, ~„„,;„„ under the railway. Mr. Glasso and Mr. H. F. Bristowe appeared for the plaintiff; the Attorney-General, Mr. Bailey, and Mr. Speedy for the defendanti. The Vice-Chancellor said that this question was one Of considerable nicety and difficulty, upon which, had it not, been such a late period of the year, he should have taken. time to consider the point; but, as the matter might be taken immediately to the Appellate Court, he would now express his opinion. The expression, "Public conveyance of passengers and goods," as used in the 3rd and 4th of Victoria, cap. 55, and the sth and 6th of Victoria, meant passengers at fares and goods for carriage charge. If the plaintiff had the right, it mattered nothing what his inten tion was; if he had no such intention, it mattered nothing whether he had the right. Let it be assumed that a per son had a right on his own land to make a railway for conveying his servants, goods, &c., and, if h e o b serve d the regulations of the Railway Regulation Acts, to use the rail way for public purposes, still the whole question turned upon the construction of the 334th section, and that only.. His Honour then elaborately considered this section, portion by portion, considering at the same time that it must be regarded as a contract between the landowners and the company, as the price of disarming their opposition. The inconvenience provided for applied to the lands on the land side of the railway, and power was therefore (a significant word) given to- make railways to connect the two portions thus severed, not to go on the level, and not for the public conveyance of passengers and goods, but for the benefit of. themselves and such persons as they might giye. leave to. It • was the common practice in the mineral counties to grant such way leaves, but there was a great and perfect distinction be tween that and the passage of goods and persons for profit, and the words " for such purposes as they may require" made it more plain; only that the company should not be entitled to compensation for going through an em bankment, &c. When the act passed, it might have been suggested that words should be inserted to enable the 'owner to make a railway to carry passengers ; but, if it had, no do abt`the company would have opposed it, and, indeed thei r present opposition showed that, and probably it would have been successfully resisted. It was true that this section contained general words, but they must receive the interpretatiOn and restrictions flowing from the whole context. The object of this clause was to give a con venient and ready access .between the lands divided by the railway, and not of a public character. It was therefore immaterial whether the plaintiff intended to connect his railway with the Vale of Clwyd Railway, which, of course, he could as long as he did not come upon the lands in ques tion. It was clear upon the correspondence and affidavits that the plaintiff did intend to have the right, at all events, to use the projected railway for public purposes, which was not within the meaning of the 334th section. Therefore, the Court being of opinion that the plaintiff had not a right to make and use a railway under the Chester and Holyhead Railway for the public conveyance of p assengers and.vods, and being of opinion that he ought not to have an injunc tion except upon an undertaking not to do so, and the plain tiff declining to give stich•undertaking, the injunction must be refused. II OUSEEEEPERS.--*The Coffee sold by Thothpson Brothers, 5, Elliott-street, nt ls, 4d., is better than you,py. is. Bd. for at any other establishment. LEWIS AND COMPANY'S NEW ESTABLISHMENT FOB BOY'S CLOTHING.—Number of boys clothed for the week ending Saturday, July 9th, 1,025 ; corresponding week last year, 989,—Increase, 36 boys. Lei oni ce _••4011..1 ~,~ M .~e~ load of 41;_