Fish Culturists' Association. 17 



ing grounds are about half a mile below, in a bend where a greater por- 

 tion of this must be carried. This, in connection with from thirty to 

 forty miles on the other side of the river, which are discliarging (or were 

 in July last) into the canals, or river, the same substances in greater or 

 less quantity, must have a terrible effect upon the fish, especialh' those 

 yet in the embryo stage. 



A well informed angler sa3-s : — 



"They say that fish that are poisoned with chloride of lime will 

 recover ; but it is not so, except perhaps in ver^- slight cases. There is 

 so much water in the Connecticut that a large fish ma}' get out of a pois- 

 oned streak in a short time, but not so with newly hatched fiy, who 

 might be caught in it, and who would have to swim perhaps several times 

 their own length to find juire water." 



That the substances mentioned are deadly- poisons to fish is very evi- 

 dent ; the only thing to be taken into consideration, is the amount of such 

 poison as compared to the volume of water and its consequent dilution. 

 On the subject of oi'dinar}- sewage from cities, I am not prepared to 

 speak ; by "ordinary sewage" please understand the drainage of private 

 houses, water closets, wash of streets, and other things, not including 

 factories using d3'eing and bleaching chemicals. That this is regarded 

 as poisonous to fish in England is evident by the following article from 

 ''Land and Water" of Nov. 14, 1874 :— 



"Cray River Pollution. — Vague rumors have reached me (not 

 through an exactly official channel) that the sewage now running into 

 the Cray is to be carried in a sewer or sewers to an outfall about two 

 miles north of Dartford. Now, though I am in no way connected with, 

 and have no claim to the attention of the sanitary authorities who have 

 the matter in hand, I do hope that they will bestow some thought 

 on what follows before taking such a course as this. Next session, 

 there is every reason to believe that Parliament will pass a comprehensive 

 measure for the prevention of pollution of rivers. Is it not probable 

 that this bill will deal with mouths and estuaries as with upper waters? 

 If so, will it not include Dartford (and Barking too, for that matter) ? 

 This seems to be the only just, straightforward wa}- of dealing with the mat- 

 ter. It would in the case of the Barking outfall involve great alterations, 

 and many different interests Avould be concerned in such a change ; but 

 why not? The end of this note may suppl}' a solution of this question. 

 Otherwise, no one would know where the functions of the Act would ter- 

 minate. Every interested person would view the question through his own 

 spectacles, and there would be no end of litigation. I say again, as I 

 have already said in your columns, either use vour sewage on land in 



2 



