View report page

92
authority. This Commission should represent the various
interests concerned, for example, capitalists might be represented
by the Governor of the Bank of England, the
Companies by the Governor of the New River Company
and perhaps another Company, the Ratepayers by the
Chairman of the London County Council, and the City by
representatives of the Corporation, and other interests in
the same way. By the adoption of such a course Mr.
Beal submitted that the settlement of the question would
be removed from the domain of party politics, and might
be proceeded with during the recess with a view to legistion
early next session, before any claim could equitably be
made by the water Companies for compensation in respect
of the anticipated increase of assessment, arising solely from
the quinquennial re-valuation now in progress.
Mr. Ritchie, in reply to the Deputation, stated that the
request to support legislation to set aside the Water Rate
Definition Act, 1885, was one that the could not entertain
on account of the principle involved in superseding rights
conferred by statute. He rather looked to the difficulties
being settled by placing the management of the Water
Supply in the hands of a public authority. His personal
view was that this authority should be the London County
Council, in spite of the enormous amount of work they
already had to get through. But the Corporation of the
City were engaged on an inquiry, at their own expense, at
the present time, into the whole subject of the London
Water Supply, and the Bill of the London County Council
then before Parliament proposed to authorise the Council
to devote a certain sum of money to the same purpose. He
therefore thought that, in view of these two inquiries, one
in progress and the other in prospect, it would not be