View report page

57
Under review, a letter was read from Sir Walter de Souza,
stating that the Council had "given a further proof of its
"indifference to the desires of Westminster by absolutely
"rejecting the improvement," negativing even the recommendation
of their Committee to grant a contribution of
£1,000, the letter concluding as follows:—
"I did what I could in urging this improvement upon the Council,
but my efforts met with but limited support. I may add that,
personally, I hold a strong opinion as to the various acts of
the Council whereby the burden of taxation has been most
illegitimately increased upon the ratepayers, while most
useful measures have been recklessly discarded. I should
wish it to be clearly understood that my personal responsibility
should be distinguished from the rash acts of the Council,
which cannot commend themselves to anyone of common
sense, or to anyone acquainted with the necessity of a proper
conduct of municipal business."
A vote of thanks was accorded to Sir Walter de Souza,
for his assiduity in behalf of the Vestry's interests, and
Her Majesty's Office of Works were forthwith informed
that the Vestry were reluctantly compelled to abandon the
improvement, inasmuch as they did not feel called upon to
charge upon the local rates the entire cost of effecting a
widening in one of the main approaches to the metropolis
from the west, and in respect of which the property likely
to receive "betterment" thereby was outside the limits of
the parish.
StruttonGround
and Pear Street.
The Accountant of the London County Council
communicated with the Vestry in November, in
reference to a contribution promised by the late Metropolitan
Board of Works of £825 towards the cost of an
improvement in Pear Street and Strutton Ground, contemplated
by the late District Board, and enquired whether it
was intended to carry out the work. The improvement in
question had been held in abeyance some ten years, but on
the receipt of this letter the surveyor of the Vestry was
instructed to re-open enquiries as to the possibility of
acquiring the property in question. As the freeholders