It is not necessary to emphasise in any way the fact that something must
be done in the tidal Thames to bring the Port of London up to date, and
to maintain it as the great inlet of British commerce. What with numerous
newspaper articles, magazine reviews, reports of Royal Commissions and
others, and a general murmur of complaint from all persons who use the
port for their business or the river for traffic purposes, there have
recently been abundant evidences that things are not as they should be.
Everyone is agreed on this point, but when it comes to the question of a
remedy, there agreement ends and confusion begins.
_What is complained of._
And, first, to briefly catalogue the complaints from all sources. They
are as follows:—(_a_) Insufficient depth of water in the river for
the increasing size and tonnage of steamships. (_b_) Tide-waiting at
Gravesend and at the dock entrances, inward and outward. (_c_) Excessive
dues. (_d_) Vexatious restrictions owing to conflicting and overlapping
authorities in the river. (_e_) Excessive cost of barging, pilotage, and
labour in loading and discharging. (_f_) Loss of time at the port. (_g_)
Dangerous navigation, due to tides, bends in the river, narrow channel,
fogs, and the crowded state of the river. That these complaints are well
founded is generally admitted.
_Remedies Proposed._
The Royal Commission on the Port of London, the Board of Trade, as
representing the Government, the Thames Conservancy, the dock companies
and others recommend the deepening of the river by dredging as a remedy
for (_a_), and as a partial remedy for (_b_) and (_f_). As to (_c_) no
remedy seems to be proposed by either, but rather an increase of dues,
or in lieu thereof a charge upon the rates of London through the London
County Council.
Partly to amend (_d_) it is proposed by all the above authorities, except
the Thames Conservancy, that a Port Trust should be created to control
the river, instead of the present conflicting authorities of the Thames
Conservancy, Trinity House, the City Corporation and the Watermen’s
Company.
But as to (_e_) there is no suggestion of amendment, nor is it expected
that the proposed deepening of the river will materially improve the
dangerous navigation (_g_).
_Port of London Bill, 1903._
The Government has sought to give effect to the Report of the Royal
Commission on the Port of London in this Bill, which reached the stage of
Committee of the whole House, and was then suspended till next Session
(1904).
But as there were seventy petitions presented against the Bill, and a
large number of amendments stand on the notices for Committee of the
whole House, it may justly be concluded that the Bill satisfies no one,
and that the attempt of the Government to force it through the House
by stifling discussion of most of its vital points in Committee was a
flagrant violation of public rights, and will have a disastrous effect on
the future settlement of the question.
_Dockisation the True Remedy._
In 1755 Smeaton proposed the dockisation of the River Clyde as a means
of providing a sufficient depth of water for the increasing trade of the
Port of Glasgow. His plan was rejected, and the Clyde Trustees have since
expended £7,430,000 in dredging and improving the river to a low-water
depth of 20 ft., and now spend annually a large sum in maintaining this
depth.
Thos. Howard proposed the dockisation of the Avon at Avonmouth in 1877
to provide a sufficient depth of water for vessels passing to the
Bristol Docks up and down the Avon, there being a rise and fall of tide
in the Severn of nearly 40 ft. His proposal was not adopted because the
extraordinary range of tide would have left the entrance unapproachable
at low water, causing delay in the Severn Channel.
Messrs. L. Murray and W. C. Mylne recommended the dockisation of the
River Wear in 1846, but this was not carried out.
The Czar of Russia has recently approved a great dockisation project,
consisting of a dam with locks and sluices across the Straits of Kertch,
in the Black Sea, to raise the level of the Sea of Azov for the purpose
of facilitating navigation to the port of Taganrog and the River Don. The
Sea of Azov will then become a fresh-water lake, with an increased depth
of water (14½ ft.) and an area of 10,000 square miles. The dam will be
nine miles long, and is estimated to cost £5,000,000.
There is, however, no actual instance of the dockisation of a tidal river
from which any data can be obtained.
[Illustration: Fig. 1. THE UPPER THAMES.