The Sun.
London, England, 1844-05-15 00:00:00

COURT OF SEWERS.

A special meeting of the Court of Sewers for the city
and liberty of Westminster and part of the county of
Middlesex, was held yesterday at the Sewers'-office,
Greek-street, Soho, for the purpose of instituting an
inquiry into the facts connected with the failure of about
820 feet of the new main line of the Ranelagh sewer, in
Gloucester-road, Paddington.
_ _ _

T. L. Donaldson, Esq., took the chair at 12 o'clock.
On a previous Court day the following report had been
presented to the Court by the surveyors :
" We have to report that, upon examination of the
Ranelagh main line of sewer in the Gloucester-road,
Bayswater, we found the arch to be fractured in several
portions of its length from Grand Junction-street to be-
yond Conduit-street, a distance altogether of about
820 feet.

" We are not at present prepared to give a definite
opinion as to the cause of this failure, but it would ap-
pear to us from the accompanying sections that the
crown of the arch has been loaded to a great extent by
the earth from the adjoining vaults and the material ne-
cessary for raising the roadway to its present level, and
that the natural subsidence of this newly made ground
has had the effect of forcing back the springing walls
from their originally vertical position. By a reference
to the drawing it will be seen that this pressure has been
in every instance outwards. It is also probable that
much of the weakness of the side walls may be attri-
buted to the disturbance of the ground behind them,
consequent upon the building of the collateral sewers at
their intersections near Conduit-street, Brook-street,
and Gloucester Mews.

" At present we are scarcely in a-position to state the
exact extent that it will be necessary to repair the
sewer, but from Conduit-street, southwards, for a length
of about 200 feet, and from Brook-street for about 150
feet south of the church, it would appear to require the
most immediate attention ; we would adcli that whatever
reparation may be considered necessary,.fill only apply
to the arch and a portion of the abutthent walls, and the
expense would be materially reduced if the Court would
sanction the re-using of the present materials, which
appear to be perfectly sound and available.
" On the acompanying drawings are given a longitu-
dinal section of the sewer with the present and original
levels of the ground, likewise cross sections showing the
positions of the adjacent vaults, those portions the most
defective, and the extent of deviation from the ori-
ginal form.
" JOHN DOWLEY, Surveyor.
" WILLIAM DOULL, Assistant ditto.
" GEORGE HAWKINS, Ditto.
Yesterday the surveyors presented a further report, in
which they pointed out the different parts in the sewer
that had been effected by the occurrences that had taken
place, and recommended their reparation.
Mr. LESLIE said that the last report was at variance
with former ones; he wished to know from Mr. Bell
whether any complaints had been made of the works
during their progress?
Mr. BELL said that he had no recollection of any
statement being made of the badness of the works during
their progress. He had no recollection of the Chairman
stating that they were so badly constructed that they
must be taken down.
Mr. LESLIE said that the time had now arrived when
it became the Court seriously to deliberate what course
they should pursue. This was a matter of most serious
and grave character. 3,4001. had been spent in building
a sewer, with respect to which each Commissioner re-
ceived a communication, stating that, of that sewer,
which was 1,200 feet in length, 820 feet were a total
failure. The course that struck him (Mr. Leslie) as the
best to pursue, and by the adoption of which the public
interests would be best served, would be to follow out
the line of instruction contained in the Act of the 23d of
Henry the Eighth. There was a defect in a great part
of their works, which they were called upon to inquire
into, and in which case the Act provided' that a
jury should be summoned, and by their verdict
they were to say by whose default the damage
had arisen. Now the question branched itself into three
important points: the damage might be involved in the
original design of the sewer, it might be faulty in its
construction, or it might be faulty on account of the
neglect of the officers of the Court. Now in any of those
cases there must be inquiry ; and he (Mr. Leslie)
thought the proper course would be to have a special
Court held on the spot, say at the Crown Tavern, which
was not twenty yards from it, and there to have a
jury summoned to inspect the parts that had failed, and
then to return a verdict as to the cause of the failure,
and upon that verdict the Court could act.
Suppose the damage had been occasioned by
the Court itself, would it at once admit it ?
Certainly not. It might be the fault of the contractors
or the officers of the Court in not properly superintend-
ing the works, and if such was the case, it was but just
to them that an impartial jury, which the Court could
not be, should decide between all parties. Now it had
been stated that these works had commenced in Septem-
ber, 1839, and that 408 feet was finished in January,
1840. Now he Mr. Leslie was prepared to show that
the work was not finished or anything like it at that
time, and that the chairman, in consequence of the
defect in the walls, ordered them to be taken down, and
yet the Court had been kept in the dark on that sub-
ject. Added to this, although the line of sewer was not
measured till 1840, yet the balance of the contractors'
account was sent in and paid in May, 1839.
The CHAIRMAN said, that the great question they had
to consider was, what was the cause of the defects ? He
wished to know what course the Hon. Commissioner in-
tended to pursue ?
Mr. LESLIE observed that they were about to insti-
tute an inquiry into the cause of the failures which had
taken place in this extensive sewer, and he was about
to show that the proper mode of doing so was to sum-
mon a jury, in order to view it, and give their unbiassed
verdict upon it. What he would propose was, that a
Special Court shold be held, say on Monday next, or
any other day to be fixed upon, at the Crown Tavern ;
that a jury should be summoned, who should inspect and
inquire into the subject, and give their verdict upon it ;
and on that verdict the Court might act.
The CHAIRMAN thought the Commissioners them-
selves ought first to go and see it, in order that it might
be ascertained whether there was any necessity for
entertaining the worthy Commissioner's proposition. At
the present moment the Commissioners could not be
prepared to come to any conclusion.
Mr. LESLIE said the conclusion lie had arrived at was
to get at the truth, and he thought the course he had
pointed out was the best mode.
The CHAIRMAN observed that he did not see the ad-
vantage of a jury at present. He thought they had
better reserve that till the next Court.
Mr. LESLIE was satisfied the course he pointed out
was a necessary one. He had seen the works ; and
why they should have had such an immense
sewer to carry through a mere puddle of water,
he could not tell. It was his firm belief that
the faults that had taken place in the sewer
were attributable to its bad design; it was b a
y 11
admit-
ted to be badly constructed, and nothing but a jury could
settle the matter satisfactorily between the public and
the Court. Mr. Leslie concluded by handing 6 in
a notice of motion, to the effect that a
Special
Crown ourt
should'be held near the site of the sewer
at
Tavern, and that a jury should be summoned who were
to inspect the sewer, and give their verdict accordingly.
As the Court appeared determined__ to go
.and view the
place themselves, he would merely hand the notice in,
and the Court could determine at what time they would
consider it when they returned.
The Commissioners then proceeded to Bayswater to
examine the sewer; and, after an absence of two hours,
they returned, and discussed the subject for some time ;
at the conclusion of which a resolution was propose&
by Mr. Hawkes and carried, to the following effect :
"That an examination of the Ranelagh sewer in
Gloucester-place, the parts of the sewer 30 ft. and 60 ft.,
with respect to which it was stated by the report of the
surveyors it was necessary they should be taken off and
rebuilt, that they be forthwith rebuilt and taken off, and

that the state of the work be reported to the Court on
Friday next."
It was then arranged that Mr. Leslie's notice, which
he had handed in in the morning, should stand on the
paper for consideration on Friday, to which day the
Court then adjourned.

COURT OF ALDERMEN.
Yesterday a Court was held for the dispatch of public
business.

SCOTCH AND IRISH PAUPERS.

Alderman COPELAND in rising to call the attention of
the Court to the subject of the weekly payments made
in the City of London on account of Scotch and Irish
paupers, said his object was to check the rapidity with
which some officers of the unions proceeded to remove
the unfortunate paupers with whom the parishes
abounded, and which was the cause of great injustice to
those distressed objects, and of great and unwarrantable
expense to the rate-payers. The returns for which he
had moved showed that in the years 1842 and 1843 the
expense of the removal of the Scotch and Irish paupers
to their own countries had increased in comparison with
former years from hundreds to thousands.—(Hear.)
Sitting as a magistrate he had witnessed the injurious
effect of permitting any case of removal of the kind to
pass without strict examination. He was convinced
that if his colleague had not, in many instances where
they found that the claimants for relief were hard work-
ing persons, supplied them with the means of pur-
chasing tools, and thus given them with the means of
supporting themselves, the charges upon the inhabitants
would have been more heavy, and the pauperism more
intolerable. A week or two ago he had observed
painful anxiety upon the part of an officer of one of the
unions to pass a poor woman who was not present
during the application. He felt bound to refuse the
order in her absence; and, upon seeing her afterwards
by accident, he ascertained that he was perfectly justi-
fied in the negative he had given, for, upon being
asked what assistance she had received from the re-
lieving-officer, she replied that, during five weeks, all
the help she had was two shillings and two loaves, and
that, for the last month, she had been with-
out the least relief, and merely dependent upon
the contingent humanity of those who saw her in this
destitute state. The relieving officer had, notwithstand-
ing this remarkable fact, the affidavits and everything
else ready for the magistrate's signature, and if due cau-
tion had not been exercised the removal would have cer-
tainly taken place in the teeth of the law. He called
upon his brother magistrates to exercise still greater
vigilance upon the subject than they were in the habit
of using, for he believed that if they relaxed in the per-
formance of the duty of vigilance the most unmerciful
[injustice would be done to the poor. He believed that
parties were employed by the unions of the City of
London, who looked upon poverty as the worst of
crimes, and would have it punished to the extremity.—
(Hear, hear.) There were put on board steamers for
Ireland, poor people who had not for thirty or forty
years been once in the country, and who were without
relations or friends there, and must in consequence
perish of starvation in Cork or Limerick to which they
might be, as it were, transported.—(Hear, hear.) He
felt that he had ready advocates in his brother
magistrates of any measure calculated to abate
so serious an evil. He called upon them to take into
consideration the heavy rates to which the inhabitants
of the City were subjected by the too great promptitude
to grant orders of removal. He believed that six or
seven years ago the whole cost of removals was annually
under 200/. In 1842, it amounted to 3,0001, ; and in
1843, it was 2,6661 General complaints had been of
late made by those who would, if immediate measures
were not adopted, call for a county rate. He (Alder-
man
Copeland) wished the matter to be referred to a
Committee, in order that some plan might be devised to
remedy or, at least, to abate the evil, the existence of
which was palpable to all. The time had arrived for
trying the experiment, for the Poor-law Bill was about
to undergo some change ; and it was the duty of
that Court to suggest some means of preventing the
frauds which were, under the circumstances to which he
had called the attention of the Court, so frequently
played off upon the magistracy of the City.—(Hear,
hear.) Alderman Copeland concluded by moving that
the whole question be referred to a Committee.
Alderman WOOD seconded the motion. He agreed in
the view which Alderman Copeland had taken of the
question, and he instanced, as two of the frauds Which
had been committed upon the magistracy, the cases of an
Irishwoman and a Scotchwoman, who came to London
to visit their respectable friends, and adopted the econo-
mical way of returning home by applying for passes.—
(A laugh, and cries of " Hear, hear.') That was not
the manner in which the power of removing was to be
exercised. Another part of the system of imposition
was that which related to the well-known practice
amongst the lower order of the Irish, who came over in
' summer to work, remitted all their earnings to their own
country, and then, without a farthing in their pockets,
applied to be passed home.(Hear, hear.) It was most
essential that abuses of such a nature should not be per-
mitted to exist. Now multitudes who came over and
were passed back, came over again and again, and under-
went the same process as often as they visited London.
Conduct of that kind, however, was punishable by law,
and any person detected in such a violation of law, could
be sent to the House of Correction.—(Hear.)
Alderman KELLY confirmed by his evidence the accu-
racy of the statement made by Alderman Copeland, as
to the ill effects of the existing system.
The motion was then unanimously agreed to.