Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1903-02-05
BARS WASTE PRODUCT
THE COURTS OPINION IN CASE
AGAINST GAS LIGHT COMPANY.
Statutes Regarded as Explicitly Pro-
hibiting Discharge Of Refuse
Into the River.

. The opinion of Judge Ivory G. Kimball
given in the Police Court Saturday last
against the Washington Gas Light Com
pany, defendant, before the court on a
charge of allowing gas tar and OIL the
waste product Of their plant at the foot
of 18th street southeast, to flow into the
Eastern branch, tributary of the Potomac
river. covers fifteen typewriter pages.
The charge was brought against the gas
company a result of fire which oc-
Cured at the Washington navy yard in
August last, and an investigation by the
police which followed developed the fact
that the waste from the gas plant flowed
into the Eastern branch and formed
scum OF oily substance on the surface of
the water. 1t was claimed, ALSO by the
officials at the navy yard that sparks from
hosting engine a wharf at the yard
fell on top of the oily skum floating on
the river, causing it to ignite and set fire
to coal barge which was lying at one of
the docks.
Members of the Fish and Game Protec-
tive Association are also interested in the
opinion so far as it relates to the pollu-
ton of the waters of the Potomac. The
substance referred to- it is said, causes
the death of the river fish whenever they
come Into contact with it.
The Law Defined.
THE law" the opinion recites. "as 1t
stands in the code, is the end of sue
cession of laws upon the same general
subject. The first act that we have, or
the first act that has been called to my
attention, is the act of April 6, 1880, found
In p statutes, page II. This is an act,
according to the title, for the protection
of Potomac fisheries of the District of Co.
fumbia, and for the preservation of shad
and herring in the Potomac
This act makes a p1nSe hut
not make totally closed year. 1t closes
the river to the use of these different sorts
of nets from the Both day of April in each
year to the end of the year, but it leaves
the rest of the year from the first day Of
January to the 30th day of April an open
season, in which fishermen could use their
nets, which were afterward prohibited by
the laws subsequently, enacted. There Is no
provision in this act against the by-prod-
ucts of these manufactures being allowed
to run into the Potomac; and there is, as
you notice. no reference to spawning
grounds. The act itself provides for the
protection of fishing, the Potomac fisheries,
In the District of Columbia
Inc next act that takes up this sub
!ect was passed five years afterward. This
Is an act to protect the fish in the Potomac
river, in the District of Columbia and
to provide spawning ground for shad
and herring in the sadd Potomac. 1t pro-
Vides for closed season for five wears
against all fishing by nets and by other
SollilNdHceS, anu mas III 1t, for the first
time, provision against the allowing of
tar, oil, ammoniacal liquors and other
waste products of any gas works, etc. to
flow into the Potomac river or its tribu-
tar!es.
Intention Of Lawmakers.
"A noticeable point in section 3 of this
act is that this portion of 1t is not to take
effect until three months after the passage
of the act. It evidently being the intention
of the lawmakers to give time to those
who were then allowing by-products of
manufactures to run into the Potomac 70
change their methods that the refuse
would not run into the river. This act was
to continue for five years. commencing with
the I'd of March. 1885. The third act was
not passed until nine years afterward. The
act just mentioned was operative for five
years For four years there has been no
law upon this subject but In 1894 the Law
Is re-enacted. as an act to continue in
force the provisions Of the act approved
March 2, 1885, entitled, AN act to protect
the hsh of the Potomac river In the Dis
trict of Columbia. and to provide a spawn
Ing ground for shad and herring in the said
Potomac river"
The opinion dwells on the evident inten-
tion Of Congress in passing the acts and
then recites: 1T is conceded in this case
that some tar and oil does run from the
gas works. on the Eastern Branch, into
the Eastern Branch, one of the tributaries
OF the Potomac river. and I am asked by
the government to allow this PRAYER:
" If the court believes from the evidence
that the defendant, Holden, as superinten-
dent of the Washington Gas Light Com
pany, doing business in said District, al
lowed, on the 18th day of October 1902 a
pany and gas works, consisting of a certain
percentage of tar and oil of said gas works,
to flow with water into the Anacostia river
tributary Of the Potomac river. in said