The Bossier banner. [volume] (Bellevue, Bossier Parish, La.) 1859-1952, 1880-04-08
CAPT. EADS'S SCHEMp
Why he Considers Railroad R....
struction Of Vessels ase mo- asnth S,.rSs 6.

struction OF Vessels no ObjectIora Co
From the N. Y. Tribune,
A tribune reporter called ~
James b. Eads, at the Albemarlaa y Sap
yesterday afternoon, and Iearn s hote
he is thoroughly in earnest IN ' 10y taa
to his ship-railway project. and ,S1i;s J
hdent OF getting it in course II : .0a
struction in few months after co - co.,
shall have passed the bill intrnlea
into the House by Mr.. Wells ~ M
ri, and in the Senate by SenataaMsso0
Captain Eads expressed the on;u;a s W
the De Lesseps canal project wss y sas
virtually dead. He continued w;. - nov
erence to the bill advocating b i'm N, Il
as follows: - pans
cit authorizes a Corporation !,
the necessary works across tho Is.s Jug
anywhere between North and S.s
America, after securing from n. u ~
trail American States the neceasa !. 20.
cessions. 1t guarantees the nrn,s' veh'
of the United States to the f rssoIon
he may secure and to the works ~
construct, and provides for the ds ~ a,a
two ships OF war, officers and ma. 1 y
aid in the necessary SURVEYS a. 1, !,
works. After fireworks are com ~ sle
and loaded ship of specified tp p'.sso
shall have been safely and satisfartos.S
transferred from ocean to ocean
guarantee of the United States Gov o., -
ment of six per cent. dividends ~ S ~
600, 600 of stock shall take effaos ~ y
thirty years; and in consideration o os. y
guarantee the United States shall, h .as
the right to fix and alter the rate ~ t sas.
at its pleasure. l am confident ~ \.
cess, and think it the sheerest wasts ~ =
time on the part of Congress or thsr,s
lie to be discussing canal when III N.
ter method, which can be put in ons,s ~
ton in one-quarter of the time an6 I.
one-quarter of the money, has the hiss
est and most emphatic approval ~ Il.
ablest engineers and shipbuilders /.
America and Europe. I'M. de Les....
were an engineer he would not mssS
his time on a scheme 80 homeless )
canal. 1t is hopeless, because can;tsl:
timid and conservative, and ii is not u
ing to be put into canal when hsts.,
and much cheaper method is urged Al
has the approval of experts Of The ~,
highest standing. Men will not n.
money into the canal, at any rate. ma
the cheaper method is shown to IL 4.
ionary, and this is simply Impossible i
be shown, because the more the sh;s
railway is discussed and examined AZ
more simple and practical will il q
pear. The discussion that has NM
opened reminds one of the discussos
which preceded my proposition in lSIs
to deepen the mouth of the NJ
sissippi by jetties. Almost ever
one thought the Fort St. PhiIs
canal was the only way the river could
be opened. / said other rivers had beeu
successfully treated by the jetty system.
Yes, oh yes, but they were all small
rivers, was the reply. To-day / urn
that vessels are transported by rail sm
have been for forty years, and liz
answer is the same, Yes, YES, but ths
are small ones canal boats, schooner
and the like. In the jetty controyerg
the opposers said the quantity Of aad
and mud that was carried in the MiNs
sippi River was so great that it could
not be controlled; and to-day they ~
out the cargo is SO great in q big shp
that she can not be carried wih0d
straining the ship. The most eminent
shipbuilders in the world say this i u
a mistake. They tell us that one Of u
imperatives rules Of their art requila
that a ship shall be built Of such
strength that if she be lifted up BY
force at each end, and without support
in the middle, she shall remain uninr
jured; and, in like manner, if she b
supported only at the middle, her huH
shall be so stiff that it will not be To-
jured thereby. 1 am not without
practical knowledge myself on this point
l have built fourteen iron-clad vW
sells for the United States. Tk
first eight she ever owned ]
built, and I know that the strength
of a ships hull, to stand the storm
OF the ocean, must be calculated just !
we calculate the strength Of Bldg
glrder. Naval architects in calculating
the requisite thickness of iron for ship
treat the proposed vessel as thought
were bridge girder. When the -
russia foundered, last fall, have 70
doubt that the iron of her bottom ~
OF a poorer quality than her architsd
was promised, or that it had becomes
injured by rust that it could not stand
the tension put upon the bottom plsia
when her bow and stern were lifted =
the same moment by two different wsse1
When the ship is upborne at the midds
by a single wave, and the bow aua
stern are without support, the dea
plates are strained in tension, while Y
bottom plates have their strains reversa
to compressive ones. Iron, like evcg
thing else used in constructing yesseh
and bridges, is elastic. A strong Iroh
girder four hundred feet long. II hessg
loaded, will defect six inches with PG
feet safety under the load, and snIe
four hundred fifty feet in length! Y
heavy seas, no doubt bend as much
that. 1t is simply impossible to keep tleI
from bending under such straus ~
as the elastic limit of the iron is mol Y
ceeded it does them no harm whste,n
The main arch of the st. Louis brlogs
five hundred and twenty feet in lengA
detected under the test load OF elgn.r
four locomotive engines and Their lsI
ders about three inches. The arcn 81
steel and it's form resists bending m9ss