Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1883-02-10
Tho Bridge Question, Again.

l certainly have no desire to misrepresent
your correspondent ''Nous verrons" He now
denies in his recent letter ever stating that a
road could be constructed on grade of foot
to the mile from 'Three Sisters to Falls
Church. An examination of his first communi-
cation. under date of December 23d, shows that
he so states as matter of information and vet
argues out from it as matter of fact so much
SO that naturally presumed he assumed full
responsibility in the premises. Having run a
line of Levels up the ravine ''Spout Run" which
shows grade of $50 feet to the mile from the
roadway Of the bridge, ''instead of mean low
tide, it was but natural should take issue with
him on his assertion as to the
''easy grade OF not more than foot
to the mile, and at very trifling cost {"
There is a radical difference of opinion between
him and myself as to the engineering problems
involved in this particular roadway. which must
necessarily overcome an elevation of at least 800
feet inside Of two miles from the Potomac
This, however, need not be discussed here,
to compel the engineer department to ask for
an additional appropriation of $50, 900. It is
not 80 much q matter of bridge at Three Sisters
as Of approaches, and on this point alone hes
depth Of water OF 70 feet between Three
Sisters and the Virginia shore. This deep water
must be spanned, for no pier can be prOftably
constructed in such depression. and, while it's
bottom may not be of such treacherous nature
as to involve most serious engineering compli-
cations, yet my impression is that they will be
found eventually less formidable a: to cost than
the approaches Of the bridge proper. No expe-
rienced engineer can question the sOundness of
judgment OF Col. Albert and Gen. Wright, chief
engineer, in recommending an additional appro-
priati0n of $4,000 cello, 900 of which shall be
for engineering alone), based upon their plan Of
bridge and approaches, and possibly 1t is one of
"N0us Verrons' 'shard blows" in virtually
claiming that his knowledge of bridge building
and engineering is superior to that Of the engf-
neer department.. My attention has been called
to Col. Abert's report on improvements of
Georgetown harbor, dated August 8, 1882 the
following extract from which is very pertinent
just now to our free-bridge discussion:
xesses is at present time liked ~ the aaaeact 3
the Chesapeake and Ohio canal which has clear head
% o
and Inclined plane q the Ike and Ohio canal
e sa has tine s Sss
so9 are to % s
horse to tow them under the aQueduct and the
s. e ss
ssss n y net e az e sy. the
put when &c Als1.nd. canal es.se. 70 useful and
SECURE ios :.ins yesseis steamers =
above &c hs: Sssa 1ssenss q n
S oS :s Sear :s cs :s
It b to Be regretted that the attention Of Con-
gress cannot 30 directed to this extract. for II
absorbs all issues as to sites, and narrows them
down to the one question Of occupancy Of the
Aquednct bridge. With the Secretary Of War
recommending Congress to condemn the Acue-
duct bridge as . speedy means Of acquiring q
tree bridge, and with Col. Albert demonstratin1
It's public benefits, - well O. tho uselessnees az
the Alexandra canal, under the recent CON
to waste our time arguing that Three Sister or
High street II the proper place for the bridge.
CHAS II. BLDs, Civil Engineer.
Washington, D. O., Fob. I, 1852
A ,noxemanf A afnok IN ulanoan IA l..aA =, .