1841.] 



THE CIVIL ENGINEER AND ARCHITECT'S JOURNAL. 



24.5 



the lateral cut is sliorter here than the others, it is ahout 14 or l.T chains or 

 350 yards, the lift is 7 ft. 6 in. the ilimensions are the same as the others the 

 length of the weir is 350 feet, the height from the hed of the river is about 

 11 ft 6 in the width of the river is from 100 to 130 lect. This talces us up 

 to Red Stone Rock, and Cloth House, and to Stourport ; the weir is to be in 

 the cut there and the lock in the river, because the towing path is on the 

 eastern side of the river, and we should have to pass over it ne put a lock in 

 the cut ; I can't give the height of this weir. We dredge between Gloucester 

 and Upton because the shoals fall so inucb less in this district and are of a 

 dillerent character ; they are shoals ot deposit formed by the inequality of 

 the sectional area of the channel. The shoals above Upton are hard beds ot 

 "ravel and marl, which pen the water over in the summer season. The etiect 

 of drednin" from Upton to 'Worcester would be to increase the liability of lie 

 banks to tumble in, and would also be inconvenient to the trader from the 

 increased height of the banks, which are already too high ; the same ettect 

 would be produced in a greater degree by dredging Upton shoal, unless there 

 was something above. Compared with the present plan, dredging would be 

 much more expensive, supposing it formed part of a continuous plan up to 

 Stourport. If you removed the lock from I pton and put it at Digits, you 

 must have a double lift there, which would be inconvenient to the trade, as 

 in point of fact it would be two locks. The extent nf dredging in such a case 

 must be to the extent of from 7 to 10 feet, which would be a serious matter, 

 and would make cataracts from the locks. By the system of weirs we sliall 

 have 6 teet of water at all times from Stourport to Gloucester, which 1 be- 

 lieve wouid be sufficient for all purposes of trade on the Severn ; I do not 

 think it would be more than necessary for tlie canal boats. Tha build ot ves- 

 sels would alter if the water were deeper. In my opinion the trade of the 

 river will be increased if these improvements are carried into efl'ect. In my 

 opinion if the maximum toll is imposed, these advantages will counterbalance 

 it to the trade ; I found that opinion upon the excessive delays, cost of light- 

 erin" pi!fera"e wear and tear, the increased power required to draw vessels 

 up, uie limited number of voyages and the light cargoes, which exist at pre- 

 sent The trade of Gloucester has sutTered much m consequence, and has 

 gone to other ports ; to mv knowledge many cargoes which, but for this, 

 would have gone to Gloucester, have gone to Liverpool ; this has been espe- 

 cially the case lately. I believe also that railways liave increased the preju- 

 dice 'to the Severn. The cost of these improvements I estimate at iloO.OOU, 

 which will be sufficient, and more than suffice, and include contingencies, 

 which I have estimated at 10 per cent. I am prepared to state m detail how- 

 it will be expended. 

 Cross-examined by Mr. Austin. , ^, , , , , ^. , 



The original plan was made by Mr. Rhodes. I have been acting under 

 Mr Cubitt since Nov. 1825. I consider the merit or dement ol' the present 

 Ian belon<'s to him. Mr. Cubitt was employed as consulting engineer and 

 ivir Rhodel as acting engineer. I was employed by the committee ot the 

 late Severn Navigation Company This is not the same plan as theirs, but 

 the same with some alterations. Their p an was first made in 1838. Ihere 

 was a plan and sections. The original plan is at the Guildhall at \V orcester. 

 I have a reduced copy of it as altered. 1 took part in the formation of the 

 ori<nnal plan. It was adopted and altered by Mr. Cubitt. I said the deposit 

 of .slioals would depend on the drifts of the river. The river is divided in 

 ?he plan into districts. The area of the hrst is .at Upton 3480 f\-et. That 

 supposes a line drawn at the top of the bank and the bed of the river. Ihe 

 wikth is 104 feet, the average depth 11 teet The ne.Mt district is ha a mde 

 lower down, and has the same area; width 101 feet, average depth 10 t. 

 6in The third is, area 3120 ft. width 98 ft. depth 11 ft. The fouHh is. 

 area 3401 ft. width 104 ft. depth 10 ft. 9 in. The fifth is area 3o29 ft. 

 width 107 ft depth 12 ft. The first section is lialf a mile below the Barley 

 House the secokd a mile ditto, the third a mile and half ditto, the fourtli 

 two miles ditto, and the fifth two miles and half ditto. That gives an ave- 

 rage of 100 feet width and 10 feet depth, which is plenty of water for the 

 necessities of the trade. There are no shoals there. Whett the water rises 

 it expands also. The fall from Upton to Gloucester is about 7 inches, or 

 2-8 inches per mile. We propose to alter the whole river from Lnton to 

 Gloucester; to assimilate it at this part, and to maintain an uniform depth of 

 6 feet The width of the river varies from 150 feet to 1/0 feet, 1 am not 

 •ive the Committee the detail of the cost of the works. Mr. 



SJ 



had not a ueLciucii conini^vv ....... - ■--- — ,,{"' . , , u 



that it is determined to lay down a quantity ol rubble stone to be used be- 

 tween Upton and Glouce-.ter. The depth of the water at the Upton weir 

 immediately above is 7 feet, and below, 3 ft. 7 in. We propose to use the 

 stuff dredged up in equalizing the width. Mr. Provis took the price ot the 

 stone from me. It was from 3s. to 3s. 6d. per yard, delivered not at the spot, 

 but on the Severn. Part of it comes from between Worcester and stourport, 

 and the other part from Malvern. I can't tell the cost ot the stone and 

 timber between Worcester and Upton. We propose to coffer-dam at Bevere 

 Island The soundings for the shoals were under my direction. Ihe borings 

 were in many instances from 8 feet to 10 feet. Maisemore shoal was not 

 bored, it being out of the direct line. We bored all the other shoals. W e 

 took 26 borings in the Worcester shoal. .., <■ i 



By Mr Serjeant Wrangham.-I do not know the quantity ot work 

 to be done for the purpose of improving the navigation It wi I be a work 

 of considerable amount to get a depth of five feet at Deerhuist shoa with a 

 width of from forty to sixty teet. The dredge below Uoton Lock will be on 

 an average of from 4 to 5 feet for the same width for the length of a mile. 

 I believe these excavations will not depress the level of water because they 

 are shoals of deposit and not natural formations, and there is no tall from 

 them By dredging to Worcester you would be making the river a succession 

 of rapids: if we deepened to a sufficient extent in low summer w ater vye 

 should get rid of the rapids, but we should lower the ponds above ; it w^oukl 



do 30 ev 



,-en wi'th'th'e''s3me"secrixi'nar area. By narrowing the banks and in- 



creasing the depth the stream would flow faster ; the shcals do not pen the 

 water back except where it acts as a natural dim. From Diglis lock to Lp- 

 ton weir the total depth is 4 ft. 6 in. : this space contains a great nuiiiber ot 

 rapids ; the fall is 4i inches per mile, wilh a soft bottom, but with a shoal ot 

 hard gravel and marl. I think that dredging up to Upton would not ret.-un 

 the level • there would be a diminution at Diglis lock of 3 ft. 9 in_ by dredg- 

 iu" if the water was not penned back by our lock ; that would leave a tall 

 of 9 inches from Diglis lock to Upton. The river is not so broad frorn Uig is 

 to Upton as below Upton ; and being so, the fall .above is greater than tlie 

 fall below, but it must not be naturally so ; it depends upon the inchn.ation 

 of the bed of the river, and the quantity of water carried. M.any rivers, par- 

 ticularly the Thames and the Kennett, have had their navigation improved 

 by artificial means. The current of the Thames is miich faster than in the 

 .Severn The velocity of the Hood of the Severn is from 2k to 3 miles per 

 hour Mr. Provis can give you a more satisfactory answer than I, as to the 

 force with whichthat would strike our weirs. 1 have seen a portion of the 

 surface of the weirs in the Thames washed off by the water, ihey are made 

 in a very simple way-by piles, filled up. Our weirs will be much stronger 

 than the Thames. During the six years I have been engaged on the .•,ev_e m 

 my attention has been particulariy directed to these subjects, arid the infoi- 

 mation I have given to the committee is the result of that investigation. Mr. 

 Provis was call?d in about two months since. I have made a calcu at on of 

 the time at which the river may become free again : and .taking all things 

 into consideration, I think it may become a free river again m foity years, 

 with the exception simply of a toll for keeping the works in repair My es- 

 timate apidies itself to tlie cost of tonnage. I am sure I lurmshed Ml Cubitt 

 and Mr. Provis with sufficient information to give an opinion on he subject. 

 The time now lost in consequence of the shoals is much greater than will Ije 

 lost in going through the locks. The impediments to the navigation of the 

 river no°w a?e mucirgreater than can possibly exist under the ;">proveir.en 

 1 have passed vessel! through the locks on the Thames in 3J mm ites; about 

 5 minutes is a fair average. Supposing a boat to s art to Glouces er in a 

 fresh, which, before the Alteration, could get back in the same fresh, t would 

 have greater facility for doing so in consequence ot the improvement of the 

 river, notwithstanding the locks. , „ . , ,, ., i i,,„„ „„„ 



Mr. Provis. Engineer, examined by Mr. Serjeant Merewethert-I have exe- 

 cuted works for lApr. Cubitt. and other engineers. The Mena, Bridge wa one 

 of those works. The Birmingham Jtinction C:mal was another and I am 

 now employed on works to the amount of £b0.000 or f 0-0"0' .f/^.^-/; If' 

 in to give an estimate for the proposed works on the Jevern, and Mr. W il- 

 liamsfnd I went down the river from Gloucester to Stourport and made 

 my own observations in addition to the information given me by Mi. \\ il- 

 liams. 1 have an estimate of the whole cost of the works, including 10 pei 

 cent, upon the cost of the works f..r contingencies, but «-«'"^'™ °f/he land 

 to be taken, which I do not pretend to value The amount of that estimate 

 is £133.108 12s. 3rf.. being £121,007 16s. 7-/. for the total cost of the woiks. 

 and £12,100 1.3s. yd. for contingencies. 1 have made such a calculation tha^, 

 if the work were offered to me, I should have no objection o midcrlake it at 

 that contract, providing the supervision was such as 1 liked Were 1 em- 

 ployed as an engineer to examine that estimate. I should sav that it is a tai 

 sum to give to any man to do the required work. Jhe ciUting remired at 

 Upton will cost '£4656 17s. 6rf. ; the lock at Upton (including the tut. dm 

 the gates, and every thing necessary to complete i ,) ±6321 4s. 2rf_, the »m 

 at Upton, (including all that is necessary, rubble s one, 8j.c.) ±3887. L" was 

 here understood that the odd shillings and pence should be e out to sim- 

 plify the statement.] This would make the total expense at Lp_ton £l'l;«f';>; 

 Worcester . cutting £4210. lock £6251. weir £2848 ; total ±13.3/9. Bevere 

 cutting £1082. lock and coffer dam (which I think will ^^JW'';^^ '''^.^^^ 

 £10.76^8. weir £1569 ■. total £13,421. Holt Fleet : '■""'"g.,^.^^'!^' '°^^/f ^?: 

 weir £1058 ; total £10,869. Lincombe llill •. cutting £ol2b locks and dams 

 (not coft'er-dams but embankments) £8072, weir f 2016 ; total £lo,214^ Total 

 of the five totals £67,750. The five lock-houses will cost ±1250 This in- 

 cludes all the work except the equalisation and works below Upton the 

 total dredging will cost £18.141. Protecting the sides »•. ''''l"'""',f p/^'X 

 These two items make £52.007. The three totals make £121,000 ^^ 'th the 

 best judgment 1 can form, I think this is sufficient for the work. 1 have made 

 estimates to the amount of millions. _ , j„ i i „„f'oo,. 



Cross-examined by Mr. Auslin.-The quantity to be 'V'^^g?'! 'f '" ^ " 

 Upton and Gloucester, including both branches of the river, is 311.000 >arUs, 

 wl'iich I estimate at Is. per yard. I believe that to be the tidl ?>■'«, and I 

 include the taking away and depositing the soil, the whole of which is pro- 

 posed to be used in narrow ing the river. Ihere is no intention to take any 

 away, except, perhaps, throwing a little into some of the deep holes and pu- 

 ling some of tfie best gravel on the towing paths, whicli are very bad Ihis 

 work, will come to £15,500. which is a very large proportion ot the totaUost 

 of dredging, leaving only £3000 more to be e.xpended on dredging between 

 Upton and Stourpon. It is proposed to face the channe with rubble stone, 

 at an inclination of 3 to 1, extending from the bottom of the dredged channel 

 to the height marked in the section to represent the spring-tide level, tueie 

 will be 193,520 square yards of rubble stone facing between Upton at'^ *,•'""- 

 cester, or about 132,000 cubic yards, at 3s. 6r/. per square yard, or as- d^i- Per 

 cubic yard. The stone can be procured at the Red stone Kock, at -Uncomre 

 Hill, and at Holt Fleet. The mode in which the facing is o •^e,™"''' .f, " "" 

 to set the dredging machine at work, and then to throw '.h-^ ^^'f^^, 1 ;""=■- 

 cuously into the channel, marks being set up tor the S">dance of the men 

 who discharge the cargoes of stone. The rubble stone facing w as rn.v sug,es 

 tion. and Mr. Cubitt has adopted it. I cannot tell how ""' ^ san'^, °' i""* 

 much gravel will have to be dredged above Uuton, as the ^''^^^''^ ^/^^.^^^^ 1° 

 is so very small that I did not consider it wortli while to exam i e ve^y rni.mte^> 

 It would be a little harder to dredge stones than grave , but not mutt., be 

 cause i. the stones were large we should remove the ''"^kets from the niadut^e 

 and replace them with claw^s, which would take up ''f f^ed stones I est - 

 mate the excavation at 10,/. per yard, which includes «'>«^f .""^f H?.; TJT 

 placing it behind the stone walls, and sloping it from the top. W e shall be 



