small steamboat to ply between Baldwinville and the sea beaches, and to do the general carrying trade of the bay. The bay is shoal, filled with many shoals and marsh islands, and the trade is insignificant. After carefully considering every phase of the subject, I am compelled to state, as the law requires, that in my judgment Baldwin River is not "worthy of improvement." It has no commerce, and the improvement would but slightly change its present status. Baldwin River is in the collection district of New York. Nearest port of entry New York City; nearest light house is Fire Island light-house, 20 miles to the eastward, and the nearest fort is Fort Hamilton, New York Harbor. Respectfully submitted. G. L. GILLESPIE, Major of Engineers, Bvt. Lieut. Col., U. S. A. UNITED STATES ENGINEER OFFICE, New York, October 4, 1884. LETTER OF MR. FRANCIS B. BALDWIN. QUEENS COUNTY TREASURER'S OFFICE, DEAR SIR: You will please pardon me for my delayed answer to your letters, as they were received in my absence, as I have been away some days. The length of improvement needed to Baldwin's River is about 14 miles long, onehalf thereof in Parsonage Cove, and at the head Hempstead Bay to Baldwin's River, and the other half thereof to the said Baldwin's River. The cove is wide enough, but only 1 foot deep at low tide. The river is deep enough, but too narrow for vessels of 25 tons. What we need is 3 feet of water at low tide in the cove, and the river made 30 feet wide. The number of people intended to be benefited by such improvement is about 15,000. Exports are oysters, clams, fish, also farm produce, such as potatoes, cabbage, and all other vegetables and garden produce. Imports: Coal, manure, lumber, and all kinds of building materials; also all kinds of goods such as general-assortment stores keep, groceries, hardware, dry goods, &c. There are about three hundred men employed in the oyster business living within 2 miles of Baldwin's river, besides a large number of men in the fishing and clam business living in that vicinity. Maj. G. L. GILLESPIE, FRANCIS B. BALDWIN. Brevet Lieutenant-Colonel, U. S. 4. F 22. PRELIMINARY EXAMINATION OF HUDSON RIVER FROM WEEHAWKEN TO BERGEN POINT, NEW JERSEY. This survey is thought to be simply an extension of the survey directed by river and harbor act, March 3, 1881, "From a point between Ellis Island and the docks of New Jersey Central Railroad to a point between Robbin's Reef Light and Constable Hook in waters of New York Bay, New Jersey," and that directed by river and harbor act, August 2, 1882, of "North River in front of Jersey City and Hoboken, to determine what is necessary to permanently deepen the channel on the New Jersey side." The report on the first survey was submitted December 28, 1881 (page 719, Part I, Report Chief Engineers, 1882), and on the second, February 16, 1884. They cover that part of New Jersey shore embraced between Hoboken and Constable Point. To comply with the river and harbor act of July 5, 1884, it will only be necessary to extend previous surveys to Weehawken on the one side, and to Bergen Point on the other, with a repetition of the cross-section soundings at stations 1 to 8 on Hudson River, between New York City and Jersey City, to note the changes which have occurred since survey of 1883. On account of the intimate commercial relations existing between the two great commercial ports of New York City and Jersey City within the limits of the required survey, the river is worthy of improvement, and the work is a public necessity. I would therefore recommend that the survey be authorized from Hoboken up-stream to Weehawken, and from Constable Point westward through Kill Von Kull to Bergen Point, together with new soundings at the eight cross-section stations in Hudson River between New York City and Jersey City. Every description of sail and steam craft constantly uses the lower river, and the survey will in consequence be subject to many interrup tions and delays, causing loss of time and entailing great expense. It is estimated that a satisfactory survey, illustrated by proper charts, will cost the sum of $1,800. An application is respectfully made for the allotment of that sum. Allotment asked for, $1,800. Respectfully submitted. . G. L. GILLESPIE, Major of Engineers, Bvt. Lieut. Col., U. S. A. UNITED STATES ENGINEER OFFICE, New York, September 15, 1884. SURVEY OF HUDSON RIVER FROM WEEHAWKEN TO BERGEN POINT, NEW JERSEY. UNITED STATES ENGINEER OFFICE, New York, February 27, 1885. SIR: In compliance with river and harbor act of July 5, 1884, I have the honor to submit herewith my report on the survey of "Hudson River, on the New Jersey side, from Weehawken to Bergen Point, Hudson County, New Jersey, with a view to deepening the water at the wharf on that side." As the interests centered along the shore line embraced in the survey are not everywhere identical the report, for convenience, is divided under three heads, and each will be discussed separately. (1) HUDSON RIVER, WEST SIDE, FROM ноок. WEEHAWKEN TO PAULUS Two surveys of late years have been made by the Engineer Department, covering almost the entire front of this section; one in 1874, extending from Castle Point to Bedloe's Island, and the other in 1883, in front of Jersey City and Hoboken, including a duplication of the sound ings of the five cross-sections of the river established during the first survey, with three additional cross-sections extending to Fort Washington. Under the act of July 5, 1884, the survey of the west bank of the river in this section was extended to Weehawken, and soundings duplicated at all the previous cross-sections. These several surveys have been directed by Congress with the view of determining the nature of the improvements which it may be practicable to undertake in order to deepen the water on the approach to the wharves on the west side of the river. It has been stated in previous reports on this subject that the deposits which occasion the obstruction alongside the wharves on the right bank of the Hudson, below Castle Point, are the result of natural causes, i. e., the set of the currents toward the east bank, occupied by New York City, due to the sinuosity of the river above, and the natural shore projections from the west side of which Castle Point is a conspicuous example, assisted by artificial projections close to and below Castle Point on the same side. These may be regarded as permanent causes tending to maintain shoal water on the west side; and nothing but their total removal, now impracticable, will bring about any but a temporary change, so long as the dock lines on the east side are judiciously established. I take occasion to say right here that the two banks of the river are kept in view when considering the subject of pier-head lines. A disregard of the mutual relations of the two systems of lines may, after construction, surprise the builders by the results obtained. A pier-head line, for instance, which would allow long piers to be built out from the east bank at and above Fourteenth street, New York City, might benefit adjacent wharves by giving increased depth there, but the effect of such constructions would be to deflect the currents to the opposite bank, tending to reverse existing conditions of velocities and depths on the two shores below Fourteenth street; that is, to deepen the bed on the west shore and to shoal that on the east. As the wharves on the west shore are located upon a convex bank, where languid currents exist, and where deposits are made by local sewers, and by shipping occupying berths in the slips, it is natural to expect that there would be, as a result of these conditions, a continuous and progressive shoaling of the water near the wharves and in the slips. The currents have insufficient velocities to produce any scour, so that all deposits made upon the bed must be removed, periodically, by artificial means. The only expedient measure of relief, then, is by dredging or by establishing the pier-line closer to the deep water channel. The frequency with which dredging is required here and the cost attending this kind of relief led me, in my report of February 16, 1884, to disapprove the further expenditure of money for dredging, and to recommend that the pier line be located within and near the 25-foot curve of the adjacent shore, believing then, as I now believe, that the establishment of such a line will not be injurious to the regimen or tidal propagation of the river. An examination of the soundings last taken along the cross-sections at the several permanent stations, exhibited upon the accompaning chart, shows that no material change has taken place during the year in the depths at Castle Point or at Weehawken as the result of the shore improvements constructed at the latter point by the railroad authorities. In my judgment the pier-head line within the 25-foot curve, which has been recommended for that part of the west shore lying below |