Northern Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1859-02-25 00:00:00

DOCK BOARD.
The weekly•meeting of the.Dock.Board took place at
one o'clock, yesterday, Mr. Chas. Turner in the chair.
The other -members :present were —Messrs. Hutchison,
Evans, Graves, nankin Mondel, Laird, Segal. !Smith,
Rubback, Farnworth, Anderson, F.orwood, Shand,'Holme,
Littledale, Tobin, Boult, Moss, Bushell, Langton, Arnold,
Brocklebank, Inman, and Lockett.
WORKS COMMITTEE.
-A letter was addressed to this committee by the Town
Clerk, asking whether the, committee would be willing to
negotiate for the transfer of the land, &c., occupied by
,
the ehain-testing machine,., to which the committee
replied that they were not at present in a position for
such a' negotiation, but as there were other questions to
be arranged between the Board and. the Corporation, that
Subject could be taken into consideration at -the same
It was agreed that tenders be accepted from Mr. H.
ICinahao, Dublin, for 5,000 shall sleepers, and from Mr.
Thompson for 5,000 large sleepers ;* "from Messrs.; Curtis
and Co , for strap and bellows leather; and from Messrs.
Roberts and Gibson,- fir common flat iron. The com-
mittee had received a deputation from the Master-ship-
builders'. Association, consisting of Messrs. Royden,
Grayson, Wilson, Green, and, C Smith, on the subject of
inadequacy of graving dock aecemmodation.on this side
of the river.

Mr. Broeklebank moved the confirmation of the pro-
ceedings, which included plans laid upon the table for a
half-tide basin and two canal docks at the north of the
Canada Dock, and a dock at the east of the Huskisson
Dock. These are the plans which had been recently
discussed and adopted by the board. •
Mr. Boult referred to the necessity of a second commu-
nication with the canal. He had since the last day, had
some communication with members of the coal trade, and
he foUnd that they were exceedingly anxious to have it
accomplished if possible. He hoped, therefore, that the
chairman of . the works' committee would give some
attention to the matter, as the expense would not be very
.great.

Mr. Brocklebank believed that the board had no power
to make such a communication, and that they were
restricted to the plans now laid before them.
Mr. Holm said he had called the attention of the
canal proprietors to the subject, and he hoped that before
long they would take it into their consideration.

AT letter was read from coal proprietors., trading upon
the Leeds and Liverpool canal, requesting that some
further consideration be given to the subject, as the com-
iounication would be of the, greatest benefit.
The letter was referred to the works' committee.
Mr. Laird rose for the purpose of stating that he still
objected to the accommodation about to be provided by
the plans proposed. He thought it unnecessary. It was
'the wrong end of the town: and he quite agreed with
what Mr. Tobin said some time ago, that for £30,000
they might give all the accommodation required, at least
for many years. The docks proposed would be very much
exp2sed.

Mr. Tobin said when he made the statement referred
to, the board were then considering the propriety or
otherwise of going to Parliament. He showed how
certain accommodation could by provided of a temporary
character. He never pretended for a moment that it
was to be anything like. permanent accommodation for
the inland carrying trade ; he only meant to show how
by a certain moderate outlay, flats could be introduced
into the dock. It had since been made apparent to his
mind during the debates in the committee, on considering
the revenue which could be • realised by making works of
a permanent instead of a temporary character, and that
the money spent in temporary accommodation would be
found when the permanent accommodation had been
made, to be so much money thrown • away ; he had
become perfectly convinced that the works ought to be
made of a lasting character.
Mr. Littledale did not intend to oppose the present
motion, but he subscribed in a great measure to what
Mr., Laird had said. He thought the action which
the board had had to meet
in the case of the
Sierra Nevada ought to be a sufficient warning against
=exposed docks.. They had barely opened their new basin,
and he therefore thought they should give it a trial
for at least twelve months. There was no hurry about
feing to Parliament. It had been frequently said that
oe was interested, as a proprietor on the Cheshire side.
,Re admitted that he was interested in the Cheshire side,
Du.,t he had a lame interesi in property on the Liverpool
; he was probably 6 more largely interested in ware-
Arse° on this side than any other of the Board, except
r' %line.
towards the Cheshire side.
th4r. Brocklebatik said the preient plans were part of
0 obligations laid upon the trust to, complete the
with
'allraugements with the timber trade. He believed that,
‘pWithout such accommodation, it would be impossible for
e timber trade to carry on its business in a satis-
a,ctor y manner. He believed that these plans,
,uell developed fully, would give stability to the rade, and would be the means of giving the fullest
'development likewise to the Canada Dock—a dock of 18
acres which could, not be done by any less comprehensive
natheadatostulrvei than that now before the btard. He declared
to he
tchaste question.ehof the Sierra Nevada had nothing whatever
Mr. Bold disapproved of the way in which the land to
themr east of the Huskisson Dock was cut up. He believed
,of
tt• Hartley did not approve of it as the commencement
principle of cutting up the land.
Mr. Boult said, the American trade would not sit
quietly
while the Bramley-Moorc Dock was being taken
Ir_r„eni them, and given to any one else. They had ships
wouldalrge draught of water, which the Brunswick Dock
not suit at 111 and it was moreover out of the line
of their business.
t, The Chairman said, Mr. Hartley did approve of the
an, for the amount of money which he had to lay out.
tike all engineers he would like to make things
rfeet• But they had certain engagements upon
e other side of the water, which th board were
determined to carry out in their integrity. It was stated
Y Sir Benjamin Hall in the House of Commons the
Other
night, that he had been informed by a nominee
member of the board, that another member had
stated that the Birkenhead works w,.re to
b_°o postponed, and that that statement was not met with
reprobation. Now it was hardly necessary upon every
occasion to express disagreement with every remark made
°Y another member, but he (the chairman) certainly
anever understood any member to carry his remarks so far
Sir,Benjamin Hall had stated. But out of the 28
2ernbch of the board, he should say that certainly 25 or
if not the whole, were determined to fulfil the engage-
Ve,!lts in all their integrity. (Hear, hear.) Indeed, he
believed that the very gentleman alluded to, would not
disposed to forfeit his engagement in any shape or
~,way; and that all they had engaged to do under the act of
54,roament, that gentleman, as well as all the rest, was irerrained faithfully and fully to carry out. He hoped
Biley should hear nothing in Parliament hereafter of any
easPieion that they were not determined to carry out their
irrtgrnae,e.ments. (Hear, hear.) With respect to the subject
itttulately before them, he believed Mr. Hartley
oved of the mode in which the £300,000 was to be
laNl °ut• He could not suggest any better plan for
tzlr,' out that amount. It would be recollected by Mr.
Mitt, ~that the question was referred to the works' com-
rniiiiZ; not to suggest how they could spend one or. two
that but how they could spend' 300,000 ; and within
4.B,truction they were obliged to confine themselves.
had r' Bold said he meant to convey that, if Mr. Hartley
mend the amount of money, he would not recom-
-I,ls them to commence in that way.
Vie Chairman : Oh, most decidedly.
niof• Brocklebank said the plans would afford accom-
co.J,,tion for 200,000 tons of the steam trade, and they
~,La not give anything like that accommodation in any
'ue Part.
RattleNir Smith said, if he understood the opinion of Mr.
the l Y rightly, that gentleman would prefer dealing with
to the east of the Huskisson Dock and the land
Whichvfl the board had still further to the eastward, as a
I,l°T. The board having decided upon certain plans
'moderate
Would take £214,000, and would only leave the
question
sum of £86,000 to be disposed of, the only
r, ion with Mr. Healey then was, how to lay it out in
such a. shape as to make the plans fitting to go before a
committee of the House of Commons. He (Mr. Smith)
o,s; far agreed with Mr. Bold, and he had tated that
don to the Works Committee, that he would a great
bi i lrather have seen it left alone for the present, in
lz
that i
. t might be dealt with as a whole. They were
fer. y going to make a dock, and there was no provision
thew arehouses at the sides of the dock, without which
steam trade could not go on there.
Itlr. Laird asked whether the chairman alluded to him
Whee he spoke of a nominee member.
he The Chairman : Sir Benjamin Hall stated in my
toladri
ntg, in the House of Commons, that he had been
4:"` °Y a nominee member of the board—he did
mention any name, and I mention no name. I
merely tell it as I beard it— that he had been told by a
llorninee member of the board, that another member had
expressed it as his opinion, that it did not signify if the
illi_trkenhead works were allowed to remain over, and that
'ley must go on with the Liverpool works.
MBold: It was Mr. Lowe who stated that.
The Chairman : Yes, you are right—it was Mr.
Mr. Bold : He said he read the debates, and took great
interest in them, and that they did great credit to the
_3:?ar
od. (Laughter.) In reading them over he said he
vered a speech. (Laughter.)
The chairman : No—he said he was informed by a
nominee member.
Mr. Laird said, Mr. Lowe asked him if he knew a
gentleman named Boult. He replied that Mr. Botch