NEW ENGLAND WATERWORKS ASSOCIATION
Thirty-First Annual Meeting at Washington, D. C.
The thirty-first annual convention of the New England Water Works Association was held at Congress Hall, Washington, D. C., Sept. 18 to 20, and was most successful, both as to attendance and the papers read and discussed. The first session on Wednesday was opened by George W. Batchelder, president of the association at 11 a.m., and Willard Kent, secretary, was present in his official capacity.
An address of welcome was made by Major W illiam V. Judson, engin e-ring commissioner ot the Board of Commissioners of the District of Columbia, who briefly welcomed the members to W ashington, which he said they should consider as part of their own. The secretary then read applications for membership from five active and two associates which were accepted. This was followed by the reading of a paper by Charles E, Chandler, C.E., of Norwich, Conn., entitle “‘State Control of the Design and Construction of Dams and Reservoirs; Actual Practice in East rn Connecticut.”
He stated that the Connecticut statutes passed in lM7d provide for the repair of unsafe dams as well as for approved design and construction of new dams. This paper, lie said, is confined to the actual operation of the law in regard to new dams in eastern Connecticut with which he was connected as engineer for the owners or for the State, or of which he had special knowledge. The essential part of the law so far as this paper is concerned is as follows: Section t80fl. Approval of Dams.—Before any person or corporation shall construct a dam or reservoir in a locality where life or property may he endangered through the insufficiency thereof, the plans and specifications for such dam or reservoir shall be submitted to a member of said board of civil engineers, who shall examine the ground where the dam or reservoir is to be built and the plans and specifications therefor; if he approve the same, he shall issue a certificate authorizing the construction of sue’dam or reservoir. No such dam or reservoir sha’l be constructed without such approval and certificate. Section Iflll). Inspection of Work; certificate of approval.—The engineer under whose authority a dam or reservoir is being constructed shall inspect the work or cause the same to be inspected at least three times before completion; and if he shall be satisfied that such dam or reservoir has been built Hi a substantial and safe manner, in accordance with the plans and specifications approved by him. and is strong and secure, he shall issue a certificate approving the same, whic certificate shall be recorded in the office of the town clerk of the town in which such dam or reservoir is located. No such dam or reservoir shall be used until such certificate is obtained and recorded. All the expensof approval and inspection is borne by the owner of the dam.
The writer then briefly explained some of the dams in the construction of which he was engaged. In the twenty-five or more cases in which Mr. ( handler was employed the following divisions might he made: First. When plans, specifications and inspection are under the supervision of competent engineers in the employ of the owner. In this class State control is merely nominal. Second. When the engineer employed by the owner is inexperienced in dam building. Generally such engineers cheerfully modify their plans at the request of the State Engineer, but not always. Third. When the owner depends on the contractor for his engineering. In both the second and third cases, the work of the State Engineer has been very important. In the opinion of the writer the law has done much good i Connecticut, but it is deficient in many respects, among which arc the following: 1. There is no provision for a hearing of interested parties. 2. There is no provision for filing plans and specifications, so that anyone can tell how a dam is to be or has been built. 5. The State Engineer cannot take the initiative in the case of unsafe dams already built.
A short discussion followed, in which some State laws governing dam construction were stated. On this subject T. H. McKenzie. oK . of Southington, Conn., said: For a period of twenty-seven years, from IKk-J to July I. 1011, I had the honor of acting as a member of the Connecticut State Board of Civil Engineers, appointed under the provisions of the law which is quoted in Mr. Chandler’s paper, and for several years when the two older members of the board were in feeble health I did a very large proportion of the inspection, and it has been my good fortune not to have a failure of any dam which t inspected. 1 have often expected failures of dams, not so much on account of the general plan of the dams, as on account of the poor work on foundations and puddling of earth and poor work in laying what was intended for watertight masonry, so much work must be done by unskilled men with very little superintendence or inspection that it is a wonder that there are not more failures of dams than there are. The present law provides for not less than three inspections of a new dam; these three inspections are not sufficient; the State Inspector should have authority to require the owner of the dam to employ a sufficient number of competent and experienced foremen to oversee the work. Owners of dams expect too much of the State Inspector; he cannot personally inspect it in detail. The regular superintendents of construction should be ten-hour-a-day men who should see every stone and every shovel full of earth that went into the dam. and they should require that all laborers who puddled earth and all masons who placed stone should first learn the business.
The proper planning of dams is necessary, but it is just as essential that they should be built of proper materials properly placed, and under tne present law the supervision is not sufficient. There have be n recently three failures of dams in Connecticut, one at Ansonia and two at New Britain, and one at Pittsfield. Mass. The Ambursen dam that failed at Pittsfield was on account of poor work on the foundations. The piers which carried thg dam were set on turf and the cut-off wall at the toe of the upper slope was no better than a blind drain, no doubt the plans were properly made, but no proper supervision ol the work made. The dam at Ansonia, Conn., which failed early this last spring doing very large damage, was due largely to bad work in puddling the foundations. A box flume of concrete passed under the dam about 12 feet lower than the bottom of the heavy concrete dam whicn was about 25 feet high. The earth filling next the concrete flume was put back in mid-winter without proper puddling and the heavy concrete dam placed on it. The filling next the box flume when completely saturated, settled and the water came through under the dam next to the concrete flume. This accident could have been avoided if an experienced dam builder had been attending to the detail of puddling. The Whigville dam at New Britain did not wash out, but it will not hold water and had to be drawn off when partially filled with water for the first time. This failure is due to poor judgment in locating an expensive dam 55 or 60 feet high, on a hill composed of coarse gravel and boulders and driving steel shee. piling among the boulders and loosening the gravel and boulders, so that the water goes under the dam as well as around the ends of the dam. Although the dam was built as well and as expensively as money could build, it will not hold water.
The other failure of a large high service reservoir in the city of New Britain very recently appears to have been caused by poor work in puddling the earth embankment. The plan of the embankment was proper and the material excellent. but it appears to have been poorly puddled, and the dam went out doing large damage. 1 am citing these accidents to show that failures of dams are more often from poor ana careless workmanship than from the plans being insufficient. The Connecticut law should be amended so that the State Inspector can require competent superintendents and foremen to take charge of the construction work, and so that he can take tile initiative in ordering old dams to b built and repaired, also that he must be consulted as to heights of flash boards that may be placed on or maintained on all dams. As it has become a common practice to raise dams by means o flesh boards or even by permanent construction after they have been built to thy height as called for by the approved plans, and as I have alread said there is great need of a trained corps of inspectors who are not engineers but who are thoroughly experienced in mixing cement mortalaying of stone and concrete and puddling earth, and selecting earth suitable for puddling. This line of work requires much skill and experience. I have cited the four failures of dams to show that more practical knowledge and experience is needed as well as engineering skill. It is not sufficient to have a dam well planned and located on a suitable foundation unles it has proper practical supervision.
Inspection of Dams
A. R. McKim, inspector of dams for the Conservation Commission of New York state, said a department of inspection of dams was maintained and that all dams must have the approval of the commission. All owners who do not conform to the law are subject to a fine of $500. He found in many cases lack of supervision, especially in not using clean sand when mixing, with cement and this proved a most serious cause in defective construction.
A. A. Reimer, C. E., asked if the codof rules governing dam construction of th? commission could be obtained so that it might be printed in the proceedings of the association, to which Mr. McKim replied that he would endeavor to furnish one for that purpose.
The paper of Cyrus C. Babb, C. E„ chief engineer Maine State Water Storage Commission, entitled “Certain Legal Aspects of Water Power Development in Maine,” was read by the author. It contained numerous extracts from state enactments made for dam construction. The present state supervision of dams is governed by law. as follows: “The governor, with the advice and consent of the council, shall annually appoint a competent and practical engineer, a citizen of the state, who shall hold said office until his successor is appointed and qualified, and who shall upon petition of ten resident taxpayers of any town or several towns, the selectmen or assessors of any town, or the county commissioners of any county, inspect any dam or reservoir located in such town or county, erected for the saving of water for manufacturing or other uses, and after personal examination and hearing the testimony of witnesses summoned for the purpose, he shall forthwith report to the governor his opinion of the safety and sufficiency thereof.” The text of a new bill contains a section to place the operations of water-storage and_ power companies under an engineering commission. Many difficulties that now come before the legislative committees should be obviated through its operation.”
Reading of the paper by Professor Frank P. McKibben, of Lehigh University, on “State Control of Dams in Pennsylvania,” followed. It staled that many engineers are dissatisfied with conditions existing in the several states as regards the relation of these states to engineering construction which affects the body polit.c is shown by numerous discussions of state supervision of engineering works during the past year. These discussions were precipitated by the disaster at Austin, Pa., in September, 1911. when the failure of an unsafe dam revealed the astonishing condition that in the great commonwealth of Pennsylvania a structure which endangers the lives and property of many people can be built in certain locations by any person whatsoever, and used without the least semblance of supervis’on on the part of the commonwealth or any other competent authority. It makes no difference whether the builder be entirely ignorant of dam construction or not; he is perfectly free to erect a dam in those streams which have not been declared public highways by the legislature. Of course in such a case the public endangered has certain legal means of protect on if it is made aware of its predicament, but such machinery is too complicated and inefficient to be worthy of consideration in connection with proper protective measures. The engineering profession must have some form of supervision of structures possessing inherent danger, not only to secure better protection to life and property, in itself sufficient reason, but to prevent the erection of such structures by incapable persons, who, posing as engineers, thus reflect on the engineering profession as a whole. It then points out that “In Pennsylvania there are four leading engineering societies—the Engineers’ Club ot Philadelphia. the Engineers’ Society of Pennsylvania, the Engineers’ Soniety of Western Pennsylvania, the Ungineers’ Club of Northeastern Pennsylvania. These organizatons, reinforced by the American Society of Civil Ungineers, can and should take such action as will strengthen the status of public engineering procedure in tbc Keystone state. A joint committee representing the four state societies should decide on what legislative action is desirable relating to the formation ot a state department of public works which shall have : upervision over all engineering matters coming under state jurisdiction. Armed with a proposal ratified by the engineering societies of the commonwealth, the committee could appear before the legislature with such force as to command respect, but if each organization individually requests a different procedure it is perfectly evident that no action of importance can be secured.” In the discussion that followed several of those present took part. W. Morris Knowles, C. E., of Pittsburgh, said:
All three papers are manifestations of the unrest and a desire to have State supervision, regulation and control even of certain private endeavors which in their unwise doing would affect many people. Two of these papers relate to dangers to life and property, due to careless design and building, and one relates to a desire to promote the broadest and wisest use without exploitation. It is well expressed by Prof. McKibben that these different purposes with others, also desirable, are intimately correlated and to multiply State Boards for each new function is unnecessary, umvicldly. and leads to confliction and confusion. I hope myself to contribute something with regard to the desirability of Statewide unification ot control in a paper upon “State Regulation of Public Utilities” which I shall read to-morrow evening. I have been interested in the change of view between what has been and that which is proposed, in the new Conservation Act now being recommended in the State of California. It is now planned to place in the control of one body, composed of five, versed in various classes of conservation, the duties and authority formerly residing in tbs Board of Forestry, Redwood Park Commission, Fish and Game Commission. Water Commission and present Conservation Commission. They are to be imposed and conferred upon the new board with broader powers and privileges. I desire, however, to speak particularly at this time of the necessity of some legislation in our States that will promote’development of thy water resources by private capital under reasonable regulation; so as to prevent exploitation and secure at the same time to the people such desirable benefits as come from regulation of stream-flow; the prevention of floods, dilution of pollution, better navigable stages, as well as others that will be obtained when we have State-wide regulation. This is the reason for the formation of the new organization in our State, called the Watjr Conservation Association of Pennsylvania, of which 1 have the honor to lie president. A group of capitalists and publicists realizing the good to come from a common meeting ground, to discuss these problems of vital importance to investors and the people, met to consider this question and it resulted in the forma tion of th s unique organization, in which many minds arc represented upon the executive committer. It is planned to conduct a State-wide campaign of publicity and education with the expectation of thus securing, by co-operative effort, certain legislation at the next session of the State Legislature which will bring ord. r out of ehoas as to water laws (the right of eminent domain as to appropriation of water, under-lands and rights of water docs not exist with companies formed since 1905), to attract capital to develop the State’s water resources; but at the same time reserve to some tribunal the review of the exercise of the right of eminent domain and not only supervise the design and construction of dams (as recommended by Mr. Chandler atiu Prof. McKibben), but also the operation thereof, so as to prevent floods and secure regulation ot stream-flow. 1 have been much impressed wi.h Mr. Babbs well-thought-out-plan of procedure in his paper upon “Certain Legal Aspects of Water Power Development in Maine”; but, perhaps because our customs may not be the same as in Maine or because we have not yet progressed as far along the journey of consideration, some few of the provisions suggested seem to be, upon first reading, either conflicting or unnecessary, in the light of the modern development of the true idea of conservation. Thus, in addition to certain parts, with which 1 wish to express the strongest agreement and appreciation, and without any spirit of antagonistic criticism, but with the attitude of inquiry, one is led to ask questions about certain other clauses. The author’s explanations will. I am sure, go a long way in helping us solve the problem in our State, where we are just beginning to think along these lines. Section 1. The provisions in the second paragraph of this section, relating to the control over the uses of water, that the greatest benefits shall be derived therefrom for all users, is excellent and directly in line with the principles advocated by the Pittsburgh Flood Commission and the same have recently been incorporated in two chapters lately granted by the Water Supply Commission of the State of Pennsylvania. Section -1. The provision herein stated that district superintendents shall be appointed from lists of persons recommended by various water users—such as log driving associations, reservoir, dam and power owners—is a recognition of the point of view, not to say the rights, of the practical operator, which is only too often forgotten in such legislation. Section fi. The provision that copies of plans, showing design and location and nature of proposed work and structures, shall be filed and then “receive the approval of the majority of the members of the said commission” is just what Prof. McKibben has been advocating and is much better than the Connecticut system, where any one member of the commission may approve. Section 9. The arrangement for the purchase by the State, herein mentioned, is extremely vague and it is difficult to imagine what may be “such franchises and rights,” other than those conferred by the acts of the Legislature, and the condition still seems more complicated by the statement in the second paragraph of Section 10 that just compensation shall be made for the “physical property.” If it is intended to convey by these terms that there shall not be any value, other than that of the physical property, as properly determined, and not allow anything for “development expense” or “business value,” it hardly semis that the provisions are fair to the investor of capital which must stand early losses. Section 10. If there be the right of purchase as provided in Section !), is there any need of the concession terminating at the end of 2o to 00 years, especially if there be a provision for the regulation of rates to be charged to the public. Earlier in the act in Section fl such business is declared a “public utility,” and it may be that some public utility law, not herein mentioned, provides for such rate regulation, but, in the absence of definite statement, we are not sure about this and it will be well if it can be cleared up. Does not the last provision of this same section permit of indefiniteness of construction and also permit either of a chance of a “hold-up” of the company, whose franchise is expiring else it must sell out at a sacrifice to the company which secures the new franchise? Section 11. An interesting query iraised with regard to this section, that if rates should be regulated, why should it be necessary to charge a tax upon the power company, either in proportion to the power developed or as a percentage of the gross receipts? With proper State regulation, such expenses of course must he borne by the rate payer, but assuming it to lie fair, is there any reason why municipal corporations, should they develop power, should not be similarly taxed? Are they not doing a commercial and not a municipal business in such a case? Section 14 The provision for a review of the exercises of the right of eminent domain is directly in line with what is now proposed in Pennsylvania, but the more cumbersome provisions of Section In, which means going to the legislature for action, e-an hardly be as satisfactory. Section 1(1. The provisions herein listed are so much like the arrangements of the “Genossenschaft” of Europe, namely, “Associations not ior profit,” which bring about the cooperative effort of Capital. State and People, in securing profits from investments and great benefits. It will be very desirable it we secure some such legislation in this country. I trust that Mr Babb will be glad to add to his already able paper and help by clearing up some of these doubtful points.
John C. Trautwine, C.F… of Philadelphia, said he favored the propositions contained in Professor McKibben’s paper for the safeguarding of dams. He. however, took issue on that part relating to the inspection of dams, as he believed the proposed committee would Infound unable to formulate plans for dealing in detail with the subject. He then read a preamble which he submitted to the Engineers’ Club of Philadelphia, dealing with the safe construction not only of dams, but other public works, which was adopted by that body. At the opening session on Thursday. T. Chalkley Hatton. C.E.. designer of the Austin (Pa.) dam, was heard in explanation of its construction and cause of collapse. He had refrained, up to this time, from answering the adverse criticisms of engineers with reference to the dam, but he considered this an opportune time to state some facts in defense of the work. In order to correct false statements made as to the cause of demolition of the dam, lie would say that the concrete did not slide on its own basis. Plans had been made to remedy apparent defects in construction, but they were not carried out at the time the dam collapsed. The mistake made was in foundation work. lie drilled test holes In to 20 fee: and found them dry and showing good strata of rock, and this part of the work was approved by engineers. Every part of the shale strata was cleared away before the concrete was laid. He described in detail the whole construction which was carried out under his supervision. As to the concrete, Mr. Hatton said that he had been using con-rete for 20 years and that lie had never prepared any better than that used in the Austin dam. Poor judgment in building the foundation and keeping the expenses within the (100 appropriated probably caused the mistake The workmanship throughout was good. It would have shown better judgment if some experienced engineer in dam construction had been called in. and (his course he would recommend to engineers not especially conversant with Ibis class of work
The next paper. “Reasonable Requirements Imposed Upon Waterworks Svstenis by the hire Protection Problem,” be Clarence Goldsmith. C.F.,. Superintendent of High Pressure System. Boston, Mass., was read. Thipaper contained considerable data covering all features of a waterworks distribution system. In relation to meters it states that meters are an actual necessity to keep down consumption, and that all services should be metered, as the only means to accomplish this result. As an instance Worcester, Mass., has effected a saving of $10,000 and decreased its consumption 4,000.000 gallons by metering. A pressure of over 100 pounds should be maintained for lire protection and one hydrant provided for every 40,000 square feet in business districts and one for every 00,000 square feet in those less congested. Fire protection should be the first consideration of the waterworks engineer. allowing the maximum of efficiency at minimum cost.
Frank Fuller, C.F.., said he thought the author entitled to much credit for so valuable a paper, that the association was indebted to him for [ireparing it, entailing as it does so much care and thought. Mr. Hawley said the paper covers a large extent of water works distribution practise He considered that the construction of works for fire protection should not be met by regular taxation. but by a special fund raised for that pur pose.
DEATH OF C. K. WALKER.
George A. Stacy asked permission to diverge from the proceedings, in order that he might bring before the association the passing away, on last Monday, of one who was a prominent factor in the success of the association and had added more to its prosperity than probably any other member. We all remember the cordial and hearty greeting that Samuel K. Walker always extended to us and whose integrity was as solid as the hills of his own state. Always modest in his demeanor, he was a bulwark of stability in his administration of office. When he delivered judgment it was a hit straight from the shoulder, but it came from a heart that always beat with human sympathy. He was one of the charter members of the association aurt once its president. Of Samuel Walker it may be truly said he had few faults, but many virtues.
Mr. Trautwine said he was pleased to hear the explanation of Mr. Hatton on the Austin dam. That the sliding of the dam was on the lower stratum and not, as reported, on the upper was more satisfactory.
The paper on “The Organization and Administration of a Supply Bureau.” illustrated, by E. C. Church, C.E., Secretary Department of Water Supply, Gas and Electricity. New York, X. Y.. was read by the author, and it was followed by a paper on “State Regulation of Public Utilities,” by Morris Knowdes, Director Department of Sanitary Engineering, University of Pittsburgh, Pa. These papers were discussed at length by Marshal O. Layton. The secretary read a list’ of the exhibitors; and, after a motion by Mr. Agnew, returning thanks to the authors of the papers, the meeting adjourned.
Following is a list of those present :
ACTIVE MEM HERS.
Samuel A. Agnew, North Scituatc, Mass.
Elliot K. B. Allaniice, Clinton, Mass.
Kenneth Allen, New York, N. Y.
Dr. J. A. Amyot, Toronto. Out., Can.
J. M. Anderson, Worcester, Mass.
M. N. Baker, New York, N. Y.
(diaries H. Baldwin, Boston, Mass.
Arthur F. Ballou, Woonsocket, R. 1.
Lewis M. Bancroft, Reading, Mass.
Frank A. Barbour, Boston. Mass.
Edward Bartow, Urbana, Ill.
George 11. Bassett, Buffalo. N. Y.
George W. Batchelder. Worcester, Mass
George A. Benjamin, Castine, Me
Charles R. Bettes. Far Rockaway, N. Y.
Philander Betts, Newark, N. J.
Forrest E. Bisbec. Auburn. Me.
Arthur E. Blackmer Plymouth. Mass.
James W. Blackmer. Beverly, Mass.
Charles A. Bogardtts, Chicopee, Mass
James Burnie. Biddcford. Me T. J Carmody, Holyoke. Mass ( Maries E. Chandler. Norwich, Conn.
Edward S. Cole. New York. N. Y.
William R. Conard, Burlington. N. J.
John II Cook, Paterson, N. J.
II. R. Cooper. Thompsonvillc, Conn.
Leonard S. Doten, Washington, D. (
Harrison I’. Eddy. Boston. Mass.
Edward D Eldredge. Onset, Mass
Frank I. Fuller, Boston. Mass.
Albert S. Glover, Boston, Mass.
W, B. Gocntner. New York, N. Y.
John M. Goodell. Upper Montclair, N. J
Frank K. Hall. Worcester, Mass.
Paul Hansen, Urbana. Ill.
Robert J. Harding. Poughkeepsie, N. Y.
W, C. Hawley, Wilkinsburg, Pa.
Frederick S. Hollis. Indianapolis, Tnd.
Walter C” Hooper. Passaic. N. I
John L, Hyde, Westfield, Mass
Daniel D Jackson. New York, N. Y.
George G. Kennedy, Harrisburg, Pa.
E. W. Kent, Newport, R. t.
Willard Kent. Narragansett Pier. R. 1.
John A. Kiotile, Wilmington, Del.
George A. King, Taunton, Mass.
John J. Kirkpatrick. Holyoke, Mass.
Frank W. Green, Little Falls, N, J.
Morris Knowles, Pittsburgh, Pa.
Beckman C. Little, Rochester, N. Y.
J B. Longlcv. Lewiston, Me.
Thomas J. Lynch. Holyoke, Mass
Daniel MacDonald, Middletown, Conn.
I heodorc H McKenzie, Southington, t onti.
Henry B. Machen, New York. N. Y.
John Mayo. Bridgewater. Mass.
George F. Merrill, Greenfield. Mass.
William Murdoch. St. John. N. B.
James A. Newlands. Middletown. Conn.
Frank L. Northrop. Boston, Mass
‘•’.mil I. Ntiebling. Reading, Pa.
Thomas A. Peirce. East Greenwich, R. I.
A. F Pickup, Holyoke, Mass.
W. II C. Ramsey. Johnstown. Pa.
John F. Reagan. Jr . Utica, N. Y.
Arthur A. Reimer, blast Orange. N. J.
Charles H. Ross, Waterloo. N. Y.
Herbert F. Salmonde, Westfield. Mass.
Percy R. Sanders, Concord, N. H.
Henry W. Sanderson, Westfield, Mass.
Jesse E. Sheldon, Holyoke, Mass.
George II. Snell. Attleboro, Mass.
John F. Sprenkel, York, Pa.
George A. Stacy, Marlboro, Mass.
George T. Staples, Dedham, Mass.
James A. Tilden, Hyde Park. Mass.
J. C. Trautwine, Jr., Philadelphia, Pa.
A. E. Walden, Baltimore, Md.
John H. Walsh, East Hartford. Conn.
Robert S. Weston, Boston, Mass.
George C. Whipple, New York, N. Y.
L. J. Wilber. Campello. Mass.
George E. Winslow, Waltham. Mass.
Irving S. Wood, Providence, R. I.
Walter Wood, Philadelphia, Pa.
Timothy Woodruff, Bridgeton, N. J. ’HONORARY.
1 W. Shepperd. FIRE AND WATER ENGINEERING New York, N. Y.
T. I). Bausher, Reading. Pa.: N. S. Saiumis and A. B. Coulters, of Builders’ Iron Foundry. Providence. R. !.: R. W. Conrow. Central Foundry CoNew York, N. Y.; F. H. Coffin. F. FI. Coffin & Co., Scranton, Pa.: C. J. Fay. Coffin Valve Co.. Boston, Mass.: J. L. Hough, Darling Pump & Manufacturing Co.. Williamsport. Pa.; C. A. Vaughan and P. H. Williams, Gamon Meter Co., Newark. N. J.: A. F. Fisher, Glauber Brass Manufacturing Co.. Cleveland, O.; C. Mueller and II. S. Piper. Hays Manufacturing Co.. Erie, Pa.; J. A. Tilden. W. C. Sherwood, A. S. Glover, FI. C. Erwin, Jr., and E. J. McKee. Hersey Manufacturing Co., South Boston, Mass.; Thomas H. Dwyer, Lead Lined Tron Pipe Co.. Wakefield. Mass.; H. F. Gould. Ludlow Valve Manufacturing Co.. Boston. Mass.; C. F. Glavin. Charles Millar &Son Co.. Utica. N. Y.; G. A. Caldwell, F. B. Mueller and C. F. Ford, H. Mueller Manufacturing Co.. Chicago. Ill.; C. H. Baldwin and J. G. Lufkin, National Meter Co., New York. N. Y.; II. B. Hodgman. National Water Main Cleaning Co.. New York. N. ‘S’.: T. D. Faulks. Neptune Meter Co.. New York, N. Y. ; II. W. Hosford. Norwood Engineering Co.. Florence. Mass.; J. B. Turner. T. C. Clifford and V. E Arnold. Pittsburgh Meter Co.. East Pittsburgh, Pa.; C. L. Brown, Rensselaer Valve Co., Troy, N. V.; William Ross. Ross Valve Manufacturing Co.. Troy. N. V.; H. 1 Halpin and J. Strackbein. A. P Smith Manufacturing Co.. East Orange. N. J : E. M. Shedd, S. I). Higley and J. H. Atwell. Thomson Meter Co., Brooklyn, N. Y.; L. P. Anderson. Union Water Meter Co.. Worcester. Mass.; D. B. Stokes, U. S. Cast Iron Pipe & Foundrv Co.. Philadelphia. Pa.; W. H. Van Winkle. Water Works Equipment Co.. New York, N. Y.; C. R. Wood anti H. S. Simons. R. D. Wood S: Co., Philadelphia. Pa.: J. A. Port and Samuel Harrison. Henry R. Worthington. New York. N. Y.; F.. F. Bart. National Tube Co.; W. F. Woodburn, Standard Cast Iron Pipe & Foundry Co.. Bristol, Pa.
A large and very attractive display of waterworks appliances was made in a lower part of Congress Hal! and received careful inspection by those in attendance at the convention. The arrangement of the exhibit, in charge of W. F. Woodburn, was satisfactory to all concerned. Meters formed the principal part of the exhibition. all the manufacturers having fine samples of their various brands on view.
National Meter Company—These embraced a large variety of Crown, Empire, Gem, Nash and Empire Compound meters of the National Meter Company.
The Hersey Manufacturing Company—A full line of Hersey. Hersey Disc. Hersey Current and Hersey Detector meters.
Thomson Meter Company—Samples of different s zes of the well-known “Lambert” meter.
Henry R. Worthington— Disc, Duplex Piston, Turbine and Duplex Piston hot water meters.
1 nion W ater Meter Company—Samples of the King Disk. King Vertical, Union Rotary. Nilo and Columbia brands of meters.
Pittsburgh Meter Company—A large d splay of the Keystone and Eureka brands of meters.
The Gamon Meter Company—Samples of “Watch Dog” meters from ⅝-inch to l-incli.
Builders’ Iron Foundry-—The Venturi Meter.
The Mueller Manufacturing Company—A large and varied display of brass goods. Columbia tapping machines, meter-testing machines and other waterworks special tools.
George H. Snell, of Attleboro, Mass.—A display of pipe couplings and tecs especially adapted for water and gas pipes.
Norwood Engineering Company, Florence. Mass.—Walker hydrants and photographic views of filtration plants.
The A. P. Smith Manufacturing Company, East Orange. N. J.—A complete outfit of waterworks tools, including the Smith tapping apparatus, service-tapping machine, meter-testing machine, lead furnace, water motor for operating large valves, French pipe-cutting machine, sleeves and gates, and an assortment of brass goods for waterworks.
R. 1). Wood & Company, Philadelphia— Mathews fire hydrants, “Redficed” specials, castiron pipe, gate valves and other waterworks appliances.
National Tube Company, of Pittsburgh—Union swing check valves. National coating to prevent outward corrosion, Matheson joint pipe and other specialties.
The Pitonieter Company—Apparatus for detecting leaks in pipes. This system is being adopted in all large waterworks, where it is giving much satisfaction.
National Water Main Cleaning Company—An interesting display of sections of pipe, showing results of cleaning.
Waterworks Equipment Company—Water specialties.
Ross Valve Company—Portable fire hydrant head used in Baltimore for high-pressure fire service. A description of this appliance will be given in a later issue of this journal.
Coffin Valve Company—Valves and hydrants. Hays Manufacturing Company—Brass goods and curb boxes.
T. D. Bausher, Reading, Pa.—Waterworks furnace and fuel.
The Self-Operating Valve Company—Hydraulic operator for gate valves.
The Central Foundry Company—Universal pipe.
Eastern Manufacturing Company, Elmira, N. V.—Wood water pipe and steam pipe coverings.
Lead Lined Iron Pipe Company, Wakefield, Mass.—A fine display of sample pipe and specials. lead and tin-lined, for services. This pipe is used exclusively in many leading waterworks throughout the country and is allowed for service pipe use in New York City.
Glauber Brass Manufacturing Company—Some samples of the Glauber brass goods.
Francis H. Coffin & Co.—Wood stave water Ppe.