The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1896-09-14
M'LEAA'S TARDY LETTER
Sends Many Details About the
Canal to the War De-
partment.
Like Banquo's Ghost the Doctor and
His Controversy Over the Project
Will Not Down.

ALAMEDA, CAL, Sept 13.-The letter
of DR.. ]. T. Mclean, in regard to the Oak
land harbor matter, which he has sue
ceeded in getting the Board of Trustees to
indorse, contains little more than a recap
itulation of the matter that has been pub
lished several times during the contro-
versy over the harbor Improvements. Al
though q week has passed since the trus-
tees signed the communication, DR.. Nc
Lean has carried it in his coat POCKET
until to-day, when he brought it to Oak
land fer publication. After reciting the
details of the work under the various en-
gineers who have been in charge since it
commenced, it says:
That Colonel Suter, under date of july IL.
1896, officially reports to the chief of engi-
neers, U. S. A, at Washington, ''that this part
1.-THE tidal canaD of the original project for the
improvement OF Oakland harbor, made in
1874, was based on imperfect information, and
is now thought to be unnecessary; and that the
estimated cost OF its completion is $4,000,
etc."
That this report of Colonel suter concern
ing the uselessness of the tidal canal as a part
of the original plan of Oakland harbor and
that the estimated cost of dredging and bridg-
ing the completed part OF said canal is $751;
600 has astonished the people living adjacent
to said harbor, who consider the statements of
said report as not well founded and who de-
pTeCdle Ine duOpilOn OF SAID statements by
she authorities of the War Department be-
cause OF the present and prospective injury
which, in our judgment, would result to said
harbor from failure to complete. it on the
general plan upon which II was originally de-
signed.
That the estimate for dredging the tidal
canal. made by United States Engineers Men
dell, Stewart and Alexander in 1874, was
$349,497 and the revised estimate made by
Colonel Menden in his report for 1887 for
dredging the canal was $413 940 and for the
bridging over the canal 100000. From these
estimates and from the actual cost of dredg-
ing nearly half OF the canal and of bridging 1t
at Park street, as stated above, it is reasonable
to suppose that the cost of dredging the un.
completed psrt of the canal under the compe-
tition OF at least three dredging firms will not
exceed $500, 900, and that the cost of the
needed bridge at High street viii not exceed
the cost of the one at Park street, $50, 900,
making the probable cost of completing and
bridging the canal $260,000.
If to this is added the cost OF the dam and
hoodgates-estimated by Colonel Mendell in
1887, for dam, $27, 000-say $40 600, we have
for the dredging and bridging OF the unfin-
ished canal and for the dam and floodgate a
total Of $500 600, a sum less by $212, 900 than
that reported by Colonel Suter.
The lengthy communication concludes
with an attempt to prove that if the
original plan be not carried out the appro-
priation cannot be touched, because il has
been made for the existing project"
What the existing project" is has already
been determined by Colonel Suter, who
differs in every respect from DR.. Mclean