The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1840-12-04 00:00:00

MEETING OF THE DOCK COMMITTEE.

The weekly meeting of the members of the Dock Com.
mittee was held yesterday at the office in Revenue-buildings.
The attendance was very numerous, nearly the whole com-
mittee being present. Mr. LEATHOM presided.
The formal part of the proceedings having been disposed
of, a report was presented from the sub-committee of works,
recommending that no more of the land near Birkenhead be
let at present.

Owen Hill was appointed master of the Liver tender, in
the place of John Williams, discharged.
The sum of five guineas was awarded to the person named
in our last, for having picked up and restored the moorings
of the Bell buoy.

The MAniNi SURVEYOR reported that he had received
a letter, signed by the master, and all the crew of the Form-
by life-boat, giving him notice that unless they were remune-
rated for their services, in proceeding to the rescue of ship-
wrecked persons, they should resign their situations.

The CHAIRMAN stated that the parties who had sent this
letter, had made no claim for remuneration, nor any state-
ment of their services. It appeared that salvage had been
claimed by the life-boat crew, on a timber ship, of Mr. Dun-
can Gibb, which had been wrecked, to the amount of £lO5O.
Mr. Gibb paid £250, none of which came in the hands of
the present applicants, and hence this letter.

Mr. CuArliAN said a most dangerous precedent would be
established, if encouragement were offered by the committee
for the crews of the life-boats to claim salvage on every
wreck. He would suggest that in cases of this kind the
same rewards be given to the life-boat crews as were given
to the pilot ; at all events something must be done to keep
these sort of claims down.

Mr. BENN observed, that the Dock Committee, unlike the
Pilots' Committee, had no power to grant rewards.
Mr. CHAPMAN added, that he would reward the life-boat
crews handsomely, but he could not consent to allow them
to make claims for salvage.

Mr. HORSFALL thought the subject deserved investigation.
The claimants appeared to think they had absolute power
over the life-boat. This committee would not concede that,
but at the same time the matter was a very proper one for
enquiry by a sub-committee.

Mr. TOBIN said the law gave the applicants a right to claim
salvage, and he for one would not deprive them of their right,
but they must make their claim before a magistrate. This
committee had nothing to do with the matter.
Mr. BENIN' remarked that the committee had no desire
whatever to interfere. Let the men make their claims before
the magistrates.

The CHAIRMAN said their object was to obtain a share of
the £250. paid by Mr. Gibb.
Mr. CHAPMAN conceived that if any claims were made at
all, the committee, as owners of the boat, ought to put in
theirs.

The letter was then referred to a sub-committee for a re-
port thereon.
__

The S,nith Harbour Master reported tlit the west quay of
Brunswick dock, and the south quay of Brunswick basin,
were greatly incommoded by large quantities of granite, &c.
being left there, and requesting the obstruction to be re-
moved.—The Surveyor was ordered to give the necessary
instructions.

On the representation of the Master of Salthouse dock, an
additional gateman was appointed to that dock.
[At this stage of the proceedings the reporters were re-
quested to withdraw for ten minutes.l

The SECRETARY then read a report from the Surveyor,
moved for at the last meeeting by Mr. Chapman, relative to
the alteration now being made in Queen's dock No. 2 steam
graving dock, and the expense of them. The cost of them,
the report stated, would be £72.

r: C said, hehad mentioned the state of the
steam graving dock some months ago, and stated that its
condition amounted to incompetency on the part of the Dock
Surveyor. He was not now going to retract that opinion,
but before he proceeded further he would exemplify the state
of the dock to the committee. Suppose a gentleman ordered
his surveyor to build a coach-house ; he gave him the dimen-
sions of his carriage, and desired him to erect the building
accordingly. But when the work was nearly completed, the
gentleman on viewing it thought it looked rather small, and
on examination found it would admit the body of the carriage
but not the wheels. Would he not blame his surveyor for
the blunder? The ease of the steam graving dock was simi-
lar to this ; and he had stated the fact some months ago,
but at that time his assertions went for nothing. If the
large steam-boats—for which the dock was expressly con-
structed—went in, their paddle-boxes rested on the quays on
each side, and their keels did not touch the blocks by fourteen
inches. Nothing had been said about this for three months ;
but the other day he went down to the dock and found a
number of men employed in breaking up the sill and remov-
ing large masses of stone and cement—probably about seventy
yards on each side the quay. Now when he (Mr. Chapman)
moved for the return, Mr. Hartley stated that the blocks
were only 9 inches from the keel; in the report he said 12
inches ; but the shipwrights said the distance was 14. The
expense of the alterations now going on was estimated at
£7O, but he was convinced that to make the dock efficient
would be not less than £3OOO. Another charge he had to
bring against the surveyor was this--he had stated that the
master shipwrights were satisfied with the alterations he
proposed to make by placing ladders in it, and even men-
tioned Mr. Roydon's name as approving of them. He (Mr.
Chapman) appealed to the chairman of the sub-committee of
works if Mr. Hartley had not stated that Mr. Roydon ap—
proved of the plans he proposed.
Mr. Gao. HOLT said he could not call to mind the exact
terms of the conversation, but he believed Mr. Roydon's
name was mentioned by the surveyor.

Mr. HARTLEY admitted that he had said Mr. Roydon
approved of the dock.

Mr. CHAPMAN said. the estimate of the expense of the al-
terations now put
.in should not deceive him. It was no
answer to the motion he had made. He had moved for a
return of the expense of building the sill, and of taking it
down again ; but the report contained only an estimate of
the expense of certain alterations, which was stated at £72.
He should like to know what calculation had been made of
the loss of materials. He knew himself that two boat-loads
of them had been sent away. These enquiries were the only
check the dock committee had upon their surveyor. Indeed
the error in design had already been admitted by the fact of
the alteration. Now he came to Mr. Roydon's letter, which
was as follows :

" Baffin-street, Ist Dec. 1840

" DEAR received yours of yesterday respecting
my opinion as to the safety of the sides of the .‘.• rain Graving
Dock, and I beg to inform you that my deciLed opinion is
that its present state is neither safe for life or property.
" I have received a notice (yesterday) to attend a meeting
of the Ship-builders' Association this evening, when I have
no doubt you will be furnished with the opinion of the trade
generally.—Yours truly, " THOS. ROYDON.
" To Mr. Chapman."
He had also requested Mr. Cato's opinion in writing, in
order that he might have facts to prove his case. Mr. Cato's
reply was this :

" Liverpool, Dec. 1, 1840.
" DEAR SIR,—In reply to your note of yesterday, I have
to observe that a meeting will be held to-night of the
Master shipbuilders to take into consideration the state of
the walls of the Steam Graving Dock ; my own opinion is,
that part of the walls will have to be taken down, and re-
built in a different form from what they now are, for they
are not safe for men to stand to set the shores in the pre-
sent state.—l am, sir, your most obedient servant,
" P. CATO."
He held in his hand a letter from Mr. Wilkins, on enclosing
a copy of a resolution passed at the meeting of the master
shipwrights. The letter was addressed to ".Thomas Leatbow,
Esq., chairman of the Dock Committee."
The CHAIRMAN said Ile had not received such a letter.
Mr. CHAPMAN explained that it had been given to him to
be presented to the chairman.
The SECRETARY read the resolution of the shipwrights'
meeting. It expressed the general opinion that the steam
graving dock was inefficient and dangerous both as regarded
life and property ; and that should the Dock Committee re-
quire any further explanation, it would readily be afforded by
a deputation appointed for the purpose.
Mr. CHAPMAN contended that these documents shewed
that Mr. Hartley had not made correct statements to the
sub-committee. It was most surprising, after what had been
read, that he should have described the shipwrights as being
satisfied with the dock. The report, too, was unsatisfactory.
There could, however, be no mistake with reference to the
meaning of his (Mr. Chapman's) motion. On the Ist DCCCTO.
ber he received the following from Mr. Hartley :
" Dockyard, Ist Dec., 1840.
" SIR,—In consequence of your notice of motion regard-
ing No. 2 Queen's Graving Dock, a copy of which has been
handed to me, I have applied to Mr. George Holt, (chair-
man of Sub-Commmittee on Works), to meet me on the spot
to-morrow afternoon; he has fixed to do so at a little before
ten o'clock.

" Perhaps you may also wish to be present, in .order to
have Such explanation on the spot, as can better be given
there than elsewhere. I therefore take the liberty of trou-
bling you with this.—l am, sir, your obedient servant,
"JESSE HARTLEY.
"To H. C. Chapman, Jun., Esq. 24, James-st."
His reply was as follows :

" De ;ember 1, 1840.
" Siu,—l am in receipt of your note of this date, request-
ing me to attend at Queen's Graving Dock to-morrow morn-
ing, at ten o'clock, in order to receive " such explanations on
the spot as can better be given there than elsewhere."
" In reply I beg to state, that the explanation I require is the
expense of building up the sill too high, and taking it down
again. The error in design has already been admitted by the
fact of the alteration.

" I regret much that a sense of public duty obliges me to
stir up in this matter, as it is, at all times, an ungracious task
to find fault particularly with one who has so long served the
dock estate.—l remain, sir, your obedient servant,
(Signed) " HENRY C. CHAPMAN.
" Jesse Hartley, Esq."
Now, if the Dock Committee were to go on in this way, it
would be useless to apply to parliament for power to erect
warehouses on the dock quays. Inquiry must be instituted
into the enormouse expenses of the surveyor's department.
He (Mr. Chapman), had proved him to be inefficient in design,
and that he had led the committee into enormous expenses.
To establish this, he would not enter into the proceedings of
times beyond the short :period during which he had been a
member of the committee. The first thing was the Coburg
Dock. Mr. Hartley had reported it to be completed, but
it was found to require deepening; that work was expected to
have been finished in September, with dredging machines.
The dredging machines, however, were still. Scarcely was
this undertaken, when Mr. Hartley called upon the com-
mittee for a grant of £BOOO to place reverse gates in that
very dock. That was one little item in the year. Then take
the South Graving Dock. The shipowners had complained
about it till they were tired ; they were smarting under the
expense it imposed upon them ; and to remedy the defect
the committee were obliged to erect an engine. Here was
£lOOO spent. If a searching inquiry were made, it would be
found that at least £lO,OO a-year might be saved in this
department alone, if the work were done in a different way.
He would not take up more time, but give notice of the fol-
lowing motion for the next meeting.

lst—" That the increase of the Liverpool Dock Estate has
been such and the expenditure so enormous in the surveyor's
department as imperatively to call for a corresponding in-
crease of vigilance and superintendence. 2dly—That it is
incompatible with the interests of the Dock Estate any longer
to allow the surveyor to undertake other works, and that his
time and talents for the future must be exclusively devoted
to the superintendence of the works belonging to the Dock
Estate. 3dly—That a first-rate engineer shall be engaged to
design and arrange the proposed works, and that from hence-
forth all works shall be lot and executed by contract. The
progress of the works to be superintended by the Dock
Surveyor, and as occasion may require by the Superintendent
Engineer." _

Mr. HARTLEY commenced his defence by saying that Mr.
Roydon had seen the plan of the dock before any alterations
were made in it, and that he had no fault to find with it.
He had shewn the nature of the intended alterations to seve-
ral carpenters—to Mr. Stephen as well as Mr. Roydon—and
as they made no objection to them, he ordered the work to
proceed. With regard to the sill, he never had to take it up.
After the Oriental had been in, he saw that if a larger vessel
should come she could not be accommodated.
Mr. CHAPMAN asked if Mr. Hartley had not the dimen-
sions of the British Queen before him in making the dock.
Mr. HARTLEY replied that he had them, but long after
the dock was made. With regard to the estimate of the cost
of the alteratious, he was not aware that he had stated any-
thing false ; the work was there to speak for itself, and he
should be willing to call in any competent gentleman to exa-
mine it. _ _ _

Mr. Ca APmAN said all the labour wag not included in the
estimate. _ _

Mr. HARTLEY pledged his word that all the labour was
included. He then referred to the original plans,
.and en-
tered into some explanations, with the view of showing that

the dock had been constructed strictly in obedience to the
directions of the committee.

Mr. CHAPMAN asked the surveyor if, when Mr. Royden
found fault with the dock, he had not told him, " If you
cannot find men to shore a ship in this dock, I can."
Mr. 'TARTLET did not think he had made such a remark.
He could only tell Mr. Chapman that the Oriental had been
shored in the dock, and no remark was made upon the dock
then. The Liverpool was shored in the old dock. He felt
he had particularly done his duty with regard to this dock ;
but it so happened that he was found most fault with where
he considered he most deserved commendation.
Mr. CHAPMAN was of a very different opinion.
Mr. HARTLEY repeated that he had done his duty.
Mr. CHAPMAN reminded Mr. Hartley that he had proved
him, from documents and facts, to have been wrong. All
the shipwrights condemned the dock. They could not stand
upon a ladder placed on a mere ledge without danger.
Mr. HARTLEY observed that it was strange they had not
found out the danger until within the last fortnight.

Mr. CHAPMANSaid he had known of it for months. His
motion was for a return of the expense of pulling the masonry
down and raising it up. It was a state of things that all the
committee must deprecate. Iu fact, they would find that
they had spent as much money in rectifying the errors of
Mr. Hartley, as the docks themselves had cost.
Mr. HAIITLRY.—What errors have I made ?

The CHAIRMAN thought that if Mr. Chapman made a
charge of this sort, he ought to produce some grounds for it.
Mr. HARTLEY said this accusation took away.all the sting
of the other charges against him.
Mr. SANDS suggested that inquiry by a sub-committee
would be the best course to take both for Mr. Hartley and
for the committee.

Mr. GEo. HOLT asked the surveyor what induced him to
alter the plan originally approved by the committee ?
Mr. HARTLEY made a reply. which was quite inaudible.
Mr. CHAPMAN, in reference to something which had fallen
from the surveyor, repeated that the paddle-boxes of a large
steamer in the dock would rest upon the quays, and her keel
be 14 inches from the sills.

Mr. HORNBY asked whether the complaint was, that the
dock was not lar enough to hold a large steamer ?
Mr. AIKIN.—No.

Mr. CHAPMAN said that in consequence of large steamers
coming to this port, the committee had been induced to alter
No. 2 graving dock for the purpose of receiving them. Mr.
Hartley had the dimensions of all of these large vessels ; Mr.
John Laird supplying him with those of the President and
the British Queen. Mr. Hartley found he had committed
an error as to the sills, but denied it when asked the question.
Not only that, but the dock was not safe for vessels, nor for
men to work in it. If every thing was referred to, the sur-
veyor, (who was the accused party), and he was acquitted
upon his own evidence, the committee would never arrive at
the truth.

Mr. G. HOLT said Mr. Chapman alleged that the President
would have hung on the quays by her paddle boxes, and that
Mr. Hartley had raised the sills 12 or 14 inches higher than
he ought with regard to the blocks.
Mr. EVANS asked whether in point of fact that error had
been committed ?
_ _

Mr. AIKIN had visited the spot and was satisfied that an
error had been committed ; and by -the enquiries he made
from practical people, he was convinced that the dock was
exceedingly dangerous, to the ship in it and to the people em-
ployed upon her.

Mr. lIARTLEY referred Mr. Aikin to the original plan.
Mr. AIKIN replied that he did not go by that, but by what
he had himself seen.
Mr. HORSFALL asked the Surveyor whether at the time
the dock was made, he was aware of the dimensions of the
large steam-ships?
Mr. HARTLEY.—No,
Mr. HORSFALL enquired how it happened that the dock
had been so constructed that vessels could not be shored in
safety ?

Mr. HARTLEY replied it was because there was not room
without encroaching upon the quays. Already there were
2i feet less of quay room than there ought to be.
Mr. CHAPMAN repeated that no vessel could be placed in
the dock with safety to her or to the lives of the people, par-
ticularly in dark nights. He pointed out the advantages that
would arise from the engagement of a regularly educated en-
gineer, under whom the surveyor might act.
Mr. MELLon said the committee gave orders for the dock
to be made in January for the accommodation of large stea-
mers; in August and not before Mr. Hartley obtained the
dimensions of them. Why had:he not taken steps to obtain
their measurement before that period ?
Mr. BENN said the dock would not have been undertaken
if it had not been to accommodate the large steamers.
Mr. GEO. HOLT thought the surveyor did not do himself
sufficient justice before committee.
Mr. CHAPMAN said it was monstrous not to have efficiency
in the surveyors department when the expences of it were
£lOO,OOO per annum.
Mr. G. HOLT said he ought to have mentioned that the
South Harbour-master was of opinion that all circumstances
considering the best possible plan had been adopted with
regard to the dock.

Mr. BARCL;Y--- observed that it had been made- in the
Tppg place.

MI.. enA; MAN.—That is the fault of the surveyor.
The subject was then referred to a sub-committee, and
the meeting separated.

CORONER'S INQUESTS

LAMENTABLE ACCIDENT.—DEATH OF MR. WINDSOR.
On Wednesday last an inquest was held before P. F. Curry,
Esq., and a highly respectable jury, on view of the body of
Mr. James Windsor, surgeon, late of St. Anne's-street. As
some erroneous impressions exist on one point—the alleged
warranty of the horse—which wrongfully reflect on the party
who sold the horse—through the running off of which the
accident occurred, we give the evidence more at length than
we should otherwise deem it necessary to do.
William Halsall, being sworn, said :—I was servant with
the deceased, whose name was James Windsor. He was a
surgeon, and resided in qt. Anne-street. Ile was constantly
in the habit of going his professional rounds in a gig. On
Friday morning last the deceased told me to go to the stable
of Mr. Atkinson, in Newington Bridge, to see a horse, the
property of Mr. Stringer, which he had some idea of pur-
chasing. I went there and saw the horse, and asked Mr.
Atkinson what character he would give it. He said that he
would warrant the horse steady in harness, and that he had
known the horse for twelve xears previous. The same day I
rode the horse up to my master's stable, and put him in the
gig. The deceased and I then went into the gig. The de-
ceased drove. We went along St. Anne-street and turned
into Islington, and were proceeding at a comfortable trot,
and did not push the horse by any means. We had not pro-
ceeded far before the horse began kicking, and reared once
or twice and kept on kicking. This was when we were near
to the corner of Christian-street. Whilst the horse was
kicking this way the gig rocked a great deal, and the deceased
either made an effort to jump out or was thrown out. The
moment the deceased was out of the gig the horse started off,
and the wheel caught against the stone-work of the railing of
the Institution, (Dispensary) and, with the jerk, I was
thrown out of the gig. I cannot say anything more about
the deceased until I stopped the horse, and the deceased was
then being conveyed to the Dispensary. He was taken to
his own house the same evening, where he was attended by
several surgeons, and died yesterday morning. I had fitted
the traces myself, by letting them out three holes, and there
was nothing at all defective about the harness. There was
nothing in the street that I could see to startle the horse.
The deceased was 41 years old.
Alice Jones said :—I am a servant in the employ of Mr.
Adam Norris, who lives in Islington. On Friday last I was
at my work cleaning the bedroom windows, when I saw a
gig coming from towards St. Anne-street, with two persons
in it. When just opposite my master's house, the horse
began kicking ; it then fell down, and one of the persons in
the gig was thrown upon the parapet. The horse jumped up
again, gave a kick at the gig, and then started off. lam sure
the deceased did not jump out, but was thrown out.
Mr. James Long, surgeon, said :—On Friday afternoon
last I was going down Islington, on the right-hand side,
when I saw a horse and gig proceeding down the street.
The horse was plunging and kicking, and I saw an individual
in the act of falling upon the parapet, but whether he jumped
out or was thrown out I cannot say. I escaped within the
rails surrounding Islington-flags, being under the apprehen-
sion that the horse would run over me. As quick as possible
I proceeded to the assistance of the injured individual, whom
I found to be Mr. Windsor, the surgeon. I assisted to con-
vey him into the Dispensary. I made an examination, and
found that he had received a compound fracture of the right
leg. At his request Mr. Halton, the surgeon, was sent for;
and on his arrival, which was within a very few minutes after
the accident had happened, the sharp ends of the bone were
removed, and several loose pieces of bone were extracted.
Everything was done that the case required, and deceased
was attended up to the time of his death by Mr. Halton,
Mr. Marshall, Mr. Windsor, surgeon, of Manchester, and
myself. lam of opinion that death was caused by the inju-
ries which the deceased had received producing a shock on
the nervous system, in a constitution of ex treme susceptibility.
John Atkinson, being sworn, said—l keep a livery stable
in Newington-bridge. Last Thursday afternoon the deceased
came to the stables, and saw a bay horse, the property of Mr.
James Stringer, and which I was commissioned to sell.
had known the horse previously from 9 to 12 months. I
told the deceased that I did not know a better horse, and
that I had seen him pass and repass frequently, and that I
knew him to be steady. I was not aware at the time that the
horse had any vice. The following day the servant man of
the deceased took the horse away for the purpose of trying
him. The same afternoon (Friday) I was informed of the
accident. I did not receive any directions from Mr. Stringer
to warrant the horse. Twenty-five pounds was the price I
asked for the horse.
Mr. James Stringer said—l am a merchant, and reside at
Aigburth. About a year ago I purchased the horse which the
deceased had on trial. From that period up to the last ten
days I was constantly in the habit of driving the horse. both
in single and double harness. I have driven him frequently
in a gig with my wife and child, and I was not aware he had
any vice. I had no other reason for parting with the horse
than that I did not wish to keep three, having recently taken
another up from grass. I would not have hesitated to war—
rant the horse steady in harness to my own brother. The
horse was what I call a slug, and I never knew hint to rear
or run away.

The coroner summed up the evidence, and the jury returned
a verdict to the effect, that the deceased had died from inju-
ries received by an accidental fall from his gig.

DEATH FROM BURNING

An inquest was held on Tuesday, on the body of Joseph
Warring Dixon, aged 18 months. The deceased is another
melancholy instance of the death of a child by fire. He was
only left by his mother for a moment, but in her absence his
clothes were set on fire and his death ensued.

DEATH FROM VIOLENCE

An inquest was held yesterday, at the coroner's office, on
view of the body of Joseph Frost. Joseph Burrell, a police-
officer, said, that about half-past twelve o'clock on the night
of the 16th November, he was on duty in Dale-street and
neighbourhood, when he heard some person call out for the
police. He was then going up Hatton-garden with a prisoner
to bridewell, whom he left in charge of some other officers,
and went to the bottom of the street, and found the ,
de-
ceased standing in the middle of the street. Blood was flow-
ing from his nose, and he had a cut on the eye-brow. He told
witness he had been knocked down by some men, and was
kicked while he was down. The men who had knocked him
down made their escape before witness came up. John Guy,
another officer, said that on the night in question, he saw a
crowd in Whitechapel, and on going up, he saw a man on the
ground, drunk and unable to walk. He and another officer
took him up Preston-street, for the purpose of taking him to
bridewell When about half way up the street, the man be-
gan to be very rough. Witness did not observe deceased
till he was brought hurt as described to the bridewell. Joseph
Clarke, another officer, saw the deceased at the bridewell,
and took him to the dispensary. He said he had been
knocked down and kicked he having seen a man very rough
in the hands of the officers. Elizabeth Frost, wife c?f. the
deceased, said he was 45 years old. He told her a similar
story. lie got worse next day, and was obliged to take his
bed. He complained of his -body and head, and his head
swelled a great deal. He was attended by a surgeon up to
the time of his death, on Wednesday morning. Mr. G.
Longbottom, surgeon of the Dispensary,
. attended the de-
ceased from the first. He was of opinion that the deceased
died from inflammation of the brain, arising from the injury
to the nose. The jury returned a verdict to the effect that
the deceased died from that cause; but how or by whom the
injury was inflicted, there was no evidence to show.

CASE OF MANSLAUGHTER

An adjourned inquest was held yesterday, touching the
death of a man named Lawrence Work, the evidence on
which, as adduced on Monday last, we supplied in our paper
of the following day. No further evidence having been
brought forward, the jury returned a verdict of " Man-
slaughter against some person or persons unknown." The
deceased, it will he remembered, came to his death by being
struck with a paving stone on the head, in Drury-lane, by
*waren* a foreign seaman.

CORRESPONDENCE

PASTORAL AID SOCIETY,

TO THE EDITOR OF THE LIVERPOOL STANDARD.

Sts,—l have read with much interest the correspondence
and articles which have appeared in the newspapers relative
to the refusal of the Pastoral Aid Society to sanction th,-;
nomination of Mr. Browne, who applied for the society's
grant. The defence of the society which has appeared in
your paper is more than satisfactory; but the official letter
of the local secretary, inserted in the courier of to-day, must
remove every doubt, as to the propriety of the society's
conduct, from the mind of the most prejudiced opponent.
Will you allow me to inquire what is the extent of the soci-
ety's operations, wherein it differs from the Additional Cu-
rates Society, and whether it has been formed under the
approval of the heads of the church ; for if it possesses the
letter, I cannot conceive what can justify the sneers of Mr.
Browne and others about a " lay association." The deter-
mination of the society to possess testimonials as to the
qualifications of any applicant, satisfactory to the committee,
cannot but be commended by every impartial person. Such
a line of conduct gives security to the subscribers that their
funds will be rightly appropriated, and an additional guaran-
tee to the church that the spiritual interests of the people
will be properly looked after.—Yours, &c.,
A MEMBER OF THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND.
Dec. 2d, 1840.

[The grants of the Pastoral Aid Society are made for the
purpose of providing clergymen and lay assistants in districts
where they are required, and of affording pecuniary assist.
ance for the erection Or fitting up of a chapel in some pre-
viously-neglected spot. The operations of the society are at
present as follows :—lncumbents aided, 275. Population
under their charge, 2,035,557; average population to each,
7,375 ; average income of incumbents, £163 ;—at a charge
on the society of £20,338, whilst its income for the past year
was £16,176. In our own county 61 clergymen and three
lay assistants are supported by the society. We know no-
thing of the Additional Curates Society, but we are satisfied
that there is abundant scope for its labours ; and, whilst we
shall never disparage its motives or objects, we shall not suf-
fer an unfounded charge against a kindred society to remain
unexposed. The Pastoral Aid Society numbers amongst its
warm supporters the Bishops of Chester, Ripon, Winchester,
Bath and Wells, Llandaff, Peterborough, and other dignita-
ries of the church. Lord Sandon, John Hardy, Esq., and
J. P. Plumptre, Esq., M.P., are amongst its vice-presidents.
—En. L. S.]

TO THE EDITOR OF THE LIVERPOOL STANDARD,

SIR,—I observe in your publication of Tuesday last a letter
signed " Justitia," the writer of which has made a false and
distorted statement of a circumstance that took place at the
Welsh dinner, on Monday, the 23d ult. It is stated that one
of the guests at the table imposed upon your assistant reporter
" names and titles of his own fabrication." It is also in-
sinuated that a young man in company furnished your reporter
with " scraps of notes," which were handed to him 'by a
preceptor who was bound by nature and duty to show him a
good example." As I have reason to believe lam both the
guest and the young man alluded to, I beg to give the state-
ment the most unqualified contradiction, and dare the base
and anonymous calumniator to substantiate his charge. The
list I handed in to your reporter I am prepared to prove was
the correct one; but that which did appear in your journal
was not mine. And here I would remark, that whatever the
feelings of " Justitia" may he upon differences in political
opinions, I have far too much respect for gentlemen occupying
exalted stations to offer them any insult, however opposed
they may be to my political or religious sentiments. I have
ever been taught by my natural preceptor to reverence truth,
and to walk in the paths of honesty, integrity, and upright-
-- -tnd I hope to guide my way by his precepts, to imitate
ample, and walk in his steps. Should the principles
neulcated by " Justitia" be in accordance with his base and
infamous insinuations, I cannot but entertain great fears for
the temporal prosperity of his unhappily circumstanced
pupils.--1 wait for the proof of his charges, and subscribe,
FIAT JUSTITIA.

~ai.
THE PASTORAL, AID SOCIETY

TO THE EDITOR OF THE COURIER.
SIR,—It was not till Tuesday morning last that I became
possessed of the correspondence upon the subject of the
Church Pastotal Aid Society, published in the Mailofthe pre-
vious week. Though able defenders have already appeared, yet
I have deemed it of importance that the clerical secretary of
the association of the society established in this town should
comment upon the transaction ; and therefore, at my earliest
leisure, have allowed myself to address you.

The facts of the society's origin are simply these :—some
good men. witnessing the spiritual destitution of the country,
determined to provide funds by which incumbents might be
enabled to pay additional curates or lay assistants. They
contributed nobly themselves,—they solicited others, and
succeeded in raising an ample store, which they distributed
as freely as they received it. They had no intention of affect-
ing the existing system of ordination. Many of the bishops
supported them ; incumbents, as they chose, applied for
grants, the committee merely requiring, for the sake of those
whose almoners they were, satisfaction as to the characters
of those whom they were to support.
At an early stage of existence, their plan was assailed as
trenching upon ecclesiastical principles, by many good men,
of what I call ultra church principles. The society, hdwever,
upheld by good men of other principles, held fast the plan
which in its simplicity had been adopted, unconscious of hav-
ing adopted a plan opposed to ecclesiastical principles ; while,
what kindly men have ever called the sister society—the
Additional Curates' Fund Society—sprung up in consistency
with the principles of the second party.
Approving of the principles of the Church Past,,ral Aid
Society, the Rev. J. Clark applies to the committee, and ob-
tains a grant of £BO, the usual condition being understood—
that the committee must be satisfied as to the qualifications,
Christian and ministerial, of the gentleman who shall be no-
minated.

Two brief letters are submitted. Purposing to be com-
mendatory, they could not contain less than they did. One
was from a respectable clergyman of our town. It consists
of one sentence, though that of course, a comprehensive one :
life, conversation, views, and doctrines are summarily stated
to be correct. The second was from a clergyman probably
equally respectable, though I conceive not much known in
Liverpool. It simply states, that Mr. Browne is a consci-
entious man, and a devoted admirer and supporter of the
ritual and discipline of the church ; the first portion of which
commendati :n might apply to many men not qualified for
the ministry; the second portion, though not necessarily,
might merely describe-one, a stickler for rubical precision,
who might possess little acquaintance with the substance or
the spirit of the Gospel. More was evidently required.
To these testimonials the diocesan appends his counter-
sign, to the effect, that they who gave them are beneficed
clergymen of the diocese, who will only state what they be-
lieve to be true. On the face of this countersign it appears,
that his lordship knows nothing of Mr. Browne.
And here I venture to appeal both to laity and clergy,
whether these testimonials were not too meagre and limited,
both in quantity and quality, to permit any committee of
Christian men to determine upon the qualifications of the
nominee. This was their conceded duty. How could it be
discharged? And here it becomes important to observe an
error in the newspapers of last week, which speak of Mr.
Wray's letter having been presented to the committee as a
testimonial. This was not the case.

While, however, the committee is thus meagrely supplied,
another aspect is thrown over the case in the country. The
Rev. C. Wray submits, in the capacity of a friend, a cordial
recommendation of Mr. Browne to the Bishop of Ripon;
and his lordship, upon the strength of the testimonials thus
reinforced, confirmed, we may perhaps permit ourselves to
say, by the premature assumption of Mr. Clark that the
society was satisfied with Mr. Browne, and having in reserve
the examination for orders to correct any possible error, de-
clares his readiness to admit Mr. Browne to orders.
But how stands the matter before the committee? They
decline to conclude upon such limited testimonials ; and, to
Mr. Clark's surprise, inform him, that the testimonials are
satisfactory as far as they go, but something more explicit
and decided as to Christian character and qualifications is
required.
Mr. Clark requests to know what the committee mean by
Christian character and qualifications a request which, on
the lips of a respectable minister of the church, must mean,
I conceive, that Mr. C. imagines that he has already fully
answered the question. But I maintain, that save in the
single line of Mr. Stafford, nothing has yet been said of the
peculiar features of a Christian character.
Where, then, are the committee to look for some account
of the conversation of Mr. Browne? Who will speak for
his meekness and gentleness ; his good report and evil re-
port, the signs of an apostle ' • his temperance and soberness;
his love of good men ; to add to the evidence which, satis-
factory so far as it goes, is almost entirely silent upon these
points?
Mr. Clark's next letter brings no additional testimonials.
He is perplexed by having prematurely hired premises and
obtained the promise of the Bishop of Ripon, without, it
should seem, having exactly stated to his lordship the stage
in which the transaction rests. He declares that he has
consulted, according to duty, his diocesan prior to recom-
mending Mr. Browne to the committee ; and that he, being
satisfied, presumes the committee " will not be guilty of in-
sulting his lordship." And again, " how the committee can
have further satisfaction, save upon his (Mr. Browne's) own
assurance, he declares he knows not."

The upshot of Mr. Clark's communication is simply, that
the meagrely-supplied table of the committee must now wait
for such a statement as Mr. Browne shall supply of himself.
But here it is necessary to observe, that the precipitancy of
Mr. Clark has so far perplexed matters, that except the
transaction be distinctly viewed, a fair occasion might appear
to exist of charging the committee with contumacy towards a
spiritual superior. But if he has perplexed himself, we must
not suffer the question to be perplexed. We repeat, up to
this moment, the fundamental rule of the society remained
unsatisfied ; a rule which Mr. Clark himself pronounced to
be good, and which his lordship, most doubtless, felt to be
reasonable, when' he eloquently pleaded the cause of the
society in the spring of the year. Two meagre letters were
all they possessed ; and were Christian men, upon such tes-
timonials, to take a step which should make them the instru-
ments of supplying a young man with his first title for orders ?
How should they be answerable to those whose almoners they
were ? The Additional Curates Society committee might
consistently, without testimonials, distribute their funds :
the Church Pastoral Aid committee, being pledged to demand
testimonials, were likewise pledged to obtain such as should
be satisfactory.
The committee come then to the letter of Mr. Browne,
containing his own assurances with respect to character,
which Mr. Clark trusts will be perfectly satisfactory, and
make up in explicitness the deficiencies of the previous testi-