the abrading action of the sea and tides upon the shore was checked suddenly, the channel opened and deepened, and began to attract attention as an available entry to the harbor. There was, however, a limit to this reaction, and at a time when the jettee still extended to a distance of 560 feet beyond low-water mark, a normal and comparatively constant condition of things was established. The shore no longer encroached upon the deep water, except upon the east side of the jettee, where it was protected from the tremendous rush of the ebb-tide out of the deep reservoir within, and formed an angle having the jettee at its apex. It was evident that the jettee had reached the limit of its usefulness in building out and maintaining the shore. The curves in the tracing show this remarkably, where the 1-fathom curve on the east side is 100 feet beyond the 2-fathom curve on the west side; the 2-fathom curve on the east reaching nearly to the end of the jettee, while opposite to it are 4 and 5 fathoms. Removing 250 feet of the jettee would bring it back to the 1-fathom curve on the east side, and give an opportunity for the escape of perhaps double the amount of water through the channel, and probably do away with the necessity of dredging altogether. I do not think any apprehension need be felt of the Drunken Dick Shoal approaching the jettee. as it is removed, believing that the increased pressure against it would at least retain it in its present position, and knowing that the end of the jettee rests upon a steep shelf of marl rock, which would itself act as a break and furnish no material for filling up the channel. My idea would be to begin at the extreme end of the jettee, and remove a section at a time of, say, 50 feet, then allowing a little time for the development of the effect produced, take off another section, and so on, stopping as soon as the most favorable condition was reached. The whole to be done under careful supervision, and the material raised to be piled upon the jettee, inside of the 250 feet. That the effect would be favorable, I do not doubt; that it is needed, I am also convinced. At present there is some danger in entering and emerging from the channel, as the powerful tide that sweeps past its mouth, both on the ebb and flood, would turn a large vessel almost half-way round before it had time to clear the jettée or the shoal, and so make it dangerous to go in or out, except near slack-water. This would restrict the usefulness of the channel, even were it deep and open, and render shipmasters timid about using it. In support of these conclusions to which I have come, I would quote from a report made by Professor Bache, Coast Survey, Lieutenant Kurtz, United States Engineers, and Lieutenants Maffit, Maury, and Davis, United States Navy: "The deposit of sand on both sides of the jettee (Bowman's) has greatly modified the shore-lines, to which it has added, at a mean, more than 100 yards. The tendency of the obstruction which this work presents to the ebb is undoubtedly to deflect the water more through the north channel, and it is one of the considerations going to show the stability of the Sullivan Island channel, that it has not been more affected by the action of the jettee." * Lieutenant Maury, in another report, says: "The ebb-tide in this locality runs with great force, and over the jettee it is very rapid until half-ebb, when the exposure of the rocks by the falling of the water produces an eddy-current favorable to the deposit which the flood-tide has already made." Captain Bowman, in his report to the Chief of Engineers, of October 11, 1839, says: "The proposed work (the construction of the jettee) will cause the extension of Sullivan's Island to the south. It will concentrate the water upon the bar of the north channel, and increase its depth." Captain Cullum, in his report of November 10, 1857, to the commissioners of the State of South Carolina, for the improvement of Charleston Harbor, in conjunction with whom he was working, says: "Connected with the improvement," (that of dredging the channel,) "I deem it important to remove to the depth of 16 feet, at low water, the extreme outer end of Bowman's Jettee, which projects into the proposed channel." * After arriving at a more thorough knowledge of the depth of water around the jettee, I find that my former rough estimate of the cost of removal of 250 feet of it was entirely too small. Iderived my idea of the depth from the soundings on the east side. For a depth of 20 feet, and length of 250, I estimated the cost at $15,750, and for the same depth and length of 125 feet, it would be about $8,000. I send, herewith, a communication from Mr. Geo. W. Clark, transmitting tabular statements of the marine business of the port of Charleston, South Carolina. I have endeavored to obtain from the Chamber of Commerce, and they from other persons intimately acquainted with the business of the port, an estimate of the increased value of commerce which would follow a permanent improvement in the channel of entry. But I find that these estimates vary within large limits, and are practically of no value. The percentage of increase is variously put at 25, 50, and 100 per cent. I should say the first figure would be nearest the truth. A large amount of cotton is shipped to New York for exportation which would, with an increased depth of water on the bar, be sent directly from this port, thus increasing its business and prosperity. The export of the phosphates, which is rapidly becoming an important item, would be greatly increased. It is a heavy cargo, and requires deep draught for large vessels. I am indebted to my assistants, Messrs. Eppley and Guerrero, for their faithful and intelligent co-operation in the field-work. SIR: Acknowledging receipt of your communication of 20th instant, informing as to such information pertaining to the business of this port desired by yourself, duly to hand, I have the pleasure to transmit for your uses tabular statements as follows: A. Of vessels entered at this port during the year 1870 from foreign ports C.-Of vessels entered coast wise at this port during the year 1870.. B. Of vessels cleared at this port during the year 1870 for foreign ports E.-Imports at this port during 1870. $547,471 00 F.-Exports at this port during 1870 G.-Duties received during 1868, 1869, and 1870 11, 184, 208 00 705,873 62 In this connection, I beg to state that many vessels enter and clear at this port without reporting at this office, they being under license, and laden with domestic goods only. How large the number of such is, can only be conjectured. My opinion would place the number at, say 300 to 400, at least. Should any other statistics be desired, please advise. Respectfully, &c., GEORGE W. CLARK, Collector. WILLIAM LUDLOW, Captain Engineers, Brevet Lieutenant, Colonel U. S. A., Charleston, S. C. NOTE. The tabular statements are omitted as unnecessary, the information they contain being summarized in the letter of the collector above. APPENDIX Q. UNITED STATES ENGINEER OFFICE, Baltimore, Maryland, September 11, 1871. GENERAL: I have the honor to transmit herewith papers as follows: Improvement of Susquehanna River, near Havre de Grace. Improvement of Rappahannock River below Fredericksburgh. Improvement of Appomattox River below Petersburgh. Improvement of Cape Fear River below Wilmington. Wicomico River, near Salisbury, Maryland; James River and Kanawha Canal, enlargement and extension; Accotink, Neabsco, Quantico, Aquia, Choppawamasie, on Potomac River; Norfolk Harbor, Elizabeth and Nansemond Rivers; Roanoke River; Neuse River; Cape Fear and Deep Rivers, as high as La Grange. In a second package, recapitulations of each of the foregoing. In one or two cases the usual commercial statistics are not found. This is either because I was unable to procure them, after application to the proper officials, or else they are to be shortly forwarded with special reports. Very respectfully, your obedient servant, Brigadier General A. A. HUMPHREYS, WM. P. CRAIGHILL, Major of Engineers. Chief of Engineers, U. S. Army, Washington, D. C. Q 1. Annual report for fiscal year ending June 30, 1871, of the improvement of the entrance to the harbor of Baltimore, in Patapsco River, and Chesapeake Bay. On the 1st of July, 1870, operations had been some time suspended for want of funds. By the act approved July 11, 1870, an appropri ation of $42,900 was made. The dredges and scows which belonged to the United States were taken in hand, and repaired sufficiently to carry them through the remainder of the working-season, already welladvanced. Dredging began about the 1st of September and was continued during that month and the next, in the lower or new channel. During November the dredges were worked in the Brewerton Channel. On the 6th of November the charge of the improvement was transferred to me by Colonel J. H. Simpson, who was ordered to another post of duty. The dredging was discontinued about the close of November, and the machines brought to anchor for the winter near town, in a secure place. The dredges and scows were shortly afterward sold, under the authority of the Honorable Secretary of War. They were old, and for a long time had annually needed heavy repairs, making them an expensive property for the United States. Other reasons were set forth in my report of November 12, 1870, in which the sale was recommended. These need not be repeated here. The property was sold, after due advertisement, for fair prices. The proceeds are available for continuing the improvement. An appropriation of $50,000 was made by the act approved March 3, 1871. After due advertisement, a contract for dredging was made, under date of April 20, 1871, with Mr. M. F. Brainard, of Albany, work to begin in June. The dredging has been confined to the Brewerton Channel, in which Captain J. H. Cooper, the efficient port warden, has zealously co-operated with two of the dredges under his charge. Mr. Brainard, although apparently putting forth his best efforts toward the fulfillment of his contract, has not made as good progress as was anticipated. His machinery is good, but, being new, has worked stiffly and has proved weak at some points. A constant improvement has lately been observed in his work, and a still greater change for the better during the remainder of the season is confidently expected. Proposals will be invited and new contracts made for additional dredging in both channels, covering the whole of the funds available for the work. The Brewerton Channel needs greater width, as does also the new channel below. The Brewerton Channel is provided with range-beacons, which greatly facilitate its use, but these very important auxili aries for the efficient use of the lower channel have not yet been furnished. It is hoped their erection will not be much longer delayed. An interesting letter to Colonel Simpson, from Port Warden Cooper, being pertinent to the matter under consideration, is here inserted and commended to special attention. PILOT OFFICE, 83 Thames Street, Baltimore, November 24, 1870. GENERAL: It affords me pleasure to say that at your invitation, on the 19th instant, a delegation from the Baltimore (Maryland) Pilots' Association, (including myself.) examined the Craighill Channel. We sounded it thoroughly from both sides of the steamer, going down, and at various points coming up, and found 21 feet of water at average low tide. This channel can be used by steamers drawing 19 or 20 feet, as long as the buoys remain in their present position; but for sailing vessels of heavy draught its width, 200 feet, is too narrow to use without assistance of steam-tugs, as the buoys cannot be relied upon, it being apprehended that the running of ice will remove or displace them, and as there are no landmarks that can be used in running this channel, it will require beaconlights to be erected before its general use can be availed of. But with more width of channel, and the erection of lights, it will not only be found perfectly safe, but five miles will be saved in the sailing distance between Baltimore and Cape Henry. With much respect, general, I remain your obedient servant, JOHN H. COOPER, President Baltimore (Maryland) Pilot Association. Brevet Brigadier General J. H. SIMPSON, Until lately, the depth of water aimed to be attained, and deemed to be sufficient, has been 22 feet at low water. The vast increase in the commercial importance of Baltimore since the late civil war, and the great development of her trade, especially by steam with foreign parts, has made the desire for a greater depth than 22 feet at low water very strong, and the urgency for it very great. Being called upon for estimates of the cost of obtaining a greater depth, communications were made, of the following tenor, to the Board of Trade, the Corn and Flour Exchange, and the harbor committee of the city council: UNITED STATES ENGINEER OFFICE, MY DEAR SIR: In your letter, March 27, is found the following: "They will be pleased to have, at your earliest convenience, separate estimates of the cost of dredging the Brewerton and Craighill Channels, both, to the depth of 21, 23, and 25 feet respectively, at medium low tide; and for width of 200, 300, and 500 feet in the Brewerton, and for 300 and 500 feet width in the Craighill Channel. Please recommend what you consider the most advisable width we should endeavor to obtain in either or both channels." As stated in a previous communication of March 28, 1871, the survey of the Patapsco was delayed by heavy rains and high winds. I regret you did not mention the cause of this delay, to which you refer in your late letter to the city council. I am able, however, now, to give the information you desire. To give a channel 24 feet deep at mean low water, of width as follows: Craighill Channel, 400 feet; Brewerton Channel, 250 feet; from end of Brewerton to Fort McHenry, 250 feet, will cost $757,000. To give a channel of the same width as just stated, but of a depth of 23 feet, will cost $542,000. I regard these widths as the smallest with which a great city like Baltimore should be satisfied. As to the depths, I have nothing to say, except that to obtain the depth of even 25 feet, though costly, would be probably the most remunerative in the end to the city. Any further information will be furnished with pleasure. Very respectfully, Mr. JOHN S. WILLIAMS, WM. P. CRAIGHILL, Major of Engineers. Chairman of Committee Corn and Flour Exchange, Baltimore, Maryland. An appropriation of $200,000 is recommended for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1873. Hon. John L. Thomas, jr., under date of July 28, 1871, writes as follows: In compliance therewith, I have to state that the sum collected, in coin, for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1871, as duties on imported merchandise, was $8,892,528 98, and the total receipts for the same period, including currency derived from tonnage, hospital, storage, steamboat inspections, licenses to pilots and engineers, &c., amounted to $3,993,036 70. The arrival and entry of vessels from foreign ports, for the last two and a half years, bear the following proportions: 1869, 650 vessels; 1870, 735 vessels; from January, 1871, to June 30, 1871, 508 vessels. |