The Sun.
London, England, 1860-06-07 00:00:00

P4RLI4 BIVT'ARY COMMITTEES.

EMBANKMENT OF THE THAMES.

The committee appointed to consider the best
means of providing for the increasing traffic of the
metropolis by the embankment of the Thames met
on Tuesday, Sir Joseph Paxton in the chair. The
other members present were the Hon. W. Cowper,
Sir J. Pakington, Lord J. Manners, Mr. Beamish,
Mr. Walter, Lord It. Montague, Mr. Phillips, Mr.
Roupell, Mr. Tite, Sir M. Montague,
Mr. Alderman',
Cubitt. and Mr. Stirling.
Mr. Thwaites, the chairman of the Metropolitan
Board of Works, was the first witness examined.—
He said the board were engaged in carrying out an
extensive scheme for the drainage of the metro-
polis. Contracts had been let for the high level
sewer from Hampstead to the River Lea, at Old
Ford, at £152,430 ; for the southern high level,
from Clapham Common and Dulwich to Deptford,
the contract was £217,000 ; for the southern outfall
sewer, from Deptford to Crossness Point, the con-
tract was £300,000 ; for the middle level sewer,
from Kensal-green to Old Ford, the amount was
£264,533 ; for the Acton branch to Notting-hill,
£8,850; m 'king a total of £942,813. Contracts were
about to be let for the northern branch ofthe low level
- sewer, on the south side of the Thames, at an esti-
mate of £60,000 ; for the Ranelagh storm overflow
across Hyde Park, at £23,000; for the sewer of the
western division, at £55,000 ; for the main outfall
sewer north of the Thames, from the River Lea to
Barking Creek, at £464,000 ; for a low loyal sewer
south of the Thames, at £152,000, for the reser-
voirs north and south of the Thames, at £240,000 ;
and for the low level sewer north of the Thames, 1
at £221,000. It was proposed to carry the last-
mentioned
sewer from the Ranelagh sewer to
Grosvenor-row, Queen's-row, Chelsea, along Queen-
street, and elgrave-place, and Victoria-street to
Charing-cr ,
, thence along the Strand, Fleet-
street, Crescent-place, Great and Little Carter-
lanes, Cannon-street, Eastcheap, and Tower-hill to
Brook-street, along the Commercial-road to Three-
Mills-lane, under the River Lea 'at Abbey Mills
While these extensive works were being carried on,
the traffic of the main streets would necessarily be
considerably interfered with. Did not think the
works would endanger St, Paul's or Somerset
House, although there might be some danger in
carrying a sewer through a narrow street.
The Chairman—What steps have the board taken
towards providing new thoroughfares for the traffic?
• Mr. Thwaites—We have three streets in the
course of formation ; one from Covent-garden ; one
in Southwark, from the end of High-street to
Blackfriars-bridge, and one as an approach to Vic-
toria Park. Most of the northern traffic from the
railway station at London-bridge will pass along
the road on the Southwark side, instead of by way
of London-bridge and Cheapside. The traffic along
Fleet-street and the Strand will not be so much
relieved as that through Cheapside, inasmuch as a
large portion of it will cross Blackfriars-bridge.
The board have had a rough estimate of the cost of
widening the Poultry. The amount of the esti-
mate is about £643,000. The street is very short,
and very little return would be given for the out-
lay. A roadway over the new low level
sewer would not at all impede its utility, and
it might be taken along the side of the Thames
without interfering with the bridges. If Hunger-
ford-market is to become a railway station a
larger area will be required, and the ground
saved from the sewer, if the Thames be em-
banked, would afford facilities for increased ac-
commodation. The mud banks in the river are
a source of great inconvenience, and would
be removed in the event of an embank-
ment being carried out. Our jurisdiction extends
only to the banks of the Thames. The jurisdiction
in the bed of the river is exercised by the conser-
vators. The attention of the board has been
directed to the desirability of constructing the
low level sewer along the foreshore of the river,
and the question was referred to a commission, who
communicated with the Thames Conservancy Board,
who approve of the proposition for embanking the
Thames, and state that they will at the proper time
consider whether the value of the reclaimed land
might not be applied to the cost of the improve-
ment. For our main drainage scheme we raise
annually £150,535 13s. 9d., and for the ordinary
current expenses of the board £132,087 18s. 4d.
The term provided by the act for levying the main
drainage rate is 40 years, but we think it will not
be necessary for more than 30 years. The metro-
polis contributes very largely to the taxation of
the country. The value of the property assessed
under schedule A is £22,385,350, whilst the sum for
the rest of the kingdom is £127,994,288. Under
schedule D the metropolis shows £37,871,644
against £89,198,950. The gross estimated rental
of the property of the metropolis assessed to the
poor rates is £16,157,320 against £86,077,676, as
against the rest of the kingdom. The amount col-
lected by the Customs far the whole kingdom is
£24,155,852, of which £12,332,061 is collected in
the metropolis.
The Chairman—Can you state what public works
have been executed in the metropolis, during the
last 20 years, at the cost of the Imperial Exche-
quer ?
Mr. Thwaites—For Battersea Park, £106,902;
Chelsea Bridge, £29,500; Vauxhall and Battersea
Bridges, £130,753; entrance to St. James's-park
from Pall-mall, £4,500; bridge in St. James's Park,
£3,500; Pimlico improvements, £27,810; West-
minster Bridge, £174,429; approaches thereto,
£46,000. I think that a portion of the coal duties
might be properly applied towards defraying the
cost of the proposed embankments.
Sir J. Pakington wished to know how these
questions bore upon the subject which had been re-
ferred to the committee ?
The Chairman replied that he was endeavouring
to ascertain the manner in which the cost of the
proposed works could be raised.
Sir J. Pakington would submit to the judgment
of the chairman, but said it had been the practice
of late years to introduce into parliamentary com-
mittees a great amount of superflous evidence, and
he thought they were now embarking in that
course.

Examination continued.—Did not think it im

proper to extend the coal tax over a given area, in-
asmuch as many persons who ought to contribute
to metropolitan improvements reside at a distance
from town, and could not be reached in any other
way. A tax on hackney carriages in the metropo-
lis amounted in 1859 to £80,368, that tax ought to
be applied to the metropolitan improvements.
The Chairman.—Would your board undertake
such a work as the embankment of the Thames
without any other resources for defraying the cost
than you have at the present moment ?
Mr. Thwaites.—Certainly not. Something ought
to be contributed out of the Consolidated Fund.
The cost of embanking both sides of the Thames
has been estimated at £2,000,000; and if the
Board of Works contributed £O,OOO, the Conso-
lidated Fund £50,000, and the Hackney-carriage
tax £BO,OOO per annum, the whole cost would be

defrayed in 22 years.
Mr. Cowper.—Are you prepared to give the
committee any details as to the manner in which
the proposed sewer is likely to affect St. Paul's ?
Mr. •fhwaites.—The sewer will be some dis-
tance from St. Paul's. It was not proposed to
Stake it through St. Paul's Churchyard, but 200
or 300 feet to the south. The complaints of the
inadequate accommodation for the traffic were
now so great that it was absolutely necessary to
form a new road, either from Cheapside to the
West, or along the foreshore of the river.
Mr. Cowper inquired where the funds were to
come from for constructing the new street ?
Mr. Thwaites thought it fair to assume that it
would be paid out of the metropolitan rates, and he
had suggested that a portion of the funds should
come out of the coal dues. The Board of Works
had power to levy rates for the construction of new
streets, but he thought the local board of manage-
ment would not be able to raise a rate for this pur-
pose on account of the extremely heavy taxation of
the metropolis. The amount of taxation necessary
to provide funds for the embankment of the Thames
would be greater than the people would endure,
and there would soon be a rebellion on the part of
the ratepayers against the rates. At present seve-
ral of the metropolitan boroughs were taxed to the
extent of 7s. 6d. in the pound, and they were in one
ease 14s. 6d. in the pound this very year.
By Mr. Cowper—The inhabitants of Hertford
contribute towards some of the taxes, and witness
did not consider that a hardship on account of the
facilities given
sgrivela.to it for the sale of its produce.
embankreesnentato mud
a Montague—The formation of an
uthesides of the river would get rid
of the pm
bank, and greatly increase the
scour. The streets whleh the Board of Works con-
templated in order
metropolis would costtoi6
relieve the traffic of the
£40,000, towards which the
Government contributed #;90,000, and the Duke of
Bedford £15,000. The Would be defrayed by
the ratepayers out of the mate:
a tax on carriages to defray the In Paris there was
cost of improve-
tied be deprived
ments. The two great advantages
from the proposed embankmentgweso be—first, a
better line for the lower level sewer u;
u
means for relieving the traffic. It woualddbenext, a
imma-
terial whether the embankments were solid
or car-
ried on arches, provided that the sewers were pro-
perly protected.
Mr. Waiter—Have you any means of ascertain-
ing the amount of traffic which now passes from
Charing-cross to Cannon-street ?
Mr. Thwaites—We have taken no steps to ascer-
tain ; but there is no doubt that it is enormous.
It is altogether incompatible with the comfort of
the inhabitants, and as the existing thoroughfares
provide no adequate accommodation, some remedy