The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1850-01-15 00:00:00

SPECIAL MEETING OF THI HEALTH COM-
MITTEE, YESTERDAY.

A special meeting of the sub-committee of the Health
Committee was held yesterday, for the purpose of dis-
cussing the clauses of the Sanatory Bill. Before open-
ing the proceedings deputations were admitted_ from the
Guardian Society, and the Horseowners' Society. There
were present Councillors Parker, (in the chair, i Thomson,
Bennett, Walthew, Hugh Hornby, Hodson, Morris, Fer-
guson, and Picton. The deputations consisted of Messrs.
James Holme, Bradley, Reay, (Secretary to the Guardian
Society,) W. Jones, (Secretary to the Houseowners'
Guardian Society,) H. G. Ireland, &c, Mr. PARKER
announced that the Town-clerk would read the bill,
clause by clause, when the gentlemen who had attended
as deputations could state any objections to their provi-
visions. After the preamble had been read, Mr. JAMES
HOLME expressed his opinion that from the multitude
of bills before the town, and in operation, it would be
very advisable that the present bill should not be pro-
ceeded with this year, and remarked that all parties inter-
ested might in the meantime communicate wit h the Health
Committee, in order to produce such a measure as would
he satisfactory to all. Mr. Picton coincided in this re-
commendation. A conversation then took place, in which
several members joined ; during which the Town-clerk,
having been appealed to as to whether the Btating and
Sanatory Acts could be amalgamated, so that parries
erecting buildings could have before them, at once, the
whole of the restrictions and regulations imposed upon
them, intimated that Parliament might probably o'iject,
and that in making the application the opportutiity of
legislation during the present year would be lost. The
clauses were then read, to enable the sub-committee to
report to the general body what were the objections urged
against them, and to make their report

of the out town-

Clauses 1 to 15 related to the sewerag
ships; and Mr. Newlands explained the difficulties which
exist under the present act. The various townships are
placed under the management of a separate surveyor, who
makes a plan of sewers, the cost cf carrying out winch is
paid by borrowing upon the security of the rates of such
townships, to be repaid within a certain term of years. A
difficulty was experienced from the circumstance that
many of the out townships had to be drained through
neighbouring townships, and frequently when the sewers
of one were prepared, the necessary means of carrying off
their contents were not prepared. It was also an objec-
tion to the present bill that the sewerage rates pressed
most onerously upon those out townships which were only
partially built upon; and in forming sewers from such
townships it was impossible to ascertain beforehand in
what manner unemployed land would he laid out. At pre-
sent the cost of forming drains and sewers falls upon the
owners of the built upon portion of the townships only.
The amended act proposed to make a set of large mains,
and to divide the assessment for the cost equitably over the
whole property of each township.
It was objected by several members of the deputations
and others, that some portions of such land were to be
severed under the act for fifty years. Mr. Newlands
shewed that the plan proposed would materially lessen the
pressure upon the owners of the houses in the out.town-
ships, whilst it would be very light upon the owners of the

unbuilt upon land.
Mr. W. JONES, secretary to the Houseow•ners Society,
objected to tax a large quantity of land which might never
be wanted to be built upon; and expressed his opinion,
that the proposition would be regarded as monstrous by
the landowners.
Mr. PARKER reminded the deputation that the Health
Committee were compelled to regard the question in a
sanatory point of view. They were bound to drain by
their present. act of Parliament, and if they did not Go
thAm_ If they carved out this

bill, which throws the cost upon household property, its
owners would be ruined. Several questions were put to
Mr. Newlands, as to the operation of the bill upon those
parties who had already paid sewerage rates for many
years, and who would have to pay again for a sewer when
at length made. A clause was pointed to (22) which pro-
vided that in such cases the money previously paid in rates
would be refunded, but it was not distinctly stated by
whom, or whether to the tenant or bouseowner.
Mr. REAY called attention to the ~nain principle of the
bill as to sewerage, which was the rating of the owners of
unbuilt-upon land.
The TOWN-CLERIC explained that the principle was not
new. Under the existing act land was expressly subjected

to be rated, but much of it being unproductive

coma run oe lain. as IL HIM Lit/ zitl ••••• -
of the present bill was to enable the Council to get the
rates upon such property, which, though unproductive at
present, is very valuable,
A long conversational discussion took place, during
which the Town-clerk explained their position under the
present act, and shewed what would be the alteration

made in the amended act.
Mr. H. HORNBY thought that the sub-committee ought
now to state whether or not they were satisfied with the
principle of the bill. It was clear that if they went on
under their present bill it would be almost ruinous, and

the rates upon household property would be fearful. They
could not stand still, for Government would come down
upon them with a Government Bill and do what they
liked with them.
Mr. PICTON, after stating that he did not care for these
threatsaboutaovernment bills, said hewas satisfied with the
general act, and having said this, he would add that he
approved of the principle of the bill before them.
Mr. TtiomsoN stated that the Earls of Sefton and
Derby, would oppose the bill.—On being asked for his
authority, he explained that they had auther.sed him to

say o
Mr_

Meatus supposed a case of a party, or parties,
erecting household property on the skirts of the borough,
and calling upon the owners of two or three miles of
intervening agricultural laud to tax themselves about 295.
per acre to pay for it.
Mr. NEWLANDS replied that it would be quite as unjust
if the owners of such houses had to make the two or
three miles of farming land at their own expense.
The Committee proceeded to consider the 16th, 17th,
and 18th clauses, enacting that the sewerage, paving,
watching and lighting rates be collected from the owners
instead of the occupiers.
Dr. BRADLEY and Mr. JONES, on behalf of the
House-owners' Guardian Society, expressed their objec-
tion to the principle of these clauses. It would press
most unjustly upon the owners of cottage property who
could not raise their rents. The owners of superior pro-
perty might be enabled to put on an increased rate.
Mr. H. HORNBY had no doubt that the owners of cot-
tage property would like to pay no rates at all. In jus-
tice, however, they had a perfect right to pay as well as
others. Hitherto the rates on such property had not been
called for, owing to the cost of collection, and the owners
seemed to think that they had a vested right to put the
money in their own pockets.
Mr. CAPES AsnLIN (called upon by the Chairman)
gave a statement of the proportion of rates collected under
the present system. In 1847 and 1848 73 per cent. was
collected for the whole of Liverpool, 10 Kirkdale 64
Everton, 70 West Derby, 63 Toxteth-park. He cal-
culated that, if the assessment was upon the owners, not
above 10 per cent. of the whole amount would be lost.

Mr. PICTON oppostd the principle of the clauses, which.
he contended, was unjust to the owners of property. The
cottage owners especially would be injured, having already
sufficient difficulty in getting even rents, from the dis•
tressed condition of many of their tenants. If the clause

applied to tenants.at-will, and they had power to deduct
the rates from the landlord, it would render necessary a

new agreement.
The TOWS-CLERK intimated that it was intended to
embrace tenants-at-will.
Mr. PICTON contended that thus, until that new ar-
rangement was made, the landlord would lose the amount
of the rates.
Mr. HORNBY stated that, if the Council did not pro-
Sanatory Bill, there were

parties in

cced _
the town wh.O would at once call for the interferenc.
the Government. He showed that, by the enactments of
the General Sanatory Bill, in the case of all property
under £lO per year, and for which the rent is paid oftener

,essed and pay a c

than quarterly, the owner may be as
position for his tenants.
Mr. JONES also opposed the clauses
Mr. JAMES HOLME thought that if these rates were to
go on parties would be prevented from building, and he
for one would not advise the laying of a single brick in
Liverpool. The Council were destroying the very pro-
perty they were appointed to guard, He himself could
go out on the Bury Railway and buy land for a tenth of
the price in Liverpool, yet be as near the Liverpool Ex-
change as if he was at Edge-hill. He could also get his

brick clay for 6d., whereas he was now paying 4s. (id. As
to the landlord getting the rates from his tenants, he
could give an example from some property of his own for
which he paid the rates, and could not get a shilling from
his tenants. He was confident that the result of adopting
these clauses would be to reduce the returns of the whole
of the property of Liverpool.
Several other gentlemen addressed the sub-committee
in very energetic terms.
Mr. REAY, of the Guardian Society, submitted that a
provision should be made to protect the owner of pro-
perty let from year to year, from the loss which he must
sustain before he can make a new arrangement with the
tenants.
Mr. WALTHEW suggested that a clause should be in-
serted to meet cases where landlords got no rents at all.
(Laughter.) He ought not to pay rates.
The TOWN-CLERK said that he had written in such
cases, in the margin of the act, " clauses strongly ob-
jected to."
Clause 21, giving power to the Council to carry th
main outlets beond the boundaries of the borough, Mr.e
NEWLANDS explained that the clause was not intended
to be carried out in the present undetermined state of the
question as to the value of sewage manure.
Mr. REAY submitted that some limit should be placed
to the powers sought for in the clause. The clause also
gave power to buy lands outside the borough for the depo-
sit and sale of the manure of the town. Mr. Parker re-
minded the sub-commitee that the question would have
to come before the Council, who would take care that no
powers were exercised injuriously to the interests of the
burgesses. _

Mr. BENNETT rose (at ten minutes past three) to say
that an important meeting of the water committee had to
meet in a short time, and suggested an adjournment,
which however was overruled.
Clause 22 was agreed to.
Clause 23, regulating the levels at which streets should
be laid out for the purpose of drainage, was objected to by
Mr. Picton on the ground that it would interfere with the
right of individuals to lay out their land as they considered
best for their advantage, and contended that all that the
Council had a right to insist upon was that any houses
erected on it should be so drained as not to be a nuisance
to the public. It was most dangerous to attempt to lay
down any given rule as to how a man should lay out his
land. It was ultimately arranged that a power of appeal
should be given.
Clauses 24, 25, and 26, were passed, the latter with a