RIVERS CONSERVANCY AND FLOODS 377 



and the Count}*- Councils' Association on the subject, and 

 Lord Thring introduced a series of Bills in the House of Lords 

 between 1893 and 1898, two of which passed the Upper House, 

 but made no further progress. A Bill was introduced in the 

 Commons in 1899, but did not get a second reading. 



The subject was revived on 3rd May, 1904, when the 

 Council reiterated their opinion of May, 1892, and the subject 

 was referred to the Boundary Fences Committee. This Com- 

 mittee, having obtained leave from the Council, went as a 

 deputation to the Board of Agriculture in order to discuss the 

 whole question, and in May, 1905, they presented their report, 

 which the Council adopted. The Committee said : 



(5) In case of rivers and the larger watercourses, which were 

 more generally dealt with by private Acts of Parliament, or by 

 Drainage Boards constituted under the Land Drainage Act of 

 1861, several members of the deputation alluded to the unsatis- 

 factory nature of some of these Acts, and to the way in which 

 their provisions were administered. With regard to the smaller 

 watercourses which were not included in any drainage area, 

 several speakers called Lord Onslow's attention to the fact that, 

 whilst it was true that Sections 14 and 15 of the Land Drainage 

 Act of 1847 provided means to remedy the default of persons 

 who neglected to clean out streams or watercourses which either 

 formed the boundary of, or ran through, their property, the 

 unanimous opinion of the deputation was that these powers needed 

 simplifying, and that it was desirable that some authority, pre- 

 ferably the Board of Agriculture, should be charged with their 

 enforcement. 



(6) It was also pointed out that the deputation approved 

 generally of the provisions of the County Councils Bill, 1899, 

 the chief difficulty with regard to which seemed to be the equit- 

 able apportionment of the expenses incurred under the Bill ; 

 but they also considered that the Board of Agriculture rather 

 than the County Councils should be the authority to administer 

 such an Act. 



(7) As the provisions of the Act of 1847 were not very widely 

 known, and as there appeared to be a great deal of uncertainty 

 as to the state of the law on the subject generally, it was suggested 

 that if the Board of Agriculture would prepare and issue a state- 

 ment giving a summary of the existing laws dealing with the 

 question, it might prepare the way for such further legislation as 

 is needed. 



(8) Lord Onslow. in his reply, intimated that the last suggestion 

 was one which the Board might very well adopt. He agreed with 

 many of the points that had been raised, and felt that the* Board 

 might with advantage make some further inquiry into present 



