Peck's Mill Dam, another dangerous obstruction to navigation, which it is also recommended that Congress grant authority to purchase. Amount appropriated by act approved July 5, 1884

$2,000 00 July 1, 1895, amount available..

2, 000 00 (Amount (estimated) required for completion of existing project

8,000 00 Amount that can be profitably expended in tiscal year ending June 30, 1887 8,000 00 Submitted in conpliance with requirements of section 2 of river and

barbor acts of 1866 and 1867. (See Appendix E E 5.) 6. Little Kanawha River, West Virginia.-Little Kanawha River is a tributary of the Ohio, and empties into it at Parkersburg, W. Va.

The present project for the improvement of this river (adopted in 1876 and modified in 1880) contemplates the construction of a lock and dam to extend slackwater navigation for a draught of 4 feet a distance of 12 miles, and the improvement of the natural channel of the upper river by the removal of obstructions for a distance of 80 miles, the object of the latter being to obtain a channel of a minimum width of 40 feet containing at least 2 feet of water during four months of the year.

No work has been done upon the upper river since 1881. At present some of the works constructed to improve this portion of the river require repairs.

During the past season additional stone has been prepared for the lock. The appropriation by act of July 5, 1884, was not made available under the condition imposed until the following January. Since then the preparations for constructing the lock have been commenced, the machinery is now in place, and the coffer-dam about half completed.

During the present season the work will be advanced as far as the appropriation will permit.

It is proposed with the amount asked for to complete the lock if practieable, and make the necessary changes required in the works of improvement upon the upper river. July 1, 1884, amount available ...,

$40,976 95 July 1, 1885, amount expended during fiscal year, exclusive of outstanding liabilities July 1, 1884

$20, 289 78 July 1, 1885, outstanding liabilities

5, 236 14

25,525 92 July 1, 1885, amount available

15, 451 03 Amount (estimated) required for completion of existing project.... 55, 173 02 Amount that can be profitably expended in fiscal yearending June 30, 1887 55, 200 00 Submitted in coupliance with requirements of section 2 of river and

harbor acts of 1866 and 1867. (See Appendix E E 6.) 7. Buckhannon River, West Virginia.-The Buckbannon River empties into the Tygart Valley, a tributary of the Monongahela River. The improvement of this river (approved in 1884) contemplates the formation of a channel 241 miles long, with a minimum width of 30 feet, and a depth of at least 2 feet during an average of four months each

When work was commenced this river was practically closed, and it was only possible during the highest rises to float logs out. A channel of the dimensions mentioned was opened through the most obstructed portion, a distance of 7 miles. With the amount asked for it is proposed to continue the improvement.

Fear.

$1,500 00

1, 453 37

46 63

Amount appropriated by act approved July 5, 1884....
July 1, 1885, amount expended during fiscal year, exclusive of outstanding

liabilities July 1, 1884.
July 1, 1885, amount available..
Amount (estimated) required for completion of existing project..
Amouut that can be profitably expended in fiscal year ending June 30, 1887
Submitted in compliance with requirements of section 2 of river and

harbor acts of 1866 and 1867. (See Appendix E E 7.)

23, 955 00 3,000 00

EXAMINATIONS AND SURVEYS FOR IMPROVEMENT TO COMPLY WITH

REQUIREMENTS OF THE RIVER AND HARBOR ACT OF JULY 5, 1884.

It appearing, after preliminary examination by the local engineer, that the locality was worthy of improvement by the General Government, Captain Post was charged with and completed the following:

1. Rough River, Kentucky.-(See Appendix E E 8.)

By the same act a report was required to be made to Congress of the condition of Green and Barren rivers, Kentucky, with the provisions and estimates of cost necessary to relieve the same from incum. brance with a view to such legislation as will render the same free to commerce at the earliest practicable period. In compliance therewith a report to this oftice, made by Capt. J. C. Post, Corps of Engineers, was transmitted to Congress February 11, 1885, and printed as House Ex. Doc. No. 212, Forty-eighth Congress, second session. (See also Appendix E E 9.)

BRIDGING NAVIGABLE WATERS OF THE UNITED STATES.

1. Bridge across Detroit River between Belle Isle and the American shore.— The municipal authorities of the city of Detroit, Mich., having, May 27, 1885, asked for information as to the right of the city to construct a bridge over a branch of the Detroit River between the above named points, reply was made July 6, 1885, that the ground taken by this office and heretofore adopted by the War Department is that when Congress has not authorized the construction of a bridge or has not required the Secretary of War to approve the plan, &c., of a bridge as a condition of its being built, the Secretary of War cannot authorize or forbid its construction, but if he is satisfied that any intended structure of that kind or any other will seriously impair the navigation of the channels of navigable waters of the United States, he has not failed to endeavor through the Department of Justice to prevent the erection of such structure, and also that it was clearly the opinion of the War De. partment that the construction of a bridge as proposed by the city authorities of Detroit should only be permitted under authority of Congress upon such plan and at such location as shall receive the approval of the Department.

(See Appendix F F 1.)

2. Bridge across Willamette River at Portland, Oregon.-The Columbia Street Bridge Company of Portland, Oreg., baving asked, May 18, 1885, the approval of the War Department of the location for a foot and wagon bridge proposed to be constructed by that company across the Willamette River at Portland, under authority of an act of the legislative assembly of the State, reply was made by the Secretary of War that in his opinion he has no authority, and that no officer of the Corps of Engineers having charge of the improvement of the Willamette River has authority to approve the plans for a bridge over said river built in vir. tue of a statute of the State of Oregon; and further that the act of Congress of July 5, 1884, does not, under recent decision of the Department of Justice, confer any authority upon the Secretary of War to act in relation thereto.

(See Appendix F F 2.) 3. Bridge across Monongahela River near Fairmont, West Virginia.—The Fairmont, Morgantown, and Pittsburgh Railroad Company desiring to construct a bridge over the Monongahela River near the town of Fair. mont, in Marion County, West Virginia, submitted, July 17, 1884, through its president, a map sbowing the desired crossing and the position of the piers with reference to the river, and also the height of the bridge above low water, and asked an examination and approval of the same.

It being presumed that this bridge is to be built under the eighth section of the river and barbor act of July 5, 1884, although doubtful whether a full jurisdiction is given to the United States by this section of the act, since this request has been made it was recommended by this office that action should be taken thereon.

With approval of the Secretary of War the subject was assigned to Lieutenant-Colonel Merrill for examination and report, and finally the plan and location of the bridge were approved by the Secretary of War with certain modifications, and the president of the company so informed October 25, 18 4.

(See Appendix F F 3.) 4. Bridge of the Northern Pacific Railroad Company across Saint Louis Rirer, Minnesota and Wisconsin.--To comply with the requirements of section 3 of the act of February 27,1873, authorizing the construction of this bridge, and upon representation by the railroad company that it would be inadvisable, for reasons given, to build the bridge in question between Rice's Point and the extreme north end of Connor's Point, a Board of Engineer Officers was constituted July 5, 1884, to consider and report upon the matter in question. The Board recommended the ap. proval of the change of location of the bridge proposed by the company and the plans therefor, with certain modifications, and recommendations, which, after approval by the Secretary of War, were accepted by the company August 28, 1884.

For the report of the Board and correspondence relating thereto, see Appendix F F 4.

5. In conseqnence of provisions of section 2 of the river and harbor act of July 5, 1884, which require the Secretary of War to report to Congress all instances of use, occupation, or injury by corporations or individuals of works built by the United States in aid of commerce or navigation, and whether any bridges and other structures erected or being erected interfere with navigation, and if so, the best mode of altering or constructing the same, and also of provisions of sectiou 8 of the same act to the effect that whenever there is reason to believe that any bridge over navigable waters of the United States, or of any State or Territory, is an obstruction to navigation, by reason of difficulty of pass. ing its draw-openings or raft-spans, the Secretary of War is directed to require the owners of the same to cause such aids to the passage of the bridge as may be deemed neccessary to be erected by them at their own expense. Certain officers of the Corps of Engineers were directed to prepare and submit to this office for the information of the Secretary of War full and detailed reports, covering all facts that he deemed nec. essary to enable a compliance with the terms of the act.

These reports and other information relating to this subject that have been received will be duly submitted in a separate communication.

LAKE HARBORS AND RIVERS.

IMPROVEMENT OF THE HARBOR AT DULUTH, MINNESOTA, AND OF

THE ENTRANCE TO SUPERIOR BAY-IMPROVEMENT OF THE HAR. BOR AT GRAND MARAIS, MINNESOTA.

Officer in charge, Maj. Charles J. Allen, Corps of Engineers.

1. Harbor at Duluth, Minnesota.—The present project of improvement provides for maintaining depth over existing dredged areas and enlargement of the harbor by dredging to a line joining Rice's and Minnesota points, about 600 feet easterly from the canal, and on lines parallel to Minnesota and Rice's points; the dredging to provide for vesse ing 16 feet. The cost, including maintenance of canal piers, was placed at $305,424.

Under the appropriation July 5, 1884, dredging was commenced in September and continued to the close of the fiscal year. The outer end of the south pier of the canal was repaired and in part renewed from the water-line. The piers are generally in good condition. The main harbor area in front of the docks, about 3,000 feet long by 900 to 1,130 feet wide, has depth of 17 feet. The channel leading from the main harbor to the blast furnaces on Rice's P nt has for a distance of 1,600 feet, a depth of 16 feet, the widths varying from 65 to 120 feet. Thence to the Saint Louis River the dredged channel is narrow with ruling depth of 12 feet.

Before adoption of the present plan the harbor area was small, and there was no channel of consequence along the east side of Rice's Point.

The sum asked for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1887, is to be expended in dredging and in maintaining the piers.

Total expended upon the present project to June 30, 1885 (including outstanding liabilities), $132,560.59. July 1, 1884, amount available ...

$581 54 Amount appropriated by act approved July 5, 1884

45,000 00

45, 581 54

July 1, 1885, amount expended during fiscal year, exclusive of outstanding liabilities July 1, 1884.

$21,510 78 July 1, 1885, outstanding liabilities.

11, 233 96

32, 744 74

July 1, 1885, amount available

12, 836 80 [Awount (estimated) required for completion of existing project

175, 424 00 Amount that can be profitably expended in fiscal year ending June 30,1887 125, 000 00 Submitted in compliance with requirements of section 2 of river and

harbor acts of 1866 and 1867. (See Appendix G G 1.)

2. Dredging Superior Bay, Wisconsin.—The present plan of improre. ment provides for dredging between the piers at the entry, from the entry along and parallel to the front of Superior City, up the Nemadji River for about one-half mile, and the preservation of the Quebec Wharf Channel; also dredging the channel of the Sant Louis River within the Bay of Superior, the dredging to provide for vessels drawing

16 feet. This last-named work was added by act of July 5, 1884. Estimated cost of the improvement, including that of maintaining the piers bordering the entry and beach protection, $345,080.

Under the appropriation of $15,000 made by act of July 5, 1884, dredging was continued, and 867 linear feet of the south pier repaired and in great part renewed above the water-line, and some slight repairs maile on the north pier, and to the sand-fence at the opening. The piers are in good condition. Following are the ruling depths in channels:

Feet. On lake appoach to entry

17 In entry between the piers..

16 In Saint Louis River Channel, from the entry to Connor's Point From Saint Louis River Channel to Northern Pacific Dock In front of Quebec Dock.....

12 From main channel near the entry across the bar into the Nemadji River

7 Before improvement commenced under the present plan the ruling depth through the entry to the Quebec Dock was 11 feet.

Total expended under present plan to June 30, 1885, including outstanding liabilities, $89,860.47.

The sum asked for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1887, is to be expended in dredging, maintaining the piers, and in beach protection. July 1, 1884, amount available

$4, 023 09 Amount appropriated by act approved July 5, 1884..

45, 000 00

16 17

49, 023 09

July 1, 1835, amount expended during fiscal year, exclusive of outstanding liabilities July 1, 1884.

$26, 889 51 July 1, 1835, outstanding liabilities,

9, 123 51

36, 013 02

July 1, 1885, amount available....

13, 010 07 Amount (estimated) required for completion of existing project 250, 080 00 Amount that can be profitably expended in fiscal year ending June 30,1887 50,000 00 Submitted in compliance with requirements of section 2 of river and

barbor acts of 1866 and 1867. (See Appendix G G 2.)

3. Harbor at Grand Marais, Minnesota.--The project for improvement adopted in 1879 and continued since that time provided for a break. water and for dredging within the area bounded by Mayhew's Point and the inner shore-line to afford anchorage for vessels drawing 16 feet. The breakwater, 350 feet in length, was completed in 1883. It can be extended as future necessities demand. During the fiscal year the dredged area was enlarged and some slight repairs made to the breakwater. Before improvement commenced there was but a narrow space under protection of the Point for vessels of 10 feet draught seeking refuge during storms. There is now a sheltered area behind the Point and breakwater of about eight acres with depth of 16 feet. The area should be considerably enlarged by dredging.

Amount expended to June 30, 1885, $67,506.13.

The appropriation asked for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1887, is to be expended in deepening and enlarging the harbor area and in maintenance of the breakwater. July 1, 1884, amount available

$2,716 70 Amount appropriated by act approved July 5, 1884.

10, 000 00

12, 716 70

July 1, 1885, amount expended during fiscal year, exclusive of outstanding