Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1883-07-20
THE OUTLET
Capt. John CowdOu I'm Answer TO Mr.
William HeWs0n.
To the Editors of the Appeal:

In your paper of the 18th instant l see
you publish a long letter from William
Hewson about myself and outlet system. 1
propose commencing with the great outlet at
LAX Borgae, and as this is a great public
question, together with statements that are
not true, l shall ask, in all fairness, the right
as well as privilege 10 reply through your
columns, 80 that my reply may reach the
same readers.
He starts oat by stating that my statements
as regards Humphreys and Abbett's report
were mol correct, and that his was correct.
He quotes from page 1893, aud goes on and
gsrbles facts from other pages. 1t was these
facts which / referred to and had reference
to the Bonnet Care outlet and nowhere else,
which, as he states, he denied, and, in order
that your readers may see that l am and was
correct in every publication | have ever
made with reference to this question, l will
here give Gen. Humphreys exact words on
pages 41S aud 419, and not S97, as Mr.. Hew.
son then insisted, and by his gsrbling tried
TO present In the APPEAL.
Humphreys says: "The mean discharge of
the river above the outlet was 1,IC0,00 0 Gu
bic feet per second, while the mean velocity
of the river was 5.45 feet per second above,
when below the crevasse the velocity was
6 Sc feet per second, while the corresponding
velocity at the bottom was 4.72 feet per sec
ond above the crevasse and 5 80 below; the
velocity of the current below the break being
more than one loot per second greater than
above, and actually an increased velocity of
six per cent. in the river"
The above is just what Gen. Humphreys
did say on that point, and | said. and now
say, it was very natural that such results
would follow, for the hood-line of the river at
New Orleans Was lowered from three to four
g. - l..a -htnb .naraoaol So
angle of fall and to that extent accelerated
the current, and accord ng to this a lowering
of the hood-lins twelve or fourteen feet at
New Orleans by the Lake Borgne outlet
would increase the current in the lower river
fully twenty-four feet, and gave the rate of
increased discharge, which he quoted cor
rectly, 30 far "a he went.
The concluding psrsgraph-ha-emitted
which was as follows: "Tbess are results that
follow natural laws which govern the true
science 10 all photographic engineering; and
when men set up such assumptions as have
the so-called River Commission, they either
do MOI know what they are talking about. OIL
are Intentionally trying to deceive the public
in general and Congress in particular"
This covers the case Of Mr.. Hewsop, which
is no doubt the reason he failed TO quote it
with other facts. But, in trying to escape
those conclusions, he starts out with a denial
that the Bonnet Care did not lower the wa.
ter, but goes further and repeats the false.
hood of the Commission, that the outlets had
| never lowered the water in the river at all.
As to the effect Of lowering the food-lius
by the Bonnet Care, as l stated, that can b.
proven, not only by a hundred living witness
but by the Carrolltou and Baton Rouge
water gauges, and, as for the other sssump
| ton, that the outlets OF Morgapza, Bonnie
1 Co-ro anl A tohaflavo bod not lo-araI ~.
! food.line above and below them, / refer hin
| to q table on page 4 of the pamphlet from
| which he quoted 30 extensively, which
| shows that the average food-line fol
| the five years of 1878-74-75-76-77, wa
| lowered four feet ak inches at New Orleans
/ nine feet three inches at Vickeburg, when III
at the mouth of White river it only lacked
| for the same time one foot and eleven iDcbe
of being to high water mark.
The White river station showed that a
| that point there was sufficient water in tn,
| Mississippi river to Keep it to near higi
water mark. Now, what made it 60 muci
lower at points below if it did not escap,
| through those outlets? To say such WIS no
the reason, there would be as much truth il
saying that water would not be lowered in
cistern when escaping through an anger hol'
in the side.
Mr.. Hewson wants TO know why these out
let's did not prevent overfows in 1882. Fol
the simple reason that the Mississi ppi wa
and is plugged up at its mouth; Red rive
came out full, which filled The Atchafalay,
to its utmost capacity, then the Bonnet Carr,
and Morganzs could not carry of the sur
plus floods and, as the Lake Borgue Jutle
was not msde, it could not be blamed TO
not doing that which it had no chance tt
do. But, if the Lake Borgne outlet wer
made, it would take of the surplus water
increase the current in the river from it
mouth to and above Cairo, scour out tn
bottom, lower the bed, stop overfiows ant
crevatses, which the educated idiots, alias en-
g~ineers, call outlets.
This would put an end TO the River Com
mission and its fraudulent jobbiDg, As Mr.
Hewson, as I understand, has been and per
haps is now in the employ of this Commits
sion, accounts for his zeal in fighting III.
| Laks RasenA- ouflef-@
Mr.. HeWson tslls ms be has known the rive
longer han I have. If 40, what does tina
amount to, for some men will never learn any
thing? He reminds me OF the fellow VII
carried his corn in one end OF his bag and
rock in the other. If this be not The cas-
there is only one other way OF accounting 70
Mr.. Hewson's little knowledge OF the ques
ton Oh which be pretends to write, and that ca
best be illustr sted by the old SOW in the corn
field that never would fnd the hole 10 go on
through which she came in so long as ther
was q nubbin left. and in this case there !
fully LOCO, 000, 900 nubbips worth 81 each
and Mr.. Hewson wants some OF these golde
nubbins. Therefore he Opposes the LAX
Borgne outlet, that costs 30 little, and stand
by the Commission, whose object Is TO squan
der hundreds Of millions. ! am, respectfully
JOHN CoWD0N.