Northern Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1859-03-05 00:00:00

THE NORTHERN TIMES, SATURDAY, MARCH 5 1859

in parliament with regard to any government which may
be formed. I will say further, that as I, along with
yourselves, resisted dictation, and a presumptuous do-
mineering spirit on the part of a faction, which falsely
assumed to itself the power of controlling this great con-
stituency, so I was one that resisted dictation as to my
votes, even from you, who conferred on me the power of
giving those votes. (Loud cheers.) I cannot expect
always to please by my votes all my supporters. I never
hoped for it but I do hope for this, that seeing how
I have conscientionsly upheld the principles which
I professed at the time of my election. I
I shall not forfeit your support nor your good opinion.
If you will allow me,- I shall very shortly remind. you
what the principles asserted by me were when I became
your candidate, and I shall leave it to you to judge
whether I have constantly carried them out. I told you
in my address, that a great commercial nation, a great
empire like this, is bound to maintain such means
of defence, and such a calm but steadfast attitude
before the world as should make known that she was both
able and determined to maintain her rights, and protect
her shores, and defend her own great colonies, and the
lives and property of her citizens who are settled in
foreign lands. Now, gentlemen, in order to do that we
must keep up our national defences. (Cheers) I be-
lieve that there is that feeling both in the House of
Commons and in the country, and that' the government
needs only to explain that there is a necessity for addi-
tional grants of money, and although we would- all be
very reluctant to pay additional taxes, yet I believe the
country is convinced that the true economy is to keep
ourselves always in such a state that nobody will dare
or have the power to injure us. (Hear, hear, and
cheers.) I shall support a rational or well
digested plan for extending the franchise,
repudiating on the one hand the opinion of finality, and
on the other hand the opinion that the intelligent and the
well-schooled, are no more entitled to the political
franchise than the ignorant and the debased. (Hear,
hear.) A bill has been introduced recently into the
House of Commons, on the part of the government,
which is called a Reform Bill. To that bill I have four
or five very decided objections. (Cheers.) In the first
place I object to the provisions which is made for de-
priving freeholders in boroughs of their county fran-
chise. (Hear, hear.) I think it is monstrous that a
man, residing within the limits of a borough, and having,
bona fide freehold property within that borough, pro-
bably having other means of voting for the borough,
should not be allowed to - exercise his 'privileges
as a county voter, because his qualifications happens,
to be within the limits of the borough sending
members to parliament. (Ilea; hear.) I think he has
a right to exercise his voice in the county- as well. My
next objection is that freeholders in the borough having
property in the borough, wherever they may reside, may
come and give their votes possibly by sending a
voting paper, as is proposed, and swamping the votes of
resident electors. ,For instance, supposing that the
government bill was . carried in its integrity, and that
the club associated itself 'in London and said : " There is
a small snug borough yonder, let us buy some property
there. Let us divide it into several small freeholds.
Thus we can create some fifty votes in that. borough "
(which perhaps has only three or four hundred electors),
" and, by voting papers sent down from London, we can
turn the election." Thus elections for boroughs may be
decided pn the small freehold franchise without the
least difficulty, by men who know nothing- of the
interest of the borough, and who merely obtain the
power for whimsical objects. (Hear, hear.) I have
another objection, that it does not go far enough with
disfranchisement. lamby no means an ad-
vocate for a sweeping disfranchisement of all
smaller places, and giving thbir portion, up to the
large centres and cities only on account of their population
and their wealth. lam no advocate for that, because I
think it would entirely subvert that mixture of opinions
and of interests which are largely and fairly discussed in
parliament, and would put too much power in the 'hands
of large and influential bodies. Numbers alone would
be admitted as decisive of the question as to the number
of members to be sent to parliament. There are various
interests to be consulted, and interests must be repre-
sented there. The House of Commons would become
very unmanageable, and would work detrimentally
even to the . interests of the working classes, to
whom so much allusion has been made ; because
I believe that their interests would not be well repre-
sented by a number of men sent in all of one class, and
who would be less able to give a valued opinion than
those now in the house, upon the general questions of the
country. Still the government bill does not go far
enough. There are several small boroughs still left
which return two members, and which might very well
be deprived of one of them, which would afford the
means of distribution among the large influential
and populous districts which have risen into im-
portance since the passing of the last Reform Bill.
I have another objection to make, and that is that this
bill' does not make sufficient provision for the working
man. (Cheers.) I believe that the poorest class of the
labouring population in this country, give as honest votes
as the class immediately above them, who now have a
franchise. I should rejoice to see them admitted to give
votes, and even to send men of their own class into Par-
liament freely and fully to express their sentiments,
provided they were only there in proper proportion.
Their voice ought to be , heard, and I think
it is one great defect in the Government Reform Bill that
it has not admitted the lower class of householders to any
share in the representation. My view of the Government
Bill is that it must be very much modified indeed, if it
settles the question of reform in this country. We shall
have that question brought on over and over again. It
will be a sore subject of discussion, and we had
much better settle it at once in such a way as
is likely to last for another thirty years. As I
said before, I think a more decided change might have
been made without going to the length of a bill which
has been much discussed of late. The tendency and effect
would be, in my opinion, to hand over the power of the
State to the control of those who, without property of
their own, would, by their numbers, rule the property of
others. (Cheers.) I mnst approve of the working classes
having a voice, and an audible voice, in the councils of
the country, but I cannot consent that they should have
an overwhelming power given to them,which would pro-
bably be the ruin of the country. (Cheers.) (A Voice : The
ballot.) Mr. Turner : 1 shall notshrink from that question.'
On the two occasions when the ballot was proposed in
Parliament, I voted in favour of it. (Cheers.) I should
wish that every man was in as independent position, as I
am myself, to go up to the poll and audibly and
honestly to give his vote. But some people feel
the want of it, and say that -want deprives them of
the power of giving their votes, and I therefore cannot
deprive them of that power, although-I may consider it
sometimes exercised in an objectionable manner. 'Now,
I must venture to ask you a question, whether or not it is
true that Manchester was disgraced and degraded at the
last election ? (Cries of " No, no." Such statements
have been made, and I believe such statements
have been promulgated from this very platform
upon most distinguished authority, the honour-
able member for Stockport, Mr. James Kershaw.
The same sentiment has been characteristically enunciated,
ore rotundo, by Mr. Hadfield, the member for Sheffield.
I might say, regarding the latter gentleman, that he has
been so deeply enamoured of liberty that be wishes to hold
her constantly encircled within his own embrace. This
hon. gentleman, than whom no speaker in the House of
of Commons excites more laughter, took the opportunity
of a meeting in this hall, to make some very important
remarks upon myself and my late colleague. (Cries of
shame). Gentlemen, I can forgive him any display of
spite, for I cannot forget that to his bigoted zeal in a
celebrated case we are indebted for the introduction, by
the late Sir Robert Peel, of the dissenting chapel's bill,
which relieved so many dissenting congregations from
the attacks of that ardent lover of liberty. (Loud
cheers). Mr. Turner, after adverting to some other
topics, resumed his seat amid loud applause.
Mr. Thomas Fairbain spoke to a resolution regarding
our Foreign policy, which declares, that we should
seek to preserve
.peace and abstain from interference in
the internal affairs of other nations, while maintain-
ing power sufficient to sustain in all cases our national
honour, and protect in all seas and countries our
national commerce

Mr. Malcom Ross spoke to 'resolution regarding our
home policy, which urged the improved administration
of existinc, laws, to removal of all unnecessary restric-
tions on trade' and commerce, to extending of education,
and promoting the social well-being of the people. •
Mr. Heugh spoke to a resolution on constitu-
tional reform, which was declared to be one to
give a parliament which should represent all
classes and interests of the community, and should
not, as in the bill prepared by Bright, give to
one class a preponderating influence. Mr. Heugh, in his
speech, vehemently condemned Mr. Brioht's bill, which
he declared to be not reform, but revolution.

The Right Hon. W. Afassey, M.P. (his health having
been drunk), addressed the meetinc, in an eloquent
speech. On the subjeet of foreign affairs, he expressed'
his belief, that although in the event of a war, Which
seemed inevitable, England might give her warm
sympathy to the struggles of suffering nations, and
although Englishmen , would ,never .speak with bated
breath in the presence of any foreign tyrant, yet any
material aid were full of harm even to the very nations
involved. In reference to home affairs, Mr. Massey
altogFther condemned the Government Reform Bill, as not
sufficiently disfranchising small borthighs, and not suffi-
ciently enfranchising the working classes.
The proceedings soon after terminated.

THE BIRKENHEAD,
LANCASHIRE & CHESHIRE

JUNCTION
RAILWAY BILL.

FROM OUR OWN REPORTER

HOUSE OF COMMONS.—FRIDAY, March 4

The committee appointed to consider this Bill resumed
its sitting to-day, at 11 o'clock, Mr. Ridley in the chair.
Mr. Charles Mason called and examined bY Mr.
Webster : I am manager of the Birkenhead, Lancashire,
and Cheshire Junction Railway. The area of the docks
now completed, the Egerton and Morpeth docks, is 20
acres. • The area of the docks at Liverpool is only 212
acres. There are three railways for carrying the traffic
from the docks, and they divide amongst them the traffic.
There are seventeen lines of railway crossing Canning-
street. They had increased from year to year. They
are not more than is required. More rails will have to
be laid down. The traffic over Canning-street is chiefly
coal traffic, which is carted from the railway trucks upon
the sidings above Canning-street. Colonel Wynne
inspected the level crossing at Canning-street, and
reported to the Board of Trade upon the danger of
the level crossing at that place. The things complained
of had been since remedied. The traffic from the docks
was 'chiefly through Bridge-street. Persons coming
from the docks would never think of going 'through
Canning-street. I approve of-the stopping up of that
portion of Canning-street which is proposed. The
proposed line of railway from Hooton to Helsby would
take a great deal of the traffic from Chester station, and
would materially shorten the distance to Warrington and
Manchester. There is no opposition to the proposed line.
There are several distinct kinds of traffic coming to Chester
station. There is the mineral traffic from North and
South Wales, which is very large; then there is the iron
traffic from the South Staffordshire district; also the
pottery traffic from the North Staffordshire district ;
and the general merchandise traffic from North
and South Wales coming by the Great Western and
London and North Western systems. There is
also a distinct traffic from the manufacturing
districts, consisting of cotton, &c., which, at the
present time, come by' the Chester station, but would
take the Hooton and Helsby line when constructed.
The construction of this line would be a considerable
relief to the Chester station. It was impossible to
carry on the traffic in a satisfactory -manner, if
obliged to carry it through the Chester station.
There has been a constant extension of the station
accommodntion at Chester station for the goods
and through passenger traffic, going down by the largy
railways. The accounts show a. very large increase in
the annual expenditure. In 1855, the proportion of the
Birkenhead line (which is one-third of the whole)
amounted to £6,781 ; in 1856 to ,Z 8,102 ; in 1857 to
£8,820 ; in 1858 to £12,520. The Chester -and
Holyhead Railway has now become a part of the London
and North Western system.

Mr. Merewether said, that before proceeding with the
cross-examination of the witness he wished to suggest to
the the committee that the powers given to the promoters
of the proposed line, by the 20th and 21st clause in the
preamble of their bill, of entering into agreements
with the London and North Western and the .Great'
Western should be at once struck out. To enter into
any arrangement there must be two consenting parties,
the person who proposes and the person who is expected
to accept. He ( Mr. M.) had the honour to represent
two companies, and he must say, in answer to the
proposal on behalf of the promoters, that on behalf of
the two companies whom he represented, he empha-
tically declined to accept their proposal.
Mr. Alexander remarked that Mr. Merewether should
state some better reason for departing from the usual
course.

The Chairman said the committee declined to inter-
fere with the usual course of proceeding, and Mr.
Alexander should proceed to cross-examine the
witness.

Cross-examined by Mr. Merewether : I do not
believe the Act limited the number of rails at Canning-
street in any way. There is not. an ounce of traffic on
which we desire toll which does not pass through Chester
station. It cannot get upon our line without pass*
through Chester station. This includes the traffic from
the London 'and North-Western and Great Western
systems. The Great 'Western bought what the Shrews-
bury and Chester had. The Great Western came on to
Wolverhampton before they purchased the Shrewsbury
and Chester line. The occupation is the same as before
the Shrewsbury and Chester passed to the Great Westen,
but whereas the Shrewsbury and Chester line enjoyed the
profit on a bale of goods for forty miles, the Great
Western Company now have the profits over 212 miles
upon that bale of goods. The' buildings at Chester
station remained the same as they were before the
Shrewsbury and Chester line passed to the Great Western.

There was no more room taken by by a bale of goods
coming by that system than before. Witness could not
say how much property was in possession of the Birken-
head company at Canning-street station.'

Mr. Merewether, in reply to a. question from the
Chairman, said he appeared for the London and North
Western and the Great Western Companies, and those
two corhpanies did not oppose the stopping up of
Canning-street. The Mersey Docks and Harbour Board,
for whom he also appeared, did oppose it, as it would
stop up the approach which they now had there to
their works.

To the Chairman: We get £l,BOO a-year from the
Great Western Company for the use of our station at
Birkenhead.

To a Member of the Committee : The traffic which
would be deviated from the Chester station by the proposed
line would be very large.
Mr. George Douglas, examined by Mr. Webster : I
have been engineer to the company since 1851; I was
acquainted with the state of things with , respect to the
two embankments at Canning-street, and carrying a

bridge over them. The existence of those embanlcm'ents

were much complained of, by reason of severing the pas-
sage to the docks. The level crossing at Canning-street
is exceedingly dangerous. We have shunting engines at
the station there, which are used for forming the trains

on the dock rails. The number of rails at Canning-street
would have to be increased, as also the crossings at that
place.
Cross-examined by Mr. Merewether : I put the cost
for altering Taylor-street at about £6O. The card is
our own. There are four distinct lines of railway.

Two of those go down to the Great Float, and the
other two by different sidings. The dock trustees did
not lay down the sidings ; they were all laid down by

the Birkenhead company. The rails lead to the
Egerton and Morpeth Docks and the Great Float.
The greatest part of these rails are not through lines.

Was not aware when the bridge at Canning-st-reet was
made. It was wide enough to allow of the broad

guage

TO the Committee : Engines pass through the Canning-
street station three hundred times in the twenty-four

This was the whole of the evidence produced on be-
half of the promoters of the bill.
Mr. Merewether, on behalf of the Corporation of
Liverpool, and the Mersey Docks and Harbour Board,
stated the grounds on which those two bodies opposed
the clause in the bill for stopping up Canning-street.
The Corporation represented the public, and had no
other interest in the matter, more than to preserve this
communication through Canning-street with the line of
docks. It would be exceedinly undesirable to stop up
this thoroughfare, which was likely, in a short time, to
turn out a most important onc, as forming a direct com-
munication with the docks on the Birkenhead shore.

Mr. Hartley, examined by Mr. Merewether : I am
engineer of the Liverpool docks. The works at Birken-
head were now being proceeded with with vigour. If
nothing unforeseen should occur, he hoped to see them
completed. In 1855 the transfer of those docks to the
Mersey Docks and Harbour Board took place. It is
intended to increase the Morpeth Dock to eleven acres,
and should this intention be carried out, it would be ex-
ceedingly undesirable to stop up Canning-street. When
the dock was increased to eleven acres, he hoped to see
it occupied by foreign steamers and other ships. It is
the dock which the Liverpool merchants coming over
from Liverpool would be most likely to go to.
There are circumstances which would render
it • a favourable dock. The corporation
of Liverpool have expended large sums of money in im-
proving the _communication between: those docks. They
objected to the stopping up of Canning-street, because it
would tend to sever the communication which ought to
exist there. The land called the south reserve was part
of the land derived from the Mersey board. The lessees
of the Corporation would be injured by the stopping up
of Canning-street. The land rises at Taylor-street, and
persons having to go by the substituted road would have
to go up a hill, in the direction of the Great Float.
Canning-street would be the line of communication which
persons and goods would take. If it be stopped up, any cart
with goods coming from a ship in the Morpeth dock to the
Mersey warehouses would have to be earned up a height
of 17 feet, and come down again, merely to go across the
Birkenhead railway. When the rails were laid down at
Canning-street, it was the property of the Improvement
Commissioners. They were then insolvent. The land
on which the rails are laid belongs to the Mersey Docks
and Harbour Board. I think it would be very undesir-