The Northern Daily Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1856-08-26 00:00:00

POLICE COURT v E STE RDAY

(BEFORE
_MR., MANSFIELD.)

CHILD DESERTION.—CharIes Riley was brought up on
a charge of having deserted his four children, and 1 av-
ing them chargeable to the parish. Mr. Williams, one
of the relieving officers, stated, that on the 3rd June last
lie heard that four children, belonging to the prisoner,
were in a destitute condition, he went to a court in
Oriel street, and found the children there in a bad
state, and he removed them to the workhouse. The
prisoner called some days after, and said his wife had
died some time before, and begged that the children
might be kept for a week, until he could arrange about
them. The children were kept accordingly, and a. 7. the
end of the week the prisoner called again, and asked to
have them kept for another week. This was also granted,
but he did not come again. Mr. Williams found that
the prisoner was in good and constant employment all
the time. Mr. Mansfield said, it was creditable to the
parish to take up such cases, and prevent ruffians like
the prisoner from acting so brutally towards their
children. He would send the prisoner to gaol for one
month, with hard labour, and let a record of the case
be kept, and when he came out, if he did not take proper
care of his children, he would inflict the severest pun-
ishment on him.

STABBING AGAIN.—A foreign sailor was charged with
having stabbed a young man named Daniel Cowan. On
Saturday night the prosecutor was passing along Par-
liament-street, when he saw the prisoner striking two
women ; he interfered to prevent him, when the prisoner
drew his knife and stabbed the complainlnt in the hand
and arm, in a dangero❑s way. The priso:>er was com-
mitted for trial.

(BEFORE sift. BOLTON.)
THEFT BY A SIIOP LAD.— Patrick Keely, late a lad
engaged at Messrs. Rocklilts, Castle-street, was
charged with having stolen some money belonging to
the firm. For some time past, small sums of money
were missed from the shop, and on Saturday evening
Inspector Murphy was called in, and on searching the
prisoner, half a sovereign was found in his shoe, and a
small knife also, both of which he bad stolen from the
shop. He was sent to gaol for one month
A BIG Cur OF TEA.—Edward Parry, late in the
employment of Mr. Thomas Sayers, tea dealer,
Ranclagh-street, was brought up on a charge of having
stolen 432 lbs of tea, value £6 15s. It appeared that the
prisoner was suspected of dishonesty, and he was dis-
charged. On Saturday evening he was found in the
horse midden, with a bag containing the tea in his pos-
session. He was remanded for a week.

EMBEZZLEMENT BY A COLLECI'OI2.—HiII Wilson Willis,
late clerk to Messrs. liarmood, Bann( r, & Co., charged with
embezzlement before the magistrates, on Saturday, and re-
manded, was brought before Mr. Robertson Gladstone, and
the evidence having been perfected, the prisoner was
committed for trial at the sessions, but the magistrate
agreed to take two securities, in £2OO each, for his
appearance.

NORTHERN TIMES.--LIVERPOOL, TUESDAY.

introduced at the opening of the session of parliament, but was
soon withdrawn. A new bill was introduced, but was also
withdrawn ; and, sir, 1 was not surprised that the Vice-
President of the Board of Trade should show an anxiety to
withdraw that bill, for I can conceive nothing more absurd
than the course which he took with respect to it. The Vice-
President of the Bo trd of Trade said, " I beg to tell honourable
members that this bill is not a bill to amend the law of part
nership," the bill which he himself introduced bearing that
title—(laughter)—but that in the ensuing session of parliament
he intended to introduce a bill to amend the law of partnership.
A large body of members, without considering the bill, said :
" If we are to have a new bill in the next session of parliament
to amend the law of partnership, let us reject this one. Why
are we to legislate piecemeal, and to take up the time of the
house and the country in legislating on the law of partnership,
which is again to be brought under our consideration in the
next session of parliament ?" That, I know, actuated a large
body of members in resisting the progress of the bill. (Hear,
hear.) Then, again, a large body of members insisted on the
principle of registration ; and when an amendment was proposed
in committee, which carried that out in principle, though, I
confess, I did not like the wording of it, yet I myself am so
strongly in favour of the principle of registration when there is
limited liability, that I was one of the majority who voted for
the insertion of that clause which led ultimately to the with-
drawal of the hi 1. And, sir, Ido confess there was another
feeling, a feeling perhaps which ought not to operate, but
which, I believe, did operate with some members of the House
of Commons, in inducing them to vote against the bill, and
that was the unpopularity, whether deserved or otherwise it is
not for me to say, of the Vice-President of the Board of
Trade. (Hear, hear.) And I am sure I will not he
suspected of any political feeling when I say, that I hone that if
her Majesty's government introduce a bill in the next session
of parliament to amend the law of partnership, they will entrust
that bill, not to the Vice-President of the Board of Trade,
but to their Attorney-General, who, I am pet feebly convinced,
has both the influence and the power to carry a bill which will
satisfy the country. The next subject to which the report
alludes is the mercantile law amendment bill. There were
several suggestions also sent up from the Chamber with
reference to that bill, and you have observed, and observed
truly, that some of those suggestions were not carried out.
Upon that occasion my honourable colleague and myself felt
ourselves in considerable difficulty. The most essential feature
of that bill we considered to be, and I believe this chamber
also so considered, as it was considered by the merchants of
London—the most essential feature of that bill was the first
clause, which went to repeal the statute of frauds requiring
any contract in amount above £lO to be a written contract.
It was felt by your chamber, and also by the merchants of
London, to be a most important clause, and Mr. Baring, on
behalf of those interested, feeling the importance of the ques-
tion, and doubting the possibility of getting members to attend
when a bill is in committee, and apprehensive that the first
clause might pass, gave notice to reject the bill altogether on
going into committee. That had the effect which he had anti-
cipated, and which I believe he wished, of inducing the
government to offer a compromise, The Vice-President of the
Board of Trade, no doubt apprehensive that the measure would
be lost, said that if Mr. Baring was prepared to allow the bill
to pass, he would withdraw the most objectionable clause. On
the faith of that representation Mr. Baring said he accepted
the offer, and we did not feel, after such a compromise, at
liberty further to oppose the bill, with the view of gaining
what would be otherwise desirable. You have thought proper
to allude to the Monte Videan loan, and have expressed, and
very properly, the thanks of this chamber to Lord Clarendon.
It affords me pleasure to have the opportunity of saying, that
upon every occasion when I was called upon to communicate,
either upon the public business of this town, or upon the
private business of individuals, which has not been
unfrequently, I have always received from that
noble lord the utmost consideration, courtesy, and
attention, and I consider that vote eminently duo to him.
(Hear, hear.) You have also alluded to the African mail
steamers. It is quite true that your members were not suc-
cessful in accomplishing the wishes of the Chamber, with
reference to the transfer of the making up of the mails from
London to Liverpool. My honourable colleague, Mr.
Wilson, and I accompanied a deputation to Mr. Rowland
Hill on the subject, but you have correctly stated the result
of our interview, and that government attaches more weight to
the number of letters which go to London, than to the large
proportion of trade which comes through Liverpool. I think
that is an improper view to take of the subject. (Hear
hear.) And I shall, in the next session of Parl'ament, press
this subject again on the attention of her Majesty's govern-
ment. (Hear, hear.) I can only take this occasion to express
my regret at having lost Lord Canning from the Post Office,
for I believe that if he had been there, this measure would
have been carried out. You alluded to the bonds remaining
uncancelled—bonds which were very properly taken when we
were in a state of war, but bands which should have been
immediately cancelled when we arrived at a state of peace.
(Hear, hear.) What can he more preposterous than when
peace is declared, and when every political offender is granted
an amnesty, the mercantile interests who are no political
offenders, but political martyrs, should yet be subjected to all
the inconveniences attendant on a state of war ? I must do
justice to the Board of Trade, and say that this is
in the department of the Treasury ; and I cin
only repeat, that I shall be moat happy to co-operate
with my honourable colleague in endeavouring to accomplish
the wishes of the chamber in regard to it; but the regulation
is so absurd and so preposterous, that I can hardly imagine.
after consideration of the subject, that the government will
insist on the completion of those bonds. (Hear, hear.) I think
these are most of the points alluded to in the report, but I
may express a hope that the attention of this chamber will be
directed to the constitution of the Board of Trade. The subject
has been brought under my notice, not publicly by this
chamber or any other body, but by individuals ; and it does
appear to me a perfect anomaly, that the commercial interests
of this country should be presided over by what is called a
board, consisting of a peer and a lawyer. Now, sir, I am quite
aware, and I readily acknowledge it, that on every occasion
that my honourable colleague and myself had necessity to
communicate with Lord Startle:- of Alderley, we were treated
by him with the greatest courtesy, and that every representa-
tion we made to him received the utmost attention ; and here
I beg to disclaim any political feeling in this matter. I am
speaking of the constitution of the board under every govern-
ment, and I do think that it ought to be a matter for the con-
sideration of this chamber, whether the Board of Trade is now
what it was originally—what it was intended to be, or what it
ought to be. hen the board was originally established, so
far back as the time of Oliver Cromwell, it was confined to a
peer or a lawyer, but there were twenty merchants from
different parts of the country associated with it, and I think
that if the same principle could be again adopted, the commer-
cial interests of this country would be benefitted far more than
they are. (Herr, hear.) I merely venture to throw out this
question for consideration, because the board—consisting, as I
maintain it virtually does, of a peer and a lawyer—exercises an
amount of influence, of which the chamber has no idea. It is
referred to by the foreign office—it is referred to by the colonial
office, and almost by every other department, and it is supposed
to be acquainted with everything connected with the trade of
the country; but its constitution is not, in my opinion, and
in the opinion of many others, what it ought to be (Hear,
hear.) I believe they have more in their hands than they
can attend to ; the variety of measures which occupy their
attention is beyond all conception. They have the commercial
interests, the manufacturing interests, the interests of water
companies, and all other great public undertakings concentra-
ted in their office. I am not going now to notice any question
of local dues, or any question upon which there may be a
difference of opinion. Every body here will agree, however,
that honesty is the best policy, and, though I am
not going to accuse the Board of Trade of any want of honesty,
yet I think I must show the Chamber what came under my
cognizance in connection with that committee. The local
dues bill, as you are aware, proposed not to abrogate the town
dues, but to transfer them to the hands of the Board of Trade.
I have no doubt, too, that they would propose to relieve you of
the dock dues, but they were anxious to alter the dock trust,
and what course did they adopt ? They are required to report
to every committee sitting on any particular question, what are
the facts of the case. Well, they had an object to accomplish
—I am not accusing them of want of candour, hut I am
accusing them of want of accuracy—and that object was the
alteration of the constitution of the Liverpool dock trust.
They were anxious to please the gentlemen of Manchester and
elsewhere. Let them please those gentlemen, but let them
do it fairly, and not by misstatement made through careless.
ness or any other cause. I hold in my hand the report of the
Board of Trade on the Birkenhead dock bill, and in it
they describe the constitution of the Liverpool dock trust :
" The bill which is passed fixed the constitution of the dock
committee as follows—twelve members are elected by the
council of the borough, and twelve by the dock ratepayers,
but no person can be elected a member who has not both
resided in or within eight miles of Liverpool, for five years,
and paid rates to the amount of £25 a-year on his own
account, or as an agent for persons residing in or near
Liverpool." Now, the very contrary is the fact. Their
object was to show that the trust was concentrated in Liver-
pool, and to meet their views they set forth that the agents
must be for persons residing in or near Liverpool, when, in
fact, they must be for persons not residing within eight miles
of Liverpool. I cannot cunceivo any official document more
disgraceful to any department of government. When making
a statement of that kind, I should imagine that the Board of
Trade would have been particularly cautious, and hem they
could put in italics a statement which is so directly at variance
with the facts of the ease, I am at a loss to conceive ; but
think that when things are done in such a slovenll
the Board of Trade, with respect to y manner atquesti
the interest of the port of Liverpool, I, as one of yonsour affecting
members,
would have been wanting in respect for this Chamber, and the
town,
and state it, know in
k now theseto facts, I did not bring them before you,
wh I be the opinion of manthers as
well as myself, that the Board of Trade has more y
in o
its hands
than it can attend to, and that we want a searching reform of
that board before the commercial interests of this
y_
mush.' can
be properly or beneficially attended
to, (Applause.) :Me
report was unanimously adopted.
W. Brown, 11CP brought under the notice of the
Chamber the scheme of 'the Honduras Inter-oceanic Railwily,
for a railway between the Atlantic) and Pacific Oceans,
through the Republic of Honduras, through Puerto Cabello
to the bay of Forseea, The honourable gentleman briefly
explained all the advantages, in a commercial and political
sense, which would be derived from the construction of this
line, and moved a resolution, pledging the Chamber to support,