The Sun.
London, England, 1858-07-20 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY EV ENING, JULY 20, 1858.

Crown,s% ating the principles on which the government
of the country would be carried on. (Hear.)
The house then resumed, and the report was ordered
to Le received this day.
The Navigation Advances (Ireland) Bill was read a
third time and passed.
The Prescriptions (Ireland) Bill was read a third time
and passed.
The Local Government Bill was read a second time.
The Militia Ballots Suspension Bill passed through
committee.
The adjourned at 12 o'clock.

HOUSE OF COMMONS—(YESTERDAY.
The SPEAKER took the chair at four o'clock.
PRIVATE BUSINESS.

The Lords' Amendments to the Crystal Palace Dis-
trict Gas Bill were considered and agreed to,
STATE OF THE THAMES.

The report of the committee on the state of the river
Thames was brought up by Mr. KENDALL and laid upon
the table.

APPROPRIATION BILL.
Sir H. WILLOUGHBY asked when it was intended
to bring in the Appropriation Bill, and if it would be
printed ?
Mr. HAMILTON said it was intended to bring in
the Appropriation Bill this evening, and that it would
be printed.
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE asked the Secretary of State
for War, if he was aware that certain differences had
arisen between Col. the Earl of Wilton and Lieut.-Col.
Dickson, bo h of the Second Tower Hamlets Militia,
with reference to the affairs and discipline of that
regiment ; and, if it was true, that the constable
of the Tower had made an application to have Lieut.-
Colonel Dickson's name, unless he would consent to
resign, removed from the Army List, without giving
that officer, after 23 years' service at home and abroad,
any opportunity of vindicating his conduct before a
proper military tribunal ?
General PEEL, after enterinc, into the rules and re-
gulations for the government of the militia, said that
Lord Combermere had forwarded to him certain charges
preferred against Col. Dickson, but as he (Gen. Peei) did
not consider the evidence forwarded to him strictly
made out the charge against Cal. Dickson, he had de-
cided on giving Col. Dickson an opportunity of vindi-
cating himself before a court of inquiry. (hear, hear.)

THE OVERLAND ROUTE.
Mr. NICOLL aiked the Secretary of State for War,
if the advantages of the overland route as a means of
transport for her Majesty's troops, as described in the
reu..it report of the re'ect c-)rnrnittec, would induce the
Government to forward Indian reinforcements by that
route during the colder months of the year, and as would
be consistent with the opinion given to that effect by the
military authorities in Egypt.
General PEEL said that in cases of emergency
he intended to send Indian reinforcements by the over-

land route.
METROPOLITAN LOCAL MANA.GENIENT ACT

AMENDMENT BILL.
Mr. S. WARREN gave notice of certain amend
merits to this bill. _ .

Mr. ROUPELL gave notice of certain amendments
relative to the outfall of the Fewage into the Thames.
TRANSPORT OF TROOPS COM.MITTEE.

Lori GODEIZICLI rose to call the attention of the

house to certain remarks contained in a pamphlet written
by Sir Da L. Evans relative to the conduct of his fel-
low committee-men upon the transport of troops to
India. (Cries of " He's not here.") The noble
lord said he had given Sir De Lacy
Evans notice of his intention to bring the
subject forward, and read a note he had sent to him
and the answer received from him in reference to it,
and he was surprised at the gallant general's absence.
Sir J. SHELLEY handed Lord Goderich a note he
had received from Sir Da Lacy Evans, dated this day
at 2 o'clock, in which the gallant general stated he was
too much indisposed to attend in his place this after-
noon.
Lord GODERICHt, having read the note, said he
would abstain from entering on the subject this after-
noon.

The subject then dropped.
METROPOLITAN LOCAL MANAGEMENT ACT

AMENDMENT BILL.

On the motion for the second reading of this bill,
Sir H. WILLOUGHBY inquired if the proposed tax

of 33. in the pound was to be -paid by the owner or oc.
copier of the premises in the metropolis. He corne
plained that the scheme for which the three million was
to be advanced r, as not before the house.
Mr. AKROYD conceived that the scheme should
be before the house before they consented to vote the
money. He hoped the house in the last week of the ses-

sion would not rush into a schme of this kind without
maturely considering its provisions, The amount of
liquid sewage thrown into the Thames was one-fifth of its

whole volume. Ho considered the evidence that had
been given before the committee, that the sewage
could be purified at the mouth of the sewers,
was worthy of coasideration, and should be first tried
before ttley proceeded to carry out so expensive a scheme
as that inferred by the bill. He thought a bill of this
kind shoul not be framed with so much precipitanoy.
The Lot weather had passed, and no harm would
result by its postponement to another year.
Mr. LOWE considered there was no reason for en•
tertaining the highest opinion of the newly created
Beard of Works, constituted as it now was, and it was
very desirable they should have the scheme that was to be
carried out before them. He considered the present was a
short-sighted plan, and if it was carried out, and Lon-
don increased at the rate it had since 1801, it
would be useless in 1871. He approved of the scheme
of the Government referee to carry the sewage to Sea
Reach, instead of the plan of the Metropolitan Board of
Works for carrying it to Risking creek, The annual
permanent expense of working the scheme of the Metro-
politan Board of Works, after the three millions had
been incurred, would he, at the end of seven or eight
years, 151,0001. a-year, which, if capitalised, would
represent four millions, so that, instead cf this
scheme costing three millions, it would cost seven mil-
lions, including a permanent charge of 4 millions, and at
the end of a few years—in 1871—the efficacy of the '
scheme would be exhausted, and new works would be
required. The cost of the scheme for conveying
it to Sea Reach would be six millions, and
the cast of working it one million, making
together seven millions, with a permanent charge
of two millions for working, &c. ; but they would gain
in this respect, for the works under the latter scheme
would he sufficient for the future growth of the metro
polis.
Mr. HE ADLA.M regretted that they were called upon
to discuss this measure at so late a period of the session.
He objected to their passing a measure which proposed
to raise a tax upon the inhabitants of the whole of this
metropolis of 3d. in the pousd for 40 years, and then
to cast off all responsibility themselves by banding over
the money to a body that were not responsible either to
Parliament, or practically to the ratepayers, without tak-
ing any care that the money should be properly ex-
pended, or the scheme properly carried out.
Mr. S. WORTLEY gave credit to the Government
for the great attention they had paid to the subject, but
thought that the excitement which prevailed in regard to
it had led them to attempt legislation upon it with too
much haste. The bill in its present form was subject, in
the first place, to the objection that it pledged the house
to a particular plan. The first clause desired the Metro-
politan Board of Works to intercept the sewage of
London. Then the hon. member for Andover—
not among the least informed members of the board—
was of opinion that there was great danger in'this system
of interception. (Hear.) But in the bill he found no
gini'that
assertion
more fully proved than by
security that the scheme would be carried out ; certain
powers and a certain amount of money were given, but
that was all ; the plsn might be changed ; it was subject
to the approval of no authority, and the board could
carry it out or not as they pleased. If that was the case
the board to which this trust was committed should be
one to command public confidence. He hoped that the
house would not be hurried into a crude, incomplete,
chievous measure.
Lord J. MANNERS
said that he had often heard
tahriadt Ptehhaat house was subject to hot and cold fits, but he
had never seen
the debates which had taken place on this question within
Her Majesty's Government was
the last three wt eke.
threatened with nothing less than impeachment nnle a
within 24 hours they settled this question, and at that
time he (Lord J. Manners) put in a dilatory plea, stating
that the Government had the matter under considers-.
tion, and begged that the house would not in its excite-
ment press at once for au authoritative decision. But
the Government having had time for consideration, and
having formed a scheme whichetbey receinmeuiled the
house to adopt, it was met by the hon. members for
Huddersfield, for Buteshire, and Newcastle-upon• Tyne,
with a serious opposition, and the Government were told
that they were rushing to a conclusion on a question
which might very well wait till next year,
as his right
hon. friend (Mr. Wortley) said, he believed, until the
coal duties expire in 1862. (No, from Mr. Wortley.)
Why were tit( y to wait another year? Some gentlemen
seemed to thine. that this was a new question on which
scientific men had not made up their minds, but having
had to look into the subject, he (Lord J. Manners) knew
that no subject had been more ex nnined into and consi-
dered, and in fact so thoroughly thrashed out as that of the
main drainage of the metropolis. If hon. gentlemen would
reflect on the number of schemes which had been proposed,
and the quantity of evidence which had been brought for-
ward, they could not say that the Government were
about to settle the question in haste. He could only
say that if the house was deliberately of opinion that no
decision should be come to on the question this year,
on the House of Commons would rest the respensibility
of losing, perhaps, the only °lapel twill of dealing with
the subject. On the part of the Government he de-
clared that they had boon prepared to take the respoc-
sibul ty of action, and then on the hon 'e must rest the
responsibility of inaction. (Her.) The G )vezninent
:gas cf opii.ioa that the only mode of dealing with the
que,tion was to be found in the f ,ur corners of this bill.
-Could
hon. member for Newcastle said that this question
eTdohriaahmitiiseas.gk;enabznuadtnpdtuhareibfilbecoasotpi.oeie:ilhiugtivteheanetinnhkal,ink,-
meld be dealt with as a whole by the Government—
innutoettnhot
enolclotuht hre: utle.inan did "not
at
the
etoL howw,.
~,t,sl:,e.
iGetozerr mitt
hwea
as t,o,pe
rAnymf
el
ta ltihibis.
waysNV and Would
means? rOet of what fonds did the hon. gentleman
propose that the Government should do all this? Were
they as a pure and naked despotism to take out of the
pocket 3 cf the ratepayers the money required for such
works, or were they to be considered as national EX-
Daises, and to be borne out cf the consolidated fund.
(Hear.) If so he (fiord J. Manners) should decline to
be the person to make such a proposition to Parliament.
Then what was left but to invest a great municipality,
which, if anything did, represented the ratepayers with
had heard, wills wurpriee the comments which bad been
powers necessary to effect tl e i evil ed otject. He

made on the Metropolitan Board of Works. That
body had originated with a liberal Government, of
a hich the right honourable gentleman the member
for Kidderminster was a member, who had spoken
so strongly of what he called a quasi representative
body. Ho (Lord John Manners) supposed that the
intention of the legislature was to be found in the pream-
ble of the act, which declared that "it was expedient for
the better local government of the metropolis in regard
to the sewerage, lighting, and cleansing thereof." The
act compelled the Metropolitan Board of Works to take
up the very question of the main drainage and purifica-
tion of the Thames,. Let him ask whether the Govern-
ment under whose auspices that act was passed believed
that they were setting up a sham and a pretence, or a
municipality, or did they believe that they were creating
an effective municipality for the government of this vast
e`ropolis ? He was bound to come to the latter con-
clusion, and therefore he had listened with surprise to
the denunciations which had been delivered against that
body. His right hon. friend (Mr. Wortley) said that it
was impossible to entrust such powers as were proposed
by the bill to the Board of Works, and he said that he
did not know the names of its members. It was possible
that he did not know their names, but were all corpora-
tions worthless unless his right hon. friend knew the
birth and parentage of all their members 1 He (Lord
J. Manner-) protested against this mode of dealing with
the subject. They found in existence a great muni-
cipality which three years ago was created for metro•
politan purposes, and every impartial man would admit
that if the Metropolitan Board had not carried out
a plan for the drainage of London, the Lime did
not lie at their door exclusively. (Hear, hear.) Tne
Government bad found that the powers of the Metro-
politan Board of Works were not sufficient to enable
them to perform their functions ; and they came to Par-
liament and asked Parliament to give them the neces-
sary powers. He had abstained on this occasion from
entering on the scientific and chemical part of the ques-
tion, and what had occurred that evening showed the
advantage of not entering on that useless theme. The
noble lord having urged tint honest things had been
said on both sides with reference to the plan of the
Metropolitan Board of Works, and that of the referees
of Sir B. Hall, proceeded to entreat the house not to be
led into a discussion on engineering questions, for if they
did they must constitute themselves a perpetual select
committee on the subject. If they agreed with him so
far, he would ask, if it was shown that the powers of the
Metropolitan Board of Works were net sufficient for
that purpose, if the house was determined that the
national resources should not be called on to pay the
expenses of such a work, and if they thought that the
boil inhebitarte, who wool! have t . pay, 611011:d Lave
a voice in the matter, which he fur one would earnestly
insist on, what better plan could be adopted than that
proposed by the bill ? And until some other plan,
which held out greater certainty and a better hope that
the great work which they desired should be accom-
plished, he entreated the house not to lose perhaps the
last opportunity of giving that board sufficient powers
which three years ago was created as an efficient and
popular representative of the great metropolis. He could
not sit down without answering a question put earlier in
the evening by the hon. member for Evesham, who
asked what was the nature of the rating powers of the
board. The power was that of sewer-rating, which
existed before. There had been no alteration of the
nature of the rating by the bill. It was called a land-
lord's rate, and unless in leases there were specific
powers to the contrary, it was payable by the landlords.
The noble lord concluded by earnestly urging on the
house to read the bill a secon I time.
Mr. GLADSTONE said the framework of the bill
presented great difficulties. He wished to know who
would be ultimately responsible for the payment of the
money. (Hear, hear.) It was intended that the
charge should be borne by the metropolis, but the public
often became involved unaware in pecuniary responsi•
bilitiee, and he should like to know how the bill pro-
vided for the responsibility in this respect. (Hear.)
In many cases the House of Commons had assented to
propositions, and there after reciting the plan in the
preamble of a bi r, had given its legislative sanction. lie
did not obj -ct to the application of the principle of a
public guarantee in a matter so important as the pre-
sent ; but the application ought to be wa.ched and scru-
tinised with severe jealousy. He wished to a-certain
the responsibility of the body to whom the guarantee
was to be given, and to avoid stepping into a position
in which it might be said the whole affair was done by
the authority of Parliament, and Parliament ought to
pay for it. Ile did not find from the bill that this was
a popular responsible body requiring aid in the shape of
a grant. On the contrary, Parliament seemed to be
made the absolute authors and projectors of the scheme.
(Hear, hear.) It was no doubt advisable to avoid
die-
cussing engineering and other details of a similar na-
ture. He agreed with the noble lord that it was ma-
possible to arrive at a satisfactory conclusion on these
' matters. But then the house] ought to have the beet
possible assurance that these matters had been ade-
quately and competently decided by those with phom
they wore dealing. (Hear, hear.) From the discus-
sions which bad taken place, and the pamphlets which
had been published, it appeared to him that the ques-
tion had not yet arrived at that maturity which would
enable the house to deal with it in a satisfactory manner.
At present hon. members were not able to stand on their
own Cons iAions or on the competencyof those with whom
they were dealing ; and they ought to deal with some
body which was competent to arrive at a correct con-
clusion. (Hear, hear.) The bill did not even say that
the Board of Works had approved of any scheme. It
contained in a few clauses the recognition and sanction
of a plan which was understood to be the plan of the
Board of Works. But that plan was to be promulgated on
the authority of Parliament ; and then would come the
question of the ultimate liability. (Hear.) Suppceie the
plan should fail, or that the 3,000,0001. should be found
to be insufficient for its execution. One or both of these
events might happen. (Hear.) And what, then, would
I be the case of the inhabitants of the metropolis ? iVould
they not be able to point to the bill and say, "I'e was
not with our will that this was done, and it was not done
on the petition of those whom we appointed—it was net
undertaken at the time wo chose ; but it was the influ•
once of the disagreeable odour of the Thames that brought
the matter to maturity. The provisions of the bill were
not dictated by a regard to popular principle, or the
conviction that you understood the question, but from a
reckless haste to escape personal and bodily annoyance."
(Hear.) If the noble lord fully understood the question.
and felt the ground secure under his feet, he congratu-
lated him on his happy condition. But, along with many
others, he frankly owned that he should feel great com-
fort and satisfaction if further time were afforded for
consideration before the house gave its sanction to any
plan. (Hear )
Mr. Alderman CUBITT felt confident that if the
Metropolit in Board of Works was invested with entire
power to devise a scheme, taking in charge also the pub-
licand moral responsibility, they would discharge their
duty in such a way as to satisfy all the requirements of
public opinion. There vies a defect in the second clause
which he hoped to see remedied in committee. He was
of opinion that the filthy water ought not to be poured
into any part of the Thames, and that it ought to be
deodorised. If the water should be carried to Barking•
creek without deodorisation, the scheme would fail.
With respect to the constitution of the Metropolitan
Board, he could assure the house there were many mem-
bers of that beard who would do credit to the home. The
board comprised both engineering and scientific skill, and
the members were perfectly competent to select the officers
to whom the execution of the work should be en-
trusted. Hetrusted the house would read the bill a second
time, and amend it so as to enable the Metropolitan
Board to carry on the work its own way. (Hear.)
Mr. CONINGHAM believed the proposed scheme
would prove to be a colossal failure, and-he would warn
the inhabitants of the metropolis that this was a direct
attempt upon their pockets ; and the house would find,
having forced the metropolis into this va-t expenditure,
that they would eventually have to aid the drainage of
the metropolis out of the national exchequer. (Hear.)
Str B. HALL intended to support the second reading
of the bill, but wished to state one particular reason
which induced him to take that course. It was essentially
necessary, in taking steps for the purification of the
Thames, that the provisions which he inserted is his bill
should be enacted in the present, and that rte Metropo-
litan Beard should have those powers of raising money
which were proposed in 1855. There were some clauses
in the present bill which required great consideration,
and to which considerable opposition would be given.
The right hon. gentleman the member for Bute had re
ferred to the report of the commissioners appointed in
1853. and he c‘nild assure the right hon. gentleman that
the bill for the local management of the metropolis was
framed as nearly as possible in accordance with the re-
commendations of the commissioners. It might be con-
venient for him to state the intentions of the Govern-
ment with regard to the constitution of that board. In
introducing the bill ho said--" With regard to the chair-
man, he proposed that the Metropolitan Board of Works
should select three names, not necessarily from their own
body, or from any district board, but that they should
have power to select from the whole length and breadth
of the kingdom three persons, any one of whom would
be fit and proper to occupy the high office he would be
called upon to fill, and thoroughly qualified to discharge
the important functions attendant upon it. These names
should be sent to the Secretary cf State, and the latter
should erase two, the remaining one to be the presidentof
the Metropolitan Board. He proposed that the chairman
r aynodf notth
alte shset
shouldba 1 ,shoool/d. ,
officeand not
umr
during
goodthans ho u should be paid iodat;Feaa I
ra
This body would have power to levy
and. also, when necessary, to
works, as at present ratestake lfaonrdimo uPt"ovfe:ntheteniirttsclwisatsi district forpo et
jabei
epurposecarry
f out outfallthe
drainage a the metropolis, because , there was no power
to make the ark rial drains beyond a certain limit. This
board would have power to make intercepting sewers for
the purification of the Thamee, and would le empowered
ro borrow mr ney from the Treasury, tu be paid within
50 years. Teat was the scheme proposed by the
Go-
vernment,i
but the house thought proper to alter it, awl
determined that the chairman should be sir cted by the
board, who, of course, selected one of their own body.
And with regard to the power of borrowing more y from
the Treasury, that provision was also struck our. He
wished now to call the attention of the noble lord to the
second clause of the bill. By the first clause the Metri
politan Board were directed to commence their wore
alLin a lea Gnlt'..,!o p_llA!.. LLe
p tints of (Antall were defined. They were to be higher
than the west bank of Barking Creek on the one side,
and not higher than Croseneis Point in Erith Marshes
on the other side. He thought that point much too
sewage,l loipcohles repeals.
enabled bit lhte
they
the Metropolitan near London ; but that was a matter for consideration
iu committee. He objected eteongly to the proviso
detehxiturke extremely
fieti,y
tud anyßoard
culptaritf 11%f :h rneimpos-
sible, to establish deodorising works within the metro-
politan area at the outfalls of the sewers, and he trusted

the noble lord would reconsider that point before giving
powe'r to tho board to erect deodorising works in the
midst of densely-populated districts. (Hear, hear.)
Reference bad been made to the case of ledcester ; but
the evidence in that case showed that the deodorising
works were in the open fields. Now in London they could
not be in the open fields. For the reasons which he
bad stated, he trusted the proviso would be struck out.
Mr. KENDALL said it was most desirable the house
should know the position in which it stood. It was
asked to give a guarantee to the extent of 3,000,0001.
But would that sum be sufficient ? The referees stated
that instead of 3,000,0001. not less than 6,000,0001.
would be required, and in his opinion it was not un-
likely that the sum required might amount to 9,000,0001.
or to 12,000,000/. Then with respect to the question of
deodorisation, Mr. Cook bad stated, with respect to
Leicester, that he could completely deodorise the sewage
of 100,000 persons for 6,0001., and maintain the works
for 1,2001. annually. For the sum of 180,0001. he could
deodorise every portion of the metropolitan sewage, and
carry on the works for 38,0001. a year. Perhaps the
amount might not be exactly correct ; but the opinion
of Mr. Cook was backed by that of other gentlemen who
understood the subject. His opinion was that the subject
was not quarter investigated ; but he believed the bill
would pass, as it appeared to be acceptable to the house.
Mr. LOCKE (Honiton) thought that a bill much
more simple in its details than the one before the house
would have answered the purpose. There were many
persons who thought that the interception system was
not the best system that could be adopted, and he might
observe also, in reference to the expenditure, that some
to
hf
ethe
mengineershaandd somecoup l
eodf
wt hi et
hp
tahr
et i ee sx
pexamined
re before
works
cf which the house had at present no know:edge. Those
other works, he believed, would be attended with consitgwenatsletmo
atnhatthehemewmobuelrdfdoriri‘eictaray:
t-
tdleeebnrotainboel:.heaTxdretnorsilgedhattnhhde°mni. that this system of deodorisation
was one which was not likely to be effective, and he cited
the evidence of a gentleman on that subject. Now,
although . he evidence was to a certain extent true, yet
they had other most important evidence tLat a plan of
deodorisation might be carried out on the banks of the
Thames without the slightest inconvenience to the inha-
bitants. Not only Mr. Cools, but Mr. Hawkesley, had
stated their decided opinion that a system of deodorisa-
tion might he carried on anywhere on the banks of the
Thames. He begged the house to understand that he
was giving as mach his own opinion as the opinions
of other persons who had been examined before the
committee. He thought if they were to deodorise the
siei::aig,e„, i:i...,vir5.0i1.1,! b..e,,_,mvu.ic,hiA,beite3r,,23attiitall:yaeiht,7llA(lll4drelhoe-
would be mach better if the bill simply gua-
tithe repayment of the money to be advanced
Parliament involving itself in any scheme what-
ever. • If it were absolutely necessary that some scheme
should be propounded, he was bound to say that he
agreed with the chairman of the committee that they
had not had sufficient evidence of what, under all the
circumstances, was the best system to adept.
1).1r. HENLEY said the hon. member who bad just
sat down said the bill should confirm itself simply to find-
ing the money. That was exactly what the bill did. The
Metropolitan Board of Works was left to adopt such
plans as they saw fit, without any indication in the bill
as to what the plan was to be. The right hon. beroeet
opposite had expressed a strong opinion that deodorise-
Lion ought not to take place in crowded localities. He
entirely agreed with him, but he thought it would be
absolutely impossible under this bill for that to be done,
' because, although it was true that it gave leave to die.
charge the sewage in certain places, and that it must first
be deodorised, yet another clause said that no nuisance
should be created anywhere. The course of this discus-
eion showed how wise it was to say nothing about a
plan in the bill, for no two members had agreed on any
plan. The simp'e question seemed to be this : some three
years ago Parliament decided to entrust to a local body
the power of doing this particular thing. For some rea-
son or other, but mainly, he supposed, owing to two
causes, nothing bad bean done. Various plans had been
before the public, and the noble lord said that all the
plans of the last three years had been pretty well thrashed
out. But no two members agreed upon anything. Were
they then to go on till they could agreed upon some plan?
If they did, nothing would ever be done at all, The two
reasons which had prevented anything being done had
been these—one was, that the board had not the means
of raising the money, and the other was, that the Go-
vernment having a veto upon them, of course the right
hon. gentleman who had to exercise that veto could
not exercise upon his own authority, and he got compe-
tent men to give him their opinion, and having cog.
petent men on his right hand and on his left, they gave
competent reasons one against another, and nothing was
done. In the meantime the river became fouler and
fouler, and some fine morning it might create a pesti-
ince. If the board anted upon any one of the schemes,
something would be done towards abating the nuisance,
but if they waited till they could agree upon a scheme,
they might wait till doomsday. The question had been
raised 'by the right hon. nvmber for the University of
Oxford whether the landlords should pay ? Now sewers
rates were not unknown, and in all cases they fell on
the landlords where the landlords had not protected
themselves. A good deal of objection had been made as
to the mode in which the Metropolitan Board of Works
was elected, but he hail not heard any metropolitan
member say that the board did not fairly represent the
metropolis. He thought the case was a simple one. If
Parliament thought the country ought to pay for it then
the Government ought to carry out the work, If, on the
other band, the metropolis ought to pay for it, he
thought it but fair that those a ho paid for it should have
the carrying out of the work. They had had some expe-
rience of this matter. Government having a veto had
brought things to a dead lock, and with regard to the
drainage of other great towns, lie did not think that the
interference of a government department had been at-
tended with happy results. He repeated that any of the
schemes would go far to prevent, if it did not altogether
prevent, the nuisance, and he believed that if ibis bil
passed, it would set a body to work that would do some
thing.
Mr. R. STEPHENSON said eight years ago he be-
came a member of the MetropoLtaa Commission of
Sewers, and he then had to comments the study of the
drainage of the metropolis. He was associated with some
very aide man, and although his views bad undergone
some modification since that time, essentially they bad
remained precisely the same. He was called on at that
time to investigate 150 different plans that were sent in
by a number of competitors in compliance with an adver-
tisement of a previous commission. He believed
i that every possible variety of scheme affecting the drain-
age of the metropolis was broached. He spent much
time in investigating the whole of them, and he came to
the conclusion that nothing would effectually answer the
purpose but the intercepting system. The right hon.
gentleman the member for Kidderminster had objected
to this system as not being adapted for the increase of
the population of London to three millions and a-halt.
Now a more inappropriate remark could not by any
possibility have been made. The intercepting system
divided London as it now stood into a series of zones.
Each intercepting sewer, therefore, dealt with the zone
immediately above it. Any increase of London, there-
fore, would only require the construction of a new inter-
cepting sewer for an additional zone without at all
affecting that which had been already done towards
the drainage of the metropolis. Indeed the chief recom-
mendation to him cf the intercepting system was that it
was capable of expansion without involving any inter-
ference with the existing drainage. Well, after plans
had been drawn with great care they were forwarded to
Government, and then he found that the hands of the
commission wore tied, and as the construction of the
minor sewers in London was a matter that could be
carried on with ordinary superinteedeace, the corn-
mission resigned. A new commission was then appointed
comprising many eminent men in his profession. They
investigated the whale question and came to the same
conclusion that he had done without having any com-
munication with him whatever, which he thought was a
strong argument in favour of the intercepting system.
What was the result ? That commission also found that
Government refused to entertain any application for
money, and the noble lord the member for Tiverton sent
to them a dictatorial letter requiring them to carry out
the plan of a person who was in his confidence. That
immediately led to the resignation of the commission,
as they could not identify themselves with such a scheme.
An objection had been made to the Metropolitan Board of
Works, but he crald not understand why. The board
was in possession of all the nec,ssary information, and
there was rio other body that was. If Parliament ap-
pointed another Indy, that body would have to collect
and arrange all that was collected and arranged by the
Board of Works already. There might be some little
amendment effected in these plane, but he agreed with
the right hon. member for Oxfordshire that they had
seldom seen mach good arise from the interference of
Government in these matters, Ile trusted that the house
would come to a decision iu favour of this bill, unless
they intended to leave the matter where it was. But he
should strongly advise the Government to insist upon
the intercepting system being carried out.
Mr. LOWE explained that what he said was that the
plan of the board was confessedly limited to a population
of two millions and a half.
Sir J. SHELLEY could confirm all that the hon.
member for Whitby had said with regard to the labour
which he had bestowed on this subject. He quite agreed
with him that the intercepting system was the most
likely to be effective, and that it would be well to begin
with an intercepting sewer of a high level to prevent tbo
storm waters inundating the lower districts. With re-
gard to deodorisation, he did not deny that Mr. Cook
had given distinct evidence, but they must remember
that Mr. Cook was the cha-irrnan of the company whose
obj et e as to sell the deodorised sewage at Leicester,
and that they had not succeeded in effecting any sales.
The bill provided that if the (rattail were at Woolwich,
deodarisation should be carried on half the year ; but if
within the metropolitan area, it should be carried on the
whole year. He thought the inhabitants of Wool aich
might reasonably re airs the same provision with re.
gar I to their district an was applied to the metropolis.
S.r G. C. LE 'XIS said it appeared to him there was
an inc :n-i-,tency in the principle on which the bill was
founded and the announcement just made by the Pre-
sident of the B surd of Trade. The right hon. gentleman
said it was quite open to the Board of Works to adopt
any plan which they might think fit, and that Govern-
ment was not reannnsiale for •inv n'rfir.lll,, pl,”.
;"‘.
ii
L.:\
LILI t+ a.r %uu 4, a, a hat he bait Fla', that
it was quite open to the board to carry out any plan.
Sir G. C. LEWIS said at a 1 events he understood that
the Government had expressed no opinion in favour of
any one plan, and that it was quite open to the board to
adept any plan they might think fit. If that were so,
why was the house called upon to guarantee the precise
sum of three millions ? &ler the heard had fixed upon
some plan, and the Government. with the knowledge of
that plan, had fired upon .nree millions, whi they said
was sufficient, or if the board hoed really not fixed upon
a plan,it Was clear they had no security that three mil-

lions was sufficient, and that they might not be called
upon hereafter for two or three millions more. Teat
was the only difficulty he had in assenting= to the second
reading of this bill.
Mr. J. LOCKE regarded this 2nbject as one of great
importance to the ratepayers of the mett opolie. (hear.)
The Government said they had no plan, but they never-
theless introduced a bill which to his mind seemed to
indicate a plan, inasmuch as it named the points where
the outlets of the sewage were to be fixed. Bat with
regard to the means of transit of the sewage from the
metropolis to those points, the Government said they
were prepared to leave that entirely to the Metropolitan
Board of Works. Now, with regard to the deodorisa-
tion of the sewage, there were different opinions. They
had, for instance, the hon. member for Honiton (Mr. J.
Locke), whose opinion was in favour of the deodorising
system ; while, on the other hand, they had the opinion
of the hon. member for Whitby (Mr. Stephenson), indi-
cating that he was an enemy to the deodorising systein.
Mr. STEPHENSON explained that he was not an
enemy to deodorising, under certain circumstances ; but
there were certain districts of London the sewage of
which could not be conveniently deodorised.
Mr. LOCKE—The hon. member was an advocate of
what he called dividing the metropolis into "zones,"
and thus his system might be described as "the zonar
system"—(!aughter)—but while he would deodoriee
some zones, his plan would not deodorise other
zones of the metropolis. It would be his (Mr. Locke's)
duly, inasmuch a; they were proceeding in the dark, not
to move that the bill be read a second time that day three
months, but that it be allowed to go into committee,
wherein the house woulel have an opportunity of '
proving it.
Lord EBRINGTON said he was by no means san-
guine of the success of the plan of which the bill was in
favour ; and in his opinion Government would be held
responsible for that plan, let them think or say what they
might to the contrary.
Mr, CLAY said it appeared to him that the bill of her
Majesty's Ministers now before the house, in nominating
the Metropolitan Board of Works to carry out the work,
had made the best redaction. The house had created
them with certain powers, but restricted them in money,
and should the work not be carried out, his belief was
that it would be because the thing could not possibly be
done. The experiment, however, was worth making,
and in his opinion the Metropolitan Board of Works was
the best bodly to make it.
Mr. PULLEN agreed in the opinion expressed by
some hon. members, that the Metropolitan Board of
Works were decidedly the best that could he npry,intr-1
- to carry ft, rr-Yi Lf the bdl our. 111. re wire two

plans before the country—one, the plan of the Metropo-
litan Board of Works, and the other that of the referees.
By the former the sum proposed te carry out the work
accordingwas onl
thy 3,0,
tool‘ot 00,a0Ost0hcclee0:100.rt00:0.,
own
i n 1 yw
Looking,hianicle
kianvothatfavour
of h
acknowledgment
tent
tneh,ene
tar referees
ltenairidnee es would,
eptsrwtoiopmoasteed
a m o esti-
matesu n,
by the Board of Works.
Lord PALMERSTON hoped the house would agree to
the second reading of the bill. (Hear.) And moreover,
because if the bill were rejected, the house would have
to postpone the power of dealing with the nuisance, and
getting rid, if possible, of its feul effects. (Hear.) It was
an evil of great magnitude He spoke not merely of the
existing evil, which arose from the pestilential exhala-
tions from the Thames ; for, although that in itself
was a great evil, yet, in proportion as the population of
the metropolis increased, and in proportion as the
sewage flowing into the Thames increased, in that pro-
portion was the Thames becoming the great sewer of the
metrepelis ; and, like the great sewer, it would stink,
and, like a stinking sewer, it would become a great evil.
(Hear.) Some men who went pleasuring down the river
to Greenwich said the r wives became sick from the stink
of the Thames, and were unable to eat their dinner ; but
he hoped that loss of appetite was a misfortune that
would not befall her M. jesty's Government on Saturday
next, when they would sit down to enjoy the Ministerial
White Bait Dinner at Greenwich. (Laughter.) It had
been said that there was no great amount of disease at
present in the metropolis, and, fortunately, there was no
epidemic in London ; but, if the metropolis was unfor-
tunately afflicted with cholera at the time the stink
emanated from the Thames, he believed that the stench
would have aggravated in the most intense degree any
disaster of that kind. The ill effects of the bad drainage
was felt in other places besides the banks of the Thames.
This was especially the case in the neighbourhood of
Hackney.brook, ao he had the means of knowing when
he was iu the Home-office, and listened to the recital of
the sufferings and annoyances arising from the stenches
and ovetflowings of the sewage. There was, too, a large
population living in the south, in one part of which there
was no drainage, and no outfaq except at low water, and
alter a great fall of rain the cellars became inundated, and
there was an amount of misery which no gentleman could
have a notion of. That required drainage by a great out-
fall, by a tunnel to be carried to a lower part of the
Thames. It must not be imagined that there was any
remedy for those evils except by intercepting sewers in
tunnels which would carry the drainage from the
metropolis to a lower level. He thought that Bark-
ing Creek and the opposite points were too near, and
it would be found in practice that money laid cut
in carrying tunnels to these was, in a certain
degree, thrown away. The Metropolitan Board would
have to come to Parliament and confess that the
plan was defective, and call upon Parliament to assist
them with further money. He agreed to carrying out
the work to the further point. Therefore, he thought it
very unfortunate that Government should persist in
limiting the point for the outfell of the tunnels at a
point so near as Barking Creek and the opposite side.
There was another point not entering into the errange•
[Tient of the bill, but to which he hoped the attention of
the Metropolitan Board of Works would be successfully
directed—the possitelity of converting to agricultural
purposes as manure that vast amount of matter die-
cl.arged into the Thames. There could be no doubt that
there was a great loss of fertilising power in matter now
carried out to sea. No process bad been discovered by
which the fertilising power could advaotageously and
profitably be applied to agricultural purposes ; but he
could not avoid entertaining a hope that chemical
science might yet before long suggest some method by
which this might be turned into a source of national
wealth, instead of being thrown into the waters of the
German Ocean. He hoped the house would agree to the
second reading of the bill, and he trusted that the Go-
vernment would regard the suggestions thrown out for
modifications. (Hear, hear, and cheers.)
Mr. BUTLER thought it most unfair that a small
portion of the metropolis only should pay towards the
making of these sewers. Why should not Richmond
pay its proportion, and also the districts further north?
He considered the area of sewage, as laid down by the
metropolitan bill, unjust, and ho hoped the committee
would have that defect remedied.
The bill was then read a second time and ordered to
be committed on Wednesday.
WAYS AND MEANS—HARBOURS OF
REFUGE.

a n
On
,aidard. trhleves
address
Lif
is) reportroaNßo foaywpa.
pdaleyahsleeadhn had given nih.
Mr. WILSON said
house to the report of
. call the attention of the
tion to
hours of refuge, and to move for
the committee on harbours
Commission in accordance there-
with, ans beingnntin
.3brought
hip
intersup ,
-,
to understand that
had since been given
but he
t had no objection to grant a commis-
the Government
of the house with any observations....
time
ON had no hesitation in saying that
Sir J. PAKINGT
be appointed . •
a Royal Commission ought to to inquire
into localities for the new harbours.
the
ELL hoped that the order of reference
sion, and therefore he was indisposed to take up the
Mr. LIDD
not be restricted
necessary.
few words from Mr. A. &Hui and Mr. Dolt-
After a
would be largteedanind
tfaukllilnagntdhteheatvidtheneeceomthmeyisseinonneiwdeorueldd
SON,
Admi-
ralty for . .
He only wished to say, that if the
Mr. INthGeElveAllntelossanwkietdh twhheicFhirbset Ladrdagofreethdet I)l.idssmnie-
the co mission.
instructions to the commission were limited to the re-
commendations of the committee, there was some am-
biguity in these recommendations as to the limits within
on. members not to pro-
ceed which
icehars
Admiraltyua such
d prewouldc harboursisea a shouldtake
possible,na br
care
:c:co
that
makellsttutch constructed,
commissioners
would be required t 4 point cut the best spot for the har-
bours in the respective dietricte.
ceed with any de!:Ate at present, having, in fact, post-
poned his motion until Thursday next, when they would
have the terms of the motion before them.
Mr. M.CANN concurred in that view, and had him
self postponed a motion which he hal on the paper.
Sir J.'ELPHINSTONE eat of opinion that the sub-
ject was one of paramount importance, and that it could
be dealt with as well that night as upon any future
evening. The appalling loss of life and property on our
coast every year was disgraceful to u; when the greater
part could be saved by the outlay of a sum of money not
greater than they were now proposing to spend upon the
drainage of London. The number of lives annually lost
was 8,000, the property lost upwards of two millions
sterling ; atd, from the large increase of our shipping of
late years, the loss must in future increase.
Mr. BENTINCIi. !,aid this important subject had been
trifled with too long, and he hoped that an efficient com-
mission would be issued, and the whole question tho-
roughly dealt with.
Mr. DUFF suggested that no person should be ap-
pointed on the commission who had served on any pre-
vious commission.
The subject then dropped.
PUBLIC ACCOUNTS AND PUBLIC BUSINESS.
Sir H. WILLOUGHBY said ho would take that op-
portunity of impressing upon the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer the importance of placing the financial state-
ments on the table at a time when they might be useful,
and not so late as at present.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said ar-
rangements were in progres by which the financial state-
ments would he preducA at an earlier period in future.
(Hear, hear.) In answer to other questions, he had to
state that be t' o light it probable the Government wculd
not press the Coinese Passengers 811 this Isis ior. He
did not intend to f.roceed with the Civil Service Super-
annuation Bill—(hear, hear) —and at this period of the
session it would, he thought, be inexpedient to proceed
further with the Pulico Force (Ireland) Bill. (li"fir,
hear.)

Ti-.e • r.:)-; t 7a3 to.
CORNWALL SUBMARINE MINES BILL.
Oa the motion that the house go into committee on
this bill,
M".:\. SMITH objected to proceeding further with
thi., bid, which defl.:ed rights t.f the Crown in which the
public had an interest, un it copies of all the documents,
case 2, and opinions of counsel. submitted to Sir John
Patteson, and upon which his arbitration was founded,
were laid upon the table. He moved to that effect.
Tioe SOLICITOR-CrBNERAL gave the history of
the bid, the object of which Sias to carry into Effie; the
arbitration of Sir J, PAtteeon,- to whom it had been re-

ferred to ascertain the respective rights of the Crown
and the Duchy of Cornwall to minerals between high
and 1)w water :nark, and below low water mark.
After a few words from Mr. W Yr,n the amendment
was negatived, and the house went into committee upon
the bill, the clauses of which were agreed to with amend-
ments.