View report page

43
between the Board of Trade and the Company, from which the Vestry
inferred that the Company had not made the required deposit of £1,000
or satisfied the Board that they were in a position to efficiently
discharge the duties and obligations imposed upon them by the Order.
The Vestry accordingly requested the Board of Trade to exercise its
powers by revoking the Order, a request which the Board complied
with as from the 10th July, 1891.
In June, 1891, notices were received by the Vestry from Messrs.
Sharp & Kent, Electrical Engineers, of 34, Victoria Street, "Westminster,
and from Mr. Sydney Morse, of 4, Fenchurch Avenue on behalf of the
County of London Electric Lighting Company, Limited, of their
intention to apply to the Board of Trade for provisional Orders
authorising them respectively to supply electricity in the parish. Both
applications were proceeded with, and drafts of the Orders were taken
into consideration by the Vestry.
In the case of the Order promoted by Messrs. Sharp & Kent, under
the title of the "St. Mary, Islington, Electric Supply Order," the
whole of the Parish was scheduled as the area in which the undertakers
were to be authorised to supply electricity. The draft Order agreed in
the main with the model Order issued by the Board of Trade. The
Vestry, however, had at this time in view the possibility of itself
supplying the Parish with electricity and declined to give its consent to
the Order in the form deposited although it intimated its willingness
to do so in respect of the area then supplied by the promoters under their
arrangement with Mr. Beale as mentioned in the report for 1889-90.
This proposal did not give satisfaction to Messrs. Sharp & Kent. The
Board of Trade ultimately refused to grant the Order on the ground
that the promoters had failed to produce the consent of the local
authority or to satisfy the Board that it should be dispensed with.
The County of London (North) Electric Lighting Order was also
drafted in accordance with the model Order of the Board of Trade, but
the Vestry, for similar reasons to those just mentioned, refused to
give its consent.
In January, 1892, the Vestry appointed a special Committee
consisting of 20 members to inquire into the working of the various