•510 Proceedings. 



NiinTH Meeting : 9th January, 1889. 

 W. M. Maskell, F.E.M.S., President, in the chair. 



New Members. — H. Taperell, W. Herbert, H. W. Eobinson, 

 and George Denton. 



Papers. — 1. " A Note in reference to a Paper which ap- 

 peared in Vol. XX. of the ' Transactions,' on ' Gravitation,' " 

 by T. Wakehn, M.A. 



Abstbact. 



Lord Grimthorpe says that he copied the figures as for an iron jar 

 from a well-known paper by Baily, P.E.H.S., who gave 6-8in. as 

 lieight of mercury for glass jar. He subsequently worked out Baily's 

 paper, and found a great mistake, which he says he has corrected in the 

 new edition of the " Encyclopaedia Britannica." This, however, is a 

 mistake : the figures 6-Sin. are uncorrected. The height should be 8§in. 

 to 9in. 



2. " On Sanitary Sewerage," by H. P. Higginson, 

 M.Inst.C.E. {Transactions, p. 369.) 



Mr. Maxwell considered that one of the chief merits of this scheme 

 over others that had been proposed was that it would obviate the neces- 

 sity of having contour-sewers at great depth, passing through private 

 property, and causing great inconvenience and expense ; and another 

 advantage was that the ejectors could be placed in duplicate. 



Sir J. Hector had always favoured this scheme. It dealt with what 

 was absolutely necessary, and nothing more. There were, comparatively 

 speaking, no gases given off as in the old system, and the drains were 

 self-cleansing, and did not require to wait for a flood to wash them out. 

 The perfect tightness of the drains was also a great recommendation, 

 and the ease with which they could be laid without going to any great 

 depth. It was a pity more information as to comparative cost had not 

 been given. He had explained this system to the engineers in Mel- 

 bourne, where it seemed unknown, and in which city the drainage was 

 very imperfect. 



Mr. Hughes did not think the cost of this system would be so much 

 less as at first appeared, as there would have to be a separate system for 

 surface-drainage. He was doubtful whether the houses would be en- 

 tirely free from the return gas, as stated. 



The Hon. E. Pharazyn did not think gas would escape. The 

 separate drains for rain would not be expensive. This sj^stem seemed to 

 have great advantages over, and to do away with many objections to, old 

 drainage-plans. There would be no difficulty in procuring information 

 as to the cost of establishing such a systexn in Wellington. The thanks 

 of the public were due to Mr. Higginson for this practical paper. 



Mr. Richardson thought it would be a good plan to try this scheme 

 on a small scale before finally deciding as to its merits. He thought it 

 would answer admirably. 



Mr. Higginson, in reply to Mr. Maxwell, stated that the " Shone " 

 system, applied to Wellington, would avoid the annoyance and expense 

 attendant upon interference with pri%"ate properties, as the sewers could 

 be constructed entirely upon the street-lines. Mr. Clark's high-level 

 contour-sewer, which for the greater part of its length passed through 

 private land, would entail a heavy outlay for compensation. 



In answer to Sir James Hector, the author said it was now accepted 

 as a fact that the " separate " system enabled the size of the sewers to be 

 properly proportioned, and avoided the necessity for constructing huge 

 brick sewers in order to carry off an exceptional rainfall, the result 

 being that in dry weather the flowing contents were represented by a 



