HC Deb 09 March 1868 vol 190 c1220

said, he would beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, Whether it is true that complaints have been made to the Home Office, by the Thames Conservators, of the Navigation of the River, having become obstructed by the accumulation of sewage at Barking and Crossness; and, if so, what course he proposes to take in the matter?


, in reply, said, that complaints had been made to him, and that in consequence he had seen the Chairman of the Metropolitan Board of Works. He (Mr. Gathorne Hardy) had suggested the appointment of an arbitrator, to decide as to whether the Board of Works or the Thames Conservancy were bound to clear away the obstructions. The Thames Conservancy said that they had no funds to remove the sewage; and, on the other hand, the Metropolitan Board alleged that, having received powers from Parliament to use the outfalls at Barking and Crossness, they were not responsible for the accumulation. Further, they denied that the obstruction was caused by the sewage. It appeared that the Metropolitan Board had been advised by their counsel that arbitration would not be the proper course. He (Mr. Gathorne Hardy) considered that the only mode of proceeding would be by indictment.