§ MR. HUMErose to move—
That in case of Bills for making, maintaining, varying, extending, or enlarging any Aqueduct, Archway, Bridge, Weir, Canal, Cut, Dock, Ferry, Harbour, Navigation, Pier, Port, Railway, Reservoir, Tunnel, Turnpike Road, and Water Work, and for all other works and inclosures on tidal lands within the ordinary spring tides, a general Plan showing the situation and approaches to the said Aqueduct, Archway, Harbour, &c, should be denoted upon a sheet or sheets of the Ordnance Survey, when published, or else upon Maps of an equivalent scale, and extending ten miles on each side; together with enlarged Plans and Sections of such parts of the works as are on the tidal lands within the ordinary spring tides, on a scale of not less than twenty feet to an inch, with the dimensions figured thereon, shall, on or before the 30th day of November, be deposited in the Board of Admiralty.As the law at present stood, the hon. Member 1221 said, no Bill for making, varying, extending, or enlarging any railway, harbour, bridge, canal, pier, tunnel, or other work, which should interfere with tidal water, would pass the House unless the Admiralty had signified their approbation. A great number of Bills, which would so interfere, were thrown upon the Admiralty at once, in the beginning of the Session, and it was quite impossible for the Board to make up their minds upon the several merits of those Bills without a careful examination. To make that examination, required considerable time, the Admiralty having no means of knowing the nature of the projected works until they were thus suddenly placed before them; and it would be as much for the benefit and convenience of the promoters themselves, as for the convenience of the Board of Admiralty, that the Board should have due time and opportunity to examine into the merits of the projects before they came before the House. For those reasons he wished that the plans and sections should be lodged in the Admiralty Office.
CAPTAIN BERKELEY, in supporting the Motion, said, that there was a very strong case in point illustrative of the necessity which existed for such an order. It was that of the Great Western Railway Company, which had proposed last year to cross the river Severn, over the tidal water, by means of a bridge. The Admiralty very properly opposed such an interference with the navigation of the river, and threw out the Bill; yet the Great Western Company, notwithstanding that defeat, had actually brought in another Bill, and were trying to get it passed, and the effect of it would be to cross the river by another bridge, not far removed from the proposed site of the former.
§ SIR G. COCKBURNsaid, that the proposal of the hon. Member for Montrose would obviate many inconveniences with regard to Bills proposing to interfere with navigable rivers.
§ Motion agreed to; as well as a Motion to compel promoters of Bills at present before the House, which would come under the action of the Standing Order just passed, to send copies of plans, sections, &c., without delay to the Admiralty.