The Roanoke times. [volume] (Roanoke, Va.) 1890-1895, 1891-09-08
COVENT GARDEN.
Tho Great Fruit and Vegetable Garden .
London.


Tho Great Fruit and Vegetable Garden of
London.
John, duke Of Bedford. had chance
to live in the memory OF his country
men as u public bcncfnctor as great MS
the carl OF Salisbury, and neglected it
for what? For the mistaken idea that
his market tolls were too valuable to DO
given up. have seen it stated since
his death. says n London letter to tho
Philadelphia Times, that he would havo
been willing to sell Covcnt Garden mar
llct if he could have found n local au-
thority to undertake. its responsibilities
and expense. But he knew very wei!
that his monopoly of market tolls would
some day or other be taken from his
family, and by nbolishing them himself,
by destroying Covcnt Garden market
and improving its site, he could have
added n more than compcnsativc amount
to the value of his other property. The
report of the royal commission on mar
kct right and tolls has just be en- pub
lishcd, and in reading 1t one learns
afrcsh how England is still ribbed
through and through with customs that
ought to be obsolete, and how weighty
with her is the example of q precedent
that ought never to have been set Be-
cause it was once held that grant to
hold n market was franchise carrying
an exclusive right, two of London's
chief markets, Covcnt Garden and
Spitalficlds, remain to-day in private
hands-thosc of the duke of Bedford
and Sir Julian Goldsmid respectively.
Covent Garden is, as is we'll known, the
great fruit, flower and vegetable mar
l1et, and it's owner can by law prevent
any other market from being estab-
lished within seven miles of him. It is
worth to the Bcdfords about fifteen
thousand pounds n year, and for Spital-
fields Sir Julian Goltls1nid gets five thou
sand pounds year rent from the pres
ent lessee.
The eight markets established or con-
trolled by the city of London-Binings-
gate, Smithfcld hay, the Central meat
and the Central fish, Faringdon, Lead
enhnll, the Islington cattle and the
Dcptford foreign cattle Notwithstanding
n yearly net profit of about twenty-five
thousand pounds sterling to their his
toric owner, all of which, of course,
goes into the pockets of the corpora
ton and is no benefit whatever to the
rest OF the metropolis. Through these
markets passes practically all the meat
and poultry supply of London and near
" all the fish, Thus, it will be seen,
through the Capitalization of markets
not only does the Londoner's dinner
pay what is almost equivalent to an
octroi, but before it gets to him it must
make long journeys across the city to
the central depots and back again. This
centralization is thought to be greater
evil than the imposition of tolls, and
probably it is So The commissions re-
port on the tolls is found to be n rather
unsatisfactory document. Its historical
treatment of the subject of markets is
all that could be desired, but 1t submits
no definite plan for correcting the pres
cnt system. y majority of the commits
sion does indeed favor compensation
upon the abolishing of the private fran
chiscs. But man need not be social
ist to feel that it is absurd to talk of
compromising the owner of a nuisance.
GoYcnt Garden market, in the light of
the needs OF modern Aondon, is not
only constructivcly but actually n
nuisance, and, considering that the only
vegetables you get in England after all
arc boiled potatoes and brussels
sprouts, u nuisance wholly without
justification il common sense.