THE SYDENHAM SEWAGE QUESTION.

Press, Volume LIV, Issue 9703, 15 April 1897, Page 3

THE SYDENHAM SEWAGE QUESTION.

■ THE DRAINAGE BOAED. At the Drainage Board yesterday matters in connection with tho Sydenham Sewage Depot and. the magisterial investigation came under consideration, The Sj'denham Borough Council acknowledged the receipt of the ; ■ Board's letters of resolution that on the mete adducedthe Board was of opinion that the Night Soil DspoVvft&Fanuisance, arid had created a nuisance in the Board's sewers, the Council did not admit the Board's right to summarily determine that question, and objected to tha arbitrary and scandalously unfair manner in which the Board was now seeking to coerce the Council. After dealing at great length with the question, the letter enclosed the following motion—" That this Council will, for the sake, of avoiding further expensive litigation, undertake to ceale operations at the sewage depot if the Draifiage Board will refund to the Council the amount expended on the constinicted works bnf the faith of the Board's permit, and that, pending the consideration of this matter by the Board at its next nieeting, the Cbutipil will suspend operations at the from Saturday next. Should the? Board refuse to entertain the' foregoing proposal, the Mayor and the Chairman o£ the Works and Finance Committees be and authorised to confer with the Council's solicitors and take such legal proceedings to protect the Council's interests as may be advised." This offer wasji made without prejudice, and the amount |fexj>ended bri the works was about £200. s This letter had been submitted to the Board's solicitors, who iivtlieir letter stated that the Engineer should that he l»ad no authority to depart flonv the terms of the Council's notice of the 2nd inst. and that as they had" failed tdffall in with the suggestion; to give an run-eonditibnal undertaking not to uso the depot for the purposes for. which it was built ilnless or until further authorised by the Board,' ; no other course was open except to carry iout the *terms of the Board's resolution. Tfcfe Engineer might add that he behalf of "the Board, any for the failure of the Council's experimeqtp whicli was carried out in the face of tl|fcfßbard's warnings as to the probable resxttt and entirely at their own risk. , The Secretary reported that a reply had been sent to the Sydenham Council in accordance with the solicitor's letter, and connection between .the depot and the sewer had been blocked?on April 10th and notice sent to tlie. Sydenham Council the .same day. r ; It was decided, after-some discuesion, to cbhfinh what had been dpne.

A letter was read from the solicitors to the Board respecting the Board appealing in the case. As Saturday .was the last, day for appealing, notice had been lodged, and it remained for the Board to say if it would proceed. Mr Taylor moved, and Mr Smith seconded —" That the Board declines to proceed with the appeal." „,» The motion was carried, Mr Samuels dissentiog. Mr Mcli*-yre gave notice to move for the rescinding of the motion not to proceed with the appeal.