The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1842-04-08 00:00:00

FINANCE COMMITTEE PROCEEDINGS

The proceedings of this committee were read by the Ds-
PUTY TOWN-CLERK. It appeared from them that Mr. Loch,
the agent for the Bridgewater trust, had called the attention
of Lord Granville Somerset, chancellor of the duchy, and of
Lord Haddington, first lord of the admiralty, to the deposit
of excavations by the dock committee, from their new works,
upon the strand of the North Shore. He complained that the
effect of them would be to enlarge Puddington Bank, which it
was exceedingly desirable to remove, and suggested that some
eminent engineer should be called in to report thereon. The
committee passed resolutions to the effect that the dock com-
mittee be requested to suspend their operations in this respect
for the present ; but the request had not been complied with.
It also appeared from the proceedings, that the Birkenhead
improvement bill, which the finance committee had been in-
structed to oppose, had passed the House of Commons.

BIRKENHEAD IMPRQVEMENT IHLL

Mr. PARKER wished to be informed of the result of the
efforts of the deputation appointed to oppose the Birkenhead
improvement bill, as far as related to the Woodside Ferry ?
The Birkenhead people were satisfied that they had outwitted
the corporation.
Mr. G. H. LAWRENCE said, that as far as the House of
Commons was concerned, the Birkenhead commissioners had
succeeded in their wishes. The arguments of the corporation
had been of no avail. There were two points which the cor-
poration urged in opposition to the measure. In the first
place, they thought the rights of ferry, as defined in the bill,
might militate against the interests of the corporation, as far
as the rights of Birkenhead Perry were concerned. The com-
missioners claimed a right of ferry both ways, whereas they
had no such right, and the corporation had power in the
House of Commons to set that part of the bill right. The
main ,objection, however, was, that it was unjust for the Bir-
kenhead commissioners to appropriate their funds to a spe-
culation such as the purchase of the Woodside Ferry unques-
tionably was. He thought they had no more right to specu-
late with•the public money in such an undertaking than the
corporation had to take shares in the Harrington Docks.
The Wisdom of parliament, however, as far as the House of
Commons was concerned, thought differently, and it was for
further consideration whether the, finance committee should
pursue their opposition still further.
Mr. LLOYD inquired whether the Birkenhead ferry was to
be rated under the Improvement Bill ?
Mr. BOLTON said it was, as part of the property of the
township.

Mr. PARKER observed that in that case this corporation
would be in the anomalous position of promoters and op-
pos2.rs of the Improvement Bill.
Mr. BOLTON remarked that if the council would recollect
the committee of the House of Commons to whom the bill
was referred, they need be at no loss in accounting for the
result. There was a feeling hostile to Liverpool whenever
a Cheshire committee met; and when it was stated that the
Birkenhead Improvement Bill was referred to a Cheshire
committee, no one could be surprised at the issue.

ELEVATION OF HOUSES IN FALKNER-SQUARE

Some conversation took place between Mr. Alderman
EARLE, Mr. G. H. LAWRENCE, and Mr. PROCTOR, con-
cerning the adoption of a reduced elevation for some houses
in Falkner•square by the Finance Committee, but no motion
was made on the subject,

BILLS BEFORE PARLIAMENT

Mr. BIRKETT inquired when prints of the bills now before
parliament, as amended, would be placed in the hands of the
council for consideration ?

The TOWN-CLERK said it was not the parliamentary course
to reprint a bill, except by leave of the house, till the bill had
gone through committee.
Mr. BIRKETT observed that, by the new standing orders,
the promoters were bound to deposit a reprint of their bill,
as amended, seven days before going into committee.
The TOWN-CLERK, in reply, said that was true; but the
standing orders required the original bill and the amend-
ments to be lodged in manuscript. It was only till after the
bill had gone through committee that a reprint could be had
of it. At the same time, there could be no objection to any
amended bill being placed in the Town-hall for the inspection
of the members of the council.

STATE OF THE STREETS

Mr. Alderman EARLE wished to call the particular atten-
tion of the Finance,Committee to the state of the streets.
On a'former occasion he had endeavoured to get the paving
board placed under the council, because if that were so, he
was sure the streets would be maintained in much better
order than they were ; and as the council paid a large sum of
money for the repairing of streets, they were in duty bound
to see that those streets, particularly the great thoroughfares,
were not suffered to remain in their present state. There
was London-road, from Russell-street to Lime-street, there
was Mount Pleasant, there was Leece-street, from the church
to the new road in Berry-street, there was Brownlow-hill, and
last of all Lord-street itself, in all of which there never was
such execrable pavements anywhere as were to be found in
those streets. They were disgraceful to the town, and he
hoped therefore that the Finance Committee would direct
their surveyor to examine them. No experiments were ever
made in Liverpool with the view of endeavouring to improve
the public pavements as in London ; indeed experiments
were made in every great town in the kingdom except Liver-
pool. Certainly a trifling experiment had been once made
opposite the Athenteum ; the pavement then put down had
never been removed to this day, and he believed it was good
still.

Mr. JAMES LAWRENCE was rather surprised at the at-
tack made .by the worthy alderman upon the Paving Board,
because wherever the corporation had any paving work to
do, they were very glad to apply to the Paving Board to do
it for them. If he would attend the board himself he would
soon see that he knew nothing about the subject.
Mr. Alderman EARLE.—I judge from having seen them.

Mr. JoHN HOLMES recommended Mr. Earle to apply
to the vestry for an increased rate before he ventured upon
making these complaints. The Highway Board were in debt;
and they had always spent their funds in the best possible
way.

Mr. Alderman EARLE.—Then we ought to spend more.
Mr. PROCTOR said the Finance Committee had nothing to
do with the works of the Highway Board.
Mr. BIRRETT was by no means surprised that Mr. Alder-
man Earle should have made this attack upon the Highway
Board ; but he ought to have given notice of his intention of
doing so. Considering that there were twelve members of
the council, one of whom was the chairman of that board,
common courtesy should have suggested to him the propriety
of giving notice of his intention.
Mr. EARLE.—I will take a lesson from Mr. Birkett in the
art of politeness, and in future I will give notice. (Laughter.)
.Mr. GLADSTONE was glad that Mr. Earle had mentioned

this subject, for he was quite sure the streets were not in the
state they ought to be. The only remedy was to bring them
before the notice of the public, _ _

Mr. Alderman EARLE.—I did it with that view.
Mr. GLADSTONE, in continuation, said that what the
Chairman of the Paving Board (Mr. John Holmes) had
stated was true : they wanted money to carry on improve-
ments, and they were also in debt; but at the same time he
(Mr. Gladstone) contended that they were proceeding upon
a wrong principle. Most of the streets that Mr. Earle had
named were not safe for people on horseback. He confessed
he did not want to see legislation in favour of one class or
another ; but he must say, that nine-tenths of the streets of
Liverpool were not safe. He hoped that some material
change would soon be made.
Mr. Alderman EARLE said his object was answered by this
discussion.
The proceedings of the committee were then confirmed.