The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1849-05-15 00:00:00

tion bad been offered

Mr. PARKER objected to the paper being read. It was
a most irregular way of introducing it in the shape of a
Mayor's communication.

Mr. HUGH HORNBY said he understood the paper had
been placed in the hands of the chairman of the Water
Committee, with the understanding that it was not to be
produced unless the subject cam - -
Mr. Harbord had made a charge as

was but fair his explanation should he read

Mr. THOMPSON: moved that it be read. (Cries of
" Read, read.")
The TOWN-CLERK then read the document referred to.
It was an elaborate statement of the present state of the
works, and said that in consequence of t'
being uncovered, the water became so impure frequently,
they were obliged to be run dry for the purpose of
being cleaned. The Kensington reservoir was net origi-
nally intended for domestic purposes. That was admitted
by the engineer wno constructed it, or it would have been
erected differently. The water there being obtained from
underground strata became impure much quicker than
surface water, when exposed to the sun's rays, and conse-
quently required more frequent cleansing.

Lie reservoirs

Mr.-COOPER said, it was well known before Mr. Scott
had anything to do with the Kensington water-works
they had great difficulty- in keeping it pure. They were
then obliged to allow the water to run down the sewers
for the purpose of having the reservoirs cleaned. The
present Water Committee had been doing the same. (No,
no.) He did not, however, blame them for it. They
could not he!p it.
_ _ _

Mnror said the subject before the Council was

the resignation of Mr. Scott

Mr. COOPER continued. The engineer said the water
would become impure, and therefore the reservoir must
be emptied for the purpose of being cleaned. The plan
adopted by Mr. Scott was to keep the water as low as
possible, so that there would not be so great a loss. This
plan had been approved of by Mr. Newlands. Then
again he found the old company raised 26,000,000 gal-
lons, and on reference to the report before the Council, he
found that the present company raised no more,, and
therefore if the old company wasted water, the new must
have been doing the same.
P • - —Order.

Mr. ARKER.
Mr. G. H. LAWRENCE said an attack bad been made
on_Mr. Scott. His explanation had been read—

o order—

%lAFOR.—Order

HOLME

I think Mr. Parker rises to disorder

(Laughter.)

MI: COOPER continued. He said Mr. Scott had
wasted no more water than he could help, and he had by
his management of the works saved considerable sums to
the Corporation. .He found the quantity of tallow
used—

Mr. HARBORD.—OhI don't travel into Grease,
(Laughter.)
Mr- COOPER.—I am not going to travel to Greece nor
Rome either. (A laugh.) lie found, however, that on
comparing the years 1848 and 1849, Mr. Scott had sa-
-40 per cent in the consumption of tallow alone. Then as
to the costs for coals ; in 1848, it was £3,720, and for the
last year, £2,828, or a saving of nearly £lOOO. Again,
since Mr. Scott put the engine at the Soho Station in re-
pair, she had discharged nearly double the quantity of
water any other engine had.
Mr. G. H. LAWRENCE said he should mcve that the
resignation of Mr. Scott be accepted with regret, that the
exr' -ation he has ' -^n i "tly satisfactory to the

plaua was giv, is perteci,.,
council ; and that it be an instruction to the Wafer Com-
mittee to give notice of dismissal to all parties employed
in the engineering establishment.
Mr. HUGH HoRNBY seconded the motion.

Mr. HARBORD objected to that part of the motion
which approved of Mr. Scott's explanation, because it
placed the Water Committee in a false position. He
brought the subject of the waste of water before the Com-
mittee a fortnight ago • and if Mr. Scott could explain
he ought to have explained .to the Committee at their
meeting last Saturday, as he was requested to do. He
hoped the Council would pause before they approved of
an elaborate scientific document without time to consi-
der it. The other part of the motion he approved of.

_
Mr. PROCTER urged upon 141 r. G. H . Lawrence the
propriety of not expre
explanation of Mr. Scott.
Mr. 141ottnis asked whether there was any resolution
upon the minutes calling upon Mr. Scott for an explana-
tion

Mr. PROCTER.—Yes.
to a resolution on the star.

After some observations he referred
iect

and said upon that resolutio:

M Scott was ordered to.'repOrt.

Mr. HOLT thought the explanation of Mr. Scott ought to
have gone before the committee before it was considered in
counciL

Mr. G. R. LAWRENCE said Mr. Scott was accused of wasting
the water from the Kensington reservoir, for the purpose of
suiting the views of a particular party. He was glad to find

he was justified on that point, he would withdraw that Portion
of his motion which referred to the explanation.
Mr. HARBORD.—AII I can say is, that having heard Mr.
Sbott's explanation, I believe he has done what he has done
believing that it was RIGHT.
The MAYOR then put the question on rhich at the suggestion
of Mr. Ferguson, the name of Mr. Procter was substituted as
the mover.
The motion was then put and carried.

ie exception of the word
t is do. e.—(Laughter.)
MESSRS..SIMPSON AND NEWLAND'S REPORT