86 
Utilisation of Town Sewage. 
move food and gave more milk, in relation to their weight, than 
those on se waged grass ; but the amount of milk yielded for a 
given amount of fresh food consumed was almost identical in the 
two cases ; though, in proportion to the dry or solid matter 
which the food contained, the sewaged grass yielded considerably 
more milk than the unsewaged. Milk to the gross value of 32/. 
per acre was obtained where the largest quantity of sewage was 
applied. The gross value of the milk from the increased produce 
of each 1000 tons of sewage was between 5/. and 6/. 
" 4. The composition of the Rugby sewage-water varied very 
much during the course of the season, being much more concen- 
trated during the drier months. On the average, over about 
seven months, 1000 tons of sewage contained about 21J cwts., 
or little more than one ton of solid matter ; about 212 lbs. of 
ammonia, or about as much as is contained in 11 cwts. of 
Peruvian guano ; and probably represented the excrements of 
21 or 22 individuals of a mixed population of both sexes and all 
ages for a year. This average composition agrees very closely 
with that which published analyses indicate for the sewage of 
London. 
" 5. On the average the sewaged grass contained, as cut, a 
considerably lower proportion of dry or solid substance than the 
unsewaged ; but the dry substance of the sewaged grass generally 
contained a higher proportion of nitrogenous compounds. 
" 6. Analysis shows very little difference in the quality of the 
milk yielded respectively from sewaged and unsewaged grass. 
The difference in composition, such as it is, is slightly in favour 
of the milk from the unsewaged grass when grass was given 
alone, and slightly in favour of the sewaged grass when oilcake 
was given in addition." 
Nothing has tended more to prevent a proper understanding 
between town and country — the producers of sewage and the 
consumers of manure — as to the commercial value of sewage, 
and the best manner of utilising it, than the very exaggerated 
statements which arc from time to time put forth on the subject. 
Only a few weeks ago an anonymous pamphlet, pretending to be 
in the interest of the urban rate-payers, was published, which 
cjuotes an estimate, professedly founded on scientific autlioritv, 
that the sewage of London, reckoning the prospective po])ulation 
at 3,000,000, \vill be worth something over 10,000,000/. sterling 
per annum ! It required an expenditure of, I believe, 00,000/., to 
satisfy those who some years ago insisted upon the very high agri- 
cultural value of solid manure obtained from sewage by lime, that 
the value assigned to it by myself, and others, was correct. At 
