View report page

67
other such matter or thing, properly and securely covered so as to
prevent any nuisance arising therefrom, and no such dust, ashes,
rubbish, offal, carrion, fish, or filth, or other such matter or thing shall
be loaded above the coamings or hatches of any such ship, boat, or
vessel."
And further that:—
"Where, for the purposes of removal within, or carriage through, the
district of the Port Sanitary Authority any cargo, load, or collection of
fœcal or offensive matter or liquid has been put into or upon any ship,
boat, or vessel, the owner or consignee, or any person who has undertaken
to deliver such cargo, load, or collection, or who is in charge o£
the same, or of such ship, boat, or vessel, shall not without a reasonable
excuse permit or allow or cause such ship, boat, or vessel containing
such cargo, load, or collection, or any undischarged portion thereof, to
remain within the said district for a longer period than 48 hours."
The locality was kept under close observation, and there was no doubt that
some nuisance was caused to the persons in the vicinity during the actual
discharge of the bones, &c., from the cart into the barge. It was not possible
to take any further action so long as the barges were kept covered when not
actually engaged in receiving bones, and did not remain unnecessarily long
in the creek. The person concerned in the trade undertook to do this, and I
have had no further complaints. It is probable, however, that during warm
weather the nuisance will be more noticeable.
For some years past the Thames Conservators have been corresponding
with the Gravesend Corporation in respect of the discharge of crude sewage
into the Thames from several houses in that town, and ultimately a notice
was served under Section 94 of the Thames Conservancy Act, 1894, requiring
the pollution to be discontinued.
The facts were that crude sewage flowed into the River Thames from a
sewer which was vested in the Gravesend Corporation as the Sanitary
Authority, and that this sewer conveyed the sewage not only from the
premises of private persons but also from premises belonging to the
Corporation.
The case was finally decided in the Divisional Court of King's Bench, and
it was held that as regards this sewage, which came from the Corporation's
premises, they had caused or suffered the sewage to flow into the Thames
within the meaning of Section 94 of the Thames Conservancy Act, 1894,
but that as regards the sewage coming from the premises of private persons
the Corporation had not done so.