The Sun.
London, England, 1856-10-07 00:00:00

METROPOLITAN BOARD OF WORKS.

A special meeting of the Metropolitan Board of Works
was held yesterday in No. 1 Committee-room, Guildhall,
for the purpose of considering the report of the engineer
of the board on the whole question of the northern and
southern drainage, with comparative estimates of diffe-
rent points of outfall, andmodes of disposing of the sew-
oge. Mr. J. Thwaites in the chair.
In consequence of a previous determination that the
outtall should be at Barking Creek, a notice for the re•
scinding of that resolution was given at the last court,
and the first subject on the paper was the consideration
a •

,at question.
Mr. WRIGHT, in pursuance of that notice, moved
" That the resolution of the board of the 17th Juno,
1856, adopting the report of the engineer so far as it re •
fates to the extension to Barking Creek, and also the re •
solution of the board of Aug. 12, 1856, negativing the
fiillowing amendment, viz., 'That the discharge of the
*tin outfall sewer on the southern side of the Thames be
made at a point in the River Thames on the Surrey side,
westward of Erith,' be revoked, with a view to the con-
sideration cf all, and theadoption of either of the several
systems of drainage set forth in the engineer's report of
Sept. 25, 1856."
Mr. Rows seconded the motion, and regretted that
on a former occasion they had been tied up from the
consideration of the whole question through regulations
made by themselves,

Mr. trlreetrumtsupperted the motion, which 'was
put and carried.
The resolution was then rescinded.
Mr. CARPMAEL, who had the following notice of mo-
tion on the paper, "That the engineer's report be adopted
89 far as it relates to the outfall at B on the plan," said
he regretted to find that many members of the board
were still in favour of what he must call a most mon-
strous scheme in their desire to carry the sewage of the
metropolis to Sea Reach. He contended that it was a
monstrous scheme, for one part of the sewer would con-
tain 16,000,000 cubic feet of sewage ; and if they added
the branch from Greenwich they would have an aver-
age discharge of nearly 20,000,000 cubic feet of sewage
which they proposed to carry to .the sea. He did not
consider that he could better describe suoh a scheme
than by adopting a description that had already been
given to it by Mr. Leslie, for it would become one vast
and elongated cesspool from London to the sea. It
might be considered-by some persons very desirable to
erect a tower which should reach to the skies, while an-
other would wish to penetrate to the antipodes, so that
the names of the projectors of such scheme should be
handed down to posterity ; but it would be for the board
to say if they were prepared to cast the burden of such
cost upon the ratepayers. He doubted as to the possi-
bility of doing it ; bet, as to the propriety of doing so he
believed that every engineer, their own included, would
set his face against it ; and therefore he at once dis-
missed No. 4 scheme as one that the board could not for
a moment entertain. If some members'contended that
under no circumstances should they discharge the sew-
age into the Thames, neither of the schemes at present
before the board would get them out of the difficulty,
and, such being so, he knew of no plan for an outfall
that WAS so Aulobjectionable, and so far removed from
human habitations, as that proposed between Erith and
Woolwich. He should have wished that an immediate
answer had been returned to Sir Benjamin Hall, point-
ing out to him the desirability of carrying out the works
at the point proposed, although it might be opposed to
a technical difficulty in the act of parliament. If his
proposition was carried, he should propose that a deputa-
tion should wait upon the Board of Works, to point out
the reason Illy they were called upon to spend upwards
of two millions of money for carrying the sewage be
yond the place they considered necessary, and that
if they did so it would be merely for the purpose of
complying with a technical difficulty in the not of parlia-
ment. 'But for the interference and veto of the govern-
ment they should have made progress in their works,
and he' doubted not but for the letter of Sir B. Hall
they should have had a number of contracts entered
into for carrying out the works they originally proposed.
He oonoluded by moving the adoption of the engineer 'e
report, so far as it relates to the outfall at B on the plan.
Mr. SERUM seconded the motion with great pleasure
as a lay member of the board, for he looked at the ques-
tion in a popular and not on a superficial ground. He
had lately looked at all the plans, and he thought it wee
the duty of the board not to spend 140,0001. unless it
was considered to be absolutely necessary, fur the)
kiught to take care of the interests of the ratepayers, and
be opposed to the trial of experiments which might pos-
sibly fail. • He should be extremely sorry to see the
board stuck fast, and was opposed to their passing the
sewage under the Thames. That was a risk wirch he
would rather not incur, unless they had an assurance
of 50 to 1 against a failure., when he perhaps might
make uplhie mind to it. As it .was, however, he saw be-
fore them a cheaper and a better plan, and he preferreo
one in which no such risk was incurred. There was
another cplootion and it eerk?,44ly did not to Ilitu appeal