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

lowd t

or-) pritat, and

44 it ilaWfi 4

i fast, and have continued ever since to adhere

firmly tp, the appropri4tipn reality,

The new corn-bill is a ruse of precisely the same de-
scription—another produce of the same forge—and
with all the family likeness strongly impressed upon it.

As to misreprentation, it is plain that we have made
none. We said that the measure was a dangerous,
most likely a mischievous experiment, and that the
Manchester Guardian allowed it to be an " experiment,"
and reasoned about it as such; and is not that state-
ment, so far as it affects our contemporary at least,
PERFECTLY TRUE ? Does he not speak of a contin-
gency ? Does he not prudently calculate on its turn-
ing out favourably, or _otherwise ? and are not we jus-
tified in calling that thing of unknown result, thus
launched forth, not only an experiment, but by our
contemporary's own confession, and the spirit of his
reasoning—a doubtful one ? Assuredly are we. Never
was there a tinier or more critically correct com-

We do not deny that it is a lever of some power ;
otherwise, indeed, there would have been little use in
calling in,its aid in a case so desperate; but it is of
great moment to consider whether it is likely to an-
swer that purpose for which alone it is now brought
into play—namely, to keep in the O'Connell ministry.
In the first place, we may observe that no scheme
which ministers may bring forward will have the small-
est chance of passing in'the present parliament. They
are now in a minority in both houses -on questions
much less calculated to provoke hostility than this.
Over and over again have both houses refused to dis-
continue the protection of bur agriculture by large ma-
jorities, and in these decisions ministers have con-
curred. Is it then likely that such a proposition will
receive any support when started by tergiversAtors—
when set up by flying renegades who use it as a shield
to hide them from the shafts of their too potent adver-
saries, and as a mere cover for their disgrace ? Of
course not. On this point we may make ourselves
perfectly tranquil. All they can possibly do will be to
bring on a discussion of the question, and from such a
discussion we have nothing to fear—magna est* veritas
et prevalebit. We have Sir R. Peel and Lord Stan-
ley and a Conservative host in the Commons—the
Duke of Wellington, the Duke of Buckingham, and
another Conservative host in the Lords—strong in ta-
lent, information, and every statesmanlike quality—
and what should we apprehend from any collision of!
mind on such a question ? Under existing circum-
stances, when there is so much misconception abroad,
and so much practice in the way of delusion, it is, we
think, rather to be desired than dreaded.

mentary on any text, nor was our contemporary ever
more out in his life than when rashly charging us with
being dishonest and misrepresentations for making
it. Really people who scribble nonsense, and write
themselves down apes, have no right to attempt getting
out of the scrape by charging others with delinquencies
of which it could be easily shewn they stand convicted
themselves.

We have anticipated the argument contained in the
remainder of our contemporary's article, and substan-
tially replied to it ; but we have no objection to repeat
the lesson—though there certainly are people of facul-
ties so extremely obtuse and impenetrable, that we
very much fear it will be thrown away upon them.
The Guardian says :

" The Standard must surely mistake the object of the
parties who ask leave to put their own property into their own
warehouses, and must suppose that they want to compel the
Liverpool people to send up their gbods to be bonded at Man-
chester, or be could hardly talk about giving apreference to
Manchester. The people of this town want no preference or
advantage ; they only want to be put on a.footing of equality
with the people of Liverpool, to which, it seems, the latter
object. They are willing to use the Liverpool warehouses
when they want them, and to employ the Liverpool brokers
when it is for their interest to do so ; but they utterly deny
the justice or the propriety of being compelled to pay for
services which they do not want*" •

But as to the result in parliament, our flying enemy
knows perfectly well what it will be, and their calcula-
tions are all made not for parliament, but fur the fac-
tory towns—not for in-door legislation, but for out-door
agitation—not for the representatives of the people,
but for a portion of their constituencies. In short,
what will take place in parliament will be but a mere
rehearsal or prelude to the serious drama which is to
take place in the country ; for we reckon upon it that
a general election is in preparation, and is immediately
to follow.

This is certainly precious argumentation. So Man-
chester does not want the assistance of Liverpool, and
is made to pay for services which she has no occasion
for. Why this Manchester " expositor" will tell us
next that Manchester has no need of the cotton of
Brazil, of the States, or of any other country, and that
she thinks it hard to be obliged to pay for it. Well,
let her do without it, say we—if she can. Let her
make calico out of chopped straw, or any other mate-
rial she likes, if it be her intent so to do. Who com-
pels her to use cotton, or to pay at Liverpool for ser-
vices she does not want ? There is just the same
master, or mistress, in both cases—self-interest—and
no other compulsion. What the " expositor" means
is, that Manchester had rather monopolise all the fruits
and benefits of commerce herself, and not allow Liver-
pool or any other port to divide them with her; that is
the meaning, though the story is so clumsily told.
Again, says the Guardian, " the people of this town
want no preference ; they only want to be put on an
equality with the people of Liverpool." Equality in-
deed ! What a droll equality that would be, that
would put Liverpool out of the market altogether, and
transfer her trade to Manchester—for that is the ob-
ject ! Well, we call that equality according to the
lion's mode of partition, but not according to fair play
and justice amongst Englishmen, and we confidently
believe it will not be conceded. •
If Liverpool sought for, or even desired to retain,
privileges not possessed by any other commercial port,
then indeed it would be fair to talk of equality or in-
equality ; but to speak of putting an inland manu-
facturing town on an equality with a great commercial
sea-port, is downright nonsense. Take from Liver-
pool the advantages she enjoys from situation and the
skill and labour of her people, and transfer them, even
in name, to some inland town, and you commence at
once the work, not of equalising, but of injustice and
wrong. Manchester has made the most of her advan-
tages of situation—and we wish her long to enjoy
them. We envy her not her. manufactures ; we seek
no rivalry with her therein ;—her interest, and her
prosperity in this respect, are, under existing relai.:,,ns
ours also. What we ask for in return is, that the peo-
ple of Manchester will leave us in the enjoyment of
those commercial privileges which have been as useful
to her as they have been to us ; and pending the ope-
ration of which both have risen to such eminence.
We would calmly suggest to them the propriety, nay,
the absolute necessity of abandoning an attempt which
can only engender . petty animosities and jealousies,
and do them ultimately no manner of good. It would
seem to be the mere offspring of that " hastening to
be rich," whose tendency is so dangerous, and not
the growth of profound and deliberate consideration.
Most earnestly and seriously, then, would we recom-
mend its immediate and complete abandonment.

With regard to the corn duties, we shall merely say,
that if there be any modification of them which would
be more advantageous to the people than the present
system, and equally safe, we are satisfied that the adop-
tion of it will be just as well entrusted to a Conserva-
tive administration as to a Whig, and that the people
will be of the same opinion. The immediate question
is, will the Whig proposition alter the state of national

opinion as to Whig government, and restore to them
that balance of power which they have unquestionably
lost? Now, in order to solve this problem, we may
just ask, what change it is likely to make in the feel-
ings of those who have hitherto evinced their dislike to
Whig rule ? As to the Conservatives, sure we are that
it will not alter them. All who are interested in agri-
cultural pursuits are outraged by it ; the counties,
therefore, will be more resolute than ever in returning
staunch Conservatives. The " firebrand " in this di-
rection will only add fuel to a flame already existing,
and be far more likely to do harm than good to those

its throwers.
As to Ireland, a country solely and entirely agricul-
tural, we cannot certainly reason about it as we should
of one whose people acted rationally and consistently
for their own interest; but this we may affirm, that
withdrawing protection from their agriculture will gain
over none whom popish priestcraft has not blinded
with fanaticism and crassated with folly.
But, lastly, as to our towns and boroughs, what
change can it make in them ? Those who imagine
that free trade in corn will furnish them with abun-
dance, will continue under that delusion still--and
those who use their understanding to some better pur-
pose, will not he caught by Whig chaff. In short, we
think this desperate, electioneering, and popularity-
hunting scheme will prove an utter failure—just the
straw caught at by a drowning man—and will be the
very last of the Whig •performances in office, not only
for this season, but, as we expect, for many a long sea-
son and session to come.

It gives us much pleasure to observe that our Town
Council has at length been induced to move on the
subject of the Inland Bonding Bill, and we cannot but
feel gratification in learning that we have been in some
degree instrumental in bring about that consummation.
Why they have been so long in awaking from their
slumbers, we cannot by any means satisfactorily ex-
plain ; but we have heard it assigned as an excuse that
some of the members regarded the idea of Manchester
entering into competition with Liverpool as a shipping
port as so much like a jest that they could not prevail
upon themselves to treat the matter seriously; whilst
others thought that it would be only " liberal, " and
show a generous enlargement of mind to let the inland
people have their way—that the scheme could not do
us very much harm, and was, in fact, almost unworthy
of notice.

With regard to such feelings •and opinions, we must
say, for our part, that we could not coincide in them.
If tEe project was a foolish one, it struck us that there
was just so much the more reason for opposing it ; but
if it were likely to prove injurious to Liverpool, that we
were called upon strenuously to defend our own rights
and interests, and to resist the meditated wrong, whe-
ther the amount of injury might be great or small,
trifling or important. Under such circumstances, we
own we thought it most culpable on the part of the
Council to remain silent and inactive. It was quite
impossible to say with truth that the bill was "no
affair of ours." It was not only obviously but pre-
eminently the reverse, and yet we permitted the in-
landers to tunnel away, or come openly across our
grounds, without uttering a word, or even making a
sign. The result must have been that the bill would
pass. What should hinder it ? Liverpool, it would be
argued, made no opposition, but seemed rather pleased
with the idea of having her warehouses empty, her
shipping idle, her brokers without orders, and her
merchants whiling away the day in listless indolence.
She "cared for none of these things," it would be
said, and therefore her privileges and advantages might
as well be handed over to others. However, we hope it
is not too late to demonstrate that quite a different
state of feeling prevails here.

Our "esteemed contemporary, " the Manchester
Guardian, is, we perceive, not well pleased with the
line of argument we have pursued on this question,
and takes us to task in his Just number for " misre-
presenting" him. Now misrepresentation is a trade
that we do not usually follow—intentionally newer. We
are, therefore, desirous to meet such an accusation,
and to show that it has been made against us unjustly.
It is preferred in the following terms :
We (viz., the Manchester Guardian) had exposed the
absurdity of the Standard's allegation, that the proposed
boon of inland bonding would be at once injurious to Liver-
pool and useless to Manchester, by showing that if it turned
out to be useless, it would not be persisted in ; and conse-
quently, Liverpool would sustain no injury. This the Stand-
ard represents as " a candid admission" that the experiment
is of a very doubtful character ! We must say that the mis-
representation is as silly as it is dishonest."

Now though we are here charged with making a mis-
representation which is at once " silly" and " dis-
honest," we protest we cannot perceive even the
ground of the charge in the figure and form in which
it is set out by our accuser. He says he exposed the
absurdity of our allegation, that the bill would be use-
less to Manchester, by showing that if it were so, it
would not be " persisted in." Now we ask, is that
" exposing the absurdity" of our allegation, or proving
the soundness or correctness of it—which? This, we
think, is that mode of reasoning which was called by
school men "confessing and avoiding"—viz., first allow-
ing your adversary's premises, and then showing how
they could be gotten rid of. So far from treating our
allegation as absurd, our contemporary treats it as a
very probable eventuation, and reasons upon it as
such. The Manchester people also, he says, foresaw it,
as well as we, and in case of such a contingency hap-
pering, were determinedTthoey, consequently,lettheactfallin ditodd notisuse
and become obsolete.
esteem the supposition as in the smallest degree
" absurd ;" but, on the contrary, a very likely and
rational hypothesis; and yet our contemporary charges
us with monstrous obtuseness and perversity for just

thing, Ws will not my THE LIVERPOOL OAR 81LL,,--FLSI3LIC &MEMO,
which party is thus sonvieted of being the " silly" one ; On Wednesday evening, meeting was held at the Adel,
but this we repeat, that it does not at all become those phi Hotel, pursuant to notice, of the contributors to the fund
who dwell so evidently in " vitreous domiciles" to be
for defraying the expenses f the deputation appointed to
. proceed to London, to oppose the Liverpool gas
the first to throw stones. receive a communication from the Gas Consumers' Com-

mittee, as to the present state of the gas bill now before the
House of Lords. •
Mr. George Walker having bees appointed to the chair,
the minutes of the proceedings of the committee were read,
from which it appeared that the Queen-square company had
been friendly to them until that moment, but were then
offering a decided opposition; and that the committee find-
ing the defeat of the bill (in its present amended state) by
the Queen-square company prejudicial to the interests of the
gas consumers, felt it their duty to oppose them.
The printed report was also read, as follows:
" TO THE COMMITTEE OF TIIE 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 rive you a summary of the
main objects of the promoters of the bill.
Ist,—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
gas rents without 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 1 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, shewing, 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 4:13 2s. 6d. per cent., amounting
to £6562 per annum - £131,250
Or, during the first ten years—average dividend,
£6 13s. 10d.--,---£3325 per annum
And during the last ten years-
£l9 125.=£9800 per annum

—average dividend of

98,000

£131,250

That the shares of £lOO each were worth £3BO ; that the
proprietors had thus made, over and 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 Ms. 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 Hedley, Esq., and
laid before a committee of the House of Commons in 1836,
shewing the relative value of gases. This table spews, 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 Ils. 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 £BOO9 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 he 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 the
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.
The company to be enabled to raise £50,000 additional
capital. The first £25,000 to be offered to the public, and to
be 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 : _

We have another subject of congratulation for our
readers to-day. The Town Council has resolved to
profit by our suggestions in the matter of the West
Indian packet station, and put forward the strong
claims possessed by Liverpool to this honour. This
is right—quite right ; and now if desert could be sure
of its reward in these niggling, huxtering days, we
should feel almost as complacent in the certain antici-
pation of our own good town oer-topping all other
claimants, and carrying off the prize, as we do in the
fact of our esteemed Town Council becoming so tract-
able in our hands. It is delightful to see men coming
to their senses, and following good advice, when given
to them honestly and disinterestedly. Positively we
could embrace every member of them with the expan-
sive arms of our affection, so overflowing is the regard
we feel for the entire body at this moment.

But touching the packet station, all that can be
necessary is, orderly to array, and fairly to set forth
before the committee the claims of Liverpool; and if
that committee possess three grains of discernment,
and do not renounce all pretence to being impartial, it
must, we say, decide in our favour. Why do the
Cunards, why do the New Yorkers, why do the
Orientals prefer Liverpool as their station ? Why—
because it is the best; and if the best for them, why
should it not be the best for the West Indian steamers ?
It is unquestionably the most central and convenient
station for both post-office, and passengers; and are
not these the principal considerations ? But in no one
particular is Liverpool excelled by any other port that
has put in a claim for the preference. We admit that
it would be for the advantage of Liverpool that she
should obtain it, and that therefore we have so far an
interest in the appointment ;_ but we can safely stand
upon the broad principle that LiverpOOl is, above all
exception, the very best port for the purpose, and we
ask no more than a clear stage and no favour for the
exhibition of the fact. Would that Parliamentary
committees could always be implicitly relied on for an
honest and impartial adjudication of such claims.

By the schooner Ariel, which arrived at Halifax, from
Bermudbover-rave. aottnots from that island to the Bth
April.
Weregre&ii-to Ittaie that the Ariel heard no news
whatever*of IlrAident.

We have: een requested by Mr. Nightingale, the surgeon
to the Workhouse, to state that the report of a police case,
which appeared in the Courier, of Wednesday, is calculated
to convey an impresalon which the facts do not justify. Mr.
Nightingale is there represented to have despatched, rather
cavalierly, a female, who had been only six days confined,
from the Workhouse, and to have refused to give the police-
officer, who came in compliance with Mr. Rushton's
request. a certificate of her health. It seems that when the
officer came for the certificate, Mr. Nightingale found her
in excellent health, and perfectly recovered from all effects
of her recent confinement. He inquired how she was, and
on her expressing her anxiety to leave the Workhouse and
appear before Mr. Rushton, he permitted her to do so, and
still considers that there was not the slightest risk in her
exposure to the air, as the child only lived about two hours,
and the mother, a robust, able-bodied woman, was at the
time in almost her usual condition.

MERCHANT SEAMEN'S HOSPITAL FUND.--A public
meeting of the shipowners of this town was held on Wed-
nesday-last, at the Shipmaster's Association Rooms, Old-
hall-street, for the purpose of adopting resolutions con-
demnatory of the proposed alteration in the management
and distribution of the Merchant Seamen's Hospital Fund.
Mr. Alston was called to the chair. Mr. Rowett, in moving
the first resolution, offered some appropriate remarks,
showing the injurious effects which would follow (from go-
vernment having the control of the whole funds, as is pro-
posed) to the recipients of the charity resident in Liverpool.
Mr. Weller seconded the resolution, which embodied the
purport of Mr. Rowett's remarks. Captain. Hunt then
moved that a deputation wait upon the Mayor, with a re.
quest that he would call a public meeting for the purpose of
taking the subject into consideration, and was seconded by
Captain Ramsay. A committee was then formed to carry
out the objects of the meeting. A letter was read from Lord
Sandon, who stated his readiness to use his best exertions
for the protection of the parties in whose behalf the meeting
evinced such honourable solicitude.

Ist,—The sinking of £.10,000 out of the £l-10,000.
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, whereas 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, £15,000 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 the 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.
24th March,•lB4l.

The CHAIRMAN said they had heard 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 be 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 been suc-
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 £340,000 in works ; but it had been proved 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 not,plying 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 eanmons 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 the
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