Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1899-06-14
Mistellaneuas 8eading.
FAIRLY GOOD TO DRINK.
Such Is the Scientific Opinion Of Yorkville
Water.

Such Is the Scientific Opinion Of Yorkville
Water.
The statement in The ENQUIRER Of
last Saturday, with reference to the
quality of Yorkville's public water
supply was correct so far as it went /;
but did not give exact conditions.
The information came secondhand,
and rather than otherwise, was com
parative. Since then we have secured
a copy of the letter written by Chief
Chemist Hardin, of Clemson college,
to Intendent Carroll, of Yorkville, on
the subject, and for the benefit of
those especially interested, herewith
reproduce the letter in full.
By way of preliminary it is proper
to explain that the water designated
as No. !, was taken from the water
works branch and sent to Clemson on
April "a. The water designated as
No. 2, came from spigot after it had
passed through reservoir, standpipe
and water mains, and reached Glenn
son on April 20. The sample desig-
mated as No. 8 came from a bored
we'll on the premises of Mr.. S. M.
McNeel:
"GRA1Ns PER U. s. GALLON OF 23l Gu
BIC INCHES.
No. l. No. 2. No. 8.
"Total solids, dried at
grade, 1866 391s 5.1Os
"Chlorne, ................ .0S7 trace .l2
Hardness, equlva-
lent to carbonate of
Iime,................... .99l trace 2.041
"Zinc corbonate,...... trace trace 1.20l
"PARTs PER MILLION.
"Actual ammonia. 1854 .036 .OO4
Albuminoid am
mona, a,................... .lOO .ooo .uoo
Nitrogen as nj
trate, uOHe tTace noue
nitrogen as nitrite, none trace none
"The samples are fairly good drink
ing waters. They bear no evidence Of
contamination with organic matters of
animal origin, though possibly they
contain little too much organic mat
ter of vegetable origin for frst-class
drinking water. This is especially the
case with sample of creek water re-
ceived April "a. This sample had a
little more suspended matter, clay and
vegetable matter, than sample of creek
water received April 20.
"You may know the cause of differ
ence. Perhaps the first sample was
not as carefully collected as the Sec
ond, or perhaps the creek was some
what muddy or possibly the first was
taken directly from the creek and the
second from a standpipe or settling
reservoir. I do not know what ar
rangement you have at the works.
"The water from tube well is about
the same as that from the creek, with
the exception of the zinc, which it has
taken up from the galvanized iron
pipe. If you will subtract tie weig ht
of zinc carbonate, found in the tube
we'll water, from the total solids, the
you will find to be about
equal to the weight of the total solids
from the creek water. Pretty much
the same thing is noticed about the
hardness of the two samples. The
1.2O1 grains of zinc carbonate are
chemically equivalent to 095S grains
of carbonate of lime. If you subtract
O.95S from the total hardness, 2.041,
you will have 1888 remaining as hard
ness due to carbonate of lime. The
carbonate of lime or its equivalent in
the creek water is 0.991.
"The actual amonia is less in the
tube we'll water; but the albuminoid
ammonia is little higher than in the
second sample of creek water. The
tests for these substances are so very
delicate that the least impurity due to
temporary condition of the water, or
to demiiohn, corks, etc., will be shown,
so that I do not think any positive
conclusions can be drawn where waters
approach each other so closely in COM
position, especially where only single
sample is analysed.
"With regard to zinc found in the
tube we'll water would say that diff
ference of opinion exists as TO the pos
sible effects of small quantities OF zinc
compounds thus taken in drinking
water. In the absence of any proof
one way or another, my opinion IS
that the daily use of waters containing
even small quantities of zinc, a grain
or two to the gallon, cannot be health
full. ,
SIN conclusion, I would say that
excluding the zinc carbonate, the two
waters are much alike, and are, l
think, safe drinking waters. Whether
or not the zinc in the tube well water
is injurious is a question which had
better be determined by physician.
Every truly, NJ. B. HARDIN,
"Chief Chemist"