The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1850-06-11 00:00:00

TfIE lIITERPOOIy .11111lAKII;

Mr. FERNIROUGH seconded the motion.
Mr. BENNETT, in a lengthy speech, opposed the motion,
contending that the appointment would have the effect of
bringing Mr. Duncan and Mr. Newlands into collision
with each other, and that ultimately it would entail an
,-additional expense upon the public, as Mr. Newlands
would require an assistant. He moved a direct negative,
Mr. HENDERSON seconded the amendment.
After a warm discussion, Mr. Bennett's amendment
was negatived by a large majority, and the proceedings
were confirmed.
In answer to questions from Mr. FERNIHOUGH,
The TOWN-CLERK said that the Extension of Time
Act, for the completion of the Rivington Works, would
be read on Wednesday evening, and that the act did not
authorise the Council to borrow more than £480,000 for
the purpose of carrying out the Rivington Works.
The Council then adjourned about five o'clock to
Monday.

ADJOURNED MEETING, YESTERDAY.
A meeting of the Town Council, adjourned from Wed-
nesday last, was held yesterday morning. The business
was opened by the Town-clerk reading the report of the
committee appointed to confer with the Hon. Mr. Corn-
wall Lewis, relative to the determination to petition
parliament to amend the laws as regards the rating of
property.

. Mr. Alderman HORSFALL begged before the report was
adopted to offer a few observations in reference to a sub-
ject connected with it. He understood a memorial from
the Houseowners' Guardian Society had been sent in to
the Council, and he wished that memorial to be read, in
order that he might make some statements relative to it.
The memorial was accordingly read by the Town-clerk.
It set forth that the memorialists had been informed that
Mr. Horsfall and other members of the Town Council had
had an interview, as a deputation from the Council, with
Mr. Cornwall Lewis on the subject of amending the paro-
chial assessment law ; and that at that interview the
deputation had sought to obtain Mr. Lewis's concurrence
to a measure which would insure a rating to the poor of the
owners of all property of the rental of £l2 and under, and
that Mr. Lewis had refused his concurrence. The memo-
rial further stated that the memorialists believing that the
deputation had not the sanction of the Town Council for
their proceedings in this resnect, considered that they
merited the censure of that body. The memorial was
signed " Geo. Sumner."
Mr. HonsFALL observed that there was not a shadow of
foundation (hear) for the statements contained in that
memorial, not a single word had been said at the inter-
view referred to on the subject about which the memorialists
appeared to be aggrieved. (Hear.) He thought it was
due to the committees of the council that the memorial be
taken no further notice of.

Mr. DOVER hoped before so strong a measure as the
onr suggested was adopted the council would reflect that
the memorial emanated from a highly respectable body,
and he was quite sure those gentlemen were incapable of
intentionally offending either the council or its commit-
tees. Was it not probable that they had been misinformed.
He had no doubt that was the state of the case, and there-
fore would suggest that the memorial be received and
allowed to remain on the table. The memorialists would
be satisfied at this mode of disposing of the matter.
Mr, HORSFALL (indignantly)—Satisfied (hear).
Mr. HORNBY rose to second Mr. Horsfall's motion
for the rejection of the memorial. He did not at all agree
with Mr. Dover ; for he thought-before those gentlemen
took so grave a course, they ought at least to have in-
formed themselves on the real state of the case, a course
in which there would have been no difficulty. (Hear,
hear.) They could have applied to the churchwardens
for the information. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. WOODRUFF opposed the motion.

Mr. HODSON defended it. He considered that an
im-
putation had undeservedly been cast upon the Council,
and ought to be resisted as an individual would resent an
imputation on his character. The report having been
read a second time,
Mr. ALDERMAN Nicol, observed that he understood
from it that it proposed to rato all descriptions of property,
consequently that class referred to by the memorialists,
must be included, and therefore that in effect they were
not in error.

Mr. HORSFALL explained that the report had reference
only to public property. It also appeared that Mr,
Nicol had not understood the memorialists to have charged
the deputation with,an attempt to rate-the 'owners not
the tenants of cottage property, he therefore suspended
further observation on the subject.
The MAYOR observed that the report said nothing
whatever about rating owners.
Mr. HORNEY said it appeared to be forgotten that the
charge against the committee was for having acted with-
out the sanction of the council (hear, hear.)
Mr. HODSON offered some further remark on the sub-
ject and concluded by again supporting Mr. Horsfall's
motion.

Mr. MANN said no man was more disposed to listen
with attention to anything which fell from Mr. Alderman
Horsfall than he was, but he would appeal to him whether
it was prudent to reject the memorial.

Mr. Alderman HeRsFALL rose to order. The question
was, whether the committee which had been appointed for
one purpose had not taken advantage of their position to
accomplish another object, to suit their own private pur-
poses. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. MANN said his object was to have all property
rated, and he considered that Mr. Alderman Horstall
would place the Council in a wrong position by calling
upon them to give a vote as to whether the memorial
should be received or not. He should therefore move
that the memorial do lie on the table.
Mr. I'AIiNEII. said the question seemed to be misunder-
stood. The object was to have all property rated ; but
the proposal sought to throw the rating off the tenants
and place it upon the landlords. (Hear, hear.) The
property alluded to was at present rated, every iota of it;
but if the committee had gone beyond their province, he
trusted the Connell would set them right.
Mr. G. HoLT said it appeared to him that the memori-
alists would make a mistake, and they stated that which
really did not occur in the committee at all. As they
had made such a mistake, he thought the memorialists
ought to be permitted to withdraw the memorial. If not
withdrawn, as it stated that which had not occurred, it
should be rejected in some way or other.
The Mayor suggested that under the circumstances the
Town-clerk should return the memorial, and state that
they had make a mistake.

Mr. THOMPSON joined in the recommendation of the
Mayor. _ _

Mr. Alderman HORSFALL had no objection to the me-
morial being returned, and if that course was persued he
would withdraw his motion.

This course was agreed to, and Mr. Alderman Horsfall
moved that the report of the committee be received and
adopted.
Mr. H. HORNBY seconded the motion.

Mr. HOLT said, he intended to offer his protest against
the report, though he should not move an amendment on
the subject. Their local rates did not call for any parti-
cular alteration or amendment by the Council. The
parish had attended to the poor-rates, which were now as
low as they well could be, and although other local rates,
from various circumstances, were at present press-
ing heavily upon the ratepayers, vet they would
soon be reduced. But when he found that the
object was to rate all the public establishments, and
amongst others the dock estate, he considered that the
scheme was ouickotic, out of place, and in every way
opposed to their advantage as a community. They now
possessed the advantage of receiving from the dock estate
a sum of not less than £lOO,OOO a year, and under these
circumstances they ought to be the last in the world to
moot such a question. He, however, should content
himse If with merely entering his protest against the
report.
Mr. Alderman DOVER rose as one of the committee to
support the report, •and in doing so expressed his astonish-
ment at finding Mr. Holt taking exception to it. The
opponents of dock rating had always done so on the
ground that other public property was not rated. (Hear,
hear, and "no no," from Mr. Holt.) He (Mr. Dover)
had always understood that was the ground upon which
the rating of the docks was opposed. He, however, on
that subject should travel out of Liverpool and go to
Porstmouth and Plymouth where the chief work of our
navy was performed. Although the sailors and others em-
ployed in those dock 3ards spent their money, or at least a
great portion of it at those places, yet when they became
unable to maintain themselves those parishes had to bear
the burthen. (Hear, hear.) Let them look to the mil-
lions which every year were received at our Custom-house
by which the country was benefitted, yet the town had to
bear the burthens of the poor which that establishment
was the means of throwing upon them. Look at Everton.
A serious injury had been inflicted upon property by the
introduction of barracks, and there not only had good pro-
perty been depreciated in value, but the poor-rates of the
township had been increased sixpence in the pound. He
believed that was the fact, but Mr. Langsdale could cor-
rect him if he was wrong.
Mr. LANGSDALE said it was true, and they would con-
tinue to increase.

Mr. DovEn continued—Then if they looked to Kirk-
dale, they would find that the erection of docks in that
township had destroyed valuable property, for houses
which formerly let for £2O a year each were now occupied
by dock labourers, at a loss of £5OO a year to the rates,
which was a serious drawback, and had increased the poor-
rates sixpence in the pound. He was, therefore, clearly
of opinion that there ought to be a general bill introduced
for giving power to rate all public property. Again, if
they looked at the unequal mode in which property was
rated. Their dock estate paid no local rates but the ware-
houses did. Their markets were rated but their water-
works were not. But there was a greater inconsistency
still. In Kirkdale their industrial schools paid poor-rata,
but the gaol did not. Again, the waterworks in that
township, from which no beneficial interest was
derived, paid parish rates, though strange to say
the new docks did not. He hoped the time was
not far distant when a general bill would be introduced
into parliament for the rating of all property, which would
set the question at rest—an event he sincerely desired to
see accomplished, and for this reason, that the agitation
of the subject had been the means of excluding from the
Council many valuable men, who were well acquainted
with corporate duties, and whom he would wish to see
reinstated. It was not his wish, nor the wish of those
who acted with him, to exclude merchants, the upper
classes, as he might be permitted to call them, from the
Council. As they bore their share of the burthens of the
town, he was wishful to see them share also in the work
of the Council, though it was not their wish to mix fur-
ther with them, as between them there was a great and
impassable guiph fixed, and he (Mr. Dover) and his
friends had no wish either to dine at their tables, or to
dance with their daughters. They were not anxious to
raise themselves up to their position ; but although they
did not wish to do that, at the same time they did:say
they should not share honours with them without also
sharing their burthens. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. Alderman BENT said it was his wish to offer a few
observations as to, the reasons which influenced his ink-

ment, and which inclined him to hope that a large majority
of the Council would not only agree with them, but even-
tually determine to petition parliament to grant such
powers as would enable them to carry into effect a mea-
sure of such interest and importance to the ratepayers of
Liverpool. He was clearly of opinion that all property,
r hether national or local, ought to contribute its fair
quota, not only for the relief of the poor, but for all other
establishments for the preservation of life and property,
and for the welfare of the community at large. (Hear,hear.) There were great numbers of persons who were
employed at our public works, who often, from adverse
times, or other casualties, were thrown upon the parish ;
and it was only just and right that those who benelitted
by such a description of labour should contribute towards
their support. The merchants of the town had the advan-
tage of the reduction of the dock rates on several occa-
sions, and it was only right that a small portion of that
income should be devoted to the public burdens. The
dock trust were now engaged in pulling down an immense
amount of rate-paying property to afford further dock
accommodation ; and were also about to remove one of
the most important branches of the trade—the timber
trade—beyond the boundary of the borough, which would
materially reduce the rates ; he felt he might urge this
circumstance upon the Council as a reason for not permit-
ting the dock estate to remain any longer free from
rates, without at least giving an equivalent for what
they were taking from them. (Hear.) Every interest
in the town ought to thrive and prosper as the commerce
of the port increases, rates ought to become less, and
property improved; but what was the fact, though the
number of vessels entering the port had increased and
the tonnage was larger, yet they found Liverpool paying
a larger amount of local taxation than ever it paid before,
there were a greater number of warehouses and houses
unoccupied, and the general trade of the town had de-
creased, thus proving that an immense trade might be
carried on without a corresponding advantage to the trade
of the town. It was his hope that the docks might go on
prrsperously,—but there was no denying the fact that
they were the means of introducisg a vast amount of
pauperism which the rate-payers alone ought not to pay.
(Hear, hear.) He considered they were not asking too
much from those who traded to the port, and for whose
advantage a vast amount of property nad been and still
was being removed, should not contribute to the support
of the public burthens. He was aware that it was an
argument used by those who opposed the rating of the
docks, that all surplus revenue should be appropriated to
the reduction of dock rates; but if the surplus was not
already expended in the increase of new docks, he thought
it only right that some portion should be devoted to the
local rates. There were also some who were of opinion
that parliament would not sanction such a bill, which was
a bill for taxing what was called a non-beneficial estate,
but parliament had already done so to some extent, and
no doubt would go further on a good cause being shown.
As to there being any fear of other ports coming into com-
petition with Liverpool, it was the great highway from the
manufacturing districts, such fears were groundless,—
(Hear, and cheers.) _

Mr. Alderman 141 COL said, when he ventured, upon a
previous occasion, to address a few words to the council,
he was rather surprised that Mr. Alderman Horsfall
should have taken offence•at his stating that it was an in-
genious mode of seeking to bring forward, in a new shape,
a plan for rating the Liverpool docks, and looking to the
speeches that had been made, that point seemed fully
proved. He (Mr. Nicol) however, was in hopes that as
the vexatious question of the Rivington Pike scheme had
been set at rest so would that ; but Mr. Bent seemed de-
termined that it should not, but hoped that the govern-
ment would give their sanction to it. He (Mr. Nicol)
knew they had tried the government, and he rather
thought they had the cold shoulder shown to them—at
least a little bird had so whispered to him.—(Cries of "no,
no," and " name, name.") He (Mr. Nicol) was in
London at the time.

Mr. Alderman HORSFALL.—What is the name of the
bird ?

Mr. Alderman Nicol, was at the home office on the
very day the deputation were there, and he need not go
further. As to Plymouth and Portsmouth a vast deal of
public money was spent, and there was no reason why
they should not contribute; but with regard to Liverpool,
what would it be without its docks ? who spent such large
sums of money in the town ? The merchants, and the
tradesmen and shopkeepers got the benefit. The parish
rates of Liverpool. were less than most large towns in
the kingdom, and where they spoke of the docks producing
a large amount of pauperism, they forgot that cholera and
other diseases visited the town, and the neglect of
sanatory regulations, which entailed a vast amount of ex-
penditure upon the town which might have been avoided
by proper forethought. He maintained that the docks
were the means of lightening the rates of the town instead
of increasing them, and it was not the duty of the Council
to interfere so as to impose ourthens upon them. For
these reasons he heartily joined Mr. Holt in protesting
against the report though he should not attempt to divide
the Council upon it.
Mr. GARDNER wished to know whether the charitable
property was to be rated. The report made an excep-
tion in favour of ecclesiastical property, but he wished to
know whether charitable property wes also to be excepted.
Mr. Alderman HORSFALL said the report spoke for
itself. The committee did not think it right to say more
than that charitable institutions and places of worship
should be excepted.
Mr. GARDNER then said—lt was quite clear from what
he had seen of Mr. Nicol that they had touched upon a
very sore point ; but he considered that the defence he had
made-in favour of the parties who were aoninah raina the
docks had satisfied every one that the efforts of the com-
mittee were just And proper, and that they ought to be
persisted in as no doubt they would be. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. PARKER said it was singular that those who wished
the subject of dock rating to be dropped should be conti-
nually agitating the question. It was a curious way to put
out afire by throwing tar barrels on it. (Hear, and laugh-
ter,) But it was said what would Liverpool be without
the docks ? Why to whom did the docks belong ! They
belonged to the corporation. Then again it was said that
the town was the lowest rated of any in the country. Why
instead of being so it ought not to be rated at all if its
revenue was properly managed. Then it was said 'the
merchants came to the town to serve it. Why he came to
the town as a brewer, no doubt to serve the public as well
as the merchants, but the fact was they all came to serve
themselves, and the public afterwards. (Laughter.) He
urged them to be united and then they need not fear the
result, but at all events they were not to be frightened
from their purpose by the threats of Mr. Nicol. If the
committee would only persevere he had no doubt they
would see all public property rated, and amongst it the
docks of Liverpool.
Mr. BIGFIAM regretted that the question was not amic-
ably settled, but he could assure Mr. Nicol it never would
be unless the rating of the docks were conceded.
Mr. TOBIN wished to say a few words in explanation
of his views on the subject. He had never said one word
against the principle of any such measure as that. He
had always stated it as his opinion that all public property
should be rated ; but what he had done was to object to
the bill for rating the docks, making them an exception
to the general rule, whereas we were now receiving from
that estate, in the shape of town dues, £lOO,OOO a year.
Mr. Bigham, had stated that the merchants did not con-
tribute their share to the public burthens because many
of them resided out of town ; but so also did a great many
of the shopkeepers, and he hoped they had heard the last
of the merchants being opposed to any portion of the
community, for,such a charge was most unjust.
Mr. MANN wished to say a few words why he should
follow Mr. Holt in protesting against the report. It was
not because he was opposed to all public property being
rated, for be was in favour of all property being rated,
both public and private; but he objected to it on the
ground that it was introduced for the sole object of rateing
the docks. If he needed proof of this, it was to be found
in the speeches which they had just heard, for scarcely
one word had been uttered except about rateing the docks.
Mr. H. HORNISY said it appeared to him the question
for discussion was not whether the docks should be rated
or not, but whether public property of every description
should be rated. The mode in which many of the rates
were laid was most unjust and unequal, and the difficulty
was in ascertaining how property could be made to
bear its proper and equal share of the public burthens.
The question was, how Liverpool, which suffered more
from this injustice than any other town, now that the sub-
ject was obtaining general attention throughout the
country—how Liverpool should make herself heard. Mr.
Holt had stated that some hundreds of millions of pro-
perty would be affected by the measure, but the question
was why should that property not be rated ? Mr. Nicol
had asked what Liverpool would be without her docks ?
Why, what would Manchester be without her mills ? Yet
they paid local rates. He was of opinion that every kind
of property, whether great or small, should be rated.
Mr. Alderman HORSFALL, in reply, regretted that Mr.
Holt did not see the distinction between making all
public property equally rateable and making Liverpool'
docks the exception. Ho did not know where Mr. Nicol
got the little bird from who whispered in his ear that the
government showed them the cold shoulder ; but he
could assure him that they were both courteously and
civilly received by Mr. Labouchere, though he did not
give any opinion on the subject either one way or the
other, which was to be expected. Again, Mr. Nicol had
called it a foolish crusade. (Hear.) They had all heard
of a celebrated character in London, 'Mr. Alderman
Wood, who used to characterise every measure which did
not originate with himself as absolute foolishness, and at
last got the name of " absolute wisdom." (Laughter.)
He (Mr. Horsfall) had opposed the bill for rating the
Liverpool docks, and lie felt he could do so consistently,
for it was making those docks at variance with the law of
the land, whereas they wished for a general measure,
which should rate not only the Liverpool docks but also
all other public property. (Cheers.)
The report was then adopted without a division.
JUVENILE OFFENDERS.
The further consideration of the report of the special
committee appointed to confer with the magistrates and
parochial authorities as to the establishment of an asylum
for juvenile offenders, which had been referred to the
finance committee was read. It recommended that the
sum of £1,200 per year should be appropriated for that
purpose with an outfit of £5OO.
Mr. H. HOENBY moved the adoption of the report and
that the subject be referred to the same committee to
carry it out. When he considered the very moderate
outlay and the great advantages to be derived even in a
pecuniary point of view, from adopting the measure, he
was at a loss to consider what arguments could be ad-
vanced against it. Should the experiment be successful,
the advantage would be considerable, and it was worth
trying for, at present the cost of maintaining the children
was nearly as great as now. The question was not whe-
ther they should vote away £1,200, but only the difference
between £1,200 and the present cost of keeping the chil-
dren in the borough gaol. He considered the subject
had been completely set at pest by the excellent letters of
our Stipendiary, and therefore he need say little more on
the subject ; but to show the interest felt on the subject
in either place!, he might mention that Du. Rushton had

lately received a letter from-Lady. Byrom- in Warwick
shire, offering a large piece of land for the purpose, which
Mr. Rushton had declined, on the ground that it was too
far distant (hear.)
Mr. Alderman HonsrALL seconded'the motion.
Mr. HODSOI.7 objected to such a resolution being
brought forward without the report being placed in the
hands of the Council. He admitted there was an absolute
necessity for,doing something for the children of the poor
of Liverpool, and he would contribute from his private
purse towards such an object; but still he held if they
commenced the formation .of a. house for reforming these
children, that the expense became a local expense, and
would be such as they had little idea of. He instanced the
Industrial School, which had caused an irnmenseincreaseof
youthful pauperism, and that many children had rot
there whose parents were able to support them. He
contended that anything which was to be done ought to
be done by government. There were sufficient demands
on the funds of the town, and he questioned whether the
sum asked (Xl2OO a year) would be at all competent for
the reformation of juvenile offenders in Liverpool. He,
therefore, moved that the proposition be not entertained.
(Cheers.)

Mr. PARKER seconded the amendment. In doing so
he admitted the extent to which juvenile crime prevailed,
but designated the plan proposed by Mr. Rushton as a
hobby of his, and quoted the opinion given by the stipen-
diary magistrate, that the industrial school at Kirkdale
was lessening the amount of crime. The law at present
afforded means for the reformation of these children.
The recorder could transport these children ; this was the
remedy, rid this country of them, and place them in a new
country where they might become useful members of
society. If they established this asylum, the fact of its
establishment would be known in every gaol in England,
and the town would be swarmed with juvenile criminals
from all parts of the kingdom. He, therefore seconded
the amendment.

Mr. DOVER said there was a charity in Liverpool called
Molyneux's charity, which amounted to about £7OO per
annum. Oue moiety of this money was for distribution
amongst the deserving widows of seamen, and the other
for the release of persons incarcerated in gaol for debt or
otherwise. Mr. Rushton thought that this moiety was
applicable for the use of the proposed institution, and he
(Mr. Dover) therefore thought that this £350 should
be taken out of the public purse. That would be legiti-
mate ; and he was favourable to granting the difference
between £350 and £1,200, inasmuch as they had to keep
those children already in gaol ; and they would not be
taking more than £3OO or £4OO a year out of the public
funds.

Mr. FREME was unfavourable to the resolution being
passed, and advised that the subject should be referred
back to the committee to report on all the details.
Mr. CHALMERS felt very deeply on this subject, for,
from twenty years experience as a surgeon in a gaol, he
had some knowledge and some facts that bore on the
case. He had met with many cases in which, from the
want of a slight assistance of this kind, youth barely cul-
pable had become deformed and destroyed ; and he was,
therefore, in hopes that something should be done. He
remembered the case of a poor boy committed to gaol who
had been brought before him (Mr. Chalmers) on his en-
trance in such a state of starvation and misery that he was
apprehensive he would have died within the first two or
three days. This lad had stolen a jacket in the country,
and was driven to the commission of the crime by hunger,
and was sentenced to three months' imprisonment. Two
years afterwards, this man came before him (Mr.
Chalmer) as a transport. In three months he became
inoculated with those principles which were imbibed in
a gaol. He came before him a healthy lad, but he said to
him, in the bitterness of spirit, he really wished he had
let him die. Looking at it in an economical point of
view, he thought a great saving would be effected to the
town, and he begged the Council to grant the money
asked for the establishment, from which great benefits
would result. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. THOMSON had determined to vote against the
motion ; but, after what had been mentioned, he would
give his vote for this establishment.
Mr. NEILL had great pleasure in supporting the
motion.

Mr. HENDERSON objected to the Corporation going
to such expense in reclaiming these children.
Mr. WOODRUFF said the result of his enquiries was,
that this measure was not only desirable but necessary.
He stated that, a few days ago, he visited the Borough
Gaol, and from what he had seen there he was fully con-
vinced of the necessity of the measure proposed by Mr.
Hamby. With reference to the Industrial Schools, he
stated the introduction of improperparties into the schools
arose from the negligence of the officers connected with
the establishment. •

Mr. PROCTER said that, as eight months of the present
year were gone by, and as this was an annual vote, they
should wait and see how the system worked at the end of
the year. He (Mr. Procter) should like the establish-
ment to be connected with the new gaol which they were
building. He threw this out as a suggestion, which
might not be thought unworthy of the consideration of
the special committee. He would, therefore, advise Mr.
Hodson to withdraw his amendment.
Mr. TOBIN said little or nothing had been done for the
reformation of juvenile offenders. Punishment was the
basis of their present system, how had it succeeded ? let
their gloomy prisons and crowded gaols answer ; let the
fact that we are now expending £150,000 to erect a new
Borough Gaol ; were they to look calmly at the wreck of
their fellow men ; let them look this question fully in the
face ; let them grapple boldly with the difficulties, for
difficulties thore.pichably would bc, and' lee them" Weigh
the balance of good or evil. Instead of a person being re-
claimed when he entered the prison, he left a worse child
of hell. After referring to the cost of criminals and the
beneficial influence which the industrial ragged schools of
Scotland had exercised on criminal youth, he asked the
committee not to allow the sea of misery which sur-
rounded these poor children to engulph them.
Mr. HODGSON supported the resolution, but urged that
the foundation of all education should be based on sound
religious principles.
Mr. FISHER would give his support to the motion, so
much good was worth the experiment.
Mr. BIGIIAM urged for :delay, but if Mr. Hornby
pressed his motion, he would support it.
Mr. HORNBY rose, and was about to reply, when Mr.
Hodson withdrew his amendment, and the resolution was
carried. Mr. Dover's suggestion relative to Mr. Moly-
neux's charity being allowed to pass as an instruction to
the committee.