HC Deb 30 May 1850 vol 111 cc456-7

MR. N. PATTEN moved for a Select Committee to inquire into the working of the Act 9th and 10th Victoria, cap 106. It would be remembered that an Act was passed in 1846 with a view of enabling parties promoting private Bills to come before the House at less expense to themselves, and in a manner likely to be loss inconvenient to Members, whose time it was supposed would be saved by local investigations being had. After some experience of the working of the Act, he was afraid no other conclusion could be come to but that the Act had entirely failed to effect its objects; but he was not asking the House to act upon his judgment, or upon the judgment of others whose advice would naturally be looked up to, but only to appoint a Committee to consider the subject. The opinion obtained for the House was always a one-sided opinion, and was often upset by the Committee, and the reports did not save the time of Members; a heavy expense was caused without any useful result. The part of the Act, however, which related to Admiralty inquiries in cases where harbours, tidal waters, or navigable rivers were interfered with, seemed very fit to be maintained.

Motion made— That a Select Committee be appointed 'to inquire into the working of the Act 9 & 10 Vic. c. 106, intituled, 'An Act for making preliminary inquiries in certain cases of application for Local Acts,' and the Act 11 & 12 Vic', c. 129, intituled, 'An Act for amending an Act passed in the ninth and tenth years of Her present Majesty, for making preliminary inquiries in certain oases of applications for Local Acts.'

MR. BERNAL

would not oppose the Motion; but he hoped the hon. Member was not prepared to say that no preliminary inquiry should take place in the case of private Bills. He would ask how it was possible that Committees on unopposed Bills could come to a proper know-ledge of the improvements necessary in a town or borough, without a preliminary inquiry. He agreed that there was at present much unnecessary expense, but he was sure there was an imperative necessity for ensuring a preliminary inquiry.

MR. SLANEY

considered that it was unnecessary that private Acts should be obtained whenever a town required to be improved or waterworks established, and such Acts should be done away with. At any rate why should not a single Act for all these purposes be passed at the end of every Session, on the principle of the Enclosure Acts?

MR. HEADLAM

said, that his constituents had suffered much by this Act, which had been most prejudicial last Session to a Bill with respect to the conservancy of the Tyne. The preliminary inquiries were always unsatisfactory, and as regarded opposed Bills the Act was most unreasonable.

MR. HUME

could only attribute the opinion formed by the hon. Member to his ignorance of the Act. The opinion of persons best qualified to judge on the subject had been taken before two Committees. The preliminary inquiries were a great advantage to the progress of private business.

SIR G. GREY

said, there could be no objection to the appointment of the Committee, and therefore perhaps it would be better to agree to the Motion, and reserve all statements until a future occasion.

Committee appointed.