96 THE "SILTING UP" OF THE RIVER RODING.
runs, dammed to a certain height, to turn the water-wheels ; on the western side
of this are the lock-gates for the navigation, fitted with sluices which can be
opened (when the gates are not thrown back to admit the full discharge permitted
by the waterway) and west of this again are what are called 'the Six Gates'
which are as many sluices designed to aid the discharge of the water. Beyond
all these gates is the open river, thence flowing unimpeded to the Thames.
" In the flood of August, 1888, part of the town of Barking was only saved
from immersion by the bursting of the river bank on its western side which poured
and spent the water over the adjacent marsh lands. Mr. Dawson, the able sur-
veyor of the Local Board, was directed to consider the whole subject, and he has
drawn the attention of his board (in a report dated September 13th, 1888, with a
copy of which he has favoured me) to the very point to which I wished to allude.
" After showing how inadequate the existing gates and sluices are to meet
such a flood he draws attention to the long disuse and now partial (but only
recent) destruction of what is locally known as the 'Hand Trough,'1 but which on
the Ordnance Map is called the 'Back River.' This natural auxiliary river, like
the small Bye Pass at the 'Old Mill' noticed above, and the duct in continuation
of the auxiliary stream at Ilford, was anciently treated to supplement the mill
sluices and gates, and to help recoup the discharging area in the event of
flood. It left the river on its western bank nearly half a mile above River Roding
Bridge, where a weir, the remains of which exist, was constructed to give the
water free exit above a certain level, and then continued in loop shape under the
Western Bridge on the Barking Road, 17ft. 6in. span, flowing in a parallel course
with the main river, and passing under what was called 'White Gate Bridge,'
now (but only recently) destroyed, till it reached, unobstructed, the open river.
This 'Back River,' had its utility not have been destroyed (for it is now merely con-
nected with a gin. pipe at its northern end, and a I5in. penstock at its southern
end) Mr. Dawson believes would have prevented the flood of 1888. Its vast im-
portance is obvious, and I am glad to think that the western bridge, which was
given over by the County to the Local Boards of Barking and East Ham for
destruction (the advantage of this Back River having, till August, 1888, been lost
sight of), is still intact, and in my judgment this Back River, in common with the
continuing duct of the western Ilford Bridges stream above mentioned, should
be restored to its old use, and that the whole river from this outfall in its mouth,
up to Woodford Bridge, should be treated and restored in one operation.
" There is one other auxiliary stream on the east bank of the main river which
I do not wish to omit, via., the Loxford Brook ; one arm of this, silted up, enters
the river a short distance above River Roding Bridge ; the main stream of the
brook passing parallel with the river under the East Bridge on the Barking Road,
11ft. 6in. span, and delivering its water into the main river above the mill. I
should desire to see the bed of this stream cleaned out at the same time, as it then
will make available the area of the East Bridge for the main river, as well as for
the brook, and the whole 56ft. passage way will be regained ; and if the naviga-
tion gates and other sluices are altered as Mr. Dawson points out in his report,
there would then exist an ample area for the discharge of the flood water, and for
the future probably prevent the disastrous results of what occurred last year. As
in the first section, so in this second, what is chiefly required is the simple work
of the restoration of the excellent ancient system of drainage which would in-
volve no very large outlay."
1 Query, whence this name? Cf "Handford Water," or the Back Water, at Walton-on-
Naze, and Handford, Ipswich.—E. A. F.