At Mauricetown there is a rolling draw-bridge of one span of 58 feet 4 inches in the clear; this is a wooden structure. Vessels and steamers pass this bridge at flood time without special difficulty, but going down stream at ebb tide are carried against the right-hand channel-pier. To avoid this danger a line of fender-piling 250 feet loag should be built, as shown by red line on sketch transmitted herewith. This bridge be longs to Cumberland County. There is about 5 feet on the bar at mean low water the tide rises from 5.5 to 6 feet. HARBOR AT WILMINGTON, DELAWARE. At Third street there is a draw-bridge opened and shut by hand. The commerce this harbor demands that this bridge should be maneuvered by steam as is done Market street, the next bridge above. This bridge belongs to New Castle Coun Delaware. BROADKILN RIVER, DELAWARE. At "Drawbridge," Del., there is a draw-bridge of two spans of 38.5 feet and feet in the clear. The present project calls for 40 feet width of channel. This brit is not considered a serious obstacle at present. BROAD CREEK, DELAWARE. The Delaware Division of Philadelphia, Wilmington and Baltimore Railroad cross this stream 2,000 feet below the turning-basin, the head of navigation, on a woo bridge without a draw. The channel-span of this structure is 32 feet wide in clear, with 20 feet headway above mean low water. The present project calls 50 feet width of channel. This bridge is a serious obstruction. It should ban draw-span of 56 feet in the clear to permit the passage of side-wheel boats. A¦ three-fourths of the commerce of this stream will pass this bridge when the pres project is completed. The present 200-ton propeller-boat has to lower her pilot-l and smoke-stack, and all vessels have to lower their masts, before passing. About 200 feet below the turning-basin there is a county bridge with two dr spans of 30 feet and 29.3 feet. This bridge answers the needs of present commety but it will probably have to be widened to 56 feet when the present project is c pleted. It is not considered a serious obstruction at present. SAINT JONES RIVER, DELAWARE. There is a draw-bridge at Barker's Landing with 34 feet clear width of span. T is a wooden structure, and is so much decayed that it will probably be necessarybuild a new bridge in a year or two. There is no tender employed, and the steak and vessels have to make landings above and below this bridge to open and shut draw. This bridge is a serious obstruction. The bar at the mouth of this stream probably require two long jetties, in order to deepen it sufficiently to run a success propeller-boat; but the river has been navigated by a double-engine side-wheel of light draught. In case the bar at the mouth is not improved, it will be necessary to resort to wheel boats; for this reason these draws should be 56 feet in the clear. The dra bridge at Lebanon has a clear span of 32 feet; this span should be widened to 501in the clear and provided with a tender. All passing boats and vessels have to do t own maneuvering at present. Both of these bridges could be widened to 38 feet small expense. The width of 38 feet is sufficient for sailing vessels and propell There is about one foot depth on the bar at mean low water. The tide rises abst 5 feet. DUCK CREEK, DELAWARE. There is a pivot draw-bridge about 7 miles below Smyrna, clear span 38 feet. T bridge is in good order and provided with a tender. Although this bridge exclu side-wheel boats it is not considered a serious obstruction at present, for the reas that the commerce of the stream is carried in vessels and steamers not over 30 wide. These vessels and steamers have to wait for the tide to cross the bar at tir mouth of Duck Creek. In case this bar is not deepened it may be necessary to * side-wheel boats. This would require a width of draw of 56 feet. This is a con bridge. There is about 3.5 to 4 feet on the bar at mean low water. The tide se about 5.7 feet. SUSQUEHANNA RIVER, MARYLAND. McClenahan & Bro., Port Deposit, Md., write as follows: "The Baltimore and Ohio Railroad has a bridge for the use of its Philade phia branch, crossing the Susquehanna at Watson's Island. This bridge is over a mile in length, without any draw, and has 7 piers in the river of heavy masonry, with the ends up the river rounded instead of pointed, and consequently offering considerable obstruction to the passage of ice. "It has two channel-spans each 90 feet above mean tide, but forms a serious obstruction to the free navigation of the river, inasmuch as schooners carrying 125 tons and upwards, in passing up and down the river to and from Port Deposit and Lapidum, are obliged to 'strike' their topmasts in order to pass under the bridge. 66 A large portion of the tonnage coming up the river to the above places is from Virginia and North Carolina, and requires the use of sea-going vessels; but now an increase in freight has become necessary to induce the captains to load, because of the trouble, expense, and detention in striking their topmasts at this bridge. "When the channel-spans of this bridge were being put up, temporary piling was driven in the channel of the river, on which cribs filled with stone were placed. It is now alleged that the stones from these cribs were allowed to drop into the channel. Only part of the piles were taken out. It is such an important matter that I would suggest an investigation of it. There is another matter to which I would invite your attention, and that is the present gorged condition of the ice in this river and the causes of it. No more opportune time than the present could be afforded for viewing it. There is no doubt but what the piers of the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad Bridge as constructed are one of the main causes." CHOPTANK RIVER, MARYLAND. There is a pivot draw-bridge at Denton belonging to the county. It has two spans available for navigation of 41 and 42 feet each in the clear. These spans can be widened to 47 feet at small expense. The present project of improvement calls for 75 feet channel width above this bridge. This bridge is considered an obstruction and should be widened to 56 feet in the clear. At Dover there is a county bridge with draw-span of about 56 feet in the clear. This structure is not considered a serious obstruction at present, although I am informed that the present side-wheel boats have only 18 inches clearance. POCOMOKE RIVER, MARYLAND. Capt. Willard Thomson, superintendent Eastern Shore Steamboat Company, writes: "There are two bridges on said river, one just above and one just below Pocomoke City. The bridge just below the town is a railroad-bridge in good condition, with draw 56 feet wide. The bridge above the town is a foot and carriage bridge, and is in very bad condition, with draw 50 feet wide. The draw of this bridge should be made 56 feet wide, and the bridge thoroughly overhauled. As it is now the draw is troublesome and dangerous to pass through. The bridge is in a very dilapidated condition generally." CAMBRIDGE HARBOR, MARYLAND. [Under examination.] There is a draw-bridge with two spans of 28 feet each between the upper and lower harbor. This bridge is not a serious obstruction at present, but if the upper harbor is improved by the Government, as is desired by the citizens at present, the draw should be increased to 56 feet. Very respectfully, your obedient servant, General WM. F. SMITH, United States Agent. CHAS. HUMPHREYS, SUPPLEMENTARY REPORT OF MR. WILLIAM F. SMITH, UNITED STATES AGENT. UNITED STATES ENGINEER OFFICE, Wilmington, Del., January 11, 1887. GENERAL: In addition to the bridges reported on the 10th instant, in compliance with General Order No. 7, Headquarters Corps of En gineers, 1886, that do or will interfere with free and safe navigation, I have the honor to submit the following: INLAND WATER-WAY FROM CHINCOTEAGUE BAY, VIRGINIA, TO DELAWARE, AT OR NEAR LEWES, DELAWARE. At Ocean City the Wicomico and Pocomoke Railroad cross Chinco teague Bay on a draw-bridge about 26 feet clear span. At Fenwick's Island there is a bridge over "the Narrows" without a draw. When navigation is opened between Little Assawoman Bay and In dian River Bay, which is a part of the route of the "inland water-way from Chincoteague Bay, Virginia, to Delaware Bay, at or near Lewes, Delaware," these bridges will be obstructions to navigation until there is a draw of 56 feet clear span placed in each of them. Very respectfully, your obedient servant, The CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. A. Wм. F. SMITH, REPORT OF LIEUTENANT-COLONEL PETER C. HAINS, CORPS OF EN GINEERS. UNITED STATES ENGINEER OFFICE, Washington, D. C., December 16, 1886. SIR: In reply to instructions contained in General Orders No. 7, cur rent series, Headquarters Corps of Engineers, United States Army, I submit herewith copies of reports made by me under date of November 5, 1884, on the bridge known as the "Aqueduct," and under date of September 10, 1884, on the structure known as the "Long Bridge." The circumstances detailed in these reports have not altered since the dates thereof, and the structures "interfere with free and safe nav igation" to the same extent to-day that they did then. Very respectfully, your obedient servant, The CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. A. PETER C. HAINS, Lieut. Col. of Engineers. REPORT OF LIEUTENANT-COLONEL WILLIAM P. CRAIGHILL, CORPS OF ENGINEERS. UNITED STATES ENGINEER OFFICE, Baltimore, Md., January 27, 1887. GENERAL: I had the honor January 6, 1887, to make a report in compliance with the instructions contained in General Order No. 7, from your headquarters, series of 1886, in which a special communication relative to Elk River, West Virginia, was promised. Since that date I have been to Charleston. *These reports are omitted, having already been transmitted to Congress, to comply with the requirements of the river and harbor act of July 5, 1884, and printed as Senate Ex. Doc. No. 12, Forty-ninth Congress, first session. Reference is requested to the report of October 30, 1884, made in considerable detail, which was printed and may be found in Senate Ex. Doc. No. 12, Forty-ninth Congress, first session, and to the report of Mr. Scott. See page 1599, Appendix CC, Annual Report of Chief of Engineers, 1886. The situation is much the same as then explained, with the following additions: A new bridge has been built on the Elk River at Charleston, which has a height somewhat greater than the others. It was, like them, built under State law, and is too low in view of the possibilities of the future increase of navigation, especially as the importance of that portion of Elk River has been enhanced by the greater depth of water caused by the Dam No. 6, on the Great Kanawha below it. The bridges are not, however, obstructions to navigation at this time. Very respectfully, your obedient servant, To the CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. A. WM. P. CRAIGHILL, REPORT OF MR. S. T. ABERT, UNITED STATES AGENT. UNITED STATES ENGINEER OFFICE, Washington, D. C., December 28, 1886. GENERAL: In compliance with the instructions contained in General Orders No. 7, Headquarters Corps of Engineers, United States Army, dated November 30, 1886, requiring me to report "whether any bridges, causeways, or structures now erected or in process of erection do or will interfere with free and safe navigation," I have the honor to submit the following statement: It is reported that the railroad bridge under the control of the Richmond and Danville Railway Company, built across the Pamunky River, Virginia, at White House, about 30 miles above West Point, interferes with free and safe navigation. The complaint made is that the channel through the draw is too narrow, and that the bridge is not perpendicular to the line of the current. The available width of opening is reported to be 45 feet. Vessels passing through the draw are swept against one or the other side of the opening, and are injured by the bolts and timbers of the fenders. A similar objection has been made to a bridge built by the Alexandria and Fredericksburg Railroad over the Neabsco Creek, Virginia. This creek enters the Potomac River about 28 miles below Washington, D. C. I have the honor to be, very respectfully, your obedient servant, S. T. ABERT, United States Agent. Brig. Gen. JAMES C. DUANE, Chief of Engineers, U. S. A. REPORT OF CAPTAIN F. A. HINMAN, CORPS OF ENGINEERS. UNITED STATES ENGINEER OFFICE, GENERAL: In accordance with General Order No. 7, Headquarters Corps of Engineers, United States Army, series 1886, relative to section 4 of the river and harbor act of August 5, 1886, I have the honor to report as follows upon bridges, &c., in this district which interfere with free and safe navigation. On October 31, 1884, I made a report on this subject which has been transmitted to Congress and printed in Senate Ex. Doc. No. 12, Forty ninth Congress, first session. On April 20, 1885, I made another report on the Norfolk and Western Railroad bridges over the eastern and southern branches of the Elizabeth River (copy herewith). This report was submitted by you, through the Secretary of War, to the Attorney-General of the United States, and on June 16, 1885, the latter gave an opinion on the same (copy herewith), of which the following is an extract: Upon consideration, I am of opinion that the facts set forth in the papers are not in themselves sufficient to authorize a judicial proceeding against said company in be half of the United States, and that for this purpose authority from Congress is needed. # In my communications to you of May 8 and 25 1885 (copies herewith), I reported that these bridges had been modified accordingly. It is understood that no further action has been taken regarding the foregoing. The above covers all facts within my knowledge and all information attainable by me relative to this subject. Very respectfully, your obedient servant, F. A. HINMAN, Captain of Engineers. The CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. A. LETTER OF CAPTAIN F. A. HINMAN, CORPS OF ENGINEERS, TO THE CHIEF OF EN GINEERS. UNITED STATES ENGINEER Office, GENERAL: I have the honor to state as follows: On the 11th instant I reported to you that the Norfolk and Western Railroad Company proposed to make certain modifications of its bridges over the Eastern and Southern branches of the Elizabeth River, Virginia; that I understood that the company's general superintendent intended to see you personally regarding the matter, and that I was preparing a report on the same, which report is now respectfully submitted, as follows: In December last the United States Advisory Board to the Board of Harbor Commissioners of Norfolk and Portsmouth, Va., received from the said Board of Harbor Commissioners a communication, dated December 16 last, transmitting copy of a letter dated December 15 last (copy herewith), from the Engineer of the Norfolk and Western Railroad, requesting permission to strengthen the company's bridge over the Eastern Branch of the Elizabeth River by trestling, &c. The Board of Harbor Commissioners also requested the opinion of the Advisory Board regarding same. The Advisory Board gave an opinion, January 7 last (copy herewith), adverse to the request. Later the Advisory Board received an invitation from the Board of Harbor Commissioners, dated the 19th ultimo (copy herewith), to meet the Board of Harbor Commissioners, the Superintendent, and also the Engineer of the Norfolk and Western Railroad Company, on the 23d ultimo, at which time the last two were to submit to the Board of Harbor Commissioners an application (copy herewith, dated the 23d ultimo) for permission to drive piles for strengthening the Norfolk and Western Railroad Company's bridges over the Eastern and Southern branches. The Advisory Board accepted the invitation, and I of course accompanied the Board, being a member. The plans (three copies herewith) of the company were submitted and explained at the meeting by the company's aforesaid officers. My views were asked thereon, and I gave them substantially as follows: I stated that the said communication of the Advisory Board dated January 7 last still applied to the plans proposed for the Eastern Branch Bridge, and that it also applied generally to that proposed for the Southern Branch Bridge; that the solid approaches to each bridge materially contracted the water-way that both bridges crossed the channel obliquely, and that |