The sewage of the metropolis, and how to utilise it / by Thomas Ellis.

  • Ellis, Thomas
Date:
[1863]
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: The sewage of the metropolis, and how to utilise it / by Thomas Ellis. Source: Wellcome Collection.

    22/42 page 18
    of trutli and honesty and manly independence—is, with few excep¬ tions, open to expose their false teaching. Mr. W. J. Christy, who is in the employment of Mr. John Bennett Lawes, the great artificial manure manufacturer, mourns over the fact with an amusing simplicity, and tells the public with tears in his eyes, that “ it is astonishing how averse the press is, generally speaking, to publish facts connected therewith, detrimental to schemes for utilising the sewage.” Unfeeling press ! The cause, sir, of the artificial-manure monopoly is all but lost, yet still these monopolists are not without hope, and clearly look to the Metropolitan Board of Works for help in their present distress. On the 29th of August, Dr. Gilbert, who is also in the employment of the indefatigable Mr. John Bennett Lawes, in a letter which appeared in the Agricultural Gazette, thus pleads :—u I would sug¬ gest that a mixed commission of engineers and chemists, in whom all might have confidence, be appointed to superintend the guaging, sampling, analysis, and calculations in such a manner as really to settle definitely the approximate average composition of the metro¬ politan sewage.” Is not the deep anxiety of Mr. John Bennett Lawes, and those in his employment, to determine for the ratepayers, whether or not the metropolitan sewage is to be utilised and thus brought into competition with his artificial manures, intensely funny ? And yet, dispassionately viewed, what could be more encouraging to the rate¬ payers than this “deep anxiety?” Assuredly if sewage was the worthless thing those manure men represent, they would long since have left it to its fate. But Dr. Gilbert, as Mr. Lawes’ representative, tells us that in this “ mixed commission” which he asks for “ all might have con¬ fidence.” Might I, however, venture to inquire, Who are “all?” The owners of the sewage do not ask for this “ commission.” The capitalists who are ready to stake their money in utilising the sewage in the interest of the heavily-taxed rate-payers do not ask for this “ commission.” Both of these parties are satisfied with the evidence taken by the Select Committee on Sewage of Towns. It is the artificial manure monopolists, then, who would L j confidence in this “ commission,” simply because ‘it would give them, as they think, another chance of deluding the public ; and at the worst, would postpone the economic utilisation of town sewage, and thus prolong their monopoly. But what right have they to be consulted as to whether or not the sewage shall be utilised ?” Why should we appoint a “ mixed commission in which they should have confidence?” Such a suggestion coming from these men is but another illustration of their immeasurable audacity. But will the Metropolitan Board of Works consult the interest of these unscrupulous artificial manure monopolists by appointing this hopeful “ mixed commission ?” We shall see.
    digitised image 1
    digitised image 2
    digitised image 3