The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1844-07-09 00:00:00

THE BIRKENHEAD DOCK BILL.

The proceedings of the committee in the House of
Lords on this bill was resumed on Tuesday, when the
committee, through the Earl of Stradbroke, announced
that they considered that sufficient evidence had been
given as to the great advantages that would accrue from
the proposed works ; and thought that the opposers of the
bill should now show in what their construction would be
injurious. On this intimation Mr. Hildyard said he
should call no more witnesses, and should proceed to sum
up in the morning.—On Wednesday morning the room
was crowded, to hear the summing up for the promoters,
and the opening on the part of the Corporation and Dock
Trustees, the opposers. The co nsel, solicitors, and
agents of the latter mustered in great force, and among
their wi nesses in attendance were Sir Thos. Brancker,
Messrs. Okill. Sothern, Askew, Hunt, M 'Bride, Gurniss,
Hudson, Hughes, Chaff,rs, Cooke, and others.
Mr. Hildyard's summing up occupied two hours. He
considered the Corporation and Dock Trustees as one
body. He noticed the open and accurate survey of the
port last year by Mr. Rendall. There had been no con-
cealment; and Mr. Laird had distinctly stated that his
purchase had been made for dock purposes. He alluded
to the two attempted sales of land on the pool by the cor-
poration ; at the second sale the land was offered with full
liberty to build docks, but was not sold, in consequence of
the advanced price repuired. A large portion of the Bir-
kenhead estate was also sold to Mr. Jackson and Mr. Pot.
ter, on the express condition that they might make docks
and other works. On the sth of March, as soon as the
contract was completed, a petition was presented against
the bill! The corporation, after the plan was matured,
sold £175.000 worth of the land, at an advance of 6s. a
yard, an advance caused by the works they now opposed.*
He then went into the engineering part of the question,
contending that the walling up of the pool would cause no
diminution of the water, as the narrowest part of the chan-
nel was across from Seacombe, below the pool. The en-
gineers agreed that the tide would have greater velocity,
as did Professor Challis. The whole evidence went to
show that the proposed works would be highly advanta-
geous, and not injurious to the navigation. The Lords of
the Admiralty and the Lords Conservators of the River,
approved of the bill, and he called upon their lordships to
rep,,rt.
The Earl of Stradbroke said that Mr. Austin should
explain the conduct of the corporation as regards the
sales of the land stated • for it did appear to be far from
being clear, open, and fair.
Mr. Austin said this was one of the many misrepresen-
tat ions made against the two bodies for whom he appeared.
He entered into an exposition of the constitution of those
bodies, which did not act in concert, but frequently op-
posed each other. He read Mr. Jackson's speech of the
7111 November, which presented a plan very different to
that now before their lordships. The entire accommoda-
tion was now confined to a tidal basin of thirty-eight
acres, one dock of three, another of ten, and a beach of
six acres, instead of the great plan originally announced.
No warehouse yards or quays were here proposed ; all was
confined to one huge, penned up pool. A very • small
amount of accommodation would by the measure be
afforded to Liverpool, the'docks of which now extended
over 112 acres, and when finished, would extend over 116
acres. He commented on the engineers evidence at great
length, and stated he should call witnesses.

,
It was then agreed that Mr. Lowndes, who appeared
for certain owners of coasting vessels, should be heard be-
fore any witnesses, and the committee adjourned.
On Thursday. Mr. Lowndes was heard in support of a
petition against the bill from 186 persons interested as
owners of coasting vessels. There were two classes of
coasters—one class that used Wallasey beach, and the
other that did not. The petitioners were of the former,
and considered the measure very injurious to them. The
beaching-ground was most valuable to them when their
vessels could not enter the docks at Liverpool. Four
hundred vessels were in the custom of resorting to the
beach, or the anchorage opposite the pool, which afforded
them ample accommodation—such as the projected docks
and basins could not supply, and there was no power in
the present bill to extend them. There was, however,
space on the south side of Woodside pier, and also on the
north side of the pool ; and he prayed their lordshirs to
insert a clause to compel the construction of the requisite
works, and to oblige the commissioners to keep at all
times a certain level of water in their ten-acre (or free)
dock, and keep it from silting up, otherwise not to receive
an money from vessels entering it.
Mr. John Askew, harbour-master of Liverpool, was
the first witness. He said the erection of a sea-wall off
the pool would destroy the anchorage-ground there, by
causing an increased velocity of tide,—already so great
that no pilot would anchor a ship off Seacombe. There
was good anchorage off the Magazines, and from Birken-
head towards the Sloyne, as well as off the pool at Wal-
lasey ; but if a gale of wind came on when a vessel was
at anchor in a race like that off Seacombe, the probability
was, the anchors would not 'hold the ship any more than
a pair of scrapers. He had recently ascertained by the
log, that the tide ran 74 knots an hour. There would be
very great difficulty in getting into the Birkenhead dock
with a west wind, and with an east wind vessels would
have to be warped out. It would take as long to warp
two vessels out of the pool, as would enable sixty to make
sail from the anchorage or the beach, and it would not be
safe to lay in the open basin in certain winds.
In cross-examination nothing particular was elicited,
except that an objection he had before entertained to
Woodside Pier could be removed by its being raised to
the level of the sea-wall.

Mr. Huds,in, mater of N 0.2, pilot-boat ; Mr. Hughes,
a pilot; and Mr. M'Bride and Mr. Garniss, dock-mas-
ters, were successively called, and their evidence v.-as to
the effect that the proposed works would be prejudicial to
the navigation of the river, and in some parts quite im-
practicable.
Isir. James Brebner and Mr. Forshaw gave evidence of
the little advantage that could accrue to steam-packets,
for wh:ch they are agents at Liverpool, upon the ground
that their cargoes were much divided among different con-
signees, and that there would be the greatest difficulty in
arranging for their accurate delivery to them. Cattle,
however, formed a large portion of the import cargoes Of
the steamers, which could be safely landed at Birkenhead
at any time. Tnere were no docks in the places to which
and
vsteamersesserisescoorutledd
as lreland,w el tkt
notc., exceptr ini n 1"Boi
rr Rh
lay kt
eniumsad,
tha" any of these ports. .

Mr. Chaffers, the floating-stage keeper, and Mr.
Cooke, of the pilot-office, spoke on the state of the river.
Mr. Bellasys then srid he should call engineers as wit-
nesses. Mr. Coulthurst was called. He is an assistdlit
to Mr. Page. His evidence was principally to prove cer
tain data on which the calculations of other witnesses
were based. He produced various sections of the river
and several tables of calculations, which in some few in-
stances of quantity agreed with those of the promote, s'
engineers, but in the far greater number of cases were
widely different. His statements sh-,wed that the opera-
tion of the time of the scouring power would, on 36 days
in the year, be exactly 1 minute and 54 seconds. Upon
cross-examination he admitted he had not had much ex-
perience in the construction or management of harbours.
It being half-past four their lordships adjourned till
Friday. _ _

On Friday, Mr. Russell, the author of several papers
on the construction of steam-boats, upon tidal basins,
currents, and other works on similar subjects, was the
first witness examined. He was of opinion the current
of the Mersey would be injuriously operated upon by the
adoption of the proposed plan. He was followed by Mr.
George Rennie.

Up-on the committee re-assembling on Saturday morn-
ing, the examination of engineering witnesses for the
trustees of the docks and the corporation was renewed.
Mr. Lewis, professor of mathematics at Putney, was the
first witness examined. He was followed by Mr. Vig-
noles, civil engineer; the Rev. Henry Mozley, a gentle-
man who has written an elaborate treatise on hydrosta-
tics, and was lately professor of mathematics at King's
College, London ; Mr. Matip,,,han, a dockmaster ; and Mr.
Page, whose cross-examination terminated the proceed-
ings of the day after a sitting of nearly six hours. The
scientific witnesses were unanimous in condemnation of
the proposed plan. In the course of the examination on,
Saturday, there were no fewer than thirty maps, plans,
and diagrams exhibited. The committee adjourned until
Monday (yesterday).

EXPLOSION OF A STEAM-BOILER IN BOLTON,
AND LOSS OF LIFE.

In our first, and also in our third edition of last week,
we gave such particulars as we could at the time obtain
(and which we stated were necessarily imperfect) " of the
bursting of a boiler at the linen-manufactory of Mr. John
Brooks, in Bolton, by which several lives were ascer-
tained to be lost, besides many seriously and some fa-
tally injured.
The following is a copy of our
.third edition, published
at one o'clock, with such corrections as we are since en-
abled to supply :

......_ ..., _ _ . ,
The factory, and extensive premises attached, are
situated close to St. George's Church; and 540 per-
sons, young and old, were employed within. Two engines
were at work, one (as before noticed,) stated to be of 50-
horse power, and the other of about 60. The boilers of
one of them burst about eleven o'clock on Monday fore.
noon, owing, it is said, to the carelessness of the tenter,
and the destruction of the other soon followed, through
the force of the shock. These were each in an extensive
well-built out-house, on the north- west side of the factory,
and the destructive effects were instant there and on the
contiguous part of the main building. The engine-house
was demolished ; the windows of the factory in that direc-
tion blown in ; its interior framework was much shat-
tered, and largemasses of building material scattered far
and wide. The top of the boiler of the larger engine was
lifted into the air, and lighted in the street about fifty
yards from its original position. Two of the work_
people were found dead in the ruins, but the precise num-
ber our informant could not ascertain in the hurry of the
moment, there being various outlets by which they might
be removed. A large and very heavy balk of timber, that
had been fixed over the engine was blown clear over some
adjacent buildings, (which it would otherwise have crushed
in,) and lighted in a back passage or area, sixty or eighty
yards from where it had been fixed, and in a direction
from the factory. The materials of the ruins were chiefly
hurled into a street called Bark-street, about fifty yards
from the point of explosion. The gliss in the windows
of the houses on the opposite side was nearly all
blown in by the shock. One woman who was picked out
of the ruins, and who had one of her hands crushed or
blown off, and was otherwise much hurt, died on Tuesday