The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1846-11-03 00:00:00

THE, LIVERPOOL STANDARD.

THE MUNICIPAL ELECTION.

Prior to giving any details of the doings yesterday, pro-
bably one or two reminiscences of previous contests, may
be interesting, more especially as the subject is of course
the " talk" of the day ; and perhaps the first thing ne-
cesiary will be to give the state of the poll in the wards
which were contested last year or the year before, as at
the last election opposition was only offered in six wards,
viz., St. Paul'e, Pitt-street, Rodney-street, Lime-street,
West Derby, and North Toxteth. The following was
last year the state of the poll at the close in those wards,
and in 1844 in the remaining wards :

Wards. Majority.
Scotland Tames Brancker (a) ..... 217
• Isaac Holmes (c)....
St. Paul's .. Eyre Evans (a).. .... ... 171
J. C. Thompson (c)..... 133 38
St. Peter's R. S. Henderson (c) .... 269
Thos. Bolton (a)....
*Rodney-street.. J. N. Wood (c)
R. E. Harvey (a)
Lime-street..... Vincent Higgins (a)
Robert Rigby (c) .
St. Anne's James Parker (c)....... 231
William Earle (a)
West Derby .... James Plumpton (c)
James Mellor (a).
North Torteth .. Thomas Lloyd (a)
John Sheppard (c)
South Toxteth .. R. L. Jones (c)
R. V. Yates (a)

* For Rodney-street Ward the noting at the last election was
equal, and the Alderman and Assessors declared Mr. J. N.
Wood duly elected.

Last year ten Conservatives and six Radicals were re-
turned to the Council, seven Conservatives and three
Radicals being unopposed ; a very gratifying state of
things certainly, though not so cheering as were the re-
sults of previous years. In 1844, thirteen Conservatives
were returned ; in 1843, twelve ; in 1842, thirteen ; in
1841, again thirteen; and in 1840, twelve; and on each
of those occasions, except last year, the successful Radi-
cal members were returned by majorities miserably small,
as compared with the majorities in those wards which
returned Conservatives. It is the more necessary to no-
tice the majorities in the successful Radical wards at the
last election, viz. 38, 72, and 64, as we have no doubt
that these unusually large numbers, combined with the
known confusion into which the Conservative ranks have
been thrown by recent events, have served to inspire our
opponents with fresh courage, and induced them to en-
gage in a contest in districts where otherwise they would
not have ventured to show their faces. They did not,
however, with all their advant-iges, accomplish yesterday
more than we anticipated ; and to shew that their expec-
tations were raised to an extraordinary pitch, we need
only refer to the fact that this year, as far as they were
concerned, they only permitted (notwithstanding all their
sills, boasts of " liberality") two wards to be unopposed,
whilst last year seven Conservatives, and in 1841 six
Conservatives, were returned without the slightest oppo-
sition. There must, therefore, have been .some reason
for this increase in their laborious exertions ; and it is the
more remarkable that this factious conduct has taken
place, when their sweet mouths have been incessantly
pouring out the honeyed words, " Oh, give up political
distinctions—let party strifes be buried—let not religious
differences be alluded to." But, gentlemen, has your
conduct been at all assimilated to your professions ?—or,
rather, has it not given the lie in the plainest manner to
every one of them ? " Thou that sayest another should
not steal-, dolt thou steal?"
Last year, the following Conservative gentlemen were
returned without opposition :—Mr. F. Shand, for Ever-
ton ; Mr. Houghton, for Scotland ; Mr. Littledale, for
Exchange ; Mr. Stewart, for St. Peter's ; Mr. Heade, for
Abercamby ; Mr. Royden, for Great George ; and Mr.
Lace, for South Toxteth. No opposition was offered to
Mr. Rathbone, for Vauxhall; to Mr. Hugh llornby, for
Castle-street; or to Mr. Earle, for St. Anne's. In 1844
Mr. Shaw was returned unopposed for Everton, Mr.
Middleton for Exchange, Mr. Aspinall for Pitt-street,
Mr. G. G. Hornby for Great George, Mr. Procter for
Abercromby. and Mr. Leigh for West Derby. Now
with these " great facts " before us, we solicit a reply
from some one of our Radical contemporaries, to the fol-
lowing question :—" How does it happen that, with all
your professions of impartiality, and your tormentingly
reiterated desires that all political considerations should
be put aside, you have rushed this year into a contest in
every ward, except two, (which are. left uncontested
merely because opposition is avowedly hopeless,) and
have endeavoured to eject, from their seats in the Coun-
cil, gentlemen whom you have yourselves confessed to be,
in every respect which is in your opinion at all essential,
well qualified to discharge the duties which they have
been called upon by the electors to perform ?" Whatever
excuse you may offer for trying to retain your old mem-
bers, or for opposing one or two gentlemen whom you
may deem, however erroneously, strong political parti-
sans, we defy you to justify, on your own principles,
your conduct in such wards as Everton, Exchange, Rod-
ney-street, or Abercromby. It is well, however, that we
have not been deceived by your specious professions, as
the following report of yesterday's proceedings abundantly
testifies.
The subjoined table
hour (as far as we cou
at the election just cl,
are in italics :

exhibits tl
ld procure
med. Tll

ie state of the poll each
,t) in the contested wards
names of the Refornatrs

No.
on 10 11. 12.11. 2. 3. 4. ICon. Rad.
Reg. IMaj. Maj.
899 EVE RTO N.
W. Atherton .. 7,8 143166,195 231;266 301
W. Wallheu, .. 67 1231140 170 193 18 278 23
296 VAUXHALL. 12
J. G. Morris .. 13 60 69 78 89 101 118
T. Chalmer.... 24 34 43 49 55 70 79 39
472 ST. PAUL'S.
John Briscoe .. 14 22 35 45 69, 83 108
James Stitt.. .26 49 73 89 105'122 143 .. 35
610 EXCHANGE.
James Tyrer .. 56 90 124 138 146 161 187
James Mellor .. 16 45 64 74 98 111 129 56
523 PITT-STREET.
Thos.Toulmin.. 39 90 96 119 134160 199.
George H01t... 9 591 71 87 100 126 I€3l 36
450 GT. GEORGE.
Joseph Collier.. 45 78. 95 116 137 150 168
W. P. Freme 17 26' 51 72 80, 92 1031 65
821 RODNEY-ST.
Saml. Holme 78126;168 206 .. i 262 306
Thos. Booth ... 52 99 131 163 .. 1200 229 77
719 ABERCROMBY.
rhos. Kaye .... 57 99 125 146 175 209 268
Thos. Todd.... 66 981124 145 173 205 243 25
746 LIME-STREET.
Chas. Saunders. 65 90116 136 163 205 254
Henry Danson .55 921108 144 180 2.30 280 .. 26
473 ST. ANNE'S.
Wm. Bennett .. .. 91 .. 169 2021
Joseph Hornby 91 . • 139 159 43
814 N. TOXTETH.
John Sheppard ... 198 135,
Robert Bean. 20212171 .. 112

[The election for Scotland Ward and South ToxtethWard
will take place to-day (Tuesday) —the former being postponed
in consequence of the absence of Alderman Houghton, and the
latter on account of the illness of Alderman Bushby.]
We had this year, therefore, three wards uncontested,
and for these the following gentlemen walked over the
course :
- • -•-

_
Conservatives unopposed. Radical unopposed.
J. A. Tinne, for St. Peter's. I J. Aikin, for Castle-street.
G. H. Lawrence, W. Derby.
There have been, therefore, ten Conservatives returned
this year to the Council, and four Radicals. Anticipating
that Scotland Ward and South Toxteth Ward will to-day
return two " good na..n and true," the Conservatives will
hold the same numerical position which they did prior to
the election. Twelve Conservatives retired, and twelve
will have been returned,—though their position in the
wards will be slightly changed. In Scotland, Vauxhall,
and St. Anne's, a Conservative replaced a Radical ;
whilst in St. Paul's, Lime-s.reet, and North Toxteth, it
was vice versa.

There were 4299 votes given in the aggregate, of which
the Conservatives polled 2246, and the Radicals 2053,
—giving a majority of 193 to the Conservatives.
The following is a list of the Town Council as now
constituted. The names printed in italics are those of
new members :

Years to serve,

No. I.—EVERTON WARD.
Alderman David Hodgson (c)
William Atherton (c)
Councillors. {Francis Shand (c)
Thomas Shaw (c)
No. 2.— SCOTLAND WARD.
Alderman ...... Richard Houghton (c)

Richd. Houghton, jun. (c) 2
James Brancker (11) .. .... 1
No. 3.—VAUXHALL WARD.
Alderman T. B. Here,fall (c)
{John G. Morris (c)
Councillors. .. William Rathbone (R)
William Preston (R)..
No. 4.—ST. PAUL'S WARD.
Alderman Richard Griffith (c)
James Stitt (s). ..
Councillors. .. {Eyre Evans (a) ..
R. B. Hill (c) ...
No. S.—EXCHANGE WARD.
Alderman .. James Lawrence (c)
{James Tyrer (c)
Councillors. .. T. Littledale, jun. (c)
C. S. Middleton (c) ..
No. 6.—CASTLE-STABET WARD.
Alderman
James Aikin (u). ..
Councillors... { Hugh Hornby (u) .... 2
John Holmes (u) ........ 1
No. 7.—ST. PETERS WARD.
Alderman J. H. Turner (c).
{J. A. Tipne (c) 3
Councillors. .. John Stewart (c)
R. S. Henderson (c) ...... 1

Councillors. ..

1
3
2
1

2
1

No. B.—PITT.STREET WARD.
Alderman Thomas Sands (c) 4
{Thos. Toulmin (c) 3
Councillors. .. T. Robinson (c), . 2
James Aspinall (c) 1
No. 9.—GREAT GEORGE WARD.
Alderman Anthony Swainson (c) .... 4
{
Joseph Cooper (c) ....... 3
Councillors... Thomas Royden (c)..:::: 2
G. G. Hornby (c).... 1
No. 10.— RODNEY-STREET WARD.
Alderman . R. S. Crook (c) I
Sansue! Holme (c)
Councillors... J. N. Wood (c) 2
Charles Robertson W._ 1

Years to serve.
No. 11.—ABERCROMBY WARD.
Alderman .. William Nicol (c) 1
Thomas Kave (c)
Councillors. .. rC. W. Reade (c)
J. Procter (c)
__ __

. , .
No. 12.—LI11E-STREE i WARD.
Alderman
Henry DanBon (n)
{ 3
Councillors. .. Vincent Higgins (R) 2
J. B. Lloyd (c) 1
__ __

No. 13.—ST. ANNE'S WARD.
Alderman Edmund Molyneux (c).... 1
{ William Bennett (c) .... 3
Councillors... William Earle (R)........ 2
Jaynes Parker (c)

No. 14.—WEST DERBY WARD.
Alderman Tan Shaw Leigh (c) .... 4
G. H. Lawrence (c)
{ 3
Councillors. .. James Plumpton (c) 2
Josias Booker (c) ..
No. 15.—SOUTH TOXTETH WARD
Alderman W P. Bushby (c)........ I

.
3
Counc'Jlors. { Ambrose Lace (c) 2
R. L. Jones (c)

No. 16 —NORTH TOXTETII WARD.

Alderman Thotfias Chilton (c) ...... 1
Robert Benn (a)
Councillors. .. {Thomas Lloyd (a) 2
William Mann (c)..
The state of parties in the government of our munici-
pality is now, therefore, (allowing for Scotland and South
Toxteth, as we have represented.) as follows :—Conser-
vatives—Aldermen 16, Councillors 34; total, 50. Radi-
cals—Councillors 14. Conservative majority, 36.
Next year. Aldermen Houghton, Griffith, J. H. Tur-
ner. Crook, Nicol, Brarnley-Moore, Molyneux, and Chil-
ton, will retire—their period of service (six years) having
then expired ; but our readers will perceive at a glance
that there is not the remotest probability of any one of
these gentlemen being displaced by a Radical, even al-
lowing that party the utmost possible success at the next
election. We are not, therefore, likely to be under Ra-
dical domination for many years to come, let the exertions
of our opponents be what they may; but the Conserva-
tives must leave no stone unturned, not merely to " hold
their own," but to improve their numerical position.
We now give a detail of what took place in the various
wards.