The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1845-01-28 00:00:00

COUNCIL PROCEEDINGS

On Wednesday a special meeting of the council was
held, to consider the bill to be brought into parliament
next session to amend the Dock Acts, and which pro-
posed to enact—

" That all those acts (except where altered by the pro-
posed act) and the proposed act shall be construed as one
act.

" That if goods deposited in the transit sheds shall not,
within 48 hours from the day on which the same shall
have been deposited therein (exclusive of Sunday, &c.,
and any holiday observed at the Custom-house), be duly
entered with the Customs, and forthwith passed by the
landing-waiter, it shall be lawful for the trustees on the
next day (not bei,g Sunday, &c.) to cause such goods to
be entered, and to obtain a Customs order for delivery,
so that the same may be passed by the landing-waiter.
And that after the Customs order for delivery shall have
been obtained, the goods shall cease to be considered as
still on board the vessel, and shall be at the risk, costs,
and charges of the owner or consignee thereof.
" That the trustees may employ persons to weigh or
measure and pass through the scale the said goods, and
to perform any work requisite or necessary with reference
to such goods, and make a reasonable charge fur the same.
And may retain the goods as security for payment of the
duties, and of the said charges ; and also, on notice so to
do, for the freight due thereon : provided that the owner
or consignee of the goods may employ any persons he
may think proper for the purposes aforesaid.
" That no goods so entered shall be liable to seizure or
forfeiture by reason of unintentional inaccuracy in the
entry thereof."

After a brief discufsion, those several clauses were or-
dered to stand part of the bill.
The TOWN-CLERK said the next clause recited the mode
in which the Albert Dock warehouses had been construct-
ed, and proposed to enact—
" That the present construction of these warehouses
shall not be considered as being at variance with the
provisions of the former dock act. Provided that the
same warehouses shall not exceed four stories in height
besides the ground-floor or quay, with vaults or cellars
under the same • and provided that the surface of the
quay over %chid, the said warehouses are erected shall be
reserved as a public quay, subject only to the general re-
gulations of the docks."
_ _

Mr. HARBORD called upon the Chairman of the Dock
Committee to explain what the working machinery of this
clause would be, so as it might appear that the warehouse
owners were not anxious to throw any vexatious impecli-
He believed the Albert warehouses
ments in the way.
were erected contrary to the provisions of the act.
Mr. BRAMLEY-MOORE said that, in asking the council
to adopt the clause, it would be necessary to offer an ex-
planation ; and he hoped that when Mr. Harbord's turn
came to reply, that gentleman would be equally explicit,
and give the council the views and intentions of the ware-
house owners. In dealing with the question, so far as he
was concerned, he repudiated all influence, internal or
external, in the course he was about to take. The ware-
house owners were composed of all grades and degrees of
political opinion ; but the question was not a political one.
It resolved itself into this—how far the use of the Albert
Dock warehouses should be impeded or extended to the
public accommodation and the advantage of the port. It
would be unnecessary to go over the ground as to any
compact entered into between the Dock Trustees and the
warehouse owners as to the building of the Albert Ware-
houses : it would be merely necessary to state that, after
a severe struggle, warehouses were to be built for the
accommodation of the port, that they were restricted to
certain designs and plans, and that those plans had, to a
certain extent, been deviated from. He might assume
that there was a deviation, for it was matter of fact and
noto iety. The Dock Committee, in carrying out the
plans, were restricted by the act of parliament ; but they
altered their plans, and, instead of making more extensive
warehouses than now existed, they afforded the public less
accommodation, by the first deviation, to an extent of
about 127,000 cubical yards. This showed that the ware-
house owners were not the injured parties, and that the
Dock Trustees had not been grasping and aiming at some-
thing to which they were not entitled; for they might
have gone much greater lengths if they chose, and in the
end it would be seen that the merchant was the injured
party, by being deprived of the accommodation to which
he was entitled, and which he might have had if the ori-
ginal act were carried out. The Dock Committee were
now in this position :—the warehouses had been con-
structed and advanced so far that it would be very incon-
venient to make any alteration. The deviation that was
now going on was in making what WPS technically called
the halt-deck floor, that was, a floor which was over that
part of the space that was kept as open quay space. Now,
this was objected to ; and the design of the present
was to prevent any interference hereafter, and to enable
the committee to carry out the act of parliament as strictly
as possible as it now existed. The object now was, that
the half-deck floor the grieved to state it) was to be left
unfinished for the present—that was to say, that the
beams, rafters, and binders should remain where they
were, and that the articles should not be constructed until
some future day, when the trustees might have power to
make the floor—the floor in the meantime remaining un-
covered, and totally unavailable for warehouse purposes.
The object, as lie had said, was to secure the Dock Trus-
tees from any intervention hereafter. The question re-
duced itself at present to a question of law, for, in con-
sequence of the deviation, any parties—the warehouse
owners, the Wallasey commissioners, or any ratepayer—
might apply to the Lord Chancellor for an injunction to
restrain the proceedings of the committee, in which case
the working of the docks might be delayed for a year and
a half or two years. Therefore, to choose the lesser of
two evils, he deemed this to be the best course—to ask the
council to adopt the clause now submitted, to deprive the
Albert Warehouses of their fifth or half-deck floor, and
to restrain parties from using the back part of the quays
for warehouse accommodation. He really felt grieved
that he should have to ask anything which militated
against the port, but he had no other course open to him,
for even if the warehouse owners came forward and said
" You may make the floor," still that would be no gua-
rantee to the Dock Committee against any factious indi-
vidual who might go for an injunction, and plenty of men
would be found to do so. Now, for the satisfaction of
the public and the council, it might be necessary to make
a few remarks as to the parties to blame in this matter.
It had been said that the committee were now coming
forward to seek an alteration of plans which had received
the sanction of the Dock Committee and council. He
regretted to state that this was not so ; for, after a dili-
gent search, he found that there was no specific sanction
of the fifth floor. He charged the parties of a former
day, who had the carrying out of the plans and the alter-
ing of them, with a great dereliction of duty, so far as the
merchants were concerned, in not affording that body the
accommodation to which they were entitled by the act.
The area of the warehouses, taken inside the walls, ac-
cording to the parliamentary plan, contained 27,136 square
yards. The area taken inside the walls, according to the
present construction, contained 18,395 square yards,
showing a clear loss of 8,741 square yards which the
merchants of the port had a right to expect. This mul-
tiplied bj four, for four floors, gave a total loss of ware-
house area equal to 34,964 square yards, which deducted
by 4,832, the area of the half-deck floor, gave a net loss
of warehouse area to the extent of 30,132 square yards.
As the Dock Committee were now about to abandon the
half-deck floor, by the clause now submitted, the original
loss of 34,964 square yards would still remain. He stated
this to show that there had been a great omission in not
making the warehouses of the prescribed limits, and also
to show the degree of unreasonableness that existed on
the part of the warehouse owners in interfering with the
present plans. To make the calculations intelligible, he
would state the loss in cubical yards, which would be
better understood, and more generally appreciated by the
merchants. According to the original plan, if carried
out, the cubical capacity of the four floors would be
357,290 yards. Their capacity according to the present
plan was 229,938 yards, showing a loss of stowage room
equal to 127,352 yards, or a loss in accommodation of
stowage of nearly 130,000 tons. The cubical capacity to
be gained by the half-deck floor would have been 10,870
yards. Therefore the warehouse owners were stepping in
to prevent the granting of 10,870 yards, although the
Dock Committee had previously abandoned no fewer than
127,352 cubical yards. This, he was aware, cut two ways.
It conveyed a severe censure on those who were to have
carried out the Parliamentary plans, and who threw away
so large an amount of space, and also for not having the
direct consent and sanction of the Dock Committee and
Council for the deviations which they made ; and at the
same time it conveyed a censure upon the warehouse
owners, who stepped in to deprive the public of the paltry
accommodation of the half-deck floor, after what had been
abandoned. He thought the merchants had strong grounds
of complaint, and that they would be justified in taking
up the matter in any way they deemed proper. Threatened
as they were with rivalry over the water and in Manches-
ter, it was the duty of the town that everything should be
devised and carried into effect which could render Liver-
pool not only an available but an attractive port by the
lowness of its charges. So far as he was concerned, he
should rejoice to see warehouses round every dock in the
town when that could be done with convenience; but he
wt's not prepared to say thrit •

..... .wandLtb/CM now arrived at. He was delight-
--.., .......... woina have those ware- ed to find-
that his fears were vain, because the result was
nooses tinder dock management, until be had experience such an excellent reply to the rebukes and reproofs which
of the success or failure of the Albert Docks in the first had been showered upon the warehouse interest. Ad-
ipstance. Re then acknowledged the receipt of a resolu- mirably had that interest behaved on the present occa-
tion from the warehouse owners; adopted at a meeting at sion ! Where was their love of pocket now ? They bad
which Mr. A lderman Bushby presided, in which they ex- sbewn themselves, he thought, as they had upon a former
pressed a hope that the Dock Committee would abandon occasion when they agreed to the concessions in the Al-
their present intention, and cause the Albert Warehouses bert Dock Act, really and truly friends to the trade of the
to he constructed in conformity with the provisions of port of Liverpool.—(Rear.) As a warehouse owner the act. He thought it was a question of the pocket with self he ia as willing to agree to the concessions pro-
whim-
the warehouse owners, and not one that concerned in an posed now, and there were no concessions that might be
ay the advantage or convenience of the town. So far a considered advantageous to which he would not readily
the views of that body went, it was a purely selfish one; consent ; but in his place in that Council he would never
and while the warehouse owners were quite right in pro- be a party to originating or suggesting any thing which he
tecting their interests and their pockets, the merchants felt was a violation of, or contrary to, the compact that
werete called upon to protect themselves. In advocating bad been entered into. lie was earnestly desirous of pro-
.h reduction of the duty on tea, coffee, sugar, and cot- rooting the interests of the port, and of every trade in it ;
ton, men benefitted themselves, and conferred a benefit but there was a consideration with him that went further
on the com►nunit ; but here the interference of the ware- than that, namely, the honour of the Council. The
!louse owner was purely selfish, and no individual was Council must be bound by the arrangement which had
benefitted but himself. (Hear, bear.)
been entered into.—(Hear.) If the warehouse ow-
Mr. BIRIEETT denied that he was influenced by selfish ners offered further concessions well and good, but he
motives, insomuch as he had no interest, direct or indi- hoped there would be no suggestion of that sort from
rect, in warehouses. He regretted exceedingly that the the Council —be hoped the great mercantile community
Council should be placed in a position in which they were would consider the concession as made in a fair and
almost
they harnpelled to go to Parliament again ; for the less amicable spirit, and that it would induce them to join with
Wasn't to do. with Parliament the better. Parliament the Dock Committee in procuring the passing of the bill
o over friendly to them ; and if they could do with- through parliament without further alteration or change.
out Parliament for fourteen years longer it would be so Mr-Nicol. thought that When the Chairman of the Fi-
Much the better. He had been labouring under the itn- nonce Committee (Mr. G. H. Lawrence) gave such un-
pruenssion that they would go to the House of Coromons in limited praise to the warehouse interest, and spoke, in
talatitel form, but Mr. Moore's observations had shaken some degree, in terms of rebrobation of what had fallen
_l,e opmion. Mr. Moore's speech was an advice to peo- from the Chairman of the Dock Committee, he forgot
ll'llow out 9f doors to oppose that which the Council were that the clause in the new bill had arisen from a threat o'
ou—(hear, hear, from Mr. North.) He con- the warehouse interest. (Cries of no, no.) With that
tended that, after the compromise had been effected, and resolution in his possession the Chairman of the Dock
had Made part of an Act of Parliament the warehouse owners Committee was borne out in what he had expressed on
never attempted to break the agreement
.; and he asked Wednesday ; and he was also borne out in what he had now

said by the changed tone and feeling that had come over
the warehouse tinterest. (Hear.)
Mr. BUSHBT was sorry that these observations should
have been made. The Dock Committee, as the Chairman
well knew he had said, had nothing to fear from the ware-
house interest. (Hear, hear.) He repeated that the
Chairman had said he was not afraid of the werehouse in-
terest but of other parties. (Oh, oh.) It was unfair to
attempt a re-discussion on this point.
The CHAIRMAN thought after the handsome act of
grace (as it had been called) from the wa•ehouse interest,
it would be well to avoid any further discussion.
Mr. Amt.); agreed with what had fallen from the
chairman, but the chairman would allow that indiscrimi-
nate praise required, perhaps, some little remark. The
old adage of " Save us from our friends" was never bet-
ter illustrated than on this occasion; for nothing was
better calculated to re-open this discussion than the in-
discriminate praise in which Mr. G. H. Lawrence had in-
dulged. He (Mr. Aikin) ventured to say that if ever the
quotation could be well applied, it would be in this in-
stance, " Praise undeserved is censure iii disguise."
(Hear.) If the warehouse interest had come voluntarily
forward, and said We see now the day has arrived when
you ought to be allowed to build warehouses completely
round Albert Dock, and we will remove all the restraints
and restrictions we have imposed upon you," he would
have joined Mr. G. H. Lawrence in thanking and award-
ing praise to them ; but what have they done. Why
nothing more _than Mr. Robinson, seconded by Mr.
Bushby, proposed to give—the use of the top of the half-
deck. He (Mr. Aikin) would, however, make a proposal
which was reasonable in itself; and, after having heard
so much about the justice of the case, the letter of the
law, and the interest of the public, he thought it ought to
be adopted. He then proposed
"That a clause be inserted in the bill authorising the
trustees to construct warehouses on the quays of the
Albert Dock, in such manner as to afford an amount of
stowage room equal at least to the whole amount of stow-
age room which would have been provided had the ware-
houses been constructed over the whole surface of such
quays, and not in stacks upon the present plan."
Mr. AIKIN urged several reasons why it should be
adopted. The foundations had been laid, the pillars had
been erected, and all that was wanted now was to carry
out that which was half begun.
Mr. Nicol, observed that the act prevented it being so
carried out.
Mr. AIKIN admitted that the letter of thelaw prevented
it, but he wished for the spirit of the law to be acted
upon.

Mr. HARBORD said, as he was anxious the warehouse
interest should stand right with the council, it was proper
for him to state that Mr. Bushby, as Chairman of the
Warehouse Owners' Association, stood pledged to that
body that the Council would not ask for more than what
had been proposed by the Chairman of the Dock Commit-
tee. One member of that association had stated that the
Dock Trustees, or some of them, were ready to ask for
more (if they could get it) than was proposed oy Mr. Ro-
binson's resolution ; Mr. Bushby gave an assurance that
the Council were not disposed to ask for more than the
completion of that part of the works which had been com-
menced • and the council must understand, distinctly,
that in the event of their persisting to ask for more, the
whole must be considered as open—and that they must
not go on with the completion of that portion which it
was understood, the day before yesterday, was all that was
required. The warehouse interest would be quite open to
follow up the subject hereafter for their own protection,
but they did not anticipate that the Dock Committee
would t row the onus or responsibility of it upon them.
Mr. HODGSON supported the view taken by the last
speaker, contending, that to adopt Mr. Aikin's proposi-
tion now would be to insult the warehouse proprietors.
Mr. :NORTH, after a few words in opposition to Mr.
Aikin's proposal, adverted to the general question, and
said that at the last meeting, he expressed his disappoint-
ment at the tone of the speech of the Chairman of the Dock
Committee. Feeling from what had now passed, that a
final settlement of a very long-vexed question was now
being accomplished, not according to any greedy illiberal
and short-sighted view of the letter of the law, a " pound
of flesh" demand, upon the part of the warehouse owners,
but by a full and voluntary concession on their part of
even much more than the Dock Committee thought it
right to ask—he did, under these circumstances, think it
reasonable to expect that the Chairman anti:Deputy-
Chairman of the Dock Committee would, to-day, have
seen the propriety of unspeaking their speeches on Wed-
nesday last. (Cries of " oh, oh !)
Mr. Nrcor. warmly defended himself and the Chairman
of the Dock Committee.
Several other councillors delivered their opinions, after
which Mr. BRAMLEY-MOORE replied.
The motion for the adoption of the clause agreed to by
the Dock Committee and the deputation from the ware-
house owners was adopted, the one proposed byMr. Aikin
having dropped for want of a seconder.
The TOWN-CLERK then read several clauses proposed
to form part of the bill, all of which were agreed to with-
out eliciting remark.
A series of clauses having been read, the object of which
is to provide a registry for all dock rate-payers,
Mr. BRAMLRY-MOORE said it had been thought desi-
rable by the Dock Committee that some special enact-
ment should be made for the better registration of the
dock rate-payers in the election of Dock Committeemen.
At present there was no test by which you could tell whe-
ther persons tendering votes we re legitimate voters or
otherwise. If any person tendered a vote, and it was
doubted, there was nothing to decide, though you might,
after a good deal of search and inquiry into the books,
find out whether he was entitled or not ; but, at the same
time, he ventured to say that a great many votes had been
given by parties who were not qualified, but who did not
know it. Many of them had not the means of knowing
it. At the last election, parties had come from a great
distance to vote—from quite beyond the limits—presum-
ing they had the right because they had paid, by their
agents, a certain amount of dues. Parties also, at pre-
sent, might, if they chose, qualify upon the very day of
election. If there was an election to-morrow, parties
might enter to-day a quantity of merchandize to qualify
them under the £lO clause to vote the following day ;
and then, after having voted, they might short-ship the
goods. It was a vote made for the occasion, and there
was no redress. The object of the clauses, therefore, was
simply that a register should be kept, printed, and laid
before the public, so that there might be an opportunity
of objecting to any person upon it who had no right to be
there, and of placing those upon it who might have been
omitted. This register would simplify the future elec-
tions, whilst the sense of the ratepayers would be better
taken than on former occasions. The Dock Committee
apprehended considerable difficulty in it when they first
discussed the matter, but they conceived it was now sim-
plifi d and put into such a shape that it would work very
well.

Mr. PARKER.—Can you inform me whether it will
curtail the franchise or not?
Mr. BRA MLEY•MOORE.—Not in the least.
Mr. TURNER protested against the imputation which
he said was conveyed in Mr. Moore's speech, that any
person among the merchants of Liverpool would venture
to tender a vote and then short-ship.
Mr. BRAMLEY-MOORE said he had only stated hypo-
thetically what might happen; he had cast out no impu-
tations. He bad stated what might arise according to the
present law. He did not mean to insinuate that any mer-
chant would go and vote who had no right ; but it was pos-
sible for such a thing to be done, and if he were to say
that there were no people in Liverpool who would do it,
he should be stating that which was not true. (Hear.)
Mr. TURNER inquired what would be the expense ?
Mr. BRAMLEY-MOORS replied that in all probability
it would be about £lOO a year. The trouble to himself
and the deputy-chairman would be considerable, but that
did not enter into consideration with them.
Mr. TURNER remarked, that if a rate-payer found his
name omitted from the list, he would be obliged to go
down to get it inserted.
Mr. Nicol. explained that the treasurer would make
the list from his books ; the list would then be printed ;
and a certain period would be allowed for persons to come
forward, if they found their names were omitted.
Mr. TURNER.—You ought to know that by the trea-
surer's list now.
Mr. Nicol. said even that would not tell who was en-
titled to vote. It was a very remarkable fact, that there
was a member of the Dock Committee now sitting as such,
whose name did not appear upon the treasurer's books at
all, although be was as much entitled to a vote as any
person could be. He was part owner of ships, but the
entries were made by the broker.
Mr. H. HORNBY objected to the proposal, on the
ground that no reason had been assigned for such an al-
teration. No necessity appeared for it. Mr. Moore
stated that abuses might take place, but he did not assert
that any had actually taken plice. No practical inconve-
nience had hitherto been sustained from the present prac-
tice, and yet here it was proposed to introduce a new and
cumbrous machinery. The franchise would unquestion-
ably be limited by it, because, if any question came to the
vote now, although he had been a rate-payer for a month
or two, he had a right to vote; but under the new system,
unless his name appeared upon the revised list, that right
was taken away. His principal objection, however, was,
to the cumbruous machinery the new system would intro-
duce into the dock proceedings—mac:rinery which he was
certain could not be carried out without infinitely more
trouble than seemed at present to be apprehended.
Mr. G. H. LAWRENCE remarked that the elections f
dock committee-men by the rate-payers took place only
once in three years.
Mr. Nowrn.—But they may occur oftener.
Mr. TINNE mentioned that on a late occasion he went
to the Dock-office to vote ; and the town-clerk and the
solicitor were occupied for a considerable time before it
could be ascertained whether he had a vote or not. They
decided he had a right. This was only one out of a num-
ber of similar cases which the establishment of a register
would obviate.
Mr. Honosoar said that upon such an important estate
as the docks, the receipts of which were upwards of
£200,000 a year, there ought to be every security for its
proper and efficient management. If people could be
brought there in the way stated, and faggot voters thus
created—(and he knew the gractice had been to create
faggot voters at various periods in Liverpool)—he was
surprised that anybody should object to the proposal on
the ground that it was necssary to show that the existing CLEANS ING THE STREETS.—lnstead of collecting the
system had been abused. Did they not see a scheme getting rubbish and soil taken from the streets into one vast mass, a
up for the manufacture of faggot voters throughout the plan has been suggested which will at once rid the town
country ; and with that before their eyes, would they say of what, in its proper place, is a most valuable manure.
that this great estate should be left, not to a fixed list of We understand that Sir W. M. Stanley, and other large
voters, but to an indefinite mode of bringing up forces to landed proprietors on the Cheshire side, are wilting to
answer any particular purpose ? 'What should prevent the enter into a contract to take away the whole of the soil
people of Birkenhead, annoyed as they were with the' p- free of expense, and to have, on all occasions, two flats in
position they had received from Liverpool, from their the docks, the one loading and the other ready to take its
legitimately taking up or advertising for parties, and qua- place, into which the manure will be emptied as it is
lifying them—to make faggot voters—so as to get into our carted from the streets, and at once conveyed to the other
dock estate such regulations as would best suit their own side of the river. With this view, application has been
purpose ? The expense was immaterial in such a matter. made to the Dock Committee, who have agreed, on re-
The estate required every exertion to give security to it, ceiving £5O annually, to allow one birth, on the south-east
and he should vote for the motion with all his heart. side of the Canning Dock, to be set apart to the flats so
Mr. HORSFALL contended that the object of the register to be employed.