Year: 1871

L. will. of course, disgust the ambitious en-
gineers and amateurs who submitted to the
Dock Commissioners innumerable plans for
new wharveS and piers for this port to know
that they have been rejected. one and all.
Here and there a valuable suggestion has been
accepted and Incorporated in an entirely
new plan, which. after years study of the
subject, Gen. Mcclellan has prepared, and
which we publish this morning in full. There
is little reason to regret the rejection Of the
plans heretofore submitted and published, for
most of them were practically worthless;
many Others if adopted. would have rendered
necessary radical changes in the water front and
in the harbOr not TO be contemplated seriously for
a moment; while still others would have caused
the infliction of a tax on commerce which in
its present condition it could not bear and
prosper. The plan adopted has been long
time under preparation, and the cost OF max
ing it has been considerable, but few will be
disposed to be captious at those who already
give evidence of having made haste slowly;
and it will be wise economy if present large
expenditures secure a good plan which can be
carried out with safety and cheapness III the
future. In spite of some criticisms of a CORE
spondent whose long experience in harbor
matters entities his opinion to respect, we are
disposed to regard the plan of Gen. Mcclellan,
now submitted in detail, as practical, elaborate
enough for all probable future demands OF our
commerce, and economical. The cost of the
docks will, of course, depend eventually on
tbs Commissioners who are to supcrintend
their construction, and of their economy in
practice we are not so well assured as of that
professed by their Engineer; but it will be not
wholly fault of the plan if an excellent sys
TEN of docks is not obtained at comparatively
small cost.


The chief dangers to be avoided in the re-
construction of our docks are the obstruction
of the currents of the rivers and bays, and
the taxation of commerce by the cost of the
work There has long existed a fear that the
encroachments of the wharves on both sides
of the two main rivers of New-York would
eventually Obstruct the channels in such a
way AS to destroy the tidal force which now
carries the deposits of the sewers and rivers
to the sea. The proposition to take away ma
teraly from the width of the rivers as made
in this plan consequently awakened grave APP
prehensions but the assurance of Cen Hum
-phreys with which Gen. Mcclellan fOrtiies
his own opinion that this disastrous effect
will not follow the narrowing of the stream,
will set doubts at rest and disarm opposition.
II is an opinion from which engineers and men
with practical knowledge of the peculiarities
of our harbor will strongly dissent; but, as
the question is one which time alone can de-
eide, the public may be content to test it on
the strength OF the opinion quoted. The En-
gineer of the Board, if not the Board ITSELF is
fully alive to the importance of not permit
ting the proposed improvement of the harbor
TO become too great IA burden to commerce.
He recognizes the necessity of making the port
attractive to the commercial marine by the
cheapness as well as the superiority and safety
of the dock accommodations. His system,
therefore contemplates the erection of cheap
wooden PIERS such as we now have, on a
plan which permits their renewal in more sub
stantial form by future generations. The sys-
TEN itself is to be permanent and unalteraDIe,
and il ordered with view to the future de-
mands of a rapidly increasing commerce; but
the piers are to be capable of renewal or alter
alton, as circumstances require and the pros
perity of the city warrants. In these Two lea
turcs the plan is unquesiionably an admirable
one. always supposng that it can be carried
out IA contemplated.


The widening of the river streets - also an
important feature of the plan, and one whose
value TO the city will not be appreciated unm