project, this in connection with the approval as required by law. While this matter was discussed at some length at the District meeting, March 27th, it was obvious that there were certain misconceptions held by the voters, also it would appear that the motives of the writer in speaking favorably concerning the well project were not clearly understood.

It appears obvious at this time that the district has just two water supply options, viz., (1) obtaining, at a cost said to be $15,000, of water from a large well on an island in the river a few hundred feet above the pumping station, such well to be about 15 feet deep and apparently representative largely, if not wholly, of percolated river water, (2) mechanical filtration of the river source. To the first there attaches an element of chance in two respects, (1) possibility of deterioration due to gradual influx of iron resulting from contact of the vegetable matter in the river water with the iron contained in the sand and gravel, (2) diminished quantity due to possible "silting up" of the sand pores in time. The first might be sufficient in degree to cause trouble and even to prevent use of this water eventually, while the second might result in insufficient quantity. If occurring at all both would come on gradually, and in consequence of continuous pump draft.

It should be understood that as to the quantity question, this department is expressing no opinion whatsoever. Your commissioners have informed me that the result of pumping tests have demonstrated to their satisfaction that the amount of water which would be afforded by this well would be considerably in excess of the daily consumption. It must be admitted that 400,000 gallons daily is a considerable amount of water to take from a single well. However, if the commissioners are satisfied as to this point, that it all that is necessary, except that we should bear in mind the possibility of eventual diminution to which I have referred.

As to the iron deterioration question, two parallel cases were cited, (1) the Kelsey Island well source of Claremont Water Works, and (2) the intervale well supply of Plymouth. As I understand it, the first always did show some excess iron and eventually this became such as to prevent use of the water. In the case of the Plymouth supply, these wells have been in use for a dozen years or more. Such samples as we have had have indicated excellent water. Yesterday I inquired of the superintendent as to this point and he assures me that there is not now and never has been any suggestion of iron or of any other form of deterioration, or evidence of inferiority.

I have mentioned both possibilities of deterioration and of diminution because it is a fact that either or both are conditions which

might eventually appear. It should be noted that the word used is possibility, not probability.

As contrasted to the possibility of failure attaching to the well source, it was obvious that a large share of the voters were imbued with the notion that the application of mechanical filtration to the river water would absolutely insure a supply entirely satisfactory both as to quantity and quality. Were this true then it would admittedly be futile to consider devoting a substantial portion of the sum required for filtration to a project to which the uncertainty referred to attaches. But it is not true. First, as to quantity in the event of any large draft, as for a fire, your village would be no better off with filtration than it would with the well source. In either case, in the absence of storage facilities, it would be necessary to pump untreated river water into the mains.

Second, as to quality: reference was made to the Pittsburgh and Washington supplies. The writer is familiar with both these situations. In the first, this city, long notorious as having the highest typhoid mortality rate of any city of the civilized part of the world, procrastinated year after year, playing politics and listening to factions who argued the relative merits of slow sand and mechanical filtration of its Allegheny River source, while doctors, nurses and undertakers continued to reap at a harvest of death and disease. This picture is drawn because it affords a striking illustration of an example which your village is in some danger of following, due to the unfortunate fact of your citizens having been long inured to the idea of having a polluted and disease-carrying water supply. In your case perhaps it cannot be justly said that "familiarity breeds contempt" but it has undoubtedly been responsible for a tendency to procrastination.

It should not be inferred that the writer is opposed to filtration. The latter is very frequently the only remedy available. Carried out in an efficient manner, with adequate control, there is no question that this can serve to produce an excellent supply from a dirty source. The error is in jumping to the conclusion that a village can enjoy the same efficiency of operation of a mechanical plant as can places like Washington, Pittsburgh and New Orleans, where there is extensive equipment and the most elaborate scientific control, based upon daily and at times even hourly examinations.

Sanitarians are agreed that, while frequently impossible in the case of a city, a supply from an uncontaminated source is always preferable to one derived by purification from a polluted source. In the case of a small supply this is markedly true, because in such case the operation must be by rule of thumb on the part of unskilled operators, and without means of continuous scientific control. And

most emphatically is this true if it be a matter of selecting, for a town or village, between an uncontaminated source and one, as in your case, which is substantially polluted by human sewage, so that any slip-up in operation might have serious consequences.

Where filtration is primarily for removing excess vegetable matter and color or to offset the effects of farm drainage, cattle pollution or road-wash, we are always justified in advising such a treatment. Where however we are dealing with a raw water that is polluted in such manner and degree as to render its use without effective treatment likely to cause serious disease, we may well give consideration to the advisability of going to considerable additional pains and expense in an endeavor to secure in its place an uncontaminated supply, particularly if the latter has the decided advantages of being clear, cold and colorless, as characterizes a ground water source.

In advocating the making of all attempts within reason to secure a disease-free ground water source I am actuated by the experience and observations of the past twenty years relative to the results of water supply filtration in New Hampshire-not to mention other striking experiences I have had along the same line elsewhere (Monongahela River supplies). It is my observation that outside of the larger cities lack of a satisfactory degree of success with filtration alone is the rule rather than the exception. A number of examples may be cited. The filtration plant at Somersworth has always afforded inefficient results and were it not for the chlorination the situation would be nearly as serious here as it now is at Woodsville. At Exeter there have long been operating difficulties. Here, fortunately, the raw water is not sewage-polluted. However, anyone who takes the trouble to investigate will discover that dissatisfaction amongst consumers of this mechanically filtered supply is quite pronounced. At Berlin they have had mechanical filtration for the Androscoggin River source for many years, but it has not been of the right kind, properly carried out, and bacteriologically it has been highly ineffective. At Lebanon the filtration results are not what they ought to be, largely because of the absence of adequate sedimentation facilities.

I am informed that the cost of the well project would be $15,000, and I believe it was stated that that of installing mechanical filtration would be but little more, probably $20,000 to $25,000. I have no definite estimate to offer as to this. I am informed however that the mechanical plant as just completed for the village of Newmarket cost, all told, $37,000, and that the bids for a similar plant, for Berlin, last year ranged from $60,000 to $80,000. I would be surprised to learn that an adequate plant, inclusive of sedimentation facilities

and all other necessary adjuncts, could be installed at Woodsville for much less than $35,000.

In this connection it is worth appreciating that a fairly substantial operating cost would be that of the alum needed. A 400,000-gallon consumption would call for 50 to 100 lbs. alum per day, which would mean an annual cost for this item alone of from $250 to $500. Incidentally, the fact that this treatment would add approximately one part per 100,000 of hard scale-forming mineral to the water would be not without interest to those using such water for boiler use. Not a large addition, yet an item worthy of consideration in connection with the well source.

At the meeting, something was said concerning the salvage value of the well source, in the event of iron contamination developing, as affording a much better water for filtration purposes than would be true of the river direct. For such purpose this well water would be superior, and, provided the quantity held up, this item could probably serve to replace the sedimentation basin otherwise called for at the filtration plant proper,—an item representing substantial expense for construction as well as one occupying space which may be difficult to find at the present pumping station.

In this connection the Merrimack situation is worth citing. For a time a polluted supply was taken from the Souhegan River without treatment. Alongside this river, driven at an earlier date, were some wells which had been abandoned because of excessive iron content. Some years ago a filtration plant was constructed but instead of its being designed for treatment of the river water, as the layman might expect, the installing engineer applied it instead to removal of iron from the well water source,-undoubtedly the wiser arrangement. The Merrimack supply is entirely from these iron wells.

Again, the town of Milford experienced iron trouble from its well water supply, derived from wells near the bank of a stream. Here, too, the filtration plant recently constructed was not for purification of the brook water but for iron removal from the well water.

It was suggested at the meeting that the local situation is not so bad, that there are probably at least a half dozen other situations in New Hampshire as bad or worse. As an expression of civic pride this is commendable. It is also probably very aptly illustrative of the local attitude regarding the present supply, and may serve very well to explain the disposition to let matters drag.

It needs to be appreciated however that there is no foundation for such an optimistic attitude. Up until 1914, when chlorination was installed, its typhoid rate made Woodsville the "Pittsburgh of

New Hampshire." Even now for a town I know of but one other raw water supply (Somersworth) as dangerously polluted as yours, and Somersworth has had both filtration and chlorination for many years. Until recent years the Andoscoggin River source of Berlin Berlin has been much cleaner, also there has been not only chlorination but an apology for filtration as applied to that portion of the Berlin supply not derived from other sources. Now that the growth of Berlin has lately changed the situation, that city is wisely proceeding at once with the needed improvements.

Unquestionably chlorination has saved both lives and sickness at Woodsville, yet in view of the degree of river pollution it is very far from adequate to insure at all times disease-free water, to say nothing of the fact that it has no effect whatsoever upon filth. As to the mechanical filtration proposition, its application to your situation must have been appreciated as well five years ago as it is today. In view of this, I am obliged to conclude from the vote in opposition to a constructive plan as offered at the meeting that there is an unfortunate disposition on the part of not a few of your citizens to favor indefinite continuation of the status quo.

I have endeavored to make clear the reasons why I personally am inclined to favor proceeding with the plan which contemplates securing water from the island well. On behalf of the Board, approval is given to this project, in case it is desired to put it into effect. It is immaterial to the latter however whether your district elects this project or decides to install filtration. The point it is desired to make at this time is that our Board would be derelict in its duty to your citizens were it to remain inactive appreciably longer in this matter. One proposition or the other should be decided upon and carried through without delay. Final action should not be deferred to the next annual meeting.

Very respectfully,

CHARLES D. HOWARD, Chief of Division The well project was proceeded with. In order to augment the supply two lines of collecting drains, as feeders of the main well, were put in. Subsequently it was found that the water brought in by one of these lines, which extended into a mucky piece of land, was impregnated by iron, and this line was therefore abandoned in favor of extensions in other directions. Except for this, quality has proven most satisfactory. At this time the construction of extensions for augmenting the supply is in in progress.