The Sun.
London, England, 1853-07-20 00:00:00

• •
W ' "
-Av • ---.- '
~ -._•-•.,..,
....*• ;,... i
~...
.:,
_...,
;,...1.:..7:::::---,,,,:,.:..,..:. 11.., ,-,..
. '''...e ''' l• .
lIIHI.
r.f.
- Is t;ik
‘ e*
• -''.''''•. •.I:',T, - e'D
_. ~.t., ~..,,...1.4.40Arr.,,_i____,1...42:16, :
_,----..:. •
.o.
,WAk4 ." 1 ,- -. , :
./...
. We " • '''
;*;
r . ,-- kl* 4" fi .".
0 ZW 1 6.i.:\ew 1. -.
s i *.',, ' ;A.,- '_
el. .•
'‘A 0; •)4 - - / ~', y 4 , -4,..4 ' 'rez-4 4704, ••. • v• Iff
. . ...... ,... 4,
4tif. * ' -/' ,•*\\%' .' • , . ...
. . • o'., •C. 3
• 0 14.
• 1-...-, ,!', WA: ,-$ '
~....,_ 4,‹ t 0 \,.e, :• ,
~., . .
• . ~
I . 4
'..- ' . :.-
Pi . ,
' .
--
.. : '7,, oat .
,„..... 0„ , .. ‘ ~.
. •t , ~..
•-,,_____ _
, •..,,,,,, ~.. 1 . gq ial ..-2,,,,,„ji, ,f, ItO:.1), „ :,,... .., t....ki .5
- it 'iC.,..Zkf 'DI ...,.1.3. • / i i. ,.. 4 LT-01 Ti . . .11), •
t.... 5.",. 1 , / Iv .14, 1
7,, .- .-,' ---4- ),' /\"4:,

LONDON, WEDNESDAY EVENING, JULY 20, 1853.

JAMES HARMER, Esquire, deceased.—All
persons haying any claim or demand upon the Estate of James
Harmer, late of hr.tri as Park, in the county of Kent, Esquire, de-
ceased, are requested to send the full particulars thereof for examina-
tion to the ucdersißmed•
ADAM RIVERS STEELE,
1, Lineolns-inn-fields, London.

the Commissioners of Sewers, and a fourth was abandoned
in consequence of the change of Government, which
gave other occupation to the authorities of the Home-
office. In the present session Mr. Morewood and his
friends have renewed their application. Their principal
opponents in Committee were the City and Metropolitan
Commissioners of Sewers, and ultimately the Committee
reported the preamble not proved. We do not dispute
thejustice of this decision, for there were undoubtedly
objections to the scheme suggested, and one material
provision, at least, was unusual, though not unprece-
dented ; but we must impress upon those who
thought proper to come forward as its opponents that
they have taken upon themselves no light responsi-
bility. They are bound without delay to produce a
comprehensive and practical measure of their own, and
to give some satisfactory assurance that the new lease of
power which Parliament is now about to bestow upon
them shall be spent, not in discreditable quarrels or
costly jobs, but in the systematic and scientific prosecu-
tion of the great work with which they are entrusted.
The promoters of the rejected Drainage Bill contem-
plated the formation of one main intercepting sewer on
each side of the river—that on the north extending from
Westminster-hall to Barking-creek (about ten miles),
and that on the south from the Effra sewer to Horn-
lane, below Greenwich-marshes. The depth below the
surface was to be throughout very considerable—in St.
Paul's Church, no less than sixty feet ; the works would
have been carried on with little, if any, obstruction of
the thoroughfares above them ; and the evidence showed
that there would have been no difficulty in connecting
the existing sewers with these, main lines. It was further
proposed that, at each terminus, the tunnel should
discharge itself into a well, and that the sewage
should thence pass into a series of tanks, in which
it Ras to be subjected to the operation of liquid
lime, the deodorising properties of which are well
known. This mode of treatment has for some time
been practised with success in the county gaol of
Cardiff, where
.the material obtained is sold, after
'desiccation, for 31. per ton. It appears, from the
calculations of one of the witnesses, that the number of
tons which might be annually collected from the sewer-
age of London would be more than 100,000—the price
of which may be taken at 300,000/., subject to a deduc-
tion of one-half for the cost of manufacture. It was
strongly urged by the opponents of this bill, and ad-
mitted by the promoters, that sewers of the size proposed
would be too small to carry off the sudden rush of water
occasioned by storms; but it was contended, and appar-
ently with good reason, that the first flush of water
would wash all the deposit out of the existing sewers
into the intercepting tunnels, which would not previously
be more than half full, and would thus be ready to re-
ceive it. The surplus water, which would be compara-
tively pure, might then, it was argued, be safely left to
find its way into the river by the existing outlets, which
would be left undisturbed. The whole expense of the
projected undertaking would have been, according to
the estimates furnished by competents engineer, about
900,0001.—0 f which sum one-ninth might have been
saved by terminating the northern sewer at Bow-creek,
to which there did not appear to be any substantial
objection. In order to secure the interest of the
advanced,tchapeitpadartihsuhses in
principallyit was
liability, which was to continue for twenty-five years,
and which could not, under any possible circumstances,
pesrtoepdo s e
ad
certain t o throw
limitedupon
have exceeded 27,0001. in any one year. We have above
alluded to this proposition as a very unusual one, and it
may be fairly questioned how far the promoters were
entitled to expect so great an indulgence ; but it is right
to observe that no opposition was offered to the bill by
the parishes or districts upon which the burden would
have been thrown. We believe that it is only by tunnel
sewers of the description proposed that the low-lying
districts of the metropolis can be effectually drained.
Such was the challenge offered by the promoters of
the bill, and not very satisfactorily met by their oppo-
nents. For the present, however, the opposition has
been successful, and we are left in the power of the Com-
missioners of Sewers. We now ask those gentlemen what
steps they intend to take ? Mr. Brunel, one of their
witnesses, objected to the measure which we have been
considering as " too vast and comprehensive." Are we
to understand that petty and inefficient mea-
sures are deemed preferable ? The same gentleman ob-
jected to creating a monopoly, which might, he con-
ceived, prove disadvantageous to the public if the specu-
lation should turn out profitable. Are the Commission-
ers, then, to have a monopoly of inutility and extrava-
gance ? Is it true that they contemplate the extension
of inland drainage only, and do not intend to take any
steps for relieving the Thames from its pollution—that
its vast bed of mud is still to be exposed at low water,
"red with animalculm," and more and more offensive as
each year increases the discharge which it receives ?
Are our sewers to continue, as at present, for sixteen
hours out of the twenty-four, vast cesspools, sending
back into our dwelling-houses their fetid stench, preg-
nant with disease and death ? And lastly, are our agri-
culturists still to be compelled to obtain from distant
countries, at a heavy expense, precarious supplies of
that fertilising material which we possess in abundance
at home ? All these questions will, we trust, be satis-
factorily answered before the bill for continuing the
Sewers Commission finally receives the sanction of the
Legislature.

THE CRYSTAL PALACE.