Approaches on Cincinnati side. To raise the wagon-way 21 feet on eight brick arches between present main abutment and Front street: 75 cubic yards additional coping stone, at $25. $21.750 13,500 5,100 For two bridges for wagon-road across Front street, each 10 feet wide, and 80foot span. 1.875 5,000 For abutments for wagon-bridge over Front street, 333 cubic yards masonry, at $18... 5,994 Embankment on wagon-approach from city grade to crossing of Front street, Masonry for piers of span across Front street, 244 cubic yards, at $18.. 4,392 Masonry of two piers for span of bridge across Eggleston avenue, 1,140 cubic yards, at $18.... 15 iron trestles, 30 feet apart, including foundations and connecting beams, (average 45 feet in length,) at $1,500.. 22,500 20,520 Railroad span of 97 feet.... 6,000 13 iron trestles, in a distance of 410 feet, height from 27 to 37 feet 15, 600 Two piers for railroad span across Kilgore street, 185 cubic yards masonry, at $18.. Railroad span of 45 feet across Kilgore street. 3, 330 1,500 33 iron trestles, 30 feet apart, decreasing in height from 30 feet to 15 feet in a distance of 990 feet 24,750 Piers for bridge at intersection of Pearl and Front streets, 150 cubic yards masonry, at $18. 2,700 Railroad bridge, 75-foot span, between Pearl and Front streets. 3,400 800 feet railway embankment, descending to grade of Front street, retained by masonry walls: Cost of raising trusses already erected, and making necessary changes. 10,000 Total cost of proposed modifications 288,605 Wooden trestle-work from Front street, Cincinnati, to Little Miami depot.. Amount that might have been saved by constructing a high bridge originally. Pier No. 6 and appurtenances. $94, 200 22,400 Cost of raising trusses and alterations of roadway 5, 400 10,000 132,000 There are several things about this bridge which demonstrate the necessity of having some one of skill and judgment to represent the United States, and to decide upon the site of every bridge built under its laws over navigable streams, and upon the location of their piers. The position selected for the channel-span is one instance to the point. It is over the main channel at an unimportant stage. The law cannot be -specific in such a matter, and no general law could be adequate for all cases. Some discretionary power should be lodged with some one, as each case arises. It would materially aid the bridge companies. There has been a United States officer in charge of the improvement of the Ohio River all the time the bridge has been building, and his advice and assistance, at any time, could have been obtained, but we cannot learn that they were ever sought. Cases may frequently arise in which it is impossible to comply with the exact letter of the law; and yet it would not be safe for the interests of navigators to permit bridge companies to decide, upon their own responsibility, what modifications are necessary, and at the same time not injurious to navigators. The provision that the clear channel span shall be 400 feet, and the next one 220, uses up so much of the river space that there is but little margin left for selecting a place for a draw. In the case now before us, the Newport and Cincinnati Bridge Company seem to have been forced by circumstances to place their draw where it is. The vital difficulty, however, is that no low bridge with any kind of a draw is admissible in this locality. Appendix E. WASHINGTON, D. C., February 7, 1871. GENERAL: I have the honor to transmit herewith a report of the board of United States engineers on the Ohio River bridges, giving the condition of their investigations up to this date. The report states the impracticability of their completing the final report upon the details of the bridges already constructed before the 4th of March, and offers a project of a general law in regard to bridging the Ohio River hereafter, with accompanying remarks explanatory of the necessity for the provisions of the law. Yours, respectfully, G. K. WARREN, Major Engineers and Brt. Maj. Gen. U. S. A., President of the Foard. Brigadier General A. A. HUMPHREYS, Chief of Engineers, United States Army, WASHINGTON, D. C., February 7, 1871. GENERAL: The board of engineers appointed to report on Ohio River bridges would respectfully state that, after mature deliberation, they have concluded that they cannot get their report ready in time to be submitted at the present session of Congress. The questions to be considered are so important that they require the most careful investigation. There are in all eight bridges over the Ohio River, which, by act of Congress, we are required to consider. They are as follows: The Steubenville railroad-bridge, the Wheeling suspension-bridge, the Bellaire railroad-bridge, the Parkersburgh railroad-bridge, the Newport and Cincinnati railroad-bridge, the Covington and Cincinnati suspensionbridge, the Louisville railroad-bridge, and the Paducah bridge. Of these the bridges at Steubenville and Wheeling, and the suspension-bridge at Cincinnati, have been finished for several years; that at Louisville for one year; that at Parkersburgh has just been finished; the Bellaire bridge will probably be finished early in the summer; the Newport and Cincinnati bridge is half finished, and the Paducah bridge has not been begun. It is manifest that no delay in the consideration of a bridge that is already completed can affect injuriously the existing status. The only bridges, therefore, that require speedy consideration are those that are in process of construction. We have already reported at length on the Newport and Cincinnati bridge, giving at the same time a general description of all the others, and the report has been transmitted to Congress, and has been printed. The modifications which, in the judgment of the board, should be made in this bridge have been clearly indicated. They cannot, in any way, be affected by the condition of affairs at any other bridge. At Bellaire the piers in the river are all finished, and one span of the superstructure is in place. The bridge is being built according to law, and it is believed that no changes will be required. The other unfinished bridge is that at Paducah, toward which nothing has yet been done, except to secure a charter from Congress. Our surveys have all been made, and the maps are nearly completed, but the report cannot be finished before the 4th of March next. Under these circumstances we have thought it best to take ample time for the consideration of the other bridges. As our examinations and surveys have already given us sufficient information to enable us to recommend the necessary legislation for future bridges, which is a matter that need not in any way be complicated with the question of the bridges already built. we have concluded to submit the following project of a law in regard to bridges over the Ohio River, which we believe to be reasonable and just, and to require no more of bridge companies than is absolutely essential for the preservation of the rights of navigation. A BILL to authorize the construction of bridges across the Ohio River. Be it enacted, &c., That every bridge hereafter erected across the Ohio River, above the mouth of the Big Sandy, shall have at least one spau of a height of not less than 90 feet above low water, and of not less than 40 feet above local highest water, measured to the lowest part of the span; that every bridge hereafter erected across the Ohio River below the mouth of the Big Sandy shall have at least one span of a height of not less than 100 feet above low water, and of not less than 40 feet above highest water, measured to the lowest part of the span; that this high span shall give a clear opening of at least 400 feet between the piers, measured at rightangles to the current at every stage. and that it shall be placed over that portion of the river used by boats during ordinary stages of water: Provided, That in case this high span is not over the low-water channel, suitable arrangements be made elsewhere to permit the passage of single boats under the bridge at low water; that all bridges over the Ohio River below the Covington and Cincinnati suspension-bridge shall have, in addition to the high span prescribed above, a pivot-draw, giving two clear openings of 160 feet each, measured at right angles to the current at the average stage of water in the river, and located in a part of the bridge that can be safely and conveniently reached at that stage; and that said draw shall be opened promptly, upon reasonable signal, for the passage of boats whose construction shall not be such as to admit of their passage under the permanent spans of said bridge, except when trains are passing over the same. SEC. 2. And be it further enacted, That the piers of the high span and the piers of the draw shall be built parallel with the current at that stage of the river which is most important for navigation; and that no ripraps or other outside protection for imperfect foundations will be permitted in the channel-way of the high span, or of the draw openings. SEC. 3. And be it further enacted, That any person, company, or corporation authorized to construct a bridge across the Ohio River by the States upon whose territory said bridge will abut, shall submit to the Secretary of War, for his examination, a design of the bridge and piers, and a map of the location, giving, for the space of at least one mile above and one mile below the proposed location, the topography of the banks of the river, the shore-lines at high and low water, the direction of the current at all stages, and the soundings accurately showing the bed of the stream, and shall furnish such other information as may be required for a full and satisfactory understanding of the subject by the Secretary of War; and if the Secretary of War is satisfied that the provisions of the law have been complied with in regard to location, the building of the piers may be at once commenced; but if it shall appear that the conditions prescribed by this act cannot be complied with at the location where it is desired to construct the bridge, the Secretary of War shall detail a board, composed of three experienced officers of the Corps of Engineers, to examine the case, and may, on their recommendation, authorize such modifications in the requirements of this act as will permit the construction of the bridge: Provided, That the free navigation of the river be not materially injured thereby. SEC. 4. And be it further enacted, That all parties owning or operating bridges over the Ohio River shall maintain, at their own expense, from sunset to sunrise throughout the year, such lights on their bridges as may be required by the Light-House Board for the security of navigation. SEC. 5. And be it further enacted, That any bridge constructed under this act, and according to its limitations, shall be a lawful structure, and shall be recognized and known as a post-route, upon which, also, no higher charge shall be made for the transmission over the same of the mails, the troops, and the munitions of war of the United States, than the rate per mile paid for the transportation over the railroads or public highways leading to said bridge; and in case of any litigation arising from any obstruction or alleged obstruction to the navigation of said river created by the construction of any bridge under this act, the cause or question arising may be tried before the district court of the United States of any State in which any portion of said obstruction or bridge touches. SEC. 6. And be it further enacted, That the right to alter or amend this act so as to prevent or remove all material obstructions to the navigation of said river by the construction of bridges is hereby expressly reserved. SEC. 7. And be it further enacted, That joint resolution No. 10, approved April 7, 1869, authorizing the construction of a bridge over the Ohio River, at Paducah, be, and the same hereby is, repealed. EXPLANATORY REMARKS. In draughting the above bill the board had before them Senate bill No. 622, second session Fortieth Congress, which was discussed in the Senate, but not passed, a substitute having been adopted directing the appointment of a board of engineers. The following remarks are annexed, in order to explain the reasons for some of the requirements in the bill which we recommend, and also the changes from Senate bill No. 622. Section 1. This section has been greatly modified. Measurements of height are now to be made to "the lowest part of the span" instead of to the bottom chord, because bridge-builders sometimes suspend floor-beams, or other members, below the bottom chord. Different heights above low water have been prescribed for bridges above and below the mouth of the Big Sandy. The reasons for this are : 1st. There are already four bridges built above the Big Sandy with a height of 90 feet above low water, while those already built below this river have a height of 100 feet, excepting the Ohio Falls bridge, which has an exceptional location, and the Newport and Cincinnati bridge, 714 feet above low water, which we have recommended to be raised to 100 feet above. A. The greater rise and fall of the river below the mouth of the Big Sandy, and the greater duration of high stages, make higher bridges necessary to secure the same accommodation to river commerce. 3d. The natural features of the mountain regions of Virginia and Kentucky are such as to compel all east and west railroads to cross the Ohio above the mouth of the Big Sandy, while the roads crossing below will be those seeking southern connections, and the roads of each class will be on a par with each other as to heights of bridges. We have placed the widest opening in that part of the river ordinarily used by coal-fleets, for whose accommodation these wide openings were designed, and have introduced a provision for the benefit of packet steamers, that run when the river is too low for coal-tows, by requiring a high span over the lowwater channel also, if it be not covered by the longest span. This only requires that this span be what is called a "through or "overgrade" bridge, with the track on the bottom chord; but it is not necessary to specify any particular length of span, as economy in constructing the piers will naturally lead bridge companies to adopt for all their spans over the river proper such dimensions as will easily accommodate single steamers. In the present state of commerce on the Ohio River the largest river steamers very seldom ascend above Cincinnati, and the bridges already constructed have made it impossible for them to do so without lowering their chimneys. Boats that habitually run on the Upper Ohio are fitted with the necessary contrivances for this purpose, but those that usually ply between St. Louis and New Orleans, between which ports there are no bridges, have no such facilities, and are very loath to obtain them. Many of these boats have chimneys 5 feet in diameter, extending 50 feet above the hurricane-deck, and it is both difficult and dangerous to lower them. These boats often make extra trips to Cincinnati during high water, when advantageons freights are offered, and if arrangements are not made that will continue to permit this, the commerce of that city, and of Louisville, will be injuriously affected. At present the only bridge between the Covington and Cincinnati suspension-bridge and New Orleans is that at Louisville. This bridge, however, besides being a high bridge, has a draw that answers both for the canal and for the river when it is high, and therefore is no obstacle. Our object is to secure the same admirable provisions for navigation at all other bridges in this section of the river. Another important consideration affecting the question of draws in high bridges is the necessity of some provision in time of war for the speedy traus portation of large bodies of troops by steamboats gathered from all sources. Many of the boats so collected would be unable to pass under bridges in high, or even in ordinary water, and serious disasters might result therefrom. The great advantages to he reaped from speedy concentration of troops are so forcibly demonstrated by the course of the present war in Europe as to make this question one that we ourselves caunot safely neglect. Section 2. This section does not differ materially from the same section in Senate bill No. 622. It allows more latitude in the choice of a site for a bridge, thus making more important the provisions of section 3, which follows. Section 3. This is the same as the corresponding one in the former bill, except that it gives more authority to the Secretary of War, permitting him to sanction departures from the exact text of the law in cases where a strict construction would needlessly embarrass bridge companies, and where such departures would not injure navigation. It places the whole subject under the control of a cabinet officer, whose position guarantees a due regard to the rights of both river and rail. This control has already been given to the Secretary of War in the case of the International Bridge Company at Buffalo, and it has resulted in a considerable pecuniary saving to them, as well as in a decided gain to navigation. The board of engineers have recommended that the draw of this bridge be placed near the shore, instead of in the middle of the river, thus removing it from a current of six miles an hour to one of four miles, and still maintaining the necessary depth for navigation. The bridge company are also the gainers by the change in that part of their bridge that crosses Black Rock Harbor. (Section 4, of Senate bill No. 622, has been omitted as unnecessary.) Section 4. This section provides for the proper lighting of channel-ways of bridges. As a matter of fact, all bridge companies on the Ohio River do light their channel spans; but it was thought best to incorporate this duty in a general law, lest it should at any time be neglected. Section 5. Copied without change from Senate bill No. 622. Section 7. This section repeals the joint resolution authorizing the construction of a bridge across the Ohio at Paducah.. This joint resolution is identical with that under which the obnoxious Newport and Cincinnati bridge is being built, and unless repealed at once, before work is begun, may result in the creation at Paducah of a similar obstruction. The effect of repealing this joint resolution will not be to prevent the construction of a bridge at this place, but only to compel it to conform to the law which we have herewith presented. The general effect of the proposed law is to authorize the construction of bridges at any points on the Ohio River for which a bridge company can get charters from the two States owning the shores. Respectfully submitted. G. K. WARREN, Major Engineers and Brevet Major General, United States Army. Major of Engineers and Brevet Major General. Major Engineers and Brevet Colonel. General A. A. HUMPHREYS, Chief of Engineers, United States Army. APPENDIX L 1. UNITED STATES ENGINEER OFFICE, Louisville, Kentucky, July 31, 1871. GENERAL: I have the honor to transmit the following report of the operations at the improvement of the falls of the Ohio River and Louisville Canal, for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1871. On the 21st of July, 1870, I received the official notice that $250,000 had been appropriated for this work, by the act approved July 11, 1870. I accordingly awarded the contracts for widening the prism of the Louisville and Portland Canal to the lowest bidders, at the letting on the 27th of May, 1870, referred to in my last annual report. A few days after this work of widening the prism of the canal was begun, it was found that in rear of the old side-walls which we removed there was a large mass of loose rock, covered with a few feet of earth and cemented together with earth. We had no reason to expect anything else in rear of these walls but clear earth, either from the appearance or from any information which we had received from those who have been employed on this canal during many years. After we made this discovery, several of these persons did remember that this mass of rock was derived from previous attempts at enlarging the canal, and was thrown in behind the side-walls and covered with earth to save the expense of lifting it on the high banks which border the canal. This circumstance, together with frequent strikes on part of the workmen, delayed the progress of the work very much, and this delay, together with the lateness of the date on which the appropriation was made, made it possible for only section No. 1 to be completed last season. The contractors on sections Nos. 2, 3, and 4 did considerable work, but still have a large amount to do, and by your authority have been granted an extension until the end of the present season. In the mean time, the contractors for the enlargement of the entrance to the canal, and those for the completion of the new locks, referred to in my last annual report, prosecuted their respective works with vigor, but did not complete them. But, as no practical benefit would have resulted, even if they had completed their contracts, and as the diffi |