The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1850-04-09 00:00:00

TO CORR ESPON DENTS.
re are compelled to postpone the notices of several interesting
publications.

YESTERDAY'S COUNCIL.-(SEE PAGE 6.)

cation of these Gentlemen who held that opinion from the
very first. Further, Mr. Stephenson agreed that the
water was of an excellent quality, and dispersed into
" thin air" all the statements made by various indivi-
duals about the pollution of the water. Jlear, hear.)
It then resolved itself simply into a question of cost ; and
in regard to this subject Mr. Stephenson had furnished
them in his report with some very valuable data, which
they could ail use in coming to a conclusion as well as Mr.
Stephenson could do, with all his eminence. They had it
-- in one of the tables that up to eleven million gallons
WE proposed in our last to explain to our daily it was cheaper to obtain it from the local sources
than to get it from a distance. But it should be further
readers the views of the Dock Committee, as stated remembered that Mr. Stephenson left out of view, and
by the witnesses examined in the House of Corn- very properly so, for it was not mentioned in his instrue-
rnons upon the Dock Bill of 1848, with respect to tions that the Council had paid £600,000 for the privilege
the appropriation to be made of the docks at the of supplying water to the inhabitants of Liverpool, and
south end of the town, in the event of the removal afearmathtesoeurcens
I or
retard g lt•I supply
o the echo cost, e y
the twe purchasedstat eat the
es
Of the timber trade to the north ; and we now pro- given i nth.e reports did not correspond. Mr. Stephenson
need to fulfil our promise, in the hope of removing told them in one of the tables the cost of raisine water
a portion of the fears which seem to be entertained from the home sources would be so much ; but, if they
of injury to result to owners and occupiers of pro- examined the tables which were given in the end of the
report,
however, thepreferred
taking
did not
belle e, (Mr. Picton,)
perty in the present locality. In the first instance,
because it was taken
we may remark that, as we are informed, it is not from the actual cost during the last year. It appeared
proposed by the Dock Committee to force the trade that the four million of gallons which at present were
from the present south docks; and it is even con- raised daily cost £6,312. According to Mr. Stephenson's
ceived that a portion of it may and will remain in calculation, to raise eight million gallons in addition to
x theirt, oporr
peren t
annum.
accountfour additional
would
thena ell s
stand, would
thus
cost
that locality. For this purpose, in a great measure,
the formation of the Harrington Dock will be pro- They had to pay the interest of £600,000 at 41 per cent.,
needed with as soon as ever possession can be had or £27,000 per annum. Add to that the cost of raising
of the site which is at present covered over by piled 4,000,000 gallons, according to the expense last year,
timber. Mr. Rankin, in his evidence, inclined to I £6342. Add, according to Mr. Stephenson's calculation,
the opinion that the wholesale trade even might be annum.±:ll2l.,oaoaoa,eigtonal ii
oforl the expensefou of raisings
advantageously divided between the two ends; outlay of £45,312, *for 8 mrill7oenw gwalelon's makingpe lya EX-1
and that ships with cargoes engaged for the manu- eluding their present sources of supplying the cost of a
factoring districts in the interior would resort, in corresponding supply from Rivington, would be annually
preference, to the south ; but the prevailing opinion the interest of £600,000, £27,000, the interest and the
was in favour of the concentration of all the whole- ;,e 92t
soofotheit,lievington scheme £500,000, at 41- per cent..
pstlse r
tables, ite
sale trade at the north, thus affording buyers an
item which
a wfuarst ltileortsui'ml.
eluded in Mr. Sntecpahmenesoains
opportunity to select from the aggregate stock in of £5OOO annually which would be necessary to keep the
the port ; and that the retail trade and the market aqueduct and the filter bed in repair ; therefore, the outlay
for sawn timber, &e., would be principally those on the Rivington plan, for eight million gallons of water
which would remain in the south, and for the daily, would be £60,000, as against £45,342, making a
of the home supply. At
carrying on of which the offices end premises exist- balance of £15,000 in favour
13 million gallons daily raised at home, the cost would be
ing there, would, probably, be little too large. £60,000 per ann., and from Rivington £61,376. These
The construction of the Harrington Dock would, statements were to be found in the tables of Mr. Stephen-
of itself, for some years to come, attract population son's report. Then there was another very important
to the south. This, however, is not the only cir- question to consider inreference to the comparative cost of
these
atwo
spnl at
int sy. 0 iAwt
apresent
aL,ievnerrap;
no ocrl dt
to did d
irvii ort rzuni i•c,
hen-
so
cumstance which would tend to maintain the
equipoise between the two localities. The removal son's report, the Rivington scheme was capable of yield-
of the mass of building, now being purchased for ing. If, therefore, they were obliged in the first instance
the Wapping Dock, will, unquestionably, drive a to go to the expense in securing a supply which it might
large number of its inhabitants further southwards be Liverpool would require in some ten or twenty years
to
out, if
the result was that . the suns of: money laid
in search of houses and business premises, whilst
fmnfusumatincopeoeunnursinetenrfesttenwoouritdwaecnctuymyueslartse the dock and warehouses to be erected upon its toou a fearful
site will, in a few years, add largely to the active A saving if £15,000 per annum, taking it at compound in-
trade carried on at that end of the town. The j terest, at 4per cent. would in 10 years amount to £lBO,OOO.
probable future application of the Brunswick Dock, This should not be overlooked, for it formed an impor-
tant item in reference to the scheme before them. But
at present used entirely for the timber vessels, if 2,000,000 gallons would serve them for the next five
many of which, during long periods of the year, years they would have another £6,000 per annum, which
lie there inactive, on sale or between the seasons, would he equivalent to £32,500; and by thus getting this
will conduce materially to give increased liveliness supply from Rivington when they did not really reonire it
to the trade and value to the property in the neigh- they would lose, in ten years, some £215,000. And then
bourhood. In his examination on the 4th April with regard to the ultimate supply for the requirements of
Mr. J. Bramley-Moore stated, in reply to a question thefind taotwtl e; close (Aferf.
API Picton) t ;e)pcboennfsens seds
report,be was
that surprisedi.
e t 0 1 (a.
by Mr. Talbot,—"ls there a demand for the Bruns- them he bad every reason to believe ere would be a
wick Dock for general commercial purposes, or only supply at Rivington sufficient for the next twenty years.
timber purposes ?"—that "if the Brunswick Dock If all the agitation and turmoil, bitter feelings and
was set at liberty, by the removal of timber from expense, that theyl had gone to during the last
that to another locality, it would be one of the ea threea, e , yearsi they wasw e
roen only togo t obtainali ta i
ss
expense,upply fo r i 20th e yearsy Nto
most convenient docks for general purposes in the to fill up the wells and cease from obtaining water fromfo
town, on account of the enlarged space there ; the the present sources of supply, let them go to some other
quay of the Brunswick Dock is 300 feet wide." place, where there was a larger supply of water. Was Li-
Should the demand for the appropriation of the verpool to content itself by looking forward for merely 10
Brunswick Dock for general commercial purposes sotri l
12,0 andya years tot.o come.tber p r
0130,
ruetss e supposingbe made,e town tot tot standbey t
be so great as to lead to its being conceded, and it have another agitation somewhat similar to the present prove in addition that the Harrington Dock is one, in 20 years to come ? He thought whatever they (lid
capable of accommodating that portion of the tim- ought to be done for posterity; they ought to look cen-
ber trade which may have preferred remaining at turies beforehand, rather than to such a paltry number of
ryeeaasroe
nassfotar,eiaiaty,;nac,ndbettreefobiren
„hien saiwntinnaltlhttesreepeoxrtegnrseoast
former be surrounded with warehouses, erected
the south end of the town, it is proposed that the
for so compParativly triflingP an''adgvantage.—(Hear,P hear.)
upon a system which is found to he a great But as it was thought that our population was likely to
improvement upon that of the Albert Dock ware- increase (lie would take it either way) at the end of 20
houses, and for the carrying out of which it is years they would have to look for fresh sources of supply.
peculiarly suitable. The following was the evidence
If on the other hand it did not, and the town continued
stationary, it was far cheaper for them to continue to
of Mr. Bramley-Moore upon the subject : obtain the supply from the home resources. In either
Question, by Mr. Talbot.--" The Brunswick Dock is 1 case they were on the horns of a dilemma, and the Pike
now occupied by the timber trade, and which will here- I scheme was not the best that could be devised. There
after be more devoted to general commercial purposes
,• was another most serious subject for consideration. It
is that the one en which dock warehouses might be erected was admitted on all hands, if they went to Rivington
with benefit ?" Pike, there would be a most serious deficiency of fends
Answer.—" I should say it was one of the best sites in 1 to meet the expenditure. Mr. Fernihough was prepared
the town, perhaps the second best ; the quay space is 1 with a statement, showing the extent to which that defici-
wider, and it will be amply convenient for a shed between ency would arise; the excess of expenditure over income,
the warehouses and that dock, which I think is a very ; if he (Mr. Picton) understood it properly, would be about
great convenience, on the principle of the London docks, I £20,000 per annum. From what source was this to be
except the St. Katherine's Docks, where I think there is ' made good ? Were they to tax the inhabitants tos a
a very inconvenient mode of constructing warehouses ; 1 borough rate to make good this sum ? Or were they to
and the Albert warehouses, which we have now got, are , stop all the further progress of improvement in the town,
upon the same principle ; but I think it is a bad principle, ; and appropriate the whole surplus funds of the Corpora-
because a shed to work in between the dock and the ware_ I tion to this purpose ? In any case recollect the sum in
houses is a great advantage ; and looking to that, that is i excess had to be taken out of the pockets of the rate-
an additional recommendation in our eyes that, by remo- payers; and he confessed he looked forward with very
ving the timber trade to the north, it at the same time an- gloomy anticipations. (Hear, hear.) He wished he could
I
swers the subsidiary purposes ; the Brunswick Dock is see the matter in a more favourable light ; but it did appear
one of the best docks for that purpose; besides relieving i to him that thesourcesof income, so farfrom being increased,
the town of the incumbranee of those enormous waggons would be cut off and diminished, for this reason: if they
that now carry the timber to the Leeds and Liverpool abandoned the present source of supply, it would be evident
Canal." to all that the supply under the red sandstone would
The witness enumerated as amongst the disad- accumulate,tt and he asked whethert the resulte would not
p ee ,
annum,ha
n t s
iwnt water
erlTsn
as exceeded ced
obtaind .fl 5). e ?rr
o.twl
n 0
vantages of the present warehouses on the edge of
the quay, the necessity of performing the wharfage warter (Hear, hear.) Thus a large source of income
work, before warehousing, under the warehouses would be cut off: and he did not hesitate to say the
themselves, by which a quantity of warehouse space income would be reduced instead of increased. It might
is lost, and the danger, in case of fire, in a dock be said, however, what course would you adopt ? What
where the yards of the vessels actually touch the
chance had they of going to parliament to get the scheme
buildings. abandoned, and were they not placed in this predicament,
that go on with the Rivington scheme we must. Be it so.
Upon an impartial consideration of the whole If parliament forced the scheme on them, they should
question, we cannot but arrive at the conclusion that, submit, and make the best of it. But so long as a
although some little temporary inconvenience may hope remained they ought net to lose an opportunity of
be felt by a few parties from the removal of the placingmn s
suitabletl
s eolnv a in
iite positionwen l d sv hichthelreo.thtought the
bulk of the timber trade to the north, the carrying that both bills be read a second time. therefore,he 7r:w proposecierk
of the whole plans of the Dock Committee will be had an objection that petitions should be preseated against
ultimately beneficial to the owners and occupiers of the bill; so it might be, but whichever bill was proceeded
property, and to the business generally of the south with, they were sure to have petitions presented in suffi-
i
end of the town. For the first time that part of c3inensnt
mnuewmibieerre.
abAnsuttoxtihseoexanpeanwscketnhea House fees frsme waswould
the town will be placed in possession of a share in before them, and after all the expense they had gone to,
the trade in the leading staples of our imports, and in £l5O ought not to deter them from taking a step of that
the most extensive and valuable portion of our ex- kind. He (Mr. Picton) would represent the matter to
port trade. The south end will also be materially the Committee of the House of Commons, candidly and
fairly; lie would show them the dilemma in which they
advantaged by the proposed railway cornmunica-
were placed if we shall carry out the scheme, and if,
tion with the entire of our line of docks, for the notwithstanding all this, they forced it on us, and say we
first time rendered possible by means of the \Yap- must go on with it, they should do the best they could.
ping Docks; and we should not greatly wonder to see He (Mr. Picton) was perfectly satisfied—he was satisfied
this dock and the Brunswick Dock become almost that he had done the best he could on behalf of the
as great favourites with the merchant, and the ship- whilstw n atnhdili is owntrenisl tituenfc in success ti give
He
but he
owner, especially for the India and China and the repeated 'argearna,s if theop&ounclwas, againstgil }IL; on this
South American trades, as the pet Prince's, or the point, he would, ingood faith, assist allin his power to carry
Albert Dock itself, as well as for other trades, the out the scheme, whatever it might be, in the best and
direction of which has been for some years to the cheapest manner. (Hear, hear.)
new docks formed at the north end. On the score Mr. Alderman Thum said he had taken no part in the
eunn t If
alltr . e
eSnt Tarh mer lon n . isteni
nr had
spoken
o e r
of an alleged tendency of the change to reduce the aol;pthenttnlir
productiveness to our local burthens of the rateable of the sufficiency of the supply' elnrtal:rz t
e Irle epof water to be obtainedrl:en
property in the south, we entertain no serious fears. from the red sandstone rock. He (Mr. Nicol) thought it
The quantity of land available for buildings in that was never denied that a considerable supply of water was
locality has, during the last few years, been diroi-
tbeeobne obtaineda b
from the red sandstone rock ; but it had
rocksupplyhioa ft
water ;om the redsandstone
nishing rapidly, and by the infusion of a more ac-
arser t eya
l lmeno
fscience
was that
diminishing the p p
five business, and one of a higher class, into the was not only a scientific opinion, but it had been a.dduced
two Toxteths, we may expect to see the remainder in their own evidence from the commencement of the
taken up for buildings of a better description than operations under Messrs. Kennedy and M'Gregor down
those which have recently been erected, to the experiments made by Mr. Stephenson's assistants.
In any event, so far as this part of the subject is Mr. Stephenson told them the moment they got under
low matter, , d
concerned, there can be no interest or advantage to int water mark, sol
o the water, and thid
ere fore i salt, f
they su&c foun
nk 1000 ya its
rd way
s, as
the ratepayers, to arise from adopting the proposal Mr. Bennett recommended, they would get considerably
made by some parties to transfer the timber below the bed of the river, and expose themselves to the
trade to the Birkenhead Docks. And with introduction of salt and other hard matters, which dete-
riorated the quality of the water. Mr. Proctor in speak-
respect to the parties engaged in that trade,
and who have expended money in the erec- ing anpe 0f the two schemes, said that one would cost £50,000
as ainst £, for ther.
tion of buildings, offices, sheds, the purchase of Mr. Alderman PROCTO42
R. 00
As againstoth £38,000.
land for yards, &c., we submit that a candid review Mr. Alderman Nicol, thought that Mr. Proctor forgot
of the facts which we brought before them in pre- to add the interest on the expenditure already incurred in
e themselves might the
produce that reThe sult,two buthemes to the mi-
are likely to be recompensed, for any reasonable nor scheme, which is to cost the smaller interest, is to be
loss which they may thus sustain, by the much added the sum already expended on the Rivington Pike
greater and cheaper facilities for conducting their scheme. Mr. Picton had referred to the revenue and ex-
business about to be afforded them at the north penditure of the Rivington Pike scheme. If the expenses
end of the town. of the one, including the expenses that had already been
incurred, was to be as great as the other, he did not see
how the town was to be benefited by it. The interest of
a million of money would have to be raid in either case,
' and there would be no saving. This should not be
brought forward as a gloom, for if there was a gloom, it
had already taken place. He (Mr. Nicoll did not know
what Mr. Fernihough had to bring forward. He appre-
hended that these calculations were based on a rate of 5
per cent. He (Mr. Nicol) did not hesitate to say that if
they went on with the extension, and gave: the collateral
security of the corporation, there would he no difficulty in
getting money at 3 per cent. He had some experience in
the application of loans of money for the Rivington-pike
scheme at the time he (Mr. Nicol) was chairman of the
Water Committee, and he had no hesitation in saying
that they could then have readily borrowed the money at
31 per cent. He doubted whether they could not then get
it at 31 per cent., by giving the security of the Corporate
estate. The objection which the Bank of England had to
lending money on such an undertaking as this was, that
there was no landed security. All they wanted was this
security. They would readily lend the money if the se-
curity was of a class consistent with their regulations.
After briefly referring to the injury which had been done
to the credit of the water-works and the town generally,
he concluded by saying that Mr. Stephenson's report
was just what he expected it to be, scientific and sensible.
slim., hear.)
Mr. Avisoet said when he entered the council he was
unfavourable to the Rivington Pike scheme, and after
reading Mr. Stephenson's report carefully he saw no
ground to change his opinion. Mr. Stephenson had
shown that a sufficient supply of water was to be obtained
la the wells, without going to any distance ; but he felt

We cannot deryplier the signature to the letter reporting the
case of cruelty in Cases-street. Our correspondent should
have given the name of the cart-owner. He cannot expect
the magistrates, on such general informs•ion as that con-
tained in his letter, to prosecute further inquiries.
The lengthy report of the Council Meeting has prevented the
intended insertion of several letters.

THE DOCK PORTERS.—We have perused the corre-
spondence which has passed between Mr. Wheeler, the
solicitor of the bill promoted by the dock porters, and the
dock solicitor. The Dock Committee seem to have acted
throughout the recent negociations with the tenderest
regard to the interests of the dock porters, and consented
leave the matters in dispute to arbitrators selected by
the dock porters themselves—Messrs. W. Brown, L.
Hevworth, and A. Henry. When these gentlemen gave
a decision, inimical to the wishes of the porters, Mr.
Wheeler refused to withdraw the hill, on the ground that
he did not consider that that verdict was to be final. As
Mr. North justly remarks in his final letter, the Dock
Committee have thus no alternative but to oppose the bill.
A FACT FOR FREE TRADERS.—A FARM GOING A-BEG-
GING.—We have just had shewn to us a letter from a
landowner in Herefordshire to his brother, a respectable
merchant in Liverpool, which contains the following
striking fact. The writer says.—" Last Friday I offered
a man 26 acres of land, with excellent buildings, to work
ft in any way he pleased, on payment of tithes and rates,
wiehout any rent at all. I made the same offer to ano-
ther man the week before, and both rejected it. The
land his grown as good turnips as ever grew, and was first
turned up in 1824." We are informed that the land in
question is most eligibly situated, in the middle of Here-
fordshire, and in a most salubrious climate, and that it
coat the proprietor upwards of £l9OO. Here is a chance
for any free trader who has a taste for agricultural pur-
suits. A farm without rent will surely tempt some of our
Manchester Solons to try their newly discovered science
upon. and retire to, from the smoke end bustle of the
world f

he could not be a party to any longer keeping up an agi-
tation on this subject. (Hear, hear.) After appointing
Mr. Stephenson, he asked would it be right, after he had
undertaken the case, and after he had gone into the ques-
tion most fully, and held an open court in the town, at
which all parties might attend and give evidence, to dis-
sent from his decision. It would be treating Mr. Ste-
phenson with great disrespect if they were to set his
report on one side. When Mr. Preeme waited on Mr.
Stephenson, in London, the latter gentleman was led to
believe that he was coming down as a mediator to settle
this question. (" Nothing of the kind.") That was
his (Mr. Avison's) impression. With regard to what
Mr. Picton proposed (if he—Mr.Avison--understood him
rightly, he had not proposed an amendment)—he pro-
posed that the two bills should be read a second time. If
he could see any good was to be derived from this course,
he should be very glad to support it ; but after consider-
ing the matter, he could not possibly see what good could
be derived from the second reading of these two bills.
He could see great evil ; he could see no good (hear); be-
cause, after all, they would have to decide which bill they
will have to go on with. The House of Commons would
not allow them to play fast and loose. They should se-
lect either one bill or the other to proceed with. Suppos-
ing they went on with both bills, they would have an agi-
tation commenced by the Rivington Pike party, for the
purpose of getting up evidence to submit before the com-
mittee in favour of the Pike scheme, and the Town-clerk
would also have to get up evidence ; therefore he could
not support Mr. Piston's motion for going on with both
bills.

Mr. Alderman HODGSON was opposed to the Rivington
scheme from the commencement, and he thought Mr.
Picton's observations would be most valuable if put for-
ward at the proper time, before the Rivington scheme
was entered upon. If they had not agreed directly, they
had by honourable implication, which he hoped the Coun-
cil would never violate, that Mr. Stephenson's report
should be conclusive. It was submitted to an engineer-
ing judge to decide what they all believed and trusted
would be the end of the dispute. With the decision he had
come-to before them they could never expect to succeed in
Parliament against the Rivington scheme. They had
submitted the case to their judge, and he had pronounced
to carry out the Pike scheme; and he (Mr. Hodgson)
asked any member of the Council what possible chance
they had of repealing that bill, or of doing anything
farther than increasing expense. He would therefore
recommend a much more cantious proceeding, and he
would therefore give his support to the amendment of
Mr. Horsfall.
Mr. A. F. JONES, a member of the Water Committee,
who was individually opposed to the appointment of any
engineer to decide on this question, but who, in obedience
to the command of the Council, was a party to the ap-
pointment of Mr. Stephenson, expressed his regret at the
conclusion arrived at by Mr. Stephenson ; but having
referred the subject to a gentleman like Mr. Stephenson,
he did think that when his opinion came before them,
however adverse it might be, they were bound to submit
to it. (Hear, hear.) He had no desire to prolong agita-
tion—it had already subsisted too long;—to do so would
only promote further heartburnings and expense, and he
therefore thought the sooner it was put an end to the
better. (Hear.) But when he (Mr. Jones) took up Mr.
Stephenson's report, he perfectly agreed in what had
f !lien from Mr. Picton—that it was, from beginning to
end. at variance with the evidence. In his (Mr. Jones's)
humble opinion, Mr. Stephenson had added nothing to
his great fame in the report that was before them. He
certainly had expected a very different report. He
thought that Mr. Stephenson had only taken into
account a portion of the evidence : all the practical
evidence had been set aside. The report seemed to be
in a great measure founded on the expense incurred in
the Rivington Pike scheme, whilst he had totally over-
looked the vastly increased amount which had already
' been expended in the purchase of the waterworks. He
regretted that these works had ever been taken out of the
hands of the companies; and he was sorry that his pre-
diction as to the evils likely to follow from that step were
to be exoerienced so soon. He doubted Mr. Stephenson's
judgment, when he spoke of the water in the red sand-
stone water being catchment water—that was "shallow
philosophy"—(laughter;)—his philosophy was deeper than
that ; he contended that the water came from unknown
sources forced by hydrostatic pressure, and concluded by
expressing his intention of supporting the amendment.
Mr. FERN [HOUGH defended the chairman of the Water
Committee for the course which he had adopted in refe-
renca to the manner in which he had brought this matter
before the Council. He contended that Mr. Stephenson
was quite wrong when he based his calculations on the
circumstance that the population of Liverpool amounted
to 400,000 souls. He felt convinced that 300,000 would
be much nearer the mark, and that, under all the circum-
stances attending the increase of our suburban districts,
it was not likely that Liverpool would have more than
400,000 souls for the next twenty years to come. lie
contended also that, if the Riyington works were carried
out in their integrity, and if the borough fund was to be
made liable for the payment of the annual deficiency
which might arise, the whole of their surplus fund would
be swallowed up, and the people would have to pay a
penny water rate.
Mr. MANN denied that any such contingency was to be
apprehended ' • on the contrary, considering that they were
likely to get their money on much easier terms he did not
think that the deficiency during the three or four first
years of the works, and which all would admit were likely
to he the heaviest, would amount to £5OOO.
Mr. NEILL would support the amendment because from
the first he had made up his mind to be bound by the
report of Mr. Stephenson,
Mr. BING/TAM had as yet heard no reason advanced
which justified their originally going to Rivington. He
protested against the doctrine that this report was to be
final. He had asked the question before, at the time
when the instructions were given to Mr. Stephenson, and
the Council declared that it was not to be considered as
final, or binding as such. His own conviction at present
was that they -would have both schemes; yet still he
could not help reflecting that the amount of liability
already incurred formed a strong ingredient in deciding
Mr. Stephenson. And he could not forget thas a gentle-
man in that Council, then in high position, had, upon the
last day of his tenure in office, signed the greater portion
of these liabilities, and, to use his own words, riveted the
Rivington scheme round our necks. (Oh, oh, and hear,
hear.)
Mr. Alderman T. B. HORSFALL said it was not his in-
tention to have offered any remarks to the Council in the
subject before them ; and lie hardly knew even then
whether the Council would expect him to notice an ob-
servation which had fallen from the last speaker. (Cries
of " no, no.") He might be permitted to observe that a
gentleman who repeated an attack in a question after it
had been answered, refuted, and decided over and over
again in the Council, was not entitled to any answer.
(Hear, hear.) Having ventured to make that observation,
he would also, as he had risen, make an observation or
two on the points which had fallen from the preceding
speakers. He did not rise, like other gentlemen, for the
purpose of laying claim to any great consistency,—a claim
which was quite unnecessary; for up to the time of hisbeing
appointed by theCouncilas a member of the Special Commit-
tee to inquire into the subject of the water question, he had
taken no part whatever in the discussion. But he (Mr.
Horsfall) must feel some satisfaction, and he was sure the
chairman of that special committee, who devoted much
time and consideration to the subject, n.ust feel great
satisfaction that Mr. Stephenson came exactly to the
same conclusion that the special committee did.—(Hear,
hear.) Mr. Stephenson did not express an opinion on
what might have been most desirable in the origin, but
lie looked at the question as it then stood with a
large amount of money already expended. He (Mr.
Horsfall) agreed with much that had fallen from other
speakers, and he differed from them in many points. He
agreed with Mr. Picton that there was sufficient in the
report to justify those gentlemen, who thought there
was a sufficient home supply. (Hear, hear.) And
he differed from Mr. Picton and other gentlemen when
they said that Mr. Stephenson's conclusion varied from
the reasoning in his report, for he (Mr. Horsfall) thought
nothing could be more conclusive than the paragraphs in
the report, and which he was sure would have great weight
in the council and with this community. He alluded to
this portion of it—

At this stage of the inquiry it may be desirable to institute
a commercial comparison between the only two projects which
appear to be suited to afford the requisite supply ; the one
from wells in the sandstone, and the other from Rivington
Pike.

The capitals required respectively are given above, and a
parallel between the annual cost of the two plans is contained
in this table :

Amount •f Supply

To obtain eight million gallons aday
will cost, per annum
To obtain nine
ten
.. eleven

Cost from I Cost from
Rivington. Wells.

twelve..
thirteen

28,356 I 23,220
28,612 26,616
28,868 29,612
29,125 32,608
29,381 35,604

It is thus obvious that, could the supply of Liverpool be for
ever restricted to 8,000,000 gallons a day, the annual saving by
adopting the well system would be .4'7,476 ; but when the de-
mand reaches 11,000,000 gallons a day, the difference turns in
favour of Rivington by the sum of 4,744 ; and to meet a de-
mand of 13,000,000 gallons a day, the saving in favour of Ri-
vington will amount to nearly 4'6,223 a year.

Now they must, as men of business, look not only to the
population of Liverpool at the present moment, but they
must look at it prospectively. He (Mr. Horsfall) con-
tended that, with facts like these before him, and know-
ing the amount of expenditure incurred, Mr. Stephenson
could have come to no other conclusion than the one he
had come to. And he would just put it to the Council as
men of common sense as it had been well put before,—
suppose you go to the House of Commons, the bill is
referred to the same Committee it was referred to before ;
and if it amounted to something like a ridiculous attempt
to get the bill repealed before, how perfectly preposterous
it must be when you go before Parliament with a report
of the character now placed before this Council. (Hear,
hear.) He did not intend to say another word, and he
trusted the Council would hardly think :it necessary to
divide on this question.

Mr. PROCTOR having replied, the amendment was put
and carried by a majority of 25. The numbers were—
For the amendment 37
Against it

Majority
The following is an analysis of the vote :
For the amendment—Councillors, E. Langdale, J. Bigham,
T. L. Hodson, J. Briscoe. G. H. Horsfall, T. Littledale, G.
Holt, H. Hornby, T. Avison, D. Bell, T. Rimmer, T. Wagstaff,
J. Rogers, J. A. Tobin, A. F. Jones, H. Neill, T. Chalmer, jun.,
J. Johnson, J. Parker, W. P. Freme, W. J. Horsfall, W. Mann,
W. Fisher ; Aldermen, D. Hodgson, A. Swainson, T. B. Hors-
fall, James Lawrence, W. Nicol, T. Sands, J. Cooper, J. N.
Wood, J. Bramley-Moore, E. Molyneux, John Bent, J. IL
Turner, T. Chilton, and the Mayor.
Against it—Councillors, W. Walthew, J. Woodruff, W. Pres-
ton, J. Atkinson, T. Godfrey, J. C. Fernihough, J. A. Picton,
W. Bennett, R. M. Beckwith, A. Henderson, E. C. Hindley ;
and Alderman Proctor._