View report page

132
was persistently opposed by Members who objected to the Board's
proposal to raise more money from the Insurance Companies, and
there was no opportunity for moving the second reading.
CANTERBURY ROAD BRIDGE.
Last year I reported that, owing to the great increase of
population in the vicinity of Canterbury road, Old Kent road, and
the present old swing bridge erected on the formation of the Canal,
being quite inadequate for their requirements, the Metropolitan Board
of Works through the Vestry's active and energetic Representatives at
that Board, were induced to insert clauses in their next Metropolitan
Board of Works (Various Powers) Bill, to enable a bridge to be
built across the Canal suitable to the wants of the large number
of persons now compelled to depend upon totally inadequate accommodation
provided by the swing bridge.
The Board, preparatory to the re-introduction of the Bill
caused an elaborate plan to be prepared of the site of the proposed
new bridge, with sections showing the width of the road and the
land required to make the approaches to the bridge, the land
injuriously affected, and the land to be given up. It is mentioned
in my previous report that the late Mr. Dredge (the eminent
bridge engineer) at the joint expense of the Greenwich Board an
of this Yestry, had prepared designs for the bridge which were
submitted to the Board and approved of by their Engineer.
The Board had consented to contribute one half the expense
leaving it to the Parishes and the Owners of the land to make
up the remaining half. The Yestry agreed to contribute the
liberal sum of £1,000, and the Greenwich Board ultimately
resolved to contribute £1,000 but the Owners whose houses and
land had not agreed to contribute in proportion to the
benefit they would derive from the erection of the bridge. Much
correspondence took place to induce them to increase
their contribution, and the representatives of this A estiy
and the District Board of Greenwich sought an