Adolph Sloman, Detroit, Mich.
Mr. FENKELL. Mr. Chairman, we were notified of the meeting to-day,
but we had no notice of the time at which the meeting would be held.
Mr. TAWNEY. The notice that was sent to the mayor stated that the
meeting would be held at 10 o’clock a. m.
Mr. FENKELL. The mayor had been out of the city for several days,
and about a week ago he came home sick. He has been ill in bed ever
since. He hopes to be at the city hall some time to-day if possible.
He intended to be here at the beginning of your meeting, and his
absence is accounted for by his sickness.
Mr. TAWNEY. Well, he has relied, I presume, for his information upon
the studies of those problems that were made by yourself and your
assistants, has he not?
Mr. FENKELL. I may say that Mr. Hubbell’s report was turned over to
the printers as soon as received. A copy of my letter transmitting
the same to the council and the summary in his report were printed
in the council proceedings. We have not received printed copies of
his report yet. Mr. Hubbell, the engineer who made our investigation,
told me this morning that he hoped to have copies by noon.
Mr. TAWNEY. Is Mr. Hubbell here?
Mr. FENKELL. He is not here. He will be here some time this morning.
He came in and asked me what time the meeting would be held, and I
told him that I had not heard, and he went out. That was about half
an hour ago.
Mr. GARDNER. What time do you use here, eastern or central time?
Mr. FENKELL. We use eastern time. I sent notices to the members of
the board of health, the health officer, the sanitary engineer,
members of the board of water commissioners, their secretary and
general superintendent, the common council, members of the committee
on health and city hospitals, members of the committee on sewers,
Mr. Hubbell, and perhaps others. I told them of the meeting to be
held to-day, but I did not state any time. Very likely a notice
giving the time of the meeting at 10 o’clock was received in my
office, but I do not remember seeing it. It is probably an oversight
on my part.
Mr. TAWNEY. Mr. Rich, before beginning the hearings the commission
would like to know what the relation of the State is to the public
health and the sewage question of the city of Detroit. Has the State
board of health supreme control?
Mr. RICH. That, Mr. Commissioner, is set forth in a law known as act
98 of the public acts of 1913, of which I think we furnished you a
copy some two years ago.
Mr. TAWNEY. When we were here before?
Mr. RICH. Yes. As we understand it, that gives the State board of
health authority to order whatever changes may be deemed necessary in
any water in the State for purposes of public health.
Mr. TAWNEY. Has that authority been questioned heretofore by the city
of Detroit?
Mr. RICH. Not in court. I do not know whether it has elsewhere or not.
Mr. TAWNEY. Mayor Marx, have you any information on that subject?
Mr. MARX. I do not recall any.
Mr. RICH. The matter of Highland Park was involved to some extent,
but that has been settled.
Mr. TAWNEY. So up to the present time under the existing law the
State board of health has the power to order any remedial measures
that it may deem necessary to protect the public health?
Mr. RICH. That is the way we understand the law, and that was the
intention when it was passed. It has not been definitely tested in
court yet.
Mr. TAWNEY. At the suggestion of the chair we will proceed to hear
the representatives of the State of Michigan with respect to the
remedies that are proposed by the consulting sanitary engineer of
the commission. It is our understanding, Mr. Rich, that your office
has been giving considerable attention and study to the various
alternative plans proposed by the consulting sanitary engineer of the
commission. I think it would be advisable to hear the representatives
of the State first.
Mr. RICH. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the commission, I regret
to say that we have not given the alternative plans very much
consideration. We have not had the report long enough to be able
to do so. It seems to me that the function of the office which I
represent is to judge not so much the economical features that
arise with respect to the various questions coming before us as
the sanitary features, although we are always glad to give the
municipalities what assistance we can in the economical solution of
their problems. But we understand that the law first contemplates our
passing upon the plans from the sanitary standpoint and giving our
opinion as to whether or not they will produce the results desired,
with perhaps not very much regard to the cost, although as engineers
we could hardly pass by that important feature as a matter of
conscience.
We have been very much interested in the studies being made, and, in
fact, have done quite a little in the way of investigation ourselves
since the termination of the work of this commission. We have in
progress now a report of our studies of the municipalities below
Detroit, having for its object the determination of the factors
entering into the production of the abnormal typhoid death rate which
has existed for a number of years. A careful study has been made of
each particular case so far as we were able to find it.
Mr. POWELL. How long before your report will be printed?
Mr. RICH. Probably two or three months. After that we expect to
proceed to remedial measures at once; that is, the different
municipalities will probably be called before the State board of
health for a hearing, giving them a chance to express their opinion
as to what should be done and what they are willing to do; and if
they are not willing to do anything, or if they seem to be too slow,
undoubtedly the State board of health would set a time within which
they must conform to its orders. That has been done to some extent
already with the city of Monroe, and proceedings are going forward as
rapidly as we could expect there for a purified water supply. Some
steps are being taken looking to the treatment of sewage. We hope
that similar results may be obtained in the other municipalities
below Detroit.
Mr. POWELL. Have you adopted any standard for purification of sewage?
Mr. RICH. We feel that we are indebted to this commission for a
very fine determination of that point, and I might say that we are
practically relying upon that entirely.
Mr. POWELL. Then you agree with us in that?
Mr. RICH. We have accepted the views of your consulting engineers
almost entirely. We feel that it was very wise indeed.
Mr. TAWNEY. Have you gone sufficiently into the proposed remedies for
sewage disposal to enable you to express any opinion whatever with
respect to the efficiency of the remedies proposed by our consulting
engineer?
Mr. RICH. In a general way; yes. From what we have been able to learn
with regard to the proposition for screening sewage and afterwards
treating it with a disinfectant we would not feel sufficient
confidence in that to recommend it. The other methods proposed we
would concur in. We concur in the judgment of the engineers with
reference to the methods, but regarding the particular location of
plants we are unable to express our opinion at the present time owing
to the fact that we have not gone into that as carefully as we would
like to do. In fact, I hardly think we would have time to go into it
enough to feel sufficiently justified in expressing a very definite
opinion as to the particular location of plants; in other words,
as to the economics of the question, but we do feel like approving
fully the views of Prof. Phelps, Mr. Hubbell, and Mr. McRae in these
matters. I think they will agree with me that screening is hardly to
be relied upon.
Mr. TAWNEY. Have you given any consideration to the proposed
consolidation of the various villages around Detroit into one general
or Detroit metropolitan sanitary district?
Mr. RICH. I have given some personal thought to it, but there have
been no steps taken as yet looking toward a special investigation of
that matter. I am very much interested in it. I am at the present
time very much in favor of a thorough study as to the feasibility of
such an organization. I believe it is the only feasible solution of
the whole problem.
Mr. TAWNEY. From an economical standpoint, do you think it would be
advantageous both to the city and to the surrounding municipalities?
Mr. RICH. I do, yes; and I think it would be advantageous from every
standpoint.
Mr. TAWNEY. Are you conducting your studies, then, with reference to
the consolidated sewage district suggested by the consulting sanitary
engineer?
Mr. RICH. No; we are not. We have not gotten as far ahead as that
yet. We are simply studying the present condition, and whatever we
recommend will probably be of such a nature that no great amount of
money would be lost if consolidation should be effected later, but it
would be more immediately available for the alleviation of existing
conditions.
Mr. TAWNEY. Are you contemplating any improvement in the matter
of sewage disposal for the city of Detroit independent of any
recommendations of this commission?
Mr. RICH. No; we are not.
Mr. TAWNEY. Have you made any bacteriological examination of the
waters of the Detroit River independent of the examination which was
made by our bacteriologists?
Mr. RICH. We have made some this summer in connection with the water
as it is supplied to the other municipalities, not making a study of
the river as a river, but, taking it as it comes through the means of
these municipalities below, we have made some studies.
Mr. TAWNEY. How does your examination compare with the examination of
the cross sections of the river made by our bacteriologists?
Mr. RICH. They could not be compared, because all the water that is
taken from these intakes comes from a single point in the river.
We have not taken any samples in the river any more than last year
we took some few samples from the western end of Lake Erie which
coincided in a general way with the findings of the bacteriologists
of this commission, except that our samples were taken at other
points and showed what might be expected from theirs.
Mr. TAWNEY. As the chief State sanitary engineer, what would you say,
Mr. Rich, as to the thoroughness and completeness of the work of the
consulting engineers in their study of the problems that are involved
here in the city of Detroit?
Mr. RICH. I think it has been very fine, indeed. I do not believe
I could speak too enthusiastically upon that point. I am very much
pleased, indeed, with the results obtained and the way in which the
work was done, and that especially in connection with Mr. Hubbell’s
work on the part of the city. It is a fine thing.
Mr. MAGRATH. You feel that we were justified in undertaking the work?
Mr. RICH. I do, indeed; and I think it is a great contribution to
the future as indicating the way in which such problems ought to be
attacked and worked out.
Mr. POWELL. Have you given any consideration to the disposal of the
sludge that would be the result of screening and sedimentation?
Mr. RICH. Not any more than our general reading of the subject. We
have not made any studies of local conditions. Sludge obtained from
fine screening would probably need to be disposed of by incineration
or else taken to a long distance from the city and buried; but
probably that would be too much for the city of Detroit.
Mr. POWELL. The city of London has installed, and the city of
Glasgow, Scotland, was about to install when the war broke out,
a system which makes it a decided success from an economical
standpoint. They produce a lot of chemicals from the sludge. You have
not given any attention to that?
Mr. RICH. You do not know what they produce?
Mr. POWELL. Yes; some of the things they produce are gasoline,
carbolic acid, and a pitch. I think there are nine by-products that
they dispose of.
Mr. RICH. No; I am not familiar with the details of that.
Mr. TAWNEY. I understand you to say, Mr. Rich, that, while you have
read the different alternative plans or remedies proposed by our
consulting sanitary engineer, you have not given them sufficient
study to determine what, in your judgment, would be the most
desirable and the most economical in practice?
Mr. RICH. No; I do not think so.
Mr. TAWNEY. You do not desire to express an opinion on either one of
them?
Mr. RICH. Only that I think we would be justified in saying that
we believe the tankage method, followed by sterilization, would be
superior to screening methods.
Mr. MIGNAULT. That is, you prefer the process of sedimentation to
that of fine screening?
Mr. RICH. That is it. That is as far as we would feel justified in
going.
Mr. TAWNEY. Have you any opinion to express as to whether there
should be one hour or two hours of sedimentation?
Mr. RICH. No. I think that would depend considerably upon the
character of the sewage. We have made no tests whatever of the time
required for the Detroit sewage. In fact, we have made no tests of
any sort on the Detroit sewage.
Mr. TAWNEY. Have any of your assistants anything to offer independent
of what you have set forth?
Mr. RICH. The two men who made the actual studies down the stream
from here are present, and if you would like to hear from them at
this time or at a future time they will be available. Mr. Follin
had charge of the field work in the investigation at Ford City,
Wyandotte, and Trenton.
STATEMENT OF MR. JAMES W. FOLLIN, OF DETROIT, ASSISTANT
TO THE STATE SANITARY ENGINEER.
Mr. FOLLIN. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, the survey which Mr. Rich
has explained to you and which Mr. Waterman and I made at Ford
City, Wyandotte, and Trenton, was made primarily to determine the
conditions existing in connection with the high typhoid death rate
in those communities and to determine what should be done to remedy
those conditions. I have here a digest of the work as we planned it
and carried it on which I will go over with you. The necessity for
these surveys was shown by the high typhoid death rates in these
communities.
Mr. TAWNET. What were those death rates?
Mr. FOLLIN. They are given in this statement which I will read:
A sanitary survey in the villages of Ford and Trenton
and in the city of Wyandotte has recently been made by
E. L. Waterman and J. W. Follin under the direction of
the State sanitary engineer and by authorization of the
State board of health. The necessity for such surveys was
shown by a study of the typhoid fever death rates in these
communities. This study disclosed the following facts:
In Ford the average death rate during the period of
1904-1915, inclusive, was 364.5; the maximum was 849,
occurring in 1907; the minimum was 126, occurring in 1908.
In Wyandotte the average death rate during the period
of 1900-1915, inclusive, was 87.2; the maximum was 144,
occurring in 1913; the minimum was 12, occurring in 1911.
For Trenton the average death rate during the period
1904-1915, inclusive, was 94.8; the maximum was 243,
occurring in 1913; the minimum was 0, occurring in 1905,
1910, 1912, and 1914.
The objects of these surveys were to determine in each
community--