The Manitowoc pilot. [volume] (Manitowoc, Wis.) 1859-1932, 1913-01-30
CITY COUNCIL NOTES.

reconsidered and put over until Feb
ruary 3 for action. This was becaase
of some small amendment necessary
because of sales since the ordinance
was originally introduced.
A letter was read from Congressman
Davidson stating that the war depart
ment board of review has disapproved
of the project to have the federal gov
ernment maintain our inner harbor.
He offers to appear before the board
while the question remains open Tor
rehearing. Action was deferred 10 let
the citizens express themselves. Fol
lowing is Mr. Davidson's letter:
Hon. Henry Stolze, Jr.,
Manitowoc, Wisconsin.
My Dear Mr.. Mayor
In the matter OF the survey for the
Improvement of the inner harbor at
Manitowoc, | have the honor to submit
the following information:
The District Engineer in his report,
estimated that the dredged channel
from the mouth of the river to the end
of the breakwaters could be enlarged
and the banks given greater slope
which would tend to lessen the wave
action, at cost of 100000.
That the dredged channel from the
mouth of the river to the first railroad
briage, could be enlarged and turning
basin created at a cost of about $1,000,
and that one could be maintained at an
annual expenditure of about 81 500.
That the channel could be dredged
to the second railroad bridge and a
turning basin constructed at cost of
about S46, 100000, and could be main
tanned at an annual cost of 81, 10000 in
addition to the 81 10000 for the main
tenance of the lower stretch of the
river.
The District Engineer favorably re-
commended the first and second pro-
positions, but reported adversely on
the third.
His adverse report on the third pro-
position was because he says the i'm
provement between the two bridges
would be largely for the benefit of the
ship yard company and the Reiss Coal
company, and not for the general pub
lie, and on that account the upper i'm
provement should not be made by the
federal goveiSatnent.
The Division Engineer and the
Board of Review for Rivers and Har-
bors report adversely upon the whole
proposition.
The Division Engineer says that the
improvement of the lower portion of
the river from its mouth to the first
railroad bridge would be almost en-
tirely for the benefit of the 500 Rail-
road company and as that company
already gives the same rate as the
Northwestern Railroad company, the
people generally would not be bene-
ted by having this improvement made
at the expense of the general govern
ment.
The Board of Review for Rivers and
Harbors, in its report, maintains that
the situation at Manitowoc is not such
as to warrant the general government
in taking over the maintenance and
improvement of the inner harbor even
to the first railroad bridge and that
tck
cedent which would lead to a very
large expenditure on the part of the
federal government in making similar
improvements in many other harbors.
1t also holds that as the principle of
cooperation between the government
and local communities in the improve
ment of rivers and harbors is being
very generally adopted and applied in
many other cases, that it would be un.
wise to now establish precedent here
by the government taking over the
work of maintaining the inner harbor
improvement.
In order that the city's interest
might be fully protected, upon my re-
quest the Chief of Engineers sent the
report back to the Board of Review
for another consideration. | did this
in order to give the city an opportunity
to be heard If it so desired. The Board
of Review will give hearing to any
delegation which the city may send
here on most any Monday of the sue.
ceeding three or four weeks. The
Board, however, is anxious to dispose
of the case at the earliest oppor.
tunity.
If you desire to have a delegation
come here and present the matter
to the Board, will take pleasure in
accompanying them and will do every
thing in my power in the citys inter
est. If it is not desired to have 9
delegation come down, and if you de-
sire me to do so, | will appear before
the Board and make an argument ir
behalf of the city and request rever
sal of It's former judgment. II, on the
other hand, you prefer to let the mat
ter go ever for future consideration,
will so advise the Board
In as much as the District Engineer
only favored the lower portion OF The
project, and not the upper portion
which, in my Judgment, is of mucf
greater Importance to the city, it nigh
be advisable to drop the matter nov
and take IT, mn aoajp Mt sone futur,