Northern Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1859-01-28 00:00:00

BADGE PORTERS

Mr. Afondel moved, according to notice, that the
badge portors be placed under the management of the
master porter's committee.
Mr. Moss seconded the motion.

Mr. Rounthwaite moved as an amendment, that the
badge-porters be placed under the management of the
marine committee.
Mr. Forwood seconded the amendment.
Upon a division, the amendment was carried by 12 to
11.

MR. SMITH'S MOTIONS

Mr. Smith proposed the following resolution, of which
he had given notice :—" That the resolution of the
board, passed on the 13th instant, adding the names
of Mr. Brocklebank and Mr. Hubback to the Marine
Committee, be rescinded, such resolution having been
adopted in violation of the standing'orders of the board."
He said the appointment had been irregular ; but if the
board thought fit to allow the matter to stand as it was,
on condition that it should not be regarded as a precedent,
he should be willing to withdraw his motion. He
moved it.

out ? On); olit answer Could be given under such
eiTim.atitet.
Let them, then, try the consti-
tuton of their parliamentary committee by that
test, On the 15th instant, a discussion took place
at,edat board, upon the question of applying to Parlia-
7,nent in the coming session for the purpose of obtaining
borrowing powers for the sum of £300,000. Whether
to certain gentlemen that stun seemed too little or too
much, whether they thought the present not a fitting
time, or whether, as he had heard it declared at that
board, they thought that not a spade should be put into
the ground for new works upon the Liverpool side
until the Birkenhead works were completed, the facts
stood recorded that the gentlemen to whose names he
now referred, Mr. Laird and Mr. Bold, were in the
minority upon that occasion. Now, he asked
whether, under these circumstances, he was not
right in declaring that *those gentlemen were
unfitting to render any assistance in carrying out the
resolution then adopted ? Could any one expect them to
fight in the House of Commons for the carrying through
of that project? If any one did, it was more than he
could do. He did not know what might be the opinions
of Mr. Bold and Mr. Laird upon the point, but he could
scarcely imagine that they were willing to be placed in
the humiliating and degrading position of doing, at the
bidding of the board, that which their honest conviction
told them to be wrong, and which they believed to be
injurious to the interests of the estate. He might be
told that the parliamentary committee were required
for other purposes than simply carrying out the present
resolution of the board, There was, indeed, one special
object which would require very serious attention in the
next session of parliament. He alluded to the question
of the rating of the docks. He did not know what were
the opinions of the members of the parliamentary committee
with reference to the rating of the docks. There might
be one, two, or more, who were absolutely in favour of
the rating of the docks. He would ask, would those be
gentlemen whom it would be fitting to place upon the
parliamentary committee ? When that question came to
be considered then it would be time to appoint a special
committee, and among others to take such a gentleman
as Mr. vans, who had given deep thought to the
subject, who had written upon it, and used more
efforts than any other member of the board to prevent
such a calamity. (Hear, hear.) On the grounds which
he had assigned, Mr. Smith contended that he was fully
jdstified in declaring Mr. Laird and Mr. Bold, after the
opinions they had expressed, unfitted to be members of
the parliamentary committee, and he therefore concluded
a lengthened address by proposing his motion. •
Mr. Evans seconded the motion. He conceived that
the arguments of Mr. Smith had been corroborated by

the results of the parliamentary committees for the last
feiw years ; and he did not hesitate to say that things had
been carried contrary to the interests of the dock estate—
carried entirely through the defective representation of
the Dock Board at London. On this occasion he hoped
that instructions might be given to the parliamentary
committee which would leave no doubt with regard
to their efficiently opposing the rating of the
docks of Liverpool. He would not enter further
into the subject now ; but he had prepared a j document
which every gentleman present would be furnished with
before many days were over; and. he hoped no hasty
conclusions would be formed on the question before
parliament.
Mr. Laird said, as his name had been alluded to by
Mr. Smith, he should offer a few remarks. In 1855, a
volunteer who gave evidence was by no means an advan-
tage to the measure then before parliament, which was
simply an instance to show that a temporary
committee or volunteered aid was not the
safest. Mr. Smith said he thought no man,
whose honest and conscientious convictions were
against the proceeding's of any committee, should remain
on it. He had often heard Mr. Smith say, that the
carrying out of the works on the other side of the river
was prejudicial to the interests of the dock trust ; other
gentlemen had said the same, and if it were to be
decided that all committees should be formed _on
Mr. Smith's principle, every gentleman who did not wish
to carry out the work in its entirety, should, retire
from any committee, the object of which was to
assist in carrying out the work. Were it the desire of
the board, he should be quite willing to retire from any
committee he was on. But let th principle apply to
the whole board; let every man make a clear breast of it
as to what were his honest convictions, and if they were
to be dealt with according to those convictions, in
reference to the varied business coming before them,
there would be a considerabie change on all the com-
mittees ; but until that was done, he should remain on
the parliamentary committee. Ie should retire when
the board asked him to do so (hear, hear) ' • but while he
remained on the committee, he should act according to
the best of his judgment, and in a fair and honourable
manner under all circumstances' that might arise. Mr.
Smith's resolution should have been put in a general
form, and not applied to individuals. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. Bold said, if it were the desire of the board, he
would retire from the parliamentary committee at once ;

whilst a member of it, his only desiie was to do the best he
could for the interests of the dock estate. (Hear, hear.)
As to any idea in Mr. Smith's mind, that because a gen-
tleman on the committee did not altogether agree with
the views of the board, being unlikely to act fairly, he
could only say that he did not think any gentleman
would be so dishonourable as to injure the interests of
the board, or in any way neglect them. For himself he
should try to serve these interests, and carry out the
views of the board, though his private opinions might
not coincide with the views of the board upon some par-
ticular matter. Mr. Smith's object had always been to
do everything he could to stop Birkenhead ; he did not
say he did it in the committee ; and therefore Mr. Smith
had no right to say that he would stop it in the parlia-
mentary committee. If Mr. Smith wished his principle
to be acted upon, and was conscientious in its advocacy,
he should set the example by giving notice of his inten-
tion to withdraw from the works committee. (Hear,
hear, and laughter.)
Mr. Bushell said, it was for gentlemen themselves to
say whether they could fairly and conscientionsly carry
out their duties to the board; and if they could not, he
did not believe there was any gentleman at that board who
would act on a committee for the purpose of thwarting
the wishes of the board. In carrying out an object, they
generally like to act with those who shared their views.
He did not think they could well lay down such a rule
as was proposed, as it would make the matter a personal
one, and would be implying a belief that gentlemen were
incapable
board.ableotconscientiously doing their duty as members
of the

The motion was seconded by Mr. Brocklebank, and
after some conversation upon it, was withdrawn.
Mr. Smith then rose to propose the following motion :
" That the names of two gentlemen be substituted for
these of Mr. Bold and Mr. Laird on the parliamentary
committee, the declared opinions of these gen-
tlemen unfitting them to render any asststance in
carrying. out the resolution of the board of the 15th inst."
Mr. Smith, in introducing his motion, said he had taken
upon himself what, no doubt, was a somewhat ungracious
task, and what some gentlemen would probably consider
as litigious, vexatious, and personal. He hoped, however,
to be able to show that he was influenced by.no unworthy
motives, and that the course he was pursuing only pro-
ceeded from a strict sense of public duty. At the second
meeting of the board, when they were called together to
consider the report of the special committee, on the formation
of the committees of the board, it was his intention to have
proposed that the parliamentary committee should not be
a standing committee, but that special committees should
be appointed, from time to time, as parliamentary business
arose, to conduct it. That motion, however, he didnot bring
forward, in consequence ofthe failure of three other motions
-which he made. lie urged that the example of the great
north dock scheme, in 1855, showed that a standing par-
liamentary committee was like some piece of furniture,
which was allowed to hang up unused, as a kind of orna-
mental appendage, until, when the time came for making
it available to some practical end, it was found to be use-
less. In reference more immediately to the.- present
question, he asked what would be thought of the wisdom
and on sense of any gentleman who, being seriously
tJ Attain a particular object, should apply to
parties whose views were diametrically opposed to his
own, and ask t
kem to aid him •
n carrying is project
anxious xicers

THE NORTTAERN TIMES, pniDAY, JANUARY 28, 1859

Mr. Tobin laid, he had seen a good deal of Mr. Bold
on the parliamentary committee, and he could say that,
whatever might be that gentleman's precon-'
ceived opinions, there was no one who more
earnestly carried out, the wishes of the board than
Mr. Bold. He had no doubt the same feeling actuated
Mr. Laird. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. Shand defended the late parliamentary committee,
which had done its duty fully, (hear, hear), and he did
not believe there was any gentleman on the present com-
mittee who would, no matter what his private views
were, do anything disparaging to the docks.
Mr. Brocklebank expressed himself as opposed to the
false principle contained in Mr. Smith's motion.
The Chairman said, he certainly could not vote with
Mr. Smith, because ho considered it was most desirable
at the board, that every gentleman should express his
views fairly and fully, and he was at aloss to conceive why
gentlemen who had so expressed their opinions, should be
considered as unfit to be members of a committee appointed
to carry out the wishes of the board. The committee had
no option but to carry out the wish of the board, and he
had no doubt gentlemen would caary out the wishes of
the board, though they might have individnally expressed
themselves opposed to some works the board might have
ordered. It would be most detrimental to the business
and interests of the board to object to such gentlemen,
because he did not believe there was a gentleman at the
board who would not resign his membership of committee
when he found that he was prevented from assisting to
carry out the work of the committee. He could not
conceive such a thing as a gentleman going up to
London with instructions from that board, and yet-doing
all he could to defeat them ; if that were the case, there
would be an end of all confidence among the members of
the board. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. Smith replied, alleging that his case was not
answered, the arguments against it being lame in the
extreme.
A division was then taken, when there appeared--
For the motion : Messrs. Bold, Boult, Evans, Laird,
and Smith-5.
Against : Messrs. Anderson, Brocklebank, Bushell,
Farnworth, Forwood, Graves, Holme, Hubback,
Hutchison, Inman, Mondel, Moss, Rankin, Rounthwaite,
Segar, Shand, Tobin, and Turner-18.
The motion was, therefore, lost.
Mr. Evans : If we want to choose members of parlia-
ment whom we do look for, but those who hold the same
opinions as ourselves.
The subject then dropped.
The Chairman mentioned, in reference to the question
of dock fines, that, at a meeting of magistrates, held on
;Monday last, it was agreed, after a good deal of dis-
cussion, that an intimation should be conveyed to the
'head-constable and the police to the effect that, in all
.cases of goods lying more than 48 hours upon the dock
quays, which rendered them liable to a fine of 65., infor-
mations should be laid by the police at the earliest
possible period, by which means the heavier Ines might,
in many cases, be avoided.
This oneluded the general business.