The Northern Daily Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1856-12-11 00:00:00

elegance and taste in the architect who would have to carry
out the building. They should be confident that he could
produce working drawings which would enable them to
carry out the building judiciously and satisfactorily, and
which would not lead the council into any undue expense.
Mr. Allem had been successful in carrying off the prize ;
but he had not the confidence of the council, and that
should be a bar to the execution of the work being en-
trusted to him. He (Mr. Holme) agreed with Mr. John
Stewart, that the best course would be to instruct the
surveyor to prepare their designs, at least for the ground
plans of the construction, and he could then get an archi-
tect to assist him in the preparation of the elevations.
He would remind the council that already, out of the
borough fund, £lO,OOO had been voted—that the piece of
ground on Shaw's-brow had cost them £3,500, besides an
annuity of £lOO a year on the life of a lady, aged sixty-
three, and he wished the committee to understand, that if
the amount were exceeded by tee architect, it would be in
vain for them to ask the council for ueeistance. In that
event, a rate should be raised ort the inhanilents at large,
In conclusion, Mr. Holme obset ved that there 47.” pre-
cedent in this matter furnished them by the dock, conee;:t-
tee. When the landing-stage was about to be bellt,4de-
signs were invited by that body, and prizes awaraal.
The best designs were then handed over to Sir William
Cubitt, and he, with their aid, prepared the design or a
stage which was satisfactory to all parties.
Mr. Pieter), in reply, defended the course pursued by
the committee, and which was sanctioned by the
council. And in proof of Mr.Allom's competency to carry
out the construction of the building read testimonials in
that gentleman's favour from Professor Donaldson, Mr.
Kendal, Mr. Cockerel, and other eminent architects.
The amendment was then put and carried, by 37 to 11.
The voting was as follows : For the amendment :
Councillors Crosthwaite, Anderson, Haydock, Nicholson,
Nl‘Guffie, Godfrey. Holden, Livingston, Steains, Banner,
J.Holme, W. P. Jeffreys,Shand, Brancker, Tobin, Earle,
Johnson, Mellor, Aikin,Clint, J.Stewart, Farnworth,Hall,
and Halhead. Aldermen Chilton, Preston, Bold, Dover,
Parker, Cooper, Turner, Gardner, Bramley-Moore, M.P.,
Houghton, Toulmin, S. Holme,and the Mayor—Total 37.
Against the amendment—Councillors Stitt, A. C. Stewart,
SheilZFteming, Robertson Gladstone, Picton, J. R.Jeffery,
Kitchen, Hodson, and Beckwith. Alderman Horsf all—
Total 1 h
Mr. Jelin Stewart then moved, as an amendment, that
the corporation surveyor be directed to prepare, under the
direction of the Library and Museum Committee, plans
for the new public library and museum, having regard to
the amount at the disposal °tithe committee.
Mr. Alderman S. Holme seconded it.
Mr. A. C. Stewart begged to remind the council that
not one fact had been produced against. Mr. Allow, while
several testimonials had been read in proof of his ability
and competency.
Mr. Shell wished to have a distinct answer whether
Mr. William Brown intended to give £12,000 to any
building erected by the corporation?
Mr. Picton replied that he had had a great deal of con-
versation with Mr. Brown on the subject. With the
resolution agreed to by the committee to carry out the
plans at a cost of £32,000 Mr. Brown was perfectly
satisfied. When that resolution was altered he (Mr.
Picton) called on him, and asked him whether he would
so far waive the conditions of his previous letter as not
to insist rigidly on the entire plan of Con Amore being
carried out. Mr. Brown's reply was what might be
expected from his generous disposition. His sole object,
he said, was to avoid delay, and that if they could go
forward at once, he had no objection to waive his feeling
in favour of that plan. (Hear, hear.) He then made this
further proposition, namely, that if he got the necessary
laud on Shaw's-brow from the council he would build
the library at his own expense, cost what it might, and
would not ask the council or the community a shilling
towards it. (Hear, hear.) That proposition Mr. Brown
was willing to make and carry out if the council accepted
of it, and he would also, in the first instance, submit the
plans for their adoption. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. John Stewart's amendment was then put, and
carried by 31 to 14.
The voting was as follows :
For the amendment—Councillors Crosthwaite, A. C.
Stewart, Shell, Nicholson, Livingston. Banner, J. Holme,
W. P. Jeffreys, Fleming, Brancker, Tobin, Picton, J. 11.
Jeffery, Kitchen, Hodson, Mellor, Beckwith, Je Stewart,
Farnworth, and Halhead ; Aldermen Chilton, Preston,
Bold, Horsfall, Dover, Parker, Gaedner, Houghton,
Toulmin, S. Holme, and the Mayor. 31.
Against it—Councillors Anderson, Haydoek, Godfrey,
Holden, Steains, Shand, Gladstone, Earle, Johnson, Aikin,
Clint, and Hall ; Aldermen J. H. Turner, and J. Bramley-
Moore, M.P. 14.
Mr. Bold was about to move that Mr. Hornblower's
plans be referred to the surveyor, but did not press his
motion on being informed by Mr. Holme that they could
not fairly take those plans unless they paid for them.
Mr. Hodson then moved as an amendment, and Mr. A.
C. Stewart seconded 11,1 that Mr. Allem be instructed to
prepare a design for a new facade for the building, as
designed by him on the plan signed Con Amore, the entire
cost not to exceed £26,000, and that in the event of the
new design satisfying the committee, Mr. Allem be em-
ployed to prepare the working drawings at once.
The amendment was lost by 35 to 9. Messrs. A. C.
Stewart, Shell, Fleming, Tobin, R. Gladstone, Picton, J.
R. Jeffery, Hodson, and Beckwith, alone voting for it.
Mr. John Stewart's amendment was then declared car-
ried, and became the substantive resolution.
In answer to Mr. Picton,
Mr. J. Stewart replied that the surveyor would have
power under the committee to consult an architect.
The general proceedings were then confirmed.
The proceedings of the Hackney Carriages, and Licensing
Committee, and of the Bath's Committee were carried
without discussion.
The proceedings of the special committee on the duties
of water bailiff contained a bye-law, to prohibit the
mooring of any vessel in that part of the River Mersey
defined on the plan, with the object of keeping a free
course for ferry steamers between the Landing-stage and
the Cheshire shore.
Mr. Bold moved the confirmation of the proceedings,
with the exception of this bye-law, which according to the
standing orders must come up at the next council.
The motion was carried.

GAS COMMITTEE.
Mr. Kitchen in moving the confirmation of the pro-
ceedings, stated that the committee would be in a position
in a few days to test the metres, and the illuminating power
of the gas.
The proceedings were confirmed.
BIRKENHEAD DOCK'S COMMITTEE.
The proceedings of this committee contained a report of
the Town-clerk, as to the bills likely to affect the com.
mittee, which were to be introduced into parliament in the
coming session. Among these was a bill for the conser.
vaney of the river Mersey, which sought to introduce some
sweeping changes into the present conservancy of the river.
This bill bore the name attached to it of Mr. Wyatt, who
acts as parliamentary agent for the Corporation of
Manches'er.
Mr. John Stewart moved the confirmation of the pro-
ceedings. He said the council would perceive that notice
had been given of some very important bills, but at the
present early stage he should deprecate all discussion of
them.
Mr. Johnson said he perceived that the dock committee
had been requested to depute three of their members to
attend that committee. He begged to ask if these gentle•
men had the power of voting.
fir. Stewart said as the Birkenhead docks would in all
probability be one day transferred to the same management
as the Liverpool docks, and the same regulations, it was
found very important by the committee to have the advice
and assistance of some members of the deck committee.
These gentlemen, however, did not vote.

The proceedings were then confirmed.
Mr. Samuel Holme moved that the coroner's account,
amounting to £49 l2s, be paid. In doing so he remarked
that in that account was included the enormous
amount of ell 2s 6d, during the past month, for cars for
jurors. This was quite contrary to the intention of the
council, who only meant that, cars should be allowed
when jurors had to go great distances upon extraordinary
occasions. (Hear, hear.) If he found such a sum as that
put down for car hire again, he should certainly move that
the privilege be withdrawn, and that the council do not
pay for any cars at all. (Hear, hear.)
After some remarks to the same effect from Mr. Parker
tho motion was passed.

MAYOR'S COMMUNICATIONS.
A letter was received from Mr. John Macfarlane, re-
questing that the council would accept a copy of his plan
of a ship canal, connecting the rivers Forth and Clyde
with the town and harbour of Stirling.

The Mayor said Mr. Macfarlane was a benevolent and
affluent individual, who merely wished the council to
accept his present.
The following letter was read from Mr. Henry Booth—.
ST: GEORGE'S HALL.
TO THE WORSHIPFUL THE MAYOR.

Sir,—More than three years have elapsed since I first called
attention to the extraordinary accumulation of defects around
and within the outer walls of St. George's Hall. I may refer
to the incisions between the columns of the south portico, the
complicated steps, the hole in the wall, the prison gates, the
dry moat between Lime•street and the great colonade, and
others, which it is hardly necessary now to enumerate. At that
time we were told that it was presumptuous for unprofessional
men to criticise a work of art before it was completed ; at
all events, it was said, " Wait till it is finished," before you
pronounce judgment. Well, we have waited, with exemplary
patience, month after month, and year after year ; while,
recently, our attention has awakened by various grotesque
noveltie3 ; and we have seen our Assize Courts assume, in
successian, the appearance of a temple of the Tritons, and a
hall of the lions. Surely there is some limit to the injunction
wait till it is finished." Is there not, at length, patent
to observation, data sufficient upon which to form our judg-
ment ? Is there one member of the Council who is content
with things as they arc ? or can a rational expectation be
entertained of any material improvement under the rule
which has prevailed for the last seven years. It is true
that it is easier to point out defects than to remedy
them ; and, in regard to the approaches, that there have been
difficulties to contend with in the inclination and level of the