general solicitor of that company a Board of Engineer officers was constituted to further examine the questions at issue with the view to avoiding all litigation between the United States and the railroad company The Board failed to effect arrangements with the company, and in consequence the Department of Justice has been requested to instruct the United States district attorney for the western district of Pennsylvania to continue proceedings in the case and press them to final completion. For report of the Board and action thereon, see Appendix D D 3. 4. Bridge across the Arkansas River at Little Rock, Arkansas.—The authority to bridge the Arkansas River claimed by the Little Rock and Fort Smith Railway Company is derived from an act of the general assembly of the State of Arkansas of January 22, 1855, and from an act of Congress of July 28, 1866 (United States Statutes, volume 14, page 338). It does not appear that there is authority granted by this last act to bridge the Arkansas River at Little Rock except by implication, and certainly there is no authority given to the Secretary of War to approve or disapprove the plan or location of any bridge constructed by the above company. It has been assumed by the War Department in cases where 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 to its being built that he cannot authorize or forbid its construction, but when satisfied that any intended structure of this kind, or any other, will seriously impair the navigation of the channels of the navigable waters of the United States the Secretary of War has not failed, through the Department of Justice, to endeavor to prevent the erection of such structures. The parties interested in the above bridge have been informed that if some slight changes suggested are made, no objection would be interposed to its construction. (See Appendix D D 4.) 5. Bridge of the Saint Louis and San Francisco Railway Company across the Arkansas River at Van Buren, Arkansas.-The construction of this bridge was authorized by act of Congress of July 3, 1882. The plan and location submitted to the Secretary of War was referred for examination to a Board of Engineer officers, who recommended a change in the proposed location of the bridge. Objection was urged by the railway company against such change as involving an increase of expenditure which, it was claimed, the company could not afford. The location originally proposed was finally approved by the Secretary of War February 1, 1884, upon the recommendation of the Chief of Engineers, and upon the following conditions, which have been accepted by the company, viz, that in case the building of the bridge shall occasion any obstruction to navigation, the company shall construct, at its own expense, such works as the Secretary of War may direct to remove such obstructions, this obligation being in addition to the requirements of section 6 of the act authorizing the construction of the bridge and relating to works to be constructed and maintained by the company for guiding steamboats, rafts, &c., "safely through the passage-way." (See Appendix D D 5.) 6. Bridge of the Chippewa Falls and Western Railway Company across the Saint Croix River, in the States of Wisconsin and Minnesota, authorized by the act of April 28, 1884.—The design and drawing of this bridge, with map of the proposed location, were submitted to the War Department by the vice-president of the company May 2, 1884, as required by law, and approved by the Secretary of War May 8, on the recommendation of the Chief of Engineers. 7. Pile and ponton bridge across the Mississippi River at Dubuque, Iowa-The secretary of the East Dubuque Bridge Company transmitted to the War Department July 6, 1882, plans and specifications for the proposed bridge, which, having been referred to Maj. A. Mackenzie, Corps of Engineers, were by him returned with a report, dated July 31, 1882, recommending certain modifications of the plan, reducing the draw-opening to about 400 feet. These were concurred in by this office and the War Department, and adopted by the bridge company August 21, 1882. The plan, however, could not at the time receive the approval of the Secretary of War, for the reason that the act of March 3, 1875, authorizing the bridge, fixed the width of the draw at not less than 500 feet. The difficulty was obviated by the act of May 29, 1884, which authorizes for the bridge, a draw of not less than 400 feet in width, and thus permitted the approval by the Secretary of War, June 6, 1884, of the modified plan above referred to. For the correspondence on this subject see Appendix C C 2 of the last Annual Report of the Chief of Engineers. 8. Bridges across the Great Kanawha River, West Virginia.-In reply to a reference to this office of a letter of April 30, 1884, from the chairman of the Committee on Commerce of the Senate, referring to the War Department a bill (Senate 1441) "to authorize the construction of bridges across the Great Kanawha and to prescribe dimensions for the same," with the request that it be referred to a Board of Engineer officers for consideration and report. The Board constituted in compliance thereto submitted a report covering all of the points in the case, with its views and conclusions thereon, which were fully concurred in by the Chief of Engineers. In view of its importance to the general subject of bridging navigable waters, the report was printed as Senate Ex. Doc. No. 114, Fortyeighth Congress, first session. IMPROVEMENT OF THE HARBOR AT DULUTH, MINNESOTA, AND OF THE ENTRANCE TO SUPERIOR BAY, LAKE SUPERIOR-IMPROVEMENT OF THE HARBOR AT GRAND MARAIS, MINNESOTA. Officer in charge, Maj. Chas. J. Allen, Corps of Engineers. 1. Harbor at Duluth, Minnesota.-The present plan of improvement was adopted in 1881, and is based upon the report and estimates of a Board of Engineers convened in January, 1881, which contemplated the maintenance of the dredged areas and enlargement of the harbor by dredg ing, as follows: 1. On a line from Rice's to Minnesota Point; 2. On a line past the Blast Furnace Docks to intersection with the channel of the Saint Louis River; 3. On a line parallel to Minnesota Point; and, 4. Along the west side of Rice's Point, in Saint Louis Bay. The dredging to provide for a depth of 16 feet at low water. The cost of the plan, including the maintenance for the present of the canal piers, placed at $212,988.36. This estimate, for reasons stated in appendix, was increased to $305,424. The inner (present) harbor of Duluth is an artificial one, succeeding the cutting of a canal in 1870 and 1871 by the city of Duluth through Minnesota Point. The work came under the charge of the Government in 1873 in consequence of an act of Congress making appropriation for the same. The original depth in the harbor where the dock lines now are averaged 9 feet. Before the adoption of the present project (1881) the harbor area was much restricted. The proposed dredged basin averages 3,200 feet in length by 1,450 feet in width. The area dredged over under the present project averages 3,000 feet in length by 850 in width. The areas dredged have required retouching more or less since 1873. During the summer and fall of 1883 certain of the shoals were removed twice. Over the dredged area the depth varies. Three-fourths of this area, mostly near the docks, has depths of 16 feet and more, some scattering shoals excepted. The channel to the Blast Furnace has a width of about 100 feet, with a narrow channel of 14 feet in depth. Between the Blast Furnace and the submerged dike the channel is 12 feet deep and 50 feet wide. From the dike to the Saint Louis River the width of channel is 50 feet, with depth of 14 feet. These channels are not completed. Amount expended under present project to June 30, 1884 (including outstanding liabilities), $99,826.50. The appropriation of $125,000 asked for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1886, is to be applied to dredging and maintenance of piers bordering the canal. July 1, 1884, amount expended during fiscal year, exclusive of July 1, 1883, amount available.... outstanding liabilities July 1, 1883.. July 1, 1884, outstanding liabilities July 1, 1884, amount available..... Amount appropriated by act approved July 5, 1884. Amount available for fiscal year ending June 30, 1885............... $21,326 72 $20,662 30 20,755 83 Amount (estimated) required for completion of existing project per revised estimate... Amount that can be profitably expended in fiscal year ending June 30, 1886. (See Appendix E E 1.) ' 570 89 45, 000 00 45,570 89 175, 424 00 75,000 00 2. Dredging Superior Bay, Wisconsin.-The present project for the improvement of this harbor was adopted in 1881, and contemplated providing a depth of 16 feet of water by dredging, as follows: 1. Deepening the channel between the piers at the entry. 2. Dredging channel from the entry past the mouth of the Nemadji River around and parallel to the shore of Superior Bay, to Quebec Wharf. 3. Thence from Quebec Wharf along the west side of the bay to an intersection with the channel of the Saint Louis River, opposite Connor's Point. 4. Up the Nemadji River for about half a mile. The deepening of the old Quebec Wharf Channel was afterwards added. Total estimated cost, $312,080, including preservation of the piers at the entry. The condition of the harbor and works at the close of the fiscal year was as follows: A least depth of 16 feet throughout the entry; and in the Quebec and Northern Pacific Dock Channel generally 16 feet depth, though parts of the channel have shoaled to 13 feet since October, 1883. Before the work of improvement commenced, in 1881, under the present project, the ruling depth in the entry was 11 feet. Amount expended since adoption of the present project, $53,847.45. The sum of $50,000 asked for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1886, to be expended in dredging and maintenance of piers. July 1, 1883, amount available... July 1, 1884, amount expended during fiscal year, exclusive of outstanding liabilities July 1, 1883.. July 1, 1884, outstanding liabilities.. $23,326 00 $14,763 96 4,538 95 19,302 91 4,023 09 45,000 00 49, 023 09 July 1. 1884, amount available... Amount appropriated by act approved July 5, 1884.. Amount available for fiscal year ending June 30, 1885 Amount that can be profitably expended in fiscal year ending June 30, 1886. 217,080 00 75,000 00 3. Harbor at Grand Marais, Minnesota.-The project for improvement adopted in 1879 provided for a breakwater, and for dredging within the area bounded by Mayhew's Point and the inner shore-line, to afford anchorage for vessels drawing 16 feet. Work upon the breakwater was completed August 31. Dredging was resumed August 1, and continued until the 6th day of September, when the allotment for dredging was exhausted. In addition, the shore end of breakwater was strengthened. Before improvement commenced there was but a narrow space under the protection of the Point for vessels seeking refuge during storms, and the entrance was of insufficient depth. Vessels drawing 16 feet of water can now make the harbor. The harbor area should be considera bly enlarged by dredging. The appropriation of $20,000 asked for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1886, is to be expended in deepening and enlarging the harbor area and in maintaining the breakwater. Total amount expended to June 30, 1884 (including outstanding liabilities). $57, 283 30 Estimated cost of original project 139,669 40 July 1, 1883, amount available.. 19,811 29 July 1, 1884, amount expended during fiscal year, exclusive of outstanding liabilities July 1, 1883. 17,094 59 Amount (estimated) required for completion of existing project..... Amount that can be profitably expended in fiscal year ending June 30, 1896. (See Appendix E E 3.) 69,669 40 20,000 00 HARBORS ON LAKE SUPERIOR (EAST OF SUPERIOR CITY), ON GREEN BAY, AND ON THE WESTERN SHORE OF LAKE MICHIGAN NORTH OF MILWAUKEE. Officer in charge, Maj. J. W. Barlow, Corps of Engineers. 1. Ontonagon Harbor, Michigan.-Previous to the improvement of this harbor the channel at the river mouth was but 7 feet deep at the shoal 5908 EN- --18 est point, and the shifting nature of the lake bottom caused frequent changes in its position. The project of constructing piers extending from each bank of the river mouth lakeward to the 18-foot curve, and dredging a channel not less than 12 feet deep between them, was adopted in 1867. During the fiscal year ending June 30, 1884, the east pier was extended 250 feet, and 200 linear feet of superstructure was built over the same pier. The amount expended during the year was $16,828.67. The total expenditures, amounting to $257,355.81, have resulted in the construction of an east pier 2,265 feet in length and a west pier 2,275 feet in length, and the removal of 10,5463 cubic yards of sand from the outer bar, forming a channel 100 feet wide at its narrowest point, with a depth of about 12 feet at low water. It is proposed to apply the appropriation of $15,000 made at the last session of Congress in pier construction. The appropriation of $60,000 asked for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1886, is for further pier extension. July 1, 1883, amount available... $15,932 16 July 1, 1884, amount expended during fiscal year, exclusive of outstanding liabilities July 1, 1883..... 15,787 97 July 1, 1884, amount available.... Amount appropriated by act approved July 5, 1884.. Amount available for fiscal year ending June 30, 1885 Amount (estimated) required for completion of existing project.... Amount that can be profitably expended in fiscal year ending June 30, 1886. (See Appendix F F 1.) 144 19 15,000 00 15, 144 19 91, 170 00 60,000 00 2. Eagle Harbor, Michigan.-Previous to the improvement of this harbor the entrance was obstructed by a rocky reef, having about 9 feet of water at the shoalest point. The project for its improvement was adopted in 1866, and modified in 1868, 1874, and 1877. It included the blasting of a channel 130 feet wide and 14 feet deep through the reef, which has been marked by a guiding-crib on each side. The modified project was completed in 1879, and meets the present demands of commerce. The expenditures to June 30, 1884, have been $93,211.07. No work has been done during the fiscal year. The funds available are reserved for repairs which may be necessary, and will probably be sufficient for some years to come. No appropriation is asked. July 1, 1883, amount available. July 1, 1884, amount expended during fiscal year, exclusive of outstanding liabilities July 1, 1883.... July 1, 1884, amount available.. (See Appendix F F 2.) $3,802 53 13 60 3,788 93 3. Marquette Harbor, Michigan.-Previous to improvement this harbor afforded no protection to vessels during easterly and northerly gales. The original project of improvement was adopted in 1866, and consisted in the construction of a breakwater 2,000 feet in length, varying from 25 to 40 feet in width, and built to a height of 6 feet above water, at an estimated cost of $385,129.58. The project was subsequently modified by reducing the width to 20, 25, and 30 feet, and the work was completed during the fiscal year ending June 30, 1876, a length of 2,010 feet having been built, at a cost of $290,646.55. |