The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1841-04-16 00:00:00

MEETING OF THE DOCK COMMITTEE

The
there Dock Committee held their meeting yesterday, when
were present Messrs. Benn, liorsfall,Barclay, T. Holt,
Middleton, Quayle,
Aiken, Booth, Mellor, G. Holt, Evans,
Chapman, Ripley, Smith, Holmes, Moon, and Sands.
Avir• idenn presided.
The Finance Committee requested authority to print a
series of questions to be put to the harbour and dock mas-
ters, and also for the use of the members of the general
committee, relative to the management of the docks.—
Ordered.
On the recommendation of the Harbour Master's Com-
mittee, two persons were appointed dock-gatemen, in the
place of two deceased, since the last meeting. In the same
report, was a recommendation that in future the candidates
for such situations be required to produce, from the surgeon
to the docks, a certificate of the state of their health. Ano-
ther recommendation was, that the dock-gatemen be required
to live as near as possible to the docks to which they were
appointed. It was stated that one of the men lived in Tox-
teth-park, nearly three miles from his station. The recom-
mendations of the committee were confirmed.
The master of King's Dock applied for an increase of
salary. it was stated that at present lie had £250 and a
house. A short discussion took place, at the end of which
it was resolved that the applicant should he informed that
the committee could not assent to the application, and that
if he were dissatisfied, his resignation would be accepted.
Mr. TOBIN then, according to notice, brought forward the
subject of an increase to the salary of the North Harbour
Master. He had only the same salary as the master of
Prince's Dock, £3OO, and it was not sufficient, compared
with his labour, which extended northward, from the south
end of l'rince's Dock. He had in fact more to do than
any master of any of the docks ; and therefore he (Mr.
Tobin) moved, that the salary of the north harbour master
be increased to £lOO per annum.
Mr. RIPLEY said the office of harbour master was a su-
perior station, and it ought to be better paid than a dock
master. . .

Mr. AIKEN expressed a similar opinion.
Mr. CHAPMAN said, as the business of the docks in-
creased, the harbour master would be much more wanted.
Mr. BOOTII expressed himself in favour of the proposed
increase.
The motion was then put and carried unanimously.
The CHAIRMAN said the next business was the considera-
tion of a petition which had been received from the flatmen
on the River Weaver, complaining of the port regulations
which compelled them, to the injury of their health, to watch
on board their vessels during the night tides, and praying for
an exemption from them. This petition was signed by 186
flatmen.
Mr. CEIAPMAN said, if flatmen weae exempted, ships
would ask for the same thing. The petition was then referred
to the Sub-committee of Works (we believe).
Messrs. Chapman and Willis's letter, referred to last
week, respecting the equalization of the dock dues on tonnage
and goods, was next read, as well as a letter from the Ship-
owners' Association, signed by their chairman, Mr. Hender-
son, praying for the dues upon tonnage to be reduced to the
same rate as those on goods.

Mr. CHAPMAN then said, if the introduction of this topic
would be likely to interfere with the passing of the dock bill
he would let it drop ; but he believed the committee had full
power to make the change which lie proposed. It was clear
that a reduction in the amount of dues had been made under
the old measurement, but shipowners had not had the benefit
of that reduction in consequence of an act of parliament
having passed which altered the mode of measurement.
Perhaps Mr. Horsfall, as he was in the committee at the
reduction, could throw some light upon the intention with
which it was made, by stating whether it was bona fide in-
tended that shipowners as well as goods should have the
benefit of it.
Mr. EVANS though. t the subject could not be entertained.
Mr. HORSFAL I. said the matter was not, as Mr. Chapman.
had now put it, n a shape that he felt at liberty to answer
the question.
Mr. CHArMAN said he wanted to
.know whether, in the
reduction which was made, it was intended that ;hipping
should pay £BOOO a-ye.ar more than goods, and whether the
intention of the committee had not been entirely frustrated
by the act of parliament?
Mr. Anus said, if any change were made the committee
might get into difficulty. There were many vessels, for in-
stance, where the tonnage under the new system was less than
under the old.
Mr. HORSFALL said it certainly was intended that the re-
duction should be both upon shipping and. goods. Mr. Hors-
fall then referred to an article in the Liverpool Courier of
Wednesday, and said it was calculated to produce erroneous
impressions with regard to the committee. He hoped there
would at all times be a sufficient sense of justice in the com-
mittee to remedy any defect or injustice.
Mr. CHAPMAN repeated that lie would. withdraw the topic
if it were likely to embarrass the dock hill.
Mr. HoasFALL said a clause to effect what Mr. Chapman
wanted could not be introduced, inasmuch ds no clause in a
private bill could override the law of the land.
Mr. SANDS said lie understood it was the original wish of
the committee to effect a reduction on the dues on tonnage.
Mr. HORSFALL said the committee had this remedy, that
they could adjust the rates ; therefore, although the act of
i
Parliament might have began the work of injustice upon n-
dividua!s, the committee could remedy it. The course he
suggested to Mr. Chapman was a reference to the Finance
Committee, to enquire as to the alleged inequality of the
rates, and to determine whether it was of such a character as
to justify the interference of the general committee.
Mr. EvANis strongly opposed the idea of a reference, and
defended the present arrangement; but said this matter
would have received attention if the committee had not had
so much upon their hands.

Mr. CHAPMAN, seconded by Mr. SANDS, then moved a
resolution to this effect.

Mr. Ripley, Mr. Aiken, Mr. Horsfall, Mr. Evans, Mr.
Mellor, Mr. Tobin, and Mr. Chapman, having spoken on the
motion, a division took place, when the numbers were—
For the motion
Against it ..11

Majority against the motion.. 10
The committee then separated.