The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1848-01-25 00:00:00

similar manner for leave to give land also belonging to
the burgesses of Liverpool, upon which the Canning and
Salthouse Docks now stand, and also for power to raise
further monies. _ .

Mr. BENNETT.—When was that ?
Mr. PooLE.—lt was in 1737. In 1761 they gave the
land on which George's Dock is now constructed, and
they applied for power to borrow £25,000; so that it
would be at once seen that from the year 1710 up to 1761,
the burgesses found the whole of the land for the docks.
(Hear.) In the year 1784, they applied for power to
purchase the land on which the King's and Queen's
- - -A

Docks now stood ; but then they ceasea to give tee Jana.
They applied for power to purchase the land,—the price
to be repaid by the Dock Estate, From that period up
to the year 1811, the Dock Estate was managed by, and
formed part of, the Corporate Estate of the town. The
management of the Dock Trust merged in the general
Corporate Estate, and was thereafter looked upon as part
of the Corporate property. In 1811 a change took place
in the constitution of the trust, f

in that year

one persons were constituted the Dock Committee ; but
it was rcquired that they should be members of the Cor,
poration, and they were elected by the Corporation, who
were themselves a self-elected body. In 1825 a far greater
change took place in the management of the trust. It
was done through the instrumentality of the dock rate-
payers, who conceived that, inasmuch as they contributed
the dock rates, they ought to have a voice in the manage-
ment of the estate. He believed it was then arrange,'
that , a ____
elect

Dock Committee out of

their own body ; leave being given to the
return thirteen other members, making up the number
to twenty-one, and stipulating that the clmirman of
the Dock Committee should be appointed out of the
the thirteen nominated by the Town Council. That
mode of government existed up to the present time.
There was, however, one important matter to be taken
into consideration. The Town Council who nominated
the thirteen members out of the twenty-one, also pos-
sessed the power of vetoing any of the proceedings of
the Dock Committee which might come before it. Now,
although the mode of government established in 1825
was that which was now in existence, there could be no
doubt that there had been considerable changes since the
municipal reform bill ; for the corporation had previously
been a self-elected body, but afterwards it had assumed
the character of vox populi, and by the operation
of the municipal reform bill the Council had got a consi-
derable quantity of the voice of the people infused into
its influence and composition, which, of course, was
wanting, in the will of the parishioners, when it was under
the old regime.—(Hear.) It had been asked how this
monstrous injustice had been permitted to continue from
1708 up to 1848. He (Mr. Poole) declared that he could
not account for it. It appeared to him that it must have
been owing to the apathy and neglect of the people who
were interested in the matter. In the first dock act in
]7OB, they left out the clause empowering them to pay
parish rates, and when they were subsequently asked
to pay them, the Dock Committee said that they
were very sorry, but the fact was, that their hands
were tied up by the act of parliament. In the year 1825,
the parish assessed the dock estate at £50,953, and this
was appealed against by the dock trustees who took the
question to the court of quarter sessions, where it was de-
cided against the parish, and then the case was taken to
the court of Queen's Bench, where the decision of Lord
Tenterden decided against the parish authorities. ( Mr.
Poole here read a note of the judgment.) He then pro-
ceeded to state that the dock trustees had disbursed
£259,000 in the shape of wages to dock labourers. Sup-
posing each individual got one pound per week for the
time, this would represent the employment of 5,000 in-
dividuals-who got their living by daily labour, and in the
direct employment of the dock estate. Now these 5,000
labourers would represent a population of 25,000 souls,—
taking each person to represent himself, a wife, and three
children. There must be a vast amount of pauperism re-
sulting from this state of things. The revenues of the
dock estate were £259,000. and deducting the expenses,
which would be £59,000, the net income would be
£200,000. This, at a rate of ls. fxl. in the pound, would
give £15,000. or about 6 per cent. on the gross income of
£239,000. Now, concerning the tax upon the goods re-
ceived at the port :—he had been at some trouble to ascer-
tain what would be the amount which each description of
goods would have to pay. A bale of cotton, weighing
4001b5., would have to pay one halfpenny ; a ton of coffee
would be charged one penny; and a ton of sugar, one
penny ; whilst the dues upon a ship that went to China
and back, a voyage of about twelve to fifteen months,
would be £1 13s. After some other observations, he
moved that a committee be appointed to consider the
propriety of rating the Liverpool dock estate to the relief
of the poor.
Mr. URQUHART seconded the resolution.
Mr. EARLE said he did not rise to oppose the motion,
but he would remark that the opposition to the rating of
the docks was grounded upon the fact that in the docks
there was no beneficial interest vested in any one, and
that the rating of them would be opposed by the govern-
ment of the country. In Bristol and London, where the
.docks were rated, they were the property of private com-
panies. The rating might perhaps bedone on this ground,
that they were obliged to send all the Irish who came
from Manchester and Stafford and other places home
again. He had every respect for the opinions of the bur-
geoses, but he would not go into the Council as a mere
PuretiJactUnakT-then rose, and producing halt n grime
of foolscap, read a long speech, which was indistinctly
heard. He said that he had no sympathy with Mr. Earle
in his statement that they had nothing to do with the
rates. The rates on the parishioners were greatly in-
creased in consequence of the immense amount of pro-
perty belonging to the Dock Trustees and the Corpora-
toa from which the rates could not be obtained. The
Dosk Trust augmented the poor rates more than the
whole town besides from the extent of uncultivated
labour they employ, and the inducements they give for
that class of labourers to locate in Liverpool, who, from
their poverty, are no sooner out of work than they are on
the parish. The reply almost invariably, given by appli-
cants at the relief board was, that they were in some way
connected with the dock works. To give an idea of the
amount given to that class of labour, the Dock Trustees
paid last year to labourers, quarrymen, &c., £279,324.
The number of parties engaged in constructing the docks
would not be less than 50,000, who were on the verge of
pauperism. The greater number of the inhabitants of
Pitt-street, St. Paul's, 'Vauxhall, and Scotland Wards
were employed under the Dock Trust, and they occupied
dwellings for which rates could not be collected. Mr.
Urquhart ,then contended that the Dock Trust, by the
erection of the North Docks, and by the clearing away of
Nova Scotia, had driven from those sites parties who were
large ratepayers for slate yards, ship-building yards, &c.,
and were going further to decrease the rateable property
of the parish to the extent of £52,000 by the destruction
of the buildings in Wapping. The Trust had, moreover,
driven from the port ship-building and other trades, and
if they carried out the power they were now seeking, they
would secure a monopoly of the warehousing trade to the
loss of the parish of rates on at least £200,000 worth of
property. For these reasons he contended that it was
unreasonable that the Dock Trust should be exempt from
parish rates. Mr. Urquhart then read extracts from
letters received from Southampton, London, Bristol,
Hull, Leith, and Dundee to show that the docks in those
places were rated to the poor and other local taxes. It
was not for them nor the committee to dwell on who the
Dock Trustees are trustees for. Sir 'William Blackstone
says " the -lands of England belong to the people of
England;', [Mr. Avrsorr: That is rather a dangerous
doctrine ;"3 but Mr. William Earle contended with us
that the docks of Liverpoo' belonged to the whole world,
" therefore (said he) we could not, nor had we any thing
to do with, rating them ; that we were interfering with
that we did not understand, nor had anything to do
with." If Mr. Earle's views were admitted the bond-
holders would soon cease to hold a beneficial' interest or
hope to have their bonds redeemed ; and who would
advance money for the future to trustees whose trust
wss without a locality ? However, the act of George 111.,
ch. 143, settled the nature of the trust, and gave the
conned, who had exercised so much judgment and discre-

Lion, a ,e t o -on all the acts of the dock tilast. There were
members of the Town Council Who were convinced of the
injustice of the dock trustees taking public property and
employing. it to oppose the burgesses in any branch of
trade or commerce, and felt the impossibility of any pub-

tic trust competing with private enterprise and inciuitry ;
but there were other members who had many years
contended for untaxed warehouses round the docks. 'Flee
cause of the advantages from those docks did not arise
from untaxed warehouses round their docks, but from the
competition of dock and warehousing business; warehouses
on the quays are the means only to facilitate the advan-
tages which are appreciated by the merchant., and these
docks are enabled, from their charges, to pay poor-rates,
rents, all expenses, and a large annual profit for the in-
vestment of capital. If the same Mode were adopted here
it would rectify all the existing evils, and could be *easily
attained. •Let the quays round the docks be sold on Cor-
poration leases, with restrictions to build warehouses,
within a limited time, as to plan and construction': let these
warehouses be built round the docks now constructed--
and cv ry advantage would be gained to the commerce of
the p 0 t,'to the profit of the merehant,and to thedespatch
of trade. The dock trustees would cease to carry on ware-
housing business, or any other trade, as incompatible with
them as trustees, and, in conformity with that character,
pay poor-rates on the amount of their income, and do
away with every possibility of any interest in that trust,
using public -warehouses at rates that do not yield.their
expenses. And as the warehouses would belong to private
individuals or companies, the rates would be easily ob-
tained, tints doing away with the necessity of putting down
mare rateable property, or making more dock», or ex-
pending above five millions of money to complete the
works contemplated in the hill coming before the council.
The members of the council should reflect that they are
trustees over the interests of the burgesses. and are blame-
able if they allow their selfish views to injure their trust.
Again we have thew who consider the interests of their fo-
reign correspondents of more importance to them than
the interests of the parishioners, who maintain that the
docks belong to the whole world, therefore, they have no
right to pay poor rates to any parish for the use of these
docks. After listening to such logic a gentleman moved
hat 1- .th Town-council roon-

corn that board and went .into . ne
and stated that he did nil he could to conrinee us that the
docks, warehouses, and all, ",belonged to the eommu-
»ity," while the troth is, he contended, their advantages
belonged to the community of l.iverpool, in perpetuity,
while they paid the local rates in common with the
parishioner; :he doggedly maintaining against us, I hat they
belonged to the whale world, not witlicAanding his low jeer
at the wiseacres be saw at this hoard, and the luminaries
lie -felt extinguishing his inviter tight, as friction pro-
duced it. • - .

3fr. BENNVIT /4&,F12 to order•. .
Mr. WIIITRY Mr. 'Earle bad re►nais►e►t to
tit,teo to it.

liruausimaT saia if gentlemeu Lad trail,
iu tilts mattes iirioy would not be !,-A) impaticoi