View report page

17
but Diversion No. 1 was referred back to the Law and Parliamentary
and Works Committees. On the 17th January, 1888, the Law and
Parliamentary Committee proceeded to consider the reference from the
Vestry of this subject, when the matter was referred to the Works
Committee to view. The Works Committee viewed this path on the
18th January, 1888, and resolved that Mr. Tower's offer of £40 be
accepted. At the Vestry Meeting held on the 25th January, 1888, the
notices and consents of Justices, in Diversions Nos. 2 and 8, were
sealed by order of the Vestry. At the Meeting of the Law and Parliamentary
Committee held on the 13th March, 1888, the Solicitor
reported the receipt of a letter from Mr. Tower offering the Vestry
£75, instead of £10, re the Diversion of Church Path No. 1, when it
was resolved that the Solicitor be empowered to proceed with and
complete the matter on Mr. Tower agreeing to pay £100 and the Vestry's
costs in the matter. On the 10th April, 1888, the Solicitor stated that
the consents and notices to Justices re Diversion No. 1 would be ready
for sealing at the next Meeting of the Vestry; it was resolved that the
Vestry be recommended to affix their seal to the consents and notices to
Justices accordingly. At the Meeting of the Vestry held on the 18th
April, 1888, the consents and notices to Justices were sealed accordingly.
On the 21th April, 1888, the Solicitor informed the Law and Parliamentary
Committee that the Magistrates would view on Tuesday,
1st May, 1888, and that it was necessary that the documents re
Diversion No. 1 should be sealed by the Vestry on the following evening,
when it was resolved that the Committee, at its rising, to adjourn till
Wednesday, 2nd May, at 6.50 p.m., to consider the documents. The
Magistrates viewed on May 1st, and at the adjourned Meeting of the
Committee held on the 2nd May, the documents re Diversion No. 1
were approved and referred to the Vestry for sealing, and were subsequently
sealed at the Vestry Meeting the same evening. On the 8th
May the Law and Parliamentary Committee considered the Solicitor's
bill of costs re Diversion No. 1, amounting to £98 13s. l1d., when the
same was passed and referred to the Finance Committee for payment.
Bishop's Meadow.
On the 27th July, 1887, the Clerk produced to the Vestry a letter
from the Coroner as to the dangerous state of the river bank at the
Bishop's Meadow, and at the Works Committee held on the 2nd August,
1887, a letter was read from the Solicitors to the Ecclesiastical Commissioners
stating that they had applied to the Thames Conservators for
extension of the line of boundary of the Meadow, but that that body had
c