The commission reconvened at the expiration of the recess.
Mr. TAWNEY. Gentlemen, the principal purpose of the session this
afternoon is to afford an opportunity to the representatives of any
of the cities and towns in the vicinity of Buffalo that were not
present this morning to appear at this time and be heard in their
own behalf with respect to the report of the consulting engineers.
Tonawanda and North Tonawanda are two of the principal towns, I
believe, that were not represented this morning. Is there anyone now
present representing those communities? If there is no one to be
heard, I do not know of anything further.
It is the wish of the commission to have a conference before leaving
Buffalo, if possible, with the mayor and the members of the city
council on this subject, with a view to seeing just what can be done
to facilitate the matter of their considering and reporting to the
commission their views with respect to the remedies that are proposed
by our consulting engineer. I understand that they are engaged
officially this afternoon in the council chamber.
(Upon the arrival from the council chamber of the members of the city
council the commission went into executive session.)
* * * * *
INTERNATIONAL JOINT COMMISSION,
_Detroit, Mich., Monday, June 26, 1916_.
The commission met at 10 o’clock a. m.
Mr. Gardner presided.
Mr. GARDNER. Gentlemen, in calling this meeting to order I think I
can truly say that the International Joint Commission obtain as much
pleasure in coming here to Detroit at this time as it is possible
for any body of men to receive that are engaged in trying to analyze
and work out to a practical solution a question of the nature of the
one that brings us here. We are especially glad because of the good
spirit that has been manifested by the people of Detroit and this
community in times gone by.
As you know, the two Governments referred to this commission for
determination the question as to whether or not the boundary waters
or waters flowing across the boundary were being polluted in
contravention of the treaty, in which they agreed that the waters on
neither side of the line should be polluted to the injury of health
or property on the other. The commission in determining the first
question of the reference employed that eminent bacteriologist, Dr.
Allen J. McLaughlin, who made the investigations. Early in 1914 the
commission issued a progress report in which it was very clearly
set forth that the waters along some portions of the boundary were
being seriously and grossly polluted. Following that the commission
employed Prof. Earle B. Phelps in reference to the second part of
the reference, which requires this commission to report to the two
Governments--
In what way or manner, whether by the construction
and operation of suitable drainage canals or plants
at convenient points or otherwise, is it possible and
advisable to remedy or prevent the pollution of these
waters, and by what means or arrangement can the proper
construction or operation of remedial or preventive works,
or a system or method of rendering these waters sanitary
and suitable for domestic and other uses, be best secured
and maintained in order to secure the adequate protection
and development of all interests involved on both sides of
the boundary, and to fill the obligations undertaken in
Article IV of the waterways treaty of January 11, 1909,
between the United States and Great Britain, in which it
is agreed that the waters therein defined as boundary
waters and waters flowing across the boundary shall not be
polluted on either side to the injury of health or property
on the other.
Prof. Phelps completed his work some two months ago, and copies of
the report have been submitted to the authorities of the city of
Detroit and the other municipalities involved in this investigation.
The commission thought it advisable, before issuing its final report
to the two Governments, to come here and have a conference with
you to see in what way, if any, there is going to be any serious
disagreement in regard to the projects submitted by Prof. Phelps. I
say projects, because he has submitted in five different methods or
plans his ideas as to how this result can be best obtained. We have
come here this morning with the expectation that you will take up
these several projects and discuss them with the commission to show
wherein, if in any way, we differ and whether or not such differences
can be reconciled.
Before proceeding with the discussion of these several projects I
will ask the secretary to read the call for the meeting.
(The secretaries then read the notice of the meeting to be held at
Detroit which was sent to interested municipalities and officials in
the United States and Canada, together with copies of the report of
the consulting sanitary engineer of the commission, and also the list
of municipalities and officials to whom said notice and report were
sent.