The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1841-05-07 00:00:00

TO THE COMMITTEE OF THE LIVERPOOL GAS CONSUMERS

" GENTLEMEN,—As the solicitor appointed to oppose the
bill of the Liverpool Gas Company, now before parliament,
it devolves upon me to report to you the progress made in
carrying your objects into effect.
The deputation which accompanied me to London, viz.,
Mr. Radley, Mr. Woollright, and Mr. Johnson, found the
company seeking, by their bill, to obtain extraordinary
powers—powers, which, if granted, would have tended only
to the enriching of the proprietors of shares, without giving
the gas consumers any chance of obtaining a reduction in the
price of that article—and they applied all their exertions to
prevent the consummation of that object.
To enable you the better to understand the whole case, it
will be necessary that 1 should give you a summary of the
main objects of the promoters of the bill.
lst,—They desired to be empowered to convert a sum of
£140,000, (being surplus undivided profits and expended
in outlay,) into capital and stock, bearing interest at 10 per
cent. •
2nd,—To be enabled to raise an additional capital of
£llO,OOO in shares, to be apportioned among the proprie-
tors themselves.
3rd,—To obtain a contingent fund of £lO,OOO.
4th,—To have powers vested in themselves to distrain for

,as rents with.out the intervention of a magistrate ; and

sth,—To charge the owners or occupiers of premises with the
expense of removing the pipes, &c., on their gas being dis-
continued.
These are the principal points in the bill. There are
others of minor importance, which I will not notice here.
The deputation proceeded to London, and I entrusted the
case to Mr. D. Pollock, a barrister of great eminence. The
gentlemen composing the deputation and myself drew up a
statement of facts in opposition to the bill, spewing, at con-
siderable length, the working of the company, and, among
other things, that the proprietors had divided profits, on an
average during 20 years, of £l3 2s. tid. per cent., amounting
to £G362 per annum :..
Or, during the first ten years—average dividend,

£6 13s. -10d.=X3325 per annum
And during the last ten years—average dividend of

33,250

£l9 12s

--=X9BOO per annum

98,000

£131,250

That the shares of £lOO each wise worth £3BO ; that the
proprietors had thus made, over Aril above the dividends, a
property in the present value of their works of £140,000 and
upwards, composed entirely of profits, which amount they
called upon parliament to convert into capital, bearing inte-
rest at 10 per cent., although they had in fact never sub-
scribed one penny towards creating it ; that the proprietors
had, up to the year 1834, made their gas from common coal
or slack, in defiance of their act of parliament, which required
it should be made of the best coal or material; that they
charged, for some time, the enormous price of 15s. per thou-
sand cubic feet, which they did not reduce until there was a
competing company. We were also in possession of a copy
of a table of calculations made by George Medley, Esq., and
laid before a committee of the House of Commons in 1836,
chewing the relative value of gases. This table shews, among
other things, that, until the company began to burn cannel
coal, the consumers paid £1 6s. sd. for that which they ought
to have had (and of a superior quality) for lls. Bd. This
statement and the table we caused to be placed in the hands
of every member of the committee.
The deputation and myself also waited personally at the
residence of each member. We were unable to see them all,
but we were received most courteously by such of them as
we did see, and our explanations were listened to with the
greatest attention. I must not omit to name particularly
Lord Sandon, Mr. Wilson Patten' Mr. Brotherton, Mr.
Bolling, Sir George Strickland, Mr. Thornely, Mr. Hindley,
and Mr. George Wilbraham.
On the 16th instant the bill was in committee, and its pro-
moters proved not only the whole of the facts in our printed
statement to be correct, but that, in point of fact, they had
divided among themselves about £BOOO more than we had sup-
posed they had. 'They closed their case on the following day,
and the case of the consumers was advocated by a powerful
and masterly speech from Mr. Pollock, in which lie exposed
the proceedings of the company, and called on the com-
mittee to interpose their authority in favour of the consu-
mers' and lay the company under such restrictions as would
be of advantage to the public. In the evening of this day a
deputation from the company, accompanied by their solici-
tor, waited upon us with the view of entering upon some ar-
rangement, but inasmuch as they were not prepared to make
any distinct offer, and were desirous only of ascertaining what
we were disposed to do, we answered them by stating that we
had nothing to propose, but were willing to receive any pro-
posal from them on the footing of a reduction in the price of
gas ; we however guarded ourselves against recognizing any
sum as the capital of the company beyond the original
£50,000. They were not prepared to make any offer that
evening, and requested us to receive them in the morning ;
in the meantime they would consult with each other on ihe
subject. In the morning they again waited upon us, and
offered to reduce the price to 7s. per 1,000 feet, and on our
informing them they were considerably above the price which
we expected to reduce the gas to, our negociation ended. On
the assembling of the committee the same morning, a pro-
posal, very similar, was again made by them through Lord
Sandon, as the chairman. That, on mature deliberation,
after a consultation of about half an hour, we also rejected.
The committee then deliberated for nearly three hours, and
ultimately came to the following resolutions :
' The maximum price of gas, of the best quality, to be 7s.
' The capital of the company to be taken at £150,000, on
which they will be entitled to divide 10 per cent., any profits
beyond that amount to be applied in reduction of the price
of gas.
"file company to be enabled to raise £50,000 additional
capital. The first £25,000 to be offered to the public, and to
he sold by auction, the premium on which to be appropriated
to additional works, as capital without bearing interest,—the
second £25,000 to be taken by the proprietors at par.
' The profits on the additional capital of £50,000, to be also
limited to ten per cent.'
On the fourth day the committee went through the bill,
clause by clause. Various amendments were suggested by
our counsel, and the committee divided on several points.
The grand result is, that the consumers have gained con-
siderable advantages, which I will sum up shortly under the
seven following heads :
lst,—The sinking of £40,000 out of the £140,000.
2rd,—The limiting of the additional capital to £so,ooo,—the
first £25,000 in shares thrown open to the public, and sold
by auction in lots of one share at a time : the premium to
be added to the capital in increasing the works, but to bear
no interest. The proprietors not to appropriate the re-
maining £25,000 until the first be expended.
3rd,—They have got rid of the obnoxious clause empowering
the company to distrain for rent.
4th,—And of the clause which imposed on them the charges
of removing pipes on their discontinuing the gas.
sth,—The reduction of the contingent fund to £6,000.
6th,—A maximum of price at 7s. per 1000 cubic feet, and a
maximum of profit of 10 per cent.
7th,—lf any of the land or buildings of the company be
sold, the money is to be applied in the purchase of other
land or building, and the surplus, if any, in extending the
works of the company.
It will be seen from this statement, that if the company
had obtained all the powers they sought for, and raised their
additional capital, they must first have divided among them-
selves annually £30,000, before the ten per cent. clause could
have come into operation, wheteas now, supposing all the
capital to be raised at par, only £20,000 could be divided as
profits. But supposing the first £25,000 to be sold at a pre-
mium of only £6O per share, £35,000 would be raised bear-
ing no interest, which would accelerate the ten per cent.
clause, and keep the company from appropriating the re-
maining £25,000.
I cannot close this report without congratulating the con-
sumers on the success of their opposition, which has been
rendered effectual in an eminent degree by the assiduity,
perseverance, talent, and management of the three gentle-
men composing the deputation, who were unwearied in their
exertions in th cause in which they had embarked, and to
whom I feel much indebted for the assistance I received from
the commencement of the undertaking to the close of it.—l
am, gentlemen, your obedient servant,
6, Lord-street, Liverpool, DAVID EVANS.
21th March, 1841.

The CHAIRMAN said they had beard read the minutes of
the proceedings from beginning to end—they were in posses-
sion of of all he knew ; and, hoping they would excuse him
from addressing them, on account of a severe cold, he called
upon . . .

Mr. FERGUSON.—The meeting had heard the report read,
and they might very well suppose that the committee were
unanimously of opinion that it should lie adopted, and con-
gratulated themselves upon having effected a great deal for
the gas consumer. They had not succeeded in obtaining all
they asked for ; but in every clause of that bill, excepting

one—the legalising to a certain amount, they had beedsuc-
cessful. With respect to the legalising the £lOO,OOO, when
this bill was taken into the consideration of the Guardian So-
ciety, it was doubted whether the Dale-street company had
expended £140,000 in works; but it had been probed before
a committee of the House of Commons, that they had ex-
pended £146,000: it was true that it was profits set by for
that purpose, but still it was money expended by them. The
committee of the House of Commons reduced this to £lOO,OOO

.....
as a punishment for their cot applying to parliament for
power to carry on the works. The question was mooted
that it should be reduced to £75,000, but it was carried that
it should be £lOO,OOO by a majority of 1. The committee
of the House of Commons examined the books of the Dale-
street company, and were satisfied of the justice of the claim,
and they (the Gas Consumers' Committee) thought it right to
be satisfied also. So much for the legalization. They
then thought the matter settled, and called upon Mr. Car-
son to ask him if he would pledge himself on the part of the
Dale-street company, to let the bill pass in its present
state. He said that if any amendment was proposed, their
(the gas consumers') solicitor should have notice of the same.
They expected to hear no more of it, and that the consumers
of gas should immediately receive the benefit of their exer-
tions—instead of which a petition was sent up from certain
gas consumers of Liverpool, against their bill, which, on
examination, was found to be signed by nineteen persons,
several of whom were not consumers at all ; and several of
those gentlemen who were consumers had written letters to
the committee of the House of Lords stating that they signed
the petition under an erroneous impression; supposing they
were carrying out the views of the Gas Consumers' Commit-
tee ; and one or two had sent letters to the committee of the
House of Lords, stating that they never signed at all. The
committee met, and as might be well supposed, were very
much annoyed and vexed at this proceeding. It was about
two months ago, at a meeting of the gas consumers, that a
committee had been appointed to protect the interests of, and
represent the gas consumers ; and they thought, if the
Queen-square company wanted to send a petition to parlia-
ment, they might have asked them, " Gentlemen, will you
stand with us in the House of Lords ?" But Messrs. Lloyd
and Banner, on the part of the Queen-square company, were
quite surprised to find the consumers opposed to them in this
business : " they did not think they cared two straws about
this bill at all." Could they think they were careless about
this bill after the exertions they had made ? This report had
been sent out and widely circulated ; and still Mr. Banner
said " he never saw it; he had only seen some little account

in the newspapers, and was quite in the dark." He said "It
was the interest of the Queen-square company to be on good
terms with the consumers, and that if they wished them (the
Queen-square company) to withdraw, they might take his as-
surance as to that point, but he thought it better to have the
opinion of the whole committee. They again thought Ihe
question settled; and, having received an intimation that the
Queen-square company were willing to withdraw, and
anxious to do so,—when they met to receive their deputation
on Saturday morning, they thought it was for the pur-
purpose of their signing a resolution to that effect ; but they
then deferred their final answer. Time was thus going on ;
and at last they found they were opposed to them entirely.
In reply to a question put to one of the deputation from the
Queen-square Company, he said, " they wished to sicken the
Dale-street Company, so as to induce them to withdraw the