HC Deb 28 March 1893 vol 10 cc1398-9

Considered in Committee.

(In the Committee.)

On the Motion of Mr. H. H. Fowler, the following Amendments were made:—In Clause 3, page 2, line 5, leave out "them," and insert "him"; line 7, leave out "any" and insert "such"; leave out line 8; lines 9 and 10, leave out "owner and"; line 11, leave out from "authority," to end of Clause, and insert— To apply to a court of summary jurisdiction, and such court, if satisfied that the said barbed wire is dangerous to persons or animals properly using such highway, may by summary order direct the occupier to remove that wire. Page 2, leave out Clause 4; leave out Clause 5; leave out Clause 6; after Clause 4, insert the following Clause:—

(Expenses of local authority.) Any expenses incurred by a local authority in the execution of this Act shall be defrayed in like manner as the expenses of the local authority incurred in respect of any highways.

New Clause—(Act not to apply to certain fences in the County of London).

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the New Clause be now read a second time."—(Mr. Kimber.)

SIR MICHAEL HICKS-BEACH (Bristol, W.)

I do not see why this clause should apply only to the County of London. There are many other populous neighbourhoods to which it should also apply.

MR. KIMBER (Wandsworth)

I am willing to strike out the words "within the County of London." I beg to move the following Clause:—

(Act not to apply to certain fences in county of London.) This Act shall not apply to cleft oak, or other solid fences, on or over which barbed wire may be fixed for protection of the property enclosed thereby.

Clause, as amended, agreed to.

MR. T. M. HEALY

I have abstained from moving the extension of this Bill to Ireland, but I give notice I will raise the point on the Report stage. I also ask that the Bill should be reprinted.

Bill reported; as amended to be considered upon Thursday, 13th April, and to be printed. [Bill 283.]