The Sun.
London, England, 1841-02-27 00:00:00

COURT OF SEWERS FOR WEST-
MINSTER AND PARTS OF MIDDLESEX.

A Special Court of Sewers was yesterday held at the Com-
missioners' Offices, in Greek-street, Soho, 1. L. Donaldson,
Esq., in the Chair, in order to consider the Bill now in Ccm-
mittee in the House of Lords, intituled, "An Act for the better
Drainage and Improvement of Buildings in large Towns and
Villages."
The heads of the Bill having been read by the Clerk at the
table,

The CHAIRMAN said that the Bill might be divided into
two portion=, the one relating to sewerage, the other to venti-
lation. With the first part only had they any thing to do. He
moved that the first clause be read.

The clause having been read,

The.CnAmmaN—said that the clause provided that no house
in a town should be built without a barrel drain. Now they
ought to hwe provided that there must be a sewer or water-
course in the street, or the drain would be of no use. It
should be in a street where there is a sewer.

Mr. LESLIE said, that it was now, fur the first-time, that
an attempt had Leen made to mix up the Comniuers of
Sewers with the building of houses. He thought that they
had quite enough to do to attend to the sewers, and that it was
not proper to throw such an onerous duty as that of superin-
tending the building of all new houses upon the Commissioners
of Sewers. It would add most materially to the business of the
Court. He thought that every thing connected with the
Building Act should be made the subject of a distinct Act. The
machinery of the Court was not adapted to the superintend-
ence of the building of houses.
Sir G. FA RRANT thought they would have no additional
trouble with the buildings.
The CHAIRMAN said that at present persons building new
houses frequently came to the Court to know when they might
drain, but they could not be compelled to drain.
Mr. LESLIE thought all the objects of the Bill might be
accomplished by compelling parties building new houses to
drain into the common sewer. If the Bill passed, the district
surveyors appointed by the Magisttates, would, by a side
wind, be maim the surveyors of the Court. The Bill was a
valuable ole but it ought to be separated into two parts.
Mr. S. Lc P:11, had heard it reported that it-was the inten—
tionof the Legislature to separate the Bill into two parts.

The CHAIRMAN agreed that it would be better the Bill
should be divided into two parts.
. 111 r. LESLIE thought if they got the power of compelling
parties to drain into a common sewer, under the • superinten-
denee of the Court, wherever there was sufficient public
sewerage, they would obtain all that was necessary. He thought
if a memorial were sent into the Home Office on the subject of
dividing the Bill into two Acts, that it would meet with
attention. .

Mr. WILLOUGHBY thought the more the Corporation at-
tended to the great lines of sewers, and confined themselves to
that, the more would they be in the performance of their duties.
With regard to private drains, they ought to confine themselves
to superintendence, and to compelling parties to drain into the
great lines of sewers. The Court was not fitted to carry out
the provisions of that Bill.
The CHAIRMAN said they should be cautious how they
gave up interference with drains, for the Poor-law Comm's-
sioners had endeavoured to get the power of ordering sewers to
be constructed into their hands. It would be a great obstruc-
tion to the business of the Court if the diitrict surveyors were
to be the officers of the Court.

Mr. WILLOUGHBY was of opinion that the provisions of the
Bill were too general, and that the Bill brought forward two
years ago was a better Bill, as far as sewerage was concerned.
In answer to a question from a Commissioner,
The CHAIRMAN stated that no one had seen the Marquis of
Normanby on the part of the Commissioners of Sewers.
Mr. LESLIE moved a resolution to the effect that although
the Commissioners approved of the objects of the 13,11, yet they
were of opinion that it would be better that the Bill should be
divided into two or more parts, so as to separate that portion
relating to sewerage from the other parts of the Bill,
and that the objects of the Bill relating to sewerage
would be obtained by giving to the Commissioners the power s f
compelling parties to drain into a common sewer. He thought
it would be better to communicate some such resolution to the
Home-office, before going into the details of the Bill. If they
went into the provisions of the Bill, he could show that it
would be impossible for the Commissioners to carry even those
relating to sewerage into effect.
Mr.\VlLLotiumir. thought it would be better to omit the
latter part of Mr. Leslie's resolution, and confine themselves
to expressing the desire for the separation of the Bill into two
or more parts, confining themselves to the general princ;ple at
first, and going into particulars afterwards.
Mr. T. DYER thought it would be desirable that the Com-
missioners should have the power of compelling parties to
make new sewers where requisite.
The CHAIRMAN proposed that the resolution might be
altered so as to embody the suggestion of Mr. T. Dyer.
Mr. LESLIE thought they had better ask only for a little,
and they would get a great deal ; if they asked for too much
they would get nothing.
The CHAIRMAN did not think they were asking too much.
If they had not the power of making sewers they would not
produce on part of the good which they would
effect if they had that power.
It was ultimately arranged that the resolution should be
divided into three parts—the first relating to the divi-
sion of the Bill, and the confining the sewerage to the
Commissioners of Sewers, which was carried unani-
mously ; the second, relating to the power asked for by
the Commissioners to compel parties to drain into common
sewers, where such were in existence, which was also carried
unanimously; and a third, relating to the powers asked for by
the Commissioners to build new sewers where a Jury should de-
cide them to be necessary, at the expense of the owners of the
adjoining property, if they refused to do so, which was also
carried unanimously.
Mr. LESLIE would like to call Lord Normanby's attention
to the clause in the local Act as to the Poor-rate being proof of
occupation, so as to introduce some such clause into the general
measure. There was a great interest at the back of the Bill—the
Surveyors.=(A laugh.) There might be hereafter, for all they
could do to prevent it, a proposal to map and plan all London.
He had an utter horror of the mapping and planning system.
Thu CHAIRMAN thought it would be better to confine them.
selves strictly to the matter on which they were engaged.
Should these resolutions be communicated to lord Normanby
by letter or by a deputation ? It would perhaps be better
that the clerk should transmit the resolutions to his Lordship,
and state that, if his Lordship wished for further information, a
deputation would wait upon him, and he would suggest that
such deputation should consist of the mover and seconder of
the resolution, and the Chairman.
Mr. LESLIE did not want any deputation.
Mr. Tx ISTLETON DYER thought a deputation exceedingly de-
sirable. If it were intended to get rid of the Commission by a side
wind, the sooner they were informed of it the better, in order
that they might set their house in order. He thought. it was
the duty of the Court to appoint some persons in whom they
had confidence to represent them before the Committee of the
House of Lords on the Bill. He thought Lord Normanby
ought to be asked to receive a deputation.
The motion was then agreed to.
Mr. LESLIE wished to know in what situation they would be
placed with regard to the proceedings on Tuesday. On
Tuesday last two gentlemen had chosen to adjourn the Court.
Now, that he believed was fatal to the whole proceedings.
The Chairman had thought proper to revive the motion, but
had not revived his amendment. _ _

The CHAIRMAN said Mr. Leslie might, at any time, pro-
pose an amendment without notice.

Mr. LESLIE understood, from high authority, that the ad-
journment of the Court was fatal to the whole of the present-
ment, and that they must bagin de novo. Let them recol-
lect that the Court, not the debate, was adjourned. Was the
Chairman prepared to rule that they could, on Tuesday, re-
vive the question ?
The CHAIRMA N—The motion was not the same motion—it
was a different one from the one brought forward on the last
occasion. .

Mr. LESLIE—But suppose Commissioners should be ad-
vised not to attend where such a fatal objection existed to their
proceedings?
The CHAIRMAN—Then • they had better stay away.—(A
laugh.) He had not revived the former motion—he had pro-
posed an entirely new one, upon which it was quite competent
to Mr. Leslie to move an amendment.

Mr. Wit.LouGtinv said, that by the bye-laws there was no
discretion left to the Chairman as to putting the question of the
adjournment of the meeting, if made after four o'clock.
Mr. A'BECKETT gave it as his opinion, that in such a case
the business mast be taken up where it had been left off on the
former occasion.

Mr. THISTLETON DYER thought the best way would be to
issue another summons, taking up the business just a here it
had been left off on the former occasion.
The CHAIRMA N thought he had acted quite regularly under
the second clause of the bye-laws. The motion and amend-
ment had been adjourned sine die, and he had to give notice
of an entirely new motion. He had no other course to pursue.
Mr. LEswe's objection was on other grounds. They had
had parties brought before them for judgment. They had
come to no decision—they had adjourned without doing so ;
that was equivalent to an acquittal, and those parties would
claim the benefit of it. The motion for the signing the decree
and the amendment were on their books, and before they were
disposed of they adjourned, not the consideration of the ques-
tion, but the Court. He had not opposed it, because he thought

, ..
it was carrying out his views. _
Mr. WILLOUGHBY thought that henceforth the reproach
of taking technical objections ought not to be confined to law-
yers alone. All the proceedings had been acconling to the
rules of the Court. .

Mr. A'BECKETT wished to know how they were to proceed
on Tuesday ?
The CHAIRMAN said they would proceed upon the business
in the paper.—The Court then adjourned.

FALMOUTH, FEB. 12.—The Royal Tar,
Captain Dorman, and Lieutenant J. Wire, Admiralty
agent, came in to-day; from Gibraltar the 12th, Cadiz
the 13 h, Lisbon the 16th, not communicating with
Oporto, and from Vig) on the 18th, passing the outward_
bound steamer off Finisterre. There is nothing to be
learnt of the state of things at Tangier; her Majesty's
brig Jaseur was still absent, and it was said remained
there. The two transports, Boyne and Prince Regent,
had not sailed for the West Indies from Gibraltar. The
Great Liverpool passed through the Gut in seven days
from hence. The United States sloop of war Preble, from
Boston, had arrived in the Tagus, after a long passage of
thirty days, having on Loard the American Charge
d'Affaires, Mr. Edward Cavanagh. The late and con-
tinued rain had caused great devastation on the borders
'of the T:gas both to lite and property. The accounts
received by the steamer from the Basque provinces of the
sprit and disposition of the natives are fir from rgrer ing
with C.'erl other. What appears positive is, that Govern-
ment is sending a division of 8,000 men to that quarter,
under the command of General Zavala. Th 3 elections
still caved disturbances'. General Espartero's late ad-
dress to the National Guards of Madrid had been con-
strued disrespectfully by some of the Opposition papers
towards that body. This had been resented both by the
addresser and the addressed at an interview which the
General had, inconsequence, with a numerous deputation
of the Guards. The opportunity was improved at the
same time by all concerned to declaim against the an-
cient order of things, to eulogise the revolutionary move-
ment by which it was upset, and to renew assurances
of mutual regard and support for the future. The Ge-
neral told them that he relied upon them, as they might
rely upon him.
The Dean of York has addressed a letter to Dr.
Phillimore, the Commissary of the Archbishop of York,
through the York Courant, in which the Dean denies the
right of the Archbishop W interfere as Ordinary.