HC Deb 22 June 1871 vol 207 cc398-400
MR. RAIKES

asked the hon. Member for Bath, Whether a proposal for the expenditure of £200,000 on the now street from Tottenham Court Road to St. Martin's Place, now intended to be made under the provisions of a Bill at present before Parliament, has been entertained by the Metropolitan Board of Works; whether eminent Contractors have not expressed their willingness to make this new street free of cost; and, whether the Metropolitan Board of Works seriously contemplate so large an outlay of money to be obtained from the ratepayers of London under these circumstances?

SIR WILLIAM TITE

said, in reply, that the Metropolitan Board of Works proposed to contribute £200,000 towards the construction of a great and important street from Tottenham Court Road to the Strand. It was to be 60 feet wide. He was not aware that there ever was any offer made to the Metropolitan Board by "eminent contractors to make this new street free of cost." The facts were these:—In 1864 an Act was passed to make a railway connecting the northern and southern railways, and that had something to do with some proposition for making this great street. However, that Act having passed, four years elapsed and nothing came of it. The Metropolitan Board were then requested to take up the street by the parishes principally concerned. At that time a new proposition came from very respectable quarters to construct a railway somewhat on the old line; and if hon. Members desired to see the importance of the railway and street together they should look at the plans which he had placed in the Library relating to both. The Act for the construction of the railway had passed that House, and was at present in the House of Lords. In 1870 an application was made to the Metropolitan Board by a Mr. George Elliot, who had something, he believed, to do with the former railway in 1864, who stated that he could bring forward, if the Board would give him power, respectable contractors who would take the whole matter in hand. The Board paid every possible attention to the application of Mr. Elliot, who, unluckily, had been unfortunate previously. However, attention was paid to his communication, and he was requested—that the Board might consider the question—to mention the names of the contractors to whom he referred. They were inquired into by the proper officers for the Metropolitan Board, who were told they had better have nothing to do with them. The other parties promoting the present Bill were men of great wealth and respectability. The street, it had been ascertained, would have cost half a million of money; but by the railway going under the street the parties had undertaken with the Board to complete this important project for the sum of £200,000. He hoped the House would agree with him that the Metropolitan Board had been wise in agreeing to that arrangement.