“Subject to any such special stipulations as aforesaid, after the company has opened or broken up a street or public road they shall be under the following further obligations:
“(1.) They shall with all convenient speed complete the work on account of which they opened or broke up the same, and fill in the ground and make good the surface, and generally restore the street or public road to as good a condition as that in which it was before being opened or broken up, and carry away all rubbish occasioned thereby:
“(2.) They shall in the meantime cause the place where the street or public road is opened or broken up to be fenced and watched, and to be properly lighted at night:
“(3.) They shall pay all reasonable expenses of keeping the street or public road in good repair for six months after the same is restored, so far as such expenses may be increased by such opening or breaking up” . . . (26 & 27 Vic. c. 112, s. 18).
“Whenever the permanent surface or soil of any street or public road is broken up or opened by the company it shall be lawful for the body having the control of the street or road, in case they think it expedient so to do, to fill in the ground, and to make good the pavement or surface or soil so broken up or opened, and to carry away the rubbish occasioned thereby, instead of permitting such work to be done by the company; and the cost and expenses of filling in such ground and making good the pavement or soil so broken up or opened, shall be repaid on demand to the body having the control of the street or road by the company, and in default thereof may be recovered by the body having the control of the street or road from the company, as a penalty is or may be recoverable from the company” (26 & 27 Vic. c. 112, s. 19).
“The company shall not stop or impede traffic in any street or public road, or into or out of any street or public road, further than is necessary for the proper execution of their works. They shall not close against traffic more than one third in width of any street or public road or of any way opening into any street or public road at one time; and in case two-thirds of such street or road are not wide enough to allow two carriages to pass each other, they shall not occupy with their works at one time more than fifty yards in length of the one-third thereof except with the special consent of the body having the control thereof” (26 & 27 Vic. c. 112, s. 20).
It will be seen that these are much more elaborate clauses, restricting the rights of the telegraph companies than those of the gas and water companies, &c., and as the Telegraphs Act containing these strict clauses was passed in the year 1863 and the Water Works Clauses Act in 1847, it is fair to assume that the clauses of the Telegraphs Act 1863 were framed to meet certain objections to these clauses and upon experience of their working, and are consequently better and more adapted for the case in point.
To obviate all the difficulties and complications arising out of this constant breaking up of streets, with the attendant inconvenience to the public and damage to the surfaces of the roadways, it was suggested many years ago that subways should be constructed under the surface of the principal streets, in which should be placed all the gas and water mains then existing.
There is no doubt that there are many advantages in this plan as well as some disadvantages. It must be recollected that probably the subways would have been constructed of sufficient capability to carry all the mains and wires then existing, with a margin for future extensions of size, but when we see the enormous growth of many towns, notably that of the metropolis, and the consequent increase necessary in the number and diameters of the mains, it is to be feared that sufficient space would not have been left, and competition between rival gas and water companies might consequently have been crippled.
Still there would be great convenience in many respects if all water and gas mains, telegraph and telephone wires could be carried in subways, as they would be easily accessible for repairs, and hidden leaks would be unknown. With regard to the one great objection so constantly urged, that in the case of a leaky gas main or service a most terrible and damaging explosion might take place, it is true that this is a very grave and serious objection, but it must also be recollected that although this danger may be enhanced by the necessarily solid masonry of which the subway is constructed, still there would be every precaution taken to prevent leakage of gas, and in the present system liability to explosion is not altogether remote. In Percy Street, Tottenham Court Road, only a year or two ago, there was a terrible explosion in trenches and mains which had become full of gas and atmospheric air in the proportions of one volume of gas to fifteen volumes of air, and if gas mains were laid in subways greater precautions would no doubt be taken.