The Globe. SATURDAY, APRIL 13, 1878.

Globe, Volume IX, Issue 1270, 13 April 1878, Page 2

The Globe. SATURDAY, APRIL 13, 1878.

It is not our intention in this article to discuss Mr, Clark’s drainage scheme as a whole. A letter, however, which appeared in the Fress, and was re-published by us, raises an important question —that of whether Mr. Clark’s proposal to pump the sewage on to the Sandhills is quite sure to be a success. That correspondent supplies a number of extracts from the work of two London engineers—names not given—with the object apparently of throwing discredit on the plan of pumping the sewage on to the Sandhills. Before discussing those extracts we would point out, in passing, that the pumping scheme is recommended as the best of three alternatives —we would prefer to say the best of four. We might go on as wo arc doing just now, sending a portion of our liquid sewage into the side channels, and thence into the river and outfall drain, the remainder being allowed to sink into the earth and poison the atmosphere. We might drain into the Estuary; we might send our sewage to the sea; or we might irrigate the Sandhills as proposed by Mr. Clark. Therefore, If it could ho proved that the Sandhills scheme will not be, in every sense of the word, perfection, the question is, will any other plan answer half so well. Were the Board to reject Mr. Clark’s recommendation, what would they adopt in its pla?o ? In considering this question it is well to the above facts, Lot ij?he first sentence is as follow ~ ;' tT . copting in laboratory experiments, and a few instances upon a very small scale, filtration of crude or untreated sewage, apart from irrigation, has never yet succeeded.” After referring to the experiments of the Rivers Pollution Commissioners, the writers go on to say — “ Whatever the filtering medium may bo, land, gravel, charcoal, or other substances, the result in the end is the same, v i z . : —1. The pores of the filter become choked after a time with the solid matter contained in sewage; and sooner or later, when they are choked, the filter acts only in a partial manner, ceasing to purify what sewage may find its way through it, and eventually is unable to filter at all. *2. The collection of solid fcccal and other matter deposited from sewage upon the surface of the soil or filter, does give rise to a formidable nuisance.” An cxplaua. is nest givep of the various nicies adopted to get over the above jdifitsuUjw, *s{ of which m eaid to km vw?

tically unsuccessful. Now it appears to us that the statements wo have cpioted may bo quite true, aucl yet Mr. Clark’s proposals in no way affected. The very first sentence wo quoted implies that the writers are dealing with one question while “ Ratepayer” is under the impression they are discussing another. Mr. Clark does not propose to filter the sewage “ apart from irrigation,” His scheme is in reality to irrigate a portion of the Sandhills, so that all the objections raised about the filter becoming choked up does not apply at all. There are four hundred acres of a reserve upon which to operate, and Mr. Clark says that the area over which the sewage will at any one time pass, will not exceed seven or eight acres. All the other portions of the irrigation area will remain as dry as the adjacent country. When one portion is saturated the liquid can be turned upon another, so that there is not the slightest danger of “ the overdosing of the vegetation” spoken of. The passages quoted in the letter evidently refer to attempts to filter the sewage; hence the writer’s talk of the “ filtering bods,” and of the difficulty of removing and replacing, from time to time, the filtering medium, as if the work were performed within a limited area. Mr. Clark’s scheme, as we understand it, is not so much one of filtering as of irrigation. It is proposed to convert the four hundred acres of sandhills, reserved for the purpose, into a sewage farm, t® irrigate one portion of it after another, and so convert into healthgiving vegetation the organic matter deposited from tho sewage. It therefore appears to us that, however useful the information furnished by “Ratepayer” may be, it is in no way applicable to tho subject under discussion. Tho real question—and which tho writer seems to have entirely missed—is, will a sewage farm bo in any way a nuisance ? Considering the fact that tho prevailing wind is from the east, is there no danger of a nuisance being caused by the distribution •of the drainage over the necessary area to absorb itp We do not know whether Mr. Clark is aware of the prevailing wind here, but ho positively asserts that not the slightest nuisance or danger need bo apprehended, and that the disposal of the sewage of Christchurch, in the manner indicated by him may bo effected so as to satisfy the most critical judgment. The opinion of an eminent authority such as Mr. Clark is entitled to great weight, still should “ Ratepayer” bo able to quote the opinions of eminent engineers to the effect that sewage farms —especially farms of a somewhat similar nature to the Sandhills —are unhealthy, then it will be the duty of the public to pay some attention to his quotations. But wo cannot think that he has, so far, succeeded in throwing tho slightest discredit on Mr. Clark’s irrigation proposals.

Oub readers will remember that when the objections made by tbo City Council were before the Assessment Court on March 22nd, certain points were raised that the notices served by the Council on the ratepayers were informal, and that in some instances the objections by tho Council bad been delivered at the place of sitting of the Assessment Court after office hours on February 15th. The Council accordingly applied to the Governor to have their actions validated. A notice has now appeared in the Gazette, the validating clause of which is as follows : Now, therefore, I, George Augustus Constantine, Marquis of Normanby, the Governor of the Colony of New Zealand, by and with the advice and consent of the Executive Council of the said Colony, and in exercise and pursuance of the powers and authorities vested in me by the Rating Act, 1876, and the Municipal Corporations Act, 1876, do hereby order that all objections made by or on behalf of the Council of the Borough of Christchurch to any particular valuation appearing on the valuation list of tho said Borough, and whether addressed and delivered at the place of sitting of the Assessment Court before or after the fifteenth day of February last, and whether the same are irregular in matter of form or not, shall be arid they are hereby validated. The Council’s objections to Mr, Cuff’s valuation, will now, we presume, be heard on their merits.