History of the parliamentary contest between the Edinburgh and district water trustees and the ratepayers / by Robert Johnston.

  • Johnston, Robert.
Date:
1872
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: History of the parliamentary contest between the Edinburgh and district water trustees and the ratepayers / by Robert Johnston. Source: Wellcome Collection.

Provider: This material has been provided by London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine Library & Archives Service. The original may be consulted at London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine Library & Archives Service.

    102/244 (page 90)
    statement of 21st February is to be believed, tben tbe minimum supply described by bim in the summer of ]870 was caused by malicious waste; but in tbe Commons' Committee be took it upon him- self to insinuate that this was an untruth, for he represented the minimum supply of that summer to be the result of natural causes likely to occur again. The citizens will judge what reliance can be placed on the word of a man who thus plays fast and loose with state- ments of fact. The inaccuracy of the evidence of Bailie Lewis, to use the very mildest possible word, as to the minimum supply derivable from the present sources, as affected by natural causes, was strikingly illustrated by the promoters' own witness, Mr James W. Stewart, C.E., who said in cross-examination :—■ 2901. Do I understand you that 28 gallons per head per day is what you can secure at present at Edinburgh ? It is. 2902. That is the minimum ? That is the average. 2903. What is the minimum ? It fell last year to 375 cubic feet, that is, it fell to about 14 gallons a head. 2904. Do you suppose, if things were to go on as they are, you might rely upon 28 ? If well managed it would give 28. Mr Bateman concurs in this estimate of what may be relied on as tbe amount of the present supply (3501). It may then be assumed to be proved by the promoters themselves that the present works, if properly managed, are adequate to give all the year round a steady supply of 28 gallons per head per day. (2.) What supply per head per day is necessary ?—The first witness who came to details on this subject was Lord Provost Law, who maintained (767) that the Edinburgh people wanted as much water as the Glasgow people had, which was proved by Mr Carrick, master of works, Glasgow, to be about 50 gallons per head per day ; and on being reminded that the 12,000,000 gallons proposed to be brought from St Mary's Loch would give 48 gallons per day to a population of 250,000, in addition to the existing supply of 28 gallons, he replied, with child-like simplicity, (789) I go in for the greatest quantity I can get; and he gave as a reason for wishing such a large supply, (758) I have a large family ! Councillor Archibald of Leith also made reference to the water supply of Glasgow as a measure for that of Edinburgh ; but like the Provost, he laid out of view the existing supply. Dr Littlejohn gave the most intelligible evidence as to the require- ments of Edinburgh for a large supply of water ; and as it stated what was really the strength of the promoters' case, the pith of it is now given verbatim. Referring to the houses in the Old Town of Edin- burgh being divided into so many flats, without water-closets and other conveniences, he said :— 1480. Does that lead you to the conclusion, that, as regards the sewage arrange- ments, and cleansing away the effete matter, and things of that kind, Edinburgh specially l-equires an abundant supply of water? It does. 1481. Can that be judged, in your judgment, by the ordinary test of domestic supply fur a community otherwise situated, or do you think something additional should