Town Council Proceedings - Cumberland and Westmorland Newspaper Transcriptions

Town Council Proceedings

TUESDAY, OCTOBER 9, 1855.

PRESENT.

J. BROWN
E. BOWMAN
R. COWEN
R. CREIGHTON
P. J. DIXON
JOS. FORSTER
J. HEWSON
J. HUTHART

C. HODGSON
T. HUTTON
J. HOWE
J. IRVING
I. JAMES
G. MOUNSEY
G. G. MOUNSEY

W. R. MARTINDALE
E. MCGIBBON
T. NANSON
A. ROUTLEDGE
W. RICHARDSON
JAS. SIBSON
W. WILSON

In the absence of the Mayor, Mr. Alderman COWEN was called to the chair.

The Town CLERK read the minutes of the last meeting and of the various committees.

On the motion by Mr. HEWSON, seconded by Mr. HOWE, a number of accounts which had been passed by the Finance Committee, were ordered to be paid.

On the motion of Mr. IRVING, seconded by Mr. HOWE, leave was granted to MESSRS. CARR and CO., to make a communication with Dow beck, for the purpose of obtaining water, so far as the board have power, on the usual terms.

POLICE.

The Town CLERK read the agreement between the county magistrates and the Corporation for the consolidation of the County Police force of Cumberland ward with the City Police force.

MR. RICHARDSON enquired if there was any provision for terminating the agreement by six months' notice.

The Town CLERK said that was provided for in the act.

MR. IRVING moved that the seal of the Corporation be affixed to the agreement.

MR. WILSON seconded the motion, which was carried unanimously.

On the motion of MR. IRVING, seconded by MR. P. J. DIXON, the seal of the Corpoartion was ordered to be affixed to the lease of the fisheries to MR. ARCHBOLD, and of the tolls to MR. CALVERT.

ATTENDANCE OF MEMBERS.

On the motion of MR. IRVING, seconded by MR. WILSON, the Town Clerk was ordered to publish the attendance of the Council and of the different committees during the past year.

FREE LIBRARY.

MR. MOUNSEY stated that the committee appointed at the last Council meeting to consider the propriety of establishing a free library in Carlisle, had not yet held a meeting.

THE SEWERAGE.

MR. HEWSON stated that MR. RAWLINSON had not yet sent in his written report on the sewerage.

The Town CLERK read the resolution of the Health Committee recommending that a lighting rate for £1,100, and a sewerage rate for £1,200 be sanctioned.

MR. RICHARDSON moved that the rate be passed. The lighting rate was merely the usual rate; the other was the first sewerage rate that had yet been proposed, and was at the rate of 6d in the pound. Land and some descriptions of property were exempt from the lighting rate, but the sewerage rate was levied on all.

MR. FORSTER seconded the motion, which was carried unanimously.

MR. HODGSON - Are we to understand that a 6d rate will be sufficient for the twelve months ?

MR. HEWSON said he thought it was very probable that the average annual rate for the whole 30 years would be 6d. At first it would be more, but it would be less afterwards.

MR. CARTMELL said he believed, calculating the interest at four per cent., the amount to be paid was £1,300, and a 6d rate would raise £1,200.

MR. C. HODGSON - Then that throws us behind.

MR. RICHARDSON said the presumption was that property in Carlisle would increase and that what was deficient at first would be made up afterwards. At all events, it was thought better to start with a 6d rate.

MR. C. HODGSON - It is a very bad plan. We should begin with clear books. [ a laugh ]

MR. RICHARDSON - We do begin with clear books.

MR. HEWSON - We can have another rate if this is not sufficient.

MR.. C. HODGSON - Then it is clearly understood that this is only to pay as far as it goes ? [ A laugh ]

MR. RICHARDSON - It should also be understood that at present it is believed that a 6d rate will do for this year.

MR. CARTMELL said he should state that the 6d rate would more than cover this year's expenses, because the interest of a portion of the money was not for the whole year.

MR. MOUNSEY - Keep it down to 6d if you can.

MR. SIBSON - Can you tell what will be the whole cost of the sewers ?

MR. HEWSON - MR. RAWLINSON said that he thought they would come a little within the estimate of £23,000.

MR. RICHARDSON - The auditors commenced to examine the accounts last night, and as near as I can remember, the expenditure was between £18,000 and £19,000 up to the end of September. But there are liabilities yet standing, and we don't know what they may come to.

MR. HEWSON said the way in which the sewers had been executed was very satisfactory.

MR. P. J. DIXON said it was, and the public ought to be much indebted to the Health Committee.

MR. IRVING said he understood the works would be completed in a couple of months, and then perhaps they would be able to ascertain what the expense had been.

MR. HEWSON - Yes, in less than that.

MR. SIBSON - Can any estimate be made of the cost of the private sewers ? [ Laughter ]

MR. HEWSON - That is quite out of the question. They will never be completed as long as the town stands.

MR. RICHARDSON - It will be a work of years. I question if they will be completed in twelve years.

MR. IRVING said he thought it would be well if the Board urged private individuals, as much as they possibly could, to get their junctions made with the sewers, so that those streets which required overhauling might be put in order. If the private works went on for some time after there had been a large outlay on the streets, it might lead to a deal of confusion.

MR. HEWSON said MR. IRVING would see by the minutes of the committee that notices were issued every week. In his opinion, the private works would never be altogether completed, but it was desirable that they should be urged on.

MR. MOUNSEY said it was a pity that notices to connect private sewers had not been served when the public sewers were being constructed, because many parties, - he for one, - would have taken advantage of it.

MR. RICHARDSON said the question had been put to MR. MCKIE and he had objected to it on the ground that it would lead to a great deal of confusion. In answer to MR. IRVING, he might state that the private sewers were going on voluntarily, and without confusion, all over the town, as fast as was practicable and as fast as good workmen could be obtained.

MR. MOUNSEY enquired under what authority the committee ordered the conversion of privies into water-closets.

MR. RICHARDSON - Under the authority of the act.

MR. MOUNSEY said he knew of some instances in which the committee had first ordered privies to be erected, and now they ordered their conversion into water-closets.

MR. RICHARDSON said that in the case to which MR. MOUNSEY alluded, the persons who had the management of the Caledonian Railway property were ordered to insert water closets, but as the sewers were not complete they applied to MR. HOGG to allow them to erect privies in the meantime. Leave was given, but on the express understanding that when the sewers were complete, the privies were to be converted into water-closets.

MR. MOUNSEY said that was a sufficient answer with regard to that case. But he wished to know on what authority these orders were made. Unless the thing were a nuisance, he did not see what power they had.

It was explaineed by MR. HEWSON and MR. RICHARDSON that no such orders were issued except where the places were complained of as nuisances, and reported to the board by their surveyor.

MR. MOUNSEY said it was well known that a water-closet might become as great a nuisance as a privy.

After some further conversation, the matter dropped.

SWIFTS ROW.

MR. SIBSON said, seeing that MR. MOUNSEY, the agent of the DUKE OF DEVONSHIRE, was present, he would call the attention of the Council to the state of Swifts Row, in the hope that some sort of arrangment might be come to with a view of keeping it in a proper state.

MR. MOUNSEY said MR. SIBSON would perhaps be aware that when it was made a street there was an arrangment made.

MR. IRVING said MR. SIBSON had better make a written application to the Health Committee, who would entertain the question and give him an answer. [ Hear, hear ]

MR. MOUNSEY said it was a private road to the SWIFTs, except so far as regarded access to the houses.

The subject then dropped.

The other resolutions of the Health Committee were then confirmed.

SUBSCRIPTION TO THE ANGLING ASSOCIATION.

MR. HOWE said it would be in the recollection of the Council that some time ago he had given notice of a motion to the effect that a subscription of £5 per annum be paid the Carlisle District Angling Association with a view to the protection of the fish in the river Eden. They were aware that the fisheries had very much decreased in value, and he believed it was wholly to be attributed to the want of protection; at the last letting the fisheries had let for very much less than before, and he knew no other reason for it than that. As to the usefulness of the society, he would state that between forty and fifty persons had been convicted of poaching since the society came into existence, and fines had been paid to the amount of £200. From this they might infer what a deal of fish must have been illegally taken out of the river before it was protected. He concluded by moving that a subscription of £5 per annum be paid.

MR. T. HUTTON seconded the motion.

MR. RICHARDSON said £5 was just a sixth of the Corporation fisheries rental. Now he would like to know if others paid in the same proportion.

MR. HOWE said the per centage might appear large, but it must be borne in mind that Corporation were more interested in the fisheries than some persons, and had the privilege of taking fish sooner.

MR. RICHARDSON - The rental will show the value.

MR. MOUNSEY enquired if the Solway act did not give power to assess the different proprietors for the protection of the river.

MR. HOWE said that was the case in the Tyne act, but not in the Solway act. He believed however that SIR JAMES GRAHAM and the EARL OF LONSDALE had it under consideration to draw up a new act and he was told that the draft was in the hands of LORD LONSDALE's agents at this time.

MR. MOUNSEY enquired what became of the £200 paid in fines.

MR. HOWE said one half went to the parish and the other half to the informer.

In answer to a question MR. HOWE, said the society did not receive any of the money; the informer's portion went to the watchers, who had pocketed about £100. They were paid, in addition, a weekly wage of 18s.

MR. WILSON said he had no objection to give a donation of £5, but he objected to an annual subscription.

MR. HEWSON said he did not see how they would be able to get anything in return for their subscription. If it had been for a charitable purpose, he could not have expected it, but he thought they should not subscribe when they saw no probability of getting anything back again.

MR. HOWE - I am certain there will be an increase in the rent at the next letting.

MR. IRVING said there was no doubt it was the duty of the Corporation to subscribe for the purpose of protecting their own property, and if MR. HOWE could give them an idea of the amount subscribed by other parties, he had no doubt a vote would be agreed to.

MR. HOWE said he could not do that, but he could state that the public subscribed about £100 a-year. The EARL OF LONSDALE subscribed £5.

MR. SIBSON suggested that a donation might be given instead of a subscription.

MR. IRVING said it made no matter. The subject would have to be brought forward again next year. He suggested that MR. HOWE withdraw his motion for the present, and bring it forward in a more digested form at the next meeting.

MR. HOWE said he would rather take the vote now.

MR. WILSON said although £5 might appear a large sum yet, if the fisheries were improved, the Corporation had the benefit.

MR. C. HODGSON - But we want to know what the others pay.

MR. IRVING - If it is right that we should subscribe, we should do so irrespective of others.   [Hear, hear]

MR. HEWSON said he would move "That it is the opinion of the Council that the subject be referred to the Finance Committee, and that MR. HOWE render such information to them as they may require."    It appeared to be the opinion of some gentlemen that a subscription should be paid, and if so it ought to be in proportion to the subscriptions of others.

MR. IRVING said he was quite prepared to vote for £5, but in his opinion if MR. HOWE allowed his motion to stand over so that gentlemen might have a better opportunity of considering the matter, he would meet with more support.

MR. HOWE said the matter had now been before them for a long time and he had no doubt that they were all acquainted with the facts, at least in their private capacities. All the gentlemen to whom the matter had been named had promised their support.

MR. RICHARDSON said that when the subject was mentioned before, the fisheries let for £60; now they only let for £32.

THE CHAIRMAN was about to put the amendment when...............................

MR. HOWE said he would agree that the subject should be referred to the Finance Committee to fix the amount.

MR. HEWSON - To report on the whole matter.

MR. IRVING - Oh no, it was a distinct understanding that something was to be given. Then I move that in the opinion of this Council, a subscription ought to be paid.

MR. HOWE said he would now press his motion.

MR. WILSON said the word "annual" ought to be omitted.

The TOWN CLERK said it was immaterial as it would have to be passed every year.

MR. HEWSON said he must press his amendment.

The amendment was then put, and was negatived by an overwhelming majority. The motion was then put and carried.

THE CHAIRMAN said that in Ireland the greatest benefit had arisen from the protection of the rivers. In some cases the fisheries had been doubled and in others trebled.

THE WATER WORKS.

MR. HEWSON said he intended to apply to the Mayor, had he been present, for his signature to a document of the Carlisle Water Works Company. The document had been prepared under the advice of their solicitor in accordance with a resolution passed unanimously at the last meeting of the shareholders.

MR. RICHARDSON - No, not unanimously.

MR. HEWSON begged pardon. He repeated that it was passed unanimously at the last meeting of the shareholders, and it was already signed by 140 or the 150 shareholders. It was proposed to get the signatures of the whole number, and he had no doubt that his friend MR. RICHARDSON and others would sign it. Whether he intended to do so or not, he did not know, but he hoped he would give leave to the Council to sign it, and he therefore moved that the Mayor be empowered to sign the document on behalf of the Corporation.

MR. P. J. DIXON and MR. HUTHART enquired what was the purport of the document.

MR. HEWSON - To increase the capital. I am ready to go into the question if it is desirable, but it is much better that we should not, I think.

MR. HOWE - Well, I don't know. You would not have us sign a document which we don't understand ? [ Hear, hear ]

MR. IRVING seconded MR. HEWSON's motion, but he thought the Council ought to be put in possession of full information on the subject. [ Hear ]

MR. HEWSON - I dare say it is known to most part of the Council that the capital of the Water Company at the commencement was £15,000, with power to borrow £5,000 more, making in all £20,000. We had also power to convert the borrowed money into shares whenever we thought fit, and we did so. But it was found in the course of time that the capital was too small, and that there was no means of increasing it. Under these circumstances, it was recommended by MR. MOUNSY, our solicitor, and our then chairman, MR. FAWCETT, that a sum of £3,000 should be borrowed with the sanction of the shareholders. The money was borrowed, and the directors gave their personal security for the amount, and an agreement was signed by the shareholders as a counter-guarantee.

The works go on and increase, and we require a further extension of capital, and the object of this document is that the Board of Directors should put themselves right with the company. It was not thought proper that they should continue their personal liability from time to time, and it was unanimously considered that this was the best way and the most economical way of raising the money.

If this plan is not adopted, then a new act of parliament would be required, but if this document is signed and lodged in the Registration Office, it is a perfectly legal mode of increasing the capital. The resolution passed at the last meeting of the company was as follows: - - -

"That it is the opinion of this meeting that the directors take such measures as they may, under the advice of their solicitor, consider expedient to increase the capital of the company, by borrowing or otherwise, to the extent of 15,000."

We don't want to borrow that much now, but merely to put ourselves right with the shareholders for the money already borrowed, and we don't care whether the amount is £15,000 or a smaller sum. The resolution was unanimously agreed to at the meeting on the motion of MR. RICHARDSON himself.

MR. P. J. DIXON enquired how many shares the Corporation held.

MR. HEWSON said he believed they held sixty-six.

MR. RICHARDSON said he had a decided objection to sign the document, on behalf of the Council, and he had refused to sign it himself, although his name had been publicaly hawked about it as the originator of it. He had certainly moved the resolution which MR. HEWSON had read over - [ hear, hear, from MR. IRVING ] - and it was carried unanimously - with the exception, he believed, of one gentleman who came in afterwards and who said he would have opposed it if he had been present.

But at the time it passed, he (MR. RICHARDSON) had the deed of settlement in his mind, and it was only his intention to authorize the directors to take the steps laid down there for altering the capital, knowing that it was provided that two meetings of the shareholders should be called before any alteration was made.

It was not the resolution of the general meeting that he objected to, but it was that the directors should have power to raise £15,000, to allot the shares and appropriate them without consulting the shareholders. That was what he objected to - that this document was hawked about before the whole body of the shareholders were consulted.

They would recollect that when it was simply the conversion of the £5,000 borrowed money into capital, two meetings had to be held. Nothing could be done under the deed of settlement, unless there were two meetings of shareholders. Here they got up a document empowering the directors, nine or ten men - all honourable men, no doubt - but they had seen in public companies what directors might do if they were inclined - empowering them to deal with £15,000, and he thought it was only right that the shareholders should have some power and not put so much into their hands.

Instead of 140 names - he did not know whether MR. HEWSON knew or not - but when the document was brought to him to sign, there were not half a dozen names on it. He then pointed out what he conceived to be an error on it, and, notwithstanding that, MR. ROUTLEDGE still went on although he knew it was so much waste paper until the whole of the shareholders had signed it. He thought the directors should have shown some disposition to make it agreeable before they went to the trouble and expense of obtaining the names they had got. He objected to the directors having power to raise the increased capital in any way they like, and he hoped the Council would not stultify themselves by agreeing to it. If they wanted a large sum of money, it ought to be raised somewhat in conformity with the deed of settlement.

MR. HEWSON said he would be unwilling to say anything offensive but he did think that the part taken by MR. RICHARDSON in this matter was a very anomalous one. Without any hesitation whatever, he moved the resolution at the meeting. He (MR. HEWSON) drew it out himself, it was deliberately read over, and they had the advice of their solicitor that it was a perfectly legal course. With regard to what he had said about calling meetings to sanction an increase of capital, surely it was better if they could get the whole of the shareholders to show their approval by signing this document than to have it passed by a meeting of only two-thirds of the number. When they had got the whole of the shareholders, they could have nothing more, and they had the advice of their solicitor that it was a perfectly legal document when complete.

MR. RICHARDSON - It never will be complete.

MR. HEWSON - I look upon this as a vote of want of confidence in the directors. If you have no longer confidence in your directors, you have the power in your own hands to change them. For my part, if I thought I had not the confidence of the shareholders, I would not remain a director for one day longer, and I repeat it that it amounts to a want of confidence in the directors if MR. RICHARDSON does not sign this document.

MR. RICHARDSON denied that he had no confidence in the present directors, but they did not know who they might be six years after this.

MR. HEWSON - The shareholders can elect whom they like.

MR. RICHARDSON - We know what little power shareholders have in these matters; we see that every day. I say it is taking them by surprise to lay this document before them. If I had thought that the directors would have gone to work at once and prepared a document like this, I should have been very sorry to have moved such a resolution, but I thought that whatever they agreed to would first have been submitted to a meeting of the shareholders. You will recollect that a proposition of the directors for the conversion of the £5,000 borrowed money was upset, and very justly upset, by the shareholders, and a saving of £1,000 was effected.

MR. HEWSON - This document is carefully worded.

MR. RICHARDSON - Aye, carefully worded, I think.

MR. HEWSON said the money was not all required to be raised now; it was merely to relieve the directors of their liability. They were certainly not fit to be any longer directors if they could not be entrusted with the money of the company. He did not think that MR. RICHARDSON had thought of this opposition at first, but he had met with another gentleman who suggested the difficulty. Indeed MR. HANNAH had himself told him that is he had been present at the meeting, he would have opposed the resolution.

MR. RICHARDSON denied that he had been influenced by MR. HANNAH.

MR. HEWSON said he had no doubt whatever that it was the fact. However, he left the matter in the hands of the Council; he had not another word to say on the subject.

MR. RICHARDSON - I merely wish to say that MR. HANNAH did not persuade me. When the document was laid before me, I said it was contrary to the deed of settlement, and no directors had had power of that kind given to them by act of parliament. It is unusual and irregular, and I think if this Council sanctions such a proceeding, it is a thing that may lead to a very great deal of abuse at some time or another.

MR. HEWSON - You should have thought of that before, when you moved the resolution.

MR. IRVING said perhaps it would be well if MR. MOUNSEY, the legal advisor of the company, and also a member of the Council, who were shareholders, stated his opinion as to the position in which they stood.

MR. MOUNSEY said he was rather taken by surprise, because he had not been aware that there was the slightest difficulty in the matter. When it was discussed by the shareholders, there was a large meeting, and he believed the resolution was carried unanimously. Subsequently the directors applied to him to consider the proper mode of carrying it out. It appeared to him that there were only two ways - either by going to Parliament for an act giving them larger powers, or by a further application at the Register Office.

It was thought inexpedient to go to Parliament because of the expense, and therefore application was made to the Register Office. They were informed that if a resolution of this kind was signed by all the shareholders, it might be registered and have the same effect as a deed, in fact precisely the same operation as the original deed. On that advice he had drawn up the document, and signed it.

It appeared that the objection made to it really had not much weight. The document certainly authorized the directors to raise the money, but, if they considered every gentleman before he signed it, was fully aware of its contents and gave the power with his eyes open. The shareholders confided in the directors he presumed, and MR. RICHARDSON had himself given an instance of their having corrected them when they were in error.   [ Hear, hear ] The shareholders instruct their directors to raise fresh capital, and now that they have got the deed prepared MR. RICHARDSON steps forward and opposes it. [ Cheers ]

MR. RICHARDSON rose to speak, but was obliged to sit down by cries of "order".

MR. MOUNSEY - The resolution merely authorized the directors to raise the money; it did not authorize them to throw it away or to expend it independent of the shareholders. This was not like many companies where the shareholders resided at a distance from the board of management. Here most of the shareholders resided on the spot and attended the meetings; it was not like cases where there were only one or two shareholders present besides the directors. The directors would be always well looked after. Their operations were in a confined space, and not like the companies in which malversations had been committed by the directors.. Independent of the personal character of the directors, there was always that safeguard; besides, they were all partakers of the benefits of the company, and he did not think there was that doubt which might exist as to the managment of some concerns. Money must be raised, and some way must be found of relieving the directors of liability. The works were enlarging daily, and they must have additional capital; and the model they were adopting for obtaining it was the cheapest and the most effectual.

If they went to Parliament, it would be attended with a great deal of expense. The objection that the directors had the power in their own hands was none at all, because their acts were subject to the supervision of the shareholders. As one of the shareholders, he had no objection to it; he had signed the deed, and he hoped that MR. RICHARDSON would not persevere in his opposition.

MR. IRVING - MR. RICHARDSON himself is an auditor. [ Hear, hear ]

MR. MOUNSEY - Yes, and he himself moved the resolution. [ Hear, and laughter ]

MR. RICHARDSON - Not the one which we are called on to sign     (Oh.)

MR. MOUNSEY - You moved that which contains the pith of it - the power to raise £15,000. His objection is merely to certain words which have been unfortunately introduced, but which do not affect the principle of the thing at all, and now that the document is nearly complete, only wanting a few signatures, I trust he will confide in the directors, checked as they are by the large body of shareholders.   [ Hear.]

MR. WILSON - What responsibility will the Corporation incur ?

MR. MOUNSEY - No responsibility. They merely authorise the directors to raise money.

MR. RICHARDSON said he had taken his objection from the first, and he must maintain it, because he thought that a meeting or two meetings of the shareholders ought to have been called before the directors took power to raise £15,000 in shares or money. He had no wish to go to parliament, nor had he any wish to prevent them getting out of their difficulties; he was anxious that they should have power to increase their capital, but he objected to their manner of doing it. If the deed had given them power "after receiving the consent of the shareholders from time to time," he would have signed it; but seeing that it left the whole in the hands of the directors, he objected, because when the thing was done, the shareholders had no control - the directors might turn round and say "We have done it, and you can't prevent it." In the other case, the shareholders would have given their consent before it was done.

MR. MOUNSEY - They give their consent by this deed.

MR. RICHARDSON - I never will consent to it. MR. ROUTLEDGE has had a great deal of trouble in getting signatures to a document that will never be worth that - ( snapping his fingers )

MR. HEWSON said if the wording had been modified and altered it might have passed, but he would be the last man to call on them to alter a resolution which had been passed deliberately. [ Cries of "divide" ]

MR. RICHARDSON - We are not called on to sign that resolution but another.

MR. CREIGHTON thought the Council had nothing to do with the Water Company. [ "Vote" ]

MR. HUTHART rose amid interruption to put a question.

THE CHAIRMAN said he did not think they should discuss the affairs of the Water Company.

MR. C. HODGSON - Does the deed give the directors power to go to an unlimited extent, or only to the extent of £15,000 ?

MR. RICHARDSON - Only to £15,000.

MR. C. HODGSON - Are they going to borrow it, or convert it into shares ?   [ Signs of impatience ]

MR. HEWSON - We had borrowed £3,000, and we had given our own security. It was thought that that was an anomalous position to be in, and when we applied for borrowing powers, it was suggested that we had better take power to borrow more at the same time. Therefore the shareholders placed confidence in us, and gave us power to raise such a sum as we might require.

MR. FORSTER - MR. RICHARDSON does not object to the borrowing.

MR. IRVING said after the assurance of their solicitor, he did not see what further objection there could be to the document. MR. RICHARDSON was a man for whom he entertained a very high respect, for he believed there was no man who had done more for the good of the town than he had. At the time when the Water Company were obliged to extend their operations, MR. RICHARDSON was a member of the board, and with the other directors incurred certain responsibilies. He then backed out - [ MR. RICHARDSON...No, no ] He was prepared to prove what he stated. MR. RICHARDSON backed out, leaving the directors in a state in which they were obliged to incur a responsibility of which he was now unwilling to permit them to be relieved. [ Hear, hear ] He must say that was most unfair, and he could not see how he could justify himself. In most things MR. RICHARDSON took correct views of things, but he had "kicks in his gallop."   [ Laughter ]

MR. RICHARDSON- It is all very well for MR. IRVING to charge me, but ( Cries of "spoke", and "vote, vote" amid which MR. RICHARDSON resumed his seat ).

MR. MOUNSEY said reference had been made to the deed of settlement requiring two meetings. Now it was in order to have the full consent of the whole of the shareholders that this other course had been adopted. When he made application to the Register Office, he was told that the consent of two meetings would not do, because the consent of every shareholder must be had. He looked on it as more complete. [ Hear, hear ]

MR. RICHARDSON - The document is more complete, but the powers are not. The directors have power to raise £15,000.

MR. MOUNSEY - Under your own resolution.

There being loud cries for a division,

THE CHAIRMAN was about to put the question when...

MR. RICHARDSON said in an undertone to MR. MOUNSEY - You know very well it is wrong.

MR. HEWSON - Now really, I think this is preposterous. I won't stand that, and I must apply to the chairman for protection. If we are to sit here and hear such observations as MR. RICHARDSON is making, I say it is not to be suffered.

THE CHAIRMAN said it was an improper remark.

MR. MOUNSEY said as the observation had been overheard, he would state that he had never known of the objection until to-day. It was the first time he had heard of it.

MR. C. HODGSON - If the company could show us they want £15,000, I would have no objection, but..................

MR. IRVING - The difficulty is this - suppose we want additional capital, we will have to go over the same ground again, and ................................

MR. RICHARDSON - It is opposed to the deed of settlement.

MR. IRVING - I beg, MR. CHAIRMAN, you will call MR. RICHARDSON to order. If the money is not required, it will not be borrowed.

MR. C. HODGSON said the CHAIRMAN knew, from his knowledge of railway matters, that when directors wanted more money, they came to the shareholders for power to borrow it. But if they did not want £15,000, why give them power to raise it ?

MR. HEWSON - They need not borrow it.

MR. C. HODGSON said they should ask for the amount they wanted.   [ Interruption, and cries of "divide" ]

THE CHAIRMAN said there would be no end to the discussion. It was clear that the Corporation were liable in no way.

The following resolution was read: ..........................................

"That the Mayor be authorised to sign, on behalf of the Corporation as holders of 66 shares in the Carlisle Water Works Company, a memorandum or agreement authorising the increase of the capital to the extent of £15,000 by enabling the directors of the company to raise such an amount, either by loan or by the creation of fresh shares."

THE CHAIRMAN then put the resolution, and it was carried almost unanimously - MR. RICHARDSON being the only dissentient.

The Council broke up at ten minutes to twelve.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~