CITY SANITATION AXD SEWAGE DISPOSAL. 23S 



Mv. Emil Knichling has collected some valuable information as ta 

 the cost of the various ways of disposing of city sewage. He was- 

 employed for one whole year by the civic authorities of Rochester to 

 devise a scheme for meeting the sewage difficulty of the east side of 

 the city, and after a careful comparison of the various methods he 

 makes the following comparative statements : 



1. By Chemical Treatment 8-595,000 



2. By Filtration without cultivation 620,000 



3. By Sewage Farming with cultivation 860,000 



4. By Dischai'ge of crude sewage into Lake .... 300,000 



The above is the estimated cost for the purification of sewage for 

 63,000 population. 



When we consider that Rochester is 6 or 7 miles from the lake 

 we can see how immensely this tells in favor of the City of Toronto 

 discharging its crude sewage into the Lake, situated as it is on the 

 lake she re. 



Furthermore, Prof. Laut Carpenter, in his recent report, says : 

 "The value for manure of the sediment obtained by subsidence is 

 'nil,' and that the deposit obtained by any of the so-called precipi- 

 tation processes is almost ' nil.' I do not say that they do not in 

 some cases produce a clear effluent, but at considerable cost, and 

 there are no returns from the sale of manure." 



Another writer says : " Tliat the titles of the companies 

 that have been chartered to convert sewage into manure and 

 failed would fill a good sized volume." And in Messrs. Mc Alpine 

 and Tully's report they quote authority stating " that farmers would 

 not haul it away for nothing^ 



The cheap and effectual method I referred to a short time ago is to 

 send it out into the Lake into deep water by the force of gravity, 

 the cheapest and most effectual force in the market. 



This brings me back to consider Messrs. Herring and Gray's 

 scheme as well as Mr. Sproat's, as both these schemes require a lai-ge 

 annual outlay for piimping. 



