Westward Ho! Drainage Question: Another Disorderly Meeting: Only a few weeks ago a meeting was held at Westward Ho! To consider the drainage question, on which occasion personalities were freely indulged in, in consequence of the alleged delay and obstruction in carrying out a plan for the proper sewerage of the place. On Friday last another meeting on the same subject was held in the vestry room, Northam. The meeting was composed of parishioners and was called for purpose of considering a proposal from the Westward Ho.! Committee for cutting a dyke through the Northam Burrows in order to facilitate the drainage of Westward Ho! and to reconsider, and, if necessary, rescind a resolution, passed at a parish meeting held on September 8th, 1871. The Vicar (Rev. M. D. Churchward) occupied the chair … (list of attendees, and complaint that the meeting was not called by the Westward Ho! Committee) … Mr. Pickard; You say the Westward Ho! Committee ever applied to have a dike cut? Captain Molesworth: We never applied for this meeting. It is the application from you. It is a matter between Mr. Pynsent and the Local Board, not with the Westward Ho! Committee. It has been the endeavour to stick everything on to the Westward Ho! Committee but we wanted to separate from you altogether. Mr. Pickard then asked the chairman to read the resolution which was passed on September 8th, 1871: The Chairman then read from the minute book as follows: “It was moved by Mr. W. Beer, seconded by Mr. W. Penhorwood, that the Local Board be allowed to construct deodorising tanks at or near Goosey Pool, into which tanks the Westward Ho! sewage is to be conveyed by earthenware pipes on condition that they waive their right to take the four aces of land, and that they be allowed to open and improve the Pill by making a gut in as straight a line as possible from the tank to the river, on condition that they carted away all the material taken out from the cutting of the said gut, and use it either in filling up the old course of the Pill, or in levelling the hollows of the burrows, and that they provide one or two floodgates, to be placed where the parish might think fit, and that the parishioners shall make no charge on the Local Board for the land which they shall require for such tanks”.
Mr. Molesworth (addressing Mr. Pickard): It was an arrangement made between Mr. Yeo and the parish long ago. The Westward Ho! people wanted to separate, and to prevent that separation, Mr. Yeo, and you, and Mr. Pynsent, and others wanted this plan to be adopted. Captain Lemon: It is your matter, Captain Molesworth, you came here as the Westward Ho! Committee, and you asked the Local Board in this room to carry out the scheme which had been agreed on … … (discussion of need to drain the Burrows, but disagreement as how best to do it) …
The Chairman produced a letter from Mr. Pynsent and asked whether he had better read it. An excited discussion ensued, and upon being put to the meeting in the form of a resolution, it was resolved, by a majority to read the letter, the purport of which was, that Mr. Pynsent objected to the cutting of the dyke, as it would result in the formation of a number of cess pits all along the length of the dyke. Mr. Bazeley said that Mr. Ellis stated that the waster passed out of the deodorizing tanks perfectly pure, and be no nuisance to persons bathing near the outfall, there could not be number of cess pits …
Captain Molesworth proceeded to explain that they had already borrowed £1,200 on purpose to carry out the scheme, and if they did not carry it out, the money must be returned. Mr. Ellis’s plan was a complete failure, and they knew it and so did the government in London, for Mr. Morgan told him to go and look at them for himself, and Mr. Ward (their surveyor) had seen the plan and he said it was a failure. A lively conversation then ensued between Captain Molesworth and Mr. Pickard, the former expressing a desire that Westward Ho! should be separated from the parish, and the latter expressing a willingness to part with Westward Ho! …
Eventually after some mores discussion and cavilling, the motion was put to the meeting, when ten voted for it and seven against it. Several remained neutral. …
[see also Exeter and Plymouth Gazette: Friday 5th January 1877]
Transcribed in whole or part from scanned originals: Presented with or without modified text and punctuation. For absolute accuracy refer to the original newspapers. Source: The British Newspaper Archive.
Referenced
GRO0835 Hennock: Thomas Pynsent: 1808 – 1887