HC Deb 06 May 1830 vol 24 cc450-3
Lord Belgrave

said, he had a Petition to present, which he thought was entitled to the attention of the House. It was from the inhabitants of the parish of St. Paul, Covent Garden. The petitioners complained of the present very inadequate communication between the northern and southern parts of the Metropolis, which was confined to Chancery-lane, a narrow and crooked street quite unfit for a great thoroughfare; and they suggested that the opportunity which the destruction of the English Opera-house presented, should be taken to open a street opposite Waterloo-bridge, for the purpose of affording the necessary public accommodation. He trusted that the noble Lord opposite (Lord Lowther) would attend to the suggestions of the petitioners.

Mr. Hobhouse

said, that the improvement recommended by the petitioners would be productive of great public advantage, and he trusted it would be carried into effect. He understood that applications had been made to the noble Lord opposite and to Government on the subject, and that no difficulties had been raised by them to the proposition, provided Parliament would give its sanction. There was a very natural objection in the first instance to appropriating the public money to measures of the kind, as such heavy expenses had been already incurred for other improvements; but he was sure, that if Parliament voted a sum for this purpose, the new buildings in the projected street would soon return enough to repay it.

Lord Lowtther

was not disposed to deny that great public ad vantage and convenience would arise from making the proposed street, and the only difficulty seemed to be as to the party who should bear the expense of the projected improvement. The funds placed at the disposal of the Commissioners of Woods and Forests were forestalled for several years, so that they could not contribute to the work. He believed that the days of prejudice had gone by, and that there was one general opinion in favour of improvements, such as were now in progress at Charing-cross. But it was to be recollected, that the improvements which had been made in Regent-street, and which were in progress at Charing-cross, were upon Crown property, and that the proposed line of street in this instance would not be upon property belonging to the Crown. The Crown property in Regent-street actually returned at present 2½ per cent. and he was sure the improvements at Charing-cross would be equally profitable to the Crown. The property here, however, did not belong to the Crown; it was not, therefore, for the department over which he presided, more than any other, to interfere with regard to the proposed improvement. There was a small portion of Crown property just contiguous to it, and he believed that some of the houses in the line of the improvement could be exchanged for it, at a cost of about 2,000l. Indeed, he thought that for 20,000l. the intended improvement, could be carried as far as the Duke of Bedford's property. It lay with Parliament to decide as to the suggested mea- sure, and whence the funds for it were to be derived.

Sir J. Yorke

had given notice of his intention to present a Petition on this subject to-night; but as it was before the House, he might as well take that opportunity to state the opinion of the proprietors of Waterloo-bridge with respect to it. The House was aware that upwards of 1,000,000l. had been expended on Waterloo-bridge, for which a very trifling return indeed was now made by that property. The money bonds undoubtedly returned five per cent, but the shares did not return 1½ per cent. The original shareholders, besides, had been completely cleaned out,—to speak in the modern phraseology, they had been totally "done." If the noble Lord, therefore, expected that the proprietors of Waterloo-bridge would do any thing towards effecting this improvement, he had a very good chance of being disappointed. It Gentlemen would but enter the door of the theatre, they would see a large space, which had been occupied by buildings, burnt down, as if done by a great operation of nature for the purpose. If he wished to make Gentlemen perceive still more fully the necessity of making this great avenue to the north of London, he would take them to Waterloo-bridge, and make that structure his advocate for that purpose. The building of that Bridge had created a great list: in all the property adjacent to it. It had increased the value of the Crown property, and also that of the Duchy of Lancaster, and had raised that of the See of Canterbury from 500l. to 5,000l. a year. It had also been of great benefit to the Excise; for the stonemasons, who, during its construction, had earned 25s. a week, expended, to his personal knowledge, full half of it in swizzle. He would also give another reason why the House should listen favourably to the prayer of this Petition. On the 29lh of June, 1815, the House resolved to address the Prince Regent, for the erection of a national monument, in honour of the officers and soldiers who had fought at the great victory of Waterloo; and on the 30th of June the Prince Regent replied to that Address, by stating, that he would give such directions as the House required. The only monument of that victory, however, which had been yet erected, was Waterloo-bridge. That circumstance ought, he thought, to weigh with the House, for the Bridge was a national monument, displaying the highest skill; and he was afraid that the victory was not likely to be commemorated by any other equally splendid monument. The public convenience would be much promoted by making the proposed new street, but the company which had erected that Bridge had no funds to execute it, nor had the Commissioners of Woods and Forests, whose funds for sometime were forestalled. The expense would not exceed 120,000l.; and he trusted that the House would see the necessity of facilitating an opening to the north of the Metropolis, which would conduce at once to the ornament of the town, and to the health of its inhabitants.

Sir James Graham

observed, that as the noble Lord opposite had said the funds belonging to the Woods and Forests were forestalled for some time to conic, he hoped that part of them were set aside for the repayment of the 250,000l. which had been taken from the sum set aside by the French government for the indemnification of British claimants. Seeing the Chancellor of the Exchequer in his place, he would take that opportunity of asking him whether he was prepared to inform the House if he had formed any plan to appropriate that sum of 250,000l., which had been grossly misapplied, to the claimants upon it who were yet unsatisfied?

The Chancellor of the Exchequer

said, that he did not expect to have been questioned, upon presenting a petition relating to Waterloo-bridge, about arrangements which had sprung out of the Treaty of Paris. He would at present simply state, that he hoped in a short time to be able to submit a measure to Parliament, for the purpose of carrying into effect some such measure as his hon. friend contemplated.

Lord Lowther

felt as strongly the necessity of repaying this sum as the hon. Baronet; and, as a proof of it, stated, that within the last few weeks they had paid on account of it a small sum into the Treasury: when circumstances permitted the whole would be paid.

The Petition to be printed.