missioners. A copy of this letter is also attached.* Nothing has since been done respecting the Delaware River. On March 21 Mr. W. R. Tucker, chairman of the Navigation Committee of the Board of Port Wardens, addressed a letter to the chairman of the Advisory Commission, stating the necessity for fixing wharf lines for the Schuylkill at an early date, that the city surveyor's department was awaiting the action of the Advisory Commission, and asking when the Commission expected to fix the lines. At a meeting held on March 25, 1881, the Advisory Commission fixed the wharf lines for the Schuylkill River and plotted them on charts. At a meeting held April 13, the Board of Harbor Commissioners approved these lines as laid down by the Advisory Commission, and resolved to recommend their adoption by the city councils. At a meeting of the Harbor Commissioners, held June 15, Mr. Smedley, city engineer and surveyor, laid before the Commissioners a chart of the Schuylkill, with wharf lines prepared by the Board of Surveys of the city. The Board of Harbor Commissioners then resolved 66 that these recommendations be referred to the Advisory Council, with favorable recommendations; and if any objection be made, notice thereof be immediately given to the Harbor Commissioners, and if no such objection be made, the survey will be considered as approved." It would appear from the above data that the Board of Harbor Commissioners has no definite powers. The permanent improvements of the Delaware and Schuylkill rivers are in the hands of the United States authorities. The wharf lines of the Delaware River are fixed from Frankford Creek to the mouth of the Schuylkill, and cannot be changed without further State legislation. Besides which, the interests of navigation demand that one bank of the river should not be considered alone. As the wharf lines on the two banks are at present fixed entirely independently of each other, a revision should only be attempted by a board which could take cognizance of both. The wharf lines of the Schuylkill River are in the hands of the Board of Surveys of the city. All of this is respectfully submitted for the consideration of the Advisory Commission. SIR: I have the honor to submit the following report of operations since the last meeting of the Advisory Commission: On February 2, 1882, there was received from the chief engineer and surveyor of the city a tracing showing the Port Wardens' lines of the Schuylkill River, as proposed by Board of Surveys of the city. This was sent to the Advisory Commission for comparison with the lines proposed for the Schuylkill River by it April 13, 1881, and adopted by the Harbor Commissioners in accordance with the resolution adopted by the Board of Harbor Commissioners June 15, 1881. As the tracing was drawn on a scale too large for comparison with the charts of the Advisory Commission, Mr. Smedley, the chief engineer and surveyor, promised to prepare, for the use of the Advisory Commission, a comparative tracing, on a scale, showing both sets of Port Warden's lines. This tracing was received at that office March 8. Charts have since been prepared showing the comparative cross-sections and comparative widths as bounded by these lines, and the comparative high and low water capacities of the different portions of the stream have been calculated. During the winter various interviews have been held with the president of the Board of Harbor Commissioners to endeavor to obtain some instructions from the Board of Harbor Commissioners relating to the scope of the information desired from the Advisory Commission and the direction which its investigation should take. Thus far this has been without result. On March 27 a map was received from the office of the chief engineer and surveyor of the city, showing the Port Wardens' lines on the Delaware opposite Philadelphia; Copies of these letters were not forwarded with this report. those on the Pennsylvania shore being official, those on the New Jersey shore being compiled from various sources. In a letter to Mr. Smedley, dated December 22, 1881, the chairman stated that his estimate for the expenses of the Advisory Commission for 1882 was $1,500. The city councils have only appropriated $500 for this purpose. Very respectfully, your obedient servant, COL. J. N. MACOMB, W. M. BLACK, First Lieutenant of Engineers, Corps of Engineers, U. S. A., Chairman of Advisory Commission. LETTER FROM THE ADVISORY COMMISSION TO THE BOARD OF HARBOR COMMISSIONERS OF PHILADELPHIA. GENTLEMEN: The Advisory Commission has the honor to submit the following on the subject of the Port Warden's lines proposed for the river Schuylkill by the "Board of Surveys," and referred to us by the following resolution of June 15, 1881: "At the meeting of the Harbor Commission yesterday, Mr. Sinedley presented a survey of the river Schuylkill. His recommendations approved themselves to the judg ment of the Commission, and as they differ in no essential point from the survey presented by the United States Advisory Council for the Commission, the latter would suggest that they be referred to the Advisory Council, with favorable recommendation; and if any objection be made, notice thereof be immediately given to the Harbor Commission, and if no such objection be made, the survey will be considered as approved." At a meeting of the Advisory Commission held July 12, 1880, Mr. Henry, president of the Board of Harbor Commissioners, appeared before us and requested us to lay out the harbor lines. At a meeting held December 16, 1880, we adopted the following resolution: "Resolved, That the Harbor Commission be notified that the Advisory Commission is prepared to consider the Port Wardens' line upon the banks of the Schuylkill, and that the said Commissioners be advised to give public hearings to parties in interest." There is no record that the Harbor Commission took any action on this resolution. On March 21, 1881, Mr. W. R. Tucker, chairman of the Navigation Committee of the Board of Port Wardens, wrote as follows to the chairman of the Advisory Commission urging the adjustment of a Wardens' line in the Schuylkill River: "* * The Board has several applications for the erection of piers in this river, on which they are obliged to postpone action until a Wardens' line can be adopted. I am informed by our city surveyor that his department is awaiting the action of the Commission, of which you are president," &c. In view of this call upon us, and believing that sufficient time had elapsed to enable your Board to judge of the necessity for the hearings we had suggested, we proceeded to plot a scheme of lines based upon those physical considerations which lay within our province and studies. Accordingly, on April 13, 1881, we presented to you a chart showing these lines. You thereupon adopted the following resolution: "Resolved, That the Harbor Commissioners of Philadelphia recommend to our city councils the adoption of the plans for the improvement of the Schuylkill River prepared by the Advisory Council of United States officers created by virtue of an ordinance of councils approved July 8, 1879." At a subsequent meeting, on June 15, the "Board of Surveys" presented to you a chart proposing other lines for Port Wardens' lines of the Schuylkill River. These lines in turn were favorably received by you and were referred by you to us as mentioned above. At your request the "Board of Surveys" sent this chart to us, through Mr. Smedley, chief engineer and surveyor. It was compiled from surveys made by the city, and was on a scale of 100 feet to the inch, too large for comparison with our charts, which were drawn to a scale of 200 feet to the inch. Mr. Smedley was requested to furnish a chart drawn to the smaller scale. On February 2, 1882, a second chart was received, again on a larger scale. Finally, on March 8, the chart on the scale of 200 feet to the inch was received, and as soon thereafter as practicable a meeting of the Advisory Commission was called. In drawing up and presenting to you a system of Port Wardens' lines, we assumed that all preparatory steps regarded as necessary upon your part had been taken, and on learning of the acceptance by your Board of the said system of lines we regarded the matter as closed. It was therefore with some embarrassment that your communication of June 16, 1881, was received; and now that we are placed in possession of the alternative plan, in suitable form for comparision, our embarrassment is increased by the discovery that this plan, while conforming in a general way to the one presented by ourselves, differs in detail in a manner which is quite marked, but unaccompanied by explanation. In our sincere desire to assist you in reaching the best results, we hold ourselves in readiness to reopen the subject in conference with yourselves. We remain, gentlemen, very respectfully, your obedient servants, Attest: W. M. BLACK, JOHN N. MACOMB, Colonel of Engineers, U. S. A., Chairman Advisory Commission. Captain, U. S. N., and member. Coast and Geodetic Survey. First Lieutenant of Engineers, Secretary to Advisory Commission. The HARBOR COMMISSIONERS OF PHILADELPHIA. F 25. EXAMINATION OF NEWTON CREEK, CAMDEN COUNTY, NEW JERSEY, FROM DELAWARE RIVER TO HEAD OF NAVIGATION. UNITED STATES ENGINEER OFFICE, Philadelphia, Pa., March 8, 1882. SIR: The following report and accompanying chart of Newton Creek, Camden County, New Jersey, are submitted in compliance with the requirements of the act of March 3, 1881. The chart was compiled in part from the maps in the office of the city surveyor of Camden, and in part from Hopkins's Atlas of Philadelphia and its Environs. The hydrography was determined by the assistant engineer, F. Sylvester, from personal observations. The examination was made in November, 1881, and extended from the mouth to the Mount Ephraim Turnpike Bridge, a distance of about 2 miles. The rise of tide near the mouth is 5.3 feet, corrected for the brief period of observation by reference to the standard gauge at Fort Mifflin. The rise at the upper limit of the survey is 3.7 feet. Newton Creek discharges into the Delaware River a little above Gloucester, N. J. The entrance depth is about 9 feet at low-water, but at a short distance above the stream is crossed by three permanent bridges, with a few feet only of head room at high-water. Between the upper two of these bridges the greatest channel depth decreases to less than 4 feet. Thence upward to within a quarter-mile of the junction with the south branch the 6-foot low-water contour is the prevailing one. Above the south branch the 6-foot curve is interrupted by long stretches of 4 feet only, and at the Mount Ephraim Turnpike Bridge the depth is reduced to 3 feet at low-water. While the creek could be made useful as a subordinate commercial channel, it subserves no such purpose at present, nor is there any navigation upon it. The three permanent bridges near the mouth prevent anything larger than a skiff or small flat from passing them. Above the bridges the banks of the creek are overflowed by the tides, and at high-water the adjacent country bears the appearance of a wide lake rather than that of a water course. The necessary preliminary steps to a utilization of the creek would be the rebuilding of the bridges as draw-bridges, and the diking of both banks of the stream where necessary to confine its waters. Until these works shall have been at least begun, no other measure for the improvement of the navigation would seem to be required, for which reason no estimates are submitted. Very respectfully, your obedient servant, The CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. A. Captain of Engineers, F 26. EXAMINATION OF MANTUA CREEK, GLOUCESTER COUNTY, NEW JERSEY, FROM DELAWARE RIVER TO HEAD OF NAVIGATION. UNITED STATES ENGINEER OFFICE, Philadelphia, Pa., February 20, 1882. SIR: The following report and accompanying papers on the examination of Mantua Creek, Gloucester County, New Jersey, are submitted in compliance with the requirements of the river and harbor act of March 3, 1881. The general outlines and topographical features of the stream were obtained from the best available printed maps, but the hydrographic conditions were personally ascertained by Mr. Gieseler, assistant engineer, whose report is appended. Mantua Creek discharges into the Delaware River about 3 miles below League Island. The upper limit of navigation is at Mautua, about 11 miles from the mouth, and the intermediate towns of Paulsborough and Berkley mark both the natural limits of sections of equal length and the points of successive diminutions in the navigable depths. In the lowest section the 9-foot low-water curve is nearly continuous; in the middle section the 6-foot curve predominates; this depth decreas ing in the upper section to 4 feet, and finally, at Mantua, to 2 feet. The velocity of the tidal wave in the successive sections is represented by the same figures in miles per hour, and the rise of 6 feet at the mouth, due to the Delaware tides, is likewise reduced to 2 feet at Mantua. The stream is characteristic in its tendency to follow the line of the fast land, and to excessive curvature when relieved from that control and flowing between marsh banks. For the improvement of the navigation, a channel should be dredged with a low-water depth and width of 10 by 80 feet at the mouth, diminishing to 4 by 40 feet at Mantua. The material to be removed is sand and mud, and in amount about 90,000 cubic yards. With suitable appliances the cost of the work should not exceed $25,000, but the estimate must be increased to $35,000 to conform to the present prices of dredging under contract. The existence of permanent bridges across the stream near Berkley makes that point the head of navigation for masted vessels, and may interfere with dredging operations above. In this case the estimate for the construction of the channel from Berkley to the Delaware will be the removal of 70,000 cubic yards, at a cost of about $27,000. If, on account of the predominating traffic from Paulsborough down, as shown in the commercial statistics, the improvement should stop there, the cost would be $17,000 to $18,000. Respectfully submitted. The CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. A. REPORT OF MR. E. A. GIESELER, ASSISTANT ENGINEER. UNITED STATES ENGINEER OFFICE, COLONEL: I have the honor to report as follows upon the examination of Mantua Creek, New Jersey. The examination extended over that part of the creek lying between the mouth and the head of navigation at Mantua, a distance of about 11 miles, as measured on the water. A small amount only of money being available, it was decided to direct the field work towards the collection of hydrographic data only, and to rely on the chart of the creek contained in J. M. Hopkins's "Atlas of Philadelphia and Environs" for the necessary topographical elements. The field-work was executed between the 10th and 18th of August, 1881. Partly from the fact that the mouth of the creek was not fully shown in the abovenamed atlas, partly from the fact that the main obstruction at this place was a bar lying out in the Delaware, the contours of which could only be determined by the aid of instrumental observations, it became necessary to make a survey of the mouth and its vicinity, the results of which are shown in detail No. 1 of sheet No. 2 of the chart. The rest of the creek was examined by sounding cross-lines at suitable distances, which were located on the map by means of the general topographica! formation. Wherever a line was sounded across the creek, the width between high-water marks was also taken. The existing shoals were exammed carefully, a sufficient number of soundings being taken on each to develop their contours. Four țide gauges were established in the creek, one near the mouth, one at Paulsborough, one at Berkley, and one at Mantua; and mean rise and fall at these places was computed at 5.8 feet for the mouth, at 5.1 feet for Paulsborough, at 4 feet for Berkley, and at 2 feet for Mantua. The duration of rise is about four and a half hours, and the duration of fall is about eight hours at the mouth, and from these figures there does not appear to be any material deviation at any point of the creek. Both the high-water and the low-water traverse the distance from the mouth to Mantua in about three hours, and the motion in both cases is a retarded one, the first 3 miles being traversed in about twenty minutes, the next 3 miles in about forty-five minutes, and the last 5 miles in a little less than two hours. The means available for the examination admitted of only a limited number of tidal observations being taken. From these-not sufficient in themselves to furnish independent results of value—the tidal data were computed by comparing them with simultaneous observations taken on the standard gauge at Fort Mifflin, on the opposite shore of the Delaware. In the upper parts of the creek, which are farther removed from the Delaware, the tidal conditions naturally are to a greater extent influenced by local causes and to a lesser extent dependent on the fluctuations of the tidal wave in the Delaware. The latter, however, forming the basis on which the abovegiven data have been computed, it follows that those for Berkley and Mantua are not as reliable as those for the mouth and for Paulsborough. The general direction of the creek is a north-northwest one. The banks for the greater part consist of low-lying meadows, which are all embanked. In many places, however, the banks are formed of high ground, low hills, and bluffs. Besides numerous farms, there are three populous settlements on the banks of the creek, viz, Paulsborough, with about 1,500 inhabitants; Berkley, with about 800; and Mantua, with about 1,000. Both Paulsborough and Berkley are reached by railroads. From and to these places there is a considerable trade in lumber, coal, manure, bricks, lime, and farm products. Near the mouth are situated the phosphate works of Coe & Richmond, an extensive establishment with important transatlantic and Southern trade. About twenty vessels, aggregating 1,500 to 2,000 tons, and two steam-tugs, are owned on the creek. |