Rock Island daily Argus. (Rock Island, Ill.) 1886-1893, 1889-06-12
Pure Reeklessness
Responsible for the Terrible
Disaster at YOUNGSTOWN.
THE DAM A MERE BANK OF MUD.

Built by an Utterly Incompetent Man,
Who Was No Engineer-The State Takes
Hold of the Work of Clearing the De-
bris, and Contractor Flynn Refuses to
Help-A Lady Missionary's Body Found
miscellaneous Disasters.
NEW YORK, June 12-The Engineering
News has investigated the Johnstown dam and
learned some facts not heretofore published.
In July, 1862, the dam gave way, carrying
out $4,000 cubic yards of material Con-
gresham John REILLY bought the property in
May, 1878. In 1879 Mr.. REILLY offered it to
the late Col B. F. Ruff, an old and success
full railroad and tunnel contractor, and the
originator of the South Fork Fishing and
Hunting club, for g., 600
Col. Ruff interested two other Pttsburg
gentlemen in the project and stated that the
dam could be reconstructed for not over
81 500 and that he would take a contract to
do it for 81, 700. On this basis the club was
organized and for some time these three gen.
tlemen were the only persons in it. None of
them are now connected with it. The total
cost Of rebuilding the dam was 1000. The
original dam was estimated to cost $1SS, 00O
and actually cost nearly S2i0, 900.
The Engineer" of the Dam.
Col Ruff engaged as foreman and super
intendent for this work Edward Pierson, a
cousin of the present mayor of Allegheny
City. Mr.. Pierson has never been an engin-
eer, but after 1880 was employed in the local
freight department of the Pennsylvania rail-
road at Pittsburg Col. Ruff was called an
engineer" but he not only was never an en-
gineer, but he had never been engaged before
even as a contractor on water works or dam
construction If he was ever so employed at
all it would appear that it must have been
to an unimportant extent
In fact, it is learned on evidence that is
positive, direct, and unimpeachable that at
no time during the process of rebuilding the
dam was any engineer whatever, young or old,
good or bad, engaged in or consulted as to
the work, a fact which will be hailed by en-
gineers everywhere with great satisfaction
as relieving them as body from heavy
burden of suspicion and reproach.
How 1t Was Reconstructed.
Information gathered from reliable sources
shows that the work of reconstruction was
done with slight care. The old material
which had caved in was left untouched The
old pipes and culvert, which still remained in
a somewhat injured condition, were covered
over with earth and permanently closed, a
double row of hemlock plank-sheet piling
being driven across the old channel. Leak
ing during the process was great, and some
tons of hay and straw were filled in to stop
1t. The dam was finally made fairly tight,
but always leaked at the bottom, and of late
years the leakage has been increasing.
Never Properly Inspected.
The Engineering News says it has investi-
gated carefully the various specific reports
that the dam was occasionally inspected by
engineers, but finds no evidence that it was
ever inspected and approved even once by
any engineer commissioned for that purpose.
who by any stretch of charity would be re-
garded as an expert The report that certain
Pennsylvania railroad engineers regularly
inspected the dam is denied by a number of
officers who should know.