To the arguments presented for and against the bridge by the opposing interests, the Board submit the following description and facts of record. At its western extremity the shores of Lake Superior converge under a sharp angle, near the apex of which lie the harbors of Duluth and Superior City. At a point in the angle where the opening is about 9 miles wide a low sand point extends across and incloses a great natural harbor, the Bay of Superior. Only one natural break occurs in it, and here the waters of St. Louis and Nemadji rivers effect an outlet to the lake. This outlet is near the southern extremity. It has been utilized as a harbor entrance and the Government has built piers and otherwise expended considerable money to improve it. Something less than a mile inside this natural breakwater, where the lake shore lines converge to an opening of about 5 miles, occurs another split lying substantially parallel to it. Here again the opening is. nearest the southern end. It furnishes an outlet for the St. Louis River. The north end is called Rices Point, the south end Conners Point. The angular opening of the lake behind this spit is a large sheet of water called St. Louis Bay, the upper portion of which is the estuary of St. Louis River. Superior and St. Louis bays are quite shallow, except where the waters of the St. Louis River form through them a narrow channel to the lake. Harbor room in either for large modern vessels has to be provided by dredging. The exterior formation making out from the north shore is called Minnesota Point. It is about 6 miles long. That proceeding from the south shore is called Wisconsin Point and is nearly 2 miles long. The two have widths varying from 200 to 1,000 feet and rise but a few feet above the level of the lake. Exterior to Minnesota Point the lake bottom falls rapidly away to considerable depths, especially in the angle at the north end. Along this point it is reported by the citizens of Duluth that vessels can safely ride at anchor in all conditions of weather. The physical conditions at this locality are such as to indicate that there might be times when such anchorage would be risky. A Lake Survey chart of 1861 shows, at the south end of Minnesota Point, a channel into Superior Bay with a least depth of 10 feet. This was prior to any improvement. An Engineer Department map of 1891 shows a least depth here of 16 feet; but the date of the soundings is not given. The St. Louis River, in this locality, forms the boundary between the States of Minnesota and Wisconsin. On the south shore of the lake opening have sprung up the Wisconsin cities of Superior and West Superior, while on the north has been created the Minnesota city of Duluth. The rivalry between these cities is intense and bitter, to the extent that the discussion of anything affecting the entrance to the port behind Minnesota Point is very much disturbed by local issues. In the fall of 1870 the city of Duluth began cutting a canal across Minnesota Point near its shore end for the purpose of effecting a quick entrance to her own harbor front. This proceeding developed great opposition on the part of Superior and the State of Wisconsin, on the ground that the waters of St. Louis River could not keep sufficient channels scoured through two outlets, and that the one at the south end of Minnesota Point, being the farthest away, would suffer. The contention resulted in the construction of a dike across Superior Bay from Minnesota Point to Rices Point, which cut off the waters of St. Louis River from an escape through the canal. The following extract from the Report of the Chief of Engineers for 1879 gives some of the subsequent history of this contention: In the spring of 1871 an injunction was issued at the instance of the War Department, restraining further operations in prosecution of the canal. This was subsequently dissolved upon the execution by the city of Duluth of a bond for $100,000 to secure the construction of a dike extending from Minnesota Point to Rices Point, and isolating the harbor from the rest of the bay of Superior; said dike to be completed by December 1, 1871. Under this agreement work was resumed and the canal completed during the working season of 1871. It was 250 feet wide and lined with crib-work piers, which extended to deep water in the lake, where the opening widens to 290 feet. The time for the completion of the dike was extended, at the request of the authorities of Duluth, to March 15, 1872, at which date it was . reported complete and offered for inspection to the United States authorities. Its construction was wholly unsuited to the requirements of such a work, being made of light crib-work ballasted with stone and filled with sand. It proved to be utterly inadequate. The filling was washed out and the crib work in parts floated out of place; in parts was crushed by ice. * No action was taken on the bond, which was pronounced worthless by eminent lawyers, the city not having legal authority to execute the same. Since the date of this report the dike has practically disappeared. The canal remains, having a length of about 1,300 feet. The distance from the outer end to Lake street, the proposed location of the bridge, is about 900 feet. Starting from the northern shore of the lake, some 2,000 feet from the base of Minnesota Point, the United States built a breakwater which, in 1872, had reached a length of 1,200 feet. It was formed of cribs 30 feet wide by 50 feet long, and was provided with a decked superstruc ture to a height of 6 feet above the water level. Although built in the most substantial manner of such structures on the lakes, it was wrecked by a storm which occurred on November 14, 1872. But little of it now remains, and it has been abandoned. The cause of this destructive action is to be readily found in the formation of the land on the northern shore of the lake in this vicinity. Rising to a height of about 700 feet above the lake level, it seems to direct easterly winds toward the location of the breakwater and the entrance of the canal, rolling the resulting seas, with accumulated force, in the same direction. It is easily conceivable that their force should prove almost irresistible by any structure less substantial than those built to withstand ocean storms. The destruction of this breakwater supports, to some extent, the assertions made by the opponents of the bridge concerning the extreme severity of the wind and wave action at this locality during unusual gales. Duluth is, at this time, both a local harbor and a harbor of refuge. The distance to Two Harbors, the nearest shelter on the northern shore, is about 27 miles, and the distance to Bark Bay, the nearest shelter on the southern shore, is about 45 miles. Hence a vessel to leeward of these, with easterly wind, has no harbor available but Duluth, and, of necessity, must make it. CONCLUSION. The Board do not admit the extent of the dangers recited by the opponents of the bridge project, and fully recognize the great advantage to the city of Duluth which would accrue from suitable means of communication with Minnesota Point. The latter clearly appears to be a necessity to the future growth of the city, as well as to the com merce which promises so soon to pour through her gates; and every foot of dock frontage behind that strip of land ought to be available. There ought to be considerable concession upon the part of each of the conflicting interests involved, and each should yield a fair measure. The design of the lift bridge proposed is one of great merit, and the details seem to be well studied and arranged. Any objections to the plan which have appeared to the Board are of a minor character, and do not extend to the main proposition, because they can be readily obviated. A complete description of the bridge is to be found in the papers and drawings* submitted by Mr. J. A. L. Waddell, the engineer who designed it. It is to be understood that these favorable remarks apply to the design and not to the question whether a lift bridge is to be preferred at this locality. As a matter of fact the Board think that a properly designed swing bridge would better fulfill the requirements, except as to the area of ground that would have to be occupied by the shore arm of the structure. The city of Duluth states that she can afford to build the bridge proposed, but can not afford to construct a tunnel (which is admitted to be a complete solution of the problem), and that if she can not have a bridge she must be deprived of the use of Minnesota Point, the only direction in which the city can expand for commercial purposes. This is a strong argument and appeals to the sympathy of the Board, especially in view of the well-known activity and enterprise of the people of Duluth, which certainly deserve all the encouragement that can properly be extended. But the Board feel compelled to put this aside and to deal with the question regardless of sentiment. They must look to the future and base their opinion upon what seems to them best for the interests of all concerned. In view of the facts and arguments detailed the Board concludes that it is not advisable to authorize the construction of any bridge across the canal entrance to the harbor of Duluth, Minn. They believe that the dangers and difficulties to shipping which would result from the bridge proposed have been overestimated by its opponents, while the degree of obstruction which would be due to such a structure has been underrated by its advocates. Any bridge over a waterway is a menace to navigation, but the propositions of the city of Duluth, if carried into effect, would reduce them to a minimum in this case. The city of Duluth proposes certain guaranties looking to the proper operation of the bridge, and even to its removal in case it should prove to be an unreasonable obstruction. The probable value of such a guaranty is indicated in the closing paragraph from the Report of the Chief of Engineers heretofore quoted. If there were a breakwater outside of and covering the entrance to the canal, such that vessels would approach and pass the canal free from danger due to stress of weather or perils of the sea, the conditions would differ so much from those actually existing that the Board might find it less difficult to reach a conclusion that would be satisfactory to Duluth. One very important factor in leading the Board to their conclusion is their disinclination to establish a dangerous precedent. The piers which border the canal at Duluth are essentially the same in general function as those which are found at the entrance to the principal lake *Not printed. harbors, and the canal itself corresponds exactly with the throat of all harbors where the entrance is between piers. It is the point where the mariner passes from the perils of the sea into the shelter and safety of the harbor. He approaches this point, and sometimes passes it, in the midst of a struggle for life and property. Such a point can not be too free from obstruction, or the possibility of it. If a bridge were authorized over the canal at Duluth there could be no reasonable objection to permitting such a structure at any other exposed harbor entrance on the lakes; and without doubt applications for authority to bridge other harbor entrances would rapidly follow upon the granting of such privilege at Duluth, thus leading to a condition which would be unendur able. Statements and arguments made to the Board have been largely reduced to writing by the parties presenting them, and are submitted herewith, as follows:* * (1) Description of the lift bridge, with drawings, by Mr. J. A. L. Waddell, engi neer. (2) Letter of Mr. Thomas E. Brown, consulting engineer, approving the plans of said bridge. (3) Letter of Otis Brothers, makers of elevators and hoisting machinery. (4) Letter of Mr. K. Bryan, chief engineer Hale Elevator Company, approving the bridge, in detail. (5) Argument of Mr. Henry Truelsen, president board of public works, Duluth, Minn. (6) Argument of the city council of Duluth, by Alderman Charles A. Long. (7) Argument of S. L. Smith, esq., city attorney of Duluth. (8) Oral argument (opening) of Mr. S. A. Thompson, representing the Chamber of Commerce, Duluth. (9) Oral argument (closing) of same. (10) Closing argument of Mr. Henry Truelsen, president board of public works, Duluth, Minn., and J. A. L. Waddell, consulting engineer. (11) Argument of J. W. Miller, harbor master port of Duluth. (12) Argument of Capt. Alexander McDougall. (13) Argument of Vessel Owners' Association. (14) Argument of Lake Carriers' Association by its delegates, W. Livingston, jr., James Davidson, Charles H. Keep. (15) Telegraphic protest of vessel owners of Buffalo, N. Y. (16) Argument and protest of vessel-owners of Milwaukee, Wis. (17) Protest of Joseph Austrian, of Chicago, Ill., manager Lake Michigan and Lake Superior Transportation Company. (18) Request of F. C. H. Arntz and L. E. Sangdahl, of Milwaukee, Wis., that their plans for a bridge be considered. * There is also inclosed a map of the harbor of Duluth, Minn. Brig. Gen. THOMAS L. CASEY, O. M. POE, Colonel, Corps of Engineers. WILLIAM LUDLOW, Major, Corps of Engineers. W. A. JONES, Chief of Engineers, U. S. A. Major, Corps of Engineers. Not reprinted; printed in Senate Ex. Doc. No. 80, Fifty-second Congress, first session. + Not printed. Y Y 2. REPORT OF BOARD OF ENGINEERS ON PROPOSED BRIDGES OF CITY OF PORTLAND, OREGON, ACROSS WILLAMETTE RIVER AT BURNSIDE AND KNIGHT-QUIMBY STREETS. [Printed in Senate Ex. Doc. No. 118, Fifty-second Congress, first session.] PORTLAND, OREGON, June 13, 1892. GENERAL: The Board of Engineer Officers convened by virtue of Special Orders No. 18, dated Headquarters, Corps of Engineers, U. S. Army, Washington, D. C., April 18, 1892, to which was referred for investigation and report the drawings for two bridges that the Portland bridge committee, a body organized and acting under authority of an act of the legislature of the State of Oregon, propose to build over the Willamette River within the limits of the city of Portland, and which had been submitted to the Secretary of War for his approval, as required by act of Congress approved September 19, 1890, has the honor to submit the following report: The interests involved in the construction of these bridges are of so great importance to the city of Portland and the commerce of the State of Oregon, and there is such a diversity of opinion among the people of the community as to their location and the need or propriety of their erection, and the effect that they will have upon individual interests, and the general prosperity of the city is so great that the Board approaches the consideration of the subject with a realizing sense of the responsibility resting on it. In order that a clear understanding may be had of the question, a brief description of some of the considerations involved is thought to be necessary. The city of Portland is located upon the Willamette River, about 12 miles from its junction with the Columbia, and 110 miles from the sea. It is the head of navigation for deep-sea going vessels and the principal financial, commercial, and shipping point of the northwest territory of the United States. It owes its importance to its location relative to the fertile country which surrounds it and with which it is connected by water and by rail. The products of this country are brought to its port for shipment, and the supplies and exchange products are centered here for distribution. Its present prosperity is also largely due to the conservative far-reaching business acumen of its leading merchants and business men. During the past year the value of the exported wheat, flour, and other products, as given by the president of the chamber of commerce, amounted to $14,000,000. The jobbing trade of the city is estimated to be $138,127,000 for the same year. Prior to June, 1891, the city now known as Portland consisted of three separate municipalities, Portland on the west side of the Willamette River, with East Portland and Albina on the east side. At that time, under authority from the legislature of the State of Oregon and a vote of the people to that effect, the three municipalities were united into one. The last census prior to the consolidation showed the number of inhabitants in each to be, Portland 51,000, East Portland 10,615, and Albina 5,169. It is claimed that the increase in population since that time will bring the total up to fully 75,000. The city has a healthy growth in all directions, especially so to the north and east on the east side of the river in what was Albina and East Portland. Being separated into two parts by the Willamette River, the question of communication across the river is one of great importance to those whose business or occupation requires that they |