HC Deb 28 June 1864 vol 176 cc415-7

Bill considered in Committee.

(In the Committee.)

Clauses 1 to 69 agreed to with verbal Amendments.

Clause 70 (Power to take Tolls for Moorings and for Lighters and Steam Tugs).

MR. ALDERMAN SALOMONS

said, that by this clause the conservators had power to levy a tariff and dues on all vessels from a boat up to a ship of the largest size. He objected to the lighters and steam tugs being made liable to a tax of this kind; and he therefore begged to move the omission of the words "lighters and steam tugs used on the river Thames."

MR. HUTT

said, he could not agree to the Amendment. The subject had been carefully considered by the Committee, and they determined that the clause should remain as it at present stood. The Committee appointed last year to inquire into the subject of the navigation of the Thames said, that no craft were more indebted to the labours of the conservators than the barges and lighters, and this clause had been introduced at the suggestion of the Committee.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Clause agreed to, as were also Clauses 71 to 74.

Clause 75 (Prohibitions of deepening or altering Sewers or Drains discharging into the Kiver).

MR. ALCOCK moved to insert proviso— Provided always, that nothing herein contained shall be deemed to apply to any legally authorized sewers, drains, or works, now in course of construction by the Local Board of Health for the district of Kingston-upon-Thames, and the connection of the houses in such district with the said sewers, drains, and works.

Amendment proposed, In page 25, line 4, after the word "condition," to insert the words "Provided always, That nothing herein contained shall be deemed to apply to any legally authorized sewers, drains, or works, now in course of construction by the mayor, aldermen, and burgesses of the borough of Kingston-upon-Thames, and the connection of the houses in such borough with the said sewers, drains, and works."—(Mr. Alcock.)

MR. HUTT

said, he had promised to agree to the Amendment, because it had been urged that the operation of the measure would act very unfairly upon the district, but he could not but confess he had done so with regret.

MR. LOCKE

said, he must resist the insertion of the proviso, because he regarded it as legalizing a nuisance. It was of little use to attempt the cleansing of that part of the Thames which ran through London, if towns above the metropolis were to be permitted to empty their filth into the river. If he went into the lobby alone, he would vote against the insertion of the proviso.

MR. LOCKE KING

reminded the House that when the Bill was introduced the clause before the House was not in it. Me thought such a clause ought not to be placed in a Thames Conservancy Bill, but ought to be embodied in a general Act dealing with the drainage of the towns upon the Thames. There was nothing in the preamble which warranted the insertion of the clause.

MR. THOMSON HANKEY

said, that as the Bill was one to protect the Thames from pollution, this clause was a reasonable one, and the insertion of a proviso which would have the effect of sanctioning the creation of a nuisance at Kingston-on-Thames was not at all justifiable. He should go into the lobby with the hon. and learned Member for Southwark (Mr, Locke).

MR. LOCKE

reminded the House that the Bill allowed Kingston-upon-Thames to go on with its present pollution of the Thames, and only enacted that no increased sewage was to be discharged into the river. He thought the proposition was a monstrous one, and not founded in justice or right.

MR. HEADLAM

thought that sewers legally in course of construction should share in the same exemptions as those already made, however objectionable the discharge of sewage into the river might be.

MR. DOULTON

said, the adoption of this Amendment would entirely upset all their past legislation in reference to the Thames.

MR. ALCOCK

thought it would be a good thing if all the towns on the Thames were forbidden to make use of the river for the purposes of sewage; but it was unfair to come upon Kingston-on-Thames so suddenly when they had just entered into a contract which would cost them £10,000.

Question put, "That those words be there added."

The Committee divided:— Ayes 9; Noes 45: Majority 36.

Clause agreed to.

Remaining Clauses agreed to.

House resumed.

Bill reported; as amended, to be considered To-morrow.

Back to