The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1856-02-26 00:00:00

LIVERPOOL TOWN DUES.-MEETING
OF THE INHABITANTS.

Or Friday last, a public meeting of the inhabitants of
Liverpool was held in St. George's Hall. The meeting was
convened by his Worship the Mayor, in compliance with a
requisition addressed -to him, signed by nearly 2,000 of the
" bankers, merchants, brokers, and other inhabitants" of
Liverpool, to protest against the proposed measures as "sub-
.
yersiye to all established rights of property, to agree to a
petition to both Houses of Parliament against the proposed
bill, and to adopt such, other measures as may best tend to
avert so monstrous and unjust an innovation."
The Mayor, J. STEWART, Esq., presided, and upon the plat-
form there were, amongst others, the following gentlemen:—
Messrs. J, P. Heywood (High Sheriff), Ambrose Lace, James
Aikin, R. A. Mactie, Ingram, F. A. Hamilton, (B. S. and C 0.,)
S. R. Graves, G. J. Duncan, J. Lyon Jones,William Rathbone,
Lawrence Peel, G. Roscoe, David Hodgson, P. F. Curry •
(coroner), Wrenn, Troutbeck, John Lockett, Robert Horsfall,
Thomas Avison, Adam Hodgson, Henry Danson, James M.
Wood, David Rae, James Smith, William Fisher, Ralph.
Brocklebank, James Reay (Secretary to the Guardian Society),
Backhouse Robinson, Robert Daglish, Roger Lyon Jones,
Charles Saunders, James Thomson, Christopher Bushell, M.
J. Sidney, J. B. Lloyd, S. Holme, J. Holme, R. L. Gardner,
T. Toulmin, George Holt, E. Bradley, J. A. Picton, D, Cros-
thwaite, J. Robertson, W. Preston, T. D. Anderson, Alderman
Cooper, Thomas Godfrey, Ald. Parker, Beckwith, M`Gowan,
Woodruff, Wagstaff, and Ald. Dover. There were about 2,000
persons present in the body of the hall and in the galleries.
Letters of apology for unavoidable absence were read by the
Deputy Town-clerk from Messrs. Charles Turner, J. A. Tobin,
H. Hornby, W. Earle, J. IL Turner, and Richard Brooke.
The MAYOR, who on rising was received with great applause,
said he felt great pleasure in calling this meeting, parti-
cularly when he-found that upon so important a subject the
requisition had been so numerously signed by gentlemen of all
political parties ; by the bankers, merchants, shipowners, pro-
fessional men, tradesmen and shopkeepers, who have all cor-
dially united in a desire to preserve those dues which had
been legally acquired, and judiciously as well as faithfully ap-
plied to the public benefit. (Applause> The great amount
of these dues appeared to him to be the chief bait which
attracted the cupidity of those by whom the rights of the cor-
poration were attacked. The magnitude of those dues, it
must be recollected, did not arise from the largeness of the
individual portions of the impost, but ratheroccasioned by the
great extension and expansion of the commerce of this great
borough ;(hear, hear ! )—by the accommodation which has
been afforded for ships and shipping, and for mercantile
transactions generally. But whilst some are attacking U 3 for
the purpose of abstracting this amount of dues, they forget
that they are loosening one of the great strongholds-of society
by which property in this country is held, not only by munr
cipalities but by individuals. (Hear, hear ! ) He couldassure
them, from the very highest authority, that there is property,
to an enormous extent, held, not only by municipalities, but
by noble lords„ noble dukes, and others, derived from that Very
title of which our town dues form only a small part. (Hear,•
hear ! ) For glntlemeu will recollect that the conveyance,
which was originally made to the citizens of Loudon, corn--
prised the dues of Liverpool, them a very trifling portioni•in-
deed, in the whole transaction. It was, in fact, to extinguish
a debt of upwards of £300,000 ; and at that time, early in the,
reign of King Charles 1., the duesof Liverpool were a very
small drop indeed, in the great amount but one title, one coal
veyance, carried the dues of Liverpool, " with divers right
over fairs, rivers, manors," and so on, which are now held by
a variety of individuals•and communities. If Liverpool is to-
submit to this,—if an. inroad is to be made on those rights
of property which have hitherto been heldsacred,—even those
who may exult at the deprivation of Liverpool, may yet be
whipped with their own rod ! (Applause.)
J. r: HEYWOOD, Esq.,-late High SherliT of the county,
moved the first resolution, which, along with the others, will
be fortain our advertising-columns. In moving the adoption
of the resolution, he said he could see neither reason nor

justice in this proposal of the•government. (h't.ar, hear.) In
his opinion the corporation of Liverpool had always expended
their large income, not solely for the advantage of the town of
Liverpool itself, but for the good'•of the kingdvm generally,
and more particularly for the advantage of the ws,nnfacturing
districts of Lancashire and Cheshire. He must confess that

he had always been amazed at theunforiunatejLalonsy with
which Liverpool had been regardid.by its neighbours, instead
of gratitude, to which he thought the town was entitled, for
the many advantages which its judicious expenditure of the
revenue derived; from the Town fides had conferred upon the
country at large. (Hear, hear.) He concluded bp moving
the adoption of the resolution.

Mr. bI3OIiGH- Hora seconded the resolution. It appeared
that the-bill now proposed by the v-ice-president of the Board
of Trade was an: attack upon the municipal institutions of
the country, and an invasion of those rights and privileges,
which, in all times; had been fouus.llof great service to the
promotion of freedom, and of an enlightened policy.: The
principle of self-government—municipally in our corporations
and parochially in• our vestries—had-been the foundation of
much free thought.and of the English character. Historians

and commentators had always regarded municipal institutions
as the foundations- of civil and religious, and especiallY of
ootnmercial, freedom. Concurring in this opinion, he rausb bay
that he viewed with considerable aarm a measure like the

present, coming from the ministry, and making an attack
upon property which, -he meant to shoo ,had been appropriated
in' the main to national, and not merelY to-local pzrposes.
The mayor had clearly set forth the foundation on which, the
title of the town to 'these dues rested- After the minutest

investigation the aourts of law had so:tinnly decided tkat they-
were the undoubted property of the corporation. Tke..dues

levied had been expended for purpcs -in reality r.c.frenal4
although to some extent these purposes might appeurcloest.
Laud had been purchased by the corporation for the purpoae
of making communications to facilitate necessary intercourse;
and, indeed, in the very first instanzed the corporatiOn of
Liverpool had voluntarily alienated a portion of their property:,
for the purposes of the dock estate, free from taxation fdrever.
From time to time they had made other grants, or had sold
land at a nomimal price, in fartherrAice of the same great
national object, ar.d besides have paid the whole expesesetthe
conservancy of theriver, in whatever-I:ands that conservancy
had from time te•time been placed. Then let them leek. at
the landing-stages; which would cost —the corporaticin not
much less than £200,000, and which-.were necessary,. not for
the accommodation. of the inhabitanteof Liverpool alone; hitt,
the docks, were required by the country at large.. (Ilecar,
hear.) And even The noble building in, which they were then
assembled, and which was a very sore subject with 4 some
'people, was as miteh built for the hundreds of Wist..Dery

ind.Salford, as foe the town of Livespeol. Was it ant,for tge
administration of justice in this division, of the county? - And
if the cost of it had not been defrayed, cot of the town, dimes,

must not a very heavy rate have feen, laid upon fate eoleety
for the erection of some building for that purpose?. He. Mr.
Holt) believed that the le,gislatures.with a full keowledke of
the facts, woulsiSnever permit this bill to pass ; anditheeteere,
without further remark, he would "...wavily second. the resolu-
tion, .which wassenanimously adopesd.
Mr. GRATES,..viee-chairman of the Shipowneer Associa-
tion, moved the next resolution.... When the repeal d the
navigation lavas•took place in this country, it was-anirersally
admitted that all the burdens upon, British shipping. skauld be
removed, and'. to a great extent flies admission bad: been car-
ried out. Bat there were burdens of a practical nature still
remaining, and to which the atten'tizer of the Board of Trade
had been repeatedly called; and.bad the vice-president of the
Board of Trade come forward with. a measure for relieving the
shipping of this country from the burdens of our sconsular
system—(hear; henr)—had the 'hoard come forward, following
in the footsteps et France and Auserica, to charged:a lights
of this country non the Consalidated Funds Ise sisacild have
been inclined to believe in the wsil intentiot-of the president
of that hoard. But, no ; listening to the clounmas of a few
individnals, he led got a pet grievance of his owns a grievance
which banes-es. been complained of by the shipovrears of this
country, _and from which they had never ask,ed to be relieved.,
(hear)—he proposed, by the •Local Dues enstahipping Bill, to..
change-the collection of thodues of this pert fawn the hand
of the-corporation to the headsof her .Majesty's Customs,
matelyste. reach the hands of tbe..Board of Trade, who, by raa,
ordeziwcouncil, at any usemeait, could either abolish or CO*, -
tiane.those dues, or allocate. them foe their own purposes.
(Cheers.) He, as a shipowner, denouneedsthe hall which he ham:
in his.hand as nothing more nor less thausmoekery. (Cheers)
Inplaceof being a boonSa the shippingiaterest of this country,
it absolutely became a burden. He did not speak thus from
hissawn individual opluion only. The .shipowners of this port
had unanimously recorded. their 01::la,eproval of this measure,
es,td had openly declared their inteatien to oppose it. litiviPg..
Teed an extract from,the petition adopted by the association at
their meeting, on Thursday, the speaker said that thissforeible
repudiation, emanating from the. interest which the bill was
intended to relieves could not fail, to arrest the attention of the
members of the Houses of Parliament, when they rsere called
upon to record tbeir.votes. upeas,a measure which, far the first
time in Parliamentary annals,. openly avowed, and undis-.
guisedly justified, the confiscation of acknowledged: rights.—
(Cheers.) Proceeding to sltew why he considered the bill a,
burden upon British shippings Mr. Graves said tbetlthe works..
undertaken aad contemplated by the Corporation. of Liverpool
in connexion,with, the shipping interest, were absolutely neces-
sary to the-vast and ever-increasing commeeee• of the. port;
works which.- had beets truly described as baying, rather a
national than. a local character—(hear, hear)—but which it,
would be impossible-to carry out, if the revenues of thesCorpo-
ration were seized, except by increased taxation, He believed
that the.very first measure which would Mow the passing of
Mr. Loire's bill would be to increase the. Dock-rates to their
maximum amount—(hear, hear)—and it was in this way that
the bill would be. a burden upon the shipping,, and a positive
and, direct injury to the trade of the port,. and that of the sur-
misleading towns and district. (Cheers.) The Viee-President
of the Board of Trade had conjured up a ghost of restricted
trade s but if this bill became law, Mr. Lowe would see this
ghost of restricted trade changing its habitation from the
Mersey to the, Dee. (Laughter.). Great stress had been laid
upon the Differential Duties which had been levied within the
port, and Mr. Lowe had brought prominently forward cases.
of great hardship. Mr. Graves would not deny that these.
Differential Duties, caused lay antagonistic interests, had
proved great obstructions to the commerce of this port but
it would have considerably raised in his mind the reputation
of the Vice-President of the Board of Trade for candour if he
had at the same time stated that there was then in the house
a bill which, in the course of a short time, would abolish the
double dues existing within the Mersey, and would, when it
became law, terminate the grievance with which he sought to
gain the sympathy of the house. The bill, if it were sifted,
might contain points which would be a boon to the shipping
interest of the country, but he thought he was speaking the
sentiments of his brother shipowners when he declared that
they would not be tempted to receive benefits of such a nature
at the expense and sacrifice of those great principles which had
ever upheld the commercial classes of this country in their just
and .existing ights. (Hear, hear, and applause.)
Mr. ROBERT RAsexiw, in seconding the resolution, cha-
racterized the bill as one of spoliation, and said that as a re-
sident in Liverpool for seventeen years, and a member of a
house which had paid these dues for forty years, he was not
one of those who could desire to deprive the Corporation of
what lie conceived to be their legal rights:
Mr. JAMES AIKIN supported the resolution, and, in doing
so, referred to the trial in which the title of the Corporation
to the town dues had been challenged, and said that he, as
one of the associated merchants, bad been a party instrumental
in causing that action to be brought. The result had been
to prove in the clearest possible manner the title of the town
to those dues—never, indeed, had a title to any description of
property in this country been more clearly established. (Hear,
hear.) It would be a very interesting thing for the meeting
to trace the dues through different possessors, during the long
period of six hundred years, until they finally became vested
in the town of Liverpool—sold first by the Crown to the Cor-
poration of London, and by that Corporation to the then