Westward Ho! WESTWARD HO! DRAINAGE: IMPORTANT GOVERNMENT INQUIRY: The Northam Local Board having applied to the Local Government Board for consent to thh deviation of the plan already sanctioned for the sewerage of the Westward Ho district, R. Morgan, Esq., one of the Government inspectors, attended at the Baths, Westward Ho, Wednesday last, for the purpose of making enquiry into the same. There were present — Captain Molesworth, the Rev. I. H. Gosset, the Rev. Edward Reynolds, and Messrs. Hole, Hookway, Pynsent, Henderson, Smale, Wins, Bazeley, Wren, Pickard, Williams, Baker, Abbott, Oatway, Risdon, Ellis, Price, and Bear. The Inspector, having announced the purport of the enquiry, said he was prepared to hear the matter discussed. Mr. C. W. Hole said, Clerk of the Northam Local Board, proposed to read a statement they had prepared, showing the reasons for the proposed deviation. The statement was as follows: — “The Local Board of Northam have endeavoured carry out the scheme sanctioned by the Local Government Board in the summer of 1870, which provides for the outfall of the sewage the Northam Burrows in an easterly direction from Westward Ho, but they find the same impracticable for the reasons hereinafter set forth. The sum of £1,200 was borrowed for the purpose of carrying out these works, on the security of a mortgage on the general district rates, out of which the sum of £839 or thereabouts has been extended in laying the drainage pipes throughout the Westward Ho district, and partially completing the outfall on to the Burrows towards Goosey Pool, in accordance with Mr. Latham’s plan.
The works were carried out under the direction of the Westward Ho! Joint Committee, constituted agreeably with the Inspector’s recommendation, made at the inquiry held Westward Ho! in 1869. The committee appointed Mr. Risdon engineer to carry out the works; and it having been suggested that an improvement of the watershed of the district might be made by cutting a dyke through the Burrows, with a flood hutch, in order facilitate the drainage, the committee unanimously agreed, February 2nd, 1870, that the matter should referred to the Government Inspector, in order that his consent might be given to a deviation from the original scheme. A provisional order was applied for in June 1870, to put in force the Land Clause Consolidation Act 1845, with respect to the purchase and the taking of four acres of the Burrows, for the purpose of irrigation to the outfall works. On the 5th of August 1871, the Joint Committee met on the Burrows, near Goosey Pool, and examined the proposed outfall, and they agreed to summon the Commoners’ Committee. The committee met the 9th of August, 1871, and considered the best mode of disposing of the outfall, and they were of opinion that outfall from the proposed tanks, carried through the length the Burrows to Old Mill, and connected with an embankment from Greysand-hill to the Shell-ridge, would be the best mode meeting the difficulty; and in the meantime the committee were allowed to carry the culvert to the place on the plan indicated for the tanks. In consequence of this meeting the Joint Westward Ho! Committee handed in to the applicants their report, of which the following is copy: —
‘To the Northam Local Board. May 16th, 1872. Gentlemen, — Referring to your resolution of April 20th, we, your committee, can add very little to the information which you already possess. The Board placed Mr. Latham’s plan of sewerage in our hands as sanctioned by the Secretary of State’s office and approved by the memorialists and deputed us to see it carried out. The board, as well as the committee, believed that the provisional order of the Home Secretary, which was considered necessary, would be sanctioned before the close of the year’s Parliamentary session. The failure of the local Government Bill containing the provisional order was neither the fault of the Board nor of the Committee; but it materially increased the difficulties the Committee laboured under. Temporary sewage pits had to be constructed, and temporary pipes laid down at a considerable cost, while nuisances of necessity arose which led to considerable complaints from individuals. The Parliamentary sanction of the provisional order was not finally in the hands of the Board until June 17th, 1871, though the Committee commenced its meetings on February 2nd, 1870. The Board are further fully aware of the difficulties that have arisen in dealing with the commoners of Northam under the said provisional order. They are fully aware how, anxious to smooth over difficulties, your committee, in conjunction with that of the memorialists, offered to lay out £250 in improving and deepening the pill. They are also aware how the parishioners of Northam, somewhat unfairly, put a still heavier burthen on the Committee, which the funds at their command cannot possibly meet. On obtaining tenders for the works on the Pill and Bank, as set forth by the parish meeting, your committee found that they would, to a great extent, absorb their funds, and leave little money for the 15 in. pipe sewer and tank. To protect the Board from threatened and probable law suits, your Committee have thought it right to lay down the sewer first, then to proceed with the tank, and afterwards, when they see what funds they have remaining, report to the Board, and call upon them provide the funds, (the providing of funds being no part of the Committee’s duty,) in such manner as the Board may decide. Your committee will be happy to carry out such further works as the Board may provide funds for, but they are unable to acknowledge the fairness of improving the drainage of the whole Burrows, and of all the adjacent lowlands, at the sole expense of the Westward district. Your committee hand in an account of the money already expended, and a rough estimate of the additional cost of the works now in progress. Your committee believe that the drainage of Westward Ho! so far it has been carried out, is in good working order. We believe that it has tended to keep the place in good health. We remain, gentlemen, faithfully yours, I. H. Gosset, John Mill.’ —
A meeting of the parishioners was convened, and consent was given to construct deodorising tanks; also, to deepen and alter the course of the Pill. Negotiations were entered into with the lord of the manor and the commoners for the purpose carrying this resolution into effect, and application was made to the Local Government Board for an alteration in the proposed outfall works. This application was assented to, and on the 21st March, 1872, at a meeting of the Joint Committee, the matter was further discussed, and it was found that the funds required for carrying out the proposed amended outfall works would exceed the sum which had been sanctioned by the sum of £400. It was therefore resolved that the main pipe sewer be carried through at once to the proposed tank, and that the tank be constructed, that the cutting of the dyke be postponed until the other works were completed and other funds provided.
In 1872 the Local Government Board desired the Joint Committee to furnish a report as to what had been done in the matter and, from the report it would appear, that the amended outfall works could not be carried out for want of funds. In the summer of 1874, it was found that, in consequence of the very slight fall in the main sewer, the sewage was not carried off, but remained deposited in the pipes, and led to nuisances and foul smells where the sewage escaped into the soil; and Mr. Pynsent, an owner of considerable property at Westward Ho! caused complaint to be made to the Local Board. The matter was referred to the Joint Committee, who carefully considered it, and determined that some alteration was absolutely needed to improve the outfall, and also to find a means to finish the sewer, and they recommended the Board call in the aid some competent engineer to advise them as to the best and most economical mode of remedying the defect. The Local Board adopted the recommendation, and called in Mr. Ellis, the Surveyor to the Exeter Town Council, who surveyed the works, and recommended the western scheme, with an outfall into the sea, which the Local Board had applied for sanction to adopt.
Mr. Ellis’s scheme was brought before the Joint Committee and adopted by them. It has been found, after the experience of five years, that the sewage will not pass away through the pipes on the Burrows, in consequence of the lowness the level and swampy state of the ground. The applicants are of opinion that Mr. Ellis’s is the only effectual scheme to abate the nuisances which have been repeatedly complained of as existing on the Burrows, and to carry off the drainage of Westward Ho! The Board have only the sum of £360 or thereabouts in their hands to complete the works; and the scheme suggested by Mr. Ellis, with an outfall into the sea, is less expensive, more effectual, and will not a nuisance to anyone. On the other hand, should the Local Government} Board sanctions the continuation of the drainage and outfall across the Burrows, it will meet with great opposition from the commoners, will tend to create a nuisance to the houses adjacent, and to render impure the water the Burrows now used by the cattle of the commoners, and in all probability involve the Local Board in numerous legal proceedings. Mr. Hole said this was the case on behalf of the Northam Local Board, and he proposed to call Mr. Ellis in support of it. Capt.
Molesworth asked who had written the statement of the case, as there were some statements in it respecting committees which were new to him. He did not remember any committees. Mr. Hole read a minute, showing that Captain Molesworth was present at one of the committee meetings. The question was asked by Mr. Pynsent, whether on all former occasions the recommendations of the joint committee had been followed, and whether it was not directed in the year 1870 that all the works of the drainage should be carried out by a joint committee of three members of the Board, under the supervision of the Local Board of Northam. The Rev. I. H. Gosset said he had tried to find out what was the aspect of the committee on that occasion. He found that there were three members belonging to the Westward Ho! district, and three members of the Board; that one on each side was in favour, one on each side against, one neutral, and one (Mr. Knill) absent. It was quite true, as Mr. Pynsent said, things went in accordance with the committee, and it was news to the members of the Board to hear that they outweighed and acted in opposition to the wishes of the memorialists. Mr. Smale observed that although a member remained neutral, he was equally answerable with the rest for the acts done by the committee. Mr. Pynsent said had to complain that those who represented the largest proportion of the population of the district should not have had the opportunity of signing the various presentations made the Board in London. For himself, as representing one-fourth of the land — that was, 77 acres out of 300 — in the district, he felt he had reason to complain that he had never had the opportunity of signing these petitions sent to the Local Government Board. The Rev. I. H. Gosset said Mr. Pynsent was speaking of a different sewer altogether. The Inspector suggested that the best way would be to read the memorials: then they would see what they were. The memorials were then read as follows: —
“WESTWARD HO! DRAINAGE: — To the Secretary of the Local Government Board, London. “Sir, — The inhabitants of the Westward Ho! district have heard with much surprise that the Northam Local Board have applied for and obtained leave to deviate from the plan of drainage sanctioned by the Board and agreed to by the inhabitants of the district some years since; although at a meeting held at Westward only a few weeks since, to which the members of the Northam Local Board were invited, and at which several of them attended, a large majority of the inhabitants passed resolutions strongly protesting against the proposed deviation as most detrimental to the best interests of the district, and forwarded copies of such resolutions to the Northam Local Board summoning officer for the district, I have therefore been instructed to pray that the Board will not allow the works be proceeded with without sending an Inspector to report on the matter and to ascertain the feelings of the inhabitants on the subject. —I am, Sir, yours obediently, H. M. Bazeley.” “Westward Ho! July 6, 1875.”
The Local Government Board, Whitehall, London: “Gentlemen, — We, the undersigned, owners and occupiers of land and houses in the sewerage district within the district of the Northam Local Board, North Devon, having seen in the public press and heard indirectly that you have lately sanctioned a complete change of the outfall of our new drainage system from the East to the West, respectfully protest against the contemplated change, and request that an Inspector from the Board may visit the locality and examine the important question on the spot before it be finally altered on an ex parte statement from the Northam Local Board. We are prepared to show that such an alteration would be detrimental the best interests of this new watering-place and the whole special sewerage district. We object to the contemplated diversion of the outfall, to which we respectfully call your attention forming reasonable grounds for Inquiry on the spot. We should mention that the views of the inhabitants on the subject have been laid before the Local Board, who are acting in direct opposition to their expressed wishes.” — (Signed by 27 owners and occupiers the Westward Ho district.)
A third presentation set forth: — “1, That in October 1869, the then Local Government Authorities decided upon the report of Mr. Morgan, then Inspector, against the scheme drainage outfall to the West, and in favour that to the East. 2, That in January 1870, the district of Westward Ho! agreed to continue to be a part of the Northam Local Board, instead of becoming a separate Board, and that one the express stipulations at the time was that the sewerage system for which it was to pay was to be completed, as already decided and agreed upon, to the eastward, and not the westward. 3, That any departure from such agreement would a breach of faith. 4, That the scheme of drainage then assented to was one for the proper sewerage of the whole district, and not only for that part close to the seashore. 5, That the proposed departure from that scheme will not provide a sewerage outfall, even for all the houses now built in the district, much less for future houses that will undoubtedly be built to the eastward, though all this property has to pay the special sewerage rates. 6, That the proposal to drain part of the district to the westward is a mere temporary evasion of future difficulties. 7, That the whole configuration of the ground and the present natural course of the rainfall overflow point to an eastward outfall and confirm its necessity. 8, That the westward outfall as proposed is contrary to the natural level of the ground. 9, That an outfall into the sea in the very heart of a new and increasing watering-place and health resort, close to the intakes of two| large swimming baths, would be a retrograde movement in sanitary science, and contrary all the experience disastrously earned in many other watering-places. 10, That it can be proved that the improvement of the present sewerage outfall to the eastward is urgently required to drain the public common and the marshy lands, and that the objections raised against such improvement are groundless in themselves and unfair towards the owners and occupiers of this district, West ward Ho! — July 6th, 1875.”
Mr. Ellis was then asked to give his opinion. He said he had examined the ground very carefully, and afterwards made a report, in which he had considered both outfalls, to the east and west, and had come the conclusion that the Westward Ho! direction would be the least likely to give rise to litigation, which he could sew was in the way of extending it in easterly direction. The sewage pipes, laid as they were, had very little fall, and were nearly choked up; and he saw that unless there was a very liberal supply of water chokage would be the result. He saw that to carry it over the Burrow to low-water mark, which was all that could be done to give a satisfactory result, would be a very expensive process; and even after that was done, they would require a liberal supply water to prevent the sewage depositing in the pipes and choking them up. On examining the western direction, he found it much the shortest, and for the purpose of drainage decidedly the quickest way to get it to low water; whilst there was a good fall, and the advantages altogether were certainly in its favour. Upon his stating his opinion, it was suggested to him to carry open dike cut through the Burrow, as a close sewer would be such a great expense; but the great difficulty would still be the want of water to carry the sewage away, and also the objection that cattle would drink of it. Again, the fall was so slight that nuisances would probably arise, and the Local Board be proceeded against by those affected by it. He thought, if the two schemes were examined on their merits, and as they stood, the western was certainly the best; but he proposed also that the sewage should be deodorised, and not only deodorised but completely clarified; and when this was done there would no comparison between the two schemes: in fact, he did not believe the eastern direction would do at all. His scheme embraced all existing housing and eligible building land except some outlying houses in the distance, which could be provided for by a separate process — by a disinfecting tank. Mr. Bailey asked how Mr. Ellis proposed to deal with the overflow of the water in the houses in the low-level Mr. Ellis said in the summertime it would pass through the sub-soil, and in other seasons it would pass over.
The Inspector asked if there was any evidence to show that the works already done had been carried out according to the original scheme. Mr. Risdon, the engineer, explained a plan produced showing the character of the works, so far as completed. Mr. Pynsent asked the contractor if it was not true that there was over 100 feet of 6-inch pipes tacked on to the 12-inch. Mr. Risdon said it was only done a temporary thing. Mr. Pynsent said whether it was temporary not, it had been there four years. There had been 138 poles of piping laid, 132 which was 12-inch piping and six poles of 6-inch piping. It was not possible to expect anything else than that it should choke up. In all length there was only one manhole, which happened to be placed opposite his house — a house which had 20 rooms, besides offices, and 104 feet in front of the balcony of the window. The manhole was covered simply with a quarry stone, without any earth the top of it; neither was it set in mortar. Well might his house not be tenanted. When the sewage pipes got full, it worked up the manhole, and the consequence was that it would lie a black foetid matter for several yards in extent around the manhole and several inches deep. Mr. Risdon said it was expected that the whole of the work would have been completed in one year. Tenders were advertised for and accepted; and what had been done since was only done temporarily because they could not get with it properly. The Inspector asked if any ventilators had been provided and was informed that there were none. Mr. Pynsent said the sewage matter also found its way into Goosey Pool, where the cattle drank. He took a prominent part in opposing the eastern scheme, both on public and private grounds. On public grounds, because it was a public nuisance, and as such the Northam Board could be made answerable for it; and on private grounds, because it was grievous injury to his property. An open sewer would not only be very objectionable, but very expensive to maintain. Besides, whilst 138 poles had only been done, 367 poles remained to be done, and an additional fact was that the Northam Local Board had already expended £800 out of £1,260 they borrowed. The Rev. E. Reynolds asked if he understood that the joint committee had confessed their inability to carry their scheme out, and if it was to be regarded as impracticable? A Voice: We don’t recognise the joint committee.
Capt. Molesworth explained the nature of the arrangement that was made when the joint committee was constituted, and which was really that certain works should carried out for a common purpose, and which they did not desire to separate about. They agreed to a scheme of irrigation, and that was objected to. Then they went on into the easterly scheme, and that went smoothly enough until they called a meeting of the parishioners of Northam, who dictated to the inhabitants the Westward Ho! district; and ever since then the matter had been in abeyance. A great cry had been made about the nuisance of the drainage; but this was the worst time of the year. As to the outfall, it could be seen, and there was plenty of water to carry off the sewage, though it was true, as Mr. Pynsent said, that a certain wash had come up the manhole. If the Northam Board did their duty, it could be easily remedied, and there was no occasion whatever to carry the sewage to the westward, for the eastward was the natural outfall. Mr. Ellis himself did not say that the westward scheme would drain the whole district: indeed, the gradient would not admit of it, and they would have the drainage of Northam going into the Pill, whilst the drainage of the college and a few other houses would be going over the Westward Ho! ground. Considering the Board had already gained the approval of the Secretary of State, it was hard to come upon them again and ask them to alter plans which had been already approved and partly acted upon; and if the Northam Board had carried out that plan, and not allowed themselves to be humbugged by pot-wallopers, they would not have been in their present predicament. The Rev. E. Reynolds said the Board were only too anxious to see the drainage carried out in manner which would be satisfactory to the inhabitants. It was nothing to them, as board, which scheme they adopted, so that the drainage was effective; but they were not allowed to adopt either, being met with opposition on every hand. The joint committee having got into difficulties, which were almost insuperable, turned round upon the Board and said, “Now, carry it out.” Capt. Molesworth said it was no longer a matter for the joint committee when it reached that stage: it was for the Northam Board to carry it out. When the Local Government Board accepted the plan to the eastward, they, as committee, were done with it, and the Northam Board should have carried it out.
The Rev. I. H. Gosset then read a lengthy statement he had prepared, giving a number of reasons why it was preferable to adopt the eastern scheme over the western scheme of drainage; and giving a history of the proceedings from the beginning to the present stage. He was an advocate of having the Pill deepened, and the outfall completed, when, he said, they would find there was ample flushing power to clear the sewer of all sediment or deposit, there being a quantity of water available for the purpose. The Northam Board, however, said they could not complete that plan, owing the opposition of the parishioners. It was their duty overcome prejudice and dispel ignorance; instead of which they were encouraging prejudice and putting ignorance on the back. A bank could be formed, and a dyke could be cut, and a deodorising tank, if necessary, could be placed. It turned out, however, that when the tenders were sent in, they were considerably in excess of the money available, and the want of money to carry it out was the great obstruction. It was perfectly clear him that the Pill was the natural course of the drainage. It was engineer’s question, and they could safely leave it in the Inspector’s hands; but he did not think Mr. Ellis’s plan would ever be sanctioned. As for deodorising tanks, they would be found costly playthings.
Mr. Pynsent observed that Mr. Ellis was a man who stood high in his profession, and the words a practicable man were of value and much more serviceable than a statement made by man who was no engineer. The Rev. E. Reynolds said he should very much like to see the deepening of the Pill; but the Northam Board was under the impression that they could not deepen it in opposition to the wishes the parishioners, and he should like to ask the question of the Inspector whether they could in the face of opposition. The Inspector said they could most certainly lay a sewer, but the Act did not say whether it should be open or a closed sewer. The Rev. E. Reynolds said the Board were anxious to carry out whatever scheme was approved of. They did not care whether it went the east or the west. Capt. Molesworth said he was glad to hear it. They only wanted the subject ventilated, so that proper drainage should be secured, and he was very much obliged to Mr. Pynsent for bringing the matter before them. The Local Board, he believed, had ever been most anxious to meet the desires of the district, and had only failed because they did not know the extent of their powers. He really did not think it was so much a question of personal feeling as a question of ignorance with them. If they deepened the Pill, it would be a great blessing, not only to the parishioners of Northam, but to the inhabitants of Westward Ho! as well. The Inspector said if the sewage was perfectly deodorised it would not be a nuisance to anybody, whichever way it went. Mr. Williams, of Appledore, said the Northam Board went with the parish in support of Mr. Ellis’s scheme for taking the sewage to the westward. They had examined it, and recommended it, and knew that it would be effectual.
The Inspector here asked questions of Mr. Ellis, as how he would prevent the wash of the sewage back upon the shore, to his mode of deodorising, and as to the quantity of water at command. Mr. Ellis explained the set of the tides, and the principle he should adopt of deodorisiug the sewage. Captain Molesworth answered the question as to the amount of water, saying that there was a great quantity always on the Burrows, which came down from the hills. Mr. Pickard said he did not know that. In fact, he had known Goosey-pool dry for months at time. He defended the Northam Board in the action they had taken in the matter and said all the Board objected to was an open dike from Goosey-pool to the Western Burrows; and he was sure the proposition would be resisted in the parish almost to a man. If they must go that way it must be by pipes: they would not have an open cesspit on their common. The Inspector asked Mr. Ellis what population he had made provision for in his deodorising tanks. Mr. Ellis replied, for a population of 4,000, which was as much as they were ever likely to require. The Inspector did not think they would take the sewage from that number. Mr. Smale opposed the proposal to go over the Burrows, on the ground that it was nearly a dead level, and that it would not afford satisfactory outfall for the sewage matter. The Northam Board had had the opinion a neighbouring gentleman, a surveyor, who told them that the gradient was so small — something like 1 in 500 — that it would be very difficult to get a fall at all. Another difficulty with them was that it was proposed to have an open sewer. The Inspector said he knew an instance where a good fall was obtained from a gradient of but 1 in 1,760, and that the sewage passed through it with great velocity. Mr. Pynsent observed that the pipes which had been laid down on the Burrows did not carry off the sewage. The Inspector said that arose probably from the defective way in which they had been laid. Mr. Smale strongly urged the western scheme and said he did not think the passage of the sewage into the sea would do any harm to the baths. The Inspector said there was such a thing as a fancied nuisance, as well as a real nuisance. Mr. Beer said he did not think an open sewer would be any nuisance on the Burrows, although he lived there, because there would be always water to carry it off. Mr. Pynsent put in a statement showing the number of cattle and sheep which were pastured on the Burrows, and which would drink of the impure water; when it was observed that sheep very seldom drank, and never on pasture. They might drink when being driven a dusty road. The Inspector observed that it had not been ascertained that cattle suffered from drinking water tainted with sewage. Milk had been known to taste of it, but then it had been found out that the pails had been washed with sewage water. The enquiry then closed, the Inspector and most of the interested parties proceeding with him down to the Burrows, examining the manhole causing the nuisance complained of by Mr. Pynsent, and then proceeding to examine the Burrows generally, in the direction of the proposed outfall.
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