The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1836-10-14 00:00:00

TOWN COUNCIL PROCEEDINGS.

On Wednesday last the monthly meeting of the Town Coun-
cil was held.

The Deputy TowN-cLEux having read over the minutes of
.he last monthly, and subsequent council meetings, proceeded
Lo read the report of the

FINANCE COMMITTEE.

At a meeting of the committee on the 9th of September, it
was resolved that the lecturers of the churches of Liverpool,
have their stipends paid to them as it appeared they were se-
cured to them on the presentation from the corporation, under
their seal ; which presentation had been sent to the Bishop.

LEASES.
A number of applications for the renewal of leases were read,
and granted.
Mr. Councillor EARLE said, he observed that it was recoin-
mended to renew the lease of of a house in Whitechapel. Pot.'
many years past the leases in this street had been renewed.
The street was very narrow, and must eventually be widened,
and he did not see why this lease should be granted, as it would
be rendering the council liable to future expense. He observed,
also, that a lease was to be renewed in Hanover-street, and he
believed that the width of this street had not yet been decided
on, and the parties applying for the lease might be building
premises which would have Co be pulled down again.
The MAYOR said, that there was a plan for Hanover-street
determined up in.
Mr. Courcillor RATHBONE said, with respect to the renewal
of leases, it appeared to him, that the council at all times ought
to renew leases. An equivalent was given for all leases; he was
aware that he was a party interested in this question. The re-
fusal of leases frequently subjected individuals to great injury,
when, sometimes, no improvement was contemplated, on which
to ground the refusal. He thought that it ought to be a gene-
ral rule to renew all leases, and that was the right course for a
public body to take, except were a special improvement was
contemplated, and a definite time was laid down.
Mr. Alderman EVANS would recommend, with Mr. Earle,
that if it was not going a great way into futurity, hereafter
all leases should be let with a clause, which, if necessary, would
enable the corporation to recover the property without any
question or trouble on such occasions.
Mr. Councillor BOLTON, for the information of the council,
would state, that so far as the finance committee was concerned,
whenever a street was contemplated to be widened, they re-
fused to confirm the application for the renewal of leases.
When there was no such contemplation, such applications were
granted as a matter of course, on payment of the usual fine.
He did not know whether Mr. Earle meant specifically to ob-
ject to the renewal of the lease in Whitechapel, but he knew
that there had been nothing stated which might lead it to be in-
ferred by the finance committee that that street was intended to
be improved. If Mr. Earle had any objections to the granting
of this particular lease, the better way would be to except it,
and for Mr. Earle to state his reasons for objecting to it.
Mr. Councillor EARLE being called upon, said he would
merely wish to avoid what had been done on a former occasion
by the old council. In Dale-street many of the houses had been
sold over and over again, and they had had to pay as much as
£lo per square yard for land which would not have cost them a
a farthing if they had refused to renew the lease. They were
guardians of the public property, and they ought not wantonly,
for want of forethought, to throw it away. He did not think
that any leases ought to be granted in Whitechapel ur in Para-
dise-street.

The MAYOR said it had always been the custom to infuse into
the minds of leaseholders that their property was of the cha-
racter of a freehold, and that had been a very politic course.
(Hear.) Where they had adopted a different course, the coun-
cil had never thought it right to look prospectively 10 of 20
years, and refuse to renew leases on account of changes which
might occur, considering that it was doing an injury to private
individuals, and giving an uncertainty to this description of
property. The grand point had always been to render this
species of property as certain as possible.
Mr. Alderman BROWN thought it must be obvious that private
interests must give way to the public good. He took the same
view as Mr. Earle, and thought that where streets were to be
rebuilt and expensive houses erected, those buildings ought not
to be erected without the consent of the corporation. He should
not like to inconvenience the present tenants, but he thought it
might be practicable to put a provision in the new leases to
effect this.

Mr. Councillor EARLE said he merely urged this on the prin-
ciple of the thing.
The MAYOR, said perhaps the council would not press this
question now, but let it be a subject of serious consideration and
future discussion, for he could not help seeing that it was a very
important question to the corporate property. If such a clans°
were to be inserted in the leases it might very materially affect
the corporate property.
Mr. Councillor S'HISL apprehended it might be of very serious
consequence if this discussion went forward to the public; be-
cause if a man could not count with some degree of certainty on
obtaining his lease renewed it would materially lessen the value
of his property. And to say that they would bind a man down to
give up his property whenever he was called upon, was there
any one in that council who would give one half for property
under such circumstances. In bringing forward these undi-
gested suggestions they really might do a very great deal of
injury to the property they sat there to protect. Gentlemen
would do much better (he said it in all humility) in all matters
of such importance if they would take a little trouble to reflect
on the consequences of observations before they made them, and
after reflecting on them to offer them in the shape of resolutions.
Even now, from these observations going before the public, a
great deal of injury might be done. He hoped it would go
abroad that no intention whatever was intended to alter the
present plan adopted.
Mr. Councillor HENRY LAWRENCE said, as there was no mo-
tion before the council he would move that the proceedings of
the committee be confirmed. _

The report was then confirmed.
GLOBE CHAMBERS.

The MAYOR said a report had been handed in that morning
from the improvement committee .relating to the purchase of
the Globe C limbers. . . .

'['he Deputy TOWN-CLERK then read the report of the com-
mittee on this subject as follows :
" The committee have to report that at a meeting of the im-
provement committee, held on the 28th of August last, it was
resolved that the surplus laud, part of the Globe-chambers,
should be offered for sale, and the sum of £l2 per yard was fixed
as the price thereof. On the 7th Sept. such resolution was fixed
in council. In the month of August, a person, probably Mr.
Sanderson, called on Mr. Okill, and inquired whether such
land would be sold. Mr. Okill replied that it would, and as'
there would be a sale by auction of corporation property about
December, this laud would probably be put up with the rest;
but Mr. Okill states that he never positively stated, that it was
to be sold by auction. At a meeting of the improvement coin-
mittee, Mr. Franklin, who had been previously employed to
sell the materials of the Globe-chambers, and had actually sold
the same to Mr. Parry. was directed to put up a board ou the
remaining laud, offering the same fur sale, but such board was
never put up. At a meeting of the improvement committee on
the 12th of Sept. letters from Messrs. Barclay and Clibborn of
the 9th, and from Mr. Wm. Rotheram, of the 10th, requesting
to know the price, having been read, and the price fixed by the
last committee having been communicated to Mr. Clibborn, it
was resolved that they be applied to for an answer to the com-
munication, and in the event of their declining the same, that
the land be offered to Mr. Rotheram on the same terms. On
the 13th, Mr. Okill having received a letter from Mi. Clibborn
declining the purchase, wrote to Mr. Rotheram offering him the
land at £l2 per yard. On the 13th or 14th, (the note bears no
date) Mr. Rotheram wrote to Mr. Okill offering £lO per yard
yard. On the 18th, Mr. Parry applied to Mr. Franklin respect-
ing the price of the land, when Mr. Franklin told him the same,
and also stated that another offer had been made, though he
does not recollect whether he mentioned the name. At a meet-
ing of the improvement committee of the 19th, Mr. Clihhorn's
letter declining the purchase, and Mr. Rotheram's letter offering
£lO, and Mr. Parry's offering £lolos., having been read, it was
resolved that Mr. Rotheram be informed that the committee
cannot deviate from the price fixed, and in the event of his de-
clining the same, that it be offered to Mr. Parry on the terms
of the offer to Mr. Rotheram. On the 20th, Mr. Okill commu-
nicated the above resolution to Mr. Rotheram, and informed
him that a higher offer bad been submitted to the committee;
but did not communicate with Mr. Parry. On the 20th, Mr.
Parry called on Mr.' Franklin, and inquired of him whether
he was authorised to sell the land. Mr. Franklin replied
in the affirmative. Mr. Parry said, " I will give you
twelve pounds per yard for it." Mr. Franklin said,
" Write me a note to that effect." Mr. Parry said, " The pur-
chase-money is ready." Mr. Franklin answered, " Put that
down at the bottom of your note." The note was given to Mr.
Franklin, and Mr. Parry said, in conversation, " Is it a sale?"
Mr. Franklin said, " Yes; unless anything supersedes it."
This expression was construed by the banking company as
meaning the confirmation of the sale by the council. Mr.
Franklin says he meant its being superseded by Mr. Rotheram
accepting the terms; he, Mr. Franklin, having alluded to his
being in treaty for the purchase of the land, in his former in-
terview with Mr. Parry. Mr. Parry's note was delivered by
Mr. Franklin to Mr. Okill, who told Mr. Franklin that the
land was under offer to Mr. Rotherham. On the 21st, Mr. Ro-
theram wrote to Mr. Okill, agreeing to purchase the land at
£l2; and on that day Mr. Okill wrote to Mr. Parry, telling him
that Mr. Rotheram's application was the first, and that he had
offered the £l2. On the 26th, Mr. Rotheram's letter, and a let-
ter from the Tradesmen's Bank, preferring a claim to 'this pur-
chase, in consequence of what they asserted to be a priority of
application, were read in the improvement committee, the sub-
ject was brought forward, and the surveyor having attended and
explained, it was resolved, " that the directors be informed that
the committee have investigated all the circumstances relative
to the sale, and regretted their disappointment, but cannot ad-
mit that they have any ground of complaint.
" Your committee on the whole, are of opinion that Mr. Ro-
therham being the party actually in treaty with the improve-
ment committee, the negotiation not having been broken off, is
entitled to be considered the purchaser, but they have come to
this conclusion with some difficulty, owing to the circumstance
of two authorised agents having been employed to effect the
sale, amid although 11Ir. Franklin did state to Mr. Parry that
another offer had been made, they are of opinion•that Mr. San-
derson was deterred from makingan earlier offer in expectation
of a sale by auction. In conclusion, they cannot help regret-
ting that a fruitless negotiation should have been kept up with
the bank through so important an officer as the surveyor, and
that the proceedings of the improvement committee had not
been more explicitly and promptly communicated to the baelt.
They think the practice of offering all land by auction; before
any private treaty be resorted to, ought to be adopted as a gene-
ral rule for the future, (hear, hear,) and that one channel only
for selling the property should be adopted.
"They have to add with satisfaction, that they can discover
no grounds whatever for the impression, that any member of
the council had the least interest in the transaction.
(Signed) " GEO. HOLT, Chairman."
The 111 avert enquired if it was the pleasure of the Council to
confirm the report.
Mr. Councillor SHIEL did not understand what the report
was to lead to. There were some discrepances in this business
with which they must deal. In the first place, there was an
offer made of £lO. and another offer of ten guineas; yet the
man who made the higher offer had' his negotiation broken,
whilst he who made the lower offer had his continued. It was
entirely a negociation. Mr. Rotherham was not bound to take
this at the offer. and the committee could not be supposed to
give it him. One of their authorised servants, the surveyor,
had been employed to sell the land, and had, apparently, con-
cluded the sale. The public could not be supposed to be cogni-
zant of their having employed Mr. Okill to sell it. On the 20th
of September they had not entered into any positive arrange-
ments with Mr. Rotherham, and on the 21st, the party who had
previously made the highest offer makes an offer of the full de-
mand. 'they don't take this into consideration, but 24 hours
after they take the lower offer of the other person. Ile made no
animadversion about this; as it was it must go to the public.
Mr.Councillor HOPE said the answer to this was very simple.
It was correct, as Mt. Shiel had stated, that there had been a
second application, and that that second offer had not been ac-
cepted. But he entirely lost sight of this most important part
of the subject that this second applicant had been informed that
there was a negociation going on with a prior applicant, and
that any neeociation could not be concluded until the negocia-
tion with the prior applicant had been decided. The answer
had been "yes; it is a bargain if it be not superseded" by the
pending negociation. The first applicant %vas Mr. Rotherham;
he made a certain offer, which was declined, haying been pre-,