The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1840-11-10 00:00:00

STANDING ORDERS.

The ToWN-CLEitiihen read over the standing orders, to-
gether with a new one which he had drawn up for the approval
of the oouncil. This new standing order was to the effect
that no resolution or recommendation of the council should
be rescinded or varied at a subsequent council, except on a
motion made on notice, which notice should specify the ob-
ject, and refer to the resolution to be rescinded or varied.
After a long conversation with respect to the propriety of
confirming the new standing order without time having been
allowed for consideration, the council went to the vote.
There were for postponement 37, for immediate confirmation
35. At the suggestion of the Town-clerk, it was then de-
cided that the whole of the standing orders, together with
that now proposed, should be printed, and taken into consi-
deration at the next monthly meeting.

ELECTION OF COMMITTEES.
Sir JOSHUA WALMSLEY said, that previous to entering on
this portion of the business, it would perhaps be better to
introduce a motion which he intended to make, namely,
" That it be an instruction to the committees, that at the last
meeting of the council in the present municipal year, a return
be furnished by them to the council of the number of meet-
ings which have been held, and of the number of meetings
which have been attended by each member of the committees,
respectively." He thought it would be in the remembrance
of the council, that about two years ago he proposed a similar
motion, which was then rejected, he believed, because it had
a retrospective, as well as a prospective view. He thought,
however, that it was due to themselves and to the public, to
furnish their constituents with a knowledge of the way in
which members attended the committees.
Mr. MELLOR seconded the motion.
Mr. SMITH observed that such a return as that would
be unfair to the hardest workers on the Watch Committee,
namely, those who attended daily duty, whilst it would be
favourable to those who might be termed the amateurs, or
those who attended the regular meetings.
Mr. BIRKETT thought it would be unjust to many of them
who had seats on other boards. He, for instance, was a
member of three committees of the highway board, and as a
churchwarden, of four sub-committes, and if he were put on
two or three committees of the council, it would be very un-
fair to judge of his labours by such a return as that proposed.
If he were put on any committees, he would do his best ; but,
being already upon seven, it was impossible that he could
attend them as others might.
Mr. H. HORNBY quite concurred in the propriety of the
motion made by Sir Joshua Walmsley. He teally could not
see that the arguments used by Mr. Birkett were at all ap-
plicable. What they wanted was, to see how members of com-
mittees attended to their duties. If Mr. Birkett had to attend
other committees than those of the council, he might
fairly allege that to he public for occasional neglect, and it
would be received by them as a legitimate excuse. If, how-
ever, Mr. Birkett had duties totally incompatible with those
of a councillor—he (Mr. Hornby) did not think such was the
case—he should not have excepted the office. He (Mr. H.)
had also various duties to perform ; but be did not allege that
as an excuse for not performing his public duties. When he
found that be could not attend to those, he would resign his
office.
Mr. EVANS said, that if the arguments of Mr. Birkett
were good for anything, they went to show that he was al-
ready sufficiently occupied, and should not have come into
the council. (Laughter.)
Mr. COGLAN had no objection to the motion; butif it were
passed, it would place him under the necessity, provided his
health continued during the current year as it had been du-
ring the past, of publishing a bulletin of his health, in order
to excuse his absence from committees.
Mr. HODGSON should approve of the line proposed, if he
thought it would answer the end in view. Though he had
not hitherto been allowed to participate in any committees—
a grievance of which he did not personally complain, though
he thought it was highly disrespectful to the constituency
which he represented ; yet he must say, that the mode of
making returns was no criterion of efficiency. There were
many men who would be chosen, not for their regular at-
tendance, but for the able way in which they discharged their
duties ; and there were many men, who, though they might
be found, nominally at their posts, were of no use when they
were there.
Mr. SHIEL supported the motion, as did Mr. BUSHELL,
and, after Sir Jos. WALMSLEY had replied, it was carried.
APPOINTMENT OF THE FINANCE COMMITTEE.
Mr. W. W. CURRIE said, in pursuance of the course which
had been adopted hitherto in the formation of the committees,
it devolved upon the chairman of each, for the past year, to
propose the members for the ensuing year. In that capacity,
he took the liberty of now offering himself. Ile would first
read the names of the finance committee as they stood on the
Ist of November, then the alterations which had taken place,
and lastly the manner in which he proposed the committee
should be constituted for the ensuing year. The constitution
of the committee last year met with the cordial concurrence
of the council, and the same principle which was then adopt-
ed in its formation had not been lost sight of this year. Mr.
Currie then read the names of the old committee, and said,
that in place of Mr. Blackburn he should propose Mr. John
Holmes; of Mr. Filcher, Mr. H. Lawrence ' • of Mr. Ros-
kelt, Mr. C. H. Jones ; and of Mr. Bolton, Mr. Alderman
Freme.
Mr. ISAAC HOLMES thought that, in order that the com-
mittee might be settled in a manner consistent with the pre-
sent constitution of the council, there should have been a
conference between Mr. Currie on one side, and Mr. Glad-
stone or Mr. Lawrence on the other. Mr. Holmes then
contended that four-thirds of the committee ought to be
conservatives.
Mr.' H. HORNBY said the constitution of the council now
was thaee-fifths reformers and two-fifths conservatives, which
was exactly the constitution of the finance committee as pro-
posed by Mr. Currie.
Mr. CURRIE added, that he had spoken to Mr. Case, Mr.
Leigh, Mr. Houghton, and Mr. Lawrence upon the subject,
all of whom expressed their perfect satisfaction with the con-
stitution of the committee.

The names proposed were then put separately by the
MAYOR, and the following are now the finance committee :
W. W. Currie, John Holmes, R. Houghton, J. S. Leigh,
J. Moon, J. Thornhill, H. Hornby, T. Case, G. H. Law-
rence, J. N. Wood, E. Harvey, Sir J. Walmsley, H. Law-
rence, C. H. Jones, and W. P. Freme.
The TOWN-CLERK then read the duties of the committee,
for the information of the members.

APPOINTMENT OF THE IMPROVEMENT COMMITTEE.
Mr. BARCLAY said, that in the place of Mr. Jones, Fho
had been appointed to the finance committee, and Mr. Horn-
by, who had expressed a wish to retire, he proposed to sub-
stitute the names of Mr. R. B. B. H. Blundell and Mr. D.
Hodgson.
Mr. BIRKETT asked whether it was the intention of the
majority in that council to exclude any, and if so how many,
gentlemen on the other side from the committees.
The MAYOR knew nothing about whom it was intended to
propose, until he heard the name ; but every member of the
council was competent to propose, either by way of amend-
ment or original motion, any one whom he might think fit to
perform the duty.
Mr. BIRKETT did not wish to object unnecessarily ; but
whilst the committees were being gone through, he wished
to take care that none were intentionally left out.
The MAYOR said it was not in his power to answer the
question.
Mr. SANDS repeated the question in a different form, and
Mr. BIRKETT also put it again.
Mr. MICEE said they had no right to ask it. They had
no right to inquire what had passed at the Angel.
Mr. EARLE.—We might just as well ask what has passed
at the Conservative Association.
Mr. ISAAC HOLMES contended that the question ought to
be answered, because it might be intended to propose some
other individuals than those named by the chairman ; and
by this means the council would be enabled to judge whether
those who had been inimical to the majority were to be
passed over.
Mr. EVANS protested against time being occupied in such
questions. (Great uproar.)
The MAYOR said it was impossible that they could be an-
swered; but when any name was proposed, it was compe-
tent for any gentleman to move an amendment upon it.
Mr. CoGLAN said, that to his knowledge there was no
understanding who were to be the members of the different
committees.
Mr. BARCLAY then proceeded to read the names. He
first proposed the name of Mr. Thomas Booth.
Mr. ISAAC HOLMES, seconded by Mr. TOULMIN, moved
that the name of Mr. Birkett be substituted.
Mr. HENRY LAWRENCE said that course, if adopted,
would be objectionable. If Mr. Holmes would withdraw
his proposition, he would take a course, when the next com-
mittee was proposed, which would answer all the purposes
sought for.
Mr. HOLMES assented, and the amendment was with•
drawn. The committee was then agreed to as follows :—T.
B. Barclay, W. Earle, T. Booth, E. Evans, H.R. Sandbacb,
J. Platt, J. Woollright, R. B. B. H. Blundell, and D.
Hodgson.

APPOINTMENT OF THE WATCH COMMITTEE.
Mr. THORNHILL read over the list of the whole committee,
and of twenty-five names which he intended to propose.
Mr. CASE hoped that the Council would 'allow him to
withdraw his name, that his health was so indifferent that he
could not attend.

Mr. SMITH proposed that Mr. Rigby's name should be
substituted instead of Mr. Case's.

Mr. H. LAWRENCE hoped that would be withdrawn, as
he should propose a gentleman who was supposed to be ob-
noxious, and let him take his fair chance. On the first
name being proposed, he should move an amendment, that
Mr. Isaac Holmes be substituted.

Mr. TifoRNHILL read the name of Sir Joshua Walmsley.
Mr. H. LAWRENCE said, Sir Joshua would understand
his motives for moving the amendment.
Mr. BIRKErr seconded the amendment.

Mr. H. HORNBY said, the whole difficulty might be got
rid of if Mr. Holmes's name was substituted for Mr. Case.
Mr. H. LAWRENCE intimated that that would satisfy
him, and that he would make the proposition on Mr. Cases
name being read.
Mr. THORNHILL then read twenty-four of the names, and
was about to read the twenty-fifth and last, when
Mr. H. LAWRENCE protested that faith had not been
kept with him.
Mr. THORNHILL.—There are 24 names now, and I move
that Mr. Kilshaw be the 25th. (Uproar.)
Mr. GEORGE HOLT stated that Mr. Lawrence had an-
nounced that when Mr. Cases's name was called he should
propose that of Mr. Isaac Holmes.

Mr. LAWRENCE strongly complained of the breach of
faith towards him.

The MAROR said his understanding of the matter certainly
was the same as Mr. Holt's.

Mr. COOPER spoke to the same effect, and Mr. THORNIIILL
said he had omitted Mr. Case's name because the council had
excused him from serving.
Mr. SMITH and Mr. IL LAWRENCE shewed that this sup-
position was groundless. (Great confusion.)
Mr. HUGH HORNBY said it was most desirable, as they
were sent there to perform the public business next year,
they should discharge it harmoniously. It must not be for-
gotten that the conservatives now formed a large portion of
the council, and it was quite absurd to expect to keep them
from their fair share of business. (Hear, hear.) Such was
not his intention, and he believed it was not the intention of
those with whom he acted. He was anxious that they should
have their share of duty. They had been sent there by their
constituents, and whatever might be the opinions of those
constituents the council were bound to respect them. (Hear)
With regard to the appointment of Mr. Isaac Holmes, which
appeared to be the love of contention, that gentleman had
been moved by Mr. Lawrence and seconded by Mr. Sands ;
and he (Mr. Hornby) put it to those with whom he acted
whether it would not be wise to consent to the proposal.
(Hear, hear.)
Mr. EARLE declared that he would not act in committee
with Mr. Isaac Holmes. He was not bound to state his
reasons there, but he would state them elsewhere if called
upon. (Great uproar.)
Much discussion followed of a very uproarious character,
in the midst of which, Mr. Rigby was proposed and se-
conded by Mr. BRIGHT and another, as the 25th member of
the committee. The MAYOR having decided that that mo-
tion must be put, an amendment was moved to the effect
that Mr. Rigby be allowed to retire, he having expressed a
wish for that purpose. The votes were taken on this question.
For Mr. Rigby's retirement, 43 ; against it, 15 ; majority, 28.
This being considered decisive of the main point, no further
opposition was offered to the appointment of Mr. Isaac
Holmes. The following is now the constitution of the Watch
Committee :

Sir Joshua Walmsley, W. Earle, Jos. Cooper, Jas.
Mellor, Richard Harbord, J. Woolwright, C. Bushell,
R. V. Yates, Thos. Robinson, Geo. Quayle, Thos. Morecroft,
Jas. Lawrence, Wm. Slater, Thos. Coglan, Jas. Proctor,
Wm. Thornhill, Francis Jordan, G. H. Lawrence, Daniel
Mather, John Smith, Richard Bright, W. P. Freme, W.
Birkett, D. Hodgson, Isaac Holmes.