140 



THE CIVIL ENGINEER AND ARCHITECTS JOURNAL. 



[Apbil, 



and apply to a iiset'iil purpose the valuable manure which is at 



5 resent wasted by beins; conveyed into the river." On the 18th of 

 une 1h;{H, be was examined before tlie Select Committee appointed 

 to consider plans for the Improvement of the Metropolis; and on 

 the nth of Jul)' foUowinfr, his matured scheme of his parallel 

 sewers — the first idea of which, lie tells us," was oripmilly pub- 

 lished in 1829 — was communicated by him, in a Report to the 

 Committee. About this time, Mr. 'i'lio'mas Cubitt devised his plan. 

 Meanwhile the Poor Law Commissioners had been at work. On 

 the 14th of Mav of the same year appeared the Reports" of Drs. 

 Arnott and Phillip Kay, '"On the prevalence of certain physical 

 causes of fever in the metropolis, which mi^ht be removed by 

 proper sanitary measures;" and of Dr. Southwood Smith, "On 

 some of the physical causes of sickness and mortality to which the 

 poor are peculiarly exposed, and which are capable of removal by 

 sanitary ref^ulatio'ns, exemplified in the present condition of the 

 Bethna'l-f^reen and VVhitechapel districts, as ascertained on a per- 

 sonal inspection," which led to the inquiry, instituted in 1839, 

 respecting the sanitary condition of our labouring population, and 

 the production, in 1842, of the local reports, and the general one, 

 by Mr. Ed«in Chadwick, from tlie Poor Law Board to Sir James 

 Graham. We pass over the continued inquiries respecting the 

 state of the Thames. In 1841, the Commission for inquiring into 

 the state of Large Towns and Populous Districts, was instituted. 

 Their first Report appeared in June that year, and the second in 

 February, 1845; then followed the consideration of the jdans for 

 the application of the sewage of the metropolis to agricultural 

 purposes, and of the schemes proposed by ^Messrs. AV'icksteed and 

 Higgs — by the Select Committee of 184(i — the further inquiry into 

 the special means requisite for the improvement of the health of 

 the metropolis — the rapid succession of the Reports of this Board 

 in 1847 8, and the passing of the "Public Health Act, 184S," 

 August 31st — the consequent appointment of the General Board 

 of Health — of a first Metropolitan Commission of Sewers, and of 

 their Ordnance Survey Committee — of a second Metropolitan (and 

 a City) Commission of Sewers — their consideration of proposed 

 schemes — their appointment, on the loth of December last, of a 

 sub-committee to report thereon — and finally, the communication 

 of the Report, at their special general court, March 15th, 1850. 

 Such is only a brief and imperfect retrospect of the chief events 

 connected with the desired improvement of the health of the me- 

 tropolis during the 30 years' peace. The result of all this labour 

 is not of the satisfactory kind we should wish to have to record. 

 We are told by the sub-committee, consisting of Sir John Burgoyne, 

 Capt. Vetch, and Messrs. Harness, Rendel, and Stephenson, that 

 "they Iiave carefully examined and considered the whole of the 

 plans and suggestions submitted to the Commissioners for the 

 drainage of the metropolis;" that "though they do not deem them- 

 selves justified in recommending any one of these schemes for 

 adoption, as a whole, they yet think that one," out of 116 plans 

 for drainage, and 21 miscellaneous suggestions, "contains many of 

 the main elements of a sound and practical system of drainage;" 

 but that a portion of this scheme "involves great difficulties," 

 and that they "consider it decidedly bad and objectionable." The 

 remaining 1 1 5 are all deemed less or more faulty or unavailable. 



This conclusion we fully expected. We observed at the begin- 

 ning of this paper that tlie delay which has taken place is not to 

 he attributed to want of talent or exertion on the part of the per- 

 sons concerned in the incpiiries, but to the want of necessary (lata 

 on which to build a well-founded proposal. Of the data required 

 for this purpose there are two distinct kinds, viz.: — Data derived 

 from local circumstances, indispensable in framing a plan; and data 

 connected with details of construction necessary for carrying into 

 effect a proposed scheme: our want of the latter kind of data we 

 have already endeavoured to illustrate; with regard to the first 

 kind the Committee express themselves to the following effect: — 

 "It is probable, that were we now called upon to deal with the 

 drainage of London, as an original question, and wholly without 

 reference to i)revious proceedings, we might reflect that a well- 

 conceived ami maturely-digested ])lau of general drainage could 

 not be framed without a larger stock of local information of an 

 accurate and specific character than could lie collected by the 

 unaided efforts of individuals, or made accessible to them without 

 undue expense and inconvenience. The effect of this deficiency 

 of the necessary information has become apparent in several of 

 the schemes submitted to us, which, though well conceived, so far 

 as regards their general features, are wholly inconsistent with the 

 levels and other natural conditions of the localities to which they 



8 Si-inii'l ItfjKH-t ot Ihv MulroiKilift iTi.prdveiiK-iils Uti;i»j. p 1411. 



9 Fourth Auiiual Report ot tUe Poor Luw Coininissiuticrs. App. A. No. 1. 



are intended to ap)dy;" and Mr. Sheriff Lawrence, in his address 

 to the Board, after the reading of the Report, adds, "Many whose 

 plans were exceedingly good, had commenced them and prejiared 

 them without having sufficient data to go upon, and had been 

 unable to fulfil their intentions in the manner which he was quite 

 sure they w ould have done if they had had proper dutii to go upon. 

 That, however, was no fault of the Commissioners, because they 

 u-ere not thcinselccs fumished iiitb the viaterUilis to furuinh .yudt data; 

 but at any i-.ite, there had been no favouritism in the decision 

 given." Doubtless, as the decision shows. The want of the first 

 kind of data is now admitted — later, we shall have to acknowledge 

 the want of the second kind. 



Accordingly, we find that few engineers of repute — those who 

 have devoted their special attention to this one subject for the last 

 few years, of course, excepted — ha\e sent in plans. We look in 

 vain in the list of competitors for the names of <iur principal R.E.'s 

 or M. Inst. C.E.'s; and we cannot be astonished at the conclusion 

 arrived at respecting the merits of the majority of the schemes. 

 How so many persons can have thought proper to venture to send 

 in plans under the circumstances described, is to us a mystery, 

 ^lany, we fear, embraced the popular opinion that the drainage of 

 London was wholly a question of outlet, and that that once found, 

 the necessary details of a comprehensive scheme must naturally 

 follow. The late outcry for an outfall, was, and is still, for the pre- 

 sent, a mere fallacy; which simply reminds us of Archimedes ask- 

 ing for a prop, as the only condition necessary to enable him to 

 lift the world — with this difference, however, that, like the Egyp- 

 tian astronomer who, vrhile calculating the motions of the planets, 

 fell into a bog in his own garden, we can analyse accurately the 

 impossible case proposed by Archimedes, but are perfectly helpless 

 as regards the other, which nevertheless necessitates an immediate 

 decision. We have the sewage of a vast population to get rid of 

 some how : one person offers to treat it chymically ; another pro- 

 poses to empty it into the Thames; a third is of opinion it should 

 be carried off under the bed of the river; and a fourth maintains 

 that, on the contrary, it ought to be raised by steam. ^Vhat with 

 one person wishing to collect it in tanks, and another to drown it, 

 a third to sink it, and a fourth to raise it— what with dry manure, 

 and highly-diluted ditto, sinking shafts and erecting engines — we 

 have now such conflicting opinions on all points, that we are even 

 beginning to question the truth of the very premises we started 

 with; and the only conclusions i-especting which there can be said 

 to be a general agreement of opinion, are — 



1. That the present pro\isions for the drainage of London are 

 insufficient, and in themselves defective. 



2. That the thorough drainage of the metropolis is desirable, if 

 it can possibly be attained. 



5. That the pollution of the Thames with sewage is to be 

 avoided, provided there be a possibility of effecting the necessary 

 drainage w ithout it, as outfall, within the limits ad\'isable for all 

 sanitary requirements. 



4. That refuse-sewage has intrinsic value, which ought to be 

 made available. 



5 That a diversity of opinions exists respecting the details con- 

 nected with town drainage. 



6. That this diversity of opinions has prevented, hitherto, effec- 

 tive means being devised to remedy the evils to which a large 

 body of this population is still subject. 



7." That something ought to be done. 



Let us now consider the question itself, and take a common- 

 sense view of the case. 



The premises we start with are the four first of the above con- 

 clusions. ^V'e send for an engineer. We request him to under- 

 take to remedy the evils we complain of. M'hat is his first step? 

 His first step is to ask for "instructions" respecting all such points 

 as are not within his control, and ivhich must in any way influence 

 his decision: "Your water supply is defective.' What are the 

 intentions of the legislature as regards its improvement.' Will 

 the supply be limited or constant.' If the first, to what extent? 

 Can you provide me with a sujiply in certain districts, if required, 

 and to what extent.' Will the same provision be made throughout 

 the metropolis; and if not, what w ill the respective provisions be 

 for each district? itc. &c. — You wish to preserve the sewage for 

 agricultural purjioses? W^ill it be sufficient to have it conveyed 

 to one point, say the Essex marshes; or do you require means of 

 direct communication into the country by rail, in different direc- 

 tions? If so, to what extent and in what directions? In what 

 state must the refuse be delivered? To what extent diluted? Will 

 the whole of it be required, or only a part, during one portion of 

 the year; and if the latter, to what probable extent? &c. &c.— 



