HC Deb 25 June 1835 vol 28 cc1229-31
Lord Sandon

rose to present a Petition of rather a complicated nature, but of very deep importance. It was a petition from the Mayor and Corporation of Liverpool, showing how the Corporation Reform Bill now before the House would affect their vested rights, their liabilities, and peculiar circumstances. They did not wish to offer any opposition to the progress of the bill, but merely to show the existence of certain local regulations and peculiar circumstances, which it would be difficult to accommodate to the general principles of that measure. The petition first recited the amount of income from freehold lands, &c, at the disposal of the Corporation, and then proceeded to show the amount of debts and liabilities which they had incurred, and which they had secured in a great measure by bonds. In respect to these debts the petitioners hoped that the House would make some provision by law, and recommended a sinking fund for that purpose. Another circumstance was, that contracts to a large amount had been entered into by the Corporation for the improvement of the town, and these improvements were now in progress. The petitioners, therefore, prayed that these contracts might be confirmed, as well for the benefit of the town as out of justice to the contractors. There was another point alluded to in the petition, which called for legislation, whether in a separate bill, or in a new clause in the Municipal Reform Bill itself, the petitioners did not pretend to say. They alluded to the dock estates of the Corporation, which were very extensive, and which had hitherto been regulated by a certain number of the Corporators, selected for that purpose—a system which, according to the provisions of the Corporation Reform Bill could be pursued no longer. The petitioners, therefore, prayed that some new form of trust might be appointed by Parliament in respect to these dock estates in lieu of that now to be abolished. The petitioners enumerated various other local acts and regulations which would be found practically incompatible with the bill brought into Parliament by his Majesty's Ministers, but into those details the noble Lord said he would not enter at the present. He would simply move that the petition be laid on the Table, and also that it be printed, in the hope that it would receive the attention it deserved at the hands of the House on some future day.

Mr. Ewart

said, that he thought the fact stated last night by an hon. Member, that in Liverpool a merchant was taxed to the extent of 1,400l. above his fellow-merchant simply because he did not happen to be a member of the Corporation, was argument sufficient against the continuance of the exclusive privileges which the Corporation had hitherto enjoyed and laid claim to. He said that if any peculiar provisions were deemed necessary to adapt the affairs of the Corporation of Liverpool to the principles of the great measure of Municipal Reform they should be brought forward in a separate bill for that purpose. But, whatever was done, he hoped the House would not permit the Corporation of Liverpool to escape from the reforming influence of the great measure now so largely occupying the attention of the House and of the country.

Mr. Thorneley

said, that although it was very true the Corporation of Liverpool was in debt to the amount of 800,000l., it was also true that they were in receipt of an annual income of 100,000l. So, also, there was a debt on account of the dock estates of 400,000l.; but the income received from the docks was about 200,000l. He could not, therefore, believe that any of the parties interested in that property ran the least risk of loss from the operation of the Municipal Reform Bill. He, for one, was a holder of dock stock to a considerable amount, and he could assure the House that he should consider that property much more safe when the Corporation Reform Bill had passed, and the dues collected by the Corporation were placed under responsible men, than he did now.

Petition laid on the Table.

Back to