SYDENHAM SEWAGE SCHEME.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 5804, 23 February 1897, Page 2

SYDENHAM SEWAGE SCHEME.

PROCEEDINGS AT THE MAGISTRATE'S COURT. At the Magistrate's Court this morning, before Mr H. \V. Bishop, S.M., tho case to' decide as to whether a nuisance had been caus.ed by the Sydenham sewage scheme was called on. The information of F. T. Haskins, town clerk, Christchurch, and others against the Mayor, councillors and inhabitants of the borough of Sydenham, and v Charles Allison, their clerk, charged them with "being the persons by whose act a nuisance arose and is continued on certain premises fronting on tho South Town Belt of the City of Christchurch, known as tho Sydonhiim nightsoil depot, having, on Feb. 4, 1897, been served by tho Mayor, councillors, and citizens of the City of Christchurch, being and acting as the local Board of Health for the said City of Christchurch, with a written notice requiring you to abate the said nuisance within twenty-four hours of tho service of the said notice, unlawfully did not comply and have not complied with the requisition of such notice within the time therein specified, and have not since abated the said nuisance." Mr Fisher, with him Mr Bruges, appeared for tho informants, and Mr Stringer, with him Mr Eussell, for the defendants, the Sydenham Borough Council. Mr Eussell also appeared separately for Mr Allison. There were also informations by S. H. Saunders and thirty-six others and R. H. Turner and thirty-six others, all inhabitants of Sydenham or persons aggrieved. These informations were taken as read. Mr Fisher an id he observed that Mr S. Lawrence, J.P., occupied a seat on the Bench. He did not know whether lie was going to take any part in the proceedings, but he was a resident of Sydenham and might perhaps be interested! Mr Bishop said ho could not offer any suggestion ; the matter was entirely one for Mr Lawrence. Mr Stringer said lie agreed with Mr Fisher. Mr Lawrence then retired from the Bench. Mr Fisher said that tho information of Mr Haskins was brought under Section 7-1 of tho Public Health Act, 1880, and thoße of Messrs Saunders and Turner under Section 71. He then briefly reviewed the history of the scheme, and stated that since it had been started, instead of the Drainage Board's employes taking six buckets of solid matter from the sewers daily, they now had to remove twenty buckets. Mr Fißher read the conditions of the permit which had been given in 1893. The Sydenham Council's scheme, he said, combined the worst features of the night removal and water systems. The objection taken by the informants was that the site was radically unfit for such an experiment. It should have been tried in an isolated place, whereas thare was a population of three hundred or four, hundred people in th.) immediate vicinity of the place. The residents petitioned first the Sydenham Borough Council, who, however, held steadily on their way. They next applied to the City Council, who wrote to the Sydenham Council, and then to the Drainage Board, who revoked the permit, but the Sydenham Council had still continued operations. Apart from the site itself, the informants objected that the arrangements themselves were not effective, that the carts were not suitable, that the building itself was full of drinks and was not provided with an antechamber, so that after a cart had been emptied all the smell was allowed to escape into the open air. Tha discharge of such large quantities of water into tho sewer as were used to flush the tank displaced the sewer gas, which was forced up through the ventilators in that neighbourhood. To avoid that the Council's employes had covered the ventilators with wet sacks, but that only forced it up in some other place. He also referred to the nuisance caused by the neighbourhood being thickly populated. The scheme was damaging the general sewage system^ and would injuriously affect the health of the whole community. No proper system of ventilation had been provided, and the fact of matter being put into the sowers in the highly fermented state in which it was filled the sewers with noxious gases which were forced out of every manhole along the sewers, to the detriment and danger of the public health. He claimed that if he succeeded iv proving that it was affecting the health of one person he had a right to judgment. He then called F. T. Haskins, Town Clerk, who deposed that the City Council was the Local Board of Health. Tho Council had objected to the sewage depot at Sydenham, and in pursuance of instructions he had laid the present information. He produced correspondence which he had sent to the borough authorities. S. H. Turner, residing at the corner of Durham Street and the South Belt, on the town side, said his house was about three chains from the depot. , He, with others, had watched the operations at the depot on the night of Jan. 4. He described what took place, and said an abominable smell arose through the^nianhole and grating over tho sewer on the South Town Belt. He noticed nothing objectionable at his house until the morning of Jan. 13, when ho was awakened about three o'clock with a fearful stench, and he went over to tho dep6t and saw the furnace burning. He was also much annoyed at 2 a.m. on Jan. IS, when the stench in his house was almost unbearable. He again went over to tho depot, and could trace tho smell distinctly as far as Durham Street. He remained up until five o'clock, and tho stench was noticeable all the time. Again, on the morning of Jan. 28, at 1.30, he noticed a dreadful smell, which he was satisfied came from the chimney of the furnace at the depot. On the following night there was little smell Avith tho first cart, when Several medical men were indent, n^ w ere refused tho privilege of watching the operations, and so they left disgusted, but a number of residents remained, and wero much annoyed by the emptying of the second cart. On Feb. G the city inspectors paid a visit to the works. There were also a number of residents present, and several of the Sydenham Borough Councillors, and the stench was the worst he had smelt. Ho had visited the depot several times since, and it was always the same. The smell permeated the rooms of his house to such an extent as to make it objectionable to live in, and persons who had visited him had complained of the smell. The fact of the depot being there would cbpreciate the value of properly all round it, but to what extent ho was not; prepared t<? say." Cross-examined by Mr Stringer : Ho was one who had gone round to got medical men to sign a petition against the depot retnainingwhere it was, and Dr Fox was only one who had asked that his name T ; * 'bo vithcU'awu. He had stated at shoula - ..^n" meeting that the first the City Con. • -M^, City Inspectors were cart on the night •,_ excreta in the present was not filled " a could detect ordinary manner, because Iv nothing objectionable in it. . /, 80-examined by Mr Bruges: ltd, w'/(-fi others, had endeavoured to get the Sydenhmn Councii to adopt somo other locality for the dep6t when it was about haltbuilt, S. H. Sauttders, who lived on the section adjoining the depot, deposed that before operations were started there, there wero no offensive smells. The carts passed within six or eight feet of the bedroom windows, and when they were there there was a most abominable stench. They were compelled to keep all the windows in the house closed. On Jan. 16 he wrote a letter (produced) to the Sydenham Borough Council, complaining or the nuisance. To this the Council replied that, in their opinion, no nuisaneo existed. Between 11 p.m. and 5 a.m, he would not go out of his house, the smell was so bad. To Mr Stringer: He was a weekly tenant, and had not yet given notice to leave. He was waiting to see what was the result of these proceedings. Mr Fisher put in the notices served on tho Council to abate the nuisance. Henry Edward Dillon stated that ho

resided, with his wife and family, on the South Belt opposite this depot, and had done so for the past four years. Since operations had been started they had been troubled with offensive smells in the house, and were unable to open their windows. The smells arose when the carts passed, and remained for some little while after. If the nuisance continued he would have to sell out and leave. To Mr Russell: "Whether it was a . nuisance or not, he did not want a depot of that kind dumped down near his place. Re-examined by Mr Fisher : Previous to any person inviting him to go out and inspect, he had taken precautions to shut out the smells by closing his windows.The Court then adjourned till 2.15 p.m. Dr Nedwill stated that he was for six or seven years health officer for the city of Christelmrch. He visited the Sydouham sewage depot in the early morning of Jan. 29 in company with Dr Symes and Mr Cuthbert. Ho saw one cart go into the depot. There was a slightly offensive odour from the carts themselves. Witness did not go inside the building. Dr Symes went inside and witness went to the ventilator on the South Belt, just opposite the building; but did not notice any smell while the cart was being discharged. He thought it would have been much better had the depot been in a hiss populated district. He should say j it was highly dangerous to store excrement | for a week and; then shoot ifcinto ..the sewer, especially as no disinfectants were used in the pans. To Mr Stringer: He really smelt nothing from the ventilator, which he inspected on Jan. 29. The odour noticeable from the carts was only such as would bo noticed in uny cart carrying uightsoil, and was perhaps not as bad as that from a city night-, curt. Excrement which had been kept for a week should not be put into the sewers nt all. The water which was put into the tank to flush the nightsoil into the feewer would not get rid of the gases, if decomposition had set in. The main argument that he saw against the scheme was that decomposing excrement should not be put into the sewers at all. He did not think it would be possible to disinfect the whole mass of oxcrement so as to prevent it being dangerous to the general sewerage system. These decomposing gases were given off by the nightsoil cart passing along a street, but they were Largely diluted with air. Re-examined by Mr Fisher: It was less injurious for the excrement to be carried to the sandhills than to be put into the sewers in a fermented condition. If the sewer system was notperfect that was all the more reason why the excrement should not be put into the sewers. Dr F. Truby King, medical officer at Seacliff Asylum, stated that he had made sanitary science a special study, and was a Bachelor of Science in public health, and had attended the Sanitary Congress in London in 1894. He had been asked by the Drainage Board to give his opinion as to the system, and hud visited the depot the previous night. "What appeared" to him an absolute objection to the system, -was the passage of the excrement into the sewers in an advanced stage of decomposition. In the ordinary system of water carriage the matter was carried off in a fairly fresh state, but if left longer than twenty-four hours it gave oif very noxious gases. If earned into the sewers in afermenting state, it must convert the sewers into a long cesspool. The addition of oxygenbaaring water merely hastened the process of decomposition. It was .of cardinal imj)ortancethat the air in. the. sewers should bo as pure as possible, because it was impossible to absolutely prevent the escape of sewer gas into houses which were connected with sewers, no matter what system was used. Fully 10 per cent of the houses in any town would show a leakage of sewer gas. Another objection was the intermittent manner in which the matter was sent through the sewer. Unquestionably the matter would loiter along the sewers more by night than by day, because there was so much less water flowing by night than by day. The gases given off would permeate the Vhole sewer system, and would effect the decomposition of the whole mass of sewage in the sewers. He condemned the system as utterly wrong. He understood that the use of earth and ashes in the pans was prohibited by the Sydenhain Borough Council. These materials retarded the process of decomposition. The tendency of sewer gas was to lower the vitality of the system, thus rendering people more prone to other diseases. He would not be prepared to recommend this system, even if the closed pan system were in use. He (lid not think it wise to mix tr/o systems. He Avas not surprised to learn that since the introduction of this system a change had been noticed at the sewage farm. It must be so, because of the presence of decomposing matter in the sewers. To Mr Russell : The temperature of the *vattT which was mixed with the excrement would have to be well down towards freezing point to arrest decomposition, but oven then the oxygen vivified and multiplied the organisms. [Left sitting.]