WEST INDIA DOCK COMPANY. (Hansard, 27 February 1821)

Mr Marryat
rose to present a Petition from the merchants of London against the renewal of the charter of the West India Dock Company. The hon. gentleman addressed the House upon the impolicy as well as injustice of continuing, in an enlightened age like this, such monopolies, which were at once injurious to commerce and to the revenue of the country. He entered into a detail of the many inconveniences and evil consequences to trade generally, and to the trade of London in particular, resulting from the very high rates charged by this company.

§ Sir Isaac Coffin
observed, that there never appeared to be much friendship in trade. Each merchant sought his own interest, monopoly was the order of the day amongst them, and beggar my neighbour the object.

Mr. F. Lewis
animadverted on the abuses which crept into establishments of this nature, through the inattention of the legislature to the precise enactments which they sanctioned. By a clause introduced into the act for the renewal of the East India Company's charter, private traders were admitted into the East India Docks.

Mr. Robinson
said, it was undoubtedly the duty of the House to watch with peculiar vigilance the tendency of any measure which involved private interests as well as the great commercial interests of the country. There were other docks which had charters, having a longer period to run than the West India; it would be inexpedient, therefore, to make any declaration of the views of government as to the renewal of the charter of this company, until the whole question, as it respected those several charters, had been taken into consideration.

Mr. Baring
said, the question was one which was intimately connected with the economy of trade. It was a fact, that the establishment of these dock companies, though it was at first a sort of experiment, had proved of the greatest public utility. When they were first established, it was impossible to know how far the rates would or would not afford a sufficient compensation for the capital employed; but now that it had been ascertained that they had greatly exceeded such a compensation, it was an important question for parliament to determine, whether the charters should be renewed. The charter was granted to the West India company, with a restriction that they were never to divide more than 10 per cent. The obvious inference was, that if the rates exceeded such a sum as would afford a dividend of 10 per cent, they were bound to reduce them. They had, however, done no such thing. Instead of reducing the rates, they had, accumulated a sum of no less than 500,000l. Prudent men would not incur the, responsibility of dividing so large a sum among the stock-holders, for such a division without the sanction of an act of parliament would be illegal.

Mr. Gordon
said, he had heard that 500,000l. had been offered to be placed at the disposal of the government, as a bribe for the renewal of the charter.

Mr. Robinson
assured the hon. member, that no sum had been offered to be placed at the disposal of government.