Page:Item 10 1862.pdf/15

as the general opinion of the town. It was like what they sometimes observed at elections, where there was a large show of hands on one side and a majority on the other at the polling. He maintained that even if he did not spend one halfpenny upon the scheme, he had a perfect right to oppose it if he believed it would be a nuisance to the place, notwithstanding Mr. Putland's assertion that it only concerned the subscribers. Ald. Clement said it appeared that a great many persons were dissatisfied with the 34th clause, and he should be glad to see it erased; for he felt certain there would be no profit arising out of the scheme, but only a loss. - Coun. Winter replied to the remarks of previous speakers, and his motion being put to the vote was carried by 11 to 6 [A noticeable circumstance of this debate was that all the speakers were Liberals, and that although on most questions they voted together as one man, yet on this harbour proposal they were strongly opposed to each other. Mr. Kenwood, a successful builder was opposed to a harbour, whilst Mr. Howell, also a successful builder, was as strongly in favour of it, notwithstanding that he had also for an opponent, MR. Clement, who had many times supplied him with the "ways and means" for his commercial speculations, with probably mutual advantages. Mr. Vidler, who had a house in Eversfield place, was not afraid of the depreciation by the construction of a harbour, whilst Mr. Bromley, who had a house at the same place, was certain of a contrary effect. Mr. Putland, a coal merchant was a strenuous advocate of the harbour, and Mr. Ginner, also a coal merchant was a determined opponent of it. Messrs. Vidler, Ross, Howell and Picknell, whose personal and commercial interests lay in the western parishes, stated that their belief that the harbour would especially benefit the old parishes of St. Clement's and All Saints, whilst Messrs. Winter, Bromley and Ginner, whose residences and commercial interest lay in those parishes, were the most effective speakers against the project. There were some other peculiarities of the debate, one of which was that of the promoters voting, contrary to the Local Act, for a scheme in which they did not intend to be mere myths. But we must proceed.] The Town Clerk read a letter from Messrs. Manning and Walker applying for a lease of land, together with the rights of the Corporation thereon for 999 years whereon to construct a pier and harbour. - Ald. Ginner said he did not wish to be again called impertinent; but he presumed those gentlemen required the ground extending from the Pier Rocks to the East Groyne, and he should like to know if the Corporation Act gave them power to let it. The Town Clerk said they had only power to lease the Corporation land for a period of 30 years. If they wished to exceed that term they must apply to her Majesty's Commissioners. Ald Ginner the protested against the application being entertained, and said the promoters ought to proceed in a straight-forward way by getting an Act -