View report page

7
METROPOLITAN AND LONDON, TILBURY AND
SOUTHEND RAILWAY BILL.
As prognosticated in the Report of last year, the united
opposition which the promoters found that they would have to
face, caused them to withdraw the Bill.
Metropolitan
and
London
Tilbury &
Southend
Railway
Bill.
THE METROPOLITAN BOARD OF WORKS
(THAMES CROSSINGS) BILL.
The nature and object of this Bill will be found dealt with at
pages 7 to g of last year's Report.
The Bill, as was expedted, was, on the motion of Mr. Ritchie,
M.P., referred to a hybrid Committee of the House of Commons,
and the Vestry were represented before the Committee by
counsel and witnesses.
Metropolitan
Board of
Works
(Thames
Crossings)
Bill.
The Tower (Duplex) Bridge Bill being treated as a competing
scheme, was referred to the same Committee.
The hearing occupied twenty-one days, and, in the result,
the preamble of both schemes, so far as related to the subway
and the bridge, were declared not proven.
In the course of the enquiry, a great variety of details as to
the nature of the subway and the cost, were brought out for the
first time.
It was found that the scheme had been considerably altered,
as it was proposed to construct hydraulic lifts at each end of the
subway, to assist, as was asserted, the heavy traffic.
The gradients on the north side were found to be 1 in 25 for
600 yards, and on the south side 1 in 27 for 500 yards, and as
these were almost as bad as the worst approach to London
Bridge, the lifts were no doubt suggested as a means which
might induce the heavy traffic to use the subway.
The cost of working and maintaining the lifts was, it was
argued, very considerable, but opinions differed considerably.
It was, however, generally considered that, at the lowest
estimate, if the expenses of working the lifts were capitalized
and added to the estimated cost of the subway, the cost would
not be less than ^2,200,000.
The Vestry adted in entire accord with the neighbouring
parishes of Limehouse and Poplar, which were also represented
before the Committee, and it was generally felt that the scheme
was one of the least beneficial ones that could be devised for
East London.
The Committee of the House of Commons made a special
report on the matter, and stated it as their opinion, that means
of communication were most urgently required, and that an
opening bridge should be placed at Tower Hill and a subway in
the neighbourhood of Shadwell, and they further expressed a
hope that the City of London should undertake the first-named
work, whilst the Metropolitan Board of Works contemporaneously
carried out the last-named.
As will be seen hereafter, the City of London have accepted
the responsibility of carrying out the Committee's suggestion as
regards them, but the Vestry have to deplore that the Metropolitan
Board of Works have not done so as regards their
portion.