HC Deb 17 March 1898 vol 55 cc100-2
MR. E. H. PICKERSGILL (Bethnal Green, S.W.)

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, having regard to a licence for the removal of human remains from the land adjacent to the Postmen's Park, on the south side of Little Britain, St. Botolph, Aldersgate, granted on 24th July, 1894, but now void, whether he will, before granting a fresh licence, agree, to hear objections on the part of the parish authorities upon material facts which have transpired since the granting of a licence in 1894?


The licence in question was granted subject to the usual condition that, if not acted upon within 12 months from its date, it should become void. I am not in a position to say whether or not, under this condition, the licence has become void, but the question is under consideration. No fresh application has been received, and I should certainly give careful consideration to any representations made to me in the matter.

MR. H. C. STEPHENS (Middlesex, Hornsey)

I beg to ask the hon. Member for the Thirsk Division of Yorkshire, as representing the Charity Commissioners, whether, in connection with the Postmen's Park, he is now aware that the trustees of the City Parochial Foundation were not restrained by interim injunction from proceeding with the work, but, as stated at the trial, the work came to a standstill because the workmen refused to dig out any more bones, and that about half the land in question has never been built upon, being part of the churchyard of St. Botolph, Aldersgate, with entrance to Little Britain therefrom; and whether, as the information supplied to him is erroneous, the Charity Commissioners will make further inquiry into the circumstances of the case?


I find that I was misinformed when I stated on Monday that building proceedings in this matter had been restrained by interim injunction. The fact is that the trustees, to save the plaintiffs the expense of obtaining an interim injunction, agreed to stay proceedings pending the trial of the action for an injunction. The only knowledge which, the Commissioners have as to the alleged refusal of the workmen to dig out any more bones is derived from the statement of the case by the Times reporter in the report of the trial of the action in the Times of January 30th, 1896. Mr. Justice Stirling, in his judgment, as reported in the Times, stated that upon the land in question, comprising a little more than 300 square yards, at least seven houses had been formerly built, and that it was not proved that any part of the land formed part of the churchyard of St. Botolph, Aldersgate, except the site of a certain passage, upon which, however, he held that the City Parochial Trustees are not restrained from building. As the foregoing matters appear to be irrelevant to the question whether the Commissioners should withhold their consent from the proposal of the trustees to exercise their proved right of building upon the land, the Commissioners do not propose to institute any further inquiry.