The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1844-05-28 00:00:00

for the entire length ; but mark, and take warning
from, this fact. The Woods and Forests have re-
tained the reclaimed land on each side of the tidal
basin for the crown ! They have themselves snatched
up this rich prize of 120 acres ; and so carefully have
they guarded its future productiveness that the
fourth article of their proposals to the Birkenhead
Commissioners expressly stipulates that "no ware-
houses or buildings, other than sheds or huts, shall
be erected upon any of the said quays herein-
beforementioned," thus leaving the projectors, who
were to have built we know not how many ranges
of warehouse property on the margin of their docks,
without a yard of land to build upon ! We leave
this fact to speak for itself, confessing, however, our
utter inability to perceive on what ground the libe-
rality of the Woods and Forests to the Birkenhead
Commissioners, so far as it goes, can be justified,
when it is remembered that our own Dock Trustees
have paid at various times for the strand which
they have occupied a sum exceeding half a million
sterling.
And now with respect to the practicability of the
plan as laid down. We say it is in itself impracti-
cable and absurd. The lift and fall to which vessels
will be subject in the tidal basin must be admitted
to be totally inconsistent with• their safe and easy
working, either in loading or discharging. Vessels
of any great size, too, must take the ground ; no great
harm, to be sure, in the case of a north country
built ship, but unluckily north country built ships
meet with little favour in this port, and less in
foreign ports, for bringing home valuable cargoes.
The trade and wants of Liverpool require a superior
class of shipping. We boast, indeed, of our clip-
pers—our John o' Gaunts and Columbuses—and
such vessels are totally unfit for taking the ground
as here they would be made to do.
Again, this tidal basin is to be cleared by a scour
from the upper pool, through sluices as described
on the plan, every day, if need be; but with all
proper deference, we contend that this is altogether
impossible. In ninety-nine days out of the three
hundred and sixty-five the tidal waters cannot enter
the upper pool at all, and sometimes this state of
things is maintained for eight consecutive days.
These points, a reference to the tide table will estab-
lish. The scour, too, we must remind our readers,
is subaqueous, and will consequently fail to cleanse
the tidal basin as prescribed : and, moreover, if it
had sufficient power to effect this purpose, it would
carry the mud into the river at low water, and in-
evitably form a bank opposite our docks, or go with
the young flood to feed the Pluckington. We
assert, however, the impracticability of the necessary
frequent scouring►, based on the fact of the tidal
waters being excluded from the upper pool ninety-
nine days out of the year, and the average duration
of the scour being limited throughout to eight
minutes and thirty-six seconds.
We now come to the second proposition, viz.,
that it is an unjustifiable interference with existing
rights and interests, and this is so clear that we need
not waste upon it many words. The pool itself, like
the Queen's highways, belongs to the public= and the
crown. Suppose, then, any public road to be
blocked up by some insuperable barrier, by which
persons were compelled to go round by Crosby to get
to 'Wavertree, would it not be looked upon as a
great hardship, a monstrosity of its kind in a free
country ? No doubt it would, and this is precisely
the position of Messrs. Bibby, Smith, and other
owners and occupiers on the banks of the Wallasey
Pool. The proposed tidal basin is a complete bar-
rier to them—they are most effectually shut out
from their own houses, and must submit to such
terms as the Wallasey commissioners may choose
in their moderation to impose upon them. This is
no exaggerated statement; and yet, when a clause
was proposed in the committee saving any rights of
Messrs. Smith, it was laughed at and rejected. A
clause was readily inserted in the bill saving the
rights of the crown; but a similar act of justice was
refused to her Majesty's "loyal lieges ! Well may
we after this exclaim with Cobbett—" Thank God
we have a House of Lords !"

We come now to our last proposition, of certain
injury resulting to the navigation of the Mersey ;
and we call upon all inhabitants interested in the
prosperity of the Town and Port of Liverpool to give
their serious attention to this point, and urge them
to use all legal means within their reach to avert
such a calamity. This is no chimerical supposition.
The width of the mouth of Wallasey Pool, from
Seacombe Point to Woodside, is 5,300 feet, and the
projection of the intended sea-wall along this, will
be 450 feet into the tide way ; this of itself, we
we should say, is too dangerous an experiment to be
tried on the currents and bed of the river, without
the most searching inquiry into its probable effects;
and as far as present inquiry goes, the balance of
the evidence is largely in favor of the port being kept
open. The construction of the wall, also, on the
amended plan at the south side of the pool curves
inward from the 10-acre beaching basin, which was
most aptly called " a mud trap," by Mr. Page.
The next and most important objection, to our
mind, is the abstraction of the tidal waters; for it is
a well-known fact to the least scientific, that all
rivers are kept open and navigable according to the
amount of back water to scour the channels,—and
we cannot view without great alarm the abstraction
of so large a portion of the tidal waters as are con-
tained in this pool. Wallasey Pool contains seven
million cubic yards, or seven million tons of water,
and this constitutes one-ninety-seventh part of the
tidal waters of the Mersey. Now, where is the man
bold enough to say that this enormous quantity can
be abstracted without danger—the most imminent
danger—to the navigation of the river ? Add to
this the intention of scouring the great tidal basin
at the very worst time of tide, when all the mud
driven out must go up the river, or be forced over
to the Lancashire side; and we have quite suffi-
cient grounds of alarm at the dangers to which our
magnificent river and docks are exposed.
The measure altogether is crude, ill-digested, and
incapable of being carried out in its present shape;
and so well satisfied are the promoters themselves
of this fact, that they objected to a clause making it
obligatory on them to construct the wall, sluices, and
other works, in accordance with the evidence of their
own engineer I Such a clause was proposed in the
Committee and rejected.
If our Cheshire neighbours want docks, let them
have them by all means; but they ought to confine
themselves to the sides of the pool, and not endanger
the existence of the port, or inflict injury upon pri-
vate individuals, by closing the waters which lead
to their wharfs and manufactories. Wallasey Pool
is eminently adapted for certain kinds of docks,—
building ships, boiler yards, foundries, and other
works,—and would, if so occupied, be a valuable
adjunct to the town and trade of Liverpool. Before,
however, it is to be taken from our coasting trade as
a beaching ground, and the public deprived of it as
it now exists, we venture to urge upon our townsmen
to call for a most searching examination, and satisfy
themselves that no injury will result to the naviga-
tion of the river and their own docks, on which
depend the prosperity and existence of the town as
a port. We say, petition the Lords without a mo-
ment's delay, or the Wallasey Bill may become law
in a few days.
If we had space we would point out at length how
the navigation of the sister river, the Dee, was de-
stroyed. We can, however, briefly say, it was ruined
by the reclaiming of land and the abstraction of her
tidal waters. Vessels of large tonnage went up to
Parkgate, in the memory of man—and not a hun-
dred years ago there was two fathoms and a hal fdepth
tehre at low water, and now there is none at all!

At length we are happy to find thatan opportunity
will be afforded to the Churchmen and orthodox
Dissenters of Liverpool, of recording their strong
reprobation of the measure of spoliation now before
Parliament, under the name of "The Dissenters'
Chapels Bill." Our own has been expressed in
these columns. We regard the measure as dis-
graceful to the Conservative government which
framed and introduced it, and insulting to every
believer in the Trinity, of whatever political party;
and we call upon our fellow-townsmen promptly to
second, by their signatures to the following petition
to the House of Commons which has been pre-
pared by the most influential' of the Clergy of Liver-
pool, the efforts making to prevent its being per-
mitted to become a law.
" 7o the Honourable the Members of the House of
Commons, in Parliament assembled :
" My Lords and Gentlemen,
" We the undersigned
persuaded that the Bill now before your Hon. House,
commonly called the Dissenters' Chapels Bill, in-
volves a national recognition of anti-christian error,
and an arbitrary alienation of trust property, dan-
gerous to the highest- and best interests of the coun-
try, implore-your Hon. House to refuse your sanction
to the said Bill,"