The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1839-09-06 00:00:00

CONTRACTS FOR PAVING THE MARKETS.

In the report of the Market Committee it was set forth,
that the tender of Mr. Thomas Brewer, for paving the South
and North Hay-markets, had been accepted.
Mr. COOPER moved, hat the proceedings of the Market
Committee lie confirmed, with the exception of the portion
relating to this tender. He had had a memorial placed in his
hands, the statements in which were fully borne out by what
lie had heard in the report of the committee. It appeared
pretty clear that great partiality, on account of political
opinion, had been shown in the acceptance of the tender.
The person selected was Thomas Brewer, who had never
served his time to the trade. The persons who sent' in ten-
ders were—Williath Green, James Clarke, Thomas Abram,
and Thomas Brewer. In all cases of this sort the respecta-
bility of the party should be a point for consideration. It
appeared that Mr. Brewer's was not the lowest tender, nor
was he more respectable or better able to fulfil his contract
than the others. If this mode were to be adopted,—if the
lowest tender were not accepted, but if persons were selected
on account of their political principles, great injustice was
done to parties who sent in tenders, for the necessary esti-
mates could not be made without great expense. He (Mr.
Cooper) knew of estimates which had cost the parties
£3O or £4O. Unless the lowest tenders were taken, no per-
sons would make tenders in future, to the great injury of the
corporation and their operations.: The surveyors knew that
the other parties were respectable, and if respectability were
not considered, the Council would continually come in col-
lision with the public. Mr. Cooper here read the memorial,
as follows :

" TO THE MAYOR, ALDERMEN, &C.—
"GENTLEMEN,—An advertisement appeared in the public
papers for tenders for paving the North,and South Markets,
when your petitioners sent in the tenders under seal, to the
Surveyor, directed to the Chairman of the Market Com-
mittee; that the prices tendered by your petitioners is, Wm.
Green,ls. 91d. for the North Market, Is. 10d. for the South
Market, ss. for the square sets. James Clark, ls. Ild. per
yard, taking the whole together. Thomas Abram, Is. 10d.,
ditto, ditto. Thomas Brewer, Is. 10d., for the North and
South paving, and ss. 10d., for the square sets ; which would
stand thus, (for the whole, agreeable to quantity given by
your Surveyor.) [This remarked. Mr. Cooper, is the correct
I way of putting it, for your Surveyor advertised for 23,000
yards of paving.] William Green, 23,500 yards, £2204,
I lower than Brewer £5O. James ark, ditto, £2252, less
than Brewer, £2. Thomas Abram, £2154, less than Brewer,
£lOO ; and Thomas Brewer, £2254. That your petitioners
were surprised that your Market Committee had determined
to give the paving of the markets to Thomas Brewer, who is
no pavior by trade. That your petitioners were brought up
to the trade and have on hand a considerable quantity of the
best materials ; can give the most respectable references ;
can well refer to many of your body, and are also able to
give the best security, and our prices being considerably
lower than the said Thomas Brewer. Under such circum-
stances, we do hope that the Town Council will put your
veto upon the said determination of the Market Committee,
and give the work to those entitled to it, by lowness of price,
and respectability of character. That unless your petitioners
have justice done them, they must decline again making any
tenders to the corporation, while so gross an act of partiality
and injustice is suffered to be done.
(Signed,) " WILLIAM GREEN.
" JAMES CLARK."
Mr. Cooper concluded by moving that the proceedings of
the committee be confirmed, with the exception of that part
which referred to the paving of the markets, which be re-
ferred back to the Market Committee, with the petition of
James Clark, and William Green, and that they report
thereon to the next council.
Mr. JOHN SMITH said he did not believe the political par-
tiality complained of by Mr. Cooper had been shown, never-
theless, he thought this a proper case for inquiry : he would
therefore second the motion.
Mr. J. NELSON Woo said he could not but feel the great-
est surprise at the accusation of Mr. Cooper that partiality
had been shown by the committee on political grounds. He
happened to be one of the persons on that committee who
had accepted the tender in question, and he was convinced
that not one of the gentlemen present knew an individual
who had sent in a tender, or about his politics, when Mr.
Green's tender was considered ; no one present knew Mr.
Green. Mr. Brewer's tender was considered ; the surveyor
and he knew Mr. Brewer ; he was a respectable man, and did
his work well. They at once decided upon accepting his
tender.

Mr. I. IfoLmEs said he was not at all ,surprised at what
had taken place—at the neglect which had peen proved, for
this was a committee which acted upon reform principles.
TLese reform principles were beautiful in theory, but bad in
practice. He thought as it was confessed that the com-
mittee knew nothing of any of the tenderers, they ought to
have inquired. He thought this was a proper subject for
inquiry, and that Mr. Cooper had made cut a very excellent
case.

Mr. THORNHILL said, the memorial made out a differ-
ence of £lOO between the tender of Mr. Abram and that of
Mr. Brewer. This was not correct. Besides Mr. Abram
made no - proper tender as he said nothing about the sets,
neither did Mr. Clark. If Abram did the who;e, he would
amount to £3B more than Mr. Brewer. Some of the other
tenders would have amounted to £lBl more than Mr.
Brewer's, 'and one, that of a person named Russell, to £375
more. With respect to the tender of Mr. Green, instead of
being £5O less than that of Mr. Brewer, it was £2l 2s. less.
They did not on all-occasions in a work of this magnitude,
which would cost no-less than £l5OO, bind themselves to ac-
cept the lowest tender. They required the work to be done
in a firm and proper manner. They did not know the per-
sons who put in the tenders, but the surveyor was asked if
he knew any of theni' and he said he knew Brewer, and he
was a workman that did his work in a firm and satisfactory
manner. He had performed work before for the corpora-
tion, and also for the Railway Company, and had given the
greatest satisfaction.. As to the political allusions which had
been thrown out, he despised the very idea of such a thing.
He believed, not a gentleman -who had decided upon the ac-
ceptance of that tender, knew: any- thing of the polities of
Mr.. Brewer till Mr Cooper was so kind as to inf.rm them.
He appealed to Mr: Wood, who was on that committee,
whether any political influence whatever was allowed to in-
terfere with its business.
Mr. JORDAN said he would read the names of the persons
of that committee who had decided the point in question :
Mr. Thornhill, Mr. Wood, Mr. Evans, and himself (Mr. J.)
He believed that not 'one of them knew the politics of Mr.
Brewer. He, for one, did not.
Mr. RATHBONIi hoped the Market Committee would not
refuse to have the subject referred back, that they might
report upon it, in order to show the idleness of these charges,
made by persons .who trifled with the feelings and character
of the gentlemen who composed their committees, and to
throw back. these aspersions upon the persons making them.
Mr. SMITH said he, seconded. the motion only for inquiry :
he did not charge the'committee with partiality. .
Mr. RATHBONE begged to say that he did not include
Mr. Sthith amongst those to whom he meant his remarks to
apply.

Etr, thought, after the language which they had
heard—after hearing the gentlemen of the Market Commit-
tee accused of being influenced by partiality to a political
bias, it seemed most inconsistent in the seconder of this
motion to wish to refer back the subject for cons:dmation to
the very persons who were accused.

Mr. G.H. LAWRENCE said he should support Mr. Cooper,
because he thought inquiry would do no harm ; but he must
express his conviction, that there had been no party bias,
and no partiality. He thought, however, that the committee
had acted hastily. •
Mr. CURRTE said, if the council were satisfied with Mr.
Thornhill's explanation, which he thought a triumphant
refutation, he could not see the use of referring the•rnatter
back to them. It was a question which the Market Com-
mittee might proceed upon if they thought proper, in con-
sequence of the accusation; but it was one with which the
council had nothing to do.
Mr. COOPER said he did not charge the committee with
either Partiality or being influenced by politics, for he be-
lieved them incapable of being so influenced. There were,
however, two markets, and they ought to have divided the
work. They said Mr. Green was not known to them. It
was not long since he had seen him paving Fox-Street for
them. Mr. Thornhill said he did not know Mr. Green,
when Mr. Green had done work for them.
The council went to the vote on Mr. Cooper's motion :
in its favour, 9 against it, 33; majority, 24.
The memorial was ordered to lie on the table.

• THE NEW SCHOOLS.
The proceedings of the Education Committee having been
read and adopted,
The MAYOR put it to the council, whether the estimates
for the building of the new schools should be submitted to
the Finance Committee.

Mr. BOLTON said, with regard to the erection of a school
on the site of Islington market, when they considered the
buildings which were to be erected on the Old Infirmary-
ground opposite, it became a matter for consideration, whe-
ther they ought not to hold the land in question, lest it might
be required for very important purposes.
It was here intimated by several voices, that the proceed-
ings 'containing a resolution to the above effect had been con-
firmed.

Mr. BOLTON said, many gentlemen, as well as himself
had been taken by surprise, on hearing that this was contem
plated.

The MAYou.thought that could scarcely be, as the notices
expressed distinctly the building of a school in Islington.
Mr. FuEhrE;--Islington is a mile long.
• Mr. EVANS-said, he found that all in his vicinity had been
equally mistaken with himself respecting the ground on which
the school was to be built. This was a matter of much im-
portance, and !they were not aware when they confirmed those
proceedings, that they were making a definitive application
of that valuable piece of land.
Mr. RATHBONE, Mr. SHEIL, and Mr. CuituiE, joined in
protesting against re-opening a question that had been dis-
posed of.