creasing it; and are likely to carry much more freight from East Boston than they have heretofore.

Q. Have you given any attention (I think you said you had) to the means of communication between the city proper and East Boston?

A. The idea I have, is, that the ferry is a mistake; that bridge would be a still greater mistake; and that the only true communication is by means of a tunnel. I entertain no doubt on that point, sir.

Q. Suppose free communication were determined upon, the running of the ferries without tolls,

what, in your judg ment, as between a bridge, a tunnel, and a free ferry, would be the least expensive and the most satisfactory method of bringing about that communication?

A. A tunnel, sir; and I will give you an illustration of my opinion, for it was partly formed on a visit to Chicago, of which I made a little record in the book which I hold in my hand, although I had conceived the idea much earlier.

I met in Chicago Mr. Chesborough, who was formerly connected with the water works of this city, a very able engineer. I had formerly acted for a company that employed him, and knew his ability and reliability. Mr. Chesborough gave me considerable information in relation to the tunnels in Chicago, which interested me very much. At Chicago, the water works are in the shape of a tunnel of two miles in length, directly under Lake Michigan. The tunnel was driven from the land end, and very possibly it may have been driven from the Lake also; but it is driven endwise, under the water, arched, and lined with tanks, and the pipes are carried out two miles into the lake, and supplied with water at a distance of two miles from the shore; the water is pumped up into a reservoir, and thus distributed through the city. They had no serious difficulty in carrying it two miles under the open lake, which is as open as the sea at that point, where it is forty or fifty

miles in width, quite as much exposed as the sea opposite my house near Nahant, where I lived many summers.

I found, also, that they had been carrying a tunnel under the river at Chicago, which forms the chief harbor of the city. There were several bridges across this river. The river is not, I think, more than two or three hundred feet in width, but it was necessary to make the tunnel considerably longer in order to get down below the river, and to make the approach easy. I found the tunnel, which had recently been finished, in operation between two bridges. The bridges were 800 feet apart, the tunnel half-way between, about 400 feet from each. Travel on the bridges was considerably interrupted, quite as much, I think, as the travel on a bridge to East Boston would be by the passage of vessels. The shipping interest of Chicago is very large. It receives in lumber 1,200,000,000 of feet annually; at any rate, it is a very large quantity. It receives about five or six times as much as we receive in Boston every year. Wisconsin and Michigan supply the prairies with lumber for fences and buildings; and it is landed on this river, principally, at Chicago.

The passage of this lumber and of breadstuffs is very great up and down that river. The navigation of that river, in summer, is nearly equal to that at the port of New York. I think the entries at the Custom-house are about the same in the summer, in the months of July and August, for instance, as at New York. The travel on the bridges was, of course, considerably interrupted by the passage of schooners and tug-boats that were towing up steamers. I will suppose, gentlemen, that we had a bridge at the foot of Hanover street, and that near where North street would come out, there was another bridge; and about halt way between them, a tunnel.

I stood where I could see the two bridges and the tunnel together, and I found the tunnel was the most attractive; that most of the travel went through it. There were the two bridges, but the tunnel had the preference; and I entertain no doubt that

if a ferry-boat had been there, the tunnel would have taken the travel against the ferry-boat as well as the bridges. I was convinced by this that the tunnel would be satisfactory. I went through the tunnel and examined it. The water was sixteen feet in depth at this point; the river, I think, a little over two hundred feet wide; the approaches which were open, were four hundred feet on one side, and three hundred on the other. The tunnel under the ground and under the river was about 900 feet long.

It was divided into two arches, each of them about 15 feet wide and 15 feet high. Through one arch went the team travel in ne direction, and on the sidewalk went the passengers in one direction; through the other arch went the team travel and the passengers in the other direction; so that there was almost continuous stream flowing through each arch, of foot passengers and teams; and I was told that the travel was so acceptable that they were going to make another very soon at another point.

The descent to the tunnel was very easy; the gradient, or descent, was one foot in eighteen on one side, and one foot in sixteen on the other side. The cost of the enterprise was, in currency, in 1868 and '69, when gold, I think, was at a premium of thirty or forty per cent, $400,000; I presume the cost in gold would have been about $300,000.

Having this tunnel in my mind, having also the tunnels under the Thames, Brunel's tunnel under the Thames, which I have examined, and which is about the same size, viz, fifteen feet in height and width in each compartment, having known something about a smaller tunnel under the Thames, I came home and the other day sat down and made some estimate of the cost of making a tunnel to East Boston. I was considerably surprised to see how cheap it could be done. I learned after making up my estimates, which were about $1,000,000, that General Foster had made an estimate that was equal to $2,000,000. To-day, I

had the curiosity to visit General Foster and examine his calculations, plans and drawings, which are in the office of the Mayor, and which I hope will be examined by the members of the Council. I found that he did not materially differ. His cost was $2,000,000, and mine $1,000,000; but the tunnels were very different things, designed on different principles, and on a different scale. Mine was on the scale of what works very well at Chicago, wide enough for sidewalks, and wide enough for two driveways for carriages; about fifteen feet, I think, was the entire width of each arch.

On examining Gen. Foster's plan, found that the width was 20 feet for each compartment; and the height to have 20 feet for each arch; so that the area, the size in cubic feet, would be in the one something like 70 per cent greater than in the other. It was 480, I think, as against 800 cubic feet. The superficial area of the front on the face, would be about 480 to 800. I found, also, that the ascent and descent in Gen. Foster's tunnel were also much easier than in mine. I had made a very easy grade. Our county wants one made with a rise of one foot in ten; and the grades I found in Chicago, were one foot in sixteen, and one foot in eighteen; mine were nearly the same, or one foot in fifteen and one in sixteen and two-thirds. General Foster's inclination was one foot in 25, or four feet in 100; travelling a hundred feet you would only rise four feet, which would make it a very easy ascent and descent. To do that, he was obliged to lengthen the approaches. The plan which I had in my mind was, to begin at Commercial street, on this side, and come out on the other side somewhere on one of the long piers, or at Marginal street.

I believe it can be accomplished. The river is eminently favorable for a tunnel between here and East Boston. About twenty or thirty years ago, I was acquainted with Mr. George Darracott, who must have been known to some of the members of the Council present, a gentleman very well known in Bos

ton, who put on a submarine armor and walked across from Boston proper to East Boston on the bottom of the river. I called for an account of his explorations, and he gave it to me. He said the floor was swept and it was all ready for any improvements we might wish to make; that the bed of the river was very hard; that a few boulders stood up on the bottom; that there was no mud and no sand, or anything through which the water would filter; that it was a hard-pan bottom. I heard to-day from Gen. Foster that he bad sent a diver across there within the last year, and that he found the bottom of the river a hard yellow clay, what on our railroad we should call hardpan, and which the contractors would want a little extra price for moving. This is precisely what is wanted for this purpose, because you can bore through it without the water coming down on you. I therefore entertain the belief that a tunnel can be made across there very easily.

The condition of the bottom strikes my mind very favorably in this particular. The greatest depth of water, which is at high water, about 45 feet, and at low water some 34 or 35 feet, is only for the distance of 600 feet. Then the bottom rises, appropriately for a tunnel, towards the Boston side, where the slope is almost 450 feet; the slope is very gradual, which is fortunate, because the wharves are not very long on the Boston side. On the East Boston side the slope is much more abrupt, and the rise is accomplished in about 340 or 350 feet; and this is convenient, because, if a tunnel is made it will descend gradually from the approaches to the deep water, making a level below the deep water; and then a gradual ascent on the other side.

So that I think the tunnel can be made with easy ascents and descents; can be lighted with gas, as it is in London, and in Chicago, I think; and in the winter it would be particularly favorable with regard to sleighing, because when the snow would melt or blow off the bridges, or be carried away by the