Northern Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1860-02-02 00:00:00

pool Corporation 'Waterworks, be in lie and i.7tead of tfie
rates for domestic iiurposegby such acts authoris-ed to be leviNt
and received by the Corporation, and may lie recovered and
shall be applied in like manner.

Mi. Komori, said the committee, had great difficulty
in investigating' the queetion, fearing, On the one' hand,
that they might press upon the poor, and on the other,
liand, that they might tax those who already paid for a
fair -supply of water.
Mr. JESTEBY said, the scale to which reference had
been made, and which hadehitherto been acted upon,
had been called a lighter "sc than the, one ,now pro-
posed to' be adopted. -That, :to ai superficial. observer,
would appear to be so, but_ when investigated that
would not prove se.. When the scale was fixed by the
committee that originally went to Pairliament, the cor-
poratiOn- had an addenda in the shape of a power to
charge for water-closets and baths. • It was felt that
that charge' operatedprejudieially to health and morals;
bed, in addition 6 to that, justice to all parties required
a revision of this tariff, which was.based upon :1i de-
creasing per centaeee.- Up to £2O, 5 percent. upon the
rental was charged for: the supply of water: That was
not 'strictly carried,- although authorised by the ACt of
P'axliament, because as-they approached the- £2O a year
rental they did not reach 20s. a year rate, and
that was made • a compromise' to prevent a reduction
below £2O when the rental was £21,. Now; if they
referred, to a, house of £7l, the old charge- would be
£2 its. 91 for a supply of water, and if they went
upwards. to £Bl rental the charge was £2 16s. 811;—one
penny' less for a house of £Bll rental than for a house of
£7l, whereas a labuse;of £B5 a-year rent 'was theaged
£3 4s. Now he would say, with these facts before• them,
that a readjustment of the tariff was necessary as an
act of jiatite: to all parties taking i water supply. And
now be. would ask geatlemere-to follow him in taking
those identical,figUres. ,ljp•to£2o a-year. five per rent.
was charged, and there weal(' be a trifling sum mere
charged in that sum -than in the original tariff, that
tariff not having been composecl'entirely in the terms of
the• act of:Parliament. But if they came to a house of
£BO a-year; they would find the' rate at present was-
£3 45., and' a. povier, in addition; to charge Bs. for aa
water-closet. and Bs. for a bath, which- made the'
charge under: the old scale -£4, whilst under the new-
tariff the charge: would be £3 . And far-, from^
the new scale being an increased. charge, it. was a
reduced charge of. /oe. in that case:. He, would next go
to a house rated at too.. a-year, charged only £5 125.,
with an addition of .10s. for a water closet, and 10s. for
a bath, making. IS 125., but he- apprehended that a
house of that," description would have-two water closets,
'and perhaps ene bath, but still under the new tariff the
charge would: be £6 •65., for Whichathere could be two
baths and one-water closet. Now thonew tariff was an
improvement upon, the old' one, whether it be upon
; equity or argument, and it was still estimated that the:
new tariff would bring an increasecbrevenue to the Cor-
poration of about -23,500 a-year by-a fairre-adjustment
of the scale, end by a removal of injiistice,. ,Up to £2O
a-year five per cent. had been charged.; then the act of
Parliament authorised a charge for houses at from £2O
• to- £4o' a-yean• of four and a-half "per Cent. ; but the
principleuponwhichthe now tariff waste mpiled was this—
that whateverwas. the rental upon a. house five per cent.
would be .eharged, upon the first MO.; 'up to £4o' the
second £2O of rent would be charged with. 41. per cent.,
andthen for the other £4O rent, up. to. £B5 rental, four
per cent. wourd:be. charged. And inthataway they' pro-:
seeded, so that every one, whether occupying s house at
£2O, £4O, 01%165 a year, would pay in the same ratio of
charge as the other. He hoped the new tariff would,
'be satisfactory to members ef: the oouncil. Their in-
eome 'in 1858'. was -£23,000 below- their-expenditure ;
and when the books for :the. past year shall have been
made up, he anticipated that there would be as still
larger deficiency in the revenue ; and the question would
then arise, whether they were dealing even-handed
justice in making the same charge without the borough.
that they did within the borough. Why should there
be any difference whatever? The property -within the
borough was mortgaged to secure the bond-holders. In
ease of a deficiency of revenue, the property within the
borough might be rated to pay the bond-holders, but
the property beyond the borough was not. soliable.. ~We
were 'liable 'in the borough now for-113,000 a year, to
be raised by. rates to pay the bond-holder his interest.
Within the borough, at the present, we contributed
£2,000 a-year towards the liquidation of the charges in
the Green-lane• Waterworks, and the. people, beyond the
borough did;not contribute one penny towards that:__ In
the borough, we were taxed ostensibly, for sanitary- pur-
purposes Id: in the pound for water, but in reality that
was a tax. to• make np for the, poverty of the water
estate. The Health Committee4evied that penny rate,
and it raised £6,000 a-year, of. which, as he had said,
£2,000 went for the Green-Lane works. • Gentlemen
without the borough should, therefore, cheerfully con-.
sent tee an extra charge of 15; per cent.—perhaps it
might be-only 121 per _ cent. upon -the tariff, they, new
paid, and if they did that then they would not:paaa
more, if so much, as was paid: by householders in the
borough. '
Mr. GLADSTONE said, it did seem to him that the
principle upon which this bill proceeded was in some
respects unsound. As' regarded the charge for water-
closets in dWelling-hOuses, he looked upon it as. an
improper tax, and as one which would operate as a. sort
of premium on filth.
The Tows-ceenx--There is now no charge for baths
and wash-houses (hear, hear).
Mr.GLA.DSTONE---Is the charge* to ,he a per-tentage
upon the rental ?
The TOwii-CLERK-77res,
Mr. GLADSTONE-7W' I understand there is a gradu-
ated scale adopted ?,
The Towar-CLERK—Yes.
Mr. 'GLADSTONE said he did not like that. Ile I
thought that if a rich man chose to,live in a large house
he should pay for it. If the principle was 5 per cent.
for £2O of rent and under, it should be 6 per cent. if
the rental was £5OO. -It was no wonder that the funds
were defiCient, if such a principle at thisavas-a:dmitted
(hear, hear).
Mr. MOZLEY said it appeared to him that it would
have been a more 'bold and' StraightforiVard course on
the part of the Water Committee, if _they had come to
the Council and told them that the object they had in
view was that of raising the water rents. (Hear, hear.)
He -objected to the -proposed tariff because the pei-
centage charged went on diminishing as the rent went
up. That deemed to be a very unfair course of proceed-
ing. If parties occupied houses of large rental,.it would
necessarily implythat they, required more water ; and if
so, upon what-rounds could they ask this Council to
sanction a loiver payment than they demanded from the
poor tenants. (Hear, hear.) If five per cent was con-
sidered a fair 'charge to take upon the rentals, then they
were bound in equity and justice to distribute that
per-centage over the entire area of the rents. (Hear,
hear.) He did most distinctly object to the committee,
by' any side-wind or sophistry whatever, attempting to
show the town that they were placing :then in a better
position, when they were in-fact-seeking to-get a larger
revenue from the people.
Mr. STITT said he could only characterise the new
scohedaduayle ouriaso*gathn
rionocorne acisleedt
hseched
Council
edule. M .
to
what
tw Jeffery,
as i n
appa-
rently an increase in 'some cases of a fourth and in other
cases of a third, had introduced the' baths and water-
closets, for which the Council were at one time em-
powered to charge. That part of the act, however,
had been repealed, and the town was, therefore, now
called upon to pay that which they had resisted success-
fully in regard to 'water-closets and baths. Of course,
all should pay a fair share of the burdens connected with
the water supply, but he did not think that they could
.arrive at that fair share upon the principle of the rental.
They ought to pay upon the amount of water they con-
sumed. -(Heer, hear.) He contended' there were
houses in Liverpool rated below no 'which consumed
a great deal more water than houses-rated at £2OO. He
(believed the committee would derive a large .revenue
from the recent alteration of charging manufacturers by
the meter ; and he thought a considerably larger item
might be derived from the shipping. ' Until the corn-
Mittee bad tried those other experiments, he should cer-
tainly be opposed to a scale which appeared on the face
of it to carry an injustice with it. (Hear, hear.)
Alderman PARKER said they were upwards of £20,000
short ; and as the proposed plan was only to raise an
additional sum of £3,000, how was the other £17,000 to
be got ? It was a piecemeal concern, and he hoped the
whole thing would be remodelled.
Mr. BELOE hoped the schedule would •be referred
back. They had not to deal only with a deficiency of
£3,000, but a sum of £20,000 a year stared them in the
face; and would it not be well, to fix the principle of a
uniform rate without naming what the amount of that
rate should be, but that it might be fixed year by year,
according to the'wants of the Water Committee ?- (Hear,
hear.) He quite agreed that a. uniform rate was an
essential principle of justice to the poorer classes of the
town—(hear, hear) ;—and he would move that it be an
instruction to the 'Water Committee to form the scale of
charges for the supply of water for domestic purposes
upon such a uniform per-centage upon the rentals as