View report page

48
filter beds of the several companies are as follows:—West Middlesex,
five in number, area 8 acres, depth 5 feet, viz., Harwich sand
lft. 9in., Barnes sand 1ft., and gravel (screened to different sizes
and arranged in layers) 2ft. 3in. The average rate of filtration per
square foot of area was, during December, 1½ gallons per hour.
(It may be here observed that the quality of the water is improved
by a slow rate of filtration— the rate should not exceeded 2½ gallons
per square foot of filter bed per hour: this will give 540 gallons
per square yard each 24 hours, and at this rate filtration
should be effectual.) Grand Junction : Number of filter beds, 4;
area in acres, 7¾; depth, 5ft. 6in.—viz., Harwich sand, 2ft. 6in.:
Hoggin, 6in.: fine gravel, 9in.: coarse gravel, 9in.: boulders, lft. :
average rate of filtration, 11/3 gallons per square foot of area per
hour. Chelsea : Filter beds, 7; area, 6f acres; depth, 8ft.—viz.,
Thames sand, 3ft. 3in.: shells, &c., Sin.: gravel, 4ft. 6in.; rate of
filtration, 21/3 gallons per square foot per hour. It will be observed
that notwithstanding the greater depth of the filter beds of the
Chelsea Company, the water supplied by the Company in all times
of difficulty arising from a flooded state of the river is unfit for
drinking, although the rate of filtration is slower than that deemed
sufficient by the water examiner. This is due to the total absence
of impounding and storage reservoirs for unfiltered water, to the
exceptionally bad quality of the water taken in by the Company,
owing to the improper situation of the intake at Ditton, and to the
impossibility of filter beds removing suspended matter when in
any large quantity; that, moreover, being a principal object of the
subsiding reservoirs. The disgusting condition in which the water
of the Company was sent out during parts of the months of
November and December formed the subject of many complaints,
both in the public press and in communications addressed to
myself, and was referred to in my reports, dated December 16th,
1874, and January 13th, 1875. I had, on former occasions, reported
specially on the subject, and particularly in February, 1872.
The dissatisfaction which the condition of the water at the latter
date gave rise to induced the Company to take steps to improve
their means of supply by enlarging their storage. The scheme
submitted to Parliament in the Session of 1873 included the embanking
of the Thames at Hampton Court, and was defeated by a
strong public opposition, on what I described at the time as sesthetical
grounds. No further attempt appears to have been made by
the Company to put their supply on a proper footing until the
great outcry referred to arose. On the 18th December, however,
at a special meeting of the proprietors, a resolution to the following
effect was passed:—
" That the directors be authorised to take such steps as in their
judgment may be necessary or expedient to obtain a fresh intake,
with reservoirs and other works connected therewith, and lay the
necessary main pipes from the site of such proposed intake to the
works at Seething Wells, with the least possible delay."
The measures taken by the directors to secure the land—an