On Thu, 16 Aug 2012 13:36:24 -0700 (PDT), "
wrote:

On Aug 16, 4:08*pm, micky wrote:
On Thu, 16 Aug 2012 11:41:24 -0700 (PDT), "





wrote:
On Aug 16, 12:58*pm, "
wrote:
On Thu, 16 Aug 2012 12:42:19 -0400, micky wrote:
If a house in town the 1910's or 20's had only an outhouse, does that
mean that it did't have running water inside the house?

Specifically, I mean Indianapolis. * About a mile or mile and a half
south of the center of town. *(Which was or at least became the poor
side of town, compared to the north side.)

My mother told me that she used an outhouse when she was little, but I
guess I assumed my grandparents still had a sink in the kitchen with
city water, rather than going out to a well, or pumping in the
kitchen.

What say ye?

No, inside water doesn't necessarily mean no outhouse. *At one time, my
grandmother had a pump at the kitchen sink, though I wasn't around then. *;-)

Being such a big country and given that all this
evolved over decades I would expect that there
were a variety of combinations. * Nothing says that
one couldn't have added a well pump and tank
for the house without installing toilets, sewer system,
etc.

But what about city water, but no sewers, so that's running water with
no pumping but no way to have an indoor toilet. * Does that seem
likely?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I don't see why not. I know of relatively recent
situations where they have municipal water but
folks still have their own septic systems.

This house was built in 2007 and has county water and its own septic system.
Is 2007 "relatively recently"? ;-)