View report page

Report on Constant Water Supply. 49
charged into the Thames, was not in any way so unwholesome, so dangerous, as the late
apparently comparatively clean supply taken from sources into which sewage has been
permitted to flow.
Notwithstanding all the expense incurred by the ratepayers of London to insure the
purity of their part of the river, the condition of the upper Thames, from which the drinking
water is chiefly obtained, is still much too foul to be safe. No less than 56 towns in
the basin of the Thames above Chelsea still cast their impurities into the river.
London has, the Committee think, a claim, after its great sacrifices, to be protected from
this abomination. The danger of using water tainted with sewage, even in a very slight
degree is great. In this district, partly in this parish, a conclusive investigation upon a
large scale, has shown how true this is. In 1849 and 1854, in a given population, part
supplied by the Southwark Company, part by the Lambeth Company, and in the same streets,
the epidemic deaths were as follows—Lambeth Company, 1849 (impure supply containing
sewage,) deaths, 1,925; 1854 (pure supply,) deaths, 611—i.e., 37 in 10,000 living. The
Southwark Company, 1849 (impure supply, and containing sewage,) deaths, 2,880 ; 1854
(still impure supply, and still containing sewage,) deaths, 3,476—130 in 10,000 living.
These figures should be well noted, for they mean thousands of unnecessary deaths.
In Oxford, in 1832, the district of St. Clements had its supply from the sewage-receiving
stream. The cholera cases were 74. In 1849, with pure water from the Headington springs,
there were but three cases. In 1854 there were 18 cases—still a small number in comparison
with the rest of Oxford. In the city gaol, 1832 and 1849, there were no cases; in the
county gaol, 1832, there were two cases, in 1849, 14 cases. In 1854 the city gaol was
again quite free of cholera, and nearly so of diarrhoea ; while the county gaol, admirably
managed, and not far from the other gaol, was again attacked, and 25 cases of cholera and
diarrhoea occurred. It was now discovered that a nearly stagnant millpond and a drain
from the prison ran into the stream, within ten feet of the supply pipe for the prison use,
from which place the kitchen coppers were supplied, and the soup and gruel made. The
supply pipes were at once cut off, and during the rest of the epidemic time but four cases
of cholera and diarrhoea occurred, not one of which was fatal.
The requirements to be considered in connection with water supply are, that it should
be sufficient, and that it should be pure. The supply will certainly be far purer under the
constant than under the intermittent system. From what we observe as to the almost
universal unfitness of the means of storage among the poor, some of the conditions being
probably more or less irremovable—its usually unclean situation and conditior , and from
the dangers resulting from the use of impure water, it is no doubt in the highest degree
desirable to have a constant supply, and that this should, if possible, be compassed at any
reasonable cost.
The question of an efficient supply upon this system depends it is said, mainly upon the
prevention of waste. Waste is very great indeed under the present system, and it might
very probably be found, that very little increased waste would occur under the new—some
competent witnesses say it would be actually much less. It is said, upon good authority,
that half the water supplied in London is wasted; in Glasgow, 15 gallons out of 39; in
Birmingham, so much, that it is considered water could, but for this, be supplied at half
or a third of the present cost.