View report page

54
(ix.) That the provision in Clause 9, Sub-section 3, as to
filling in the ground and making good the pavement of
any road opened or broken up by the Company is not
sufficient to secure the proper re-construction and paving
of the roads under the care and control of your Petitioners,
(x.) That the provisions in Clause 9, Sub-section 4 and Subsection
5, are vague and insufficient to prevent delay in
the carrying on and completion of work by the Company,
and are inadequate to enable the Road Authority to
recover expenses or penalties from the Company,
(xi.) That the provisions in Clause 9, Sub-section 6, is not
sufficient to provide for the necessities of the traders and
other inhabitants of the roads where works are being
carried on by the Company, and due provision is not made
for the requirements of the general public.
(xii.) That the provision of Clause 9, Sub-section 7 and
Sub-section 8, are not sufficient to safe-guard the sewers
under the care and control of your Petitioners, which have
been constructed at the cost of the ratepayers of your
Petitioners' District of nearly £100,000.
(xiii.) That no periodical or other testing or inspection of
Telephone wires can be carried out so as to ensure the
efficient protection of the inhabitants of your Petitioners'
District, and of the public generally, from the dangers
arising from the erection and suspension of over-head
wires; and that the provisions of the Act are wholly
inadequate to safe-guard and protect the inhabitants of
your Petitioners' District and the public generally from
the danger, annoyance, and inconvenience which will result
from the erection and suspension of Telephone wires and
the posts and works connected therewith.
(xiv.) That the marginal note to Clause 12 of the Act is
misleading, inasmuch as it states "Local Government
Board to make and enforce rules for prevention of danger
from the Companies' Works," whereas the said clause
gives power to the Local Government Board (inter alia)
to make, alter and repeal rules to be observed by the Road
Authority, and for the imposition and recovery of penalties
for breach of such rules, and your Petitioners strongly
object to any such clause or any such power being given
to the Local Government Board.
(xv.) That the Act proposes to give to the Company the
use of the public roads for the purpose of their works,
which works, although convenient to the public, will be
carried on for the profit and advantage of the Company,