The Sun.
London, England, 1863-02-17 00:00:00

POSTAGE-NEW ZEALAND.

_ -
Mr. MAGUIRE asked the Under Secretary of State for
the Colonies whether any correspondence had passed be-
tween her Majesty's Government and the Colonial Govern-
meats of Australia and New Zealand, respecting a new
postal service between those colonies and the mother coun-
try via Panama ; and, if so, whether there was any objec-
tion to lay such correspondence on the table of the house ?
Mr. C. FORTESCUE replied, that no correspondence
had taken place in the matter worthy of being laid on the
table of the house. The Legislature of New Zealand had
Passed an act for authorising a postal rate by way of Pa-
nama; but the Legislature of Victoria had not, according
to the last accounts, favoured the project.
BIRTHS AND DEATHS REGISTRATION
(IRELAND) BILL.
This bill was read a second time.
ILLEGITIMATE CHILDREN (IRELAND) BILL.
This bill, after a few amendments, passed through com-
viittee.
DRAINAGE (IRELAND) I3ILL
Report brought up and agreed to.
POST-OFFICE SAVINGS BANL9.
Report brought up and power given to bring in a bill
thereon.
CUSTOMS ACTS (TOBACCO DUTIES).
Report brought up and power given to bring in a bill
thereon.

THAMES EMBANKMENT.
Mr. COIVPER moved for leave to bring in a bill to autho-
rise the Metropolitan Board of Works to construct a great
thoroughfare between Blackfriars-bridge and the Mansion-
house. He believed that every one in the house would agree
that this was one of the most urgent wants of the metro-
polis. At present the Strand was inadequate to the traffic
passing from west to east, and when it reached Temple-bar
the real difficulties commeaced. Afterwards, when it reached
Ludgate-hill, the traffic had already reached there from
many quarters, and the greatest delay was the result, In
St. Paul's-churchyard was the next pressure, and then in
Cheapside; and when Cheapside was reached it was found
that the traffic poured in there not only from Charing-cross
but from Holborn and Oxford-street, and the Poultry and
Cheapside were totally inadequate to keep up the communi-

F cation between the east and the west end of the metropolis.
What was absolutely required was, another distinct tho-
roughfare, which would enable persons to pass from the
centre of commercial activity—from, he took it to be. the
open space between the Mansion-house and the Bank to
Charing-cross and Westminster Hall. The street to be laid
out to make this new thoroughfare was considered last year
in a bill for the embankment of the Theme . The commit-
tee to whom that bill had been referred had not had time
to censider the objections and details, and the question was
therefore deferred to the present year. The Commissioners
on the Thames Embankment scheme had had an opportu-
nity of examining witnesses and fully considering the mat-
ter, and he understood they had reported in favour of the
street which he had proposed last year, and thought there
was no preferable alternative. The first alternative would
be to carry the embankment further east from Blackfriars-
bridge. The bill of last year provided a spacious thorough-
fare from Westminster-bridge to Blackfriars, leaving 13
acres for garden ground as a place of recreation for the

inhabitants of those crowded districts. But the thorough-
fare would not be of much use if it stopped at Blackfriars.
The question to consider was, whether the embankment
could be carried further east. It happened that below
Blackfriars there were many very valuable wharves, which
would cost a great deal of money in the way of compensa-

Lion, and as the business was very important which was car-
ried on in them it would be wrong to deprive the commerce
of London of that advantage. Even if the road were carried
through the wharves it would not be the most direct
thoroughfare to the centre of the City. It would be more
circuitous, as it would proceed about so far as Queenhithe,
where it would leave the river and go in a northerly direc-
tion t' the Mansion-house and Charlotte-row. It was
thonght that some advantage would be derived by widen-
ing Walbrook, but that would be a very costly work. It
would be impossible for an impartial inquirer not to see that
there would be no advantage in adopting the embankment
in preference to the more direct line. though no doubt a
promenade on the side of the river would be very agree-
able ; but it would be very costly, and the public conve-
nience would not be so much secured as by the proposed
line. They might, no doubt, in place of a solid embank-
ment have a viaduct on arches, which :would allow barges
and other craft to pass under; but such a viaduct would
do great injury to the wharves, and entail a large expense
in the way of compensation, while the architectural effect
would not be so good. The other alternative was a line
from Blackfriars-bridge direct to St Paul's Cathedral,
which he would greatly desire, as it would have the advan-
tage of opening out that noble work of art, which was at
present so much hidden from the view. But that would be
a difficult thing to accomplish, as St. Paul's stood on ground
so much higher than Blackfriars-bridge, and a very large
sum of money would be required to widen St. Paul's church-
yard. It was therefore not thought desirable to carry out
that plan. The street he proposed making by the bill
which he now asked leave to introduce would be carried
from Chatham-place, 'Blackfriars-bridge, to Charlotte-row.
It would not be a very expensive street, as it would
not interfere with the frontage of any street. It crossed
existing thoroughfares diagonally, and would not interfere
with any street in which any retail trade was carried on, so
that the amount of compensation required would not be
very large. It passed from Chatham-place, crossed Upper
Thames-street, followed the line of Earl-street, crossed Can-
non-street, and debonehed between the church in the Poultry
and Charlotte-row. He had encountered a certain amount
of difficulty. As he had already stated, the Poultry was
choked up with vehicles, and another line of traffic carried
there would create greater difficulty; but there was power
given in the bill to widen the eastern end ,of the Poultry.
The expenses of making the proposed street would be drawn
from the Embankment and Metropolitan Improvement
Fund which was created by the bill of 1861. That fund, as
it was constituted, would not be sufficient to meet the new
charge for this street, which it was estimated would be
about £600,000, though the first outlay would probably be
about a million. The course which it would be necessary to
adopt would be to allow the coal duties to continue for ten
years more, from 1871 to 1881. All he would ask the house
to do would be to allow the Metropolitan Board of Works to
borrow money at once, upon the security of those duties. It
would be greatly to be desired that some portion of the Surrey
side should be embanked from Westminster-bridge,andt hat
portion of it was especially required from Lambeth Palace
to the gasworks at Vauxhall, in accordance with the report
of the commissioners, and a bill was under consideration for
that purpose. The next important work which was required
was the raising of the valley of Holborn-hill, that portion
which was under the Corporation of the City of London, to
and from Smithfield market. In that way the coal duties
could be made serviceable in effecting that and other much-
needed improvements. As to the embankment recommended
to be carried from Lambeth Palace,that work would be very
useful for the traffic from the Nine-elms and Vauxhall rail-
way stations. He thought he need not say more in asking
for leave to introduce a bill, as the alterations he had made
in the bill of last year were not very great. The right hon.
gentleman concluded by moving for leave to bring in the
bill.

Mr. LOCKE said that probably the right hon.gentleman
was not aware that the improvement he spoke of making
from Blackfriars-bridge to the Mansion House was by no
means a new idea. Some 12 or 15yeare ago the Corporation
of the city of London proposed making a similar improve-
ment, and he wished to know whythe right hon. gentleman
wanted to transfer the making of that improvement from
the Corporation of London to the Board of Works. The
Corporation was very;proud of the alterations they had made
in Cannon-street, which, if sot a Parisian improvement,was
at any rate very well done. As to the bridging over the
valley of Holborn-hill, that was a thing which had been
talked about for years. The city of London got 4d. out of
the 13d. coal duty, and he wanted to know what was the
state of the fund. The question had been asked last year,
and if the right hon. gentleman could not inform them, per-
haps the Lord Mayor, who was present, could. As to the
cost of the new street, he would warn the right hon. gentle-
man that it would cost much more than he had stated in his
estimate to the house, if it did not cost double that sum.
He believed that the Metropolitan Board of Works had
given the right hon. gentleman no encouragement in regard
to this matter. Last year an objection was raised that any
new street ought to be made by the City, and for that
reason the Thames embankment was stopped at Blackfriars-
bridge. If the scheme were carried further, it ought to be
done by the City out of the 4d. coal duty, and the other 9d.
left for other improvements in other parts of the metro-
polis.

Mr. WALPOLE rose to a point of order. According to
the statement of the right hon. gentleman he proposed to
collect the duty on coal until the year 1881, and out of the
money so obtained he hoped to get a sufficient sum to carry
on the proposed works. He (Mr. Walpole) wished to know
whether in that case the bill ought not to have been intro-
duced in committee of the whole house.
Mr. COWPER said he was afraid he had not made him-
self sufficiently understood. This bill proposed to give the
Metropolitan Board of Works the power of appropriating
money of the Thames embankment for the purpose of these
works. The bill would not go beyond the powers of the
Metropolitan Board of Works. and it could not be viewed
as a bill to levy a tax on the inhabitants, It was his inten-
tion to ask leave on a future occasion to bring in a bill to
replenish and increase the Thames embankment fund, if it
should be found necessary. He had followed the precedent
of last year, and he believed that he was perfectly in order.

Mr. HENLEY said it was a very inconvenient state of
things for a Minister of the Crown to come forward with a
bill for the purpose of carrying out a certain scheme, and
state that at a future time he would propose a plan by which
to raise the funds to pay for it. That was placing the house
in this position, that they would now assent to the scheme
being carried out without knowing how the money was to
be raised. He was of opinion that the two things should
be considered together. The scheme proposed might be
a very good one, but it was hardly fair to ask the house to
pledge itself to the measure, and at the same time say, " I
will upon a future day call upon the house to assent to the
continuance of a tax to pay for it."
The SPEAKER said that no doubt some inconvenience
might arise ; but if no new charge was to be imposed by the
bill, the present proceedings were not out of order. In point
of form he did not think it would be necessary to introduce
the bill in a committee of the whole house.
Mr. DOULTON asked the right hon. gentleman to post-
pone for a week or two the introduction of this bill, as the
Metropolitan Board of Works was to meet on Wednesday
next to consider whether it would be advisable to abandon
a great portion of the proposed street. It would be inconve-
nient if the house should assent to a scheme which the Board
Works might consider should not be proceeded with. He
also understood that the City authorities were divided in
opinion as to whether the lower part of the street should be
made. lie was opposed to the principle of paying for this
new street out of the ninepenny coal duty, and another rea-
son why the matter ought to be postponed was, that the en-
gineers whom the right hon. gentleman employed and the
engineers of the Metroplital Board of Works differed in
opinion as to the course and gradients of the street, and also
as to what the cost of the works should be. On the latter
point the variance extended to some hundreds of thousands.
The LORD MAYOR said that the hon. member for
Lambeth had truly described the proposed new street as
part of the City scheme to continue New Cannon-street to
Blackfriars-bridge, in order that it might form an outlet to
the Thames embankment. But that was not proceeded with
from want of funds. The 4d. fund had been entirely fore-
stalled by the cost of the street already made. Tho time
had come when there must be an outlet for the enormous
City-traffic; but the City had got no funds to make the
street. The right hon. gentleman now proposed to continue
the gd• coal tax, in order that a street should be made not
only from Blackfriars-bridge to Cannon-street, but to the
Mansion-house, and if that were not done the traffic would
eoofnawrkooto a dead lock. He objected to the Metropolitan Board
being introduced in the City of London. (Hear,
hear.) The corporation had done their work well and faith:
tally, and if the house thought it wise to continue the 9d.
coal tax, they could not do better than give the City autho-
rities the power of carrying out the scheme now proposed.
Mr. W. WILLIAMS thought the right hon. gentleman
should bring in a bill for the embankment of the Surrey side
of the Thames. (Laughter.) The inhabitants on that side
of the water were very much inconvenienced and suffered a
great deal from inundations, and something was absolutely
called for to prevent the destruction of property. The noble