The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1838-05-01 00:00:00

We should be out of the path of duty if we did not. We owe
it to our families—we owe it to ourselves,—nay, we have the
authority of holy writ, that we should be more than blameable
if we did tot, He that provideth not for his'own, and those
of his own household, is worse than an infidel."
Nor can we allow of the assumption, that the dock trustees
are qualified to be our arbitrators, for, from their almost exclu-
sive connexion with ships, they are apt to overlook all other in-
terests than that of the ship owners. It is possible that self-in-
terest, love of patronage, or desire of change may have some
weight in their deliberations. They have little or no interest
iirthe warehouses; they, therefore; may risk their experiment:
if it answers—well; if not, they are no losers.
`We object to the dock trustees building warehouses, on the
'ground, that they are a public body, and that it is not fair for
-them, with the public money at thir command;to come into
'competition with private individuals Their powers are already
Sufficiently great, monopolising, the sole privilege of making
docks in the town, shutting out from that privilege the whole
extent' of the shores of the Mersey, from the sand banks of
Crosby to the rising town of Runcorn—from the hold shores of
New Brighton to the fair domains of Sir Thomas Stanley at
Eastham—all must bow before them. Now, Sir, are you pre-
pared to allow them to increase this almost unheard of monopo-
ly? Is parliament prepared to increase it? Are the Cheshire
members likely to increase? J should say not.
We cannot meet them upon the same terms. If to increase
the value of their estate, to allow, for the sake of argument, that
this scheme would increase it, they are allowed to build ware-
houses, why Should we not be allowed to make docks? They
-may erect rfarehousp's—we cannbt claim the privilege of taxing
them ; but if we were to make docks, we should be obliged to
may their rates. I say, on 'that ground, we are not on a fair
-footing. But, Sir, we object to their scheme of erecting ware-
houses on another ground. Warehouses at present are over-
,alone; and as.l wish to assert nothing but what I can prove, I
have taken the trouble of extracting from the brokers' circulars
the account of the stocks for a period of several years-past, on
the 31st Dec. each year. I have taken cotton and sugar as an
example, forming, as they do, the bulk of our stocks, and they
may be taken as an average of the comparative stock of other
produce.

COTTON-BALES.
1828. 1829. 1830. 1831. 1832.

313.000 295.000 203,000 '258,000 212,000 198,000
1833. • 1834. 7835. 1836. 1837. ....

[BO,OOO 145,000 184,000 204,000 170,000 ....

827. 1828. -1829. SUG A
18R-HI-I ' 30. l DS.
&31. 18.32. 1833

8,000 11.000 11;000 10.500 10,700 10,500 13,000
1834. 18.35. 1836. 18.37.

9,000 11,000 17,000 7,000 • •
These details are rather dry, but I think you will agree with me
. that it is necessary to go into them. We wish, Sir, to conceal
nothing; we are desirious to put the public in possession of facts
that they may be able to form a just opinion of our case.
From these tables, if will be seen, that in the article of cotton
there has been a falling off in the stocks; that in the year 1827,
the stock was more than double than in the year 1837; and in
sugar, the stock was.somethitig less • and it is a notorious fact,
that since 1827 the warehouses have increased one third; but, it
will be asked, are there:not. goods now stored in the town that
we had not in `1827?' to which we anwer—yes—tea--but how
many warehouses does tea require? Why, Sir, not ten ware-
houses-; 'there' are-tiOt, at the present moment, more than six
warehousei full with that article, and what are six out of about
1200 warehouses, for there are, at least, that number of ware-
houses in the port.'
' A statement-was put forth by one of our dock trustees, show-
ing by the return of the increase of tonnage of vessels, that the
trade of the port had increased,.and hence their conclusion,.
that more warehouses were required. • It cannot be denied, that
the trade of the place has increased, but that has nothing to do.
with. the warehouses: Warehouses are affected, not by the
quantity of goods imported, but by the quantity storcd„ that if
the imports were increased one hundred fold, but if the goods
are not stored, or if they were stored, and did not long, remain
in the warehouse,_ there would be no necessity for additional
warehouses.
Independently; of the result shown by my -statement of the
stocks, I may mention, that it is a fact welt knimn to 'every one
connected with warehouses, that atthe clhse of the last year, they
were not one fourth full—that they 'hik-ve' not been full for
several years past, and that, if not one, More. is erected, there
will bo no scarcity for several years to come. In one part
of the year 1827, the stock of cotton was 450,000 bales, and,
taking, into account the increase of warehouses, we have now
accommodation for 600,000 bales; that is, we have room for at
teast,.loo,ooo hales more the-011ie stock at the close of the last
year. And if furtiier-pro,if of the abundance of warehouses is
wanted, it will be found in the. present low price of storeage;
in cotton", for Tnitance, the rent was 1 1. per bale, per week in '
showinglB2s it
a4fanio.liwn g
fid ~f
from`
25a
ecife%4soiroe e,rkc
ce:gt.o
Andit was
.haast
:consequence of this state of thingS,te all connected with ware-
do net low
wll as
se
e
heuses? ruin absolute ruin, ;if some change does not soon take
place. To the.*arehouie :owner a falling off in his income,
already of a heavy'per tentage, and a further falling off if things
sPeedilY:niOnd.J. Whilst to the warehouse occupier, his
:business, which.fer several years has nut been worth following,
bring hiin, if be continues in it, to•bankruptcy. Yet, in
the face of these things, the dock trustees are about to erect
from '2O to 25neW warehouses.
' Great stress is laid upon the saving of cartage,—now, sup-
posing that these '2O or 25 warehouses were to displace an equal
number of the-old warehouses; the saving of cartage would be
about £6OO. per annum, but.the loss of interest on the prop'erty
thrown out of employment, would be £1.500; and thus there
would belt positiVe loss against the Public, of nearly £4OOO. per
annum, •

It will scarcely be credited that the amount of cartage in-
wards, that is, from the ship to the warehouse, on all produce,
does not amount to £30,000. per annum : and if, by the plan of
erecting warehouses around the docks, the whole of the present
warehouses were thrown out of employment, and the cartages
saved, there would be a loss against the public. For instance,
the warehouses are valued at £200,000. annually, frOm which
deduct the cartage £30,000. you have a deficiency of £170,000.
per annum; for surely the warehouse owner is as much entitled
to be considered a part of the public as the merchant. But it
will be said, that the whole of the warehouses will not he thrown
out of use, but suppose half, then yon have a loss of £85,000. or
suppose a ['earth, you have a loss of £42,500. Now take the
advocates of the measure, upon the ground of their often re-
peated axiom, that " private interest should give way to public
good" you have a result, in this ease against themselves, that
the measure would be against the public good.
It is said, further, that there are no warehouses on the dock
quays.—now, if these assertions were made by persons not ac-
quainted with the towni• or made to persons who were not resi-
dent. we should not be surprised, but, when they are ,made by
those who are welt acquainted with the localities of the place,
and to those who reside in it, we are surprised. Why, sir, there
are. at least, 114 warehouses on the dock quays,' on the east side
of-the Prince's there are 25 warehouses, -George's Dock 32,
Canning Dock 15, Salthouse Dock 20, King's Dock 17, Queen's
Dock 5; with space to erect three times the number, at least,
when they are wanted. -Indeed, on the far greater part of the
land the owners.are tied down by the corporation to erect ware-
hotisesvrarid waft-11'66es 'only. It is further said, however; that
there are warelitritSes required, for particular descriptions of
. aonds, and great jmpertance is laid upon the necessity of erect-
, rug Warelieuies fur',ltidigo for which, it is asserted:there 'is a
!great want. ,111,14 'stock of indigo both here and in London, on
ihe.3lst of Dec: last wifs26.ooo chests, now, suppose we were to
get the whole of the Indigo trade, there would notbe a sufficient
quantity to fill half a dozen warehouses; Indigo, however, being
so valuable, cartage. is no object, therefore, it is about the last
thing, for whiCh there is a necessity of having warehouses on the
dock side.
We assert, however, that • there are already warehouses in
which indigo is stored, and against which I never heard a tan-
gible complaint; but if there really was wanting a warehouse
for indig6 specially; I have, myself,' more than one warehouse,
near to the north docks, and to the Exchange, for that is re-
ally an object, as that article is viewed in bulk by the pur-
chasers; I say, 1' have more than one warehouse that I am
ready to devote to that purpose, whenever it is required,—a
warehouse, which for light and security, will vie with any ware-
house in London. The warehouse, of which I speak, was
erected purposely for tea, but which, to my cost, tea has not
been in for many months; the .warehouse room., for that as for
every other article having been sadly over done. But, sir, if
this Is not enough, I beg leave to mention to you a circum-
stance that occurred a short' time ago.
A gentleman, haying land in a convenient :situation, was
about to erect a warehouse, and thinking that one might be
wanted for indigo, he called upon thi importers of ,that article,
telling them, that he would erect,a warehouse for the reception
of indigo solely, upon an improved plan, if they would patron-
ise it: askip them at the same time to sign an agreement to
that effect, 3'14 what was the result ? they all declined doing
so.' In cerlboration of which, I, with your permission, will
read'a letter which I have received front him upon that sub-
ject- • • . • •
[Here Mr. Dover read a letter from Mr. Lancelot graham.'
I am afraid that I shall tire you, but really.it is very import-
ant that. we sheuld go into these details. It has been said by
one of the Dock Trustees, that if you had warehouses generally
on the dock quays, von would save the expense of cartage, &c.
on goods that were reshipped; at first this sounds very plausi-
ble. hut when you come to examine into the matter you find it
rp,t Practicable ; simpese, for instance, the goods were lying
in the Prince's Dock warchouse,s, and the vessel: was ,in the
Aintfs Dock ; is it at all likely that she would haul out and
gnu the risk of going d,iwn into the Prince's Dock ? why the
expense, not lo olvn.lion the danger, won.1(1 prevent it ; the ex-
pense will ,rcater tlAto the cartaire on the goods. If the
vessel litippetca to he in the same thick. this might, peAaps, be

,and one-half by the warebtilis4=lti4P*s.•_. The-system pursued
by th-e - warehnuse.-keePer 'id some cases he lets rooms
out to the "inerchahts, to *limn he gives up possession of the
keys; nod, in- othrs, he takes in goods, upon a weekly rent,
by the package. In gen,rat he is only the store-keeper, the
merchant doiug all porterage, cartage, &c., himself. The only
exception (as far as my memory serves) is in the case of tea,
when, generally, the warehouse-keeper does the whole work
from the ship's side—porterage on the quay. cartage to the
warehouse, and porterage, cooperage, laving out for sale, &c ,
in the warehouse, for which and for rent he receives a fixed sum
from the merchant.
It has been the custom, from the commencement, for the
warehouse-keeper to be merely the store-keeper, with the fore-
going exception, why, I cannot say; the merchant has been
satisfied, and we have gone on in the old way; but latterly
there has been some expression of discontent, especially on the
London houses, who have—it is natnral.a predilection for the
London system. Now this discontent is not general, and I
give as my opinion that, if it were put to the vote, merchants
generally would be against it; and the Dock Trustees will find
that, if they take the partial expression of dislike to our present
system—of which we have heard so much of late—to be the
general opinion, they will,find themselves mistaken. The
merchants generally have been taken by surprise—they have
not had time to think about the matter, and, at least, we may
say that pnblic opinion is not up to the mark that they have
anticipated it—if you van correctly so speak of a thing that may
never come to pass. But, whenever the time arrives that it is
the general opinion that the old system should be given up, it
I will be found that the' warehouse-keepers will be very glad to
come into the arrangement.
However, at this stage, I hope the Dock Trustees will not
take it amiss if I tell them frankly that the proposal must not
come from. them; it must emanate from some other source;
'and, if I might be allowed to name that source, I should say the
different mercantile associations in the tosin—that,,however de-
siroua they may be to bring the system into opeirttion, it will
not succeed without the aid of these bodies.
The arguments in favour of our present system are, that it
allows every man to look after his own affairs, and do his own
business, and some think, too, that it is an economical plan.
Here, Sir, I must protest against the position that our oppo-
nents take against us. They say, yon are interested in the
question ; we cannot attend to what vou say; your opinions are
of no weight in this matter. Beautiful reasoning this! Who
would defend our property if we (lid, not ! Could we expect any
one else tolake up the cudgels for us if we did not defend our-
selves ? "Surely not. We have a right to do so; if we did not,
we should be worthy of the robbery and wrong meditated against
us