The Sun.
London, England, 1861-08-08 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, THURSDAY EVENING, AUGIiTST 8, 1861.

THAMES EMBANKMENT.

A meeting of ratepayers was held last evening
at Exeter-hall, which had been convened by the
vestry of the parish of St. Martin, to consider the
propriety of adopting resolutions condemnatory of
the plans at present contemplated by the Metropo-
litan Board of Works.
Mr. H. HOARE, having been called to the chair,
said that the meeting might be regarded as a con-
tinuation of a meeting of the ratepayers of St.
Martin's, held on the 13th of June, 1860, to petition
against the construction of a lovg-level north sewer
along the Strand and Fleet-strat. That meeting
was unanimous in favour of some embankment east
of Westminster-bridge, within which such sewer
might be constructed, and a petition was presented
to Parliament, urging that powers and funds be
given to the Metropolitan Board of Works to carry
out that important undertaking. Since that time
the question had, on the whole, made satisfactory
progress. The deodorization of the sewage would
be the main question for the present discussion.
With every disposition to place a general confidence
in the Metropolitan Board of Works, they felt that
none were infallible, and that if a mistake had
occurred, it was better that a friendly and public
discussion should take place now than to wait till
further progress had been made involving as it
would a further expenditure of valuable resources.
The extreme difficulty of the subject was admitted,
and credit was due to the Metropolitan Board for
their past exertions, whether or not there were
points in which they were mistaken. All personal
feeling was to be deprecated, and it was only in a
calm, philosophical temper that they should ap-
proach the discussion of a subject of such magni-
tude and importance.
Mr. MARSHALL (the senior churchwarden) rose
to move the first resolution. It had often, he said,
been the subject of complaint that we did not
manage so well in England as our friends did on
the continent great public improvements and works
of national importance. He admitted the force of
that statement, but some consolation was to be de-
rived from the reflection that it was not owing to
any deficiency in architectural or engineering skill,
or to any want of money, but rather because there
was too great an abundance of both; and hence
whatever scheme might be entertained, they were
immediately overwhelmed with arguments pro and
con. concerning that scheme, till they were sorely
puzzled how to act or deal with the question at all.
He rejoiced that the Royal Commission had recom-
mended the embankment of the Thames. It was a
great national undertaking which the Government
were pledged to carry out, and it was with great
pleasure, therefore, that he moved the following
resolution :
,4 That the grateful thanks of this meeting are due to her
Majesty the Queen, and to both Houses of Parliament, for
securing by recent enactment the continuance of the coal
and wino dues, with a view to some embankment on the
north side of the river, between Westminster and Blacktriars
Bridges, the construction of which the ratepayers would
naturally wish to see entrusted to the Board of Works
elected by themselves; that in the opinion of this meeting,
the additional space so acquired should, if possible, be ap-
propriated to purposes of utility and trade, as well as to
those of recreation and ornament; and that possibly such
portion thereof that lies to the west of the Temple garden
may be, in part at least, beneficially allotted to the use of
barges and other craft on the river."
Mr. BARTON seconded the resolution, and ex-
pressed himself in favour of entrusting the great
work of embanking the Thames to the Metropolitan
Board of Works rather than to a Royal Commission.
Mr. HELMORE said, there appeared to him to be
a contradiction between the resolution and the
recommendation of the Royal Commission. By the
resolution the opinion was expressed that a portion
of the space acquired by the embankment should be
utilized, but the Royal Commission proposed that
every wharf between Westminster and Blackfriars
should be done away with. He was himself a whar-
finger, and gave evidence before the Commission,
and on finding what their plan was he did all he
could to point out where they were wrong. If the
wharves were to be removed, the streets of London
would be clogged and crowded three or four times
more than they were at present. Why, the railways
were actually endeavouring to procure for them-
selves river termini, and yet it was proposed to de-
prive those of it who already possessed the advan-
tage of that source of trade. No doubt the embank-
ment of the river would be a great improvement,
still there was no necessity of annihilating the whole
trade on its shores. There was an embankment
above Vauxhall-bridge, and yet the great works of
Cubitt were suffered to remain. That was just the
sort of thing required. He believed it to be quite
practicable to have a road on the embankment and
at the same time to continue the wharves.

Mr. BIRD said that for the last five years he had
kept the subject of the Thames embankment before
the public at his own expense. He considered the
remarks of the last speaker exceedingly feasible.
The error which the Royal Commission and others
committed was to look at the Thames not as a navi-
gable tidal river calculated for business objects,
but they looked at it as they would at the Seine
—a river for ornamental purposes. If they
sacrificed the utility of the banks of the Thames
simply for the sake of ornamentation, they would
find it in the end to be a great failure and a
great loss. The railways were every day ap-
proaching nearer and nearer to the Thames, and
there were companies willing to carry out a sys-
tem of embankment which would suit all the pur-
poses the public could require, and that without
putting the ratepayers to one shilling expense. He
thought it was essential, before they pledged them-
, selves to any definite plan which would do away
with the scheme for constructing a railway between
the west end and the east, that they should give the
question further consideration. With respect to the
mode of executing the work, whether it should be
by a Royal Commission, or by the Metropolitan
Board of Works, it was not for him to say. In his
humble opinion, there was private enterprise in this
country capable of accomplishing a great deal more
than could be done by Government interference, or
by any board of management.,
Mr. DELANY was disinclined' to intrust the exe-
cution of the embankment of the Thames to the
Metropolitan Board of Works, that body not having
yet performed any great undertaking sufficient to
inspire the public with confidence in their efficiency.
Mr. PETTER did not wish it to go forth that there
was any want of confidence in the Metropolitan
Board of Works. It should be remembered that the
principal work which had been intrusted' to them
was the main drainage of the metropolis; it was to
accomplish that great scheme that it was chiefly
called into existence. A Royal Commission was not
a proper mode of carrying out works of this de-
scription.
The resolution was carried unanimously.
. The CHAIRMAN here took occasion to observe that
the committee felt it to be their bounden duty to
protect the shopping interest along the Strand. If
a series of river shops were to be erected, and the
public should be diverted into that line of thorough-
fare, it might operate very hardly upon the keepers
of shops in the Strand.
Mr. PETTER then moved the following resolution :
"That this meeting prays the said Board immediately to
direct its impartial attention to the leading plans for deodo-
rising the sewage; taking more care than heretofore to
promote adequate demonstrations of such plans, in order
that this feasibility or otherwise may be ascertained, and
become publicly known, the comparative merits of the
several chemical agents having been satisfactorily tested
by competent authority. That the attention of the said
Board be likewise solicited to the circumstances of the flat
localities which are found to exist on both sides of the river
above Westminster-bridge • and that in the opinion of this
meeting, the processes of Westminster-bridge;
and filtration, if
adopted anywhere, should not be disregarded in this par-
ticular locality, it being considered that both those pro-
cesses in combination should be made to precede the action
of the pump, in all cases where such action is required."

reason
the _
to rft
tholwel
.
In thus calling upon the Board, as it were, to stop
their hands, the committee were influenced by the
conviction that the small inclination of the sewer
as proposed to be constructed from Westminster
was not suitable to carry out satisfactorily the in-
tentions of its promoters, and that it would be im-
possible to make so small a fall act rightly. With
respect to the subject of deodorisation, that, it
should be remembered, had reference only to the
low level sewer. The Board, he believed, had
adopted the system of deodorising the sewage in
the Brompton locality, and the committee saw no
A - PARSONS seconded the resolution, and in
ryphuyepboatlnrhistceiidorinerrsienodfciehlee lsohwoulledvnelotsebweeerx. tended to
reference to the observation of Mr. Bird, that the
construction of the embankment ought to be left
of Commons last eart,haa
owpaesn competition, said that that point
tndthaefter due deliberation
bythe committee of the House
of the committee they were of opinion
was considered
ietctuetee the etropolitan Board
of Works was the best fitted to
wereonl a under-
taking. The names
gua-
rantee that the question
public point of view. Among those names were
winerae
Sir S. Peto, Mr. Cubitt, Mr. Beames, Mr. Walter,
Mr. Montagu, and Mr. Stirling.
Mr. PEDLAR thought it impossible that any
scheme of deodorisation could be applied to so large
a body of sewage as was daily passing through the
metropolis. Indeed, he did not understand why
the system of intercepting the sewage should be
combined with deodorisation. If they could succeed
in separating the feculent matter and convey it into
the country as a manure they would be rendeevedring
an Essential service to London ; but be beli
that the work of deodorisation would create a
greater evil than it was proposed to cure.
Mr. Dims said the Metropolitan Board of Works
had already given long and painful attention to this
subject for the last ten years. It should be gene-
rally known that 6-7ths of the manure was held in
solution, and only 1-7th in suspension. It was easy
to precipitate the substance held in suspension, but
it was utterly impossible to take the manure out of

the sewage which had been in solution. Now thel
sewage when heated by deodorising materials, and
when the matter held in solution was precipitated,
presented all the appearance of perfect purity, but
he should be exceedingly sorry to drink any. The
value of the sewage, which was the property of the
ratepayers, was 2d. per ton ; consequently the total
value of the sewage of London was over £2,000,000
a year. That was what they were now calledupon
to throw away. (No, no.)
The CHAIRMAN—The resolution leads to nothing
but inquiry.
Mr. ELLIS—The inquiries had already been most
ample.
The CHAIRMAN—What we want is to have the
sewage deodorised and filtrated, and then to put
the pure water into the Thames, and to reserve the
feculent matter for agricultural purposes.
Mr. ELLis said that was quite impossible. It had
been proved so over and over again.
The CHAIRMAN-.We submit that proper and
satisfactory evidence has not yet been obtained.
The Board has refused inquiry, and we call upon
the public to force them to institute an inquiry.
Mr. PEDLAR (at the suggestion of the Chairman)
moved the following amendment:—

" That the deodorisation of the sewage of London in Lon-
don is impracticable, and that the only plan to be adopted
is to remove the sewage into the country, whore it will be-
come of great value.
Mr. ELLis seconded the amendment.
After some further discussion the amendment was
negatived, and the resolution agreed to.
Mr. LATCHFIELD moved the following resolution :

" That this meeting cannot but regard with the greatest
repugnance the proposal to pump up the contents of a low
level north sewer, or elongated cesspool, and to propel the
volume so pumped up, in its moat noxious form, at all
hours of the day, in a tunnel through the heart of the city
from Queenhithe or elsewhere to West Ham ; and de
precates in the strongest manner the formation on
each side of the river of open tanks, or reservoirs
from which the sewage, having been a second tine
pumped up, shall, at ebb tide, be discharged into
the river ; considering that since the specific gravity
of sea-water greatly exceeds that of sewage, the inevitable
result must be, that the latter will never commingle with
the former, but will continuallY ebb and flow on the surface,
while the silt and other settlement matters not lifted by the
pumps will necessarily accumulate at the bottom ; and that
there being no longer the ancient direct outfalls into the
river, the sewer itself along the foreshore, being nearlyon a
dead level, may soon become inconveniently, if not in places
entirely ehoked up ; a result the consequences of which
would be of a malignant character too horrible to describe."
Mr, SOAME seconded it.

Mr: BIRD said the resolution was a completh con-
demnation of the Metropolitan Board of Works.
As an engineer he was prepared to say that it was
perfectly possible to carriage the sewage down at
the proposed level, and that without any difficulty
whatever.

The CHAIRMAN admitted that the language of
the resolution was rather strong, but he contended
that the refusal of the Metropolitan Board of Works
to agree to anything that had been suggested or
proposed to them by the committee fully justified
the terms in which the resolution was couched. He
considered that the board had behaved extremely
ill to them.

After a few observations by Mr. Nowall, Mr.
Bird, and Mr. E. Jones, the resolution was adopted,
four hands only being held up against it.
A vote of thanks to the chairman terminated the
proceedings, which lasted upwards of four hours.

RAILWAY S AND PUBLIC COMPANIES.

BRISTOL AND EXETER.

It is stated that the directors of this company
have decided on recommending to the proprietors a
dividend at the rate of 4 per cent. per annum for
the past half-year.

progress made in the works of the railway had been
satisfactory, and £31,170 had been expended on
that account during the half-year, principally in
connection with the bridge across the Thames at
Charing-cross. The requisite powers had been ob-
tained. in the past session of Parliament enabling
them to extend the railway into the city to a ter-
minus in Cannon-street. This extension was ex-
pected to add largely to the value of the under-
taking, both as a city terminus for the traffic of the
South-Eastern lines, and as a means for accommo-
dating the very large local traffic constantly pass-
ing between the city and the west-end. To afford
the requisite accommodation for this new traffic, it
had been determined to provide a third line of way
between the junction of the city terminus line (a
little west of Wellington-street, Borough), and the
Charing-cross bridge, to be devoted exclusively to
the city and west-end trains, which would thus be
prevented from interfering with the through trains
of the South-Eastern Company ; and the directors
were informed by their engineer that this important
addition to the convenience of the railway might
be provided without exceeding the original capital
of the undertaking. The report of Mr. Hawkshaw,
the engineer, stated that the main girders across
one span of the Charing-cross bridge were com-
pleted, and were rapidly advancing over another,
and the cylinders for supporting the girders were
put in from the Surrey shore to the centre of the
river. The contractor was preparing to sink the
cylinders on the Middlesex side. The brick viaduct
had been extended from the Thames to the Waterloo
Road. The capital account to the 30th June last
showed that £317,151 had been received, and
£248,016 expended, leaving a balance of £69,135.
The CHAIRMAN, in moving the adoption of the
report, said that considerable progress had been
made with the works during the past half-year.
The evidence of persons examined by the Com-
missioners of the Thames Embankment showed
that a large traffic existed between the city and
the west-end. The commissioners did not propose
a railwayon that embankment. The company's Can-
non-street terminus would be within 150 yards of the
Bank of England, and as the distance from Cannon-
street to Charing-cross would be performed in from
five to eight minutes, there would be no occasion for
a railway along the proposed embankment.
Mr. ThomrsoN seconded the motion for the adop-
tion of the report. _

Mr. BEATTIE wished to know when there was a
probability of the line being opened, or a portion of
it, for traffic.
Mr. HAWKSHAW said he had not had time to con-
sider the question. He lied been pushing on the
works of the bridge, but as it was now proposed to
open a portion of the line from the London-bridge
station to the Waterloo station previous to the
opening of the Great Exhibition next year, he
thought it was a question that concerned the direc-
tors more than the engineer. It would involve a
rapid outlay of money, and some additional expense.
He was willing to make the attempt provided the
funds were forthcoming.
Mr. THOMPSON had no doubt of ample funds
being provided.
The report was then unanimously adopted, and
the proceedings concluded with a vote of thanks to
the chairman.