FIRST READING. (Hansard, 13 May 1862)

§ MR. AYRTON
, in moving for leave to bring in a Bill to authorize the construction of tramways on turnpike roads and other roads in England, said, that power had already been given to the local authorities in Scotland and in Ireland for the construction of tramways there; but the measure he asked leave to introduce did not propose to confer such an extensive power as this. In London the tramways laid down had been found most inconvenient 1620 to vehicles using the same line of road; they were in fact railways sticking up in the middle of the roads; but the tramway which had been many years in use at the east end of London did not interfere with the ordinary traffic, and iron ways of a similar character might probably be devised. Such tramways would be of immense advantage both to agriculture and commerce, and would greatly reduce the draught of the carriages and their wear and tear. The Bill would enable the local authorities, where no objection existed, to consent to the tramways being laid down within their jurisdiction; and where any objection was raised on the part of any person occupying property in the parish, or using the road, the Court of Quarter Sessions would be empowered to examine into the objection, and if they disapproved of the project, it would not take effect. The power of the local authorities would be limited to a tramway which could not interfere with the ordinary traffic of the road; and every person would be at liberty to use it, on payment of a reasonable toll. No compulsory powers would be conferred by the Bill, which would be entirely of a voluntary character; nor should he ask the assent of the House to the measure until the details had been examined by a Select Committee; and if the House should consent to read the Bill a second time, he should move to refer it to such a Committee.

§ SIR JOHN SHELLEY
said, his objection to the Motion was removed by the declaration of his hon. Friend that it was ultimately his intention to refer the Bill to a Select Committee. But he could promise him that, in consequence of the experience they had already had of the effects of laying down tramways in the crowded thoroughfares of the metropolis, unless the metropolis were exempted from the Bill, it would meet with great opposition.

§ MR. DEEDES
said, he should have liked to hear who were to be the promoters of these tramways—whether they were to be executed by a company or by persons locally resident in different parts of the country? On the other hand, a provision which gave such a power to the local authorities would be viewed with much jealousy. In some instances, surveyors of highways had assumed a right to authorize the erection of electric telegraph posts, or interference with the road for one purpose or another. But the right to the soil of the road remained in the proprietors on 1621 either side: though the local authorities might have power to prevent it from being broken up, they had no inherent right in the soil. He should not oppose the introduction of this Bill, but it would require to be watched with great care.

§ SIR LAWRENCE PALK
said, he believed there were many parts of the country in which tramways would be found a great convenience by the inhabitants, while it would be an act of great humanity to provide the relief which they would afford to horses. He had no doubt that such tramways would be most beneficial to the whole country, and would in process of time prove; valuable feeders to the various lines of railways. For these reasons he hoped that leave would be given to bring in the Bill.

§ MR. AYRTON
said, the Bill did not contemplate the formation of any company, as it would be open to any one to lay down a tramway. Nor did it confer any authority upon local surveyors. In reply to the S remarks of his hon. Friend the Member for Westminster (Sir J. Shelley) he might observe that it was by no means necessary that tramways, if laid down within the metropolis, should be laid down in the same objectionable manner as those to which he had referred.