The Sun.
London, England, 1825-05-21 00:00:00

MEETING AT LEITH.

EDINBURGH, MAT 14.—Yesterday a Meeting of the In-
habitants of Leith was held in the Exchange Coffee Room,
called for the purpose of petitioning the House of Lords against
the proposed Dock Bill. WlLLtax AuLn, Esquire, in the
Chair. _ _

The CHAIRMAN stated the object and purport of the meet-
ing. He said, that although great amendments had been made
in the Committee, yet the town of Leith ought not to relax in
its efforts to obtain the total repeal of the bill. The measure
proposed was one of the vilest and grossest jobs that was ever
published. The. town of Leith had, no doubt, spent a consi-
derable sum in defending altat they conceived to be their just
rights, but it had cost their opponents a great deal more. Of
the result, he.had still sanguine hopes, the conviction of several
Members of Parliament were decidedly hostile to the proposed
measure ; and to one in the Committee they were deeply in-
debted for the interest lie had taken—lie alluded to their towns-
man, Mr. Gladstone, who, had been one of the mightiest chain-
pions, and who deservedly was entitled to some mark of their
estimation. Some of the gentlemen present would inform them
what had been done by those in London.
Mr. Seawrit'read the following Report of the Committee :
" Your Committee had hoped that it would have been in their
power now to report their complete success in Parliament, by
throwing out the Dock Company's Bill; hut they have been
disappointed in this expectation by the operation of circum-
stances which they could not controul. Although, however,
they cannot report complete success, they have the satisfaction
to state, that' the exertions of Leith in the cause have not been
altogether fruitless. Previously to the Easter Holidays,' an offer
of compromise was made through Mr. Gladstone, a' gentleman
who has devoted the greatest attention to the Bill, and for whose
zeal the inhabitants of Leith can never be sufficiently grateful ;
but, on considering the terms of the compromise, and taking the
opinion of Counsel on the subject, the Committee came to the
resolution respectfully to decline the same, giving their reasons,
which satisfied Mr. Gladstone that they acted properly in doing
so. That you may judge of the terms of the compromise, and
its result had it been gone into, an appendix to the Parliamentary
state is herewith produced, which shows the matter in the
clearest light. Although they did refuse this compromise, they
have lost nothing that that would have gained for you, for in
the Committee of the House of Commons the Bill has been
modified in almost every respect, as was then proposed. It may
be satisfactory to know what good you have already achieved by
your opposition to. the Bill, the knowledge of which,. far from
slackening the exertions of the community, should tend to in-
crease them, seeing that much has yet to be gained, which can
only be obtained by a steady perseverance and continuance of
those exertions which have hitherto been made. By this Bill,
as originally printed, it was proposed by doing away the exemp-
tion in favour of vessels making more than eight voyages; as to
payment of dock dues, to burden the trade with an annual
tax of - £lsoo '0 0
And a sum proposed to be had under the name of
entry dues, was equal to, per annum 300 0 0

£1,600 0 0
This annual burden was given up on the first show of serious
opposition to the Bill, and calculating this sum at twenty-five
years purchase, the public has been relieved of a burden
equal to - . - - £40,000 0 0
• The Bill was then introduced into Parliament,
constituting the Company, with a capital
of - - - £300,000 0 0
This has been reduced to 265,000 0 0

Making a difference of X 35,000 0 0

61 per cent. per annum on which
is --f £2,187 10 0
And by a clause introduced at the
suggestion of the opponents to the
measure, the feu-duties are to be
sold, which will make an annual
difference of

Together
which at 25 years. purchase is

1,800 0 0

£3,087 10 0
99,575 0 0

£139,575 - O. 0
Showing a reduetion.of the pmpo.ed• burdens: of &capital sum
of about 140,000/. Nor is this City of Edinburgh are

moreover bound to expend the sum of 20,000/. nn extending
the Pier, without having the privilege of resorting to the ob.
noxious tax on the luggage of passengers, from which they ha
calculated they would derive a revenue of 18001. per annum.--
They are not without hopes, besides, that another sum of
25,0001. will be deducted from the capital, which will, fie
a very material saving. All efForts, however; to reduce-
the dividend have been unavailing, and the Joint stocx
Company are still to be allowed to pocket the large
turn of 6i per cent. for Their money, besides paying all ex-
pences, while the whole debt, it is proved by the Officers of
the City of Edinburgh themselves, can be borrowed at 3i.. It
is unnecessary to spew how injurious this will be to the port of
Leith. The debt will be perpetuated, and the clock dues,
which would, at no distant day, have been removed to the great
advantage of our trade, will now be an everlasting burden to our
most material prejudice. Your Sub-Committee have received
assurances from high quarters, that the principle of the Bill is
so obnoxious, and the illegal transactions of the Council, in the
sale of shares, so apparent, that it never can receive the sanc-
tion of the House of Lords, and that there it will, in all pro-
bability, nay almost to a certainty, be thrown out. The Sub-
Committee would, therefore, again press on, the attention of the
Committee the absolute necessity of unanimity
.and further
persevering exertions, that the cause in which they have all
embarked may finally be brought to a successful termination.
Mr. WADDELL moved a series of resolutions against the
measure, which was seconded by Mr. Dudgeon, sen., and una•
nimously agreed to.
Mr. ScsitTn proceeded to read a statement of the shares
subscribed for, bought, sold, and retained by the Members of
the Town Council, from which it appeared that 18,5001.. had
been the original amount of their subscriptions, that they had
bought 38,4001. of stock in addition, that they had
.sold
44,3001.. and now only retained 12,600/. Of this sum the'
Lord Provost holds 6,300/., Sir Wm. Arbuthnot 1,000/.,
Archibald M'Kinlay 300/., and Mr. Carlyle Bell 5,0001: In'
this statement Mr. Turnbull, the City Chamberlain, is said
to have subscribed, 2,6001.—t0 have bought 9,oool.—and to.
have sold the whole. A letter from Mr. Turnbull to Mr.
Goddart, explanatory of his share of this transaction, was
read; it stated that the 9,000/. referred, was held by him for
a friend, and that with regard to his own shares,. he sold out
whenever he saw they became a matter of speculation.
On another analysis, it appears that there was subscribed fin,
the city, and for persons members of the Council at the'
ime - - £63,001

By persons formerly in the Council - -
13y bankers to the city, and by persons in its employ-

29,500

_ _
_
ment - - - - - - --
42,1 00-
By persons nearly related to the above three classes - 17,700'
By persons
on mandatesaboversonsinthe-
classes for others of their
friends
-
By persons subscribing " for self and others," it being
declared in prospectus, that no persons signing as
mandatories are in no way responsible for such sub-
scriptions - - -

7,200'

13,000

. £172,500
Of the remaining sum, there was subscribed by one
merchant in Leith, the sum of - . - 1,000
By merchants and dealers in Edinburgh, 14 in num-
ber, to the extent of - - - 32,000
The remaining sum of - - - - 94,590
is held by a number of ladies, clergymen, country
gentlemen, and gentlemen in the law, the medical
profession, and the army

£300,000
Mr. CassELs- said he had returned from London-that fore..
noon, he had carefully attended the whole proceedings of the
Committee, and had private conversation with several members
of Parliament on the matter, and they were convinced that their
cause did not rest on the question as to who were.or were not
sharehol;lers • and if it depended only on that, they would be
sure to lose their cause. The real question was whether there
should be ajoint stock company. There was no difference in
the opinion of the Committee as to the right of the.MeMbers
of Council in becoming shareholders. That subject had been
frequently before the Committee, and had been fully argued
by council, and after a strict investigation, the Committee had
almost unanimously agreed on this point. The question before
the meeting rested on very narrow grounds. The. great ques-
tion they ought to rest upon and press should be, whether the
Town of Edinburgh had the pow.et to- make a sale of this
property to a joint stock company: The question.rested
.-on
very narrow ground, and should be urged with all, ingeniiity ;
it was whether the property should be disposed of,to a
joint stock company, and whether it would not be oppressive
or injurious to trade. Mr. C. proceeded to state the bad ',acts
that might be expected to Leith, from the disposalef the Docks
to a third party. He allowed that the Town Council taking-
shares was disgraceful, but still that was not the only and the
most powerful objection, it was that the measure would be op-
pressive and prejudicial to trade. The Edinburgh committee
had been very attentive to their interest, and had .stisa.. in the
handsomest manner given every information to him when he
was in London. The committee was not secret, it was open:
for the admission of every one. He concluded by pressing: on
the attention of the meeting, the necessity of urging the op-
pressiveness it would create on the trade of the port. It had
been held out in London in some printed papers, that should
the measure be lost, that the Council would increase the har-
bour and dock dues. But, said he, let them, for his own part,
rather than there should be a joint stock company, he would.
submit to the imposition of any additional dues, knowing that
they would go to the reduction of the debt.
Mr. lidacriE said that the Magistrates had not the power
to raise dock dues without the permission of the Leith Dock
Committee.

Mr. SCARTH said that Mr. Cassels wished them only to
confine themselves to one point, but they ought to argue all the
points of their cause. There was good reason to believe, froru
a recent decision iu the Court of Chancery, that the job would
not succeed in the House of Lords, as the decision went directly-'
against the city of Edinburgh's right to dispose of the docks,
they being trustees. He then read a comparative statement of
the proceeds of the docks under the present system, and under
the Joint Stock Company, which stated that under the present
system with the state of trade, that if money were borrowed
at WI per cent. the surplus would be 4,190, while-under a Joint
Stock Company paying 61- per cent. the annual deficit would
be 541/. • _ _ _ _ _ _

Mr. PIIILIP said a few words in support of the resolutions.
Mr. SCAIIT/I then read the petition to the House of Lords,
which was unaniptously agreed to ; after which, the meeting
separated.
A great number of gentlemen subscribed the petition.--
(Edinburgh Courant, May 14. )

COAL MARKET, MAY 20.
Ships sold
161.

Ships at Market.
Newcastle -
15. Sunderland -

Price.
1298 Od to 38s ad
28s 6d to 39s Oa

COURSE OF EXCHANGE, May 20.
Amsteitlaw
Ditto, at. Sight l2 19
Hof terdmo l2 3
\ntwelti l2 3 •

Handmigh
Altotia

36 9 di Us.
36 10 017E1

Paris,3 liziy's sight
Ditto ...„. '
Boni demix, ditto
Berlin 7' 0

Frankforhiii the Main
Pete! slitirgh . 9+'

Vienwt

9-52

Trieste- 9 52
Madrid
Cadiz • 36* • Effective

!Whoa
Barcelona
cvillr
Gibraltat

Leghorn 49i,
Getwo ... 458 -Venice, Ital. Liv. 47
Malta ---Naples
Palermo . l22b pet O.
Lisbon
Oporto
ItioJatteiro
BalliA • . 56
Dublin .... 93 Curls qii pet Cent.
BULLION

Portugal Golll,i n Coin I n 0 0 per Og.
Foreign Cold, in Bars 3l; 96
New Doubloons
New 'Dollars 0 4 1
Silver Standard in Hats.....

BIRTH.

Yesterday morning, the 20th instant, at his house in York-
place, Portman-square, the Lady of Henry Charles Hoare, Esq.
of a son.

MARRIED.
On the 18th inst., at st. Ueorge's, John Bishop, of Bernard-
street, Russel-square, Esq. to Elizabeth, youngest daughter of
the late Richard Daston, of the County of Lincoln, Esq.

DIED. -- •
On Friday, May 20, at her house in Bedford-square, Mrs.
Everett, widow of the late Thoinas Everett, Esq. M.P.

Printed and Published for the PROPRIETORS, at the SUN.
OFFICIi, No. 112, Strand, by J. B. CARSTAIRS

I