SEWERAGE. What Civil Engineer Wilson Has to Say About the Matter. fo THE HON. MAYOI?, AND CITY COUNCIL, SUMTER, ?S. C. GEXTiaviv;-At your request I ?ame here a week ago to look *bver The ground and make ii preliminary report on the subject ol' sewerage. I have made such an examination as is possible without surveys, and have arrived at the opinion that a system of sewerage is perfectly practicable. Before proceeding: with my report pardon me for introducing some re? marks on the importance, or rather necessity of sewerage. Ju the ab? sorbing pursuit of business we have not time to give much thought to these matters, and often ignoro or underestimate the dangers which surround us. By long association, too, we become inured to sights and odors, which would be repulsive to a stranger or to us if away from home. Our own good health and strength, ?too, often convinces us that there is nothing dangerous or unsanitary in our surroundings, forgetting that the victims are generally the weak, the poor and the helpless, who have not til ? means or the knowledge to protect themselves against these un? favorable conditions or the strength to resist the attack of disease. For this very reason the responsibility for the public health rests all the mere heavily upon us. It is sometimes suggested that our fathers got along well enough with? out these so-called modern improve? ments, and that what was good enough for them is good enough for ns. But the conditions then were mite different from those of to-day. The population of the towns was small and scattered, and tiie pollu? tion of soil, water and air had just begun, and was comparatively mild. It is row concentrated far beyond the limit of safety. But as a matter )f fact our fathers were not so well off in thisirespect after all. Where ever statistics have been kept they show a steady decline in the death rate, as progress has been made in public sanitation. In the past forty vears the death rate in Kngland has been reduced 15%, saving 100,000 lives, and upwards of 2,000,000 eas of illness. The death rate of London has been reduced Z~% in the same time. L nder the able administration of the Massachusetts State Board of Health for the past twenty years the jeaths from typhoid fever per 100,000 have been reduced from 89 to 35, and :n the city of Boston from to 32. We areinclined to take comfort in the fact that our total death rate is little if any higher than that of other cities. But this argument involves a serious fallacy, for perhaps three iourths of all the deaths are due to causes which are still beyond our control, such as old age, violence, ionsumption. etc., and do not gener? ally vary much in different towns, so that the difference in the total death rate is rarely very striking. The true test of the sanitary con? dition of a city is in the prevalence of filth diseases. The best known type of these diseases is typhoid fever, and sanitarians have univers? ally, adopted it as the measure of comparison. Compared on this basis most of our American cities have little cause for congratulation; with a few exceptions the typhoid death rate among them ranges from Go to 264 per 100.000. In Paris it is 20, Glasgow 20, Hamburg IS. London 17, Amsterdam 16; Berlin 9, Vienna 7, Dresden ?. Rotterdam ?, The Hague 2. Taking Berlin as an attainable standard, these figures mean that Sumter shouldhaveonly one typhoid ieath in two years. The very low typhoid rat?, in European cities is of course clue to improved works in all branches of public sanitation, and cannot ail be attributed to sewerage. Just how much is due to that branch and how much to clean streets and pure water it is impossible to say. Jiu: certain it is that sewerage plays an impor? tant part. Prof. Mason has com? pared the death rate in fifteen un sewered cities i:i all parts of the world with that of fifteen cities of the same class bu* s< wered. and found it 37". higher i:: the former than the latter. The prime requisite of health. laid down thousands "t years ago. aie pure food pure wat?'!', pur?; air, and pure soil. With the firstof these the Engineer as yet has little to do. You already have a pur - pubih water supply, iiut it is well to remember :hat only 1..",'.?'.' o?" your people arc drinking the city water: th'- other 5,000are drinking from shallow sui face wells, which cannot tai! to be already largely contaminated from the numerous cess and pools and vaults. Tiier^ is a popular :mpr? thai the rou! water flowing through the ground from these iii:!: deposits is purified in a short distance but that theory is now entirely exploded, lt is true that solid matter to some extent strained out at. first, hut th* dissolved organic matter and bacteria pass into the drinking wells without hindrance. The only purifying pru iess is oxidation, and that does not rake piac< to a:iy appreciable extent In the subsoil. That thc two last requisitesof health, pure air and a pure soil ca a: n it \> had without some system <>: immediately and com? pletely removing ali iii:;: to a safe distance ts self-evident. Thedauger of poisoning the air from city waste arises mainly from ti;" putrefaction, when its poisonous elements are given oil in gaseous form. A properly designed system of sewers carries away and ultimately dispenses of these wast'- before putri Seation begins, but in any system ol' depositing them, either temporarily, or permanently, whether in vaults or cess pools or movable receptacles, putrefaction begins i:i a few hours. Tho only danger from in.- plumb? ing, a danger so great as to have led a distinguished writer twenty years agoto say: "Modern conveniences may fairly be said to be ti:'- bane of modern society.*' J< the danger ?>f putrid L'as<*> escaping through the pipes into the house. With a good system of sewerage properly
excrement is ti:'- only
sennas or dangerous element of a
j city's waste. There could be no
greater delusion; water is often
I charged with elements of infection,
! and there is nothing more offensive
; than putrifyingkitehen wastes.
The late Col. Geo. E. Waring in
speaking of a former report of his
says: '.in common with the rest of
the world ar that time. T believed
that ioeal matter con ..tuted the
chief factor in the sewerage problem,
lt is hardly necessary for mc to say
that I tim now convinced that faecal
I matter may be regarded as almost
! trifling when compared wi:!! other
! wastes."*
liut sanitary works are expensive,
and taking an economic view <>nly.
the question is sometimes asked, do
they pay? Can one afford to save
the'typhoid victims? The answer is.
that confining ourselves to the same
economic view, we cannot afford to
do otherwise. It is estimated that
tho average human life is worth
$2.000 to the community. Assuming
merely for the sake of illustration
that you have six typhoid deaths
per year, you sulfer an annual loss
of $?2,000. But there are ten cases of
typhoid to one death, and the aver?
age duration of illness is 4;; days.
The value ol" the time lost from work
at $1.00 per day would amount to
s2.r>yi) for CU cases, and the doctors*
and nurses" hills and medicines will
not he less than $50 per case, making
$3,000 more, or a total annual tax
levied by this bingle preventible
disease of $17,580,which is equivalent
to a capital sum of more than s:s>u.
000. You can substitute your actual
typhoid deaths and figure the result
yourself. Xor does this take into
account the indirect loss io business
from occasional epidemics, and the
repelling of capital and industry and
immigration for the fear of them, --lt
cati readily be seen." says Prof.
Mason, --that public works which
could eliminate a reasonable fraction
of this great tax would pay for them?
selves in the course of a few years,
even though, they were originally
expensive.'"
The introduction of sewerage need
not involve any increase in the gen?
eral tax levy, the interest and cost of
operation may be met hy an annual
charge for the use of the service just
as water works revenues are raised,
so that those who are directly bene
fitted shall be taxed.
The first question to be considered
in approaching the problem here. is.
shall we have tiie combined system,
which provides for the removal of
rain and house drainage in the same
channel; or thc separate system
which handles house drainage only,
and leaves the question of rain water
as a distinct problem. The former is
much, more expensive at first, but
some day it will be necessary for yon
to provide for the removal of storm
water in closed drains, and if you
look that far ahead, it will be cheap?
er to do it now in a combined sys?
tem. You will be at once amply
repaid for the extra cost, in the im?
provement of the streets and lots.
The combined system is universally
used abroad, and in tl ie Iargei
American cities, while the separate
system is most popular among th?
smal olaces in this country, and it
has i ?ny able advocates who urge it
on other grounds than its cheapness
The relative advantages can only he
determined by actual surveys in each
particular case.
The next question is the ultimate
disposal of the sewerage. Th*
simplest, cheapest and most g?nerai
practice is to discharge the crud?:
sewerage directly i .nt o a flo wins
stream. The next is to first effect
tile purification by chemical pro?
cess, and expensive and unsatisfac?
tory operation. Another method h
purification by bacteriological treat
j ment, a system which is yet scarcely
j beyond th?; exp?rimentai sitige, bm
which offers great promise; and still
another, the success of which i:
amply demonstrated, is agricultura
. irrigation.
I have examined the country aboui
Sumter, and am informed that th*
stream of Green Swamp, is -1."' fee!
below the city, and can be reached
in a distance of a mile and a half
which affords sufficient gradient foi
an outfall sewer. ? believe that tin
I volume and velocity of tin's stream
are sufficient to dilute and convey
away the sewerage yon would dis?
charge imo it without offense or clan
i- to the few people living near it,
] ?' ir should ever happen in the futur?
that by reason of your growth, oj
more stringent state-laws, it should
b< come necessary to discontinue' the
use of the stream for that purpose, ti
j few acres of the low lands along th<
stream could be converted into s
sewerage farm, and you could dispos?
j of your sewerage in that way. The
: cost of preparing such a farm would
I be very little, and tier profit of it
I cultivation would give a handsome
return on the investment.
Of course without surveys it is im?
possible to do more than make a
j guess ar the probable cost ol' a sys
I tem of sewers, and it is perhaps un
j wise to attempt actual figures tit this
stage, and any that I give are t.
. be taken with extreme caution. I
j have assumed that twelve mik s ol
j mains, including the outfall, as suf
I iicent to meet your present needs.
; This will more than cover the dis
j trict now provided with water mains.
Built on the separate system it ought
to cost from $iO,U0O to $0<),0iX). I can
seo no reason why it. should exceed
tlie latter figure. '
Built <>n the combined system, not
even a guess will he attempted with?
out a survey.
I recommend that you have a cow
i p?ete survey made, and detailed
j plans, sp?cifications and estimates
; for a system covering the entire city.
Von can then hui!:! so much of i: at
; once as you may >.?.. iii. and extend
? it from tin:?- io ri?e- as finances mav
??.?rmi* or necessity demand.
My charge for complete profession
j al services, including surveys, plans,
i specifications and estimates for tue
sum of one thousand dollars, with
the understanding that tis the system
? is built ! am to superintend its con
I struction and am robe pail of
[ the actual cost less the S-l.UO*'' above
! mcniion*-.I.
Respectfully submitted.
Cu AS. ( '. W I I.sox. < '. Iv.
li?- Fooled thc Niirjjcoii.-.
.'.'I .:.<.;< r? i- '. l i!--:.i?-k ?hvmi?;?>n.o?' Vl'c?
. JelFers.-.-n. o , :iIr s?JT-T?: ~ ts r-- nfhs from
! ]',<. fit Fi - Vii;:, lie woy. i J l : \>v.t be-carcl l