Northern Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1857-07-02 00:00:00

AMERICA.

IMPE RIAL PARLIAMENT.

13y British and Irish Magnetic Telegraph.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, WEDNESDAY.
The PPEARER took the chair at twelve o'clock.
The Kinrosshire Railway Bill was read a third time,
and passed.

THE MEDICAL BILLS.
Mr. HEADLAM moved the second reading of the Medical
Profession No. 1 Bill.

Mr. CRAWFORD moved that the bill be read a second
time that day three months. His objection to the mea-
sure was upon the belief that it created elements of dis-
cord which did not at present exist, and he gave the pre-
ference to the bill of his noble friend, Lord Elcho, because
it carefully regarded vested interests. He had allowed
his name to be placed upon that measure because, without
being open to the objections of Mr. Headlam's bill, it would
carry out the required objects of reducing the fees of
students, and facilitate the obtaining of licenses to prac-
tice in any part of the United Kingdom.
Lord BURY proposed the amendment, the object of which
was to throw out the bill of the member for Newcastle, and
to substantiate that of the noble lord.

must withdraw the bill, leaving the responsibility of the
withdrawal in the , quarter in which such responsibility
arises.
Sir J. GRAHAM : I imagine that that decision applies
also to the next bill the Birkenhead Docks' Management
Bill. _ _ _

L.
Mr. MmixwErrizit : Certainly. We withdraw both the
Construction and Management Bills.
Sir J. GRAHAM then directed the committee-room to be
cleared, and on the re-admission of the public, at the
expiration of an hour,
Sir J. GRAHAM asked if the next bill—the Liverpool and
Birkenhead Docks' Bill would be proceeded with ?
Mr. JOHNSON said it would. He was perfectly pt.( pared
to go on with it.
Mr. MitaxwirritEa : The Corporation take no part in
that bill. They have neither petitioned .for nor against it.
Sir J. Gitankai : Do you take any part in the next
bill—the Liverpool Town and Dock Bill ?
Mr. 11.1enawErusa : Yes, we oppose it.
The Birkenhead Docks' Construction Bill, and the
Birkenhead Docks' Management Bill were then ordered
by the Chairman to be withdrawn from the consideration
of the committee

LIVERPOOL & BIRKENHEAD
DOCKS' BILL.
The Committee thenproceeded to consider this bill. Mr.
Johnson appeared for the promoters, and Mr. Alexander,
Q.C., opposed on behalf of the Liverpool Dock Trustees.
Mr. JOHNSON, in opening the case of the promoters,
stated that the object of the bill was to exempt vessels
resorting to the docks in the County Palatine of Chester
from the payment of certain dues. The preamble recited
the several acts which had been passed—and they were
very numerous—which had reference to the trustees of
the Liverpool docks. The evidence already before the
Committee, in the inquiry just concluded, would con-
siderably curtail the evidence which he should otherwise
have had to offer. The evidence of Mr. Aspinall Turner
would be that to which he should more particularly refer,
as it applied more particularly to the case of the
Braziliers, which he was especially anxious to lay
before the Committee. In that case, the Committee
would be already aware that the B”aziliera took in her
cargo at Birkenhead and cleared out into the river, where
she subsequently took on board a few parcels which had
arrived late. The Dock Trustees thereupon levied a sum
£45 53 3d. which had the effect of subjecting the vessel
to the full rates, which would have been charged if she
ha] used the Liverpool docks instead of those at Birken-
head. Several other cases would also be heard before the
committee—among others those of the Sarah Sands, and
of the Sir Harry Smith. The great grievance complained
of was the prohibition which was placed upon vessels
which would otherwise use the Birkenhead Dock, vie.,
the incubus of having to pay the full Liverpool Dock
rates if she happened to take a package on board within
the stream of the Mersey. The question which would
naturally ccsur to the committee in the first instance was,
whether such a power really existed, and whether the
legislature had ever sanctioned its exercise by
the trustees of the Liverpool Docks. He con-
tended that in reality the legislature gave no such
power, aid that the right claimed by the trustees rested on
no satisfactory bssis. But, considering that it had been
exercised for so long a period, he should have considerable
difficulty in recommending any t f the vessels frequenting
the port to contest it in a court of law, and he therefore
believed that the promoters, in introducing the present
bill, had taken the best course to resist the charge. Ac-
cording to the view of the trustees, if any vessel, after
leaving the Birkenhead decks. took on board a single
parcel, she rendered herself liable to the payment of the
full dues levied by the trustees upon vessels loading in the
Liverpool docks, The promoters now asked the committee
to relieve them from this serious imposition, which was
most unjust and unfair, and placed the docks at Birkenhead
at a (serious disadvantage. He did not appear as the rep,esen-
t-tive of persons interested in the docks transferred by the
act of 1855, but on behalf of Mr. Laird, and gentlemen
who had decks of their own at Birkenhead, and who found
that by the exercise of the right claimed by the Dock
Trustees operated as a serious drawback upon the trade of
Birkenhead. Various efforts had been made to carry out
the ele]ecta now sought for in the present bill since 1844,
but by some unfortunate circumstances, they had never
been brought to a satisfactory issue. The learned counsel
contended that the time had arrived for the interference
of parliament to prevent the Liverpoool dsck interest from
destroying that on the opposite side of the Mersey, and
quoted a report of the Board of Trade in support of the
views of the promoters of the bill. The Board expressed
in their report a strong opinion that the power now exer-
cised by the Liverpool Dock Trustees, in reference to the
loading of vessels from the Birkenhead Docks, should be
eb lished. All that the promoters asked was, that
vessels which used the Birkerhead &aka should not be
liable to the Liverpool Dock Rates, when they simply
need the stream of the Mersey, and aid not avail themselves
of the accommodation which the Liverpool docks afforded.
They had no desire to oatain any undue advantage over
other vessels frequenting the port ; but, on the contrary,
they were perfectly ready to contribute to the buoyage,
lights, landmarks, telegraphs, and other harbour improve-
ments which conferred the slightest degree of benefit upon
HOUSE OF COMMONS, WEDNESDAY, JULY 1. the shipping. The general feeling in Liverpool and Birk-
enhead upon the question was, that Parleiment ought to
The Select Committee re-assembled this morning, at step in and remove an unjust burden. The Corporation of
twelve o'clock, Sir JAMits GRAHAM in the chair. Liverpool were not unfavourable to the bill, and he
Sir JA3IEB GRAHAM said the committee were prepared to believed that the Deck Trustees were not unanimous in
hear at once the decision of the Liverpool Corporation. opposing it.
Mr. MEREWETHER :In our most earnest desire to pro- Mr. Joine LAIRD was then examined. He said he was
ceed with the Birkenhead Docks Construction Bill, we have the principal p °motor of the bat though the benefit
employed the time which the committee were kind enough which would accrue from it would be partici-
to give us, in full consideration of the position in which pated in by other individuals in Birkenhead. Was
affairs are now placed, and that consideration has been an extensive shipbuilder at Birkenhead, and had also
applied to the solution of two difficulties. In the first a twenty-five years' lease of the Graving-docks from
Place, I understood the committee to express their deter- the Liverpool Corporation. At the present moment
mination not to depart in the slightest degree from the be was in pessession of four docks which were capable of
Principle of the decision arrived at the other day; and, in affording accommodation to. vessels of very large tonnage
the second place, the gentlemen whom I represent are In point of fact he bad a greater depth of water in his
equally firm in the resolve not to do anything which docks than in sny graving-dock in Liverpool. The docks
might be tortured by their opponents into the most remote were opened in August last and soon afterwards a vessel
acquiescence in the principle of that decision. We have from New York, the Edinburgh, a vessel of 2000 tons
endeavoured to consider every alternative by which these burden, was docked there. 'The total charge for docking
difficulties might be solved. We thought it might be the vessel was £4O, and if the Dock Committee had levied
possible, and not inconsistent with your decision, their rates as well, an additional charge amounting to £4O
to refer to the legislation of 1835, in which a or £5O would have been imposed. The owners of the
power was given to she Corporation to give certain vessel wsre prepared to back witness in resisting the
thinge with a fixed contemplation of their having charge if the Deck Trustees had attemp-ed to levy it. The
to transfer them ultimately to others. We have also con- Dock Committee, however, made no charge, and witnesses
sidered that out of the bill should be etruik the naming of thin wrote to des mon the 2nd of October last, inquiring
any operating hand, so that the bill might present itself whether the Edinburgh was to be considered an exceptional
neither in conflict with the views of the committee, nor as case, and intimating his readiness to psy for lights, buoys,
a waver of our own. But we find, from those who are or any other charge from which the shipping derived
competent to advise us upon the subject, that by the forms advantage, but to contest the right of the trustees to charge
of the other house of parliament, a bill so framed could not dock dues for vessels which did not use the Liverpool docks.
pass through the standing orders, because, when the bill He received a letter in reply from Mr. North, the solicitor
arrived at the House of Lords, the promoters would have to the trustees, wile said that all ships loading or discharg-
to make a decla-ation of the source from whence the fuel's ing in the stream of the Mersey was liable to the payment
are to be supplied, and by whom they are to be supplied of dock rates, and he could not recommend the trustees to
The consequence would be, that a bill framed as we intended forego their right to levy them. The object of the present
to suggest could not pass the House of Lords, or, if it did. bill was to declare, in definite terms, that the trustees had
would return to the Rouse of Commons with provisions at no right to levy a tax which hal the effect of discouraging
variance with the bill as it parsed this committee. 'There shipping from entering the docks at Birkenhead. In the
was, however,_ a further alternative—that the bill might case of the Edinburgh, the charge for docking at Birken-
Among other facts to show the failure of the be a clause head amounted to £4O, but if the vessel had had a cargo of
pass as framed at present, but that there should
attempt, supported as it was by the connivance of inserted at the end binding the transfers of the works at iron or any other article, and Ithtened a portion in the
the Government at Washington, to crush out the some given date, to the parties who should represent the stream, she would have rendered herself liable to the full
Free-State overning body; but when we came to refer to the bill, we Liverpool dock rates, which sum would have amounted w
spirit 0 f Kansas, we must mention the fund that by the money clauses which it contained, it was more than the entire charge for docking at Birkenhead. A.
following :—The Lawrence Herald of Freedom, imperative upon the Corporation to raise the money, and few weeks ago, the Khersonese from North America, ar-
Which was destroyed a year ago as a nuisance, and that, too, upon the security of the borough fund. Of course rived in the Mersey on a Friday evening, and was docked
Whose editor was imprisoned four months for tree- the committee will understand that, on making this disco- in witness's docks on the following morning. She there
Son, for daring to publish a free and independent very, an insurmountable difficulty was created to the pro- discharged her cargo, and was hauled into the stream
newspaper, now boasts of a circulation of 8,000 secution of the bill in that shape, because elihough the within a week. She took her coals on board In the stream
Copies. It comes to us printed on a steam power- proposition might be that there should be an execution by and was, in consequence, compelled to pay the full dock
press—the only one, we would venture to say, the Corporation of the works, and the payment during that rates of" he Liver') )01 Dock Trustees, notwithstanding thet
west of the Missisippi, save at St. Louis, which is execution by them, they being bound to transfer at the she had never ente,ecl the Liverpool docks. But for the
also a Free Labour City. A complete' job and first cost on payment of interest, you will readily see that accommodation afforded by the Birkenhead docks, the
office and bindery are attached, the whole book another insurmountable obstacle was created. We believe vessel would have been in docks at Liverpool for
recently renewed at a
establishment having been that, as far as in us lies, we have contemplated four or five weeks unable to get away. It
cost of 8,000 dols. the various modes by which, under present circum- the Brazilliera were to be charged the full Liverpool
A contract has just been entered into for the stances, the bill might be proceeded with; dues every time she used the Birkenhead docks, she would
but in the interval which the committee were be compelled to pay from £5OO to £6OO a year for
acro completionst on the Ist of November next of a bridge kind enough to give us we have also had an oppirtunity of accommodation which she never received. In the case of
of 70,000 dols.
Kansas River at Tecumseh, for the sum entirely considering the' full effect of what fell from the the Sarah Sands, that vessel arrived in the Mersey from
be erected, dols. Two piers and three arches are to right hon. chairman of the Committee, which, though Portland on the 25th March, 1854, and after discharging
i gh tv atte d
wither mark.
, the latter to be 40 feet above ordinary expressed in terms perfectly clear, was cot quite so clear her cargo into four fiats in tit river, went into the Birken-
alongThis town, it will be recollected, to us at the moment. [The learned counsel here read an head docke, -where she unleaded ihe verneander of the cargo,
has recentlya u
almost all the other towns in Kansas,
extract from the shorthand writer's notes of the proceed- and reloaded her outward cargo. She sailed for Portland
and capital. ecumbed to Free-State influence jogs yesterday, containing the statement of Sir J. Graham, on the 30th March, and stuck fast in the Woodside basin
that the Committee would upon no account alter the deci- coming out. She was charged, and paid for dock dues as
Messrs. Totten and G
fine kiln of 168,000 brickreen are
.just burning a v
sion to which they had arrived in reference to the Conser- follows :—Livereool dock dues on 931 tons, at is 4ael per
the Free-State Hotel, to 81; already contracted for ancy Bill, by agreeing to provisions in an ,thee bill which ton, £6l Os ii, although. she never entered a Liverpool
contravened that decision.] I must admit that at the dock : Birkenhead dock dues on 031 tons, at is per ton,
on the site of the one e erected at Lawrence, time I did not feel the full force of the observations £46 IL In 1851 the Sir Harry Smith unloaded a portion
Sheriff" Jones and his burnt last summer by which fell from the right honourable chairman. But of her cargo in the Mersey, and paid £5B Se 6, the full
posse.
The new town Quindaro, which
as the port and harbour for may be regarded .at the present moment the question is one of time, new vessel, built in Liverpool, where she coaled
Missouri, though founded only Lawrence on the and viewing the prospects of the bill passing through and swung compasses, proceeded to the Bit.-
-
month since, some three or four the Committee in time for the. House of Lords, kenhead docks, loaded, and sailed for Portland
s has a free school, a Free St did that practically
ce not only by
paper, and connection with Lawrence not sate news- w© a it would be impossiblefor the bill on the 2nd March, 18.4. She paid for Liverpool
Paper, -
to pass through parliament this session. I have now eau• dock dues on 811 tons at 9d per ton, £3O 10a 6d, and for
a line of light draught boats running up and down
the Kansas, but by road, with good didly avowed to the committee what has passed in our Birkenhead (lock dues on the same cargo, only £2O is.
brLd
substantial minds. We believe,
at the same time, that the plan which He did not think that at the present moment any incon-
the ges across all streams. 'we propose is the best that could be carried into execution, veuience 'arose from loading or- unloading in the former.
e There. are undeniable marks that the Free-State ' both for Liverpool and Birkenhead—and we are honestly If any inconvenience did arise, the Corporation of Liver-
"aPsthit still lives. One does not read of such doing 1 desirous of going on with it ; but we find that the circum- pool would have power under their act of 1855 to regulate
cuese in any Slave State, whether Slave State i
embr . Stances of the case, and the decision of the committee the ',corking of the Mersey. Had not been
pa party to any
yo or Slave State in fact. a , upon the Conservancy Bill, present such insurmountable
difficulties that, however reluctantly upon our parts, we 4 ma Sense which would prevent him from promoting this
gill, but on the contrary he had endeavoured, on more

Col. SYKES concurred in the principle of the two bills,
which he understood to be to provide for a perfect system
of education, and to extend the liberty of practising to the
whole of the United Kingdom. There were some points
which he approved of in each of the bills, but he must op-
pose the measure proposed by Lord Elcho, on account of
the nomination by the Crown provided by it.
Mr. DBASY here appeared at the bar, and stated that in
consequence of the illness of the Duke of Marlborough,
the Marquis of Blandford had been absent from the Cam-
bridge committee, and since that information had reached
him, he had heard from the noble lord that his father was
dead. For this he moved that the noble lord should be
discharged from further attendance upon the committee.
The motion was agreed to.
The debste on the Medical Profession Bill was then
resumed.
Colonel FRENCH wished to know what course Lord Elcho
intended to pursue, that they might know what they were
about.
➢lr. W. EwanT, notwithstanding the allurements of a
representative assistant, gave his support to Lord Etchls
bill, as the more suitabi-.
Mr. HATCHELL supported the bill before the House.
Mr. A. BLACK approved of the details of both measures,
but thought Lord Elcho's bill a better stock than Mr.
Headlame, upon which to graft the best provision of the
other.
Mr. GROGAN preferred no one as a stock bill to No.
3, and after eulogising the medical profession in Ireland,
stated that its approbation was unanimemly given to Mr.
Headlam's measure.
Mr. VANCE opposed Lord Echo's bill, on the ground
that it violated existing rights.
Mr. Thomas DUNCOMBE was opposed to state physic,
and gave his vote against both measures.
Mr. BLAKE supported the measure proposed by Lord
Eleho and Mr. Brisco. _

Mr. BRI6CO supported the bill before the House.
Lord ELCHO defended his bill. He stated that both
measures had the slime object in view, but he claimed
support for his upon the ground, that it did not give a
monopoly to Corporations ; and in support of his proposi-
tion he quoted the opinions expressed by a Corporation in
Dublin,—by the Edinburgh College of Physicians—by the
British Medical Association, and by the medical men of
Jersey.
Mr. NArrna supported the principles of Mr. Headlam's
bill, which met with the approval of his conseuents.
Mr. Cowrim preferred the bill of Lord Elcho's to the
measure before tie House.
Mr. HEADL AM replied, and the House divided,
For the second reading, 225
Against it, 78

Majority, 147.
The Christchurch, West Hartlepool, Bill was read a third
time and passed.

ROCHDALE ELECTION.

Sir J. Y. Btrum reported from the Rochdale Election
Committee that Sir A. Ramsey was duly elected to serve
in parliament for the borough of Rochdale.
The House adjourned at five minutes to six.

THE BIRKENHEAD DOCKS
COL STIWC HON BILL.

(FROM OUR OWN REPORTER.)