A question put by a councillor led up to subjects which filled the paramount place in the evening’s discussion. One subject introduced others and at last the Council was in quite a tangle and when this was eventually cleared the opinions were so divided that nothing was decided. The Vice Chairman, Mr. C. H. Gould, asked the Chairman, Mr. A. Sharp J.P. that seeing that the Railway viaduct was being guarded above and below was it not advisable to close the bathing place which is in the shadow of the viaduct for the remainder of the season? The Chairman thought that it would be advisable in the interests of the lady and gentlemen bathers to discontinue. Mr. Clewitt was antagonistic to this course and said, in his opinion it was not necessary. Mr. Mellish interrupted that such a course ought to be taken as a safeguard. Mr. Clewitt replied that at the meeting held recently it was asked why the bridge had not a military guard and it was understood that the Company have undertaken to guard their property. It was his opinion that the L & N.W.R. Railway knew the conditions and if they considered it so dangerous they would have notified the Council, whose bathing place is on the Company’s property.

Mr. Meacham expressed his opinion of waiting until they were notified before taking such a course. Mr. Thorneycroft remarked that the viaduct was a place which required proper guarding. All along the line he’d found soldiers guarding even small bridges and he thought the viaduct required a military guard. He proposed that the Council write to the L & N.W.R. on this matter. The Chairman thought they would be quite justified in writing to the company explaining that in the view of the whole neighbourhood it required a military guard, being a critical point on the main artery of the system. He still adhered to his opinion that the bathing place would be best closed.

Mr. Bull asked as to what harm would the bathers come to. The Chairman said that the viaduct was guarded by men and the very fact that bathing was taking place under the arches, these men on guard, and he thought they were not all Wolverton men, they would not know whether the men going to bathe were Wolverton men going for a legitimate purpose, or strangers giving the impression they were going to bathe and only going for the purpose of damaging the viaduct. Mr. Bull moved that the bathing be continued until the proper authorities notify them of the danger. Mr. Clewitt readily seconded this and said that by taking such a course as closing the bathing place they would only be creating a panic and a scare in the minds of the people in the district. They were being told repeatedly to keep a cool head and here they were trying to take an opposite course.

Mr. Fetter said that they were quite justified in taking precautions. Mr Thorneycroft proposed that the Council write to the Railway Company with regard to the inadequate guard on the viaduct. This was seconded but not carried.

At this juncture the business got in quite a tangle and some of the councillors voiced their opinions and alluded to the Council’s action in writing to the Railway Company as ‘childish’. They upheld that the Company were quite aware of conditions. In order to try and settle the matter, Mr Bull moved that the discussion be left over until the next meeting. This was seconded but the discussion continued and eventually no definite conclusion was arrived at as the opinions were so divided.