View report page

48
Since communicating the above, the proposal to give an officia
sanction and encouragement to bathing in the river Lea in its
present state has been abandoned by the Council. The wisdom of
this course is obvious. There is no doubt that parts of the river
have been used during the summer by young persons for bathing,
but no sanction or approval of such a practice has ever been given
by the local authority.
With the river in its highly polluted state such an act is
attended with danger. Organisms of disease are no doubt plentiful
in the water, and bathing cannot take place without some of the
water being swallowed by the bathers.
As to the statement that the "conditions would be materially
improved as regards the purity of the water," I have no hesitation
in saying it is open to very great doubt, unless some means are
devised of renewing the water of the pool other than by subsoil
filtration, the water would soon become filthy and stagnant. The
device of renewing it at flood times and occasionally at high tides is
more objectionable still. The water brought down at flood times is
turbid, contains a large proportion of organic and inorganic suspended
matter—it contains the service pollutions of the adjacent
lands. The water at high tides is more highly polluted still, being
forced back by the rising tide from the lower parts of the river.
It seems extraordinary that anyone should entertain the idea
that water of less purity than that used for domestic purposes is
good enough for bathing in. The chief object, I imagine, of bathing
is that of cleanliness, the secondary object is the acquiring and use
of a healthy exercise; with dirty water, the former would not be
realised, and the exercise would become a dangerous and unhealthy
one.
There is no doubt the idea of the bathing pool is a good one;
and if it could be supplied with pure water, would be a great boon
to many young people in the East End.