The Sun.
London, England, 1853-12-16 00:00:00

COURT OF COMMON COUNCIL.

Yeslmlay a Court was held for the despatch of pub-
lic buginess.
STEAM-BOAT ACCOMMODATION ON THE SURREY SIDE OF

LONDON-BRIDGE.

Mr. R. C. BIICKNALL brought up the following re-
port, which was read by Mr. Woodthorpe :
"To the Right Honourable the Lord Mayor,
Aldermen and Commons, of the City of London,
in Common Council assembled.
" We, whose names are hereunto subscribed, your
committee for letting the Bridge-house Estates, to
whom on the 24th day of November last it was referred
to consider the petition of the London, Westminster,
and Vauxhall Steam-packet Company, and the City
Steam-packet Company, for increased facilities for the
landing and embarking of passengers at the south end of
London-bridge, and to whom, on the Bth Of December
inst., it was referred to consider the petition of Henry
Wilson, and Richard Lawrence Fennings and James
Fennings, against the adoption of the plan No. 2,
annexed to and recommended by the report of the
Navigation Committee, presented to this honourable
Court on the 27th February, 1851, do hereby certify
that we proceeded in the said- reference, and were at-
tended by Mr. Jennings, Mr. Caltarii,:, and Mr.
Riddle, on behalf of the steam packet companies ; and
by Messrs. Fennings, and their solicitor, Mr. George
Richard Corner, who also representeu the petitioner,
Mr. Henry Wilson, all of whom were severally heard
upon their respective petitions. And we caused to be
laid before us the several proceedings of this committee
in the year 1850, when the subject of the construction
of a steam-boat pier at the south end of London-bridge
was under consideration, with the evidence then laid
before your committee on both sides of the question ; and
we also caused to be laid before us the before-mentioned
report of the Navigation Committee,
with the proceed-
ings of this honourable Court in relation thereto on the
21st of March, ISSI, and having fully and maturely con-
sidered the whole subject, we beg to report that, so far
as relates to London-bridge and thestairs belonging
thereto, we do not see any objection to the adoption of
the Plan No. 2 annexed to and recommended by the
before-mentioned report of the Navigation Committee,
provided care be taken to secure sufficient accommoda-
tion for the landing and embarking of other passengers
besides those using the steamboats. All which we submit
to the judgment of this honourable Court. Dated this
15th day of December, 1853.
"R. C. Bucknall. T. Barkley.
James Bailey. F. Joyce
R. Chaplin. D. J. M'Lauchlan.
J. Waterlow. T. Dakin.
S. Read. W. Hartridge.
G. Mason. J. M. Barnard."

Mr. DE JERSEY moved, as an amendment, that the
further consideration of the question be adjourned for
the present.
The amendment having been seconded,
Mr. DAKIN said that he hoped the motion would not
be interfered with, considering that the question under
consideration had been before the Court since July, 1850.
It was a question of diverting a million of passengers
annually from the foot of London-bridge. (Hear, hear).
The amendment was put and negatived, after which
the original motion, that the report be received, was
carried.