Northern Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1857-06-17 00:00:00

THE

had naturally the interests of the commerce and trade of
Liverpool at heart. Any complaints which were made
were :promptly inquired into, and, if found to be well
grounded, were redressed. There was no charge upon
the Dock Estate except the interest of the debt. When a
surplus was received over and above the sum required for
working the docks and for interest, a reduction was made
in the charge. I have glanced at the bill now before the
committee, and I do not think that any advantage would
be gained by effecting a change in the constitution of the
Dock Committee. Ido not think that the present consti-
tution is perfection, but I think it would be difficult to
beat it. I do not think that any Dock Estate could be
managed by persons who are not resident on the spot.
People who are resident would learn from one another the
nature of the wants of the community, and would bring
them before the Dock Committee for investigation.
Mr. MEREWETHER : Those wants would of course have
various tendencies, there being conflicting trades and
interests.

MERSEY CONSERVANCY
AND DOCKS BILL.

(FROM OUR OWN REPORTER.)

HOUSE OF COMMONS, TUESDAY.

The committee re-assembled this morning at twelve
o'clock, Sir J. Graham in the chair. The other members
of the committee, namely, Lord Henniker, Mr. Phillipps,
Mr. Paget, and Mr. North, were all present.
Mr. TWEEDIE, the Treasurer of the Corporation was
called, and examined in reference to the income and
expenditure of the Liverpool Corporation. He put in the
following return, showing the net receipts and expenditure
during the last:ten years :
Income from aschorage Other E xpendi-
For the year ending and Town Dees. sources. tare.
31st August, 1647
1848 .... •
1849 .... • 101,016 .... .. 51,242 .. 131,031
19 1850 .... • ... 93,059
.. 46,093 .... 113,674
1, 1851
1852
„ 1853
9, 1854 ....
„ 1855
11 1856

WITNE_S: Undoubtedly.
Mr. MEREWETHER : For instance, an arrangement which
would be for the advantage of the timber trade, might net
be for the advantage of other trades ?
WiTNEss : Certainly : I think that all persons appointed
upon the committee ought to be upon the spot, so as to
have au opportunity of acquiring an intimate knowledge
of all circumstances connected with the trade of the port.
Mr. MEnEwrrnEn : Therefore you attach great im.
portance to the residential element ?
WITNESS : I do.
Cross—examined by Mr. Webster : I was a member of
the Dock Committee for six years previous to ISSI.
Mr. WEBSTER : Did you not have repeated representa-
tions from the shipowners and merchants as to the
expensiveness of constructing docks at Liverpool, and the
cheapness with which they might be constructed at
Birkenhead ?
WITNESS : There may have been such represw.tations,
but I do not recollect any special complaint having been
made. The trade has generally been connected with the
docks in Liverpool, and it would have been a great incon-
venience to the merchants to take their ships over to
Birkenhead.
Mr. ROBERT GRINNELL examined, said : I am a citizen
of the United States, and am a merchant and shipowner
of Liverpool. My father is one of the largest shipowners
in New York, and furnished the ship which went in search
of Sir John Franklin. I have no complaints to make o
the manner in which the shipping interests are cared for
in Liverpool. I was acquainted with Captain Asa
E!dridge, who is now dead. He was examined before the
committee of 1855, for the docks, and f tated that he had
formed a very high opinion of the Liverpool docks, and
had received more accommodation there than in any other
port in Great Britain. I think that the port of Liverpool
generally is well managed, and that the accommodation
provided is very goo 3.
Cross-examined by Mr. Webster : I also agree to some
extent with Captain Eldridge, when he stated that
Birkenhead offered greater facilities for dock accommo—
dation than Liverpool.
Mr. WEBSTER here read a long extract from Captain
Eldridge's evidence, in which he stated that docks should

Mr. MEREWETHER : Does the Birkenhead Dock yield
pay the interest under which the Corporation are liable
for the money paid to the landholders ?

WlTNrss : It does not.
Mr. MERENVETIIER : Wnat is the sum necessary to
make up the difference?
WITNESS: The interest is £27,860, and the corporation
estimate the surplus from dues, rates, and rents of pro—
perty, at about £9,000, leaving a deOcit of £lB,OOO or
thereabouts.

Mr. AIEREWETHER : Are you in a position to give the
committee a return of the receipts from town-dues, from
an earlier period than the returns now handed in refer to ?

WITNESS: I cannot do so in the absence of Mr. Shuttle_

worth.

By Mr. WEBSTER : The returns which I have given are
the nett, and :not the gross returns. There would be a
difference of abut £2,000 for expenses. I cannot say
what sums ought to be added to the sums I have men-
tioned for allowances to freemen ; nor can I say how much
has been expended in any particular year upon harbour
or shipping purposes.
Mr. WEBSTER Do you know the value of the Corpora-
tion estate?

WITNESS : I do not.
Sir J. GRAHAM : Are you in a position to state what is
included under the head of " other charges ? "
WITNESS : In the year 1856, the Town Dues and anchor-
age realised £132,592. There was also received in fines
on the renewal of leases, £50,401 ; markets within the
borough, £7,464; rents of houses, £9,614; rent of tobacco
warehouses, £4,097 ; for river craft, £2,731 ; hipwrights'
charge, £2,597; property in Birkenhead, £1,812 ; .fees
from magistrates, £3,737; fines from summary convic.
tions and srecial penalties, £4,011.
Sir JAMES GRAHAM: Has the sum received in th 3
shapes of fines on the renewal of leases, always reached
£50,000 a year.
WITNESS : No, it was above the average in 1856. The
average for the last ten years has been about £20,000.
By the Committee: The corporation have sold property
since the passing of the Municipal Corporation Act, with
the permission of the treasury. The sales, however, have
been exceptional, and to no large amount.
Sir JAMES GRAIIAH : Can you tell us what was ex-
pended on St. George's Hall ?
WITNESS : I canna ; the expenditure was entered into
by the corporation withouti previously consulting the
treasury.

be constructed where nature had designed they should
be, which, in his cpinion, was the other, or Birkenhead
side of the water.
Mr. RALPH BOOCKLEBANK was the next witness. He
said—l am an extensive merchant and sh;powner at
Liverpool, and possess more than thirty vessels. lam a
member of the Deck Committee, elected by the rate-
payers, and have taken my part upon the general and
subcommittees. All the members are very zealous in
in the discharge of their duties. With the exception of
Friday, a general or sub-committee is held daily. I think
it is almost a sine
.qua non that the members of the
committee should be residential. A person not actually
resident in Liverpool would be entirely unable to look
after the interests of the port, and to master all the
details.

Cross-examined by Mr. Webster : I have been a con-
stant attendant at the meetings of the committee latelY.
Works are now going on on the north shore for the con-
struction of a new dock, and for forming an entrance to
the Great Float. The dock in question is situated north
of the Huskisson Dock, and covers eighteen acres. The
entrance at the Great Float will be the largest in the
world, being 100 feet wide by 500 feet in length.
Mr. WEBSTER : What has been expended in the com-
pletion of the North River Wall ?
WITNESS : I am not prepared to say. £850,000 has
been authorised .to be raised by Act of Parliament, for
the improvement of the existing docks and basins, and
the completion of other works in progress. The flew dock
of eighteen acres, and the entrance which I havo referred
to, do not come under any of the schemes for which the
£850,000 was authorised to be raised.
Mr. MEREWETHER remarked that. the witness was mis-
taken. The works referred to were in progress i•A 1855,
and were included in the act referred to.
' Mr. WEBSTER : Now, did not these- very works form
part of the £4,000,000 scherse which the committee re-
jected ?

Mr. NORTH : Has all the expenses of erecting St.
Georges Hall been paid ?

Witrlnss : I believe not.

Mr. NORTH: Then there,is::still a debt, notwithstand-
ing that the corporation have been; receiving a surplus of
.E 38,000 a year.

WITNESS: Yes.
Mr. WEBSTER : What was the debt of the corporation
sixty yeas ago ?
WITNESS £852,000.
Wr. WEBSTER: What is it LBW?

WITNESS: A:1,148,000. •
Mr. WEBSTER : You say that the corporation have hot
effected any considerable sales since the Municipal Cor—
porations Act passed. Have they purchased any property
since ?

WITNESS : Yes ; they are always buying property, more

or less.

Mr. MEREWETHER.: But have not those purchases since
the Municipal Act, been for purposes of Improvement?
By the COMMITTEE : The corporation have purchas ed
an estate for £96,000, at Newsome House, for the purpose
of forming a park.
Sir J. GRAHAM : What is the condition of that estate
now?

WITNESS : I think not.
Mr. WEBSTER : What will be the cost of the works in
progress on the north shore ?
WITNESS : I cannot tell.
Sir J. GRAHAM : Speaking generally of Liverpool, can
you say that there is an absence of warehouse accommo-
dation contiguous to the docks ?
WITNESS : There is that defect no doubt, but it has
been remedied to a certain extent by the erection of

WITNESS : It is let out to tenants at will.
Sir J. GRAHAM : Then there is no park as yet ?

WITNESS : No

Mr. MEEEWETDER objected to evidence of this nature
being received from Mr. Tweedie. L. The:proper person to
afford the information was Mr. Shuttleworth.

warehouses on the quay.
Sir J. GRAHAM : Has that remedy only been recently
applied ?
WITNESS : A portion of the warehouses have only been
completed within the last 12 months.
Sir J. GRAHAM : Then, until recently, you admit that
there was this defect in the constitution ?
WITNESS: Decidedly so.
Sir J. GRAHAM: Until it began to be remedied, where
were the warehouses ?
WITNESS : Scattered about in various parts of the
town.

Sir J. GRAHAM said these facts were very important,
inasmuch as it had been shown by the witness that within
the last ten years the debt had increased, notwithstanding
an apparent surplus of X 38,000 per year.
Mr. WEBSTER Have not the facts which you have
just stated been obtained from the books of the Corpora-
tion ?

WITNESS : Yes, so far as the figures are concerned.
Mr. IVEnsTen Now, during thin last ten years have not
the Corporation expended a sum of £338,000 in purchases ?
WITNESS : I cannot answer that question.
Mr. WEBSTER: Have they not purchased at Birksnhead
what is called the North Reserve ?

Sir J. GRAHAM : At a distance from the docks ?
WITNESS : Some of them at a considerable distance from
;he docks.
Sir J. GRAHAM : Does not that distance materially en-
hance the cost of embarkation, to the disadvantage of the
consumers and of the shipping interest ?
WITNESS : There are extra charges in consequence.
Sir J. GRAHAM : Who derive the profits from the ware
houses where they are now situated, the consumers and
shipowners being damnified by such distance ?
WITNESS : The warehouse proprietors.
years. Sir J. GRAHAM : Are they the electors of the Town
Sir J. GRAHAM : How was the money raised? Council; that is, have they a voice in the election of
councillors ?
WITNESS : It was borrowed under the prison's act.
WITNESS : No doubt they have.
Mr. STEWART was then called, and, in reply to Mr- Sir ;J. GRAHAM: Have they a large interest in the
Merewether, said the property on the Foreshore was pur- election ?
chased by the corporation, of the Woods and Forests, WITNESS :I do not think that they have any greater
because it was required for graving docks. The North interest than any other body in the town.
Reserve was bought because it was considered essential Sir J. GRAHAM : Are not the warehouse proprietors for
for the completion of the Birkenhead docks scheme. The
so large a trade a very powerful body in Liverpool ?
site did not belong to the Birkenhead trustees, but Mr. WITNESS :No ; they are not a very powerful body.
John Abel Smith was the lessee. In witness's opinion, if
Sir J. GRAHAM: Are they not a numerous body ?
the purchase had been delayed for eight or ten years, and WITNESS ; Yes; they are.
the dock scheme had been successful, the cost of the land Sir J. GRAHAM : And being ratepayers, have they nol
would have been considerably increased. a voice in the choice of town councillors ?
The CHAIRMAN: What sum did the corporation pay?
WITNESS: They have.
WITNESS : I do not recollect. Sir J. GRAHAM : So that it is to their interest to keep
Mr. TWEEDIE, in reply to Mr. Merewether, stated that the warehouses where they now are, at a distance from
the sum agreed upon was £lOO,OOO, which was payable by the port, they being the possessors of them?
yearly instalments. WITNESS: Undoubtedly, it is to their interest.
Mr. STEWART was then cross-examined by Mr. Webster,
Sir J. GRAHAM; Until lately, whatever their interest
but nothing of importance was elicited.
may have been, the fact is, that the warehouses were at a
Mr. TWEEDIE, in answer to the Chairman said : £57,000
distance from the docks, and the dock trustees have only
has already been paid to the purchase of the North Reserve, lately began to remedy the evil?
The cost of the management of the Birkenhead Docks is
WITNESS ; The erection of new warehouses was corn"
paid out of the Corporation Funds, but the expense of
menced ten years ago.
extraordinary works, such as the deepening of Wall asey
Mr. MEREWETHER; In the bill of 1855, which cut off
Pool,,is defrayed out of the borrowed money. An annual
the £4,000,000 scheme, £1,000,000 was intended to be
sum of £6,000 a year, bearing interest, is payable out of
expended in providing warehouse accommodation.
the income.
Mr. CHARLES SAUNDERS was then examined. He said : Sir J. GRAHAM ; And out of the £850,000 which was
lam a member of the firm of MiCallum and Brothers, granted in 1855, how much was expended in warehouses?
extensive merchants and shipowners at Liverpool, and Mr. EROCELEBANK ; Nothing.
for six years I was a member of the Dock Captain EVANS was the next witness. He said :I am
Committee. A general or a sub-committee sat every a captain in the Royal Navy, and was appointed acting
day in the week except Friday, and the meet- conservator of the River Mersey, under the 'Act 4th and
ings were well attended 'by persons cognisant of the sth Victoria, Captain Fitzroy was the first conservator,
local 1/Iterests and trade of the port. The members of and I succeeded him in 1843. It has been one of my
the committee were all gentlemen engaged in the trade of do,:ies to report to the commissioners of the Conservancy.
the port, or 6OllllP9ted with the Corporation, Bic, They'. Mr. Menewrraza here read numerous extracts from

WITNESS : They have.
Mr. WEEiTSR, : At a cost of £98,000 ?

WITNESS It is not paid for. They have also purchased
an estate at Foreshore, on the Cheshire side. It was

purchased of the Woods and Forests for £,4000. I am
not aware 'that any purchase has been recently made at
Tranmere Pool. Upwards of £200,000 has been expended
in the erection of a new gaol within the last four of five