The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1851-02-18 00:00:00

The adjourned meeting_waeheld ea Wettnesday,—the Mayor
in the Chair.
The proceedings of the -Dock COmmittee referred to the bilk;
now before Parliament;. and Afr.. LITTLEIDA LE, in mcving.
their-adoption, explained-the nature of the opposition intended'
to be offered to the Birkenhead Dock Titill,:and the bill of the
American Chamber of Commerce:
Some conversation then took, place relative to St. George's,
Hall; but it terminatedon. Mr..Lloyd'S assurance that an am-.
ple report would be laid.beforethe neat Council..
The proceedings of several committees having been con-
firmed, Mr. HoLT moved theconfirmstion of the Water Com-
mittee's proceedings.
Mr. BENNETT, before-the proceedings were passed, begged
to say a few words. The- chairman would recollect that there
was iapon those proceedings the borrowing of so large a sum WS
.6130,000. (Hear, hear.). He wasa consenting party to this,
on theunderstandingthat it was.ta SO to the payment of those
bondholders who were receiving rates of interest at four per
cent: It. by no means followed that,because they had borrowed
this money, .the Rivington.worke, were to proceed. At the last .
meeting of the Council he-requested that his resignation should
be received by the Gannon, provided the estimates, which had
been so long promised, and held, by Mr. Hawksley, were not
laid before the water committee, to be decided upon at the
present meeting of the council. As this had not been, done, he
hoped he should bepermitted to resign his place on that corn-
mittee, and to state his-reasons far so doing. At present it was
not known how the town of Liverpool would be supplied with
water; whether altogether from the Rivington or from the
home supply, or whether there would be a joint supply from
both sources ;..and how this-would run in accordance with the
act of parliament he could not tell. The supply was now equal
to about fifteen gallons per day for all the inhabitants of Liver-
pool,—far more than.they could possibly require. Again, on
the 12th of August, in accordance with the instructions from
the committee, the plans and estimates, which every member-
of the committee knew he ought to have had ready, were de-
manded at the• hands of Mr. Hawksley, but they were not
ready, nor had they up to the present time been received. In-
deed, since the 25th of August, he (Mr. Bennett) believed they
had not seen Air.. Hawksley at the committee; although they
had, since that time, heard of his being in consultation with
those members of the committee favourable to the supply from
Rivington. In no other committee were matters kept so much
in the dark as by the members of the Water Committee. They,
knew nothing of what was going on, and he defied any member
to state a single consecutive course that was at all likely to be.•
carried out in relation to their proceedings. In looking over
the Water proceedings, he found that an agreement had been-
entered into with Mr. Jackson, who was the originator of the.
Rivington Pike scheme, and who was to receive .el,OOO for,
completing the works, and doing all that was necessary;
whereas they were now paying Mr. Statham for doing a por,_
tion of this very work ; and he (Mr. Bennett) did complain
that they should pay twice over for the same thing. These,
were the principal reasons which, Mr. Bennett said, prevented
him from sitting longer upon the Water Committee.
Mr. WOoDRUFF defended the water committee, and Mr.,
SAMUEL HOLM'S condemned the opposition of Air. Alderman
Bennett.
Mr. H4oLT, in a brief reply, said that the loan from the Bank
of England had been obtained on most advantageous terms,
and that the court of directors had in reality acted with great
consideration towards the committee. The expenditure which.
Mr. Bennett had condemned was, Mr. Holt contended, limes,
sary to provide for any emergencies, such as the demand upon
the water supply in case of fire, &c. As to Mr. Hawk'ley's at-
tendance, he had always attended the committee when sum-
mooed to do so; and by letter he had also frequently given
most valuable advice. And with regard to the contract for
.415,000, Mr. Bennett knew as well as he (Mr. Holt) did that
this matter would partake of a double character; and that it
was a connecting link between the Old Swan and the Rivington
reservoir. He would say further, that Messrs. Finch and Wil-
ley had contracted to do a portion of the work for .e 5, for which
six, seven, and nine pounds would have been paid to. others.
Another member of the committee, Mr: Picton, had sent a
_note to him stating that he wished to withdraw from. the coin-
mittes ; it would be for the Council to fill up the vacancy at
the next meeting.
The resignations of Mr. Alderman Bennett and Mr. Picton
were received.
The proceedings of the Church Expenditure Committee,
comprising special recommendations for the reduction of pay-
ments to clerks, organists, and choirs, at each of the Corpora-
tion churches, and the discontinuance of payments to officers
of the parochial churches, and at St. Thomas's': hurch, amount-
ing to .4600, were read. Several communications which had
been addressed to the Mayor upon the same subject were also
read. They contained a letter from Mr. Edwd. Lovatt, parish
clerk, requesting that his present salary of ~i 8 per annum be
continued to him during his life; another from Mr. W. C.
Wilkinson. clerk of St. George's Church, requesting that his
present salary of .'5O per annum may not be reduced ; and a
third from Mr. Geo. Holden, organist of St. George's Church,
on the same subject. Other communications from the her.
Mr. Pain, the minister, and the chureh,vardens of St. Thomas'
Church, together with a letter from Mr. H. B. Hornby, a
member of the congregation, were read with regard to the
proposed reductions in that church.
Mr. FERGUSON moved the adoption of the report, and made
a few observations with regard to the necessity for the Town-
clerk's report, guided by which the Expenditure Committee
had come to the resolutions which were that day submitted.
For some time past much dissatisfaction had been excited, not
only in the Council, but out of doors, at the large and extrava-
gant amount of the church expenditure. The annual report of
the Borough Fund showed the large expense incurred in main-
taining the several churches, St. George's, St. Michael's, St.
Luke's, St. Martin's, and St. Thomas's, which were upheld
mostly ac the cost of the Corporation. They were splendid
edifices; and, if they were but filled by large congregations,
would be the pride of Liverpool. But he was sorry to say the
reverse was the case. In the outlay for thes, churches a pro-
fitable investment was not looked for; there was a higher ob-
ject in view, that of supplying the gospel to the poor. They
had been taunted with extravagance; and, anxious to know
what claims were obligatory and what were not, they had
thought it their duty to request the Town-clerk to draw up a
report upon the subject, which showed that the total expendi-
ture of the five churches was 43,712 12s. 3d.; while the seat
rents only realised 4636 is. 12d.; leaving a deficit of .43,076
Ss. sd. The present system of paying the officials was a bad
one; the Corporation paid a part of their salaries, and the
churchwardens another part ; and neither the Corporation nor
the churchwardens had any control over them. Mr. Lovett
received a salary of .4-50 per annum, and fees in addition, from
St. Michael's Church ; and this salary they deemed might well
Le reduced. From St. James's Church they did not receive a
single penny, of seat rents. Having enlarged upon these de-
tails, Mr. Ferguson said it would have been an extraordinary
circumstance if the Church Expenditure Committee bad come
to any other conclusion than the one which they lied adopted;
because, according to the report, the .payments were not only
not obligatory, but many of them were unjustifiable.
Mr. BiGIiAM seconded the resolution.
Mr. PARKER. Opposed the adoption of the committee's re-
commendation, and moved an amendment, which was second-
edby Mr. Rout NSON, to the effect that the report be not received.
Mr. GARDNER thought it completely below the attention of
the Council to commence with such small items as the reduc-
tions in the salaries of old and faithful servants. The salaries
ought to die with them.
Mr. Tit ost SON having followed on the same side, a somewhat
lengthy discussion ensued, iu which Mr. S. Holme, Mr. Tool- i
min, Mr. Hodson, Mr. Bighatn, and Mr. Hornby took part. '
Mr. licrimu gave notice of another amendment for the re-
ference of the report back to the committee.
Mr. FERGUSON having replied, the votes were taken upon
the amendment of Mr. Parker, which was lost by 24 to 29.—
Mr. Holme's amendment was thentaken, and carried by 45 to 7.
Mr. BIGHAAI, as a member of the committee, denounced
the conduct of some other members Of that committee who
had voted for the amendment.
'the proceedings of the Shipbuilding Committee comprised
a recommendation to lay out the land in Batlin-street for ship-
building, according to a plan submitted, at a cost of .4'6,500.
Mr. TOBIN moved the adoption of the committee's report,
and some discussion arose as to the advisability of delaying
the consideration of the plan; but Mr. 'robin warmly opposed
this, on the ground that shipbuilders would be prevented from
entering into contracts if the matter were thus delayed. An
amendment for the postponement was put and lost, the origi-
nal motion confirming the report being carried.
MR. RUSHTON AND THE JUVENILE REFORMATORY.
The proceedings of the Juvenile Offenders Committee com-
prised a letter which had been received from Mr. Rushton, in
reference to the proposed site of the juvenile reformatory at
Walton. When thee committee had first asked his opinion
about the site, (the magistrate wrote,) he had not seen the
land at Walton, but he had since inspected it, and lie was of
".asrillostle ticttiesettioultliaobnleoi nay, that it Was im-
p 101 ns
to,
Ine that
carry otto
Its proximity to the gaol sacs a fatal objection, since the re-
leased prisoners would tend to corrupt the inmates. The char
racter of the land also was not suitable, even if there were no
other considerations. '1 here were other remarks in the letter,
which, however, are referred to below, w hich called forth some
expressions of dissatisfaction
,on the part of several mein hers
of the Council. The letter being finished, the minutes of the
committee on the subject were read, recommending the Coun-
cil not to incur the expense of building the reformatory at
Walton ; and asking permission to seek for some other site, to
which the objections which they had found to prevail, and
which were alluded to in the letter of Mr. Rushton, would not
apply.
--

HORNBY moved the confirmation of the proceedings,
and hoped the Council would approve of the course which the
committee had taken. One part of the letter of Mr. Rushton
deserved their serious consideration, lie (Mr. Hornby) quite
agreed with the magistrate, that unless they were prepared to
go heartily into this undertaking, and resolved to give their
support not only to the committee, but to the officers who
would have the charge of the institution, anti upon whose dis-
cretion and energy the success of the affair mainly depended,
they would do tar better in abandoning the thing altogether.
(Hear; hear.) He-hoped he should not be misunderstood in
these remarks. He was very far from imputing to any gentle-
man in that room a want of feeling for the wretched indivi-
duals whose condition they desired to ameliorate. No one
could doubt that Mr. Parker, in point of benevolence and a
desire to promote the happiness of his fellow-creatures, yielded
to no man in that Council ; but what he meant to say was, that
if any very considerable sect,on of the Council were so tho-
roughly impressed with the hopelessness of the success of the
proposed undertaking as to Mance them rather to wish to
obstruct the views of the committee than give thew their warm
and cordial support, they would not only be acting more wisely
but far more humanely, in abandoning. the thing altogeth&
Mr. Torts, jun., seconded the 11)(nnin, and, altt
marks front Mr. Tnomsti--

)me re-

FmiNlllol'oll drew attenticn to the letter of Mr. Rush-
He had no wish to speak in the seine disrespectful terms
^,'gistrate as that gentleman had done of a
.urge portion of the members of the Council. '[here were men
in that Council uho valued their seats there no longer than
'hose seats wee•- nourable; and he regretted that
the position of stipendiary ma-

of the stipen

'orthy and he

, a man place(
ncu!cate oßlei

Win resptct for the con-
'',re thought it right,

to one

which was the reiteration of what he might
mating libel, and one which he (the speaker) had
a previous occasion indignantly denied in the presence of
le magistrate himself. The libel was, that the object of those
who voted against the committee was merely a ruse, their in-
tention being to destroy the principle. Such a chavirp wfia

reflection upon men of honour; rind, notwithstanding 111
Rushton la.d heard this assertion denied, its purport w
again recorded in the document which had been
said, " 1 tear very much that the removal of the
from Wall-hill, where all circumstances f
meat, to Walton, ;where everything is
result, but denotes a foregone conclusion

areg rthe exper

inst the

ndirect

Was a gro

to move

the tio(

direct dictation to the Coi
dictated to by any one, he

for one,
position t

111 r. HORAIY;111-1

:ed the

proposed by A 3 r. Fer

gd which Mr. Ri
rated, for be hal

men were ready t

turn was brot