View report page

15
Board of Works, the Ecclesiastical Commissioners, as Lords of
the Manor, and others, for the acquisition of these Commons by
the Metropolitan Board for the use of the public.
THAMES RIVER (PREVENTION OF FLOODS) BILL.
The Board regrets to have to report that notwithstanding
the decision of the Select Committee of the House of Commons
in 1877, as fully reported in last year's proceedings, the Metropolitan
Board of Works has, for the third time, introduced
a bill into Parliament, by which it is proposed to cast the responsibility
and cost of works necessary for the Prevention of
Floods, within the Metropolis, upon the Vestries and District
Boards, in respect of public docks, roads, and ways, and upon
riparian owners, and occupiers in other cases, proposing thus to
make a new liability upon Riverside Authorities, owner, or occupiers,
in direct contravention of the Common Law as laid
down in Hudson v. Tabor.
For the due protection of the interest of this District, the
Board is again obliged to enter into an expensive contest with
the Metropolitan Board, the necessary Petition has been deposited,
and in due course the Board will appear by Counsel
thereon.
Petitions from this District against the Bill have also been
presented by the Board of Guardians of the Fulham Union, the
Vestry of Fulham, the Vestry of Hammersmith, and also petitions
from two public meetings of the Ratepayers.
The Board hope that the result will be such as to relieve the
District from a burden of unknown magnitude, which the provisions
of the Bill, as at present drawn, would entail.
The Board desires to record its thanks to the Borough
Members for the ready and valuable help they have at all
times given in opposing the Bills.
THE MALL (OBSTRUCTIONS).
In the matter of the occupation of certain land in front of
East Cottage by Mr. William Ayres as a wharf, and the action
brought by Mr. William Ayres against the Board, to try the
question whether that portion of the Mall, opposite Mr. Ayres'
cottage, was or was not a public way, the Solicitor-General,
Mr. Talfourd Salter, Q C., and Mr. Shiress Will, appeared for
the Board, and Mr. Herschell, Q.C., and Mr. Reed for Mr.
Ay res. After a long trial, which lasted two days, a verdict
was given for the Plaintiff. The Solicitor-General subsequently