THE PORT OF LONDON AND THE THAMES BARRAGE.
[TO THE EDITOR OF TUB "Sr scrATo3.1 SIR,—Having just read the article on the above topic in your issue of August 24th, may I point to one probable result of the proposed conversion of the Thames between Teddiugton and Gravesend "from a tidal into a tideless river" which the writer does not happen to suggest, but which would, as I conceive, affect thousands of Londoners of all classes, accord- ing to their proximity to the Thames ? The constant and powerful sweep of the tide, twice in flow and twice in ebb daily, is for many miles through our Metropolis a great purifier and " health agency." The • rush of the water not only brings in an enormous volume from the estuary to meet the stream from above, but carries with it up and down four times a day, and thus constantly disturbs, the atmosphere above it. Any one who like myself lives on the riverside can testify to the relative cleanliness of the fogs which haunt the river, and to the freshness of the air for riparian residence. These are valuable and important considera- tions to add to that beauty and fascination of the river- and-craft scenery of London which would also probably be largely affected by the suggested barrage. Without saying that the scheme would involve stagnation from Chiswick down to the Pool, along miles where it would be most difficult for even the. London County Council and the Thames Conservancy to prevent all refuse and rubbish, I do suggest that the down- ward flow and the riparian conditions are very different from those of the Rhine at Cologne, or even the Seine at Paris. Huge as is the issue whether or not the Port of London shall continue to be the greatest in the world, the health of our overcrowded city is of such paramount importance that the wisest and best advice of medical and scientific experts should be sought on this aspect of the question. The promoters of the scheme are likely to minimise it.—I am, Sir, &c.,
13 Hammersmith Terrace, W. WARWICK H. DRAPER.
Previous page
