The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1849-09-04 00:00:00

TOWN COUNCIL ISIRE'fINGg.

to4'eoBl/e( t';; Council was held on Wednesday
wateasider the report of the Special Committee on the
our r dQuestion, the chief features of which we gave in
A a.
.1
%eiet memorial to the Council from the Liverpool Guardian
not was then read. It was to the effect that they were
betle'2lllinced by the report of the special committee, and
bee„,ing that the capabilities of the local supply had not
repourttested, they prayed the Council not to confirm the
;cat similar memorial was presented and read troth the
&hr,al,Al. nfederati pn.
fir, OR then called upon Mr. HOLT, on which
ii-latie,'',lAanonn said he rose to a point of order. He
1040 to ask the Town-clerk whether, according to the
4ntLie clause of the sth and 6th Victoria, section 2, those
Speak men who were mortgagees on the water estate could
have _or vote on this report, as they seemed to him to
To pecuniary interest.
cle,,A!.rowx-cLEux replied, that he did not think the
that °f
the act of parliament referred to applied in the
that et the report before the Council, and was of opinion
let)t ,anY member of the Council, though he might have
toe ;:lneY on the water account, was perfectly at liberty
coruiliand vote on the question.
of feeii uerable discussion took place, and some warn:th
, ir Was exhibited, after which
he did our rose to move the adoption of the report, and
dared !') under the conviction that, after having consi-
he could, question as patiently and as dispassionately as
elte,, he had come to the conclusion that there was no
did '"n ative but to go on with the Rivington scheme. He
the coet consider that they were in a position, considering
tt° •Iltracts which had been entered into, and the re,
e sibilities of the Council, which had been incurred on
the tltesentations of the town at large, now to abandon
kith:ll4ton scheme. As he had said before, it was
frok ;eu on all hands that more water must be obtained
grl° source or other—that a very large increased
lOppi .3' Must be obtained for sanatory purposes, and for
lug
,
Ying the inhabitants, which were constantly increas
beenalso for scavenging. During
.the time he had
Tears ui.laverpool. which was a period of forty-two
the ti tue Population had wonderfully increased. At
and no he came to the town the population was 90,000,
pi.opo°r4,Y it Was 400,000, and still increasing in a greater
He therefore said that no scheme. would
ooppplect that did not involve a consideration for
thea2Pg that increase. The scheme that was before
tit) 'ld so, for it made provision for supplying a popula-
-11
of 800 Oat , 00 souls, and this provision was to be made
ernaitexPense of £450,000 which did seem to
which a very
hlr
sum as compared with the £600,000 they
already had to pay for. 4,000,000 gallons per day.
Molttto then went into the particulars of the informs-
Persowhich the committee had received from different
tork,ls as to the capabilities of the Rivington and other
tilate" and afterwards proceeded to allude to the esti-
ley 8 for the Rivington works as supplied by Mr. Hawks-
te and Messrs. Simpson and Newlands. As to the
there Y of the bondholders, it did appear to him that
tniN 90111 d be no subject that could be brought before a
!hat„eciPal body which was of such great importance as
Irep,' a Plentiful supply of water. It was of the utmost
ttleance to every member of the community; it was
on t but right and just that the security for money lent
herecos works should be lent on the security of the
far asrate estate. He therefore was of opinion that, as
to the bondholders were concerned, there was nothing
fear ; and he did not consider it necessarto refer
tierth
er to that point. He would now say a few words on
;pp,i'lllestion of compensation. Compensation always
btlt'iheu,,When private rights and interests were affected,
torrij,' Rivington scheme it seemed to him that the
koCeensations, as compared with other projects, were
workrate ; indeed, as compared with the Manchester
atios, they were very light ; and what wak the compen-
after all ? Why it was water for water, In Bolton
tot Itin.other places no parties had appealed, and he did
1104'1,1_11k they would do so in the present instance. Mr.
torell detailed the particulars of a visit of the special.
eati to Rivington Pike, and expressed himself
od with the quality of the water. They saw it
oed he out of the fissures as limpid and as pure as crystal,
frora C.,,Was convinced that the great body of the water
furth.4ivington was of the same quality. After some
khe„,s'r general remarks, Mr. H. said that if the Rivington
was not now carried out, the public would be cla-
-4°ll 1 •
11/ka L 8 Y calling out for it in ten or twenty years; but. it
tie ills opinion that they could not wait until that time.
otatzeirsen concludednju by saying that he had nothing more to
"an to core the Council to adopt the Rivington
slr
BELT.the,BELT.seconded the motion, and gave a summary of
,tbesons which induced him to change his views on
lirieence schnewemeact. Twere £he enga2ogemento,ooo, and s of the Corporation
NL not more than
or £60,000 of that amount could be redeemed by
elite`"auge of policy. Seeing so large a sum at stake, he
arid tte,d anxiously into the merits of the Rivington scheme;.
Ozia:tueor result was, that he must give his unqualified
Of "as to the power of the district to yield the quantity
required of it ; and all the reports upon its
e01„:' convinced him that it would be found in practice
eta,, Actionable. (Hear, hear.) Finding this to be the
iep,he Cid not enter with minuteness into the sandstone
thetl• But assuming the most favourable view, in itself
ae Of would be £300,000, which, added to the forfeiture
the other, would leave nothing in point of economy to
te
the for. Parliament, he thought, would not
toal the Pike act. Government would say, " You may
ag,,„ e Your Council as often as you like in Liverpool, but
Platrnnot change our legislation here." (Hear, and ap-
Illisihse*) He looked at the question, too, as a man of
,elikZtes, and felt unwilling to protract a struggle which
ter Involve innocent parties. The contracts ought to
ealt with in a spirit of honour and integrity ; and all
te-,,se reasons induced him to join the majority of the
Mans it in recommending the course submitted. (Ap-
thi,\l". Bennett, in a long speech, went into the history of
44 Ater question, and combatted the arguments of Mr.
toljsr• Alderman PROCTER rose to move an amendment
htg :e Proposal of Mr. Holt, and in doing so expressed
etie'a,rPrise that Messrs. Holt and Bell had found out in
le4dvisit what it had taken Messrs. Simpson and New-
ebais, Mouths to accomplish. Mr. P. then proceeded to
tioi,!se the committee's report, and denied the conclu-
the to which the committee had come as to the cost of
weil."•,,,vington works ; and after showing that the works
ipt,,"l cost upwards of £627,000, asked the Council how the
hot done
upon the borrowed money was to be paid. It could
'401,12 done except by increasing the rates. The bond-
of On the corporate estate would appreciate that part
report which recommended the borrowing of more
thteY, and he fancied would be looking closely after
the." When they went to parliament. He then said that
the ttoPosal which the old Highway Board had made was
vre est to carry out for an efficient supply of water. Mr.
14tcter then read his amendment, which we gave in our
I..kr
'vs '4-ENDERso)r, as a member of the special commit-
itu.,',leisconded Mr. Procter's amendment. Mr. H. went
I,4lleiu; e capabilities of the local supply and the increased
1,„• -"t,Y which might be obtained from it, and concluded
Ot b,-"llciemning the proposal to expend such an amount
the;,.°lleY as was involved in the Rivington scheme, on
ta°•elind that it was not necessary, and that the
eestate ought not to be saddled with paying the
lest of it.
cokl.,Alderman HORSFALL, as a member of the special
litiea"",,tttee as well, thought Mr. Holt had gone into the
Ithiaten and the report in a very full and able manner,
!so-,;',ArePort had been ably seconded b 3 Mr. Bell. He
Ilern:"ed that Mr. Procter had cast a sneer at those gen-
vay.`c, in stating that their conversion was the work of a
they
tend the whole time he had associated with them
!,11e t"ad exhibited the most anxious desire to arrive at
'as ruth,„„ and the truth only. He himself had gone into
:4-"Mmittee without any predilections whatever in fa-
'of either one scheme or the other • for he,
• noad d been anxious to arrive at the truth, and
1,,t as firmly convinced of the propriety of going
AsOn;:n the Rivington scheme as were those two
.4.°4 'Ceti. He would ask why they referred the ques-
Pre ""„ a committee unless that committee were to
.reet',.ll opinion ? He did not agree with Mr.
t,_'gth 1°1; M finding fault with the report ; but he agreed
hnie„,gn hi blaming the Council, or rather the various
tb who voted for one thing to-day and another
e;eht-te'rclvv• Mr. Procter had also. spoken of the folly of
a eeph:PaYers, so that all came in for a share of his
• el-I,"g condemnation. Mr. Bennett had alluded to
,svPorrt thrown upon the Council by. hurrying the
,‘',lttee* Nothing was further from the wish of the com-
re ape' . had Mr. Bennett, or Mr. Harbord come before
e veal committee, and stated that the report should
meets hands of the committee at least ten days before
evcolieettillig of Council, nothing should hveinduoecerdtaliinir
t and JO a shorter
. period.._ Mr. Proctoro
3,10.‘ it was as an individual member f the council,y
the " stated that the report should be ten days
beentitt gihands of the Council; but other opinions had
t,s'ien that they had been tardy, and they were
eLsely A,A,' task at the last Council for being too slow.
;OA tieet"•°,.ll,
_id he have consented to postponement at the
Harbord or Mr. Bennett, to whom, the one
th!terean and the other as deputy chairman of the
eted pnreittee, due deference was due ; for though he
tittich attmal them on this subject, they had both devoted
lea to ;Mum the subject,
who after being requested to
Ittresir,„,la office as chairman of the committee, persisted
.0141AereausIng. Mr. Procter had said, go to Green-lane,
apply was obtained before, and try it again. In
ed Otto this was the opinion of Mr. Newlands, ex-
tit the be
the committee, that if they got their water
- red sandstone rock, they would find the cost of
tooelittplpeatig more • •• (H bear.)
than going to Rivington. . ear,_
le„ claw" to every member of the committee, for he
DeNewland's words, whether he did not say
ktimrs, ~`• Henderson here remarked, " After 20 or 30
reltle soitn The speaker proceeded to say that Mr. Procter
Itet,to e remarks on the discrepancy in Mr. Hawksley's
its oet,Voth regard to the filter beds, and that £60,000
(1111.g‘eri into his calculation of £458,000 or £480,000.
Noarilh„porsfall) had no doubt that he was right; he
Iblittildbe
othe matter, but thought at the same time it
toi!, to b TIIY right, in calculating Mr. Hawksley's esti-
tekeave stated all the case. There would be £19,000
of eh wo la rom the estimate for Colonel Tempest's land,
1,110•t2/,0* nOt be required, and there was also a saving
ilet,o,hot4ridoteestit:ar,iti contract purposes, not required. He
ctgbh t, in stating a case of that kind, to state
e same time, pro and con. on the estimate.
0o tint whad also expressed an opinion that the water
tieq,-gnild not justify such an outlay of the public
‘th'ol,aoies'oll taking the calculation made by the water
of the future increase of the population, the
• eonse Water would soon be required, and there
Itat,'ration Inently be an increase of rental. Resides the
44 I Lot contemplate any dividend, as the old
314`,trtee did, but only the mere matter of interest,
414 w0,,13, doubt but that in a short •S-nale the water
`Lio be fully adequate to pay the interest on

A z..•,iciai

the Itivington outlay. He hoped the committee would
do full justice to Mr. Newlands, and he himself moved that
the committee should recommend a certain salary tO that
gentleman ; but he was over-ruled. He did not agree
with Mr. Bennett that Mr. N. would spurn such a re-
commendation made by the committee. Mr. Bennett
quoted from the report of the commissioners that there
seemed no reason to doubt that a quantity of water might
be obtained on the spot. What did those commissioners
say further ? They received no evidence on the subject
(hear, hear), and those very commissioners' report, to
which Mr. Bennett alluded, was before the committee of
the Houst3 of Commons, and they received evidence, and
they said there was not sufficient. (Hear, hear.) The
committee of the House of Commons, who beard evi-
dence, and had the commissioners' report, came to a
different conclusion. Mr. Bennett had further found fault
with Mr. Holt for speaking of forty years' experience in
Liverpool, and stated something about 800,000 gallons, or
that the supply from Rivington was only for twenty years.
But if Mr. Bennett bad looked a little further iato the
report he would have found that there were several
streams, the Douglas and others, which could be diverted
into their reservoir, and increase the supply if necessary.
(Hear. hear.) Mr. Bennett further spoke of Mr. Eaton.
He (Mr. H.) had accompanied them in the review they
had made of Rivington, and a more intelligent man he
had never met with. He had the greatest confidence in
the report made by such a man. He was prepared to say
that the work could be fully accomplished within the
estimate. Mr. Hawksley stated before in that Council
that he was prepared with contractors, who were prepared
to contract within the amount specified. It was as de-
cidedly a matter of business as any thing could be,
and he could not tell how a man of business could
get over a statement like that, unless he was prepared
to dispute Mr. Hawksley's word altogether. (Hear.)
A great deal had been said about the quality of
the water. There were only two tests; the one a chemi-
cal analysis, the other the natural test of taste. The
committee went over to the district and tasted for them-
selves. They had before them the evidence of scientific
men, who had analysed the water, and they (the com-
mittee) came to the conclusion that it was in every respect
satisfactory •, and he never wished to drink better water in
his life. (Hear.) It was not necessary -to say more with
reference to salt water. He had at first himself approved
of it, but the objections since stated had changed his opi-
nion. Then objections had been taken to giving the se-
curity of the corporate estate, which he considered absurd.
It was ridiculous to suppose that the bondholders of the
corporation would thereby be endangered. What was
the debt ? Only three years' income of the corporate
estate ! The Council had power to give the bondholders
security by a mortgage upon the estate, and if they
claimed to go for an act, they were bound as honest and
honourable men to do so. He concluded by condemning
those who had made this water question a personal matter,
and he could sympathize with those who had written and
spoken on the subject. He knew the difficulty with which
Mr. Holt, in submitting his proposition had to contend,
to give to each party the appearance of feeling. He did
ask gentlemen to think of the best interests of the town—
to throw overboard every personal and private considera-
tion, and to adopt the report which bad—he spoke it as
an honest man, had the best consideration of the commit-
tee, without partiality one way or the other—he asked
them to adopt the report, feeling perfectly satisfied in
doing so they would consult the best interests of this
town, they would consult its sanitary condition, and they
would do justice to their own financial position.
Mr. HARBORD replied : Mr. Horsfall had told the
Council that he entered the committee without a predilec-
tion ; but if that were really so, he (Mr. Harbord) wished
to ask how it was that, on all occasions, Mr. Horsfall was
voting for the Rivington Pike scheme, and bad found
fault with Mr. Procter for saying that nothing had been
done relative to the appointment of Mr. Newlands. The
special committee had only adopted the recommendation
which had been again and again laid before the Council,
and which, if adopted by them when first offered, would
have saved the water account several thousand pounds.
Mr. Horsfall had, in a very Jesuitical manner, stated that
as the population increased, the cost of pumping would
be more expensive than a surface supply, and that the
income from the water rents then would be able to pay
the expenses ; and this assertion was not contradicted by
any gentleman in the room. He (Mr. Harbord) met it by
a direct negative ; the income would not pay the expenses.
As regarded the taste of water, he asserted that the
Rivington water would have to act the part of scavenger
to the whole district before it came to Liverpool ; and, as
to procuring money, that might be done for a considera-
tion to some bankers and capitalists, on a mortgage of the
corporate estate ; but he contended, before such a thing
as this was done, the burgesses should be consulted, a
public meeting should be held, and he asserted that if the
burgesses had half the sense and determination for which
he gave them credit, they would defeat any attempt that
might be made to obtain an act of parliament to make the
borrowing of money legal. Mr. Harbord then referred to
the course which he pursued on the Water Committee,
and said he was pround of what he had done; and he de-
fied that gentleman to put his finger on any act which he
had done and say it was wrong, or dishonest, or unworthy
of that great corporation.—(Cries of " hear, hear.") He
then referred to the arguments of Mr. Bell, and adminis-
tered a severe eastigation to that gentleman for his recent
change of opinion. He then entered upon a minute
analysis of Mr. Holt's speech, which lie treated in a
jocular style, and afterwards commented paragraph by
paragraph on the report. Towards the conclusion of his
address, he appealed to the Council to postpone the con-
sideration of the report to allow time for expression of
public opinion, and stated, in the event of an effort being
made to carry the report to-day, he would move amend-
ment after amendment until he forced them to desist.
The debate was then adjourned to Friday.

The adjourned meeting was held on Friday. There
was only a thin attendance.
Mr. BENNETT was allowed to correct a statement in his
speech which appeared in the Liverpool Times. It was
there stated that Mr. Hawksley, when questioned before
the committee, said he could supply 18,000,000 of gallons
of water for £420,000. It should have been 8,000,000 of
gallons.
The debate was then resumed by
Mr. MANN, who observed that the question now resolved
itself into whether they should proceed or abandon the
Rivington Pike scheme, and, for his own part, he would
give his vote in favour of proceeding. It was a scheme for
which they had obtained an act, and certain works being
commenced, it required the greatest consideration before
they adopted any course contrary to that pointed out by
the act of parliament. It was admitted that there was
not a sufficient supply of water for the town, and that an
additional supply was required ; the only question was,
where it could be best obtained. A great deal was said as
to the rental from the water supply, but he was not
inclined to take so gloomy a view of the matter as some
gentlemen had done. He could have wished the report
had entered more minutely into the financial statements.
It appeared that the water income, according to what was
stated in the report by the treasurer, was £85,000 for the
eighteen months, which would be equal to £57,000 per
annum. Assuming the town would increase in the same
proportion that it had done, the income would be, in 1852,
by the time the Rivington scheme was expected to be com-
pleted, something like £66,000. Deducting £20,000 for
the working expenses, left £46.000, and, adding the penny
rate for watering the streets, the total income would be
about £50,000. After referring to the interest to be paid
out of the money borrowed, he came to the conclusion that
there would be sufficient to meet all requirements, and
more than that, as the town went on increasing. Tn con-
clusion, he considered that, under all the circumstances,
the council would at present have to pay as much for any
other scheme as the Pike scheme, and he would support
the report of the special committee.
Mr. SAMUEL HOLME, after alluding to the unfounded
statements which, he said. had been put forth in the town
in reference to the water question, considered that some-
thing was due to those who had not had the truth put
before them. A great deal was said as to parties being
interested in forwarding a measure which was called for
by imperative necessity, and which would be one of the
greatest boons ever conferred on the inhabitants of this
locality—whether they were rich or poor. He thought
the question ought to be considered on its merits, and
not in the way it now was being made to a great extent—
s party question, and a popular cry for electioneering
purposes. He thought it was right the public should
know how they had been urged on in the first instance by
many of the burgesses and by a portion of the press ;
and was proceeding to read extracts on the water question
from the Liverpool Mercury, showing that, although the
editors of that paper now opposed the Pike scheme, they
were at one time in favour of it, when
The MAYOR said he could not allow him to go into the
subject as to anything that had been said in the news-
papers.
Mr. HOLME said he had beard a great deal of public
meetings ; but he would call one himself of the electors of
his ward, and make known that which he was prevented
from doing, in council. He went into the origin of the
Pike scheme, justifying the statements made by Mr.
Hawksley, which, as regarded the yield of the water from
the red sand stone, were fully borne out by the evidence
of Messrs Kennedy and Macgregor. The estimate was
given by Mr. Hawksley at 4,039,000 gallons, while those
gentlemen set it down at about 4,100,000 gallons. He
believed he was also correct as to the estimated cost of
the works, notwithstanding what had been said by Messrs.
Simpson and Newlands. He denied Mr. Bennett's state-
ment, that there was any fear from a fracture of the pipes
occasioned by pressure. He knew for a fact, which could
be ascertained by scientific culculation, that the pipe allu-
ded to by Mr. Bennett would sustain equal to a column of
500 feet vertical. As to the decay of the pipes by oxidiza-
tion, it was perfectly ridiculous, when they were properly
embedded in the ground. After replying to some other
objections as to the compensation to the mill-owners, the
great liabilities in which the corporation would involve
themselves, &c., he urged the council to adopt the report
of the committee, for, if they plunged themselves into a
parliamentary contest, they could scarcely contemplate the
result, or estimate the cost. As to the argument that they
were, by carrying out the Pike scheme, alienating the
public funds, he denied it, and contended, that the appli-
cation of the corporate funds for the public benefit was no
alienation. After all that had been said, the purchase of
the old compan;es was the great difficulty they had had to
contend with ; and if that had not arisen he believed that
in a few years the inhabitants would have been in such a
position as to have water for nothing. (Hear, hear.) Even
from the out-townships a considerable amount would be
realized ; there were about 4,753 houses producing a sum
of £133,000, and, at a rate of one shilling in the pound,
they would produce an addition to the water revenue of
. £6, 670 A friend of his in Parliament had stated, during
a conversation as to the probability of getting the water
act repealed, that the council might just as well ask for.
a re-enactment of the corn law.. (Hear, 'Tn..) A great
deal was said b
eing the influence of public opinion, and
the burgesses being opposed to the scheme, but. he had no
objections to half-a-dozen public meetings being
.called,.
in order thatthe facts might be fully before the mhabi—

tants : and no doubt the time would cdrilB when they
would see that the course adopted by certain gentlentett
was rather for some specific purpose than for the general
good,—when those gentlemen would be cast off, and no
more allowed to darken the council chamber. Hear, hear.)
After paying a high compliment to Mr. Bell, who, he
said, had done himself honour, and who, he had little
doubt, would. in two years, be in request by a dozen
wards, to stand as their representative, he called upon the
council to adopt the report of the eetamittee.
Mr. PARKER, in a speech replete with consicietiible
humour, replied to some of the statements of Mr. Holme,
whom he characterised as the Leo of the Council. He
would take the mighty man first ;—he would not go to
the outworks but attack the fortress itself, and then he
thought the outworks would give way and a victory might
be obtained. (Laughter.) Mr. Holme, whom he would
call the great luminary, was to make everything as bright
as noonday, and, added Mr. Parker, "let light into you,
gentlemen." (Renewed laughter.) He wished to make
extracts from a paper called the Liverpool Mercury, a
respectable paper no doubt,—one which he (Mr. Parker)
respected as much as he did any other paper. (Laughter.)
Mr. Holme ought to have been the last man to quote
from newspapers, seeing that he had at times figured there
so conspicuously, and he (Mr. Parker) would like to go
over the files of papers and read about the various bitter
pills that gentleman had swallowed. Mr. Parker then
proceeded to analyse many of the statements which had
been put forth in the first instance by the advocates of
the Pike scheme, when it was said that not one farthing
of expense would be thrown on the inhabitants—a state-
ment which was subsequently found out to be a mere
fallacy. After some general remarks, to the effect that
the Pike scheme was not called for either by the necessity
of the case, or by the burgesses, and that there was plenty
of water under the town of a better quality than could be
obtained anywhere else, he drew a kind of dramatic pic-
ture, in which the chairman of the special committee and
Mr. Bell figured as the principal heroes, the scene being
laid in one of the hills of the Pike district. The allusion
caused much amusement to the members of the Council,
and elicited roars of laughter. He condemned the report
as unsatisfactory, and contended that under any circum-
stances they must go to Parliament; and, if they did so,
it was necessary that an alteration should be made in the
charge for water to the shipping interest. It was an in-
justice that 100 per cent, should be given in favour of the
shipping, and that, too, by act of parliament. (Hear.)
He condemned the Rivington water as dirty, muddy stuff,
and as an instance of the superiority of the Liverpool
water, mentioned that Mr. Bent, who was a brewer in
Johnson-street, brewed from his own water, obtained
from his own well in the sandstone rock, the best ale in
Liverpool. (Laughter.) "It is," continued Mr. Parker,
the best; it is proverbial—(renewed laughter)—and, if
you will go to Mr. Bent's brewery, you shall taste his ale,
and I will be bound to say the facts will bear me out.
(Roars of laughter.)
Mr. BENT.—You deserve a barrel for that. (Laughter.)

,
Mr. PARKER made some further remarks in opposition
to the arguments advanced by various speakers on the op-
posite side, and concluded by giving his support to Mr.
Procter's amendment.

Mr. TINNE supported the adoption of the report, and in
doing so justified the course pursued by the committee,
who were entitled to credit for the consideration they had
given to the subject, and the conclusions they had arrived
at. The report contained everything that was required in
reference to the subject before them, and supplied ade-
quate information to the members of the council. It was
quite unnecessary that they should have published the
whole of the evidence on the subject of the water sup-
ply, especially when the great expense entailed on the
corporation by so doing was considered. Mr. Tinne then
mentioned the names of the gentlemen who had in the
first instance taken considerable interest in the Rivington
scheme; amongst these were Messrs. Rathbone, Lace,
Earle, Holme, Horsfall, G. W. Lawrence, Holt, and
Cooper, the latter being as much interested in property as
any person in that council.
Mr. HARBORD said that bricks did not always mean
brains. •
This led to some altercation. .. _ _

Mr. TINNE, after explaining that it was not the inten-
tion of Mr. Hawksley to abandon the Green-lane works
nor the Windsor station, concluded by recommending the
adoption of the report.
Mr. G. H. LAWRENCE said the question was, at the
present time, what was to be done under existing circum-
stances. and whether it would be more advantageous to
go on under the act of parliament they had obtained or
abandon it. For his own part, he had come to the con-
clusion that it would be easier and more advantageous to
proceed. (Hear, hear.) He went at some length, as
most of the speakers had done, into the question of water
supply, the quality, and other details, and expressed him-
self favourable to the report.
Mr. BENT said he still retained his former opinion, that
if the Rivington scheme was carried out it must be at an
outlay which would most seriously limit, both for the
present and the future, the useful application of the
revenue of the corporate estate. He objected to the
quality of the water to be obtained from the Pike, and as
to the application of the proposed reservoirs, they would
not obviate all the difficulties to be encountered. Be-
lieving that the greater part of the rate-payers of the
town were opposed to going to Rivington, until it were
proved by actual experiment that the present wells would
not yield the required supply, which views were in accord-
ance with his own opinions, he would support the amend-
ment.
Mr. Alderman HODGSON supported the adoption of the
report, and was followed by
Mr. FISHER who, at some length, denounced in strong
terms the conduct of those who had opposed the Pike
scheme, and made some remarks to the effect that Mr.
Harbord had, amongst many other things, displayed a
great deal of buffoonery in his speeches in the Council.
After some difference between Mr. Harbord and Mr.
Fisher, the latter was called to order by the Mayor.
Mr. GARDNER disclaimed being a party to any factious
opposition, and said he was quite unconnected with any
confederation or party. He hoped he should have that
credit which he gave others, that he gave his vote con-
scientiously, and discharged his duty to the best of his
ability. A great deal was said as to the scarcity of water
in and about Liverpool ; but he could state, in reference
to some property which he possessed at Everton, that
there were two wells on the premises, one a surface and
the other a spring ; and though men had been employed
to pump a whole day at the spring during the repairing,
they were unable to find the bottom • and, as regarded
the quality, he challenged any one to test it. He would
not deny but they might get a supply of water from Ri-
vington, as money would accomplish a great deal • but he
was afraid it would not be so pure as the water they ob-
tained at present from the sandstone rock. They might,
it was said, get a supply for fires and flushing sewers from
the river, but then a question would arise as to where the
money was to be obtained from. He thought that gen-
tlemen in going to Rivington, had begun at the wrong
end, as they ought first to have tested this locality ; he
felt satisfied that there was water in the neighbourhood of
Knowsley-brook, and if an artesian well were sunk in
that district, it might be attended with advantage. There
was also abundance of water in the river Alt, which, with
other streams that flowed into Sefton Meadows, might, if
necessary, be made available at Liverpool. After some
remarks as to the difficulties which appeared to be con-
nected with the carrying out of the Pike scheme, he
concluded by expressing his approval of Mr. Procter's
amendment.
Mr. ROBINSON supported the amendment, after which
Mr. H. HORNBY expressed bis regret that he could not
take the same view of the question. In his opinion, the
matter must be taken as it stood at the present time, and
there was not the least probability of inducing parliament
to rescind the act. He considered that the evidence
which had been produced in connexion with the subject
was satisfactory, and such as could be relied niacin. Seve-
ral statements had been made by Mr. Harbord as to the
expenditure, which were subsequently found to be incor-
rect. He had set down the expenditure as being above
the income, which was not the case ; he had also intimated
that the water from Rivington was likely to produce
disease in Liverpool, while the fact was that in this town,
where the inhabitants drank the water from the red sand-
stone, the cholera was more prevalent than in any other
place in England. (Hear, hear.) It was also a startling
fact that in Rivington, where the supply of water was from
drainage, there have been no traces of the disease.
After some desultory discussion,
Mr. FREME made a few remarks, in which he said that
the amendment did not exactly coincide with his own
views, though he could not vote for the reception of the
report. He submitted, as an amendment, that the fur-
ther consideration of the report be deferred till an early
day in November ; but, in the meantime, no steps be
taken to promote or impede any proceedings, the neces-
sary parliamentary notices only excepted.
Mr. HOLT then replied, and went into details, princi-
pally to show that the water obtained from Rivington
would, by passing through filtering beds, be rendered
perfectly clear and proper for all purposes. He had a
letter from Wilson and Co., of the Vulcan Foundry, Glas-
gow, calling the attention of the Council to the position
they were in as to payment for the pipes. They had con-
tracted to supply • they had delivered £1,600 worth of
work, and had to the value of £4,000 more yet to deliver ;
they wished the Council to consider the difficulties they
were in in consequence of the recent proceedings in the
Council.
The amendment of Mr. Procter was then put, and lost
by a majority of twenty-eight to twenty-two.
For the amendment—Councillors Langsdale, Walthew,
Woodruff, Preston, Ferguson, Toulmin, Robinson, Har-
bord, Rogers, Wagstaff, Kaye, Gardner, Neill, Johnson,
Bennett, Parker, Beckwith, and Hindley. Aldermen
Holmes, Henderson, Procter, and Bent. Against the
Amendment—Councillors J. Holme, Morris, Tyrer,
Aikin, Holt, Hornby, Tinne, Bell, Rimmer, S. Holme,
Tobin, Booker, Lloyd, Freme, Lawrence, Watson, Benn,
Mann, and Fisher. Aldermen Hodgson, Swainson, T.
B. Horsfall, Nicol, Cooper, Wood, Molyneux, and Chil-
ton.
Mr. BENNETT then submitted a motion to the effect,
that the report be referred back, with instructions to have
Mr. Haw ksley and Messrs. Simpson and Newlands brought
together. That the question of the cost of the Riving.
ton scheme be more fully gone into, and that a debtor and
creditor account be furnished, showing the claims and
liabilities.
The amendment was seconded by Mr. HARBORD, when
a long conversation ensued as to whether the amendment
was in order.
The MAYOR ultimately decided that only the first
clause of the amendment could be put, which was ac-
cordingly done, and it was lost by a majority of twenty

to eighteen.
Mr. FREME then submitted his amendment, referred
to. in a previous part of the proceedings that the further
consideration of the report be deferred till November.
This was also negatived.
Several, members then, left the roomy when
Mr. IFARBORD submitted another amendment as fol-
lows :--
'•That the Comais placed in. it& present embarrass-

LIVERPOOL STANDARD.