The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1843-07-04 00:00:00

LOCAL NEWS.

The despatch of the Overland Mail for India, via
France, is postponed till Thursday next, the 6th instant.
Letters posted in Liverpool to-morrow (Wednesday),
will be in time to go by this conveyance.
PUBLICANS, &c.—Three publicans appeared on Friday,
at the Police-court, for infringing the law, of whom one
was acquitted, anp the others were fined £4 10s, and one
beer-seller was fined £l.

The advertisement of Mr. Williams, in another page,
is well worthy the attention of all parties requiring resi-
dences or desirous of making investments. The list sub-
mitted by Mr. W. includes some of the most eligible
property in the town and neighbourhood.
SCOTCH CHURCH, RODNEY-STREET.—The Rev. Mr.
Parke, the able and respected minister of the Scotch
Church, Rodney-street, is about to resign his connection
with that church, and will leave in about two months,
having accepted the incumbency of the parish of Glencairn,
Dumfriesshire.
A STRONG SHIP.—The Vernon, a coaster, for Glasgow,
of no great burden, which was stranded during a storm,
on Burbo bank, on the 13th of January last, was got off
on Tuesday last and brought into dock. The vessel is con-
siderably shaken, but still worth repairing, although so
many months have elapsed since the occurrence.
STATUE OF THE LATE EGERTON SMITH, ESQ.—We
have much pleasure in stating that the architect, in Lon-
don, has now nearly completed the statue in honour of
the memory of the late Egerton Smith, Esq., and that it
will, in the course of a week or two, be erected in the
hall of the Mechanics' Institution, Mount-street—Mer-
cury.

DOCK AUBIT COMMISSIONERS.—The election of eight
merchant commissioners for the audit of the accounts of
the dock trustees, took place at the Town-hall, on Mon-
day last. The following gentlemen were re-elected with-
out opposition :—Messrs. John Marrow, Edmund B.
Lyon, Thomas Moore, Charles R. Taylor, George Crane,
David Rae, David Cannon, and Thomas Hatton jun,
LOCK-UP AT SEACOMBE.—At the Cheshire quarter
sessions, held at Nether Knutsford on Monday last, on
the motion of I. W. Harden, Esq., J.P., seconded by
Henry Winch, Esq., J.P., the sum of four hundred
pounnds was voted by the county towards the erection of
a suitable lock-up and constable's residence for the popu-
lous and flourishing townships of Poulton-cum-Seacombe,
Liscard, and Wallasy.
THE COMPUNCTIONS OF CONSCIENCE.—On Tuesday,
Peter Mackay, dressed in the style of the more respecta-
ble class of boatmen, was brought before Mr. Rushton,
and a police-officer stated, that he had been called to the
prisoner during the night by two men, who had great
difficulty in preventing him from throwing himself
into the George's Dock Basin. Mr. Parkinson said he
believed the prisoner had been a teetotaller for five years,
but that, on Monday, he had got some drink, and that
was the reason of his attempting the rash act. Under
these circumstances the prisoner was discharged.

DOCK COMMITTEE.—On Thursday the usual, weekly
meeting of this body was held. The following members
were present :—Messrs. Sands, (Chairman,) Horsfall,
Barclay, Holt, Smith, Holmes, Bullet', Bowden, Middle-
ton, Nichol, Evans, Ripley. Moon, and Chilton. The
Chairman stated that a letter had been received from the
Finance Committee of the Corporation relative to the
Floating Bath, to the effect that they (the Finance Com-
mittee) were not disposed to order its removal. Some
conversation then took place as to whether the Dock
Committee ought to rest satisfied with the decision of the
Finance Committee, and it was ultimately decided that
they should wait until a proper answer was received from
the Council. A letter was received from Mr. Brown rela-
tive to the safety of the warehouses about to be erected
on the dock quays, and suggesting some alterations for the
consideration of the committee, some of the fire-offices
having objected to insure them. Mr. Aikin said he was
anxious the public mind should be disabused of the no-
tion that the warehouses were liable to danger, and he
wished it to be distinctly understood that they were per-
fectly fire-proof : so much so that a fire could never
spread, and he felt satisfied the fire-offices would change
their opinion ; he could not help thinking but that the
enemy had been at the elbow of those individuals to in-
duce them not to insure the warehouses. After some ob-
servations from Mr. Ripley, who observed that there was
sufficient capital in Liverpool to raise a company for in-
surance purposes, provided the fire-offices refused, the
letter was ordered to lie on the table. The committee then
proceeded to the consideration of financial business, and
soon afterwards adjourned.

NIGHT WATCHING WAREHOUSES.—The occupiers of
warehouses held a meeting on Tuesday last, at the Cla-
rendon-rooms, Mr. Harbord in the Chair, to take steps
for the more effectual watching of warehouses in the
night-time. It was the opinion of the meeting that in
doing anything in the matter, it would be better to con-
sult with the mercantile interests, and with them to de-
termine upon the mode to be adopted, and a deputation,
consisting of the chairman and Mr. Thomas Brown, was
formed for that purpose. It was said that the great means
of preventing fires in Warehouses would be the employ-
ment of porters in them by the warehouse-keeper, a con-
cession, they expressed a hope, from the recent calamities,
that the mercantile interest would concede to them. It
was thought that there was no systematic incendiarism
going on. It was observed that the high rates of insu-
rance were only as a corrective, with a view of forcing
certain alterations in the exterior of the warehouses which
the owners were generally willing to adopt, as well as the
interior arrangements which they were willing to make.
That there were warehouses in Liverpool now (where such
alterations were made) in which goods could be insured
at thirteen shillings per cent. Some indignation was ex-
pressed at the very unfair attacks made upon the occu-
piers in a portion of the Liverpool papers, which had, un-
fortunately, found their way into the London and some of
the provincial papers, to the injury of the port. The
evils of the system here were not attributable either to the
warehouses or the warehouse-keepers, but to the preference
which the mercantile interest gave to it. The meeting
was of opinion, that under any system, wherever cotton
was stored in such masses, there would be fires. Some
blame was also attached to the Insurance Companies, for
some few months ago having adopted differential rates for
districts, (the evil consequences of which were pointed
out to them at the time,) charging, in most cases, the
highest rates for the best, and the lowest rates for the
worst warehouses, and thus forcing the cotton into build-
ings of bad construction.

CORRESPONDENCE.

THE DOCK TiWSTEES AND THE WARE-
HOUSE OWNERS.

TO THE EDITOR OF TIIE LIVERPOOL STANDARD.

An article, signed " T. T.," appeared in last Monday's
Albion, recommending meetings to be called for the pur-
pose of pressing certain amendments in the Fire Preven-
tion Bill, upon the attention of the council. What those
amendments are, ought certainly to have been specified;
but it is pretty well known that the object is to annul the
late Dock Warehouse Act, and to erect warehouses on the
verge of Albert Dock, and also on the west side of the
Prince's Dock, at the expense of the Dock Trustees. It
is not our wish to become the advocates of all the acts of
the Dock Trustees, but as "T. T." calls their compro-
mise with the Warehouse Owners, " the most impolitic,
reckless, and imprudent compromise ever entered into by
a public body with a section of the community," it is only
right that the conduct of the Dock Trustees should be
rescued from that imputation. The Warehouse Owners
were prepared to push their opposition to the last extre-
mity, and would have persevered in opposing the then pro-
posed dock bill, had not one of the members for the bo-
rough interfered, and by way of conciliating the two parties,
proposed a compromise, which terminated in the adoption
of the present dock bill. Had the Dock Trustees refused
that suggested conciliatory measure, the Warehouse
Owners %ould have carried on their opposition, and, very
probably, defeated the bill. Of course it is a debateable
point whether they would or would not have succeeded,
but the Warehouse Committee of that day felt a strong
confidence in their chance of success, and they had too
deep an interest in the question to abandon it without a
determined struggle. The Dock Trustees, therefore,
acted prudently in agreeing to the compromise suggested
by our member ; and the advocates of Dock Warehouses
may thank the Dock Trustees for their conduct on this
occasion, as they probably would have lost the bill, had
they attempted to carry the whole question, and at the
present moment there might have been no traces of founda-
tions for dock warehouses at the Albert Dock. Several
of the leading Warehouse Owners were decidedly adverse
to any compromise with the Dock Trustees. The advo-
cates of dock warehouses should, therefore, be obliged to
the Dock Trustees for the point which they have gained
of being permitted to erect dock warehouses at all at the
Albert Dock, instead of calumniating them for not obtain-
ing greater powers in their duck act. "T. T." may be
assured that it was from no kindness towards the Ware-
house Owners, that the trustees compromised the dis-
pute : they yielded to necessity—or, at all events, to what
they deemed good policy. Whatever other charges may
be brought against the Dock Trustees, their conuct in
this transaction was politic ; they did what they conceived
was for the public good, and thought it wise to take a part
when they could not obtain the whole.
Having endeavoured to do justice to the conduct of the
Dock Trustees in this affair of compromise, albeit they
have never slewn much favour or affection to the ware-
house interest, let us examine that other position of
"T. T," which asserts that the public had nothing to do
with this compromise—that their " rights and property
were bartered away irrespective of their opinions. The
Dock Trustees' proceedings are subject to the revision
and control of the Town-council—the council is the domi-
nant authority—the council, therefore, is responsible for
the acts of the Dock Trustees. The council thought fit to
obtain an act of parliament, called the " Liverpool Dock
Act." Is not the town hound by that act? Who are the
public? Can they act in their individual capacity? Are
they not bound by the acts of their representatives in the
council, and shall any one say that he is not bound be-
cause he did not give his individual consent? Apply this
reasoning to the acts of parliament on national subjects,
and let us hear what " T. T." would say to any man who
refused to obey the act because he had no vote, and might,
therefore, argue that he was one of the unrepresented, and
that thus his rights were taken from him " irrespective of
his opinions." Would this logic be tolerated by any rea-
sonable man? And yet this is the logic now advanced,
because a non-elector might as well refuse to obey an act
of parliament, as a non-elector of Liverpool refuse to
obey an act obtained by the council—the plea in both cases
being the same, that the dissentients were not parties to
the act. This is a dangerous doctrine subversive of the
authority of local government, and unconstitutional as
applied to national legislation. _

W. D.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE ALBION.