asked the Senior Member for Chelsea, Whether it is his intention to take any other step for the purpose of bringing under the notice of the House the course pursued by the Metropolitan Board of Works with reference to the Thames River (Prevention of Floods) Bill, having regard to the opposition offered to his Motion on the subject by the Chairman of that Board?
§ SIR CHARLES W. DILKE,
in reply, said, it was quite true, as implied in the Question of his hon. Friend and Colleague, that the opposition of the hon. and gallant Member for Truro (Sir James M'Garel Hogg) had prevented, owing to the operation of the half-past 12 o'clock Rule, his bringing forward his Motion in favour of altering and proceeding with the Thames River (Prevention of Floods) Bill. The hon. and gallant Member had refused to proceed with the Bill, and nothing would now be done to prevent the continuance of these floods, the responsibility for which would lie at the door of the majority of the Metropolitan Board. He might, however, possibly find an opportunity for making some remarks upon the subject upon the second reading of the Metropolitan Board of Works (Money) Bill, which stood for second reading 28th upon the Orders of the Day, although it had not been printed.