of wooden pavements; of the success of these I have little doubt,
though for the present many failures have occurred, either from the
foundation not having been truly and firmly laid, or from the blocks
of wood not being massive enough. The greatest objection to wood
pavements at present is the slipping of the horses, but this I believe
might be obviated. The question, however, at present is to get rid of
the street dirt, such as it is; and for that purpose I concur in
opinion it would only be necessary in wet weather during rains that
the street-cleaner should sweep the dirt into the kennels, and aid the
water by stirring the mud, to carry off the material in a state of
diffusion; in dry weather, the opening of pipes with hose attached
would serve the same purpose as the rains, and at the same time aid
the sewerage at the time most required. After a short but heavy fall
of rain, the cleansing effect of the water is fully perceived: and if
any means could be devised of saving the rain-water that falls on the
houses and in the streets, so as to apply it in considerable
quantities at intervals, it is probable that the rain-water would be
amply sufficient for all the purposes in question.”
Mr. Roe states, that arrangements were made with the water companies for
supplies of water for the cleansing of the sewers in the Holborn and
Finsbury district, but it was found that the ordinary supplies to the
sewers sufficed, and those from the company were not used.
The cleansing of the streets and the removal of the impurities from the
habitations appears to have been the subject of considerable attention
at Paris of late years. An individual proposed to the administration of
that city a mode of cleansing the streets and pavement, by sweeping all
the refuse into the sewers which are discharged into the Seine, that had
hitherto been daily gathered into heaps and carted away beyond the
precincts. The minister of police thought it advisable to take the
opinion of the Institute on the proposal. The superiority of the
proposed mode of street cleansing was admitted, but the members of the
Institute, to whom the subject was referred, having ascertained the
quantity of rubbish which was daily collected in Paris, and also the
quantity of water which flowed in the Seine during the summer-time, they
found that this volume of water was 9600 times greater than the greatest
quantity of filth and rubbish collected in the same length of time from
the streets of Paris; and they reported as their conclusion, “that the
quantity of dirt which would be thrown into the Seine, compared with the
volume of water in the river, would be found to be so extremely small as
to be absolutely inappreciable; that it was not from the consideration
therefore of insalubrity that the project for cleaning the streets as
proposed should be negatived, but solely because by that means there
would be lost a quantity of most valuable manure, which was quite
indispensable to the agriculture around Paris, and consequently to Paris
itself.”[9]
Mr. Roe has furnished me with a calculation made from the flow of water
in the Thames, at a neap tide: taking the ebb, and comparing it with the
quantity of deposit in the water running from the sewers from the whole
of the metropolis (assuming that the sewerage bears the same proportion
as the Holborn and Finsbury division), that the proportion of impurities
to the volume of water of the Thames is as 1 to 10,100. If the surface
cleansing of the streets were added to the ordinary mass of impurity, he
calculates that the proportion held in suspension would then be about 1
to 5069. To this must be added the impurities from land-floods, and
those from vessels in the river. The amount of impurity discharged from
the sewers was calculated from the amount of deposit known to have been
formed in several of them. The amount of impurity in the Thames would
therefore be, at the least, double the amount of that calculated for the
Seine.[10]
If the evils of the pollution of such a stream were much greater, they
would still be found inconsiderable as compared with the perpetual
pollution of the air by the retention of ordures and refuse amidst large
masses of the population. What has been stated as to the practicability
of extending threefold the cleansing of towns, by dispensing with
cartage, and using the sewers for the removal of the refuse of the
streets, is stated as an advantage, even on the supposition that no use
is made of the refuse, and that it is entirely thrown away. But it were
a reproach to stop at the advance to this far lesser evil, and to add to
the pollution of the streams of the towns, which throughout the country
form the chief common sewers, by throwing into them everything that is
vile in the towns, i. e. everything that is most valuable for increasing
the surrounding fertility.
On a full examination of the evidence adduced and of the evidence
indicated, it will, I trust, be found to be satisfactorily established;
that the houses of towns may be constantly and rapidly cleansed of
noxious refuse by adaptation of drains and public sewers; and that with
such an adaptation, for one street or one district cleansed at the
present expense three may be cleansed by the proposed mode; that the
natural streams flowing near towns may be preserved from the pollution
caused by the influx of the contents of the public sewers, by the
conveyance of all refuse through covered pipes, and that the existing
cost of conveyance, by which its use for production is restricted, may
be reduced to less than one-fortieth or fiftieth of the present expense
of removal by hand labour and cartage;[11] that these bounties on
cleanliness and salubrity on the one hand, and beneficial production on
the other, are dependent on skilful and appropriate administrative
arrangements. But for the attainment of these objects, and the relief of
the worst-conditioned districts, another provision appears to be
requisite, namely, appropriate
_Supplies of Water._
Besides those reports from towns in which a large proportion of their
salubrity is attributed to a natural drainage, from the porosity of the
soil, or from the undulations of the surface being favourable to the
discharge of moisture, as at Birmingham, other reports ascribe a large
proportion of the comparative health of the population to advantageous
circumstances, in respect to the supplies of water. From such
information as that already cited, it will be manifest that for an
efficient system of house cleansing and sewerage, it is indispensable
that proper supplies of pure water should be provided, and be laid on in
the houses in towns of every size, and, it might be added, in all
considerable rural villages. No previous investigations had led me to
conceive the great extent to which the labouring classes are subjected
to privations, not only of water for the purpose of ablution, house
cleansing, and sewerage, but of wholesome water for drinking, and
culinary purposes.
_Mr. John Liddle_, one of the medical officers of the Whitechapel union,
after describing the deplorable condition of the dwellings of the
labouring population in that part of London, states, that—
“In connexion with this state of things is the deficiency of water
which is not laid on in any of their houses.
“How do they get such water as they use?—They get it for the most part
from a plug in the courts. I cannot say whether it is the actual
scarcity of water, or their reluctance to fetch it, but the effect is
a scarcity of water. When I have occasion to visit their rooms, I find
they have only a very scanty supply of water in their tubs. When they
are washing, the smell of the dirt mixed with the soap is the most
offensive of all the smells I have to encounter. They merely pass
dirty linen through very dirty water. The smell of the linen itself,
when so washed, is very offensive, and must have an injurious effect
on the health of the occupants. The filth of their dwellings is
excessive, so is their personal filth. When they attend my surgery, I
am always obliged to have the door open. When I am coming down stairs
from the parlour, I know at the distance of a flight of stairs whether
there are any poor patients in the surgery. Any one who attends on the
relief days of the out-door relief may satisfy himself as to the
personal condition of these parties.
“Are the courts in which the labouring classes reside, in your
district, paved or cleansed?—They are not flagged, they have a sort of
pebbles; they are always wet and dirty. The people, having no
convenience in their houses for getting rid of waste water, throw it
down at the doors. If I cast my eye over the whole district at this
moment, I do not think that one house for the working classes will be
found in which there is such a thing as a sink for getting rid of the
water.
“Then there is not such a thing as a house with the water laid on?—Not
one in the poorer places. There is also the want of cesspools; there
is only one or two places for a whole court, and soil lies about the
places which are in a most offensive condition.
“What is the number of cases which you visit for the administration of
medical relief during the year?—During the last year the number of
cases was 1560, all of them out-patients.
“Has not a large sewer been recently formed through your
district?—Yes, through Rosemary-lane.
“What has been its effect?—Very little as respects the inhabitants of
the courts; the landlords are not compelled, and do not go to the
expense of making any communication from the courts to the sewer; the
courts are in as wet and dirty and in as bad a condition as ever.
“What are the rents paid for these descriptions of tenements?—I am
informed, very high rents. I am informed that this description of
property pays a better per centage than any other description of
property.—My impression is that it pays as much as 20 per cent. in
many instances.”
This evidence exhibits the common condition of large masses of
habitations, even in the metropolis, where there are so many competing
companies.
_Mr. Mott_ states that, in Manchester,—
“There are numerous pumps and a plentiful supply of water within a few
feet of the surface, to say nothing of the various tanks and cisterns
in factories and private dwellings, which in this proverbially rainy
district are always abundantly supplied; but, from the nature of the
atmosphere, the rain-water is frequently like ink. The Irwell and
Medlock rivers run through the town of Manchester; but being
receptacles for all kinds of filth and refuse, the water is too impure
for general use. In the suburbs of Manchester the water is generally
procured through the medium of rain-water cisterns, or from very
shallow wells by pumps. In the better class of houses it is generally
filtered, but the poorer classes use it without any preparation. The
custom is for owners of small cottage property to erect a pump for the
use of a given number of houses; this pump is frequently rented by one
of the tenants, who keeps it locked, and each of the other tenants are
taxed a certain sum per month for the use of it. One poor woman told
me she paid 1_s._ per month. The water company give a plentiful supply
to small houses at 6_s._ per year, or about half what this woman paid
for a precarious supply from the subscription pump. The Stockport
Local Act empowers the commissioners of that town to _compel_ the
cottage owners to provide a good supply of water to their tenants.”
_Mr. John Moyle_, medical officer of the Truro union, states—
“But few houses are properly supplied with water. In very dry seasons,
they have to fetch water from a distance varying from a quarter to 1½
mile.”
This is at present the condition of a large proportion of the houses in
Hampstead, Highgate, and Hendon, where water is purchased by the
pailful.
_Mr. Daniel Antrobus_, medical officer of the Audley district, Newcastle
union, Staffordshire, says—
“They have seldom a good supply of water, are without _pumps_, and the
occupants are obliged to obtain it from stagnant reservoirs or impure
springs, situate often at a considerable distance.”
_Mr. Henry Cribb_, the medical officer of the Dunmow union reports, as a
circumstance which is highly injurious to the health,—
“The want of good and wholesome spring-water: there being scarcely any
pumps for the use of the poor, they are compelled to use water
collected from ditches; and I have known it frequently to be not only
very impure, but almost in a putrid state.”
The medical officer of the Bishop’s Stortford union, states—
“I am of opinion that, in this and most of the rural parishes,
complaints often arise from the want of good and wholesome
spring-water, there being very few pumps, or even wells, and the poor
being compelled to use water collected from ditches and other impure
sources; this circumstance, connected with the very imperfect
drainage, I think requires strict investigation.”
_Mr. Whilpels_, the medical officer of the Lexden and Winstree union,
states—
“There is a point I deem most worthy of notice, I allude to the
deficiency of spring-water. The inhabitants of Salcot Virley and Great
Wigborough are compelled to drink pond-water, which is impure,
brackish, and most injurious to the constitution. The few who have the
means, send for water a distance of four miles; to obviate this evil
would be a blessing conferred upon the great mass of the population
residing in these parishes.”
_Mr. William Blower_, surgeon of Bedford, states,—
“At Wootton (near Bedford) the labourers are very numerous, and before
the passing the Poor Law Amendment Act the greater part of them were
dependent for support upon the poor-rates. The land was enclosed and
undrained, employment was scanty, and wages were very low; the water
was very bad, the inhabitants being principally supplied from pits dug
near their houses, and filled by rain in the winter, which in the
summer, and particularly in dry seasons, were almost emptied by use
and evaporation, leaving only a muddy fluid covered with a green scum,
and loaded with aquatic animals and plants. Sporadic typhus prevailed
extensively in the summer and autumn, and ague in the winter and
spring.
“Since the introduction of the New Poor Law and the enclosure of the
land, considerable draining has been effected, employment has been
more plentiful, and the wages higher, and many of the labourers have
allotments of ground. Typhus has been rapidly diminishing, and this
year (1839) there was no case until November, and then only two. This
must principally be attributed to the improved state of the parish,
and partly, perhaps, this year, to the wetness of the season, by which
the water-pits have been kept nearly full, so that the conditions
favourable to the generation of malaria have not existed.
“A few wells have been dug lately, and good water has been obtained,
and there is every probability if the water-pits were filled up, and
more wells dug, and the draining completed, that sporadic typhus and
ague, which have so long infested this village, and occasioned so much
distress and expense, might be entirely eradicated. A respectable
farmer informed me that, in the neighbouring parish of Houghton, a few
years ago, his was the only family that used well-water, and almost
the only one that escaped ague.”
The state of the supplies of water to the labouring classes in Scotland
appears to be similar to that prevalent in the towns and the rural
districts of England.
_Mr. William Tait_, surgeon, of Edinburgh, states, in regard to the
houses in the High-street, Cowgate, and Canongate:—
“The dwellings of the poor are remarkable for their generally
uncomfortable appearance, and I attribute this in most instances to a
deficient supply of water, necessaries, and such like conveniences.
There are no receptacles for filth of any description, and it is
either accumulated in the stairs or dwellings themselves, and the
stairs are scarcely ever washed. And how can it be otherwise, seeing
that the poor have to travel for a considerable distance for water,
and afterwards carry it up five, six, or seven stories?”
The Return from Glasgow states that the—
“Sewers or drains are left uncovered, and with no diluting water
except the refuse of families and rain-water.”
That—
“There is no scarcity of water if carried into the poorer houses.”
_Dr. Alexander Cuddie_, of Aberdeen, states that the—
“Water is plentiful; but it would be proper to bring it into the
houses of the poor as well as the rich.”
_Mr. Forrest_, in his report on the sanitary condition of the population
of Stirling, states that in that town—
“The supply of water is often very deficient. There is no
water-company, and the water is not conveyed into the houses even of
the wealthy inhabitants. In times of scarcity it is no uncommon
occurrence to see from 80 to 100 persons waiting at each public well
for water; and the scarcity of it is often made an excuse by servants
for the neglect of domestic duties. I may therefore with propriety
say, that the poor of Stirling are often not properly supplied with
water for the purposes stated in the query.”
The _Rev. George Lewis_, the minister of St. David’s parish, Dundee, in
speaking of drainage, says that—
“Everything in this way is done very imperfectly; drains and sewers
are insufficient, and run into the mill-pond.”
That there is—
“No water, except what is purchased or taken out of the filthy
mill-pond.”
Another informant states—
“The west and south-west suburbs are destitute of water, and have no
sewers; the north and east suburbs are also badly supplied with water,
and have no drains. Indeed there are only two drains in the town that
I know of, and I should think them rather hurtful than otherwise, as
there is not water enough to scour them out.”
In answer to the question, whether the residences of the population
amidst which contagious febrile diseases arise are properly supplied
with water for the purposes of cleanliness of the houses, person, and
clothing? _Dr. John Macintyre_, of Greenock, states that—
“Their proprietors or landlords, with a few exceptions, have not
properly supplied them with water, although an ample supply of that
necessary aid to cleanliness can be cheaply obtained by means of pipes
from the Shaws’ Water Company.”
_Dr. James Sym_ states that—
“There are few wells of good water in Ayr. The water in general is
strongly impregnated with lime, and the supply is defective. Strangers
find it unpleasant, and I believe horses which have not been used with
it are apt to suffer when it is given them to drink.”
_Mr. A. Cochrane_ and _Mr. W. J. Thomson_, surgeons, of Arbroath, state—
“That the town is well supplied with _hard_ water, but that an
abundant supply of soft water might be brought into the town with very
little expense from a spring in the neighbourhood.”
The Return from Renfrew states that—
“A plentiful supply of water may be had from the street wells, and
also from a burn which runs close to the town.”
_Dr. Henry Douglas_, of Dunfermline, says—
“They are _very inadequately_ supplied with water for these purposes.”
The return from Kirkwall, states—
“That water is supplied at public wells: there is no scarcity of
water, but it is somewhat hard.”
_Dr. W. B. Ross_, of Tain, in reply to the question whether the town is
properly supplied with water? says—
“By no means; the water is very hard, and unfit for most domestic
purposes.”
_Dr. S. Scott Alison_, in his Report on the sanatory condition of the
town of Tranent, furnishes an exemplification of the condition of many
of the smaller towns:—
“I do not believe there is a house in Tranent into which water is
conducted by pipes. There existed great difficulty on many occasions
in getting water at all. During the seven years I lived there, the
village was, on the whole, extremely ill supplied with water: it was
usual for it to be occasionally absent from Tranent altogether. Last
summer the supply of water was stopped for several months. The
inhabitants suffered the greatest inconvenience from this cause; they
could not get sufficient water to maintain cleanliness of person and
clothes; it was even difficult for labouring people to get enough to
cook their victuals; and I know that many of the poor were, in
consequence, reduced to the practice of using impure and unwholesome
water. On these occasions water was carried from a considerable
distance from the village. Some went the distance of a mile; some used
barrels drawn on carriages; some employed children to bring it in
small vessels; and, I doubt not, many went without it, when it was
highly necessary, from inability or infirmity to go themselves, and
from want of funds to employ another for the purpose. Since the above
was written I have learned from a lady, previously resident in
Tranent, that, when cholera prevailed in that district, some of the
patients suffered very much indeed from want of water, and that so
great was the privation, that on that calamitous occasion people went
into the ploughed fields and gathered the rain water which collected
in depressions in the ground, and actually in the prints made by
horses’ feet. Tranent was formerly well supplied with water of
excellent quality by a spring above the village, which flows through a
sand-bed. The water flows into Tranent at its head, or highest
quarter, and is received into about 10 wells, distributed throughout
the village. The people supply themselves at these wells when they
contain water. When the supply is small, the water pours in a very
small stream only; and it happens, in consequence, that on these
occasions of scarcity great crowds of women and children assemble at
these places, waiting their ‘turn,’ as it is termed. I have seen women
fighting for water. The wells are sometimes frequented throughout the
whole night. It was generally believed by the population that this
stoppage of the water was owing to its stream being diverted into a
coal-pit which was sunk in the sand-bed above Tranent. That pit has
been lined with sheets of iron, and the water has lately returned to
Tranent in great abundance.”
The observations made by _Mr. Burton_, in his Report, appear to be
deserving of attentive consideration. He states—
“I have reason to believe that in many parts of Scotland the want of a
good supply of water is one of the most material impediments to the
furtherance of cleanly habits among the working people. Besides the
immediate evils of a narrow supply, much time is wasted, and many bad
habits are acquired by those who have to wait their turn at the wells
in a time of drought. Dundee, Stirling, Dunfermline, Lanark, and
Arbroath, are all, I believe, imperfectly supplied. The community of
Dundee have spent about 30,000_l._ in a contest between the supporters
of two contending water-bills; and I understand that an Act which was
passed about three years ago has been found incapable of being put in
operation. The evil is rendered more serious by the demand for cooling
water for the numerous steam-engines, and the article is so precious
that it is for these purposes repeatedly re-cooled by exposure and
evaporation after it has been heated. I believe that in many of the
colliery and manufacturing districts there is inconvenience, amounting
to suffering, from want of water. Where there is a positive deficiency
of the element on the spot, the means of procuring a supply from
another place are so various and so dependent on local circumstances,
that nothing but some arbitrary authority, possessed of sufficient
funds, could ensure its being obtained in every instance.”
On these and various reports from the medical officers and others in
England, as well as from Scotland, in which it is stated in terms
similar to the return from Renfrew, “that a plentiful supply of water
_may_ be had from the street wells, and also from a burn which runs
close to the town,” it is to be observed, that the economy of a town, or
of any considerable collection of habitations, appears to be essentially
defective, insofar as it leaves a large proportion of the inhabitants
dependent on such a mode of supply.