View report page

51
III. -(a.) "That steps have already been taken by the
"East London Water Company which should in our opinion
"afford sufficient storage of water to meet any deficiency in the
"supply of water within their district for many years to come."
(b.)"That for the protection of the consumer against
"unavoidable temporary intermissions of the supply, we consider
"that there would be distinct advantage in having properly
"designed means for storage of water in houses."
On the 4th March, 1896, the Board approved the Report
of a Committee in the following term:—
"That having carefully considered the Report of the
"Local Government Hoard's Inspectors on the alleged failure
"of the East London Water Supply in the Summer of 1895,
"they regretted to find that the same was equivalent to an ex"oneration
of the Company, and were of opinion that abundance
"of evidence was produced at the Inquiry to clearly prove that
"the Company was responsible to a very great extent for the
"short supply caused by the mains not being laid at a sufficient
"depth to protect from frost and to prevent them bursting, in
"consequence of which great waste of water occurred, and the
"Committee further considered that the action of the Company
"in lowering their mains in the District since the Inquiry, was,
"In itself, proof that the Company recognised the fact that such
"mains were not previously laid at a sufficient depth, and the
"Committee regretted that the provision of storage cisterns
"wass recommended in the Report, although the medical
"gentlemen who gave evidence at the Inquiry were unanim"ously
of opinion that the use of such cisterns was dangerous
"to health."
In December a letter was received from the London
County Council asking the support of the Hoard to a propose Bill
to require the East London Water Works Company to supply
water constantly at such a pressure as would make the water reach
the top story of the highest houses within their limits of supply, and
the Hoard agreed to support such Hill.