The Sun.
London, England, 1864-09-06 00:00:00

SEWAGE OF TOWNS.

A select committee of the House of Commons sat
in May, June, and July of the present year to in-
quire into plans for dealing with the sewage of the
metropolis and other large towns, with a view to its
utilisation to agricultural purposes. The committee
examined a great number of witnesses, and the re-
port agreed to, and just published, is as follows:

The committee commenced their inquiry by examining
into all those plans for utilising, in a liquid state, the
sewage of the metropolis which had been laid before the
ISletrorntit.r. :Board of Wnrka, end wer. referred to the
committee by an order of the house. The committee have
ascertained from Cornish engineers of the greatest reputa-
tion the prices of the steam engines and pumps which
would be required to raise various quantitie3 of sewage to
stated heights. Mr Bateman, the well-known water engi-
neer, was examined as to the prices of the mains and pipes
which would be necessary for the conveyance and distribu-
tion of sewage over land, and the estimated cost of laying
them down and jointing them. The committee has come to
the conclusion that it is not only possible to utilise the
sewage of towns, by conveying it in a liquid state through
mains and pipes to the country, but that such an undertak-
ing may be made to result in pecuniary benefit to the rate-
payers of the towns whose sewage is thus utilised. That
benefit may, in a few years, be greatly increased ; for the
amount of artificial manures is even at present insuffi-
cient, and the sources whence same of the most im-
portant are obtained will in a few years be exhausted. Other
means of fertilising land must therefore be resorted to.
The committee, having examined the chairman and en-
gineer of the Metropolitan Board of Works, are of opinion
that more might have done by that board towards the pro-
fitable use of the sewage of London; and that the comple-
tion of the outfall sewerage of the metropolis ought, at the
earliest possible moment, to be followed by the adoption of
a system which may convert that sewage from a nuisance
into a permanent and increasing source of agricultural fer-
tility.
Even if a pecuniary benefit were not to be secured, yet
such a consideration should not deter local authorities from
taking such steps as aro possible to free rivers from pollu-
tion.
Tho committee examined several witnesses regarding the
pollution of the rivers and streams of the country. There
can be no doubt as the injury which results from the prac-
tice of conducting sewage and other refuse matters into the
rivers, whence numerous towns, villages, and country popu-
lations derive their water supply. It is imperatively neces-
sary that such a practice should be discontinued. No
efficient artificial method has been discovered to purify, for
drinking and culinary purposes, wafer which has been ones
infected by town sewage. By no known mechanical or
ehymical means can such water be more than partially
cleansed; it is always liable to putrify again. Processes of
filtering and deodorisation cannot, therefore, be relied upon
to do more than mitigate the evil. Water which appears
perfectly pure to the eye is sufficient, under certain condi-
tions, to breed serious epidemics in the population which
drinks it. Soils, however, and the roots of growing plants
have a great and rapid power of abstracting impurities from
sewage water, and rendering it again innocuous and free
from contamination. Mr Ffennell, the Chief Inspector of
Fisheries, stated in his evidence that sewage in a putrifying
state is destructive to fish. A considerable increase in the
amount of food far the people and of revenue to the owners
of rivers would, therefore, result from purifying the rivers
of the -United Kingdom, which are now contaminated by
sewage and other matters.

If the sewage of towns is no longer to flow into rivers, the
only alternative which remains is to dispose of it on the land.

It has been decided that it is a nuisance at common law to
discharge any sewage into a river. Yet the law is neverthe-
less_inoperative, for want of powers to remove the nuisance.
Latil within the last 30 years it has been the custom to
utilise all the nightsoil and other refuse on the land. Great
obstructions used to be thrown in the way of making house
drains which should empty themselves into the street sewer.
The use of the latter was confined to the conveyance of the
surface waters of the town. There was a service of scavengers
whose duty it was to remove excrementitious matters in
their carts; and it was the office of the mayors of towns to
take care that rivers, streams, and ponds were kept free
from all noxious or filthy substances. But when the mo-
dern water-closets came into vogue, and the practice was
introduced of flushing house drains into the sowers, then
the diluted nightsoil first began to find its way into rivers.
Yet the removal of house refuse to the land would now be
much easier and cheaper than it was formerly—because
carriage by suspension in a liquid is the cheapest mode of
transport.
"In many towns of Lancashire there aro to this day nu-
merout cesspits. This is the case with Manchester, where
the local authorities expend about L 20,000 a year for empty-
ing them and then removing the contents to the land, and
receive back 53 per cent. by the sale of the material. A
system of sewerage, and the necessary works to remove all
the refuse in a liquid state t.o the adjacent fields, would, in
Mr Rawlineon's opinion, cause a saving to the town.
"The Commissioners of Sewers and the Board of Health
took no steps to prevent the introduction of the practice of
flushing the refuse of houses into the street sewers, and
thence into the rivers. For they were of opinion that no
time should ho lost in freeing habitations from the danger-
ous infection of petrifying substances; and assumed that
when this more pressing object had been accomplished the
law would be again respected, and measures would be
taken to free the rivers and restore the refuse once more to
the land.
" Dwelling houses in the metropolis and many parts of
England have already been freed—which has caused the in-
creased pollution of rivers. This latter evil is becoming
worse every year in proportion to the adoption of a better
water supply, of a more perfect system of house drainage,
and the increase of the population.
"Dr, AA& and other witnesses believe that rivers can

be effectually freed from pollution only by extendiag the
Local Government Act to entire watersheds—or, rather, by
establishing boards somewhat similar to the present local
boards of towns, which should extend over the whole area
of each catchment basin, instead of being restricted to the
precincts of each town. These watershed or catchment
boards should, in the opinion of those witnesses, have all
the powers for this purpose which are now enjoyed by the
local boards of towns ; and they should be placed under the
direct authority and supervision of the Home .office. They
furthermore hold that it should be the duty of the Home
Secretary to see that the law as to the pollution of streams
is strictly enforced by these watershed boards.

The secretary of the local government office, as well as
Mr RawEason, the inspecting engineer, while concurring
in the necessity of appointing a board for each catchment
basin, gave a decided opinion that the duty of the watershed
board should be merely to supervise the action of the local
boards within their district, and enforce an obedience to the
law in causing them to desist from polluting the streams;
but that the necessary works should be carried out by the
local boards alone.

The committee recommend that the important object of
completely freeing the entire basins of rivers from pollution
should be rendered possible by general legislative enactment
enabling the inhabitants of such entire districts to adopt
some controlling power for that purpose ; but it should in-
clude a provision for compelling local boards to render the
sewage of their districts innocuous by application to the land
for agricultural purposes. The case of the Thames valley
(where the purification of the river, which has been sought
by the expenditure of enormous sums, is to a considerable
extent counteracted by the increased discharge of sewage
from towns higher up the stream) requires special and im-
mediate attention. _ _

Before concluding the inquiry the committee received
some evidence with regard to the measures now being car-
ried out by the Metropolitan Board of W orks for diverting
the sewage of the metropolis. This inquiry the committee
have been unable to complete.