56 DOCK FACILITIES IN NEW YORK CITY. 
I am largely in favor of the adoption of a permanent, central, non-partisan, 
Harbor Board, whose duty it would be to handle all such questions, relieving the 
Dock Department of this duty. The Dock Department, being more or less polit- 
ical, is susceptible of changes at each change in the City government. A Harbor 
Board, being non-partisan, would formulate a permanent policy governed by public 
opinion, and would in this manner determine the best plan for the formation of the 
city’s water front. 
Mr. Barney (Communicated) :—The first point made by Mr. DesAnges is that 
the proposed freight transfer stations located above the Chelsea Section would in- 
crease the difficulties of navigation owing to the necessary diagonal crossing by, 
presumably, car-floats. We are rapidly approaching, in New York Harbor, the 
necessity for clearly defined lanes of traffic on the part of the various classes of 
vessels, such as now exist in other principal harbors of the world. At present is 
seen the rather absurd spectacle of a ship under sail zigzagging across the waters of 
New York Harbor and seriously interfering at times with the navigation of our 
largest vessels. 
Such practices will undoubtedly have to be regulated in the near future and 
among such regulations it will be no hardship to require that carfloats leaving New 
Jersey terminals shall proceed northward along the New Jersey shore until above 
and clear of all traffic issuing from the Manhattan side below 23d Street, and 
thence crossing at right angles to the proposed transfer station. Such a regulation 
will do much to improve the present conditions in the harbor. 
In fact, the extension of the present location for moorings for carfloats under 
the current method will tend to seriously hamper navigation in the North River, 
for now carfloats leave the New Jersey shore and strike across indiscriminately for 
the various freight piers of the respective railroads on the North River, presenting 
constantly reoccurring obstacles to the north and south traffic in the fairway. 
One of the minor arguments in favor of removing the carfloats to some point 
north of 23d Street is thatunder the above regulation it wouldleave the lower river, 
at least on the west side, comparatively free for the navigation of incoming and 
outgoing steamers. 
It seems to me that Mr. DesAnges in further advancing the argument as to 
the inconvenience that would arise from the handling of freight by moving the 
transfer points for railroad cars notrh of 23d Street, presents in reality a very strong 
argument for the adoption of Commissioner Tomkins’ plan. 
To move the transatlantic and other steamers notrh of 23d Street would mean 
that an enormous quantity of package and other freight brought into Manhattan 
for distribution to wholesale and distributing houses downtown would be subject 
to a long truckhaul or else this distributing center for such freight would have to 
be moved uptown. Whereas, on the other hand, if carfloats are required to land 
their cars above 23d Street, this will not mean that the transfer of freight between 
the car and the shipper must there take place. On the contrary, it will take place 
Se re = ow 
