DIRTY WATER AGAIN.

Evening Post, Volume XXXVII, Issue 111, 11 May 1889, Page 2

DIRTY WATER AGAIN.

TO THE EDITOR. Sic— l would like to ask, Is there no remedy for the filthy, dirty water we are continually receiving' at short intervals? Only this (Friday) morning the water was almost unlit to bathe in. Every time thero is a burst, or the Wainui shut off, we get the filth from the Polhill Gully stream, whioh, coming, an it does, through a direct main a few feet from the bottom of the stream, and only turned on as soon as the other is off, the bed of the river is stirred up, and we get it like mud. We were informed some time ago, when the water had a poisonous smell (after an enquiry bad been held), that it wonld not occur again. I have no idea what was done ; certainly the Bmell is not so bad, but the oolonr is muoh the same. Now, sir, others beside myself must have noticed this, and I ask is this water lit for our school children to drink? We are told that several deaths through fever have occurred, attributable to bad drainage. Probably so; but had we pure water my opinion is the foundation of the disease would not have been implanted. Let this state of affairs be properly attended to, and a thorough system of drainage effectually carried out, place £20,000 to the .£15,000 already proposed, then I think the ratepayers will have faith in believing that something like a complete system may be ventured upon. This alone will add considerably to the revenue of the city by the aid of the w.c. fees, distribute plenty _ of work in various direotions, which is greatly needed, and, by no means impossibly, lead to a redutt.on in our rates. Ratepayers seenre for yourselves a pure water supply and proper drainage, and thus mako the whole of Wellington a recreation ground (bar the neighbourhood of the Destructor), a cemetery when it is needed, and a Town Hall when we can afford it. I am, &c, H. J. White. Levy-street, 10th May. [Our correspondent has a very incorrect idea of what an effcotive system of drainage with a sea outfall would cost. We have authority for believing it wonld not be less than .£150,000.— Ed. E.P.