View report page

57
blown out of their casings by the force of the explosion. So far as the sewer proper
is concerned, there does not appear to have been any damage, to cause the explosion
there must have been some inflammable explosive gas existing in a free state
in the sewer, the origin of which is somewhat difficult to ascertain. On inspecting
the sewer to-day it was found to contain a large quantity of the vapour of naphtha.
If this same gas was present on the day of the explosion it is quite sufficient to account
for what occurred. Again there might be some leakage from the numerous
gas pipes as in the case at Putney some few years ago, which might have found its
way into the sewer, but there is no smell of ordinary burning gas in the sewer at
the present time.
Sewer gas is in itself explosive and more so if mixed with coal gas, but in the absence
of any coal gas smell, and the sewer being quite clean, having been recently
flushed, we do not think this could have been the matters exploded.
In the absence of any positive evidence as to what kind of gas was present in the
sewer at the time of the explosion it would be simply conjecture to hazard an opinion
as to its nature, at the same time if naphtha vapour is to be permitted to prevade
this sewer or any other sewer to the extent it docs on various occasions then an explosion
may be anticipated at any moment. What the immediate cause of the explosion
was, it is difficult to say. A light such as a workman lamp, a lighted match
thrown down the sewer, or any inflammable oil floating down in a burning condition
would of course be quite sufficient to fire the gas, but in the absence of any direct
evidence that any of these existed it is impossible to say in what way the gas was fired
As previously stated all the covering to the man-holes was blown open with the
exception of the one at Francis Street, which was shattered, this having been complained
of, has not been open for some time since, thus forming with the man-hole a
closed receptacle in which the explosive gas mast have accumulated as it evidently
received the greater force of the explosion—This we should recommend to be entirely
done away with or more frequently used—with respect to the others being the weaker
part of the sewer, they suffered accordingly.
Seeing then that the sewer does at certain times contain the vapour of naphtha—
the question arises—whence does it come — we believe it is from the well pumping
at the new Battersea Bridge—and for this reason—that when the water from the
well is directed into the river, the sewer in Church Road and Bridge Road, is free
from naphtha smell, but so long as the water is pumped into the sewer in Bridge
Road, on account of the high tide, there it, as well as the Church Road sewer is
charged with naphtha vapour. We have examined the well or sump at the Bridge,
and found it contains a considerable quantity of naphtha.
We would recommend that the company be requested to discontinue the pumping
from the swamp into the sewer—not only for the reason mentioned above, but also
on account of the odour which is given off when passed into that channel. On
ceasing to pump into the sewer all vapour of naphtha ceased, and there has been no
further complaint of nuisance—there is therefore presumptive evidence that therein
laid the source of the explosion.
Water supply. Dead Ends again, complaint was received
of offensive smell proceeding from the water delivered
into the cisterns in Winstanley Road near the Station
End. On examination, the water was found to be turbid