66

Mr. FREEMAN'S answer was unhesitatingly clear: it is distinctly unwise, but exceedingly common for such appoint"ments to be made," and he has "no doubt that if the other "side objected to such an arbitrator being appointed, the "court would support the objection, and revoke the appoint"ment."

It does not seem that Mr. FREEMAN's opinion, although it would commend itself to the layman, is that held by the legal authorities.

The case to which I referred was reported in the Times of November 25th, last year* (Jackson v. The Barry Railway Company), and was argued before a Court of Appeal consisting of Lords Justices LINDLEY, BOWEN, and A. L. SMITH, who decided by a majority (Lord Justice A .L. SMITH dissenting) that the engineer employed by the company was a fit and proper person to act as arbitrator between the company and their contractor, and that, notwithstanding his having expressed a decided opinion upon one of the principal points in dispute, he might still be regarded as possessing the " mind" necessary open necessary to a judge or arbitrator. Lord Justice A. L. SMITH'S dissent is most ably expressed, and carries with it all the weight of his Lordship's well-known common sense and practical ability: but it differs not only from the view of his learned brethren, but from various precedents gathered by Mr. HUDSON, in his valuable work on building contracts, which unanimously favour the view confirmed by this judgment of the Court of Appeal. Mr. HUDSON's statement, Chap. XIII., sec. 4 (c), is, that "no interest of the arbitrator which is known to the "parties as existing, or likely in the ordinary course of "business to exist, disqualifies him." In support of this, he quotes several strong cases-Ranger v. Great Western Railway Company, 5 H.L. Cas. 72; Stevenson v. Watson, 4

*Professional Notes," vol. vi., p. 69.

C.P.D. 148; Wansbech Railway v. Trowsdale, L.R. 1 C.P. 269, and several others bearing directly upon the matter, though rather with regard to engineers than architects; and gives (under paragraph 9, page 526) a quotation from the LORD PRESIDENT conveying a very similar impression to some of the observations made by Lord Justice BOWEN on the case above mentioned.

It is, no doubt, very unadvisable that an architect should be referee or arbitrator upon a matter in which he has already acted on behalf of one party: but, if no objection to his arbitration should be taken before the contract has been signed and stamped, the contract seems to render his position in so acting, if clearly defined therein, legally inexpugnable. HENRY NORTHCROFT, Fellow.

On Mr. Tom Bright's Paper on "Underwoods: their Growth, and Utilisation."

("Transactions," Vol. XXV., pp. 347-368.)

As the subject of this Paper has considerable attractions for me, and as I think that the question of the utilisation of underwoods is likely to become a much more important one for country surveyors than is now the case, I shall be glad if space may be spared for the following notes:

1. Though I cordially agree that the materially reduced value of hop poles does, as was pointed out in the Paper, and by several speakers at the meetings, considerably affect the prices obtainable for underwoods, I would venture to submit that the prices of other products obtainable from the cutting have also very sensibly declined of recent years, and that it is the effect of the diminished returns from several

of these sources which has caused the very serious diminution in the annual returns from our underwoods.

To take one instance-another source of profit to the purchaser of underwood which has declined in quite as large a ratio as hop poles is, hoops; and as no figures upon this detail of the subject are quoted in the "Transactions," I give the following (taken from accounts in my possession) which may be of interest. The prices realised per cutting tend to confirm the remarkable (though unfortunately only too true) figures given on page 351 of the "Transactions" :Prices realised at public auction for underwood (mixed ash and hazel) on a piece of land situate on the chalk on the boundary of Hants and Sussex

£18 58. Od. £7 10s. Od. £4 0s. Od. per acre.

Prices of hoops (“kilderkins," i.e., of size to go round a kilderkin cask-120 hoops to a bundle, 30 bundles to a load)

1874-5.

£5 0s. Od.

1882-3. 1891-1.

? £2 12s. 6d. per load.

I am, unfortunately, unable to give the price for 1883. Instances of declines in this and others of what may be termed the "manufactured products" of a cutting may be multiplied ad infinitum. Personally, I have thought it very remarkable that by far the larger proportion of the underwood in this district should be cut into "bunts" for firewood, which, naturally, cannot produce a very large return per acre.

2. I have carefully scanned both the Paper and the discussion with a view to ascertaining whether by any means a plan might be devised either for increasing the returns from our existing underwoods, or, in the case of new plantings, whether any member of the Institution could suggest

any wood which a peculiar demand rendered more profitable

than others.

As, however, this does not appear to be the case, I would make the following remarks, with a view to eliciting opinions from the author of the Paper or any member having special knowledge on the subject::

a. Taking it for granted that the new method of "wiring" for hops will be such a success as to generally supersede the old pole system, can any better course be pursued than to include a large proportion of larch in making new plantings for underwood? I believe that whole timbers will always be preferred to sawn posts, on account of their greater durability.

b. Imagining that the returns from our present system of management may diminish still more, will it not become the most profitable proceeding to plant a quick-growing wood for cutting, say, every four or five years, for firewood only? On such barren soils as are afforded by the lower greensand, where birch springs up naturally, I feel certain this would prove to be the most remunerative course to pursue.

c. Why do our walking-sticks come so largely from abroad? I believe that local factories (even if only established for the preliminary processes of cutting, peeling, and filing) would prove not only a financial success, but of considerable benefit to a rural population, and of great service in the conversion of our underwoods.

Such woods as hazel, black and white thorn, holly, Scots fir, cherry, &c., might certainly be utilised in this way.

In this connection, I imagine it is not generally known that a large demand exists for furze for export to New York, notwithstanding the duty put upon it there.

G. S. MITCHELL, Fellow.

On Mr. Grantham's Paper on "Recent Experience in Sewage Filtration considered in relation to River Pollution."

("Transactions," Vol. XXV., pp. 401-422.)

I have received the following remarks from Mr. SANTO CRIMP, M. Inst. C.E., who was unable to be present at the discussion on my Paper. They are important as coming from one whose practical experience and intimate knowledge of the treatment of sewage have been exemplified in his successful management of the Wimbledon Sewage Farm:

I regret that I was prevented from attending the meeting on the occasion when Mr. GRANTHAM'S Paper was read. It was an excellent résumé of the subject of sewage disposal. The key note of successful sewage farm management was struck in the reference to the Abingdon Sewage Farm. I have seen the effects of unskilful management at Wimbledon, where the farm, which is mainly of clay, was for a time ruined-from the sewage purification point of view-by reason of the underdrains, and by careless management. A great nuisance was the result, which, however, I partly remedied by taking up vast numbers of drains, and by carefully attending to the surface of the land, the local board at the same time appointing a thoroughly capable manager, Mr. SNOOK, who has since turned out one of the best effluents to be found in the kingdom.

In another case I was recently consulted with regard to the sewage disposal of Industrial School buildings, with a population of about 1,000, surrounded by land of excellent quality for sewage treatment, but where a nuisance existed simply due to careless management. In that case I recommended the proper preparation of a small area for sewage treatment, and insisted upon the importance of efficient management; and, indeed, in several other instances in which I have been consulted, I have found bad management of both sewage farms and chemical processes, to be the main cause of failure. The author of the Paper referred to Chiswick, Acton, Mortlake, and other towns on the Thames below the intakes of the water companies, where the treatment was satisfactory, whether the effluent was passed through filters or not, but it is not to be assumed that these processes would be equally satisfactory in cases where the effluent was poured into a small stream. It would be difficult