The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1891-07-21
THE BOARD OF WORKS
Another Letter From Benzette
Williams.
NEW DISTRICT TO GET WATER.
Charge Made for Ship Extending
Athwart wharves-The Old Hulk
Mississippi to Be Blown Up.

The board OF public works held it, regular
meeting yesterday, and among the principle
business was the reading of the following letter
from Benezette Williams:
Assuming that the newspaper account OF Mr..
Cnalk report, made to you July G, relative to
Inc enlargement OF the pumping-works, il cor
rect Deg to submit few remarks.
l dld not assume in my report June 10 that
the present consumption il only 100000 gal
Ions daily. took for the consumption the ac-
tuaI ngures OF Mr.. Chalks report OF the opera
tion OF the water-works for May, viz 200
gaiions daily; and assumed that sif the distri.
button system was thoroughly carried out. that
.ne demand would, doubtless, be much greater
Ii general distribution system were in opera
tion today there doubtless would be 100000
gallons needed.
In estimating 10, 100000 gallons as the amount
70 De provided for by pumps, did not assume
tnat the population would be 100000 when the
pumps would cease to supply. / assumed that
Ine pumps would not be needed LONGER than the
eariy part OF 1896, and stated that by that time
the city might have 100000 population, but that
1t might not exceed ZOO.
believed then, and / believe now, that II the
ultimate supply is TO come from Cedar river, that
II would be q serious mistake to build high
graae, e xpensive pumping plant.
Deiieye that II gravity supply is to be fur
nlsned within five years from this date that TO-,
OOOOO0 gallons net and Ii 600 gallons gross, 10
enough to provide. With the new reservoir,
which assume will be built before that time,
such plant can toward the last of its service
supply 12,0Oo,00o gallons daily. And what Is
more, 1t ia perfectly legitimate for the supply to
be little slack toward the last; and if the city
was forced to get along on 100 gallons per day
per inhabitant, 1t would be no serious hardship,
and would ieopardize no important interest.
why go to the extreme in providing temporary
supply?
It now almost year since the worthington
pumps were put into operation, and about one
year and half since they were ordered; and
though in the beginning il was suspected that
they would have been supplemented by a third
one before this time, they and the old pumps are
stu supplying the city. and, as understand,
5000, 600 gallon pump could do Then what
becomes of Mr.. Chalks statement that Ii was
hardly six months before they were unable to
supply the demand?
These pumps were ordered early in 1890, in
harmony with the avowed purpose OF the then
system in operation within two years. Three
such pumps were ample for the time In contem-
plation In fact, from present prospects, two
years will have passed before even q third pump
shall have been put to work.
In the same paper which contains Mr.. Chalk's
report upon which am now commenting, is .
report of Comptroller Ferris, in which the state
ment 10 made that the assessor estimated the
total assessment OF the city for the present year
at SO, Coo co. If such estimate is realized, them
surely, four years from next January Ia ample
time in which to get the gravity works into OPP
Grafton. No worse blundsr could be committed
than to build elaborate pumping works with
such an outlook Ii 1t be true that AZ much
water is going to be used by the city Mr..
Chalk estimates, then the interests of the city,
financially and otherwise, demand q still earlier
construction OF the Cedar river work.
submit that early in 1890, with the outlook
then presented to me, that it would have been
criminal malpractice to have gone into pump
Ing machinery more extensively than was then
done.
In his former report Mr.. Chalk's anxiety re-
garding the proposed Cedar river supply was
the fear that it would be shut of by landslides.
Now 1t is the fear Of wsshouts and other break
downs, especially If the pipe be made of wood
This is not the time nor the place to say any
rala In 6nr. x.fr ThA
board can rest assured, however, that at the
proper time, and in the proper manner, there
will be no difficulty in establishing both the
safety and the durability of woodeR pipe; and
that NO pipe such az proposed has ever failed to
give satisfaction because none has been built.
The danger from washouts and landslidss Is
acquainted with the two lines will bear me out
In the assertion, that there is less danger from
line located, than there is on the line from the
pumping works to the reservoir.
There is no water shed that drains across the
proposed pipe line as large as the one draining
the pipe is to be carried under the river in
rock trench or tunnel.
In his former report, Mr.. Chalk considered
that no new boilers would be needed at all; now
he thinks that you can get along with the pres
emit boilers for "some time" In this agree
with him. think the boilers now in use will
answer for some time, whether a low duty or q
high duty plant is built; possibly o little longer
in the latter case than in the former. was
10,000000 gallons daily, and not one for 100000
or 5000, 900 gallons which is all that will DO used
for some time, while he was estimating on a
much larger supply than 100000 gallons.
Mr.. Chalk says that it costs nearly $50 per mil
lion gallons to pump water now, while it ought
not to cost more than 50.
Let us see! In his report of June 9th, Mr..
Chalk gives the cost OF pumping 1851, $40 gal
longs ut Lake Washington as 2,346.77, which is
1854 per million gallons; hence it is costing,
at this rate, s., S4677 where it should have cost
but 81 3D. The cost for fuel is given at 81 1S4
and all other expenses at 81 l62.77, which in
cudes 81 ,oS4 - for salaries. From this it would
appear that, cutting off all of the fuel bill and
VS.. 10 Tor other expenses, the pumping in May
could have been done for s. per million gal
Ions; or, by cutting of all other expenses, in
GLIDING salaries, and taking s446S off of the
fuel bill, the work could have been done at the
same rate II would be interesting to know
whether the high duty engine is to run without
fuel or without attendance
But as matter of fact is the cost of pumping
at Lake Washington extravagant? / have not
the exact head under which the pumps work,
from $50 feet II it cost 1854 to pump 100000
gallons $50 feet high, it will cost S0.056 to pump
100000 gallons one foot high, which is lower
thsn the average work done in this country
with coal averaging 1914 per ton, mostly an
thracite. where more than one-third of the
work was done with high duty engines, the cost
is reported officially for 1890 at s006S per 1,00o
600 gallons ono foot high.
At the West pumping works, with bituminous
coal averaging $2Sl per ton, the cost is reported
at s0.04s per million gallons one foot high. The
pumps here are exclusively high duty pumps.
AT the Sixty-eighth street pumping works,
Chicago, with bituminous coal costing an aver
age of $3.50 per ton, nearly all the work being
done by high duty pumps, the cost for 1890 Is
reported at $0.045 per million gallons one foot
high.
The btuminous coal used in Chicago, costing
s2Sl and $2.s3 per ton, is doubtless fully as