Court Of Common Council.
The Times, 1824-05-04T00:00:00

Yesterday the Court assembled for the despatch of business, at tvwo o'clbck. SETTLERS AT THE CAPE OF GOOD HOPE. Alderman THoxiPsox presented a. petition from several gentle. men forminI a committee for relieving tile distresses of the settlers at the Cape of Good Hope, prayirig that the Court would be nlased to grant themr some pecuniary assistance, to enable them to eflect the object wbich they had in view. The worthy alderman said a few words in supoort of the petition. On the motion that the petition be referred to the committee of general purposes, Sir C. HrUrTEn observed, that the settlers at the Cape were in a niostdistressed state, and he trusted the corporation would extend their bounty to them.-The petitioni was then referred to the committee. ST. CAT1rERItNE'S DOCK. Alderman- Sir C. HUNTER presented a report fromn the Bridge- house Committee,recommending that the Corporation should petition against the St. Catrierilie's Dock bill, and the South London Dock bill, on the ground that the pronosedI docks were not wanted, and would be injurious to the Bridgte-house prop. rty. The wor- thy alderman-moved tliAt the report be received. fle coi-n plained that the bill before Parliament for creating the St. Catherine's dock contained no provision for granting compensation to those persons who would be injuired by the measure. He believed that the scheme wouid prove ruinous to thoce wvho embarked in it. The proprietors of the London Docks could now. after all the trouble and a:nxiety which they had undergonc, obeln only iA per cent on their capital. A IslEstnR hoped; that the bill would not be allowed to pass through Parliament without a clause being introduced to grant com- pensation to those persons whose interests must be afbceted by the establishment of new docks. Ar. PACOC K, as a mcmber of the Bridge-house Committce, felt bound to say that the report was by no means unanimously agreed to. lf the Court should resolve to petition Parliament against tie bill, they would justify the taunt which had been recentlv thrown out against them-namely, that when any improvement was pro- p,osed, the citv was alwavs prepared to obiect to it. (HeTr.) Ar. RoiJSE opposed tbe report. He denied that the existing docks afforded sufficient accommodation to commerce. It was true, that when the W,est India Docks were built, compensation wms given to same individuals; but that was on account of some special privi- leges, and not as a general principle. (Hear.) If the new docks were not built, lie was certain that the West Inlia Companny would find it necessary to extend their docks; therefore the only question lwas, whether it was not better to have the additional accommoda- tion close to the citv's walls, than at a distance of five miles from them. He moved as an amendment " That the Court do agree with so much of the report only as relates to the South London Dock bill." Mlr. JJO'ES approved of the erection of new doclks, as calculated to be beneficial to the commercial interest. M1r. Alderman LuCAS thought that new docks were quite unne- cessary. Not half of the existing docks were occupied. Alr. DIxoN likewise disapproved of' the proposed new docks. He looked with great jealou'v at the schemes which had recently been set afloat by persons who had a superabunidance of money. MIr. Allderman BRoWssE followed on the same sile. Mr. Alderman TibompsoNx thought that the new dockis were ne- essary, in consequence of the great increase which had taken place in the import trade since thelast docks were built. The crowded State of the pool from Bi'lings,rate to Blackwall was a strong proof of this fact. Hfe was sorry to hear the loss wyhich theB3 ridge-house estates would sustain alleged as a reason for opposing the bill boefore Parliament. It did not become thc Corporation to oppose a great and national object on such ground. (Hear.) They ought to set an example of liberalitv, similar to that which had been displayed by the C,orporation of Liverpool, and which had been the chief means of raising that town to itc present eminence. It was a fact worthy of the consideration of the Court, that the import trade of Li-. verpool last year exceeded that of Ltondon. Alr. WELcsr declaimed vehemently against the erection of anY new docks; and during hisaddress the worthydeputy was repeated- ly called to oyder. i!lr. S31STH opposed the amendment; and llr. LEG supportedit. Theamendment was then carrinel by a show of hands. TIrE CITY'S DEBTS. Mr. FAVET.L presented a report from the Finance Committee, which set forth that Mr. Alderman Wood had given information, that an individual was willing to lend the corporation money at 4 pler cent., sufficient to enable uem to pav off all the holders of the city bonds, who wvere at present recciving interest at 5 per cent., and recommerding that the Court should petition Parliament for leave to bring in a bill to enable the corporation to borTow money at 4 per cent. ;fr. Favell sai l. thilat the plan, if carried into effect, would cause a saving of 6,0001. a-year. He moved that the re- port be received. Sir C. HUNTER thought that the discussion of suclt an im- portant question ought to be defcrred to another day, because suffi- cient notice had not been given of the intentiont to bring it *orrward. air. JA:MrEs said, that if the corporation were to adopt the scheme which had been propounded, they would be guilty of a breach of f,ith towards the holders of city bonds, who had lent them monev on the understanding that thei should not be paid off except out of l the funds aricing from the coal dutiesand the navigation tolls.(Hear.) Mllr. OLDHrAMr approved of the report. Mlr. Alderman WNroOD said, that he was aware the measure would be unpopular in that Court, because many of the members were holders of city bonds, but that considefation should notprevent him from performing his duty. The plan which the report recominended had been submitted to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and had re- ceived the approbation of that riglt hon. gentleman. There was no wish to deal hardly with the citv bond-holdlers; and the petition to Parliament was framed so as to'permit them, as well as other indi- viduals, to lend the corporation money utt 4 per cent. The motion was then agreed to, and a petition, founded on the report, was drawn up, and ordered to be presented to the House of I Commons by the Sheriffs.-TheCourttben adjournedat five o'clock. COURT OF COMMO.YV COUNCIL.