Sacramento daily record-union., 1883-10-20
THE CoNrRADIC FIoNS AND PERPLEX-
ITIES OF sANIFARY REGINEERS.

| THE CoNPRADIC rIONS AND PBRPLEX-
ITIE5 OF SAAIfARY ENGINEERS.
The New York Tribune complains, and
with point and justice of criticism, that
sanitary engineers are not agreed for any
great length of time upon the proper sani-
tary appliances. Thus, house constructed
to-day, after the most approved sanitary
plans, is very likely to be condemned as
faulty five years hence by the same class
of engineers who in the first instance ap.
proved it. In the first place there are
wide discrepancies in practice between the
engineers, and in the second place the
principles do not appear to be settled.
So, to, as to materials and construction in
plum bing there is a constant change, ap-
proval and condemnation. Now this may
be, and probably is, due to the fact that
sanitary science is as yet in its formative
stage 1t certainly is not an exact science.
1t is subject to the developments of the
age, which tread upon the heels of one
another with amazing rapidity. We are
of that period which may be termed the
experimental we see constantly set before
us host of new inventions for trapping,
for ventilation, for subsoil drainage, for
exclusion of dangerous vapors from houses,
for draining malaria. breeding lands, for
sewerage and the disposal of sewage, etc.
In such a maze, what shall we choose
The Tribune, in the course of its COM
ments, quotes from the american Archi-
tect, which publishes paper from Colonel
George E. Waring, Jr., the eminent sani-
tary engineer, where that gentleman says
that " flushing is the watchword of the
best sanitary science OF this time and he
adds that he has little faith in the universal
specific of trap ventilation and kindred
appliances. This is very discoura ying to
those who have spent large sums in trap.
ping their houses and grounds and in
searching out the very best appliances Of
that order, especially after sanitary en-
gineers have pronounced certain traps en-
tirely safe, and complete protection. Mr..
Waring advises that the least plumbing
possible be done about houses, and AYERS
that the danger. increases inversely as the
square of the distance. That is to say,
given four times the length of lateral pipe
or twice the number of stationary wash.
stands or sinks, and the danger is either
sixteen, or four times as great. This is
very unsatisfactory to the householder who
has piped and trapped his house from end
to end with the most approved materials
and devices. But are we to accept every
new statement made by an engineer? Is
his dogmatism to be the rule, simply be-
cause he is eminent : May not these SCI
entific men become Just little " cranky"
on their favorite hobbies? Of course we
would not condemn them for changing
their views whenever they have new light,
but they should be able to make the lay
men see the light also make them under
stand why the old is bad and the new is
good, comparatively. The Sanitary En-
gneer, an excellent and thoughtful journal
published in New York and London, and
which calls to its columns some of the best
thought and experience of the day on
these subjects, has recently entered the
arena of the debate opened by the Tribune.
The Engineer, in very dispassionate re-
view of the matter, hints that Mr.. War
ing, despite the eminence he has attained
and the success which has met most
of his efforts, is not infsllible.
His views are not necessarily to be taken
as sanitary law, because he bluntly enun-
ciates this or that doctrine which may be
opposed to the views and experience OF a
majority of the engineers of the old and
the new world. But it holds that it is not
necessary to go to this extent in criticising
the Colonel. He has several times changed
his views, but in each case he has brought
his new opinions before the public in such
a way as to secure extensive perusal. 1t
is mistake, however, says our contempt
rary, to conclude from this that the lead
ing authorities on this subject are equally
vsscillating and unable to agree as to the
vital points. They do not claim that the
subject is settled, and that no further i'm
provements are possible, but they do claim
that careful and repeated observations and
experiments by competent and WE'LL known
engineers have shown that certain things
are necessary to obtain security. Colonel
Waring denies this, but without giving
reasons. Such denial has very little
weight with scientific men.
The Engineer then proceeds to add that
the paper by Waring, which gave rise to
the debate, is needlessly alarming in some
respects, mischievous in its sensationalism
and the method Of agitating points not
essential to and that will not increase the
value of the advice of its popular author.
The paper referred to was read by War.
ing at the recent Social Science meeting
and has been printed extensively through
out the country. The Engineer is solicit
GUS that the press and the public shall dis.
criminate as to those opinions which are
the results of observation and experiment,
and are therefore generally accepted until
suoh time as further observation and ex.
pertinent shall indicate their modification
and those opinions which pertain to an in
dividual, that rest on no proof beyond his
bare assertion, and have 3 tendency to
alarm the public and urge expensive
changes without any evidence that such
changes are either necessary or desirable.
Our view of this matter is that while we
are in the experimental stage regarding