Bismarck weekly tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, Dakota [N.D.]) 1884-1943, 1890-01-10
A Card From Mr., Heron.

EDITOR lR1BUNE: In reply TO Lne artl-
Giles appearing in the last issue of Mr..
MoffeC's paper rejecting on the engineer
who located the bridge-to be-over Apple
creek near Samuel Lawrence's place, said
article calling attention to the altitude of
that structure, 1 wish to make the follow
ing statement of facts:
On August 18th last at the request Of NJ.
j. Edgerly, commissioner of the First dis
trict, l in company with MIR. Edgerly as he
directed, located and measured a certain
ditch to be constructed and also marked
the location of an iron bridge to be built.
IN measuring for the same l was assisted
by Samuel Lawrence who asked Mr..
Edgerly what height the new bridge would
be- placed at. Mr.. Edgerly asked Mr..
Lawrence where high water had come.
Lawrence replied not quite up to the floor
of the old bridge. Mr.. EdgerIy said that
we will have the new bridge placed one
foot higher than the old bridge. He at the
same time asked that | would furnish an
estimate for a ditch thirty feet wide on top
with the proper slope to the bottom and
the depth to be down to the level of the
water as it was then. | made the estimate
finding that it would require 3,14S cubic
yards to be moved; bids were advertised
for by the board and the contract was let
the latter part OF August to }. 7. Kent,
whose bid was about 10 cents per yard.
l was anxious to have the work on ditch
pushed during good heather, if to be done
at all this season, leaving in ditch roadway
for crossing and entertainments at each end
to keep out water. Mr.. Edgerly said the
ditch would not be touched till bridge was
being put up and that bridge company
WAS hpiOO 6plaVp6 9hnIt uattinp ont iron
work. The iron work was not hauled to
the ground until after December LIST. but
the bridge company pushed their work in
good shape. Feeling it my duty as county
surveyor to watch the putting up of the
bridge, and as it was the expressed desire
went out several times. On December 18th
I went out and asked Mr.. Mclean, the
foreman in charge, if he did not wish a
level for the height given. He said he did,
and | leveled across. setting a stake the
height Of the old bridge, saying: Mr.; Ed.
higher than the old" Mr.. Mclean had
the west pillars put III for that height. A
few days afterward on going out l was
very much surprised to find the east pillars
set in 8 feet z inches higher. When l
Edgerly ordered him to tear out the west
the east pillars which Mr.. Edgerly had
placed at the attitude they are. So that
the floor of the new bridge now stands as
finished, 5 feet 8 inches higher than the
floor of the old bridge. The height of the
jOisCs and floor, adding to the height above
the pillars, are about four feet higher than
Mr.. Edgerly had said last summer the new
bridge would be-so that I consider that I
am not to blame for the height Of the new
bridge. 1t Is not my purpose to ~criticise
what Mr.. Edgerly is responsible for
but leave that for the public who
can see plainly enough that the
bridge is too tigh and will be a large
expehsAt4 OFtEeSg0untyft6lh aYe itssgradedS up
saaacaSntfsK makes HghbtS grade lind easy
protlesshowing cuts,fopthe Same was to
have been ttlirtAA. feet wide; son 't6pa Mr..
EAGERLY .6rdeiedit made fiftytfeett wide on
top, which htids Materially. to the expense
atsttisSeasOn o. the. year, When-thetgrOund
isir9zetl! ] MrsEdgeTly evidently has mot
c6tsidefed q Worth Wlhiisgto consdlt4sme
with regard tt this work, for reasons which
LIDO not know. l nave been willing to
snperintend any such work, as l think it
my duty as county survey or, and am still
atshis service in 50 far as my duty is con-
cerned. Respectfully submitted,
!. THOMAS P. HEBRON,
County Surveyor.
Bismarck, Jan. l, 1890.