« AnteriorContinuar »
"and town refuse can be permitted to remain beneath ol "near habitations.
"That by no means can remedial operations be so con"veniently, economically, inoffensively, and quickly effected
as by the removal of all such refuse dissolved or sus"pended in water.
"That it has been subsequently proved by the operation "of draining houses with tubular drains, in upwards of "19,000 cases, and by the trial of more than 200 miles of M pipe sewers, that the practice of constructing large brick "or stone sewers for general town drainage, which detain "matters passing into them in suspension in water, which "accumulate deposit, and which are made large enough "for men to enter them, and remove the deposit by hand "labor, without reference to the area to be drained, has "been in ignorance, neglect or perversion of the above
"That while sewers so constructed are productive of "great injury to the publio health, by the diffusion into "houses and streets of the noxious; products of the decom"posing matters contained in them, they are wasteful from "the increased expense of their construction and repair, "and from the cost of ineffectual efforts to keep them free "from deposit.
"That the house-drains, made as they have heretofore "been, of absorbent brick or stone, besides detaining sub
'stances in suspension, accumulating foul deposit, and "being so permeable as to permit the escape of the liquid
'and gaseous matters, are also false in principle and waste"ful in the expense of construction, cleansing and repair.
"That it results from the experience developed in these "inquiries, that improved tubular house-drains and sewers "of the proper sizes, inclinations, and material, detain and "accumulate no deposit, emit no offensive smells, and re"quire no additional supplies of water to keep them clear
"That the offensive smells proceeding from any works "intended for house or town drainage, indicate the fact "of the detention and decomposition of ordure, and afford M decisive evidence of mal-construction or of ignorant or
"That the method of removing refuse in suspension in "water by properly combined works, is much better than "that of collecting it in pits or cess-pools near or under"neath houses, emptying it by hand labor, and removing "it by carts.
"That it is important for the sake of economy, as well "as for the health of the population, that the practice of "the removal of refuse in suspension in water, and by com"bined works, should be applied to all houses, especially
those occupied by the poorer classes."
Later investigations of the subject have established two general conclusions applicable to the subject, namely, that:
"In towns all offensive smells from the decomposition "of animal and vegetable matter, indicate the generation "and presence of the causes of insalubrity and of prevent"able disease, at the same time that they prove defective "local administration; "and correlatively, that:
ilIn rural districts all continuous offensive smells from "animal and vegetable decomposition, indicate prevent"able loss of fertilizing matter, loss of money, and bad "husbandry."
The principles herein set forth, whether relating to sanitary improvement, to convenience and decency of living, or to the use of waste matters of houses in agricultural improvement, are no less applicable in America than elsewhere; and the more general adoption of improved hous* drainage and sewerage, and of the use of sewage matters in agriculture, would add to the health and prosperity of its people, ai; 1 would indicate a great advance in civil* cation.
NOTE TO CHAPTER XL—(second Edition.)
On reading over the preceding chapter, I am disposed to leave it essentially as first written, because the principles which it sets forth are as true now as they were then, and because there has been no essential modification in processes which makes it important to change its directions.
I would say, however, that the system of Back Drainage described, has not come into general use, for the reason that it is considered better, all things taken into the account, to avoid, so far as possible, the laying of public drains on private land. Where there are lanes between the backs of the houses, or where it is practicable to take a small strip of land for this purpose and put it under the control of the public authorities, the manifest advantages of the system may be availed of. In the majority of instances, however, this will not be practicable.
So far as the use of small pipes is concerned, experience has fully justified all that was anticipated ten years ago. Especially where the question of stormwater can be left out of the account, that is, where this can be allowed to run through surface gutters, or where separate sewers can be made for its removal. What is known as the Separate System, that is, the removal of house-drainage by itself, is much to be recommended, and even in cities where house-drainage alone is to be accommodated, very small pipes, even six or eight inches in diameter, may be very largely used for lateral sewers.
The use of small pipes is greatly facilitated, and their permanent working secured, by the adoption of Roger Field's method of accumulating the drainage of a few houses at the upper end of each line, including the roofwater, in underground tanks of considerable size, which, by the automatic action of an ingeniously arranged siphon, discharge their whole contents with great rapidity as soon as they become full. This secures the thorough periodical flushing of the lower line of the drain, and allows us to use very low gradients where a slight fall is made necessary by the level of the land. Field's flushing tank is not only valuable for this use, but equally so for the accumulating of the drainage of single houses, and for discharging it with a cleansing flow from the house-drain; and enables us to use with safety, for any private house, an outlet drain only four inches in diameter.
For the ultimate disposal of the drainage of country or village houses, of asylums and even of small towns, the delivery of the flushing tanks by periodical discharge into common agricultural drain tiles two inches in diameter, laid on lines two to six feet apart, having a fall of not more than four inches per hundred feet, with uncemented joints, and placed not more than 8 or 10 inches below the surface of the ground, secures the absorption of the liquid by the upper portion of the soil, within reach of the roots of plants, and of the oxidizing influence of the air. This constitutes the most efficient means of disposal yet devised. I have had this system in operation at my own house since 1870, and find it entirely satisfactory. In 1876, 1 adopted it for the disposal of the entire sewage of the village of Lenox, Mass., and I do not hesitate to recommend it as satisfactory in all similar cases.
The directions for work, as originally given in Chapter IV, should be followed only as modified by the later information given below; which is a reprint of two articles published in the American Agriculturist, after the body of this work was written.
IMPROVEMENTS IN DRAINING TILES.
In view of the fact that in my article on "Tile-Draining," published in the Agricultural Annual, and in my first edition of "Draining for Profit and Draining
for Health," I have very strenuously insisted upon the necessity for using silt-basins in the laying of underdrains, I have thought it advisable to state explicitly the reasons which have led me, in my own practice and in advice to others, to dispense almost entirely with their use. They were at best a rather imperfect and quite ex