side pockets or basins of 12 feet depth and more, one at the mouth of the proposed narrow channel and the other about midway to the bridge, where vessels can lie when waiting to pass or to get to their berths at the wharves. These waiting basins would, I think, be found quite sufficient in size, since vessels destined for Pawtucket, as a general rule, remain in Providence River until their berths at Pawtucket are ready for them. The channel through the rock, of the dimensions above stated, being furnished at the expense of General Government, the remainder of the expense necessary for providing means to get deep-draught vessels to the wharves, namely, the berths at the wharves and communications from them to the channel would doubtless be provided for by the wharf-owners. The following is the estimate above referred to: MAIN CHANNEL 12 FEET DEEP AT MEAN LOW WATER, AND 150 FEET WIDE FROM RED BRIDGE TO THE LEDGE OPPOSITE GRANT & Co.'s WHARF, THENCE TO PAWTUCKET BRIDGE 40 FEET WIDE. Mud excavation, 246,667 cubic yards, at 35 cents.... $86,333 194,000 191,345 $471,678 I have estimated the costs of channels of other widths and depths, the depth of rock cutting in each case being the depth of the main channel below, and they are as follows: MAIN CHANNEL 100 FEET WIDE AND 12 FEET DEEP AT MEAN LOW WATER. ROCK CUTTING 40 MAIN CHANNEL 150 FEET WIDE AND 10 FEET DEEP AT MEAN LOW WATER. ROCK CUTTING 40 MAIN CHANNEL 100 FEET WIDE AND 10 FEET DEEP AT MEAN LOW WATER. ROCK CUTTING 40 A depth of 12 feet at mean low water (17 feet at mean high water) is doubtless required for the commerce of Pawtucket, and if we make a channel of this depth it would probably be sufficient for many years to come. I am inclined to doubt, however, the necessity for making the width of channel as great as 150 feet, since the freights between the port of Providence and Pawtucket are almost exclusively propelled by steam. If the width in the first instance be made 100 feet; if we cut off the angles so as to widen the channel at these points, and place good range beacons on the shores of the river for marking the axes of the different reaches of the channel, I think it will be sufficient for the present. My judgment is, therefore, that the "improvement proper to be made" in this case is a channel 12 feet deep at mean low water, 100 feet wide from Red Bridge to the ledge opposite Grant & Co.'s wharf, thence 40 feet wide to Pawtucket Bridge. The estimate of the cost of this improvement is $382,478. In view of the serious obstruction to the navigation of Pawtucket River by the present Washington Bridge, and of the delay in the appointment of two of the commissioners, under the recent act of the legislature of Rhode Island, which provides for the rebuilding of this bridge with proper draw openings and the removal of stone and other materials which have been deposited under and above it, it is recommended that the first appropriation for the work be accompanied by the following proviso: Provided that this appropriation shall not become available until the officer in charge shall have reported that the rebuilding of Washington Bridge with good and sufficient draw openings has been commenced. It should be remarked, in conclusion, that in estimating the cost of the work allowance has been made for the difficulty of getting tows of scows containing the excavated material through the bridges near the mouth of the river, and for the long distance which they must be taken for dumping. The soft material should not in any case be dumped where it will be carried back into the channels to be excavated in this river and now excavated in Providence River. Possibly it may be safe to dump the gravel in the shoal places of Pawtucket River, but probably the whole of the excavated material will have to be towed to the dump ing ground below Prudence Island in Narragansett Bay, in the vicinity of Half Way Rock, which is now used in the improvement of Providence River, an average distance of about 22 miles. Respectfully submitted, GEORGE H. ELLIOT, Lieut. Col. of Engineers. Brig. Gen. H. G. WRIGHT, Chief of Engineers, U. S. A. EXTRACT FROM COL. ELLIOT'S ANNUAL REPORT TO CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, U. S. A., FOR 1883. Improvement of Pawtucket (Seekonk) River, Rhode Island. The project as far as adopted and approved was completed some years since. The mouth of the river is obstructed by two bridges with badly arranged draws; but Washington Bridge, which interferes with navigation more than the other (the railroad bridge), is to be rebuilt under an act passed by the legislature of Rhode Island at the January session of 1883, and the obstruction caused by this bridge, which has heretofore been a bar to recommendations by the engineer officer in charge of the district for further appropriations for the improvement of the river, will now be removed. The following is an extract from the act referred to: AN ACT providing for clearing the channel of the Seekonk River, at India Point, in Providence, of obstructions; and for the construction of a bridge near the site of the Providence Washington Bridge. It is enacted by the General Assembly as follows: SECTION 1. The city of Providence may elect, on or before the first day of July, A. D. 1883, to remove forthwith the stone and other materials deposited in the Seekonk River under and near Washington Bridge, so called, at India Point, in said city, from said river, and cause the channel thereof under and around said bridge to be dredged and cleared of all obstructions to the flow of the tides into and out of said river, to a depth of 15 feet at low-water, and reconstruct said bridge with a swing-draw in the main channel of said river, with an opening on each side of said draw, not less than 80 feet wide, for the safe and convenient passage of vessels navigating said river, through the same, in such manner as the harbor commissioners shall approve. SEC. 2. If the said city council shall elect within the time limited in the preceeding section, to dredge and clear the channel of said river and reconstruct said Washington Bridge in the manner prescribed in said section, the city shall cause said work to be completed to the satisfaction of the harbor commissioners within one year from the time such election shall be made by said city council, and the obligations of said city under an act entitled "An act in relation to the Providence Washington Bridge and the draws in the bridges of the Seekonk River," passed at the January session, 1859, and accepted by said city April 12, 1859, to maintain and keep in repair said Washington Bridge and draw, shall remain in full force in respect to said reconstructed bridge and draw. SEC. 3. If the city council of the city of Providence shall not elect within the time limited in section 1, to reconstruct said Washington Bridge in the manner aforesaid, a new bridge over said river, on or near the site of said Washington Bridge, shall be built with a swing-draw therein with an opening on each side of said draw not less than 80 feet wide, so located with reference to the channel and currents of the river as to be most safe and convenient for the passage of vessels navigating said river, through the same, in such place and manner as shall be determined by five bridge commissioners, of whom two shall be appointed by the city council of said city, two by the governor, and one by the town council of the town of East Providence. And if said new bridge shall be constructed upon the site of the present Washington Bridge, the said commissioners shall first remove said Washington Bridge and dredge and clear the channel under and near the same, of all obstructions to the flow of the tides and to navigation, to a depth of not less than 15 feet at low water. SEC. 4. The bridge commissioners so appointed shall cause within two years from the time of their appointment said new bridge to be constructed and completed according to plans and specifications by them approved, and when the same shall be completed and opened for public travel, the said commissioners, in case said bridge shall be on a site other than that of the present Washington Bridge, shall cause the present Washington Bridge to be removed from said river, together with the piers and piling thereof and connected therewith, and shall also cause the channel of said river to be dredged under and about said Washington Bridge and said new bridge, to a depth of not less than 15 feet at low-water, and in such manner as the harbor commissioners may direct, and deliver to said city the materials composing said bridge, piers and piling for the use of said city. An allotment has been made from the appropriation for the examination and survey of rivers and harbors, contained in the act of Congress of August 2, 1882, for the survey of this river. The survey and report thereon will be made in time for action at the next session of Congress. After the death of General Warren (August 8, 1882) this work was in temporary charge of Maj. J. W. Barlow, Corps of Engineers, until the 24th of November, 1882, when, by direction of the Secretary of War, it was transferred to Lieut. Col. George H. Elliot, Corps of Engineers. Pawtucket is largely engaged in commerce and manufactures, and the larger size and draught of sailing vessels of late years makes it desirable that the navigable depth of the river should be increased. Pawtucket River is in the Providence collection district, and that port is the nearest port of entry. The amount of revenue collected at Providence in the last fiscal year was $256,443.50. The nearest light-house is Sassafras Point light. The nearest fortifications are Fort Adams, Newport, R. I., and the fort at Dutch Island, R. I. DEAR SIR: Your favor of May 22, addressed to the Pawtucket Business Men's Association, was duly received, and the undersigned, a committee appointed by said association to obtain the information desired, most respectfully submit the following statistics of the commerce in Pawtucket River for the year 1882: The above merchandise was received chiefly by barges and sailing vessels carrying from 150 to 600 tons each, and drawing from 74 to 11 feet of water. |