Telegram-herald., 1889-09-26
WHAT PEOPLE DRINK
HUGO IHUAU EENn GODFREY.
TIE yie@s ~ Eas EInia~ot etri1eas
olssa i4 kaA sh4t tas People aAs
Jad.s oar 81 4tsr >appis = S1ss-
tlss - - i..4 = l4aes.


ut s-l g gs.e "a -.lea ae.p .l.lszrss
t1a1 Me lELEsRAA-li1hALD tals uora-
lls gives ap large amount oi space IA
ol iel ~ gfess1l tle views 81 tso ~eii-
known aaa iatelagvn te.t.zens. &ho are,
without doaot sqaall5 ANXIOUS Tor tAs
Ns-iale ol tAe cfg 44s sh0 d.tsf 10
tneI luIsment. Ils letter tEom Sir.
1-dlsy OF FgaAlly appeared II tAe
keie. tut -l1ce Nr Inum's comndni-
eaton IS largely alepiy 70 Mr. God
freY s irtfer. tre latter = repfodueeh,
fal.u4n4 Nf. Ill4u b. i4e n-ufcs 20
fanelfne.,- leier Lo lne foot notes.
I.tla EtIrar af lle r..s,as-- ilzaA-D.
L. my lcti.gs ca t1e pgess thus FAR
haF 1o4e mg ucsL t9Asvla any cvntIo-
ges A. Go lle value oi authorities,
aal have end av1scd % ge-t my ar
-lalraf- ans coac.ftsiou, vn clsuel u.s-
LJf...tl Ilet- 0r ou such scitutiilc truths
as aAVe npen demonstrated, tlli 80 belag.
lu uly mud tle only data from winch
oae = Juslned la drawing any positive
conclusion.
However. when Mr.. Godfrey come,
0lt pluitly all nts.s las conclusions
Ou llie author ty oi teu or a dozen IA
VINO wrote some lwcaty years ago, he
forces me % cfIticlse the character OF
tlc evidence upon winch he bases hls
opinions. The matter would not be OF
80 much Importance II hs opinions
were lnoae Oi private cltlzen merely,
tut when A member OF the Board OF
Pubic Works Is discussing a question Ol
public interest and AZ time when he
ls At stake," his opinions merit the Sc
Ycrest criticism.
Let us look for A moment at the char
acter Of ms evidence. TO begin with, az
cOrdng to MS own dates, the latest OF
which : 1909, the authorities whom he
quotes, wrote at a tune when, although
many intelligent observers were noting
the connection between the use OF water
contaminated with sewage, and the
soread OF the infectious diseases, still
there were few authentic cases which
could be clted as proving that typhoid
fever and the other specific diseases
were spread by drinking water II.
Again, the tone OF Mr. GOdfrey's ar
ticle indicates that between 1860 and
1870 there was but one opinion between
scientific men as TO the character OF
the water from the river Thames, !. c.,
the one which Is exempllfied by the au-
thOritles whom he quotes. Now | have
abundant quotations at hand which
show that even Ghen many OF the lead
M scientists and prominent officials
aud laymen We're cOudemning the use
OF water contaminated with sewage for
domestic use as strongly rs the same Is
condemned today ~. Moreover, |
have quotations to show that some OF
the very men whom Mr.. Godfrey quo
ted have expressed opinions the direct
opposite OF those which are indicated
by the quotations gwen IN the Eagle of
September - (3l.
The above | think is sufficient TO
show the abSurdity of resting ones
opinions on ISOLATED quotations from
authorities however famous or titled
the men may have been. Opinions OF
eminent authorities are of historic
value as indicating the stage of scien-
ufic progress at any gwen time, but
they are not an adequate or safe
basis upon which TO rest "a conclusion IN
reference TO current scientific prob
lem.
And now for some facts TO show the
character of the water of the Thames,
asit Is delivered TO the inhabitants of
IL AOltAt4fA Will LllF WAtiA
which the Board OF Public Works IS
now delivering 20 the citizens of Grand
Rapids. As the inorganic constituents
IN both waters are equally InnOcuous,
we viii direct our attention 20 their or
ganic contamination. And as that
portion Of the organic constituents
which Is derived from sewage Is the
most important for our consideration.
We Will devote some time on that point.
II does not require a chemist or one
deeply yersed IN scientific matters TO
determine whether or not a gwen
source OF water 5 polluted by direct
sewage contamination. There Is suth-
cent evidence of that fact II sewers are
continually dlscharging their contents
into the course OF the stream. We
all know that such S the fact
IN the case of Grand river. How
- 10 in reference 10 river Thames
Tins river has always been more or
less under official control since the time
of William the Conquer0r. the super
vis0u becoming the more thorough ss
time passed on and the population on
"a drainage area increased, but no
verv Efficient work vas done IN this re-
spect until Subsequent 20 the year 1855,
when acts Of parl lament We're passed to
compel all the towns and cites above
the intake OF the water companies 20
divert their sewage INTO other chan
nels. a.. The power to carry out this
act was placed "a the hands Of the con-
servancY board. and their powers were
continually increased, even 30 the ex-
tent Of giving them control over land
living along the hanks Of the Thames
for ten miles on either SIDE. 35l-
Although in the recent discussions
We ind frequent reference 10 the fact
that even now the river : not sufficient
lv protected from the pollution, still
there has been a co1unual improve
ment in this respect and the object
aimed at = the complete diversion ot
sewage from the river Thames
Moreover. the authorities ot England
we're forced u thus protect their DRINK
ing water from pollution tor me unnis-
taxable connection between the use or
contaminated drinking water and spi-
denies of infectious q sease pointed di-
rectiv 10 the conclusion that the sew
avp pollution vas the means of spread
ny tnose diseases. 81.
The following table. which SHOWS ne
relation between the morts lity from
cholera ard the pollution Of ~ the
drinking water = very instrlctlFe'
Epidemic ~ fss7; character - water supply.
-.ii.r-aa f.faf mortality from cholera e-41t
ste~-s.Ir frarn chofrra per lHaf- 81 a
F-isaniic % fsf1, character ~ N7ter seep7.
rrru much polluted tofa norfailty freia tslel-
era. ftls- mortality from cholera per M't@.
rs
F,,ss-,i- 4, fsss. charscfs- - water xup-
rf~ iesS polluted t1rai 0'nrisl1g tre'1 tat
rr-. rf f-< mcrra.i-v from eholer7 per MoA
Frise,uic ~ isss. character - water supply.
nrrh 'ess pei Hfft rsfs. norfiffv rom r1o-