The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1841-01-29 00:00:00

TOWN COUNCIL PROCEEDINGS.

A special meeting of the council was held on Wednesday,
for the purpose of taking into consideration and determining
upon the report of the special committee, appointed on the
11th instant, to inquire, consider, and report, whether alte-
rations cannot be made in the dock bill, as it now stands, to
prevent all reasonable opposition. The Mayor presided.

DEATH OF MR

ALDERMAN LEATHOM

The MAYOR said it was his painful duty to announce to
the council the death of Mr. Alderman Leathom. In private
life Mr. Leathom was amiable, kind, and considerate ; as a
merchant he was honourable, just, and intelligent ; to these
qualities he united a sound and a discriminating judgment,
which endeared him to his friends, and those with whom he
was called to associate. He possessed a minute and exten-
sive knowledge of local affairs, and, associated many years
ago with Mr. Horsfall, Mr. Myers, and others, was mainly
instrumental in discovering the frauds on the dock estate
under the old management. Those discoveries gave him a
knowledge of the affairs of the port and dock estate which
enabled him, very efficiently and advantageously to the pub-
lic, to exercise the office he so recently filled. Those who
knew his services best would most sincerely lament the loss
they had all sustained. He (the mayor), might say much
more in testimony of the respect to which his memory was
justly entitled, but he could not satisfy himself with saying
less than he had said in bringing the fact of his demise under
the notice of the council. His place, as an alderman of the
ward, would have to be filled up, and another in his room
would be required to be nominated by the council for the
management of the dock estate. It would also be the duty of
the council to nominate a chairman for the dock estate ; and,
on referring to the town-clerk, it appeared that those several
vacancies would have to be filled up at the meeting of the
council on Wednesday next.

- ,
THE DOCK WAREHOUSE QUESTION-REPORT OF THE SPE-

CIAL 'COMMITTEE.
The MAYOI next called on Mr. Robertson Gladstone to
present the report of the special committee appointed upon
the warehouse question, that gentleman having presided
over the said committee.
Mr. GLADSTONE having accordingly presented the re-
port,
The TOWN-CLERK read it at length, as follows :
REPORT. .

the committee to whom the council, on the 11th January,
1841, specially referred " the dock bill as it now stands,"
with instructions " to inquire, consider, and report whether
alterations cannot be made therein to prevent all reasonable
opposition," have agreed upon the following report :
That the committe proceeded forthwith upon their ap-
pointment to take into consideration the matters referred to
them, each member approaching the important subject with
an anxious desire to effect conciliation, and with a disposition
to submit his moderated views to the test of candid discus-
sion and cairn deliberation.
That in comidg to the following recommendations, the
committee duly considered the dock -bill as it• now stands on
the one hand. and on the other, the representations of the
Land and Warehouse Owners' Association, contained in a
paper laid before the committee under the signature of secre-
tary of the association, dated the 16th January, 1841.
That the result of their deliberations is, that the committee
are enabled to submit the following conclusions without a
division on any of their resolutions ;
First—That, in the judgment of the committee, alterations
can be made in the bill to prevent all reasonable opposition.
Second—That the following alterations are recommended
by the committee to the consideration of the council for
effecting that most desirable object :-
1. That the intention of building warehouses on the west
quay of the Prince's Dock be abandoned.
2. That transit sheds should be erected on the west quay of
the Prince's Dock as soon as practicable after the passing of
the bill.
3. That such sheds should be so constructed as to combine
security to the revenue and the greatest possible despatch to
business, the goods being subject to a rent amounting to a
penalty if not removed in twenty-four hours after being pas-
sed by the landing-waiter.
4. That power ought to be taken to erect transit sheds on
the quays of the other existing docks.
5. That it ought to be obligatory to erect transit sheds on
the west quay of one other of the existing docks, unless the
committee, at the expiration of six calendar months after the
opening of the transit sheds on the west quay of the Prince's
Dock, should pass a resolution against the erection of such
further sheds : and such resolution, on being submitted to
the council, us dock trustees, should not be annulled under
the power reserved to them by the existing dock acts.
6. But that the bill ought to proceed as to the new dock to
the west of the Salthouse Dock. with warehouses on its
quays, and without any restriction as to the period of such
warehouses being completed or opened, save that there
should he none commenced upon such parts of the north and
east quays as are between the two intended entrances until
two years after the completion and opening of the ware-
houses on the south and west quays, and the part of the east
quay not lying between the two entrances, provided that in
such excepted space there may be laid and built, along with
the filling up of the quay, foundations and walls up to the
surface, of sufficient strength for the erection thereon of
warehouses after the expiration of the two years, with vaults
under the quay surface.
7. That the warehouses should comprise vaults under the
surface of the quay ; but the surface of the quay over which
the warehouses are to be erected should be reserved as a
public quay, subject only to the general regulations of the
dock.

8. That the funds necessary for the erection of the ware-
houses should be raised on the security of the rates of the
general docks and the warehouses.
9. That the accounts of the warehouses and the docks
should be kept distinct, and be separately audited ; but the
profits of the warehouses should merge in the general fund.
10. That provision should be applied for to enable any
owners Or masters of vessels, or their consignees, to enter
goods unclaimed, or on which freight shall not be paid, or of
which entries shall be delayed, and to deposit them in any
warehouses that may be specially licensed and duly autho-
rised.

11. That the new warehouses should be subject to the
watching, lighting, cleansing, paving, and sewerage rates as
well as what are strictly parochial.
12. That it be recommended to the council and Dock
Committee to pass a resolution, .giving a pledge that .there
shall be no application to parliament for further powers to
erect warehouses on any of the existing quays until the ex-
piration of four years from the completion of the warehouses
to be authorised by the bill, and to consent that such pledge
should be laid before the committee of the House of Com-
mons, and, if there should be no parliamentary objection,
that it should be made part of the.bill, provided that upon
such pledge and consent opposition to the bill be withdrawn
by the Land and Warehouse Owners'•A4soeiation, and that
the bill, as now proposed to be altered,.shall pass in the pre-
sent session. • •
13. That if these principles. for :alteration of the bill be ap-
proved by the council, the carrying of them out, comprising
the adjustment with the Dock Committee of all matters of
detail, and the approval of the necessary corrections •in the
bill consequent upon the proposed alterations, be referred to
the Finance Committee, in, addition to the references already
made to them, with instructions to confer with the Dock
Committee thereon, and to report to the council on the bill

as corrected
Mr. ROBERTSON GLADSTONE, as chairman of the special
committee, begged leave to move that the report be received.
In doing so, he would take the opportunity of stating that
the important subject which had been referred to the special
committee, had received from every member of it the most
serious and undivided attention. It was right, however, that
he should state, in moving that the report be received, that
it had been agreed to without prejudice to the opinions of the
members of the special committee in the event of its being
rejected either in that council chamber or out of doors. He
stated this fact because it was so understood in the committee,
but he hoped no such circumstance would happen.
Mr. HENRY LAWRENCE seconded the motion.
The MAYOR said, that as it had been proposed and se-
conded that the report be received, he presumed there could
be no objection to the motion being passed.
Mr. SHELL said he should like to know, before making any
further observations, whether the whole of the bill was to be
again submitted to the consideration of the council, and whe-
ther ample time would be afforded the council before de-
ciding on it ? If it would be again submitted, and if ample
time would be afforded, which had not been the case last
year,—(hear, hear)—then it would not be necessary for him
to make any observations on the subject at present; if other-
wise, he would feel it necessary perhaps to submit a motion,
and to divide the council.
The TOWN-CLERK, by way of reply, again read the latter
part of the report.
Mr. SHELL wanted a simple answer to a very plain and
simple question—namely, whether the bill was to be again
submitted or not? If it were to be again submitted, he saw
no necessity for taking up the time of the members with any
remarks at present, but if this were to be a final measure he
would divide the council.
The MAYOR said that the receiving of the report at pre-
sent was not a final decision of the council. The bill had
been already read in separate clauses, and various matters
respecting it had been discussed ; therefore, all the new
matter contained in the report read, would be brought before
the council again, when, upon every item, the members
would have an opportunity afforded them of expressing their
opinions.
Mr. SHELL said the mayor's reply was quite sufficient, but
he begged to make an observation or two with regard to the
present report, and also with regard to all future reports.
He was sure every member must see the unreasonableness
of calling a number of individuals together to take a subject
into consideration without giving them the slightest informa-
tion beforehand as to the details of that subject. In cases
of necessity, or emergency not amounting to necessity, such
an omission ought to be looked over, but no such excuse
could be offered in the present instance. A meeting had
been held on Saturday, and the council had met on that day
(Wednesday) without any step having been taken by the
committee to give the slightest information to the members,
or to let them know the course they had thought proper to
adopt. He did not say it was intentional, but it was acciden-
tal disrespect to call on the council to decide on matters of
great importance without telling them the details in the first
instance. He made those remarks now ; he had had occasion
to make similar remarks before, and if the council did not
perform its duty in calling on the committees to furnish de-
tails, he would have to make the same remarks again; but
he hoped such an omission would not occur hereafter. How-
ever, as long as he was in the council, which he thanked
God would not be very long (hear, and a laugh), he would
always express his unqualified disapprobation of such hasty
proceedings.
The MAYOR said that the report read had been agreed
upon by the committee on Saturday last, and that it had been
since within the Town-hall, accessible to every member of
the council for perusal. If, therefore, gentlemen did not
avail themselves of such an opportunity for ascertaining its
details, it was hardly fair to cast reflections on the committee.
(Hear, hear.)
Mr. HUGH HORNBY thought that the charge made by Mr.
Sheil was quite groundless. The committee had been ap-
pointed for the purpose of ascertaining whether they could
not adopt some plan to do away with all reasonable opposi-
tion. They were further directed to draw up a report, and
that the mayor would call a meeting of the council to take the
propriety of receiving that report into consideration. He
(Mr. H.) had never beard of any report being Sent to the
members of the council after it had been adopted, and to pur-
sue such a course in the present instance would be quite un-
precedented. The most respectful plan was to leave it in
the Town-hall for perusal; and that plan had been pursued.
Surely, then, no want of respect was manifested on the part
of the committee in having merely fulfilled their instructions.
(Hear.)
Mr. AIKIN said that the committee had a simple duty to
perform, and that they had discharged it by adopting Lord
Sandon's recommendations. It did not require any very
acute mind to discover from the reading of the report that
they had been precisely following up Lord Sandon's recom-
mendations, for, whoever read the report would find that the
whole pith and marrow of his lordship's suggestions were
therein embodied. The question of the warehouses had,
however. been so much before the council, that he was really
astonished there should be anything like a degree of warmth
evinced by the speakers on the present occasion.
Sir JOSHUA WALMSLEY could not concur with others in
saying that the question at present was, whether there should
be warehouses or no warehouses ? The question really was,
whether any differences of opinion could be settled by the
adoption of the report to which the committee had agreed,
and whether the opponents of the warehouse question would
meet the plan proposed?
Mr. PROCTOR agreed with the former speakers, that inas-
much as the committee were called on to report and had re-
ported, Mr. Sheil was in 'error in attaching any blame to

them.
Mr. Sum explained that the summons convening the
preSent council was a little different from the ordinary sum-