Northern Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1859-03-09 00:00:00

THE NORTHERN TIMES, WEDNESDAY, MARCH 9 13 S 9

On the 28th of September, a direct demand itu
Portugal !or the friendly interference of ,this eotint.
the purpose of effectinc, an amicable settlement
On the 2nd of October, the French Cabinet decided Off'!
' demanding the release of the vessel. That decision might
be regarded as conclusive. Thus .it appeared that Lord
Malmesbury abstained froM interference so long as it could
have been of any use ; but on the 3rd of October he made
an offer of arbitrathin which was declined by the French
Government. It was, therefore, not without reason that
the growth of the dispute could be referred to the negli-
gence and delays of our foreign Secretary, who did nothing till
the time for action , was past. This inaction, which con-
tinued during seven months; was one of the causes assigned
by France herself for the serious turn which the affairs sub-
sequently took. After this, Lord Malmesbury sent .a small
force to the Tagus. Of what use was a small force ?
He should have sent a sufficient force or none at all. Such
as it was, the force did not leave England till the middle of
October. Further efforts were now made by the govern-
of this country to obtain the submission of the matter to
arbitration, which would, he believed,, have been success-
ful if made at any previous time : but the Imperial decision
was made, and it was now too late. Lord Mali-nes-
bury, throughout, had acted neither with France nor
Portugal, but took a course of his own respecting which he
called upon the House to pronounce. Referring to the
despatches of the Foreign office, he censured the Secretary
for sacrificing the honour of England, by suggesting sub-
terfuges under which Portugal might deliver up the vessel.
This he contended was sacrificing the honour of the country.
On the other hand the conduct of Portugal was worthy all
praise, both in respect of this country and her own
dignity.
Mr. Buxton seconded the motion. • He blamed the
government, not' for refusinc, to support Portugal at all
hazards, but because they omitted to urge mediation at the !
earliest possible moment. If the British Government had
done its duty, the difficulties which arose out of the case
might have been avoided. The Emperor of the French
could not have refused mediation if it had been urged at the i
proper time. Lord Malmesbury waited till the decision
was settled, and then broke out into lively complaints
against the French for not submitting to mediation.
Mr. S. Fitzgerald said that there was no more delecate
international questions than that involved in in the seizure
of a vessel belonging to one country, by the government of
another. This particular case involved special difficulties
upon which the British Government had no right to
pronounce—it had done all that was in its power.
It had recommended that the despatch should ibe
referred to the mediation of a third party. It had been
asserted that this ought to have been done earlier ; but at
first the affair did not assume the serious aspect which it
took subsequently. It was not till -the despatch from Mr.
Howard; received on the 24th of September, arrived, that
the government became aware of the magnitude of the
difficulties, and on the next day an answer was returned,
offering the good offices of her Majesty's Government.
this was before any demand for assistance was made by
Portugal. The papers showed that Lord Cowley was in
daily communication with the French Government to bring
about an amicable settlement, and yet it was said that
we were idle in the affair. The subsequent settlement
was mainly due to the exertions of Lord Cowley. 'He !
repeated that it was not till the despatch of Lord
Cowley, received in England on the 4th of October,
that the government became fully aware of the
serious way in which the matter was viewed
in Paris, and nine days later, on the 13th, the whole matter
was.put in order, and an amicable settlement provided for.
He therefore appealed to the house, whether the indictment
had been made out that we had neglected an old ally, and
soiled the honour of the country. As for the papers asked
for, the telegraph messages. could not be produced without
betraying the government cipher, while of the rest, all that
were of importance had been already published.
LMr. Lowe said, that while it was the conduct of Lord
Malmesbury which was arraigned, the Tinder-secretary had
defended Lord Cowley. He entered into the merits of the
seizure, contending that the vessel was legally condemned,
and that we ought to have supported Portugal in her proper
course of conduct. He should have been satisfied if the
government had • recommended to Portugal any decisive
course, but it recommended nothing at all, and did nothing
that was not dishonourable. He contended that Lord
Malmesbury was fully forewarned of the coming difficulty.
Mr. Bovill examined the legal feature of the affair, con-
tending that the vessel was not condemned as a slaver, but
because she had entered interdicted waters. There was,
therefore, great uncertainty in the case enough to justify the
course taken by her Majesty's Government. It should be
remembered that if Portugal was our ally, France was our
ally also.
Lord John Russell contended that the case was precisely
of the kind provided by the protocol of Paris, as one to be
settled by a friendly arbitration. If Lord Malmesbury, in-
stead of giving utterance to abstract phrases, which
meant nothing, had offered arbitration in the
first instance, he would have saved the
difficulty and dishonour which ensued. Instead of this, he
showed himself almost indifferent on the business, sug-
gesting both at Paris and at Lisbon that Portugal must be
in the wrong, and manifesting a strong desire to take the
part of the strong power against the weak. The conduct of
Portugal had been admirable and dignified; he wished he
could say as much of our own. Even supposing France to
have been in the right,Lshe ought not to have made her
demantls•as she had done. If her threats had been en-
forced, it would have rendered necessary the direct inter-
ference of this country. He blamed severely the pusillani-
mous language of the British Minister at Lisbon, which
ought to have been reprobated by Lord Malmesbury,
instead of which it met with his unqualified approval. The
worst feature of the whole case was the disregard shown by
France to the Arbitration Clause of the Protocol of Paris.
t He asserted that if Lord Malmesbury had protested in time
against the violence of France, that country would have
I yielded. As it was, we only showed the small influence we

- made by
`-v, for

had over the councils of our ally.
The Solicitor-General repeated the argument, that the
case was one not belonging to any municipal court, but ap-
pertaining to international law, and belonging to the domain
of diplomacy. He cited cases in which we had ourselves
enforced a similar doctrine. He contended that all fair,
proper, and reasonable means for accommodating matters
between France and Portugal had been used by Lord
Malmesbury, who was not aware at the outset that any serious
interference on the part of this country wonld be required.
He blamed the conduct of Portugal in declining the offer
of mediation made by the French government for fixing the
amount of compensation. He admitted that France
might have shewn more forbearance, but he must censure
the Government of .Portugal for concealing that offer. He
maintained that the British Ministry had done all in its
power for the interests of Portugal.
On the motion of Sir R. Bethel, the debate was adjourned.
POOR RELIEF (IRELAND) ACT.
On the motion of Mr. Gregory, the House went into
committee to consider the Poor Relief (Ireland) Act, relative
to the religion in which deserted children should be regis-
tered and educated.
After a protest from Mr. Vance, a resolution was passed,
and leave was given to introduce a bill to amend the act in
question.
On the motion of Lord Naas, leave was given to intro-
duce a bill for the registration of births, deaths, and
marriages in Ireland.
Mr. Bouverie obtained leave to bring in a Bill to amend
certain defects in the Oaths Act.
The report of the committee of supply was brought up,
and agreed to.
The Mutiny and Marine Mutiny Bill was read a second
time.
The House adjourned at ten minutes to one o'clock,

LONDON & NORTH WESTERN
RAILWAY,
AND OTHER RAILWAY COMPANIES
(WORKING AND TRAFFIC ARRANGEMENTS)

BILL.

THE GREAT NORTHERN ENTRANCE INTO

LIVERPOOL.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, TUESDAY.
The committee sat at eleven o'clock, Mr. Ridley in the
chair.
Mr. Serjeant Wrangham and Mr. Venison, Q.C.,
appeared as counsel on behalf of the promoters of the bill.
Petitions against the bill were presented from the Mid-
land, the Lancashire and Yorkshire, and the North Stafford-
shire Railway Companies.
Mr. Alexander, Q.C., Mr. Power, Q.C., Mr. Webster, and
Mr. Holloway, appeared in support of the petition.
This was a bill promoted by the Great Northern, the
Manchester and Sheffield, and the London and North
Western railway companies, under which they sought for
powers to enable them to enter into an agreement
between themselves for making arrangements to
secure a mutual interchange of traffic in goods
and passengers from one system to another over
the whole length of the respective systems of the companies.
Under the agreement, the Great Northern Railway Com-
pany is to have access to the four stations belonging to the
London and North Western Railway Company at Liver-
pool, the Manchester and Sheffield Company having access
to the London-road station of the London and North
Western Company, at Manchester, through. the Great
Northern system. By this arrangement, if sanctioned, it
was contended, on behalf of the promoters of the bill, an out-
lay of nearly a million of money would be saved, which
expenditure, under different circumstances, the Great North-
ern and the Manchester and Sheffield Railway Companies

• •
s, but I think that the wells- should be placed further

. j The Chairman : You have not explained to us why you
differ from Mr. Rawlinson's theory.
Mr. Bateman explained that Mr. Rawlinson had been
tocalL;ng of the coal strata, whilst he (Mr. Bateman) referred
ti‘e saiiprlstone strata. tot
yin
Rawlinson, re-called, said he did not thank Mr.
Bateman
for his reference to his (Mr. Rawlinson's) opinion
on the coal s. rata. He never referred at all to the coal measure.
"If," said Mr. Rawlinson, "you sink a well in the new red
sandstone, the voli:vile of water takes the form of an inverted
core, and the water
it
p,2 is Llrawn' 4ses in at different angles from the
surface from which
but in this particular case
the dip would prevent the iL "
•
w of the water from the .
Bir-
kenhead Commissioners' wells.
Professor Binney, of Mancheste* was next called, and
stated that in the red sandstone fonna.tion, the construction
of one well in the neighbourhood of another, affected the
latter.
Mr. Hawksley, C.E., was next called, and after stating the
results of his experience at the Liverpooi water works, in
connection with the red sandstone formation, gave it as his
opinion that the proposed well was too near the Birkenhead'
wells, and would affect the supply from the latter.,
His examination had not finished when the committee
adjourned.

THE

WIRRAL WATER WORKS
BILL.

[FROM OUR OWN REPORTER.]
HOUSE OF COMMONS, Tuesday.
The Select Committee on this Bill assembled this morn-
ing ; Mr. Ker Seymer in the chair.
Mr. John Cunningham, examined by Mr. Rodwell ; Lam
an engineer and an architect, and a Fellow of the Geological
society. lam well acquainted with the geological condition
of the docks of Liverpool and Birkenhead. I have selected
the site at Benton for the well in connection with the pro-
posed works. In my judgment it is the best. The quantity
of water there is so unlimited, that I cannot define it.
There is twenty times more than can be required by the
population for the next 50 years. I calculate twenty gallons
per head per day. At that rate, we should not require
more than 300,000 gallons per day, but our proposed
works would give 1,000,000 gallons per day. The
place consists of a well and pumping _stations, and
two engines of sixty horse-power each, and an acqueduct
leading from the stations into the reservoir. I propose to
construct a reservoir in Oxton, and another at the highest
point of Tranmere, with a water tower at each place, which
will enable us to supply water to houses on the
highest points in the district. The reservoir and water
towers are to be excluded from the light and atmosphere.
The estimate of the cost of the works is £35,000. Ido not
think that the works will at all interfere with the wells of
the Birkenhead Commissioners. The confirmation of the
district is such that there will be a kind of impehetrable
wall between the works and the existing sources of supply.
Our works will be separated from those of the Birkenhead
Commissioners by a series of faults. Last year Mr. Bate-
Man, engiueer to the Birkenhead Commissioners, proposed
to sink an additional well for their works under circum-
stances similar to what we now propose. If our
proposed works would affect the Birkenhead wells, ' so would
the additional works proposed by Mr. Bateman, because
in that case he would be tapping his own wells.
Cross-examined by Mr. Webster : lam convinced, from
personal, observation, that there is an almost impervious
barrier to the circulation of the water between our wells and
those of the Birkenhead Commissioners. Mr. Bateman's
proposed well was within the district of the commissioners'
works. The Birkenhead Commissioners contested the Bir-
kenhead water company's works last year when the company
was before parliament, and on that occasion Mr. Bateman
projected the proposed well. The result of the parliamen-
tary enquiry was, that the Birkenhead Commissioners pur-
chased the company's works, with the proposed additions,
giving bonds for them. I have had considerable experience
in the pumping of water from the red sandstone.
I recollect Mr. Stephenson stating in reference to the
Liverpool Water Works, that wells within one and two
miles of each other in the new red sandstone effected
each other. Ido not agree with him. If Mr. Stephenson
should say so before this committee I should differ with him.
I believe that in many cases the faults in the red' sand-
stone are impervious. If I had thought proper I could
have placed the wells, which I propose in connection with
the works, a mile further from those of the Birkenhead
Commissioners. The nopulation of Birkenhead had largely
increased of late years; and there were several ship-building
yards and commercial establishments there.
By Mr. Theodore Martin, parliamentary agent : I think
it would be very injudicious to sink a well in Tranmere
for that particular district. The drainage of Tranmere
would render the water impure. ,
Mr. Martin : But would it not be possible to obtain a
proper supply within the limits of the township of
Tranmere ?
Mr. Cunningham : Certainly. At present a well is either
sunk, or proposed to be sunk, for Wallesey. Wallasey is
governed by a local board, and proposes to supply itself in
the same manner as Tranmere proposes to provide its own
supply. The inhabitants of Tranmere are generally poor.
The population is rapidly increasing. The Tranmere people
generally have not supported our bill. I believe there are
1,700 houses in Tranmere, rated at £28,000.
Re-examined by Mr. Rodwell : In my opinion, the re-
spectable portion of the inhabitants of Tranmere are in
favour of our bill. I think it much better to have a com-
prehensive supply in' the different townships like the one
proposed, than a separate supply for Traninere. Under one
management, the expense would be much less.
By the Chairman : The rain-fall of the district is from
34 to 36 inches. I propose to carry the well to a depth of
200 feet, but. I don't think I shall have to go more than 150
feet.
Mr. Hall, geological surveyor to the Board of Ordnance,
examined by Mr. ltodwell : I was employed in making the
ordnance map for this district, and made myself acquainted
with the geological condition of the locality. I generally
agree with the conclusions at which' Mr. Cunningham has
arrived with reference to the sites he has selected being good
ones for the supply of water. From a calculation I have made
from the observatory at Liverpool, the rain-fall during the last
12 years has averaged 4,000,000 gallons per square mile per
year ; and according to the data laid down by Mr. Prescott,
in his treatise upon the subject, one-third of that quantity
would be allowed to percolate into the strata, while the
other two thirds would be carried off by evaporation and
drainage. Ido not think that the proposed supply will in-
terfere with the supply of the Birkenhead Commissioners.
Mr. Duncan, engineer to the Liverpool Corporation
Water Works, examined by Mr. Rodwell : I have been
engaged in the construction of water works for the last
fifteen years. I have heard the evidence of Mr. Cunning-
ham, and I generally agree with him. It would be difficult
to say positively that the sinking of the proposed well
would not interfere with the Birkenhead Commissioners'
wells, but my own impression is that it would not; bi.t
even should that be, I am of opinion that the strata of
the district would provide far more than sufficient for both
Birkenhead and the districts included in the proposed
works.

---
Mr. Robert Rawlinson, C.E., examined by Mr. Rodwell
- - - - -

I have had considerable experience in the construction of
water works, and am now engaged in constructing works
for Wallasey for the Wallasey Commissioners. I have no
doubt Mr. Cunningham will obtain far more water than he
requires in the district where he proposes to sink the well.
I do not think that the Birkenhead wells will be affected by
the proposed wells. My reason for this opinion is that the
dips go towards the Birkenhead wells, instead of from it,
and therefore I think that as regards the well proposed by
Mr. Bateman for the Birkenhead Commissioners, the boot
is on the other leg. I think Mr. Bateman's well would be
more likely to rob Mr. Cunningham's.
Cross-examined by Mr. Calvert : The Wallasey people
were obliged to introduce water works.of their own, because
no one would give them works.
By Mr. Webster : I do not agree in the conclusions of
Mr. Stephenson, as to the proposed well abstracting water
from the wells of the Birkenhead Commissioners, beeauie
those conclusions do not agree in themselves, but in fact,
from the nature of the strata, I do not think it possible for
the one well to affect the other.
This was the case on the part of the promoters of the
bill.
Mr. Webster then addressed the committee, in opposition
to the bill, on behalf of the Birkenhead Commissioners,
who considered that their works would be affected by the
sinking of the proposed well. The learned counsel entered
into a lengthened explanation of the circumstances under
which the Birkenhead Commissioners became possessed of
the Birkenhead works last year, paying for them in bonds, and
guaranteeing to the inhabitants an ample supply of water,
the surplus income to go in reduction of rates. After
adverting to the increasing population of Birkenhead, he
contendthat the Birkenhead Commissioners should have the
means placed at their disposal for providingwater for a far
greater population than their works at present supplied, and
urged that the proposed well would undoubtedly interfere with
the Birkenhead supply. Notwithstanding what had been
stated by Mr. Rawlinson, and the other gentlemen who had
been called, he would call Mr. Hawksley and Mr. Bateman,
and those gentlemen would tell the committee that, from the
experience they had had of the new red sandstone strata
in Liverpool, which was exactly the same as
that on the Cheshire side, it was permeative, and that one
well will materially affect another, unless the wells were at
least two miles distant from each other. Mr. Cunningham,
according to his own statement, might have gone at least a
mile further from the Birkenhead well, and not having done
so, he ran the risk of drawing frem the Birkenhead supply.
• Mr. Bateman, C.E,, was then called, and examined by

------
- 1 .
Mr. Webster. His testimony was entirely confined to the
effect the proposed well wouldhave on the Birkenhead sup-
ply: He was connected with the enquiry at Liverpool
which Mr. Stephenson made as to the supply of
water from the wells there, and on that occa-
sion it was distinctly proved that one well affected
the supply . of another, especially the • Green-
lane well, which was shown to effect other wells even at
three miles' distance. He believes that the proposed well
would affect the Birkenhead wells. He did not see why
Mr. Cunningham could not have gone further with the pro-
posed well.
Cross-examined by Mr. Rodwell : I altogether disagree
in the theory of Mr. Rawlinson and Mr. Hall. I think
them wrong. I don't deny that there is amply sufficient
' water in the area for both Birkenhead and the districts
which it is proposed to supply, but in the red sandstone
formation one well does affect another, as they are per-
meable, and I therefore think the proposed well is too near
the Birkenhead well. There is a bare possibility of Mr.
Cunningham's well not affecting ours, but I think it Toy
improbable. I quite agree with Mr. Duncan, that there is
sufficient water in the peninsula of Wirrall for both sup-
shouldincur to construct indepen dent stations for their own use.
It was provided with a view to guard against the possibility
of misconduct on the part of the railway companies, that
the agreement before being put in force must receive the
sanction of the Board of Trade. There was a clause in the
agreement which gave power to the Board of Trade to
determine the conditions of the ag,reement, and also pro-
vided for a revision of the terms of agreement at the
expiration of every ten years. At the end of this period it
would be at the option of the Board of Trade tosanction a
renewal of the agreement. It was contended. by Mr.
Sergeant Wranghani, in opening the case of the promoters
of the bill, that the proposed arrangements were solely pro-
moted with a view to the benefit of the public upon the
most economical terms, and also to save these companies
from the ruinous consequences of engaging in competition,
which, without conferring a benefit upon the public; was
destructive to the companies themselves.
Evidence having been given in support of the bill, the 1
committee adjourned until to-morrow.