The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1824-01-27 00:00:00

SPONDENCE

ILLATIVE TO TAE DWI/MI II ETWEEW THE MIRCHANTII
OF LONDON AND THE LONDON DOCK COMPANY.

It is well known to the mercantile inhabitants of the
metropolis that a mismidersunwling has, for some time,
existed between the merchants of London and the Directors
of the London Dock Company; but the particulars of the
dispute, so important to the commercial interests of this
great city, had not transpired. We therefore fed much
pleasure in being enabled to communicate to the public the
official documents and the correspondence which had passed
between the merchants and the London Dock Company
on this important subject, which involves in it not only the
interests of several of the great branches of our trade,
but the prosperity of an incorporated body, the London
Dock Company, whole stock amounts to between four and
five millions sterling. As introductory to the following
documents, it may be tecessary so premise that the dis-
pute commenced with the Directors of the London Dock
Company having reused to delver goods to the Orders of
the merchants to whom they bad given transfer notes,
in consequence of which several cargoes have bein deli-
vered at the warehouses direst, without panting thrones
the intermediate mearstre of placing them in tlic London
Docks.

Baltic Coffee House, Nov. H,
At a Meeting of Merchants and other Persons interested, held
at the Baltic Coffee House, to consider what atom should be
taken in consequence of the Directors of the London Dock Com-
pany having refused to comply with their own Certificates of
Transfer
nENJA3IIN kIAWES, Esq. in the Chair;
Resolved unanimously,
Ist That the wage of making transfers of goods st HeLoudon
Doeks by the London Dock Conpee", from the sellers to the
buyers, has hitherto been productive of great facility in mercantile
operations.
Id. That the sums paid to the London Dock Company own
each transfers are ample compensations for the trouble incident
thereto.

_
3d. That the transfer notes issued by the London Dock Company
expressly acknowledge the transfers to have been made, and contain
a positive engagement "that the goods will be delivered to the
parties named in the transfer notes, and to their order only."
4th. That, according to the usage of merchants, transfers made
by the London Dock Company of Goo& in the London Decks have
always been deemed, and considered, and acted upon, as actual
transfers of such goods.
6th. That the transfer notes issued by the London Dock Com.
pony are in conformity with this usage, and that such transfer
notes have always been deemed so correct and official, that the
fullest credit has been given to them by merchants, either by their
paying for the goods particularised in the transfer notes, or by
their making advances upon the goods transferred.
6th. That in the cases which have given rise to this meeting,. the
parties to whom the London Dock Company have refused to dc-
' liver goods, have actually paid the purchase-monies fcr such goods,
upon the faith and credit of the transfer notes issued by the London
Dock Company.
7th. That the London Dock Company well knew the credit and
reliance Oven to and placed upon their transfer notes.
11th. 1 hat the refusal of the London Dock Company to act upon
their own transfer notes, in fulfilment of their own positive engage-
ments, is a beach of good faith, and if persevered in will not only
be utterly subversive of all confidence in the London Dock Com-
pany, and of the usage which has hitherto prevailed, but will
tend to establish a system highly Injurious to the interests of com-
merce, and productive of the most ruinous consequences to indi.
viduals.

9th. That if the London Dock Company have omitted to do
any act which they ought to have done, or have acted irregularly
in making transfers, and if any lou has been sustained by indi-
viduals, in consequence of any omission or act of the London Dock
I Company, that loss ought to fall on and be made good by the
ILontion Dock Company, who were paid a compensation for making
' the transfers.
10th. That the London Dock Company are the agents of the
parties to whom they have issued transfer notes, and with whom
they have entered into express engagements to deliver the goods
included in the transfer notes, and that their refusal to deliver such
I goods in conformity with their acknowledgment, and in fulfilment
of their engagements to their principals, is a dereliction of their
duty as such agents.
11th. That a deputation, consisting of Mr. Tooke, Mr. Thomas
Wil/1011, Mr. Edward Parsons, Mr. Andrew Thompson, Mr.
Taylor, Mr. B. Hawes, and Mr. Alexander Macdonald, do wait
upon the London Dock Company with a copy of the preceding
resolutions.
12th. That the example of the London Dock Company having
been followed by the proprietors of Watson's Wharf, a cop of
the preceding resolutions be sent to Messrs. Watson and Metcalfe.
13th. That in cue the London Dock Company and Messrs.
Watson and Metcalfe refuse to deliver goods, for which they have
' issued transfer notes, a committee, consisting of the before-named
gentlemen, be and is hereby appointed to consider what further
steps should be taken to remedy the grievance, and to take such
steps accordingly.
14th. That a copy of these resolutions be printed and circulated.
(Signed) BENJAMIN lIA WES, Chairman.
-

The above Resolutions were followed up by several
Meetings between the Directors and the Deputation : as no
alteration was adopted, the following declaration has been
signed, and continues to be signed, by houses of the first
respectability. We give no opinion on this important sub-
ject, but shall be obliged by any information or commu-
nication on the subject :

GOODS IN TIIE LONDON DOCKS, AND THE LONDON DOCK
COMPANY.
The Condon Dock Company having refused to fulfil their own
specific engagement, contained to the transfer notes issued by them,
in relation to goods landed at the London Docks, the undersigned
feel it incumbent on them thus publicly to draw the attention of
Merchants, Bankers, and others, to the risks and inconveniences to
which they are exposed, if the line of conduct recently adopted by
the London Dock Company be persisted in.
Hitherto the fullest reliance has been placed on the transfer
notes which have been issued by the London Dock Company, for
goods warehoused and transferred in the London Docks, because
the Company not only expressly scknowledge the goods to be trans..
ferred, but state that the goods will be delivered to the party to
whom the transfer is made, and to his order only, u will appear
by the following form of the London Dock Company's transfer
DOUm:-.

" Transfer of floods deposited at the London Docks.
" Mr. I have this day transferred to your ac-
count
by virtue of as Onler of Mr. -, dated-----„ which
said goods, as per marks and numbers In the margin, will be de-
livered to you or your cedes only.
For the London Dock Company,
A. B.
" No Order In wbich there is say erasure will be received."
It is hardly possible to conspire any form of engagement more
stmg ace packs than is puss* by these words. And it is
further to be °Wand, that the Company have been in the habit or

making a distinct charge for the transfers In their books, which
transfers are the foundation on which the notes here alluded to are
issued.
But, in violation of engagements so precise, the Company have
lately accepted of orders to withhold the delivery of goods to 'he
the parties named in the Transfer Notes. These Transfer Notes,',
issued by the London Dock Company, are either correct or not cot.
rect. If correct, there cannot, of course, be the slightest pretence
for refusing to comply with the tenor of them. If not comet, the
Landon Dock Company ought not to have issued them ; bat hav-
ing issued them, whether advisedly or no, the Company are equally
bound in law and honour to abide by them. If the Company be
not so bound, no person having bought or sold goods, or advanced
money on goods in the Lomita Docks, epee the faith of the Trans.
for Notes, can be considered as oat.. And the mast satensio mis-
chief may ensue to individuals by the stopper of goods; on the
due delivery of which, in pursuance of the tithes aT dre Transfer
Notes, they may have Implicitly relied, as the 1111111•11 it making
their payments.
It was in contemplation of the bijoviens Weds which would re-
sult from invalidating the security of such transfers, that Lord El-
lenborough decided against the werehousekeeper, in the ease of
" Simard atoinst Dunkin." His lordship's weals. as 'opened,
were, that whatever might be the rule between "buyer and miler,
it was clear that the warehouseman weld no2sed=sr:
belong to the party claiming it, after the es.
knowledged to hold it on his account, and he,
borough, should entirely oversee the security ef orreanedellalings,
were he to suffer the warehouseman to moan the title of the party
to whom he gave his acknowledgment."
This doctrine of lewd Ellenborough was recendy confirmed by
the present Lord Chief Justice Abbott, on the trill of a cause—
" Hawes against Watson," at Guildhall, on the tid of December,
; and the warehousekeew was accordingly WE Sable to the
Ley to whom the goods had been transferred.
It was to have been expected that the result of the above trial,
and the confirmation given by bad Chief Justice Abbott of the
doctrine of Lord Ellenborough on this point, weak! have induced
the London Dock Directors to have abandoned any further attempt
at resisting the fulfilment of their engagements; but unfortunately
this is not the ease, for the Company still refuse to del=ve the goods
which have been stopped, and threaten to brie( the patties *ho
claim the goods under the Transfer Notes, and who Intend com-
mencing actions against the Company, intttet*Sof Chancery.
The undersigned have no hesitation to disapprobs.
• of this conduct of the Common as befog mob ye of all that
1114 and komenraltie In deagipl sod they &ether
that if the elsinparty pent* W•tenempt to invalidate
their present written acknowledgments, no confidence whatever Can
be placed in any form of engagement which the Directors may here-
after think proper to issue, because none can be more solemn or
precise than that which they now refuse to fulfil.
J. Thompson, T.Bonar, and Co. William James King.
Thomas Wilson and Co. Wilkie and Sosmes.
Baring, Brothers, and Co. John Smith.
W. Astell Charles Field.
C. G. Thornton. William Seymour.
Thomas Tooke. J. S. Greenwood.
John Mitchell and CO. Trueman and Cook.
Garry and Curtis. Neale, Bowdon.. and Co.
Paris, liPeausland and Co. Thomas Kemble, Son, and Co.
Barclay. Brothets, and Co. Roebucks, Stow, and Co.
Edward Parana and ed. James and W. Field.
Ewart, Taylor, and Co. Kymer, Petry, and Co.
Cartleys and Esdaile. 'it dilate Mitchell.Jno. Hubbard and Co. John Frederick Amy.
Douglas, Anderson, and Co. John and Joseph Crop and Co.
Jacob H. Busk. Eduard and James Man.
Cattley and Stephenson. Joseph liedley and Son.
Thomas and Benj. Hawes. Dubuisson and Rougement.
John Schneider and Co. Palmer and King.
T. B. and L. Rowe. Kilby and Carroll.
W. Simonds. C. H. Stavenha.
George Morewood. Tetleys and Richards.
Skey, Lodge, and Co Robert Day.
L. M. Hilbers. Arthur Ryder.
John Ord. Holden and Vanhouss.
Frederick Scheer. David Morgan.
And for John Milford James Hill and Sens.
John Anderson and Sons. J. Henry Schroeder and Co
Thomas Frame. B. A. Goldschmidt and Co.
Featherstone and NevilL E. H. Brandt.
James Turpin. Edward Lee and See.
William Neal. J. B. Suwerkrop.
B. F. Hopkins. A. Palmer.
James Henry Levin. John Rew.
William Charles Levin. George Houghton and Co.
&e. &c.

[Anvinurisz]tExT.]
GENERAL BENEFIT' INSUIIAYCE OFFICE,
ALDERSGATE-STREET.

I 'nisi ailisilishment of this Company in 1820 may be considered
$ sew win in an important branch of political economy ; anthe
successful labours of its founders, in assimilating its plan and pear.
Irice to the various eminent Fire and Life Insurance Offices, call
for and meth the attention of those classes for whose security and
convenience it was undcnaken.

Experience proves that the lives of a given number of persons
will become extinct by regular progression I and it is also certain,
that sickness and accident will affect a certain portion of and like
given number: to enable the Mechanical and Labouring Classes
to provide against these casualties, ins manner the least exmsive,
the most secure, and with the least possible lose of value rinse,
are she objects of this I orikation ; and the phertical operation of
the system amongst the very large body who have already availed
themselves of the advantages offered, afford decisive proof of its
importance as a substitute for the proverbial uncertainty of Friendly
Socicties._

These Societies have been necessarily named (and of which there
are many, in their component parts, highly respectable), not for
the purpose of denouncing them generally, or of detracting from
the merits of particular Associations, but for the purpose of enabling
the public to form a correct estimate of the plan and practice of
this Institution.

In the farrago of puny observations, which have been recently
put forth on Benefit Societies, and recommendatory hints for their
improvement, nothing has been offered that has not before
through the ordeal of public opinion into the waste-paper passed
of the chersemonger. Benefit Societies ever were, and ever will
be the same; legislative enactments have failed in producing any
beneficial effects upon them ; any number of maims being comp..
tent, under the Friendly Society Acts, to form themselves into a
Benefit Club for the purposes usually advertised, it would be worse
than useless to endeavour to convince them that those who gene.
rally undertake the management, have not the ability to do so,
although experience 'hews that such is the fact.
For the improvement of Clubs, some recommend higher rates
of contribution, and more vigilance in dispensing the funds ; but
these trite observation,' have already occurred to many thousands
connected with Benefit Societies, and have been tried in repeated
instances, without producing the expected results; yet there are
persons vain and ignorant enough to put forth such propositions
as entirely new ; in one word, the classes to whom these observa-
tions are addressed, are invited to a comparison of the advantages
and conduct of this Institution with that of any existing Society,
when it will be found that the large average number of the assured,
and the concentration of business, enables the Company to offer
allowances in sickness, and other benefits, at a less rate of premium
than could possibly be afforded by any Society of less magnitude;
and that a liberal administration, equally conducive to the increase
of the Society, and to the security and comforts of the assured,
pervades every branch of the establishment.