Evening public ledger. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1914-1942, 1917-03-08
PLANS FOR CAMDlNj
HARBOR OPPOSHn
Board of Trade Commits.
Makes an Adverse
Report
SPIRITED DEBATE ENSIlFs
Commission Not Expected 5
Give Much Weight to De.
rogatory Comment
SPIRITED DEBATE ENSrlp0

Camden's Board Of Trade heard -.
from its river and harbor committs. MI
adverse to the plans of the hsrbor co,r,ssqy ]
sion FOR the development of Spruca ss...-
wharf at cost of SSs5.COO. H
Following the report there was a.,
tempt TO refer the Board of Trade. r...'.S
to Mayor Ellis and Councils for con.,Sss..' 4
ton, but this llan was defeated whsr n
dlssehtIng member OF the Board of Trndxs
committee quoted the law which decI, =
that Councils may only consider r.os.s
mendations OF the Harbor Commission A.
ruling out the recommendations Of n.
boards committee
The debate was spirited. especIa,,v =.
tween Charles s. Boyer, chairman ~ n.
boards committee, and George M n
Bradley. a member of both the corn,,,
tee and of the harbor commission Tr
latter body was created by State act u,
Bradley was the dissenting member Of N.
committee. ~.
The derogatory nature of the Roara VI
Trade committees report was somewhst
or a surprise because the executive ~
mittee of the board had approved the N 4.
of the commssion. There was soma ~.
OF politics having place In the report
This talk comes from the former preaenx.
on the harbor commission of Mr. Bovsr
now chairman of the board COMMITTEES. m
falled recently of reappointment to NJ.
commission. His report today was sirn5x.
by George NJ Beringer, James Buckslee
William j. Cooper. Walter Wood N
FRANCIS b. Wallen, president of the Board
Of Trade. -
On the Harbor Commission besides M
Bradley are Benjamin Maloney John Miller
and Charles S. Wolverton. They will INV
get the Board of Trade committees report
before 1t can be considered by Councils and
It is,. therefore. thought the Board of Trade
document will have little influence with
Councils, for only the commission and not
any committee is allowed to make any re.
concentrations to that body.
The Board of Trade committee declared
among other things that the Harbor Com
missions plans are 'unwse and unbus
nessike"
1t points out that the proposition is too
big Tor the present shipping facilities in
camden, that sea-gong vessels drawnE
over twenty-five feet could not reach the
wharves. that it exceeds anything Philadel.
pha has yet attempted in the matter Of
dock Improvement and that the cost on the
investment would be about $40 per capItA
as compared with a per capita outlay OF IS
in Philadelphia ts~ n
The proposed plans of the Harbcr Cons
mission call for the construction OF two
wharNes at the foot of Spruce street. DEL
aware River. Camden. on property owned
by the city one of which, pier A, would be
326 feet wide, and the other. pier B, sew
enty-hve feet On the wider pier II Is pro-
posed 10 erect two three-story warehouVad
ABOUT 100 feet wide by $50 and $50 fs<t
respectively in length, and between theee
Two buildings would be a driveway sixty
feet in width.
To the east of these sheds It is proposed
to have railroad yard with accommods.
tons for twenty freight cars and a small
freight house The smaller pier. would be
an uncovered structure, with two railroad
t1acks on the southery side, but without
any other freight handling facilities. The
capacity of the warehouses would be 200.
900 cubic feet. a.