St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1886-03-18

to reach the heart of the city. There is a
double track street railway running across
the suspension bridge and travelling across
the same has become tedious and dangerous.
The
GREAT GROWTH
of the city and the suburbs thereof, as well
, as the business and manufacturing interests
along said river on both sides thereof. with
in a quarter of a mile both above and below
said bridge site and for long distances ayyav
from the river on both sides thereof. renders
more and better bridge facilities. at said
! point of the proposed stone-arch bridge,
imperatlYeiy necessary TO accommodate the
| business interests of the city and state. as
well as the people residing therein" The
contract Tor the construction of the bridge
that the city has signed is referred to, and
the loss that the city will suffer in case an
injunction is made permanently forbidding
the work. is held as part of the defense.
Upon the question of economy it is denied
that bridges of iron composed of n single
span ana equal III width and capacity to the
! proposed StOne-arch bridge and over which
all vehicles can be safely driven at trotting
speed. can be constructed over said channel
at said point for $3.50. 600. or any sum less
than $500. 600; and also denies that tn e
StOne-arch bridge cannot be built for less than
$3.50 00 but says the same will not prob
ably cost over $500. 600.
Several denials follow, that the building
of the Stone-arch bridge will in any way
injure the mill property, the city water
works and supply, or that it is
4 NEEDLESS EXPENDITURE
! of money and that it can be built for $780,
/ 600. Any injury resulting from the build
! ing of the piers for the bridge is specifically
] Ia,,iaI md affi hot r;,-
/ channel will not be narrowed to exceed
forty feet instead of IA feet, as claimed by
! the plaintiff.
The answer says that the width of the
of the river is $50 feet instead of 4S6 feet,
| and that it will only be reduced from ass
/ feet clear width for flow of water in the
channel, according to the stage of water.
! instead OF 342 feet. as the plaintiff claims
1t is pointed out that bridges both above
! and below the site of the stOne-arch bridge
have been built with piers set in the bottom
/ OF the river on the sand rock, as well as
! hundreds of piers around the falls for the
! holding of the booms. which have not
! interfered with the flow of the water or
with the bed of the river. Further, that
! the railroad bridge Just above the proposed
! stone-arch bridge is and has been for many
| years, fully as much of an obstruction TO
! the current of the river as will be the
! StOne-aTch bridge, and there will be fully
as much space between the piers and be-
! tween the piers and abutmentS of the stone
arch bridge. through which the water of
river can flow. as there is between the
piers of the railroad bridge. Even if the
bridge should dam the waters the securing
of the river bed would be prevented
Further, that it is not proposed to rip-rap
around the piers, as it is intended to place
/ H. ,tA 80 L. IL ~. 4
the sand rock in such way as rip-rapping
will not be necessary.
IT Is ADMITTED
that there is danger of undermining the
apron at the falls, but it is claimed that
there is not any connection between this
danger and the construction of the bridge.
The real danger lies in the excessive amount
water in the west channel which has
been greatly narrowed al the falls by the
unlawful construction and maintenance OF
many saw mills in the bed of the river at
the brink of the falls which have narrowed
the channel one-half at the falls, and the
further principal danger TO said falls is
caused by reason Of the fact that each one
of the plaintiffs has constructed and for
many years maintained tunnels from below
the falls through the sand rock up under
the ledge or the falls and made openings
from said tunnels up through the SAID lime
stone ledge to connect with the water in
the dam above said brink of said falls,
thereby giving an outlet to the water in any
loose seams through the sandstone rock, and
any and every danger which is
IMMINENT TO THE FALLS
is caused by the contributory, negligent and
willful acts of each of said plaintiffs in so
contributing and maintaining said tunnels:
that there is far greater danger to the falls |
and apron, and retaining walls so built by |
the government and to the water-power. by |
the construction of any and all bridges
which have been constructed or are pro-
posed to be constructed by the city,"