The usual fortnightly meeting of the above was held at the Union Hall, Scotch-street, Whitehaven, on Thursday last, MR. G. W. KENWORTHY, J.P., presiding.
There were also present:  MESSRS. J. S. AINSWORTH, J.P.,C.C.,  J. J. DIXON,   W. GRAHAM,   W. ATKINSON,   J. BRAGG,   J. WRIGLEY, J.P., C.C.,   W. REDSHAW,   and   SJ. MUSGRAVE, J.P., C.A.:  with the clerk MR. W. H. ATKINSON.
A letter was read from the Seascale Parish Council objecting to the proposed sewerage extension at Seascale.
MR. WRIGLEY said before the matter wes disposed of he might say that he was requested to oppose the scheme.  Of course, he knew that any opposition the Parish Council might make had no effect whatever.  What this Council were required to do in a case of this kind was, as he thought the clerk would bear him out, simply to give notice to the Parish Council who might agree or object.
    The Parish Council were powerless altogether in the matter.  At the same time he might say that the statements made in the letter and the opinions expressed at the Parish Council with regard to the carrying out of the work had a good deal of truth in them. 
    The present scheme was no abatement of the nuisance, and it would be found, as it had been found with regard to the last extension that was made in connection with the sewer, that there would be another nuisance after the present extension was carried out.  It would have been much better instead of going on with one item and then another, to have formulated it all out at once.
THE CLERK said the scheme had been adopted by the Council.
MR. WRIGLEY said he had carried out the wishes of the Parish Council by making the objection.
THE CLERK said a tender for the carrying out of the work had been made by MR. JOHN WATSON, of Gosforth, for £25, and MR. BOYD recommended that it be accepted.
MR. AINSWORTH moved that the tender of MR. WATSON be accepted, and that the work be proceeded with.  He would just like to say, in answer to MR. WRIGLEY, that the matter had been before them now for a long time, and been referred back on several occasions.  He did not see that they had anything before them now, and they had to do their duty as Guardians for the health of the district.
    When a nuisance existed, it was their duty to see about it and abate it;  and they could not abate the present nuisance excerpt by incurring this comparatively small amount of expenditure.  He would like to say something with regard to the action of the Parish Council in the matter.
    The District Council, which was the Sanitary Authority, proposed the scheme, and the business of the Parish Council was to propose an improved scheme.  If the Parish Council had proposed an unproved scheme, he was quite certain that the Board would only be too ready to go into it thoroughly to see if it was an improvement.  As it was, the Rural Council had to deal with the matter somehow or another, and failing an improved scheme, he did not see anything they had before them.
MR. MUSGRAVE seconded the motion.  In the letter from the Parish Council, they said that the pipes should be carried further than the tanks, which would make more than this £25 to be expended.  There would still be the drainage from the farms adjoining, which was as great an extension as the present one.  He was bound to confirm what the surveyor had suggested, and he would second MR. AINSWORTH's proposition, and he hoped it would be agreed to.
MR. REDSHAW asked if they were going to leave this farm business out, and then have to undo the present work.
THE CLERK said they were doing nothing that would have to be undone.
The motion was carried.
The question of the Seascale road improvement was left over till the next meeting, as the surveyor was in London.
THE CLERK said the next business was to consider MR. AINSWORTH's notice of motion that the report of the Southern Water Committee be considered.
THE SURVEYOR, in his report, which dealt with the sources from which a supply of water could be obtained for the parishes of St. John,  St. Bridget,  Haile,  Lowside Quarter,  Ponsonby,  Gosforth,  Seascale,  and  Netherwasdale, said there were four different places within more or less reasonable distance where water could be procured, viz., at Cogra,  in Lamplugh,  at Cold Fell Gate,  at Wormghyll,  and  at Scalderskew Beck in the Bleng Valley.
    There was also another source of supply, viz., Ennerdale Lake, but its elevation being comparatively low, would not serve the higher parts at Carleton,  Ponsonby,  or  Boonwood by gravitation.  The Cogra source had already been utilised for Frizington and Egremont, and before it could be made available for the district south of Egremont, a considerable amount of capital would have to be expended at Cogra, and probably a new main laid to Egremont, and a new Act of Parliament obtained, so that he thought Cogra as a possible source might be put to one side.
    The supply from Cold Fell Gate would be principally from springs, and as the springs were not very large, extensive storage works would be necessary to supply the whole district, so that this source could not be recommended.
    He did not consider Scalderskew Beck would be a very desirable source of supply and he had come to the conclusion that Wormghyll would be the most satisfactory in every way.  It was a source from which a plentiful supply of water might be obtained at a suitable elevation and position, and was well adapted for the supply in question, and, in fact, capable of supplying a very much larger district.
    His estimate for this scheme amounted to £22,000.  If this amount were borrowed for 30 years at 4 per cent., the annual repayment of principal and interest would be about £1300, and the revenue from the water sold might probably amount to £500 per annum.  At the end of 30 years the annual payment would cease.
    Although the Ennerdale Lake source was not high enough for supplying by gravitation several high points, still it would serve a great part of the district, leaving these high points (where the population is small) dependant upon either pumping the Ennerdale water from suitable points along the supply mains, or by finding sufficient small separate supplies in the neighbourhood of each place.  The probably cost of this scheme he estimated at £16,500.
MR. AINSWORTH said he thought there was no reason why he should detain the Council with this for long.  They were all agreed when this report and plans were printed and circulated.  The cost, he believed, had been quite small, and they would see by the correspondence read, that they had sent a copy to the Local Government Board to let them see that the business was being attended to in a proper way.  He thought the members of the Council would all be of the same mind.
    It was an excellent scheme, the only difficulty being as to the paying of the money.  He found in these schemes that they all agreed as to the benefit of them, but the difficulty was as to the paying.
    Since this report had been made, they would all be aware that the Egremont District Council were prepared to go into an independent scheme of their own for getting water, and he thought it was most desirable that the Rural District Council should endeavour, when Egremont go in for their scheme, to have an understanding with them to get a supply from them for that end of the district.
    It should be left in the hands of the officials to communicate with the Egremont Urban Council, with a view to having an understanding with them on that point.  He moved that the Clerk approach the Egremont Council on the matter.
MR. MUSGRAVE said from the report that they had before them, they had three sources,  Cogra,  Scalderskew,  and Wormghyll.  MR. AINSWORTH, as far as he could hear him, said that they should approach the Egremont Council upon the question of this Wormghyll supply.  He would suggest to MR. AINSWORTH that instead of definitely fixing on the Wormghyll supply, that they should have a supply to the district including the parishes to the south of Egremont.
MR. AINSWORTH:  That is what I mean.
In reply to MR. WRIGLEY, the CLERK said that the Egremont Council had instructed their engineer to make a report on Wormghyll.  They had already had the water analysed.
MR. WRIGLEY said he had often seen reports in the newspapers as to complaints about the supply, but he had never seen any steps they had taken to get a different supply.
MR. GRAHAM:  Yes, MR. BOYD has been instructed.  He thought if the Egremont people knew that the Rural Coouncil were intending to become customers, it would help them in their decision.
MR. ATKINSON objected to be tacked on to the tail of any other authority.
MR. MUSGRAVE and MR. AINSWORTH's proposition was to approach the Egremont Urban Council to ask if they would consider the question of a water supply with them for Egremont and the parishes south of Egremont.
MR. AINSWORTH:  That is so.
MR. ATKINSON:  If this is so, I fall in with it.
The motion was carried.