The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1846-11-10 00:00:00

THE DOCK WAREHOUSES,

The Lirerpool Mercury of Friday last has been exer-
cising his powers in inventing a charge against the trustees
of our docks, the substance of which may be very briefly
stated. There is " a settled design" he says "on the
part of a certain class of individuals to make the ware.
house experiment at the Albert dock a failure." The in-
dividuals in question are the warehouse owners, who have
now "obtained a predominance both in the Dock Comm t-
tee and the Council ; and the object of their settled de-
sign is to get the dock warehouses transferred from the
bands of the former, into those of a private individual or
company." "The Town Council and the Dock Commit-
tee" our contemporary contends, " must know that the
shameful mismanagement which has prevented two of the
main advantages anticipated from the dock warehouses—
economy and despatch—can only be regarded as proof
positive of a foregone conclusion. The warehouses are
not intended to answer as a public institution, under the
same management as the docks, and, in fact, forming an
essential part of them ; but they may, nevertheless, turn,
out very lucrative affairs in the hands of individuals, by
and bye."

An awful charge this! The Dock Committee ought to
be tried before a jury of their fellow-countrymen, if the
authority making it were worth a button-top. They are
wilfully endeavouring to "make the warehouse experi-
ment a ese trustees—fora venal purpose. Tbey
" must know "—these same trustees—" that the shameful
mismanagement which has prevented two of the main ad-
vantagekanticipat,,d from the Dock Warehouses—economy
and despatch—can only be regarded as proof positive of a
foregone conclusion," to show that these warehouses
cannot be advantageously conducted by a public body,
and ought to be handed over to private individuals! Mr.
Aikin, Mr. Ripley, Mr. liorsfall,—how is it that we
lever hear your voices denouncing so very infamous a con.
airacy ? Are you warehouse owners in disguise ? The
7hig members of the Council, too—Mr. Eyre Evans,
Earle, Mr. James Brancker, and others—are they
:ted? for we hear few of their protestations against
the wilful and venal mismanagement referred to. They
never predicted the failure of the warehouses. They have
no interest, that we know of, in their failure. What
sadly changed beings they must be—these sleepers at their
post when their capitol is threatened ! By the bye, it is
clearly no intention of ours to compare them—although
our reference to the defenders of the capitol of old Rome
may by the spiteful appear to do,so—to the poor fowls who
achieved the great achievements recorded in history. Our
contemporary may, with greater fitness, claim the honor,
should it unfortunately prove that there is any wisdom in
his present sibillation.

Seriously, boy
though one may

ever—for the charge is a serious one, al-
be excused for laughing at it, considering

the quarter froin which it comes—where is this " shame:
ful mismanagement" of which our contemporary talks?
Dispatch, it is admitted by every consignee and ship-
owner who has used the dock, has been fully attained.
Economy, too, if security is, at the same time, taken into
account, has been also attained. Of course, however,
there is much to be attained in this respect. A well-de-
vised rate of charges is not the work of a day ; yet such a
rate will shortly be determined upon and laid before the
mercantile public. We know that its preparation is now
occupying the earnest. .
attention of the members of the
1%
Dock Committee,
and Conservative working toge-
ther harmoniously for its accomplishment.
As to any other mismanagement, beyond }het which
may originate in the experience of the subordinate offi-
cials in working a "new experiment"—to use the
terak applied to it by OW contemporary—we know of