The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1825-05-04 00:00:00

GOLD AND SILVER.

An Account has been presented to the House of Com-
mons of the quantity of gold and silver expos-led in the
last ten years. The total export has becn—

GOLD. SILVER.
ounces. dTts. ounces. duds.
In 1814 . 2118.121 17 - 2,699.933 18
1815 - . 316.950 . 6 491,888 1
1816 . - 11.703 2 - . 6 814.883 18
1817 . 176.423 2 - - 8 329.770 16
1818 -137.97 t 4 - - 17.777.366 11
11119 - . 98,293 2 - - 7.356,086 0
1820 . . 39,.570 19 - - 5,550,467 6
1821 . . 13.1129 0 . 4.674.157 17
1822 . . 284,277 16 - - 14.6511,251 14
1823 . . 296.475 15 - 11,724 019 6
1824 - - 1,131.407 13 - - 8.705 977 14
The value of the gold and silver exported in the last
year, at the standard prices of those metals, may be taken
in round numbers at 6,500,000/. sterling. Of this large
export. the greater part has been to France, vie.:---Of
gold, 907,048 ounces; of silver, 4,083,678 ounces. Hollatid
stands next to France in the quantity of gold it has rccejvpd,
108,864 ounces having been sent thither in 1824;
Brazil next in the quantity of silver, 2,314,607 ounces hav-
ing been sent thither. It thus appears, that of the gold ex-
ported in the last year, nine-elevenths were sent to France,
and one eleventh to Holland. Of the silver, nearly one-
half was sent to France—and the total value sent -to that
country was about four millions and a half sterling. These
accounts do not exhibit the imports (which are not to be
ascertained at the Custom-house), but it is quite impos-
sible that any considerable import of specie could have been
going ou at the time of so large an exportation.

A few days since the Earl of Portmore, whilst on his
way from Geneva, was visited with a paralytic stroke ;
the after-consequences of this misfortune are not yet known,
but at the time this information was forwarded to England
his Lordship was considered in extreme danger.
Mr. Watson Taylor has sold the remainder of his house
to Lord Beresford 'for 10,000 guineas. This sum, added to
the former sales, makes up 35,0001., for the property
which cost Mr. Taylor, in prime cost and repairs, at
least 65,0001. . _

On Lord Blantyre's grounds at Erskine a brood of
thrutbes were, nearly three weeks since, completely fledged,
and flying from tree to tree.
We understand that Government steam-packets are to
be established forthwith between Liverpool and Dublin,
for the conveyance •of letters from Birmingham, Man-
chester, and all parts of the Northern manufacturing dis-
tricts, to Ireland. Twenty-four hours will be gained in
the teansmivsion of letters by this arrangement.
After a drought of almost unpreeceentedly long continu-
ance, we have had this week a number of abundant and
refreshing showers, the effl•cts of which upon the gardens
and fields are cheering and beautiful.—Edinburt-h Piper.
A wool-market is about to be established at Stettin.

We feel much pleasure in giving insertion to the follow-
?fig letters :
To Captain A. Chrystie, commanding the Hon. East India Cont.
pany's Ship Thomas Coitus, Chatham-place, Camberwell-grove.
Mau Sin—We hare been charged with the very acceptable
office of procuring a piece of plate, to be presented to you in the
names of the passengers on board your ship on your last voyage to
Bombay, as a mark of the esteem and friendship inspired by the
exceeding liberality and unceasing kindness extended to them.
In now handing to you this token of their regard, we take leave
to express our best wishes for your health and success.
We have the honour to he. dear Sir,
Your mad obedient servants.
BAZETT, FARQUHAR, CRAWroItD, and CO.
Broad-street. 30th April, 1823.
To Messrs. Hazen, Farquhar, Crawford, and Co.
GENTLEMEN—I have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of
your very friendly letter, forwarding a piece of plate from the gen-
tlemen who were passengers with me in the H. C. ship Thomas
Coutta to Bombay.
It is truly gratifying to my feelings their haying mentioned me
to you in such flattering terms.
Accept my best thanks for the handsome manner in which you
have executed this commission, as well as for your kind wishes for
my prosperity.
I have the honour to be, Gentlemen.
Your most obedient servant.
Chatham-place, Grove, Camberwell, ALlcx. Cttarsric•
30th April, 1821.

ST. K.47'HARINE DOCKS.

We lately gav_ some extracts from a pamphlet pub
lisped by Mr. Simon Cock, under the title of " The Case
of the London Dock Company." A reply to that pato.
phlet has sit ce hcen published, entitled, " Observations
upon the Case of the London Dock Company," with the
motto :—Audi altering& parkin. The author thus states his
purpose ?
It wilt he the object of this little publication to show, by a brief
statement of facts, eccompanied by a few observatfor.s and refer-
-1 ence to official documents__
First:—That the renewed complaint of the London Deck is with.
'Out, foundation.
• • And Second—That the allegations by which they seek to luatify
the opposition offered by them to an extension of the wet dock
system in the port of London cannot be sustained, and are inca-
pable of proof.
A Rill for constructing wet docks, Ate. at St. Katharine's, In the
port of London, was submitted to Parliament last year, sold lifter
being tinder the consideration of a Committee of the Rouse of.
Commons nearly a month, was withdrawn in conseiuence of the
late peritadaf the then Session, and of the specks of oppersit;in
offered by the London Dock Company atilt other interested par-
ties ; an opposition, the character of which was strongly animad-
verted upon by a Committee of the House, in a special report,
dated Ist June, 1824.
The standing orders of' both Houses of Parliament having in
every respect been complied with, and 'one year's notice given of
the proposed measure, beingafx months beyond the period required,
the promoters of the St. Katharine Docks renewed their application
this Session with increased confidence of success,
I'hey prayed for no exclusive privileges or immunittes' , and in
the legitimate employment of mercantile capital far Inc seem-
plishment of an object of peat public utility, snitch; no other ad-
vantage than those whicholitteelt to a spirit of honoursblq rivalry
through the means of competmon. •
The subscribers ate nearly all merchants, and odors immedl-
a.e'y connected with the trade of the poet of London, and no
shares have been aimed to.be sold or tranaferred.
The measure, although a private undertaking partakes of a
public character ; i; is 'unnamed by the commercial, manufactur-
ing, and shipping interest, generally ; whose sentiments have been
strongly expressed in numerous memorials presented to the Lords
of the Treasury, and further testified to the Douse of Commons In
various petitions.
1. From merchants, hankers, and traders of the metropolis, signed
by upwards of l7(19 leading mercantile establishment's, some of
whom are consid'.rable proprietors of the London and other
Docks in the pen of London.
2. From ship-owners and others connected with the „navigation of
the riv:r Than es, signed by upwards of 1600, Eeht plaining also
of the regulation adopted by some of the ,Deal Companies,
under which the erews are turned out of the vetzels, and coin-
ye lied to lodge ashore, by which evil habits arc contracted, and
the character of the British seamen demoralised.
3. From the wine and spirit trade.
4. From the merchants, &c. engaged in the seed trade.
5. 'From between three and four hundred of the inhabitants of Sr.
Katharine's and St, Botoph Aldgate; and upwards of two-
' rbittls of the owners and occupiers (which, in the whole, consist
df 1256 persons) are in favour of the measure.
6. From the merchants, ship-owners, &c. of the following ports:—
Newcastle, Sunderland. Leith, Dull, Grimsby, Kirkahly,
Lyme-Regis, Yannoutli,'lpswich, Harwich, Colchester, Sheer-
ness, Rochester, Dover, ltareregatet Sandwich, itlargate, Rye,
Portsmouth, Newhaven, Cowea, Poole, Weymouth, Jersey,
Dartmouth, Plymouth, Falmouth, Penzance, Swansea, Pad-
stow, Bristol, Cork, Dublin, Boston, Barnstaple.
All parties indeed connected with the coasting trade with the
port of 'London feel deeply interested in the success of a measure
calculatA to afford considerable relief from the existing impedi-
ments to the navigation of the river Thames, and by establishing
competion, to produce a permanent reduction in the charges of
the port.
The benefit the public will derive by the reduction of charges
through the construction of' the proposed clocks is manifest ; since
;he mere agitation of the measure has already produced a consider-
able diminution in the rates upon certain goods in the port of
London I'. thus proving, that under the influence of monopoly they
were exorbitant.
It was difficult for the promoters of the meastre to conjecture any
public or parliamentary ground on which it could be opposed, but
i
they felt satisfied that f any renewal of the efforts at resistance
offered during the last Session should take place, it would present
the following singular
CONTRAST,
IN eavoun OF THE 311 - AGAINST THE mrsauna.
suRE. Local interests.
The Public. Advocates for exclusive pri-
•ileges, and compulsory regu-
lations.
The commercial, manufac.'
turing, and shipping interests.
The importers of raw mate-
rials, to the uses of British in-
dustry.
The consumers of foreign
commodities in the metropolis
and its vicinity, and many of
the nut ports.
Friends of free trade, compe-• The promoters of monopol:,,
titian, reasonable charges, and and such as benefit by exorb,-
improved management. tans rates.
After giving an account of the progress of the St. Ka-
tharine Dock Bill through the House of Commons, and
justified the Commire: 'goblin the complaint of the Lon*
don Dock Company that they were denied a fair bearing,
the pamphlet proceeds:—slaving thus disposed of the complaint of the London Dock
Company, previoua to proceeding to a consideration of the second
and last branch of inquiry, it is necessary to notice the conelernna-
don which has been pronounced on their behalf upon the several
eel:echo' Acts passed in the 3d and 4th years of the ,eign of his
I recent Majesty Acts, which were hailed by the mercantile corn.
munity as the first solemn pledges of an improved system of corn.
mereial legislation, practically illustrating the sound principles
which influenced Parliament in adopting a liberal policy of trade,
which has so materially contributed to raise our commerce, menu.
factures, Ace. to a state of unexampled prosperity.
The reasona openly avowed in the `• Case of the London Dock
Company" for sithholding approbation from those public men.
sures, quite consistent with the motives which have throughout
ruled the struggle of monopoly against competition, are so very
questionable, that it is difficult to suppose they have received the
sanction of the proprietors of that establishment.
Those reasons embrace two most disinterested propositions :
First—That as those Acts of Parliament have extended to the
out.porto all the advantages of the warehousing system, they have
a tendency to diminish the trade of the Port of London, and
hence, to injure the interests of the proprietors of the London
Ducks.

Certain of the shareholders
the several docks in the port of
London.
Some of wharfingers an 3
warehout:.keepers.

Second—That na principles of reciprocity in trade have been
established by those measures, the shipping of other countries will
more freely participate in the navigation of both. That hence the
number of foreign ships in the port of London will be increased ;
and as such vessel, do not frequent wet docks in the same propor-
tion with British ships, the effect must be prejudicial to the Lon.
don I)ock Company.
These propositions furnish the following conclusion :—That the
London Dock Company must in all mum be viewed as pa, amount,
and that every consideration, even of national advantage, must
yield whenever it shall be found to interfere with their private
interests.

In thirteen distinct puts of the publication, the attention of the
public is drawn " to the injury the interests of the London Dock
Company will sustain," " the disastrous results," " the ruinous
consequences," &e. &e. which will be entailed upon that establish-
ment; their interests, indeed, are tonjuitts perdris. whereas those
of the public appear to have been expunged from the London Dock
vocabulary.
Reference has been had to the archives of the Shipowners' Society
to which, it is presumed, the London Dock Company have from
circumstances obtained a privileged AMASS, in search of opinions
favourable to the principles propounded. The copy of a memorial
from that Society to the Lords of the Council for Trade, dated
March, 1823, has been incorporated with the proofs which were
proposed to be offered against the preamble of the St. Katharine
Dock Bill, in which our present commercial policy is freely con.
demned ; upon the ground, that in proportion as our trade and
navigation may thereby be increased, foreigners will participate in
the advantages; or, in other words, that no trade is to be encouraged
which shall not secure the exclusive employment of British ships.
The opinions of such an influential body might peradventure bare
acquired additional weight, if some 01 the gloomy predictions to
be found In tie protocol of their proceedings had been verified.
The benefit our trade and navigation has derived under the loft-
; ence of the liberal policy which has been adopted must render those
opinions of little value as authority, from the erroneous views which
that Society entertained of the injurious effects which they predicted
those enlightened measures would produce ; opinions., however. not
generally prevalent with the shipowners of the United Kingdom.
The following observations occur on the mode and extent
of charging in the London Decks, and on the recent reduc-
tion of these rates, from the dread of competition.
The reduction tardily made by the London Dock Company
after the Nun of St. Katharine had knocked at their gates, cannot
be permanently secured to the public without competition, as under
a local Act. the 51st Oeorgc
possess a power of exacting at any time rates from certain goods,
fur the bonding of which no other legal places exist within nearly
four miles of London Bridge, of full Se per cent above those to
which, under an apprehension of
competition, they have been lately
reel owed. cap. 49 (which is perpetual), they
seiwors4bilyanfeilat.creabutaawwilibar
aiomnsplianiatte PortTh eofreLonpmentlott.
antidote of competition is
to
"ow d .o exist ?
sem
it:.
iever
have the
pub
ice h
powerfulh st alatreadne dtstaat
ot
lace, tan
css
cations and remonstrances of merchants and others have in many
sanbaec‘..extrie °thuem'reeguotl'act
instances been disregarded, and in others tardily attended to, whilst
haveß u
for
rouraas calyaa iyrees:.
the manopoly possessed by the London Dock Company, under the
an of incorporation, rendered them indifferent to improved manage.
went. No choice being left to the proprietors of certain goods as
to the places for deposit, their interests were unavoidably consigned
to arbitrary control ; and it is clear that the advantages of open
competition can never be enjoyed by the public. as between tbe

Itesent docks, because upon the expiration of the compulsory lois i-
Pges, the Lotition Docks must, from their contiguity to the scat of
Lushness, in comparison with the distant situation of the others,
'lissooy a virtual monopoly. It most be evident, therefivre, that
without additional dock-accommodation near to the centre of the
toetropolis, the, proprietors of certain good*. compelled by the
recatotions of the Act of the 4th Geo. IV. c. 21, to be deposited in
places surrounded by walls, or desirous of depositing them where
they would be exempt from demands for deficiencies, would have
no choice, for even after the expiration of the exclusive privileges.
unless the owner who shall desire to lodge his goods at a convenient
distance from the market, chooses to submit to such rates as the
Leedom Dock ('otnpany may thick fit to exact, he would be corns
relied to choose between two evils.—of being expiated to ruinous
chorges, or of lodging his goods in the West India Decks, which,
at a distaxic? of upwards of three miles from the metropolis, might
seriously obstruct the sale, it being known that very many go,
ds
will not find buyers, unless they ran undergo convenient personal
inspection. It is equally notorious that the excessive charges ot
the Port, and the obstruction to navigation, from the crowded state
of the river, have induced foreign merchants to shun it, and seek
the ports of the Continent, which have afforded cheaper Om es for
deposit, greater facilities in the examination, sale, and transport
or therthandise.
But if any additional proof were wanting of the effects produced
by the high rates of the London Docks, it will be found in the fact,
that in the year 11123, the number of vessels which entered those
docks was 1-180, whereas in 1824, when the number of vessels
which arrived in the Port of London exceeded those of the preced-
ing year between 2 and 3,000, the number which entered those
docks was only 1,348. Not that the tonnage rates prevented ships
horn going in, as they are low, but the proprietors of the cargoes
refused to allow them to he there discharged, on rccount ot the
• er -tempos expense to which merchandize in the Loudon Docks is
subject to.
We must conclude with the author's remarks on the
great increase that has taken place in theitransit trade :
Should the metropolis, in future, not enjoy a very large share of '
that lucrative branch of trade, it will he attributable only
to exorbitant charges, which are indeed the sole cause why the Lon.
• don Dock Company's warehouses are not more than fully occu.
pied ; The high rates have deterred merchants upon the Continent
from making consignments in transit, as the expenses upon small
quaraitien of goods sent as mere expertments to try the market, hare,
in many instances, operated as a prohibition.
In resneer to the rapidly-increasing trine of the country, it may
be stated, that in the year 1795, the value of our imports and ex-
ports was 45 millions, and it will appear, from the official account,
that the last year amounted to 96,488,1621. sterling.
Can any additional proof be required of the important advantages
which have flown out of our improved Commercial Code ? What
becomes then of the indiscreet attempt which has been made to im-
pugn the enlightened principles which now govern it ?