View report page

10
occupied, and would form an encroachment beyond the
building line. Application was therefore made to the
Superintending Architect of the Metropolitan Board of
Works to define the general building line in accordance
with the provisions of Sec. 75 of the M.L.M. Act, 1862.
The Superintending Architect heard the parties in the
case (when your Surveyor represented the Vestry), and
afterwards forwarded a letter to the Vestry, of which
the following is a copy.
Metropolitan Board of Works.
Dear Sir, 31st October, 1888.
Cane No. 38,692.
With reference to your request that I should decide
the general line of buildings in relation to the buildings now being
erected at Nos. 236, 238 and 240, Cambridge road, Bethnal Green,
I beg to apprize you for the information of the Vestry, that I find
that buildings formerly existed on the whole of the site of the
buildings in question; and, under these circumstances, and having
regard to the decision of the Lords Justices in the case of
"Aukland v. The Westminster District Board of Works" (Law
Reports, 7 c. 597), that it appears to me that no question as to the
line of the buildings, Nos. 236, 238 and 240 can be rained under the
75th Sec. of the Metropolis Management Amendment Act.
Yours faithfully,
Thos. Blashill,
R. Voss, Esq. Superintending Architect.
On this letter being laid before the Yestry it was
resolved that no further action be taken in the matter.
Hill street.
Two applications were made on behalf of the Proprietor
of the Seabright Music Hall for permission to
erect a canopy over the footway of Hill Street in front
of the Music Hall, but the Yestry declined to approve
of the proposal.
Compensation.
Two claims for compensation for accidents were made
against the Vestry. Full enquiries were made into the
circumstances and the claims were abandoned.
A claim was made for damage to a quantity of sheet
iron placed by a tradesman in the roadway, which was