The Daily Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1861-01-24 00:00:00

THE DOCK BOARD.

The weekly meeting of this board was held yesterday,
at the Dock Offices. Mr. Charles Turner presided, and
the other members present were Messrs. Smith, Hub-
back, Laird, Anderson, Boult, Rankin, Bushel, Little-
dale, Holme, Evans, Segar, Bold, Arnold, Inman,
Langton, Tobin, and Shand.
THE COMMITTEE OF WORKS.

The proceedings of this committee included a recom-
mendation to accept the tenders of Messrs. Samuel
Turner and Son, and Mesirs. Sleight and Jones, for a
supply of oak and ash timber. The subject of the con-
struction of the 85 feet wide grafting dock had Agdin
been taken into eonsidetrition, *hen the engineer bad
been instructed.to prepare: ft plait alibiing the sfigkes-
Hots madei and submit it to the committee. In refer-
tried to the indemnity demanded efrom vessels entering
the Birkenhead docks, the committee recommended that
it should be withdrawn so soon as the system could be
brought int.e:operation suggeited by the engineer and
harbour 'master but that the same indemnity be
required from the Morpeth half-tide dock as in the
half-tide docks on this side of the river. The'engineer
had been instructed to furnish plans for a landing-stage
for the low water basin.
Mr. Rankin moved, and' Mr. Smith seconded, the
confirmation of the proceedings.
Mr. LAIRD said the indemnity should never have been
put on ; it had existed nine months, without any autho,
rity from the board. It had been put in force without
their having an opportunity of discussing the matter in
public. Many reasons were given for the indemnity.
One was that the gates and sills were defective, On
inquiring into that, it was found that tln4i tiefe hot
defective. Another reason eras twat they were only
single gates, arid thefefore unsafe. The Coburg doeli
and George's dock, on this side, had single gates, yet no
indetnnity was asked for them.' When the indemnity
was removed, the Great Float would be opened, the
same as . the docks 011 this side were ; but on' this
side the quays reit pavbd, tails laid, ibbils feared,
and everythiiag done to {S.
On the other side llf *itEt, if gentlemen would
goi they *Mild tha that the quays were a mass
of mild and dirt ; no preparations were made ; and
no trade could be expected for months to come. He
2,"`"•••
...wetted this had not been seen to sooner ; he had
brought forward the matter from time to time, and
orders had been given to carry on the works without
delay, but unfortunately this had not been done. When
a dock was made for the steam trade at the North, the
sheds were arranged, and the dock was opened, not only
with water space, but every convenience for trade. He
thought the public and the board must not be disap-
pointed, if for the next six or twelve months very little
trade should go to the other side of the water.
The CHAIRMAN said with respect to the Coburg
Dock, the chairman was under a mistake. It was
explained in committee that the Coburg was not to att
as a halkide dock : it was wotked to the tide. As
regarded the ether thattet; lie thtifight Mr. Laird ought
to have taken into gel:Alia the great difference in the
Works on the titles of the river. At Birkenhead
there hid teal a great many unforeseen difficulties,
/fable id arise with all new works, a tremendous quan-
tity of piling, and a deal of additional work that the
bngineer did not contemplate; and he had confidence
that the engineer had gone on with the work as fast as
he possibly could. It was easier to get men to work'on
this side of the water than on the other. The works
were comparatively small ; while at Birkenhead they
were of an enormous character, involving millions of
money ; but the remarks of Mr. Laird would lead the
public to suppose that they had not done all that they
Could. Now it had been the anxious desire of ,the
Works Committee to carry on the works .with • the
utmost speed consistent with safety, and there had been
no want of energy on the part of the engineer. Every-
thing had been done to carry out to the spirit and he
letter the works imposed upon them by act of Par-
liament.

Mr. SMITH, as a member of the Works Committee,
said fair play for both sides was a game which he should
like to see at that board ; but it appeared there was one
exception in Mr. Laird. He always fiddled on one
string. They heard everything on one side of the
question ; but they did not hear what might be said on
the other. Mr, Laird complained that those works had
hot been. gone on with as fast as they possibly could;
but had they ever heard Mr. Laird, when he rose to
.hake those complaints, refer to the fact that that scheme
kVtitn it came into the hands of the board, either from
the ignorance or negligence of those who had concocted
it, was so deficient that when the water was let out of
Float, they found they had to spend £60,000 to put
walls in repair which they had thought were
in perfect order, and did not require 6d. spent upon
them. Had Mr. Laird ever referred to the different
position in which they would have been if the labourer::
on whom this £60,000 had been expended had been
employed on the new works ? He never had. Now, he
admired Mr. Laird's courage ; he was a man who was
never afraid to speak : but he thought that when a gen-
tleman took up a question, he should view it from all
sides.

Mr. BOULT said Mr. Laird's remarks formed their
thanks for letting the water into the Great Float before
the work was done. Only a few months since workmen
were strengthening the walls, the leakage being very
great. With respect to the gates and the indemnity,
they had only acted upon the opinion of the engineer.
Mr. LAIRD said he did not allude in any way to the
outer works : that was a wide question which they did
not wish to go into. He referred to the quays, cranes,
. and conveniences necessary to work a dock properly.
No gentleman could say that he had not promoted every
measure for giving facilities on this side, and therefore
he was not open to the remarks of Mr. Smith.
Mr. RANKIN was sorry that Mr. Laird should harp
on the imputation as to delay at Birkenhead; but any
one who went over there would see that the allegation
was unfounded. There was not one member of the
Works Committee who was not as desirous to carry out
the works in their integrity as Mr. Laird himself. As
to•the supposition that works were progressing faster
' on the Liverpool side, he could state that at this moment
the works at the canal docks were stopped, so as to
expedite those at Birkenhead ; and of that the timber
trade might justly complain, although they did not do-So.
The proceedings were then confirmed.
•, THE WAREHOUSE COMMITTEE.—TILE GUANO TRADE.
The proceedings of this committee haying been read,
Mr. HI:BRACK moved their confirmation. As chair-
man of the committee, he expressed his regret at the
decision come to by the board last week, with respect
to the charge on warehousing guano at Birkenhead.
Being absent in London, he was unable to take part in
the discussion. He thought gentlemen had allowed
their personal feelings to get the better of their sense of
justice. He should certainly have Toted in the minority
on the ground that the superintendent of the Birken-
head warehouses had stated that a reduction could be
made without incurring loss to the trust. No doubt,
taking a surface view of the question, it might seem to
members of the board almost unreasonable to suppose
that 2d. per ton would prevent an article of the value of
£I3 a ton coming to this port ; but he thought they
must deal with men and things as they found them, and
not stick to abstract principles. As he possessed some
knowledge of the guano trade, he was inclined to
think that it was a matter of indifference to Messrs.
Anthony Gibbs and Son whether a ton of guano came
or not. His feeling was that no more guano would
come, and he was confirmed in that by letters which he

had received from shipowners in town. Two vessels at
Cork had been ordered to Bristol instead of coming to
the Mersey. One shipowner wrote that he had 21
vessels which wonld be thus diverted ; another had

11,000 tons.
Mr. EVANS—Is this question before the board ?
This is a posthumous hearing after the thing is dead
and gone. _

The CHAIRMAN said it was not properly before the
Board.

Mr. HT BBACK said time alone would show whether
he was correct in his opinion ; but this he wished to be
understood, that if hereafter they found that no more
guano came to the port of Liverpool, he, as chairman of
the Warehouse Committee, and the majority of that
committee, would not be to blame.
Mr. ARNOLD seconded the conffrmation of the minutes,
but differed materially from Mr. Ilubback, and thought
the board had come to a right conclusion. The reason
given for the reduction was the 2d advance in the town
dues. That was a condemnation in itself of the increase
of the town dues. lie could not believe for a moment
that the trade of the port hung upon so slender a thread
as 2d a ton.

Mr. LAIRD said he had voted with the minority from
a conviction that they could afford 2d a ton on a com-
modity the revenue from which was last year £7,000.
Mr. EVANS said this had been all discussed before,
and they had no right to hare their time taken up with
a posthumous speech after the body was buried.
Mr. LAIRD-Ilthough Mr. Evans has a license for
interrupting people—
Mr. EvAxs—l am stopping you on a point of order.
It is you, sir, who are interrupting the hoard.
Mr. Laird was proceeding, when the chairman inter-
posed, and stopped the discussion.
Mr. LITTLEDALE asked if the letters which Mr. Hub-
back had received could be read to the board.
The Ciimumioc—Not to-day ; you may give notice
for next week.
Mr. I.lrnnAcK—There is an apprehension on the part
of Messrs. Gibbs & Sons that, owing to the unfortunate
business of the Sierra Nevada, they will not have the
same facilities.
The Chairman again interposed.
Mr. SMITH—'.Mr. llubback has said that gentlemen
allowed their feelings to get the better of their judgment;
it was a most improper expression. If he meant me, I
call upon him to withdraw it.
Mr. II CBEACK—I withdraw it.
Mr. SMITH—Then I accept it.
The proceedings were then confirmed; as were also
those of the Pilotage Committee.
THE DOCKS AND (WAYS COMMITTEE.
The proceeding of this Committee comprised the

appointment of two pier-masters and five doCkgatemen
and to remove a shed from the east quay of the Hus-
kisson Dock, at a costfrOf_about £6O ; also, to provide
two double purchase capstans for the Egerton flock at
Birkenhead.—The master of the Garibaldi had written
that ha slibuld hold the board liable for any damage the
ship or cargo might sustain by straining on the sill of
the Staialey Dock.—The five dock•gate men recom-
mended for appointment, and four of whom are for
Birkenhead, were Hugh Roberts, William Molyneux,
Francis Dixon, James Downey, and. James Wilson.
_ _

Mr. Smith moved thg confirmation of the proceedings.
Mr. LAIRD understood the plans for the accommo-
dation of the corn •trade had been submitted- to the
committee

The CitAmtix---Yesl but Ildthifig decided upon.
Mr. SMlTli—The subject will come before the board
next week.

' Mr. LAIRD—Has anything been done as to the Bruns
wick Dock ?

Mr. SMITH replied that nothing had been done last
Wednesday as to the erection of warehouses at the
Brunswick Dock. That opened a large question, be-
cause it involved the purchase of land from Wapping
to Sefton-street, and probably the purchase of property
on the east side.

Mr. LAIRD said the corn trade were most anxious to
have accommodation', but they were Ott off from time
to time. Re did not see that the question bad anything
to do with the widening of Wapping.
The proceedings: were then confirmed ; as were also
those of the Iliustet roiierage Committee.

TILE NEW Jide /ha:

The following letter was fedd and tereired to the
Pailiatiibfitary qummittee. • •

"Rnmford-street, Jan. 18, 1861.
"Sin,—The Cotton Brokers' Association have had
under their consideration several provisions contained
in a proposed bill, entitled ' Bill to enable the Mersey
Docks and Harbour Board to purchase, &c., &c., and to
enable the board to improve the working of the docks
and the loading &nd unloading of itelsels.4
" Th 6 atiitkiatitift, firlS tit li ifiiofi that several of the
probyiiiis WV :allied in the latter portion of the bill are
very inimical to the interests of the cotton trade, and
have appointed a committee of five gentlemen, to seek
an interview either with the board or with such of their
committees as are entrusted with the regulation of mas-
ter porterage and of goods remaining on the quays. •
"Will you have the kindness to. inform me if, and
when, it will be convenient to receive the deputation ?
—I am, sir, yours
"Daniel Mason,, Esq." " SAM. GATH, Chairman."
THE SALT TRADE AND THE NAVIGATION OP THE

IVEAirER.

The following' communication was next read :
" Salt Chamber of Commerce, Northwich and
"Liverpool 23rd January, 1861.
" Siu,—l have been requested by some of the leading
shipbrokers to send you the accompanying memorial,
signed by captains of vessels now in port, respecting the
detention they haste met with in obtaining cargoes of
salt. "I amj your obedient servants
" 11. HAriviziti, Secretary.
" Charles Turner, .2sq., Chairman of the Mersey
" Docks and Harbour Board."
"TO THE CHAIRMAN OF THE MERSEY DOCKS AND