The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1856-1888, 1880-09-11

Col. George E. Waring, of Newport. to whom wa
assigned abont a year ago the collection of dat
with reference to the sewerage of cities and towns
with a view to its Improvement. has inst made hi
report To the National Board of Health. Unde
his direction during the past year sewers hsv
been gagged in different parts of the country
with results which he relates especially. The de
auctions which he makes therefrom are sub
stantially as follows
1t has been almost the universal custom up t
this time in planning a system of sewers for
town. large or small. to regulate the size Of th,
sewers with a view to the removal, not only o
domestic and manufacturing wastes, but also o
a considerable amcunt of rainfall. This custom i
open to several objections.
First-Sewers large enough for the removal o
storm water are SO much too large for domestic
sewerage that they must inevitably be foul and In
a bad sanitary condition except when flushed by
storm water. As storm water is often withheld fol
many weeks together. and often at a season wheI
the decomposition of deposits in the sewer is most
active aHd injurious. this condition constitutes q
very grave sanitary defect.
Second-While the cost of storm water sewers
may be borne with tolerable ease in a city where
the whole a%butting property is built up. the dis
tribution Of such a charge among the scattered in
habitants of a mere village-town. where lot fronts
are often very much larger than in the city. con-
stitutes a serious burden ; so serious, indeed, as to
be, in many instances, prohibitory.
Third-Aside from the foul air produced in the
sewers themselves. the decomposition Of the filth
which accumulates in the catch basins by which
street water is admitted 10 the sewer il often q
source of most serions offense, If not of danger.
Fonrth-By extending the underground removal
OF storm water to the very crests OF the elevations
of a town, the gutter flow, even at points where it
could cause no Inconvenience, is so much reduced
as to prevent the cleansing Of the cutters. which
would otherwise be affected with each storm.
So serious are the objections above cited. that I
have found. in more than one case serious opposi-
ton to the construction Of sewers on the part Of
the local sanitary authorities. In Baltimore. for
example. where the removal not only Of surface
water but Of the liquid washes of households is
effected by surface drainage only. a very influential
portion of the community strenuOusly resists all
projects for sewerage because of the advantage
they believe now to be derived from the cleans
ing effect of storm water flowing through the
streets.
1t seems to me more than questionable whether
IL would not be better to preserve the surface re-
mOEal of rain water in all parts OF a town or city
where its accumulation would rarely amount to q
serious interference with the use of the streets. and
where injury to private property is not to be ap-
pretended. This would enormously reduce the
and consequently the cost OF the storm
water system. and would at least con6ne to certain
limited localities the objectionable features which
now so prominent.
There seems to be good ground for tue belief
that il he sizes of sewers can be adjusted to the
of foul wastes only, not only will their
be very much improved. but their cost
be so vastly reduced as to bring their sdvan-
tages within reach of the smallest communities.