The Northern Daily Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1856-05-23 00:00:00

THE FACTORIES BILL.

On the motion that the House do now resolve itself into
committee on the Factories Bill,
Mr. COBBETT objected to the measure, and moved as an
amendment, that the House go into committee on the bill on
that day six months.
The House divided, when the numbers appeared—
For the original motion
For the amendment

Majority

The House then went into committee. On the fourth
clause, which provides for the protection of children and young
persons, being proposed,
Mr. COBBETT moved an amendment, the object of which was
to extend the protection to adults; both male and female.
The committee divided, when the numbers were—
For the clause
For the amendment .. 33

Majority .
The remaining clauses were then agreed to, and the House
resumed.

THE REFORMATORY SCHOOLS BILL,
This bill also passed through committee.
FORMATION OF PARISHES BILL.

The House went into oommittee on the Formation of
Parishes' Bill, in which progress was made as far as the fifth
clause. At this stage the chairman reported progress.

The Reformatory School (Scotland) Bill went through
committee.
The Registration of Leases (Scotland) Bill was read a second

time.
Commissioners of Supply (Scotland) Bill was read a third
time and passed.
The Registration of Voters (Scutland) Bill was ordered to
be committed to a select committee.
The Industrial and Provident Societies Bill was read a
third time and passed.
The other orders were postponed, and the House adjourned
at a quarter past one o'clock.

THE BIRKENHEAD
DOCKS' BILL.

[FROM OUR OWN REPORTER.]

HOUSE OF COMMONS, THURSDAY.

The select committee on the Birkenhead Docks' Bill
re-assembled to-day in committee room No. 2. The fol-
lowing members were present—Sir William Clay (chair-
man), Sir J. Paxton, Sir E. Deering, and Mr. Fergus.
The counsel whose names have already been announced
in connection with the proceedings were present.
Mr. Bramah said that unfortunately he had no counsel
in attendance, but he hoped that the committee would
permit him to put some questions to Sir John M'Neil, the
first witness he intended to examine.
The Chairman said he trusted that the different parties
interested would make some arrangement with reference
to the number of professional engineers to be examined,
merely for the purpose of expressing an opinion, as the
committee were prepared to give the subject their fullest
consideration. It was quite unnecessary to examine so
many witnesses with respect to the engineering branch of
the question, for if they adduced so much testimony of
that description they might protract the proceedings
until Christmas.

Mr. Bramah said that the matter had been considered
at the last meeting of the promoters, and it was intended
by them not to call any more evidence of the description
in question, beyond that of Sir J. M'Neil aua Sir W.
Cubitt.

Sir J. M'Neil was then examined by Mr. Brame': He
stated that he had experience (as civil engineer) of thirty
years. He was acquainted with Birkenhead, and he
agreed generally with the evidence of Mr. Hartley, rela—
tive to his plans. Upon some minor points he differed
from him.

By Mr. Webster : He did not remember having ex—
pressed any opinion in 1854, relative to the half—tide
basin. He did not think that if the dam was
higher, it would prove more advantageous. He did
believe that he said, if Mr. Abernethy entrance had
been larger, and more pointed down the river, that,
it would have been better. As regarded the testi-
mony which he had given before Admiral Beaufort
and Mr. Robert Stephenson, he could merely say that he
had always entertained the opinion that if the entrance
was large enough to cover the largest steamer, it would
be quite sufficient. His evidence on the occasion in ques-
tion was merely in support of Mr. Abernethy's plan, and
he did not remember having given any contrary evidence.
Sir W. Cubitt examined by Mr. Lock: Ile was well
acquainted with the Mersey and its tides. He had exe-
cuted several works for the Liverpool Corporation,
including the great landing stage, which had answered all
the purpose for which it was intended. At present he
was erecting another stage that was double the size of the
one to which he had alluded. He considered that if a
similar stage was constructed at the opposite side of the ,
river, vessels would be enabled to approach at all times
of the tide, and railways could arrange their trains irre-

spective of the tides. He considered that it would be at
advantage to the Birkenhead side of the river if the star
in question was erected. hew long
By Mr. Calvert : Ho could not state exactly
it was since he was first consulted respecting their 005
but it might have been two months ago. He had
given any opinion respecting the plans in writing to LI
corporation of Liverpool. Had known Birkenhead ab°,°....
fourteen years, and he gave the preference to 3",
Hartley's plan as compared with Mr. Rendall's.
Ae
retained merely to support Mr. Hartley's plan to the 0,
of his ability. He was not prepared to say which of tZ:
two was the best calculated to give the best accomoun
tion to the public. (The witness was being exattoo7,
with respect to some opinions which he had previoug.tiY_
expressed, but the chairman interposed, stating that tt
committee considered any evidence of that descriptwu
unnecessar.
Lieutenanyt) Hosking, R.N., examined by Mr.
vi
Loeck gap!
been harbour master since 1844. He had given ntt-
in support of the original scheme, and would suPPcr"
want
By Mr. Bra of a better. and
mah: It was in 1837 that the Morpet- f
Egerton Dock was opened, and since then the workigB:4
the docks had been entrusted to him. Subsequent t° ins%
his attention had been directed to the sand and ;;
ion
held in solution in the Mersey and he was of °P—sio
that the proposed method of sluicing the great %tater baebi,
would not be successful, as small vessels would therThe
be incommoded by the motion of the water produced'l.o
prevailing winds in the Mersey were from west to 13-
-vie9ir
and the greatgales were generally from then orth:;,,
When the latter took place, the vessels in the great bad
would be influenced by them. . e-
at
Mr. Jones, shipowner, of Liverpool, was exattun
ilartleY
some length, his evidence was in favour of Mr.
plan.
Captain Manghatt, harbour-master of the London docks,
was next examined, and his evidence, to a certain ate
was also in favour of Mr. Hartley's plan.
The committee then adjourned.

THE TOWN DUES.

LOCAL CHARGES ON SHIPPING

(FROM OCR OWN REPORTER)
HOUSE OF COMMONS, THURSDAY NiGrfr';
The select committee on the Local Charges on ShiPP..atle.
resumed its sittings at noon to-day, after the
recess. The members of the committee present were"
Lowe (chairman), Lord Hotham, Mr. Bouverie, Mr. pancii7,
Mr. Fenwick, Mr. Milner Gibson, Mr. Headlam, Mr' nar2
Watson. .0
Mr. Hardy, Mr. Vance. Mr. Beamish, and Mr.
Mr. Gregson, a shipper to the United States, residinklis
Liverpool, was the first witness called. He stated that ;at
attention, as as a commission merchant and shipowner, ha ge
some years been directed to the Liverpool town dtte%larli
complained of their operation generally, but more part': coo-
with reference to salt, the amount paid ori which was, ''oo paia
sidered, most excessive. On general goods, the witri:f salt
in town dues about £5OO a year. Large q„Dtitieo Salt is
Wbitsueti;v..
were exported from Liverpool to America. vane"
made at New York and Virginia, and with the from
facturers of the article there the shippers of Galt ntittt.s
Liverpool had to. contend. He often sent out large qua' oter
of salt. The gross amount paid on salt
Liverpool was £7,500 per annum, exclusive of that ex
salt
by freemen. The Northern States of America import
s,
F
from Turk's Island and Cadiz. That involves a considerfroolav
competition with the Cheshire salt imported to America, the
Liverpool. If the 6d per ton tax on salt was removeitit
Liverpool salt could successfully compete with other ea
America, and be sent far inland. f th°
By Mr. Horsfall : I do not complain as a citizen 0
United States, but rather as a merchant and a residaat a
Liverpool. 014
By Mr. Lowe : Freemen of Liverpool, who exportr ;etre
derive special benefit. The Weaver dues and the flat f
have to be paid beside the town dues double
exported fro
By Mr. Horsfall : The Weaver dues amount to
those of the Liverpool town dues.
ther that
to Mr. Lowe : I consider that the dues altoge
to a great extent, the exportation of salt. I don't thltti;
the port of Liverpool gain anything by the ireP°"t an'
of town dues, because the return to the corporation la na°t. the
equivalent for the disadvantages attending the exaction but
town dues. Coal is exported from Liverpool to Anaer.ican'f the
not in large quantities. I complain more particularly
unfair advantage enjoyed by the Liverpool freemen in
exempted from the operation of the town dues. ht
By Mr. Horsfall : I believe there are several free'vete
Liverpool who export salt to America, and who can
r 0& at
51
orders at a profit when non-freemen cannot make a Pr° wig
all. They can also compete unfairly by offering a Pre%pot
to first class ships to take their salt, which non-freemen
ea
afforddu°
By Mr. Lowe : There cannot be a doubt that the town
are a benefit to the American salt manufacturers; but ta
individually, there is no benefit.
that
By Mr. Bearnish : Within the last few ears I a"`""
the export of salt from Liverpool has increased. ,„.ester
By Mr. Horsfall : The Weaver dues are certainly 3 6-

burthen than the Liverpool town dues. are 13°'
By Mr. Lowe : The protective dues in America
against American manufactures. t til'
By Mr. Headlato : The Liverpool dues are not against _
,
Liverpool freemen. been Pre
By Mr. 'Parson : Mr. Healey, of Liverpool, has _e iciLl'
vented from executing an order for salt in accordant
_ .

instructions.
Mr. Thomas Lloyd, a retired tradesman of Birmieghbfis .•'.
was next examined. He was formerly in the hardware dues
had particularly occupied his attention.
ness. For the last twelve months the Liverpool tool', that
they were a grievance, because the money derived freln ere,
exaction was not expended in givin convenience t 0 c°°°3
"
g convenience , be st, ~
but only in local purposes applying purely to Liverpoo" districts °f
thou ht that they were a great burthen on the iron distritode
Staffordshire, inasmuch as the greatest portion of Thereo° oils
from those districts passed through Liverpool. .
would amount to £6,000,000. vibel°
Mr. liorsfall: You mean the total exports for the
kingdom ? sfe,
Witn : ess True ; but I believe that nine-tenths 0f it Pa
through Liverpool. Wit
tent of u 0
By Mr. Lowe : Leather is exported to the ex ted fr°
£4,000,000, and I take off one-third as being expor
.010 oiy
He considereotheir
other places besides Liverpool. The dues, calculated fl
hello°
own books, amounted to about 2d. per cent, but I iud. per
rates amount e Messrs. Vanwarf and Son pay to the amount of
Whiles.. to
loecnatt.
threegt
aomwenu
n firmt t 0 haveonly paid.zs4
1£595.0 in town d u es,
By Mr. Horsfall : Nine-tenths of the trade pa'l_, 600-
and the ere
aore
\Liverpool, notwithstanding the town dues,
that
a freeman got no • ' •only acteu d'" t 0
ecial benefit if he ' tO ge
°T.
It was a matterof 'I)
• notoriety that freemen nasnat _, coe.
benfit somehow. Ho was not aware of any portico s'
Mr. Lloyd's • examination having closed, tto the
The Chairman produced a letter that had beßrldgeu gent t 0
committee by the executors of the late Duke of does
which referred specially to the Liverpool tow° t tire
'A bat •
as regards the trade on the canal. • The letter sais• .t peel,
trustees of the Duke of Bridgwater did not consider 1 taco"
sary to attend the committee, in consequence of I'ol4
given evidence on the question before the cornarittee.
an j the
Mr. Horgfall objected to the receipt of this letter,rsorte
room was cleared for the committee to deliberate. 00 sbiectio°
being re-admitted, we learned that Mr. Borsfall's °lace.:
had been sustained, and the letter struck out of the °lit as 11,:
Mr. Salt, of Bradford, was next called, and ga,./;ej to 5""
opinion that the Liverpool town dues were prejedte— ,
trade of that town. oileor
Mr. Alderman Bancroft, of Manchester, was nelt to the
and examined at very great length, with referelleterestsr
operation of the Liverpool town dues rt Birkenhead Hinters
the
more particularly as regarded the Birkenhead railwaYi of the
bigti were
docks there. He gave what was called a
town dues from the time when the first grt s lqr,i
made from the Crown and the Molyneux fareb,,.•;ple, en-
Bancroft considered the town dues unjust in Prie-„.•e. •
injurious to the general interests of trade and eonitnerb; of the
By Mr. Beamish : Those who disputed the rig ~o, bri"g
Liverpool corporation to the to ;;n dues could, ot cour'so ; but
the matter before a court of Law, it they choose to a° ,
perhapsß that would not be good policy. (Laughte)_ouid, os
By Mr. Ilorafall : The Liverpool
corporation 7,
uos were
course be entitled
, enti to compensation, in case the to W 0 due coy
l
removed,
so far as their real rights were concerned. 'aooriai
•poration of Manchester were entitled to certaiq in wool'
rights, in consequence of purchase, which rights theY
/prom
defend if attacked.
At the close of Mr. Bancroft's examination, Mr. Twilit°
town clerk of Manchester was called, to explain eerta°o' I ogle
regard
Litir: and
referred to in Mr. BancrOft's evidence, with
made by the Manchester corporation to the Lane°
Yorkshire railway company. v ne%t-
At four o'clock the committee adjourned to 1%/O°.•A 3°