Licence: Public Domain Mark
Credit: Punjab sanatory report. 1862. Source: Wellcome Collection.
Provider: This material has been provided by London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine Library & Archives Service. The original may be consulted at London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine Library & Archives Service.
13/100 (page 5)
![Essential differences in the barrack system. ( ) the reception of both fluid and solid refuse matter being deposited on the sand, E. The immediate removal of all refuse matter from the latrine itself, and the careful burial every evening in trenches dug for the purpose. F. The abolition of the practice of sj^rinkling powdered lime in tlie urinarics and latrines, or in any other spot. 2G.—That these several differences arc very essential ones, and that much advantage, b(.)th in a sanatory and financial point of view, would be gained by the practice which obtains in tlie Punjab jails being extended to tin? barracks in which European troops are located, I will attempt to show seriatim. 27. —It is a well known fact that the acid contained in urine (known by the name of uric acid) has a .strong tendency to combine with lime in any shape, and Action of urine upon, lime AHi.1 concrete the new compound tbrmed thereby is highly offensive from its strong ammoniacal odour. It is this which produces the overpowering fetor in all urinaries where lime-stone, or pucca cement containing lime, is used, and there is no remedy but to lireak up and remove the entire brickwork with its coating of concrete, a troublesome and expensive process, e.specially as it has to be done constantly. The destructive effect produced by urine on lime cement, cannot fail to be apparent to any one who takes the trouble to examine one of the uri- naries attached to a European barrack, and the efllu\’ium is perceptible to a painful degree even before entering the building. Stone .slabs are only one degree less objectionable than pucca masoniy, as they are mainly composed of lime-stone joined together with lime cement. 28. —For the .same reason, all drains or conduits, however small, should be prohibited. They .soon become saturated and tainted with the ammoniacal odour. The effl of drains. which no washing or flushing with water can remove ; they are, also, constantly made use of improperly, and every modification and j:)lan of copper and zinc tubing, stone drains, and leaden pi]>ing, has been tried, but all have been condemned from the urine infiltrating and finding its way beneath, where it remains giving rise to a constant and irreme- diable stench, which is communicated to the clothes of those who enter the building. 29. —The superiority of the dry over the wet .system, or, in other words, the total aboli- tion of the use of water for flushing the urinaries, requires but ocu- Superiority of the dry sys- lar demonstration to convince the mo.st sceptical or prejudiced. In theory, the idea of a stream of water constantly flowing through the urinaries appears perfect; in practice, it is known to be a total failure, because the urine is passed above and below, and on the sides, while the water itself merely trickles along a small portion of the conduit; added to this, the water after flowing through the urinary becomes itself polluted, and has to be got rid of. It cannot be used to lay the dust or water the road, and hence expensive cess-pools are dug to receive it, where it remains stagnating and offensive, or it occasionally bursts through the surface of the ground, in close proximity to the sleeping barracks, and even the wells which sup- ply the troops with drinking water. This has hapipened at jMeean IMeer more than once, as well as at Sealkote. 30. —By placing the urinaries under the same roof as the lavatorie.s, the former are](https://iiif.wellcomecollection.org/image/b24914885_0013.jp2/full/800%2C/0/default.jpg)
