Second series. Concise statements of the main features of the plans for the drainage of the metropolis : sent in pursuance of the resolution of the Court, 20th August, 1849.

  • London (England). Metropolitan Commission of Sewers.
Date:
[1849]
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: Second series. Concise statements of the main features of the plans for the drainage of the metropolis : sent in pursuance of the resolution of the Court, 20th August, 1849. Source: Wellcome Collection.

    94/156 (page 94)
    V 94 back drainage, without flooding the houses in the vicinity of the outlets when the gates are closed. At times, during heavy rains, the rush of water is very great; and if this happen at a time when the flood-gates are closed against the tide, the houses in the low parts must be occasionally inundated. Bermondsey, Rotherhithe, Lambeth, and other places, have been occasionally visited by this annoyance;—even the river Effra, which is a sewer in the Brixton-road, has had the arch blown up by the pressure of water from the high grounds. Having a knowledge of these facts, I am decidedly of opinion that all main sewers should be of a capacious size, particularly where any influx occurs, but more especially where the accumulation increases at the outlets into the river. The appropriation of land to building purposes around London, and the rapid increase of houses, must eventually require new outlets to relieve the present main sewers, or the lower districts will be more annoyed than they noAv are. OBJECTION TO THE TUNNEL PLAN. When it is understood that immense quantities of refuse, filth, and water, are continually poured into the sewers from the fellmonger’s yards, tanneries, dyers, hatters, and other manufactories on the south side of the river, it is plain that the plan of tunnelling is a scheme which, I believe, cannot answer, however low it be. The force of water is very great when it is concentrated by a violent stream from the high grounds, in a confined tunnel, entering it in opposition or in conflux, and must derange the concavity in the joints, whether it be of iron or brickwork. A passive stream might flow quiescently, but turbulent torrents, from high grounds, would derange the tunnel, and then the serious question is, how is it to be remedied without an outlet for the contents of the several sewers ? Even if this plan were in any way practicable, and a plot of ground found sufficiently low to contain the immense quantities of filth which is continually passing into the sewers, would not this deposit create a pestilential pond, pouring forth its exhalations for miles around ? On these grounds I incline to the present mode of outlet into the river Thames from the north and the south sides. Although many persons have complained of the filth which passes into the river, it is a well attested fact, that the Thames water lasts pure for a longer time than any other which is procured from other parts of the world, as is attested by all mariners: this may be attributed to the neutralization of poisons, which pass into the river, depositing the matter, or enabling it to pass away in the current of the ebbing tide.