766 
PROCEEDINGS OF SECTION II. 
the catacombs.” Elise Heel us has it that “ both Homans and 
Hellenes believed that wells and quarries retarded the disturbances of 
the earth, and were a protection to buildings in their neighbourhood.” 
Humboldt relates that the inhabitants of Sail Domingo sink wells in 
order to weaken the effects of earthquakes ; and Professor Milne has 
it that “ Quito receives protection from the numerous canons in the 
neighbourhood, whilst Lactacimga, fifteen miles distant, has often been 
destroyed,” and similarly, he thinks, “it is extremely probable that 
many portions of Tokiohave from time to time been protected more or 
less from the severe shocks of earthquakes by the numerous moats and 
deep canals which intersect it.” In addition to the foregoing, many 
of our modern inquirers believe that deep foundations are a great 
preservative from the effects of earthquakes, but the security here 
* sought for will greatly depend on the distance from the seismic focus 
and the nature of the substratum. 
Dr. H. J. Jolmston-Lewis, when reviewing the effects of the 
earthquake in Ischia in 1883, found that “ houses built on the sea land 
suffered very much less than neighbouring ones built on alluvial and 
therefore loose incoherent tufa ; and these latter again suffered much 
less than those built on the comparatively hard tufa rock of the 
island. The maximum damage occurred on or in the neighbourhood 
of the masses of highly elastic trachyte.” 
In reference to Casamicciola, he continues : — “ W e have a striking 
example of the effects of geological structure in modifying earthquake 
violence, for here we see how the looser the particles of a rock are, on 
which buildings rested, the less they have suffered. Were it not for 
tidal waves it appears that it would be preferable to build on the 
seashore, where they would have a foundation of sand.” Prom all 
the facts he concludes that “ buildings should be placed on nearly 
level ground, and at a distance from any declivity or cliff edge.” 
Individually, be prefers the principle of fixing the buildings firmly 
to the ground, and communicating the earth’s movement to the whole 
simultaneously. 
Professor Milne, writing of foundations, remarks that “ one 
suggestion is to place a building upon iron balls.” Another method he 
suggests is “ to place a building on two sets of rollers — one set resting 
on the other set at right angles. The Japanese themselves build their 
houses on round stones.” The professor is of opinion that “ one of 
the safest houses for an earthquake country would probably be a one- 
storied, strongly framed wooden house, with a light flatfish roof made 
of shiDgles or sheet iron, the whole resting on a quantity of small 
iron balls.” 
Dr. Jolmston-Lewis, when writing on the system of supporting 
buildings on iron balls or similar mechanical arrangements such as 
those adopted by Professor Milne in Japan, objects to them because of 
their great cost, and the difficulty attending this mode of construction, 
and thinks he is right in adding the comparative uncertainty of action, 
combined with the fact that it affords protection from umlulatory 
motions only. He says : — “ Of course it might be possible to introduce 
a kind of spiral spring mattress above the balls to absorb vertical 
motion, but with such arrangements a dwelliug-liouse would represent 
a great and costly seismograph.” 
