HC Deb 19 March 1888 vol 323 cc1636-7
MR. BRYCE (Aberdeen, S.)

asked the First Commissioner of Works, Whether a sum of £2,000 was voted by Parliament in the year 1874 for the purchase of Clarence Lanes, Roehampton, which are the shortest route to Richmond Park from the central and western parts of London; whether this purchase was never completed, owing to the fact that a much larger sum was demanded by the owners of the lands; whether the present owner of the lands has recently offered to transfer them to the Office of Works as a free gift; whether the Office of Works has refused to accept the gift, stating that the Treasury will not permit their Office to incur the expense of keeping the lanes in repair; whether the probable cost of keeping the lanes in repair will be less than £100 per annum; and, whether, with proper management, this sum could be provided out of the sum now allowed for the maintenance of the roads in Richmond Park?

THE FIRST COMMISSIONER (Mr. PLUNKET) (Dublin University)

No Vote has ever been taken in Parliament for he purchase of Clarence Lanes. In 1869 the Treasury authorized negotiations for their purchase at the price of £2,000; but the negotiations came to nothing, as the then proprietor held out for a larger sum. In 1874 the matter again came up; and the Office of Works asked the Treasury whether they were still willing to propose that Parliament should contribute £2,000 to wards freeing the roads, as there was a movement among residents in the neighbourhood to raise by subscription the balance of the sum demanded by the proprietor (£2,500), but that suggestion was not adopted. It is true that the present owner of the lands has recently offered to transfer them to the Office of Works as a gift, and that the Office of Works has refused to accept, because the Treasury will not undertake the expenses. The cost of maintaining the roads would not probably exceed £100 a year, but an expenditure of £200 would be required to put them in order; and it certainly would not be possible to save that amount out of the sums allowed for the maintenance of the roads in Richmond Park, especially as this year those sums have been considerably cut down. I may, however, add that, while the Government are not willing to undertake the maintenance of these roads, which lie outside the Park, yet if those roads were otherwise made available to the public the Government would gladly provide a gate-keeper and keep the gate open.