LEAVE. FIRST READING. (Hansard, 1 March 1870)

§ MR. SHAW-LEFEVRE
, in moving for leave to bring in a Bill to facilitate the construction and to regulate the working of Tramways, said, the House would not require excuse from him for bringing before them the subject of tramways. Hon. Members must be aware that there were before them numerous Private Bills asking powers to lay down tramways in the streets of our principal towns. In all, there were twenty-seven companies asking for such powers over 515 miles of road, with a capital of £4,000,000. For London alone there were seven companies seeking these powers over 125 miles in some of the most important streets; while others had in contemplation systems of tramways for Manchester, Liverpool, Birmingham, Leeds, Glasgow, Portsmouth, and Plymouth. Now, previous to this year, as far as he was aware, only six private Acts had been passed authorizing tramways. Of these, three companies had obtained powers to lay down and work tramways in London south of the Thames. Tramways had also been established, and were now at work, in Liverpool, Birkenhead, and Salford. Those in London were not yet complete; that at Liverpool had been at work for some months, and was in every way a success. Those for London were authorized last Session after a most careful inquiry before a Committee presided over by his hon. Friend the Member for North Hants, and although an attempt had been made to show that the Committee authorized the making of those tramways as an experiment, he was assured by his hon. Friend that that was not the case, that the Bills were passed on their own merits, and under the full belief, founded upon the evidence, that they would be a success, and would be a great convenience to the public; and if anyone would take the trouble to read through the evidence 1081 adduced before the Committee as to the working of tramways laid on the improved principle in most of the leading, cities of Europe, and particularly at Berlin, Vienna, Brussels, Copenhagen, Geneva, and other places, to say nothing of their universal use in America, he could not fail to come to the conclusion that in proper places, in streets which were suited for them, they were most desirable, and a great convenience to the public. The evidence, indeed, seemed to him to establish that the more crowded a street was, and the greater the traffic of all kinds, the more useful and important was the tramway, subject only to this, that the street was wide enough to afford room for other carriages to pass on both sides of the tram. Subject to that, the tramway appeared to have the effect of regulating the traffic by sending it in straight lines, and by affording relief to all those vehicles which, although not fitted with flange wheels, could use the rail with their ordinary wheels. There could also hardly be a doubt that safety was insured by this regularity, and also by the easy means of stopping the cars by break power. Of the economy in horseflesh, and of the greater comfort to passengers in the tramway car, it was really unnecessary to speak, the only point open to doubt was the possible ill effect on private carriages of the rail protruding above the level of the street; but the rail now being laid down in London, and which was laid at Liverpool, was not open to the same objection on this score as that laid by Mr. Train some years ago, and which was universally condemned. It was, doubtless, in view of these facts, that the numerous Bills now before Parliament had been promoted, and he thought it was impossible to deny that tramways in certain streets or roads were not only desirable but inevitable, and that the question in what street or road was one of degree and of public convenience. In fact, it appeared to him that the principle of tramways must be admitted, and that the only questions were by whom they were to be made, what control local authorities were to have power over them, subject to what terms as to fares and dividends and repurchase by local authorities, and to what streets or roads they were suitable. He believed the opposition to these Bills would not be against their principle; but 1082 on the part of local authorities to the effect that they did not wish to part with the control over their streets, and that they were prepared themselves to undertake the task of laying down and repairing the tramways in the streets, and of letting them on lease to private omnibus companies on charging tolls for the use of them. He had received deputations during the last few days from the municipal authorities of Manchester, Leeds, Birmingham, Salford, and Stockport, to that effect, praying that they might be allowed the opportunity of making tramways themselves. There were also a variety of other questions affecting tramways—such as the relation of the companies (if they were to be made by companies) to the road authorities, the conditions under which other persons were to be permitted to use the trams, and the terms on which the local authorities were to have power to purchase—which required considerable care and consideration. Those questions were all more or less dealt with by the Committee of last Session, and for the most part the clauses inserted in the Acts appeared to be reasonable and proper; some of them, however, and particularly that as to purchase, seemed to him to require reconsideration. The clauses inserted in the Acts of last year had all been copied in the Bills now before Parliament, and it would, of course, be possible to send all these Bills to Committees, subject to the chance of conflicting decisions and imperfect inquiry which attend such inquiries. But it had seemed to the Board of Trade that the present was an occasion which might never occur again, for laying down, after due and careful inquiry, the general conditions under which these tramways might be made, by whom to be made, repaired, and worked. They were at the commencement of a great movement in favour of tramways, and if they neglected this opportunity, it might never recur. The questions he had alluded to were also independent of the more narrow question whether the streets or roads indicated for tramways in the particular Bills before the House were such as were reasonably suited for that purpose, and ought, therefore, to be discussed and determined apart. In this view, then, it had seemed to the Government better that the general questions of policy, whether local authorities should be per- 1083 mitted to make tramways, and what should be the conditions of working them, and, if by companies, what should be the terms of concession, should be discussed and determined before the Bills now before the House were proceeded with. He had therefore prepared a measure dealing with these questions, so far as it had appeared proper to the Board of Trade, and if the House approved, he would propose to refer this Bill to a general Committee, and in the meantime to suspend further proceedings in respect of the Private Bills. The Bill which he should lay before the House would propose three methods of making tramways. Under the Bill local authorities might obtain the consent of the Board of Trade to make tramways themselves, and having made them, to charge tolls for the use of the same, or lease them to companies subject to conditions to be laid down in the Bill; or they might obtain a certificate from the Board of Trade for making the lines, and, having done so, grant a concession for making them to a private company; or, thirdly, companies might, with the consent of the local authorities, obtain a certificate for making tramways, In all cases the certificate issued by the Board of Trade must be laid before Parliament (as was now the case under the Railways Construction Facilities Act), and would not be valid until six weeks after so being laid before Parliament. Parliament would, therefore, have the opportunity of considering the merits of any scheme, should it be thought desirable. Another portion of the Bill would contain all those clauses which appeared to be desirable for the purposes of regulating the working or use of tramways, and, in the case of companies executing or purchasing the works, would lay down the terms on which local authorities would have power, after twenty years of purchase. He might mention here that the clause for purchase under the Acts of last year appeared to him to be so drawn as really to make it impossible for any local authority to carry it out. They included in the purchase-money to be given for the undertaking not only the value of the tramway and of all the property and premises of the company, but also goodwill and prospective profits. In the clause which he should submit goodwill and prospective profits would be excluded, the local authorities would 1084 have the right to purchase after twenty-one years, on payment of the actual value of the tramway and the other property of the company necessary for working the same. The only question which could arise upon this was whether capital could be raised upon such terms. He could not, for his part, doubt that it would, the more so as he had inserted no limitation of dividend in the interval, and no compulsory lowering of fares. Another point in which they had thought it right to make a change was to the effect that all companies obtaining certificates should be registered as ordinary joint-stock companies, so as to avoid the complications and difficulties similar to those which now attended railway companies under their private Acts. It was not, however, necessary that he should go at length into these clauses, the less so as he proposed to refer the consideration of them to a Committee. It would be seen that although they pointed out the means of obtaining powers to make tramways, which would avoid the expense of Parliamentary applications and contests before Committees, yet they did not propose to shut out the access to Parliament to those who might think proper to resort to this process, and there might be cases in which it might be the more desirable course; but in such cases, if they obtained Private Acts, they would be subject to the clauses of the general Bill, in the same way as Railway Bills were subject to the Railway Clauses Act. Now, although the Bill would give power to local authorities to construct tramways—but not, of course, to work them—yet he believed that, as a general rule, they might look forward to the tramways being constructed rather by companies than by municipal authorities; but there was a process under this Bill, which he had already alluded to, which he thought might with advantage be resorted to by municipal authorities, who wished to have the general control over the laying down. It was that which would enable local authorities to apply to the Board of Trade for a certificate for tramways upon a general system within their district, and, having obtained the necessary powers, to sell or lease the concession to a company or companies. Under this provision a corporation would have the power to lay down a general plan for tramways, and 1085 then to offer it as a whole or in sections to competition. The consent of the Board of Trade would be necessary for any such transaction, and the principle to be acted upon in such cases appeared to him not that very great profits should be made by the ratepayers, but that the public should gain as much as possible by lowering the fares. He did not think that profit should be made by local authorities out of tramways at the expense of the general public, for whose use they were intended, and more good was to be arrived at by lowering fares than by reducing local rates. This was a principle which was not laid down in the Bill, but would be left to the Board of Trade to carry out in its application of the Bill. In conclusion, he had only to repeat that he proposed to lay this Bill before a Select Committee constituted with special reference to this important subject, and to whom full opportunities would be afforded of discussing these clauses and amending them if the Committee should think fit; and, in the meantime, he should ask the House to suspend the second reading of the Private Bills now before them. The hon. Member concluded by moving for leave to bring in the Bill.

§ MR. PEASE
expressed his cordial approval of the course proposed by the Vice President of the Board of Trade, and his belief that if such a plan had been in existence last year, the tramways now in course of construction would not have been laid down in the way they were now being laid down.

§ MR. SCLATER-BOOTH
observed, with respect to the Bills passed last year, that the vestries of the parishes through which the tramways passed were unanimous in their approval of them. But he thought the hon. Gentleman had exercised a wise discretion in introducing the present measure. He did not think that in respect of tramways London stood on all-fours with any other town. He did not believe it would be expedient to construct tramways in the crowded thoroughfares of the metropolis. Last year the Committee appeared to take that view; for, as regarded the metropolis, it confined the tramways to certain open roads. The rights of the owners of frontages on the streets through which the tramways passed would have to be considered. The effect of the Bills of last Session was that one-third of the repairs of the roads was to be undertaken by the companies 1086 constructing the tramways, and the vestries, naturally enough, agreed not to oppose these Bills, without any regard for the rights of others. It should also be borne in mind that those who advocated the tramways were the people who now travelled in omnibuses, whereas a large number—he supposed the majority—travelled in cabs and private carriages. The scheme would work well in other towns; but the difficulty of carrying these tramways through the crowded thoroughfares of the metropolis would be very great. He trusted that the means of removing this difficulty would be found in the Bill.

§ MR. LOCKE
said, he thought a Bill of this nature was absolutely necessary. Many of the tramway schemes of last year were very objectionable from the fact that they were intended to run along thoroughfares on the other side of the river, which were very narrow; but he was glad that, tinder the present scheme, that would not be the case. One thing which would need to be looked after was as to whether the tramways should run along the centre or along the sides of the streets, and it would be very objectionable to allow them to run along the sides. The coal merchants and others were very anxious that they should not be laid down at the sides of the streets, as their waggons would then be unable to draw up close to the foot-pavement, and it would be impossible to deliver coals and other heavy goods. Many of the tramways authorized under the legislation of last year were not yet completed or near completion, which was somewhat extraordinary considering that last year legislation was pressed forward on the ground that not a moment should be lost in carrying out the scheme. It was said that Train's tramways were a complete failure; but it was not yet known from experience whether the tramways authorized last Session would be more successful or not. If tramways could be laid down in wide thoroughfares, it should be on the outskirts of the metropolis, and not in the heart of this great city. A tramway along Oxford Street, for instance, could not fail to be a nuisance instead of an improvement. It would be very desirable, before any decision was given by the vestries, that they should see one of these tramways in a working state, with the carriages in motion.

§ MR. W. H. SMITH
, on behalf of his constituency, tendered his thanks to his hon. Friend for the measure he had introduced. The greatest care, however, would be necessary in laying down these tramways in the crowded streets of the metropolis. Some alarm had been expressed by the owners and occupiers of frontages in streets like Oxford Street at the prospect of the road on both sides the street being occupied by tramways. The Bill would be a boon to the metropolis, in so far as it would prevent the necessity for vestries appearing before Committees of that House in the case of every separate Tramway Bill. This would be avoided by placing tramways, as now proposed, under a general Act. It must be remembered that a great part of the traffic of the metropolis was slow traffic, and it would be necessary to give facilities for the slow as well as the rapid traffic, otherwise great injury would be inflicted on the mercantile interests of the metropolis.

§ MR. AYRTON
said, he thought the metropolis would be better protected by the arrangements of this Bill than they could be in any other way. His belief was that the interests of the ratepayers would be promoted by the Bill, and that much public money would be saved by it. When the Bill went before the Select Committee after its second reading he had no doubt it would be adjusted so as to give general satisfaction.