B 18. IMPROVEMENT OF HARBOR AT CHATHAM, MASSACHUSETTS. Chatham Harbor is at the eastern end of Nantucket Sound, about 15 miles east of Hyannis, Massachusetts. Its outer anchorage, known as Chatham Roads, is a capacious, deep, unobstructed, harbor of refuge from northerly and easterly gales. The inner harbor, locally known as "Stage" Harbor, is small, but well land-locked. It is about one-half mile long, 500 to 600 feet wide, and has 8 to 12 feet depth at mean low water. Its entrance is obstructed by three bars, on which the depth at mean low water is not to exceed 4 feet. The mean rise or fall of the tide is 5 feet. The project for the improvement of the inner harbor was submitted December 19, 1890, and was based on a survey made in October, 1890. It proposed to dredge a channel 6 feet deep, at mean low water, through the three obstructing bars, 100 feet wide at the inner bar, 150 feet wide at the middle bar, and 200 feet wide at the outer bar, at an estimated cost of $10,000. But one appropriation has been made for this improvement, viz: This sum it is proposed to expend in dredging a channel 100 feet wide and 6 feet deep through the three bars. Bids for this work were invited by public advertisement, dated January 10, 1891, and the proposals received were rejected as excessive. No other operations were in progress during the year. The work will be again advertised during the summer months. To complete the improvement will require an appropriation of $5,000, all of which could be expended to advantage during the fiscal year ending June 30, 1893. Chatham Harbor is in the collection district of Barnstable, Mass., of which Barnstable is the port of entry; the nearest light-house is Harding Beach Light. The accompanying commercial statistics have been furnished by the collector at Barnstable, Mass. Money statement. Amount appropriated by act approved September 19, 1890.. July 1, 1891, balance unexpended............. Amount (estimated) required for completion of existing project $5,000.00 398.81 4, 601. 19 5,000.00 5,000.00 Abstract of proposals for dredging from Chatham Harbor, Massachusetts, opened February 10, 1891, by Lieut. Col. S. M. Mansfield, Corps of Engineers. PRELIMINARY EXAMINATION OF NORTH RIVER, SALEM, MASSACHTSETTS, FROM BEVERLY BRIDGE TO THE NORTH STREET BRIDGE. [Printed in House Ex. Doc. No. 28, Fifty-first Congress, second session.] OFFICE OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, SIR: I have the honor to submit herewith the accompanying copy of report, dated November 13, 1890, from Lieut. Col. S. M. Mansfield. Corps of Engineers, giving results of preliminary examination of North River, Salem, Mass., from Beverly Bridge to the North Street Bridge, made to comply with provisions of the river and harbor act approved September 19, 1890. Lieutenant-Colonel Mansfield reports that, with its limited present and prospective commerce, he is of the opinion that North River at this point is not worthy of improvement by the General Government. I concur in this opinion. Very respectfully, your obedient servant, THOS. LINCOLN CASEY, Brig. Gen., Chief of Engineers. REPORT OF LIEUTENANT-COLONEL S. M. MANSFIELD, CORPS OF ENGINEERS. UNITED STATES ENGINEER OFFICE, Boston, Mass., November 13, 1890. GENERAL: In compliance with instructions contained in letter from your office, dated September 20, 1890, I have the honor to submit the following report of a preliminary examination of North River, Salem, Mass., from Beverly Bridge to the North Street Bridge, provided for in the river and harbor act approved September 19, 1890. North River borders the city of Salem on the north and west, flows northeastwardly and enters Beverly Harbor lying just east of Beverly Street Bridge. It averages a quarter of a mile in width between the high-water lines, within the limits of this examination, and its low-water channel carries from 3 feet of water at the North Street Bridge to 6 feet water at the line of Marsh street, Salem, in a crooked course through about the middle of the flats. In North Salem are two or three wharves near North Street Bridge, where there is annually delivered by light-draft vessels about 4,500 to 5,000 tons of coal, a dozen cargoes of wood and bark, and a half dozen cargoes of building materials. The east side of the river is now of no commercial importance and is almost entirely owned by the Eastern Division of the Boston and Maine Railroad, whose track skirts it. The Naumkeag Street Railway Company have recently purchased a tract of land upon the western shore and propose to erect thereon an electric-power plant which will require delivered to it about 5,000 tons of coal annually. Under chapter 194 of the acts of the general court of Massachusetts, in the year 1884, the city of Salem acquired possession of the flats in the river; section 1 of said act reads as follows: For the purpose of abating the nuisance in the city of Salem in that part of the North River lying easterly of North street, the said city may, from time to time, purchase or otherwise take any or all of the lands or flats in the said North River in Salem lying easterly of North street, and northerly of the location of the Eastern Railroad, and fill and raise the same to such grade as may be deemed necessary or expedient; or said city may dredge any flats taken by it under the authority of this act or heretofore taken by it under authority of chapter one hundred and eighty-five of the acts of the year eighteen hundred and eighty-three. On three separate occasions within 10 years the city of Salem has dredged out the channel of the river at an expense altogether of $20,000; the last dredging was done about 2 years ago. I understand the river is again in need of dredging to remove the discomfort occasioned by the accumulation in it of filth from the town of Peabody, which empties its sewage into the river, and the refuse from a long line of tanneries, glue factories, and cotton-cleaning establishments discharged into the river above. Repeated dredging of this basin has become a necessity to remove the nuisance, and so long as it is permitted to use the river for this purpose, periodical dredging will be required in the interest of. the health and comfort of the people of Salem. Taking into consideration the present condition and use of the river, with its limited present and prospective commerce, I am of opinion that it is not worthy of improvement by the General Government. Very respectfully, your obedient servant, Brig. Gen. THOMAS L. CASEY, Chief of Engineers, U. ́S. A. S. M. MANSFIELD, Lieutenant-Colonel of Engineers. B 20. PRELIMINARY EXAMINATION OF SHOALS AT THE MOUTH OF NORTH RIVER, MASSACHUSETTS, WITH A VIEW OF REMOVING THE SAME AND OTHER OBSTRUCTIONS. [Printed in House Ex. Doc. No. 20, Fifty-first Congress, second session.] OFFICE OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, SIR: I have the honor to submit herewith the accompanying copy of report dated November 13, 1890, from Lieut. Col. S. M. Mansfield, Corps of Engineers, giving results of preliminary examination of "shoals at the mouth of North River, Massachusetts, with a view of removing the same and other obstructions," made to comply with provisions of the river and harbor act approved September 19, 1890. Lieutenant-Colonel Mansfield reports that he is of opinion that the mouth of North River is not worthy of improvement, and I concur with him in this view. Very respectfully, your obedient servant, Hon. REDFIELD PROCTOR, Secretary of War. THOS. LINCOLN CASEY, Brig. Gen., Chief of Engineers. REPORT OF LIEUTENANT-COLONEL S. M. MANSFIELD, CORPS OF ENGI NEERS. UNITED STATES ENGINEER OFFICE, Boston, Mass., November 13, 1890. GENERAL: In compliance with instructions contained in letter from your office, dated September 20, 1890, I have the honor to submit the report of a preliminary examination of the shoals at the mouth of North River, with a view of removing the same and other obstructions, provided for in the river and harbor act approved September 19, 1890. The North River is a very winding stream, about 15 miles long, flowing through extensive marshes between Hanover, South Scituate, and North Marshfield, Mass. As it approaches the sea, as if to burst through the beach, it turns almost at right angles to the east and runs parallel with the seashore for about 4 miles before it finds its outlet, leaving a barrier against the sea about 20 rods in width, which at the time of my visit had all the *appearance of being permanent, except for the half mile about its mouth, where it is narrower and devoid of any vegetation, and through which the river finds its outlet, varying in position according to the violence of storms and tides, its southern movement being limited by a rocky promontory just below the mouth of South River. This barrier has on one or more occasions been breached by the waves during violent storms to the injury of the channel, which in connection with other circumstances has led to the total abandonment of all com mercial enterprises upon the river, once famous for its shipbuilding. The project of reclaiming the extensive marshes of the river has enlisted the consideration of no less distinguished persons than Professors Mitchell and Whiting, of the United States Coast Survey, and in their valuable reports the question of the practicability and economy of improving the inlet as a harbor, and the channel of the river so as to render it navigable, has been incidentally discussed. Professor Whiting says: Owing to the limited extent and volume of the waters of North River its inlet is, and must ever be, of small capacity, and subject to change in width and depth by the action of storms upon the sandy bar and beaches at its mouth. The resultants of the natural forces at work upon the inlet and lower reaches of North River seem to determine towards a lessening of their depth and a shifting of the inlet southward. The results of Mr. Mitchell's survey show the capacity of the inlet and lower channel to be insufficient for the passage of a vessel suitable in size for the general purposes of freight or traffic. The inlet as a harbor of refuge is of no value. The excavation of a channel through the shoals of the lower reaches of the river would be attended with vast expense in proportion to the result obtained, and when done the whole work might be destroyed by the action of a single storm in breaking over the lower portion of the outside beach and sanding up again, and changing the whole physical condition of the outlet of the river. But should the artificial improvement of the mouth and channel of the river fully succeed, what would it effect? When shipbuilding and commerce occupied the borders of North River, no railroads or telegraphs controlled the business markets of the country, and the vessels built were of different style and different size from those of the present day. While it is true that a class of small vessels, such as coasting schooners, etc., might again be built upon the shores of North River, should its navigation be made sufficient for importing the necessary timber, and afterwards for launching the vessels and getting them out at sea, it is equally true that there are many harbors, rivers, and waters in Massachusetts, now unoccupied, which are more suitable for this business and purpose in their present natural state than North River would or could be after the greatest improvement practicable. Any large expenditure of money for the purpose of establishing maritime commerce only could scarcely be made to pay, and would probably never become of material value to the community settled upon the shores of this small river. I coincide with these views, which are as sound to-day as when they were written, over 20 years ago. There does not appear to be any change from the conditions formerly existing unless it be, as predicted, a less depth of water upon the shoals at the mouth of the river, and the presence now just within its mouth of a mussel bank, forming a middle ground, or island, which is bare at low water and occupies nearly its whole bed. The river at present is of no commercial value; its importance as a shipbuilding locality, which it had in earlier days, would not be revived even were the river improved, and but an insignificant commerce would be possible in this sparsely-settled region. The cost of the improvement would be very great; even the removal of the mussel shoal just within the mouth of the river would probably exceed $25,000. I am therefore of the opinion that the mouth of North River is not worthy of improvement. Very respectfully, your obedient servant, Brig. Gen. THOMAS L. CASEY, S. M. MANSFIELD, Lieut. Col. of Engineers. Chief of Engineers, U. S. A. |