1 



652 



reports is to be found in the examination 

 of water from a new well or a recently 

 'developed' spring. Given an old and 

 well-situated spring upon a hillside, the 

 desire of the owner to 'improve' the prop- 

 erty with a view of placing the water upon 

 the mai'ket will commonly result in a dis- 

 turbance of the immediately surrounding 

 soil. From a sanitary outlook no harm 

 has been done the water, and one familiar 

 with the situation will offer no objection to 

 continuing its use, but both the chemist 

 and the bacteriologist will secure analytical 

 results which will require to be explained 

 to avoid an adverse report. The writer has 

 seen many cases of this kind. 



AVells which are newly dug likewise fur- 

 nish water of temporary apparent pollu- 

 tion. Distinction must here be made to 

 allow for actual pollution arising from for- 

 eign siibstanees being left at the bottom of 

 the finished well. In such instances the 

 evidence pointing to contamination will be 

 found to persist. 



The tying up of pollution through the 

 action of frost is another fruitful source 

 of error, if the judgment be controlled by 

 the laboratory data alone. Swamp waters 

 commonly improve in winter, and samples 

 of them Avill mislead the analyst who is 

 unfamiliar with the districts whence they 

 come. Again, the same agency will solidify 

 surface sources of contamination like those 

 which produced such havoc at Plymouth 

 and New Haven, and the la))()ratory exam- 

 ination, whether chemical or bacteriolog- 

 ical, will, throughout a noi-thern winter, 

 utter no prophecy of what is to be expected 

 dui'iiig Ihe coming thaws of spring. Noth- 

 ing short of a thorough sanitary survey 

 can be depended upon in such instances. 



The water in a tidal river may bg un- 

 impeachable during ebb flow and quite the 

 reverse at periods of flood. How could an 

 analytical examination at the former stage 



[N. S. Vol. XXI. No. 539. 



of the stream predict what might be ex- 

 pected at change of tide. 



Instances very often arise when public 

 clamor is heard loudly complaining of the 

 taste and smell of water supplied to the 

 people. Much irritation is felt whenever 

 the senses are offended by its physical con- 

 dition, although gross pollution by patho- 

 genic organisms will be complacently ac- 

 cepted. This tendency of the public to 

 be their own judge as to the suitability and 

 safety of the water they are asked to drink 

 reminds one of the decision of a ]\Iissis- 

 sippi court in a case with which the writer 

 had to do about a year ago. His honor 

 said : " It is not necessary to weigh with 

 tenderness and care the testimony of ex- 

 perts. An ordinary mortal knows whether 

 water is fit to drink and use." 



AYould that the ordinary mortal did 

 know. Typhoid fever might then be rele- 

 gated to the list of rare diseases, and much 

 money and many precious lives be saved. 



When odors in water occur, what is the 

 analyst to do ? By the time the laboratory 

 is reached all smell may have left the 

 sample and great discredit of the scientist 

 will follow should his statement be that the 

 water is sound, when the users thereof 

 know to their sorrow that something is the 

 matter with it. An examination in situ is 

 what is needed in cases of this sort, and a 

 view of the storage reservoir backed by 

 microscopic detection of the offending or- 

 ganisms will do vastly more good than any 

 amount of chemical analysis. 



A man now deals with the data of water 

 examination in a broad-gauged fashion, 

 feeling that the day has gone by for blind 

 adherence to cut and dried standards. He 

 approaches his decision pretty much as 

 does the medical practitioner frame his 

 diagnosis at the bedside. It may be that 

 the symptoms of the patient do not accord 

 with the description of the disease as found 

 in the books, and the practitioner's atten- 



SCIENCE. 



