The Sun.
London, England, 1866-12-13 00:00:00

set to? foot an inquiry into the condition of the
River Lea, which is the first step, we may hope, to
a better state of things. The evidence taken by
the Commissioners on Tuesday included that of the
engineer to the trustees of the river, the engineer
to the East London Waterworks, and the engi
neer to the New River Company. On Monday
the witnesses were the Secretary of the East
London Waterworks, and the engineer-in-chief of
the same company. It is only fair to the East
London Company to state that they have shown
every desire to promote the inquiry, and them-
selves applied to Government for its institution.
A good deal of valuable information was obtained,
though there are still some perplexing mysteries.
For instance, Mr. GREAVES, the East London
engineer, when questioned as to the probable rea-
son of the outbreak of cholera in the districts
supplied by the company, professed himself quite
unable to account for it, as the water where the
cholera did not appear was the same as where it
raged. At the same time Mr. GREAVES did not
maintain that the water was immaculate ; on
the contrary, he said that he considered it of the
utmost importance that jurisdiction should be exer-
cised at the earliest possible period for the
prevention of the discharge of sewage into waters
wherever such was likely to take place, and he ad-
mitted it to be a fact that the sewage of Luton,
Hertford, and Norford, got into water which was
afterwards used for domestic purposes. It is no
guarantee of the purity of the water that there
should have been very few complaints respecting it,
since it has been abundantly shown that serious im-
purities may exist in the water without being per-
ceptible in the smell, taste, or appearance. There
is one point in Mr. GREAVES'S evidence on Mon-
day which, taken in conjunction with the autumnal
outbreak of cholera, is of some importance. He
stated that he had reservoirs still in exist-
ence which were originally made as deposit-
ing reservoirs for water as it came from the
river. They were capable of being filled
by a sluice connected with the disused canal, which
was the company's conduit before 1852, and the
water from one of these open reservoirs was drawn
upon this year, at what exact time he was uncer-
tain, but probably in June. Mr. RAwLiNsoN
thought this so important that he was anxious to
obtain the date of the communication with the open
reservoir, the quantity pumped, and the length of
time during which it was used, information which
was not readily forthcoming. In answer to his
inquiries, however, Mr. GREAVES admitted that,the
disused conduit was capable of taking water from
the Lea at a point lower than the new filtering
beds, and lower than the junction of the works
that separate the sewage from the upper conduit.
The Lea is no inconsiderable river, being navigable
from the Thames to Hertford, and with proper
care would, no doubt, serve effectually to supply
the East of London. Mr. GREAVES declared, on
behalf of the company, that they had no objection
to the adoption of a constant instead of an inter-
mittent supply of water, provided they had the
proper powers given them ; he thought it would
effect a saving of water. Mr. BENRMORE, engineer
to the trustees of the river Lea, stated that some of
its tributaries were in a disgraceful state, and there
was nothing to prevent the pollution of
the river above Hertford. It is evident that
there has been great neglect in this matter,
no one, perhaps, being specially to blame,
but a general feeling of " letting well alone" pre-
vailing. Mr. Mum, engineer to the New River
Company, said, indeed, that the company were per-
fectly ready to adopt the plan of having one large
iron tank to supply a court of small houses, so that
every 0133 in the poorer parts would have water in
his house, but the, landlords would not do it. This

is something more than mere insouciance, and is a
defect which may very well be remedied by the in-
terference of Parliament. Surely it would not be
difficult to make it compulsory upon every landlord
to provide a proper receptacle for water. They are
allowed by the law to have every security for their
rent ; it is not too much, then, to exact from them
what is absolutely indispensable to the health and
comfort of their tenants.
Another unpleasant piece of information respect-
ing the London water pipes was obtained from Mr.
MUIR, who admitted that in crowded parts, where
the gas and water pipes interlaced, there was some-
times a back draught of gas into the water pipes.
This is wholesome and agreeable certainly ! It is
very evident that the Commission was much needed,
and that the whole question of the water supply
wants looking into. Where the companies have not
sufficient powers, more must be conferred ; where
they fail to fulfil their obligations to the public they
must be compelled to do so. Expense, inconvenience,
and the interference of the Legislature in matters
which 80111 e hold to be beyond their dominion, must
be put completely on one side in a matter which so
closely affects the vital interests of the population.
Simultaneously with the prosecution of this in-
quiry, the registrar-General has appended to his
weekly report a supplement on the deaths by
cholera, giving definitively the number of deaths in
each district to every 10,000 inhabitants, and the
water supplied to those districts. There are, as we
have said, in referring to the evidence, some
singular and apparently ionconsistent facts, re-
lative to the outbreak of cholera and
its connection with the water supply,
but
that such a connection does exist there is not the
shadow of a doubt. Very staking
proof of this
was given by the
experience of the South London
which were undrained and supplied with
widen
districts,
the foul sewage-water of the Thames in 1849- Two
companies, the Lambeth and the Southwark, sup_
plied it. One of these companies succeeded in get-
ting purer water above Teddington Lock prior to
the visitation of 1854, the other only obtained it
after that year. This year both are supplying com-
the shallow
paratively wholesome water, while

pumps have been dried up by the drains. The re-
sults are seen in the following figures :--The deaths
from cholera to IG,OOO inhabitants of South
Loudon were, in the years 1849, 1854, and
1866 respectively, 120, 87, and 8 ! From cholera
and diarrhoea out of the same numbers living the
deaths were 142, 104, and 15. This is certainly
" the inexorable logic of facts," and no ingenuity
can explain it away. No doubt the East London

Company will use every effort to arrive at equally

satisfactory conclusions. Many other causes con-
tribute to the propagation of cholera, such as over-

crowding, bad smells, insufficient drainage, and

poor living ; yet the water is evidently a matter of
primary importance, and the Registrar does not hesi-
tate to affirm that the East Loudon water had much

to do with the outbreak of 1866. The Company,
be says, has pumps at two different stations, one at
Lea-bridge, the other at Old Ford, two miles be-

Low, where there is a small covered reservoir and

two open reservoirs in dangerous proximity to the
Lea, at a point where that tidal river is full of
foul sewage. The deaths in these parts were very
different from those in the rest of London, vary-
ing from 63 per 10,000 in Bethnal-green to 111
in Stepney. Two sub-districts on the east side of
the Lea, supplied with the same w..ter, suffered
in the same proportion. We do ma, y absurd and
inconsistent things, but, if looked at in the ab-

stract, the absurdity of sending the sewage into a