New-York tribune., 1906-07-04
a STENoH IN THE NosTR1Ls.

In some respects the sense of smell is fairly
well protected by law from needless offence.
Soap factories, tannerieS and other malodOrous
establishments are not permitted in residential
regions unless they can pretty thoroughly abate
the pUngency of their stencheS. II our streets
are not always perfumed like Araby the Blest.
there is at least a cOmmendable endeavOr to sup
press the most offensive smells. Perhaps the
worst outrage perpetrated upon the nOstrils
of the urban public is that of the shoulder
ing extinguished cigar which some bOorish
passenger so often insists upon retaining in
crowded vehicle, to the disgust of decent smokers
as well as of nOnsmOkers. But the Blessed
Serosch. who flieth around the earth seven times
each night, whispers that this too, shall pass.
1t is a pertinent question, however whether
a nauSeating stencil is not nuisance, and is not
properly an object of legal abatement if placed
by the roadside where multitudes must pass
every day, just as much as though it were es-
tablished among the homes Of the people. There
are, for example, in the outskirts of the city Of
Newark certain industrial establishments which
emit stenches of the most revolving description
and of exceptional intensity and power. They
are situated so near to the lines of the two great
railroads between this city and Newark that
all the passengers on those roads. numbering
scores Of thousands daily, are subjected to the
nflictiOn for a time on almost every trip, for a
considerable part of the year. In winter when
the car windows are shut, the stenches are
scarcely noticeable if at ALL But in summer
when the tide Of travel is greatest, they cOnsti-
tute a serious nuisance. A rapidly moving train
passes through the stencil zone, of course, in q
short time But such suffering for only a few
minutes daily should not be endured if there Is
any way of avoiding it,
The most obvious way of avoiding il would
be so to conduct the operations of the estab-
lishments in question that no offensive OdOrs
would be emitted if that could be DONE and
with the vast resources of modern science at
command it seems not improbable that il could
If the prOprietOrs of the works knew they could
considerably increase their profits by stopping
the SMELLS they would not rest content until
they had done the trick, and it would seem fit
ting for them to exercise a measure of such zeal
for the public comfort. But If it should be
settled cOnclusively that deOdorization of the
business was impossible, then the question
might well be raised whether the works could
not be removed to some place where their
stenches would not offend so great a multitude
of people The present site of them was prOba-
bly, chosen partly because it was then-while cas-
lily accessible for commercial purpOSes-remOte
from many human habitatiOns. But the growth
Of two great cities has brought large pOpua-
ton pretty near to it. and the two great rail-
roads which pass close by now form probably
the most frequented highway of suburban travel
in the country. In these circumstances the place
is less fitting than it was for the site of an in
dustry which, while lawful and necessary. is
peculiarly disagreeable