The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1843-10-31 00:00:00

PURCHASE-OF LAND FROM LORD DERBY

Mr. G. H. LAWRENCE said that, having now succeeded
in inducing them to dispose of part 'of their Cheshire
estate, he had next to call upon them to increase t hi, ex-
tent of their property on this side of the water. He al-
luded to the next subject on the paper—that of pur-
chasing 1,000 yards of land from the Earl of D,rby,
from Beacon's-gutter, extending northwards. In March
'42, a report of the Finance Committee had been agreed
upon, which acknowledged the importance of such a
purchase as that now submitted for consideration ; and at
that time the Finance Committee were instructed to carry
on negociations with the Earl of Derby. It appeared,
however, upon investigation, that however good his lord-
ship's title might be in his own-judgment, yet that the
arrangement required the approbation of the Chancellor

of the Duchy; and the result was, that, after a length-
ened negociation with the doehy, the committee had
succeeded in getting her Majesty to relinquish any claims
of the crown to the locality in question. The terms on
which her Majesty had agreed to the relinquishment had
been embodied in the report of the committee ; and he
would endeavour to state them briefly. In the first place

the council were to pay to the duchy 40s. annually for
their rights, until they should have proceeded to parliament
and obtained a legislative sanction to the complete sale or
transfer of the property to the corporation. The'Chancel-
lor of the Duchy agreed to surrender his rights for a sum of
£BOO, to be paid by the Corporation; but one of the sti-
pulations which he attached to the surrender was, that
the council should agree to make a river wall, or protec-
tion to theproperty. without which indeed it could never
be made available for any useful purpose. He firther
stipulated that the wall should bemade, half iu five years,
and the other half in five years more—the whole to be
completed in ten years. This .part of the arrangement
would, of-course, be very expensive, inasmuch as to build

_
a wall there must add most materially to the, cost of the
purchase.. Bat this was one of the conditions to which the
council were submitting. Thenthere was another stipu-
lation which, at first, nearly thwarted, or put. an extin-
guisher noon the negociations of the committee with the
Duchy. The Duchy were advised by Lord Granville So-
merset that there was considerable detriment done to the
river by the practise of the Dock Committee in discharging
the mud or rubbish they extracted from the docks into
the river. +Lord Granville Somerset had seen this prac-
tice, and when the committee first approached him on the
subject of the purchase, his lordship made the cessation
of the practice one of the conditions. He said. " Gentle-
men, you must abandon that practice, which I cousider a
nuisance.;" and it was with difficulty that the committee
persuaded him to forego any stipulation upon that head.
No difficulty now existed on this point with respect to the
Duchy • no further renaonstrancesmould be made by Lord
Granville Somerset ; but his lordship had made it one of
the conditions that be (Mr. Lawrence) should bring the
subject before the council, and that he should explain to
the members his feelings and views ; and he had further
intimated that whenever the Dock Committee went before
Parliament again he would require the subject to be
thoroughly sifted. His lordship said that he would then
inquire into the subject, and require of the committee to
show cause why they continued the practice; and, there-
fore, he (Mr. Lawrence) mentionedsit now, as he had pro-
mised to do, in order that the council might be prepared
to meet the subject.
SANDS.—We have met it.

Mr. LAWRE?WE was aware that the Dock Committee
had met it by a letter from Mr. Hartley, and by saying
that there would be great difficulty in remedying the prac-
tice; and it was upon the reading of Mr. Hartley's letter
that Lord G. Somerset had said he would require further
explanation. It appeared that there was deposited in the
river. as extracted from the docks, about 220,000 cubic
yards of mud annually. Mr. Hartley's statement was to
the effect that the remedying of the practice would be at-
tended with immense expense—that three mud docks, with
double gates, would have to be erected, and that the
220.000 cubic yards of mud would annually cover upwards
of 20 acres of land. The answer to Lord Granville So-
merset was the enormous expense of the undertaking;
and it was upon the strength of this answer that his lord-
ship was willing that the further consideration of the sub-
ject should be postponed. He did not say that his opinions
were changed, but that the matter required the considera-
tion of the Dock Committee and that of parliament. In
his lordship they had a person willing to lend them a fa-
vourable ear, conversant with their interests, and anxious
to advance them ; and the result of the present negocia-
tion showed that his lordship was favourably disposed, and
not desirous of extracting money from them for the pur-
pose of increasing the revenues of the privy purse. (Hear,
hear.)

Mr. SANDS expressed a hope that the council would be
satisfied with. Mr. Hartley's explanation on the subject.
The report on the purchase from Lord Derby was then
confirmed.

The following further recommendations of the Finance
Committee were next confirmed :—Recotnmendation for
the appointment of Francis Broadfoot as master of the
River Craft Dock ; the appointment of Thomas Boothby
as collector of fines on summary convictions, at a salary
of £llO per annum ; the appointment of an additional
racer as inspector of hackney coaches, at £65 per annum ;
the sal:; of an additional piece of land to the Baptist
Chapel land in Myrtle-street; the purchase of the area
in front of James Owen's house, in Islington.

WATCH COMMITTEE.
The proceedings of the watch, lighting, cleansing, and
fire police committees were confirmed.