The national Republican. [volume] (Washington City [D.C.]) 1866-1870, 1868-01-13


CAN may be obtained daily. -f3Ll
TIE ALEXANDRIA Aouxpucr BnfDog QuRs.
rIos:-Messr,; Philip ouiElsy, Henri, y nsllss
Company, have died an answer in the supreme
Court Of the District Of Columbia to the BILL Of
complaint Of pr. Joshua A, Ritehie, Jerome Q.
maker, previously filed in said court, protesting
against the use OF the aqueduct bridge for canal
elaborate, covering a space Of twenty-seyen oc.
tavo pages, and after reviewing at length the act
Of insorporatio,n, under which they set proceeds
work could be built without enormously inoress-
canal IL conpectins Il with xieSsndris, and says
"thnt connecting with the Chesapeake and Ohio
,sn aSUys :, 4. ss and H.
would have almost destroyed the canal commences
Of deorgctewn, by diyertinS y: trade and bust
iowingit, as now, to come TO it,
Further on, the answer says; "Thst tho level
Of tho Chesapeake and Ohio canal At Georsetown,
canal must connect the Aqueduct was built upon
the highest level above the waters Of the Poto-
nine openings, each one hundred feet in the cesf
character and kind, as before the location Of the
Aqueduct did navigate the waters OF the Poto-
mac above that point. And these defendants are
Informed and believe, and therefore charge the
vessels and boats which at that time were aceus-
toned to navigate the river above that point,
and whatever benefcent purposes nature may
have had in view, as stated by the oomplainants
bill, these defendants are informed and believe,
that the channel OF the Potomac, above the Aque-
duet, Is 50 crooked sna ei5catons, t ana 80 90,
SO rapid, rs to render II Of no value for naviga.
ton BY vessels Of large size, carrying masts and
respects constructed in such manner as to offer
the least obstruction to commerce and navigation
upon the river, and that the new 3, structure now
replacing the old one, Is being SO built As to offer
known as the spur-braces, which, to some extent,
they deny thatthe said .A9ucduct, ~ originally
constructed, or as now being rebuilt, was then
| or T. now, a common nuisance but II was then,
conformity with the provisions OF law In reia-
tion to the same, authorized and empowered BY
done BY virtue Of such legislative authorities 10,
| or can be, public nuisance"
| Ailuding to the channel from the Long Bridge
| to9eorgetown, the defendants say that they are
| informed and believe no vessels drawing over
eleven feet of water can get to or from the port
frequently ground in the river above the Long
| Bridge, causing great expense, demurrage and
delay thereby. That those engaged In ne coal
trade greatly prefer the port OF Alexandria, and
willing to carry coal from 1t for Is cents per
ton less than from Georgetown, while the present
rates OF toll by the Alexandria canal from GEORGE
town to Alexandria are but eight cents per ton,
| and the boatmen on the canal, as general rule,
are Willing to cary coal oyer ne q, Caespsstks
for which they bring 1t to Georgetown"
The answer then goes on to tecite that the
crippled. or retarded the commerce, growth, or
business of Georgetown. The defendants also
deny the right or butterfly Of the eSmpisisnnnts
adv ahtages to the defendants as pccuniary in
yestment, and say that 1t Is not true that the
the contrary they deem 1t OF great value, and
confidently expect that II Will produce rev.
| nf M nd nf
The defendants further say that ait 10 true
however, that at the time they acquired said
lease, they did, and ever since have designed, II
ne necessary \, NV nd sos'u IL o
| nvnr tbe ,tera 81 Tho aid aauednct and aione
| the bants ~ the said esnaI IN whoIc or In mart
srom Gso,9etnwn to Siexnnaris,' hui the nara,
mum " IN p.Uai a. nsn.I ""' '"'
The defendants further say, THAT they are in.
oI co,mniaint. that nv means Of neebanienl inn.
oroyement. water gates can be piaced in said
aqueduct so as to allow section OF 1t to be
turned on pivot ana thus us, admit omit me passssgt Q,
vessels carrying mastsi put they ailege, thnt 20
to destroy the aqueduet, and render 1t of no
In reference to the outlet lock, the defendants
deny that the interests OF commerce coula pc
secured ana that eoai equla Ve mdvahtaseo.G sy
The outlet lock through the Potomac river to
Which Is th.s no bt .n at
| emit pass through the said outlet lock into the
Potomac river drawing over 2 feet 10 inchei
water, while the boats on the Chesapeake and
Ohio canal engaged In the coal trade, when
oaSea ufaw from ~ s,n ,hV tha
moii LDaw and Inc hnnts uSicS how mas,
through the said outlet lock are compelled Be
ioLs g9ihg out OF We saHe' W uhio"" "oou' o"'
mi h o. .hons III some NJ tho mali, ,on,. NJ IN,
s.n ~ the ies.nns a,a thn m sttpr no,y hei n,
placed before the court, It is expected decision
! thp INN ri MI wi ha N