Tag: North Devon Journal

North Devon Journal: Thursday 20th June 1878

Northam Local Board: A meeting of this Board was held on Saturday in the vestry-room, Northam. Mr. Pickard in the chair … (list of attendees and reading of correspondence including from the Local Governing Board regarding Westward Ho! and its exemption from payment of Appledore drainage costs) … The Board at the same time direct me to enclose a copy of a communication which they have received from Mr. Pynsent with reference to the drainage of Westward Ho! and to request that they may be furnished with the observations of the Local Board on the subject … Captain Sangster said Westward Ho! was the best off, having all their roads made for them; and in reference to Mr. Pynsent’s letter, he (Captain Sangster) moved at a previous meeting that the Pympley scheme be carried out; but, having no seconder, it fell to the ground …  

[see similar, Exeter and Plymouth Gazette: Friday 21st June 1878]

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

North Devon Journal: Thursday 14th December 1876

To the Editor of the “North Devon Journal”: “Sanitary proceedings at Westward Ho! – A Farce in several acts, performed for the last six years and more by local Amateur Performers. Act the last- Building a Golf Club House and objecting to its purification though attainable without cost to its Owners.” Sir. — All and every one having at heart the true interests of the new watering-place, Westward Ho!, may feel truly indebted to you, for the fair and full report of the meeting on the drainage question, held lately at its Bath-room, which appeared in a recent issue the ‘North Devon Journal,’ inasmuch that the result may be, that from the publicity thus given through the press, those who have persistently obstructed every remedy for evils by their own acts created, may regard it as their interest, now that the state of things has become more known, to abandon from henceforth their course of obstructive action. My object, however, now addressing you, is to point out one paragraph (in your generally most correct report the meeting) affecting myself, which does not correctly give that, at least, which I intended to say.

The report reads thus — “Mr. Pynsent produced a bottle, nearly full, of a thick, black liquid, which he said came from one of the tanks,” etc., etc. Now, for anyone to produce liquid taken from a sewerage tank, in order to prove that it contained sewage matter, would certainty have been a superfluous and ridiculous act, What, however, I did desire to state was this, that the black liquid contents of the bottle produced were taken from water, clear as crystal, which percolates through clay subsoil, abutting on a large cesspit immediately in front the balcony the newly erected Golf Club House, which cesspit has become denuded by the high tides of the spring and autumn of the present year,  that both the Pebble Ridge and boundary fence in face the Club House are going, going, and almost gone, through greater force than was ever wielded by knock down hammer auctioneer: that, as may be seen by anyone, the redbrick ventilating shaft of the said tank has been laid bare and exposed to view through the force of the incoming waves – that the fate this cesspit is certain, its destruction by the waves a mere question time – and yet, though the schemes No. 2 and No. 3 of Mr. Ellis, the civil engineer, which my motion at the meeting recommended the choice for adoption by the Government Board, Whitehall, would have superseded these tanks, through the construction of tanks elsewhere, yet the motion was rejected at the meeting by, as reported, s majority of three of those present. A further object I had in producing the bottle was this: —Knowing that the effluvia pervading the Club House had been complained of, I considered the sight of the black liquid might afford to some members present evidence of the cause thereof, learning, as did, their complaint thereon had been made light of, and. Credat Judaeus!” its origin attributed to gas. A few words more on this unhappy Club House: Its date of erection being 1875-76 will serve to show with what lack of wisdom the world — at Westward Ho! is governed as, for example, in 1871, when the sewerage works were carried out, two cess pits for the sewage, one round, the other square, were formed, near to each other and near to the sea. Land, close thereunto, and a little more inland, has since been selected as the chosen site of the Golf Club House. The sea, however, will soon set all smooth and square by removing, at one fell swoop, tanks, border fence, and Pebble Ridge.

As to the Club House itself, certain of its members are contemplating the project removing it all, intact and entire, by aid of machinery, after the plan contemplated with respect to the Baptistery at Ravenna, submerged by Adriatic Sea and sands in the middle-ages. I apprehend, however, that the suggested plan, or if not that, the stones of the Club House, would one or both fall through. I have visited both the Baptistery and Club House. The project with regard to the former is for raising only, and not for removing to another site. Neither project do I regard, a safe or profitable investment. After all, however, there is something classical in the idea with respect to this Club House site. Ancient had its Cloaca Maxima, and its tutelary deity thereof in the Pagan goddess Cloacina. “Parvis componere magna.” Why should not Westward Ho! also? Her Cloaca greatly needed protection. When last in Rome, some two or three years since, I viewed the mouth the Cloaca Maxima, at its junction with the “Yellow Tiber.” Though dating from the time Tarquinius Priscua, well-nigh 25 centuries ago, it still performs its work; whereas alas! the Cloaca of Westward Ho! the work of A.D. 1871, in contrast with those of B.C. 688, have long since come to grief.

The more modern works, it appears by a letter read at a recent Northam Board meeting (reported in your last), are after the manner carried out at Salisbury, I know not whether the Salisbury model comprised that carried out at Westward Ho! of commencing with pipes of 12-inch diameter, with 6-inch pipes in continuation, if so, I consider it would have been better to have followed, if not the manner of Old Sarum, at all events that of Ancient Rome. But then, it may be urged, every principle in ancient Rome had its guardian deity and every deity his or her temple, and to erect at Westward Ho! temple to Cloacina would have been costly, especially for a Joint Stock Company “limited,” and this unavoidable omission may have been the cause of failure. In Rome, notwithstanding the change from Paganism to a purer faith, the temple system still goes on. The temple of Apollo, when that worship ceased, was dedicated to the martyr Apollonaris; and that of Mars, involving also small change in name, to the martyred Martina, expressed in the well-known lines: “Mars hence expell’d, Martina, martyr’d maid, Claims now the worship which to him was paid.” A few words more, however, before quitting the Club House. Was it fair, or was it right when obtaining aid from afar for its erection, from strangers from a distance, from Scotland, London, Blackheath, and elsewhere, to withhold from them information as to what lay in concealment almost within the chosen site for the temple edifice? This the native golfers must themselves have known but did they name it? The dangers from the Atlantic waves were, of course, apparent.

I can only picture to my-self some enterprising golfer from afar, a resident in some distant town, who may have arrived at Westward Ho! to play golf, inhale ozone, with pure Atlantic sea-borne air, soliloquising thus, on the Club Home balcony — “What! I though the healthful breezes Blow fresh o’er Lundy’s Isle, When the Cloaca ‘neath our Club they cross, alas their scent is ……” To you, gentle reader, I leave it to supply a word, to furnish “reason and supply the rhyme” for this last unfinished line, premising only that the word supplied should not be redolent either of otto of roses or earn de cologne.

As, however, I have a full mile and a half to travel from west to east across the Northam Burrows to Appledore, in order to complete my narrative, I must move onwards either in poetry or prose: and as I have been prosaic enough, I fear, in what I have already written I will essay to convey my meaning principally in verse. The Poet Coleridge, being of enquiring turn of mind, when on a visit to Cologne, discovered (as reported in Murray) after careful exploration from 30 to 40 (I forget the exact number) distinct and definite perfumes in that ancient city, not one of which bore the most remote resemblance to Eau de Cologne, the far-famed special manufacture of the place. He thus immortalized his discovery in verse: – “The river Rhine, it is well known, Doth wash the city of Cologne. Tell me, ye Gods! what powers divine Shall henceforth wash the river Rhine.” Unhappily, at Westward Ho! we have no poet to celebrate the wise actions of its sanitary leaders and set forth what they have brought us. Coleridge have we, and soon, alas! may we have to deplore the loss our far famed Pebbleridge — disputed by winds and waves. A parody, however, on the above lines Coleridge having application to the cases of Westward Ho and Appledore, in absence of better, may run thus: — “Consequences which most result from sewage drains across the Burrows.” “The Taw and Torridge lave the shore, Of bright and beauteous Appledore, In progress toward the sea; Black waters — ‘l’ eau de Westward Ho! Slowly advancing, thither flow, Meandering o’er the lea. The Ebb Tide bears them toward the Main, The Flood Tide brings them back again, The Pools their ebon sweets retain, Thenceforward, for aye.” Now for a few lines after Butler’s Hudibras, and considerably after: – “Alas! alas! in such quandary – Is placed our glorious estuary, Oh! may it end next January, When down th’ Inspector comes.” In conclusion, I give you my address: – “I pen these lines at ‘ Ilfordleigh’ – In the well drain’d health resort — Torquay — And remain yours ever faithfully, THOMAS PYNSENT. December 9, 1876. N.B. — Torquay is expending £70,000 in drainage works in order to merit its well-earned title “Health resort”; whereas the sanitary leaders of Westward Ho! last week rejected both the plans submitted one involving an outlay £579 5s., the other of £375 only — providing fully for the removal of recently created nuisances.

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

North Devon Journal: Thursday 30th November 1976

WESTWARD HO! – THE DRAINAGE QUESTION: On Monday afternoon a lively but extremely erratic meeting of the Drainage Committee and the inhabitants of Westward Ho! was held Adams’s Baths, for the purpose of taking into consideration the drainage question, and of adopting the best scheme for carrying out the same. General Hutchinson was called to the chair, and there were also present — the Rev. I H. Gosset, (vicar of Northam,) Colonel Wheeler, Captain Molesworth, Dr. Hemmings, Mr. Pynsent, Mr. Price. Mr. Sangster. Mr. Ellis, Mr. Prior. Mr. Adams, Mr. Henderson, Sergeant Murray, Mr. Beer, Mr. Mill, Mr. Cawsey, and Mr. Bazeley (honourary summoning offices). Mr. Bazeley opened the proceeding by stating that that meeting had been called to consider the amended plans of Mr. Ellis (of Exeter) for draining to the eastward, in accordance with a letter read from the Clerk to the Northam Local Board to obtain the views of habitants of the district upon the subject. An amended report had been received from Mr. Ellis, but the amended plan to which that report referred had not come to hand. He had two in his possession at the present time, but they did not tally with the report. He had that morning been to the offices of Messrs. Hole and Peard solicitors, Bideford, and was there informed that the two plans were to be taken together; but it was his opinion that there “was a third, for he did not see how the report could correspond with the others. Mr. Pynsent enquired why it was that several gentlemen including two of the largest farmers of the district had not been summoned to attend the meeting. Mr. Bazeley said he hardly knew in what position he stood in regard to the whole question. He had given his services as summoning officer for several years and had received no acknowledgment my kind. If any gentleman had not received notice of the meeting, he was sorry for it, but at the same time he did not think it right that the blame should be cast upon him, for he could not be expected act as errand-boy. Mr. Price said that be represented the largest amount life in the parish, and yet he had never been summoned to attend any of the meetings which had been held to consider the drainage question; He had always been somewhat of an intruder, but they had been kind enough not to kick him out. Mr. Bazeley repeated that it was not his fault that anyone had been passed over and added that it had been the custom for the Secretary at the Hotel Company to call the meeting, and that on that occasion he had requested him to send the notices round. Mr. Pynsent farther said that in 1870 it was decided that the drainage works of Westward should be carried out by a joint committee, consisting of three members connected with the Local Board and three landowners and he complained that they had not been summoned separately. Mr. Bazeley said he had been informed at Mr. Hole’s office that Mr. Pynsent’s name did not appear on the books at all.

Mr. Pynsent said that he was appointed on the committee when the money was nearly all spent. The other day he was summoned by Mr. Hole to attend a meeting of the joint committee at Northam, which was to be held at half-past ten. There was a meeting of the Local Board at eleven o’clock in the same room, and as an official was ten minutes late there were only 20 minutes allowed for the discussion of the subject. As to Mr. Bazeley’s remark that he had never been paid for all the trouble he had taken, he most look to the “obstructives” for it, for he would never get it from the district. Capt. Molesworth said that Mr. Bazeley had never been actually appointed summoning officer: and the Chairman observed that he was sure that the remissness complained of must have arisen from mistake, and not from any dishonourable intention. Mr. Bazeley said he did not think there was any question involved the legality the meeting, for that was not an element of it at all, it being simply held for the purpose of obtaining the views of as many of the ratepayers as possible. The Rev. I. H. Gosset thought that in the absence of the proper documents it would be perfectly futile to go into the question. He had read Mr. Ellis’s amended report carefully and it appeared to him certain that it referred to a plan which had not yet come to hand. But which had evidently been at the office of the Local Government Board. He therefore proposed that the matter be adjourned until Friday, and that the adjournment be notified to Mr. Hole Clerk to the Northam Local Board, with the expression of hope that he would procure the amended plan by that day. Mr. Pynsent protested strongly against the adjournment and denounced the persistent opposition which had been manifested towards the improvement of the drainage of Westward Ho! for nearly two years, for nearly so long ago as that that Mr. Ellis was first called in. He asked what was the state of the Burrows at the present time? Why, in June last the Medical Officer of the Northam Local Board made an examination, when he pronounced that there existed a most dangerous nuisance; and that nuisance had obtained ever since, for at every meeting which had been called with the view remedying it, obstructive policy, has been advocated and supported by some gentlemen.

In June of 1876, the Northam Local Board opened 220 feet of drainage on the Burrows, at which time an action was pending; they opened a new 220 feet, in order to form an open gutter, and it was within a month from that time that the medical officer reported the presence a most dangerous nuisance. The Board also took up pipes which exposed an additional 100 feet of sewage, and then at the end of this there was a natural gulley 198 feet long, and 198 feet long and from six to seven feet in breadth, so that there was at present 580 feet of open sewage drain the Burrow. Then after the sewage passed from the drains, it flowed into two large pools, called the Goosey Pools, the acreage which he could not exactly give, because it depended upon the inroad of the sea and the water which came down from the hills. That was the present of Westward Ho! Captain Molesworth (interjecting): It is not in Westward Ho! Mr. Pynsent: I say it is. We pay no rates, and it is not in the parish of Northam, but in the district of Westward Ho! Captain Molesworth repeated his assertion, when Mr. Pynsent begged to say, subject to the interruption of Captain, that it was composed of lodging-houses, the inhabitants of which had complained greatly of the offensive smell to which they were exposed but had been afraid to say too much because it might injure the reputation of their houses.  Continuing his observations at the point which he was interrupted, Mr. Pynsent said that the services of Mr. Ellis were brought into requisition in December 1874, after the things he had been describing had been going on for three years and he, Mr. Ellis, recommended a plan for draining into the sea to the westward, which was violently resisted by an organised opposition. He was quite ready to grant that the people of Westward Ho! might have felt that they had a grievance, for they perhaps feared that the scheme, if carried out, would be prejudicial to their health. But however, that might be, they succeeded in overthrowing it, he and wanted to know why, having carried their point in that instance, they persisted in opposing everything which had been suggested since. Mr. Ellis had since brought forward two other schemes for draining to the eastward, and they, were met by the same spirit of antagonism, which-seemed to have had the effect of suppressing one of the plans. Mr. Gosset solemnly denied that the document had come hand, and said that if it had, he should not have moved for an adjournment.

Mr. Pynsent continuing, read an extract from the report of the directors of the Hotel Company, dated August 1871, in which they congratulated the shareholders on th drainage sewage works having been carried out beyond the Company’s estate. He complained that the nuisance had actually been deposited at other persons’ doors, including his, a cesspool having been made in front of his house. Capt. Molesworth: You are mistaken. Mr. Pvnsent: Indeed, I am not; I can swear to it. Capt. Molesworth: It was your own cesspool. It was there before you came. Mr. Pynsent indignantly re-asserted that his statement was correct and read a letter from a reverend gentleman in which testimony was borne to the extreme offensiveness of the nuisance which arose from the sewage exposed in front of the Pebble Ridge Hotel. Capt. Molesworth: The smell came from your own drains. Mr. Pynsent: I can take my solemn oath it did not. The Chairman here interposed with a suggestion that all were satisfied that the drainage was in a very bad condition, and that what they were met to consider the best means of remedying it: the origin did not signify. Mr. Gosset begged to protest against Mr. Pynsent’s insinuations that he was actuated by any spirit of opposition. It was not a question of obstruction at all, and his sole object in making the proposition on that occasion was because he thought it would be a waste of time to attempt to argue the question out from the documents before them. Mr. Pynsent: What objection is there to Mr. Ellis’s second plan?  Mr. Gosset: It was objected to at a previous meeting. Mr. Pynsent: It is prepared by a competent man. Mr. Bazelev: It does not appear that the district is satisfied as to his competency. The plan has been objected to by the landowners and other ratepayers of the district. The amended report of Mr. Ellis was then read by Mr. Bazeley, and it appeared theretofrom that he proposed to carry the sewage to the eastward into the deep part of Goosey Pool, but not to extend it so far as Pimpley, as had been contemplated in plan No. 2. Mr. Wren added his testimony to that of Mr. Gosset and other gentlemen that the report did not refer to either of the plans before the meeting, and he mentioned that the Northam Local Board had had the proper one before them.

Mr. Pynsent produced a bottle nearly fall of a thick black liquid, which he said came from one of the tanks, and grimly invited any gentleman who did not choose to take his word to the offensiveness of the effluvium arising from the tanks to smell or taste the contents of the said bottle — an invitation the generosity of which was evidently not appreciated, for it was not accepted, notwithstanding that Mr. Pynsent repeated it more than once. Dr. Hemming said it was quite certain, from having inspected Mr. Ellis’s plans, that the sewage would have to upon a still higher level than he had recommended. Irrigation had been approved of by Local Boards of late, and that was the only system of deodorisation which he believed to be effective; and in order to ensure its effectiveness the filtration should be deep as possible. If they took sewage to Appledore it must be deodorized before it got there, or else the inhabitants would turn round upon them and compel them to take it elsewhere; and, having taken independent view of the whole question, he believed that both plans should be adopted: id they were able to carry out both, so much the better, and if not they could carry only one them, he would suggest that a Committee be formed of gentlemen who were favourably disposed towards the various schemes, and that the matter be left with them, to construct a system of works which he hoped would give satisfaction to all, interested. He was certainly of opinion that they must have a higher level than that proposed by Mr. Ellis. Mr. Pynsent said that according Mr. Ellis’s second plan the works would cost £579 5s; and by his last plan, which was following the same route, but only going part of the way, the cost would be £375, to meet which there was the sum of £360, which had been in the Bideford Bank since 1870, when it was borrowed for the special use of the Westward Ho! district. He was of opinion that they should carry out the plans before them far they went, and if they were not effective, they could be improved upon. He proposed “That this meeting, after a long discussion, has come, to the determination to recommend that either Mr. Ellis’s second plan of draining to Pimpley, or his amended plan of taking the sewage to Goosey Pool, be carried out, whichever meets with the approval the Local Government Board.”

In reply to the observation that the plans had already been disapproved of, Mr. Pynsent said that the disapproval was only expressed of a point of detail, and not as to the line of route. Capt. Molesworth quite agreed in the observations which had fallen from Dr. Hemmings with reference to irrigation and said that that was the principle which they had always advocated. Mr. Latham proposed scheme of irrigation to the Northam Local Board some years ago, but it was not adopted, and he remembered remarking at the time that either Mr. Pynsent or someone else, would agitate for something being done. The plan of Mr. Latham, who was one of the best engineers in London, was approved of by the Local Government Board and by the Committee of the Local Board, and he wanted to know what reason there was as to why it should not be carried out now. He had been requested to write the Local Government Board, informing that body of the opinion of the inhabitants, and he intended to write them to the effect that they were favourably disposed towards Mr. Latham’s amended plan; that the plans of Mr. Ellis were incomplete, complicated, and expensive, and made no provision for Westward Ho! and that the only scheme which really met the requirements of the district was Mr. Latham’s.

In conclusion, the speaker remarked on the advisability of Westward Ho! having a Local Board of its own and managing its own affairs. Mr. Pynsent expressed himself as being averse to the separation of Westward Ho! from the parish. Mr. Wren, referring to an unpleasant reflection which had been made upon the Northam Local Board, of which he was Chairman, said that they were quite as interested the matter, and equally anxious to deal with it in the most effectual manner, as any gentleman present; but their difficulty was to fix upon the most suitable method of disposing of the sewage; and it must not be forgotten that the responsibility connected with the subject was cast upon them and not upon meetings such that. After Mr. Beer had indulged in quite a variety of forcibly-expressed vituperations against the inefficiency and the prejudices of the Local Board, Mr. Price seconded Mr. Pynsent’s motion, and at his suggestion the motion was altered, as follows “That this meeting has come to the determination to recommend that either Mr. Ellis’s second plan of draining to Pimpley, or his amended plan taking the sewage only to Goosey Pool, be carried out, whichever meets with the approval of the Board; and that if the levels could be taken rather higher it would be still better.” Capt. Molesworth moved as an amendment that Mr. Latham’s plan be adopted, and stated that did so, amongst other reasons, because Mr. Ellis’s scheme did not deal with the lower level houses; that it would necessitate there being a number of cesspool pits on the Burrows, which now caused the effluvium; and that a great deal of building land would not be available for the future drainage of the place. Mr. Beer the amendment, which was supported Mr. Gosset, who said that very recently he was reading a book upon drainage by an influential man, of some years standing, who advised that in all matters of drainage one must endeavour to follow Nature. Nature said as plainly as possible — “Drain in the direction of the pool down into the estuary, and if the fall is not sufficient the only thing you have to do is to increase the outfall.

A good deal of ridicule had been thrown upon the present system of drainage, but he maintained that there was no occasion for it, and if there had been a proper outfall, he believed that it would have answered perfectly. A remark had been made that a large quantity of water from the Burrows would damage the channel; but he was of a different opinion, because why should not the water destroy the pool at the present time? The water would run up a little quicker, but it would scour it and keep it open, and all that would be necessary would be a few occasional repairs. He therefore thought that the way suggested by Nature as the way to be improved upon by Art was to carry the drainage to the eastward into the estuary. He believed that method was agreed to by all parties some years ago, and even the parish of Northam gave its consent, but at the last moment it turned round upon them and threw some obstacles in the way. He looked upon Mr. Ellis’s plans as being, so far as he understood them, miserable plans. He considered the proposal to have a number of disinfecting tanks in the Burrows a despicable one. If it were, necessary to have a disinfecting tank, let; them have one, and let the water go into the deepened pool. It would then be out of the way, but to have a number of them scattered about he looked upon as a simple absurdity. The expense would all fall upon the North Local Board, and he certainly should not recommend that body incur liabilities for which there was no necessity. As to the remark that Mr. Ellis was a good engineer, certainly he had no high opinion of his ability. He had sent them report after report written in bad English and failing to explain himself all; and could only say that had never seen such reports turned out of any one’s office. They had apparently been copied by a clerk, who had not taken the trouble to punctuate them, so as to make them legible. Mr. Pynsent protested against a man of Mr. Ellis’s ability and experience being spoken of in such terms as those employed by the reverend gentleman; when Capt. Molesworth denied Mr. Ellis’s title to be called a man of experience, and said he was only a mason. Mr. Pynsent again raised his protest, and Mr. Price said that they had seen enough of Mr. Ellis know that he was a man of ability.

Mr. Price made the following addendum to the motion of which he was seconder: “And that the plan of tanks be modified according to the suggestion of the Local Government Board.” The amendment was then put to the meeting and carried, the-voting being as follows: For: The Chairman, Rev. I. H. Goseett, Col Wheeler, Capt. Molesworth, Dr. Hemmings, Mr. Ellis, Mr. Prior, Mr, Adams, Mr, Henderson, Mr. Beer, Mr. Bazeley, and Sergt. Murray: Against — Mr. Pynsent, Mr. Price, Mr. Sangster, Mr. Mill, and Mr. Cawasy. Mr. Pynsent requested Mr. Bazeley to record the names of the gentlemen who voted, which he was proceeding to do when, Mr. Pynsent accused him of putting down the name of Mr. Ellis having voted for the amendment, when he did not hold up his hand; This accusation Mr. Bazeley warmly resented, and on Mr. Ellis being appealed to, he said that he did hold up his hand. Mr. Price boasted that if he had had information of the meeting sooner than did, he could have packed the room so as to carry his point, which opinion Captain Moleeworth with equal confidence disputed. After the division Mr. Sangster, who had not previously raised the question, said that the meeting was illegal because the whole of the inhabitants had not been summoned to attend, and that therefore the amendment could not be said to represent the opinions of the inhabitants of Westward Ho! No notice was taken of the objection beyond the Chairman pointing out that it would only have been fair if Mr. Sangster had mooted the point before the division. The proceedings then terminated with a vote of thanks to the Chairman for the impartial manner in which he had acted as President, proposed by Mr. Pynsent.

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

North Devon Journal: Thursday 9th November 1876

NORTHAM. Board: Saturday: A. R. Wren Esq., J. P., chairman; also, present Capt. Molesworth, Messrs. B. Pickard, Sandercock, Bellew, Hevwood, Kelly, Cawsey, Lemon, Reynolds, Williams, Tucker, and Bissett. — Mrs. Stapledon attended, stated that the Board, having purchased two houses at West Appledore from her for the purpose of widening the street, had now she understood, demurred to the title. … … …Estimates for a general district rate were presented, which amounted to £369 8s 6d. To meet this estimate, a rate 1s. 4d. in the pound was proposed and carried. — It was proposed by Mr. Williams, and seconded by Mr. B. Pickard, “That the money borrowed on the Westward Ho! drainage account (£150) be paid off.” — Carried. —Previous to the genera! meeting of the Local Board there was a meeting of the Westward Ho! Drainage Committee, at which there were present Messrs. T. Pynsent (in the chair), Lemon, Beer, and Cawsey. The meeting was held to consider the plans of Mr. Ellis, C.E., and after a long discussion the Chairman moved, “That the most economical plan be carried out, at the cost of £360, if effectually done, with a guarantee from Mr. Ellis;” but there being no seconder the motion fell to the ground.

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

North Devon Journal: Thursday 19th October 1876

Hillsborough, Northam: Oct. 13, 1376. Sir, —The Bideford and Plymouth papers of Tuesday, and the ‘North Devon Journal’ of Thursday, give in almost the same words a report of the meeting of the Northam Local Board on Saturday, the 7th inst.  I infer there from that each of these reports was supplied by the same reporter. One paragraph of this report, in which my name appears, is certainly not accurate it runs thus — “Mr. Pynsent applied for an improvement of the road from Jacket’s-lane Bridge to Northam Burrows. Mr. Lemon moved, and Mr. B. Piclcard seconded, that the improvement should carried out. Mr. E. Williams moved, and Mr. Basset seconded, as an amendment, that it should not be carried out. Seven voted for the amendment and four against it. The amendment was therefore carried.” The inference that any one reading the above statement would draw there from would be, that I desired to put the ratepayers of Northam to expenses for improvement of a road, whereas my application by letter, which was of course read at the Board meeting, and which I append a copy, was simply to obtain the sanction of the Local Board to carry out by voluntary subscriptions in cash and cart labour, under the supervision of the Surveyor of the Board, a footpath, alongside of the road leading from Northam village to the Burrows, commencing at a point below the broadest part of the space between the hedges, which part is now utilized for deposit and breaking stones for road repairs. Further, I should have been prepared, under sanction of the Burrows Committee, when obtained, to have carted rubble stones wherewith to fill up the deep ruts of the road on the Burrows at its principal entrance at Pimpley, and also to place some on the arch of the adjacent bridge, now almost dangerous to ride drive over, the stonework of the arch having little metalling thereon. Towards effecting these small improvements, I sought from the Board no aid, and expected none. Opposition and obstruction my proposal got, which truly I was unprepared for, recollecting, as I did, a precedent, that about a year or two ago the Board had sanctioned a similar improvement namely, a subscription footpath from the road at Edy Cross to Northam Cross. To make the case quite clear, I subjoin a copy of my letter the Clerk of the Board, and his reply thereto, subsequent to the Board meeting.

[COPY OF LETTER.] Hillsborough, Northam, Oct. 6, 1876, Drear Sir, —As it appears to me that circumstances are at present very favourable for carrying out the following improvement, I write to request that you will lay this statement before the Local Board at their next meeting. – Yours truly, Thomas Pynsent: Charles Hole, Esq., Clerk to the Northam Local Board: “Suggested footpath along the lower part of the road leading from Northam to the Burrows at Pimpley, commencing near the Bridge, at the west end of Jacket’s lane, being below the wide part of the road now used for the deposit and breakage of stones, for road repairs. “There is now, belonging to James Blackford, in Hillsborough Quarry, a large heap of stones computed at 120 yards, which, as shown in the accompanying paper, written out by him, he agrees to sell for L1 10s. In the event of the above improvement receiving the sanction of the Northam Local Board, I will endeavour to provide subscriptions in cash for the purchase of the above stones, and for the discharge of some other incidental expenses for labour in loading the carts and spreading the stones, together with voluntary aid in cart labour for drawing the stones and depositing them at such places along the road as the Surveyor to the Board may direct”. With the above was sent to the Clerk of the Board the original of James Blackford’s terms, as follows: — October 5, 1876. Sir, — I have put back a heap of rubble stone in the centre of Hillsborough Quarry, amounting to about 120 yards, which I will sell, if it be required, for the sum of one pound ten shillings —£1 10s — Yours truly, James Blackford. To Thos. Pynsent, Esq., Hillsborough:

I subjoin a copy a letter which reached me by yesterday’s post. Northam Local Board Office, Willett Street, 11th October 1876. Dear Sir, — I am directed by the above Board to acknowledge the receipt of your letter the 6th inst, and to inform you that this Board will not consent to the improvement being carried out by you. Yours truly, C. W. Hole, Clerk: T. Pynsent, Esq., Hillsboro’, Northam. There is surely much to be learned from the above although, but few words are used; they may be regarded as a declaration of the principles which actuate the intelligent majority of this Honourable Board. First comes the candid admission, that the formation the proposed footpath would be ” improvement: Second, the using the term “being carried out by you” shows that “This Board” at 1east knew this, that the carrying out the suggested “improvement” would cost the parish nothing. Third, the climax of absurdity and obstruction is now attained by the resolution passed that this Board would note consent to the “improvements”. An honest and candid declaration truly of the principles of action, or rather inaction, which guides the conduct of the majority of the members of this model Local Board, which may be briefly summed up “This Board will not submit to improvements though the cost is nothing”. Able proficients indeed are too many of its members, of the class, so happily described by Dickens as skilled in the practice of “How not to do it”. I remain, yours truly, THOS. PYNSENT

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

North Devon Journal: Thursday 12th October 1876

Northam: The Northam Local Board met in the vestry room, on Saturday, A. B. Wren, Esq., J.P., chairman. There were also present — General Hutchinson, Messrs. Williams, W. Pickard, B. Pickard, Parkhouse, Penhorwood, Bassett, Lemon, Cock, Tucker, and Cawsey. The Clerk reported that had seen Mr. Bencraft respecting Mrs. Stapledon’s two houses about to be purchased by the Local Board for widening Irsha-street and found that there could not be a legal title, the Crown might step in and take it. … …. Mr. Pynsent applied for an improvement of the road from Jacket-lane Bridge to Burrows. Mr. Lemon moved, and Mr. B. Pickard seconded, that the improvement suggested should be carried out — Mr. E. Williams moved, and Mr. Bassett seconded, an amendment, that it should not be carried out. — Seven voted for the amendment, and four against it. The amendment was therefore carried.

[see also Exeter and Plymouth Gazette: Friday 13th October 1876 and Exeter and Plymouth Gazette Daily Telegrams: Monday 9th October 1876]

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

North Devon Journal: Thursday 25th May 1876

Northam: Local Board: This Board met at the vestry-room on Saturday, A. B. Wren, Esq., J.P., in the chair. Also present, Messrs. Tucker, Pickard, Penhorwood, Williams, Bellew, Cawsey, Lemon, Heywood, Bassett, Cook, and Captain Molesworth. — A letter was read from the Auditor, cautioning the Board not to overdraw their account, and also stating that the Collector had only one surety, and that the Treasury had no surety. —A letter was read from the Local Government Board, recommending that another engineer should be called in, respecting the Westward Ho! drainage in consequence of the parties not agreeing. — Mr. Williams: We have had several engineers already, and plans made out, and the Westward Ho! Company objected to them. — Captain Molesworth said the Company did not object, but Mrs. Pynsent did. They stuck to the original plan and were quite satisfied with their drainage. — The Chairman stated that something must be done, as he had had two threatening letters from Mrs. Pysent’s solicitor, Mr. Stubbins, respecting the nuisance by her property. — Mr. Pickard: I do not see how we are to act; we have had several engineers, and they have failed. — Captain Molesworth was of opinion that if the pipes were cleared, they would choke again, unless the pit was deepened, in order to have a good 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

North Devon Journal: Thursday 27th April 1876

Northam: Local Board: This Board met at the Vestry Room on Saturday last. This being the first meeting after the election, Messrs. Heywood, Penhorwood, and Lemon, qualified. There were also present A. B. Wren, Esq., and Messrs. W. Pickard, B. Pickard, Bellew, Bassett, Tucker, Cawsey, Cook, and Williams. Mr. Wren was elected Chairman for the ensuing year. Messrs. W. Pickard, Williams, and Cawsey were elected the Finance Committee. — It was resolved that, as the Gas Company had not repaired the roads, the Local Board Surveyor repair them and charge the same to the Company. … … … A letter was read from the Local Government Board respecting the drainage at Westward Ho, stating that all opposition was removed, and the original scheme of Mr. Morgan’s might be carried out. Mr. Williams and other members of the Board said their opposition was not removed, and it was resolved that the Clerk should write letter to the Secretary to know particulars, as it appeared that Mr. Pynsent was in correspondence with the Local Government Board. The Chairman said that Northam was the healthiest place in the division, there being only 13 deaths per 1,000.

[Exeter and Plymouth Gazette Daily Telegrams: Tuesday 25th April 1876]

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

North Devon Journal: Thursday 6th April 1876

NORTH BURROWS AND THE TIDAL RIVERS TAW AND TORRIDGE: Sir, have read with much interest your remarks in the ‘North Devon Journal’ of the instant, the recent inroad of the sea on Northam Burrows, and the detailed particulars connected therewith in the letters of the Rev. Mr. Gosset and Mr. William Bear, all tending to show that unless prompt and effective steps be taken, Northam parish must sustain great injury to its burrows, or common lands, and, as a certain consequence thereof, the ports on the Taw and Torridge, and on the estuary of those rivers, more especially Barnstaple, Bideford, Appledore, Instow, and Fremington, may greatly suffer from sand deposits on the sea coasts and mouths of those rivers. By the same post as brought me your last journal I also received, but without any intimation leading me to judge from whom the proposed meeting emanates, printed notice paper in the following words: —

“A meet will held at the National Schoolroom, Appledore, Saturday, April 1st, at four p.m., to consider the proposal of the Instow, Appledore and Westward Ho! steam ferry and tramway, and with it the protection of the Northam Burrows. The inhabitants Instow and the parish of Northam are invited to attend. Dated March 21st, 1876.” It being quite out of power to be present at this meeting, I wrote to a gentleman resident at Appledore, who I considered would most probably attend it, pointing out how in my opinion the construction of the proposed tramway through the whole length of the Burrows might afford the needed protection to the common from future encroachments of the sea, and the accumulation of sand banks in the estuary, prejudicial to the navigation of the rivers to the ports situated thereon, and provide the funds essential for these objects. The statements in your Journal of the 23rd thoroughly concur in one view of the case, on which there can exist no doubt, viz., that money, and that of no limited amount, will be required to prevent encroachments of the sea. May not then, I would submit, the required money may be difficult to obtain, that a substitute for it would be forthcoming, after this manner: – Let the free grant of the common land required for the proposed tramway be made to the projectors, whoever they may be, of the steam ferry and tramway, and who, without specific obligations binding them so to do, would necessarily, for the preservation of their tramway, erect such works for protection thereof as would guard the burrows lands also; and further, the projectors might be required to construct a dyke or canal parallel with their tramway, the excavations from the construction of which would be of essential value to them for raising their tramway to the level required for laying their metals on, at an elevation above the natural level of the lands. The said canal, or dyke, would moreover prove most useful for carrying off the rainfall and other waters with which the Burrows may at any time hereafter be flooded. The proposed plan for uniting Instow and Appledore by a steam ferry, as has been found to answer so well on the South Devon line, with respect to Kingswear and Dartmouth, must assuredly prove beneficial to the two towns, besides affording to the towns and parishes on the North Devon line direct access to the seacoast. Italy, the country from which I write, and in which have been passing the part winter, supplies me with hints on which I mainly base my present suggestions.

The Pontine Marshes, extending from six to twelve miles in breadth, and twenty-five miles in length, lying between Rome, Terracina and Naples, remained, for many centuries after the fall of the Roman Empire, little better than a swamp. About the end of the last and the beginning of the present century, however, it was determined by the Papal Government to construct a post road through the said marshes. A canal was at the same time cut, parallel with the new road, furnishing as it did, materials for elevating the newly formed road to its required level: subsidiary small canals were also formed for draining the surrounding swamps into the trunk canal, and passing the water onwards to the sea; and thus by these wise steps, extensive tract of land, for so many centuries unproductive, has been redeemed and turned to profitable account. “Parvis componere magna,” as Virgil was wont to do. May not then Northam parish do with the superfluous water of its Burrows what Rome has done in the matter of its Pontine Marches, that is, find an outlet for them in the sea.  I suggest this, under the full impression that as the Mediterranean has been found equal to the absorption of the waters of the Pontine Marshes and of the Tuscan Maremma, the Atlantic would not be inconvenienced by the accession of the waters of Northam Burrows and its central lake, the celebrated Goosey Pool! Barnstaple, Bideford, and other ports interested in the free navigation of the Taw and Torridge, will doubtless be forthcoming, and ready to aid in a measure so absolutely needed for keeping the channel of those rivers free from impending accumulations of sand. I remain, Sir, yours faithfully, Florence, March 30th, 1876. THOS. PYNSENT.

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

North Devon Journal: Thursday 23rd September 1875

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