The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1853-05-24 00:00:00

THE BIRKENHEAD DOCK QUESTION- LIVERPOOL ELECTION COMMITTEE.
ELECTION OF COMMISSIONERS.

THE exciting contest which is now going on in
Birkenhead, for the election of Commissioners, out
of which body are chosen four Dock Trustees,
tends to justify the remarks which we offered last
week, as to the advantage and necessity of trans-
ferring the Birkenhead Docks to the Liverpool
Dock Trustees, EO that this description of property,
on both sides of the Mersey, may be under one
efficient management, and the public, as well as the
proprietors, be spared the mischief and expense of
useless litigation and senseless disputes. For the
eight vacancies in the Board of Commissioners,
there are as many candilates on each side, ranged
under the respective colours of blue and red, and
long addresses from the opposing partisans are
issued almost every day, with all the ardour of a
Parliamentary contest. It must not be supposed,

however, that the colours which have been adopted

are in any way indicative of political bias, as the
Blue, which, in Liverpool would enlist much Ra-
dical sympathy, is here adopted by a party of can-
didates who are nearly all Conservative, whereas
the Red list, which, on our side of the Mersey would
be a Constitutional symbol, contains in Birken-
head many of Radical politics. Party politics are
therefore altogether eschewed, and the votes of the
rate-payers, who number about two thousand,
are solicited upon grounds which solely apply to the
unhappy disputes about the Dock property. On
behalf of the Red party, Mr. CARMICHAEL, who is
one of the candidates, has put forth an address, in
which, as a shareholder of the Dock and Ware-
house Company, he complains of the obstructive
course which he says has been adopted towards that
company by the Birkenhead Dock Trustees, in
which the Blue interest at present predominates.
They have lately made, he says, great exertions to
let their land on the margin of the Float to manu-
facturers, shipbuilders, and others, and he cannot
conceal his indignation at the Dock Trustees
coming forward on the threshold of improvement to
contest the right of the Dock Company to a free
control of their property, and threatening a suit in
Chancery if they remove a stone from their own
walls, which he states were built at the sole
expense of the Dock Company ; and further,
that it was entirely owing to the money ad-
vanced by the Company to the Dock Trus-
tees to excavate the Great Float, that the walls
have been made accessible. He professes his
desire to afford every inducement to shipbuilders
and others to locate themselves on the margin of
the Float, and adds an expression of his anxiety to
have the contract with Messrs. BRASSEY and
M'Co.RaircK, for the completion of the outerworks,
carried out as early as possible, which, however, he
says, must take several years to accomplish. In
reply to this, Mr. A. W. POWLES, the chairman
of the Dock Trustees, has published a letter, in
which he says that the Company set up a claim to
deal with more than a mile in length of the Dock
walls, the conservancy of which rested with the
Trustees, who have simply resisted an invasion of
their rights—rights in which the township of Bir-
kenhead is deeply interested, and which, so far from
being now asserted for the first time, have been
equally asserted by their predecessors in the Dock
Trust for years past. He asserts that, so far from
being influenced by feelings of hostility, the Dock
Trustees have on two occasions—the 23rd of last
month, and the 14th of this month—written to the
Dock Company, proposing a meeting for an amica-
ble arrangement of the matters in dispute, but to
neither have they received any reply. He denies
that the Dock Trustees are opposed to the estab-
lishment of manufactories on the banks of the Pool,
and contrasts the course of policy pursued by the
present Trust with that of their predecessors, refer-
ring to the one great fact accomplished—the re-
sumption of the works; and he expresses his con-
fident expectation that, before their term of office
shall have expired, they will have entered into
contracts for the entire completion of the works,
unless the result of the forthcoming election—by
which he means the success of the Red party—shall
have the effect of restoring to the Board the same
elements of disSension which before rendered them
a byeword. He states that in four months from!
this time the dam will be across the entrance of the
low-water basin, and the outer works will be finished
by October, 1855. He concludes by affirming that
the interests of the Dock Trtistees, the Dock and
Warehouse Company, and the Township of Birken-
head are identical ; and expresses his regret if the
Company should continue to resist a friendly

I THE ballot for a select committee, to investigate the
' allegations in the petition against the return of Messrs.
CHARLES TURNER and WILLIAM FORBES MACKENZIE,
as Rrepresentatives of Liverpool, and complaining of
bribery and treating at the last election for this borough,
took place yesterday (141onday) afternoon, when the follow.

ing members were chosen.
Mr. ROBERT INGHAM, Chairman.
Mr. JAMES WILLIAM FRESHFIELD,
The Hon. JAMES PIERCE MAXWELL,
Mr. JOHN BALL,
Mr. WILLIAM WILLIAMS.

In enquiries of this kind, so much depends on the poli-
tical bias of the members constituting the committee,
that our readers will be interested in speculating on pro-
bable results, by understanding the peculiar opinions of
those to whom this petition is entrusted. We therefore
subjoin the following brief particulars, as given in Dodd's
Parliamentary Companion

Mn. ROBERT INGRAM, the chairman, is member for
South Shields, and a Queen's Counsel. He is a Whig,
and formerly voted in favour of the Corn Laws, and

against the Ballot. He supported the Conservative
Administration, on several occasions, in 1835 ; but now
"holds it would be both unwise and unjust to reimpose
any duty on Foreign corn." He is in favour of the May-
nooth Grant, and of Parliamentary Reform.
MR. JAMES WILLIAM FRESIIFIELD, the member for
Penryn and Falmouth, is a Conservative, in favour of
Protection to Native Industry, and of " Protestant prin-
ciples ;" but considers " that no attempt can be made for
the re-enactment of the Corn-laws."
The Hon. JAMES PIERCE MAXWELL, the member for
Cavan, is a Conservative, and voted for Agricultural Pro-
tection, in 1846.

Ma. JOHN BALL, the member for Carlow county, is a
Liberal, in favour of Vote by Ballot, and of " complete
equality for all religious denominations." He was called
to the bar in 1843, but has not practised. He is the
author of various essays on mathematics and natural his-
tory, and of a political pamphlet, entitled, " What is to
be done for Ireland ? "

MR. WILLIAM WILLIAMS, the member for Lambeth,
is a Radical Reformer, an advocate of the strictest eco-
nomy and retrenchment in the expenditure of the public
money, and is in favour of the repeal of the " Inquisi-
torial Income-tax." He is the author of two pamphlets
on the state of Education in Wales ; and also a pamphlet
on the defective state of the representative system. He
is known in the House by the soubriquet of " Smollett,"
as being a bad continuaticn of Hume.