Newark evening star and Newark advertiser. [volume] (Newark, N.J.) 1909-1916, 1912-10-08
BALK AT COST or
BIG TRUNK SEWER
East Orange Likely to Discon-
tinue Negotiations With
Commission.
THREATENED WITH SUIT
IF 1T ENTERS PROJECT
Committee Recommends Matter
Be Held in Allegiance
for Year.

cussed last night by the special sew
age committee, of which Mayor Greg
ory is a member, but the price asked
by the commission from East Orange
seemed to be a stumbling block. Mayor
Gregory and Councilman Pierson
were instructed to draw up a report
to be presented to the City Council
In respect to the project.
The committee received a letter
from Samuel Millinery, a consulting
engineer, who is a water commits
sioner In the city, which had been
sent to Mayor Gregory, stating that
he stood ready with other residents to
seek an injunction to restrain the
council from joining with the COM
mission at the price asked. He be,
lieved that the commission is not
legally able to proceed with the plan
and that New York intends to fight
to the bitter end.
Mr.. Whinnery said that the method
being advocated by the commission
FOR treating sewage would be wholly
inadequate in a short time and that
he had good reason to believe the first
cost, with East Orange, Orange,
Montclair and Bloomfield included,
would run from SIS, 600, 900 to SIT, $780,
600 instead OF $12, 900, 000, which was
first stated as the figure by the COM
mission.
The engineer stated that he was an
enthusiastic advocate of the Imhoff
plan of treating sewage and the city
need not at present commit itself to
that scheme, but it had to be adj
mitted the scheme looked the best of
what had been so far brought for
ward. He advocated a delay of q
year to permit the city to Investigate
thoroughly all the plans that are
being suggested.
Urges Less Costly Scheme.
That East Orange could have a
system that Would prove satisfactory
and be less costly than the big drain
was another claim of Mr.. Whinnery.
He entered protest against the city
doing anything hat would bind the
officials to the terms of what had
heretofore been advanced by the com
mission.
A letter from John S. Gibson, clerk
of the commission, to Mr.. Pierson
was read stating that in case East
Orange was to enter into any further
negotiations 1t would be necessary to
submit its proposal to the fifteen
municipalities Joined with the COM
mission, as called for by the law.
The has only been planned
now to take care of the fifteen places.
he stated. Z
& Mr. Pierson, who was chairman of
the old committee that has been deal
Ing with the situation for a long time,
gave q report to the new committee
embodying what had been accom-
plished. In his report Mr.. Pierson
stated in part:
II believe that the Mayor is right
In the stand that he takes that there
should be some official record of the
fact that the city of East Orange has
repeatedly and in various ways tried
to secure relief from the injustice
that would be imposed upon the city
In case it were to Join with other
municipalities in the Passaic Valley
sewage proposition and has failed to
secure any relief. An attempt was
made to secure the passage of an
amendment of the Passaic Valley
sewage act changing the plan of APP
s~portionment of cost. Every effort
was made to secure the passage Of
the amendment bill, but without sue
cess.
Never Got Any support.
A 40 time have the i'assaic VAL
ley sewerage commissioners or the
municipalities opposing US in a sepa-
rate sewage disposal plan aided us in
any way or helped as to secure relief.
The attitude Of the Passaic Valley
sewerage commissioners at the present
time is clearly stated in the attached
communication from the commission
under date of October 3, and in reply
to my letter of September 2S, in which
J inquired as to their attitude and
suggested that a conference with the
commissioners WAS desirable.
1.-THE members Of the sewage DIS
posal committee became convinced
that it was possible to secure a sys-
tenn of sewage disposal thai would
be successful and not be offensive
to adjoining properly interests. The
members of the advisory committee
were Of the same opinion and there
fore the city. 70 all intsnts and pur-
poses, disregarded the rassaic Valley
opportunity, If 1t could be called such,
and worked On. the problem of a
separate pant.
ut has lei as to the present condi-
ton, which, stated briefly, is that the
city has secured the consent of the
State Board of Health to construct
and operate n disposal plant even less
thorough and less expensive than we
had outlined in eur application to the
State Board of Health. which clearly
indicates that we hid gone to the
limit with respect to th%oroughness
and safety.
Can Afford to Wait a Year.
we are soon to see in practical
operation in several American cities,
some of them with conditions similar
to our own, disposal plants practi-
cally the same as the one that has
been approved by the State Board of
Health. and it seems to me that the
the present time, inasmuch as no re-
lief has been afforded from the con-
ditions of the Passaic Valley scheme,
Is to wait for perhaps a year and
have clearly demonstrated to us, and
to others who are interested, that
such plants as we propose can be
operated with entire success and
without unreasonable expense, and
without being an offense in the
peighborhood where located.
Before taking any further steps