The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1844-04-09 00:00:00

TOWN COUNCIL PROCEEDINGS.

On Wednesday the usual monthly meeting of the
council was held at the Town-hall.

vVYY
FINANCE COMMITTEE.
The proceedings of the Finance Committee comprised
the recommendation to increase the salaries of Messrs.
Woods and Rishton, the district surveyors, from £2OO to
£250. The committee stated that additional sales of land
at Wallasey Pool had been made to Messrs. Laird, Potter,
Bailey, Horsfall, Macgregor, Radcliffe, &c.
Mr. G. H. LAWRENCE, seconded by Sir THOMAS
BRANCRER, having moved the confirmation of the pro-
ceedings,
Mr. TINNE asked whether the report was correct that
the opposition offered by the committee to the Monks
Ferry Bill had been characterised as useless, frivolous,
H. LeAteurEs. NcE, after having alluded to the in-
n and vexatious, and that the bill bad been supported by
theeo borough.
eu.sgsfih Innof newspaper reports, particularly when such
p r
emanated from anonymous correspondents, went
remror.
c.
teo
on to say that it was very true the Finance Committee

had acted up to the powers confided to them by the coun-
cil to watch all bills which were progressitig through par-
liament, and which bore in anywise upon the interests of
Liverp mol. They had, therefore, watched the Birkenhead
Improvement MIL and more especially one of its clauses
which seemed to interfere with their int-rests ; bat it was
equally true that the remonstrances of the committee on
the occasion had been set aside. He had never heard that
ihe two borough members voted against them, or that the
attempts of the committee to frustrate any part if the
measure were considered frivolous and vexatious. Lord
Fandon could not have voted against them, inasmuch as
be was not a member of the parliamentary committee, and
as to Sir Howard Douglas, he fully concurred in the
views of the council.

Mr. PARKER said he had crossed the water the evening
before, for the purpose of attending the meeting of the
Birkenhead Commissioners, and that he was quite sur-
prised to hear " the great man" on the other side (Mr.
'William Jackson) talking of having defeated the corpora-
tion of Liverpool upon all points. These were the words
of " the great man ; ' and they had certainly startled him
(Mr. Parker.) He had always had his doubts es to whe-
ther they should go to parliament to oppose bills, and the
Birkenhead Improvement Bill amongst the rest, except
upon very good grounds. At the same time he supposed
the Finance Committee had the power to send deputations
to London whenever they considered it advisable. He
understood that Sir Thomas Brancker, Mr. Nicol, and a
large party had lately gone up—(" No, no")—and be cer-
tainly thought if these sorti of deputations were to be con-
tinued, it would be well to subdivide the council and send
up others also. (A. laugh.) He wished to know why one
of the terms of the sale of the Wallasey Pool property
had been altered? for it seemed to him that the gentlemen
on the other side had only to express their wishes in order
to induce the corporation to accede to them. He also
wished to know whether the deposit of ten per cent. had
been paid ? (A voice—" It is.") He understood, from
the reading of the proceedings, that the purchasers of the
Wallasey property were to be allowed to make bricks and
sell them off the premises, on the payment of half-a-crown
a thousand; but did it never strike the committee that by
selling the clay they would make bare the land ?
The TOWN-,CLERK said they were limited not to go be-
yond a certain depth.
Mr. PARKER said they were at liberty, if he understood
right, to send bricks to any part of Birkenhead, on the
payment of half-a-crown a thousand, and that the money
so received was to go towards the payment of the land.
Mr. BIRKETT.—Oh ; no, no !
Mr. THORNHILL.—Yes ; it's so stated.
The DEPUTY TOWN-CLERK having read that part of the
proceedings which had reference to the disputed point,
Mr. BIRKETT defended the conduct of the committee in
having opposed the bill.
Mr. lionnsorr thought it perfectly out of order for any
committee, on any general grounds, to take upon them to
become opponents without having first come down to the
council, and stated the nature of the case.
Mr. H. HORNBY, as one in favour of the opposition,
had merely to say that there was a clause in the Birken-
head Amendment Bill, which interfered with the rights of
the corporation ; and he always conceived that it was the
duty of the Finance Committee to protect those rights from
any attack made upon them in any bill before parliament.
There was no time to have brought the bill before the
council, as the committee of the House of Commons were
to meet in a few days. One of the clauses interfered with
their rights to the corporation ferry ; for, by the original
bill, it was provided that no tunnel should be made from
the terminus at Grange-lane to the Monk's Ferry until
a branch should also be made to the corporation ferry.
But, by the present bill, this clause was attempted to be
evaded; and it was under those circumstances the com-
mittee considered themselves justified in making the op-
position. (Hear.) With regard to the liberty given the
purchasers of the Cheshire property to make bricks out of
the clay, that was a permission which all lessees who pur-
chased land for 75 years were entitled to obtain, and all
the committee bad done was to provide that nothing
should be taken off the land until the price was paid.
But, when that was paid, the parties might do what they
pleased, so as they did not injure the value of the land.
Mr. ISAAC HOLMES expressed his belief that Lord
Derby did not allow lessees to make bricks, except to build
on the property they obtained from him. He believed
that Mr. J. S. Leigh would never dispose of land on which
there was a great mass of clay without having first ob-
tained the value of that clay ; and he thought the council
could very well have disposed of the clay on the Cheshire
property before they effected the sales. He believed the
Finance Committee had been called upon by the tenant of
the Birkenhead Ferry to oppose the bill in question, as it
infringed on his rights ; and he further believed that the
committee would be bound to oppose it still in the House
of Lords.

Sir T. BRANCKER thought great inconvenience would
arise if the Finance Committee were to come before the
council on all occasions and expose their case to the pub-
lic, and that if the council had not sufficient trust in that
committee, in the matter of watching bills, they had better
appoint another committee. (Hear.)
Mr. G. H. LAWRENCE said that the ten per cent. must
be paid on the purchases ' • that Messrs. Horsfall and
M`Gregor, two of the purchasers, were going to establish
a large foundry on the other side, and that Mr. Radcliffe
and others of the purchasers were about to make other
improvements : so that the property would be brought
into real usefulness, and was not sold, as had been said on
former occasions, to gamblers. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. JALoyn intimated his intention, when the increase
of salaries to Messrs. Woods and Rishton was brought
before the next council, (as it must be according to the
standing orders,) to call for the proceedings of the Paid
Officers' Committee, with reference to those gentlemen,
to be read.
The proceedings were then confirmed.