The Sun.
London, England, 1824-09-10 00:00:00

LONDON DOCK PROPRIETORS.

A Court of Proprietors of the London Docks,
assembled at one o'clock yesterday, at their house, in Prince's-
street, for the purpose of considering the expediency of enlarg-
ing the works of the company. Mr. SOLLY in the Chair.—
When the advertisement by which the Court had been con-
vened was read,—

The CHAIRMAN BIRIEd thi4t the Directors, conceiving it ne-
cessary to enlarge the works of the Coriipanv, had resolved to
call a Court of Proprieters, in order to submit to them their
ideas upon the subject. The Company was in possession of
some waste ground, at the east end of the docks, and the pro-
posal to be submitted was, that that ground should be appro.
priated to the excavation of vaults and the erection of ware-
houses. An estimate of the expence attending the proposed
improvements had been given by Daniel Alexander, and Geo.
Chapman, Esqrs. These Gentlemen were of opinion that those
expences would not exceed 300,0001.
A PROPRIETOR asked, if there were not actually some va-
cant warehouses at this moment ; and also, if the Docks had
been found inadequate to the reception of the number of vessels
applying for admittance ?
The CHAIRMAN allowed that the Docks were capable of
accommodating more vessels than were at any one time within
them, and also that they had vacant warehouses. In fact,
although their trade was in a flourishing condition, yet it did
not keep pace with the improvements of the Company's
works. There was, nevertheless, a scarcity of room for ware-
housing wine, and political circumstances rendered it pro-
bable that this want of room would be more seriously felt,
unless the present plan was adopted. In the present state ,
of South America, Portugal was cautious of sending her pro-
duce
thither, and as this state of things might continue for
some time, the probability was, that warehouse room for 13,000
pipes of wine would be required.
A PnoPRIETon inquired if this measure was not caused by
the intended erection of St. Catherine's and the South London
Docks.

A DIRE CT on said, that the present enlargement of the Docks
would better enablo them to compete with those companies
which, as yet, were only in embryo.
A PIIOPILItTOIL asked, if it would not be better to wait a
few months, to ascertain whether Parliament would agree to the
Bill for the erection of the St. Catherine's Docks ?
The CHAIRMAN said, it would be then too late, as their char-
ter would expire in January, MO. He had also to mention,
that the Directors proposed raising the money by loan, and did
not contemplate an increase of capital.
A PnornucTon asked, if no communications bad been
held with Government on a subject so vitally important to the
interests of the Society, as the erection of the Saint Catherine's
Docks?

A DIRECTOR replied, that when the subject was first
started, the Directors applied to the Government, and stated
how injurious it might prove to their interests; stating also,
that no individuals would embark a capital of 3,300,0001.
in the erection of extensive works for the improvement of
the trade of London, upon a Charter, for the short terns of
twenty-one years, unless they had an expectation of its re-
newal. The Company. did not want a monopoly, but they
did think they had a right to the exclusive patronage of Go-
vernment.

A DIRECTOR observed upon the probability of the Gentle-
men, about forming the st. Catherine Docks' Company giving
up their project, if the present Meeting concurred in the views
of the Directors.
A conversation ensued between several of the Proprietors,
after which the following Resolution was carried by a consi-
derable majority :
" That the Directors be empowered to enlarge the Docks
and Warehouses of the Company, as to them may seem
proper, provided the expences do not exceed the sum of
200,0001."
Some Proprietors, who were dissatisfied with the unanimous
decision of the " Ayes" upon the thew of hands, required a
ballot; but it appearing, from a by-law of the company, that
no ballot could take place unless a paper to that effect was
handed to the Chair, signed by nine Proprietors, they acquiesced
in the original decision. It appeared to us that the majority
was unquestionable.—The Court was then diSsolved.