------------------------+----------------+----------------+-----------------+ | No. 5 Rough | No. 7 Single | No. 8 Single | | Contact Bed. | Contact Bed. | Contact Bed. | ------------------------+-------+--------+-------+--------+--------+--------+ |Dates. |Gallons.| Dates.|Gallons.| Dates. |Gallons.| ------------------------+-------+--------+-------+--------+--------+--------+ Original water capacity}| 1899. | | 1899. | | 1899. | | after putting }|Feb. 28| 53,100 | March | 75,000 |March 23| 29,500 | in the coke }| | | 24 | | | | | 1900. | | 1900. | | 1900. | | After experiment |June 1 | 13,200 |October| 21,600 | June 1 | 9,800 | | | | 20 | | | | ------------------------+-------+--------+-------+--------+--------+--------+ Duration of each of } | | | | | | | above experiments } | 15 | 39,900 | 7 | 34,100 | 14 | 19,700 | and loss in gallons } |months | | months| | months | | | | | | | | | Loss in percentage of } | | | | original capacity } | 75 per cent. | 61 per cent. | 67 per cent. | ------------------------+----------------+----------------+-----------------+
_N.B._—The average duration of the above experiments was 14 months, and average loss of capacity about 70 per cent. original water capacity in that period.—A. S. J.
At Wrexham, in North Wales, I had nineteen years’ management of about 150 acres of good land, with a mixed residential and manufacturing sewage of some 15,000 population, with large breweries and leather works. The owner of this land at the termination of lease asked so exorbitant a price for the improved freehold, that the corporation decided to sacrifice the sewage works on his land, and to carry out a scheme of mine for carrying the outfall sewer two miles further to a site of 200 acres, which they could acquire on reasonable terms in the year 1889.
During my management there was no trouble about the effluent, although it was carefully watched by the authorities of the city of Chester, which takes its water supply from the river Dee, some twelve miles below my late farm; and the fact that the scheme which took the Wrexham sewage two miles nearer to the Chester waterworks intake was carried out _unopposed_ is, I think, strong evidence of well-founded confidence in the efficiency of land treatment where the public have the opportunity of observing such results. It is easy to get up a case with expert evidence against any sewage scheme where the land-owners, clergy and others have no means of properly informing themselves, and have a prejudice against sewage which it is very difficult to overcome except by giving the utmost possible publicity to the truth.