The Sun.
London, England, 1858-07-01 00:00:00

THE STATE OF THE RIVER THAMES.

The Select Committee appoint:ll by the House
of COMMOIA to inquire into the present state of
the river Thames, with a view of devhing some re-
medy for the existing state of things, reassembled
yesterday at 12 o'clock. Mr. Kendall in the hair.
Ile other members of the commit' ee present wore
—the Hon. Percy Jocelyn Mr. Alderman Cub:tt,
Sir John Yarde Bullr, Sir John Shelley, Mr.
'Fite, Mr. Roupell, Sir B. Hall, Lord P.,liners'on,
Lard John Manners, &c. _ _

Mr. Goldsworthy Gurney was called and exa-
mined by the Chairman—lie said, I wish bAore
giving my evidence' to express a hope that the
public press will deal fairly, and give the evidence
in favour of my plan as well as that given agaiLstit.
After some discussion the committee said, they
could not prevent the public ition of the evilence,
and passed a resolution regretting that some parts
of the evidence which were in favour of Mr. Gut-
ney's plan on a former occasion had not been given
as well as that of Mr. Walker against it.

Mr. Garney was then further-examinel—He ad-
verted to the.lodging of th,e sewage in b, attices near
the share, and said, that when the committee went
down the river the other day in a:steamboat, nearly
opposite Rotherhi he church, in the centre of the
river the water was tested, and it was found to he
altogether free from smsll, while on the sides of the
river the water was not much better deep that In
an ordinary cesspool. He had tiken water from
the London D icks, and that taken at 15 feet from
the surface was found to be pet fectly clear. The
smell principally arose from the water at the sides
of the river. The sewage from the sower emptying
itself into the river near Himgerford-market was
(mite clear, occasioned, lie believed, by deep pits
in it, in which the sewage was precipitated. He was
not aware whether th,re had been any diver,ion of
the sewage f our that sewer. A slope of the tanks
of 1 in 16 would generally keep them clear, but 1
in 12 would be much better. (The witness then
gave some further evidence, which was entirely of
a technical and scientific character.):
Mr. G. Bidder, the celebrated engineer, was
then called and examined by the °heir:nate He
said—l :nu a civil engineer, and have been so for
many ye me I have read ir. G. Gurney's report,
but it is a considerable time ago, and I do not ex-
actly understand upen what part of it I am called
upou to give an opinion.
The Ceairman —Well, first of all, part of Mr.
Gurney's plan is this :—He intends to form two
channels 30 yards wide and three yards deep, with
an average distance of 50 yards from the wharf walls
with a slope of 1 in 12, by which means he consi-
ders that the mud which is now cast upon the banks
of the river will be removed, and so got rid of the
nuisance. Do you think, if he succeeds in dredging
channels of 3) yards wide and 9 feet in depth,
which are supposed to receive a scouring p twer,
that these channels will keep themselves clear with-
out any material expenses in dredging.?
Mr. Bidder—l cannot tell whether the expenses
would be material or not, but they will require
dredging, as the bed of the river is composed of
gravel, and that is move'l by the current of the
river. When the old Loudon-bridge was removed,
a great change took place, for bath B'ackfriars and
Westminster briiges were .affected by it, and r, -
c: ntly Vauxhall-bridge piershad to be encased with
stonework. I cannot speak to the necessity of
deepening the present channel of the river, but it is
impossible that these small channels can be kept
clear without artificial assistance. If they can be
kept clear without. having recourse to dredging I
should say that it would be almost miraculous.
Clay will resist any amount of scour, but gravel
will not. The formation of these two channels would
be very inconvenient as regards the navigation of
the river, and especially at low water if steamers
came across the edges of these channels. If they
were formed they might stand. I think the ques-
tion as to whether these slopes would retain th e mud
at the inclination proposed must greatly depend on
the locality, as the mud remains on a slope at Black-
wall with an inclination of 1 in 5. Taking the upper
part of the Thames generally, I do not think that a
slope of 1 in 12 will prevent the deposit of mud.
If all the outlets of the sewers were taken
down to low water mark it would be beneficial to a
certain extent, and the noxious gases would be ar-
rested, but no other advantage would arise from it.
I agree with Mr. Bazdget.e—indoed I have no
doubt , fit—that the sewage lodging on the mud
banks is the cause of great evil. Mr. Hawksley has
assisted me in examining the river for the Metro-
politan Board of Works ; we are still pursuing our
inquiries, and I hope in a few days to be able to
give you all the information you require upon this
subject.
Mr. Roupell—You say that the gravel in the
river is liberated by the current or stream of the
river ; is not the motion a slow motion, and, if it
is so, would not the gravel be carried down the
river ?
Mr. Bidder—Yes ; but below London-bridge I
find mud on the banks and gravel in the middle of
the river. But, as regards the slow motion of the
gravel, you may have a notion. that it. is slow ; but
I do not think, if it moves 100 yards in a day, that
can be called a slow motion. If there are to be
angles from the shore of 1 in 12, I do not believe
that they will be free from mud. I cannot say, as
a general principle, that, a slope of 1 in 12 will be
sufficient to prevent mud depositing on them. If the
sewers of the metropolis were to he carried to low
water mark in the river, the probability of the sew-
age being carried to the sea would be the same as it
is at present. It would be the same in that respect,
but it would prevent the accumulation of mud on
the backs.
Mr. Tite—Supposing all the sewers to to tr3ppe 1,
the sewage to be turned out of the sewers at low
water mark, the noxious gases to be drawa out of
the sewers and burnt in furnaces with high chim-
neys, and that there should be an angle on the shore
with a slop' throughout of lin 12, with channels on
each side of the river to facilitate the drainage to
the tea, do you think that this plan would be a so-
lution of the drainage question? Give us your opi-
nion upon the whole scheme, as a remedy for the
present evils ?
Mr. Bidder—That would open the whole ques-
tion as to whether these two little channels will
cure the impurity of the Thames. That is a ques-
tion I would rather go into at another time.
Mr. Tie3—l want your opinion Low. Do you
think the whole scheme a feasible ono ?
Mr. Bidder—l, do not think it is a feasible plan

the scheme.
By Mr. Alderman Cubitt—lt would of course be
an advan'age to keep the banks of the river clean.
There is a great difference between the slopes on the
banks of the Seine and the Thames, as one is a
tidal river and the other is not. I have no doubt
that thee channels would fill up.
By Sir B. Hall—Looking at the map on the wall,
it iud.cates that the current of the river towards
the Penitentiary is to the north, it then sets to the
south towards Lamb tla Palace, and then it is di-
verted to the north approaching Watello.)-bridge ;
but we are told that, if this deep channel is for mcd,
instead of the na,ural current it will be diverted to
the south side at Wattrloo-bridge, do you agree
with that prop sit:on ?
Mr. Bidder—Certainly not.
Sir B. Hall—Will not the result be this,—the
fresh water that comes down will strike the south
side of the river below Lambeth Palace, will then
be turned in a northerly direction near Waterloo-
bridge, and there fill up the channel rather than
deenen it ?
Mr. Bidder—l have no doubt of it. To suppose
that these two little channels will alter the course
of the river is quite out of the qut si ion. Ido not
think it would be desirable to prosecute this scheme
as to them, channels, and, in point of fact, if they
were made it would be so much money thrown away.
By the Hon. J. Percy—l have no scheme of my
own, nor have I given an opinion upon any other
scheme. If these channels were mad-, and were silted
the expense of dredging them would depend en-
tirely upon the time they t ruk to fill up. If they
required dredging once a mouth of course the ex-
witild be very gr at, but I will undertake to
say they will fill up. Ido not b3lieve a general
slope of I in 12 will answer, arid I have _alluded to
Blackwall, where the mud accumulates on a slope
of lin 6. lem not aware that ureat damage has
been done to harbours and other places by embank-
ment of rivers.

By Lord Palmerston—Gravel has alconstant ten-
dency tl trawl toward: the centre of the river. So
loon- asthere is an impelling farce it continues equal,
and if it meets with noobitrucliQn, gravel continues
its onward course ; but that depends upon the size
of the gravel.
Lord Palmerston—Suppose the bed of the river
to b,l petfectly uniform and smooth over all its
area, ihu force equal, then the action of the cur-
rent would have no effect ? _ _ _

Mr. Bidder—None at all. The removal of Lon- I
den-bridge had led to the deepening of the channel
above bridge? If these channels were made ;hey
would fill up, and could not be maintained. They i
would silt up more or less. I will give you an in-
stance of that. I lately made holes in some grounds
of Mine alrough which a stream runs, for the pur-
pose of bolding fish, and they have all filled up with
gravel. To make a running channel uniform in
all its parts that man must be more than mcrtal.
It might be in the constitutional tendency of na-
ture to make deep places, but that could nut be
done by any other course. Ido not believe that
if you cut off an elbow in a stream formed by na-
ture that )ou can do so without forming another.
If all the seweis were to dis!charo their contents
at low water mark it would prevent exhala,,ious
and would be so far beneficial, but it would not re-
lieve the river.
By Sir J. Shelley—As far as gettinn rid of the
mud banks this scheme would be beneficial—there
is no doubt of it. I do nut think that would
cause any silting up of the channel as the sewage
matter is so light. With regard to the edges of
eiese channels at low water, it would have a bad
effect upon the navigation. The stability of these
channels would depend a great deal upon the ma-
terials put in. Bricks would not reaiain unless
they were cemented together. Granite blocks
would stand, but that would be a gr,:at additional
expense.
By Lord J. Manners—A. dredged channel will
fill up. lam not aware of any part of the river
which has been dredged having filled up.
By the Chairman—lf a channel between the
Houses of Parliament and Westminster-bridge has
been dredged for seven years, and not filled up at
the present time, lam not aware of it, nor do I
believe it.

By the Chaitman—l approve slopes if made of a
sufficient incline, but I do not think that the mud
could be washed off with an incline of I in 12. I
also approve the plan of sending the contents of
the sewers by means of closed channels into the
river at low watermark, for the same telson as I
approve of removing mud from the banks. The
cutting of a channel on each side of the river has
never been heard of before and will never be heard
of again. Any rational man would carry a channel
to the centre, and not on each side of the river.
This plan, in some respects, seems to me to create
an evil for the purpose of overcoming it.
By Mr. Roupell—Some portions of Mr. Gurney's
plan might to a certain extent be useful, but the
work ought to be carried out in a more extensive
manner. I have made no special examination of
the river after reading Mr. Gurney's report.

By Mr. Tite—The river is as irregular longitu-
dinally as it is crosswise. If it were stiggeAteethat
these channels should be formed, that the mouths
of the sewers at low watermark should be trapped,
and that the gases should be burnt by connecting
the sewers with a furnace, I should certainly not
feel disposed to recommend the adoption of such a
course as a temporary expedient. If au intercept-
ing sewer were formed, except the removal of the
mud banks, these works would be of no use what-
ever.
By Mr. Alderman Cubitt—The deepening of the
channel would not necessarily affect the safety of
the bridges.
Mr. Jas. Lewes, examined by th 3 Chairman—l
have given great attention to the sewerage ques-
tion. Some portions of Mr. Gurney's pl4n hare
c nuder my notice. I read the report sometime
ago. My opinion is that the depcit,4 on the mud
banks of the Thames is the cause of the nuisance
I agree with Mr. Gurney that, whatever distance
you carry the sewage down the river, it will come
back again. I agree with Mr. Gurney, too, that a
great deal of the present nuisance ati=es from the
mud banks of the Thames. If Mr. Gurney's plan
would get rid of the mud banks and a great deal of
the sewage which is floating about the river it
would be a great impr6vernent ; but I cannot say
that this process would do that. Mr. Gurney's
Man would prevent the deposit of mud on the
banks, and would Prey( nt the exhalation of gases
as far as low water mark ; hut, as he sends all the
f e w ago into the Thames, I do not th'nk it will meet
all the difficulty. As long as we have a alms of

Ifloating sewage in the Thames, Mr. Gurney's plan
will not remove it. In warm weather there is a
great escape of the noxious gases.
The Chairman—lf the sewage were dischlrged at
Barking-creek do you think it would return to
London ?
Mr. Lawes—l think it would.
prrit of it would return.
The Chairman—Would it return in such a form
as to be injuriow to the inhabitants of London ?
Mr. Lawes—l think it would. If sewage deodo-
risatiou works were to be estibiished at Birki6g-
creek, I do not think the value of the manure
would be found.
By Sir B. Hall—l am not able to say from actual
experiments what part of the sewage will return to
the metropolis. I have made no experiments of
that kird.
Sir B. Hall—Can you give any idea of the effezt of
the lime which is now thrown on the mud banks ?
Mr. Lawes—lt will arrest the nuisance to a
certain extent, but I think it will have a preju-
dicial effect on the navigation of thy, river, as for
every ton of lime thrown in you gtt four tons of
deposit, and if you throw in one hundred tone
a-week that may prove a very serious matter. All
the sedimentary matter goes down to the bottom
by the action of the lime, and if the practice of
throwing lime into the river went on long enough
the navigation would he choked up
Sir B. Ball—Suppose a large quantity of lime
to be thrown into a sewer where the cutrent was
slow, what would be the result ?
Mr. Lawes—lt would choke up the sewer.
Thcro was.llo doubt that the lime would cause a
large amount of deposit.
By Lord Pilmerston—Supposing all the sets age
of the metropolis to be discharged into the stream
of the river, and retained i here for some little time,
before it was carried down.tbe river, and there was,
a certain amount of temperature, it would hrnit
noxious and disagreeable gases?
Mr. Lawes—The river would be dangerous when
the temperature was from 68 deg. to 70 deg. The
temperatureof the atmosphere would then hi about
120 deg. There would always be a great that of
noxious exhalation during summer. To secure
London from the inconvenience to which it is now
subject, and to remove the sewage to the lower
part of the river, and to prevent it coining back
within the limits of the metropolis, they must de-
stroy that part of the sewage which is held in sus-
pension, as the matters held in suspension are the
most dangerous.
By Sir J. Shelley.—l think the smell from the
Thames would be removed if they threw in lime
enough ; but that would be at an enormous ex-
pense to the ratepayers. Ido not think that the
spending of 1,5001. in lime would have the effect
of raising its price in the marke. The present nui
canes may probably last as long as the warm wea-
ther lasts.
At half-past 4 o'clock the committee adjourned.

A considerable

THE THAMES SEWAGE.

(Front the Tinos.)

The sewage question reminds one of the won-
detful stozehouse at Weedon Barracka, where an
infinite quantity of Loots and other stores are
poured in at one end and disappear at the other,
nobody knows how, without any reckoning. Com-
mittee after Committee, Commission after Com-
mission, has sat on the question, collecting facts
enough to build on them a hundred different
systems of drainage. But nobody appears to know
anything of them. The facts are buried, forgo ten,
obsolete, rotten before they are ripe. So, when we
ask for something to be done, the cry is for another
Commission, or Committee upstairs. As, in com-
pliance with Mr. Disraeli's request, Orders are now
to have precedence of Motions every day of the
week, and the Thames nusance itself has evidently
become a reason for nothing else being done ex-
cept what cannot be helped, it is time to ask,
" How about the Thames itself?" If we have a
world of business besides, that might perhaps ex-
cuse our doing nothing with the river, for there
are circumstances under which life itself becomes
a secondary consideration. But there is nothing
else. The India Bill is nothing, for Parliament
has agreed to take the third India Bill, shorn of
all peculiarities, and reduced to a neutral colour.
As for measures in general, Government inherits
none, and has made none of its own. It pleads
its position, the heat of the weather, and the
pettilential stream that flows by its windows. So,
what with provisional government, and what with
the Thames, Lord Derby and his friends have an
easy time of it. But, if the Thames is to be a reason
for doing nothing else, it is all the stronger reason
for our doing something with the nuisance itself.
In fact, it rests with Government. They have the
game in their hands. Parliament would give them
any powers they might have the courage and
honesty to ask for, if they really wished to be
worth their salt. They have only to apply for a
portion of those power s 'under which they are blow-
ing mountains to pieces, and casting them into the
sea, to make harbours of refuge, or making docks
larger and larger at all the great arsenals, and
Parliament will be too happy to give them twice
as much authority and money as they ask for. So,
it is as their responsibility that the work is post-
poned. They are now doing nothing but throwing
a few boatloads of lime into the river, in the vain
hope of sweetening the classic shores of Lambeth
and Millbank, or pottering somewhere or other
with the mouths of the sewer. All that will make
mighty little difference this time next year. We
want something that will go to the heart of the
evil, and that without a day's longer delay than is
absolutely necessary.
That the prob'em is an easy one, or that it
admits of mathematical certainty, is m ire than any
man would venture to say ; but we have a very
s rong opinion that the inherent difficulties of the
ease are not so great as those which prejudice or
jobbery would superadd to them. All mug re-
member the very great pains taken to make the
Exhibition in Hyde Park an eternal affair, a thine-
of brick and mortar, an architectural triumph..
Walls 12 feet, domes of solid masonry, and founda-
tions down to the London clay, were some of the
features of the project, and there was good reason
to fear that a continuous stream of bricks as ould set
in at every approach to the park for the next
twelvemonth. In like manner our earlier railway
stations comprehended vast palatial halls for
nothing at all, and porticoes borrowed from the
largest temples of antiquity. In the later ones the
directors, "wiser grown," have been content to
cover the largest possible areas with the est t
ligh
possible wood or iron roofing. Twenty Yea"s ago

We point this out as the right way of dealing
with the sewage, specially so called. Of course,
no piping, and no other plan for carrying off our
sewage to the sea, will suffice for the suifitoe
drainage, or the " storm water" of the me-
tropolis. It is rather hard upon any engi-
neer to expect him to convey fifty miles across
country the occasional deluge that submerges a
hundred square miles of hill and plain. But there
ate two special nuisances that we think ought to be
apecia2ly dealt with. The Gas Companies ought to
be compelled to disposo of their " blue billy," as
it is calle3, themselves, without adding it to the
natural obligations of our overtasked river. No
wonder that the Thames water is bad when hun-
dreds of tons of downright druggists' poison are
thrown into it week by week, withou% a soul be say
nay. We have a right to be protected from every-
thing el=e but simple sewage. Now, as things are
in these days, this is an affair of machinery from
first to last, and admits of the exactest calculation.
We know to a gallon how much water is supplied
to a house. We know the supply, which is n tver
exceeded, though often not reached. With a cer-
tain allowance for additional rainwater at certain
times, it will be ea.,y to provide sufficient sewers—
as much iron as possible—for the water that passes
through our houses. If ueceshary, and if the ordi-
nary supply of water is not enough to keep the
pipes cleat, they can be occasionally flushed. But,
anyhow, this particular part of the nuisaec,, be-
ginning, as it doe:, with an artificial and regulated
supply of water, and being controlled by machinery
throughout, appears to us specially susceptible of
a similar treament in the river, and right down t.)
the' sea, if necessary. It is, however, the chief
merit of this proposal that it can be commenced at
once, and we can feel our way to an indefinite ex-
tension of it afterwards.

' (Front the Daily News)
England• is an ernieently practical nation, and
somewhat selfish; our constitution is based upon •
the principle that a man who is just outside the
class whose wanks are supplied from day to
day by the sweat of tbe.r brow has his feel-
ings and his wishes represented in one branch of
our legislature, and we are yearly placing our mem-
bers more and more under the direct control and in-
fluence of their constituents. Members are being
detached from party tactics and the personal in-
flue ce of leaders. The unity of thoueas t and ection,
as represented by a majority in the House of COM-
mon-, is swayed by ire fixed princii Is of leader-
ship or expeeieucy. The Conservatives strain their
conscience and belie their name by palish g Radical
measure-, and the his rale vote with them. How-
ever we may blame minister s, we consider the re-
sult beneficial to progress,. It is one of those turn-
ing points in our history inaugurated by S r Robert
secession, which brings into prominence the.
dictum of "measures, and not then.''
That is constitutional policy working its end
through a disunion of thought, a balance of con-
tradictions ; but after all, noble lords and honour-
able members, learned judges and right reverend
divines are but me:r, who have five senses in com-
mon. The putreseetit state of the Thames has
attacked their sense of smell ; doctors write to the
papers that this is a prelude to cholera, fevers,
dysentery, and what not, and a unanimous howl is
raised against the Government for allowing stick a
stench to go abroad, and a peremptory opinion is
expressed that it must be put down at once.
Hero is a grand opportuuity for Lord Derby to
use his maeician's wand; a practical step is
wanted ; and,,for once, all the discordant elements,
fi-om the Crown to the metropolitan voter, are
unanimous. If Lord Derby will only look the
matter boldly in the face, and act upon his own
conviction of what is right, the wand is in his hand,
and he can use it. But we can give him one piece
of advice :—Do not refer this question of the Thames
and metropolitan drainage to any more committees
or commissions. Every tittle of information that
can possibly be required is already available in a
whole library of blue-books and reports, dating
from 1640 to the present year. The facts upon
which a remedy must be based are known, any
further inquiry will only distort them to serve
personal considerations and advance the nostrums
of unpractical scientific men.
Ties. state of the Thames is aggravated by two
causes :—The sewage of London duly flowing ir.to
it, and the accumulation of sewage in the form of
black mud along its banks between Lambeth and
London-bridge.
The remedy is self-evident :—To carry the Lon-
don sewage so far clown the Thames that it shall
not return into London proper with the flowing
tide and to do away with the mud banks.
First, we must deal with the sewage. The great
fact which strikes one at first is the waste of valu-
able manure in allowing the sewage of nearly three
millions of inhabitants to flow into the sea. That
is no doubt a paradox which will be !solved 'some
day. Our present aim, however, is to prevent three
millions of people being poisoned, not that of utilis-
ing their farces. Granted that some system of deo-
dorisation is available, it is evident that the appli-
cation of it cannot be in the heart of London. If
every house could deodorise its own sewage, the
problem would be solved ; but the most ardent ad-
vocates of the system admit the necessity of cen-
tralisation in reservoir', and these reervoirs must
be out of London.

The drainage of London must, therefore, be car-
ried out of town by some other conduit than the
river. The simplest and most efficient plan is that
.of interception, i.c., to make on each side of the
Thames, and parallel to it, large covered drains
which shall intercept all the drainage and carry
it below the metropolitan aiea. The point of out-
fall into the river must be low enough down to
allow of the sewage being discharged into it only at
the turn of high-tide on the ebb, so as to prevent
it from being brought back above that point by
the return tide, but still not into salt water, as
fr.2sh water tends to deodolis.4 sewage, salt water
ondir3 it nafire putres:ient, This limits the point
of outiall to soave point between Sea Reach and
Wo,lwicli, and renders it necessary to have reser-
voirss°i
ng
present works
anyni here-
aftersewage
large enough to keep back the sewage dining
flood-tide.
At
the.be eesrteasenri
svboei ra d
d ;o d
a °srs to
etioap.ng into the river; but whether this can be
done or not, the river will have been purified
31)3\1) Wodwicll.
The tide flows five hours and ebbs seven, so that
if the sewage is discharged only during ebb tide a
very small proportion of it will come back to within
four or five miles of the point of discharge, and
then it n ill be so diluted that no ill effects will
result ; in assuming, therefore, that the point of
outfall for the intercepting
_drains will be between