METROPOLIS WATER SUPPLY BILL. (Hansard, 17 June 1852)

§ MR. MOWATT
moved an Amendment, the object of which was to require that all reservoirs within a distance of five miles from London, and in which water intended for domestic purposes was collected, should he covered.

§ MR. WALPOLE
said, the Clause provided that all reservoirs holding water for domestic purposes, within five miles of St. Paul's Cathedral should be covered; but it also provided, that if reservoirs within such a distance contained water to be subjected to subsequent filtration, they need not be covered.

§ MR. MOWATT
said, he considered it impossible by any mere process of filtration to render water fit for domestic use. Could it be said for a moment that water obtained, for instance, from the reservoir in the Park, could be rendered drinkable by filtration?

§ MR. BARROW
said, the Committee had devoted the closest attention to this clause, and they considered it would secure a supply of water perfectly fit for household purposes.

§ MR. MOWATT
said, he would not divide the Committee on his Amendment.

§ MR. MOWATT
said, he should wish to propose to have five years, instead of three, fixed as the period within which the Companies should complete their arrangements for furnishing an improved supply of water. 870 He also objected to the Proviso contained in the Clause, which enacted that the constant supply of water by each Company was to be subject to the provisions made in the special Act of each Company. It seemed to him that this would make the special Act in each case override the general Act.

LORD SEYMOUR
said, he wished to explain that the different Companies supplied water at various heights, and that if one general height were fixed for all the Companies, they would be requiring of some of them what they could not do. The provisions in each of the private Acts fixed the exact height to which each Company could carry the water, and all that was intended by this Proviso was to confine them to that height.

§ LORD JOHN MANNERS
said, this subject had received very careful consideration at the hands of the Select Committee, and he thought the clause should not be disturbed.

§ VISCOUNT EBRINGTON
said, he would observe that evidence was in readiness to show the facility with which the change to a constant supply could be made, but all such evidence was practically excluded by the Committee.

§ MR. BARROW
said, the interests of the public were well represented by counsel before the Committee, and everything was done that could be done to protect the public.

§ MR. MOWATT
said, he would not press the point, but he hoped the Committee would leave out the words which made the constant supply of water "subject to the provisions of the special Act relating to such Company."

§ MR. GEACH
said, that if these words wore loft out, the Lambeth Committee would be put to an enormous expense to supply some five or six houses, which, with theirpre-sent means, they wore unable to reach.

§ SIR BENJAMIN HALL
would suggest that they should insert in a schedule the height to be reached by each Company.

§ MR. WALPOLE
thought that, by the omission of these words, they would press with undue severity upon two companies—the Chelsea Company and another—which were in a peculiar position.

§ MR. MOWATT
said, he must beg to call the attention of the noble Lord in charge of the Bill to the provisions required to be complied with before a constant supply of water was given, which he thought would render the clause itself in- 871 operative. For instance, it was required that before a constant supply was given from any distant main, four-fifths of the inhabitants of that district were required to have provided themselves with the requisite apparatus for the working a constant supply in their houses. This, he believed, would operate as a denial of a constant supply for a great many years.

§ LORD JOHN MANNERS
said, he had an Amendment upon the clause, which he hoped would obviate the objection of the hon. Gentleman. He proposed to add after the condition about pipes and other apparatus, words to the effect that a constant supply should be given on the requisition in writing of "four-fifths of the owners and occupiers on such main."

§ MR. MOWATT
said, he thought that a majority of the inhabitants should be sufficient, and that their assent only should be required. It would be physically impossible to get the written application of so many persons.

§ LORD JOHN MANNERS
said, he considered that four-fifths of the inhabitants were not too many, when it was recollected that the demand would in effect tax the minority to a considerable extent, by compelling them to provide in their own houses the apparatus requisite for a constant supply.

LORD SEYMOUR
said, if the mere application of the inhabitants of a district for a constant supply was all that was necessary, without their houses being adapted for its reception, the consequence would be that people would find their houses flooded, and, being wholly unprepared, they would be subjected to much inconvenience, and even alarm.

§ VISCOUNT EBRINGTON
said, he would refer to the case of Wolverhampton, where a similar change was made at the small expense of 16s. 6d. for each house, and no such fearful results as the noble Lord anticipated were experienced.

§ LORD ROBERT GROSVENOR
said, before the House resumed, he begged to be allowed to express his thanks to the Committee, and to his noble Friend who had acted as the Chairman, for the attention they had paid to this subject, for the manner in which they had discharged their duties, and especially for having contrived to include so many valuable enactments within such small compass. Pie regretted the want of proper municipal institutions to 872 control matters of this kind, the consequence being that such subjects were referred to the Board of Trade, and much unnecessary odium was thrown upon the Government. He hoped the Government would turn their attention to the subject, and propose some measure to obviate this great and continually growing evil.