The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1844-03-19 00:00:00

TOWN COUNCIL PROCEEDINGS.

The meeting of this body, adjourned as stated in our
last, was held on Tuesday.
The TOWN-CLERK commenced the proceedings of the
day by reading his report on the dock bill, as it had been
agreed upon, with one or two exceptions, between himself
and the dock solicitor, and as it had been afterwards re-
vised by the dock solicitor with parliamentary counsel in
London. The bill, i❑ its present shape, proposed to take
the strand to the south-west angle of the road called
Sandbills-lane ; but it was intended to introduce clauses
in committee which would include the rest of the purchase
from the Earl of Derby. He then explained that all the
clauses from 5 to 81 were property clauses for the taking
of the property required, and that the time limited for the
purchase from the several parties was a period of seven
years. Clause 82 was for the erection of new docks, &c. ;
clause 83 conferred a power upon the trustees to make
alterations ; and clause 84 empowered them to inclose the
docks by walls.

After-a
few remarks from `Zr. BRAMLEY-MOORE, Mr.
EVANS, and Mr. HORNBY, it was agreed to insert the
words that it should be lawful for them to inclose " if they
should think fit."

Clause 85 had reference to the communication with the
Leeds and Liverpool Canal. The next was a manuscript
clause, sent in since the bill was printed, for the erection
of a cottage for the use of the keeper of the locks. Clause
86 was struck out. Clause 87 was that the cut should be
supplied with water from the Leeds and Liverpool Canal.
Clause 90 was that the cut should be made across Great
Howard-street arid Regent street.
A manuscript clause was next read, from which it ap-
peared that the sum of £50,000 was to be naid, in four
instalments, by the Leeds and Liverpool Canal to the
Dock Trustees, power to be given to pass through on the
payment of Id. per ton, except when dock dues were
paid.
It was agreed that the Dock Committee should have the
power to arrange the question of dues for goods passing
through, taking the following principle for their guide :-
Id. per ton, and id. per parcel as the maximum.
By the subsequent clauses the trustees were empowered
to raise the sum of £1,417,584 for the objects contem-
plated in the dock acts.
Some discussion took place as to the parties to whom
the power should be given to allow lights to be used on
board vessels in the graving docks, &c.
Mr. GLADSTONE moved that it be given to the magis-
trates, the chairman and the deputy-chairman of the Dock
Committee.
Mr. new. moved, as an amendment, that it be ex-
tended to the mayor, deputy mayor, and stipendiary ma-
gistrate.
Eventually the amendment was withdrawn, and Mr.
Gladstone's motion was carried upon the understanding
that the party granting the license state the purpose for
which it was granted, and that a policeman should be
present during the time the lights were being used.
Clause 115 was to the effect that whenever the despatch
of business, or the repairing or cleansing of docks should
be obstructed by any vessel, it should be lawful for the
trustees to cause her to be removed into any other dock,
without being taken into the river, and that the master,
owner, or consignee should pay the expense of such
removal.

Mr. GLADSTONE moved an amendment to the effect
that the latter part of the clause be struck out.
Mr. Woo]) seconded the amendment, which was car-
ried.

Upon the motion of Mr. BRAMLEY-MOORE, the clause
was then struck out altogether.
The TOWN-CLERK said the 120th clause was for the
repeal of the Harrington Dock Company's act. By the
24th section of that act there was required to be a street
from Sefton-street, a parade, and two slips or flights of
stairs in the wall of the parade. It now appeared that
the parade would materially interfere with the execution
of the works by the Dock Committee, but that the slips
and stairs might be made.
The clause was agreed to.
The TOWN-CLERK said, that by the dock act of 1841,
it was provided that there should be certain landing ac-
commodation to the west of the Albert Dock, or, if not
there, at George's Pier. He asked whether some provi-
sion should not be inserted in the present bill, to the
effect that those works be now proceeded with.
Mr. NORTH thought it very desirable that there should
be a provision of the kind.
Mr. GLADSTONE suggested that something should be
done for the convenience of those who bad to cross the
river, by placing at the south end of the Prince's Dock a
bridge, that could be made use of independent of the
gates—he meant a bridge that could support itself, and be
sufficiently wide to allow foot passengers to cross, while,
at the same time, the shipping might pass into the gut.
Mr. BRAMLEY-MOORE, in reply, said, it would be re-
collected that at the last council, to show the intentions of
the Dock Committee, and how desirous they were to
afford accommodation, they proposed to remove the pre-
sent bridge at George's Dock, and to construct a magni-
ficent one like that leading to the Albert Dock, which was
unequalled in the world ; and this would very shortly be
brought into operation.
Mr. GLADSTONE said he had been speaking of the
passage at the Prince's Dock, but that he should be very
glad to see accommodation afforded at both places.
After a few further remarks, the whole of the dock bill
having been gone through, the following resolution was
unanimously adopted :—" That the bill now read be ap-
proved, subject to the alterations therein now directed and
the instructions now given ; and that all the clauses and
provisions requiring adjustment between the Finance
Committee and the Dock Committee be referred to the
Finance Committee to be adjusted accordingly ; and that
it be referred to the town-clerk to settle with the dock
solicitor all verbal alterations remaining necessary, the
same being done subject to the approbation of the Finance
and Dock Committees."
SALE OF LAND AT 'WALLASEY POOL.

Mr. G. H. LAWRENCE brought under consideration
the offers which had been made, and accepted by the Fi-
nance Committee for the residue of the land at or near
Wallasey Pool, subject to the approbation of the council.
The first was an offer from Mr. John Laird, to purchase
21,000 square yards at 16s. each ; the second was an offer
from Mr. Potter, for a lot of about the same size, 17,000
square yards, at the same price ; the third was an offer
from Messrs. Jackson and Laird, for four lots of 11,000
souare yards, at the same price; and the fourth and last
W-
3S from Mr. Cole, for the residue of the land at the
south side, 97 statute acres, or 47,900 square yards, at. the
rate of £l2OO per statute acre, or as. per square yard , the
whole of those sales to be subject to an immediate payment
at the rate of 10 per cent., and the rest in five and ten
theyears.
WallaseyMr.Lleaewdr,eneceet wireicnltuodnintgo the Birkenhead
itrhuaetnthheeadwheostlaetoef,
had stood the corporation in, with interest, £320,000 ;
that sales had already been effected to the extent of
£155,000, and that the present offers w,uld realise a sum
of £175,000 more; thereby leaving a balance of from
£BOOO to £lO,OOO to be carried to the credit of the corpo-
ration, exclusive of 87,000 or 90,000 square yards of most
valuable land, which they had still left, with the rever-
sionary interest, which would be of immense value. He
then strongly urged that these offers be accepted, not so
much upon public grounds as because of financial con-
siderations ; for he contended, that unless the resources
of the corporation were allowed to be developed by mea-
sures of a bolder nature than any hitherto attempted, it
would be impossible to carry on those public undertakings
which from time to time, and by the most benevolent
men, were brought before the council. He admitted that,
if the Wallasey dock bill were carried, of which he enter-
tained little doubt, the property of the corporation on the
other side of the Mersey would be enhanced in value ;
whereas, if the scheme should fall through, it would be
materially deteriorated and thrown back for years. He
concluded by moving, that the resolution of the Finance
Committee, in reference to the offers, be confirmed.
Sir THOMAS BRANCKER seconded the motion.

Mr. PARKER asked what security had the council for
the payment of the purchase money on the 47,000 square
yards?

The TOWN-CLERK said, that, in the first place, they had
10 per cent. of the money down ; in the next place, within
five years, the purchaser would have to pay as eighth part
down ; then he was to build a river wall, and to keep the
buildings he had erected upon it insured. If he made de-
fault, even in the payment of the interest, the corporation
bad a power to re-enter, and either to sell, and hold him
liable, or to resume the property with all the advantages
he had put upon it.
The TOWN-CLERK having here read the proceedings of
the Finance Committee with reference to the sales, those
proceedings were confirmed ; and the council adjourned
at twenty-five minutes to three o'clock.
It may, perhaps, be necessary to mention that in con-
firming the proceedings of the Finance Committee, the
council sanctioned the sales of the residue of the land at
Wallasey Pool.