Northern Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1859-02-25 00:00:00

THE NORTHERN TIMES, VRIDAY, FEBRUARY 25, 1859

the diseitssiott • that took place with reference
to this matter at the committee, and it did
appear to him, and to the committee at the time, that
the facts- could not hate 'come before Mr. Mansfield or
• he could scarcely, under the circumstances, have dismissed
the man in the way he did. They thought their officials
were not taking the necessary steps to protect them as
trustees' of the property, and they were desirous to know
whether they had brought the case before Mr. _Mansfield
as reported' to them,- for if they had, it appeared to the
committee that the decision was entirely inconsistent.
The committee came to the conclusion to write a letter
to Mr. Mansfield, and they: took care that that
letter should be written in the most :courteous
terms—and the only object wasto know whether the facts
had really came before Mr. Mansfield as they had came
before the committee. Under these circumstances they
thought they really shouldhavoreceived a courteous reply.
Mr. Mansfield -might have good reasons for replying as'
he did if he had an impression which might be a false
one, but he thought they might meet this by a middle
course. Mr. Mansfield would now see that that board
thought this a matter of great importance. • Ire suggested
that a letter should be written from that board to Mr.
Mansfield, and the letter to be as courteous as . language
could make it, and expressing the opinion that, according
to the facts that came before the board; they
were entitled to know whether the. same
facts came before him. If the facts did not come before
him, he might.be perfectly correot ' • and, if the facts were
brought before him' as they were before the committee,
and as their officials told them they were, then they were
entitled to a courteous reply. There the matter might
end, and he thought good would come out of it.
Mr. Brocklebank said he was not at the committee
when these circumstances came . before them,' but it ap-
peared to him that there must be some neglect on the
part of the officials—either on the part of. Mr. Cowan' or
some of the superior officers, • who ought .to hkve been
present when this man was brought before Mr. Mansfield.
It appeared to him that they were censurable for not
being there. So far as he could judge, the matter had
been left to the police and another witness.
Mr. Bushell said, with Mr. Littledale's consent, he
withdrew his motion, and he would move that the matter
be referred back_ to the warehouse comtnittea,, and that
they communicate with Mr. Mansfield, placing before him
the whole of the facts of the case. ;He expressed his im-
pression that Mr. Mansfield had not before him the hole
of the facts ; but if they had not a stipendiary magistrate
with whom they. could communicate andact harmoniously
in the punishment of crime, -he feared they would be
involved in the greatest difficulties.
Mr. Tobin really thought this matter had been allowed
to go far enough There had been sufficient said,
and the public attention had been drawn to it. It was
not for him to say anything upon the judgment, as the
facts were not AP before him, nor before that board, but in
reference to Mr. Bushell's motion, for bringing this '
matter before the Home Department, it was a proceeding •
which could only be taken in the most urgent case.
Mr. Shand approved of the remarks of Mr. Tobin,' and
said such a course would be showing a temper which, they
should not exhibit onsuch an occasion.'
Mr. Hubback said, on the part of the warehouse com-
mittee, they did not wish to show any temper in the
matter at all. (Hear, hear.) But in reference to Mr.
Mansfield not having the evidence before him,.he would
simply state that they went over the case, and found that
the facts as reported by Mr. Cowan were clearly laid
before hiin, and was simply with a view to confirm this that
the letter was written.
The subject then dropped.
MARINE COMMITTEE.

The committee had had under its consideration further
evidence in regard to the anchoring of vessels in the
track of the ferry steamers, and a report from the marine
surveyor, defining the track, was read. The considera-
tion of the question was again postponed to Tuesday next,
when the hearing of evidence will be resumed.

Mr. Mondel Moved the confuniation of the proceedings,
which was agreed to.

PILOTAGE COMMITTEE.
This committee had had before it an opinion from the
dock solicitor, to the effect that the license of,.a master
or mate of a coasting steamer' implied no exemption from
pilotage.
. _

Mr:Shand moved that the proceedings be confirmed,
which was agreed xo.,

DOCKS AND QUAYS VOMMITTEE.
The proceedings of this committee contained the
bye-laws for the regulation of harbour masters, &e.,
which, after some discussion, were confirmed upon the
motion of Mr. Lockett.

MASTER rORTERS' COMMITTEE.
The Committee intimated that they were about to re-
vise the bye-laws and rates, and that they invited
suggestions whieh might aid theta in that object.
The proceedings were confirmed.
A letter was read from Messrs. Laird, Fletcher, and
Co., requesting as agents for the African mail
steamers, a proferance of entrance into the graving docks
for these vessels, over any other ships not under contract
to Government, for the conveyance of the mails. The
letter was referred to the Docks and Quays Committee.

,
A letter was read from Mr. Jaws Samuelson, request:
ing the sanction of the patronage of the Board to a new
institution, about to be formed among the employees of
the Dick estate, for their mutual instruction and im-
provement. . _ .

uni:er which dock extension and improvemetifr on the Liverpool
side e! the Mersey may proceed contemporaneously with the
Birkenhe:4l Works. •
Oa that 0 Icasion the following. remarks were made at
,
the Dock Board
The Dock Chairm.lll said, he thought their solicitor would
tell them it was impossible for them in the present bill to do
anything in reference to the prayer of the memorialists. •
Mr. Laird said, the board had adopted a certain course, and
that no steps could be taken until next session of parlianient,
with regard to any improvement. 4 on this side of the water
ether than those contemplated by the bill now before Parlia-
ment.

In order to make this the more clear, if possible, the
board on the 25th Of March, adopted the following,
resolution, on the motion of Mr. .Rankin, and that, too,
not by any hasty determination, but after the subject had
undergone two adjournments :
That as soon as conveniently may be, after the decision of
parliament on the bill now before it, the board resolve itself
into a committee for the purpose of considering dock improve-
ment and extension upon the entire property of the trust on
the Lancashire side 61 the Mersey, and the time and order in
which it is desirable that those improvements should commence.
Mr. Rankin said, in moving the resolution, the board, in the
present bill, only taking' borrowing powers for: £266,000, it
becomes imperatively. necessary that this board should adopt
the course suggested in my motion, and prepare for our succes-
sors' plans and recommendations, and give the necessary '
notices of a bill for the next session of parliament wide enough
to meet the growing wants of the port.
How, then, was it possible to say that the act was
obtained on the faith of their not going to Parliament
again, while such facti were staring them in the face?
It was utterly impossible for any of their opponents to
maintain that they had entered into any agreement fet-
tering their successors or binding themselves in any shape J
or way not to go to Parliament that session for a works'.
bill. On the 15th of April appeared the report of the.
Board of Trade, which contained the following
That the Birkenhead plans should first be finally settled, and
fairly put in hand; and that, in next or future years, it would be
competent for the new Mersey Board, which would then have
received its final constitution, if they should be of opinion that
the trade of the port required dock extension at Liverpool either
on the north or south of their estate of the Mersey, to prepare a
well considered scheme, in which the works to be done, and the
maney to be spent on them, should be fully brought to the notice
of Parliament_
In a subsequent clause it was stated that f‘ a memorial
numerously signed by persons in Liverpool, has also been
brought to the notice of the Board of Trade, setting
forth the urgent necessity for increased dock accommoda-
tion on the Liverpool side of the Mersey." That was
before the second reading of the bill. It was not until
Months after that the railway companies ever set up
the plea of . breach of faith. It was not until last
November that a letter was received, charging the board
with breach of faith, and when the chairman replied,
denying that there was any such understanding whatever
as that referred to, they heard nothing more of any oppo-
sition all—not one word, not one breath of contemplated
opposition until two days before the second reading of
the present bill. He asked, therefore, if they were not

- -
justified in stating, that the, object of .their opponents
was to keep their opposition as secret and quiet as
possible, in order that the board might be taken by
surprise, and so be defeated. More than that, Mr.
Henley, president of the Board of Trade, said in the
second reading of the bill, on Tuesday night, that he did
not find anything in the report to justify the assertion
that nothing was to be done in Liverpool until the
works at Birkenhead were completed, and that
it . appeared to him the case of the' opponents'
had been overstated. (Hear, hear.) It was of
the utmost importance that that board should, on
all occasions," keep the most perfeet faith with parliament,
and that they should prove to the public at large that
they had done so. Mr. Tobin concluded by moving the
following resolution :

" That the board has heard, with surprise and regret,
that it has been' recently alleged, with reference- to the
Mersey Docks and Harbour Board Works' Bill, now
peind iug in parliament, that the prosecuting of such a
bill is in contravention of an agreement enteredinto be-
tween the Mersey Dock Board (provisional), certain
railway companies, and the Board of Trade, in February,
1858, and desires to record its emphatic denial of any
agreement having been entered into, whereby it was
precluded from going to parliament this session, if it
thought fit, for new works on the Liverpool side of the
Mersey."

Mr.. Bold: Is not that a breach of privilege ?
Mr. Tobin did not think it was ; he certainly did not
intend it so.

The Chairman : I don't think you will be brought to
the bar of the House on that ground. (Hear, hear, and
laughter.
Mr. Shand seconded the motion..
Mr. Bushell said, in his opinion Mr. Tobin had clearly
made out his case. With all the public documents and
debates, and the statements made, it waS•shown that, as
to a charge of a breach of faith on the part of that board,
Was totally without foundation. It might be so con-
sidered on the part of individuals, but there was certainly
no breach of faith on the part of the board.
In reply to the Chairman,
Mr. 'robin said he had no particular desire to press his

motion.
Mr. Laird said he thought it only right to state that, in
his opinion, there had been for some years past a breach of
faith with regard to the completion of tae Birkenhead
works.

Mr. Graves rose to order, and said this was a totally
different matter. '

The Chairman said, Mr. Laird must confine himself to
the present bill in parliament.
Mr. Laird said he would abide by the decision of the
board, but he thought they should deal with the question
on the whole.

The chairman said the question was this, Mr. Tobin
had called attention to statements made in London in
regard to an alleged breach of faith, with reference
to the bill now before parliament, and he (Mr. Laird)
must confine himself to that, and not go into a prior
breach of faith.

Mr. Laird said he would agree with the wishes of the
board, but he protested, at the same time, against one
portion of the matter being taken, and that in re-
ference to Birkenhead being left out. Mr. Tobin had
read some of his remarks and omitted others ; but he
thought the whole should' have been quoted that bore on
the subject. Mr. Laird then read the following portion
of his speech, which he considered Mr. 'robin should
have read :
Mr. Laird, as connected with Birkenhead, said be considered
that this board had full power at any time before the next
session of parliament to take any steps they liked for increasing
and extending the accommodation of the port anywheke they
thought best. hey must consider this as a trust for both sides
of the river, and not one for this side of the river, as the old
trust was too much looked upon with regard to the Birkenhead

works.
Mr. Tobin quoted the first part of my remarks, which
suited him. He omitted the other -part ; the whole
should have been quoted. This is from the report of the
meeting on the 12th of February. The remarks Mr.
Tobin has alluded to in the commencement. These were
the conclusions of the remarks I made on that occasion:
So far as concerned the Liverpool docks, he would like to see
every facility afforded for working them; but, looking to the
enormous extent of accommodation afforded by Birkenhead by
deep water entrances, with proper warehouses, railway, and
other facilities on the margin of that float, the immense quantity
of land there was in addition to that belonging to the trust (for
the corporation had a large quantity there as well as other land-
owners), he thought it would be injudicious at present to propose
any very extended outlay until they saw the result of these works.
He had no doubt that nine or ten miles of quay space on that side
of the water, with large deep watersills, where vessels instead
of lying in the river could get out and in every day of the year,
would have a very large trade. Therefore, it would be injudicious
to make the alterations that had been suggested, and increase
expenditure. First they ought to look that what Parliament had
enacted were works they ought to carry out, and then they ought
to look for the best site for further extensions.
There was another gentleman spoke on that occasion
who, he regretted to say, was not at that board now,
that was Mr. Robertson Gladstone, who said he believed
that, although there was not a distinctive agreement,
there was an honourable understanding with the govern-
ment, and ho remembered what took place, and his mind
was strongly impressed with the idea, and he did con-
sider that, after adjudicating upon certain matters, they
should not go on with any works on the Liverpool side
until the works on the Birkenhead side approached com-
pletion. He (Mr. Laird) thought it his duty, when he
saw Mr. Tobin's notice of motion, to write to Sir
Benjamin Hall in reference to this matter, and the fol-
lowing was the reply he received :
London, February 22, 1859.
Sir, —I have just received your letter of yesterday's date, and,
in reply to the question contained in it, I beg to say that my
impression, certainly, was that, in the first instance, a large sum
was desired for expenditure on the Liverpool side of the river ;
that this sum was reduced to £266,000 ; that the works upon
which this sum was to be expended were clearly specified, and
that no further amount was to be raised for additional new works
until those on the Birkenhead side of the river were in active
course of completion. This was, in short, a species of guarantee
that the Birkenhead works should be pushed on with the greatest
possible energy ; and that no further expenditure of money on
new works should take. place on the Liverpool side till those on
the Cheshire side were very far advanced towards completion.
Such was my understanding of what I conceived to be an
honourable engagement ; and, if I could have supposed that
there was any doubt upon the matter, I would have suggested to
the committee the propriety of inserting special provisions for
effecting the object.
You arc at perfect liberty to make any. use you please of this
letter. I am, your obedient, signed B. HALL.
John Laird, Esq., Birkenhead.
It was, he said, a clear understanding, that no more
money should be applied for on the Liverpool side until
the Birkenhead works were advanced towards comple-
tion. In the Board of Trade report there was
natnhc.3lst
agree-
ment that these works were ta. beferoonmiptlte
position these
March, 1860. He was cheretaawn
'mild not be completed in
works were now. that t
that time. lie. there ore mybsintained, that, if they were.
a posl.
.t o keep the argaini they had made, they
not in
h. The plans were. fixed by parliament,
were b,reAkblg
faitts of the- bill were• satisfied with these
and, the. '3,Pto:n
y were agre.od, to. on: the condition tb4tt
as they
to be comOvted. at a. certain date,. and he
teY. Itertheat they w.e_te bound'. to) complete. tlieskiv94§
ciia. 11°1

at the time specified, and they Were now gOitl, for:
money for works on the Liverpool Sick, before ttief
pleted their engagements at Birkenhead. He wthr Boit
against extension of docks on this side of th'e' water,' he
should'support all further extension necessary, if th'o'se'
works on the other side were advanced towards conple-;
flan. There was one point which should not be over-
looked in this question. It was stated by Mr., Bonit
that these Birkenhead docks were a load put upon
them. , Bat if there was an obligation
put upon them to complete those works, was there not
at the same time something given to them in return. The
town dues Were transferred to that board, on the con-
sideration that these works should be completed, and
these town dues were a very valuable-property. Mr.
Tobin stated some time ago that they, were £4,900,000,
which would do, a great deal mare than complete the
works on the other side, so that they had not got such a
bad bargain. If they went on and completed the works
they would get a fair return for the property once they
should open it.

The Chairman in the• first place did not perceive that
Mr. Laird contravertal any point whatever of Mr. Tobin..
He (Mr. Laird) did not say that be did not make the
statements quoted by Mr: Tobin, and there could be no
question as to the allegation. of a breach of faith; if he
admitted the statement made by Mr. Tobin. Mr.. Glad-
stone's remarks did not sanction any breach or, faith.
Sir Benjamin Hall had strong views au the subject, but
he- (the Chairman) would say- that there was not a word
passed which could be tortured into the' expression of Sir
Benjamin Hall. (Hear, hear) Mr. Laird had stated
that the works on' the Birkenhead side- would not be
completed at the time specified. Mr. Lakd could form
a judgment on this as-Well as other'membcrs, and as well
as their engineer; but he challenged him to say that, if
they were not completed; it would be the. fault of that
board. That board had giveninstructions tePtheir officers•
to' complete theni as fast as possible. There might be•
something over which the board had no control. No'
accusation could be brought against them if, from causes
which were not foreseen and over which
,they had no
control, these works were not completed within the
period parliament proscribed. He had stated over
and over again, in Parliament, when he was
asked would the works on the LiverpOol side
interfere with the works on the Birkenhead' ale, that
instead of impairing they would very materially assist
these works. And he did think it was a most short-
- sighted Policy, on the part of gentlemen who advocated
the carrying on of business on the other Side, to• stop
on this side, pending the progress of these works.
Mr. Graves said, he was quite surprised:
.that they
should be called upon again to discuss this matter in re-
iereneeto the Birkenhead works after what had already
been said on the subject. He was anxious, when he rose
before, that these two matters should not be mixed up,
and that they should clear themselves distinctly from
these accusations of the breach of the faith. The
defence Mr. Laird had put forward,. however inge-
niousit might be, had not in the slightest degree altered
the statements of Mn'Tobin, and whatever the opinion
of Sir Benjamin Hall might be, he took as the strongest
proof what Laird himself stated on the subject,
which admitted of no possible doubt. He did not think
Mr. Laird could clear himself. After those remarks were
made at the House of Commons, putting the whole board
at stake, he was anxious that the matter should be cleared
up to their satisfaction, and to show, in an unquestion-
able manner, that there was no undertstanding existing,
either implied or expressed, with which- they should be
debarred from going to parliament with the present bill.
Mr. 'robin replied to the remarks made by Mr.
Laird, in reference to his not quotiniT the whole
of his speech. He said he should be ashamed
of himself if he gave a garbled statement, but he
gave the whole of the report as far as it appeared
to him hearing on the matter, and what Mr. Laird had
stated did not affect it in the least.

The motion was then put and carried, Mr. Laird only
voting against it.
MR. LAIRD AND THE PARLIAMENTARY COICILITTEE.
Mr. Boult begged to ask Mr. Laird a question with
regard to his public conduct. It had been publicly stated
in print that Mr. Laird went to the Board. of Trade, in
company with Mr. Tollemache, on the subject of the
W 'orks' Bill of that board. The Birkenhead Commis-
sioners, of whom Mr. Laird was chairman, had agreed to
petition against the Works' Bill of that board, and had
also presented a petition in favour of the Corporation
Dock Rating Bill. Mr. Laird was not present when that
petition was agreed to; but, as it was commonly sup
posed in Birkenhead that he, like Cato, "gave his little
senate laws," and ruled them stricly, too, it Tnight be
reasonably inferred that if he had any very decided ob-
jection'to it it would not have been agreed upon.
The Chairman said, if any member objected to Mr.
Boult's going on withoat giVing notice, it must be
decided that he was out o order. If there were no
objection of course he could go on.

Mr. BouIt.: I thought it would save time, if the
question were put and answered now. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. Laird : Ido not object at all. I think the sooner
the question is settled the better.

Mr. Boult said Mr. Laird was a member of the par-
liamentary committee of that board, and upon a recent
occasion stated that if he found any of his opinions in-
consistent with his duty as a member of that committee,
he would at once resign his seat upon it. Now, the
question he (Mr. Boitlt) wished to ask was, whether Mr.
Laird had not used his influencelo promote the works' bill
of that board, and whether, if he had not done so, he had
resigned his place as a member of the, parliamentary
committee. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. Laird said he was rather glad Mr. Boult had
brought this subject forward. It would give him an
opportunity of stating what he stated in committee, when
reporters were not present, that he would take no
proceedings whatever on the parliamentary committee in
reference to the bill for £300,000. Oa Saturday week lie
came to the works committee, and finding they were
reading some communications from London, he retired
until that part of the business was over. f the Board
wished, he would retire from the parliamentary commit-
tee with great pleasure, but before doing so, he should
like to ask one or two questions. He understood, not
having been present, that the committee had sent forward
a petition against the Chester and Birkenhead Railway
Bill, a bill which had the most important object of short-
ening the distance between Birkenhead and Manchester
ten or fifteen miles. He believed there had been no
authority given by the Board to present that petition. It
had been done without the sanction of the Board by the
parliamentary committee. He thought it prejudi-
cial to the interests of the Board that they should
go and oppose a bill which would benefit their
property upon the other side of the water. He was
charged with inconsistency. While absent last week he
found from Mr. Bushell's speech, that certain gentlemen
of the board, including the Chairman himself, who were
members of the Council,.were present in the Council at
the time when the question of rating the docks was raised,
and supported that measure. He knew it would be said
they did not vote, but he thought it was the duty of any
member who dissented front the views of the Council to
have moved an amendment, even though he stood alone
as he (Mr. Laird) did then, and as he should always be
ready to do when he believed himself to be right. Again,
if it were inconsistency in members of that board to act
with other public bodies, he conceived that members of
the finance committee of that board, who were also
members of the ,Council, ought to retire from the
finance committee, seeing that very weighty ques-
tions frequently arose between those bodies, and
large amounts had to be settled in the purchase of
property and other ways. Other parties too might be
interested in railways which were antagonistic to the
Chester and Birkenhead Railway. He would retire from
the committee with the greatest pleasure, at the saute
time stating that, as a matter of consistency, other
gentlemen ought to come forward and resign also.
The Chairman said, Mr. Laird had attempted to
establish a similarity between two things essentially
different. No one complained of Mr. Laird being on the
board and opposing the views of the majority if he
thought fit. But what they did complain of was, that
any ucted to
longer
Mr. Laird, being a member of the parliamentary com-
mittee, 'specially instructed to promote a certain bill,
went up to London and canvassed against that bill
(Hear, hear.) A course of proceeding of that
kind was in his (the chairman's). opinion, totally
subversive of the interests of the board,
and was a very different thing front his merely
sitting there as a member of the board, and then going
to London to oppose the bill, not being in the committee
which was instructed to promote it, and, therefore, not
it out the
r
having heard what passed in that committee upon the
subject. (Hear, hear.) He thought, if Mr. Laird found
cohaberj
re
ycc
osuolwdt
hincel theot not aid
certainly connit t
ought e
notconscientiouslyewa s
inin
carrying
instructed specially
propriety
to remain a member of the committee. (Hear, hear.)
With regard to the opposition to and the Chester
Birken-
head Railway, he could not conceive
e what that had to do
with the subject. The parliamentary
petitioned against that bill for the committee had
purpose of obtaining a
locus standi, and had not yet determined what course they
should pursue. He could not
comparison could be drawn
betweeneonceive either how any
Mr. Laird on theparliamentary the position of
that of members. of
the committee, and
finance committee, who
were also. members of the Town Council. A man could
'Sot be a member of the parliamentary committee and
hear what passed upon onethereforepairttws of the
utbusiness, atiodrs_hot
his ears to the rest,
Laird to say that he took no part in notan
anything
for f
to
ir.
that bill. They all recollected the notorious fase in Lon-
dcm..where,thft secretary of a minister who had to read

the despatches in Downing-street, was then supposed to
be able to go into Threadneedle-street stock-jobbing, and
r,Tet all he had read. (Hear, hear )
Mondel did not think after the honest admission
made, he could any longer remain a mem-
^ntary committee.
Tld resign if there wen an ex-
')oard to that effect, but he
was asked to do so

Ver. of thle
Mr. saidt 1,0 wo,
preSsiort of the' opinion, of thro
Would' not resign merely he'aiSie•
b)r the. chairman, .Mr. Boult, Mr. Mon, .
Mr. Brocklebank said, if a motion were ~.
Mr. Laird be called upon to rektftt,
should -certainly vote for it. Mr. Laird's cenneetiotr
with the' works committee gave hint an opportnnity
of
frequently knowing what was passing with respect to
works,. which were part of their- bills, anti gave him ass
unfair advantage, which he ought not to possess. (hear,
hear.)
Mr. Evans: An enemy in the' very camp.
Mr. Boult gave notice that he would move next day
that Mr. • Lai;d's name be struck off the parliamentary
and works committees.

ie that
he

Mr. Laird said, after the opinion which had beer ex-
pressed by Mr. Ifrocklebank and Mr. Evans, he beggad:
to tender his resination of his seat as a member of the

parliamentary conunittce; but he gave pair warning that
unless moved- by the board off the works committee ha'
would not go. He defied Mr. Brocklebank or any other
gentleman to,say that he ever since he came'to that board
took undue advantage' of his position in any way. He'
found that out of ten members of the work.4'cpmmittee,
only three or four hacil ever expressed an opinion itt•
favour of Birkenhead, and he would not leave that
committee unless compelll3d,
Mr. Laird's resignation of the parliamentary corn-'
• mittee was accepted.
Mr. Brocklebank and Mr: Smith urged on Mi. Boult
to withdraw his motion, reminding the board that Mr.
Laird was a very useful member of the works com-
mittee. Mr. Boult withdrew his motion accordingly.
Mr. Tobin said, with regard! to the question of dock
rating-, he freely owned that it was his duty to, have
moved an amendment, or, at least, recorded a protest in
the council upon that subject, although it could have
been attended by no practical resaik
The Chairman said, he opposed it upon the first
occasion, but he saw no use in, dividing the courted
uselessly by opposition on the second occasion.
Mr. Farnworth, as a member of the council, declared
himself highly opposed to the ratinorof the docks.
The general business soon after terminated.

RApia PASSAGES.—The ship Humphrey Nelson, Capt.
Chilien, has arrived at this port; frolValparaiso, in Btl
days, being m
the quickest passage this season.• The clip-
per ship Friar Tuck, Captain Richardson, belonging to
James Beazley, of Liverpool, arrived in the Downs on
Tuesday, after a very rapid passage from the East Indies,
having left Whampoa on the 13th November, and passed
the Straits of Anjer on the 30th of November, making
the passage from Anjer to England in S 4 days, being one
of the fastest runs on record. The ship Veloz has arrived
at Belfast, from Hong Kong, in 96 days; also a remark-
ably fast passage.
MAIL STEAMERS —The fine screw steamer Armenian
sailed yesterday afternoon, for the West Coast of Africa,
with the regular monthly mails, and about twenty
first-class passengers. The Liverpool, New York, and
Philadelphia Company's screw steamer Kangaroo,
Captain J. M. Jeffery, carrying the American mails,
is now due. Her advices will be three days later
than that previously to hand, and will extend
from New York. to the 12th inst. The Cunard Royal
Mail steamer Asia, Captain Lott, with advices from New
York to the 16th inst., may be expected here by Sunday-
The next mail steamer for America will be the Arabia,
which sails from the Mersey, to-morrow (Saturday), for
Halifax and Boston. The post-otlice box will be open until
twelve o'clock, with late fees until one, and on the
landing-stage until two o'clock in the. afternoon. On
Wednesday next, the screw-steamer City of Washington
will be despatched to New York. The next direct mail
from the Canadian Provinces will be brought' by the
-,teamer Indian, Captain Borland, expected to
arrive from Portland on the 9th proximo. On the Ist of
April, the Montreal Ocean Stearn Navigation Company.
start (under their new contract with the Colonial Govern-
ment) to run vessels weekly between Quebec and
Liverpool, their new vessels, the Bohemian and Trun—
earian, being. almost ready. The mails from the Aus-
tralian colonies will be oae week later this month than
previously, the screw steam-ship Orvida not leaving
Melbourne until the 21st of January. She cannot„
therefore, be looked for before a fortnight. She is likely
to bring news of large shipments of gold In April the
contract with die Peninsular and Oriental Company
comes into operation, under very stringent regulations,
and which is likely to ensure more regular advices from
the Australian colonies.

screw-;

WORKILOUSE COMIRITTEE.—The usual weekly meeting
of this committee was held yesterday. Mr. Church-
warden Cropper in the chair. The other members
present were--Messrs. Smith, Steele, Critchley, 'Owen,
Peck, Denton, Byford, Syred, and Gair. The medical
officer reported that the number of deaths during the
week ending 22nd inst. was 28, of whom 8 were men.
10 women, 4 children (above two years old), and 6
infants. The number of patients under treatment last
week was 661 ; new cases admitted since, 184 ; cured and
discharged, 133 ; now remaining under treatment, 684;
of whom 47 were fever, 15 itch, and 5 small-pox cases_
The master of the vagrant sheds reported that there
were relieved in this department, during the week
ending the 19th inst., 137 male persons, 49 females, and
10 children ; total, 196, showing a decrease from last
week of 4 males, and 27 females; increase in children, 1;
nett decrease, 30; also a decrease of 124 when com-
pared with the corresponding week of last year. The
governor's return showed that the number of paupers in
the establishment last week was 2,329; number this
week, 2,330; number in the corresponding week of last
year, 2,696; showing- a decrease on the year of 367.
Iroinceopeaky Again.—Mr. Denton said he would perhaps
be allowed to make a remark in reference to what took
place at the last meeting, in his absence. It appeared
that the chairman had produced a letter in reference to
the medical officer, Mr. Smith, in the Sheffield union, a
homoeopathist. That letter, he said, only confirmed what
he had before stated, that they had the power of making
the appointment of a homceopathic practitioner, provided
they were agreed upon it. While he was speaking, he
was asked to be allowed to say that he hoped the
gentlemen would refrain from making remarks in reference
to the system—remarks which were not at all fit to
be' used by gentlemen of that committee, or any
other body of gentlemen. " Quacks" and " humbugs"
were not fit terms to be used in such places-
Mr. Critchley : I say humbug again. Mr. Denton : It
is very improper. The Chairman said Mr. Denton had
mentioned this matter particularly to the board, and
seeing this letter, he thought it quite right that the
public should hear the other side of the question.i
cioe ss subject,
cj for
'tv
and Sal itthha is quite :t
Mr.
r.
en
sufficient,ton has emopitiitei dthleiirtonsieslf
noonnet
goingropopda.ny
Afuftrotrliderispwoistiloigthoef
somes formal business, theubject. The matter then
committee adjourned.

LIVERPOOL.' BOROUGH SESSlONS.—Yeiteraav, the fol-
lowin7 charges of felony were disposed of :—Mary Kelly,
for stealing a leg of pork from Timothy Crowley, six
W hs_
months. 11lary Ann Carney, for stealing
.two purses,
containing between £4 and £5 of money, from the person
of Letitia Costello, five years penal servitude. William
eref
y atilck of steel and
Boardman,
files,
Ibbott, for stealing a gold watch from Louis, Morath and
Co., eight months. Josiah Hannah, for stealing thirty
yards of flannel from William Phillip, three mont
John Francis, for having broken into the house of .B.
Bragg,
sevenandg,y
stealingears pne tahlro servitude.a quantity
for the same offence, eight years.. M
stealing several articles of Wea • Mar Irving., for
John M'Elroy, five years. Ann Jones,
apparel from
offence, six months. Elizabeth "es'
for the' same
quilt, the property of Anthony Little, for stealing
Welsh, for stealing eiolit
Smith, five months.
of Richard Darlinotoyards of print from the shop
stealine, two-and-a-h
0 ,112 five years. Margaret Britt, for
au o•lasses and a basket from
the trustee-
,of the 1 t Mary '• d ' I '
a e Fiel , six mont is at hard
labour. William Bnrke and Mary Roberts, for stealing
Some bed Cloth
eqh. seco id es from Margaret Boardman, four weeks'
Court: Henry Cropper, for stealing a
box of wear'. ing apparel from Mary Aspinal, nine months.
Catherine Deegan, for stealing the sum of .£'2, 103 from
the person of Alexander Love, four vears' penal servitude.
William Morris, and Peter Kelly, f'or stealing a quantity
of carpenters' tools, from William M'Culloch, the former
was sent for four years' to penal servitude, and the latter
to six weeks' imprisonment. Anne I.luf;hes, and Mary
Love, for stealing a pair of shoes from Thomas Sharp;
Hughes was committed for twelve months, and Love was
discharged. Bridget Quinn, for stealing several articles
of wearing apparel from Anne Callanan, Michael
M'Wade, and Elizabeth Finn, three months. Edward
Johnston, for stealing from the pocket of Mrs.
John Aldred, the sum of 3s. 81d., six years. Michael
Digney, for stealing a jacket from Michael Joseph
Courtney, three months. Jane Fitzgerald. alias Richard-
son, ana Mary Mack, for stealing a shawl from Daniel
Davies, and a petticoat from Joseph James Cummings--
the former was sentenced to five years' penal servitude
and the latter to four. Johanna Hogan, for stealing &-
from the person of Owen Murray, discharged. Peter
Wilson, James Connelly, and Isaac Brady, for st-aling a
mantle, the property of Dougald Stuart---. Nilson was
sent to prison for twelve months, and to be three times
whipped; Connelly was sentenced to six years' penal
servitude, and Brady to ten. The court then adjourned
till adjourned.
till a quarter-past nine o'elook this morning,

LIVERPOOL POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
BEFORE MR. MANSFIELD.
A MAD WELSH WoMAN. —Anne Evans, a strange
specimen of the principality, from Llan some place
spelled with all the consonants, wasr brought-up by officer
623, on the following charge. The Rev. Mr. 'England,
of Grove-street, stated that, on Saturday week, the
prisoner was engaged at his house as cook, although she
could not cook a bit. On Wednesday night, after eleven,
he went to see if the prisoner had done all her work, but
lading she had some boots to clean, he told her she must
do 60 before fr.,._ ed, she_refused, saying she would
dye in the morning and do it.
„a of trying, to get her up early,
Al on her doing the work, when she
very outrageous and disortierly, abused
-nonage, said he was, worse than
He then wanted-her to go to bed,
andlat last be was obliged to call in the
The officer said, whilst taking her to the station
is hand severely, and kicked him in the shins
iner made a rairiblin, -‘ '

get up. at hal.
.He had ea:la
and insis

him with b-ad
Sat* and like

but. she refused

ish accent, and
ted

atement, w

named ZV

Ali a strong
iron her manner some doubt was
!1w sanity, and she was ordered to stand by

ERRAND Boy.—A miserable `looking lad,
M Doherty, apparently about fourteen years
liarged with baying stolen a quantity of
ling postage stamps and post-office orders,

from his' ethpliel.s., Ittessrs. Lloyd; and &ins, printers,
Brc., 11, -St.'Arfne--stteet. The lad was in custody of Mr.
Cozens, the post-office detective officer. It appeared that
the boy was a. messenger in Messrs. Lloyd's place
for the last two.years, and since December last a num-
ber of letters., containing altogether postage stamps and
money orders to the amount of £2 ls. 2d., were extracted
by him froth the letter box. Mr. Cozens was informed
of the letters being missing, and he laid a plan to catch
the thief, and the result was that the prisoner was foUnd
taking the letters that morning,,one of which contained
an order for 14.5. 10d.' and the name of Messrs. LlOyd
had been forged to it by the prisoner. He was remanded

for the present.
" TA.KING TIAB BY THE FORELOCK."—A dock duffer,
named William Hough, was charged hy-,a Spanish
sailor, named Attdrew- Cufles, with/having stolen a
The complainant was
here there were a num-
a friend, and held ,out
, When the prisoner seized
T'

watch value £7
on the 'Prince's. Pi
ber of
hi
hi

:Ch, and

p.— Ahe prosecu-
tor caught hold-of him and held him, when the prisoner
put his hand behind hiS hack, as if to give the watch to
some one, but, instead of doing so, he flung it into the
basin. Of co-urse,- it was not recovered: The prisoner
was sent to gaol for six mouths with hard labour.

• 131tEAIC.ING INTO A STORE. --John M'Vey and Timothy
Macharriara were charged for haviiim broken into the
marine store of John Barrett, of Ifopwood-street, and.
stealing a quantity-of lead therefrom. A few nights ago
the store was broken open, and the lead taken. It was
subsequently sold to another person by the prisoners.
The case was clearly proved, and the prisoners were sent
to gaol for three months with hard labour.
" A POINT."—Two American sailors, named James
Sullivan and John Melbourne, belonging to the ship
City of Brooklyn, were charged with having taken up the
bed of another sailor, and walked away with it. Mr.
Bluck was for the prisoners, and asked the prosecutor
when the offence was committed ? and he replied after the
ship left New York. Mr. .131uck : Then your Worship
has no jurisdiction in this case, as the ship is an American.
His Worship agreed in this, and discharged the prisoners.
Immediately after leaving the dock, they entered the
witness box to prosecute a fellow named Ryley, a " duffer,"
for having stolen a pair of boots. Mr. Block in this case
was also for the prisoner, and hoped he would. be as
successful as in the last, but the case being too clear, his

client was set

) gaol forone month

--T-A 'well dressed female named Anue

ail for six !mutt

BEFORE MESI

allowing, after a considerable deal of discussion among
themselves, 7s 6d costs against the plaintiff.
THE WATER WORKS ULAUSES ACT.—Abraham Woods,
was charged with drawing water from a tap not
property, namely, from a tap in the stable yard of one
Thompson. The penalty- in cases of this kind is not over
110 for ea.ch offence. As this was the first easel brought
under the act, the defendant was convicted in the costs
-of the court only (3s 6d), and it was intimated that in
future the full penalty would be inflicted. - •
.Tgg TEN CROSSES OF CHRIST.—Kate Ilanlon, and
Mary O'Rourke. are both Irishwomen, and neighbours to
boot, each being the proprietress of a flourishing pig-sty.
They are in the habit of quarrelling, and so late as on
Thursday last, they came into collision, the result being
that Mrs. Hanlon received a severe kick on. the shin, and
Mrs. O'Rourke a bite on the arm. Mrs. Hanlon was
summoned by Mrs. O'Rourke. Each endeavoured to fix
the quarrel upon the other ; and Mrs. O'Rourke said that
she was afraid of her life, as " Mrs. Hanlon had sworn
by the ten crosses of Christ that she would have her life's
blood." A witness for the complainant said, that she
saw the fight—one was as bad as the other-and they were
both a nuisance to the neighbourhood. 'Airs. O'Rourke
had the satisfaction to be sent into bridewell along with
her friend, until both obtained security for their good
behaviour for the future.

HEALTH COMMITTEE.
The weekly meeting of this board was held yesterday,
Mr. Alderman Dover in the chair. The other members
present were Messrs. It. Shell, Crellin, Vernon, Avison,
Crosthwaite, Anthony, Haydock, Bowring, Hodson, and
Stitt. REPORTS, &C.

The.Berough Engineer, Building. Surveyor, -and In-
spector of _Nuisances, reported various particulars of tho
operations in their several departments during the week,
from which it appeared that 131 nuisances complained of
by inhabitants had been inspected, and means taken to
remedy them ; 867 houses in the unhealthiest districts,
containing 2,812 apartments, and 664 cellars, had been
put under examination with the view of improving their
sanitary condition, and 211 lodging-houses had also been
examined and reported upon
Mr. Fresh also reported that the following code of rules
and regulations had. been agreed to by him and Mr. Rose
for the guidance of the contractor's staff in the night
time, in addition to those already in existence, and
which, with the sanction of the committee, would be
adopted, viz.:— _ _

_
" Ist. The inspectors must examine each and every
midden after the night men have left the places, in order
to ascertain if they have been thoroughly emptied, and
to satisfy themselves that no damage has been done to
the property, and that such property is left secure. '
" 2nd. That no private house midden shall be emptied
under any circumstances without first arranging with the
occupier to that effect, and on all occasions of the men
falling short of work, they must confine themselves to
public court middens exclusively.
" 3rd. That the system of inspectors making reports
on slips of paper, and sending them to Cornwallis-street,
must be abandoned, and in lieu thereof the inspeCtors
must report on their sheets any impediment they may
meet with, which must be further examined into by the
superintendent, and by him reported to Mr. Fresh, if
necessary.

" 4th.' That in all cases of wet middens, the inspectors
must cause the walls, &c., to be well examined by their
men, in order to ascertain whether the midclens are
already drained, and if so, they must cause the gratings
to be carefully cleaned and opened, so as to prevent any
further accumulation of water. This is a most important
point as regards both the contractors and the public in-
terest, as wc•ll as those of the night-men, and must be
strictly attended to.

"sth. The inspectors, desirous of maintaining the credit
of the contractor's staff, will see the necessity of strictly
enforcing the above regulations, and any night-men who
may without, order, open any door, or get over any wall,
or in auy other way interfere with any private house
midd.en, for the first offence must be suspended one week,
and for the second discharged, and any case of neglect on
the part of the inspectors will be promptly reported to
Mr. Rose, and be by him dealt with accordingly.
"That in addition to these regulations, those formerly in
force will be strictly enfOrced, as the comfort and con-
venience as well as the property of private families, must
not be in any way interfered with or invaded in these
operations." . •

The committee agreed to these regulations

HEALTH OF THE TOWN

Wilson,