The Jersey City news. (Jersey City [N.J.]) 1889-1906, 1897-08-23
MIR. BALLS REPORT.
Paper on Pequannock Pol
luton Submitted to Mr..
Sherrerd in June.
eHARLoTTEBURG NOT MENTIONED
Commissioner Herr Wants tosF tx
the Responsibility for the Ex-
listing State Of Affairs.


Especial to s.The Jersey City Sews."l
NEWARK, Aug. %. lss7.-Engineer
Slierrerd, of the Board of Works, has
found the report hat was submitted TO
him by Assistant Engineer Arthur D.. Bal,
concerning the possible sources of pollu-
ton along the line of the Pequannock
River. 1t is dated June is, and is as
follows:-
Memoranda (Pequannock River Pollu-
tion)
Theodore Browns Hotel at Newfound-
land, house sewage and other refuse mat
ter emptied. directly into cesspooi wnlch
is not tight. from there runs into ditch
which empties directly into the Pequan
mock River. Bad condition
Leo Wise. Newfoundland, manure ple
back of stable on main line river. Mr.
Wise is willing TO dig manure pit If
thought necessary.
.Bigelow's Mills. Newfoundland, old
timber and sawmiil lying on branch OF
river. Probably not dangerous.
.Charles Neuman, Newfoundland, chick.
en-coop back of farm, about twenty-five
feet from river. Probably not dangerous.
John Vreeland, New ~foundland. water
closet fifty feet from stream. ProDapfy
not dangerous.
David Davenport, Newfoundland, pig
pen and water-closet about ten feet, from
branch of main stream. Bad odor from
water cloSea.
"William Sisco, Newfoundland, manure
pile short distance from branch OF main
stream.
Porter Norman, Oak Ridge, water
no pollution.
ALBERT Davenport, Oak Ridge, n
pile fifty feet from branch of main
stream.
Jake Mead, Stockholm, barn and ma
nure pile alongside stream.
Booths knife factory, Stockholm,
water-eloset alongside of branch OF
stream, also one of Booths tenants
water-closets alongside of main stream.
s.Edsalls, Stockholm, manure pile thirty
feet from stream.
David Oldham, Charlotteburg, water
closet alongside of branch of main stream;
has been put there recently. Bad condi-
ton.
Probably the cause of contamination
has been on account of the great amount
of rain during the past month, Whlef
washes refuse matter from manure pies
which are close to the stream into them.
John Ozier. First house above Maco-
pin intake. Pigpen and water-closet some
distance from intake. oniy troublesome
The oldham property referred to IN
the report is not situated. on the cry
property, but outside of 1t on the ROAD
leading down TO the Chariottepurg stu
ton.
Mr.. Sherrerd a some difficulty in find
ing the report which, it is claimed, is the
one referred to by Mr.. Ball. and before ne
found it Mr.. Ball made from his note,
book a copy of what he said ne bel1eved
was in the original report. Along with
the places designated in the original re
port. the latest report submitted by MT.
Ball contains the following
Two privy vaults at Chariottepurg
filled up.
John ozier. Macopin intake. Pigpen
washes into stream.
Cows that drink water at Newfound-
land were also cited.
Before the report was found, Mr.. Van
Duyne, in referring to it, said he UNDER
stood that the report had been submit
ted by Mr.. Sherrerd to City Counse Price.
The latter declared positively that he
had not received a written or printed re-
port of any kind concerning the water
shed. Some time in June he said Mr.. Sher-
rerd had consulted with him in reference
to an alleged source of pollution in the
rear of Browns Hotel at Newfoundland,
another near a cutlery factory at Stock
holm and a third near the Macopin in
take. and asked how the alleged nuisance
might be abated. Colonel Price said he
informed Mr.. Sherrerd that under the
law enacted this year all positive or pos
sible sources of pollution could be re-
moved through the medium of the Board
of Health.
Commissioner Herr. of the Board OF
Works, is not disposed to let the question
of responsibility for the condition of at
fairs at the city reservation at Charlotte
burg drop without fixing it where it be-
longs 1T is quite proper to proceed with
out delay to remove the sources of pollu-
ton found there" the Commissioner said
in an interview, "but something more is
required. | agree with the assertion of
Mr.. Stainsby that a mere motion to burn
the houses located there does not remove
the reflection cast upon the board by the
discovery through the medium of a news
paper of the fact that the city itself, on
its own property, was maintaining an ap-
parent source of pollution. So far as the
board is concerned 1t shows lndlITerence,
if not negligence. l have repeatedly urged
a. visit to the watershed, but was unable
to force action until THE News directed
public attention to the matter. All the
Commissioners expressed surprise, and
were unanimous in demanding a thorough
Investigation. Messrs. Stainsby and Hew-
son were particularly anxious to fix the
responsibility where it belonged, and Mr..
Van Duyne, although chairman of the
Water Committee, expressed surprise at
our meeting III lhoiiudy OsSl tHC idCl liu
city property was occupied by any one
other han a caretaker. A thorough if-
~vestigation was to have been made and
a report submitted to the board.
IT succeeded in having the stenographie
report of our trip to Charlotteburg read
on Thursday and it showed that Assist
ant Engineer Ball and Engineer Sherrerd
were both cognizant of the fact that sew
eral houses on the Charlotteburg tract
were occupied. What was the result? Mr..
Hewson expressed a desire to see Mr.. Ball
pxorarafGd frnrn all htama for fhh a3enn
that he was not expected to look after
pollution. / don't know where Mr.. Hew-
son got his information, but | do know
that Mr.. Ball. in the presence of Mr..
Sherrerd, declared to me that he had re-
ported to Mr. Sherrerd and Mr.. Van
Duyne about six weeks ago ali the pos
sibie sources of pollution in the water
shed. Mr.. Sferrerd, in the presence OF Mr..
Ball. admitted that Mr.. Ball had made d
contained the statement that no trace of
contamination WAS found at Charlotte
burg / asked Mr.. Ball if he had made
such a report concerning Charlotteburg.
and he replied in the affirmative.
Now, what ! want to know is why Mr..
Ball made any report at all concerning
pollution. If it was nots as Mr.. Hewson
appears to believe. his duty to 90 so.
| | also desire to know why Mr.. Ball ranks
as Assistant Engineer in charge of the
watershed. and why Mr.. Sherrerd says it
there at "a heavy expense to the city,
if he is not supposed to guard against
possible sources of pollution. Surely. he
is not paid 1880 a year and xpenses to
visit the watershed weekly and take
comics of gauge and meter reading fur