The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1833-11-26 00:00:00

THE LIVERPOOL STANDARD,

LIVERPOOL CORPORA7ION INQUIRY.

SEVENTELISTH DAY.

This morning (.Friday) the labours of the investigation were
resumed. .The Commissioners took their seats upon the bench
shortly after ten o'clock.
- The Town-Clerk- banded in the petition to the Common
Council (alluded.to by Mr. James Malieneux yesterday) from
the churchwardens and a portion of the congregation of St,
Michael's Church, complaining of the appointment of the Rev.
"1-hoinas.Johnson, and recommending the Rev William God-
dard as a successor to the Rev. Mr. Asyinall.
Mr. Radcliffe, the Solicitor, in allusion to the petition which
was read by the Town-Clerk, said that St. Michael's Church
a parish church, and on its being. given up to
was originally
the Corporation, there was a stipulation that 700 sittings should
he reserved for the accommodation of the poor. During the
ministry of Mr. Aspivall these sittings were crowded. • The
other pews-were also all taken, and the churchwarden, Mr.
Lawrence, had great difficulty in getting one for himself.
Since the appointment of Mr. Johnson, the seats of the poor
were comparatively deserted, and thirty-nine of the other pews
at least were now empty. Another minister, however, had
lately been appointed, Who had a voice capable of being heard
in that church, which Mr. Johnson -had not. The Rev. Mr.
Goddard did not come forward as a candidate, as he had little
prospect of success. The petition of the churchwardens was
treated in cbuversation with Mr. Lawrence, by Mr. Alderman
Peter Bourne, as an act of dictation on the part of the congre-
gation.
Mr. Lawrence, one of the churchwardens who signed the pe-
tition, confirmed the statement of Mr. Radcliffe.
Mr. James Mulleneux, in having brought forward this affair
to the notice of the commissioners, disclaimed any hostile feel-
ing towards the Rev. Mr. Johnson, whom, he stated, he most
highly respected; but the manner in which the Corporation dis-
pensed their patronage he thought was inimical to the interests
of the church congregation.
. Mr. W. 13ushby, one of the late churchwardens of the church,
in answer to an inquiry from the Town-clerk, stated, that pre-
vious to Mr. Johnson's appointment to Sit. Michael's, he was
the curate of St. Nicholas's, in which situation he was univer-
sally:respected by the congregation. He was a most zealous
visitor of the poor, and both rich and poor held him iu high
esteem.

Mr. Lawrence and Mr. Mulleneua agreed with Mr. Bushby
that the personal character of the Rev. Mr. Johnson stood very
high.
Mr. Dutton, one of the congregation of St. Michael's Church,
said there were many complaints of Mr. Johnson being inaudi-
ble, and, although not dull of apprehension or hearing, lie never
heard a sermon in his life that he could make anything of. (A
laugh.) Whitt he meant was, that he could not hear Mr. John-
son s sermons so 'as to understand them.
Mr. Commissioner Wilkinson asked the witness if be also
entertained a high respect for Mr. Johnson's personal charac-
ter ? •

Witness.-4 do., sir; I have done work for Mr. Johnson, and
he always treated me as a gentleman. (A laugh.)
The court, noW resumed the inquiry into the affairs of the
Dock Estate.

Mr. Edward Crook examined.—ls a merchant of Liverpool,
but not a burgess. The Clarence Dock is for steam-vessels.
They are better able to stop their way than other vessels. (A
laugh.) I wish. you to take a note of that. (Loud laughter.)
Its the best regulated dock of any, in my opinion. The new
docks I know nothing about, as they would not let me in. Af-
ter giving some other particulars of no moment, Mr. Crook
said he " wished to address himself to the George's Parade."
(A laugh.) The steam-boats have all their own ,way at the
pierhead. (A laugh.) The small boats have no place to lie
in, and are hardly allowed to ply for passengers. Yesterday,
I saw the Britannia go into George's Dock Basin. She struck
against the pier with her cat-head, and drove one of the stones
in four inches, just as a paviour would do. (A laugh.) This
is a proof that the docks are not built with proper solidity. They
don't treat ships with civility at the docks. (A laugh.) I don't
think it is necessary for me to say anything more to prove that
the docks are not taken care of as they should be. (Laughter.)
The,yessels are allowed to run in confusion against themselves.
(A laugh.) After reciting a great many instances of_ neglect
and confusion in support of his opinions, he concluded by say-
ing, "All I have to say on the subject is, that things are not
carried on as they ought to."
Cross-examined by Mr. J. C. Morrall.—Ships are under the
command of pilots until they come within the basins, but I think
they should not be. It would tend more to prevent accidents if
they were under the charge of the Dock Committee.
Mr. Radcliffe stated that the boatmen who plied upon the ri-
ver had complaints to make in consequence of their not being
allowed to land goods and passengers at Woodside, they having
received notice from the proprietors and tenants of the land,
prohibiting them from so doing.
John Wardleworth, a •boatman, here came forward to be
examined respecting the want of accommodation for small
craft in the river. In the number of grievances to which the
boatmen were subject was the annoyance the small boats ex-
perienced from what he termed the Ball-jumper of Eastham,
which, he explained, was a boat that carried bulls and other
animals from Eastham. Had received a notice from Mr. F.
R. Price, the proprietor of the land at Woodside, and from Mr.
Williams, the tenant, prohibiting him and other boatmen from
landing goods or passengers. There was, originally, an ancient
ferry to Woodside, to which the boatmen had resorted from
time immemorial. Mr. Williams had built a new quay, having
pulled down the old one. He had a toll-gate placed on the quay,
through which he prevented the boatmen from passing their
passengers.
By the Town-clerk.—Mr. Williams did not always prevent
them from going through the gate, but did as he liked, like
other big men. (Laughter.) He prevents boatmen from land-
ing on the
He has another gate, which all passengers must
_pass through,
even if they were landed on the beach. lie (witness)
thought there shouhrbe a dock for the small boats between the
Salthouse and the Dry Docks.
Mr. Rosson,,the barrister, here rose and begged to make a
suggestion in reference to the inconveniences brought under
the notice of the commissioners by Mr. Cook. It appeared by
the 51st Geo. 111. cap. 143, sec. 82, the Dock Trustees had
power to appoint sufficient officers for the management and
regulation of the docks. He wished to make a suggestion for
improving the polic.e of the docks. He thought the line of
clocks should be divided into three districts,..ancl7that assistant
hat hour-masters should he appointed—lieutenants of the navy,
or men accustomed to command. The dock police had pri-
vates enough, but wanted officers. At the Bromrelaw, at Glas-
gow, there were two such officers, who compelled the steam-
boats to start punctually every half hour, as the clock strikes.
They wanted offiCers here who should take charge of ships as
soon as they came within hail, and provide proper accommo-
dation for them. He suggested, with every respect to the
Dock Committee, that they should write to Glasgow, and other
leading ports, and obtain copies of their regulations. The ar-
rangements at Glasgow, in this respect, were excellent.
Mr. Alderman Ithrsfall examined by the Town-clerk.---Is a
merchant and a shipowner extensively engaged in business.—
Was one of the audit commissioners in 1822 or 1823, who took
an active part in the proceedings which led to a change in the
Dock Trust. I wasone of the sub-committee for arranging vari-
ous clauses then under discussion. The fullest opportunity. was
given to both parties to discuss the clauses. My impression was,
that the audit commissioners were to have simply the power of
auditing the accounts, without interfering with the application
of the money. I went to London to watch the bill. Thinks
that Mr. Ilitskisson contemplated this arrangement as a final
one. As a shipowner and merchant has a considerable interest
in the good management of the Dock estate. Is also interested
as a Common Councilman. Is not conscious of any instance in
which the Dock Commitee have not acted for the benefit of the
port. Conceives the Dock estate to be exceedingly well ma-
naged; could not be better.
Examined. by. Mr. Duncan.—ln the negociations on the bill
of 1825 was one of .those who tried to get a majority of rate-
payers on the Dock Committee. The merchants twice offered
to leave the questions in the bill of 1825 to Mr. Huskisson. The
Common Council twice declined. The rates of' the London
docks are much lower than those of Liverpool. The despatch
of vessels is much more expeditious.
By Mr. W. Rathbone.—Was not chairman of Mr. Colley
'norter's committee; did not give instructions to the canvassers
to go out, nor ever gave a sixpence to any man whatever, either
in that or any other election. (Cheers.). Does net know, ex-
cept from common report, that a great deal of money was ex-
pended.
Mr. Rathbone.—Did not you desire Mr. George-Robinson to
go to Warrington to canvass?
Mr. Horstall.—l -did not interfere in anyway, as' I have
already • stated.

Mr.ttil;bone.—Was there not a connexion contemplated
between your family and that of Mr. Porter ?
Mr. 114sfall.:-.4 'shall not answer the question. I think it
impertinent. (Cries of "So it is.")
Nr. Commissioner Wilkinson said that Mr. Horsfall was not
bound to answer the question.
Mr. Horsfall stud the only objection he had to answer the
question was, than thOught it impertinent. (Cheers.)
Mr. Rathbone 'said he put the question, as Mr. Foster had
just stated that there was no family connexion.
Mr. Foster denied having stated anything of the kind.
The commissioners referred to their notes, when it appeared
that Mr. Foster had not made any such statement.
Mr. Itathbone.—lt appears I am mistaken. If I have used
any language that may have seemed impertinent in manner, I
ask Mr.- Horsfall's pardon ; but as to the matter of my question,
I think I had a right to put it.
Mr. Horsfall.-At- was not. to the manner ,but to the matter
of your question that I objected.
111 r. Rathbone would place himself in the judgment of the
commissioners whether his question was either irrelevant or
impertinent. lie' wished to ascertain whether there existed-a
family connexion. If the commissioners thought proper to
check him he would bow to their decision. •

Mr. Commissioner Wilkinson said that the question did not
strike'him as lieing either irrelevant or improper.
, Mr. RathbOne, .(to Mr. Horsfall.)—You have saved some
hundreds a year by receiving your freedom ?
Mr. Horstall.-1 have saved a considerable sum. I don't
know how much.
Mr. Rathbone.---You have given the freedom to your son ?
Mr.' Horslall.—l have; the Mayor's freedom.
Mr. Ilathbone.did not find fault with 31r..Horsfall for having
given the freedom to his son, as he thought 'it perfectly natural.
He then said that he had put the questions for the sole purpose
of showing that the grounds of admission to the freedom and
to the Common Council frequently rested on family influence.
Mr.. A. Woodward asked Mr. florsfall what advantage his
son would derive from the freedom as applied to the town dues,
he being a broker?
Mr, liorsfall replied none.
The Town-clerk called upon Mr. Alderman Bourne for a
statement of the amount of town dues paid by his firm.
Mr. Alderman Bourne stated, in reply, that, in 1814, he had
paid £1325 19s, 9d. Of town's dues on salt exported. Of that sum
£704 17s. was ott salt sent to the Prussian government, which,
it was stated the other day, he had attempted to evade the pay-
ment of. This he charged to the Pruisian government. Tile
King of Prussia did not complain of the dues being oppressive.
Had never heard complaints on the subject.
Mr. Duncan said, there had been.memorials presented to the
Common Connell, complaining of the duties on salt.
Mr. Alderman Sandbach sworn.—Was one of the audit com-
missioners. Thinks there is no better managed estate than the
Dock Trust. Is interested as a dock bond-holder to a larger
extent than any one else.

Mr. Itathbone said, that having been at different times
chairman of the American Chamber of Commerce, they had
had' frequent communications from the manufacturing districts,
complaining of the dues, and also instructions from American
correspondents,. soliciting. the interference of the Chamber
against, the imposition of the town dues, contending that those
town 'dues were a tax upon trade, hut that they were expended
solely for local improvements not benefiting that trade, and
that, in many instances, the duties seemed to be disproportion-
ately levied.

The Town-clerk.--My impression is, that the Chamber of
Commerce did remonstrate with the Common Council on the
subject. The duty on salt is oppressive, being 10 per cent. upon
its present low rate.- The American Chamber of Commerce is
one of the bodies that have come forward complaining of the
town dues in the case of Mr. Bolton. The opposit►on is general.
No. money has come front America to aid Mr. Bolton's suit.
Has seen the improvetneuts in the town. Is not aware that the
merchants have had a meeting to oppose such an expenditure.

The whlenin6, of the streets has hen a general advantage to
the inhabitants of the town.
. .

Mr. Aldorman Thomas Case,—The duty on salt is 1U per
cent. upon the present cost.' Of course, wuen sa.t was at 235.•
per ton it must have been half that.
The isown-clerk here said that the purchases from Sir John
Tobin and Mr. Laird were made in 18M, and the total amount
of the purchase appeared• to be, from the corporate books,
£81,657. The whose a►nount of the bond debts was 1:792,009 •
13s. l ld., of which, Common Councilmen, for themselves as
executors and trustees, held to the amount of £68,372.
Mr. llosson said that it might be' desirable to submit evi-
dence of the Catholic population, which amounted to more
than one-fourth of the population of the town: The court said
they would name Monday at ten o'clock to receive that and
-oth;r statistical information. _ _ . _ .

The Town-clerk having handed np copies of the various minutes
of the vetus of the Common Council on the Dock Committee reso-
lutions; asked the commissioner whether he was to understand
that the inquiry into the affairs of the Corporation was now at
an end?
. _

The commissioner said there was one or two 'points in the
investigation that had not been gone into, one of which was the
mode of selecting juries
Mr. Thompson and Mr. Ashton, who had served the office of
bailiffs, were examined as to the mode of selecting juries. it
appeared that this was done sometimes by the 'fown-clerk,
sometimes by the Bailiff. It was admitted that in point of
fact, the petty jury were nominated by the Town-clerk, or in
his office. Had heard no complaints as to the mode of selecting
the juries, except that the jurors sometimes complained of
being called on too often.
The Town-clerk here rose and addressed the court on the
subject of the duties of the Recorder. Ile was not aware that
an opinion of his was of any valde, but he- thought that if the
Court of Passage were extended, it would be necessary for the
Recorder to reside here, or to come more frequently to the
town. From what he had observed in the papers of a plan that
the Recorder should aid the magistrates in the discharge of
their duties, he (Mr. F.) thought it not desirable that he should
do so, the alteration in the law having placed under •the juris-
diction of the court of quarter sessions the trial of all serious
offences. He entertained a strong opinion that justice would
be best administered if the judge of the court were tree from
all bias which might arise from Ins interference in the incipient
.proceedings. A judge is best enabled to discharge his duties
correctly, who is not exposed to the risk of participating in that
excitement, which often takes place in large towns, when an
offence of any high character, or. an offender of any previous
note is brought to justice. Therefore, he thought the residenee
of the Recorder was not necessary—or perhaps advisable. Mr.
Foster said there was but one pannel for the trial of prisoners
at the quarter sessions. In consequence of the great labour of
the last session or two, it was the intention of the court to con-
tinue the quarter sessions without intermission on the Thurs-
day, so as to allow the court of passage to continue its busi-
ness. By this it was expected that the session would be con
eluded within the week. The pannel, in future, would be rix-
tended from_ltuirty.-six to forty-eight, to gain a jury rcre'the
Thursday. He hoped the magistrates' would arrange for some
-barrister to assist them, while the Recorder would preside in
the Court of Passage. Should this plan be adopted; therewould
be a great reduction in the charges on the county rate; for the
attendance of witnesses would be shortened, which -constitutes
a great portion of the expense.
Mr. Lliis examined.-1 have been in the Town-clerk's office
twenty-five years. I have always selected the juries since 1819,
without any interference.—After giving full information. re-
specting the selection of juries, Mr. Ellis proceeded to say that
although he had been a burgess for twenty-five years, he had
never voted at an election but once, and that was far hOrd
Sandon and Sir Howard Douglas. We have never had causes
in the Court of Passage in which political questions were in-
volved, or in which the Corporation was concerned.
The Town-clerk said that on one occasion a man was com-
mitted for embezzling the dock rates, and the Mayor and
Recorder refused to try him on account of the interest they
conceived they had in the dock rates, as trustees. The man
was removed Gy certiorari into the Court of King's Bench, tried
at Lancaster, and sentenced in term. The proceeding cost the
dock trustees £2OO. •
Mr. Commissioner Wilkinson now stated that on those sub-
jects on which they had received letters of complaint they would
hear the parties to-mthrow morning at ten o'clock. '
The commissioners then adjourned the court until Saturday.
_ _ EIGHTEENTH DAY.

This morning, (Saturday,) the investigation was resumed.—
The commissioners took their seats upon the bench at ten
o'clock.

Lieutenant Morrison rose and again wished to draw the at:
tention of the court to the subject of the Seamen's Hospital.—
He said that in 1747 a building called the Seamen's Hospital
was commenced in Liverpool. It was finished in 1752, and cost
the sum of £1,500. The support of the Hospital bad been ef-
fected by the payment of sixpence a month by every seaman
sailing out of the port of Liverpool. The seamen also paid 6d.
per month to the Greenwich Hospital. The money' was 'col-
lected at the Custom-house, by authority of an actor Parlia-,
ment. The building was pulled down in 1826 to make room for
the improvements, since which time there had been no attempts
made to restore it. .The funds now in the hands of the Corpora-
tion were somewhere about £40,000, and the custom now was
said to be to allow the sum of 2s. or 3s. per week to those who
were claimants on the charity. The object of his application
was to see justice done to the seamen as a body. He held in his
hand the letter of a seaman's widow, stating her claims and pro-
fessing her inability to procure any relief from the charity.
(The letter was read : it purported to be from Anne Borton,
who claimed upon the charity in consequence of her husband
having been wrecked in the ship Susan, of this port.) He
(Lieutenant Morrison) understood that there was a president,
secretary, treasurer, and collector attached to the institution,
and that Mr. Marston, the late Mayor, was the president.
Mr. Alderman Horsfall rose, and, with reference to the state-
ment of Lieutenant Morrison, said, that an hospital had been
built for seamen at the cost of £1,500, -which sutra was raised by .
Private contributions, the site being given by the Corporation.
The building eventually got dilapidated, and was sold to the
Corporation for the sum of £6,500, on which interest of 5 per
cent. was now paid. There arc fifteen trustees of the institu-
tion, elected from the shipowners and Merchants of-Liverpool:
the act of Parliament did not require an hospital; the accounts
were published annually; and the seamen paid Is. per month,
one half of which went -to the. Greenwich.- Hospital. -si There hi. a'
secretary, Mr. Allen, who is paid a salary of £l3O per annum,
Mr. Horsfall here handed the commissioners the current account
for the year 1832, from which it appeared that the capital stock
was £36,950, .and the yearly income £4,048 2s. ld. ; that the
sum of £3,021 17s. had been paid to 861 widows, children, and
disabled seamen. The incidental expences; (including sala-
ries, &c.) amounted to about £2OO, leaving a balance of about
£l,OOO in Heywood's Bank.
Mr. Horsfall here wished to explain, in reference to the con-
test of Mr. Alderman Porter, for the office of Mayor, iu 1827,
alluded to yesterday by Mr. Ratiihone, that the contest was
.entered into without his (Mr. H.'s) consent, although he cer-
tainly had subscribed to pay a portion of the expences. tie
was not a burgess at the time, and hail only been twice in the
committee-room during the contest. He was not aware what
the expences of the election were, and he had never sent Mr.
Robinson, or any one else, to Warrington to seek up voters,
Lieutenant• Morrison again rose to touch upon that very
sore subject to him, the telegraphic establishment. He said
that that establishment, as managed by the dock committee,
cost the port much more than it ought to do. The committee
allowed Lieutenant Watson to carry on a private business at a
great charge to the merchants. The sale of signal flags in the
first year of the establishment must have been nearly £2000.-
He asked the clerk of Lieutenant Watson, who was present,
what was the amount in one 'year received for the sale of flans'
Mr. Colman; the clerk, had understood that Lieutenant W:it.
son had received £SW in one year for the sale of flags. tie
could not, however, speak positively, nor did lie know the
amount of Lieutenant Watson's emeliiments. _

Mr. Alderman Horsfall remarked that the subject was pti_
vate business.
Lieutenant Morrison replied that it was, and the committee
allowed Mr. Watson to carry on business at the charge of the
merchants. It was in the commissioners' notes, from the evi_
dente of Lieutenant Watson, that the information to the pub_
lie from the telegraph stations was supplied gratis. The fact
was, that Mr. Watson had asked the Lyceum to pay him
a year, but they paid him eight guineas. He was also paid by
the West India, American, and other associations.
Mr. Colman did not know what Lieutenant Watson received
as emoluments. _ _

Mr. Alderman Sandbach, referring to the evidence given by
himself on the Dock Estate, said, that he had been reported as
having, described the collisions of the Dock Committee "as a
struggle fur ascendancy." He had not meant to say so, for 4e
had never seen a division without rate-payers and Common-
Councilmen on each side. _ _

Mr. James Perrin, a merchant, alluded to the questioning of
Mr. Horsfall yesterday by Mr. Rathbone, and expressed his
opinion that the latter had been insulted by the former statin4`
Mr. Rathbone's questions to be impertinent. He was procea
ing with several rude remarks in application to Mr. Ilorsfall,
and defending the conduct of Mr. Rathbone, when the court
informed him that Mr. Rathbone was quite capable of defend',
ing -himself: The observations of Mr. Perrin in allusion
tor. Horsfall elicited much disapprobation throughout the
court.

Mr. Perrin wished to be examined on the subject of the town
dues, and, being sworn, stated ?that there were discrepancies
which must be altered even if the town dues were continued.
A ton of butter worth £BO was charged Is., whilst a bushel of
oats worth-£l2 paid Is. 4d., and the same value of butter paid
consequently oats paid ten times as much of butter.' A
ton of copper worth £9O paid 6d.. and £5 worth of oats paid
6d.; so that oats paid 18 tunes as much as copper. Ivory worth
£5OO or £6OO per ton paid Is.; so that oats, the food of the poor,
paid 70 times more than the foreign luxury, ivoi v. He also
complained that the burgesses of Wexford, Waterford, and
other ports, should be free from the town dues.
Mr. Robinson was then examined.—ls a stationer,. and re-
sides in Liverpool. Is not a burgess. Was one of the witnesses
examined before the House of Commons, on the subject of bri-
bery at elections here. Was examined as to points which re-
quired exercise of memory. The point as affecting Porter's
election was this: a report had reached Porter's committee that
Robinson's party were bringing men down from London. Af-
fairs were so nearly balanced thattbese voters would haveturned
the scale against*Porter. Parties were sent to meet these vo-
ters. Witness went with others to Warrington, with instruc-
tions either to get the men over for Porter, or to keep them
back. Mr. Horsfall was on the committee, and witness saw
him when he got these instructions, and considered him as the
chairman. It appeared that he was only vice-chairman ; and
for six years a printed account of the election contained a state-
ment to that effect. . _

A report of the evidence of a Mr. Hugh Close was here read,
referring to bribery at Mr. Porter's election.
Mr. J. C. Nicholson gave evidence relating to a dexuand. of
sixpence made by the Dock Estate on him, when he alleged
that there was a balance of over paid dock dues in his favour.
His evidence was contained in a letter of complaint, which he
handed to the court. It stated that he had been summoned be-
fore Alderman Bourne for the sixpence, and Alderman Bourne
ordered that all future claims, if even no more than a.penny,
the merchants should be summoned at once, without intimation
that such claims existed.
Mr. William Foster explained that the act exempted the
Dock Trust from any claims of a longer date than 12 months.
Several letters of complaint, on various subjects, received from
individuals in the town, were here read; they were wholly void
of public interest, and entirely foreign to the meaning Of the
commission of corporate inquiry; one was a petition fiom Thomas
Vickars, respecting the licensing of a public house in Regent-
street, and certain persecutions affirmed to have originated with
his refusal to purchase ale from Mr. John Abbott' Kaye—his
imprisonment on arrest by Mr. Kaye—the suspension of his
license, (in 1829-30,) and the subsequent refusal of the magis-
trates to renew it.

It was stated, on reference to .the books, that when applica-
tion was made to have the license granted to Vickars, (who was.
in gaol, and who had been ejected from the premises in due
course of law by Mr. Kaye,) the magistrates declined renew-
ing it. Mr. Kaye also applied, but the magistrates thought it'
best to let the license drop.
Vickars complained that he was now chargeable to the parish,
being, unable to work from an accident in his hip. He merely
wished to know whether there was any chance of the license
being renewed, •
The court told the applicant they were sorry for lus iqrmi

ties bat they could nut interrere. From what had appeared
of tlleconduct of the magistrates in toe business,- he thought
it verfccllv satisfactory.
Dr. Cofiins ream: ta-d that many of the persons going into
public houses were on he: the influence hreweis; troin
iney were comixelled to purcinise their beer and porter, or put
the houses.

Mr. Radcliffe intimated that Mr. Peter Woods was present
for the purpose of giving evidence relative to the mode of erect-
ing members of Parliament, and Mayors, and Bailiffs.
Mr. Peter Woods was then sworn and examined.—ls an
attorney, was articled in Liverpool in 1788, admitted in 119:3,
and has resided here since. In 1190, commenced his electioneer-
ing career. Espoused the side of Colonel Tarleton, the liberal
site, there being three candidates; all came down to canvass;
after some days, Tarleton found there was a coalition, and left
Liverpool in despair. His opponent rather hastily closed the
taps—this created a mutiny in the camp—the closing the taps
opened their eyes, and they discovered, all at once, that farleton
was the fittest man. They went about the streets with his colours,
and increased like a snow ball. (A laugh.) Tarleton's friends
took advantage of this, encouraged such a feeling, and went to
the poll. There was a sham bar, to split votes for him. With
great difficulty the first day was got over. The next day Tarte-
ton returned and carried all before him. Our opponents began
to fight-us, but we then beat them, driving the Mayor and the
Recorder out of the Exchange. Before the election was over,
Lord Penryn ran away, and Bamber Gascovue was taken ill.
Tarleton stood at the head of the poll. After all was over,
a subscription was entered into, and each burgess who voted
for Tarleton received 2s. tad. for his independent vote. This
stirring up of the muitituCe became very serious, for it led
to a Common Hall the next year—which led to two trials at
Lancaster, as to who had the power to make by-laws—the
Common Council or the whole burgesses. Was at Lancaster
in 1792, when one tr ial cane on, and in the Court of .I(ing's
Bench in 1793, when the third new trial was granted. Was
then in the office of the London attorneys, employed by the
Liverpool burgesses, and, shortly after, a letter came with the
news that all was over, as the subscriptions were at an end. At
the election he named the treating went on, and also in 1796,
when witness kept a check for Tarleton. In 1802, Mr. Birch
was a candidate, and there was a puncheon of rum, with the
head taken out, and distributed among " the independent bur-
gesses." In IEO6 the Whigs were in power, and Mr. Roscoe
was returned. He then had more friends than -at any time
before or since whether they were expectants or not cannot
say, but it was likely. Much money was spent then, and bri-
bery with cash commenced. In 1812 I got promoted, and was
made captain of a district. I had fourteen lieutenants under my
command. I had many houses to attend to, and had to make
a great many abort speeches. The speech usually was, "Is
all the beef and ale done ?" and the invariable answer was,
"It is!" Some of my lieutenants used to make long speeches;
but my short speech, with the beef and ale to back-it, made
more impression than all their oratory. 1 was the innocent
cause of much mischief; for these gentlemen became orators,
and we. never could silence theinsince. There is nu getting.
through business at any public meeting since. 1 advocated the
cause of Messrs. Brougham. and Creevy. We spent £17,000,
paid £14,000, and got £3OIX) in debt, which is not yet paid.
We were defeated, as usual. In 1816, Mr. Canning was re•
elected, and Mr. Leyland was started to oppose him. I get so
often defeated that I gave it up. I only won once in thirty-five
years, and then I took to mayor-making. Between the election
of 1812 and 1816, I became very intimate with Mr. Leyland,
our rich banker. He told me very often he was determined to
become. a candidate to represent the town in Parliament,- and
we thought it important to have a friendly mayor at the time of
the election. General Green (a notorious man that Most peo-
ple would recollect) came to me and asked if I had any objec-
tion to Mr. Wright (the present mayor) becoming mayor. Mr.
Leyland- and myself consulted, and we told Green he might
make him mayor if he chose fit. Soon after, Mr. Leyland
came to me and said, " Mr. Wright will not do for us." I said,
" Why did you not say so sooner? lam committed to Green,
and do not know how to be off." I added, "A thought strikes
me how to get out of this. I'll send Green out to Mr. Wright,
to ask him if he will call public meetings on a requisition being:
sent to him." I fully expected he would refuse, but he de-
ceived me, for he said he would. (A laugh.) So we were in
for it. Then we set about making two bailiffs, and fixed on Mr.
George Drinkwater and Mr. Edw. Pearson ;_ the latter was in
indifferent health, and we substituted Mr. J. D. Case, knowing
him to be one of our friends. When the election came on, Mr.
Leyland did not become a .candidate. In 1820, we made him
Mayor, and, in 1821, we proposed his nephew, Mr. Bullen. Mr.
Cyrus Morrell and myself were the only persons who took an
active part in giving the money away. Early on the morning
of election, 1 met, Mr. Leyland opposite the Athenaeum, in
Church-street, and, in talking about the election of his nephew
for mayor, he said, " My advice is to spare neither exertion or
expense. 1 care not who is mayor." Looking at the future,
I consider his meaning to be that he would offer himself as a
candidate for a seat in Parliament. I then saw. Mr. Morrall,
told him what had passed, and said that I considered it equiva-
lent to a carte blanche, that be would be blamed if we did not
Win the election, and propbsed to spend the money freely.
How it was I don't know, but the money was not forthcoming.
About twelve o'clock we were very .near beaten. I was told
that, by an arrangement between the parties, not more than 6s.
was to be paid to each burgess for his vote. Hearinohat our 1
opponents had broken their agreement, by giving ale in ad-
dition to these 68., we commenced giving ills. or El a-head.
Our opponents followed us, but we kept overt their heads,
having the longer purse of the two. A. placard was printed,
offering, £3O a tally. One of those was posted opposite our op-
ponents committee-room, and they came over to us. I pro-
posed to have a board painted, with " £5O. a tally," and have
it carried up and down-Castle-street, that every one might see
the system. But we only gave £4 a-head, and were successful.
In 1824, some of us subscribed £5 a-piece, at the election of Mr.
Elollinshead, in the hope that lie would call a Common Hall.
We were successful, and I got £3 back out of my. £5. I am not
aware that I have any more to say. I came to give evidence
by the wish of-Mr. Radcliffe, and I have finished my statement.
Mr. Radcliffe said, the court would now see that they had a
history down to within ten years of the period embraced in the
report which they had possession of.
Dr. Collins wished to give evidence on the subject of eccle-
siastical patronage. has resided in Liverpool nearly ten years.
Ilas frequently taken an active part in protecting the parish
from extravagant expenditure. The indirect influence of the
Corporation -has always marred those efforts., Several attempts
had been made' for tlie, adoption of certain measures for re-. '
trenchment, -but these were frustrated by some -per-sons-hating
six votes,' according to their property, and the churchwardens
and most of the select vestry beingenider Corporation influence.
It was discovered that Sir aolin Hobhouse's bill gave one vote
and no more to all rated parishioners. Notice was given of
the intended introduction of this act. The select vestry and
churchwardens grew alarmed. A public meeting was called,
by the churchwardens, to take the sense of the parish against
the bill. Mr. Mac Ivor was in the chair, and many of the lead-
ing whigs of the town (Mr. W. Currie among them) were against
the bill. Resolutions were proposed, condemning the introduc-
tion of the bill, but they were defeated, and counter resolutions
passed, declaring that tire bill wouldbe advantageous to the parish.
These resolutions were not made public, as the others would have
been. The law required that certain papers, with signatures, should
be sent in to the churchwardens, and Mr. Foster and Mr. Braucker 1
endeavoured to prevent the votes coming in. Remonstrated
with the churchwarden, and said that he (witness) saw uentle-
men taking the papers and putting them into their pockets
stead of returning them. The churchwarden, informed of this
act, declined to interfere. When the polling closed, we eadea-1
voured to ascertain what number had voted, and received no
answer hut.that the number required had not.: nor is it known
to this day. When the meeting took place in the Sessions-house,
Mr. Turner stated that there being no check, thousands per
annum could be sequestered by collusion. When, at parish
meetings, a poll is demanded, the gentlemen on 'Change rush
in, and carry the question by their six votes. To show how far
lavish expenditure prevails, the law expenses of the parish
amount to £2,000 a-year. Mr. Lowndes, the vestry-clerk, has
only £350 salary, but makes at least £2,000. The parish ac-
counts, amounting to £50,000 at least, are presented, and ex-
pected to be passed, without allowing the parish any time to see
On what items the. charges are made. The parties who have
been most anxious to promote these abuses have always been
the active partizans of the Corporation.
Mr. Lowndes, the vestry-clef k, said that on Monday he would
adduce evidence to rebut the charges made by Dr. •Collins in
hi:: evidence. -

• In answer to a question from the court, the Town-clerk said
that the average expellee of a private act of Parliament, unop-
posed, was about £,lOO. Some bills which were opposed some-
times cost thousands.
Dr. Macintyre enquired whether the court would be open on
Monday to receive evidence from any medical man respecting
the present mode of obtaining medical evidence at coroners' in-
quests,—amode much complained of by the profession. The
Town-clerk had given an answer on the subject, which, in his
opinion, was by no means satisfactory. -
The Couit.—Certainly, we shall receive evidence on that.
subject.
Mr. James Foster denied that he, as churchwarden, had acted
Unfairly respecting the introduction of Sir John C. Hobhouse's
bill. there was a scrutiny of votes by the churchwardens, and
the parishioners had to depend, for a knowledge of the result,
on the churchwardens.

Dr. Collins said that great impediments were thrown in the
way of such parishioners as wished to examine the votes. Mr.
Stewart (partner of Mr. Wm. Foster) assessed the town, and
got ELMO for doing so. It. was announced that the assessment
was incorrect, and that Mr. James FoAter consented to remain
in office to secure the payment of that item. (Hisses, and- cries
of " No!")
. Mr. Stewart said that the contract had been made before Mr.
Poster came into office. •
The Mayor bore testimony to the character of Mr. Foster, and
to the worth and respectability of the Common Council.
Mr. Bolton, in allusion to the late election, stated that the
numbers who voted for Mr. Ewart were 4,931, and for Sir
Howard Douglas 3,249. Of 35 members of the Common
Council Who voted, 29 voted for Lord Sandon, and 4 for Air.
Ewart, which sheaved that the Common Council was not the
image of the people, whose affairs they administered.
The Mayon—Surely, Mr. Bolton, you would allow us to vote
as we pleased. (Cheers.)
Mr. Bolton.—Yes, hut [ draw the inference, and from that
argue, that there must be a change in the constitution of the
Corporation. ,
Mr. Thornely here rose and said, that as his name had been
mentioned during the inquiry, he begged to state that, when in
Li public requisition he offered himself as a candidate for the re-
presentation of the borough. he never expected the votes of the
self-elected. (A laugh.) 'Po the three who did vote for him he
was grateful. One of his objects, had he been sent to Parlia-
ment, and he avowed inch to have been his purpose, would
have been to open the Corporations of the country. Although
he lost his election, be fervently thanked God that he had lived
to see the day when the King's commissioners sat on that
bench to inquire into the Corporation of Liverpool.
It being now half-past three o'clock, the court adjourned until
Monday.