HEARINGS OF THE INTERNATIONAL JOINT COMMISSION IN RE REMEDIES FOR THE POLLUTION OF BOUNDARY WATERS. (continued 5)

APPEARANCES.

Prof. Earle B. Phelps, of the United States Public Health Service, Washington, D. C., consulting sanitary engineer of the commission.

Dr. J. W. S. McCullough, of Toronto, Canada, medical health officer, provincial board of health of Ontario.

F. A. Dallyn, Toronto, Canada, sanitary engineer, provincial board of health of Ontario.

W. J. Stewart, Ottawa, Canada, representing the department of public works of Canada.

James White, Ottawa, Canada, assistant chairman of the conservation commission of Canada.

Francis S. King, representing the Dominion Marine Association.

George A. Wright, mayor of Brockville, Ontario.

W. H. Kyle, chairman of the public utilities of Brockville, Ontario.

G. H. Bryson, city engineer of Brockville, Ontario.

Dr. A. J. Macauley, medical health officer of Brockville, Ontario.

J. R. A. Lang, member of the council of Brockville, Ontario.

J. E. Chrysler, member of the council of Brockville, Ontario.

C. J. Sheriff, member of the council of Brockville, Ontario.

George K. Dewey, city clerk of Brockville, Ontario.

F. S. Evanson, mayor of Prescott, Ontario.

R. R. Dowsley, superintendent of the water and light system of Prescott, Ontario.

G. F. Darrow, chairman of the water board of Ogdensburg, N. Y.

Andrew Irving, chairman of the board of public works of Ogdensburg, N. Y.

Frank Chapman, member of the board of commissioners of Ogdensburg, N. Y.

Mr. Gardner. We will first call on the mayor of Brockville.

STATEMENT OF MR. GEORGE A. WRIGHT, MAYOR OF BROCKVILLE, ONTARIO.

Mr. Wright. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, I shall have very little to say, personally. We have with us our city engineer and medical health officer, who will be able to give you whatever information you require and to ask for whatever information we ourselves desire. It is needless to say that we are very much interested in this question. Pure water has been a big problem with us in the town of Brockville. Within a year we have suffered severely from impure water. Therefore we are looking at the present time for ways and means to secure a supply of pure water. We have been dealing with the question of filtration, but the matter has not been definitely settled by us yet.

As to the disposal of our sewage, our civic officers will give you information regarding that. I do not think it is necessary for me to take up any more of your time than to introduce to you, first, our medical health officer, Dr. Macauley.

Mr. Gardner. You obtain your water from the St. Lawrence River, do you?

Mr. Wright. We take our drinking water from the St. Lawrence River and discharge our sewage into it.

Mr. Mignault. Do you discharge your sewage into the St. Lawrence River treated or untreated?

Mr. Wright. Untreated.

Mr. Tawney. You said that you had suffered severely from impure water within the last year. Will you kindly state what your experience was in that regard?

Mr. Wright. We had a typhoid epidemic about a year ago.

Mr. Tawney. How large an epidemic did you have in your town?

Mr. Wright. We had about 180 cases.

Mr. Tawney. What is the population of Brockville?

Mr. Wright. About 10,000.

Mr. Tawney. How many deaths were there?

Mr. Wright. Fourteen.

Mr. Gardner. Was that the first instance of typhoid that you had?

Mr. Wright. It was the first epidemic. We had a break in one of our pipes, which I think had something to do with the cause of it.

Mr. Tawney. Did you trace the source of the epidemic to the pollution in the river water?

Mr. Wright. Yes.

Mr. Powell. What is the cause of your pollution?

Mr. Wright. We think the sewage is the cause.

Mr. Powell. Sewage from where?

Mr. Wright. From the town of Brockville. Of course, as I stated, there was a break in our sewage pipe which permitted the contamination.

Mr. Powell. Is the source of your intake farther upstream?

Mr. Wright. It is above our sewage outlet; yes, sir.

Mr. Mignault. How far above?

Mr. Wright. Not a great distance, but much farther out in the river. The town engineer will be able to give you that information.

Mr. Powell. If your intake is farther upstream than the outlet of the sewage, how can the sewage be responsible for the trouble?

Mr. Wright. We have a considerable eddy. On account of the eddy in the river we occasionally find sewage above the town.

Mr. Powell. That is the town’s own sewage?

Mr. Wright. Yes. We find that the river there is contaminated, and we find a great deal of difficulty in obtaining any samples of pure water in the river anywhere in the neighborhood of the town.

Mr. Powell. Are there many shoals in the river which cause a deflection of the current?

Mr. Wright. Yes; there are a great many shoals.

Mr. Powell. That leads to a mixture of the waters on both banks?

Mr. Wright. Yes.

Mr. Mignault. Is there any sewage in the river above Brockville?

Mr. Wright. There are some small summer resorts above the town, and I understand that a limited amount of sewage goes in from them.

Mr. Powell. How far is it from Brockville to Gananoque?

Mr. Wright. A little over 30 miles. We do not feel that we are contaminated from Gananoque, though.

Mr. Powell. I suppose you have never made an investigation to see whether you are or not?

Mr. Wright. No.

Mr. Magrath. You would rather have those questions directed to your health officer, would you not?

Mr. Wright. I think so. I will ask our health officer, Dr. Macauley, to take the floor now.

STATEMENT OF DR. A. J. MACAULEY, MEDICAL HEALTH OFFICER OF BROCKVILLE, ONTARIO.

Mr. Gardner. What is your official position, Dr. Macauley?

Dr. Macauley. I am medical health officer of Brockville.

Mr. Gardner. How long have you occupied that position?

Dr. Macauley. About 15 years.

Mr. Gardner. What has been your observation in regard to the water supply for the city of Brockville?

Dr. Macauley. The water supply, the untreated water, for years has been found to be impure. It is much more impure now than it was some years ago, but we have always found colon bacilli in the water.

Mr. Gardner. In your opinion, does it increase in amount as the time goes on?

Dr. Macauley. It certainly has increased.

Mr. Powell. To what do you attribute the increase?

Dr. Macauley. I suppose it is the pollution. There is a constant emptying of sewers into the water all the way up. As you will find by investigation, the St. Lawrence River is polluted all the way up, even above the towns where the summer resorts are.

Mr. Mignault. There are a large number of boats that ply on the river, are there not?

Dr. Macauley. There are a great many boats; I could not say as to the number.

Mr. Mignault. I suppose the islands and the riparian communities are increasing in population, and the increase in sewage would be the logical result?

Dr. Macauley. Yes, sir.

Mr. Tawney. Have you ever made any independent examinations?

Dr. Macaulay. Examinations have been made by our board. They are made every week. I think from four to six samples a week are analyzed, and the raw water is now found to be constantly polluted.

Mr. Tawney. Have you a water-filtration plant?

Dr. Macauley. We have not. We chlorinate our water by gas chlorination.

Mr. Powell. What would be the average summer contamination, expressed in colon bacilli?

Dr. Macauley. We find colon bacilli practically constant in 5 to 10 cubic centimeters.

Mr. Gardner. Do you notice any difference in the amount of pollution in winter and summer?

Dr. Macauley. I think it is practically the same; perhaps it may be a little higher in the summer season.

Mr. Mignault. What have you done locally to remedy the situation, Dr. Macauley?

Dr. Macauley. Our epidemic was due to an accident. The intake pipe we have now extends 700 feet out into the St. Lawrence from the dock, but the one we had before extended only a little over 100 feet into the river. There is an eddy that flows down to Picketts Point right below Brockville, and it goes right straight up back along the shore; but our sewage pipe extends about 900 feet down and about 800 feet from the shore. In December about two years ago a boat anchor got a hold of the sewer pipe down below our intake pipe and opened it about 200 feet from shore. It made an opening in the joint of the pipe, and we got the pollution from the sewage into the intake pipe. That is undoubtedly what caused the epidemic. When that was remedied the epidemic stopped.

Our water is chlorinated. We use about 100 pounds of hypochloride to 3,000,000 gallons of water. It is put in as an equivalent, because we use gas instead of the chlorine.

Mr. Gardner. Have you more than one outlet to your sewage discharge?

Dr. Macauley. Yes; we have. We have an outlet at the western end of the town. Our engineer will give you the capacity of that outlet. Our main outlet is below the town and also below our intake pipe.

Mr. Powell. Your system of piping is a series of small pipes, is it not?

Dr. Macauley. Yes; but there is a trunk sewer.

Mr. Powell. How large are those pipes?

Dr. Macauley. The engineer can give you that information.

Mr. Powell. Dr. Macauley, on which side of the river is the riparian population increasing most rapidly, on the United States or the Canadian side?

Dr. Macauley. I think it is increasing most rapidly on the Canadian side; perhaps not in the summer resorts; there is quite a large population on the islands, but principally on the American side. The population is increasing very rapidly each year.

Mr. Powell. When you say on the Canadian side do you mean exclusive of Brockville?

Dr. Macauley. Well, they are increasing every year.

Mr. Powell. As rapidly as on the American side?

Dr. Macauley. I do not think so with respect to the summer resorts, because the majority of the islands are on the American side.

Mr. Powell. What is the density of the population during the time that the summer residents are there?

Dr. Macauley. I could scarcely tell you that.

Mr. Powell. I want to get the floating population passing from one side to the other.

Dr. Macauley. I could not give you that information. There is a great deal of pollution undoubtedly from the boats.

Mr. Mignault. There is quite a large summer population on the islands?

Dr. Macauley. There is, particularly this summer.

Mr. Mignault. You do not make provision for letting the surface water of the city pass into your sewerage system, do you?

Dr. Macauley. Partially it does; but it enters the St. Lawrence by a separate pipe.

Mr. Gardner. How many cases of typhoid fever do you think developed in consequence of the sewage pollution in your water supply?

Dr. Macauley. At that time?

Mr. Gardner. Yes; that is approximately how many cases?

Dr. Macauley. There is no doubt that the breaking of the intake pipe was practically the cause of the epidemic. We have had too high a typhoid content always until the water was heavily chlorinated. We have chlorinated our water since 1910.

Mr. Gardner. Previous to that time did you have an epidemic of typhoid?

Dr. Macauley. We had in 1909 a slight epidemic. There were, perhaps, 25 or 30 cases. I could not give you the exact number now. We had none in 1910. The dredging that was being done along the river front was practically the cause of the epidemic. We have never been as free from typhoid as we were this last summer. We have never had any cases that we could trace to the water since it has been highly chlorinated. Still our water is always suspicious, and if anything went wrong with the chlorination plant we would surely have typhoid.

Mr. Mignault. At the time of the last epidemic the water was chlorinated?

Dr. Macauley. Yes; but it was not chlorinated highly enough. We practically got sewage into our water pipe.

Mr. Powell. I suppose there was too great a burden thrown on your chlorinating system?

Dr. Macauley. Yes.

Mr. Powell. In the official circles of your city has the question of purification of your sewage ever been mooted or discussed?

Dr. Macauley. Not of our sewage. We have been for some time agitating very seriously the question of putting in a filtration plant.

Mr. Powell. That is for your water for consumption?

Dr. Macauley. Yes.

Mr. Powell. But what about the sewage?

Dr. Macauley. The sewage is never treated.

Mr. Magrath. Have any demands been made upon you by the public-health service of Ontario to improve your system?

Dr. Macauley. We have been notified that the time would come when we would have to do that. We are trying to get our filtration plant in. We thought last year that we practically had it.

Mr. Powell. You would look after your water and let the other fellow look after the sewage?

Dr. Macauley. Self-preservation first, always.

Mr. Magrath. Have you any complaints against the pollution of water from this side crossing over to the Canadian side?

Dr. Macauley. I do not know that we have. Examinations made by our local board have shown that for several miles up the river the pollution is practically constant in the raw water.

Mr. Powell. Across the whole river?

Dr. Macauley. Right across the channel. We examined all the way across.

Mr. Powell. But you have had no independent examination?

Dr. Macauley. Yes; we have.

Mr. Powell. And that independent examination showed the same results as our examinations?

Dr. Macauley. Practically the same.

Mr. Powell. Showing that contamination extends across the whole channel?

Dr. Macauley. Across the whole channel and all the way up.

Mr. Powell. Has any opposition on the part of the citizens to purification of the sewage, or sterilization of it, ever manifested itself?

Dr. Macauley. I think not. It has been mooted, but no definite action has been taken.

Mr. Powell. Why was not definite action taken in compliance with the request of the provincial board?

Dr. Macauley. I think the lack of funds was the main thing.

Mr. Mignault. Did you ever have studies made as to sewage treatment in Brockville?

Dr. Macauley. No; I think not; not for Brockville especially.

Mr. Magrath. It is just your water supply that you are contemplating improving?

Dr. Macauley. At the present time that is all. We know that we shall have to improve the other in time. No doubt it is dangerous.

Mr. Mignault. But you have not seriously considered it so far?

Dr. Macauley. I can not say that we have. It has not been brought to my notice if it has been.

Mr. Powell. The engineer can probably answer this question, but his experience may not go far enough back. Has any investigation ever been made as to the natural facilities that are afforded for sedimentation beds and things of that kind on the other side of the boundary?

Dr. Macauley. I think not.

Mr. Powell. Have you ever heard of any complaints owing to sewage from vessels passing up and down the river?

Dr. Macauley. Yes; we have heard complaints. During the year 1909 one of our wharves was in bad condition, and many of the large boats stopped at a point that was practically over the end of our intake pipe. That was doubtless the cause of our epidemic. There is no doubt that the year the boats were there there was an epidemic. We went so far as to prohibit the boats staying there. We prohibited the large liners or passenger boats tying up to that wharf. For some months, however, they did tie up to the wharf.

Mr. Powell. As a man having to do with sanitary matters, what is your opinion regarding the effect of the boats discharging the sewage into the river? Is the discharging of that sewage into the river detrimental to health on your side?

Dr. Macauley. Undoubtedly.

Mr. Magrath. I would like to say, Mr. Chairman, that if Dr. Macauley as the health officer of a great town along the river here wishes to make any statement to the commission he may do so. He may have gotten the idea that he is here to ask questions. If he has anything to say on the subject, this is the time to say it.

Dr. Macauley. I do not know of anything special at this time. Something may later suggest itself to my mind.

Mr. Tawney. Can anyone here give us information as to the number of vessels passing up and down this river in front of Brockville? Is there any record that would give such information?

Dr. Macauley. I do not think we have any such record.

Mr. Gardner. I suppose, Dr. Macauley, that you are willing to say that the tonnage passing up and down the river here is very large?

Dr. Macauley. Certainly there are a great many people passing up and down the river on the line of boats, the Kingston and the Toronto, especially this season. Owing to the fact that the season has been a very hot one, the boats have been crowded all summer.

Mr. Powell. I suppose the reports of the lock masters of the canals would give us some idea of the number of boats passing up and down.

Dr. Macauley. I do not think so, because a large portion of the travel comes from the train or from Brockville; but a large number of passengers would go only as far as Prescott. I think it would be only a fractional part would go to Montreal.

STATEMENT OF MR. G. H. BRYSON, CITY ENGINEER OF BROCKVILLE, ONTARIO.

Mr. Gardner. Mr. Bryson, you are the city engineer of Brockville, are you?

Mr. Bryson. I am.

Mr. Gardner. How long have you held that position?

Mr. Bryson. Four and a half years.

Mr. Gardner. Have you with you plans of your sewerage system?

Mr. Bryson. No; I did not bring any. They are on file with the commission’s original report of 1914.

Mr. Gardner. Can you give us a general outline of the character of your sewerage system?

Mr. Bryson. The town is divided into two systems. One system discharges into what is called the west-end division. The main sewerage area takes about three-fourths of the area of the town and discharges about 820 feet from the intake pipe. It starts with a 16-inch outlet and then follows up with an 8-inch outlet in the river. The original system was laid out to take only sanitary sewage, but for some reason that was abandoned. The west-end system is a 9-inch pipe, except the small piece of 8-inch cast-iron pipe running into the river. That discharges about half a mile above the intake pipe. It is practically all sanitary sewage.

Mr. Gardner. What is the nature of the surface of the country there? Is it flat?

Mr. Bryson. No; it is very hilly. We have really three watersheds in the town.

Mr. Gardner. As an engineer, would it, in your judgment, be very difficult to put an intercepting sewer in there for the purpose of purifying the sewage?

Mr. Bryson. Plans have been gotten out for intercepting all the west end sewage and bringing it into the main system.

Mr. Magrath. Have those plans been approved by the public health service?

Mr. Bryson. No; they have never gone to them, but it is a recommendation from them that the sewage from the west end be pumped into the main sewerage system. That was one of the conditions contained in the original order, that the west end sewage be passed into the main sewerage system.

Mr. Powell. What is the estimated cost of that work?.

Mr. Bryson. About $10,000.

Mr. Gardner. That was a suggestion for the purification of your sewage?

Mr. Bryson. It was just simply to divert the sewage so it would go out below the intake.

Mr. Gardner. You have never taken into consideration the purification of your sewage before it is discharged?

Mr. Bryson. No; nothing has been done about that.

Mr. Powell. What is the axis of this rotary area where you have the back flow?

Mr. Bryson. I beg your pardon?

Mr. Powell. There is a back flow on the Brockville side. What is the major axis, and what is the minor axis?

Mr. Bryson. It flows west to about the Canadian Pacific Railway dock and then turns down the river.

Mr. Powell. About how far is it from where it starts to flow up to the end of the curve?

Mr. Bryson. It starts about half a mile below the town. I should think it is out about 800 feet. The intake is supposed to be across the present eddy.

Mr. Powell. Just beyond it, near the margin.

Mr. Bryson. Yes.

Mr. Powell. During your time has the pollution increased very much?

Mr. Bryson. It has increased with the population in the western end of the town.

Mr. Powell. Have you ever made any estimate as to what the cost would be of sterilization by sedimentation or otherwise of the sewage?

Mr. Bryson. No, sir.

Mr. Magrath. So far as I can gather, you have been the chief offender against yourself in the past.

Mr. Bryson. I think so, Mr. Magrath.

Mr. Gardner. Your concern has been chiefly in regard to your water supply?

Mr. Bryson. It has been to protect ourselves.

Mr. Gardner. And you have no complaint to make about the water being polluted in the stream above you?

Mr. Bryson. No.

Mr. Mignault. Are there any large towns below Brockville that would be polluted by your sewage?

Mr. Bryson. Prescott is the only possible place that could be affected by it, I think.

Mr. Powell. There is no surface sewage that passes into your western system?

Mr. Bryson. There is very little; nothing to speak of.

Mr. Powell. Does all the surface sewage in the lower system pass into your pipes?

Mr. Bryson. It passes into other pipes now; but for the last four years we have been taking out such surface sewage as we could because we have been having very heavy floods in the lower pipes of the town.

Mr. Powell. Could you avoid a pumping system in disposing of your sewage?

Mr. Bryson. No; we have to pump. The location of a plant would be very difficult from the present point of discharge.

Mr. Powell. Have you any idea from what elevation you would have to pump the sewage in order to dispose of it?

Mr. Bryson. I think to get land we would have to go outside of the town limits entirely.

Mr. Powell. But how high would you have to go?

Mr. Bryson. About 90 feet.

Mr. Powell. That would be quite expensive?

Mr. Bryson. Yes. There is no available land in sight.

Mr. Magrath. You have no general statement that you wish to make regarding this situation, have you?

Mr. Bryson. Dr. Macauley was asked about the pollution in the river. Last year I went out all over the lake taking samples and sent them to the provincial board of health. Every one showed contamination. We crossed the main channel and right over to the American side. We went up the river to Big Island.

Mr. Gardner. Did that investigation cover the whole surface of the river from shore to shore?

Mr. Bryson. We took samples every 400 feet right across.

Mr. Powell. Have there ever been any complaints made by the lower communities on your side against the sewage?

Mr. Bryson. No.

Mr. Powell. You have never been threatened with any lawsuits?

Mr. Bryson. No.

Mr. Evanson. May I ask Mr. Bryson a question?

Mr. Gardner. Certainly.

Mr. Evanson. Mr. Bryson, in speaking of purifying the sewage of the town of Brockville you said it would have to be pumped for a considerable distance. Do not the sewers go down some of the principal streets of Brockville?

Mr. Bryson. Yes.

Mr. Evanson. Is it not possible that a plant could be built under ground beneath those streets to take care of the sewage?

Mr. Bryson. I do not think so. I think we would have to spend too much money in rock excavation.

Mr. Evanson. I know that Mr. Murray, of Toronto, suggested that system to me some years ago. He said it could be taken care of without pumping at all.

Mr. Bryson. Our outlet is in rock now and it is below the level of the St. Lawrence.

Mr. Powell. There is not much rise and fall of the St. Lawrence River here, is there?

Mr. Bryson. No; not very much.

Mr. Powell. About what is the range?

Mr. Bryson. About 4 feet at Brockville.

Mr. Powell. Is there much shallow water on the Brockville side?

Mr. Bryson. Not along the main water front. It is only along the west end that it begins to get shallow. There is a shoal over there.

Mr. Powell. Is there an area there of some acres of shallow water?

Mr. Bryson. Yes.

Mr. Powell. Could you not dike it off? Or would that be too expensive?

Mr. Bryson. Yes; it would be too expensive.

Mr. Gardner. Is there anyone else from Brockville who wishes to be heard?

Mr. Wright. Possibly we might hear from the chairman of the water commission, if the question of filtration is of any interest to this commission.

Mr. Gardner. This commission is not so much concerned about the purification of your water supply as about the purification of your sewage.

Mr. Wright. I understand that. The point we wish to establish is that so far as our experience goes we have not been able to find pure water in the river irrespective of any pollution that comes from the town of Brockville. While no doubt there is pollution from the sewage in the town of Brockville, at the same time in all our experience with the river we have been unable to find pure water in the neighborhood of the town, either above or below the sewage outlet. Therefore, we have come to the conclusion that the river is polluted irrespective of our sewage.

Mr. Magrath. Do you know of any community treating the sewage above you?

Mr. Wright. No, sir.

Mr. Gardner. The commission would be glad to hear from the chairman of the water commission.

STATEMENT OF MR. W. H. KYLE, CHAIRMAN OF THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF BROCKVILLE, ONTARIO.

Mr. Kyle. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen: We had tests made of the water above the town, away above any contamination from our sewage, and I believe to-day if we could get pure water above Brockville we could put a pumping plant up there.

Mr. Magrath. And treat your sewage so as to leave the people below you in the same position?

Mr. Kyle. We are in the position that we take that as an international question, and there would be no use of their treating it unless it is made general. The water is polluted also from the big insane asylum there. That will have to be taken into consideration when the question of the town of Brockville is considered.

Mr. Gardner. Where is that located, in reference to your city?

Mr. Kyle. It is about a mile below our city. I believe we can not get any pure water in the river at the present time and that we shall have to treat our sewage and also put in a filtration plant. I believe that the trouble in our water is caused by shipping. I remember passing one of those big liners in a motor boat one day. I do not know what sort of an apparatus they had, but they dumped the material, and everybody immediately grabbed their handkerchiefs and held their noses until they got by. I believe that has a great deal to do with the contamination of the water. Many of the summer residents also wrap their garbage in paper and throw it in the river.

Mr. Gardner. That is increasing in amount?

Mr. Kyle. Every year.

Mr. Mignault. Have you any idea as to the summer population above Brockville?

Mr. Kyle. Practically all the islands are occupied now, as well as the shores, by summer residents, and at Alexandria Bay there are thousands and thousands of people every day. I think we are getting more contamination from the vicinity of Alexandria Bay than we are perhaps from Gananoque.

Mr. Mignault. How far are you from Alexandria Bay?

Mr. Kyle. About 22 miles.

Mr. Mignault. How far are you from Gananoque?

Mr. Kyle. About 30 miles. I think probably in another year we will filter our water. I think the water should be filtered, no matter whether the sewage is treated or not.

Mr. Mignault. I suppose the point you make, Mr. Kyle, is that unless all communities treat their sewage, the treatment of sewage at Brockville would not help you?

Mr. Kyle. It would not affect us and would not affect the other towns. They would still have to chlorinate.

Mr. Mignault. In other words, the water as it comes down from Brockville is already polluted.

Mr. Kyle. Yes.

Mr. Mignault. And I suppose, inasmuch as the summer population on the islands is increasing, you could hardly expect that any system of treatment of sewage or garbage going into the river could be ever attempted?

Mr. Kyle. I do not know just how they would get after them. But they would have to burn the garbage and treat their sewage. It is a serious question for the municipalities. They have all issued debentures for putting in plants for the disposal of the sewage, I suppose with the permission of the Government. Some towns can do it very easily, but in our town it would be a very serious question.

Mr. Mignault. I understand that no studies have been made as to sewage treatment in Brockville.

Mr. Kyle. Well, not to any great extent. The engineers have informed us that it would be a very expensive undertaking on account of the rocky formation and the hilly ground on which we are located.

Mr. Powell. As I understand you, your personal view is that there should be a general prevention of the deposit into the river of raw sewage?

Mr. Kyle. Yes; it is my view that it should be prevented by both the United States and Canada.

Mr. Powell. You think it should be prevented by all concerned?

Mr. Kyle. Yes; by all concerned.

Mr. Powell. All communities should be prohibited from depositing raw sewage into the river.

Mr. Kyle. Yes, sir.

Mr. Mignault. You would still have trouble from the campers on the islands, even if the communities treated their sewage?

Mr. Kyle. Yes.

Mr. Gardner. And from navigation also?

Mr. Kyle. Yes, sir; also from navigation.

Mr. Powell. You are in favor of that as applying to the whole community, but you think that it would be of no avail for any particular community to attempt purification because of the communities above?

Mr. Kyle. Yes, sir; because the boats would still contaminate the water.

Mr. Powell. Have you ever brought to the notice of the steamboat association the pollution of the waters of the river through the boats?

Mr. Kyle. Only by ordering them away from our docks. We have a dock at the pumping station where the boats sometimes land, and we have refused to allow them to land; but that applies more to our old intake pipe than to the present one.

Mr. Powell. But the fact remains that their presence there has the effect of polluting the water?

Mr. Kyle. We simply ordered them away as a precaution.

Mr. Powell. Was it a mere precautionary measure or was it because they were a source of pollution?

Mr. Kyle. At that time we believed they were stirring up the water, and the diver told us that the bottom was all soft stuff and it would be naturally stirred up and go into the intake pipe. They can not do that now. There is no question but what our water with the new intake pipe is very much better than we got before.

Mr. Powell. Then, what is the ground of your complaint? Is it against the steamboats in that they stir up the deposit at the bottom of the river, or that they add to the pollution?

Mr. Kyle. At the present time they add to the pollution. I do not think they stir it up to any great extent.

Mr. Powell. And you believe that is a real source of danger?

Mr. Kyle. Yes.

Mr. Magrath. Do you think that the passenger traffic is of sufficient size to be a danger?

Mr. Kyle. I do. I think a thousand people coming out on a boat would produce pollution in the river.

Mr. Gardner. Have you any idea of the number of people that passed up and down the river in boats during a season within the past two years?

Mr. Kyle. The excursion steamer Thousand Islander goes out with a thousand people. It very seldom goes farther than Alexandria Bay, which is about 28 miles from Brockville.

Mr. Powell. How many trips does she make a week?

Mr. Kyle. She makes a trip every day, practically; but that is only one of the boats.

Mr. Gardner. Do you think that on an average a thousand people a day pass up and down the river during the period of navigation?

Mr. Kyle. For the total number of boats; yes, sir; very many more. I think that around Alexandria Bay there are two or three thousand people, or more, perhaps, every day, because the boats from Kingston run in there.

Mr. Dewey has just informed me that he thinks there would be 30,000 people during the day within 30 miles of Brockville on passenger steamers.

Mr. Gardner. That would have reference to the whole navigation season?

Mr. Dewey. Yes; and during July and August I think it would be a very conservative estimate to say that there would be 35,000 people on steamers every day.

Mr. Powell. About how many freight steamers pass up and down daily?

Mr. Dewey. I could not say. There is a continuous line of them. The majority of the boats that go through the Welland Canal, freight boats, that pass down the river, pass by here.

Mr. Gardner. I do not suppose you have any means of knowing what the average river population would be during the entire navigation season?

Mr. Dewey. No, sir.

Mr. Gardner. It would fall off greatly, of course, after what you might term the vacation season?

Mr. Dewey. My estimate of the number of people, tourists, would be from the regular line of boats and the excursion steamers passing.

Mr. Gardner. How late do these steamers run on the river here?

Mr. Dewey. Until the middle of September.

Mr. Mignault. Can you give us an idea as to the population on the islands?

Mr. Dewey. On the islands in the immediate vicinity of Brockville there are about 1,500 people.

Mr. Magrath. You say Brockville people?

Mr. Dewey. Probably Brockville people.

Mr. Mignault. But from elsewhere than Brockville, what would the total be?

Mr. Dewey. The number of nonresidents of Brockville that would be in the vicinity of Brockville would not be very large.

Mr. Mignault. I am referring to the population that might affect the water flowing past Brockville.

Mr. Dewey. There would not be any substantial increase there, but I should think it would be safe to say that there would be anywhere from 5,000 to 10,000 people in the immediate vicinity of Alexandria Bay and Clayton during the summer months.

Mr. Powell. I was told that on one island alone there were pretty nearly 10,000 people as a floating population.

Mr. Dewey. Yes; that is on Thousand Island Park.

Mr. Powell. You will find the floating population of Thousand Islands and Alexandria Bay to be pretty close to 50,000.

Mr. Dewey. Yes; but these would be permanent for the summer. There is practically none in the immediate vicinity of Brockville occupied by summer cottages.

Mr. Powell. Taking the region that we have loosely called the Thousand Island region, what would be the floating population of those islands and the vicinity on the main land?

Mr. Kyle. That is difficult to say because they are coming in by the thousand every day and staying a day and then leaving. I believe 100,000 a day would be a conservative estimate for the islands and the immediate shores.

Mr. Powell. Mr. Dallyn, did the bacteriological examinations that were made on the river here cover the season when the floating population was present?

Mr. Dallyn. There were two examinations made. We were on the river with a laboratory from about the middle of April until the end of May, and from about the 10th of August, to the 20th of August. It is reported in the progress report.

Mr. Powell. Have you any data, exact or otherwise, as to the summer population of the district?

Mr. Dallyn. No; but I think there is something in Dr. McLaughlin’s report as to that. We made no calculations ourselves. I know the populations of Cape Vincent and Clayton double themselves in the summer; but what the island population and the excursion population were I have not any idea.

Mr. Mignault. Is there any record available to show what that summer population amounts to?

Mr. Dallyn. I am not sure.

Mr. Mignault. It is rather important to know because that is a feature, that and the pollution, and it strikes me at the present moment that even if the communities treat their sewage and the boats sterilize theirs, there will be still a danger from this summer population camping on the islands.

Mr. Dallyn. Yes; that is true. They will come, of course, under township regulations. I do not know just how they handle them on the American side. In the Muskoka Lakes we make them treat their sewage properly.

Mr. Mignault. How do they accomplish that?

Mr. Dallyn. They have various methods of getting at it. Some use the chemical process, and store it and pump it out in a nocuous form into beds. Some lay piles through the sand.

Mr. Mignault. What is your opinion as to the danger of pollution from your summer population?

Mr. Dallyn. It is very serious. We were very much amazed in making a minute survey on some of the islands to find that their sewage outlet and their intakes would be only 40 feet away from each other, making it practically certain that the two would mingle.

Mr. Tawney. Mr. Dallyn, I have here a report which you and Dr. McLaughlin and Dr. McCullough made, a portion of which I wish to read into the record. From page 50 of the progress report I read as follows:

While examination below Wolfe Island among the Thousand Islands did not show an average gross pollution, its intermittent character presents a menace to the summer residents in this section who take their supply of water from the river without purification.

Examinations made in the vicinity of Brockville showed that the shore samples collected from the cross section above Brockville carried considerable pollution. Toward midstream, where dilution and mixing had taken place, the samples showed constant pollution of lesser degree. Below Brockville the major pollution remained near the banks of the river. Samples collected in midstream showed very little pollution in the early work before navigation opened. The latter work in August showed a very general serious pollution, due probably to summer resort population and to boat traffic. The condition of the river between Brockville and Cornwall is very bad in the summer months, as evidenced by midstream samples Nos. 266-273.

Unquestionably, the water from this portion of the St. Lawrence River should not be used as a water supply without adequate purification.

Mr. Powell. It is a fact, is it not, that the pollution at these summer resorts is steadily and rapidly increasing?

Mr. Dallyn. Undoubtedly so.

Mr. Tawney. There has been more this year than ever before, on account of the long period of hot weather, and also the fact that many people who have formerly gone abroad on their vacations have remained here.

Mr. Dallyn. The education of the people has improved very materially during the last few years, and they demand better conditions at the summer resorts.

Mr. Powell. You are quite familiar with the Thousand Island region, are you not?

Mr. Dallyn. We spent about a month there in small boats.

Mr. Powell. Passing in and out among the islands?

Mr. Dallyn. Yes, sir.

Mr. Powell. Bearing in mind what Mr. Tawney read from the progress report to the effect that there was a greater admixture of water above Brockville than below, that would be due, would it not, to the various channels and rapids among these islands?

Mr. Dallyn. Yes, sir; and the channel is very tortuous just at that point.

Mr. Powell. And there are jetties in all directions, which result in a general churning and admixture of the water.

Mr. Dallyn. We discovered that the Cataraqui Bay at Kingston periodically discharged itself completely into the St. Lawrence. That would give us a very high pollution. It is simply a tidal effect. The river seems to flow in both directions opposite Kingston.

Mr. Magrath. How far is it from Kingston to Charlotte?

Mr. Dallyn. I am really not aware. I imagine it would be about 130 miles.

STATEMENT OF F. S. EVANSON, MAYOR OF PRESCOTT, ONTARIO.

Mr. Evanson. Prescott lies opposite Ogdensburg on the Canadian side of the St. Lawrence River, and the river at this point is about 1¼ miles in width. We have a splendid water system in Prescott for a town of its size. We obtain the water in the St. Lawrence River. We have three outlets for our sewers. We discharge our sewage into the river in a raw condition.

Mr. Gardner. Have you ever contemplated the purification of your sewage in any way?

Mr. Evanson. We have never considered it.

Mr. Gardner. You have never had it under consideration?

Mr. Evanson. No.

Mr. Gardner. In your opinion, would it be a difficult thing to do?

Mr. Evanson. No; I think we could treat it all right. Prescott has been most fortunate in that we have not had any experience of an epidemic of any kind. Brockville has been troubled with typhoid for some years, but we have been free from it. We never attempted to chlorinate the water until Brockville had an epidemic a few years ago, and we chlorinated the water as a precaution. At present we have not a case of fever in Prescott. You will find that the fever cases in Prescott are much below the average.

Mr. Magrath. You are satisfied?

Mr. Evanson. We are satisfied with the conditions as they exist at present.

Mr. Gardner. How long have you been treating your water?

Mr. Evanson. Since the epidemic in Brockville we have been treating it most of the time. I regret that the medical health officer of the municipality could not come here to-day. I may state that the quantity of chlorine we put into the water is lowered at certain seasons of the year.

Mr. Gardner. Did you have anything of the nature of an epidemic in your town before you commenced to treat the water?

Mr. Evanson. We never had. I was mayor of the town in 1910 and 1911 and during that time I asked the medical health officer frequently to send in samples of our water, and he did so. He took the water from the taps in the town, and not from the river, and it was rarely shown that it was contaminated in any way. I can only remember one occasion on which there was slight contamination.

Mr. Gardner. At what point in the river is your intake?

Mr. Evanson. The intake pipe is at the most westerly point in the town and it runs into the river for 400 feet.

Mr. Gardner. Do you find the channel within that distance?

Mr. Evanson. No; we would not be out in the channel at that distance. The nearest sewer pipe is 1,500 feet from the intake pipe.

Mr. Gardner. That would be down the river.

Mr. Evanson. Yes. Of course I think the current of the river at Prescott improves the conditions there. It is said that the water flows by there at about 4 miles an hour. We have no eddies at all such as they have at Brockville. At Brockville there is a point that juts out and obstructs the flow of the river at the west side, and that is the cause of the eddy there, but we have no eddy whatever at Prescott.

Mr. Gardner. Is the river narrower opposite Prescott than it is opposite Brockville?

Mr. Evanson. I think it is about the same width as at Brockville; we are about a mile and a quarter across here.

Dr. McCullough. The river is one mile and three-quarters wide at Brockville.

Mr. Gardner. What is the average depth of the river here from shore to shore?

Mr. Evanson. I can not say as to that. Of course, along our docks at Prescott, the river is 14 or 15 feet, and the two Richelieu boats are in there every morning, the one from the west coming in at 7 o’clock, and it remains there until 10 o’clock or half past 10, and the boat from the west comes in at 10 o’clock and remains there until noon. The sewage would not contaminate our water because the sewage outlets are at least half a mile east of our intake pipe.

Mr. Gardner. Did you notice any disturbance of the river bottom when these steamboats are leaving or arriving at the wharf?

Mr. Evanson. No. Of course the town owns the western wharf where our water system is and no boats tie up there at all; the only boat that comes there is an occasional boat with coal.

Mr. Powell. Have the town authorities at Prescott ever considered the advisability of purifying or sterilizing the sewage?

Mr. Evanson. In 1911 we put in a further sewerage extension in the east end of the town. We had two outlets then. We extended the sewer in the east end of the town, and in order to get an outlet for that extension we had to put the east one farther west, and the question was considered then, but it was decided that it was useless to purify the sewage at one small outlet and let the two larger outlets go without purification. The question received some consideration then. It was suggested that we could put in a plant which would take care of the purification of the sewage.

Mr. Powell. Have you the same rock formation at Prescott as at Brockville?

Mr. Evanson. I do not know of any harder rock than we have at Prescott; you are liable to run into it at any place in the town.

Mr. Magrath. What is the assessed value of the property in your municipality?

Mr. Evanson. A little over $2,000,000.

Mr. Magrath. What is your rate of taxation?

Mr. Evanson. The rate of taxation varies from 25 to 27 mills.

Mr. Magrath. Is the water supply of your town satisfactory to the public health authorities of Ontario?

Mr. Evanson. I think so.

Mr. Gardner. What is the basis of taxation; is it the full value of the property?

Mr. Evanson. No; I think it is about 75 per cent of the value of the property, I think that is the way the assessor places it.

Mr. Powell. What is the rate of taxation?

Mr. Evanson. Twenty-seven mills on the dollar last year; that is $27 on the thousand.

Mr. Powell. Does that cover everything?

Mr. Evanson. Yes; of course it does not cover the water and light rate; it covers the general taxes of the town and the school rate; the school rate is about 11 mills.

Mr. Powell. The individuals who consume the water pay for it?

Mr. Evanson. Yes; and the municipality owns it.

Mr. Gardner. What is your indebtedness?

Mr. Evanson. Our indebtedness would run about $170,000. I should say that in the neighborhood of $100,000 of that covers the water and light system. Of course, the water and the light take care of their own departments. We own the water and the light plants.

Mr. Gardner. And a proportion of your indebtedness is because of your ownership of these utilities?

Mr. Evanson. Yes. When we put in the water and light systems in 1900 we issued debentures for $120,000 at that time to take care of it. We have extended the sewerage system since at a cost of $25,000 or $30,000.

Mr. Powell. If the purification of sewage is made obligatory along the river here I suppose that your town would have no objection to comply with the general rule?

Mr. Evanson. Certainly not.

Mr. Powell. But you would have objection to be singled out and compelled to do that if other people were allowed to go free?

Mr. Evanson. Yes. Prescott is most fortunate in having first-class water in the river here, and that has been the condition for a number of years. I think it proves that flowing water will purify itself in a distance of 12 miles, because there must be a great amount of sewage flowing into the river at Brockville, which is 12 miles above us.

Mr. Gardner. Unless you have some general statement to make to the commission I think that is all we want to hear from you, Mr. Evanson.

Mr. Evanson. I have nothing further to say. I say that the municipality of Prescott will be glad to carry out the wishes of this commission and of the United States and Canada if a means can be devised to purify sewage.

STATEMENT AS TO ASSESSED VALUE OF BROCKVILLE.

Mr. Gardner. I wish to ask the mayor of Brockville what the assessed valuation of the town is.

Mr. Dewey (city clerk, Brockville). The assessed valuation of the town is about $5,000,000, and the population 9,500.

Mr. Gardner. What is your rate of taxation?

Mr. Dewey. Thirty mills this year.

Mr. Gardner. What is your basis of value; is it full value?

Mr. Dewey. No. Under the law it is supposed to be.

Mr. Powell. Is that a supposition contrary to the fact?

Mr. Dewey. Taking it on the whole, I presume it would be 75 or 80 per cent of the value.

Mr. Gardner. It is high enough at that rate, I should think. What is your indebtedness?

Mr. Dewey. The net debt, including public utilities, is $600,000.

Mr. Magrath. What do your public utilities cover?

Mr. Dewey. Electricity, gas, and water.

Mr. Powell. Is there any surplus from the supply of electricity, gas, and water?

Mr. Dewey. There is a slight surplus over the operating charges and the amount necessary to take care of the debt.

Mr. Gardner. How are you paying that? Is it by a sinking fund?

Mr. Dewey. Some of it. Some of it is payable in annual installments. We issue debentures both ways.

Mr. Powell. Is your debt diminishing or increasing?

Mr. Dewey. I think it is diminishing. Our local improvement debt constitutes the bulk of the debt.

Mr. Powell. And these public utilities carry themselves?

Mr. Dewey. Yes. The local improvement indebtedness is paid largely by the property owners.

Mr. Magrath. It might be well to state for the information of those gentlemen who have come here from a distance that we are to hear this afternoon Mr. Paterson, an expert in the matter, in reference to methods of treating pollution. It might be interesting to these gentlemen to stay here to hear Mr. Paterson.

Mr. Powell. It may interest these gentlemen, because Mr. Paterson claims that the municipalities could make a large profit out of the treatment of this sewage.

Mr. Gardner. You would be able to pay off your indebtedness, perhaps, if you took Mr. Paterson’s advice.

(The commission took recess for luncheon.

After the luncheon recess.)

STATEMENT OF MR. EDWARD A. PATERSON.

Edward A. Paterson, chemical engineer, London, England, appeared before the commission and said:

After I received the telegram from the secretary of the Canadian section of the commission asking me to come here I cabled to London for certain plans and models and additional samples, as I only had a few samples on this side and a few notes. These samples and reports have not yet got here, I suppose owing to the war conditions. I therefore have to rely upon rough laboratory notes, which I hope to augment with further information as soon as the data arrive here. I hope you will excuse me for not having the short report which I have made in fuller detail. I shall be glad to give you more interesting information later.

I may state, first, that my remarks are purely from the British point of view; I am not at all familiar with the conditions on this side, except as to a few of the plants, such as the Baltimore plant and others, where they have erected up-to-date plants for the collection of the solids. I have been investigating this matter for about six years purely from the point of view of the disposal of the solids, and I have looked upon it from the utilization point of converting waste products into a commercial enterprise. Our difficulty in Great Britain is that we have an enormous accumulation of what we call sludge cake or sewage cake, which comes mostly from the filter press, and in some cases it is taken out to sea and in others it is disposed of on the land and in other cases they burn it. In England alone we have enormous quantities of this material, which costs from 1 shilling to 5 shillings—that is, from 25 cents to $1.25—per ton of wet sludge. When I refer to “wet sludge,” I mean sludge that contains from 50 to 60 per cent of water.

As to the raw material, the process to which I will refer deals with the raw sewage which has been precipitated or agglomerated by means of lime, “ferro-alumina,” or other agent, and rendered solid either by filter pressing or “lagooning” at the sewage-disposal works. This solid material contains on an average 50 to 55 per cent moisture and must, owing to its nature, be quickly disposed of, because for about six months in the year it becomes extremely offensive, and they have in England a very small area in which to dispose of it. It has to be taken away by railway trains and in boats and such like conveyances. In Great Britain the amount of solid material—containing 50 per cent moisture—produced by each 1,000 inhabitants is approximately 100 tons per annum, and, for the purposes of this report, those towns in the United Kingdom having a population of over 100,000 people produce annually 1,800,000 tons.

In disposing of it we look upon it from the commercial point of view, and, therefore, the composition of the sewage is very important.

The composition of raw sewage, of course, must vary very considerably, depending on the time of year and the district which it is derived from—trades waste, and so forth, e. g., paper factories, iron works, dye works, render it very complex, and an ever-varying mixture, but the following analysis will give a very general idea of its character and composition in Great Britain:

Analysis of raw sewage per 100,000 parts as solids.

In solution, 125.4 } 188.3

In suspension, 62.9

Chlorine 8.9

Free ammonia 2.1

Organic (albuminoid). Ammonia 76.0

I have a sample here of the material that is generally produced at the sewage works.

(Sample produced and shown to the commissioners.)

That sample contains from 55 to 60 per cent of water and is as it comes from the filter press, and it is called filter-press cake.

Mr. Gardner. That is not in commercial form?

Mr. Paterson. No; that is in the form, as it comes from the sewage works, and it is material that gives us much trouble to dispose of. The analysis of that material, not air dried, is approximately—by “approximately” I mean the general analysis of that class of material over the United Kingdom—as follows:

Analysis of press cake (not air dried).

London. Leeds. Wimbledon.

Per cent. Per cent. Per cent.

Water 50.00 58.05 56.15

Organic matter 15.40 16.69 11.36

Silica 6.40 8.08 7.10

Carbonate of lime 10.30 7.94 11.14

Nitrogen in sewage sludge (dry) 1.63 ... ...

To ammonia 1.95 ... ...

To ammonia sulphate [2]7.67 ... ...

The ordinary air-dried sewage—we do not have very much of it in England—mostly comes from the small towns, in which the sludge is pumped up into lagoons and allowed to dry there, and the composition of that material is, generally speaking, as follows:

Air dry. London. Leeds.

Per cent. Per cent.

Water 11.86 16.40

Organic matter 24.61 27.92

Phosphoric acid (P₂O₅) 1.04 .75

Sulphuric acid 1.12 1.02

Carbonic acid 10.98 13.11

Lime 14.33 17.51

Magnesia 2.34 7.67

Oxide of iron 3.02 2.32

Alumina 4.13 6.33

Nitrogen .86 .70

These analyses will give a general idea of the composition of filter-pressed sewage cake, which we treat in Great Britain, and of which we have 1,800,000 tons per annum.

The object of the process under consideration is to dry the solids so that they may be available either for a fertilizer or, secondly, to be in a condition that by-products of commercial value can be recovered. The greatest difficulty with which we have had to contend was to provide a way of liberating the moisture, of which the pressed cake contained from 55 to 60 per cent, without volatilizing valuable material, and at the same time achieve the object in a short space of time and at low cost. One of the difficulties that has caused a great deal of time and trouble to solve is how to get rid of that moisture and dry the material at a moderate cost without losing any of the valuable constituents, because the valuable products are volatilized at a very low temperature. A very large amount of money and time has been spent in Great Britain in trying to dry sewage pressed cake, or sewage sludge, economically, and many ingenious mechanical appliances have been invented to try and solve the difficulty, but they have not been a success, as they have been costly to operate and required high temperature, with consequent loss of some of the valuable constituents of the sewage. This is due to the water in the sewage being in so many different forms, namely, hydroscopic water, water of combination, and water of crystallization; the first being easy to drive off and the two latter extremely difficult. So it is recognized now that the problem is one of chemistry and mechanics applied, and I can safely say that there is now a satisfactory solution of these difficulties on a practical scale.

Further on in this report I will give you some figures as to the cost of plant and cost per ton of drying pressed cake.

Having dried the material, it is in a condition to be treated by destructive distillation, whereby ammonia, oil, gas, fat, phenols, and other materials suitable for drugs and dye making may be extracted.

I show you a sample of the material as dried. It appears in that form [specimen exhibited], and it contains 50 to 55 and 60 per cent of water. After it is dried it becomes absolutely, as you see it there. That specimen is practically free from water; it contains only about 2 per cent of water. That material is valuable as a fertilizer, and it is sold in the form of a butter. [Butter specimen exhibited.]

The value of the material, as any chemist knows, is in its fertilizing contents for particular purposes. For certain purposes, the merchants who deal in the product add the necessary quantities of phosphoric acid that the material is deficient in, to bring it up to Government standard. That material is worth to-day on the English markets from $12 to $15 a ton.

Mr. Gardner. What is the relative proportion of potash to phosphoric acid in that sample?

Mr. Paterson. It varies very much, indeed. In small towns where it does not pay to extract—where there is not sufficient tonnage to pay for extracting the oil and the fat from these other products—they are either put into this form, or, if the towns are sufficiently near a large center, it is shipped on the railway to central works where it is treated for these products. But in isolated cases they simply dry the material by a special process, and they have local sale for it, and it is cheap to operate, so that where a man is usually employed in these plants the man can do the whole thing, and you can practically make a small number of people the limit of cost. Taking about 1,000 as being about the limit, or 500 persons, they can put it into this form and use it for manure purposes.

Oils are interesting to the British people, because we have no oil in England outside of the oils which are obtained in very small quantities from the Scottish shale deposits, so that when you are dealing with several million tons of material which will produce a very large quantity of oil per ton it becomes a matter of extreme interest to the Admiralty.

Sir Boverton Redwood, Bart., D. Sc., F. I. C., and Alfred Gordon Salamon, A. R. S. M., F. I. C., the former of whom is one of the consulting chemists of the British Government, state in a report on this process, made two years ago:

1. That the process is capable of furnishing valuable commercial products for which there is a practically unlimited market. In this connection, we may state that the sample of crude oil distillate which was subjected to test remained fluid until cooled to 20° F., had a specific gravity of 0.971 at 60° F., and a flash point of 256° F. A sample of the redistilled oil previously tested by us contained only 0.24 per cent of sulphur, and had a calorific value of 10,230 calories per gram, or 18,415 British thermal units. It is evident that a product similar to the crude oil examined would be a fuel oil complying with the contract requirements of the Admiralty.

2. That very large supplies of the raw material, viz, sewage-sludge press cake, would be available in this country as soon as it became recognized that such press cake could be disposed of.

3. That it may be reasonably anticipated that a substantial profit would result from the general application of the process.

The yields of valuable products, of course, vary within very wide limits, depending upon the composition of the sewage, but, speaking broadly, the amount of ammonia as sulphate ranges between 60 and 130 pounds per ton of sewage containing 5 to 10 per cent of moisture. Oil, from 18 to 40 gallons per ton; fat, from 5 to 10 per ton; gas, from 14,000 to 17,000 cubic feet per ton. The rare products, it is difficult to give any reasonable figures. Then, after these products have been extracted, there is a residue which has a commercial value as a fertilizer base, as it contains products valuable for agricultural purposes. It is an inodorous grayish-black friable substance having the following general composition.

Siliceous matter 66.30

Iron oxide and alumina 7.30

Calcium carbonate 3.44

Carbon 20.40

Magnesia .07

Phosphoric acid 1.14

Moisture

Sulphur 1.09

99.74

The commercial value of sulphate of ammonia may be usually taken at 2 cents a pound, in Great Britain. It is difficult to say what the commercial value of these products is to-day, in war time. We obtain from 5 to 10 per cent of fat, and under special conditions, such as they have at Bradford, which is a wool-washing place, the amount of fat runs up to 20 per cent. It is difficult to give any definite figures as to the value of other products, because they vary in different localities, but there is a fair amount of substances which are used in drug making.

That butter, or residue, after these other products are taken out, is absolutely innocuous, and quite a deodorizer because of the amount of carbon it contains.

That material is used by the fertilizing companies and they add to it the requisite amount of ammonia or phosphoric acid, or potash, or what is required for particular kinds of agriculture.

One of the chief products is oil, and the analysis of the crude oil obtained from the process is as follows:

By volume.

Specific gravity at 15° C per cent 9.931

Light oil boiling under 170° C do 5.000

Light oil boiling between 170-230° do 19.600

Light oil boiling between 230-270° do 18.700

Light oil boiling between 270-350° do 29.900

Residue, a soft pitchy substance, valuable for many purposes do 26.800

100.000

The crude oil is a very dark thick-looking substance, very much like what you would see lubricating any bearing of engines, and very much like the crude oil that is obtained from the oil wells of this country. It can be split up and fractionated into different parts. It has not a very pleasant smell or a very unpleasant smell; it is quite different from the ordinary crude oil you get from the earth, but several different spirits can be obtained, which are useful for driving motor cars, internal combustion engines, and so on.

After that black crude oil has been split up into these various grades, and various other compounds taken out, there remains in the still a pitch which is practically animal pitch, and which is useful for all kinds of things for which bone pitch is used. [Sample produced.]

The extraordinary thing is to think that that comes through a human being, but it does.

I have no sulphate of ammonia with me; it is such a common thing, you will see it in any drug store, it is used in most households, and it is known to everybody. The mean calorific value of the gases after the extraction of all condensible oils in the process was found to be 130 British thermal units. It will be noted that all the products mentioned in this analysis are easily salable, and always in demand.

These products are extracted in this way: The chief process is drying material, which has been one of the greatest difficulties in solving the sewage problem.

Mr. Tawney. What is the device used?

Mr. Paterson. They have revolving cylinders, they have chambers, they have glass houses, they have towers that it is worked down through; all these sorts of things. In this process they take the gases which are coming from the garbage plant, and pass them through a brick chamber in which there is an endless belt made of wire-woven mesh. That travels a distance of about 120 feet in 20 minutes, and the carbonic-acid gas from the furnace, in conjunction with certain other material, creates a chemical reaction which breaks up these various forms of water, and in 20 minutes the material is dry, and in that condition in which you now see it. Having obtained it in that condition, if it is not used for fertilizing, it is put into a gas plant, which consists of retorts, in which the coal is thrown, the door closed, and heat applied. The volatile matter, gas and tar and so on, goes over in the condensers and the gas passes on and leaves behind it a tar and ammonia and liquor, etc. This process is very similar to the ordinary gas process, with this exception, that the ordinary gas retorts are not suitable, owing to the extremely low heat-conducting properties of dry sewage. So, special retorts have had to be constructed, and they are mostly vertical and in benches of 4 or 8 or 12 or 16. The material is taken along an automatic feed and pumped into these retorts and the top closed, and then the oil goes through a condenser and is thrown down in that form in which you see it. Steam is introduced and the ammonia runs over, the steam is condensed, and the ammonia is in that ammoniacal liquid. The ammonia is extracted from that liquid and the oil floats on the top and flows into these fractionating stills. Then the gas which passes on, 14,000 to 17,000 cubic feet, comes around again and is used for doing the distillation, so that practically the amount of gas in the sewage will complete the operation. In other words, it costs practically nothing for heat for doing the distillation.

The cost of one of these plants will depend on several factors, the chief of which is the population of the place. To deal with a small tonnage costs more per ton than to deal with a very large one, the overhead charges have to be taken into account, so that one is limited to a certain population for extracting the by-products.

As to whether a drying plant is installed alone or in conjunction with a distillation plant, this of course could only be decided by the careful examination of local conditions. Broadly speaking, a drying plant to treat 30 tons of sewage, containing 55 to 60 per cent of water, would cost approximately for the machinery $2,500.

Mr. McGrath. For what population?

Mr. Paterson. For 1,000 people making 100 tons a year. Usually, around a municipality, they have buildings and garbage plants and structures of different kinds, so that practically in most of the towns I have visited in England that is about the total expense for machinery, after putting the material into the condition you see it, without practically any extra labor. The cost of drying in England, for the plant at Wimbledon is $1.50 per ton. A larger plant would cost relatively less, as certain mechanical parts that would be necessary for a small plant would serve a much larger one. In London, as I have said, it is costing us for drying per ton of sewage about $1.50, and the value of the product as a fertilizer, which naturally depends on its chemical composition, is from $12 to $15 per ton, and as a matter of fact on its chemical contents it is worth more than that. That is a very conservative figure to put upon it, because the fertilizer people want profits.

The cost of the distillation plant will, of course, vary in different towns and different localities. It is extremely difficult to give estimates on the cost of a distillation plant on this continent as the conditions vary to a large extent, but to generalize, a plant is not expensive and we consider in England a unit for treating, say, 40 tons a day of dried sewage would be in the neighborhood of $40,000, most of which plant would be suitable for treating 100 tons per day with only the addition of retorts, which is the least expensive part of the plant.

I have gone into the subject in this report in a quite general and untechnical way, and I shall be pleased to answer any further questions which you wish to ask me.

Mr. Tawney. Where are the plants, which you speak of, situated?

Mr. Paterson. At Wimbledon, which is part of London.

Mr. Tawney. Are they operated by the municipality or by private interests?

Mr. Paterson. They are operated by private interests.

Mr. Tawney. Do these private interests buy the sewage?

Mr. Paterson. The sewage is delivered to the works free of charge. Speaking from memory, the cost at Wimbledon is about 75 cents a ton. They are getting rid of it for nothing, and, in addition to that, they give the land necessary for the treatment.

Mr. Tawney. How long has that plant been in operation?

Mr. Paterson. About a year. On account of the war it has been shut down two or three times by the Government taking the men away; but now it is practically under Government control, for it comes under the Munitions Department. It is now looked upon by the Government as a necessary national project, and comes under the munitions department.

Mr. Powell. Because of the gasoline they get?

Mr. Paterson. Yes.

Mr. Tawney. From your knowledge, what do you estimate the cost of a plant would be for a city of, say, from 50,000 to 100,000 people?

Mr. Paterson. I should say from about $40,000 to $50,000.

Mr. Tawney. That would be about $1 per capita.

Mr. Paterson. About that; but less per capita for a population of over 50,000.

Prof. Phelps. What is the cost of operation?

Mr. Paterson. From 35 cents to 50 cents a ton; that, of course, depends on circumstances and conditions.

Mr. Tawney. What are the elements of cost?

Mr. Paterson. The elements of cost, after the material is dried, are simply the cost of distillation, which is the principal cost, and there is also the cost of the maintenance of the plant.

Mr. Tawney. What labor cost is involved?

Mr. Paterson. The labor cost is about 2 shillings per ton.

Mr. Dallyn. Does the fertilizer possess a solid residue devoid of organic life; do the seeds germinate at all?

Mr. Paterson. That is not our experience; of course, there is bound to be organic life.

Mr. Dallyn. I mean, as you deliver it from your plant?

Mr. Paterson. Not so far as we have found.

Mr. Dallyn. I speak of disease germs.

Mr. Paterson. We have not found it so. That dry piece of sewage which you see there has been in my bag for five months.

Mr. Magrath. This process deals entirely with the solids?

Mr. Paterson. Yes; it deals entirely with the solids.

Mr. Magrath. And it does not include any treatment of the liquid sewage.

Mr. Paterson. No.

Mr. Magrath. What would be the minimum population that you consider it would be feasible to erect a system for?

Mr. Paterson. Do you mean commercially?

Mr. Magrath. Yes.

Mr. Paterson. Well, on the dry process, I should think down to 1,000 people, or probably 500 people. In England, the War Office, at two of their camps, have put in small plants for about 1,000 men. They call them field destructors, and they get sufficient oil to run the machines, but they do not save the products.

Mr. McCullough. What process of sedimentation do you use?

Mr. Paterson. They have a series of sedimentation tanks, and they use both lime and alumina to precipitate.

Mr. Tawney. Are the costs of the precipitants included in the cost you have mentioned?

Mr. Paterson. No; this is purely for the treatment of the solids.

Mr. Powell. It includes the drying?

Mr. Paterson. Yes.

Mr. Dallyn. The use of chemicals for precipitating in your sedimentation tanks would make it cost more.

Mr. Paterson. In certain cases they do not use a precipitant at all, but in other places they do. In places they use lime and alumina, and that is expensive: It does not affect the process at all if lime or any other agglomerant is not used, you still have the solids left. They are rather getting away from lime precipitation on account of its cost, but, on the other hand, where they have it for a fertilizer they are getting the value back that they paid for their lime to a very large degree, and possibly they are making a profit out of it. There is no doubt that lime does give more rapid precipitation, and it has its advantages, but it does not affect the solids for treatment or the by-products that you get from the solids.

Mr. Magrath. Do I understand that none of the important centers have yet taken this matter up?

Mr. Paterson. They have signified their intention to take it up. Glasgow and Sheffield are contemplating putting in a plant, and Derby and Leeds. The plants would have been built this year, but the condition in England now is that no municipality can lend money without the sanction of the treasury. The plans are drawn for Glasgow, Leeds, and Sheffield.

Mr. Tawney. Is this a patented process?

Mr. Paterson. In part; the distillation part is not patented.

Mr. Mignault. Did you tell us what profit is realized out of the disposal of the sludge?

Mr. Paterson. That could only be given in a general way, depending on the quantity which is treated. In London, which has 100,000 tons a year, you would naturally make a very large profit there in comparison to a city of 3,000 or 4,000 or 20,000 people.

Mr. Mignault. Take a city of 100,000 people.

Mr. Paterson. It leaves a fair margin of profit.

Mr. Mignault. What do you mean by a fair margin of profit?

Mr. Paterson. A fair margin of profit, and to pay for the depreciation of the plant, the redemption of the plant, the money that is necessary to keep it up, the cost that the city has gone to, and leave interest on the money plus decrease of capital, plus profit, I should think $1 a ton profit on 100,000 people, after paying all this, would be quite a good thing.

Mr. Magrath. I suppose, as a matter of fact, this process is in the experimental stage, or do you consider it is now sufficiently established?

Mr. Paterson. It is sufficiently established, because the plant is paying. It went from the laboratory to a small plant at the rate of a ton a day, and now it has gone to a bigger one and a bigger one. We practically hope, and we are pretty sure, that we are going to take over the London sewage, which would be a very large plant.

Mr. Mignault. How much money has been invested in these plants?

Mr. Paterson. The one at Wimbledon is not a fair criterion, because it has been in operation for a long time, and it has gone through all the initial stages of a new process. Now, of course, it is in perfect order, and running smoothly, and giving good results, but it has come up from a smaller plant to a large degree, and there were lots of difficulties encountered which have been surmounted. I suppose it might be said to cost $300,000 now.

Mr. Gardner. And, in the light of your experience, what do you estimate you could duplicate that plant for?

Mr. Paterson. The same plant could be put in to-day easily for $40,000 or $50,000. Of course, in a new process we are continually putting in different things and trying different things, and also extracting things which we never dreamed of were in the material.

Mr. Dallyn. Is it not a fact that when the pressed sludge was first offered to the agricultural interests in England it was taken up and they paid a certain amount for it?

Mr. Paterson. Yes.

Mr. Dallyn. And, after the system was generally adopted, is it not so that they could find no demand for it? Do you not think that if this process were generally adopted the value of the by-products would decrease on account of the large volume offering?

Mr. Paterson. I do not think so, because of the nature of the by-products. Take this continent, and you import an enormous amount of sulphate of ammonia. The recovery of nitrogen is one of the problems which the United States Government has taken up within the last year. We have to have nitrogen, and you can not get it much cheaper than you can out of sewage, because you have to get rid of the sewage anyway. I do not think that nitrogen will ever depreciate in value. They are trying to take it from the air to-day, and have been fairly successful. Oil will always be valuable, gas will always be valuable, potash, phosphorus are all absolutely essential for the human race, and everybody is straining his brains and experimenting genius in trying to discover methods of getting oil and nitrogen. It seems to me to have been wicked that the English-speaking races should have been throwing this material away for so many years and looking upon it as a curse instead of a blessing. We can imitate the Germans in a great many respects, and that is one of them—to keep what is valuable instead of throwing it away.

Mr. Mignault. Did you read the testimony of Mr. Hatton given before the commission?

Mr. Paterson. Yes.

Mr. Mignault. Comparing your process to the one he spoke of, what would you say?

Mr. Paterson. I came to the conclusion, in reading Mr. Hatton’s report, that he had the same difficulty which we had in Great Britain—that is, as to treating sewage. He complained that there was not sufficient sun. He said that after he had dried it that it was worth $20 a ton—I think he placed the minimum at $15 a ton. But his difficulty seemed to be with the process of drying and the difficulty of drying. In some of the plants I visited—in the plant at Baltimore—they have a drying plant there, and, perhaps I should not say it, but they have not got any further than we did four years ago. They had not discovered yet how to get over the difficulty in drying this material. If you have to wait in the summer time for the material to air dry, then you have the difficulty of bad smells, putrescent material lying about, and complaints. The material should be treated as soon as it is recovered.

Mr. Mignault. According to your system, do you get rid of these difficulties?

Mr. Paterson. Yes; we get over the difficulties. Formerly it used to take us two months to dry it, and if we tried to force the drying by most of the machines that have been invented we would lose most of the valuable constituents. Glasgow spent £6,000 on a drying machine, and then it had difficulty, and they were still in that difficulty five months ago. The difficulty about drying the material is that you must not drive off the valuable constituents, because if you do you lose money—you lose the volatile oils, you lose several things of value—and after it gets dry to a certain extent it becomes extremely inflammable. This material here that I have shown you could be used quite suitably as a fuel. It burns beautifully. That brick there, if you put a match to it, will burn quite easily and make an excellent fuel. If you want to augment the heating qualities of it, you can add coal or slack or anything like that to it, because it is a very excellent fuel.

Mr. Mignault. Has this system any distinctive name?

Mr. Paterson. I do not think it has. We have a company in England, we call it the S. O. S.; not the call for help—it is quite accidentally called that—but it means Sewage Oil Syndicate.

Mr. Powell. I suppose the difficulty in drying is that if you use heat to expedite the drying you are apt to drive out the volatile constituents?

Mr. Paterson. Yes.

Mr. Powell. You must dry at a reduced heat?

Mr. Paterson. Yes; it dries at a very low temperature. Another difficulty with the drying is that this sewage cake is so extremely nonconductive. You could heat it up to a temperature in the retort of 2,000 F., a piece the size of your fist, and the center will come out exactly as you put it in the retort. It will retain the moisture still, almost in the same condition as it went in, after receiving that high temperature for six hours.

Mr. Tawney. Has the development of this system proceeded beyond the experimental stage, or has it yet reached the commercial stage?

Mr. Paterson. Yes, sir; it has reached the commercial stage. You have to take into consideration that the conditions in Canada and in the United States are considerably different from what they are in Great Britain. Great Britain is a smaller country, thickly populated, and I would want to point out that isolated towns would not have the same facility of working that we have here. Take a town like Rochester, and Buffalo, the next town, is 70 or 80 miles away. A town like Indianapolis, with a population of 300,000, has around it many towns of 20,000 or 25,000 people which radiate out from that center, and it would mean an absolutely sure profitable proposition. In other towns, like in Ontario, where they are isolated, you could not expect to make as large profits as in these well-situated towns.

Mr. Powell. What is the highest percentage of net profit on capital expenditure? Maybe you do not wish to disclose that.

Mr. Paterson. I do not think that would be wise at the present stage. Before answering that, I would like to know the conditions in this country better. One might make a statement as to that and then fall down lamentably on it after he understood the conditions.

Mr. Tawney. Do you think that a city of 25,000 inhabitants could install a plant of this kind for the disposal of sewage at a profit, or without a loss?

Mr. Paterson. And using the by-product as a fertilizer?

Mr. Tawney. Yes.

Mr. Paterson. If a town is situated like Hamilton, in Ontario, with respect to a large city like Toronto, yes. But not to put up a by-product plant for itself. It certainly could make a profit. I think Mr. Hatton bears me out in that, that there is almost an unlimited demand for this material at about $15 or $20 a ton in America.

Mr. Mignault. I think Mr. Hatton stated that there was a very small percentage of fat in the sewage of Milwaukee. I would like to know whether this system can be applied anywhere, or does it depend on the nature of the sewage?

Mr. Paterson. In England we take out the fats first in any case, but where it is used for fertilizing alone, Mr. Hatton is quite correct in what he says. In England, where we are dealing with large tonnages and taking out the other by-products, yes, it pays. Generally speaking, small towns of 25,000 people, unless they are well situated with relation to larger towns, the only way they can make a profit, so far as I know, is by drying the product and selling it as fertilizer, and that they can do at a very moderate cost. A drying plant will not cost more than $2,500, and the operating expenses are practically all done with the staff they have; that is, for a small city.

Mr. Gardner. I wish, Mr. Paterson, on behalf of the commission, to express to you their thanks, and to say how much we appreciate that you have come before us from Indianapolis on our invitation and given us the valuable information which you have.

Mr. Paterson. We professional chemists look upon it that we should render your commission the most useful information which we have in our possession, and I am sure we are all glad to do so. If I can be of any further assistance to the commission, I shall be glad.

Mr. Gardner. We appreciate that.

Mr. Paterson. If I can give you further information, I shall be only too pleased to do so.

Mr. Tawney. Mr. Paterson stated at the beginning of his statement that he had a full report on this matter on its way from England, or that he expected one before long. I would suggest that when he receives that report he should forward it to the commission, with any additional data that he wishes to submit to us. I am sure we would appreciate it.

Mr. Paterson. I shall be very pleased to do so.

STATEMENT OF DR. A. W. GOODALE, OF THOUSAND ISLAND PARK.

Mr. Gardner. What is your position at Thousand Island Park, Dr. Goodale?

Dr. Goodale. I am the secretary of the association and health officer. I have held those positions for several years. We received a notice from this commission from Washington to appear here. However, we have nothing to ask of you.

Mr. Gardner. What are your particular duties as health officer?

Dr. Goodale. I have had charge of putting down all the sewers, looking after our water, getting rid of our closets, and running them by water instead of having outdoor closets.

Mr. Gardner. Have you a system of sewage disposal there?

Dr. Goodale. We have.

Mr. Gardner. What is your outlet?

Dr. Goodale. Our outlet is the St. Lawrence River. We have a sewer that runs through the center of the park to the river. Then each street has a sewer that runs into the main sewer, and through that into the river below where we take our water.

Mr. Gardner. What is your permanent population?

Dr. Goodale. We haven’t any. I suppose there are a dozen families living there; not over that.

Mr. Gardner. What is the population during the vacation season?

Dr. Goodale. We have a transient population there of about 10,000 tourists. They are there from the 1st of July until about the middle of September.

Mr. Gardner. That would include those arriving and departing day by day?

Dr. Goodale. Yes, sir; but we have about 500 cottages. About 105 cottages and our principal hotel and stores were burned about two years ago. They were owned by the association.

Mr. Gardner. How near the boundary line is Thousand Island Park?

Dr. Goodale. It is about 6 miles across, and we are about in the center.

Mr. Gardner. About how far is the border of the island from what you might term the ship canal—the channel where the navigation goes up and down the river?

Dr. Goodale. About half a mile. The main channel, I think, is on the American side.

Mr. Gardner. Where is the outlet of your sewers with respect to that ship channel?

Dr. Goodale. It goes out pretty near the channel.

Mr. Gardner. You do not treat your sewage at all, do you?

Dr. Goodale. No, sir. If I may be allowed to say it without being asked, I would state that we have the healthiest people that I know of anywhere around. We have no typhoid fever; we have no diphtheria, scarlet fever, or any of the contagious diseases. We are now suffering under the misfortune of having to quarantine people in order to keep out infantile paralysis from New York and other places south of us.

Mr. Gardner. Do you think you contribute anything to the good health of those farther down the river?

Dr. Goodale. No, sir; I do not think we do; that is, nothing except in the way of pure water.

Mr. Gardner. You think you have the advantage of them in obtaining pure water.

Dr. Goodale. Well, we have the same advantage that Detroit and Niagara Falls and those places above us have of us. We take their pollution, if there is any.

Mr. Gardner. The two cases are hardly parallel. You are right at the mouth of a big lake.

Dr. Goodale. Well, virtually we are. I think where the big lakes empty in is up about Cape Vincent and Kingston.

Mr. Gardner. As a matter of fact, before getting up into the lake the only town above you of any considerable size that sends sewage down to you is Clayton, is it not?

Dr. Goodale. Clayton and Cape Vincent.

Mr. Gardner. Have you ever considered any plans or schemes for purification of sewage?

Dr. Goodale. We have had schemes suggested to us with which I am not familiar that we have considered not to be feasible, on account of our being situated in such a way that the water goes in both directions at Thousand Island Park. Part of it goes into the Canadian channel and part into the American channel. We have considered schemes of treating the sewage there, and it has always been so expensive that we could not afford to do it if it had been desirable.

Mr. Gardner. That, then, has been the only reason why you have not formulated plans for the purification of sewage, the matter of expense?

Dr. Goodale. The matter of expense and the fact that we have not considered that it was necessary so far as we are concerned.

Mr. Gardner. But you have recognized it as a pending evil?

Dr. Goodale. Yes, sir; we have not dodged that. It is an evil that has got to be done away with. However, we have not suffered with it at all. We have about 15 or 20 very good wells from which we obtain drinking water.

Mr. Gardner. Are they artesian wells?

Dr. Goodale. No, sir; we pump the water, and sometimes a hundred families get water from one well.

Mr. Gardner. You do that, I suppose, because you think you get better water from your wells than you do from the river?

Dr. Goodale. Well, many have had typhoid fever in Clayton and many of the residents there have felt afraid to use the St. Lawrence River water. But I do not think it is very bad. I talked with some boatmen coming down on the Island Belle. They have been running the Island Belle for 20 years. They say they do not want any better water. I asked them where they got their water, whether they got it at Clayton or Thousand Island Park, and they said no; that they got it out in the center of the stream.

Mr. Gardner. You have quite a good deal of navigation going to and from the island?

Dr. Goodale. Yes, sir; there are a great many boats landing there every day.

Mr. Powell. Have you any idea of how much of a floating population there is in the whole region, the mainland and the islands?

Dr. Goodale. Well, it would be a guess. Do you mean during the summer while the tourists are there?

Mr. Powell. Yes.

Dr. Goodale. I should think 50,000.

Mr. Powell. I was there before the big hotel was burned and on that one island alone for a week or so they had a population of over 10,000.

Dr. Goodale. At Thousand Island Park we have a population of nearly 10,000 at this minute.

Mr. Powell. You think a fair estimate of the total population would be 50,000?

Dr. Goodale. Yes, sir. Of course, it is all guesswork. I have no means of knowing.

Mr. Powell. You never took a poll or made a census?

Dr. Goodale. No; I have been looking after sewers and sick people.

Mr. Powell. What do you do with the excreta or raw sewage?

Dr. Goodale. Do you mean our garbage?

Mr. Powell. No; the excreta from the inhabitants.

Dr. Goodale. From the water-closets or toilets?

Mr. Powell. Yes.