I am, dear Sirs,
Your obedient Servant,
CHAS. LAHEE,
Vestry Clerk.
Messrs. Lee and Pemberton,
44, Lincoln’s Inn Fields, W.C.
* * * * *
_Extract from the Minutes of a Meeting of the Committee of Works and for
General Purposes_, _held in the Board Room_, _Manor House_, _Tuesday_,
_May_ 1_st_, 1860,
The Committee considered the letter of the Solicitors (Messrs. Lee and
Pemberton), dated 24th of April, respecting the Bill for the Amendment of
the Metropolis Local Management Act. The Clerk laid upon the table 12
copies of the last reprint of the Bill, and reported that the Bill had
been introduced the previous evening in the House of Commons by Mr. Tite,
M.P.
Resolved,—That this Committee _do not_ concur with the Solicitors in
their remarks upon the Bill accompanying their letter respecting the
following five clauses:—
CLAUSE 11, enacting that any Vestry or District Board may pay the
precepts of the Metropolitan Board of Works out of any money in their
possession, and reimburse themselves out of the Sewers Rate. _Remark
referred to_:—‘We think this clause very objectionable; it appears to
involve a breach of trust on the part of the Vestry. Funds raised for
one purpose should not be applied to another; and the effect is to give
the Metropolitan Board of Works a first charge on every Rate collected.
What does the Poor Law Board say to it?’
CLAUSE 13, enacting that if any Vestry, &c., neglect to pay the money
required by the precepts of the Metropolitan Board of Works, that Board
may make a rate on default, without awaiting the expiration of the period
fixed by the precept. _Remark referred to_:—‘Two months is not enough,
it should at least be four.’
CLAUSE 41, relating to the case of a Vestryman—a member of a District
Board—not attending meetings for six months. _Remark referred to_:—‘Or
committee thereof. We think this inexpedient. The member should go out
as if by rotation, and be ineligible for the vacancy so created.’
CLAUSE 60, relative to contributions to the cost of main sewers and
sewers built since January 1st, 1856, or hereafter to be built. _Remark
referred to_:—‘Leave out these words (lines 32 and 33, ‘at their
discretion’).’
CLAUSE 62, prescribing the regulations to be observed in making openings
into sewers. _Remark referred to_:—‘We think this clause is better out,
unless it is made to go further. The Vestry should have power to alter
old drains.’
_Resolved_,—That if in the opinion of the Solicitors further powers are
requisite than are contained in the above clause, they be authorized to
prepare such a clause.
_Resolved_,—That this Committee _do_ concur with the solicitors in their
remarks respecting the following ten clauses, and authorize them to
prepare clauses to give effect to their recommendations.
CLAUSE 22, relative to the recovery of moneys assessed by the
Metropolitan Board of Works on extra parochial property for payment of
debts. _Remark referred to_—‘Instead of ‘a justice’ should be ‘two
justices or a police magistrate,’ the same error occurs in other parts of
the Bill.’
CLAUSE 42, providing that owners and occupiers of land may execute
drainage works at their own expense. _Remark referred to_:—‘We think the
sewer when built should vest in the Vestry. It should be built under the
superintendence of their Surveyor; and the party applying should find
sureties for the performance of the work, under penalties, to be
recoverable as liquidated damages.’
_Resolved_,—That in the opinion of this Committee the words in line 21
‘hereinafter mentioned’ should stand, with the interlineation ‘_or_ that
any Vestry may think proper to attach.’
CLAUSE 48, prescribing the regulations to be observed on abandonment,
alteration, &c., of designs for sewers previously approved by the
Metropolitan Board of Works. _Remark referred to_:—‘And in case they do
there should be a heavy penalty recoverable by action.’
CLAUSE 66, empowering Vestries, &c., on neglect of owners, &c., to carry
out works, pursuant to orders, to proceed for the penalties, or do the
works themselves, and recover the cost. _Remark referred to_:—‘Line 27
erase ‘person or persons,’ insert ‘such owner or occupier.’ Line 37
insert ‘or occupier.’
CLAUSE 67, extending penalties to persons causing offences. _Remark
referred to_:—‘And all penalties recoverable under this Act.’
CLAUSE 69, empowering Vestries, &c., to compel supply of water to houses.
_Remark referred to_:—‘We do not think this clause will work, unless a
power be invested for making the expense a first charge; it will be
nugatory and will cause useless expense.
CLAUSE 74, empowering Vestries, &c., with sanction of the Metropolitan
Board of Works, to effect improvements within their districts, &c.
_Remark referred to_:—‘We think this clause requires remodelling. It
does not go far enough. We think the clauses for improving streets in
the Towns improvement Clauses Act should be embodied in this Act,
particularly sec. 67; and also the clauses of the Lands Clauses
Consolidation Act, enabling the Vestry to take compulsory possession of
land.’
CLAUSE 75, enacting that buildings projecting beyond the general line of
the street, where taken down to an extent exceeding one half, shall be
set back to the general line. _Remark referred to_:—‘This should be
extended to Vestries with the consent of the Metropolitan Board of
Works.’
CLAUSE 78, empowering Vestries &c. to drain and pave courts, &c. on
default of owners, in lieu of enforcing penalties. _Remark referred
to_:—‘The judgment when recovered should be a first charge on the
property, with power of sale in default of payment, on three month’s
notice affixed on the premises.’
CLAUSE 93, enacting that a Vestry or District Board may require payment
of costs or expenses from an owner or occupier, and the occupier paying
to deduct from rent. _Remark referred to_:—‘We do not think the clause
goes far enough. The Vestry to be properly protected against their
enormous outlay, should have a statutable charge upon the premises for
moneys expended by them recovered by judgment. We see no reason why the
Vestry should not have a power of sale something similar to that given to
the Commissioners of Police under the 74th section of the Metropolitan
Buildings Act, 18 & 19 Vic., cap. 122; unless this is effectually done,
the annual loss to every parish which carries out the intentions of the
Metropolis Local Management Act, must be considerable; the Act will
become a dead letter, or Vestries must be protected from loss.’
_Resolved_,—That the attention of the Solicitors be directed to the
discrepancy between the marginal note to Clause 52, and the body of the
clause.
_Resolved_,—That the Solicitors do endeavour to obtain the following
alterations:—Clause 90 in the Bill above referred to, line 29, omit the
words, ‘which may be unfit for the keeping of swine, or where the
breeding, feeding, or keeping swine may create a nuisance or be injurious
to health,’ in order to insert the words, ‘within forty yards of any
street.’
Line 31, insert after the word ‘place’ the words, ‘or in any locality,
premises, or place in such manner as to be a nuisance to other persons
residing near thereto.’
_Resolved_,—That the Solicitors and the Vestry Clerk be instructed to
arrange with Mr. Tite as to the best mode of obtaining the above
alterations in the Bill now before Parliament.
* * * * *
_The Vestry Clerk to W. Tite_, _Esq._, _M.P._
April 25th, 1861.