THE DRAINAGE SCHEME.

Evening Post, Volume XLVIII, Issue 140, 12 December 1894, Page 4

THE DRAINAGE SCHEME.

TO THB EDITOR. Sir— That rea°onable letter from Mr. Hay ward does not seem to have aroused tho amount of public criticism or sympathy that it should have done — vide, no answer. Tnia outfall sewer bad always seemed to me to be nothing more or less than a critical or doubtful experiment. We have the assurance of our experts that no unpleasantness or danger will accrue through the deposit of sewage at the Bay, that it will be carried well to sea, that the churning process will effectually destroy all dangerous matter, and that the drift of tides will remove everything that might possibly be left. I know not how the putting of this sewer ont to sea is disposed of, but I venture to say that, however planned, it is nothing but an experiment. If by trestlework, the question of strength and endurance are vital pointß. I have seen breakers on this beaoh that would try tho strength of any struoture, however strong. If below the surface, then the question of the movement of probably some thousand 8 of tops of sand at one time will have to be considered. Have you, sir, never heard of Weber's Folly, at Napier, where an eminent engineer was going to stop tho travelling of shingle by putting down groins at ritrht angles to the beach ?— a beautiful theory, but a huge failure. And I cay we must be sure we are not made the victims of an experiment hero. Now about the churning process. Why, sir, if this churning is of the value represented, it could bo provided for within the harbour. Why spend j>200,000 to churn the ee wage from the city? I will guarantoe it could be done within 100 yards of Te Aro foreshore for one-twentieth of the cost. Of course I would not guarantee there would be no unpleasantness or danger Neithor do I think that the churning at the Bay will be effeotual. The drift of tides I look upon as a nautical question, and beyond my ken. But I have seen plenty of driftwood ashore around this spot, and consider the evidence adduced almost worthless, being contradictory. My conclusions are that it will be a grave dunger'to carry this outfall anywhere below high-water mark, that the churning process is a falutin theory, and that we stand faoe to face with a danger of destroying one of our prettiest bays, one of our most valuable and prolific fishing and crabbing grounds, beside the risk of innumerable compensation claims talked of. Now, sir, I offer an alternative scheme, and this is to abandon this outfall and provide instead an outfall tank -within the harbour, in which the solids and the liquids would be divided —the solids to be taken out to sea (the further the better), the liquids, I presume, would not be a source of danger. The trend of the age among sanitary engineers of large cities with a seaboard goes in this direotion. I am afraid my letter is too Ion?, or I would go further. lam, &0., Gratis.