b*70
IH7!
 188b


I'iVJGrf
s§
HOPKINS.					
SEWAGE OF	WORCESTER IN		ITS	RELATION	TO
■EHE BLAGKSTONE		RIVER.			
_.v-, 
WA 670 H794s 1886

30830660R
NLn osmasi3  s
    NATIONAL LIBRARY OF MEDICINE
m
i&a
m§W

NLM051425135 
 
 
/=/ C F>KI A/ 5   (oJ.J
THE
SEWAGE   OF  WORCESTER
DT ITS RELATION TO
THE BLACKSTONE RIVER.
ARGUMENT OF JOHN  HOPKINS
BEFORE THE
JOINT COMMITTEE ON WATER-SUPPLY AND DRAINAGE
    OF THE MASSACHUSETTS LEGISLATURE,
APEIL % 1886.
TV*. 7"
   LTIiRAJL

1____/_.<!_ 2—J 
 
THE
SEWAGE  OF   WORCESTER
IN ITS RELATION TO
THE BLACKSTONE RIVER
ARGUMENT  OF  JOHN HOPKINS
BEFORE THE
JOINT COMMITTEE ON WATER-SUPPLY AND DRAINAGE


    OF THE MASSACHUSETTS LEGISLATURE,
APEIL 2, 1886.
        BOSTON


PRESS OF RAND, AVERY,


          1886.
  LIBRARY
SURGEON GIV-FAI.'S OFFICE
-"7 -'TC 6
    JUN.-7.:riv




L&- C'OMr^N¥r--—*-—"""■ 
Wa
IoTC

1884 
ARGUMENT  OF  JOHN  HOPKINS.
   Mr.  Chairman, and  Gentlemen  of the  Committee, — The
 question before you is a simple one.
   It is, Shall the bill recommended by the Drainage Commis-
 sion of 1884 be reported by you to the Legislature ?
   The object of the bill is to compel the  city of  Worcester
 to  purify  its sewage before turning  it into the Blackstone
 River.
   The first section is  as follows : —

   " Section 1.  The city of Worcester is hereby directed, within
 years after the passage of this Act, to purify from all offensive, noxious,
 and polluting properties the waters or substances that may thereafter be
 discharged from its sewers into Blackstone River,  or any of its tributa-
 ries, so that said waters and substances shall not of themselves, or in con-
 nection with other matters, create a nuisance,  or endanger the  public
 health; and said city thereafter shall cease to empty from its sewers into
 Blackstone River, or any of its tributaries, any waters or substances con-
 taining said properties until the same shall have been first so purified."

   It will be  observed that  this section is  prohibitory in its
 character; it recognizes two evils  from the discharge of un-
 purified sewage  into  the stream: first, a nuisance; and sec-
 ond, danger to the public health :  and the distinction  between
 these two  classes of evils must be kept  constantly in mind.
 This section  is intended  to  provide a remedy for both, but
 does not impose upon the city any  specific plan of operations
 by which it is to  be  accomplished: it must, then, be consid-
 ered in connection with the suggestion of the engineer of the
 Commission, found on p. 219 of the report, that "Worcester
 ... be required to purify its sewage in some  way, leaving
the  choice of methods,  and  its details, to be determined by
 the  city itself."
677  5 
4
  I cannot  agree  with the city solicitor in his proposition
that it imposes upon the city the  duty of adopting the plans
of the State Board of Health in 1882.   Whether the method
shall be intermittent downward filtration, or broad irrigation,
or chemical precipitation, or a combination of two or more of
these methods, is  left  optional with the city;  the prime ob-
ject is purification: so  far as the bill is concerned, the means
are unimportant.
  The second section of the Act gives  the city ample author-
ity to do all things necessary to be done in  carrying out the
purposes of the Act, and in  its terms corresponds with  the
provisions of like nature  found in  all Acts conferring upon
corporations, municipal or otherwise, rights analogous to that
of eminent  domain; and the authority given  by it has prac-
tically been judicially determined by a long  line of decisions,
so that the extent of the authority conferred and the  method
of its exercise are plain.
  Section 3 authorizes  the city to raise and appropriate  the
necessary money to carry out the provisions of the Act.   It is
submitted  that this section  is an  answer to the evidence
offered as to the fact that Worcester has nearly reached  the
limit of indebtedness permitted by law.   It is competent for
the Legislature to order work done by  a municipality involv-
ing an expenditure of money, and to authorize it to raise  the
necessary amount; and the effect of such legislation is to take
the municipality out of the general law regulating indebted-
ness so far as that expenditure is concerned.
  Section 4 provides a remedy in case the provisions of  the
bill are not complied  with by the  city; and it  will be  ob-
served that it guards carefully the rights of the  city in this,
that the remedy  can  only be sought  by the selectmen of
towns upon the Blackstone River, so that there is no dano-er
to apprehend hasty and inconsiderate  and hostile action by
individuals whose private rights may suffer ;  and in general it
recognizes the proposition that it is  a  matter of public con-
cern,  with which  the court is to deal.
  The Act, then, is simple in its provisions,  contains  no new
principles of law, and does not seek  to impose upon  the city
any embarrassing  details, or  interfere  with that freedom of
action in regulating its own  affairs  which all  municipalities
enjoy and prize. 
5
   The draft suggested by the Commission, however, is  silent
 as to the time within which the city shall purify its sewage:
 the  petitioners, realizing as they  do the magnitude of the
 work to be done, and  the fact that the city has not yet done
 any thing in this direction, will be content with the judgment
 of the Commission, however liberal in this respect it may be ;
 for when once it is known, that, by legislative enactment, the
 work must be done, we have full confidence that the city  will
 in good  faith do that which it is commanded to  do, with all
 due diligence, and within a reasonable  time; and with  the
 certainty that relief is coming, the inhabitants of the valley
 will regain  their  confidence,  and once  more look upon  the
 future of their business and their homes  with pleasurable
 anticipations instead of  the present mistrust.
   The bill being before you, the question comes, Who  asks
 for it?   Five thousand people ask for it.  Who are they, and
 where do they come from ?  They are residents of the Black-
 stone Valley, who are  to be directly and beneficially affected
 by its provisions.   They are from all  classes in the communi-
 ties  along the river, — the mill-owner and the mill-operative;
 the  merchant and his clerks; the mechanic and the  farmer;
 the  day-laborer and the emploj'er; the wives and mothers
 who care for the homes of their husbands and children, who,
 in the factories  and shops  and  schools,  are  subjected to the
 dangerous and  almost deadly influences emanating from  the
 river.
   And where and what  is the Blackstone Valley?  Taking
 its name from the first settler of  Boston, and extending from
 Worcester to Providence Bay, it has a  history as  an indus-
 trial centre  antedating  the history of Worcester as an  in-
 dustrial  city. It is a  busy  valley, and, as such, has a record
 of which the petitioners are proud: its inhabitants  have
 served the State and  the whole country well from  the  be-
 ginning.   The river, in its course to the sea, operated the first
 cotton-mill established in this  country ; and from that day to
 this, it has turned more  spindles, for spinning wool and cot-
 ton,  than any other stream of like  size in the world.  To do
 this,  it has had to be used over and over  again; so that, from
its source to its mouth, it may almost be said, that the tail-race
of one mill-privilege is  the flume of the next  one  below.
But its industries are diversified :  not alone do the cotton and 
6
 woollen industries of the country owe a debt of gratitude to
 the Blackstone River and the mechanics within its valley, but
 every other mechanical industry has had its home there from
 the latter part of the last century.  The General Government
 was supplied largely with  arms and  munitions of war from
 the town of Millbury for the war of 1812 and  the Mexican
 war and  the war of  the Rebellion.   The first scythes and
 improved agricultural implements made in the country were
 made at  Millbury.  The first  paper-machinery was set up
 there, and for years  it was  the only source of  supply for
 paper.  To-day from the  Rivelin  Works,  Millbury sends
 out the best edged-tools made in the country.   The world-
 renowned invention for turning irregular surfaces was  con-
 ceived and perfected at Millbury; and to-day the memory of
 the inventor and his  invention is perpetuated in  one of  the
 beautiful halls in its town-house, in which the Drainage Com-
 mission  of 1884 heard our complaints, and which is named
 Blanchard Hall.  Then, too, at Millbury was conceived  the
 principle of interchangeability of parts in machines and  im-
 plements, which revolutionized their  manufacture, and now
 prevails elsewhere in the country, and made possible success-
 ful competition, by American mechanics, in the  manufacture
 of watches, machinery of all  kinds,  guns,  and every other
 mechanical device.   At Northbridge was manufactured  the
 first cotton-machinery ever made in this  country; and from
 that source the mills  of the country have been largely  sup-
 plied with  their machinery, and new improvements  in  that
 particular have there been invented and applied.
  I speak of these  things, gentlemen,  to  show that   the
 petitioners before you have  had and exercised rights  and
 privileges, and have performed useful functions  in  the State,
 long before the acts of the  city of Worcester infringed upon
 them ; and they are  not in the condition of persons who have
 voluntarily established business and  homes  under the con-
 dition of things that now exist, and of which they complain.
 While having a county pride in the growth and  development
 of Worcester, they cannot forget that the  city  owes   her
prosperity largely to  the commerce  that comes to her from
 the inhabitants of the Blackstone Valley.
  These are the people, then, who ask this legislation.   The
city government of Worcester  alone  protests.  Its able and 
7
 eloquent alderman representing it says, " The city is unqual-
 ifiedly opposed to this or  any other  legislation  looking  to
 the same end."   But the  city  government in this matter is
 not  a representative body ; it was not elected  upon this
 issue ; it does not respond to any expressed public sentiment;
 the danger being imminent, no meeting of the citizens has
 been  held,   instructing  the  government  to  unqualifiedly
 oppose legislation.  On the contrary, the only meeting of the
 citizens  ever held to  consider it, took action  in a friendly
 spirit, and in direct opposition  to the  position now taken by
 the officials.  I refer now  to a meeting held Nov. 14, 1885,
 at the call of such citizens as Judge Adin Thayer, Joseph H.
 Walker, Rev. George W. Philips, Senator Hoar, Congressman
 Rice, Stephen Salisbury, and many other representatives,  at
 which Mr. Rice said,—

    "It is not a question  for Worcester to consider as Worcester simply,
 but as Worcester the great  central municipality of Worcester County,
 which has grown out of the  great county of Worcester; and it is not for
 our interest, nor is  it good  policy, to disregard, even for our own direct
 advantage, the welfare of any one of  the neighboring towns ... to see
 if science and ingenuity cannot devise some means for righting the great
 physical if not legal wrong we are doing to the people of Millbury."

   Judge Adin Thayer said, —

    "If we are polluting  the river, whatever  can be reasonably done to
 remedy it, we are entirely willing to do; and  we are here to inaugurate,
 so far as we can in  our capacity of citizens, measures for the solution of
 this problem."

   Senator Hoar spoke of the Act — that is, the Act of 1867
 — as  providing for the presenting of claims for  damages for
 the pollution  of the  river within two years from  the time  it
 was taken, and said, —

   "If in six, eight, or ten years, a  consequence not measured or con-
 templated had resulted which had destroyed the homes of the people,
 and reduced the  value of the  property of the people on the stream below,
 Worcester has more to do than to say, ' We have a legal right to this, and
 will do it with as little injury to you as possible.'  The Golden Rule is the
one we should apply.   We should act as the City of Worcester would act
if  Millbury was  above, and pouring  its sewage down upon  Worcester.
That is the thing we ought  to desire, and the Legislature will not long
permit us to stand upon our strict legal right.   We ought to look at the 
8
  question as though the Millbury people were Worcester people; and the
  Millbury people,  as well  as the Legislature, should understand that
  Worcester people are actuated by this spirit."

    Senator Hoar in his letter of recent date, read to you in
  evidence, re-affirms these views, and says  that time only has
  strengthened them.  So that am I not right in saying that
  the city government is not a representative body  on this
  question? From alderman down or up, as you choose to call
  it, to auditor,  treasurer, city engineer,, superintendent  of
  sewers to city solicitor, the exigencies of their official station
  blind  these  men to the expressed sentiment of the commu-
  nity in which they live, and seem to  justify  them in refusing
  to express their opinion as citizens, as  to the  duty of that
  community.
    You will observe, Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, with what
  warmth and evident  feeling  the city solicitor attacks the
  meeting of  Worcester's  citizens, to which  I have  referred
  you, and please note  also how earnestly he argues  at the
  views there expressed.   Too  intelligent not to see the force
  of them, and  too high-minded not to  feel the weight of them,
  he yet, with  the words of Alderman Parker ringing in  his
♦ ears,  "unqualifiedly opposes"  every thing, even  the ex-
  pressed wish  of his own people, and  for the  city government
  of Worcester formulates the  new  Golden  Rule;  namely,
  " Do unto others whatever they cannot by law prevent your
  doing."
    The question, then, being, Shall the bill be reported? and
  these  being  the  parties proposing and opposing it, the ques-
  tion then comes, Why should it be reported?
    The answer is, to meet an evil found to exist  by every
  committee and  commission that  has ever been  called upon
  to consider it.
    The pollution of the Blackstone River has long since been
  officially recognized.  Let us  look at it historically.
    First, The State  Board of Health, as early  as 1876, on
  p. 73  of its  report, reported as follows:  "The Blackstone
  River is  probably more polluted than  any  other  river  in
  Massachusetts."
    Second,  The  State Board  of Health, being  specially re-
  quested by the Legislature of 1881, reported as follows :__ 
9
  " Mill Brook, with its accumulated sewage, empties into the Black-
stone River at a point about three miles above the more thickly populated
portion (the village) of the town of Millbury: .  . . along the whole course
of the stream for some miles below Worcester, putrefaction of the organic
constituents of the sewage takes place  (most rapidly in the summer
months); and, as a consequence, offensive gases are liberated, which are
largely the cause of complaint of this method of disposing of the sewage.
That the stream at times is very offensive, is quite evident; and that this,
with the gradual filling up of  the ponds, will soon depreciate the value of
property in  its vicinity, unless some other method  of disposing of the
sewage of Worcester is adopted, is beyond question."

   Third, The Joint Legislative Committee of 1881 recognized
the evil by its  report, upon which the State Board was re-
quested to make its examination.
  Fourth, The Legislative Committee of 1882, by its report of
bill, Senate  Docs. 220, 239, recognize the  existence of the
evil.
  Fifth, The Joint Committee of 1883 heard the parties, and
reported the bill which is found as House Doc. No. 391.
  Sixth, The Joint Committee of 1884, with the evidence of
former reports,  both of committees and commissions, caused
the appointment of the Drainage Commission, who recommend
this bill.   (Resolve of 1884.)
  So that it appears that every board and legislative commit-
tee since  1876,  that has  considered the matter officially, and
ever}^ special commission, have  arrived at the same conclu-
sion as to the question of whether or not an evil exists  that
needs the application of  a legislative remedy.
  And  these conclusions have not been arrived at upon  ex
parte evidence: every step in the progress of  events towards
a remedy has been contested.   Worcester has  been  a party to
all  the hearings that  have been had:  she has called to her
aid men skilled  in  the art of  sifting evidence, and  forcibly
presenting it.
  And  now, with the report  of the Special  Commission  of
1882, supplemented by the report of the Drainage Commis-
sion of 1884,  before us, I submit that the  petitioners  are
entitled to consider something as settled.   It  has been delib-
erately adjudged that  an evil exists that ought and can  be
remedied; in other words, that a  nuisance  is  caused in  the
Blackstone River by the sewage of Worcester.
  Without referring further to the evidence that preceded it, 
10
 I now want to call your attention to the report itself, which
 justifies the  Drainage  Com mission  in  asking you with us to
 report their bill.
   That the Commission regarded the resolve appointing it as
 fixing the fact  that former  hearings had determined, as it
 were  judicially,  that  an evil existed,  appears  from p.  8 of
 the report: —

   " We interpreted the language used in the resolve which directed us to
 report  measures for the relief of certain  districts, to relieve us of the
 burden of proving the need of relief.  We construed the terms chosen
 to import an assumption by the Legislature that a condition of things
 existed now, or was likely soon to  exist, which called for some remedial
 measures; and it was the character of these measures, and not the ques-
 tion of their necessity, which it was given us in charge to determine."

   That they entirely concurred, appears from their statement
 on the same page: —

   " And irrespective of the precise text of our Commission, we should
 have been forced to this conclusion by consulting the reports of our pred-
 ecessors iu the same fields of labor."

   It further appears in the report of the engineer, on p. 218,
 in which he says, —

   " The description given  in Part I. of the conditions  existing in the
 Blackstone-river Valley, shows that  there  is only one serious cause of
 pollution which calls for an  immediate remedy. This  is the nuisance
 caused  to the towns below by the discharge of the sewage of Worcester
 through Mill Brook into the river."

   In addition to the evidence which results from the conclu-
 sions arrived at by committees, boards,  and commissions, and
 covering a period since their  examinations and  reports  were
 made,  and that you may, independently of all former evi-
dence, determine the question anew  as to the existence  of the
evil, we have  offered you some evidence of its present  exist-
ence, and  in increasing and alarming proportions.   Without
in detail considering  the evidence  of  each  witness, we may
sum it up as follows:  Within the territory near to the  river,
the death rate is increasing, and is much larger than in locali-
ties  remote from the river, and is  out  of proportion to the
total death-rate in town ;  the health-rate is low, convalescence 
11
is  tardy,  and symptoms of disease of  an obscure type  are
found:  this is the concurrent testimony of the physicians of
Millbury.
  That such a condition of things might  be expected under
the circumstances,  appears probable in view of the opinion of
eminent medical men, as expressed in the  letter  of the health
officer of Providence, Dr. C. V. Chapin, which appears in the
report of  Samuel  M. Gray, the city engineer  of  that  city.
Speaking of the effect upon public health  of emanations from
rivers, he saj's on p. 143, —

  " The foul water may effect an injurious influence in two directions :
it may affect health in a general way without producing any particular or
specific diseases, or it may be an important factor in  the production of
such diseases."

   He says frankly on p. 144, —

   " While it is certain that our public waters exert an  injurious influence
upon  health by rendering the atmosphere impure, there is considerable
doubt as to whether they  have been directly causative of any specific
diseases.
   " I believe that cholera and typhoid-fever may be produced by exactly
such  conditions as exist in our midst.  And as these  conditions  must
steadily become worse, unless active measures are immediately taken to
prevent it, the danger will, of course, increase from year  to year."

   We have also given you evidence of a marked increase of
deposition of foul  matter in the  ponds, and upon  the bed of
the stream, and a  reduction of water-power resulting there-
from.
   There is evidence, too, of a depreciation in value of prop-
erty, not conclusive, I admit, not entirely satisfactory in and
of  itself, because   other  causes  may  have  been  operative,
which in combination with this may have produced the ob-
served result; but  look at the facts  as they  appear, and say
whether or not this is one of  the causes.
   The Burling Mills are destroyed  by fire ; there are left to
the corporation a mill-site, a water-privilege, tenement-houses,
and building, such  as a factory-village requires, and an other-
wise  valuable property;  but the water-power  is only useful
at best  for turning the wheel, and  cannot be  used for any
other of the many uses for which it is wanted.  The nearness 
12
of the polluted stream  is offensive to employees;  and as a
consequence  the  privilege is abandoned, and  the  village is
literally deserted.
  More or less empty tenements  in the vicinity of  the river
attest  the fact  that there  is a something operating  which
makes them  undesirable for residences; and whjr seek a  re-
mote caiv-e when  a sufficient one is so near, — a river of filth
flowing sluggishly by?
  The selling-price of property, under a diminished demand,
proves also a reduction  of values  right in the heart  of the
village, where the opposite result should be found.
  But it is not alone by affirmative evidence that the  fact of
an existing evil is to be  proved.  We are entitled to have
considered the probabilities in the  case.
  What are the facts here that are pertinent ?
  In the first  place,  the stream itself is a small one, and not
very rapid.  Its head waters and various  sources are within
the control of Worcester; the reservoirs above, that feed it,
and which were the creation of the mill-owners of the valley,
have practically all been taken by the city, under various Acts
of the Legislature, as sources of its water-supply.  The water
comes down under the regulation  of the water-board  of the
city ; and in quantity regulated by the city's needs alone, and
not with regard to  the river or riparian  owners below the
city; so that in the  summer months you find flowing in the
stream practically the sewage of the city  in its  various forms
of street-washings, storm-water, house-waste, excreta,  waste
refuse of manufacturing processes, and generally the filth that
is made in a city of seventy thousand people, and nothing in
the shape  of pure  water to dilute it.
  In quantity, in  1883, the flow per day of sewage was three
million  gallons: prior to that time, under a system  then pre-
vailing whereby certain  reservoirs were  controlled by their
owners, there was added to this  flow of  sewage  during the
months of July, August, and September and October, pure
water in amount varying from 3,500,000 gallons to  7,000,000
per day, being about one-third of  the  entire stream.  Since
that time the city has  taken these reservoirs,  and now con-
trols them, so that, since former  investigations by Commis-
sion, the  flow of sewage has increased, and  the flow of
diluting pure water  has diminished. 
13
  In 1882 there were in the  city thirty-six miles of sewers.
At  the present time the length has increased to fifty miles,
and is yearly increasing.  It needs no argument to prove that
the constant flow of such  a  large volume of pollution into
so small  a stream destroys it as a stream of  water:  it is no
longer a river, but a sewer, with all that that implies.
  The waste of sixty thousand people cannot be turned into
such a stream without  imparting  to it the  character  of  a
sewer ; and  when  decomposition  sets  in, as it soon  must,
then can it be possible that it needs argument to  prove it a
nuisance  ?   It goes without argument that it must be.
  I contend, then, Mr. Chairman, and gentlemen of the com-
mittee, that b}r abundant evidence  independent of the pub-
lished reports and acts of committees and commissions, you
are warranted in finding that an evil exists sufficiently grave
to be called a nuisance.
  How is the case met  b}^ the city government  upon this
point?  In  the same way  that they have always  attempted
to meet it;  that  is, by the denial that there is a nuisance.
They say you haven't proved it. When the position  is  exam-
ined, it appears that they mean, we have not  proved a condi-
tion of things that endangers the public health.  Apparently
nothing short of that constitutes a nuisance upon their the-
ory.  Can this position  be a correct one?   " Where," they
exclaim exultingly, "is your increased death-rate?" Can  it
be possible that Worcester will grant no relief until the pes-
tilence comes?  Shall  not  the  Legislature act until the few
surviving people of the valley come and show the long roll of
their dead ?  Must the funeral train displace  the busy traffic
in our streets before our cry is heeded ?
  Will nothing but the constant tolling of the  funeral bell
reach the ears and touch the  consciences of the city fathers?
  It cannot be that the Legislature is powerless to avert such
consequences as  these before the death-rate increases; pre-
vention is better than  cure:  the  law  recognizes a  nuisance
other than a plague, and something other than the bills of
mortality as evidence of it.
  Beyond the  suggestion  that there is no increase in the
death-rate, Worcester  says nothing; she does not deny the
lar^e quantity of  polluting matter turned  into  the small
quantity of  diluting water; she does not deny that  offensive 
14
exhalations arise from  the stream ; that  streams and  ponds
are filled up by it;  that the water is useless  for  any purpose
other than turning  wheels, and as a carrier of filth ;  that the
dwellers upon the banks of the stream have to  exclude the
odor from their homes as best they can ;  that property is de-
preciated in value ; and in general they deny nothing except
that the death-rate  has  increased.
   If the evils I have spoken of exist, and are caused by the
sewage of Worcester,  manifestly this legislation should  be
had if, in the judgment of  the  committee, it will work a
cure: so that the question now comes, Will the passage of this
bill result in an effectual remedy?
   Representing the petitioners, I maintain that it will.
   In  the  first place, I  assume that Worcester will  obey the
mandate in it, and  in good faith do that which  the  Commis-
sion say her engineer is competent to do.
   The question  then comes, Can  she purify her sewage to
the extent contemplated by the Act?
   Upon this question we must, I take it, rely upon the judg-
ment of sanitary  engineers, aided by the experience of others
similarly situated.
   In the first place, Worcester has been, of all places in the
Commonwealth, favored in this, that she has  had the benefit,
at the expense of the Commonwealth, of the  deliberate judg-
ment of the best  minds in  the country upon  the question of
the feasibility of  sewage purification.
   I am embarrassed by the abundance of evidence upon this
point.  I can only  refer to the reports of  the State  Board of
Health from  year  to year;  the  official  reports of  her own
honored engineer Phineas Ball, who,  familiar with every fact
concerning her  system  of  sewers,  and knowing well every
topographical detail involved, has put himself  upon record,
and says,—

   " In short, it can hardly be conceived of a better locality on which to
test the workings of sewage utilization in this country, where such varied
experiments could be made so easily and at  so small an outlay, as upon
the location which  can be taken  for this  purpose by  the city.  In  its
present condition, not  much of this territory is under a high state of culti-
vation.  Much of the soil  may be called of but little present value for
agricultural purposes.
   " In this territory, assuming 600 acres as  available for irrigation, and
allowing 5,000 tons per acre as an average application, the  area would
consume 3,000,000 tons annually, or 2,000,000 gallons per day. 
15
   " By extension and elevation, the area could easily be increased to
 2,000 acres.
   " Upon the west side of the valley, there are many acres of land that
 would lie only a few feet above the level of the main carrier  for this
 section, where sewage  could be used to the best advantage.  The con-
 veyance of the sewage upon these lands is a simple problem."

   It will be observed that this report was made in 1873, and
 proves, first, that the subject-matter of this hearing has  been
 long and well considered ; and second, that there is an abun-
 dance of land available for the purposes of the proposed Act.
   Mr. Ball further  says in the same report, —

   " These facts indicate  . . . the beginning of  a serious attempt to find
 a remedy for a real, not a fancied, evil."

   And further he adds, —

   " It is firmly believed, that if the system of irrigation is adopted, and
 pursued with energy, intelligence, and skill, success will be as sure to fol-
 low the effort as it is when the same  traits of character are applied to
 any other industrial  or professional calling ; and that the same rule of
 action which insures success in the one case, will  also  guarantee  it in the
 other."

   From this it appears that the evil was found to exist as far
 back as 1873; that it was then a real one: and the well-recog-
 nized probabilities  of increase fully answers the suggestion
 of the city solicitor that it is now exaggerated.
   Then comes the report of the Special Commission of 1882,
 which forms the basis of the report of the Drainage Commis-
 sion of 1881.
   The conclusions  reached in all the reports  I  refer to are
 identical, and perhaps may best  be stated in the language of
 the last commission, where, referring to the report of the for-
 mer commission upon  the general subject,  and also the specific
 method recommended, they say on p. 40 of their report, —

  " This disposition seems  to us entirely feasible, and we believe it will
effectually remedy the great and growing nuisance which results from the
existing methods of discharge."

  And in the language of the consulting engineers, Joseph
P. Davis and Rudolph Hering, that, — 
16
   " The scheme proposed is one of land filtration, and the soil is well
adapted to the purpose.  With careful management, the result cannot be
other thau satisfactory."

   But the  city government of Worcester  insist  that we
shall go back of all these opinions and judgments, and review
the evidence upon which they  are  based, and the  grounds
upon  which they  rest.   They insist  that these men are all
wrong; that after all, however  eminent they  may be, they
are mistaken; they do not understand the subject-matter in
controversy, and have been inaccurate in their observations,
and in error in their conclusions ; and that there is absolutely
no way yet discovered whereby the sewage of  a city can be
purified ; that somehow  or  other,  civilization has advanced
beyond the point, in its various appliances, where it is possible
to do any thing with sewage, except to turn it into a  running
stream, and thus remove  it beyond the point where  it would
be offensive to the super-civilized sensibilities of its creators;
and so from the  beginning, even  unto this day, they have
gone on  building  their  sewers in  the best way to  get  the
sewage to the stream, there  to take care of itself.   The en-
gineering problem  with them has been a simple one ; in fact,
it has hardly risen to the dignity of  engineering at  all:  but
for the fact that they have an official, called a city engineer,
the work might as  well have been done by the street commis-
sioners.  In a country town, some man who happens to have
a team of horses or cattle is  elected highway surveyor of his
district; and with a common laborer he stakes out on the  sur-
face of the ground, a line of ditch to carry off the water to the
nearest water-course, with such filth as may fall into it.   The
ditch is dug: they may put  a cement pipe into it, and cover
it up;  they may run it under a road, and arch  it;  but there
is no scientific skill called for in  laying it out or constructing
it, for the end sought is simple, and the means are primitive :
so in  Worcester they have  dug a ditch, and  filled it with
mason-work; and from time to time, as it became a nuisance
to their own people, they have covered it over:  but  there is
no  ingenuity in their method, and no skill in  its execution,
beyond the ordinary  skill of the  surveyor and the mason.
   But I  do not propose to restate the  opinions  of former
commissions and   of  scientific experts,  or recapitulate   the
evidence which they offered; but I deem the petitioners for- 
17
 tunate in this, that since  the last hearing, evidence, cumula-
 tive  in  its nature  it is  true, has been possible in support of
 those opinions, and confirmatory of  the conclusions  which
 they held.
   The argument of the city has been, that all the illustra-
 tions used have  been of operations abroad, where the situa-
 tion  was entirely  different, and especially  where climatic
 influences were more favorable than in our cold New-England
 cl mate.   If  we have  pointed to sewage operations and dis-
 posal in England, the answer has been, that what was possible
 in her mild climate  was entirely impracticable here.  If we
 have said Dantzic,  they  have questioned  the accuracy of the
 reading from the  thermometer ; and generally, while  they
 have  conceded that the substance to be  dealt with was prac-
 tically the same abroad as here,  and have  even admitted
 that  it  was  more  foul  if any thing than here, yet they say
 your illustration is  pointless because from abroad.
   Fortunately  we can now refer you to a place nearer home.
 The petitioners are especially happy in referring to Pullman,
 because their own  trouble was not unknown  to the project-
 ors of the Pullman  sewage system, who  watched closely the
 efforts made  by them in 1881 and 1882 to obtain relief from
 the flood of pollution pouring down upon them.
   I desire to put before you communications from Pullman,
 received  since  the  last meeting  of the Committee,  which
 contain  an answer to  every suggestion  that  has  ever been
 made by the city  as to the feasibility of purification by inter-
 mittent downward filtration and broad irrigation.  (See Pull-
 man letters.)
   But the evidence is further strengthened by the report of
 the Commission now  under consideration ; for upon p. xvi.
 it says, —

   " It is urged with great force, that Old England and New England
 differ  too diametrically in their  climates to admit of  safe comparison.
 The sceptics point out that England's atmosphere is moist and equable,
 while  our heats are tropical, and our cold arctic; that one-half the year
 our land is frozen solid, and the other half baked hard; that in summer
 the sewage will stink insufferably, while in winter it will freeze into dirty
 icebergs, which spring will  convert into torrents of  sludge and filth.
 Once more we fall  back upon  experience.  At Pullman, where it is colder
than in most parts of Massachusetts, the frost  never  prevents the flow
and absorption  of the sewage;  and  in the hottest days  of July and 
18
August, the primitive filter-field at Concord is never a nuisance, nor the
lawn at the Worcester Hospital an annoyance.  The sewage is warm, and
melts its own way into the earth when the frost is hardest ;  and no mat-
ter how hot the air,  the earth has  a wonderful power of deodoiizing and
destroying the  harmful elements in sewage.   This property has been so
abundantly  manifested in a  multitude of instances, here and elsewhere,
that  we feel that we take no undue risk in dismissing the climatic bug-
bear  as a a chimera.  We have, then, no hesitation in recommending the
adoption of this system where for any reasons broad irrigation is imprac-
ticable or undesirable, and the ocean unattainable; and we think it likely
to prove  always  a valuable auxiliary, in combination with irrigation,
where the surroundings admit of its introduction."

  And again, by the evidence of the Commission's engineer,
who on p. 128 says,—

  " Apprehensions are sometimes expressed that the severity of the win-
ters in our State might interfere with  land nitration at that season.  No
trouble has ever been experienced from this  cause    Sewage is so warm
that it keeps the earth to which it is applied  from freezing, or thaws it
if already frozen.  The winters at  Pullman are colder than in most parts
of Massachusetts,  but irrigation has always proceeded  there without
interruption.   I made a visit to that farm in February, 1885.   For the
five days previous the mercury had not risen to 0 Fahrenheit, and had
been as low as — 25.   On the day  of my  visit, the mercury standing at
—12, I found the sewage going on to the land, and covered by a stratum
of ice from one to eight inches thick.   I broke the ice, and with a spade
dug  a hole in the  ground  below, which was perfectly open.   As the
weather moderated, the sewage rapidly melted the ice above it."

  But assuming that  the land will  freeze,  that  a  coating of
ice will form upon the surface, and  that the sewage will flow
over it into the river during the coldest of the winter months,
the  petitioners will uncomplainingly bear  that, and you  will
not  find us here seeking relief.   It  is the nuisance which the
hot  summer  air develops which  we ask to have abated,  and
not  the inconvenience which  the frosts of midwinter reduces
to its minimum.
   And how is this evidence  met?  By the  testimony of the
city engineer of Worcester.   Under what circumstances does
he testify ?   Let the record speak.
   At a meeting of the city government, Oct. 2, 1883, the fol-
lowing report was made : —

   " The Joint Standing Committee on Sewers would  respectfully com-
mend to the City Council the desirability of procuring, at an early day, 
19
such information as is accessible upon the general subject of sewage as
experimented upon in other countries.  The natural  and acquired rights
of the city are constantly assailed with evidence and  arguments assumed
to be based on said experiments ;  and in our judgment  we  should be
guilty of gross negligence if we did  not provide ourselves with a thorough
knowledge of the subject, gained from an intelligent investigation of the
results as they exist, and in competent form to be offered in a court of law.
We therefore unite in recommending that the city engineer be directed
to perforin this duty by direction  of the Joint Standing Committee on
Sewers and the city solicitor, the expense not to exceed seven hundred
dollars."

   Under these circumstances, Mr. Allen went abroad, charged
with a specific duty; that was, to obtain  evidence, if possibly
it might be found, to be  used in the trial of  a cause in which
his  city was  involved.   He does not go with the purpose of
acquiring  useful knowledge that will enable him to serve his
cit}T in  working  out the problem of its sewage disposal, nor
with the purpose of broadening his views by contact with his
fellow-engineers abroad, nor to add to his  accomplishments
as a civil engineer or surveyor a knowledge  of  sanitary engi-
neering as a  science, but just for the purpose of finding out
how not to  do the very thing which needs  to be done ;  and,
having fitted himself as an  expert  in the short space of three
months, he returns, and guards with a jealous care the secrets
he has wrung from  his fellows abroad, and  from his own ob-
servations, so  that even his own townsmen, as they are here
present, hear  for the first  time the results  from the lavish
expenditure of money they made in educating their engineer
up to the testifying-point.
   In pursuance of his instructions, Mr. Allen goes abroad ;
and the  places he visited prove positively we are right in  say-
ing  his purpose was to find every thing that could be found
adverse  to  the  petitioners.   Of  all  places, he apparently
selected Doncaster as  the one  upon  which  to pin his faith
and to  base his testimony.  Presumably he did  this because
it was a notorious fact  that at Doncaster four gentlemen —
civil engineers by profession — attempted to carry on a farm,
and made a failure of it, —at least, did not  attain that meas-
ure  of success  that  they  hoped for.  And yet, in  spite of
the difficulties and embarrassments of his position, he brings
back no such damaging  facts and  opinions as would warrant
you in  ignoring the recommendation  of the Drainage Com-
mission. 
20
   Mr. Allen  is too intelligent a man not to have an opinion
upon the matter he has investigated : he is too honest a man
to falsify.  The pressure of his  superiors in the city govern-
ment crushes him, and he dares not give the Committee, when
he  is asked, his professional  or private  opinion  upon  the
matter before them.
   Well may we, who hoped for relief, exclaim, —

         "O star-eyed Science! hast thou wandered there
          To waft us back the tidings of despair ? "

   In  sharp contrast with the methods pursued by Engineer
Allen was the  course pursued by  Mr. Gray, the engineer of
Providence, who, being  sent abroad, saw more than the city
engineer  of Worcester saw, and, returning, made that valuable
report, to which reference has been  made  in this discussion,
in which he finds not only that the sewage of a large city can
be purified, but also a way in which his city can do it.
  Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, I have said that  the  only
answer the  city of Worcester makes to the finding of the
Commission on the question of the feasibility of sewage puri-
fication  is  the testimony  of  Mr.  Allen ;  that testimony,
reduced to its final analysis, is this:  "T  don't  know  how to
do it."   He confesses ignorance, admits defeat, and stands
appalled  at  the prospect which his predecessor, Mr. Ball, re-
garded with  hopefulness, and  anticipated  with professional
intelligence.
  But in fairness it must be said that the city solicitor  does
not rely alone upon this evidence, but has  quoted  many iso.
lated propositions contained in the  final report of the " Koval
Commission on Metropolitan Sewage Discharge," published
in November, 1884.   We join  issue with him  upon  this re-
port, and refer you to it in its entirety, especially to the con-
clusions  of the commissions found on pp. lxvi. and lxvii. of
the report.
  In examining this report, it must always be borne in mind
that the  problem to  be  solved by the Koval Commission far
exceeded in  its complexity that before our own Commission.
  You cannot  reason from London, the metropolis  of the
world, to Worcester, the heart of the Commonwealth.
  The former Commission had to deal with the sewage of five 
21
 million people, more than the entire population of New Eng-
 land, and one-twelfth the population of our entire country.
   The operations of the one were to be in a city that was old
 when our continent was discovered, the other in a city incor-
 porated within the memory of witnesses before you.
   The  sewage of the latter  could be cared for on a tract of
 land of six hundred acres:  the  former, on the same basis,
 would require a tract of land of fifty-seven thousand six hun-
 dred acres, or ninety square miles.
   Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, what may be  called the  de-
 fence of the city, so far as  evidence  is coucerned, rests here:
 all else  that  is  urged against the report  of the bill may be
 said  to  be  matters  of law, and an appeal to  what they are
 pleased to call good faith on the part of the Legislature.
   Not caring to indorse the notion of the alderman, who tes-
 tified that the city has riparian rights which will be infringed
 by the proposed  bill, the city solicitor ingeniously,  but not
 accurately, calls  the city  a riparian city, and asserts that she
 is doing only what at common  law she has a right to do ;
 that  is, by  the common  law she  could turn her  unpurified
 sewage into the stream.
   In support of  this proposition,  they rely upon the case of
 Merrifield vs. Worcester, 110 Mass. 216 ; but that case decides
 that the plaintiff's only remed}r was  by a petition under the
 Act of 1867.
   Again, they cite Washburn  <f Moen vs. Worcester, 116 Mass.
 458;  but the court there  re-affirm the doctrine of the former
 case,  that damages can only, under the circumstances of the
 case,  be recovered by petition under the Act of  1867.   Both
 of these cases are fully considered in  the report of the  hear-
 ing in 1882, which is before you.
   The more recent  case  of Morse vs. Worcester,  139 Mass.
 463, is  still pending before the  court,  the  demurrer of the
 defendant city having been overruled; and the dictum of the
 court, that  for certain supposed  conditions a  remedy  had
 better be sought from the Legislature, is  directly in conflict
 with the position assumed  by the city solicitor, that  the city
 is only exercising its  common-law rights.
  All of these cases,  instead of proving that the city is exer-
cising its common-law rights, are directly to the contrary, and
establish the  doctrine that the rights which parties  had at 
22
 common law were taken from them by the Act of 1867;  and
 it is  in  consequence of this  that the petitioners  are now
 before you, as representatives of  the Legislature,  the only
 tribunal that can redress their grievances.
   It is then said that this bill should not be reported, because
 it would interfere with the rights acquired by the city under
 the Act of 1867, and that it would  be a gross violation of the
 public faith, which by that  Act was pledged to secure forever
 to the city the right to empty  its sewage into the stream.
 It is  admitted that  the suggestion would lack  force it* the
 right granted had been one for which the city had nothing to
 pay:  but it is  contended, that, inasmuch as the Act provided
 for compensation, it must be presumed that compensation
 was  made; and you are referred  to  a petition  brought by
 Washburn & Moen, under  the Act, which is said to be now
 pending.  I hazard nothing in saying that the city of Worces-
 ter has never paid one penny as  damages on account of the
 Act, unless it was to Washburn & Moen; and it is a notorious
 fact, that in their case proceedings  were suspended, while the
 city  took out  of their pond  all its  sewage, and, by a new
 sewer costing upwards of two hundred thousand dollars, car-
 ried  the entire volume  of  it out of and by their pond, and
 turned it on to the  people a half a  mile below  them.   Just
 what settlement was made with  them beyond this,  has been
 carefully kept  from the  public, so  that they are as  ignorant
 of it as  of the experience  of  the city engineer in his search
 for evidence.
   It will readily be seen  that the evils of  which  the  peti-
 tioners complain  would not develop  themselves within two
 years, and then, by the terms of  the Act, they had lost their
 remedy; and can it be seriously  urged that  the  public faith
 was so far pledged as to forever authorize the city to do acts,
 however injurious, the consequences of which could  not then
 be foreseen, and which would not exhibit themselves  in  any
 event until the  time had expired within which a remedy
 could be had?
   Can it be possible that the  public faith is pledged to  a
scheme  which  takes away valuable rights, and substitutes
 a nuisance?
   Has the Legislature no right to repeal or modify  a gratui-
tous grant which operates to convert a river into a sewer? 
23
   The only remedy, Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, that has
 ever been suggested by Worcester for the evils we have con-
 sidered, is to pull down the dams ; mark the simplicity of it;
 note, too, it involves no act on the part of the  city; it  is as
 though I said  to my  neighbor, who complains of my  filth,
 " Clear out the drain on  your land, so  that the overflowings
 of my cesspool, and the waste from my sink-drain, may flow
 unimpeded and quickly to you and away from me."
   They answer our complaints by referring us  to what they
 are pleased to call a  natural law; namely, that water  must
 run down hill: but the answer is not satisfactory.   Imagine,
 if you please, a man is passing along the street where he has
 a right to be; the window above him is opened, and a bucket
 of slush is turned upon his head;  would it be  entirely  satis-
 factory if, in answer to  his  complaint, the offender replies,
 u My dear sir, I'm sorry for you  ; but you were below, and it
 only went down in  obedience to the laws of gravity."
   It needs but a moment's reflection  to  realize the folly of
 the proposition that relief would come, and justice be  done
 the city and the valley  below,  b}' pulling down  the dams.
 This  means  depopulation of the  valley; for without our
 dams, our wheels cannot turn;  without them our mills  stop,
 the operatives scatter,  the  rest of  the  community dependent
 upon them must go elsewhere.  The  logical end would be
 an aggregation in  cities, no rural population, and a filthy
 sewer from Worcester  to the sea.  Worcester  cannot afford
 this, for by the commerce of the people clustered around the
 dams, she thrives;  the Commonwealth cannot afford it, for
 Massachusetts  needs every foot of  water-power within her
 borders if she is to  maintain  her position as a manufacturing
 State: there  are no elements of statesmanship in the proposi-
 tion; there is no ingenuity in it; there is no  genius in it;
 it is a confession of inability to cope with a difficulty success-
fully  dealt  with elsewhere; it is an acknowledgment  of
 defeat, for the community that cannot take care  of  its own
excrement is  a failure.
  True, it is  said that steam can be used; but the answer is
twofold.   The  comfort and health of  the operatives in the
mills will be  affected by the current of pollution running by
them, for a  running stream  of  pollution is the result  after
decomposition sets in;  and for this reason, if for none other, 
24
you have a proscribed district, shunned by the skilled opera-
tives upon whom alone success depends, and without whom
profits are at first precarious, and ultimately impossible:
natives flee such a district, and foreigners shun it.
  Then, too, the increased  cost  of operating  the  mills by
steam would practically  prevent  their operation at all ; for
the margin of cost between  water-power already established
and equipped, and steam, to  be established, is the profit upon
which the  manufacturing industries outside the cities thrive,
and are made profitable and  remunerative.
  Assuming, then, Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, that an evil
exists; that the  city of Worcester, under the Act  of  1867,
created it; that, with reasonable certainty, a remedy can be
found; and that  the bill recommended by the  Commission
will  effectuate it, — the  question  then  comes, Shall the
remedy be now applied?
  The city, through its legal  officer, says no, and asks that
action be postponed, so that this  and all other matters em-
braced in the report may be  further considered  by the  cities
and towns  affected by  the recommendations  of the  Commis-
sion.
  The answer is twofold: first, the danger to  be averted is
imminent, and admits  of no delay; and second, the subject-
matter has been well considered:  all parties interested have
long  been  conversant with it.
  A  reference to the report of  the hearing of 1882 shows
that  the mayors of the city, from  Judge Chapin, in  1871, to
Dr. Kelley, in 1881, in their inaugural addresses, called the
attention of the  people of Worcester, and  especially of the
city government, to the increasing complaints from the people
of the valley, and to the  duty which they owed, in  the lan-
guage adopted by Mayor Verry, " to so use their own as not
to injure another."
  It  is a fact, not without significance, that since 1881,  when
the people below, having found that nothing came of the fair
suggestions of the inaugurals, began actively to move and
press for  legislation,  the various succeeding  mayors  have
either avoided the subject altogether, or have  touched  upon
it very generally, and, as a rule, have assumed that there was
nothing that  the  city ought to do,  because  there was no
power at  law to compel her  to do'it:  in  other words,  the 
25
Golden Rule, as formulated by the city solicitor, has been
indorsed by the mayors.
  This is illustrated by the inaugural of the present mayor,
in which he says, in speaking of the complaints of the peti-
tioners, " While acting in our  official  capacity, we  must be
just to our own people before we are generous with our neigh-
bors ; " so  that you will observe the Worcester idea of gen-
erosity of to-day, while it is entirely at variance with that of
Mayor Verry, yet forms, consistently, a  part of the code of
ethics upon which the argument  of  the city solicitor  is
founded.
  But, from whatever stand-point the officials  have viewed
the question, the  fact remains, that for fifteen years it has
constantly been before them;  year by year the  complaints
have  increased;  year by year the evidence has been  accumu-
lating, until to-day there is a strong and  abiding  conviction
on the part of the thinking people of the city, that the com-
plaints are too well founded, and that absolute justice, and
not mere generosity, demands that they be heeded.
  In  fact, the reasons urged for the postponement of action
upon   other portions of the report of the Commission  are
reasons for action  upon this ;  if postponement is desirable
for want  of consideration in some  localities, this has been
well  considered;  if delay is  asked  by  some  communities
affected by the report because of the complexity of the  pro-
visions relating to them, this is marked by simplicity; if  the
recommendations  of the report in  other  instances involve
the relations of two or more municipalities, this  bill  affects
Worcester alone.
  If,  as  contended  by the  city, the subject-matter of the
report is experimental, then Worcester is the  best place in
the Commonwealth to try the experiment, as appears  by the
reports of every commission, and also by the evidence of her
own engineer, Mr. Ball.
  In  conclusion,  Mr.  Chairman and gentlemen,  these peti-
tioners feel that something must be done to  avert a great
calamity:  the   instinct of  self-preservation  impels them.
The people of  Worcester feel  that something  ought to be
done  to  remedy  the great and fast-growing evil for which
they  are responsible: their  sense  of justice  impels them.
Sanitary engineers tell us that  an effectual remedy has been 
26
found.  The Commission are of opinion that Worcester should
be  required by law to apply it, and  every consideration for
the public welfare demands action at the present time.
  Let this bill become a law, and the city will obey it.   With
her splendid resources she will call to  her aid the best en-
gineering skill to utilize her great natural advantages.  Her
skilled mechanics and artisans will  execute the  details of a
work of  which  she will  be justly proud; and Worcester,
proud heart of the Commonwealth, as she loves  to call her-
self, whose every pulsation should send life and health through-
out the valleys that surround her, will regain the respect and
honor which are her due.
EXTRACTS FROM THE  SECOND  AND  FINAL  REFORT OF
  THE  ROYAL  COMMISSION ON  METROPOLITAN SEWAGE
  DISCHARGE, NOVEMBER, 1884.

  Referring to the prospect of profit from the utilization of sewage,
they say,—
  "Looking, however, to the fact that sewage does contain ele-
ments of value, and that the aggregate value of the metropolitan
sewage is undoubtedly very large, we think  the possibility of real-
izing some of the value should be borne in mind in devising plans
for its disposal.   And it is clear that our present knowledge points
to the application to land as the most probable mode by which this
can be done.
  " But we are strongly of the  opinion that it would be wrong to
delay proceedings on this  account, and that freeing the  Thames
from pollution must be undertaken as a work to  be done and paid
for, whatever the cost may  be " (p. xxxvii.).
  With reference  to  broad irrigation,  they say, " We  are  of
opinion, —
  " 1. That, generally speaking, it offers a satisfactory mode of
disposal of  town  sewage where  circumstances admit of its applica-
tion.
  "2. That it offers the most likely means of realizing some por-
tion of the value of the sewage.
  "3. That when properly arranged, and carefully conducted, the
effluent will be effectually  purified,  but  that  under careless man-
agement the purification ma}' be incomplete.
  "4. That it need cause no danger to health. 
27
  " 5. That with proper care, when applied on a moderate scale,
it need cause no serious nuisance to the surrounding neighborhood,
but that, if improperly managed, nuisance may arise, and become
considerable"  (p. xliii.).
  Reporting on the filtration system, they say,—
  " It will now be understood that the essential difference between
the intermittent filtration system and that of ordinary broad irriga-
tion is as follows : —
  " Broad irrigation means the distribution of sewage over a large
surface of ordinary  agricultural ground, having in view a maximum
growth of vegetation (consistently  with  due purification) for the
amount of sewage supplied.
  14 Filtration means the  concentration of sewage, at short inter-
vals,  on  an area of specially chosen porous  ground,  as small as
will absorb and cleanse  it;  not  excluding vegetation, but making
the produce of secondaiw importance*' (p. xlvi.).
  " With regard to filtration through land, we are of opinion,—
  "1. That the process has great scientific merit, and  offers valu-
able practical advantages for the disposal of  sewage in situations
where broad irrigation  is  impracticable,  and  where  land suitable
for filtration can be obtained.
  "2. That, however, it appears desirable, when the area of land
is considerably reduced,  that the  sewage should  be  previously
treated by some efficient process for removing the sludge.
  "3. That an  arrangement  of this  kind would be  applicable
to the metropolis, as  we  shall explain more fully  hereafter"
(p. xlviii.).
  "In discussing the treatment of sewage by chemical precipita-
tion,  we have pointed out that the clarified liquid, though improved,
still contains a considerable amount of  impurity.
  "And we  have also  noticed  in  a former place, the  remarkable
effect  of application to  land in purifying  sewage-water from  its
noxious  properties.
  "Hence it is a natural  inference, if these two processes could
be combined, — that is to say, if, after chemical clarification, the
still impure liquid could be  applied to land, — the purification would
be completely effected, and at the same time some advantage might
be gained by the utilization of the fertilizing matter" (p. lviii.).

              " CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS.

  " 2. We are of opinion that it is neither necessary nor justifiable
to discharge the sewage  of the metropolis, in its crude state, into
any part of the Thames. 
28
   "3. We  are of opinion that some process of deposition or pre-
cipitation should be  used, to separate the solid from the liquid por-
tions of the sewage.
   "4. Such process  may be  conveniently and speedily applied at
the two present main  out-falls.
   " 7. The liquid portion of the sewage remaining after the precipi-
tation of the solids, may, as a preliminary and temporary measure,
be suffered to escape into the river.
   " 10. But we  believe that the  liquid so separated would not be
sufficiently free  from noxious  matters to  allow  of its being dis-
charged at the present out-falls, as a, permanent measure.
   "14. In  new drainage-works,  the  sewage should  be, as far as
possible, separated from the rainfall"  (p. lxvi.).

  EXTRACTS FROM THE  REPORT OF SAMUEL M. GRAY.
   Samuel  M. Gray, city engineer  of Providence, R.I., having,
under instructions from the city  council of that  city, investigated
the matter of sewage disposal abroad, reported, under date of July,
1884, as follows : —
   " As  the result of  nry investigations and study of this question,
1 recommend, first, that intercepting sewers be built; second, that
the sewage of the city be conveyed to Field's Point;  third, that it
be  treated there  by chemicals in such a manner as to precipitate
the  matters in suspension, and to clarif}' the sewage ; fourth, that
the clarified effluent be emptied into deep water at Field's  Point."
  After describing in  detail the system he recommends, he says, —
   " No system of sewerage  is complete which fails to dispose of
the sewage  so as to  avoid its causing a nuisance.  It is believed,
that, if the  scheme herein recommended is thoroughly carried out,
the Providence River and its tributaries may be reclaimed from their
present  filthy condition, and  that the air, which is  now so often
laden with foul gases  rising from their waters, may  be preserved
pure and wholesome.  .  . . The system herein recommended is not
new, the constructions involved are not experimental:  they are in
successful operation in many of  the towns and cities of Europe "
(p. xvi.).
  He says further, —
  "No difficulty is reported in disposing  of sewage by irrigation
during winter, either on the Continent or in England.   In Germany,
where the climate is similar to our own, as at Dantzic and Breslau,
the irrigations are reported to be uninterrupted in winter bv the
frost.  Vegetation not existing in  winter, the purification of the
sewage is effected solely by the action of the soil.   The  tempera- 
29
tnre of sewage has been frequently observed at different seasons of
the year, and it has been found to be  relatively warm in winter,
and cool in summer.
   " At Dantzic the temperature of the sewage is said not to fall be-
low forty degrees Farenheit at the pumping-station, and fort3'-two
degrees at the  point of delivery to the irrigation-fields.   Its tem-
perature  in summer is said not to rise above fifty-nine degrees at
the pumps, and forty-eight degrees at the outlet.  Between  the
pumping-station and the irrigation-fields, the sewage is conveyed in
three siphons beneath the Vistula and the ditches of the fortifica-
tions, and is carried underground in closed pipes, to the irrigation-
fields.
   " The  irrigations are continued throughout the winter at Dant-
zic without interruption, in  spite of the severity of the climate.
The sewage is said to arrive at the fields at a temperature of forty-
two degrees Fahrenheit, even during the greatest frosts.  It melts
the snow and ice, and continues to percolate  into the ground,
without causing trouble to the tenant of the farm.
   " The severity of the winters at Dantzic  is such that the ground
freezes  from one to three feet  deep.  Water-pipes are laid five feet
under ground.   The temperature of the air falls  at times to eleven
degrees  below  the  zero of Fahrenheit.  Snow falls  as early as
October, and as late as April.   The  rivers at Dantzic are frozen
from the middle of November to the last of April.
   " The following  table gives the mean monthly  temperatures at
Dantzic for eight3'-one 3-ears,  together with the mean monthly
temperature at Providence for forty-eight years.
								Mean Temperatibe.	
								Dantzic.	Providence.
January February March . April . May . June July August September October November December								26.8 29.1 32 4 41.2 50.4 58 3 62 8 61.9 54 5 44 1 36.3 30 0	26 78 27 33 33.90 44.50 55 14 65 15 70.69 68 78 61 17 50 74 40 00 29.73
  " At Breslau ... no trouble is  said  to be  experienced from
frost  at  the  irrigation-fields, although the soil  is not as porous as 
BO
at Dantzic.   The frost enters the ground from two  to  four and
one-half feet deep "  (Appendix A, p. 93 et seq.).

              THE  PULLMAN SKWAGE-FARM.

  The Pullman sewage-farm is located at Wild wood, Cook County,
III., a station some  three miles south of Fullman, on the Illinois
Central Railroad.  The farm  consists of some 170 acres: of this,
about 140 acres are  underdrained.   This large area  of land was
not secured  because  of immediate  needs, but for the reason that
it may all be required in the near future, owing to the phenomenal
growth of the town whose necessities it serves.   In the opinion of
the manager of the farm, not far from ten acres would be sufficient
to care for the present Mow of sewage ; the population being now
about 8,600.   After  the sewage  leaves the village-mains, it is col-
lected  in  a great cesspool, which (for convenience only) occupies
the basement of the  water-tower, and from thence is pumped to a
distributing tank at Wildwood, where it is screened; and all por-
tions which fail to pass a half-inch screen are rejected.
  The pressure at  the "Tank-house," Wildwood,  amounts  to
nearlv ten pounds.
  The system of sewage  disposal now in use at  Wildwood, has
had from  four to five years' trial, and is considered a perfect suc-
cess ;  the  experimental period having long since gone by.   This
system is  equally effective at all seasons of the year ;  the only dif-
ference being, that in the coldest weather a little larger area  must
be used for flooding purposes.   During  the cold weather  a coating
of ice of  greater or  less thickness is formed over the flooded por-
tions of the  farm ; but the ground below is never frozen, even with
the mercury at twenty-five degrees below.  From the distributing
tank the sewage is carried beneath the soil (below the line of frost)
by means of vitrified drain-pipe; and  from these  arise hydrants,
which conve}' the sewage into troughs,  which may, or may not,  be
used in its distribution over the  surface.  The soil here is  called
" sandy," yet it is  far richer than the soil of the average New-
England farm.   Below this surface is a substratum of the toughest
blue clay, which extends to  an unknown depth.   Thus far the
Pullman  soil has absorbed all the sewage which has been offered,
and has shown no signs of saturation. The crops raised are onions,
cabbages, celery, cauliflower, beets, tomatoes, etc.   Most of these
have been cultivated with the greatest  success, the only doubtful
crop  being  Irish potatoes.   Not only is  the quantity raised very
large  for the area, but the quality of the vegetables raised here is
of the very  best, and  nearly  always commands  the preference  in 
31
 the market.   These vegetables are sold all  over the county, east
 of the  Missouri River, and especially are  the}- in  demand at the
 South.   The total first cost of this farm was nearly $1 30,000, di-
 vided nearly as follows : —

 140 acres land @ -$350.......cost, $49,000
 Pumps, 3 miles 20-inch pipe, tanks, buildings, hydrants, etc.  .  70,000
 Laying pipe under 140 acres.......7,000
 Tools, teams, etc..........3,000
 Extras...........1,000
    Total...........130,000

   You  will notice that the first cost of the land  seems very large
 for farm-land ; yet this same  land  could not be bought to-day for
 StiOO per acre, without the improvements.
   The sewage investment shows a very good profit thus far.  When
 we consider  the high cost of the land, the distance of most of the
 markets, and all other expensive features in construction and man-
 agement, the result is truly remarkable.   This  result shows not
 only  that the sewage of  our cities can be  disposed  of, but that it
 can  be done at an actual profit* and in  a wa}* which will not be
 detrimental to the public health.  For proof  of this, I respectfully
 refer }-ou  to  the letter  from the  farm-superintendent, and to the
 small death-rate among the people of Pullman.  There are many
 other features of this model  town well worthy the attention  of
 legislators, scientists, and  philanthropists ; but none  show better
 the wise forethought and humane  purposes of Mr. George  M. Pull-
 man, than do the practical results of this model sewage-farm.  For
 the data  with which  to  compile  the  above,  I am greatly indebted
 to Messrs. E. T. Martin, E. W. Henricks, and William Davis.
                         Ver}- truly,
                                                H. H. WATERS.
 Chicago, March 29, 1886.

          PULLMAN'S  PALACE  CAR  COMPANY,
                     TOWN OF PULLMAN.
                                      Pullman, III., March 29, 1886.
 O. H. Waters, Esq., Millbury, Mass.
  Dear Sir,—I have read an article  prepared  by Mr. Waters on the
Pullman Sewage Farm, and 1 take great pleasure in saying that the facta
are properly stated, and the conclusions entirely correct.
                          Yours truly,
                                       E. W. HENRICKS, Agent. 
32
                      PULLMAN  FARM.
                               Wildwood, Cook Co., 111., Mar. 29, 1886.
0. II.  Waters, Esq.
  Dear  Sir, — I have read the accompanying article on  the Pullman
Sewage Farm, and take pleasure in stating that it states things about as
they are.
  I question  if ten acres would thoroughly purify our sewage for any
great length of  time ; but as we apply it, say for two or three months,
then crop the land, it is purified thoroughly and perfectly.
  It is unquestionable that the sewage, as we handle in, is taken care of
without nuisance or offensive odor; that the health  of the farm-hands
living in the immediate neighborhood of or on the farm, is much better
than that of the inhabitants of lliverdale  or  Dalton, two or three miles
from the farms  ; and that on the average a fair profit can be shown above
the operating expenses, and cost of taking care, of the sewage
  I may add, that for four years my house has been supplied constantly
with vegetables grown on the farm; that visitors say they have never
eaten a better grade; that our trade is  constantly increasing, through the
superior quality of  our produce,  last  year I refusing orders  for some
twenty carloads of cabbage and onions; and  that so  far from my own
health, or that of my family, being injured by our having the sewage  all
around  us,  or by our eating the products of the  farm, it has been  im-
proved,  my own weight now being thirty pounds more than when I  took
charge here between five and six years  ago
  As the farm now is, we could take care  of the sewage of  a city of over
twenty-five thousand inhabitants.
  The ground receives the sewage  in very cold weather nearly as well as
in summer.
  The effluent is used for steam, and  often for watering horses, and is
so pure that fish may at any time be found in the manholes,  and at the
mouth of the main underdrain.
                        Very respectfully,
                                    E. T.  MARTIN, Superintendent.

                                            Chicago, March 29, 1886.
Hon. O. II.  Waters, Millbury,  Mass.
  Dear Sir, — Your queries, with   reference  to the purification  of the
sewage  by  the method used at Pullman, I have the honor to answer as
follows: —
  1.  " Can sewage be purified by the process in use at Pullman ? "
  Experience at the Pullman farm demonstrates conclusively that sewage
can be sufficiently purified by grouud to be admitted to flowing streams,
and this at  all seasons of  the year; though, of course,  the purification is
more perfect  in warm weather —particularly during the growing season
— than  in cold.
  2.  " Is this process  adapted to the use of a city of one hundred  thou-
sand people, provided the works are proportionately large ?  "
  So far as the purification of sewage is concerned, this question can 
33
only be answered in the affirmative;  but so far as it relates to the  finan-
cial results, no positive answer could be given without knowing all the
circumstances of  markets, etc.
  3. " Will not the soil become saturated by sewage so as to be unable
to accomplish the purification claimed after a few years' use ? "
  It is manifestly impossible for organic matter to permanently clog the
pores of the ground; as all such matter is subject to destruction by decay,
and there are no solid substances other than those of an organic nature
in Pullman sewage.
  It is, of course, impracticable to continue the application of sewage to
one tract of land without intermission with good results.
  Intermittency must be observed in all such cases.
  4. "Can  a sewage-farm be conducted  so as to become self-support-
ing?"
  An answer to this question is also subject to  qualification.  The Pull-
man farm is more than self-supporting;  and, in my judgment, there are
numerous places where a like result can be obtained.
  5. " Do you consider the Pullman project a success for the purpose
desired ? ''
  The sewage disposal at Pullman is undoubtedly a success in the accom-
plishment of the prime object aimed at; viz., the purification of the sew-
age in a way to be self-sustaining.
  It should  be said, in this  connection,  that  the  success  attained at
Pullman in the disposal of the sewage during cold weather, is possibly
partly due to the fact that no effort is made to run the sewage through
long, open ditches,  nor over the surface of  a great area of land; the sew-
age distribution  being by  underground pipes below frost, with frequent
outlets through hydrants.
  6. " What is the cost ? "
  The accounts kept by the  Pullman  Company include three miles of
twenty-inch cast-iron main  from the village to the  farm, and, owing to
parts of the land not being fully prepared, gives no idea of what the
actual cost of the drainage and distribution systems is.
  One tract of sixty acres that was  first prepared, and which,  with the
exception of ten acres afterward under-drained twelve and one-half feet
apart, was more thoroughly under-drained than any other part of the farm,
cost as follows: —
  For under-draining thirty-seven and one-half feet apart, $7,260.00.
  Total cost of distribution, exclusive of main pipe to farm, $9,600.00,
or an average of 1281.00 per acre for both  the drainage and distribution.
A considerable part of  this amount is properly chargeable  to another
tract of land.
                          Respectfully yours,
                       BENEZETTE WILLIAMS, Engineer of Works.

                                         Washington, Feb. 27, 1886.
   My dear  Sir, — You are quite  right  in  your belief that  I  meant
exactly what I said in the  remarks from which you quote.   My opinion
is unchanged, except so far as it is strengthened.  But I cannot  under- 
34
take to give an opinion as to any particular plan of remedy until I have
had  opportunity to  know what it is,  and hear it discussed.   I think
Worcester ought to do, and means to do, just what she would if Millbury
were part of  her own territory.   I cannot do much more than to give my
voice and vote for her action in  that spirit.  I have  had no time to read
the report of the Commission.  I have hoped much from  the joint com-
mittee of which you are a member, but I have seen nothing of its action.
                       I am yours faithfully,
                                                  GEO.  F. HOAR.
               COMMONWEALTH  OF MASSACHUSETTS.

        THE  WORCESTER  LUNATIC  HOSPITAL.
                                    Worcester, Mass., Feb. 16, 1886.
Geo.  C.  Webber, M.D., Millbury.
   Dear Sir, — The method for the purification  of the sewerage of the
hospital continues to be satisfactory.
   We have no trouble in cold weather.
                         Very respectfully,
                                               J.  G. PARK, Supt.

EXTRACTS  FROM  RIVERS'  PURIFICATION  ASSOCIATION,
       LIMITED. — THE  COVENTRY  SEWAGE-WORKS.
  The  following correspondence  dates  from  the  establishment
of the  Works in April,  1874, up  to 1880,  and  shows  the effi-
ciency of the  operations,  and  their  complete freedom from any
nuisance.
                         Finham Park, Kenilworth, 14th July, 1874.
  Dear Sir, — In answer to your inquiry  as to the  pollution  of  the
river Sherbourne, I beg to say it has very considerably abated  since the
late alterations at the Sewage  Works.   I  have not seen  a dead fish since,
but have noticed  large numbers of them enjoying themselves by flirtinc
out of the water, during the late hot weather.
   There is a considerable quantity of  mud on the banks, the accumula-
tion  of past time, which, no  doubt, the winter  floods will carry away ;
and then, I have no doubt, we shall find a still further improvement.
                  Believe me, dear sir,
                             Yours faithfully,
T  „  „       ^                               JAMES  WESTON.
J. C. Melliss, Esq.


                        Whitley Abbey, Coventry,  8th August, 1877.
   My dear Sir, — I was very  much pleased on  my return home, about
a fortnight ago, to see and feel the improvement  in the state of the river
Sherbourne.  There is  really  nothing to complain of now; and if it can
only be maintained in its present condition, I do  not think I am likely to
trouble your  Corporation any more on the subject.  I must at the same 
35
time tender my thanks to the Corporation for the successful efforts they
have made towards remedying this nuisance.
                   I remain,
                         Yours faith ully,
                                                 EDWARD  PETRE.
T. Browett, Esq., Town Clerk, Coventry.

   Note. — The fact that this gentleman had been, previously to the
erection of the present sewage-works, in  litigation with  the  Corporation
for polluting the river,  increases  the  strength of the testimony given by
his letter.

                          Royal-Oak Inn and Tea-Gardens, Whitley,
                                         Oct. 5, 1880.
To the  Rivers' Purification  Association.
   Gentlemen, — I have now kept this inn for four years,  and during  that
period I have never had occasion to complain of any nuisance arising,
either from your works or the filter-beds, notwithstanding that the latter
join  my  Tea-Gardens, and the works so close;  nor have my numerous
customers ever found fault, or my trade been injured.
                             Yours truly,
                                               WALTER BUTLER.
                                     Whitley Villa, near Coventry,
                                           26th February, 1877.
   Dear Sir, — In reply to your letter, I have much pleasure in stating
that I consider the works and process  for purifying the river Sherbourne
are perfectly successful.  Living as I do in close proximity to the works,
I should be the first to suffer were they obnoxious or offensive; but I am
glad to say I have no fault to find, and consider Whitley as healthy as
any place in the district.
   I may add incidentally that the value of the property here has lately
increased, I myself having raised my tenants'  rents.
                         I remain, dear sir,
                                 Yours truly,
                                            THOMAS  L. GILLOTT.
E. F. Coddington, Esq. 
30
                         CROYDEN.
  Croydon has a population of 80,000, and  collects  sewage from
about 65,000 inhabitants.   The dry-weather flow of sewage amounts
to about 4,700,000 gallons.  This quantity is augmented  in times
of rain  by rain-water.   The sewage is  disposed of b}7- what  is
known as  broad irrigation, and  is  applied to about 450 acres.
This farm is about  a quarter of a mile from  the nearest  inhabited
district.  The soil  is light and gravelly.   The land is drained only
by a few large, deep drains.  Grass,  marigolds, cabbages, etc., are
raised in large quantities.  The grass is cut from three to six times
in a season.  The  animals fed on the crops are well, and the milk
produced is of the  best quality.   The sewage is applied to the land
from two days to as many weeks at a time.
  The farm gives rise  to  no bad odors.   This farm has been  in
operation for about twenty-four jears.  The land is said  to absorb
the sewage as freely now as when the farm was started.
  The effluent from the sewage is clear, and free from smell, and  in
appearance resembles spring-water.
  The sewage thus disposed of is without danger to health,  or a
nuisance to any one.
  Many other places where similar results are attained  might be
mentioned.
  Berlin, Germany, disposes of the sewage from about 900,000 in-
habitants in the same manner and with good sanitary results.  The
sewage  of  100,000 inhabitants at Dantzic,  German}', where the
climate is similar to that of New England, is disposed of b}' irriga-
tion without inconvenience.
  Breslau,  Germany,  with 300,000  inhabitants,  disposes of its
large  amount of sewage by broad irrigation, and thus avoids caus-
ing nuisance.
  Many other places might be mentioned where sewage is success-
fully disposed of by irrigation.

                         COVENTRY.

  Coventry, Eng., is a city of 45,000 inhabitants.   The sewage is
collected from the entire population,  there being some 9,000 water-
closets in use.   The dry-weather flow of sewage  amounts  to two
and a quarter millions  gallons.   In times of rain  this quantity is
increased, all the rain-water falling being admitted to the sewers,
besides waste products from manufactories, amounting to upwards
of 50,000 gallons  per day, and composed of dye-water from silk
and wool works.   The sewage is treated by  what is known as the 
37
Coventry process, mechanical straining, precipitation by means  of
crude sulphate of alumina,  salts of iron, and small quantity  of
lime.
  The effluent from this is passed through land.  Some eight  tons
of pressed sludge are thus obtained, which is used as dressing for
the land.   The  effluent is  very good, and  is  discharged into the
river Sherbourne, the volume of which is often less than the amount
of effluent from the sewage-works.
  These works have been in operation upwards of ten years.

                           LEYTON.

  Lej'ton, with 35,000 inhabitants connected with the sewers, has
about  1,000,000 gallons of sewage  per day.   This sewage is
mechanically strained, and  then precipitated  b}r means  of crude
sulphate of alumina, salts of iron, and a little lime.
  The effluent is bright and clear, and almost odorless.   It is dis-
charged into a branch of the river Lea, the quantity of effluent be-
ing to the flow of water in the stream as about one to six.
  About six or seven tons of sludge are produced per day, which
is taken away b}' the  farmers  for land-dressing.  The  sewage is
thus disposed of without  causing nuisance to any one.
  Among many  other places which  might be  mentioned where
chemical precipitation is  successfully practised, is Aylesbury, Brad-
ford, Hertford, Leeds, etc.

                        IRRIGATION.

  " The most natural way of disposing of sewage, — the way which
first  suggested itself by  the analogy  of the old way of  disposing
of excreta, — was to apply it to land by a process of irrigation as
liquid  manure ;  and,  by the application of ordinary agricultural
knowledge,  this  system has become  very effective."
  "The sewage, by a judicious  arrangement  of channels, or car-
riers, is allowed to flow over the surface of the  land on which crops
are orowino-; part of it is absorbed  and assimilated b}' vital action
in the vegetable growth ; part of it  filters away through  the  more
or less  porous soil; and part flows over the  surface to channel-
drains which convey it away as an ' effluent.' '
  "The important  result of the  process is, that the noxious and
offensive elements of the sewage are either beneficially  appropri-
ated  to the  crops, or are detained  in the soil by the mechanical
filtration,  or by the long  and repeated exposure to the  air are
decomposed, oxidized,  and changed into  innocuous matters,  so
that  the effluent  runs away in a comparatively pure stream.  At the 
38
same time the fertilizing ingredients in the sewage  are utilized by
manuring the land, and promoting the vegetation."
   " To apply this process so as to obtain the utmost benefit from
the sewage, a  large area of land  must be employed, for which
reason the system is termed broad irrigation, to distinguish it from
another species of sewage application to land (hereafter described),
where a much smaller area of land is made to suffice."
   "The  Sewage  Commission, in  their report  of 1858, mentioned
man}- towns where the system  was at that  time beneficially em-
ployed ;  but  it has made great progress since that date.  In a
return  made to the House  of Commons  in 1875, eighty-seven
towns were mentioned as adopting irrigation ; and the  number has
now much  augmented, many very  populous places disposing of
their sewage in  this way."
   ..." We ma}- now add extracts of the evidence on the  same
point taken before ourselves."
   Sir R. Rawlinson.— "If you could provide an acre of land
to each one hundred individuals, and that land were properly pre-
pared and properly attended to, you might  irrigate it from year
to year without  producing any disease."  . . .
   " Many towns dispose of their sewage by broad irrigation  with-
out causing a nuisance, and at  the  least cost  to the rate-payers.
The disposal of the sewage  is satisfactory."
   Mr.  Bkundkll. — "Where a very high  standard of  purity is
required, I know of no process equal, as a means of cleansing the
sewage, to the use of land in the way I have described."
   Col.  Hope. — "Irrigation is the only complete and  absolute
remedy,  and the only  remedy  which holds  out any prospect of
making the two ends meet."
   Mr.  Baldwin Latham. — "As a rule, I am very much in  favor
of applying sewage to land  where it can be done:  as  there  is no
doubt that that  is one of the most economical and the most  satis-
factory modes of producing a good effluent."  . . .
   " There is no evidence to show, so far as  experience in connec-
tion with existing  sewage-farms is  concerned, that they  exercise
any baneful effect on health."
   " I should not, however, consider it a proper thing to distribute
sewage over land from which  the probable  future  water-supplies
of the metropolis may be largely procured ; namely, from the  chalk
formations around London."
  "Although there are many points in regard to this  system in which
the authorities differ in  opinion,  there can be no doubt  of  the gen-
eral conclusion, —that the  results of experience, and of the inves-
tigation of the subject  by  the  most competent authorities,  have 
39
been strongly and almost unanimously in favor of the application
to land as in  every respect  the  best and most advisable mode
of treating  sewage, when  circumstances will  admit  of its use."
{Royal Commission on Metropolitan Sewage Discharge, 2d Report,
1885,  pp. xxxviii.,  xxxix., xl.)

     SOME INSTANCES OF SUCCESSFUL IRRIGATION.

  Cheltenham. — " Population  about  45,000. . .  . Volume  of
sewage every  twenty-four  hours, 1,250,000 gallons.  .  .  . Before
irrigation was  adopted, proceedings were threatened ;  .  .  . and in
1870 they purchased a farm of 131 acres.  . . . No complaint has
ever been substantiated since the adoption of irrigation ; and there
is not  now, even in hot summer weather, any nuisance  caused by
the effluent from the sewage-farm " (pp. 11, 12.)
  Doncaster. —"  Population  about   20,000. . . . Volume  of
sewage about 600,000 gallons per day.  . .  . The sewerage-works
were completed in 1870,  .  .  . and the sewage then flowed by an
existing  outlet into  the river Don navigation.  The proprietors of
that navigation, in  the autumn of 1870, filed  a  bill  of complaint
in chancery,  and  obtained an injunction.  The corporation, as
advised, not having  a  defence, consented  thereto, asked for time
to be given  in which to carry out remedial works ; and the  court
granted two years.   The corporation then directed Mr. Brundell
to examine and report on the best means of disposing of the sew-
age.   This  he did, and  reported  in favor of irrigation, advising
that the  sewage should be intercepted from the river, and pumped
on  to  land, the  property of the corporation at  Long Sandall.
Subsequently, the works, as designed, were carried out  at a cost of
£20 000. .  .  . The sewage-farm  has now been in operation  three
years,  no nuisance having arisen either at the  pumping-station or
on the farm"  (pp.  14-16).
  Leamington. — "Population  24,700. . . .  Volume  of sewage
every  24 hours, upwards  of (gallons)  800,000. .  .  .  The offen-
sive state of the river  became gradually intensified by the impure
sewage of the town flowing into it; and eventually, after repeated
complaints by Lord Warwick, Mr. Richard Lleath, and Mr. W.
Field,  riparian owners, Mr. Richard Heath, on the 25th Novem-
ber,  1864, filed a bill of complaint in the Court of Chancery, and
on the  1st June, 1866, obtained an ' interim injunction ' to restrain
the local board from polluting the river  Leam  with the sewage of
Leamington.  The  local  authority did not satisfy the  court that
they were taking proper means  to  abate  the nuisance ; and an
order  of sequestration was, on the  2d  August,  1867, issued, but 
40
suspended from time to time.  Subsequently, in  1868,  the  local
board caused the  bed of the river to be cleansed,  and  paid the
costs of this work, amounting to £1,500, and also  the costs of the
suit, £5,000.  About the same time Lord  Warwick caused  an
offer to be made to the local board to take from them on  lease for
twenty-one years the sewage of  Leamington,  and pay £450 a year,
provided it was delivered on to the Heathcote farms  a distance of
two miles from the town.  The  local board accepted the offer  on
the 5th April, 1870: and .  .  .  these works were finished, and the
pumping of the sewage to the ' Heathcote  Farm '  commenced  on
the 5th October,  1871 ;  and the entire  volume, except  in heavy
rainfall, has  been  pumped daily  ever since that  date.  The soil of
the farm is  a  fine loam on  a subsoil of gravel:  the flood-water
flows by a storm outlet into the Leam." . .  .
  "The  effluent  water  on the date of  our visit  to the  farm,
Aug. 18, 1875, was sufficiently purified to be  admitted into the
river, as not a trace  of sewage could  be detected in  the  clear
and  inodorous stream  which flowed from the meadows into the
water-courses" (pp. 19, 20).
  Tunbridge Wells. — "Population (about)  23,000. . . .  Vol-
ume of sewage every 24 hours (gallons) 650,000.  . . .
  " The  sewage was formerly allowed to run direct  into the Cal-
verly Brook.  On the  24th  November,  1865, an injunction was
obtained  by Mr. Frederick David Goldsmid of Summer-hill  Park,
to restrain the Improvem ;nt Commissioners from  polluting the
' brook :' and the latter having failed  to satisfy  the  court that
they had rendered the sewage inoffensive, an order  of sequestration
was  subsequently granted ;  this order,  however,  was suspended
from time to time, and finally discharged on 2d July, 1874, on the
commissioners undertaking to intercept the sewage, and practically
purify it  before it flowed into the  brook; to defray the expense
of cleaning  out the Summer-hill Lake, which amounted to  £744
17s. 8d.; and also to pay the costs of the suit, about £3,000."
  " To satisfy these conditions, the Improvement Commissioners
caused intercepting sewers and outfall works to be constructed ; and
they also purchased  two farms, one of 120 acres of stiff, loamy soil,
one and  a half mile to  the  north, and the other  of 165  acres of
light, open soil, three and a half miles to the south, of the town.
These farm3 are prepared and laid out for irrigation : and the sew-
age, which is not  treated by any chemical process, flows  by gravi-
tation through  subsidence-tanks; and  a daily volume  of about
414,000 gallons is thus delivered on to an area of  118 acres at  the
South Farm, and  about 2:>6,000 gallons on to an area of  100 acres
at the North Farm ; the solid refuse is removed from the tanks when 
41
necessary, and sold to farmers, who clean out the tanks, remove the
deposited material, and pay £65 a year for it.  The effluent water
from the North Farm flows into the Calverly Brook, and that from
the South Farm into the  Brodwater Brook and the  County Ditch,
which are tributaries  of the Medway.  Samples of this water are
collected every fortnight by the farm-bailiffs, and submitted to the
Sewage Outfall Committee.   No complaint has been made of the
state of the effluent water since the removal of the order of seques-
tration " (pp.  26,  27.  Local Government Board.   Report of a
Committee  .  .  . London, 1876, loc. cit.).

               FILTRATION THROUGH LAND.
   " In speaking of broad irrigation, we have said that the purifica-
tion is partly effected by the  filtration of the sewage  through the
porous soil.   This, however,  is only an incidental action,  depend-
ing on the character of the ground ; and sometimes  in heavy soils
it  may scarcely take  place at  all."
   " We have also alluded to a novel system of sewage treatment,
which was first proposed  in the  Rivers' Pollution Commissioners'
Report of 1870 on  the Mersey and  Ribble  Basins.   This system
consisted simply in making the filtration  through porous land the
principal instead of an incidental process of sewage  treatment."
   . .  .  "Dr. Frankland  . .  . instituted a series of experiments,
and established the fact that by passing sewage through a  suitable
porous  soil,  not  constantly  but intermittently, a high degree of
purification could be insured, the object of the intermittence being
to aerate the  filter, and  so give an opportunity for the purifying
action of the oxygen.  It is explained that a filter  so used  is not
a mere mechanical contrivance, but a chemical apparatus  for  oxi-
dizing, and thus altogether transforming, as well as  for separating,
the filth of dirty water."  . .  .
   "Filtration means  the  concentration  of sewage,  at short inter-
vals, on an area of specially chosen porous ground, as  small as will
absorb and  cleanse it; not excluding vegetation, but making the
produce of secondary importance." . .  .
   " As to the purity of the effluent, the Rivers' Pollution Commis-
sioners said, ' It would be difficult to decide between filtration and
irrigation ; ' but there are some  reasons why the filtration  process
would seem  to  have the advantage" (Royal Commission  on Met.
Sewage Discharge, 2d Report, London, 1884, pp. xliv.-xlvii.). 
42
SOME EXAMPLES OF SUCCESSFUL FILTRATION  THROUGH
                           LAND.
  Merthyr Tydfil.— Population, 50,000 ;  adjacent districts, 50,-
000;  total,  100,000.    "On  the  14th of  June,  1884,  Mr.
Hasper, the local engineer and surveyor of Merthyr, in  reply to
an inquiry, obligingly informed the author  that  the  quantity of
land sewaged for the  combined  districts was  336 acres." . .  .
" In the same month  the  medical officer of the  district  wrote,
saying, ' The Troedyrhiem areas do their work thoroughly.'  '
  Kendal. — " Mr. Banks (formerly  borough surveyor), writing
on the 26th August, 1884, says, ' I . .  . think it one of the most
successful  schemes for dealing with sewage that  there is  in the
country.' "
  Abingdon. — "On the  27th May,  1884, the   local  surveyor
wrote as follows: ' I have to state that the  council  thoroughly
approve of the mode  you adopted  for the  disposal  of the sewage.
We have not received at any time any complaint as to any local
nuisance.' "...
  Forfar. — "The  manager,  writing to  the author  in the early
part of 1884, stated,  .  .  .  ' The farm is giving every satisfaction,
and the effluent  is  always  quite  clear.' ....  Mr.  Alexander
Campbell, inspecting officer to  the Board of Supervision, Scotland,
having visited the farm, publicly advised all sanitary  authorities
to pay it a visit, and judge for  themselves."
  Barnsley, Yorkshire. — "The  manager writes  on  June 5,
1884, ' The farm  is not yet  paying  its  working  expenses ; but
there  are  now no complaints whatever from adjoining landlords,
nor any threats of  a  renewal of proceedings  in the  court of
chancery.' "
  Dewsbury, Yorkshire. —"A  manufacturing town on  the river
Calder.  .  .  . Population about 30,000.  The  farm-manager, on
the 25th of May, 1884, wrote to the author,  saying, ' The sewage-
farm is  doing better this season than before.  .  . .  The sewage
consists chiefly of dye-wash:  nevertheless, the effluent is very
good, and every one that sees it is surprised to  see  how clear it is.
There are a great many mill-hands come to have a bath at the out-
let, it being the only clear water for miles  that they can bathe in "
(Denton, J. Bailey.   Ten Years' Experience (now fourteen  years)
in works of Intermittent Downward Filtration .  .  .  London, 1885.
pp.  10-16). 
43
                      PRECIPITATION.
  "A chemical precipitation process does two  things: it effects
improvement in the liquid flowing away, and it leaves behind a pre-
cipitated deposit which has to be disposed of " (p. 1).
  "Precipitating processes, though the same in principle as that
of thirty years ago, have been greatly improved in detail, and, when
well worked, are effectual where the quantity of sewage is not very
great, where the sewage can be promptly treated, and where there
is a running stream, into which  the effluent can be discharged in
a proportion not exceeding five  per cent  of the supply of fresh
water " (p. liii.).
  Mr. Melliss " considers  . .  . the clarified  water would be quite
pure enough to discharge into the Thames."
  "It is not a pure water, but he does not suppose that a pure
water is necessary."
  " The effect Of this treatment would be to deprive the sewage of
the whole of the polluting matter in suspension,  and one-half that
in  solution,  rendering the  effluent water  sufficiently  pure to  be
discharged into the Thames."
  Mr. Sillar. — "He will not say that by the A. B. C. process the
water is restored to its original purity : it is  restored  to a degree
of purity which is unobjectionable."
  Mr. Redgrave. — " In the case of towns situated on tidal rivers,
where the volume of the river is large as compared with the amount
of sewage  to be dealt with, it is  unnecessary to attempt to com-
pletely purify the sewage so as to make it chemically pure.  All
that is necessary is to remove the grosser suspended matters."
  "The matter left in the  effluent water would not cause a nui-
sance, considering the volume of water into which it would be dis-
charged."
  " Any dilution over a hundred times would suffice to render the
effluent innocuous : any thing less would cause a nuisance."
  Dr. Frankland. — "The efflaent  from  chemical  treatment is
quite sufficiently pure to be mixed with the  Thames  water at the
two outfalls  at  the present moment;  but,  when the population
draining to these outfalls  increases, he does not think it would
then be sufficient to prevent the pollution of the river.  He thinks
the treatment by chemicals would be only a temporary measure.
The sewage  would increase, but the quantity of pure river-water
would decrease" (p. lii-)-
  Mr. Mansergh. — "He has no fear of the  constant discharge of
the  effluent water at all, if it is  discharged clear."
  " He thinks fish would live in the effluent." 
44
  Alderman Avery. — " Precipitation alone  is not a satisfactory
process:  the  effluent  requires afterwards to be filtered through
land" (p.  liii.  Royal Com. on Met. Sew. Disch. 2nd  Rept. loc.
cit.).

      SOME EXAMPLES  OF SUCCESSFUL PRECIPITATION.
  Aylesbury. — A. B. C. process.   " The Local Board of Health
for the District  of Aylesbury hereby express their entire  satisfac-
tion with the continued sanitary success of the native Guano Com-
pany's A. B.  C. process, which has for the  past five  years  been
employed for the treatment of  the sewage of the district; and they
have much pleasure in confirming their  certificate of the  23d July,
1880."
  "That the effluent water was, and still continues, in a sufficiently
purified  state  to flow  into any river,  as shown  by the chemical
analyses  of Professor Wanklyn and others.
  " That there has been no complaint of any kind, and  that the
whole operations are carried ou without the  slightest nuisance to
the neighborhood."
  " Dated this 21st day of October, 1881."
                                             Seal of the
                                         Local Board of Health
                                            of Aylesbury.

  Hertford. — "In  1883 the Conservancy Board  of this  river
(river Lea) brought an  action against the  Corporation of Hert-
ford  for  polluting the river  by their  sewage.  The Corporation
were bound  by Act of Parliament  to purify their sewage by i the
best known practicable process ;' and after some changes, they had
lately adopted a chemical process, effected by mixing the sewage
with solutions  of sulphate of alumina,  sulphate of iron, and  lime.
The  plaintiffs  contended  that the Corporation  had allowed un-
treated and imperfectly treated sewage  and other injurious matter
to pass into and pollute the river: this  the defendants denied, con-
tending that the sewage was thoroughly defalcated  and clarified,
and was  substantially free from offensive and  injurious matter."
  "The trial,  before the late Mr. Justice Williams, without a jury,
came  on in  February, 1884, and  lasted thirteen days:  many ex-
perts  were examined. . .  . The judge exonerated the defendants
on all points of the action,  finding ' that they had treated  the sew-
age, and were still treating it, thoroughly, according to the best
practical  process ;  and, moreover, that no real injury,  pollution,
or nuisance had been caused by the Corporation to the waters of the
Lea "(/toy.  Com. on Met. Seic. Disch. 2nd Rept. 1<S<S4, p. xxv.). 
45
   Coventry. — "At the time of my visit, the statements as to the
 inoffensive character of the  process were quite borne out by the
 evidence of my own senses.   The only unpleasant odor noticeable
 arose from the lifting-shaft of the underground sludge-chambers,
 and this in its immediate vicinity.  One of the filter-beds, which
 had just been  left to rest, and might have been expected to exhale
 unpleasant effluvia, if  secondary fermentation occurred, was  per-
 fectly sweet."
   "The result of the  chemical  treatment appears to be the  pro-
 duction of a neutral effluent water, in which the organic matter
 which still remains does not  rapidly undergo putrefactive change.
 All of the samples of affluent waters, both off the tanks and off
 the filter-beds, which I have obtained, are, at the present date, still
 unchanged.   I have tried to infect some of these with putrefactive
 ferments, with negative results" (Dr. Bushell Anningson,  Re-
port on the Treatment of Sewage at Coventry, London, 1882, p. 7).
   Leeds. — " Since this time the Corporation have had no experi-
 ments,  and the precipitant used has been  lime  only.  . .  .  The
 effluent is most satisfactory,  the discoloration from dye being only
 periodical, and then very slight." 
 
Petition  of nearly One  Thousand JVomen  to
   the  General   Court,   in  the  matter  of the
   pollution of the  Blackstone River.


     The undersigned,  resident  women of the Town of Millbury,
respectfully set  forth their  grievance  on account of the pollution of
the Blackstone  River, showing —

     That their health is impaired and their comfort abridged;
     That they  are subjected to the  discomfort of nauseating  odors
constantly filling the air and surrounding their homes;
     That they cannot, during the oppressive heat of summer, enjoy
the cool  evening air, either within  doors or without, but are obliged
to remain with  doors and  windows closed  in order to exclude  the
foul and sickening odors ;
     That, during  the heat of the  day, the  fetid air arising from  the
river, thick  and sluggish with the  offal of a city of 70,000 people,
becomes  an almost intolerable burden, creating nausea and weakness ;
     That it is  impossible  for them to visit the  graves of their dead
without encountering  an  overpowering  stench  from  the polluted
waters  by which the cemetery is surrounded;
     That, in passing along the streets and valley roads, there  are
localities  where it  is necessary  to  suspend  the  breath until a more
favorable point  is reached;
     That the water of the  Blackstone River has become utterly unfit
for all  domestic purposes, while formerly it  was  put to  many uses by
residents  on the bank of the river.

     Your petitioners,  therefore, earnestly pray  you to enact such
measures as  shall be  for their immediate relief.
                                JOSEPHINE  GODDARD,
                                    And nearly 1,000 Others. 
 
    GEO.  E.  WARING, JUN.,
          M.  Inst. C. E.,
CONSULTING ENGINEER FOR SANITARY AND
      AGRICULTURAL DRAINAGE.
                                       Newport, R.I., May 4, 1886.
C.  D. Morse, Esq.
  Dear Sir, — I see no reason to suppose that the system recom-
mended for the Worcester sewerage by the Massachusetts commis-
sion would not be satisfactory.   As the sewage would have to be
pumped, it would probably be  pumped high enough to  reach a
considerable  amount of land  by broad irrigation, which I think,
on  the whole, is better than " intermittent filtration " where con-
ditions are favorable for it.
  The only reason why I prefer the plan  that I recommended  is,
that, while I think it would be quite  as  effective as the other, it
would  cost very  much less.   Either  method would  undoubtedly
relieve your people of their annoyance by purifying the sewage of
Worcester.
                       Very  truly yours,
                                       GEO.  E.  WARING,  Jun. 
 
 
NLM051425135