Report by the Joint committee of the House of Lords and the House of Commons on public sewers (contributions by frontagers) : together with the proceedings of the committee and minutes of evidence and speeches delivered by counsel.

  • Great Britain. Parliament. Joint Committee on Public Sewers
Date:
1936
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: Report by the Joint committee of the House of Lords and the House of Commons on public sewers (contributions by frontagers) : together with the proceedings of the committee and minutes of evidence and speeches delivered by counsel. Source: Wellcome Collection.

    33/126 (page 5)
    13° Maii, 1936.] [ Continued. of sewers laid in public roads for the benefit of their estates without contri- buting anything towards the cost of the séwers. Directly the sewer is laid, up goes the value of the estate; it has a building value far in excess of what it had before, and the landowners, who get that additional benefit by reason of the construction of the sewer, ought to pay a‘ contribution towards the cost of the sewer, and it ought not to be borne by the general body of ratepayers, for the benefit of the particular landowner. Lord Macmillan.] It is a proposal, _ really, to assimilate the two classes of roads, in certain cases and under certain safeguards? “Mr. Tyldesley Jones.| It is. -Mr. Wrottesley.] I think my friend’s answer to Sir Henry Cautley was only true of Section 62, the first clause with which we are dealing. Mr. Tyldesley Jones.] My friend is quite right. There are two sections in the Romford Act, the first one dealing with the laying of sewers in public roads. The second one—my friend is quite right —does deal with the cost of a sewer laid in a (private street but through land which is subsequently converted into a street; it may be public or private. Mr. Wrottesley.| Yes, that is right. Mr. Tyldesley Jones.| That will emerge later. I agree that my learned friend is quite right. That is the point really. One section in the Romford Act, Section 62, assimilates the law as regards the cost of the construction of sewers in public streets to that of private streets. he position is. that it is felt in practice so unreasonable that the general body of ratepayers should bear the ex- pense of constructing a sewer for the benefit of an estate about to be developed, that the practice of the Ministry of Health is this: If a local authority apply to the Ministry for their sanction to a loan for sewerage works, constructing new sewers, and the Ministry find that the sewer will be available for an estate about to be developed, they say to the local authority: ‘‘ Have you got an agreement from the landowners to con- tribute? If you have not, go and ask them for it’’. And the practice in all cases is now for the local authority to go to the landowners and say: ‘‘ We will lay a sewer there if you contribute ’’, and the landowners’ do, generally, contribute. Lord Macmillan.| What is the power of the local authority to receive contri- butions in aid of the discharge of their duties?—Is it a charitable contribution? Mr. Tyldesley Jones.| I do not think so. I do not think there is any difficulty about that. I should rather want notice of that question, if I am to cite authority upon it. Chairman.| Would not it be this, that the landowner wants to develop and he goes to the local authority and says: ‘¢ Will you make sewers?’’ and they say: ‘No, not until you do develop ’’? Mr. Tyldesley Jones: Yes. Chairman. | Until they make the sewers he cannot: develop, and thereby he is forced to contribute? Mr. Tyldesley Jones.| That is how it works, but Lord Macmillan’s point is, what is the right of the local authority to receive a contribution? Lord Macmillan.| Yes. Mr. Tyldesley Jones.|] I do not think there is any difficulty about that in law. Lord Macmillan.] As you know, there is a difficulty about certain trustees for certain purposes receiving moneys unless they have power to receive additional moneys to those which they are entitled to at law. Mr. Tyldesley Jones.| There are sub- sequent difficulties as to how they are to dispose of these moneys. Lord Macmillan.] The contribution is really more of a levy than a contribution. A contribution suggests a voluntary pay- ment, but this is paid under suasion. Mr. Tyldesley Jones.| Your Lordship sees why I was insisting wpon the position under the general law. The. local authority cannot be required to lay the sewers; therefore, there is no statutory obligation. The landowner says: ‘* Will you lay a sewer? I want to develop the estate ’’. The local authority cannot be compelled to and there is no statutory obligation to do that. That is why I referred to the decisions. But the local authority say: ‘‘ We are prepared to lay that sewer in anticipation of your de- velopment and in excess of our statutory obligation, if you, for whose estate it is going to be laid, will make a contribu- tion ’’, and that is what, in fact, happens. Sir Henry Cautley.| If the landowner did build his houses, the local authority would then be bound to lay a sewer, would they not? But they will not allow