The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1853-11-01 00:00:00

THE LIVERPOOL STANDARD, AND GENERAL COMMERCIAL ADVERTISER

but I have to propose the name of a gentleman well known
to us all, and well respected by the majority of the mem-
bers of this Council,—that is, Mr. Thomas Bold. (Ap-
plause.) And, if necessary, I would appeal to Mr. Turner
to speak to his qualifications for the duties of either a
municipal office, or as a member of the Committee of the
Dock Trust. I beg to propose Mr. Thomas Bold. (Applause.)
Mr. CHARLES TURNER said as Mr. Toulmin had re-
ferred to him, he could say that he had worked with Mr.
Thomas Bold on the Dock Committee, and he would not
say he was the most useful, but he would say he was one
of the most useful members of the Dock Committee they
had ever had ; and he was quite sure that the Dock Com-
mittee and the town lost a most valuable man when they
lost Mr. Bold's services in the Dock Committee. (Hear.)
.Alderman J. H. TURNER said he was one of those Who
thought Mr. Bold would make an efficient member, for he
knew that he was so when on the Dock Committee. At
the same time he thought the chief-magistrate was the
first person they should think of. When he first heard of
Mr. Holmes's death, he had expressed to the Mayor a hope
that he would allow his name to be put in nomination.
He had not attended any caucus meeting, and, therefore,
he was unbiassed and unprejudiced.
Alderman PROCTER said the election of the retiring
Mayor as Alderman was not the course always pursued.
He-had voted for Mr. Littledale last year, but the majority
had not thought wise to elect him.
Mr. BIGHIM said, if this were merely a personal matter
between two individuals, it might be allowed to pass quietly
on their parts ; but as it involved a great principle, and
one embodied in the municipal act, clearly defined in
words, it was not wise in them, honest or manly, it was
not courageous on their part to sit still without giving a
reason for their votes. He was surprised at the attempt
made by a gentleman who had been engaged as a can-
vasser to stop the discussion. Persons could vote for the
mayor not only as admirers pf his public conduct, but they
could vote for him because it was to uphold a principle in-
volved in the municipal act. But charges had been brought
against them that they would not have brought his
name forward if at some caucus meeting the choice had
not fallen on another party. Did Mr. Bold know
the disgraceful traffic attempted to be made with his
name—did he know the persons employed, or who
had taken upon themselves the disreputable office of
going to various members of the Council (at least he
spoke for himself as one of them), and offering them the
withdrawal of opposition in one ward, and that another
gentleman should walk over—(Confusion.) Mr. Buck-
master, a gentleman connected with a political body in
the town, came to him distinctly and offered to with-
draw the opposition to Mr. Woodruff in Scotland Ward, if
he would vote for Mr. Bold • —nay, more, if he would
promise to vote against Mr. Thomson next year,—
The MAYoR,—I think you had better confine yourself
to the subject before us. It is not exactly right to have a
discussion ; but, as it has been so on former occasions, I
did not wish to stop it.
Mr. BIGRAM said, he thought when he entered that
room that the numerous attendance might be for the pur-
pose of joining in the compliment which would be paid to
the Mayor, that being the last time of his sitting in the
chair ; but he could not give them that credit, when he
knew that a drum-head court martial had been held to
get them there to carry out a certain object. Now, he had
not one word to say against Mr. Thos. Bold as a public man ;
no doubt he would make a valuable member of the Council,
and if he had taken the course laid down by the Municipal
Act, and gone before the constituency of some ward for
election, he had no doubt that his great knowledge might
be beneficial to the town at large. But having been so
recently ejected from his situation on the Dock Commit-
tee, where there had been so marked a feeling on the part
of the most influential portion of the town, the dock rate-
payers, he could not help thinking that it was unseemly in
that ouncil and unwise to pitchfork him in there, in
opposition to one who had been so frequently before the
town, and who had presided over the Council. But there
was more belonging to this than a breach of principle it
was carrying out a dastardly spirit of revenge engendered
at the recent Parliamentary election ; all parties were not
only abusing the privileges which they hold in putting
him in there in opposition to the wishes of the ratepayers,
but they thought that, at the same time, they would
wreak their revenge upon a person who offered himself as
a candidate for this great borough. The object was not to
put one in, but to turn the other out. Not one word could
be said against the Mayor as a fit and proper person.
He (Mr. Bigham) must confess he would rather have
had one who entertained political opinions like his own,
but he should not allow political opinions so far to influ-
ence him as to vote for one person who was not as equally
fitted for the office as another. Although they might now
be defeated by a combination of influences, united for an
improper purpose, and which disgraced the town in the
estimation of all honourable men, he only wished that
they had a rule similar to that in the House of Lords, that
he might enter his protest against their prostituting their
privileges for the base purpose of carrying out political
partisanship or personal revenge.
Mr. GonirusT said Mr. Bigham had been speaking
largely about combination. He wondered whether in the
election of Mr. Dover and Mr. J. H. Turner, in which Mr.
Bigham was concerned, the same principle did not apply.
(Hear, hear.) At the caucus meeting the party had first
nominated three gentlemen, all of whom declined, and
now they sought to upset the other party by naming the
mayor. It is not, said Mr. Godfrey, through any respect
or love for you, Mr. Mayor. (Laughter.) Now Mr. Big-
ham should do as he would be done by. He was now- con-
demning what he himself had done twelve months ago. He
thought he should act honestly, and not make a long
speech. (Laughter and applause.)
The votes were then taken, after an intimation by- the
MANOR that they were not bound to the gentlemen who
had been named, but might vote for any party upon the
burgess roll. The result of the voting was that Mr. Bold
was elected by a majority of 30 to 18.
The following is an analysis of the division :
For Mr. Bold.—Messrs. Stewart, Procter, W.. J.
Horsfall, Mellor, Godfrey, Tyrer, J. B. Lloyd, Clayton,
Lawrence, Tobin, Chilton, Littledale, Robinson, Moly-
neux, Halhead, J. N. Wood, J. M. Wood, Raymond
Houghton, John Gladstone, jun., Cooper, Jeffreys, Hen-
derson, M`Nieholl, Bennett, Toulmin, Anderson, Aked,
Wagstaffe, Charles Turner, and the Mayor.
Far Mr. Samuel Hohne.--Messrs. Harmood Banner,
M`Guffie, Beckwith, Gregson, Holt, Bradley, Bigham,
Fleming, Preston, Johnson, Moss, Brancker, Avison.
J. H. Turner, John Nicholson, Langsdale,: Picton, and.
Hornby.
Mr. Bold was soon afterwards introduced by Mr. Toni-
min and took his seat near the head of the room. After
he had sat for a little- while,
Alderman PROCTER rose (humorously, we believe) to
a point of order, and. inquired whether Mr. Bold had made
the proper declaration as an alderman ?
Mr. TOULMIN said the Town-clerk had gone for the
books, and would be back in two minutes.