FACTS PLAINLY STATED : 
 
 IN 
 
 I ANSWER TO A PAMPHLET 
 
 ENTITLED 
 
 « PLAIN STAlEMENT OF FACTS, 
 
 Connected with Uie j^ — 
 
 PROP O S ED 
 
 ^t. matfjarine's ©ocfe." 
 
 BY A 
 LONDON-DOCK PROPRIETOR. 
 
 LONDON: 
 
 PRINTED FOR J. M. RICHARDSON, 23, CORNHILL. 
 
 1R24.
 
 J 
 
 Note. — The Minutes of Evidence, S^c. quoted in 
 the Notes, are selected from the Examinations taken 
 before the Committee of the House of Commons on 
 
 Foreign Trade. 
 
 MARCHANT, PRINTER, INGRAM-COURT, LONDON.
 
 FACTS PLAINLY STATED, 
 
 A Pamphlei has just appeared, entitled a " Plain 
 Statement of Facts, connected with the proposed 
 St. Katharine's Dock ;" which, although it seeks to 
 attract observation, by alluring professions of open 
 and general competition, yet will be shown, in the 
 following pages, to have little claim to the public 
 attention. The Author of the Pamphlet, whilst he 
 impugns the intention of the publishers of various 
 anonymous remarks, suppresses his own name — 
 but, as he is not very delicate in the use of misre- 
 presentation and censure — " It is," to quote his 
 own words, " important that such misrepresenta- 
 " tions should be met by an unqualified contradic- 
 " tion, least they should influence the minds of 
 " those who will have to determine, whether the 
 " project (he advocates) shall receive the sanction 
 " of the legislature or not.'' 
 
 A 2
 
 In opposition to vvlmtmi^lit be inierred, from the 
 lanoiiaoe of the Pamplilct in question, it is material, 
 that it should be clearly understood by the public, 
 that the persons who are concerned in the Docks 
 already formed have never opposed the views of 
 government, as respects the Warehousing-System ; 
 on the contrary, their interest must have led them 
 to wish that system success; and whatever value 
 may have been assigned to the evidence given on 
 this subject, by Mr. Hall and Mr. Thornton, those 
 who will give themselves the trouble to read the 
 evidence before the Committee of the House of 
 Commons on Foreign Trade, will find ample testi- 
 mony in favour of the existing establishments, and 
 of their willingness, on every occasion, to reduce, 
 as much as possible, the expenses of the Port of 
 London ; although it cannot but be evident, to any 
 one at all acquainted with the subject, that it is 
 impracticable for any Docks or Warehouses in 
 London to reduce the charges to a level with those 
 of Holland, Antwerp, &c. whilst the wages of 
 labour and the expenses of construction are so 
 mucli higher here than they are in those places. It 
 must always be borne in mind, that house-rent and 
 the expense even of existence are dearer here than 
 in any other part of Europe. When these expenses 
 are reduced, then, and not till then, can we hope, 
 fairly, to compete with foreigners. 
 
 The Evidence of Mr. Thornton, to which allusion 
 is made in that part of the Report of the Committee
 
 5 
 
 of the House of Commons, which is set forth in tlie 
 Pamphlet, it should be observed, related chieHy to 
 the bottling- of wine — in consequence of his Evi- 
 dence, an order was given to allow wine to be 
 bottled in bond, for exportation. 
 
 The moment this order was issued, arrangements 
 were made in the London Dock to give every faci- 
 lity for carrying it into eft'ect, and the charges 
 imposed by that Dock are little more than sufHcient 
 to cover the actual expense incurred ; yet, notwith- 
 standing the accommodation thus afforded, not 
 more than 140 pipes of wine have been bottled for 
 exportation. 
 
 The Author of the Pamphlet has accused the exist- 
 ing Dock Establishments of imposing vexatious re- 
 gulations, though, it is remarkable that he has not 
 thought it convenient to point out any one of the vexa- 
 tions he complains of, he cannot but know, that not 
 any of the regulations which are alleged to inte- 
 fere with the facilities that Mercantile Tmnsactions 
 require, have been adopted, until found necessary 
 and insisted upon by the OfHcers of the Excise and 
 Customs.* Every one must see that it is manifestly 
 tlic interest- of the present establishments to aflord 
 all possible accommodation to trade in their power; 
 and as to the assertion, tliat representations and 
 
 * Mr. Tooke's fi'idcnrf. -T\w acroiniiuidiition nl tli< l.nn- 
 (lon Dock, fixceptinp; as connected, iiiolinhly, willi tlif r»\ (iiiif- 
 laws, is very satisfactory.
 
 6 
 
 remonstrances have, in most instances, been disre- 
 garded, the London Dock Company can have no 
 hesitation in meeting such unsubstantiated accusa- 
 tions by a direct denial, and the Author is defied 
 to produce any proof in support of his charge of 
 injustice. 
 
 With respect to the Rates imposed by the seve- 
 ral Dock Establishments, — in the " Plain Statement 
 of Facts," a very important fact is, most unfairly, 
 kept out of view, viz. — That the London Docks are 
 restricted in their charges, to those paid in the Port of 
 London, in the year 1798 ; and that, in very many 
 instances, the charges at present imposed are even 
 much below those rates. By the permission given, in 
 consequence of the recommendation of the Foreign 
 Trade Committee, of the 3d of June, 1823, to 
 bond goods wherever sufficient security could be 
 provided, ample opportunity is afforded for carrying 
 into effect the desired measure of bringing goods 
 into the very heart of the City, and thus, greater and 
 more extensive facilities and advantages to trade are 
 given than any which the New Dock can possibly 
 offer ; and that competition (the asserted want of 
 which is the great argument made use of, in support 
 of the new scheme, by the Author of the Pam- 
 phlet, and his party) is thus, as respects the Ware- 
 housing of Goods already effectually in operation. 
 In respect to landing, the Dock Establishments 
 are also sufficiently competed with, by the legal 
 Quays and Sufferance Wharfs, to remove all hazard
 
 of exaction.* If, indeed, we were to derive our 
 information on this head from the Pamphlet alone, 
 we might think that this competition was, in effect, 
 little more than nominal ; for, in the statement 
 there given, a most important fact is withheld, 
 viz. — That, by the official returns, delivered to the 
 House of Commons, on 17th of March last, it ap- 
 pears, that, on the south side of the river, eighty- 
 six vessels of 100 tons and upwards, and, on the 
 
 * Air. Tooke's Evidence, July, 1822. — I am not acquainted 
 with the proportion of charges as between the West India 
 Docks and London Docks, but as between the London Dock 
 and Sufferance Wharfs, I believe that the whole of the advan- 
 tages, in a pecuniary sense, preponderate in favour of the 
 London Dock ; at least, so we think, and we act accordingly, 
 in directing by far the largest proportion of our business to 
 those Docks, 
 
 I believe that the charges in those Docks, (Commercial 
 and London,) and Wharfs, which are open to competition, 
 are on a very reduced scale, and do not come under the objec- 
 tion which I have stated of Port Charges. 
 
 I have not spoken of the London and Commercial Docks 
 as being unreasonably high. 
 
 We do find their charges as low as at any of the Suftcrance 
 Wharfs. 
 
 I conceive that if the charges of the I^avigation of the Port 
 of London could be materially reduced, it would tend in a 
 very great degree to restore the business of the Port of Lon- 
 don to the utmost it has ever been at, 
 
 I have found upon the whole there has been a competition 
 (between (he London Docks and Sufferance Wharfs) which 
 has constantly kept them on an <-rpialitv.
 
 8 
 
 nortli side sixty-two vessels of the same description, 
 may unload at one and the same time, between Lon- 
 don Bridoe and Limehouse. It is observable, that 
 the Author studiously endeavours to undervalue the 
 usefulness of the Docks, &c. on the south side of the 
 river, for general purposes, upon the presumption, it 
 may be supposed, that the immense population on 
 that side of the Thames are not consumers , and as 
 to the assertion, that " no vessel of more than 200 
 " tons, with a heavy cargo, and such only as are 
 " flat bottomed, and Dutch built, can discharge 
 *' at the Sufferance Wharfs ;"' the best answer that 
 can be given is, that many owners of vessels above 
 200 tons, and neither flat-bottomed nor Dutch 
 built, have (notwithstanding what has been said 
 upon the subject) been desirous, that these ves- 
 sels should unload at the Sufferance Wharfs ; but, 
 upon application -to the Customs for leave to do so, 
 have often been refused. The Owners may cer- 
 tainly be considered to be the best judges where 
 their Vessels may be unloaded in safety. 
 
 The Author felt, no doubt, that, in opposition 
 to his assertion, of there not being sufficient wharf- 
 room to afford fair accommodation to the increased 
 Trade of the Port of London it would be urged 
 against him, that the extension of accommodation 
 furnished by the construction of the existing Docks, 
 is much more than proportionate to the increase of 
 trade ; he, therefore, has been driven to make a very 
 curious statement of the number of vessels which 
 resort annually to the Port of London.
 
 9 
 
 He asserts that no less than 52,838 vessels arrived 
 and departed from the Port of London, during 
 the year 1823. Now, it appears from the Report 
 made to the House of Commons, on the 11th of 
 March last, that the number of ships, which en- 
 tered the Port, was — 
 
 British. 
 
 Foreign. 
 
 Total. 
 
 In 1814,.... 2,773 
 
 . ... 2,297 .. 
 
 .. 5,070 
 
 1821, ... 3,527 
 
 ... 571 .. 
 
 .. 4,098 
 
 1823,.... 3,648 
 
 865 . . 
 
 .. 4,513 
 
 And, from the Harbour Master's Report, the num- 
 ber of vessels moored between Limehouse and 
 London Bridge was, — 
 
 In 1814, 13,100 
 
 1817, 13,219 
 
 1822, 13,433 
 
 1823, 13,112 
 
 And steam-boats, do 945 
 
 Now, as these returns are the only authentic 
 data upon which the Author, it is concluded, can 
 possibly found his calculations, it becomes matter 
 of no small ditHculty to discover how he could 
 arrive at the conclusion he has done ; the method, 
 however, which he appears to have pursued is 
 this; — Supp(;sing 945 Steam-vessels to visit the 
 the Port of London annually, he reckons them 
 botli at tlicir arrival and at their departure; aiul
 
 10 
 
 thus makes 1,890 of them, and so with the other 
 vessels. 
 
 The statement given of the official value 
 of Imports and Exports appears to aHord to 
 tlie advocate of St. Katliarine's Dock cause for 
 regret. He says, " Let it be observed that the in- 
 " crease of the Trade (viz. from 1821 to 1822) 
 " was confined to the export of British manufac- 
 " ture and produce only, which show the mis- 
 " chievous effect of excessive charges upon the 
 " Transit Trade." But if a larger proportion of the 
 increased Trade of the country consisted of British 
 Manufactures exported, its real advantages would be 
 so much the greater; and also more generally diffused 
 than by putting Goods into Warhouses and taking 
 them out again for exportation ; however good the 
 A¥arehousing System may be. The Author of the 
 Statement of Facts will find but few real well- 
 wishers to their country to join his lamentation on 
 this head. 
 
 Every person, who thinks on the subject, must 
 be as fully sensible, as the Author of the Pamphlet 
 is, of the extensive advantages which must accrue 
 from making the Port of London a deposit for 
 Foreign Merchandize ; and it is certainly a matter 
 of great gratification to learn from him that Go- 
 vernment have in view the adoption of plans which 
 will reduce the expenses and facilitate the Trade of 
 the Port : — as these plans are not intended, exclu- 
 sively, it is hoped, for the new Dock at St. Katha-
 
 11 
 
 fine's, their beneficial effects will, no doubt, be 
 felt in the existing- Establishments ; if the dif- 
 ficulties and expenses which ships coming to the 
 Port of London now said to experience are thus 
 removed, it may fairly be expected that a part of 
 the vacant room now to be found in every Dock 
 and Warehouse, will be, to a certain extent, occu- 
 pied ; when that vacant room is either filled or 
 there is any appearance of want of accommoda- 
 tion likely to take place, further Warehouse Room 
 will immediately be provided — but whilst the want 
 of room and accommodation exists only in the 
 imaginations and writings of the supporters of the 
 new scheme, those who manage the present Esta- 
 blishments are surely justified in the opposition 
 they make. 
 
 As is stated in the Pamphlet, the Charter of the 
 West India Dock expired in the month of August, 
 1823, but the privileges secured by that Cliarter 
 did not practically cease till the month of February 
 last : — the cessation of those privileges was cer- 
 tainly calculated to bring some ships from the 
 West Indies into the London Docks ; three 
 West India cargoes have been landed tliere, but 
 a larger number of Vessels which used to be 
 brought to tlie London Dock have, since the trade 
 was laid open, gone to the West India Dock. The 
 West India Dock have in hand a large surplus fund, 
 which, by an arrangement entered into with tlie 
 Foreign Trade Conuiiittee, they have agreed to 
 apply to the reduction of tlicir rates; the conse-
 
 12 
 
 quence is, tliiit tlie rates now actually raised by 
 that Company, at least as respects the West India 
 Trade, are avowedly insufficient to pay the ex- 
 pense incurred in landing- and storing the goods. — 
 To attempt, therefore, to compete Avith the West 
 India Dock, by reducing all charges to the level of 
 their present rates, would be a competition for 
 ruin. But there is another circumstance which 
 will give the West India Dock, in many cases, a 
 preference over the London Dock — viz. their being- 
 lower down the River ; for there are owners of 
 Ships who, notwithstanding the local advantages 
 which the London Dock possesses, prefer sending 
 their Vessels to the West India Dock to incurring 
 the risk which they imagine heavily loaded Ships 
 are subject to by the additional length of the navi- 
 gation in coming higher up the River ; and it may 
 be affirmed that this circumstance will always, to a 
 certain extent, counteract the Monopoly which the 
 Author of the Pamphlet wishes to have it supposed 
 would result to the London Dock, on accoimt of 
 its lying so much nearer to the centre of Commerce 
 in London than the West India Dock. 
 
 It will be well to examine a little into the nature 
 of the superior advantages which the Author pro- 
 mises that the New Docks will affi^rd. — In the first 
 place, it is asserted that building-materials and 
 labour are now greatly cheaper than they were 
 when the existing Docks were formed, and that, 
 therefore, the expenses of construction will be so 
 much less. From which assertion it is of course 
 
 /
 
 13 
 
 intended to be inferred that they will be able to 
 serve the public at lower rates. But the sum which 
 the purchase of the ground and houses wanted 
 will require, will, probably, more than counter- 
 balance the advantages of the present low rate of 
 materials and labour. And, it must be remarked, 
 that the Author has in no part of his Plain State- 
 ment favoured us with any intimation of what the 
 charges at the New Docks are to be, although there 
 is much promise of superior vigilance and economy, 
 and the usual inducements are held out which con- 
 stitute the Formula of a regular Prospectus, such 
 as we nmu see every day. 
 
 With regard to the advantages promised from the 
 improved state of engineering, it is yet to be seen 
 how they are to be so very beneficially applied to 
 the new projected Works. It is stated that the 
 New Docks and Basin will atford the means of dis- 
 charging and loading 120 Ships besides Craft at 
 one and the same time ; but were the 120 Ships 
 laid side by side, the Docks, as described, would 
 scarcely hold them ; and (supposing the Ships 
 could be acconniiodated within the room marked 
 out) in Docks so crowded, as these would be, 
 should any accident, by fire, occur, it is evident 
 that, lor want of room to separate them, every 
 Vessel would run the risk of being destroyed. It 
 may furth(>r bo observed, that the greatest allowance 
 made by experienced engineers, to afiord i\\\c ac- 
 commodation, is only eiglil Ships fo ;in iicrc of
 
 14 
 
 water, and, as the j)ioposed Docks are stated to be 
 about eight acres, the number will only be sixty-four 
 Vessels, and then they must be laid double along 
 the whole of the Wharfs, so that, in fact, only 
 about thirty-two Vessels will lie with their sides to 
 the Quays. The boasted advantage of Ingress and 
 Egress during the night, it may be safely predicted, 
 will be but seldom availed of, unless the Proprie- 
 tors are prepared to pay for all the damages and 
 losses which may happen. 
 
 As to the situation of the New Docks, it is evi- 
 dent that all the objections which Owners of Ves- 
 sels feel to bring their Ships up the River to the 
 London Dock will apply more strongly to the Docks 
 at St. Katharine's ; moreover, if Ships should not 
 happen to arrive at the Docks, just at the time of 
 high-water, so as to be able immediately to enter 
 the Basin, they will be subjected to almost certain 
 Damage, as there is not a situation in this part of 
 the River, where they could lie afloat with safety. 
 
 The scheme which is proposed, of employing 
 Steam Boats to bring the Vessels up to the Docks, 
 is one which may appear plausible to those unac- 
 quainted with the River ; but any one capable 
 of judging, will pronounce the plan to be dan- 
 gerous, if not impracticable, and under all the 
 circumstances which exist, to a seaman, ridiculous. 
 With the Tide, Ships come up through the crowded 
 parts of the River quite fast enough. Will they 
 be brought up against the Tide ? and arriving at
 
 15 
 
 low water, be sntfeied to remain in the River 
 until there is sufficient water to carry them into 
 the Dock ; thereby incurring the danger before 
 mentioned, from not having any place where they 
 may lie afloat in safety ? We are favoured in the 
 Pamphlet with a table of the Depths of the Water, 
 in the neighbourhood of St. Katharine's, at low 
 water ; but since it is only at high water that any 
 communication can be had between the Docks and 
 the River, it would have been as well if the Author 
 had accompanied the statement with some expla- 
 nation of its utility ; it would also have been 
 satisfactory if he had given his reason for taking 
 the soundings, in that part of the River which 
 is deepened by the return of the tide, down 
 the channel of the present St. Katharine's Dock : 
 he must know, that, as soon as the reflux from St. 
 Katharines's Inlet is stopped by Dock-Gates, the 
 river will, in a very short time, assume its natural 
 depth. 
 
 Upon what data the number of persons the new 
 scheme will remove is estimated is not mentioned, 
 but that number is erroneously stated, and instead 
 of 4000, it may be satisfactorily proved, that in the 
 two parishes, or rather the Precinct of St. Katha- 
 rine's, and the parish of Aldgatc, in tlic county of 
 Middlesex, it will be infinitely greater, and not fall 
 much l)eh)w 8000, besides, there is no provision 
 made in the Bill for the; poor of the Precinct, the 
 whole of which, it is understood, is included in
 
 10 
 
 th(? proposed plan, and instead of 860 Householders, 
 as stated in the Pamphlet, it is fair to infer, that 
 the number is much greater, as the Schedule attached 
 to the Bill actually describes 1032 houses, and other 
 buildings. That additional time should be given to 
 the inhabitants to find themselves fresh residences 
 has been in a manner forced from the Projectors; 
 they, therefore, cannot claim any merit on this 
 head. As to the notoriety of their intentions it may 
 safely be said, that no great undertaking was ever 
 more cautiously and secretly planned ; so much 
 so, that those most interested in its conse- 
 quences were ignorant of it, until it was ready to 
 be brouofht before the House of Commons. That 
 a more extensive plan was originally intended, than 
 is now avowed, is very likely, because the injustice, 
 which in some cases it is probable would have been 
 inflicted, has no doubt been successfully estab- 
 lished, and, in some other cases, the cost may be 
 more than the Projectors choose to encounter. 
 
 If the Author will give himself the trouble to 
 look into some of the City Churches, he may find 
 the attendance not more numerous than what he 
 describes at St. Katharine's ;* (the Pamphlet states 
 
 * The writer of these remarks has attended the Service in 
 the Church at St. Katharine's, and certainly he never joined 
 in worship with a more attentive and deVout Congregation, 
 consisting of very respectable people, the service admirably 
 l)€rformed, and the Charity Children, Boys and Girls, dressed
 
 17 
 
 about 150 persons,) but surely an excess of demo- 
 ralization in a neighbourhood cannot be used as a 
 reason why there should be less means of religious 
 improvement afforded : the demolition of a place 
 of worship, rendered doubly sacred by its anti- 
 quity, (for the purpose" of forwarding a speculative 
 scheme,) if it be not without a parallel, is certainly 
 not worthy of imitation ; seeing as we do efforts 
 made every day to spread amongst the lower or- 
 ders due respect for religious institutions ; sub- 
 scriptions raised to supply sea-faring men with 
 places of worship, even afloat, how inconsistent 
 does it appear, on such a plea as that offered on 
 the present occasion to demolish an ancient and 
 venerable Church, belonging to the Establishment? 
 What veneration can it be expected will be paid 
 to our Holy Religion, if its Temples are thus 
 to be lightly thought of, and made to succumb 
 to every Commercial Project ? Rivalry in Trade 
 is beneficial, kept however within proper bounds ; 
 but it can never be justified when its effects are 
 injurious to the interests of Religion, or detri- 
 mental to the welfare of many, who have no op- 
 portunity of obtaining redress. Should the Au- 
 thor of " Plain Facts' really wish to cleanse an 
 
 with particular neatness, their quiet, regular conduet duriuf;, 
 Service, would be beneficially imitated by sonje others it hav 
 been his misfortune to observe act diflerently. 
 
 B
 
 18 
 
 Aiio-ean Stable, let him try his skill in St. Giles's, 
 or the neii}^hboiu-liood of Whitcchapel ; there he will 
 find ample scope for the exercise of his benevo- 
 lent intentions ; but then there is no place for 
 a Dock, and all its expected emoluments and pa- 
 tronage : — his disinterestedness, however, will, on 
 this account, be the more apparent. 
 
 We are favoured with an extract of a Petition to 
 the Honourable House of Commons, signed by 
 between " one and two hundred inhabitants of St. 
 " Katharine and St. Botolph, Aldgate." This 
 Petition is actually signed by one hundred and 
 twenty-five persons ; but what surprise will it ex- 
 cite when the public are informed that, of these 
 one hundred and twenty-five, only one name is to be 
 found amongst them of a resident in St. Katharines, 
 and that one has only resided a short time ; in 
 the Parish of St. Botolph, Aldgate, in the County of 
 Middlesex, where the proposed Dock is to be con- 
 structed, the names of about half a dozen gentlemen 
 belonging to the Mint, (of which Mr. Wallace is at 
 present master,) and three or four others ! All the other 
 signatures are of persons living in another, but ad- 
 joining, parish, viz. St. Botolph, Aldgate, within the 
 City of London, many of whom, probably, know as 
 little of St. Katharine's as if they resided miles dis- 
 tant. What inference can we draw from this, but 
 that there is an evident intention to mislead the 
 Public, and impress upon the minds of the Mem- 
 bers of the House of Commons that the actual re-
 
 19 
 
 sidents of the space the Docks are to embrace are 
 desirous of their being constructed, and upon the 
 alleo-ations stated in the Petition ascribed to them, 
 and to which, it now appears, they are not par- 
 ties ? no comment is necessary ; only one conclu- 
 sion can be drawn. The circumstances of the Peti- 
 tion on the Manchester Gas-Lights must be fresh in 
 the recollection of the reader. 
 
 The Petition states that the ground in St Katha- 
 rine's is in part covered with houses of ill-fame ; 
 and that it will be greatly to the advantage of the 
 Public that the proposed alteration should take 
 place. But, supposing the case to be really as the 
 Petition states, — may it not be fairly asked, what is 
 to become of the nuisances which the alteration 
 proposes to clear away from St. Katharine ; and 
 what advantages are to be looked for by the neigh- 
 bouring Public from the dispersion amongst them 
 of the dissolute persons who now congregate, as 
 is asserted, in such numbers in St. Katharines ? 
 There has, moreover, been a Petition presented 
 against the Bill, signed by many inhabitants of 
 the place, all of known respectability. 
 
 The Author, in his Pamphlet, has called the 
 
 attention of the Public, more })articularly, to the 
 
 London Dock, as affording, l)y the present incapar 
 
 city of accommodation, and the circumstances he 
 
 affirms to have occurred there, liic best pruc^f lo he 
 
 adduced of the necessity for the New Docks b(;ing 
 
 formed. The assertions which tlir Author l)ns 
 
 ■> •)
 
 20 
 
 made on this subject being fairly explained, the 
 Public will judge on how false a basis the whole of 
 his arguments are founded. 
 
 He has said that goods have been left to become 
 damaged on the Quays of the London Dock, and 
 that others have been stowed in unfit places. Now, 
 as the Company would be liable to any damage 
 which might result from such conduct, the only 
 reply that need be made is, to use the Author's 
 own language, " these charges will be denied until 
 " otherwise proved." 
 
 Again, it is asserted, that some Vessels, recently 
 arrived from foreign parts, have not entered the 
 London Dock, in consequence of the want of ac- 
 commodation ; and it is insinuated, that, for want 
 of sufficient storage, the Officers of that Establish- 
 ment have discouraged the landing and housing of 
 certain goods. Now the facts (as stated to the 
 writer) are, that, in not one single instance has 
 any ship whatever been refused admittahce into 
 the London Dock, except where the parties 
 have wished to impose terms upon the Company 
 by which they would have lost money by landing 
 the cargoes ; and the Officers of the Establishment 
 have in no case discouraged the landing and 
 housing of Goods, excepting where those Goods 
 would not repay the Docks for the labour. 
 
 Again, it is asserted that the wines and spirits 
 brought to the London Dock have been deposited 
 inj)laces totally unfit for the purpose. Mr. Inglis,
 
 21 
 
 in his evidence before the Committee of the House 
 of Commons, gives a case parallel to the present; viz. 
 
 The immense overflow, from a particular cause, 
 has more than filled the vaults ; but that overflow 
 has subsided, and may not recur again for ano- 
 ther period of fourteen or fifteen years. 
 
 It is asserted, that " the Owners of goods depo- 
 " sited in the London Dock have made fruitless 
 " application for housing them." This charge 
 may, no doubt, be satisfactorily answered by re- 
 ference to any particular case, and the reasons found 
 to clear the Ofiicers of the Dock most completely 
 from all blame in this respect ; for it will be seen, 
 that when the goods have remained upon the quays, 
 they have been left there either by desire of the 
 merchant, or on account of the regulations of the 
 Excise.* 
 
 * Mr, Inglis's Evidence. — Are wines and spirits now occa- 
 sionally lying any considerable time on the Quays ? — Never 
 from any wish of the Dock Company ; their object is to house 
 them as soon as possible; if they remain on the Quays, it is 
 either for tlie convenience of the revenuc-olficers, till fhey have 
 time to guagc them, or for the convenience of the merchant, as 
 he may have the op|)ortunity perhaps of selling them without 
 housing them. 
 
 On what occasion was it that the Quays of the London 
 Dock were so crowded as not to allow of the discharge of all 
 the vessels in the Docks? — At one period of the war, in which 
 the French armies were marching into the Peninsula, and 
 threatening Spain and Portugal, the whole of the wine that
 
 22 
 
 The Aiitlior asks, wliy the London Dock Com- 
 pany have not thought fit to open the Western 
 
 could be removed from those countries was brought into this 
 country, as a dep6t for security. 
 
 Mr. Charles Stuart's Evidence, June 14, 1822. — In 
 cases where brandies are kept on the London Dock Quays, 
 whether is it done for the convenience of the owners of the 
 brandies, or whether is it done for the convenience of and to 
 save expense to the Dock Company ? — It is not done to save 
 expense to the proprietors, but it is often done to suit the con- 
 venience of both. 
 
 Explain how ? — Sometimes the importers of brandies might 
 wish to keep them for a day or two after the three days al- 
 lowed, paying a greater quay-rent, to avoid the expense of 
 housing. 
 
 In general are they kept on the Quays for the accommoda- 
 tion of the one or the other ? — Of both ; it does happen that it 
 is for the accommodation of both at times. 
 
 In general which prevails in a greater degree ? — In a press 
 of business with the Docks. 
 
 When there is not a press of business ? — Then with the 
 Trade. 
 
 Does such press of business frequently occur ? — Not so 
 frequently as we have experienced, unfortunately. 
 
 Are they kept on the Quays for want of accommodation in 
 the vaults ? — Not now. 
 
 When was that the case? — In the years 1808 and 1809. 
 
 Not since then ? — 'No. 
 
 Mem. — It therefore appears, by this evidence, that between 
 1809 and 1822, a period of thirteen years, there was no want 
 of vault-room. 
 
 Mr. Fletcher Wilson's Evidence.— In large Establish-
 
 •J3 
 
 Lock for the ingress and egress of shipping I The 
 motive of the Directors is understood to be, that 
 although the Western Lock is necessary, in order 
 that no delay might occur to the Trade, in case any 
 accident should render the other entrance unser- 
 viceable ; yet, that whilst the Eastern Lock can be 
 used, the Western Entrance, when applied as at 
 present, aifords much more accommodation to the 
 Trade than it would do if it were thrown open, and 
 less inconvenience to the Navig-ation of the Port. 
 
 Upon what authority the Author has asserted 
 that " great delay has lately existed in delivering 
 " goods for exportation from the London Docks," 
 is not shown ; ])ut it may very safely be replied, that 
 no delays occur, beyond those which must ever 
 happen in all large concerns ; and unless the Author 
 can point out some instances of the evil he com- 
 plains, it may be suspected that he has no just 
 ground for the charge which he makes. 
 
 The Author labours, to cast a doubt upon the 
 
 mcnts there are always some inconveniences, but the London 
 Dock regulations arc very good ones. 
 
 I have seen a great many packages for weeks lying on the 
 Quays. 
 
 Tiiey have been generally lying there for particular objects, 
 at the re(|uest of the proprietor. 
 
 I believe that the goods which J have observed lying on the 
 Quays of the London Docks, wines, antl other articles, lie al- 
 ways at fh«! request of the |)roprictors, for the convenience of 
 sale, or for •»ther purposes.
 
 24 
 
 assertion, tliat a considerable portion of the Ware- 
 houses of the London Dock are, at present, unoccu- 
 pied, and he says, that " the allegation will be 
 " denied until otherwise proved." What the Lon- 
 don Dock Company have to allege on this point, 
 it will be for them to prove, before the Committee 
 of the House of Commons, if it be so required ; at 
 present it is sufficient to say, that persons of the 
 first respectability, as well as of rank in the coun- 
 try, have seen that the assertions, with respect to 
 vacant room in the London Dock Warehouses, are, 
 unfortunately, too true. 
 
 If, indeed, there had not been a sufficiency of 
 room, within the London Docks, as they at present 
 stand, to afford every necessary accommodation for 
 the Trade, the works would have been long ago 
 extended, for the Company possess a large quantity 
 of ground conveniently situated for the purpose,* 
 which is now utterly useless and unproductive ; and 
 where they can, and will make further accommoda- 
 tion so soon as the Trade of the Port requires it ; 
 and this accommodation can be completed long 
 before any Docks at St. Katherines can be con- 
 structed. 
 
 * Frederick Gibson, Esq. Evidence, June 28, 1822. 
 — The London Dock Company have a very large space for 
 building an additional Dock, and additional Warehouses, and 
 a Stack of Warehouses, called Pennington-Street, which con- 
 sists at present of only Vaults and a Ground Floor, which are 
 so built as to be raised whenever there is occasion for them.
 
 25 
 
 It is not true, that tlie Dock Charges are the 
 cause why the Bonding- System has not flourished 
 in the Port of London. If the reader will refer to 
 a Pamphlet published by Mr. Hall in the year 1821, 
 he will find there a detail of grievances and an enu- 
 meration of expenses quite unconnected with the 
 Dock Establishments, which grievances and expen- 
 ses, and not the Dock Charges, are amongst the real 
 causes which have prevented the success of the 
 Bonding System within the Port of London. 
 
 Compared with other Docks, the London Dock 
 Proprietors have some reason to complain, for the 
 charges they have made to the Trade have not been 
 sufficient to give them such a profit as a Mercantile 
 adventure should fairly afford ; yet they are accused 
 of exaction. The large sums they were obliged to 
 pay for the purchase of their premises, subjects 
 them to a considerable loss ; whilst the Public 
 enjoy the advantages of locality ; and the London 
 Dock Company are competed with by Legal Quays, 
 Wharfs, and Docks, constructed and established 
 upon much lower terms. 
 
 That the East India and West India Docks have 
 paid their Proprietors a dividend of 10 per Cent, 
 certainly cannot be used as a proof that the Lon- 
 don Dock Charges are excessive, seeing that their 
 average dividend is only £4:14 : G per Cent, and 
 now only £4 : 10:0 per Cent. ; and with respect 
 to their Surplus Fund, that is necessarily retained 
 U) \)v j)r( pared against any unforeseen accident that
 
 20 
 
 may occur to their Works, and to prevent alter- 
 ations in their Dividends, such alterations having 
 been justly apprehended, owing to the occasional 
 unoccupied state of their Warehouses. As to the 
 present value of London Dock Stock, that can only 
 be fairly estimated by a comparison with other 
 investments ; and although its price may be above 
 £100, yet, if sold, will not purchase now as it 
 would have done, an Income in any other Securi- 
 ties equal to what it would have produced before 
 the new scheme depreciated its value. — That the 
 London Dock Company have, at certain periods, 
 divided 6 per Cent. (viz. for two years) is another 
 of the uncandid statements the Author makes, in- 
 asmuch as he has omitted to mention, that, for three 
 years and a half, the Dividend paid did not exceed 
 3 per Cent. Government certainly do pay £L5,000 
 a year for a Tobacco Warehouse, which covers 
 five acres and upwards of ground, and is the finest 
 building of the sort, probably, in the World. The 
 Company, however, pay all the taxes, and have, 
 further, at a very great expense, constructed a 
 Dock, which is used almost exclusively for the 
 Tobacco Warehouse; so that the income derived 
 from this source, which is brought forward by the 
 Author, as a notable discovery, is but common In- 
 terest for the money expended. That the rent which 
 Government has received is not equal to the sum 
 which they have paid, is not the fault of the Lon- 
 don Company : — previously to this Warehouse be-
 
 27 
 
 ing built, Government made use of premises of its 
 own, charging little or no rent upon Tobacco ; and 
 if the arranofement had not been advantao-eous for 
 the Public, it is very unlikely that the Treasury 
 would have entered into it. 
 
 In direct contradiction to what the Author states, 
 the London Dock Company have acknowledged that 
 the Compensations paid to those injured by the 
 Establishment of Docks, were not disbursed by the 
 Proprietors of the Docks, but were paid out of a 
 duty levied upon Shipping : if the Compensation 
 had been paid by the Dock Companies, the rates 
 charged by them must necessarily have been higher, 
 to reimburse the amount ; this London Port Duty 
 has never been wholly taken off, although the ad- 
 vances made by Government in Compensations 
 have been amply redeemed : — this is one of the taxes 
 which serve to impede the full operation of the 
 Warehousing System. 
 
 The Author states truly, that, when application 
 was made to Parliament for the Establishment of 
 the London Dock, the promoters did not, for the 
 accomplishment of their original object, desire any 
 exclusive privileges ; but that object was extended, 
 and the exclusive privileges were annexed in con- 
 sequence. Even if it were true that it was the 
 wish of the Directors of the London Dock to sur- 
 render their exclusive privileges to Government, on 
 condition that all the Docks shouhl hv. put uj)()ii 
 the saiTU' footing, it may have been a (pu'stiun
 
 28 
 
 whether (as there was a large quantity of the Com- 
 pany's Stock held upon trust, and to which, there- 
 fore, no legal consent could be obtained) even a 
 General Meeting of the Proprietors was competent 
 to give sanction to the measure.* But be this as 
 it may, in what manner the wish of the London 
 Dock Directors to relinquish their privileges (under 
 the circumstances stated) imposes upon them the 
 necessity of supporting the establishment of a New 
 Dock, which cannot but materially injure their 
 Proprietors, it is difficult to divine. The London 
 Dock Proprietors do not seek for perpetual Mono- 
 poly, as the Author asserts ; neither can they com- 
 prehend his prophecy, that a rival Establishment 
 will materially benefit them. The Directors, there- 
 fore, would be wanting in a duty, which they owe 
 to their Proprietors, if they did not use their utmost 
 efforts to oppose the projected Dock ; but notwith- 
 standing the London Dock may appear to be the 
 only parties who have regularly entered the lists, it is 
 
 * Report of June 3, 1823 : — " Your Committee have 
 considered how far it might be expedient, either to continue 
 the exclusive principle to the West India Docks, to the 
 period of the expiration of that of the London Dock Com- 
 pany, unless that Company should be disposed to relinquish, 
 during the remainder of their term, the exclusive privilege 
 now possessed by them. Your Committee have found that 
 such relinquishment is not practicable, either on their part, 
 or on that of any other Company similarly circumstanced,"
 
 29 
 
 not therefrom to be taken for granted, that other 
 Companies will not come forward to lay before the 
 Legislature the extent of the injuries they are likely 
 to suffer, and to claim the protection which their se- 
 veral circumstances entitle them to. The situation 
 of the Sufferance Wharfs, particularly on the south 
 side of the water, is truly lamentable, and were it 
 not for the quantity of Corn in store, they would 
 be, for the most part, empty : should the St. Ka- 
 tharine Dock be constructed, that species of pro- 
 perty must be utterly ruined, notwithstanding the 
 assertion made by the Author, that the New Dock 
 will not, in any manner, interfere with their in- 
 terests. 
 
 At the time when British Cruisers scoured the 
 seas, and brought their prizes to London ; when 
 many foreign Colonies were in our hands ; when 
 the whole of the Trade from the Brazils, as. well 
 as South America, came to this Country ; when 
 almost the whole of the Trade of Europe centred 
 here ; when the Berlin and Milan Decrees closed 
 the Continental Ports against us ; when immense 
 Importations of Corn were brought into London, 
 all in addition to the regular Trade of the Port ; 
 even then, sufficient room was found to meet such 
 extraordinary circumstances. Shall it be expected 
 that the slow operation of the Warehousing Sys- 
 tem will instantly call for such great increase of 
 accommodation ? — This is more to be wished than 
 expected, so far as experience has yet enables us
 
 30 
 
 to jiulo-e ; the Author, has, tliereforc, completely 
 failed in establishing- his position, that more Docks 
 are necessary for the accommodation of Trade, or 
 for the purpose of competition. * 
 
 Without callino- in question the intentions of the 
 very many respectable persons who patronize the pro- 
 jected Dock at St. Katharine's, it may be feared that 
 they are not aware of the injuries they will inflict upon 
 a great number of people, and there is hardly a possi- 
 bility of their receiving any benefit themselves. So far 
 from the Stock not being an object of speculation, 
 it is reported to have been sold at various prices, 
 until, at last, it does not find purchasers at par. 
 
 The recorded testimony of eighteen hundred 
 mercantile establishments in favour of the New 
 Dock might be considered to be of some importance, 
 if many of the signatures had not been obtained, 
 by the most intrusive importunities, at the doors 
 of Public Meetings, not omitting that of the Cham- 
 ber of Commerce, whose fate the St. Katharine's 
 Dock Scheme will, it is hoped, follow; opinions, 
 however, directly opposite have been recorded by 
 numbers possessing property and respectability, 
 such as any cause might be proud to have as sup- 
 porters. 
 
 How the money has been expended upon the 
 London Dock is more a question for the Proprie- 
 tors than the Author of the Plain Statement of 
 Facts, and may be safely left in their hands until 
 his interference is asked for. And the Ship-
 
 31 
 
 UC SOUTHERN REGIONAL LIBRARY FACILITY 
 
 mil III! II III III II III III! I II III mill III I 
 AA 000 564 002 4 
 
 Owners of this Country are a class of men of so 
 much intelligence that they will not require his in- 
 structions as to what will best promote their inter- 
 ests. 
 
 The Revenue has been completely secured by the 
 Docks, and ample testimony may be produced that 
 every assistance possible has been given to the 
 King's Officers, without regard to expense, when 
 necessary for the purpose. A new Dock must 
 bring a very considerable increased charge upon its 
 collection, without adding any thing to the Re- 
 venue. 
 
 After the exposure of so many fallacies what 
 reliance can the Public place in the assurances 
 which are held forth, of the great advantages they 
 are to derive from the Establishment of St Katha- 
 rine Dock ? 
 
 Under all the circumstances, it may be unequi- 
 vocally asserted that the Pamphlet in question is 
 very erroneously entitled " Plain Statement of 
 " Facts." 
 
 THE END.
 
 MAR«HANT( PRINTER, INO RAM-COURT, FENCHU RCH-STR SET. 
 
 7) /^