The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1844-11-12 00:00:00

tleworth the question proposed, particularly in a matter
where salary was concerned. He should not have taken
any part in the debate if he thought it involved legal con-
siderations ; but, in his opinion, it was obvious to com-
mon sense that, if, the great concerns of the Corporation
of Liverpool were to be properly managed, they must
always have some authorized person bearing the name.
He could upt consent to act under the authority of a
person who was not fully recognised by the Council itself.
He believed that the Town-clerk must frequently be in
London. He was sorry to foresee that he must be more
in town than ever, for the Council were troubled with
questions regarding their property which would require
attention in Parliament. Whilst he (Mr. Hodgson) was
an economist, so far as economy could be consistently
carried, he was, nevertheless, of opinion, that the Council
must afford to pay for those duties which were necessary
for the preservation of the property and right government
of the Council, irrespective of the amount. He was of
opinion that the best course they could pursue would be
to continue their late sub-division of officers, and to ap-
point in addition, a Clerk of the Peace.
Mr. LACE agreed with the view taken by Mr. Birkett.
The only argument advanced in favour of having a Deputy
Town-clerk appeared to be this : that his services would
be required in case of the absence of the Town-clerk in
London ; not that the Town-clerk, with able assistants,
could not conduct the machinery of the Corporation, but
that we should be at a loss when he was absent from town.
Now he (Mr. Lace) hoped the Council would not have
occasion to go to London for two or three years hence.
Liverpool, he could assure them, was at a great discount
in the metropolis,—(" hear, hear !" from Sir Thomas
Brancker.)—and he certainly hoped they would keep
away for two or three years. They were not, therefore,
called upon to provide a remedy for what was to occur
every month or every year, but for what might occur once
in two or three years. (Hear.) It was agreed upon all
hands that they were to have a separate officer as Clerk of
the Peace ; and the gentleman selected to fill that office
would be fully competent to advise the Mayor in the ab-
sence of the Town-clerk. No one would be offered for
the office of Deputy Town-clerk or Clerk of the Peace
without being fully competent ; and, if this were so, the
greatest difficulty would be overcome and the stongest
objection removed. There was in reality no such office
as Deputy Town-clerk and Prosecuting Solicitor con-
templated by the Municipal Act, and the only way in
which prosecutions were kept in one hand was by a kind
of collusion with the magistrates. The Town-clerk
was the party responsible for all the documents of the
Corporation which legally were in his possession, and if,
by electing a Deputy Town-clerk, these documents were
allowed to go out of his possession, they might be de-
stroyed by such deputy, yet the Town-clerk alone was
responsible. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. NORTH was also in favor of the original motion.
The main argument in favor of the amendment entirely
failed, for it was alleged that there would, if the original
motion were carried, be no responsible head at home,
whereas it was intended to have a separate officer as
Clerk of the Peace, who would be quite competent to ad-
vise the Mayor, and perform the duties of Town-clerk in
his absence. (Hear, hear.) He concluded by paying a
high compliment to the talents of Mr. Shuttleworth, and
expressed his intention of supporting the original motion.
(Cheers.)
Mr. BUSHELL remarked that the theories of Mr. Lace
and Mr. North differed from their practice. They agreed
that the business should be performed under the direction
of one head, and that all the officers should be subordi-
nate to that head. Now, on looking at the directory he
found that the chief law firms in Liverpool consisted of
two, three, and four persons. Mr. Bushell read over the
names of a number of firms, and finished by quoting last,
but not least, " Ambrose Lace, Joshua Lace, Myers,
Rigge, and Roscoe." And in what differed private
from public business ? What was good in one case was
good in another case. Mr. Bushell then referred to the
different statements of approval made by the late Town-
clerk and the Deputy-clerk, and concluded by supporting
the division of the offices.
A conversation then ensued respecting the report to
which allusions had been made, and the motives of the
Council at that time in appointing the committee.
Mr. SHUTTLEWORTH said that, from what had passed,
it would appear that he had, at that time, made state-
ments which now he was ready to disclaim. He therefore
wished it to be understood that the question on which
the report was given was, as to whether there should be a
Town-clerk and a Deputy, or a Town-clerk and a borough
solicitor. If the Council determined to have two officers,
he trusted they would appoint a deputy, and not an officer
totally independent of the Town-clerk.
Mr. H. HORNBY recommended the postponement of
the question.
The Council divided, when there appeared, for the
amendment, 20 ; against it, 32. The amendment was,
consequently, lost. The following members voted in the
division :
For: Messrs. D. Hodgson, R. B. Hill, C. S. Middle-
ton, J. A. Tinne, R. S. Henderson, J. Sothern, T. Hoy-
den, C. Bushell, J. Procter, J. Kilshaw, R. Rigby, J.
B. Lloyd, R. Jones, R. L. Jones, J. Parker, J. Plump-
ton, R. Harbord, J. Sheppard, R. Houghton, J. Bram-
ley-Moore.
Against: Messrs. T. Shaw, W. Thornhill, R. Hough-
ton, J. Brancker, T. Chalmer, T. Blackburn, W. Pres-
ton, J. North, J. Aikin, Fl. Hornby, J. Holmes, J. Stew-
art, T. Toulmin, W. Fawcett, J. Aspinall, G. G. Hornby,
W. Birkett, J. N. Wood, J. Pemberton, T. Kave, J.
Hornby, G. H. Lawrence, J. S. Leigh, T. T. Glazebrook,
A. Lace, W. Mann, Sir T. Brancker, J. H. Turner, R.
S. Crook, T. Chilton, the mayor, A. wainson.
Mr. MOORE then moved, as another amendment, that,
for the present, the salary of the Town-clerk be £1,500
a year.

Mr. TINNE seconded this amendment.—(Cries of
" Vote !")
Mr. PLUMPTON asked whether he was to under-
stand, that, out of the £1,500, the Town-clerk was to
provide his own clerk ?
Several voices, " No, No !"
Mr. NORTH put it to Mr. Moore whether he would
persevere with his amendment?
Mr. MOORE said he thought it necessary so to do. He
should not enter into any reasons beyond this, that he did
not think that an incoming Town-clerk ought to come in
on a maximum salary. He thought that if they com-
menced at £1,500 and saw how he got on that they might
hereafter have it raised.
Sir THOS. BRANCKER said, that, in the Reform Coun-
cil, the sum of £2,500 a year had been recommended for
the Town-clerk. That sum had been suggested by a great
economist, Mr. William Rathbone, a very honourable,
straight-forward man, although they differed from him in
politics. The recommendation, however, was notadopted,
because of the heavy annuity to Mr. Foster, the previ-
ous Town-clerk. Why the new Town-clerk was to be
worth less money than the last he (Sir Thomas) could not
understand.
Mr. BLACKBURN said he had been a member of the
Council when the first Town-clerk was appointed, and
that he was an advocate for giving him £2,500 a-year.
He thought the man who had the talent to discharge the
duties of such an office deserved £2,500 ; but, in addition
to this, Mr. Shuttleworth was not a new man. On the
contrary, he was a tried man and a known man, and de-
served £2,500 a-year. (Hear, hear!) His (Mr. Black-
burn's) opinion was, that the Corporation should have the
first talent the town afforded, and that the talent should
be properly remunerated. (Hear, hear!)
Mr. AIKIN said he was one of those individuals who
did not think it right to be exceedingly liberal at the
public expense. He knew of no one so well qualified to
fill the situation of Town-clerk as Mr. Shuttleworth, nor
one for whom he had a greater esteem ; but the raising of
his salary from £lOOO to £1,500 a year was a good be-
ginning, and he (Mr. Aikin) did not think he should be
either extremely paltry or contemptible if he submitted a
motion to that effect. They should recollect that Mr.
Radcliffe, when appointed to the office, was at the head of
the best legal business in the town, and that they had to
induce such a man to take the position. The case at
present was quite different; and he must say that £1,500
a year, when he compared it with the salary paid to the
stipendiary magistrate or the salaries paid to some of the
legal authorities of the land, or the judges on the bench,
was by no means so paltry and contemptible a thing.—
(Hear, hear !)
Mr. TURNER contended that what had been said about
the stipendiary magistrate was not by any means anala-
gous to the case of the Town-clerk. Surely Mr. Aikin
did not wish to compare the duties of the two. Mr.
Rushton had no wear and tear of the mind such as Mr.
Shuttleworth would have to undergo. The latter could
not go home at night without thinking of the duties of
his office; whereas Mr. Rushton might go without having
any care whatever on his mind. He (Mr. Turner)
thought that £2,000 a year was not at all too much, par-
ticularly when the Council considered the claims made on
an officer in such a situation. He was called upon to
subscribe and entertain; and surely a gentleman in such a
situation ought to be able to lay by something for his fa-
mily. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. LACE observed, that when the late Town-clerk re-
tired from the office of Radcliffe and Duncan he was ena-
bled to make provision for his son. Mr. Radcliffe had
told him (Mr. Lace) that, if he had any idea of the labour
of the Town-clerkship, he should not have undertaken it
for £3,000 a-year. He (Mr. Lace) knew no man in
town more capable of taking the office or discharging its
duties efficiently than Mr. Shuttleworth. He had seen
Mr. Shuttleworth's mode of conducting business in
London, and it was most admirable. They could not
give him more than he was worth.
Mr. PARKER said he was a trustee for the burgesses of
Liverpool, and that there was an excellent old adage of
"be just before you are generous." He thought if they
began with £1,500 a year they should be doing very well;
and with all due respect for Mr. Shuttleworth, whom he
warmly congratulated on his appointment to the Town-
clerkship, he should support the amendment.
Mr. HODGSON said he should not be the man to split
on a question of £4OO or £5OO, seeing that Mr. Shuttle-
worth was to be the Town-Clerk and that there was the
greatest confidence in that gentleman's talents and in-
tegrity. But, at the same time, he (Mr. Hodgson)
should like to have some understanding that the Council
were not to be called upon for additional expenses for
additional clerks. They were to understand that the
£2,000 was to be the covering price, and that this was
not the getting in of the wedge. With this view he
should vote with great pleasure for the £2,000.
Mr. G. H. LAWRENCE fully concurred in all that had
been said respecting Mr. Shuttleworth's great zeal and
ability, believing that he most entirely deserved it. He
was anxious to have it understood by Mr. Parker that the
proposal now about to be carried out would be productive
of considerable saving to the corporate estate. There
would, for instance, be the saving of the salary of a
Deputy Town-clerk ; and, though they proposed to bring
in a Prosecuting-clerk—(" No, no," " Yes, yes,")—to
assist Mr. Shuttleworth in carrying on the prosecutions,
yet this was a party to whom some £2OO or £3OO a year
only would have to be paid. In the end they would save
some hundreds a year and carry on the establishment far
more efficiently than at present.—(Hear, hear!)