Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1909-01-30

gas from being manufactured at ail-the
10 per cent limit for carbon monoxioe.
Now, evidence has been put 'before TINS
committee that water gas Is hve OF SIX
times more deadly or dangerous than coal
gas. containing less than 10 per cent car
bon monoxide
will notice, a poor assumption as the
statement Is made by the people VINO
make It, There Is no question but what
carbon monoxide is a violent poison. ana.
other things being equal, the more you
have of it in g. mixture the more poison
Gus that mixture might be. But other
things are not equal when you are com
pairing illuminating coal gas and 1iluml-
mating water gas. SO that statement does
not apply to the two things. When peo-
pie undertake to say that it is q certain
number of times more poisonous because
of the increase in the amount, that Is
pure assumption. There is absolutely no
evidence about 1t; there never have been
any experiments to support the PROPOSE
ton.
What Experiment Shows.
Mr. SIMS-What do you have to say to
these experiments when you expose ami
NAL life to these gases. coal and water
gas. and animals exposed to the water
gas die in much less time and are fatally
poisoned in much less time? Do you con-
tend that that proposition is not true?
Mr.. BARKER-No, sir: I do not.
think that is true: that Is shown by the
experiments in Massachusetts. 1t was
in Massachusetts that those experiments
were demonstrated, but the fact Is that
the exposures to illuminating gas which
are fatal are exposures for a sufficient
length Of time, as a rule. so that death
results, and would result whether the
gas was so-called coal gas or water
gas. 1 mean for practical exposures.
Mr.. S1MS-1n other words, the prac-
tir0l Ill "a 11
fatal at all, in either case; Is that what
you mean?
Mr.. BARKER-I do not mean to say
that they are necessarily fatal, because
we have more cases Of recovery after ex-
posture. both from coal gas and from
mixed gas, than we have fatalities.
Mr.. SIMS-I understood you to state
in former part OF your testimony that
there was greater number of actual
poisonings from exposure to water gas
or mixed gas than there are from ex-
posures to coal gas: that Oftener the
trouble with coal gas was suffocation
rather than actual poisoning. Am 1 cor
rect in that statement?
Mr. BARkER-That is right
Recovery Indeterminate.
Mr.. S1MS-Now. then. by exposing the
people. by accident or otherwise, to two
gases. one that almost universally poi
sons and the other does not always, but
affects by suffocation, would not the
chances for recovery in exposure be
greater where the trouble would be SUI
location rather than actual poisoning
Mr.. BARKER-The actual cases. many
hundreds of them. have been Investigated
and considered by us. and they leave that
proposition, l think / might say, tnde-
terminate.
Mr.. sIMs-Are you member OF the
board OF health Of Massachusetts,?
a In CT of hn on nd
electric light commission.
Mr.. SIMS-Are you physician?
Mr.. BARkER-No sir.
Mr.. SIMS-I did not remember. I did
not know but what you were.
Mr.. BARkER-No, sir. I hope I make
my understanding Of it clear, and that
is that in the investigation OF a great
number of these fatal cases the exposure
was for a sufficient length of time. and
the exposure is ordinarily, from the ma
ture of things, for sufficient length of
time to cause death, whether 1t was coal
gas or water gas; that Is to say, even
II 1t were theoretically provable that the
coal gas would kill in q certain number
Of hours. and that the water gas would
kill in certain less number of hours,
the exposures Of the fatal cases are al
most invariably sufficiently long to bring
death in either case.
OF time would 1t require to produce fatal
results by the exposure to mixed or water
gas and exposure to the other gas?
Probably Same Result.
Mr.. BARKER-I do not think anybody
can answer that question except to say
that 1t would probably be the same re-
suit.
Mr.. SIMS-In water gas?
Mr.. BARKER-In water gas.
Mr.. SIMS-And therefore, you concede
that the length of exposure to produce
fatal or dangerous results is less in water
gas. or mixed gas. than it would be in an
exclusively coal gas? You admit that, as
Mr.. BARKER-I should think that
might be so.
Mr.. SIMS-Now. admitting that 1t is
necessarily so. your contention is that
practically 1t. is not so?
Mr. SIMS-To the extent Of the cases
you have observed?
Mr.. BARKER-Yes. sir.
Mr.. SIMS-But no further; I mean. the
literature on the subject does not bear
you out. does it?
Mr.. BARKER-The literature upon the
subject is purely technical, and does not
deal with practical occurrences. OF
course. I think l understand the litera-
ture upon the subject and I am not in
conflict with 1t at all.
. Mr.. SIMS-You may not be, but from
what l have heard said to the committee,
you seem to be. I understand the great
difficulty of layman undertaking to
question an expert. and know with what
great facility the expert can give an alb
Solutely correct answer to the question,
and yet miss great deal that the COM
mittee ought to know.
Mr.. BARKER-I am not here particu-
larry expert.
Mr.. SIMS-I know, you are not interest
ed one way or the other.
No Personal Interest.
Mr. BARKER-I have not any personal
interest I'm the matter
Mr.. SIMS-You are simply a public of
ficer In Massachusetts, doing your duty
as I understand 1t.
Mr. BARKER-And I hope to make my
self clear to the committee.
is giving testimony to a nonexpert, it is
little difficult to make 1t clear. In
other words, do not understand 1t,
and consequently our questions may seem
tedious to you. AS far as l am concerned
they may be. but l simply want to get at
the facts. If there is no practical benefit
to the people in the way Of saving life
and health In using coal gas exclusively.
see no argument for passing the bill be-
fore us, but if health and life are in
volved as far as I am concerned, If it
puts gas up to 81. so thousand, I am not
measuring the expense of the gas with
the results to life and health.
Mr.. BARkER-Our duty has called us
to investigate this subject from a prac-
teal standpoint, and that investigation
has been made with a full knowledge of
the nature and effect of carbon mono ide
and its appearance i'll the two gases, and