New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1875-10-26

rents as are found are entirely similar to
those at the Sulna mouth.
The season Of flood in the Brazos river ia
also the season of northers. The floods are
sudden in their rising, and the northers are
the most violent storms known along the
coast of Texas.
At the mouth of the Brazos, the general
trend of the coast is such that the wind ac-
companying these northers blows along it,
very Obliquely to it, or directly of it.
The Hoods and the northers completely
sweep away that portion of bar formed
during low water in the river by the south
erly winds, and drives the material SO
swept off into the deep water of the gulf.
From this it is seen that the bar is a drift
bar, because formed at a time when the
river is bringing no deposit to it and
washed away when the river is in flood
and most heavily charged with earthly mat
ter, which it is moving toward the bar. 1t
is also formed when the currents, induced
by the winds, set on shore, and washed
away when the more violent currents, in
duced by the winds from an opposite direc-
ton or along shore. prevail The Sulna
mouth of the Danube presents as near a
parallel case as could have been selected
with our present information regarding all
the drift bars in Europe and America to
which jetties have been applied.
The SO called "littoral current" 80 etfica-
cious there, is the current caused Dy tie
frequent gales from the northeass, ), which,
aided by floods, speedily break down ne
| shoals formed at low river by the southe,!y
winds.
The general trend of the coast through
which the Sulina discharges is about the
same as that at the mouth of the Brazos.
The nOrthers of Russia are probably
much like those of Texas, and the winds
crossing the Black Sea to beat up the sand
n the Nrlinp har mnab lkQ fhoca
the Gulf of Mexico to perform like SER
vice for the Brazos bar. Similar long
| reaches of sand beach flank the two bars on
| either side, and the bars are both mainly
formed of sand.
During river floods, when delta bars
| usually shoal, these two scour out, while
| during low water, when true delta bars,
| like those at the mouths of the Mississippi,
are at their best these drift bars are shoalest.
1t is now evident that the success of jet
| ties at the Sulina mouth is principally de-
| pendent on the fact that the general direc-
tiOn of the coast on either side is the same
as that of the most violent winds. That
precisely the problem presented at the Su-
| lima mouth is presented at the Brazos mouth,
and that it is probable the practical failure
of jetties on other drift bars, because of the
necessity for their frequent extension or for
dredging between them, is due to the fact
that the most violent winds to which they
are exposed blow on shore. There is prob
ably no true littOral current involved in
the discussion of any of them, except it be
found along the Holland coast.
The applicability of jettes at the Sulina
mouth of the Danube being established by
actual trial, their applicability at the mouth
| of the Brazos must now appear certain.
| They would act, as at the Sulina mouth, to
aid the floods and norehers to scour deeper
channels than these otherwise would. Dur
ing low water in the river, by concentrating z
| the river discharge, they will increase the
velocity of its current enough to keep the
drift from the southwark from settling be-
tween the jetties. except il may be during G
| such remarkable low water seasons as that
noted for the DaI ube in 1863 when bar
formed between he jetty heads at the Su-
lima mouth.
Estimated cost of ietties at the mouth OF
the Brazos, $2S6, ,4S4. Cost of survey,
$3S42 81.
SURVEY OF CEDAR BAYOU BAR, TEXAS.
This survey was at the mouth of Cedar
bayou, emptying into the head of Galveston
bay, Mt ar the mouth of the San Jacinto
| river.
The results of the survey showed that
a channel across the bar, five feet deep and
| 100 feet wide, would benefit the commerce
| concerned, and therefore an appropriation
of $3.50 y is recommended for that pur
| pose. Cost OF survey Silb9 l0.
EXAMINATION OF GUADALUPE RIVER, BELOW
GONZALES, TEXAS.
From this examination it was learned
| that the expense that would attend the re.
mOval of all the oostructions would not be
| justified by the amount of commerce to be
served. Beyond the removal of three rafts
in the lower river, which will open the
navigation of the river at all seasons of the
year to vessels not drawing over three feet
to point forty-two miles above its mouth,
no recommendation for improvement was
made. For this purpose an appropriation
of $7l94 was recommended. Cost of survey
1880 Sc.
| FORTIFICATIoNS
The modification of Forts jackson and
st, Philip was continued daring the year at
an expense of $33, ,357 SO for the former, and
$32, ,246 "a for the latter.
The repairs and preservation of Forts
Livingston, Pike and Mscomb, Battery
Bienvenu and Tower Dupres and Proc,
tOrsville, Louisiana, were continued at an
expense OF $4,000.