368 MISCELLANEOUS 



areas. It was comparatively easy to get so far, but when an 

 instruction came before a Committee there was 110 witness to 

 put the case for agriculture, while the promoters were always 

 represented by counsel ; it was therefore eas}' to satisfy the 

 Committee that everything necessary was being clone, when 

 only one side was given a hearing. Consequently, Com- 

 mittees always reported to the House that the provisions of 

 the Bills were adequate to comply with the instruction. As 

 the Central Chamber has no locus standi and local Chambers 

 have seldom the financial means to engage counsel to appear, 

 it is not easy to carry matters further ; but the action taken 

 did result in an alteration being made in the Standing Orders 

 of the House of Commons, requiring every Committee sitting 

 on a Water Bill to inquire into the question of adequate 

 provision being made, and to report to the House accordingly. 

 Up to the present the Government have taken no further 

 steps in the direction of holding a full inquiry into the question 

 of water supply, as recommended by the Joint Committee in 

 1910. 



Boundary Fences. 



In June, 1883, the West Riding Chamber sent up a resolu- 

 tion complaining of the unsatisfactory state of the law on 

 boundary fences, and, considering this a question of some 

 importance, the Business Committee put it on the agenda 

 for the folio wing November. On that date Mr. Henry Williams, 

 of Monmouthshire, introduced the question, and the following 

 resolution was carried by 15 votes to 14 : " That the law with 

 regard to fences requires to be more clearly defined and to be 

 more conformable with the prevailing practice . " In December, 

 1887, after an interesting debate, a Committee was appointed 

 to inquire into the whole question of boundary fences and, if 

 necessary, to draft a Bill on the subject. This Committee 

 consisted of Lord Ebrington, M.P., Mr. S. Rowlandson 

 (Chairman), Mr. Clare Sewell Read, Mr. Fletcher (Maidstone), 

 Mr. S. B. L. Druce, Mr. W. Stratton, Mr. W. H. Gatty (North- 

 amptonshire), and Mr. T. Colborne (Monmouthshire). The 

 Committee's first report, adopted by the Council on 2nd May, 



