IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) 1.0 I.I iiijilM IlilM m linn n ^ m 2.0 i.y iilllM 11 1.8 1.25 1.4 1.6 ^ 6" - ► V] . o ^l. %'^ / Photographic Sciences Corporation 23 WEST MAIN STREET WEBSTER, NY. 14580 (716) 872-450;l 4is CIHM/ICMH Microfiche Series. CIHM/ICMH Collection de microfiches. Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions / Institut canadien de microreproductions hisloriques v> Technical and Bibliographic Notes/Notes techniques et bibliographiques The Institute has attempted to obtain the best original copy available for filming. Features of this copy which may be bibliographically unique, which may alter any of the images in the reproduction, or which may significantly change the usual method of filming, are checked below. L'Institut a microfilmd le meilleur exemplaire qu'il lui a 6t6 possible de se procurer. Les details de cet exemplaire qui sont peut-dtre uniques du point de vue bibliographique, qui peuvent modifier une image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger une modification d^ns la methods normale de filmage sont indiquds ci-dessous. Coloured covers/ Couverture de couleur D D D D D D D D Covers damaged/ Couverture endommagde Covers restored and/or laminated/ Couverture restaur6e et/ou pelliculde Cover title missing/ Le titre de couverture manque Coloured maps/ Cartes gdographiques en couleur Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or black)/ Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire) Coloured plates and/or illustrations/ Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur Bound with other material/ Reli6 avec d'autres documents Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion along interior margin/ La reliure serrde peut causer de I'ombre ou de la distortion le long de la marge intdrieure Blank leaves added during restoration may appear within the text. Whenever possible, these have been omitted from filming/ II se peut que certaines pages blanches ajouties lors d'une restauration apparaissent dans le texte, mais, lorsque cela 6tait possible, ces pages n'jnt pas 6t6 filmdes. □ Coloured pages/ Pages de couleur □ Pages damaged/ Pages endommagdes □ Pages restored and/or laminated/ Pages restaurdes et/ou pellicul6es □ Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ Pages ddcolotdes, tachetdes ou piqudes I I Pages dataciied/ D Pages cStachdes ShowthroucSi/ Transparenre I I Quality of print varies/ Quality indgale de {'impression Includes supplementary material/ Comprend du materiel supplementaire Only edition available/ Seule Edition disponible Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata slips, tissues, etc., have been refilmed to ensure the best possible image/ Les pages totalement ou partiellement obscurcies par un feuillet d'errata, une pelure, etc., ont 6td filmdes d nouveau de fapon d obtenir la meilleure image possible. D Additional comments:/ Commentaires suppl^mentaires: This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ Ce document est filmA au taux de reduction indiqud ci-dessous. 18X 22X 10X 14X 26X JOX 12X 16X 20X 24X 28X 32X The copy filmed here has been reproduced thanks to the generosity of: Library of the Public Archives of Canada L'exemplaire film6 fut reproduit grflce it la g4n6rosit6 de: La bibiiothdque des Archives publiques du Canada The images appearing here are the best quality possible considering the condition and legibility of the original copy and in keeping with the filming contract specifications. Original copies in printed paper covers are filmed beginning with the front cover and ending on the last page with a printed or illustrated impres- sion, or the back cover when appropriate. All other original copies are filmed beginning on the first page with a printed or illustrated impres- sion, and ending on the last page with a printed or illustrated impression. The last recorded frame en each microfiche shall contain the symbol —^-(meaning "CON- TINUED"), or the symbol V (meaning "END"), whichever applies. IVIaps, plates, charts, etc., may be filmed at different reduction ratios. Those too large to be entireSv included in one exposure are filmed beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to right and top to bottom, as many frames as required. The following diagrams illustrate the method: Les images suUaa:es ont 6t6 reproduites avec le plus grand ^oin, compte tenu de la condition et •*'i la nettet^ ie ^'exemplaire film6, et en conformity avec les conditions du contrat de filmago. Les exemplaires originaux dont la couverture en papier est imprim6e sont filmte en commenpant par le premier plat et en terminant soit par la dernidre page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustration, soit par le second plat, salon le cas. Tous les autres exemplaires originaux sont filmds en commen9ant par la premidre page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustration et en terminant par la dernidre page qui comporte une telle empreinte. Un des symboles suivants apparaftra sur la dernidre image de cheque microfiche, selon le cas: le symbols —^ signifie "A SUIVRE ", le symbole V signifie "FIN". Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent dtre film6s d des taux de reduction diffdrents. Lorsque le document est trop grand pour Atre reproduit en un seul clichd, il est film6 d partir de I'angle sup6rieur gauche, de gauche d droite, et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre d'images ndcessaire. Les diagrammes suivants illustrent la mithode. 1 2 3 32X 1 2 3 4 5 6 r /^^ ^ '14_ REVIEW ■vcr- 7-7 OK THI-; REPORT OK KURD PETERS, Esg.,C.E. CITY ENGINEER, ON THK Water Supply OK THK CITIES OF ST. JOHN and PORTLAND. GILBERT MURDOCH, Esq., C. E,, {M.Am.Soc. C. E.) ^ii/>'t 0/ Sewerage and Water Supply. S. SAINT JOHN, N. B. : J. & A. McMiM.AN, 98 Prince William Street. 1884. i f. ^:- ^^1%^^ ^ REVIEW OF THE REPORT OF HURD PETERS, Esq.,C.E, CITY ENGINEER, ON THE Water Supply OF THE CITIES OF ST. JOHN and PORTLAND. BY GILBERT MURDOCH, Esq., C. E., (.M.AiH.Soc. C. E.) Sup't o/ Sinverage and Water Supply. SAINT JOHN, N. B. : J. & A. McMillan, 98 Prince William Street. 1883. M ■a St I ■ii ■II lift ^ Office of The Commissioners of Sewerage and Water Supply, City Hall, Prince William Street, Saint John, N. B., September 22nd, 1883. Gilbert Murdoch, Esq., C. E., Superintendent Sewerage and Water Supply. Sir, — At a Meeting ot the Commissioners of Sewerage and Water Supply, held this day, I was instructed to refer to you a copy of a Report of Hurd Peters, Esq., C. E., relating to Water Supply. As I am informed by the Common Council that the information given in Mr. Peters' Report is handed to the Commission in order to afford them, and yourself, an opportunity to make any remarks that they may desire on the subject matters of said Report, I would ask you to furnish at as early a date as possible to the Commission, your views, &c., upon the matters referred to. I am. Yours truly, A. CHIPMAN SMITH, Chairman. sn^b REVIEW. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT, SEWERAGE AND WATER WORKS, SAINT JOHN, November, /SSj. •i. To A. CHIPMAN SMITH, Esquire, Chairman Sewerage and Water Commission, Dear Sir, — In reply to your favor of the 22nd day of September last, enclosing a copy of the Report submitted recentiy to the City Council by Hard P(!ters, Esq., City Engineer, I beg to say that I deem it my duty to lotice briefly some of the main features of said Report. In doing this, however, I shall not attempt to follow the writer through the manj '.engthy extracts that form so large a part of his work; but rather try to reach his meaning, and, on points on which we differ, give what may be called the other view of the subject, as clearly and concisely as possible. Nor will I complain of the way in which references have been made, or extracts taken from a few of my former Reports. Some of these are fairly made and used ; but this much cannot be said of all. Indeed, in not a few instances, an opposite opinion might be come to readily ; but it would be unkind to Mr. Peters to sus- pect him of seeking to accomplish by inuendo what he would not formulate into specific charges, did he believe there was ground for such. A remark or two should be made, however, in relation to the REPORTS FROM WHICH HE HAS QUOTED SO freely; and that is, that each in its turn was carefully and honestiy prepared, and set forth accurately the condition and (3) prospects of the Works at the time it was written. An intelligent and unbiassed perusal will show that they are CONSISTENT WITH THEMSELVES, and if, on the point of supply, anticipations have not been fully realized, our City, in this particular, is not exceptional — as there is no city on the Continent, with an unmetered water supply, that has not had a similar experience, and has not found, to its surprise and sorrow, that the demand has greatly outrun the supply. To overcome this universal tendency towards extravagant consumption has baffled the best efforts of municipal authorities everywhere, and is likely to do so until water, like gas, is sold by measure. A careful perusal of the Reports referred to will also show that THE EVIL EFFECTS OF WASTE have not been overlooked nor neglected in the past ; but have been kept steadily in view, and timely warnings given of the cer- tain result, if no reasonable heed was paid to the matter. And in addition to this, unremitting efforts have been made to restrain, as far as practicable, this evil tendency; but without satisfactory results. And, in this connection, it may be remarked, further, that every suggestion made hitherto, with a view to improving the Works and maintaining a satisfactory supply, was always carefully considered, with a view to economy as well as to efficiency ; and I have no personal objection — indeed, I am only anxious — to have everything connected with the past, the present, and the future of our Water Supply submitted to experts of experience and character — to engineers who know something of hydraulics, and whose opinions will be worth something when obtained. With these few general remarks, I will now proceed to notice, briefly, the chief points raised by Mr. Peters in relation — (i.) To the past and the present of our Water Supply; and next — (2.) His proposed remedies, as cheap substitutes for the recom- mendations of my Special Report of December, 1882 — in refer- ence to a high service supply. 5 The first point to be noticed, in reference to the past, is the TWENTY-FOUR-INCH MAIN, OF 1873. Mr. Peters seems to misunderstand, or misrepresent, the reasons for laying this pipe ; expresses some degree of wonderment that it should have been laid ; and appears to think that the performance of this work was a great mistake. A brief recital, however, of the circumstances that led to the laying of this second main, will enable the reader to judge of the value of this extension, and to what extent the action of the Commissioners, who made it, was prudent or otherwise. In the year 1870, two interruptions to the general supply occurred, — through the breakage of the 24-inch main — one of which left the City without water for 24 hours and the other for 8 hours ; and, in reporting these interruptions to the then Com- missioners, the inconvenience and danger attending such failures were set forth in the following language : " In olden times St. John had many wells from which water could be drawn for general use ; but most of these have now disappeared, or become contaminated to such an extent by neglect and iniiltration, that no one could think of using their waters except by compulsion. Under such circumstances, to be suddenly deprived of water, for one day even, . is a matter of much inconvenience, as well as loss and suffering. " Did the evil end here, it might be borne, but it extends also to our manufacturing interests, and in many cases causes a total suspension of work until the usual supply can be had again, besides exposing boilers, &c., to serious damage, especially when waited on by careless attendants. " But the greatest danger attending a total suspension of the usual water supply is the extra fire risk it involves. ***** No doubt our fire force, with its telegraphic alarm, its steam engines, its hose, its horses, and its men ever on the alert and always ready to respond to the cry of danger, is not inferior to any similar organization on this continent ; but without water what could it do ? Would it not be help- less to a great extent, and would not the fire be left to lick up every- thing consumable that came in its way, until for want of further food it burnt itself out ? Fortunately no fire has yet broken out when the water was shut off for repairs ? but supposing such a thing did take place, can any one venture to foretell the result? "* Following the above is a short sketch showing the losses sustained by St. John and Portland by a few fires previous to 1870, •Special Report 1870. Page 9. :. I 6 amounting in the aggregate to about $2,800,000.00, and the Report proceeds to say : "Feeling keenly the danger to which the City is exposed, when necessity compels the water to be shut off, I take the liberty of bringing this subject specially to your notice, and urging some immediate action in relation thereto ; as without an assuredly constant supply for fire pur- poses our City is not as safe as it should be. " In former Reports 1 have adverted to this in a general way, and suggested certain remedies which seemed rehsonable under our then experience ; but subsequent events have led to a reconsideration of the subject, and after mature deliberation I would earnestly recommend as the surest remedy for the danger apprehended, that another 24-inch main be laid with as little delay as possible, from tiie City to the Little River Reservoir. " An additional main of this size would make a constattt supply all but certain; for, if an interruption did take place, by the bursting or breaking of a pipe, it would be for a short time only, while the necessary stop-cocks were being adjusted. As soon as this was done the supply would go on as usual, through the second or supplementary main, until necessary repairs were completed. This cannot be done under existing circumstances. When repairs are now needed the whole supply must be shut off; nor can it be restored again until they are made, no matter how dangerous the delay, or urgent the cry for water. " So far it has not been necessary to shut off for more than 24 hours at once, and seldom this Img, even, but fortunately no interruption has yet taken place in the winter Si^ason. Should such a thing happen however, during a severely cold spell, or violent snow storm, it is hard to say what time might be needed to repair the broken part and restore the supply. Let it, however, be long or short, a day, a week, or a month, the City must remain without water for fire or family use until it is done. * * » * " Besides the protection which another main would give to property of all kinds, it would place at the disposal of the Commissioners a large surplus of water for public purposes, and put St. John ahead of all cities on this continent in respect of water supply. We could then calculate with certainty on a daily discharge (when needed) of at least ten million gallons, &c. * * * * " But in addition to the safety which another main would give to property, and the copious streams it would furnish for manufacturing and sanitary purposes, there are yet other advantages of no tkivial kind which it would confer, such as extra facilities for making repairs, for inspecting stop-cocks and air valves, and for flushing and freeing depressions from sedimentary deposits. " Each one of these considerations is important in itself, and timely attention to all is essential to a satisfactory maintenance of the works between the City and the Reservoir. Under present circumstances, however, neither can be attended to as it should ; as to do so would be to deprive the City of water for a greater or less period of time, and cause inconveniences and risks which should not be run, so long as they can be avoided. "This is a very undesirable state of affairs, as it precludes the possi- bility of doing much which should be done to ensure perfect efficiency, and is often very embarrassing when mains are to be flush»*d, stop-cocks inspected, or air valves cleaned. "While, however, the quimtity of 7>.'ater brought to the City would be mr^aj^r^ by another main, the Quality and Prkssure would remain unchanged. The summits of the City ivould be supplied no better than at present, and during the summer season, the water would continue to lose its usual transparency and become more or less discolored as the weather happened to be warm and wet, or cold and dry. * I am sorry to have to quote so much of this old i\ ; Tt of 1870, but it has been so much and so persistently misreprcs' iited that I cannot do otherwise, in justice to myself and the '"ommission un- der whom the extension of 1873 was made. Oul vvrould think ^hat no person, i\ ' ^ the above Report in his possession, coii' 1 possibly misvmderstand the reasons that led to the laying of ihr second 24- inch main ; and yet Mr. Peters must have done so, or deliberately misrepresented the motives that led to the performance of this work, as the following extracts from his recent Report will show. " Allowing," says Mr. Peters, " for increased consumption when in 1870 the determination to lay the second 24 inch main was arrived at, the actual daily supply of water was far in excess of the demand (as is stated to be the case now), and what was wanted was pressure to supply the sumviitsy The obvious design of the above paragraph is to create an im- pression in the reader's mind that the extension of 1873 was made with a Adew to increased supply, to add to what was already " far in excess of the demand.' It is hard to believe that Mr. Peters did not know that he was mis-stating the facts when penning the above quoted lines ; as no one surely could be so stupid as to read the Report of 1870, that recommended the laying of this 24- inch main, and not understand that the duplication was urged (and made) as a matter of safety, and not from a desire to increase the * Special Report, 1870. Pages 15, 16, 19, 20. ■ ■■IHlHIii 8 supply ; as Mr. Peters puts it. Increased supply was an incidental benefit, but not the controlling motive. When this is put forward therefore as the inducement that led to this extension, it looks like an attempt to falsify the record and impose on the City Council. But as no gentleman would do this, it must not be supposed that such was Mr, Peters' inte ition. The admission by the City Engineer that "what was wafited" (in 1870) "was pressure to supply the summits^'' is worthy of be- ing noted, as this acknowledged aefect still exists. And it is to meet this want and give to the summits a protective pressure that an extension to Loch Lomond is advised as soon as the financial interests of the City will permit. It is satisfactory to have the evidence of Mr. Peters on this point ; though his opposition to having done now what he thinks should have been done in 1873 may not be easily understood. The pressure that the City Engineer says "was wanted" (in 1870) "to supply the summits" is yet "wanted," and will be so long as Little River continues to be the source of our summit supply. But, finding that he cannnot ignore altogether the plea for duplication, on the ground of safety, he proceeds to remark (page 6): " It is true an argument was used in favor of a duplicate line ; but there was a dupHcate line already — a 12-inch and a 24-inch — in case of casualty or mishap." One can scarcely believe that the City Engineer is serious, when he suggests that, " in case of casualty or mishap " to the 24- inch pipe, the 12-inch one could take its place and perform its duty ; yet he appears to be sincere, and I have no doubt he is, or was so when he made the suggestion. It is no doubt true that in 1870, when the Report referred to was written, a 12 and 24-inch pipe were laid from the Reservoir to the Aboideau ; but it is also true that in case of accident to the larger pipe, the smaller one was quite inadequate to maintain a supply for o'"dinary purposes. It was unable in 1856 to meet the requirements of the City and Portland, and it was this very ina- bility that led to the laying of the first 24-inch pipe in 1857. From 1855 to 1870, our distributing pipe had increased from 56,300 feet to 172,773 feet, — fully 206% — and from 1870 to the ii ! 9 dose of 1882, to 279,498 feet, or upwards of 398% from what it was in 1855 ; and yet Mr. Peters seems to think that the dupUca- tioii of 1873 was unnecessary, and that, "in case of casualty or mishap," the old 12-inch pipe could take the place of the original 24-inch one and perform the work of both. But experience had shewn that the ability of the 12-inch pipe to maintain a satisfactory supply when left to itself, did not admit even of a peradventure. Many opportunities had occurred to test its capacity, and in no instance was it able to meet, even approxi mately, the industrial and domestic wants of the City when the larger pipe was shut off. When Mr. Peters assumes, therefore, that " in case of casualty or mishap " to the latter, the smaller pipe could become a satisfactory substitute, he assumes an ab- surdity. " The only sure way to place the City in a relatively safe position was to duplicate the 24-inch main ; and since that time, the wisdom of this course has been frequently demonstrated — the last occasion having been on the evening of Sunday, the 22nd of July last, when the side was blown from one of the old 24-inch mains at midnight, and the City suddenly deprived of water. With Mr. Peters' 12-inch pipe, this deprivation would have continued until the following afternoon; but, in less than two hours from the time the break occurred, the broken pipe was isolated from the general Supply, and the pressure restored to within 2 lbs. of what it was when the rupture took place; and the only citizens cognizant of the accident were the ubiquitous re- porters, a number of whom were on hand within half an hour after the occurrence, ready for an interview. But Mr. Peters RETURNS TO THE SUPPLY QUESTION, and proceeds to remark, on the same page, that in 1870 there was "A supply of water sufficient in quantity for all requirements, and yet the Superintendent says that, after mature deliberation, he would recom- mend, as tile surest remedy, the laying of another main to Little River, to increase to twice as much the already abundant supply, while, at the same time, he declares that by so doing, the supply to the summits, which were in most need of it, would derive no benefit therefrom. The quantity and pressure^ he says, 7''ould remain unaltered from what they were in 1851, and the summits be supplied no better than at present." Iff 10 The apparent intention of the above remarks is to lead the reader to believe that the second 24-inch main was laid with a view to increased supply, and that I had recommended it on this ground and for this purpose. Such a mistake as this can scarcely be accidental, and that it should be repeated again and again by Mr. Peters is rather surprising, and not easily explainable on the theory of professional honesty of purpose. The main of 1873 was recommended, as Mr. Peters must know from the Report of 1870, as a " sure remedy " against protracted interruption to the Water Supply; and all other advantages ac- cruing therefrom were subjective to the ruling idea of permanency of supply; and in making the recommendation I was careful to point out, as Mr Peters says, that the nominal pressure would remain unaltered from what it was in 1851. And this is true to-day, as it was then. No material change in pressure can be made until a higher source of supply is obtained, or steam power employed. But, in the item of quantity, I did not say, as Mr. Peters asserts, that it " would remain unaltered " from what it was " in 1 85 1 " ; but said it would be increased to about 4,500,000 gallons more than it was in 1870, or to about 10,000,000 gallons in all. In justice, however, to Mr. Peters, I would say that the word quantity is probably a misprint for quality — at least I took it for this when his Report was published in the Evening Glebe ; but, seeing it reproduced in his revised pamphlet, I take the liberty of naming it for correction, which I am sure he will gladly do, when the next edition of his Reporc is published. The action of the Commissioners, in laying this second 24-inch main SEEMS STRANGE TO MR. PETERS, and no doubt had he been consulted on this occasion, he would have advised an extension to Loch Lomond as the surest safe- guard against interruptions. He would have increased the pres- sure from say 160 10 300 feet, and trusted to what is vulgarly called " luck " for a continuous supply. Had this been done, he says, (page 7) "the system would have been in its general scope complete, however much supplementing some parts of it might have required." Or in other words, when the extra pressure n s 11 caused frequent breaks and manifold interruptions, then a supple- mental expenditure would be in order :o insure constancy of supply. The Commissioners of 1870 thought it wiser, however, to make sure, as far as practicable, of what they had, and trust to the future for means to extend to Loch Lomond. Mr. Peters' " general scope " system may be " advanced engineering," but it is not such as would commend itself readily to common sense, nor is it likely to receive the endorsation of any hydraulic engineer of experience. But the above is not the last of Mr. Peters' troubles with this duplicate main of 1873. There is STILL ANOTHER SURPRISE to him. And, that is why this main should have been stopped 300 feet from the Gate Hoeise, and left " to derive its supply from the same pipe which already had to supply a 24-inch and a 12-inch" main, leaving one 24-inch pipe to supply " all that the two 24-inch and one 12-inch pipe could carry off and convey to the City." Allow me to say that part of the above statement is true and part of it untrue ; and Mr. Peters must have known it to be so when he penned it, as he had plans placed before him (on the 20f.h day of April last) which showed that two 24-inch mains led from the Gate House, and that one or both could be used for City supply as occasion might require. But more than this: in the Report of 1857, ^0"^ which he quotes, it is specifically stated that both 24-inch pipes " leading from the Gate House are connected between the receiving chamber and the dam, so that either or both may be used for City supply by a proper adjustment of stop-cock T * This, surely, is sufficiently plain ; yet, with this statement staring him in the face, Mr. Peters repeats the falsehood first uttered be- fore the General Committee of the Common Council, that there was only one 24-inch pipe to supply the three mains leadii^g to the ■ City. Had he at any time expressed a doubt of ne plans or state- ments of the Report, every desired opportunity would have been given to him to verify, by occular demonstration, the accuracy of ♦ Report Sewerage and Water, 1857. Page 17, ■Tf» ill 12 both. And should he still be sceptical on this point, it is not yet too late for a personal examination. It will afford me pleasure to aid him in this work, if he will only submit to the trouble of doing so — and have the manliness afterwards to admit his error. It is not necessary that I should discuss the competency of a SHORT PIECE OF 24-INCH PIPE discharging into a large receiving chamber — to supply as much water as the two 24 and 12-inch mains can bring to the City — working under a fall of about 10^ feet per mile. Mr. Peters, on page 7 of his report, puts the quan- tity at 10,000,000 gallons ; and I shall not dispute this statement, as, no doubt, he has made the calculations and knows all about it. It is enough for the present to state that the short supply to the summits during cold weather is not the result of a one pipe ar- rangement at the Gate House, but of increased consumption and excessive waste. And I would here repeat what I stated to Mr. Peters on the 20th day of April last, — when he called at my office to inspect plans and interview me on the question of water supply generally — that during the whole of last winter and spring the mains lead- ing to the City were fed continuotisly by three {t,) 24-inch pipes, and still the supply at Blockhouse summit was very imperfect, and often (on extremely cold days) failed to reach the basements even of the higher districts, while in other cases bath-rooms and water- closets on second stones were left without water for days and weeks together. Only those who have suffered this inconvenience know what a terrible annoyance it is, and truly appreciate the extra risk to which property is subjected in case of fire. Now, while the three (3) 24-inch pipes were insufficient to maintain even a reasonably fair low pressure supply at the sum- mits during the cold weather of last spring and winter, 07ie 24-inch pipe has done this thoroughly and satisfactorily since May last — so far, at least, as a satisfactory supply can be had from Little River. If there is any doubt on either point, enquiries may be made of dwellers on the summits, who have di practical knoivledge of both supplies ; and if proof is required as to the number of pipes in use, I am prepared to furnish it to an extent that will even satisfy Mr. Peters. These two facts should be sufficient to set at rest forever all the pseudo-scientific talk and twaddle, so freely indulged in last «>i 13 spring, and since, about a one pipe arrangement, and re-echoed in this Report of the City Engineer. The next point to which a brief reference may be made is what Mr. Peters calls the MAIN PIPE PROFILE. Apparently, this does not meet his approval. Still, he does not condemn it altogether. And, in regard to this, it may be admitted readily that it is not exactly an ideal pipe line. A far prettier one could be made on paper ; but it is about the best obtainable, and received the endorsation of some really able engineers — but Mr. Peters was not one of them. While he does not say it is bad, yet he thinks there are some points about it of " sufficient interest to make mention," and sup- plies (on page 8) the following information in relation thereto : "The pipe is then, after ascending for a short distance, carried, with but slight undulations, for a distance of about a mile and three-quarters, to a point about thirty feet below the surface of the Reservoir, when it descends rapidly some 115 feet in about a quarter of a mile, and rises again rapidly some 75 feet, after which it descends again nearly 80 feet, and then rises to the top of the Cemetery hill, where, at the distance of two-and-a-half miles from the dam, it is only about 40 feet below the surface of the Reservoir." The above statement appears to be very exact ; but, short as the paragraph is, it CONTAINS SEVEN ERRORS. (i.) At a mile and three-quarters from the dam, the pipe is 5J feet below the surface of the Reservoir, and not jo feet, as stated by Mr. Peters. (2.) The descent during the next quarter of a mile isjj feet, and 7iot 115 feet, as stated by him. (3.) The next rise is 72 feet, and 7iot y^ feet, as he puts it. (4.) The next fall is JO feet, and not 80 feet, as he says it is. (5.) At the old West- morland road, or Cemetery Hill, as Mr. Peters calls it, the mains are not 40 feet below the surface of Little River Reservoir, but 2y feet only. ( 6, ) Consequently, they are not about the same eleva- tion as the bottom of the Leinster street Reservoir, but nearly ij feet higher ; and (7) instead of being 10 feet belo^v the City summit, at Leinster street, they are really about j feet above it. It should be said, however, in fairness to Mr. Peters, that on page 9 he says he has been ^A w 14 DEALING IN ROUND NUMBERS, and by these he thinks he has made it " plain that as far as the Cemetery the available head is only 40 feet, and that the water which is forced to that point by the pressure of thai head flows thence to the Marsh with the velocity attaching to a head of 160 feet or more." Now, this is what his " round numbers " have not done. They have deceived him cruelly in the matter of " avail- able head," or virtual velocity. There is an error of /j feet in his " available head " — the fall from the Reservoir to the point named being 27 feet only, and not ^o feet, as his " round numbers " made it appear to be. • .. This 27 feet (or about 10.5 per mile) is the head under which the discharge would take place did the pipe terminate here ; and for each additional mile in length, cityward, an additional fall of 10.5 feet is required to maintain the velocity and discharge. At the end of three miles the fall would be 31.5 feet, and at the end of five miles, 52.5 feet. At this distance from the Reservoir, or say at the Court House, the point of discharge would be about 106 feet above high water, and the velocity throughout the who t length of this main would be that due to a fall of about 10.5 feet per mile, and not " 160 feet or more," as the City Engineer's " round numbers" made him say it would be in its descent to the Marsh. This difference of level, or fall, from the surface of the supply- ing Reservoir to the point of discharge is known as the " hydraulic inclination," or " virtual declivity," and hydraulicians tell us that " no loss of effect arises from the pipe following the section of the ground, so long as the contour of the pipe does not, anywhere along the line, rise above the hydraulic mean gradient. * Perhaps Mr. Peters knows all about this, and I merely name it that readers unacquainted with the general principles of hydraul- ics may not be misled by his wonderfully exaggerated recital of the numerous "ups and downs" of the water, — with velocities attaching here to "40 feet," and there to " 160 feet and more," in its transit from the Reservoir to the City. .^ But the fall from the "Cemetery Hill" is not i6o feet, as "round numbers" puts it, but 133 feet— another error of about * Box's Practical Hydraulics, page 24. 15 27 feet. Be it however the one or the other, the velocity to the Marsh would not be that which attaches to 133 or 160 feet, but would depend on the elevation of the point of discharge and 'the rate of flow or draft on the mains. With no draught, there would be no velocity ; with a small draught, a small velocity, and with a greater draught, a greater velocity ; but in no case, while supply- ing the City, could it " be that which attaches to 160 feet or more." With the "hydraulic hiclination" produced to the Court House (say 106 feet above City datum), or to the intersection of Leinster and Wentworth Streets ( 1 30 feet above datum), the velo- city, whatever it was, would be practically uniform along the whole length of the mains, and the depressions ''would only act as troughs^ and convey the water due to the head for friction and velocity of entry. \ lithe full draught took place, however, on the Marsh, the con- ditions would be changed from what they are in actual practice. The mains laid there would be valueless for City supply, as the surplus pressure now lodged within them would be lost, not only to the road, but to the City as well, as has been shown frequently by breakage on this and other low points. • . Under such conditions, there would be no available pressure at the "Cemetery Hill," and in proportion as the consumption in the City rises towards the full capacity of the leading mains, in like manner will the pressure at this and all corresponding eleva- tions diminish. ^ RESERVOIR OSCILLATIONS. Referring to Little River Reservoir, Mr. Peters remarks, on page 5, that " The greatest difference in the level of the water therein since 1862 is given 4 feet 5 inches in 1877 (in the Report of December 1882, this difference is given at 6 feet 11 inches), and the least at 7 inches in 1867 given at 11 inches in the 1882 Re- port), the average oscillation in 17 years being 24 inches." I am glad that my attention has been drawn to the above figures, as I find on referring to the records that the figures print- ed in the Report of 1882 represent the lowest point reached since 1862, instead of the greatest annual oscillations, viz., 4 feet 5 inches. The seveyi inches given in the Report of 187S is a mis- print, and should have been eleven inches. t Stone's Hydraulics, page 34. :i;ill m ; I am obliged to Mr. Peters for having given me an opportunity to correct these mistakes, and regret that I did not discover them sooner. He is wrong, however, when he says that the Report of 1882 puts the least yearly difference at eleven {ii) inches, as the figures printed are /en ( 10 ) inches. But this too is probably a typographical error, or a slip of the pen, like the ones noted above, and has no material influence one way or another on the main issues. Since 1862, CAREFUL RECORDS have been made daily of the height of the water at Litde River, and the maximum reached in 1877 still maintains its pre-eminence. Last year (1882 ) the greatest difference l^etween high and low water in this Reservoir was 2 feet 10)^ inches, and the average of 21 years is 2 feet 3 inches. The records are on file and open to public inspection. PECULIARITY IN THE CAPACITIES OF THE MAINS. On page 9, Mr. Peters calls attention to " a peculiarity in the capacities of the three mains given in the last Report," which appear to him to be somewhat striking, viz., " The 24-inch main will, after the i^roposed extension, discharge less than now, and the 12-inch one more. The former decreasing from 4,500,000 gallons to 3,895,000, and the latter increasing from 550,000 to 605,000 gallons." This "striking" peculiarity is easily explained ; and it is some- what surprising that Mr. Peters should have missed the reasons for it when perusing the Reports of 1857 and 1882. On page 21 of the first named Report it is stated that while the 24-inch main was being laid the excavations at the " Old West- morland Road was made sufficiently capacious to accommodate the 12-inch as well as the 24-inch pipe, and the grade of the for- mer lowered seven (7) feet." And on page 23 it is stated that the capacity of the 12-inch, prior to the alteration of its grade, was computed at 23,000 gallons per hour, or 552,000 gallons per day. Change of grade, therefore, or additional head at this point, is the reason of this "striking" peculiarity, or increase in quantity. Other reasons for these "striking" peculiarities are found on pages 42 and 43 of the Special Report of December, 1882 ; where 17 W it is stated that the theoretical discharge of the /ow service 24-inch pipe had been reduced 20%, as in the case of the high service one, /or loss of area and other reducing causes. All calculations of this sort are necessarily approximate, as the formulae in general use are based on results obtained from pipes laid with theoretical accuracy, and smooth and clean inside, — conditions that are never met with in actual practice. But, in addition to this, there is no absolute agreement among hydraulic engineers as to what allowance should be made for the irregular- ities that follow every system of water mains. And this is no cause of wonderment, as the conditions are never precisely alike, no matter what care and foresight have been practised at the outset. Some waters are much more active than others in producing in- crustation, and some lines present fewer curves and easier gra- dients than others. In our own experience we find that the diameter of the old 24- inch pipe has been reduced from i^ to 2 inches by feruginous and vegetable deposits, and the 12-inch one fully one inch. The actual diameter of the former therefore is not more than 22 to 22^ inches, and of the latter about 1 1 inches. These and other im- portant points were carefully considered when the Report of 1882 was being prepared, and a liberal allowance made for the losses that come in this and other ways, as my desire was rather to under estimate than over estimate the capabilities of our leading mains. To have done otherwise, with the knowledge I possessed of these old mains, would have been dishonest.* These and similar reasons for reductions on mains as old as ours would have occurred readily to any hydraulic engineer of ex- perience, but as they do not appear to have occurred to Mr. Peters, and as the reduction was to him a "striking" surprise, I have deemed it my duty to enter into explanations more fully — (for the benefit of the inexperienced) — than I would have done otherwise. • " In pipes which convey certain kinds of water, oxidation proceeds rapidly, and the discharge is very perceptibly and sometimes very greatly diminished. In a main laid at Torquay, the dis- charge diminished from this cause more than 50 per cent, and the supply became insufficient for the town." " The most important resistance to the motion of water is the surface friction of the pipe. * * For new and clean pipes the friction varies considerably with the nature and polish of the surface of the pipe. For clean cast iron, it is about one-and-a-half times as great as for cast iron covered with polish. • • * Old and incrusted pipes give twice as great a friction as new and clean ones." — Professors Greenhill and Unwin, in En. Brit., Vol. 12, pages 4S4'S-f>- 18 QUALITY OF LITTLE RIVER WATER. " It's rather late in the day," says Mr. Peters on page 7, "to impugn its excellence after so many years asserting that every- thing connected with the supply was all that it should be." In reply to this, I would say that no impugnment has ever been made o( the waters of Little River. All that has ever been said about them was that they are NOT AS PURE AND STKADILV TRANSPARENT as the waters of Loch Lomond ; and that they contain a greater amciunt of solid matter than the waters of the last named Lake. On no occasion have they ever been represented as bad or un- wholesome, and the statements made in relation to them are based, as stated, on the authority of the late Dr. Robb. So far from impugning or assailing the waters of Little River, special pains have been taken to show, in my Report of 1870, as well as in that of 1882, and many others, that they are compara- tively soft and good, and well fitted for City purposes, though inferior to the waters of Loch Lomond. In no instance has im- proved quality been held up as a reason in itself for change ; but only as an incidental advantage that would accrue from an exten- sion to Loch J^omond or Lake Latimer. In the 1870 Report, to which Mr. Peters has referred so freely, are the following remarks : " In relation, however, to the yUALITV OK THE WATER NOW BROUGHT TO THE CITY, I would not be understood to say that it is bad or unwholesome at any season of the year. The discoloration spoken of is not known to impair its fitness for culinary use, nor make it unsafe to drink ; yet, when in this state, it is neither so pleasant to the eye, agreeable to the palate, nor so well adapted to some kinds of housework (washing of linens, etc.) as in its normal condition. This, however, is not an unusual grievance. It is conmion to all cities whose sources of supply are similar to our own — and, unfortunately, it is an evil that cannot be cured by artificial means, nor ordinary filtration. "With us, the sources of this discoloration are the peaty deposits which cover large tracts of the collecting grounds that feed Little River Reservoir ; and, as the streams that contain this coloring matter cannot be dispensed with, the inconvenience, such as it is, must be borne until a new and better supply can be had from other sources." •■ ♦Special Report, 1870, page 20. • ■ ' V ' • i ' ! ■■; -■■:•■ i I t( S< Ci S( tl r« ir si SI 19 And, in the Report of December, 1882, this water is referred to as follows, viz. : "The water obtained from this Reservoir (Little River) is generally soft and clear, and well suited for City purposes ; but it is subject to dis- coloration when a warm and dry season is followed by heavy rain. *' This discoloration makes it unpleasant to the eye, and unfits it to some extent for domestic use, — such as washing of clothes — but it does not lessen its generally salubrious character. This is a point on which the best authorities are fully agreed, however much they may differ in respect to certain other organic and inorganic impurities commonly found in well and river water. * * * * * "So far as volume and general softness a.id purity are concerned, the daily supply of water obtainable from this Reservoir is ample, and gener- ally suitable for present requirements; bu', in point of quality, it is inferior to the waters of Loch Lomond and Lake Latimer, as will l)i' shewn hereafter ; and it has not the altitude that is necessary to make the supply what it should be at the higher levelsof Saint John and ['ortland." t And further on in this same Report 1882 / a tabulated resume is given, showing the analytical results of chemical investigations in 33 towns and cities in Great Britain and America, including St. John, by which it is shewn that Little River water, though gready inferior to that of Loch Lomond and Lake Latimer, is yet greatly superior to what is furnished to many of the places named. The above extracts show clearly that no attempt has been made to " impugn the excellence" of Little River water, and had the writer of the imputation been other than the City Engineer, one's charity would have been sorely taxed to believe that his " it's rather late in the day to impugn" the "excellence" of Little River water was not a deliberate attempt at misrepresentation. MEASUREMENTS OF DAILY CONSUMPTION. After making sundry references to reported measurements of consumption in the Reports of 1858 and 1859, M^"- Peters remarks, on page 6 of his Report, that he does " not find any other state- ment of measurements given, although the same tneayis of via king it continued to b*' at the disposal of the Commissioners and their Superintendent." This paragraph is designed, apparently, to convey the idea that somebody had neglected an important duty. On this score, t Report, December, 1882, pages 32-33. ' ' '.'[ i 20 « however, there was no neglect of duty ; but the " means " at com- mand for performing it were wholly inadequate — unless at an unwarrantable risk to the general Supply. And the reasons that led to the discontinuance of attempts at measurement are stated explicitly in the Reports from which Mr. Peters quotes, but were overlooked, no doubt, in the hurry of perusal. This subject is referred to in my Report of i860, where, on page ID, it is stated that — " It was not deemed expedient last winter (1859-60) to risk a series of shuttings off at the Aboideau for the purpose of ascertaining the maxi- mum daily consumption. There is always considerable danger connected with the opening and shutting of large stop cocks (particularly during the winter season), which it was thought prudent to avoid, so long as it could be done without prejudice to the general interests of the Works." It is noticed again, on page 31 of the Report of 186 1, as follows : " There is no way of ascertaining, exactly, the water consumption of this City and Parish. Heretofore, this has been done, approximately, by frequent shuttings off at the Aboideau ; but it was not considered prudent during the past year to hazard this when it could be avoided, however desirable it might be to ascertain correctly what the consumption really is." A similar intimation is given in the Report for 1862 (page 40), and the same topic is again briefly discussed in my Report of 1864, in the following words (page 36; : " It would be very satisfactory, could a correct knowledge be had of the actual daily consumption of water in City ind Parish ; but, without a proper intermediate reservoir (as I have recommended in former Reports and now strongly urge), there is no safe zvay of knowing what this really is. Information of this kind, to be reliable, should be the result of actual observation and measurement ; and at present this could only be done by shutting off frequently at the Aboideau and supplying, for definite periods, from the Leinster street Tank — an operation that involves too much risk for the good the knowledge thus acquired could confer, how- ever desirable it might be in itself" The means for ascertaining periodically the quantity of water being used were never of a safe nor satisfactory character, and no sane man who understood the labor and risk involved in obtaining even meagre approximations to our daily consumption by the present "means" at the disposal of the "Commissioners and their Superintendent," would ever dream of exposing the City to the TTP n dangers that such experimenting implies. Observations that might be made with a reasonable degree of safety under a relatively small consumption would become fool-hardy under a greatly in- creased one. DRAINAGE AREA OF LITTLE RIVER. I cannot conceive why this matter has been introduced into the Cit> Engineer's Report, but since he has (for some wise pur- pose no doubt) thought proper to give it place and prominence, it might be considered uncivil to pass it in silence. I will there- fore claim your indulgence to a few plain remarks on the follow- ing "luminous" paragraph. And in doing this, I shall take the liberty of dividing it and italicising the parts to which I mean to refer more particularly. On page 8, Mr. Peters informs his readers that "The drainage area of Little River is given at 9,500 acres, of which some 300 acres represent the water areas of the Reservoir and lakes Long, Buck, Douglas and FitzGerald. The latter lake having been re- cently drained off, may be omitted from the list ; but Lake Latimer should be added, as, by a connecting conduit, its waters have been brought into this district, making the water area about 430 acres." There is nothing special to be said in reference to the above. As a statement of fact, it is pretty nearly correct ; yet a question might be raised as to the propriety of tacking the water surface of Lake Latimer on to the drainage area of Little River without taking with it its watershed. An approved rule in modern engineering is to deduct water surfaces from drainage areas ; * for the simple reason that the evaporation from water surfaces is, in numerous instances, equal to their rainfall, and sometimes much greater. As Mr. Peters has deemed it proper, however, to follow the anti- quated course, I will leave these water surfaces, for the present, where he has placed them, and proceed to notice his next state- ment on same page. " On the 9.500 acres the rainfall of the year, taking it for the sake of argument (Mr. Peters says), at the 40.64 inches given by Mr. Murdoch in his report of I S66, gives about 9,500,000,000 gallons for the year, or about 26,000,000 gallons per 24 hours. Allowing for evaporation, percolation^ etc., and taking one-half of this amount, there would be, from rainfall, an average daily supply of 13,000,000 gallons, from which the three mains were to draw the ten millions represented as their capacity." *Jiilius W. Adams; Van Nostrand's Engineering, Vol.34, page 337. f I 22 li m There are some errors in statement, as well as in calculation and practice in the above, which I will take the liberty to correct before proceeding further. (i.) In my Report of t866, the six years average of rainfall is not said to be 40.64 inches, as Mr. Peters states, nor is the average of rainfall given at all ; but the six years average of total precipita- tions is given (which includes snow as well as rain), and that is shown to be 57.7^^5 inches. The figures used by Mr. Peters per- tain to temperature, and are plainly marked as such in the table from which he quotes. ( 2. ; But Mr. Peters is not only wrong in his rainfall figures, but he is wrong also in his computations of the quantity of water which a rainfall of 40.64 inches falling on 9,500 acres would yield. This is a simple calculation, and may be made easily by any one having an ordinary knowledge of multiplication. As an inch of water on an acre of ground is equal to 22,614.9 imperial gallons, this quan- tity multiplied by 40.64 and by 9,500 gives a total quantity of 8,7ji,i6o,^92 only — the difference between which and Mr. Peters' 9,500,000,000 shows a mistake of nearly 769 millions, and reduces his average daily supply of 13,000,000 gallons to some- thing less than 11,960,000 gallons. If it be suggested that the City Engineer may have used the average of 51.746 inches in his calculations, this would make the matter worse, as this depth of rainfall on the area named, would furnish upwards of 161 7 million gallons more than Mr. Peters' estimate. This is another instance of the misfortunes that follow a too free use of " round numbers." (3.) Were the water supplying ability of Litde River Basin in question, I would deem it my duty to follow the City Engineer more fully in his calculations, but as this is not at present a live question with us, whatever it may be in the future, I would simply remark that Mr. Peters has made a mistake in basing his estimate of available water from <:he gathering grounds of Little River on a general average of its annual rainfall. In old times this average annual rainfall system, propounded by Mr. Peters, was generally followed by hydraulic engineers, but as many of the works constructed on this theory — even when equipped with large storage reservoirs — came to grief (notably 23 during the great droughts that prevailed in England in 1865 and 1868), it has been abandoned in Europe and America as wholly unreliable; and no prudent engineer now-a-days, when designing works for a city's water supply, would ever think of making it a basis of calculation, no matter what period the general average covered. On this point there is no difference of opinion among hydraulic engineers and meteorologists who have studied the subject of rainfall in relation to water supply ; and were it necessary, many cases of failure could be cited where the general average system had been adopted. " The whole principle of estimating from ' yearly averages,' " says Julius W. Adams, one of the highest living authorities on hydraulic engineering in the United States, "has been proved by experience to be mis-leading, and for the purpose of a permanent City supply no longer recommended."* On this and other im- portant points relating to available rainfall, much rare and valuable information is to be found in the " Minutes of Evidence of the Royal Commission on Water Supply," published in 1869 by order of the Imperial Parliament. The rule now recognized and used by British engincc-rs is based, not on a general average of annual rain, but on averages derived from minimum rainfalls, — applying to this the mechanical axiom that the strength of a beam is the strength of its weakest part. So, the water obtainable from a given catchment area dur- ing protracted seasons of extreme drought is the true measure of its capacity. The difference between these two systems is great and important, as the average of dry years is greatly less than the ordinary annual averages. The practice in England, where this subject has received great attention, is to deduct from the mean of the three ( 3 » consecutive years of lowest rainfall the amount due to evaporation and absorp- tion I by vegetation;, and the balance or residue is the available rainfall, and may be depended on for town supply, provided there is ample reservoir accommodation for its collection .^.nd storage. When this cannot be had, the available residue is greatly reduced, as the quantity that might have been impounded under favorable * Van Nostrand, Eclectic Engineering, Vol. 24, page 336. L k KM m M conditions is lost during heavy floods. And to overcome this diffi- culty (when the area is relatively small for the work it has to do), the collecting grounds have to be enlarged or supplemented from other sources. Much time and science have been devoted in England to ascer- tain the annual loss by evaporation and absorption, and Mr. Hawksley, the foremost of English hydraulic engineers, says that it " rarely amounts to less than ii or 12 inches annually, and very commonly, on hilly grounds, to 13, 14, and 15 inches," while "on flatter grounds and more porous soils, where the water is held superficially and re-evaporated, it amounts to 16, 17, and 18 inches." * And Beloe, in his treatise on catch-water reservoirs, says that the loss by evaporation alone is sometimes taken at 25% of the rain-fall.t Less attention has been given to this subject on our side of the Atlantic; but where investigations have been made with due care, the results have shewn a much greater loss than in England. In Massachussetts it has been found to vary from 15 to 30 inches annually, or about one-half of the rain-fall, while from water surfaces it has risen to 56 inches annually, the atmosphere here being drier and more absorbent than in England. % An increased loss by evaporation means, of course, a less quantity of collectable rain ; and carefully conducted observations in connection with the Boston Water Works have proven that in years of low rainfall, with conditions unfavorable for collection, that the " amount of water that enters the streams and ponds of a drainage area like that of Cochituate, is somewhat less than equal to a depth of 12 inches over the entire area." In planning the Sudbury works for an additional supply to Boston, 12 inches was adopted by Mr. Davis, after much patient and painstaking investi- gation, as the unit of collectable rainfall ; || and this was the unit adopted also by Mr. Thomas Keifer when considering a gravita- tion supply for the City of Hamilton, Ontario.*^ Applying this rule to the basin of Little River, our available rainfall would be reduced to about 2,578,100,000, or not much more than one-half of Mr. Peters' estimate. * Minutes of Evidence, Royal Commission, page 484. t Catch-Water Reservoirs, Chs. R, Beloe, page 11. X Boston Additional Water Supply Report, Joseph P. Davis, C. E., 1873, page 11. II Boston Additional Water Supply, Report of J. P. Davis, C. E., 1873, pages 6 and 12. g Hamilton Water Works, page 12. 25 But to return to Mr. Peters' Report: On page 8, dealing still with his assumed available yield of 9,500,000,000 gallons, he pro- ceeds to inform the City Council that half of this body of water would furnish 10,000,000 gallons daily to the City, and 3,000,000 gallons a day to run to waste over the dam — exclusive of the " supply front springs^ On paper this seems plausible and has an air of scientific exactness about it that is quite imposing ; but it would have been well if the City Engineer had gone a step farther and shewn how much of this enormous quantity of water would have to be im- potinded to maintain a uniform flow of 13,000,000 gallons a day, exclusive of " supply from springs^ Would storage reservoirs have to be provided for the whole of this water, or for one -half or one-quarter, and what would be the probable cost ? Suppose the smaller quantity is taken — and on this small supposition storage accommodation would have to be found for 1,186,250,000 gallons, or 3,250,000 gallons per day.— to store this quantity of water would require three (3) reservoirs, each with a surface area equal to about a loo-acre farm and an average depth of about 15 feet. The cost of impounding this quantity of water, at the modest rate of twenty-five cents per 1,000 gallons,* or $250 per million, would amount to $296,562.50, and to twice or four times this sum if the half or the whole of the City Engineer's 13,000,000 gallons daily had to be impounded. Fortunately, no such works are yet re- quired by our City ; and if they were, suitable sites could not be obtained It is not to be understood because I have used Mr. Peters' "round numbers," that I have forgotten that his estimate of the product of 40.64 inches of rainfall on 9,500 acres is nearly 768,000,000 gallons in excess of what it should be. Such is not the case ; but, as these were the figures in his mind when showing to His Worship the Mayor how much could be done by one-half of this assumed rain-fall — exclusive of the "' supply from springs'' — I have used * Hughes, on page 336-7 of his Treatise on Water Supply, gives a list of seven impounding reservoirs buih under the superintendence of F. W. Hateman, the justly celebrated hydraulic en- gineer, the average cost of which, reduced to our currency, was about 40 cents per i.uoo gallons, exclusive of land. These examples are given by Mr. H. because he considered the work was "estimated at fair prices." In this country the cost generally is much greater. An impounding reservoir constructed '1881) at Amsterdam, N. V. , capable of holding 90,000,000 gallons, cost about Si. 10 per 1,000 gallons, while Chestnut Hill Reservoir, Boston, with a capacity of 800,000, 000, cost upwards of $3 per i,oou gallons. D ii Hi 2fi them to show the magnitude of the work involved in handling and storing such immense volumes of water. Having shown on paper what Little River basin can do, by his system of computation, Mr. Peters returns again to the QUESTION OF "STORAGE CAPACITY" for impounded water, repeats his previous statement about its being " 430 acres," and on this basis computes that one foot in depth on this area is equal to " about 1 10,000,000 gallons, and to twice, thrice, four or five times as much * "^^ " to any depth obtainable." The only remark to be made in reference to this paragraph is, that 12 inches of rainfall on 430 acres would amount to 1 16.692,884 gallons, and not 110,000,000, as the City Engineer says it is. But. as this is an error of a few millions only, — about 6,692,884 for each foot in depth, or 33,464,420 gallons for a five feet depth — it would be a pity to spoil the beautiful rotundity of the numbers by correction. This, however, is not the only blunder in this short paragraph. There is still another and a greater one in the 430 acres figured for storage. This area is made up as follows : Little River Reservoir, 37 j^ acres. Lake Long . 30 " Lake Buck, 100 " Lake Douglas, 55 " Lake Latimer, 210 " 432}^ acres. Were neither of the above employed at present for storage purposes the above statement might be passed as correct ; but, as Little River Reservoir and Lake Latimer are already in use and can have nothing added to their storage capacities, their areas have to be deducted from the above 432)4 acres, and when this is done the united area of the other lakes is only 185 acres ; and 12 inches of water on this area would be 50,205,078 gallons ( 22614.9X 1 2^X185 acres). " At present," says Mr. Peters, referring again to his alleged ^jo acres of storage capacity, " only jy}4 acres in the Reservoir is made available for storage^ It is difficult to account for this statement. It is charitable to believe that it was made through an ■WP aberration of the memory or a slip of the pen, and that Mr. Peters did not mean to state an untruth. And yet he has done so : as Lake Latimer is now used and has been used for storage purposes since 185 1 ; and the fact of its being so was kno7vn to the City Engineer when he made the above extraordinary statement — that '^' the Reservoir^' only " is made available for storage^ The body of water that may be stored in this lake for dry season supply with favorable rainfalls, is upwards of 350,000,000 gallons (271378,8X200X6)^). . DAMMING OF THE LAKES. With a steady eye to the damming of the lakes, at least, Mr. Peters remarks truly enough that to construct dams at their outlets would not be very expensive, as suitable material is near at hand (page 8). But as an offset to this, it may be asked with propriety, would the water thus impounded prove suitable for City supply ? Would it remain sweet and wholesome, or would it deteriorate in quality — become, in fact, bitter and bad ? There is no doubt about the practicablity of increasing the capacity of lakes Long and Douglas by the erection of dams across their outlets ; but this could be done to a limited extent only, and, as much o{ the impounded water would be lodged on swampy ground and shallow, its temperature would be increased, its nature changed, and its quality greatly deteriorated. It is to water thus stored that the nauseous " cucumber taste " so loudly complained of at times in Boston and other places has been attributed, and there is every reason to believe that similar results would arise here from a l" »ge area of shallow water flowage. .With a thorough knowledge of the Lakes to which reference has been made, I am decidedly of the opinion that they are not suitable for storage reservoirs, unless to a very limited extent. Lake Buck, the largest of the three ( 3) belonging to the water shed of Little River, is a lake by courtesy only, as by far the greater part of its area is little better than a peaty bog. Its water is shallow, its border lands flat and swampy, and its outlet inca- pable of damming. Lake Long might be raised a few feet by placing an embank- ment across its outlet, but some parts of its border lands are also flat, and the waters that come from its collecting grounds — like m in: i'M 28 those derived from Lake Buck — are often deeply tinted by color- ing matter extracted from decaying vegetation. Lake Douglas might also be raised from 2 to 3 feet, but be- yond this point its flowage would be extensive and shallow, and unfavorable to the storage of water for domestic use. As the two lakes last named are the only ones that could be utilised in adding to our present storage capacity, and as their joint area is about 85 acres only, the storable volume per foot is reduced from 116,000,000 to about 23,000,000 gallons. So far, the supply obtainable from Little River, with the help of Lake Latimer, has been sufficient, in the driest times yet expe- rienced, to meet our requirements. That it would do so were our mains taxed to their greatest capacity, I am not prepared to say ; but I have reason to believe that it would be insufficient, with our present means of storage. When the time comes, however, for dealing with this question, a short survey will show that there is at least one other place (not a lake) that has much more to com- mend it for storage duty than either of the natural lake feeders of Little River ; and the choice will then rest between the construc- tion of a reservoir at this point and the bringing of a supplemental supply from Loch Lomond in one or other of the ways suggested in my Special Report of December, 1882. Before passing from this paragraph, I will take the liberty of correcting another error into which Mr. Peters has fallen. He says, on page 8, that he would hold the water thus stored as a " reserve on which to draw at the dry seasons of the year," that the supply which " he has been told is fairly satisfactory in wet seasons, might be kept up to, or, at any rate, nearly up to, the wet season rate all the year round." Whoever told the City Engineer this, falsified the record and told an untruth. So far, a few feet in difference on Little River Reser- voir makes no appreciable difference in the supply to the summits. But I do not wish to be understood as saying that this state of things will continue. The nearer the daily demand on the leading mains comes to their maximum capacities, so will the summit supply become more and more sensitive to changes in static pres- ue, caused by oscillations at the Reservoir. But the great ^ij-T.urbing influence now is cold weather waste. To show how far . Peters' ■•Mr. II t - x^ Vv J'' Ii«i^, 'r. • X , ;,'„„W>-V-1««?'*^ ,.•^^*■ .'/ a r' : » ^.^ST'-dnin'W^rrW "'W , "asss m f }^at^' IflC •lu^'^'- ^ -^ I ^ 5! ! In 1 29 ■ WET AND DRY WEATHER THEORY IS WRONG, I may state .what every citizen will remember, viz., that last spring was unusually wet and cold, and the summer just gone unusually dry and warm ; yet the supply to the summits during the spring months was very poor, while that for the summer season has been exceptionally good. And further : during the spring months the level of the Reser- voir was fully up to what Mr. Peters would call high water mark, while during the months of July, August and September, it was frequently 2 to 3 feet below it. These statements are not hearsay, as Mr. Peters' seem to be ; but are capable of proof, and may be tested by our daily pressure records (noted hourly, day and night), or by the evidence of dwellers on the summits. Finding, however, that Lake Latimer could not be ignored altogether, Mr. Peters proceeds to say : " It is true that this — supplementing the natural flow of Little River — is claimed to be effected by drawing on Lake Latimer ; and further, we are told that for years together Lake Latimer's waters are not needed ; yet, in spring time and in freshets, the summits are supplied to an extent that is wanting in dry summer weather. It follows, then, that drawing on Lake Latimer will not have the desired effect ; or, that Lake Latimer is not drawn on as often nor as fully as it should be." In this, Mr. Peters imprudently departs from his " I am told," and assumes the responsibility of bold assertion. The only reply to be made to that part of the above which refers to spring and " dry summer supplies " is, that it is untrue, and that the facts of the case are the " exact opposite " of this assertion. When the City Engineer affirms, therefore, that Lake Latimer is not drawn on as often or as fully as it should be, he is giving an opinion on a matter of fact of which he is profoundly ignorant. That a clearer view may be had of the absolute want of con- formity between rainfall and summit pressure, I beg to submit the annexed diagram, showing for the year ending with the 31st day of October last its monthly precipitation, compared with its monthly average and minimum of pressure, a short examination of which will show that there is no reality in Mr. Peters' assump- tions that in " spring time and freshets the summits are supplied to an extent that is wanting during summer weather^ mmm,mi"!^ Z ....'••■ ,,.- -'* V • i . (! >^ 1 \ t Gvi ^ ^ I' I 8; I I 4 4 5? MittmtStaxnUi ♦> Mantuw Steam LmCo St Min » Hxtiftt-r V 30 DISTRIBUTING MAINS. On page lo Mr. Peters devotes a paragraph to .distribution, and, " while not pretending to exhaust the matters requiring con- sideration," yet he " cannot pass over the /ac^ that some of the evt/s complained of and some of the matters brought forward in the Report are connected with and attributable to distribution." If such is " the fact" it must be a matter of regret to our citizens, as it is to me, that Mr. I'eters has not shown in what way and to what extent " the matters complained of and some of the matters brought forward" in my Report of December, 1882, are " attributable to distribution." On these points, however, he is strangely silent, notwithstanding their importance. But even yet it is not too late to show in what way the distribution is defective. Such information should not have been held back if it existed in any other form than suspicion. Says Mr. Peters : " The unequal, and at times variable, supply in different parts of the City is not in accordance with the elevation of these points above datum : that is to say, a constant and satisfactory supply is obtained at high points, while those at much loivcr ones are deficient ; also, that the supply is some- times more abundant by night and someiimes by day." The statements italicised in the above paragraph are contrary to the truth — so far, at least, as they declare that a " satisfactory supply is obtained at high points, while those at much lower levels are deficient." And the last assertion is only true if the night supply of one season of the year is compared with the day supply of another and different season of the year. For instance : the night supply of the current season is greatly better than the day supply of last winter and spring ; but no one with any practical knowledge of Water Works administration would ever think of attributing this to defective distribudon. And every one resid- ing on the City's summits knows that iho year round the supply is uniformly "better by night than by divy" — and this, too, is a matter of indisputable proof by prcs..u.e records, as well as by consumers, who know something from experience on this point, which the City Engineer does not. Having delivered himself of the aboye oracular opinions, Mr. Peters proceeds to remark, with becoming gravity, that " in the tables so profusely given in the Report to show loss of pressure 31 at hydrants, it may be a fair question for argument as to whether the size or arrangement of the distributing pipes have nothing to do with it." The pressure tables referred to record mere matters of fact. They show what has been the loss of static pressure within certain specified tim^s by hydrants fed from the same mains and occupying the same positions that they did when the observations were com- menced. This being the case, the conclusion that this loss is chiefly due to increased consumption is irresistible, and in perfect accord with the experience of other cities in this particular. But it is not an uncommon mistake for gentlemen having a superficial knowledge only of practical hydraulics, to attribute this loss of pressure to many other causes than the true ones, and to consider it a " fair question of argument as to whether the size anc'. arrangement of distributing pipes have nothing to do with it." But for a professional gentleman to fall into such an error is some- what astonishing. I do not claim perfection for our distributing system, but I am not afraid to submit its every detail to inspection, if the examiner is an expert, with a fair knowledge of his profession, not given to pandering to popular clamor, nor ready, for a consideration, to become the servile echoist of men more ignorant than himself. The next point to be noticed is what Mr. Peters calls THE GREAT MOVING CAUSE for all the proposed action of the Commissioners, viz., " the scan- tiness, or insufficiency of supply to the summits ^ and on which he proceeds to base an argument against anything being done with a view to radical relief or improvement, inasmuch " as these sum- mits, so far as St. John is concerned, are of very limited area, and not very densely populated, being occupied chiefly, if not entirely, by handsome private residences," * ::=>!:** >. Block-house Hill having an area of about 8 or lo acres only, and occupied by say 200 families, or say 1000 persons." The above remarks, to speak mildly, are disingenuous, and do not cover the whole truth. The protective phase of the question is ignored altogether, and- a feeble basement supply, under a max- imum head of "5 feet above the ground at the intersection of ii' -:-(.■•■■ 82 Wentworth and Leinster Streets" (page loj assumed to be all that is wanted. This might have done in plden times when the laws of health were less perfectly understood — when housekeepers were accus- tomed to intermittent supplies — when wells and stand-pipes were in vogue, and when baths and water closets, and hot and cold water arrangements on second and third stories were unknown ; but modern ideas of convenience and comfort are not now satis- fied with such supplies, and require for domestic purposes constant and copious supplies, under pressure, on each flat. This has be- come mdispensable ; and any supply that falls short of it is not satisfactory, even to the owners of "handsome private residences." To remedy this defect in our present low pressure system was one only of the " moving causes'' ; a second and more important one was the desire to provide a better force for Jire purposes on the higher levels of the City and allay a large amount of well- founded fear and discontent. It is well known to observant citizens that large areas of St. *John and Portland are poorly protected, — the pressure in the mains being insufficient in itself to send water to third and fourth stories, in sufficient force and volume to suppress incipient fires, and that in consequence of this defect much valuable time and property are lost while waiting for engines to arrive and get to work. A desire to overcome this serious defect anr. give to the summits a protection equal to what now prevails on the lower levels of the City, constituted the second "great moving cause; " but this important point the City Engineer has failed to notice. To change our present low pressure system to a high pressure one, and give thereby to the hydrants on the summits ' that are now practically useless ) a pressure for fire purposes equal to what now prevails on Prince William and Water Streets — raise it, say, from zen o 70 pounds, or 160 feet, — with a corresponding in- crease, when needed, over the entire City, was surely an object worthy of consideration. The advantages that would accrue from such a change are incalculable, and would compel reductions in insurance rates and Fire Department expenses greatly beyond what the interest on the additional outlav would amount to annually. 33 But, in addition to ignoring this view of the question, Mr. Peters has also MISUNDERSTOOD THE AREAS with which my Report deals. The area of low pressure in the City is not confined, as he has chosen to put it, to the Blockhouse summit of 8 or lo acres, but covers an area of fully 112 acres, in- habited by nearly 1200 families, instead of 200, as he says, and is possessed, at a moderate estimate, of insurable, or, rather, burn- able property, worth at least $3,500,000. (As shown by Tabulated Statement on next page.) lii B 34 Tabulated Statement Of Estimated Value of Burnable Property in High Service Districts of Saint John. . . ° h ^ rt rt > — Si: 3 r U 'MXa bjoi: u >< ^ c o o Z bJ) wi November, 1882 December, " January, 1883 February, March, Aprl, May, June, July, August, September, October, ° 62 18 48 5 40 —14 —10 1 -10 49 + 15 69 32 75 77 77 59 46 45 45 39 26 t4,5.o 146.2 146.2 143-9 147.2 I3S-8 13.2 0.0 138.1 143-4 i33>5 9-7 0.0 136.2 139-7 130.0 7-3 3-0 133-6 134.6 128.9 3-9 4.1 132-3 I33-I 121.9 0-5 II. I 127.5 130.2 131.1 5-1 x-9 132.8 135-8 134.6 9-7 0.0 135-8 141.8 133-5 12.0 0.0 137.2 143-4 134.5 13.2 0.0 138.1 143.2 133-5 13.2 0.0 137-4 143.6 133-5 10.9 0.0 135-8 142.0 134.6 14.2 0.0 141.0 144.8 1 5-3 3-5 i.o 0.8 2.7 3.0 6.0 6.2 5-1 6.2 6.2 3.8 An examination of the above figures shows that in St. John, as in other places, the pressure is largely influenced by the temperature. With the approach of cold weather it begins to fall, and the difference between midnight and noon to diminish. The greatest absolute loss of pressure for the year under review occurred, as will be seen, in March, when it dropped on several occasions, in consequence of continuons cold, to 12 1.9 feet above datum. At this point, with the Reservoir open, the water level would have fallen ii.i feet below the overflow line or to within 2 feet of the bottom ; and, under the conditions named, this body of water (11 feet fully) would have been lost for fire purposes, without conferring any substantial benefit on the summits. 3 + lb « Pt £ £ Ml la T3 (A li 5-3 3-5 i.o 0.8 2.7 3.0 6.0 6.2 5-1 6.2 6.2 3.8 P i!: 1 i4»«Sitin#U*iii''0 '■»-- 39 Again, it will be noticed that the differences between the mid- night and the noonday pressures follow a similar course, becoming less and less as the winter advances, and shewing conclusively that the draught by night increases with the cold until it is little less than the draught by day. And this experience is not confined to St. John, but is well known to water works managers every- where having winters such as ours to contend with. The greatest monthly difference for the year between midnight and noonday pressure was 6.2 feet, and the least 8-ioths of a foot only in February, with an average of but 1.5 foot, or 18 inches for January, February and March. These figures show that at this season of the year there is prac- tically no "rest" to the water in the mains, and that the universal fear of freezing keeps it moving pretty steadily by night and by day ; and a closer analysis of the records would show that for days together, during severely cold weather, there is really no differ- ence between night and day pressure. Under such conditions, the Brussels Street lo-inch pipe would have no surplus sup[)ly to place in the Leinster Street reservoir. "Households" may be "sleeping," and "weary hands resting," as Mr. Peters pathetically remarks, but before retiring, the " weary hands" have taken care to put the water in motion and keep it moving without cessa<^ion or ''rest'' until morning, or until a re- turn of mild weather has removed the danger of freezing, when this can be done without detection. A section of Leinster Street reservoir to scale and chief points of the foregoing table are traced on the annexed diagram, that the eye may assist in conveying to the mind a clear view of the influ- ence and evils that arise from winter waste. Looking at diagram No. 2, herewith annexed, and comparing the lines of mean and maximum pressures with the Reservoir Une of overflow, it will be observed that for the greater part of the year these lines rise above high water in the Reservoir. Whenever and so long as this is the case the supply to the summits is better without the Reservoir than with it, as the water is delivered at a higher average level. In October, for instance, the line of maximum pressure is fully 14 feet above the Reservoir high water line — the noonday average rfatt TeytU of ^citrrat/iUU JUyrrUdftrvoir. ,h \^ ' 5 ^ of mean aiid i and of mean atLfcinstei' Strt .AfoK>w.' %Mui.iHiiHFa^. .;^# - -, _.:_:: : .z:.:s L.l .„ _ .... -- . _ _ ■ '^y -.."..■ - — ■■- - ..... — _, — -,- .r:. : .^z :' _ '. '-■ ..„.: ." ~ r: :.::. : : .\::.'\^ , ^ fTjcirtster Street Hcserv^m^r ' --- - - ■' ■ / _ _ ' „i . ' . - '~ . " .j:V. -■ .s' ' . ■ • - ® • / i j • V • ^ - 1 N 5^ 'I * ^. 1 « ^ \^ ■ ^ i^ ^^ • > ^ m^m.'...n y/ /r///jAt JArr/^ :^r.jr//r/} ofnieciii aiidmaxiniuiii SiirfcU e Levels at Lilile Ri^er Reservoir and of mean and/naxmian^i Tl'jnpa^ciUiresandll^lcrf^tssures atLfcinster Street BpeYarcl for 12 mouths ending witK the 3H' day cf Odobei-. /6-^?^<9^1 8 8 S^eK^V^NS^'-^^ 40 8 feet and the midnight 11.8 feet. In February the maximum of the month was 3.9 feet above the overflow, while the noonday mean was 0.7 fcot bclmv it, and the midnight o.i foot above it. In March again — an uncommonly cold and backward spring month — the highest pressure recorded was only six 16) inches above the overflow Ime, while the noonday mean wasyiYr {^) feet six (6) inches beloxv it and the midnight hvo ( 2 )feei ten ( 10) inches below it. But the greatest diflerences are observable in the low pressure curves and in the month of March, when, at sundry times, it dropped to a point ii.i feet belcm^ the overflow; and, as aire; remarked, this loss could have been recouped only by shutting on from part of the City for a longer or shorter period of time. On this point, however, there is a wide divergence of opinion between the City Engineer and myself. My contention is, that the water leaves the Reservoir and will not return to it again in cold weather because o{ instijfficient pres- sure, induced and maintained by excessive waste. But Mr. Peters says 710. " It must be owing to the fact, as shewn me at the office, that there is BUT ONE PIPE CONNECTING WITH THE RESERVOIR " (at Leinster Street) to act as itilet and outlet. When, therefo ^. " the Reservoir is full, the gate has to be dropped to allow oj " return of the xvater for supply, and zvhile this continues, no 7/n,. . ''water can be take7i iyi, and so the reservoir is emptied^'!! (page 9.) Here, at least, is something surprisingly original. There is but 07ie pipe to act as inlet and outlet to this reservoir, and when the stop-cock or gate on this one pipe is dropped or shut so that no more water can get in, then the water that is in runs out, and so the reservoir is emptied ! ! And there is no doubt or perad- venture on this point with Mr. Peters. He is quite positive that the shutting of the stop-cock on this pipe " must be " the cause of the water running out of the reservoir. But how it can get out without an orifice of outflow open and unimpeded, the City Engineer saith not. Most ordinary people believe that a stop-cock that prevents water from getting into a vessel would also keep it from getting out when properly closed, and I never had a doubt on the of 41 matter until now. As this woiukiful discovery is entirely new to me, I hope I shall be pardoned if I should doubt the City Engineer's ipse dixit on this point and take the liberty of placing my experience against his superior science. Having shown to his own satisfaction that the Reservoir is emptietl because the stop-cock or gate on the one pi|)e that acts as inlet and outlet is kept closed, he next proceeds to say : "According: to the plans shown me and the statements made to me, there is a u-incli pipe ix^nw the Marsli liridj^i; to llie Reservoir, which has no ilraiight in it l)ut the domestic service and tlie fire hydrants of lirussels Street. This pipe also receives the How from the is-inch pipe on Erin Street." The above is another instance of the great inaccuracy of state- ment that characterizes this report. No sucli information was given to Mr. Peters at the Superintendent's office, nor do the plans show the pipes named by him in Erin and Brussels Streets. The Brussels Street main is only lo inches in diameter and not 12 inches ; and the Erin Street one 12 inches and not fifteen ( 15), as Mr. Peters puts it. The wonder that a mistake of this kind should be made is increased by the fact that the diameters ■ A the mains are written plainly on the plans and specified distinctly in the printed reports that the City Engineer has in his possession, and from which he has copied so freely. This, however, is not a matter of much importance. In the one case the area is only 44 per. cent, in excess of reality, and in the other 56 per cent, in excess of what it should be, still it is a point on which one has a right to expect accuracy. Mr. Peters proceeds to notice next the CONDITION OF THE LEINSTER STREET RESERVOIR, and the water stored therein. " Supposing it to be full," he says on page 9, " for sometime before use, the supply must be from stagnant water." This " must be," however, is another of Mr. Peters' " round " inventions, as the water stored in this Reservoir is 7iever " stag- nant," nor can it be as it is kept in co7istant motion by a continuous inflow and outflow. When the City Engineer, therefore, tells His Worship the Mayor that any supply taken from this Reservoir F I 42 " must be from stagnant water" he draws on his imagination and states an untruth. The water stored here is never inferior to what comes from the mains, and is always sweet and pure. But Mr. Peters continues : " The tank, as it is sometimes called, " does not present a very inviting appearance. The platform or " flooring which extends over the whole surface is supported by " wooden posts staiiding in the water y This appears to strike the City Engineer as something terrible, still, he does not say in what way any real injury can arise from this. There is one point, how- ever, on which this statement differs from many others in his report, and that is, it is true. The flooring is supported by posts standing in water, and I don't know that any one, excepting the City Engineer, would say that this is detrimental to its quality. The old roof of this Reservoir was supported in the same way until the fire came and destroyed it in 1877 ; and when the wooden posts were taken out after a service of ^o years, they were as sound as when first placed.* The roof and flooring protect the water from extreme thermal changes, as well as from atmospheric dust and dirt ; and, in these important particulars, the water stored here has a great advantage over water stored for City service in an open reservoir. It is a maxim in hydraulic engineering that no service reservoir, retain- ing water for city purposes (in a centre of population), should be left uncovered, as urban air is always charged with sooty matter and other noxious impurities, from which water for domestic use should be carefully protected. Still, this is not the worst of it. TLere are really " open traps or hatchways " in the flooring, " and should nothing be carelessly or maliciously thrown in, rats or other vermin might jump or fall in — not a very pleasant contemplation, — " says the City Engineer. And neither it is. I must plead guilty to there being one " trap, or hatchway," and one other " opening." The former is for access to the interior of the Reservoir when inspections or repairs are needed, and the other for aeration and ventilation. The hatchway is never open ♦The water supplied lo Ottawa is brought from the Ottawa River to the pumping station by a wooden box or pipe laid in the channel that brings water to the turbines, and the water for Toronto is brought, from Hanlon's Point to the pumping station by a pipe 6 feet in diameter made of wood. II 43 except when being used, and the " opening " is covered by closely meshed wire-cloth during the summer and by neatly fitted plank- ing during the winter, There is not much danger, therefore, of sportive or suicidal rats jumping or falling into the water. Indeed, I never saw " rats or other vermin " about this Reservoir before Mr. Peters' visit, and nont; have been seen since he left on the 20th day of April last, after a two minutes' inspection of the Reservoir and all its appurtenances. Were I inclined to retort on Mr. Peters, I might contrast this old Reservoir with the one in Carleton, which he has been pleased to hold up as a model " of what can be done to eke out a meagre supply," and show, without much trouble, that the pollution he fears is more likely to befall an uncovered, unwatched and unpro- tected reservoir as that is, than one that is covered, protected, and watched by day and night, as ours is. But I will not follow him in sensational nonsense. To do so would be unkind to our Carleton friends. Mr. Peters proceeds to say (page 10) : "the remedy "for this would seem to be the laying of another pipe as an outlet" (for the rats, I suppose), " say into the Leinster street pipe (a very short distance), which at that point would be some 10 feet or more below the surface of the water when the tank was full. This outlet pipe might have a much smaller diameter than the inlet, by which means the height of the water might be kept up. There would be no stagnant water Xh^n, and, unless I am mistaken, a fairly good supply would be given to the houses in the neighborhood." Here the City Engineer passes from the probable to the prac- tical, and points out what the remedy seems to be for all our water troubles, viz., the laying of another and "much smaller" pipe from the Leinster street Reservoir to the Leinster street main. And by this simple expedient the Reservoir is to be kept from being emptied, the water from becoming "stagnant," wicked "rats and other vermin" from "jumping or falling in," — a fairly good supply to the houses in the neighborhood "secured, and all discontent allayed." How beautifully simple and sublimely com- prehensive are the promptings of genius ! This unique and original conception speaks for itself, and needs no comment. If the laying of this "much smaller" pipe will ac- i 1 I 44 complish all, or part only of what the City Engineer claims for it, the work ought to be done without delay ; and will be, if so or- dered. The cost will not be great. " Almost nominal," Mr. Peters says, as all the required material is on hand. And so it is ; but whether the experiment will be worth the outlay, is another ques- tion. In my judgment, the proposition is preposterous, the very essence of puerility ; which, when reduced to reality, will add nothing whatever to the supply of the summits. The benefits, like the cost, will be nominal. SERVICE RESERVOIRS. Mr. Peters has still another suggestion, if this "much smaller" pipe remedy succeed. "The reservoir (he says, page lo) might be enlarged and " made of more extensive use " ; and in further application of the system of reservoirs, he would suggest " the construction of one on some point in Portland, where the supply would be given more effectually than at present." These suggestions are conditioned, it will be observed, on the success of the "much smaller" pipv? experiment. If that suc- ceed, its complement is to be an extension of the Reservoir sys- tem ; but in case of failure, there is no alternative scheme ; at least, none is suggested. If the "much smaller" pipe succeed, reser- voirs are to be tried ; but if it fail, what next ? On this point the City Engineer is discreetly silent. Before proceeding to notice these reservoir suggestions, liberty may be taken to correct another error into which Mr. Peters has fallen when referring to the contemplated enlargement (by an ex-Commissioner) of the Leinster street Reservoir. On page 7, he says, " no mention is made of any (subsequent) attempt to do this," although " additional ground adjoining it has been purchas- ed and $15,000.00 so spent." If Mr. Peters will refer again to the Report from which he has taken these figures, he will find that the sum named includes land and buildings, such as offices, barns, sheds and workshops. But this probably is another "round number" delusion which the City Engineer will gladly correct when a second edition of his Report to His Worship the Mayor, etc., is called for. About the utility of service reservoirs, when properly placed, there can be no difference of opinion. When sufficiently elevated ■^^*^ -'"V-Sf 45 and capacious, they are desirable adjuncts to gravitation as well as to pumping systems of supply ; but to secure satisfactory re- sults, they should be placed on land sufficiently elevated TO SUPPLY THE UPPER STORIES of summit buildings with a fair pressure (say 50 to 80 or 100 feet), and when such positions are not to be had, or the supply by gra- vitation insufficient, the defect is usually made up by pumping. Water being taken from one or other of the service reservoirs, or directly from the mains at some convenient point and forced directly into the supplying pipes of the high service district, or through the medium of a stand-pipe. As there is no land in the immediate vicinity of Saint John or Portland sufficiently elevated and obtainable for this purpose (sup- posing that Little River Reservoir had the necessary elevation, which it /las not ), the supply to the summits of both Cities would have to be met, sooner or later, by the establishment of one or more high service pumping stations, as in New York and Boston and other places, or a high pressure supply obtained from Loch Lo- mond. Again : When placed within a City's bounds, or in centres of population, SERVICE RESERVOIRS SHOULD BE COVERED, to protect their waters from soot and dust-germs and other atmos- pheric impurities incident to city life.* Covering, however, is always an expensive item, and adds greatly to the cost of such structures. In consequence of this, it is sometimes dispensed with ; but always to the detriment of the water and increased danger to the consumer. Other reasons in favor of covering are found in the protection it gives to the water against extreme changes of temperature, to the masonry during the winter season when freez- ing is active, and when 'but for this covering) ice would form from 20 to 30 inches thick over the entire water area, and reduce the capacity of the reservoir to that extent. Again : To be of practical value, a service reservoir such as Mr. Peters suggests, should be able to STORE AT LEAST TWO DAYS SUPPLY. • Prof. Rankin's Civil Engineering, page 739 ; Water Supply to Cities and Towns, Humber, page 134. 46 Humber, a well known and highly esteemed English authori- ty, says : " It is not advisable, under any circumstances, to have much less than two days supply, while reasonable prudence would seem to require for long conduits a week's supply, or even more." * Taking the smaller of these figures, this means, at our present rate of consumption, from ten to fifteen million gallons in ordinary seasons, and looking to the future as well as to our extra winter draught, as a matter of prudence the capacity of such reservoirs as Mr. Peters has suggested should greatly exceed this minimum. Let it be assumed, however, that the whole quantity for which provision is to be made is 12,000,000 gallons, that the City Engi- neer's "much smaller" pipe experiment is a success, and that his suggestions respecting the enlargement of the Leinster street Re- servoir and the placing of a new one somewhere on the high ground in Portland is adopted, and then see what would be the probable cost. The dimensions assumed for the Leinster Street enlargement are 200 X 83 X 20 feet, or a capacity of about 2,000,000 gallons, and for the Portiand Reservoir 401 X 200 X 20 feet, or about 10,000,000 gallons. The bottom line of both is placed on the same plane as our present City Reservoir, or 1 20 feet above city datum ; and the high water line is 140 feet above city datum, or 20 feet below the overflow level at Little River Reservoir. To make these reservoirs fairly effective, the mains that now terminate a^ the Aboideau would have to be extended so as to lead the water brought from Little River to the City direct to each, say one of 24-inches in diameter to Leinster street, and one 12- inch and one 24-inch (or one pipe equivalent thereto) to Fort Howe, where a reservoir might be placed. The extra length of main pipe required for these extensions would be of 24-inch to Leinster Street, 4000 feet, and of 12-inch and 24-inch, 6000 feet each ; or 16,000 feet in all. And, in addition to this 16,000 feet of leading mains, the distributing pipes would have to be rearranged to suit the new conditions, as there would be no use for city reservoirs unless the piping leading from them was made to answer the new centres of supply. ♦ Water Supply for Cities and Towns, page 121. 47 M * At present, the Aboideau is the point from which all the sup- plying mains radiate, but with an enlarged reservoir on Leinster Street, and an additional one on Fort Howe, this would have to be changed, and the supply taken directly from the reservoirs. Without this, no dependence could be placed in their efficiency. They must be receivers as well as suppliers of all the water brought to the City for their respective districts, if the reservoir system is to be carried out as it should be to ensure success. But to extend the leading mains to reservoirs placed on Block- house Hill and Fort Howe, would raise their planes of maximum delivery, reduce their hydraulic gradients or falls per mile, increase their frictional resistances and curtail their capacities of supply. To show the approximate effect of such a change, the plane of delivery or point of discharge into the new reservoirs, may be assumed at 130 feet above city datum, or midway between high and low water in the reservoirs. On this line, the gradient or fall per mile would be reduced, in the case of the Blockhouse Hill main, from 10.5 feet to 6 feet per mile, and in the case of the 12 and 24-inch mains for Fort Howe from 9.33 to 5.5 feet per mile. These reductions in the rates of fall mean, of course, reductions in the rates of delivery or supplying capacities of the mains ; but this loss would not be as the direct difference in the falls, but as the square root of their respective falls. That is to say, the loss in the one case would be as the ^10.5 is to the J'e (or as 3.24 to 2.45) and in the other, as the J'^^ is to the ^5^, or as 3.05 is to 2.34. Or, calling the present capacities 100, the reduced ones would be about 75.6 and 76.7 respectively. These differences would change, of course, with the oscillations of the water in the reservoirs — increasing as the water rose, and contracting as it fell — the difTerences at their summit levels being as 100 to 61.7 and 62.6, and at the bottom levels as 100 to 87.0 and 88.4 respectively. With the Blockhouse Hill reservoir full to overflowing, water could be drawn in Mr. Hall's kitchen under a pressure of about two (2) feet, but when its general district draught increased to about 140,000 gallons an hour, the stored water would begin to diminish. When it fell to about 138 feet above datum or two feet below the overflow line, it would disappear from Mr. Hall's kitchen, im 48 and at 130 feet, or midway between high and low water, from his basement, and leave him without any water whatever. And a similar experience would come to his neighbors, but in varying degrees. As the loss of head at the 130 feet point would be 10 feet, the line of draught would drop this much ; and sup- plies once drawn on third stories would drop to the second, from the second to the first, and from thence to the basement, until, as in Mr. Hall's case, the inflow ceased entirely. Under certain conditions, service reservoirs are valuable auxil- iaries to a city's water supply. By their aid the pressure may be sustained more or less perfectly during seasons of extreme draught, but their success, even in this particular, is contingent on their capacity and the ability of their supplying main or mains, to recoup in a reasonable time the water withdrawn during periods of extra consumption. PROBABLE COST. Part of the contemplated reservoirs would be in excavation and part in rubble masonry, faced with cut stone, and laid in English cement. The required excavation for both would be mostly in nek, part of which would be compact and tough and part relatively soft and easy to work. It is assumed that both reser- voirs would be covered ; but the difference in probable cost between covered and uncovered is shown in the summaries of estimates given below. The cost of the Blockhouse Hill Reservoir, including main pipe extension, is estimated at $105,000, and that of the Fort Howe one at $233,000, as follows : BLOCKHOUSE HILL RESERVOIR. Land, |i2,ooo Excavation in rock, 7,880 cub. yds. (nj^ 80 c 6,304 " in earth, 1,500 " " 20 c, 300 Masonry, rubble, in E. cement, 3,452 cub. yds. @ 15-50, 18,986 " brick work, 30 M., laid, (V/) I17, 510 " cut stone lining, 14,150 sq. ft., Oi' 80 c, ... 11,320 " granite coping, 598 lineal feet, ('^'^y |i 2.50, ... 7,475 " concrete flooring, etc., 1,476 cub. yds, f'r |5, 7,380 " gate chambers, say 3,000 167,275 49 Main Pipe extension — 24-inch, laid, 4,000 lineal /set, T" ls.40. Stop-cocks and specials, say Engineering and extras, Approximate cost, without roofing, Add for roofing, Total approximate cost, roofing included, Brought forward, $67, 275 |2i,6oo 3,000 24,600 9.125 $101,000 4,000 |io5,ooo ■\ u <( FORT HOWE RESERVOIR. Excavation in limestone rock, 38,320 cub. yds., (^»- 70c., 126,824 Masonry, rubble, in E. cement, 7,500 " O^r, $5.50, 41,250 cut stone lining, 30.050 sq. ft., (« 80c., ... 24,040 granite coping, 810 lineal ft., (i»).auii>if ^ii^p 61 was about $13.52, and land included $15.78 fully. At these rates, our smaller reservoir would cost from $27,040 to $31,580, and the larger one $135,200 to $157,900, exclusive oi pipe extension and covering. BodwelVs Hill Reservoir. Lawrence, Mass., has a rectanglar form and is partly in earth and partly in embankment. Its capa- city is about 33,333,000 Imperial gallons, and its cost was $275,000." Parker Hill Reservoir, Boston, was built for high service supply, and has a capacity of 7,200,000 U. S. gallons f ( say 6,- 000,000 Imperial). Its cost, without land, was $138,797, or $23.13 per 1,000 Imperial gallons, and with land, $228,246, or $38, fully, per 1,000 Imperial gallons.;}; Taking the first-named cost, and applying it to our proposed reservoirs, the cost of the one would be about $46,260, and of the other about $231,300, exclusive of land or pipe extensions. Beacon Hill Reservoir, Boston, with a capacity of 2,678,961 U. S. gallons (about 2,232,468, Imperial), cost $368,425, or about $165 per 1,000 Imperial gallons, zvithoiit laad, and land included, $513,533. § South Boston Reservoir, with a capacity of 7,508,246 U. S. gallons (about 6,256,872 Imperial gallons), cost $35,804, without land, and $90,908 with land added. And East Boston Reservoir, with a capacity of 5,591,816 U. S. gallons (about 4,659,- 847 Imperial gallons), cost, exclusive of land, $42,440, and with land included, $66,io3.|| Beacon Hill Reservoir was a massive granite structure, and South and East Boston Reservoirs were formed of puddled em- bankment, lined inside with granite rubble, laid in hydraulic cement. Costly and necessary, however, as these works seemed to be when built, they have outlived their usefulness. In 1882, Beacon Hill Reservoir, the smallest and dearest of them all, was " beifig demolished,'^ having ceased to form, a portion of the water system. East Boston Reservoir is being used "in connection with the high pressure pumping works of its district," — a totally different duty from what it had to do originally, — and * Commissioners' Report, 1876, pages 70-71 and loi. t Engineer's Report to Commissioners, 30th April, 1875. X Report Water Board, 30th April, 1876, page 4. g History of Boston Water Works, pages 252 and 267. II History of Boston Water Works, pages 253 and 267. w 62 South Boston Reservoir is '^ only kept full in case of accident to the supply mains of this section, and is not of much value as a portion of the water system." * What has led to the disuse of these reservoirs is, the ever increasing demand for water under greater pressure — for house and fire purposes, as well as for mechanical and manufacturing operations — than answered satis- factorily a generation ago. And New york, with its 42nd Street Reservoir, has had a similar experience to Boston. This reservoir formed part of the original Croton works, and was a stately stone structure, capable of storing 19,000,000 Imperial gallons ; but it, too, has been abandoned y " as the storage capacity is now of 710 account, and a better pressure is obtained from the mains without it than with itT^^ CANADIAN RESERVOIRS. Rose Hill Reservoir, Toronto, is a receiving as well as a dis- tributing reservoir, and occupies a position 80 feet above the highest inhabited part of the city. The water is forced into it by steam power and there is but 07ie main for inlet and outlet. It has an irregular shape, a water surface of 9^ acres, a maximum depth of 20 feet, and holds about 33,000,000 gallons.;}; The site chosen was unusually favorable, and allowed a basin to be formed in the cheapest possible manner — half in earth and half in embankment. Its cost was $85,6oo.§ McTavish Reservoir, Montreal, is likewise a receiving and distributing reservoir. The water is forced into it through two 24-inch pipes by steam and water power, and the same mains act as outlets, also, as occasion requires. It has the form of an ellipse and is divided into two compartments. It is 204 feet above harbor datum, and is excavated in solid rock, as ours would be. Its greatest depth is 24 feet, and its capacity 13,500,000 gallons. It cost, with some additional excavation for enlargement, $410,375, || or about $30 j^er 1,000 gallons. At this rate, our smaller reservoir would cost, without covering, about $60,000, and our larger one about ^300,000. * Boston Water Board Report, 1882, page 25. t Report Allan Campbell, C. K., Commissioner of Public Works, to City Council, December, 1879, pages 12-13. X Engineer's Descriptive Report, 1876, page 155. \ Commissioners' Financial Report, 1877, page 27. II LeSa^e's Report un Enlargement, 1873, page 15. 58 And in 1873, when an enlargement of the works was under consideration, an additional reservoir was proposed, on the same plane as the McTavish one, and connected thereto by a 30-inch pipe. This reservoir was to be in earth excavation and embank- ment, its contemplated capacity 113,500,000 gallons, or about a month's supply, and its estimated cost $686,440, exclusive of pipe, and with pipe added, $860,188.* Besides this, a high service reservoir (200 feet above the McTavish one) was also under consideration, capable of holding 32,000,000 gallons. This reservoir was likewise to be excavation (in earth) and embankment, and its estimated cost was $331,400,! or about $10.35 P^"" 1,000 gallons. It would be easy to furnish numerous other instances similar to what have been quoted ; but sufficient has been done to show that city reservoirs, in embankment or masonry, in earth or rock, are not so simple and inexpensive, nor yet so permanently useful, as the City Engineer seems to think, or would have the public to believe ; and I am clearly of the opinion that service RESERVOIRS ALONE WILL NOT MEET our requirements, no matter how much present value may appar- ently attach to them. If built and used constandy, they would take from the present pressure, instead of adding to it, and will not satisfy the continually increasing demand for a truly high pressure service for house and fire purposes. No matter what number of low service reservoirs may be con- structed, nor what amount of money may be spent thereon, a greatly better pressure than now prevails, or ever can be had from Little River, must be obtained sooner or later, either by pumping or by an extension to Loch Lomond, as recommended in my Report of December, 1882. And, before leaving this reservoir question, I will take the liberty of repeating what I have said before, viz., that if an inter- mediate or service RESERVOIR IS TO BE CONSTRUCTED, Trafton's Valley, so called, is the proper place for it. A reservoir * LeSage's Report on Enlargement, 1873, page 23. + LeSage's Report on Enlargement, 1873, page 24. . !. r 04 placed here would be about i}( mile from the centre of the City — it would be chiefly in earth, would contain upwards of four times the water of I'ort Howe and Blockhouse Hill Reservoirs combined, and at a j>;-reatly less cost. Its surface level, when full, would be about seven feet above the present high water level of Leinster Street Reservoir, and, as the mains It-ading from Little River to the City pass near what would i)e its upper end, no loss in daily discharge would be sustained by extending them to it; nor would extensive and costly re-arrangements be required of our distributory system, as would follow the placing of service reservoirs on Fort Howe and Bhjckhouse Hill ; but the construc- tion of this reservoir would add nothing to the City pressure — so long as there is an excess of pressure at the "Cemetery Summits." In concluding this Review, allow me to draw your attention again to my Special Report of March, 18H3, and express the hope — should it be deemed inexpedient, in view of the present condition and prospective outlook cjf our City, to undertake the expenditure implied in an extension to Loch Lomond — that facilities will be given to make tlu' most of our Little River supply, and such ad- ditional legislation obtained as may be necessary to reduce to a minimum the flagrant waste that now exists. Apologizing for the length of this Review, I remain, dear sir. Yours truly, GILBERT MURDOCH, Superintendent Sexverage and Water Supply. SPECIAL REPORT OF MARCH, 1883. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT, SEWERAGE AND WATER WORKS, SAINT JOHN, March 26th, 1883. To A. CHIPMAN SMITH, Esquire, Chairman Sewerage and Water Commission. Dear Sir, — When I submitted my Special Report of December last, in obedience to your resolution of February, 1882, 1 did not consider it my duty under said resolution to make any extended remarks on our present distributory system, for two reasons: ( i) a discus- sion of this question did not come within the scope of your reso- lution, which required me to report " the present condition in " respect to pressure and quality of the water supply of St. John " and Portland with the best means of improving the same, so that " a purer and more efficient supply may be had for House and "Fire purposes than is now obtained from Little River'" ; and ( 2ndly ) I contemplated dealing with this subject separately as soon as the larger question of remaining at Little River, or ex- tending to Loch Lomond, had been decided, as the extent and character of the additions required depend in a measure on the decision come to in the matter of continuing our present low service system, or by " carrying a sufficient main or mains to Latimer's Lake and Loch Lomond, or either of them," as required by 18 Vic, c. 38) secure for our summit levels as well as for the whole of St. John and Pordand. a high pressure water supply— such a supply as would enable the water area to be largely extended, and give to districts 3 and 4 a Fire pressure about equal to what now prevails in Prince William and W^ater Streets. Pending the consideration and final decision of this question, and presuming that for financial reasons no change is likely to be made for some time to come, I beg to suggest : w ■■ 56 (i) That preparations be made for laying an additional main via Erin and Wentworth or Waterloo and Sydney Streets, as may be determined hereafter, from the Aboideau to about Orange Street, for the exclusive use of districts 3 and 4, should the supply be divided hereafter as noticed in another part of this Report. This main should not be less than 15 inches in diameter, but a larger one (say 18 inches) would answer better. Via Erin Street the cost of the first named pipe, with stop-cocks and branches complete, is estimated at $18,000.00, and the second or larger one at about $20,000.00. By way of Waterloo and Sydney Streets, the cost would be something greater. (2) That new and larger pipes chiefly for fire purposes be laid in Orange Street ( between Pitt and Sydney Streets ) ; in Princess Street (between Pitt and Charlotte .Streets); in Leinster Street (between Pitt and Sydney Streets); and in King Street 'between Wentworth and Carmarthen Streets ) ; with such additional res- ervoir connections at Leinster Street as may be deemed ad- visable on consultation with some competent hydraulic authority. The p pes proposed to be used in these extensions vary in size from 8 to 12 inches in diameter, and the estimated cost is about $12,000.00. These minor extensions should be made dur- ing the coming summer if practicable, and at rangements made for laying the larger leading main in the summer of 1884, if the larger scheme of improvement is indefinitely postponed. (3) That you consider the advisability of cutting off Districts 3 and 4 from the general supply of St. John and Portland, and of "urnishing a special supply thereto direct from the Aboideau. This can be done easily by a few small alterations in the present piping, and the closing of a cordon of gates already pLced and ready for use. This isolation or districting will improv<; the pressure to some extent in the districts named, and lessen it to the rest of the City. This was done to a partial extent during the winter just gone, but from my experience and l-nowledge of our water svstem, 1 deem it my duty to say that I jonsider such a proceeding under our relati\ely low pressure scarcely advisable, unless in extraordi- nary circumstances. With your authority, however, I will have the division made as soon as practicable ; but when this is done, arn ngements should be made to have one or mc/re engines accoiiipany the hose-carts 57 at every alarm of fire. The cost of extra stop-cocks and required changes in our present piping to effect this districting would not exceed $2,000.00. (4) Besides the above I would also direct attention again to the advisability of having a reserve or Intermediate Reservoir constructed in what is known as the " Trafton Vallev," in the Parish of Simonds. The advantages that would accrue from such an appendage to our present system of supply have been frequently pointed out in former Fscports, and are fully summarized on pages 22, 23, and 24 of my Special Report on the formation of Anchor Ice, submitted in December, 1880. A reservoir placed here would have a water surface of 18 acres, and an extreme depth of about 20 feet. Its surface level, when full, would be about 140 feet above City datum, or 20 fc^t below the surface water of Little River Reservoir, and its capacity would be about 52,000,000 gallons. The bottom of this reservoir would be about on the same plane as that of the Leinster Street Reser- voir, but its surface level, when full, would be 7 feet higher than the surface level of the latter. (5) Another matter I beg again to bring to notice is the desira- bility of having ^a/5»rt«<7Z/^ tanks iox fire purposes placed at con- venient points along the City summits. Such arrangements are common in other cities whose water pressures are greatly superior to what we have in Districts 3 and 4, and are valuable protective auxiliaries. For additional remarks on this see Annual Report for 1864, and Anchor Ice Report, 1880. (6) I would also suggest and earnestly urge, with a view to the prevention of waste, a revision of the present water tariff, par- ticularly in the item of water closets, that by greatly increased rates cisternless " hoppers " and other closets flushed directly from the mains may be discontinued, and more economical ar- rangements adopted. Cisternless closets are usually adopted on account of their cheap- ness, and will be continued as long as a water closet is simply rated as a water closet, without regard to its construction and facilities for wasting or economising water, as is the case under our present tariff. WW.W,H^H»ip