According to this table, the Chelsea company's water possessed, in February last 16-2 degrees of hardness, and 100,000 lbs. of it, when used for washing, destroyed or wasted 1944 lbs. of soap; whilst Loch Katrine water had only 03 degree of hardness, and 100,000 lbs. of this water destroyed only 3-6 lbs. of soap before the detergent action of the latter came into play. Such is the chemical history of the water at present supplied to the metropolis, and it must be borne in mind that, grave as are its defects, the mode of delivery of this water to consumers is still more defective. That in a densely populated city, water should be delivered only once, and for a few minutes, in twenty-four hours, and not at all on Sundays, is a condition of things utterly incompatible with the supply of wholesome and palatable water. Even if the water of Loch Katrine itself were delivered in London, according to the system at present adopted by the metropolitan water companies, it would infallibly be rendered unfit for human consumption after twenty-four hours' exposure to the vile atmosphere and sewer gases in which the water cisterns of London are systematically placed.

The fundamental defects of our present water supply may be thus summed up:

1. Great previous sewage contamination.

2. Liability to present sewage contamination.

3. Great hardness.

4. Intermittent supply.

The

The waters from the sources of the Severn, and from the Cumberland lakes have not yet been submitted to the process of investigation above indicated, and it is therefore impossible to compare them in all respects with the present metropolitan supply. water of the Bala Lake, in North Wales, which may be regarded as similar to that which would be supplied by Mr. Bateman's scheme, was examined by the late Dr. R. D. Thomson, and the waters of the Cumberland lakes have been more elaborately investigated by Professor Way. From the analyses of these chemists the following numbers are calculated:

A comparison of these numbers with those given in the previous tables exhibits the great superiority of the proposed waters over those at present supplied to London, as regards total solid impurity and soap destroying ingredients; whilst it can scarcely be doubted

that water obtained from such sources will be as free from deleterious organic contamination as that of Loch Katrine.

In the event of a new source of water supply being at once determined upon, at least seven years must elapse before it can be rendered available to the metropolis; it therefore becomes important to inquire how far it is possible in the interim to ameliorate our present supply. The first and most obvious improvement would be the substitution of the constant for the intermittent system of delivery. With certain restrictions, all the metropolitan companies express their willingness to make this change, and with the unanimity of opinion regarding its advisability, it is difficult to account for the delay in effecting it, unless it arise from the paltry cost involved in the alteration of present fittings, which would fall upon the landlords of small tenements. Most towns of importance in Great Britain have been long supplied with water on the constant system; why then is this boon denied to London, where it is much more urgently required? Until this alteration is effected it is, for the bulk of the population, almost useless to improve the quality of the water. Where a supply for one or even two days has to be stored in a filthy butt, exposed to the foul atmosphere of a crowded court or alley, good and wholesome water can never reach the lips of the consumers.

The most formidable danger arising from the use of the present water supply is undoubtedly the liability to actual sewage contamination such as that which there is every reason to believe destroyed so many lives in the East of London last summer. The fearful import of such contamination is most graphically described by Dr. Farr, in the report of the Registrar General for the week ending July 28th, 1866. It is greatly to be wished that these reports which contain the weekly results of the great hygienic reactions of the community were more generally studied by the public, and especially by those who watch over the public health. It would be difficult, if not impossible, to find in the same space matter of greater or more immediate importance to a civilized nation, and it scarcely admits of doubt that by the prompt action rendered possible by these reports, thousands of lives were saved last summer in the metropolis alone. Describing what he saw in one of his visits to the East of London during the height of the cholera epidemic, Dr. Farr says:-"The mortality is overwhelming in some of the districts. In Poplar alone, 145; in Bow, 188 people died last week, including Dr. Ansell, the meritorious health officer, and Mr. Seeley, clerk to the Board of Works, whose name figures on the placards. The people are falling ill every hour; you see them of all ages, children and adults, lying about their beds like people under the influence of a deadly poison; some acutely suffering, nearly all conscious of their fate and of all that is going on around them. Here

the doctor is drawn in by the husband to see the wife now attacked; there the husband lies in spasms; here is an old woman seated dead with eyes wide open; there lies a fine four-year old child, his curly head drooping in death, but his mother says the pulse is strong and he takes what she gives him. An older brother just recovered is running about. Several wards of the London Hospital are full of patients, many of them very young children, in all stages of the disease; some dying, some well again and playing. The medical men have no rest, and with the Health Officers are nobly doing their duty; brave men ready to lay down their lives for their patients. The people themselves are most patient, most willing to help each other, the women always in front, and none shrinking danger. There is no desertion of children, husbands, wives, fathers, or mothers from fear."

This picture of misery, traced with such a high degree of probability by eminent medical authorities to the sewage pollution of water, suggests the inquiry whether or not anything can be done with regard to our present water supply to prevent such frightful accidents in future. How can we best protect ourselves against this noxious contamination? The answer is, there is no absolutely reliable protection. Filtration through animal charcoal is perhaps the best safeguard, but I have shown that this process fails to remove from water the matter which is believed to constitute cholera poison. Permanganate of potash is also an excellent purifier of water, but there is not the slightest evidence that this agent can destroy cholera poison. Boiling the water for a short time is no guarantee that its noxious qualities are destroyed, for even on the very probable supposition that cholera and other similar poisons are organic germs, we know that many such germs, especially those which are of a low type, retain their vitality after being boiled in water, or even after exposure to a temperature of 248° F. for a considerable time. The late Dr. Lindley mentions the fact of raspberry seeds germinating after being boiled for jam, and as syrup boils at a higher temperature than water these seeds must have been exposed to a heat considerably higher than that of boiling water. Nearly twenty years ago a curious red fungus or mould (Oidium aurantiacum) attacked the bread of Paris. M. Payen exposed pieces of bread, upon which spores of the fungus had been sown, for half-an-hour to a temperature of 248° F. in tubes; the red fungus afterwards germinated, although its vitality was destroyed when the temperature was raised to 284° F. I have incontrovertible evidence of the production of violent cramps and diarrhoea by the drinking of tea made from water which, previous to boiling, had become contaminated with sewage.

Nevertheless, whilst none of these methods can be relied upon for the destruction of noxious organic matter in water, I am far

from wishing to discourage their use as measures of precaution. More especially would I recommend filtration through animal charcoal as a most undoubted and valuable means of greatly reducing the amount of organic matter in water. I find that water will readily pass through a stratum of animal charcoal three feet thick at the rate of 41,472 gallons per day per square foot, the oxidizable organic matter contained in the water being reduced to one half. Five hundred tons of animal charcoal would be an ample quantity through which thus to pass the whole of the present metropolitan water supply. This at 137. per ton would cost 6,5007. The charcoal would require to be heated to redness in retorts or ovens for a couple of hours every six months. It would last for two years and would then be worth nearly half its original cost as

manure.

With regard to the excessive hardness of the London waters, it does not appear that any practicable scheme of amelioration has yet been contrived. Some years ago a beautiful and very simple process of softening hard waters by the addition of lime was devised by Dr. Clark of Aberdeen; but although this process has repeatedly been tried by water companies, it has invariably been again abandoned, since, notwithstanding the cheapness of the material employed, the amount of carbonate of lime deposited by the London waters, when submitted to this treatment, was, in the case of such vast volumes of water, so enormous as to cause the process to be pronounced impracticable. It is to be feared therefore that we must for the present be content to block up the pores of our skins with the greasy curd of hard water, but it is very desirable that the other ameliorations of which I have spoken should be carried out at once, although they ought not to delay the introduction of a water supply free from sewage contamination, for until such a supply reaches the metropolis its inhabitants will continue liable to repetitions of the terrible slaughter which occurred last summer, from the effects of which the east of London has not even yet recovered.

II. MR. JUKES AND THE GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY.*

Ir not unfrequently happens amongst large bodies of men whose affairs are conducted by a committee, council, or directorate, that the action of the executive will occasionally be disapproved of by some one or more individuals, who may even feel personally injured

* Additional Notes on the Grouping of the Rocks of North Devon and West Somerset with a Map and Section. By J. Beete Jukes, M.A., F.R.S., &c. Preceded by an Introductory Statement. Printed for circulation among the Fellows of the Geological Society of London. Dublin: Webb & Son, 1867, pp. 37.

thereby. Such differences are not unknown amongst scientific societies, and we now propose to discuss one which has recently arisen between the council and a distinguished Fellow of one of the most prominent of the learned societies-the Geological Society of London.

On March 7th of last year, Mr. J. B. Jukes, local director of the Geological Survey of Ireland, read before the Geological Society a paper "On the Carboniferous Slate (or Devonian rocks) and the Old Red Sandstone of South Ireland and North Devon," which was published in due course in the Society's Quarterly Journal,'* occupying fifty closely printed octavo pages. In this paper the author endeavoured to prove two points:-(1) that the Devonian rocks of North Devon are synchronous with the Carboniferous Slate of Ireland; and (2) that "the Lynton beds are on the same general horizon as those of Baggy Point and Marwood," although "there appears to be a regular ascending succession of rock-groups from Lynton to the latitude of Barnstaple," which Mr. Jukes endeavoured to explain by the aid of a "concealed fault running nearly east and west through the centre of North Devon with a large downthrow to the north. In this way he split up the great mass of Devonian rocks of North Devon into alternate zones of Carboniferous Slate and Old Red Sandstone (considered as distinct from Devonian).

Than this hypothesis it would be difficult to conceive a more startling heresy in British geology, and the reading of the paper was consequently followed by an animated debate, in which every speaker dissented from the view now for the first time expounded in England. Nevertheless the paper was published in full, for the idea was apparently new, and it is possible that future discoveries may lend it confirmation. Its author saw, however, that to convince his associates further evidence was necessary, and accordingly on the 7th of last November he read a second paper, the title of which is prefaced to this article. This paper, it appears, the council of the Society declined to publish, except in the form of an abstract without illustrations; and as this decision did not fall in with the views of the author, the council, at his request, returned to him his manuscript and illustrations, and published only the title of his paper in the Quarterly Journal.' Mr. Jukes has therefore printed his second paper as a pamphlet, prefacing it with some observations on the action of the council (at which he felt very much aggrieved), and on the history of the subject, and has sent a copy to every Fellow of the Geological Society.

Having thus placed our readers in possession of the essential facts, we can now discuss that part of Mr. Jukes's preface relating to the action of the council, in which he strikes at the fundamental *Op. cit., vol. xxii., No. 87, August, 1866, pp. 320–371. † See also 'Quart. Journ. Science,' No. XII.