of water-quite out of proportion, in my judgment, to all reasonable requirements for health and proper sanitary arrangements. Then I notice it is made compulsory to use cisterns in houses. In clause 5 of the Regulations it says, "To secure to consumers a sufficient supply when the general draught is greatest, a cistern, to be called the house cistern, holding not less than 25 gallons (increasing in size in proportion to the size of the house) must be provided in each dwelling." According to the test which we made at the flow, I am inclined to say that a house cistern is not required at all, and I think it is exceedingly objectionable. I have a great objection to cisterns; I think they are abominations in most towns, and where you can get a supply direct from the main, by all means do it, and I don't see in this case why it should not be done. Those are most of the notes I have made, Mr. President, and I won't detain the meeting any longer, as I know time is short.

Mr. PARKER: I should like to ask Mr. Winship, seeing that in this case it is proposed to use the inferential meters, if he has tested them with the Kennedy's positive meter. I am inclined to think that meters for domestic purposes are not only a mistake from a sanitary point of view, but it is almost criminal on the part of the Corporation to insist upon them, because persons would abstain from using that amount of water which is essential for flushing closets and for sanitary purposes and so be prejudicial to the drains themselves. I could not tell, like the previous speaker, why this cistern to hold not less than 25 gallons was wanted at all; and then with regard to inferential meters, I could so arrange the stoptap as to have all the water I required, and not have one gallon recorded by the meter itself. I do not know whether there is a minimum charge made whether the persons consume any water or not, but there should be, or the financial results will be disastrous. I observe that previous to September last the price charged was 1s. 6d. per 1000 gallons, and now it is 1s., and there would be 6s. per annum interest to pay on the rental of the meter itself. I contend that the gross waste of water can be prevented, and without the adoption of meters; all that is required is double chamber cisterns. The consumption is very low. Only thirty-nine houses, as I understand, have been connected with this system, and it has been about two years in operation. I happen to know that at Bridgwater, where the works were constructed by Messrs. Oakley, there were no meters, and at the end of October 1879-in one

year and nine months-they had put on 1300 houses, representing a gross water rental of 12007. per annum, in that short time. I have no doubt it will be a long time before you can get a sufficient revenue to pay for that outlay under the present arrangement, and I say a constant and unlimited supply can be given without meters at all, as was done really in that case, by seeing that a proper class of fittings are adopted. With regard to authorised plumbers, I am afraid Mr. Winship, like many waterworks managers, will find that a difficult question. I do not know whether there are any who do work and are not authorised, but even if a plumber refuses to become authorised or to subscribe to these rules, if he does his work in a satisfactory manner, I take it that you cannot refuse to pass the work. I object on sanitary grounds to these meters.

Mr. TAYLOR: I should like to know whether Tylor's patent meter was selected after having tried other patent meters, or if they use it because they think it the best; and can the author of the paper give us an analysis of the water?

Mr. GAMBLE: I see in the regulations it says, "No pipe for the conveyance of water supplied by the authority shall communicate with any cistern, bath, boiler, or other receptacle not approved by the authority; and no bath shall be so constructed that water can flow into and out of it at the same time." How would Mr. Winship construct a vat if the tap is not to run? I see a difficulty in that being carried out. Then further on it says, "all taps must be self-closing," but there has been great difficulty experienced in frosty weather with these taps, and some people may not be able to get them to work properly. And clause 16 says, "A supply of water for domestic purposes does not include a supply of water for any trade or business whatever." But it all goes through the meters, and I don't see what it is to do with the authority if the water is used for any other purpose. Looking at it from a business point of view, if they wanted to create a dividend and make it a success financially, they must sell the greatest quantity they could. They also say, "Two days' notice must be given before any alteration or addition is made to any existing pipes and fittings." If connections are made, I hardly see that affects the authorities so much, if every drop of water will pass through the meters. I don't see the utility of these two clauses.

Mr. READ: I agree with Mr. Parker's observations as to these inferential meters. My experience of meters similar to those of Tylor's is, that they register very well as long as they are clean,

and in good order, but they gradually and slowly decrease in the registering until they stop altogether, if they are not well looked after. What we do is to have a rent based upon the rateable value of the house. That is the lowest charge made to the consumer, and when the meter registers in excess of that a charge is made accordingly for the additional quantity.

Mr. VAWSER: The matter we have been called upon to consider to-day refers less to the regulations for the use of water than to the somewhat novel scheme of introducing water into the town of Abingdon. I am glad we shall have some record of this scheme on our books, because it is in its way a very novel scheme indeed. Mr. Pritchard some time ago brought under the notice of the Association a somewhat similar scheme he had laid out for the town of Warwick, and I shall be glad indeed if some arrangement can be made to incorporate with this volume, and in connection with this discussion, some brief details of the work that Mr. Pritchard carried out some years ago at Warwick. There are a number of details in connection with the rules that one would like to discuss, but I think our visit to Abingdon was more for the purpose of seeing the syphon principle than for discussing plumbers' regulations, and I merely refer to them again in order to say that where it is possible to supply an unrestricted quantity of water to the inhabitants it is infinitely better so than where the water must be restricted to a meter service and charged for by meter. Of course there are places where the limited supply of water available would render it necessary to restrict it, and in such a case the Local Board could be excused, but as a principle, the supplying water by meter is very much to be deplored.

Mr. COULTHURST: I understand the cost of the works was something over 90007., and the present rental for supplying 118 consumers is 937. per annum. I think it is important to see if 1s. per 1000 gallons is sufficient to make it remunerative. My own opinion is that it would be far from remunerative, and no doubt the people are told if they are not economical in using the water they will have a heavy bill to pay, and in consequence they do not use a sufficient quantity to ensure cleanliness and proper sanitary precautions. With regard to the connections to the house, I don't know whether you charge from the main to the house, or whether that is put in at the expense of the occupiers. I should like to know what quantity of water is used for other than domestic purposes, street water, and the like. I entirely agree with what has been said by Mr. Lemon

with regard to the nuisance of storage cisterns for domestic supply.

Mr. DOWNING: I stated before the Members started that they would see some most interesting works, and I have no doubt my prophecy has been fulfilled. I forgot to ask Mr. Winship whether the 4-inch hole through the soapy clay he speaks of still remains open. He says in his paper that nearly the whole of the water was secured from the rock above, and that a small quantity came out of the clay, and I suppose he has not closed the 4-inch hole. I observe he took a wise precaution in leaving the mains open and testing them in lengths, and the advisability was proved by the result. One portion it seems to me had a large proportion of defective joints on so small a main. With regard to the meter question, I may mention that the Abingdon Corporation consulted me in a friendly way through Mr. Winship, when the question was first mooted, and so far as I remember, I told them that it behoved them to be very cautious in adopting a meter system, and I mentioned that at that time I did not know of more than one town in the kingdom that was supplied solely by a meter system. I said the consumption would be somewhere about five gallons per head, and I find from Mr. Winship's paper that it is 5.99. In considering the expense and what should be charged per 1000 gallons, I told them they would not get sufficient revenue from their customers unless they charged 2s. 6d. per 1000 gallons. The price charged was 1s. 6d. per 1000 gallons, and now it is 18., and that seems to me exceptionally low. I did not know until it was mentioned to-day that the cost of the works was 90007., and from present appearances they will only have a small revenue to cover the expense they have been at. I see the revenue is 937. per annum, and Mr. Winship gives one or two instances of revenue derived from respective houses. I will take one instance where the rateable value is 597., but that appears somewhat exceptional from the fact that there are eighteen persons in it; their consumption was 62,000 gallons for the year. Perhaps you will excuse me if I take the charges for the water in the city of Oxford, and compare them with those of Abingdon to show the difference. I take our own city because I am more conversant with it. I may mention that Mr. Winship does not in his paper say whether this 5.99 covers the supply of water to closets, but I take it that it does. I take the case of the City of Oxford Waterworks on a rental of 597., and with two water-closets, our charge for that would be two guineas

per annum; 17. 9s. 6d. at 6d. in the pound on the gross rental, and 10s. for the first water-closet, and 2s. 6d. for the second. But according to Mr. Winship, the charge by meter for 62,000 gallons would be 37. 2s., and with the meter 37. 8s. Taking a 207. rental, our charge would be 6d. in the pound and 7s. for the closet, that would make 17s. per annum. Taking five inmates in a house of 207. a year, you would have 11s. for your meter consumption and 6s. for the rent of meter, which makes 17s., coming to exactly the same as the City charges at the present time. And going lower to a 127. house, our charge would be 6s. for the domestic supply, and 4s. for the closet, making 10s. per annum. In a 127. house it is fair

to assume you would still have your average of five inhabitants, and so represented by meter supply the 127. would still be 11s. and 6s. for meter, which I think very heavy. With regard to cisterns for houses, I agree most positively with the remarks of previous speakers. I think they are absolutely a nuisance for any domestic supply whatever. Whilst engineer in Oxford, I had constant complaints with regard to them, and infinite trouble to contend with, and they were especially a nuisance, at one time, seeing we had an intermittent supply, and that somewhat rendered cisterns necessary. Directly the water was turned on in one district the effect of it coming on again was that it disturbed it, and we never got clean water. A previous speaker has referred to taking water without registration, and I know it is quite possible to take water from these inferential meters without any registration at all. All you need do is to have a cistern and draw gently from it. With regard to the regulations I cannot say that they are required. If you have your meter, I cannot see that you require them. I think the nuisance of a meter is this-to take this 127. rental-that the man will say to his wife, "You must not have so much water," and they use as a consequence dirty water and little of it. I have no more to say particularly on this subject, but I will mention one thing that I omitted on Thursday night in returning thanks for the kind manner in which my health was proposed. I have spoken to the Mayor, and I think it a great pity that such an arrangement cannot be made with all sanitary authorities, at all events that your annual meeting should not be more fully attended than it is. I think the Secretary should write to the respective boards and sanitary authorities, and call attention to the fact. I would go further, and say the sanitary authorities should devote a sum per annum to pay the expenses of those who attend, because it is for the benefit of