The Northern Daily Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1856-02-28 00:00:00

SHIPPING INTELLIGENCE

LIVERPOOL, FEBRUARY 28
HIGH WATER—Morn., 3 26—Eveg. 3 46—Height. 12 it II in

OFF THE PORT AND INWARD BOUND
Pelican (s.s.)
ARRIVED.

Feb. 26.—City of Montreal, Charleston—First Fruit, St Michaels
—Ann, Maria Henrietta, Amsterdam. Feb. 27—Wm. L. Burgess.
A pa'achicola—Katwaroo (s.s.), Varna—Lym, Regis; Alexandria—
Father, Rossano—Karnac (4.5). Malta— Clrrnpion, avanilla
Houghton, New Orleans—Alliance, Halifax—Flandre, Havre.

SAILED

Feb. 27.—Bommeleward, Batavia—Falcon, Ceara—Caroline, and
Annapolis, Baltimore—Swift, Gibraltar—Astoria, Ch rleston.

0 UTPO RTS,

Falmouth, Feb. 26.—Arrived—Stad Appingedam, Liverpool.
Dublin, Fels. 27.—Arrived—Sarah, Dunkirk Levies, and Ondine,
London.

Belfast. Feb. 26.—Arrived—Antelope, Alexandria—Sarah and
Isabella, Svr.i.

Gr enock. Feb. `.2 6 . —Arrived—Wvr Eaele. Cardenas. Feb. 27 .
Harlequin, Savanna. Sailed, Feb. 27.—Rather, Buenos Ayres.

MARITIME EXTRACTS.
Liverpool, Feb. 27. The Mangalore, Hitchens, from Mauritius
for Queenstown, was abandoned in lat. 50 N., lon. 17 W.. F, b. 15.
Crew taken off by the Emerald, arrived here last night from New
fork.

The Wm. Penn, and Avondale, for Liverpool, are said to be frozen
up at Baltimore.
Ft. Helier, Jersey Feb. t'O— The Amelia, hence to Liverpool, which
was on sl•.ore on the Hermitage Rocks, was floated Into the old pier
last night. She appears to have several holes i❑ her bottom ; her
planking is not st,,rt•d.
Kamiesch, Feb. 4.—The barque Glenmore was los', nith all
hands, near this place, Feb. 2. The weather is very stormy.

FOREIGN PORTS.
Tenet*life 's.s ), Bell, from Constantinople at Smyrna.
Elwy, Colburn, sailed from Smyrna for Llvervol Feb. 10.
Frankfort (s.s.), from Messina at Palermo. and left for Liverpool,
Feb. 15.

Co inthian (s.s.), Campbell, from Gibraltar at Palermo, and left for
Messina.

Genoa (s.s ). Smith, from Syra ; and Sardinian (Ls.), from Mes-
sina—both at Naples.
Minho (s.s.). hence off Oporto.
Rita (s.s.), Arana, hence at Santander.
Nonpareil, hence at Breakwater.
Victoria, hence at Brost ershaven.
Maria Helena sailed from Browershaven fur Liverpool, Feb. 10.
Jane, hence at Nantes.

BIRTH.
On the 24th inst., the wife of Mr. George Davies, Copperas hill,
of a son.

•
iii" Births, Marriages, and Deaths, are only inserted when sent to
our Office duly authenticated:

THE BANKRUPTCY OF WILLIAM PALMER, OF RUGELEY.—
On Saturday a petition before the Lords Justices was called
on for hearing, appealing from the decision of Mr. Com-
missioner Balguy, of the Birmingham Dierict Court, who
had refused to adjudicate William Palmer, surgeon, of
Rugeley (cow in Stafford jail on a charge of murder), a
bankrupt, on the ground that an imprisonment of twenty-
one days at the suit of Mr. Padwick on a ca. so,, and on a
charge of murder, did not constitute an act of bankruptcy.
Against this decision the petitioning creditors had appealed.
Lord Justice Knight Bruce started an objection to the
jurisdiction of the court. There was no order from the
commissioner. Mr. Daniel submitted that the court had a
general jurisdiction. Tho attorney for the petitioning
creditor said it was arranged that the question should be
discussed. Lord Justice Knight Bruce said the old Court
of Rev'ew bad all the powers cf a commissioner, but he was
not aware that the act under which they now sat gave the
Court any such power. The case must go back, unless Mr.
De Gex, who appeared for William Palmer, would consent.
Mr. De Gex replied that the attorney who instructed him
was only the agent in the matter, and could not consent.
Mr. Daniel asked the court to let the case stand for the next
petition day ; all that was to be done was to get a formal
order from the commissioner. Lord Justice Knight Bruce
said it might be done in as inexpensive a way as possible ;
but at present the court without a consent had xi) juris-
diction to hear the matter. The case accordingly stand

LIVERPOOL TOWN DUES'

(Continued from yesterday.)
to be paid to the mayor, bailiffs, and burgesses of •
Liverpool, by the citizens of London, trading in cheesei
laden or unladen within the port, or reputed Port' °
Liverpool ?
An action was brought, and the corporation
first, that a certain toll duty, or custom was due °'
payable to them by the freemen and citizens of Londofolt;
trading in cheese u ithin the 'port of Liverpool, or
cheese by them laden, or • unladen, within. that pert'
reputed port. Ine
Secondly, that a certain port duty of 20d or 6
other duty, was due and payable to them by the toyeitizeli
and freemen of London, trading in cheese, for "every a
pleadaercil:
of cheee laden or unladen within such port, or repute
port, and after that rate for a lesser or greater
quantity.
tried

Issue was taken on the pleas, and the cause was of
at bar, on the 23rd of April, 1701, by a special iulthe
the county of Hertford, and a verdict was found for

plaintiffs;
The corporation applied for a new trial, praying tb.er
might not be defeated of their inheritance by one tilser,
but that a new trial might be had by a jury of allot%
county. The court directed that the issue should4o
again tried, by a jury of the county of Berks.
41r
second trial took place on the 25th of October, 1.„,.
and a verdict was found once more for the plain the.
and in consequence thereof, by a decree made io tia
same year, it was ordered that the defendants sh°lllat
forthwith pay the value of the cheese; that they slieuor
be restrained by perpetual injunction from receiving„ol,
demanding the said duty from the said plaintiffs, or Jr:be.
any other citizen and freeman of London, and that "0/
plaintiffs should be paid, by the defendants, the MO
the proceedings.
reader of
The foregoing brief narrative will inform the real., 0,
the nature of the title to town's (sues set up by the Or.P., t
ration at this early period. In the proceedings a, ga
the freemen of Lancaster, they alleged they were entip4:4,
to town's dues on several sorts of goods ; in the Pr°c;; be
ings against the citizens of London, they claimed t it,
entitled to town's dues on all sorts of goods. The sibs
seem to have settled the right of the corp,oration as t 0 the
claims of London, but they by no means decidedoe
question as to the non-freemen of Live.'l'"l° 0
reason why no proceedings occur against pcm-
at this early period is, doubtless, because the 'PaYilit,r
of a small tine, at the time of these suits, and loin; "—be
wards, entitled any man resident in the borough, LO
admitted to all the privileges of a burgess.
doOV
Up to the year 1780 the corporation sold the iree 4
of the town, at a price varying with the eircumstatleavs,
of the purchasers, from three to fifty guineas. In 17
to
the corporation sold the freedom of the borough ea,
an Jrish merchant, named Lloyd, for one hundr
guineas. d:
The corporation, as the town increased in trade 113,,
importance, after that period, declined to sell the fre,-,0
freenlent
dom of the borough, and thus arose the now saki :a
pecuniary distinction between traders who are free, al,
those who are not. It is not the object of this paPer
ill
question the power of the corporation so to aet,.but it
it
hereafter be shown that in the result, the refusal to se
the freedom of the borough has worked much injustig;
It is still the practice in many toroughs to sell l,
freedom to all residents who desire to purchase t'ia"
franchise.
,0
From the time of the last suit, to the commenceol,;,,,
of these proceedings on behalf of the merchants of 1,111,-0
pool in 1830, the corporation collected the dues frotic,"ce
traders of Liverpool. When the proceedings of I°%;
commenced, the amount levied on the merchants, la,
being freemen, had reached £50,000 per annual-
the attempt to force payment from the freemen of Pt,
caster and of London, it will be remembered, th They
corporation stated a consideration for those dues. "a
maintained the strand, and the harbour, and cleanse
the river, and kept scales and warehouses for the 133e"'
chants." In the year 1708, an act of parliament CV..-f,
obtained, giving powers to build the first dock et',
made in Liverpool, and by the same act, a duty ort
tonnage of all ships resorting to the port was iinnosef
Various acts of parliament have since been passed, .ent
increasing these rates. Since 1811, dock rates have la
levied on all goods, wares, and merchandise, irnOrrhiy
into, or exported from, Liverpool. In the last year,
duty on tonnage amounted to £84,061 las lid, the sat
on goods, wares, and merchandise, amounted
£107,663 is 9d ; making a total of £191,729 17s 8d- t
With the exception of the portion of this arriou,_e
which is applied to the liquidation of the debt of thue
dock estate, or to the payment of interest thereon, tPa
whole of this sum is expended ,on the building ali
repairing of the docks, and on the maintenance of the
port and harbour. The corporation have not, and do 10;
pay one shilling towards the maintenance of the ha;
bour, or to any one object stated by them to have bee°y
consideration for the town's dues in t 691. In the Ye jl5
1789, it appears from a case submitted by the then to of
clerk to the recorder, the corporation were not aware ;e1
the title by which they demanded these dues. The
clerk, in that case, gives up the title by prescrinti°;,.
but hopes from the length of time during which the CO;
poration have received these dues, " prescriptive riglia`r.,
will be presumed. About the year 1830, certain s.
chants of Liverpool, many of whom paid very large 0"i„
of money in town's duties, deemed it right to instittict
an investigation into the title of the corporation to o,Bro
these dues. A ease vas prepared, and laid hellicier
counsel, and after the lapse of a little time a fu„t,e.
case was prepared, and an opinion thereupon ta7,-or
The opinion given, after a review of all the cire'rect
stances, and of course, at that time, with but inWer'llic
information, was so satisfactory as to induce 7

merchants to resolve to try the question. be
That the case was not raised on light grounds 1113.7
gathered from the facts, that one mercantile lira' la
Liverpool, in a period of nine years, paid £4,101 1050
as town dues on merchandise which they imported
.04
exported ; and from the 2nd of May, 1830, to the ithe
of June, 1834, the defendants in the late action paid tett
sum of £2,751 is for the like dues on goods iinPora-c,
and exported by them in that period. From thesleo
ments a merchant, being a freeman, would have 0.01:1
exempt. Many merchants, both members of the con; the
council as well as others to whom the freedom n'
tiorf
borough has been given, have saved, by their exenlP
from the payment of town's dues, sums varying
amount from £5O to £5OO per annum. avec!
Independently of the facts above stated, it alVe •,,ct

from an examination of the authorities on the the
of imposts of this nature, that the question 0'
legality of the tolls might be fairly raised. large
It is not the intention of this brief memorial of a ,11
and important question to enter into a dissertatiolop
the abstract legal case; but it may not be either useitiet
or improper to state here some of the high autliprnioo
upon which the merchants were guided, in the 01'1104
which they formed as to the illegality of the t° tioti
dues. They thought, that in order to justify the e%acor
of which they had and have so much cause to -cowl/ that
the corporation would first he called upon to prove,her•
some " consideration" existed for the tolls, and for`ble,
that the tolls or town dues must be certain and reaso',
An abstract of some authorities will enable the ,
reader to form a proper judgment on these points, "to'
it is presumed, will fully justify the merchants ill
course which they have adopted. ods
Where a toll was claimed by prescription for goo ths
brought within a certain manor, it is said that 115 e
court was not satisfied with this prescription, bee,licti
there was no recompense for it ; and every preserdnetit
to charge the subject with a duty, must impart a bust be
or recompense to him, or else some reason ill'epyi
shown why a duty is claimed."—Warrington V. -11°5heeil
4 Hodern Rep. 323. So in a number of cases it has gbh'
held that a person cannot prescribe for toll thoretit of
that is for a toll for passing along a highway, witll°ir!.
the same time shewing a consideration, as that he rel',t
the highway ; for the public, having a general rig ;or
passing through highways, cannot be charged Witfterd'
.2".RReport,
2017,0 r,
irastt, receivingßip.
rt duties
t. 1:r:too
irpjedi
Mayor
arrtryeieooisirnteaaomitneblyvl
resemble
tepttni
o,4.eculkfli
hest
ra.
alt
mvb.e r ierb /6e0501-;
fairs and tolls thorough, appears froml paid atnTinearilFY::ettillst,.blai°ljitgi:
ties. Lord Hale says, Every public port is a fr'.;,-,0,-rOc,
or liberty, as a market or fair, or much more."
tibus Maris, Hargrave's Law Tracts, p; 50. 'That'
regard to publicity, ports are on the same footing
flame
highways, appears from another passage in the and
tract, " Ports ought to be free and open for subjects
foreigners to come and go with their merchandi'le ose
84. If, then, the public at large, are entitled to "Legal
of a port as of a highway, that right cannot be abrdy i°
without a corresponding recompense. Accordinlo/4
the older cases, a considration for these duties is 3,60
stated: "Itis a good prescription," says Chin J° are
Rolle, " for the corporation of Dublin that tbe;relie,b
owners of the port, and that they maintain Peopelf
in the river, and direct the ships in the deep ei+l,u 30t
and that they maintain the key and crane, and 010
consideration of this they prescribe to receive gao,
merchandise in the said pound, for here is quid Piro
,serif;
—2 _Rolle's Abridgement, 265. Viner's Ab. title 01;
tion (E). In an action of debt, on a bye Jaw' linde';
stated that the city of Norwich was entitled to sO tro•
; or a ton upon all goods passing along the river, oret,
the
repaired Was not stated that the city cleansed the r of tut.
repaired the banks, or did any other act in liet,l,ourt
payment. The plaintiff had judgment in the the
Common Pleas, but upon a writ of error hr"nglit i
there
King's Bench, the latter court were of opinion to o, the
was error, and that this was inalunz toinetani, bec3t„ autY:
plaintiff in error had no sort of benefit from tvubere
Hishord v. IVills, Siderjin's Rep. 454. Again, a ointelea
person prescribed for a toll in consideration o,fifrj lie be
mg a quay, &c., Hale, chief justice, said,

------
• (To be continued.)
---0 .
--- Ic'lol
r 21,
-- - -
Printed and Published by CHARLES WILLMER. °- o,es, t-
.
street, at his General Printing and Stationtry E""kli'll
South John-street, Liverpool.
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY SS. 31336 CI