Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1893-01-25

DISASTROUS was this food that in the river and
for a survey Of the Potomac river IN he vein
ity Of Washington with reference 20 the
improvement Of navigation. the establi,h
ment Of harbor lines and the rnisine
Of the fats. Owing 70 great Interest
felt in the subject a board Of engineer officers
was constituted consisting Of Lieut. Col o A
Gilmore. Lieut. Col. VIM p. Craishill ana
Lieut. Col. c b. Comstock, 10 which we're re-
ferred the report Of the survey made BY Mr.. 4
7. Albert, L. 5. civil engineer, and the plan of
Major Vim. J. Twining. corps Of engineers, then
Engineer Commissioners Of the District Of Co
lumbia. The board Of engineers did not adopt
either Mr.. Abert's plan or Major Twining's plan
In their entirety. but recommended . new plan
which combined certain features Of each
THE nrpopr or rur mann or xxa,xrxp.
t. ,,.;r -. -, ,-.,,.s.C
= ~, ILL n "Hs suDnii,eo 70 Nou-
eress Msfcn o. 1851, the board OF engineers
made the following recommendation in relation
to the Long bridge: ct il REGARDED as peces-
sary to the proper execution 81 this nlan that
the Long bridge shall be rebuilt nj an
early period during the progress of the i'm
provements, with wide spans upon piers offer
ing the least possible obstruction TO the flow Of
water" (Senate Ex Doc. l26-Forty-seyeutn
Congress, first session, u. ls.O
On August 2, 1882, Congress made the first
appropriation for improving Potomac river nj
Washington, and directed that the work be
done in accordance with the report Of the
board Of engineers
1t would appear, therefore that in the adop-
ton Of the plan Of the board Of engineers Con-
gress also adopted their recommendation in re-
lation to rebuilding OF the Long bridge.
Since the inception of the Improvements at
tention has been called in the various annual
reports thereon TO the necessity for legislation
providing for the reconstruction Of the bridge
In the report OF 1884 Lieut. Col. Hams states
that no plan OF improvement can be made
satisfactory while this bridge remains ss
is, most serious obstacle to the
now OF water beneath il; that in
It's present condition II serves the purpose OF q
dam and retards the flow OF water. and that the
only radical cure for the evil effects of the
Long bridge in time OF freshets is q new bridge
with wider spans.
In the report OF 1856 action by Congress is
again urged, ana II Is stated that IL has been
necessary to stop the dredging of the Virginia
| channel both above and below the bridge at
some distance from the same for fear Of iniuring
the foundations OF the piers.
In February, 1883, special report was made
IN reference to the probabilities OF damage ID
the Improvement on the city front and to the
city itself by high spring treshet. This re-
port was transmitted to Congress and printed
IN Elk DOC. No. i'o, IL. H., Fltueth Congress,
nrst session. IL recommended that the Long
orioge snouIu De rebuilt without delay and SCI
iortn tne reasons tor THIS action
In June, issy, the anticipated freshet came
ana proved higher than any previously known.
Inc results were disastrous. the lower parts OF
the CITY were Hooded, the river improvement
was seriously damaged and great loss resulted.
In the report for 1889 viii be found full details
| OF this freshet, which rose to a height
OF nearly thirteen feet at the Long
bridge and wrecked one span Of this
bridge over the Virginia channel. On April 5,
1890, the Secretary of War transmitted to the
Senate, in response toa resolution of the Senate
OF March z, 1880, a report from Lieut.. Col
Hams relative to the separation Of the wagon
road from the railroad on the north side Of the
main channel OF the Potomac (printed in SEN
ate Ex. Doc. No. sc, Fifty-frst Congress, first
session.:
In this report Col. Hams recommends the
sc ~ sne .4au i,oui '.e is.tI oau
of the grade Of the railroad tracks across the
fats high enough to give passageway for We
hicies under them and to the reconstruction Of
tne Dridge over ,he main cnannei OF the river
On wiuer spans tnAt via cause less OBSTRUCTION
70 ,ne no" oi wafer. ne suonits pians ior the
, ,s anu cons,ruction OF tne proposed
prloge' WHICH VIII De lound Attached 10 the re-
port
IN .ne annual report OF June ~, lss, Col
nAihs s'a'es ,na' !, is now I'M perauve 'nat TINS
WORK snoulo De no longer oeiayeo II the cestrac-
tion OF the bridge Itself, as wen as damage to
the work on the river front and still greater
damage to the city, Is not TO be invited.
Again In 1881 II Is stated that as the improve
ment progresses the necessity Tor rebuilding
tine Long bridge becomes more and more
urgent that on account OF its Iauits construc-
non IL remains constant menace TO the inter
ests on the river front above 1t and also to the
WORK OF improvement. upon which large
sum mas peen expended py the governments;
tnst In tne event OF freshet occur
nm WINE tne river is 1uii OF Ice the most
serious results are to be apprehended from the
pfopapie iormaton OF an Ice gorge at the
water ana the noodlng OF the lower parts OF
tne city
having tnus summarized the previous action
IN reference 10 TINS question, respectfully in
site attention 10
THE EXISTING CONDITION OF THE LONG nRrpaE.
Al the date NJ IN. iroon,;or % .ha po,or,.,
.-NN. I,ood1 80 "a 'Ae
river Improvement Siooz) tne Long oridge con-
sisted OF three parts, viz. commencing at the
Washington shore, Cd a bridge across the
Washington channel of wooden spans on ma
sonry piers and about eco feet in length.
(2) a causeway Of earth between masonry re,
tanning walls across the fats between the two
channels and about $50 feet in length, and go
a bridge across the Virginia channel about
1900 feet in length. which is the structure
specifically referred to in section 10 of the
pending bill
The Long bridge across the Virginia channel
is, as shown on the plan Of the same herewith
inclosed Enclosure No. 81, a wooden Howe truss
bridge consisting of thirteen spans of 1875 feet
oh in tho claar md npa 6ru epa, $aat 90,