New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1865-10-07

they would afford for loading and unloading vea.A
would be superior to the present SLOW cambrous saA
expensive arrangements that tho expense of
ing business would be less than IL ID now Even I'm
were not 20. the inference 10 that pintcnfbs Of hin
owners would TO pay srse advance in order y
obviate the inconvenent and frequent ruinous dc,sys
which at present cause so much complaint among them
Another important consideration Is that the fee q
the land which the present piers are built beonss
TO the Statc-he City having for erecting over this
land the present structures. the privilege Of COLLECTING
rates Of wharfage which pledged Tor The psyreut
OF the interest upon the city debt But the expeusss
incurred by keeping the piers in repair. dredging ~
tween them etc., great and the rates Of wharfage
so low that the piers, instead Of being source Of
revenue TO the city. are an expensive membranes.
Certainly this should be otherwise ard the projectors
OF the new plan are confident Of ability to effect an e.
during and beneficial change. o. t--- Wv "
The difficulties which the Company have had 10 q,
counter have been Of that character which has dis
tinguished the introduction Of all great improvements
of this nature and which so srikngIy promineas
in the history Of the London docks those stupendoas
monuments Of commercial enterprise which were bqih
by private enterprise and capital
That system OF docks first agitated In the Hoass
Of Commons in 1896 and involved the seizure the use
of the private company by which they built of the
ancient properties and franchises Of the City Of Loa-
don and the private property Of individuals
large bodies of land under water. closing up an syas
out streets tearing down whole blocks and sausrsa
embracing 2 200 teneneDts; destroying vast properties
aud valuable privileges. constituting old & iny sss.is-
ments endowments Of charitable and ed ucs;onal ns
tutions including the University OF s1ford.
All these imperiIed interests made powerful and Der
sstent opposition to the efforts of the company to -
cure the adoption of the present system of docks sos
London. Foremost among these opponents was ~
City Of London. represented by its Lord Mayor :. High
the House of Commons in pc: ff0n and reuop,r,,s.
against the incorporation Of the London Dock Con
setting forth:
First. That the city OF London. through its Mayor.
&c. was entitled TO the custody and control Of The
waters OF the Thames and tie wbaryes thereon
Second. That the city was entitled 10 all the pronb
and fees accruing from said wharyes.
Third That by the passage Of the bill the rights md
privileges Of the city would be invaded and the trade
and commerce Of the port would DO removed IRON ne
control of the citys agents.
FSurtE, That such removal wonld be not only vio-
laton Of he ancient rights and privileges OF the city
but also would be productive OF the most runous conse
ouences 10 divers incorporated societies and companies
as well to great number OF individuals acting N
der the authority OF the city.
iuD0a upon the commercial ,vnna9e of London.
S,rtA: That the city authorities have from time 70
time devised ard offered 10 execute plans :or increasing
the trade of London and were maturing plan then
Ssrenh That they had already secured an Act q
Parliament providing against the periis and delays =
tending the river by nayigable cut across lne As
Dogs and also for the appointment OF haroornis'ef
10 regulate the mooring and sta,ionng of vessels
EiQhth: That the bill i, unnecessary; Dut, III neces
sary the petitioners VIII maze the fea9es
hope thst the House will not encourage Trcaidsost
especially such are proposed by tue biu. WHOA
though not called for ~ any commercial necessity. 1
por-serously depreciate II not destroy. an immense
property consisting Of whaives warehouses; aud other
buildings connected with the water-side in and neas
the City Of London. and deeply violate the most an
cient corporate rights aud privileges OF the city.
The interests, however. which We have euumerate1
are only small portion Of those that were unfavorab
affected II not entirely destroyed. By the adoption
the present system of London DOCKS and remoa
strances were continually. persistenty made BY inAa
entail commissions corporations associations and In
dyidua proprieors representing those INTEREST," Bot
ut last after five years struggle and debate the CON
oany triumphed under the championship OF Sir William
Pitts and Parliament naugurated the system OF doOAs
upon which the grandeur and prosperity OF Lonoos
have so -reatly, we may say vitally. depended.
The following statement OF a writer on the supte~
will show the important light in which the suo'ecs "ss
then viewed
"Or suitable system OF docks and warehouses % /
peuds commerce. for O nation can no more secure W "
tain CONNIE rcal power without such sys0u ~
merchants can secure and transact their DusiHees
out stores and offices. Docks and warehouses arg w
snyo 65sfiess n.ees of a commercial State. whics
Sect a merchant whose wealth and power depend up's
tbe facility and dispatch it secures to commerce.
The Chief Engineer Of the Uuited States Army, NJ
others, appointed an Advisory Committee Of ~
Harbor Commission uader the Act of 1855 In commst
ing upon the opposition to the London Docks. says:
1T tasked all the resources OF the supreme intene
and power Of Mr. Pitt TO triumph over these obstscs
these docks upon the commercial prosperity OF Londoo
Without them her progress must have been seriously
inpeded il not positively arrested. They are the r.
centaces OF her trade Into them Is poured the wea
OF the world, which but To-. them. must have found
else where a place of deposit They are. indeed. ~
means as we'll the symbols Of the COMMERCIAL grsas
ness of the city,"
The revolution to be effected by the irod pissA
successfully carried ont mus: have far grauder 70
suits than those which effected by the institution
Of the London docks which. while they wers probably
the best system which could have been adopted thsrs
were by no means a novelty, but favorite mode
wharf structures in ancient cities. The strength, u
durability and the beauty OF the new system VIII rends
them adaptable to almost any port in the world VIII
the advantages which they present as q safeguAnl
against fire are manifest In the fact that all Of our ksE
ing insurance companies were petitioners for the
sage OF the bill incorporating the present Nsw.Ye
Pier and Warehouse Company.