Westward Ho! the Drainage Question: Who is to Blame? The question as to the best mode of disposing of the sewage of Westward Ho has been under the consideration the authorities and the ratepayers generally for six or seven years. Numerous meetings have been held; the subject has been many times discussed by the Northam Local Board (Westward Ho! being part of the district of that Board); and three inquiries have been held by Inspectors of the Local Government Board. But the drainage is now in as unsatisfactory state as ever. The principal point at issue has been whether the sewage should be carried across the Burrows eastwards, or whether the outfall should be at Westward Ho! to which the residents of the district are naturally strongly opposed, the result would be, they contend, to injure the prospects of Westward Ho as a popular sea-side resort.
Complaints having recently been made to the Local Government Board by T. Pynsent, Esq., one of the principal landowners of Westward Ho! and by other gentlemen, that the Northam Local Board had been guilty of default in the matter, another enquiry — the fourth —was held for the Board above on Wednesday in last week, at the Westward Ho! Hotel, by Lieut.-Col. Ponsonby Cox, R.E. There were present — A. B. Wren, Esq. (Chairman of the Local Board), the Rev. I. H. Gosset, Col. Wheeler, Capt. Molesworth, Capt. Wyborough, Capt. Williams, E. U. Vidal, Esq., T. Pynsent, Esq., Mr. J. Ellis, C.E. (Exeter), Mr. C. Hole (Clerk of the Northam Local Board), Messrs. Sandercock, Bazeley, Pickard (2), Oatway, Vellacott, W. Kelly, Vickary, Heywood, G. Baker, Cawsey (2), Mill, W. Bassett, Dymond, Ellis, Tremeer, Cory, Lock, E. Williams, Price, and Ward (Local Board Surveyor). The enquiry lasted only about two hours, for the Inspector insisted, firmly but courteously, upon the exclusion of remarks irrelevant to the objects of the enquiry, which he defined to be — (1) with reference to a complaint made to the Local Government Board that the Local Board Northam had made default in not providing the district with sufficient sewers; (2) with reference to a proposal which had been made to dissolve the district of the Local Board, and merge it in that of the Rural Sanitary Authority of the Bideford Union, or, in an alternative proposal, to include the portion of the district known as Westward Ho! in the said Sanitary Authority; and (3) with reference to a suggestion which had been made to reduce the number of members the Northam Local Beard. First of all, he would invite information relating to the first of those points — the alleged default of the Local Board.
After Mr. Wren, as Chairman the Local Board, had made a few remarks, which were subsequently repeated, Mr. Pynsent was requested to speak in substantiation of his complaint. Mr. Pynsent went so far back as 1870, when, after Mr. Morgan, C.E., had held the first enquiry, it was decided to drain to the eastward, but as the pipes were laid almost at a dead level, and as there was no proper outlet provided, an intolerable nuisance was created. He read a letter from the Rev. Cowley Cowles, Eversley, Hampshire, who visited Westward Ho! with the late Canon Kinsley and Mr. Froude, the historian, bearing emphatic testimony to the nuisance which found to exist. The gentlemen named were staying at the Pebble Ridge Hotel, belonging to Mr. Pynsent (and which has long been vacant consequence the defective drainage I, and when they went out to the balcony Mr. Kingsley was taken ill, the cause being the stench which arose from the sewage which had been brought in close proximity to the hotel. Mr. Pynsent was proceeding with his narrative, when the Inspector remarked that the Board above were already in possession of the facts, complaints having been made to them from time to time by Mr. Pynsent and others. What he wished to ascertain was what the facts were at the present time, and he thought it was not necessary to go further back than when the Local Board, after Mr. Morgan’s last inquiry, obtained powers to borrow £350 in part payment of the works for the Pimpley scheme. Could the Chairman of the Local Board explain why these works had not been executed?
Mr. Wren said that in consequence of Mr. Morgan’s recommendation the Board resolved to carry out the Pimpley scheme, but they could not, of course, proceed with it in the summer months when visitors were about. On the 15th of June last, the Clerk reported that Mr. Bazeley had not, as requested, convened a meeting of the Joint Westward Ho Committee, and it was resolved that, having regard to the delay in the calling of that meeting and to the approaching hot weather, the Pimpley scheme should be proceeded with, and that plans and, specifications should be obtained from Mr. Ellis, advertisements should be issued, and steps taken to procure the completion of the works. At the next meeting, on the 13th July, the sea having in the meantime broken the cesspit then in use, the Surveyor was instructed to lengthen the outfall into the sea, and to abate the nuisance temporarily until the Pimpley outfall was made. The next meeting was held on the 10th August, and the Clerk then reported that Mr. Ellis had declined to furnish plans, the reason he assigned being that Capt. Molesworth was opposed to the scheme, and would thwart its being properly carried out; but he promised to re-consider his decision, if the Board wished him to do so. On the same day the Clerk was directed to forward a copy of Mr. Ellis’s letter to the Board above and inform them that an outlet had been constructed, which they wished to give a fair trial. Afterwards came the notice of the Local Government Board’s intention to hold the present enquiry. Capt. Molesworth, noticing Mr. Ellis’s letter, denied that he had ever opposed the Pimpley scheme, and said that even if he had been opposed, he should not have attempted to thwart it if once adopted.
Mr. Pynsent said there had been plenty of voting by the Local Board, but no action. There had been enough voting to cleanse Cyprus. (Laughter) The money of the ratepayers had been squandered in carrying out temporary works, and those which had been last constructed, in May last, were swept away by the ocean. The “trial” alluded to in the Local Board’s letter came off last Saturday week, when the works were carried out into the sea and smashed. Mr. Wren said that, that experiment having failed, the Local Board would, no doubt, have gone on with the Pimpley scheme, in accordance with the resolutions which were passed, but for this enquiry. Mr. Bazeley had no doubt that if the experiment had succeeded the Local Board would have abandoned the Pimpley scheme and drained to the westward. Capt. Molesworth thought Mr. Pynsent was perfectly right in the main, and that but for his complaint the Local Board would have shelved the matter until they saw an opportunity of draining to the westward, which would not benefit Mr. Pynsent’s property at all. Members of the Board had said as much at meetings at which he had been present. The Local Board had passed resolutions, he knew, but he judged their intentions from their action. Mr. Pynsent: Inaction. Capt. Molesworth said he had not complained because of the injury which complaints did to the reputation of the place, the drainage and water supply of which were amongst the best in England, although a very different impression had got abroad.
Mr. Pynsent, disposed to leniency, asked the Inspector if the sentence of capital punishment proposed to be passed on the Local Board could not mitigated to one of “six months’ hard labour,” in which time they should be compelled to carry out the Pimpley scheme; but the Inspector replied that he could not answer that question without anticipating many stages of the enquiry. Mr. Pynsent said transportation was no longer allowed, or he should be disposed to transport of the Local Board to Cyprus. (Laughter)
Capt. Molesworth said that as a member the Local Board he held that body to be guilty of the charge now under investigation. Mr. Williams said Capt. Molesworth had strongly opposed the Pimpley scheme. The Inspector said he would now proceed with the other points, and at the close of the enquiry would go and visit the outfall and inspect the locality. In reply to the Inspector, Mr. Vidal, as Chairman of the Bideford Rural Sanitary Authority, said that that body had not considered the desirability of the district of the Northam Local Board being merged in the Union; and Mr. Wren said that the Local Board had not discussed the question whether it would be well for Westward Ho! to separate from Northam and become part of the Union. Mr. Beer: Why not give us a separate district altogether?
Mr. Gosset said that he had been for some years in favour of reducing the number of members of the Local Board, which now stood at 24, and the largeness of which had produced considerable difficulty. He considered that 12 would be quite sufficient, and in fairness to all they should be elected in wards, so that the people resident at Appledore should no longer be able to bear down, by the weight of their number, those living in Northam and Westward Ho! His idea was that Appledore should return four members; that part of Northam towards Appledore and the sea, two; that part of Northam towards the river Torridge and Bideford, two; Northam Ridge, a small district on the other side of Bideford, one; and Westward Ho! three. As to the proposal that Westward should be included in the Union, he would remark that he thought Westward Ho! had been badly treated by the Local Board from the beginning, the completion of its sewerage system having been so long delayed. He wanted to know why Westward Ho! should be punished for having been neglected by the Local Board by being despoiled of what little local self-government belonged to it. The penalty, he thought, should fall upon obstructors in other parts of the district.
Some years ago the people of Westward Ho! memorialised for separation from Northam and Appledore and for the right to elect a Local Board of its own; but on the occasion of Mr. Morgan’s third enquiry it was agreed that things should remain as they were, the Local Board promising to provide proper system of drainage. If that undertaking had been carried out this enquiry would not have been necessary, and he certainly did not see why the punishment should be visited upon the unoffending but offended —against Westward Ho! If there was to be any separation, he thought it should be of the kind originally proposed, namely, that Westward Ho! should form a Local Board district itself; or else Appledore should be expelled and Westward Ho! and Northam constitute a Local Board district. Then Appledore, which, unfortunately, had set itself against the promotion of the best interests of this district, might come under the petticoat government of the Bideford Rural Sanitary Authority, which would appoint three dictators to look after it and do exactly what they pleased. He was averse to the dissolution of the Board because he thought the parish of sufficient dimensions and importance to rule itself; but if it must be dissolved, let the district divide into two or three parts, and give each a fresh start.
Mr. Pynsent, having mentioned that out of the 284 acres, 1 rood, 37 poles, of which Westward Ho! consisted, he owned 75 acres, 37 poles, besides being a shareholder in the Hotel Company and the owner of many houses, recommended, not what Mr. Gosset was now advising, but what that gentleman practically advocated in a pamphlet he published in 1869, viz., that the parish of Northam should form part of the Bideford Union, as it did up to the year 1867. The administration would then be in the hands of the leading magistrates of the neighbourhood and would not only be more efficient than under the present system, but also more economical, for instead of having to pay the salary of the clerk the Local Board, the parish would only have to pay the 16th part of the salary of the clerk to the Sanitary Authority. The Inspector remarked that the Local Board was composed of unusually large number members, and asked what the views of the members present were to a reduction. Mr. B. Pickard said he used to be in favour of a Board of 12 members, but that Mr. Gosset recommended 24; and his brother, with Mr. Wren’s concurrence, said he thought the Board would not object to a reduction of one-half. Capt. Molesworth condemned the present constitution of the Local Board as unwieldy and spoke in favour of Westward Ho! separating and forming a new district. It could not be expected that it would be fairly treated by Northam and Appledore, for its wants as a watering place were altogether different from theirs.
The Local Board had had the roads cleaned in anticipation of this enquiry; but if the Inspector had come down in the summer, when it was of real importance to the interests of Westward Ho! that they should be well kept, he would have found them in a very different condition. He did not see why Appledore and Northam should object to the separation: he should have expected that they would be glad to get rid of Westward Ho! Mr. Williams: Very glad. (Laughter) Mr. Pickard said it was the proper and ordinary time to have the roads cleaned now. Capt. Molesworth further remarked that it would not be right to saddle the other parts of the district with a share the expense for what was particularly necessary to it as a watering-place. The Inspector remarked that the Local Government Board set its face against the creation of small, independent districts. He did not see why the members of the Local Board should not be returned by wards, but no change could made until after an approving resolution by the ratepayers and a Local Government Board inquiry: As to Capt. Molesworth’s last observation, that difficulty might got over by having a separate assessment, without disintegration. Mr. Pynsent, having expressed a wish that the Local Board should be compelled to carry out the Pimpley scheme within a given time, conveyed to the Inspector the thanks of the assembly for the genial manner in which he had conducted the enquiry, which then terminated.
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