MR. W.CRAWFORD (Durham, Mid)asked the President of the Local Government Board, Whether his attention has been called to the fact that in the rural parish of Crossgate, in Durham, a rate of 2s. 6d. in the £1 was levied by the Durham Rural Sanitary Authority to construct a sewer discharging unfiltered sewage into the River Wear; that the Auditor, having decided the construction of such sewer to be illegal and in contravention of the Rivers Pollution Act, there upon disallowed and surcharged the members of the Board the amounts paid in respect thereof; that the Local Government Board, when appealed to by the Durham Rural Board, confirmed the Auditor's decision, but remitted the surcharge, thus depriving the ratepayers of any redress, although they admitted the rate of 2s. 6d.in the £1 wrongfully and illegally levied for such a purpose; and, if the circumstances are as stated, will the Government say whether the ratepayers of Crossgate have any means of recovering the rate of 2s. 6d. thus illegally levied on them?
§ THE PRESIDENT (Mr. RITCHIE) (Tower Hamlets, St. George's)Sums amounting to about £130, which had been expended by the Durham Rural Sanitary Authority in providing a sewer for the contributory place of Crossgate, were disallowed by the Auditor on the ground that unpurified sewage was discharged through the sewer into the River Wear in contravention of the 511 Rivers Pollution Prevention Act. On an appeal by the members of the Sanitary Authority who were surcharged, the Local Government Board confirmed the Auditor's decision. It appeared, however, that the river was largely polluted from other sources, and that, in fact, the new sewer had not occasioned any material increase in the pollution. It did not seem to the Board necessary to require that the members surcharged should personally bear the cost of the works, and they, therefore, remitted the disallowance and surcharge. I am not aware of any means by which the ratepayers of Crossgate can be recouped the amount in question.