REPORT 
ON THE 
WATERS OF THE HUDSON RIVER, 
TOGETHER WITH AN 
ANALYSIS OF THE SAME, 
MADE TO THE 
WATER COMMISSIONERS 
OF THE 
CITY OF ALBANY, 
C. F. CHANDLER, PH.D. 
BY 
JANUARY, 1885. 
NEW YORK: 
TROW’S PRINTING AND BOOKBINDING CO., 
201-213 East Twelfth Street. 
1885. With the compliments of 
C. F. CHAN DLER, 
SCHOOL OF MINES, 
Columbia College, 
49th Street, cor. 4th Ave., New York;, 
who wHl be greatly obliged for copies of Water Analyses 
and Pf aphlets on Sanitary Subjects. REPORT. 
New York, January 31, 1885. 
To the Board of Water Commissioners of the City of Albany: 
Gentlemen : In accordance with your request, I have 
made a careful study of the water of the Hudson River at 
Albany, with special reference to its present condition, and 
to the question whether it is still safe to rely upon it as a 
source of supply for the city of Albany. 
As you are aware, I had the honor to be called upon to 
investigate this subject, by the Board of Water Commission- 
ers in 1872, and my conclusions were embodied in the follow- 
ing paragraph at the end of the report which I made in that 
year: 
uTlie most careful examination of the water has failed to 
reveal anything to sight, taste, smell, or analysis, which can 
be considered as throwing the slightest suspicion upon the 
purity of the water of the Hudson, or its fitness for supply- 
ing a wholesome beverage for the citizens of Albany. 
I am further confirmed in this opinion by the careful compar- 
ison of the river and its surroundings with the sources of 
supply in other cities in this country and Europe. I have no 
hesitation, therefore, in recommending it as a suitable and 
proper source of supply.” 
I understand you to ask me now whether anything has 
occurred during the past thirteen years to lead me to change 
my opinion as expressed in 1872 ; whether new methods of 
chemical analysis may not have been introduced which make 
it possible to discover contaminations which could not be 
recognized by the methods formerly employed ; whether other 
methods of analysis, especially microscopic and culture ex- 
periments, may not reveal the presence of dangerous organ- 
isms which would escape every method of chemical analysis ; 
whether the knowledge of zymotic diseases has not advanced 
to such a degree as to compel different conclusions ; and 
finally, whether the test of experience in the city of Albany 4 
has not demonstrated the danger of making use of this source 
of water supply. 
I have carefully considered each of these questions and 
will briefly state the results. 
I. CHEMICAL ANALYSIS. 
In 1872,1 made an analysis of a sample of the water taken 
from the river outside the pier opposite Quackenbush Street, 
on March 14th, by the methods then in use for such analyses. 
The following were the results : 
The suspended impurities which rendered the water tur- 
bid, being temporary in character, were allowed to subside ; 
the clear water was then found to contain the following sub- 
stances in one United States gallon of 231 cubic inches. An 
analysis of the Croton water was presented at the same time 
for comparison. 
I. Analysis of the Water. 
Hudson River. 
Croton River. 
Chloride of sodium 
0.361 grains. 
0.157 “ 
0.076 “ 
0.980 “ 
4.165 “ 
1.397 “ 
0.408 “ 
0.070 “ 
0.699 “ 
0.402 grains. 
0.179 “ 
0.260 “ 
0.158 “ 
2.670 “ 
1.913 “ 
0.621 “ 
a trace. 
0.670 “ 
Chloride of magnesium 
Sulphate of potassa 
Sulphate of soda .. 
Sulphate of lime 
Bicarbonate of lime, CaH>(COa). 
Silica 
Alumina and oxide of iron 
Organic and volatile matter 
Total 
8.313 grains. 
6.873 grains. 
Hardness 
3.35° 
2.51° 
The above figures represented the compounds as they 
were believed to exist in solution in the water. It should be 
noticed that the Hudson River water compares very favor- 
ably with the Croton in purity, the total difference per gal- 
lon being only 1.54 grains. 
It was clearly recognized at that time that the mineral 
constituents'of a water, while they might be of importance 
in determining the value of a water for manufacturing or 
culinary purposes, are not, unless present in very unusual 
quantities, many times the amount contained in the Hudson 5 
River water, of any significance in discussing the fitness of 
water for drinking purposes. It was well understood that 
the only constituents that could possibly produce disease 
were the organic constituents,—namely, those derived from 
sewage,—and it was well recognized that the method of distin- 
guishing wholesome from unwholesome organic matter was 
not very accurate. I did not, therefore, at that time rely 
upon the analysis, but carefully discussed the waters of the 
Hudson River as compared to those of other large rivers 
which had been found to be entirely satisfactory for domes- 
tic purposes in other parts of the world, the discussion being 
based upon other considerations than chemical composition, 
namely, the drainage area, population, fiow of stream, etc. 
Since that time considerable progress has been made in 
the chemical analysis of waters, with special reference to the 
examination for sewage contamination. It has been found 
that where water has been contaminated with sewage it 
will exhibit, when tested by the new methods of analysis, 
the unchanged organic substances of the sewage, which can 
be recognized and estimated in quantity by distilling the 
water with permanganate of pothsh. This process converts 
the albuminoids of the sewage into ammonia, the amount of 
which can be determined with great accuracy. From this 
the amount of albuminoids in the water can be computed. 
It is further found that the sewage in the water is rapidly 
destroyed, and that the products of this destruction are am- 
monia salts, commonty spoken of as “free ammonia,” and 
nitrates and nitrites. When, therefore, water has been re- 
cently contaminated by sewage, the amount of such contam- 
ination can now be determined with great accuracy by an 
analysis which shows the amount of free ammonia, albumi- 
noid ammonia, nitrites, and nitrates, and as far as determin- 
ing the extent to which the water is contaminated, this 
method is quite satisfactory. 
I have carefully applied it to samples of the Hudson River 
water, having twice visited Albany for the purpose of observ- 
ing the local surroundings of the river, and of procuring sam- 
ples. I have been assisted in these analyses by I>r. Elwyn 
Waller, the Instructor in Analytical Chemistry in the School 
of Mines, who has been engaged in making similar analyses 
of waters in other localities for the State Board of Health. I 6 
also procured from a friend in Troy a sample of the water of 
the river taken above Lansingburg, and a sample of the water 
drawn from a hydrant in Troy. 
It will be noticed that samples were taken from the river 
at the inlet to the pumping station, both at high and low 
tide, on two different days, as well as from the Bleecker Reser- 
voir and Tivoli Lake 
The results of these analyses are presented in tabular 
form. Table II presents them expressed in grains per United 
States gallon of 231 cubic inches. Table III presents them 
in parts per 100,000, this being a European method of 
presenting such analyses. It will be noticed on inspecting 
the tables that two analyses have been made in several 
cases, as indicated by the numbers. Two demijohns of 
water were taken in each of those cases. The analyses 
marked 5c, 6c, 9c, and 10c, were made of the clear water in 
the demijohn after allowing the sediment to subside. The 
analyses marked 5s, 6.?, 9.?, and 105, were made from the 
water of the duplicate demijohn, care being taken to first 
shake the demijohn in order to bring all the sediment into 
suspension, so that the analyses include the sediment in 
these four cases. The figures in the tables represent all the 
analyses that were made. The important columns are those 
which show the “chloride of sodium,” the “nitrogen in ni- 
trates and nitrites,” the “free ammonia,” and the “albu- 
minoid ammonia,” these being the figures which represent 
the organic matter derived from all sources. 
As chloride of sodium, or common salt, is a substance 
which is freely used in all dwellings, it naturally finds its 
way into the drainage, and the amount of this substance in 
water is found to indicate, to some extent, the variations in 
the quality, though it is of little use in comparing samples 
of water from different localities. 
To facilitate comparisons, Tables IV and V have been 
prepared. They exhibit the results of these analyses shown 
as whole numbers in ten-thousandths of a grain in one U. S. 
gallon of 231 cubic inches, and in parts in one thousand mil- 
lion. 
For further comparison tables of analyses of American and 
Foreign waters are presented. 7 
It will be seen from a careful comparison of tlie analyses 
of the Albany and Troy waters that the water at Albany ac- 
tually contains a smaller quantity of albuminoids than the 
water above Troy, in spite of the fact that there is undoubt- 
edly some addition of matter to the river in its passage past 
Troy, while the products of the destruction of organic matter, 
that is, free ammonia and nitrates and nitrites, have increased. 
This is entirely in keeping with the theory of spontaneous pu- 
rification. Running streams may receive moderate quantities 
of organic matter and lose the same by chemical changes which 
take place in the water. In my report in 1872 I devoted con- 
siderable space to the subject of spontaneous purification, 
and quoted largely from the best European authorities to 
support the opinion which I gave, that such spontaneous 
purification takes place. This position was not satisfactory 
to those citizens of Albany, who had made up their minds be- 
forehand that the Hudson River water must be largely im- 
pure, and the possibility of such purification was seriously 
questioned in the discussions which ensued. 
This process has been thoroughly investigated in the past 
few years, and it is now admitted by all writers upon the 
subject. It is hardly necessary, therefore, to present any fur- 
ther evidence upon this point. The writings of Frankland, 
Tidy, Warington, Poleck, and many others, are very explicit 
upon the subject. Lest there may possibly exist unbelievers 
in this process I venture to insert the following quotations : 
INTERPRETATION OF THE RESULTS. 
“It must, nevertheless, be borne in mind that by the con- 
stant exposure of fresh surfaces of polluted water to the ac- 
tion of the atmosphere, which is accomplished in a running 
stream, the organic matter is oxidized, and may thus be 
eventually converted into products which are perfectly harm- 
less ; in other words, a river is competent to effect its own 
purification unless overtaxed with pollution” (Huxley, 
1878). 
“ The decay of organic matter is the joint work of a num- 
ber of independent organisms of different functions, the ac- 
tion of one class following that of another, and carrying the 
process through a further stage. We are too imperfectly ac- 8 
Number. 
Description of Sample. 
Date when taken. 
j Time when drawn. 
Appearance in two-foot 
tube. 
Odor when heated to 
1 100° Fahrenheit. 
| Chlorine in chlorides. 
1 Equivalent to sodium 
| chloride. 
Phosphates. 
Nitrites. 
Nitrogen in nitrates and 
nitrites. 
Free ammonia. 
1 
| Albuminoid ammonia. 
Oxygen ab- 
sorbed at 
80° Fahr. 
Hardness 
equivalent to 
carbonate 
of lime. 
I Organic and volatile 
matter. 
~~ i 
Mineral matter. 
_ 
Total solids dried at 
230° Fahrenheit. 
In 15 minutes. 
>•4 
D 
O 
Before boiling. 
After boiling. 
1 
Mohawk River, above Diamond 
1884. 
Woollen Mills 
Dec. 5 
Turbid, greenish yel- 
Faint, 
low 
0.0411 
0.0020 0.0043 0.1208 
0.2160 
3 988 
3 988 0 991 5 249 6.240 
2 
Hudson River,above Lnnsingburg 
Nov. 12 
Faintly turbid, light Faint, 
0 0144 
0 0087 0 1509 
0.2420 
2 227 
2 227 
1 283 3 382 4 COS 
3 
Troy Hydrant 
“ 12 
Faintly turbid, light 
Faint, 
0 016G 
0 0009 0 OO.sO 0 1004 
0 2333 
2.023 
2 .337 
1 510 3 791 5 307 
4 
Hudson River, at Maple Island .. 
Dec. 6 
Faintly turbid, green- 
Faint, 
0.097 0 154 
0 0358 0.0008 0 0048 0 1049 
0 2391 
2 944 
2 822 1 400 
3 091 4 491 
5c 
Hudson River, at inlet 
Nov. 1 
High tide. 
Clear, 
0.192 0.309 
0 0101 0.0037 0 0059 0 0974 
0.1812 
3.439 
3 439 0 .816 5.715 6 531 
55 
Hudson River, at inlet 
“ 1 
it 
Faintly turbid, light 
Faint, 
yellow 
stale ... 
0.192 0.309 
0.C154 0.0022 0.0083 0.1102 
0.1994 
3.037 
3.637 
2.910 4.199 7.115 
6c 
Hudson River, at inlet 
“ 1 
Low tide.. 
Clear, brownish yel- 
low 
Faint 
0.213 0.340: 
0.0275 0.0016 0.0078 0.1271 
0.1854 
3.637 
3.549 1.050 5.365 6.415 
6s 
Hudson River, at inlet 
“ 1 
“ 
Turbid, brownish 
vellow 
Faint 
0.213 0.340 
0.0168 0.0029 0.0072 0.12f3 0.2024 
3.527 
3.527 2.799 4.7S2 
7.581 
7 
Hudson River, 50 ft. south of inlet 
Dec. 4 High tide. 
Slightly turbid. 
brownish yellow .. 
Oily 
0.133 
0.210 
0.0377 
0.0031 0.0006 0.1463 0.2510 
3.190 
3.190 2.041 2.024 4.005 
8 
Hudson River, at inlet 
“ 4 Low tide.. 
Turbid, brownish 
vellow 
Oily 
0.107 
0.170 
0.0353 0.0037 0.0052 0.1300 0.2578 
3.405 
3.405 0.875 4.374 5.249 
»c 
Bleecker Reservoir 
Nov. 1 
Clear. 
faint yellow 
0.19S 0.315 
0.0282 0 0030 0.0040 0.0881 0.1503 
3.108 
2 270 1.458 
5.132 
6.590 
9* 
“ 1 
Turbid, faint yellow. 
Faint, 
stale ... 
0.198 0.315 
0 0285 0.0027 0.0059 0.1023 0.1761 
3.846 
3.846 3.324 3.960 7.290 
10c 
Tivoli Lake 
“ 0 
Faint milkness 
Faint, 
Doubt 
stale ... 
0.480 0.173 
ful. 
Trace. 0.0290 0.0107 
0.0047 0.0455 0.1184 
4.122 
2.513 1.106 G.998 8.104 
10s 
“ 6 
• 
Faint. 
Faint 
stale ... 
0.4SO 0.773 
trace. 
Trace. 0.0350 0.0115 0.0163 0.0700 0.1053 
4.321 
3.190 3.499 6.415 
9.914 
11 
Tivoli Lake 
Dec. 4 
Turbid, greenish.... 
Faint. 
Faint 
Faint 
marshy. 
0.563 0.896 
trace. 
trace. 0.0778 0.0220 0.0009 0.1 627 0.1027 
> 1 1 
4.938 
4.938 1.S6G 6.065 
! 1 
7.931 
II. Analyses of the Moiiawk and Hudson River Waters. 
All Results are Expressed in Grains per United States Gallon of 231 Cubic Inches. Number. 
Description of Sample. 
Date when taken. 
Time when drawn. 
Appearance in two-foot 
tube. 
Odor when heated to 
100° Fahrenheit. 
Chlorine in chlorides. 
Equivalent to sodium 
chloride. 
Phosphates. 
1 
2 
Nitrogen in nitrates and 
nitrites. 
Free ammonia. 
Albuminoid ammonia. 
Oxygen ab- 
sorbed at 
80° Fahr. 
Hardness 
equivalent to 
carbonate 
of lime. 
| Organic and volatile 
matter. 
j Mineral matter. 
Total solids dried at 
230° Fahrenheit. 
O 
3 
a 
9 
a 
U 
o 
Tji 
C 
be 
.5 1 
‘o 
& 
o ! 
3 
O 1 
bo 
.s 
"o 
.D 
U 
o 
1 
Mohawk River, above Diamond 
1884. 
5 
0.233 
0 371 
0 0705 0.0044 
0 0074 
0.2071 0 3704 
6 838 
6 838 
1 70 
9.60 10 76 
o 
Hudson River, above Lansingburg 
12 
0.0247 
0 0160 
0 2091 0.4153 
3.818 
3 818 
2 20 
5 SO 
8 00 
8 
t( 
12 
greenish yellow 
vegetable 0.233 0.371 
0.0284 0.0015 
0.0151 
0.2750 0.4000 
4.498 
4.-198 
2.60 
6.50 
9.00 
4 
Hudson River, at Maple Island.. 
Dec. 
6 
Faintly turbid, green- 
Faint, 
marshy. 
0.167 
0.0614 0.0014 0.00S2 
0.2827 
0.4100 
5.049 
4.839 
2.40 
5.30 
7 70 
5 c 
Hudson River, at inlet 
Nov. 
1 
High tide. 
Clear, 
light yellow 
Faint 
0.333 
0.530 
0.0277 0.0064,0.0102,0.1670 0.3111 
5.897 
5.897 
1 40 
9.80 11.20 
5s 
Hudson River, at inlet 
U 
1 
U 
Faintly turbid, light 
Faint, 
0.333 
0 530 
0 0265 0.0038 0 0142 0.1S90 0.3422 
6.237 
0.237 
5.00 
7 20 12 20 
6c 
Hudson River, at inlet 
“ 
1 Low tide.. 
Clear, brownish yel- 
0.1.66 
0 583 
0.0471 0.C028 0 0134 0.2180 0 3180 
6 237: 
(i 086 
1.S0 
9.20 11 no 
6s 
Hudson River, at inlet 
“ 
1 
4 * 
Turbid, brownish 
0 583 
0.0288 0.0050 0.0124,0.2200 0.3470 
6.048, 
6.048 
4 80 
8.20 13 60 
7 
Hudson River, 60 ft. south of inlet 
Dec. 
4 
High tide. 
Slightly turbid, 
Oily 
0.233 
0.371 
0.0647 0.0054 0.0114 0.2609 0.4340 
5 470 
5 470 
3.50 
4.50 
8.00 
8 
Hudson River, at inlet 
4 Low tide.. 
Turbid, brownish 
Oily 
0 183 
0 291 
0.0606 0.0004 0.0090 0.2230 
0.4420 
5.SES 
1.50 
7.50 
9 00 
9c 
Bleecker Reservoir 
1 
0.340 
0 541 
0.0484 0.0052 0.0068 0.1511 
0.257S 
5.330 
3.893 
2.60 
8.80 11.30 
a 
1 
Turbid, faint yellow. 
stale ... 
0.340 
0.541 
0.0489 0.0046 0.0102 0.1755 0.3020 
6.577 
6.577 
5 70 
6 80 12.50 
10c 
6 
stale ... 
0.833 
1.325 
trace. 
trace. 
0.0507 0.0184 0.0080 0.0780 0.2030 
7.069 
4.309 
2.0012.00 14.00 
10s 
‘4 
6 
stale ... 
0.833 
1.325 
trace. 
trace. 
0.0611 0.0198 0.0280 0.1200 0.1852 
7.409 
5.4S1 
6.60 11.00 17.00 
11 
4 
Turbid, greenish ... 
marshy. 
0.966 
1.537 
trace. 
trace. 
0.1334 0.0380^.0118 0.1075 
0.1762 
8.46S 
8.468 
3.20 10.40 13.60 
III. Analyses of the Moiiawk and Hudson River Waters. 
All Results are Expressed in Parts per 100,000. 
ft 10 
Expressed in Ten-thousandths of a Grain per U. S. Gallon of 231 Cubic Inches. 
IY. Results of the Analyses 
Number. 
Locality. 
Sodium 
chloride. 
Nitrogen in 
nitrates and 
nitrites. 
Free 
ammonia. 
Albumi- 
noid am- 
monia. 
1 
Mohawk River, above Diamond Woollen Mills .. 
2,160 
411 
26 
43 
2 
Hudson River, above Lansingburg 
2,160 
144 
0 
87 
3 
Troy Hydrant 
2,160 
166 
9 
89 
4 
Hudson River, at Maple Island 
1,540 
368 
8 
48 
Bo 
Hudson River, at Albany— 
At inlet, high tide 
3,090 
161 
59 
5 s 
At inlet, “ 
3,090 
154 
22 
83 
6c 
At inlet, low tide 
3,400 
275 
16 
78 
6s 
At inlet, “ 
3,400 
168 
29 
72 
7 
At inlet, high tide 
2,160 
377 
81 
66 
8 
At inlet, low tide 
1,700 
353 
37 
52 
9c 
Bleeoker Reservoir 
3,150 
282 
30 
40 
9s 
3,150 
285 
27 
69 
Average for river water used at Albany 
2,892 
257 
28 
68 
10c 
Tivoli Lake 
7,730 
296 
107 
47 
Ids 
“ 
7,730 
366 
116 
163 
11 
8,960 
778 
220 
69 
Average for Tivoli Lake 
8,140 
477 
147 
93 
V. Results of the Analyses 
Expressed in Parts in One Thousand Million. 
1 Number. 
Locality. 
Sodium 
chloride. 
Nitrogen in 
nitratesand 
nitrites. 
Free 
ammonia. 
Albumi- 
noid am- 
monia. 
i 
Mohawk River, above Diamond Woollen Mills 
3,710 
705 
44 
74 
2 
Hudson River, above Lansingburg 
3,710 
247 
0 
150 
3 
Troy Hydrant 
3,710 
284 
15 
151 
4 
Hudson River, at Maple Island 
2,660 
614 
14 
82 
Hudson River, at Albany— 
5c 
At inlet, high tide 
6,300 
277 
64 
102 
5 8 
At inlet, “ 
6,300 
265 
38 
142 
6c 
At inlet, low tide 
5,830 
471 
28 
134 
6s 
At inlet, “ 
5,830 
288 
50 
It 4 
7 
At inlet, high tide 
3,710 
647 
54 
114 
8 
At inlet, low tide 
2,910 
606 
64 
90 
9c Bleecker Keservoir 
5,410 
484 
62 
68 
9* 
5,410 
489 
46 
102 
Average for river water used at Albany 
4,962 
441 
49 
109 
10c 
Tivoli Lake 
13,260 
507 
184 
80 
Ids 
“ 
13,260 
611 
198 
280 
11 
16,370 
1,334 
380 
118 
Average for Tivoli Lake 
13,957 
817 
254 
159 VI. American Waters. 
The Results are Expressed in Ten-Thousandths of a Grain per U. S. Gallon 
of 231 Cubic Inches. 
Number. 
Locality. 
Date. 
Chloride 
of 
sodium. 
Nitro- 
gen in 
nitrates 
and 
nitrites. 
Free 
ammonia. 
Albuminoid 
ammonia. 
Analyst. 
1 
New York City— 
Croton River 
Dec., 1884 
3,090 
379 
5 
52 
E. Waller. 
2 
Boston, Mass.— 
Cochituate Lake max. 
39 
113 
W. R. Nichols. 
8 
44 “ mm. 
3 
57 
“ “ 
4 
“ “ 
Nov., 1881 
9 
67 
Ira Remsen. 
5 
Farm Pond max. 
19 
262 
“ 44 
0 
“ “ min. 
0 
158 
7 
Sudbury River max. 
44 44 .... .min. 
5,773 
25 
176 
E. S. Wood. 
8 
2.020 
3 
49 
4 4 4 i 
9 
Springfield, Mass.— 
Broad Brook 
Jan., 1876 
2,429 
58 
75 
C. 0. Thompson. 
10 
M “ 
‘‘ “ 
1,943 
38 
74 
W. R. Nichols. 
11 
“ 44 
Apr., 1873 
4,275 
11 
70 
C. O. Thompson. 
12 
Lowell, Mass.— 
Merrimac River * 
Sep., 1873 
1,359 
29 
66 
W. R. Nichols. 
18 
“ “ t 
44 “ 
1,942 
25 
64 
44 4i 
14 
“ “ t 
44 44 
1,749 
18 
74 
4 4 41 
15 
Worcester, Mass.—• 
Blaclcstone River § 
“ II 
—, 1873 
15,550 
2,157 
239 
44 44 
16 
—, 44 
6,607 
145 
128 
44 44 
17 
“ “ 1 
, 44 
5,053 
29 
87 
.4 4» 
18 
Taunton, Mass.— 
Taunton River 
Aug., 1877 
29 
123 
44 4« 
19 
New London, Conn.— 
Lake Konomac 
Dec., 1879 
29 
93 
44 44 
20 
Plymouth, Mass.- 
South Pond 
June, 1877 
46 
99 
44 44 
21 
Grand Rapids, Mich.— 
Grand River 
Nov., 1879 
7 
103 
Hugo Thum. 
22 
Toronto, Canada— 
Lake Ontario 
Nov., 1881 
3,207 
134 
11 
63 
W. H. Ellis. 
23 
Philadelphia, Pa.— 
Schuylkill River 
Jan., 1880 
3,304 
17 
145 
G. F. Barker. 
24 
June, 1880 
2,916 
886 
5 
104 
A. R. Leeds. 
25 
“ “ 
Nov., 1881 
9,135 
356 
0 
15 
H. Leffmann. 
20 
Delaware River 
if 44 
18,175 
46 
116 
44 44 
27 
Portsmouth, Va.— 
Dismal Swamp 
Nov., 1884 
896 
469 
13 
437 
E. Waller. 
28 
Cincinnati, O.— 
Ohio River 
Nov., 1880 
12.798 
29 
92 
29 
Nashville, Tenn.— 
Cumberland River 
Oct., 1876 
2,887 
665 
0 
23 
U. T. Lupton 
30 
St. Louis, Mo.— 
Missouri River 
Jan., 1878 
7 
122 
G. W. Riggs. 
31 
Mississippi River 
4 4 44 
15 
519 
32 
Jersey City, N. J.— 
Passaic River 
Jan., 1880 
2.166 
997 
29 
219 
33 
Watertown, N. Y.— 
Black River 
June, 1881 
509 
84 
24 
38 
E. Waller. 
34 
Yonkers, N. Y.— 
Grassy Spring River 
Feb., 1875 
3,175 
32 
54 
W. R. Nichols. 
35 
Hudson, N. Y.— 
Hudson River 
Nov., 1877 
34 
88 
36 
“ “ 
Dec., 1877 
2,886 
29 
88 
44 it 
37 
“ 
Jan., 1878 
3.175 
71 
77 
44 44 
38 
Poughkeepsie, N. Y.— 
Hudson River 
Nov. 13, ’77 
3,081 
63 
115 
44 44 
39 
Nov. 19, ’77 
3,081 
60 
91 
44 44 
40 
Brooklyn, N. Y.— 
Ridgewood 
May, 1884 
11,643 
9 
17 
E. H. Bartley. 
41 
Syracuse, N. Y.— 
Oneida Lake 
—, 1881 
5,759 
13 
59 
F. Engelhardt. 
42 
Tully Lake 
» 
5,279 
18 
126 
* Above Lowell. 
t Below Lowell, above Lawrence, 
t Below Lawrence. 
§ Below Worcester. 
|| Five miles below Worcester. 
1f Twenty miles below Worcester. VII. American Waters. 
The Results are Expressed in Parts in One Thousand Million. 
Nitro- 
4 
T3 
o 
Locality. 
Chloride 
f?en in 
s 
Dnte. 
of 
nitrates 
t 2 
£ 2 
Analyst. 
p 
sodium. 
E*. a 
5 £ 
nitrites. 
s 
c5 
s 
< * 
New York City— 
1 
Croton River .... 
Dec., 1884 
5,300 
651 
10 
E. Waller. 
Boston, Mass.— 
2 
Cochituate Lake max. 
67 
195 
W. It. Nichols. 
3 
min. 
5 
99 
4 
5 
Farm Pond max. 
Nov., 1881 
16 
34 
116 
450 
Ira Remsen. 
6 
7 
“ min. 
Sudbnry River max. 
9,900 
0 
43 
272 
302 
E. S. Wood. 
8 
“ min. 
3,465 
5 
84 
Springfield, Mass.— 
9 
Broad Brook 
Jan., 187G 
4.165 
100 
130 
C. O. Thompson. 
W. It. Nichols. 
3,333 
11 
Lowell, Mass.— 
April, 1S73 
7,330 
20 
120 
C. O. Thompson. 
12 
Rep 1873 
2,330 
114 
W. R. Nichols. 
13 
“ “ + 
3,330 
3,000 
44 
31 
14 
“ “ % 
44 it 
127 
Worcester, Mass.— 
15 
—, 1873 
26,665 
11,380 
3.700 
250 
410 
1C 
17 
“ *• 1 
8,665 
50 
Taunton, Mass.— 
150 
18 
Taunton River 
Aug., 1877 .... 
51 
211 
44 44 
New London, Conn.— 
19 
Lake Konomac 
Dec., 1879 
50 
160 
t( ti 
Plymouth, Mass.— 
20 
South Pond 
June, 1877 
80 
170 
44 ti 
Grand Rapids, Mich.— 
21 
Grand River 
Toronto, Canada— 
Nov., 1879 
12 
178 
Hugo Thurn. 
22 
Lake Ontario 
Nov., 1881 
5,500 
230 
19 
109 
W. H. Ellis. 
Philadelphia, Pa.— 
23 
Schuylkill River 
Jan., 1880 
5.665 
30 
250 
G. F. Barker. 
24 
June, 1880 
5,000 
1,520 
10 
ISO 
25 
Delaware River 
Nov., 1881 
15,665 
610 
0 
26 
H. Leffmann. 
26 
»4 (t 
31,165 
80 
200 
Portsmouth, Va.— 
27 
Dismal Swamp 
Nov., 1884 
1,587 
805 
23 
751 
E. Waller. 
Cincinnati, 0.— 
28 
Ohio River 
Nashville, Tenn.— 
Nov., 1880 
21.945 
50 
156 
C. R. Stuntz. 
29 
Cumberland River 
St. Louis, Mo.— 
Oct., 1876 
4,950 
1,140 
0 
40 
N. T. Lnpton. 
30 
Missouri River 
Jan., 1878 
13 
210 
G. W. Riggs. 
31 
Mississippi River 
it it 
26 
890 
Jersey City, N. J.— 
32 
Passaic River 
June, 1880 
3,712 
1,710 
60 
377 
A. R. Leeds. 
Watertown, N. Y.— 
33 
Black River 
June, 1881 
874 
145 
24 
66 
E. Waller. 
Yonkers, N. Y.— 
34 
Grassy Spring River 
Feb., 1875 
5,445 
93 
W. R. Nichols. 
Hudson, N. Y.— 
35 
Hudson River 
Nov., 1877 
69 
152 
44 ti 
30 
41 44 
Dec., 1877 
4.950 
51 
152 
44 i< 
37 
Jan., 1878 
5,445 
123 
133 
44 41 
Poughkeepsie, N. Y.— 
38 
Hudson River 
Nov. 13, ’77 
5.283 
5.283 
109 
104 
197 
157 
ti 
39 
44 44 
Nov. 19, ’77 
40 
Brooklyn, N. Y.— 
May, 1884 
19,965 
16 
80 
E. H. Bartley. 
Syracuse, N. Y.— 
41 
Oneida Lake 
—, 1884 
9,876 
22 
32 
102 
F. Engelhardt. 
42 
* Above Lowell. 
§ Below Worcester. 
t Below Lowell, above Lawrence. 
J Five miles below Worcester. 
t Below Lawrence. 
T Twenty miles below Worcester. VIII. Waters of Great Britain and Ireland. 
The Results are Expressed in Ten-thousandths of a Grain per U. S. Gallon of 231 
Cubic Inches. 
| Number. 
Locality. 
Date. 
Chloride 
of 
sodium. 
Nitro- 
gen in 
nitrates 
and 
nitrites. 
Free 
ammonia. 
Albuminoid 
ammonia, j 
Analyst. 
London, River Thames— 
1 
Chelsea Company 
March, 1883 
13,471 
1,248 
35 
35 
Chloride of sodium 
2 
West Middlesex Company. 
44 
“ 
13,471 
1,539 
23 
41 
and nitrogen in 
3 
Southwark and Yauxhall 
nitrates, etc., by 
Company 
44 
14,434 
1.919 
35 
47 
E. Erankland. 
4 
Grand Junction Company. 
“ 
14,434 
1,802 
23 
23 
(-Free and albumi- 
5 
Lambeth Company 
44 
15,396 
2,298 
23 
35 
noid ammonia, 
London, River Lea— 
by J. A. Wank- 
6 
New River Company 
44 
15,396 
2,187 
12 
23 
lyn and W. J. 
7 
East London Company... 
44 
16,358 
1,866 
12 
29 
Cooper. 
8 
Exeter, River Exe 
Nov., 
1881 
11,547 
1,825 
15 
26 
P. P. Perkins. 
9 
Reading, River Kennet 
44 
i4 
11,643 
624 
4 
35 
J. Shea. 
10 
Worcester, Rivers Severn and 
Vyrnwy .. 
May, 
“ 
J2,627 
624 
0 
41 
H. Swete. 
11 
King’s Lynn, River Gavwood.. 
Nov., 
44 
21,843 
2,682 
18 
70 
W. Johnstone. 
12 
Plymouth, peat bogs 
— 
“ 
11,643 
3,330 
8 
38 
R. Oxland. 
13 
Coatham. River Tees 
Dec., 
1877 
7.794 
373 
68 
58 
14 
Isle of Wight, River Yar 
Sep., 
44 
72,265 
583 
41 
59 
15 
Carnarvon, Quellvn Lake 
“ 
44 
14,071 
233 
20 
39 
16 
Mayport, river water 
Aug.. 
10,672 
466 
27 
59 
17 
Whitehaven, Ennerdale Lake.. 
“ 
7,814 
236 
30 
20 
18 
Portmadoc, lake water 
Sep., 
“ 
13,119 
216 
98 
57 
19 
Lvnton, river water 
Oct., 
44 
13,646 
117 
34 
20 
Llanfairfechan', river water ... 
Nov.. 
44 
10,730 
233 
12 
28 
21 
Glasgow, Loch Katrine 
April, 
1876 
not det. 
150 
6 
50 
22 
“ t< it * 
March 
1882 
6,062 
47 
0 
47 
E. J. Mills. 
23 
Dublin, Loch Vartry 
Dec., 
1881 
13,568 
trace 
17 
50 
C. A. Cameron. 
* Average for twelve months. 
IX. Waters of Great Britain and Ireland. 
The Results are Expressed in Parts in One Thousand Million. 
Number. 
Locality. 
Date. 
Chloride 
of 
sodium. 
Nitro- 
gen in 
nitrates 
and 
nitrites. 
Free 
ammonia. 
Albuminoid 
ammonia. 
Analyst. 
London, River Thames— 
1 
Chelsea Company 
March, 1883 
23.100 
2,140 
60 
60 
2 
West Middlesex Company . 
“ 44 
23,100 
2,640 
40 
70 
3 
Southwark and Vauxhall 
Company 
“ 44 
24.750 
3,290 
60 
80 
4 
Grand Junction Company . 
24,750 
3.090 
40 
40 
5 
Lambeth Company 
44 “ 
20,400 
3,940 
40 
60 
London, River Lea— 
6 
New River Company 
44 “ 
26,400 
3,750 
20 
40 
7 
East London Company ... 
44 44 
28,050 
3,200 
20 
50 
8 
Exeter, River Exe 
Nov., 1881 
19,800 
3,130 
26 
44 
9 
Reading, River Kenntt 
i. 14 
19,965 
1,070 
7 
60 
10 
Worcester, Rivers Severn and 
Vyrnwy 
May, “ 
73.095 
1.070 
0 
70 
11 
King 8 Lynn, River Gay wood.. 
Nov., “ 
37,455 
4,600 
31 
120 
12 
Plymouth, peat bogs... 
4% 
17,300 
657 
12 
197 
13 
Coatham, River Tees 
Dec., 1877 
13,365 
640 
117 
100 
14 
Isle of Wight, River Yar 
Sep., “ 
123.915 
1,000 
71 
101 
15 
Carnarvon, Quellyn Lake 
4 4 44 
24,300 
400 
34 
67 
16 
May port, river water 
Aug., “ 
18,300 
800 
46 
101 
17 
Whitehaven, Ennerdale Lake.. 
13,400 
404 
51 
35 
18 
Portmadoc, lake water 
Sep., “ 
22,600 
371 
169 
97 
It II 
10 
Lynton, river water 
Oct., *• 
23,400 
200 
59 
95 
20 
Llanfairfechan, river water... 
Nov., “ 
18,400 
400 
20 
48 
ir it 
21 
Glasgow, Loch Katrine 
April, 1876 
not det. 
258 
10 
85 
22 
“ “ “ * 
March, 1882 
10,395 
80 
0 
80 
E. J. Mills. 
23 
Dublin, Loch Vartry 
Dec., 1881 
23,265 
trace f 
29 
86 
C. A. Cameron. 
* Average for twelvemonths. 14 
quainted with the organisms effecting these changes, and 
their particular functions have been too little studied, for 
any accurate sketch of these processes to be given. In the 
first rank we must probably place the fungi, whose main 
function is apparently the rapid oxidation of carbon. Fol- 
lowing these we have the innumerable army of bacteria, em- 
bracing many families of very similar physical structure, but 
endowed with very different chemical powers. One class of 
these bacteria attacks nitrogenous organic matter and liber- 
ates the nitrogen in the form of ammonia ; while another 
class of bacteria determines the conversion of carbonaceous 
organic matter and ammonia into simple organic bodies— 
carbonic and nitric acids. Lastly, we have the chlorophyll- 
bearing plants, which consume the carbonic acid, ammonia, 
and nitric acid produced by lower organisms, and are also 
capable of assimilating urea and other amide bodies, and a 
large number of inorganic ash constituents” (Warington, 
1880). 
“ Eli resume, the little beings which we have been consid- 
ering have an important role : they cause the return of dead 
organic matter to the atmosphere and to water. 
“ Without them, organic matter, even exposed to the air, 
would not be destroyed, or would be transformed with ex- 
treme slowness, in consequence of a slow combustion pro- 
duced by oxygen. With them, on the contrary, its destruc- 
tion takes a rapid march and becomes complete. If, then, 
the equilibrium is maintained between living nature and 
dead nature, if the air has always the same composition, if 
the waters are always equally fertilizing, it is thanks to the 
infinitely minute agents of fermentation and putrefaction ” 
(Magnin from Duclaux, 1878). 
Hulwa, in his investigation of the River Oder, before it 
enters and after it lias passed through the City of Breslau, 
found that in its progress through the city the river showed 
increased pollution, and at its exit was greatly polluted. A 
short distance down the river the effects of dilution became 
evident, the self-purification of the river by the combined 
action of the oxygen of the air and of the vegetable and ani- 
mal life in the stream very marked, and the impurities 
diminished so rapidly that at a few miles below the city the 
water was as pure as when it entered it. Hulwa thinks it a 
mistake to forbid the outflow of sewage into rivers, provided 
the outfall is below the city and the rapidity and volume of 
the stream are sufficient to carry the sewage to such a dis- 15 
tance as will allow the operation of natural causes of purifi- 
cation (1884). 
The action of air in effecting, directly or indirectly, the pu- 
rification of water has been practically tested within the last 
year or two, in Hoboken and Philadelphia, where air has been 
systematically pumped into the water for the purpose of has- 
tening the operation. 
A further comparison of the Hudson River water at 
Albany with the chief waters used in America and England 
for city supplies, demonstrates the fact that the Hudson River 
water does not contain any excessive quantity of organic 
matters, and the application of these new methods of analysis 
confirms the opinion which I originally reached with regard 
to this water. 
In a recent report of the Committee on Drainage, Sewage, 
and Topography of the State Board of Health, the statement 
is made that “ the experience of the past ten years has clearly 
demonstrated that the chemical test cannot detect the specific 
poisons of zymotic diseases, and therefore the results of 
chemical analysis of the water of the Hudson River are no 
proof as to its safety for drinking purposes.” This is no 
doubt the opinion of the Committee, but it is not the opinion 
of those persons who have had considerable experience in the 
examination of waters for sanitary purposes. I do not mean 
to say that chemical tests will detect the specific poisons of 
zymotic diseases in water. For that matter there is no 
method of investigation yet proposed which can accomplish 
this, except the actual production of the diseases, and no one 
has ever found in a river-water the specific poison of any 
zymotic disease. Dr. Koch thinks he observed the cholera 
bacillus in a water-tank at Calcutta in which persons suffer- 
ing from cholera bathed and washed their clothes, and this is 
the only case in which any reliable authority has ever claimed 
to have found disease-germs in water of any kind. 
In 1880, Dr. Tidy, of London, one of the best authorities 
on the subject of water examination, made the statement that 
“ in all well-proved cases of outbreaks of disease resulting 
from the use of drinking-water, such water would have been 
unhesitatingly condemned on analysis by the chemist.” 
The Committee of the State Board of Health attempts to 
sustain its condemnation of chemical analysis by reference 16 
to tlie epidemic of typhoid and typho-malarial fever in Bath, 
Steuben County, during the past year. In this case there is no 
evidence that the disease originated with the well-water. The 
printed analysis shows further that the water was very impure. 
It contains 37.6 parts in 100,000 of total impurities, while the 
quantity contained in the Hudson River water at Albany aver- 
ages only about 10 parts in 100,000. This well-water further 
shows the presence of 9,900 parts of nitrogen derived from 
nitrates and nitrites in one thousand million parts of water, 
which is an enormous quantity. It should further be remem- 
bered that well-waters cannot be considered upon the same 
basis as river waters. The well contains a small quantity of 
water, which is not in motion, and which is not brought freely 
into contact with the air. Moreover, well-waters are very vari- 
able in composition. They are liable to temporary defilement, 
so that while at one time a well-water may fail to disclose any 
alarming peculiarities to chemical analysis, it may at a later 
period, owing to a change in the condition of the ground- 
water in its neighborhood, or to some accidental pollution, 
become charged with offensive matter. All chemists realize 
the fact that it is never safe to decide the condition of a well 
from a single analysis of the water, as no matter how pure 
the water may prove to be by analysis on any particular oc- 
casion, there is no certainty that this condition of purity will 
be maintained for any length of time. The river, on the 
other hand, is not subject to sudden variations in the quality 
of its waters. The conditions that surround it are pretty 
nearly uniform from one end of the year to the other, the 
greatest extremes being those which result from high water 
and low water. The opinion of the Committee as to the value 
of chemical analysis, as far as it is based on the Bath out- 
break, is without adequate foundation. 
The slight turbidity or opalescence which is noticed at 
times in the water drawn from the hydrants at Albany, is 
due to the clay which is so abundant in the Hudson and 
Mohawk valleys, either as soft clay or as crumbling shales. 
It has been shown by Professor W. II. Brewer, that clay 
settles very slowly from pure waters. 
It will be noticed that the analyses of the water from 
Tivoli Lake, show a much larger amount of sodium chloride, 
nitrates, and of free and albuminoid ammonia. I did not visit 17 
the lake, but I am satisfied from the analyses that drainage- 
water finds its way into this body of water. 
II.—BIOLOGICAL ANALYSIS. 
Great stress is now laid by many persons on what is called 
the biological analysis of water, and much has been pub- 
lished upon the subject within the last few years. It has 
been known for more than two hundred years, that minute 
organisms exist in water. They were discovered by Leeuwen- 
hoek, in rain-water, in 1675, and have been studied with great 
interest ever since. Some are known to be animal in charac- 
ter, others vegetable. They have been carefully studied and 
classified, but while they were extremely interesting to the 
botanist and the zoologist, they attracted very little attention 
from the chemist and the etiologist till quite recently. They 
first came into general notice in the study of fermenta- 
tion, which had been supposed by many to be a purely chemi- 
cal process, but which was finally traced to the agency of 
these minute organisms. It was found that there are a great 
many different kinds of fermentations, each of which is due 
to some one specific organism. The further study of these 
organisms led to the revival of the theory of spontaneous 
generation, and many elaborate investigations were made 
into their origin. Finally, it was found that most kinds of 
contagious and infectious disease, and many diseases that 
had never before been recognized as infectious, were due to 
peculiar micro-organisms. 
These discoveries gave rise to what is known as the “ germ 
theory” of disease. I have had special occasion to study 
this subject for various reasons in connection with my duties, 
and ten years ago I carefully examined the publications of 
the most active investigators of the subject in preparing an 
article on “Fermentation” for “ Johnson’s New Universal 
Cyclopedia.” When it was proposed, therefore, to determine 
the sanitary quality of water by microscopic examination, 
either of the water itself, or of the culture-fluids or solid me- 
dia planted with water, I was not taken by surprise, but was 
in a position to realize how much and how little might be ex- 
pected from this method of examination. 18 
Biological analysis lias thus far been resorted to for the 
purpose of determining the number of germs or spores of 
micro-organisms contained in a given sample of water, and 
by counting them to decide on the relative value or safety of 
the water for domestic use. If these organisms, whether 
bacteria, algm, or mould fungi, were only contained in pol- 
luted water, or if they were injurious to life, this method of 
examination would undoubtedly be extremely valuable, but 
as a matter of fact these organisms are found everywhere in 
nature. They have been shown by Deherain, Maquenne, 
Koch, Miguel, Warington, and many others, to exist in all 
soils. They have been shown by everyone who has studied 
the subject to be constantly present in the atmosphere. The 
following quotation from the work of Cooke and Berkley on 
the fungi, expresses the universal opinion with regard to the 
occurrence of bacteria and other fungi in the air : 
“ Spores and other vegetable cells are constantly present in 
atmospheric dust, and usually occur in considerable numbers ; 
the majority of them are living and capable of growth and 
development. The amount of them present in the air appears 
to be independent of conditions of velocity and direction of 
wind, and their number is not diminished by moisture. 
“No connection can be traced between the numbers of bac- 
teria, spores, etc., present in the air, and the occurrence of 
diarrhoea, dysentery, cholera, ague, or dengue, nor between 
the presence or abundance of any special form or forms of 
cells and the prevalence of any of these diseases.” 
Bacteria are always present in water. Magnin and Stern- 
berg say rain -water will always be found fertile in germs, and 
when it is collected with care it represents the bacterial flora 
of the atmosphere at the time of its fall. The following 
quotation is additional proof on this point: 
“Water contains considerable quantities of bacteria and 
especially of germs. Their presence in atmospheric water is 
established by the experiments of Lemaire and Gratiolet, 
—and after them by more recent observers—by means of 
condensers filled with ice, and placed in the fields, and for 
comparison, in closed apartments. Rindfieisch has since ex- 
pressed the opinion that the vapor of water does not contain 
spores or bacteria, and that telluric waters alone contain 
them ; but Billroth, Cohn, and others have proved that Rind- 
fieisch was too positive in his statement. 
“It is not surprising that telluric waters contain such a 19 
quantity of bacteria, that their existence is admitted by all. 
The dust gathered upon the surface of stones, of leaves, of 
fruits, etc., shows upon microscopic examination an abun- 
dance of germs (Marie-Davy, Tissandier); the washing of these 
objects and of the soil by the rain, transports them into the 
rivers, and from the rivers to the sea, which contains con- 
siderable quantities of them. 
“Thus, a drop of water from the Seine, according to Pas- 
teur and Joubert, is always fecund, and may give birth to 
several species of bacteria. The distilled water of labora- 
tories also contains germs, and these of so small a diameter 
that they pass through all filters. Cohn has proved that 
some are not arrested by a superposition of sixteen filters. 
The only waters which do not contain them are those drawn 
from the very source of a spring.” (Magnin.) 
It should further be noted that all kinds of food contain 
bacteria and other micro-organisms. Nothing is richer in 
bacilli than ordinary hay, from which they are never absent. 
Finally, I would call attention to the fact that human beings 
are never free from them. They occur in the body in life ; 
they are constantly found in saliva, and the mucous mem- 
brane of the alimentary canal exhibits myriads of them in a 
state of activity. They are found upon the surface of the 
skin, in the bronchial passages, and in fact wherever air, 
water, or food are brought in contact with the body externally 
or internally. Pasteur recently read a paper, by Duclaux, 
before the French Academy of Sciences, in which he claimed 
that the presence of bacteria is indispensable to the germina- 
tion of seeds and also to the digestion of food. 
Cohn says: 
“Bacteria belong to the most wide-spread of organisms ; 
we may say they are omnipresent; they never fail either in 
air or water; they attach themselves to the surface of all 
firm bodies.” 
And according to Magnin : 
“ The bacteria are of all beings the most widely diffused. 
We meet them everywhere, in the air, in water, upon the 
surface of solid bodies, in the interior of plants and animals. 
If we expose a transparent liquid containing traces of organic 
substances, we find after a short time that it has become 
clouded, and the microscope shows us that it contains myr- 
iads of these beings.” 20 
Under these circumstances it would appear that counting 
the number of bacteria that will develop in gelatine, or in 
other culture media, on the addition of a sample of water, 
is not a very reliable method for determining the danger of 
water for domestic purposes, although some enthusiastic mi- 
croscopists, carried away by their skill in raising bacteria in 
their microscopic gardens, have said that the days of chem- 
ical analysis of water supplies are numbered. 
W. R. Nichols remarks in speaking of biological analysis : 
“ None of these methods have reached the subject of prac- 
tical utility, and it must be left entirely with the specialists 
to interpret the results of their own observations.” 
Dr. Robert Angus Smith, who made a great many biologi- 
cal examinations of water with gelatine, in which he noted 
particularly the production of little spheres of transformed 
gelatine after the addition of water, remarks as follows : 
“We must be careful in drawing conclusions as to the 
wholesomeness of the water tried ; the existence of spores of 
transformed gelatine caused by organisms is no proof that the 
water is unwholesome.” 
Dr. Frankland has also tested biological methods, and in 
one of his papers he states, speaking of such methods : 
“My own experiments completely conform with Mr. 
Heich’s observations, with two important exceptions, viz.: 
that, firstly, the fungi growths are not peculiar to water 
contaminated with sewage; and secondly, the germs from 
which they originate are present in all water which has been 
even momentarily in contact with the air.” 
It is claimed by some of the biological experimenters that 
if a solid jelly, to which a little of the water has been added, 
becomes fluid in a short time, owing to the development of 
bacteria, it is proof positive that the water is contaminated 
with sewage, and that it is unwholesome. 
I have applied this test to the waters from Albany, in 
comparison with Croton water, and with water from the 
Hackensack and the Passaic. In all cases the gelatine be- 
came fluid from the growth of organisms, which were readily 
seen under the microscope. At the same time I simply ex- 
posed to the air some jelly made from calves’ feet, some clear 21 
bouillon prepared from lean beef, and slices of white and 
Graham bread. 
The calves’-foot jelly soon became fluid, the beef bouillon 
became turbid, and both became opaque and offensive. Under 
the microscope both were found to contain myriads of bac- 
teria, some quiet, some in active motion. The slices of bread, 
which were covered with bell jars to prevent their becoming 
dry, were soon covered with a luxuriant growth of mycilium 
fungi or mould plants, white, green and yellow. 
Now if the organisms in the gelatine, to which the samples 
of water were added, prove the water to have been contam- 
inated with sewage, what can be said of the air of New York 
which filled the calves’-foot jelly and the bouillon with simi- 
lar organisms, or covered the bread with the mould fungi? 
Had the jelly, bouillon, or bread been exposed to the air 
of any other locality in the United States, the result would 
not have been different. The truth is, the germs of micro- 
organisms occur in all water and all air, and all that is neces- 
sary for their development is the proper soil, that is, organic 
matter, such as the jelly furnishes. 
We have daily proof of this in the spontaneous fermen- 
tation of the juice of the grape in wine making, the transfor- 
mation of cider into vinegar, the souring of beer and light 
wines, of milk, of food generally, the ripening of cheese, the 
decay of timber, and the putrefaction of all animal and vege- 
table matters. All these processes can be prevented by simply 
excluding the germs which are contained in the air, as is done 
in “canning” food, or by destroying their vitality by heat 
or antiseptics. When the biologist learns to detect in water 
“ the specific poisons of zymotic diseases,” and to distinguish 
them from the harmless organisms that we eat, drink, and 
breathe with impunity all our lives, then we may set up 
biological analysis as superior to chemical analysis, for the 
selection of drinking water. 
Up to the present time, however, biological analysis will 
not tell us anything with regard to the Hudson River water 
that we do not already know. The river receives a small 
amount of drainage, and thanks to the oxygen and the micro- 
organisms, it becomes so thoroughly purified that, when it 
reaches the Bleecker reservoir for distribution in Albany, it 
may be drank without danger to health. 22 
Some stress has been laid on the fact that nematoid worms 
were found in the mud taken from the basin near the mouth 
of a sewer. While it is not claimed that these worms were 
found in the water of the river, the only object in mentioning 
them was to associate them in some way with the water- 
supply. I would simply note that they are of no significance 
in any case, as nematoid worms are found in all fresh water, 
especially in ponds and lakes. They are also found in sour 
paste, and in vinegar, and are well known to microscopists as 
paste eels and vinegar eels. 
Speaking again of the omnipresent organisms which are 
harmless to man, the zymogenic organisms which produce 
the fermentations—alcoholic, acid, viscous, etc.—and the sep- 
tic organisms which produce putrefaction, it has been sug- 
gested that under certain extraordinary influences they may 
undergo some peculiar change by which they may develop 
into pathogenic organisms, capable of producing some specific 
germ and its zymotic disease. 
This has actually been claimed in several cases, but it is 
clearly settled now that in no one of these cases was there 
any satisfactory evidence of such a change. The pathogenic 
organisms are distinct and peculiar, and are not in any way 
developed from the others. 
III.—ADVANCES IN THE KNOWLEDGE OF ZYMOTIC 
DISEASES. 
Since the biologists have perfected their methods for 
studying micro-organisms by the addition of new methods of 
staining, culture, and inoculation,the most wonderful advance 
has been made in the knowledge of zymotic diseases. The 
labors of Pasteur in investigating the diseases of silkworms, 
of Davaine, Koch, and Pasteur in investigating splenic fever, 
of Pasteur on chicken cholera, of Obermeyer and Carter on 
relapsing fever, of Pasteur on swine plague, of Koch on tu- 
berculosis and cholera, and of these and other observers on 
many other diseases, have thrown a flood of light on the eti- 
ology of zymotic diseases. It would seem as if a few years 
would make the biologist master of the situation ; as though 
this class of diseases may perhaps be brought entirely under the control of the physician, by a kind of preventive inocula- 
tion, as is now the case with smallpox. 
But after all, this advance in knowledge has not as yet 
thrown any light on the question we have before us. Is the 
water of a large river, which has received a certain amount 
of drainage, a safe beverage for a city ? Nothing in the dis- 
coveries of these great investigators enables us to say that 
this water is unsafe. It is believed that typhoid fever and 
diarrhceal diseases have often been disseminated by polluted 
wells, but no cases of these diseases have ever been traced to 
the waters of a large river. 
Tiie Cholera Question. 
It having been established with some considerable degree 
of probability, that the wells in certain parts of London had 
aided in disseminating the cholera poison during the succes- 
sive visitations of that disease to the metropolis, an opinion 
had gained credence that the water of the Thames had con- 
tributed in no small measure to swell the awful list of victims 
who died from that disease, especially the water supplied by 
the East London water-works. Considerable testimony was 
therefore taken upon this point by the Water Commission, 
the most important of which I will quote.- 
Testimony of Dr. Robert Angus Smith, Government 
Inspector. 
“ If the germs pass into tlie rivers we do not know how far 
they may be carried. On the other hand, we do not know 
that they ever can be carried in pure water, the dissolved 
oxygen may destroy them, as it unquestionably does putres- 
cent matters. A positive proof of their transmission, in 
otherwise pure water, is wanting. One might ask if a cholera 
germ in the water at Oxford would produce disease in Lon- 
don, and one might answer by asking if one cholera germ 
passing into the air at Woolwich would produce disease in 
Pimlico. This we do not know, but it seems probable that 
disease cannot be carried far by pure air, nor by water with 
much oxygen in it, which is equal to pure air. We are in- 
formed that the atmosphere is full of germs, but the evidence 
seems to be that it requires an unusual excess to attack us 
successfully, it seems to be a question of quantity.” 24 
Testimony of Dr. Letheby, Medical Officer of Health 
to the Corporation of London. 
Q. “ You are aware that it has been alleged that the main 
cause of the cholera, iii the east end of London, was due to 
he water-supply; do you entertain that opinion?” A. 
“No, I entertain the opposite opinion; it was a matter of 
duty with me to investigate the whole of the circumstances 
connected with the East London supply ; in the first place it 
was supplied to the hospital to which I am attached, in the 
next place it was supplied to the eastern division of the city, 
where, as officer of health, it was my duty to look well into 
the matter, and in the third place I had a general interest in 
it scientifically, apart from any official connection with the 
subject, and I was very desirous to ascertain whether or not 
the water had been in any way concerned in the propagation 
of the disease ; I therefore investigated it very fully.” 
Q. “ Do you think the present supply of water to the Lon- 
don people is wholesome water ? ” A. “Ido, a thoroughly 
wholesome water.” 
In his report on the sanitary condition of the city of Lon- 
don for the years 1866-07, Dr. Letheby is much more explicit 
in his discussion of the cholera epidemic of 1866. He says, 
on page 26 et seq. : 
“But difficult as the problem is, to determine the exact 
value of the several circumstances which influence the severity 
of the disease, and especially those which give to it its marked 
local intensities, enough has been ascertained to indicate its 
general habits, and to show that it fixes itself at low levels in 
proximity to tidal rivers, among dense populations, that are 
living in ill-constructed houses, that are filthy, badly venti- 
lated, badly drained, and generally defective of sanitary pro- 
visions ; and the inference is, that the actual agent of cholera, 
be it what it may, can only find congenial conditions for its 
full development in damp and impure air,” 
“ The theory of Pettenkofer is, that the essential conditions 
for the active manifestations of the disease, are a porous soil, 
charged with excrementitious matter, and having a certain 
degree of hydration, as happens when the subsoil water has 
been just drawn off or is slowly retiring. All these con- 
ditions were singularly coincident with the localization of 
the disease in the eastern districts of London ; for the soil 
is gravelly, and therefore very porous to air and water, and 
it is largely charged with excrementitious matters derived 
from the local tide-locked sewers. It is also remarkable that 
for some months before the outbreak of the disease, the 
subsoil water had been gradually sinking in consequence of 25 
the drainage operations that were necessary for the construc- 
tion of the main low-level sewer, and its branch to the Isle 
of Dogs. Now, according to Pettenkofer, it is exactly under 
these circumstances that a district is most liable to choleraic 
infection.” 
“The alleged pollution of the water rests upon a series of 
assumptions, many of which are in the highest degree im- 
probable.” 
“Apart, however, from the improbabilities of these as- 
sumptions, it is a fact that the water which is said to have 
been thus polluted did not produce its effects in the several 
districts to which it was distributed in anything like uni- 
formity of time or force. Suppose, b}r way of illustration, 
that alcohol or arsenic had become mixed with the water, 
and that on a certain day it was distributed to the public, 
we should expect to find that the action of the poison was 
not only manifested at the same time over the whole district 
of supply, but that it was confined to that district. Not so, 
however, with the water in question, for although it is not 
alleged to have been more than once polluted, yet the first 
effects in the several districts occurred at long intervals ; and 
there were many places to which it was distributed, where 
there was no sign of the disease ; while others, which did not 
receive the water, were seriously affected.” 
“More remarkable still, there were places in the very 
heart of the cholera field, and others close adjoining it, where 
the residents received the same suspected water, and used it 
freely without suffering in the least degree. In the Lime- 
house School, around which the cholera was frightfully 
fatal, there were 400 children who drank the same water as 
their neighbors, and yet there was not even a case of diar- 
rhoea among them. In the London Hospital, which is also in 
the heart of the cholera field, for it is surrounded by the 
districts of Whitechapel, Bethnal Green, Mile End, Old 
Town, and St. George’s-in-tlie-East, there was an average 
resident population of 463 persons, and, although they drank 
freely of the unfiltered East London water, yet there was not 
a case of illness among them.” 
“Again, in the eastern division of the city of London, 
which adjoins the cholera field, the suspected water was 
supplied to 161 houses, with a population of about 1,732 
persons, but except in one of these houses (20 Somerset Street), 
which is on the boundary of Whitechapel, there was not a 
single death from cholera, and to verify tliis, I have obtained 
the addresses of all the persons who died in the cholera ward 
in Bishopsgate Street. But, besides this, the disease was 
singularly fatal in places where the suspected water was never 
used. In Crown Court, Blue Anchor Yard, Whitechapel, 
where the water-supply is from the New River, the mortality 26 
was at the rate of 284 per 10,000. In Boar’s Head Yard, of 
the same district, which is also supplied by the New River, the 
death-rate was 193 per 10,000 ; and indeed there are eighteen 
courts in Whitechapel, where none of the East London water 
was used, and yet out of an aggregate population of 4,351 
persons, there were 30 deaths from cholera, the mortality 
being at the rate of 69 per 10,000 ; that of the whole district 
being but 77.” 
‘'So that, on carefully examining the facts in their rela- 
tion to the water theory, we find : 
1. “ That there is no proof whatever of choleraic pollution 
of the water.” 
2. “ That there was no coincidence of time in the appear- 
ance of the disease in the several districts supplied with the 
suspected water.” 
3. “That numerous districts receiving the same water, 
but situated at high level, or placed beyond the cholera field, 
were entirely exempt from the disease.” 
4. “That even in the very heart of the cholera field, 
there were places receiving and using the suspected water 
with impunity. 
5. “ That other places not supplied with the water, but 
situated within the infected area, suffered equally with the 
neighborhood.” 
“I am far from wishing it to be thought that choleraic 
matter diffused through water will not produce disease. 
There is abundant evidence to show that it is often a prolific 
source of it ; but I am anxious, in dealing with a question of 
so much public importance as the origin of the late epidemic, 
that none of the facts should be perverted, and that no hasty 
or ingenious hypothesis, without solid foundation, should 
take possession of the public mind. In the conduct of in- 
quiries like this, there should be a calm, a full, and a candid 
examination of the facts ;—we should endeavor to study the 
phenomena in a philosophical spirit, and apply to them the 
tests of sound induction ; we should strive also to deduce 
from them such laws as will not only expose the nature of 
the malady, but will, at the same time, enable us to treat it 
successfully. Rash opinions, boldly asserted and tenaciously 
held, though they may force themselves on public attention, 
rarely lead to useful results ; and while they have their hold 
on the popular mind they seriously hinder the progress of 
real knowledge.” 
These extracts are sufficient to indicate the opinions of the 
most eminent medical officers who have considered the fitness 
of the waters of the Thames for supplying the people of Lon- 
don with wholesome water. The verdict of the commissioners, after carefully and con- 
scientiously weighing all the testimony presented, is as fol- 
lows : 
“ The only point raised against the Thames water on the 
ground of organic contamination is of less positive character ; 
it is said that water which has been once contaminated with 
sewage, may still contain undecomposed organic matter, 
which, though inappreciable by the most delicate chemical 
tests, may still exercise prejudicial effects on the human 
system.” 
“The strongest form of this objection has reference to 
some opinions now prevalent, that certain forms of disease, 
such as cholera and typhoid fever, are propagated by germs 
contained in excremental matter; and it is conceived possi- 
ble that when matter of this kind once gets into streams, 
these germs may escape destruction and long preserve their 
dangerous character. It is said that no process is known by 
which such noxious material can be removed from water, 
and, therefore, it is argued, that water which has at any time 
been contaminated by sewage is henceforth unsuitable for 
domestic use. But we cannot admit them as sufficiently well 
established to form any conclusive argument for abandoning 
an otherwise unobjectionable source of water-supply ; we are 
of opinion that there is no evidence to lead us to believe that 
the water now supplied by the companies is not generally 
good and wholesome.” 
This report was made in 1869, and has been before the 
British public in an accessible form, in all its details, sixteen 
years, and its conclusions have been generally accepted. 
Cholera in 1884. 
A fresli opportunity was offered last year for studying the 
propagation and dissemination of cholera. Dr. Koch had 
succeeded in detecting peculiar comma bacilli in the intestines 
of persons who had died of cholera in Egypt and Calcutta ; 
and he has satisfied himself that these bacilli are the true 
originators of the cholera. As he has been the most successful 
investigator of pathogenic bacteria, his opinion carries great 
weight. Nevertheless, there are many who are not yet con- 
vinced. 
Dr. Koch noticed “ that the cholera often settles in a par- 
ticular locality, and displays its greatest virulence in certain 
quarters. Such epidemics are frequently observed in the sur- 28 
roundings of tlie so-called ‘ tanks,’ which are small ponds 
or wells enclosed within huts. The neighbors obtain their 
water-supply from these tanks, and simultaneously utilize 
them for various purposes—such as bathing, washing cloth- 
ing, cleaning domestic utensils, etc.” 
In one of these tanks Dr. Koch discovered the comma 
bacillus, and thus found an argument in favor of the trans- 
mission of cholera by the water-supply. Not of a large river, 
to be sure, but by a “ tank.” A very animated discussion lias 
arisen from these observations, and the cholera in the South 
of Europe last summer has furnished much material. The 
outbreaks in Toulon, Marseilles, Italy, Spain, and Paris have 
been very carefully studied, and thus far no evidence has 
been secured to connect the spread of the disease with the 
water-supply. 
One writer says : “ The microbists’ theory of cholera 
propagation rests mainly on the hypothesis that water is the 
agent that spreads the disease. Now, Paris is supplied with 
water from four different sources, and the cholera broke out 
almost simultaneously in quarters the farthest removed from 
each other, and furnished with totally distinct water-supplies. 
It was predicted that those who drank the Seine water would 
be the chief sufferers, owing to the extent to which it is con- 
taminated. The prediction has not been verified. The most 
virulent outbreak was in the charitable institution kept by 
the sceurs 7iospitalieres, where over sixty inmates died in a 
few days. This home is supplied with the water of the Vanne 
—beyond all comparison the purest that is brought into 
Paris.” 
R. DeLuna says (in the Compt. Rend., 97, 683): “ The cause 
of cholera always exists in the air, and is transmitted by per- 
sons and things. It generally acts through the organs of res- 
piration, and incubation generally takes place when the in- 
dividual is in a passive condition, and particularly during 
sleep.” 
M. Gibert, in describing, in the Revue Scientifique, the 
outbreak of cholera at Yport, near Havre, says : “ The cholera 
was brought to Yport by insufficiently disinfected clothing, 
soiled by cholera dejecta; that the disease was propagated 
from house to house ; and that the question of water has no' 
bearing in the case, for the very good reason that the Ypor- 
tais never drink any.” 
In a long article on “Cholera,” which runs through sev- 
eral numbers of the London Lancet in November, 1884, Dr. 29 
Max von Pettenkofer, of Munich, the leading sanitary au- 
thority in the world, makes the following statement: 
“ The further one investigates the drinking-water theory 
the more and more improbable does it appear. Robert 
Koch, too, the famous bacteriologist, has hitherto failed to 
substantiate the drinking-water theory, and I feel convinced 
that the time is not far distant when he will own that he lias 
gone in the wrong direction. Koch has succeeded in finding 
the comma bacillus in a water-tank in a region where cholera 
was prevalent. I have the greatest respect for this impor- 
tant discovery, not as a solution of the cholera question, but 
only as a very promising field for pathological, not epidemi- 
ological, inquiry. It must be remembered that cholera was 
already prevalent in the neighborhood of the water-tank from 
which Koch obtained the bacillus. Now, this tank was used 
not only for drinking purposes, but also for bathing the per- 
son and washing clothes, as Koch himself admits. Accord- 
ing to my view the comma bacillus must have been present in 
the water. It had not been shown, lnowever, that the bacillus 
was in the water before the outbreak of cholera. Koch is of 
the opinion that all the bacilli in the water-tank could not 
have come from the washing of clothes of cholera patients, 
but must have partly been derived from multiplication, yet 
he forgets that, as he himself has shown, the meat-broth in 
which the bacilli grow must not be too dilute. It would 
have been interesting if Koch had estimated the strength of 
the nutritive material in the water-tank. But what chiefly 
contradicts the doctrines of the contagionists is the simultan- 
eous disappearance of the cholera on land and the cholera 
bacillus in the water-tank. If it were really true that every 
case of cholera, the first as well as the last in an epidemic, had 
the same infective material in its intestinal discharge, and that 
the epidemic only ceased because the susceptibility of man 
had passed away, then the bacillus would continue to exist in 
the tank, always supposing that there was sufficient pabulum 
for it. And thus it is most probable that the bacillus gets 
into the tank from man, and not vice versa. While Koch 
was in Calcutta the English physicians there imbued him 
with their views on cholera and drinking-water. The English 
had been brought up on the drinking-water theory of typhoid 
fever and cholera, and could only lay it aside with difficulty. 
But a few of those English physicians who had studied wide- 
spread epidemics had renounced their original ideas. Dr. 
Bryden (the chief of the Statistical Department), Dr. J. M. 
Cuningham (the Sanitary Commissioner), Dr. John Mac- 
pherson (the Inspector-General of the Bengal Army), Dr. 
Lewis, and Dr. Douglas Cunningham, were all disbelievers in 
the drinking-water theory.” 30 
I quote these opinions not because I entertain them all 
myself, but to show that the best authorities do not sustain 
the theories or the fears that have been expressed by the op- 
ponents of the river water at Albany. I believe that wells 
and small streams may be so polluted as to disseminate dis- 
ease. 
IV. THE TEST OP EXPERIENCE. 
When, in 1872, I first had occasion to consider the question 
of employing the Hudson River water at the city of Albany, 
I was limited in my study to the chemical examination of 
the water by the methods then in use, and to the careful 
comparison of the size of the water-slied of the Hudson River 
and the populations residing thereon, with the water-sheds 
and population of other large rivers used successfully as a 
source of water supply. My conclusion in favor of the use 
of the water at that tinte was arrived at with a full appreci- 
ation of the great responsibilities of the decision. 
In the following spring I was placed at the head of the 
Health Department of the largest city in this country, and 
for eleven years a large part of my thought and study was 
directed to sanitary questions. I found myself compelled to 
study every subject bearing upon the public health, and I 
have never lost sight of the important issues involved in my 
decision of the Albany water question. I have from time to 
time made inquiries with regard to the health of the citizens 
who were using the water of the Hudson River, and it has 
always been a source of great satisfaction to me to learn that 
the health of the people of Albany continued to be remark- 
ably good, and that no evidence was presented to indicate 
that the use of this water had resulted in any ill effects, and 
I have never had occasion to regret the advice I gave at that 
time. The diseases which have been attributed to polluted 
water are especially typhoid fever and diarrhceal diseases, 
with which the city of Albany has been less afflicted than 
most other large cities in this country, many of which are 
supplied with water of the highest degree of purity. I anj 
satisfied, therefore, that the test of experience fails to present 
any facts which would indicate that the Hudson River water 
is unwholesome. 
The following Tables XII and XIII present the deaths 31 
from tliese diseases in Albany and the towns above, and also 
for further comparison, New York City, Brooklyn, arid Roch- 
ester. The figures were obtained from the last four Bulletins 
of the Newr York State Board of Health—the only ones to 
which I had access. As the city of Troy receives the Hud- 
son River water from above Lansingburg, it would naturally 
be inferred that if the water becomes polluted through its 
passage past the city of Troy there would be an increase in 
the death-rate of the city of Albany from the diseases attrib- 
uted to polluted water. It will be observed that this is not 
the case, but, on the contrary, the returns from the city of 
Troy indicate a much larger death-rate from these diseases. 
It may be said that these returns are not complete. This is 
no doubt true. A note at the foot of the November Bulletin 
of the State Board of Health remarks that, “ The returns 
from several localities, Troy especially, are notably incom- 
plete,” and a note to the December Bulletin says, “ In Troy 
the actual burials for November were found on investigation 
to be 146, but 43 having been reported ; the December returns 
show improvement, but are still incomplete. Returns from 
Cohoes are utterly unreliable and are now under investiga- 
tion by this Board.” It would appear, therefore, that the 
incompleteness is particularly in the Troy returns, and that 
if the full death-rate were recorded the contrast between 
Troy and Albany would be much more striking, the Albany 
returns being considered the most reliable of them all. 
In Table XIII the death-rates per 1,000 per annum are 
presented, computed from the numbers contained in Table 
XII. It will be noticed that in the fourth column the typhoid 
fever and malarial diseases have been added together. This 
is done because it is well known to every physician who has 
had occasion to investigate deaths attributed to malaria, that 
in the majority of cases the deaths were really due to typhoid 
fever. These figures clearly show that there is nothing in 
the vital statistics of Albany to indicate that any evil result 
has ever followed the introduction of river water. 32 
XII. Deaths from Typhoid Fever, Malarial and Diaiirikeal 
Diseases, for the last Four Months of 1884. 
Extracted from the Monthly Bulletins of the State Board of Health of New York. 
ALBANY—Population 97,344. 
Deaths. 
Rate 
per 1,000. 
Typhoid. 
Malarial. 
Diarrhoeal 
September 
October 
November 
December 
163 
148 
141 
140 
18.86 
18.25 
17.39 
13.00 
18.12 
8 
3 
5 
1 
17 
2 
0 
0 
1 
23 
8 
4 
3 
Four months 
588 
3 ‘ 
38 
TROY —Population 00,000. 
September 
October 
November 
December 
130 
70 
43 
81 
20.00 
14.00 
8.00 
10.20 
4 
3 
1 
0 
1 
0 
2 
25 
4 
1 
1 
31 
Four months 
324 
10.46 
15 
WEST TROY—Population 13,000. 
September 
October 
November 
December 
20 
17 
20 
20 
89 
24.00 
16.69 
18.40 
24.00 
3 
2 
o 
2 
o 
0 
0 
0 
0 
5 
3 
0 
1 
Four months 
20.54 
7 
9 
L AN SIN GBU RG—Population 8,600. 
September 
October 
November 
December 
22 
27 
21 
25 
95 
31.00 
38.11 
20.04 
35.30 
33.74 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
2 
0 
0 
0 
Four months .... 
0 
0 
2 
COHOES- 
-Population 
20,000. 
September 
October 
November 
.... 
15 
12 
21 
55 
9.00 
4.20 
7.20 
12.00 
1 
0 
? 
2 
0 
1 
0 
0 
1 
3 
0 
1 
0 
4 
Four months 
8.25 
GREEN ISLAND—Population 5,000. 
September 
October 
November 
December 
5 
0 
0 
7 
12.00 
14.50 
14.50 
10.80 
1 
0 
0 
1 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 _ 
0 
0 
1 
Four months 
24 
14.37 
2 
0 
1 
NEW YORK CITY—Population 1,350,058. 
September 
October 
November 
December 
2.080 
2.543 
2,807 
2,987 
11,317 
26.45 
22.48 
24.82 
26.42 
25.04 
02 
06 
54 
99 
34 
57 
39 
23 
153 
540 
301 
95 
Fonr months .... 
217 
081 
BROOKLYN 
—Popnlation 644,520. 
September 
1,309 
25.40 
19 
33 
339 
October 
5.101 
21.99 
19 
41 
149 
November 
1.060 
19.83 
13 
32 
31 
December 
1.253 
23.33 
8 
29 
14 
Four months 
4,809 
22.06 
59 
136 
533 
ROCHESTER 
—Popnlation 101,000. 
September 
181 
21.50 
4 
0 
42 
October 
140 
17.35 
0 
18 
November 
135 
16.04 
9 
2 
1 
December 
137 
16.97 
9 
0 
3 
Four months 
599 
17.79 
29 
2 
64 33 
XIII. Death-rates per 1,000 per Annum for the last Four 
Months of 1884. 
Computed from the Data Contained in Table XII. 
Deaths 
from all 
causes. 
Typhoid 
fever. 
Malarial 
diseases. 
Typhoid fe- 
ver and mala- 
rial diseases. 
Diarrhoeal 
diseases. 
Albany 
18.12 
0.525 
0.090 
0.615 
1.173 
Troy 
16.45 
0.750 
0.099 
0.849 
1.548 
West Troy 
20.54 
83.74 
1.620 
1.620 
2.070 
0.708 
Cohoes 
8.25 
0.800 
0.150 
0.450 
0.600 
14.37 
1.200 
1.200 
0.600 
New York 
25.04 
0.480 
6.339 
0.819 
2.169 
Brooklyn 
22.66 
0.270 
0.630 
0.900 
2.484 
Rochester 
17.79 
0.861 
0.060 
0.921 
1.699 
CONCLUSION. 
After applying every possible method of investigation to 
the Hudson River water, I am free to say that I find no evi- 
dence to lead me to change the opinion I expressed in 1872. 
There is no reason why the city of Albany should not con- 
tinue to use this water. 
Except at Troy, no sewerage of any consequence is dis- 
charged into the river; and even here, the volume of sewer- 
age is so small in comparison with that of the river, that it 
does not make any impression upon it. 
The average volume of the Hudson at Albany was es- 
timated by Mr. Sweet to be 618,111 cubic feet per minute, 
equal to an average daily How of 6,677,000,000 gallons. The 
minimum being 1,829,000,000 in July, and the maximum 
12,330,000,000 in March. 
In 1883, the engines pumped an average of 6,064,000 gal- 
lons daily, or of the average flow of the stream. 
I must not omit to call attention to the unusual combina- 
tion of circumstances by which the most complete aeration 
of the water is effected. Glens Falls, the falls of the Mohawk 
at Cohoes, and the State Ham at Troy, are the most effective 
means contrived by nature and art for preparing the water 
for the use of your citizens. 
1. Chemical analysis shows that the water compares 
favorably with that of other cities in this country and Eu- 
rope. 34 
2. Biological analysis reveals nothing in the water that 
has ever been known to produce sickness. 
3. Culture experiments have failed to connect in any way 
the omnipresent organisms which are found in all waters 
with any diseases, or to make it probable that they are likely 
to produce any evil effects. The experience gained during 
the recent outbreaks of cholera in the East and in Europe 
have aided nothing to the knowledge of this disease that 
makes it probable that, in case we have an invasion of it next 
summer, the river water would be likely to aid in introdu- 
cing it into your city. 
4. Experience in using the water for the past ten years 
has demonstrated its freedom from objectionable constitu- 
ents. There have been no epidemics during that time, and 
the city has been less afflicted witli the diseases which are 
generally supposed to spring from polluted water, than Troy 
and other towns, that take the water above that city ; or 
than New York orBrooktyn, which are supplied with unusu- 
ally pure water. 
5. With regard to the pollution of the water-supply by the 
action of the tide on the water which flows out of the Basin, 
I can only say that if anything is added to the water from 
this source it must be extremely small in quantity. Several 
of my samples were taken from the river at the inlet, half at 
low tide and half at high tide, and several were taken from 
Bleecker reservoir. None of these samples show the presence 
of such contamination, and they could not have failed to do 
so, had there been any to show. Although there is no ap- 
preciable contamination from this source, I would nevertheless 
strongly urge the adoption of the recommendation of the 
Committee on Drainage and Topography of the State Board 
of Health with regard to cleaning out the Basin or tilling it, 
and also the construction of an intercepting sewer. 
6. I would also advise that steps be taken to protect Tivoli 
Lake from drainage waters, which now find their way into it 
to some extent. 
7. I would further say that I consider the water of the river 
so free from any objectionable contamination, that the whole 
question seems to me to be one of practical economy for the 
taxpayers. If there were an equally available supply of water 
from a source against which no one, however biased, could sug- 35 
gest a suspicion (I know of no city that has a supply of water 
which does not at times arouse the alarmists), then I would 
say, as a matter of sentiment, to silence if possible all com- 
plaints and arguments, abandon the river. But it would be 
very foolish to abandon a never-failing supply of wholesome 
water, which can be had by simply pumping, to go to large 
expense, simply as a matter of sentiment, to prevent a few 
persons from saying disagreeable things about the quality of 
the water. Besides, if water were brought from some lake, 
a new class of troubles would result. Lakes are very liable 
to be invaded, at certain seasons of the year, by abundant 
growths of vegetable or animal matter, which communicate 
color, taste, and odor to the water which are very offensive. 
Almost every city in the country that is supplied by lake 
water has experienced this difficulty. 
In studying this subject (to use the language of Dr. Leth- 
eby, already quoted), I have been “anxious, in dealing with 
a question of so much public importance, that none of the 
facts should be perverted, and that no hasty or ingenious 
hypothesis, without solid foundation, should take possession 
of the public mind. In the conduct of inquiries like this, 
there should be a calm, a full, and a candid examination of 
the facts ;—we should endeavor to study the phenomena in a 
philosophical spirit, and apply to them the tests of sound 
induction. Rash opinions, boldly asserted and tenaciously 
held, though they may force themselves on public attention, 
rarely lead to useful results; and while they have their hold 
on the popular mind they seriously hinder the progress of 
real knowledge.” 
Very respectfully yours, 
C. F. CHANDLER.