On this page
-
Text (3)
-
wr> .„,. ~ , „ m•» , ^ ,, ^ MT ! \^ 0 A^^ RD ? T ?^^ ;t i3H IrI ££
-
Untitled Article
-
Untitled Article
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
-
-
Transcript
-
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.
Untitled Article
miles . This is the fifth , winter since they perished , and the drifting sands of that barren region , being in lat . 68 ° north , have piled in successive layers on the bones of these noble and ill-fated men . Mr . Stewart describes tte region as dreary in the extreme—not a Wade of grass or a stick of timber met the eye . No game of any kind could be found . The Esquimaux , from whom their information was obtained by signs , pressed their fingers int o their cheeks , and placing their hands on their stomachs , endeavoured to indicate tlie manner of their horrible death . TTiey were charged with killing them , but merely answered with their sighs . "
A boat , with the significant name "Terror painted on it j snow shoes of English make ; iron kettles , bearing the mark of the English Government ; and a few other articles , were brought away It is thought the crew must have travelled southward ( their vessels being probably crushed in Victoria Straits ) , and must have endeavoured to reach some of the Hudson Bay Company's poits . This as supposed to have been in 1849 and 1 850 ; but , when they reached tbe coast at the mouth of the Fish River , it is evident that death ensued from sheer exhaustion . Such is the close of one of the greatest tragedies of modern times .
Wr≫ .„,. ~ , „ M•» , ^ ,, ^ Mt ! \^ 0 A^^ Rd ? T ?^^ ;T I3h Iri ££
MR . F . O . WARD ON THE TUNNEL QUESTION AND ON THE NEW METROPOLITAN BOARD OF WORKS . * We have been accustomed , for some years past , to publish , ais documents of permanent value , the letters by which Mr . F . O . Ward has gradually advanced the town drainage que&tion from the uncertain condition in which , he found it , to its present relatively fixed and normal position . Mr . Ward ' s present struggle to secure small tunnels , as " the logical consequence , " to use hi . 8 own expression , " of small tubes , " is virtually concluded by 3 iis masterly letters , published in Beveral of the morning journals last Monday , in reply to Mr . Burnell , a civil engineer , put forward as the spokesman of the engineers who oppose Mr-Ward ' s views . We regret that the length of this letter ( which fills three columns and a half ) precludes our publishing it in extenso , but the following analysis conveys , we believe , its principal points . After a brief exordium , Mr . Ward states the views he contends for to be : — " That the reduction of size which lias been accomplished in street sewers , -with a large economy of public money , may now , with , proportionate advantage , be extended to the proposed main tunnels of the metropolis ; or , to put the same thing in other words , that £ 874 , 000 may be saved " on tlie north side , and a proportionate sum on the south , by the substitution of John Roe's middle-sized tunnels for tb > colossal tunnels of Messrs . Stephenson , Cubitt , Haywood , and Bazalgette . " This view having been contested , Mr . Ward proceeds to say , and the mathematical investigation invited by him having been successfully resisted by the Jebb party in the Court of Sewexs , he had no plternative but to appeal to the public ; and , to secure aublic attention , he put aside for the time the abstruse aspects of the question , aud suggested a " plain , practical issue , " based ou the principle that " the question of size is virtually a question of velocity . " That isBue is the now celebrated " turniptest ; " a term of which Mr . Ward thus explains the origin : — " The swifter the stream through a tunnel , the smallor the tunnel may be made . A formula which underrates velocity is a formula which overrates size , and so leads to extravagant expenditure . The formula set forth in the ' Data' of our antagonists aa having been employed by them in designing their colpsaal tunnela may , therefore , bo tested by the run of tho rivor Fleet . According to that formula , the Fleet , at a certain point name d , should run loss than two miles an hour : John Roo , at that point , baa 8 « en it run upwards of ton . John Roe ' s observations having ^ been questioned , I proposed to verify them by timing the descent of a float . And aa a turnip , swimming just under water , makes tbe best float for tho purpose , I happened to suggest its adoption . Hence tho expression ' turnip-teet . ' " Mr . Ward then proceeds to prove , Ln detail , that on tho 8 th of last November , Mr . Ba / . algette made out by his formula the run of the Fleet at tho point juamod ( PakonUam-streot ) to bo only Ik milo per hour , whereas a velocity of 8 uriloa per hour is uow , since the promulgation of the turnip-test , admitted by Mr . BasBftlgotto himself . So again , with respect to tho slope of tho l * l « et sower at this point , Mr . Word Bhova that on tho 8 th ult . Mr . BaKiilgotto put at nt one foot and a small fraction per milo ; whereas now a elope of 25 foot per milo in assigned , on Mr . IW , algotto a behalf to thin part of tho Floot eewor On this disorepaucy of Mr . BaKalgotto Mr . Ward thus oxpresses hiiuaolf : —
Untitled Article
January 12 , 1856 . ] THE LEADER . 2 Q wt
Untitled Article
• Thin article \ ym uii < ivol < lu . tily omitted li « mt wools . Wo luaort it now " a tltro do document . " " ^
" To the 10-foot sewer in Pakenham-sfcreet Mr Bazalgette assigned , on the 8 th ult ., a velocity of only 1 $ mile per hour instead of 8 , and a fall of only 1 * 018 foot ; per mile instead of 25 . " How is it that since the ' flippant' proposal of th « ' unphiloaophical' turnip-test , the velocity of th « Pokenham-street sewer has increased , in our opponents' estimation , upwards of six-fold , and its declivity nearly twenty-five fold ? " Does the mere prospect of this ' shallow' experiment strike our antagonists with such terror , that they hastily abandon ' delicate and abstruse' positions so boldly maintained only a short month since ? " The motive of the outcry raised against the c turnip-test * begins , I think , to be apparent . " This test ia feared because it affords an exjoeriinentum crucis , intelligible to the ratepayers at larg-e , and readily applicable to try tbe value of a formula hitherto wrapped in algebraic mystery . " It inspires alarm , because for one man who understands equations , or will take the pains to check a calculation , there are thousands who can time a float ; and are rather amused than otherwise at the idea of a turnip-race , with £ 874 , 000 staked on tie event . . " If a tunnel will flow twice aa fasfc as was supposed , it will also discharge twice as much , and need only be half as large ; whence a proportionate reduction of its cost . Such is the train of reasoning suggested by the turnip-test . It is not too profound for the most illiterate ratepayer ; it is not too long for the busiest . Hence the consternation in Great George-street , * hence the loud clamour and the precipitate retreat . " Mr . Ward adds , with as much force as moderation t" My antagonists describe my statements to be ' glaringly at variance with truth ,. " I do not retort -this expression . I merely call the reader's attention to it ; and leave its application in his hands /' Mr . Ward disclaims the intention imputed to lain by bis antagonist to settle the whole question , by " swimming a single float in a single length of sewer ;" he says : — " Iii casting ( so to speak ) our symbolic turnip on the waters , we challenge our antagonists w > submit their views , with ours , to tbe test of a series of experiments , as varied as those of John Roe , and sufficiently numerous to prove him right or wrong . " So , again , in taking the Fleet se-wer for purposes of illustrative comparison , we would by no means be understood to set up that stream alone as an absolute standard . John Roe compared its flow with tb . at of many other sewers ; and the table -which embodies his results ( see ' Minutes of Information on Town Drainage / p . 67 ) is founded , not on individual cases , but on broad averages formed with due allowance for disturbing circumstances . Amongst these , in the case of the Fleet , may be instanced , on the one "hand , the steepness of its upper end , to which ' Engineer * directs attention ; and , on the other , tbe multiplied obstructions to ita current , which ' Engineer' passes unnoticed . " These obstructions he proceeds to enumerate , showing that they give an a fortiori value to the velocity observed in the fleet sewer ; while , on . the other hand , some deduction muat be made for the " initial speed " acquired by the stream in descending the steep upper end of the Fleet valley : a circumstance , he adds , " which my antagonists wholly ignore . " He then proceeds to observe : — " It will , therefore , I trust , be understood , that in comparing the Pnkenham-street sewer with the proposed middle level intercepting tunnel , I keep fully in view the different circumstances of the two caBGB ; being only absolute in my denial of our antagonists' absolute formula . As , in the case of tho Fleet , that formula gives a theox ctic velocity of 1 ^ milo per hour , against an observed velocity of 8 miles au hour ; bo , I contend , in the case of the middle level tunnel , will the real velocity lavgely exceed the theoretic two miles an hour , assigned by the aamo formula . Tliat the excess in this case , as in the caao of the Fleet , will be xactly in the proportion of 1 J to 8 , I neither affirm nor deny . Many points require to bo known and considered before tho precise deviation of the formula from truth can bo determined , in . any given caao—as , for instance , amongst other things , tho number and position of tho tributaries . But the excess of tho real over tho- theoretic velocity is so large aa to leave room for all reasonable deductions and allowauoea , and otill remain ample for our purpose . For , aa wo only propose a reduction , of about half in tho collective capacity of our antagonists' colossal tunuola ( moasured at tho outfall ) , our view will bo juBtifiod if tho real bo only doublo the calculated velocity , instead of sixfold , aa in the case of tho Fleet : and on thia wo may confidently reoicon . " After mooting his antagonists' doubts whether tho small tunnels provides uufnoiontly for prospective y > opulation , Mr . Ward proceeds to answer the quontion , " Would not tlnoso small tuunolu burnt , and flood tho town during extraordinary utormn 3 " On than head , Mr . Ward turtle the tablet * on Lin antagonists an follows : —
nJ ! 2 f ? % *^ S ^ not > de Pe *** <> n the ratio of its discharging power to the quantity of water it receives . John Roe's tunnels are designed with a liberal margin of discharging power beyond the amount required . " Similar praise cannot , I fear , be bestowed , on the designs , colossal though they be , of our eminent antagonists . Their high-level tunnel , for instance ( the characteristic feature of their scheme ) , whether tested by their public or their private formula—for they have t-wo ( see ' Calculations , ' p . 14 )—proves to be throttled at the outfall . To remedy this serious evil , Mr . Stephenson , as I have elsewhere stated , proposes to work this tunnel under pressure ; employing an accumulated head of water above , to force a passage through the stricture below . This proposal , if carried into effect , would indeed involve the bursting pressure , and the liability to flooding , so properly deprecated b y Mr . Burnell ; whose commendable anxiety on this head should therefore take a different direction . " John Roe , I may mention in passing , avoids altogether this costly high-level diversion . He does not provide an enormous tunnel to take the -water of sudden storms from the Hampstead hills to the Lea river ; but allows them , to flow down their natural channel , the Fleet ( aided at one point by a loop-line ) , to the Thames , of which they aid the scour . So with the Ranelagh waters , further westward . John Roe does not , like Mr . Stephenson , take them in a subterranean river to the Lea at Stratford , but gives all the relief required by bifurcating tbe Hanelagh sewer at its outfall . The adoption of these simple expedients will save veiy large sums of money . " Controversialists would do well to imitate the tone of Mr . Ward ' s next remarks : — " I pass over—as beside the purpose , and . probably in some degree inconsiderate—Mr . Burnell ' s speculations as to my desire for a lucrative appointment , and the epithets which escape him in referring to my person and my principles . In debates of this kind the public attention is given not to epithets , but to arguments . The disputant who provides solid facts and sound reasonings may rely on his readers to find epithets ; and to apply them as deserved . " Mr ^ Ward thus speaks of Mr . Hoe's contributions to hydraulic science , and of the prevalent ignorance of ita laws : — " I know of no investigations , previous to those of John Roe , affording any reliable information as to the flow v of water in a ramified system of town sewers , John Roe was the first to determine , by actual experiment , the yield of various classes of town surface during showers of various intensities . And John Roe also first pointed out the effect of numerous affluents on the discharging power of a tunnel . Of the ignorance that has prevailed , and still prevails , on these important questions , we have excellent proof in the fact that , up to the 8 th of last month , the engineerin-chief of the Metropolitan Commission of Sewers ( Mr . Bazalgette ) was actually under the impression that the maximum velocity of the Fleet , in running through a ten-foot tunnel , was only one mile and onethird per hour , for which creeping pace the swift rush of eight miles per hour is now ( "thanks to the turniptest ) substituted by coinruon consent . " Mr . Ward then adverts to Mr . Burnett ' s display of hydrodynanaic erudition ; quotes D'Aubuisson ; states the precise error of his antagonists' formula ; puts forth , one of tho boldest challenges we have ever seen offered ; adds a striking familiar illustration of his point ; and winds up his , letter by a reference to the downfall of the Jeob party , and the advent of Mr . Thwaites to power . These concluding portions of hiai letter wo transcribe at length : — " Mr . Burnell makes an impressive display of hydrodynamic erudition ; enumerating , and recommending for my perusal , the works of 32 authors , from Galileo to D'Aubuisson . As , however , Mi " . Burnell makes no quotation from any of those authorities , I will supply the omission . * ' D'Avibuisson , at page 124 of hie excellent ' Traite d'Hydrauliquo , ' observes that the accelerating force of gravity , which urges a stream of -water onward , ' no dependra quo de la pente a la surface' ( will only depend on the declivity of tho surface . ) " It is precisely in tho negleot of this principle that the main error of Messrs . Stephenson , Haywood , Cubitt , aud Baxalgette consists . Their formula takes aa the fall , not tho surface but the bottom declivity ; not the fall of tho stream itaelf , but 'the fall of tho aowor iu feet por mile . ' ( Vide ' Data , ' p . 4 . ) Fox thorn , therefore , the strewn , in a tunnel , falling ono foot por mile , has thia precise declivity and no more , whether it bo flowing only eight or ten inches doop , or whotljor it bo swollen by rains to tho depth of aa many foot . Erroneously assuming ( with Bossut ) an absolute parallelism between tho elopo of tho steam » nd that of tho channel , they ignore such modern observations as thos « of Mr . Rawlinson nt ilitchin , who , in a 15-inoh pipe , 235 feet long , falling only eight inches from end to ond , found tho stronna , vtrhon flowing full at tho head , only nix inchos doop at tho outfull . They overlook the obvious fact that , iu
-
-
Citation
-
Leader (1850-1860), Jan. 12, 1856, page 29, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse2.kdl.kcl.ac.uk/periodicals/l/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2123/page/5/
-