§ SIR JOHN HAYasked the Chairman of the Metropolitan Board of Works, Whether the Board has given its sanction to the removal of the Pimlico Pier from the site where it has so long afforded convenience to the inhabitants of the district; whether the Pier on the south side of the river, opposite to the Pimlico Pier, which is supposed to cause the necessity for the removal of the Pimlico Pier, has only recently been placed there, and therefore ought itself rather to be moved if inconvenient; and, whether before the removal of the Pimlico Pier takes place, he will cause an inquiry to be made into the wishes and claims of the residents in that neighbourhood to have the pier continued in its present site, on the faith of which houses have been built and occupied in that locality?
§ SIR JAMES M'GAREL-HOGGI beg to inform my right hon. and gallant Friend that two communications have been received by the Metropolitan Board on this subject—the first from the Steamboat Company applying for the Board's consent to the removal of the Pier; the second from inhabitants of the vicinity in opposition. The Board replied in both cases to the effect that having no jurisdiction in the matter they had no objection to offer to the proposed removal. I believe the Pier on the south side of the River has only recently been placed there; but I can express no opinion 1218 as to the expediency of its removal. With regard to the last part of the Question, seeing that the Board have no jurisdiction over the position of the Pier, I do not think it would be advisable to enter upon the inquiry suggested by my right hon. and gallant Friend.