San Antonio daily light. [volume] (San Antonio, Tex.) 1886-1907, 1890-11-19

1
| dermining of the work, and finally
burying it under the original bottom
AS we'll might snow fence be placed
on the wrong side of railroad cut to
prevent it filling with snow. These
results are not idle speculations, but
oft-repeated facts, proven by
surveyors" instances of which
are cited from reports of the
engineer, but the one which
appertains particularly to this case is
| to be found in Elk. Doc. 454, 81 con-
gress, LIST session, which is just, pub
lished and Is conclusive, as to the
soundness of Prof. Haupt's opinions.
This report, made by the late civil
assistant engineer, states that upon
the crest of the outer bar there has
been a pretty general shoaling of
from one fourth to one half of foot.
The depth in the jetty channel, how.
ever, still remains at Is Ia feet, but
the width of the channel between the
13 foot contours has considerably
diminished and the distance from
the IA foot depth inside, to the IA foot
depth outside has Increased from
20O0 to $500 feet. The bar has also
advanced very perceptibly outward
The shoal Immediately
north of the jetty has continued its
outward advance. =
"The indications are that the proba-
BILE effect of the further building of the
south jetty will be the obliteration of
the jetty channel itself. \ The
outward advance Of the bar is not an
Unexpected result Of the extension of
the jetty, and think we may expect
q continuation of this advance until
the equilibrium has been restored, or
the supply of sand exhausted. 4
"The sand has accumulated on the
north side of the jetty and some has
passed over the crest and settled
next to the base. This is another in
dication of the loss of force in the lit
toral current at that point, and also
shows from which direction the sand
is moving that has caused the
shoaling."
The foregoing report, stating the
facts so strongly, was only produced
by order of the House of Representa-
tives, and the sequel of its publica-
ton was an order to discharge it's au-
thor from further service on govern
ment works, after about Is years
experience at this harbor. A clear
intimatien to future civil assistants,
that brains are not desired in the SER
vice.
During the hearings before the
of congress when the Gal
weston Bill was under considera-
ton, Professor Haupt entered his
protest, as an engineer, against the
further expenditure of public funds
upon plan that gave no promise of
success, and for which there was no
precedent in the world. But not to
leave the case in hopeless condition
he offered q substitute for utilizing
the natural forces existing on
our coast, and urged the cessation of
work on the south jetty at once, as
positively injurious and extravaganza,
stating that had the north jetty been
started first and been correctly de.
signed and located, the south one
would never have become necessity.
He believed that it was an absurdity
to expect to obtain even the mini
mum channel fixed upon by the
board of 1889 by means Of two jetties,
7 900 feet apart, five miles long and
with tide Of only fourteen inches,
and protested against any further
waste of money, unless a radical
change was made in the plan of the
work. He also explained the
cause for the existence of
deep water along the city point
and showed, by means of
a model, how by suitable construction
similar conditions and equally good
results could be produ ced on the bar.
Upon the conclusion of Prof.
Haupt's remarks, the engineer officer
formerly in charge at Galveston, who
had been ordered to Washington,
and was present at the hearing, was
asked if he had any reason to change
his opinion. He replied "none what
ever" for he was satisfied the zap
proved plan" would produce the re-
suits claimed for it by the board of
engineers.
This officer stated to the senate
Committee that Galveston, having but
favorable situated than Venice, where
80 feet of water had been obtained in
spite of five inlets there are seven),
thus exposing his Ignorance of the
requirement of deep water-open en-
trance for the flood tide-which ma
ture had vouchsafed to Venice, but
that art must supply to Galveston
and other Gulf inlets of Texas.
Whilst the country at large may
rejoice at the liberality of congress in
making so large an appropriation, as
well as the citizens of Galveston, who
really desire deep water channel
across the bar-they should insist
that before any further expenditures
are wasted on this experiment, that