Fig. 413 represents a kind of hopper closet invented in England about half a century ago by Thomas Smith. In this closet the flushing stream is applied to much better advantage for emptying the basin and trap than in the preceding. To overcome the inertia of the heavy body of standing water in the bowl and trap, a jet of water is introduced directly into this water below its normal level, and in the direction of its outflow. A given stream or head of water acts far more effectively in communicating motion to an inert volume of liquid, when it enters directly within that body than when it strikes its surface from some point above or outside of it. In the latter case the force of the water is exhausted, partly by friction in passing through the air, which tends to divide it into a spray, and partly by the impact against the water surface by which it is turned and partly deflected. The remainder of the flushing stream enters from above in the usual way. The lower jet tends to prevent the "piling up" of the water in the basin.

This is the prototype of what has become within the last ten years the most popular and most scientific form of water closet known.

Fig. 414 represents this closet in section. Thomas Smith appears never to have been rewarded in any way for this invention by the unappreciative public as he should have been, but enjoyed the usual fate of an inventor whose ideas subsequently become of service to the world, that of oblivion. Hence this little tribute to his memory.

Trap Jet Closet 450Trap Jet Closet 451

*Fig. 413. Reproduction of English Patent Office Drawing of the Thomas Smith Patent of 1842.

Fig. 414. Section of the English Siphon Jet Patent of 1842 of Thomas Smith.

Fig. 414. Section of the English Siphon Jet Patent of 1842 of Thomas Smith.

In 1876 another Smith, surnamed William, this time from California, secured a patent for a combination of siphon jets, as shown in his patent drawing, Fig. 412B, but soon found in practice that only the single jet of his English brother Thomas, was of any real value, and he never used his own invention. Nevertheless, since the world seemed to have forgotten poor Thomas way off in the antipodes, William claimed himself to be the sole and original inventor of the siphon jet closet, and proclaimed that he was the only one who ought to enjoy the privilege of making them. Accordingly in 1888, secretly aided and instigated, as the story goes, by unlimited and unscrupulous outside capital, he brought a most unrighteous suit against the makers of the "Sanitas" closet without the shadow of a just reason and lost his case, as a little common sense would have shown would be inevitable, after much expense and annoyance to everyone connected with the affair. In the more civilized "dark ages" such highwayman's villainy was sometimes roundly punished by an indignant public. But in these days the public are too busy with their own petty individual commercial robberies to mind such a commonplace indignity as the attempted clubbing in the dark by a bullying giant of some poor inventor. They are even too much occupied to applaud feebly when the bully sometimes, as in this case, receives his well merited whipping. These wicked marauders performed nevertheless the useful service of advertising the siphon jet principle as valuable public property. The episode adds one more to the long and wearisome list of persecutions the average hard working inventor is still subjected to by the unscrupulous as a sacrifice to the moloch of capitalism. It is certainly fortunate for the cause of progress in the world that inventors as a class are ignorant of the dismal history of their past. For if they were not most of them would have chosen say, street sweeping, as a more blissful and lucrative occupation than the work for which nature seemed to fit them. The time has certainly arrived when the State should insure adequate reward to the useful inventor or at least legal protection in the use of the patent it grants him both in the interest of progress and of justice and. public welfare.

*Thos. Smith's English Patent of 1842, with English Patent Office Coat of Arms.

Fig. 412 b. Modification by William Smith, of California.

Fig. 412-b. Modification by William Smith, of California.

The requisites for a water-closet are, (1) simplicity, (2) quickness and thoroughness of flushing, (3) freedom from all unscoured parts, (4) economy in construction and water consumption, (5) compactness and convenience of form, (6) amplitude of standing water in the bowl, (7) accessibility and visibility of all parts, including trap, (8) smoothness of material, (9) strength and durability of construction, (10) facility and reliability in jointing, (11) security against evaporation and siphonage, (12) ease and convenience of flushing, (13) noiselessness in operation, and (14) neatness of appearance.

The pan-closet must be discarded, because it violates every one of the above requirements.

The valve and plunger closets must be discarded, because they violate all but the sixth and twelfth requirements.

The ordinary so-called long and short hoppers are to be rejected, because they violate the second, third, fourth, sixth, tenth, eleventh, and thirteenth requirements. There is no standing water in their bowls to receive and deodorize the soil, so that they are constantly fouled. A preliminary flush is sometimes arranged, to partially obviate this trouble, but this contrivance is not to be relied upon. The method of connecting the common hopper with the soil-pipe is usually defective, the seal is too shallow to withstand even a slight evaporation and siphonage, and they are exceedingly noisy in operation.