Page:The Building News and Engineering Journal, Volume 22, 1872.djvu/471

 May 31, 1872. THE BUILDING NEWS. 449 eee that the air or ventilating pipe of soil pipe should be as large assoil-pipe itself, but a little sensible con- sideration soon shows the fallacy of his reasoning. The soil-pipe is for the passage of dense and non- compressible matters, whereas air is the opposite ; and, under the circumstances alluded to, to put in the same sizeof pipe for ventilation as for soil is simply a waste of both money and material—with which system true science has no sympathy. One might aswell say the nostrils ought to be as large as the mouth! Referring to the gas gathering at the upper bend of the syphon-trap, as per Q, Fig. 118, p. 392, Mr. Slage tells us that the foul air or gas gathers there, “because the ventilating pipe above it [or rather above main soil-pipe, I suppose he means] is con- tracted, and prevents the free exit of the foul air upwards and out into the atmosphere above the roof.” Now, that idea is totally wrong, for although the ventilating-pipe on top of soil-pipe was even larger than soil-pipe, that would neither prevent nor take away the gas gathering at Q, Fig. 118, for the simple reason that the top of upper bend of syphon- trap at Q is several inches, more or less, as the case may be, higher than the junction of branch with main soil-pipe, as is shown by Fig. 118. Conse- quently, it appears to me as a practical tradesman—and as a humble student of theory, I trust, too—that a 2in. or 24in. main ventilating-pipe, and a in. branch ventilating-pipe, will answer the purpose in the case in question not only better than Mr. Slagg’s pian, but Mr. Slagg’s full-sized ventilating-pipe would do no good whatever to gas at Q, unless, indeed, he likewise went to the expense of also carrying up a full-sized ventilating-pipe from Q, which, however, would be simply absurd. Then, to tell us that ventilating-pipes, if put in smaller than soil-pipes, “tare worse than useless,” is simply a piece of gross presumption; and to add that. supposing a fourth part of the foul air found its way out at roof through the 2in. or 24in, ventilating-pipe referred to at p. 392, the other three-fourths would escape into the house, is a pure dream; and, as a_ practical plumber, I would like to know how it could get in if the work were done as described at page 392. I take an interest in this matter, owing to some of my remarks and drawings appearing in the January numbers of the Buripine News upon the subject; and, in looking over my books for December last, I find that the putting in of even a 13in. ventilating-pipe on top of the soil- pipe into which four water-closets and baths led, one above the other, had the effect of at once curing a bad smell complained of: the soil-pipe had been fitted up originally without any ventilating-pipe:at all. I am afraid the principal end to be served by putting in full-sized ventilating-pipes above soil-pipes, would be to counteract bad jointing, &e., as far as possible, while the number of cases of typhoid fever among the upper classes, so often occurring, forces one to ask, ‘In how many points are things improperly done?” And, in the case of Sandringham House, referred to at page 392, the idea cannot help getting into one’s mind. If mere accident, as it would appear, has disclosed one mistake, how many more may exist? I had a visit this week froma south-country master plumber, who frankly con- fessed being in the habit of doing the work in gentle- men’s houses, where agood job was required, in the way shown by Fig. 119, and he had thought it very fine!—I am, &c., PLUMBER. May 25. HOUSE PLANNING COMPETITION. Srr,—It is a question whether your last illustration, ““Cofite qu'il Coiite,” in connection with the above, is open to the same amount of severe criticism that the preceding designs have been subject to. Granted that it is, the plan, possessing the merit of a varied ‘outline, also betokens that compactness (which is so essential in a villa, and so seldom met with), has, in this case, been studied to a greater extent than in most of the other designs. In looking at the various ‘arrangements, there exist some objectionable ones apparent tothe most superficial observer, and evi- dently the result of an over-anxiety to retain the compactness that exists. 1. The w.c. on half-space landing will apparently hang at least 2ft. Gin. below the ceiling of morning room, although in recess, yet the distinctness with which the operations will be heard cannot but be disagreeable; further, those entering w.c. cannot fail to be observed from door of dining-room and hall generally. 2. The “servery” arrangement is unsatisfactory; smells from kitchen will inevitably penetrate where not required ; to say nothing of door being too close to chimney breast in dining room; and please to imagine yourself the host or carver with your back to the fire. 3. The hall entrance to kitchen cannot be looked upon with satisfaction—the apology for a lobby does not improve it. 4. Could a worse position be found for the housemaid’s sink ?—hard up to door of best bedroom, and should door (to sink) be ajar, the in- side would be exposed to the view of all coming upstairs. What provision is there for housemaid’s closet either on ground or first floor, or both?» Where is the china to be kept? No larder nor stove! No wine or beer cellar! Will the pantry suffice (8ft. x 3ft.!) for all these purposes? A £25 a year ‘‘ semi-detached” contains most of these con- veniences. By-the-bye, will any of your readers measure the height from kitchen floor to floor of bedroom over (8ft. 6in., I think), and say it is sufficient for a kitchen?- The foregoing demerits, though seemingly trifles, would prove serious annoyances at times.—I am, &c., Liverpool, May 28. Juntus Brutvs. Srr,—I must emphatically protest against the in- justice done to me by giving priority, in illustrating, to the designs for villa residence, and also against your unfairness in not allowing me the opportunity of re- futing the errors attributed to exist in my design, “fn Avant”—errors for which Mr. James Hicks should have had the credit, and not I. Your columns appear to be ever open for the justifi- cation of Messrs. Lockwood and Hicks, and in your (?) description of the latter gentleman’s design you have the candour to admit (what in his design is very apparent), that the remark of the referees with regard to the non-provision for rain water in roofs was a mis- take. Why, therefore, you withhold the same amount of justice from me I cannot conceive, unless, indeed, the absence in my case of the 12in, x Gin. brass plate of which ‘‘Docendo Discimus” speaks in his letter, published in your paper of to-day, is the secret. I trust, in common fairness, you will not longer with- hold the publication of my design for the sake of illustrating those of secondary importance in the competition, and until the interest of lookers-on shall have died out, when its appearance would be comparatively unimportant.—I am, &c., West Bromwich, May 25. Bens. C. HUGHES. (Mr. Hughes should blame himself and not us. His drawing was sent with the others to the photo-litho- graphers, and after several ineffectual attempts and mére than usual expense, an impression fit for publi- casion could not be produced. All the other drawings were reproduced with comparative ease. For photo- litho. purposes his plan lacked good draughtsmanship, as the above letter lacks good taste. In one respect we ought to sympathise with each other, as he has lost his temper, and we have lost our cash.—ED.] ECCLESIASTICAL DILAPIDATIONS ACT, 1871. Srr,—It has been thought by some of the Diocesan Surveyors that it would be very desirable to have a meeting of all the surveyors appointed under this Act in London early in June, for the purpose of discussing the Act, and promoting uniformity of practice, and for discussing fees, &c. We have been requested to communicate with the surveyors in the Province of Canterbury, and Mr. Johnson, of Newcastle-upon-Tyne, with those in the Province of York, on the subject; and we shall feel obliged if surveyors will inform one of us, by a line on an early day, if they would be able and willing to attend such a meeting.—We are, &c., Epwarp G. Bruton, Diocesan Suryeyor, Oxon. RALPH NICHOLSON, Diocesan Surveyor, Ripon. R. REYNOLDS Rowe, Diocesan Surveyor, Cambridge. S. Michael’s Chambers, Oxford. Antercommunication, QUESTIONS. 2575.]—Tool-Chest.—Will some reader kindly give a sketch of a good tool-chest, showing the longi- tudinal and transverse section, with sizes of the drawers marked ?—AMATEUR. (2576.|—Liverpool Churches.—I should feel obliged if any of your Liverpool readers can adyise me of the names of churches in the neighbourhood which may be accepted as good examples of pure Gothic, and also the various styles of same.—BRUTUS. REPLIES, (2570.)—Brick-Burning Kilns.—In reply to; “w.,” I am myself an inventor of a new continuous kiln, also am a licensee of Hoffman’s patent. Both systems are in constant use at my works. If ‘“ W.” will apply to me at Poole Works, Woodville, near Burton-on-Trent, I would forward him full particulars. —E. ENsoR. PARLIAMENTARY NOTES. QUEEN-SQUARE, WESTMINSTER.—Mr. OC. Bentinck moved on Tuesday “Thatin the opision of this House it would conduce to the convenience of the public if a carriage communication were opened between Queen-square, Westminster, Birdcage-walk, and 8S. James’s-street.” The hon. member recapitu- lated the steps that had already been taken to improve the communications between Queen-square and 8. James’s-street, and described what yet remained to be done, contending that the convenience of the public was seriously concerned in the improvemené of these communications. . Against the plea that he was asking Imperial money for local purposes, he urged that the improvement of London was no longer a local question. Thanks to the railways, all the kingdom came to London, and had a common interest in the perfecting of its communications. Mr, Ben- tinck was proceeding with his observations, when the House was counted out. THE BIRMINGHAM SEWERAGE Bitt.—In the House of Commons on Tuesday, the report of the Select Committee on the Birmingham Sewerage Bill was brought up, and agreed to, and the Bill was ordered to be read a third time. os ee LEGAL INTELLIGENCE. EXHIBITIONS IN ART AND Scrence.—IMPORTANT JupGMENT. —In full Court of Appeal in Chancery on Thursday week, it wasdecided that the Endowed Schools Commissioners have a right of supervision over Meyrick Exhibitions in Jesus College, Oxford. This decision affects all exhibitions in art, science, or learning. VESTRIES AND CoNTRACTORS.—Mr. Justice Quain tried on Saturday an action brought by a builder named Baker to recover damages for injuries sustained by him. About nine o’clock one evening in April, 1871, he was driving a pony and cart along the Seven Sisters-road towards Holloway-road. His wheel came in contact with a heap of flagstones, which were piled several feet from the kerb; the plaintiff was thrown out of the cart and a good deal hurt. The defendant, Mr. Trickett, is a contractor, and was doing work for the Vestry of 8S. Mary, Islington. It was submitted that the defendant was not liable, as he was acting under the yestry. The jury said the injury wasoccasioned by the defendant's negligence. They found a verdict for the plaintiff for £50. ay WATER SUPPLY AND SANITARY MATTERS. Guascow. — With the view of ventilating the sewers of Glasgow, and destroying the foul emana- tions from them, the Police Board haye resolved to connect them with several large chimneys through- out the city. Wuitwoop.—An inquiry into the sanitary con- dition of the township of Whitwood, near Castleford, was held last week, by Mr. J. T. Harrison, from the office of the Local Government Board. The Com- missioner commented on the apathy shown by the members of the Board, and pointed out that one of their first duties should have been to adopt a system of sewerage. He would hayeno hesitation inrecom- mending to the Local Government Board that the Whitwood Board be called upon to show cause why they had not carried out a system of main sewerage, and that within six months they should be ordered to carry out such a system.—In the course of some conversation that followed, the Commissioner sug- gested that Castleford and Whitwood should unite in a common outfall; and Mr. Richardson, steward for Lord Mexborough, stated that he believed his Lordship would grant land at a reasonable rent for irrigation purposes. CAMBRIDGE.—A report has been received from Mr Bateman, the engineer consulted by the University as to the diversion of the sewage from the River Cam. He proposes to divert the flow of sewage by the construction of main and branch sewers, at an estimated cost of £16,500, and this sum, added to the sum required for pumping station, engines, deposit— ing tanks, and pipes to Stourbridge-common, will involve a total expenditure of £32,000. This is ex- clusive of such expenses as must be incurred by the respective colleges in altering their conveniences and reversing the drains within their precincts. West Ripinc oF YorxKsuiRE.—Several towns in the West Riding of Yorkshire, suffering from the in- convenience arising from the system of emptying the sewage in the rivers, are considering the best means of remedying the nuisance, and the Corpora- tions of Sheffield, Doncaster, Barnsley, and Rother- ham intend holding a conference on the subject. aS The Wesleyan Chapel at Etruria, Potteries, has recently undergone extension and improvement. The building has been extended 16ft. at the rear. The body of the chapel has been pewed ; the in- terior newly fitted up and decorated neatly ; the ex- terior cemented, and the porch laid with encaustic tiles, furnished gratuitously by Messrs. Cork, Udge, & Malkin, of Burslem. Thealterations have been made by Mr. Barlow, of Stoke, from the designs of Messrs. Scrivener & Son, of Hanley.