Northern Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1857-06-18 00:00:00

the part of the merchants, of the want of dock accommo-
dation at Liverpool ?
Witness: I belive that letters to that effect have ap-
peared in the newspapers.
Mr. Webster : And I believe that you have ventured to
tell the gentlemen making such complaints, that Parlia-
ment has insisted upon the completion of the works at
Birkenhead, before further dock accommodation should

be provided at Liverpool.
Re-examined by Mr. Hope Scott : The money expended
in works on the Liverpool side of the river, is the money
of the doek trustees, while that expended on the Birken-
head side is the money of the Liverpool C3rporation.
Contracts to the extent of £120,000 have been let for the
deepening of the pool at Birkenhead, but considerable
difficulty bas been experienced in finding a place where
the spoil could be deposited. It is now deposited upon Mr.
Viner's land. In point of fac', the corporation are now
doing for Mr. Viner what the dock trustees have done for
the corporation. There is no ques'ion that Mr. Hartleys
scheme provides a better entrance to the float than the

original plan.
Sir J. Graham : The Great Western Company were
originally opposed to the bill of 1855.

Witness : Yes.
Sir J. Graham : How did yon overcome their opposi-

tion ?
Witness : They saw it was impossible that the docks
could be finished in the hands which they were then in,
and having faith th';t the corporation would fini,h them if
they came into their possession, they were anxious that the
corporation should ob.ain them•
Sir J. Graham : OW you give Mr. Sagnders an assur-
ance generally that the works should be carried out ?
Witness : Do you mean in accorlance wi h Mr. Rendal's
plan ?
Sir J. Graham : No ; generally.
Witness : Certainly we did.
Sir J. Graham : Did net Mr. Saunders press for some-

thing more specific then a general a.smraricc?
Witness: No. If Mr. Renda!s plan had been mentioned

I should have said at once that it was impossible to carry

it out.

Sir J. Graham: I em sorry to press you upon the point,
but are you quite sure that you only gave the general
assurance that the docks should be executed, and that you
did not discuss wits Mr. Saunders. before he changed from
an opponent to a supporter, the particular pans which
would be carried out.

Witness: Most certainly not. I assured him that, as
soon as the bill passed, the corporation would honesly set
to work on the principle sanctioned be the act of parlia-'
ment, so es to accommodate the trade of the Mersey in
connecion with the dock estate.
Mr. North : You say that you gave Mr. Saunders and
the Great Western Company to understand that the docks
would be carried out in connection with the Liverpool
docks?
Witness: Yes. . .

Mr. North : Will you have the goodness to explain to
the committee what you mean by " in connection with the
Liverpool d. cks ?"
Witness. I will explain a; well as I can. S) long as
Birkenhead was separate and diitinct from Live, pool, and
had different interests, it required docks of an entirely
different construction ; whereas, if it evere connected with
Liverpool, it might be desirable to have the steam trade
over at Birkenhead, in which case wider entrances to
the docks would be required. It might also be advisable
to take the timber trade to Birkenhead from Liverpool ;
and the construction of timber docks is upon a different
principle to the construction of general docks. That is all
the explanation I can give.
Mr. John Laird, examined by Mr. Hope Scott : I am
an iron shipbuilder at Birkenhead, and 1 rent a large s`lip
building yard of the corporation between Monk's Ferry
and Birkenhead Ferry, I have been chairman of the Bir-
kenhead Improvement Commissioners for the last two
years. I was also a considerable shareholder in the Dock
Company, and I ir,ld extensive property in Birkenhead.
As an owner of property, and as a large ratepayer, my
interest in Birkenhead is very great, I took part in the
negotiations for the purchase of the docks. The manner
in which the works were to he completed was frequently
discussed in the negotiations, but the corporation invariably
sail_, that they would not be bound by Mr. Rendel's plan,
but that they would insert a clause giving the Birkenhead
people a year in which to propose their plans; and if plans
were not proposed in that period, the parliamentary
plans would be carried out. As chairman of the Birken-
head Improvement Commissioners, I reported all that had
taken place in the negotiations and also before parliament.
The people of Birkenhead were most anxious that the
works should be placed in the hands of the Liverpool
Corporation. Changes were made in Mr. Rendel's plan
from time to time by Mr. Bendel himself. The low water
basin was originally proposed to cover 37 acres and now it
is proposed to cover only 29 acres. I took part in the
negotiations last autumn between the corporation, the rail-
way companies, and the Birkenhead Improvement Com-
missioners. I prefer Mr. Hartley's plan to Mr. Benders,
and my impression is that Mr. Hartley's plan to a great
extent was the plan agreed to by the Great Western
Company.
By Mr. Webster : In 1851, Admiral Beaufort and Mr.
Robert Stephenson, to whom the plans had been referred,
reported against Mr. Abernethy's plans and in favour of
Mr, Rendel's, but the evidence upon which their report
was based had been altered without the consent of the
witnesses. The Birkenhead Trustees were unanimous in
supporting Mr. Abernethy's plans, and opposing Mr.
RendePts.
The learned counsel here read a leter from Mr. Laird to
a Liverpool newspaper, dated May 12th, 1857, in reference
to a report that Messrs. John. Bibby and Son were about
to remove their steam trade to Southampton, in which
Mr. Laird stated that the best way of encouraging increased
accommodation at the port and deep water entrances,
which were the great wants at present, would he for the
Dock Committee to support the Corporation in endeavour-
ing to carry the Dock Bills now before Parliament. He
added that the Dock Committee must learn to consider
Liverpool and Birkenhead as one interest, and that if they
would give all the facilities which the present docks were
capable of affording, there was no ground for believing
that Messrs. Bibby and Son would take their trade to
Southampton.
Mr. Webster : Did you write that letter ?
Witness : I did, and the views expressed in it are the
views which I entertain at present. I have always hid a
strong 'opinion that the corporation of Liverpool would do
much more justice to Birkenhead than the Dock Com•
mittee, because I have invariably found that the repre-
sentatives of the ratepayers are the parties to preso on the
North Shore Scheme, and to do what they can to obstruct
the progress of Birkenhead. On the contrary, so far as I
have observed, the corporation would have been further
on at this time with Birkenhead, had it not been for their
being mixed up with the Dock Committee. I have no
interest whatever in Liverpool, but I have a very great
interest in Birkenhead.
Sir J. Graham : When you say " ratepayers," do yo
mean the dock ratepayers P
Witness : I mean the representatives of the dock due
payers. The corporation have already done a great deal
to promote the interest of Birkenhead, and they have a
large stake in the property on that side of the water. I
have generally tound that people who have a large stake
in property do all in their power to promote their own

interests.
By Mr. Webster : I was a large purchaser of leasehold
property from the Liverpool Corporation in 1843, shortly
before the Birkenhead commissioners resolved to apply to
Par.iament for power to construct docks at Birkenhead.
Mr. Shuttleworth was then called, and resumed his evi-
dence. lie said in answer to Mr. Burke: In 1812 the
corporation voted £5OO towards an application to Parlia -
ment to open the East India and China trade to the
general merchants of the coutry. In 1813 the dock
trustees were impoverished in consequence of the pressure
caused by the American war. They passed a resolution
stating that they were anious to allow a sum of money to
assist them in the prosecution of their works, and the
corporation lent them £5OOO, which was repaid with
interest in the course of a few years. The corporation
have also been at the expense of erecting a landing stage,
which is very necessary for the accommodationof passengers
and is also available to a certain extent, for the landing
of goods. It is open at all hours of the night
and at all times of the tide to the public, free of charge.
It cost altogether, including machinery, a sum of £35,157,
and was erected in about the year 1835. The annual cost
of the stage t') the corporation is about £9OO ; but it
been found insufficient for tthe accommodation of the
public, and another stage is now in the course of erection
which will be 1,000 feet long, and will cost £130,000.
The Lords of the Trecenry authorised money to he
borrowed for defraying the expense of eonstruceing this
stage, and a sinking fund is provided for extinguishing 'he
debt. The annual cost of mairoeining the stage will he
£B,OOO, and the debt will be extinguished at the rate of
£2,600 a year, which sum is included in the £B,OOO. The
corporation also expended upwards of £30,000 in 1829,
for the erection of a lighthouse near New Brighton, and in
1830 they contributed a further sum of 1,000 towards
opening out the Cbina trade, Money has also beon expended
in putting up a chain and cable machine. They spent X 11,144
in the machine, and gave the land upon which it has been
erected. A small charge is made for testing chains and
cables, but there is a deficit of £lOO in the receipts as
compared with the cost. Prior to 1835. the assizes of the
county were held at Lancaster. There was no railway
at that time open to the north, and as the business of the
i
county increased, which it did very largely, great ncon-
venience was experienced by the jurymen and witnesses
who were required to be inattendance.awAaiilnarggetheexir trialpense
was also incurred in keeping prisoners
at Lancaster. Petitions were presented with a view to
obtain the removal of the assizes for the southern division
t of the county to Liverpool, and after considerable negociA-