The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1844-02-13 00:00:00

DOCK AND TOWN DUES.

Mr. Turner, on behalf of his house, has addressed the
following important letter to the Finance Committee of
the Towa Council :

(COPY.)

TO THE CHAIRMAN OF THE FINANCE COMMITTEE.

SlR,—The Council having decided that,as respects the
payment of town dues, all packages in wood or canvas
measuring above eight feet, and weighing more than two
hundred weight, shall be considered cases or bales, and
charged with duty accordingly. I beg on behalf of the house
of Sands, Turner, and Co., in which I am a partner, and
of whose business I have the principal management, to
enter my protest against this decision as altogether arbi-
trary,—not supported by custom,—contrary to the prac-
tice of the Town Dues office hither o, and at variance with
instructions which have been repeatedly given by the re-
ceiver of the town dues to exporters for their guidance,
and therefore incapable of being enforced at law. In the
evidence given by Mr. Corrie, the receiver of the town
duel, before a special committee of the Council, appointed
in November last, he stated :
That his attention was called to the subject during the
litigation with Bolton, Ogden, and Co., which terminated
20th June, 1843.
That he spoke to Mr. Blake (the clerk of Sands and Co.)
on the 30th June, 1834, and that the subject was again
mooted by him on the 22d July, 1834, and a few days af-
terwards carried as far as he could carry it.
That the matter was afterwards mentioned to the Town-
dues Committee; he does not recollect the date, but he
says that Sir Thos. 13rancker, " who was a member of
the Town-dues Committee at the time, recollects the cir-
cumstance, and will confirm my statement of the result ;"
and Mr. Corrie adds, " With that result I was sickened."
Mr. Corrie, your own receiver, was then asked :
Can you define the difference between bales and trusses,
and boxes and cases?—No.

Is there any person in your office who can give a decisive
definition ?—No.

Is there any authority to which you can appeal for a de.
finition ?—None.

Have you appealed to the Town-clerk in other instances
beside that of Sands and Co. ?—I have spoken to him on
the subject, but the difficulty of defining the difference be-
tween packages has prevented any further proceeding.
Mr. Corrie further stated in his evidence.
" That he had never remonstrated with Sands and Co.
since 1834, having been then set at defiance.

" That he made a complaint against Mongredien and
Co., to the Town-clerk, but it was not proceeded with.
" That he bad told Mr. Ripley's clerk that he might
enter packages of 400 lbs. weight as trusses.
" That he had told Messrs. Brownrigg, Stevens, and
Co.'s clerk that he would be doing right if he entered
goods according as they were advised to the firm (it being
quite notorious, I must add, that all wooden packages corn-
ing from Belfast or Glasgow are called boxes, whatever
their size or weight may be.)
Mr. Corrie further stated,
" That be had, in company with Mr. Bridge, (the then
Inspector for the Town-dues office) visited the warehouse
of Messrs. Moon and Co., for the purpose of inspecting
some packages (which they were in the habit of shipping
as trusses), which be (the receiver) considered questiona-
ble, and being asked what was the size of the questionable
packages, he stated about twenty-seven cubic feet ; and
being further asked under what denomination these ques-
tionable packages were passed for town dues at his of-
fice, he stated that they were always passed as trusses.
It is thus well known from the evidence of the receiver,
as well as from other sources, that the subject was consi-
dered by the Town-dues Committee so far back as 1834,
and that their attention was at that time specially called
to the circumstance that several of the merchants con-
ceived that the Town-Council could not legally enforce
the payment upon the export of dry goods packed in wood
or canvas, of any higher duty than the box and truss rate,
and that some of the largest exporters had been and were
continuing to act upon that impression. No legal steps
were, however, taken at that time, nor have they subse-
uu
ee
sntti loyn boefe
ine
ga tl ermi
gphtte db
y;
at
nh uasd,
mi t
tee ffd eacct
q,
us
juersrceenndceer in all
g andal
acceptanceqes of the lower rate of duty for the last ten years
t.
The Council however, now determine that they will
levy hereafter the higher rate of duty upon all packages
measuring above eight feet, and weighing more than two
hundred weight—upon what grounds it is difficult to con-
jecture, after the evidence of the receiver, and we have
reason to believe that none of the mercantile asoociations
who were applied to by a sub-committee appointed on the
subject, could, or at least did, give any definition what-
ever, whilst several of them expressly declared that no sa-
tisfactory definition could be given of the difference between
cases and boxes, or bales and trusses.
Although, therefore, considering the small amount of
any payment I can have to make, Ido not think the point
worth contesting in a court of law, and it is my intention
to adopt the definition that has been decided upon by the
Council, I think it due to myself and my house to say,
that 1 cannot admit its correctness.—l am, sir, with much
respect, your obedient, humble servant,
Liverpool, Ist February, 1844.

CHARLES TURNER.

THE REFORMATION SOCIETY.

On Tuesday evening, a meeting of the British Society,
for promoting the Religious Principles of the Reforma-
tion was held in the Music-hall, Bold-street. George
Finch, Esq., late M.P. for Stamford, and the Rev. John
Cumming, .Secretary for Scotland, attended as a deputa-
tion from the parent society. Every part of the spacious
building was crowded with respectable auditors.
The Rev. H. M`NEILE was unanimously called to the
chair.

Prayer having then been offered up by the Rev F.
Parry,

Th,l Rev. CHAIRMAN proceeded to explain the princi-
ples and objects of the society in behalf of which they
were assembled. The work, he said, is, the defence and
diffusion—defence against the hostile, and diffusion among
the ignorant—of the religious principles of the Protestant
Reformation. It is not willingly, as a matter of abstract
preference for its own sake, that we are engaged in the
contention inseparable from this work. Peace and ease
are objects of attraction to us as to other men, and if we
had no objects of more powerful attraction because of
more paramount importance, we would rest in peace and
ease. The real cause of our conduct is this, we believe
our Bibles ; and so long as the Bible remains the final and
sufficient standard of Christian truth and Christian duty,
it must continue to be a Christian duty earnestly to con-
tend for the integrity of Christian truth. (Hear.) 'We
are fully aware of the repugnance, the seemingly amiable,
and charitable, and kind repugnance, to all contention
which we have to meet. We are aware of the prime
facie advantage which the advocates of peace and har-
mony possess with the public. We are aware of the skill
with which that advantage has been worked. At this time,
and in this country, the policy of Rome is apparent peace,
and consequently her practice is denial of all that would
justify contention. The principles we impute to her are
denied, although announced in the very words of her own
publicly authorised, accredited, and unrescinded formu-
laries. (Hear, hear.) The practices we impute to her
are denied, although transcribed from the pages of authen-
tic history. We know with what consummate talent, and
with what encouraging success, this game was played by
the late learned prelate Dr. Baines, Bishop of Siga, where-
ever that see is situate—(laughter)—and factor for Rome,
at Prior-park, in the city of Bath, and throughout the
southwestern counties of England. We know how, at
the opening of new Roman Catholic chapels, built in a
great measure by contributions from deceived Protestants
—(hear-hear)—and among the rest at the opening of St.
Anthony's, in this town, he managed, under the profes-
sion of expounding the Roman faith, to gloss over, mys-
tify, or deny all the peculiar and distinctive principles of
Romanism—(hear, hear)—so that Protestant gentlemen,
attracted there by curiosity, returned thence quite charmed
with the meekness, urbanity, and winning gentleness of
the good bishop. We know that similar success is now
attending similar practices, as carried on by Dr. Wise-
man the bishop of Melipotamus, another outlandish see,
—(laughter)—who is doing Rome's work in the midland
counties of England. Full well we know that the denials
of these gentlemen are palatable, because they plead for
peace, and that our associations are unpalatable ,because
they invite to contention. We perceive also, that what is
called, though most improperly, the liberal section of our
population, however widely they may differ from Roman•
ists in- anything else, agree with them cordially in their
opposition to the gospel and to us. (Hear.) And as the
Romanist accuse us of obloquy, so these accuse us of
bigotry and uncharitableness. On this side also our op-
ponents seem to plead for peace, while again upon us is
thrown, with skill and effect, the appearance of wilful
contention. (Hear and cheers.) We are not ignorant of,
or insensible to, the many disadvantages of our position.
It is with our eyes open, having counted the cost, and
seriously considered the alternative, that we have occu-
pied, and continue to maintain it. The cost is loss of
reputation for judgement and discretion and moderation
among men whose good opinion we enjoy in other respects,
and value in every respect ; the alternative is, as we firmly
believe, unfaithfulness towards God. Therefore we can-
not hesitate. We believe it is better, far better, for men
to disagree about truth, than to agree in falsehood ; bet-
ter, far better, to disagree about religion and holiness,
than to agree in irreligion and sin. (Much applause.)
As to mis-statements, unfounded calumnies, and all such
charges so freely inculcated against us, our simple answer
is, we do not make any. It is easy to assert without
proof, and a press which boasts its liberty and high prin-
ciple takes the liberty of asserting roundly, not only with-
out proof, but in direct opposition to counter-proof,
which counter-proof is wilfully suppressed by the same
free press. (Hear, hear.) Amongst all the charges of
maligning the Church of Rome, advanced and reiterated
by a large portion of the press of this town, against your
present Chairman, not one instance has been specified ;
and why ? Simply because not one instance has occurred.