NORTH SHORE BREEZE 
MANCHESTER, MASS., FRIDAY, DECEMBER 18, 1908. 
SEWERAGE FOR MANCHESTER 
Subject Discussed in Very Ably Prepared Paper by Mrs. Wm. L. 
Putnam, before Manchester Woman's Club, Tuesday. 
BY MRS. W. 
Until a few years ago we had no sew- 
erage problem in Manchester. Every 
house had to depend on its own water 
supply and consequently each house- 
holder could easily dispose of his sew- 
age satisfactorily enough on his own 
premises. But the public water supply 
which we now have, and an exception- 
ally good one it is, has of itself thrust 
upon us the need of a sewerage system 
by enormously increasing our use of 
water and consequently our sewage. 
The importance of the proper care of 
sewage has only been lately learned. 
In old times great cities like Houdon 
and Paris, were frequently devasted by 
some pestilence and even in ordinary 
times, the death rate was frightfully 
large. In 1844, a Commission on the 
Health of Towns made a report, which 
aroused England to vigorous action. 
It was then indeed realized that filth 
was unhealthy, but it was not known 
why, nor was it appreciated how much 
more dangerous some kinds of filth are 
than others. Sewage is mostly made up 
_ of the waste and excrement of the bodies 
of human beings and other animals, 
therefore of all the impurities which the 
body is trying to get rid of, a large 
part ¢s organic matter, which if not 
properly destroyed, will putrify and lead 
to foul “smells and generally unhealthy 
conditions; but mixed with this organic 
matter is something much more danger- 
ous—the germs of all sorts of diseases. 
We now know that typhoid fever, diph- 
theria and many of our worst diseases 
are caused by minute living creatures, 
which get inside of our bodies and 
flourish themselves while they potson us. 
And a very curious thing about this, is 
that without being ill ourselves we can 
carry about with us and discharge from 
our bodies the germs of disease, notably 
typhoid, from which others may sicken 
although we ourselves are well. 
It is because these bad bacteria are 
terribly apt to be in filth that filth is 
dangerous, and when we know more 
about their habits we may hope to stamp 
out germ diseases. 
Fortunately there are more harmless 
germs than harmful ones. It isa germ 
in the yeast that works and breeds and 
makes bread light and healthy. It is a 
germ, or rather millions of them, that 
turn apple juice into cider, and cider into 
L. PUTNAM. 
vinegar, and one of the most efficient 
ways of killing off bad germs in sewage 
is to let the good ones eat them. ‘This 
is called purifying sewage. Prof. Wins- 
low, of the Massachusetts Institute of 
Technology, in speaking of the import- 
ance of the proper disposal of sewage, 
says: 
“In Berlin, when a pure water supply 
was introduced, the typhoid death rate 
dropped, but when a sewerage system 
followed some years later, another de- 
crease in the death rate occurred almost 
as striking as the first.’’ 
There are various ways of dealing 
with sewage today. Some purify it 
much better than others, and some, alas! 
not at all. The commonest is by dilu- 
tion—letting the waste flow into the 
nearest water, as has always been done 
here along the brook and the pond, but 
unless there is a great volume of this 
pure water, preferably still and cold, this 
is a dangerous practice, for the foul 
matter collects on the bottom and the 
sides, so that often after the practice is 
discontinued, dredging has to be resorted 
to in order to get rid of the foul smells 
and bad conditions. ‘*‘In Massachu- 
setts alone there are at least seven rivers 
so polluted as to become a_ public 
nuisance for a part of their course,’’ 
(Winslow, page 6.) and this is what we 
are doing ona small scale. After our 
sewage leaves the pond our conditions 
are somewhat like those of Lynn, 
where the sewage is discharged over tidal 
flats, and as Prof. Sedgwick says, ‘‘ a se- 
rious nuisance is created.’’ 
Discharging our sewage through the 
channel makes it settle on the flats, pol- 
lutes the shellfish and renders all bathing 
in the neighborhood of the outflow, 
whether the tide be on the flood or on 
the ebb—very objectionable. In saying 
this I have been quoting the greatest 
authority we have in such matters, Prof. 
Sedgwick. 
The habit of disposing of sewage by 
dilution is being gradually supplanted by 
processes of purification, much more 
complete and rapid. They are, I. 
Chemical Precipitation. II. Sewage 
Farming---pouring the sewage on to land. 
Ill. Contact Beds. IV. Trickling 
Filters. V. Intermittent Sand Fil- 
tration. 
Continued to Page 10 
SPECIAL TOWN MEETING 
Held at Manchester Monday Evening. 
Appropriated for Moth Work. 
The special town meeting called for 
Monday evening, in Manchester, called 
forth no undue excitement, though there 
was a flurry over the moth expenditures, 
what became of the money received for 
work done on private estates, etc., and 
the reason why Manchester should be 
called upon to pay so much of the ex- 
pense on the new ‘‘Cut Bridge’’ at 
Gloucester. 
Nobody could answer the latter ques- 
tion. Selectman George Lockhart Allen 
represented the selectmen at the hearing 
on the matter some weeks ago, and is, 
presumably, versed on the whys and 
wherefores, but he was not at the meet- 
ing Monday night and therefore could 
not answer the questions brought up on 
this point. * 
The meeting was called to order at 
7.35 by Town Clerk Jewett, who read 
the warrant... Raymond C. Allen was 
elected moderator by a unanimous vote, 
on motion of W. C. Rust. 
Art. 2. Moth appropriation. This 
was reported upon favorably by the 
Finance Committee 
Chairman Knight of the selectmen 
read a letter from Supt. A. H. Kirkland 
of the moth commission, authorizing the — 
town to spend $5000 for moth destruc- 
tion before Nov. 30, 1909. He stated, 
further, that the moth appropriation had 
been overdrawn thus far, $55, and that 
the selectmen recommended that the 
town appropriate $2500 to carry on the 
work, this being a sufficient sum to carry 
on the work until the next town meeting 
in March. 
A short discussion followed as to 
where the money went to that is assessed 
to private estates. The question was 
asked by W. C. Rust. E. S. Knight 
said that the receipts as assessed went 
directly into the town treasury. 
Mr. Rust asked if the money could be 
drawn on for moth appropriation, or did 
it go into the general treasury. 
Mr. Knight replied that the town had 
voted against using this money for moth 
work and thatthe money goes into the 
treasury for general expenses. 
F. J. Merrill said that this assessment, 
as he understood, went into the treasury 
just as money assessed for concrete work 
on private property went into the treas- 
ury. 
F. K. Swett said that the town should 
appropriate $5000 and above that the 
private owners could be assessed 4 of 1 
per cent. of the valuation of the property. 
Money 
