The documents relating to the bridge in question, which were received with your letter of the 19th ultimo, are herewith returned, the maps being in a separate roll. Respectfully, your obedient servant, The CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. A. WM. E. MERRILL, Lieut. Col. of Engineers. [First indorsement.] OFFICE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, October 18, 1887. Respectfully submitted to the Secretary of War, inviting attention to the accompanying report of the Board of Engineers, reconvened, with the sanction of the War Department, by Special Orders No. 74, Head quarters Corps of Engineers, current series, to assemble at Pittsburgh, Pa., to consider and report upon new plans submitted by the Ohio Connecting Railway Company for their proposed bridge across the Ohio River near Pittsburgh, Pa. After due examination and consideration of the maps and plans presented by the railway company the Board were unanimously of the opinion "that a bridge built upon the proposed location and plans would be acceptable and satisfactory to all interests." The Board state, however, that "the construction of a bridge upon the proposed plans will not meet all of the requirements of the general law governing the bridging of the Ohio River; but, owing to the peculiar location of the bridge, the Board are of the opinion that it will conform to the spirit of the law, and that the departures from some of its minor requirements are not such as to injuriously affect navigation, for the protection of which the law was framed. This opinion is also held by the parties who represented the river interests at the meeting of the Board." The Board further state that "the proposed plans for a span 525 feet long between centers of piers and 507 feet clear water-way across the main channel of the river to the right of Brunot's Island" practically spans "the entire water-way of this branch of the river at low water." "Over the left-hand channel, which is only run by tows when by accident they fail to make the right-hand channel, the plans provide for a span giving a clear water-way of 400 feet, which is deemed ample." * * * The plans submitted, however, contemplate only a height of 80 feet above low water, while the law requires an elevation of 90 feet above low water, but the Board are of "opinion that 80 feet height near Pittsburgh will give as much head-room in floods as 90 feet at Steubenville, owing to the fact that the extreme oscillation of the river at Pittsburgh is more than 10 feet less than it is at Steubenville, and they therefore think that the proposed reduction in height will not be an injury to navigation." Finally, the Board recommend "the approval of the proposed bridge except in the matter of height, which should be left open until Congress has had time to act on the application of the Bridge Company" for a change of the law in this respect. In the event of the failure of Congress to authorize the proposed reduction in height the superstructure must of necessity be 90 feet above low water, as required by existing law. The views of the Board are concurred in, and it is accordingly recommended that the company be informed that the plan and location of the bridge will be approved provided Congress, by appropriate legislation, authorizes a reduction of the height required for the superstructure to 80 feet above low water. CHAS. W. RAYMOND, Acting Chief of Engineers. SECOND REPORT OF BOARD OF ENGINEERS. OCTOBER 4, 1887. The Board of Officers of the Corps of Engineers, constituted by Special Orders No. 60, Headquarters Corps of Engineers, current series, and reconvened by Special Orders No. 74, Headquarters Corps of Engineers, September 17, 1887, "to consider and report upon new plans submitted by the Ohio Connecting Railway Company for the proposed bridge across the Ohio River, near Pittsburgh, Pa.," would respectfully submit the following report: The Board met at Pittsburgh on the 4th of October, at the call of the senior member, and held a public session in the Monongahela House. At this session the railway company was represented by their chief engineer and his assistants, and the river interests were represented by a number of the leading coal operators. The maps and plans presented by the railway company were examined and discussed by those present, and it was their unanimous opinion that a bridge built upon the proposed location and plans would be acceptable and satisfactory to all interests. The construction of a bridge upon the proposed plans will not meet all of the requirements of the general law governing the bridging of the Ohio River; but, owing to the peculiar location of the bridge, the Board are of the opinion that it will conform to the spirit of the law, and that the departures from some of its minor requirements are not such as to injuriously affect navigation, for the protection of which the law was framed; this opinion is also held by the parties who represented the river interests at the meeting of the Board. The proposed plans provide for a span 525 feet long between centers of piers and 507 feet clear water-way across the main channel of the river to the right of Brunot's Island, thus practically spanning the entire water-way of this branch of the river at low water. The piers are about parallel to the direction of the current at low water, making a slight angle at higher stages. The 7 feet in excess of the 500 required by law is deemed sufficient to compensate for the slight obliquity of current at the higher stages. Over the left-hand channel, which is only run by tows when by accident they fail to make the right-hand channel, the plans provide for a span giving a clear water-way of 400 feet, which is deemed ample. The spans between the two channel-spaces, as proposed by the plans, are to be deck-spans. Owing to the facts that the left-hand channel is what might be termed an accidental channel, only occasionally used, and that the right-hand channel is narrower above the bridge location than the channel-span, the Board do not deem it important to require that the minor spans of the bridge should be through spans; they are also of the opinion that across the higher part of the island, say for a distance of about 600 feet, the construction of an embankment would not be objectionable to the interests of navigation. The general bridge law requires that all bridges across the Ohio River above the mouth of the Big Sandy River shall be 90 feet above low water. The plans under consideration contemplate a bridge giving a clear height of 80 feet above low water, or 10 feet less than required by law, and the representatives of the river interest state that they are content with this reduced height. The Board are of the opinion that 80 feet height near Pittsburgh will give as much head-room in the floods as 90 feet at Stubenville, owing to the fact that the extreme oscillation of the river at Pittsburgh is more than 10 feet less than it is at Steubenville, and they, therefore, think that the proposed reduction in height will not be an injury to navigation. Under these circumstances they are in favor of an 80-foot bridge at this locality, but in view of the positive requirements of the Ohio River bridge law, that bridges in this part of the river shall have a height of 90 feet, they do not see how the War Department can approve of the proposed height without additional legislation. As the Bridge Company has announced its intention of asking for such legislation, the Board would recommend that the War Department give the Bridge Company their support and co-operation in endeavoring to secure from Congress the privileges desired. In conclusion, the Board would recommend the approval of the proposed bridge, except in the matter of height, which should be left open until Congress has had time to act on the application of the Bridge Company; it is evident that a failure of Congress to authorize the proposed reduction in height will necessarily compel the raising of the superstructure to a height of 90 feet above low water. Respectfully submitted. The CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. A. WM. E. MERRILL, Lieut. Col. of Engineers. J. W. BARLOW, Lieut. Col. of Engineers. Major of Engineers. LETTER OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS. OFFICE OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, UNITED STATES ARMY, Washington, D. C., June 1, 1888. SIR: I have the honor to submit the accompanying plans and papers pertaining to the proposed bridge of the Ohio Connecting Railway Company across "the Ohio River from the south shore to the north shore thereof at a point about one-half mile south of the mouth of Cork's Run, in Allegheny County, Pennsylvania," provided for by "an act to authorize the construction of the Ohio Connecting Railway Company Bridge," approved May 14, 1888, and to state that upon measurement the main channel-span is found to be 525 feet from center to center of piers, and the piers to be 18 feet in thickness on the low-water line; deducting therefor 9 feet from each of the piers-18 feet-the clear width of the main-channel span is 507 feet, as required by the act. The back-channel span, adopting the same method of measurement, is found to be 416 feet from center to center of piers, from which deducting 16 feet for width of piers, leaves 400 feet clear width, as required by law. The plan also shows the bridge to be 80 feet above low water to the lowest part of the superstructure of the bridge, which is also in accordance with the requirements of the act. It is accordingly recommended that the plan as submitted be approved. Very respectfully, your obedient servant, Hon. WILLIAM C. ENDICOTT, J. C. DUANE, Brig. Gen., Chief of Engineers. Secretary of War. (Through the Acting Judge Advocate General, U. S. Army.) [First indorsement.] WAR DEPARTMENT, JUDGE-ADVOCATE GENERAL'S OFFICE, Washington, D. C., June 4, 1888. Respectfully forwarded to the Secretary of War, with instrument. (prepared in duplicate) for his approval of the plans of the proposed bridge of the Ohio Connecting Railway Company across the Ohio River at the mouth of Cork's Run, Allegheny County, Pa. There is no extract from the company minutes showing the names of the present officers of the company with the papers. With this exception, the papers required by the War Department circular of July 31, 1886, are complete. G. NORMAN LIEBER, Acting Judge-Advocate-General. LETTER OF THE SECRETARY OF WAR. WAR DEPARTMENT, Washington City, June 19, 1888. SIR: I have the honor to return one copy of an instrument indicating e approval by this Department of the plans and location, as shown on the accompanying map, of the bridge authorized to be constructed by che "Ohio Connecting Railway Company" over the Ohio River near the mouth of Cork's Run, Allegheny County, Pa., under the act of Congress approved May 14, 1888. Very respectfully, Mr. M. J. BECKER, WILLIAM C. ENDICOTT, Chief Engineer Ohio Connecting Railway Company, Pittsburgh, Pa. W W 20. FRIDGE OF THE GEORGIA PACIFIC RAILWAY COMPANY ACROSS THE TOMBIGBEE RIVER AT WAVERLY, MISSISSIPPI, AUTHORIZED BY ACT OF CONGRESS OF MARCH 3, 1887. [THE ACT OF APRIL 2, 1888, CHANGES THE NAME OF THIS COMPANY TO RAILWAY INSTEAD OF RAILROAD.] THE GEORGIA PACIFIC RAILWAY COMPANY, Birmingham, Ala., May 16, 1888. DEAR SIR: As you are aware there has already been approved by the War Department the plans for the erection of a draw-bridge by this company crossing the Tombigbee River at Columbus, Miss. We have now in contemplation a change of route which has in view the crossing of the Tombigbee River at a point 9 miles above Columbus known as Waverly. Should this line be adopted, we presume the Department will consider the necessity of our still building the drawbridge, although no boats have ascended the river beyond the point of contemplated bridge site in the past four years. We have therefore prepared plan for a bridge giving 220 feet draw, which we respectfully submit for approval. You will find appended to the papers herewith an agreement (in duplicate) executed by the president of this company, which agreement is similar to the one heretofore executed by him in the matter of our proposed bridge across Tombigbee River at Columbus. I learn from the president that the information required by the War Department as to the directors and officers of this company for the current year, and as to the acceptance by this company of the several acts of Congress mentioned in the agreement, has been heretofore furnished, and is now filed with the papers pertaining to the bridges already authorized. This has been done in order to save time in the transmission of the papers back and forth, the necessities of our construction being urgent. We would therefore ask that you give this matter your earliest convenient attention. Yours, truly, CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. A. I. Y. SAGE, General Manager. [First indorsement.] OFFICE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY, May 23, 1888. Respectfully submitted to the Secretary of War. Plans for a bridge across the Tombigbee River at Columbus, Miss., submitted by the Georgia Pacific Railway Company, were approved by the Secretary of War April 28, 1888, as will appear from the papers herewith. The railway company now contemplates a change in the location of its proposed bridge from Columbus, Miss., to Waverly, a point on the river 9 miles above, and asks for the approval of the War Department thereof. The plan submitted covers the whole of the water-way of the river with its draw-spans, which, as nearly as can be ascertained from the drawings, are of sufficient width for the purposes of navigation at the proposed new location. The act of March 3, 1887, providing for the construction of bridges across the Sunflower, Yazoo, and Tombigbee rivers, authorizes the Georgia Pacific Railway to build bridges "at such points as may hereafter be selected by said railway company for crossing said rivers with its railroad line, the said bridges to be so constructed as not to interfere with the navigation of said rivers," and it is assumed that under this provision the railway company may change the location of the proposed bridge, the plans already approved having been first canceled. The information already furnished by the company in accordance with the requirements of the rule of the War Department dated July 31, 1886, will, it is supposed, suffice in the case of the bridge now proposed. Previous papers herewith. J. C. DUANE, Brig. Gen., Chief of Engineers. |
