Year: 1872

Boston, Portland, Montreal and WetT new
Northwest.


N1JOR HOUSTON OE THE CANAL AND


Dixie.


We pointed out last week, some of the
Inconsistencies of Major Houston in refer
ence to the canal and dixie, and as the sub
ject will bear a little more ventilation we
recur to it.


There are three points connected with
our harbor, in regard to which the public
have a right to expect, that scientific as op-
posed to experimental civil engineering
shall be applied to them: these are, lst, the
OF our entry Improvement, 2nd,
the effect Of the canal, and Sd, the effect Of
the dixie.


So far as is shown by the Letter to the
Senate from the Secretary Of War, the En-
gineers are consistent in their opinions on
all these points, the only exception to this
is Major Houston, and he is consistent in
one direction up to a certain date, and then
after that he is equally consistent, but in an
entirely opposite direction.


!. vt one time "the St. Louis river is nee
essary to maintain the channel" at another
& we would have better harbor if both
the St. Louis and Nemadji were non-exist-
ent" In May the outlet depends on the
securing effect Of the CURRENT in August
''it depends mainly on the ebb and flow of
the lake"


.. At one time he supports us in Court, in
our efforts to stop the canal outrage, by his
evidence that it will be 'Ehighly danger
ous," highly injurious" it viii divert the
current, probably entirely close up the en-
try" and then shortly afterwards our op-
ponents are enabled to quote from his re
port that 'sthe canal has 40 detrimental in
fuence on the entry" In May "the canal
will entirely close up the entry unless the
costly cxpcdent Of dredging is resorted to;
in August any possible injury can be easily
cured by dredge."


3. In June unless dixie IS constructed,
the current will be seriously weakened" )" in
August . if dixie is not imperatively need
ed, it would be better not to put it IN" In
June he advises "until the dixie is built the
canal should be stopped;" in August that
q all action in the matter should be defer
red


Now though our Duluth neighbors give
Superior the credit of every tenth man in
it, being a civil engineer, we do not profess
to belong to the corps, and we therefore do
not presume to judge whether the Majors
first or second thoughts are the most cor
rect: we know however they cannot both
be sound, and one peculiarity OF them is,
they do not appear to be oscillations in
opinion caused by the varying phases OF a
difficult question undergoing a protracted
scientific Investigations they remind US
more of tidal wave flowing steadily in
favor of our harbor up to June 1871, and
then in August flowing strong and steady
in favor of the Duluth canal


The Major seems to have been partly
conscious of this, for in his report to Gen
eral Humphreys dated 22nd November
1871, he explains his early opinions as to
the detrimental effect of the canal, on the
odd supposition OF the canal ESQ feet wide
Is feet deep being opened, echile the works
at the entry remained as they were in Sep
tember 1870. Such a construction Of his
evidence is quite inadmissible; the project
ed canal implied much labor, and required
years tor its completion; in coming into
court therefore in September 1870, and
helping by his evidence to fight it, it would
have been preposterous to have asserted the
dangerous effect Of the canal on the entry
solely on the supposition that the former
was fully completed, 1chile the latter re-
mained Is it was.


He further explains in th6 same report
But different state Of things now exists,
the piers at the entry have been extended
ont nearly to the deep water Of the lake +"
So it seems by this that the danger OF
the canal was mere scare; this danger
was indeed thought so great on 29th June
that he recommends that "work on il
should be suspended if possible;" but seven