2. To dredging channel 100 feet wide and 10 feet deep at mean low water, from deep water opposite Sand Point to the Lynu Harbor line (being the eastern half of the projected channel), 84, 156 cubic yards, measured in place, at 40 cents Contingencies, surveys, &c. (12 per cent.). 33,662 40 Total amount estimated for 37,870 20 55, 142 32 3. The balance of $2,562.61 may be expended in the removal of bowlders too large to be raised by the dredge, should any such be met with, in widening the channel at its turns, and in sloping the steepest parts of the western bank of the cut. In the above estimates allowance has been made for a slope along the eastern limits of the projected channels. The work specified in the first item above is required by the provis ion of the Board that the exposed portion of the channel shall be dredged and the rate of filling observed. This leaves $40,432.81 to be expended. Since the training-wall, according to the estimate of the Board, will cost $65,847, it is not desirable to retain this balance for the commencement of its construction, for if it is begun it should be constructed as rapidly as possible. Moreover, it is desirable to deepen the upper channel immediately, since this deepening will doubtless have some influence upon the rate of filling in the lower channel. For these reasons the work indicated in the second item is recommended The Board has assumed the cost of dredging in the channels at 28 cents per cubic yard, measured in place. The prices assumed above will therefore appear excessive and require explanation. The work in the lower channel (estimated for in the first item above) is in an exposed locality, without convenient shelter in the vicinity; the average cutting is less than 2 feet, and the dredged material must be carried a distance of five or six miles out to sea. Judging from present prices, I am of the opinion that this work cannot be done for less than 50 cents per cubic yard, measured in place. The work in the upper channel (estimated for in the second item above) is in a comparatively safe and sheltered locality; the average cutting is nearly 4 feet; but the dredged material must be transported a distance of six or eight miles. It is not safe to estimate the cost of this work at less than 40 cents per cubic yard, measured in place. It is probable that better terms can be obtained by contracting for this dredging by the cubic yard measured in scows. I therefore recommend that bids be called for in both scow-measurement and measurement in place, so that the terms most advantageous to the Government may be obtained. Should lower prices be thus secured, the money saved can be advantageously expended in further widening the upper channel. As regards the recommendation of the Board that before beginning work further borings be made near the White Rocks, in order to be sure that the dredging proposed is practicable, I beg leave to remark that if unknown rock exists in this immediate vicinity it is probably in the form of bowlders and not of ledge; and bowlders cannot be detected with certainty by boring. Furthermore, operations of this character cannot be satisfactorily conducted in this locality until the arrival of settled summer weather. In order to avoid delay, I therefore recommend that work be commenced at the upper part of the lower channel without regard to these investigations. A clause may be introduced into the specifications requiring the removal of all bowlders not too large to be raised by the dredge. A thorough examination in the vicinity of the White Rocks can then be made before work is commenced at the lower end of the channel. Very respectfully, your obedient servant, The CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. A. CHARLES W. RAYMOND, Major of Engineers. B 8. IMPROVEMENT OF MALDEN RIVER, MASSACHUSETTS. This river empties into the Mystic River, 3 miles above its mouth, at the navy-yard in Boston Harbor. The object of its improvement is to increase its navigability from its mouth up to the second draw-bridge, in Malden. Previous to the improvement there was a navigable depth of barely 7 feet at mean high water, the mean rise and fall of the tide being 9.8 feet, and the channel was narrow and crooked. The original project for the improvement was proposed in 1880. It contemplated the excavation of a channel 100 feet wide and 12 feet deep at mean high water up to the second draw-bridge, with two cut-offs, one east of the island near the junction of the Malden and Mystic rivers, and the other through the marsh land, about half a mile above. The existing project was adopted in 1882. It consists in the excavation of a channel following the natural bed of the river, having a depth of 12 feet at mean high water with a width of 100 feet up to the drawbridge in Malden, and of 75 feet from this point up to the second drawbridge near the rubber works. The original estimate of cost for the adopted project was $40,000. In addition to this estimate, at least $7,000 will be required to complete the work at present rates. To insure reasonable permanency to this improvement, the cut-offs contemplated in the original project should be executed and the banks revetted. For this work no estimate is submitted, as it does not form a part of the adopted project. In furtherance of this project, $10,000 was appropriated in the river and harbor act of August 2, 1882. The total amount expended to June 30, 1883, is $1,310.63. During the fiscal year, the contract entered into on May 23, 1883, with Mr. Robert Hamilton, jr., of Cumberland, Me., has been completed, 30,811 cubic yards of material (measured in scows) having been removed. The total amount excavated under this contract is 35,232 cubic yards. This work has improved the natural channel from the mouth of the river to the draw-bridge of Malden, a distance of 14 miles. Its least width is now 50 feet, being 70 feet at turns; and it has a depth of 12 feet at mean high water. The completion of the improvement in accordance with the existing project will require the expenditure of $37,000. This excess of $7,000 over the original estimate is due to the fact that the cost of dredging in this locality is greater than at first assumed, owing principally to unanticipated difficulties in disposing of the dredged material, and also to the fact that necessary slopes to the banks were not allowed for. The entire sum of $37,000 can be profitably expended during the fiscal year ending June 30, 1886. This work is located in the collection district of Boston. The nearest port of entry is Boston, Mass. The nearest light-house is Long Island Head Light in Boston Harbor. Money statement. July 1, 1883, amount available.. July 1, 1884, amount expended during fiscal year, exclusive of outstanding liabilities July 1, 1883.... $8,689 37 8,689 37 Amount (estimated) required for completion of existing project.... $37,000 00 37,000 00 B 9. REMOVAL OF SUNKEN VESSELS OR CRAFT ENDANGERING OR OBSTRUCTING NAVIGATION. The wreck of the schooner Sunbeam, lying in Gloucester Harbor, Massachusetts, was examined by order of the Chief of Engineers, and reported, on October 17, 1883, to be "an obstruction to navigation as contemplated by section 4 of the river and harbor act of 1880." Under this act it was accordingly removed by Mr. S. S. Andrews, of Biddeford, Me., for the sum of $675, the work being completed on April 10, 1884. This work was advertised in the usual way, and awarded to Mr. Andrews, he being the lowest bidder. The expenses of advertising, wharfage and inspection being $296.52, the total cost of the removal was $971.52. In accordance with the provisions of the act, the material landed was advertised and sold at public auction on May 15, 1884. The cargo being lime, was practically of no value. The amount received was $2.50, which was the amount of the expenses of the sale. Abstract of proposals and contract for removal of the wreck and cargo of the schooner Sunbeam from Gloucester Harbor, Massachusetts, opened March 4, 1884. * Will raise and deposit wieck in 20 fathoms of water outside Gloucester Harbor for $890, or will raise and put schooner aud cargo afloat in Gloucester Harbor for $1,298. The contract was awarded to Mr. S. S. Andrews, the lowest responsible bidder. B 10. PRELIMINARY EXAMINATION OF THE HEADLAND IN THE TOWN OF HULL, AT THE ENTRANCE TO BOSTON HARBOR, MASSACHUSETTS, WITH A VIEW TO ITS PROTECTION BY SEA-WALL OR OTHERWISE. UNITED STATES ENGINEER Office, Portland, Me., October 7, 1882. GENERAL: In compliance with instructions contained in Department letter of the 27th of September, I have the honor to state, in further response to Department circular of August 11, in relation to the proposed survey of the headland in the town of Hull, at the en trance to Boston Harbor, Massachusetts, being the northerly side of Telegraph Hill, south of Quarter Ledge, with a view to its protection by a sea-wall or otherwise, whether in my opinion this work is "worthy of improvement, and that it is a public necessity." The object in view for which the proposed survey is to be made is, in my opinion, worthy of improvement, and the work is a public necessity. Respectfully submitted. GEO. THOM, Colonel of Engineers, Brt. Brig. Gen., U. S. A. Brig. Gen. H. G. WRIGHT, SURVEY OF THE HEADLAND IN THE TOWN OF HULL, AT THE ENTRANCE TO BOSTON HARBOR, MASSACHUSETTS, WITH A VIEW TO ITS PROTECTION BY SEA-WALL OR OTHERWISE. UNITED STATES ENGINEER OFFICE, Boston, Mass., October 13, 1883. GENERAL: In compliance with instructions contained in your letter of April 24, 1883, I have the honor to transmit herewith the report of Mr. H. F. Bothfeld, assistant engineer, on the survey of the headland in the town of Hull (being the notherly side of Telegraph Hill, south of Quarter Ledge), and its protection by a sea-wall and stone apron. This survey, and the project based upon it, were made under the direction of my predecessor, Col. George Thom, Corps of Engineers, during the latter part of the year 1882. With reference to the proposed improvement I have the honor to submit the following remarks: The importance of the preservation of this headland is beyond question. It forms the northern boundary of the Hull Basin and the southern boundary of Nantasket Roads. Its deterioration must in some way be checked, or the anchorage at Hull will eventually be destroyed. Considering the great exposure of this locality to the action of the sea and of large masses of floating ice, I am of the opinion that sea-walls, located as Mr. Bothfeld proposes, will probably prove the cheapest effi cient protection which can be obtained, if the cost of procuring a title to the necessary land be left out of the question. The estimated cost of these improvements is $181,000. The acquisition of a title to the land required for the construction will, however, probably prove a matter of some difficulty and great expense. The site of the proposed work is now occupied by the track of the Nantasket Railroad. This road is constantly in use during the summer season, which is the season of construction. Even the temporary removal of its track and cessation of its traffic would involve heavy damages. Supposing, however, a satisfactory arrangement for this purpose could be made with the railroad company, it would be doubtless an indispensable condition that the company should have the right to lay its track upon the completed works. It would, in my opinion, be a matter of some difficulty for the United States to grant such a right, and at the same time retain the necessary power to repair, modify, or even remove its works in the future. Under these circumstances, it seems to me desirable to consider whether a sufficient protection for this locality cannot be obtained by a heavy stone riprap work placed beyond the line of high water, thus avoiding all expenditures connected with the site. The objections to such a construction are that the stones composing it would have to be of unusual size in order to resist the action of ice and sea; that in this locality the materials probably cannot be beached, but must be transported on land, by the railway or otherwise, at large expense; and, finally, that such a work will probably require continual repairs, and can hardly, under any circumstances, prove as efficient a protection as the sea-walls proposed. I am unwilling to recommend either of these methods of improvement until the changes in progress and the forces working to produce them have been more carefully studied. Reliable data for such an investigation do not now exist, but if, as Mr. Bothfeld recommends, the construction of these works be postponed for a year or two, the necessary information can be obtained by reference to the carefully established lines of the recent survey. This course I respectfully recommend to the Department. The proposed works of improvement are situated in the collection district of Boston. The nearest light-house is Narrows Light, situated on Brewster Spit or Bar, about 1 miles distant. Very respectfully, your obedient servant, The CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. A. CHAS. W. RAYMOND, Major of Engineers. REPORT OF MR. H. F. BOTHFELD, ASSISTANT ENGINEER. UNITED STATES ENGINEER OFFICE, Boston, Mass., January 1, 1883. GENERAL: In conformance with instructions received from you by letter dated August 23, 1882, a survey has been made, in September last, of the northerly side of Telegraph Hill, in the town of Hull, at the entrance to Boston Harbor, Massachusetts, with a view to its protection by sea-wall or otherwise. The result of the survey has been embodied in a map, a tracing copy of which accompanies this report. LOCATION OF TELEGRAPH HILL. This hill, the highest, if not also the most important, headland in the lower part of Boston Harbor, is called, on the United States Coast Survey chart of Boston Harbor, Nantasket Hill, but popularly goes by the name of Telegraph Hill, no doubt on account of a telegraph station having covered its summit for many years back. It is situated on a narrow tongue of land which branches off the Nantasket Beach, the southeastern boundary of Boston Harbor, almost under right angles, and extends from Point Allerton, the headland at the turning point, in a westerly direction over 2 miles, at a width varying between 120 feet at its narrowest and 2,600 feet at its widest part. This tongue of land forms the southern border of the main ship-channel and of the anchorage-ground called "Nantasket Roads," and is the northern barrier of the Hull Basin. Telegraph Hill is situated where the tongue of land is widest. Most of the houses of the older part of the town of Hull are situated on the southern slopes of this hill or in the narrow valley which separates Telegraph Hill from another hill on the southern shore. PRESERVATION OF TELEGRAPH HILL. On account of its being an important headland, which furnishes shelter against high winds to vessels at anchor in the "Hull Basin" and in the "Nantasket Roads," and also to vessels in the main ship-channel, its preservation should be considered of great importance. The United States Commissioners for Boston Harbor, in their report of January, 1867, stated that Nantasket Bluff (which means the northerly side of Telegraph Hill) had worn away inside six years 22 feet, at an average, along a distance of 800 feet, and recommend that a sea-wall be built for its protection. If fifteen years ago such protection was deemed necessary, it is much more so now, when the northerly slope of Telegraph Hill has been abraded to a much greater extent. |