Summary
Dr Rowland Morris Fawcett, medic, councillor, magistrate and mayor was a civic titan in Victorian Cambridge. He moved this item in 1870 to get a new sewage farm built for the town.
“His papers are held in London (see here). So if anyone wants to write a biography about him, you’ll be contributing a huge chunk of knowledge to the history of how Cambridge modernised. The reason being that Fawcett was one of the driving forces behind the improvement in sanitation in Cambridge. This from the British Newspaper Archive.
THE STATE OF THE CAM.
“The next business was to call the attention of the [Cambridge Improvement] Board to the increased impurity of the [River] Cam, with the view to obtaining an Act to divert the sewage from the river, with the necessary borrowing powers (Dr. Fawcett).”
“In accordance with this notice of motion, Dr. Fawcett said that in putting the notice on the paper and calling the attention of the Board to the increased impurity of the [River] Cam he was fulfilling promises he had made. In the summer a gentleman of the University asked him to do so, stating that at St. John’s, the river was so foul that men with rooms on it had to keep their windows closed, or go to other rooms, and that one or two men ascribed illness to it.
“About the same time Mr. Dennis Adams asked him to have a meeting of medical men to present a memorial to the Board on the filthy state of the Cam, Mr. Adams wished him to do this in consequence of the prevalence of scarlet fever of which there had been many severe and several fatal cases.
“He (Dr. F.) conferred with Dr. Paget [Likely Sir George Edward Paget, brother of James Paget, who had a hospital named after him] who agreed with him not to hold such meeting—it might create an unnecessary panic, which would be very injurious at that time to both town and university.
“Moreover the epidemic was not confined to Cambridge, but was pretty general through the country.—Then it was to be hoped that Autumn showers would sluice the drains, and cold weather stay the disease. He therefore promised to bring the subject forward at the November meeting. He now wished to make one professional remark, and would then proceed to the river.
“Medical men could not make any positive assertion with regard to the origin of these contagious epidemics. But they could positively assert that they were aggravated and intensified bad and deficient drainage; and that where such drainage existed were worse. Their duty therefore was—irrespective of other towns—to see and make Cambridge as healthy as possible.
“And now for the river. When the Cam Improvement Committee commenced their works for boating purposes, the Cam Purification Committee said they should hand in hand with them for sanitary purposes. About the same time Mr. Hawkshaw in a letter the Times—said
“When the deepening and widening have been completed the cause of the mischief will still remain. The river will again silt up more speedily than before, for the town grows larger every day,”
—The Cam Committee too said,
“It is of little permanent use deepening and widening the Cam for boating purposes, if 30,000 inhabitants are constantly pouring their sewage into it.”
“What was the result? The Cam was worse than ever. What had been done had conduced to better rowing the river, and perhaps to it may be ascribed the victory of the Light Blue at the last Boat Race. But the Cam remains, as Mr. Rowe graphically described it in 1864, an elongated cesspool; only now in 1870 it is deepened and widened; improved as a cesspool, but not as river. The only remedy for the evil is total diversion of sewage from the river, and utilizing the same for agriculture.
“Mr. Reynolds Rowe, Mr. Bazalgette [Joseph the engineering giant], and Mr. Stephenson have reported that diversion was not difficult. Funds were only wanted. Surely the people of Cambridge would not let rate stand in the way of a clean river. Money could be raised borrowing powers (the payment spread over 50 years) and if all they heard was true the scheme would be remunerative.
“Then as to utilizing sewage, discussions had been carried on between supporters of irrigation and deodorizing by precipitation. He at first was an enthusiast for irrigation. He had become, perhaps, an unwilling convert to precipitation; but the evidence and reports in favour of irrigation were strong, that was content to swim with the stream, though a dirty one. And now as to the position of the Board, in reference to the question.
“At meeting in June, 1809, it was agreed to wait for the report of the Royal Commission on the pollution of rivers, and the possible legislation thereon. In June of 1870, a vote of money was granted to the Committee of the British Association, appointed to enquire and report on the treatment and utilization of sewage. Both reports had been published.
“The report of the Royal Commissioners was decidedly and strongly in favour of irrigation successful and paying mode of dealing with sewage. The Rev. Mr. Corfield, engaged to report for the British Association from the evidence obtained the Committee, compared the two systems. His conclusions as to deodorizing by precipitation were:
“All these precipitation processes do, then, to a certain extent, purify the sewage and prevent the pollution of rivers, chiefly by removing the suspended matters from the sewage; but they all leave a very large amount of putrescible matter in the effluent water, and at least all the ammonia contained in the sewages (sometimes they add to it); the greater part of the phosphoric acid is precipitated some of them, while they increase the hardness of the river water, master of great importance if the stream be a small one.
“The manures that they produce are in every case very inferior, as may be expected from the known value of the sewage constituents that can be precipitated. They have all failed in producing valuable manure because the valuable constituent of sewage, par excellence, the ammonia which of course invariably totally escapes in the effluent water, and is lost to the manure; this shows the futility of all attempts to utilize sewage precipitation.”
“Then as to irrigation
“We conclude then (1) that careful and well conducted sewage, irrigation, especially with the application of small quantities per acre, the purification of the whole liquid refuse of a town is practically perfect, and has been ensured in cases where it was not at all the object of the agriculturist; and that it is the only process known which the can be effected on a large or small scale.” (2) “That Jt the value of land is enormously increased—at least doubled every instance. That perfectly worthless land, blowing see sand for instance, can be made in this way to support large and valuable crops.” (3) “That the quantity per acre obtained from all crops increased.” (4)” That it reduces to a great extent or entirely renders unnecessary, the usual amount of artificial manures of all kinds, supplying a manure especially adapted, from its complex constitution, for the nourishment of crops, supplying it moreover in a state of solution (that is to say, in the most ready absorbable condition), and supplying at the same time that most necessary aid to vegetation—water—by which the value of the manure during the greater part of the year is almost That it the farmer is rendered independent of the weather, so that he can be practically certain of his crops, and moreover be able to transplant transplant them as he pleases.” “(6) That, with all these advantages, it is no wonder that, whenever sewage has been wastefully applied, it has been found to pay; and that where its management is more thoroughly understood it will doubtless be found to be valuable source of income to towns.”
“And now, before moving his resolution he (Dr F) wished to explain his position. The late abortive meeting he was prepared to move a resolution referring to the commons and the constitution of the Board of Improvement Commissioners; but he found they were likely to involve an opposition, which would upset the Cam scheme. Mr Barlow, their clerk, had sent him an opinion of his agent’s, which was to the effect that:
“It is quite competent for the Commissioners to proceed with their bill, advertising the same as fully as possible, and depositing the plans and sections in accordance with the standing orders; and if they are not opposed on standing orders, it is very likely the Standing Orders Committee will allow them to proceed with their bill, notwithstanding their not having advertised in accordance with the standing orders If, however, they are opposed, there is less chance of their succeeding.”
“The last clause of that letter determined him to go in for the Cam purification only. The Board had received a letter from the Clerk of the Conservators – not the first letter of the sort, and, perhaps, not the last, which last might savour somewhat stronger. Hw would now, thanking them for their attention, move:
“That the Cam Purification Committee and the Parliamentary Committees be requested to appoint a sub-Committee to take all the necessary steps for obtaining a local Act to deal with the sewage question, if there should be no general legislation on the subject in the ensuing session of Parliament; and that such Committee report to this Board from time ti time; and that this meeting on rising, be adjourned to this day three weeks, December 13th [1870].”
The Vote
Following an extensive debate, Dr Fawcett’s motion was approved 14-10 with 2 abstentions.”
Lost Cambridge 