Northern Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1860-01-27 00:00:00

she was compelled to lose her steerage way in endeavour-
ing to keep.clear of ships in the track. Ile denied that
if the clear track were kept there would be any diminu-
tion in the caution at present shown by the captains and
crews of, the. Woodside beats in crossing the river, and
urged that if the bye-law were passed there would not
be foUnd any difficulty in keeping the space clear. He
suggested that on the north and south side of the lines
,of the clear space three or four rnooring-buoys should be
laid down, and that instead of vessels anchoring there
they should use the buoys. He believed it woulti define
the lines, and be of great benefit to the trade of the port.
Mr. BusHELL would not 'discuss the question on its
own merits, but on moral and, legal grounds. If the
board failed in exercising the power which they had got,
and any accident should happen, he would warn them
that, by refusing to carry Mr. Shand's motion, they
-would incur an amount of moral responsibility at all
_events, and he believed legal responsihility too,. which
he, as a member of that board, shrunk from to the
.utmost possible extent.
Mr. BOLD explained the part that the Corporation of
Liverpool had taken, some time ago, in framing a bye-
law to keep the Woodside track clear. The special
committee of the Council, conceiving that they were
bound, having the power, to make the bye-law, did so ;
.and the judge to whom it was submitted viewed the
river, and was so impressed with the necessity of the
bye-law that he signed it before the time ; but it was
not put-in, force, because the power that was then. in the
hands of the Corporation was about to be transferred to
the Dock Board, who had the interests of the trade of
the pert in their keeping. He was in favour of keeping
clear the track, and throwing the responsibility on ship-
owners, provided the vessels could be anchored else-
where.

Mr: Bouia strongly opposed the motion, on the
ground that danger would be increased by removing
ships from the track; ,vessels at anchor acting, in fact,
as direction posts. 'He was opposed to the suggestion
of Mr. Laird as to buoys being placed north and south
of the lines of demarcation, but would wish to see them
laid down in the Sloyne .or off the magazines, where
they would be the means of economising the space for
anchorage purposes.

Mr. IN37IAN- said, if he was rightly informed, any
-British ship that anchored in the track, would not-only
be liable to the penalty of but liable also to the act
which was generally considered by British, ship-owners
the most odious one of all—Lord Campbell's act. On
the other hand.- a foreign ship might use the anchorage,
and be simply liable to the penalty of £5. That was a
strong argument; and he could not help feeling that a
heavy responsibility would rest upon the board gene-
rally, if in consequence of the proposed enactment any
accident might take place attended with loss of life.
It was his decided opinion, individually, that the danger
would be increased rather than diminished by the
alteration. In the case of the Europe, which met with
a collision in the Atlantic diiring fog, it was laid down
by the Admiralty that no steamer had any right to
move in fog at any speed that would be dangerous. If
they made the track clear, and an accident were to occur,
would they not put on the board a heavy moral responsi-
bility ?
The CHAIRMAN said the subject • had now been fully
dicussed. The board, having ordered that the pilots
should keep th'at space clear as far as they possibly could,
had, in fact, adopted the principle which was now sought
to be carried out. Therefore the question was; whether
the bye-law proposed would conduce to that end or not.
lle did not think the captains of the ferry boats would
become rash if the place were ordered to be kept clear,
because it would be impossible for them to forget that
many vessels, under certain circumstances, would be
compelled to anchor ic that space. He did not quite
agree in what Mr. Bushell had stated, that the board
ought to pass this law in order to get rid of a respon-
sibility. All their responsibility was to do what was
'right under the circumstances, for the interests of the
port and the safety of the people. As to laying down
buoys in the' river, he thought that would be a dan-
gerous thing. • They bad claims upon them already for
buoys in their docks, and he was afraid if they were laid
*in the river they might often have claims made upon
them in case of accident.

Mr. LAIRD denied that the ferry boats would run at
fall speed if the track were kept clear.
Mr. SHANDY in replying, said he did not think the
regulation would bring ships under Lord Campbell's
Act.

Mr. NORTH, the solicitor, thought it would have that
effect.

Mr. MONDEL moved, as an amendment, .that the
matter be postponed for a month ; that in the interim
the solicitor should weigh the question in all its bear-
ings ; and that he should report to the board on their
responsibility, and the responsibility of the shipowner,
anchoring in the forbidden track, under Lord Campbell's
ACt.

Mr. SMITH seconded the amendment.
Mr. SHAND said if the solicitor thought they ought to
delay the matter, he should have no objection.. •
Mr. NORTH thought it an important question, and
that there was a great deal in Mr. Mondel's amend-.
ment which required consideration ; but he thought he
would be able to report on the subject in a fortnight.
- Mr. TOBIN said it was always desirable that the board
Should have the fullest information upon all subjects,
and he should, therefore, vote •for the adjournment for
a fortnight.
Mr. SHAND said he would;vote for the amendment,
though he had moved the original resolution.
Mr. LAIRD desired that Mr. North would state in his
report whether there was any risk upon the board
under the law now existing that no ships should anchg.
within 100 yards of the pier ?
The amendment was agreed to without a division ;,
and as this' concluded the public business, the reporters
withdrew.

MOTHS IN FURS, AND FLEAS ON Doos.—Their prevention and
eure' by Greer's Patent Anti-Vermin Lotion (Camphorated),
3d., dd., and Is., at the Anti-Vermin Office, 49, Brownlow-hir.
- -

The latest edition. Just published. Sent free per post for
three stamps, or may be had on application. TEETH : THEIR
Loss AND ItEsTonserion. On the best means of restoring teeth,
by the new principle of self-adhesion, with vulcanised gum-
coloured India-rubber in,lieu of bone or gold, and by means of
a flexible gum, without springs or wires, and without extract-
ing roots, at half the ordinary cost. By Messrs. Gabriel,
Dentists to the Prince D'Ottajana. A multum in parvo bro-
chure, which all requiring the aid of a dentist will do well to
peruse, as, emanating from such a source, it may be confi-
dently relied on.-- United Service Gazette. Dental Establish-
ments: 134, Duke-street, Liverpool; 33, Ludgate-hill, and
110, Regent-street, London. Note name and number. Estab-
lished 1815 Vide diploma.
A Copenhagen letter of the 19th says that there has
heen no further disturbances there ; but that on the pre-
vious day the government, having learned that a num-
ber of evil-disposed persons intended to renew the rioting,
ordered the troops to be prepared to act, and that ball-
cartridges should be distributed to them. The energetic
attitude of the authorities appears to have deterred the
rioters, for the day passed off quietly. The Countess
Danner had left the capital for. Jagerprus, and it was
thought that the king, with part of the court, would
soon follow her.

THE MISSING MR. GEORGES Hfitscrr.—During these
last fourteen days information has been received in
London from Paris that a Mr. Georges Hirsch, who
had lately come from South America, had mysteriously
disappeared, and a reward of £lOO has been offered for
intelligence as to his wherabouts. The opinion on the
Continent was, that he had been murdered in England,
or that another Waterloo-bridge tragedy has been
enacted. The case was placed by the relatives in the
hands of Mr. Pollaky, the foreign superintendent of
Field's Private Inquiry Office, who from his inquiries
entirely set at rest the idea that Mr. Hirsch had been
foully used. It appears that on the 31st of July, 1859,
Mr. Hirsch wrote .a letter to Messrs. Rimmel, the
eminent perfumers of 96, Strand, purporting to besigned
by Marchand and Mathey, of Rio Janerio, intimating
that the house could dispose of a large quantity of
Messrs. 'Rimmel's various goods; that on or about the
12th day of December last, Mr. Hirsch called on
Messrs. Rimmel, and selected perfumery to the amount
of t 2•10; and, that after he had so selected the goods, •
he prevailed on the above gentlemen to discount
£7OO value in bills which Hirsch had brought with
him ; that, on or about the 14th of December, Hirsch
proceeded to different parts of the country, adopting the
English name of Stevens, and taking with him various
small Bank of England Rotes, having previously changed
the large ones—amounting to £550, and endorsed there
in his new name. Mr. Pollaky traced Hirsch to
several towns in England, where be had been purchasing
goods, and to the hotels where he had been living in
London and Liverpool under his assumed name. What
could have induced. Mr. Hirsch to have acted in the
manner described will no doubt have hereafter to be
_explained. It is almost needless to say Mr. Hirsch
never paid Mr. Rimmel for the goods, nor did he return
to this gentleman after he had obtained discount of the
bills. The Home-office was set to work to cause in-
quiries to be made about the missing Mr. Ifirsch, but
a telegraphic message from Mr. Field to Paris soon put
out of the question further trouble en the part of the
Government.