The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1843-06-20 00:00:00

•
Total, •
Per ,„u
are
yard

tllt ":lttnlaration of ti iws here as
erect
tm
by t of
ri_4. le 1 e
of warehouses
to, Pattie 1 ate Warehouses, or expressed,
i►‘1111(1. '' "aVin` no public funds at their
.iti io 4, i. (,-, .
opportunely
t c'tt
Ile ~,,° foolish
whitcsies, we have very disposa
4,4% b:,7°4llectus Just issued, of " the s
of
‘v4iell ‘t, -e"
and W 'h
• ' '' in the estimate
N(1441. e hnd
the
,are rehouses," Hercula-
-225• per
1,54 e Yard
aacoi,t of the land put clown
ware-
It 4, with
.44 the erection of " 16 fire-proof
~ estimated
1,4 Nit r INlitigarld reservoirs complete,
'''"ve ()4 •
this into figures as
-nparot of
'we hi4ve '92°. Resolving
ti
for
1 ---
I,,Yar(4.
at62%:atehouses, say 6,720
ectiott
-8. . . . .
liciNt4,of la fire-proof .ware_ t with piping and reser-
'Siete

NOtt story w ____
arehouses, £2 per floor

£7,392 0 0

73,920 0 0

ii,(,' 4 til,
v 4 Ne -NC 114 t, 4 (ro Ot 2 per square yard; and taking
Ivis ,41 C the height is not stated) to be the size,
1i4,4t, tis 4fore,
_,)
,A`‘ th,,i L'eti, i,
t.` per floor.
NeeNtf t filch?'" obvious conclusion to be drawn
, N4t krtroio 'We are warehousing cotton, in
14ir one 4sesi in Liverpool at the present mo-
, LO4 , 4
oh per ale
tQt ' Illid i'ellltY p b ' '
vil kcif mr exist.
.....
Per week ; and this is re-
tii Il"bieb log system of imperfect classy?,
Nrharitel , lOore b
1), -1 ~ Oc , Ye and bye) to cover the rent
•.44 pe,, e -aro.
gotise
144,'ho„,hore yn., which have cost but two
-‘4l) f -"4 per floor. Need we ask any
et t the el. or two payit;illa suer
in simple arithmetic) what
Nw/ pg trice in a warehouse which has
`Vie
obviously, four times the

£81,310 0 0

~
%
4(1 qtll/1,41' be two, d
saving in
f4ttits.4et 14tters nt e
about;
but
it is perfectlytis
4414zi t°
44ppoe oi
the kind .
can reconcile 11
til
ti"itere
e t la"uch
Saving Competition to which
insurance
t
tit4tcl(sll,k WatePh4tleY. With
the
sed, it
ofis
marketquite
t
t4ie, -t th„
„,s,es must be
i.cr 4
...., ;tit he compelled te:Paccept
t compulsion, willcan
11,11:! ! 4 414-14, Y. Nothing, except
he
__
,41.:01. 4 h " to buy that for fourpence which_
would
11.:
till,
NvetnittleY; :411d i a complllsory fofurorPmeno:
portih!
Illtip -olt e„, r4e .11 tvare..ouslng
a
tltt.paterit :I[ll.Uitittee, therefore, must warehouse,
for the current There
ktt, . 444 iet
.418 y establishments,
willstand.
we
ttii.°l (11,
~ u tee then how they
Quays,
•
the fair
41; ei 15
llP.raetent btlikiings on the Albert
ehouses for which we suppose
about
t(ltl`koitio
be
eh ,
tly
)4,,fitt4t4,
,tbenarging those current rates,
with
co
e i i eatlOot, however,
ktt. thell4rtir letiki than four times those rates.
something
1 t 14r t.°l.e) 1° the (I k estate will be
eipts
‘ill, het 11101cired per ueer„.
von their reficgures.
r'ever, tre sall state our case in
consistently
The

There are; then, on the Albati Dock quays, 75 ware•

houses, For these say

75 warehouses, at £2OO each rental . . . £15,000
should be, to leave a profit upon their
cost, four times the rental, or

Loss, therefore, per annum

60,000

. . 45,000!

Now, we ask those gentlemen who are driving us
towards a further? plunge into a system of such out-
rageous waste, how soon the carrying out of their
views, under the direction of the gentlemen, who have
managed thus far the erection of our dock warehouses,
would beggar the estate whose funds they lavish so
freely upon this, their favourite hobby horse ? They
may tell us of " systems"—of insurances--of excellent
management ; but these last are nothing. Can they
disprove our figures ? 'We tell them that the figures
in question are THEIR OWN ! As to the cost of these
warehouses, they are condemned out of their own
mouths ! And we appeal fearlessly to our fellow-
townsmen for a reply to the question which we now
put—whether it is not rather their duty to pause and
watch closely the working of the warehouses already in
course of erection on the quays, than to remit that
breathing space of two years—which the legislature so
wisely allowed—and rush madly into a course of
which the issue is destruction to the best interests of
the port ?

We shall return to this subject. In the meantime,
we need scarcely remind any Liverpool merchant that
the security from fire, of which so much is said, and
the classification of merchandise which is so desirable,
are matters perfectly attainable in the warehouses of
private individuals, if we are willing to pay for them.
Let merchants, if they are anxious for security for
their goods, resort to the best constructed warehouses
already existing, instead of running, for a paltry saving
of a farthing or an eighth of a penny, to any old rotten
shell of building, in which proper stowage is impos-
sible, and the chances rather in favour of than against
combustion !

THE MANCHESTER GUARDIAN AND THE
WAREHOUSES OF LIVERPOOL.

The Manchester Guardian is not the most scrupulous per-
sonage in the world of journalism at any time; but, when he
has a point to gain from an opponent he is a terrible despiser
of every kind of hesitation with respect to the quality, or the
usefulness, of the instruments which he uses. In his advo-
cacy of the question of bonding warehouses in. Manchester,
for instance, not a stray piece of folly could drop from any
quarter, at all likely to serve his purposes, which was not
forthwith appropriated, and levelled against this poor port of
Liverpool; but if the folly in question was the perpetration
of any maddened Liverpool radical—however stupid—or:
could be tortured from the lips of any Liverpool Conserva-
tive, it was seized upon with an avidity, perfectly maniacal
in appearance. Need we wonder, such being the propensi-
ties of our contemporary, that during the past week he has
been i❑ a perfect ecstacy of delight with the opportunities,
which Liverpool merchants and Liverpool journalists have
afforded him, for the advocacy, at their expense, of his
favourite hobby ?

We are compelled, however, though reluctantly, to dispel
a few of the visions which he has embodied, or rather reduced
to type, in an article in his last publication. We shall,
therefore, to the best of our power, and as briefly as we can,
do this seriatim. First, then, in the article in question,
which is headed "Banding warehouses in Manchester—the
Liverpool warehouse owners," the Guardian remarks, that
" In consequence of the recent fires in Liverpool warehouses,
and the apparent apathy with which they are regarded in that
town, the London assurance offices had again increased their
rates ; so that, at present, the cost of insurance in Liverpool
becomes very nearly £2 per cent. ; whilst in London it is
2s. 6d., and in Manchester ss. per cent."
In reply to this statement we can inform our contemporary
that in Liverpool the rates of insurance are, upon a floating
policy, 355. ; and, for specific insurances, 275., 205., and 17s.
In Manchester, no doubt they have been ss. ; but we can
assure him, for his comfort, that the attention of the fire
offices having been drawn to this low rate, by the boastings
of the Guardian himself, (! !) the people of that great town
will have the pleasure of paying somewhat more for the
future. Already the rate on mills has been raised from lfis.
to 275.; and we fully calculate that the rate on warehouses
(which is now left open for future decision) will be at least
20s. per cent.

Upon the observations of the Guardian, with respect to
the warehouse owners, and their influence in getting rid of
the " Fire Prevention Bill," we shall only remark, with
every deference to the gentleman whom the Guardian very
aptly describes as "a Mr. Todd," that the warehouse owners
were not the parties, whose influence obstructed that bill.
The real party was one rather nearer to the dock warehouses,
so complacently regarded by our contemporary, than is very
generally understood.

After giving to his readers a quantity of the trash of his
Mr. Todd—of whom we make him a present—the Guardian
remarks upon the assertion of that gentleman, as to the high
charges for warehousing in this port ; and about some query
having been put to an insurance company as to the rate
which would be charged for insuring cotton in a " barn at
Fulwood." Now, first with respect to the " high charges."
The rate of a penny per bale per week is an extreme rate.
The average in Liverpool is three farthings ; and, Mr. Todd,
or any other importer of cotton, could at this moment con-
tract for the year round at three farthings. Large importers,
of which Mr. Todd is not one, never pay more than three
farthings ; and that rate is lower than is charged in any port
in the kingdom ! A penny farthing is the rate in London ;
and, with respect to the advancing rates of insurance upon
cotton in Liverpool, the rates are advancing every where.
And, now for this barn at Fulwood—where cotton it would
seem has been conveyed for greater safety—what does our
contemporary imagine was the reply of the insurance offices
to the question put to them with respect to it? Why, that
they would not insure it at any price !
As further excellent authorities, we observe that the Guar-
dian has got hold of some letters and statements, which have
appeared in the columns of a contemporary, who deals very
frequently in mare's nests, and other equally valuable dis-
coveries. Of course we need not say that we refer to the
Liverpool Times. We shall not trouble ourselves with the
Liverpool Times, or his correspondents, except to quote the
following, which we give entire, with a few remarks in reply.
The writer, who signs the initial C., states that—

" It is a fact, that 1,000 bales of cotton may be removed
direct from the ship to Manchester, warehoused and insured
there for twelve months, and then returned to Liverpool, at
less cost than the same can be warehoused and insured in
this town. This is not stated as a supposition, but on a
basis formed for a real transaction, which will probably be
carried out by the party, and perhaps hereafter extensively
imitated. if any thing be yet necessary to show the dis-
graceful state into which we have fallen here, it is thus
furnished
1,000 bales Mobile cotton, 220 tons, value £B,OOO.
If warehoused in Liverpool—

Rent Id. per bale per week, 4s. 4d.
1 year's insurance £B,OOO at 355. and 3s. duty.. 152 0 0

£368 13 4

If deposited in Manchester—
Carriage up, 10s. per ton, 220 tons..
Carriage back, Bs. 4d. per ton
1 year's insurance there, only sa. and 3s. duty.. 32 3 0
Rent as agreed in this instance for 12 mouths.. 125 2 6

£358 15 10
There are no other charges whatever, by agreement, in
Manchester, and every facility afforded. Probably, if very
large quantities of cotton should be warehoused in Man-
chester, the rate of insurance would be increased ; but the
increase would not be considerable, and most likely it would
be more than counterbalanced by a still cheaper arrangement
as to the rent charge. What will the warehouse owners say
to this, and the merchants and brokers. too ? threatensA as
they are with Manchester competition under a bonding
system. If the most efficient warehouse economy be not im-
mediately adopted, their crafts are in danger."
Now we beg to inform the Guardian what is the fact with
respect to those very 1000 bales of cotton, and the statement
given, which was " on a basis formed for a real transaction."
In the first place. then, the 1000 bales are at this moment
warehoused in Liverpool. They are not warehoused at id.
per bale, but at id. They are not insured at 355. per cent.,
but at 28s. Then, the insurance, which was to be done at
55., cannot be done at that price, but must be left open, and
will, in all probability, not be effected at less than 20s. To
make the affair more clear, however, we give our counter
statement as follows :

COST OF 1000 BALES OF COTTON, ACTUALLY WARE
ROUSED IN LIVERPOOL.
Rent 1000 bales, at id.
One year's insurance, at 28s. (not 35s )
and duty 3s. on £BOOO .. 124 0 0

Total cost on 1000 bales in Liverpool

286 10 0

COST OF 1000 BALES WAREHOUSED IN MANCHESTER.
Carriage up
Carriage back
One year's insurance (could not be as-
certained at present as the premium is
not yet fixed, but probably will be 20s) 92 0 8
Rent .. . 125 0 0

Total cost on 1000 bales in Manchester 418 13 4

Balance in favour of Liverpool.

£132 3 4

Let the Guardian compare one of those accounts with the
other, and then perhaps he may arrive at a different conclu-
sion to that which he appears to have arrived at from a hasty
adoption of the mare's•nests of our friend over the way, and
his correspondent, C.

MOST ATROCIOUS ACT.-At the Llandovery (Carmarthen-
shire) Petty Sessions on the 9th instant, two men were
charged and committed for trial for feloniously killing 27
slieep,•the property of John Joseph. of Penyrallt, in the parish
of Llanddausaut.—John Joseph stated the sheep were his
propetity, and were grazing with others on the Black Moun-
tain. They were taken up on the 6th instant, all dead, from
the river Usk; their eyes were beaten out, and their horns
knocked off their heads.