The following text may have been generated by Optical Character Recognition, with varying degrees of accuracy. Reader beware!

1903-] as a sufficient ground for a reasonable modification of the existing current. Were it either necessary or desirable to find other con- sideration it may be found in the act of incorporation itself where- in it is provided that when the channel is completed and 300,000 cu. ft. of water per minute turned therein, the same is declared to be a navigable stream, and that whenever the general govern- ment improves the Des Plaines river for navigation, to connect with the channel, said general government shall have full control over the channel, subject to the rights of the district for drainage purposes. It may well be assumed that the government, through its proper officers, had this in mind. My conclusion upon the matter is this: By permission of the general government the respondents connected the channel with the south branch of Chicago river. Such permission was with- held until certain requirements were complied with, Respondent took all necessary legal steps and acted within the permit. What- ever damage accrued to libelant grew out of the congestion of the channel by reason of the bridge piers or abutments, which were not under its contract. There is no undertaking with navi- gators, express or implied, that the current of the river shall not exceed a certain rate of speed, except the 3-mile provision of the act creating the district. The damage complained of would not have accrued to a smaller vessel. It was the resistance of the current as augmented by the narrow draw and the great bulk of the vessel, the latter being such as to practically fill the draw and stop the flow beyond her. bow. These three causes combined brought about the damage claimed. Was the additional. current an unreasonable use of the permission given by the government? I think not. It was also a reasonable 'exercise of the power vested in the secretary of. war. .I find no adjudicated. case dealing with the rights of navigators with reference to difficulties of navigation caused by increased speed of currents resulting from acts ap- proved by the proper government officers. In the case of Cummings vs. Chicago, 188 U. S. pp. 410 to 431, Justice Harlan lays down certain general principles affecting the relative powers of the United States and of the state with reference to navigable waters, which, while not bearing directly on the facts of this case, would seem to indicate that it was not the purpose of the act of 1890 to deprive the state within whose limits the navigable water is wholly situated of all reasonable con- trol for local purposes. On general principles, however, the rights of navigators must be held to be subject to the exercise of such power by the gov- ernment. The most that can be said for libelant is that it has made out a case of damnum absque. injuria. The libel is dis- missed. ----ae PLANS FOR DEVELOPING HARBOR. Plans for the improvement of Cleveland harbor were dis- cussed quite thoroughly at a meeting of the Chamber of Com- merce, 'held in Cleveland on Tuesday evening. Addresses were made by Maj. Dan C. Kingman, government engineer, Hon. T. E. Burton, chairman of the committee on rivers and harbors of the house of representatives, and Mr. Harvey D. Goulder, who has for years taken an active interest in Cleveland's lake com- merce. Maj. Kingman outlined in his paper plans providing for a new and extensive harbor with wharves from Erie street to Gordon park and entailing an expenditure of $30,000,000. In his general definition of what a harbor should' be Maj. Kingman said: "A harbor ought to furnish a sheltered area of sufficient size for all vessels likely to take refuge in it. The depth of water should be sufficient to float the largest ship and not too great for convenient anchorage. The bottom should be of good holding ground and the shelter against waves should be complete. En- trances and exits should be convenient. But in law and commer- cial usages harbors should be more than this. They should have proper facilities for unloading' vessels and proper wharf facili- ties' and the land approaches should be convenient. Trains should be able to run alongside the*ships. A harbor without proper railway facilities is no better than without water in it. Maj. Kingman believed that large commercial harbors must exist at Duluth, Chicago, Cleveland and Buffalo, as all four cities are located to feed an important territory. He reviewed the his- tory of Cleveland harbor from 1825 to the present date and showed that while in 1874 Cleveland had 93 per cent. of the en- trances and clearances in the Cleveland district and 96 per cent. of the tonnage, it had now only 52 per cent. of the entrances and clearances and 37 per cent. of the tonnage. He believed that in- adequate facilities was the cause of this decline and that the real harbor of Cleveland had always been the river, extremely tor- tuous and difficult to navigate. Continuing he said: "What is to be done? - Congress has recently approved a plan for greatly enlarging and improving the entrance to the harbor of Cleveland, extending the breakwater to Gordon park. The Work will cost $4,500,000, and already an expenditure has been allowed that will suffice for a new entrance and for the construc- tion of about 10,000 ft. of new breakwater. The work is now in Progress. This will protect three miles of lake front. Will this suffice to restore the lost commerce? No. The general govern- ment is simply building a fence around your farm. It is for oe to cultivate it with skill and diligence. If this great breakwater that we are building is permitted to stand there and serve no other pu tect a length of shore from erosion, if ee ee: S ire riparian rights and tailroad companies are allowed to acquir tian Tif hold them far the purpose of 'excluding rivals, if. individuals a syndicates get possession of this front and keep it for = sake of the «unearned: increment, then: what I am doing out there 1s MARINE REVIEW AND MARINE RECORD. 25 worse than folly, it is a positive crime against the whole United States. It were better to take the millions collected and scatter them broadcast in the lake." _Maj. Kingman declared that Cleveland should secure an entirely new haven for its ships and that it were useless to at- tempt to develop either the west breakwater or the river. He believed that the natural harbor, owing to ease of approach, was from Erie street east. This would result in a shifting of busi- ness centers and a complete rearrangement of land approaches. Describing it he said: "The breakwater will extend to Gordon park. It is 3,700. ft. from shore, with an entrance on the east and one opposite Erie street. It will afford a waterway 1,700 ft. wide. The first front- age, 700 ft., belongs to the United States government, being the marine hospital. This I have asked congress never to give up, as it will be the basis of the new harbor. Here the government can build two slips, each 150 ft. wide and 700 ft. deep, with wharves alongside. These wharves can be well constructed, with the upper part of massive concrete. Wharf room would be pro- vided for a harbor custom house and a mooring place for a revenue cutter and for a lighthouse depot. These wharves of the United States government would be a model for the city to follow. To Gordon park there is a frontage of 17,250 ft. This should be secured for the benefit of the: public. No actual land above water need be secured. The riparian rights secured, a ser- ies of wharves should be constructed. Each wharf might be 200 ft. wide, with slips between 150 ft. wide and 700 ft. deep. . Forty- nine and one-half piers are provided for to furnish ninety-eight wharf fronts. No tugs would be required for ships to enter. "Now as to the railway approaches. It is a great problem. I would advocate two four-track railroads passing. through the city by means of tunnels, one at the foot of Alabama street and one at the foot of Willson avenue. As to the cost. The bulk- head along the inner end of the slips would cost $140 per linear foot, or $2,415,000. Between this bulkhead and the shore the space, 16,500,000 cu. yds., must be filled. Part of this fill will come from the excavation for the tunnels. The bulkhead and the filling would cost $4,890,000, For the revetment for the wharves for 13 I-10 miles of water front would cost $1,050,000, making the wharves cost $12,700,000. This would require .t0o miles of railroad track, costing $900,000, and 6 miles of tunnel, - costing $12,000,000. In all, the cost would be $30,490,000, or, in round numbers, $30,500,000. A large sum, but the work need not all be done at once. And the 22,000,000 sq. ft. of made land should be worth a dollar a square foot, or produce an income of 5 per cent. on that basis. The wharves ought to be worth $2 a square foot, or produce an income of 5 per cent. The property would be worth in all $35,000,000, and produce a gross annual income of $1,750,000. This would suffice for cost of maintenance. To do this work I should have a directorate formed of the mayor of the city, for the city; the government engineer, to represent the United States; the Lake Carriers' Association, if incorporated, and at least three representatives from the Chamber of Com- merce. The first two members should serve ex-officio, and the others elected for stated periods, and, if Cleveland-is to become as I think she should, the queen city of the lakes, 'this is not ena. Cleveland has the opportunity, and she should make use of it." é Mr. Harvey D. Goulder gave a very clear exposition of the legal aspects of the case. He believed that the title to the land under the water, involved in the extension of piers, is in the state of Ohio. The doctrine of private ownership, which applies to rivers and waters lying: wholly within the state, has not been extended to the waters of Lake Erie. But the shore proprietor has the right of wharfage-out, as it is called, that is, of building wharves and structures for purposes of navigation, out to the established dock line. It has been a mooted question whether this is a property right or a mere easement. It has been involved in some disputes about its taxability. And so arises a minor question, whether the right should be appropriated, and 'if so, whether there must be paid compensation as for actual property taken or whether it is merely a question of damages. He had no doubt, however, of the' city's right 'to appropriate. Concerning the present ownership of the-18,000 ft. involved; he believed that some 5,300 ft. were owned by a railroad company, which is cur- rently reported to be bound by a traffic arrangement which for- bids its exchanging freight with vessels at Cleveland, and' so has no interest in the water front except to use it as a right of way; part is owned by the city, part by the general government and part by individuals. For himself he did not think it so es- sential that the city should own the docks as that it should con- trol them and see that they were properly operated. oo Considerable of what. Mr. Burton said in his address has already been published in the Review--that is, his observations on his recent trip abroad and the greater vision with which public improvements are approached there than here. Coming down to the method of assessing costs for these improvements, which is a' ~ vital point, Mr. Burton said: : "Tt would be impossible fo portray to you any general system as to the way in which this expense is met. That was one object of the investigations which we were making in Europe, to see if it were possible to evolve from all the varied systems any method or way which would afford valuable suggestions for our own country. I tried to classify the different methods, and con- cluded that there were three. oe ae "The first was that in which the central government improves | the channel, or makes-the improvement, and makes no, charge . whatever upon the commerce availing itself of the improvement, _