Northern Times. — Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1857-06-26 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. (By British and Irish Magnetic Telegraph.) HOUSE OF LORDS.—THIIRSDAY The House met at five o'clock. FOUL LITERATURE. Lord CAMPBELL moved the second reading of the Sale of Obscene Books and Prints Bill, the object of which was to give power, upon an affidavit, to search for and seize obscene books and prints. Lord BROUGHAM opposed the.bill, on the ground of the diffilulty of defining what could be considered as obscene. Lord LYNDHURST and the Loan CHANCELLOR also opposed the motion, and the latter noble and learned lord moved that the bill be read a second time that day six months. Lord CAMPBELL, however, promised to amend the bill in committee, to meet the objections stated, and upon that understanding the amendment was withdrawn, and the bill passed a second reading. LITIGATION.-PROPOSED COURTS OF RECONCILIATION. Lord BROUGHAM drew attention to the vexatious litiga tion carried on in the piesent state, of the law, and pro posed the second reading of a bill which had for its object the creation of courts of reconciliation, to which contending parties should go, with a view of preventing actions instituted for the mere purpose of obtaining costs. He did not wish then to press his bill, and therefore, at that stage, moved the postponement of the debate The Lord CHANCELLOR thought that the courts of recon ciliation would not answer the purpose for which they were designed, but would rather tend to embarrass. Lord CAMPBELL took a similar view. The debate was then adjourned sine die. The County Cess (Ireland) Bill, and the Grand Juries (Ireland) Act, 1836, Amendment Bill, were read a second time. The house adjourned at twenty minutes past seven. HOUSE OF COMMONS—THURSDAY The SPEAKER took the chair at four o'clock- PRIVATE BILLS. The Manchester Corporation Bill, and the Deeside Extension Bill, were read a third time and passed. The Lorda' amendments to the Calcutta and South Eastern Railway Company Bill were considered and agreed to. ELECTION COMMITTEES. The members to serve on the Pontefract, Marlborovgb and Wareham election committees were sworn at table. ABOLITION OF PASSING TOLLS Mr. LowE, in answer to Mr. Ingham, said he regretted that the state of public business would prevent him from introducing, in the present session, his bill for the abolition of passing tolls. SYNOD OF THe ESTABLISHED CHURCH IN CANADA. Replying to Mr. Commis, Mr. LABOUCHERE said the Royal assent had been given to the bill passed by the Canadian Legislature, to enable the members of the United Church of England and Ireland to meet in synod in order that the members thereof might be permitted to exercise the same rights of self-government that are enjoyed by other religious communities. He had recommended the Crown to assent to the measure, in the belief that it placed the appointment of bishops in that church in the synod, and he believed that such was the intention of the assembly of Canada. ADMISSION OF JEWS INTO PARLIAMENT. On the motion for the third reading of the Oaths' Bill, power is unnecessary, the Dock Trustees, take such matters into their own hands entirely, and do not allow the DocklCommittee to exercise any influence at all. Now, on one (cession the Dock Committee had ad mitted that the veto had been properly exercised, and they came to parliament to correct their error. It was really not worth while adverting to the veto on the admission of reporters, and one or two other very insignificant matters. The veto had been fully explained by the Town'Clerk, and it was in evidence that the latter part of the clause above quoted was untrue, for the Dock Committee, by their HOUSE OF COMMONS, THURSDAY , JUN E 25. own solicitor, and other officers, carrird the bills through parliament—the bills having first been sanctioned by the When we closed our parcel yesterday, Mr. Hope Scott Dock Trustees. Then, he came to the imputation was still addressing the committee on behalf of the Liver- I that the Corporation of Liverpool had fostered trade to ;It.teit corporation 0 raiverpoo of l and ra l v e s r n p b o s o e l q u w e e n r e t 1 y g r f I e e a e t c e l d a n i d t o b y w n t a e r i t e a t i a o n n d at six o'clock, and we now report his remarks to a con- a pool Corporation. The learned counsel's address closed who, therefore, if they were not, was to foster trade? elusion. After describing the nature of the property, and Why, then, should they tax it? They might as well speak the peculiarity of its tenure—that it was held in trust for of injustice and the want of feeling of a mother who had the burgesses—he pointed out that our govern ment were devoted to the first six er eight years of the life of her child considerable attention, and then when it came to about to pay a considerable sum to the Danish govern boyhood ceased to take the same amount of care of her pro ment for the abolition of the Sound Dues —dues of geny that she did when in its infancy. The Board of Trade in an analagous character to those of Liverpool, 1857, said—" It appears that the Corporation never obtained which were now proposed to be abrog a ted from Parliament power to sell and appropriate for dock pur without an compersation whatever being awarded poses more land than was actually wanted immediately for y the purposes of the docks for the time bieng, in course of to the possessors of them by law. Mr. Hope I construction; but always reserved to themselves the adjacent Scott then quoted from the Board of Trade report of last strand " A more unjust statement he never heard of. It year, to show that it was admitted the Liverpool Corpora- was known w fa a c e t w th a a n t te P e ar b l n ia t m t e h n e t C n o e rp ve o r r w at o io ul n d w gi i v th e more a l w an eli d than tion in earlier years had managed the docks well ; and not considerable foresight, did that which was tantamount to only so, but had, from time to time, given land it ; they bought the land in anticipation, and sold it to the and money towards the improvement of the port. Now they Dock Trust at cost price, plus the interest on their outlay. r a o f e t t e h e e e la n. with s on e excavations t o ha v e . A e g e a n i n n 2 , i t made by said d e , were able to carry that down to the latest period ; and D " o M ek uc T h the committee had had handed in to them a return showing D from the docks, and a great part of the land has the expenditure in money, and the gifts of land f o r p ur- been subsequently wanted for dock purposes, and poses beneficial to the trade of the port, and to the river has been sold by the Corporation to themselves, Dock Trustees." That question had been completely but and to shipping frequenting not only the port, as and for ever sat at rest by the very candid evidence of Mr. y but going higher up the river. He was bound to believe Wrightman, confirmed by the report of the Municipal that the committee having viewed Liverpool from a Board Corporation Commissioners in 1835, wherein it was stated, of Trade aspect, would not refuse to look upon it from a that as regards Liverpool, there were no flagrant abuses view which he should offer to their notice. Viewing then Proved—on the contrary, that as a Corporation, they appeared to have been economical and judicious in the the Liverpool Corporation, living as a wealthy proprietor arrangement of their affairs, and as a governing power had on the banks of the Mersey, what had that proprietor exercised their functions judiciously. But what was most done ? They found that proprietor giving a sum of money remarkable in all these transactions was, the opponents of towards the construction of the old dock —a sum ver y large Liverpool could not lay their finger on a single one and say that it was tainted with fraud or bore the semblanee of at the time, considering the income of the C o r poration— say job. Indeed, many of these large transactions were in larger than the total income from the Town Dues at that the recollection of living men, and yet, not one man could period, which was £360, and the gift was £5OO. They be induced to say that they were tainted. Mr. Aspinall Turner, a witness to be trusted in every respect, and who, a lso found that Corporation contributing to the improve from h is ' being resident there, had a thorough knowledge ment of the river Weaver, to open up an inland communi of Liverpool, said he could not blame the Corporation for cation with Cheshire ; they contributed towards charts of having taken a fair price for their land ; but that their the Mersey, towards improving the highways to Preston and position as buyers and sellers, necessarily laid them open to Warrington, (ungrateful Manchester); towards improving I s th us e tcio tra n. neao Th ti a o t n p e o i t n o t w a as jenarsyily rWhether b t y ha re t fe w rri ou n l g d all the navigation of the Mersey ; towards making the Sankey desirable he was not prepared to say. Next, Brook navigable; they built forts, gave sites to government as to the warehouse question in 1840. It had been for forts for the protection of the port; they improved the insinuated both in statement and in argument that the T approaches to the docks, and, in fact, made every variety Town Council interest was adverse to the interests of the port, in respect to dock warehouse accommodation. This was of expenditure for the benefit of trade and commerce , in - really too bad—inexcusable. The fact was, a bill was pro eluding an outlay of £llO,OOO towards a custom house, R ioted by the Dock Commitee, in the name of the Dock dock, and post-office; they established an observatory, Trustees, and might have been D veto k ed T by the Corporation of which was of incalculable value to mariners ; they prepared t L h i e ver , ! i o d ol n i o n t their capacity tti onagy a a s inu o t cru he s y tee g s a . ve A no s e it pp w o a e s t , and passed a bill for the conservancy of the river ; they tion y to the measure—but it was opposed by the Warehouse raised a regiment of so'diers for the protection of their Association, some members of whom were in the Town native land ; they, in fact, incurred expenditure upon Council,where their votes on the question did not affect the almost every object for the local accommodation and pro - And now f a lB s s t 7 o B e i a r i k d e uh e : —, a , I d t . i The e n oeße necessary oft t o T Trade, a , in t tection of shipping since the first Dock Act, to the extent of bill ll r report il length the history of the Birkenhead docks. y When they £1,702,992. The total revenue, as far as they knew it, were first projected in 1824, the Liverpool Corporation (the very earliest returns were not complete) from the bought large tracts of land and shares of Wallasey Pool, in Town Dues and anchorage, commencing in 1727, was o rder,la e a , s r p resent Town s s tate e d by l the rka ITownstye rto Clerk in preventlB3 4 theandestab lishment asfaii n£3,29s,B76 ;so that upon public objects connected with liys th j tn hment of a rival port"—a very good reason, indeed, for the trade of the port, and, without reference to what had the purchase. "In 1843 44, the scheme for docks having been lent on low rates of interest and repaid, and again been set on foot, the Corporation sold long without reference to the expenditure on property, from leases of this land at high prices, They then vigorously opposed the Birkenhead Dock's Bill. The which they now derived rent, out of 13,205,876 • subsequent history of Birkenhead, is the history of a received by the Corporation, they had an actual ex- struggle with Liverpool, and with Liverpool taxation. An penditure, not compulsory, but voluntary, upon old and absurd cry revived, The Corporation issued those general objects for the benefit of commerce of notices for a bill in 1828, and made very great concessions £1,702,992. But if the committee would look further, to individuals, to make docks on the land which the Cor poration leased to them, subject however, to a very strong they would find that the Corporation had lent the Dock general warning, that the plans on which y proceeded Trust sums of money, not large in amount as compared must not be injurious to the estate, and the then with fall with our day, but which, in earlier periods, were very and perfect notice beforehand, that if their plans were of considerable. In all they had lent the Dock Trust such a character, they should be strongly opposed. The £ll,OOO, and besides this, they had expended on lessees did introduce obnoxious plans, and the Corpora tobacco warehouses, at the request of the Commissioners of l tion t er did offer it t o was the ni the thl u ir ck ratepayers sospwpohso refused itionA to Customs, a Castoms, a very considerable sum, besides giving the have p e r i odecks at Birkenhead. The Corporation had brought and, worth £72,000. They had also paid icr cranes for in a bill for the purpose, and took the sense of the rate the use of the craft trading is the Mersey ; had erected oil payers upon it, the result being that the members sent "houses to encourage the Greenland Fishery ; erected four down by the committee to the Dock Committee, were in a gunpowder magazines, and other objects of public utility, that minority, itw aae ine xp edient the ratepayers to aff ord s nominees t ea passedee accommodation resolution od a ti o n at an expense of £276,21 2 , which were at present giving a in the shape of ed docks by going to Birkenhead. Had the return of .. 4 .'3 15s 2d per cent., being building property, Corporation been allowed to proceed, no doubt an immense which, in an ordinary speculation, would be expected to sum of money would have been saved to the commerce a o e w ih t e l , y .e o C ri o g rE a r i a i t y io e n tee st d ood t i h n i a iv p e o r s p iti oo o i n realise at least 7 per cent. Again, supposing there had o w f . t h h eM erse y been in 1793, a Dock Trust only, could that Trust have wit h They were Birk en head,the. own ers of a very fine and valuable estate, sustained the honour and credit of the town without the which must be benefitted by the completion of the docks, aid of the Corporation ? The Corporation even could and therefore with truth the Admiralty had said—" Their not have done it without the Town Dues— lordships consider it would be highly desirable that works with them they were not obliged to do it, on which so much time and money have been spent should But that was only one of the many bright examples of n f ow L b .v e e carp l e , d w o h u o t and eu c h o t ttet b ed e , and the t b li e s e t t th . e d Co e r e po o r f at t ir e their generous conduct towards the trade and commerce requirements, orpo and who have the greatest in ju tefest in the of the port, and was only one of many instances showing outlay, should be permitted to complete works which have the immense advantages derived by the port of Liverpool remained so long in abeyance." The fight of the Corpora from the generosity of the Corporation—a wealthy and tion with the Great Western Company was l this, that t the liberal corporation, whose interest it was, he (Mr. Hope l o e r p i :) i r r t e i o n n h e w ad ou e eta n te ot e g n w t e h u e p se th u e th m ß o e st eerv va e ua w bl h e ie p h ar wa o e f Scott) admitted, to be generous, but whose liberality held in trust for commercial purrses—for railway pur descended in a thousand blessings upon future generations, poses exclusively. If the Corporation had sought their not only of the people of Liverpool, but of the whole i own interest in the matter, they would have sought to have country. Now, putting the other case, supposing the th e t r ade taken higher up the Float, near their own pro- Molyneux family had held this property (as they did perty, or upon the North Reserve ; but they felt that they before the corporation purchased it from them), the royal held those docks on the faith of constructing them according commissioners would have told parliament, tt It is private to the best plans possible, and therefore refused to allow one property ; you cannot touch it." A n d, l e t hi m ask, would railway company to monopolise a large and most valuable the Molyneux family, who had made these dues the subject portion of the estate. He must say, that on a calm review of marriage settlements on the daughters of thei r dependents, of the whole case, he was surprised that, after a lapse would they have made this expenditure ? And yet, of 150 years, so few accusations could be brought forsooth, because these dues of a private family had been against the Corporation. Reformed or unreformed, bought and paid for by an aggregation or corporation of the Liverpool Corporation had shown the same spirit, individuals, they were to be confiscated on the ground that had acted on the same wise and liberal principles, they were not analagous to private property. But he would and on have developed a commercial scene, which was put yet another case. Supposing the Corporation were the unequalled for its grandeur and stupendous extent by any lessees, under a thousand years' lease, and the Molyneux commercial city in Europe or America. The present family were the reversioners, what would the committee Dock Committee was unchallenged by their opponents, in have said to them? Would the committee have passed the bill without giving compensation? They could not— respect of their conduct. Their present constitution was modified in 1851, and gradually would be capable of they dared not. The r e never b a d bean a man bold enough further modification perhaps by an addition to the repre yet to attempt the confiscation o f pro p er ty s o held. The sentation. The past history of the Dock Committee people of Liverpool had purchased their property, and it showed a gradual extension of the ratepaying franchise, was not safe in their own hands, th oug h it wou ld be in the and the privilege of representation ; and the evidence of hands of the Molyneux family, where it would receive a the general satisfaction which the Dock Committee gave very different application to that which it had met with was decisive. There had been celled Mr. Saunders, a from the Corporation. Apart from this, however, he merchant ; Mr. Grinnell, an extensive and wel l-known would ask, where was the town in this kingdom that American merchant, who quoted the late Captain could show such a catalogue cf expenditure to purposes Eldridg's opinion, that Liverpool was a hundred years for which the funds of the Corporation were not neces- a-head of London; there had been ten years favourable eerily liable or applicable ? Certainly that was not the reports from Captain Evans, the acting conservator of the practice of Manchester. The way in which they managed Mersey. In fact, the committee had had everything before their gas affair would not come within that category. The them to establish good conduct and successful results way in which they sought to get an act of Parliament for Under the present system, and yet that was the system bonding warehouses, and to apply the surplus to the which, upon a few charges made, and refuted as soon as borough fund was not at all in the direction followed by made, to assuage the jealousy of a neighbouring city, the Town Council of Liverpool, who had laid out money and gratify the cupidity of a commercial company, for tobacco stores, oil warehouses, and other places for all this good management was to be abolished. the accommodation of trade, eith,r at a low rate Then they were told by the Board of Tra . .le, that taxation of interest, or as an absolute gift altogether. The an d representation should go together ; but did any one Committee, therefore, would easily understand why the ever hear of those two things making a port ? Nobody, Board of Trade, in their report, wished to throw a mist over in fact—it was necessary that some body of weight should their eyes as to the legality of the dues. Now, he (Mr. develop the trade of a port, and in this case Liverpool had Hope Scott) ftlt tolerably safe and clear upon this head; done so —the reward for her pains was that she must be but they had been charged with misconduct in reference cast into oblivion to carry out the quack nostrums of to the Dock Trust and Birkenhead, and upon this subject Manchester. But they would first find who paid the tax the Board of Trade was full and copious. They say " the before they could give representation. Mr. Lowe at first audit commissioners appear, at first, to have had extensive said the shipping interest paid it; lately he had informed powers of extending the expenditure, and they instructed the House of Commons that " the gown of every woman, the counsel who appeared before the jury to assess the from the Queen on the throne, to the maid of all work, value of land, bought by the Dock Trust from the Corpo- who scrubbed the steps," paid these dues. Well, certainly ration. In 1824, these commissioners endured great ample provision had been made under the Mersey Conser abuses. In 1825, the Corporation procured an act by vancy Bill for the representation of the Queen, but who which the power of the audit commissioners was confined was to represent the maid of all work. (Laughter.) But, to seeing that vouchers was produced." Now, what was supposing the principle could not be carried out, the the fact? Against whom were the abuses alleged, and que stion became merely one of convenience and policy. brought home to ? Not to the commissioners, but to certain Who then would be represented ? The man who lived at servants of the trust, who had corrupt dealings with con- Manchester, and who had an interest only in keeping down tractors ; and for their discovery, the audit commissioners the rates, without regard to the efficiency of the Port, or the were voted,. publicly, the thanks of the Corporation. This man whose whole interests were bound up in the welfare aide-wind imputation, therefore, upon the council was of Liverpool ? The truth was that the Board Trade and the exposed, and the Committee, he hoped, would deal with it, Manchester interests were so bent on the immediate object and any of a similar class, in the manner it and they of humbling Liverpool, and confiscating her Town Dues, merited. Upon the subject of the veto, the Board of that they would not pause to consider consequences. Trade left the matter tolerably open. In their Better far, that the whole government of the port should report they said, " The power of veto has been go to the central government auth rity at once, than that repeatedly exercised ; properly, as the Corporation con- it should be handed over to such a Board as that pro tend—improperly, as their opponents contend ; but, how , posed, and it might possibly be that the way to produce an I ever this may be, against the wishes of the Dock Ohm_ a bsolute despotism, was to give an absolute democracy , mittee, and against the interests of the dock ratepayers. The present constitution of the Dock Trust worked well; The veto requires a majority of two-thirds el the Town , nobody found fault with it on the ground of laving com- Connell ; b u t i n th e mo st important mat of all, viz , those 1 mitted any offence, and therefore it was absurd to seek to which relate to new bills, the Co l l2:Yration find that this change it , By complying with the request 0 Mnchaster, The Marquis of BLANDFORD moved that it be read a third time on that day six months. He maintained the importance of reminding members of the Christian character of this country and the legislature, on coming to the table to be informed of his parliamentory functions, and objected to the bill on the ground that all mention of religion was by it removed from the oaths. The measure had been amended, and rendered inconsistent, by declar ing that Jews should not be allowed to execute the laws which they were invited to help to frame. In addition to this, he objected that Boman Catholics took an oath not to act against the church, which was not provided for Mr. DRUNDIOND looked upon the bill as for the purpose of admitting Baron Rothschild to Parliament, though that object was not apparent in any part of it. The bill could never have passed in a House not already unchristianised. He would treat the Jews as the Jews would treat him, and he wished that all who professed Christianity would •act up to their religion as the Jews did. He seconded the amendment. The O'DoNouottuz objected to the third readirg, because he considered that the Roman Catholics were treated by it with injustice. The object was to admit some half a dozen Hebrews to privileges which the Roman Catholics did not possess, and he, therefore, opposed the bill. Mr. E. BULL considering that the country owed a great deal to the Jews, and that their admission to Parliament would not unchristianise the Legislature, gave his support to the third reading of the measure. Mr. DILLWYN regretted the introduction of the clauses excluding Jews from certain offices. Mr. COLLINS protested against the principle of the bill, and supported the amendment. Mr. BOWYER had always supported the bills introduced for the removal of Jewish disabilities, but could not Banc ion this measure of injustice to the Roman Catholics. Mr. DEasy opposed the bill for similar reasons. The House then divided. The numbers were—. For the third reading 291 Against Majority ...... ....123 The announcement of the numbers was received with loud cheering. The bill was then read a third time and passed. On the motion for going into Committee of Supply, some discussion arose as to the arrangements far the ceremony of the distribution of the Order of Valour in the Hyde-park tomorrow ; and subsequently, upon a motion made by Lord Palmerston, to inquire into the condition and administration of metropolitan workhouses, which was ultimately rejected in a thin house by a majority of twenty-cue. The House then went into committee, and the consi deration of the Estimates for the Civil Service was pro ceeded with. A. number of votes were agreed to sub MERSEY CONSERVANCY AND DOCKS BILL. Upon the Education vote of £361,000, Mr. CoopEß entered into a lengthened explanation of the increase, urging the advantages of the system, and stating his belief, that for the benefits of Education, the people were prepared to pay the price. Sir JOIIN PAKINGTON, Mr. ALCOCK, Mr. W. EWART, and several other members, having stated their views on the subject, Mr. HENLEY and Mr. HARDY condemned the proposal for an Education rate. (PROM OUR OWN REPORTER.) There was a general approval given of the system now pursued by her Majesty's Government. Lord llRLauen deprecated the annual increase of the education vote, and moved a redaction by £90,000, t he increase over last year's estimates. The amendment was negatived on a division by 7 to 163, and the original vote was agreed to. The CHAIRMAN then reported progress. The other business was dispoied of, and the House adjourned at a quarter past two o'clock. At a Public Meeting of Ratepayers, held yesterday in the Town-hall, the following gentlemen were elected Commis sioners for Auditing the Dock Estate, viz :—Messrs. John Gordon, Henry Dawson, David Rae, James Brebner, Jas. Williams, C. T. Bowring, Georg e Kendall, J. A. Black. The Commissioners subsequently unanimously re-elected r. H. B. H orn by as their special acco un t ant , - THE NORTHERN TIMES.--LIVERPOOL, FRIDAY, JUNE 26, 1857. the effect would be to lower the whole position, and, in fact, depress the whole focus of that commercial power, which has been in connection witba- corresponding power in various parts- of the country—constituting a much higher element than the manufacturing interests of the country. They might have a dozen- Manchesters—they would not have a second Liverpool. The manufacturing bodies had sufficient scope before them for strength and authority in their own sphere, but if it should please Providence to make Manchester a seaport, let it be so. But to found upon injustice, and to proceed, by agitation, to put down a rival whom they could not help admiring, while they could not love him, was a process neither creditable to Manchester nor likely to suit, in any degree, any constitutional politician who was willing, under the nature and force of circumstances and the development of time, that hoary institution should acquire a status in the balance of power, but who would never lend himself to destroy such a monument of our national greatness as the port of Liverpool, the fall of which threatened unspeakable disaster to the commercial world generally. Having thanked the committee for their patient hearing. counsel retired. The committee then rose. THURSDAY. The Committee re-assembled at half-past twelve o'clock this morning, Sir James Graham in the chair. Mr. CALVERT, Q.C., at once proceeded to address the committee on behalf of the promoters of the bill. He regretted that the task of replying had devolved upon him in the unavoidable absence of Mr. Sergeant Wrangham, and said that it would be his object to deal with the several matters before the committee as concisely and distinctly as possible. In the first instance, in reference to a large portion of the speech of Mr. Hope Scott, he did not intend to address the committee—because that it did not appear to him that it was any part of his business to inquire wt ether or not it was an advantageous system that the Board of Trade should make reports to the House of Commons, and still less was it part of his province to criticise the opinions of great statesmen—among others Sir Robert Peel upon arrangements of this character. On the contrary, he intended to deal with the system as he found it ; and he found it a regular system, fully established, by which reports of this nature were presented to the House of Commons, under the direction and authority of the House, and under the idea that they would assist the House and its committee in arriving at a safe and wholesome conclusion upon matters brought before r them Or deliberation and inquiry. He thought that the question (how far these reports were desirable) was more a question for the discussion of honourable members than for argument at the bar of the house. Indeed, it had almost appeared that his learned friend (Mr. Hope Scott) was under the impression that he was addressing that assembly of which, at same future day, he would probably be a distinguished ornament, and that he was discussing the propriety of sanctioning the issue of these reports. When he (Mr. Calvert) had seen the formidable pile of papers which had come from his learned friend's bag, the impression had struck him that the speech and the debate upon the same question last year originated from the same quarter, and that those who had prompted his learned friend, after having been defeated in one quarter, had taken advantage of a new opportunity for ,discharging their vollies of indignation in another. Without entering further upon the question of the Board of Trace Reports, he would simply remind the committee that he appeared before them upon the evidence to which his learned friend had alluded ; and, he believed, before his remarks were brought to a close, that he should be able to satisfy the committee, upon the evidence now before them, that the question they were called on to decide, namely, whether it was fit and proper that the Liverpool authorities should have the exclusive govern ment of the Mersey, was one which it was impossib'e that the committee could decide, in conformity with the wishes of those Liverpool authorities. In the first place he wished to call attention to a question adverted to by his learned friend, which was pertinent to the enquiry in connection with the debates in the House of Commons, namely, whether the subject was a fit subject for legislation by means of a private bill. Mr Hope Scott had seemed to think it a hard case upon his clients, that, at one time, a public bill should be introduced, and that at another the question should be referred to a select committee. He (Mr. Calvert) contended that it was greatly for the benefiit of Liverpool that the matter shculd be referred to a select committee, with power partly judicial, and partly legislative, so that all the circumstances of the case might be fully inquired into, and the particular arguments in frvour of the Corporation be brought before an unprejudiced tribunal. The learned counsel then pro ceeded to reply to the speech of Mr. Hope Scott, in refe ference to the conduct of the Great Western Railway Company, and Mr. Saunders, their secretary. Mr. Saunders stated that in 1855, an assurance was given bfthe Corporation of Liverpool, that the scheme of Mr Bendel, substantially should be carried out, and on the other hand two gentlemn had been called, men of high honour and equei veracity to Mr. Saunders, for the purpose of disputing that,etatement. It was a matter of considerable importance to Mr. Saunders, that this matter shoteld.., be. set right, and he believed that when he should have gone through the evidence of Mr. Tobin and Mr. Bold, he should have established, to the satisfac tion of the committee, that the statement of Mr. Saunders was strictly and perfectly true. Mr. Calvert then pro ceed to read extracts from the evidence, when he was interrupted by Sir JAMES Giuliani, who begged to remind the learned counsel that upon the first day when Mr. Hope Scott addressed the committee, before he had fully considered the whole of the evidence, he appeared disposed to con sider the contradiction as very direct ; but on the second day, Mr. Hope Scott modified his opinion, and was evi dently of impression that the contradiction was no so direct. They were all honourable men, Mr. Saunders on the one hand, and Mr. Tobin and Mr. Bold on the other, and it was quite clear that in a conversation that took place two years ago, some misconception had arisen. In his (Sir J. Graham's) opinion, a great deal turned upon so narrow a point as the expression, " a low water basin," and "the low water basin," the latter expression convey ing the adoption of Mr. Rendel's plan, and the former those of Mr. Hartley. He did not think that Mr. Hops Scott intended to charge Mr. Saunders with direct mis representation, nor did he believe that there had been any intentional misrepresentation on either side. The statement of both parties was quite reconcilable with the existence of a misunderstanding. In his (Sir J. Graham's) opinion the honor of all parties was perfectly intact. Mr. MEREWETIIER, Q.C., said he belived that Mr. Hone Scott had no intention of impugning the honor of Mr. Saunders—but, his only object was to show that he was mistaken in the impressions which he appeared to entertain in regard to the understanding upon which the Great Western Company agreed to support the bill of 1855. Mr. CALVERT then continued his address. He denied the charge Mr. Hope Scott had preferred against the Great Western Company, of having, for some private and personal motives, pursued a course in opposition to that which they had taken in 1855, and which, if successful, would end in the destruction of the port of Liverpool. The assertion, he said, was altogether erroneous, and he believed he should be able to satisfy the Committee, from the evi dence already before them, that the statement of his learned friend had a tendency, though perhaps unintentional, to mislead the Committee. The learned counsel then quoted the evidence at considerable length. with a view of showing that the Great Western Company had not acted from personal motives, but that they had taken a course which they believed would be for the advantage of the public as well as of themselves. He next contended that Liverpool had acted in the teeth of the act of Parliament by not completing the docks, com mencing the works in September, 1856, the Committee having refused to alter the plans of Mr. Rendel. The Liverpool Corporation were at the mercy of Parliament, or of any one else who chose to take proceedings against them, for they were acting in defiance of their engagement every day they were negotiating with the railway com peeks. Moreover he begged the committee to remember that at that very moment the Corporation and the Dock Trust too were defying the Legislature s and certainly it did not lie in their mouths to call in question the conduct the Great Western Railway Company were pursuing when they were trying to. deliver that Corporation from the scrape into which they had got. And,now he came to the general system of resistance to this. bill. It seemed to be thought by the opponents of the bill that its promoters entertained the impression that the Corporation of Liver pool were open to censure as regarded the government of Liverpool. Nothing of the kindwas hinted at. The promoters of the bill did not wish to take from them any credit which they might enjoy. Far from it, They entertained no sort of ill feeling towards Liverpool. Their interests were bound up together. The prosperity of Liverpool and that of Manchester would go hand in hand together, and cer tainly those who were promoting the bill had no idea of speaking disparagingly of the authorities at Liverpool in respect of their government of the Liverpool town. But the question now was not the government of Liverpool town, or of Liverpool port ; the question was one of a totally different description. On one side of the Mersey was a rising port, with altogether a different physical capacity to that of Liverpool, and the promoters therefore said, " Don't put under the authority of Liverpool another town which would give far greater advantages to the public at large than those which nature had supp li ed o n t he Liverpool side of the water." They did not su gg est for one moment that any of the honourable men who were at the head of the Liverpool board deriving one tittle of pecuniary a dvantage for their ser vices ; the; knew that no pecuniary benefit accrued to htvathne ptargast,eiflnsdniyvi, d w u o a r ls e d f e ro ri m ved th b e y d t o h eks ep , anubldie,thi3atittthwe promoters said, was, that there were two bodies in that town perfectly distinct, and that the town itself presented two aspects. A port of transit and a town of inhabitancy, and they said when they came to look at the past history of the place, those two interests were distinctly in many respects opposed to each other,. and that the legislation which might apply to the port of transit might be by no means convenient to the inhabitancy of the town, and the converse was equally the case. With reference to the Dock Committee, that body, in 1857, was composed of twenty-four gentlemen, twelve being elects I by the ratepayers and a like number by the Corporation in their character of Dock Trustees. There could be no doubt that upon the face of the bill it appeared the large body of tradesmen in Liverpool who had nothing to do with the docks, had been exercising an undue influence over the port of transit, which influence was by no means wholesome. Now what did the promoters want that day ? They simply said the alteration should be carried farther, and that the fact of persons living in Liverpool was no reason why they should take a part in the government of the docks. On the other hand they said—" Those whose interests were bound up in the successful ma'iage ment of the port of Liverpool ought not to be excluded from from the government of it, because they did not happen to live at Liverpool. He would put to the Committee a parallel case— the London Docks. These docks were owned by persons residing in all parts of Europe, who knew nothing more of the government of the body than as if they were not shareholders. They appointed a governing body, received their dividends, and that was all they knew about the matter. Now, a manufacturer in Leeds held an exactly parallel position to that snareholder, and it was, therefore, very hard that he should be shut out from representation at the board which was to regulate the affairs of the port. In fact, the promoters of the bill contended that the governors of the port and docks should be only those really and truly who were interested in the management of the docks. Then, as to the Town Dues, he was not there to make any innovations, but so secure that the Town Dues should be properly applied—applied to the objects for which they ware first given, and he would con vict the Corporation on their own evidence of having mis applied those does. Sir J. GRAHAM here called the attention of the learned counsel to several verbal imperfections in the preamble of the bill, and asked if he proposed to introduce any amendments before the Committee came to a:decision upon the preamble. Mr. CALVERT said, it was impossible that. in so extended a preamble some slight errors should not have crept in. He would, however, take care that they were corrected before the Committee gave their deCsion. Mr. BURKE objected. He thought the Committee ought to decide upon the preamble as it stood. Sir JAMES GRAHAM said, it was most desirable that the Committee should have the preamble before them in a per fect shape. Mr. BURKE submitted that, if the preamble was im perfect, the Committee ought to reject the bill. Mr. Hope Scott had urged that it was imperfect, and all that remained for the learned counsel for the promoters, was to prove that it was perfect. It was contrary to all practice to introduce amendments in the manner suggested. SIR J. GRUIAM: It will be for us to decide whether the preamble is bad or good, subject to correction. Mr. CALVERT remarked that a preamble of fifteen pages was certain to contain a few imperfections. He then resumed his statement, urging that the conduct of the Great Western Company, in regard to the amalgamation with the Shrewsbury and Chester Railway Company, and in respect to the lease of land on the south reserve to the latter company, in 1852, was not open to censure. The agreement for the lease was executed in August, 1852, before the amalgamation with the Shrewsbury and Chester Company was effected, and the Great Western Company had every reason to believe that it was valid. Indeed, it was valid, for all intents and purposes, until set aside by a proper tribunal. He had alrealy drawn the attention of the committee to the fact, that a port of transit, and a town of inhabitancy, might frequently come in contact with each othiSr, and he now proposed to show how grievously, in this case, the port had suffered in its dealings with ilia town. In the first instance. he would take the case of the sale of land, and upon that point he asked why Mr. Bramley-Moore, whose evidence would have been of such great value, had not been examined before the committee? He believed the reason was, that Mr. Bramley-Moore knew too much, and would have told all that he knew. The learned counsel then referred to the evidence, in order to show that, for many years, the land of the Corporation had been improved at the expense of the port. Why, he asked, had not Mr. Hartley, the Dock Engineer, been submitted for examination on this point ? Simply because the promoters of the bill would have extracted from him a minute account of the iniquitous jobs between the Corporation as a Corporation, and the Corporation as Dock Trustees. They would have seen how the money of the public, transferred from one pocket was put into the pocket of the Corporation. Talk not to him of the generosity of the Liverpool Corporation. Ask him not again, " Where is the Corporation that has been so generous towards commerce as Liverpool?" The fact was the Corporation had got 57 acres of land improved at the expense of the Dock Trust; they had pocketed £685,000 from the sales, and if they had had no docks, there would have been no town dues. He contended, therefore, that if the Corporation had given all the land for docks, without receiving a farthing in exchange, the town dues would have been equivalent to 15 per cent. on their generosity. The learned counsel then went on to criticise the evidence given with reference to the warehouse question by the wit nesses in opposition to the bill, and placed in contrast to the evidence of Mr. Chapman in 1851, who said gentlemen who were warehouse owners went into the Town Council to prevent dcck warehouses being carried out. That wit n-ES stated also that the preponderating local political party excluded from the Council Mr. Eyre Evans, the man who would have carried dock warehouses, and the consequence was that the port was starved for dock accommodation. The Learned Council had not concluded his address when the committee adjourned at four o'clock. ROCHDALE ELECTION COMMITTEE. By British and Irish Magnetic Telegraph. HOUSE OF COMMONS THURSDAY, JUNE 25. The committee met this day to ',consider the petition against the return of Sir A. Ramsay. Mr. Monek opened the case on the part of the petition ers, who charged the agents of the sitting member with having obtained his seat by bribery• A number of witnesses having been examined, the committee adjourned. CAMBRIDGE ELECTION COMMITTEE. By British and Irish Magnetic Telegraph. HOUSE OF COMMONS, THURSDAY, JUNE 25 The committee appointed to try the allegation in the petition against the return of Mr. Stuart for this borough, assembled in room No. 17, Mr. Deasy in, the chair. Mr. Power opened the case relative to the engagement of paid canvassers, and proceeded to contend that by law he was entitled to do so. Mr. Slade, Q.C., opposed the petition on the part of Mr. Shafto The Chairman decided that the evidence should be gone into. Witnesses were then called as to engagement and pay ment of canvassers. The committee theu adjourned. MAYO ELECTION COMMITTEE. By British and Irish Magnetic Telegraph HOUSE OF COMMONS, THURSDAY, JUNZ 25. This committee, consisting of Mr. W. Schofield, Chair man, Sir J. Hammer, Colonel North, Mr. J. Buller, and Mr. George Tomline, met at twelve o'clock this day, for the purpose of proceeling with the petition. Counsel for petitioners—Mr. Edwin James, Q.C.; Mr. O'Mlley, Q.C. and Mr. W. P. Hale. For the sitting member—Mr. Moore, Mr. M. Smith, Q.C., and two other learned gentlemen. Mr. James, Q.C,, opened the case for the petitioner. He said he never knew a more important petition, involving, as it did, the freedom of election, in more than one Irish constituency. They were preferring a series of high crimes and misdemeanours againt prelates and priests in Ireland, and therefore he should open the case as calmly as if he were opening a criminal execution. The charges were, that there was an organised conspiracy on the part of certain priests of the county Mayo, of which Dr. Hale, Archbishop of Tuam, was at the head, to pre vent electors from voting for Col. Higgins, and compelling them to vote for Mr. Moore. The learned counsel then recapitulated some of the leading facts of the case, introducing several times the name of the Archbishop of Tuam. The Chairman, interrupted—He thought the committee could not recognise Dr. M`Hale as Archbishop of Tuam. Mr. E. James : Certainly not. The learned gentleman proceeded and stated particularly on the outrageous conduct or Mr. Conway, a catholic priest, who had denounced Colonel Higgins from the altar, and put himself at the head of a furiously excited mob which attacked the voters for Colonel Higgins. Other priests in different portions of the country also denounced the colonel from the alter. Conway had locked up voters in his house who were supporters of Colonel Higgins, and they were taken to the poi and compelled to vote for Moore, others he had sworn on the Breviary not to vote for Higgins. Ia the village of Clone-Morris the people, while at mass, rushed out with Mr. Reynolds, the priest, at their head, and oru.elly used the voters, [AI one stage of the proceedings the learned counsel sud denly stopped, and sddressityg Mr. G. H. Moore. who was standing behind the chairman, directed him not to smile at/ the recital of such grave charges. He said it might be-amusing to Mr. Moore, but perhaps he might not find it so at the close of the inquiry. Mr. Moore replied thatlit was not at all amusing to him. Vgis little episode created some excitement.] The learned counsel next went into that part of the allegation against the sitting member which related to bribery a d treating. There was alsoin the petition an allegation against Mr. Moore's qualification, which, if necessary, he should prove; so he should prove that the whole of the election was changel.by violence anti intimidatiots He should con tend that it would be absurd merely to unseat Mr. Moore, and to send down a writ for a new election; for if this state of things were to be tolerated, the writs of the House of Commons would be of no avail, and the right course henceforth would be to send down the writs to Dr. M‘Hale, in order that he might return his candidates for the county of Mayo. Mr. Moore said• that if, by the movement of a single artic:e, he had interrupted Mr. James, in the course of his able address, he-begged to apologise. Mr. James said he was perfectly satisfied' with the statement of the hon. member. Mr. David Rutledge, a magistrate of the county, was then examined at some length, in support of the petition, and the committee adjourned till this day (Friday): The committee room was crowded throughout the morn ing by auditors, including several priests, and members of Parliament. THE POPE'S EYE. Some people, even amongst the most devout, have- a de cided objection to the idea (of the Pope's crowning of the Emperor Napoleon), upon tee plea of his holiness being the victim of a most severe and incurable affliction—one before which gout, palsy,. rheum, and sciatica are as nought ; an affiiction which, not confined to the sufferer himself, spreads its dire influence over all who approach—a disease which affects all on whom the sufferer looks; in a word, his holiness is believed to be the most powerful jettat 're in all Italy 1 So enrooted is this idea amongst the population of Rome, that you will see the lower order of the people, while• throwing themselves on their knees to beg his blessing, ex tend the forefinger of the right hand to divert the " evil eye" which he is believed to possess, and which, if not annihilated in this manner, will bring disease, despair, and death to those on whom he gazes. The most extraor dinary thing of all is the fact that, while this jetratore is dreaded and abhorred as the most cruel gift the Fates can bestow, yet the belief in its existence takes nothing from the holiness of the Pope Pius, nor from the reverence with which his subjects regard them. As proof, however, of the extent to which the superstition is carried in the Papal States, we may quote the circumstance of the railway to Frascati, which occurred not very long ago. In his eager ness to render himself useful to the undertaking, his Holiness had proposed attending the opening of the railway in person, and, by making the festival a national holiday, to assist in making the affair as popular as possible. The foreign contractors. in their ignorance of the prejudice against the luck of his Holiness, were rejoiced at this courtesy, and in their delight spread the news far and near, distributing handbills all over the city, and despatch ing messengers to Ate towns and villagt s in the neigebour hood. To their great astonishment, however, the news was received with anything but pleasure; the propositions for making all things agreeable, the promises held out, were met with so mournful a silen e, thee they could not forbear expressing their surprise, when one of the officials, under the strictest promise of secrecy, and displaying his drawer full of unsold tickets issued for the occasion, and, unsought by any, was fain to confess the truth. "Have the Pope to bless the undertaking, and you will never have one single traveller by your railway," said he to the astounded Englishman, who had displayed the greatest delight at the Pope's urbanity, Goad gracious ! and pray wuy ?" said he, aghast. " Because his Holiness, whom Heaven bless, is the most terrible jettatore in all Italy, and your train will be sure to smish before it reaches Frascati !" In spite of the laughter and derison which the announcement occa sioned amongst the Englishmen, the proof of the real existence of the idea was but too evident in the empty till of the company's bureau; so means were to be devised in order to break the horrible spell which his Holiness was unconsciously about to throw over the undertaking. One of the Cardinals was consulted. His eminence undertook, by dint of sacrafice and real sympathy, for none mourned the existence of the deAdly gift more than he—to prevent the consequences which else must fall upon the hapless company. What his Eminence did must ever remain a secret; he perhaps was fortunate enough to procure an " evil eye" of greater power even than the Pops's, but it is certain that, within a day or two of the ceremony, it was announced that the Pope was suffering from indisposition, supposed to be occasioned by an indigestion of pasteechi. Presently it was understood that the, said indisposition would prevent him from opening the railway. The rush for tickets became tremendous; and when the day arrived, and it became certain that Cardinal , the arch. enemy of jettatori, who can cure the bite of a mad dog by a glance, and the sting of a vipar by a passe of his left hand, was to take his Holiness's place, not a ticket was to be had for love or money. Many and many a laugh have the jolly contractors enjoyed over their wine at remem brance of the"utter bewilderment in which, they had remained when viewing the indifference with which their grand treat was regarded by the population of Rome, and many a wink was passed from one to the other when allud ing to the timely help of Cardinal ---, the indigestion of pasteechi, and the quantities of warm ptisane and com forting cordial his Holiness had been compelled to swallow while the ceremony was going forward.—Paris Correspon dent of the Court Journal. DEFICIENT WEIGHTS AND AIEA.SITKES.--A. number of persons, comprising provision-dealers, coal-dealers, but chers, and puolicans, appeared on summons before Mr. T. Bolton and Mr. J. R. Jeffery, borough magistrates, for having in their possession and use deficient weights and measures. They all carried on business in the poorer quarters of the town. A fine varying ,from is to 2s 6d, with costs, was imposed in nearly every case. ELECTION OF DOCK AUDITORS.—The annual election of Dock Auditors took place yesterday, at the Town Hall. The following gentlemen were elected—Messrs. John Gor don, Henry Dawson, James Brebuer, David Rae, J. A. Black, George Kendall, C. T. Bowring, and James Williams. After their election, these gentlemen appointed Mr. Gordon their chairman, Mr. Dawson their vice-chair man, and Mr. H. B. Horaby a. special auditor to assist them. STEAM TO PORTLAND.—We read in the- Canadian News, Messrs. Wier, Cochrane, and Co., of Liverpool, the origi nators of the North Atlantic Steam Navigation Company, are making arrangements for establishing a weekly line from Liverpool to Portland, via Newfoundland. We believe the Legislature of this colony is willing to grant a liberal subsidy. There is also a probability that an eminent London shipowner will place his fine fleet of screw-steamers on a now line between. London or Liverpool and Quebec in the summer, and Portland in the winter. BIRKENHEAD MODEL YACHT CLUB—SECOND SAILING MATCH OF THE SEASON.—These , matches will come , iff to . morrow (Saturday), 27th instant, on which occasion one of the Woodside Ferry stearn,rB will accomp my the yachts sailing in the matches. The steamer will leave the Landing-stage, Prince's Pier, at one o'clock, p.m., and the Woodside Pier at half-past one. The starting point will be north of the Woodside Pier, and the prome nade at Woodside Ferry presents one of the best views on the river fez seeing the start, race, and final close of the same. THE ASSOCIATION FOR THE PREVENTION OF STEAM BOILER EXPLOSIONS.—The monthly meeting_ of the com mittee of management of this association was hold, on Tuesday, at the office of the secretary, Mr. Henry Whit worth, 13, Corporation-street, Manches tar when the chief inspector, Mr.R. B. Longridge, presente d his monthly report, from which we have the following extracts : During the present month, 276 visits have been made to members of the association ; 717 boilers inspected (89 ): these internally), and 84 engines indicated ; 43 visits, t 103 boilers inspected by Mr. R. B. Ungridge. The rincipal defects which have been observed in these boilers are as , follow :—1 boiler dangerous frena over-pressure, 2 ditto injury resulting from deficiency of water ; 7 boilers injured from the same cause, but not to a dangerous extent; 11 boilers defective from corrosion or fracture of plates ; 2 boilers from over-heating of plates over fire ; 3 safety valves out of order ; 2 water-guages out of order; 3 pressure guages incorrect. - - A MANUFACTBRER ROBBED OF £l2O IN LUBIN —Mr. Thomas Raistrick, cloth manufacturer, Idle, near Bradford, ca me to Leeds on Tuesday evening, on business. He called at the Midland Hotel, immediately adjacent to the station, to see a gentleman with whom he had an appointment. He met his friend, and they adjourned into the taproom, and proceeded to the despatch of business. Raistrick had occasion to use his pocket-book for the payment of a small account, but when he had done with it be placed it in his coat pocket. He was next engaged in examining several samples of goods, and while Go occupied a man came from the opposite side of the room, and, under pretence of also inspecting the samples, sat down by the side of Raistrick. No suspicion was excited at the time, and when the stranger had gratified his curiosity, he rose to move to his own side of the room. Just then, either by accident or design, he tipped Raistrick's hat over his eyes, and then sharply and suddenly left the room. Raistrick soon discovered his loss. The contents of the pocket-book were a check for £lOO on Gurney St Co., and four £6 notes. The thief endeavoured unsuccessfully to change two of the £5 notes the same evening, at a public house. The police are on track.