Northern Times. — Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1859-12-14 00:00:00

LIVERPOOL AND LONDON , -FIRE AND LIFE . INSURANCE COMPANY. Yesterday afternoon, a'.peeial general meeting of the proprieters in this company : Was held in the,Company's Offices, 1, Dale-street, Liverpool, to consider the pro priety of appointing; and if Oa determined, to appoint, a committee, before whom".l‘lr. Matthew•Fo'rster c a n attend with his. evidence, and pro've the allegations in his pare phlet entitled " Statement "of Facts," relating 4.) Mr. Forster's removal from the London Board of this com pany. The chair was taken by Mr. J. C. Ewart, the chairrnan of the board;. and amongst the gentlemen present were—Messrs. J. - Y. Lee, T. B. Barclay, Gray, C. T. Bowring, liubback, Geo. Halt, C. T. Parker, Cor bally, Win. l rle, Thomas Dover, 11_•ap_cker, Francis Shand, Scholetield, M.P., Thos. Brooklebanle, G. H. Lawrence, Hugh Hornby, C. E. 11.1wlins, Charles Mozlcy, Woodrad', A. Thrner, M.P., J. A. Tobin, Terr, Caine, Keightley, Harold Littledale, Mullene,ux, T. B. Forwood, &e. Mr. SWINTON' BOUM', the secretary, read the notice convening the meeting.. _ _ The CH 1=4.1.N said, - in conformity with that notice, they were-met to=day in order that they might consider the propriety of taking any'farther proceedings, in con sequence of a paraphlet which Mr. Forster wrote., Since the reply which the board had made to that pamphlet, Mr. Forster had published another circular, repeating those allegations, and stating that if a committee were appointed, he was Willing to appear before it. He had, received a letter that morning from Mr. Forster, and he bad been requested to .real it to the meeting. It was as follOws : To the Special General Meeting of the Proprietors in the Liverpool and London Fire and Life resmance Company, to be held at LiverPeol, 'on the'rith instant;. GENTLEMEN,—This meeting being &pc:daily convened fir the purpose of considering the propriety .of appointing a com , naittee to investigate the questions raised in my p,mpirlet, and in the reply of the directors of your Liverpool Board, I infer that the business of the meeting will be strictly confined to that subject. Acting, therefore. Upon this coneluAion, all the facts necessary to guide the shareholders is their' decision being on record, and in their possession; and feeling that any . risk of a premature discussion on the matters in controversy is best avoided, as tending to prejudice .the enqui7y, I beg, respectfully to state that it is.not my intention to attend the meeting to-morrow. 7ilth respect to the construction of the committee, yrur Liverpool , Boar& have proposed that it shall consist of four shareholders, with liberty to appoint an umpire. To this I agree.' But 'to their glut. c . s,electieg the four refe rees in e::estion I pose that each pa: v I - . from whom the other s - 1 . 1;::: . es my personal knowledge of the sharehe ; , :s -.. 1 ' compared a ith that of the twenty directei - s of I. . 1 I Board, I find it quite intposible to einch in this Besides there is another :atal objection to this scheme.; A preliminary canvass on the scale requisite to obtain ten nominees willing to act, which in the case of a board composed of twcoti gentlemen seeking a common objcict pre.sents . ,no lin, was in my case, for obvious reasons, 'wholly out of the oucstien. ; Consequently, even were I able to name ten shareholderS who _ • would be acceptable to me, there wiould be no assurance that any- two of them . selected , by your. Liverpool. Board would undertake the elehei.t ri:ee propoked to them; The incon venience .rot 7^ , eated refusals to act need not 1. - . - InistanceF,therefare, I beg to t• • : I.arty nu:tr . :Se; two reilres, who , • :.intim - ; as . umpire; to whi'.'ll lie r.. ' • --I remain, gentlemen, y,1,111" (ST:, London, Dcc. 12th, I.). Now he was very sorry that Mr. Forster vas not there that day. (Lotid.cries of "hear, hear lie thought it would have been better—it would have been but right, after that gentleman had sold all his shares, except £2O of stock, and published such apimphle, , t as Mr. Forster had done—it was but dii to all the shareholders in this great company that he should have been there that day and explained his views, and the objects he had view in publishing that pamphlet. (Hear, hear, and eo: He hoped, indeed he was 'sure, that every - .n. in - .'eat • room who knew him, knew that he ras the last man to make a personal attack on anyone, and therefore, as far as he was concerned in that. mooting, no expression should fall from hint calculated to give the slightest offence to Mr. Foriter. Mr. Forster had alluded in his letter to a plan" relative to the constitution 'of 'the 'committee of inquiry. Now, he look upeu himself to write to Mr. George Frederick Young—since Mr. Forster did not think proper to speak to him (the chairman) after his dismissal from the London Board—who he knew was' a Mutual friend of Mr. Forster, and ho therefore suggested, as being anxious to have a fair and impartial committee, that the best plan would be for each party to select ten shareholders, end out of those ten each party should' select two. He communicated that to Mr. Young, and after a week's delay he had a letter froni that gentleman stating that. Mr. Forster had no objection to each party naming five, out of which two shareholders might be selected. He_ immeaiately wrote to Mr. Young, stating that he would agree. to Mr. Forster's • proposition, the only objed he' could have, and that the directors could have, 'would be the - appointment of such a Comtnittee as *nisi 'bo' free from anything, like partisanship: , Mr.' Young wrote in reply, stating. that he (the •chairinan); had misconceived the actual: tenor of his note, and that Mr. Forster - did :not agree. to five, hut that two should be proposed by each. To that, he replied that he did not 'think that was a fair way of constituting the committee, because- Mr. Forster might very possibly—he did net.suppoSe that -he would, ' but he might select two partisans, and it was yeti possible also for the -board to appoint two 'partisans; that, therefore, it was utterly impossible for him, on the part of 'the board, to agree to the proposal of Mr. Forster ; and that they must, therefore, naturally fall back upon the shareholders, which was a fair and ' legitimate course, to . chose - a committee_ of ,enquiry. It was, therefore, left to the shareholders -to decide upon the' question.' As fai: hi the board was con cerned, he might-state that they had nbthing whatever to conceal from the shareholders. (ear, bear,' and applause.) They wereanost anxious for a full inquiry into everything; and if, after any disefiSsion which took place at the - meeting, the shareholders still considered • that a Committee should be appointed, he could'only say that it should receive every assistance from the Board of Diaectort, who would 'give every information i. Foßsur., relative to those allegations which Mr, Forster had brought before the public. If the committee was to be appointed, he should hope, in justice to the share• . holders, in justice to the policy-holders—(hear, hear)— , and in justice to the directors, who clid hold a very large stake in the company, and scarcely one of whom, at all events few of whom, like* himself, had scarcely sold a single share in the company since he had been a director, it was die to every one •I of those parties that if a committee was to be appointed it should meet immediately, andproceed with the in quiry, so as to afford the least possible delay in bringinc , this matter to a conclusion. (near, hear, and applause.) With these observations he would leave the matter entirely in the hands of the shareholders, and on the Part of the board, he was most anxious ; to give every information that could possibly be desired; and'if, after that explanation, the shareholders agreed to a Committee, he could only repeat what he had already stated, namely, that it should reccive.the cordial concurrence of the board of directors. (Applause.) There was one letter which had been sent to him, and. which he had been requested to read. It was as follows :- 10, Springfield Villas, Kilburn Priory, London, Dec.l2, 18.59. Sir,---As a shareholder of the Liverpool and - London perso nally, and also in trust for others, it was My intention to have been present at the meeting •called for to-morrow, to co-ope rate in any resolution that might be adopted to stigmatise the • proceedings of Mr. Matthew Forster, and to inspire public • confidence in . the character and resources of the Liverpool and London, and the integrity and good faith of its management. , Unfortunately circumstances prevent my leaving London, but I beg to enclose you my proxy cad that of my joint trustee, to be used at your discretion in any manner that will promote the best interests of the company. I may add that it was in co equence of the strong recommendation of Mr. Forster in ! t a !lazy last yea r th a t i n d uce d m yself and those I am trastee In. to invest near £3,000 in the company.---I am, sir, your obedient mrpant. JOHN 1.1.1.1318. To J. C. Swart, Esq., M.P. Mr. KENRICK, of Birmingham, as 'a shareholder, thought the proposal of Mr. Forster was one Which w ould be extremely injurious to this company at large. He should be sorry to see the imanagement taken out of -the hangs of the directors and put into the hands of other pecle, whO were 'much less capable: He could . not see anything at all in Mr.. Forster's2amphlet calling for, an inivestigation; but _he should ask the chairman for.information on one or two questions. He saw in the reply to Mr. Forster's pamphlet, that E, loss of £20,000 on railway shares, incurred some.time since, had not yet been wipedofffrom. the list of bad debts. If that was sa, be thought it was .a pity that the re-insurance fund, which was stated from time to time to be an increasing one, was commenced before . they-had paid over all their 4 liabilities. The other point on which he would make an observation was, that the company had in creased its, operations to a great. extent, and, as the . result appenrcd, in a satisfactory manner t 3 the intercE,t- - : of the shareholders.. Bat looking at the large extnt the operations of the company, he could not help ." ing that some little stress ought to be 4made upon nature of the investment 3 in. which the capital of the company now and he thought if the directors reflected a'_...::pan the matter, same portion of their capital might be . .uvested in what were called first-class securities. (Hear, hear.) Mr. lUnDm.‘..N said, that though an original praprieter such had ben his confidence in the integrity e. ;eoit management of the directing body, that this t - eo first meeting he had ever attended ; and the object • with which he came to-day was to say, notwithstanding all he had heard and read, and all the inquiry he hal made, he had seen nothing to abate his confidence in the directors, but on the contrary to- confirm it: (Applause.) Had the directors on the appearanee of Mr. Forster's pamphlet wrapped themselves up in their dignity, and "We decline to answer this, as a calumnious attack, not merely on our judgment, but on our honour and veracity" —there might have been some reason for calling for inquiry. What course had they pursued ? They issued a notice that a reply would come forth. The reply did conic forth ; and, considering the character of the gentle men whose names 'were attached to it, he must say a More complete and more triumphant reply was never issued from the press. (Loud applause.) Supposing they were to nominate a committee, he should like to ask to what points their-inquiries would be directed. They surely did not mean to go into share trans actions which occurred fourteen or fifteen years age ; and if they did, it would be certainly difficult fur, them to place their m i n i s in the position of the min's of that day. .At that time, the whole world was wild as.to shares, manybellevingshares to be more certain even than consols. Then came the - panic, and it was so sudden and unex pected, that the margins , were swept away : in a single day. It might he said that they should have sold these _Ares in the first instance, before the loss wee so great. It was all very well to judge after it was past, but it was probably thought that the 'pile was temporary. The - • affair,, however, was k:iown at the' time. He maintel . ned it„ had _long since been condoned by the shareholders ; and he was told at the pi - esent moment the total loss. upon the present shareholders amounted to about £16,00-0. There weroather points, however, in Mr. Forstees pamphlet, which, thoagli incidentally answered, were not _answered as fully as the shareholders had a right to expect. One was the serious one, that the foreign insurance had been carried on in a reckless manner. (Hear, hear.) This was a material point ; and he thought the chairman should present to the meeting the result of the foreign insurance: mpared with the domestic insurance. It would be satisfactory to the meeting to know that the result presented no such thing as Mr. .Forster charged. Bat the main question was, whether the £1,150,000, as asssets, was really good and convertible into money ? (Hear, hear.) Now, he believed they were so, but they were of a rrAlare that he did .not. believe any committee of inquiry could tiler enghly . investigate.' The shares - were ,C. 16 0,0 00.. Then there were insurances in Liverpool upon buildings of various lair. ?a, all of which had been passed by the surveyor and the solicitor ; and they were believed to he as good as it was possible for such things to be. As to the Bank of Liverpool . shares, a goode deal had been said about this company holding shares' in unlimited liability cOmpanies; but they must remember that their own was a great unlimited liability concern. AS to the foreign securities, he should like to know whether the. committee of inquiry would appoint a committee of in-' quirt' to go out to,New York to examine into these matters. After all, they must , take the words of the , gentlemen , there ; and he , held that the words of those gentlemen_ . were implicitly to be relied upon. Then they came to Montreal, which rested on the 'same footing, for £102,000 was secured in the game way, and he thoUght they must assume that the security was perfectly good: He confessed that £15,000 was a large sum to pay for the'building in Australia, but they must remember that laboeur was very dear at the, tine of, its erection. He believed,the securities in the rising community of :Mel bourne were.also perfectly good. But if the committee. went into all these matters,' they would only shoW the . way to their rivals to make good' investments' and cem e pete With them: (Hear,' hear...) He attended here: exclusively in t'le interests of the company, • and in his own interest, which was very large ; .and he implored • the meeting not to consent' to an investigation Com 7, flaittee at all, provided the/ chairman answered any questions put to him in a,satisfactbry . manner, which he had no doubt he would. - (Applause.) Me. TEULON moved that a committee be appointed. , He said he:did so because• there — had been un expression of-opinion that it was desirable a committee should be appointed, The question was, Whether the management :of the company in, Liverpool was what that management ought to be: He, for one, had very great faith. in' the management of the company ; and he had great faith in it . because, in the year 180, he remembered being present, at a general meeting ,of the company, when the grievances of,Mr. Forster's pamphlet ,was discussed in public. Upon that occasion a.. sum of money was written off • for depreciation of railway share's held by the 'company. Therefore the matter did net come before 'the shareholders on this occasion as new matter. On the other hand, he thought the report of a committee would be Of the greatest advantage to the company. (Hear, hear.) If anything shouldi be proved to be wrong in the management, the directors would have the opportunity of rectifying. it. They would all have the benefit of the labours of the com mittee. If, on the other hand, the committee should .endorse the management of the directors, it would have this effect, it would he published, and the world atlarge would know that - the LiVerpoOl management could not be impeached. (Hear, hear.) Under either circum stance, thnresult of the committee must be of great ad vantage to the . company. • '(Hear, hear.) They all knew how slight a matter injured ' the reputation of an, individual engaged in commerce, and the same applied to a corapany. Thi s company had stood very high, but they nad now come to a point. when the management, of the company, • was challenged, and when the company was charged by the public press in London, with:being unsound iu the mode of investing its capital. Under these circumstances' he moved, that a committee of investigation bo appointed. Mr. MOZLEY said it appeared . to him that the object for which they were cgled . together was to cons i der the ' propriety of 'appointing a committee to enter into the 'subject brought forward in the published pamphlet of Mr. Forster. He deprecated. going into particulars at this meeting ; but he looked at it in this point of view, that Mr. Forster had made distinct charges against the Board of Directors, charges which he (Mr. Mozley), believed were unfounded. (Applause.) But at the same time, he thought 'it was due to the honour and character of the Board of Directors; he thought it was due to the policy-holders and the annuitants of this great company, but more especially to th'e public, who . . had been- made-acquainted with - those charges, that prompt and efficient means should be afforded to relieve ' the Board of Diiectors from that which he believed to be an erroneous imputation. (Hear, hear.) The Board of . Directors, in their reply to Mr. Forster's statements, had given a direct contradiction. He would not call in question the terms which they had used; but by the conventional ioale the remarks made on page 23 went to this extent,---:that they were untrue, and there -was not one paragraph tnwhich they had not attached the same meaning.. Whilst he would protect the board from • charges brought against them, he did think it was due' to a gentleman holding the position of Mr. Forster, and dee, to the character of the board, that where they made le elies, not in the most courteous terms,—yet it was to Mr. Forster, or to any other individual, that an ee:ortunity should be afforded to him to . substantiate ,i. charges. If Mr. Forster Idled —as fail he ( Mr. ~::,y) thought he would—then the board would come i forth to the public, and its proprietors, cleared from every imputation; and. Mr. Forster must bear the result of his own acts, and the taint would rest upon him. (Hear, hear.) He seconded the motion with this view, d antl to avoid recrimination of every kind—with the view that i the board shouldstand before the world as the organs of ! a great company—that they shou.i4. restore that confl dence which, he confessed, had been materially shaken in the public mead, and afford to the proprietors that satisfaction which they were in justice bound to do, where charges were made which impeached either their management or judgment. He would suggest the. ap - pOintment of a committee- of five shareholders, holding not less than fifty shares in the company; that they - should have full powers to -investigate all charges ; brought forward by Mr. Forster and have access to -all documents, books, and papers which might be necessary ; and further, that they be allowed to call .. in such assistance as would enable them to report as . early as possible. (Applause.), Mr. Tm.a.oN said his resolution would be as follows : —" That a committee of five proprietors be appointed, before whom Mr. Forster - can attend with his evidence, and prove the allegations im his pamphlet, entitled ' Statement of facts relating. to Mr. Fdrster's . Removal from the London board of this company.' " Mr. H. E.umn thought it was an odd course to show their confidence in the directors by appointing a com mittee, the meaning of which was, that they had no confidence in them, and did -not believe a word they said. (Loud erics of "No, no.") Bat this was the necessary - 1. The directors had pat forward a statement meet all the points, cacopt as to a - , 1, which .ho presumed . Mr. Ewart was pr..p,11 - _ He denied that the company had' been at L:1 injarA. . Their busineSs was increasing, and they were in a :::ore prosperous state. He may 1, as an That this meeting, h)..ving c . . - ..nflihnee in Crs, do not see any neces sity ix.: a corrirlitico invcstigatiOn." . Mr. nded the amendment. Mr. MeiLni wished to say that if this meeting was c•.l led t... - . ether for a vote of confidence in the Board of Directors, he did not . belieVe there was one amongst them who would not record his vote in their favour. (Ap plause.) He called upon the Board 'of Directors, for their own sake and their own character—(hear, hear, and applause)—for that high position they h t.l hitherto held 'in .the community -in which they lived—that they should afford such an opportunity as would enable the -report of the committee to be made • satisfactory to the public at large. - If lie was a member of the board, he would insist on a committee of investigation,,in order to . shovi that there was nothing in the world which he had to conceal; .and he believed that the present board of directors wished to conceal nothing. (Hear, hear.) He hoped the board . themselves,Wealld. call upon Mr. Earle and his seconder to withdraw the amendment. Mr. C. E. 1-'o.wriNs said he should vcte for the original resolution, utterly repudiating the idea thrown out by Mr. Earle, that in doing. so he threw any doUbt whatever upon the directors. (Loud applause.) There was scarcely .one of the names in the list of directors , which had not to him been as household words for honour, integrity, and uprightness. He believed if neeminittee' were appointed, that the directors would come out perfectly blanieless in this matter--not only in point of uprightness and honour, but in point of judg ment. Ile.hacl no want of confidence himself in the • directors, but they must 'remember that the Success of the concern depended, not upon their own opinions, but upon the opinion of the public: (Hear, hear.) The CHAIRMAN then rose to reply to the various questions put to. him. He would express to the last speaker his cordial thankS' for the ma carer in which he had spoken of tlie chairman and directors of the com-, panics; at the saine' tithe, it was rather an odd way of showing confidence in the dir3ctors to 'appointa 'corn mittee of inquiry. • The board had nothing to conceal, and were most anxious' that every one - should knoW . the real 'state'ofthe concern, and it was for the share holders to consider whether it would be better to have a committee, or whether,the personal explanations g i ven at the meeting that day were sufficient. If a committee were decided! on, however, it should have the cordial: concurrence of the diretors. (Hear, hear.) In reference to the South-Eastern Stock, there never was any seereiy about the matter, for it was mentioned in the year 1848, and was again alluded to 'by the then chairman; Mr. Nichol, in 1850; Who 'stated what would be .thelossnpthr 'that.stOck.: :The.shareholders then decided that the. calla shOubf be Up,, and that the Stock should not be sold. The money had been lent upon, not invested. in the purchase of the Stock, which came into the hands of the company before the great railway panic, and it was that panic which had caused the loss upon it. . Mr. Hardman Earle had asked a. question having reference to the• foreign fire business, which, as stated' by Mr. Forster in his yarriphlet, was said to have been carried on in a most reckleSs and dangerous mariner. He did not wish to indulge iii remarks which were strong, and perhaps the best way to reply to such a statement was to give the facts. Now, the foreign fire business was commenced in 1850. Mr. Forster made no charge at all against the management of the home businessH(hear, hear) ;7—but he brought a charge, a very improper charge, against the board, in connection' with the foreign fire business. Since 1850 the foreign fire premiums amounted to £989,620. Mr. MoznEY—ls not this prejudging the question? The CHAIRMAN-Oh, no. - (Loud cries of " no.") Mr..FOI4OOD said Mr; Mozley should not interrupt these explanations which shareholders had a right to expect. (Hear, hear.) • The CHAIRMAN said he was not going into the gene ral question whether a committee should be appointed or not ; but certain questions having been put to him as chairman of the company it was his duty to answer those, or any other questions that were put, fearlessly and openly. (Applause.) NO shareholder could fairly come to a vote without having these questions fully and properly , explained. The losses on the foreign fire premiums had: been £553,046, being about 66 per cent. of the receipts.. That included, as they were aware, the very heavy loss at Valparaiso. (Hear, hear.) Mr. TAtNTON—The whole loss ? The CnAmmAN—lt includes £65,000, which is our share of it, for we cannot put down the whole amount until it is decided by the courts of law whether or not we are liable. Now the loss at Valparaiso was most disastrous, but it-was one of those accidents to which all fire insurance offices were subjected some time or other. Even in Liverpool they had had the Goree fire, which was most destruCtive. I n re f erence t o th e con d uc t e t t h e company ' s foreign b us i ness, he would say that, at Valparaiso, that business was conducted by the agents in a careful and a straightforward manner. As respected the home busi "ness, the prenduniii were £439,837, and the losses £222,246, being about fifty per cent. of the receipts, and he would - pat it' to the proprietors, whether or not these statements were proofs that the foreign fire business had been'condncted in a reckless and dangerous manner. An allusion had been made to their foreign . securities. InNew York the securities consisted, for the most part of land and baildings which had been surveyed by -a surveyor appeinted•by the - New Yark Board;' and the best answer he (the chairman) could give thein as to the value of those securities was, that - in the year ISs7—one of the most disastrous years that the United' States, had ever gone through—the company had not' lost a single penny by any one of those securities. (Hear, - hear.) As to whether they were available in case .of need, he could only say the beard had nester had the slightest difficulty in paying any loss, nor were they likely to have any difficulty whatever, so far as they could see, in paying .any loss that might occur in that country. He believed he could say the same - of their sec - antes in Australia. They were all raported to the hoard as of the Most sath.factory cleserip -tion, - and the only loss which ea had ever made in Australia was that—stated in 1:• , reply to Mr. Forster's -pamphlet—of £SOO, - of the death of the borrower. (Hear,- litar.) 'Some allesioa had been made to investments in 'the ahares in the Bank of Liverpool: They all knew that bank, and that, per .haps, it was as good as the Bank of England itself. He agreed with other speakers however, that, as • an Insur ance, Company,.they, should not 'invest any of their funds in unlimited liability concerns, although the deed of settlement allowed them to do so. That was the fact, . or the board would not have done it. It was not right,. however, in his opinion; and, as a proof of their feeling, the company hail some stock in the Montreal Bank, which the board long ago ordered to be sold; and, as respected the shares in the Bank of LiVerpool,.the board passed a resolution more than a year ago that that . stock should be sold as favourable-opportunities for doing so occurred. A Voice—We have sold a good deal Of it. - The - CHAT 'SAY went on to say, he had answered all the questions which had been 'put to him. lie would not follow - Mr. Motley in one or- two personal remarks which he Made, 'for he had hitherto purposely avoided anything like personal allusions at that meeting, and all that he had to say was, that he left 'the matter - entirely in the hands of the shareholders, and by their decision the board would abide. (Applause.) Mr. Tr.ur.oiv said every shareholder in the room would be sorry that any resolution should be' considered as a reflection upon. the board, and therefore he would add to his motion the folloWing words :—" At the same time, this meeting wishes to express _the fullest. confidence in the honour aind integrity. of the board of directors." Mozan'y 'would' agree to the alteration, but he must confess-that he -would like to have seen the resolua tion left entire ,in its naked integrity, as at first proposed. _ Mr. Fonwoo - D—l think, after the ellairmanq expla natieni, Mr..2lOzley feels how awkward his position 13.' Mr. Mozary- e -I. trust nothing shall be said that shall reflect upon me personally in any way. The CHainalicait might be complimentary. Mr. MOZ LEY—I thank you; 'I do not require it. - (Laughter.) Mr. FOII'AT, OD was surprised to hear Mr: 'Mosley attempt to cheek the explanations which the - chairman desired to give.- - ' 'Now, he knew -something of - fire insurance, and. he did hope, after the explanations that had- been afforded them, they would rally round the Beard of Directors, and say—" Let no Londoa press, let no envious parties whatever in any large city or cone munity, who envy Liverpool's prosperity., endeavour to shake our prosperity by throwing - a reflection. upon our • directors." (Applause.) To . his mind there was a gross inconsistency in the appointment of a committee of in - 'qUiry 'Whilst, at the same , time, they placed on . record their confidence in the henesty and integrity. of the board. II considered that the reply of the hoard to . the pamphlet issued by Mr. • For':,;.• was a triumphant • vindication• of their conduct. Mr. J. Y. LEBAhought it very l e 4 .1; t.:e in quiry ?should be prodeeded with ; : , n I:tat could be the case in the event of Mr. declining • to appear before-Ole committee ?: - Mr. TEULON said if Mr. Forster declined, then the commutee must report. to the shareholders. Mr, G, F. Yo 7 xq, as the personal friend of Mr, Forster. but entirely unconnected with him in reference, to his pamphlet had no hesitation in saying that Mr. Forster would attend if a committee - of inquiry were voted. The amendment was then put, and lost, and :la Tculon•,-; motion for a committee agreed to. Mr. 11AnD3i.ix Ea.ra.r: hoped that no gentleman would be put upon the committee who was tinged with the Forster heresy. (Laughter.) • Mr. G. F. YOUNG named Mr. J. A. Turner, M.P., as . a member of the committee. (Hisses.) He 'was not personally acquainted with that gentleman,. but he believed him to be a most admirable man for the office. • The CHAIRMAN said Mr. Turner knew very: well that he had -the highest opinion of him in every way, but he ,would take the liberty of suggesting whether that gentleman, being a director of the company, should he on the committee'? (Hear, hear.) Mr. YOUNG —A director! The CHAIRMN-At, Manchester. • Mr. YOUNG—Oh ! Then perhaps lam a director ? . 'Thc. CHArn3tAx'—Yes in -London Mr. YoUN6—lndeed. Then I think I shall be able to show you: that you have said I -am'not. (Laughter.) Mr. J. A. TunNEr., M.P.-=—You put . the question to me, whether I consider myself a director ► By the nOtnination of the directors, I am a :member of the board of management at Manchester, who are by , courtesy called directors ; and I have learned from this -corregponilence• that I am - removable at • any, moment from the board of management if my course of conduct does hot coincide with the views.a. the Liverpool board of directors. . - A Voice.—Very properly so too. - The CrrAirorA:sT. —I think nry objection to Mr. Turner . is much strengthened, for the retnarkS which have just ; , fallen from him show that he has a very strong bias in favour of the views taken by 'Mr. Forster, (Hear, hear.) The committee should be an impartial" and a farremn- . mittee ; and wilt denounce at. this mecting i or •at any other meeting, any attempt to put on the committee any gentlemen. who I ‘l3elieve, and byhis own admission has, expressed himself with some little bias_on this question. (Hear, hear, and applause.) . • Mr. lIARD3IAN EARLE—I object to.'Mr, niftier on. another ground—that of his intimate connection with Mr. 'Forster ; and besides, that he haS sold many of his . shares: (Confusion.) Mr, J. A. TURNTR, M.P.—As Mr. Hardman Earle has presamed to assign a reason for my selling my,shares,. I tell this meeting' that I neither chose' to consult'him nor Mr. Forster, but my own convenience—'(partial hisses)—as to the time at which I sold my shares,, of which I hold considerably more than is sufficient as a qualification for a seat at your board. Mr. Turner's name not being seconded, the resolution , fell to the ground. Mi. G. 'F. YOUNG was rising to Fpeak,• - when Mr. EAST said, it was anything but at act of delicacy' in a member of the London Board to come there and threw the torch of 'discord amongst them.' (Hear, hear, and applause.) • Mr. Yov.)ra would not make Mr. East the judge of what was delicate. • (Confusion.) He. scorned the 'ac cusation of Mr. East, and begged' to say, that as an individual proprietor, he had' come ,there with motives as pure as that gentleman had. Mr. EAST .rose amidst great confusion and cries of " hear him." The CHAIRMAN, deprecated these. frequent personal allusions, and hoped Mr: Young would adhere to 'the 'question before the meeting. Mr. YOUNG—Then I move that the mover and seconder of the resolution be members of the committee.' , • Mr. TAuxToN said it was plain that' Mr. Young had come down there to fight the battles of Mt FOrater. His opinion was that neither the accused nor the accuser should appoint the committee, but the shareholders themselves—(hear, hear)—and that each member of the committee should have a large beneficial interest in the Concern.'. (Hear, hear,) • . Mr. Mozley , was proposed and seconded, but that gentleman declined to serve.. : • Mr. YOUNG said he appeared there as an independent shareholder, and not at the instigation of Mr. Forster. He had both publicly and 'privately expressed his own opinion, and stated that he had implicit reliance in the honour and integrity of the directors. Mr. TEULON then nominated the following gentlemen on the • committee :—Messrs. Teulon, N. Caine, Gil christ, Capt. Gladstone, - Beighttey, and It. G. Wynn. - The motion was agreed to; and amidst much con fusion the meeting broke up, having first accorded to the chairman, on the motion of Mr. G. F. Young, a vote of thanks, for his able and impartial conduct in the chair. LIVERPOOL WINTER ASSIZES. • CROWN 'COURT, Yis Trnsh.v. (Before Mr. Baron MAnTru.) His - Lordship resumed his Seat this . morning at nine o'clock. On the• jury being re-sworn, the trial of pri soners was proceeded with. .HIGHWAY ROLLERY AT lIINDLEY.—John Fisher (23), and .John Porter . (25), were indicted for having, at HindleY, on the lSth September last, feloniously assaulted John Barton, and with violence stolen from his person £3 ss. 9d. • .The prosecutor, a collier, residing at Hindley; said that on the 17th September, he went to the Bull Hotel, Wigan, - where he received.the sum of £3 is. 6d., which was due to him. Having been paid the - money, he called for some rum, and drank two glasseS, and shortly afterwards left the house; but he called in four other public-houses on his way home, and . had something to drink in each.- According to his own statement, the last . public-house he was in was the Bird-in-Hand, from which he proceeded home, and on his way he was overtaken by the prisoners. Fisher, whom he had seen during the evening in a public-house in Wigan, asked him for a match, but he answered that - he. had none— Just then Fisher tripped , him, and when down Porter put his hand over his mouth to prevent him calling put, while Fisher rifled his-pockets •of their contents. Both men then ran away. The evi dence of the other witness went to show that the. man was quite drunk, and in such a- state_ as to render it almost impossible that he could identify any person at the time when it was. alleged the robbery took place. The: jury found-the' prisoners not guilty. MANSLAUGHTER' AT BLACKIIIMN, Hugh Garrag- hall (52) was indicted for the manslaughter of Patrick Ward, on the Bth October last, at Blackburn. It ap peared that the deceased was a factory operative, and lodged in the house of the prisoner for some time pre vious to his death. • On the evening of the day in ques queStion, both the prisoner and the deceased were drunk, and some rough jokes passed between them, which resulted in a quarrel. For some time the pr.i 7 soner refuied to have any fighting in his house, and retreated to avoid being struck, but the deceased per sisted in the challenge he had offered ; whereupon the -prisoner; being hard pressed, seiied a weapon (supposed to be a poker that lay near,) and struck the. deceased a blow on the head, which knocked. him down senseless on the floor: The deceased did not speak for some time afterwards, and then only uttered a few words to a woman who lifted up his head. He died on the day following that on which the quarrel took place. The prisoner was afterwai'ds arrested in a neighbour's -house, where he was concealed. The defence offered was, that in all ,probability. the injury which caused death was received by falling' on a fender Which was near the place. His lordship said, even taking into account the possibility of deceased having come . to his death by falling up )n the fender, still his being 'knocked down by the prisoner was quite sufficient for the jury to find him guilty of' manslaughter.' The , jury- found the prisoner guilty, but recommended him_ to mercy on the irroUnd of his having roe, i7ed great provocation. The judge said he would - 'ee recommendation that'con sideration which fe .1 - 7 , 'l. The prisoner was sen tenced toEtwo with hard labour: ASSAULT:NG A POLICE-02'_ AT LIVERPOOL WITH A NAISICIO'SS INTEI:iT.—S`'.' Doran, a blind man (19), William M`Ford, a lame man (22), and Joseph-. Walsh (is), were indieted,for having, at Liverpool, on the 21st.of August last, feloniously assaulted John Rob inson James, a police-officcr, with intent to do him some grievous bodily harm. Mr. Aspinall conducted the prosecution, and Mr. Scott defended the prisoner Doran and M‘Ford, and Mr. Wheeler defended the other pri soner Welsh. The prosecutor is police-officer 640, of the borough, and was on duty in Wellington-street, -between twelve and one o'clock on the-morning of the 21st of August last, when he saw several persons stand ing.in the-street, among :whom were the prisoners. He told them to move on, which they did, but, after going a short distance they again stopped. - The prosecutor went up , to them and told them to move on, when M'Ford raised his crutch and struck him a violent blow, which felled him to the ground. While- -endeavouring to rise, Doran gave him a heavy blow which cnt his car thrOugh. The prisoner Welsh kicked the officer several times when down. Mr. Scott called several witnesses, who .deposed that the lame man was not present at the time, . -but came up afterwards ; and he contended that it was all but impossible for the blind man to inflict the in juries which were laid to his charge: Mr. Wheeler con tended that.the identity of Welsh _was left in doubt, and that there was no evidence to show that he was present at the time.—The jury found the prisoners Doran and- M'Ford guilty; and acqUitted Welsh. • His lordship, in passing sentence, said, Stephen Doran and William M'Ford had.been convicted of One of the most serious assaults that he had ever heard proved, on a man who had done nothing but his duty. He entertained no doubt of their guilt, and would, therefore, sentence them to ten ytarS' penal servitade.• • S LumiNG AT WIGAN. - John Gallagher (21), was indicted for having at Wigan, on the. 18th of September last, ' feloniously stabbed and wounded. Michael Darkin, with intent to do him grievous bodily On -the day-in question,_ the prosecutor was in a public-hot/Se' called the Angel," in Wigan, and on paSsini . through the lobby some person called him to the har. - He went to the bar, and there met the prisoner,. With a man named Dunn," and some other persons. Soon after the prosecutor joined the comPany a dispute 'arose about a cap Worn by one of the parties present. The prisoner got up to fight with the prosecutor. He turned to the wall, and was obserVed to take a k'nife out of- his pocket, and on' turning round again; he exclaimed, " Now I 'am ready for you," and before the prOsecutof ' could make any defence he rushed upon him and stabbed ' him' in the back- of the neck, inflictinea'wOund an inch deep, and about four inches in length. The prosecutor pushed the• prisoner from him, and he fell. On rising, he made a sceond attempt to stab the prosecutor in the lower part of the body, who, on putting out his hands 'to protect` himself, received several severe cuts across the fingers. The landlord of the house saw the knife in the priSencr's hand. The prosecutor was taken to a surgeon, Who pronounced the wound to be . cif a serious nature. Mr. Russell contended, on behalf of the' Prisoner, that' there was no Malicious intent, and that though ,the knife was used, it - 'had only been used on the moment when' he was in a 'passion. He called a witness who khew' the prisoner to be of a peaceable. &position. Tho ji/ry found a verdict of wilfully wounding, but - not with malicious intent. The learned 'Judge said the jury had taken a mereiful view of the'case,as it was clear that a man who used a knife against another man, and inflicted a wound an inch deep and four inches long, intended to do harm. The Prisoner had been guilty of a mean and cowardly act, and it was but right that he shOuld be punished. He -*as sentenced to twelve months' imprisonment with ' bard labour. ASSAULT AND ROIDIERY AT MUCH WOOLTON.— ThomaS Butler (23), James Littlemore (22), Mary Brownbill (24); and Thomas Burrows (19), were in dicted for having, at Much Woolton, on the 11th Sept. last, feloniously assaulted John Jordan, putting him in bodily fear and danger of his life, and with violence stealing from his person 4s. 6d. Mr. Cross conducted the prosecution, and Mr. Wheeler defended. It ap peared that the prosecutor had been at the Roman Catholic Chapel, Woolton, and afterwards at ,a - house where he had some ale. On going home td Speke, where he resided, he passed along Allerton-road, where • he expected to meet a comp a n i o n, but hiS friend did not join him. He went a l o n g the road a piece farther, till be _came to a Late where he s3aw the prisone r Butler standing with the female prisoner, and he bid them Pe a night. He passed along i little further, where he Met the other two prisoners, and they , knocked him &mil• Butler and the woman joined the other prisoners, anc l after beating him, they put their hands into his pocke ts and robbed him of his money. It was a clear, night , and he bad a good - opportunity of seeing the parties who •had maltreated him. The prose6itor ran across the fields and met two police-01E9e° , and went back with them to 'the place of the robbery; and there met two of the prisoners, vill° sl he identified, and they were accordingly taken into todv. The prosecutor admitted, in his cross-exaniin': tion, that Burrows took no part in the robbery, stood at a distance. He heard him say, "It's a' shal e to. kill the poor in that way."—His Lo r d s hip "s 3il : l that there was no case again s t B urrows , as 11(1113', taken no -part in the rcbhery.--Ba rrows was then. in the witness box for the defence, and he swordth aw no man had been knocked down by any of the ell prisoners. He had bee n w ith th em a ll th e evening, al' they could not have done it without being seen by lll''' . The prisoners were acquitted, on _the ground that thr-' - `' was not sufficient evidence to satisfy the jury that thc . rc had been au assault with intent to rob. His Lords ordered an indictment against the prisoners for assault. MANSLArGHTER AT MA.NCHESTT:II.—JattIe3 C (24), committed on a coroner's warrant, charged v. 13 feloniously killing and slaying Ebenezer Bennis - 6i, 5C Manchester, on the 10th October last. Mr. Iligg lils conducted the prosecution in this case, and Mr. Litt defended the prisoner. The deceased man, Bennis , :!' was about fifty-nine years of .age at - the time of 11 ' 5 death, and up to that - time - resided in -R o chd a l e -road' Manchester. :On-- the . 10th October he went into ,1 beer-house where he - met the prisoner, With wh° ll ; he had some quarrel about drink. The decease A left the beer-house to go home. The prisoner folloic'T him, and struck' him a' bl ow - on the side of the hesu,', which caused-him to .fall heavily on th e ground. W r te ha . was down. the prisoner kicked. him; He 1c ,,, ' r„ taken to the infirmary ; -but b e f ore hi s arr i va l t h ere , was quite dead.. Several witnesses were called _for t- 11 : defence, who deposed that two men were fieti ll ' 7 ,, together, and while so engag e d, th e d ece a se d f e ll wile' making a blow at- the prisoner. His lordship said tho evidence did not relieve the prisoner from the e har,lei because, if two men were fighti n g and one of them le' f upon the ground and was kill e d, the other was gailtY ° J manslaughter. The jury f oun d th e p r i soner gu ilty, .ar he was sentenced to f our days' imprisonment, it beill taken into consideration that .he had been in pri° /1 since the 11th October. , BIGAMY- AT TOD3lollDM—Edmund Ashwortu wa3 indicted for having, ,at Todmorden, on the °„ April, 1851, feloniously m arr i e d M ary G reen, hi s wife being then alive. Mr. Cross prosecuted, and Littler defended. It was shown that the prisoner .Nc . ,-7 married to`a woman named Ann Sandyford, in and she had been seen - en the day-of her marria g e '- an innkeeper,. but not afterward s un til O c t o b er There was no evidence to show that the prisoner known - that his wife was _alive. within the last secc' years, and he was accordingly'acquitted. The court then adjourned to nine o'clock 0) -morning. SELECT VESTILY. The fortnightly meeting of this body was held in Li" Parish-offices, Brownlow-hill, yesterday forenoOn. Churchwarden Jones presided; and the other M et al present • were-Messrs. Cropper, Owen, ,Scott, Smi t i Whitty, Cook, Bairstow, E. Byf o rd, D en t on , S . i're Satchel', Williams, Whitby, Broome, Peck, and WORKHOUSE CO3IMITTEE. The proceedings of this conntittee, whi c h 115 so already been reported in our columns, having been r0 . ', 4 Mr. Churchwarden_ CnorrEn. moved their confill' l ,, / e Lion. He wished to draw particular attention to t last sentence •of the report, in reply to Mr. Rolvil tro, " i ',, which expressed the feeling of the committee, that the future no such letter as-that which appeared - in' t;' o a p ( e l rs a s r h , o hear.receivety he t at t te h l a i t t i o i n t o w f . ; "" t i c n o o u r i i in t g t e e P . mistake, after it was- done, that they had taken 8 !';', notice of it at all; and if any gentleman choose to wr.',i l such letters in future, they should just treat them, wl` Contempt. • of The CHAIRMAN said the. suggestions in the ,letter s „ , a Mr. Rowntrbe would involve au additional outlay, wit" would mean an addition to the , rates. They must pose that a stranger, on whom the rate would not -11 . j would not be very careful in the suggestions he Is la make. He thought -it a bad precedent to r eply to t observations made by a casual inspector of the Pic for he supposed one visit was the only opportu 3 %;, within Mr. Rowntree's reach of obt a i n i ng i n f o rmatio, He thought it was a piece of very. great p re§u mptioll to of temerity on the part of any man of common sense o come into an immense parish like Liverpool, walk e 0 an hour or two through a large house like this, and P o consider himself competent to give advice to gentleP tt e who have spent years_ in acquiring knowledge 01 ". management. (Hear; hear:) • - • li DEN - roN was not sorry that the inquiry had boe - entered into, because it only showed the public that t o vestry Were alive to all the impoSitions 'that'mi e r practiced upon them, and .that.they did in - all eases cise considerable care. He quite approved of the .4" o f mination 'of the committee not to take any more noti ce such - unenymous communications. llf' A Member—lt was not anonymous. It was • Rowntree. y t - Mr.'Dt - ITrox—:•Ile was anoiiyous: as a ratepaye r ' any rate. (Laughter.) , • -. The proceeding were then confirmed: - • • mpustnlAL SCHOOLS COMMITTEE. The proceeding of this committee were next rev:. OA Mr. BAIII-STOW having moved,the confirmation el proceedings, ' 4tat li Mr. CROPPER directed- attention to the defectic° of .the, approaches to the schools, and the fences , to rounding thejandbelongin(r to_them. und . f'''„ t D that a sub-committee had been appointed to consie,,, e 'i t t matter, and he would like to know when. that colo“'" would be prepared to submit their report. Oct Mr. BAIRSTOW complained of the meagre attend 3 0. 'in the sub-committee, andstated that the chairmaP , ., imes, tad not taken his place upon it, either frti l " health or some other cause. - • oel s The CHAIRMAN said . he should 'not shrink l' o itit comparison of his attendance at the con imittee s , that of any other gentbunan ; but, he had latte rl e signedly absented himself from the sub-comi il t :question, because from the Want of unanimiY 7fios i committee themselves, or the want of more libertio. Oce the board, it was impossible to carry out anytlitTail o a comprehensive plan of improvement. lie cO r aholi .board with opposing. anv outlay whatever on the s h , e • ec t and particularly named 'Mr. Denton as one who °l' to any expenditure of the kind. d tlo Mr: DENTON denied the. imputation; and sts•—. 4 , i iiic all the schemes of improvement at the schools, 3 were found, to be reasonable had been carried " t "„ e s 1 0 0 Mr. OWEN denied that the matter of the fen` col ie_ A ever been brought before the Board since he b e re ful member, and contended that the Board nev er au any expenditure which was proved to be reasona • necessary. • The proceedings were confirmed. FINANCE COMMITTEE. eat t • The proceedings of this committee were nest r t o - .4r. 0 wm, in moving the confirmation of thci4jell ceedings, wished to correct an erroneous opinion fli l Fhb, to exist as to the duties of a relieving , cl to al The business of the relieving officer was to a ttelw bu t tc cases of destitution when made known to him ; l a Oil was not sent to hunt them up. If persons wet', doe send word to the Board or the Vestry - cler k of 1 01 ; b ut 1, tute case, it would be attended to without delay ;.,,iiie-P did not suit the taste of some gentlemen to do b' in that quiet way. 11 0 Mr. Cu ' oppEn, in seconding the resolution stel thy, oo the reply of the Finance Committee of the Town ' l',c! as to the measurements, was not satisfactory- 0..).xi• rePlied that they had no power to insist Leastor Co M mm r. Weightman furnishing the board with the longerief, ments. Therefore, they would be some time coul d an getting dtheythmemus.t now However,rest satisfiedthe yhad t that tne timea ll vi th o e l li 11' 0 7 n ee its own cure. - it - D te E e N w xo as x m sa e id rely th m e a ay e pl b i y ca t t h io e n the üblic that they had left no stone unturnet'he otb io ' them_easurements. He saw Mr. Weighting', io the day,, and he promised he would be ready t„,. 0 Ater./ 0 before the board in the course of a week. (l'inly sole The proceedings were confirmed; and after formal business, the board adjourned. n t ° l.e e t t i li n eg Finnl t s o l /;,°e:t NORTHERN D ILY TIMES DECEMBER 14, 1859. t4; l, ` 17t, ,(:: 11Y - ' •letfll, ter4; e . , k)oti; .q' ne II Pth ik`e 3 - A ,~~V ~~,r ; ,~a I''~o, r~`~