Waterbury evening Democrat. [volume] (Waterbury, Conn.) 1887-1895, 1891-09-23
LETTERS FROM THE PEOPLE.

flow into rivers, which they contaminate,
IS becoming question of great impor-
lance, solution of which is looked |
forward to with great interest. The
state board of health has been called in |
lately to examine the Naugatuck river
between Waterbury and Platt's mills, |
with a view to have something done to |
avoid the pollution of the river Should |
Waterbury alone be held responsible for |
the corruption of the river north of |
Platt's mills? Have not Torrington,
Thomaston, Watertown and Oakville |
something to do in this matter? Does not
deleterious and unhealthy water find its |
way from these places into the Nauga- |
tuck river, either directly or through |
tributaries?
Torrington, that has shown extraordi- |
nary growth in population during the
last decade, and there is no reason why
similar increase should not take place
during the decade have entered upon,
emptieS her sewage into the river, |
together with the chemicals and slush
of all kinds that come from her mills.
This may have been one Of the causes
of the prevalence of sickness in Water
bury this summer.
If Thomaston, Watertown, etc, have
not at present sewer system they may
have one before long. Sewer system or
not, there is now no doubt but that
near a river, or one of it's tributaries,
there is a contamination Of such river
therefrOm. 1t has been found to be so
along the banks of the Croton river
where the dwelling houses are but few
and far between in most instances. If
it can be proved, and it can, that other
towns and villages above Waterbury
contribute toward the contamination of
the Naugatuck Ilver, why should Water
bury alone be obliged to do the washing
| for all her neighbors?
But there is no place between Water
bury and Platt's mills to make a basin
for the reception of sewage, with a view
to apply some one of these pretended
purifying systems, nor even between
Waterbury and Derby. 1t is said on
good authority that none of the precipi,
tating or purifying systems have been
successful in eliminating from the sew
age and polluted water the bacteria,
bacilli, microbes and other infectious
germs. If so, one of the principal OBJ
jects would not be realized-the proven
ton of pestilence and disease generated
and propogated by these minute organ
isms Besides, who would think of
collecting the filth and sewage of the
city between Waterbury, and Platt's
mills, even if there was a place for it,
SO near the city and alongside the Nauga-
tuck railroad, the Naugatuck turnpike
and the New England railroad, over
which so many people come into
and pass out of the city. 1t would
soon go abroad that one would
have to hold his nose in getting into and
out of Waterbury over these routes
Besides, the land owners adjoining and
the people of Hopeville, Simonsville and
Brooklyn would have something very
pronounced to say in the matter 1t
may be added that the plant necessary
} for the publication process, so-called,
would cost 100000 at least to begin
with, and the expense for running it
would be $4,000 year. This would be
only for the present needs. What would
| be the cost of enlarging the plant and
its increased running expenses when
| che city would double it's population, or
, even if each house already built had one
or more closets connected with sewers
l as will be the case. Counting also the
surface water that runs into our sewers
5 might we not suppose that we could add
: another $4,000 a year for running ex-
7 penses. Before twenty years the outlay
7 might be over half a million.
But, some one may say, something
! must be done. What can be done? The
following is proposed, as already
: intimated i'll your paper, as the mos
: efficient, the best and in the end tho
l age question along the Manga
t tuck valley: That "a main sewer
be made along the bed of the Naugatucb
S river, near its banks if found best easily
. done in summer time), extending from
TOrrington to point below Derby where
the fluX and retluX of the tide are felt
Let the mouth of the sewer open into
!, a basin that would open into the rive
tt by sluice gate; this sluice gate to bC
opened twice day, when the tide is go
u ing out. The sewage would be thereby
y more rapidly carried out to the sea, the
Il refluX of the tide acting in conjunction
:, with the natural flow of the river.
Seeing there would be no land DANA
o ges for the right of way for this mair
e sewer, it being along the bed of the riv
i er, and that there would be no more
S digging than what would be necessary
e for the width and depth of the sewer
it might be- said that the work could bt
i done for $4,000 a mile. But how pay
u for this? By charging pro rata eacl
u town through which the Naugatucl
y river and its principal tributaries pass.
. These towns are Torrington, Litch
: field, WATERFOWL, Waterbury, Manga
Il tuck, Beacon Falls, Seymour, Ansonia
y, Birmingham and Derby.
But, someone may ask, how get these
towns to join in tie expense of this mai1
i sewer? BY showing them that it vii
j., be for their greater benefit to do so.
u For example, suppose Waterbury wa
+ compelled by law not to pollute thu
u Naugatuck river in any way because i
l. would be injurious and unhealthful t.
= those people living below Waterbury
u Who in justice can deny this city tn
o right to demand of Torrington and thes
e other towns north of here not to contain
T. mate in any way the Naugatuck rive
l. that flows through the heart of this city
y In like manner Beacon Falls, Seymou
,; and Ansonia would be demanding O
J Naugatuck and Union City to adop
! some system to prevent the sewage O
D. polluted water from their mills iron
l. flowing into the Naugatuck river. Ant
.; then Derby would be demanding pc
Z: ton against Ansonia and Birmingham
y; Would it be cheaper for each tow
"a and city along the Naugatuck river O
s. adjacent to it to adopt system or unit
d in one common and final system IN
le main sewer such as has been mentione