53
Level district quoted in the enclosure B. we would add the following extract from the report on the drainage of the Lower, Western and Central Districts of Victoria:-
"In the report on the sewerage of the high level district the objections to the use of storin-water channels for the conveyance of sewage were fully set forth. These objections apply with even greater force in the case of the low level district, where, in many places, the storm-water channels are nearly level and accumulate not only sewer tainted air but also sewage deposit.
*
*
*
+
The methods for the improvement of the drainage of this, and other districts, suggested in my report of 1882 have not been tried. This is fortunate, for ny subsequent experience leads to the conclusion that they would not have remedied completely the evils which existed then and which still exist It will now be necessary to re-sewer the whole district with earthenware pipes; and to divert the sewage proper, or dry-weather-flow of the sewers from the storm- water channels, which are not and cannot be made suitable for its reception. The existing stone channels therefore should revert to their legitimate use, the con- veyance of storm-water from the surface of the district and from the bills above it.',
In his report on the drainage of the Eastern District Mr. Chadwick wrote: "The principles as to self-cleansing sewers, admission of rain-fall and ventilation which have been laid down in previous reports apply to this district with equal force."
He concluded this series of exhaustive reports with the following remarks: "In conclusion I beg to record my obligation to Mr. Cooper ***
*
*
*
We have discussed together every essential feature of these projects and are of one mind on every point of importance; so much so indeed that the documents sub- mitted may be fairly looked upon as joint reports." (Government Guzette of 1890 page 980:)
The projects were carried out under the direct supervision of Mr. Cooper and a reference to the plans of the sewerage of the City will show that there is no foundation for the widespread belief mentioned by the Chamber.
The statement contained in the same paragraph that the contents of the storm- water drains are nearly as foul as those of the sewers is true, and the only remedy appears to be a more efficient method of removal of night-soil and the more effective control of the hawking of vegetables, sugar-cane and fruit in the streets.
It is also true that the inlets to the storm-water drains in the streets are mostly untrapped, but it may be pointed out that Mr. Chadwick advocated ventilat- ing orifices in the streets for the sewers, and that the escape of gas in the streets is comparatively harmless owing to the excessive diffusion.
The Petitioners take exception in the same paragraph to the practice of pass- ing chains through sewers, and draw the deduction that the sewers must have insufficient fall or be inadequately flushed.
The practice is merely a precautionary measure adopted in most well ordered cities to ensure that no stoppage takes place without being detected and remedied
at once.
10. In paragraph 20 the Petitioners make certain allegations regarding delay in providing latrines.
Regarding the latrine at Shek tongtsui it was not an entirely new latrine (as) might be inferred from the Petitioners' remarks) that was recommended in the end of 1896, but an enlargement of the already existing latrine at that spot.
At the time the recommendation was made an Ordinance was being prepared to protect Public Latrines.