The Sun.
London, England, 1851-06-06 00:00:00

JUNE 6, 1851.

LNGE.-(THIS DAY.)
Gibraltar— •••••••• •,, ea ...
Leghorn ........•••••• 30 50
Genoa •••• •• •• •••• •••• 25 40
Milan ..•••••••••••••• •••••
Ven1c0........•• ••••••
Naples .... •••••••• 41
Pa10rm0,per05........ 123 N

Messina .........
Lisbon.... • • .....
Oporto .......... •
Rio Janeiro
Buenos Ayres .. • -
New York, 60 days'aigh
Philadelphia
rItICES OP BULLION, PEE 01.
Foreign Geld in bars.. £3 17 9
Portugal Gold Coin .. 0 0 0
Spanish Doubloons .. 0 0 0
New Dollars ...... 0 4 11
Silveria bars 0 b 0%

53%
5334

- ---
MR. EMERSON on SLAVERY in AIIIERICA.
The following letter was sent by Mr. R. W. Emerson,
in answer to an invitation to attend the annual meeting
of an Anti• Slavery Society held at Concord, United
States, on the 3rd ult.:—

" New York, 18th March, 1851.
" Dear Friend,—l bad more reasons than one to regret
leaving home at this time, and, if my present engage-
ments were not of two seasons' standing, I should have
made every effort to relieve myself. For your liberty
meeting, I thing it has a certain importance just now;
and, really, at this moment, it seems imperative that
every lover of human rights should, in every manner,
singly or socially, in private and in public, by voice and
by pen--and, first of all, by substantial help and hospi-
tality to the slave, and defending him against his hunters,
enter his protest for humanity against the detestable
statute of the last Congress. I it a subject of
conversation in all cars and steamboats, and everywhere
distributing society into two classes, according to
the moral feasibility of individuals on one part, and
their habitual docility to party leading on the other. I
do not know how the majority of today will be found
to decide. Sometimes people of natural probity and
affection are so wrapped by the habit of party, and show
themselves so unexpectedly callous and inhuman, that it
seems we must wait for the Almighty to create a new
generation a little more keenly alive to moral impres-
sions, before any improvement in institutions can be
looked for. But, as far as I hare observed, there is, on
all great questions, a tide of undulation in the public
mind, a series of actions and re-actions. The momentary
interest carries it today; but, presently, the advocates of
the liberal principle are victorious—and the more entirely,
because they had persisted unshaken under evil report.
And, as justice alone satisfies everybody, they are sure to
prevail at last.
" If the world has any reason in it, it is for ever safe
and successful to urge the cause of love and right. I
know it is very needless to say this to you, and others
like yon, who cannot, if they would, help serving the
truth, though all the world be gone to worship Mam-
mon. But it is the only answer I know how to make
to our mathematical compatriots. So, wishing you a
day of happy thoughts and sympathies on Thursday, I
remain, yours respectfully and gratefully,
" R. W. EMERSON."
IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

J 5.
AMENDMENTHOUSE OF
OF THELORDS
LAW, une
OF EVIDENCE
BILL.
On the order of the day for the committal of this Bill,
Lord BROUGHAM signified his disapproval of cer-
tain parts of the Bill, and suggested that it should be
referred to a Select Committee, but at the same time
he was understood to protest against the Bill being re-
ferred to the judges.
The LORD CHANCELLOR was in favour of re-
ferring this most important Bill to a Select Committee.
Lord CAMPBELL considered that the Bill would
greatly improve the administration of justice—(" Hear,
hear," from Lord Brougham)—and his opinion had been
greatly confirmed by the letter which had been published
by his illustrious predecessor, Lord Denman.—(Hear.)
He thought the judges ought to be consulted, and that
their opinion was entitled to great consideration. He
would consent to refer it to a Select Committee, and had
no doubt that it would there receive every consideration.
Lord BROUGHAM had only intended to object to
calling the judges as witnesses before the Committee.
He thought the opinion of the judges entitled to every
respect.
The Bill was then committed pro forma, and ordered
to be referred to a Select Committee.
Lord BROUGHAM said his Noble and Learned
Friend, who was not then present (Lord Lyndhurst)
had, in a recent speech, made a statement respecting the
Bill passed some time ago for the improvement of the
Court of Chancery in Ireland, the result of which he
said had exceeded: all their expectations. Ho had not
then compared that Bill, which was framed by the pre-
sent Master of the Rolls, with the provisions of the
measure he was now about to lay upon the table of the
House. That was the same Bill which he:had introduced
to that House in the course of last session, and which
had passed through all its stages then without any oppo-
sition, with the exception of some doubts expressed by
the late Noble Master of the Rolls. These doubts were,
however, subsequently so far removed that the Noble
Lord had waived any further objections to the measure.
In consequence of the lateness of the session when it
went down to the other House it was dropped. Now this
Bill was almost identical with the one which it appeared
was so successful in Ireland, and the facts mentioned by
his Noble and Learned Friend respecting the Irish Bill
applied with equal force to his measure. Ho had stated
the provisions of the Bill on a former occasion. It had
been most carefully prepared by a learned relative of
his, and was intended to supply the defects of the dead
men's clauses, as they were called, in Chancery.
Lord CRAN WORTH said that the Bill, no doubt,
deserved their most serious attention. He did not think
that the case of England stood in the same position as
that of Ireland. Ile recollected that Lord Cottenham,
about twelve months ago, had proposed an alteration in
the proceedings of the Court of Chancery, abolishing
the necessity of petitioning. By these new orders the
system was, he believed, made as inexpensive and expe-
ditious as could well be expected. If the Bill had
worked so well in Ireland, he (Lord Crsnworth) was
surprised that his Noble and Learned Friend had not
adopted that feature of it which referred to the petition-
ing part of the subject.
Lord BROUGHAM said it was owing to the expense
of petitioning, which was 151. alone, that he did not pro-
pose to proceed by petition.
Lord CRANWORTH said that that fact showed the
propriety of saying nothing on the Bill until it was
actually before them.

Lord BROUGHAM said that when his Noble and
Learned Friend saw the Bill he would And that it did
❑ot interfere with the new orders.
The Bill was then laid on the table and read a first
time.

Lord BROUGHAM having proposed the names of
the Select Committee to which he referred his former
Bill,

Their Lordships then adjourned.

Sir B. HALL should not vote for the proposition of
the Hon. Gentlemen— ho could not understand it.
Mr. B. COCHRANE said he would withdraw the
amendment to give way to the amendment fur a seeond
reading that day six months.
The amendment was withdrawn.
Mr. MOFFAT then rose to move as an amendment,
that the Bill be read a second time that day six months.
It was clearly and distinctly proved by the Board of
Health that the supply of water to the metropolis was in-
sufficient by reason of its defective distribution; that it
was inferior in quality, as containing vegetable and or-
ganic matter in solution; and that its cost was higher
than it ought to be. The cost was now about 450,000/.
per annum, but it had been shown that it oould be ob.
tained for half that sum, of a much more useful and effi-
cient character, and of a greater economy in the article
of washing. The total cost of washing in the metro-
polis was five millions yearly. There was a graver ob-
jection to the Bill, inasmuch as it proposed to take the
whole property of these companies at a fair and liberal
valuation. But the value must be taken at the present
value—the value of monopoly; not such a value as open
competition would have settled. Ho also objected to the
mode in which the machinery of the Bill was to be
worked. If the Bill passed ho believed there would be
no material benefit to the public as far as a pure supply
of water was concerned. Nor was the Secretary of
State the proper person, even if he had time to spare,
to look after this important sanitary matter. Ile did not
believe the Bill would lower the rate to the public gene-
rally; for he found that by the Bill the rate was still to
be 6d. for every 1,000 gallons. Now, in Whitehaven he
knew that the inhabitants were supplied for ld. per 1,000
gallons. He thought the Government ought to do with
water the same as had been done with gas. This would
serve to protect the public against combination. He
thought Government had neglected the interests of the
public in the step they had taken; for it appeared to him
the only effect of the Bill would be to substitute one
great monopoly for several smaller ones. He begged to
move his amendment that the Bill be read that day six
months.
Sir B. HALL bad no hesitation in declaring from his
knowledge of the feeling of the inhabitants of the me-
tropolis, from the east to the west, that they unanimously
desired the Bill should not be proceeded with. The
effect of this Bill would be to continue the management
of affairs in the hands of the existing directore, and the
result would be that competing companies could never
be agein established. He objected also to the mode
proposed for valuing the property and the shares of the
existing companies, because if persevered in it would be
impossible to expect that the public would have any im-
mediate reduction of the present cost of water to them.
The Bill was a Bill entirely for the benefit of holders of
shares in water companies, and before they granted this
boon the House ought to see what good these compa-
nies bad done to deserve it.' Had they carried out the
conditions upon which they obtained their powers from
Parliansent?—(Hear, hear.) He would prove from
documentary evidence before the Board of Health that
this was not so. It was impossible to get the Legisla-
ture to interfere effectually on behalf of the public, be-
cause the water interest was too strong in that House.
He had been told that no less than seventy-five Mem-
bers of that House were holders of water company
shares, and therefore, as they bad a direct interest in
keeping up monopoly, he considered they ought to ab-
stain from voting on questions in which their private
interest was opposed to the public interest. To
show the variation in the charges to the pub-
lic, in one company the price was charged Bd.
per 1,000 gallons, in another the charge was
3id. per 1,000 gallons, showing a difference of
128 per cent. between the charges. Pamphlets had been
written on bsth sides of the question—one by the Hon.
Member (Sir W. Clay), in which it was stated that the
Grand Junction, of which he was the chairman, drew
water at a place where there was no sewerage. Now he
(Sir B. Hall) believed it would be found that there was
a great deal of sewerage in the district from which the
Grand Junction drew its supply. Another company
drew its water from Battersea, but here there was the
disadvantage of drawing the supply of water between
two sets of sewers. It was this system that the lion.
Member (Sir W. Clay) wished to be left undisturbed.
He could quote numerous other instances to show that it
was necessary the supply of water should be taken out
of the hands of thoso who at present had the entire mo-
nopoly secured to them. The Hon. Member here read
the chemical analysis of several descriptions of water
supplied by different water companies, to prove that all
the supplies were more or less loaded with impurities,
animalcules, and other things injurious to health and
domestic purposes. The Hon. Member (Sir W. Clay),
however, said this was the kind of water the public
ought to have, and which his company would go on sup-
plying if Parliament would not interfere. Ho would
just show that the proposal of Government would fix on
the public a higher price than the New River Company
charged. He would first mention, that from a return
recently made of the price of shares of water compa-
nies, ho found that a 1001. share of the New River, we
understood, was valued at 17,300/. For each 100/.
share the directors ge a showerlge income, nearly
he believed. Ile would that the scale proposed
by Government for the rate of charging was
higher than the present scale of the New River Com-
pany. For a 7-roomed house the New River charge was
245.; the Government chargee24s. 6d. For a 9-roomed
house, New River charge, 305.; Government charge,
31s. Gcl.; and for a 10-roomed house, New River charge,
365.; Government charge, 40s. He said Government
ought to place the whole management and control in the
hands of the rate-payers.—(Hear.) Do not let the pub-
lic be subject to all the schemes and extravagances of
the present directors, especially when they found that
the chairmen of two companies had put forward a pam-
phlet to say the public ought to be satisfied with the
system as it existed. The public would be content to
buy the plant and property of water companies at its
own price—(Hear)—but that price must be a very low
one. If the ratepayers were entrusted with the matters
they would be found fully capable of managing their
own affairs. He felt bound, therefore, to resist the Bill
to the uttermost.;
Mr. W. WILLIAMS said the quantity, quality, and
price of water were complained of from one end of the
metropolis to the other. The Bill was only intended to
create a job for the perpetual supply of impure water to
the public under the sanction of her Majesty's Govern.
ment.—(Hear.) To show the working of the system he
would, just notice that in London and Southwark, where
there was competition, the average price per house was
20s. In the districts supplied by the seven companies
the average price was 355. per house, and in West Mid-
dlesex the average per house was 58s. Here was a dif-
ference of nearly 300 per cent. in charge. Now, did Govern-
ment mean to pay the companywhich sold its water at 30.
at the same rate as the company which charged 15d.
for the same quantity? He was satisfied that the Bill,
instead of putting an end to monopoly, would only con-
centrate the present seven monopolies into one gigantic
monopoly. Why did the Right Hon. Gentleman not
leave the power of managing their own affairs to the
ratepayers. It was only by giving the ratepayers this
power that they would get good water at a cheap rate.
There must be something in the background, for the
present Bill certainly contemplated something more than
the public good. At public meetings the universal feeling
ing was that the ratepayers should have the management
of this question placod,wholly in their hands, as they were
the best parties to look after their own interests. He
was of opinion that the power sought by the Bill ought
not to he confined to the Secretary of State. He was
satisfied it would bring that high functionary into con-
stant collision with the inhabitants and ratepayers of
the metropolis. He should give his decided opposition
to the Bill.
Sir G. GREY was anxious to hear all the objections
that could be urged on the subject before he addressed
the House. Ho had listened with attention to the dis-
cussion, and he was now prepared to address the House
on the question. The Hon. Member for Bridport, on the
second reading of the Bill, had brought forward some
amendments which he afterwards withdrew. On that
occasion he did not labour to prove that which was
distinctly admitted—the defects of the present supply
of water to the metropolis. He had, however, re-
ferred in general terms to the various 'inquiries
which had taken place on Committees by the direc-
tion of the House, and the evidence taken before the
Board of Health; and be assumed that it could not be
disputed that some essential change was necessary to se-
cure to the public the best possible supply of water at
the lowest possible rate. The Hon. Member for Mary-
lebone had dwelt on the character of the present supply
and the expense, as if he (Sir G. Grey) were disposed
to contravert that position, when in fact the Bill before
the House was founded on those admitted defects. Ho
was not bound to enter upon the defence of the existing
water companies. Hon. Members connected with thorn
might do so if they thought fit; but as far as the tenour
of the statements made to the House went, he was pre-
pared to admit the present sources of supply were de-
fective—that the quality was bad—and that the expense
of supply had been greater than was necessary.
Another point insisted on was that competition had
failed to accomplish the object attributed to it. Now,
the Bill was framed on the principle that competition
could not be relied on for the supply of water to the
metropolis, and the facts alluded to in the report of the
Board of Health supported that view. He did not think
the House would act wisely in encouraging competition
in the hope that it would produce the results desired.
The Hon. Member for Marylebone thought that 80020
control should be given to the ratepayers. He had
expressed a similar opinion, but had stated that pe-
culiar reasons existed in the metropolis which
did not apply to other large towns, and which
for the present it was not easy to overcome.
After a competition among the nine water com-
panies so severe that many shareholders were ruined, a
combination was effected, which now enjoyed
monopoly in supplying the metropolis with a complete
water. The
Government had
Board of Health carefully considered the report of the
, whole of the evidence, and
the effect it had produced on his mind was, that the' Go-
vernment would not be justified in assuming as proved
that the existing sources of supply should be abandoned,
or that the sources of supply indicated by them ought to
be adopted. The Government had selected three gen-
tlemen to report on the subject, and the inquiry was still
pending. The Government might have taken advantage
of that inquiry to have said that %bile it was pending
they would not support any measure on the subject. But
after the various inquiries that had taken place, they had
thought it to be their duty to propose an alteration of
the present system, reserving the right of taking new
sources of supply, end also of closing any of the exist-
ing sources which should be proved to be unfit. The
principleof the Bill, therefore, was not the I,erpetuation
of an irresponsible monopoly, but the substitution in its
place of a combined management, which he believed
would be productive of a great saving of expense. It
was proposed to consolidate the boards of management
of the nine existing companies into one, with restric-
tions as to dividends, and limitations as to the amount
of the rates, and subject to the control of the Go-
Torunant afa $9 the sourcep fr9th which water

might be derived, and a 3 to its mode of sup-
ply. Another provision of the Bill would enable the
Government to keep the interest of any of these com-
panies at a fixed rate, and to transfer it as Parliament
might think fit. To a certain degree he believed the
charge, that the companies had abused their trust. Tho
remedy proposed was to tehe away the irresponsibility
of the companies, and to place them under such a con-
trol_
as would prevent the recurrence of abuse. Some of
the recommendations of the Board of Health report
were, in his opinion, well founded. He thought it was a
sound recommendation, that whatever might be done in
superseding the existing companies, a fair and adequate
compensation should be awarded to them, either by ar-
bitration or by a jury; but ho did not approve of their
suggestion, that a board of salaried officers should be ap-
pointed for the purpose of taking on themselves the ma-
nagement of a ,supply of water. On the part of the
Government he had declined to ask for those powers
which the Board of Health had recommended. 1111 the,
power they propoaed to take was for the purpose of
exercising some efficient control over those trading
bodies to whom was entrusted the supplying of the me-
tropolis with water. He was not at present prepared to
controvert the opinions of Mr. Napier on the subject:
but looking to the contradictory opinions of the Board
of Health on the subject, he thought he should not be
warranted in saying that the whole supply of water
should be drawn from the sou; ee indicated in the re-
port. It had been assumed that the expense of the Go-
vernment plan would be greater to the consumer then
the expense of the present system. It was difficult
to enter fully upon such a point on the second reading:
The schedule now proposed was not to be regarded
as final, but as a subject for discussion in Committee:
The present expense had been stated at 450,000!
a year. Tho result of the inquiries had been stand
in the schedule, and there was every reason to beliese
that the expense would be reduced, as stated, by at least
100,000/. a year. Last year. in the Bill for providing ,
supply of water from Watford, the expense was state?.
at 478,0001,, being an increase on the present amour"
It had been assumed that an extravagant compensation
would be given. It had been thought advisable not %if
lay down any absolute principle of compensation in Sul
Bill. They had for their guidance the principle adopt?
in the local waterworks Acts, under one of which the
Corporation of Liverpool had effected the purchase o._'
the water companies in that town. It was a mistake to
suppose that the Government guaranteed to these comps'
nies 5 per cent. whatever might be their malvermatir
or extravagance. On the contrary, the complaint on the
part of those water companies who bad expressed alit
opinion on the Bill was, that it guaranteed no dividend
at all. The 31st clause contained a provision by which
the Lords of the Treasury, after inquiry, would be eta'
powered, although the company might not be receiving
5 per cent., if they thought it was neglecting its duties'
to reduce the rates, and to charge such rates as they,
thought might remunerate the company. As to control
by ratepayers, he might remark that a Bill bad been
printed that day to the introduction of which, thoucil
he had not yet road it, he had given his assent, as be did
not object to its principle. That Bill proposed to buy up;
under certain circumstances, the existing companies, and
to supersede the management of the nine companies bf
entrusting the management to a body to be appointed bf
the ratepayers. If the House thought fit to refer that
Bill to a Select Committee, he should offer no objection
to such a proceeding. The Hon. Member for Maryle-
bone seemed to doubt the efficiency of Government con-
trol, and bad referred to the conduct of the Board of
Health with respect to the Interments Act. The Board
of Health had been most anxious to come to some amic-
able arrangements with the different cemetery companies
in order to obtain possession of their grounds, but the/
bad failed in every one instance, and were now about W
take the ultimate steps pointed out by the Act, and to
bring the terms of compensation either before arbiters
or a jury.—(Hear, hear.) Without pretending that the
present was a perfect Blil, he hoped the House would
read it a second time, so that its details might be sifted
in Committee. If the House agreed to the second read-
ing, he should propose to refer it to the Committee of
Selection, in order that they might name a Committee of
five Members to consider its details up stairs.
Sir J. JOHNSTONE thought some measure was re-
quired to compel landowners to lay on water for their
tenants, where it could be easily done. His objections
to the present Bill were, that it proposed to do awe/
with the rights and privileges of the existing water
companies of the metropolis—that it proposed to &male
gamete them, without taking into consideration the dif-
ferent districts they supplied and the different sources
from which they derived their supplies of water; and
that it contained no principle of compensation. He did
not think that the saving anticipated would be such se
to justify amalgamation, nor could amalgamation be jus-
tified on the ground that there existed a source su-
perior to all the present sources of water supply. The
Farnham scheme was a one-sided affair, and had been
originated by persons not of the highest authority in
engineering matters. He denied, on behalf of existing
water companies, that there would be anything equal to
the supply alleged to be required for the metropolis
from the Farnham districts; and that assertion was
borne out, he contended, by the reports of Mr. Napier
and other scientific persons who had been employed
to examine the locality. Whatever might have been
the approved quality of the water, the supply could
never be sufficient for this city. The Board of Health at
one time complained that the companies did not send
enough of water; and at another, that they sent double
the quantity required; so that the companies were at a
loss to comprehend exactly what it was that was meant.
If the Government were determined upon legislating on
that subject, lot them appoint a Committee to examine
into everything connected with the present water supply,
and let that Committee report to the House on every
point bearing upon it. They should take into consi-
deration all the schemes started to supply the present
alleged deficiencies of the existing companies in their
respective works, the capabilities of the districts from
which they now derive their supplies, and the powers
which they might possess of increasing them ; also the
liabilities of each company, the amount of compensation
they might require, their scales of rates, whether rea-
sonable or otherwise, and then let them come to the con-
clusion that all the existing companies were to be de-
stroyed, and one large company established in their
place for the supply of the metropolis and its neighbour-
hood. On the report of such a Committee they would
have a basis upon which Parliament might fairly legis-
late. He thought he had stated sufficient to show why
they should object to the present Bill. That any com-
pany could give the supply demanded under the existing
arrangements he did not think possible. As for those
whom he represented he could say they courted inquiry.
They had sustained a considerable quantity of abase,
and yet the complaints made against them were not well-
founded. They only asked for an opportunity of meeting
face to face those who were so ready to accuse them of
so many faults. He bad only to observe, in conclusion,
that be would oppose the motion for the second reading
of the Bill before the House.
Mr. MO WATT said he need take up but very little of
their time in demonstrating that which was already ad-
mitted on all hands—namely, that the supply of water to
the metropolis at present was bad and vicious in the ex-
treme. It was bad in quality, deficient in quantity, and
excessive in price. Indeed, the Right Hon. Baronet the
Secretary for the Home Department, from the very fact
of his attempting to legislate on that subject, proved that
the nature of the supply was bad, and some legislation
necessary. Therefore he (Mr. Mowatt) would only deem
it expedient to apply himself to the Bill before them.
Now if legislation was necessary for the procuring of a
better supply, the question arose, whether the proposi-
tion of the Right Hon. Baronet would go to meet the de-
ficiency? He would ask, did that Bill remedy those ra-
dical and fatal difficulties which the present system pos-
sessed? He maintained that it did not, but, on the con-
trary, the effect of his measure would be to perpetuate
through all time those very evils and abuses which he
said had induced him to legislate on that subject.
When, like a great many other denizens of this vast
city, he had discovered the impure quality of the
water supplied for the use of the inhabitants, he had
been glad to find that the Government had come for-
ward to legislate on that question. The succession
of Committees which had been appointed to inquire
into the matter had led him to expect a much more
comprehensive measure than the one now proposed?
What was the character of that Bill ? Did the
Government propose that they should go to better sources
which r a
supplesuy than those impure and deplorable ones
existing companies were obliged to use?
No such thing The Right Honourable Gentleman did
not
eitherto do anythingdi
d he prtohpeonse to do
astothaenyqtuhaientgityto and
quality..
duce the cost of the present supply; but he contemplated
consolidating all the companies, so that the evils which,
existed in every shape shape and form would continue
in perpetuity. So far from rendering any service to the
public, or bettering the supply of water, be thought the
Right Honourable Baronet would inflict the greatest ca-
lamity on the metropolis which it was possible for legis-,
lation to devise. The only advantage which would be
derived from flans amalgamating together all those com-
panies would be, that their general management might
be thereby simplified. Now the public did not want
that consolidation of the existing companies, seeing that
all their plant was connected with the present impure
and deficient supply. He did not object to those com-
panies making us much as they could of their respect-
ive speculations; but it was requisite that the public
exigencies should be met at some time or other It
might be said that Government reserved to themselves
the power, after consolidating the companies, of re-
quiring that if the water be not pure, and the supply
sufficient, recourse should be had to other sources for
a supply better in quantity and quality. Ho
(Mr. Mowatt) however, considered that they were al-
ready beyond that part if theqiueBsdvgate
tienu.l,totagduableietyn
long admitted that the supply was n
bad, and the price too high. The Right Hon. Gentle-
man, therefore, was doing a great injury to this metro-
polis, in deferring a decision on that subject one day
after the Bill was brought into that HOUse. If the
Right Hell. Baronet was not prepared to say to the
water companies at once, s You must go to certain good
sources for a better supply than you
egidnaotwe atPracleltierrne''t'bhaet
He did not think the Right
had better not have attempted to i
ImIoon". igroorntaetnt question%
was justified in delving what the Hon.
Baronet the Member for 'Marylebone had said with re-
spect to the effect of his Bill on raising the rates on the
inhabitants.

Sir G. GREY said it would not have that effect in th
aggregate.
MOWATT continued—After all, the amount of
rates was of minor consequence, when the necessity of a
supply of good water for the health of the publics was
taken into consideration. It was in a sanitary point of
view that the question was to be looked at most parti-
cularly. The Hon. Member hero went into a brief de-
scription of some experiments which he had made on
the t
a water supplied to his own premises, which he said
l thick, slimy deposit every month in the
Cisterns ; and this used to cause the water,
after nulling ill, to be muddy Nad doll; but that,