 |
Back to Document 28 |
 |
Up to Document List |
 |
Ahead to Document 30 |
|
|
|
|
Document 29 – |
Letter from Sydney S. Durfee to Edward B.
Talcott |
June 11, 1848 |
|
Document 29 |
Transcription |
|||
|
|
Mr. Talcot Esqr
Chicago June 11. 1848 Chief Engineer Dear Sir M & I Canal At the suggestion of Mr. Scovell I take the liberty of sending you a plan for a scow scraper for taking out bars in Canal A scow, say 50 feet long and 14 ft. wide, sides about 2 feet high decked about 18 inches above bottom with a recess 4 feet wide & say 20 feet long in the middle to admit a scraper suitable for taking up Earth, the handles of the scraper to be made fast at one End of recess and a windlas over the other End with chains attached to the scraper allowing it to drop down through the recess to the required depth, and to raise the scraper to the deck when fill |
|||
|
-ed with Earth, a Pully on the forward End of the scow where a rope passes through that has one End made fast on the bank and a yoke of oxen on the Towing path to the other End, to moove the scow forward, to fill the scraper, some stakes attached to the sides of the scow will hold it fast while the windlas raises the scraper & the Earth shoved off onto the deck & the scraper, dropped down again. when the scow is ready to move ahead again The above is the principle & out line description a machine that has been used on the Erie Canal with good results —the scow is usefull as a Canal repear -er without the scraper, & is cheap to build. I have had some Experience on the Erie Canal and offer my services to you. Your Obt. Servt. S.S. Durfee |
||||
The canal had been built on the "shallow cut" plan. That is, on the Summit (eastern) Division it was filled by the Des Plaines River and other feeders and by water pumped up by steam engines from the Chicago River at Bridgeport. Lake Michigan did not directly feed the canal as envisioned by a deeper cut. As completed the I and M was sixty feet across at the surface, thirty-six feet wide at the bottom, and six feet deep. From the time of the canal’s opening in April, its depth along the summit level had been problematic (see also document 41). The seventeen mile feeder from the Calumet River was not to be completed until the fall of 1849. And the soil along this portion was unusually porous. Consequently the pumps at Bridgeport were in constant use. That a dredging device was even being suggested just two months after the canal’s opening demonstrated the seriousness of the problem.
Sydney S. Durfee served as Chicago’s harbor master from 1848 through 1850. Thereafter he was engaged privately as a contractor doing excavation work below wharves along the banks of the Chicago River (harbor). Hiram H. Scoville and his three sons in 1848 operated a foundry and machine shop in Chicago at Canal and Adams Streets.
What was S.S. Durfee proposing to have built?
What is a scow?
Why were oxen to pull this scow rather than mules or horses?
Why would such a device have been proposed on June 11, 1848?
|
|
|
Back
to Illinois and Michigan Canal Introduction
page
Back
to Illinois State Archives home page
