The Sun.
London, England, 1856-02-25 00:00:00

" CAPTIIN ROBERT:ON'S REPORT.

' My Lords,—Referring to the 434th section of the
Merchant Shipping Act, which provides that an assessor
appointed by the Board of Trade to assist at an investi-
gation shall, upon the conclusion of the case, either sig-
nify his concurrence in the report by signing the same,
or, if he dissents therefrom, shall signify such dissent
and his reasons therefor to the Board of Trade,' I beg to
submit that I differ from Mr. Yardley in the conclusion
come to him respecting the cause of collision between
the Josephine Willis and the Mangerton, and consider
that, so far from the chief officer of the Josephine Willis,
who was in charge of the deck at the time, being excus-
able, the collision wait caused by his wrongful act and
default, and I submit the following reasons for forming
that opinion, viz. :
" 1. That the chief mate of the Josephine Willis, at the
time of a light being reported ahead, rather on the star-
board bow, was in charge of the deck of that vessel, and
ought to have known, from the bearings and distance of
Folkestone, that the light on Dungeness was some 12 or
14 miles to the westward ; and if the night was such as
is described it was impossible to see so far ; consequently
there could be no necessity for immediately altering the
course of the ship for the reason stated by him.
"2. That be should have carefully watched the light,
and upon seeing a d light ought then to have :newel
that it was the port bow of a steamer crossing or edging
to starboard ; that there was a risk of collision if they
continued their respective courses, and have ported his
helm in ac:ordance with the 296th section of the Mer-
chant Shipping Act ; they would then have passed on
the port side of each other, and tlaus have avoided a
collision. The evidence of Mr. Ray, late chief officer
of the Josephine Willis, is confirmatory of this in a great
measure, as ho admits that bad the Josephine Willie
ported her helm no collision would have taken place.
"3. With respect to the chief mate's evidence as to
his seeing a green Ugh', I cannot conceive that was pos-
sible until the vessels were so close that a collision was
inevitable,
"4. With respect to the course pursued by the Mae-
gerton, I think they did perfectly right in porting their
helm after losing sight of a light they had just before
seen a point to a point and a half on their port bow, as
they could not pozsibly tell the way the vessel ml ht be
standing, which they could have done if she had been a
steamer. It is to ha regretted that the helm was not
put hard a-port at first.
" I am also inclined to think that bal a bright light,
such as is required to be used by all sailing vessels, been
shown the collision might not have taken place. The
steamer Mangerton losing sight of the light of the Jose-
phine Willis arose, in my opinion, from the latter star-
boarding her helm, thereby presenting to the steamer a
green light, and that being a fainter light accounts for
its not being again seen up to the time of the collision,.
as stated by some of the witnesses. The lantern in
question was fixed at the bowsprit end of the Josephine
Willis, and showed a bright light ahead, a green light
on the starboard bow, and a red l;glit_ the pork,
tainly not such a light as is required to be shown by the
Admiralty regulations. I consider, therefore, that there
is no blame to be attached to any person on board the
Mangerton as regards the collision.
" With regard to the conduct of the captain of the
Mangerton after the collision, I coincide in the opinion
expressed by Mr. Yardley, excepting that I consider him
to blame for having all his boats inboard on deck; and
one of the boats a Bich was got out, and by which seven
persons were saved, had neither thole's nor even a plug to
keep the water from coming in. This is noticed in Mr.
Yardley's report.
" The conduct of the two mates and part of the crew
of the Josephine Willis, after getting on board the Man-
gerton, seems to have been very reprehensible, no at-
tempt having been made by them to go to the assistance
of the persons left on the wreck of the Josephine Willis.
"There are four particulars elicited in this evidence
to which I would beg to call their lordships' attention :
" 1. The state of the boats and their being carried in-
board, which is said to be very common.
"2. The particular kind of lantern carried by the
Josephine Willis, and which is said to be coming into
general use.
" 3. To the very unsatisfactory answers given by the
several witnesses as regards the lights and the rule of
the road.
"sl. The creditable conduct of two young seamen,
passengers
bythe ahg
Anderson, w
the wreck and saved seven of the crew and passengers
aon
wenterto n,
in nt h
a ci .Tames
Mangerton
boatewhata
and to
when no one else would go, and who are, I submit,
deserving of such a reward as their lordships may deem
fit.—l have the honour to be,
"Your Lordships' obedient servant,
"13. ROBERTSON, Commander, R.N.,
Surveyor-General.
" Board of Trade, Feb. 21."

TOWN DUES-MEETING- IN LIVERPOOL,

On Friday a ,oublic meeting, convened by the Mayor,
in compliance wite a requisition signed by nearly 2;000
of the bankers mere ants, brokers, and general traders
,
of Liverpool, was held h. St. George's-hall ; John Stew-
art, Esq., the Mayor, prey. ling. The meeting was con-
vened in opposition to the bii: introduced into tne House
of Commons by the Vice-Presitle,,,t of the Board of Trade,
by which it is proposed to deprive the corporation of the
borough of the properties of the town dues and anchor-
age. The meeting was exceedingly crowded, and there
were present on the platform most of the members of the
corporation, dock committee, and the leading gentlemen
of the town.
The CHAIRMAN in opening the proceedings, said that
the property sought to be wrested front the corpotation
had been secured to them by conveyance, and those who
were for abstracting it, forgot that they were losing oae
of the great strongholds of society by which the property
of the country was held, not only by municipalities, but
by individuals. (Cheers.) He tool it front unquestionable
authority—that there was property held to an enormous
amount by municipalities, noble lords, dukes, and others
derived from that very title of which their town dues
formed only a small part. (Cheers.)
Mr. J. P. HEYWOOD, late high sheriff of the *aunty,
moved the first resolution, as follows : "That this inen-
t-
itig has learnt with astonishment that a bill has been i
troduced into Parliament by the Vice.President.of the
Board of Trade, by which it is proposed to deprive the
burgesses and corporation of this and many other sea-
ports
in England, Scotland, Ireland, and Wales, of the
revenue which they now lawfully derive from dues on
goods and shipping." ure
In the me
mj
as of the Govern-
ent, ho could see neither reason norjustice. The
town dues were not devoted to fecal purposes only,
thed districts
s
around Liverpool, l
rgel
y by
but the greater part of them were expended in matters
connected with the welfare e I the nationa large, and
more particularly
whicho li
of the
tmanufacturingted a en
efi
facili-
ties afforded by the corporation of Liverpool to the
commerce of the town. The jealousy with which some
of their neighbours regarded the town dues was, in fact,
foolish and unbounded. Those dues were obtained by
the Corporation as the result of a fair and free bargain
and sale, and consequently there could be no justice in
taking them from the Corporation, except upon the
principle of an ample compensation. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. GEORGE HOLT seconded the resolution. They
had seen how legally the foundation of their rights rested
in a court of law, when it had been decided that the
town dues were their property ; and who of them would
not be satisfied that their claim was good after such an
assertion as the courts of law gave ? (Hear, hear.) The
dues had mainly been devoted to purposes of a national
character. For the purpose of having better access to
the docks from the town, and from the former to the
railways, the Corporation had granted land of their es- I
tate, at almost nominal prices, for the benefit of the 1
docks, and for the promotion of the commerce of the
country. Look at the conservancy of the river, the
landing stage, &c., paid for out of the funds of, the Cor-
poration ; and if the dues were taken from them, did
they think they would have a remission of those rates ?
Did they imagine that the Vice President of the Board
of Trade would administer far better than the Corpora
tion of Liverpool had done ? (Cries of "No, no.") He
was properly reminded of St. George's Hall, which had
been a very sore subject, Was it not built as much for

the county as for that borough ? Was it not also built
for the Hundred of West Derby, and for Salford, as
much as for Liverpool ?—for the administration of
jus-
t'ee ; and if a tax were laid on the hundreds, the county
would greatly repine. (Cheers.). With regard to the
meeting at Manchester, held the previona day, be "-as
surprised to see such inaccuracies ; he had almost said
foolery—(laughter)—speakers agreeing in favour of the
bill, and supposing that they would he relieved by its
operation. They would not be relieved one farthing,
but they might go elsewhere were they successful.
Mr. S. R. GRAVES, chairman of the Shipov.-ners' Aeso-
elation, moved the next resolution to the effect, that the
dues on anchorage tolls and on goods had been legally
acquired by the corporation, and were too trifling in
amount to be of serious importance to the -shipping
interest, the right having, been also ratified by the highest
law courts. The Vice-President of the Board of Trade,
in the speech which he delivered in introducing the bill
into the House of Commons, complained of the griev-
ances which the shipowners of -his country felt by the
operation of their town dues. Now he (Ur. Gra. e )
denied that the shipowners of that town, or of the
country, had ever asked to be relieved from the town
dues. He felt convinced that the Government them-
selves were ignorant of the measure which they asked
tie country to support. For himself, he looked upon
the bill as notl-ing mare nor less than a mockery for,
instead cf a bow, he conceived that it won d absedst,ly
become a barthen to the shipowner. (Hear.) lie felt
that he was justified in stating that the ehii swat r•
that port had unanimously expresied their 61am-rival
of the measure, and were determined t r adopt every
means ito oppose it. The association was prepared to
offer the mist vigorous opp .sition to the bill in its pas-
sage t'hough Parliament. (Loud cheers.) [Here the
gee titer read an extract from the proceedings of the
speoial meeting of the Shipowners' Aesociatien, which
was to the effect that that b rdy had never considered
the town dues as bearing injuriously on shippirg or the
commerce of the port of the Mersey. Teat th 7 had
never made any etch complaints to Geiernment or Par-
liement, and that any such representations w rich might
have been made to their honourable house had been
made in error and without inquiry. The speaker also
read an extract from a petitie n to F'arliament against
the bill, which was agreed to at a meeting of the Asso-
ciation.] In continuation Mr. Graves proceeded to say
that he thoUght such a forcible appeal from the ship-
: which'wobwhi
msen members er -
owners
whße
was nsfill
Rd; not:trahaanßi
readn
:Agi
sal
NI
siimeaKekdi
;eel
liNndl toti proaa ine tffdatt
secondeder rtch ettochtnot he attention of the
influence:er:
osdt."
rignefoil
lc
at:
urt4t.tvi
:r e° votes
o°,
nfnajtaphuoaactnet
a shipowner, denied that from his 40 yearn' experience,
that the removal of the dues would benefit shippirg.
Quite the contrary. He instanced the fact of the surplus
funds of the Marine Board and anothei association hav-
ing been applied to the benefit of other places than
Liverpool. (Cheers.)
Mr. JAMES AIKEN, the next speaker, entered at length
into the origin and history of the town dues, tracing
them from the earliest period to the time when they
were absolutely purchased from the Sefton family by the
corporation, and then reverted to the trial as to their
legality, which took plane in the year 1830. The trial,
he said, took place before the Lord Chief Justice of
England, when most eminent counsel were engaged on
both sides. Eventually, the case went to the jury, and
the corporation obtained fa 'verdict. Their opponents
then availed themselves of a bill of exceptions, but on
their own counsel intimating to them that they had not
a leg to stand u) on—that our right to them was clear
and complete, they gave up the contest, and submitted
to an.adversedecision. Though entitled to those dues,
ithout performing any act, the corporation gave ground
for the making of dockr, and, instead of seeking for
power to rate the dock estate, they were parties to an
act being obtained by which the docks of Liverpool were
ma le national property, and freed from being rated at
all. (Hear, bear.) If the Manchester gentlemen and
others would but reed the statement made by the Vice-
President of the Board of Trade in the House of Com-
mons they will find the title to those dues indisputably
clear and complete. He felt confident the bill would be
rejected by a large mejority. He supposed the Vice-
President of the Board would not deny that if these
dues had still remained the property of the Earl of
Sefton, be would not have thought of touching them ;
but as they were no longer the property of an individual,
they were no longer to be held sacred. (Applause.)
Mr: J. H. SMITH, a shipowner, also argued at consi-
derable length that the shipping interest did not consider
the town dues as at present levied a burden, while
there was nothing in Mr. Lowe's to show them, that
when the dues were collected by the Board of Trade,
they would not be appropriated to matters unconnected
with the port, such as the harbour of Holyhead, which
was not of the slightest use to the commerce of Liver.
pool.
The resolution was passed unanimously.
The third resolution, condemnatory of the proposed
bill as a measure of unjustifiable spoliation, was moved
by Mr. Amnaoss LACE, and seconded by Mr. R.
BROCLEB.I):K,

Mr. Councillor PICTON, in supporting it, contended
that hitherto no acknowledged right or property had
been taken from individuals or communities without
granting compensation. In reference to the Manchester
meeting, be deprecated the terms applied to the corpo-
r ation of Liverpool, and strongly condemned thephra. es
of plunder and plunderers applied to those dues and to
the corporation. It seemed to have been taken for
granted throughout the Manchester meeting, that if
Mr. Lowe's bill pee ed there would be no mots dues on
goods—than 2d. per bale on a bale of goods would for
ever cease, awl that halcyon days for the people of
Manchester weu`d begin. But he felt tbat Manchester
would not be quite in this happy /oat', for he had looked
icarsfully over the bill brought in by the Vice-President
of the Board of Trade, and he did not fee that the town
dues were to be done away with at all—(heao—neither
did he see the slightest reference to it in Mr. Lowe's
speech. He warned the gentlemen of Manchester, that,
if successlul in uhtaining all that was . proposed in the
bill, they would find that they bad got rid of the Liver-
pool town dues, but had merely been successful in trans.
!erring them to the hands of Government. Be (con-
demned the bill as one el the numerous attempts o the
G'.vernrnent to carry out the reprehensible system of
cent) alisatior.

The resolution passed nem, con.
Mr. IL A. MAME opposed the fourth resolution,
which condemned the drawing of any distinctions be-
tween the rights of property belonging to private indivi-
duals and that held by communities. In the course of a
lengthy speech, Mr. Macfie detailed the various public
purposes for which the corporation had expended their
funds. They had built public baths and wasbhouees,
opened free public libraries., spent upwards of 1,000,0001.
in widening streets, principally for facilitating the com-
mercial business of the port ; 30,0001. had been laid out
in the constriction of a li,;hthouse, and upwards of 1201.
was now being expended in the construction of a large
landing stage for sea-going steamers. The very cotton
and timber brought to Liverpool for Manchester and the
surrounding towns involved the corporation in a vast
annual expense in repairing the streets.
Mr. CHAS. SAUNDEP.S seconded the resolution, which
Wact un.inimors y adoptect.
Mr. W. RATHBONB moved the fifth resolution, which
protested against the attempts made in the bill t re-
move the control of the corporate fund.: from municipal
to Government officials. The Government, if successful
in their attacks on the right of corporations, might some
day take a fancy to confiscate railway property, for the
great and wealthy railway companies were also corpo-
rations, with no better legal title to their vast revenues
than that possessed by Liverpool to their town dues. As
to Manchester, the corporation of that city devote the
profits of their gasworks to municipal purposes, and by
them they have paid for many town improvements.
Some day the Board of Trade might take a fancy to
manage that property, and he would like to know what
the Manchester people would say to that ?
The resolution was seconded by Mr. A. F. HAMILTON,
of the firm of Brows, Shipley, and Co., who said that
the mercantile community had always found the corpo-
ration ready and willing to do anything which would
facilitate the business of the port.
The resolution having been supported by Mr. CHRIS.
TOPHER BUSHELL, was passed unanimously.
The adoption of a petition to Parliament, embodying
the resolutions agreed to at the meeting, was moved by
Mr. U. DAbisoNb(agent for Messrs. Allsopp and Co.)
The resolution was seconded by Mr. SIDNEY, boot and
ed e interminated shoemaker,
Bto the chair-
man, and three cheers for the Queen.
and haviwn
githbe a been
vote of thanks passed item. con., the pro

LAST YEAL'S IMPORTS OF GRAIN AND
FLOUR.

A return has just been published by the Board of
Trade of the grain and flour imported into this country
during the year 1855, distinguishing the relative propor•
tious from the various sources of supply. The total
taken of grain of all sorts appears to have been 5,729,241
quarters, and of flour 1,922,318 cwt. This presents a
considerable diminution from 1854, when the quantities
were of grain 6,850,498 quarters, and of flour 3,705,161
cwt. The quantity ordinarily to have been looked for
from Russia, against which there is now a blank, may
be eQtirnated at about 1,560,000 quarters of grain.
Of the total of grain the quantities of each description
were :

Qrs.
Wheat
Barley
Oats
liye
Peas
Beans
1,3214114325,:394337543898
Indian Corn
340
Buckwheat
Bare or bigg
Total
Of these the chief portion of the barley and oats came
from Denmark, Sweden, Hanover, and Holland. Of
peas the largest importation _was from Denmark and the
Those Towns. The beans were principally from Egypt.
Of the Indian corn the United States supplied more than
half, and the remainder was mostly fr om Greece and
Egypt.

EXPLOSION OF GAS.—During Friday night a chan-
delier in the head offices of the Manchester and Shef-
field Railway, at Manchester, fell from the ceiling, and
on Saturday morning, when the woman employed to
light fires entered for that purpose, so much gas had
escaped jthat an immediate explosion occurred. The
woman was a good deal burnt, several windows wero
blown out, and doors detached from their hinges ; some
fittings also caught fire, but the porters and servants of
the company being speedily in attendance, the Rams
were extinguished with very slight damage being done.
Tllo loss will therefore be inconsiderable

:-~„~