The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1851-04-22 00:00:00

TOWN COUNCIL PROCEEDINGS.

Yesterday, a special meeting of the Council was held at
the Town•hall, to take into consideration and determine
upon :-Ist. The Liverpool Dock Bill (alteration of
management, &c.,) as altered by the Committee of the
House of Commons, and the course to be pursued, with
reference to that bill, in its subsequent stages.-2nd.
The Mayor's communications.

JOHN BENT, Esq., the Mayor, presided, and there was
a very full attendance. A copy of the new bill lay before
each member.

Mr. Thomsosr, before the commencement of proceed-
ings, moved that the Council should be adjourned for two
days, to afford time for a town's meeting on the subject ;
but the motion was not seconded, and fell to the ground.
Mr. HORNBY then rose. He said, as one of the com-
mittee sent to oppose this bill in parliament, perhaps it
might be expected that he should bring forward some re-
solution in accordance with the views of the deputation.
He believed that in the resolution which it was his in-
tention to propose, he expressed their unanimous opinion.
He was quite aware there was little or no difference in that
Council with respect to the alteration in the constitution
of the Dock Committee which was proposed in the bill.
He believed that, with one or two exceptions, they
unanimously preferred the present constitution of the
Dock Committee to that suggested. For his part he was
fully persuaded that if any alteration had to take place in
the trust, the prosperity of that trust would be better con-
sulted by giving to the Council even a larger power than
they now possess over that estate. (Hear, and applause.)
But thiswasnet what they had now to decide. This question
had been under the consideration of a higher tribunal,and a
committee of the House of Commons had already given
its sanction to the bill, copies of which lay before the
Council; and the only question was, whether they should
continue their opposition to the bill in its remaining stages
through parliament. Now this was a question which in-
volved a considerable outlay of the public money under
their management, not only of the funds of that Corpora-
tion but of the dock estate ;• and, therefore, it behoved
them to go into the consideration• of it calmly and dispas-
sionately. What was the alteration proposed to be made
in the trust ? Instead of 13 members of the Dock Com-
mittee being appointed by the Council and 8 by the dock
ratepayers, it was proposed that each-of these constituencies
should send twelve members into the Dock Committee.
Instead of the chairman of that committee being chosen
by the council, ho was in future to be-elected by the com-
mittee itself, but out of the members sent down from that
room. The veto remained precisely thesarne as at present
(hear, hear) ; and with the exception of the change in
the committee to which he had referred, the trust of the
council remained in every respect untouched. Now he
must say, that if the committee of the House of Com-
mons had come to the determination of passing the
preamble of this bill, be thought it impossible that they
could have made a slighter alteration, or one less pre-
judicial, in the constitution of the Dock Committee, than
that which they had made ; and he must aske should they
t be exercising a sound discretion—should they be acting
the part of wise and prudent men, if they- sanctioned
proceeding with an opposition—a doubtful apposition—to
this bill, and the outlay of a very large amount of the
public money, for the purpose of opposing. so slight a
change ? (Hear, hear). In his opinion this change was
one, practically speaking, which would be scarcely felt.
They should still obtain a majority upon the committee,
inasmuch as the chairman must always he chosen
from the members sent down by the Council, and he
would. have not anly the casting vote, but from his
position must exercise a greater influence over the com-
mittee than any other member. (Hear, hear). But
there was another more important question—had they a
rational prospect of defeating by opposing the ? (Hear.)
He believed it was admitted on all hands that, an the fur-
ther progress of that bill through the House of Commons,
there was n 3 hope whatever; and he asked, was it not
probable that, when a bill of that nature was submitted
to the House of Lords, th y would consider it as one
of a very moderate character, and were not likely to
throw it out. Now, noon this subject the deputation had
taken the written opinion of the various counsel employed
by the Corporation and by the Dock Committee, as
to what chance they would have in further opposing
the bill—and lawyers, he might observe, who were
as eminent and experienced in parliamentary practice as
were to be found; and they, without exception, had
strongly recommended them to abstain from all further
opposition to the bill. (Hear, hear.) Now, he (Mr.
Hornby) would ask whether. in the face of the statement
which he had just given, they should exercise a sound
discretion in increasing the enormous expense which they
would have to be at in offering further opposition. For
his own part, no one could resent more deeply the in-
dignity which had been offered to the town, both from
the manner in which the bill had been got up, and from
the nature of the evidence offered in its support ; but,
at the same time, he thought that the Council would give
the best answer to the charges made against them ef-
being incompetent to ,manage the Deck Estate by acting
on this occasion with discretion, and with that view
be should propose the following resolution :--4 The 1
Liverpool Dock Bill, as altered in the Committee
of the House of Commons, having been considered,
resolved, that considering the slight practical amount
of alteration thereby made in the existing law, in
relation to the constitution of the committee for the affairs
of the estate of the trustees of the Liverpool Docks. and
that the trustees will continue to have, by the exercise of
the veto, the same control over the proceedings of the
Dock Committee which they now possess, it is not desi-
rable to offer further opposition to the bill ; but that the
Finance Committee be instructed to watch its further
progress, in order to see that no alteration be made
therein affecting the rights of the trustee:,-and of the
Corporation."
Mr. Alderman JonN HOLMES seconded the motion.

Mr. HALL asked if the motion was intended to preclude
any alteration in the clauses of the bill, and
The Tows CLERIC answered in the negative. He said,
that in going carefully over the bill, some verbal altera-
tions would be necessary.
The following phrase was subsequently, added to the
resolution :—" And for making such alterations in the
clauses as are found to be desirable and necessary."
Mr. FaEME rose to move an amendment, which he did
in a lengthy speech. He characterised the bill as a "bill
of pains and penalties." He had all his life, he said,
been a Reformer, but he was always opposed to constitu-
tional changes, except to achieve some positive good or
correct some acknowledged abuse, and taking this view of
the case, he asked what chare.e could be brought against
the Corporation in their management of the dock estate?
(Hear.) If they looked at the progress of the docks and the
way in which they had been managed hitherto, they
might congratulate themselves that there had been no
instance of injustice or of jobbery ; no charge could be
brought of malversation of any kind against the members
of the Dock. Committee who had bean sent there by the
Corporation ; and if no charge could be brought against
them, upon what ground was this change to be made ?
The only charge was, that the Council did join with the
parishioners of Liverpool, with their aimost univer-
sally expressed wish, to get a clause in an act of
parliament subjecting the dock estate to parochial rates.
Now, this was merely a question proposed to be submitted
to parliament ; whatever the Corporation had done was
done fairly before the public, and was a fair question for.
debate ; and he (Mr. Freme) was there to assert his
opinion that there was no class of property but had. its
duties to perform to the sick, the aged, and the necessi-
tous poor. (Applause). But that call had now died
away to a whisper, and he believed that all parties
were willing that the question, should be held in abeyance
Other charges, however. had been whispered, though not
expressed,—that that Council, by its constitution, had
become an unfit body to manage this great mercantile
estate • but he thought such an accusation came with
very bad grace from gentlemen whose names.were so
highly honoured as having been the great promoters
of municipial reform. (Hear, and applause,)—that
they had been the first to infringe it and to narrow its
functions. They had always been taught in language
that sounded like household words, that " the voice of
the people was the voice of God ;" that the welfare of the
people was the supreme law ;—(laughter)—and the de-
parture
n
these
our e i fromnature.ha
suchsentimentsierand laughter.)
seemed u
almostn
anoutrage t
they might appeal to the past if the Council had not been
stimulated by a strong desire for the economical manage-
ment of the Dock Estate ; and he asked if the gentle-
men sent from that Council to the Dock Committee, in
the most unfavourable view, would not bear comparison
with those sent by the dock ratepayers ? They were
gentlemen who had fixed property in the town, who could
not run away at a moment's notice, whose interests were
identified with the prosperity of the place, and there-
fore we had the greatest:security that they would do their
duty for the general benefit of the community. Although
they might feel, and did feel,, the absence of some
gentlemen who shed a lustre in the Council Chamber,
there was a great moral to be learned from that exclusion
which ought not to have been followed with a bill like
that. The bill was not in the name of the Town-clerk

nor of the Dock-solicitor, but in that of aCKerae-P1:
ties ; and it was galling and humiliating to the Council
in the highest degree. Although they regretted that they
had not in that room now the impassioned eloquence of a
Rathbone, still that gentleman and others had, on, a late
occasion, flown in the face of public opinion, and the
public had taken the only means which they had of show-
ing their disapprobation, that of choosing other gentlemen
in their stead. But was this a ground that they should
have such a bill as this, which implied a malversation of
trust, and why the Commons house of Parliament should
be called upon to interfere with the charter of municipal
reform, and denude the representatives of our bur-
gesses of an important trust ? He thought that in prac-
tice the change enforced in the bill would be a bad ar-
rangement ; the members being so equal in number upon
the Dock Committee, the Council would often be called
upon for its veto, and this would destroy that cordiality
and harmony which should exist between each depart-
ment of the Corporation. Upon these grounds he
thought that they had no right to surrender. If they
were called upon to yield to destiny or a power which they
could not control, they must submit ; but if they yielded
to less than that, he thought they should betray their
trust. (Applause.) Let them be able to apply to them-
selves the couplet—
" Good men struggling with the storms of fate,
And greatly falling with the falling state."
He begged to move, as an amendment, that a petition
should be pruen•ed from the Council to the House of
Commons, to which the Corporation seal should be
attached, against the third reading of the bill.
Mr. Fv.rrstnotrott seconded the motion.
Mr. ROBINSON said, although they were not in the
same favourable position as they were in when the depu-
tation went up to London, still he would have them bear
in mind that they had gone up as defendants ; and after
the plaintiffs had gone into their evidence—which was the
most, poor, weak, and imbecile, certainly that had ever
been submitted—the legal advisers of the Corporation had
thought it better not to bring their evidence forward.
Now, whit did the evidence amount to ? That what

was asked was simply returning to the structure
of the bill on which it was intended to frame
the constitution of the Dock Trust in 1835 ; a
mere milk-and-water arrangement. The committee had
thought it so trifling, that the people of Liverpool would
accept it by way of putting an end to the divisions of the
place ; and the committee, he dared to say, thought that
their suggestions would meet the unanimous approval of
all parties. He considered that the American Chamber
of Commerce, the ex-aldermen and councillors had sus-
tained a signal and complete defeat ; that the Council
had lost nothing, for they had retained the power which
they possessed, to veto the proceedi, gs and otherwise
control the Dock Estate. Then it must be borne in mind
that since the present constitution of the Dock Committee
had been adopted, the dock business had been greatly ex-
tended, and it might be desirable to lighten the labonr of
members by enlarging the hoard. He could see no
harm in the admission of three or four extra ratepayers;
for he was sure when members took their seat at the
committee, they did not consider whether they were sent
there by the Council or the ratepayers, but united in
what they thought desirable for the estate. He thought
that the Council would be acting wisely in adopting the
new arrangement.
Mr. HALL would like to call the attention of the Council
to the position in which they would be if they proceeded
with the opposition. The alterations in the trust suggested
by the committee of the House of Commons were, as
nearly as possible, similar to those whiclr had emanated
from the Finance Committee. (Loud cries of " Hear,
hear.") Therefore, unless they were prepared to ignore
those proceedings of the Finance Committee, and state
that they had acted without any authority whatever, he
thought that they should come before Parliament with a
bad grace. He thought that the proposed arrangement
would create dissentions rather than produce concord. It
was an insult to the town of Liverpool, and he was sorry
that if should have emanated from such a source.

Mr. A. F. JONES considered the hill a very impudent
attack upon the rights of the town, and that there
was no justification for it.• It should have his most
strenuous opposition. (Applause.) Mr. Jones twitted
Mr. Samuel Holme with having given way in his oppo.
sition, after the assurance which he had given at a late
meeting, that he should nail his colours to the mast.

Mr. kraus:it at some length supported the amendment..
He commented upon Mr. Nicol's statement in Loudon,.
that "'he did not know Mr. Greaser)," who had done so
much•to benefit the trade of the port. It was a disgrace
to him (Mr. Fisher said) to utter- words which he could
scarcely think to be true. Mr. Fisher then proceeded to
explain the reasons that he had voted for Mr. Henderson
in preference to Mr. Nicol, as chairman of the Dock
Committee ; and stated that he had himself suffered, in a
pecuniary way, fram the deputy chairmanship of Mr.
Nicol.

Mr. FERGUSON thought that they had reason to blame
themselves for the false position in which they were placed.
Why was not the bill defeated upon its second reading
He had no hesitation in saying that if the deputation from
the Council had been asactive as the otherparty,they would
have succeeded as well. What would be theresult i f they now
adopted the policy recommended by Mr. Hornby ? They
should bring.upon themselves the contempt of their con-
stituents, and, they should lose also the confidence of the
bondholders, who had lent their money upon the faith of
the Ccuncil, not of the dock ratepayers. He hoped that
each member, on goingto the vote, would think what his
constituents might say. It was a serious thing to vote
away the rights of the burgesses, and he, for his part,
would never consent to it.

Mr. BENNETT supported the amendment, and asked
the Town-clerk-if it would involve much expenditure ?
The TOWN•CLERK said Mr. Freme's amendmen t did
not authorise them to follow the bill into the House of
Lords.

Mr. BIGITAM said it would be followed up by other
amendments. It was merely put forward as a, trial of
strength.

In answer to a question from Mr. CHALMER,
The TOWN-CLERIC gave it as his opinion that it would
not be necessary to take the bill that day and Consider it
clause by clause. _ _

Mr. THOPISON asked what were the instructions given
by the Finance Committee to the Parliamentary Commit-
tee ? (The resolution appoining them was read, and they
had been instructed, it appeared, to offer the most
strenuous opposition to the bill.) Mr. Thomson quoted
from the speeches of Mr. Hornby and Mr. Holtne at
the late meeting of the Council, and said he was sorry
that they did not adhere to the sentiments which
they then uttered. Five members of parliament consti-
tuted the committee of the House of Commons, and they
had declared by a majority. of one only, the preamble of
the bill of the American Chamber of Commerce to be
carried. lie asked how many counsel had been employed
altogether ? [The TOWN-CLERK said four on behalf
of the corporation,—Seven altogether.] Now (con-
tinued Mr Thompson) there was no charge against the
trustees. The reductions of dock rates had been as
follows :---1836, 381 per cent. ; 1844. 38 per cent. on
East India. rates ; and in 1848 £40,000. Did
they call that bad management on the part of the
trustees ? He should say it' was first-rate. Everything
was done for the benefit of merchants, and yet they
did not know what they wanted. (Laughter.) He thought
that the fight would never have taken place for the ad-
vantage of having four additional ratepayers on the com-
mittee • but the ultimate design was to get rid of the
town dues. (Hear, hear.) He thought that the rate-
payers should have a public meeting in reference to the
bill. Tt was no use in going to the House of Lords, if
they were to be backed in that:room merely, by- a majority
of five or six.

Mr. GztEGSON was reluctant to occupy the time of the
Council, but wished to make a few remarks, it was
stated that the parties in London were so satisfied with
the evidence for the bill, that it was not deemed necessary
to call for the counter evidence ; and three members out
of a committee of five decided that the preamble had been
proved. Now, he thought, that in common law, under
such circumstances, they, would have good grounds in
going for a new trial, on the ground that the verdict of
the jury was contrary to the evidence. (Hear, hear, and
applause.) He thought that if the constitution of the
Dock Committee were altered, it would materially affect
the interests of the bondholders, for there would then be
upon the committee from nineteen to twenty merchants,
whose. interest would be solely to lower, the rates,
and to keep them as low as possible. (Hear, hear.)
If they once destroyed the confidence of the bondholders,
the eXect upon the docks would be ruinous. Only imagine
fora moment that the dock bondholders should take the
alarm, that no money could be raised, and where would
be the position of the docks? (Hear.) They could not
ask.the American Chamber of Commerce to supply the
money,; it must come from the public and the confidence
which they had in the> trustees. They should consider
that at the present time they had an enormous debt
upon the docks. The debt at the present time was
£4,6001,000, and by the ,time that the new works were
completed, it would amount to £5,300,000. They
should also remember that £2,000.000 had been spent
upon the Birkenhead Docks. These ware debts upon
the port, and could not properly be looked upon
as a separate interest, for they must draw their revenues
from the same source • and thus they should have a debt
in a short time of £7,00,000. (Hear.) Ho considered,
that to meet the expense of working the. docks, and to
meet the interest of that, we should require Nearly a
double amount of chipping to what we have. And could
any one suppose, that in any moderate time, the shipping
would extend to that amount ? They must be very
sanguine if they, did so. If the rates should, by any
means, be lowered so as to endanger at all the payment
of interest to the bondholders, he thought it would be
most ruinous ;, and it would be almost right in the
Council, to protect the bondholders, to have a clause put in
the bill that a certain surplus amount should be kept year
by year for the payment of the bonded debt. If there
was a sinking fund of £40,000 a year, it would take 100
years to pay off that debt. It had been stated that the
docks were the property of the public. That could not
be so while the bondholders had such an enormous claim
upon them., He should support the amendment, for he
thought they had fair grounds for going to Parliament.
(Applause.)
Mr. S. HOLME, in an eloquent speech, defended himself
from the imputations which had been cast upon nim. He
was fully of opinion that no ease had been made out for
depriving the Council of their veto upen the Dock Com-
mittee proceedings ; and, with one exceptional instance,
perhaps there never was an estate which had been better
managed than the Dock Trust by the members sent down
from the Council. Their, conduct had been unexception-
able ; and he tlfought it desirable, that in a body engaged
in the carrying out of great public works, there should be
a sprinkling of practical men whose judgements would
be of importance. But the question which the Council
were now called upon to consider resolved itself into
one of prudence ; and having been in the midst of
the fight, and having nailed his colours to. the mast,
which gentlemen present could testify that he did
during the whole course of the fight, he had been most
unwillingly and against conviction compelled to bow to a
superior power. He had seen how different their position
was in London to what it was in Liverpool ; and he felt
satisfied that everything was done which the deputation
could do. They had been defeated by an adverse vote of
a committee of the House of Commons ; and he was sure
that if the bill went to a third reading, many liberal
members would throw their 'liberal professions to
the wind, and take that opportunity, at the expense of
Liverpool, of benefiting the manufacturing districts. Mr.
Holme then argued that the bill was not so objectionable
or hurtful as it might appear, and the American Chamber
of Commerce were disappointed with their success. Their
object was to wrest the entire controul of the docks out
of the hands of the Council, and as they had not succeeded
in doing so, the trustees had so far achieved a triumph.
He afterwards replied to Mr. Freme and Mr. Fisher.
He did not wish to protract the proceedings. The depu-
tation had fought to the very last, but the ship had gone
down, and, of course, her colours with her. (Cries of
" No, no.") As far as their fight in the House
of Commons was concerned, they might depend upon
it that such was the case. Whether, with all which
they had heard of economy, it would be prudent
in them to go on any further, teeing lawyers to the
tune of 120 guineas a day, (for they would have the
expenses of the adverse party also to pay,) and whether
they might not peril the power which they already pos-
sessed, by taking proceedings in the House of Lords,
he would not give an opinion ; but he knew it was the
opinion of eminent lawyers that, their opposition would
damage and not better them.
Mr. BIGLIANI next spoke. He attributed the adverse
decision of the House of Commons to the compromise
which the Finance Committee had offered. He asked if
there was any trustee in that room could take the
, responsibility of handing over the dock estate, and all its
rights and interests, into the hands of New York mer-
chants ? If they went to the House of Lords, it was a fact
that there were from forty to fifty of the first merchants
in Liverpool prepared to give evidence in their favour.
Mr. Avisoss showed that it would be quite useless to
petition the limo of Commons on the third reading of

April 2, OU

it 0
a private bill, unless they also took other step sec 0
prejudice them in the upper house if they ded 10
going there. peeeb'
Mr. J. A. TOBIN, in a lengthy and very able g•.• tea
then addressed the Council. How could they bed eLejo
when their opponents had lost that only which they
fibit
desirous to obtain, the removal of the veto? vitsti
must they attribute the change which the parliamflloo
committee had agreed to. It was neither the evidethe
offered by the American Chamber of Commerce•
tye
compromise suggested (without prejudice) bY.,,,61
Finance Committee, nor the allegation that the o'so
had abused its trust. What then had led the cowl y
to the resolution equalising the number of member' o<
did not hesitate to say that it was the recommee°a;;;(l ttl
Mr. Huskisson in 1825. Mr. Tobin then Precee,_,Lid be
shew that on the principle that representation tent"
coeval with taxation, the project had often been toe
tained of increasing the number epaye of t rs'ul"
ra
Dock Committee, and that in fact a special COraCTw'A re.
Council who had considered the subject in 1836 Pa' fit
ported in favour of exactly such an arrangement
now embodied in the bill. nlgla

Alderman PARKER, in supporting the motion,
a very humorous speech. aoa
Mr. HODSON spoke in favour of the amendment' the
said that all our leading merchants were oppose,' ciegi
proposed change, and those only in favour of it wh°
agents, and dealt merely with goods in Iran:Mi. rtioo,
Mr. TYRER said that was a most extravagant We' d
• hths
At a very large meeting of shipowners, seven-elg
them had voted for aresolution in favour of the altered the
Then the China and East Indian, the Canadian an beg
C
African associations were all with the American ,ha,,Tett/
of Commerce in the matter. The Council had 11"htit
complain of their defeat ; and he (Mr. Tyrer) thong(' tile
would be better to put up with it, because he ha
authority of gentlemen whom he had heard szl'aio
should the bill not pass, they would go the nexo
for another bill. (" Oh, oh.")
Alderman COOPER was in favour of the motion. the
Ald. BRAMLEY-MOORS enforced, with fresh facto'' 900
view taken by Mr. Tobin. The dock ratepaYera ftlif
eight members to the committee when the tonnage 001201
port was only 1,200,000 tons;: and now that the snlioulcl
was 3,600,000, it was not unreasonable that they bit
send twelve members. He concluded by stating 9fl
belief that he should best be promoting the in° tilt
of Liverpool and of the dock estate by supporting efe
motion of Mr. Hornby, for he believed if this bill 1:1,00
passed, it would set at rest a question which lisagor
rite to a deal of acrimonious feeling, (dock rating,) -
which they would probably never hear of again. ~„est
Mr. FERNTHOUGH spoke in favour of the amenu.'ta,
In-concluding he said he thought there was no OPPvieg.
nity like the present to denounce a' want of moral I
etig
titude and right. He thought that when a manb of
traitor 0
his country or his town that man or 01
menshould be denounced ; and the real origin of thl,scer
arose from a feeling of revenge, from the exclusion el bl?
tain individuals from the Council Chamber. And 'l4O
because they had set at defiance the public 1"001
and would not reflect the views- entertained)
of doors. He (Mr.. Fernihougb) regretted as a lihera,,,bli
he had followed men by whom he had been so inise:fol
deceived,—men who had used the term Liheralio'oe
their own personal ambition. He regretted to seehjel
whose grays head should be a crown of,giory, but I/
was to him only a covering of disgrace.
Ald. BRAMLEY-MOORS : Shame, shame ! .tigigt
The MAYOR (indignantly interrupting): You are
strong language; I cannot allow you to proceed. d like
for what oo,nt.i—mWayhahtahvaevseaild said
wrong.? I s
itehoup;ohostit.
to Mr.
apologiseF
ERlqo
The MATort.—No, I have said sufficient when
told you that you were out of order.
„1
Mr. FERNIDOUGIL—Then, unless I am told lihiejttlr
have transgressed in, I cannot proceed. (Mr. Ferni
then sat down.)
Alderman DOVER then rose, and in severe terms „
demned the deputation for having had a leaning "(110
matter, in not offering more energetic opposition °Ad,
bill. He was not going to use the vulgar parlancialola,
say that the Council had' been " sold ;" but tbialle,,,
say, whether he should offend or not, that the batt"
not been fought as a battle ought to be fought.
led 00
After some further discussion Mr. llornby rePl
,u-,llb/a
the Council divided. when the amendment was of ,
majority of 29'to 28. The following is an analysis, gel'
division :—Far' the amendment : Councillors S. pegs
lor, J. Thomson, J. Bighorn, J. Woodruff, T L. Pry O•
J. Atkinson. W. Nicholson, J. Briscoe, T. G_ed!,r,W,
11 Holden, J. Ferguson, J. C. Fernihough, J.' -'64.5.
Fleming, A. F. Jones, R. C. Gardner, J. Johnson.
Freme, J. Nicholson, A. Henderson, E. C. IlinduiL'ill!
Fisher, T. Lloyd, W. Gregson ; Aldermen w•
W. Preston, T. Dover, E. Molyneux : total, 28. le.
Councillors IL Aged, T. Chalmer
J Sen., T. Littleda,
Tyrer, H. Hornby, T. Avison, J. Gladstone, .I,.,Violgit
Toulmin, W. P. Jeffreys, T. Wagstaff, W. A.
J. A. Tobin, B. Hall, J. A. Picton, J. B. LloY°oDaegg'
Wood, W. J. Horsfall, S. Holme ; Aldermen E•bioson'
dale, J. Holmes, J, Lawrence, J. Parker, T. a°,,,,reert
J. Cooper. J. N. Wood, J. Bramley-Moore, J.
T. Chilton. The Mayor : total, 29.
ciiTand
jeoourringeindaal
fmteortaiosnitwtiansgtohfenthargereeehdou;
rtso
aanndd
atle half.
fotr

The Bankruptcy Courts were closed yesterdaY ape '-
day. They will re-open to-morrow. 004
More than four thousand persons left London on
Friday by the cheap-excursion trains. ?Ist'
Bartholomew Harrington, who was sentenced to f t-
portation for life, at the last Plyrnou,h assizes, fa
./
manslaughter of William Ambrose, has made a full
,cO.
fession. He wasprosent but did not strike ;:he fatal-7,0,4 re
The screw steam-ship Arno, Capt. Harem, areises- IV
on Sunday morning, from Marseilles and Gibraltar,' plea
passage from the former port was accomplished in belt
days and a half, and from Gibraltar in five and a 0 Sec.
This beautiful vessel has made the shortest' Paa°l4
'ol6° achieved out and home.
r u i sfeci
INCIDENT& OY THE CENSUS.—The to[h.oW-Ilg ,1390
of womanly assumption was given in one of the 7tsas:
returns not a hundred miles from College-street, P°0000;
" Jane wife, head of the family, manglingctoaie
John2,_husband,. turns my mangle.
,_...pee ,
oi
Times.
CHEAP TELPS.—The return of the festive sesslrr
Easter and the delightful weather combine to reetroall
fitable the arrangements of the different railway ee'horarill
for the cheap excursions of the middle and 19%01
classes of the manufacturing districts. On the a'gitir's
of Good Friday, an immense number of persons: rojoa,°b,
in this town, availed themselves of the a.ceemsa 60° di
offered by the Lancashire and Yorkshire to 1464 a 111.",
port and Manchester; still greater numbers ca. n',.;ter°7
lwnigalt
,cwgsiohinssiiri eetusdr eaafheacc,lrliod,asneasfindttdh,
the latter town and its vicinity on Saturday one Y-1,8 la"'
Ail t tb°
to refrzsh themselves with the sea breezes. ~,,:, to
nufacturing towns have contributed more or l'—
I'
general stream of pleasure-seekers.
h Sessi 10
ATTEMPT TO BRIBE A PROSECUTOR.--At the it Jo t,
last week the Recorder sentenced two men 011.eatillet
and Christopher O'Hare to eight months' imPr,"l:, der
with hard labour, for attempting to bribe a clot'-'OOl6l/
from Ireland, named Conley, not to prosecute an
tunate girl named Smith, who had robbed him °_,L to biro
sovereigns, no part of which bad been restoreut to gllO
The prisoners offered the prosecutor £8 or X9,13,°d of:d
his evidence, and they went together to a frier t° ro 'l',
prosecutor'sto•deposit the money, but he refuse the Pros ;
anything to do with it. A sovereign was paid t°risollelb.
atbtdtsineoiheeaexernnacothtcouah
rcaunsti
rdt,
obeseeewhpnenelafl,dtle
special
idafori
eelirnwplefii
iwhich,intht.
interposition
hpboeus
most
t iofoosntr
owillaPtroavPidPeaenrsce, reightsal
secutor, which he afterwards returned to the ar;„a to '
and, failing to obtain any more money, he apP""
106 k
police. Itig lel
THE FALLING OF A BELL.—On Sunday even ,
heart-rending circuinia; 06
nothil WI
'tsh this Church,.churc church amse openedil iLimekiln-lane.
an
bye. tb.l;/#lo'
dAitolhcbaeatsne in June last. The architect vit'ssPii4
St.
At the north end of the church is 648'
bell
liochf ,aabtouant
aalttoitnudweeiogfhtaboußtenfoearttt Ywregbel::
"bßAowt
hartracsetssuhitbr°PeueelPerdaeiwt;lSl recollected
hil
nasnet suspended is the ent r a n c e for the coilg,, .0 0 6
tion, and below this a cellar. On the level with theot tbt.
entrance
tnraeanrcleydsooo,
risofthwehgicrhouna dshfiorotorei ogfhtthoef
sctlieuprscihe,adcr,
o,:Vcii
gallery. Above this, in the spire was another fiVra belj
constituted the remaining portion of the steeple viol
loft. The person ringing the bell, whilst doing sZerlro,
stand on the stairs immediately leading to the g of
~,,ti
the church. It appears, from the statenleT.secs,rot
Knaggs, the sexton, that representations of the l" 0 fee j,
of the bell have repeatedly been made, and thee tijal;;;Jo'
than five accidents have occurred to it, by reaseno'd fl;ta
vious cases, of the tongue having given waY, $ ple fI 01
out of it. The bell was suspended in the stf,r telor,
two cross-beams, to which it was affixed. a sc";1
of an iron bar, at the end of which as'Apep, -or
of something rather less than three inches "-waS ~'Ol6.
thus, passing through the beam or beams, ,h 0 0." 0'
tened by a net on the other side, so that vet be,o
length of the screw forming the support could 11°„ast,00
most, more than an inch. At a few minutes ro old
o'clock on Sunday night, as James Knaggs, the s..tire- gr-0'
grwhthohaiefethrtbehemielnletssencurrdvmeoewumnsegodcanrvianebsgehwtt,wahey'eeea,
reenrnele.:ectoo
foi
pi:
et ahhaeat
stair
peopleirth christeningea landingc eei
drweeahrissi:tzindel
I:ice:ln:et:o6 1. :
cleAleai mtar
trtneil i eyds e
bdtaiemwifnoaeryteho
for theusual evening service. Several persons ,117, the
either one minute before or after the time it did' or 0: Id
done to the church, which•
sequences must inevitably have been fatal to one 0 Ole
human lives ; arit was; the only injury done Was., JO •
hurt to the boy who had been ringing, and th:L,
' 'd able'

LIVERPOOL :
TUESDAY, APRIL 22; 1851' 0011!
PRINTED AND PUBLISHER EVERY 'EUESDA. t
'of
By JOSHUA FLETCHER LACE, of 53,GYOVegtree1,
LEONARD ADDISON, of 14, Great Orford-stir_a
ero
No. 4, ST. GEORGE'S CRESCENT,. LIVERY.'" -0t,OOO
pl eil
Orders for Advertisements received by Messrs. vieetalt,
Co., Warwick-square; Barker and Whiter Joeo
Deacon, Walbrook ; Reynell,Chancery-lane ; C,Pa.„„hileijj",'"f
Birchin-lane ; Joseph Tlionias, 1, Finch-lane, uo' CVO
den Hammond, 27, Lombard-street; Alitchell,lkot,
,101,
court, Fleet-street; Lewis and Lowe, 3, Castle-,cvnejaM4
hill; at the London Commercial Collfee-housctnter
at the Jerusalem Coffee-house, Cornhill; u'tlicoo;,lo4l.
house, Paternoster-row; North and South AlD`gaLlietef
house, Threadneedle-street ; Parsons, 9, Ave-,"•„ •,_oCrdi
London; Johnston and'Co., Eden Quay, pub triP
Exchange-street, and C. H. Lewis Market-streeo,
ter Haddock, and J. and W. Bocith, Bookselleft
tong; Clarke, Pilot-office, Preston; and Wriliaticl,
Herald-office, Birmingham; Harthill aid F•gi•
Prince's-square, Buchaaan-street, Glasgow. 1-,,‘
BIRKENHEAD: TODHUNTER, Chester-streets .00
PINKNEY, Argyle-street; OSRORNE, Chester-P•
GaIFFITH, Hantilton-street.
Tr,

ANNUAL SUBSCRIPTION.
IN APYANet........ M. I OW Citapite 0*