SANITARY SEWAGE.

New Zealand Mail, Issue 880, 11 January 1889, Page 15

SANITARY SEWAGE.

Mr H. P. Higginson, M.I. C.E., read an exceedingly interesting paper on the above subject at the meeting of the Philosophical Society Wednesday night. After summarising the general conditions to be faced, and condemning the wholesale discharge of sewage into the harbour, Mr Higginson proceeded to explain and warmly advocate Shone’s hydro-pneu-matic system of sewage disposal (which has already been fully explained in our columns), coupled with the “ separate system,” by which house sewage is kept distinct from storm-water and ordinary drainage. The paper was very generally commented oiu Mr J. P. Maxwell noticed that the Shone system would obviate the necessity of “ contour sewers,” which were part oi Mr Clark’s scheme, and one of its principal difficulties, as they went largely through private grounds, while in (the Shone system the sewers would be kept in the streets. Sir James Hector highly eulogised the system, stating that he had recommended its adoption in the city of Melbourne, which has no drainage system, and is wholly dependent on earth-closets. Mr H. Hughes raised an objection on the score of expense which would be involved by the “separate system,” as he thought one system of drain ought to carry off both sewage and ordinary drainage. Mr R. Pharazyn spoke in favour of the scheme. Mr C. T. Richardson thought it would be advisable to have the scheme tried experimentally, sav with the Government Buildings and reclaimed land drainage. The President asked if Mr Higginson had brought the scheme before the City Council. He thought they might have expected the presence of his Worship the Mayor and some of the Councillors when the announcement had oeen made that such a paper as Mr Higginson’s would be read. The adoption of a drainage scheme was a momentous ques-

tion in city affairs, and lie thought it would not be too much to expect that the Mayor and some of the Councillors would have been present to give them the benefit of tlieir opinions on the scheme. He thought it his duty to comment officially, as President, on this matter. He noticed one Councillor present, but he believed he was not present in his official capacity. Mr A. de B. Brandon said he might apologise for the Mayor’s absence, as lie had to attend a committee meeting. Mr Pharazyn said he thought the President’s remarks were not wholly justified, as after all it was merely a division of labour, they being the scientific body and the Council the active body. Replying to the various comments, Mr Higginson said that as to Mr Hughes’ objection it was now generally believed by all competent authorities that the “ separate system ” was the best, and the Shone system as a whole was cheaper than Mr Clark’s. As to Mr Richardson’s 'remarks as to experimentalising, he thought they would soon have an opportunity of seeing the systpm in working order atPitone, that township, he thought, being aboutto adopt it. In reply to the President, he said he had not brought the system before the City Council as they had adopted another system, and he had not the data to hand to enable him to lay the scheme before the Council in detail. The only publicity he had given to. the scheme was in a conversation he had with Mr Rous Marten, in which he explained it, and that information had been puplished in the New Zealand Times. Mr Higginson illustrated his paper with the aid of a diagram.