as the Dark Ages—Sanitation during the Dark Ages—Beginning of Material
Progress in Sanitation—Pilgrimages to Juggernaut—Water Supply to
Paris—London Water Supply—Aqueduct of Zempoala, Mexico.
During the period following the fall of Rome, the empire was overrun
by barbarians from the north, and the magnificent baths, aqueducts and
public edifices reared by the Romans with such painstaking care were
suffered to fall into decay. So little in sympathy were the barbarians
with the people they conquered and their institutions, that in time the
inhabitants of many localities even forgot the uses to which the old
works had been put; and had it not been for the Popes the supply of
water to the city of Rome would have been cut off completely, while as
it was the service was frequently interrupted.
Following the fall of the Roman Empire there was a period of over one
thousand years of intellectual darkness, during which no material
progress was made; indeed, instead of progress a retrograde movement
set in which left a lasting impression on the times. The little spark
of knowledge that survived this period burned in the monasteries of the
monks, who treasured and kept alive the spark of civilization.
[Illustration: Destroyed Lead Font, Great Plumstead, Norfolk]
The Dark Ages, as this period is called, if lacking in progress, were
replete with adventure. During this period, which might equally well
be called the Age of Romance, there sprung up a brotherhood of men
noted for skill in combat, who were dubbed knights. There also spread
a creed about that time that uncleanliness was next to godliness,
and clergy and laymen vied with each other to see which could live
in the most filthy manner. They associated in their minds luxury
and cleanliness as inconsistent with godliness, while squalor and
bodily filth were considered as outward indications of inward piety
and sanctification. So it came to pass that bathing, instead of a
daily practice, became uncommon; homes and inhabitants became filthy
and streams polluted. Such violations of sanitary principles could
not continue indefinitely without evil results, and scourge after
scourge of filth diseases that swept over Europe and Asia, claiming
over 40,000,000 victims, were due to the unsanitary condition that
prevailed. The restless, seething, venturesome spirit of the times and
the emotional zeal displayed in religious matters contributed greatly
to the spread of pestilence. The crusades, starting out with a romantic
and religious fervor, but with no set rules of conduct for guidance,
and lacking a leader strong enough in discipline to hold in check men
whose only claim to distinction lay in their powers in a tilt and their
love of battle, soon degenerated into the most disorderly and lewd of
rabble. Women camp-followers joined their fortunes with that of the
knights, who in most cases forgot the object of the crusade, and gave
themselves up to indolence and debauchery. Sanitary precautions were
dispensed with on the march, and the result was that wherever the
crusaders went they left sickness and pestilence in their wake.
[Illustration: Leaden Cup, of the time of Vespasian, found in Rome. The
band was decorated with colored glass]
[Illustration: Lead Pipehead and Pipe]
[Illustration: Lead Cistern with the Arms of the Fishmongers' Company,
in the possession of Mr. Merthyr Guest]
Pilgrimages to the holy shrines, which drew together thousands of
human beings without adequate shelter or food, also served to spread
contagious diseases throughout the land. Perhaps the best picture of a
pilgrimage which, while of a latter date, will still serve to show the
unsanitary conditions when thousands of people are brought together
without food or shelter, can be had from a report of Dr. Simmons, of
the Yokahama Board of Health. In speaking of a latter-day pilgrimage
in India, he says: "The drinking-water supply is derived from wells,
so-called 'tanks' or artificial ponds and the water courses of the
country. The wells generally resemble those of other parts of Asia.
The tanks are excavations made for the purpose of collecting the
surface water during the rainy season and storing it up for the dry.
Necessarily they are mere stagnant pools. The water is used not only
to quench thirst, but is said to be drunk as a sacred duty. At the
same time, the reservoir serves as a large washing tub for clothes, no
matter how dirty or in what soiled condition, and for personal bathing.
Many of the watercourses are sacred; notably the Ganges, a river 1,600
miles long, in whose waters it is the religious duty of millions, not
only those living near its banks, but for pilgrims, to bathe and to
cast their dead. The Hindoo cannot be made to use a latrine. In the
cities he digs a hole in his habitation; in the country he seeks the
fields, the hillside, the banks of streams and rivers when obliged to
obey the calls of nature. Hence it is that the vicinity of towns and
the banks of the tanks and water courses are reeking with filth of the
worst description, which is of necessity washed into the public water
supply with every rainfall. Add to this the misery of pilgrims, then
poverty and disease and the terrible crowding into the numerous towns
which contain some temple or shrine, the object of their devotion, and
we can see how India has become and remains the hotbed of the cholera
epidemic." In the United States official report the horrors incident
upon the pilgrimages are detailed with appalling minuteness. W. W.
Hunter, in his "Orissa," states that twenty-four high festivals take
place annually at Juggernaut. At one of them, about Easter, 40,000
persons indulge in hemp and hasheesh to a shocking degree. For weeks
before the car festival, in June and July, pilgrims come trooping in
by thousands every day. They are fed by the temple cooks to the number
of 90,000. Over 100,000 men and women, many of them unaccustomed to
work or exposure, tug and strain at the car until they drop exhausted
and block the road with their bodies. During every month of the year a
stream of devotees flows along the great Orissa road from Calcutta, and
every village for three hundred miles has its pilgrim encampments.
[Illustration: Car of Juggernaut]
The people travel in small bands, which at the time of the great feasts
actually touch each other. Five-sixths of the whole are females and
ninety-five per cent. travel on foot, many of them marching hundreds
and even thousands of miles, a contingent having been drummed up from
every town or village in India by one or other of the three thousand
emissaries of the temple, who scour the country in all directions in
search of dupes. When those pilgrims who have not died on the road
arrive at their journey's end, emaciated, with feet bound up in rags
and plastered with mud and dirt, they rush into the sacred tanks or
the sea and emerge to dress in clean garments. Disease and death make
havoc with them during their stay; corpses are buried in holes scooped
in the sand, and the hillocks are covered with bones and skulls washed
from their shallow graves by the tropical rains. The temple kitchen has
the monopoly of cooking for the multitude, and provides food which if
fresh is not unwholesome. Unhappily, it is presented before Juggernaut,
so becomes too sacred for the minutest portion to be thrown away. Under
the influence of the heat it soon undergoes putrefactive fermentation,
and in forty-eight hours much of it is a loathsome mass, unfit for
human food. Yet it forms the chief sustenance of the pilgrims, and is
the sole nourishment of thousands of beggars. Some one eats it to the
very last grain. Injurious to the robust, it is deadly to the weak and
wayworn, at least half of whom reach the place suffering under some
form of bowel complaint. Badly as they are fed the poor wretches are
worse lodged. Those who have the temporary shelter of four walls are
housed in hovels built upon mud platforms about four feet high, in the
center of each of which is the hole which receives the ordure of the
household, and around which the inmates eat and sleep. The platforms
are covered with small cells without any windows or other apertures
for ventilation, and in these caves the pilgrims are packed, in a
country where, during seven months out of twelve, the thermometer marks
from 85 to 100 degrees Fahr. Hunter says that the scenes of agony and
suffocation enacted in these hideous dens baffle description. In some
of the best of them, 13 feet long by 10 feet broad and 6½, feet high,
as many as eighty persons pass the night. It is not then surprising
to learn that the stench is overpowering and the heat like that of
an oven. Of 300,000 who visit Juggernaut in one season, 90,000 are
often packed together five days a week in 5,000 of these lodgings. In
certain seasons, however, the devotees can and do sleep in the open
air, camping out in regiments and battalions, covered only with the
same meagre cotton garment that clothes them by day. The heavy dews are
unhealthy enough, but the great festival falls at the beginning of the
rains, when the water tumbles in solid sheets. Then lanes and alleys
are converted into torrents or stinking canals, and the pilgrims are
driven into vile tenements. Cholera invariably breaks out. Living and
dead are huddled together.
[Illustration: Distant View of Zempoala Aqueduct, Queretaro, Mexico]
In the numerous so-called corpse fields around the town as many as
forty or fifty corpses are seen at a time, and vultures sit and dogs
lounge lazily about gorged with human flesh. In fact, there is no end
to the recurrence of incidents of misery and humiliation, the horrors
of which, says the Bishop of Calcutta, are unutterable, but which
are eclipsed by those of the return journey. Plundered and fleeced
by landlords, the surviving victims reel homeward staggering under
their burden of putrid food wrapped up in dirty clothes, or packed
in heavy baskets or earthenware jars. Every stream is flooded, and
the travelers have often to sit for days in the rain on the banks of
a river before a boat will venture to cross. At all these points the
corpses lie thickly strewn around (an English traveler counted forty
close to one ferry), which accounts for the prevalence of cholera on
the banks of brooks, streams and rivers. Some poor creatures drop and
die by the way; others crowd into the villages and halting places on
the way, where those who gain admittance cram the lodging-places to
overflowing, and thousands pass the night in the streets, and find no
cover from the drenching storms. Groups are huddled under the trees;
long lines are stretched among the carts and bullocks on the roadside,
then half saturated with the mud on which they lie, hundreds sit on the
wet grass, not daring to lie down, and rock themselves to a monotonous
chant through the long hours of the dreary night. It is impossible to
compute the slaughter of this one pilgrimage. Bishop Wilson estimates
it at not less than 50,000, and this description might be used for
all the great India pilgrimages, of which there are probably a dozen
annually, to say nothing of the hundreds of smaller shrines scattered
through the peninsula, each of which attracts its minor horde of
credulous votaries.
[Illustration: Near View of Zempoala Aqueduct, Mexico]
Such then may be accepted as a picture of one of the numerous
pilgrimages made during the Dark Ages and which helped to spread
infectious diseases broadcast throughout the land, polluting water
supplies to such an extent that in many localities filth diseases
became epidemic. It was not until about the end of the sixteenth
century that general improvement began to be made in sanitary matters,
although some notable exceptions may be mentioned in the construction
of a few important works in Spain by the Moors, such for instance
as those at Cordova in the ninth century and the repair of the Roman
aqueduct at Sevilla in 1172. Until as late a date as 1183 Paris
depended entirely on the River Seine for its water supply. During
that year an aqueduct was constructed to conduct water to Paris from
a distant source, but as late as the year 1550 the supply of water to
Paris amounted to only one quart per capita per day.
[Illustration: Zempoala Aqueduct. From an old print in the _Engineering
News_]
London, England, was more backward than Paris in supplying the
inhabitants with water, and it was not until the year 1235 that small
quantities of spring water were brought to the city through lead pipes
and masonry conduits.
Little is known about the strange race of people that inhabited the
North American continent prior to the Indians, and it is only by the
ruins of works which they constructed in the shape of mounds that
their existence is known of. Nevertheless, had historians of that
time written of the engineering projects successfully carried out by
the engineers of the mound builders no doubt some surprising facts
would be revealed to contemporary man; for wherever men have existed,
whether in China, Japan, Egypt, Europe, England or, as we are informed
by astronomers, on Mars, gigantic works of irrigation have been
successfully undertaken, and in most of the places mentioned conduits
or aqueducts to supply water to inhabitants of communities were
constructed. Reasoning then by analogy it would be safe to infer that
before the race of mound builders became extinct they built works of
equal importance if not of equal endurance. This belief is borne out
by the fact that long before Columbus discovered America, the Aztecs
of Mexico built an aqueduct to supply the ancient city, built on the
site of the present City of Mexico. How long the aqueduct supplied the
city before Cortez, in his expedition to conquer Mexico, destroyed
the works, in 1521, nobody knows and the truth will probably never be
told. The fact of the existence of such a structure is interesting
chiefly as showing that in the matter of supplying communities with
water the ancient tribes of Mexico and America had made considerable
progress long before Europeans set foot on shore. It was in Mexico,
too, that the next aqueduct in point of time was constructed. This work
was built during the period between the years 1553 and 1570, under the
supervision of Friar Francisco Tembleque, a Franciscan monk, and served
for about two centuries to carry water from the mountain Lacayete to
the city of Otumba, state of Hidalgo, district of Apan, a distance of
27.8 miles.
The aqueduct, which is known as the Zempoala, included three arched
bridges of a maximum height of 124 feet. This aqueduct is further
interesting from the fact that the original agreement, under which
the work was performed, is still in existence, a copy of which was
published in the _Engineering News_, 1888, from which the following
copy is taken.
The first bridge contains forty-six arches, the second thirteen arches
and the third sixty-eight arches. The length of the longest bridge
is 3,000 feet and the span of the arches at the springing line is
fifty-six feet. About five years were required to build the principal
part of the aqueduct which is carried on arches.
CONTRACT UNDER WHICH AQUEDUCT WAS BUILT
I, Friar Cristobal y Chanriguis, preacher and secretary of this holy
province of the holy evangel, certify that Father Luis Gerro, preacher
and guardian of the Convent of All Saints, Zempoala, has presented to
me a patent in favor of natives of said town, whose legal tenor is as
follows:
We, Friar Juan De Bustamanti, Commissioner General of the Indes of
the Ocean Seas, and Friar Juan De San Francisco, Provincial Master
of the province of said holy evangel, and Friar Deigo Nolivarte, and
Friar Juan De Gavna, and Friar Antonio Centad Rodriquez, and Friar
Bernardino De Sahagun, subordinate of priests of said province of the
holy evangel, declare:
That inasmuch as you, the Governor Alcaldes and principal officers of
the town of Zacoala, have agreed, for the love of God and because of
our intercession, with the same officers of the town of Otumba to give
to them half the water which you have in your town of Zacoala for the
use and benefit of the inhabitants of Otumba and for the use of the
monastery of our order founded in that town, in which you do great
good to them and to our said monastery, because of our intercession as
stated; and, inasmuch, moreover, as you, the said people of Zacoala,
with much labor and for the good of your souls, agree to join with
the people of the Flaquilpan and Zempoala in the place where you are
erecting an All Saints Monastery, at which point you agree to remain
and work and not to depart for the reason that you are removed from
your own houses; on order to labor for the good of our souls and in
return for the labor which the priests have in visiting you. And
whereas now you will soon have together a monastery for the friars of
our order, in which must be administered for all the holy sacraments;
therefore, in return for this benefit and work we promise you that
in all our time we will not cease to give friars for said monastery,
and for the whole length of our lives we will aid you in your prayers
in all the agreed respects; and for the time to come after our
lives, in consideration of said benefit, we will petition the said
Commissioners General and Provisional Masters that they will severally
and collectively adhere to the agreement, and always have the charity
to furnish friars in the Monastery of All Saints, as now in view of
the great and good work which you have done through our intercession,
both in giving the said water and in aiding the said work to supply
it. And if by chance there should happen to be so few priests that it
is impossible to spare them from the house of Otumba that they shall
place friars in said Monastery of All Saints first and let the loss
fall upon other places than Zacoala and the Monastery of All Saints,
in all of which places you are entitled to be taught by our priests.
We will beg of our successors in charity to favor us in these said
respects, in return for your faithful labor and agreement in our
behalf, and so we sign this agreement, made this seventh day of
February, 1553.
Then followed signatures.
[Illustration]
[Illustration: ·THE·OLDEST·BATH·ROOM·IN·THE·WORLD·
·IN·VSE·2500·YEARS·AGO·
·AT·TIRYNS,·GREECE·
From Stereograph, copyright 1908 by Underwood & Underwood, N. Y.
(See page iv)]
[Illustration: CHAPTER VI]
SYNOPSIS OF CHAPTER. Introduction of Pumping Machinery into Waterworks
Practice—The Archimedes Screw—Use of Pumps in Hanover, Germany—First
London Pump on London Bridge—Savery and Newcomen's Pumping Engine—The
Hydraulic Ram—Pumping Engines Erected for the Philadelphia
Waterworks—Pipes for Distributing Water—Hydrants and Valves for Wooden
Pipes—Data regarding the Use of Wooden Pipes—Modern Pumping Engines.
Water wheels for raising water were in use at such an early period that
the exact date of their invention will never be known. The earliest
known or approximate date for the invention of a water-raising machine
extends back to about 215 years before the birth of Christ, when
Archimedes, the Greek mathematician, who was killed at the taking of
Syracuse by the Romans, invented the Archimedes screw. This apparatus,
unlike pumps of later date, was operated independently of the
atmospheric pressure, and by using a number of the screws in series,
water could be raised to any desired height.
[Illustration: Savery's Engine]
The Archimedes screw was not adapted for raising large quantities of
water, however, so that Greek and Roman cities never were supplied
with water by means of engines. It remained for Hanover, Germany, to
install the first pump of which we have knowledge, for supplying a town
or city with water. In Germany, waterworks were constructed as early as
1412, and pumps were introduced in Hanover in the year 1527.
In London, England, the first pump was erected on the old London Bridge
in 1582, for the purpose of supplying the city with water from the
Thames and distributing it through lead pipes. There are only meagre
accounts of the Hanover and London Bridge pumps to be had, however, and
no illustrations showing their construction.
[Illustration: Newcomen's Engine]
The oldest known print of a steam engine is in the Birmingham public
library,[2] and shows a machine built in 1712 by Savery and Newcomen.
A search made by _The Engineer_ of London, has brought to light an old
engraving dated 1725, and entitled "The Engine for Raising Water by
Fire." It is unique in containing the first illustrated description of
a steam engine. This machine is somewhat different from that portrayed
in earlier engravings, for the boiler is fed with a portion of the
hot water coming from the bottom of the cylinder or hot well. This
fixes the date of the improvement described by Desagaliers in his
_Experimental Philosophy_ as follows: "It had been found of benefit to
feed the boiler warm water coming from the top of the piston, rather
than cold water, which would too much check the boiling and cause more
force to be needful. But after the engine had been placed some years,
some persons concerned about an engine, observing that the injected
water as it came out of the induction pipe was scalding hot, when the
water coming from the top of the piston was but just lukewarm, thought
it would be of great advantage to feed from the induction or injected
water, and accordingly did it, which gave a stroke or two of advantage
to the engine."
[Illustration: Section Through the Engine House of the Centre Square
Water Works, Philadelphia]
At about this time or late in 1700, a Frenchman, Montgolfer, invented
the hydraulic ram. This machine, while simple in construction, is one
of the most efficient water-raising devices made, and in the later
improved designs amount actually to hydraulic engines. That pumping
engines of this period and steam boilers to operate them were of crude
design there can be no doubt, indeed, many years later, in 1800, when
waterworks and a pumping station were introduced in Philadelphia, the
pumps and boilers were of the crudest design. A sectional illustration
of the pumping house, taken from Volume 17 of _Engineering News_,
conveys a fair idea of the design of the pumps. The engine was built
mostly of wood and had cylinders 6 feet long by 38¼ inches inside
diameter. A double acting pump had a cylinder of 18½ inches diameter
and 6-foot stroke. In these engines the lever arms, flywheel shaft and
arms, flywheel bearings, the hot well, hot and cold water pumps, cold
water cistern, and even the external shell of the boilers were made
of wood. The boilers were rectangular chests, made of 5-inch white
pine planks of the general dimensions shown in the illustration. They
were braced on the sides, top and bottom with white oak scantling, 10
inches square, all bolted together with 1¼-inch iron rods passing
through the planks. Inside the chest was an iron fire-box, 12 feet 6
inches long by 6 feet wide and 1 foot 10 inches deep, and 8 vertical
flues, 6 of 15 inches and 2 of 12 inches diameter, through which the
water circulated, the fire acting around them and passing up an oval
flue situated just above the fire box and carried from the back of the
boiler to near the front and then returned to the chimney at the back.
[Illustration: Wooden Boilers used in the Philadelphia Water Supply]
These wooden boilers were used at the Centre Street waterworks from
1801 to 1815, but did not give general satisfaction on account of the
numerous leaks. They were operated at very low pressure, averaging not
over 2½ pounds per square inch, but even at this extremely low pressure
were found unsatisfactory.
During the early days of water supply, following the period of
aqueducts, lead was the material commonly used for water supply mains.
Later, however, pipes made of bored-out logs were used and continued in
service up to the year 1819. The water mains used in Philadelphia were
made of spruce logs, reinforced at the ends with wrought-iron bands. A
section of one of these old Philadelphia water mains, which is still
in a good state of preservation, is on exhibition in the Builders'
Exchange of that city.
So far as is known, Philadelphia was the first city in the world to
adopt cast iron pipe for water mains. Cast iron water pipes were laid
in Philadelphia in the year 1804, antedating their use in London,
England, by a few years.
[Illustration: Section of Bored-out Log Laid in Victoria, B. C., in
1862 and taken out 1900]
The durability of wood pipe is rather astonishing when the short life
of logs exposed on the surface of the earth is considered. After lying
buried in the earth for fifty or sixty years the wood pipe used in
the Philadelphia waterworks was sold to Burlington, N. J., in 1804,
and remained in constant use there until 1887, when larger mains were
required.
[Illustration: Valve for Wooden Pipes Used in the Philadelphia Water
Supply]
[Illustration: Hydrant for Wooden Pipes Used in the Philadelphia Water
Supply]
Portsmouth, N. H., used bored pine logs for mains from 1798 to 1896,
when they were replaced with larger pipes. When dug up, the logs were
entirely sound and good for many years' service.
A few data regarding the use of wooden pipes might not be without
interest, while at the same time pointing out the approximate dates
when waterworks were constructed in several cities. Log pipes laid in
Victoria, B. C., in 1862 and taken out in 1900 were quite free from
decay but badly checked.
Constantinople still receives part of its supply through wood pipe.
London had 400 miles of wood pipe in use for 218 years, from 1589 to
1807. When taken up it was found to be quite sound.
Boston used one system of wood pipes from 1652 to 1796, then replaced
it with another one which lasted until 1848.
Denver, Colorado, has nearly 100 miles of stave pipe conduit and mains
in use. All the water brought to Denver for domestic use passes through
wooden pipe 37 inches in diameter, which conducts it from Cherry Creek,
which is about 8 miles from center of city.
The hydrants and valves used in connection with wood pipes in
Philadelphia were made of metal, and it is presumed that the valves and
hydrants used in other cities were likewise made of metal.
[Illustration: Modern Vertical Triple-Expansion Pumping Engine]
Only one brief century has passed since waterworks pumping stations
were introduced in the United States, but what wonderful improvements
have been made in pumping machinery design within that short space of
time! Steel and iron have taken the place of wood in the manufacture of
boilers and pumps, and instead of the leaky, unsatisfactory apparatus
of other days, even when working under low pressures, we now have
pumping engines which will work continuously month after month under
several hundred pounds pressure, and deliver the daily volumes of from
a few hundred to many million gallons of water.
[Illustration: ·AQVEDVCT·CROSSING·THE·ALCANTARA·VALLEY·
·SPANISH-PORTVGESE-BORDER·]
[Illustration: CHAPTER VII]
SYNOPSIS OF CHAPTER. Early British Sewers—Sewer in the Great Hall of
Westminster—Shape of Early English Sewers—Adoption or Recommendation
of Pipe Sewers—Early Paris Sewers—Paris Sewers of To-day—Lack of
Sewage Data in America—Effect of Memphis Epidemics on Sanitary
Progress.
The earliest mention we have of English sewers is contained in an old
record of the fourteenth century, which informs us "The refuse from
the king's kitchen had long run through the Great Hall in an open
channel, to the serious injury to health and danger to life of those
congregated at court. It was therefore ordered that a subterraneous
conduit should be made to carry away the filth into the Thames." This
description of the sewer from the Great Hall presents a vivid picture
of the sewers of that day. At first the main sewers were natural water
courses which, having become offensive, were arched over to shut out
the sight and odor. Street gutters leading to those arched-over water
courses became foul in turn, and were replaced by underground channels
of the roughest brickwork or masonry. These drains which were square
in cross section received and carried off slop water and rain water
from the streets; the drains were constructed according to no regular
design nor fixed principles, although usually they were 12 inches
square and made by laying flat stones to form the bottom of the drain,
then building walls of brick and topping off with flat stones, spanning
from wall to wall. Excreta were collected in cesspools often built
beneath the floor of the house. The introduction of the water closet
about the commencement of the century, though it abated the nuisance
of the latrine, aggravated the evils of the cesspool by introducing
a large volume of water far exceeding in weight the actual excreta,
waterlogging the subsoil. The difficulty and expense of emptying the
cesspools were increased. Cesspools were therefore connected to sewers
by house drains. The channels intended to carry off rain water became
sewers. "Sewers and house drains were constructed on no scientific
principle.[3] The walls were rough, irregular and porous. Naturally
deposits took place in them; hand cleaning was considered a normal
incident to the history of the sewer, and irrespective of the volume
of sewage to be conveyed, sewers were made large enough to admit the
passage of a man to facilitate cleaning."
In 1852, the General Board of Health under the Public Health Act,
made their first report to the British Parliament, and advocated very
strongly the introduction of smaller pipes in lieu of the large brick
and stone drains then in use for house drainage. Prior to this date,
the first report of the Metropolitan Sanitary Commission, London,
appeared, which, while not to be taken as advocating exclusively
the use of small pipes, yet pointed out the necessity of reducing
the dimensions and altering the shapes of the old stone and brick
structures. From this period, then, can be assumed the adoption and
first use of earthenware pipes for house drains and public sewers.
The construction of sewers in Paris dates from 1663, but the earliest
of those still in use are not earlier than the beginning of this
century. Before the great epidemic of cholera in 1832, the total length
of sewers was not more than 21 miles. The sewers of Paris to-day
aggregate over 750 miles in length, and constitute one of the sights of
the city. According to Mason,[4] "They may be inspected without charge
on the first and third Wednesdays of each month in summer, by writing
for a permit to the Prefect de la Seine. Descent is commonly made
near the Madeleine by a substantial stairway of stone, and the boats
awaiting the party at the foot of the steps are fully as large and
quite as comfortable as Venetian gondolas.
The great sewer, which is tunnel-like in dimensions, being 16 feet high
and 18 feet broad, is, on occasions of a visit, lighted with lamps
alternately red and blue, and as these stretch away into the distance
the effect is decidedly striking.
Under ordinary circumstances, the sewage confines itself to the center
channel, but upon occasions rises above the sidewalk on either hand.
The central channel is about 10 feet wide and 4 feet deep with a curved
bottom, and a walk on either side. The boats with their loads of
visitors are pulled by ropes in the hands of attendants who walk along
the sidewalks. On either side of the sewer may be seen the large mains,
carrying the city water supply, also the telegraph cables."
Reliable data concerning the construction of sewers were not obtainable
in the United States until long after the close of the Civil War.
In 1857, when Julius W. Adams was commissioned to prepare plans for
sewering the city of Brooklyn, N. Y., which at that time covered an
area of 20 square miles, a great proportion of which was suburban
territory, the engineering profession was wholly without data of any
kind to guide in proportioning sewers for the drainage of cities and
towns. The half century intervening since that time, however, has seen
the development of sanitary engineering and witnessed the installation
of sewer system, rightly proportioned and properly designed, in
almost every city, town and village in the United States, while text
books on engineering contain all necessary data for their design and
construction. It must not be inferred from the foregoing statement that
sewers were unknown in the United States prior to the construction of
the Brooklyn sewer system. There was one in Boston, for example, which
dated from the seventeenth century, while the first comprehensive
sewerage project was designed by E. S. Chesbrough, for the city of
Chicago in 1855.
There was no great activity in sewer building in this country thirty
years ago. Up to that time most of the cities were comparatively small,
and no thought was given by the various municipalities to treating the
combined sewage as a whole. The conditions were ripe, however, for some
unusual event to crystallize public opinion and focus attention on the
subject, and the event was furnished by the city of Memphis, Tennessee.
Ever since 1740, Memphis had been known as a particularly unhealthful
city, where the death rate was abnormally high, and epidemic after
epidemic of cholera, yellow fever and other contagious diseases had
scourged the inhabitants. So common had those events become, that they
were accepted as incident to living in the locality, and were looked
upon as special visitations which could not be avoided. Such was the
state of affairs when an epidemic of yellow fever broke out in 1879,
which caused a death list of 5,150, and was followed the succeeding
year by a further death roll of 485, due to the scourge. Had the
disease been confined within the boundaries of the city, it is possible
that little would have been thought of the matter outside of the state
of Tennessee. However, refugees, fleeing in all directions, carried
the dread disease with them, until a strict quarantine—a shotgun
quarantine—confined the infection to a certain circumscribed area. In
the meantime, interference with railroad traffic, armed forces guarding
the borders of neighboring states, together with the fear of the dread
disease spreading all over the country, brought Congress and the public
to a realization of the necessity for doing something to stamp out the
disease. The most practical good accomplished by the agitation was the
organization of a National Board of Health, a committee from which made
a thorough examination of the sanitary conditions of Memphis. What the
committee found in the way of filth was almost beyond belief. The city,
they found, was honeycombed with cesspools and privy-vaults. Many of
the cesspools and privy-vaults were under or in the cellars of houses,
where they had been filled with accumulations and abandoned to fester
and rot. Filth was everywhere—above ground and beneath the surface,
in the house and out of doors. There was only one thing to do—give the
city a good cleaning; and that was the only time in history, perhaps,
when pressure from the outside forced an almost bankrupt city to
observe the laws of decency and sanitation.
The various works which had been built up to this time to supply
communities with water, had for their sole object the providing of
an adequate supply so far as quantity is concerned, but gave little
thought to the quality of the water, so long as it was clear and
cold. The sewers or drains on the other hand were constructed solely
to prevent a nuisance and with no definite knowledge that an unclean
environment and polluted water were conducive to ill-health, while pure
water and clean surroundings were conducive to the public health.
Some events were about to happen, however, which would awaken the
public mind to the dangers of dirt, and that would usher in the present
epoch of sanitation.
[Illustration]
[Illustration: ·BATHING·AND·BVRNING·
·HINDV·DEAD·AT·BENARES·
"Who dies in the waters of the Ganges obtains Heaven"
From Stereograph, copyright by Underwood & Underwood, N. Y.
(See page iv)]
[Illustration: CHAPTER VIII]
Synopsis of Chapter. Sanitary Awakening—Realization of the Danger of
Unwholesome Water—Cholera in London Traced to the Broad Street Pump—An
Historical Stink.
Truth is mighty and will prevail, but sometimes it is centuries before
its voice can be heard and additional centuries before its language is
understood. As early as 350 B. C., Hippocrates, the Father of Medicine,
pointed out the danger of unsterilized water and advised boiling
or filtering a polluted water supply before drinking. He further
believed that the consumption of swamp water in the raw state produced
enlargement of the spleen. Had his warning been heeded the lives of
millions of people who were carried to untimely graves by the scourges
of pestilence which swept over Europe, Asia and Great Britain, might
have been saved. Some idea of the ravage caused by filth diseases can
be gained by reviewing the mortality due to cholera in London during
the epidemics of 1832, 1848, 1849, 1853 and 1854.
On account of its size and lack of sanitary provisions, the London of
that period was the kind of place in which, with our present knowledge
of disease, we would expect a plague to reach its height. Prior to
1700, the city of London had no sewers and was without water supply,
except such as was obtained from wells and springs in the neighborhood.
The subsoil of London we can readily believe was foul from cesspool
leachings and from slops and household refuse deposited on the surface
of the ground, so that water from the wells within the city limits,
while cool perhaps and palatable, could not have been wholesome.
Many public wells with pumps had been installed at certain intervals
on the public highways, and an epidemic of cholera traced to one
of these wells, was the means of pointing out the danger to public
health, caused by an infected water supply, and of showing the channel
by which the infectious matter from people suffering from intestinal
diseases was transmitted to healthy individuals. The story is well
told by Sedgwick:[5] "One of the earliest, one of the most famous,
and one of the most instructive cases of the conveyance of disease
by polluted water, is that commonly known as the epidemic of Asiatic
cholera connected with the Broad Street, London, well, which occurred
in 1854. For its conspicuously circumscribed character, its violence
and fatality, and especially for the remarkable skill, thoroughness
and success with which it was investigated, it will long remain one of
the classical instances of the terrible efficiency of polluted water as
a vehicle of disease.
[Illustration:
_ASIATIC CHOLERA_
- AND -
_THE BROAD STREET PUMP_.
_LONDON 1854._]
As a monument of sanitary research, of medical and engineering interest
and of penetrating inductive reasoning, it deserves the most careful
study. No apology therefore need be made for giving of it here a
somewhat extended account.[6]
The parish of St. James, London, occupied 164 acres in 1854, and
contained 36,406 inhabitants in 1851. It was subdivided into three
subdistricts, viz., those of St. James Square, Golden Square and
Berwick Street. As will be seen by the map, it was situated near a part
of London now well known to travellers, not far from the junction of
Regent and Oxford Streets. It was bounded by Mayfair and Hanover Square
on the west, by All Souls and Marylbone on the north, St. Anne's and
Soho on the east, and Charing Cross and St. Martin's-in-the-Fields on
the east and south.
In the cholera epidemics of 1832, 1848, 1849 and 1853, St. James'
Parish suffered somewhat, but on the average decidedly less than
London as a whole. In 1854, however, the reverse was the case. The
inquiry committee estimated that in this year the fatal attacks in St.
James' Parish were probably not less than 700, and from this estimate
compiled a cholera death rate, during 17 weeks under consideration, of
220 per 10,000 living in the parish, which was far above the highest
in any other district. In the adjoining sub-district of Hanover
Square the ratio was 9; and in the Charing Cross district of St.
Martin's-in-the-Fields (including a hospital) it was 33. In 1848-1849
the cholera mortality in St. James' Parish had been only 15 per 10,000
inhabitants.
Within the parish itself, the disease in 1854 was very unequally
distributed. In the St. James Square district, the cholera mortality
was only 16 per 10,000, while in the Golden Square district it was 217
and in the Berwick Street district 212. It was plain that there had
been a special cholera area, a localized circumscribed district. This
was eventually minutely studied in the most painstaking fashion as
to population, industries, previous sanitary history, meteorological
conditions and other general phenomena common to London as a whole,
with the result that it was found to have shared with the rest of
London a previous long continued absence of rain, a high state of
temperature both of the air and of the Thames, an unusual stagnation of
the lower strata of the atmosphere, highly favorable to its acquisition
of impurity, and although it was impossible to fix the precise share
which each of the conditions enumerated might separately have had in
favoring the spread of cholera, the whole history of that malady,
as well as of the epidemic of 1854 and indeed of the plague of past
epochs, justifies the supposition that their combined operation,
either by favoring a general impurity in the air or in some other
way, concurred in a decided manner, last summer and autumn (1854) to
give temporary activity to the special causes of that disease. The
inquiry committee did not, however, rest satisfied with these vague
speculations and conclusions, but as previously shown in the history of
this local outbreak, the resulting mortality was so disproportioned to
that in the rest of the metropolis and more particularly to that in the
immediately surrounding districts, that we must seek more narrowly and
locally for some peculiar conditions, which may help to explain this
serious visitation.
Accordingly special inquiries were made within the district involved
in regard to its elevation of site, soil and subsoil, including an
extended inquiry into the history of a pest field said to have been
located within this area in 1665, 1666, to which some had attributed
the cholera of 1854; surface and ground plan; streets and courts;
density of population; character of the population; dwelling houses;
internal economy as to space, light, ventilation and general
cleanliness; dust bins and accumulations in yards, cellars and areas;
cesspools, closets and house drains; sewers, their water flow and
atmospheric connection; public water supply and well water supply.
No peculiar condition or adequate explanation of the origin of the
epidemic was discovered in any of these, even after the most searching
inquiry, except in the well water supply. Abundant general defects
were found in the other sanitary factors, but nothing peculiar to the
cholera area, or if peculiar, common to those attacked by the disease,
could be found excepting the water supply.
At the very beginning of the outbreak, Dr. John Snow, with commendable
energy, had taken the trouble to get the number and location of the
fatal cases, as is stated in his own report:
"I requested permission, on the 5th of September, to take a list, at
the general register office, of the deaths from cholera registered
during the week ending the 2nd of September, in the subdistricts of
Golden Square and Berwick Street, St. James' and St. Anne's, Soho,
which was kindly granted. Eighty-nine (89) deaths from cholera were
registered during the week in the three subdistricts, of these only
six (6) occurred on the first four days of the week, four occurred on
Thursday, August 31, and the remaining 79 on Friday and Saturday. I
considered therefore that the outbreak commenced on the Thursday, and
I made inquiry in detail respecting the 83 deaths registered as having
taken place during the last three days of the week.
On proceeding to the spot I found that nearly all the deaths had taken
place within a short distance of the pump in Broad Street. There were
only ten deaths in houses situated decidedly nearer to another street
pump. In five of these cases the families of the deceased persons told
me that they always sent to the pump in Broad Street, as they preferred
the water to that of the pump which was nearer. In three other cases
the deceased were children who went to school near the pump in Broad
Street. Two of them were known to have drunk the water and the parents
of the third think it probable that it did so. The other two deaths
beyond the district which the pump supplies, represent only the amount
of mortality from cholera that was occurring before the eruption took
place.
With regard to the 73 deaths occurring in the locality belonging, as
it were, to the pump, there were 61 instances in which I was informed
that the deceased persons used to drink the water from the pump in
Broad Street, either constantly or occasionally. In six (6) instances
I could get no information, owing to the death or departure of every
one connected with the deceased individuals; and in six (6) cases I was
informed that the deceased persons did not drink the pump water before
their illness.
The result of the inquiry consequently was that there had been no
particular outbreak or increase of cholera in this part of London,
except among the persons who were in the habit of drinking the water of
the above mentioned pump well.
I had an interview with the Board of Guardians of St. James' Parish on
the evening of Thursday, 7th of September, and represented the above
circumstances to them. In consequence of which the handle of the pump
was removed on the following day.
The additional facts that I have been able to ascertain are in
accordance with those related above, and as regards the small number
of those attacked, who were believed not to have drunk the water from
the Broad Street pump, it must be obvious that there are various ways
in which the deceased persons may have taken it without the knowledge
of their friends. The water was used for mixing with spirits in some
of the public houses around. It was used likewise at dining rooms
and coffee shops. The keeper of a coffee shop which was frequented
by mechanics and where the pump water was supplied at dinner time,
informed us on the 6th of September that she was already aware of nine
of her customers who were dead."
On the other hand, Dr. Swan discovered that while a workhouse
(almshouse) in Poland Street was three-fourths surrounded by houses in
which cholera deaths occurred, out of 525 inmates of the workhouse,
only five cholera deaths occurred. The workhouse, however, had a well
of its own in addition to the city supply, and never sent for water
to the Broad Street pump. If the cholera mortality in the workhouse
had been equal to that in its immediate vicinity, it would have had 50
deaths.
A brewery in Broad Street employing seventy workmen was entirely
exempt, but having a well of its own, and allowances of malt liquor
having been customarily made to the employees, it appears likely that
the proprietor was right in his belief that resort was never had to the
Broad Street well.
It was quite otherwise in a cartridge factory at No. 38 Broad Street,
where about two hundred work people were employed, two tubs of drinking
water having been kept on the premises and always filled from the Broad
Street pump. Among these employees eighteen died of cholera. Similar
facts were elicited for other factories on the same street, all tending
to show that in general those who drank the water from the Broad Street
pump well suffered either from cholera or diarrhœa, while those who
did not drink that water escaped. The whole chain of evidence was made
absolutely conclusive by several remarkable and striking cases, like
the following:
"A gentleman in delicate health was sent for from Brighton to see his
brother at No. 6 Poland Street, who was attacked by cholera and died
in twelve hours, on the 1st of September. The gentleman arrived after
his brother's death, and did not see the body. He only stayed about
twenty minutes in the house, where he took a hasty and scanty luncheon
of rump steak, taking with it a small tumbler of cold brandy and water,
the water being from Broad Street pump. He went to Pentonville, was
attacked with cholera on the evening of the following day, September
2d, and died the next evening.
The death of Mrs. E. and her niece, who drank the water from Broad
Street at the West End, Hampstead, deserves especially to be noticed.
I was informed by Mrs. E.'s son that his mother had not been in the
neighborhood of Broad Street for many months. A cart went from Broad
Street to West End every day, and it was the custom to take out a large
bottle of the water from the pump in Broad Street, as she preferred it.
The water was taken out on Thursday, the 31st of August, and she drank
of it in the evening and also on Friday. She was seized with cholera
on the evening of the latter day, and died on Saturday. A niece who
was on a visit to this lady also drank of the water. She returned to
her residence, a high and healthy part of Islington, was attacked with
cholera, and died also. There was no cholera at this time either at
West End or in the neighborhood where the niece died. Besides these two
persons only one servant partook of the water at West End, Hampstead,
and she did not suffer, at least not severely. She had diarrhœa."
Dr. Snow's inquiry into the cases of cholera which were nearer other
pumps showed that in most the victims had preferred, or had access to,
the water of the Broad Street well, and in only a few cases was it
impossible to trace any connection with the pump. Finally, Dr. Snow
made a statistical statement of great value which is here given in its
original form:
THE BROAD STREET, LONDON, WELL AND DEATHS FROM ASIATIC CHOLERA NEAR IT
IN 1854
+------------+-------------+--------+
|Date | Number of | Deaths |
| |Fatal Attacks| |
+------------+-------------+--------+
|August 19| 1 | 1 |
|August 20| 1 | 0 |
|August 21| 1 | 2 |
|August 22| 0 | 0 |
|August 23| 1 | 0 |
|August 24| 1 | 2 |
|August 25| 0 | 0 |
|August 26| 1 | 0 |
|August 27| 1 | 1 |
|August 28| 1 | 0 |
|August 29| 1 | 1 |
|August 30| 8 | 2 |
|August 31| 56 | 4 |
|September 1| 143 | 70 |
|September 2| 116 | 127 |
|September 3| 54 | 76 |
|September 4| 46 | 71 |
|September 5| 36 | 45 |
|September 6| 20 | 37 |
|September 7| 28 | 32 |
|September 8| 12 | 30 |
|September 9| 11 | 24 |
|September 10| 5 | 18 |
|September 11| 5 | 15 |
|September 12| 1 | 6 |
|September 13| 3 | 13 |
|September 14| 0 | 6 |
|September 15| 1 | 8 |
|September 16| 4 | 6 |
|September 17| 2 | 5 |
|September 18| 3 | 2 |
|September 19| 0 | 3 |
|September 20| 0 | 0 |
|September 21| 2 | 0 |
|September 22| 1 | 2 |
|September 23| 1 | 3 |
|September 24| 1 | 0 |
|September 25| 1 | 0 |
|September 26| 1 | 2 |
|September 27| 1 | 0 |
|September 28| 0 | 2 |
|September 29| 0 | 0 |
|September 30| 0 | 0 |
|Date unknown| 45 | 0 |
+------------+-------------+--------+
| | 616 | 616 |
+------------+----------------------+
In addition to the original and general inquiry conducted from the
time of the outbreak by Dr. Snow, the Rev. H. Whitehead, M. A.,
curate of St. Luke's in Berwick Street, and like Dr. Snow, a member
of the Cholera Inquiry Committee, whose knowledge of the district
both before and during the epidemic, owing to his official position,
gave him unusual advantages, made a most elaborate and painstaking
house-to-house investigation of one of the principal streets affected,
viz., Broad Street itself.
The Rev. H. Whitehead's report, like that of Dr. Snow, is a model of
careful and extended observation and study, cautious generalizing and
rigid verification. It is an excellent instance of inductive scientific
inquiry by a layman in sanitation. Mr. Whitehead found the number of
houses on Broad Street 49; the resident householders 35; the total
number of resident inhabitants 896; the total number of deaths among
these 90. Deaths among non-residents (workmen, etc.) belonging to the
street, 28. Total deaths chargeable to this street alone, 118. Only 10
houses out of 49 were free from cholera.
The dates of attack of the fatal cases resident in this single street
were as follows:
+------------+----------------+
|Date of | Number of |
| Attack | Fatal Attacks|
+------------+----------------+
|August 12 | 1 |
|August 28 | 1 |
|August 30 | 1 |
|August 31 | 6 |
|September 1 | 26 |
|September 2 | 24 |
|September 3 | 9 |
|September 4 | 8 |
|September 5 | 6 |
|September 6 | 5 |
|September 7 | 0 |
|September 8 | 2 |
|September 9 | 1 |
+------------+----------------+
| | 90 |
+------------+----------------+
Mr. Whitehead's detailed investigation was not made until the spring
of 1855, but in spite of this fact it supplied most interesting and
important confirmatory evidence of Dr. Snow's theory that the Broad
Street well was the source of the epidemic. Mr. Whitehead, moreover,
went further than Dr. Snow, and endeavored to find out how the well
came to be infected, why its infectious condition was so limited, as
it appeared to have been, and to answer various other questions which
occurred in the course of his inquiry. As a result, he concluded
that the well must have been most infected on August 31st, that for
some reason unknown a partial purification began on September 2d,
and thereafter proceeded rapidly. There was some evidence that on
August 30th the water was much less infected than on the 31st, so that
its dangerous condition was apparently temporary only. He further
discovered that in the house No. 40 Broad Street, which was the nearest
house to the well, there had been not only four fatal cases of cholera
contemporaneous with the epidemic, but certain earlier cases of an
obscure nature, which might have been cholera, and that dejecta from
these had been thrown without disinfection into a cesspool very near
the well. On his reporting these facts in April, 1855, to the main
committee, Mr. J. York, secretary and surveyor to the committee, was
instructed to survey the locality and examine the well, cesspool and
drains at No. 40 Broad Street. Mr. York's report revealed a startling
condition of affairs. The well was circular in section, 28 feet 10
inches deep, 6 feet in diameter, lined with brick, and when examined
contained 7 feet 6 inches of water. It was arched in at the top, dome
fashion, and tightly closed at a level 3 feet 6 inches below the street
by a cover occupying the crest of the dome. The bottom of the main
drain of the house No. 40 Broad Street, lay 9 feet 2 inches above the
water level, and one of its sides was distant from the brick lining of
the well only 2 feet 8 inches. It was constructed on the old fashioned
plan of a flat bottom, 12 inches wide, with brick sides rising about
12 inches high, and covered with old stones. As this drain had but a
small fall or inclination outward to the main sewer, the bottom was
covered with an accumulation of soil deposit about 2 inches thick, and
upon clearing this soil away the mortar joints of the old stone bottom
were found to be perished, as was also all the jointing of the brick
sides, which had brought the brickwork into the condition of a sieve,
and through which the house drainage water must have percolated for a
considerable period.
[Illustration: ASIATIC CHOLERA AND THE BROAD STREET WELL. LONDON 1854.]
After opening back the main drain, a cesspool, intended for a trap but
misconstructed, was found in the area, 3 feet 8 inches long by 2 feet 6
inches wide and 3 feet deep, and upon or over a part of this cesspool
a common open privy, without water supply, for the use of the house,
was erected, the cesspool being fully charged with soil. This privy was
formed across the east end of the area, and upon removing the soil the
brickwork of the cesspool was found to be in the same decayed condition
as the drain, and which may be better comprehended by stating that the
bricks were easily lifted from their beds without the least force, so
that any fluid could readily pass through the work, or as was the case
when first opened, over the top course of bricks of the trap into the
earth or made ground, immediately under and adjoining the end wall
eastward, this surface drainage being caused by the accumulation of
soil in, and the misconstruction of, the cesspool.
Thus, therefore, from the charged condition of the cesspool, the
defective state of its brickwork and also that of the drain, no doubt
remains in my mind that constant percolation for a considerable period
had been conveying fluid matter from the drains into the well; but lest
any doubt should arise on this subject hereafter, I had two spaces of
the brick stemming, 2 feet square each, taken out of the inside of
the well, the first 13 feet deep from the level of the street paving,
the second 18 feet deep, and a third was afterward opened still lower,
when the washed appearance of the ground and gravel fully corroborated
the assumption. In addition thereto, the ground was dug out between the
cesspool and the well to 3 feet below the bottom of the former, and
its black, saturated, swampy condition clearly demonstrated the fact,
as did also the small furrowed appearance of the underlying gravel
observed from the inside of the well, from which the fine sand had been
washed away during the process of filtration. It was thus established
as clearly as can be done by circumstantial evidence, that the great
epidemic in St. James' Parish, Westminster, London, in 1854, was caused
by the polluted water of the Broad Street well, which for a very few
days was probably infected with cholera germs. It is much less clear
how the well became infected, but it seems probable that the dejecta of
a cholera patient found tolerably direct access to the well from the
cesspool or drain of a house nearby. There is no evidence whatever that
the germs multiplied in the well, but rather much evidence that they
rapidly died out. It is repeatedly stated in the report that the water
was preferred for drinking because it was cold, _i. e._, colder than
the cistern water derived from public water supply and this condition
would probably favor such dying out.
That the water had long been polluted there can be no doubt. There was
evidence of this, and also some evidence that it was worse than usual
at the time when it was probably infected. One consumer spoke of it as
having been at the time offensive in taste and odor. It is instructive
to note that mere pollution seems to have done no obvious harm.
Specific infection, however, produced Asiatic cholera.
Mr. Whitehead in his singularly fair and candid report raises an
interesting question, viz: Why, if an early and unrecognized case in
the house in question brought about infection of the well, should
not the four severer cases of undoubted cholera subsequently in the
same house, with no known change in the drainage, have produced even
greater disaster? This question remains unanswered, except that after
the removal of the pump handle on the 8th of September access to the
well was shut off, and during the intermediate week the well may have
been avoided by the frightened people; or owing to illness less water
may have been used in No. 40 Broad Street, so that the cesspool did not
overflow, or some other condition unknown may have been changed."
Following closely on the heels of the report of the Cholera Inquiry
Commission came an event, which, though fraught with no danger,
nevertheless did more to call attention of people in general and
lawmakers in particular to the necessity for sanitary surroundings and
the danger of polluted water supply, than had all the epidemics of
cholera and typhoid fever which had preceded. This event was one of the
most famous stinks recorded, if not the most famous, and arose from
the Thames in London in 1858 and 1859. The following account of this
historic stink is by Dr. Budd.[7]
"The need of some radical modification in the view commonly taken of
the relation which subsists between typhoid fever and sewage was placed
in a very striking light by the state of the public health in London
during the hot months of 1858 and 1859, when the Thames stank so badly.
The late Dr. McWilliam pointed out at the time, in fitting and emphatic
terms, the utter inconsistency of the facts with the received notion
of the subject. Never before had nature laid down the data for the
solution of a problem of this kind in terms so large, or wrought them
out to so decisive an issue. As the lesson then taught us seems to be
already well nigh forgotten, I may perhaps be allowed to recall some of
its most salient points.
The occasion, indeed, as has already been hinted, was no common one. An
extreme case, a gigantic scale in the phenomena, and perfect accuracy
in the registration of the results—three of the best of all the
guarantees against fallacy—were combined to make the inductions sure.
For the first time in the history of man, the sewage of nearly three
millions of people had been brought to seethe and ferment under a
burning sun, in one vast open cloaca lying in their midst. The result
we all know. Stench so foul we may well believe had never before
ascended to pollute this lower air. Never before at least had a stink
risen to the height of an historic event. Even ancient fable failed to
furnish figures adequate to convey a conception of its thrice-Augean
foulness. For many weeks the atmosphere of Parliamentary committee
rooms was only rendered barely tolerable by the suspension before every
window of blinds saturated with chloride of lime, and by the lavish use
of this and other disinfectants. More than once, in spite of similar
precautions, the law courts were suddenly broken up by an insupportable
invasion of the noxious vapor. The river steamers lost their accustomed
traffic, and travelers pressed for time often made circuit of many
miles rather than cross one of the city bridges.
For months together the topic almost monopolized the public prints. Day
after day, week after week, the _Times_ teemed with letters filled with
complaint, prophetic of calamity or suggesting remedies. Here and there
a more than commonly passionate appeal showed how intensely the evil
was felt by those who were condemned to dwell on the Stygian banks. At
home and abroad the state of the chief river was felt to be a national
reproach. "India is in Revolt, and the Thames Stinks," were the two
great facts coupled together by a distinguished foreign writer to mark
the climax of a national humiliation. But more significant still of
the magnitude of the nuisance was the fact that five million pounds in
money were cheerfully voted by a heavily-taxed community to provide the
means for its abatement. With the popular views as to the connection
between epidemic disease and putrescent gases, this state of things
naturally gave rise to the worst forebodings.
Members of Parliament and noble lords, dabblers in sanitary science,
vied with professional sanitarians in predicting pestilence. If London
should happily be spared the cholera, decimation by fever was at
least a certainty. The occurrence of a case of malignant cholera in
the person of a Thames waterman, early in the summer, was more than
once cited to give point to these warnings, and as foreshadowing what
was to come. Meanwhile the hot weather passed away; the returns of
sickness and mortality were made up, and, strange to relate, the result
showed not only a death rate below the average, _but as the leading
peculiarity of the season_, a remarkable diminution in the prevalence
of fever, diarrhœa and the other forms of disease commonly ascribed to
putrid emanations."
While the historical stink of the Thames was without apparent effect
on the public health, the nuisance caused was so great and the fear
engendered was so real, that much good was the immediate result. One
of the most lasting and far reaching benefits was the appointment by
Parliament of a Rivers Pollution Commission, to study into and devise
ways for the prevention of pollution of streams, lakes and water-sheds,
from which public water supplies are obtained. In addition to this,
the stink stimulated inquiry into the sources of infection in cases of
epidemic diseases, and means for preventing the spread of disease, with
such success, that as early as 1866 it was decided that cholera was a
water-borne disease and that the cause of infection, whatever it was,
could be destroyed by heat. This is evidenced by the signs the local
sanitary authorities caused to be issued during the epidemic of Asiatic
cholera in 1866:
CHOLERA NOTICE!
"The inhabitants of the district within which cholera is prevailing
are earnestly advised _not to drink any water which has not been
boiled_."
Following this, the Rivers Pollution Commission[8] of 1868 went
on record as authority for the statement that "the existence of
specific poison capable of producing cholera and typhoid fever is
attested by evidence so abundant and strong as to be practically
irresistible. These poisons are contained in the discharges from the
bowels of persons suffering from these diseases." So it was that close
observation and rigid inquiry discovered the truths that discharges
from bowels of persons suffering from intestinal diseases contain the
specific poison of the disease; that these discharges, mixed with
the sewage of cities, often found their way into water supplies, and
thus caused an epidemic of the same disease, and that boiling of
water before drinking would destroy the infection, thus rendering it
harmless. These truths stand to-day and the same means of prevention
are resorted to in time of danger that were recommended during the
epidemic of cholera in London in 1866. We know now, however, thanks to
the investigations of Louis M. Pasteur, that all that class of disease
which he designated as zymotic, are caused by little microscopic
vegetation which gain lodgment in the body where they grow, multiply
and thrive at the expense of the host; and knowing the specific cause
of a disease makes it more easy to fight to prevent and to cure.
[Illustration]
[Illustration:
THE·FOVNTAIN·OF·ELISHA· ·NEAR·JERICHO,·PALESTINE·
From Stereograph, copyright 1899 by Underwood & Underwood, N. Y.
(See page iv)]
[Illustration: CHAPTER IX]
SYNOPSIS OF CHAPTER. Introduction of Water Filters—Striking Example of
their Efficiency and Value—Cholera at Altona and Hamburg—Purification
of Sewage—The Automatic Scavenger of Mouras—Investigations of the
Massachusetts State Board of Health—Garbage Destruction.
As the suburban population around London, England, grew and occupied
the drainage area from which the London water supply was obtained, just
in such proportion was the water supply polluted, and London was early
forced to devise measures for purifying an already polluted water; so
it is that as early as 1839 London was filtering part of the water
derived from surface sources, and so successful were the early attempts
that at the present time although London is supplied with water by
eight separate water companies, all of the water used within its
confines which is derived from rivers, lakes or streams, is filtered
before delivery into the distributing mains. Europe was not slow to
grasp the value of filtration, and at the present time most cities of
importance in Continental Europe have slow sand filters, while America,
or at least the United States, which is reputed to adopt almost
immediately anything which possesses merit, had constructed no filters
as late as 1880, and to-day can number but few. A striking illustration
of the value of filtration for sterilizing an infected water supply can
be instanced in the cholera epidemic of Hamburg, Germany.
[Illustration: _MAP showing the Locations of the Cases of Cholera
adjacent to the Boundary between HAMBURG and ALTONA in the Epidemic of
1892_
Boundary line indicated by line of dashes.
Cases of cholera by solid circles.
Cases of cholera imported from Hamburg by circles.
Water mains in Hamburg streets by black lines.]
On the river Elbe, some miles from the sea, there are three cities
adjoining and forming in appearance one large city of 800,000
inhabitants, the combined sewage of which is discharged into the river
Elbe. The water supply to the city of Hamburg, a free German city,
with a population of 640,400, is derived from the Elbe above where
the sewage is discharged into the river but not sufficiently far away
to escape contamination from a recision of polluted water at flood
tide. This water after some imperfect sedimentation passes direct to
the consumer without filtration. The supply of water to Wandsbeck, a
city of 20,000 population, is obtained from a lake which is unexposed
to contamination and is filtered before being delivered to the mains.
The supply to Altona, on the other hand, a Prussian city of 143,000
inhabitants, is obtained from the river Elbe at a point about 8 miles
below where it receives the combined sewage of the three cities, with
their population of over 800,000. It will thus be seen that the source
of supply to Altona is the worst of the three. This most grossly
polluted supply, however, is filtered with exceeding care before
delivery to the consumers, and to this fact is attributed the freedom
from cholera that visited Hamburg in 1892. The story is well told by
Dr. Thorne, medical officer of the London Local Government Board.[9]
"The different behavior of Hamburg and Altona as regards cholera is
extremely interesting. The two towns adjoin; they are practically one
city. The division between the two is no more obvious than that between
two densely peopled London parishes, and yet a spot map indicating
the houses which were attacked with cholera, which was shown to me by
Professor Koch, points out clearly that whereas the disease prevailed
in epidemic form on the Hamburg side of the boundary line, that line
running in and out among the streets and houses and at times passing
diagonally through the houses themselves, formed the limit beyond
which the epidemic, as such, did not extend. The dots on one side of
the dividing line were proof of the epidemicity of cholera in Hamburg,
their comparative absence on the Altona side of it was proof of the
absence of the epidemic in Altona. To use Professor Koch's own words:
'Cholera in Hamburg went right up to the boundary of Altona and then
stopped. In one street, which for a long way forms the boundary, there
was cholera on the Hamburg side, whereas on the Altona side was free
from it, and yet there was one detectable difference, and one only,
between the two adjacent areas—they had different water services.'
Professor Koch has collected certain proofs which he regards as crucial
on this point, and Dr. Reincke has supplied me with a small plan in
support of the contention. At one point close to and on the Hamburg
side of the boundary line between Hamburg and Altona, is a large
yard, known as the Hamburger-Platz. It contains two rows of large
and lofty dwellings, containing 72 separate tenements and some 400
people, belonging almost wholly to those classes who suffered most from
cholera elsewhere in Hamburg. But while cholera is shown by the spot
map to have prevailed all around, not a single case occurred among
the many residents of this court during the whole epidemic. And why?
Professor Koch explains that owing to local difficulties, water from
the Hamburg mains could not easily be obtained for the dwellings in
question, and hence a supply had been laid in from one of the Altona
mains in an adjacent street. This was the only part of Hamburg which
received Altona water, and I am informed that it was the only spot in
Hamburg in which was aggregated a population of the class in question,
which escaped the cholera. At the date of my visit to Hamburg, a
notice board was affixed at the entrance to this court. It stated that
certain tenements were to let; but, above all, in large type, and as an
inducement to intending tenants, was the announcement that the court
was not only within the jurisdiction of Hamburg, with the privileges
still attaching to the old Hanseatic cities, but that it had a supply
of Altona water.
During the epidemic the deaths in the several cities were:
+-----------+----------+-------+-----------+
| | | |Deaths per |
| |Population|Deaths | 10,000 |
| | | |Inhabitants|
+-----------+----------+-------+-----------+
| Hamburg | 640,000 | 8,605 | 134.4 |
| Altona | 143,000 | 328 | 23.0 |
| Wandsbeck | 20,000 | 43 | 22.0 |
+-----------+----------+-------+-----------+
That infectious matter was communicated to the Elbe water from Hamburg
is not in any way a hypothesis. Cholera germs had been as a fact found
in the Elbe water. They were found a little below the place where the
Hamburg main sewer flows into the Elbe. They were also found in one of
the two Altona basins into which the water flowed before filtration."
No more striking example could be found, demonstrating on a large scale
the efficiency of filtration as a preventive of water-borne diseases
than that of the cholera epidemic of Hamburg in 1892, yet, at the
present writing, there are people holding public offices throughout
the United States who do not believe in the value of filtration as a
public prophylactic, or who are so indifferent as not to advocate its
adoption. Nor is this disbelief confined to public officials; many
there are outside of public office who have made no study of sanitation
and cannot believe that merely passing water downward through sand will
purify it, and for the benefit of those who wish to be better informed,
the story of the Hamburg epidemic of cholera, together with the part
played by filters in saving Altona from a worse visitation, cannot be
too often told.
It is but natural that, suspicion having once fallen on water as a
source or vehicle of disease, means would be adopted not only to
properly sterilize water before delivering it to the public, but,
furthermore, to select the source of supply where there was least
danger of contamination from filth. By this time public water supplies
had progressed to such a stage that but few towns, cities or villages
of any importance were without a municipal plant. Further, most cities
of any importance had a more or less complete system of sewers, and
the filth from these sewers was discharging freely, and in the crude
state, into the streams and rivers of the realm. Such a condition of
affairs could not last long without causing a nuisance, as well as
becoming a menace to the health of the commonwealth, and it was not
long before the problem was discussed of purifying the sewage before
discharging it into streams and rivers. In Great Britain, the pollution
of streams was felt more keenly than in America. The population along
the rivers in Great Britain is quite dense, and the rivers, which are
comparatively small, are used as sources of supply for the different
municipalities along the banks, so that some means had to be devised
to prevent the people up stream from polluting and perhaps infecting
it for those lower down. So early as 1840, this matter forced itself
on the attention of Parliament, and in 1843, a royal commission, the
Health of Towns Commission, was appointed to inquire into the present
state of large towns and populous districts. This was followed in 1857
by the Sewage of Towns Commission, a royal commission appointed to
inquire into the best means of distributing the sewage of towns, and in
1865 by the Rivers Pollution Commission, a royal commission appointed
to inquire into the best means of preventing the pollution of rivers.
Progress was not at a standstill during this time, however, but, on
the contrary, chemical precipitation of sewage and purification by the
application to land were striving with each other for supremacy. Up
to that time, the important part that bacteria play in the reduction
of organic matter was not understood, and instead of affording every
advantage for the decomposition and fermentation of organic matter
under the least objectionable conditions, the principal efforts of
those interested in the problem were to prevent or put off as long
as possible the septic action of sewage. It was not until so late as
the year 1880 that attention was turned toward the possibility of the
micro-organisms in sewage. In that year Dr. Mueller took out a patent
endeavoring to utilize the micro-organism in sewage for the purpose
of purification. According to Dr. Mueller's views, "The contents of
sewage are chiefly of organic origin, and in consequence of this an
active process of decomposition takes place in sewage through which the
organic matters are dissolved into mineral matters, or, in short, are
mineralized, and thus become fit to serve as food for plants. To the
superficial observer, however, it is chiefly a process of digestion, in
which the various, mostly microscopically small, animal and vegetable
organisms utilize the organically fixed power for their life purpose.
"The decomposition of sewage in its various stages is characterized
by the appearance of enormous numbers of spirilla, then of vibrios
(swarming spores) and, finally, of moulds. At this stage commences
the reformation of organic substance with the appearance of
chlorophyl-holding protococcus."
About the same time, December, 1881, the account of Mouras's automatic
scavenger was published in France. Mouras had been working and
experimenting along the same lines as Dr. Mueller, and the result was
an apparatus consisting of a closed vessel or vault, with a water seal
which rapidly changed excrementatious matter into a homogeneous fluid,
only slightly turbid, and holding the solid matters in suspension in
the form of scarcely visible filaments. The principle claimed for his
automatic scavenger by Mouras was that animal dejecta within themselves
contained all the principles of fermentation necessary to liquefy them.
The teachings of Dr. Mueller and Mouras went unheeded for a long time,
on account of the chemical processes then in vogue. It was maintained
by those who were supposed to know, that lime and other antiseptic
substances were particularly valuable in sewage purification, because
they destroyed living organisms, such as bacteria, which give rise to
putrefaction and fermentation. They contended that if all the organisms
could be destroyed, that sewage would be rendered unobjectionable.
So conditions stood when in January, 1887, Mr. Dibden read a paper
before the Institute of Civil Engineers, in which he pointed out
that the very essence of sewage purification was not the destruction
of bacterial life, but the resolution of organic matter into other
combinations by the agency of the micro-organisms. He pointed out,
further, that a septic and not an antiseptic action was what was
wanted, consequently any process which arrested the activity of the
bacteria was the reverse of what was desired. Dibden's paper had the
effect of turning investigation in the right direction, but a world
of experimenting on a practical scale would be necessary before the
practice of sewage purification could be established on a safe, sound
and scientific footing. It remained for the Massachusetts State Board
of Health to conduct those investigations, and so thoroughly was it
accomplished that the records of their experiments furnish the basis
for sewage purification practice in the United States. The experiments
have been carried on since 1887, and the thoroughness and value of
these investigations can be judged by the fact that during one period
of twenty-two months four thousand chemical examinations were made in
addition to the microscopic examinations.
Following the historic investigations of the Massachusetts State Board
of Health, numerous engineers and investigators commenced applying to
practice the principles there laid down, and with such good results
that there are upwards of 200 purification plants in the United States
to-day, and in Pennsylvania alone plans are under way at the present
time for over one hundred sewage disposal works. Such a showing is
encouraging, and leads to the hope that within a decade no city of any
importance within the States will be pouring impurified sewage into
public streams or lakes.
Up to within the last quarter century no thought was given in the
United States to the disposal or destruction of the grosser particles
which make up the waste of a large city, nor was provision made at
sanatoria, hospitals and like institutions for the destruction of
materials which might prove infectious; yet, no less important than
the removal of sewage by water carriage is the systematic collection
and subsequent destruction of all matter of no value which might
prove a vehicle of disease, if a clean, sanitary environment is to be
maintained. The necessity for such removal and destruction was first
felt in hospitals, sanatoria, barracks and camps, where many people
are brought together under unusual circumstances, and infective matter
is liable to accumulate, thereby proving a menace to the community.
It is not surprising, therefore, that the desirability of destroying
such accumulated wastes was first brought home to the medical staff
connected with military service, and that the medical authorities
should be connected with the British army.
The first garbage destructor, or garbage furnace, of which there is any
record, was constructed about 1860, at Gibraltar, for the exclusive
destruction by fire of all waste matter from the British garrison.
In the United States, likewise, it was at the army posts where the
need for waste destructors was first felt, and in 1885 Lieutenant
H. I. Reilly, U. S. A., built the first American garbage furnace at
Governor's Island, New York Harbor. From that time on, the value
of garbage destructors became more widely known, and within recent
years the need for a sanitary and convenient method for disposing of
waste matters has been occupying the attention of those in charge of
institutions devoted to the care of the sick, infirm, feeble, and to
the control of the criminal. In addition to the superintendents of
hospitals, prisons, sanatoria and asylums, those in charge of medical
schools and laboratories, hotels, business houses and municipalities
have given the matter much consideration, and at the present time most
of the large cities of the United States have constructed garbage
destructors, or are seriously considering the step, while the principal
hospitals, hotels, department stores, medical colleges and public
institutions throughout the country have already installed destructors.
Likewise, garbage destructors have been constructed at all of the
United States Government army posts.
[Illustration]
[Illustration: · NEW·YORK·PVBLIC·BATHS·
·23d·STREET·
The Twenty-third Street Public Bath is considered one of the finest and
most modern in New York City]
[Illustration: MODERN & RECENT PLVMBING FIXTVRES]
=Passing of the Marble Lavatory—Public Bath Houses—Public Wash
Houses—Public Comfort Stations—Conclusion=
No history of sanitation would be complete without touching upon
the plumbing fixtures in buildings, and showing the marked progress
along these lines within the last quarter of a century. It is only a
little over a century and a quarter since the first English patent was
granted for a water closet. That was in the year 1775, and was issued
to Alexander Cummings, who, strange to say, was a watchmaker. This
closet was the first one patented which had what is known as a trap to
contain water for a seal. Three years later a patent was issued to
Joseph Bramah, inventor of the hydraulic press, for a water closet with
a valve at the bottom. Little progress was made in the improvement of
water closets during the next half century, and when in the year 1833
the first American patent was taken out the art had not advanced very
far. Indeed, it might be said that until the time of the filing of the
application for the Fraim and Neff patent, for a siphon closet, that a
real cleanly and sanitary type of closet was not on the market.
[Illustration: A Bath Room of the Early 70's]
[Illustration: One Stage in the Evolution of the Porcelain Enamel Bath]
[Illustration: A Slop Sink of Long Ago]
Bath tubs and lavatories have improved as much in appearance in the
time that has elapsed as have water closets. The earliest bath tubs
of which we have any knowledge were hewn out of marble. Later, when
bath tubs came into rather extensive use in the United States, they
were made of wood, lined with either sheet zinc or sheet copper,
tinned on one side, and it is only within comparatively recent years
that porcelain enameled tubs came into use, and that solid porcelain
tubs were manufactured in this country. Open plumbing was unheard
of twenty-five years ago and in its stead plumbing fixtures were
concealed as much as possible by encasing them in woodwork of more
or less ornate designs; at that time the lavatories were all made of
marble, and of this material fully 90 per cent. of the lavatories were
made up to about the year 1902. About that time, porcelain enameled
and solid porcelain lavatories commenced taking the lead and worked
a complete revolution in the design of these fixtures. Indeed, so
sudden and complete was the change that inside of a year the marble-top
lavatories were driven as completely from the market as though they
never existed, and, outside of old work, they are as much a curiosity
to-day as an old pan closet.
[Illustration: Bath Tub Encased in Woodwork]
[Illustration: An Old Marble-Top Lavatory]
With the perfecting and cheapening of plumbing fixtures came an
increased demand for their use, and the attention of public-minded
citizens turned to means for providing the people less favored with
worldly riches with means for cleansing the person and apparel.
Liverpool, England, was the first of modern cities to establish public
bath houses. The first bath in that city was established in 1828, and
is known as the Pierhead. It contains eleven private baths, two vapor
baths, one douche, one plunge 46 x 27 feet, one plunge 40 x 27 feet,
and two small private plunges. In all, Liverpool has at the present
time nine public baths.
Birmingham, England, was next in point of time. It now has five bath
houses, the first of which was built on Kent Street, and opened May 12,
1851. In this establishment a Turkish bath can be had for a shilling.
London, England, follows on the heels of Birmingham, with eleven bath
houses, the first of which was erected in 1854. At present municipal
London has invested over $2,500,000 in public baths and laundry
establishments, which cost $550,000 annually to maintain.
[Illustration: A Modern Porcelain Enameled Lavatory]
Provisions for free public baths were made in New York in 1870 by the
erection of two floating baths. These bath houses, however, could only
be used during warm weather, so could not be considered, in the full
sense of the word, bathing establishments. The New York Association for
Improving the Condition of the Poor, realizing this and the lack of
public bathing facilities, undertook to supply the deficiency as far
as possible, and in 1891 opened the first real public bath house in
the United States, at 9 Centre Market Place. Yonkers, N. Y., however,
claims the credit of being the first city in the United States to
establish a municipal bath house, supplied with hot and cold water,
open all the year round, and maintained at the public expense.
The example set by a few cities has not been without effect, and other
cities in the United States have followed the lead. It is noticeable,
however, that it is only in the Eastern cities that public bath
houses are built and maintained at the city's expense. According to
the "Report on Public Baths and Comfort Stations," Buffalo, Boston,
Philadelphia, Newark and Trenton each have one public bath house and
Chicago has three. Since the publication of that report, however,
many cities both in the East and in the West have built public bath
houses and many have built, are building, or have planned to build,
public comfort stations. Indeed, the standard by which the advancement
of cities will be judged in the near future is, "What have they done
for the comfort and welfare of the citizens?" And among the visible
evidences of what they have done, standing foremost will be the public
bath houses, public comfort stations, and last, but not least, public
wash houses.
[Illustration: Present Stage in the Evolution of Porcelain Enameled
Baths]
Events of to-day become history of to-morrow, and no history would
be complete without recounting contemporaneous facts and events. So
it is with sanitation; no history of that subject would be complete
without illustrating a few of the plumbing fixtures in use at the time
the record was written. We of the present age believe, as did those
of a generation ago, that we have almost attained perfection in the
manufacture of plumbing fixtures; but have we, or will succeeding
generations look back upon what we consider good as we do upon the
fixtures in vogue in the early 70's? This we do not know nor can we
foresee. Time alone will tell.
[Illustration: A Twentieth Century Bathroom]
[Illustration]
FOOTNOTES:
[1] _Ewbank's Hydraulics._
[2] _Engineering Record_, Oct. 21, 1905
[3] Wanklyn and Cooper.
[4] Water Supply.
[5] Principles of Sanitary Science and the Public Health.
[6] The complete original report is entitled "Report on the Cholera
Outbreak in the Parish of St. James, Westminster, during the Autumn of
1854. Presented to the Vestry by the Cholera Inquiry Committee, July,
1855. London, J. Churchill, 1855."
[7] _Typhoid Fever, its Nature, Mode of Spreading and Prevention._
[8] _Sixth Report_, London, 1874.
[9] _Cholera Prospects and Prevention._
* * * * *
TRANSCRIBER'S NOTES
Minor punctuation and printer errors repaired.
Italic text is denoted by _underscores_, bold text by =equal signs= and
font changes by ~tildes~.
End of Project Gutenberg's History of Sanitation, by John Joseph Cosgrove