The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1841-04-13 00:00:00

CHESTER AND BIRKENHEAD RAILWAY
COMPANY.

complained of by them ; but he wished to remark, that at the ship to repair, but the liability as to the remainder from a
time in question (1839) the weather had been so bad, and he certain point or boundary was denied. It was proved and
had in consequence so much to do, that he could not devote admitted that the road had all heenin use fora hundred years,
sufficient time to every vessel.—Mr..H. C. Chapman, agent and that it had been many times repaired, but that it was
to Lloyds', said that he had taken a cursory view of the now in a bad state.
Maia after her return, and thought that the repairs then Mr. CROMPTON said it was somewhat strange, his learned
being made were unnecessary—an almost complete waste of friends having known that this was an old road, but the
money. In his opinion the builders of London were twenty township had never before been ' called upon to repair it.
years behind Liverpool.—Mr. Roydon, ship-builder, said With the exception of the hundred yards admitted, the road
that he thought it was sufficient to have a bolt through every had always been repaired by the inhabitants residing on the
alternate floor. Since the building of Noah's ark, th's good river side thereof.
old rule of our forefathers had been followed, but Lloyds had Witnesses were called for the defence, who proved the
lately introduced a rule that every floor should he bolted. He custom alleged, namely, that certain parties resident at
had looked through the la for extra works, and was o Mosley-hill and Cumberbatch had always repaired all the
opinion that it was very moderate. road with the exception of the hundred yards before men-
r. DIINDAS, for the defence, said that his case was that tioned. The jury found the defendants not guilty.
the vessel had been very badly built, as was found out soon DOWNWARDS V. SMITH.
after she went to sea, and that she was deficient in several This was an undefended action, brought by Thomas Down-
respects, wherein she ought to have been in accordance with ward, tailor and draper, upon an indenture of apprentice-
the contract, so as to ensure her a place in class A 1, at ship, dated Bth July, 1834, for seven years, against Mr
Lloyds'. At this moment she was liable to be reduced to James Smith. The latter had left the service of . . _

anoiher class, because the contract in respect of the bolts
through the kelson had not been complied with. He con-
tended, too, that much of the extra work belonged to the
contract, and even if it did not, that it was overcharged.
Lloyd's Survey Book, for 1837-1839, was put in, and it
was found to order that, for an A 1 ship the kelson bolts
should. go through each floor.
Mr. George Graham, Secretary of Lloyd's, stated that he
ordered a survey of the Maia after her arrival in London.
She continued 12 A 1 at Lloyd's ; but very considerable re-
pairs had been made. If the bilge bolts and kelson bolts had
not been put in according to the rules, 'she would have been
liable to be displaced from that class at any time. Mr.
Clarke, a shipbuilder, of London, and Surveyor to Lloyd's,
examined the Maia, and found kelson bolts through every
alternate floor. He considered that there were no bilge
bolts. There were 9 butt bolts on the starboard side, and 7
on the larboard side. On the straik immediately above the
bilge planks there were 7 on the starboard and 6 on the lar-
board side. There were no holes bored on the inside for
bilge bolts. There ought to have been one bilge bolt in each
buttock-31 on each side. There was no shelf to the beams
of the hold—only a clamp. A ship having clamps ought to
have iron knees. The staple lodging knees appeared to have
been badly fitted to the beams, and particularly to the beam
arms, and there were not enough of bolts on the part of the
knee running along the side. The staple standards were also
imperfectly fastened. The breast hooks ought each to have
had a bolt. There were 3 in each arm, but that was not
sufficient. The hold beams had worked, from want of fas-
tenings. The iron work was throughout deficient. The
upper deck beams were not sufficient in number.
beams on the upper deck were short. They had no shelves,
but a very good clamp. There was a general weakness in the
fore-round beams. The vessel had made a good deal of
water, fore and aft. This might arise from defective
corking, but he attributed it to want of fastenings. The
vessel had not been so constructed as to entitle her to be
placed 12 A 1. In his opinion, it would haVe taken £292 to
put the vessel in such a state, when she was launched, as
to entitle her to the class 12 Al. His estimate had allusion
to the work and materials necessary at the time she was being
built. The expences incurred in 'London would show what
was necessary after she was launched. [This witness's evi-
dence as to the requirements in building a ship differed on
almost every point from that of the evidence of the Liverpool
witnesses for the defence.]
Cross-examined—lt often happened that vessels are much
shaken after a long voyage. A vessel was seldom shaken in
her upper timbers after a first voyage. Sometimes she was
on a -second.

Mr. Peter Courtney, another surveyor of Lloyd's, also
examined the Maia, and concurred with the previous witness.
At the time of the survey it would, he said, have taken about
£5OO to make her a first-class vessel.

A notice to the plaintiff to attend a survey of the Maia, in
order to ascertain what repairs were necessary to make her
sea-worthy, was then put in. It was signed by Captain B.
Sproule..

Other London ship-builders were called, and they gene-
rally concurred with the two first witnesses.

Captain Benjamin Sproule, part owner of the Maia, and
liable jointly for the expenses of building, if it turned out to
be a 12 years ship, was next called, but Mr. Cresswell ob-
jected, and Mr. Baron Rolfe ruled, that the evidence of Mr.
Sproule was inadmissable.
Mr. John M`Killock, shipswith, of Liverpool, deposed
that many of the items in a bill for extra work were over-
charged. He taxed oft £l9 2s. 61d. from £lO7 6s. 3d.
Cross-exathined—We did a part of the iron work of the
vessel.

Mr. Pindar, master mariner, proved that the long boat of
the Maia (which had been returned by the defendant) was so
defective as to be unfit for service. Some of her planks had
been split by the driving and riveting of the nails.
R. S. Agnew stated that he was an apprentice on board
the Maia. In their outward passage to Sydney and Valpa-
raiso, they had some bad weather, and the vessel leaked so
much that the hands were almost continually at the pumps.
Cross-examined.—Did not strike the ground off Sydney.
Had a general cargo outwards. In the borne cargo there was
no copper ore.

Mr: Cresswell replied, and his Lordship summed up, after
which the jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff, damages
£l2O.

The court rose at seven o'clock. There remain for trial
only ten causes, two or three of which are expected to
go off.

MONDAY

CROWN COURT
lIALSAL T. V. KE VAN

This action was brought to recover damages for breach
of contract, the defendant having, as alleged, broken an
agreement to which he was aiparty in an indenture of ap-
prenticeship.
Mr. Martin and Mr. James appeared for the plaintiff;
and Mr. Alexander and Mr. Murphy for the defendant.

It appeared that in the year 1836, Miss Halsall, daughter
cf Mrs. Halsall, of Altear, was bound apprentice to Mr.
Kevan to learn the business of a pawnbroker. She was to
receive a certain salary per year, with board and lodging.
On the 9th Nov. 1839, Miss Halsall accompanied Miss
Kevan to the theatre. On their return home, Mr. Kevan
was standing at the door : he ordered Miss Kevan to bed,
and told Miss Halsall to quit his house. She did so, and
Went to the house of Mrs. Campbell, a neighbour; she went
back to Mr. Kevan's next morning, and was preparing to
tale
tn
ake her loxes away, when Miss Kevan induced her to sign
caleerdn.or?ptium to the effect that the indentures were can-
hetasewa.4
"6'equently-brought before Mr.
Rushton, who
Kevan to ulfil having
in vain endeavoured to induce Mr.
with as f the conditions of the indenture, dismissed it
suggestion that a remedy might be found by an
action at law.

•
After a portion of the evidence had been heard, and a
little wrangling had taken place amongst the counsel, it
was agreed that a verdict should be taken for the plaintiff,
with £4O. damages, the indentures to be cancelled and no
further proceedings to arise.

COOK V. BROWNRIGG.
David Cook, a ship chandler of this town, was the plain-
rr• The action was brought to recover from Mr. Henry
ownrigg the sum of 1.:19. ss. 4d.
Mr. Crompton appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. Mur-
phy for the defendant.
The plaintiff's claim was clearly proved. In the course
of the trial, which occupied hut a short time,
Mr. CROMPTON called Mr. Smith, the defendant's at-
torney.

Mr Smith said he had not been subpcened,
not stand up.
Mr. CRomPToN appealed to his lordship, and asserted
him right to call whom he pleased without any subpoena.
The conduct of the attorney in refusing to answer was most
extraordinary. He (Mr. Crompton) had a right to call
any person in court.
Mr. MURPHY thought Mr. Smith might refuse to be
Sworn if he chose. If the plaintiff had required his evidence,
he ought of course to have subpcened him. It was not for
his learned friend now to call upon him to prove his case.
Mr. C ROMPTON.—I apprehend his lordship will not sanc-
tion such a proceeding. Mr. Smith may refuse to answer,
but I shall call on his lordship to notice the contempt of
court.
Mr. 111 u RPHY said Mr. Smith was not surely to be called
upon in that sudden manner without any previous notice.
Mr. CROMPTON.—I shall call Mr. Smith. and if he do not
answer, I apprehend my lord will commit him, and that will
be a lesson for attorneys in future.
Justice MAULE.—Mr. Smith must be sworn certainly.
to be called upon suddenly in the course of a trial.

and he would

Nothing is more common than for the attorneys in causes
Mr. Smith.--If your lordship think I ought to answer, I
have no objection ; I shall have great pleasure in giving my

evidence.
Justice MAULE.—It is a circumstance which is continually

occurring.
Mr. Smith was sworn accordingly. The jury found for
the plaintiff, damages £l9 ss. 4d.
DAVIDSON V. COLE.
The plaintiff in this cas is the public officer of the Com-
mercial Bank of England ; the defendant is Mr. William
Cole, an architect, residing at Birkenhead. The action was
brought for the recovery of a sum of £550, the amount of
twa bills of exchange, drawn and accepted by Mr•. Dobbs,
of the firm of Golborn and Dobbs, and indorsed by the defen-
dant.
Mr. Crompton conducted the case for the plaintiff, and
Mr. Alexander and Mr. Henderson appeared in behalf of
the defendant.
_____

The bills were produced, and notice of their being disho-
noured was proved to have been served by the bank upon the
defendant.

The defence got up was, that one of the bills which was
for the 'sum of £450, was only an accommodation bill, of
which notice was given to the bank, who in discounting it
only gave £5O in cash to the defendants, reserving the rest
for two other bills which were becoming due. The arrange-
ment, it was averred, had been made between the bank and
Mr. Dobbs, without the knowledge of the defendants. The
banking company had proved the bills under the bankruptcy
of Mr. Dobbs, which took place some time afterwards; and
it appeared that they had received two shillings and sixpence
in the pound as a dividend thereon. The action was brought
to recover the balance. With regard to one bill for £lOO no
ebjection was urged.
The jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff; damages
£555 lls. 81d. the amount claimed after the deduction of
the dividend.

WHARTON V. WRIGHT

•
This was an undefended action for the recovery of £7O,
the amount of two bills of exchange, accepted by the defend-
ant. Verdict for the plaintiff for the amount claimed.
THE QUEEN V. THE INHABITANTS OF WEST DERBY.
This was an indictment against the inhabitants of the town-
ship of West Derby, in the parish of Walton-on-the-Hill,
to coma them to repair a road in Edge-hill, called Lord..
street, running between Wavertree road and Sreithdown-
lane.
•: Starkie and Mr. James appeared in support of the
indictment, and Mr. Crompton for the defendants.
The objection urged on behalf of the defendants was that
it was no road at present, repairable by anybody.
In the course of the trial, Mr. CROMPTON said they had
no objection whatever to adopt the road, and keep it in re-
pair for the future, providing it were first paved and made a
good road. The jury found the defendants not guilty.
The above decision was given on the ground that the place
in question, both in his lordship's opinion and that of the
jury, was not a highway.
A long discussion ensued on an application from Mr.
STARKIE, for his lordship to throw the costs of the indict-
ment on the defendants, under section 95, sth and 6th Wil-
liam IV., cap. 60.
Mr. CROMPTON said it was something new for the winning
party to be made to pay the costs of his adversary.
Mr. STARKIE contended that the statute had a peculiarity
in this respect, as where the indictment was directed by the
justices. the expenses of trying the question were to fall upon
the public.
His LORDSHIP having examined the various provisions of
the statute, had doubts on the subject, as the case had been
-first brought at quarter sessions ; and it was at length agreed
that he (the learned judge) should suspend his decision on
the point till a future day.

QUEEN V. INHABITANTS OF WAVERTHER

This was an indictment against the inhabitants of Waver-
tree, for not repairing a certain highway in that township,
leading between the township of Garstang (past Mosley-hill),
and Toxteth-park, in length 722 yards.
Mr. Starkie and Mr. Henderson appeared in support of
the indictment, and Mr. Crompton for the township. -
it was admitted that the township were bound to repair all
highways within its boundary, and that as to one hundred
yards of the road iu question, it was the duty of the town-

:us master
before the expiration of his period of apprenticeship. The
apprentice was to receive 3s. per week for the second year,
4s. for the third, and Bs. for the seventh. He had now set
up in business for himself, and had deprived his master of
his services. It was proved that Mr. Downward would
have to pay 245. per.week for a man sufficient to supply the
place of the defendant. The plaintiff sought to recover
from the defendant compensation at the rate of 16s. per
week. The jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff.
HALL AND SON V. MIGSON.
In this case Messrs. Hall and Harrison, solicitors, of Man-
chester, were the plaintiffs, and Mr. Higson, formerly over-
seer of the township of Gorton, the defendant. The action
was brought to recover a sum of for fees paid and
law charges, in defending in certain cases of appeal made
against a rate for the above township.
Mr. Wharton appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. Murphy
for the defence.
It was proved that the sum of £6 13s. Gd. had been phid
by Messrs. Hall and Harrison as fees to the clerk of Mr.
Brandt, arid of £4 9s. to the clerk of Mr. Wilkins. The re-
tainer had been given by Mr. Hihbert, a fellow overseer of
Mr. Higson, but application had been made to the former
during along period without effect. A witness was called to
speak to an admission of Mr. Higson, that he had received
the money from the township.
For the defence, Mr. MURPHY contended that the testi-
mony last adverted to was unworthy of credit, as the inter-
view at which it was stated Mr. Higson made the admission,
was alleged to have taken place on the 17th of March last,
after the present action was commenced. It was proved that
Mr. Higson was one of the persons who signed the notices of
appeal against the rate, and that he had paid the costs on be-
half of hiinself and the other appellants to the attorney em-
ployed to resist the rate. Mr. Fligson had, on an action
been entered against him for the recovery of the amount,
neglected, inconsequence of some misapprehension, to put in
his appearance. and suffered judgment to go by default;
upon which execution followed, and the debt and costs were
paid to the sheriff under protest.
The jury returned a verdict for the defendant.
WARING V. TRUSWELL.
Mr. John Waring is a hide merchant of this town, and the.
defendant, Mr. Richard Truswell, a tanner, of Sheffield.
The action was undefended, and was brought to recover a
sum of £l4 10s. 7d. for goods sold and delivered. Verdict
for the plaintiff for the sum claimed, and 7s. interest.
The Court adjourned at six o'clock.

ASSAULTING POLICE OFFlCER.—Yesterday, a man
named John Sutton, who had been to Bootle with a shandry,
was found by a police-officer, violently abusing his wife, and
on being remonstrated with, he struck the' officer on the
mouth, causing much swelling. The case being proved he
was fined 60s and costs, or in default to be committed to
gaol for one month.

A meeting of the Protestant Operative Association was
held yesterday (Monday) evening, in St. Luke's School-
room, Cropper-street, for the purpose of forming a branch
association for St. Peter's Ward. The meeting was addressed
by Mr. Barrow, Mr. Leatherbarrow, Mr. Adshead, Mr.
Eavanson, Mr. Huyten, and Mr. M'Clay. We are happy
to find that these branch meetings are now held weekly
in some parts of our town.

WRITING--One of the first questions put to a candidate
for employment is, what sort of a hand do you write ? If the
applicant cannot pass muster, though otherwise estimable,
he is often rejected. As it is no longer fashionable to write
badly, we cannot do better than recommend Mr. Thomp-
son to notice, whose address will be found elsewhere. •

SQUINTING.—We have formerly called attention to this
subject, and our readers will perceive, by Mr. R. Atkinson's
advertisement in another part of the paper, that his present
visit to Liverpool will terminate on the 24th instant. There
are numbers. he has cured who will no doubt remember him
hereafter with pleasure and gratitude. There are, however,
many who might avail themselves of his professional services
with advantage to themselves, which, if they neglect, the loss
will be their own.

DHAFNESS.—The following interesting case cannot fail
to attract general notice :—A boy named Morgan, four years
old, " deaf and dumb," was placed by his father (a ware-
houseman at the Apothecaries' Hall, Colquitt-street) under
Mr. Cronin's treatment, for deafness. The improvement in
this boy's hearing has astonished numerous persons who have
seen him within the last week, particularly as it is known
this little fellow has had the advice of many eminent men,
who " all" pronounced his case a hopeless one. Captain
Macgee's son (whose case we have already noticed) is rapidly
improving.—See advertisement.—From a correspondent.

ALBION HOTEL, CHESTER.—A very pleasant excursion
by the railway to Chester, and a superb dinner afterwards,
may be enjoyed by those who avail themselves of the op-
portunity of attending Mr. Whaley's opening dinner at the
Albion Hotel. This hotel has been newly fitted up, papered
and painted from roof to cellar, and may be considered a
perfect model, for comfort and convenience. Some of the
first gentry in the county are expected to be present at the
dinner. The railway train leaving at four o'clock from
Birkenhead will take those who intend to be Mr. Whaley's
guests from Liverpool just in time. The ride will se-
cure an excellent appetite. The omnibuses belonging to
'the Albion Hotel will convey parties from the railway to
the place of destination without trouble or inconvenience.

NEWS- FROM AffiRRICA.-The royal mail steamer Cale-
donia, which left Boston on the Ist instant, may be expected
to reach Liverpool to-morrow. The Rocius packet-ship of
the 25th ult., from New York is now due, and may come
up the river to-day. The intelligence by these vessels is
looked for with more than ordinary interest on account of
the uncertainty which still hangs over the President.—The
British Queen would leave New York on Saturday, and is
therefore due off Southampton on the 25th instant.

THE REV. W. DALTON.—An advertisement in another
part of our paper, announces that the annual sermons in be-
half of the national schools attached to St. Bride's church,
will be preached on Sunday next by the Rev. W. Dalton.
The name of this gentleman has long been intimately asso-
ciated with sound scriptural education, and our readers will
not need any further inducement than what they already
know of this eminent divine, to induce them to listen once
more to his silvery eloquence, and respond liberally to his
awakening appeals.
THE PRESIDENT STEAMEP..—The anxiety respecting
this vessel was yesterday for a short period considerably
allayed by a report which seemed to have some foundation,
that a letter had been received by the lady of the commander
of the President, which stated that the steamer had called
at Madeira for a supply of coals. The rumour originated in
e message which Mrs. Roberts directed her servant to take
to the captain of the Britannia steamer, Mrs. Roberts wish-
ing to ascertain whether the latter gentleman considered it
probable that the President would touch at Madeira, such
a suggestion having been made to her ; and the maid under-
standing that the fact was really so, and that a letter,
which Mrs. R. at the time was reading, conveyed the in-
telligence from her husband. So informed Capt. Clelland,
of course, lost no time in giving publicity to the report.
The error was soon discovered ; and we are still unfortu-
nately without the slightest information of this unlucky ship,
though, we confidently anticipate, that in a few days the
uncertainty and alarm which now prevail respecting her
will be cleared up and removed.

IRON WAR STEAMERS.—Towards the close of last year
we gave a circumstantial account of the two iron war steam-
ers, the Nemesis and the Phlegethon, built by Mr. John
Laird, of Birkenhead, which were intended to, and did, in
fact, join the expedition against the Chinese empire. The
following paragraph, which we extract from the Times,
will show that the Nemesis hcs been found of considerable
utility, and has more than answered the expectations which
were formed of her. " The steam-vessels then attacked the
fleet of junks lying in Anson's Bay, but, owing to the shal-
lowness of the water, only the Nemesis could approach them,
towing 12 armed boats from her MajePty's ships. Her first
rocket set lire to the powder magazine of one junk ; lb
others were blown up by their own crews, and the rest es-
caped into the inner waters." The buoyancy of the Ne-
mesis is owing to her being constructed entirely of iron,
and her consequent light draught of water enabled her to
enter a harbour inaccessible, not merely to the ordinary
vessels of war, but even to the other steamer. The result
was the total destruction of the Chinese junks. In the ata
tack on the forts, the Nemesis also did good service, having,
in conjunction with the Qneen, thrown shells into the uppe-
tower which commanded the lower fort.

D RATH ON BOARD SHIP. —An inquisition Was yester-
day held before P. F. Curry, Esq., touching the death of
Richard Prouse, a soldier of the 10th regiment of foot. The
deceased had embarked on sick furlough at Cork, on board
the steamer Ocean, to proceed to Liverpool, in charge of a
corporal of the same corps, and a private. The vessel
sailed on Friday morning. The deceased was brought down
in a cab. He was in so exhausted a state that three men
had to carry him from the house he was in, on board the ves-
sel. He was placed in one of the sailors' berths. Every
possible attention was paid to him on board. The vessel
arrived at Liverpool on Saturday, and he died about ten min-
utes before he could be got on shore. The
.private soldier
stated that the decased appeared to be so moldy and weak
when he was brought on board, that he was not likely to
live over the passage. Mr. P. Smith, staff surgepn resid-
ent in Liverpool, said the deceased was brought tu the hos-
pital od Sunday morning, quite dead. The furlough bore
the signature of Major Charles Hay, commanding officer of
the depOt, 10th regiment of foot, and he had no doubt was a
genuine document. He added that he had made an exami-
nation of the body, and was of opinion that death was
caused by inflammation in the abdomen, which was general
throughout, and caused by the effusion of serum, and the
result of dropsy, which had evidently been of long stand-
ing. Verdiict accordingly—died by the visitation of God.
STEALING A COAT.—TWO young men, Thomas Wa-
terson and John Kelly (both well-known thieves), were
brought before the stipendiary magistrate, on a charge of
stealing a coat from a cab. Waterson and another youth
were, on Saturday night, seen by police-officer 390, who
was then in plain clothes, loitering about a car which
was standing in Dickenson-street, a few doors from
Pitt-street. They went away, one of them (supposed to
be Kelly) carrying a coat over his arm, which he after-
wards handed to Waterson. The officer seized them
both ; but they broke away from him. He pursued them,
and succeeded in apprehending Waterson, who had drop-
ped the coat. They were seen by other parties ; but
neither the officer nor they could identify Kelly, who,
strange to say, had come into the court, no donbt to lis-
ten how the case went, and was, from his appearance and
the description given of him, suspected to be one of the
delinquents, and was instantly placed in the dock with
the other. The owner of the coat, William Fletcher,
had had a fare to the house in Dickenson-street opposite
to which the car stood, and had gone in to get his money
when the robbery was accomplished. He identified the
coat as his property, which he had left on the box. As
Kelly could not• be sworn to, he was discharged. Wa-
terson was committed for trial at the sessions. Kelly
had been before eight times 'committed, and three times
discharged ; Waterson had been three times committed,
and twice discharged.

visable to pursue the subject further in this meeting.
Sir J. WALMSLEY—I want to know whether we did not
in the first instance, buy Woodside ferry ?
The CHAIRMAN--It is satisfactory to say, with regard to
that ferry, that it is now doing exceedingly well. If it is the
wish of the proprietors, under the sanction of the directors,
to sell that property, you may do it ; and I believe you may
get £25,000 for it, and still retain the rights you have.
Sir J. WALMSLEY—What rights, Mr. Chairman ?
The CHAIRMAN—The rights which we hold under the
lease.

The half-yearly general meeting of the company of proprie-
tors of the Chester and Birkenhead Railway was held on Sa-
turday last in the Clarendon-rooms, South John-street, for
the purpose of receiving the reports of the directors and the
engineer, and a statement of the accounts for the last six
months. The meeting was very fully attended.
WILLIAM DIXON, Esq., chairman of the board of directors,
took the chair exactly at twelve o'clock, and opened the pro-
ceedings by stating that the directors had prepared a report,
which was in the hands of the solicitor who would read it.
Mr. MALLABY, the solicitor, then read "The report of
the directors of the Chester and Birkenhead Railway to the
half-yearly general meeting of the proprietors on the 10th of
April, 1811." • This document was to the following effect :
" When the last yearly meeting of proprietors was held,
the line, then incomplete, had been but imperfectly opened,
and experience did not justify the directors in expressing a
decided opinion as to the traffic which might be anticipated.
It was not until near Christmas, last year, that both lines of
rails were opened the entire length for traffic. The charge
for passengers which the directors thought it right to make
upon opening the line, though reasonable, was found to ex-
pose the company to the continued opposition of lower fares.
So soon as the railway was in an effective state to answer the
public demands for accommodation, the charges were there-
fore reduced, and the traffic has since steadily and progres-
sively increased. A comparison between the traffic of the
last week of the former prices, and the last week of the pre-
sent prices [that is, last Saturday] will, it is hoped, afford
abundant reason for congratulation, and be the best augury
of the benefits to be obtained from a more genial season for
traffic. For the week ending 12th December, 1840, there
were 1,360 passengers, and the receipts amounted to £180;
but for the week ending April 3, 1811, there were 5,879 pas-
sengers, and the receipts were £459 12s. 2d. This traffic, it
must be observed, is;a native one, deriving no aid from any
other line. When the public become better acquainted with
the convenience of travellinr, by it, and the traffic becomes.
settled, the directors confidently expect to render the line
much more productive. Any detail of profits beyond what
appears in the accounts may be dispensed with, as the direc-
tors do not contemplate that a dividend from the past brief
and imperfect working of the line will be expected. The pro-
prietors may have heard that some arrangements are in pro-
gress with the post-office authorities for conveying the Irish
and other mails along this railway • but, while the directors
think it may be satisfactory generally to confirm such a re-
port, they purposely abstain from entering into the details
until the whole be matured. The works, in connection with
the stations, and which will economise the expenditure of the•
carrying departments, are now complete. Other works will
appear, from the engineer's report, to be carrying on, the
costs of which, and of whatever else may be necessary to
make a complete and effective railway are anticipated to be
provided for. The report of the engineer and the accounts
referred to being produced, it is only necessary now to add,
that the retiring directors by ballot are Mr. William Jackson,
Mr. Joseph Uniacke, and Mr. William Ravenscroft, all of
whom are eligible for re-election."

Mr. MOSLEY (we believe) thought the meeting ought to in-
quire into the circumstances of Monks' ferry, because if they
did not, they were doing an injury by trespassing upon
some points which they did not yet understand. He wanted
to ascertain whether since the period that purchase was
made, any circumstances had occurred which tended to taint
its value ?

The CHAlRMAN—Certainly not.
Mr. Mosm continued—lf not, then the ferry was in the
same state now. If, however, the directors said at the last
meeting they were not, under the circumstances, justified in
communicating information respecting this ferry, but that
they hoped to be able to give it at this meeting, and they•
still deferred it, in dependence on the judgment of the pro-
prietors, it must be for them to take the responsibility, with
this full understanding, that the proprietors did not, at the
present moment, see the ground of the purchase, the reason
why all the circumstances were not now developed, and that
they would, upon a future occasion, if the undertaking did
not turn out beneficial, enquire how far they had been met
in a fair spirit, and why they were not consulted upon a
point of such vital importance. He contended that the in-
vestment of a large portion of the funds of the company in
undertakings which might lead them into legal difficulties
and controversies, was a very important item for considera-
tion; but feeling that directors were sometimes placed in
situations of difficulty, that the answering of one question
might lead to future difficulties, and involve matters of deep
importance, he thought if the meeting were able to say that
they had confidence in the discretion of the directors, the
proprietors had no right to trespass upon them further at
the present moment.

Sfr J.•WALMSLEY said if the directors at the last meeting
had skewed the company that they had particular reasons for
not laying the whole affair before them, and again, without the
slightest reference to any such wish now, kept back infor-
mation upon points so important to the company as the ex-
penditure of £50,000, the keeping up of two -establish-
ments, and of two sets of directors, and still the proprietors
were to rely entirely upon their discretion, without saying
one word, as they did not wish to be asked any questions
—and if gentlemen suggested they should not be
asked—he (Sir J. W.) was at a loss to understand bow their
own affairs were to be brought at all before the proprietors.
(Hear, hear.) They might go on blindly from year to year,
and every year they came, hear the same persons say, " it
is not convenient for you, the proprietors, to ask the direc-
tors any questions—you must rely upon them—upon their
discretion." (Hear, hear.) He did not wish to impugn the
integrity, the good intentions, or the zeal and efficiency of
any one member of the board; he had not the slightest rea-
son to do so ; but he did think it was nec:ssary to put some
questions to them when, at the last meeting, the proprietors
had such important information kept back from them. (Hear,
hear.) Surely it was now time for them to have some expla-
nation. (Hear, hear.) He had several other questions to
ask. The proprietors must bear in mind that it was very
necessary to know for what reason it was that they had been
buying land here and there. They were told that the land
in Cheshire was all profitable. It was vary well that it was
so; but why, he wanted to know, were they to undertake,
without knowing it, and without being asked a single ques-
tion upon the subject, on this [Liverpool] side of the water,
to build an inn, and carry on transactions here?
The Cu AIRMAN rose, but gave way to
Mr.MosLEY, who said Sir J.Wahnsley wool I give him credit
for not being in the least degree privy to these transactions.
He knew nothing of the matters referred to ; but he had heard
their law adviser state that it might be dangerous to enter
upon a subject the discussion of which would involve legal
points. He, therefore, suggested that the discussion should
drop, but at the same time putting it in this form, thetas the
directors took upon themselves the entire responsibility, the
question must rest upon them whether they had acted cor-
rectly. If the directors stated distinctly that it would be in-
expedient to communicate the points at issue, he (Mr.
Mosely) put it to the proprietors whether they would press
the inquiry, although, as regarded the information, no one
would be more anxious to hear it than himself.
Sir J. WALMSLEY said if he understood or had been in-
formed rightly, the company had bought the Woodside Ferry
for £25,000, that they were keeping up there an establish-
ment of several boats, and that they- were further paying a
rent of £lOOO a year for it. Subsequently to that purchase
they purchased Monk's Ferry, which was close to Woodside!
Now, he wanted to know what they had purchased that for ?
and Mr. Lawrence had asked another question since, viz.,
whether a notice had not been received that they had no
right to use Monk's Ferry at all ? Reports to that effect
were as common as possible; and he had, been informed
that there was such a document in existence. If the com-
pany had bought that ferry, and there was a right of ferry,
they would have the right upon their side, and no law could
take it from them : but if they had not, let the directors
meet the difficulty, if there was one, like men, and at once
say—" we have made a wrong purchase." The shares could
not be worse than they
_were at present._

Mr. MALCABY then read -the report of Mr. John Dixon,
the engineer, which was to the following effect :—At the last
meeting of the proprietors, which was held on the 2d Oct.,
1840, he had, in conjunction with Mr. Stephenson, to report
that the railway was opened throughout, but that a portion
of it was ready only for a single line of rails. The other line
could not be laid,—and inasmuch, as the embankments were
not formed of the full width, it was not till Christmaslast that
both lines were opened. He had now, however, to state, that
the whole of the cuttings and embankments were formee, and
nearly all of them soiled and sown. The station at Birken-
head had been so far completed as to be sufficient for preszut
purposes : workshops were constructed, at which they were
doing the chief repairs to the engines and carriages, and they
were now erecting a small stationary engine for driving
lathes, pumping water, &c., the latter having been done by
manual labour up to this period. A new office was in a
forward state—at Birkenhead. For five months after the
opening there was only a very temporary wooden but for a
booking office, &c., at Chester; latterly, however, the houses
purchased from Cromford and Kay had been rendered com-
fortable and convenient for passengers, by the erection of a
large shed and landing stage. The engine-house was also
completed ; and, instead of pumping water for the locomo-
tives by hand, they had erected a cistern and connected it
with the mains of the Chester Water Works Co. The cot-
tages for the intermediate stations at Sutton and Bebbington
had been completed and were in regular use; but only tem-
porary accommodation had been provided at Mollington and
Hooton, where suitable cottages would be required previous
to the next winter. A considerable traffic had sprung up be-
tween Mold and Sutton, and it would be found necessary to
provide stables there. A stable capable of accommodating
twenty-four horses was now completed. The maintenance
of the way and works had been a heavy task upon the con-
tractors. As to the state of the ground there had been no
particular subsidence through the winter season. He was
happy to be enabled to state, that there had not been any im-
portant failure in any part of the masonry upon the line, nor
any slips of magnitude in the cuttings and embankments ;
arid as the spring advanced the contractors were not only
dressing the slopes, completing the fences, and repairing those
which were injured, but they were going afresh through a
great portion of the permanent way in order to put it in effi-
cient repair. With regard to the travelling department he
would only remark that he trusted the trains had performed
their journies with as great regularity as on most of the new
lines, where the arrangements must be incomplete for a time—
and what would be still more satisfactory, without any acci-
dent to passengers, servants of the company, or to any indi-
vidual, as well as freedom from casual breakage either of
engines or carriages.

Mr. MALLAIIIC next read a statement of the accounts,
which were made up in two branches, the general account
and the traffic account. By the general account it appeared
that the act of parliament cost £60,000, law charges £523
13s 10d, the expenses of opening the line £126 7s 10d,
works £13,643 12s, Monk's Ferry £14731 lOs 10d. On
the traffic accountlit appeared that the amount received from
passengers and merchandise from the 23d September to the
3d April was £7907 8s 2d; that there was a balance In the
bankers amounting to £2785 4s. and the liabilities on this
account were £924 6s Bd.

Mr. MOSLEY, before any discussion took place upon the
report, suggested that in future the report and accounts to
printed and distributed to the proprietors in the room. The
practise had been adopted with success in other companies.
It was quite impossible for the proprietors, upon merely hear-
ing the report, to form ah opinion of it.
The CHAIRMAN promised that the suggestion should re-
ceive attention.

Sir Josnun WALMSLEY enquired whether the directors
could furnish an account of the total amount expended in the
undertaking ?

Mr. MAiLABY said that would appear by the accounts.
He then referred to them, and said that £388,044 8s 10d had
been expended on the line, and £68,587 is 3d on the stock,
total £456,631 lOs Id.
A PROPRIETOR asked whether the sums borrowed on
mortgage were included in that amount ?

Mr. MALLABY said everything had been included which
had been received.
Sir J. WALMSLEY wished to know whether there were
not some mortgages included in that amount ?
Mr. MALLABY.—Everything is included up to the 28th
February.

Mr. HUDSON said the question was—had there been any
money borrowed since the 28th February ? (Hear, hear.)
Mr. JAMES, the treasurer, replied in the negative.
Sir J. WALMSLEY.—Then can you say what property
that X 456,000 includes, exclusive of the railway ?
The CHAIRMAN.—You have in the first place I should
state a piece of land at Tranmere Pool, which has not been
employed for any purpose for the use of the railway, the cost
of which was £12,500. We have had that land valued within
the last week, and the valuation is £19,000. There is also
a piece of land at the station in Chester, which was purchased
from the Dean and Chapter. The road has taken sufficient
land for its present use, and there is a quantity left, which at
a moderate valuation would produce the sum of £7,000.
Sir J. WALMSLEY.—You do not state what the first cost
was.

The CHATRMAN.—The first cost was £7,000. We made
use of what was necessary for the road, and the remainder
will realize £7,000. lam glad to say that upon every pur-
chase made by the railway of land not yet used, there is a
considerable increase in value. Then you have the Monk's
Ferry property.
Sir J. WALMSLEY.—Is there no more land ?
The CHAIRMAN.—There is some near the station, and
near Monk's Ferry.

Sir J. WA Ch ISiE Y.-But that you have sold ?
The CHAIRMAN.—No ; that is for consideration. There
is land near the Grange station, but that I do not think it
advisable to sell.

Sir J. WALMSLEY.—What is it valued at ? In asking
these questions I only wish the proprietors to see what pro-
perty thelhave, as this railway is not a very,beneficial con-
cern. They would, therefore, like to know what beneficial
interest they have.
The CHAIRMAN.—Perhaps I may state in round numbers ;
the amount is £37,191 of valuable property.
Sir J. WALMSLEY.—What, in Grange Lane?
The CHAIRMAN.—That is included in it; the total is
£37,000.

•
Sir J. WALMSLEY.—Thera be good enough to state what
it consists of.

The CHAIRMAN.—Then, there is the land in James's-
street, the purchase of which was made with the intention of
erecting an office and an inn. The amount is £7,114 and it
is not wanted.

Sir J. WALMSLEY.—What would that sell at?
The CHAIRMAN.—For more than we gave for it
Sir J,WALnistmr.—lt would ?

_ .
The CHAIRMAN.—There is no doubt of it. Then there
are some houses at Bebbington, for which we gave £1,700,
and which we expect will realize that sum. There is also
the Dean and Chapter land, which is worth £7,500.
Sir J. WALMSLEY.—Which you can re-sell ?
The CHAIRMAN.—We can, but I do not think it desirable
to offer it for sale at present.
A. PROPRIETOR inquired whether the land adjoining Tran-
mere Pool was likely to be wanted for the purposes of the
railway ?

The CHAIRMAN.—There can be no feeling upon the part
of the directors. They can have no wish to keep back in-
formation merely for the sake of keeping it back. If you
ask the directors why the purchase of Monks' Ferry was
made, we reply that it was made when it was necessary to
have it for the convenience of passengers. You make an al-
lusion to the purchase of land not wanted : I will first allude
in reply to Tranmere Pool. It was at first thought that a
dock might be made there, and that would require a depot
for goods ; and with regard to the purchase of the Dean and
Chapter land in Chester, I think it was an exceedingly desi-
rable purchase. Every one who knows Chester will say it
was exceedingly cheap, considering the very little freehold
land to be had in Chester. When that purchase was before
the directors, it was a question whether they would take a
part or the whole; for myself I said if they would not take
it I would, and I should be exceedingly glad if they would
let me have it. The result shews that there has been no in-
jury to the company, hut, on the contrary, a large profit upon
every purchase made.
Sir J. WALMSLEY.—You say you should want Monks'
Ferry for passengers; perhaps you will explain that.
Mr. LAWRENCE.--I never saw any use for it.

The CHAIRMAN.—If the proprieCors are willing to take
the responsibility upon themselves from the directors the ex-
planations shall be made. If you want an explanation we
will give it you ; but you must understand that the respon-
sibility goes from our shoulders. (Hear, hear, and cries of
" No, no.")

Mr. LAWRENCE said he was a considerable proprietor in
this railway : this was a very important question, and he
should like to have some information upon it. (Hear.)
A PROPRIETOR.—There was no want of the ferry at all
when it was bought. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. MOLYNEUX said he was inclined to move for a com-
mittee of inquiry into these affairs. (Hear, hear.)
The CHAIRMAN.—The directors would not object to any
thing of the kind. If the proprietors would rather that we
should explain the whole of the circumstances, we will do
so, but as a director Ido not recommend it. Appoint any
set of gentlemen you please, who are proprietors, and the di-
rectors will meet and explain to them every particular.
(Hear.)

Mr. MOSLEY said the question put to the directors was,
what were the original grounds upon which Monk's ferry
was purchased, and the necessity for it, when the company
had the command of another ferry. That was the question.
He must confess that he was not very willing to take from
the shoulders of the directors the responsibility they were
under of having made a bad purchase, but he wanted to
know what had led them to buy that which was not wanted,
when they had that which was necessary before?
Mr. RADCLIFFE approved of the appointment of the com-
mittee, and suggested that the meeting should adjourn to re-
ceive its report. It was useless, after what had passed, to
ask the proprietors to agree to the report of 'the directors,
until enquiry had been made.

A PROPRIETOR mentioned that he was a proprietor in the
Monk's Ferry Company, and he would give the meeting his
word that he was ignorant of any proceedings against the
railway directors.

TheCitAIRMAN.---I am satisfied that any sub-committee
which may be appointed, will be satisfied that we have done
quite right; but I do not think, as I have said before, that
it would be for the interest of the company to go into parti-
culars here. We shall be very glad to meet the committee.
Mr. MOLYNEUX.—Then I beg to name as the committee,
Sir J. Walmsley, Mr. Lawrence, Mr Radcliffe, and Mr.
Mosley.

TheCHAmm AN.—Not at all, I think, at lea6t according
to our present views.

The PROPRIETOR.—Nor the James'-street property ?
The CHAlRMAN.—Certainly not; and it is our intention to
sell it. You have also the land at the station at Birkenhead.
Sir J. WALMSLEY.—What was paid for that at last?
The CH AIRMAN.—A variety of prices. The last price was
9s. a yard. We have now 15s. a yard offered for some, but
the value would be nearer 20s. We have, however, offered
15s. There is also land in the neighbourhood of Monk's
Ferry, which might be sold without interfering with the
house or ferry, and which would realize £6299. I believe
that to be a very low valuation. I believe it is valued at 20s.
a yard, but it is worth 245. or 255. We take it, however,
at 20s.

Sir J. WALMSLEY.—Then the total amount of land avail-
able, if the proprietors were disposed to sell, would be
£37,000. In your previous report you stated that there were
some peculiar advantages in the purchase of Monk's Ferry;
but first let me ask what was the cost of Woodside Ferry.
The CH A IRMAN.—X2S,OOO.
Sir J. WALMSLEY. And what are the terms of that
purchase ?

The CHAIRMAN.—We purchased the ferry upon a lease
for 18 years.

Mr. LAWRENCE said before the Chairman proceeded, he
would read a clause from the report this time last year,
relative to this purchase. Mr. Lawrence then read this
clause, which was to the effect that the directors had pur-
chased Monk's Ferry, but that to develope the whole plan
would, at that time. be most prejudicial to the interests of
the company. They, therefore, threw themselves upon the
proprietors, requesting that confidence which was necessary
to enable them to carry out their views. Mr. Lawrence
added that, as it would have been injurious to the company
for the directors to develope their plans in this purchase
then, perhaps they could do so now without such risk ?
;Me CRAIRMAN-At that time we had the hope of making
a tram-road from the permanent station to Monk's Ferry ;
that design was not accomplished, and we have been obliged
to use omnibuses.

---
A PROPRIETOR—I presume that ferry was purchased for
£14,000.

The CHAIRMAN said £14,000 had been paid.
Mr. LAWRENCE.—Have you received notice that that
ferry must be discontinued ?
Mr. MALLABY—I do not think it right or prudent that
that question should be answered. It would be inconvenient
to answer it.

Mr. LAWRENCE—It came to tny ears by a fiiend, and I
could scarcely believe it to be the case.
The CHAIRMAN-I think that is a question which you
should leave to the directors.

Mr. MALLABY--Any individual proprietor can get the in-
formation ; but I do not think it would be prudent or ad-

Mr:MALLABY.—What are to be the objects of the com-
mittee?

Mr. MOLYNEUX.—Why, to inquire generally. We have
had a report this morning which I can compare to nothing
but a king's speech, for it gives us no information. (Hear,
hear.)
The CHAIRMAN.—Is it to be a committee of general in-
quiry into the acts of the directors ? If it is, its appoint-
ment is an act of direct disapprobation of the conduct of the
directors from the commencement. If that feeling is to be
shown to us, let it be stated at once . let the proprietors say,
" We are not satisfied with the conduct of the present direc-
tors, let us elect directors of a better selection." (Hear,
hear.) I should he exceedingly glad to retire the first oppor-
tunity given to me.
Mr. MOLYNEUX begged to disclaim any intention to cast
an imputation upon the character of any individual in the
direction, but he did not see any other means of arriving at
the information, except through the medium of a coin.
mittee.

The CHATAMAN.—Then you should state the object of
your committee. Is it to go into this question only, or is it
to
_enquire generally

Mr. MOLYNEUX.—The duties of the committee, I appre-
hend, will be to enquire into the purchase of the Monk's
ferry. _ _ _

Sir J. WALMSLEY.--I should be glad to be relieved from
attending to anything of that kind only ; if the object of the
committee be only to enquire into the merits of that bargain,
I will not be one. (Hear, hear.) I would rather go into
the whole case. I do feel some dissatisfaction, I must say,
not against any particular director, or even against the di-
rectors generally ; but I do say the accounts brought before
us this day are not such as to give me satisfaction, especially
after the previous reports, which stated we should place con-
fidence in them for a time, after which they would give us a
full explanation. (Hear, hear.) We are just in the same
situation as we were twelve months ago, and now we are
going on another year without enquiry ! I think it would be
far better if Mr. Molyneux would make the question a broad
one. (Hear, hear.) The directors, I believe, will come
out of this enquiry quite clear; and if I were one of them, it
would be satisfactory to me that a committee of enquiry was
instituted. (Hear, hear.) We had the same threat held out
12 months ago of resignation ; if that threat is held out, for
heaven's sake let the resignation take place. (Cheers.) Let
us meet the question fully and fairly. There is no man in
this community for whom I have a higher respect than for
the Chairman ; I believe him to he incapable of doing any
one single thing that is incorrect ; I speak of him with great
respect, and it would be to me a matter of deep regret were
he, or any of the directors, to resign. I beg they will not
consider there is any thing offensive in this, but take it in
the opposite sense. The shareholders wish for an enquiry
from some other body than the directors, and that is this
committee. The directors have themselves suggested it;
they have suggested themselves one part of the enquiry, but
why are we to be restricted to one part ? (Cheers.) I think
there are no reasons why we should have two directions ; why
we should have a ferry committee and a railway committee.
And what is the reason there are to be 17 directors upon a line
of only 16 or 17 miles ? I cannot see the reason of that. I
have many other questions to ask besides that.
The CHAIRMAN.—If you will allow me, before you pro-
ceed further—
be well, Mr. Chairman,
Mr. MoLysEux.—Would it not.
that I should put my motion into a regular shape?
The CHAIRMAN.—The pointed remarks made by Sir
Joshua Walmsley are such, that I do not feel I ought to
remain quiet without making a reply. He has alluded to a
wish to retire which I expressed at our last meeting; but
he must be aware that the subject of discussion at thet meet-
' ing was not really upon the merits of the Birkenhead and
Chester line but the asking for information which I did not
feel myself justified in giving, and the result proved that I
was correct. It concerned an arrangement which was made
for the sale of the Chester and Crewe line. I felt then, and
I still feel, that it was a question that ought not to have 'been
put to me. (Hear.) -
Sir J. WALMSLEY.—What was the question?
The CHAIRMAN.—It was for the particulars of the ar-
rangement made with the Grand Junction Company for the
purchase of the Chester and Crewe line. It had nothing to
do with the question before the meeting, and I am only aur-

prised you should bring it forward now. With regard to our
own proceedings, we court inquiry in every way—(hear,
hear) ;—and for that reason I say appoint your sub-commit-
tee ; but I would leave it to you, and to any gentleman pre-
sent, if you were appointed as directors, whether you would
wish them to be instructed to look into every item? Say
whether or not you approve of the conduct of the directors ;
come forward at once if you disapprove of them, and let us
retire. lam certainly ready to retire. (Hear, hear.)
A PROPRIETOR, whose name we could not learn, said he
thought that Monks' Ferry might become a very desirable
property. For instance, the directors might think it neces-
sary at a future time to make a tunnel—(loud laughter.)
Mr. MosLEY put it to the chairman, whether it would not
be better for the directors to consent to the committee hav-
ing the objects proposed, from the fact that the suggestion
had come from himself without mentioning any terms. It
was the general wish of the proprietors to appoint a com-
mittee, without the slightest intention of casting a slur upon
the directors ; and if the directors did not agree to it, the
result would be that persons would presume that which he
(Mr. Mosley) was sure was not the case, namely, that things
had been done which ought not to have been done. He did
not see, after what had occurred, how they could avoid the
alternative—either to appoint a committee of inquiry, or to
enter upon a full discussion of things which they themselves
bad stated not to be advisable or prudent. (Hear.) At the
same time, he thought if the motion could be so framed as
to reach the objects of those gentlemen who wished for in-
formation, yet without any disparagement of the directors,
it would be exceedingly desirable.
Mr. MOLYNEUX.—Then I move that a committee be ap-
pointed, to inquire and report, to an adjourned meeting, upon
the general affairs of the Chester and Birkenhead Railway
Company. (Hear.)
A DIRECTOR.—Let the information be given.
The CHAIRMAN.—WeII, as the question is pressed
Sir J. WALmsEny.—The question is not pressed.
The CHAIRMAN.-But there is a wish expressed to have
the information. It does appear to me that the body of pro-
prietors think they ought to be acquainted with the particu-
lars of the arrangements. I should say, as one of the direc-
tors, that we are willing to enter upon the explanation at
once ; but of course the proprietors are to take the respon-
sibility of it upon themselves : we do not come forward to
recommend it.

Mr. HUDSON.—Has the difficulty which lies in the way
of giving the information anything to do with pounds, shil-
lings, and pence, or are the difficulties of a legal nature ?
The answer to that would decide, I think, whether the
proprietors would have the information now or not.

Mr. MALLABY.—They are both. The legal difficulties
would involve the pounds,
Ishillings, and pence—
Mr. HUDSON.—That can understand; but I want to
know whether there are any independent legal difficulties ?
Mr. MALLAnr.—There would be legal difficulties attend-
ing it. It is a matter of prudence—
Mr. HUDSON.—Then before you proceed—
Mr. MALLABY.—It is a matter of prudence or not which
it is for you to decide.

Mr. flunsoN made some remark, the exact purport of
which we did not hear.

Mr. MALLABY.—Then I will proceed. With regard to
the two questions— (Cries bf " No, no.")
Mr. MOLYNEUX.—I beg pardon, Mr. Chairman. I have
proposed that a committee should be formed, and the motion
has been seconded. (Bear, hear.)
Mr. RADCLIFFE observed that their law adviser had stated
it would be prejudicial to the interests of the company to
make the explanation, and if that was so the proprietors were
satisfied. But now the directors seemed to say, "if you dare
us into the thing we will give the information, although to
mention it publicly would be prejudicial." (-Wear, hear.)
The CHAIRMAN said the proprietors had expressed a wish
that the proceedings should be entered into, and the direc-
tors had given their opinion that it was not desirable. Since
that certain remarks had been made impugning the conduct
of the directors, not only upon this particular question, but
their general management. As the matter had gone so far,
perhaps the proprietors would think it desirable that the ex-
planation should be given, and he as one of the directors re-
quested that it might be done _ _

- Sir J. WALMSLEY.—What, although it would injure the
affairs of the company? (Hear, hear.)
The CHAIRM AN.—They take that upon themselves. (N0,n0.)
Mr. Hunsox.—Mr. Chairman, there is no resolution be-
fore the meeting calling upon you to explain. (Hear, hear.)
Had the proprietors undertaken to pass a resolution
calling upon you to explain any transaction which you
thought prejudicial to the company to be explained, then
I conceive you would be relieved from responsibility ;
but.till that resolution is passed the responsibility rests with
you, and by any unwise declaration of them you involve your-
self in the difficulty of injuring the interests of the company.
A committee of inquiry is proposed : I do think that to you
and the directors it must be satisfactory to have that com-
mittee ; for I am satisfied, as has been said by Sir Joshua
Walmsley, though you may possibly have erred, though your
intentions have been honest. You have property to the
amount of £37,000 to sell, which is an anomalous position for
a small company. That is a circumstance which of itself
calls for inquiry, and I am sure you will consult, not only the
best interests of this company, but also that high honour and
integrity which has ever characterised this direction by allow-
ing this investigation to take place. (Cheers.) lam satisfied
that the shareholders will place the duty of inquiring in
honourable hands, and that you will come out of it in a man-
ner that will reflect credit upon the direction.
The CHAIRMAN.—I am sure it is the wish of every direc-
tor of this company to give every possible explanation. The
only question is the mode in which that is to be done. It
had been stated that the proprietors thought it was better to
enter into particulars ; we objected ; the matter was rather
pressed ; but as it seems to be the wish of some of them yet.
I say, in the position we are placed, let us do it—(Loud cries
of" No, no.")

Mr. MOLYNEUX.-It would be quite as well if my motion
were put into a shape- .

Mr: BOOTH.—Is your committee to make a general en-
quiry into the affairs of the company ?
Mr. MOLYNEUX.—Yes. (Hear, hear).
Mr. BOOTH.—Then, that certainly appears to my mind
to be a general reflection upon the conduct of the directory.
If that were passed, I for one should retire (hear).
. PROPRIETOR.—Then we must appoint some one else.

Mr. BOOTH-

—Very well

The CHAIRMAN—If the proprietors have come here with
the wish of having this matter fully explained, we, the direc-
tors, are ready to do it. (No, no.) We merely give our
opinion that we do not think it would be desirable; but if
the proprietors think differently, they shall know the whole
of our proceedings. Let us go on. (No, no.)

Mr. LAWRENCE—I did come' here expecting this
matter would have been exlpained, but you and the solicitor
have said it would be injurious. I told you I would meet you
at once, as a large proprietor. When you stated it would be
disadvantageous to explain, it was the general wish that you
must not; and as such a course seems to be most agreeable
to the proprietors, I am satisfied with it.
Mr. JONES said he should be very sorry if the directors
conceived the resolution proposed to be a censure upon
them. Were he a directorhe should not so consider it, but,
at the same time, he should wish the committee to be limited
in its objects. The great object of the inquiry which appeared
to him at present was the mystery (for he could not call it
anything else) respecting the two ferries. (Applause.) If
the committee was limited to an inquiry respecting these two
affairs, then the shareholders and the directors would unite,
and it could not in any way be a censure upon the directors.
The CHAIRMAN.—That quite meets my views. It is quite
clear if the committee is appointed to inquire into this ques-
tion, of course they will see the general working of the com-
pany ; but I must say I do not like a resolution of this kind
passed which goes to make a general inquiry into the affairs
and proceedings of the company. It does appear to me to be
a direct censure upon the directors.
Mr. RADCLIFFE could not see how an inquiry into their
own affairs could be a slur or censure upon the directors, for
they themselves had courted inquiry. They threw suspicion
upon themselves ; and it was not the proprietors who sus-
pected them. They appeared to him like petted children,
" Oh," said they, "if you do not do as we consider right,
we will resign." He submitted that that was not the sort of
conduct for them to adopt. (Cheers.)

The CHAIRMAN.—There is no such feeling on the part of
the directors ; and we are willing to explain every item.—
What is your motion, Mr. Molyneux ?

Mr. MOLYNEUX.—My object is general inquiry. I was
inclined to limit it at first, but I now think the duties of the
committee should embrace a general inquiry. ( Hear.)
Mr. HUDSON suggested that the duties of the committee
should be limited, as the chairman had such strong objections
to a general inquiry. He for one would much rather have
had a general inquiry, but—
A lengthened and somewhat warm discussion succeeded
on a resolution which had been drawn up on the part of
Mr. Mollyneux by Mr. Mosley. This resolution under-
went a great number of modifications, in the attempt to
make it embrace a general enquiry by the committee, with-
out conveying an implied censure upon the committee.
We regret that we have not room, even with the aid of
the supplement which we present to our readers this day,
to give the discussion on this resolution, as it was pungent
and interesting. Eventually. it was carried in this shape,
"That a committee be appointed to enquire into the pur-
chase of Woodside and Monk ferries, the propriety of a
better arrangement of the direction, and such other matters
as can be inquired into without injury to the company;" the
chairman promising that every thing should be open to the
committee.

The following gentlemen were appointed the committee :
Mr. J. S. Ratcliffe, Mr. James Lawrence, Sir J. Walmsley,
Mr: Nicholas Martindale, Mr. Robertson Gladstone, Mr.
Abbot, and Mr. John Jones.

The.meeting was then adjourned till Wednesday, the 12th
May, for the purpose of receiving the report of the director a

THE NEW POOR-LAW IN LIVERPOOL.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE LIVERPOOL STANDARD.
Sia,—There are now living, not above hundred miles from
Shaw's-brow, an old woman and her grandson. The grand-
son is in the fifth year of his apprenticeship, and receives, of
course, very low wages, 3s. per week, I believe, and the old
woman has hitherto received Is. Gd. per week out-door parish
relief. The old grandmother is singularly attached to her
grandson, and the lad (whose parents are both dead) is as
strongly attached to his grandmother. Their pittance will
not indeed allow of the idea of high living, but the boy is
kind and affectionate, and performs whatever of domestic
work lies within his power, is a cheerful companion for his
aged grandmother, and hopes, doubtless, to be able in future,
to do much better for her than at present. She may be con-
sidered in the place of father and mother to him. They
regularly attend church together, are desirous of being good
neighbours and good christians, and are as comfortable as
4s. 6d. per week can be expected to make them.
But, sir, the notoriously-infamous new poor-law has al-
ready commenced its desolating work in Liverpool, and this
poor old woman has received notice that she is no longer to
have her meagre Is. Gd. per week ; and that if she now wishes
to have any help from the parish, she must leave her grand-
son, and retire to the workhouse. The poor lad must, there-
fore, be left to shift for himself—starve or not ! Without a
protector !—without an instructor !—and without restraint !
Under such circumstances can it be any wonder if the boy
should become a drankard, a debauchee, or even a thief ?
So much for the new poor-law in its infancy ! A law
which seems to have been invented for the purpose of tor-
turing those who may become dependent in any measure upon
parish relief; and whose motto is " blood! blood! blood !"
This step is equivalent to saying to the old person in ques-
tion, " You have too much comfort and satisfaction for a
poor old woman like you! You shall be incarcerated, and
cut off from society ! The parish, madam, would rather keep
you altogether, though it should cost them three times the
sum it now costs, than see you in such tolerable circum-
stances ! Leave your grandson ; let him fend for himself,
and restrain himself, and guard himself; he needs no care or
guardianship of yours; and if he do, he cannot, he shall not
have it !"

Now, sir, this being the first time that I have heard that
the cloven foot of the new poor•law has been seen in this
town, I have thought it right to send you this letter for pub-
lication in your independent paper; by inserting it, there-
fore, you will oblige a number of lovers of justice, and of
haters of whip economy.—l am, sir, yours, &c.
AN ENGLISHMAN.
April 8, 1841.

THEATRE-ROYAL.—This theatre was fashionably and nu-
merously attended last evening. Miss Delcy's debut was
brilliantly successful. _

- .
ASSAULT.-At the Police-court, yesterday, George
Shakeshaft was fined £5, or , to. be imprisoned two
months, for a violent assault on Amelia Jones, who, see-
ing him in a fight, merely remonstrated with him. The
complainant's nose was injured and her eyes blackened
by his blows.