New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1907-03-19
4 Ed LOB.

There will be much disappointment and some
disbursement at the refusal Of the legislative
committees at Albany to report the COhalan-
Sheridan bill for undOing and stopping the
Bronx Valley sewer scheme. Such action at any
time would be regarded by the thoughtful with
regret. At the present time it provOkes amaze
ment also. For if any fact connected with the
general subject of sewage disposal has in the
last few months been fOrclbly impressed upon
the public mind, it is that there is urgent need
of more emil ghtened methods than the barbarOus
old system Of Slushing the filth into some con-
venient brook or river. The names of Pittsburg.
Scranton, Middletown and other places are
pregnant with reminders, too often tragic Of the
danger of turning morbific germs of pestilence
loose, I'm general circulation. That New York,
with menace Of typhoid at this very moment
In the CrOton Valley, should persist in cllnging
to obsolete slovenllness is most discredtable.
Two arguments are put forward for going on
with the sewer scheme. One Is that the amount
Of filth It will pour into the Hudson will be
small in comparison with what is poured
into that river. That is doubtless true, though
the amount will actually be large and 1t will
steadily and rapidly increase. But decrease,
rather than even the smallest increase. Is what
is desired in the food of Hudson pollution. At
the present moment an important commission is
devlsng ways and means for decreasing the
inflow Of sewage into the Hudson. and the ma
tional government itself has been asked to aid
In the work How illogical and stultlfying II
would be for the state while trying with one
hand to abate the nuisance. 10 aggravate II with
the other Moreover, this new inpouring Of
sewage would be at a different point from the
present scene of contamination and would dehle
an expanse of the river which is now compare
lively clean, and it would do so at point where
and menacing. The sewage of the Bronx Valley
poured into the river at the Battery would have
no percepuble effect. Poured in at YOnkers, ana
by slack tides distributed along the shore from
Spuyten Duyvil TO Peeksklll II would have a
most serious effect
The other argument is that it would be unjust
to stop the sewer Job now that some 100000
has already been spent on II. But that is far
from convincing. 1t is probable that all that
has been done thus far could be utilized for
some other plan, and It is certain that most OF
1t could. But even II such were not the case.
and If abandonment OF the sewer would mean
the loss OF every cent which has thus far been
spent there. we should still say Il would be bet
ter TO stop the Job II is proVerbially foolish to
throw good money after bad. If 100000 has
already been III spent it would not mend mat
tiers TO go spending several millions more on
the same III conceived enterprise. We may be
sure that II the Bronx Valley sewer ever IS COM
pleted the work will one of these days have to
be undOne at heavy cost 1t would be better to
lose the 100000 now outright than TO proceed
with a plan involving the further loss Of n much
larger sum.
In addition to these considerations, and to
others which have hitherto been suggested, there
is this objection TO the scheme, which should be
regarded as overwhelmingly, that II would
set the vicious and mschlevous precedent Of
diverting the drainage of one watershed into an
entirely different region. It is not neighborly
nor good morals for a man TO get rid OF his
rubbish by throwing it over the fence into his
neighbours field, and the fact that his neighbours
field is much bigger than his does not palliate
the offence II the communities Of the Bronx
Valley want to keep on with the old, filthy and
wasteful method Of getting rid of sewage they
should pour 1t into their own Bronx and let It
run to the sea through that channel. They have
no business to pipe it across country into an
other watershed and pour 1t into another
stream. If the Bronx Valley can divert it's sew
age to the Hudson. why should not the Upper
Housatonic Valley send its sewage across coun-
try to the Bronx or to the CrotOn? From every
point Of view the Bronx sewer scheme is a bad
job, and instead Of burkng the COhalan- Sheridan
bill for stopping it the Legislature should enact
that salutary measure at once