The Globe. FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 9, 1877.

Globe, Volume VIII, Issue 822, 9 February 1877, Page 2

The Globe. FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 9, 1877.

The opposition which the Drainage Scheme of Mr. Carruthers has called forth since its publication, has now assumed a new and far more formidable shape. The people themselves, as a body, are now beginning to bestir themselves, mid the first sign of this was given last night, when a meeting of the residents of the Heathcote District took place. They are perhaps more interested than the general body, inasmuch as the scheme proposed will leave all the sewage of Christchurch at their very doors. Besides they are in a position to give a pretty accurate

opinion of what the result is likely to be, inasmuch as they have now, iu close proximity to them the outfall drain, into which a portion of the city drainage flows. There can be no mistake about the opinion held by the residents of this district on tho subject. They are unanimously of opinion, judging from the experience of the past and their local knowledge, that the carrying out of the scheme will not only deteriorate very considerably the value of the the property in the district, but will be a fertile cause of fever and other

disease's. In this they are at one with those who have already through the columns of the local journals addressed themselves to this topic, hence it appears to us that before committing themselves to a scheme which is so universally condemned, the Board should pause. We feel certain of one thing, and that is that the consideration given by the Board to Mr Carruthers’ plans was not by any means sufficient to enable them to thoroughly understand the full effect of them.

Had they done bo they never could have sanctioned the adoption of a scheme which practically casts upon the verge of another district the whole sewage of the city;, at a place where too the noxious and pestilential exhalations are most likely to be carried over the whole district. No one can say for a moment that the residents in the Heathcote district have not good cause for complaint, and we hope they will endeavour, by all constitutional means, to remove from their midst so terrible a nuisance. In calling a public meeting, we hope the promoters will come prepared with some facts and reliable data as to the effect of the scheme upon the district, It is not enough to assert in general terms that the carrying through of the plan will have a detrimental effect. There must be something tangible, upon which they can confidently ask the general body of the ratepayers to join with them in protesting against, and, if necessary, in taking legal steps to remove. And this is the more necessary as regards this meeting, because it is the first public action taken with regard to the drainage scheme. Articles and letters, it is true, have been written, and in this way to some extent public opinion has expressed itself, but the general body has not bad an opportunity of doing so either one way or the other. It is only reasonable to suppose that residents in other districts, likely to be similarly affected, will also take steps to hold meetings, and therefore it is the more important that the case made out by the opponents of the i scheme should be clear and convincing. If this be done—as we apprehend there | will be no difficulty in doing—then

other parts of the district will join in the pressure thus brought to bear upon the Drainage Board, which will no doubt be such as to cause them to re-consider the matter.