Northern Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1857-06-12 00:00:00

THE CASE FOR THE CORPORATION

Mr. BURKE—The case of the Dock Committee is close-1, and the
corporation will now pursue theirs: The evidence will be given first,
and Mr. Hope Scott will address the committee afterwards.
The CHAIRMAN—That is the most inconvanicnt course, and is going
to sea without a chart, and when you have completed the voyage
you give us the chart. •
Mr. SHUTTLEWORT a , Town-clerk of Liverpool, said—l have held office
since Nov. 1844, and had been in the employ of the corporation ,inge
1833. I filled the office or deputy town-clerk some years, and can give
evidence relating to the affairs of the corporation as such, and also as
dock trustees. The witness procmded to give evidence on tee insti-
tution of the Dcck Tru it from the year of Queen Anne.
The CHAIRMAN said all this had been given over and over again, and
it would therefore be better to impuene any of the statements made oa
the part of the promoters of the bill. The committee were perfectly
conversant with the whole of the changes that hal t•tken place in the
constitution of the Dock trust.

Mr. Bu Ritz only wished the contrelttee to be in fall possession of all
the facts relating to these changes.
The CRAIRMAN—The committee are thoroughly acquainted with
them.
Mr. Bugg e—Now, it has been insinuate!, and a charge has in fact
been made, that the transfer of land from the corporation to the dock
trust was open to suspicion. Hive the corporation records been kept,
and are they accessible from the date of Queen Anne?
Toe rows-CLellE—Yes ; I have examined them and they contain
a reference to the different transactions between the Dock Com-
mittee and Corporation as regards the sale of land They also contain
a reference to the land transactions of the corporation, before a cam-
mitte to manage the docks was applied, under the Act of 51 Gee. 111.,
1811. I have made myself acquainted, as regards the transfer of lane.
to the Dock Committee, from the corporation, for dock purposes. In
some cases the corgeration gave laud, aid in others they purchased
land in anticipation of dock requirements, and then they transferred
land to the dock trust at the cost price to themselves. The Act of
Parliament required that they should transfer it without any benefit
to themselves. In each case the sales were made to tie Dock Com-
mittee, with the consent and authority of Parliament, and ever since
the passing of the Municipal Reform Act, no land has been sod or
leased without the authority of the Lords of the Treasury, and a public
notice having been given that such an application would be made, one
month before it was so made. As regards the land on the Cheshire
side of the Mersey, misrepresentations have been made to the
committee. . _ .

Mr. BURKS—It has been insinuated that the reason why the Liver-
pool Corporation purchased land at Wallasey, was in order that they
might prevent tee construction of the docks there.
Tne Tows-C,Eato—That is not so, 1 believe. I find the same
charge was made at that time when the commissioners, to inqli-e
into Municipal Corporations, visited Liverpool. The then Town-
c'erk, however, stated that immediately atter the purchases was
made, the corporation had plans prepared for the conversion of
Wallasey Pool into docks, and notice was given that an appli-
cation ;would be made to Parliament for powers to make such
docks. I find that on the 15th of October, 1828, the minutes
of a special meeting of the committee set forth that the pur-
chase of land should be made from Mr. Price for purposes
connected with the trade of Liverpool. The Corporation, through
their Finance C3mmittee, solicited an interview with the Dock Com-
mittee to learn their opinion upon the mode in which the property.
of the Wallasey Poo! shored be dispeesed o At 'that time there was
no means of confining the waters of the pool, and no suggestion on
that question came from Mr. Reudall ; in fact, the Corporation were
convinced of the feasibility of constructing docks in the pool long
before Mr, Rendal suggested docks there. The Dock Comm'. tee at
that time passed a resolution that the dock accommodation would be
sufficient for some years to come, and therefore they did not concur in
tne proposed application to Parliament by the Corporation for the
construction of docks Et Birkenhead. The members who proposed
and seconded that resolution were gentlemen elected by the dock
ratepayers, not members sent down by the Corporation. It Wes
carried by 9 to 5, and the minority consisted exclusively of members
frem the Town Council. I was examined before Mr. Lewe's com-
mittee, last yew., in reference to the sale of land to Mr. Potter and
Mr. Laird. I repeat now the exp anation that I then gave of those
transactions. The Corporation did not object to the construction of
docks, but only to such docks as were then proposed to
be made ; but if a petition against the bill was presented
it was a matter of pure accident. The Birkenhead Dock Bill was
read a first time in the House of Commons on the 16th of February.
1844. In December, 1841, Mr. Lawrence declared in the Council, and
hi, speech went forth t 3 the public through the new,pap3re' that the
Corporation would oppose any bill int ouuced which affec:ed prej
cially their interests or property at Birkenhead. The bill in question
contained a clause repealing our Town Dues. Mr. .tacksen, Mr.
Laird, Mr. Potter and others purchased limit to a great extent at
Birkenhead, and I believe their bargains were good ones, (or they
bought at 165., and sold at £4 a yard. Toe Corporation were ad-
vised by a profes,ional gsntlemao, that Sir. Beeders original plan for
docks at Birkenhead would be injurious to the navigation of the
Mersey. Clause No. 141, in the Birkenhead Dock Bill, 1844, took
from us our right to levy our Town Dues at Birkenhead, and did not
seek powers to make docks on the shores of the pool, with the excep-
tion of ore small three acre dock, as proposed by Mr. Bendel. The
bill passed the House, the Town Dues repeal clan, te being ex-
p taiga I,
Mr. CALVERT—It never came before the committee.
Mr. BeexarThey were more modest in those days.

The TowN CLERE--The clause was struck out by con-ent in corn

mitten. In 1845, the Birkenhead Dock Company's Bill war first
introduced, to construct docks on the banks of the Wa lasey Pool.
The land was only leased for 75 years to the gentlemen I have spoken
of, and they sought to make us sell our reversion by compresion. we
petitioned against that bill, but the committee ordered us to s the the
matter by arbitration or by a jury. 'S e w,eit to arbitration, and the
result was that £113,000 was awarded to us. We have never received
a halfpenny of that sum. Having obtained their act, the Birkenhead
Dock Trustees could not finish the docks—the Liverpool Dock Trus-
tees were not in a position to take and complete the constructon of
the docks—and, in 1855, the Liverpool Corporation came for Ward and
became the purchasers of the d.'elfe, with a view to carry them into
effect. The Birkenhead Dock Trustees and Birkenhead Dock Company
refused to take the security of the Liverpool Dock trustees, and had
it not been for the Liverpool Corporation, the works would have re-
mained unfinished. There facts came out in an int,rview that we
had with the President and the Vice-President of the itoard of Trait,
on the question. There is not the slighest wish oaths part of the Cor-
poration to retain the docks in th.er hands, when the Fork Committee
are prepared to accept them. Their interest is to g,,t rii of the
docks, for they are at present a heavy charge on the corporate
revenue. We were to give the trustees of the BirkenheadDo ks bonds
to the amount of *391,463, which are elassee, and are halt of the
first•el.iss bonds to the extent of £45.000, will become p' yeele neat
year. We have to give binds to the Birkenhead Dock Commis .ioners
in the aggregate amounting to £751,537.
Mr. PHILLIPS —ls the Liverpoel Borough Feud pledged to pay off
these bonds ?
The TOWN CLERK —Yes. Our revenue to mast this heavy expen-
diture is not sufficient, and we have a till now before the committee
with a view to obtsin powers to borrow money to inset tee bonds.
The recsipts last year from the B &ennead Docks , did not pay the
working expenses, irrespective of interest. It must be some time
before those ("oaks can be brought int , a paying state, is the opinion
of men conversant with such subjects. The Liverpool Dock Trust
depends for its income upon the dues levied on skips frequenting the
port, and if they were charged with a heavy interest on a large and
unproductive property, that charge must come out of the rates autho-
rised to be levie:l on ships using the Liverpool Docks, and if insuildrient,
then the Liverpool Dock rate, would have to be increased to pay for
docks at Birkenhead. Under these eircumetaners, the Liverpool
Coe:oration thought it right, and mueli better fir all parties, teat they
Should find the money in the first instance, rather than to allow the
Dock Estate to do so, and to bear the loss rather. than
to throw it on the commerce of the port, with the intention and the
willingness to transfer hereafter the property to the Liverpool Dock
Trust when such a transfer should be be consider,. d desirable. Last
year we brought in a bill to complete the works, which, although it
had been supported by the great shipping and mercantile interests of
the port, was rejected. Since then the Corp era ion had consulted
eminent engineers, and they were advised that Mr. Renders plans
were not desirable, from the danger that attehded the construction of
such a great low water basin. It is consideredthet each a bas n would
fail, and, falling, would necessitate the re-oonstteetion of the where, of
the dock works. The Corporation are waling to try a low water
basin, and Mr. Hartley provides one on h;s plans, which, if it failed,
would not be attendant with the dangers &astounding these by Mr,
Bendel. Mr. Hartley's plans haze ben approved by the, Dock Com-
mittee, and the grew. trading and mercantile interests, in Liverpool.
We have held out a conciliatory hand, to the rail way comeane s, but
they have all along been unwilling to sacrifice that Ittege property
simply to railway purposes. Mr. itendel proposes in his plan that we
should build a hotel on the aeuth reserve for the G7eitt Western
Railway Company.
To the Chairman—lt is quite true, that the Birkenhead Dna:. e'
mittee of the Council refused to delegate to their servant
to determine the plops, because they were reeneteeie`
ataarge. The works we propose plops,ure en ore %tee.' e o e epootleeri
".‘'ue
gravingar
.ve than Mr. Itendees
but we believe that they are more, beceuee e`,Y 9 in
e rpodroecekaslcainilla t.sed on
ship
pee'.
meet the requirements of the port. ale eo oration havelit ad
lease on the 'Birkenhead side of th:Jllersey for shipbuilding purposes,
and have expended ,ZeQ,OOO constructing
1:m114111g yards, which are 'admired and considered as perfeet as any-
thing of th 4 sort could 'be.
The Town-clerk was next examined on the power of the corpora-
tion to veto acts of the Dock Committee, and gave the details of three
cases In whi*.the bate had been exercised. -he first was a ems in
91'_71 the Deck Committee had sought to take land from the corpora.
Lion without paying' for it ; the second was a case in which a floating
bath was sought to be moored off the George's baths, and in spite of
the veto, the bath' did remain there many .years ; the third had
reference to an attempt to take land for. a dock-yard, which the corpo-
ration had otherwise disposed of. He also mentioned that theta had
been voto,s on the admission of reporters to report the preceeeings of

the Dock Committee, which was subsequently rescinded and denying
the right of the committee-to represent them in a petition against a
bill bihore Parliament; etso upon a vote of the committee giving Hr.
Worthington, the sol:citor to the trust, a retiring p .nrion of .£2OO a
year. Sinle 1851, when the-Dock Com ..itteo was change.' is consti-
tution, the cerporstion have only exercised the veto once, but subse-
quently, withdrew it, .

Mr. 301ILICE ,The Boardof Trade in their report, say " the veto
requ res a majority of two•thirds-of the Town ! °need, tut in the
most important cases of all, vire those which relate t, new bills, the
eOrporation And that this power is not ne essary. The Dock Trustees,
who it will be rene-mbeieo are the eovtrnine bogy of the Town Corpo-
ration, take such matters into their own bonds entirely, and do not
allow the Dock Commiltee to exerciei any influence whatever Is it so'l•
The Tows-Ceuta—The Dock Committee p 53; a resolution, in
which they staie tout it is nei..eissary to epply to Parliament for a
specific purpose. Tnat resolution is probably passed by the council,
who are the Dock Trustee!, and the Dock Co nmitteu then prepare
the r notices through their own solicitor, and the till, when printed,
and prior to its e, ming be:ore a l'arliamentary ( °ea:mitt-ea, is sub-
mitted to the Dock frastecs, when any alterations or amendments in
the bill me mra he; an I ft is teen subraltted to the DIAS COmmittee,
who have the, car. iage of it througn Parliament through their own
SJitc,tor and officers totally independent of the Town Council. Where
a new bit is sought for, it is considered new matter awl a bare
,nsj ority is all that is considered necessary to aocept, reject, or amend
it.

Mr. Brats -z—Then the Board of Trade is wrong in ssyiev. that the
Dick Committee are allowed no influence in passiugatew
The TORN-CLES.R—DIIit is decide ,ly a mistake. Wit+. reference
to the Board of Trade's report that if Livero,,ol had the management
of the to ks she ould have an undue influence at Birkenhead,. the
Town-Cler said it wa, sole y in consequence of the remarks from
tr. Lab racr.rre that the Birkenhead Dock ought to be v sted• in a
public board in Liverpool, and its consequence of the refusal of tbo
,iirkenti-..ad Dock Tr istees to take the security of rite Li oirpon! r,ock
Trustees that the Corporation came fo-turd and toner the Birkenhead
Docks, With a view to complete them. by the bill if 1856, ,he Cor-
poration proposed tiat the paxment of rates by any pe,sou at- the
Birkenhead Docks should entitle him to vote for member., of the
took Committee. There was a similar provision in the Birkenhead
D cis mansgdment Sill.
_

Tue Cita tiimAti—Raaliy this is not re!evazt. It refers to a bill
which. is not bsf•rre us.

air. BURKE—The Tearable of the bll now before the committee
says that no provision is to ale in our manav,einent b 11 for the-.
rra-con:titu'ion of ihe Liverpool Dock Commttee, so as to ena':ile the
ratepayers of the Birkenhead Docks to be represra,eil at the Liv.!r-
pool Lock Committee.

The CH AIRM sN—Thia makestlie matter material ; 1 was not aware
of this before.

Mr. Bosse—And the Board of Trade state the very ,arrte thing.
They ,ay that Birkenhead will not be rep: esentei. at the Liverpool'
Dock o,,nemictee, whore•ts in our bll we make provision tor it. Our
Town Dues, aecordng to the Municipal Reform Act, are carred to the
account o the borong:t fund, and the seettrity for the purc!ios, of the
Birkenhead D:cks is the torongh fund. I should sate that a gentle-
men made a mistake here the other day. We are not pasEelsert of as
estate worth .t'7,000,000.

The committee, at four o'c'4: k, adjourned until to-day

THE
WEAVER NAVIGATION BILL

(FROM OUR OWNT REPORTER

HOUSE OF COMMONS, Tertinea AT.
The committee entrusted with the inquiry into this bill re-assembled
this moraine, at twelve o'clock. The mcmeers of the committee pre-
sent were Lori Naas (chairman), the Marquis of Biandford,
Booker Blakemora, Mr. Wickham. and Mr. Handley.
Mr. Geoccox Jac esoe. manufacturer of sat, at Winsford, stated
that he had made salt last year at a loss. He exported salt by way
of the Eastern Coact, and considered teat the dues premed evert more
heavily upon the merchants who sent salt to the East Ceast, than
upon the,e who conveyed it to Liverpool.
In cross-examin ttion by Mr. Drake; Parliamentary agent, witness
stated that a memorial had been pc as nted to the trestees ;,3- the salt
manufacturers, for a reduction of the dues. Witness accompanied a
deputation to wait neon the trustees. In the course of Vie interview
it was stated that, if the trustees would rednee the charge upon coal,
mehing more wont 1 be said in reeard to the salt (hies; but witness
did net aeree with that proposition. A sum of Is. was charged upon
every ton of salt exported by meg of the Weaver, but when it got
upon the canals it travelled upwards of 120 miles for 2s.
ity Mr. Haley—So long as tee bill was before +Arnie-sent, the.
trustees refused to do anything in the matter, and they dee Led to
give any undertaking to reduce the tolls. If the deputation refused to
support the bill.
Me SAMUEL BRACEOIRDLE, examined by Mr. Haley, said he was a
salt m,ainfacturer at Northwich and Winafo:d. The persons engaged
in the salt trade had had repeated meeteags respecting t :e dues,
whin pressed very heavily upon toe trade. In the first place they
asked for a redaction of the charge upon coals, because, being upon
the river, they were unable to obtain coals as cheap as other manu-
facturers who were served by the railway and cartel companies. The
mannfacturersetrigi, ally confined their request to coals, b •cause they
thou.tht that if they asked too much, tie trustees would give tilt ra.
nothing. For that reason they did not endeavour to obl. in a reduce
Hon of the salt dues at that time. The fl at interview with the trus-
tees took place in January last, but it was at a reeeting on the 2nd
Fe ruary that the refusal to grant a reduction was male. Witaess
extorted 1°,090 tons of salt last year to New Orleans.
LORD Ness don't think the committee reqiclee any farther evi-
. dance with regard to the condition of the salt t ade, between iris
country and the United States. It is perfectly plait that a reduction
of the toll, from is to 4d, would bscf,benetit to tile exporter. '
Mr. HALEY said the point which he was anxious tu impreis upon
the committee was, that the redaction of theedues eharg •p ion the
Weaver was of immense importance to the trade of the river,.intrimet k
as it would lead to a great increase• iL the quantity of salt axeerted to
America, in which case the af.gregate amount of the dues paid would
be brought up to neatly their pre eat mark.
Examination continued—On t• A 10,00 1 tons which I exported last
year, I had no profit at all. A portion of it was cold at New Orleans
for 80 cents a sack, which was an absolute loss, but another portion
was sold at a higher rate, so that the accounts of profit and loss exactly
balanced.

The Margate of BLANDFoLD— 11)W long have pee been i a the
trade ?
WITNEss —About six years.
The Marquis of BLANDFoRD—Have yen explrted the same quantity
every year during that period?
WrratEss —No ; I exported very little until last year.
The Marquis of BLANDFOR.D—Was ,a-it year an eneeptional-cese*?
WITNESS —There has been little or no profit for the last free or six
years, except up,re one occas,on.
By Mr. Haley—lf I had paid a less due by 81, I should hays sold
my silt at the same ericfeat New urle +tie, and should consequently
have realised a profit whien,could hare induced me to continue the
American trade. If I could get a profi,. of 31 .per ton I should be
perfect), satisfied. if the salt had been exporte 1 by a Liverpool
merchant, instead of- by the menuractarer, the:e . wield have been a
considerable loss upon it. We c,neot export salt at 'all when the
freight is more than 10; a ton. If we ever get 2; a.r on more for our
sat, it is le consequence of a reduction in the freight, and nut from
any rise in the price of salt.
Cross-examined by Mr. S Tgeant Wrangham—Lord Stanley of
Alderlev, Lord hiciamere, and Mr. F wire, of Bostic!, Hell., are the
principal owners of the lane upon the riser, but I cannot say whether
any of the landowners ,re salt manufacturers as wall. At the present
moment I am making salt at tne rate o' 40,000 tons perannma. There
are about 3d manufacturers, some of whom. make 5,0 o tons, an same
not more thin 1,000 tons a year. The works I oeenpy Meng to Lord
Mansfield and Lord Delamere If the duty was reduced from Is to
4d, I do nob believe that the reduction would Make much difference
to the coasumer in America. In the spring the frele hta.are very high,
and we cannot commence shipping until
.t ley ctrae down to 10t. If
the duty was reduced we could ship when the, freights wore lie, and
could thus commence exporting tso menteseirlier. I never shipped
salt to America as ballast. If the dues were red,..ced. the manufac-
turers world be better enabled to compete wi,h the Mel Iterraneen
trade, and also with the a ,lt produced by the Americansthemselves.
At the present moment the freight charged for the exeorte-
tion of salt to the United states. is ita. high as 12s
per ton. From 700,0e0 to 300,000 tons are produce} in
Cheshire attire persr-nt moment. I belive the supply could easily be
increttaed to 1,000,00 e tone a Tear. I have said that the .brinein.some
of the shef,s has decreased, bat the cattle was the sinking in of the
earth.

Mr. Serjeant Wrangham here read a paragnph from a Liverpool
newspaper, giving a acconnt cf a statement made by Mr. Itracegirdie
to the editor respecting a decrease in, the yield, of salt. Mr. Brice-
girdle stated that in the works at orthivich there had been a gradual
doere ise in the quantity of brine, and that the yield had decreased in
cons,:quence ful y5O per cent. The higher mines at Winsford had
completely failed, and those, of Anderten and Northwich had fatten
off, within a fortnight, 50 per cent., the brine having decreased to
the ext at of Ii jr.,rd,. The leirned counsel wished to know, from
Mr. Bracegirdle, if that statement was correct ?
Witness said it was, belt,, the cause of the decrease had been the
sinking o, the lied, which turned the current of the urine inland,
instead of towards the sea, bat it had now returned to its original
c ;arse.
Mr. Sergeant WR A Nonkm—ln point of fact fie silt has comeback
since this ell was intro aced.
_ _ _ _

By the Marquis of Blaudford—l beliesiyo there are ices in America
in which the price of saiii is higher I tiaii at New 0 cle/ns, but the Ilew
,trleans market is important, in co 9 equeneo of the cot, on trade.

By Mr. Calvert--The works npaa, thc; Weaver
advantage as compared with those whiz 7-1 hare. factilitlei for com-
muuie with the railway, the pime of coils by railway being
imich les.,s than by the ricer Weaver. The brine at the works near
the railw4 and canal, is nearly.al good Ai th:lt in the immediate"
v,rinitv of the Weaver.
Mr. Blakemore—The rumnfaetnre of-salt is not very exp7;_nive,
but the cost of the works is heavy.

Mr. WM Evasts, examined by Mr. Mtmesty,. said—l am a partner
in the tirm.uf Mulligan Evans, and Lsmpriere, merchants of Liv, r-
pool, who are agents to the National Compan,,,,a comp.,ny more largely
engaged In the Cheshire salt trade than any oiler. If the company
were to pot ail their working pans In order. they conl4l make 80,010 to
10,000 tens a-year. The e,,mpany have a tifty years lease of the works
at Wittsford. _ . .

kr. ROM Scorrvlejected to the tenure of the company being proved
byeteeentleman who. wits only the Liverpool agent to the. company
for toe sale of salt., • -
The committee sustained the. objection.
Examination resumed—The corePaPy make atel se., d to me for sa'e
every description of salt, and, 1, frequently have; a large supply c.i
hind. I sent stored salt to. Calcatta, New York, and New (Weans:
'the s tlt trade has been of great assistance to the cetton trade in
providing a.couemodity whielethe ships from Ainerica could take out
on the tete= voyage. • '
L. -rd • N aati here interrupted,- and said,the corn inittee we ee erfectly
satisfied with respect to.the coed don of the export trade between
Liverpool and America. 1.,. was not necessary to hoer any further
evidence on that particular point;
- By Mr. Manesty—The. salt 'exported comes into competition with
salt produced is other quaxtdra, and the competition is se strong that w
it is a matter of the most carious Importance to have alt the charges
upon it cut done to theloweet possible limit. At present the supply
of salt down the Weaver to Liverpool is in excess of the de.nand, and
latte!ly we have had ennsiderable difficulty in effecting "ales The
manfacturers r,,eet with great compAdtion from the saltdstricts in the
. Mediterranroan, and on the coast of Portugal.
Cross-examined by Mr. Hope Scott—Ara there no places in England
which compete With you? • •
W ess —I believe no,.
Mr. Hoes Scotere—Dtd you never hoer of Droitwich ?
WITNEL,S —Yes • 'bet not is in the same district (Laughter.)
• Mr. Here Seer:r —Wheie is Dreitwicia
Wires:se—ln Cheshire. (Laughter.) Well. than, it's some other
wieb,"
Mr. MANE TY—Mr. Evans means Nautwicle.
M.S. noes Scam* sugge .ted that he Might. have been thinking of
ttl°-jeianCitshire"witches,"
etreTnosiees T4'001141 Was ilext examine I, and shred that. he was
engaged in the manufacture of salt at Frodsharn, NorOwith, and
Winsford, until March last. The VK i, sford distr;ct had greatly in-
creased since the establishment of raillay communication, but the
works, which could only send salt to iverpool by way of the Weaver,
' hird greatly fallen off. Half of the National Company's Works on the
Weaver, tor instaece, were now standing idle. Ile did nofebelieve
that, unless the salt proprietors _were ale, owners of date:, `hl),dlit
could be obtained from the manufacture of salt The coal comes
erincipally from Wigan and St Helens.
By the Committee—some of the coal p'oprietora have b come salt
manufacturers in order to provide a means of consuniinz their
slack," a devription of coal which would other, ise not be turned
to a useful account.
By Mr. Manisty—The primary object of the manufacturers has
been to obtain a reduction of the dues upon coal, because they paythat
due, bat they consider tnat the merchants of Liverpool pay,the due
upon silt.
The evidence of this witness cies d the case on behalf of the pre-
, motors. and the committee then adjOurned, at La (-past tig§'d 9'04+01.
r thl this day (Friley).