Report to the General Board of Health on a preliminary inquiry into the sewerage, drainage, and supply of water, and the sanitary condition of the inhabitants of the city of Norwich, and the county of the same city / by W. Lee, Superintending Inspector.

  • Lee, William, 1774 or 1775-1853.
Date:
1851
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: Report to the General Board of Health on a preliminary inquiry into the sewerage, drainage, and supply of water, and the sanitary condition of the inhabitants of the city of Norwich, and the county of the same city / by W. Lee, Superintending Inspector. Source: Wellcome Collection.

    52/156 (page 44)
    supplied. I wish to draw your attention to the necessity of some material alteration in the drainage. We want the powers that the Public Health Act would give to enable the drainage of Heigham to be effected. It was found that the Sanitary Committee had not powers to carry it out. On the part of the parish we therefore apply to have the Public Health Act applied.” Mr. George Blahe, brickmaker, of Heigham, says:—■ “ I represent my father at his request; he is an owner and occupier of property in Heigham-street. From the drainage of the street being permitted to enter the river adjacent to his property the water in the river has become so filthy that all vegetable and animal life has ceased. That is just above where the water-works draw the water to supply the city. The well on his premises has become perfectly useless, and the water disgustingly offensive; and after 40 years’ struggling to remove these nuisances, he has found it impossible to succeed, owing some- times to the prejudices, and at other times to the apparent inability of the Paving Commissioners to grant the making a drain through their jurisdiction from the hamlet of Heigham. It is my conviction that unless we are placed under the operation of the Public Health Act, we, the hamlets, will never have the slightest chance of removing our nuisances. And as an owner of property in the hamlet of Lakenham, even with the assistance of all our local bodies, as much as the law would permit them to give, I could not succeed in removing the greatest nuisance existing in the vicinity of the city only at a loss of nearly 50/. out of my own pocket. “ I therefore conclude that we have no better chance in Lakenham than in Heigham of getting rid of the nuisances except by being placed under the Public Health Act. “ I think we spent in Heigham five times as much in litigation as would have removed the nuisance ; and in Lakenham, besides the 50/. loss to me, it has cost different private individuals, in attempts to remove it, I believe a sum of not less than 600/. “ The effluvium from the ditch or river above the New Mills, and communicating with the suction-pipe of the Water Company, is so bad, that a few evenings since we could not admit air into my father’s house, although there is sickness in it at the present time.” Mr. George Bean gave some evidence upon the subject matters of the memorial respecting Mariner’s lane, showing very forcibly the necessity of more adequate powers for drainage. He says :—■ “ I live in Mariner’s-lane. There is a local drain brought from other parts of . the city and discharged on the surface at the top of the lane. There are slaughter-houses, and the blood is very offensive. The refuse lodges in the holes made by the channel, and sometimes the stench is horrible. In July last I was very unwell, and was ordered by Dr. Hull | to remove from the neighbourhood. I did so for a time. I made appli- cation to the Sanitary Committee in September last, and they referred me to the Tonnage Committee of the Corporation. That Committee ordered the City Surveyor to examine it, and report, which he did, but nothing was done. I then went before the magistrates and asked them for an order under the Highway Act, but I did not get one, and, there- fore, went before the Sanitary Committee again, and received a promise