THE FLOOD OF 1843. 29 



also lost a horse from drowning. The sleeper bridge, near 

 Mr. Leiper's, was carried away. Mr. L's. factories were not 

 materially injured, and their occupants sustained but little 

 loss from the flood. The location of the stone bridge at the 

 post-road, being out of the current of the flood, sustained but 

 little injury. A small portion of the western wing walls was 

 carried away. 



The height of the flood in this creek, it will be seen, did 

 not exceed that in Darby creek at corresponding points, until 

 you reach Beatty's mills. Below that place it was an average 

 about two feet higher. This is readil}'^ accounted for by the 

 fact, that the very heav}^ rain was more protracted, and 

 extended lower down the valley of Crum than of Darby creek. 



Ridley creek. — The flood in this creek caused some damage 

 above the boundary line which separates this county from 

 Chester, but nothing very material. Yarnall's mill dam, 

 which is on a tributary, and within the borders of this county, 

 was injured to some extent. The county bridge, known as 

 "Russell's," on the main stream, sustained some damage. 

 The first place on this creek, from which the committee have 

 any very particular account of the flood, is on the farm of 

 George Howard, in Edgmont. At this place the water 

 attained a height of twelve feet six inches, which was six 

 feet six inches higher than the great freshet of 1839, and six 

 feet four inches higher than that of 1795 ; this last being the 

 highest which had previously occurred at the same place, 

 during a period of at least ninety years. Although the rise 

 in the water of the present flood was about twice as great as 

 that of 1795, the quantity of water which passed at a given 

 time was greatly more than double. A cross section of the 

 flood of '95 gives but nine hundred square feet, while that of 

 1843, gives upwards of two thousand five hundred square feet. 

 By making a proper allowance for the accelerated velocity of 

 the flood of 1843 over that of 1795, which would be neces- 

 sarily incident to its increase of volume, it is rendered pro- 

 bable that more than three times as much water passed in a 



