, Pay:
Tot rar
CMA In
sp DOOM
8 ar visa)
: ey easing
4, 2
rea He i
i" y Pt
oN) rea
¥ ‘ re M " aad Se Ons
Si zeit ils
TAR MOTE GH 92 ata
i PN PM a
ul % ; nda oe
CHM cre 3) Ve)
Bahay
MEO OOM AL dj
: i ens (octet iu
, H Cesena:
; A iy in oats
Hi MAS iy OM
9 J a aes SAL aya al das hae
v i A dts Meth F iin ot aaa NAH ae uh
haved Aw) Gi A Gey ‘ th? sain th
jl Ny i
Na ae id het
MMH SN t I Hea)
14 ON Ae ig ane § if MUKA Ae
rH ) { TO ans
A Oe) a
Ay SW, Ct EN et ‘
Mt an A a
POM EE Petr, PAs ‘ t Hin 7 i
fi ny HER HE Vo ete ary Mh
 

 

 

 

CORNELL
UNIVERSITY
LIBRARY

 

ENGINEERING

 

 

 

 
Cornell University Library
TD 264.C64H39

Report of Sir John H

3 1924 0

miss

ii

04

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

engr, ana
REPORT

Or

SIR JOHN HAWKSHAW.

THE COMMISSIONER

APPOINTED TO INQUIRE AS TO

THE PURIFICATION OF THE RIVER CLYDE.

TOGETHER WITH

APPENDIX AND MINUTES OF EVIDENCE.

 

 

Presentey bo Command of. Her Majesty to both Mouses of Parliament.

 

 

EDINBURGH: PRINTED BY MURRAY AND GIBB,

FOR HER MAJESTY’S STATIONERY OFFICE.

1876.

C.—1464.]
CONTENTS.

PAGE

Commission, . . a : : 3 ‘ ‘ ‘ 3 ‘ i
Report, . . P 3 % “ 3 iii
Description of the Clyde eat its Tributaries, ‘ : ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ iv
Tributaries of the Tidal portion of the Clyde, . a , j 3 : iv
The Leyen, . 5 e ‘ ‘ oe : , ‘ iv
The Black Cart and the White Cart, é i i ‘ ; : iv
The Kelvin, . . . ‘ iv

The Pinkston, Molendinar, Camlachie, auiésion, St. Enoch’s, ‘#na ide.
house Burns, : e ‘ v
Tributaries of the Clyde between Gliaew and Hamilton, v
The Rotten Calder, . ‘ . 3 v
The North Calder, . ‘ 7 v
The South Calder, . a : Vv
The Cadzow Burn, . : A v
The Clyde above Hamilton, ‘ . é ‘ ‘ f v
Principal Towns on the Clyde and its Tributaries, . ; 2 3 : vi
Methods of disposing of Solid and Liquid Refuse or Sewage, . . ‘ : é vii
Gravitation, ‘ 2 : : 7 - : # ‘ vii
Irrigation, . é 3 . : 3 ‘ 5 - c vii
Filtration, . 2 ‘ < ay Ps a 3 , vill
Chemical Drestiianty, ‘ 3 : : a ; ‘ : viii
Glasgow and its Neighbourhood, 5 5 - i P 2 ‘ ix
Intercepting Sewers, . : ‘i : ‘ ‘i : : 2 x
As to the Outfall, ‘ j A a 3 xii
Districts which would Discharge into ii Outfall Sirens F ‘ . xiii
Glasgow and its Neighbourhood, and Paisley, Johnstone, and Renfnay, 3 ; xiii
Coatbridge and Airdrie, . ‘ ‘ A ; : : : xv
Disposal of Sewage from other Districts, a ‘ ‘i : xvi
Barrhead, Thornliebank, Neilston, Busby, and ae Catheart, ; : xvi
Wishaw, Motherwell, and neighbouring places south of Coatbridge and Addie 3 xvii
Hamilton, . ‘ : : 3 _ ‘ ‘ : Fi XVili
. Greenock and Gourock, .. Pr os f ie es 3 : xviii
Port Glasgow, : 4 ‘i 3 xix
Helensburgh, . : ; ; : ‘ : xix
Dumbarton, and Villages on a tha River Leven, . i - . xix
Duntocher and Faifley, and Old Kilpatrick, ‘ i : xx
Lennoxtown, Kilsyth, and Kirkintilloch, . 3 ‘ ‘ xxi
The Upper Region of the Clyde, z ‘ : : xxi
Lanark, . ‘i 3 : ¥ ‘ ‘ ‘ xxi
Other Towns and Villages, 2 2 ‘ ‘ , : xxi
Works and Manufactories, % : = : : ‘ é ‘ xxii
Water Supply in relation to Sewage, . ei a ; ‘ ‘ : xxiv
General Remarks, : A : : ‘ 5 . % 5 xxvi
Suggested General Provisions, . ‘ 2 , : : ; : xxvii
APPENDIX— . : . -  ¥xxi
Estimate of Works dain ia in (Sir seit Hay iain 8) Raroit, : ‘5 . xxxi

Reports to the Metropolitan Board of Works by Sir J. W. Bazalgette and Mr.’ Keates
relative to the Experimental een of the Native Guano Company at

Crossness, . ‘ ; ; ‘ ‘ ‘ xxxii
Information relative to Water Bue ‘ ; . ‘ : . xxxvii
Information regarding existing Waterworks, . : : : ‘ . XXXvili

Minutes or EvipENce— . ° . . . . . . ‘ 1
Alexander George Thomson, . . . . . . 7 - 41,42

Malcolm M‘Callum, , . . < . - . ; 7 2
INDEX,

John Carrick, is
David Falconer, 7
William Paton Buchan,

William Strang,
James M‘Intyre,

Bailie Salmon, .
Adam Scott, . e
William C. Sillar,

R. S. Syminton,

William R. W. Smith,
Gavin Kay, : -
Thomas Biggar, :
Provost Murray, S

Malcolm Macdonald, .
Dr. Andrew Fergus,
James Brown, .
Thomas Reid,

Alexander Gray Simpson,
J. C. Wakefield,

Thomas Short,

Kenneth M. M‘Leod,
William Campbell, .
Edward C. C. Stanford,
J. I. Coleman, ‘
Hugh Sharkie, .
James Robertson, i
Joseph Lindsay Watson,
William Walls, - . :
David Anderson,
Councillor Dreghorn,
Joseph Wylie,

William Robertson, 5
John Charles Melliss,
William Millar,

Gavin Chapman,

John Purvis, . 3

Sir Joseph William Bazalgette,

William Crookes, ‘

CONTENTS.

PAGE

4, 19,

6,

16,

45,

34

36

mo

11
15:
44
20
21
23
25
25
29
30
31
32
32
34
35.
36

AESSETRER BERR ES

61
COMMISSION.

 

ICTORIA R.—Vicroria, by the Grace of God of the United Kingdom of Great

Britain and Ireland, Queen, Defender of the Faith, to Our trusty and well-beloved

Sir John Hawkshaw, Knight, one of the Honorary Councillors of the Institution of Civil
Engineers, Greeting.

Whereas, We have deemed it expedient, for divers good causes and considerations,
that a Commission should forthwith issue for the purpose of inquiring as to what towns
and places contribute to the pollution of the River Clyde and its tributaries; and how
and by what means the sewage of such towns and places, and the refuse arising from
industrial processes and manufactures carried on within the same, can be utilized or got
rid of without risk to the public health, or serious injury to such processes and manufac-
tures, otherwise than by discharge into the River Clyde and its tributaries, or rendered
harmless before reaching them ; and also for the purpose of inquiring into the best means
of otherwise securing the purification of the said River and its tributaries, and of remedy-
ing any evils or inconveniences arising from its present polluted state :

Now know ye, that We, reposing great confidence in your zeal, ability, and dis-
cretion, have authorized and appointed, and do by these presents authorize and appoint,
you, the said Sir John Hawkshaw, to be Our Commissioner for the purposes aforesaid.

And for the better enabling you to form a sound judgment in the premises, We do
hereby authorize you to call before you all such persons as you may judge most compe-
tent, by reason of their situation, knowledge, and experience, to afford you correct infor-
mation on the subject of this inquiry. And We do further hereby authorize you to
‘employ such persons of scientific knowledge as you may consider best qualified to aid
and advise you, and to adopt all other lawful ways and means to effect the object of this

inquiry.

And it is Our further will and pleasure that, so soon as the same can conveniently be
done (using all diligence), you do report to us in writing, under your hand and seal, your
several proceedings by virtue of this Our Commission, together with your opinion on the
several matters herein submitted for your consideration, and all questions therewith

connected.

And We will and command that this Our Commission shall continue in full force and
~virtue, and that you, Our Commissioner, may from time to time proceed in the execution
thereof, although the same be not continued from time to time by adjournment.

And for your assistance in the due execution of this Our Commission, We have made
choice of our trusty and well-beloved James Badenach Nicolson, Esquire, to be secretary
to this Our Commission, and to attend you, whose services and assistance We require you

to use from time to time as occasion may require.

Given at our Court at Saint James’, the Fifteenth Day of December 1874,
in the Thirty-eighth Year of Our Reign.

By Her Masesty’s ComMAnp.

(Signed) RICH’D. ASSHETON CROSS.
RIVER CLYDE PURIFICATION.

 

REPORT.

May IT PLEASE your Masgsty,—

In obedience to the commands contained in your Royal Commission to inquire into
the causes which have led to the pollution of the river Clyde and its tributaries, and to
ascertain the best remedies for restoring the river and its tributaries, as far as may be
practicable, to their original pure state, I humbly beg to report as follows :—

The polluted state of the river Clyde and some of its tributaries has for. a long
time been a source of nuisance to the city of Glasgow and other towns and places, and to
the traffic on the Clyde; and the Corporation of Glasgow have for many years had under
consideration what means could be taken. to remedy it, and they have received many
able reports on the subject. I have been furnished with copies of these, of which the
following are the principal, viz. :— a

Report on the Means of Deodorizing the Sewage of Glasgow, by Thomas Anderson,
M.D., F.R.S.E., and J. F. Bateman, C.E. July 1858.

Report on the Sewerage of Glasgow, by J. F. Bateman. December 1858.
Report by Messrs. Bateman and Bazalgette on the Sewerage of Glasgow. 1868.
Report by Professor Anderson in relation to the Sewage of Glasgow. October 1869.

Report, Designs, and Estimate for the Drainage of the Sewage out of Glasgow and
the Purification. of the River Clyde, by George Thornton, C.E. 1869.

The foregoing reports had relation to the pollution proceeding from Glasgow and the
immediate neighbourhood, and did not attempt to deal with that proceeding from the
various manufacturing centres and works throughout the region of the Clyde. The scope
of the inquiry delegated to me is much more extensive, embracing not only the Clyde, but
its tributaries, so far as they are at present suffering from pollution. I have also availed
myself of the reports of the Commissioners appointed to inquire into the pollution of
rivers, and of the Commissioners appointed to inquire into the best mode of utilizing the
sewage of towns, and of numerous pamphlets and statements bearing on the subject. In
some cases I have been furnished with copies of these documents by the authors them-
selves; in other cases by the Town Council of Glasgow, who have throughout this
investigation been most ready and anxious to furnish me with the fullest information. —

In the Fourth Report of your Majesty’s Commissioners appointed to inquire as to
the Pollution of Rivers throughout the kingdom, which deals with the rivers of Scotland,
much valuable information is given respecting the condition of the river Clyde and its
tributaries, and the various pollutions arising from works situated in the valley of the
Clyde. I have given this Report the careful study which it merits.

Every facility has been afforded by the various local authorities in the towns and
villages embraced in my inquiry, who have readily given all the information I asked for;
and I have found manufacturers throughout the district, who are necessarily specially
interested in the question, most willing to give information as to the nature of their
works and the various processes of manufacture carried on in them.

In order to give the local authorities of the various towns an opportunity of stating
iv CLYDE PURIFICATION COMMISSION.

their views as to the best method of remedying the polluted state of the streams and
rivers, circulars were issued to them, asking them to attend before me in Glasgow on
January 27, 1875. With some ‘exceptions, delegates from the various towns attended.
I likewise announced by public advertisement that I would sit at the City Chambers in _
Glasgow, on Monday, the 17th May 1875, and following days, to hear evidence and receive —
any suggestions that might be made on the subject. The information elicited on these
and, subsequent occasions is given in the Appendix.

DESCRIPTION OF THE CLYDE AND ITS TRIBUTABIES.

That portion of the river Clyde which lies between its source and Greenock is 98
miles in length. The tide flows up it as far as Glasgow. Of the tidal portion of this
section of the river, that which lies between Glasgow and Dumbarton 1s of moderate
width, its course being determined by artificial banks. From Dumbarton to Greenock
(a distance of 7 miles) the river is more estuarine in character, but extensive banks
and shoals appear at low water. These shoals cease opposite Greenock, and just below
that town there is an unbroken stretch of river, 3 miles in width at all times of
the tide.

After that the Clyde again contracts, and its width diminishes to 1} miles opposite
Gourock. Below Gourock it again widens, and enters the Firth of Clyde.

The area draining into the Clyde above Gourock is 1481 square miles in extent.

TRIBUTARIES OF THE TIDAL PoRTION OF THE CLYDE.

The tidal portion of the Clyde receives four principal tributaries—the Leven, the
Black Cart, the White Cart, and the Kelvin.

THE LEVEN.

The Leven drains an area of 305 square miles, including the drainage area of Loch
Lomond, to which it forms the outlet. It enters the Clyde on the right bank at
Dumbarton, and is much polluted by dye and other works on its banks. It also receives
the drainage and refuse of a population of more than 20,000 persons living in the town
of Dumbarton and villages of Bonhill, Renton, Alexandria, and Jamestown.

THE BLACK CART AND THE WHITE CART.

The Black Cart and the White Cart enter the Clyde together on the left bank about
64 miles below Glasgow Bridge. .

The Black Cart drains an area of about 107 square miles. It receives the drainage
of Johnstone, with a population of about 8000, and the refuse from mills in that town
and neighbourhood, besides pollution from other minor sources.

The White Cart drains an area of 93 square miles, and is the most polluted tributary
of the Clyde. It receives the whole of the drainage of the large manufacturing town of
Paisley, with a population of upwards of 50,000. Before reaching Paisley, it is much

polluted by the manufacturing centres of Busby, Cathcart, Pollokshaws and Neilston,
Barrhead and Thornliebank.

THE KELVIN.

The Kelvin flows' through part of Glasgow, entering the Clyde on the right bank.
about 2 miles below Glasgow Bridge. It drains an area of 127 square miles. It
receives a portion of the sewage of Glasgow, but, before reaching that city, is much
polluted by works and domestic drainage at Milngavie, Kirkintilloch, Kilsyth, and
Lennoxtown. It also receives the refuse from isolated mills on its banks. _
REPORT. v

THE PINKSTON, MOLENDINAR, CAMLACHIE, FINNIESTON, ST. ENOCH’S, AND KINNINGHOUSE BURNS.

Besides the above four tributaries of the tidal portion of the Clyde, there are the
Pinkston, Molendinar, Camlachie, Finnieston, St. Enoch’s, and Kinninghouse Burns, which
flow through the city and suburbs of Glasgow, and which, though small in themselves,
are considerable sources of pollution, having been covered in and converted into sewers
after they enter the city.

TRIBUTARIES OF THE CLYDE BETWEEN GLASGOW AND Haminron.

The principal tributaries of the river Clyde above Glasgow, taking them in order
from Glasgow upwards, are—

THE ROTTEN CALDER.

The Rotten Calder enters the Clyde on the left bank, 9 miles above Glasgow
Bridge, and drains an area of about 22 square miles. There are no works or manufac-
tories or centres of population within the area drained by this stream, and it is not
appreciably polluted. :

THE NORTH CALDER.

The North Calder joins the Clyde on the right bank, about half a mile above the
point where the Rotten Calder enters that river. Its length from where it leaves the
Hillend reservoir is 15 miles, and it drains an area of about 50 square miles. It receives
the whole of the drainage of Coatbridge and Airdrie, with that of the villages and works
which adjoin those towns. Throughout much of its course it is no better than an open
sewer.

THE SOUTH CALDER.

The South Calder enters the Clyde on the right bank, about 54 miles above the
North Calder, and drains an area of about 39 square miles. It receives the drainage
of some of the villages which supply labour to the numerous ironworks and coalpits in
the district through which it flows; but the pollution is not in proportion to the popu-
lation, which is scattered through small villages,’ at present mostly undrained.

THE CADZOW BURN.

The Cadzow Burn is.insignificant in itself, but is greatly polluted. It serves as a
main sewer to the town of Hamilton, through which it flows, and conveys the drainage
of a large part of the population of that town, amounting at present to about 12,000
inhabitants, but which will be greatly augmented in the course of a few years from the
extension of mining industries in the neighbourhood.

Tue CLYDE ABOVE HAMILTON.

Above Hamilton, the Clyde is not appreciably polluted, nor are its tributaries. At
the same time, it receives, with a few notable exceptions, the drainage of all the towns
and villages which lie within its watershed. But as there are scarcely any works and no
large centres of population, Lanark, with between five and six thousand inhabitants,
being the most considerable, the proportion of polluted liquids which find their way into
the river is small as compared with the volume of pure water in it.

I have thus briefly described the tributaries of the Clyde which are chiefly instru-
mental in polluting it, The accompanying maps will help to convey a better idea
of the:prineipal sources of pollution, Plan No. 2 shows the public manufactories in the
valley of the Clyde, and the chief centres of population.
vi CLYDE PURIFICATION COMMISSION.

PrincipAL Towns ON THE CLYDE AND ITS TRIBUTARIES.

The following is a list of towns and villages within the area drained by the river
Clyde and its tributaries which at the last census had a population of about 1000 persons
and upwards :— a

Population, Census of 1871. ‘Population, Censys of 1871,

Gourock, . ‘ ‘ ‘ é 2,940 Old Kilpatrick,. i ‘ 903
Greenock, ai : : : 57,821 Duntocher and Faifley, . : 1,921
Port Glasgow, . a 3 F 10,823 Renfrew, . i> 485 4,163
Helensburgh, . ima : 8975 ot

Glasgow, including— ) Shettleston, a j eh 2,418
oc) i ae ee ss
Hillhead, . 2. wt Cambuslang, . «. + «+ ° 2,218
Springburn, . é é Uddingston, . é ‘ a 1,997
Govan, . 3 2 3 Bothwell, . : : é ‘ 1,209
Kinning Park, . : ; Blantyre Works, i a 5 1,304
Crosshill, . ‘i 3 ‘ Hamilton, : 7 3 : 11,498
Pollokshields, . : : 569,375 Carluke, fi ; : : 3,423
Strathbungo, . : ‘ Overton, : ; : ; 1,517
Mount Florida, . ‘ ae Lanark, : : i 5,099
Crossmyloof, ... . ‘ : : Kirkfield Bank, .. . : 963
Shawlands, : ,
Pollokshaws, and
Rutherglen,

 

 

4

The above towns and villages drain either directly into the Clyde or into small
streams which flow into it, with the exception of Glasgow and its suburbs, which in part
drain also into the Kelvin and the White Cart.

The following towns and villages drain into the larger tributaries of the Clyde :—

Population, Census of 1871. Population, Census of 1871;

 

Dra into tHE Ketvin— Draw into tHE Waite Cart—continued—
Milngavie, : * ; 4 2,044 Nitshill, 4 ‘ ‘ 986
Lennoxtown, . ‘ ‘ 3 3,717. Neilston, p : - : 1,716
Kirkintilloch, . f z 5 6,139 Busby, 2 , 3 2 1,621

_ Kilsyth, . ‘ . ‘ ‘ 4,895 New Cathcart, . of 8 : 933
Maryhill, . ‘ ‘ ‘ F 5,842 Crossmyloof, . : ‘ 3 988

‘Draw into THE Norta CatpER— Eaglesham, ; ‘ ‘ ‘ 1,237
Baillieston, ‘ 3 e ‘ 2,805 East Kilbride, . * s ‘i 1,100
Bellshill and Mossend, , ‘ 2,233 Paisley, : : : - 48,257
Airdrie, including— Thornliebank, ae ae 2 128°

Rawyards, . ‘ ; ; Drain nto THE Brack Cartr— sg. es
Drumgelloch, and . i 15,671 Beith, z P ‘ a , 3,707
Clarkston, . é ‘ Bridge of Weir, : ‘ 5 1,315
Coatbridge, including — ” . Elderslie, F : ; : 1,114
Whifflet and . ‘ 5 22,660° ° Johustone, ‘ ‘5 ‘ 7 7,538
Coatdyke, . 5 3 . / _Kilbarchan, Fi : i é 2,678
Calderbank, . 3 3 ‘ 2,176 Linwood, aah, oe ‘: 1,250
Calder Ironworks, . . ; 1,787 DRaIn into THE LEVEN—~ rap eae
Chapelhall, ie Wa i ss 1,707 Alexandria, . . .) , 4,650"
Holytown, : * 4 2 2,197 Bonhill, i : 3 «  26r0 *:
Newarthill, . °. ‘i ‘ - 1,530 Dumbarton, . : ‘ ° 11,423

Drain INTO THE SouTH CaALDER— Renton, ‘ ‘ ‘ 3,087
Cambusnethan, ; : : 1,795 Jamestown, ; é 1,168
Craigneuk, ‘ ‘ i : 1,377 Drain into Dovatas WaTeR—

Carfin, . : ‘ : : 1,111 | _ Larkhall, 3 . : 43973
Newmains, ‘ : i> a 2,545 Stonehouse, . - si : 2,623
Motherwell, .  . . . 6,943 Strathavon, . ‘ f° F 8,645
Wishaw, ‘ a ore Ss 8,812 Dratns into THE Netruan— ;

Dykehead, : . 985 Lesmahagow, . : : . 1,448

Drain into THE Wuirr Cart— Draws ito Ervan WaTeR— :
Barrhead, 3 Spt i 6,209 b Leadhills, : . B s 1,038.

The amount of liquid refuse produced by the above towns and villages is not by any
means proportional to the population, but varies with the number and nature of the
industries. which give employment to the people, with the sanitary system they have
adopted, and to some extent with the rainfall. ee

For example, a mill ethploying 700 hands may discharge one and a half million:
gallons of polluting liquid into the public drain or adjoining water-course each day, whilst
REPORT. vil

the amount that would be discharged into the same channel, arising from the persons
employed in the mill, would not exceed 32,000 gallons, or barely a fiftieth of the above
quantity, even if the sanitary arrangements of their dwellings were perfect.

The above case is an extreme one, the work I have selected being one of the largest
dyeworks in Glasgow,—a class of work in which more water is required than in perhaps
any other.

Many of the villages and towns in the above list have no system of drainage, and no
water supply.. Some of the refuse is thrown into middens or ashpits, from whence it is
taken by farmers on to their land. Some, comprising all the household slops, is thrown
in front of the door, where the liquid portion soaks into the ground, or, in dry weather,
evaporates, and in wet weather is carried, with much of the solid polluting matter, into
the nearest water-course, and so to the Clyde.

. In determining the best method of dealing with the sewage and manufacturing refuse
of the population of so large an area, it will be necessary to take into consideration the
vast changes taking place in the district, the extension of mining operations, and of new
works and manufactories, and the probable variations in the numbers forming the existing
town and village groups. In parts of the district in question, where a large part of the
population is employed in mining industries, the numbers are liable to sudden increase or
diminution. The population of Hamilton, which now numbers about 12,000, may shortly
be increased by 50 per cent. or more, to supply the labour for the coal-pits which are now
being sunk. In other parts, as in the neighbourhood of Airdrie, for instance, the popula-
tion may diminish or remain stationary, as seams of coal are worked out, or it is found
that they cannot any longer be profitably worked.

Meruops or Disposine or SoLip AND Liquip REFUSE oR SEWAGE.

I believe that there will be little variety of opinion as regards dealing with the solid
or dry refuse. The producers of this should find means of disposing of it otherwise
than by throwing it into running water, and the practice should in future be prohibited
by law. St

It may be as well here to describe generally and briefly some of the systems proposed
or in use for dealing with liquid refuse or sewage.

These may be classed as follows: viz. Gravitation, Irrigation, Filtration, and Chemical
treatment.

GRAVITATION.

The first and most natural is the Gravitation system, which consists in conducting
the ‘sewage by pipes or covered conduits to some point, provided such a point can be
found, where it may be discharged. It must be borne in mind that this system of gravita-.
tion, to a certain extent, is common nearly to all other systems. The sewage must be
conducted, either by gravitation or pumping, to some place where it may be dealt with,
and in large towns, if it is to be applied to irrigation, it must be led to some distant
place. The Liernur system, by the creation of a vacuum, draws sewage from given
districts:to central depots, where it is proposed to be dried by the application of heat;
but that: system could only deal with a portion of the polluted liquids of a town; and
whether the sewage is ultimately to be used in fertilizing the land, or is to be rendered.
innocuous by chemical treatment or filtration, up to a certain point it must flow in
artificially-constructed channels by gravitation alone, or with the assistance of pumping
when the fall is insufficient. ye

IRRIGATION.

oe
ud

-11. By the Irrigation system 'is meant the distribution of sewage over the land, whereby,
if the soil be.of a suitable character, and the area irrigated large enough in proportion to.
the sewage distributed over it, the liquid flowing from the land is rendered comparatively
pure'and inoffensive: ‘This system has been fried more or less completely, and with vary-
mg success, at Edinburgh, Croydon, Rugby, Carlisle, and many other:places. i ..3 | 3
Vili CLYDE PURIFICATION COMMISSION.

Where there is soil of a suitable description and land available to which the sewage
can be conveyed at a moderate outlay, and so situated as to prevent the sewage farm from
becoming a nuisance, it may be employed with advantage. But its application on a large
scale is beset with many difficulties. The opposition of surrounding proprietors to the
proposal to place vast sewage farms in their neighbourhood would, in many cases, be
great and proportionately costly, and in some cases fatal. The cost of distribution of
sewage over the land would not increase in direct proportion to the area irrigated, but
at a greater rate; nor have we any experience of how far the nuisance of a large area
of many thousand acres irrigated with sewage would extend. On these grounds it is
not safe to argue, from small irrigation farms to large ones, either from an economical
or a sanitary point of view. There may be cases where, on @ moderate scale, irrigation
may prove a good method, and in some such cases it may be the best.

FILTRATION.

The Filtration system consists in passing the sewage through artificially-constructed
filter beds, or through the soil when that is suitable. A fair trial was given during three
years to the system of filtration through artificial filters at Rugby, and it resulted in
failure. The difficulty of disposing of the solid matters, retained in the form of an
offensive sludge by the filters, except on a comparatively small scale, would be great, and
it would, I think, be impracticable to deal with a large amount of sewage by this system
alone.

CHEMICAL TREATMENT.

Several companies have been formed, and many patents have been taken out of late
years, for the deodorization of sewage by chemical treatment, and the preparation of sale-
able manure from it. Purchasers have not been found for the manures which have been
made, though the quantities manufactured hitherto have not been large. In some cases
the manures have proved worthless, and have been allowed to accumulate in the neigh-
bourhood of the works. Some of them, no doubt, possess valuable qualities to a limited
extent, and as these qualities become better known, purchasers will be more readily
found for them. Still, though the cost of treatment of the sewage may be reduced by
the sale of the manure, the cost of the substances used for deodorization will probably
rise as the demand for them increases. The cost of treatment has in many cases been
calculated on the basis that some of these substances would be obtained for nothing, or
at nominal rates, as the waste products of manufacturing processes; but they would
rapidly become marketable commodities, as in some cases they have already done, even
with the small demand which has arisen for them.

By the addition of certain chemical substances in proper proportions, the solid
matters in sewage may be precipitated and rendered inoffensive; and if the effluent water
be afterwards passed over artificially-constructed filters, or over suitable land so as to
oxidize the matters in solution, the effluent water may be rendered tolerably pure. The
chief objection to the system at present is its costliness, and that it is still in an experi-
mental state. The Patent Sewage and Manure Company undertook to deal with the
sewage of Coventry free of charge; but instead of the profit they anticipated, the cost of
treating the sewage, amounting to 2,000,000 gallons a day, is now about £10 a day,
exclusive of the interest on the cost of the works and depreciation of plant. Their
machinery for making the sludge into manure was not, however, complete when I received
this information respecting the cost of their process. The Corporation of Leeds are now
dealing with the sewage of that town on a system somewhat similar to that patented by
the Native Guano Company. The sewage amounts to about 12,000,000 gallons a day, and
on this quantity £15,000 a year is expended at the sewage works on labour, materials,
and pumping alone. The cost of the works, including land, was about £48,000. The
effluent water at Leeds is not by any means pure, but might be rendered so by a larger
expenditure in deodorizing substances and precipitants, and by an outlay on filter beds.

For the effectual chemical treatment of the quantity there dealt with, at least
£20,000 a year would be required, as I am informed by Mr. Crookes, F.R.S., the chair-
man of the Native Guano Company, who takes great interest in these works.

An official trial of the Native Guano Company’s process (known as the A B C pro-
cess) was made at the Crossness outfall of the Metropolitan Drainage Works. In Sir
REPORT. ix

Joseph Bazalgette’s and Mr. Keates’ reports on the trial, it was shown that the cost of
making a ton of native guano far exceeded the amount which it could reasonably be
hoped to realize when offered for sale.

_ From reports which have been submitted to me on other processes which have any
claims to efficiency, I find that in all cases the cost of manufacturing the artificial manure
from sewage would greatly exceed the sum which its sale could be expected to produce.

GLASGOW AND ITS NEIGHBOURHOOD.

As will be seen from the accompanying plans, the centres of population and manu-
factures are very irregularly distributed throughout the region of the Clyde. The
‘principal groups lie in and about the towns of Greenock, Dumbarton, Paisley, Glasgow,
Coatbridge, and Hamilton. Hamilton is the least important industrial district at present ;
but beneath it lie thick seams of coal, which will shortly be worked. Six pits are now
being sunk in the immediate neighbourhood of the town, and the population will rapidly
increase in the next few years.

Owing to the practice of building houses in flats which prevails in Glasgow, the
population occupies a much smaller area than is usual in large towns, London, for
example. In London, it has been ascertained that in a district of average density wholly
built upon, there are 30,000 persons to one square mile, or about 47 to an acre. In
Glasgow, however, the population in the burgh, of which the acreage is 6093, was, in
1874, 534,530, or between 87 and 88 to an acre; and parts of the suburbs are quite as
densely populated, having not far short of 100 persons to the acre. This crowding of the
population on a small area would make the dry-weather flow of sewage from the in-
habited area large in proportion to the wet weather flow, in comparison with less densely

populated towns.

The population of Glasgow and its suburbs amounts to about two-thirds of the whole
population of the region of the Clyde; and it will be convenient first to consider what is
the best mode of dealing with the sewage of this vast population, dwelling on a com-
paratively confined area, as the mode selected for Glasgow may determine that for one or
more of the smaller centres of population.

At the census of 1871 the population of the burgh of Glasgow, together with that
of the adjoining small burghs and suburbs which now form a continuously inhabited area
with it, was about 570,000. The population of the same district now will not be less
than 680,000. The population actually supplied by the Glasgow Waterworks in the
year 1874 was, as I am informed by Mr. Gale the engineer, 680,000, and was increasing
at the rate of 20,000 a year, so that it is now 700,000. Part, however, though a small
percentage only, of the above population which is supplied by the Glasgow Waterworks
is not included in the district to which my estimate relates. The quantity of water
supplied daily by the Glasgow Waterworks for all purposes amounted in 1874 to
36,000,000 gallons, or 53 gallons per head of the population supplied. Of this quantity,
5,800,000 gallons is the average daily supply throughout the year for manufacturing
purposes. Deducting this from the total supply, we have 45 gallons a head as the

amount supplied daily for domestic use.

In addition to this large volume of water supplied by the Glasgow Waterworks, which
is daily poured by the common sewers into the Clyde after it has been rendered foul by
the various uses to which it is applied, there is an average of 10,000,000 gallons
pumped from the Clyde for manufacturing purposes, and returned in a polluted state to
the river, and also an average of 2,000,000 gallons flowing daily down burns, which pass
beneath the streets of the town, and have been made part of the general system of
sewers. Thus there is daily a volume of close upon 48 millions of gallons of polluted
water flowing into the Clyde through the sewers of Glasgow and its suburbs.

Large as the above quantity of sewage is, it is but a part of the polluted liquid which
sometimes flows into the sewers, and by them to the Clyde. As yet I have taken no
account of rainfall, and the above is only the dry-weather flow. However good the
scavengering and cleansing of a large town may be, there will always remain an immense
x CLYDE PURIFICATION COMMISSION.

amount of filth to be removed from its streets and courts by rain. An inspection of the
gutters and bye-streets of any town will make this patent to any one. Analyses of the
water flowing in the London gutters have proved it to be as foul as ordinary sewage, when

judged by the amount of organic matter capable of putrefaction which it contains. This —
foul liquid, which is too often lost sight of by advocates of various schemes for dealing .

with town sewage, must be carried off by sewers ; and a system of sewers for this purpose
alone is indispensable. The street sewers must, moreover, be capable of carrying off the
whole of the rainfall which may at any time occur in the district which they drain, and
this will at times far exceed in volume that of the domestic and manufacturing sewage.
A quarter of an inch of rain in 94 hours over the inhabited area in question (about
10,000 acres) would amount to 56,560,000 gallons.

It must be obvious that any such partial change in existing conditions as the aboli-

tion of the water-closet system, were that practicable or advisable (which it 1s not), would
not reduce the vast quantity of sewage in any appreciable degree, or in any way simplify
the question of dealing with town sewage, as some scem to suppose. The volume of
domestic sewage might no doubt be reduced; much of the water supplied for domestic
use could be restricted; but there seems no hope that the domestic consumption of water
in Glasgow can be reduced below 40 gallons a head, or 11 per cent. under the present
consumption. The manufacturers might perhaps reduce the quantity of water which they
consume, and should be compelled to do so as far as possible.

INTERCEPTING SEWERS.

But if these and all other practicable reductions were made in the quantity of
water consumed, there would still remain a daily amount of polluted liquid so large that
it would be quite out of the question to attempt to deal with it within the limits of
the inhabited area. It must either flow to the Clyde as at present, or be intercepted by
a new system of sewers, and be conducted by them to some more distant point beyond
the inhabited area. These intercepting sewers need not be constructed of a capacity suf-
ficient to take off the storm waters of exceptional rainfalls. When such occur, the storm
waters may be discharged by special outfalls into the Clyde; but the sewers must be of

sufficient size to take ordinary falls of rain, say up to a quarter of an inch in twenty-four
hours. Such a system of sewers I haveshown on Plan No.1. There are two sets of inter-
cepting sewers—a low level and a high level sewer—on each side of the river, with a
falling gradient nowhere less than 2 feet a mile in the direction in which the river flows,
and terminating near Whiteinch, on the Clyde, about 3} miles below Glasgow, and beyond
its present suburban limits. Separate syphon pipes would have to be laid beneath the
bed of the river at this point, to convey the sewage of the high and low level sewers from
the north to the south side of the river, where the sewage from the low level sewer could
be raised by pumping.

If the Clyde is no longer to be allowed to remain in its present foul condition, some
such system of intercepting sewers as I have indicated is necessary, and would have to
be carried at least as far as I have shown, whatever scheme were afterwards adopted ‘for
dealing with the sewage of Glasgow. |

The intercepting sewers I recommend are shown on Plan No. 1, and are calculated —

to take the whole of the existing sewage of the town, with 50 per cent. increase. They
would vary in diameter from 3 ft. 6 in. at the upper end, to 6 ft. 6 in. at the lower end.

Having arrived at the conclusion that these intercepting sewers are necessary, what-
ever be the means eventually adopted for disposing of the sewage, it remains to be deter
mined how that can best be done, and how the sewage, after being brought to one point
on the Clyde, which I have fixed near Whiteinch, can best be dealt with without polluting
the river. The four general systems which have been briefly described are the only ones,
in my opinion, demanding consideration. One—that is, Filtration—may be dismissed for
reasons already stated. Irrigation, as a means of disposing of the whole of the sewage at
this place, has next to be considered. The only land in the immediate neighbourhood of
Glasgow at all suitable as regards level and contour for irrigation and sewage farming,
lies on both sides of the Clyde, just below Whiteinch. Several schemes for utilizing the

sewage of Glasgow on this land have been submitted to the Corporation. The soil, however,
is not altogether suitable; the rainfallis large; andthe cost of the large area of land that

Noe
REPORT. 3

would be wanted would be very great. Moreover, the prevalent winds blow directly over
it towards the best quarters of the town, and several thousand acres of land so situated
and irrigated with sewage might prove a nuisance greater than the river in its present
polluted state. And finally, the quantity of available land at this spot, as will be seen
below, would be insufficient for the present amount of sewage.

There are on the south side of the Clyde about 8000 acres of low lying land
extending for a distance of 7 miles west of Whiteinch, and with a width varying from
1 to 4 miles. On the north side there are about 1500 acres suitable as regards level
and contour for irrigation. This gives an area of 9500 acres. Experience seems to show
that the best results are obtained by distributing 5000 to 6000 tons of sewage over each
acre per annum. Taking the dry-weather flow of Glasgow at.48 million gallons a day,
there would be 214,286 tons of sewage to distribute daily, or 784 million tons yearly,
which alone, at 6000 tons to the acre, would require 13,000 acres, and an additional
quantity of land would be required yearly for the increasing population. Independently
of Glasgow itself, there is a large and increasing population in Paisley and its neigh-
bourhood, in elose proximity to this same land, who would have an equal claim to it
with the Glasgow district.

I could hardly venture to estimate the difficulty of obtaining such a vast area of land
for such a purpose in such a situation, nor the-cost of purchasing it if it could be ob-
tained. Even the cost of preparing it for sewage farming would be very large ; and I can-
not advise, in this case, that an industrial work on so vast a scale as a sewage farm of many
thousand acres should, with all its attendant risks, be undertaken with ratepayers’ money.

Considering the Filtration and Irrigation systems inapplicable in this case, it remains
to be considered whether it would be advisable to discharge the sewage into the Clyde at
Whiteinch, after subjecting it to some process of deodorization, or to convey it still farther
and discharge it into the river, or Firth of Clyde, or the sea, at some place to be decided
upon. :

By the addition first of suitable deodorizing and precipitating substances, such as
alum, clay, lime, and charcoal, to the sewage, then allowing the solid matter to subside,
and afterwards filtering the liquid through prepared filters to be used intermittently, I
believe that the whole of the sewage of the district under consideration might be dis-
charged into the Clyde at Whiteinch without causing a nuisance to the neighbourhood.
The solid matter precipitated by the process now in operation at Leeds is inodorous, and
possesses some value as a manure. The quantity which would be produced ae
from the large volume of sewage of the Glasgow district would be very great. The soli
matter in only 48 million gallons per day, judging from the average of that contained
in four of the principal sewers, would, in a condition suitable for carting, amount to close
upon 186,000 tons in one year, and this amount would be largely increased by the
addition of the deodorizing and precipitating substances. Messrs. Anderson and Bateman,
in their report to thé Sanitary Committee of the Town Council of Glasgow, estimate that
the lime process of precipitation would increase the solid residue by 24 times, or to

465,000 tons.

Mr. Napier found that it required 31 tons 8 cwt. of a mixture of alum sludge, lime,
and charcoal to deodorize and precipitate 1,000,000 gallons of average Glasgow sewage,
which would amount to 550,000 tons per annum for 48,000,000 gallons.

One great objection to the adoption of such a system on so large a scale, when any
other is available, is the uncertainty of what it may cost. The price of the materials
required for the process would fluctuate from time to time, and would rise as the demand
for them increased. The cost of the process must in any case be very great. Taking the
experience of Leeds, it would be about £80,000 a year on 48,000,000 gallons per day for
pumping, chemical materials, and labour, if the chemical materials could be procured in so
large a quantity in Glasgow at the same rate as at Leeds, and assuming that the solid
precipitant could be disposed of free of cost. Moreover, though artificial manures of high
fertilizing quality bear the cost of carriage to distant places, those of lesser value would
be limited to a much narrower area of sale.

'

| The quantity of artificial manure consumed annually in the United Kingdom is not

so great as might be supposed. Mr. J. B. Lawes and Mr. J ames Caird have obligingly.
xii CLYDE PURIFICATION COMMISSION.

given me their opinion as to the consumption, and they put it at from 700,000 to 800,000
tons, including nitrate of soda and Peruvian guano. If this estimate is correct, and J
know of no better authorities on the subject, it is obvious that it would be unwise to
enter upon a costly scheme of deodorization with the expectation that any considerable
return would be derived from the sale at one spot of four or five hundred thousand tons
of an inferior quality of artificial manure.

There remains the further question, whether an enormous amount of products such
as would be produced under such a system could be disposed of at all in the neighbour-
hood. If, as is probable, much of it could not, mounds of it would accumulate on the
spot, requiring more expenditure for space on which to put it, and greatly deteriorating
the adjoining lands; or it would have to be carried away to some distant place of deposit,
such as Loch Long.

On the whole, I have come to the conclusion that it would not be wise to adopt
a system of deodorization, and to discharge the effluent water into the Clyde at White-.
inch; but that it will be better to convey the sewage still farther, to an outfall in the
river or Firth of Clyde, or in the sea.

AS TO THE OUTFALL.

The decision as to the best point of outfall, and of the best course for an outfall
sewer, involves grave questions for consideration, and has occupied much of my
attention.

I have made careful examinations of the banks of the river, and of the shores of the
Firth of Clyde from Glasgow to Troon, and have examined the region lying between this
extent of shore and Whiteinch, the place which I consider the best point of departure
for an outfall sewer, to whatever point it may be carried.

Between Gourock and Glasgow there is, I think, no place where it would be possible
to discharge a large volume of crude sewage into the Clyde without creating fresh causes
of complaint. The class of property along the banks of the Clyde, and the nature of the
river itself, are sufficient reasons for this.

Beyond Gourock there are three points of outflow worthy of consideration, viz. Cloch
Point, Farland Head, and one near Irvine on the Ayrshire coast. The last was the
place recommended by Messrs. Bateman and Bazalgette in their report in 1868.

I have surveyed lines of sewer from Whiteinch to all these places, and a plan and
section of each is shown on Plan No. 1.

_ There would, so far as regards engineering works, be no very material difference in
first cost, whichever of these three routes were selected.

In deciding between them, there is one material element for consideration which
cannot be neglected.

An outfall sewer to any of those places will be a work of magnitude and of consider-
able cost, and, when constructed, ought to be calculated to endure.

_ It must, from circumstances, be constructed with only a small inclination or fall per
mile, and it is necessary to carry it as little as possible through lands liable to be under-

mined by future coal or mineral workings, which, by disturbing the strata, might deflect
or fracture the sewer, and hinder its proper working.

_ Feeling the importance of this question, I directed Mr. Rankine, an experienced
mining engineer, to examine the neighbourhood, and to report to me on the extent of

ce yet to be wrought; and I have availed myself of the information thus
obtained. .

To this source of danger the sewer to the outfall near Irvine would be the most

exposed; the sewer to Farland Head and the sewer to Cloch Poi
free from objection in this respect. 0 &foch Foint would be the most
REPORT. xiii

If this contingency had to be met by purchasing coal or minerals along the line of
sewer, it would in course of time add greatly to the expenditure. It is no doubt true
that, looking to the possibility of sewage farming hereafter, it might be an advantage to

_ convey the sewage to the sandy soil of the Ayrshire coast; yet the town of Irvine might
not appreciate that method of disposing of the sewage of the city of Glasgow. The outfall
would be only about two miles from Irvine, and about the same distance from Saltcoats ;
and although I may be of opinion that sewage delivered into the sea at that distance
might not be found to be a nuisance to either of these towns, yet, having regard to the
quantity of minerals on the route, and the residential considerations, I think there are
objections on the whole sufficient to deter me from advising the adoption of an outfall
sewer to that point.

It remains now to consider Cloch Point and Farland Head.

One very great advantage of a sewer to Cloch Point would be, that it would provide
on its way for the drainage of Port Glasgow and Greenock. There might, however,
be residential objections to that outfall. The land on the shore from Gourock southward
is partly occupied by country residences and villas, and the part of the Firth adjoinin
: used for recreation in yachting and boating by a large part of the population of ths
Clyde.

After duly weighing every circumstance, and all the possibilities and objections
which, so far as I can see, may arise, the conclusion I have arrived at is that an out-
fall sewer from Whiteinch to Farland Head is the most free from objections. An out-
fall at that point will be farther seaward than at Cloch Point; and the risk from passing
over mineral property, by alterations I have made in the line since I received Mr.
Rankine’s report, is reduced to small dimensions.

No doubt the adoption of this outfall would subsequently lead to the necessity of
constructing an intercepting sewer from Port Glasgow past Greenock to some point
-down the Clyde.

The cost of an outfall sewer from Whiteinch to Farland Head, of a diameter of
13 feet, will be £1,500,000 (see the estimate in the Appendix). In this sewer I
have made provision for the whole of the existing population, which it would serve,
together with an increase of 50 per cent. Should the growth of manufactories, build-
ings, and population hereafter extend down the Clyde below Whiteinch, as it may do,
‘there will be no difficulty in constructing an intercepting sewer from a point 6 or
7 miles lower down the river, falling towards Whiteinch, and there communicating
with the outfall sewer to Farland Head.

DISTRICTS WHICH WOULD DiscHARGE INTO THE OUTFALL SEWERS.
GLASGOW AND ITS NEIGHBOURHOOD, AND PAISLEY, JOHNSTONE, AND RENFREW.

The intercepting sewers extending to Whiteinch, and the outfall sewer from thence
to Farland Head, would afford the means of disposing of the sewage of Glasgow and the
suburban districts which are continuous with it, and form part of the same inhabited
area, viz. North of the Clyde—Partick, Hillhead, and part of Springburn; and south of the
Clyde—Govan, Kinning Park, Crosshill, Pollokshields, Strathbungo, Mount Florida,
Crossmyloof, Shawlands, Pollokshaws, and Rutherglen ; and also that of the detached
but neighbouring villages of Maryhill, Shettleston, and Tollcross, which are north of the
Clyde; and the towns of Paisley, Johnstone, Kilbarchan, and Renfrew, and the villages
of Elderslie and Cambuslang, which are on the south side of the Clyde. The population
of the above towns and villages amounts to about 760,000, and more than two-thirds
of this population is comprised within the burgh of Glasgow, of which the population
was estimated to be 534,530 in 1874. The area of the Municipal Burgh is 6093 acres,
and nearly the whole of it is sewered. The greater part of the sewage is discharged
directly by several outfalls into the Clyde. The remainder is discharged into the river
Kelvin and the various burns which have been covered in and flow beneath the town.
The present outfalls along the banks of the river Clyde are exposed at low water, and

masses of filth are deposited on the foreshore.

Hillhead, Partick, Springburn, Govan, Kinning Park, Pollokshields, - Crosshill,
xiv. CLYDE PURIFICATION COMMISSION.

Strathbungo, Mount Florida, Crossmyloof, Shawlands, Pollokshaws, and Rutherglen
immediately adjoin the inhabited area included within the burgh boundary, but are under
separate local authorities. These districts, of which the population has rapidly increased,
and is in most cases still increasing, are all supplied by the Glasgow Waterworks, and
are sewered. The sewers of Hillhead discharge into the Kelvin; those of Govan, into the
Clyde direct; and those of the remaining districts, either into the Clyde or into burns
which flow to it, with the exception of Pollokshaws, Shawlands, and part of the Cross-
hill district, which discharge into the White Cart. Maryhill is situated on the Kelvin,
about a mile to the north-west of Glasgow. It has a population of about 6000, who
are supplied with water from the Glasgow Waterworks. There are several large manu-
factories in the town and its immediate neighbourhood, which contribute to the pollution
of the Kelvin. Shettleston and Tollcross are small villages lying to the east of Glasgow,
having each a population of between two and three thousand. They are supplied with
water from the Glasgow Waterworks.

The sewage of Maryhill, Shettleston, and Tollcross would flow by gravitation, without
pumping, into the Glasgow high-level intercepting sewer on the north side of the Clyde.

The burgh of Renfrew, which has a population of between 4000 and 5000, is situated
on the river Clyde, about 14 miles below Whiteinch. It has a complete system of
sewerage. The sewers discharge by four outlets into the Pudzeoch Burn, which forms
the eastern boundary of the burgh. ‘The tide flows up the burn for a distance of about
700 yards from the Clyde, and it is into this tidal portion of the burn that the sewage is
discharged. There are only one or two manufactories in the town. It is supplied with
water from the Glasgow Waterworks. ,

The situation of Renfrew is too low to admit of its draining by gravitation into the
outfall sewer, and it will be necessary to make a low-level sewer to the pumping station
opposite Whiteinch.

Paisley is a large manufacturing town of 50,000 inhabitants. The White Cart is
much polluted before it reaches the town, through which it flows, but it receives a large
addition to its impurities in its course through Paisley. Provost Murray, whose evidence
as to the condition of the town appears in the Appendix, estimates the quantity of liquid
refuse daily discharged into the river by the manufactories in Paisley at about one million
gallons. Owing to the defective state of the drainage, the river is not largely polluted
by domestic sewage; it would be much more so if the town were better drained, as it
must be before long. Paisley is well supplied with water from three reservoirs, which
have each separate gathering-grounds in the hills 4 miles to the south and south-west
of the town. The daily supply amounts to from 2 to 3 millions of gallons for all purposes.

Johnstone is situated on the Black Cart, about 2 miles to the west of Paisley.
It has a population of between seven and eight thousand, principally employed in
manufactories in the town and neighbourhood. It is supplied with water from the
Paisley Waterworks. The town is sewered. The sewers discharge into the Black
Cart, into the Pockland Burn, which flows into it, and into the Glasgow, Paisley, and
Ardrossan Canal. —

The village of Elderslie, lying between Paisley and Johnstone, adjoins and forms a
suburb to the latter town. Its population exceeds 1000 in number.

As will be seen by the map, the outfall sewer to Farland Head passes close to
Paisley, Elderslie, and Johnstone. A large part of the sewage of Paisley would drain
directly by gravitation into the outfall sewer, but that from the lower part of the town
would require to be raised by pumping. The sewage of Kilbarchan, a small town
of between two and three thousand inhabitants, lying to the west of J ohnstone, could
be discharged into the outfall sewer, from which it is distant about one mile. The
quantity of sewage would be small, however, and it should, if possible, be disposed of

on the land in the neighbourhood, as the situation of the town on high ground offers
great facilities for irrigation. .

_The remaining village on the south side of the Clyde without the. Glasgow in-
habited area is Cambuslang, which has a population of between two and three thousand,
It lies about 2 miles to the west of Rutherglen, and is not supplied by the Glasgow

- Waterworks, but has'its own waterworks, the reservoir and gathering - ground being
REPORT. ost

situated about 2 miles to the south of the town. It may not be advisable at
present to conduct the sewage of this population into the system of sewers which will
discharge by the outfall sewer, as a large quantity of coal still remains to be worked in
the neighbourhood, and there would probably be great settlement along any line which
could at present be selected for a sewer. But as soon as a line for a sewer can be
found free from this objection, the sewage of the population of Cambuslang can be
discharged without pumping by the Glasgow high-level sewer, south of the Clyde, into
the main outfall sewer. :

I estimate the quantity of domestic sewage and manufacturing waste liquids, which
would pass daily into the sewers draining the area inhabited by the population of 760,000,
at about 52,000,000 gallons exclusive of rainfall. A quarter of an inch of rainfall in 24
ve over the area inhabited by the same population, would amount to about 65,000,000
gallons.

COATBRIDGE AND AIRDRIE.

Coatbridge lies about 9 miles from the centre of, and to the eastward of, Glasgow,
and is an industrial centre of considerable activity, with a population of about 23,000,
including that of the adjoining villages of Whifflet and Coatdyke, and of the immediate
suburbs. There is no general system of sewerage, but parts of the town have been well
sewered by the owners of the soil. For other parts, plans have been prepared, and an
assessment has been made, for a system of sewerage. Other parts are still unsewered.
The sewers now in use discharge into the Luggie Burn, which flows into the North Calder.

Airdrie is situated about 14 miles to the westward of Coatbridge, beyond the
village of Coatdyke, which lies between the two towns. It has a population of about
16,000, including the suburban villages of Rawyards, Drumgelloch, and Clarkston.
There are few important manufacturing works, and the coal-mining industry in the
immediate neighbourhood, which lately received a new impetus, is not likely to increase,
but rather diminish, now that the Hamilton coalfields are to be worked. There is no
complete system of sewerage; and such sewage as does not soak into the soil finds its
way, by covered drains or by open ditches, into the South Burn, and thence to the North
Calder.

The whole of the population of Coatbridge, Airdrie, and above-named neighbouring
villages, amounting to about 40,000, is supplied with water by the Airdrie and Coat-
bridge Waterworks from the reservoir at Hillend. The quantity of water supplied daily
is about 24 million gallons. The district supplied by these works is an extensive one,
extending as far as the Glasgow water supply district, which it adjoins at Shettleston,
and comprises a straggling population, not included in the above estimate. The land in
the neighbourhood of the above towns is not very suitable for irrigation as regards the
nature of the soil, which is in great part a stiff boulder clay; but there would be no diffi-
culty in finding land for the purpose, conveniently placed with regard to level. In that
respect, the land situated to the south of Airdrie, along the Monkland Canal about Hill-
head, and to the north end of the town about Kippisbyre farm, seem to be the best for
the Airdrie portion of the population. As regards the Coatbridge part of the popula-
tion, the land most conveniently situated appears to be in the neighbourhood of Old
Monkland, along the bank of the North Calder. If it were determined to distribute the
sewage of Airdrie, Coatbridge, and their suburbs over the land, it would be necessary to
make about 2 miles of sewer, beginning in the centre of Airdrie, to conduct the sewage
of that town and its suburbs to a suitable place for the purpose. For Coatbridge and its
suburbs, a sewer of about the same length at least would have to be made. Now, a
sewer 4 miles long, that is, of equal length to the above-mentioned sewers taken
together, if it were begun at the same point in Airdrie, and were made beneath the
turnpike road through Coatbridge towards Glasgow, would convey the sewage of both
towns to within 3 miles of the Glasgow system of sewers, which would extend
to Shettleston. The construction of 3 additional miles of sewer beneath the road
through Baillieston to Shettleston would discharge the sewage of Coatbridge, Airdrie,
and their suburbs into the Glasgow north high-level intercepting sewer, from whence it
would flow by Whiteinch to Farland Head. If, on the other hand, it were determined to
deodorize the sewage of these towns, it would be obviously the most economical course to -
make one work suffice for the two towns, rather than have separate works for each, and
about the same length of sewer—namely, 4 miles—would be required, beginning at
the same point in Airdrie, and passing through Coatdyke to Coatbridge, to carry the
CLYDE PURIFICATION COMMISSION.

dorization works. From this it will be seen that
ith the sewage of these towns is, whether it would
of sewer beneath the road to Shettleston, there

to join the Glasgow system of intercepting sewers, than to carry out a separate system of
sewage farming, or a joint system of deodorization. In the first place, the cost of such a
sewer can be ascertained beforehand; and taken as a charge on the rates, it will decrease
each year, whilst provision will be made for disposal of the sewage for many years to
come. On the other hand, it is impossible to estimate with certainty what the cost of
sewage farming or that of deodorization will be. But whatever it may be now, it will be
a charge annually increasing with the increase in the population. From the above con-
sideration, it appears to me that the best plan to be adopted for disposing of the sewage
of the whole of this population will be to construct a sewer, beginning at Airdrie and
running along the line of the high road to Glasgow, to join the Glasgow system of sewers
at Shettleston. The total length of this sewer would be about 7 miles. It need not be of
large dimensions, as the fall is considerable throughout the whole distance. I have
shown such a sewer on Plan No. 1, and included it in the estimate. It will be seen that
this sewer will have to be made throughout in a mineral district. Coal is now being
worked along the whole line of the proposed sewer; but the fall is so great, that I do not
think this is a fatal objection in the case of a sewer of such small sectional area.

Xvi

sewage to a suitable place for the deo
the question to be decided in dealing w
be the better course to make 3 miles

Adding the population of Airdrie and Coatbridge to that previously given, will give
a total of 800,000 inhabitants. The sewage, including a quarter of an inch of rainfall in
24 hours, will amount to 120,000,000 gallons; and adding 50 per cent. to this, the
total quantity will be 180,000,000 gallons in 24 hours, which the sewers have been cal-
culated to take. The cost of the intercepting and outfall sewers appears in the estimate

appended to this Report.

There is a scattered population in the villages of Baillieston, Barrachnie, and Sandy-
hills, along the road between Coatbridge and Glasgow, which might use this sewer if
their sewage could not be otherwise disposed of on the land in their neighbourhood.
Provision might be made without difficulty for distributing sewage at convenient points
along the line of the sewer to farmers, who were disposed to take it and pay for it, which
they would probably do more readily if they could have it when they required it, and
were not obliged to take a stated quantity at all times, as must necessarily be the case
where a large quantity of sewage has to be disposed of on one farm of limited extent.

Disrosat oF SEWAGE FROM OTHER DistTRIcTs.

The outfall sewer will only provide means for disposing of the sewage of a part of
the region embraced in the Commission, as will be seen from the plan which shows the
extent of that region. Several towns and villages, and many works and manufactories,
will still remain to be dealt with.

It would be plainly impracticable to construct sewers communicating with the
intercepting and outfall sewers above referred to from all the outlying towns and villages,
or from every work and manufactory. Many of these, therefore, will have to be dealt
with locally and by other methods.

Nor would it have been possible for me, without delaying this report for an unreason-
able length of time, to have designed precise schemes for every one of these outlying
towns and villages, much less for every work and manufactory. In some cases the choice
of method may have to be determined by the possibility of obtaining suitable land for
irrigation—a question that can only be determined after negotiation with landowners.
But I propose to indicate generally what occurs to me as to the principal towns and
places, and also the mode in which I would propose the works and manufactories should
be dealt with; and before concluding, I shall suggest a” system of local government, in
respect of sewage, applicable to the whole district, which, I think, would enable the
objects aimed at in this report to be best attained.

BARREHEAD, THORNLIEBANK, NEILSTON, BUSBY, AND NEW CATHCART.

Tt will be seen from the map that there is a group of villages to the south of
Glasgow and Paisley, situated on streams which flow into the White Cart, The popula-
REPORT. xvii

tions of these villages supply labour to numerous manufactories, among which are cotton
and weaving mills, print works, dye works, and chemical works, some of which contribute
to the pollution of the White Cart. All these villages are supplied by the Glascow Water-
works; but the mills and other works in most cases obtain their water supply from
streams and small reservoirs. In some of the works of this district, settling ponds and
tanks have already been provided by the owners, to purify, to some extent, the water
which they pollute, before passing it into the streams. Ash and other closets have also
in many cases been provided for the workpeople. Much, however, still remains to be
done, as may. be seen from an inspection of the streams flowing to the Cart, some of
which are very filthy. . Oo

The high-level intercepting sewer on the south side of the Clyde will pass at no great
distance to the northward of this district, and would provide a means of disposing of the
sewage should the population increase sufficiently to prevent its being easily disposed of
in other ways. Barrhead had, at the last census, a population of about 6300; Thornlie-.
bank came next in size, with a population of 2100. As the population of these places is
not large, the sewage could perhaps be disposed of on the land in the neighbourhood ;
though the sewage of Barrhead might be cheaply disposed of by constructing a short
sewer to the outfall sewer at Hurlet.

WISHAW, MOTHERWELL, AND NEIGHBOURING PLACES SOUTH OF COATBRIDGE AND AIRDRIE.

South of Coatbridge and Airdrie, in the mining district lying between the North and
South Calder, and between the latter river and the Clyde, there is a large population
employed in raising coal and in various works principally connected with the manufacture
of iron. This population is collected in scattered places, of which there are 13 having a
population of 1000 and upwards, and many smaller ones, supplying labour to the large
ironworks situated throughout the district.

The names of the principal places in this district are-—Wishaw (including Craig-
neuk), Motherwell, Bellshill and Mossend, Calderbank, Holytown, Calder Iron Works,
Chapel Hall, Newarthill, Newmains, Cambusnethan, Carfin, and Dykehead.

The whole of the sewage of these places is discharged, with one or two exceptions,
directly into the streams of the North and South Calder or their tributaries. Throughout
this district water-closets are the exception, the privy and midden system being generally
adopted, and it is not likely that there will be any change made in this respect. The
water supply is very inadequate at present. Wishaw is the best off in this respect, being
supplied by a reservoir of its own, distant about four miles from the town. The popula-
tion of Wishaw, together with that of Craigneuk, which is now included within the
boundary of and forms part of Wishaw, amounts to 15,000, showing a large increase since
the last Census. The water supply amounts to 16 gallons a head. Cambusnethan is also
supplied by the Wishaw waterworks. The only other place which has a systematic water
supply is Motherwell, of which the population is now about 7000. Motherwell is sup-
plied, by an arrangement made with the Caledonian Railway Company, at the rate of
about 8 gallons per head, the water being pumped from the Clyde. I understand that a
comprehensive scheme is now under discussion for supplying these places with water, as
also Bothwell, which lies more to the westward, and is at present supplied by shallow
wells, which will probably become dry as more pits are sunk in the neighbourhood. I
do not recommend that the sewage of these towns! and villages be dealt with as a
whole. The quantity produced at each place will generally be small in proportion to
the pdpulation, and will be best disposed of on the land in the neighbourhood, after the
solid and more offensive parts of the sewage have been removed, or after the sewage
has been deodorized; where the land available for irrigation is in proximity to human
habitations. ;

‘The sewage of Wishaw has for many years been disposed of on the land by irrigation.
The principal portion of it is conducted, partly by a covered drain and partly in an open
ditch, to the Carbarns farm on Lord Belhaven’s estate, on the north bank of the Clyde,
about two miles from Wishaw. The conduits, as far as the burgh boundary, were made
at the expense of the burgh authorities, who advanced £100 towards the further exten-
sion of them to the farm. For the last fifteen years the sewage has been distributed over
the farm at a profit to the owner. The sewage of Cambusnethan was likewise for a time:

C
XVili CLYDE PURIFICATION COMMISSION.

it has been
conducted to some meadows near Coltness House, but for the last two years 1
allowed to flow into a burn, and from thence to the Calder. At Motherwell there has
been no systematic attempt at irrigation, but farmers take sewage on to their fields from
three of the principal outlets. I can see no reason why the whole of the sewage of the

district should not be disposed of on the land.

HAMILTON.

Hamilton is situated on the south side of the Clyde, at a distance of about 84 miles
by road from Rutherglen, which I have included in the Glasgow system of drainage. The
population of Hamilton is now 12,000; but, as before observed, it is likely greatly to
increase in the next few years. It is supplied with water by works situated on the high
land to the south-west of the town. The present supply amounts to about 20 gallons
a head, but an Act has been obtained to authorize the construction of new reservoirs,
which will double the present supply. The water-closet system does not prevail exten-
sively, and it is not looked on with favour by the authorities. There is a good system of
sewerage throughout the town, by which the sewage 1s discharged into the Clyde, prin-
cipally by the means of the Cadzow Burn, which has been partly covered in.

I have considered the propriety of making a sewer, and have made trial sections for
one, from Hamilton to join one of the Glasgow intercepting sewers at Rutherglen. But
there are several objections to this course. A considerable length of such a sewer would
necessarily be over coal workings, where the seams of coal are thick and lie near enough
to the surface to disturb and fracture the sewer. The work would prove too costly for
the population to be served at present, more especially if it were constructed to serve
the probable large addition which will be made to the population of Hamilton and the
district lying between that town and Glasgow, on the south side of the Clyde, in succeed-
ing years, when the rich coal beds beneath it are worked. There is no land near the
town available for irrigation, except that forming part of the park to Hamilton Palace, or
in its immediate neighbourhood. It is probable, therefore, that the sewage of Hamilton
will be best disposed of by some deodorizing process, expensive though that may be.

GREENOCK AND GOUROCK.

Greenock is situated on the south bank of the Clyde, about 20 miles below Glasgow
Bridge. The town lies partly opposite to and extends for two miles beyond the last
shoals which are exposed at low water from Dumbarton downwards. After Glasgow, it
is the most important town in the region of the Clyde, having a population of about
65,000 (1875). It is well supplied with water from large reservoirs in the hills behind:
the town. These waterworks, besides satisfying the demand for domestic and manufac-
turing purposes, supply water-power to many manufactories in and about the town. The
supply for domestic purposes only amounts to 50 gallons per head, the water-closet system
being in general use. Part of the Greenock water supply is drawn from outside the area

which I have included in the region of the Clyde, as will be seen by a reference to Plan
No. 2.

The gathering ground of this water supply is at the head of the burns which
discharge into the Firth of Clyde about Innerkip and Wemyss. But a part of the supply
is drawn from two reservoirs, which receive the drainage of about 2418 acres, at the head
of the Gryfe Water, a tributary of the Black Cart river.

For sewerage purposes the town is divided into ten districts, there being a separate
outfall to the sewer of each district. . Three of these outfalls, draining the central
districts, discharge into deep water along the river quay, where the current is
strong, so that the sewage is soon lost in the large volume of water with which it
mingles. A fourth outlet, also from a central district, discharges into the East Dock.
This sewer brings down a large amount of refuse from sugar and chemical works. Two
outlets to the eastern districts, one on each side of Garvel Point, discharge on the
foreshore between timber ponds, and render the mud exposed at low water very
offensive. The four remaining outlets are opposite the esplanade, near the best residential
property in the town, which would be greatly benefited by their being taken to some other
point of discharge, by the construction of an intercepting sewer along the foreshore.
REPORT. xix

Although the Clyde may not at present appear to be greatly polluted by the sewage
of Greenock, as the expanse of water in front of the town is great, and the deep-water
channel of the river, along which there is a strong current at the ebb and flow of the
tide, passes close by the sewer outlets, yet, as the population increases, or the river
above is more contracted by artificial embankments, the sewage will be carried by the
tide higher up the Clyde, and improved drainage will become necessary.

To do this, if the outfall at Farland Head were adopted, an intercepting and out-
oa sewer would require to be made from Port Glasgow to some distant point below
reenock.

Gourock, which has a population of between 3000 and 4000 inhabitants, is almost a
suburb of Greenock, and lies about a mile to the westward of that town down the Clyde.

After what has been said with respect to Greenock, it is needless to consider Gourock
in connection with the pollution of the Clyde. It would naturally be included in any
scheme for conveying the sewage of Greenock to an outfall farther down the Firth.

PORT GLASGOW.

Port Glasgow is situated on the Clyde above Greenock, and almost adjoining that
town, the intervening space along the river margin being occupied by timber ponds,
manufactories, and scattered habitations. It has a population of about 11,500 (1875).
The town is supplied with water from reservoirs in the hills behind it. The daily supply
amounts to about 408,000 gallons. The sewage is discharged by one principal outlet
into the deep water of the main river channel, which passes close to the shore in front of
the town. Above this principal outlet there are three small pipes, which discharge a
‘small quantity of sewage into the river.

Port Glasgow is somewhat nearer the narrow part of the river above Dumbarton
than Greenock, and sewage from Port Glasgow might be carried by the flowing tide into
that part of the river. Before many years elapse, it is probable that the inhabited
areas of Greenock and Port Glasgow will coalesce. The observations I have made with
regard to Greenock apply to this town.

HELENSBURGH.

Helensburgh is situated on the Clyde, opposite to Greenock, and near the entrance
to.the Gare Loch. The ground on which it is built rises steeply from the water's edge,
and as the town has been regularly laid out with parallel rows of streets and cross streets
at right angles to them, it is easily drained, and has been sewered throughout.

The sewage is discharged by five outlets on the beach in front of the town. And
although it cannot be said at present to add appreciably to the pollution of the Clyde,
as the Clyde opposite Helensburgh is three miles wide, the present position of the outlets
is objectionable. Helensburgh owes its existence to its being a place to which the
people of Glasgow resort for health and recreation, and it would be to the advantage
of the town to remove the present outfalls, by constructing an intercepting sewer, which
would discharge the whole of the sewage, after deodorization, at a point more distant
from the town; or to dispose of it by irrigation.

DUMBARTON AND VILLAGES ON THE RIVER LEVEN.

Dumbarton is situated on the Leven, near its junction with the Clyde. It has a
population of about 13,000. There are eight manufactories in the town, consisting of
shipbuilding yards and foundries, which cause pollution to the river by the sewage of
the people employed in them, which is discharged by private drains into the Leven.
The town is sewered, the whole of the sewage being discharged by several outlets into
the Leven. The drainage is not good, owing to the low situation of the town, which
causes the sewage to back up in the sewers.
EX CLYDE PURIFICATION COMMISSION.

Dumbarton is well supplied with water from the hills which rise to a considerable.
elevation to the north-east of the town. The supply amounts to about 26 gallons a head
for domestic and trade purposes. Owing to the low situation of the town, no change
could be made in the present mode of disposing of the sewage without having recourse to

pumping.

The quantity of sewage, as compared with the volume of the Clyde, is not large ; but
at present much of the sewage, which is discharged after the time of low water, must find
its way up the narrow, embanked part of the Clyde, and add to the pollution of that
river. By constructing two intercepting sewers along each side of the Leven, the sewage
of Dumbarton might be conveyed to the Clyde, and be there discharged after deodoriza-
tion. It would be better, however, if land could be procured at a reasonable cost to pasg
the sewage over it. There is land of a suitable nature along the road from Dumbarton
to Bowling. There would be no difficulty in bringing the sewage of that part of the
town which lies on the right bank of the Leven across the river by means of a Pipe,
so as to have one pumping-station on the left bank only, from which the sewage might
be distributed over the land in question.

There is a population almost equal to that of Dumbarton inhabiting the villages of
Alexandria, Renton, Bonhill, Jamestown, and Balloch, on the banks of the Leven above
that town. The villages are partially sewered, and the sewage is conducted by sewers or
by open ditches to the Leven. «As the water supply is not large, being in most cases
from springs in the neighbourhood, the amount of sewage is not great. The villages are
very close together, and the ground attached to the residences along the banks of the
Leven leaves little land available for irrigation. In order to remove this source of pollu-
tion from the Leven, it would be necessary to construct one or more small intercepting
sewers along each bank to points where plots of land can be obtained, if not of sufficient
acreage to admit of irrigation, at least large enough to permit of the sewage being
chemically treated, and afterwards discharged into the Leven. The principal pollution
of the river Leven arises in the Turkey-red dyeworks which line its banks.

Seven of the largest of these works on the Leven together pollute daily from 8 to 9
million gallons of water, drawn in the first instance from the river. Some of these
mills have done much to purify their refuse liquids before allowing them to flow into
the Leven, but much still remains to be done. As regards these works, they should
be dealt with in the manner hereafter suggested in the General Provisions.

DUNTOCHER AND FAIFLEY, AND OLD KILPATRICK.

Duntocher and Faifley, with the small villages of Hardgate and Milton, are situated
on the high ground bordering the Clyde, about. half-way between Glasgow and Duin-
barton. These villages, which closely adjoin one another, have a population of about
2500, and supply labour to some large cotton mills and other works situated on the
Duntocher Burn, which flows past them. They are supplied with water from waterworks
having a reservoir in the hills about two miles to the north. The population is not’
increasing, and several of the mills are not working at present. The sewage from
these villages is now discharged into the Duntocher Burn; it should be disposed

of on the land in the neighbourhood, which, as regards level, is well adapted for
receiving 1t.

Old Kilpatrick is a small village on the north bank of the Clyde, about six miles
below Whiteinch. It is situated on low ground, but not so low as to prevent the

ah which is now discharged into the Clyde, being distributed over the adjoining
and.

‘The only other village on the north bank of the Clyde which need be mentioned
here is Yoker. The population of Yoker was 535 at the census of 1871; but it has
largely increased since then, and is now about 2000. The situation of this village is
very low, and there might be some difficulty in obtaining land on which to distribute ..
the sewage. Yoker will be well. provided for by the low-level sewer which, as I have

before stated, can be made along the Clyde to th t Whitei
tion extends in that direction. in vee = _ eee
REPORT. a

LENNOXTOWN, KILSYTH, AND KIRKINTILLOCH.
These places contribute to the pollution of the Kelvin.

Lennoxtown is situated on the Glazert, a tributary of the Kelvin. Its population,
which at the last Census was 3717, is not increasing. There are three outfalls from the
public drains, which, together with several private drains, discharge into the Glazert.
This stream is considerably polluted before it joins the Kelvin by refuse from manufac-
tories both above and below Lennoxtown. Jn Lennoxtown there are only two works, a
calico print and an alum work, in both of which an attempt, though not a very effectual
one, has been made to keep a part of the refuse from the stream. The present water
supply is defective, being obtained from a burn and from wells; but waterworks are being
constructed which will give a good supply. The town lies low, but there is land, suitably
situated as regards level, below the town, on to which the sewage, which is necessarily
small in quantity, might be discharged.

Kilsyth has a population of about 5000, to which the coal mines in the neighbour-
hood. of the town afford employment. The water supply is from the hills, whence it is
brought to the town by a 6-inch pipe, There are two sewers in the town, which dis-
charge into a burn flowing into the Kelvin. The town is so situated that the drainage
might without difficulty be discharged on neighbouring land.

Kirkintilloch has an increasing population, amounting now to about 7000. The
town is well supplied with water from a reservoir in the hills some miles distant. These
works also supply Milton, a village on the Glazert, and a scattered population south of the
town. Kirkintilloch is well sewered. The sewers discharge by several outlets into the
Luggie Burn, which joins the Kelvin close to the town. There is one small drain which
discharges direct into the Kelvin, partly along an open ditch. The town is well situated
for discharging its sewage on land in the neighbourhood.

Tue Upper ReGion OF THE CLYDE.
LANARK.

Lanark is the only town of importance in the upper part of the region of the Clyde.
It contained, at the last census, 5099 inhabitants, and there has been no great increase
since then. ‘There are no works or manufactories in the town, but just above it, on the
river Clyde, there are several large mills.

The town is supplied with water by waterworks belonging to the Corporation. The
water is pumped for a distance of about a mile from a loch into a high service-reservoir

situated in the upper part of the town.

Lanark is sewered. There is one large main drain passing along the principal
street, and discharging on to some meadows about half a mile from the town. There are
also two smaller outfalls, one in a field on the south side of and close to the town, the
other not far from it, and from which part of the sewage is discharged on to fields, and
part into a burn which flows into the Clyde. The greater part of the sewage is now dis-
tributed over grass land, but the arrangements for distribution are not good. The sewage
from the main drain flows in an open gutter by the side of the high road for some
distance after leaving the town. There could be no difficulty whatever in distributing
the whole of the sewage over land in the neighbourhood, as the town is admirably

situated for the purpose.

OTHER TOWNS AND VILLAGES.

‘There are.a number of small towns and villages, as will be seen by reference to the
plans, having a population of less than 3000, and one or two somewhat exceeding that
number.. It will not be necessary for me to. allude more particularly to these. There
can be no difficulty in dealing with the. small quantity of sewage which they produce,
which may in all cases be distributed over the land. In some few cases this has been
already done, though not systematically. At Carluke, which has a population of 3400,
xxii CLYDE PURIFICATION COMMISSION.

the sewage from one of the outlets is distributed over a field of 3 acres, which pro-
duces good crops of grass. The only place having a population much exceeding 3000 is
Larkhall, which has a population of close on 5000. This village is composed almost
entirely of miners’ cottages. The only sewage from it would be the slops thrown into the -
open gutters in front of the cottages. As the village stands high, this source of pollution.
might easily be got rid of on the adjoining fields.

 

WORKS AND MANUFACTORIES.

An examination of Plan No. 2 will show how widely these are distributed over the
area to which my inquiry relates.

They cause a vast amount of pollution to the streams and rivers on the banks-of
which they are. placed.

Many of them would be gainers by the abatement of this ever-growing nuisance. A
work or manufactory placed near the source of a stream gets water pure and clear ; it
transmits ‘it to its next neighbour more or less polluted; this, and the works still
farther down, add new increments of pollution, until at last—as, for instance, in the case
of the White Cart—the water, where it enters the Clyde, is exceedingly foul.

Tt is evident that those works and manufactories situated on the lower portion of
the streams suffer from the pollution arising from those above them; and assuming all
were treated alike, and every one of the works and manufactories were compelled to
return the water into the streams practically free from pollution, the generality of the
owners would be gainers thereby.

The question remains, Is it practicable to obviate this state of things with a due
regard to manufacturing interests? And the conclusion I have arrived at is, that to a
large, and,.as I think, to a sufficient extent, it is quite practicable.

In some manufacturing districts the mills are situated in narrow valleys, where
little land exists at or about the level of the streams, on the banks of which they are
built, and where the mills are so close to one another that it would be some-
times difficult for the millowners to acquire the land which will be necessary
for the construction of settling ponds and filters for the purification of their waste
liquids. Such cases do not often occur in this district, where, although examples
are not wanting of narrow valleys with little level land near the water’s edge, the
manufactories are generally scattered, and stand in close contiguity only in the neigh-
bourhood of towns, where they might be permitted to use the town sewers under certain
restrictions. There are very few cases in the region of the Clyde where a sufficient
quantity of suitable land could not be found near the manufactories. The greatest diffi-
culty might occur in the case of the mills on the Leven; but even there the mills are not.
so close to one another, nor the physical contour of the land such as to prevent the manu-
facturers doing in the neighbourhood of their works all that is necessary to prevent their
liquid refuse from polluting the river. The mills on the Leven are principally Turkey-red
dyeworks, a class of work in which as much water is daily used and polluted as in any
process of manufacture; yet in one of the largest of these works, belonging to Messrs.
John Orr Ewing & Co., measures, which do them much credit, have been taken by them
to prevent the Leven being polluted by the discharge from their works. The water so
discharged, it is said, has been brought up to the standard of purity suggested by
the Rivers Pollution Commission in every respect except one. The matters in suspension
still exceed the given standard. Even this last remaining cause of pollution might

possibly be remedied by rapid filtration, as was suggested by the Rivers Pollution Com-
mission in their Fourth Report (1872).

The most polluted liquids can almost always be dealt with within the limits of the
works. Where land is not available for dealing with the less polluted but more volu-
minous refuse liquids, as is the case now in other districts, and may be the case as
manufactories increase in number in some parts of this, it may be useful for the owners

of works to combine to construct a common conduit to some point where there is suitable
land, or to the nearest system of sewers. ,
REPORT. xiii

Attempts have been made with more or less perfect success to purify the waste
liquids produced by nearly all the different manufacturing processes which add to the
pollution of our rivers and streams; but such attempts have rarely been made by manu-
facturers until they have been compelled to make them by those interested in the purity
of the streams which they pollute. Manufacturers are at present at the mercy of
riparian owners of land along the streams on which their works are situated, and may be
‘compelled by them to close their works, or comply with the demands of such owners with
regard to the purification of the polluted liquids from their works.

On several of the rivers of Scotland, action has been taken by the riparian owners,
and the manufacturers have had to comply with their requirements. On the river
Almond, the proprietors of some large paraffin works, after trying other and simpler
modes of purification,—none of which were effectual enough to satisfy the chemists
appointed by the Court to protect the riparian owners,—were obliged to make arrange-
ments for evaporating the whole of the water, including the rainfall, passing from the
part of the works liable to pollution during the process of manufacture. The area
subject to pollution was 35 acres in extent. Fortunately, a large quantity of water is
necessarily evaporated in this process of manufacture, otherwise the cost of applying such
a remedy might have made it impossible to carry on the works at the locality in
question. I should mention that from some of the waste liquids evaporated at these
works valuable products are recovered; but still the processes necessary to prevent pollu-
tion in this case are not remunerative, but a source of loss to the manufacturer,—a loss
which is aggravated by the fact that it may fall on one manufacturer and not on another.
The owners of paraffin works would suffer no great hardship if they were all compelled to
dispose of their polluted water on the works,—an opinion already expressed by the Com-
missioners on the Pollution of Rivers in their Fourth Report.

The papermakers on the river Esk are now being compelled by process of law to
abate the nuisance which arose from the discharge of the waste liquids from their works
into the river. The most filthy liquids are now all evaporated, and some of the less
filthy are used again until they can in turn be evaporated. The products recovered after
evaporation pay the cost of this remedy. The least polluted liquids are conducted to
settling tanks, from which they flow into the river after depositing a part of the impure
matters which they contain. Owing to the large volume of these less polluted liquids,
the process of purifying them must necessarily be a cause of expense to the paper
manufacturers, and they complain, and not without some reason, that they should be
compelled to incur the expenditure thus imposed upon them, while others in the same
trade, with whom they have to compete, are permitted to escape similar requirements.

In many cases the chemical matters in solution can be recovered at a profit. One
manufacturing chemist in Glasgow informed me that he was now annually recovering,
by a simple process, valuable products worth £500 per annum, which he had hitherto
allowed to run to waste into the sewers. Most of the stronger solutions produced in the
various manufacturing processes, and now contributing largely to the pollution of rivers,
can be evaporated or purified by precipitants without expense to the manufacturer, as
the value of the waste products recovered will cover the cost of the process. Many
examples of these processes are given in the Rivers’ Pollution Commissioners’ Reports.
‘The weaker solutions may be used to form the stronger ones, and by this means, without
‘inflicting any hardship on the manufacturer, the most polluting liquids may be kept
from the river, and even where the products recovered from solution by these operations
do not repay him, as they sometimes may not, he will often gain largely by the improved
-condition of the river.

To deal with the large quantities of water containing matter in suspension or used
for washing, as in print and dye-works for instance, will be more troublesome to manu-
facturers, for they cannot hope in any case to reap any benefit beyond the improved
condition of the river; though this, in some cases, will be an advantage. Some of these
waste liquids contain so little impurity that they may be discharged into the river at
once; but in some cases, settling ponds and filters will have to be provided, or chemical
precipitants will have to be used. In the printworks of Mr. Thom, situated near Chorley,
in Lancashire, which I visited, chemical precipitants and settling reservoirs are used.
The process of purification adopted by Mr. Thom is largely successful, and Mr. Thom
says he disposes of the products of his process so as to afford him a profit.

The most notable case that I have examined, of how much may be done in a small
xxiv CLYDE PURIFICATION COMMISSION.

space, may be seen at Mr. Biggar’s works and mill at Dalry. Much of the wool there
used is largely saturated with grease and tar, and the water used in the cleansing pro-
cesses was for a long time returned to the river greatly polluted.

By processes adopted by Mr. Biggar, and explained in the Appendix (pp. 21, 22),
not only the tion 40 eel ia eo that previously arising from the seo epdet
of the work-people, is now got rid of. Mr. Biggar candidly stated that : id not
undertake to remedy the evil until he was compelled by law (at the instance of some of
the proprietors on the stream below) to do so.

The space occupied by the processes adopted at the Dalry Mills for remedying the
evil is small, and the first outlay not large. Accordingly, Mr. Biggar assured me that
the improvement thus effected, so far from costing him anything, is now producing
a profit. :

The Turkey-red dyeworks at Blantyre have, at a trifling cost, —judging from the
appearance not exceeding £100,—obtained the means of abstracting the fatty matter
from the water before passing it into the river, and they dispose of the grease so obtained
for £8, 10s. per ton. I do not mention this case as making a sufficient provision for
the evil to be remedied, for the method is rude and of a temporary character, but only
as indicating the direction in which the necessary improvements will have to be
carried, and that they can in many cases be effected by ascertained and inexpensive
methods.

I might give many other instances, which have come under my notice in the course
of this investigation, of works in which steps are being taken to recover the products
contained in the more polluting liquids hitherto discharged, with few exceptions, into
the rivers. Since so much attention has been given to the subject of pollution, new
processes are continually being found by which these waste products can be made avail-
able at a profit; but manufacturers, and the large ones more especially, who most con-
tribute to the pollution of rivers, will not, for the sake of the small addition to their
incomes to be derived from the recovery of these waste products, be at the expense of
recovering them.

In Paisley, an enterprising chemist has undertaken to recover the grease and
fatty matter from the waste liquids of manufactories in that town, and is now doing
so for several manufactories at a profit to himself derived from the grease which he
recovers.

Manufacturers should be encouraged to reduce the quantity of water used in their
works as far as possible. A fixed standard of purity might tend to increase rather than
diminish the consumption, for it would often be easier for the manufacturer to dilute his
refuse liquid by the addition of pure water, until it was above the standard of purity, than
to adopt means to remove the impurity before passing the liquid into the river. By
such a course much impurity would be unnecessarily passed into the river.

Few waste liquids from manufacturing processes are suitable for application to land
for agricultural purposes. Those from distilleries form an exception. They are exces-
sively polluting, and their volume is so great that it has been found, after trials where
the owners have been compelled by law to purify them, impossible to deal with these
waste liquids in any manner so as to make them sufficiently pure to be discharged into
ariver. Fortunately the manurial value of this refuse, or ‘pot ale’ as it is called, is
very great. The success of the Carbarns Farm, over which the sewage of Wishaw is
distributed, is mainly owing to the high fertilizing power of the sewage consequent
on its receiving the discharges from a distillery.

WATER SUPPLY IN RELATION TO SEWAGE.

In the foregoing remarks upon the principal centres of population in the region
of the Clyde, I have given some particulars respecting the water supply in all cases
where any systematic supply existed, and I have added a Plan showing the position
of the reservoirs of the different waterworks, the drainage areas which supply them,
and the districts supplied by them. -
REPORT. er

The questions of water supply and sewage are intimately connected, and there
are one or two important points involved in this connection which demand some con-
sideration.

The physical conditions of the region of the Clyde are such as to render it pos-
sible to obtain readily an abundance of water at almost any point within it. It is
generally surrounded by large tracts of uncultivated land, rising to considerable altitudes,
and in most parts favoured with an abundant rainfall.

The water which is impounded in reservoirs for the use of the population is, after
supplying their wants, allowed at present to run into the rivers and streams which flow
into the Clyde, or into the Clyde itself. As in most cases the water so impounded is
such as would flow off quickly in time of floods, it is obvious that the construction of
waterworks tends to diminish the quantity of water flowing down the river in flood
times, and to increase the ordinary or dry-weather flow.

The construction of an outfall sewer would divert a certain volume of water daily from
the Clyde, and it is necessary to consider, and I have considered, whether the diversion of
so much water as will flow along the sewer will affect the scour and navigation of the
upper reaches of the river.

No doubt the downward flow will be pro tanto diminished. On the other hand, the
large amount of deposit now carried into the Clyde by the existing sewers will be got rid
of, and, on the whole, the one will, I think, compensate for the other.

The storm waters, in rainy seasons, would still pass into the Clyde, and that river
is, in my opinion, kept open more by the influx of tidal water than by the downward flow
of upland water. Moreover, the Glasgow Waterworks’ Commissioners are under obliga-
tion to remove the dam or weir which crosses the river above the Glasgow bridges. If
this were done, more tidal water would then flow up it, and increased scour would be
thereby obtained.

On the whole, I am persuaded that there need be no fear of injuring the navigation
of the Clyde by intercepting so much of the sewage as I propose to do, and passing it by
the outfall sewer to any of the outfalls referred to.

But although I do not think that the quantity of sewage which will be diverted from
the Clyde into the outfall sewer will injure the navigation, it may be necessary to place
some restrictions on the use, for manufacturing purposes, of the water of the rivers and
streams in cases where the water, after being used, will pass into the outfall sewer, and
will not be returned to the source from whence it was derived. At present, the filthy
condition of the Kelvin, White Cart, North Calder, and other streams renders them unfit
for use for manufacturing purposes, and manufacturers draw their supply from waterworks
instead. But if the rivers and streams in question are made, by the proposed measures,
sufficiently pure to be used for manufacturing purposes, manufacturers will, in many
cases, have recourse to them rather than pay for water supplied from waterworks. The
result may be, that if manufacturers are allowed to discharge the water which they have
used and polluted into the sewers, which are connected with the outfall at Farland Head,
too large a portion of the water of such rivers and streams might be intercepted from
passing into the Clyde. To prevent this occurring, it might be necessary, in some cases,
to prohibit the discharge of water into the sewers, where it had been obtained direct from
a water-course, and not from reservoirs or waterworks providing a compensation flow.

If the measures which I propose for purifying the water-courses of the region of the
Clyde are carried out, manufacturers will be divided into three classes :—

1. Those who, from whatever source they obtain their water supply, will be com-
pelled to take measures for purifying so much of it as they may have polluted.

2. Those who, being supplied by waterworks in towns, are permitted to discharge
part or all of the water which they pollute into the town sewers.

3. Those who, while they have the advantage of the use of the sewers for
getting rid of the water which they pollute, obtain their water direct from streams in the

neighbourhood a their works.
xxvi CLYDE PURIFICATION COMMISSION.

Those in the third category will obviously have an advantage over the others, and it
will be no hardship to deprive them of the use of the sewers, as I have suggested, and
oblige them to return the water, to which they have no exclusive right, in a pure. state
to the source from whence they took it.

GENERAL REMARKS.

I have not attempted to enumerate all the various kinds of works and manufactories
which contribute to the pollution of the streams and rivers of the Clyde district, nor all
the mechanical or chemical processes which have been tried or recommended as means
for purifying the liquids hitherto run to waste in such works and manufactories. The
works and many of the processes in question are described in the valuable Reports of the
Rivers Pollution Commission, to which I beg to refer. I have made myself acquainted
with previous inquiries, and have obtained information enough, I think, to justify me
in believing my recommendations to be practicable of application, and that, if they are
adopted, they will secure the end in view.

Those who own and manage works and manufactories have them wholly under
control, and can therefore provide and enforce the necessary provisions and regulations
for removing the nuisances which they so often create.

There can be no necessity whatever for the foecal matter from such establisments
being passed into streams.

The earth closet with its various modifications, the Colquhoun closet,—first adopted
in Paisley, I believe,—and other systems, render this source of pollution one which should
at once be put an end to in manufactories. In many works which I have visited, more
or less perfect arrangements have been made for keeping this source of pollution from
running water. The most perfect which I have seen, and already alluded to, is a modifi-
cation of the Colquhoun system, contrived by Mr. Biggar, and in use at his mill at Dalry, |
in Ayrshire. I have seen no works or manufactories in which there is not ample space to
provide arrangements of this description.

Manufacturers cannot, however, so readily provide remedies in some other cases.
When large volumes of water are made foul each day, they may often find it difficult to
obtain space for purifying them, and some provision may be necessary to meet instances
of this kind, such as means of acquiring land under Provisional Order, or other com-
pulsory powers. The want of room will, however, chiefly occur in towns where, in most
2ases, and under proper regulations, the sewers can be made use of.

The Pollution of Rivers Commission, in their Reports, give a number of analyses of
sewage, and of the effluent waters from sewers, which have been treated by different pro-
cesses of deodorization. They also recommend certain standards of purity (determinable
by chemical analysis) which the effluent water should not be allowed to fall short of, and
give tables of the minimum quantities of noxious matters which the effluent should be
permitted to contain. These quantities are minute, and it would require very careful
analysis to estimate them, and be difficult to get chemists to agree on the quantitative
analyses.

. Mr. Crookes, who is an eminent chemist, suggests a more simple test for the purity
of the effluent water, and he hopes, by the addition of various mineral substances to
the sewage, to produce an effluent which shall bear such a test, viz.: ‘That the effluent
water shall be clear, that it shall neither taste nor smell, and that fish shall be able
to live in it.’ Most peoplé would, perhaps, consider water which stood this test. to be
sufficiently pure. Still, where the presence of poison is suspected, e.g. in the case of the
liquid flowing from works where arsenic is used in the process of manufacture, it would
always be necessary to have recourse to chemical tests. Small’ quantities of” such

matters, so small as to be incapable of detection otherwise than by a chemical test,
might be exceedingly injurious to health.

Ina matter involving such. paramount interests it will be ‘prudent to proceed by
steps. I see no difficulty in greatly improving the state of the Clyde and its tributaries,
“ .
REPORT. a

so as to remove the palpable and crying evils experienced by those who reside near them:
but absolute purity, if ever attainable, must be a result of time, and await the progress
of invention. ;

In the present state of science and of knowledge on this complex subject, and during
the time when new methods and processes are being propounded from day to day, to
stereotype further than may be necessary any of those processes would be unwise. It ig
better to leave parties from time to time to adopt the best then known, and to raise the
standard of purity as experience may warrant.

Of course it may, and perhaps will, be said that I am proposing extensive works
which future knowledge may prove to have been unnecessary. All I can say on this
point, in addition to what I have already said, is that I cannot imagine any system which
will in this case render the works. I have suggested unnecessary or useless. Unless the
feecal matter could in Glasgow be separated from the rainfall, I see at present no method
of making it useful and avoiding a great nuisance except at larger cost; and I know of
no mode of separating it which would be tolerated in such towns as Glasgow and Paisley.
If hereafter it should be proved that the sewage in the state it arrives at Whiteinch, or
passes from thence along the outfall sewer, is sufficiently valuable to justify the expense,
and the adjoining landowners are willing it should be so applied, it could be lifted by
pumping and used for irrigation on the adjoining lands.

The advocates of several processes of deodorization think they may be worked at a
profit. I have as yet found no proof of this. At the same time, I should not deem
such proof necessary in order to justify their use in some cases. Outfall sewers are not
sources of profit. The question to be determined in each case is, What is the best avail-
able method for adoption, cost being a great but not the only element in the considera-
tion? Deodorization and irrigation schemes may be applicable and suitable in cases
where it can be shown that no better and cheaper methods can be found. It is not
necessary to prove, though it would be a happy circumstance if it could be proved, that
the pollution of streams and rivers can be prevented, and the sanitary condition of towns
and villages improved, without cost. Expenditure within reasonable limits will have to
be and ought to be incurred wherever it becomes necessary.

I am not aware of any, and indeed I feel confident there is no single method of
dealing with this question capable of universal application.

The engineering works which in this case I have recommended—by which
{ mean the intercepting and outfall sewers—will provide for a portion only, though a most
important portion, of the large district under consideration. The remaining portions will
have to be dealt with in other ways. Taking a wider view of this question, and looking
beyond the district of the Clyde, there are towns and villages in the Midland Counties
where there is no sea within reach, and where, if prohibited from discharging sewage
into their river, they must have recourse to systems of irrigation or deodorization, or
some other method. Some of the places in the region of the Clyde are in a like pre-
dicament, and cannot avail themselves of the intercepting and outfall sewers I have
recommended. These can, I think, be dealt with under the General Provisions which I
propose shall be applicable to the whole district.

The region of the river Clyde can be well defined, by making it embrace nearly the
whole area within the watershed of that river and its tributaries. I think the Govern-
ment ought not, and I shall assume that they would not, undertake the onerous duties
pertaining to the direction of sanitary works of such a varied character as would be
required throughout the area in question.

Such duties would, I believe, be better performed by Local Authorities already con-
stituted, or to be constituted, with control over enlarged districts where necessary, and
with a constitution somewhat similar to that of the Metropolitan Board of Works of

London. ‘

SUGGESTED GENERAL PROVISIONS,

I proceed finally to state the general provisions which I recommend should be made
+o secure as far as practicable the purification of the Clyde and its tributaries. Although
XRViil CLYDE PURIFICATION COMMISSION.

much might be done by the individual action of the sanitary authorities in the different
localities, I am strongly of opinion that much time and money will be saved, and earlier
and better results will be obtained, if a body be formed having jurisdiction over the whole
region draining into the Clyde, and armed with authority to prevent the pollution of its
waters.

1. I therefore recommend that, in the first instance, there should be constituted a
Board of ‘Sanitary Commissioners of the Clyde,’ to consist of representatives of the
various Town Councils or sanitary authorities within the area indicated on the Plans
attached to this Report. The number of the Commissioners should not exceed thirty-
six, and they should be allotted among the various authorities as nearly as possible in the
ratio of the rateable value of the property within their respective districts. In some
cases, two or more of the smaller authorities. should be combined for the purpose of
electing a representative. The Commissioners should have power to appoint and pay
the necessary officers, and to make requisitions upon the different rating authorities for
their quota of the expenses incurred, for which an efficient audit should be provided.

2. It should be the duty of the Sanitary Commissioners to compel the various local
authorities, as well as individual owners, to take steps for preventing the pollution of
the Clyde. Where the necessary works were voluntarily undertaken by those most
immediately interested, the action of the Commissioners would remain chiefly in abeyance.
But if the local parties refused or neglected to execute them, the Commissioners should
have power either to apply to a court of law to compel their execution, or themselves to
execute the works, levying the cost of doing so upon the defaulting authority or owner,
and applying to Parliament, when necessary, for the requisite authority.

3. It should be enacted, that ‘solid and dry refuse,’ not including under that term
feecal matter, should immediately cease to be conveyed or thrown or placed so as to fall
or be carried into the Clyde and its tributaries.

4. It should be enacted, that after a definite period, which might be fixed at eighteen
months, no fecal matter or urine from manufactories or public works should, except
under special licence from the Sanitary Commissioners, be passed into the Clyde or its
tributaries. Within eighteen months it should be practicable, in most cases, to make
provision for keeping back these offensive matters,

5. It should be enacted, that after the time absolutely necessary for making suitable
provisions to prevent it, no town, village, manufactory, public work, or other premises
should in any way pollute the Clyde or its tributaries. What is to be regarded as
‘pollution,’ I would leave, in the first instance, to be determined by the Sanitary Com-
missioners, with such technical assistance as they should think fit to employ. But,
under sufficient safeguards to prevent vexatious litigation, an appeal might be allowed
against their determination to a court of law. The time within which the works for

preventing pollution should be executed, and the character of these works, should be
decided by the Commissioners. .

6. All attempts to lay down satisfactory standards of purity which shall be universally
applicable have so signally failed, that I think it worthy of careful trial, whether the
question of purity might not be safely left to the determination of a body of persons

locally appointed, and, it may be assumed, conversant with the peculiarities and require-
ments of each district.

_ 7. In some cases the necessary works could not be executed without additional land
being procured on which to place them. In these cases, facilities should be given for the
compulsory acquisition of the land required, under the provisions of the Lands Clauses
Consolidation Acts. As in the case of the Metropolitan Board of Works (18 & 19
Vict. c. 120, sec. 152), it might be provided that these facilities should not be exercised
without the previous consent in writing of one of the Principal Secretaries of State.

_ Afan Act of Parliament were obtained giving effect to these general recommenda-
tions, I believe the means would at once be available for securing, as far as practicable,
the purification of the waters of the Clyde basin. My instructions are limited to that
district; but I am bound to say that, if my recommendations are deserving of adoption in
regard to the Clyde, somewhat similar provisions should be made in regard to other
similarly situated river basins throughout the kingdom. Wherever large populations are
REPORT. xxix

gathered, and numerous manufacturing industries exist oh the banks of any river and
its tributaries, combined action should, without delay, be taken to secure, as far as
practicable, their waters from pollution. As a matter of fairness to manufacturers, all
works and manufactories similarly situated should be treated alike. The general pro-
visions I have suggested would ensure this, as far as the region of the Clyde is concerned.
If similar provisions were made with regard to other similarly situated river basins
throughout the kingdom, it would be necessary that there should be a certain amount of
uniformity of action on the part of the different bodies of Commissioners. This might be
ensured by the Government appointing an officer who should be ex officio member of all
the Commissions.

Should the Commissioners fail in the requisite amount of activity and firmness, it
would always be open to the Government to take such other steps as might be deemed
desirable.

I am assuming throughout this Report that the authorities of the district under con-
sideration, .or some large section of it, such as Glasgow, will adopt the initiative by
applying to Parliament for the requisite powers to enforce these general provisions.
‘Should they fail to do this, then the interference of Government.would be required.

Which I humbly submit to your Majesty.

Witness my hand and seal, this 21st day of March 1876.

JOHN HAWKSHAW. (8) :

33 GREAT GEORGE STREET, WESTMINSTER, 8.W.
APPENDIY.

No. L

ESTIMATE OF WORKS REFERRED TO IN (SIR JOHN HAWKSHAW’S) REPORT.

 

Length. :

Miles, Yards.

16 836

22 440

38 1276

 

Intercepting Sewers on the North side of the Clyde;
including—

1. High Level Sewer from Airdrie to Shettleston,

2. High Level Sewer from Shettleston to White-
inch, .

3. Low Level Sewer through Glasgow to White-
inch,

4. Branch ‘Intercepting Sewers for Glasgow and

Suburbs, and for Maryhill, Hillhead, etc.,

 
  
   
  

Intercepting Sewers on the South side of the Clyde,
including —
1. High Level Sewerfrom Rutherglen, with Branch
to Pollokshields, . . :
2. Low Level Sewer, with Branch to Renfre ew,
3. Intercepting Sewers at Paisley, and aia
Pumping Station, ‘ :
4, Intercepting Sewer at J obnstone, ;

| Iron Pipes under the Clyde, and Pumping Station,

Contingencies, 15 per cent.,

Interest on Money during construction,

| Cost of the Intercepting Sewers, and of the a

Station opposite Whiteinch, including Land,

The Outfall Sewer, :
Contingencies, 15 per cent.,

Interest on Money during construction,

Ve

| Cost of the Outfall Sewer, including Land, .

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Note.—The cost of the Outfall Sewer would be about the same, whether it terminated at
Cloch Point, at Farland Head, or at Irvine Sands.

ANNUAL CHARGES.

Interest at 4 per cent. on £2,500,000,
Note.—The rate of interest is taken at 4 per cent. per annum ; but if there be a
sinking fund, a higher rate of interest would be. necessary.

other hand, the redemption would reduce the capital year by year.

Annual cost of Pumping, . : : 2

Maintenance of Outfall Sewer, d

Which sum is about 63d. per £ on £4,000,000.

£ x
354,000
296,000
150,000
800,000
120,000
_ 920,000,
80,000
1,000,000 1,000,000
1,200,000
180,000
1,380,000
120,000
__ 1,500,000 1,500,000
2,500,000
£
100,000
On the
5,000
3,000
108,000

 

The present rateable value of the property is about

£3,500,000; but before the expenditure for the works can all become a burden, the rateable value of the
property will probably amount to £4,000,000.
XXXil

CLYDE PURIFICATION COMMISSION.

No. IL.

REPORTS to the Metropolitan Board of Works by Sm J. W. Bazatexrre and Mz.'Kezares relative to the
Experimental Operations of the Native Guano Company at Crossness.

ENGINEER’s DEPARTMENT, SPRING GARDENS,

11th January 1873.
GentLeEMEN,—Application having been made to you
by the Native Guano Company for permission to erect
temporary works on your land at Crossness, in order
to enable the Company to submit for your observation
the mode of purifying sewage by the A BC process,
you sanctioned the experiment on the 27th January
1871, and subsequently directed Mr. Keates and my-
self to observe and record all the facts bearing upon
its operation, and report to you the result. Mr. Keates
will report to you the chemical results, whilst I herein
submit a statement of the quantities of the ingredients
used, the cost of the process (exclusive of buildings,
plant, and depreciation, wear and tear), and the com-
mercial results. .

The Company’s works and operations were in no
way interfered with or restricted by your officers, and
the Company modified and altered them from time to
time according to their own views.

The modifications thus introduced by the Company
occasioned considerable delay, and it was not until
the 27th August last that they were able to submit
their process for our inspection. It was continued
from that date up to the 30th November last, or for a
period of about three months.

Before reporting to you the results obtained during
that period, I should state that I received, on the 10th
instant, from Mr. C. Rawson, the general manager of
the Company, a letter, bearing date the previous day,
addressed to Mr. Keates and myself, urging that cer-
tain expenses incurred during the process ought not to
be debited to it. But, as his letter had been printed
before it was placed in my hands, I assume that it is
intended to be read by others as well as Mr. Keates
and myself; and whilst I deem it to be my duty to report
to you simply what was done, and not what might have
been done or left undone by the Company during the
three months of the experiment, I must not be con-
sidered to assent to the accuracy of the views put forth
in Mr. Rawson’s letter. It is not for me to say why
the Company paid £8, 5s. per ton for sulphate of
alumina, if they could have obtained it of equal quality
for £2 perton. Nor did this Board require the settling
tanks and machinery to be placed above ground. This
was done by the Company for obvious advantages to
their works, and had it not been done, other expenses
would have been substituted for the pumping now
sought to be deducted. There are other arguments
in Mr. Rawson’s letter to which I should demur; but
I proceed to report to you the facts observed.

Between the 27th August and the 30th November
1872, 11,672,737 gallons of sewage were experimented
upon, being about 1-343d part of the average flow of
sewage discharged at Crossness, and 1-686th part of
the sewage of London, and about 2-7ths the quantity
proposed to be treated by the Company, who intended
to have erected two tanks, each capable of containing
125,000 gallons, by the agency of which they stated
they would be enabled daily to effect the conversion
into solid sewage matter of the deposit from 500,000
gallons of liquid.

The quantity of A BC mixture used in the shape
of alum, clay, charcoal, lime, and blood, amounted to
166 tons, 14 cwt., 1 qr., 13 Ibs.; and the sewage
treated, assuming it to produce 100 grains to the im-
perial gallon, 74 tons, 8 cwt., 3 qrs., 16 lbs., making
a total of 241 tons, 3 cwt., 1 qr., 1 lb., giving in the
shape-of dried residue, called Native Guano, 133 tons,
7 ewt., 2 qrs. 11 Ibs. Besides this, the subsiding
tanks contained, on the 30th of November last, 41:70
tons more of wet mud deposit than they did at the
commencement of the trial; this would produce a dried
residue of 8°34 tons,

The total expenditure amounts to £895, 3s. 3d., and
may be divided thus—

 

Charcoal (refuse animal), £63 14 9
35 (wood), . é ‘ ‘ 312 6
Alum (crude), . j 175 14 7
Clay alum, . . : . » 2818 7%
Clay (common), . ; ; . 1817 0
Blood, . ; ‘ : : ‘i 213 0
Coals, - ‘ ; . 230 11 3h
Lime, . ‘ * ‘i : , 06 #
Wages—
Manufacturing, . £22012 24
Mechanical supervision, 38 0 10
Chemical, 83 10 4
Sale account, bagging
and loading, . 815 3
Office, wages of boy, 716 14 |
308 14 9
Engine stores, .  . ; . 14 7 44
Manufacturing stores, . : a 4713 0
£895 3 8

 

This gives the cost of manufacture, taking the dried
and wet residue as perfect Native Guano (141-7199
tons), at £6, 6s. 4d. per ton, exclusive of rent, interest
on capital, depreciation of plant, and other incidental
items.

About 80 tons of the deposit were sent across the
river to Messrs. Sillars, who are actively concerned in
the management of the ABC Company, to mix with
fish manure. Two or three tons of it have been put
upon a small quantity of land rented by the Company
at Crossness; about 10 tons remain in a wet state,
banked up upon the ground; about 40 tons, in a dried
state, are in the Company’s sheds, and a few tons have
been sent away in small quantities as samples; but,
with the exception of a few shillings, the Company's
books show no returns in the shape of sales of manure.
—I am, gentlemen, your obedient servant,

(Signed) J. W. Bazatcetre,
Engineer. :
To the Works, etc. Committee of the
Metropolitan Board of Works.

January 13, 1873.

I nave the honour to report herewith upon the results
of the experimental operations of the Native Guano
Company at Crossness, carried on from the 27th August
to the 80th of November last, under the supervision of
the engineer and myself on behalf of the Board, in
accordance with the instructions of the Works, etc.
Committee of the 25th July 1871. My report relates,.
however, only to that part of the experimental working
which involves chemical and sanitary considerations;.
the commercial and financial results are given and
treated of by Mr. Bazalgette in his report presented
to the Committee at the same time as this.

The experimental works were set partially in opera--
tion early in August, and betweet the 6th and 27th:
samples of the effluent water were taken on several!
occasions and submitted to analysis; but before making
@ definite commencement it was necessary that the
stock of materials on the premises should be carefully
taken; this was not completed until the 26th of Au-
gust. On the morning of the 27th, however, at 9
o’clock the works were started, and the experiment.
effectively begun.

It was intended in the first instance that the opera-
tions should be carried on day and night, but con-
sideration showed that it would be very difficult to-
keep up such supervision as appeared desirable during”
the night; after discussion it was therefore thought
APPENDIX.

better .by Mr. Bazalgette and myself that the works
should only go on during the day, and instructions
were given to the effect that working should be com-
menced at 7 a.m. and be continued up to 5 p.m. daily.

Tt was also arranged that the work should not be
continued on Sundays.

The number of days on which the experiment was
actually going on was 80.

To relieve Mr. Houghton from the responsibility of
constant attention, and to afford him such assistance
as he might require, the Board authorized the sending
of Mr. Gotto, one of the officers, to Crossness; from
the commencement of the experiment on the 27th of
August up to its termination on the 30th of November,
he accordingly kept a strict supervision over all the
proceedings at the works, day by day, during all the
working hours, so that an effectual check was held
over all the different operations, and as to materials
received on and removed from the premises; he also
furnished me with a daily record of the state of the
effluent water and of all notable circumstances occur-
ting on the works.

With the object of ascertaining with exactness the
current effect of the ABC process upon the sewage,
daily samples of the effluent water were taken by Mr.
Gotto and my own assistant, and these were analyzed
day by day as they were brought up from the works.
Samples of raw sewage were also taken on several
occasions during the time the experiment was going
on, and these were likewise analyzed as they were
brought to the laboratory.

The A BC process appears to have been simplified
since I inspected the Leamington Works two years
ago; at that time.a very complex mixture of ingredi-
ents was employed, and the mechanical mode of
mixing was cumbrous. At Crossness a much simpler
formula, containing only sulphate of alumina, clay, and
carbon, with a little lime and blood, was employed, and
the mixing was effected without mechanical agency by
allowing the sewage and A BC mixture to meet as
they issued from their respective supply pumps and
cistern.

By permission of the Board, the Native Guano Com-
pany were to have 500,000 gallons of sewage per day
of twenty-four hours; by the reduction of the time of
working to ten hours daily, of course this quantity
would be reduced in proportion; but, in point of fact,
even the reduced quantity was never reached, as the
mean quantity treated daily was 145,909 gallons.

The gross quantity of sewage treated during the
eighty days of the experiment was 11,672,737 gallons,
and to defecate this and precipitate the solid suspended
matter with a portion of that dissolved in the sewage,
upwards of 166 tons of A BC mixture were em-
ployed. This mixture contained the ingredients in the
following proportion :—

Sulphate of alumina 2.5 parts.
Charcoal 14.5 ,,
Clay 18.0 ,,

with a little blood, and occasionally lime.

The carbon and clay, as well as the sulphate of
alumina, contained, however, in the state in which they
were used, a very large percentage of water, more
than 50 per cent., and it is stated by the Company,
and my own analyses bear this out, that the 166
tons of ABC mixture, as used, contained actually
only about 81 tons of dry material. The amount of
dried manure ultimately obtained by treating the
11,672,737 gallons of sewage with the 166 tons of
ABC mixture, containing, as I have stated, 81
tons of dry material, was about 142 tons, of which it
may be said that about 61 tons were derived from the
sewage, and 81 tons added in the A B’C mixture.

With reference to the chemical part of the inquiry
at Crossness, it appeared to me that there were three
principal points for elucidation ; these were—

First, as to the effect of the treatment of the sewage
by the A BO process as a means of clarification and
defecation.

Secondly, as to the possibility of completing the pre-

E ;

XXxill

paration of the manure without creating offensive
effluvia, which might prove a nuisance to the surround-

‘ing neighbourhood.

Thirdly, as to the value of the manure produced
from the precipitated solid matter.

First, as to the effect of the A BC treatment upon
the sewage :—

It is to this part of the subject, perhaps, that the
greatest importance attaches itself, in a sanitary sense,
as upon it depends the solution of the question whether,
or no the A BC process can so far purify the sewage
of towns that it may be allowed to pass into rivers
without polluting them to a dangerous degree.

The condition of the effluent water must be taken as
the exponent of this purifying action. -

The sewage was treated with the ABC material,
estimated, in the undried or ordinary state, in the pro-
portion of rather less than 32 lbs. to the 1000 gallons
of sewage, and after being thus treated, it passed along
through five of the settling tanks, which are 50 feet in
length and 20 feet wide, so traversing a distance of
about 250 feet, and becoming more and more clarified
in its course, owing to the precipitation of the sus-
pended solid matter, which is partly derived from the
sewage and partly from the added ingredients. At the.
end of the last tank, the clarified sewage, or, as it is
termed, effluent water, was made to fall over a ledge
seven or eight feet high, forming a kind of cascade,.
into a channel below, by which it was finally carried
away into the river. This channel is four feet wide,
and upwards of 270 feet long, and its condition during
the experiment was the object of constant inspection,
as affording an important indication, among others, of
the state of the effluent water which flowed through it.

As I have stated before, two samples of effluent. water
were taken daily during the time the experiment was
being carried on; these were taken, one early in the
morning, the other in the afternoon. In some cases,
both samples were analyzed; but generally the two
were mixed, and the analysis made upon the mixed
liquid. Altogether, seventy-six samples of effluent
water were examined; four between the 6th and 20th
of August, and seventy-two . between the 27th of
August and the end of the experiment on the 30th of
November.

In the analysis of effluent water proceeding from
treated sewage, there are two determinations whichi are
considered indicative of its character as a possible
source of pollution; these are the total solid matter,
mineral and organic, dissolved in the liquid, and the
amount of organic nitrogen, which represents the
putrescible principle.

The quantity of ready formed ammonia contained in
such effluent water is of no importance in relation to
the question of pollution; in the analyses made of the
effluent water from Crossness, the ammonia was, how-
ever, estimated. The analytical determinations were,
then, the quantity of dissolved solid matter, mineral
and organic; the organic nitrogen; the ready formed
ammonia; total combined nitrogen; and the amount
of chlorine. The quantity of chlorine present is really
of ne more importance in respect to pollution than
ammonia, and it is not registered in the table at the
end of this report; but an interesting question having |
arisen as to the capability of the A BO process to
remove a portion of the chloride of sodium present in
sewage, I was desirous of settling the point if possible,
and I am now convinced, by the results of several
experiments, that the quantity of chloride of sodium is
not altered by the A BC treatment.

The state of the effluent water at Crossness was, on
the whole, extremely good. Occasionally there was a
slight smell of sewage at the point where the water left
the last settling tank and fell over into the channel by
which it finally flowed away, but generally there was
little or no perceptible smell, and the water was bright
and colourless. On a few days the sewage smell was
rather strong in the effluent water, but with those
exceptions it was, as I have said, very free from odour,
and clear and bright in appearance. As it fell from the
tank and flowed along the outlet channel, it was also
XXX1V

free from the characteristic dirty, persistent froth or
scum which is generally seen in such cases, and on the
occasions of my visits during the experiment, I did not
observe any sewage odour over the settling tanks, nor
along the course of the channel through which the
effluent water was flowing.

For some time after the experiment was begun, the
outlet channel was cleaned every morning. On the
10th of September I desired that it should be left
‘untouched, in order that the effect of the effluent water
might be noted, and from that date to the end of
November, the half of the channel most distant from
the outfall at the tank was never cleaned. After ten
weeks there was no appearance of sewer fungus or
other organic growth on the sides and bottom of the
channel.

On several occasions samples of the effluent water
were kept in closed vessels in the laboratory, with the
object of ascertaining whether it would become foul by
the putrefaction of the organic matter which it still
contained. It was always found that about the second

CLYDE PURIFICATION COMMISSION.

day the sewer odour became distinct in the: water,
although not very strong; on the third day, it remained
about the same, but after that the odour became less
and less in degree, and in a few days was entirely
gone. With respect to this point, however, it must be
observed, and I shall have again to direct attention to
it, that owing to the long-continued rain, the sewage’
_at the southern outfall was abnormally weak throughout
the whole of the experiment, and that the putrefactive
matter present in it, as measured by the amount of
organic nitrogen, was considerably below the usual
standard. This, of course, rendered the purification of
the sewage by the A BC process much easier than it
would otherwise have been, and the results, as ex-
hibited in the character of the effluent water, so far
manifest a favourable leaning towards the process.
The analysis of the effluent water bears out the
above statements as to its comparative purity, the
mean composition of the water, in grains per gallon,
during the three months’ experiment being as fol-
lows :— a

 

 

 

 

 

Total Solids in) Mineral Organic Organic : Total
Solution. Matter. Matter. Nitrogen. Aeon a Nitrogen.
98.70 88.10 10.60 0.188 1.750 1.938

 

 

 

 

 

Secondly, as to the preparation of the dry manure
without producing offeasive effluvia :—

After the sewage was mixed with the ABC
materials it was passed through the length of the sub-
siding tanks, in which the solid matter was precipitated
in the form of thin mud or sludge. The supernatant
water was drawn off os closely as possible from the
precipitate, which was then pumped up into a peculiar
kind of filter known as Needham’s Press; by this
treatment the mud was brought into the form of a
sclid cake, still containing, however, about 50 per
cent. of water, which had to be in great part removed
by subsequent treatment.

Up to the 24th of October there were no means at
Crossness of drying the solid material derived from the
filters, and an accumulation went on to the extent of
between 200 and 300 tons. This mass, which lay for
some time in the store, never emitted any offensive
smell, although fermentation and considerable heating
took place in it.

On the 24th of October a contrivance for drying the -

solid matter and converting it into manure was com-
pleted, and this drying apparatus continued to work,
with occasional stoppages on account of mechanical
defects, until the end of the experiment.

In drying the precipitated solid matter of sewage, the
great difficulty. irrespective of cost, seems to consist in
the liability of the animal matter to burn during the
process, and so to give off an offensive stench; whilst
the drying apparatus was in use at Crossness, however,
upwards of 180 tons of manure were dried without
producing any offensive emanations.

A further experiment was also made with reference

the drying of the mud from the tanks by mere ex-
posure to the action of the air. A space was hollowed
out in the ground in the form of a tank, and into this a
quantity of the mud was run; the water partly drained
away and partly evaporated, leaving the mud progres-
sively more and more consistent. There was no of-
fensive smell developed, although the mud was exposed
for sixteen or eighteen days, and was finally dried off
at the end of the experiment by the drying cylinder
already spoken of.

Thirdly, as to the value of the manure produced by
the A BC process :—

With respect to this part of the inquiry, my views
are necessarily taken from a chemical standpoint. I
have no means of judging of the effects that have been
obtained in the practical application of the manure in
agriculture, and what I have been able to learn by

inquiry seems too vague and conflicting to permit of any
satisfactory judgment being formed. Whether or no
the fertilizing power of a manure can be exactly mea-
sured by its chemical composition, is a question which,
perhaps, admits of some discussion; in endeavouring, ?
however, to set a value upon the manure obtained from
the working at Crossness, I can only be guided by
chemical. analysis, giving to the ingredients the under-
stood market value.

The composition of a sample of the manure, as dried
in the drying apparatus, and completed ready for sale,
is as follows :—

 

Water, 26.45
Organic matter, s 16.16
Alkaline salts, F ‘ 0.36
Sulphate of lime (traces) ree
Carbonate of lime and magnesia, 2.62
Phosphoric acid, . . F 0.48
Alumina and oxide of iron, 15.42 :
Insoluble siliceous matter, 38.51

100.00

 

Total nitrogen in the organic matter, calculated as
ammonia, 0.929 per cent.

Phosphoric acid, as soluble phosphate of lime,
0.760 per cent.

The ammonia and phosphate of lime are the only
substances present in this manure to which any real
manurial value can be attached, as the amount of
en salts is too low to materially affect the ques-
ion. ; ‘

If the value of the ammonia be taken at 74d. per
pound, or £70 per ton, the ammonia contained in a
ton of the manure will be worth 15s. 6d. If the phos- ©
phoric acid be calculated all as soluble phosphate of
lime, and valued at 3d. per pound, or something under
£30 per ton, the worth of the phosphate contained in
the manure will be 4s. 2d. per ton; adding the value .
of the ammonia, 15s 6d., to that of the soluble
phosphate, 4s. 2d., we have 19s. 8d., say 20s. per ton,
as the net value of the manure. Whatever value it
may possess beyond this cannot, in my judgment, be
estimated upon any chemical reasoning, and I am in-
clined to believe that continued experience will prove
the amount mentioned to be about the fair commercial.
value of the commodity. I have no means of drawing
any inference as to the value of the manure from sales
made during the Crossness operations, as, so far as I
 

APPENDIX.

am aware, no actual sales, at least of any quantity, of
the manure were made.

Taking into consideration the results of the Cross-
ness experiment, chemically considered, I come to the
following conclusions :—

First, That the effluent water was, on the whole,
very good. The A BC treatment so far clarified and
defecated the sewage that, looking solely to the physi-
cal condition and chemical composition of the water
produced at Crossness, I am of opinion that such water
was in a fit state to be admitted into any ordinary
river without producing a dangerous degree of pollu-
tion. I must here again direct attention, however, to
the extremely dilute state of the sewage during the
experiment. The effect of this was to render the re-
sults somewhat inconclusive, as it is, of course, impos-
sible to say, at least from this experiment, how far the
ABC treatment would defecate sewage of a stronger
character. ie i

Secondly, That during the preparation of the
manure, including the storing of the moist cakes of
mud from the presses, and the final drying in the drying
cylinder, no offensive effluvia were emitted, and that,

XXXV

taking the experience of Crossness as a guide, the
A BC process may be carried on up to the completion
of the manure for the market without producing any
nuisance. r

Thirdly, That the value of the manure, as judged of
by its chemical composition, does not exceed twenty
shillings per ton.

I beg leave to append a table of all the analyses of
the effluent water made during the course of the experi-
ment, commencing the 27th of August, and also of
twelve analyses of the raw sewage made at different
times during the months of August, September,
October, and November. A comparison cannot, how-
ever, be drawn between the sewage and effluent water
of a corresponding date, as it required some time for
the water to pass through the settling tanks. The
effluent water of any particular time would, in fact,
represent sewage of a time considerably antecedent.

(Signed) T. W. Kuartzs, F.CS.,
Consulting Chemist, etc.

To the Works, etc. Committee, Metropolitan
Board of Works.

ANALYSIS OF EFFLUENT WaTER—CROSSNESS (A BC Procsss), IN GRAINS PER GALLON.

 

 

 

 

Date, 1872. <r ™m | Mineral Matter. | Organic Matter. oes Amufionia. oe

Aug. 28 90.3 79.8 10.5 0.383 2.205 2.588
29 87.8 78.0 9.8 0.258 2.152 2.410
” 30 > 87.9 79.2 8.7 0.297 2.406 2.708

Sept. 2 86.8 78.4 8.4 0.214 1.788. 2.002
iS 84.8 73.1 11.7 0.200 2.450 2.650
A 81.4 7B2 8.2 0.235 1.680 1.915
an: 79.8 69.3 10.5 0.235 1.575 1.810
6 92.4 80.8 115 0.298 3.570 3.868
ye a ahd 73.2 82 0.277 1.662 1.939
” 410: 92.2 81.5 10.6 0.338 2.520 2.858
. if 98.8 89.2 9.6 0.238 2.310 2.548
” 12 115.8 105.0 10.8 0.378 2.450 2.828
> AG 149.2 133.5 15.7 0.133 2.100 2.233
4a 158.5 141.0 17.5 0.280 2.245 2.525
> 18 158.0 141.0 17.0 0.220 2.310 2.530
” 49 122.7 116.9 15.8 0.130 1.561 1.691
” 90 161.7 144.9 17.5 0.343 1.470 1.813
ar?! 168.4 151.2 17.2 0.140 1.561 1.701
> 93 123.3 112.8 10.5 0.210 2.100 2.310
24 128.1 114.1 14.0 0.220 2.640 2.860
25 1241 |. 118.6 10.5 0.200 1.750 1.950
» 26 136.4 128-4 12.9 0.238 1306 | , 2.044
97 145.9 131.9 14.0 0.360 1.603 1.963
113. 101.3 12.1 a om i

ae a 86.8 11.2 0.336 2.310 2.646
9 :

Oct. 1 110.0 99.0 112 ze 1.876 a

2 111.7 99.7 11.9 0.280 1.820 2.100

» 4 93.6 83.4 10.2 0.300 1.456 1.756
— s 163.4 149.4 14.0 0.260 2.002 2.962
=. 8 132.3 121.1 112 0.198 2.202 2.400
og 105.7 95.2 10.5 0.327 1.617 1.944
"9 103.2 93.4 9.8 0.220 1.864 2.084
~ 40 107.4 96.2 112 0.378 1.642 2.020
es 98.2 89.2 9.0 0.230 2.401 2.631
"12 88.5 78.7 9.8 0.214 1.848 2.062
"44 85.7 75.9 98 | 0.265 1.948 2.213
* ab 92.9 81.3 11.6 0.274 2.100 2.374
a ie 99.0 88.9 10.1 0.208 2.016 2.224
- ; 292 a :
a oe 101.5 91.0 10.5 0.29

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
XEXVI

Awazysts or Errivent WaTER—Crossness (A BC Process), IN GRAIN

CLYDE PURIFICATION COMMISSION.

+

3 PER GALLON—continased)

le”

Ad

ab

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

   

~ sequin cindt ae.

sao 4 ic Ni ‘ F tal Ni

Date, 1872. toe euae 11 | Mineral Matter. |Organic Matter. agrees a Ammonia. tet Aosmonia
Oct. 18 108.2 94.5 13.7 0.120 1.260 1.380

» 19 105.0 100.1 4.9 0.140 1.743 1.883.

4 2k 103.9 95.5 8.4 0.214 1.663 1.877

» 22 100.4 89.9 10.5 0.123 1.997 2.120

» 23 99.0 89.6 9.4 0.161 1.008 1.169

» 29 96.6 87.1 9.4 0.120 1.740 1.862

» 26 82.5 73.5 9.0 0.160 1.645 1.805,

» 28 80.5 70.0 10.5 0.147 1.666 1.813

» 29 75.2 66.5 8.7 0.252 1.641 1.893.

» 380 87.5 \76.6 10.9 0.229 1.643 1.872

» 93 86.3 76.5 9.8 0.150. 1.277 1.427
Nov. 1 63.3 54.6 8.7 0.040 0.906 0.946

59 2 79.8 69.6 10.2 0.030 - 0.976 1.006

7 4 79.4 70.7 8.7 0.036 0.997 1.033

3 5 76.6 66.8 9.8 0.065 1.386 1.451

7 6 70.3 61.9 8.4 0.057 1,120 1.177

a 7 77.8 67.9 9.9 0.046 1.330 1.376

33 8 82.2 71.7 10.5 0.122 1.428 1.550

ar AD 77.7 67.9 9.8 0.085 1.568 1.653

» 13 81.5 TA 10.1 0.067 1.250 1.317

= abe 82.9 73.8 9.1 0.163 1.489 1.652

a LD 76.4 - 69.3 7.1 0.116 1.417 1.533

» 16 72.1 62.3 9.8 0.202 1.396 1.598

» 20 75.6 65.8 9.8 0.114 0.837 0.951

» 2l 76.4 67.9 8.5 0.055 1.006 1.061

» «22 78.9 70.3 8.6 0.066 1.484 1.550

» 23 80.1 70.3 9.8 0.052 1.008 1.060

«Be 79.4 70.0 9.4 0.058 1.262 1.320

> 28 75.2 66.8 8.4 0.110 1.610 1.720

» 29 78.1 69.0 9.1 0.081 1.302 1.383

» 30 72.1 63.0 9.1 0.060 1.3820 1.380

ANALYSIS OF Raw SEWAGE—CROSSNESS, IN GRAINS PER GALLON.
Date, 1872. ca 2 | Mineral Matter. Organic Matter. ee Ammonia. peg an te
Aug. 15 80.5 67.2 13.3 0.700 8.150 3.850

5 28 74.9 63.7 11.2 0.412 1.621 2.083
Sept. 9 76.6 66.1 10.5 0.294 1.764 2.858

» 14 77.3 64.7 12.6 0.264 2.597 2.861 ‘
Oct. 15 77.0 66.5 10.5 | 0.382 1.342 1.724

ge ELE 87.4 76.5 10.9 0.246 1.260 1.506

» 28 73.5 66.5 7.0 0.208 1.739 1,947 i
Nov. 5 61.2 51.7 9.5 0.112 1.300 1.412 |}

» 16 67.2 56.3 10.8 0.238 1.400 1.638 ;

» 20 60.6 51.4 9.2 0.145 1.148 1,293

» 28 63.0 52.5 | 10.5 0.079 0.940 1.019

9 30 65.2 53.0 | 12.2 , 0.106 1.120 1.226

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
XXXV1

APPENDIX.

 

‘000s ogy

‘000°GTF mnoqy

‘UMOTY JOU SYIOM JO 4s09

: 000*2
qnoge 4800 OAvT SxIOM OY} ‘Surdt
PIO emos jo woydooxe 047 UIT

“pourey.za08 you surdid"jo yso9
‘kuedmoy Aeayrey uermopeten oy
0} unuue sod Qo, sked ySang ogy,

Ges‘69F ‘ysoo! oyeumtxoiddy
000°ST *  ‘Burdid wou soy ppy
GOF'LT * “09 "Trey werdopsTen)

0} pred aq, 0} pojoodxg
L08‘98F . * 4800 Ose SHIOAL
‘00S'FTF mnoqy
“00S‘OTF yNoqy
“000'0¢F snoqy
"GL6‘9TF

greets °° + eno,
SFSi2L °°  * ‘sHIOM MONT
000;09F * * * ‘SxIOM PIO
“PIPagn Ty

‘FB ‘pe ‘sperourm ty e
‘sq ‘sosnoy ! ¢ @ ‘pg ‘soSeqiz0y pue
Spue]—iIojyVM JOy osIVGo Jo sozexy
“podivyo osye sreqerorqnd uoyas[3
000‘00T tad “sgg ‘ragou kq ye “pg
‘ayer OseUOp ' ¥ e "pg ‘ayeI oqng

- “worgdtrosqus
yenuue Areyuntoa v Led sxoummsuos
MOF BING | oFVI JOYVM OU SI o1O,
S1T@3 000‘00T 40d 89, 808e0 Moz v UL
pus “sqe3 900‘OOT sed ‘sgg ‘aaqour
Ag -sosodind ]ye 107 ¢ 8 “pg “sy Ur
pepnyour yng | yer dye feroods oN

‘quounssesse [eloods ON

‘xeak yyeq rod
pemnsuos AyWUenb 07 Barpsosoe
‘smoyTe# Q00‘00T ted ‘sog 0} ‘sog
Joyour Aq pue ‘x esp ‘ayer raze Ay

‘FV pe sp ‘ayer roye Ay
‘siojoradoid wo Apaed pue

syueue} uo Apyied “y v ‘sy ‘eyes 19042 AY
_{smoqTes 000‘00T sod “sor
6% ‘sesodimd opvsy soz te & “pg

‘ayaa orfqnd {ye “pg ‘ayer onsom0g

°F @ Sy ‘oqer sage Ay |

‘3 FPL
‘oyea orqnd ‘z e ‘sy ‘ayer onsout0g

“38 “pT ‘Appedrorun py wrqqra

oper orfqnd | ye pit ‘Aypedrorunyg

puokeq ovr osomop ty @ ‘pg
‘Aqpedioran fl UIIIA ayer onsomw0g

 

24800 SYIOMIO}VAA OY} CART FBT AA

 

|
EIO}EM IOy oSreyH Jo opey ONF st eq AA

 

 

“£ep @ -sie3 Qoo‘oet 4[ddns
0} paqyoadxa ore poyonIysI00 oq 04
Moqge syI0 A ‘Avp e-syeS eqg‘gp

“‘Buvfsnqurey jo ysueg

ye peyeys uondumsaoo quesarg | oy} jo AyoGINY [eoo'y ou, “TLOATASOY ALTON, ‘ONVISQAEHV(
000‘¢zz : *  ‘nuixeyy wage hoe
00000 «ti tC SoS eaOAW "STOTOISSTULUO A)
‘Aep 8 “s][8D SYLOMIOFV AA WOYIUV_ OYJ, ‘uMg yoourey ‘NOLTIINVA,
: : ‘UM04 OT} Jo syavd- sno
“kep @ -II@A Ul sT[oa duind-g f ynoqe
smoTTeS QN0‘09 ynoqe oSezoae ‘yreuey =| pue ‘urears [pews v ‘qoo'y
0} 9qsnoq, nq !UAOUY yon] Jo Tioun0gQ uUMOY, 049 OF, | JOOP, YeuBTY avott sBuradg “MUVNV'T
‘uMOTY ou NUM :
-TXtUr pu oseIoAe qoexy “ep. *1944e[ OT}
@ surfed Q00'GTS 4 000‘0IZ “MESIAL JO YSng | qwou ssayds ureyrso pus
wor st uoyduinguco “pep oyy, | oq4 JO.s1uOIssIMMMIOD 944 oy, | ‘Wing aep ‘ung esprinog *MVHSI AL
faeduop seapey wermop
*  fep | -apeg ony Xq poduind soy 4
B suoHes 900'8S ‘HearomOW | TearomoW jo  ysmg . ; ae
jo ysaing oy poyddns £44ueng 94} JO SIOMOISSTUMMIOL) O49 OY, ‘opAIQ qAATyY “TTI MUAH LOL
_‘kep e suorres 0on‘00¢'z ; ‘ued .
qe poyemnss pue ‘paseorour |-mog soye,y eSprzqyeog
Ajesief styt Mon’ “Lupe suoyes | pur otpary ety 04 pred ;
000‘OEL‘T ynoge sem Ayyuenb | pue ‘kuedmozy feapery : ‘ming s3407q9 *ADCTUALVOD
eu} ‘G18T INdy WITT 043 esoyag | uermopeteg oy} 07 Ayreg | pue Tioasesey sey Sn0y aNv gIuduly
000{00T_ = * = hoqe oSereay | = “WOOTMULYATy Jo ysueg | — “uaeumsq zeou smears “SIZNa'T NV
“Lop. e--BEpey. 94} Jo AyOYINY [vooT oy OJ, | Jey{o =pue ynodg eyi0g|] HOOTITININUTY
2 . ‘royooyung Jo ysuey of _ *aLAWwIvg
‘oqoqduuoo eymb yok you syxr0 4 | 09. Ja AyIOINW [eooT ou, *qoo'T OuyooH | aNV HxHOOLNAG
a : + SOMUTXeyy F
ooo‘org = ‘eBer0Ky a “aoyequmn¢ ; ang
“Kep'e “siren fo TUN) WAOT, 349 OL “Mae MOA WOLEYE ROG
000'%ee «6 «ney : -
000‘80% : : ‘oSeIoay “MOSSETD) 10g Jo _ Tamg. 103s
‘Kep 8 “stpeKy SIOUOISSIUMIOL) SdT]Og oy} of, | -ABpUTT pus 109% 4 oFAIN ey, | “MODSVIN LUOg
aoe . . Sumituarxe ; 7 :
ooo'stt's * . el a “fay "SITOATOSOY YUeq, *ANOLSNHO?
‘Kap 8 e189 -SIVq JO uoyerodioy oy} oF, | -aoy pure ‘opueyg ‘avporeyy ONY AGISIVG
ooo‘oos'sg °°  Sumunxeyy — *8yTOuk
000‘000‘¢e °* i ‘oSeiaay | ‘SIOUOSSIUIMIOD SYIOMIOVS AA | =10YUM WOT} e9TABIN seq,
‘Avp @ “sy[ex) vomerodio() MoBseyy) 94} OF, | JO‘) oy} pue euiey Yoo'y *“MODSV'TS)

 

‘ayenbape
eq [a fay, ‘poyord
W109 O18 SYIOM MOU UOT AA

“popueyxe aq 09.
qnoge ole syIOM-ynq ' sox
“quaT0
-Igns oqnb oq 0} you preg
s ; 89
‘ON
"89 X-
| ‘SOX
‘ir
L "sO
‘sox
‘so
24011481 Io WMO,
Poy Jo syuourermmber ey} 04
oyenbepe 4iddng jueserd oq} st

eg PLysiq eq}
04 Strep porfddns reye 4 Jo eumny[o A
UNUMIXBA, PUY OSBIOAY oYy SI ICT M

 

 

» ¢3u0j9q
SFIOM IVE M OY} OP wWOyA OF,

 

, ¢yueseid ye paurey,
-qo sesoding onsomog oj
JOJEA\ OF} ST ONO eq MOTT

 

 

WOU GANIVLAO ATddAS YALVAM OL TAILV TIEN NOILVWYOANI

‘TH ON

 
“XKXVill | CLYDE PURIFICATION COMMISSION.

No. IV.

INFORMATION REGARDING EXISTING WATERWORKS.

 

1, AIRDRIE AND COATBRIDGE WATERWORKS.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Area of District supplied, . . . . «© «© + + + + about 1500 Acres.
Area ao Area. Capacity.
Acres. Acres. Gallons.
. Reservoir, . . 3 750 116 468,750,000
Shotts Burn (where the
Tunnel enters), . ; 1600
2350 116 468,750,000
Area of Filters, . ‘ ‘ 3 3 ; : 3 - : . . 2,500 Square Yards.
Capacity of Tank, . : ‘ ‘ ‘ : : ‘ : ; : 580,000 Gallons.

2. CAMBUSLANG WATERWORKS.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Area of District supplied, . ; ‘ ‘ ; ‘ ‘i : : . 380 Acres.
’ Area seen Area.” Capacity.
Acres. Acres. Roods. Poles. Gallons.
| Lower Reservoir, . a 80 3 1 0 3,200,000
Higher do, . 147 9 3 27 16,283,000
; 227 13 0 27 19,483,000
Area of Filters, 2. 2. 2... Oh : ‘ 320 Square Yards.
Capacity of Tank, . ‘ , : ‘ ‘ . ; : , 47,700 Gallons.

3. DUMBARTON WATERWORKS.

 

 

 

 

Area of District supplied— i ’ Acres,
West of River Leven, ~ . 5 4 ‘ . ‘ : . 215
Hast of do, i & @ & «© 5 « =» d50p = 009 Acme.
Area of Gathering A
Ground. ree Capacity.
Acres. Acres. Roods. Poles. Gallons.
Garshake Reservoir, . 619 4 0 38 14,686,406
Black Linn do., ‘ 111 {10 1 0 21,875,000
|
730 14 1 388 36,561,406
‘ ok

 

 

 

 

 

 

Area of ‘Filters, : z 4

Capacity of Tank, 400 Square Yards.

125,000 Gallons.
APPENDIX.

4. DUNTOCHER AND DALMUIR WATERWORKS.
Area of District supplied,

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2600 Acres.
ae Set Area. Capacity.
3 Acres. Acres. Roods. Poles. Gallons.
Cochno Loch, 361 38 2 0 251,000,000
: When Raised.
62 3 0
5. GLASGOW WATERWORKS.
Area of District supplied—
: In Mass Acres. Detached Acres. Total Area. ‘
North of Clyde and Hast of Kelvin, 4965 662
Do. * and West of do., 548 658
South of Clyde, . ; . 1553 2104
7066 3424 10,490 Acres,

Note.—Each pipe along a suburban road is supposed to supply an area 500 feet wide.
(1.) Portion wirnin THE REGION OF THE CLYDE, AS SHOWN ON Pxan No. 2.
(a) Gorbals Waterworks.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Area te Area. Capacity.
, Acres. Acres. Roods. Poles. Gallons.
Balgray Reservoir, 153 2 6 746,826,662
Royal Linn do., 2560 21 Oo 15 74,852,431
Waulkmill Glen do.,. 47 3 4 288, 383, "187
Littleston | do., : 4 0 22 8, 458, 7550
2560 226 2 7 1,118,520,830
Area of Filters (Waulkmill Reservoir), . 3832 Square Yards.
Gallons.
Capacity of Tank (Balgray Reservoir) . 200,000) _
Do. do. (Waulkmill do. ), | 3,236,100 \ = 5,486,100 Gallons,

(6) Mugdock Service Reservoir, in connection with Loch Katrine Waterworks.

 

 

 

Area, Capacity.

Acres, .Roods. Poles, Gallons.
' Main Reservoir, 59 3 3 548,655,565,
_ Upper Pool; ‘ ; 1 3 38 5,256,725
om 2 a 38 <A , 553,912,290

 

 

 

 

 

(2.) PortIoN WITHOUT THE REGION OF THE CLYDE, AS SHOWN ON Pian No. 2.

Loch Katrine Waterworks.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Area ine Area. Capacity.
7 Acres. Acres. Roods. Poles.|” ; Gallons.
Loch Katrine, . te 23,192 3058 2 38 5,623,581,250
Loch Vennachar, . . 24.686 1021 2 20 2,588,960,350
Loch Drunkie, ‘ d 148 Oo 16 773,750,063
47,878 4228 1 84 8,986,291,663 :

 

 
CLYDE PURIFICATION COMMISSION.
6. GREENOCK WATERWORKS.

 

 

 

Area of District supplied, . ‘ . : ; : . 2230 Acres.
(1.) Portion wirfIn THE REGION OF THE ee AS SHOWN ON Pian No. 2.
Maximum Supply to Town from Gryfe, : : ; : : : 6,280,416 Gallons per day.
Average 35 - : : ; : : i 4,079,160 59
| Area ee pattering Keen. Capacity.
Acres. Acres. Roods. Poles. Gallons.
No. 1 Reservoir, . : 1,622 166 3 11 903,000,000
No.2 Reservoir, . 791 70 2 24 431,000,000
2,418 237 «1 (85 1,334,000,000

 

 

 

 

 

 

(2.) Portion WITHOUT THE REGION OF THE CLYDE, AS SHOWN ON Puan No. 2
Supply to: Town—

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

To Public Works by Melon 6: Cm Ue, 60s 1,524,333 Gallons per day.
To Inhabitants, : ‘ 3 3 : ss : : : 4,449,985 4
5,974,318 $s
ane ee ering Acres. Capacity.
Acres. Acres. Roods. Poles. Gallons. |
Kelly Reservoir, . ; 744 10 1 14 38,987,000 -
Crawhin Reservoir, ‘ 212 10 1 10 18,125,000,
Kelly Aqueduct, . 574 oe i” :
Compensation Reservoir, 344 40 2 0 90,412,000
Loch Thon, s : 38,600 296 2 35 1,779,241,000
Main Aqueduct, : ‘ 675 ie we
Reservoirs 2 & 4, : 33 C«; it 19,000,000
Reservoirs 1, 3, 5; fe &7, 489 e ioe 70,858,000
Filter Aqueduct, ‘ 94 age re
Overton Reservoir (at
end of Main Aqueduct), ae 2 : ig epee 008 ‘
Whinhill Reservoir, . 420 16 1 387 59,556,000
‘Cowdenknowes Reservoir, 199 7 1 38 21,164,000
Town’s Reservoir, : 1 3 8 6,928,000
Berry Yards Reservoir, 52 0 2 16 1,892,000
Total, 7,366 ee 2,108,341,000
Area. cee
Square Yards, j ons.
High Filters, - 5,666 High Tank, . 3 Soo
Low , é 887 Low ,, a 500,000 i
es eee ae
6,553 3,771,000 ‘
i
7. HAMILTON WATERWORKS.
Area of District supplied, . . : : : 5 . . : : : 2 594 Acres.
Area of Gathering Area of Capacity of
Ground. Reservoir. Reservoir,
Acres, Acres. Roods. Poles. Gallons.
370 15 2 0 50,000,000
Area of Filters, . . : ‘ : : ; : ' : : : 577 Square Yards.
Capacity of Tank, . es ; F ; ‘ : ‘ 5 - 98,000 Gallons.

8. KIRKINTILLOCH ann LENZIE WATERWORKS.
Area of District supplied—

Acres,
Kirkintilloch Water Supply District, ‘ ‘i : . ‘ 5 : 330 ,
Lenzie ditto, eo ce lel ce cag : 127 +. = 604 Acres.
Supply beyond Municipal Boundaries, : , ‘ : ; a 147
Area of Gathering Ground, ee ww a ce BBE eran:

There are no Reservoirs. . a:
CapacityofTank,, . 2. . . . ly, ep 2005000 @allons.
APPENDIX.

9. LANARK WATERWORKS.

Area of District supplied, :
Capacity of Tank, . -

Nota—The water supply is obtained from springs.

85 Acres.
159,750 Gallons.

10. MOTHERWELL WATERWORKS.

Area of District supplied,
Capacity of Caledonian evel Company s Reservoir,
Area of Filter, ‘

Capacity of Tank,

Note.—The water supply is obtained from the Clyde.

214 Acres.
1,273,600 Gallons.
89 Square Yards.
22,500 Gallons.

11. PAISLEY WATERWORKS.

 

 

 

Area of District supplied— Acres.
Within limits of compulsory supply to Paisley, 3540
Johnstone, 138 | _ 4049 Acres
Outside limits of compnlsory supply to Paisley, 254 [ ;
” s Johnstone, 117 J
anes See Capacity.
Acres. Gallons.
Harelow Reservoir, . 166 89,050,000 :
Stanly _,, ; 624 177,125,000
Clear Water Basin, net 44,962,500
Rowhbank Reservoir, . 1220 481,250,000
2010 792,387,500

 

 

 

 

 

Area of Filters, .
Capacity of Tank,

3,120 Square Yards,
1,564,475 Gallons.

12, PORT GLASGOW WATERWORKS.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Area of District supplied, 500 Acres.
Area of Gathering Area of Impounding | Capacity of Impounding
Ground. Reservoir. Reservoir.
Acres. Roods. Poles. Gallons.
From Gryfe, : . 162 2 0
From Finlayston Burn, 62 2 0
225 0 0 56,250,000
138. WISHAW WATERWORKS.
Area of District supplied, 407 Acres.
Area, oe Capacity.
Acres. Gallons.
Upper Reservoir, . : 255 12,000,000
Under 54 ‘ ; 142 2,000,000
397 14,000,000

 

 

 

 

 

Area of Filter, te
Capacity ad Tank,

196 Square Yards.
118,800 Gallons.
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE

TAKEN BEFORE

THE COMMISSIONER

APPOINTED TO INQUIRE INTO

THE BEST MEANS OF SECURING THE PURIFICATION OF THE RIVER CLYDE
AND ITS TRIBUTARIES.

GLASGOW, MONDAY, 17th May 1875.

* Present:
Sir Jonn Hawxksuaw.

)

THE Commissioner stated that the intention to hold a public inquiry had been advertised in all the districts
interested in the purification of the Clyde and its tributaries, and he was now ready to receive any evidence
which might be tendered as to the best means for securing that object.

Mr. ALExanDER GEeorcE Tuomson, C.E., Glasgow,
examined,

1. The witness read and put in the following state-
ment :-—

‘194 West Grorce Street, Guascow,
13th May 1875.

‘To Sir John Hawkshaw, Mem. Inst. 0.E., H.M.
Commissioner for promoting the purification of
the river Clyde.

‘Srr,—I am a civil engineer of a good many years’
standing in Glasgow, and have always been greatly
impressed with the importance of arriving at a satis-
factory solution of the problem of the disposal of the
sewage of this great city.

‘Understanding that you are now holding a local
court of inquiry, I think I cannot do better than submit
for your consideration such views as I have formed on
this subject, and which, I may state, Ihave not hitherto
made public in any shape.

‘ The scheme is briefly as follows :—

‘(1.) Iam not of opinion that to convey the sewage
to a considerable distance and discharge it at a lower
point of the river or estuary would be a satisfactory
solution, as that would involve the contamination of
other localities for the benefit of Glasgow.

‘ (2.) It is perfectly practicable, in the present position
of chemical and engineering science, to purify the
sewage in the immediate vicinity of the city, with an
apparatus so substantially constructed and well ven-
tilated as to obviate any inconvenience.

‘(8.) The sewage of Glasgow is so charged with
refuse of public works as to render its utilization a
matter of secondary importance.

‘(4.) Starting from these premises, I would propose
to reduce the quantity of matter, first, by keeping the
rainfall separate from the sewage, and carrying it off by
a new set of drain pipes; and, secondly, by enacting
that all W.C.’s be provided with apparatus for restrict-
ing the quantity of water used for flushing.

‘(5.) The sewage thus reduced in quantity would be
conveyed through existing sewers to a northern and a
southern intercepting sewer of moderate dimensions, con-
structed with sufficient fall from the centre eastwards
and westwards; an overflow sluice to river being pro-
vided for use in case of repairs.

‘(6.) Intercepting sewers to terminate at each end in
air and water tight rece’vers, surmounted by lofty and
capacious cupolas, gathering into a ventilating shaft or
lantern in the upper part. These cupolas, being pro-
minent objects, should be architecturally treated and
varied in design. '

‘The sewers also to be connected with ventilation
shaft at intermediate points.

‘(7.) The gaseous products arising from the sewage
to traverse ashpits of furnaces placed at the base of the
ventilating shaft, by which means they would be par-
tially consumed, and the ventilation rendered more
powerful.

‘(8.) Layers of common gypsum (sulphate of lime)
should be deposited within the shafts to fix the vola-
tilized carbonate of ammonia, which is one of the chief
products arising from sewage, and convert it into
ammoniacal salts, which are innocuous and of some
value. eh
‘(9.) The remainder of the sewage matter I propose
to treat by a process of calcination or cremation, as
follows:—Benches of retorts are to be arranged in
ovens, in sufficient numbers, around the base of the
receivers.

‘These retorts-are in the first instance to be charged
with a proportion of sodium, or such other chemicals
as shall by their affinity for the water of the sewage.
decompose it, seize its oxygen, and in so doing cause
the hydrogen, sulphur, phosphorus, and all combustible

constituents to burn, leaving a remnant of calcined

ashes, containing a proportion of potash and silica, to
be periodically removed, and of some value as manure.
The application of heat will expedite the process.

‘The charging of the retorts with the sewage matter
to be effected by mechanical means.

*(10.) The plan here proposed can be carried out by
degrees, and a portion of the larger existing sewers
could probably be made available as intercepting
sewers. Its application to localities deficient in a suit-
able outlet for liquid sewage is particularly obvious.

‘I will only add that I should be happy to be per-
mitted to co-operate in the great work committed to
your charge, whatever means may be resolved upon for
its accomplishment.

‘I am, Sir, your obedient Servant,
‘ Arex. Grorce Tuomson, C.E.’

2. You have not attempted to form any estimate of
the cost of this scheme ?—No; I have not gone into
details. I should imagine, however, that the products
remaining might compensate for the cost of the chemi-
cals used.

3. Have you considered the difficulty there would
be in keeping your drains open, while excluding the
rainfall from them entirely ?—We have such an abun-
dant supply of water for flushing, that we are not de-
pendent upon the rainfall here for that purpose.

Alex.
George
Thomson,
CE.

4, Then you propose to use water for flushing these '

sewage pipes or drains?—There are certain patents
Alex,
George
Thomson,
C.E.

2 CLYDE PURIFICATION COMMISSION.

which have, I think, given satisfactory results for
limiting the quantity of water used, and preventing
waste. There is a great deal of water wasted in the
closets here.

5. You propose by your scheme, that what may be
cailed the sewage drains should take everything from
the houses except the rainfall; I mean should take
slops and all the refuse from the houses, simply ex-
cluding the rainfall?—That is so; and I propose
that simply for the reason that the rainfall will not
pollute the river when poured into it, and it is a very
variable quantity.

6. But how would you. deal with the washings from
the streets? Would they go into your rainfall sewers?
—They would go into the rainfall, undoubtedly.

7. Then you would still put a considerable amount
of pollution from the streets into the river?’ If you
were to allow the washings of the streets to go with the
rainfall, you would not then have unpolluted water to
deliver into the river?—-No. I don’t think, however,
that the washings of the streets would produce such a
pernicious effect as the products from the various
water-closets and public works.

8. Have you. made any calculation of the quantity
of sewage that you would have to deal with in this
manner, supposing you had separated it from the rain-
fall?—The present quantity of sewage, exclusive of
rainfall, is about 85,000,000 of gallons daily; but
that quantity might be considerably reduced by the
use of some of the patents, such as Hoey’s patent,
which have been introduced to avoid waste of flushing
water.

9. Have you estimated, or tried to estimate, the pro-
portions in that 35,000,000 gallons of solid and
liquid matter when you were considering the question ?
—No. I have not attempted to calculate that, but. I
believe the water used is perhaps twice as much as is
at all necessary.

10. I don’t quite see from your statement, in what
way you propose to deal with the liquid part of the
sewage ?—The liquid is reduced to a minimum, and
it would be treated in the retorts as I propose.

11. Yes, but I don’t quite see how you would deal
with the liquid in retorts. How would you get the
liquid into the retorts?—Of course, to some extent,
there would be evaporation; and the matter remaining
after the flushing water is reduced to a minimum would
probably be of a nearly solid character.

12. Then if you got it of a solid character, I don’t °

see how it would flow through your drains. You
must keep it liquid to get it to flow to these establish-
ments. If you make it solid before it starts towards
these establishments, it would not flow at all. It
would simply remain, and fill up the drains ?—I believe
it. would be worth while to try the process on a section
of drainage in the first instance. Hitherto the process
chiefly used has been simply filtration; and this would
be a different method, which might be found to remove
some of the inconveniences of simple filtration, and
make the purification more thorough. It does not
necessarily exclude filtration ; it might be a good sup-
plement to it.

13, Have you got any calculation as to the amount
of rainfall? You have given me 35,000,000 gallons
daily as the amount of sewage. Have you estimated
the rainfall at any quantity in your calculation?—It is
an exceedingly variable element. I think the rainfall
alone varies from 35,000,000 gallons daily to about
double that.

= You are speaking now of Glasgow, I suppose ?'
—Yes,

15. Can you tell me, when you speak of Glasgow,
what area you take in, because that is rather an inde-
finite term ?—I would take in the present boundaries.

16. Do you know the acreage of that ?—No.

: 17. But you deal with the present boundaries of the
city, I suppose ?—Yes; I don’t refer to the suburbs,
because this process would probably require to be ‘ap-
plied there at different intervals, at the extremes, as the
suburbs are continually extending.

18. Do you take the Parliamentary boundary of the

‘earth ?—Quite so.

city of Glasgow into your calculation ?—The limit I
Was supposing was the Kelvin.

19. Is there anything more you would like to add
to the statement you have made?—The only point is
one to which I have already referred,—that I would
not consider this process to exclude filtration.

20. You mean that. it would include it?—Yes. [I
mean that filtration could be applied with advantage
in conjunction with it.

Mr. Matcorm M‘Caxtom, 8 Scotia Street, Glasgow,
examined.

21. What are you by profession?—I am at present
out of business. I have been connected with building,
very much as an amusement, for many years.

22. The letters, of which I have been furnished with
a copy, written by ‘ A Builder’ were written by you!
—They were.

23. I have seen a copy of these letters before ; but I
did not know the author. I have read the letter which
describes what you propose ; but you will perhaps now
state it more in detail?—-I have simply attended here
in order that you might have an opportunity, after
perusal of the letter, of putting any questions to me
that might suggest themselves to you.

24. I see that what you propose is to pass the sew-
age into an improved cesspool, which you describe very
clearly in your letter?—-Yes. The process may be de-
scribed as filtration, with the preservation of the refuse.

25. The plan is simple enough,—I mean your de-
scription of it is quite clear; and I quite understand
your proposal, which is in reality to make improved
cesspools into which you pass the sewage, and purify it
in the cesspool ?— Yes, and to allow the water to escape
to the running streams comparatively pure,—in fact,
absolutely pure. I may mention that when Messrs.
Bateman & Bazalgette were in town, some three or
four years ago, I had an interview with them, and they
made a very fair reference indeed to my pamphlet in
their final report,—as fair a reference as I could have
looked for, seeing they had a proposal of their own.

26. Your plan seems to me to be rather an extension
of what is called the earth-closet system, except. that
you propose that ashes should be used instead. of
In fact, the normal refuse of.a
domestic establishment might be a sufficient agent, and,
of course, it is entirely outside of any premises.

27. But what would you do with the mills and
manufactories, and other public works ?—These would
require a special adaptation of the system. Of course
the view of it taken in these letters is only applicable:to
dwelling-houses; but a modification of it might be so
arranged as to suit almost any conceivable circum-
stances.

28. Do you consider that these ashpits of yours
would be applicable to mills and dye works and paper
works?—Yes, It would of course be a sine qua non
that the whole of these closets should be several: feet,
or at least feet, above the ordinary level of the outer
ground,—gravitation being the power employed..

29, Are there at present in Glasgow any large
number of cesspools?—No. I am not aware that any
system of cesspools has ever been adopted in Glasgow.
It is not in favour with the Scotch public.

30. They are extensively adopted in Manchester?—
They are; but the ordinary water-closet, with. all-its
objections, is certainly preferable to cesspools..

31. Do you suppose that, taking the densely-crowded
portions of Glasgow, there would be enough . ashes
made in the houses there to purify the sewage in the
way you propose ?—Yes; I think so,. Baad

382. Do they all burn a sufficient quantity of coal for
that purpose ?—I think so, if you take into account the
sweepings and the natural refuse from every establish-
ment—waste paper, straw, and all the odds and ends
that constitute the contents of an ordinary ashpit.

33. Only, in order to purify the sewage effectually,
you want ashes, if you can get them?—Yes; but if
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 3

the quantity was short, it would be a very simple matter
to: supplement it with a little earth. I believe it is
pretty well understood and admitted that there can be
no better deodorizer than ashes.

34. Take the summer season, for instance. Would
you then have a sufficient number of fires going in
districts covered with cottage property to give you
ashes enough?—We have always fires in use, both
summer and winter, in kitchens.

35. I am alluding now to a working population. Of
course I don’t profess to know enough about it myself
to be able to tell; but I am only asking whether in
summer you think it is probable that a sufficient quantity
of ashes would be made in that: class of houses to
answer the purpose which you are aiming at by your
proposal?—Yes. I think the ashes and the other
natural refuse of every domestic establishment would
about provide enough for the purpose; but as I have
said, if the quantity was short, it might very easily be
supplemented by a little earth.

86. But if you had to find ashes somewhere else, and
cart them to these pits, and put them in, then you would
have the same difficulty that you have in the extensive
application of the earth-closets?—I don’t anticipate
that there would be found to be any scarcity. In two
distinct cases I put that plan into operation, and I
found it to be most effective.

37. There is no doubt that ashes would be as
effective as dry earth, but I am rather directing my
questions to the possibility of having a sufficient
quantity of ashes in densely-populated districts to allow
of such a purification as you seem to expect from your
system ?—We use coals so bountifully and so freely in
Glasgow, in consequence of their comparatively low
price, that I do not anticipate there would be any diffi-
culty at all on that score. As I have said, I found it
in two instances to be thoroughly effective.

38. I quite understand that it would be effective if
fairly carried out in situations where you could apply
it and look after it,—I mean that it would no doubt act
the same as the earth-closet acts, which deodorizes the
sewage; but it would not do to depend upon any kind
of rubbish being thrown into these cesspools, because
if you begin to throw vegetable matter, such as cabbage
leaves and things of that kind into them, you would
produce an evil instead of a benefit ?—I don’t know that
any evil would be produced by the mode which I have
described.

839. Not by the mode, but it is the difficulty of
effectually carrying out the mode which I am dealing
with. I mean it would not do to replace ashes with
vegetable matter, and so on, because then you would
get putrefaction ?—The stuff would then be better fitted
for agricultural purposes, and then the places could be
cleansed out, possibly at an interval of a very few days.

40. Would you propose to make these places of such
a size that they would require cleansing say once a
week ?—That might be rather too often; but possibly
two or three weeks’ supply would justify removal. I
don’t by any means offer this as a perfect scheme.
There is no doubt each position of property would
require certain modifications. I offer it simply as the
rudiments of what has long appeared to me to be a
practical solution of the question. :

41. Don’t you think you have rather under-estimated
the expense ?—I do not. :

42. In some places you would have a difficulty in
finding’ space, I should think?—Yes; but I suppose
that in nine cases out of ten there are already spaces
allotted for these purposes.

43. Do you propose a cesspool for each house ?—
No; but I think the term ‘ cesspool’ is altogether inap-
plicable.

44, Then do you propose one place, whatever you
call them, for @ group of houses?—I would propose
one for each tenement, as we call them in Scotland ;
not for each dwelling, but for each separate building.

45. What do you call a tenement ?—A ‘land’ pos-
sibly of four flats, having perhaps eight or ten houses,
one above the other, but all under the same roof.
There is generally an ashpit attached to each tenement,

and that ashpit would be appropriated as a filter for Malcolm
the water-closet sewage which would be discharged M‘Caj-

into it, That may be said to be the germ of the idea.
_ 46. Have you any idea of the number of tenements
in Glasgow ?—No. I am not prepared to speak upon
that point, but I daresay an approximation to it could
be got in a very few minutes.

47. Of course you would require a separate drain
from each ashpit to the sewer?—Yes; but there is’
nothing more simple than that, and the mode in which
it is carried into effect is, I think, clearly pointed out.

48. Do you propose that these places should be all
emptied at night?—Surely. That is the plan presently
followed in Glasgow,—to empty the ashpits at night,
and, of course, it is the only proper plan.

49. Do you propose that all the slops from every
tenement should be emptied into this receptacle?—
Yes. I think that would be an improvement, and I
would recommend that.

50. Don’t you think it is possible that you would
have these places overwhelmed sometimes, and that you
would not get room for all the sewage ?—I don’t think
so. We know that there are a great many valuable

fertilizing agents contained in these fluids.

51. There is no doubt about that; but I mean, look-
ing to the chance of the progress of this large quantity
of fluid being stopped, and not getting to the bottom
of the chamber which you propose ?—I think that, with
ordinary care in the preparation of these filters, there
would be no chance of a stoppage; but even if there
were, the construction of it is such that a very few
hours would put it right. Of course, as I have already
said, I do not by any means recommend this as a
thorough, efficient plan; and I have entered a caveat
in a preliminary note that each position of property
must be regulated by rules applicable to itself.

52. Is there anything more you would like to explain?
—No. I would leave the pamphlet to speak for itself ;
but I thought it proper to attend in case the perusal
of it might suggest any questions to you which you
might desire to put.

53. The explanation of your plan is clear enough,
and I quite understand it. The only questions which
have suggested themselves to me I have already put,
namely, as to the possibility of the liquid not making
its way with sufficient rapidity through ashes, especially
if they happen to be fine ashes?—With the slightest
attention to workmanship there would be no structural
obstacle that could possibly arise.

54. Then there is just the other question, as to
whether or not the bottom chamber which you propose
to make might not fill up in the course of time, and
have to be taken out?—It is quite a possible, but it
is an unlikely thing. However, from the, construction
of it, that would be a matter that could be put right
in a few hours.

55. Is there any particular limitation as to the depth
of ashes that you would propose to use?—No.

56. I see you give a depth for the pit. Of course
if your ashes were of any great depth, the liquid would
go through them very slowly, and nothing stops the
progress of liquid so much as very fine ashes; we use
them sometimes to stop the percolation of water ?—So
long as the water went away freely, I would have no
limitation to it.

57. But I am looking to the possibility rather of its
not going away freely, and that would depend ‘upon
two things—first, the depth of the bed of ashes, and,
second, the fineness of the ashes?—I have known the
depth in such an ashpit as is there described to amount
to 8 or 4 feet, and yet the water escaped perfectly
freely.. Of course it would not be advisable to have
a greater depth than that, nor could there possibly
be a greater depth if there was cleansing within one
or two weeks.

58. There have been eases within my own knowledge
where drains have had to be taken up because they
were found to be choked or stopped up with ashes. I
have had some cases of that kind in matters on which
I have been engaged before—I have no doubt that,
with the sand or gravel which would divide the small

lum.
Malcolm
M'‘Cal-

lum:

 

John
Carrick.

 

David
Falconer.

 

+ CLYDE PURIFICATION COMMISSION.

flags described, there could be no escape of the dust or
ashes into the drain. In fact, there is nothing that can
intercept ashes more thoroughly than a bed of sand, or
coarse sand and small gravel.

Mr. Joun Carrick, Master of Works, Glasgow,
examined.

59. As you are aware, Sir John, the subject of your
inquiry has engaged the attention of the Town Council
of Glasgow for many years, and I think it would per-
haps be convenient now that I should put in the reports
which the Town Council have received upon that sub-
ject from time to time. The first is a report on the
sewerage of Glasgow, addressed to the committee of
the Town Council of Glasgow, by Mr. John Frederick
Bateman, dated 1st December 1858, and it has refer-
ence to various experiments that were made upon
Pinkston Burn with the view of ascertaining the value
of treating the sewage of Glasgow by precipitation.
Following upon that, there is also a report upon the
same subject by the late Professor Anderson, Professor
of Chemistry in the University of Glasgow, and Mr.
Bateman, to which there is an appendix, containing the
report of the experiments that were carried on at the
Pinkston Burn under the superintendence of Mr. Napier.

60. What is the date of that?—July 1858. These
two reports contain full information as to our experience
of the various means adopted for deodorizing the sewage
of Glasgow. I also beg to submit to you the report.
by Messrs. Bateman & Bazalgette, of date 20th July
1868, on the subject of the sewerage of Glasgow and-
the purification of the river Clyde. That report contains
very ample information upon all the various schemes
that up to that date had been considered for the puri-_
fication of theriver, and it is accompanied by plans and
various information which, I have no doubt, will be use-.
ful. I deem it unnecessary that I should give any:
explanation about that, as the report speaks for itself,
Following upon that is a separate report by Professor.
Anderson upon the chemical view of the matter. I
think these reports contain all the reliable information
that we have upon the subject up to date. The Town
Council have had, from time to time, numerous schemes
laid before them for the accomplishment of the objects.
aimed at, but not assuming any definite shape. I.
believe you will have the parties themselves before you
to advocate their various schemes ; and I may perhaps;
direct your attention before you leave to a limited. pro-’
ject which I myself submitted to the Town Council on-
the same subject, but I think this is the best time to
give you the formal information which I have now laid
before you.

TUESDAY, 18th May 1875.

Mr. Davip Faxconer, Joiner and Inspector of Works, 3 Pitt Street, Glasgow, examined.

61. Sir John Hawkshaw.— You exhibit a model
which you propose to apply for the purification of
sewage ?— Yes.

62. Can you shortly explain how that model is in-
tended to work ?—The sewage is supposed to go in by
this entrance (showing) and go through this extractor
(showing), and then to go down into the well here
(showing) through the sieves, and then to go down into
this place (showing) below the river bottom, and it
comes up through this grating (showing) to the river
again; sometimes these parts of the machine (showing)
require to be turned in order to get rid of any glut,
and to keep everything clear.

63. You let the sewage in through this pipe (show-
ing) to what you call an extractor, which is supposed
to revolve inside, and which is to be perforated, I
understand, with holes ?—Yes.

64. The sewage, having passed through that, goes
down through the strainer to the bottom of the river,
and then rises up through a grating into the river ?—
Yes.

65. I suppose you would propose to clean out the
apparatus frequently ?—Yes; it would be cleaned out
every time it was needed. The model is supposed to
represent an apparatus 16 feet square, and then, of
course, there would be an apparatus above for the pur-
pose of burning the gas, but it was too large to bring
here. It is for the purpose of burning the gas above,
but it is such a common thing that the way of carrying
it out is quite well known to engineers. This piece of
the apparatus (showing on model) is for the purpose
of taking off any grease or floating matter that comes
in.
66. You mean that it is for taking off the scum ?—
Yes. I may say that I have been observing the river
for more than forty years, ever since we had a severe
touch of cholera here, and when we all had ‘ middens,’
and places of that kind, at the backs of our houses,
and dry water-closets. I began to pay attention to
the subject then, and I have since given it a good deal
of consideration. I may also say that I have some
other things on hand for raising the air and the water
and the gases, but I did not think it necessary to bring
them here,

67. Have you tried this apparatus of yours at all?
Have you made any experiments in order to see how it

would work?—I have made no further experiments
than in my own house.

68. But have you made experiments anywhere ?—
Yes; but just in the jawbox of the house. I had no
means of doing anything else. The jawbox is a place
in the kitchen, which would he called a sink, for putting
in the house refuse.

69. You have tried your apparatus there ?—Yes.
T have tried it there on my own account.

70. And you have tried it nowhere else ?—No.

71. Then, of course, you can give me no information
as to the power which such an apparatus would require,
if it was made 16 feet square ?—The extractor would,
require a good deal of power to drive it, but not avery
great deal either, because the water, while it runs in at:
the one side, would be made to run out at the other side.,

72. What do you expect to gain by the use of the:
extractor? The sewage after it passes through the:
extractor goes through the strainer, and I don’t quite
see the value of the extractor. What is the object of
it ?—It is for taking the gases out.

73. Then you seem to think that by making the ex-
tractor revolve rapidly the gases will escape ?—They
will escape quite furiously; indeed, you could hardly.
stand beside it while the water was going into the ex-
tractor without covering up your mouth and nose. If
you were standing at the side of one of them, even in a
common washing-house, where they were washing, and
using the extractor for taking out the soap and ashes
and soda, and other things of that kind from the
clothes, you could hardly stand near it in consequence
of the speed at which the extractor would be going.

74. Then the use of the extractor is for the purpose
of making the gases separate from the sewage ?—Yes;
to separate them from the sewage, so that they may,
get speedily away to be burned or consumed, or carried
off through the vent.

75. Then I understand you propose that a boat is
to come alongside of this apparatus, and to take away
the solid matter?—Yes, if the apparatus is put into a
place that is suitable for that purpose, and where the
solid matter has to be taken away while the tide is out;
but when the tide is up it rises to the point that I have
marked here (showing) for the purpose of gathering
the grease and oils, and things of that kind, that float
upon the very top.
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 5

76. Are you able to farnish me with any estimate of
the cost of this apparatus?—-Yes. I can give an esti-
mate of the cost of it, which I got from one of the
most able engineers in the city. He estimated that an
apparatus of that kind, 16 feet square, and made of
iron, would cost about £750. That does not include
the cost of putting it in its place; it is simply the cost
of the apparatus as made in the engineer’s yard.

77. Then you say that the estimated cost of con-
structing an apparatus similar to the model, but 16
feet square, would be about £750?—Yes; and it
would throw 10,000 gallons per minute.

78. Do you mean that that cost of £750 would in-
clude the cost of a steam-engine to work it?—-No; that

_is merely for the shell of the apparatus, as it were. I
have no doubt that it would cost double that sum
before it was put into its place.

79. Then that sum does -not include the cost of a
steam-engine to work it ?—No.

80. Have you any idea as to the size of engine that
you would require to work it?—I should think that
ten-horse power would work a thing of that kind
easily. Even although it was a good deal larger, I
think ten-horse power would drive the extractor. Of
course it is a little stiff to start; but after it is started,
it goes quite easily. It does not require a great deal
of power after it is once set agoihg.

81. Is there anything more you wish to add to what
you have already stated?—There is nothing more
except I might be allowed to say something about the
sanitary condition of the town; and I have a proposal
to make for flooding our sewers every day, and letting
the gases out of them—at least out of the low levels.
I have already written to the newspapers about that
matter, and my views are quite well known about the
city. I propose to bring the salt water up into the
sewers, instead of following Mr. Bazalgette’s plan, and
take away our filth from the city. I propose to bring
up the water, and wash out the sewers, and retain the
sewage matter, and send it to the country. I now
produce a copy of the Glasgow News, dated 8th March
1875, containing my proposal on that subject.

82. I see that this is a proposal to bring water up
from the sea for the purpose of flushing the sewers ?—
Yes, and also to promote the health of the city by using
it for bathing.

83. You seem to assume in that letter that if sea-
water were passed into the sewers, it would disinfect the
sewage, and render it innocuous ?—I believe I am wrong
about that, because one of the principal chemical men
in London has said so. One of our councillors, Dr.
Fergus, and another one, named Mr. Smith, had written
up to him about it; and he had replied to them that
sea-water introduced into the sewers would make the
gases worse instead of better. I cannot see myself that
that would be so; but I think that if the sewers were

flushed every day, it would a great improvement. If

the sewers were cleaned out every day, the whole of
the noxious gases would be put out, and the filth would
be taken away, so that there would be no fear of any
bad effects.

84, Then the substance of your proposal is to bring
the water from the sea, and to pass it into the sewers,
and also to use it for the purpose of sea-bathing; but
you say that the chemists have told you that admitting
sea-water into the sewers would make them rather
worse than better?—Yes. I would allow the chemists
to judge for themselves about that. I am not com-
petent to express any opinion myself on these chemical
matters; it is only the mechanical part that I can
speak to.

Mr. Witt1am Paton Bucwan, Master Plumber,
254 Renfrew Street, Glasgow, examined.

85. I wish to say a few words upon this subject,
both as a practical tradesman and as one who has
taken a great deal of interest in it, and who has taken

G

part in the controversies about it in the London and
Glasgow papers. I wish to look upon the subject in a
practical manner, and to give my opinion as to the
way in which it should be carried out. Glasgow, as
your Honour knows, is a very large city, and has a
great many interests in it; and this scheme must not
only take up the disposal of the sewage from the water-
closets and kitchen sinks and so on, but it must also
deal with the manufacturing refuse, which is very largely
produced in this city. Consequently I consider that
any scheme which would be worthy of Glasgow must
be a comprehensive scheme, and deal with the matter
as a whole, and not in a mere partial manner—dealing
with one part of it here, and another part of it there
I once thought that collecting the water-closet sewage,
beside the houses, from the soil-pipes was a good plan ;
but after considering the matter, and examining certain
places which had been fitted up to carry out the pro-
posal practically, I had to give up that idea. For
example, one plan brought forward was Hoey’s system,

which was chiefly recommended by various parties to:

this city. I went with one of my men and examined
that system privately, dressed as a workman, because
I considered that the other gentlemen, who had gone to

examine it dressed as gentlemen, had not had a fair.

opportunity of testing it; for the people were afraid to
give them their opinions, as they might be behind with
their rents, or something of that kind, and they were
afraid to speak their minds. Consequently I went just
as a workman, and as if I had been looking after
repairs. Well, I found the majority of the water-closets
on that system to be in a very bad condition indeed.
They were pan-closets, and only about a cupful of
water was allowed to flush the closet each time it was
used. That water came when the handle was held up,
and when the handle was put down the pan was left
dry. The consequence was, that when the next person
came to use the closet their soil stuck to the pan.
Several persons did that, and the soil gradually accu-
mulated; so that when I went to examine them the
majority of the closets were in a very bad condition
indeed—the soil sticking and being squeezed up between
the basin and the pan, until the place was in a disgrace-
ful state.

86. Are these Hoey’s closets that you are describ-
ing just now?—Yes. Some of the closets were in a
better condition, but these had been recently cleaned
by the people pouring down water and cleaning them
with their hands. In one that I went into the people
were just in the act of cleaning it, and the smell was
very bad indeed. It was in a top flat, and the people
in that house said they were disgusted with the closet ;
and they wished it was out, because they had to take
a great deal of trouble with it—carrying water from
the kitchen sink to pour down into the closet every
now and again. In another property which I ex-
amined, one party, when we were going up stairs,
said, ‘Are you at these closets again? We are
about stunk out of the property with them.’ The
result of my examination was, that I had to throw up
Hoey’s system of closet; and my opinion, as a practi-
cal plumber, is, that any water-closet fitted up with
only a cupful of water to flush it out every time it is
used is simply unworkable. There were only two
buildings in which these model closets were fitted up ;
and I could not help asking the question, If that was
their state in these two model buildings, how would
they be in the whole city? There were people looking
after these properties, and going over them from day
to day, to see how these closets and other things were
going on; and if there had not been that constant
supervision of them, they would have been in a worse
condition than they actually were in when I did ex-
amine them. Then with regard to the idea of collect-
ing the water-closet soil in large cesspools at the
mouth of every close, or of so many closes, I had to
give up that idea too, because a great deal of the
water-closet sewage was dissolved; and these cesspools
or pits, which were intended to gather it, did not col-
lect the sewage, but a large portion of its valuable
products went away mixed up amongst the water and

William
Paton
Buchan.
6 CLYDE PURIFICATION COMMISSION.

William were lost. Looking at the matter, therefore, in the

Paton
Buchan.

light of what is best for the comfort and health of the
inhabitants, and also to allow people to have a water-
closet in their houses,;which is a great convenience, not
only to people in health, but especially to people who
are not able to go out to back doors—as when they are
in bad health and so on—I consider that if a water-
closet is put up properly in a house, which can easily
be done now from the light that has been thrown on
the subject within the last eighteen months, the pro-
vision of water-closets with a sufficient supply of water
is the best way of disposing of human refuse and of
soil. Consequently, looking at the matter as a whole,
and in order to deal with the soil and with the chemi-
cal refuse and the manufacturing refuse, etc. of Glas-
gow, I consider that the only scheme yet brought
forward which is worthy of Glasgow, and which will
deal with the subject in a thoroughly practical and
tradesman-like manner, is Mr. Bateman’s scheme, or
some scheme similar to his—if it can be made a better
one, so much the better—of collecting all the matter
which at present goes into the Clyde, and carrying it
away down to the sea-coast at Ayrshire, or some such
place, so as to keep the Clyde pure. That, as a prac-
tical tradesman, and on thinking over the matter, is
the conclusion to which I was forced to come, having
studied the matter for two or three years; and as you
were sent down here for the purpose of collecting evi-
dence, I thought it my duty to come and say a few
words on the subject, especially as I had taken part
in the various controversies which have taken place
about it.

87. Does Hoey’s water-closet differ in its structure
at all from other water-closets ?—It is only a common
pan water-closet, and it has only a cupful of water
every time the closet is used.

88. Then the main object of it would seem to be to
limit the quantity of water used ?—In one of the places
T examined, there was a large pit dug in the centre of
the building—inside the building and below the close ;
and the soil from the water-closets went into that large
cesspool, and lay there for several days until the pit
was filled up, and then it was carted away. The
object in giving so small a quantity of water to the
closet was because, if a larger quantity of water than
a cupful was put in every time the closet was used, the
sewage, they said, would be so much diluted that it
would not be worth carrying away—it would not pay
the expense; but I consider that that was killing the
people for the sake of making a little show. There is
one other remark I would make with regard to the
water-closets. We have heard a great deal lately
about the gases from the drains and the soil-pipes
going through houses and killing the people. The reason
of that is simply because the drains are improperly put
in, and the soil-pipes are improperly ventilated, and
also the water-closets. In one case lately where it was
desired to make the ventilation as perfect as possible,
in a house where the Prince of Wales was living, they
carried the ventilating pipe from the top of the trunk
of the water-closet into the ventilating pipe of the soil-
pipe of the water-closet, which they imagined would
draw up all the gas that collected in the water-closet
trunk, and take it out of the house. The consequence
was, that instead of that, the draught of the fires in the
house drew the gas from the drain right into the
house, and, I believe, was the cause of the Prince of
Wales’ illness. And only the other day I received a
communication from a pretty high quarter—I shall not
say where—recommending me to adopt the same plan.
They always imagine that the gas will go up, never
thinking of the back draughts, and of the great power
of a fire inside of a house. That ventilating pipe
should have been sent through the wall or up to the
roof of the house, so that if any draught came back it
would have given a draught of fresh air, and not one
of bad gas from the drain. That result, therefore, is
not the fault of the drains or of the soil-pipes, but it is
the result of the ignorance of the architects or others
who have to do with the matter. Put up a drain or a
soil-pipe properly, and you may put it in your bed-

room. You may fit up a water-closet in your bed-
room if it is rightly put up.

 

Mr. Wittiam Srranc, Manufacturer, 64 Gordon
Street, Glasgow, examined.

89. Ihave put into writing the ideas which I wish
to lay before you, and I may say that I take in not
only the purifying of the Clyde, but my scheme includes
the purification of our sewers. The one thing follows
the other when looked at as a whole scheme; butI
have considered as one part of it the cleansing of back
courts and the disposal of the sewage. First, I would
give # short description of the machine to be connected
to water-closets and kitchens; and I can mention
where these may be seen working both in private houses
and at public works. Secondly, I would show how]
deal with water-closets connected with public works,
and the public urinals in the city and at railway stations,
etc., and also with the removal of manufacturers’ refuse,
Thirdly, 1 would give a description of the plan for
removal, and the quantity of soil and urine to be re-
moved. Then I would state how ashpits should be
done away with, and How we get the manure at little
cost ; also where we get the filtering material, and how
sewer gases would be prevented from entering dwelling-
houses. I now produce a sketch of my plan, showing
the idea of the water-closets. Of course we do not
interfere with the present water-closets except where
wanted. This plan shows the way in which we have
them fitted up at our own works, and where you may
see them if you wish. Here (showing on plan) is the
soil-pipe; and this (showing) is the water-closet. The
soil comes down here (showing), where there is a bed of
ashes, and the greater proportion of the urine is found
to lie here (showing); while the water which flushes
this being lighter than the urine, naturally flows up
through here (showing) by its own weight, and runs
away here (showing), while the soil is taken away here
(showing). That is one way of it. Another part of
the plan shows its adaptation to a public work, where
there is a large quantity ; and of course the apparatus
would just require to be proportionally greater. Then
as to the urinals, the urine comes down here (showing),
and being heavier than the water, this place (showing)
is filled up with the urine, while the pure water naturally
flows away, and at the same time there is always a top
of pure water preserved which keeps down any offensive
smells.

90. What do you propose to fill the filters with —
Ashes ; the very best thing we can have, and which can
be got cheaply. Given that idea of the machine, you
will be better able to follow the description of my plan.
The principal feature of the plan is, that it intercepts, by
means of the jilter, all the sewage from each house or
tenement, and keeps back the excreta and other pol-
luting matter, allowing only the water in a perfectly
innocuous state to pass into the sewers. In proof of
that, see Professor Anderson’s report to the Town
Council of Glasgow; also second report, dated 25th
September 1869. The filtering machine is so con-
structed that the under part holds the urine as it falls
to the bottom from its specific gravity. The soil may
be divided into two. One portion, being heavier than
water, subsides and falls to the bottom, mixing with the
urine; while the other portion in suspension is kept
back by the ashes from flowing into the drain. The
water used for cleansing the water-closet passes down
the soil-pipe, carrying all the soil with it; it then passes
upwards through the ashes, and is filtered before passing
into the drains. I have next anote of the places where
these may be seen at work, and J can furnish you with
it if you wish it. Then the water-closets in connection
with public works, railway stations, etc., would be pro-
vided just with a machine of the same sort as I have
shown on the plan, only a little larger in proportion.
Next, with regard to urinals, it would be of advantage
that the urinals should be filled with pure water every
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 7

day. You will see, from what I have already stated,
that if they are filled with pure water, the urine coming
down displaces the water, and lies under the pure water,
thus keeping the urinal free from smell. The urinals
would be emptied daily as with water-closet machines,
and connected with the sewage pipes leading to the
Clyde. I shall afterwards have to explain how that is
to be done. Then with regard to manufacturers’ refuse,
refuse in suspension would be purified by having a
good-sized filter of sand or ashes, allowing plenty of
time for subsidence and slow filtration. Refuse in
solution might require chemical treatment, but that of
course is a very difficult thing for any one to speak of,
unless they first know what they have to deal with; and
as that has not come under my notice, and as I do not
know the different kinds of sewage that may be coming
from the different works, it is impossible for me to say
how they might be treated in a chemical way. Besides,
I do not profess to be a chemist; but when we have
refuse in solution which cannot be purified (and this, I
think, is an important matter), provision is made for
the removal of all such refuse by means of the sewage
pipes. ‘These are extra pipes that would be laid down
from the tanks, and they would be laid into every public
work for the removal of the urine and soil ; but as they
would not always be in use, they might be used for
running off the polluting refuse, or the refuse that is in
solution, from the works to barges on the Clyde, and
removed to where it would be harmless. The method
of removing would be by a sewage pipe, that would
require to be laid down through the streets connected
to each machine. These pipes would be used for con-
veying the urine and soil from the intercepting machine
to barges on the Clyde, where they would be collected
along with the ashes—the barge to be constructed so as
to receive ashes and street sweepings in the upper part,
and the urine and soil in the under part. As the barge
gets filled up the ashes will get saturated with the urine,
and this will reduce the bulk of the ashes by about
one-third. These steam-barges could remove at a cheap
rate every day all the soil and urine, with the ashes,
garbage, and street sweepings collected in the city to
places along the coast, and sold to farmers. Another
way in which it might be removed would be as it is
being done in the city just now. The soil and urine
taken from: these machines might be removed in the
manure carts, but whenever these carts pass they throw
off a fearful smell. But there is another way in which
it might be done. As one-half of the quantity to be
removed, would be water,—that is, about 100,000
gallons, taking the inhabitants of the city of Glasgow
at 500,000,—then there would be 75,000 gallons urine,
and 25,000 gallons soil; and it might be as well to collect
all the soil in a drainer, allowing only the water and
the urine to pass through the sewage pipes so as to
prevent them from being clogged or choked up; and
there would be so little of the soil, that mixing it with
the ashes would keep down any offensive smell. ect,
with regard to the quantity to be removed: For a block
of houses where there are ten families, and five persons
to each family, a machine holding twenty gallons would
be large enough. This machine would hold for one
day 10 gallons urine and soil, and 10 gallons of water,
to be removed daily. It is well known that a greater
quantity of water is used in water-closets, but this
makes no difference in the quantity to be removed, as
all extra water flows upwards through the ashes into
the drain. As the bulk of sewage to be removed would
never exceed 20 gallons for every fifty persons, the
maximum quantity to be removed from Glasgow would
be 200,000 gallons daily. To this quantity must be
added all sewage coming from public works and urinals.
This simple plan reduces the bulk to a quantity which
can be easily got rid of.

Neat, with regard to ashpits—At present the pre-
vailing system is to have deep ashpits, into which all
kinds of garbage and ashes are thrown and stored up
for weeks and months, till they throw off gases which
are, to say the least, offensive. I do away with all
such places, and substitute portable cans of sufficient
size to hold all the ashes, etc, for one or two days.

By substituting portable ‘ean no time would be Willi
* * = Ul
required for lifting the ashes from ashpits as at Saee,

present, and they would save back courts from bein
polluted. These portable cans would be constructed to
keep the ashes dry, and free from rain. There would
be no necessity for manure depots, as the barges would
serve all necessary purposes, and save these manure
depots, which are a nuisance, and often source of
complaint. The ashes, etc. would be carted to the
barge, saving all extra cartage. It is of importance
that everything coming from houses, whether ashes or
garbage, should be removed every twenty-four hours—
never allowing to lie in back courts what would not
be allowed in streets for a day.

With regard to manure—aAshes at present cost a
large sum for removal, as they are comparatively worth-
less in themselves ; but if treated in the way we propose,
by mixing them with the urine and soil in the barges,
we would have a valuable manure, at little cost for
production. Ashes are very porous, and seem as if they
were provided for enabling us to remove in a portable
form the urine and soil from our cities, by mixing them
together, and preparing them for the farmer. While
the ashes absorb the urine and become valuable as a
manure, they are at the same time reduced in bulk,
lessening the cost of removal.

Next, as to the filtering material.—Filtering material
comes from every dwelling-house in the shape of ashes,
which make a first-class filter, keeping back what is in
suspense, and deodorizing what passes through them.
This material costs nothing, as it is got where it is
wanted, and after being used is more valuable than
before.

With regard to gases.—By placing one of the machines
to every soil-pipe, it would be impossible for gases to
pass into our houses. By removing the urine and soil
every twenty-four hours, no time would be allowed’
for gases forming. The pure water passing down the
soil-pipe would keep down all smell from the machine,
and form a self-acting trap. The air in cities could
not be tainted with sewage gases, as all impurities
would be removed every day. Another advantage of
the system is when fever, such as typhoid, scarlet,
small-pox, etc. etc. were found in any block of houses,
the soil and urine kept back by the machine might be
treated with disinfecting acid before it was removed.
If what comes from fever patients be allowed to run
through a long drain or sewer, no one can tell how
many may be affected before it becomes neutralized ;
but if it is disinfected before it is taken away from the
house where the fever is, and if it is kept sealed with
water till it is taken away, the danger is reduced to its
minimum. This machine traps all sewer gases at the
foot of the soil-pipe, allowing of a much simpler water-
closet being used. Sewer gases at present are allowed
to pass up through the soil-pipes, and trapped at each
water-closet by the pan. I would do away with the
pan, and have the trap at the foot of the soil-pipe for
each land or block of houses by placing the machine at
the foot of the soil-pipe. This would be a complete trap
to all sewer gases; and by removing the pan of the
present water-closet, the urine as it was passed would
flow down through the soil-pipes till it reached the
filtering machine; it would then pass through the
water to the bottom of the machine, where it would
remain till removed. The soil would be carried down
to the machine by the pure water, when it would be
intercepted by the ashes—the water flowing upwards
through the ashes into the drain. There is one thing
with regard to the rain-water which I may mention.
Of course that plan would make no difference as to
the rain-water, because the rain-water would not go
into that pipe at all, or, if it did, it would flow away
just the same as this extra water would do. Then, in
summing up what I have to say, it appears to me that
this machine which has the merit of simplicity, allows of
the water-closet system being extended into every court
and land in the lowest districts. Water is the most con-
venient, the cheapest, as well as the best agent known
for cleansing and carrying off all impurities. Water is
not only the best agent for cleansiug, but it is a self-

 
8 CLYDE PURIFICATION COMMISSION.

William acting trap for keeping down all offensive smells that

Strang. might come from the machine till it is removed. Water Mr. James M‘Inryre, Fyfe Park House, Port

 

is also recommended by medical men for keeping down
infection from patients, by placing under water all
clothing coming from them. If useful for clothing,
how much more for the excreta from fever patients.
It provides a simple and cheap method of removal
of all street sweepings, ashes, and water-closet filth
every twenty-four hours from our city—keeping down
sewer gases, by removing their source. It would
check infectious diseases by keeping all that comes
from fever patients from entering drains till it has
been purified. It turns into a valuable manure what
is at present worthless. It provides a simple plan
for public works getting rid of all refuse they cannot
purify. a

91. Have you ascertained yourself that the difference
in the specific gravity of water and urine is such that
the pure water would always be at the top and the
urine at the bottom?— Yes; I have tested that
thoroughly. I have tested it through a stream, and
you may easily test it for yourself. If you take a jar
of clean water, and put a small pipe into it, and pass
urine down through the pipe into the pure water, you
will see that it goes down, even although the pipe is
not down to the bottom of the jar; and you can see
the urine going down almost like a stream of silver,
while the displaced water passes up. I may say that
a machine fitted up for a land of houses is not a bulky
machine.

92. How often do you propose that the ashes in
these machines should be changed ?—If the under part
is removed every day—as I think it should be, because
I don’t think it is advisable to keep it waiting for more

.than a day—then the ashes could be used for perhaps

nearly a fortnight or a month. There would be so
much pure water coming down the closets that it would
preserve them, and the ashes would not require to be
changed very much. Of course if the machine got
choked up with the soil and the urine, then the ashes
would become perfectly saturated, and they could not
act; but if the urine and the soil are taken away before
they choke up the machine, then the quantity of pure
water coming down from the closets would be so large
that they would act for a fortnight at least, and I
don’t know that they might not remain for a longer
time. In fact, we have not got any test with regard
to that.

93. How do you get your quantity of 75,000 gallons
of urine for the whole of Glasgow ?—I took the popu-
lation of Glasgow at 500,000, and I estimate that
there would be 14 Ibs. of urine and 4 Ib. of soil for each
person per day. That is the average which has been
taken by persons who have been giving this matter
their attention. Of course that is a matter that could
easily be tested, but these are the data on which I have
gone.

94. What do you propose to do with all the slops
and stuff used in washing, and so on? Do you expect
that to be filtered, and to pass away as clear water ?—
Anything in the shape of sludge would remain at the
bottom, and the water would go away. Of course
anything which was in suspension, such as grease,
would be kept back. I do not say that the filter
would make the water perfectly pure, but the ashes
act as a very capital filter. I may say that the
machine which I have described has been fitted up and
tested in a place about which there has been an
interdict.

95. Have you had an analysis of the water escaping
from the upper part of one of these filters?—I have
had three. There is one of them in Professor Ander-
son’s printed report, which I see you have got.

96. Does Professor Anderson give an analysis of
the water after it has passed through one of these ash-
beds?—Yes. I have also another analysis, which I
got from Professor Anderson myself, and of which I
will send in a copy; and also one by the late Professor
Penny, of the Andersonian University. I shall send

in a copy of it also, and also a copy of the pl hi
I have exhibited. ’ e anes

Glasgow, examined.

97. I produce a tracing, on the scale of 6 inches to
the mile, showing the course of the sewers which I
propose to be made on the north and south sides of
the river. I also produce a model of a portion of the
sewer, showing the pockets which I propose should be
made in them; and also a plan of cesspools, showing -
the mode of lifting the water. I also put in @ copy of
a paper read by me before the Philosophical Society
of Glasgow, in which my scheme is fully described.

98. Is your plan based upon accurate levels?—{
claim that it will run exactly on the level; but it can
be worked on any level, because if there was a great
declivity, it would only be necessary to raise the pockets
a little more.

99. But you don’t propose to make it level?—No,
I propose to give it the exact declivity it requires from
above, whatever it is.

100. Have you made any estimate of the cost of
this work ?—I have got two or three estimates, but
they have all arrived at somewhere about £260,000 for
the north side sewer from Dalmarnock to the foot of it.
I don’t profess to have much knowledge of such esti-
mates myself, but I got the estimates from those who
ought to have a knowledge of them—Messrs. John
Coghill & Co. and Mr. Haldane.

101. And what do you make the south side sewer?
—It would not be nearly so much. In fact, I never
asked an estimate for it. :

102. Would it not be the most?—It would be the
most, because it is longest; but it would be nothing
like so high as the north sewer in proportion to its
length. I do not propose, however, that the south
side one should go higher up than Rutherglen, because

above that I think the Clyde would be shallow enough

to allow the sewerage from any towns on the south
side to be conveyed across to the sewer on the north
side. I propose that that sewer should begin with a

_certain size at the source, and increase in size between

the various towns, according to the requirements of the
population.

103. Do you propose to go right to the top of the
Clyde?—Yes, or any other river that my system is
applied to.

104. Do you mean to do that for £260,000 ?—No.
That is only for the sewer from Dalmarnock to Erskine
—a distance of about 12 miles.

105. Then you have not got an estimate of the cost
of the whole scheme ?—No, because I was not aware
of the size of sewer that would be required at the
different towns. Of course it would have to be altered
in size to suit their requirements—starting, perhaps,
with 3 feet, and then making it 4 feet, then 5 feet,
and so on.

106. But you cannot give me an estimate of the cost
of the entire scheme?—I don’t think it was for me to
try that; but the cost of the outside of an ordinary
sewer without the pockets would be £260,000.

107. Have you anything more you wish to add? I
quite understand your plan, which is quite plain and
simple.—I don’t think I have anything more to say.

 

Bailie Satmon, Glasgow, examined.

108. I have to explain, Sir John, that as convener
of the Sewage Committee of the city, having heard
Captain Liernur’s scheme presented in Glasgow at the
Social Science Congress, and having studied it so far
otherwise, I applied to him to prepare a plan and esti-
mate for the application of his scheme to a certain
section of the city; and I got a plan prepared of that
section, with a proper description of it, showing the
character of the houses, and the drains, and other
useful information, which was sent to him. Captain
Liernur, on the information that I gave him, and on
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 9

the plan that we sent him of the district of the city,
has prepared a plan and an estimate, and a description
of the application of his system to that section of the
town; and Mr. Scott, who was, I believe, the purchaser
of the patent for the United Kingdom, is here to-day
to explain the plan and the description.

 

Mr. Apam Scorr, 221 Gresham House, London, H.C.,
examined,

109. I produce a plan of the district of Glasgow
which was selected by the Sewage Committee for this
proposed trial. It contains a population of about
12,500, and it is provided with sewers in every street
with the exception of one. I have here Captain
Liernur’s report, but it is a very lengthy one, and per-
haps it would be better that I should shortly describe
the principle of the system.

110. I think you had better describe it in your own
way.—The principle of the Liernur system as com-
pared with other systems is to divide and conquer,—
not to put into one sewer such an enormous mass of
unmanageable material as is put, for instance, into the
sewers of Glasgow, London, and most of our large
towns, but so as to divide and conquer the difficult
parts of the sewage, that the water that goes into
the ordinary sewers is clean enough to go into a river
without further purification. The polluting elements
in sewers are, first, manufacturing refuse; secondly,
human excrement; thirdly, street detritus; and fourthly,
the soiled water of households. First, with regard to
manufacturing refuse, Captain Liernur lays down the
law, so far as he can lay down a law, and which is
now apparently going to be laid down by the Govern-
ment, that all manufacturers must be made responsible
for cleaning their own refuse. Fortunately, in so far
as legislation has hitherto interfered with that, it has
been found that manufacturers have been able to doit,
and actually to make a profit by so doing. I need
not instance the alkaline and soda works, where that
has been the case.
substances of manufacturing refuse that have to be
cleaned are those from dye and bleach works; and we
have it now proved by Mr. John Thom, who read a
paper at the Society of Arts’ conference upon the pollu-
tion of rivers, that even that is possible at a profit to
the manufacturer. However, the question is not whe-
ther it is profitable or not. The manufacturer must be
made responsible, according to Captain Liernur’s plans,
for purifying his own refuse water. Whether the whole
of the cost, or only part of that cost, is to be a burden
upon himself, is a question to be settled between him
and the public. The necessary thing is, that the stuff
should be purified separately, and not be allowed to
complicate the sewage question thereafter. Then, with
regard to street detritus, it is of course polluted; and
Captain Liernur, instead of allowing it to get into the
sewers as at present, and to silt up the sewers, and
finally to enter the river and silt up the river courses,
proposes to insert in the street gulleys a bucket, into
which all the street water flows. It flows in by a
funnel, and can only flow out and in to the sewer by an
upward filtration through a thickly-woven straw mat,
all the detritus being thereafter thrown down into that
bucket, and periodically removed by scavengers. This
prevents the necessity of expensive methods of flushing
sewers and of opening them, as has to be done very
often for the purpose of cleaning out the deposits. In
fact, it prevents deposits pretty well altogether. The
third division is that of the putrescible matters in towns,
composed principally, as the most dangerous refuse of
towns, of human excrement, and also of solid or sedi-
mentary matters which get into sewers generally
through the house water, these being fatty and sedi-
mentary products of food and fragments that have
been partially cooked. These matters are practically

the same as human excrement. They are food, but
they have not yet passed through the human body, and
therefore they are in that way several days less forward

Perhaps the most difficult of all °

on the road to putrefaction and to danger to the public 4dam Scott.

health. The collection of these putrescible matters is

effected by what is known as the pneumatic system.

Every town is divided into certain large districts, each

of which is separate and independent the one from the

other, as if they were separate towns altogether. In

each district is stationed a central house containing a

steam-engine working an air-pump. This air-pump

maintains during the day a vacuum in certain air-tight

cast-iron tanks below the central building, and also in

the pipes extending from these tanks throughout the

city. The districts, again, are further subdivided into

small districts or drainage areas, each one of which
centres in a small street-tank, with which each houseis
connected by means also of cast-iron air-tight pipes.
The vacuum which I have mentioned is maintained in
the central building ; and the central or master pipes
that run from that building can be connected to
any given street-tank by simply turning a cock,
and thus form the motive power for emptying the
closet pipes of all the houses at one and the same
time, independently of the fact that one house may
be more distant than another from the tank where the
vacuum power is, for the time being, stored up, and
independently of the fact that one closet or closet-pipe
may have received more matter than another, or may
have received none at all. I shall not go into the reasons
how it is that that is so, but I shall give the Commis-
sioner some papers upon the subject, which will explain
to him thoroughly the principles upon which the pnen-
matic system’ is formed. Perhaps there may be no
objection to my here mentioning the fact that the senior
medical Government Inspector of Holland, writing
upon this system from his experience of it in that
country, says, that ‘for the English reader this system
has a double interest. It embodies the principles which
have been demonstrated in every report on the sewage
question for the last dozen years at least to be the
only ones upon which a satisfactory solution is attain-
able;’ and he also quotes the official report of all the
twelve medical inspectors of that country to the Minister
of the Interior, stating that the Liernur system, both
sanitarily and with regard to the convenience of the in-
habitants, is the best system hitherto known. The great
drawback in all systems of collecting human excrement
hitherto has been, that if they have been dry systems,
they cannot be put in operation in towns which have
been accustomed to the luxuries or conveniences of the
water-flushing system. This system of Captain Liernur’s
requires no alteration in the habits of the people who have
been accustomed to the conveniences of water-closets,
as a water-closet such as he himself has invented,
which restricts the quantity of water to be used—some-
what like the Hoey closet in Glasgow—can also be used
on his system. At the same time he provides for the
poorer classes, for whom water-closets are not at all
suitable, a closet in which no water requires to be
used, which has nothing moveable or apt to get out of
order, and which is sanitarily perfect. It would take
too long to give an explanation of how that closet is
formed, but I may add that it has been inspected by
a number of gentlemen from this country, including
such men as Dr. Buchanan of the Local Government
Board; and I have Dr. Buchanan’s statement made at
the Society of Arts the other day, that these closets with-
out water are superior to the ordinary accommodation
in water-closet towns in this country, which he mentions
as a proof of the efficacy of this particular form of
water-closet. With regard tothe disposal of the deposited
refuse collected in these central tanks under the central
building, there are two methods which can be followed.
It must be remembered, to begin with, that it isin a
highly undiluted state, and, therefore, that the mass of
water to be dealt with is not very great. It can be
used, therefore, either in the fluid condition, or, what is
really the end and purpose of the Liernur system, the
water must be evaporated, and the sewage derived in the
shape of poudrette of highly concentrated value, easily
transported, and that can be kept for any length of
time. In order that the closets should not be made the
receptacles for all the household water, Captain Lier-
Adam Seott.

‘Keep the subsoil water always at a low level.

10

nur provides, so as to’ be more accessible to the
domestics of the house, certain slop-sinks. In this way,
by depending upon the laziness of the people, the sewage
under the pneumatic system will be got in the con-
centrated state I have mentioned. I may mention,
also, that the sink sediment, which is the same
practically as the fecal matter, is also collected by
this pneumatic system; and it is done in this way,—
all the water of households, including the sink water,
passes into a trap, and cannot escape to the common
sewer except by filtering upwards through a very fine
grating ; all the sediment or pieces of food, generally
coated with fat, remaining behind. This trap is open
to the air, so that the sewers of the town have no direct
communication with the interior of any house, thus
doing away with all danger from that source, even
supposing there were in these sewers anything which
could create gases detrimental to the public health.
The trap in which the sediment collects stands in con-
nection with a pneumatic or closet pipe; and during
the twenty-four hours when the pneumatic operation
takes place, the trap is emptied just in the same way as
the closet pipes are. The water then flowing through
the sewer is household water, purified from its solid sub-
stances. In evaporating the product got at the central
station, an ingenious use is made of the waste steam of
the high-pressure engine by which it is collected. Of
that waste steam, in the very best engines, only 8 per
cent. is actually converted into motive power, the re-
mainder escaping with the exhaust steam. It is with
this steam, used much in the same way as it is already
used in sugar reducing, that Captain Liernur dries the
contents of the central tanks. The result, so far as
has been ascertained simply by experimental trials, is a
very valuable manure,—sufficient in towns with an ordi-
nary density of population, and according to the analyses
of the most eminent chemists, and the values put upon
it by eminent agriculturists like Mr. Lawes, to pay all
working expenses, and to contribute considerably, if
not altogether, towards the interest upon the capital
employed, the redemption of that capital, and sinking
fond for renewal of machinery. It will be seen by the
plans submitted by Captain Liernur at the request of
the Sewage Committee, that not all the streets in Glas-
gow are sewered; and therefore it will be well to men-
tion the principles upon which he would drain any such
streets. He objects to the old system of constructing
the sewers, for two reasons. The first is, that no
masonry construction can possibly prevent the polluting
elements in a sewer from being forced outwards, and
contaminating the soil. The result of such contamina-
tion is this, that as the sewers serve also as drains for
the subsoil water in dry weather, the level of the sub-
soil water naturally sinks down to the level of the
invert of the sewer. When sudden rain comes on, the
increased height of water in the sewer takes place much
more rapidly than any increase of height outside the
sewer could be got by the percolation of rain through
the subsoil; hence there is a hydrostatic pressure in the
sewer tending to burst open the drains, or at any rate
to force out the sewage matter into the soil. After-
wards, with the rise of the subsoil water, it follows as
a matter of course that a similar stratum of air, which
has occupied the soil, must be pushed out into the
town, or, as it is generally pushed out, into the base-
ments of the houses. Captain Liernur’s principle, then,
is to make impervious sewers of vitrified earthenware,
so that they shall not form the direct drains of the
subsoil water. Then he would drain the subsoil water
in the same way as farmers do by the ordinary agri-
cultural drain pipe, fixing upon the level for that drain-
age as the lowest level that subsoil water generally
reaches. The effect of this subsoil drainage is to
Here
and there the subsoil drains communicate with the
impervious sewers, so that the surplus water of course
goes off into them. The technical advantage of this
system of subsoil drainage is, that the ordinary sewers
can be made very much smaller than is at present
the case with our ordinary sewers, because Captain
Liernur has no fear of allowing his smaller sewers to
become not only quite full, but even to allow columns

CLYDE PURIFICATION COMMISSION. .

of water in the gully pipe, so long as such columns of
water are not as high in level as that of the subsoil
drainage, the hydrostatic pressure of the water in the
soil counterbalancing any effect that the hydrostatic
pressure inside his smaller sewers would have. The
effect of this, as shown in comparative estimates, has
been to show that Captain Liernur’s system of subsoil
drains costs about half as much as ordinary drains. [
have been requested by the chairman of the Sewage
Committee to make a few observations upon the sub-
ject of the necessity, for the sake of health, of dealing
with our fecal matters, and not prolonging our present
sewers. That is the principle upon which Captain
Liernur has gone in his pneumatic system. At
present it is well known that cholera, diarrhoea, and
diphtheria are directly due to excremental pollution,
and it is also believed in many medical circles to be the
fact that small-pox, measles, scarlatina, scarlet fever,
hospital fever, puerperal fever, and a number of other
diseases, though not all due to excremental pollution,
are to a certain extent conveyed by it. As a proof of
that, take in particular this city of Glasgow, the medi-
cal officer of which, in his report for 1868, stated that
the evils that were inseparable from the water-closet
system were likely to be less felt in Glasgow than in
many other places, owing to the considerable fall of the
greater number of the sewers, and the almost unlimited
supply of water by which the matter was diluted. A
few years’ experience seems to have convinced him
otherwise, because, in 1872, he states ‘that it has been
conclusively shown that houses presumed to be beyond
suspicion of any possible danger to health from this
cause—houses in which the most skilful engineers and
architects had, as they believed, exhausted the re-
sources of modern sanitary science—have nevertheless
been exposed in a high degree to the diseases arising,
from air in contact with the products of decomposition
in sewers, and this for a very obvious reason; such
sewers are usually built on high levels, where the
drains have a very rapid fall.” It seems, therefore,
from this, that throwing excrement into ordinary sewers,

, Where they have the fall which is desired by every

engineer, has not been a benefit to health; and this is
proved by the experience of the sister city of Edinburgh.
In the Medical Journal of that town, in the latter end
of last year, a comparison is made between the Old
Town and the New Town of Edinburgh. The Old
Town, which is inhabited chiefly by the working
classes, and consists of those large buildings for which
Edinburgh is famous, has no accommodation in the
way of water-closets ; all the excrement is removed daily
by pails or pans. In the New Town, however, which
is the city of the gentry, these conveniences of water-
closets are universal. It is very striking, therefore, that
when you examine into the prevalence of typhoid and
diphtheria, you find that in the Old Town, where this
—disgusting though it may be—system of daily
removal takes place, typhoid and diphtheria are,
practically speaking, unknown; whereas in the New
Town, with its system of water-flushing, these dis-
eases are never absent. It is the belief that it is
absolutely necessary, as it were, to imprison human
excrement before twenty hours after production.
That gives rise to the pneumatic system of Captain
Liernur, and in fact it only carries out in practice
what theoretically was laid down some years ago as
being the only conditions of safety with regard to
health by Dr. Simon, the medical officer of the Local
Government Board, and also of the Privy Council.
‘The local conditions of safety,’ he said, ‘are, above
all, these two: first, that by appropriate structural
works all the excremental produce of the population
shalt be so promptly and so thoroughly removed, that the
inhabited place, in its air and soil, should be absolutely
without fecal impurities.’ The water-flushing system,
of course, can never carry out that condition of safety,
because you have gases which must escape somewhere;
and if they escape into the air of a town, they simply
lower its oxygenating powers, and if they escape into
the houses, are doubly dangerous. The second cov-
dition of safety is that the water supply of the popula-
tion shall be derived from such sources and conveyed
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE.

in such channels that its contamination by excrement
is impossible. Fortunately, in Glasgow.they seem to
have very little chance of the propagation of: disease
from the water supply, if carefully handled; but we
had it proved at the last meeting of the Social Science
Congress here that even the presence of sewer gas in
cisterns, owing to the overflows going into the sewers,
had the effect to a certain degree, although very
minute, of poisoning the waters. I think, therefore,
that a case has been made out for at any rate im-
prisoning all the excremental produce of the population ;
and that Captain Liernur’s system does this most
effectually will be evident from a short quotation which
I would make, also from the report of the senior medical
inspector of Holland, in which he says, speaking of the
sanitary merits of the Liernur system: ‘The excreta
are, from the moment the closets are emptied to the
moment the process is finished, and they are converted
into dry powder, absolutely deprived of all chance of
doing harm, being locked up from first to last in air-
tight vessels. The powder itself is harmless, because
fermentation in a dry state is impossible. The water
of the excreta has also become harmless, because, being
driven out by evaporation and condensed again (the
vapour passes through an ordinary condenser), it
returns to the public streams as distilled, and conse-
quently pure water. The gaseous products of the
evaporation, perhaps still containing germs of disease,
are combined by the air-pump machine with the rest
of the air, and sucked up out of the tubes and pipes
into the fireplace of the boiler, and there are completely
burned. No matter, therefore, how infectious the
excreta may have been, their power to work evil is
stopped for ever.’ I now hand in certificates by the
International Medical Congress of Vienna and other
towns, and by the Director-General of Holland; and
also copy of the Sanitary Record, which contains a long
technical description of the system.

111. Am I right in assuming that the slops from
houses and tenements are intended to pass directly into
the ordinary sewers?—Those from bedchambers are
recommended by Captain Liernur to be sent into his
closet and to go into his pneumatic system, and to be
converted thereafter into poudrette.

112. Then the bedchamber slops would not pass
into the sewers ?—No.

113. On the drawing you show what is called a
sink. Does that sink communicate with the vacuum-
chamber ?—No ; it communicates with the sewers, so
that the house water may generally go into the sewers.

114. That is what I rather assumed. The water
from these sinks would pass into the ordinary sewers ?
—Yes. There is some slop water that passes into the
sewers, but Captain Liernur recommends that the slops
of the chambers should be sent into the closets, as they
contain matter which is valuable.

115. But the water used for washing, and contain-
ing soap-suds, and so on, would pass into these sinks
and into the sewers ?—Yes ; diluted, however, with fifty
gallons of water per head, which, I believe, is supplied
in Glasgow from Loch Katrine alone, irrespective of
rain-water.

116. Bui a little of that water goes down the water-
closets ?—Only a very small quantity.

117. But I am speaking of the water that passes
into the sinks; that water is to pass into the sewers ?—
nee) after being purified by this filter (showing on
plan).

118. That filter, however, as I understand, would
simply prevent lumps from passing through ?—Yes;
sedimentary matters. It is represented in the plan as
a strainer, so that you may see it; but in reality it isa
very fine grating, so as to prevent the very smallest
particle from going through, and it is quite impossible
for it to be choked’ up, because every day when the
pneumatic operation takes place, the air that carries
that away into the pnenmatic pipe cleanses the strainer
at the same time. It clears everything away.

119. It clears away the solid matter ?—Yes.

120. But the liquid matter, as I understand, goes
into the sewers ?—Yes.

11

_ 121. Have you formed any estimate as to the rela-
tive quantities of what you call kitchen slops and what
you call matter from the water-closets?—No; I have
no estimate of that. Of course the proportion is diffe-
rent in different towns, and I have no idea what pro-
portion Glasgow would give.

122. Can you give me any calculation, or have you
formed any idea of the volume of matter from water-
closets which would have to be dealt with in a town
like Glasgow?—Captain Liernur in his report goes
into that question fully, and gives the amount and the
reasons why he considers that a certain amount would
exist. He gives the quantities as the product of a cer-
tain number of inhabitants. I do not think that what
he gives in his report would be a calculation based on
any data given in Glasgow, but it is simply a calcula-
tion made to cover even an extreme case. He says
that his improved closet, would use six quarts per head
per day, to be removed by the pneumatic system.

123. Then I understand you to say that he proposes
to convert that quantity into poudrette _—Yes.

124, Have you any calculation as to the quantity of
coal which would be required to convert that quantity
of sewage?—Yes. The district upon which this esti-
mate is made contains 12,500 people, and he reckons
4% tons of coal per day for that number as being more
than sufficient.

125. Captain Liernur appears to deal only with
about a gallon and a half or six quarts, but in Glas-
gow, I suppose, they now get rid of forty gallons per
head per day. Of course a gallon and a half per head
would only be a very small proportion of the water that
would be passed through the tenements or houses in
some shape or other. ‘Therefore it is only a very small
portion of the whole that would be dealt with by this
pneumatic process, and all the remainder, whatever that
remainder may be, must still pass into the common
sewers ?—Yes; it must pass into the common sewers,
or go into the river direct.

126. Then the question is, to what extent would that
remainder be in an objectionable state? I mean that
it would have to be dealt with as sewage taken from
the same place, which would have to be made inno-
cuous ?—On that matter Captain Liernur says it would
be pure enough, in his opinion, to pass into a common
river. The street detritus is all kept out.

127. That is the rain-water, which is a separate
item; but he assumes that the remainder of the water
used in the tenements, whatever its state may be, would
be sufficiently free from objection to be able to be run
direct into the Clyde. Is not that his assumption ?—
Yes, that it contains no solid substance at all.

128. And having freed it from the excrementitious
matter, he thinks it may ren into the Clyde without
any danger ?—Yes, without anything of the nature of
sediment.

Mr, Wit1am C. Srzrar, Victoria Chambers,
Westminster, examined.

129. I am the representative of the A B C process,
carried on by the Native Guano Company. I am a
director of the Company. I am the patentee. I am
very glad to have had this opportunity of personally
giving an explanation of the process, because I hold
that it commends itself from its simplicity, its efficacy,
and its economy. It is a system of precipitation, and
as such does not open the question as to whether it is
advisable to have sewers at all; nor, having sewers,
whether it is advisable to keep out anything from
them. We take it for granted that there are sewers,
and we take it for granted that the people will put into
these sewers whatever comes to their hand, and that
we have to treat with what we find at the sewer mouth.
But the process adds to its precipitation purification,
and in that respect I think it differs somewhat from
other processes. We first, as soon as we conveniently
can, get access to the sewer, and add to it a mixture
of clay, charcoal, and blood. These three elements

Adam Scott.

William
C. Sillar.

ae
William
C. Sillar.

12 CLYDE PURIFICATION COMMISSION.

we call the purifying elements, because each of these
individually has a decided purifying tendency of its
own. Clay, we know, has a purifying power ; charcoal,
we know, has a purifying power; and blood, we also
know, has such a power, although its purifying power
is not so well understood as that of the other two.
After mixing with these purifying elements, the sewage
is all run into a precipitating tank where there is added
to it sulphate of alumina. The precipitation then takes
place. The depusit so precipitated contains such a
very large proportion of all the organic impurities that
were found in the sewage, as to leave the effluent water
practically harmless ; and as none of the elements I have
mentioned exercises the least destructive effect upon
the manurial properties of the sewage, it stands to
reason that these manurial properties will be found in
the deposit. The expense of the process consists
necessarily in the construction of tanks; but as the
precipitation by that process is as rapid as by any
other known process, the expense does not exceed in
that respect that of any other precipitation process,
which is as well known to engineers as any simple
subject can be. The drying of the deposit afterwards
is entirely ap engineering question, and whether it is
dried by mere exposure to the air, which it does very
rapidly, or whether it is dried by artificial means, is
merely a question of cost. It has been dried in three
ways. It has been laid out upon the ground and
dried, where it dries so rapidly, that after two or three
days’ exposure it cracks like a clay-bed. It has been
dried by Needham’s pressure process; and it has been
dried by revolving iron cylinders by artificial heat.
In all these ways the deposit obtained has been
absolutely free from offensive smell, either in the
process of drying or exposure. After being so dried,
it has the appearance of brown mould, and on being
applied agriculturally, it has proved itself, beyond all
question, of very great agricultural value. All these
points are so important that we have taken great pains
to have them verified, and a company was established
to demonstrate them, and it spent a very large sum of
money in getting the very highest talent available for
the purposes of that demonstration. The company
engaged the services of Mr. Crookes, F.R.S., at a very
high salary, who spent twelve months in closely investi-
gating the process. Mr. Crookes said that he would
not be connected with the company, nor would he in
any way move in the matter until he was thoroughly
satisfied of it himself, and he devoted twelve
months exclusively to the study of the process.
He has given the result of his experience in a
paper which he wrote to the Quarterly Journal of
Science—a copy of which I now hand you. He also
went to Paris, where he established works himself and
applied the process under his own supervision ; and he
studied it there for six or seven months, personally super-
intending and examining the process in every conceivable
way. The process itself was recommended to the town
of Leeds, and the I.eeds people very properly said that
before going to the expense of erecting works, they
would like to have the process tried upon one-fourth of
their sewage. Thereafter tanks were constructed for
one-fourth of their sewage supply, and they saw the
working of them for two years before they made up
their minds as to whether they would extend the system
to the whole of their sewage or not. Therefore no one
could have had a better opportunity of knowing or
testing the efficacy of the process than the chairman
of their Sewage Committee. A short time ago the
people of the town of Otley in Yorkshire were in the
same difficulty as Glasgow and other towns with regard
to the disposal of their sewage, and for their own satis-
faction their chairman, Mr. Garnet, wrote a private
letter to Mr. Tatham of Leeds, asking him for his
report. That report was an independent evidence as
to the process, and was not given to the company;
and therefore with your permission I will read it. It
is in the following terms :—

‘The fortnightly meeting of the Otley Local Board
was held on the 19th of November 1873. Present :—
Messrs, Longfield (in the chair), J. Brown, Thompson,

Robinson, Payne, Lambert, Blakey, Barrett, @. Brown,
and Thackery.

‘At the last meeting a resolution was passed that
inquiries should be instituted at Leeds with regard
to the working of the A B C process of purifying
sewage in that town, and the clerk read the following
letter from Alderman Tatham :—

‘Dear Mr. Garnet,—During the last three or four
years the Street and Sewerage Committee of the Leeds
Town Council (of which Committee I have been chair.
man during the time) have devoted their best endeavours
to solve this most difficult problem of modern times,
the purification of sewage in large towns.

‘'We have endeavoured to acquaint ourselves with
every known process, visiting every place where we
could see any system at work—that is, the Sub-Com-
mittee to whom the matter has been deputed year by
year by the General Committee—and the result is,
that although some at first were in favour of other
systems when they saw them in work, the Committee
are unanimous in believing that the much-abused
A BC system is the cheapest and best mode of
treating the Leeds sewage which we can adopt, and
that is hitherto known.

‘We have been driven to this conclusion in the face
of much hostile criticism and professional and other
opposition. We are most desirous to find out some
cheaper mode, but hitherto, though some have promised
off-hand great things, when tested, every process has
proved inferior to the A BC.

‘We have not yet received General Scott’s report,
but the fatal defect of his process for us is, that his
primary object is not the purification of the sewage,
but to make mud into cement. His effluent, so far as
we have seen his process at Ealing, was not fit to be
turned into a running stream without either filtration
or irrigation, whilst the A B C dispenses with the
need of either.

‘Irrigation may do at places like Harrogate, where
there is sufficient waste-land near the town on which
the sewage can gravitate, but the outlay must be ten-
fold that required for precipitation, and the ultimate
success is problematic. We have had no support from
our local papers, but I enclose a slip from the Leeds
Daily News.

‘The financial result depends upon the products.
Crossness and Leeds are two different places—the
Leeds sewage will not cost one-half of what the writers
estimate. (Much less, I think.) The value of the
manure is difficult to establish; we have tried it upon
plots in our own lands at Knostrop, and the Native
Guano at £3, 10s. per ton compares to advantage with
Peruvian at £15.

‘Our experimental works are now in operation with
the A B C process—they are at the service of any
person who wishes to demonstrate a better plan.

‘Your Committee can see the works, both the ex-
perimental and permanent—the latter are approaching
completion—and we shall be glad to render any assist-
ance, or give you every information in our power.

‘Very respectfully yours,
‘Grorer TaTHam.

‘ Leeds, 6th November 1873.

‘ The letter was considered highly satisfactory ; and
it was laid on the table for future consideration,’

Since that was done, the works at Leeds have been
finished, and they have cost, I think, somewhere about
£60,000.

130. Is that for one-fourth of their sewage or for
the whole?—It is the permanent works for the whole
of the sewage. After having had the practical expe-
rience of the process in connection with one-fourth of
their sewage, they have erected works for the whole,
and I think the cost is about £60,000. After the
completion of these works, they gave permission to any
person who had a process to try experiments upon them,
for although they had themselves selected the A BC
system, they were not so bigoted as to refuse to receive
or hear of any other. Therefore several processes have
been tried in these works, it is not for me to say with
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 13

what success ; but we have had an intimation that after
these triels are over, the A B © system is to com-
mence working again, and I was told that they were to
commence working it this very day; so that if they
have not actually commenced, it will be in the power of
any person interested in the subject to go to Leeds
very shortly and see the A B C process actually at
work there. They will see to what extent it purifies
the sewage, and at what expense it does.so, and what
is the effect of the process generally ; and I think that
-one personal inspection is worth a great deal of theory.
The action of the A B C process is very closely con-
densed in a paper that was prepared by Mr. Christopher
Rawson, and read before the Society of Arts.
There was a conference there upon that question, and
this paper says that there were four points which
the A BC process professed to solye,—first, that the
effluent was sufficiently purified as to be innocuous
and fit to go into a river ; second, that this could be
effected without creating any nuisance; third, that
no material was used which injures or destroys the
manurial qualities of the sewage; and fourth, that it
produced a manure capable of raising good crops of
every kind, and that the value of such manure at least
covers the expense of the process, even if it does not
leave a satisfactory profit. In proof that the A BC
process actually accomplishes these results, and, first,
that the effluent is sufficiently purified to go into a river,
we have a certificate from Mr. Tatham of Leeds, and
we have also a very full report from Mr. Keates upon
a three months’ trial on the Crossness Sewage of the
Metropolitan Board of Works. I now produce Mr.
Keates’ report. At an expense of upwards of £20,000,
works were put up at Crossness for treating a portion
of the London sewage, in order to demonstrate what
the A BC process could do. Mr. Keates personally
inspected the works for three months; and this is his
official report: ‘Mr. Keates, the Chemical Adviser of
the Metropolitan Board of Works, after a careful super-
vision of the process at Crossness, reports as follows :
—“ That the effluent water was on the whole very
good. The A BC treatment so far clarified and de-
fecated the sewage that, looking solely to the physical
condition and chemical composition of the water pro-
duced at Crossness, Iam of opinion that such water
was in a fit state to be admitted into any ordinary
river without producing a dangerous degree of pollu-
tion.”’ You will observe that Mr. Keates speaks very
carefully; for he does not say that it was without
any degree of pollution, and we never professed that
the water was absolutely purified. Then the Leeds
people had their injunction removed, on account of
the official testimony to the condition of the effluent
water, Mr. Rawson, in his report, says: ‘The use of
the process at Leeds enabled the authorities to get
their injunction suspended; and the chairman of the
Streets and Sewage Committee, Mr. Alderman Tatham,
on the 22d September 1873, officially testifies “‘ that the
effluent water produced by the process is sufficiently
pure to be allowed to flow into the river with the sanc-
tion of the authorities.”’ Mr. Tatham also testified that
the effluent water was in no way destructive to fish life,
as fish had been kept in it for months, while in Paris,
also, the most delicate kinds of fish, gudgeons and
others, were kept in the purified sewage for some time.
The French people, as you know, are very particular
about the fish in the river Seine. Mr. Keates also tes-
tifies that during the whole of the time that the process
was carried on at Crossness, there was no offence either
in the purification of the sewage or in the final drying
of the manure into powder for the farmers’ use. Re-
garding the efficacy of the manure for agricultural
purposes, proof ought to be given, and we can give
proofs of several kinds. At Crossness 6 acres of
ground were put into cultivation, and the manure made
there was put upon that ground. Before being applied,
it was weighed and kept. under lock and key by the
Metropolitan Board of Works; and so particular were
they that they even dictated that we should use Chubb’s
locks upon the doors of the warehouse. The crops grown
there were the finest I ever saw in my life. The wheat
H

was seven feet high, and the farmer there said he never
saw better corn grown, although he knew the land to
be the sourest land in the county. I think from first
to last the Native Guano Company have sold some-
thing like 4000 tons of their native guano, and they
have never sold a ton under £3, 10s. all the time
they were working. At the end of every spring they
sent circulars to the farmers, asking them, for the
benefit of the public, to give them a report of what the
results had been. These reports have been published
in two volumes of testimonials, and I know that
these testimonials are genuine. Whether the reports of
the farmers are true or not, it is not for me to say, but
I believe them to be substantially true, for I know that
my own experience of the native guano fully bears out
the testimonials given. I now produce the three years’
testimonials. Another question to be considered is the
expense of working this process; and that is a very
serious fault which Mr. Bazalgette, in his report on
Crossness, finds with it. The town of Bolton, in Lan-
cashire, adopted the process without any interference
from the Native Guano Company, and they worked it
themselves. We asked them to give us an official report
of what it actually had cost, and their foreman of works
gave us the report which I now produce, and which the
mayor, Mr. Cannon, certified to be correct to the best
of his belief. These are facts and figures, and are
therefore entitled to belief. I saw the mayor about
twelve months afterwards, and I asked him if he had
any reason to alter his opinion, and he said, No; that
the cost in one week might have been a little more, and
in another week a little less, but that, substantially, the
figures remained the same as they were when that
statement was given tous. The result of that state-
ment is, that the whole expense came to about £2, 6s. 6d.
per ton of the manure made, of which sum £1 con-
sisted of costs not literally chargeable to production,
leaving the result to be about 26s. per ton as the cost
of manufacture of the native guano. We have always
estimated, and our engineers have estimated, that 30s.
per ton was what we might fairly calculate on as the
eost of making the stuff, but I think we may also
fairly calculate that when the thing is in actual and
positive working, the cost may be less; because
experience always enables people to make their work~
ing expenses less as they go on.

131. Is that estimate of cost inclusive or exclusive
of interest on the cost of the works?—There is an
entry there of Burgh Treasurer’s statement for interest
‘and tear and wear, £14. That is what we say is not
literally chargeable to production; it is interest on the
cost of works. In addition to the other papers I have
produced, I now produce an official testimony from Mr.
‘Tatham on the subject of the purity of the water. The
testimonial certifies: ‘(1.) That the town of Leeds has dis-
infected a part of the sewage of the town, and are about
completing works to disinfect the whole of the sewage,
by means of the “A BC” system. (2.) That the effluent
water produced by the process is sufficiently pure to be
allowed to flow into the river, with the assent of the
authorities. (3.) That the whole of the process, in-
eluding the preparation of the native guano, is per-
formed without offensive odour or nuisance.’ I have
also here the statement of the results of the trial of the
6 acres of ground at Crossness, where crops were
grown with the native guano, under the supervision of
the servants of the Metropolitan Board of Works. That
report I take to be extremely valuable, because it shows
us what an enormous value of material we annually de-
stroy by our present suicidal process of throwing it into
rivers. I have now, sir, given you independent testi-
mony from these men upon all the four points I have
named; and I may say that these testimonials have not
been procured without a great outlay on the part of the
Company. Scientific men cannot afford to give twelve
months of their time without being highly paid for it.
Some people make the objection, that if a man is paid for
his services, his testimony isnot worth having, while others
say that unless a man is paid, his testimony is not worth
having. I think that is not a fair way to look at the
matter. When the chairman of the Local Board of

William
C. Sillar.

—_—
William
C. Sillar.

 

14 CLYDE PURIFICATION COMMISSION.

Health at Leamington was asked, ‘Have you any per-
sonal interest in this Native Guano Company?’ and he
said, ‘No, and I never had;’ then‘it was said, ‘If you

. had had any confidence in it, you would have had an

interest in it;’ but when he retired and another gentle-
man came in and was asked, ‘ Have you any personal
interest in the company?’ and he said, ‘ Yes, I have a
very great interest in it,’ he was told, ‘ We do not
believe a word you say.’ And Professor Liebig, whose
reputation we all know, said, that whenever a great idea
was brought out, it underwent two phases; at first
everybody denied its truth, and then everybody said
that everybody knew about it. The A B CO process
has undergone both of these calumnies. At first people
absolutely denied that there was anything in it; and in
high official quarters, I know that it has been called a
fraud and a swindle, which I know it is not; and then,
when it was proved to be able to produce the different
resulis I have mentioned, it was said that anybody
could have done that as well. But if itis true that any-
body could have done it, why, I beg to ask, has no-
body done it, and why are our rivers polluted yet. I
leave this matter now in your hands. J have given you
all the information that I possess, and if there is any
point on which I have not made myself clear, or on
which the evidence which I have brought before you is
not satisfactory, I shall be very glad to supply the defi-
ciency. On engineering questions we have our engineer,
who has put up the works for the trial of the process,
which were superintended by Mr. Hawksley at Leeds ;
and on chemical questions we. have our chemist, Mr.
Crookes, who is a man of eminence and well known in
the scientific world. These gentlemen will give you any
information on the matters which lie in their department.
I am neither an engineer nor a chemist, and I speak
diffidently myself on these points; but when I have pro-
duced the reports of scientific men on these points, I think
Ihave done everything that any reasonable man can
expect.

132. Is your process applicable to the whole volume
of the sewage of a town like Glasgow, or do you
require a separation of what is called sewage from rain-
fall ?—As the tanks require to be of sufficient capacity
to hold a certain number of hours’ run of sewage, of
course the larger the run of sewage the larger the tanks
would require to be, and that would entail more ex-
pense. It would be more economical to treat the con-
tents of the sewage only than the other, but that is not
necessary. :

133. How is it done at Leeds ?—The whole sewage
comes'down. There is no separation, but there is a
-very remarkable thing about that Leeds sewage. The
difficulty that has proved the greatest there has been
the dye waters. The water at one moment comes down
as black as ink, and at another as red as ruddle.
When Mr. Crookes got samples of all these different dye
waters, he found that they were all, to a greater or less
extent, susceptible to treatment by the A B C process,
‘but after he had finished his’ experiments, and when he
put all his samples into one mug, he found that they
‘Were precipitable with a tithe of the cost that they
required when they were separate. The chen#cal action
of these waters was such, that on one being added to
another, it had a chemical effect upon it. One being
acid and another being alkali, they positively precipi-

tated each other, and therefore I believe it would be the.

most economical way to treat the whole of the dye
waters, and everything coming down the drains, together.

134, Can you give me any information as to the
volume that is dealt with at Leeds? —I think it is
14,000,000 gallons per day.

135. Is there any place near London where your
process is used ?—It was used at Crossness,

186. But that was only temporarily ?—Yes; we are
not working at any place near London just now.

137. I thought you said something about Leaming-
ton?—We got a two years’ lease of the works at
Leamington. That was where the Native Guano Com-
pany put up works to demonstrate the process for them-
‘selves, and to know whether it was worth while spending
money upon,

138. Do you consider Leeds to be the best place
where the process can be seen in operation ?—They said
that they were to begin to work it in Leeds to-day,
Whether they have begun ornot Iam not quite sure, but
they certainly will be working there almost immediately,

189. Have you got analyses of the effluent water
after it has been purified, so far as your process purifies

_ it?—Yes.

140. Because there are cases of which I know per-
sonally, where the water has been made perfectly clear,
and to all common observers quite pure, but yet in
three or four days it began to smell again.—The clear
water has remained in the tanks for weeks, and we have
had fish living in it. There is one certificate where it is
stated that they kept fish in the water for eight months
after it had been purified by the process. I think we
have got some fish in the offices that have been there
for three years; and in Paris the purified water was
filled with the most’ delicate fish.

141, That would be a good test, for if fish could
live in the water for eight’ months, it would be pure
enough.—The fish did live, and they thrived in it, for -
they increased in size. The materials which we use are
none of them expensive. The bulk of them is clay.

142. Do you use ordinary clay?—We prefer the
clay because it is not only a purifier of the water, but
it fits the manure for the farmers, as the less substance
that is added to it the better.

143. Have you applied sulphate of alumina instead
of clay ?—That is what we use for precipitating ; it is
added after the clay. Mr. Crookes, as a chemist,
has taken out a patent for himself, which we have got
the working of, in which he uses what he calls basic
sulphate of alumina. I cannot tell what it is, but he
uses it for reasons of economy. ‘The sulphate of
alumina is the most expensive portion of the material,
and he says that this basic dispenses with a quantity of
it, and makes it much more economical. Of course I
have no reason to disbelieve what he says, but I know
that whereas, when we began the process, the sulphate
of alumina cost about £7, 10s. per ton, our use of it
has been so far economized, as we do not require the
pure stuff, that we can get it now for £3, 10s., which
is a very considerable reduction on the price.

144. You say that the cost of the works at Leeds
has been about £60,000. Are these works all concen-
trated in one establishment?—Yes. The works are at
Knostrop.

145. Are you so thoroughly acquainted with Leeds as
to be able to say whether these works which you say
have cost £60,000 will be sufficient to deal with the
14,000,000 gallons per day?—They are considered
to be sufficient, but I ask you to remember that they
have never worked the A B C process on that scale
there, because, previous to applying it to the whole
sewage, they have allowed these other people to try
experiments, and these people have knocked the
machinery about, and made alterations to suit their
own plans, and the works have to be put right again.’

146, What other process was it that they applied?
—We were working at Bolton, but the Mayor of
Bolton and the Burgh Analyst had a patent of their
own, and I suppose they had influence enough to get
their own process adopted, and they tried it. It is
called Goodall’s process, and they went to Leeds and
got permission to try it there too, so that they have
been trying Goodall’s system at Leeds also,

147. Do you know what Goodall’s process is ?—It is
something with iron. I am not sure what it is, but
they have tried it, and ceased trying it. I think that
General Scott's process was tried also, but I do not
know with what results. Even if I did know, it would
not be for me to say with what results it had been tried,
because, being a prejudiced party, my testimony would
not be very valuable.

148. Have you any means of giving me the solid
quantity of manure that you get from any given quantity
of sewage ?—I think that, as a rule, we consider that
if we put in a ton of clay and stuff, we get out 25 cwt.

149, But out of how much sewage? I want to get
at the volume of sewage; for instance, what quantity
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 15

of ingredients would be necessary say for 100,000
gallons of sewage or any other quantity?—In the
experiments, when I used to look to them personally,
120,000 gallons of sewage produced a ton of dry guano.

150. What weight of ingredients would you have
to put into 120,000 gallons in order to get that ton of
guano?—I think the actual figures are in the Bolton
report. I see there that the weight of manure in one
week averaged 20 tons, and they put in of clay 8 tons
5 cwt.; of charcoal, 5 tons 10 cwt.; alum, 3 tons;
and night-soil, 4 tons. But then it must be taken into
consideration that all those materials were moist.

151. You appear, therefore, to get the same quantity
of guano as the quantity of materials you put in?—
Yes; but these 20 tons of guano are dried by heat,
while the clay would have 20 to 25 per cent. of moisture,
and the charcoal would have 50 per cent. I think we
have an estimate that 20 cwt. put in brings out 25
ewt. of dry guano. I may mention, although perhaps
it does not bear on the present question, that the price
which the Blackburn people had to pay for their
farm was about £200,000, being, I believe, about 60
or 70 years’ purchase. They got compulsory powers
from Parliament to purchase, and the price they had
to pay for their land was something fabulous.

152. Have they got an Act for making a sewage
farm there?—They got an Act with ,compulsory
powers to buy the land, and they could not agree about
the price. The consequence was, that they left it to
arbitration, and the arbiters did give them a sum to pay.

153. How near was that farm to Blackburn?—I do
not know; I have not been there.

154. Do you know what, they are doing at Bir-
mingham just now?—The last I saw of Birmingham
was, that they were treating their sewage with General
Scott’s process, and taking the deposit into the ground
all round it; but Birmingham is a very curious place,
it is so very much mixed up with metal works, that I
question whether a deposit from Birmingham would
have any manurial properties at all. J think it would
be of no use to attempt to treat it on that ground,
because its chemical and mineral works have some
deleterious effect upon the manure.

155. They have got plenty of these works in Glas-
gow ?—It would not be difficult to separate anything
that would destroy the manure; and it would bea
great pity to destroy the manure simply for the mix-
ture of one or two things in it.

156. I thought you said that Mr. Crookes said
there was no harm in letting all these things stay in ?—
These were things that came from the dye-works.
Colouring dyes do no harm. I do not know what
effect the quicksilver, arsenic, and things that come
from tin works and the like would have. They would
destroy fish life; but there is nothing in clay, or char-

coal, or blood that has any evil effect either on manure

or on fish life. ILime has sach an effect, and I should
be very sorry to allow lime to go into any river. Sul-
phate of alumina is harmless in the quantity in which
we use it. But the proper way to try these things is
for people to take a small portion of the material and
put iton their own ground. That has been done in the
case of the A BC process, and we have got official
reports of what the result is. There is one very
remarkable fact that has come before us, and which I
may mention. It was a matter of theory at first, but
it has since been proved to be a fact, that the
manurial value of solid matter is nothing compared
with the manurial value of liquid matter, and almost
the whole manurial power is in the urine. When we
took the native guano and mixed it with the same
weight of night-soil and tried them together, they were
tested carefully by the Leeds people, and they found
that the’guano was better without the dung than with
it. That seems a very curious fact, but a medical
man explained it to me in this way: he says that the

moment an animal eats its food, what it swallows is’

divided into two parts—the useful and the useless.
What is useless passes through the bowels that very

day, and forms the bulk of the dung; while the rest, |

which goes into the tissues of the body, takes its place,

and displaces there a thing which has already done its
part, and which is daily passing away in the shape of
urine; and that the reason why guano has a higher
fertilizing power than other manure is that birds do
not make water, and the urine and the dung are all in
one. You may have noticed in the case of a farmer
that he will use dung which he has got from a gentle-
man’s stable; but if it has been got from a livery
stable it is hardly worth carrying away, because they
economize the straw, while in a gentleman’s stable they
give plenty of straw, and the straw takes up the urine
and retains it. The urine is the valuable property.

Mr. R. 8. Syminton, Telegraph Engineer, 24 Oswald :

Street, Glasgow, examined.

157. Ihave brought here a model, of which I shall
read a description. My system is one of filtration for
catching the refuse at each tenement, and the model
which I have here is made to serve for two tenements,
when placed on the boundary between them. The fol-
lowing is the description of my apparatus, which is
called ‘The Deodorizing House Ash-bin and Sewage
Purifier : ’°—

‘A new sanitary appliance, combining in a portable
and sightly iron structure a simple and effective method
of purifying the sewage of dwelling-houses, and deo-
dorizing all household refuse in town or country (and
not interfering with the existing water-closet system).

‘The structure occupies very small space—measuring
7 feet long, 5 feet high, and 24 feet broad, and com-
prises “‘ash-bin,” “filter,” and “receptacle” for all
household refuse. It is so planned that it can serve for
either one or two separate houses or tenements, if placed
on the boundary with the end projecting into the ad-
joining property; it provides both with independent
accommodation, and may be placed on the ground
level, or in a sunk area.

‘The two upper ends of the structure form “ filters,”
which are charged periodically, one with household
cinders, the other partly with cinders and partly with
animal charcoal. !

‘The upper centre compartment forms a chamber
which receives the excreta from the water-closets, and
is so constructed that the solids are retained hermeti-
cally in the chamber, while the liquids are filtered (up-
wards), first through the cinders and afterwards through
the charcoal compartment, causing the water to pass
off pure into the sewer or stream.

‘The two lower ends form convenient “ ash-bins,”
etc. A door on being opened presents two hoppers-—
the wet or soft matter (such as vegetable and animal
refuse) thrown into the lower hopper is deodorized by
the dust and small cinders thrown into the upper
hopper falling on an inclined grating or riddle.

‘The lower centre compartment retains the larger

cinders for the recharging of the “ filters” from time .

to time.

‘Conveniént arrangements are provided for the
periodical removal of the soil, ashes, etc., the whole
(mixed in the process of removal) forming a valuable
manure.

‘The adoption of this appliance, either in town or
country, cannot fail to add to the health and comfort
of the community, as all offensive and dangerous cess-
pools and dungsteads can be dispensed with. Com-
plete isolation is secured to the tenement from the gases
of polluted drains, sewers, and rivers, and percolation

of sewage impurities into drinking wells is thoroughly

prevented.

© P.S.—This appliance is. particularly adapted for :

houses at the coast or in the country where there is no

proper system of sewage pipes, and where offensive .

matter is often run into the sea or the nearest stream,

forming a nuisance to the inhabitants, and often produc- |

ing disease and death in our most salubrious situations.’
The witness then described the various parts of the
model.

Wilkan
C. Sillar.

 

RS.
Syminton.

 
RS.
Syminton.

William R.
W. Smith.

——

16.

158. What your apparatus proposes to do is to
filter the liquid part of the sewage, but the solid part,
the excreta, is taken away bodily ?—Yes; it is taken
away solid. .

159. Mixed with ashes ?—Yes.

160. Do you propose tomake it of iron?—Yes. Part
ofit might be madeof slate or stone, and part of it of iron.
Those that I have made hitherto have been of iron.

161. What would be the cost of it ?—2£30 for two
tenements. The model which I have shown could serve
for two villas or two tenements, being £15 for each house.
There are double hoppers for the ashes and refuse.

162. Suppose you were to apply your apparatus to
one of the tenements in Glasgow which are divided into
numerous houses, how many houses do you think it
would serve ?—I estimate that this apparatus, emptied
once a. fortnight, would do for a tenement containing
twenty-four persons.

163. And at the same cost of £30?—Yes. Of
course, you could empty it once a week, and then it
would do for forty-eight persons.

CLYDE PURIFICATION COMMISSION.

164. Is it in operation anywhere?—This double:
filter is not in operation yet. I expect to have it in
operation in a very short time, but I have. had the single
filter in operation. This is Strang’s principle. Mr.
Strang has a patent for the same thing ; but I repeat
the process, while he only filters once. . ;

165. Is the one devised by Mr. Strang in operation
much ?—It is in operation in a few places in Glasgow.
Mr. Strang has already been examined to-day. He
has these filters in operation at his own mill at Bridge-
end, near to Glasgow Green, and it is in operation in
one or two tenements on the south side of the river, and
has been very successful. This one repeats the filtra-
tion, and makes the water absolutely pure. I have had
gold fish living in it. :

166. Then you consider this to be an improvement
on Strang’s ?—Yes. I have an arrangement with Mr.
Strang to introduce it. The two patents are combined.
There is one of full size—not in operation, but for ex-
hibition—that can be seen in the Burnbank Drill Hall
in Great Western Road.

 

WEDNESDAY, 19¢h May 1875.

Mr. Wittram R. W. Surra, Merchant, Glasgow, examined.

167. I think it right to say at the outset that, as a
citizen of Glasgow, I was very violently opposed to
this Commission ; and, in order that you may clearly
understand the grounds of my opposition, I lay before
you the letters I wrote at the time opposing its issue.
Of course my opposition was not made on personal
grounds, for at that time I knew nothing whatever
about who was to be appointed Commissioner, but
having for a very long period given close attention to
this sewage question, and having posted myself up
with regard to it from all the sources from which I
could obtain information, as well as from my own ex-
perience, I came to the conclusion, after I had seen the
fourth report of the Rivers’ Pollution Commissioners,
that we had there as much reliable information as we
could possibly obtain on the subject, and that was the
subject of my contention, which was so serious that
Mr. Marwick thought it necessary to answer my argu-
ments to a certain extent, although without naming
me, while the Herald devoted a special leader to me.
With regard to the question itself, I can only say that
I fully endorse in every respect the conclusions of the
fourth report of the Rivers’ Pollution Commission.
After long experience and study, I am perfectly satis-
fied in my own mind that we can find no other course
than the course laid down there, whereby we can
cleanse our cities. I am very much strengthened in
that conviction by a speech delivered some time ago
by Lord Derby to the Conservative Working Men’s
Association in Liverpool, from which I would read a
short extract. His Lordship said: ‘It is quite on the
cards that the next generation may find out that the
gigantic drainage works, on which so many millions
have been spent, are comparatively useless; and what

we want now is not so much a few schemes of national.

dimensions, as a more minute and careful supervision
of local details which do not make any particular show,
but which, being looked after or neglected, constitute
the whole difference between a healthy and an un-
healthy district.” In that short passage you have the
text of any suggestions that I would make to you.
168. When was that speech delivered?—A year or
two ago. It is dated 9th January, but there is no
year given. JI think, however, it must have been in
1873 or 1874. In speaking of the general question of
sewage, I divide the sewage of our towns into three
parts. I take, in the first instance, the excreta sewage ;

second, the manufacturers’ sewage; and third, the.

house sewage and street sewage. With regard to the
excreta sewage, I lay it down asa standing axiom that
it must be kept out’ from the: sewers and from all’ cou-
nection with our houses, inasmuch as you have had
ample details of the danger arising from that source and

from the sewer gases.. The first question to be con-
sidered is how that excreta sewage is to be kept out from
the sewers. On that matter I submit to you, in the
first place, a paper on the charcoal system, by Mr.
Stanford. That system is in work in Glasgow, and
you can see it in my own office privately ; and you can
also see it in public works, where there are large numbers.
of people working. I next put before you Hoey’s,
system. I have been unable to lay my hands on the.
paper describing Hoey’s restricted closet system, under
which a restricted quantity of water is used, but I,have.
no doubt you have heard of that system. But Hoey’s
system proceeds upon another principle than that.
merely of restricting the quantity of water. It has a
tank in the street, or in a back court, into which the

present water-closet system is run, and from that he

exhausts the material by pneumatic pressure. There-

fore, by having an air-pipe from the tank put through

the houses no gas can ever find its way into the houses,

because the matter there is removed every week, and the

cleansing is perfect. Supposing the slightest smell should

arise, you have the remedy in your own hands close

by, because you can deodorize the matter in the

tank, after cleansing the tank also. It has no over-

flow into the sewer, and the arrangements are of the

most perfect kind. There are, therefore, these two

systems—Stanford’s and Hoey’s; and these would, in

the first instance, do whatever we wanted for a dry

principle, and they will do whatever we want in con-

nection with the present accommodation of water-

closets. These two systems, with one that was laid

before you yesterday by Mr. Strang, were experimented.
upon by direction of the Board of Police of Glasgow;
and I now put in a report by the City Analyst on the

subject, which he presented to the Board of Police.

You will see from that report the possibility of working

these’ processes, and the cost requisite for working

them. I have also made some calculations, which I.
shall hand in, based upon. the cost as furnished by the

late inspector of cleansing for the city, Mr. Bllison.
That estimate of cost has reference to the year 1873;
when labour was rather higher than it is just now; but.
still you will be able from that to see the cost of work-

ing this closet system, supposing we have 40,000 closets

in Glasgow.

169. The report by the City Analyst which you have
put in is not upon Hoey’s system alone, but it is upon
all the three?—Yes. In the first place, with regard to
Strang’s system, le uses the ashes, as he calls them, but
they are not the ashes ; they are the ashes and cinders
mixed, and perhaps there is. no possiliility of finding. 9
more filthy material, or a more abominable deodorizer,
among the whole matters that can be used for that
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE.

purpose, than ashes and cinders. I employed those
matters for some time, but I came to be convinced that
there was a singularly unpleasant odour that. arose
from them, and I wrote to Dr. Angus Smith of Man-
chester on the subject, and asked him if he could direct
me to any chemical researches on the emanations from
a mixture of ashes and excreta. He wrote me in reply
a very long letter, and said: ‘ You have started an en-
tirely new point. There has been no investigation on
that matter that I know of, but I am at present engaged
on some investigations on a similar matter, and I will
see you shortly,’ Afterwards, when he was in Glasgow,
he called at my office, and said : ‘ You have given me a
horribly dirty job.” I said, ‘How so? It is a very
important job ;’ and he said, ‘I see that it is more than
ordinarily important, and I will see how I can get at
some result about it.’ Dr. Smith was then engaged
on his book on Air and Rain; and the result of
my speaking to him was that he went into the sub-
ject. of middens, which he had no intention of doing
before, and he there observed, as you will find at
page 8 of his book, that the quantity of carbonic
acid in the air of middens was °7850. He says:
‘Some people will probably inquire why we should give
so much attention to such minute quantities—between
20°980 and 20°999—thinking these small differences
can in no way affect us; but supposing its place oc-
-eupied by hurtful matter, we must not look on the
amount as too small. Subtracting 0°980: from 0-999,
we have a difference of 190 in a million. In a gallon
of water there are 70,000 grains,’ and so on. Farther
-on he says: ‘ But we drink only a comparatively small
quantity of water, and the whole 13 grains would
not be swallowed. in a day, whereas we take into our
lungs from 1000 to 2000 gallons of air daily.’ Then,
again, he speaks of the same condition of things at
page 55, where he says: ‘ In the above analysis the air
-containing °0774 is really worse than that containing
1604, and even -3, because over the middens there is a
little sulphuretted hydrogen. It is well, then, in such
-eases to use the double test.’ I shall give in a refer-
ence to these passages in Dr. Smith’s book, so that you
may be able to refer to them afterwards. Now the
causes of that are not far to seek. I have here an
analysis of coal ashes used: for the dry-closet system,
made in January 1870 by Dr. Wallace, which shows
-of what these are composed. The analysis is :—

Carbon (cinder), 21°46
Silica, . 57:08
Alumina, 15°80
Oxide of iron, 2°18
Lime, . 3 : : 1-39
Magnesia, . 2 : 3 1:06
Sulphuric acid, ‘ . 86,
Phosphoric acid). . Z 17

100

Yow have there 1°39 of lime, which diminishes and, in
‘fact, destroys the value of all these other materials as
deodorizers ;. and these coal ashes are the thing that
T aw telling you itis such a mistake to'have ever em-
ployed. In fact, I have come to the conclusion, as the
result of my own investigations,.and. from. the analyses
-of Dr. Wallace'and Dr. Angus Smith, that this mixture
-of excreta. and coal-ashes ought to be prohibited by
law; for E believe it is one great: cause of the bad air
which we.find in our large cities. In Birmingham it
was found that there was an area of something like
18. acres existing of middens; and I have no doubt
that. in. Glasgow we have an area of 20 acres, lying
covered with putrefying matter to a depth of 2 feet.
Tw fact, these things will require to be entirely pro-
hibited, if we are to have good health in our cities.
E think: that disposes of the excreta sewage of the
cities; and. the: next thing I come to consider is the
manufacturevs’ sewage. In the year 1869 I obtained
from Dr. Wallace (who has been of very great assistance
to me in these inquiries, and who, knowing: that’ my
labours have been con. amore, has given'me' the: benefit

«

17

of his scientific labours without cost).an analysis of the
pot-ale sent out from the distilleries. The result: which
he brought out, with regard to the ale sent out from
one of our distilleries in Glasgow, was rather startling.
He says: ‘ Taking the distillery dreg at 500,000 gal-
lons in six days, this is 83,000 gallons in one day;
each gallon contains 118 grains of ammonia, or nitro-
gen equal to that, so that the daily discharge of that
dreg (or pot-ale) is equal to the total excreta of
48,970 persons per day. This one distillery therefore
discharges as much fertilizing material as one-tenth of
the population of Glasgow.’ We made such an
agitation about this matter at the time that the dis-
tillery to which this refers has since stopped putting
this material into the sewers, and is now realizing from
£1000 to £2000 a year out of that refuse, which for-
merly polluted the river. Now this ought to be the basis
of all our dealing with manufacturing sewage; and I
have laid it down as a principle that all manufacturers’
sewage must be cleansed, and not allowed to pollute
our drains.

170. What was the name of the distillery from which
the pot-ale was obtained of which you gave the
analysis ?—The name at that time was Mr. Macfar-
lane’s distillery at Port Dundas, but the practice has
since been stopped. I merely put in the analysis to
show what can be done in that direction. Now this is
the hasis of all the dealing that I would have with that
manufacturing sewage. I should plainly and simply
lay down the law to the manufacturers: ‘Cleanse your
sewage. If you can cleanse it at a cost, you must
cleanse it.’ A paper manufacturer up the Clyde said
to me: ‘ We can cleanse the sewage that we put into
the river, we admit; but we shall not do it until we
are compelled.’ Now, I hold that any man who will
say that, when speaking of the damage he does to the
river, and the annoyance which he causes to his
neighbours, deserves very little mercy at our hands.
But here comes in an exceedingly difficult question.
There are many large chemical works which pour out
vast masses of chemical materials, the cleansing of
which would simply destroy the conditions of their
existence. Suppose, for instance, that at St. Helen’s,

or down at Irvine, there is a large chemical work, and

it is only surrounded by the population, or very little
else than the population, who work at that chemical
work, you. can at once see that the tax upon that dis-
trict would be so grave a charge upon it as simply to
ruin the whole of the people, or to ruin, perhaps, the
proprietor. Now, I hold that a work placed at St.
Helen’s or down at Irvine is a work belonging to
the country; it does not belong to the special dis-
trict ; it is no specialty of the work of that district;
it simply happens to be set down there for very
special purposes; and I should say—and this is a
principle which I hope will soon be recognised, for I
believe it is a true one—that whenever, under proper
Government chemical inspectors, the chemical sewage
is found of so great an amount or weight as to be a
serious drawback and a hindrance upon the work, or a
serious tax upon the district, the cleansing of that
manufacturer’s sewage should fall upon the Consoli-
dated Fund of the country, for it is a business of’ the
country. That idea, I know, is a perfectly new one.
171. Perfectly new.—But I am sure it is an idea
that will be recognised sooner or later; and if you
think a little over it, I have no doubt it will commend
itself to you. It is all very well for a large taxable
area like Glasgow to bear these things; but when you
come to take into consideration the fact which I will
tell you, that four or five of the paraffin oil works in
the centre of the country, in the Bathgate district, are
at present putting their heads together to see how they
can make from twenty-five to thirty miles of sewer to
earry their refuse to the'sea, you will see that that is a
task beyond the power of any manufacturing concern in
a small district to bear. I. learned that fact from one
of the managers of one of the oldest'and most important
of these concerns, who told me that such a: thing: was
really in contemplation; and that they were considering
whether they could overtake it, or whether it would

William R.
W. Smith.
18 CLYDE PURIFICATION COMMISSION.

ruin them. .What they would do, they did not know,
but they seemed to think that that was the only course
which they could follow.

172. Where are these works?—They are situated in
the centre, of the country, about Bathgate, half way
‘betwixt Edinburgh and Glasgow. They think their
only course is to carry a sewer a distance of twenty-five
or thirty miles to the sea, if they can get it through the
intervening land ; and you can easily see what difficulties
they will have to meet with regard to the rights of pro-
prietors in passing through their lands, and the cost of
bridges and culverts to carry such an enormous sewer
for such a great distance. Now, if we are to have our
rivers purified from a contamination such as paraffin
oil works make,—which does not leave the river until it
finds the sea, for you will find the contamination from the
paraffin oil thirty miles distant from the works, as per-
fect as when it entered, and no aeration seems to
remove it,—then I believe that you must ultimately
recognise the principle which I have laid down, that if
the works are to remain where they are, and the dis-
trict where these works are is not to be utterly ruined,
and the works themselves are not to be ruined, we
must place on the Consolidated Fund the cost of cleans-
ing that part of the sewage where it is found impossible
for the. parties themselves to bear it.

173. Would you propose that the Consolidated Fund
should be charged with the cost of making that thirty
miles of sewer which you have spoken about ?—I
would propose that whatever is necessary to keep it
out of the river, and to cleanse it, should be done; but
I don’t think that will come to a very serious affair,
because the great mass of chemical sewage which is put
out from works will be found capable of being con-
served at its own cost. That, I think, has been almost
incontestably proved, but I have no doubt in my own
mind that the ultimate result must come to something
of the kind which I have stated, otherwise particular
districts will be so heavily burdened, that they will be
unable to exist under the burden. There is no other
way in which those businesses which constitute the
‘strength and power of the country can be preserved.
If, instead of throwing the burden on the works
* themselves, the burden is thrown upon the district alone,
then that district reaps no advantage from it, except
in so far as the labour required for the works is taken
from the district. The profit derived from the business
is not of much advantage to the district, because, gene-
tally, such businesses are conducted almost entirely in
Glasgow, while the works may be ten miles distant.

174. Don’t the Rivers’ Pollution Commissioners, in
the report which you say you adopt, deal with refuse
from paraffin works? Do they give any chemical
means for getting rid of that refuse?—They don’t give
any chemical means. They don’t go into detail. In
one of the letters written by me, and of which I have
handed in a copy, you will find the recommendations
and conclusions of the Commissioners.

175. Would you be in favour of enacting the stand-
ards of purity given by the Commissioners, and insist-
ing upon them?—There would perhaps be a difficulty
in the way of enacting these standards of purity.

176. But you have already said that you adopt the
report of the Commissioners absolutely; and that is
why I ask you whether you would be prepared to enact
these standards of purity?—I adopt the report in its
recommendations. The standards of purity are a
difficulty, I admit, and it is in order to meet that diffi-
culty that I am endeavouring to show you that part of
the manufacturers’ sewage should be thrown upon the
Consolidated Fund. I freely adopt the recommendations
of the Rivers’ Pollution Commissioners, and also their
purity standards; but I say that which the Rivers’
Pollution Commissioners’ report has not said, that if
the cost to arrive at these standards of purity is so
-great as will close the manufactories or hurt the dis-
trict by reason of the taxation which it would involve,
then that tax should be thrown upon the Consolidated
Fund, because it is one of the businesses of the country.
» 177. Is not that like'saying that you adopt these
‘recommendations, but that. whenever difficulties are

found which would become expensive to the manufac-
turers, then the Government shall bear the expense?—
No; I don’t say that that shall be the case when they
are expensive to the manufacturers. ;

178. Or too expensive?—Yes, too expensive; and
that is tantamount to saying that the Consolidated
Fund should bear the expense when it would be too
great to be borne by the manufacturers themselves.

179. Who would have to ascertain the fact whether
the necessary processes were too expensive or not ?—
I should put these works under Government inspection,
as the alkali works are at the present moment.. |
should put them under a similar class of Government
inspectors; and if the Government chemical inspectors
said, ‘You can cleanse your sewage by this process,
and the cost to you will be so and so,’ then I should
say that the manufacturers should bear that expense.
I would make these inspectors hired and paid men, the
same ag the alkali inspectors are at present; and J
should say to the manufacturers, ‘ You can cleanse
your sewage at such a cost, and the loss to you will be
so small that you must endure it.’ But on the other
hand, if the loss to the manufacturer is to be so great -
that he cannot bear it, then he should get a warrant or
order entitling him to receive so much out of the Con
solidated Fund.

180. To whom would you delegate the power of
finding out whether the loss was to be such as the
manufacturer could bear, or that it was so large that
he could not bear it, and that therefore the Govern-
ment should bear it? Would you delegate that power
to the Government inspector ?—Clearly. ,

181. Don’t you think that that would be somewhat
like authorizing the Government inspector to tax the
country at discretion for trade purposes?—By no
means. The country is taxed at present in order to
prevent the pollution of the air by the alkali works.
Dr. Angus Smith is one of the inspectors in connection
with these works, and they have the duty of going
round and examining the works, and seeing that no
noxious vapours escape into the atmosphere. They
have carried out that until they have reduced the
quantity to 5 per cent., and I believe they have now
told the manufacturers that they must come down to
24 per cent., or even to 1 per cent.

182. Do the Government pay for that ?—The
Government pay these inspectors.

183. That is a different thing. Do the Government
pay the expense of the process?—-No; but that is the
very point I wish to draw your attention to. So long
as carrying out that process would be a gain to the
manufacturer, or so long as the cost to him woeld bea
mere trifle, I would say to the manufacturer, ‘ You
must cleanse your refuse. It would only be in very
exceptional cases where the Consolidated Fund should
be called upon to give assistance; and that. should
only be done where a thoroughly-trained chemical
inspector had stated to the Government that the carry-
ing out of the process at the cost of the manufacturers
would ruin the trade, and that something must be done
for them. My own conviction is that the cost of this
would not come to more than a few thousand pounds
a year, and unless that were done it might lead to the
destruction of various houses in various trades in this
country. There are only a very few exceptional cases
in which the necessity for such assistance would arise;
and though you were to tax the country for the
chemical manufacturers in one district, you would.
require to tax it also for them in another district. If
you were to tax the country for the cloth works in one
district, then you would have to tax it for these works
in another district. There are various districts in
which such manufactories are carried on. For instance,
we have the Galashiels district, and we have the West
of England district, where cloth works are established ;
and we have chemical works all over the country. I
cannot see my way out of this difficulty in any other
way than I have stated, and I have studied it for a very:
long time; and I put. it before you as the only course
which will relieve us of a vast difficulty. We can
cleanse our manufacturers’ sewage to an enormous:
- i MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 19

extent if we choose, but the difficulty is to get manu-
facturers to do it. As I already mentioned, a paper
‘manufacturer on the Clyde said to me, not long ago,
‘I can stop my soda waste; I can stop the pollution of
the river; but I won’t do it until I am compelled” The
fact is that he can stop that pollution; and that he can
do it to a profit is incontestably proved. Therefore I
say that if we have inspectors with regard to this
matter, as we have inspectors with regard to the air
from the alkali works, we shall, by exactly the same
principle, arrive at an exactly similar conclusion. I
wish now to put in for your consideration two volumes
of pamphlets, which have been in the course of collec-
tion by me for a number of years. 1 don’t expect, of
course, that you will read them all; but you may skim
them over, and perhaps get some information from
‘them. One is a volume of pamphlets on the purifica-
tion of the Clyde, and the other contains pamphlets on
sewage. Then, with regard to the house and street
‘sewage, which is the third division that I have made
on the subject, I have one plan to put before you which
has presented itself to me as unquestionably the best
that has appeared in point of cost. It is by Mr.
Robertson, civil engineer, Glasgow. After we remove
the excreta and the manufacturers’ sewage, we shall
then have only the house sewage and the street sewage
to deal with; and that, I believe, we could deal with
at a very moderate expense by having an overflow, so
to speak, off the river, as shown in Mr. Robertson’s
plan. Here (showing on plan) is Glasgow; these
(showing) represent two main drains, brought down to

tanks here (showing); this (showing) represents a river .

‘wall up to this point; these (showing) represent flood-
gates upon it; and this (showing) represents a tidal
reservoir. At high water this (showing) is shut, and,
‘as a matter of course, the tanks are then open, and
their contents are swept into the sea. Now, as it
‘would only be the house sewage and the street sewage
that would have to be dealt with in that way, these
tanks, having to lie for six hours, could be in sets, and
‘a large quantity of the ‘silt which exists in the bottom
‘of our river tvould be cleared out.

184. What would you say to depriving all those men

who have property adjoining this large tidal reservoir
of their frontage to the river? Whose property is this
‘here (showing on plan)?—The property here (showing)
‘is Lord Blautyre’s, but there is a large bank of sand
covered by the tide up to this point (showing). This
is Lord Blantyre’s property up to Erskine Ferry ; but
‘there would be clean water here (showing) at all times ;
there would never be any sewage. The sewage must go
‘down the Clyde as usual. However, the plan itself is
quite distinct ; and of all the schemes which you will
find among these pamphlets, this one has commended
itself to me as perhaps one of the'simplest and best. This
‘place (showing on plan) could be used advantageously
for floating timber and other things of that kind, where
at present there is. neither more nor less than sand-
‘banks. Mr. Scott's pamphlet is also in this volume ;
but I think Mr. Robertson’s scheme is superior to Mr.
Scott’s. It is the same sort of thing, but I think a
better scheme. That is all which I have to say about
the third division of the sewage. There is only
one other point to which I have to ask your attention.
I have here an article on the pollution of the Clyde,
which was published lately in the Glasgow News; and
in it you will find it stated, that at an extensive cotton
mill in Lanark all the pollution is kept from entering
the river. I put that in as an argument in favour of
the principle which I have laid down with regard to
manufacturers’ sewage.
_ 185. What is the name of the mill?—New Lanark
Mill. I say that if one mill can do this, then every
Other mill can do it; and if it is not a cost to them, it
-would not be a cost to anybody else.

 

Mr. Joun Carricx, Master of Works, Glasgow,
examined.

- 186. When I attended here on Monday, I submitted

the reports which the Town Council possessed upon this
subject; but during the last few years there have been
many schemes sent in to our office, and perhaps it is as
well, in case the parties themselves do not think of
appearing before you, that I should submit these plans
for your information in considering the general ques-
tion. These plans are all more or less confined to the
mere question of dealing with the sewage of Glasgow ;
but before laying them before you, allow me to refer to
another matter, which may be of some importance in
connection with the purification of sewage. It was
only communicated to me the other day, but it relates
to a point in the inquiry which may be of some conse-
quence. It is explained by the following letter :—

‘280 Bara Crescent, GLAscow,
‘4th May 1875.
‘J. Carnicx, Esq.

‘ Dear Sir,—Herewith I have pleasure in handing
you two samples of the Glasgow Bridgeton sewage
kindly sent me in January last from your office.

‘The sample marked A is the sewage as received
from you, after keeping in the light on my office desk
for three months.

‘Bottle B is a sample of the same sewage, which
was filtered through about 8 inches deep of crushed
oil-works shale (a substance consisting chiefly of alu-

minous earth, associated with finely-divided carbon).

‘The two samples have remained side by side on my
desk, and now you will notice the unfiltered sample
stinks most abominably of sulphuretted hydrogen,
whilst the other is odourless.

‘I may mention that there is practically an unlimited
supply of this deodorizing agent, which is at present
quite useless—probably a constant yield of nearly 1000
tons daily within 30 miles.of Glasgow.

‘I have shown the samples and similar notes I now

‘give you to a recent meeting of the Glasgow Philo-
‘sophical Society, and should be pleased, if you think

fit, that you should mention the matter to Sir John
Hawkshaw; but I have no desire to thrust myself
prominently forward as a “Sewage Philosopher.”—
Dear sir, yours truly, ‘J. 1. Coreman,’

Accompanying that letter were the two samples
which J now produce. I don’t know Mr. Coleman; he
is a stranger to me; but I thought it of some im-
‘portance that you should have the result of his experi-
ment. The sewage was taken from the Bridgeton
sewer, which is discharged into the Clyde above Glas-
gow. .The change is certainly a remarkable one; and
as it is effected by a substance of which there is an
unlimited quantity, this is a very important matter. I
now produce plan of a scheme that was submitted to
the Lord Provost of Glasgow by Mr. A.D. Stevenson,
C.E., and it seems to have received from him consider-
able attention. It is on the principle of intersecting the
sewage at different levels, and the small hand-map
which I now produce shows his whole scheme at one
glance.

187. What is the date of it?—There is no date on
it. It came into my hands last year; and it has evi-
dently been matured by him with great care. I have
the other plans of the scheme here, but the small map
gives a bird’s-eye view of ‘it.

188. Did Mr. Stevenson make any estimate of the
cost of the scheme ?—No.

189. Or any report ?—No. There was just a simple
letter to the Lord Provost, and of course at that time
we had in-view this inquiry by some person like your-
self, and we took no steps in the matter. The scheme
is confined purely to Glasgow, and Mr. Stevenson ‘has
taken it for granted that irrigation was the proper
mode of disposing of the sewage. Then, about fifteen
years ago, Mr. Smith, C.E., prepared, under my direc-
tion, a scheme for earrying away the sewage of the

high levels of Glasgow on the north side of the river,

and utilizing the sewage, by means of irrigation, upon
the low land on the banks of the Clyde lying between
the river and the high land, which is almost formed by
the contour line of the Helensburgh Railway, - This

John
Carrick.
John
Carrick.

 

Gavin Kay.

 

20

scheme is also taking it for granted that irrigation was
the best mode of disposing of the sewage, and was,
I may say, suggested to myself by a visit to the
meadows at Craigentinny, near Edinburgh, where the
application of sewage to irrigation is done so cheaply.
What occurred to me was this, that intersecting the
high-level sewage of Glasgow, embracing the high
parts of the town and the West End Park district,
and conveying the sewage across the Kelvin just at the
Park by a high-level bridge, and then by means of a
tunnel finding a way to the district lying in the neigh-
bourhood of Yoker, we could by that means have it at
such a level as would place something like 2000 acres
of land on the banks of the Clyde on the level of the
sewer. The matter never was gone into at all, except
that it was considered by all parties as one mode of
dealing with the subject, but it was delayed in view of
& more comprehensive scheme for dealing with the
whole sewage of the city. I have thought it right to
place this plan before you, as it may be a question how
far other parts of the valley of the Clyde may not be
dealt with in that way. ‘Then in 1869 Mr. George
Thornton, C.E., now residing in Brussels, prepared a
plan, and a very elaborate report upon the drainage of
the sewage out of Glasgow and the purification of the
river Clyde. This report and plans have been in my
possession ever since, but the scheme has never been
submitted to the Town Council. I wrote to Mr.
Thornton when I heard of your intended visit here, re-
‘questing that he should appear before you and submit
his plans, but he has not made his appearance, and I
am just in a difficulty as to whether I should lay the
plans before you or not.

190. I think it can do no harm that I should have
the report and plans before me. ‘They may contain
some information which I have not got otherwise.—It
is a totally different plan from any other that has been
suggested. Mr. Thornton proposed to intersect all the
sewage of Glasgow and convey the same to the fore-
shore of the Clyde lying below Erskine, and between
Erskine and Port-Glasgow, and by reclamation of the
foreshore obtain a large area upon which he proposed
to precipitate the sewage of the river. This report
gives you the details of the scheme, and I need not
trouble you with them; but he may perhaps wish to
communicate with you himself. I believe that since
these plans were prepared, Mr. Thornton has revised
the scheme again, and he may be prepared with further
information. He proposed to utilize the high-level
sewage so as to raise the low-level sewage, I believe, by
means of mechanical appliances. I now produce his
section through the city, and also his report.

Mr. Gavin Kay, Plumber, 81 Rotten Row, Glasgow,
examined.

191. I had prepared the following paper to lay it
before the Town Council of Glasgow; and as it con-
tains my views on this matter, I shall just read it to
you :—

‘In laying before you my plan and system of
purifying the common sewers of this city, I beg to
state that, by praetical experience on a small scale, I
have for many years practically known it. I will show
you, I think, its efficiency and durability; and as my
system differs from others you have got, I crave your
particular attention while explaining it, as I have no
model, it not being necessary, and a written statement
will do as well.

‘ My system is to alone purify the sewers, then, as a
matter of course, the river is purified. No man can
make the river pure tillthe sewers are purified. If one
sewer, the worst in the city, is granted to me, I will
make it the model for the whole city. ‘That one sewer
might be the one emptying itself into the river at Albert
Bridge, which is conducted up the Saltmarket and
High Street, how far I cannot say, but the ground
plans will show. On this sewer there are many surface

CLYDE PURIFICATION COMMISSION. 7

drains on both sides of the sewer, going into small
streets, wynds and closes, back courts, vennels, etc. ete,
These drains have on them open iron grates to carry
off the surface water. The sewers become full of
poisonous gases, especially during the night while
people are in bed, and the foul air going up these
drains all night into the lungs, becomes a fearful cause
of disease, particularly in the low part of the city,
where there are so many infants and young and sickly
persons huddled together. This is the state of matters
just now, and these drains damage every part of the
city.

to proceed with onescommon sewer, my system is
that all these grates or surface drains and iron urinals
shall be taken out, and in their place proper bell-traps
put; they keep out both foul air and rats from getting
into houses. Also all surface openings, such as lamps
and outlets, shall be closed up. These bell-traps being
put on that one sewer, and urinals, etc., I proceed to
talk of the sewer. Cut down a sufficiently large open-
ing to the top of the sewer, and opposite the newest
house; at the top a track shall be cut from the sewer
to the foundation of the house under the pavement,
with a declivity down to the sewer, as shown by a sim-
ple sketch or plan which I now produce. In it shall
be put an air syphon of large dimensions. If the sewer
be a long one, it may requiretwo. These underground
syphons shall be fire-clay of the best material, well
burnt and glazed. The upright fixed to the house,
raglen corner, front of house, or gable. It shall be
made of strong galvanized iron tube, rivetted on seam
with white lead, having four coats of oil-paint all dry,
and shall go up on said house 3 feet at least, or
more, above the highest chimney-can on that building.
These air-syphons, with bell-traps on drains, will cleanse
the sewer in a few days, and keep it in all time coming
free from poisonous gases—clean as when first con-
structed ; and then no fear for the people. These air-
syphons get hold of the foul air and noxious gases, and
sweep all aloft into the atmosphere—like smoke from a
vent—where its effects are dissipated. The sewers
cannot be purified effectively without shutting all air
in, in every quarter, by bell-traps on the surface drains
and urinals, so as to throw all into the sewers, in order
that the air syphons get hold of the poisonous gases,
I know, also, the air-syphon sucks and draws and dis-
charges aloft the effluvia, even from the mouth of the
sewer at the river, then fills the sewer with pure air,
night and day, year after year, without stopping, ‘unless
the house that supports the upright iron tube falls
with age.

‘In order to have my system as intended, I may
suggest that there is in the north-east end of the city,
by St. Rollox, that ground being high and having
great fall to the west; in my opinion there might be
Worse money spent than by making a large common
sewer in that quarter by the north back of the city, and
to empty a little below Kelvinhaugh. That sewer would
be a great blessing to the city. At present, where the
sewerage is let down, it is often almost insupportable.
i had some years’ experience of it in my house in Duke
Street. This suggested sewer and drains must have
bell-traps and air-syphons like the others in the city.

‘As the air-syphons lift all the foul air from the
sewers, it removes the offensiveness from the ordure or
manure as it rolls down to the river, producing solidity,
and so it falls to the bottom free from pollution. With
regard to the river, you are aware it is a constantly
running water, not a standing loch or pool, where all
that goes into it tends to pollute it. Nothing of the
kind, but the pollution that is flowing on the surface of
the water comes from the sewers. When the tide is
full, it is often about three-fourths of an inch thick; it
sticks fast to the sides of rivers, ship-bottoms, logs,
etc. These poisonous gases, when the tide recedes, dry,
then fly ashore among the people. This is the case just
now, but my system, by the use of the bell-traps and
syphons, will prevent all pollution of the river. The
substance or manure, freed from its noisome properties,
sinks to the bottom of the river, where it is ready for
the dredging machine. Besides, the river can be
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 21

deepened in the centre for what is solid. So the
syphons, along with bell-traps, will prevent that poison-
ous gas floating on the surface of the river. Thus the
surface being made clean, and the weir removed, the
mills higher up the river will have plenty of clean water
by a lade from the side of the river. Pollution then
will become unknown.

‘With regard to water-closets, in my opinion it

were well if there were hundreds more in Glasgow than
there are. All know their value, and when properly
put up there is not a more cleanly and useful piece of
furniture can be had. How to prevent any disadvan-
tage resulting from their use, 1 can explain satisfac-
torily by plans and working drawings.
' 6 Also, there is a cause of pollution arising con-
tinually, especially in the low parts of the city, occa-
sioned by the number of houses of accommodation in a
very disagreeable state, and when cleaned at night a
noxious vapour is diffused in their vicinity. So if,
instead of these, there were, although fewer, iron houses
on the water-closet principle, with eight seats in each,
and a urinal at each end, it would keep people from
using closes and causing annoyance.

‘To repeat, my system will keep the sewers clean, as
if newly built, from all that is most offensive and dan-
gerous. The manure and sludge running down
amongst pure air, which neutralizes the nastiness of it,
is discharged into the river deprived of its evil qualities,
and the bad air flies up into the syphon, and is so con-
veyed away. Also the soil from water-closets is not
defilement ; any bad air coming from it the air-syphons
take away, and the ordure, comparatively clean, then
falls ‘into the river, where, reclaimed by dredging, it
will be found a rich and fertilizing manure. In regard
to the noxious stuff accumulating in chemical works,
such as oil of vitriol and the like, it should not be put
down the drains upon any account, or in the sewers,
until it be filtered in coarse sand and lime, so as not to
cause pollution. This can be done at the tanks which
contain it, and at the works.

‘Such is my system for deodorizing the sewers and
purifying the river, and if it is adopted, I believe it will
prove a blessing to thousands. I might have written
more in explanation, but not to take up your time I
have omitted naming some most essential improvements
for purifying the surface (in the city); but I trust
enough has been advanced to recommend my system to
your attention, and I leave it in your hands to decide
on its merits.

‘ This system is my own, and belongs to no person
else.’

Mr. THomas Biecar, Manufacturer, Dalry, Ayrshire,
examined.

192. The witness read the following paper :—

‘ Mode of converting Night-soil, etc., into concentrated
portable manure, as practised at Bridgend Mills, Dalry.

‘There are upwards of 600 hands employed at the
works, and the whole of the night-soil and urine is now
‘eollected and converted into portable manure. The
closet in use is what is known as the “ air-closet,” in-
vented by the late Mr. Colquhoun, Paisley. As this
closet is indispensable to the success of the method, it
will require to be notited first. The body of the closet
is a square wooden box, inside of which is secured an
earthenware tub, with a hole at bottom, to which a
pipe is fixed, to convey the urine to a convenient re-
ceptacle. Inside of the earthenware tub is placed a
moveable galvanized iron pan, with a perforated bottom,
for receiving the excrements ; at the back of the wooden
box a three-inch pipe is inserted, which communicates
with the boiler or other flue or ventilator. As outside
air can only enter downwards through the seat opening,
a downwards draught is established which carries every
vestige of smell onwards to the flue and up the chimney
stalk, where it cannot possibly annoy any one. Having
noticed the closets, the method of dealing with the

I

night-soil falls to be described. Every Saturday after-
noon, as soon as the works have stopped, it is the duty
of two men to open each of the closets, and after
covering the pan with a suitable lid, to remove it, and
substitute an empty one in its place. In order to allow
the urine to filter away, a thin layer of one-half inch
bones is placed in the bottom of each of the pans.
The two full pans are placed on a low three-wheeled
carriage, and drawn to the manure mill, where they are
emptied. The manure mill is a circular tank of cast
iron lined with brick and cemented. It is 43 feet in
diameter, and 3 feet deep, and is provided with a
stirring apparatus driven by machinery. The mill is
so arranged that the heated air and smoke from one of
the fires can be made to enter at one side (immediately
below the cover), and pass out at the other. On
Monday morning, as soon as the fires are kindled, a
quantity of sulphuric acid is added to the night-soil and
bones, the heated air is made to pass over above them,
and the stirrer is set in motion. The combined result
is that the bones are gradually dissolved, the moisture
is dried up, the night-soil is partially deodorized, and
all smell evolved is carried up the chimney stalk. By
Tuesday morning, if the heat is well kept up, the con-
tents of the mill will have the appearance of a dark
pasty magma, and the greater portion of the smell will
have disappeared. Two hundredweight of good ground
bone ash must now be put in, and well stirred, and
there should be sufficient free acid remaining to dissolve
the greater part of it. By the afternoon the manure
will be sufficiently dry to be lifted out and taken to the
manure shed. The bones and bone ash are useful in
various ways. As before stated, the 4-inch bones
allow the urine ‘to filter away, so that it can be col-
lected separately ; 2d, they neutralize the sulphuric
acid, which it is found advantageous to use in order to
deodorize the night-soil; 3d, the sulphate of lime formed
combines with part of the moisture ; 4th, the night-soil
is easier handled ; 5th, they themselves form a valuable
manure when dissolved. As soon as the mill is empty
the urine is put into it, and after neutralizing the free
ammonia with sulphuric acid, the heat is turned on, the
stirrer gently moved round, and by Saturday the most
of the moisture will have become dried up. Recently
an evaporating receptacle has been built in connection
with another flue, by which about one-half of the urine
will be dried up without any trouble whatever, beyond
that of taking out the dried contents once every six
months. The dried urine is at present mixed with the
other manure, and tends to enhance its value. During
the last twelve months there have been made about 20
tons of manure, and it is being sold at £8 per ton.
The following analysis shows that it is full value for

 

 

the money : .
‘Biphosphate of lime, . . - 18°46
Equal to soluble phosphate (21-08).

Insoluble phosphate, a . 19:42
Sulphate of lime, 5 19-82
Sandi: -e  @. we ae at eee
Alkaline salts, . a 2°35
Organic matter and water, 40-08

100-00
Ammonia in organic matter, . 2°75

After making allowance for bones, bone ash, sulphuric
acid, labour, and power, a fair sum remains for profit.
The advantages of the system are—Ist, freedom from
smell in the closets, as well as in subsequent process of
drying ; 2d, comparative ease of collection ; and 3d,
the production of a manure which pays. ‘
‘The system seems well adapted to large public
works, because there the conditions needed to secure
the greatest results are generally present. The con-
ditions are a large number of people on a limited area,
waste heat, and a tall chimney stalk. After the neces-
sary plant has been obtained, the labour is small, and
the sale for the manure certain. In looking at the
above results, it must be remembered that the hands

Biggar.

 
Thomas
Biggar.

 

are only present at the works about ten hours in the
day, and not more than fifty weeks in the year.
Although less likely to pay well, the system might be
extended so as to meet the requirements of a large
city, with great advantage in a sanitary point of view,
and with at least a reasonable hope of profit. Let the
city, be divided into districts of a suitable size, at the
lowest level of any district, or as near it as it is possible
to obtain ground; let a long covered tank be built,
with a furnace at one end and a tall chimney stalk at
the other. The tank would be required to receive the
urine produced in the district, and the heated air from
the furnace fire would effect the double purpose of
drying the urine and maintaining a draught for the
closets. Every tenement would of course have to be
provided with a “ Colquhoun closet.” From each closet
a 3-inch air-pipe would require to communicate with a
main-pipe laid along the street. The main-pipes of the
district would all converge into a space below the fire-
bars of the central furnace. The deleterious gases
from the closets would thus be drawn to and pass
through the fire in the furnace, when they would become
thoroughly decomposed, and afterwards pass up the
chimney stalk. The fire might be allowed to go out at
stated seasons, in order to remove the dried urine. If
this was done at night the ventilation of the closets
would not be interfered with. The dried urine might
either be sold in that state or mixed with the night-soil
manure. Another system of pipes would require to
run alongside the air-pipes in order to convey the urine
into the evaporating tank. The main-pipes in both
cases might be of fire-clay well cemented at the joints.
At some central and, if possible, elevated situation, as
far as possible from dwellings, a manure factory would
have to be erected where the whole night-soil of the city
would be collected and made into portable manure.
The apparatus needed and the plan of working would
be very similar to that in use at Bridgend Mills, but of
course on a very much larger scale. As a steam-engine
would be required to drive the stirring and other
machinery, one or more steam-boilers would be needed.
The waste heat from these would dry or assist in
drying the night-soil, and the smoke, etc., would pass as
usual up a tall chimney stalk. A staff of men with
horses and covered lorries would be employed in re-
moving full pans, and leaving empty ones in their
places. These labours would be performed from very
early morning till say 7 or 8 o’clock a.m. As one pan
would serve an ordinary family two or three weeks, and
in many cases longer, this staff of men and horses need
not be so large as one at first sight would be led to
suppose.

‘Such are the salient points of a plan for applying the
system to a large town or city which suggest them-
selves, after two years’ experience of it on a less
extended scale.

‘BripGenp Works, Datry,

‘ March 23d, 1875,

193. Can you give me any idea of the cost of what
you have been describing as applied to your own mill?
—wWe sell it at £8, and I think the cost would be
about £5 to £5, 10s.

194. But I mean the cost of the apparatus. Can
you give me, in rovfnd numbers, about what it cost you
to start this process -in your mill?—It does not cost
very much. Each closet would cost about £6, and
then there are the pipes connecting with the chimney.
I should think that the whole thing would not cost us
more than £100 or £120.

195. I suppose I may take it that the whole cost
would not exceed £150?—I am certain it will not
exceed that for our 600 workers. I have brought a
small quantity of the manure in order to show it to
you.

196. I should like to see it, but in the meantime you
consider that the cost will not exceed £150, and you
think that the after process that you carry on really
costs you nothing, as the price you get for the manure
covers the expense ?—It will more than cover that now,
and we make a considerable profit out of it. I think

22 CLYDE PURIFICATION COMMISSION.

all that we put into it will not cost us above £5 or £6,
and we get £8 for it. I think we have about £2 per
ton of profit. I have a small mill for grinding the
manure, and it is sown on the grass just like guano,
(The witness produced a specimen of the manure.)

197. I understand that at your mills you also apply
some method of purification for the woollen manufac-
tures?—Yes. I have written a short account of it,
which I shall read. I have not carried the account of
it further than the point where it is prepared for dis.
tillation. We distil it as well, but I have not gone into
that, as I understand you only wish to have it up to
the point when it would be put into the river.

198. Yes. I merely wish to get it up to the point
when you render the water to be put into the river
innocuous.—The witness then read the following state-
ment :—

‘ Treatment of spent Soap-suds practised at Bridgend —
Mills, Dalry.

‘The above-named works are situated on the river
Garnock, a fishing river; and it became necessary, for
the protection of the fishings, to adopt some plan to
neutralize the spent soap-suds, so that the water
returned to the river might be clear and innocuous.
The spent soap-suds are produced in the scouring of
wool, and contain a certain percentage of the alkali
used in the process of scouring, tallow or oil, which is
present in the soap required, and also the animal grease
and other impurities present in the wool previous to
scouring, as a large proportion of the wool used at these
works consists of blackfaced laid wool, that is, a wool
which has been treated while on the sheep’s back-with
a salve composed of butter (or some other greasy
material) and wood tar. The result is, that the suds,
when run out of the wool-washing machines, are very.
impure, and very destructive to fish, and from their
nature do not amalgamate with the water in the
stream, the oily or fatty matter floating on the surface,
and the earthy material remaining for a considerable
time suspended in the water.

‘The means adopted to render the spent soap-suds
innocuous, and to clarify the greater part of them, so
that the water may run into the river again, is as
follows:—The spent suds are conveyed by pipes into
brick tanks, and there treated with a certain quantity
of sulphuric acid, and it has been found that the most
economical acid is of the strength of 144 degrees
(Twaddle). The tanks used contain each from 2000 to
3000 gallons of suds. After being filled with suds the
acid is added, and the contents of the tank are then
briskly stirred with a wooden plunger for a short time.
When the acid is put in a considerable effervescence
takes place, caused by the action of the acid on the
alkali. The result is the neutralizing of the alkali by
the acid, and the setting free of the fatty matters for-
merly held in combination with the alkali. The tank
is then allowed to settle for about eight hours, after
which it is found that a certain portion of the lighter
solid matter has floated to the top, and the heavier por-
tion has settled to the bottom of tank, the clear water
lying in the middle. This water, which then contains a
weak solution of a soluble salt (sulphate of soda), is
tapped off and allowed to flow into the river; and to”
facilitate the tapping off. the water, the tank is con-
structed with a thick hard-wood board, perforated
with holes of about an inch diameter, built into the
brick-work of one of the ends of the tank, or in the
most convenient position for running off the water.
The holes in the board are filled with wooden plugs
when the tank is filling, and one or more plugs can be
taken out at pleasure when running off the water.
When the water has been run off, the residuum is left at
the bottom of the tank, and is of the consistency of @
thick cream, and of a light-brownish colour. This
residuum is then pumped out of the tank and allowed to
spread over a filter-bed, composed of gravel and a
layer of sawdust on the top, and the water in it is
allowed to filter away, and the material then becomes
of the consistency of soft clay, and is termed “ magma.”
The grease is afterwards, by steam-heat and pressure,
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE.

extracted from the magma, and the earthy impurities,
which still contain a small portion of grease, are used,
mixed with coal, as fuel. The grease recovered is by
other processes converted into stearine and cloth oil;
but as these processes are another branch of manufac-
ture, they are not here entered upon.’

199. Can you give me any estimate, in round num-
bers, of the cost of this process applied to a woollen
mill? What do you suppose those tanks would cost?
—The erection of the tanks would not cost a great
deal. I think it would not cost above £50 or £60.
They are just brick tanks.

. 200. You mean that all that you require for this
process is to get off the greasy matter?—Yes. You
require a tank, and then you run it into the tank; and
we adopt the plan of a board at the side. If you put
the cost at £100, you will be quite safe. It does not
take up much space. Just now we have no complaints
whatever about the water injuring the fish. The
colour of the water when run off is like that of brandy.

201. Does it satisfy the people below you now ?—
Yes; they are quite satisfied. That was all tested and
proven years ago, when they got it analyzed.

202. Do fish live in it?—Yes; they do so now.
The right of fishing in the river belongs to a gentleman
in the neighbourhood, Captain Blair, who has an old
charter from the Crown; and he let it to a party of
gentlemen from Glasgow, who complained that we
killed the fish... We had a law process about that, but
now they are satisfied. ;

208. By the time you finish this process and convert
the material into stearine, does that pay the expenses?
—I found it did not pay to sell it in the rough state;
but I now find it to pay because I carry it further on,
and I put it into oil and stearine now.

204. And by making it into oil and stearine you
consider that the process pays for itself ?—It certainly
does. We have stills, and we distil it as well by
superheated steam. We superheat the steam up to
about 600 or 700 degrees of heat. The stuff changes
its colour. It ig quite a black colour at first, and it
comes out of the stills nearly white. By two distilla-
tions it is made almost as white as snow. The stearine
must be white for making into candles. We sell it for
candles, and they also mix it with parafiin.

205. Then I gather from what you have read and
from what you have now stated, that supposing there
was no better process, it would not be a hardship upon
works like yours, with 600 hands, to require them, in
the first instance, to deal with their privies in the way
you have just been describing. Would it be a hard-
ship to a woollen mill to require it to deal with the

“other matters in the same way?—No; they could
easily do it, if they would only be at a little trouble
and expense,—that is, so far as regards the scourings
of wool; I cannot speak about any other thing.

206. I am speaking only of a woollen mill.—They
could very easily do that ; there is no doubt about it.

207. What space does the process for dealing with
the soap-suds take up?—The tanks are about 15 feet
long by about 34 feet wide.

208. How many are there of them?—Three. They
hold about 2800 gallons each, and we fill one of these
every day. Then we have long filter-beds, about 40
feet in length and about 6 or 7 feet in width.

209. How many filter-beds have you?—We have
five filter-beds. ‘

 

Provost Murray, Paisley, examined.

210. I may premise, Sir John, that I do not come
here to advocate any theory or to propound any scheme
of my own for your consideration in this important
inquiry; but as the town which I have the honour to
represent here before you to-day is very much interested
in your inquiry, I thought it right, before you made up
any report, that you should be put in possession of

23

some information with regard to the state of the town
of Paisley, as regards public works and the impurities
which flow into the river Cart, a tributary of the
Clyde. The population of the town, as I have no
doubt you are aware, may be stated roughly at about
50,000. It is situated on both banks of the Cart, and
the population are very largely employed in manufao-
tures of various kinds. I may mention that besides
smaller industries, such as handloom weaving, there are
23 dye works, 5 soap works, 8 starch and corn-flour
manufactories, 8 scouring and finishing works (that is
for scouring and finishing cloths and yarns), 1 brewery,
1 distillery, 1 paper work, 10 thread works, 2 carpet
works, 3 chemical works, 1 tan work, 1 oil work, 7
engineering shops, 1 powerloom factory, 1 foundry, 3
bleach works, and 1 candle work; and that 9 various
processes, more or less, throw impurities into the river.
37 of these public works discharge their waste
outfall direct into the river Cart; 18 into a burn
called the Espidair burn; and 7 into another burn,
called St. Mirren’s; and these streams all fall into the
Cart as it passes through the town. There are also 23
other works that discharge their impurities into sewers ;
and these sewers, with one exception, all find their way
into the river, also at the town. The total amount of
waste outfall discharged daily from these various
works, exclusive of rainfall, I estimate as follows :—

Dye works, 364,420 gallons.
Soap works, . ‘ 6,130,
Starch works, : F . 117,600 _,,
Scouring and finishing works,. 299,725 ,,
Brewery, ; - 12,000 ,,
Distillery, 20,000 _,,
Bleach works, 67,280 ,,
Oil works, . ‘ 6,000 __,,
Smaller works, abou 25,650,

In all, about . 918,805,

It is right to mention, with reference to this matter,
that 10 of these works have settling-tanks, and I have
no doubt these prevent a good deal of impurity from
reaching the river, which would otherwise find its way
there. Indeed one of these works—a starch work—
has no fewer than 7 of these depositing-tanks, and
the water from it passes off comparatively pure com-
pared with the water from the others that have no such
tanks. So far as I can gather, and I think I am rather
within than over the mark, there are 360 water-closets
which find their way into the river. The town is very
imperfectly and but very partially drained, and not on
any general system. Plans for a general system of
sewerage were obtained many years ago, but these
plans contemplated the disposal of the sewage by
irrigation, and it was found that the soil into which
that irrigating process would go was not suited for the
purpose, being a heavy clay stiff soil below. That
consideration, as well as the unsolved problem about
the disposal of sewage, has hitherto prevented the
local authorities from incurring the expense of carrying
out that general scheme. I need not trouble you, Sir

_John, with the details of the partial drains that we

have, because I believe our Master of Works has sent
you a copy of the Ordnance map, on which the existing
drains are indicated, such as they are. In addition to
the impurities that flow into our river from the works
situated within the Parliamentary limits, there is a large
amount of impurity that comes down to us from works
situated on the upper reaches of the river, and tributary
streams falling into the river above the town. The
course of the river Cart, as you will see from the map,
flows through the parishes of Eaglesham, Mearns,
Cathcart, and Eastwood, and all along that extensive
stretch there are large numbers of public works, such
as bleach works, paper works, printing works, dye and
chemical works of various descriptions, from which a
large quantity of impurity finds its way down into the
river. In its course through the parish of Cathcart
the river Cart receives part of the sewage of the suburb
of Crosshill, about which so much has been said lately

Provost
Murray.
Provost
Murray.

=

24 CLYDE PURIFICATION COMMISSION.

in Parliament; and in passing through the parish of
Eastwood, it intersects the town of Pollokshaws, in
which, I believe, there is a paper work, and a number
of other works, which discharge into the stream, in
addition to any general sewage from that manufactur-
ing town which falls into the river. Besides the pollu-
tion which flows into the river where it passes through
the town, and also into its upper reaches, there is a
stream called the Levern which intersects the exten-
sive valley of Neilston and Barrhead, Hurlet and Nits-
hill; and along it there is not only an extensive popula-
tion all engaged in manufactures of one kind or
another, but there are manufactories which throw a
great deal of pollution into the river, so that, in addi-
tion to what falls into it from the town of Paisley
itself, its manufactures and its sewage, there is a large
amount of impurity that comes down from the villages
and works situated on the upper reaches of the river.
The impurities in the river Cart, and so far as these
impurities find their way to the river Clyde, are, I
think, mainly attributable to public works. The
sewage of the town does not, in consequence of the
defective sewerage, pollute the river very much. The
best proof of that is, that on Sundays, and on other
days when the public works are not on, the difference
between the flow of the water and its purity then, and
on other days when the works are in full operation, is
very marked indeed. I am not insensible to the advan-
tage of having a system of drainage, but I repeat that
I think the impurities which affect our river, and which
may find their way from our river to the Clyde, are
mainly attributable at present to the public works.
Of course the purification of the river Cart or the river.
Clyde means really the disposal of the sewage, and of
the impurities that are now finding their way into it;
and, of course, I don’t know what Glasgow, or Paisley,
or other towns would be without their public works,
giving employment and remuneration to artisans, and
giving wealth to the capitalist; and I should not like
to say anything that would injure public works or
drive them away; but I am afraid the days of pure
Tivers, such as we have been accustomed to see, are at
anend. At the same time I believe that, as with the
smoke nuisance, a very great deal can be done to miti-
gate and reduce, almost to a minimum, the complaints
against the offensive matter that is thrown into the
streams. I listened to the gentleman who preceded
me, and who satisfied me, as I have been satisfied before
from knowing what has been done in some other works,
that a very great deal can be done by deposition and
filtration, and the application of chemicals, to render
comparatively innocuous much of the offensive matter
that now finds its way into the rivers from manufac-
tories and other works. In so far as the town of
Paisley is concerned, I am afraid that the water-closet
system will never be applicable to remove the human
excreta, and that because we have so large a portion
of our population belonging to the industrial classes,
and living in tenements to which water-closets are
wholly unsuitable; but I think that if some stringent
police regulations were adopted, enforcing either dry
earth-closets, or probably something simpler still, the
construction of dung-hills and common privies, on such
a principle that the.ashes would fall into them and
deodorize the human excreta, and, by a considerable
addition to the police expenditure, removing these very
frequently, and enforcing cleanliness in the back courts,
much might be done to mitigate the evil. I may say
that what has been described to you by Mr. Biggar
has been carried on in some of our large public works
by the use of the earth-closets, which he described;
and I believe that some of Colquhoun’s closets are
in operation in one or two of our largest factories;
and also another by a Mr. Moser, of Southampton,
has been in use in some of our schools, and has
heen found most efficient. I had seen it in ope-
ration myself in some of the workhouses in Eng-
land, and I got it introduced into our industrial
school. I shall send you Moser’s description of it. It
1s very simple self-acting thing, and seems to answer
admirably. I believe that the enforcing of some such

system on all public works and public institutions and
schools, where large numbers of people are congregated
together, would reduce very largely the amount of the

impurities which are at present thrown into our drains.

As I have already said, I have no theory to propound;

but I believe that, even with such a system as I have

mentioned, it would be necessary that we should have

some system of drainage to carry away house slops and

waste water, and all that accumulation which neces-

sarily takes place in every community where human

beings are congregated together. The disposal of that

seems to me at present, so far as I am able to judge, to

hinge very much upon two modes,—either carrying it

away by some expensive engineering process and.
throwing it into the sea, or so using it in the neighbour-

hood of the town, by deposition and filtration, as that

the cireumambient water may be allowed to flow, if not

perfectly pure, at least in such a state as would he
innocuous to health. JI confess my present opinion

seems to tend to the latter scheme as being the least

expensive, if it can be carried out; but upon that.
matter I have great hesitation in venturing an opinion,

not being a practical man. I don’t know that I have

anything more to say, but I wished, before you make

up any report, that you should know.the exact state of
our locality.

211. You spoke of one large work, I think you said
it was a starch work, that had got reservoirs: can
you give me any notion of the area which they occupy?
—No; but I shall send in a note of it. I could not
speak at present about their size with any accuracy,
because I have merely looked at them.

212. With regard to the works generally which
you have been describing, have they in most cases
any spare land upon which they could provide tanks
or settling places?—-Many of them have; but I am
sorry to say also that, in some instances, in the centre
of the town, where land is expensive, and where works
have been set down without the means of extension, it,
might be a little difficult to provide such accommodation.

213. That is a thing which would have to be con-
sidered; because, suppose we were to come to the con-
clusion. that we ought to require all these works to do
something or other in order to purify their refuse,
there might be some cases where it would be difficult
for them to get space?—Yes. I may mention that
when the Rivers’ Pollution Commission was here, the
chemical member of the Commission gave it as his
opinion that the refuse from the starch works and distil-
leries was of all the refuse the most deleterious, but waa,
at the same time, the refuse which would be most easily
collected, and be most valuable. I may say also that,
although hurting the river so far as fish are concerned,
and also hurting the appearance of the river, I am not
sure that the dye-stuffs which are put in produce any
very prejudicial effect upon the health of the inhabit-.
ants. From the acids and alkalies in them, although,
when thrown into the river, they tend to blacken it
and destroy its beauty, yet at the same time they tend.
to destroy some of the other deleterious ingredients
that come in from other works. >

214. How far was the land from Paisley on which
you say it was proposed to put the sewage, and which
you say was unsuitable?—It lies to the north of the
town. It was originally a moss or morass, which had
been drained. It was a light soil on the top of a very
heavy clay.

215. Have you any light sand-soil near Paisley ?—
None. E

216. Have you none within any moderate distance?
—No. Jam afraid we have nothing nearer than the
coast.

217. You heard Mr. Biggar’s evidence?—Yes; and
I happen to know Mr. Biggar personally,

218. From what he said it did not seem that there
would be any great hardship in requiring a large work
to provide for its excreta in the way he mentioned.
What is your opinion about that?—-I can see no
difficulty in doing that in the case of a work, but I
have some doubts how far it would pay to apply it to
a large town,
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE.

219. That is quite another question. I am only
dealing with works in the meantime.—I would go in
for enforcing some such scheme as that upon every
public work.

220. Its application to large towns is, of course,
quite another question. I was only looking at its
application to works, and where you have so many
works in a district as there are here, it would be very
important to get some means of taking away that
portion of the sewage.—It would; and some scheme
of that sort would take away a great’ quantity of the
sewage, because there are so many people congregated
about these works for more than half the day.

221. In the new fortifications, which have been build-
ing so extensively in England within the last few years,
provision has generally been made for the use of earth-
closets; but that is easily managed in a fort, because
soldiers are under discipline, and you can make them
do as they are told, but even in works it appears there
is no difficulty in making regulations for the use of
such places, and seeing that they are observed.—That
isso; and I believe that if these common tenements,
where so many people reside, were under more strict
police surveillance, and the ashpits and dung-heaps
were constructed so that they might be cleaned out
once a week, the ashes would fall and cover the
excreta in such a way that it could be easily removed.
That would involve some expense and some surveillance
on the part of the local authorities, but I am certain
very much could be done in that way to lessen the
nuisance among that class of people to whom water-
closets can never be applicable, because they would
not remain in working operation for eight days.

Mr. Matcorm Macponaxp, Crosshill, examined.

222. I would propose to dispose of the sewage on
Mr. Bateman’s plan,—taking it down the river; but
instead of leading it into the river, J would, at con-
venient distances, erect basins that would contain one
-day’s sewage, and the railway could convey the ashes
of the city and drop them into these basins. What I
may call No. 1 basin would have, say, this day’s sewage,
and then next day’s ashes would be taken and dropped
into the basin. Another basin might be made at a
convenient distance from the first, so that while the
first was being filled with ashes the second would be
filled with sewage; then while the second was being
filled with ashes, the third would be filling with sewage.
The solid matter of the sewage and the ashes would
assimilate to each other in the basin No. 1, and there
could be a sluice from, it, with probably a filter attached
to it, so that the water or fluid matter that was on the
top would go into the filter and be filtered away; and in
process of time the stuff in the first filter would become
very good manure for boggy land. Another way
would be, that a pipe might be conveyed from the tank
No. 1 to a lower level, in order to serve for irrigating
purposes farther down. Experience would show the
distance at which each basin should be made from
another, but that gives an idea of what I propose.
Basin No. 1 would be filled with sewage and then get
its quantity of ashes; and basin No. 2 would be getting
filled with sewage while No. 1 was settling down, and,
after getting its sewage, basin No. 2 would be filled
with ashes; then basin No. 3 would be getting filled
up, and ashes would be conveyed to it while No. 2 was
settling down; and while No. 3 was filling, the solid
matter in No. 1, having gravitated to the bottom, might
be removed. In that way the farmers in the neigh-
bourhood could get their manure from a place near
their farms instead of having to drive it from Glasgow.
The scheme which I have now proposed has reference
to the north side of the river. The same plan might
be adopted on the south side, and in that case Paisley
might be taken in, and Johnstone, and all the towns
farther down. That would be an important matter,
becanse the purification of the Cart is an element in the

25

purification of the Clyde. There is no machinery
necessary for the scheme which I have proposed, and
no chemical processes. There would be no expense in
that way. The thing would work in the simplest
manner; and I think it would be the least expensive of
any, and the most easily done.

223. I quite understand your proposition; but, of
course, you would have the expense of conveying the
ashes to each receptacle?—It would not cost much to
have a truck filled with ashes and taken down to one
of these basins; but if the sewage was converted into
manure elsewhere, it would require to be conveyed in
trucks to the country districts at any rate. The ashes
might be filled into trucks, and a railway siding might
be laid into the basins, and the ashes emptied into
them in that way. If this plan were adopted, the stuff
from our Glasgow conveniences, instead of being put
into pans and carted through the streets, might be run
into the sewers. Another remark I may make is, that
in the eastern districts of the town, the ashpits are
closed in at the top, which I think is a great blunder.
I should propose that the conveniences should be
erected at a wall between the different buildings, and
that the ashes should be put in on each side, and that
the top should be open in order to let in the air of
heaven, and to have free ventilation. When these
conveniences are closed, .as our city ashpits are at
present, then what is thrown into them is simply con-
centrated; whereas if it had free play, the air would
be made wholesomer, and people would be less liable
to suffer from infection. That is simply an idea of
my own. I don’t know whether I am correct in it
or not, but I have frequently observed, in country
places where I have been, and where these places
are made more close, that the smell from the con-
veniences is very noisome. It catches one whenever
you go near it. Our city places are more open, but
some of them are as bad as those that I have seen in
the country.

224. Is there anything more you wish to add?—
Nothing, unless you wish to put any questions to me.
I may say that my plan would include Paisley, and all
the other towns in the neighbourhood, because there
would be a separate scheme for the sewage on the
south side of the river. °

Dr. Anprew Ferreus, M.R.C.S. Eng., President of
the Faculty of Physicians and Surgeons, Glasgow,
examined. _

225. I was district surgeon, for nearly twenty years,
of a district of the city extending from a central line
between Washington Street and M‘Alpine Street on
the west, to the central line of Dunlop Street on the
east, and from the central line of the river on the south
to Argyle Street on the north; and I wish, in the first
place, to speak about my experience there. During
that time, I did not find any prevalence of excremental-
pollution diseases in the district. :

226. At what period were you district surgeon
there ?—I think it would be from about 1847 to 1866;
and during that period I never found that the polluted
state of the river had any effect whatever upon the
public health. I took particular notice, for another
purpose, of the prevalence of an epidemic of cholera in
1854; and I found that during that epidemic, along
the whole line of the Broomielaw, including all the
shipping, from Washington Street to Dunlop Street,
where some of the courts contain a very large popula-
tion, there were only twenty-one cases of cholera and
eleven cases of diarrhea. I mentioned, however, that
the west boundary of my district was the centre of
the space between Washington Street and M‘Alpine
Street, in fact, the boundary-line was a sewer which
had formerly been a burn; and I considered that that
sewer produced a very deleterious effect indeed, because
in that one street, M‘Alpine Street, not by any means
a very populous street, running from Argyle Street to

Malcolm
Macdonald.

Andrew
Fergus.

 
Andrew
Fergus.

 

26 CLYDE PURIFICATION COMMISSION.

the river, I had during the same period seventy-
one cases of cholera and forty-six cases of diarrhea.
I may mention, as a remarkable fact, that as you
receded from the sewer so did the cases of cholera
diminish. These observations were all made before

- I paid much attention to excremental pollution as

a cause of disease; but since then I have been
turning my attention a good deal to that matter, and
specially since the introduction of the Loch Katrine
water, because, if we have excremental pollution as a
cause of disease, it must be conveyed either by air
or by water. Now, as regards water, I think Glas-
gow is beyond suspicion; because, as you are aware,
the public wells have been absolutely closed ; and there-
fore, if we have excremental-pollution diseases in
Glasgow, unless they are conveyed by milk, which is a
factor in the conveyance of these diseases, it must be
through the air. With regard to typhoid fever, it was
not kept separate from typhus until the year 1865; but
since 1865 we have had an average of- 195 deaths a
year, and an average of 26 deaths registered as infantile-
remittent fever, which in my impression is much the
same disease; and if you put these together, you will
find it gives an average of 49 deaths per 100,000
people living. ‘That led me to look to other places ;
and I found, on looking at the reports of Mr. Simon,
the medical officer of the Local Government Board,
and formerly of the Privy Council, that, according to
one of his former reports, there were 60 places visited
by his inspectors on account of their increased death-
rate, and that increased death-rate was produced in 50
of these places by excremental pollution, producing in
49 cases typhoid, and in 16 cases scarlet fever. From
his last report, I make out that there were 138 places
visited on account ,of increased death-rate; and in
these, typhoid fever existed in 127 places, diarrhea in
21 places, and scarlet fever in 19 places. With regard
to the influence of water-carriage, that is to say, water-
carriage introduced into workmen’s houses, I may read
a quotation from what was said by Dr. Littlejohn,
the medical officer of health for Edinburgh :—‘If
they took a range of houses where this had been done
(that is, where water-closets had been introduced), in
the course of one year there were double the number
of deaths from typhoid and scarlet fever; and any
epidemic fever occurring in these houses was intensified,
and assumed a character of malignant mortality.’ In
connection with this subject, I was at the trouble to
prepare a table from the returns of the Registrar-
General from 1838 to 1871. There is a hiatus from
1842 to 1847, as no réturns were procurable for these
years. I wanted to find out exactly what was the state
of the public health as regards excremental-pollution
diseases and other diseases, and I got the table checked,
and the percentages worked out, by a gentleman used
to these things. That table is contained in my pamphlet
on The Sewage Question, a copy of which I shall hand
in. J find from it that from 1838 to 1842 there was
an average of diarrhceal deaths, per million of people
living, of 298 ; during the five years from 1847 to 1851
(including an epidemic of cholera), there was an average
of 1569. I need not go into details with regard to the
whole period, but taking the last five years—1867 to
1871—when there was no such thing as cholera, the
diarrheeal deaths averaged 1161 per million of the
people living—that is to say, they were nearly four
times what they had been in the five years from 1838
to 1842. Then, taking another disease, there was not
a single case of diphtheria registered until 1851, and
then it is debited with 2 deaths per million of the people
living. By 1859 it had risen to 487 deaths per million
of the people living. It is now down, but I have
never since found it below 100. Then, as to scarlatina,
I found the deaths from it in the first five years of the
return to be 798 per million, and during the last five
years, 1017. Unfortunately, at first the fevers were not
separated—the typhus from the typhoid; and there-
fore I don’t think the information with regard to them
has much bearing ; but I may mention that during the
first five years the number of deaths from fevers was
1053, and during the last five years, 800. The first

three diseases in that table, I hold, can be excremental-
pollution diseases. Then I come to the diseases that
are not so clearly traceable to that source; and I find,
with regard to measles, that during the first five years
the mean was 540 per million of people living; and
during the last five years, 409, being a decrease. Then
I take hooping-cough, and I find that during the first
five years there were 504 deaths, and during the last
five years, 491, being a very small decrease. Small-
pox, showing the influence of compulsory vaccination,
gave 577 deaths during the first five years, and 283
during the last five years. Then, taking the totals, I
find that during the first five years the total death-rate
per million of people living was 22,078, and during the
last five years, 22,341, being a slight increase; but if
you go into detail, you find the whole increase taking
place in the excremental-pollution group of diseasés,
and that in the other diseases there was absolutely a
decrease. With regard to the diarrheal group of
diseases, Dr. Greenhow says, and Mr. Simon confirms
it, that they are on the increase, and that they can
always be traceable to one of two distinct causes,—the
taking into our system, by air or by water, organic
matter in a state of decomposition, and most fre-
quently human excrement. I mentioned decomposi-
tion just now, because I hold that fresh excrement is
not in the least degree injurious to health. By the
researches of Dr. Angus Smith, it has been well ascer-
tained that the air in towns differs from the air in the
country ; that there is generally less oxygen in the air
of towns, and that there is less in crowded districts
than in open districts, and there is less in the neighbour-
hood of middensteads than in any other part. There-
fore the decomposition of organic matter going on, as
well, of course, as the breathing of animals, robs the
air of a certain amount of oxygen, and in that way it
will be injurious by lowering the health. But then, I
think, that same decomposition going on will produce
specific poisons, and it will increase enormously the
infective power of any zymotic disease—that is to say,
the infective power of the excremental discharges of
cholera and diarrhoea, and of typhoid fever, will be
enormously increased by the decomposition going on.
Now I have said already that Glasgow should be free
from excremental-pollution diseases ; but unfortunately
it is not, and the question is, What is the reason?
I have said before that I think it is mostly to be found
in the air. I have repeatedly, in cases where there was
typhoid fever, found by examination that the pipes in
the houses were defective. I now produce a specimen
of one of these pipes, the history of which I shall give
you; and one history will serve as a type of a great
number. I was attending a case of typhoid in the house
where this pipe was afterwards got. When I was called
in, I asked the lady of the house if her closet arrange-
ments were all right and proper. She happened, I
suppose, to know something of my proclivities, and
said, in a very triumphant manner, ‘Oh, doctor, you
are quite in the wrong this time; the whole closet was
renewed two months ago.’ Well, you can’t argue with
a lady, so I retreated; but two days afterwards, when
I was again in the house, I said: ‘ Where does that
smell come from?’ She said, ‘Oh, the plumber says
it is a dead mouse, or a dead rat in the skirting!’ I
made the exclamation, ‘A dead fiddle-stick! Go to
the plumber and tell him that the soil-pipe, or the
cross-pipe, is all decayed and eaten away!’ She after-
wards told me that the plumber was greatly astonished
next day when he found the pipe just as I had said.
I told her to make the plumber keep the pipe; but
plumbers, we know, won't keep pipes generally. How-
ever, IT went up to his workshop and said, ‘I want that
pipe ;’ and he said, ‘You cannot have it I said, ‘I
don’t want it as a gift, but I will pay you twice the
price of old metal for it.’ He said, ‘Our people won't
like that ;’ but at last I got the pipe, and I now show
it to you. This (showing) is the upper surface, and
you will see that it is all worn and eaten away, and
that, as I think I will be able to prove, by the action
of gases. It comes to be rather an important question
in connection with this matter, how long lead pipes
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 27

will last, and I shall speak to that immediately; but
the proof that this has been cansed by gases is, in the
first place, that it is the upper surface of the pipe or
the sides of it that are eaten away, it is not the bottom
of the pipe, where the water ran. You will find in the
place where the water ran, that the pipe is as whole as
on the day when it was put in. The next proof that
the decay has been caused by gases is to be found in
the chemical analysis. This white powdery stuff is
mostly carbonate of lead. The next proof is, that the
pipes will last much longer when they are open, or, as
it is technically termed, ventilated, than when they are
closed. I used to fancy that a non-ventilated pipe
would last from eight to ten or twelve or fifteen years,
and I used to say that a ventilated pipe would last
from twenty to thirty years; but quite recently I cut
out a pipe in my own house which had been open, and
which had been only sixteen years in use, and I found
that it was quite eaten away and decayed.

227, Was it ventilated 2—It was ventilated. Before
I go further, I should like to show you a platein which
there are representations of several of these decayed
pipes. The upright pipe on the right-hand side of that
plate, with the perforations in it, is a pipe which has
been laid open to show where the water ran, and where
the pipe was perfectly good.- When I showed the de-
cayed pipe, which I have now produced, to some gentle-
men, I was told that: that must be peculiar to Glasgow;
but the fact is, that the worst pipe shown in that plate
is one which came from Edinburgh, and only a few
days ago I got some pipes from London which were
even worse than any of these. Well, having observed
these matters for a number of years, and satisfied my-
self, by chemical analysis, that these results were pro-
duced by gas, the question occurred to my mind, How
did the gas get there? I observed that these perfora-
tions were always on the house side of the trap.

228. What do you mean by the house side of the
trap ?—Not the sewer side, but always in the house,
or on the side next the house—that is to say, there
was always the trap interposed between the decayed
part and the sewer; and the question came to be, How
did the gas get there to destroy these good, well-made
lead pipes? Three things occurred to my mind as
likely to be the cause; one was an occasional tension
in the sewer overcoming the resistance of the trap,
which, however, I did not think could be of much im-
portance, for it was a thing which could only happen
occasionally. The next thing that occurred to me
was, that on the house side of the trap, as the feces
are generally lighter than the water, they will float,
and can only get away when they partially decompose.
That I thought might produce, and possibly it does
produce, a certain amount of this gas, which causes the
destruction; but afterwards another thing occurred to
me. Remembering the late Professor Graham’s expe-
riments about the diffusibility of gases, I thought that
the same law as regards diffusion might hold through
water as through other media separating the gases
from each other. Professor Graham’s experiments
were of this nature, that if you take a vessel filled
with a very heavy gas, say carbonic acid 1:5, and a
lighter gas, say hydrogen, by and by the two would
commingle, and I thought that that diffusion of gases
might take place through water. I performed a
number of experiments in proof of that, of which I
have the diagrams here. At first I tried ammonia,
but the objection ‘was brought to that, ‘ Oh, that was
very likely to happen, because ammonia was much
lighter than water ;’ but the very singular fact came

out that ammonia, though a lighter gas, passing.

very rapidly away, first of all saturates the upper
surface of the trap, and then sinks down in a fine
stream, taking the upper curve of the trap, and—what
Was quite new to me, and I believe was new alto-
gether—it appears to discharge here (showing on
diagram) long before the body of the water is saturated,
and in fifteen minutes it shows here (showing) the re-
action, and in half an hour it shows by hanging up a
piece of litmus paper here (showing). The objection
was brought to this experiment that it was a light

gas; and another objection was brou i

whole of the experiments—‘ But your a : eae
lated” In order to meet that objection I put in a ven-
tilator here (showing on diagram), and I found that
the result was exactly the same, only taking a little
longer time. Well, the objection being taken to the
light gas, I then took a heavy gas, carbonic acid, 50
per cent. heavier than the atmosphere; it still saturates
the surface, but, being a heavy gas, sinks down by the
broad curve of the trap, and shows in the usual way
Then I took sulphuretted hydrogen, also a heavy gas,
and it passes right through the centre. Then here
(showing) was a very interesting one, the heaviest of
all gases, chlorine 2°50. It saturates the surface first,
and, being a heavy gas, sinks down along the bottom.
If this trap had been filled with litmus water, the whole
colour would have been discharged in three-quarters of
an hour. Therefore I conclude that the destructive
action on these lead pipes is very likely produced by
the diffusion of sewer air through the water in the
trap. In these experiments the gas was always at a
great disadvantage, for it was placed down here (show-
ing) at a considerable distance from the water, and
the bottom of the model trap was perfectly open, so
that a heavy gas in the vessel did not rise above here
(showing), and you would naturally fancy that it
would just have flowed over and gone out at the
bottom. The practical inference which I draw from
these experiments is, that, so far as I am aware, no
water trap will be sufficient to keep sewer air out of
your houses. Then, with regard to water as a car-
rier of excremental matter, I must observe that it is
simply a carrier. Water of itself and by itself has
no power of self-purification. It simply removes
the filthy matter, whatever it may be, from one
position to another. I have used the expression,
‘water of itself and by itself’ has no purifying
power. There is no doubt that running water has a
considerable power to destroy excremental matter, but
it is the air contained in the water that has that effect ;
that is to say, if you could by any possible chance shut
up perfectly pure water and (if you can use the term)
pure filth together without any air, it would remain
filth still; it would not be purified. Now that, I think,
is a fact of some importance, because, take the Clyde as
an example, if you put in so much refuse organic
matter up at Lanark, the water from there has a
regular fall, it is continually being re-aerated, and by
the time that it would reach Glasgow it would be
almost free from that organic matter. But that would
not hold if you put an enormous amount of organic
matter into the river where the flow is very slow, such
as at Glasgow. Then again the putrefaction, I think,
is assisted by shutting up the organic matter in nar-
rowish passages with a limited supply of air and water,
and especially with heat; and the practical inference
to be drawn from that is this, that steam or heated
water should be as little as possible put into the sewers.
I think another factor in producing decomposition is
the fact of decomposition being there already ; that is
to say, that matter already in a state of decomposition
acts, as it were, as a ferment, and causes the rapid
decomposition of the added excremental matter.
Generally drainage dries the sub-soil, and this is a
sanitary benefit ; but if water from the sub-soil can get
into the sewers, polluted air, as the result of the decom-
position, can get out of the sewers and pollute the
ground. Then, again, I consider that sewers are very
seldom self-cleansing. No doubt if you take the time
that pure water will flow through sewers, they are so
laid that if the substance was only pure water, they
might be self-cleansing; but as the substance to be
conveyed is not pure water, but is a mixture of
numberless things, many of them specifically heavier
than water, it then happens that there is a lodgement.
I have been noticing sewers for a considerable time,
and I have not found in any sewer, not even in a six-
inch house drain, that there was not a deposit, while in
larger drains there was a still greater deposit. In the
small drains it is a mixture of sand and other matters
from the household slops; but wherever a deposit takes

Andrew
Fergus.

 
Andrew
Fergus.

28 CLYDE. PURIFICATION COMMISSION.

place, of course the flow will be retarded, and decom-
position will be facilitated by organic matter lodging
in the irregularities of the deposited surface. Now I
think that sewage, when it is entirely in the open, is not
injurious to health, although it is certainly extremely
offensive, and it is very desirable to get quit of it. I
have also the opinion that an enormous deal of the pol-
lution of our rivers arises from organic matter, and chiefly
from human excrement. I think the best proof that can
be given of that is shortly to compare three rivers. On
the Thames there was no very great increase of chemical
works, but an Act was passed in 1847, and confirmed
in 1851, compelling all human refuse to be thrown into
the river; and we know how rapidly the river stank.
On the Tyne, again, I was utterly surprised at what I
learned a few yearsago. I then believed that chemicals
had a good deal to do with the pollution; but knowing
the enormous amount of chemical refuse that went into
the Tyne—45 per cent. of all the alkali is produced on
the Tyne—I yet found salmon passing up freely. Dr.
Angus Smith told me that the.refuse from those works
was put into the Tyne in a much more acid ‘state than
anywhere else; but still the river was so pure that
salmon were found going up. Now, on the Clyde, we
have both chemicals and we have had an enormous
increase of the water-closet system, but my impression
ig that the Clyde has become polluted in proportion to
the increase in the quantity of excrement passing into
it. Then, in considering the question of the disposal
of sewage on a large scale, this question should be con-
sidered, that sewage is considerably lighter than salt
water ; so that if you pass it into the sea it will float,
and very likely the decomposition will be retarded and
rendered more slow by the addition of the salt in the
salt water. Another question to be considered in con-
nection with the disposal of sewage is the question of
pumping. I think if you dispose of sewage at all by
pumping, it is very apt to increase the risk to the
public health. That, I think, is brought out by a
return by Mr. Simon, in which there was an account
given of the results of sanitary improvements in twenty-
five towns in England. In a large proportion of these
there was a great decrease in typhoid fever, but in
the four lowest on the list there was either very little
decrease at all, or an absolute increase, and in these
four they pumped their sewage. As bearing upon that
point, I may mention that Dr. Murchison, in the last
edition of his work on fevers, when talking of the
increase of enteric or typhoid fever in London, mentions
it as a singular fact that that increase has been con-
temporaneous with the completion of the main drainage
scheme of the Metropolis. With regard to sewage
irrigation, 1 don’t believe very much in it, but I be-
lieve it would be a- positive evil whenever you re-
quired to pump your sewage; and I, perhaps, would
go a little farther, and say that I think all the patents
and all the plans that propose to deal with sewage
at the outfall would have been of no sanitary benefit
whatever, because all the mischief that arises to the
public health is done before the sewage arrives at the
outfall; and therefore, looking at it from a sanitary
point of view—and it is from that point of view
entirely that I am making my remarks—I think that
no plan whatever which proposes to deal with sewage
at the outfall would be a success in any way, or a
benefit on any sanitary point whatever, especially
if pumping was used, when it would likely be an
evil, because the liquid would be pumped away, and
the chances are that the gases would be left. I
would here make a parenthetical remark on Messrs.
Bateman & Bazalgette’s scheme which I did not
mean to make, but I will do it now with your permis-
sion. Messrs. Bateman & Bazalgette dwell with
considerable complacency on what they call the im-
pounding capacity of their sewers for storing storm
water; that is to say, they do not propose their sewers
to be made to carry off storm water at once, but they
depend for the disposal of that storm water on the
storing capacity of their sewers. I may illustrate
that in this way : Suppose that after a long period of
drought the sewers were about one-fourth filled with

fluid, and a sudden storm comes on, and they fill com-
pletely,—the first effect of that is, to stir up the matter:
which has been lying there festering and fermenting, and
the impure air impounded in this sewer is forced out by
hydraulic pressure by the entering water, and must be
forced either into houses or out some way into the city.
Therefore I think in that respect, as well as in others,
their scheme was not a correct one in a sanitary point
of view.

229. They did not propose that the sewer was to
contain the rain-water,—I mean, to impound it. They
proposed, if I recollect rightly, what they called storm
overflows ; so that when the water rose to a certain
height it would flow from these overflows into the
Clyde ?—They dwell on the storing capacity of these
sewers for storm water.

230. But they did not propose, and I don’t think it
could be supposed, that the sewer which they projected
would hold the total rainfall?—I thought it was
singular; and that was why I mentioned the fact that

‘they dwell with considerable complacency on the im-

pounding capacity of their sewers. It is a good while
since I read their report, but I think you will find that
they speak in it in the way I have mentioned. I shall
look over it again and mark the passage for you..
Then the next question which naturally arises is, What
is to be done? Of course I am looking at the matter
purely in a medical capacity. Suppose there was an
epidemic of cholera here or anywhere else, the Medical
Officer of Health would at once try to get hold of the
stools of the patients and disinfect them. But that
would be a very difficult, thing to do, and it would be
very imperfectly done ; and I consider that so enormous
is the evil produced by the decomposition of human ex-
crement, that the only true remedy is, that no decomposi-
tion whatever be allowed to take place, but that the ex-
cremental refuse of the population should be in one way
or another—there are plenty of plans—either by chemi-
cals, or by charcoal, or by earth, or by some other mode,
prevented from decomposing. My impression is, that
if attention had been directed earlier to that point, the
problem would have been solved long ago, and that we
would before this time have got quit, in part at least,
of what is one of the disgraces of our civilisation, the
deplorable amount of preventable death. I hold that no
excremental matter whatever should ever be allowed to
get into the sewers, but that the sewers should be kept
to drain the surface and sub-soil water, and that the:
excrement should be dealt with in some other way. In
that way you would have no gases, and would have
no decomposition arising. You would also have this.
powerful check for the evil, that excremental stools of
diseased patients would not get into the sewers to de-
compose and produce disease of the same kind. Of
course, being here, I have talked about the sewers, but
at the same time these excremental diseases are not
produced solely from the sewers. A considerable num-
ber of them are produced by drinking polluted water;
but if this principle were broadly laid down, that ex-
cremental matter should be removed within twenty-four
hours after being voided, or subjected to chemical or
other action rendering decomposition impossible, then’
you would at once check the spread of these excre-
mental - pollution diseases. I think that, unless you
have any questions to put to me, that is all I have to
say.
231. What would you say to the excremental matter
which is in the streets, for instance? I suppose you
would not attach much importance to the excrement of
horses, or other animals, which is dropped on the streets?
It is the human excrement you refer to principally ?—
It is the human excrement, because I consider that
water has a certain oxidizing power, and therefore,
with the rainfall here, and the grinding down there is
upon our streets, by the time the matter reached the
river it would be practically innocuous.

232. Do you think the excremental matter of the
streets might be allowed to pass into the sewers with-
out danger ?—I do.

233. I think the Pollution Commissioners make out
that that excrement is almost ag dangerous as the
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 29

other.—That is a point on which I should like to make
some remarks. My answer to that is very simple. The
Pollution Commissioners’ reports refer to middenstead
towns. There all kinds of refuse matter go into the
middensteads, and by and by the ground gets satu-
rated, and that saturated matter gets into the soil.
That is, allowing the thing to decompose on the midden-
stead, and all the nuisance to escape into the soil, and
from the soil into the stream.

234, But I am rather referring to what falls upon
the streets. You think there would be no objection to
that getting into the sewers?—It would do no harm,
and the excrement of horses will not produce typhoid
fever. Besides, the amount of that excrement would
be very small in proportion to the quantity of water.
Considering the large quantity of water which we
have here, 50 gallons per head per day from Loch
Katrine, and the enormous rainfall we have, I don’t
think there would be the slightest risk of pollution
from the excremental droppings on the streets.

235. Can you give me any information as to the
ventilation of the Glasgow sewers, or as to the extent
_to which they are ventilated?—To use the term venti-
dation, in the strictly scientific sense, they are not ven-
_tilated at all, because ventilation means the replacing
of foul air by fresh.

236. But I mean are there any apertures along the
course of the sewers ?—There are plenty of apertures.

237. Because I have been looking about the streets,
and I have very seldom seen any?—Still there are
apertures. I may mention that it is now the rule
that the soil-pipe in all new buildings should be carried
right up to the roof and left open, but still that does
not prevent the pipes from being decayed, as I have
shown .you. In good houses there are hot-water
boilers, and the escape-pipe from them must be carried
to the roof, generally in the soil-pipe. Often the rain-
water pipe serves as the soil-pipe as well.

238, But are not these overflow pipes always trapped
before they get to the sewer ?—-They are trapped, or
they ought to be.

239. But still, what I want to know is, whether there

‘are ventilators in the streets regularly and systemati-
cally? Are there apertures made from the street into
the sewers in Glasgow? I ask the question, because I
have looked about as I have gone along the streets,
and.I saw none. In other towns that I know they are
frequent and regular, and made for the purpose of ven-
tilating the sewers.—There are apertures here, but in
many cases there are no openings in the ‘apertures,—I
mean, that they are closed with an impervious lid. In
other cases there are slight openings, but they are so
relatively small that very frequently they get choked up
by the mud on the streets. I have seen that repeatedly ;
and I have also seen repeatedly—referring to what I
said before about the destructive action of steam—
steam come: boiling out of these openings. In new
sewers I think it is usual that there are apertures made ;
‘I don’t think it is usual in old sewers. There is a
return which Mr. M‘Leod will present to you—which
I moved for at the Police Board some time ago—that
will give you all the information you want on these
matters.

240. My observation merely goes to this,—You have
stated, and I think very rightly, that mere water with-
out air-does not do much good in preventing the putre-
faction of sewage; but of course if you don’t let air
into the sewers, there can be no air there, and I should
say, from common observation, that that is not much
attended to in Glasgow. I know that in other towns it
is considered ‘very important, and that great mischief
has arisen in.one or two cases from the neglect of it.—
Still, when there are such openings, the vitiated air
comes out and pollutes the air of the town.

‘241. Then you evidently attach great. importance to
the evils arising from pumping ; butmay not that arise
in this way,—I don’t suppose it will arise from the mere
act of pumping, but does it not arise from this, that
when you pump, it is from a place where the sewage
stands yntil.it is pumped out, and therefore where you
have not a flow by gravitation? In such a case, is it

not likely that the sewage will stand a longer time
stagnant until it is removed ?—Very likely that is so;
and because provision is not sufficiently made for the
escape of the gases. I may mention, as I see the thing
has been mentioned to you before, that I had a closet
fitted up on Hoey’s limited system, to see how it would
work. I was told it would not work; but it is now
six years since I fitted it up, and it has been by far
the cleanest closet in my house, and I have other five.
Formerly it was a very awkward closet. When it was
used. I had to cover it with an iron cage with sea-weed
charcoal; but since the limited supply has been intro-
duced, it has kept perfectly clean. The water has
always flushed the closet, and it has never cost mea
sixpence for repairs.. I merely fitted it up by way of
trial and experiment.

242. That shows the difficulty of getting at facts in
these matters, for we had a gentleman here before who
stated that these Hoey closets did not act at all ?—It
acts with me. I use it; my guests use it; and it is
perfectly sweet. Of course mine does not go into a
tank, as Hoey proposed ; it goes right into the sewer;
but one-fifth of a gallon has kept that closet perfectly
sweet for six years ; and it is in a room, which is a very
awkward place for a closet.

Mr. James Brown, Housefactor, 8 Gardner Street,
Glasgow, examined.

243. I may say, Sir John, that I was for some
years a clerk of works. I am a tradesman, although a
housefactor now. I don’t know that I can add almost
anything to what I have stated in the pamphlet which
I have put into your hands.

244, This paper describes what you suggest with
regard to the drainage of Glasgow ?—Yes; and there
are estimates in it, and so on. I may say, however,
that the scheme was introduced to the public first of
all in 1858. I first talked over it, as I mention hero,
about 1854; and it was published in the Bulletin news-
paper about that time. Some discussion took place
upon it then, but the matter lay over. There have
been different schemes of the same sort proposed since.
The idea of the scheme is to intercept the sewage and
drainage—to catch the sewage as far up the river as
possible. My proposal is to catch it as far up as
Tollcross, and Westburn, and Shettleston, and Carmyle,
and to carry it down the Clyde on the banks.

245. Where to?—To the sandbanks below Dum-
barton, below the Leven, and below Erskine House,
away about Findlayston Perch. The ground there I
take to be sufficiently large for the purpose. From
low water-mark upwards it may run almost a mile in
breadth, and there should be a stretch of somewhere
about ‘seven miles long from the mouth of the Leven to
Ardmhor—that is, the sort of cape or promontory that
there is before you come to Helensburgh. ‘Several
parties have taken up the same scheme; I don’t say
that they did so because they had no mind of their
own, but the same idea has presented itself to @ number
of persons who have given their time and attention to
the question. Some take one method and some take
another of disposing of the sewage; some propose to
carry it down both sides of the Clyde, north and south ;
and one gentleman, Mr. Paterson, I think, proposed to
dispose of it by cutting off the river to some extent
and forming large basins, and impounding it. Others,
again, take the same mode of conveyance, and carry it
down to Dalmuir, and so on. The only thing about
the proposal which I make, to which I may draw your
particular attention, is the number of tanks. I ‘say
there should be six; but I don’t think that number
would be necessary. Probably three would be enough,
I take it that to hold a day’s sewage, which I have
mentioned at sixty million gallons on the north side,
and forty million gallons on the south side, it would
require on the north side a tank of about three-

Andrew
Fergus.

James
Brown.
» James
Brown.

. Shields, where there would be another lift.
- that pumping would, in my Opinion, be most injurious,

30 CLYDE PURIFICATION COMMISSION. ©

quarters of ‘a mile long, and half a mile broad, and
about ten feet deep. I am not sure about the exact
size, but I think it would not be far off that.

246. How many millions do you take the north side
at ?—Sixty millions, but that, of course, includes the
ordinary rainfall. If the rainfall was kept out it would
not require so much by a good deal. I may say, in
explanation of my scheme, that I have all along pro-
ceeded ou the assumption that the water-closet. system
is.a fixed institution. We need not attempt to change
it. There has been a great deal of talk about improv-
ing closets, and getting quit of the material that is in
them; but it all comes to nothing, for you won't get
the people to follow other people’s ideas; and such talk,
in my opinion, is a mere waste of time. Then a good
deal has been said to-day about sewer gases. It was
part of my original scheme to carry off the sewer gas.
I proposed, and I propose still, that in running a main
conduit along the Clyde for receiving the city sewers,
and catching the sewage from these sewers, there should
be openings or ventilators in. that conduit along the
river bank, sufficiently large to admit of a full draught
of atmospheric air getting in; and my idea was to have
openings, and to introduce pipes into the upper seg-
ments of the sewers at suitable distances, and to have
these thoroughly fixed and hermetically fastened into
the sewer. These would be led away into a main, and
led out of the city into some upland locality, and
passed into a stalk, or you might erect furnaces if you
liked; but with these openings along the river wall, led
away into that drain, the action of the air passing
through the sewers would drive off the light gases
formed in the sewers. I heard what Dr. Fergus said
about decomposition accelerating its own action. If
the decomposition is fairly met by the introduction of
cold air, then it rather retards it; and the virulence of
the sewer gases is very much destroyed by the intro-
duction of atmospheric air. The lightness of these gases,
however, necessitates their rise to the highest opening; and
supposing that a vacuum is created by a furnace at that
opening, then the cold air below drives the whole sewer
gases clean away. With such a provision as that for

_ Temoving the gases, the sewage could be led away into

a conduit, and deposited upon some bank, such as I
propose, down the Clyde. There is one thing with
regard to the tanks which I may mention. I propose
to fill up the tanks, after they are walled up, with the
dredgings from the river, and, in the first instance, just
to allow the sewage to fall upon them, and, as they are
filled up, to introduce field drains plentifully into the

_space, and leave openings in the river walls, and the

filtered sewage would run away into the river, on the
same principle as proposed by Messrs. Bateman &
Bazalgette. The only other remark I wish to make is
about Messrs. Bateman & Bazalgette’s scheme, and it
has reference to a thing which has not been noticed,
but which I think is an important thing. They propose

to concentrate the higher level with the middle level about .

Ann Street and Duke Street near Tennant’s brewery,
and from there they propose to run it down Hunter
Street and along a continuation of that street down to
Great Hamilton Street and across the Green. There
is no Hunter Street now, because the railway people
have taken it away; but then they propose to carry a

. large sewer across the Clyde, just above the weir which

is at present in existence, and carry it on arches up

. Rose Street or in the immediate neighbourhood of it,

and then along by Cumberland Street, and on to
Pollokshields ; and they propose to have large pump-
ing Appliances nearly opposite to the jail. At that
point the two burns, the Molendinar burn and the

Camlachie burn, unite, and they would have a pumping -
station there. If they formed a deep enough pit, the -
- whole thing would be thrown up, and then it would be

driven away into this tube or tunnel that is carried
across the Clyde, and then carried down to Pollok-

Now, all
and it would create a noise in the city that would not
be tolerated.

247. How would you propose to get rid of the neces-

sity for pumping ?—The' sewage could be run down so
far by the Clyde; and then if any pumping was re-
quired, it could be done at a point farther down.

248, You propose to go'down to some distant point,
and introduce the pumping there?—Yes. It could be
done out of sight in some spot that was sheltered by

‘foliage, and that would prevent any offensive smells,

T have here a plan,—I am not at liberty to leave it,
but it is one of those schemes which followed mine, and
it shows a method of carrying it off as I proposed. Dr,
Gray showed this plan and read a paper to the Philo-
sophical Society some time ago, and Mr. Baldie fur-
nished the chart. He carries the sewage on the south
side down to Newshot Isle, and on the north side to
Dalmuir. There is a good deal of waste ground about
there, and I am not sure that in some respects it is not
better than my proposal; but I am not perfectly ac-
quainted with it. My plan carries it down to Dun-
barton, to the bank which I propose there.

249. You would carry it below Dumbarton ?—Yes,
and thus catch the sewage of Dumbarton as well. My
plan would catch the sewage of all the places round
about—Maryhill, Duntocher, Kilpatrick, and up the
Clyde as far as Carmyle. Then, on the south side, you

‘have Ruthergten, Pollokshaws, Pollokshields, Ren-

frew, and other places. The whole thing is taken up.
Any scheme that does not thoroughly take in the whole
sewage passing into the Clyde, at least from Carmyle
downwards, would fail in its object, and it would only
require to be gone back upon some years hence for
something better to remedy the defects of the plan.
At one meeting at which I was present, Mr. Deas, the
engineer of the Clyde Navigation, was saying that, in
order to carry out such a scheme as mine, we would

‘require to make the water run up-hill; but I don’t see

that we need to do that, for Mr. Baldie’s sections show
that there is a good enough run down to the Clyde. ‘T
may say that the first thing which suggested this
scheme to me was a chart of the Clyde furnished to the

’ Town Council by Mr. Kyle, surveyor, Glasgow, at the

time when the Council were applying for an Act:of
Parliament for the formation of Kingston Dock, I think
about 1838. It was from the levels which I saw upon
that plan that I fell upon this scheme of carrying: the
sewage down as I now propose. I think Mr. Kyle is
quite correct in his levels, and that there is a very good
fall indeed, if it was properly worked. Of course, if
the thing is blundered, it is of no use; but I think the
sewage can be carried down with a sufficient fall to
give at least the maximum flow mentioned by Messrs.
Bateman & Bazalgette. 2s

Mr. Taomas Rerp, Farmer, Monckton Mill, Ayrshire,
examined.

250. I have nothing new to suggest on this matter,
but I am very much interested in it as a tenant farmer,
and I wish to support Messrs. Bateman & Bazalgette’s
view as to the disposal of the sewage. I have had the
same opinion for upwards of thirty years, and I have
levelled nearly one hundred acres of sand-hills on the
Ayrshire coast in the prospect of some such scheme
being carried out. I have got sick of the matter,
because it has been delayed so long without anything
being done; but I hope that something to the purpose
will be done now. Messrs. Bateman & Bazalgette
called at my place when they were here, and made:a
survey before they gave in their report; and I hope
you will also come and see it, if you require to come
down to the coast on this occasion.

251. I have been there twice already. Whereis
your farm ?—It is three miles on this side of Ayr. The
railway passes through my farm, and the station is in
the centre of it. The land which I have levelled was
with the prospect of getting the sewage on to it some
day ; and I look forward to getting. it yet. I will-be
able to pay the Glasgow Corporation as much rent for
it as I pay to my.landlord, because I'consider that by
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 31°

irrigating it with sewage, they will raise the value of
the land as much as if they became proprietors of it.

952. Are you not your own landlord ?—No, I pay a
rent. My landlord is Captain Campbell, of Irvine.

953. How near is the Duke of Portland’s property to

our farm?—It just adjoins my farm. There is a

small burn that comes from three or four parishes, and
that goes into the sea there; and that is the only pro-
per outlet between here and Irvine where the sewage
could be brought down and be carried away with any
supply of water in addition to what came from Glasgow.
Another thing is, that there is not a house within more
than half a mile of the place; the proprietor’s house is
about a mile away. My view of the whole matter is,
that we farmers, with regard to our fields, are just the
same as the tenants of houses in towns. They get gas
and water into their houses and pay for them, and we
want sewage into our fields and we are willing to pay
for it. Whenever water and gas are introduced into a
house, the rent of that house is raised; and in the same
way, when we get sewage into our fields the rent rises,
and we are willing to pay the increased rent. I would
pay as much for a supply of sewage as I would do for
artificial manure; and I pay almost as much for arti-
ficial manure at present as I do for my rent.

- Mr. ALEXANDER Gray Smpson, of Carfin Hall,
examined.

254. My idea is to have a large tunnel or sewer on
each side of the Clyde; to collect the whole sewage
into that tunnel or sewer; to have seven depositing
ponds, one for each twenty-four hours; to collect, by
means of the tramway rails, all the sweepings, contents
of .ashpits, and everything during the night; to run
them in on the top of these ponds, and let them out
with a hopper on to the top; to drain all the water
into the river with the fall of the tide, one of these
ponds to be emptied every twenty-four hours; if neces-
sary to get quit of the gas, to have funnels at intervals
throughout the course of each tunnel, and if it is neces-
sary to increase the ventilation of these funnels, to do
so by means.of vents or otherwise, as may be found
expedient. I think that is all I have to say. In that
way, what is put into each pond would have about
a, week to consolidate, when it could be removed by the
railways throughout the country.
255. Have you formed any opinion as to the distance
you would go down the Clyde?—No; but I would go
down to.the most convenient place, and I should say that
it would be pretty well out. If it was necessary to flush
the tunnels, that could be done from the Clyde, from
Rutherglen Bridge. ‘The water could be taken off
there to flush the tunnel right through, if the sewage
was not liquid enough to serve the purpose.
256. Is that after the weir is away ?—No, it would

be taken off above the weir..

— I understand you are a large coal owner ?—
COS. 63; mye Peg 4 2s

eee Do any of your pits drain into the Clyde ?—
es.

259. Where are your pits?—They are above
Motherwell. ae 7

260. I suppose the water you raise from the coal,
generally speaking, is not very deleterious #—No.

261. I saw one place where there was a good deal

of iron, but, generally speaking, the water that came
from the pits.that I saw was very clear?—Yes, in
this district. Iniron districts it sometimes destroys fish.

262. What is the depth of your pits generally ?—
From 70 to 90 fathoms. :

263. Is that the general depth in the neighbour-
hood ?—There are a good many seams there, and they
range from 20 fathoms (that is, 40 yards) up to 120
fathoms. .

264. You are in the Wishaw district ?—Yes.

265. To. what depth are you troubled with water?
—The greater part of the water is at a depth of about

50 fathoms from the surface,
water is there.
266. Are any of your deep pits quite dry ?—Yes.
they are dry in the Botton, rere oe
267. I suppose at a depth of 120 fathom
would be dry ?—Oh, yes; comparatively dry, bis
268. I know that in South Wales you get into a
depth where you are perfectly dry, but the pits there
are deeper than you have mentioned—Yes, much.
269. How many beds of coal do you get in the
Wishaw district? I put the question because I want
to get at the amount of settlement there would be on
the surface?—I should say that there are six seams at
un ordinary depth; what we call the upper seams.

The heaviest part of the

270. What thickness of coal would that represent.

on an aggregate of all the seams ?— About 25 feet.

271. What effect does that have on the surface, sup-.

pose you work out all these six seams? How much
would you expect the surface to go down in that case ?—
That depends very much upon the nature of the cover.
If the superincumbent strata is of a light, friable nature,
then, as you go down with your sinking, it gradually
falls of itself ; but if it is close and regular, then it falls
at once. Hach district varies very much in that way.
Then, again, it is seldom that the whole of the seams
are removed. The thinner seams are all taken out,
but in the thicker ones there are pillars left to support
the roofs, and these pillars are not generally got out
entirely, so that in that case you have not a complete
subsidence. I may say that the greatest subsidence of

surface that I recollect, at the moment, of having seen, ~

is about 15 feet. That was where three or four seams
had beén worked out, and in that case some of the
seams were very near the surface.

272. Is that a common occurrence ?—No; it is not .

a common occurrence.

273. Do you get coals under the railways in your .

district ?—Yes. There are some of the old Acts,
however, under which the coal has been taken with the
land.

274. Did the railway companies buy it?—They did —

not buy it, and that is a question upon which there is
a little doubt. In the early days of railways in Lanark-
shire, the proprietors were of course very anxious to
see them there, and in some cases they gave the land
free. The railway companies hold, that in giving the
land free they also gave the coal.

275. You have just given me 15 feet of subsidence,
and you say that that is rather an unusual case. What
would you call a general subsidence ?—I should think
from 4 to 5 feet.

276. Do you know much about the coal betwixt
Glasgow and Hamilton, for instance?—Yes; I have a
general idea of it.

277. What amount of subsidence would you expect

to have there? as-much as 4 or 5 feet?—I rather .
The coals are at a much greater distance .

think not.
from the surface up there. The first coal that is got
in the Bothwell and Hamilton district is, I should say,
at a depth of about 120 fathoms.

278. Is that the top bed?—Yes.

279. Would you apply that to the whole district
betwixt Glasgow and Hamilton ?—Up towards Ruther-
glen, nearer Glasgow, it is not so deep. You would
have to take it in two sections there. I think you
could not get an average of the two very well.

280. What would be the average between Glasgow
and Rutherglen, for instance? What is the depth of
the top bed there?—I am rather afraid to give, any

figures about that, because I would not like to say .

anything that would not bear close inspection. I
know more about the district farther up.

281. But you say that the top bed there is rather
nearer the surface than farther on?—It is.

282. Then, between Rutherglen and Hamilton, what
is about the depth of the top bed?—About 120
fathoms. ‘There is a district called Cambuslang, near
Rutherglen, where the depth is not so much, but after
that the cover increases considerably.

283. The bottom bed there would be at a great

depth ?—Yes.

Alexander
Gray
Stmpson.

 
J.C.
Wakefield.

32

284. What would you expect to be the subsidence
of the surface in that district where the top bed was at
a depth of 120 fathoms ?—It would be very little, be-
cause all above the soft coal is mostly what we call soft
metals, and it would fill itself up gradually.

285. What is the thickness of your thickest beds in
that district?—8 feet. Of course it varies, but I
am giving you about the average.

286. Are the others much thinner ?—Yes; they are
from 3 to 5 feet.

287. In these thicker beds do you always have to
leave pillars?—Yes; and in addition to the pillars we
have to leave a part of the coal. The roof does not
stand of itself. There is what is called head coal
usually left on. A good part of it is taken out when
coming home, as we call it, after we have got the bulk
of the coal out.

288. But you don’t work out the whole of the coal?
—No.

289, It does not pay, I suppose?—The quality is in-
ferior. By working this head coal along with the
principal part of the coal you would injure the quality
of the whole.

290. Do you know anything of the coal below
Glasgow, or of the iron mines which I saw working in
the direction of Paisley ?—No ; they are of more recent
date, and I have not been down them. I have a gene-
ral idea of the thing, but I cannot give you any reliable
information about them.

291. How are the pits above Airdrie? Do these
resemble yours at all?—Very much. They resemble
the pits in the Wishaw district more than those in the
Bothwell or Hamilton district, but in the Airdrie
district they have not got this Wishaw coal, what is
technically called the Ell coal. They have got it, but
not in the state in which it is at Wishaw. It is very
thin at Airdrie, and is not worked at all in most
instances.

292. What is the floor of your coal pits here
generally ?—There is usually a little fire-clay.

293. Is that what we call white earth ?—Yes.

294. Is the roof harder ?—Yes.

295. Do you use much timber for propping ?—Yes.

296. What do you generally use?—Foreign timber.

Mr. J. C. Waxzriexp, of Messrs. Inglis & Wakefield,
Busby, examined.

297. Tam not here to propound any scheme, but
from the benefit, in my opinion, that will arise from
the use of dry-closets, I thought it right that my
experience should be known. We have had the dry-
closets in use for a number of years, and have found
them to work very well. My opinion with regard to
the sewage is, that it is the soil from water-closets
that does the great damage to the water in the Clyde,
more than almost anything else. We employ about
800 people, and we have adopted these dry-closets for
a number of years, and have found no difficulty what-
ever with them.

298. I remember seeing them when I was there.
You use earth-closets? Yes, but we use ashes
instead of earth, We formerly used earth, but we
found the ashes to do as well. I consider that in large
blocks of buildings, or in large factories in the vicinity
of any river, these dry-closets could be made to pay,
independent of saving the great loss which is caused
by sending such matter down the rivers. We get
4s. 6d. per ton for all the ashes and soil together, and
we remove it daily. Ifa large reservoir were made to
hold it, it would not require to be removed daily, and
therefore the profit then would be much larger,

299. You get that 4s. 6d. per ton at your works ?—
Yes; the farmers take the stuff away, and I believe we
could sell far more of it than we make.

300. Then you would not think it was any hardship, to
put all public works under the necessity of purifying

CLYDE PURIFICATION COMMISSION.

their sewage before it is discharged?—None what

ever. I think it would be a great benefit to the manu-
facturers themselves, and it would also be a great
benefit to the farmers in the neighbourhood, because I
consider that that sewage is a very valuable property.
We have no difficulty at all in utilizing it. Weemploy a
man who removes it daily; and if in large blocks of
buildings you could collect a week’s supply, you could.
then remove it at very little expense in comparison
with the expense that we are at in removing it every
day.

OL. Are you at all acquainted with the plan which
Mr. Thom has applied at his print works at Chorley?
—No. I have never been there.

302. I went there to see it purposely. I do not
know that I can explain it very well, but it consists: in
collecting all the coloured matter or soapy matter,
which he carries off into a place not much bigger than
this room, and there he uses two chemicals—the muriate.
of soda, I think, is one of them—which precipitate the
colouring matter and the soapy matter into tanks. He
has two or three of these tanks, and when the colouring:
matter and oily matter is collected, it looks very much;
like red soft-soap. He then passes it into casks, and,
he told me he was selling it at £5 per ton. I asked’
him if the thing was any expense to him, and he said,
No, that he rather considered it a profit, and it did not
require much room. Of course there is another liquid
from his works which he cannot deal with in that way
—the washing water—We have a large reservoir for
that.

303. He has two or three reservoirs, and he simply
passes it from one to another and lets it settle—That
matter or refuse must go. into these large reservoirs,
because it is of no good for the land.

804. But the colouring matter and the soapy matter.
can be used ?—There are certain things no doubt that
can be precipitated and be .valuable, but we have
not adopted that system.

305. It seemed to me to be very simple, and it did not
take up much room, which is a very important. thing
for some works that have not much space. Mr. Thom
wrote an account of his system for the Society of Arts:
in London, and the water certainly passes into the
river perfectly clear.—My own impression strongly ‘is,
that the dry-closets are not sufficiently known to: be
properly appreciated. We find them to be very useful,
and in fact before we adopted them we were continually.
annoyed by the smells about the works, and the filth:
that constantly accumulated. We could not get; the:
people to be so decent as they are with the dry-closets;
and I came here merely to give my own experience with
regard to them, believing that the thing is not in suffi-
cient practice or so well known as it ought tobe. ,
Certainly, in all large print’ works, and large manufac-
tories of every description, it would. save an amazing
deal of refuse from going down the rivers, and ashes
could easily be procured in all these. places. There
might be a little difficulty in towns in getting a suficient
supply of ashes, but we are only too. glad to get rid of
a hundred tons of ashes at any time, for we are troubled
with them if we cannot get them away. We are
obliged sometimes to bury them.

 

Mr. Tuomas Suorv, 4 Kelvingrove Street, Glasgow,
examined.

306. The witness produced a model of an apparatus
for purifying sewage, which. he explained, and’ with
reference to which he handed inthe following paper :—

* Intercepting and Purification of Sewage and Sewage Gas,
wn and Utilizing the Sewage. uae

¥ This invention has for its object the intercepting and
purifying of sewage, by removing from it the various
Suspended matters and impurities, so that the water
may subsequently flow into: a river, canal, or harbour
without polluting the water therein. .
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 33

‘This apparatus is designed for being applied in the
course of any main sewer, a certain length of such
sewer being removed for the reception of the apparatus,
which it is proposed to construct principally of cast-
iron.

‘The apparatus comprises two chambers or compart-
ments, peculiarly contrived and fitted, with the view of
promoting the deposition of suspended matters, and the
sewage water is allowed to flow through one of these
chambers when the deposits are being removed from

the other.
‘The water and gases, before finally leaving the

apparatus, are made to pass through quantities of —

suitable charcoal, contained in cages, arranged so that
they can be easily removed for emptying and re-filling.

“The flow of the sewage water is temporarily retarded
by the action of a water-wheel, which it is made to
drive on entering ; but the force imparted to the water-
wheel is utilized in working the pumps and fan, and in
restoring a large proportion of velocity to the purified
water as it leaves the apparatus.

«And in order that I may be properly understood, I
have made out large drawings and a model, represent-
ing a modification of this machine suitable for a main
sewer.

‘In these drawings the same reference numerals are
used to mark the same or like parts wherever they are
repeated.

‘Figure 1 is a side view, figure 2 is a plan; whilst
figures 3, 4, and 5 are transverse vertical outlines.
The apparatus is formed with a flanged inlet (1), at
what is represented as the left-hand end, for connection
to the main sewer in the course of which it is placed;
and just within this inlet there is formed a chamber or
enlargement (2), having fitted within it a paddle-wheel
(8), which the sewage water turns on entering, losing a
little of its velocity in doing so. After passing the
wheel, the water proceeds by a deepening passage (4)
to the entrances to two passages (5, 6), commanded by

sluices (7), only one of which is open at a time. Most

-of the chambers and spaces are in duplicate, and sepa-
rated from each other by a longitudinal vertical partition
-(8), extending almost the entire length of the apparatus,
and it wili only be necessary to describe one set, and

the parts appertaining thereunto.
‘ By'the passage (5)—best seen in figure 2—the water

-enters a depositing chamber (9), the bottom (10). of:
which is formed with large openings, leading into what.

“may be termed a mud chamber (11) below.

“In the chamber (9) there are a number of bafiling
“plates (12) and gratings (13), which tend to break or
arrest the currents, and thereby favour deposition.
The gratings (13) are in the interior or front part of
the chamber (9), and are inclined and arranged so that
the water has to move upwards, or partly upwards, in
passing through them. ‘The space (14) forward of the
gratings (13) communicates with a front mud chamber
(15), and there is constructed, so as to dip into the
intermediate: space, a chamber (16) formed by a back
perforated partition (17), which is nearly vertical, and
by a forward perforated partition (18), which is formed
with horizontal baffling plates (19), and is inclined to

favour deposition. Within the chamber (16) there is.
a cylindrical well or compartment (20), into which the

water flows through very small perforations, excluding
all but the finest suspended particles. In the well (20)
there is a pump (21), which is by preference of the kind
known as:the Archimedian or helical pump, which may
be placed vertically as shown, or at an inclination.
The mud chambers (11, 15) are formed with inclined
bottoms (22, 23) at the middle of the apparatus, to
favour the lodging of the mud towards the ends, from
which parts: it. is to be periodically removed by means
of pumps arranged to exhaust it through pipes (24, 25).
The central pumps (21) are worked by gearing, (26)
receiving motion through a longitudinal horizontal shaft
(27), indicated by a line from the water-wheel (3). The
water flowing up and raised by the pump (21) passes
on over the top.of the forward part of the chamber (16)
towards the continuation of the sewer ; it has, however,
on its way to the sewer to. pass. through charcoal, as

hereinbefore mentioned. The charcoal is contained in
rectangular iron boxes or cages, formed with close
sides and bottoms, whilst the front and back ends are
made with the upper halves of perforated metal plates
having half-inch holes about an inch from centre to
centre, through which the sewage gas is purified, and
with the lower halves three-eight inch vertical rods
with three-quarter inch spaces. The cass are fitted
with anti-friction rollers at the corners to bear on ver-
tical guide bars in spaces (28, 29) formed for them
near the forward end of the apparatus; and in the
course of the outflowing waters close-fitting doors are
provided in the top-of the apparatus over the spaces
28 and 29, to admit of the introduction and removal
of the charcoal cages.

_ ‘ Finally, in the outlet (30) leading to the continua-
tion of the sewer, there is a screw propeller (31) driven
by a continuation of the shaft (27), which, as herein-
before stated, derives its motion from the water-wheel
(8) at the entrance, and this propeller restores to the
outflowing water some of the velocity which it had at
the inlet. The propeller (31), by sucking the gases
and air from the course of the sewer, facilitates the
flow of the sewage, and therefore is not so liable to
settle and decompose before being removed.

‘The water-wheel, which is on the principle of
Poncelet’s undershot water-wheel, is balanced by two
levers and weights, so that should anything come down
the sewer and stop the wheels the buckets will get
filled, and the wheel being balanced it is forced up and
relieved, and then goes on as before.

‘ All running gear will be on anti-friction rollers, so
that the tear and wear will be comparatively little, and
can be run with much less power than if made in the
ordinary way.

‘T estimate the excremental and other refuse at 200
tons per day, thrown into the river by the sewers and
wasted; take this as worth nothing more than the
cartage (2s.), and if made into charcoal at a cost of

 

6s. per ton. gives. ; ; . £21,900
‘ Suppose, now, 73,000. tons of sludge gives
26,000 tons of, charcoal at the very
moderate price of:20s. per.ton, . 26,000
‘ Leaving a, balance of £4,100’

307. How much sewage do you estimate you would
have to deal with by this process?—Seventy gallons
per head per day for the whole, population.

308. That includes the rainfall also ?—~ Yes.

309. How much do you estimate your process would
cost for the whole sewage of the. town? — From
£125,000 to £130,000.

310. Does that mean for the cost of the machines ?
—The cost of the machines complete, and the working
apparatus. That is for putting the whole thing into
working order. .

311. It includes the excavation of the pit for re-
ceiving the machines and the cost of the machines
themselves ?—Yes.

312. But it does not include the manipulation after-
wards ?—No.

313. What do you estimate would be the cost. of
providing the filters, putting in the charcoal, and taking
it out and taking away the material; or have you gone
into that at all?—I expect that by a machine that I
am working at just now I will be able to manufacture

-charcoal that will serve the purpose; and supposing it

had to be lifted every day, it would cost about 4s. 6d.
to 4s. 9d. per ton. . :

314. I have already got from you that you estimate
that £130,000 would provide machines for the sewage
of the whole city; but I want to get at what would be
the expense to the town of working these machines. I
mean what would: be the cost of taking out the solid
matter, and lifting the charcoal filters and renewing
them, and soon; have you formed any estimate of what
that would cost ?—Not more than 10d, per ton for the
refuse thrown into them.

315. And how much would you take the refuse
throwh into them to be?—About 200 tons a day.

Shert. .
Thomas
Short. .

Kenneth
M‘Leod.

 

34°

Probably it would be above that, but I have given
that as a minimum figure.

316. Are you a mechanic ?—Not practical.

317. That is not your business?—No, although I
have been about twenty-five or twenty-six years con-
nected with it.

$18. Do you mean connected with sewage ?—No ;
connected with engineering.

319. Are you a civil engineer?—No. Iam a me-
chanical engineer, but not practical.

320. But you have been connected with engineering
establishments ?—Yes.

321. Have you tried this machine and its effect upon
sewage ?— Yes ; upon made-up sewage, but not sewage
proper.

322. How was it made up ?—It was just sweepings,
and so forth.

323. You made some artificial sewage, and then you
tried it on the machine ?—Yes.

324. What was the result? Did the water come
out clear?—It came out perfectly clear.

325. But I suppose you have no chemical analysis of
the discharged water ?—No.

Mr. Kenneta M. M‘Leop, Sanitary Inspector for
Glasgow, examined.

326. I now hand in an official copy of the reports
received by the local authority with regard to the
purification of the Clyde.

827. Do you wish to say anything with regard to
these reports?—Not unless you wish to make any
inquiry regarding them. I merely wish to state that
the latter part of the volume was got up upon a motion
by Dr. Fergus, who has been examined to-day; and
the first report by myself was prepared after a memorial
had been received from some ratepayers complaining of
the pollution of the Clyde, and it gives a full account
of the sources from which the pollution comes.

328. Can you tell me in what manner the sewers of
Glasgow are ventilated just now ?—They are ventilated
by street gratings. There are very few of the street
gratings trapped. They are mostly all open gratings,
and the man-holes are almost all ventilated too.

329. You have not been in the habit of having ven-
tilators placed directly over the sewers, as we have in
England ?—We have a good many in the centre of the
streets. Livery man-hole of the main sewer is a ven-
tilator—that is to say, it is an open grating.

330. But have you, besides these, some ventilators
directly over the sewers?—None. About two years
ago I made a survey of the city, and asked the manu-
facturers to allow us to ventilate through their
chimneys. I got the consent of upwards of 100 of
them ; but the local authority found it was to be a very
expensive matter, and they only ventilated one.

331. Can you give me any idea as to how frequently
you have ventilators? I mean what is the average
distance between them?—They vary very much. I
cannot give you that information.

832. You do not have them at stated distances, I
suppose?—No. Mr. Carrick, however, would be better
able to give you information on that matter. All the
drains are under his charge.

333. Is there any further explanation you would -

like to give upon these reports ?—I think not.

334. Have you charge of the men who are employed
about the sewers, or is it Mr. Carrick ?—Mr. Carrick.

335. Have you many of what are called ashpits in
Glasgow ?—A great many. The number of them is
given in the reports which I have given in.

836. Are they generally covered or open ?—There
are very few of them open now. ‘They used to be all
open, but we are getting them covered up every day.
There is an abstract of the whole of these things at the
end of the book which I have put in.

337. Have you formed any opinion as to what

should be done in Glasgow about the sewage?—I have.

CLYDE PURIFICATION COMMISSION.

not formed an opinion sufficiently to give it public
expression yet.

338. You perhaps know something about the Hoey
water-closet ?—Yes; I have seen it. It has too little.
water. I think that is one fault of it.

339. What is the actual quantity of water allowed?
—About two gills, I think; or half a pint.

340. Do you mean that there is not more than half
a pint allowed for each sitting ?—That is what was
aimed at.

341. So far as your observation goes, do these
closets seem to keep themselves clean and clear?—The
persons using them complain a good deal about that,
and that is the chief complaint, that there is too little
water. There are two or three of these closets not far
from here, and they can be seen quite easily.

342. Who puts them in? Is it any plumber ?—
There are very few of them in the city. It was Mr.
Hoey himself who put them in, but they have not been
adopted to any extent in the city. I find that the
carbon-closet—that is, the dry-closet—works wonder-
fully well in some places here.

343. That is using charcoal instead of earth ?—Yes;
they work very well wherever they are properly at-
tended to, and I think they give the greatest satisfac-.
tion.

344. Are they expensive?-—-No; I think £2, 10s.
would furnish a very nicé one.

345. How much charcoal would be used in a day?
—Not avery large quantity at every use. I can get
the exact quantity, if you wish it.

346. I have seen complaints about them being rather
dusty or nasty?—-We do not find them so. A good
many warehouses here have adopted them recently,
and they are highly pleased with them. They are put-
ting away their water-closets, and taking these dry-
closets in preference.

347. Who cleans them out? Is it the parties them-
selves ?—There is a company that furnishes the char-
coal, and in exchange for it they get the excreta and
charcoal together again. They remove it periodically...

348. There is a company here who do that, so that
the parties have really no expense connected with the
closets?—-No expense whatever. The company are
quite ready to furnish the charcoal in exchange for the
excreta, but persons adopting them must get the con-
sent of the local authority, because the local authority.
have all the manure of the city, and it is necessary to
apply to the local authority when they put in a closet
of that kind.

349. Who are the makers of the carbon-closet ?—The
Carbon Fertilizing Company, in West Regent Street,
Glasgow. The head office is in London; General
Singh is at the head of it there.

Mr. Joun Carricx, Master of Works (recalled), »'
examined. :

350. With reference to a note which I have re-
ceived from Mr. Nicolson, I may state that we have
never provided in Glasgow what I may call a formal
mode of ventilating sewers. Imyself formed an opinion’
many years ago that to trap all the street gratings,
without providing an efficient means of ventilation, was
very doubtful policy, and except in one or two cases,
where we had a discharge of steam, owing to the hot
water from some of the public works that are in the
centre of the town, I have allowed all those street
gratings to remain open as the only ventilators to the
street. In London, of course, the man-hole, with the
ventilator in the centre, answers the same purpose, but
here we have, in my opinion, very general ventilation in
the sewers, arising from our rain-water conductors, |
which almost all communicate with the sewers. We
have had one or two cases where the covering in of a
large water-course has led to inconvenience, and then
we have applied a ventilating shaft, which has had the
effect of relieving the pressure; but we have no means,.
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 35

in ordinary cases, except the rain-water conductor and
the ordinary street grating, of ventilating the sewers.
I may say that we have had no complaint of sewer gas
in Glasgow, except along the valley of the Pinkston
Burn, in the Cowcaddens district, where we receive the
drainage of various chemical works and distilleries.
There the action of the chemical refuse, with the dis-
charges front the distilleries, sets free the sulphuretted

hydrogen, and we have had great complaints from that —

part of the town for many years. We have had to
meet the evil by trapping the main sewers themselves

in some cases, so as to prevent the escape of the gas:

from the main sewer up to the higher levels, which we
found it had a tendency to reach. In some cases there
have been great complaints, owing to the gas getting
into the dwellings of the parties living in that district,
and we have attempted some mode of ventilation there,
by means of street lamps, but only to a very limited
extent. My own feeling is, that in order to make
things right, there should be a means of ventilation
provided for sewers in all circumstances.

351. You say that the rain-water pipes afford a
means of ventilation, but in heavy rains (and you have
a great deal of rain in Glasgow) these rain-water
pipes, instead of letting the air get out from the sewers,
would be rather forcing it into them ?—Of course, but
then, on the other hand, our sewers in Glasgow are at
such short' distances that we have had really no com-
plaints of sewer gas, except in those cases I have
mentioned, where the sewers receive the deleterious
matters which are discharged from the chemical works
and distilleries. 22

352. Have you had no complaint about gases escap-
ing into houses?—Not from the main sewers, I should
say that any defect of that kind arises from imperfec-
tions in the private drains; and we make a point of
the soil-pipe being always carried up through the house
+o the roof, so as to prevent the pressure of sewer gas
upon the water-traps.

358. How do your rain-water pipes communicate
with the sewers ?—There is one which can be seen from
the window of ‘this room, on the building opposite. I
think myself that’ the ventilation of the sewers would
be best effected by having the drains from houses and
the soil-pipes of every house so free as to give a means
of ventilation.

354. In London they used to have the ventilators
tight over the centre of the sewer, but latterly they
have put them a little to the one side, so as to prevent
choking ; because when they were in the centre of the
sewer, gravel and other things used to drop through
the grating, and gather into a heap in the bottom of
the sewer, and obstruct the flow.—Still, in point of
fact, if the gully grating were not trapped you would
require no other ventilation for the sewer.

* 355. That would depend on how numerous they
were, and at what distances they were placed. How
near are your gully gratings?—-They are very close,
and they must be so in large towns. Where you have
streets, as in Glasgow, at an interval of never more
than 100 ‘yards, you are compelled to have a gully
grating there; and besides, at mews lanes and at
places of business, you may also require to have gully
oeaee that you may have them every 20 or 30
yards.

“ 856. If they are clear, they ought to act, but the
shorter thé distance they travel the better.—In the
case of the Pinkston Valley, where we found the
nuisance arising from that chemical drainage which
I referred to, I was afraid of trapping the drains,
because it increased the evil in the houses. In some
cases we applied Stanford’s charcoal filter in one
or two parts of the town, where there were com-
plaints as to the steam rising, and we found it to act
beneficially. .

357. Have you any pit at your gully to receive the
detritus?—No; it is all just as it comes into the
sewer. I may say that we have no deposit in our
sewers, or at any rate it is very trifling.

' 858. Have you much macadamized road in Glasgow,
or are- your streets. generally - paved ?—They are

generally paved. We have perhaps about 18 miles
of macadamized road leading to the outskirts of the
city ; but the streets in the centre of the town, amount-
ing to nine-tenths of the whole, are paved streets.

359. I suppose you have generally good gradients in
your sewers ?—Yes; very good.

360. You have not many flat sewers ?—No ; we look
on anything above 1 in 120 as being bad.

Mr. Witu14m Camppett, Assessor under the Lands
Valuation Act for the Burgh of Glasgow, examined.

361. I produce a statement giving details as to the
number of houses, population, and annual value in the
burgh of Glasgow :—

Number of houses in the burgh for 1874, 111,357
On north side of river, 86,486
» south ‘ - ; 24,871
Estimated population of burgh for 1874, 534,530
On north side of river, 415,420
» south = 119,110

Rental or annual value for 1874,  £2,740,032 19 ' 0
On north side of river, £2,295,477, 2s.
» south 45 444,555, 17s.

I also produce a statement applicable to certain of
the suburban districts :—

 

 

 

Govan—No. of houses in 1874, 7,429
Estimated population, . 37,120
Rental, : £143,229

Partick—No. of houses in 1874, . 4,754
Estimated population, . 23,770
Rental, . : ‘ £95,981

Maryhill—No. of houses in 1874, . 1,517
Estimated population, . 7,585
Rental, x £30,939

Crosshill—No. of houses in 1874, . 564
Estimated population, . 2,820
Rental, 3 ‘ A £19,619

Crosshill District (embracing Pollokshields,

Strathbungo, and Mount Florida)—No,

of houses in 1874, . 5 : . 2,556
Estimated population, . 12,780
Rental, : ‘ : £78,068

Kinning Park—No. of houses in 1873, . 2,042
Estimated population, . : 10,210
Rental, ‘ ‘ : £30,855

Hillhead—No. of houses in 1874, . 822
Estimated population, . 4,110
Rental, i F £48,746

I have also been asked by Mr. Nicolson to make up a
statement, showing the number of tenements in Glas-
gow; that will take some little time, but I shall prepare
it, and put it in afterwards. I may explain that the
burgh of Glasgow was extended in 1872. There is a
considerable area now within the municipal burgh that
was not within the Parliamentary burgh—somewhere

about 970 acres—embracing what is called the ancient:

royalty or Springburn district to the north, a little
portion to the south, the Alexandra Park, and the
present University at Gilmorehill.

362. Then the extended burgh is not now called
the Parliamentary burgh?—The municipal burgh and
the Parliamentary burgh were co-extensive until 1872 ;
but the area of the municipal burgh is now much larger
than that of the Parliamentary burgh.

363. Is what you have given us as the burgh all

included within the municipal burgh?—Yes.

John
Carrick.

 

William
Campbell.

 
William
Campbell,

Wiliam
‘Streing.

——

36 CLYDE PURIFICATION COMMISSION.

364, Are these what you called the suburban dis-
tricts included within the municipal burgh?—No. They
are all beyond the municipal burgh. They are the
districts surrounding it on the south, west, and north.

865. Suppose the Act which the Corporation are
applying for this year were passed, would it include the

whole of these outlying districts?—-Not the whole . of
them. It would include Crosshill and the district lying
between Crosshill and Glasgow; but although not
in the burgh, I was desired to give the information
with regard to these outlying districts, and I have.
done so.

 

THURSDAY, 20th May 1875.

Mr. Wittram Srrane, Manufacturer, 64 Gordon Street, Glasgow (recalled), examined.

866. I should like to make a remark with regard to
a report by Dr. Wallace, which I see, from the news-
papers, has been handed in to you. I may be allowed
to state that the machine which I described when I
was here before was the third machine that I had ex-
hibited to the Town Council. The first one was put up
privately in a house in Crown: Street, where I showed
it to some of the members, and they asked me to fit up
one in the ‘Old Man’s Institution.’ That was the one
which Dr. Anderson reported on, and whose report you
have got. Some time after that the Town Council went
into it again, and they agreed to spend £500 or £600
on trying three schemes—Hoey’s, Chapman’s, and my
own. I got a place from the Town Council, in which
to fit up my machine. I had nothing to do myself
with selecting the place, but they gave it to me, and I
fitted the machine up there. I fitted up two machines
in the block of houses which they gave to me, and I
was waiting on, expecting that they would let me know
when the machines were to be tested, or who the
chemist was that was to be employed, so that I might
have an opportunity of seeing that the machines were
properly looked after before the test took place. I
expected to know at least when they were to take off
the samples, so that I might see that the machines
were in proper order at the time, because if they were
not emptied regularly, or attended to regularly, it
could not be expected that they would work properly.
The keeping of the machines in order was looked after
by the city, and not by me. I had no control over it.
The matter was taken charge of entirely by the city
authorities, and if the machine was not kept in proper
order, of course it was impossible for it to have a fair
test. I now wish to draw your attention to the second
sentence in Dr. Wallace’s report, and I think it will
bring out clearly what I wish you to notice. He says
in the opening sentence of his report: ‘ Gentlemen,
in accordance with your request I have made careful
analyses of the products resulting from the various
systems of disposing of the sewage which have been for
some time under your consideration, and now beg to
report.’ The next sentence is the part of his report
which I feel very much: ‘The various samples were
collected by Mr. Ellison’—who was superintendent
of cleansing in Glasgow at that time, but who has
since absconded— with the exception of those result-
ing from Chapman’s and Hoey’s processes, which were
supplied by Mr. Gavin Chapman. ‘You will observe
from that that Mr. Ellison and his men collected the
samples from the machines which I had fitted up; but
Mr. Chapman, who was one of the competitors, knew
the chemist, and was allowed to take his own samples,
although I never even knew that the samples were being
taken off the machine.
_ 867. What you complain of is, that in the one case
the samples from your machine were taken without
your knowledge, and in the other case the parties
themselves furnished the samples?—Yes, that is one of
the things of which I complain. I did not even know
that the samples from my machine were taken off. Of
course if the machine had been worked by me, it would
have been quite right for them to have taken off the
samples at any time they liked, so that I might not
have been able to doctor the machine; but when they
had charge of it, it was surely right that they should
have let me know when the samples were to be taken,

in order that I might see that the machine was in pro-.
per order. If the stuff is not taken away from below,
the machine gets perfectly saturated with urine and
soil; and in that case it is utterly impossible for the
water to come off pure. Dr. Wallace’s report was the
first notice that I got that the thing had been done.
I have here a copy of Dr. Anderson’s second report,
with which I promised to furnish you. It is a true
copy. Ihave a printed paper here which gives Pro-
fessor Anderson’s analyses in a condensed form, and
I now hand it in for your consideration. These-
analyses have reference both to the effluent water
and to the water which comes out from below. The
large drawings of my machine are not yet ready, but I

‘Shall send them in when they are done.

Mr. Epwarp (©. C. Sranrorp, F.C.S., Glasgow.

368. You wish, I understand, to make some state--
ment with regard to your process?—I have devoted a
considerable amount of attention for several years to.
the question of sewage,—as to the best means of dis-
posing of sewage from water-closets, and as to the best
means of collecting the excreta; and I have come to:
the conclusion that the best method of collecting the:
excreta is by the system known as the carbon-closet
system, which is a modification of the dry-closets, so
far, that charcoal is substituted for earth or ashes. One.
great difficulty of the dry-earth system is the large
amount of useless material necessary to be carried in
and out of the place of collection, and the next great
difficulty is in the weakness of the manure. Another -
very important difficulty lies in the provision of the-
necessary earth. These difficulties are overcome by the -
use of charcoal. In the first place, considerably less -
than one-fourth of the amount of charcoal is sufficient.
In the next place, the difficulty of procuring the mate- -
rial is entirely done away with by this process, because -
the mixed product is re-burned, the ammonia is distilled
off, and the resulting charcoal can be used again. We
commence with any variety of charcoal, but after the -
process has been in use for some time, the whole of the-
charcoal ultimately is derived from the matter itself, .
The charcoal so derived, of which there are full analyses
in the various papers on the subject, which have been
read before several scientific societies, and which are
now in your hands, is very similar to animal charcoal.

369. You are now speaking of charcoal made from
the residue itself?—-From the excreta itself. That
will be readily understood when it is remembered that
the excreta is disintegrated bone and muscle, and
mixed with the animal and vegetable dejecta, and there-
fore, to a large extent, it is very similar to animal
charcoal, and almost as valuable. I should state with
regard to the dry system, what I have frequently stated
before, that we have this advantage over the advocates-
of a wet carrier, that they are limited to the use of
water, while the advocates of the dry system have a.
large choice of deodorizers; and I have shown in the:
papers I have produced, that of all the deodorizers,
perhaps the worst to choose is earth or-ashes. Ail.
chemists who have examined the product of the earth-
closet have been unanimously agreed with regard to its.
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 37

great poverty in nitrogen. I have worked some time
on this subject, and have published a paper in the
Chemical Society's Journal, in which I have shown that
whereas if you mix organic nitrogenous material with
charcoal, it preserves the nitrogen for any time; but if
you mix it with earth, from the time of the mixture
the nitrogen gradually disappears. That is clearly
shown in a number of the analyses in the paper before
you, and it fully explains the poverty of that material.
I may state, in regard to this particular city of Glas-
gow, that the city authorities send out, I think, 20,000
or 30,000 tons per annum of what may be called a
valueless mixture of very valuable materials. They
mix all the outcome of the city in one mass—a very
stinking product it is; and it has to be got rid of ata
very low price. After it has been used, you may see
the pots and pans, and kettles and old iron, and things
of that sort, strewing the fields all round Glasgow.
Now, I think that this is very wrong. I think that
these things should be kept separate. By mixing the
excreta as they do with all the valueless material,
material which would have value if it were picked out,
they are obliged to dispose of an offensive manure at a
very low price.

370. Do you know the price they get for it?—I
think it is about 2s. per ton.

371. Do the parties who purchase it fetch it away
from the yard?—Yes; I cannot give the exact price,
but it is mentioned in one of the papers I have given
in. In these papers I have gone into the subject so
fully, that I do not wish to take up much of your time
in entering more fully into details. With regard to
sewage from the ordinary water-closet, I have worked
upon that for a considerable number of years. About
twelve years ago I exhibited the first filtration of
sewage through charcoal, and I gave it up then, for a
very sufficient reason. J found that although the
charcoal most perfectly purified the sewage, and was
capable of very prolonged use—so much so that I was
unable in my experiment to exhaust it—it did not pay.
The reason why it did not pay was because the
charcoal retained, scarcely any of the nitrogenous
matter, and a company which has since started to
make peat charcoal has, I think, found to its cost that
that is correct. My own experiments, to which I have
referred, were the filtration experiments at Bradford in
Yorkshire. The effluent water was perfectly clear, but
the manurial value of the charcoal was almost nil. I
think, from my experiments, that the only way in which
to treat the sewage is, in the first place, to precipitate it
with lime, as was recommended by Dr. Frankland ; and,
in the next place, to filter the effluent through charcoal.
But the filtration must be intermittent. Dr. Frankland
recommends earth, but I believe if charcoal be
employed, the proportion to earth will in the end be
found the cheapest. Of course any experiment of the
kind cannot be made to pay, but, I think, considering
that the charcoal continues in use for a very long time,
provided you give it only the organic material to
remove, and provided the filtration is intermittent, then
by re-burning the filter you could use the filter for ever,
and it would be found in the end the cheapest method.
The water would be improved afterwards for irrigation
if it were required; because the action of the charcoal
on the nitrogenous matter in the sewage is to convert
it into ammonia.

372.. Does it fix the ammonia?—TIt converts
the albuminoid nitrogenous material into ammonia,
and the ammonia passes off; it does not fix the
ammonia. The effluent is a perfectly clear, colourless
fluid, containing a little ammonia, but it is pure
ammonia.

373. That is using it as a filter?—Yes. Using it
in the dry-closet, it retains the whole of the nitrogenous
matter. There are other products that come over in
the distillation of the dry-closet material, which are
fully specified in the analyses. .

374. Do I understand you to be recommending the
use of charcoal as a filter in preference to using it as a
dry-closet?—_No. I mean that wherever it can be in-
troduced, the dry system is by far the best. The char-

L

coal-closet is a much cleaner closet than any other, and
is always perfectly free from odour.

375. Then you are only speaking of cases where
charcoal might be used as a filter, but not that you
propose that as the better plan ?—Certainly not. Iam
only speaking of where the water-closet system must be
dealt with. I mean that the bulk of the work should
be done by precipitating with lime, so that the charcoal
should simply have to remove the nitrogenous matter,
which it does very thoroughly; and if it has no other
work, re-burning it occasionally will make it last for ever.

376. In filtering through charcoal, and letting the
ammonia go free, what becomes of the ammonia?
Does it pass into the atmosphere, or does it go away
in the water ?—It passes away in the effluent water.

377. Would not the water, in the course of time,
begin to smell again?—No, because the ammonia is
pure ammonia; it could not decompose.

378. You think the water which passed through this
filter of charcoal would not, after standing for a period,
again smell?—No. I havea specimen of water now
which was shown to the first Rivers’ Pollution Com-
mission, I think about twelve years ago, which is still
as bright as ever, and it was in the Paris Exhibition
during the whole of that very hot summer. It is quite
impossible that it should deteriorate at all after the
action of charcoal.

379. Then what do you expect to gain by the pre-
cipitation. with lime? What is the object of that ?—
The object of that is to clear the sewage previous to
filtration.

380. But are you aware that the matter so precipi-
tated seems to have no value for manure?—I am aware
of that.

881. Then what would you do with it, because there
would be such an immense mass of it ?—It has a small
value. I think it is stated by Dr. Frankland to be
worth about 6s. 8d. per ton.

382. I saw a large quantity of it at Leicester, large
mounds of it at the works there, where they used the
lime precipitate, and the burgh surveyor assured me
that the farmers would not cart it away.—I think that
will be found to be the case with every precipitate from
sewage.

383. I tried it myself; I took some of it to my own
place, and my gardener said he found no fertilizing
matter whatever in it. That was also what was told
me at Leicester, where I saw it in great masses, that
the farmers would not carry it away.—So I have
heard. :

384. Of course that would create a great difficulty
if the process were carried on on a large scale in a city
of the size of Glasgow, because they would not know
what to do with this precipitated matter ?—Unless it
were made into cement. ,

385. That has been a later proposal. I should like
you to give me some information about the dry-closets.
Is the carbon system your own invention?—Yes. —

386. I have been looking at one or two dry-closets
in this neighbourhood, and Mr. W. R. Smith informed
me that the matter which was taken away from these
closets was lying in large heaps somewhere,—I forget
in what quantity, but he said it had not been used. Do
you know the reason of that ?—The reason is, that the
apparatus for distilling it is not ready.

387. Then you do not propose to sell it as manure?
—Not until the process is quite perfect. Supposing
that we began with ordinary charcoal, the product
increases about one-tenth by each re-burning, so that
after a time it becomes the outcome of the dejecta
itself,—the animal charcoal. Having arrived at that
stage, the ammonia which is distilled off is mixed with
it, and then it can be sold as a manure at about £10
per ton. That has not yet been fully carried out. I
may mention that a company that is working it has
got the whole town of Oldham. The whole of the

,town is under the process, but they have not yet begun
to re-distill, because their works are not yet ready.

388. How long has this system been in operation in
Oldham ?—It commenced last July, but the works are
not yet completed.

Edward
C.C.
Stanford.

 
Edward
&. C.
Stanford.

 

38 CLYDE PURIFICATION COMMISSION.

389. Have they not begun to use the material at
all?—No; they are storing it.

390. Could you sell those heaps that are lying in
this neighbourhood, if you wished to sell them, as
manure ?—Yes; they could be sold as they are.

391, What would they sell for as they are per ton?
—They would be worth about £38 per ton.

892. Then it is not because you cannot sell the
material that you are keeping it, it is because you are
reserving it for some further process ?—It is to make it
into a proper manure by completing the whole process,
as laid down in the paper which I have handed:to you.

893. You propose to take these heaps and burn
them, and use them fover again?—We distill them in
retorts, and then mix the charcoal with the ammonia.

394. And you are reserving these heaps for that
purpose ?—Yes.

395. Then when you have made it into what you
call proper manure, what do you expect that it will
sell for ?—It will sell for about £10 per ton. With
regard to the dry-closets, I may mention that they are
particularly valuable for large-works. Great difficulties
have been met with in using water in many of the works
around Glasgow, and I may refer particularly to one,
the large ship-building yard of Messrs. John Elder
& Company, where a large water-closet and a large
charcoal-closet can be seen side by side.

396. Ihave seen them. I did not observe them very
carefully, but I was at the works with Mr. Dewar, and
I saw the buildings that had been put up, and the
apparatus that had been provided there. Can you
give me any idea as to the quantity of charcoal you
would require for a given amount of population, say
for 100,000 ?—The total outcome for 100,000 persons
would amount to about 40,000 tons per annum. :

897. Do you mean it would require that amount of
charcoal ?—No; it would require half that amount of
charcoal.

898. Then for 100,000 persons, 20,000 tons of char-
coal would be required for a year ?—Yes; that is, if
the whole of the urine is taken in. The total removal
amounts to about the same as the ashes per house.

899. Would the total removal be 40,000 tons, as
you have stated just now ?—Yes.

400. Then, supposing you used 20,000 tons of char-
coal in one year, you would have to remove 40,000
tons of residue?—Yes. In the table which you will
find in one of the papers I have given in, there are the
figures on that subject which are given by different
authorities, and you will find that these authorities
differ greatly in the quantities. They vary from 20,000
to 45,000 tons a year.

at Does the,table give the price of the charcoal?
— Yes,

402. I see that reference is made in the report of the
Rivers’ Pollution Commissioners to the use of charcoal
made from sea-weed, and they speak of its beneficial
effects when so made. Is it a necessity that the char-
coal should be made from sea-weed?—No. That is
the charcoal we begin with, simply because we are
manufacturers of it, and it is cheapest.

403. Then it is not because you consider it has any
advantage over other charcoal that you use it?—It
has a great advantage over all other charcoals except
animal charcoal, inasmuch as its composition is more
like charcoal from the animal than from the vegetable—
the sea-weed from which it is made lying just at the
boundary-line of the animal kingdom.

404, By animal charcoal you mean charcoal made
from bones ?—Yes.

405. Do you know what the sugar refiners pay for
their charcoal ?—They pay, I daresay, £12 per ton for
their best charcoal.

406. What do you get for your sea-weed charcoal ?
—About 30s. a ton.

407. You can make it for 30s. a ton?—Yes; of
course that is less than its manurial value.

408. Where are the works for making this charcoal
from sea-weed ?—At Dalmuir.

409. What is the name of the Company ?—The
British Sea-weed Company.

410. Is that charcoal made for any other purpose
than for matters connected with sewage?—It is used
as a general deodorizer. . ,

411. I think you said that ashes do not act well as
a deodorizer ?— Yes. Res

412. On what is that opinion founded ?—In the first
place, both earth and ashes act simply as deodorizers
so long as they are driers. Unless the mixture becomes
perfectly dry, it becomes putrid. ;

413. But, dealing with ashes first,—and I wish to
direct your attention to that, because I have seen some
works where they are using fine ashes in some of these
dry-closets,—and assuming that the ashes are dry, what
is to prevent them acting as a deodorizer?—They do
act as a deodorizer if in sufficient quantity, but then
the quantity required is large.

414, What quantity would be required as compared
with charcoal?—-Compared with charcoal, I should
think the quantity required would be at least six times
as great.

415. Would it be as large as the quantity of dry
earth ?—It would require more than dry earth, and the
mixture, judging from the analysis of earthy mixtures,
would constantly deteriorate in value.

416. Do you mean that it could not be used over
again ?—No; I don’t mean that. I mean, with regard
to earth, that when the product comes out from the
closet, if it is kept for any length of time, it loses
nitrogen, I believe in ammonia. 2

417. But suppose it was put on pretty speedily,
that would not signify ?—It would not.

418. I wish you to confine your attention to the
ashes, because that is more important for works such
as print works and others, where they have, perhaps,
500 or 600 hands employed, and where they have plenty
of ashes; in such a case, of course, it is a very con-
venient thing to use up the ashes for that purpose, if
they are useable; and the objection to it in your mind
is, I understand, simply that if the ashes are allowed
to remain, the ammonia would be dissipated in the
atmosphere ?—That is one objection, but I have a fur-
ther objection, which is this, that if you wish to have a
valuable manure, where you have to remove these sub-
stances, it does not seem right to mix it with six times
its weight of valueless material, and to take the whole
of it away. It is much better to mix it with a small
quantity of a material which retains its value in the
manure. I mean that even if you had to use animal
charcoal, you would get a price for the manurial value
of the charcoal when it came out in the manure, and
therefore it would pay better to use the best charcoal
rather than to use ashes.

419. Take the case of a manufacturer who has print
works beside some of the rivers up the country; do you
think it would pay him to buy charcoal rather than to
use ashes from his own works ?—I think so.

420. The cost of taking the ashes away in the
manure would not signify very much, because they
would be obliged to take them away in any case. At
present they throw them into the river, but if they were
prevented from doing that they would have to take
them away?—If they could find immediate use for
them on the neighbouring land, the ashes might be.the
cheapest, but ashes are not a good thing to put upon
a soil unless it happens to be a very stiff clay soil.

421. My reason for asking you these questions
about ashes is, because I rather understood-Mr. Smith
to say that the use of ashes led to the formation of
some very mischievous gases. In fact, he almost left
the impression on my mind that you should give up
using ashes for the dry-closet altogether, and the idea,
I must confess, was new to me.—That would only
occur where the ashes were used in insufficient quantity.
Almost any mineral would be a deodorizer, as ashes
are, provided you use enough of it. ck

422. Then you are not afraid of the ashes and soil
being apt to generate noxious gases ?—Not.at all. .

423, Suppose that charcoal came to be extensively
used in large towns and other places, would not that
lead to an increase in its price?—This process would
prevent that, because in working a large town. you be-
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 39

gin with a certain portion of charcoal, but you re-burn
that at the end, perhaps, of the first week, and you
gradually provide the whole city with charcoal of its
own manufacture; and having once supplied the whole
city, you have daily balances of charcoal for sale.

424, Have you formed any opinion as to the extent
of retorts that you would require? Does that appear
in any of the paniphlets you have given in? Fora
population of 100,000, for instance, what amount
would require to be expended in the shape of retorts ?—
That appears in the paper.

425. Does it also give the outcome?—Yes. I think
the outcome of Oldham would be about 20,000 tons.

426. What is the population of Oldham ?—I think
it is about 80,000. The pan system is in use there.

427. What do you call the pan system ?—The system
of carrying away the excreta in pans, which is adopted
a good deal in Lancashire.

428. Is the proposal in Oldham to apply this system
to the whole sewage of the town—that is, to what is
called the house sewage as well as to other kinds of
sewage ?—-Not at present. They have no difficulty in
Oldham with their house sewage. They are extremely
well satisfied with the pan system; but they were met
with this difficulty, that having carried the stuff away
from the houses they could not dispose of it, and it
became a very difficult matter to get rid of it. At
present it is carted to these works and mixed with
charcoal. ;

429. What do they do with their house sewage ?—I
believe that probably it runs into the nearest river, but
I don’t know about that. I only know that they have
no difficulty with regard to it.

430. Do you know the expense of the application of
this system to Oldham ?—The company receive exactly
what it was costing the corporation to remove the
sewage; that is all.

431. Do you know how much that is?—About
£3000 a year.

432. What do they do for that? You say the
company are not dealing with the closets?—Not at
present; but they propose to introduce that.

433. What is done by the company for that £3000
a year ?—They simply act, as the town did before, as
scavengers in taking away this material.

434. They take it away from the houses and mix it
in the yard, or wherever it is?—Yes; supplying fresh
pans.

435, And they then dispose of it in the best way
they can ?—Yes,

436. Which company is it that does this ?—The
Carbon Fertilizer Company.

437. Where is their office?—In Palmerston Build-
ings, Old Broad Street. ,

' 488. Have they a secretary ?—Yes.
name is the Hon. H. C. Ponsonby.

439. Is that the same company that has to a limited
extent applied the system in Glasgow ?—Yes.

440. But I suppose the system has not been carried
to any great extent in Glasgow ?—No. It has merely
been experimental here. I may say that this is the only
safe process that can be applied to an hospital for in-
fectious diseases, because if a retort is fitted up on the
premises, there can be no further fear of the malaria
extending beyond the hospital.

441. What are the retorts like? Are they like gas
retorts ?—Probably the best kind may be found to be
vertical retorts, similar to those used in the shale
works,

442. Do you mean in the shale works in this
neighbourhood ?—Yes ; but that is merely a question
as to the most economical retort for firing purposes.

443. Have you'any knowledge or experience of the
value of shale as a deodorizer after the oil has been
extracted from it ?—I only know that it does act as a
deodorizer, as a filtering medium. It contains alumina
and carbon, and that would make it a pretty efficient
deodorizer. .

444, We have been furnished with two specimens
(showing the two bottles produced by Mr. Carrick, and
which had been experimented upon by Mr. Coleman) ;

I think his

one is of sewage previous to being filtered, and: the
other is a specimen of the water after it has been
filtered through the crushed shale. We have been
told that this water, which is perfectly clear, has been
standing for several months in that state, and it
appears to have no smell. If that beso it ought to
be a very valuable deodorizer, because I know that
several other deodorizers, although they have left the
water clear for a time, yet it began to smell again.
Are you aware whether crushed shale has been applied
as a deodorizer to any extent ?—I believe not. That
specimen was brought out a few months ago by Mr.
Coleman at a meeting of the chemical section of which
I am president; and he made a statement about it
which I heard. That is all I know of it.

445, Is there anything more you would like to add?
—I wish to say that in speaking of lime precipitation,
I referred to house sewage, excluding rainfall. That
would materially alter the character of the precipitate.
I forgot that when answering your question about the
precipitate at Leicester.

446. You only propose the lime precipitation to
apply to house sewage ?—Yes,

447, When you say that that would materially alter
the character of the precipitate, do you mean that it
would make it better or worse?—I mean that it would
make it more valuable.

448. You mean that lime would make the pre-
cipitate from house sewage more valuable than what
they got at Leicester?—Yes; because in keeping out
the rainfall you would keep out the road dust and
the detritus from the streets. It would then be almost
entirely organic.

Mr. J.I. Coteman, F.C.8., Bath Street, Glasgow,
and Chemist to Young’s Paraffin Light and
Mineral Oil Co.

449. I shall be glad to hear any explanation you
have to give us with regard to the experiment you
have made.—I was induced to make the experiment
from the fact that shale, after the oil has been extracted
from it, gives a residue which is raked up from the
bottom of the vertical retorts used in distilling the oil,
and that residue contains a considerable proportion of
carbon or charcoal, united with the earthy matters of
which shale is largely composed. I suspected that,
containing such a large proportion of carbon, and
the carbon being in such a state of minute division,
it would act as a deodorizer; and I’made the experi-
ment simply by filtering the sewage through a layer of
crushed shale about 3 inches in thickness. I had
noticed that, in filtering sewage through deodorizing
materials, the smell frequently returned a few days or
a few weeks after the sewage had been filtered, and
therefore I put these samples together, at the tempera-
ture of an ordinary office, for some weeks, in order to
see whether or not the smell did reappear after filtra-
tion. I was surprised to find that the filtered liquid
remained perfectly odourless, whereas that which had
not been filtered smelt very strongly, not of sewer gas,
but of sulphuretted hydrogen. I was led to suspect
then that the real cause of the smell of the river was
very possibly the reaction of the organic matter upon
the sulphates in solution; and I thought the thing so
interesting, chemically, that I drew up a short note
and showed the samples to the chemical section of the
Philosophical Society of Glasgow. Of course it follows
from these experiments on refuse shale as a deodorizer
that it could be applied to the solid feeces as well as
to liquid sewage; but I have not made any experi-
ments on the subject in that direction, nor have I
prosecuted the experiments any farther since the results
which I have now described to you were submitted in
that short paper to the chemical section of the Philo-
sophical Society. It was not my intention to give any
special evidence on the subject before you, but happen-

ing to be in the room when it was mentioned, lam |

Edward
€.e,
Stanford.

 

JI.
Coleman,
JI.
Coleman,

 

refuse which you make at the paraffin works?

40 CLYDE PURIFICATION COMMISSION.

glad to have this opportunity of answering any
questions which you may put to me.

450. Has the note which you read to the Philoso-
phical Society been published ?—No; it was a mere
verbal communication. It has not been published yet.

451, Was the statement you made nearly to the
same effect as you have made now?—It was to the
same effect.

452. Was the clear water, which of course is now
without smell, left exposed to the air?—No; it was
kept corked. Both bottles were kept tightly corked,
and they were under the influence of light.

453. Don’t you think it would have been better if
you had left them exposed to the air ?—In that case I
think the experiment would have been less satisfactory,
because any gas that might have been formed would
simply have escaped. The gases proceed from internal
decomposition, and not from any external action.

454, However, you did not try that?—No; I did
not try it.

455. Of course, if the filtered water had been left ex-
posed, you think the result would have been the same,
and that it would not have had any smell ?—I think so.
The consequence of the exposure of a small quantity of
liquid like that would likely have been the loss of smell
in both cases in a short time, probably in a few weeks.
I may state, further, that the sewage on which I made
this experiment was got from Mr. Carrick in a two-
gallon jar. That jar was left in the basement storey
of a building, where the temperature would probably
be about 50° Fahr. The samples in the two bottles
which have been produced lay side by side in a place
where the temperature was probably about 65°, or an
ordinary office temperature, and they were exposed to
the full light underneath a skylight. But it is curious
to note that the smell from the stuff in the two-gallon
jar, which was kept in a temperature of about 50°,
remained pretty sweet; whereas the identical liquid,
when freely exposed to the light and in a temperature of
15° higher, developed the strong smell that you notice
in the sample. Therefore you have there the result of
the action of warm weather, and possibly also the
action of light, although that is a question which re-
quires further investigation ; but at any rate you have
there the conditions which exist for sewage com-
mencing to smell after it has entered the river, either
by the action of light, or by the action of light com-
bined with heat; and you have it further shown that
these conditions can be removed by filtration through
carbonaceous shale.

456. Do you mean that sewage corresponding to
the sewage in the bottle, which is black, will not, when
kept in a cooler temperature, smell like the specimen
before us?—Yes. If it is kept at a temperature of
50°, or between 40° and 50°, it does not smell materi:
ally ; but if it is kept at a temperature of 60° or 70°,
a smell is developed; and the smell is not the smell of
sewer gas, but it is the smell of sulphuretted hydrogen.

457, What is the composition of sewer gas as com-
pared with sulphuretted hydrogen?—Sewer gas con-
tains what is called albuminoid ammonia; that is, the
ammoniacal vapours combined with organic nitrogen,
which have a very wonderfully prejudicial effect upon
the health; whereas the sulphuretted hydrogen is a
chemical gas of a simpler character, which is certainly
of a depressing character to breathe continuously, but
is not of that poisonous, contagious nature which the
sewer gas is.

458. But still it is deleterious to health ?—Yes ;
sulphuretted hydrogen is deleterious to health, and it
is very deleterious to metal, such as the copper sheath-
ing of shipping, and it is very disgusting in smell.

ee In short, it has the smell of Harrogate water ?
—Yes.

460. Which paraffin works are you connected with?
—TI am connected with the works of Young’s Paraffin
Light and Mineral Oil Company (Limited).

461. Where are these works situated?—At West
Calder and at Bathgate.

462. Can you give me any information as to the

What

is the residue that is passed away generally from
paraffin works?—The only residue that may be con-
sidered a waste is the carbonaceous shale, which I.
have been speaking about.

463. Is there any liquid residue?—A_ considerable
‘amount of water is used in distillation, in condensing
the oil vapours, and also in washing, which may be
considered waste unless it is used over again.

464, But is anything run away from the parafiin
works into the stream or river which cannot be
utilized? Do you at these works take any means of
utilizing the liquid products of the works?—All the
secondary products produced in the distillation of oil,
which are the tars and the chemicals used in the treat-
ment of the oil, are recovered. The tar is recovered
and sold, either in the form of pitch or grease. The
soda which is used in the refining of the oils is recovered
by a process on the spot, and is used over again. The
acid is also recovered, and used over again, so that
the only thing that is wasted in oil works is any small
quantity of oil which may accidentally run away in
contact with the water.

465. I don’t know whether you can answer this
question or not, but what would be the effect upon the
paraffin works, suppose it were enacted that they should
not discharge into a stream anything which tended to
foul the water? Could that be complied with gene-
rally ?—My opinion on that matter coincides with the
opinion which has been already expressed by Professor
Frankland in the report of the Rivers’ Pollution Com-
missioners, that it would be an unjust thing to require
total freedom from manufacturing impurity either in
this or in any other manufacturing operation, and that
a standard of contamination should be allowed. I
think if that is not allowed, it is a serious injustice to
the manufacturers, and it is virtually so serious as to
interfere with the progress of the trade or industry.

466. Still, I understand you to say that a very con-
siderable portion of the products of this manufacture
is recovered and utilized ?—Yes.

467. There was a statement made the other day
by Mr. Smith, when speaking of paraffin oil works
in the middle of Scotland, to the effect that it was
proposed, as a last resource, to build a drain ex-
tending probably thirty or forty miles to the sea, and
that the products of paraffin would be found thirty
miles from the works. Are you aware of any such pro-
ject as that—to make a drain thirty or forty miles to the
sea?—I may explain that such a project has been
talked of, but since then, owing to legal action having
been taken on the part of the riparian owners in the
vicinity of these works, such steps have been taken,
under the guidance of a chemist appointed by the Court
of Session, as are at present, I believe, satisfactorily
preventing complaints.

468. When were these alterations made ?—During
the course of this year.

469. Who is the chemist ?—There are two or three
chemists. Professor Crum Brown was one of them.
There was a referee appointed by the Court. Mr. Pat-
tinson, of Newcastle-on-Tyne, and Professor Crum
Brown have had to do with it, but I cannot say exactly
who the referee is now.

470. I understand that the shale which you used in
this experiment was simply the shale raked out from
the retorts, and then crushed ?—Yes.

471. You had no other process ?—No.

472. I suppose that shale would be a thing which
could be supplied at a very low price?—Yes.

473. What do you do with it now?—It is simply
put into heaps. It is perfectly useless. It has been
tried, practically, for filtering water, and it has been
used in our own premises for some time for that pur-
pose, and is very efficient.

474. How do you suppose it would act if it were
applied in one of these dry-closets instead of charcoal?
—I am of opinion that it would be an efficient deodor-
izer; perhaps not as efficient as charcoal itself, but
approximately so. It might very easily be tried.

475. What would be the carriage of it per ton to
Glasgow ?—I think about 5s. per ton.
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE.

476. What is the distance from Glasgow to Bath-
gate?—About thirty miles.

477. What is the distance from Bathgate to the sea ?
—I think about twenty miles.

478. I think this might be made a very valuable
thing ; but you would, possibly, require more experi-
ments on it?—There would be no difficulty in making a
few more experiments on the subject.

Hue Sxarxe, Bottle Blower, Garngad Hill, Glasgow,
examined.

479. Ihave long considered this question of the bad
state of the river Clyde, and after much consideration,
L have thought of a remedy; but previous to stating
that remedy it would be well to state my opinion with
regard to the evil which the present condition of the
Clyde produces. I think the best way in which I can
do that is by using a simple illustration. If you wish
to empty a bottle, you raise the bottom of the bottle
above the mouth, so as to get quit of the whole of its
contents. If you wish to get out only the pure liquid
from the bottle, and retain the sediments and impuri-
ties in it, you then keep the bottom of the bottle a little
below the mouth, and so get rid only of the pure liquid.
And just the same with the Clyde. If we take the sur-
face of the water at Greenock, when at low tide, as the
mouth of the bottle, and the bottom of the Clyde here
-at the Broomielaw as the bottom of ‘the bottle, then we
have a difference in level of about 10 or 12 feet.
‘Give sufficient space at low water for the sediments or
impurities still to remain in the Clyde after the tide has
passed out; and the plan that I was thinking of was to
-adopt a means to force the impurities or impure water
from the harbour by retaining a sufficient quantity
above the weir, by raising the weir as high as it was
convenient to do without injury to the surrounding pro-
perty ; then when the water was let down into the
Clyde, you could at the same time have pipes running
along each bank, so as to force up the impure water
from the bottom of the Clyde, and before the water was
allowed to go down into the harbour.

41

480. You propose to retain the water above the
weir ?—Yes.

481. Are you aware that there is an Act of Parlia-
ment in existence at present for taking the weir away !
—Well, that would do away with that thing.

Mr. James Rozerrson, Engineer, Glasgow,
examined,

482. I havé not very much to say on the subject,
but Iread a paper at the Sewage Association some
years ago, describing a system of separate pipes for
water-closets, etc., leaving the main drainage as it now
is, and having intercepting tanks, and taking it away
in barges. With regard to the sewage question, I
think that Messrs. Bateman & Bazalgette’s report is
probably the best; but what I wish to bring under
your notice is a system of cleaning out the tanks which
T proposed should be formed. At present I am lifting
sand and sinking cylinders at the docks, on the prin-
ciple which I would advocate for cleaning out the tanks.
It is done by a system of jet-pumps. I force the water
through a nozzle, and draw up the sand, and deliver
it about 45 feet above the bottom of the place
where it is taken from. I propose to empty the tanks
and clean out the sediment in the same way. I like-
wise have another system of cleaning the tanks by
centrifugal pumps. I now produce a printed descrip-
tion of the mode in which I am at present sinking the
cylinders, and which could be applied to the cleaning of
the tanks.

483. Are you using that method on the Clyde just
now ?—Yes.

484. Instead of Milroy’s method ?—Yes.

485. Do you find it better than Milroy’s?—It is
quicker. We can take up a ton of sand in a minute
by a 44 inch pipe. I also produce a plan showing the
method of doing it by centrifugal pumps, which will be
interesting to you at least mechanically. I have only
made one or two of these. It has only recently come
out, but.its object is the same. (The witness described
the plan which he produced.)

 

FRIDAY, 21st May 1875.

Mr. Josern Linpsay Warson, Treasurer of Police, examined.

486. I now hand in a statement, showing the cost of
* the cleansing department of the city of Glasgow, for
the three years ending 15th May 1874 :—

“ Statement showing the cost of the Cleansing Department of
the City of Glasgow for three years, ending 15th May
1874

‘Year ending May 15, 1872.
Expenditure, £41,051 15 9
Receipts, 23,847 10 0

 

Expenditure over Receipts,
‘Year ending May 15, 1873.

£17,204 5 9

 

 

Expenditure, £46,275 10 8
Receipts, 17,493 6 7
Expenditure over Receipts, 28,782 4 1
‘Year ending May 15, 1874.
Expenditure, £56,638 7-1
- Receipts, 21,094 19 3
Expenditure over Receipts, 35,543 7 10

‘ Correct—Jos. L. Watson,

Treasurer.’

I also produce the three following statements prepared
by Mr. Waters, at present inspector of cleansing :-—

* Scavenging Department.
* Statement showing the number of Men employed, and their
weekly wage, for fortnight ending 19th May 1875.
‘Sweeping Streets—
Inspectors and Foremen, 1 at 30s., 1 at
28s., 1 at 27s., Lat 25s., 7 at 24s., 13
at 21ls— . 3 Ps 3 . 24
Sweepers, 99 at 18s., 17 at 17s., 33 at
16s., 2 at 15s.— o% . 151
—- 175

‘Close Washers (with hose)—
Pipe Maker, 26s3-— . ‘ . it
Washers, 1 at 20s., 1 at 19s., 1 at 18s.,
1 at 17s., 2 at 16s.— . 6 .
‘Cleaning Private Streets and Courts—
Sweepers, 1 at 19s., 208 at 18s.,7 at 17s— 216
Broom Makers, 1 at 19s., 4 at 18s.—. 5
Clerk, Storekeeper, and Assistant, 1 at 37s.,

1 at 30s., 1 at 25s.— : ‘ 3
Urinal Painters, 2 at 20s., 1 at 18s.— 3
Night Watchman, 19s.— ; 1 +s
‘Sanitary Department—
Fumigaters, 25s— . 4 2)
Carry forward, 23 410

Hugh
Sharkie.

 

James
Robertson.

Joseph
Lindsay
Watson.

 
42

Joseph
Lindsay
Watson.

‘ Statement showing the number of Horses employed during

* Statement showing the number of Men employed, and their
weekly wage, for fortnight ending 19th May 1875.

CLYDE PURIFICATION COMMISSION.

bea Brought forward;

Clothes Washers, 1 Foreman at 22s., 11
Women at 16s— . ‘ ‘

Van-drivers, 253— . '

Total,

—

23 410

3

‘THomas WATERS,
Inspector of Cleansing.’

‘ Correct—Jos. L. Watson,

Treasurer.’

* Cleansing Department.

fortnight ending Tth May 1875.

* Night, : 63
Day, ‘ : ‘ 73
Sundry work, watering, etc., 20
Sick and unfit for work, 4

Total, 160

‘THomas Waters,
Inspector of Cleansing.’

‘Correct—Jos. L. Watson,

Treasurer.’

* Cleansing (Manure) Department.

‘ Night Duty—
Foremen, 1 at 40s., 7 at 28s., 4 at 26s.,— 12

Wheelers, paid by weight, received £116,
14s. 3d., showing an average of £2,
18s. 43d. per man per fortnight—

Carters, at 25s.— ‘ A

» Foreman, at 30s.—

Stagfillers, at 20s—  . : ss

Gateman and Stablemen, 1 at 22s., 2 at
21s., 1 at 258.,1 at 248— .

Depot Foremen, 2 at 25s.,4 at 24s., 2 at
20s.— ; : . ‘

Depot Labourers, at 18s.—

Soil Men, at 25s.—

‘Day Duty—

‘ Correct—Jos. L. Watson,

Carters, 76 at 25s. 5 at 24s.— . .
»  oremen, 1 at 30s., 1 at 26s.—
Depot 5 1 at 30s., 3 at 26s., 2
at 25s., 3 at 24s., 1 at 23s., 1 at 22s.,
4 at 20s.— ‘ ; .
Depot Labourers, at 18s—  . :
Cartwrights and Waggon-builders Fore-
man, at 45s.— Z :
Cartwrights and Waggon-builders, 6 at
32s,, 1 at 29s., 1 at 27s., 1 at 25s., 2
at 23s., 1 at 22s., 1 at 20s.— ‘
Blacksmiths and Horseshoers, 1 at 39s.
3d., 1 at 35s., 2 at 32s. Lat 31s. 3
at 30s. 9d., lat 26s. 6d., 2 at 22s.—
Saddlers, 1 at 32s., 2 at 26s— . ‘
Yard and Stablemen, 1 at 27s., 4 at 25s.,
1 at 24s., 1 at 23s., 4 at 22s., 4 at 21s.,
4 at 20s., 2 at 18s.—. ‘ :
Labourers, 1 Foreman at 26s., 9 at 20s.,
24 at 18s.— .

Sale Office, 2 at 32s., 1 at 24s., 2 at 208.—

Office-cleaner, at 7s. 6d.— ‘ 5
Slaughter-houses, 1 at 30s., 1 at 22s., 6
at 18s.— : ‘ :

Total,

21

34
5
1

8
—250

422

—_—

‘Tuomas WATERS,

Treasurer.’

Inspector of Cleansing.’

38

448

Mr. A. G. Tomson, C.E., 194 West. George Street,
recalled.

487. I wish to put in the following statement, in
addition to the evidence which I gave before you at a
previous sitting :—

‘194 West GzorcEr Street, GLaseow,
May 19, 1875.

‘To Sir John Hawkshaw, H.M. Chief Commissioner,
Clyde Purification Commission. ;

‘Srr,—In reference to the scheme I had the pleasure
of bringing before your notice on Monday, I ask leave
to submit a few amendments and explanations, partly
suggested by your remarks.

“On Sec.4. In separating the rainfall from the sewage,
it would be better to make use of existing sewers to
carry off the rainfadl, and to have a new set of well-laid
glazed pipes, of moderate section, for the sewage water.
Although it is desirable to minimize the quantity of
matter to be treated, the amount of water used for
flushing must still be amply sufficient to cause a steady
flow. Receivers at termination of intercepting sewers
to be furnished with filters, through which part of the
water can be drained off comparatively pure.

‘On Sec. 9. The term “ retort” is perhaps scarcely
accurate as applied to designate the vessels within
which I propose to subject the sewage water to chemical
action by sodium, etc. This action is by no means of
the nature of that produced by heat on dry materials
in gas or other retorts; and the water contained in the
sewage is a necessary element, yielding, by its decom-
position, the oxygen necessary for the entire combustion
of the remaining constituents.

‘I should be happy, if so instructed, to prepare plans
for such apparatus as would be required to test the
practical application of the scheme.—I remain, your
obedt. servant,

‘ Arexr. Grorce THomson, C.E.’

Mr. Witt1am Watts, Refining and Manufacturing
Chemist, Glasgow, examined.

_ 488. You.are a member of the Town Council of
Glasgow ?—Yes.

489. And you have been one of the Bailies of the
city ?—Yes. I am also a Justice of Peace for the
county. I propose to state what my experience has
been with regard to the process of refining spermaceti.
In 1851 1 commenced operations in that direction in
Glasgow, and I was the first to do so. I continued
the work in the usual way, as it has been done in
London, till 1871. I knew, of course, by that time, °
that there was a considerable quantity of refuse from
the works put into the drains.

490. From chemical works ?—Yes, from the chemical
works. I accidentally found, on opening the drains,
that there was a considerable precipitate or deposit
there of valuable stearic acid or spermaceti.

491. You found that in the ordinary drains ?—It
was in the ordinary drains passing through my own
premises. I immediately directed my attention to the
matter, in order to ascertain the cause of that precipi-
tate or leakage; and I found that by keeping back the
sewage—I do not know whether I should call it sewage
or liquid refuse—but I found that by placing it ina
vessel lined with lead, and then treating it with sulphuric
acid, keeping up a moderate temperature and consider-
able agitation, I got in the morning a large and
valuable cake of spermaceti on the top of the liquid.

492. This refuse you speak of was refuse from
chemical works?—Yes; refuse as the result of the
refining process. I may mention that during the first
year that I kept back that refuse I preserved it all, and
found that in value it was quite equal to £800 for one
year.

493. And previous to that time this had been running
away ?—Previous to that, and from the year 1851, it
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE.

had all. been going into the sewers and down to the
Clyde. I do not say it had been done to the same
extent in the previous years as in the year I speak of,
because that was a year in which we did a larger
business than usual; but I have no doubt whatever that
from 1851 onwards we had been sending into the sewers
the equivalent of from £300 to £400 a year. That
is now, I believe, entirely stopped ; because, on examina-
tion, the liquid, after having been treated with sulphuric
acid, is perfectly clear.

494, Is this process you refer to carried on at most
of the chemical works?—It is carried on at all the
chemical works of the same nature as my own.
‘Wherever oleac or stearic acid is treated with alkali
there must bea very serious loss of the oleac or stearic
acid, because the alkali will not go away without taking
its fill of it. It is like a sponge dipped in water.
Directly the alkali meets with the oleac or stearic acid,
it takes a large portion away ; and it will not give it up
until it has been treated with acid.

495. It will not give it up, in short, until it is made
to do so?—No; and the acid makes it discharge it.
The mechanical apparatus used in the process is
a small leaden vessel, arranged in such a way as that
the liquid shall at all times be drawn off from the
bottom of the vessel. It is quite an open vessel. The
outlet would be from a pipe taken from this point
(showing), and conducted into the drain.

496. You use a syphon?—It is almost a syphon;
but it is only when the liquid is above the top of the
discharge-pipe that anything can get away, and you
will see the object of that at once; that nothing but
the heavier portion of the water can get away. So
long. as there is any light oleac or stearic acid, it remains
on the top of the liquid, and continues subject to the
chemical treatment I have named.

497. Then in that tank you put what?—All the
refuse from the refinery is collected in that tank.

498. And what acid do you treat it with?—Sul-
phuric acid.

499. None of your refuse escapes without that
treatment? — None whatever. Nothing can escape
except the ordinary water which really is not refuse,
because whenever we use chemical liquids, all these
chemical liquids are collected in this vessel and treated
there.

500. I assume that the process pays, otherwise you
would not adopt it?—It costs almost nothing to do it.
The sulphuric acid is of very small value, and the
vessel in which it is collected is a thing that costs £20
or £30 perhaps, not more.

501. Then of course it pays?—Yes.

502. And it is worth the while of the manufacturer
to recover this?—Yes; it will pay itself in less than a
month,

Mr. Davin Anperson, Ironmonger and Weighing-
machine Maker, 93 Stockwell Street, Glasgow,
examined.

503. The witness read the following paper :—

‘So far back as 7th October 1857 and July 1858,
the Glasgow Herald kindly inserted two letters of mine,
on the best plan for utilizing the sewage and the puri-
fication of the river Clyde.

‘After such a length of time I expected there would,
on the present occasion, have been brought before you
some original and ingenious principle for carrying out
this long desiderated improvement ; but seeing that
almost all the proposed plans have been suggested
ae years ago, I am induced to bring before you my
plan. ‘

‘T proposed that the old waterworks at Dalmar-
nock, where at that time there were powerful steam-
engines and extensive reservoirs, should be taken ad-
vantage of for my proposal, -which was, that by inter-
cepting sewers on both sides-of the river and running

43

parallel with it, and as far down as might be
necessary, the sewage thus intercepted ceald ie
the river instead of down, and falling into a large tank
be then pumped into the reservoirs, and, after simple
precipitation or otherwise, purified; the clear water
could be run into the river, when the residuum could
be treated in various ways, and be mixed with the
now comparatively useless ashpit contents, carted for
the purpose, and thus converted into good and profit-
able manure.

‘I have read of many plans, and some of them are
now brought before you, such as having receptacles
with perforated bottoms covered with ashes and char-
coal, and the water-closet pipes running into such; the
water thus cleaned would then be run into the sewers,
and the residuum to be used for manure. This plan I
consider good in its way, but it would be expensive,
costing, as the proposer says, so much as £30 for two
closets. By my plan the same thing could be done at
less cost; seeing the sewage would be conveyed to one
place, it could thus be much easier purified, and
otherwise manipulated in quantity, than by so many
thousand small receptacles.

‘If the dry-closets had been introduced before
water-closets, this plan I daresay might have done well
enough in small towns, but for such large places as
Glasgow it would be troublesome and expensive, so
that I think it would be too late now to change to such
a principle.

‘Messrs. Bateman & Bazalgette’s proposal to send
the sewage to the sands of Ayrshire I considered to
be very comprehensive, but by far too expensive to
cost so much as £3,000,000 sterling.

‘I think that by my scheme being partly used as at
first proposed, and by means of the same steam-engines
to be'erected, the sewage could be forced by pumps to,
say, the top of Cathcane Braes; it could be conducted
then by gravitation, in pipes or open drains, to all the
level grounds in the Vale of Clyde, or to the Strath of
Renfrewshire, and so all the farms in these districts
could be irrigated at a very cheap rate to the farmers,
and profitable to Glasgow.

‘I have no pretensions to be an engineer or a man of
science, to be able sufficiently to explain how my scheme
could be carried out; but when it was at first pro-
posed by me it was approved of by many gentlemen
of position, and even spoken of in the Town Council,
although brought forward by a member of Council
as his own idea; and the Glasgow Herald noticed ‘it
favourably. I believe my plan would cost somewhere
about £400,000 or £500,000, being perhaps less than
a sixth of the expense of Mr. Bateman’s.

‘If the distance to Ayrshire had been a good deal
less, where there are so many thousand acres of waste
sandy land, I have no doubt but Mr. Bateman’s plan
would have been tried long ago; but if my scheme were
adopted, which I think equally practicable, and as there
is plenty of land in the districts I have named within a
few miles of the city, and porous, sandy land, capable
of absorbing all the sewage, I have no doubt the
farmers would gladly take advantage of both the
sewage, as also the manufactured manure from the city
ashpits mixed on the spot with the sewage. I hardly
think it necessary to notice that the principle of irri-
gating land with sewage is by far the best and most
natural fertilizer and purifier, as instance the meadow
land of Edinburgh, which at one time was valueless,
but now is worth from £20 to £30, and more, per acre.
T am aware that there was an objection to feeding cattle
from grass so produced, and that the sewage on the
land was offensive to the smell. All this has been dis-
proved in respect to anything hurtful to the cattle or
their milk; and for smell, if any, sewage can now be
rendered inodorous and innocuous.

‘As I have already stated, I anticipated that some
new idea would have been proposed to overcome the
sewage difficulty, or else I would not have intruded my
plan to your notice at present. It was only yesterday
T thought of doing so; and therefore any inaccuracies
or want of explanation I will be glad to correct or
make more plain, if. wanted.

David
Anderson.
 

a CLYDE PURIFICATION COMMISSION.

‘T have just read a description in the Glasgow Mail
of to-day of the sewage works at Coventry; and as it
describes so fully the plan there carried on, I can’t do
better than refer you to such, as, in my opinion, the
same principle is quite applicable to my scheme for
Glasgow.’

504. I see you propose to take the sewage up the
river. Have you considered what point you would
take it to?—To Dalmarnock. Although the powerful
engines that once belonged to the Corporation are not
there,—at least they are used for a different purpose,—
the reservoirs, which are very extensive, are still there ;
and to supply new engines is a thing that could easily
be done in Glasgow. The distance to Dalmarnock
from the Cross of Glasgow is not much more than two
miles.

505. Where is the sandy land in the neighbourhood
that you refer to?—Round about the Tollcross dis-
trict, a distance of about three miles from here.
There is an immense quantity of it there.

Councillor DrecHorn, Glasgow, examined.

506. I have taken a good deal of interest in this
matter for the last thirty years, along with Mr. Morris
Pollock, of Govan, who was impregnated with the
notion that irrigation was the proper way of dealing
with the sewage; and a few years ago I took up that
scheme, and spoke about it to various people, among
others to Mr. Myles, the factor for the Elderslie estates.
I was saying to him that the proposal was to take the
sewage down to Ayrshire, and to irrigate the land there
with it; but, he said that before it got the length of
Ayrshire it would be taken up and utilized by the
farmers on the line through which it went. He said:
‘I know how it would be; and you may depend upon it
that that is the way to deal with the sewage of Glas-
gow. I have a number of papers and plans connected
with the matter, but I thought it was not worth while
troubling you with them.. That, however, was the
plan which Mr. Pollock thought was the correct one
for utilizing the sewage, and he had studied the sub-
ject. He had been abroad; he had been in America a
good deal, and I suppose he had seen the system in
operation there. He is now dead, but I have some of
his pamphlets and papers, which, if they would be of
any use to you, I could send in. The proposal at that
time was to convey the sewage across the river, just at
the present jail, at the end of the Green, and then to
send it down on the other side of the river.

Mr. W. B. W. Smrra, recalled.

507. I have to ask your attention, Sir John, to a
statement from Mr. Joseph Wylie, who is now in attend-
ance, and who called upon me this morning with an
introduction from a gentleman in Glasgow. Perhaps
you are aware, from the public prints, that we are at
present in some difficulty with our cleansing department.
This Mr. Wylie was formerly in the employment of that
department, and had charge of the mixing of the manure;
and, curiously enough, when talking to him this morn-
ing, the matter of the mixing of ashes and night-soil
came up. I said to him, ‘ But we are not getting the
price for the manure, because you must know as well
as I do that the whole matter evaporates.’ With this
introduction I shall leave Mr. Wylie to tell you what
he said to me in answer to that, and I have no doubt
he will give you the fullest information.

Mr. Josep Wruix, Contractor, Glasgow, and formerly
employed in the Cleansing Department, examined.

. 508. We found on mixing ashes and night-soil to-
gether, that when not immediately covered up they

evaporated into the air, and if they were kept open
for a matter of twenty-four hours they were worth
absolutely nothing. When the farmers bought the
stuff from us, I used'to tell them to put it down in
large heaps, and cover it up with the top-dressing of
their ground, in order to keep it from evaporating ;
and they found that was of great service in preserving
it for use.

509. Then I understand you to say that this evapora-
tion took place from the fact of the soil not being
covered up with ashes?—If it was not covered up
immediately it was laid down, either with ashes or with
earth, it evaporated all at once.

510. Suppose it had been properly covered up with
ashes, do you expect that it would then have lost
the valuable properties of the manure? — The full
strength of the manure would then have kept in
for a considerable time; but by not doing so, it eva-
porates.

511. But suppose this manure was immediately cov-
ered all over with ashes, what would be your opinion
of it then?—If it was immediately used on the farmers
getting it, it would do a great deal of good, and they
would then get the proper use of it; but if it was allowed
to lie for a considerable time, it became of very little
use.

512. How long were you employed in the Cleansing
Department ?—Three years. The manure did very
well for six months if it was at once used, but after
that it was of no use at all.

513. Do you mean that it would remain good for six
months?—Yes; it would remain good for six months
in the ground, if it was immediately used after being
mixed.

514. Is it of no benefit to a crop after six months?
—None whatever.

515. Have you ever known cases of injury to cattle
by manure carried out of the town?—No; I never knew
anything of that kind. ;

516. You never heard any complaints of that ?—
No; not further than that I have heard of pieces of
leather being left amongst the manure, and the cattle
sometimes choked upon them. When the fields came
to be sown out in grass, the cattle went to these pieces
of leather, whenever they could get them, and chewed
them, and sometimes worried upon them.

517. Do you mean that cattle are fond of chewing
leather ?—Yes; they chew it, and after it has been a
considerable time in their mouths, it goes down, and if
they are not relieved, it chokes them.

518. What price did the farmers give for the manure?
—When I was in the Department, we used to get 3s. 6d.
per ton for it, but I believe they are not getting so
much for it just now.

519. Did you carry it to them?—Yes; we sent it
out in railway waggons.

520. Who paid the railway carriage ?2—The farmers.

Mr. Wu. Rosertson, Civil Engineer, Glasgow,
examined.

521. In 1868 I wrote a letter to the Lord Provost’
of Glasgow as to the purification of the river; and as
Mr. Smith, whom I never met except in the discussion
of this question, has handed you a copy of my pam-
phlet without my knowledge,,I shall be happy to give
you any explanation with regard to it which you may
wish. (Produces copy of his pamphlet.)

522. Have you made any calculation of the quantity
of water which you would have in this tidal reservoir?
—It would hold about 250,000,000 cubic feet, but I
only expect 150,000,000 to be available for flushing
purposes each tide.

523. What is the size of the tanks which you pro-
pose to make ?—The tanks would be sufficient to contain
eight or ten hours’ sewage of the whole town on both
sides, and they could be enlarged.
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE.

‘* 594. What quantity do you take that to be?—It is
mentioned in the pamphlet.

525. Have you made any estimate of the cost of this
scheme ?—No; I have made no regular estimate, but I
jotted it down roughly at the time that it would cost
about £600,000. The wall, instead of being built as
shown there, might be a large embankment; and I pro-
pose that one water-channel might be in the reservoir,
where small craft could always come up the river
during the rising tide, and that would take them
from the main channel between Port Glasgow to the
Cart.

526. Did you assume in that estimate that you would
have to pay anything for the land on the foreshore?—No.

527. You assumed no charge for the land?—No
charge for the foreshore within high water-mark, but
there are 20 or 30 acres of ground to be taken
beyond that, for the purpose of giving a sufficient width
to the channel near to the Cart.

528. But as regards the foreshore, between high and.
low water-mark, you assume that you would have
nothing to pay for that?—Nothing. There would be
no pumping required for the scheme, except that there
would be a small subsidiary sewer along the river, to
take the lower drainage up, and that would require to
be pumped to the upper drain; that is, the drainage
from the centre of Glasgow.

529. How do you propose to apply this scheme to
the north side of the river ?—-The same as to the south
side—by a large drain.

530. I see that; but how do you get the sewage
from the tank on the north side to the reservoir on the
south side?—This (showing a plan) is a pure-water
reservoir. :

531. But what do you do on the north side?—Just
allow it to flow into the river, between high tide and
low tide, and the water would wash down the sewage
from both sides. The tidal reservoir would convey the
pure water up to the tanks.

532. And you take it that it would wash down the
sewage from both tanks ?—Yes.

Mr. Joun Cuarres Mexziss, Engineer of the General
Sewage and Manure Company (Limited), 1 Crown
Buildings, Queen Victoria Street, London, examined.

533. I believe you wish to give me some information
with regard to the operations of your company ?— Yes.
I propose, with your permission, to give you some account
of the work of the General Sewage and Manure Com-
pany, which has extended now over the best part of three
years. My description will relate more particularly to
the construction of the Sewage Works at Coventry,
for dealing with, defecating, and disposing of the sew-
age of that city. I may say that the city of Coventry
some three years ago was prohibited, by an order of the
Court of Chancery, from polluting the river Sherburne.
They had previously tried to filter their sewage through
gravel and matters of that kind, and they spent a good
deal of money in that way, but without any success.
- They then adopted the idea of taking a sewage farm,
which was at that time, I think, perhaps almost the
only way of getting out of this great difficulty; and I
have been informed, on very good authority, that they
purchased 282 acres of land, for which they paid
£28,500; but when they went a little further into the
cost of preparing that land, and draining it, and pump-
ing the sewage on to the top of it (for I may say that
some of it was nearly 100 feet high), and distributing
the sewage over the whole of the land, they came to the
conclusion that they would be involved in endless ex-
pense, and something they could not very well see their
way out of. It was about that time that the General
Sewage and Manure Company came forward, and
undertook to defecate the sewage, and to relieve the
city of expense; and that has been done in such a way
that the Court of Chancery and everybody else has been
M

45

satisfied. I may say that the works are precipitation
works, and they are adapted for dealing with the sew-
age by a chemical process. If you will allow me, I will
hand in a copy of a small pamphlet which I have just
drawn up with the view of giving an account of my
work in the matter of purifying sewage. This is
the order in which the sewage is dealt with,—first of
all, the grosser particles are strained out by a machine,
known as Latham’s Solid Sewage Extractor, so that the
garbage, and all fecal matter, and paper, and every-
thing of that kind is taken out of the sewage, and it is
brought into a cleaner condition for chemical treatment.
The sewage is then dealt with by a chemical process,
that is to say, sulphate of alumina in solution is
added, and milk of lime is added, and precipitation is
allowed to take place. The precipitate which takes
place is daily converted into a portable form, because I
have found from my own experience, extending now
over several years, that although we would certainly
be improving the condition of our rivers by purifying
the sewage in that way, yet we might be creating a
nuisance quite as bad by allowing the precipitate from
the sewage to accumulate, and not to reduce it to a
portable form, and get rid of it in some way or another.
The fourth process, which is in operation in Coventry,
is the filtration of the effluent water.

534. Is that done after dealing with it chemically?
—Yes.

535. Then first you filter it, then you deal with it
chemically, and now you are to give us the next pro-
cess ?—Yes. _ I perhaps might have taken up the pro-
cesses in better order, but I find that in the pamphlet I
have got them in that order. I might have taken them
thus,—first, mechanical straining of the sewage; second,
chemical treatment and precipitation; third, filtration
of the effluent water; and fourth, reduction of the pre-
cipitate daily to a portable condition. I would here
remark that the General Sewage and Manure Company
in their works deal with the whole of the sewage of the
town, amounting to two million gallons per day. It is
not a mere experiment; the works are substantial works
in every way, and every drop of sewage that comes
from the town is dealt with. The population amounts
to about 40,000. I may also say that we are under
pretty strict supervision there; the municipal authorities
keep a very close watch over us, to see that everything
goes right; and I am happy to say that not only does
everything go right, but everything has gone right for
the last twelve months, so that I am speaking from
experience. The sewage of Coventry is a very foul
sewage. It is rendered very foul and costly to deal
with because of the large amount of dyeing refuse from
the silk-dyeing factories in the town. Sometimes it is
as black as jet, sometimes it is bright blue, sometimes
it is red, and sometimes it is other colours. With
regard to the effluent water, I would say that a very
small amount of land is used for filtering it. The pro-
portion of land required is of course very small as
compared with the large amount of land that would be
necessary for filtering crude sewage. I find that 4}
acres are sufficient to filter the whole of the effluent
water from the Coventry sewage, but we have prepared
9 acres as a filter, in order that we may be able to
change our filter beds. When one has been used for a
fortnight or three weeks, we change it for another, and
then plough over the surface. I have for my own
information had an analysis made of the effluent water
by Dr. Voelcker, and [ think it shows a very fair
standard of purity. The analysis itself is given at page
14 of the pamphlet. It gives first the mineral matters,
but when we come to the really injurious matter you
will see that in the imperial gallon it contains only -630
grain of free (saline) ammonia and ‘042 grain of
organic (albuminoid) matter: Dr. Voelcker’s opinion
with regard to it is as follows: ‘ The water contained
a few flakes of suspended matter, which rapidly settled
to the bottom of the bottle in which the water was
received. It had no perceptible smell, and was almost
free from colour; the residue, which was left on
evaporating the water, was only slightly coloured
yellow.

The sample of effluent water contains but.

John Charles
Meltiss.
46 CLYDE PURIFICATION COMMISSION,

John Charles little organic (albuminoid) ammonia, and not much

Meliss.

more than half a grain of saline ammonia per gallon.
From this sample the nitrogenous organic constituents
of raw sewage appear to have become oxydized and
changed into nitrates to a very large extent.’ I may
here remark that I have myself kept fish in this water
for two days without any effect being produced upon
them, and many gentlemen whom I have had the
pleasure of showing over the works have not only
tasted it, but several of them I have noticed have even
swallowed a small portion of it.

536. Can you give me any idea of the cost of the
works ?—Do you mean the cost of erecting our works,
or the cost of working them annually ?

537. I should like first the cost of erecting the
works, and then the annual cost?—The works cost, I
should say, about £14,000.

538. Is that including the land ?—It is exclusive of
land.

539. What do you call the annual cost of working ?

—I have got it before me in the form of an annual
charge on the rateable property. A charge of 1s. per
£ on the rateable value would cover the whole
cost.
_ 540. Do you know what the rateable value is ?—The
cost of working is about £5000 per annum, or perhaps
I should say, as I am speaking from memory, between
£4000 and £5000, for it is not quite £5000.

541. At any rate it does not exceed £5000 ?—
No.
542. By what name is this process called ?—Ander-
son’s process.

543. You say that it is milk of lime and sulphate of
alumina that are used ?—Yes, sulphate of alumina and
milk of lime.

544. Do you know anything about the works at Rio
de Janeiro, where it appears to me that very nearly the
same process is used ?—I do not.

545. I have seen them lately, and they use sulphate
of alumina and milk of lime there, and it occurred to
me that the processes might be the same. Mr. Gotto
is the engineer there, and I went over the works with
him.—I was not aware that they were working the
process out there.

546. They are certainly using sulphate of alumina
end milk of lime. Whether they use something else or
not I am not certain, but these two things I know are
used at the works at Rio.—One great advantage that
we have at our Coventry works is, that we manufacture
e cheap sulphate of alumina there. We make the
chemical there, so that we produce at a very moderate
cost what, if we went into the market for it, we should
have to buy at, I suppose, four or five times the
cost.

547. Do you dispose of the precipitate ?—We do.

548. What do you get for it?——I have had it
analyzed also by Professor Voelcker, who is, I think,
if not the best, at least one of the best authorities on
the subject; and the material, his analysis of which is
given at page 19 of the pamphlet, is worth from 30s.
to 40s. per ton as a manure. It is not a high-priced
manure, a matter to which I shall speak presently ;
but if it were not taking up too much of your time, I
should like to give some little description of the process
employed in our works.

549. I shall be glad to hear it.—I have already
referred to the straining of the sewage, which is our
first process. As it goes through the city it is strained
by means of these extractors which I have mentioned.
Then we manufacture the chemical on the spot; then
we prepare a solution of the chemical by dissolving it,
and then we add it to the sewage. The sewage and
the chemical are thoroughly mixed together, as it passes
through continuously. It then passes on, and a pre-
paration of milk of lime is made in a similar way to the
solution of sulphate of alumina, and then the whole of
the mixture is stirred together again. This operation
goes on constantly; as the sewage passes through a
well, it is simply stirred round.

550. Can you give me the proportions of sulphate of
alumina and milk of lime to any given quantity of

sewage—say to a gallon?—I could not speak to that
with certainty. I might be misleading you if I were to
attempt'to state that. Of course it varies very. much
at different hours of the day, according to the quality
of the sewage; and that is a matter which we find, on
practical experience, that it is better to leave in the
hands of the working man. ‘That seems a crude way
of doing it, but I find in practice that it is better than
any theory. He does it in this way: At @ certain
point he has glass test-tubes, with which he takes off a
sample; and if he sees that precipitation does not take
place quickly—and of course from practice he knows
how quickly it ought to take place—he simply throws
on more or less of the precipitating material. Then
the whole mixture—that is, the sewage mixed with the
sulphate of alumina and the lime—enters the precipi-
tating tanks; and I find that that mixing is really of
very great consequence. Many people have told me
that I have a good deal too much machinery, but I do
not at all agree with them, because I have tried it both
ways, and I find that the thorough mixing economizes
chemicals very considerably. We treat it as a con-
tinuous system—that is, we allow the treated sewage
to enter at one end of the tanks as the effluent water is
passing over at the other, so that the operation is going
on continuously. By the time it has reached the end
of our tank, subsidence has taken place sufficiently to
allow a fine sheet of water to flow over a weir; and
that water, as I remarked just now, we filter in the
tank. I do not myself consider that it is absolutely
necessary to filter it, and I think that wherever there is
a large river, or wherever it goes into the sea, we shall
probably find in time, from experience, that it will be
made sufficiently pure to go into a large river or the
sea; but at Coventry we have got a very small river,
—a river that contains, generally speaking, about one-
half the flow of the sewage itself; so that we have
filtered the water there in order to make it come up to
a high standard.

551. What do you do with the precipitate? Do
you dry it ?—Before coming to that, perhaps you will
allow me to mention that there is an account of the
works in the Morning Advertiser, which I did not meet
with until this morning, and which I won’t read through
unless you wish me to do it, for it is a pretty long one;
but it may be of interest to you. It has appeared in
several other papers; it appears in the Hour, and it
appears in the provincial papers published in the neigh-
bourhood. This account which I met with in the
Morning Advertiser this morning appears to me to give a
tolerably fair description of the system. Now, having dis-
posed of the water, I come to the precipitate or sludge.
At present we work those tanks for a period varying
from two to three days, and we have four tanks. I
may say that we are always working three, while we
are cleaning up the fourth, and so the process goes on
in regular rotation. The precipitate or sludge which
falls to the bottom is swept up by manual labour. We
have found manual labour to be the best for this work,
because it employs men who must be otherwise on the
works. One of the chief features of our system is that
we have very few men on our works. I don’t think
they exceed twelve or thirteen at any time, and at night
we employ two men only. On Sunday, I am sorry to
say, we are still obliged to keep our work going, but
the labour then is reduced to a minimum, for there are
simply two men on the premises to see that the engine
is going. There is no work of preparation of chemicals
or anything of that kind done on Sunday. Then the
precipitate from the bottoms of the tanks is passed’into
an under-ground chamber, which is 3 feet below the
bottom of the precipitating tanks, and there we have a
means of drawing off any water that rises to the top.
Of course the precipitation still goes on there; it con-
solidates to a certain extent, and. we draw off the efflu-
ent water there by a very simple contrivance. There
is a sluice in the side of the tank, with some holes and
pins, and we pull out the pins in a downward direction.
The sludge then contains,—of course it: varies very
much,—but I should say it contains about 90 per cent.
of water, and perhaps often more. The sludge passes
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE.

from this under-ground chamber by a passage under
our drying rooms, and it is there lifted pretty much in
the same way a8 common dredging machines do. We
first .of all strain that mud, or, as it is commonly called,
filter it (I think myself that straining is the better word
for it); and it is done by a very ingenious patent
machine,—the first one, I think, that has ever been made
is now on our works at Coventry. I don’t know that I
can describe it: very well so as to make myself perfectly
clear to you. Itisa large drum, about 8 feet in diameter
and about 4 feet across, which revolves in a trough
of sludge. The surface of it is covered first of all with
a wire netting, and then with calico. As it revolves
and dips into the sludge, the air is exhausted behind the
wire netting and the calico, so that the mixtureis sucked
through, and a film of stiff sludge adheres to the face of it.
As it goes round, the water passes out through the
trunnion or axle, so to speak, of the machine, and is
drawn away ; the stiff mud is scraped off, and has then
got to a much stiffer consistency. That seems perhaps
to be an elaborate machine, and I thought so myself
when I first heard of it; but after seeing it working, I
have a much better opinion of it than I had at first,
and we have.adopted it. The mud, or sludge, or pre-
cipitate then passes into a drying machine, which may
be tolerably well known by the name of Millburn’s
Patent Sludge Drying Machine, where heat is applied
to it. It is there dried to a powder, and that. produces
the sewage manure (of which I gave the analysis just
now rem p. 19 of the pamphlet), worth about 30s. or
40s. per ton. But we'have found from experience that
although it is well worth that money to the farmer, who
is naturally very shrewd and knows what he is about,
he does not take very readily to a manure worth only
80s. or 40s. per ton. He argues in this way, ‘If I
can get a.manure at £6 or £7 per ton, it will cost
me so much more in proportion to cart your cheap
manure than it does to cart that concentrated manure,’
and therefore he very naturally does not like the cheap
manure very well; but in order to meet that difficulty,
we add fortifying agents—that is, other fertilizing
agents—to the manure, sulphates of ammonia, phos-
phates, and other materials, so as to bring the manure
up to any value that the farmer demands. In that
way we find it meets a much more ready sale, and be-
comes much more popular. I have just now explained
one mode of drying amd of fortifying this manure; but
the General Sewage and Manure Company have within
the last week patented another mode of drying and of
fortifying at the same time, which I think will lessen
the cost of production, and be very much.more satisfac-
tory. Itisa mode of drying the sludge without the
application of artificial heat, or if heat is employed, a
very small amount of artificial heat will do. I will ex-
plain the process in this way. The wet sludge is mixed
‘with dry powdered phosphate of lime and sulphuric
acid at the same time. Of course a great deal of the
moisture, or most of the moisture, in that way is
absorbed, and enters into chemical combination as
water of crystallization; and after remaining for per-
haps twelve or twenty-four hours it dries up the whole
material, so that with the dry sludge we enrich the
manure.

552. Can you give me the weight of the precipitate
from, say, a day’s sewage of 2,000,000 gallons ?—
‘Between 4 and ‘5 tons. ‘That is perhaps a wide
margin that I am giving you, but it is as near as I
can estimate ; I should say about 43 tons.

558. Then 2,000,000 gallons of sewage affords
about 44 tons of precipitate?—Yes; it is not less
than that. Tt is very probably a little over it. It is
dry precipitate, when it is reduced to the dry form.

554, ‘When. giving me £5000 as the cost, was that
with credit for the sales or without credit?—It was
without credit for the sales. I have not entered upon
that. There is a sale for the material, and it has been
sold, but, as with all new articles in the market, it
requires a little time to make its way. I may further
say, that what the General Sewage and Manure Com-
pany have done at Coventry they are now quite pre-
pared to do elsewhere.

-the ey for this reason,

47

555. How long is it since the
—It was formed in 1872.

556. Then there would be no account of it t
the Rivers’ Pollution Commission, which gat conan
ago il think not. I may here mention that the
operations of the company have been kept tolerably in
< which I hope you will
agree with, that they adopted what I think was a very
wise policy. They said: ‘There has been so much
theorizing about sewage, and so much talk, misleading
the public, that we will not come forward publicly with
our scheme until we have dealt with the whole sewage
of a town for a time to the entire satisfaction of all
concerned, and then put the facts before the public.’

557. When were your works completed at Coventry ?
rd were completed and put in operation in April

558. And have you since April 1874 been dealing
with the whole sewage of Coventry ?—Yes. I may say,
further, that I have been only a very short time in
Glasgow; I only arrived this morning; but since I
have been here, I have endeavoured to make myself
acquainted with some of the local circumstances ; and
although it may seem presumption in me to say any-
thing after having been here for so short a time, I
think I have found out a little about the sewage of this
place; and I believe, from what I can understand, that
it is quite possible to deal with it by precipitation, just
as is done at Coventry, without pumping. I have a
great objection to pumping. Pumping sewage is a
ruinous undertaking, particularly in faulty sewers where
water gets in. Of course it is a very approximate
thing, but I feel perfectly authorized in saying that the
General Sewage and Manure Company are quite pre-
pared to deal with the whole of the sewage of Glasgow
in the same way as they have done at Coventry; and
‘they will erect their own works, on payment of, I should
say, @ maximum rate of 1s. in the £ on the rateable
value, or a minimum of 6d. Having been here so very
short a time, it is very difficult for me to say anything
which would be more definite,—so much depends upon
the quality of the sewage, and a great many local cir-
cumstances,—but I am sure that J am stating a maxi-
mum and a minimum amount in stating what I have
done. I am satisfied, from information which has been
kindly given to me this morning by several gentlemen
in the city, that very little, if any, pumping would be
necessary, and that the intercepting sewers might be
laid down and the sewage taken to a particular spot,
where it could be worked by gravitation. The fall
required for working our process at Coventry is very
small. We do not pump there, we work it by gravi-
tation. I have found from experience that pumping
sewage with defective sewers is very expensive work,
and very likely to land in a great deal of trouble. I
may further add that there is no nuisance arising from
our works at all. We have worked them now through
winter and summer, at different temperatures, high and
low; the men are all healthy, and like the work; and
the works do not bear the aspect of anything objection-
able in the slightest degree. In fact, I have made it a
rule in throwing all my influence into this sewage
question—which, I think, is about one of the most
important that we have now to consider—to see that
everything should be done in a proper, orderly, and
cleanly manner, and that neither the men nor anything
else about it should be slovenly. Hitherto we have
been in the habit of saying, with regard to sewage,
‘Oh, this is an objectionable thing ; let us put it out of
sight,’ and in order to put it out of sight we put it into
our rivers, and now we are suffering.

‘559. [think I have got all the information I want,
and if I should want anything more I shall get it at
your offices.:—If you were disposed to inspect our
works personally, in order to verify what I have stated,
I should be most happy to show them to you.

company was formed ?

John Charles
Melliss.
William
Millar,

 

48 CLYDE PURIFICATION COMMISSION.

Mr. Wm. Miiuar, Treasurer of the City of Glasgow,
examined.

560. I would state in the first place, that of all the
many systems that have hitherto been proposed for
Glasgow, it does not seem to me that any one of them
meets the whole requirements of the case in a satis-
factory manner; these requirements are so various,
according to the different districts of the city. Of
course we have all considered the great scheme of
Messrs. Bateman & Bazalgette, but I have certain
objections to that scheme, which, with your permission,
I would state. The first objection is to the enormous
expense of pumping the whole of the sewage of Glas-
gow, including the rainfall. Were it only the sewage
that was to be pumped, it might possibly be a manage-
able quantity, but the rainfall would involve an enor-
mous amount of outlay.

561. Do you think they propose to deal with the
whole of that ?—The whole of it, including the rainfall.
There is no separate system for the sewage ; the rainfall
goes into our sewers, and therefore the whole must be
pumped, the same as in London. Now the quantity
of rainfall will be vastly greater than the sewage water,
—great though it is,—and would become so enormous
as to be enormously expensive. Then that expense
would require to be borne, in the first place, entirely by
an assessment; and I should say that that assessment,
if laid on over the whole city, would be altogether
unfair to certain districts of the city. There are some
portions of the city of Glasgow, as you are no doubt
aware, that are actually benefiting us by their excreta.
Were it not for the excreta of the lower parts of the
city—that is, the middle and east parts—we could not
dispose of our ashes at all; but in consequence of the
ashes being mixed with that excreta, we are enabled to
get a large sum annually out of our refuse. Therefore
it would be altogether unfair to tax those people who
are benefiting the city, in order to pay the expense con-
nected with the great water-closet system, which is
really the chief cause of the evil that is created. Then
another objection I would have to Messrs. Bateman &
Bazalgette’s system is, that it would encourage the use
of water-closets. Now I think our aim should be
rather to discourage than to encourage the use of
water-closets, because one great and necessary evil of
these closets is the pollution of the sewers; and the
gases arising from thesesewers get into the houses and
are injurious to health. J think no one can doubt that,
to a greater or Jess degree, the gases from our sewers
injure the health of the population, and that therefore
the more water-closets are used the greater is the
injury done in that way. My opinion would be, that,
were such a system adgpted, a tax should be put on
water-closets specially, as being the great cause of the
nuisance. Then I would also say, as being an opinion
which I have formed, that no scheme whatever will be
sound in principle that does not secure the utilization
of the sewage, or rather the excreta, for the purposes
of cultivation. It is intended by nature for that pur-
pose; and if it is diverted from that purpose, it must
come back upon us in some way or other, either in a
deficiency of supply or in a difficulty of disposing of
it. Now I should like to say, that if a scheme of
drainage is to be adopted at all, such a scheme as
Mr. Carrick’s seems to me to be the most useful one
for a large district of Glasgow. The district to
the north-west of Glasgow is certainly the greatest
one for water-closets. There is by far the greatest
number of water-closets in it, and Mr. Carrick’s
scheme takes in the whole of that district. He would
carry away the sewage by gravitation, without any
pumping, to a district of country to the west of Glas-
gow which is admirably adapted for the purpose of
irrigation. There is a large extent of level ground about
Yoker which is admirably adapted for that purpose.
Then, as in my opinion no one scheme would be
applicable or fair in its application to all the districts
of Glasgow, I would say that the city should be
divided into districts for this purpose, and that each

ao

district should be dealt with in a different manner,
and according to the circumstances of the district. I
think that for that purpose a local board should be
formed in Glasgow, consisting, I should say, of the
Master of Works, two members of the Health Com-
mittee, the medical officer, and three members of the
Trades House, or in any other manner that might be
considered desirable; and to that board should be
committed the duty of deciding as to the best means
of dealing with each district of the city with regard
to the disposal of its excreta or sewage, and that board
should have power to compel landlords to carry out
any arrangements that they may consider necessary in
each district, and also to assess the inhabitants of each
district, if an expensive system of drainage were con-
sidered necessary. I have taken no notice of the question
of public works, which is of course a very important one’
in such a city as Glasgow, because I think that the
Bill which is at present before Parliament on the
pollution of rivers, if it is passed, would be sufficient to
remedy the evils arising from public works in Glasgow ;
but as a matter of principle, I should say that every
manufacturer should be compelled to purify the water
that he uses before he passes it into any sewer or any
river. Then, again, I have taken no notice of the out-
lying districts of Glasgow. I have only taken notice
of the city itself and its suburbs; but I have really no
opinion as to these outlying districts, or as to how
they should be dealt with, except to this extent, that
they as well as Glasgow, and to the extent to which
Glasgow is compelled to keep impurities out of the
river, should also be compelled to do the same thing.
With regard to the various schemes that have been
propounded, I don’t want to say almost anything. I
think I have seen nearly the whole of them in opera-
tion; but it seems to me that of the whole, these two,
the charcoal dry-closets on the one hand, and the
Liernur system of removing excreta on the other, are
the best adapted for the requirements of such a city as
Glasgow.

Mr. Gavin Coapman, Manufacturing Chemist,
Glasgow, examined.

562. I understand you had charge at one time of
removing the urine from some of the urinals in Glas-
gow ?—Yes.

563. Are you still doing that ?—Yes.

564, And you are well acquainted, I suppose, with
Glasgow ?—Yes; I am very well acquainted with it.
I have, for the sake of conciseness, committed to writ-
ing a few remarks which I wish to make :—

‘The sewage question in Glasgow has been for
some years discussed from many points of view, so
many, indeed, as to introduce no little confusion of
ideas in regard to the whole question. It has been
considered in its relation to the health of the city as
affected hy sewer gases; in its commercial aspects, as
to the prospect of its being a source of profit, or the
cause of great expense ; and lastly, the question seems
to have come forward most prominently of all, What
is to be done to improve the state of the river? I pre
sume that this inquiry has reference principally to the
last question. Limited to this as the sole or, at least,
principal end in view, the solution of the Glasgow
sewage question becomes comparatively simple, as a
great many proposed schemes of operation must at
once be laid aside—schemes which, even if successful,
would be very partial in their effect in the purification
of the river.

‘It is quite evident that there are only three general
methods by which all schemes having the preservation
of the purity of the river for their end must proceed.

‘ Hither all polluting matter must be carefully kept
out of the sewers, or, if allowed to get in, the produce of
the sewers must be collected and purified before it flows
into the river, or finally, without attempting any purifi-
cation, it must be raised up by pumping, and made to
discharge itself on some convenient part of the coast.
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 49

‘In regard to the first of these methods, all experience

shows it to be impracticable. It might be possible, by
stringent regulations rigidly enforced, to compel all
"kinds of manufactories and chemical works to purify
their refuse liquors ere passing into the sewers. It
would be a very great hardship to some parties, in many
cases an injustice, as well as an injury to the commer-
cial interests of the city. It could be done, however ;
but after all, the most serious and most unmanageable
source of evil would still have to be dealt with. Beyond
all question, the ordinary excreta of cities is that which
most of all pollutes rivers, and it is the very kind of
‘matter which can only partially be prevented from
getting into thesewers. It might naturally be supposed
that, were @ city completely furnished with water-closets
and conveniences of every kind, the contents could be
collected, and the sewers kept free from contamina-
tion. Experience shows it not to be so easy a matter.
As a proof of this, I can offer the following data:—
About three years ago the Health Committee of the
city fitted up some water-closets with the late Mr.
Hoey’s contrivance for limiting the supply of water.
The contents of these closets have been regularly col-
lected, and I am in @ position to state what is their
average quantity and quality. In Abercorn Street,
New City Road, there are, in a tenement belonging to
Mr. Elder, seven closets in seven different houses occupied
in all by sixteen grown-up persons and eleven children.
The weekly produce is about 110 gallons, and the
quality is about 180 grains of nitrogen per gallon.
Now there are about 50,000 water-closets in the city ;
‘and supposing them to yield at the same rate, this
would, only give in all somewhere about 450 tons of
nitrogen. In a city numbering about 500,000 inhabit-
ants, the yearly production of nitrogen is at a low
average, 10 Ibs. per individual, or in all about 2200 tons;
showing that, in the present state of things, the whole
water-closets of the city, if trapped, and the contents
collected, would not account for much more than about
the fifth part of the whole polluting matter of the sew-
age; and the rest would inevitably find its way to the
river by.the sewers.’ [I may say on this matter that I
differ entirely from Treasurer Millar in his statement
that the water-closets are the entire source of the con-
tamination of the river. I think that is an entire mis-
‘take. In Manchester, for instance, where there are
‘almost no closets, the sewage is just as bad as in cities
which are full of water-closets; and this is a proof of
it, thatin Glasgow, at the present time, the water-closets
are not supplying much more than one-fifth part of the
matter that pollutes the river. It flows into the river
in all different sorts of ways. These are actual data,
which I am prepared to verify at any time, and which
any person can verify, because the contents are drawn
from these water-closets every week, and they are taken
to a place, I think, in Stirling Road, so that the thing is
quite a measurable thing ; it is not a matter of guess
at all.] ‘Something of the kind must account for the
fact that in cities where there are no water-closets, such
a8 Manchester, the sewage is just about as filthy as in
those where there are.

‘ There is no doubt that by a perfect and thoroughly
organized system, extending to the poorest and dirtiest
parts of the city, this state of things could be improved,
and a very much larger part of the total excreta kept
out of the sewers; but I cannot conceive of a state of
things so perfect that there would not be a large
margin finding its way uncontrolled to the river. And
then, in a large and rapidly increasing city, the margin
would become an absolutely larger one year by year,
whilst the river remaining always the same would, in
the process of years, gradually become as polluted as
ever. This objection must therefore apply to all
schemes which profess to collect and deal with this
part of the sewage by itself. .

‘ With regard to the plans proposing to deal with the
total sewage in a body before entering the river, the
‘most of them proceed on a totally mistaken idea that
Sewage can be cleansed by screening, filtering, and
keeping suspended matter out of it. A certain benefit
no doubt could be derived from the absence of solid

matter at the bottom of the river, but it would be a
very partial one, and not worth the labour and expense
that would require to be expended in accomplishing it.

‘ Almost the same kind of remark applies to the diffe-
rent chemical processes which have been proposed to
deal with the sewage in bulk. It has to be borne in
mind that, owing to the large consumpt of water, the
sewage of Glasgow is less than half the strength of

that of London and many other large cities. Pro-

cesses, such as that of precipitation by sulphate of
alumina, perchloride of iron, and that known ag the
A BC process, would only result in a waste of the
chemicals employed, and produce no good result.’ [I
noticed that a gentleman who preceded me, Mr. Melliss,
mentioned, if I heard the figures right, that the effluent
water flowing from the sewage, after it is cleansed,
contained rather more than a grain of ammonia per
imperial gallon,—being four of one and six of another.
[Mr. Melliss—The figures in the analysis are -630
grains of pure (saline) ammonia, and -042 of organic
(albuminoid) ammonia.] Well, that is almost three-
fourths of a grain per gallon, including the saline am-
monia, and that would be almost one-third part of the
whole organic matter in the sewage. Now the sewage
is very weak; it has not much more than two grains
per gallon on the average; and if you take that as
diluted with the rainfall, it would be much weaker. I
am, however, taking it without the rainfall at all, so
that, even with such a process as that, you would still
have nearly all your polluting matter left in it when it
flowed into the river. It is so very weak that it makes
it almost a hopeless matter to deal with it by any pro-
cess.] ‘ Perhaps the best plan of the kind, and the one
best adapted for a very weak sewage like that of Glas-
gow, would be precipitation by lime. This would cer-
tainly throw down all suspended matter in the sewage,
make a clear liquor, and rid it of all offensive smells,
except that of ammonia; but this would require a very
heavy outlay at the first, to put up the necessary works,
and it would entail a constant expense afterwards, be-
cause experience has shown that, though the resultant
manure has a real value, it is practically unsaleable.’
[These manures are just of the kind which Mr. Melliss
described. In Leicester, for instance, they had a
manure which was of the theoretical value of 20s. per
ton, but in reality they could get almost nothing for it.
In fact, when I was there, the farmers were welcome to
come and take it away for nothing.

565. You are now speaking of that, which was simply
dealt with by lime precipitation ?— Yes.

566. I know that in Leicester it was practically of no
value.—That is the case. The sulphate of alumina
throws down a little more of the nitrogenous matter,
and makes it a little more valuable, but, of course, it
only throws down a portion of it.]

‘ The only other method of dealing with the sewage in
a body that can claim consideration is irrigation. Here
we are met, however, with all kinds of difficulties. The
weakness of the sewage, the abundance of the rainfall
in the West of Scotland, and the great improbability
that the inhabitants of any large district of the country
would allow it to be turned into a great sewage farm,
are insuperable objections to any prospect of good
being done by irrigation. It could be tried on a small
scale, but, looking at the little success that has attended
it in other places, and especially at the peculiar diffi-
culties which surround the subject in the case of Glas-
gow, it would be mere folly to suppose that any return
could be got by irrigation in the way of lessening the
expense of removing the sewage. There may be many
ways. yet discovered of removing part of the value
which undoubtedly exists in the sewage, and it would
be unwise to neglect them; but if the river is to be
thoroughly and properly cleansed, it must be paid for
in the meantime. :

‘To get the river pure and limpid would be a kind of
luxury. In its present state it is not so bad as that of
many of the rivers in England. Things might go on
as they are for fifty years, and it would not be so bad
as the Irwell in Manchester and the Aire in Leeds are
at the present time. There is no proof that, in an im-

Gavin
Chapman.

 
Gavin
‘Chapman.

50 CLYDE PURIFICATION COMMISSION.

proved state, it would do anything to improve the sani-
tary state of the city ; but it would be certainly a great
‘boon to be able to look down on it from the bridges
snd see it bright and clear, and to be able to sail down
it without being annoyed by the stench, which is so
offensive at present. It is the question of 8d. to 10d.
on the rates.’ J think 1s. on the rates, which was what
Mr. Melliss spoke of, would be something enormous.
[Mr. Meiliss.—I said from 6d. to 1s.] Well, to pay a
company from 6d. to 1s. for taking the matter out of
the sewage by a chemical process, when it could be
taken to the sea for 10d., would be great folly. The
question just is, Are the public willing to pay for it?

567. I think you gave the quantity which would be
taken and disposed of by the present number of water-
closets as one-fifth ?—Practically, it would be about
one-fifth.

568. I don’t know if you gave the quantity which you
think would be disposed of if every tenement had a
water-closet?—No; but I don’t think that one-half of
the city is supplied with water-closets just now.

569. Then, suppose the entire city had water-closets,
how much of what you call the sewage of the city
would find its way into the river ?—I should say some-
where about one-half.

570. I see it is stated in one of the tables which
have been put in that there are now 31,000 water-
closets and about 100,000 houses in the city, so that
that would only be about one-third?—Yes; but I
was going on the assumption that there were 50,000.
I have heard the number variously stated.

571. With reference to precipitation by lime, have
you had any experience of it ?—Yes,

572. I ask you the question because I was informed
at Leicester that the effluent fluid, with precipitation by
lime, although it comes out without smell and quite
clear, yet in a few days begins to smell again almost as
bad as ever.—It has a smell of ammonia. The system
at Leicester is very far from being a good one. It is
too hurriedly done. The tanks are by far too small,
and the sewage does not get time to settle. It is run
away into the river before the precipitation is complete.

573. I saw the operation there. The water came
out from the building without smell, and quite clear ;
but the burgh surveyor assured me that by the time it
flowed three or four miles down the river it began to
smell again.—That is the case. It is not perfectly
cleansed. There is no doubt it is a great improvement,
and the water is quite clear, but it is not perfectly
cleansed. There are none of these chemical processes
that have succeeded in making the water perfectly clean.

574, I have been furnished with the result of an ex-
periment by Mr. Coleman of using crushed shale as a
filter, a process which I think is deserving of further
experiments. This bottle (showing) contains sewage,
while the other bottle (showing) contains the result
after the sewage had been passed through a layer of
3 or 4 inches of crushed shale. Mr. Coleman said
he was very much surprised at the result himself, for
the water came out as you now see it; and although
it has been kept in his office for a considerable time, it
has still no smell. It would seem to me from that ex-
periment that that material might be very valuable as
a filter, assuming that these samples are a fair test of
it, because crushed shale is a very cheap material, and
there would be plenty of it. Has that been tested in
any way chemically ?—[Mr. Carrick—No. Mr Oole-
man got the sewage from me, and he sent me that as
the result of his experiment. ]—Sewage is a very decep-
tive thing to look at. The smell is certainly away
from that sample, but it would be necessary to test it
chemically, The Glasgow sewage is so very weak
compared with the sewage of other towns, there being
not above two grains of nitrogen per gallon in it, that
any chemical process has little effect upon it. Many
of the processes that are practised upon the sewage of
English towns take a good deal of matter out of that
sewage; but even after that, it is not much better than
the Glasgow sewage is at its worst. We are drowned
here with water altogether.

575. One of the great objections to the precipitation

by lime, and what apparently they were suffering from
at Leicester, was the accumulation of the precipitated
matter, which they could not dispose of at all.—Yes;
that is a great source of trouble.

576. They could not sell it, and they could not even
get it carted away for nothing.—Quite true; and it
remains there accumulating, an enormous nuisance to:
the place. It is manure, however, if it could be got
taken away; but if it stands any time in bulk, the am-
monia must go away from it. If it was fixed by an
acid when it was coming out, then it would be all very
well; but that cannot very well be done. It is lime,
and no acid will fix it until you neutralize the lime ; and
it would take an enormous amount of acid to do so.

577. Have you any experience as to the nature of
the street refuse—I mean, as to the quantity of organic
matter it contains as compared with sewage ?—LI see it
taken off the streets and carted away continually ; but
all that I know is, that it is a very unequal thing,
Sometimes it will be a great deal better than at others.
Of course there is a good deal of it that consists of the
droppings of horses, and the abrasions of the granite,
and so on; but it is just mixed up along with the ashes
and the refuse from the works, where ‘there are a great
many pans and pan-closets.

578. Can you tell me anything about the matter from
the back courts? I went into a few of them yesterday,
and, from what I saw, I should think the washings from
these back courts would be nearly as bad as sewage—the
courts were so dirty. Ifa shower of rain was coming on,
and washing that out into the sewer, I should have some
difficulty in judging which was worst.—These back
courts must have been some unfavourable specimens,.
for Glasgow closes are pretty well washed out now.

579. I know that the smell was very bad, and the
filth was very considerable—They are vastly improved.
now from what they were.

Mr. J. C. Metuiss, recalled.

580. With regard to the works at Coventry, I think
I omitted to mention that that is really the only instance
in the kingdom at present where the whole of the sew-
age of a town is dealt with to the satisfaction of the
authorities.

581. I quite understand that you deal there with
the whole of the sewage ?—Yes; and that has been
extending over twelve months to their satisfaction.

582. And you don’t require any separate system
previous to treating it?—-No. We have got beyond
mere laboratory experiments ; and adopting the system
and trying it for twelve months has done the whole:
thing. With regard to the manure produced, I may
mention that our manure is of a better quality than
that produced by a precipitation of lime alone; because
we don’t allow any solid matter to go into the sewage
with our chemical.

583. I am not assuming for.a moment that the pre-
cipitate which you get at your works is of the quality of
that which I saw at Leicester—No; and of course we
have sold it, and we are selling it at the price I have
mentioned.

 

Mr. Joun Purvis, 222 Buchanan Street, Glasgow,
examined.

584. I am a hotel-keeper at present, but I have been
an agriculturist during most of my life. I am only an
eight years’ residenter in Glasgow, but I have looked
about a good deal with regard to this great question;
and I think, from the lie of the river and the sluggish
state of its current, that it is an extraordinary thing
that sueh a vast amount of stuff should be allowed to be
poured into it. I think that to propose to run it away
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE.

to a great distance, and use it for irrigation in some
country place, or to run it away into the sea, is out of
the question ;. because if it were ran into some country
lace, it would ultimately become a nuisance and would
be condemned, while conveying it to the sea would
be such an enormous expense, and puta stop to a great
many other things while it was going on. There is a
plan which I have thought of many a time for meeting
the difficulty, and that is with regard to the water-
closets. To deal with the water-closets in the way that
some people speak of would make such a war among
the tenants that I don’t think it possible to get it done.
My plan would involve very little alteration on the
water-closets at-all. I would leave it to some trades-
man to make a sufficient closet, or pan, or whatever it
may be called, with a sufficient close lid; then the
streets should be laid out, and the connections with the
houses made, somewhat in the same way as they are
made by the gas people. The parties would then
know the places where they begin and where they end.
After the connections once get set a-going, they would
know the time at which to come for my closet, and they
would just come to my house, and, without any annoy-
ance whatever, they would put in the clean pan or closet,
and take away the foul one. Then there would require
to be one or two manure-works outside the city, where
the stuff from the closets would be manufactured into
a very valuable manure. Some people say that that
manure would be of little value; but the cost would be
so enormous in running away the sewage in sewers or
otherwise, that I think the mode I have proposed of
collecting it from the closet would be the best way of
doing ; and I know that the manure would sell. I have
been a'buyer of manure for the last twenty-five years,
and I am certain the price would run from £8, 10s. to
£10 per ton, and the process would leave a profit in
the end. |
585. Then you propose a kind of moveable cesspool,
in fact,—some vessel or other in each house,—and that
the matter from the closets should go into that vessel,

51

which would be lifted out and carried away, while a
clean one would be put in its place?—Yes, There is
one thing I forgot to say, and that is, that I would
abolish all water in the water-closets. I would have a
urinal for males, but no water to go into the closet, as
that would destroy the system. :

586. How would you get the matter to run into that
vessel ?——The vessel would be lifted out bodily from the
closet. Some people say there would bea stench from
it, but a little hopper could be put on the top, as in the
dry water-closet, which would not cause much expense,
and then there might be a bell-handle, which would
bring down a little of the charcoal and deprive the
matter of its odour.

587. Then you would do away with the water and
use charcoal?—Yes, The idea of attempting, in this
great city, to make sewers which would convey the
sewage to the sea, which would be attended with such
enormous expense, is quite out of the question; and
even when it was done, I question very much how it
would work. There is no doubt at all that the excreta
of towns is a very valuable manure, and it is a very
extraordinary thing, at this time of day, that it should
be lost in any town. As the city is increasing very
fast, this plan of mine might be tried in one district to
see how it would work; and one manufactory might be
tried in the outside in the meantime. There is no
question whatever that it is the closets that are the
great source of the pollution of the river.

588. Don’t you think that if your plan were adopted,
a great many people would object to a man coming
into their houses once a day to carry off this pan ?—
No. If the thing were once set a-going, I see no
inconvenience there would be. It would be the very
same as the gas man coming in, without law or leave,
as I may say, and taking a note of the gas.

589. I should have a decided objection to the gas
man coming into my house every day.—But it would
not be every day. J should think it would only be
somewhere about twice a week..

LONDON, MONDAY, 27th December 1875.

Present :

Sir Joun HawksHaw.

Sm Joseph Wim Bazarexrrs, O.B., Engineer of
the Metropolitan Board of Works, examined.

590. Sir John Hawkshaw.—I think you had some
Xxperiments made at Crossness with the A BC pro-
cess?—The A B C Sewage Company applied to the
Metropolitan Board of Works for permission to erect
their works at the Board’s outfall at Crossness, in order
that they might there try the process of purifying the
sewage, and that the Board might have an opportunity
of watching that process during the experiments, and
coming to a conclusion whether they thought it would
answer to be used by them or not. At the end of the
period of that experiment, I made a report to the
Metropolitan Board of Works upon the result some
few years since,—the date I do not at this moment
remember, and the details I do not at this moment
remember,—but the report is printed, and I should be
very happy to place in your hands a copy of that
report, which will give the details in a way that I can-
not do now. But I dan state generally the result,
which was, that after very considerable expenditure in
Works and in manipulation, the Company did obtain a
considerable amount’ of purity in the effluent water, and
that that was done without creating. a nuisance, except
8o far as sewage works at all times are objectionable ;
but it was done at considerable loss, about £6, 6s. per
ton. TheCompany claimed to have sold some of the
sewage deposited for a considerable sum; but upon in-
vestigation it turned out that those sales were not bona
Jide sales to the public, and that there really was no

market for the residue—in fact, that the process was
so costly that it was not one which could be continuéd
at Crossness, and the result was that the Company
were called upon to take up their works, and the whole
thing has been removed. Of course the Metropolitan
Board of Works felt that any process for purifying
sewage and dealing with sewage, or any proposal for
doing it, should have a fair trial. There was great
difficulty about it, and they were anxious to obtain
all the information upon the subject that they could,
particularly when a Company undertook to do it at
their own cost. .

591. Is there any other process of which you are
aware, which, in your opinion, would be more likely to
prove successful?—No, In my opinion every plan of
disposing of sewage by means of precipitation, or ab-
stracting the solid from the liquid, has failed... At
Birmingham at the present time, as you are aware, they
are carrying out large works for dealing with the sewage
by the lime process, under Mr. Hawksley. ; The works
are very well devised, and at Birmingham it is the best
thing that: they can do at the present time; but they are
such works as could not be carried on in the neighbour-
hood of any town or city without creating a nuisance
to the neighbourhood where they are erected, and being
highly objectionable. They are not remunerative, and
they cannot deal with the sewage in times of heavy
rain. In fact, 1 went down to those works, I think last
year, to look at the property of Sir Charles Adderley,
which had been flooded in times of rain; and the ground
was covered with sewage, the walks in his garden

John Purvis.

 

Sir Joseph
William
Bazalgette.

 
Str Joseph
William
Bazalgette.

 

ae

52 CLYDE PURIFICATION COMMISSION.

included; and I think that the Birmingham Corporation
have since paid a very large sum in compensation for
the damage done to his property, in spite of those works.
I think I may go so far as to say that they regard
those works as temporary works till some better plan
can be devised.

592. Is the plan the same, so far as you know, as
that which has been adopted at Leicester—the lime
process?—Yes. The lime process adopted at Leicester
was the first idea of separating the solid from the liquid,
and then, as you know, it failed, principally on account
of the immense amount of deposit; and that is the great
difficulty with the lime process,—the more lime you put
in the more deposit you get, therefore on the one hand
you are spending money in providing the purifier, and
you are increasing the quantity of deposit to be removed
and the cost of removing it, so that it will not pay.
Mr. Hawksley has suggested many improvements in the
mode of manipulating the sewage since it was tried at
Leicester; but it is remarkable that after twenty-five or
thirty years’ trial so little progress has been made with
this process. The truth is, that with all those experi-
ments,—the mere laboratory experiments upon the table,
which appear a perfect success,—they will produce toyou
clear water passing off, but the very moment you come
to try it upon a large scale in a town, it is a failure,
and it is a failure for the reasons I have given: first of
all, that the precipitant is very costly; and then, that it
increases the difficulty by increasing the deposit, and
therefore there is always a tendency to shirk carrying
it out properly. They shirk carrying it out at night,
they do not put the full quantity in, and they try to
save in every way, and are directly interested in saving.
At Cheltenham they tried the same process, and after a
considerable amount of litigation it failed; and I think
now they have recourse there to irrigation. At Weston-
‘super-Mare they tried it for some time, but it led to
much litigation by reason of its creating a nuisance,
and it was abandoned, and we carried out an intercept-
ing sewer, discharging into the sea at a distant point,
and they have had no complaints since that time.

593.-Do you know anything about their proceedings
at Leeds ?—No, I do not.

594. They have, I think, adopted the same process
—the Native Guano Company’s process?— Yes; but
Ido not think that any of those, the Phosphate Sew-
age, or the Native Guano, or the A B OC, is an
improvement upon the lime process, which was the
original one.

595. When I was at Leicester, Mr. Hawksley and
I went together to the borough surveyor, and he told
us that their difficulty was in dealing with this residue,
that he could not get the farmers to cart it away.—
Precisely so. ‘There are inland towns so situated that
you must have recourse to some process or other for
purifying the sewage; and in that case any one of
those processes you may fall back upon, in order to
get a certain amount of purity. You may be obliged
to do it, but you can only do it at very great cost, and
you can only gain partial success. In the same way
you may have to revert to any other process. They
have tried the earth system in some situations with
considerable success; but in large towns you must get
rid of the surface water,— you must get rid of the
washings from the houses,—and you must therefore
have sewers.

596. Do you know at all what is likely to be done
or proposed to be done in the upper part of the
Thames? I think I saw some suggestion of your own
lately in one of the papers?—-Yes, You may take the
Thames as an illustration of what I have just been
saying. All the towns in the Thames valley drain
more or less directly into the Thames; and the Thames
Conservators have served them with notice to divert
their sewage from the river, the Thames being the
source of water supply to London. They have tried
all kinds of plans,—sewage farms, and deodorizing
processes, and every suggestion that can be made,—
and they have one after another failed.

597. Is there anything now at all in contemplation
with regard to that subject?—Yes; there is at this

i

moment: an inquiry being held by Colonel Ponsonby
Cox. I have laid before him a proposal which has
been before the public for some few years, that those
towns in the Thames valley should combine, because it
is impossible for them single-handed to construct out-
fall sewers which shall carry the sewage sufficiently far
away from the neighbourhood, and it is a locality un-
suited altogether for sewage farms. And last year I
made the same proposal for West Kent, that they
should combine and construct an outfall sewer, and
carry the sewage into the river Thames, at @ point
some seven miles below the Barking outfalls. An Act
was obtained last year for the construction of an inter-
cepting sewer, which is to take the sewage and form
an outfall for the towns of Dartford, Crayford, all the
Crays, the Cray valley, Bexley, Bromley, Beckenham,
and other places. - That sewer is carried about thirteen
miles in the country, up near to Croydon, and it now
offers an outfall, if enlarged, for the whole of the sew-
age of the Thames valley ; and therefore what I have
proposed is that those towns in the Thames valley
should unite, and have a representative body of a cer-
tain number, who should take charge of the main out-
fall works, and construct sewers discharging into the
West Kent authorized sewer, by which means the
whole of the sewage of the Thames valley will be
removed, and carried to the river at Long Reach.

598. Is the point of outfall Long Reach ?—Yes,
in Long Reach. The great difficulty to be contended
with there is the difficulty of getting the different
towns to unite. Some approve and some object. There
will always be a difficulty where it is necessary for a
number of towns to unite to carry out one common
object; but where several towns are situated close to
each other, there is a very great advantage gained by
‘their combining. I will put it in this way: Assuming
one town requiring a sewer of one foot in diameter and
nine towns of the same size were to unite, and put
in a sewer three feet in diameter, the excavation for a
sewer three feet in diameter is the same as the excava-
tion for a sewer one foot in diameter. And the dis-
charging capacity of a three-foot sewer is more than
nine times the discharging capacity of a one-foot sewer.
Again, the velocity of the current is greater where
there is a large body of water passing through a large
sewer, and therefore less fall is required—and less fall
means less pumping. Then the pumping is not to
be measured by the actual power. If divided into a
number of different pumping stations, it is greatly in-
creased by the wages paid to the different people at
them. If you can unite the whole into one pumping
station, a small staff working large engines will do the
work of eight or nine small pumping stations. So
that in every point of view there is great economy in
uniting ; and I think that may be applied to Glasgow.
There are towns near to Glasgow which contribute
sewage to the Clyde which would be very advan-
tageously united to that city in disposing of it, who
would be certainly unable to do it advantageously by
themselves. :

599. Can you tell me what is the cost for pumping:
sewage under the Metropolitan Board of Works?—I
cannot. I do not remember the figures at this
moment.

600. Do you have duplicate engines at the stations?
—Yes, we do. We provide for taking the maximum
flow of sewage, and have duplicate engines to cover
the increased quantity of rainfall, and so on. I think
in many instances great economy would be effected by
having an equalizing reservoir, so that when a great
flow of sewage came in, there’is a reservoir to receive
it, and let the pumps take it off more gradually.

601. And to distribute the duty over a longer period
of time ?—Yes; that in some cases may be very ad-
vantageously done.

602. What description of pumps do you generally
use ?—Double-acting beam engines.

603. Vertical :cylinders ?—Plunger pumps.

604. Have you never tried the centrifugal pumps?
—No; they do very well with a small lift. We find
ours have acted remarkably well.
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE.

605. Could you give us any information about irri-
gation in cases that you are aware of? You say it is
applied at Croydon; the accounts that one hears of it
are rather conflicting. Some say it is no nuisance
whatever putting sewage into the soil?—I do not think
it is a nuisance at Beddington. A sewage farm is
a thing which I should not like to have near my
‘residence ; there is some smell from it at times. But I
do not think it may be said to be a nuisance at
Croydon, for there are persons who are building won-
‘derfully near to the sewage farm; but, at the same
time, I think it would depreciate the value of residen-
tial property to have a sewage farm near it.

606. Would not it be rather dependent upon the
size of the farm, because a small farm might not be
so great a nuisance as a larger ?—I do not think so.
I think it would depend upon the quantity of sewage
put upon it, and the way in which the farm is managed.
‘At Croydon, the Corporation obtained land, I think,
at a rental of £10 an acre, and they let it with the
sewage upon it to a Mr. Marriage, a Quaker, at a
low rental, so that he worked it for some time at a
profit: the Corporation were sustaining a loss. Mr.
‘Marriage afterwards gave up the farm, and the Cor-
‘poration are now working it at a considerable loss.
‘There is no doubt. that by irrigation sewage may be
thoroughly purified.

607. You mean, I presume, the effluent water ?—
Yes; the effluent water may become quite purified ;
but it is only under very exceptionally favourable cir-
cumstances that that can be done at a profit. If there
is a heavy rent to be paid for land, or if there is
pumping to be paid for to any extent, that would
reduce the return.

608. I remember visiting the Barking Sewage Farm
on one occasion, and dining with Mr. Hope, who had
the manor house, which is pretty near the farm, and
certainly the smell in his dining-room was something
fearful on that occasion, which was in July ?—Cer-
tainly there is a smell when you are putting the sewage
on the land, and if you walk over the land you per-
ceive the smell-of sewage; but, at the same time, you
gmay be very near to the farm and not perceive it ;
and, as I tell you, there are a number of very good
villas which have been built very close upon the
margin of the Croydon Sewage Farm.

609. That farm is of very small size, I take it ?—
‘Not very small. I should say that there are two great
difficulties in dealing with sewage: one is the bulk
of the water which carries it down, and the other is
the great quantity of land concerned in purifying it.

610. Have you ever made yourself acquainted with
what is called Liernur’s system ?—Yes. I have looked
into it; it is what is termed a pneumatic system.
He lays in iron pipes connected with the different
closets, and he has a reservoir in the streets; and he
has an air-pump, and he creates a vacuum in the
pipes, and draws all the sewage down from the house
into the reservoir in the streets; and he says that the
vacuum being always kept up, there can be no escape
of air into the houses. He also says that he can
use it, and that it is not necessary to do away with
the water-closets—that he can use it with moderate
supply of water; but it must be a very moderate
supply, and it must be an exceedingly costly process.
You must have in addition to that a sewer for carry-
ing off the rainfall and the washings from the houses,
which putrify and are very offensive; and you must
have these iron pipes laid down; and you must have
pneumatic pumps to pump the offal out of the houses
into the streets; and then you have iron pumps, again,
to pump this through iron mains out of the streets,
or you inust have carts to go round and take it away.
Tn fact, altogether it is so complicated a business, and
80 expensive, that it will never answer. Of course,
the iron pipes to begin with are much greater than
the cost of laying down other pipes. Then there is
another process which is very much in favour at this
moment, because it helps to get rid of what I may
call the land difficulty; and that is the intermittent

downward filtration system, which Mr. Bailey Denton
N

oo

has started at Merthyr Tydvil, based upon the experi-
ments of Dr. Frankland, who showed by experiments
which he made that the sewage from 3000 people could
be filtered through an acre of land drained 2 yards
deep so as to purify it entirely. Based upon that
theory, Mr. Bailey Denton laid out a farm at Merthyr
Tydvil, and he drained it 2 yards deep, and poured
the sewage for a short time of 1000 people per acre upon
that land; and then, based upon that experiment, it is
proposed that all over the country where there is a
difficulty about obtaining sufficient land for sewage
farms, to fall back upon intermittent downward filtration,
and to put the sewage of 1500 or 2000 people to an
acre of land, regardless of the soil. That proposition
rendered it necessary that I should go about two years
ago to Merthyr Tydvil to see what was done, and there
I found that there was a gravelly soil 50 feet in depth,
an admirable opportunity of drainage, and circum-
stances more favourable than could be obtained almost
in any other place, and that they did for about six
months under those favourable conditions apply the
sewage of 1000 people to the acre without causing any
nuisance ; but that the engineer who had charge of it, a
very intelligent engineer of the name of Harper, came to
the conclusion that even under those favourable condi-
tions you could not apply the sewage of more than
500 people to an acre safely and permanently. The
plan for this process which they adopt is to take
three acres to begin with; they divide it into three,
and they irrigate 1 acre for one year and leave the
other 2 acres at rest. Next year they turn the sewage
upon the second acre, leaving the acre which has
been under sewage for the former year two years to
purify itself again. Now that calculation means, that
before the year was out for some time, and for some
time after the year was out, the land has been charged
very heavily with sewage, and therefore cannot have
been in a proper state for purifying sewage. Then
they divide the acre which is in use into three parts
also, and they pour the sewage for eight hours upon
one part, eight hours on another, and for the remain-
ing eight hours upon the remaining third; therefore, if
there are 1000 people to the acre, there is going on a
portion of the land fora year the sewage of 3000 people
—that is, 1000 people upon one-third of an acre,
which is equal to 3000 per acre. The theory is, and
it is a very good theory, that the sewage should be
allowed to go through land well drained and well
aerated, and coming in contact with the air it is oxy-
dized and purified; but if it is allowed to be upon
the land for any length of time, it gets clogged and the
sewage is not purified, and therefore they apply it inter-
mittently, and they allow it time for the air to pass
through it. It is a very useful plan, as are all other
modes of dealing with sewage under certain conditions ;
but it is very apt to be taken up, as most of those
theories are, and applied too extensively, which must
only end in great disaster. The fact is, that for a city
of 500,000 inhabitants it should be very carefully
applied only under very favourable conditions, and not
carried to too great an extent.

611. It would take 1000 acres?—No doubt it
would take 1000. 600 must always be at rest for two
years whilst they are dosing the other third.

612. Do you know anything of Mr. Odams’ cylinder
for straining sewage ?—Yes, I have seen his models.

613. It is hardly in working order ; but Mr. Odams
is making it, and he will let us know when it is ready.
He proposes to make these cylinders of gauze as fine
as a silk pocket handkerchief, and make them revolve
rapidly, so that the liquid will escape by centrifugal
force, and the solid parts be retained ?—It is the same
principle as Leatham has used for some time at Croy-
don. They strain it through wire gauze ; only there
it is an upright wheel which revolves, and as the
sewage passes through it is deposited and falls into a
groove, which is worked by a Jacob’s ladder, and
drains it away. And then he has continual jets of
water, worked by the same power, which keep washing
the gauze to prevent its being clogged. Mr. Odams
thinks that the gauze in his cylinder will be kept clear

Sir Joseph
Wilkam
Bazalgette.

 
Str Joseph
William
Bazailgette.

—_

54 . CLYDE PURIFICATION COMMISSION.

by this continual revolution and throwing it off. I think
that there is considerable doubt about that; and
when he has done it he has only taken out the more
solid portions, which are held in mechanical suspension.
The ammonia, and all those portions of the sewage
which are in chemical solution, are carried off with the
sewage, and when decomposed will become most offen-
sive; so that really that is only a very partial thing.

614. Supposing that it will do what he says he
intends it to do, it would seem to be a process for
taking out a portion of the solid matter of the sewage
—that is all?-Yes. One is so accustomed to
hear of the different processes which are brought
before you being perfect successes, and to hear them
even quoted, after they have been in operation for
some time, as a perfect success, and to see them aban-
doned after all, that one looks upon them with caution.
Scott’s process was said to be a most admirable solu-
tion of the difficulty, and at Birmingham it is said to
be in operation now; but if you go to Birmingham
you see that they make about 4 tons of cement by
Scott’s process in the week, and it is a mere flea-bite
compared with the bulk of the sewage that they are
dealing with. It is a mere experiment; and besides,
they do not get rid of the cement—they cannot sell it
in bulk.

615. Do you know any case where those Companies
are disposing of the residue of their manufacture to
any advantage ?—Not one.

616. Is there anything further that you would wish
to say with regard to any of those processes ?—My
observations apply to all that I am aware of, and
I think I have seen most of them; that is to say, that
they are none of them succeeding commercially,—that
they have been all had recourse to under circumstances
of difficulty to help to purify, but that they can only
succeed where there is no great bulk of sewage.

617. It is essential that these things should be
proved to be commercially good, because in making
an outfall sewer it is not a paying transaction, and
therefore it may be necessary in some particular
localities to have recourse to some of these processes,
whether they are profitable or not, as the only means
at hand?—Quite so. I may mention St. Leonards.
At one time I recommended them to have a sewage
farm at St. Leonards. There was land near St.
Leonards which was available, and they said to me:
‘In our houses at St. Leonards there are a number of
invalids and persons who study their health, to whom
a sewage farm would be frightful, and they would go
away; and whatever the profits upon that farm might
be, it never would compensate for what we should
lose in our rents.’ I felt that that was a very strong
argument, and a very reasonable one.

618. What did they do at St. Leonards?— We
carried the sewage into the sea very much in the same
way as at Brighton, and it answers very well, and
they are perfectly satisfied with it.

619. Do you find'in your large receptacles at Cross-
ness and Barking any large accumulation of deposit.?
—It all washes away. There is a scum forms upon
the bottom, but it all washes away.

620. In fact you have not in reality ever to clean
them out ?—No.

621. Then they are so far self-acting?—Yes. I
may say that at Bournemouth also it was proposed, I
think, by one of the Government inspectors, to apply
the plan that is being adopted at Birmingham. I
mean the plan of using the lime process, and deodoriz-
ing the sewage; but the Bournemouth people felt very
much as the St. Leonards people did,—that although
such a process might be tolerated in the outskirts of
Birmingham, or in a low neighbourhood, to adopt
such a plan there would be ruinous to the reputation
of the town. They have not carried out anything as
yet; but they probably will carry out an intercepting
sewer to some point into the sea, where it will cease to
be a nuisance. At Birmingham they spread the de-
posit over a large tract of land, let it dry there, and
then dig it in. They always have a portion of the
land covered‘ with this deposit in a wet state, a portion

of it covered in a drier state, and a portion of it that
they are digging in. .

622. There must be an end, must there not, to that
process some day ?—Of course it takes up a great deal
of land. The way that they tried to get rid of it was
to crop that land and thereby to exhaust the manure;
but they found that the dug part of the land at Birming-
ham was so rich, and so fed with sewage, that nothing
would grow upon it. It was quite a nuisance. That
was before they carried out their new works.

623. The attempt at Birmingham two or three years
ago was to get a large sewage farm, and they applied
to Parliament for an Act, but they failed ?—Precisely
so. One has been accustomed to hear Birmingham
quoted for years as a great success in dealing with
sewage by the lime process, and also afterwards as
great success in dealing with it by Scott’s process.
Ealing, again, was quoted as a great success for dis-
posing of sewage by Scott’s process, but they have
abandoned it there, so that really you cannot form an
opinion of what the result will be for the first year or
two.

624. I see that the date of the report by yourself
and Mr. Bateman upon the sewage of Glasgow was
1868. At that time I do not know that you recom-
mended, but you contemplated the possibility of sewage
being largely applied to farming purposes?—Yes; we
recommended that an independent outfall should be
provided for the disposal of the sewage, and we then
pointed out that there was land very suitable for irri-
gation—a sandy soil—in the neighbourhood of that
outfall, upon which we thought it might be used with
profit; but the scheme of our getting rid of the sewage
was quite independent of the irrigation scheme. ‘There
can be no doubt that a sandy soil would be very much
improved by irrigation of any kind, especially during
the summer months.

625. Have your views as to the value of irrigation
changed since then at all, or do they remain very much
as they were?—I think as to profit I am less sanguine
than I then was. In that report we quoted a good
deal from the Barking farm. Now I understand that
the Barking farm is being given up.

626. I understood a considerable time ago that it
was not profitable, but I had not heard what had hap-
pened to it lately?—I cannot speak positively about
that, but I believe that is so.

627. Of whom was the Barking farm held?—I do
not know who the owner is.

628. Does Mr. Hope get your sewage ?—-Mr. Hope
has nothing to do with the Barking farm. Mr. Hope
is now utilizing the sewage of Romford.

629. I mean, whoever has that farm, does he get
your sewage?—Yes, he gets our sewage. The term
expires in a few months for which that Company have
a lease of the sewage of the metropolis. I should ex-
plain that that Company was formed for reclaiming a
portion of the Maplin Sands on the Essex coast,
taking the whole sewage of the metropolis, and they
commenced their work for that purpose.

630. Have they not proposed to the south side as
well ?—No, only the north side. They got a lease of
the sewage for the north side, and in order to show
what could be done by sewage irrigation at that time,
and to enable them to raise the necessary capital for
the larger scheme, they established near to Barking a
small sewagefarm; they carried a portion of the sewage
on to that farm, and tried their experiments on it; that
farm was the one which was referred to in the report
by Mr. Bateman and myself in 1868. Mr. Bateman
was at that time joint engineer with Mr. Hemaus for
carrying out the works of that sewage irrigation scheme.
However, the capital was not raised, and the works
were not completed. The lease is now expired, or is
about to expire, and I believe the Barking sewage
farm is about to be given up.. No doubt that in the
Craigentinny meadows, and in many other places,
wonderful crops are produced under sewage irrigation;
but still, there we have the fact that very few sewage
farms for some reason or other-are made to pay.

631. They produce very wonderful crops at the
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE.

Barking farm. I saw ten acres of strawberries there
which were larger than walnuts; but I could not then
get, though I tried to get, at the expense which they
had been at to distribute the sewage, which is a very
important element. I could see the conduits ofiron. Of
course the sewage Will not flow on a flat surface. You
must give it a fall; and I could see from the appliances
on that farm that the expenditure per acre must have
been very considerable; they either did not know it, or
at all events they did not choose to tell me ?—That has
always been very difficult to get. You can see clearly
that my view is that I should not rely upon a sewage
farm as an outfall if I could obtain a more certain one,
but I should endeavour to place my outfall near land
suitable for the reception of sewage, to which in future
time it might be applied if possible.

632, You mean if you could do it without reference
to other interests?—-Yes. I should think it is an
advantage where it can be done. I am afraid we must
regard sewage as an enemy to be got rid of, and not as
a friend to. be sought.

633. Supposing a sewage outfall farm were made,
which, as you are aware, is a very expensive work, and
a work which should last for all time, what would be
your opinion as to carrying it over ground containing
coal, which might be worked hereafter, and which, if
not purchased, might lead to the deflection of the sewer ?
—I should endeavour to avoid such a position, of course.

634. A sewer is not like a railway; I have made
hundreds of miles of railway over coal, but we can lift
them up from time to time; but a sewer cannot be lifted
up ?’—Precisely so. We say in our report, ‘The
conduit throughout its whole length will be upon the
coal-measure formation, and by the position of the
workable coal and minerals the line selected will for-
tunately escape all workings except for the last two
miles, and be constructed upon ground not liable to be
affected by mining operation.’

635. In making those two miles, does not it follow
the workings which are now in progress?—We go
on to say, ‘The tunnel will be wholly in the “ blaes ”
or sandstone; and a tunnel at so small a depth
from the surface in these strata may be constructed
nearly as cheaply as if it were made in the ordinary
way of cut and cover.’ Of course we had our atten-
tion called to it at the time.

636, I could not quite understand from the report,
when you were speaking, I think, of being two miles in
the coal workings, whether you meant present workings
or prospective workings?—I do not remember. I
should think, present workings.

637. -I rather read the report as referring to present
workings ?—Probably so. We came to the conclusion
that our line was pretty safe from any contingency of
that kind, from the best information we had.

638. I could not quite gather from the report
whether you were looking at workings that were
already in existence, or workings which may be formed
from time to time. One of the difficulties in dealing
with this region is that there are portions in which
future workings may be very serious indeed, so serious
as to render it unadvisable to make any very costly
work over ground of that sort. There are cases of
that sort in the region of the Clyde, where the remaining
coal which has yet to be wrought is so thick and ex-
tensive that to make a very costly work over such
ground would lead to great risk of its being destroyed
in the course of time ; still, work of this kind must be
made for future time?—Yes; that is the case.

639. There are some particular portions of it where
the workings would be very extensive indeed, and
ultimately would lead to a very great depression of
the surface, not in this particular neighbourhood, but
in other parts that I have had to look at where the
ground may be very much undermined, which is a great
difficulty in dealing with some of these questions?—Yes;
it is a point which requires very careful consideration.

640. Will you explain the way in which you raise
your money in the Metropolitan Board of Works?—
We raise money by issuing bonds in the market, giving
security for those-bopds, and we raise them at 32 per

55

cent. The Government have offered other towns an
opportunity of raising money for drainage purposes
upon the same terms. We pay off 1-60th part of the
principal each year. Then, if a work upon those con-
ditions can be executed for a 64. rate at starting, it is
obvious that the next year 1-60th having been paid off
there is less to be paid as interest, and each year it
goes on decreasing the rate; then, whilst from that
source there is a decrease in the rate, there is, on the
other hand, an increase in the rateable value of most
of our large cities by the increase in the cities, and
therefore an increased fund for paying off the debt.
Those two causes operating, very rapidly reduce the
rate. In London we started with a 6d. rate, now we
are down below a 3d. rate, and so it would be adopting
that principle with any other large and improving town.

641. How long is it since you started a 6d. rate ?—
About 15 years, I think. A 6d. rate at starting has
done uncommonly well.

642. Have the Government made it a condition that
the capital should be paid off in 60 years ?—Yes.

643. Of course, where you take the land absolutely
for your sewer you pay for it like any one else, I
suppose ?— Yes.

644. Will you just give me the measure of the mode
of payment ?—To a large extent we go through public
roads and streets, and of course there is nothing to pay
then. When we go through private property, we give
the persons owning that property the power of building
over our sewers. We, the Metropolitan Board of
Works, put in the foundations for their houses, so that
they should not interfere with the sewers.

645. Is that within your district as well as without
it ?—That applies to within our district only. Where
we have gone beyond the district, we have in most
cases purchased the surface; but the Essex Reclama-
tion Company obtained in their Act the power to go
through upon payment of easement.

646. In your sewers beyond the district, do you go
on the surface for a considerable portion of their ex-
tent—in the marshes, for instance?—Yes, in some
portions the sewers are above the surface.

647. Have you any case where, outside your dis-
trict, you have a tunnelling under the land?—No; not
outside our district. We have done an immense deal
of work that we have never paid any compensation for.
We have tunnelled from one end of Woolwich to the
other; but at Woolwich we have never paid compensa-
tion for that, or easement of any kind.

648. Was that generally under roads?—No; a
straight line.

649. Then you really have tunnelled under private
lands without paying compensation?—We have. In
paying easement, you must bear in mind that a sewer
through an estate available for building enhances the
value of that estate, and converts land which was
previously not fit for building, into building land;
and therefore, instead of paying easement, we have in
many cases come to an arrangement to give them the
use of the sewer. ,

650. Is there anything else that occurs to you?—I
am not aware of anything else.

Wiutram Crooxes, Esq., F.R.S., examined.

651. Sir John Hawkshaw.—You are an eminent
chemist. Will you give, in your own way, a short
account of the process with which you are connected ;
first of all, what is the name of the Company ?—The
Native Guano Company, of which I am chairman.
The process of purification adopted by the Native
Guano Company is what is called the A B C process,
but it has been very much modified of late years since
JT have been connected with the Company. The process
consists essentially in mixing with the sewage a quantity
of clay and charcoal in the form of an emulsion, and
then putting in a solution of sulphate of alumina.
The property of clay, when it is added in the form

Sir Joseph
William
Bazalgette.

 

William
Crookes.

—
William
Crookes.

56 CLYDE PURIFICATION COMMISSION.

of an emulsion, is to keep in a milky state in the
water, and not to settle; and the property of the
sulphate of alumina, when that is added, is to cause
this milky mixture of clay and water to coagulate, very
similar to the white of an egg, which coagulates when
it is boiled. In the act of coagulating, the clay carries
down a great deal of organic matter which is in solution,
a quantity of colouring matter, and a certain amount
of ammonia from the solution. The sewage, besides,
is always alkaline; and when sulphate of alumina is
added to alkaline sewage, alumina is precipitated, and
that also has a very powerful action upon dissolved
organic matter. For instance, in the manufacture
of colouring matters, what are called lakes among
painters is the organic colouring matter of certain
solutions, precipitated by alumina in the same way.
The charcoal acts as a deodorizer, and prevents any
smell coming from the mud. If the sewage is not
alkaline enough to precipitate the whole of the alumina
from the sulphate of alumina, lime is added; but great
care must be taken not to add so much lime as to
render it alkaline, or else the principle of the process is
entirely altered, and it becomes then analogous to what
is called the lime process; but if the lime is kept in
insufficient quantity to precipitate the whole of the
alumina, there can be no free lime in solution, and the
effluent water remains slightly acid, which is what we
wish to preserve,

652. Could you state, approximately, the cost of the
process ?—The cost of the process varies, of course,
with the amount of purification required. At the
present time the Corporation of Leeds are working the
Native Guano process under licence from the Company ;
but as their officials are not quite so skilful at the pro-
cess as they probably will be after they have worked
t for a year or two, I go down occasionally and
superintend operations, and try experiments to see if
greater economy cannot be introduced. The amount
of sewage at Leeds is an average of 12,000,000
gallons in the 24 hours, and it used to cost to purify,
when they first commenced, at the rate of £50 or £60
a day, and the effluent that was produced was very
good indeed. It was quite good enough to put into
any river in the kingdom, except, perhaps, immediately
above where water was drawn for drinking, and then,
of course, it would not be recommended.

653. You do not put it forward as a potable water?
—No, I should not recommend it as potable water, but
it was just short of that—it was good enough to put into
-any river. The Corporation of Leeds were induced to
adopt the A BC process, being under an injunction
not to throw sewage into the river. The words of the
injunction were somewhat to the effect that the sewage
must not be put into the river so as to be a nuisance to
the neighbourhood, or injurious to health. It was very
soon seen when this beautifully clear water was being
thrown in at a large expense that the terms of the in-
junction could be satisfied with a very much less amount
of purity, and, of course, at much less expense; and
the consequence was, they have been diminishing the
expense, and, of course, diminishing the purity, at the
expense of the system. But the river itself is so shock-
ingly bad that it is a shame to put good water into it ;
it does no good whatever; therefore it is very fairly
said, ‘When our neighbours above Leeds send us
decent water in the river, then it will be time enough
for us to put in a better effluent; but as long as the
river is nearly as bad as sewage, why should we put
ourselves to the expense of several thousands a year
extra to get a fanciful state of purity which does no
good. We know that the process can give it when
needed, but at present we will work the process in the
most economical manner possible.’ Of course, looking
at it from the Leeds point of view, that is a very fair
argument; but looking at it from my own point of
view, as connected with the Native Guano Company,
I naturally want to have the process worked to the
best advantage, and I have been experimenting for
some time past to see if by any modification of the
materials or any alteration of the proportions I can
get, without exceeding the limits of expense, a really

better effluent than I thought I could get at first. I
think now the effluent going to the river Aire is pretty
good; there is no particular smell about it; fish could
live in it; there is but little turbidity on standing ;
there is no particular taste; it does not putrify ; and
the expense of purifying the sewage to this degree is
under £2 per million gallons.

654. That is, doing it in this method as you have
described ?—Yes, in this very economical way.

655. Supposing you wanted to do it to the utmost
extent to which you, as a chemist, could say it could
be fairly done by this process, what do you think would
be the expense in that case?—At present it is costing
about £22 or £22, 10s. a day of 24 hours. I should
like to have an extra £5 or £6 a day, and I think that
very great extra purity could be produced in that: way ;
because when we get up to a certain point, a very little
extra expense in sulphate of alumina, which is the chief
purifying agent, does a great deal of good.

656. Do you work it both Sundays and week-days?
—Yes, day and night. The Leeds Corporation say
they will not spend more than £15,000 a year on the
process. Of that £15,000 a year, £5000 goes on coals,
and wages, and sundries, and things of that sort.
£10,000 remains to be spent in chemicals, and that
would be somewhere about £1 an hour, or £24 a day.
I want to keep a little under the mark.

657. £22 a day is nearly £8000 a year ?—-Yes.

658. My question pointed to the total cost; suppos-
ing the process was carried to the extent to which you
think it ought to be carried, supposing that the people
above Leeds were doing what the people of Leeds are
going to try to do,—that is to say, they were all com-
pelled to purify the water and not to pollute the river
above, and then that you were called in to prescribe
what the Leeds people should do to deliver their water
into the river equally pure to that which came from
above, what would you then call the expense?—I do
not think I should want much more purity than we
get now. The expense now is, say, £24 a day for
chemicals—I put it at £22, 10s., but £24 is the amount
to allow, and probably it will amount to that taking
the whole year; I think I should require another £5
or £6, making a total of, say, £30 a day for chemicals,
or £11,000 a year, which, added to the £5000 a year
for coals and all the other expenses, would bring up
the total to £16,000 a year.

659. What is the expense of the construction of
works, tanks, and buildings?—The expense, I think,
would be about £60,000.

660. I think this process is very much the same,
from your description, as that which they have adopted
at Rio Janeiro. I was in Brazil last year and saw
their works,—they are all new, and they have drained
Rio and established these deodorizing works; and they
are now using a method at Rio which strikes me as
very much like yours,—they use sulphate of alumina,
and they use lime also. I do not quite recollect about
the clay ?—The clay is an important element.

661. They may use it, but the water comes out
clear and limpid water; but in draining Rio the whole
town had to be drained de novo, and they have a
separate system of sewage from the rainfall, and in
that way not such a large volume to deal with ?—Of
course, if the rainfall can be separated from the sewage
it makes the expense so much less.

662. The difficulty which they experienced here, and
which we must always experience, is the stopping up of
sewage drains,—that is to say, unless you admit a
large quantity of water into the drains with the sew-
age, they are apt to choke up?—Yes; certainly that
must be so.

663. You are aware of the various tests which have
been suggested, some of them by chemists,—that is
to say, taking the proportions of grains of certain
elements per gallon, and so on; what is your opinion
upon that method of governing questions of this sort?—
I do not think that it touches the real point. For
instance, water may be found to contain a certain frac-
tion of a grain of organic nitrogen and of organic carbon,
but this gives you no idea whatever of the kind of water.
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE.

It may be sewage, or it may be coffee, or beef-tea.
The purest water—that is to say, perfectly pure dis-
tilled water—if you drink it, by the time it has got to
the back of the mouth, contains more organic impurity
than effluent water would contain to be condemned by
those testa. I think it would be better to take such
a test as it does not require a chemist to see. If
a water is clear to the eye, has no offensive taste or
smell, does not deposit a sediment on standing, and
will allow fish to live and thrive in it, it is certainly
good enough to go into a river, whether it contains
much or little carbon or nitrogen.

. 664. Then, if you were proposing a test, that would
be the way in which you would put it?—Yes; I
should propose some such test, in addition to a chemical
test. A manufacturer at Leeds has to take the river
as he finds it,—he requires an immense quantity of
water for his works. One manufacturer, I think, uses
over a million gallons a day. If he takes that water
from the river, he ought not to be obliged to throw it
back into the river purer than he gets it; therefore the
river itself should be the standard of purity. If that
standard is adopted, every town would have a different
standard, which is objected to by some persons, who say
the standard should be uniform; but I think that that
argument is not correct ; because, if a person is near the
head of a river, where he gets pure water, he ought to
-pay something more for that great purity; and that extra
payment will be the additional expense he has to be at
to hand pure water down to his next-door neighbour.
This test of chemical analysis fails in another respect.
Supposing a manufacturer is on the river Aire, where
it is neither very good nor very bad water; he takes
100,000 gallons from the river, and puts it in the river
just below the standard, so that it would not pass the
standard ; all he has to do is to turn a little more water
into his works and dilute it with river water, and it will
pass the standard.

665. You think it would be rather holding out an
inducement to manufacturers to waste the water ?—
Yes; because when the river is passing through their
works, or close to their works, it would be very little ex-
pense to turn more water through it to dilute the effluent
water that comes out. There is another objection to this
very strict standard that some chemists would impose.
To make it of any use, it must be generally adopted
throughout the country, and that would press very
hard indeed upon all large towns situated at about the
centre of a river, or below it. For instance, it would
be absolutely impossible, I think, for the manufacturers

at Leeds to carry on their business if they were obliged:

to put the water into the river as good as the chemical
standard requires. They must either break the law or
give up business. It could not be done practically,
because the water is so bad to begin with, it is so far
inferior to the standard proposed by the Rivers’
Pollution Commission, that they could not purify it
sufficiently.

666. But are you taking into consideration the pos-
sible circumstance that, beginning at the source of
rivers or their tributaries, supposing each manufacturer
was obliged to purify the water, and no longer to pol-
Inte it under certain restrictions, then of course the
people of Leeds would not suffer as they do now—that
is to say, if the people above them were all hindered
from polluting the stream, the stream would come down
then to Leeds in a purer state than it does now ?—
Certainly. The objection that I have to insisting upon
this standard all over the country is, that it would press
very hardly at first upon some manufacturers and not
much upon others. Some rivers require a greater purity
in the water that is put in than other rivers. For
instance, I should insist upon a higher standard of
purity for the Thames than for many other rivers. As
it is, the Thames is under a different jurisdiction from
other rivers ; the Thames is under the Thames Conserv-
ancy, and other rivers will be, I suppose, under the
Rivers’ Pollution Commission, or under their standard.
The standard of the Thames Conservancy is somewhat
lower than the other standard. Some rivers which pass
over pretty nearly all granite are very pure, with only

a7

afew grains per gallon impurity ; and of course the
standard for these ought to be very high. Every river
should supply its own standard.

667. You mean that every river has its own charae-
ter, and originally may not be so pure as another river
and therefore it would be unfair to make one standard
apply to all rivers alike?—Yes. Then I think there is
another view that has been rather lost sight of. We
must think of the manufacturers on the river as well as
the fishes in the river. It would scarcely be right to kill
a manufacture—to destroy Leeds, for instance—for the
sake of getting purity in theriver. The manufacturers
of Leeds declare that, under the circumstances, they
could not purify the water up to the standard, and they
say, ‘We must either break the law, which of course we
cannot go on doing for ever, or give up business.’
That is what has to be thought of.

668. You can import your fish, but you cannot im-
port your manufactures ?—No; we are driving too many
manufactures out of the country as it is.

669. Have you ascertained whether the effluent water
from this process which has been applied at Leeds,
after being allowed to stand for a considerable length
of time, begins to smell again?—That depends upon
how it is done. If it is in an open vessel it does not
smell; if it is tightly corked up it will smell. I am
speaking of water as it is turned out now, insufficiently
purified; in a running stream it would not smell.

670. I asked that question because in a town where
the process is being applied, and where I myself have
seen the effluent water coming out of the premises where
this process was carried on, it was at first pure, it had
no smell, it was quite clear, and it was asserted had no
taste. I did not myself drink it, but I was told that
individuals had drunk it, and notwithstanding that, T
was also told that after flowing down some four or five
miles (it was a sluggish stream, no doubt, flowing but
slowly) it began to smell again. Of course that would
be over a long river a matter of considerable import-
ance ?—Would it not be difficult to know whether it
was the actual effluent from the process which smelt,
or something else in the river; because it would be
very much diluted, I imagine, by the river water.

671. It was a small stream, you could scarcely call it
a river, but about as wide as this room. That was told
me by the borough surveyor himself, who was of course
interested in making out that the process was good, and
certainly it was good so far as regards the immediate
operation of the process at the works; but he told me
that after flowing five or six miles it began to smell
again ?—That might be the case; but I should say if
such a thing were told me at Leeds or any place
that I had under my own charge, I should conclude
that something had gone wrong, and I should say, ‘ Let
me come down and I will set it right.’

672. That does not apply to your process, it was
simply the lime process.—There is an essential differ-
ence between the A B C process and the lime pro-
cess. The effluent from the A BC process ought to
be acid; the effluent from the lime process is neces-
sarily alkaline, and anything that is alkaline putrifies
readily. The great requirement of all processes is to
keep everything acid; as soon as there is alkalinity
anywhere there is putrefaction. The effluent from the
lime process must necessarily putrify, and the mud
must necessarily putrify; whereas the mud that we
produce has no smell whatever. It can be thrown on
to a field. I have seen a large tank, about 2 feet
deep, covering a good fraction of an acre, filled with
the mud in a fluid state and allowed to drain and dry
in the sun till it cracked up, and could be carried
away with spades and carts, and there was no smell
whatever. You could not detect a smell by taking
some up on a stick and putting it to your nose.

673. The distinction you draw is, that you think it
probable that an effluent water which is alkaline might
smell before long ?—Yes. ‘The effluent water from the
ABC process, unless it is properly purified, will also
smell if it is corked up in a bottle. The reason of
that is this: there is always a certain amount of
organic matter left in it; it is impossible to take the

William
Crookes.

 
William
Crookes.

——

58 CLYDE PURIFICATION COMMISSION.

whole of the organic matter out unless enormous ex-
pense is gone to, which no town would submit to.
This organic matter, when it is kept in the water free
from the air, tightly corked up so that the water
cannot absorb oxygen from the atmosphere, reacts
upon the sulphate of lime, for instance, which is in the
water, and reduces it to a sulphide; and the sulphide
and carbonic acid liberate sulphuretted hydrogen, and
that causes the smell. A great many mineral waters
will smell in the same way if corked up. In fact,
very few river waters will stand that test. The water
supply of London would not stand that test. If you
cork water up in a bottle for some time, and then shake
it, you can always detect a smell.

674. Would you call the water of London alkaline?
—It will be acid from the carbonic acid in it.

675. Supposing the pumping were to make the
water absolutely pure,—that is, so pure that it would
be potable, and anybody might drink it,—what do you
say, as a chemist, would be the cost of doing it? In
the first place, do you consider it is practicable to
begin with ?—I do not think it is practicable.

676. By any process that is known?—I do not
think it is possible. The only chance would be by
making use of the property which an alumina salt has
of throwing down impurities, and trying whether putting
more and more of it.in would do good; then of the
property which charcoal possesses of removing putres-
cible matter and removing the smell.

677. Supposing you were asked to attempt it, what
do you presume would be the cost of attempting it?—
The cost would amount up to anything, short of in-
finity.

678. Apply it to Leeds, for instance.—It could not
be done— it would be an impossibility to purify it
properly. I can purify the water by this process
sufficiently to pass the standard of the Rivers’ Pollution
Commission.

679. And supposing you were to apply it, what
would it cost at Leeds?—It is nearly done now at
Leeds. I think with the extra cost that I mentioned
a little time ago it would be done; but then that would
not give water which I should like to drink.

680. But you think it would be nearly up to the
standard proposed by those chemists?—Yes. Dr.
Letheby analyzed it a shorttimeago. The Leeds Cor-
poration wanted to know how the process was going
on without my being there. They thought that per-
haps my being there kept the workmen rather closer
to their work than otherwise ; so, without saying any-
thing to us in London, they gave orders that a sample
of effluent should be taken several times a day and
corked up in a bottle, and that should go on fora
week. At the end of the week all thosebottles should
be mixed together, so as to get an average sample of
the week’s work. A bottle full of that was sent to
Dr. Letheby, and he was asked to analyze and report
upon it. Dr. Letheby gave results which, when com-
pared with the Rivers’ Pollution Commission, showed
that it was superior to their standard in every respect
except one; and I think a very little more purification
would have removed that one point of inferiority. The
Leeds authorities expressed themselves particularly
pleased with the result of that test.

681. It would appear so far, then, that Dr. Frank-
land’s standard was not so very wide of the mark ?—
It does not demand, as some persons say it does, a
fanciful degree of purity; but the difficulty is to
analyze water to that extent of minutie. The amounts
that are sought for do not exceed the limit of experi-
mental error.

682. Therefore you would have a considerable
difference of opinion by employing a greater number of
chemists ?—Yes; it would be a fortune, in fact, for
analytical chemists if that method was adopted.

683. You make a residue which you suppose in the
course of time would be saleable. Could you form an
idea of about the cost per ton of this saleable residue?
—At Leeds they reckon that they will make about
12,000 tons a year, and they will pay for that £15,000.
We maintain that that is a valuable manure.

684. That would not include the cost of works ?—
No.

685. You must add the interest of works upon that ?
—Yes.

686. That would be about £20,000 at. least at
Leeds? — Yes; say roughly 30s. a ton. But we
reckon that it can be made for much less than that.

687. What do you suppose that it would sell for?—
Our Company have sold about 4000 tons of it at £3,
10s. a ton.

688. At Leeds?—No; from different places. Where
the sewage is from a residential town, with water-
closets and no manufactures, the demand for our manure
at £3, 10s. a ton is largely in excess of the supply;
but in a place like Leeds, where the sewage is very
much mixed with dye liquors and waste from manu-
factories, and where there are so many earth-closets
and privies, the contents of which do not go into the
sewers, of course the manurial elements are not in such
excess as they would be in other towns. But the
Corporation of Leeds tried some experiments. on some
land which they had. They took equal areas of land
—I think half an acre—and put different manures on of
the same value. They spent 30s. in native guano, taking
it at £3, 10s.a ton; 30s. in stable manure; 30s. in
Peruvian guano, and so on for several others; and I
think the native guano came out best. It was equal
to Peruvian guano of the same value. After that they
advertised to the farmers of the neighbourhood that if
they would send their carts to the sewage works, they
should have a ton or half a ton, or whatever they
liked, of the native guano, given to them for nothing,
if they would try it on their fields and send reports
to the Leeds Town Council. The reports are now
coming in gradually. The last time I heard, twenty
or thirty reports had come in, and about ten or twelve
of them were favourable. A less number than that
were unfavourable, and said that it was of no value
whatever; others were, that they could not tell much
one way or the other; but some of those reports which
said that it was valuable put a money value upon it.
Some said that it was worth £1 a ton, others said it
was worth £2; another said it was very valuable in-
deed, but he put no money valueonit. It was probably
used for different soil and different crops.

689. What does Peruvian guano fetch a ton ?—
£13. It is rising almost daily now, and the standard
is diminishing. They will not guarantee it now of the
high standard that it was before.

690. Have you any idea at all what quantity of
artificial manure is used in the kingdom? Are there
any statistics to that. effect ?—There are statistics, but
I do not remember them. I should think it would.
exceed a million tons.

691. Have you ever seen it stated?—I recollect see-
ing some statement of that sort, but I forget it at the
moment.

692. Are you applying this process anywhere else
except at Leeds ?—No.

693. Do you know what they do at Bradford ?—I
do not. JI think they are using the lime process, but I
am not certain. We are negotiating with the town
of Aylesbury.

694. Have you formed any opinion at all upon the
irrigation system ?—I have seen a good deal of it in
Paris. They irrigated with a certain portion of the
sewage of Paris an experimental farm in the plain of
Gennevilliers, close to Paris. I saw a great deal of
this a year or two ago, having to go there daily on
matters connected with the sewage of Paris. The
sewage farm was carried on by Government, and no
expense was spared. They had plenty of labour, and
they took the sewage when they liked and turned. it
away when they liked. The vegetables grew with the
greatest luxuriance, but there was no firmness about
them ; for instance, I could thrust my finger right. into-
the heart of a cabbage with the greatest ease; and if I
took a vegetable, a cabbage or something of that sort,
and broke it, and squeezed the juice out, I could
always detect a sewage smell in the juice. Some quick-
growing Italian rye-grass will take up actual sewage
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE.

into circulation. You can break it, and squeeze water
out that has a decided smell of sewage. The earth
that those plants were grown in was covered with
a crust of the solid matter of the sewage that would
not pass through the ground, and that crust smelt very
badly indeed in the sun. The ground is as porous a
soil as I should think it was possible to get—it is
a very deep sandy peninsula. The process worked
very well, T understand, for a few years; irrigation
went on very well, but the solid matter of the sewage
gradually choked up the upper portion of the soil,
and then it was dug in and it worked better again
for a short time; but in a shorter time it choked up
again, and they were gradually getting the whole
ground so clogged up that it would not filter.

"695. What was the extent of the farm ?—Nearly a
hundred acres. Part of it was let out to different
market gardeners to use. I think sewage irrigation
might answer if a person might take the sewage just
when he wanted it, and let it pass by when he did
not want it; but to have to use the whole of the sewage
T think would be a failure, because then the sewage
must be taken not only in the summer, when plants
can take any amount of water, but also in the winter,
when vegetation is very sluggish, and when there is
frost and snow on the ground, and also when there
is a flood of rain.

696. Do you know what has become of the Bark-
ing farm, whether it is being carried on or not ?—I
do not know.

697. You would expect that the soil would deterio-
rate?—Yes, the soil will deteriorate—the filtering
power will deteriorate.

698. You are aware, are you not, of Mr. Bailey
Denton’s proposal of deep drains and earth filters ?—
Yes. I do not think earth will filter sewage long.
Sewage is the most difficult thing possible to filter.
Yon cannot filter it through filtering paper; it contains
a kind of glutinous papier-maché stuff which clogs up
any filter.

699. You would expect those filters very soon to
fill up?—Yes; they must not be so open that the
solid matter in the sewage will pass through, and they
will then be so close that they will soon clog up.

700. You do not believe in a filter of that sort
answering in perpetuity? —No; it probably might
answer very well for a few years.

701. Might not motion assist it ?—Yes, that would
renew the surface, but it would only delay the time
that it would be clogged up. For instance, a good
coarse sand will filter almost anything, and will allow
almost anything to run through, but that very soon
gets clogged up with sewage. ;

702. You would not expect much from the filtering
process?—No, not after a few years’ time.

703. With regard to the sewage of the Seine, do
you know how far they take the sewage down the
Seine ?—It goes in at Clichy and St. Dénis, but all the
solid matter goes to the forest of Bondy.

704. How do they separate it?—They -have scarcely
any water-closets; they have cesspits, which are
emptied into closed carts which come round. A pipe
goes down into the cesspool, a tap is turned, and the

59

contents are sucked up into those carts. The

then taken to La Vilette on the outskirts of ae
Boxes are placed underneath the closets in some of the
houses to receive the fecal matter and paper and things
of that sort, and they also are carried to this same
place. At Vilette the carts and boxes are all emptied
into a large underground reservoir, where the semi-fluid
excrements are well mixed up. From this there is a
pipe five or six miles long to the forest of Bondy, and
the whole of this feecal matter is pumped through this
pipe, where at Bondy it forms large lakes about the
size of the Serpentine, and 20 feet deep, composed of
nothing but the solid contents of cesspits.

705. What do they do with it ?—They let it dry in
the air for seven or eight years. In seven years’ time
the matter is sufficiently dry in those lakes for people to
spread it about, when old women go over it for any-
thing solid that there may be, and pick out the
large corks and cleanse them, and send them back to
Paris to be used. The dried powder is called pou-
drette, and is used as manure. It is worth going to
Bondy to see that modern Lake Avernus; the smell is
something so fearful, that few people can get within
half a mile of it. The rain of Paris principally goes
down the gullies in the streets; the street sweepings
and the slops from the houses go in the same direction,
and it is that liquid that was put on the plain of
Gennevilliers, not the solid matter.

706. The tests which you have mentioned are matters
which could be determined by the body in authority in
a town, without aid in the way of any very skilful
analytical chemists ?—Yes. I should think that in a
large town probably the officer of health, or some
person like him connected with the Town Council,
would be the person. At Leeds there is a Sewage
Committee, which would be quite capable of judging
of those standards which I think sufficient for the
ordinary purpose of the water to be returned. In
some cases it would be necessary to call in the aid of
a chemist. For instance, arsenic must be kept out, and
copper should be kept out, and certain metals that
would be known to be coming in from the kind of
works that were carried on in the neighbourhood.
The water must not contain more than a certain
quantity of free acid, and different things of that sort.
There a chemist would be required; but in ordinary
cases, wheresuch special things are absent, common sense
is much better than chemistry. I might observe, that
after the effluent water passes through the works at
Leeds, it passes through a pond of five or six acres,
and a few feet deep. <A part of this pond is to be
planted with osiers, and in the pond is to be a
considerable quantity of the American water - weed
anacharis. This American water-weed will very soon
fill up the pond, and will form the most efficient sys-
tem of purification that can be adopted with the
effluert.

707. You say that that particular weed has the
quality of purifying ?—It is a very gross feeder; it will
live in any kind of water. In fact, any vegetation has
a wonderfully purifying property upon water ; it gives
out oxygen in the water, and that, burns up organic
matter.

William
Crookes.

 
INDEX.

—_— —_—_—_o-—-———__—_

Nore.—The references in Roman numerals are to the Report, and those in ordinary figures to the Evidence.

ABC process, Description of, viii., 11; a system of precipi-
incu 11; use of elay, charcoal, and blood, 11, oF
experience as to, at Leeds, 12-14, 56, 57; Sir J.
Bazalgette’s ce as to, xxxii., 51,.52; differs from
lime process, 7; method of drying precipitates, 12;
manurial value of products, 12, 13; cost of permanent
works at Leeds, 12; volume of sewage dealt with at
Leeds, 14;.application of, at Crossness, xxxii.—xxxvi., 13;
not now applied there, 14; fish live in the effluent
water, 14; quantity of solid precipitates obtained, 15.

AIR-CLOSETS, Colquhoun’s, xxvi., 22, 24.

AIRDRIE, Population of, vi., xv.; water supply of, xv.,

'_-xxxvii., xxxviii.; disposal of sewage of, xv.

ALEXANDRIA. .(See-Leven.)

AMERICAN weed, Use of, to purify sewage, 59.

ANDERSON, David, explains his scheme for purifying
Glasgow sewage, 43 ; objections to dry-closet system,
43; and to Bateman and Bazalgette’s, 43; is in favour
of irrigation near Glasgow, 43, 44.,

ARTIFICIAL manure, Quantity of, used annually, xi.

ASHES, Filtration of sewage.through, M‘Callum’s scheme
for, 2,3; Strang’s machine for, 6,7; supply of, 2, 3,
7, 87; when saturated, value of, as manure, 7;
Syminton’s improvement of Strang’s machine, 15, 16;
objections to mixture of ashes and excreta, 16, 17, 36,
87; analysis-of mixture, 37; opinion in favour of use
of, in dry-closets, 32; comparison of, with charcoal
ag deodorizer, 36-38.

ASH-PITS, Proposal to substitute portable cans for, 7;
extent of, in Glasgow, 17:; opinion that they should be
open at,top, 253 generally covered at present, 25, 34,

BAILEY DENTON’S system of purifying sewage by inter-
mittent filtration, 53, 59.

BAILLIESTON, Population of, vi.;, disposal of sewage of,
XV., Xvi.

BALLOCH. (See pale,

BARKING, Experience of sewage irrigation at, 53:

BARRHEAD, Population of, vi., xvil.; water supply of,
xvi. ; disposal of sewage of, xvi., xvii.

BATEMAN and BAZALGETTE’S Scheme, Opinion as to,
ee 43,.48; Sir J. Bazalgette’s explanations .as to,

5

BAZALGETTE, Sir Joseph William, is engineer to Metro-
- politan Board.of Works, 51; opinion as to application
of A BC process at.Crossness, xxxii., 52; opinion that
all systems of ‘precipitating sewage have failed, 51;
explains lime process'as used at Leicester, 52 ; proposed
combination to purify Thames, 52; Act obtained for
combined sewage operations in West Kent, 52; advan-
tage of combination, 52; cost of pumping sewage, 52;
use.of equalizing reservoirs, 52; gives information as
to sewage farm at Croydon, 53; whether it is a
‘ nuisance, 53; persons building close to sewage farm,
53; opinion as to Liernur’s system, 53; explains
Bailey Denton’s intermittent filtration system, 53;
refers io Odams’ cylinder for straining sewage, 53;
none of the purifying processes now in use commercially
profitable, 54; objection to. sewage farm at St. Leonards,
54; proceedings at-Bournemouth, 54; failure to obtain
Act to establish sewage farm at Birmingham, 54;
refers to his and Mr. Bateman’s report on Glasgow
sewage, 54; views as to value of irrigation, 54; risks
attending sewers and sewage farms from coal workings,
55; explains way in which money for drainage raised
by Metropolitan’ Board of Works, 55; loans paid off
by instalments, 55; terms on which Metropolitan
Board of Works take lands for,sewers, 55.
BELLSHILL, Population of, vi.; disposal of sewage of,

xvii. ‘

BIGGAR, Thomas, describes mode of converting night-soil
into portable manure, 21; use of Colquhoun’s closets,
xxvi., 21, 22; how system might be applied to town,
22; o of method, 22; method of cleansing spent

soap suds, xxili., xxiv., 22; resulting profit ¢o manu-
facturer, 23.

BIRMINGHAM, Sewage operations at, 51, 52, 54,

BLACKBURN, Cost of sewage farming at, 15.

BLACK CART, The, drainage area of, iv.; pollution of,
iv., xiv. ; places draining into, vi. ey

BONHILL. (See Leven.)

BOTHWELL, Population of, vi.; water supply of, xvii. ;
disposal of sewage of, xvii. :
BRITISH SEA-WEED QOMPANY, description of their

charcoal, 38. :

BROWN, James, explains scheme for purifying Clyde, 29,
30; provision for escape of sewer gas, 30; objections
to Bateman & Bazalgette’s scheme, 30; objections to
eee 30.

BUCHAN, W. P.,,describes Hoey’s system, 5,6; objections
to, 5, 6; objections to cesspools, 5; is in favour of
scheme for conveying sewage to sea, 6.

BUSBY, Population of, vi. ; water supply of, xvi.; disposal
of sewage of, xvi., xvii.

CADZOW BURN, The, pollution of, v.

CALCINATION of sewage, A, G. Thomson’s,scheme for, 1.

CALDER. (SeeNorth Calder, South Calder, Rotten Calder.)

CALDER Ironworks, Population of, vi.; disposal of

__ sewage at, xvii.

CALDERBANK, Population of, vi. ; disposal of sewage of,
xvi,

CAMBUSLANG, Population of, vi., xiv.; water supply of,
xiv., XV., XXXvii., XXXvViii.; disposal.of sewage of, xiv.

CAMBUSNETHAN, Population of, vi.; water supply of,
xvii. ; disposal of sewage.of, xvii. :

CAMLACHIE BURN, The, v.

CAMPBELL, William, is assessor under Lands Valuation
Act for Glasgow, 35; gives statistics as ‘to Glasgow
and suburban districts, 35.

CARBON. (See Charcoal.)

CARBON FERTILIZER COMPANY, description of their

Closet, 34, 39.

CARFIN, Population of, vi. ; disposal of sewage of, xvii.

CARLUKE, Population of, vi., xxi. ; drainage of, xxii.

CARRICK, John, master of works, Glasgow, 4; produces
various reports on purification of Clyde, 4.; describes
-Coleman’s method of purifying sewage through crushed
shale, 19; Stevenson’s plan for purifying the Clyde,
19; Smith’s irrigation scheme, 19; Thornton’s scheme,
20 ; ventilation of sewers in Glasgow, 34,35; trapping
of sewers, 34, 35; good gradients of Glasgow sewers, 35.

CART. (See Black Cart, White Cazt.) laos

CESSPOOLS, not many in Glasgow, 2; objections 40, 5;
M‘Intyre’s system of, 8.

CLE EEL Hal Population of, vi.; disposal of sewage
of, xvii.

CHAPMAN, Gavin, states different methods for purifying
Clyde, 48; manufacturers’ refuse might be kept out-of
river, 49; excreta could not, 49; proof.of this, 49;
experience as to Hoey’s water-closets, 49; number of
“water-closets in Glasgow, 49, 40; they do not supply
more than one-fifth of pollution of Clyde, 50; sewage
cannot be perfectly cleansed by mechanical or chemical

‘processes, 49; sewage of Glasgow -weak, 49; opiniowy
as to precipitation by lime, 49; thinks Coleman's pro-
cess of filtration deserves further trial, 50.

CHARCOAL, Use of, 16,33, 34; cost of animal, 33,

CHARCOAL closet, 16, 34. 6 ues op?

CHEMICAL ‘treatment, Disposal of sewage by, viii. ; dif-

ferent methods of, xi.; cost of, xi.; weight of solid
products, xi. ; difficulty, of disposing of products, xii. ;
deodorization may sometimes be best mode of dealing
with sewage, XXvii. : Em, cos

CLOCH POINT, Outfall at, considered, xii., xiii.

CLOSET. (See <Air-closet, Charcoal-closet, Colquhoun’s
closet, Dry-closet, Hoey’s closet, Water-closet.

CLYDE, Description of, and its tributaries, iv. ; tidal por-
62 CLYDE PURIFICATION COMMISSION.

tion of, iv.; area draining into, above Gourock, iv. ;
tributaries above Glasgow, v.; above Hamilton, v.;
principal towns on, vi.; sewage of Glasgow falling
into, ix., x.; region of, as defined by watershed, xxvii.;
navigation of, would not be affected by outfall sewer,
XXV.

COAL workings, Water from, not deleterious, 31; effect of,
in depressing surface, 31; risks from, to sewers and
sewage farms, 55.

COATBRIDGE, Population of, vi., xv.; water supply of,
XV., XXXvil., xxxviii.; disposal of sewage of, xv.

COATDYKE. (See Coatbridge.)

COLEMAN, J. J., describes method of purifying sewage
through crushed shale, 39, 40; might be used in dry-
closets, 40; steps taken to cleanse products of paraffin
works, 40; opinion as to Rivers’ Pollution Commis-
sioners’ standards, 40. (See Carrick, John.)

COLQUHOUN'’S closet, Use of, at Bridgend Mills, Dalry,

21, 22; in Paisley, xxvi., 24.

COMBINATION, Advantages of, for making intercepting
sewers, 52; Act obtained for, in West Kent, 52.

CONSOLIDATED FUND, Opinion that cleansing of manu-
facturers’ refuse should be charged on, 17, 18.

COVENTRY, Treatment of sewage at, viii. ; operations of
General Sewage and Manure Company at, 45, 46, 47.

CRAIGENTINNY, Experience of sewage irrigation at, 54.

CRAIGNEUK. (See Wishaw.)

CREMATION of sewage, A. G. Thomson’s scheme for, 1.

CROOKES, William, F.R.S., is chairman of Native Guano
Co., viii, 55; an eminent chemist, xxvi.; suggests

_ tests of purity of water, xxvi.; describes A BC pro-
cess, 55, 56; results obtained at Leeds, 56; question
as to adopting chemical standards of purity, 56, 57;
different rule applicable in different rivers, 57 ; opinion
as to Rivers’ Pollution Commissioners’ standards, 57 ;
states results of sewage irrigation near Paris, 58;
opinion as to sewage farm, 59; opinion as to Bailey
Denton’s intermittent filtration system, 59; treatment
of solid matters obtained from sewage of Paris, 59;
production of poudrette, 59; in judging whether water
pure enough to go into river, common sense better than
chemists, 59 ; when chemists are necessary, 59; use of
American weed to purify sewage, 59.

CROSSHILL, vi., xiii., xiv. (See Glasgow, White Cart.)

CROSSMYLOOF, vi., xiii., xiv. (See Glasgow.)

CROSSNESS, Experiments on ABC process at, viii. ;
experiments at, 13, 14, 51,54. (See Appendix.)

CROYDON, Sewage farm at, 53. :

DALMUIR. (See Duntocher.)

DEODORIZATION. (See Chemical Treatment.)

DOUGLAS WATER, The, places draining into, vi.

DRAINS, Ventilation of, 6.

DREGHORN, David, in favour of irrigation as way of
dealing with Glasgow sewage, 44.

DRY-CLOSET, Use of ashes in, 2, 3; objection to, 16, 17,
86. (See Stanford.)

DUMBARTON, Population of, vi., xix.; drainage of, xix. ;
water supply of, xix., xxxvii., xxxviii.; disposal of
sewage of, xx.

DUNTOCHER, Population of, vi., xx.; drainage of, xx. ;
water supply of, xx., xxxvii., xxxix. ; disposal of sewage

of, xx.
DYKEHEAD, Population of, vi.; disposal of sewage of,
xvii.

EARTH-CLOSET, Use of, recommended, xxvi.; the Col-
quhoun, xxvi. (See Dry-closet.)

EFFLUENT. (See Water.)

ELDERSLIE, Population of, vi., xiv. ; disposal of sewage
of, xiii., xiv.

ELVAN WATER, The, place draining into, vi.

EXCRETA, Whether mixture of, with ashes, deleterious, 16,
17; conversion of, into portable manure, 21; practi-
cable to deal with, of a manufactory,'24; not practi-
cable to keep all out of Clyde, 24, 49.

EXCREMENTAL-pollution diseases, Dr. Fergus’ observa-
tions as to, 25-29.

EXTRACTOR for purifying sewage, Falconer’s, 4.

FACAL matter. (See Works, General Provisions.)

FAIFIEY, vi., xx. (See Duntocher.)

FALCONER, David, exhibits model of apparatus for
purification of sewage, 4; explains model, 4; use of
revolving extractor, 4; cost of apparatus, 5; proposes
to flush drains with sea-water, 5.

FARLAND HEAD, Outfall at, considered, xii., xiii.

FERGUS, Dr. Andrew, is President of Faculty of Phy-
siclans and Surgeons, Glasgow, 25; was district
surgeon in Glasgow from 1847 to 1866, 25; did not
find that filthy state of Clyde was injurious to public
health, 25; experience during cholera epidemic in
i854, 25; has paid much attention to excremental-

pollution diseases, 26; gives statistics as to these, 26-29;
explains dangers from corrosion of drain-pipes, 26; no
immunity to be secured by trapping sewers, 27; water-
closet system a chief source of pollution of Clyde, 28 ;
objections to disposal of sewage by pumping, 28, 29;
objections to Bateman and Bazalgette’s scheme, 28;
holds that no excremental matter should pass into
sewers, 28; experience as to Hoey’s closets, 29;
opinion as to ventilation of Glasgow sewers, 29.
FILTERING material for sewage, 2, 3, 7. : :
FILTRATION, Disposal of sewage by, viii. ; impracticable
on large scale, viii., x.; of sewage through ashes,
M‘Callum’s scheme for, 2, 3; Strang’s machine for, 6, 8.
FINNIESTON BURN, The, v.
FLUSHING of sewers with sea-water, 5; danger of, 5;
objections to, with fresh water, 10.

GENERAL PROVISIONS suggested, xxvii., xxviii. ;
representative ‘ Sanitary Commissioners of Clyde’
to be constituted, xxviii.; their powers and duties,
xxviii. ; no solid or dry refuse to be thrown into river,
xxviii. ; after eighteen months, no fecal matter or urine
from works to be passed into river, xxviii. ; unless with
special licence, xxviii. ; after fixed period, all pollution
of river to be prohibited, xxviii.; ‘Sanitary Commis-
sioners’ to determine what is pollution, xxviii. ; sub-
ject to appeal to Court, xxviii. ; facilities to be given
for manufacturers acquiring land for purification pur-
poses, xxviii.

GENERAL SEWAGE AND MANURE COMPANY. (See
Melliss, J. C.)

GLASGOW, Estimated quantity of sewage of, 2, 33; not
many cesspools in, 2; ashpits in, 3, 37 ; population of,
vi., ix., 35; density of population, ix.; water supply
of, ix. ; volume of sewage of, ix., xi. ; weight of sewage,
xi. ; rainfall of, ix., x.; intercepting sewers for, x.;
outfall sewer for, xii., xiii.; area of municipal burgh
of, xiii. ; places included and adjoining, which would
discharge into sewers, xiii., xiv.; number of water-
closets in, 16, 50; estimated quantity of urine in,
7, 8; daily consumption of water in, 29; opinion as
to ventilation of sewers in, 29, 34, 35; houses in, 35;
rental of, 35; description of police manure, 36, 87;
price obtained for, 37, 44; scavengering of, 41, 42;
enormous rainfall of, 48 ; sewage of, weak, 49.

GLASGOW WATERWORKS, Population supplied by,
ix., xiv., xvii.; quantity of water supplied by, ix,
Xxxvii.; sources of supply, xxxix.

GOUROCK, Population of, vi, xix. (See Greenock.)

GOVAN, vi., xiii, xiv. (See Glasgow.)

GRAVITATION, Disposal of sewage by, vii.

GREENOCK, Population of, vi., xviii. ; water supply of,
xviii., xl; existing drainage of, xviii.; disposal of
sewage of, xiii., xvili,, xix.

HAMILTON, pollutes the Cadzow Burn, v.; population of,
vi., xviii. ; likely to increase, v., vii, ix.; coal at, ix.,
xviii. ; disposal of sewage of, xviii.; water supply of,
xviii., xxxvii., xl.

HELENSBURGH, Population of, vi., xix.; drainage of,
xix. ; disposal of sewage of, xix.

HILLHEAD, vi, xiii., xiv. (See Glasgow, Kelvin.)

HOEY’S system of water-closets described, 5, 6; objec-
tions to, 5, 6, 34; recommended, 16; Dr. Fergus’ ex-
pounce as to, 29; Mr. Chapman’s experience as to,

HOLYTOWN, Population of, vi.; disposal of sewage of,
xvii.

INTERCEPTING Sewers for Glasgow, x.; to terminate
near Whiteinch, x. ; size and cost, x.
IN me downward filtration system. (See Bailey
enton. :
IRRIGATION, Disposal of sewage by, vii. ; whether avail-
able for Glasgow, x., xi.; used at Wishaw, xvii. ; in
certain cases may be best mode of dealing with sewage,
xxvi., xxvii. (See Sewage farm.)

IRVINE, Outfall near, considered, xii., xiii,

JAMESTOWN. (See Leven.)
JOHNSTONE, Population of, vi, xiv.; water supply of,
Xiv., Xxxvil., xli.; disposal of sewage of, xiii., xiv.

sas ha describes his system of deodorizing sewers,

i ake

KEATES, Mr., report by, on ABC process, ix., xxxii.

KELVIN, The, drainage area of, iv. ; pollution of, iv., xiv.,
xxv. places draining into, vi., xxi. ; disposal of their
sewage, xxi.

KILBARCHAN, Population of, vi., xiv. ; disposal of sewage
of, xiii, xiv.

KILSYTH. (See Kelvin.)

KINNINGHOUSE BURN, The, v.
INDEX.

KINNING PARK, vi., xiii. (See Glasgow.)
KIRKINTILLOCH. (See Kelvin, Waterworks.)

‘ARK, Population of, vi., xxi.'; water supply of, xxi.
aoa xii; drainage of, xxi.; disposal of ens of, xxi.
LAND, Facilities for manufacturers obtaining, xxvi., xxviii.
LARKHALL, Population of, vi. xxii; drainage of, xxii.
LATHAM’S Solid Sewage Extractor, Use of, at Coventry, 45.
LEEDS, Treatment of sewage at, vili., xi. (See A BC pro-

cess.

LEICESTER, Lime process adopted at, 52; products ob-

-. tained of no manurial value, 49, 52.

LENNOXTOWN. (See Kelvin.) : ; 7

LEVEN, The, drainage area of, lv. 5 pollution of, iv., xix.,

 xx,; places draining into, vi., xx.; disposal of their
sewage, xx.; difficulty of getting land near, xxii. (See

Dumbarton.) ais : -
LIERNUR'S system of disposing of sewage, vii., 9 ; descrip-

tion of, 9, 11; opinion regarding, in Holland, 11;

opinion in favour, 48; opinion against, 53.

LIME, Precipitation by, 49. (See Leicester, Chemical
treatment.)

M‘CALLUM, Malcolm, 2; his scheme for filtering domestic
sewage through ashes, 2; filtered water only to go into
sewers, 2, 3.

MACDONALD, Malcolm, describes plan for purifying
Clyde, 25 ; sewage and ashes to be mixed in basins on
side of river, 25. : : .

MINTYRE, James, exhibits model of intercepting sewers
with pockets, 8; and plan of cesspools, 8; cost of
scheme, 8. :

M‘LEOD, Kenneth M., is Sanitary Inspector for Glasgow,
$4; ventilation of sewers in Glasgow, 34.

MANUFACTORIES. (See Works.)

MANUFACTURERS’ refuse may be purified at a profit, 9,
17, 23, 82, 42, 43; should be kept out of sewers, 17,
48, 49; should cost of doing so be put on Consolidated
Fund? 17, 18.

MARYHILL, vi., xiii, xiv. (See Glasgow, Kelvin.)

MELLISS, John Charles, is engineer of General Sewage and
Manure Company, London, 45; explains their treatment
of Coventry sewage by precipitation, 45°; effluent water

uite clear, 45; ‘fish live in it, 45; cost’ of permanent
works and of working, 46; precipitates used, 45, 46;
value of products, 47 ; small number of men employed,
46 ; objections to pumping sewage, 47 ; estimated cost
of applying his system to Glasgow, 47.

METROPOLITAN BOARD OF WORKS, Mode in which
money for drainage raised by, 55; mode of taking land
for sewers, 56.

MIDDENS. (See Ashpits.) : :

MILLAR, William, is Treasurer of Glasgow; objections to
Bateman and Bazalgette’s scheme, 48; to water-closet
system, 48; would put special tax on water-closets,
48; thinks sewage should be utilized for. agricultural
purposes, 48; in favour of Carrick’s scheme for irriga-
tion at Yoker, 48; suggestion that Glasgow should be
divided into districts under a representative Board, 48 ;
favourable to. charcoal-closets and Liernur’s system, 48.

MILLBURN’S Patent Sludge-drying Machine, 47.

MOLENDINAR BURN, The, v.

MOSER’S closets, 24.

MOSSEND, Population of, vi. ; disposal of sewage of, xvii.
-MOTHERWELL, Population of, vi. xvii.; water supply
of, xvii., xxxvii., xli.; disposal of sewage at, xviii.

MOUNT FLORIDA, vi., xiii, xiv. (See Glasgow.)

MURRAY, Provost, describes industries of Paisley, 23 ;
quantity of waste outfall, 23; other pollutions of the
Cart, 23, 24; Paisley imperfectly drained, 23 ; sug-
gestions for improving its sanitary condition, 24; diffi-
culty of getting spare land for draining, 24; settling

NATIVE GUANO COMPANY, Proceedings of, at Leeds,
viii. (See AB C process.)

NAVIGATION of CLYDE would not be affected by out-
fall sewer, xxv.

NEILSTON, Population of, vi.; water supply of, xvi. ;
disposal of sewage of, xvi, xvii.

NETHAN, The, place draining into, vi.

NEWARTHILL, Population of, vi. ; disposal of sewage of,

xvii.
NEW CATHCART, Population of, vi.; water supply of,
xvi. ; disposal of sewage of, xvi., xvii.
NEWMAINS, Population of, vi.; disposal of sewage of,

xvii.
NORTH CALDER, The, drainage area of, v.; pollution of,
v., xxv. ; places draining into, vi, xv., XVil.

‘ODAMS' cylinder for straining sewage, 53.
OLD es Population of, vi. ; disposal of sewage
of, xx.

63

OUTFALL sewer for Glasgow district, xii; different
termini for, considered, xii., xiii. ; cost of, xifi. ; places
which would drain into, xiii., xiv.; volume of sewage
and waste, xv., xvi.; rainfall in region drained by,
xiv., xv.; would not affect navigation of Clyde, xxiv.

PAISLEY, Population of, vi., xiv.; defective drainage of,
xiv. ; water supply of, xiv., xxxvii., xli.; disposal of
sewage of, xiii., xiv. ; recovery of certain products of
waste at, xxiii, (See Murray.)

PARAFFIN works, Purification of refuse from, 17, 18, 40.

PARIS, Poudrette obtained from sewage of, 59. (See Sew-
age farm.) °

PARTIOK, vi., xiii. (See Glasgow.)

PINKSTON BURN, The, v.

PNEUMATIC system, Liernur’s, for disposing of sewage.

(See Liernur.
POLLOKSHAWS, vi., xiii., xiv. (See Glasgow, White

Cart.)

POLLOKSHIELDS, vi., xiii. (See Glasgow.)

POLLUTION. (See General Provisions.)

PORT-GLASGOW, Population of, vi., xix.; water supply
of, xix., xxxvii., xli. (See Greenock.)

POT-ALE, Cleansing of, 17.

POUDRETTE obtained under Liernur’s system, 9, 11; from

- sewage of Paris, 59.

PRECIPITATION as a means of purifying sewage, 11, 45,
47. (SeeA BC process, Lime, Melliss (J. C.), Chemical
treatment.)

PUMPING sewage, Dr. Fergus’ objections to, 28, 29; Mr.
Brown’s objections to, 30; Mr. Melliss’ objections to, 47.

PURVIS, John, opposed to carrying sewage to sea, 50; in
favour of periodical removal of night-soil in covered
pans, 51. :

RAINFALL, Separation of, from sewage, 1, 7; extent
of, 48.° (See Glasgow.)

REID, Thomas, farmer, Ayrshire, 30; advocates Bateman
and Bazalgette’s plan, 30 ; has levelled sandhills in Ayr-
shire for irrigation, 30; ready to pay for sewage, 31.

RENFREW, Population of, vi., xiv. ; disposal of sewage of,
xiii., xiv.; water supply of, xiv.

RENTON. (See Leven.)

REPRESENTATIVE body recommended to carry out com-
; ae for making sewers, 54. (See General Provi-
‘sions.

RIO JANEIRO, separate system of drains for rainfall and.

sewage, 56; method of purifying sewage at, 56.

RIVERS’ POLLUTION COMMISSIONERS, Conclusions of,
supported, 16; difficulty as to adopting their standards
of purity, xxvi., 18, 57, 59.

ROBERTSON, James, explains his scheme for purifying
Clyde, 41. :

ROBERTSON, William, describes his scheme for purifying
Clyde by tidal reservoirs, 44; cost of scheme, 45. _

ROTTEN CALDER, The, drainage area of, v.; not pol-

' luted, v.
RUTHERGLEN, vi., xiii., xiv. (See Glasgow.)

ST. ENOCH’S BURN, The, v.

ST. LEONARDS, Objections to sewage farm at, 54.

SALMON, Bailie, is Convener of Sewage Committee of
Glasgow, 8; procured plan for applying Liernur’s
scheme to section of Glasgow. 8.

‘SANITARY COMMISSIONERS OF THE CLYDE.’ (See
General Provisions.)

SCOTT'S, General, process, Results of, at Birmingham, 54;
at Haling, 54.

SCOTT, Adam, holder of Liernur’s patent for United
Kingdom, 9; explains Liernur’s system, 9, 11.

SEA-WATER, Proposal to flush sewers with, 5; objections

5

to, 5.

SEWAGE of Glasgow, Quality of, 1, 49; estimate of
quantity of, 2, 33.

SEWAGE FARM, Cost of, at Blackburn, 15; Smith’s
scheme for, on north of Clyde, 19; difficulty of pro-
viding one near Paisley, 23, 24; proceedings at
Coventry in connection with, 45; difficulties of estab-
lishing one on large scale, 49; experience of, at
Croydon, 53; whether it is a nuisance, 53 ; proposal
to have one at St. Leonards abandoned, 54; failure to
obtain Act for, at Birmingham, 54; risks from coal
workings, 55; results obtained near Paris, 58, 59;
considerations affecting, vii., viii.

SEWER GASES, how to be prevented going into houses,
6, 7; presence of, in cisterns, 11; can they be effectu-
ally trapped, 27; provision for escape of, 30; compo-
sition of, 40.

SHALE, Crushed, use of, as deodorizer, 19, 39, 40 ; worthy
of further investigation, 50.

SHARKIE, Hugh, his scheme for purifying Clyde, 41.

SHAWLANDS, vi., xiii., xiv. (See Glasgow, White Cart.)
64,

SHETTLESTON, Population of, vi. ; disposal of sewage of,
xill., xiv., XV.

SHORT, Thomas, exhibits apparatus for purifying sewage,
82; use of charcoal, 43; cost of applying apparatus,
33; cost of charcoal, 33.

SILLAR, William C., explains
Native Guano Company, 11. :

SIMPSON, Alexander Gray, explains plan for purifying
Clyde, 31; water from coal workings not very dele-

sree 81; depression of surface from ¢oal workings,

the A BO process of

SMITH, William R. W., agrees. generally with conclusions
of Rivers’ Pollution Commissioners, 16; thinks exereta
must be kept separate from general sewage, 16; use of
Stanford’s and Hoey’s closets for this purpose, 16;
objects to use of ashes as deodorizer, 16, 17; opinion
that manufacturers’ refuse must be kept out of sewers,
17, 18; cost in certain cases to be charged to Consoli-
dated Fund, 17, 18 ; difficulty as to adopting standards
of purity of Rivers’ Pollution Commissioners, 18 ;
recommends Mr. Robertson’s scheme for purifying
Clyde, 19. |

SMITH’S irrigation scheme, 19.

SOUTH CALDER, The, drainage area of, v.; pollution
of, v.; places draining into, vi., xvii.

SPRINGBURN, vi., xiii. (See Glasgow.)

STANFORD'S, Edward C. C., system: of charcoal-closets,
16, 36-89; found successful, 35 ; objections to earth
and ashes as, deodorizers, 36, 38; description of Glas-
gow police manure, 37; price obtained. for, 37 ; use of
charcoal ag filter, 37; purity of effluent water from his
closet, 37 ; manurial value of solid products, 37, 38;
cee of charcoal required, 38; sea-weed charcoal,

STEVENSON’S plan for purifying the Clyde, 19.

STRANG, William, 6; his scheme for purification of
sewage, 6; describes filtering machine, 6; use of
ashes, 6, 7; excreta, urine, and ashes to be conveyed
to steam barges and taken down Clyde, 7; complains
of manner in which his process has been tested, 36.

STRATHBUNGO, vi., xiii., xiv. (See Glasgow.)

STREETS, Sewage arising from, x.

super eNee of surface on account of coal workings,

SYMINTON, R. S., exhibits model of his ‘deodorizing
house ash-bin ’ and ‘sewage purifier,’ 15; for filtering
refuse of dwelling-houses, 15; cost of apparatus, 16.

THAMES, Proposed combination to purify, 52,

THOM’S method of purifying refuse of print-works af
Chorley, xxiii., 32.

THOMSON, A. G.: scheme for disposing of sewage of
Glasgow, 1; rainfall to be kept separate, 1; sewage
to be calcined or cremated, 1.

THORNLIEBANK, Population of, vi, xvii. ; water supply
of, xvi. ; disposal of sewage of, xvi., xvii.

TOLLCROSS, vi., xiii, xiv. (See Glasgow.)

TRAPPING of sewers, 6, 7; Dr. Fergus’ opinion as to, 27.

URINALS, Application of Strang’s machine to, 6.

CLYDE PURIFICATION COMMISSION. .

URINE, Treatment. of, in water-clossts, 8; in urinals, 7;
estimated. quantity of, in Glasgow, 7, 8; specifig
gravity of, 8; high manurial value of, 15. (See Works,

_ General. Provisions.) ogo

VENTILATION of drains, 6, 29; of water-closets, 6; ex~
tent of, in Glasgow, 34; of sewers in Glasgow, 34, 35,

WAKEFIELD, J. €,:. opinion that pollution of Clyde
“chiefly caused by water-closets, 32; experience as to
earth-closets, 82% use of ashes, 32; value: of pro-
duct as manure, 32; manufacturers’ refuse may be
urified at profit, 32.. * :
WALLS, William, en one of the magistrates of
Glasgow, 42; explains his. method of purifying refuse
from soap-works, 42; efftuent water quite clear, 43 ;
process profitable to manufacturer, 43. 2
WATER, Reduced consumption of, recommended, x., xxiv.,
xxv. } standards of purity of effluent, xxvi.; difficulty
in working them, xxvi.; Mr. Crookes’ suggested tests,
xxvi; daily consumption of, in Glasgow,, 29.
WATER-CLOSET system cannot be dispensed with, x.
WATER-CLOSETS, Ventilation of, 6; advantages of
general system of, 7 ;, objections te, 10; number of, in
Glasgow, 16, 50; a fixed: institution, 303 chief source
of pollution of Clyde, 32, 48; suggested tax on, 48.
(See Fergus, Hoey.) : _
WATER. SUPPLY, its relation to sewage, xxiv.; abund-
ance of, in Clyde region, xxiv.; effect of proposed
sewers on navigation of Clyde, xxiv, : -
WATERWORKS, Statistics. as to. (See Appendix.)
WATSON, Joseph Lindsay, is treasurer of Glasgow Police,
41; produces statements as to cost of scavengering
Glasgow, 41.. .
WEST KENT, Combined action for purifying sewage of, 52,
WHIFFLET. (See Coatbridge.)
WHITE CART, The, drainage area of, iv.; pollution of, iv.,
xiv., xxv, ; places! draining into, vi,, xiv., xvi.
WHITEINCH, Proposed terminus of Glasgow intercepting
sewers, x.; land at, available for irrigation, x., xi, -
WISHAW, Population of, vi., xvii.; water supply of, xvii,
xxxvii, xii. ; irrigation at, xvii, |
WORKS and manufactories, distribution of, xxii.; pollution -
of rivers and streams by, xxii, ; interest of owners in
purification, xxii, xxv.; is purification of refuse practi--
cable? xxii.; land required for settling ponds and filters,
xxii.; case of paraffin works on the Almond, xxiii.; of
the paper works on the Esk, xxiii.; chemical products.
can often be recovered at profit, xxiii,; Mr. Thom's
works at Chorley, xxiii. ; Mr. Biggar’s, at Dalry, xxiv. ;
reduction of water consumption recommended, x., xxiv.,
xxy.; different classes of owners, xxv.; no: fecal
matter or urine from, should pass into rivers, xxvi.,
xxviii. (See General Provisions.):
WYLIE, Joseph: was formerly in cleansing: department,
Glasgow, 44; states opinion as to mixture of ashes
and night-soil, 44; prices of police manure, 44,

YOKER, Population of, xx.; disposal of sewage of, xx. +
Mr. Carrick’s scheme for irrigation at, 48.
REPORT

OF

SIR JOHN HAWKSHAW,

THE COMMISSIONER

APPOINTED TO INQUIRE AS TO

THE PURIFIGATION OF THE RIVER GLYDE.

se

“TOGETHER WITH

=? APPENDIX AND MINUTES OF EVIDENCE

aoe

 

 

Presentey by Command of Her Majesty to both Wouses of Parliament.

 

 

 

EDINBURGH: PRINTED BY MURRAY AND GIBB,
FOR HER MAJESTY’S STATIONERY OFFICE

eel

18 7 6.
BN

} ay
Ath A fa Hf

S

me voles

onsen

Aaa
i Mis

" Hy
ret ins ote cdi Meaty
i

Ry
ONT bad Rea a Lah)
AYTITDINST OT APL acs tan Re AU
Sa MTD bre et Pe PIS We Ty
te eats tie) Gree 4
ODay

is
‘ Rn
ment va

RUSE

0 Key Rat) Sain

ct
saat ky
was Ay i)

ity

Ora eT i
“ Meh iis

Crauiteatuertay se
aC Saat ae (i
APA nf

a fi i
ta Tt is aie ih

We)
CON Rt at
his

ann
a ei RNS i
Ce at 1 Wa yen MM
fart LAAT tt
ae ial