One Recalcitrant Opposed Chamber’s Sewerage Project
In perusing the old records of the Norwood Chamber of Commerce, or the Norwood Business Association, as it was known then, one is impressed by the way these early members swung into action to accomplish and bring about improvement which was, in their opinion, for the best interests of the town they served. This is best illustrated by their fight against disease and the building of a sewage system.
About the turn of the century, e’en as far back as ’ ’94, the new organization set out to investigate the cause of so many cases of diphtheria in this town. Each year the death rate caused by fevers, particularly diphtheria, was alarmingly high, especially among school children.
Scattered throughout the records, among discussions and resolutions pertaining to national and international events, local improvements in transportation, building, and advertising the town, one finds a regular reference to this fight, each notation a definite step toward the goal.
Committee Appointed
On the evening of May 8, 1894, a committee of three, W. E. Locke, G F. Everett, and Doctor E. C. Norton, were appointed to investigate. At the following meeting of the Association, F. A. Fales appeared with that committee and addressed the members on the sanitary condition of the town, presenting facts and recommending changes.
Doctor Norton, at a later date, reported that the committee had engaged scientific experts, and he said the water conditions of the town were obnoxious, caused by “organisms half vegetable and half animal, the remedy being artificial filtration.” He called it a “statewide” menace as little knowledge on the subject was available at that time.
An R. W. Rogers, who he was or where he came from, the secretary neglects to add, talked on the subject of a thorough scientific sewerage system for the town and said a filtration system would be preferable to connection with the Metropolitan system owing to difficulties in reaching it. He said the natural slope of the town was ideal and he gave an estimated cost for the consideration of the association.
Both Rogers and Norton were later called before a meeting and plied with questions. Norton stated that the installing of a system was an “absolute need ”
At that same meeting, J. W. Folan offered the resolution, “… that the board of health recommend to the town . . . that a system of sewerage . . for the welfare of the town . . . be installed . . . construction to begin as soon as possible.”
A vote was taken and the secretary casually records it as 14 in favor, and opposed. One man opposed the resolution. The question in the mind of the writer was, “Why?” What possible reason could any man have in opposing such a move? An organization moves to save thousands of lives and one man stands in opposition.
The records mention no other plan held up for consideration, no debate is recorded in which objections were voiced, the facts are there to show all that such a step was an absolute need, yet one carbuncle on the neck of progress, perhaps for some personal reason, voted against it.
Other Measures Taken
At the same time the committee on public health recommended construction and compulsory use of sewers, prohibition of brooks for sewerage use, abolition of surface drainage and compulsory construction of cess-pools, a site to be used as a public dump and prohibition of dumping anywhere else, and use of heavy paper covers on all books in the public library.
The facts are not available, but the writer suspects from the description of a speech made by F. A. Fales, that pressure was brought to bear to make certain individuals clean up unsanitary spots owned by them.
Such is the way the early Chamber of Commerce attacked problems which were in ways greater than those we face today, discussion, presentation of facts, and finally action.
(All articles originally published in the Norwood Messenger)