Page images

purposes was supplied by collecting rain water, which only required filtering to become pleasant for drinking purposes.

Prof. T. HAYTER LEWIS, F.S.A. (London), knew a district not above fifty or sixty miles from London where no one could drink the water from the wells, and every drop of water was collected from the roofs. The problem of getting the water from the roofs and clearing it of defilement, was a serious one, and the people in this case had to use filters and strainers, and so forth, to get rid of the grosser impurities.

Mr. L. L. MACASSEY, B.L. (Belfast), referred to the case of a friend of his own in Ireland, who wished to provide his country home with a supply of water under pressure. This gentleman obtained the following particulars of a windmill in actual operation at a railway station, and the details might be interesting to the meeting. The mill worked a set of pumps with a lift of thirty-five feet, and raised on an average some five thousand gallons per day; the cost of erection was about fifty pounds, and the superintendent of the railway stated that he found at the end of the first year's working the saving in coal formerly used in the pumping by steam was about equal to the cost of the mill. The pattern adopted was the American self-reefing mill, with a diameter of thirteen feet. The amount of storage required to keep up the daily supply during calm weather was about fourteen days-but it must be borne in mind that the situation was very favourable for catching the wind. Village authorities, as a rule, objected to engines or windmills, or in fact anything likely to get out of order; what they wanted was a means of supply that would work automatically, and consequently a gravitation system was always to be preferred when it could be obtained at a moderate outlay. He was of opinion that fresh legislation was necessary in the matter of acquiring water by means of a provisional order: at present a local authority could not obtain powers to take waters compulsorily in this way; they could take land and sink wells, but if they desired to acquire stream or surface water they had to obtain an Act of Parliament. In the present state of the law, local authorities who could not afford to go to Parliament had to treat with the riparian owners-and anyone who had ever done this would know what it meant or else they had to resort to a supply of water from wells. One great objection to well supplies was the liability of pollution. The surface soil became saturated with organic matter, and in many cases portions of this matter were washed down into the well through the pores of the ground in wet weather. A friend of his living in the country had a well some distance from his house, which he prized very highly; mineral oil was used in the house, and the barrel of oil was kept in an out-house some little way from the well; by accident the oil tap was left open, and the oil ran out and soaked into the ground; as a consequence, the well-water became undrinkable, and it remained tainted by the oil for over twelve months. This well was thus dependant for the purity of its water on the condition of the surface; and without doubt, many wells in connection with dwelling houses were in an equally unsatisfactory condition.


Mr.J.CORBETT (Manchester) remarked that special consideration was required as to the cheapest means of raising water for village supply. After all, the cheapest and simplest power was that of the housewife's arm and the hand-pump, and if they could apply that power to an improved source of supply they would best meet the village wants, and meet them with the least expenditure. He wished particularly to call attention to a case with which he himself had had to deal. The landowner who was making the improvement stipulated that the work should cost so little that he had to come down to the very simplest of means. A good supply was brought into the village by gravitation, but at such a level as to supply only a few houses. All the houses were situated within about twenty feet of the level of that supply. He therefore carried suction-mains to the eight or ten existing pumps, and then supplied new pumps in the old casings. This, with a small covered reservoir, completed his arrangement. In one case he had a pipe 220 yards long, with a lift of 22 feet. He made that pipe only 14 inch diameter, and it was of lead-encased block-tin. It gave a satisfactory supply, thanks to the expedient of placing an air-vessel with the suction-pipe from the supply introduced into the top of it, and the air-vessel placed at the height of the pump-barrel and connected to its suction-valve at the base. This appliance formed a self-priming cistern for the pump valves and bucket, and also formed an equalising or air-vessel for the long suction-pipe; and the practical result was perfectly satisfactory.

Mr. R. RAILSTON-BROWN (Bridlington Quay) said that he had been superintending the waterworks for Market Weighton. They found the place supplied from dumb-wells about ten feet deep, and the drainage in a most unsatisfactory condition. When they went there they found no fewer than eighty cases of typhoid, but within three months of starting their first supply from the chalk, from a well and bore seventy-six feet deep, there was not a case of typhoid in the village.

Mr. A. E. ECCLES (Chorley) wished to know how it was that whilst the cities and towns were getting rid of pump water, they were now recommending it to villages. Pump water was generally hard water, and hard water was injurious, as it contained lime and other mineral matter, which produced stone and other internal accumulations in the body of man. Wherever it was possible, villages should be supplied with soft pure water from a hilly district, like some of our best waterworks are.

Mr. J. J. BRADSHAW (Bolton) observed that they frequently found people in villages had good teeth, whilst those in towns had bad ones. There was that objection to town water, that it had often not sufficient lime in it to aid in the formation of bone. The difficulty of separating pure and impure roof-water was in many cases met by Mr. Roberts' Separator.

On "The Fouling of Streams," by Major LAMOROCK FLOWER, Sanitary Engineer to the Lee Conservancy Board, &c,

WATER!-of Heaven first-born: ever in all ages a sacred emblem, from that remote period when "the earth was without form and void, and darkness was upon the face of the deep, and the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters." Alas! in these latter days more abused than is any other element; and fouled streams-from the babbling brook to the broad, once silver highway of nations, and those portions of the "wide, the open sea" (a "stream" within the meaning of the Act of 1876)—amply justify the assertion.

It will be convenient in considering the subject to regard it from three distinct points of view:

1st. The Causes of the Fouling of Streams.

2nd. The Effects thereof.

3rd. Remedial Measures.

I trust my long experience and daily familiarity with the subject may be my excuse, if I appear somewhat didactic in this

[blocks in formation]

Prominent is inefficient legislation: the permissive character of existing Acts of Parliament which have been framed with the object of abating and preventing river pollution, and the many loopholes which are found in special clauses. Our laws hereon are complicated; they are conflicting, and also are ineffective. Prosecution of offenders is enormously expensive, and the machinery is cumbersome.

The removal of sewage by water-carriage, born of the introduction of the water-closet-which contrivance, some say, was the invention of the devil-lies at the root of much fouling of streams. Sewers are laid by which sewage of towns and villages is discharged direct into streams; or, if into cesspools, these receptacles have overflows which contribute sewage in its worst condition-putrefaction. The fluid part of sewage is the worst part of it.

Then the storm-water outlets, the "back door" to systems of sewerage; there must of necessity be a safety valve of the kind, but this contrivance has too often acted as a "back door," or means of surreptitiously passing large volumes of foul matter

to our streams. For example, given a town of say 10,000 inhabitants which disposes of its water-carried sewage on land, we will say the land either worked by a sanitary authority, or, it may be, leased to a sewage farmer-what are the conditions? The authority or its tenant is bound to receive and also to dispose of the whole of the sewage of the inhabitants every day of the week, all the year round, rain or shine, heat or cold, presumably on a given area of land; what happens? When all is fair sailing the sewage is properly got rid of, but when storms come or when a hard frost is present, where does the sewage go to? Naturally into the streams again. I am prepared to hear it advanced that sewaged land is not liable to be frozen, and therefore no overflow could take place; but experience teaches me that sewaged land does get frozen, and that sewage does escape over such frozen land into the water-courses. Again, in heavy storms the sewers get overcharged, and volumes of sewage pass to the rivers of our country by the "back door."

Or, the sewage may be disposed of by chemical treatment. What a temptation lies here to save chemicals and let the sewage improperly dealt with pass away. The sewage doctor as well as the chemist, to say nothing of the ratepayers, seem to profit by practically breaking the law. The sewage farmer lets what he does not want of the sewage pass away by the storm outlet. The Local Sanitary Authority saves by starving the chemicals.

Again, unless the sewage be borne to the outfall by gravitation, how excellently good it is to be able to save some few pounds in a year by reducing the pumping expenses; what a feather in the cap of the official in charge to be able to say, "we have saved something," however trivial. "Keep the rates down" has been one of the fruitful causes of fouling of streams-a "penny wise and pound foolish" policy. When will folk learn the value of the wise man's saying, "There is that scattereth and yet increaseth?" and I am sure that many of my hearers can point to the result of following out the principle in their own experience. False economy is another of the causes of fouling of streams.

High farming-the top dressing of lands with manure of all kinds, artificial or otherwise-and the drainage therefrom into water-courses; sewage sludge spread on lands and allowed to drain into a stream also.

Carriage of manure in old and rotten barges is another cause; one of the greatest difficulties I have to overcome in the river Lee is pollution from manure barges. The carriage of manure is specially sanctioned by a clause in the Act of 1868.

Canal boats and house boats on rivers are fruitful causes of pollution; all the refuse from a canal population passes or is cast into the water; and as to house boats, I give a picture from a local newspaper of the condition of affairs at Henleyon-Thames :-"There was a great number of decomposing salad leaves, some rotten fruit, innumerable egg-shells, with part of the yellow of the egg still adhering, several large pieces of bread, the skin of a salmon, a skirt of lamb, stale pieces of fat and meat, some spring onions, innumerable crushed lemons, faded flowers, lobster shells, bruised tomatoes, and a dead roach." The report follows grotesquely, "a bucketful of water taken from the midst of this garbage smelt very unpleasant!"

Inefficient or improper chemical treatment of sewage is another cause. "All is not gold that glitters," we know, and "bright effluents," "pellucid jets of spring water," are often delusive. I always say that the value or otherwise of a chemical process is shown by the effect upon a stream of the effluent which is discharged therefrom.

Privies erected over water-courses are another cause, and similar necessary conveniences placed over ditches also; here the filth accumulates and decomposes, and is washed away into the nearest water-course by heavy storms.

Pollution from manufactory refuse also contributes to the long list of causes of river pollution. How frequently do we read some such notes as the following:-"The river Aire flowing through Leeds contains probably every loathsome and disgusting impurity which exists; it is the open sewer for half a hundred towns and villages; it is the ever ready receptacle for every waste product of mills, tanneries, dye works, chemical works, slaughter-houses, and everything else of which man is in a hurry to rid himself; such a burden does the black bosom of the river Aire bear at Leeds bridge."

Again, we read of the Irwell: "From time immemorial it has been the receptacle for quarry rubbish, surplus excavation, ashes, and refuse of the various manufactories on its banks; and at the present time (1887) the sewage from a population of upwards of a million persons passes, with scarcely an attempt at purification, into its stream." Of the Irwell it is said: "It is the most foully used stream in the world. The staple trade of England is largely indebted to this river for its prosperity, and like many another faithful servant, its well-being has been ignored by those who have derived most advantage from its services."

Refuse cast or allowed to be discharged, of which malting refuse brings about some of the greatest nuisances possible, also fouls streams to a great extent. On the river Avon, one writer

« PreviousContinue »