The Northern Daily Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1856-06-03 00:00:00

deliberate.

ItY Of t

for the c

SHIP

n, upon I

.1_ In af

minutes

A
_ Prot

!na, Grf
to Port

6'..1 and

Y 49 da

THE BIRKENHEAD
DOCKS' BILL.

(FROM OUR OWN REPORTER.)

HOUSE OF COMMONS.—MoNDAY NIGHT.

The Select Committee on the bill promoted by the
Liverpool Corporation for the completion of the Birkenhead
docks, re-assembled at twelve o'clock to-day, Sir William
Chy in the chair. The other members of the committee
present were Sir E. Dering, Sir Joseph Paxton, Mr. J. C.
Ewart, and Mr. Esmonde.

The room was much crowded throughout the day, the
local parties interested from Liverpool, Birkenhead, and
Manchester, swelling the number. Amongst others in the
committee room during the day we noticed Mr. Charles
Turner, Chairman of the Dock Committee, Mr. J. B. Lloyd,
Mr. John Laird, Mr. James liolme, and Mr. Thomas Bold,
in addition to a host of engineers, who seemed much
interested in the protracted examination of Mr. Rendell,
C.E , against the plan of the promoters of the bill, as designed
by ol.r. Hartley, the dock engsneer.

The examination of Mr. Rendell was resumed by Mr.
Webster. His testimony to-day had mainly reference to
the estimated cost of carrying out his (the witness's) own
plan, consisting of the great low water basin and approaches,

as compared with the cost of the plan of the promoters,
designed by Mr. Hartley. He showed by a comparison of
figures that his (Hr. Rendelk's) plan would cost £200,000

ess to carry out than Mr. Hattiey's, that is, that his low
voter basin would cost less by that amount than the
;onstruction of the locks as proposed by Mr. Hartley.

t two o'clock

Mr. Mc:r

ewether commenced cross-

examining the witness. He was first interrogated as to the
arrangements of the railway companies, in connection with
the south reserve, at Woodside. In answer to certain
questions, he said that the railway companies had no par►
liamentary powers to use the south reserve, but that
arrangements were in existence by which they did use a
portion of it. The cross-examination was next directed to
the mode of working witness's plAa ; more particularly with
regard to keeping the low water basin, and the entrance
from the Mersey, free from silt and mud, by toe action of
the tide. He stated, in answer to questions from the
learned counsel, that, in his opinion, there would be much
greater security for the entrance to the docks being kept
free from mud, by retaining the low water basin, than by

abandoning it.

The cross-examination closed about a quarter past three
o'clock, when the room was cleared for the committee to

Oa the re-admission of strangers, the Chairman said that
the committee did not wish to have any further evidence
on either side, as they considered the whole case was before
them ; but they would be ready to-morrow to hear the
counsel in opposition, after which they would decide as to
the preamble of the bill.

THE TOWN DUES.

LOCAL CHARGES ON SHIPPING

(FROM OUR OWN REPORTER.)
HOUSE OF COMMONS, MONDAY.

The select committee, appointed to enquire into the local
charges on shipping, met to-day at twelve o'clock. Mr.
Lowe in the chair. The other members present were
Messrs. Aorsfall, Hardy, Beamish, Milner Gibson, Vance,
Watson, Lord Hotham, Bouverie, Moffatt, Duncan, and Sir
John Duckworth.

On the asssmbling of the committee, a letter was read
from Mr. Lloyd, of Birmingham, enclosing one from Mr,
Halliday, in reference to the evidence given before the com-
mittee, on a former day, by Mr. Lloyd, in which that gen-
tleman stated, on the authority of Mr. Halliday, that there
was a firm in]Liverpool which was in the habit of forwarding
goods in the name of one member of the firm, who was a
freeman, for the purpose of evading town dues.
Mr. Halliday stated in his letter to Mr. Lloyd that the
latter had altogether misunderstood him in reference to the
firm in question, and that he was not aware that they were
in the habit of evading town dues in the manner alleged.
Mr. Lloyd, in his letter desired the committee would strike
out this portion of his evidence.

The letters having, been read, strangers were ordered to
withdraw for the committee to deliberate.

On the public being re-admitted, it was stated that the
committee had resolved to have both letters entered on the

r. Shelley, of the treasury, was called, and stated that
the amount paid out of the consolidated fund to the port of
Liverpool for defferential dues, levied on foreign ships,
Was, for the year ending December, 1855, for pilotage,
£7,129 18s, 64., and for anchorage, £l9 ls. 63. In 1854
fur pilotage, £8,589, 13s. 3d., and for anchorage, £25 7s.
Witness then read the acts under which these sums were
paid, commencing in 1819. The amount, he said, was
primarily ascertained by the Trinity board, who paid the
money.

Mr. J. H. Butterfield, of the Trinity house, was the next
witness called, and described how the amounts due fur deffe-
re3tial dues at Liverpool were ascertained. His evidence
had reference mainly to anchorage and pilotage.
Mr. Henry Bremner, solicitor, of Liverpool, was the next
witness called.

By Mr. Lowe : I believe you appear before the committee
in support of the retention of the pilot dues levied at Liver-

pool ?
Witness : I do. I appear on behalf of the Liverpool
Pilots' Commissioners for that purpose.