Northern Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1859-07-12 00:00:00

TOWN COUNCIL.
An adjourned meeting of the Town Council was held, at
eleven o'clock, yesterday , his Worship, the Mayor, Wm.
Preston, Esq., PresideA• ,
ST. GEORGE S HALL COMMITTEE.
The proceedings of this committee did not contain any-
thing of importance.
Mr. Earle moved their confirmatiori, which was agreed to.

MR. JOHN' STEWART'S EXPLANATION

Mr. John Stewart rose, at this stage of the proceedings,
and said : Mr. Mayer, you allow me to interrupt
the proceedings upon a matter personal to 'myself.
(Hear, hear.) I hope I shall not trespass many
minutes upon your time, but I cannot allow certain
observations which were made in my absence to pass
without taking some notice of them. (Hear, hear.)
I think it due not only to myself, but to the public, that I
should do so. (Hear, hear.) I shall say very little, upon
the first portion of the remarks -to which I refer,
and which amount to a charge of want of eour-

tesy, or

upercilious conduct, upon my part, as chair-
man. of the finance committee, to a deputation which
attended that committee upon Friday week. I shall con-
tent
,myself, so far as that subject is concerned, 'with' saying
that, if there was anything of discourtesy or incivility, or
anything like a supercilious bearing on my part, I can only
say, most sincerely, that I was unconscious of it, and did
not intend' anything of the sort. (Cries of hear, hear.)
Fortunately for me there was a large committee present—
think very nearly a full attendance---,and it necessarily
follows, and I am very glad indeed to know it, that there

atlernen there, I hope, as competent as, those who
_arged me with supercilious conduct to form a judg-
ment as to my bearing, and I cm only say that I have not
heard one word of condemnation either at that time or since,
(Hear, hear.) For myself, I again repeat, that if I was

were get
have chE

guilty of anythinF„, of the sort it was quite unintentionable
upon my part. (Hear, hear.). ,It is painful to have to allude
to' this, but,, even if it were true, was there any occasion that
the public papers should- allude to my late father, who has
been in his grave 19 years ? Was it right, after he had.
lived in Liverpool nearly s►xty years, and was buried in 1842,
to up his ashes and cast them in my teeth I shall now
pass on to the observations which were made by Mr. Jeffery,
about the position in which I stand as arbitrator for the
Mersey Docks and Harbour Board, with re and to the taking
of some land upon the north side of Wallasey Pool. lam
tor. I
.am not their paid advocate. Neither
3oard, nor the Corporation, nor any individuals

the lie
can ni

- • -
me their advocate, and no payment of -money
which they could offer me could induce me t
any man's property except at .a full and a fair

\I-fear, hear.) It is Painful to. have,to refer to"niatters which
are purely persOnal to myself, but if the h.ooks of the corpo
ration are searched; you . will find that when I was a
young man, pursuing my profession, when theemolu-
ments .of it were important to 'me, pursuing a success-
ful husiness —aye, years befoie l'had any connection
with the Foster family, which has been alluded ,to,
for that connection • began in 1824, when I ,had
been nine and a-half years in business on my own account,
and was doing a large and successful business long previous
to that connection,—you' will find that the corporation
books record a iesolutiOn that Mr. John Stewart, then a

Man, be - appointed arbitrator to'act for the
corporation in every case, which came under their cognis-
ance and which they. had to deal.with. At that ittme a
most active and useful member, Mr. Jonathan Hollinshea.d,
whotn Mr. Ehrle -and' some of the older members 'will

very Youn

robably recollect, was chairman of the improvement
immittee. Years rolled- .on, and although I was
ipposed to be identified with the party which had opposed

the municipal reform tY

a corresponding resolution after a lapse.,of "somethinec' .
twenty odd years. From about the year 1829 orlB2l,
something like forty years after the first resolution of which
I spoke, I 'acted for the corporation of Liverpool, and I
can appeal to the records of that corporation, to show
whether, in the majority of cases, the individual whose
interests were affected were not contented to leave the
settlement of the questions in my hands. (Hear, hear.)
With regard to the dock
.board, my engagement wi h that
board began, think, somewhat dallier even than with the
corporation, and I-have continued to act for tinm, and I
believe it is admitted by every one that in carrying out one
of the largest purchases of late years, some seven or eight
years ago,i mean the Wapping extension, wherein I acted.
throughout with the most implicit confidence of all the doCk
committee, *here the dealings were with persons of all ranks
in life, small owners andlarge owners, public bodies, companies,
and private individuals, at least 80 per. cent of the whole
of those. enormous' purchases were made with parties not
appointing any person at all, but leaving themselves entirely.
in my hands. Certainly, all the great purchases, all the
large amounts, were entirely and exclussvely left to
myself. (Hear, hear.) Well, now, with regard to
the immediate subject, I do not know whether, it is
meant to impute mercenary motives to me in
taking the appointment of arbitrator under -the dock-
board. If that be so, I can only ''answer
it by saying., that I have relinquished one Of the.
best professional businesses out of London. I hale relin-
quished it, and suffered it to go away to comparatively
pothing, to next to nothing, by reason of the corporation
calling upon me for my services, which have been 'accorded
gratuituously to them for a series of years. (Hear, hear.)
During the year 1855, I would ask the town-clerk, whether,
through the greater part of diet year, I was not most
actively and busily engaged, entirely for the corporation.
Daring the year 1856, when the question of the great
town dues was under discussion, and the honour
.and
integrity of this corporation were assailed by an
opponent, as to our dealings between the docks and
the corporation, who was there to defend !our deal-
ings—who was there to give a history of the whole
traninctionS--Whe was there to vindicate the honour Of the
corporation but myself? :(11eir hear.) During'lBss -add
1856, the whole of my time, or at least a very great portion
of it, was devoted gratuitously to the serving of this corpora-
tion.: - Now, sir, I come to speak of the effect which it has
been said my acting as arbitrator for the dock board in re-
ference to the land -of Messrs. Pollard and others, will
have upon the corporatiOn estate. .Hitherto I have the
proudsatisfaction of saying 'that the council, up to 'a, year
or two ago, was but too hagy to refer the question between
the dock, board and the corporation entirely to myself in
many eases—in most cases indeed In the present instance
the dock board, for-whona. I have acted so long, have got an
act of parliament to enable them to ninke a quay and a
public street upon the north side of :Wallasey Pool, to
obviate the difficulties which every gentleman who was
On the Birkenhead' committee knows did exist, and
which 'we in. vain endeavoured to get over.
We never could get the pool deepened on ,the north side, and
the quay walls, which are very expensive, put in. The
dock board undertake to complete the quays, they under-
take to make a dock quay on the north side of, the pool,
they undertake to make a street twenty-five yards wide;
to pave and sewer it, and to give the use and enjoyment
of it- to the owners of the land 'abutting upon it on the
landward side. And, althoiigli it would, not become
me to enter into details of the reference, I thi
gentlemen will hear, with as much' astonishment
as I did, that 'the several landowners claim from the dock
board upwards of £900,000 for that purpose, the dock board
building the wall. In the particalar case which was the
first subject of reference, the claim was upwards of £200,000.
Is the prosperity of Liverpool,—is the good of the town to
be promoted by the commercial comrnumity submitting with-
out a struggle to pay what they conceive, rightly or wrongly,
to be an exorbitant sum. Mr. Jeffery talks of being a paid
advocate. lam not a paid advocate. (Hear; hear.) Every
One conversant with the dock affairs, and everyone conversant
with the taking of land by public companics under,com-
pulsory powers, knows that that which you want is protec-
tion against exaction 'on the part of owners, not against
any attempt upon the part of any public body, corporation,
or otherwise, to take anybody's land without paying the
full and true value for it. (Hear, hear.) I should be
ashamed of 'myself if I were to attempt to aid such
a thing. But lam not a paid advocate: The arbitra-
tion takes place under a public act of parliament,
and that act of Parliament prescribes the mode "of dealing
with it. There was not necessarily any difference of opinion
between any co-arbitrator and myself, because an umpire
had been called in, but the act of parliament says, before
you stir a step you must appoint the umpire. The act calls
upon the arbitrators to make a solemn declaration before a
magistrate, that they will honestly and faithfully discharge
the trust reposed in, them; and the advocacy is confided to
.
two barristers on the part of the dock-board, and three bar-
risters on the part of the claimants. I had the unpleasant
duty of listening for some days to the roundabout- way in
which we are to arrive at the value of the land, according to
toe lawyers, which involves something like 1,100 or 1,200
folios of evidence. With regard to the corporation, it is
perfectly true that the corporation own certain land on the
north side of the pool, and the portion of land belonging to.'
the corporation is included in the compulsory powers.
The portion thus included is about six. and a-half
acres. Now, analogy may be taken to some extent,
as Mr. Jeffery puts it, but every case must stand
upon its own merits. What is the fact with regard to the
corporation ? A considerable portion of their land was
leased in 1834. In N4vember, 1834, it was' that the
corporation granted tht,:t lease, for a considerable portion of
this land—for how .on ? For 99 years, 74 of which will
be unexpired in November.next. The whole interest of the
corporatio4 in that portion of the land is £IOQ a leo, tl4O