View report page

135
Owners agree to pay their respective contributions, and the
Freeholders and Lesees agree to convey the land required to
effect the improvement, and pay their contribution as agreed.
This agreement has been duly executed by all parties, and the
Seal of the Yestry affixed. I learn that Tenders will shortly be
invited for the construction of the bridge.
COAL AND WINE DUTIES.
The Bill for the continuance of these duties which was
reported upon fully in the last Report, has been again introduced
into Parliament, and the Metropolitan Board of "Works fowarded
to tlie Vestry a letter asking them to present a Petition to
the House of Commons in favour of such Bill, but the Yestry
resolved to take no action in the matter.
CANTERBURY ROAD PAVING.-VESTRY V. STOTESBURY.
In the last Annual Report it is reported that the Court of
Queen's Bench had decided, in the Special Case of the Yestry v.
Board of Works for the Greenwich District, that the Yestry
could not recover the sum of £613, the cost of paving this
road upon the Deptford side, but that the Vestry had power
under the order of the Metropolitan Board of Works,which vested
the management of Canterbury road in the Vestry, to recover the
paving expenses from the owners of property, although such property
was not in this Parish. The Vestry were consequently necessitated
to make a new apportionment against tlie owners in this
Parish, as also owners in Deptford Parish for the paving
expenses of the road. In consequence of the decision (so
clear and conclusive) that the Vestry had the legal right to charge
the owners in Deptford Parish, a hope was expressed that the
owners would not endeavour to escape payment by legal technicality,
these hopes were unfortunately not realized, as one owner
stated he intended to take advantage of every technical point.
The demand made on Mr. Stotesbury not having been paid, a
summons was issued in the Greenwich Police Court Lr £548 3s. 8d.