The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1899-11-04
COL. LESTER WILL OPPOSE 1T.
HE DOES NOT WANT HARBOR PRO-
JECT CHANGED.

mel Depth should BE Maintained
and VIII Ask Congress TO Make an
Appropriation for Securing n
Depth of Twenty-eight Feet-He
Has Not Seen the Report of the
BOard-PiIOts Say That Vessels
Drawing More Than TVyenty-fOur
Feet Have Been Taken out Re-
Gently ana That with Dredging of
ShOuI Places Vessels of Even
Deeper Draught Can lie Taken
out.
Congressman Lester DOES not regard
with favor the recommendations of the
Board Of Engineers vi regard to changes
in the Savannah river and harbor pro-
ject, published in yesterdays Morning
News. Among other te omme ndatiOns the
report fayoIs the abandonment Of the pro
ject for a 26-foot channel and the subsu-
tuticn Of one for the accommodat lions of
vessels drawing q feet o. water. with an
increase of the pr sent depth Of water on
the bar. There is now &c feet OF water
there.
The report was male about a year aeo
by Maj. Steers, Engineer Bixby and Mai
Simons, who were sent here for the pur-
pose of making a thorough examina ion Of
the work. 1t remained in the archives of
the engineering corps at Washington until
a copy was obtained this week by Capt
Gillette, United States engineer for this
district The report considers the break
water at Tybee unnecessary, either for
deepening the water on The bar or for pro
recommends in definite abandonment At
ter reviewing The condition Of he work as
it existed at that time, the board, in be-
ginning its recommendations, speaks Of he
success which had attended the project for
attaining a 28-foot channel. Further on
in the report a change in the project is re-
commended as stated.
II shall certainly oppose any change In
the project looking 10 a less depth of wa
ter in the river," said Congressman Les
ter "Of course, there is no objection 10
an increase of wafer on the bar, though
for the matter of that have never heard
any complaint Of lack Of water there.
Whether the board means by a channel
capable of accommodating vessels draw
ing "a feet, a channel of that depth at
mean high water or whether it means one
with a depth of between "A and % feet,
am unable to say"
Have you seen this report of the
board?" Col Lester was asked.
mo" he replied. Il asked for a copy
not long after it was filed, but was in
formed at the engineers office in Wash
ington that IL was not yet ready to be
made public. I shall write at once for
copy"
Col Lester said that the report will
come before Congress for action and that
when it does he viii oppose its adoption
and suggest radical changes in the pro-
ject as 1t now stands.
Instead of decreasing the twenty-sx
feet of water in the river, which we now
have, or should have" he said 1.-The eff
fort should be 20 secure twenty-eight feet
in the channel with thirty feet on the bar.
This was Gen. Gilnnore's original project,
and is entirely feasible. In fact, Carter
simply adopted the Gilmore project, and
IL was at first supposed 10 secure this
depth of water. When It was found that
there was only twenty-six feet of water
on the bar. the project was changed to
one for a channel of twenty-six feet. The
abandonment of the breakwater is an err
ror, in my opinion. as the break
water would have been a great
help in deepening the water on the bar
and in maintaining the depth after it had
been dredged OUT
Business and shipping men who were
seen in regard to the report of the board
were not prepared to discuss the question
at length, as they were in some doubt as
to whether channel capable of accom-
modating a 2-foot vessel means a de-
crease in the present depth of the river.
The general sentiment was in maintain
ing a twenty-six-foot channel. 1t was ac-
knowledged, however. that as a matter
OF fact. the twentv-six-foot channel does
not exist at present, there being several
shoal places which are a foot or more
under that depth.
The neglect Of the river since the bring
ing of the charges against Carter nearly
two years ago." said one Of the oldest
merchants on the bay, "is responsible for
some deterioration in the channel. Had
the work been maintained there is not the
slightest doubt but that this depth would
exist for the full distance. / am satisfied
that had 1t not been for the number of
deep-draught transports, which made use
of the river last season and kept the mud
stirred up at the bottom that the shoaling
would have been much greater than it is
at present"
I'll is very good idea to have more wa
ter on the har." said Capt. M p. Usina.
secretary of the Pilots Association. but I
see no reason why he river channel
should be cut down to a draft Of "a feet
We have carried cut two vessels within
the last month drawing more than that
the Glengoil and the Cussius one drawine
doubleday be a greater depth Of water on
the bar than in TIE channel. As the largS
Vessel 90 out on the ebb tide we run the
risk of getting a thump on he bar in case
of choppy sea. which IS likely 10 give a
pilot the tootnache. The Chester was tax
en- out drawing . feet In fact. vease s
drawing 20 feet could be taken out now On
a high tide but some dr. dging Is need, i
at shoa ed places"
We certainly do not want any less wa
ter IN the river" said Wee President
Eean Of the Ocean Steamship Company.
What we want is more wafer and I hope
Capt Gillette will undertake to give 1t
to us"
A gentleman who is familiar with the
shipping business of the port, aud who is
inclined to agree with Cope. Gillette IN his
Id as, said: "W.ih ony q feet Of water on
the bar a 2i-foot channel in the river is
all that we have need Of. Very few shtns
cone here Of any r at + draft than that
With a channel Of fu ~ q fee, a vessel
drawing 24ia or even IS fe [ could he rak-
en- out on two DIS a. Is now dome With