View report page

66
" proved, but I pointed out in December that it was still one of
" the least pure of the Kent waters, and but little purer than
" Thames-derived waters. The July report shows that this
" is still the case. The full reports of the bacteriological
and chemical examinations are given of each of the Kent
" waters. It appears that the average number of bacteria
" per cubic centimetre in all the Kent waters on the number
" of examinations was 7'0, whereas the Plumstead well"
water contained, on a similar number of examinations,
" an average of 14'3 bacteria. Only three wells showed
" a higher average, viz.: Westerham Hill, Westerham
"Town and Shortlands, and of these the Westerham Town
" well has since been closed. The Plumstead well water
" gave, with one exception, the lowest percentage of samples
" containing no bacillus coli in 100 cubic centimetres of
"water, viz.: 83.3, as compared with 100 for the best
'' waters. As regards the chemical examinations, Plumstead
" well water contained far the highest amount of total and
" permanent hardness, viz.: 37.86 and 14.5 respectively,
" and also far the highest amount of chlorine, viz: 6.07
" parts per 100,000. The average amount of hardness
"appears to be about 27, and the Deptford wells (the
''highest next Plumstead) give a hardness of 31.
" Plumstead water is also above the average as regards the
" ammoniacal nitrogen, albumenoid nitrogen, oxidised
" nitrogen, and oxygen absorbed from permanganate. With
" the analyses given with the official report I have com"
pared an analysis of the water at the Plumstead Baths,
" supplied by Professor Smith on August 26th last. Al"
though the two wells are within about ½ mile from each
" other there is considerable difference in the composition of
" the two waters. The Baths water contains only 3.1 parts of
" chlorine per 100,000 and only 24.3 parts total hardness.
" The presumption appears to be that the Plumstead well-