THE ELECTRIC AND CABLE RAILWAY SCHEMES. (Hansard, 1 March 1892)

§ MR. WHITMORE (Chelsea)
I rise to move the Resolution which stands in my name. There is no doubt at all that the result of the labours of the Joint Committee that sat in 1864 was to give London a perfect system of external communication. Numerous important schemes for electric and cable lines are now before Parliament, and if they are considered independently the result may be that London will be intersected by unnecessary and even conflicting lines, when what is wanted is a scheme as comprehensive and perfect as that of 1864. It is in the hope that that will be the outcome of the labours of a Joint Committee that I venture to move this Resolution.

§ * MR. T. H. BOLTON (St. Pancras, N.)
Sir, I rise to second the Motion. I brought forward a portion of this subject last Session in connection with a Bill for the construction of a tunnel railway from the City to the West End, and the question then raised was how far the people of London had some right to compensation for the interference with the subsoil of the streets. That is an important question, and will, I suppose, come before the Committee. There is the larger question as to the general arrangements with reference to these railways—the level, the sort of cuttings, the size, the direction they shall take, and the dealing with the subsoil of private property that they may disturb. The Reference to the Committee will probably cover all these questions, so that all the important subjects raised can be considered.

§ MR. KIMBER (Wandsworth)
I rise to move, as an addition to the Resolution, to add after the word "Session" these words— And that such Committee have power to hear the parties promoting such Bill, and, if desired by them, receive evidence thereon. Sir, in moving this addition I desire to say that I quite concur in the object of the Resolution moved by my hon. Friend the Member for Chelsea, and all I wish is to give power to the Committee to hear parties and witnesses before pronouncing any judgment which might arrest the progress of many valuable schemes. There are already lodged no fewer than seven Bills of which this Committee would, doubtless, take cognizance and examine into, in order to test the principles which they may lay down for the guidance of Parliament. But it would be most unfair to those who have come to this House with their Bills, having incurred great expense and expecting that their Bills would be considered in the usual way by a Select Committee—I say it would be most unfair to these parties if, without calling upon them to show cause, the Joint Committee were to report that these schemes should not be proceeded with. I therefore move my Amendment.
Amendment proposed, At the end of the Question, to add the words, "and that such Committee have power to hear the parties promoting such Bills, and, if desired by them, receive evidence thereon.—(Mr. Kimber.)

§ MR. COURTNEY
Sir, I hope the hon. Member will consent to the withdrawal of these words for the present. There is a great deal in what he said that is, in my opinion, of a decisive character. It would be very unfair that the Joint Committee should express 1612 an opinion upon a particular scheme without hearing from the promoters whether it is part of a general scheme or what were its merits. However, I will not enter into those points. I only rose to ask the hon. Member not in the meantime to press the words, which have not been under the consideration of the noble Lord the Chairman of Committees in the other House, but to allow the Resolution to pass in its original form; and if he does that, I will take care that the words are, brought under the notice of the noble Lord and of the Joint Committee.

§ * MR. ISAACS (Walworth)
I entirely agree with the hon. Member for Chelsea; but with reference to the Report of this Joint Committee, I think it should be understood that there should in the matter of these electric railways be no such result from this Committee as that resulting from the Committee which sat in 1864. It is very much the habit of Parliament to lay down rules as regards Metropolitan and other Railways, and to lead people to believe, when assenting to these schemes, that they will not sanction any competitive lines. In 1864 the Committee laid it down that the great trunk thoroughfares, such as Oxford Street and Uxbridge Road, should not be interfered with in any way for the formation of railway lines. Nineteen millions of money have been spent in underground railways in London under the impression that Parliament, having imposed that condition, would not at any subsequent period have allowed these thoroughfares, which the promoters I allude to were precluded from touching, to be interfered with. Notwithstanding, however, the Report of the Joint Committee in 1864, Parliament last year sanctioned the Central London Railway Bill for a line of rail from Shepherd's Bush to the City. Looking to the fact that for railway enterprises money must necessarily be largely subscribed, it would be well to bear in mind, when laying down any special rules for lines of railway, that people who promote schemes expect when the routes are once filled 1613 that they will not be interfered with by any competing line.
Main Question put, and agreed to.