laid out and maintained in manner herein-after provided for use as a garden open to the public…subject to such byelaws and regulations as the Commissioners of Works may determine”) to submit that future regulation of the Garden is left to the good sense of the Commissioners and no further provision needed to be made for the future or their protection. However, on the basis of the wording of section 8(1), I am of the view that the ordinary and natural reading is that the byelaws and regulations are intended to regulate the detail of the overall purpose, which is the provision of a garden for public use. ii) Conclusion on the construction of section 8 of the Act 76. Accordingly, I arrive at the following construction of section 8 of the 1900 Act: 1) On its ordinary and natural meaning, Section 8(1) of the 1900 Act imposes an enduring obligation to lay out and retain the new garden land for use as a public garden and integral part of the existing Victoria Tower Gardens. It is not an obligation which was spent once the Gardens had been laid out so that the land could be turned over to some other use or be developed or built upon at some point after it had been laid out whenever it suited those subject to the obligation. 2) Section 8(8) cannot be read as only covering repair or upkeep. The language is very similar to s.8(1) and the latter says in manner-hereinafter provided. Sections 8(1) and 8(8) are both to the same effect. They require the land to be laid out and thereafter kept as public gardens. 3) The detailed prohibitions in Section 8(15)-(18) do not detract from the substantive obligation in section 8(1). Sections 8(15) - (18) simply impose controls on works that could be carried out (or were not the subject of any absolute prohibition). 4) The repeal of the larger part of the 1900 Act, save for the prospective and continuing obligations in ss. 7-9, confirms the enduring nature of the obligations imposed by them. 5) As was common ground by the end of the hearing, the advent of the modern planning system has no bearing on the obligations in the 1900 Act. iii) The pre-legislative material 77. The Trust produced evidence from Dr Gerhold, a former House of Commons Clerk and a Fellow of the Royal Historical Society and the Society of Antiquaries. In his witness statement, he stated that he was familiar with the Parliamentary process and with archival work. He explained that he undertook research on the history of the Act using the London Metropolitan Archives and the Parliamentary Archives. The bulk of the material relied on comprises Minutes of the London County Council 27