The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1844-06-11 00:00:00

DOCK COMMITTEE.-THURSDAY.

Present—Messrs. Moore, Barclay, Holmes, Molyneux,
Holt, Chilton, Evans, Royden, Kendal, Shand, Ripley,
Bold, and Aikin.
The tender of Messrs. Jones and Jump to execute the
carpenters' work, at a new shed to be erected at the north
docks, was accepted.—Leave was given to place an iron
pallisade round the New Observatory.—Mr. Ripley moved
that a public clock should be placed at the north end of
the Prince's Dock, but the subject was, after some dis-
cussion, referred to the Sub-committee.—The Sub-com-
mittee of Works recommended that in coping the river-
wall at the Albert Dock, granite should be used instead
of sand-stone. Mr. Evans opposed this on the ground
of the great expense, and the matter was referred back
to the committee, in order that estimates of the relative
cost of the two materials might be procured.—Mr. Ripley
said that merchants were complaining exceedingly of not
being able to get their ships berthed opposite to the tran-
sit sheds, in consequence of vessels loading there ; and it
appeared that the clock-masters had not sufficient discre-
tionary power to remove vessels already in loading berths.
He thought every facility ought to be given to vessels
discharging at these sheds. After some little conversa-
tion the matter was referred to the Sub-committee.—The
Harbour-masters' Sub-committee recommended that the
second stage berth at the south-east end of the Prince's
Dock should be appropriated to the use of vessels trading
regularly to Rio de Janeiro. The Chairman said that a
distinction ought to be drawn between packet-ships and
transit vessels. A letter from Messrs. M`Tear and Had-
field, objecting to this exclusive privilege, and requesting
that their vessels to Rio might be similarly provided for,
was read. An answer was directed to be returned, to the
effect that if their vessels were despatched on regular days
they would have the same accommodation.—A letter from
Mr. W. H. Hutchinson, as to the erection of a shed at
Trafalgar Dock, was referred to the Committee of Works.
—The chairman of the Steam Tug Company inclosed the
following resolution to the committee, and stated that it
had been passed the day before at the annual meeting of
the proprietors :—" That it is the opinion of this meeting
that in future the directors will not be justified in placing
a steamer of this company at the disposal of the Dock
Committee, on any dangerous service, without a fair re-
muneration for any services performed." After some
little conversation, the resolution was referred to the
Marine Surveyor's Sub-committee, who have been in
treaty with the company.—The resolution passed last
week as to the survey of the channels outside the banks,
was referred to the Marine Surveyors' Committee, to
determine what was necessary to be done.

THE WALLASEY DOCKS.

Mr. RIPLEY asked the chairman if he had a communi-
cation fora the conservators of the river as to the Wallasey
docks ?

The CHAIRMAN said there was one from the Admiralty.
Mr. RIPLEY.—I should like to see it.
Mr. EVANS.—I have heard that it has been forwarded
to you officially.

The CHAIRMAN said be considered it to be his duty
first to submit the document to the Parliamentary Com-
mittee. When they had dealt with it be should do as
they thought proper. That was not the place to bring it
first.

Mr. EvANs said that if they delayed, it might be too
late for that committee to take any notice of it.
The CHAIRMAN.—I am sorry to say I cannot agree
with you.
Mr. EVANS never knew of a document being withheld
after it was acknowledged to be in existence. Here were
bills going on, and if the document were withheld for
another week the bill might be passed or thrown out. He
called upon the chairman to place the report before the
committee.
The CHAIRMAN was sorry he could not comply with
the request. It was a part and parcel of the parliamentary
proceedings, in answer to a communication of his own,
and he thought it his duty to lay it before them first.
Mr. SHAND.—You have not received it as chairman of
the Dock Committee, but as chairman of the Parliamen-
tary Committee.
The CHAIRMAN.—In answer to a parliamentary com-
munication.
Mr. EVANS knew that the document had been supplied
elsewhere officially, and he thought the Dock Committee
ought not to be the last party left in ignorance.
The CHAIRMAN said he should lay it before the Parlia-
mentary Committee, and they could deal with it as they
thought proper.
Mr. AIKIt' thought that the document ought to be sub-
mitted. It had been forwarded to other parties, and
might next day appear in the public prints. What
could there be in matters connected with the conservators
of the river and the Admiralty of that secret and myste-
rious nature as to prevent the committee from seeing the
document ?
The CHAIRMAN said there was nothing mysterious in
it ; but his course appeared to be to lay it before the Par-
liamentary Committee. If suck documents were to be
laid before the general committee, the use of the Parlia-
mentary Committee was none at all.
Mr. BARCLAY.—What is the document ?
Mr. IttpLzy.--It has reference to the navigation of the
river.

Mr. /knurl said they bad been told that the great ne-
cessity for opposing the Wallasey Dock Bill was babause
of the injury that would be sustained by the navigation of
the river. That belief was founded on the opinion of
some engineers, who said that the building of the wall at
Wallasey would be injurious : other engineers were of a
contrary opinion ; and if it could be established clearly in
the minds of the Admiralty and the conservators that it
would not be injurious, that might induce the Dock Com-
mittee to say to the sub-committee that they must expend
no further sum in the way of opposition to the bill. Now,
if the document tended to show that the wall would not
be injurious, it ought to be produced, and the Parliamen-
tary Committee should come to the general committee for