View report page

10
the local authorities most interested in the arrangement had had
an opportunity of carefully considering it and of expressing their
views thereon. This was done, and shortly afterwards a Conference
was convened by the Vestry of Camberwell of local authorities to
consider the Scheme, this Board appointing Messrs. Couchman,
Hawkins, and Rider as delegates on its behalf. The delegates met
accordingly, and the general opinion of the Conference being that
the proposed amalgamation would be detrimental to the interests of
the consumers, and Mr. Michael, Q.C., having advised that the
Board of Trade would be acting in access of its powers in consenting
thereto, it was resolved at an adjourned meeting of the Conference,
held on the 20th November, to retain the services of that gentleman
as Counsel on behalf of the Conference; to employ an Engineer,
and to instruct Mr. Alfred Lass, a Chartered Accountant, to
prepare a statement as to the relative financial position and
prospects of the two Companies. It was further resolved to request
the local authorities interested to contribute to a fund for defraying
the expenses of the opposition, this Board agreeing to contribute
pro rata to the extent of £50. The Counsel prepared accordingly a
very able and comprehensive statement of objections to the Scheme,
and Mr. Lass drew up a tabular statement to accompany the
objections, the principal heads of which were as under:—
1.—That no power existed authorising the Board of Trade to
sanction the Scheme of Amalgamation, the Acts of Parliament relied
upon by the Companies having become obsolete or applying to other
Companies.
2.—That that which Parliament had expressly determined, Parliament,
unless it had given authority to some other authority in that behalf
could alone alter.
3.—That what was proposed to be accomplished by the Scheme as to
present and future financial arrangements was in direct defiance of all
right principles governing capital expenditure, and in direct opposition
to the enactments governing both the capital and revenue of the
Companies.
4.—That the Scheme on its merits was highly objectionable, and would
prove in its working most prejudicial to the interests of gas consumers
in the district, and ought not to be sanctioned by the Board of Trade.