The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1843-06-16 00:00:00

MEETII46. LOCK CaIMITTEt

The weekly meeting of the Dock Committee was held yet,
terday, when the following members were present :—Messrs.
Sands, (chairman,) Horsfall,-Barclay, Holmes, Middleton,
Evans, Boyden, Tobin, Bold, Shand, Aikin, Holt, and
Bramley-Moore.
Mr. BARCLAY said, that in reading over the proceedings
of the last meeting of the committee, he observed that coun-
sel's opinion had been given, to the effect that the committee
were not liable for any loss or damage by fire in the new
warehouses, and that, consequently, notice to that effect
should be given to all parties. Was it not possible that some
difficulty might arise from parties, in such cases, contending
that they had not received due notice? if the committee
were not liable why give the notice at all? By saying that
they would give notice they said, in fact, that it was right to
do so.

Mr. AIKIN said the notice spoken of in the proceedings
was not to be given to individuals but to the public.
Mr. BOLD added that it was intended to post it up in each
shed.

Mr. AIKIN, in continuation, said it would be much better
to give public notice. The public was not to complain if any
accident happened, and come to the committee for compen-
sation, and say, they took the property into the possession of
the Dock Trustees, and thought they would be all safe, we
had no notice. The notice, therefore, ought to be public.
The CH A IRMAN.—And also in the sheds.
Mr. AIKIN understood that was ordered at the last
meeting. _ _

Mr. RVANs considered that the property would never come
into the hands of the committee, except where they did not
know the proprietors, or scarcely ever. Notice could not
be given to individuals if they did not know them. What-
ever got into their hands would be a kind of derelict—that
was nobody's.

Mr. AIKIN replied that if property was derelict, it was the
duty of the committee to protect it for the party to whom it
belonged. He would rather the committee should be in the
position of the customs, who had a lock for the sake of the
duty. The committee should have a lock upon the goods
for the sake of the dues. They did not take the manage-
ment of them, but kept possession for the dues.
The CHAIRMAN read the resolution agreed to at the last
meeting, which was to the effect stated by Mr. Barclay.
Mr. EVANS thought that Mr. Aikin had opened up an
analogy between the committee and the customs which was
excellent, and he should say it ought to be the law of the
committee as well as the law of the customs. The customs
were not liable.

Mr. HORSFALL was of opinion that a public notice would
be sufficient, but not to individuals.

The CHAIRMAN also thought that individual notices
would be most objectionable.
Mr. TOBIN suggested that besides putting up the notice in
the sheds, it should be advertised in all the Liverpool papers
and also in the London Gazette.

Mr. EVANS observed that even if the committee did not
give public notice, their non-liability of the committee would
be borne out by the act of Parliament.

The conversation on this snbject now dropped, It being
understood that public notice only would be given.
On the reeommendation of the Sub-Committee for the de-
partment of the Harbour Masters the sum of £24 was or-
dered to be paid to the South Harbour Master for expenses
of car-hire during the last year: and further aat the sum of
£2O per annum be allowed to him for his car-hire upon ex-
traordinary occasions.

The allowance to John Roberts, superannuated dock-gate-
man of 15s. per week was ordered to be continued to him
for three months longer, in consideration of twenty-nine
years faithful service.
A report was read from the North Harbour Master on
the subject of the damage done by the American ship George
Stephens to the shed on the quay of Clarence basin, as men-
tioned in our last; and it appearing that the damage was
caused by an accidental breaking of the ropes owing to a
sudden squall, the amount claimed from the Captain be re-
mitted.

A letter was read from Mr. Edward Chaloner, in reply to
a communication addressed to him, on the part of the com-
mittee, remonstrating with him for having appropriated part
of the sheds rented by him, from the committee, for the
storing of mahogany, to the warehousing of cotton. 'Mr.
Chaloner's explanation was of great length. It was to
the effect, that he had expended upwards of £3,300 upon
the shed, and when he took the premises in 1838 for
seven years, at a rent of £4BO per annum, he had
no idea of any alteration in the duties on mahogany by
which the trade would be diverted into other channels. The
consumption of it, now, too was so great that the stock
could not accumulate, and under thesecircumstances he con-
sidered that there would be no objection to his devoting a
part only of the premises to other uses especially as there was
still ample space for whatever mahogany might come in.—
A long discussion followed upon the subject in which Mr.
Bramley Moore, Mr. Gray, Mr. Aikin, Mr. Tobin, Mr.
Shand, and Mr. Horsfall took part, at the end of which Mr.
Chaloner's letter was referred to the Committee of Works,
the Surveyor in the mean time to inspect the actual state of
the sheds and report thereon to the general committee next
Thursday.

This being the whole of the general business the parties
retired, but the Committee sat a short time longer in finan-
cial matters.