View report page

42
was directed to inform the Vestry that under present circumstances, and having
regard to the large outlay which will have to be made for the construction of the
Tunnel under the Thames between Blackwall and Greenwich, the Board did not
see its way to make an application to Parliament next Session for powers to
provide means of transit between Rotherhithe and Shadwell.
Miscellaneous.
At a meeting of the Vestry held on the 17th April, 1888, it was
"Resolved, that a Deputation consisting of the whole of the Vestry wait
"upon the Directors of the South Eastern Railway Company, to urge them to make
"speedy provision for the accommodation of the public, by the erection and
"opening of a new station between Spa Road and Deptford on the Greenwich
"line," also
"Resolved, that the members of Parliament for Rotherhithe and Bermondsey
"Divisions of Southwark, also the members of Parliament for Deptford and
"Camberwell, together with the principal Ratepayers of Rotherhithe, be invited to
"join the Deputation in support of the object in view."
On the 3rd of May, 1888, the Deputation attended by appointment, and met
the Directors of the South Eastern Railway Company at the Cannon Street Hotel,
and urged upon them the necessity for the provision of the requisite station
accommodation upon their line between Deptford and Spa Road as desired, in
which the Deputation were supported by J. R. Kelly, Esq., M.P., for Camberwell,
Charles Darling, Esq, M.P. for Deptford, John Tolhurst, Esq., member of the
Metropolitan Board of Works, and others. The Deputation were informed, the
matter should have the consideration of the Directors, and it was arranged that a
Committee of this Vestry and of the Ratepayers should meet a Committee of the
Directors and confer with them, as to the acquisition of the property required for
the purpose of the proposed new station, &c.
The Vestry have since caused several communications to be sent to the
Directors, urging upon them to take the necessary steps for the formation of the
said Railway station, and on the 11th March, a letter from the Secretary of the
South Eastern Railway Company in reply to a letter of the Clerk to the Vestry
on the subject, was received as follows : —
South Eastern Railway,
Secretary's Office,
London Bridge Station, S.E.,
11 th March, 1889.
Dear Sir,
I have your letter of the 9th. It may become necessary for the Directors to
confer with the Vestry as was originally proposed, but hitherto, I think such a
conference would have been useless. The only difficulty is the excessive price
claimed by one Landowner, a Freeholder in possession, and I do not suppose