Louisiana. State engineer, '
Special report...on the system of intentai
improvements. 1857.
HE 594
.I'4 L8
1857
■ vi-'
• m
r- \C •
ÊÎ '
r
-^rr-v
k
-^ll ■'■
^ j) f f i a l ^ 1^ tr ri I ^ ..
Í
Si ï A T 15 E N (i I K 15 15 i!,
SVSTKH (IF ISTKliNAI. IMPROVEMBNTS,
LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF LOUISIANA.'
It A T O N E U U 0 K . .
PRINrKI) Af TIJE OFKICK OK THK t>.Vll.V ADVpCATH.
1857.
.M" ■
4^
S> p t t i a 1 |l t ^ Û r Í
or THR
STATE ENGINEER,
ON THE
SYSTEM OF INTERNAL IMPRGYEMENTS,
TO THE
LEGISLATUKE OF THE STATE OF LOUISIANA.
BATONROUGE.
PRINTED AT THE OFFICE OF THE DAILY ADVOCATE.
1857.
.pmal flí|)orí on Internal Improbements.
To the Honorable the Senate,
and House of Representatives :
At tlie last session of your honorable bodies, you adopted the
following
"joint kesolütion,
Instructing the State Engineer to report to the Legislature, at its
next session, a system of Internal Improvements.
" Whereas, Great losses are sustained by the planters of this State
yearly, by overflows ; and, whereas, the danger is yearly increasing ;
therefore,
" Be it resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the State of Louisiana, in General Assembly convened, That the
State Engineer be, and he is hereby instructed to examine and report
to this Legislature, at its next session, a complete system of Internal
Improvements ; that he devote his particular attention to the expe¬
diency and practicability of reducing the Mississippi to its natural
banks.
"Be it further resolved, ^c., That the State Engineer be in¬
structed to report (should he be of opinion that it is practicable to
reduce the Mississippi River to its banks) fully, where, and in what
manner, said work should be commenced, and what natural water¬
courses may be opened and used for the aforesaid purposes.
"Be it further resolved, ¿-c., That said State Engineer be in¬
structed to report fully, plans and surveys, in support of such system
as he may in his judgment report, in order that the Legislature may
have all necessary light possible on this important subject." Ap¬
proved March 20th, 1856.
4
Your honorable bodies will notice that this Joint Resolution natu¬
rally divides itself under four heads, viz :
First. Examine and report a complete system of Internal Improve¬
ments.
Second. The expediency and practicability of reducing the Missis¬
sippi to its natural banks at times of floods.
Third. If it is practicable to reduce thus the Mississippi to its
naturM banks, in what manner the object is to be obtained.
Fourth. Report fully, plans and surveys in support of the system
of Internal Improvements which the State Engineer would deem right
to recommend.
It must be acknowledged by all, that under each one of these heads
there is work enough cut out to occupy the Engineer one entire year ;
especially when it is remembered that his office at the State Capitol,
the State Library, the archives of every other Department of the
State, and also the documents and papers of your honorable Houses,
furnish but a very meagre amount of information of the kind needed to
establish correct, scientific, and definite opinions and views. Still,
there is such a close connection between those heads, and dependence
of one on the other, that they form a whole ; and neither could be
fully examined or discussed without the information necessary to the
whole. And here let me put the question— What is the information
necessary ? I answer as follows, viz :
A correct, complete, survey of the State of Louisiana. And what
is meant by a correct, complete survey ? There is meant more than
the State has yet achieved, or than anything that has as yet been
done. Such a survey calls for an instrumental examination of the
entire State, so as to establish the causes of all its streams, the position
of all its lakes, swamps, hills, etc., etc. It calls for the running of
lines of levels throughout the State, so as to determine the height
of hills and ridges, the depth of swamps, lakes, and streams, and the
fall of streams and of lands. It calls for a measurement of waters,
of currents ; a calculation of amount of sedimentary matter in our
running waters. In fine, to sum up in brief, a complete suiwey of
Louisiana would be one made by a scientific corps of engineers, and
would be topographical and hydrographical. I must add that such a
survey would only be perfect when made geological also.
Now, your honorable bodies are well aware that no such survey has
5
ever been made of the State. Under the direction of the United
States Gorernment, a board of U. S. Topographical Engineers sub¬
mitted, in January 1851, vieu'S as to a proposed survey of the delta
of the Mississippi. (See U. S. Senate Doc. 13, Second Session, 81st
Congress.) The system of survey thus proposed was immediately
prosecuted, under the supervision of one of the same oiScers. The
field operations have been completed, but the oifice work has not, as
yet. From a letter of Capt A. A. Humphreys, the able oificer who
directed the field operations, I take the following extracts relative to
those operations ;
" The Topographical Survey was begun at the mouth of Red
River, and, including the upper mouth of Atchafalaya, extends along
the west bank of the Mississippi to Baton Rouge. The parties were
unable, at the time of the survey, to include the east bank in this
distance, on account of high water. From Eaton Rouge to New Or¬
leans, the survey covers both banks of the river, extending down to the
swamps. Lines of levels were run on each bank, and cross-lines of
levels at many points. The survey of the Plaquemine was extended
to Indian Village.
" River meters were established at several points above the mouth
of Red River—one at the mouth of Red River, one at Baton Rouge,
one at Donaldsonville, one at Carrollton, one at Fort St. Philip, one
also on Lake Pontchartrain, at the mouth of the new canal, one (for a
month) at Proctor's Landing, one in an inlet from the Gulf, near
Fort St. Philip—and these three Gulf meters were connected by lines
of level with the nearest river meters.
"The stand of the water on these various river meters was observed
for two years.
riydrographical sections of the river were made at the mouth of
Rod River, and at various points between that and New Orleans ; and
extensive and careful observations for velocity of current were made
at these points. Sections were likewise made of all the bayous lead¬
ing from the river, between the same points, and similar observations
of velocity."
Capt. Humphreys hopes that he will be allowed to devote his time
to complete the plottings of maps, etc., etc., of the survey.
It will be seen that, so far as this survey extends, it will, when
completed, give much and very valuable data, upon which we can
6
base a system of works to prevent the overflows of the Mississippi.
Still, so far as the State of Louisiana is concerned, it would be neces¬
sary to extend the survey above Red River, and also, by various
lines, above those mentioned by Capt. Humphreys, to the Gulf. We
have lands that overflow above Red River, and it is necessary to de¬
termine if it would not beneflt us—as to overflows and drainage—to
open other outlets to the Gulf besides the existing ones. The survey,
as projected, is good, and of the right description ; but it is too limited
to determine completely the measures to be adopted in a general
system for the entire State of Louisiana.
I have sought elsewhere, and indeed everywhere it could be ob¬
tained, for information. I have found much that is valuable in
several places ; and I would mention here Reports of the old Board
of Public Works, Reports of my predecessors in the Engineer De¬
partment, Report of the Senate Committee on Levees, etc., in 1850,
and Reports of Charles Ellett, Jr., to the United States Bureau of
Topographical Engineers. But, at the same time that I found every¬
where some valuable information, and many correct views and pro¬
positions, all of the surveys and examinations upon which the several
documents are based have been too partial, too local, too much ap¬
pertaining to single and solitary improvements, too disconnected and
independent of each other, to allow any one to base, upon such infor¬
mations, views and propositions, such a system of internal improve¬
ments as that which your Joint Resolution seems to require, and as
the one I would wish the State to establish.
The next step which my sense of duty directed as the proper one
for this Department to take, was to undertake to make a survey of
the State ; here I was at once made to pause, by the consideration
that I was not authorized to undertake such an extensive work, and
not authorized to make any expenditures or incur any debts for it.
Admonished by the blame which has been cast upon officers and com¬
mittees heretofore, when they assumed to make unauthorized expend¬
itures in the name of the State, I resolved to profit by the experience
taught by past legislation, and appear before you blameless. I have
therefore commenced no survey of the State.
In the meantime, wishing to prepare, as far as the means of the
Department allowed, the way for such a survey, I have caused maps,
on an enlarged scale, and more in detail, to be made of the State,
from the township plots of the State Land Office. Those maps.
7
though certainly very inaccurate, will he of great utility in directing
a survey of the State.
I had hoped that, by my efforts during the year, and by assistance
from data obtained elsewhere, and especially from data confidently
expected from the Bureau of United States Topographical Engineers,
to give your honorable bodies at least a partial report, which might
have proved satisfactory to you and to myself. This is one reason
why, during your last session, I approved of your Joint Eesolution ;
but such was not the only and principal reason of my approval of
the measure. The fact is, in my humble opinion, the measure is a
move in the right direction. My inability to obey your mandates
I certainly regret, but my regret can only be personal to myself ; and
it only remains for me to say that my firm conviction is, that should
the Legislature furnish the Engineer Department with the means
necessary to enable it to give a full report, as required by the Joint
Resolution, then will be commenced the proper and real improve¬
ments demanded by the State of Louisiana. The Resolution, indeed,
adopts the system of preliminary surveys and estimates pursued by
all States or powers who have prosecuted a successful system of in¬
ternal improvements, and which has been so long disregarded by
Louisiana.
So, then, we have taken one step in the right direction as a State ;
my failure to report fully does not matter ; let the next step be to
give the means to carry out the views and aims of the Resolution, and
we are safe on the way we should travel.
As, however, it may be deemed incumbent upon me to give my pre¬
sent views as to objects set forth in the Joint Resolution, I will re¬
spectfully communicate the following remarks,
RELATIVE TO A SYSTEM OF INTERNAL IMPROVEMENTS.
The present internal improvements of the State are carried on by
two separate and distinct Departments—that of the Board of Swamp
Land Commissioners, and that of the State Engineer. The first have
under their entire control the reclamation and drainage of the swamp
and overflowed land donated to the State of Louisiana by the
United States ; and for this purpose have in use such portions of the
fund accruing from the sale of said lands as may be yearly appro¬
priated by the Legislature. The State Engineer has in charge the
improvement, for navigation purposes, of all the streams of the State,
and the construction of public roads for land transportation. The
8
means at his command are the snag-boats of the State, ninety-four
slaves, and such sums as the Legislature appropriates yearly to his
Department.
Such is briefly the present organization. The Constitution of the
State (Title VII., Articles 130, 1, 2, 3, and 4) apparently has in view
the adoption of a totally different organization. Efforts have been
made by members of the Legislature heretofore, and are now being
repeated, to establish the Board of Public Works contemplated by
the above title of the Constitution.
It therefore seems to be here my duty to submit, respectfully, to
your honorable bodies, my opinions upon both systems, and to dwell
briefly upon the features of all the Acts by which, during the last
three years, the second system has been sought to be established.
Allow me to make, first, some general remarks which bear upon the
subject. The following proposition is self-evident, viz : An Internal
Improvement Department, however constituted, is, and mustie, execu¬
tive ; this must be admitted. With this as a starting point, the next step
is to inquire. What is the first essential requisite for an effective Exec¬
utive Department ? If we look everywhere, we find that it is to have
one single responsible head ; a head who is made as independent, in his
sphere of action, as circumstances will permit. Kings and Potentates
in Europe, the President of the United States, our State Governors,
our Chiefs of Departments in the General Government, and in all
the branches of its service, are such heads ; all its subject to only such
modifications, in their positions, as are necessary to said positions.
It must be further admitted, as a second proposition, that the more
responsibility is divided, the weaker it becomes ; this springs from the
weakness of human nature ; therefore I lay down.
First. That the Internal Improvement Department is executive.
Second. That being executive, its efficiency and success depend
upon the existence for it of one single responsible head.
I will be pardoned for not entering into an elaborate argument to
establish these positions. They must strike every reflective mind as
self-evident. I will therefore pass on and make a brief application
of them to Title VII. of the Constitution, and at the same time ex¬
press my views of the different provisions of said Title. Article 130
provides for a Board of Public Works, to consist of four Commis¬
sioners. Here is at once a division of functions, a weakening of effi¬
ciency, and diminution of responsibility. But as if this was not yet
9
bad enough, the article goes on to make those Commissioners elective
in four different districts ; and, therefore, by bringing about a clashing
of sectional interests, still more reduce the efficiency of the system. Is
it not evident that four men cannot be held to the same accountability
as one ? and is it not also evident, tiiat in a department where prompt
decision and untrammelled action are required, that one ruling mind
is more efficient than four minds who are embarrassed, retarded,
crippled in decision and action, by the difference of opinions, ideas,
and wishes of each other ? Is it necessary to answer these ques¬
tions ? The clashing of interests between four different sections of
the State would be a source of great evil, and certainly would create
still more disagreement between the members of the Board. In fact,
it would be enough to paralyze completely its actions and operations.
It would also throw into the Legislature, at every yearly session, a
brand of discord. The Constitution directs a division of the State
into four districts, containing, as nearly as may be, an equal number
of voters. Now the city of New Orleans contains a number of
voters which almost entitles it to be a district by itself. Some few of
the populous parishes come up with New Orleans in the same
category. Now it happens that New Orleans has not much work of
internal improvement which is not in the hands of chartered com¬
panies, or which would not necessarily and legally belong to the
corporation of the city. Many of the parishes which need most improve¬
ments are the most sparsely settled. Now how is the Legislature to
divide the funds between the four districts ? Let every individual
member of your honorable bodies put the question to himself ; and
let him settle upon the amount of money he wants for his district. I
am afraid he will be wanting more than he will obtain.
The next point is that the Commissioners are elective, each in his
district. This still farther goes to divide the Board into four dis¬
cordant parts, as the manner of their appointment makes them
independent of each other ; whereas their duties would require them
to be as one mind. Did they owe their appointment to one and the
same power, there would certainly be more agreement and more con¬
cert of action between them. But a few words as to the making of
the Commissioners elective. And first, must a Commissioner be an
engineer and at the same time a voter and resident in his district, or
in the State ? It must be admitted that Louisiana has not had such
extensive works of internal improvements achieved as yet to have
2
10
formed, even by routine, very numerous and competent engineers.
Our present rvish to do better in the future is sufficient proof of this.
The consequence is that there would be great danger that men should
be put in office, not for their competency, but merely for their popu¬
larity. For it must be admitted, farther, that engineers, from the
nature of their profession and avocations, and from their habits, are
by no means fitted to court the good will of the people, and obtain
the popular vote. We have the example of all the governments of
the civilized world to teach us that we must seek and secure talent
wherever it is to be found. When Russia wishes to build her great
St. Petersburg and Moscow Railroad, her Emperor sends to America
for a Whistler. When she wishes to build her fortifications along the
Danube, she calls in French engineers. When France and Germany,
and other powers, wish to have competent men to conduct their steam
machinery, they send to England. General Bernard, so conspicuous
in our national history, and relied upon even in our own State, was à
Frenchman. Claudius Crozet, once our State Engineer, now the
able State Engineer of Virginia, was a Frenchman I do not wish
it to be understood that I advocate the casting aside of our own
engineers, Louisianians or Americans by birth or citizenship but I
wish to impress the necessity of not throwing such impediments in
the way of talent as to deprive us of obtaining it when the State
needs it. But I have said enough to show that, in my humble
opinion, it would be highly detrimental to our interests to make the
Commissioners elective. This may appear anti-democratic in the
unlimited signification of the term demoracy ; but I am willing to
rest under any charge that it may bring upon me. If we are to
have a Board of Public Works, let us have the Commissioners ap¬
pointed by the Governor, subject to the advice and consent of the
Senate. The Governor having his reputation and that of his adminis¬
tration at stake, and being well qualified to judge of talents and
capacity, would at least give us engineers for Commissioners.
But the diflerent Acts which have been brought before the Legis¬
lature during the last few years to establish the Constitutional Board
have had, without exception, a feature still more objectionable. They
have all proposed to create the office of " Civil Engineer," and all
have made this officer elective by the Board. At the same time, they
throw upon him functions which he cannot fill without being inde-
11
pendent of the Board. They make him a mere creature of the
Board, dependent upon the good will of the Commissioners, and yet
throw upon him a responsibility which the Commissioners alone ought
to assume. This is complicating matters, and rendering the system
still more cumbrous, ineiScient, and inoperative. All other officers
are to be likewise appointed by the Board. Here is a new complica¬
tion and increased difficulty.
Elected for four years, "the Commissioners may be removed by
the concurrent vote of a majority of all the members elected to each
House of the General Assembly." Does any one expect that he
will ever see a Commissioner removed under this clause, however in¬
competent he may have proved himself ?
AVhy not adopt a system free of all these objections ? Make one.
Engineer for the State of Louisiana ; give to him the sole control of
all the improvements undertaken by the State ; hold him responsible
for the employment of all sub-officers, their appointment and removal
at his will ; let him be appointed by the Governor, with the advice
and consent of the Senate, for a term of four years, but removal at
the will of the Governor ; make his salary sufficient to induce him to
devote his entire time and labor to his functions ; specify these func¬
tions, so as to make him collect and keep on record all matters that
may benefit the internal improvement department ; hold him to a
strict accountability for all his disbursements, even by giving bond ;
let his department decide upon what works shall or shall not be done,
and let his estimates and opinions be a guide for legislative action ;
make him responsible for the proper discharge of his duties, by
causing him to endanger, in case of dereliction, his personal interest
and reputation. We Avill thus have an energetic, efficient, and suc¬
cessful system. As a matter of course, sufficient means, pecuniary
and otherwise, must be furnished the Engineer.
Such is the system I most earnestly recommend. The present
State Engineer Department, with very slight modification, and in¬
creased means, will answer every requirement.
So far, I have only considered the two systems, (that contemplated
by the Constitution, and the one I recommend), as regards efficiency.
I ,wish to call your attention to the fact that the Constitutional Board
would certainly be, by far, more expensive to the State. If we refer
to the records of the old Board of Public Works, which formerly ex-
12
isted here, we will find that their yearly expenditures far exceeded
the expenditures of the present department. Not that I consider
those expenditures exorbitant—still the comparison is in favor of the
present system. In the first place, under the Constitutional Board,
we would have a serious expenditure for salaries of officers, as it is
not to be denied that no good men would act as Commissioners except
at a remunerative jsrice. Again, each district would require and
make increased expenses. In fact, I know of but one system which
would prove more expensive—it would be the " contract system."
Relative to this last, we have had sufficient experience to admonish
us never to resort to it ; and I do not consider it necessary to enu¬
merate its numerous and ii-remediable defects.
In conclusion of this subject of a system, 1 would say, let us
modify (not in its main features, but in some of its minor points) the
present system ; let us give it boats, tackles, etc., an increased num¬
ber of slaves ; let us give it store-rooms, shops, a ship-yard and a
hospital at the seat of Government ; let us give it yearly the pecu¬
niary amount necessary to utilize all its resources ; then let us compel
it to make ttie survey of the State recommended in this Report.
After this is done, Louisiana will begin to be improved and beautified.
Any other course, in my opinion, will prove a failure.
EXPEDIENCY AND PKACTICAEILIÏY OP REDUCING THE MISSISSIPPI TO
ITS NATURAL BANKS IN TIME OF FLOODS.
The discussion of this subject without the data, which can only be
furnished by a survey of the entire overflowing portions of the State,
may amount to nothing more than to express views founded on con¬
jectures and erroneous premises. I will not pretend to lay claim to
originality in my views. Others have entertained them before me,
and theories have been given before, which accord with my ideas.
It is acknowledged by all that there was a time when the sea ex¬
tended over all the country of alluvial formation along the Missis¬
sippi, or that at some remote time the Mississippi had its mouth at
the head of this alluvial formation, and as it brought down the sedi¬
ments from the great West, (for I consider the Missouri the main
stream), it gradually filled up the sea, and, forming land, finally
reached its present mouth. The changes which we know have oc-
13
curred at the Balize since we have a knowledge of the Mississippi,
and the topography and geology of the country, establish this to our
satisfaction. Then, in considering the Mississippi, we should start
with this as an admitted fact. AVe should next refer back to the con¬
dition of the stream and of the country when the Europeans first ex¬
plored and settled our lands ; and then take in view the changes
which have taken place since, either naturally or by the efforts of man.
What was the condition of the Mississippi and the country when
first visited by Lasalle ? The Mississippi rose annually, and over-
ffowed several large districts of land along its eastern bank down to
Baton Rouge, and along its western bank down to Red River, which
districts received its waters and retained them as in reservoirs, to dis¬
charge them again into the bed of the river when the ffoods passed
off". Below Baton Rouge on the eastern bank, and below Red
River on the western bank, the waters passed over the lands, but
found their way directly to the Gulf of Mexico and never returned
to the river. Let us first consider the Mississippi in its natural state
above Baton Rouge and above Red River. The proper point to start
from is one above the confluence of the Mississippi and Ohio Rivers
at the base of the rock-bound shores called the Big and Little Chains
of the Mississippi. Following the eastern bank, we leave the Ohio
River, and find that, some eighteen miles below, the Mississippi sweeps
along the Iron Banks, the Chalk Banks, Mill's Point, and the first,
second, third, and fourth Chickasaw Bluff's. This brings us to the
present location of the city of Memphis. A few miles below, we
come to the broad, extensive district of alluvial and overflowing lands
' O
known by the name of Yazoo Swamps, and through which the Yazoo
River and its numerous bayou tributaries run. This district, along
the river, is some 400 miles long. At its lower termination, we meet
the Walnut Hills, the present location of Vicksburg. Below the
AValnut Hills we find intervals between hills, ridges, or cliff's, at the
following now named points, viz : at Grand Gulf, Rodney, Natchez,
Ellis' Cliff's, Fort Adams, Tunica, Bayou Sara, Port Hudson, and
Baton Rouge. We then find that from the mouth of the Ohio, on
the eastern bank of the Mississippi, this river, by sweeping the foot
of ridges of highlands, divides the alluvial formation into sixteen
separate and distinct districts ; some of these are of no large ex¬
tent—that of the Yazoo is very extensive.
14
Let us go to the western bank of the Mississippi. lYe shall com¬
mence again at the Big and Little chains above Cairo, and we shall
find a striking difference both in the extent and continuity of the
overflowed districts. We meet with no interruption of lowlands, from
the chains downwards, until Ave arrive at the present position of
Helena, 370 miles by the course of the river ; thus we have a district
370 miles long by the rh'er, and stretching to a width of some 50
miles, and terminated northward or Avestward by the Avestern slopes of
the St. Francis River. The St. Francis and its tributaries pervade
this district. From Helena to the mouth of Red River there is a
continuous district of lowlands, subject, in a state of nature, to
annual overfloAvs. Such we assume to be the condition of alluvial
lands above Baton Rouge and Red RiA^er. Let us now examine the
effect of an overflow of the Mississippi on those lands, (always unpro¬
tected by artificial means). The points named as high ridges must
he recognized as at all times above any Mississippi waters. The
Mississippi commenced filling up the sea, let us admit, at the foot of
the Big and Little chains, and filled up the spaces nearest its mouth.
Gradually it formed lands in the districts above Helena, and also in
the districts nearest the Ohio on the eastern bank. Having filled up
two opposite districts to the point of having banks to its newly
formed bed through these districts, it began to invade another dis¬
trict, and thus it finally reached, on the western side, the alluvial
deposit which likewise the Arkansas and Red Rivers were forming as
they brought down the sands of the Great West—uniting Avith these
streams in the work of making lands for the benefit of man, it finally
reached, in its labors southward, the last high ridge of Baton Rouge.
Without stopping to reflect here upon the matters here laid doAvn,
let us folloAV tho Mississippi southwaixl. On the eastern bank, we
find a district from Baton Rouge to the mouth of tiie river, and ter¬
minated eastward by the same highlands of Baton Rouge Avhich run
along the margins of Lakes Maurepas and Bontchartrain, and the
banks of the Amite River. Thus forming betAveeu Baton Rouge, the
Amite, Lakes Maurepas and Bontchartrain, and the Gulf, one
immense district subject to overflow from the Mississippi. Let us
now look to the country on the Avesteru banks below Red River.—
Here Ave find a vast district having for its eastern limit the Missis¬
sippi down to the Gulf, and for its Avesteru limit the Atchafalaya and
15
its continuation of lakes, bayous, bays, etc., down to the Gulf. Low,
flat lands also extend westward of the Atchafalaya. But these, though
affected by the overflow of the Mississippi, will not now be taken into
consideration ; for it may be doubted whether the Mississippi had
any thing to do with their formation. We must rather suppose that
Red River had most to do with the formation of the alluvial soils west
of the Atchafalaya.
Now let us go back and reflect a little. We know that the differ-
ence of level between the Mississippi at the mouth of the Ohio, and
the Gulf of Mexico at the Balize, is about 275 feet. Admitting
that the Mississippi commenced forming land at or near the Ohio, we
must see that it there first faised lands above the sea, so that the
first section raised must have been at one time coincident with the
surface of the Gulf. By annual inundations, it gradually elevated these
first lands, whilst constantly pushing southward its inroads upon the
bed of the sea. With every advance of new formation in the Gulf
we can conceive a corresponding elevation of the soil previously formed.
But there was another effect. Of course if the Mississippi once met
the sea at the chains, it must have precipitated itself from a height of
275 feet ; filling the sea, it finally destroyed this immense cataract,
by prolonging its own course and reducing its plain of inclination.
To pass from cataracts to an even and smooth flow, it must have gone
through every stage of the velocity of waters—from falling waters to
mere running waters. Can we not now conceive the Mississippi gra¬
dually forming its alluvion, and, by lengthening its course south and
diminishing its plain, gradually lessening the velocity of its current ?
Such would appear to be the plausible theory ; now a step farther.
Taking the first sea-basin filled above tide-water, and the second basin
coincident with it, naturally every rise of the river still continued to
overflow the land of the first basin. So, when the the third basin was
filled, the first and second continued to be overflowed ; and so on in
succession with all the basins, all being yearly overflowed and elevated
more and more. This has in it nothing surprising; because, as the
river lengthened its course the waters rose higher and higher at its
different points—otherwise, the alluvial soil near Cairo would not be
higher than at the Balize. Again, the rise and fall of the river
increases gradually from the Gulf to the Ohio. At New Orleans it
is some 15 feet, at Baton Rouge some 32 feet, at Helena about 45
16
feet, and so on ; whereas at the Balize it is very small. In a natu¬
ral condition, we should therefore understand the Mississippi to have
overflowed annually all the lands of its own formation, from the Ohio
to the Gulf, and annually to have elevated those lands to an increased
height proportionate to the advancement of its mouth into the sea.
But these overflows, wliat were they ? Did the water's rise to the
depth of several feet above the immediate hanks of the stream ?—
Not at all. They merely skimmed over these banks, and, as they
thus escaped, laterally with a diminished velocity of current, deposited
their sedimentai-y matter on those banks or on their outer slopes.
Thus the hanks were raised higlier and higher, and their slopes pushed
farther and farther, so as finally to fill up all inner basins or flats.
Such, then, must be our conception of the manner in which the
Misssssippi formed its immense delta of lands. We are sustained in
this theory, by what actually existed when the adventurous Lasalle
first descended the mighty river, and when the white race first settled
its banks. True, many things go to cast doubt upon this theory ; but
there is nothing to invalidate it, and which cannot be well explained
under it, when we consider that the many singularities of the topo¬
graphy of the Mississippi Valley can easily be accounted for by sup¬
posing very accidental causes. The mere falling of a tree in the bed
of a stream, may form a bar, then an island, and, thus, may shift the
entire channel.
The first settlers along the Mississippi found, therefore, rich lands,
annually (or nearly so) overflowed by the river. They found, besides,
on both banks of the stream, f^i'om Bed River and Baton Rouge to
the Gulf, numerous outlets, by which the waters were carried laterally
to the sea. Everywhere, except in these outlets, the waters, barely
to the depth of a few inches, passed over the banks of the river.
Since then, nature has been at work and man has been at work. Let
us see if we can determine what nature has done.
There is no doubt that had man never interfered with the Missis¬
sippi, it would have continued to flow as explained above, forming new
soil at its mouth, and elevating the surface of land previously made.
There is no doubt, also, that many and extensive changes would have
been brought about along its entire course. The topography of the
country shows, conclusively, that the present bed of the river is not
the one it has always occupied ; that this bed has shifted time and time
17
again. There is also one indisputable conclusion—that the river has
changed its regimen from time to time. We are also struck with the
fact that its cuiTent increases as we leave the gulf, and that the chan¬
nel becomes more and more tortuous as the current increases. As it
assumed a more tortuous condition, it naturally deepened its bends,
and often these bends, breaking through the narrow necks which sepa¬
rated them, cut-offs were made, the old channel was filled at each ex¬
tremity, and lakes, false rivers, etc., formed. To these natural
changes add the elevation of the bed of the river, as explained be¬
fore, and we have the extent of the workings of nature.
Now, what has man done ? Paradoxical as it may appear, he has
done too much, and too little. He has had no foresight, and he has
worked without having or entertaining a proper view of the conse¬
quence of his woi-ks. Taking the Mississippi, and its alluvial lands,
as we find them, as above explained, let us proceed. The first settlers
on the banks of the river found that they were periodically subject
to overfiows. They found that by throwing up a small dike in front
of their settlements they protected themselves from these overflows ;
because the waters, on account of the inclination of the land perpen¬
dicularly to the line of the river, were carried off on either side of
their habitations. Adopting this as a proper system, they resorted to
it everywhere. The French engineer. He la Tour, traced out the city
of New Orleans, under the orders of Bienville, in 1717, and recom¬
mended a dike for its protection. In 1727, this levee is reported
completed. Below New Orleans, and above, the leveeing system is
continued, and, by 1770, we have a levee from the English Tuim to
more than fifty miles above. But it is not necessary to trace out the
history of levees along the Mississippi. It is sufficient to remember
that levees were gradually built along the banks of the Mississippi,
cutting off the waters from their natural lateral flow over the lands,
and, through innumerable outlets, up as high as Baton Bouge and Bed
Biver, with the exception of Bayou Lafourche, Bayou Plaquemine,
and the Atchafalaya. Above Bed Biver and Bnton Bouge levees
have been built, or are being built, so as to exclude the Mississippi
waters from all the large districts of flat lands previously mentioned
in this Beport, and which are to the number of eighteen. Not only
individual enterprise, but the combined efforts of States, have been
applied to this stupendous work.
3
Through the beneficial aid of the United States Government, all
the States (Louisiana included) who possess lands of Mississippi for¬
mation, are now engaged in building levees, and very soon there will
be a line of levees from the gulf to the Big and Little chains of the
Mississippi.
Let us now consider how levees have affected the river, and inter¬
fered with its natural regimen. It is evident that with every foot of
levee built up there was a proportionate volumne of water confined
to the bed of the river, and, consequently, an interference with its
regimen. A still greater effect was produced by the closing of out¬
lets. As we gi-adually confined these waters, we necessarily raised
the surface of the river, and at every step in the construction of
levees and dykes, we found the necessity of building them larger and
higher. So that now, in places where there was sufficient protection
afl'orded by levees of one or two feet in height, we require levees of
six, seven, or eight feet. Another consequence of the confining of
the waters is, that we thus have increased the current, and by causing
the river to advance more rapidly in the gulf than it naturally would
have done, have elevated its bed in a like proportion. The gulf has,
however, resisted this artificial encroachment upon it, and to such a
degree as to force the river to seek its regimen by slightly widening,
in a few localities, its bed, and especially by increasing its length.
In fact, the Mississippi is now more tortuous than it ever was, and
will continue to become more and more so. I have said that as we
recede from the sea the stronger is the current ; another fact is, that
as we recede from the sea the more winding is the stream. Is it
not, then, evident, that as we increase the current we lengthen the
river ? We are also forced to the conclusion, that nowhere has the
Mississippi deepened its channel, although, by confining its waters,
and by making, at times, cut-ofl's, we have increased the force of its
current. The Po, in Italy, once ran between low, natural banks, as
did the Mississippi. Small levees were built at first, and proved suffi¬
cient ; and as the Po was controlable by man, it was confined to one
almost invariable channel. Did this channel deepen? No ; it has
filled up ; and now its bottom is as high as the soil which the waters
at first merely covered. Had not the Mississippi been uncontrolable,
and had it not sought to resume its natural regimen, by yearly break¬
ing through our feeble barriers, and particularly by lengthening its
19
course, our levees vfould even now have reached the height of fifteen
feet in lower Louisiana. Our salvation has been, that we have not
done all that we intended to do—that the Great River has rendered
null some of our efforts to seek our own destruction. Let us, there¬
fore, hear no more of the scouring out, hy the force of the cur¬
rent, of a deeper channel for the Mississippi.
Without going further into remarks or arguments, we conclude,
then, that man has built up levees and closed outlets, to the extent of
confining the Mississippi to its channel, (or will very soon,) throughout
its course from the sea to the Big and Little Chain. Now it
must be recollected, that the amount of lowlands thus rescued from
overflow, is about 40,000 square miles. Of these lands, all above
Red River and Baton Rouge, acted by districts, as immense reser¬
voirs, in which the surplus waters collected at time of floods, to be
there retained until the river began to subside. Below Baton
Rouge and Red River, every drop of water that left the river left
it altogether, and, flowing seaward, gave room for the escape of more.
We can thus see how it is that the river, in its natural condition,
could never overflow its banks to more than a few inches, and how
it is that we see it now many feet above those same banks.
Another effect of man's labors must here be noticed. He has
cleared the lands of their natural growth, and has brought them
into cultivation. One effect of this has certainly been to increase
the amount of evaporation of the water that falls upon these lands
by rains and snows ; but another counter-effect is, that every drop of
that water has been facilitated in its course to the sea. Every farmer
has his ditches, drains, &c., so that the water, which once remained on
his lands in a virgin state several days, is now rushed off in a couple of
hours. Again, for cultivation and drainage, and, in many important
instances, for navigation, creeks, bayous, rivers, have been cleared
out, and now bring doAvn their waters in much less time than they
did naturally.
And we must remember, that in tlie matter of cultivation, and
clearing out of streams, we must not look to the delta of the Missis¬
sippi only, but also to the thousand of its tributaries, and the
thousand and thousand tributaries of these last. A drop of water
artificially hurried into the Ohio, at Pittsburg, or one so hurried
into the Missouri, at the foot of the Rocky Mountains, contributes
to the overflow of our lands in Louisiana.
20
To sum up, then, we see that, by artificial means, we have interfered
with the Mississippi :
First, By the building of levees, and the closing of outlets.
Second, By the cultivation and drainage of lands, and by improve¬
ments of streams for drainage and navigation.
Third, By making cut-offs between bends of the river.
xbnd we see that all our labors are the direct causes of the evils
under which we suffer. In our greediness to rob the Mississippi of
its rich soils, we have taken no precaution to protect ourselves from
its wrath ; but on the contrary, have gone on to outrage it still more
and more. We should have steadily kept in view that we were
seeking the reclamation of lands, and, at the same time, increased
their liability to overflow. We should have kept in mind that, as
we confined the great river at one point, we should have given it
artificially easier exit elsewhere. It is true that we have been
allowed to confine it, to a certain extent, without danger. Until
1828, it never admonished us that we were going too far. Up to
that time, we were comparatively left in security. Since that time,
repeatedly have we been punished for forgetting a part of our duty.
We conclude, then, that the more we build levees, and close reservoirs
and outlets, the more we ,expose ourselves. We should have stopped
somewhere in our reclamation of lands, or else have applied means
to counteract the influence of our own works upon the rises of the
river. Thus we have done too much in one way, and not enough in
the other.
Now let us consider the position of the State of Louisiana, making
application of all that has gone before. In Mississippi, Arkansas
and Missouri, and in Louisiana, above Baton Bouge and Red River,
we have noticed that all the alluvial lands have been but acting as
reservoirs, having the river itself as their drain.
It is easy to see that there is but one way of reclaiming these
lauds ; viz : the building of levees. These are being built, and
very rapidly, either by individual enterprise, or by State efforts.
Here, then, unless some of those districts are reserved as reservoirs,
there is no means of counteracting the bad effects of the levees
which reclaim their lands ; and we must suppose that all the waters
which once filled those districts must be ultimately precipitated upon
lower Louisiana. We see, therefore, that lower Louisiana must not
21
only prepare for the increased rise of the river due to her own levees,
but for that due to the works along the entire valley.
Her position offers certainly no cheering prospects, but rather
threatens complete destruction. The question is, What is to be
do?ie ?
We have seen that we could work with impunity to a certain fixed
point, and that when we passed beyond it we were punished.
Therefore, to answer the question we must go back to that point.
It must be admitted that it is only the surplus waters of the Missis"
sippi that we must find how to dispose of. Here, then, is the problem
to be solved. The solution is evident.
We must give vent to the surplus waters. Of course not by tearing
down all our levees ; but, I say, by tearing down some of them.
That is, we must endeavor to give outlets to the Mississippi, which
will reduce its surface to such a degree that we can control its
remaining fioods. We have now, as remaining outlets, the Lafourche,
the Plaquemine, and the Atchafalaya. These, in the first place,
should be made to take off more waters. This can be done by clear¬
ing out their channels of all obstructions, and in some instances, by
straightening those channels. If we should do nothing else, let us
at least preserve those outlets.
And here I must be allowed to digress a little, and notice a move
which is being made to prevail upon your honorable bodies, to
close the Plaquemine. We have but three remaining outlets ; the
Atchafalaya is the most important ; next, the Plaquemine, and
thirdly, the Lafourche. So we see that the higher up the outlets
takes the waters the more it carries off. The total discharge of the
Plaquemine has been calculated to be about 28,500 feet per second
of time during the high water of 1851. Throw suddenly this
quantity of water in the Mississippi below, and what devastation
and ruin may occur? Independently of the preservation of an
outlet here, ought we not to take warning of the past, and profit by
our experience, so sadly taught by the great injuries done when we
have caused a sudden change of the regimen of the river ? Let us
remember the Raccourci Cut-off.
Therefore, close not the Plaquemine.
To return. We should not only preserve the existing outlets, but
we should go to work and make new ones. And here arises a question.
When an outlet is closed, lands are reclaimed. Yes ; but, as we have
22
seen, the danger of overflow is increased. The estimated escape of
waters between Red River and a point eleven miles below New
Orleans, by crevasses in 1851, (independent of outlets,) was 100,800
cubic feet per second. Imagine, then, if the Plaquemine and Lafourche
had been closed, and if all the levees had resisted, to what height the
river would have risen. So in 1851, even with our present outlets,
100,000 cubic feet of water, or more, were vented by crevasses
in lower Louisiana. Of course these spread desolation and ruin
over large districts. Does not this point out the course we should
follow ? Does it not tell us plainly that we should sacrifice some of
our lands for the security of the great body of them? It does, most
assuredly. As I have said before, we have been too greedy; we
want the whole, when we should leave a part. The proper course is,
therefore, to choose out what lands we should sacrifice, and make
through them the outlets the Mississippi calls for so imperatively.
By making these outlets ourselves, we can do so to our advantage,
and control them.
Such, gentlemen of the Senate and House of Representatives, are
my views, respectfully submitted, concerning the Mississippi.
I fear I have not done justice to the subject, even in this lengthened
Report, written, perhaps, in a very disconnected manner. I would,
in termination of the subject, strongly recommend the outlet system.
Because the Mississippi has left us in quiet for some years now, we
must not forget that one of its floods may injure us suddenly to the
amount of millions ; and we should keep constantly in mind, that
when that flood comes it will be greater than ever.
To establish where and how new outlets ought to be made, requires
the survey of the State recommended in the first part of this Report.
Relative to the other matters called for by the Joint Resolution to
which this Report is an answer, it is of course unnecessary to say
anything here. They will be attended to, should you adopt now the
recommendations of this Report.
I have spoken, thus far, of the lands inundated by the Mississippi.
I shall be pardoned if I express briefly my ideas respecting the wants
of others. During a great portion of the year when our streams are
low, many sections of our State are cut off from market.
This has been seriously the case in the district above Red River, in
the Red River A'^alley, along the Bœuf, and elsewhere. There is no
23
resourse, in such cases, but to build railroads. Let us improve our
streams, because, when it can be obtained, water transportation is
the cheapest ; but when we cannot get this, let us have railroads.
The Red River Valley wants, and must have, a railroad. I would
then deem it right to encourage the construction of such roads by all
the means allowed by the Constitution of the State.
To sum up my recommendations, I would say that I advise,
First, A survey of the State, and would add that the seat of Gov¬
ernment, as recommended by the Swamp Land Commissioner of the
First District, in his last Report, be made the initial point of said
survey.
Second, The continuation, v:ith slight modifications, and increased
means, of the present State Engineers department.
Third, The improvement of existing outlets, and the making of new
ones, for the escape of"the surplus Avaters of the Mississippi ; the new
outlets to be laid out according to the above survey.
Fourth, The encouragement of railroads.
It may be observed that what I recommend will cost perhaps
millions. It may be so, but we have been expending thousands and
thousands without any benefits whatever. Let us spend millions and
reap benefits ; let us do what other States have done. New York
thinks nothing of twenty-five millions of dollars to enlarge the Erie
Canal.
I may here be allowed to make an additional recommendation.
The Mississippi River, in my humble opinion, should be considered as
an inland sea, and its improvement should appertain to the General
Government. I am happy to see that our able Senator, Mr. J. P.
Benjamin, takes this view, and that he has lately called the attention
of Congress to the matter. It is hard for Louisiana to have to suffer
from the works prosecuted by her sister States of the valley of the
Mississippi, and to be left to her sole resources against the accumulation
of evils thrown upon her.
I Avould therefore recommend that your honorable bodies request
of our members in Congress to exert their influence to cause the
Mississippi to be recognized as a national stream. The General
Government should also be strongly urged to remove the obstructions
placed in the Bayou Lafourche, under orders of General Jackson, in
1814. This Louisiana has a right to demand. It is but little for the
24
United States to give, and it is a great deal for Louisiana to receive,
in her present position.
All of which is most respectfully submitted,
LOUIS HEBERT, State Engineer.
Baton Rouqk, La., January 31si, 1857.