HC Deb 22 February 1887 vol 311 cc295-7
MR. CONYBEARE (Cornwall, Camborne)

asked the Chairman of the Metropolitan Board of Works, Whether the following is the usual form of certificate granted by the said Board to applicants for certificates under "The Metropolis Management Act, 1878," section 12, namely— The Metropolitan Board of Works, having been applied to by—for a certificate under 41 and 42 Vict. c. 32, section 12, do hereby certify that, subject to the condition here-under specified, the house, room, or other place of public resort known as—, was on its completion in accordance with the regulations made by the said Board under the provisions of the above-mentioned Act so far as such regulations are applicable thereto. As witness the seal, &c. The condition above referred to. That no intoxicating liquors be sold on the premises; whether the said Board grants a certificate in the above form, or to the like effect, in the case of halls used, or to be used, for dramatic representations as well as for dancing and musical entertertainments; whether no other form of certificate is used by the said Board in the case of such applications under section 12 of the above-mentioned Act; whether a second certificate has ever, or, if ever, in what number of cases, been required by the said Board in such cases; whether, on the 22nd December, 1886, the said Board wrote by its Secretary the following letter to the Clerk to the Magistrates at the Surrey Sessions— The Board have this day refused the application of the Rev. G. Brooks for a certificate that the Lower Norwood Public Hall is suitable for the performance of stage plays; whether at the time when the above refusal was sent, the hall in question was constructed so as to comply with the regulations of the Board of Works; and, whether, before sending the said refusal, the said Board had taken any and what steps to ascertain whether or not its regulations had been complied with; and, if not, whether the Board will now take such steps as may be necessary to ascertain that its regulations have been complied with, and re-consider its decision?

THE CHAIRMAN (Sir JAMES M'GAREL-HOGG) (Middlesex, Hornsey)

I beg to inform the hon. Member that the form of certificate set out in his Question is that usually adopted, with the exception that he attaches a condition prohibiting the sale of intoxicating liquors which is only used in special cases. The form of certificate is the same whether the building be used for dramatic representations or for dancing and musical entertainments. To the third Question of the hon. Member my answer must be in the negative. There have been occasions on which a second certificate for theatrical purposes has been asked for; but in no case has this been given. Such a letter as that referred to by the hon. Member was sent by direction of the Board. With regard to the sixth clause of the Question, I am informed that the regulations were not wholly complied with. Steps were taken by the Board before deciding on the application to satisfy itself as to the suitability or not of the building referred to for dramatic performances; and I think it unlikely that the Board would be willing to re-consider its decision.


If all the regulations have been complied with, will the Board be willing to re-consider its decision?


I have done my best to answer the very long and elaborate Question of the hon. Member, which I think very extraordinary; and if he desires any further information I must ask him to put a Question on the Paper, and I will do my best to answer it.