470 The Water Companies. [MAY, 



we are afraid it would be difficult entirely to get rid any where. Mere 

 " offence to the imagination'' will be referable to the different delicacies, 

 or predilectipns, of parties. No doubt, to drink the water of a river 

 like the Thames, into which the sewers of a city empty themselves, is, 

 abstractedly if we choose to dwell upon it " offensive to the imagina- 

 tion." But if any person were to amuse himself by counting the dead 

 dogs since, in answer to plain charges, we must speak in plain terms 

 which he might find in the small stream of the New River, between the 

 Sluice House and Sadler's Wells, or to look at the crowds of individuals, 

 of every rank and calling in life, who wash their persons in the same 

 narrow stream every summer's morning, in spite of the great exertion 

 which is made to procure all possible cleanliness, by the New River 

 Company, it is possible that such an individual (for a few moments after 

 the survey) might hardly be satisfied to raise a glass of New River 

 water to his lips ? And, " imagination '' apart, the truth, we believe, is, 

 that the story of the " offensiveness " of the Thames water has nothing at 

 all in it. The impurities which proceed from the drains, on the banks 

 of the Thames, seldom make their way far into the bed of the river ; 

 and are neutralised as far as they do so by the enormous body of 

 water into which they flow. The constant inclination of all the drainage 

 is to be carried at once down by the tide as it comes forth along the 

 margin of the river ; and it is only where the supply is taken from an 

 improper vicinage as has been the case with the Grand Junction Com- 

 pany from some spot which the proximity of the sewers is enabled to 

 operate upon that any real inconvenience, or " offensiveness," would 

 arise. We repeat that we do not speak here of persons who choose to 

 indulge their u imagination ;" and who would be as disinclined to 

 approve of the water of Paris carried about the streets for sale, in wooden 

 tubs, by dirty fellows as they are to drink that which comes clean into 

 their cisterns, only because they know that it is taken from the Thames. 

 But we call the water of the Thames "filthy" and "poisonous!" Are 

 we not forgetting that two-thirds of the population of town, within the 

 bills of mortality, has never been supplied with any water but that of the 

 Thames ? . Do we remember that a vast quantity of this poisonous water, 

 from time immemorial, until within the last three years, has been used 

 to be thrown, by the water works at London Bridge, directly into the 

 cisterns of the people of London, without being previously deposited 

 in reservoirs, or subjected to any course of purification whatever? And, 

 moreover, when we are told thus suddenly, that the Thames water is 

 unfit for use is it not time to recollect, that, up to the reign of James I., 

 the whole population of London never had any supply of water but this 

 " Thames water," so taken up at London Bridge, in the very heart of the 

 city ? 



For the present, a pressure of other matter compels us to quit this subject ; 

 but it is possible that we may return to it ; because we rather think, that 

 upon the strength of an evil which has only been slightly partial, and 

 could only be temporary we see a desire on the part of some speculators 

 to get up a profitable job. 



The story of the " monopoly" we take, in plain terms, to be pure hum- 

 bug. If we have a " monopoly" of five companies now when a riesv 

 company was started, we should only have a "monopoly" of six. 



The complaint of " extravagant charge" as against the companies 



