MOTION FOR A SELECT COMMITTEE. (Hansard, 23 February 1869)

§ LORD ELCHO
, in rising to move the appointment of a Select Committee to inquire into the Roadway and Viaduct proposed to be made on the Thames Embankment from Hungerford Bridge to Wellington Street, Strand, and whether the site might not be more advantageously occupied by some Public Building; also to inquire whether any, and if so what, controlling power over Public Works in the Metropolis, is vested in and exercised by any Government Department, said, he omitted from his Motion the words directing the Committee to inquire whether it might be desirable to establish some such controlling power, as it was thought that they pledged the House to an opinion on the point; but he left them out on the understanding that the Committee would not be debarred from considering and reporting on that subject.

§ MR. TITE
said, the Metropolitan Board of Works had no feeling in respect to this matter but to do what was right, and what would best serve the interests of the public. The project objected to was none of theirs; but, at the same time, he thought that it had been very much misunderstood. The original Question of the noble Lord had reference to some Viaduct from Charing Cross. ["No !"] There certainly had been an impression that the Metropolitan Board of Works intended to build a Viaduct from Charing Cross to Waterloo Bridge. Now, they had no power to interfere with Charing Cross, and they never entertained the intention of making a Viaduct either from that point or anywhere else. The simple fact was this:—The Embankment from Westminster Bridge to Blackfriars was about a mile long and 100 feet wide, and it would be strange if such a road should exist, running parallel to Fleet Street and the Strand, without proper communications with those thoroughfares. However, if the noble Lord's Committee chose to take upon themselves to stop the proposed Viaduct from Hungerford Bridge to Wellington Street, Strand, the Board of Works would not be sorry, for they would then be saved the expenditure of £230,000. The arching upon the proposed road was only 270 feet long; this 278 extent, forced upon the Board by the Government, who were the owners of certain laud west of Waterloo Bridge, the object being not to interfere with two graveyards containing the remains, as it was alleged, of some of our early Sovereigns, about whose remains apprehensions appeared to be entertained in the very highest quarters. The question was how the communication with the Strand should be made; and, if it could be shown that a road a mile long required no lateral communication, the Board would be glad; but without such communication a man who wanted to go by the Embankment from Westminster to the new Courts of Law must go to Blackfriars Bridge and back to Carey Street. He agreed that some sort of control like that mentioned by the noble Lord ought to exist; and the Institute of Architects, of which he was President, would, he was sure, feel flattered if their opinion could be sought upon questions of this kind. But he could not admit that any serious mistakes had been made in the improvement of the metropolis. On the contrary, he thought that the Corporation had done exceedingly well, for it had placed itself in the hands of Sir Robert Smirke, and had loyally carried out his suggestions. It was said that these improvements were paid for out of the rates. The fact was, that they were paid out of the proportion of the coal tax which the Board of Works received, the City having 4d. per ton, and the Board 9d., on all coal brought into London. This source of revenue would cease, he believed, in 1888, by which time the outlay on these works, including the £230,000, would be entirely covered. He supported the appointment of a Committee.

§ MR. LAYARD
said, the Government had no objection to the proposed Committee. His hon. Friend (Mr. Tite) was mistaken in supposing that the noble Lord had referred to any Viaduct at Charing Cross; he alluded to the proposed road from the first arch of Hungerford Bridge to Wellington Place, which would be partly a road running parallel to the Embankment and partly a viaduct.

§ LORD ELCHO
feared that he had been misunderstood. He found no fault whatever with the Metropolitan Board of Works. Indeed, he held them to be perfectly blameless in the matter. He 279 simply asked that a Committee might be appointed to inquire into the necessity of the road, and to see whether, by a different arrangement, the fine site could not be kept as an ornament to the metropolis.