Congress made the grants herein before referred to, will thus be carried out. Both corporations are desirous that the plans of the bridge which have been prepared by their engineer, Mr. T. E. Sickles, should meet with your approval, and they therefore respectfully request that you cause to be issued such orders as you may deem proper in order that if any changes in said plans be recommended, they may be made before the work of construction has actually begun. We remain, very respectfully, your obedient servant, President Little Rock Junction Railway Company. Hon. ROBERT T. LINCOLN, Secretary of War. [First indorsement.] Respectfully referred to the Chief of Engineers for prompt report. By order of the Secretary of War. Respectfully returned to the honorable the Secretary of War. There are three acts of Congress authorizing the construction of bridges across the Arkansas River at Little Rock, viz: 1. Act approved July 1, 1870 (U. S. Statutes, Vol. 16, p. 185), giving authority to the Citizens' Bridge Company. 2. Act approved May 31, 1872 (U. S. Statutes, Vol. 17, p. 193), giving the authority to the Little Rock Bridge Company. 3. Act approved March 3, 1879 (U. S. Statutes, Vol. 20, p. 363), giving the authority to the Arkansas River Transfer Railway Company to build a railway from some suitable point in the city of Little Rock, across the Arkansas River, to some suitable point in the town of Argenta, &c. The authority to bridge the Arkansas River, claimed by the Little Rock and Fort Smith Railway Company, is derived from an act of the general assembly of the State of Arkansas, approved January 22, 1855, and from an act of Congress approved July 28, 1866, "to revive and extend the provisions of 'An act granting the right of way, and making a grant of land to the States of Arkansas and Missouri, to aid in the construction of a railroad from a point upon the Mississippi, opposite the mouth of the Ohio River, via Little Rock, to the Texas boundary, near Fulton, in Arkansas, with branches to Fort Smith and the Mississippi River,' approved February 9, 1853, and for other purposes." (U.S. Statutes, Vol. 14, p. 338.) It does not appear that there is authority granted by the above act to bridge the Arkansas River at Little Rock except by implication, and certainly there is no authority given to the Secretary of War to approve or disapprove the plan or location of any bridge that may be constructed by the Little Rock and Fort Smith Railway Company by virtue of that act, and it has been the rule of the War Department, in cases where Congress has not authorized the construction of a bridge or has not required the Secretary of War to approve the plan, &c., of a bridge as a condition to its being built, that the Secretary of War cannot authorize or forbid its construction; but if he is satisfied that any intended structure of that kind, or any other, will seriously impair the navigation of the channels of the navigable waters of the United States he has not failed to endeavor, through the Department of Justice, to prevent the erection of such structure. Previous papers herewith. H. G. WRIGHT, Chief of Engineers, Brig. and Bvt. Maj. Gen. LETTER OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS. OFFICE OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, SIR: I have the honor to return herewith the papers in relation to the construction of a bridge by the Little Rock Junction Railroad Company across the Arkansas River at Little Rock, which were recently withdrawn informally from the War Department with your sanction, and to say that the tracing submitted by Mr. T. E. Sickles, showing the plan and location of the proposed bridge, was referred to Maj. M. B. Adams, Corps of Engineers, whose report thereon is herewith submitted. There being no law authorizing this bridge, the Secretary of War cannot approve the same; but if the slight changes suggested by Major Adams are made there seems to be no reason why the War Department should interpose any objection to its construction. In this connection attention is invited to the action of the War Department in the similar case of the bridge across Missouri River at Plattsmouth, to be found in the inclosed papers (5966 W. D., 1879). Very respectfully, your obedient servant, H. G. WRIGHT, Chief of Engineers, Brig. and Bvt. Maj. Gen. REPORT OF MAJOR M. B. ADAMS, CORPS OF ENGINEERS. UNITED STATES ENGINEER OFFICE, Little Rock, Ark., January 31, 1884. GENERAL: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 24th instant, inclosing a tracing showing the location and profile of a bridge as designed for construction across the Arkansas River, at this place, by the Little Rock Junction Railroad Company, and directing me to report as to whether it conforms to the usual requirements for bridges across the Arkansas River, and whether the location is such as to cause no undue interferences with the free navigation of the river. I have the honor to report, I find, upon examination, that the tracing gives quite accurately the general characteristics of the river, bottom, shore line, &c., at the location. The axis of the bridge, if built as designed, will have a direction, as near as may be, at right angles to that of the current at all stages of the river, and that the clear opening in this bridge would be somewhat greater than that of the bridge now in operation across the river at this place. The location is all that could be desired, with the exception of its being, possibly, too far down stream to allow steamboats to "round to" at the landing or "levee" after passing the draw, and they may in some instances be obliged to go out from shore some distance and "round to" below where they ordinarily would, if they could be further off shore than the draw at the position of the bridge. In comparing the design with the act authorizing the Texas and Saint Louis Railway Company to build certain bridges in the State of Arkansas (approved June 27, 1882), the following changes in the design appear to be demanded to make it conform, in the letter and spirit, to that act: 1st. The bridge should be raised 0.551 feet, as the high-water mark of the design is that much lower than the records of this office indicate, assuming the low-water mark of the design to be correct and allowing their datum plane to be 260 feet above that to which our levels are referred. In other words, they show an extreme variation in the water surface of 33 feet, whereas our records show a variation of 33.551 feet. 2d. The point of rocks, which is marked on the design "to be excavated," should all be cut away, not only to the width of the abutment and 4 feet below low water, but such excavation should extend entirely through "Point of Rocks," so that the clear opening immediately below the bridge shall be 160 feet as at the bridge itself, and the face of the excavated rock should be left as smooth as the faces of piers and abutments usually are. I have the honor to return the tracing herewith. The CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. A. M. B. ADAMS, Major of Engineers. LETTER OF THE SECRETARY OF WAR. WAR DEPARTMENT, Washington City, February 12, 1884. GENTLEMEN: In reply to your letter of the 17th ultimo, inclosing, for my approval, plans for a bridge over the Arkansas River, at Little Rock, which it is proposed shall be constructed by the Little Rock Junction Railway, under contract with the Little Rock and Fort Smith Railway, I beg to inform you that the subject was referred to Major M. B. Adams, Corps of Engineers, at Little Rock, and to inclose herewith a copy of his report dated the 31st ultimo, in which he suggests the importance of certain changes in the plans of the bridge as submitted. As the act under which it is understood that the construction of said bridge is claimed to be authorized, does not confer any power upon the Secretary of War, in relation thereto, the Secretary of War cannot ap prove the plan; but there seems to be no reason why, if the slight changes suggested by Major Adams are made, this Department should interpose any objection to its construction. F. GORDON DEXTER, President Little Rock Junction Railway, Boston, Massachusetts. DD 5. PROPOSED BRIDGE OF THE SAINT LOUIS AND SAN FRANCISCO RAILWAY COMPANY ACROSS THE ARKANSAS RIVER AT VAN BUREN, ARKANSAS. OFFICE OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, UNITED STATES ARMY, Washington, D. C., January 26, 1884. Sir: In returning the papers informally withdrawn from the War Department on the 23d instant, in relation to the proposed bridge across the Arkansas River at Van Buren, I beg to transmit for your information a brief of the action hitherto had in the matter derived from the papers in the case, and prepared in this office. I remain in the opinion that the location of the bridge selected by the company is not the best for the interests, present and prospective, connected with the navigation of the river, but that the one some 550 or 600 feet higher up and recommended by the Board of Engineer Offcers is preferable; while that suggested by Captain Handbury, somewhere between 1,800 and 3,000 feet above the line proposed by the company, is still more desirable. In regard to the latter it was found, how. ever, that the excessive cost of the approach on the Van Buren side, which involved a curved tunnel in very difficult soil, amounted to a prohibition of the work, and was therefore abandoned by the Board. The objection urged by the company against the location recommended by the Board is one of cost, it being claimed that the increase of expenditure involved will not be less than $50,000, a sum which it is claimed the company cannot afford. It is understood that the company now asks the approval of the bridge at the site proposed by it, such approval to be accompanied by the condition that in case the building of the bridge shall occasion any obstruction to navigation the said company shall construct, at its own expense, such works as the Secretary of War may direct to remove such obstructions, this obligation being in addition to the requirements of section 6 of the act authorizing the construction of the bridge, and relating to works to be constructed and maintained by the company for guiding steamboats, rafts, &c., "safely through thepassage-way." The interests represented by the railroad are undoubtedly much greater than those connected with the navigation of the river abovethe proposed bridge, and as the two most important places on the river at and above the locality, viz: at Van Buren and Fort Smith, have by resolutions of their authorities and the petitions of their citizens asked. that the location be authorized, and in the further view that the impediment, if any, to the, general navigation is remote, it seems to me that the Secretary of War may properly adopt the location proposed by the company under the added condition specified above. Very respectfully, your obedient servant, H. G. WRIGHT, Hon. ROBERT T. LINCOLN, Secretary of War. [First indorsement.} The views of the Chief of Engineers are concurred in, and the location proposed by the company under the condition of the statute and the added conditions specified within is hereby approved. WAR DEPARTMENT, February 1, 1884. ROBERT T. LINCOLN, Secretary of War. MEMORANDUM IN RELATION TO PROPOSED BRIDGE ACROSS ARKANSAS RIVER AT VAN BUREN, ARKANSAS. November 6, 1882, W. W. Belknap, attorney of Saint Louis and San Francisco Railway Company, submitted to the Secretary of War plans of a bridge across Arkansas River at Van Buren, Ark., authorized by act of Congress of July 3, 1882, and asked early action thereon; referred to the Chief of Engineers November 9; referred by Chief of Engineers to Captain Handbury for report. November 24, returned by Captain Handbury with report: 1. Map not in conformity to law, as not giving the topography and shore lines at high water for 1 mile above and below the proposed location, and that the direction and strength of the currents are entirely omitted. 2. The location of a bridge near the head of a bar or island that separates the waters into two channels would be injurious to navigation, especially in this case, where, owing to the alluvial nature of the riverbed, slight changes in the conditions of the flow will produce important changes in the direction and strength of the currents. During low water boats take the channel to the right of the bar, whilst at ordinary high water the other is used. 3. The direction of the axis of the bridge and the location of the drawspan are not favorable to the navigation of the channel next to the town, and the approaches to the bridge, as proposed, from the right bank to low water, would have the effect of drawing the water beyond the point of location of the draw. 4. The difference between high and low water, as assumed by the company, is 32.5 feet, whereas it was 35.5 in 1844, and 39 in 1833. 5. That the proper location of the bridge would be from 1,800 to 3,000 feet higher up stream. To this the chief engineer of the company replies, December 5, 1882, through W. W. Belknap: 1. That the location suggested by Captain Handbury is impracticable, since the curve approaching the bridge would require tunneling through 5908 EN-113 |