Northern Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1859-11-18 00:00:00

NORTH-ERN DAILY TIM M.

MERSEY DOCKS AND HARBOUR BOARD:

Charles Turner: presided at the usual weekly
meeting of the Dock Board yesterday, and the other
members present were—Messrs. Brocklebank, Hubback,
Littledale, Smith, Rankin, Forwood, Mondel, Farn-
worth,
.Rounthwaite, Bushell, Segar, Tobin, Langton,
Graves, Bold, Eyre Evans, Maclver, and Boult.
WORKS. COMMITTER.

This committee recommended that certain portions of•
the sea wall between Scaeombe and Egremont, which
had been damaged during the late gales, should be re-
built at the expense of the board. The followin?; tenders
were recommended for acceptance, viz.: Mr. James Blake.
to supply soap ; Messrs. Walker, Parker, and Co., to
supply white and red lead; and Messrs. Matthews and
• Co., to supply Venetian red.
Mr. BROCKLEBANK moved the confirmation of the
proceedings, which was agreed to.
The CHAIRMAN, in answer to Mr. Langton, said that
the previous decision of the committee in reference to
the rebuilding of the Cheshire sea-wall had .been re-
versed.
• WAREHOUSE COMMITTEE.
The committee had reconsidered a previouscresolution,
and now agreed that the clerks an 4 other partiefi em-
ployed'under the Doak Board in the warehouse depart-
ment be informed that the Warehonse Committee did
not in any way wish to prevent them enrolling ;a any
volunteer artillery or rise corps, provided that their
duties to the board were not impaired or interfoted.with.
Mr. Ilunnkcic, in moving the confirmation of the'gro-
endings, said
.he trusted the. decision of the committee
as to the volunteer movement would be satisfactory.
It SMITH seconded the motion, which was aired
to.

MAPINE COMM.MEE. "
Tive• committee having reconsidered the question of
providing a new life-beet for the I ilbre Island' Station,
persisted, in recommending that one of White's boats
should be- ordered at a cost of £l-28, and that a boat
be built on the principle' of Peak!s• boat,. at a cost of
£220. The committee hadihad under consideration the
question -oKthe. loss of the Austrian barque Tyrol: and
the condtict:of the crew of two of the life-boats. After '
a full examination of the-, master and mate, of" the.
Formby life-boat, the keepw of the light-house, and
the man Clarke, who horsed the boats, it had
been resolved that oa consideration of all the
circurnstances,, it , appeared to the cenainittee that
no blame attaches to tha• crew of the Formby
life-heat. The inquiry vme,al,l be still further
proceeded with;, in reference to the conduct of the ,
crew of the Liverpool boat.
Mr. Moxoan, in moving,the confirmation-of the pro-
ceedings, said it. was a- matter et regret that the com-
mittee had not been able to proceed -further with the
inquiry in refererce to the conduet of the lifeboat men,
in consequence of the absence of material witnesses who
were preVented
.attending, owing to the dense fog that
prevailed.on Tuesday. In reference7to the recommenda-
tion to order a life-boat from the Messrs. Waite, of
Cowes, hes would state briefly tha- premed** of the
committee-ou that matter. On the 30th of August last,
the Hilbre Island life-boat was reported in want of
repair,nndwas ordered to be brought into port fersurvey.
On the 13th of September the report of the survey was
considered, the boat condemned as too -old for satisfac-
tory repair, and. it was ordered that tenders for-a new
life-boat be pro'cured. Tenders were submitted on the
20th of September for a life-boat on, a Liverpool model,
by Costain T on the model of the National Insdtution, -
by Forrest, of Limehouse ; and on' the patent of Lamb
and 'White, by the patentees. On that occasion. the
tenders were,opened,.and further estimates were ordered
to be procured in Liverpool. On the 4th of thatcher
further estimates were submitted, and. the ,whose: con- .
sidered ; and. on. the 11th of October it was resolved .that
one of Lamb and_White's boats be built, but this-reso-
lution was not confirmed by the board, who, on the 'l4th
of October, referred it back to the committee for.recon-
sideration. Messrs, Lamb and White were communi-
cated with on the subject of the buoyancy of their boat, .
and the following letter was received.from.them
Cowes,.lBth October, 1859.

Sir,—We are in. receipt of your favour.of the .14th.instant,
and in answer would submit that we consider the building the
air cases :n the boat forms a principal feature, as being part
of the boat itself it increases the strength. of the side in a
great degree ; and it is this construction that.. makes theSe
boats specially adapted for hoisting in. davits without the
danger of breaking. All loose apparatus placed in a boat
adds weight without increasing the strength ; and if the india-
rubber fender is placed round the' boat, I,think. there can be
little danger of damaging the air cases, as the beat has a
double side to stand the blow; and these sides. supported by
bulkheads at, every five feet. We are satisfied. the committee
would be pleased had they one of our boats, and.we shall feel
pleasure in building should they so decide.—Remaining, sir,
your Obedient servants,
JOHN & ROBERT WHITE.
per JOHN. WHITE.
M. T. Parks, Esq.,

Marine surveyor's Office,liverpool.
PA.—When we consider the number of compartments,
there is littl chance of all being damaged. This, I think, has
been explained before.
This letter was considered, and the marine surveyor
ordered to report. on the capabilities of the boat
patented by Lamb and, White. The marine surveyor
reported that the air cases, were built into the boat, to,
give it additional strength and extra buoyancy, and
that the boat appeared to. have been extensively used
by the Peninsular and Oriental Company, and by the
Revenue cruisers. The reason why the committee
hail chosen this boat for an outlying station was, be-
mime of its superiority over any other description of
boat in pulling to seaward in bad weather—a quality
which was considered of primary importance, for in its
absence all other good qualities would be of no avail.
Mr. Mlclyzu seconded the confirmation of the pro-
ceedings.
•
Mr. TOBIN opposed the recommendation in reference
to White's life-boat, and contended that the committee
should have been prepared to submit the advantages
that would arise from any change in the construction
of the life-boats. The committee only said that a
change was necessary; the reason for that change was
no 6 6ivon, and 4bp onromittoo ohouldi havo borno in
mind that a change was not always an improvement.
When they found too that 'the present boats had done
their work in a manner' which was not surpassed by any
boats in the country,'it was clear that the board should
not make a change, unless the; committee colld give
the soundest reasons to convince them that the
change would be one for the better. (Hear, hear.) The
principle of this patent boat was reported against by the
Northumberland Commissioners, who examined the 280
models sent in for the £lOO prize; and those commis-
sioners were all eminent nautical. men. The marine
surveyor, too, was very guarded in his report, for he
said the boat was well adapted for a ship's life-boat; but,
then, did the marine surveyor consider it was superior to
the boats now in use ?
Mr. MAclven—Yes.
Mr. Team resumed—He had it on good authority
that the marine surveyor considered the presents boats
were equal, if not superior, to any -Alter boats round the
coast. (Hear.) Why, it was only last year that this
same boat was before the committee, and they rejected
it at that time as unsuitable ; but now they were told
that this boat was wanted on trial. If the trial had
reference to goods, he would not have objected to it ; but
when the question was one of saving human life, hewould
make no change unless thoroughly convinced that it
would he for the better. Mr. Tobin then censured the
course taken by the committee in reference to obtaining
tenders tenders for boats, and said that in having opened the
first lot of tenders, and then advertislig for
second, they had laid the matter open to great abuse,
which was exceedingly wrong in principle. He then
went on to condemn White's boat, his proofs being
quotations from the report of the Northumberland
Conimisaioners, and pointed out that of the thirty-eight,
boats which were classed. White's was the lowest but

. . .
two; and tkat the Liierpool boati, by Cattalo,
,wer
considerablyhigher on the list. They would, no'doubt, have
been higher had they been constructed to free themselves
of water more quickly, but that fault had been. since
remedied. Mr. Tobin quoted the only, two instances
Which he found on record of the services of White's
boats, and argued, from the results of their_perfonnances;
that the boats were failures. He contrasted with those
services the results of the operations of the: Shields and
Liverpool boats. 'At Shields, last year, the boats had.
gone to 33 wrecks ; at Liverpool, in the same period,'
to 24. - 'The' Shields boats went off 84 times,'
,and
saved 493 lives in 11 years; the Liverpool boats went
off 269 times and saved 1,123 lives; The Point of Ayr
boat alone went off 120 times, and saved 664 lives.
The services of White's boats were not to be put in
comparison with those of the Liverpool boats. From
1840 to the present time the Liverpool boats had saved
1,786 numIET far in excess of any life-boat
establishment in the kingdom. There Were, therefore,
no grounds for the change, and he should oppose the
recommendation of the committee. •
Mr. NAUTVER: said Mr. Tobin should bear in mind
that the Government to a- very large extent recognised
White's boats.

Mr. TOBIN—For ships' use only ; net for coast

service.
Mr. MAclverc said, from the Marine "surveyor's- re-.
marks in committee, he way led to suppose' that
was an excellent' boat. If the board would order one'
Of those boats, and did not like it afterwards, lie won4tl'
give them £lOO for it, and put it on board one of hie
own Tends.
131C0C4.LEBANK. seconded,Mir:,Tobincs'amendment,.
which, was' that, that part of the proceedings:relating to
the purchase of a life-boat from the Messrs. White be
not confirmed. In 185 T-the .committee. arrived at the
conclusion that the boats'then in use would Carry more •
passengers, anti were better'idapted for being towed out
to a Wreck, through a roula,sea, than ,any other boat
rf the committee wanted to ,try White's boat; let them
do !so ; but he protested against her being: put on any
station in lieu ofany of the existing boats:- •
• Mr.• LANGTON said the boat•previously.refused by the
committee was only a single banked boat; whilst that
which it was. intended, to .have built now. woad be
double banked, uncles° strong lip., consequence that there
could-be little fear of the air cases being damaged.
Mr: Bouvr said he would like to hear something as
to the-relative.cost brthe boats.,
Mr.. GRAVES said the number! of lives saved' by the
Liverpool boatYshowed hOW 'admirably they were adapted
to the wants of the port, and..eipreffied- his i6ar that
.White's beet Would be too light to bkOwed through a
heavy sea. He strongly recoiumended'a trial of Peak's'
life-boat,. which' was meg_ by the RojraliLife-boat Insti-
tution.

Mr. SMITH urged that any life.7boat, that was .con-
*meted should be one he which the men had confidence ;
iand all the- life-boatmen had.porfect confidence inithe
boats at present used by the Dock peard.
The CHAJR.I4IA.N said the principle on which the-Liver-
pool: life-boats had hitherto been constructed, had been
considered with special, reference to the service- to be
performed, and the coast on which that service was.-to
be performed. In Mr! the marine.- surveyor was, of
opinion that the life-boats lhen in use, with certain-I'in-
provements. which had, been since made, would be
superior to any beat of which, he ,then had any know--
ledge. He-wonld like the: opinion of the marine sur-
veyor upon' the relative merits of the Liverpool boats
'and those.pmposed to be substituted.
Mr. BesnELL concurred in the remarks of the chair
man.
Mr. MOM:I,EL having replied, the - board went u, .a.
division, when there appeared—for the amendMent,. ti:;.
against it, 7";. so the amendment was carried.
Oa the motion that one of Peak's life-boats be built,
it was moved by Mr. SY4TH, and seconded-by...N:lr. FOR,
wOOO, that the whole subject be referred back to-the
committee, and that the marine surveyor do, report
upon! the relative merits of the Liverpool boats- and.
Peaks boat.
The amendment was.lost by le . votes against,,to
for, and, tine proceedings were then confirmed, excepting
thatipart relating to 'Mute's boat._
The proceedings of the Pilotagcf: Docks and Quays,
and, Master POrterage Cominitteesrliere read and:con-
firmed.
letter from Mn., ,Caleb Smith on behalf of, the
master ship-builders-and shipwriglats, suggesting that :a
mast shed should be erected on the east side of-No. 1'
§andon Graving-daek, was referred 'to the Docks and
Quays Committee.
TAR VOLUNTEER RIFLE AND. A,RTILLERV MOVEXENT.
Mr. GILAYES postponed for a week his notice of
motion for voting-£250 to .the fund for raising Tolunt eer
corps in Liverpool.and the neighbourhood.
A letter from, Mr. John. Laird, asking that the fear
Wallasey Companies of Rifles, might participate in. the
grant, if made, was read.

TILE SYSTEM, OF MASTER PORTERAGZi
Mr. MACINER then.ntoved the resolution; notice of
which he gave last week, that the system, of master
porterage, as. respects steamers, required alteration, and
ought to be altered without delay. He considered it a
description of ,heathen 'darkness and ignorance to say
that the present system was a check upon the dues in
any way, or that it helped the working of, the docks, for
it did just the reverse. , (Hear, hear.)
,He contended
that the consignee ought to be the master porter of the
vessel, but, as it was, the largest consignee took the
porterage ; and, although the list of masters porters em-
braced the names of first-rate gentlemen., yet they en-
trasted the work to their butler's son's sister's little boy
—(roars of laughter)—and the result was neglect, and
delay, and damage.

Mr. SEGAR seconded the motion, hut hoped it would
be withdrawn, as the Master Porterage Committee was
fully alive to the subject, and would deal with it., The
picauut zybtem appeared to, hang as a drag on that
despatch which was of such vital importance to, the
steam trade.
Mr. SMITH and Mr, BaULT considered the present
system an impediment to business.
Mr. BusuELL was of the same opinion, and said that
on the 20th of January last a special committee was
appointed to inquire into the management of the docks
and quays. This question concerned that committee;
and he should like, to know how often they had met, and
how far they had progressed in the inquiry. (Laughter.)
Mr. GRA.VES said the committee had been very hardly
pressed by. other business, still if Mr. Bushell had not
declined to serve on the special committee, he believed
it would have been at work ere this. In reference to
Mr. Maclver's motion, he considered that a strong case
had .been made out, and expressed a hope that the
MaSter Porters Committee would consider the whole
question. For himself, he would say, he should like to
see the board take the master porterage of the port into
its own hands.
Mr. MAclvicn—Oh! nonsense. (Roars of laughter.)
Mr. Brocklebank, Mr. Tobin, Mr. Rankin and the
chairman admitted the necessity of an alteration in the
present. system.
It was then.agreed that the whole question, both as
regards sailing and, steam vessels, should be inquired
into: by the Master Porters -Committee, and thereupon
Mr..Maclver withdrew his motion.
This was the whole of the public business, and at half-
past four the reporters withdrew.

V'
DEATH WHILE OOLIRTING.-OH 'Monday, a coroner's
inquest was held at Malton, upon the body of John
Atkinson, who had fallen down dead on the Saturday,
night previous. Deceased was a,farm .seivant, and haa.
attended,the Malton hiring; •and pal-ions to returning,
had walked with a young woman whom he was courting
to the outskirts of the town. lie suddenly• fell,
knocking his companion down also, and{ died instanta-
neously.—Verdict,".Died by the visitation of God."