398

members of the noblest and most continuously self-sacrificing of all professions. They must have high ideals,for a member of their service was both surgeon and soldiertoo. The firing of guns and rifles imposed no speciallyarduous task on anyone. What called for the display of allthe finest soldierly qualities was the performance of theseduties under fire ; and it could not be said nowadays thatanyone associated with the combatant army anywhere nearthe front was not within the zone of fire of the long range ofthe present field guns or that of the low-trajectory rifle.Doubtless there were men of various abilities in the class;some who had had good luck and some whose luckwas bad, but with whatever ,ability they were equippednow that they were becoming members of the greatsocial organism there were two qualities they should

possess in order to secure success-namely, tact and

courtesy-or in more homely phrase common-sense and goodmanners. Without these the best abilities often failed ofsuccess, and with them the deficient talent was often com-

pensated. He would urge them to continue their reading notmerely of technical works but of the best literature of theircountry; they should check in some way the narrowinginfluences of a special service. They should practise puttingdown their thoughts, whether technical as derived from theirwork or not, in writing. It was Bacon who said, " Readingmaketh a full man, writing an exact man," and a medicalofficer in the army should be both ; and the third of thethree R’s should not be neglected. It was most usefulto cultivate arithmetical thought ; they had doubtlesslearned something about statistics. These could not be

properly prepared by anyone who did not accurately perceivethe limited sense in which a fact could be stated in figures,and as army statistics afforded the information on whichmany all-important decisions depended he urged the carefulpreparation of the returns which they would be called upon torender. He feared that the remarks he had made were some-what trite, but they contained such advice as he would giveto his own son, and the short intercourse he had had withthe young officers, especially the very agreeable and joyousevening of the day before, had led him to regard them asspecial boys of his own, whose names he now possessed, andwhose careers in the future he would be always interested in.

I

He congratulated them very sincerely and on behalf of allpresent offered them the heartiest good wishes for theirfuture.The DIRECTOR-GENERAL, after thanking Sir Ralph Knox

for his able speech and for his kindness in coming to Netley,remarked that the young officers of the Indian MedicalService were sure to find interesting work in India and

opportunities of distinction, for plague, pestilence, famine,and war were one or all of them nearly always presentin the country they were going to. He congratulatedthem on obtaining their commissions. Turning tothe young officers of the Royal Army Medical Corps hesaid that they were entering the service with a fair windand that this was so was due to the wise policy of Lord Lans-downe who had given them the warrant which they so highlyvalued and whose name would in the future be rankedwith that of Lord Herbert of Lea as one of the greatestbenefactors of the medical service of the army. Associatedwith Lord Lansdowne in drawing up the recent warranthad been Sir Ralph Knox and his predecessor, Lord Hali-burton, in both of whom the medical officers of the army hadfound firm and excellent friends.The proceedings were brought to a termination by a few

words addressed to the young officers by Surgeon-GeneralNASH who wished them God-speed in their careers. The

company was subsequently entertained at luncheon bySurgeon-General Nash and the officers of the Royal ArmyMedical Corps.

THE ROYAL COMMISSION ON THE METRO-POLITAN WATER-SUPPLY.

THE forty-eighth sitting of the Royal Commissionerswas held at the Guildhall, Westminster, on Jan. 31st.The Commissioners present were the Chairman (LordLlandaff), the Right Hon. John Mellor, Sir John Dorington,Sir George Barclay Bruce, Mr. de Bock Porter, Mr. Lewis,and Major-General Scott. The witnesses examined were

Lieutenant-Colonel Mark Lockwood, M.P., and Mr. William

Booth Bryan, the chairman of, ;and engineer to, the East.London Waterworks Company.Mr. BRYAN put in a statement as to their sources of

supply and a brief description of the works of the com-

pany, a table giving a description of the engines and thecapacity of the pumps at the various stations of the company,and a table showing the distribution of the capital expendi-ture of the company from the year 1880 to the year 1896. Adescription of the company’s works has already been fullygiven in THE LANCET.1 Mr. Bryan gives in a footnote to his.tables some information as to the time during which pipes last.Mains have been dug up and found to be in a perfectly goodcondition after having been in the earth for upwards of 60years. The chief accidents which occur to pipes are thoseproduced by the effects of frost and it is found also that insome districts in which the ground has been artificially madeup the mains have been injuriously affected by the local con-ditions. Apart from such accidents no period can be assignedas the proper "life of a main."

Colonel Locziwoov was cross-examined by Mr. BAi.FOUBBROWNE on behalf of the London County Council. Mr.Balfour Browne pointed out that Mr. Charles Greaves (aformer engineer to the East London Company), in givingevidence on a Bill which was before Parliament in the yea.1867, said that in the year 1864 they had found that thesupply of water from the Lee was barely sufficient for theirrequirements. In that year there was "the greatest droughtwithin the memory of any one." The company resolved to.make application to Parliament for powers to take a supplyfrom the Thames and to increase their storage capacity atWaltbamstow. In 1867 before the Royal Commissioners on the.Water-supply Mr. Greaves gave evidence to the effect that hethought that the company ought not to be entirely dependenton the Lee. He was of opinion that the Lee alone could net.be depended upon for the supply of East London and he pro-posed to combine the Thames works and the Lee works andto use the reservoirs in the Lee Valley for the storage oThames water should occasion require.

In answer to Mr. BALFOUR BROWNE the witness said thatthe East London Company were taking steps to obviate &water famine in the future and that the new work wouldinvolve a large expenditure. The works in contemplatior,provided for the supply of an increased population. Withregard to the question of control the witness said that hewould be willing that the water examiner appointedby the Local Government Board and he analyst should beadmitted to the works of the company. He thought that themore publicity there was with regard to the companies’ worksthe better it would be. The analyst, had, of course, access tothe taps in EastLondon, but the witness thought that heought also to have a right to visit the works of the company.If the undertaking were bought by the London County Councilthat body might obtain profits on any new works whichmight be made for an increased population.Major-General SCOTT pointed out that they would also

have to take the risks.Mr. BRYAN explained the conditions on which the East

London Company takes water from the Lee and the way inwhich water is pumped up to the lower reaches of the LeeNavigation Canal during periods of drought.The CHAIRMAN said that they had heard something

about the pumping of polluted water from the lowerreaches to the higher reaches. The witness explainedthat the company had a pumping station at BromleyLock. At this point the tide passes through at highwater and enters the Navigation Canal. The tide flowsup as far as Old Ford Lock, at which place the upperpond is about eight feet higher than the lower and thetide can get no higher up the Navigation Cut. The tidalwater, however, can pass round through "back rivers" "higher up. The Lee Navigation is canalised and thetide can get no further than Old Ford. Barges go upthe Lee Navigation through the artificial canal. Theyalso go up certain I back rivers " to Stratford. Thevessels go to Old Ford on the tide and there are gateswhich open with the tide at Bromley Lock. The bargescome into the Navigation Canal on the tide and the gatesare closed as soon as the tide begins to ebb. The trafficinto the Thames then depletes or lowers the head of waterin the Limehouse Cut. At this point the East London Com-pany have put up a pumping station to raise water from the

1 THE LANCET, May 1st, 8th, 15th, 22nd, and 29th, 1897.

399

how level as the tide is rising in order to keep up the Naviga-tion water to its proper head and to make up the loss causedby the lockage of barges going out into the Thames. Theamount of water which the Conservators of the Lee have aright to take for the purposes of navigation is 5,400,000 gallonsdaily. This amount is made up partly by water pumped bythe East London Company in the manner mentionedand partly by water which flows down the Lee Naviga-tion. By pumping up the tidal water the company areeaaabled to take more water for the supply of their customers.

Mr. DE BOCK PORTER asked whether the Lee ConservancyBoard acquiesced in this arrangement. The witness repliedthat it was a statutory arrangement and that in the Act ofParliament there was a clause which enabled the company to

pump from pound to pound and to provide part of the statutoryquantity by this means.

In answer to Sir JOHN DORINGTON, the witness said thatthe company put up temporary pumps to raise the waterfrom one pond to another. The water is pumped up beyondTottenham Lock but never into the reach which supplieswater from the intake of the company.

In answer to Sir JOHN DORINGTON the witness said thatthe water of the Lee runs down the Navigation and is notunder the control of the East London Company.The witness explained to the Commissioners exactly

how the water was pumped and pointed out on a map thesituation of the various places to which he referred. Brieflythe evidence amounted to this : The East London Companypump from the old tidal channel of the river Lee into theLee Navigation at Bromley Lock ; they occasionally pump atOld Ford Lock which is slightly higher up the Navigationchannel. This water flows into the Bottom Pound Lock andthe reach into which the water is pumped is four miles inlength and extends to Tottenham. Above Tottenham wateris pumped into the Navigation channel. The water so

pumped does not go beyond Stone Bridge Lock. No brackishwater is pumped to any place through which it could pass tothe intake of the company near Enfield Mill. The pumpingstation near Bromley Lock is a permanent station ; at otherplaces the pumping is effected by portable engines.

In answer to the CHAIRMAN the witness said that duringthe water famine of last year there was a great deal ofwilful waste and the company received a large number ofletters from their customers calling attention to the waste indifferent places and asking them to put a stop to it. On theother hand, the company received letters from people sayingthat they would allow the water to run away in order tospite them."The CHAIRMAN said that this was a serious statement

and Mr. PEMBER suggested that the letters should be pro-duced. The witness said he had none with him but thatthey could be produced.

Sir JOHN DORINGTON asked the witness whether he agreedwith Sir Alexander Binnie’s inference that powers granted bycorporations could not safely be given to water companieswith regard to measures for the prevention of waste of water,and with regard to powers for testing the fittings which wereused by the water consumers. The witness said that in oneof their bills they had inserted clauses copied from theManchester Corporation Waterworks Acts which dealt withthese matters. The local authorities in whose districts thecompany gave their supply strongly objected to this super-vision and the clause was therefore withdrawn.

In answer to Sir JOHN DORINGTON the witness said thatthe local authorities thought that the company was trying toget too much power into their own hands. He did notknow, however, whether the local authorities themselveswould have been inclined themselves to exercise suchpowers on behalf of the company had they been entrustedto them.

In answer to Mr. FREEMAN, who cross-examined on behalfof the London County Council, the witness said that the LeeConservators had power over the water of the river and tookwhat they wanted. He could not say what amount of waterwas actually taken by the Conservators for the purposes ofnavigation. He was unable to say how much was pumpedop into the lower reaches of the river. The pumps usedwere centrifugal pumps and it was not possible to estimatewhat the amount pumped actually was. The Navigationwater was kept up to its proper level and the pumpingarrangements were made to effect this. When the rightheight of water was obtained pumping operationsceased.

Lord ROBERT CECIL cross-examined on behalf of the

Hertfordshire County Council, and asked some questionsabout the wells.The CHAIRMAN said that the Commissioners had nothing

to do with deciding whether or not the New River Companyand the East London Company are injuring wells and springsin Hertfordshire."

Lord ROBERT CECIL contended that the case for Hertford-shire was that the supply in that county had already beendrawn upon more than the supplies from the heavenswarranted. If the chairman told him that the Commissionwould safeguard the interests of Hertfordshire he would notwish to examine further.The CHAIRMAN said: We have nothing to do with the

interests of Hertfordshire, you must take care of yourselves.Lord ROBERT CECIL said : It is very material to Hertford-

shire and it is very material for the supply of water toLondon.The CHAIRMAN said : We are not inquiring into the supply

of water to London but into the expediency of transferringthe supply of water to London from the companies to apurchaser.

-

The forty-ninth sitting of the Royal Commissionerswas held at the Guildhall, Westminster, on Feb. 6th.The Chairman (Lord Llandaff) and all the Commissionerswere present. The witnesses examined were Mr. Isaac A.Crookenden, secretary of the East London Waterworks Com-pany, and Sir Henry Knight, chairman of the Southwark andVauxhall Company. Supplemental papers referring to theEast London Waterworks Company’s financial statewere put in. Sir Henry Knight put in tables referringto the financial state of the Southwark and VauxhallCompany.At the commencement of the proceedings Mr. PEMBER,

Q.C., on behalf of the East London Company, made a state-ment with regard to the statistics which had been put inreferring to the probable increase in the population of thedistrict within the company’s area of supply.. Three differentestimates had been made. Lord Balfour’s Commission hadsuggested that the decennial increase of the district wouldbe 25-8 per cent., and if this proved correct in the year 1937the population would amount to 3,165,445. At an averagedaily supply per individual of 35 gallons, 110,790,000gallons of water a day would be required and the cost of thework necessary to carry out this was estimated at 4,238,000.The directors of the East London Company, however, foundthat the increase of the population had been 17’1 betweenthe years 1886 and 1896, and they therefore thought that theestimates made by the Balfour Commission were in excess ofthe amount of population which they would probably becalled upon to supply.Mr. CROOKENDEN, in answer to the CHAIRMAN, explained

how the estimate of a decennial increase had been obtainedand, in answer to further questions, said that between theyears 1891 and 1898 the population had increased at the rateof 22’65 per cent.The CHAIRMAN pointed out that as the average increase

of the population of the East London Company’s area hadbeen higher than the average of 18’2, which was the estimategiven by Lord Balfour’s Commission for the whole ofLondon, it did not seem safe to take that average as abasis for future calculations of the East London Company’sdistrict.

Mr. BALFOUR BROWNE cross-examined the witness withregard to the profits made by the company immediatelybefore the water famine of last year and asked for an

explanation of how it was that the expenses had beenreduced and the profits at the same time increased. Thewitness pointed out that the expenses of 1896 were largerthan those of 1897, because in the former year a consider-able outlay had been caused by repairing the damage doneby the frost of the year 1895.The witness gave some particulars with regard to the

profits recently made by the East London Company. He hadnot come with the figures worked out and as Mr. Pember onbehalf of the East London Company had to correct thefigures at a subsequent meeting of the Royal Commissionersit is useless to publish them. [Mr. Pember explained at thefiftieth sitting held on Feb. 7th, that Mr. Crookenden wasunwell when he gave his evidence.]Mr. BALFOUR BROWNE asked the Chairman to what

decision the Commissioners had come with regard toaddresses by counsel at the conclusion of their reception ofevidence. He contended that the counsel for the companies

400

should first address the Commissioners and that he shouldhave the final right to reply.

Mr. LITTLER, Q.C., and Mr. PEMBER, Q.C., on behalf ofthe water companies, strongly objected to this method ofprocedure and the CHAIRMAN remarked that the Commis-sioners might possibly be driven to exercise their prerogativeand not hear counsel at all.

Mr. PEMBER expressed a hope that counsel would beallowed to speak. Mr. BALFOUR BROWNE was content toleave the evidence in the hands of the Commissioners.The CHAIRMAN said that he was unable to decide from the

evidence whether the London County Council were desirousthat the Commissioners should advise purchase on the

ordinary terms of arbitration or whether they wished theCommissioners to find that purchase would be expedientonly on certain special terms. In this condition of

uncertainty it would, he said, be more convenient had therepresentatives of the London County Council spoken first,but as they claimed to be heard last as a matter of right onthe analogy of Parliamentary committees the Commissionershad decided that the London County Council had such a

right and it would therefore be necessary for the counselrepresenting the water companies to give their argumentsin what he termed alternative form, forecasting as best theycould the views which the London County Council mightrepresent. The Chairman added that the question as to whospoke first or last would not in any way influence theCommissioners.Mr. BALFOUR BROWNE said that he thought the question

as to whether the London County Council wished to buy thecompanies only on the condition of obtaining special termsshould be referred to his clients and that he would make astatement upon the subject before counsel for the watercompanies made their speeches.

Sir HENRY KNIGHT, chairman of the Southwark andVauxhall Company, took a cheerful view of the company inwhich he was interested. Their maximum dividend of10 per cent., he thought, was "immediately in sight." Hedid not think that the purchase of the water companieswould be an advantage to the water consumers of London,because under the sinking fund clauses which were now inforce when further capital was raised by the companies thepeople of London would ultimately become possessed of allthe undertakings without paying for them.

In answer to the CHAIRMAN who asked whether it wouldtake one, two, or three centuries to accomplish this objectthe witness said that he had not made any calculation. He

gave it as his opinion that an equalisation of the water rentsthroughout London would be unfair to the poorer customers,and he further gave it as his opinion that he thought it rightthat notwithstanding the failure to give a constant supply bythe East London Company that company ought not to sufferfinancially for their default.

Public Health and Poor Law.LOCAL GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT.

REPORTS OF MEDICAL OFFICERS OF HEALTH.

Derbyslaire County District.-The annual report for 1897on the health of this district has but recently reached us,and at a time when the reports for 1898 are making their

appearance. This delay in the issue of reports is distinctlyto be regretted and we think that all medical officers ofhealth of whatever standing should use every effort to

expedite the issue of their reports. The estimated populationof Derbyshire at the middle of 1897 was 474,015-i.e., ratherless than the population of Birmingham at the last census.The county birth-rate was 32’67 and the general death-ratewas 16’27 per 1000. As regards infectious diseases we notethat the death-rate from enteric fever for 1897 is considerablyin excess of that of England and Wales, the chief cause ofthis prevalence being regarded as polluted soil, and Dr.Sidney Barwise in his report strongly urges the abolition ofprivies and the substitution of the water-carriage system.In the matter of tuberculosis an example has been set"to thecounty by the late Lord Vernon who remodelled two farms insuch a. manner that each cow has 800 cubic feet ’of air

space and proper regard is paid to warming and ventilation,.As a result of the tuberculin test no less than 54 per cent. ofthe cows on the estate were found to be tuberculous. Theselatter were isolated and fed up for slaughter whilst theremainder were very wisely removed to new cowsheds.Each farm is furnished with a refrigerator and a centrifugalmachine through which the milk is passed after milking.It is then by means of machinery which dispenses with aUmanipulation decanted into bottles and heated up to 186°F>After being suddenly cooled and left for two hours with theobject of allowing the conversion of spores into bacillithe milk is completely sterilised by being heated for 20minutes at a temperature of 212u:If. The bottles are then

hermetically closed automatically and rapidly cooled. Wecordially endorse Dr. Barwise’s hope "that the increasedprice which the milk realises will be sufficient to induceother landowners to follow the example set by Lord Vernon."Maldon R11’l’al IJisi7’ict.-As usual, Dr. Thresh is setting a

good example by the early issue of his annual report for 1898on the sanitary condition of this district. The drought oflast summer has not been an unmixed evil as it has broughthome to the inhabitants of certain parts of this district whatit means to have their springs dried up during the hot weather.They are now adopting a different attitude towards Dr.Thresh’s schemes for water-supply than was formerly the case.Complaints are still heard in this district as to the nuisancecaused by the unloading and carting of London manure andit is satisfactory to hear that henceforth the business will beduly regulated by by-laws drawn up for the purpose.The "Peculiar People" have not yet ceased to be peculiarin the sense that they decline to seek medical advice in caseof illness, and hence infectious disease amongst them is notbrought to light. It was, however, recently decided in theHigh Court that failure to seek medical assistance con-

stitutes "neglect" in the eyes of the law and Dr. Threshtrusts that there may be relief from the present unsatis-factory state of affairs under this decision. By way ofassistance to medical men in the diagnosis of phthisisDr. Thresh in his capacity of county medical officer of healthundertakes the bacteriological examination of sputum at hislaboratory. For poor patients the charge is 7: for othersa nominal fee of 2s. 6d. is charged. Dr. Thresh apparentlylooks to educational rather than to legislative measures todiminish the death-rate from tuberculous disease.

VITAL STATISTICS.

HEALTH OF ENGLISH TOWNS.

IN 33 of the largest English towns 6717 births and4275 deaths were registered during the week endingFeb. 4th. The annual rate of mortality in these towns,which had declined in the four, preceding weeks from 19’tto 17’0 per 1000, rose again last week to 19’5. InLondon the rate was 19’4 per 1000, while it averaged19’7 in the 32 provincial towns. The lowest death-ratesin these towns were 11-0 in Croydon, 13’1 in Brightonand in Huddersfield, 14’3 in Norwich, and 14’5 in Hull; thehighest rates were 23’5 in Newcastle-upon-Tyne, 24’5 inGateshead, 25’2 in Liverpool, and 27’2 in Sunderland. The4275 deaths in these towns included 340 which were referredto the principal zymotic diseases, against 380 and 329 inthe two preceding weeks ; of these, 98 resulted from whoop-ing-cough, 87 from diphtheria, 64 from measles, 34 from"fever" (principally enteric), 31 from scarlet fever,and 26 from diarrhoea. No death from any of thesediseases was recorded last week in Norwich ; in the othertowns they caused the lowest death-rates in Croydon,Brighton, Birkenhead, and Newcastle-upon-Tyne, and the

highest rates in Preston, West Ham, Sheffield, and Bolton.The greatest mortality from measles occurred in Man-chester, Oldham, and Bolton ; and from whooping-cough inBristol, Swansea, Nottingham, Preston, Halifax, and Gates-head. The mortality from scarlet fever and from "fever"showed no marked excess in any of the large towns. The87 deaths from diphtheria included 32 in London, nine inLeeds, eight in Sheffield, six in West Ham, five in

Birmingham, five in Leicester, five in Liverpool, and threein Portsmouth. No fatal case of small-pox was registeredlast week in any of the 33 large towns, and no small-pox patients were under treatment in any of the Metropolitan Asylums Hospitals. The number of scarlet feverpatients in these hospitals and in the London Fever