The CHAIRMAN. What is the width of that opening?

Mr. PIERPONT. I do not know. It is very wide. As I say, previous to that time there was a bridge which was built in conformity with the requirements of the engineers something like 15 years ago; but this new bridge is of sufficient size to take care of any vessel that it is possible to have up there for many years to come.

Mr. FREAR. I wish to call your attention to this: Recently local interests have requested that the 21-foot channel be completed, as inquiries have been received for factory sites in the locality affected, and the funds asked for on the 21-foot-channel project will be expended in continuing this improvement by dredging, either under contract or by Government plant, as appears most advantageous to the Government. That is up to this proposed factory site?

Mr. PIERPONT. The 21 feet is above the present factory sites. That 21-foot project is supposed to take care of the demands now and what we anticipate.

Mr. FREAR. I think I understand.

The CHAIRMAN. Is there anything else?

Mr. EDWARDS. I would like to request that the mayor be given the privilege of revising his remarks and of submitting such additional facts as he may desire. I wish to insert in the record a letter from the secretary of the Savannah Board of Trade on this subject. The CHAIRMAN. That may be done. (The letter is as follows:)

Hon. CHARLES G. EDWARDS, M. C.,

Washington, D .C.

SAVANNAH BOARD OF TRADE,

Savannah, Ga., January 8, 1916.

MY DEAR CHARLIE: I understand that Col. Langfitt, in his last annual report, has recommended a further appropriation to complete the project of deepening the Savannah River or Harbor 2 miles above the city to the foot of Kings Island. This work, as I understand it, can not be considered a new project, as considerable work has already been accomplished on the same. You will, no doubt, recall that this project was taken up in 1910, at which time Gen. Kingman gave it his unqualified indorsement. In fact, he stated in his report to the Secretary of War that in his opinion the plan for deepening the Savannah River or Harbor above the city, with a view to securing improved navigation, was one of merit and worthy to be undertaken by the United States. At the same time Col. William T. Rossell, senior member of the Board of Engineers, stated that in his opinion the growth and extension of the city of Savannah must be up the river in the vicinity of the present project and that the board concurred in the recommendation of Gen. Kingman.

As the continuance of this project is so essential to the commercial growth of Savannah, we feel that it is our duty to leave no stone unturned to obtain the appropriation asked for by Col. Langfitt. Therefore we will more than appreciate if you will kindly keep us advised in this matter; and if you think it necessary that we have representation to appear before the committee to which this appropriation will be referred, we will be pleased to have you so advise so as to enable us to have proper representation.

Trusting to hear from you at an early date, and with best wishes for a happy and prosperous new year, I am,

Yours, very sincerely,

THOMAS PURSE, Secretary.

Mr. PIERPONT. I want to say that the people of the city of Savannah appreciate the liberality which Congress has shown, and I want to thank you for your attention.

The CHAIRMAN. We were very glad to hear from you.
(Thereupon. at 11.45 o'clock a. m., the committee adjourned.)

TRINITY RIVER, TEX.

COMMITTEE ON RIVERS AND HARBORS,

Washington, D. C., Tuesday, January 25, 1916.

The committee met at 10.30 o'clock a. m.

Present: Representative Sparkman (chairman) presiding.

STATEMENT OF HON. HATTON W. SUMNERS, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF TEXAS.

The CHAIRMAN. You wish to be heard on the subject of the Trinity River, I understand.

Mr. SUMNERS. Yes, sir. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, I want to proceed very briefly in a discussion of the Trinity River project. Those of us who are on the outside looking in hardly know just what scope our presentation of these matters should take. I take it that this committee does not have under consideration the abandonment of any of the projects upon which considerable sums of money has been spent. For that reason I shall discuss the project from the viewpoint of its continued improvement. I believe there are a few new members of this committee present, and I shall make a very brief statement with reference to the general proposition.

Trinity River, as the members of the committee probably recall, is about 650 miles long; from Dallas, which has always been known as the head of navigation, to the Gulf is about 512 miles. The watershed above the city of Dallas is about 7,000 square miles, and the total watershed is about 16,000 square miles.

The work upon this project, as I understand it, has been made in line with the report made in 1902. Lieut. Col. Riche made that report, and in his report it was estimated that it would require 37 locks and dams between the city of Dallas and the Gulf to lock and dam this stream sufficiently to give, I believe, 6-foot navigation. The river was divided into sections. Section 1 reaches from the city of Dallas approximately 50 miles to the point where the branch of the river coming down by Dallas joins the East Fork of the Trinity, coming in from the more easterly section of Texas. In my discussion of this project with Members of Congress I have discovered that it is rather difficult for a Member of Congress whose knowledge is limited to the average rivers in the country to appreciate just the sort of stream the Trinity River is. From the standpoint of its navigability, gentlemen of the committee, it ought to be regarded as a canal and not as a river, in the ordinary acceptation of the term. When you speak of a river with a rather small flow of water the mind of the average man turns to a little stream with sand bars and low banks and a shifting current. The Trinity has

some very definite and distinct advantages over any other stream that I know of. It has a deep channel, relatively narrow, cut through gumbo soil that holds water almost like a jug. The banks are extremely stable. Therefore, you have, in considering this project, a stream to lock and dam and make a canal of, the relatively narrow banks, requiring the minimum expense to lock and dam, because of the comparatively short length of the dam which you must build across; you have no sand bars in the middle; you have the minimum of percolation (it is practically nil); and you have the minimum of evaporation, because of the relatively small surface which is exposed to evaporation.

In carrying out the plan outlined in 1902 Congress has appropriated for the purpose of building locks and dams and for channel purposes something more than $2,000,000. The people of the city of Dallas have expended something over $1,000,000, not all of it, however, upon this work. They did that in raising their bridges and diverting their sewers from the bed of the river, and we acquired, through local efforts, most of the sites for these locks and dams.

We have two locks in process of construction far below Dallas, one about in the neighborhood of 300 and the other of 230 odd miles below Dallas. We have in the upper reach of the river seven locks and dams contemplated. All of those locks and dams in the upper reach of the river have been completed or are in process of construction except Locks and Dams Nos. 3 and 5.

Mr. SWITZER. Just those two out of the seven uncompleted? Mr. SUMNERS. Yes, sir. Seven, I believe, are in process of construction. That is right, is it not?"

Mr. HARDY. That is right.

Mr. SUMNERS. It therefore leaves 3 and 5 yet to be provided for. With the completion of Locks and Dams 3 and 5 navigation will have access to the main stream of the river, formed by juncture of the stream that comes down from Dallas with the east fork, which comes, as I have stated, from a more easterly section of the State. Mr. FREAR. Dces not the Army Engineer's report state that until the complete system is finished navigation can not be undertaken on the Trinity? Is that not true?

Mr. SUMNERS. It is possible to so construe his statement.

Mr. FREAR. I was merely inquiring. I was not certain about it. Mr. SUMNERS. Yes, sir. I am not sure myself as to what the Army Engineer's report means. He says that there is navigation now 40 miles up from the mouth of the stream. He says that logs are being rafted down from 50 miles up the stream. He states that navigation in low water, or ordinary low water, I do not recall just how he qualifies it, is not possible above 50 miles.

The people who live in Dallas, the people who know the river well, believe that if Locks and Dams 3 and 5 are completed that for a considerable part of the year-it has been stated to me that for at least eight months of the year-navigation with shallow boats will be permissible and feasible from Dallas to the Gulf; but these two locks and dams being absent from the system of locks and dams make it absolutely impossible, Mr. Chairman, to use to any purpose whatever the appropriations which have been made by Congress for the river. It is exactly as though you had started out to construct a chain with seven links completed and had left two uncompleted.