The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1848-05-16 00:00:00

BIRKENHEAD DOCK COMPLETION.

The three bills introduced into Parliament relative to
the Birkenhead Docks, went before a select committee of
the Commons on Tuesday last. The committee included
Lord Charles Wellesley, Admiral Bowles, Sir G. Strick-
land, Sir P. Egerton, Mr. Tollemache, the two members.
for Liverpool, &c. A large model of the entire works
was placed before the Committee. The Bills were sup-
ported by Mr. Sergeant Wrangham, and two other bar-
risters and Messrs. Austin, Talbot, and Venables ap-
peared for the Liverpool Dock Trustees. The several
railways interested in Birkenhead were also represented,
as were several petitioners, owners of land, ratepayers,
owners of coasting vessels, &c. Mr. Sergeant Wrang-
ham, in a speech of three hours' duration, supported the
bills—entering into all the details of the money already,
expended, some of it illegally, by the Dock Commis-
sioners, the provisional offer of government towards the
completion of the works, &c. A sum of £370,000 would
be required to accomplish this and pay the outstanding
debts. With regard to the coasters, he contended that as
neither the admiralty nor the conservators of the river
had assented to their view of the case, they had no claim
upon the attention of the committee with regard to the
northern point of the works to which their petition
related. With regard to the petition of certain inhabi-
tants and ratepayers, he submitted that if they represented
the trading public, the arrangement with the crown would
be clearly beneficial to them ; for it was the only mode
by which the works would be completed, whilst the bar-
gain was expedient and advantageous. The valuations
made by Mr. Stewart showed that the arrangement with
the Crown would be advantageous to the Crown, whilst
the estimates of Mr. Stephenson and Mr. Rendel estab-
lished the fact, that the bargain was a provident one as
regarded the works. This, however, was a question
entirely for the committee. To the petitioners of Sea-
combeand Wallasey these measures would be eminently
advantageous, for they would be represented in the Dock
Coinmission by three members. He considered that no
valid objection could be made to the chairman of the
trust being a barrister, nominated by the Crown, for
after what had occurred the Crown ought to have a veto,
so long as the Crown advances remained unsatisfied, The
present was not a time to consider of an amalgamation
with the Liverpool Dock Trustees. -The works must he
completed before such a negociation could proceed. He
wished the independence of trade on both sides of the
Mersey to remain ; and if an union has hereafter to be
made, to enter upon its consideration equitably towards
both, but the present was not the time to go into the
question of amalgamation. It would be most unfortunate
if, now that the Crown was willing to stretch forth a help-
ing hand to complete this vast design, the whole should
sink from the want of the necessary funds, caused by the
refusal of Parliament to assent to their application.
The works could not be completed without the aid of the
Crown. Give the Crown permission to act upon its own
discretion, well-advised and deliberate as it always was,
and a valuable estate, a mighty boon to the commerce of
tie Mersey would be created. Refuse it, and all that had
been done at so much cost would return to its original
chaos—opera interrupta minceque murorum ingentes—
and so would end the dream of Birkenhead.

The only witness examined this day was Mr. Hookey,
harbour-master of Birkenhead, who proved the dues and
rates charged on the dockage in Liverpool, upon vessels
going to the latter placc after landing cargoes at Birken-
head.

On Wednesday the Committee again met, and Mr.
Rendel was examined at great length as to his estimate
for the completion of the works. He expressed his
opinion that the bargain with Government would be
most advantageous to the public, as the works would
thereby be completed. The next witness was Mr. Dun-
can Gibb, who approved of the designs for completing the
works, but on the whole his evidence was considered as
unfavourable to the promoters..
On Thursday, Mr. Rendel said, in further evidence, that
the completion of the upper part of the Pool was essential
to the success of the scheme. In reply to questions put
by Mr. Cardwell, he said that he considered the security
to the Crown to be good, and was surprised that the bond-
holders did not think so too. Mr. Maynard,.solicitor to
the bondholders, said that bondholders to the amount of
£390,000 had signified their assent to the arrangements
with the Crown. There was but one dissentient—Mr.
Wm. Stewart.

Mr. Talbot addressed the committee against the rating
bill. He considered the effort to obtain the bill
most audacious and unjust to the dock estate.. It went to
alter the estates of the mortgagers. He considered it a
transfer of the security,—an attempt to' get for Birken-
head what she was not entitled to. He proceeded to show
at great length, that, if Birkenhead were, as proposed,
converted into a distinct and independent port, the Li-
verpool Dock Estate would be seriously injured, inasmuch
as its tonnage and goods rates would be almost taken
away, and the security of the bondholders- destroyed.
Mr. Bremley-Moore, on being examined, said, that
when the Birkenhead scheme was first promulgated, it
was represented that no rates would ever be charged, or
any privileges asked for Birkenhead. Reductions had
been made in the Liverpool dock rates in the years-1836,
1845,. and 1847, to the amount of £1,400,000; and a
further reduction was now going on at the rate of £40,000
per annum. If the present bill were successful, it would
operate upon all vessels trading foreign, both inwards and
outwards. A vessel of 700 tons entering Birkenhead
would pay there Is. lid. per ton. amounting to £39,7i. 6d ;
she might then go over to Liverpool, remain there four
months, and then load outwards by paying 24-d., which
would be only £6 11s. 3d., and would leave £32 16s. 3d.
in favour of Birkenhead. This was upon the tonnage
only, no rates being charged upon coasters. In July,
1847, the foreign rates upon tonnage were £10.852. As-
suming the whole of the foreign tonnage had gone into
the Birkenhead docks, and afterwards passed into the
Liverpool docks, there loading outwards, they would have
paid £2888; leaving a loss to Liverpool, per month, of
£7963. Assuming this system was in operation upon all
the tonnage coming to Liverpool, it would make the total
loss amount to £209,000 per annum. There would,
therefore, be a deficiency of £75,000 upon the interest of
the debt.

Mr: Marrow, collector of the Liverpool dock rates,
produced documents confirmatory of Mr. Moore's. testi-
mony. The committee then adjourned.
The Committee met again on Friday, when Mr. Mere-
wether opened the opposition on the part of the Cheshire
Junction Railway Company, who opposed the bills be-
cause they had expended a considerable sum of money
in opening a railway communication with the docks, in
expectation that those docks would not be rated, and that
money would not have been laid out if the rates at present
proposed had been contemplated. They had also ex-
pended £BO,OOO on the edge of the great float-, under the
belief that a fixed level of thirteen feet was to ba main-
tained in the float, and unleSs that level was maintained,
the company's land would be useless.
Mr. John Laird was called, and stated that the railway
company had expended £300,000 on the faith of the
dock works being carried out in their original integrity,
and that they would never have thought of carrying the
line to Manchester if they had not believed that the
great float' was to be.made into a dock and the rates made
as low as possible, in order to compete with Manchester.
He had not received any notice of the alteration in the
level of the great float. In his opinion the inner and
outer works should go on together. If the outer basin
was not kept clean by „sluicing from the inner pool it
must be kept clean by dredging, which would be expen-
sive, but how the expense was to be met he did not
know.

Mr. W. Gibb, member of the Manchester Chamber of
Commerce, stated that that town took a warm interest
in the entire scheme of the docks and railways,.on account
of the proposed cheap railways and intended docks, but
the proposed rates would change the feeling of Manches-
ter towards the scheme, inasmuch as they would mar its
advantages.
Mr. Lowndes then opened the case on behalf of the
coasting trade, which ,by the present bills would be de-
prived of the advantages which they obtained under the
act of 1844. _ _ _

Mr. W. Marrow proved that the amount of tonnage
dues received from coasting vessels at Liverpool had in-
creased fifty per cent between 1843 and 1847.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.

INFORMATION UNDER THE SANATORY ACT.—On
Tuesday, William Byrom, estate agent, Kent-square,
agent to Adam Lodge, Esq., of London, was fined £5 for
refusing to repair nineteen privies and ten ash-pits in
Roper's-row, Lodge-lane.
A SAVAGE Doc.—On Tuesday, Thomas Fazakerley,
of Bridgewater-street, was fined forty shillings and costs,
for allowing a large dog, of ferocious disposition, to go at
large. The animal had bitten a little child three times
within the last three months.

STOWING AWAY EMIGRANTS.—OR Friday, Terence
Smith, a tidily-dressed Irishman, was brought before Mr.
Rushton, charged with having defrauded a young woman,
named Margaret Flynn, out of a sum of £1 4s. 6d. He
had offered to secure her a passage to America for £l, and
induced her to purchase a large chest, which he at last
requested her to get into, that she might he stowed away !
He was discharged on technical grounds, but it will be
proceeded against by information.
CHARGE OF DAMAGE.—On Wednesday, the owners
of the flat Charles, summoned Captain Hackstaff, of the
steamer United States, for £7 9s. Gd., amount of damage
done by the steamer whilst being removed from the Coburg
Dock to the Graving dock. It was the opinion of the
pier-head master that the hands on board the flat were to
blame, and the other circumstances of the case bearing
out this opinion, the case was' dismissed, Mr. Rushton
remarking that flatmen were generally very careless,
relying more upon the strength of their boats than any
thing else.
STABBING.—On Wednesday, Elizabeth Wilson was
charged with stabbing Margaret Kaye, in Peter-street.
From the evidence, it appeared the prisoner went into the
house, and going up to Kaye said, " Receive the contents
of this, killer of my heart ;" at the same time striking
her in the breast with a sharp dagger-knife, seven inches
long. Prisoner said, "Now I have had my revenge,"
then threw down the dagger, but picking it up again,
struck Kaye again three times, wounding her so severely
that her life is despaired of. The prisoner acknowledged
the offence but said she had seen her husband sitting
with his arms round Kaye's neck. The witness denied
that the prisoner was married, but said that she lived with
a man. The prisoner was remanded, in, order to await the
result of the injuries inflicted upon Kaye.
MISCONDUCT OF SOLDIERY. —On Saturday, Mr.
Rushton heard a case in which Mr. Breed, merchant, of
this town,. was complainant, an Michael Brennan, Pay-
sergeant of the 43rd regiment, Michael Cassidy his orderly,
and two privates of the same- corps were defendants. On
the 22nd March, the two, first-named defendants were
billeted upon thri housa of. Miss Keale, who keeps the
Commercial Cee'ee-house, in Dale-street, and came in the
afternoon, when thn rooms were full of gentlemen, dining
CO: taking 'Rink, r.oll4,thirtY to fifty soldiers came along

Nay 10, 184 g.

with the sergeant, filling the kitchen and front passageE.
Miss Kcale remonstrated against,so unusual an intrusion
at the busiest hour of the day, but the orderly swore at
anti was very insolent to Miss Keale, and refused to leave.
During the excitement Mr. Breed came for a lunch, and
was requested by Miss Keale to interpose, which he did
but ineffectually, as the men refused to furnish any in-
formation. On leaving he again asked the men their
names, when the sergeant ordered two of the soldiers to
take hold of him and put him out, which they did by force.
Mr. Rushton said Cassidy had behaved in a very bad
manner, but over his conduct he had nojurisdiction. The
sergeant it appeared was a man of good character. He
expressed his regret at what had occurred, but he was
much excited and could not get on with his work. The
other men were allowed to go, but Mr. Rushton inflicted
a fine of £5 on the sergeant, or a month's imprisonment.
The fine was paid.
SHARP PRACTICE.—John Hughes was summoned by
the Gas and Coke Company on Tuesday, at the Police-
court, for a sum of money said to be due. The case
turned upon a dispute of 145., the defendant stating that.
he had been insolvent. and owed the company some
money. He commenced business again, paying the sum
in question on the new account, but the company cleverly
credited the old account with it, and wanted it paid again.
Several papers were handed in, and the collector did his
best to throw dust in the magistrate's eyes, but missed his
object. Mr. Rushton said it was very dexterous, but
would not do. They might call it ability, but he called
it cunning. The claim was disallowed.
HEARTLESS CASE OF SWINDLING.—CAUTION TO
COUNTRYMEN.—On Thursday, three men, Liver, Col-
lins, and Frith, were brought before Mr. Rushton, charged
with having defrauded a Yorkshireman named William
Frith of £4O. The complainant, a respectable small shop-
keeper, thinking the sea air would benefit his wise, who
was ill, to leave Yorkshire and take a shop in Liverpool..
For this purpose he sold up his stock, and came here on
foot, arriving here on Friday week. He brought with him
only a sovereign and some small amount in silver. Not
finding a place to be let that would suit him, he strolled
about the docks, where he met two-of the prisoners, who
claimed acquaintance with him as belonging to the same
county, and gained his confidence by the mention of the
names of parties in that county whom he happened to
know. They all adjourned to a public-house, and there
the third prisoner, who pretended to be quite a stranger to
the others, made his appearance, and said he had had left
to him £2,300 by an uncle, and had come from the country
to secure it. The others affected not to believe him, and
he then produced a pocket-hook containing £3O in notes
(flash), which he said he had already received as part of
the legacy. He added that if any one would shew him
that he was worth £5O, he would lend that amount on se-
curity of a promissory note. The complainant, after some
further conversation with the parties, put down his sover-
eign as a guarrntee that he would produce the sum on the
Monday following. The silly man then went to Yorkshire,
and raised the sum by borrowing it from neighbours. He
returned to Liverpool on Monday, in company with his
wife, and found one of the prisoners waiting for him at
the railway station. The others afterwards came up, and
they all went to a public-house in Circus-street. There
the parties induced him to deliver up his £4O; and
to accompany one of them to purchase a stamp for the
promisory note. The man, however, made an excuse to
leave him for a short time, and did not return ; and, on
going back to the public-house, he found that the others
had decamped with his money. On Thursday, two of the•
detective police who had received information, succeded
in capturing the three offenders. In the house of one.ol'
them was found a gold watch and £lO. The complain-•
ants wife had strongly advised him not to advance the.
money. Two of the prisoners are said to be beer-house.
keepers. They were committed for trial at the sessions.-
One of them had the effrontery to request the watch and
money to be delivered up- to his wife. Mr. Rushton.—
No, they shall go to the complainant as a dividend for the
loss he has sustained. I, cannot order it, hut, at the trial,
I shall make application to that effect.—The prosecutor
thanked Mr. Rushton for his kindness, and the prisoners
were sent to gaol.