1841.] 



THE CIVIL ENGINEER AND ARCHITECT'S JOURNAL. 



245 



the lateral cut is sliorler liere than the others, it is about 14 or 15 chains or 

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

 length of the weir is ojO feet, the height from the bed of the river is about 

 11 ft. 6 in., the width of the river is from 100 to 1.30 feet Tliis takes 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 if we put a lock in 

 tlie cut ; I can't give the height of tliis weir. M"c dredge between fJloucesler 

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

 different character ; they are shoals of deposit formed by the inequality of 

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

 gravel and marl, which pen the water over in the summer season. The elfect 

 of dredging from Upton to ^Vorcester would be to increase the liability of the 

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

 increased height of the banks, which are already too high ; the same efi'ect 

 would be produced in a greater degree by dredging Upton shoal, unle.ss 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 Diglis, 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 o' from 7 to 10 feet, which would be a serious matter, 

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

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

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

 think it would be more than necessary for the canal boats. Ths build of ves- 

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

 river will be increased if these improvements are carried into effect. 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- 

 ering, pilferage, wear and tear, the increased power required to draw vessels 

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

 sent. The trade of Gloucester has suffered much in consequence, and has 

 gone to other ports ; to my 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 have increased the preju- 

 dice to the Severn. The cost of these improvements I estimate at £150,000, 

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

 which I have estimated at 10 per cent. I am prepared to state in 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 demerit ol" the present 

 plan belongs to him. Mr. Cubitt was employed as consulting engineer, and 

 Sir. Rhodes as acting engineer. I was employed by the committee of the 

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

 the same with some alterations. Their jilan was first made in 1838. There 

 was a plan and sections. The original plan is at the Guildhall at Worcester. 

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

 original plan. It was adopted and altered by Mr. Cubitt. I said the deposit 

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

 the plan into districts. The area of the first is at Upton, 3480 feet. That 

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

 width is 104 feet, the average depth 11 feet. The next district is half a mile 

 lower down, and has the siime area; width 101 feet, average depth 10 ft. 

 6 in. 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 3,529 ft. 

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

 House, the second a mile ditto, the third a mile and half ditto, the fourth 

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

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

 necessities of the trade. There are no shoals there. When 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 Upton 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 170 feet, I am not 

 now prepared to give the Committee the detail of the cost of the works. Mr. 

 Provis made the original calculation of the expense. The average dredging 

 of the whole line will be less than 5 feet. The general estimate of the present 

 plan was made by Mr. Cubitt at Worcester, in the autumn of last year. We 

 had not a detailed estimate until within the last two months. I do not know 

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

 tween Upton and Gloucester. 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 of the 

 stone from me. It was from 3s. to 3s. fid. 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 MalveiTi. I can't tell the cost ol the stone and 

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

 Island. Tlie soundings for the shoals were under my direction. The 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. We 

 took 26 borings in the Worcester shoal. ' 



By Mr. Serjeant M^rangham.— I do not know the quantity of work 

 to be done for the purpose of improving the navigation. It will be a work 

 of considerable amount to get a depth of five feet at Deerliurst shoal with a 

 width of from forty to sixty feet. The dredge below Upton Lock will be on 

 an average of from 4 to 5 feet for the same width for tiie 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 fall 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 water we 

 should get rid of the rapids, but we should lower the ponds above : it would 

 do so even with the same sectional 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 d.im. From Diglis lock to Up- 

 ton weir the total depth is 4 ft. 6 in. ; this space contains a great number of 

 rapids ; the fall is 45 inches per mile, with a .soft bottom, but with a shoal of 

 hard gravel and marl, I think that dredging up to U)iton would not retain 

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

 ing, if the w'ater was not penned back by our lock ; that would leave a fall 

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

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

 fall below, but it must not be naturally so ; it depends upon the inclination 

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

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

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

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

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

 force witli which that would strike our weirs. 1 have seen a portion of tlie 

 surface of ihe weirs in the Thames washed olf by the water. 'They are made 

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

 than the Thames. During the six vears I have been engaged on the Severn 

 my attention has been particularly directed to these subjects, and the infor- 

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

 Provis was called in about two months since. I have made a calculation 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 in forty years, 

 with the exception simply of a toU for keeping the works in rep.air. My es- 

 timate applies itself to the cost of tonnage. I am sure I furnished Mr. Cubitt 

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

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

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

 river now are much greater than can possibly exist under the improvements. 

 I have passed vessels through the locks on the Thames in 3* minutes ; about 

 .5 minutes is a fair average. Supposing a boat to start to Gloucester in a 

 fresh, which, before the alteration, could get back in the same fresh, it would 

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

 river, notwithstanding the locks. 



Mr. Provis, Engineer, examined by Mr. Serjeant Merewether :— I have exe- 

 cuted works for Mr. Cubitt. and other engineers. The Menai Bridge was one 

 of those works. The Birmingham Junction Canal was another, and I am 

 now employed on works to the amount of £tiO.000 or £70,000, I was called 

 in to give an estimate for the proposed works on the Severn, and Mr. Wil- 

 liams and I went down the river from Gloucester to Stourport, and I made 

 my own observations in addition to the information given me by Mr. Wil- 

 liams. I have an estimate of the whole cost of the works, including 10 per 

 cent, upon the cost of the works for contingencies, but exclusive of the land 

 to be taken, which 1 do not pretend to value. The amount of that estimate 

 is £133,108 12s. 3rf., Ijeing £121.007 lbs. lil. for the total cost of the works, 

 and £12,100 1.5s. Id. for contingencies. 1 have made such a calculation that, 

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

 that contract, providing the supervision was such as 1 liked. M'ere I em- 

 ployed as an engineer to examine that estimate. I should say that it is a fair 

 sum to give to any man to do the required work. 'The cutting required at 

 Upton will cost £4656 17s. firf. ; the lock at Upton (including the building, 

 the gates, and every thing necessary to compleie it,) £6321 4s. 2d. ; the weir 

 at Upton, (including all that is necessary, rubble stone, &c.) £3887. [It was 

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

 plify the statement.] This would make the total expense at Upton £14,865. 

 Worcester . cutting £4210. lock £62il. weir £2848 ; total £13.379. Bevere : 

 cutting £1082, lock and coffer dam (which I think will be required there) 

 £I0,7U8, weir £1569 ; total £13,421. Holt Fleet -. cutting £3347, lock £5863, 

 weir £1658; total £10,869. Lincombe Hill; cutting £5126, locks and dams 

 (not coffer-dams but embankments) £8072, weir £2016 ; total £15.214. Total 

 of the five totals £67,750, The five lock-houses « ill 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 of the river, £33,806, 

 These two items make £52.007. The three totals make £121,000. With the 

 best judgment I can form, I think this is sufficient for the w-ork. I have made 

 estimates to the amount of millions. ^ 



Cross-examined by Mr. Austin.— The quantity to be dredged between 

 Upton and Gloucester, including both branches of the river, is 311,000 yards, 

 which I estimate at Is. per yard. 1 believe that to be the full price, and I 

 include the taking aw ay anil depositing the soil, the whole of which is pro- 

 posed to be used in narrowing the river. 'There is no intention to take any 

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

 ting some of the best gravel on the towing paths, which are very bad. This 

 work, will come to £15,500. which is a very large proportion of the total cost 

 of dredging, leaving only £3000 more to be expended on dredging between 

 Upton and Stourport. It is proposed to face the ch.innel with rubble stone, 

 at an inclination of 3 to 1, extending from the bottom of the dredged ch.innel 

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

 will be 193,520 square yards of rubble stone facing between Upton and Glou- 

 cester, or about 132,000 cubic yards, at 3s. 6rf. per square yard, or 5s. M. per 

 cubic yard. The stone can be procured at the Red Stone Kock, at Lincombe 

 Hill, and at Holt Fleet. The mode in which the facing is to be done, is first 

 to set the dredging machine at work, and then to throw the stone promis- 

 cuously into the channel, marks being set up for the guidance of the men 

 who discharge the cargoes of stone. The rubble stone facing was my sugges- 

 tion, and .Mr. Cubitt has adopted it. I cannot tell how much sand or how 

 much gravel will have to be dredged .above Upton, as the quantity of dredging 

 is so very small that I did not consider it worth while to examine very minutely. 

 It would be a little harder to dredge stones than gravel, but not much, be- 

 cause it the stones were large we sh;iuld remove the buckets from the machine 

 and replace them with claws, which would take up detached stones. I esti- 

 mate the excavation at 10(/. per yard, which includes the removal of the soil, 

 placing it behind the stone walls, and sloping it from the top, M'e shall be 



