§ SIR FREDERICK MILNERasked the President of the Local Government Board, If it is the intention of the Government to wait till the arrival of the cholera before they take any vigorous steps to purify the Upper and the Lower Thames, which is now in a state of semi-putrefaction, and which threatens, with the gravest danger, all who live in proximity to it?
§ SIR CHARLES W. DILKEWith respect to the Lower Thames, in reply to a Question which was addressed to me by the hon. Member for Finsbury (Sir Andrew Lusk) on the 14th instant, I referred to the action which was being taken by the Metropolitan Board of Works as to the sewage discharged at Barking and Crossness, and, as the hon. Member is aware, a Royal Commission are inquiring as to the alleged pollution of the river in connection with these outfalls. The Home Secretary asks me to say that he has addressed a letter to the Metropolitan Board on the subject and is waiting for an answer. By the Upper Thames, I presume the hon. Member means the part of the river on which Richmond and other places included in the Lower Thames Valley main sewerage district abut, and, as regards that part, I regret to say that at present I have nothing to add to my answer to the hon. Member for Finsbury on Friday last.
§ SIR JAMES M'GAREL-HOGGsaid, that a full and complete answer would be delivered to-morrow to the letter to which the right hon. Gentleman had referred.
§ MR. MACFARLANEasked the right hon. Gentleman whether, as experience had shown that the sewage was dis- 1746 charged at a point too high to be all swept out by a single tide, he would not consider the propriety of discharging it a considerable number of miles further down?
§ SIR CHARLES W. DILKEsaid, that the hon. Gentleman's Question assumed that that was the duty of the Government and not of the local authorities. This was one of the main questions under consideration at present by the Royal Commission.