The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1836-07-15 00:00:00

to the last moment for discussion. It would have been desirable
to have had a little inure time for reflection on a matter of such
serious importance as that before them.
Mr. COGLAN said the claim would first have to be proved,
and then it would be reduced to two-thirds.
Mr. DUNCAN had the fullest confidence in the committee,
and should, therefore, give them his support. He wished to
know what the charge upon the corpoiatiou fund now was for
the same duties that had been done by the•late town-clerk?
Mr. RATHBONE replied, that the average of the late town-
clerk's receipts, according to his own showing, fur the last five
years was £6,700 per annum. At present the sums paid for the
same work he performed were—to the town-clerk £2,000 per
annum, the under town-clerk £7OO per annum, which, in addi-
tion to Mr. Foster's claim of £2,500, would make a total charge
o❑ the borough funds of £5,200 a year, which was a saving of
about £1,500 to the borough fund. The clerks to the magist rates
received no stated salaries, but were paid by the fees arising ou
of their business in the police court.
Mr. SHELL said Mr. Rathbone had overrated the saving to
the town, inasmuch as there was upwards of £B5O paid to clerks
in Mr. Radcliffe's office.

The TOWN.CLERK explained that the fees in his office accrued
as heretofore, and it was from them that his salary Was paid.
His clerks were about the same expense as in Mr. Foster's

Mr. HOPE again pressed his amendment. The council should
then form themselves into a secret committee in order that the
report might be read in private.
Mr. COGLAN offered some observations in support of Mr.
Hope's amendment.

Mr. RA T HIVINE would still adhere to the motion he had pro-
posed at the outset of the proceedings. He was aware he was
incurring no slight responsibility in asking the council for their
confidence, and perhaps he might obtain some unpopularity out
of doors by the step which he had taken; but, knowing what he
did, considering the patient and rigid attention which the com-
mittee had given to the considerat►on of the claim, he was
willing to receive all the odium that might fall upon him rather
than submit to have the report read and the question reconsi-
dered by the members of the council.
Mr. BROWN inquired whether, in the event of the council agreeing
to the recommendation of the committee, the public would afterwards
he put into possession of the report.
- - -

The TOWN-CLERK replied that there could be no objection after-

Mr. BnowN—ln the event of the reporters retiring, would each
member of the council be required to pledge himself not to commu-
nicate anything in the report to the public.

The TowN-cLERK—I suppose no gentleman will be required to do
that, but the report cannot he given to the public press.
Mr. BIRCH said, if the reporters were ordered to retire and after-
wards the report was read, still it would be made public. In the
House of Commons on divisions strangers were ordered to withdraw,
nevertheless, what transpired in their absence found its way into the
public prints. As it appeared to be the wish of several gentlemen
that the report should be read, he would move, if necessary, that it
should be so at once.

Mr. EGERTON SMITH was decidedly opposed to excluding any gen-

tleman connected with the press, (a laugh) and he should therefore
oppose Mr. Hope's motion. He was most sorry that a suggestion of

this nature had met with even transient support, particularly from his
friend Mr. Coglan. Discussions of this nature would always come
before the public through some channel, they had done so before even
from the most close assemblies.

Mr. AIKIN expressed his opinion that it would be the better plan
to exclude and enter freely into the subject.
It was agreed that Mr. Hope's amendment, that the reporters should
withdraw be first put, which was done, when there appeared,
For the amendment, Messrs. S. Hope,Woolwright, Rushton, Bright,
H. liornby, Earle, Coglan, and Blain.
Against the amendment, Messrs. J. Holmes, Logan,Thornhill, Sheil,

Harvey, E. Smith, Thornely, Rawdon, Birch, Rathbone, Preston, J.
Lawrence, Maxwell, Lassoll, T. Holt, Carson, Morecroft, Blackburn,
Roskell, E. Cropper, Alison, Leigh, G. Holt, J. Cropper, Jordan,
Duncan, Tayleur, Moon, Gulley, Barclay, Robinson, Stuart, Booth,
J. Hornby, Brown, T. Smith, Benn, and the Mayor.—Against the
amendment 39.—For the amendment B.—Majority 31.
Absent—Messrs. Horsfall, M'Gregor, Barton, H. Holmes, L. Hey-
worth, Mellor, Walinsley, Bolton, H. Lawrence, Brocklebank, San-
dars, Evans, 0. Heyworth, Freme, Leathom, and Jones.
Mr. Birch's amendment, that the minutes of the committee should
be read, was then put. There appeared for the amendment, Messrs.
J. Holmes, S. Hope, Logan, Thornhill, Sheil, Harvey, E. Smith,
Thornely, Birch, Woolwright, Rushton, Bright, H. Hornby, Preston,
J. Lawrence, Maxwell, Aikin, Earle, Carson, Blackburn, Roskell,
Coglar, Alison, Leigh, G. Holt, Blain, Moon, Barclay, and Benn.
Against the motion, Messrs. Rawdon, Rathbone, Lassell, S. Holt,
Morecroft, E. Cropper, J. Cropper, Jordan, Duncan, Tayleur, Bulley,
Robinson, Stuart, Booth, J. Hornby, Brown, Smith, and the Mayor.

For the amendment
Against it

........
11

Majority
Absent, same as on the preceding division.
On the motion of Mr. BIRCH, seconded by Mr. EGRRTON SMITH

the minutes of the committee were then read as follows :

" That in finding the compensation it would be right and equitable
:o take into consideration, not only the salary and just emoluments of

the office of Town-clerk, but also the profits derived from the per

formance of the legal business of the several Corporations, executed

by the Town-clerks in their official capacity, and the just emoluments
of any other corporate appointments, held by such Town •clerks, and
annually held in conjunction with, or attached, or annexed to the