View report page

35
"In concluding our comments upon this branch of the
inquiry, whilst we would point out the difficulty of avoiding
fallacies in drawing inferences from vital statistics
over short periods of times, we are of opinion that however
grave the inconvenience that has resulted from the
scarcity of water in the area of the East London water
supply during July and August 1895, there is no evidence
to show that it had detrimentally influenced the public
health of the districts involved.
III.—The Means which should be adopted with a view of
preventing a becurrence of any such deficiency.
With regard to this head of our inquiry we do not think that
much need be said. The conditions presented by the year
1895 were very exceptional. An unprecedented drought
following a most unusually severe frost created difficulties
not likely to be exceeded in the future, and it may be
assumed, for purposes of calculation, that a maximum
strain was this year put on the resources of the Company.
We have already stated that by January 1896 it is expected
that the works now in progress in connection with the
Bacecourse reservoir and the additional pumping plant
will be completed. These works will give an additional
storage capacity for 200,000,000 gallons, as well as power
to obtain an additional 3,000,000 gallons a day from the
Chalk. In addition to these works other reservoirs, under
the powers given by the East London Water Act, 1894, are
in course of construction, which will finally increase the
present storage of the Company to 1,200,000,000 gallons,
an amount equivalent to some 27 days average supply.
Under these circumstances we consider that, when Parliament
passed the Act of 1894, they furnished the East
London Water Company with powers sufficient to prevent
the recurrence of a deficiency of water in their district
until such time, at any rate, as the population to be supplied
shall have again outgrown the provision made.