§ SIR JAMES ELPHINSTONEsaid, he would beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty, If he will state the reasons which induced the present Board of Admiralty to reverse the decision of their predecessors, and permit the extension of Ryde Pier to the westward; and, whether the proposed extension was not the subject of inquiry by the late Board of Admiralty, and refused by them on the ground that it would interfere with the navigation of that part of the Solent?
§ MR. CHILDERSSir, there are two piers at Ryde, the property of a joint stock company, and an application was made to the late Government to allow a considerable extension of one of them to the west, in order to enable a ladies' bathing-place to be erected. This was strongly supported by the local authorities of Ryde, but opposed by the owners of lighters and coasters, on the ground that it would interfere with their access in certain winds and tides to a small landing-place between the two piers where coal and other merchandize are landed. My predecessor refused the application. This year the same application was made to the present Board, and as I found much difference of opinion on the part of the officers I consulted, I took advantage of a recent visit to the Solent to inspect the locality with Sir Sydney Dacres and Sir Thomas Symonds, and I decided to sanction a modified plan, which, in their opinion, would not interfere with the navigation. From a naval point of view there is no objection to either plan.
LORD HENRY LENNOXsaid, he would beg to ask, Whether the right hon. Gentleman will have any objection to lay on the Table of the House Copies of the opinions on which the late Board of Admiralty had come to a decision on the question, especially of the opinion of the Master Superintendent of Portsmouth Dockyard and his (Lord H. Lennox's) gallant Friend the Director of Works to the Admiralty, both of whom had made a personal inspection of the site?
§ MR. CHILDERSreplied that his noble Friend could, if he wished, have access to the enormous volume of Papers on the subject. He did not, however, think it would be worth while to print 359 the Correspondence on a question which had been so fully considered by the Admiralty.