31 



had spent considerable sums of money, and on two or three 

 occasions had bought the land to endeavour to get rid of the 

 sewage. Finally they had a vast inquiry, which lasted over 

 five days, into the question of the Thames valley sewage, and 

 cost 20,000/. or 30,000/. This inquiry ended in nothing. 

 It simply condemned the systems then proposed of deal- 

 ing with the sewage of the Thames Valley by ordinary 

 irrigation. He was glad to say that that very Board of 

 twenty-four members had now unanimously determined 

 that the only way of dealing with it was by chemical 

 treatment, and at this moment two eminent engineers 

 were appointed for preparing a scheme or schemes for 

 dealing, on this plan, with the sewage in one or more 

 places in the Thames valley, and this was the nearest 

 approach he had yet seen to a solution of the difficulty. 

 The delay which had taken place was not due to the 

 local authorities, but to the Local Government Board, to 

 whom was entrusted the supervision of these works. Their 

 idea was total diversion, and they had sought to force that 

 upon the local authorities against their convictions, en- 

 deavouring to compel them to carry away the sewage by 

 what was called the West Kent sewer, and throw it into the 

 Thames. The only effect would be to involve hereafter an 

 additional cost in carrying farther the same defective ap- 

 pliances. They did not want additional legislation, for the 

 local authorities were perfectly ready to do what they 

 could. They had spent money in a liberal way in endea- 

 vouring to solve the difficulty, and he did hope they would 

 now get a solution in the direction he had named. He 

 was quite certain that the Aylesbury Company had done 

 more at Coventry to demonstrate the evil of this method 

 of dealing with the sewage than anyone else ; and although 

 there seemed to be a prejudice against these works, he 



