The Sun.
London, England, 1854-11-30 00:00:00

W.ROUJIT IRON ORDNANCE.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE TIMES.
Sir,—Deeply impressed with the intimate and
vital connection which the subject of these remarks
has with the successful, speedy, and glorious ter-
mination of the present great war, I earnestly beg
you will permit me to offer them through your
medium to all concerned.

If we investigate in a common-sense spirit the
cause of the all but entire failure of our great naval
expedition to the Baltic, as also the cause of the
protracted, and, as yet, unsuccessful operations be-
fore Sebastopol, involving, as they have already
done, so fearful a sacrifice of our bravest men, it
appears to me we shall find that the want of ord-
nance of power adequate to the emergency lies at
the root of all these disappointing and sad results.
Had we armed ourselves, as we might have done,
and might yet do, with such guns as -would be cap-
able of throwing shot and shells of 2 cwt. to 3 cwt.
'each, and tirat from distances sufficiently great to
keep us (rat of the reach of the missiles of the
enemy, we should thus be able to knock his strongest

forts to ruins.
Tlei reason why we have not been able to do so
%ink/. if rests with the fact, that we continue to cm-
plc. y fur our great ordnance a material (cast iron)
Ninich, on account of its inherent unfitness to with
stand violent shocks and strains, has, in every other
case, been discarded from use.
Were we to revert to the employment of wrought
iron, possessed as that material is of every quality
requisite, and aided as we now are by the ample
and energetic means which my steam-hammer has
given us for forging ordnance of yet unheard-of
power, we should thus be enabled to arm ourselves
with guns the tremendous powers of which would
only be equalled by their perfection of performance;
as, admitting of the introduction of the Minie rifle
principle, in union with those capabilities of throw-
ing shot and shell of vast weight, we should soon,
by such powerful agents, bring this great war to a
most glorious termination.
When I inform you that the strength of forged
iron is to that of cast iron as six is to one, you will
at once see how important such an accession of ex-
plosion resisting capability bears on the matter in
question, as it is simply the strength or tenacity of
the material of a gun which limits the capabilities
of it as to the distance and weight of missile it is
capable of discharging. It requires no lengthy
reasoning for prove -or show what mighty results
would issue from the employment of great ordnance
formed of a material at least six times stronger
than what we at present employ.
In order to place the matter, perhaps, in a
stronger light, what would be thought of the
judgment of a man who should propose to employ
cast iron for an anchor or railway axle ? How in-
finitely more absurd, then, is it to employ cast
iron for our great ordnance, as it is well known to
practical men that, besides the, vast inferiority in
strength in the case of cast iron, its tenacity de-
creases in a rapid ratio with the increase in the
massiveness of the object it is employed, to form !
Why, then, do we continue to use cast iron for
our great ordnance, which are naturally subjected
to vastly more severe shocks and strains than an-
chors or railway axles, and in so doing limit our de-
structive power to its verylimited capabilities, to ac-
commodate which we are obliged to come to such
close quarters and discharge such comparatively in-
effective shot that we sacrifice in consequence thou-
sands of lives of our bravest men, and spend millions
of money in our endeavour to accomplish, by
throwing a vast number of small pieces of iron,
that which we might to a certainty accomplish by
massive shot and shell discharged from our wrought
iron ordnance at distances quite out of reach of the
enemy; for nothing but such massive missiles as I
refer to—namely, shot of two and three hundred
weight, will ever effectually destoy the tremendous
forts in question ?
Having spent the best part of my life in most
intimate connection with the working of wrought
iron on the greatest scale, and where that admira-
ble material has to resist shocks and strains of the
utmost violence, and having besides had the hap-
piness to give to the world the most energetic
agent mankind has ever possessed for the forging
of great masses of wrought iron, I trust I
may be permitted to speak on this subject
with some degree of confidence, as it is one that
has a most vital and important bearing on the
speedy and.successful issue of this terrible war. Had
I. but the opportunity given me to bring all the
exforience I possess on this subject to bear, I
should go heart and soul into it, and soon show,
what my steam-hammers can do towards helping
us to solve the fearful problem that, if we value
our position as a free and powerful nation, we
must, and that soon, accomplish.
I may state in conclusion that, although I have
submitted most complete plans and designs for such
great wrought iron ordnance, with the same for
appropriate Miniti rifle shells and shot, should I
not be entrusted with the carrying out of my own
designs I shall not be the less zealous in ailbrding
the most hearty assistance to whomsoever may
be selected to give proof of What wrought iron can
do for us in our present great emergency.
I am, Sir, yours most respectfully,

JAMES NASMYTH,
Bridgewater Foundry, Patricroft,
near Manchester, Nov. 24.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE TIMES.

Sir,—Observing in the Times of Saturday last a
letter signed " Horace J. Rockwell," in which that
gentleman gives it as his opinion that wrought iron
guns ought to be excluded from our service—first,
because of their insecurity ; 2dly, the enlargement
of the bore ; 3dly, their liability to rapid beating ;
and 4thly, their expense—l beg leave to state the
following facts, which came under my own obser-
vation, and which seem to me to render the cor-
rectness of Mr. Rockwell's opinion doubtful.
About five years ago I was applied to by some
gentlemen of Bristol to obtain at Woolwich a trial
for a gun made of hammered iron, constructed by
Mr. Wm. Morgan, whose reputation as a naval en-
gineer is well known, whether as the engineer to
the Austrian Lloyd's Company or with reference
to the steam-ships he has constructed for our own
mercantile marine. Lord Anglesey, who was then
Master-General of the Ordnance, granted the trial
sought for, the parties paying all expenses. A -
pounder gun, 5 feet in length, and weighing under
6 cwt., was accordingly forwarded to Woolwich in
order to have its qualities tested, more particularly
its durability and powers of resistance.
Mr. Morgan had constructed the gun as light as
it could be, that the trial might be made on the
most disadvantageous terms possible : he was aware
that a brass 9-pounder gun weighed 13 cwt., six
feet in length, and consequently he gave away full
5 cwt. of-metal, which he might have used, and
yet made his gun as light as a brass fieldpiece.
The trial sought for was, that the gun should be
burst upon progressive charges. I was present
upon the first day's trial, the charge, powder,
wads, and shot, being progressively increased ; the
gun did not burst. On the second day's trial they
did buret the guwa n.
ten inches half that is, was ripped open about
y u The tl was d
by all the authorities presentria to have been a
very severe one, and the following were the
results :—firstly, the great durability of the
ran ; secondly, the absence of heat on its re-
peated discharge ; thirdly, the absence to enlarge-
ment at either muzzle or touchhole ; and, lastly,
as it had been prophesied that the smoothness of
the bore would be ploughed up by the passage of
iron shot, the gun at the conclusion of the trial
was found to be as smooth as it was at the com-
mencement.
As regards the expense, I remember that Mr.
Morgan calculated that a hammered iron gunmight
be made as cheap as a brass gun, and, when worn
out, the same material, as in a brass gun, might be
used again. I have had no communication with
Mr. Morgan on this subject, nor do I know your
corresponent who writes under the name of
" Hammered Iron," but, if you think the fore-
going ad rem, it is at your service.—l am, Sir,
yours obediently,

F. HENRY F. BERKELEY.
Victoria-square, Nov. 26.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE TIMES.
and r,gir--BeiDg interested in wrought iron guns,
eading in your valuable paper several letters
ou the subject, I beg to hand you the particulars
of a wrought-iron gun which I forged at the _Mer-
sey Steel and Iron Works, Liverpool (which was
said to be for the United States steam-frigate
Princeton), and Proved on the North shore at
12 feet ; diameter of
Liverpool in the yea 1345, viz. :—Length of bore,
bo, 1 foot ; weight of shot,
2191 b each. Proving-Ist
and double shot ; 2d charge, 451 b of Powder
and 3(1 charge, 441 b of pow-
powiler and single shot.
der anti double shot ; li and 30th charge, 301 b of
At
I am, Sir, yours very rPspectfiilly,
JAMES EA.STWOOD.
Railway Iron Works, Derhy, Nov. 23.

[ADVERTISEMENT.]—Holloway's Ointment and
the first remedies in the world for the cure of Rad C ;2'
--Anne Williams. of Village place, Claton-street Li
pool, states, in a letter to Mr. Robinson, drugg'ist, v:7l.
Copperas-hill, Liverpool, that she had an ulcerated leg
for many months, and that she tried various remedies in
anticipation of effecting a cure, which appeared quite
hopeless, as it became worse every day until she made
use of Holloway's ointment and pills. The first dress-
ing there was a decided improvement, and in a few
weeks the wounds were completely healed, and she now
enjoys moat excellent health.—Sold by all vendors of
medicine, and at Professor. Holloway's Establish-
ments, 244 Strand, London, and SO, Maiden-lane,
York:

METROPOLITAN COMMISSION OF
SEWERS.

OPENINCr OF THE NEW CO3IMISSION.

A. special Court of Sewers was held yesterday, at the
Court-house, Greek-street, Soho, for the purpose of
opening the new commission, and making arrangements
for the regulation and management of the business of the

commission.
The members of the commission present were Messrs.
R. Jebb, T. Hawes, L. Redhead, G. S. Smith, J. Hodg-
son, J. Pascall, G. Offer, F. Chalmers, J. Thwaites, and
W. Evans, Sir J. V. Shelley, Dr. Sayer, Dr. Lewis, and
Captain Johnson.

The commission was then read by the secretary, and
The CHAIRMAN proceeded to make some general ob-
servations upon the leading features of the present state
of the commission. He observed that few of the new
commissioners were, perhaps, aware that previously to
the year 1348 London and its neighbouring city was,
with respect to its sewage, governed by seven separate
commissions, and that the jurisdiction of those commis-
sions
extended over an area of 200 miles. The commis-
sion just read and every commission since 1848 bad been
nearly identidal in regard to the extent of the jurisdic-
-ion which, under previous commissions, had existed for
upwards of :00 years. But the limit of 200 miles did
not represent the full extent of Ler Majesty's powers,
her she was able to extend the power of the commission,
.cot only over the territory subject to the old separate
eounnis,ioni, but also over any district which was
within twelve miles of St. Paul's, whi,:h would in-
dude an area of 400 miles. That power had nut, how-
aver, Leen acted upon. again, the commissioners had
in their discretion forborne to act in many of the out•
lying parts of their own jurisdiction; where, if they
pleased, they might have levied rates and have ex-
orcised the powers of drainage. In 1843 the act of
the 11th and 'l2th of Victoria, ehap. 112, was passed,
which first established the Metropolitan Commission
of Sewers. The first act of that commission was to in-
crease the area of some of the existing districts, and to
form some new districts, the total area of all the districts
being 114 square miles. He wished particularly to draw
attention to the new districts, the state of which would
require attentive consideration, in consequence of the
gross inadequacy of the sewers, and of the amount of
the rates to supply the wants of those districts. A six-
penny rate was altogether inadequate to provide for
what was required. The large area under the jurisdic:
tion of the commission was divided into 25 districts ;
each district was rated separately, and the rates raised
in each were expended solely for that district, and could
not be expended for any other district. On the north
of the Thames the general course of each district was at
right angles with the river. They had been formed
with :reference to the natural fall of the ground.. The
drainage of each district might be considered as com-
posing a principal contributory to the Thames, with a
hill lon each side, forming its boundary, the drain or
sewer being in a valley. On the south there was the
great Surrey and Kent district ; on the south-west there
was one of the newly formed districts—the Wandle dis-
trict ; more westward there was the Richmond district.
These districts the commissioners had rated ; but there
were other districts which they never had rated, such as
Kew, Mortlake, and Putney. It had been, he 'believed,
the intention of the commission of 1849-50 to rate those
districts, but it was never acted upon. On the south-
east was the Ravensbourne district, formed also in
1849, and the Greenwich district. On the north were
Fulham and Hammersmith, entirely new districts. To
them, and also to Ravonsbourne, would apply the ob-
servations he had already made as to the inadequacy of
the rates to provide for all the wants of the district.
The chairman then proceeded to notice the financial
position of the commission. The rate which Parliament
originally empowered the commissioners to levy was ls.
in the pound. Two years afterwards the rate was re-
duced to 3d. in the pound, and in 1852 it was raised to 6d.,
at which it stood at the present time. The commissioners
who had just gone out of office came into office about two
years and four months ago. After carefully examining
the state of the financial accounts, they were of opinion
tbat a sixpenny rate would not he sufficient to provide
proper sewage for the different districts; they; therefore,
had felt it their duty to raise in each district the full six-

penny rate, except in the Regent-street and Regent's-
nark district, where a rate of fourpence only was levied.
The total amount which had been raised by the late com-
missioners in the two years and four months was
433,0001. A sixpenny rate would realise 216,000/. a
year, over the whole taxable district, with the slight ex-
ceptions he had stated. The next topic to which the
chairman adverted was the nature and extent of the
works which had been executed or undertaken by the
late commissioners, The works to which the commis-
sioners felt it their duty to attend were of three kinds—
first, the main drainage works, or what were called the
arterial works. Those were the sewers which were in-
, tended to convey away the sewage from the Thames.
They were intended to intercept the general sewers which
ran at right angles into the Thames, and, instead of run-
ning north and south, they would carry the sewage from
the intercepted sewers from west to east, about four
miles below Blackwall. That was the first great work
to be accomplished; the seconi was the formation of the
subsidiary sewers ; and the third, the construction of
the house drainage. Up to the present time it had not
been in the power of the late commission to commence
the main drainage works. The works hitherto put in
hand had been limited entirely to the subsidiary drain-
age. Everything had been made subordinate to the main
drainage, ant.rno sewer had been constructed which would
r not fall in with the main drainage scheme. The total
amount of money expended by the late commission,
two years and four months, on works which
were either executed or now in progress, was 595,0001.
That included 31.0001. for repairs, 43,000/. for cleansing,
50,0001. for pipes, sewers, &e. The total length of the
sewers constructed was about 114 miles ; of that length
92 miles consisted of brick sewers, and the remainder of
pipe sewers of various sizes. In addition to this, a vast
amount of sewerage work.had been done by private indi-
viduals, not merely in house drainage, but in subsidiary
drainage ; the expenditure fur which was not less than
255,000/., up to the close of the present year. Many of
Lhose private works could not have been constructed if
the works of the commissioners had not formed an out-
let for them. The amount expended on the works ex-
ceeded the receipts from the rates ; but certain sums had
been borrowed by the commissioners to carry out the
works. He would new call the attention of the court to
the main drainage question. In 1849 and 1850 a vast
number of schemes were brought before the commis-
sioners in consequence of invitation by the commission.
The late Mr. Foster, who was employed by the commis-
sioners, was directed to prepare a scheme for the main
drainage of the metropolis. He did se, and his reports
upon the different portions of that drainage, north and
south, were among the papers of the commission. Mr.
Foster estimated the amount of the cost at 1,250,0001.
One of the first labours of the late commissioners was to
reconsider the whole question of the main drainage, and
they referred Mr. Foster's report to their own engineer,
Mr. Bazalgette, in conjunction with Mr. Heyward, con-
nected with the city commission. Those gentlemen
prepared a plan which was afterwards fully considered
by, and received the unqualified approbation of, the
commissioners' consulting engineers, Sir W. Cubitt and
Mr. Stephenson. The late commissioners adopted the
scheme so prepared and approved, and were desirous
of carrying it into effect. The money it would require
to do so was 3,000,0001. [The chairman here explained
the cause of the great difference between the two esti-
mates.] Mr. Foster did not provide for the drainage of
the western section on the north side of the Thames, nor
for compensation to parties whose lands might be inter-
fered with, nor for the purchase of land that might be re-
quired. These and other items omitted would have made a
great difference in the amount of that gentleman's esti-
mate. The difference of the two estimates was, there-
fore, after all, more apparent than real. The report of
Messrs. Bazalgette and Heyward bad been printed and"
widely circulated, and the commissioners were very de-
sirous it should be well 'understood by the public. [The
chairman here referred to a plan lying on the table, and
pointed out to the Court those portions of the main
drainage scheme which demanded their earliest and most
earnest attention.] In reference to the question of con-
verting sewage into manure and making it an article of
sale, the commissioners had thought it right to take ad-
vice upon the matter, and had consulted Mr. Wickstead
on the subject. That gentleman had entirely disposed of
one part of the question—namely, the rendering of the
sewerage of London available in a liquid state ; for if
the drainage were all upon a level, the first outlay would
be no less than 20,000,0001. And, even if it could be
disposed of in a solid state, that would not dispense with
the necessity of constructing the Hackney-brook sewer ;
nor, if the, scheme were considered applicable on the
south side of the river,, would it materially interfere
with the design of the main drainage on that side of the
river. The north portion of the work might be more or
less affected by the success of the scheme, but, at all
events, no less a portion than 1,000,0001. out of the
3,000,0001. of the cost of the main drainage would re-
main unaffected by any plan for converting the sewage
into manure ; the commissidners, therefore, would be
justified in at once commencing that portion of the
works which would remain untouched by the suchceeslsaotof
Mr. Wickstead's, or any other person's plan, The
commissioners made several ineffectual attempts to ob-
tain from Parliament the necessary funds, but circum-
stances prevented the Government from attending to their
demands, at least, to their full extentof 3,000,000/. But in
1853 the commissionersobtained Rower to borrow2oo,ooo/.
They were anxious to begin the main drainage works, but,
not having ate assurance that money would be forthcoming
to enable them to complete those works when once com-
menced, they came to the conclusion that they would
not be justified in entering upon the main drainage
scheme at all. Having, however, so large a sum in hand,
they devoted 130,0001. thereof to the carrying out of the
subsidiary works, which works were now either com-
pleted or in progress. As to the remaining 20,0001., it
would be for the new commissioners to decide how it
should be applied. It was true, he considered, they
would be in some degree fettered by what had already
been done; for Parliament had called upon the late com-
missioners to make a return setting forth the way in
which they proposed that that 20,000/. should he appro-
priated. A statement showing the manner in which it
was intended to expend the money had been presented
to Parliament, and to this extent he felt there was a sort
of moral obligation imposed on the preeentcommissioners
in regard to the appropriation of that sum. He should
Zr
000
w,
e00d00: .0
toahonei (.1
:80,
have stated that when the old separate commissions
expired there existed a permanent debt of between
0., which was afterwards increa-ed
therefore,Ppoerwmeranent debt
tn
atmheou2nOteed,ootool.
3701071.-
raise a further sumo 3a05
Last session
effected two loans, amountingoOP
()given to the commissioners to
, . would be
Thaedvcaonrricrnedisfcrioomneras had
together to 290,000/.,
and a sum of 10 0001
passed • which enabled the borrowcommis-
it he was requested by the Home
pri-
vate quarter." As to the appli • of this 300,0001.,
abiefonoerios tthoe bit

Secretary to make a statement of what was proposed to
be accomplished in the course of 12 months, on their
bein g authorised to raise thzt money ; he was to state
the extent of the works, the mode in which they were to
be made, and the advantages to result from them ; and
he believed it was greatly owing to the statement
which he made that the power to borrow the
300,0001. was given. He did not mean to say that any
such communication with the Government could ne-
cessarily fetter this commission, but the view taken
by the late commissioners was that they were morally
bound to fulfil the kind of engagement which was
made as to the application of the money. The decision
to which the late commissioners came as to the applica-
tion of the 300,0001. was what they believed would give
the greatest satisfaction to the public. If they had looked
at the subject in one aspect only, they might have applied
the whole to the formation of the Hackney-brook sewer
the whole way from Hainpstead to the river Lea. It
would have just completed that part of the scheme. But
they thought the people on the south of the Thames
would have reason to complain if the whole sum had
been appropriated to the north. They, therefore, ad-
vised that 110,0001. should be applied to the Hackney-
brook sewer, and 190,0001. to the drainage on the south

of the Thames. The 110,0001. would comitruct a sewer
from the river Lea to Stoke Newington. It would, in
fact, supply the main trunk sewer of the valley of the
Hackney-brook district, and enable the subsidiary
sewers tote formed. It would be a deop-covered sewer.
The work proposed to be done on the south side of
. .

. .
the river was not that which was the most advisable in
an engineering point of view, but perhaps the best under
the circumstances. Such, then, was the present state
of the question with regard to the main drainage, and it
would be for the Court to consider whether they would
adopt the views of their engineers, approved of as they
had been by their consulting engineers and by the late
commissioners. Probably most of them were acquainted
with Mr. John Rowe, formerly connected with the Fins-
bury Commission, and afterwards with the Metropolitan
Commission, who considered that their scheme might
be materially diminished in cost if certain suggestions
of his were adopted, and he laid before the late commis-
sioners a plan which was to have that effect. But cir-
cumstances prevented the late commissioners from
attending to that suggestion. The plan itself had only
recently come into their hands. It was now before
their consulting engineers, Sir W. Cubitt and Mr.
Stephenson, and the Court might expect
_ to have
their report in a few days. Whether the sugges-
tions it contained would be valuable or feasible he was
not in a position to say, but they would soon know. He
believed he had now adverted to all the prominent topics
connected with the commission. He had shown what
was the amount of their receipts, what the sum in which
they were indebted—being 600,0001., the full extent to
which the commissioners were enabled to borrow by act
of Parliament—and he bad also stated what were the
works they were endeavouring to accomplish. He had
little further to add. As to details, they would come
before the Court at different times.

Mr. °FITS—What is the rate of interest you pay for
your borrowed money?
The CHAIRMAN—The interest varies from 43/4 to 5 per
cent.
Captain JOHNSON expressed his extreme satisfaction at
what had fallen from the chairman respecting the main
drainage, compared with which all other matters were
of minor importance. He wished to be furnished with
copies of all the reports made by the engineers with re-
ference to that great question, and also for a copy of Mr.
Rowe's report. He thought it would be likewise desir-
able that copies should be supplied of all the general
orders relating to the drainage since the breaking up of
the commission in 1849.

The CHAIRMAN said the engineer's report should be
furnished, but Mr. Rowe's report was as yet only in
manuscript. The general regulations would be found
in the blue-books.

Mr. OFFER supposed it would be for the new commis-
sioners to consider whether they were to be the general
orders and rules of the commission or not.

The CHAIRMAN—UntiI they are repealed or altered
they must be the rules of the commission, otherwise the
commission would be at a standstill. Of course, the new
commissioners had the power to alter or rescind what
orders and rules they pleased.
Mr. OFFER regretted to find that a rate of 6d. in the
pound was not sufficient to carry on the local drainage.
He trusted it would eventually be found an adequate
*barge.

Sir J. SHELLEY wiihed it at once to be understood
that, looking at the importance of the duties they had to
perform, he should be very sorry if it should be supposed
that he came to that Court with his mind made up to op."
pose everything that had hitherto been done. Still, lie
should feel it his duty to make himself fully acquainted
with all matters that came before him for decision, and,
if any inconvenience arose from the delay which would
be necessarily occasioned thereby, the blame could not
be considered to attach to him. He had been appointed
to the commission several months ago, and yet those
who were introduced into the commission with him had
only been called upon to.attend that Court on almost the
last day of November. He deemed it right at once to say
in reference to the main drainage of the metropolis, that
at the time the 300,0001: was voted there was a distinct
understanding that the amount so raised under the sane-
tion of Parliament was t© be wholly expended on the
outfall works of that drainage. It was never contem-
plated that such a sum as that could complete those vast
works. In fact the report of Sir W. Cubitt and Mr.
Stephenson showed that 300,0001. would go a very little
way. But he understood the chairman to say that
110,0001. was to be expended on works at what was
called the Hackney-brook district, which only affected
a small portion of the drainage on the north of the
Thames. That could hardly be called the outfall of the
works north of the Thames. The hon. baronet concluded
by saying that while he should on the one hand refrain
from opposing everything that had been done by the late
commission, still, on the other hand, he should require
to have his mind fully informed upon every subject
which he might be called upon to sanction.
The CHAIRMAN could not conceive that any commis-
sioner would come and in a blindfold manner approve of
all that might have hitherto been done. Of ci urse they
must examine into every question, therefore any delay
that might onnur would be inevitable. He was happy
to find that the hon. baronet approved of the whole of
the 300,0001. being applied to the main drainage. It
would be so applied ; for, although 110,0001. would be
laid out on works in the Hackney-brook district alone,
it was not with the view principally of benefitting that
district that it was proposed that the money should be
so expended, for, if the commissioners had now the whole
300,000/. in their hands, that would be the proper mode
in which to apply it. The locality lay high, and the
works ought naturally to commence in the highest por-
tion of the area where they were to be constructed.
Dr. SAYER, referring to the non-success of all preced•
ing commissions, said that the real cause of their failure
was to be found in the acts of Parliament which consti-
tuted the commissions. It was well that the old sepa-
rate commissions should be superseded ; they had the
representative principle, but no unity of action. But
what had the acts of Parliament done ! They gave unity
of action, but no representative principle, and se long as
the representative principle was denied to that board
they would not be able to do more than their predeces-
sors had done. With respect to the formation of this
commission, ke was himself nominated •n the 21st of
July, 1854, and the commissions had not been called
into action till four months afterwards ; and, according
to the last sentinuation act, their powers would neces-
sarily expire on the 31st of August next; thus the com-
mission would only have eight months' vitality, There
was no act of Parliament by which they had any real
legal existence. There was nothing more to authothe
their acting than the kind permission of the Secretary of
State for the Home Department. Were they to be a
transition commission g or were they to form an experi-
mental commission 4 With the limited powers and
means they possessed, the public must not expect from
that new commission more than they had received from
any previous commission. In reference to the conver-
sion of sewage into an article of manure, he thought it
would be quite practicable at the great outlets. The
thing had succeeded in Paris, and he saw no reason why
it should not be successful here.
Mr. THwernia was of opinion that the first act of the
new commission should be to make themselves masters
of their finances. He therefore encored, "That the secre-
tary do prepare and lay before the court a detailed state•

merit of the liabilities and resources of the commission,

setting out the date, the amount, and the time for the
completion of all contracts, and the payment, if any,
made on account thereof."
Mr. WADE seconded the motion, which, after a few
remarks from the chairman, was agreed to.
It was then ordered that a communication be made to
the Lord Mayor, Aldermen, and Commons of the city of
Lonilon as to the opening of the commission.
A long discussion ensued as to the day and time for the
court holding its meetings, when it was agreed that fur
the present the court should meet on Tuesdays at hi.
The usual routine business was then disposed of, and
the court adjourned.