diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'old/62224-0.txt')
| -rw-r--r-- | old/62224-0.txt | 1287 |
1 files changed, 0 insertions, 1287 deletions
diff --git a/old/62224-0.txt b/old/62224-0.txt deleted file mode 100644 index 2585b66..0000000 --- a/old/62224-0.txt +++ /dev/null @@ -1,1287 +0,0 @@ -The Project Gutenberg eBook, The Great Thames Barrage, by Thomas Walter -Barber - - -This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most -other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions -whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of -the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at -www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you'll have -to check the laws of the country where you are located before using this ebook. - - - - -Title: The Great Thames Barrage - - -Author: Thomas Walter Barber - - - -Release Date: May 25, 2020 [eBook #62224] - -Language: English - -Character set encoding: UTF-8 - - -***START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE GREAT THAMES BARRAGE*** - - -E-text prepared by deaurider and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team -(http://www.pgdp.net) from page images generously made available by -Internet Archive (https://archive.org) - - - -Note: Project Gutenberg also has an HTML version of this - file which includes the original illustrations. - See 62224-h.htm or 62224-h.zip: - (http://www.gutenberg.org/files/62224/62224-h/62224-h.htm) - or - (http://www.gutenberg.org/files/62224/62224-h.zip) - - - Images of the original pages are available through - Internet Archive. See - https://archive.org/details/b22415737 - - - Some characters might not display properly in this UTF-8 - text file (e.g., empty squares). If so, the reader should - consult the html version or the original page images noted - above. - - - - - -THE GREAT THAMES BARRAGE - - - * * * * * * - - “Public - Works,” - - CONDUCTED - BY THE - EDITOR OF - - “The Surveyor and - Municipal and County - Engineer.” - - A high-class magazine dealing with Governmental and Municipal - enterprises in all parts of the world. Published on the 15th of - each month. - - SUBSCRIPTION. - - PUBLIC WORKS will be sent direct by the Publishers on the - following terms:— - - For the United Kingdom and Ireland, 16/- per annum } Post free, including - Abroad 18/- ” ” } special issues. - - Subscriptions are payable in advance, and should be made - payable to The St. Bride’s Press, Ltd., and crossed “National - Provincial Bank of England, Ltd.” They should be forwarded - to the St. Bride’s Press, Ltd., 24 Bride Lane, Fleet Street, - London, E.C. - - Code A.B.C. - Telegrams: “MUNICIPIUM, LONDON.” - Telephone: 1359 HOLBORN. - - Vol. 1 (first four numbers), with 376 pages and 491 - Illustrations, bound in Ornamental Cloth-Gilt Cover, 5s., post - free, 5s. 6d. - - ☞ SEE BACK OF COVER. - - * * * * * * - - -[Illustration: THE PROPOSED THAMES BARRAGE: A VIEW OF THE RIVER FROM THE -GRAVESEND BANK AS IT WOULD APPEAR IF THE DAM WERE CONSTRUCTED - -DRAWN BY H. C. BREWER FROM MATERIALS SUPPLIED BY MR. T. W. BARBER - -Mr. T. W. Barber, M.Inst.C.E., and Mr. Jas. Casey, M.I.N.A., have -suggested that the difficulties of which the shipping interests complain -might be met by the construction of a barrage across the river from -Gravesend to Tilbury, a comparatively simple engineering feat after the -great Nile dam (about 1¼ miles in length), especially as the bed of the -stream is here firm chalk. This would, it is claimed, give a navigable -depth of water, varying from 65ft. at Gravesend to 32ft. at London -Bridge, without dredging, or any interference with the river bottom or -banks. Some of the advantages which would, the advocates of the scheme -claim, be secured are as follows:—Ships drawing 30ft. could proceed to -London Bridge at any hour of the day or night, without waiting for tides; -ships of all tonnages and draughts could traverse the river, anchor -anywhere, lie alongside any wharf or quay, always remain at one level -for loading or unloading, and need not lie out in the river or obstruct -the free navigation; dock entrances could be left open, thus saving the -cost and time lost in working them—the London and India Docks Company -estimates the cost of working their entrances at £50,000 per annum; -while greatly increased safety of navigation would result, there being -no possibility of grounding, swinging with the tides, or collisions due -to tidal drift. In addition to these, London would be provided free -with a lake of fresh water forty-five miles long, and from a quarter -to a half-mile wide. In short, we should have a vast inland lake from -Gravesend to Richmond.] - - - - -[Illustration: THE GREAT THAMES BARRAGE - -BY T. W. BARBER - -M.INST.C.E.] - - -It is not necessary to emphasise in any way the fact that something must -be done in the tidal Thames to bring the Port of London up to date, and -to maintain it as the great inlet of British commerce. What with numerous -newspaper articles, magazine reviews, reports of Royal Commissions and -others, and a general murmur of complaint from all persons who use the -port for their business or the river for traffic purposes, there have -recently been abundant evidences that things are not as they should be. -Everyone is agreed on this point, but when it comes to the question of a -remedy, there agreement ends and confusion begins. - - -_What is complained of._ - -And, first, to briefly catalogue the complaints from all sources. They -are as follows:—(_a_) Insufficient depth of water in the river for -the increasing size and tonnage of steamships. (_b_) Tide-waiting at -Gravesend and at the dock entrances, inward and outward. (_c_) Excessive -dues. (_d_) Vexatious restrictions owing to conflicting and overlapping -authorities in the river. (_e_) Excessive cost of barging, pilotage, and -labour in loading and discharging. (_f_) Loss of time at the port. (_g_) -Dangerous navigation, due to tides, bends in the river, narrow channel, -fogs, and the crowded state of the river. That these complaints are well -founded is generally admitted. - - -_Remedies Proposed._ - -The Royal Commission on the Port of London, the Board of Trade, as -representing the Government, the Thames Conservancy, the dock companies -and others recommend the deepening of the river by dredging as a remedy -for (_a_), and as a partial remedy for (_b_) and (_f_). As to (_c_) no -remedy seems to be proposed by either, but rather an increase of dues, -or in lieu thereof a charge upon the rates of London through the London -County Council. - -Partly to amend (_d_) it is proposed by all the above authorities, except -the Thames Conservancy, that a Port Trust should be created to control -the river, instead of the present conflicting authorities of the Thames -Conservancy, Trinity House, the City Corporation and the Watermen’s -Company. - -But as to (_e_) there is no suggestion of amendment, nor is it expected -that the proposed deepening of the river will materially improve the -dangerous navigation (_g_). - - -_Port of London Bill, 1903._ - -The Government has sought to give effect to the Report of the Royal -Commission on the Port of London in this Bill, which reached the stage of -Committee of the whole House, and was then suspended till next Session -(1904). - -But as there were seventy petitions presented against the Bill, and a -large number of amendments stand on the notices for Committee of the -whole House, it may justly be concluded that the Bill satisfies no one, -and that the attempt of the Government to force it through the House -by stifling discussion of most of its vital points in Committee was a -flagrant violation of public rights, and will have a disastrous effect on -the future settlement of the question. - - -_Dockisation the True Remedy._ - -In 1755 Smeaton proposed the dockisation of the River Clyde as a means -of providing a sufficient depth of water for the increasing trade of the -Port of Glasgow. His plan was rejected, and the Clyde Trustees have since -expended £7,430,000 in dredging and improving the river to a low-water -depth of 20 ft., and now spend annually a large sum in maintaining this -depth. - -Thos. Howard proposed the dockisation of the Avon at Avonmouth in 1877 -to provide a sufficient depth of water for vessels passing to the -Bristol Docks up and down the Avon, there being a rise and fall of tide -in the Severn of nearly 40 ft. His proposal was not adopted because the -extraordinary range of tide would have left the entrance unapproachable -at low water, causing delay in the Severn Channel. - -Messrs. L. Murray and W. C. Mylne recommended the dockisation of the -River Wear in 1846, but this was not carried out. - -The Czar of Russia has recently approved a great dockisation project, -consisting of a dam with locks and sluices across the Straits of Kertch, -in the Black Sea, to raise the level of the Sea of Azov for the purpose -of facilitating navigation to the port of Taganrog and the River Don. The -Sea of Azov will then become a fresh-water lake, with an increased depth -of water (14½ ft.) and an area of 10,000 square miles. The dam will be -nine miles long, and is estimated to cost £5,000,000. - -There is, however, no actual instance of the dockisation of a tidal river -from which any data can be obtained. - -[Illustration: Fig. 1. THE UPPER THAMES. - -SHEWING EXISTING DAMS AND LOCKS BETWEEN LONDON AND OXFORD] - -The Thames, moreover, differs entirely from any of the foregoing rivers, -and must be considered on its own merits. The map (Fig. 1) shows that it -is already dammed and provided with locks at thirty-four places between -London and Oxford, the object of these dams being the maintenance of -a uniform level of water for navigation and boating purposes, and to -prevent the river running dry in the dry season and exposing the muddy -foreshores. - -But from Teddington Weir to its estuary the Thames is tidal, and there -is no obstruction to the tidal flow except the bridges and the half-tide -weir at Richmond, which merely holds up sufficient water to cover the -foreshores for the advantage of the riparian owners and of boating. - - -_The Tidal Thames._ - -To understand clearly the conditions to be dealt with, it is necessary to -consider the daily movements of tide, the affluents, the dock and wharf -business and the traffic of the river. - -The maps (Figs. 2 and 3) show the tidal river and estuary from Teddington -to the North Foreland. [Transcriber’s Note: It seems ‘Teddington’ here is -an error for either ‘London’ or ‘Southwark’; that’s what the maps show, -anyway.] - -The river proper—that is, from Teddington to Gravesend—is forty-six miles -long, and averages one-third of a mile wide. Its depth at low water -varies from 6 ft. at Teddington to 10 ft. at London Bridge and 40 ft. at -Gravesend, and the rise of tide at London varies from 17 ft. to 21 ft. -and at Gravesend from 15 ft. to 19 ft., the current usually averaging -four knots per hour. At London Bridge the Spring tides flow 5 hours and -ebb 7½ hours; while at Gravesend they flow 6 hours and ebb 6½ hours. - -The river winds about considerably. The straight line distance from -Teddington to Gravesend being thirty-three miles, shows that thirteen -miles are added to the river in its bends, some of which—as those at -Grays, Erith, Blackwall and Limehouse—are short and tortuous. - -The longitudinal section (Fig. 4) of the river from Teddington to -Gravesend gives graphically all the data necessary for our purpose. -Ordnance Datum (O.D.) is the common datum line of the Government -maps. Trinity High Water (T.H.W.) is the water datum usually -adopted in the river. High and low water, ordinary and Spring tides -(H.W.O.T.—L.W.O.T.—H.W.S.T.—L.W.S.T.) are the levels of the respective -states of tide in the river at various points. The highest and lowest -known tides are also given, as well as the level of the river bottom and -the levels of the principal dock entrance sills and of the crowns of the -Thames tunnels, showing their depths below the river bottom. - - -_Tidal Wave._ - -The curved lines (in various forms of dotting) represent the levels of -the surface of water at various states of Spring tides and clearly show -the tidal wave which ascends the river and by its momentum and volume -raises the high-water level at the upper end several feet above that at -Gravesend. - - -_The Thames Estuary._ - -From Gravesend to the Nore is an immense triangular area with sandy -bottom, muddy foreshores and several deep channels running in the general -direction of the Essex coast line, that is, N.E. to the North Sea. The -area may be roughly estimated at 120 square miles, and the navigable -depth of the principal channels at from 60 ft. to 26 ft. at low water -Spring tides. - -The volume of the estuary at high water Spring tides may be taken at -2600 million cubic yards, and at low water Spring tides at 1500 million -cubic yards, the volumes of the river from Gravesend to Teddington being -respectively 180 million and 80 million cubic yards, so that the volume -of tidal water entering the river each tide is about 100 million cubic -yards. - - -_Upland Water._ - -But there is a daily flow over Teddington weir—excluding the water -abstracted by the London water companies—varying during the year on the -average as follows:— - - Cubic yards. - Jan. 11,800,000 - Feb. 5,300,000 - March 4,100,000 - April 3,250,000 - May 4,720,000 - June 2,900,000 - July 1,760,000 - Aug. 1,590,000 - Sept. 1,160,000 - Oct. 1,900,000 - Nov. 3,530,000 - Dec. 8,230,000 - -Average daily flow, 4,186,000 cubic yards. - -Below Teddington, numerous small affluents add to this volume of upland -water as follows:— - - Cubic yards - per day. - - The River Lea and Essex streams on the north bank 60,000 - Streams in the Kent district 500,000 - To this must be added a large quantity of spring - water rising in the bed of the river and land - drainage—quantity uncertain 1,000,000 - Sewage effluents discharged at Crossness and Barking 1,176,000 - Storm water overflow from London sewers 580,000 - --------- - Total upland fresh water daily average 7,502,000 - -This gives an average volume of 7½ million cubic yards of fresh water -descending and mingling with the oscillating tidal water of the river and -estuary, which slowly pushes the latter down into the North Sea. Taking -the high-water volume in the river as above at 180 million cubic yards, -the proportion of fresh water from the upland daily flow is 1/24th, and -therefore it will take 24 days to change entirely the water in the tidal -river. - -Mr. W. P. Birch has shown that the combination of fresh water and sewage -which enters the river below Teddington remains in the river, oscillating -up and down with the tides for 45 days before it finally gets pushed out -into the North Sea. - -[Illustration: THAMES MUD.] - -In this way the discharge of effluents at Crossness and Barking passes -up and down in front of London for more than a month, and it becomes -apparent that the tidal action keeps the river continually saturated with -about 45 days’ soilage. It is no wonder, therefore, that the conditions -of colour, smell and turbidity of the river below Teddington are so vile -as compared with the Upper Thames, especially as to the above sources of -filth must be added the tidal current, which is so rapid that it keeps -the mud continually in suspension, washing it up at one time, depositing -it at another, but never permanently leaving it except in the places -unscoured by the upland water, such as docks, backwaters and places out -of the main current. It has been acknowledged by all writers that if -the upland water should be stopped the Thames would become a stagnant -oscillating ditch, because all filth discharged into it would remain in -it permanently. - -The docks trap a very large proportion of this mud, and it costs at least -£60,000 per annum to clean it out. The mud enters with the locking water -and with that pumped to make up the basins. - - -_Effect of Dockisation on the River._ - -It is proposed to construct across the river at Gravesend a dam or -barrage similar to that across the Nile, containing numerous adjustable -sluices, and in addition a series of very large locks, the dam to hold up -the river to about Trinity high-water level (see section, Fig. 4). - -The immediate effects will be these:— - - (_a_) The tides, Neaps and Springs, will be stopped at the dam. - - (_b_) The river will be converted into a long lake having - numerous affluents, the principal of which will be its natural - flow over Teddington Weir. - - (_c_) It will have a slow downward current, never reversed, so - that all that enters it will pass downwards to the dam. - - (_d_) Its level (normally at Trinity high water) can be - regulated to any level above low water by the sluices. - - (_e_) Within from 25 to 45 days of the closing of the dam the - upland water will have pushed over the dam all the oscillating - foul water of the tidal river, and thenceforward the water of - the lake will be the same as that of the upper river, and any - soilage in it must enter it by sewage or land drainage. - - (_f_) There will thus be obtained by one work a navigable depth - of water varying from 65 ft. at Gravesend to 32 ft. at London - Bridge, without dredging or any interference with the river - bottom or banks. - -[Illustration: THE RIVER THAMES BELOW BLACKWALL, As it will appear when -dockised.] - -But the consequent effects upon the business and usage of the river will -be tremendous:— - - (_g_) Ships drawing 30 ft. can then proceed to London Bridge at - any hour of the day or night, without waiting for tides. - - (_h_) Ships of all tonnages and draughts can traverse the - river, anchor anywhere, lay alongside any wharf or quay, always - remain at one level for loading or unloading (an immense boon - to shipowners and wharf wharfingers) and need not lie out in - the river or obstruct the free navigation. - - (_i_) Dock entrances can be left open, thus saving the cost - and time lost in working them. (The London and India Docks Co. - estimates the cost of working their entrances at £50,000 per - annum.) - - (_j_) There will be no mud entering the docks and backwaters, - the water in which will freely circulate with the clean river - water. - - (_k_) Exceptional tides, being stopped at the dam, will not - overflow the river banks as now sometimes happens. - - (_l_) Reduced cost of towage, barging, repairing river banks, - camp-shedding, quays, dredging, management, control and - policing of the river. - - (_m_) Greatly increased safety of navigation: no grounding, - swinging with the tides, collisions due to tidal drift. The - tides are responsible for most of these accidents and for many - lives lost—casualties which would not occur in a lake. - -In addition to these there is a most valuable asset created in the -advantage the new conditions open up for— - - (_n_) Pleasure traffic, boating and sailing, fishing and the - provision of efficient steamboat services, with fixed piers. - London will be provided free with a lake of fresh water 45 - miles long and from a quarter to half-a-mile wide. It is - certain that this will give rise to extensive pleasure boating - of all kinds, which will have ample room owing to the removal - of all vessels from mid-stream anchorages to the shores. - -The illustrations show the present crowded condition of some of the -reaches of the river and the clearance that will be effected by a -barrage. - - -_Water Supply of London._ - -Perhaps the most important advantage created by the barrage will be the -permanent supply of water for the increasing demands of the London area. - -By the Act of 1903 has been created a Water Board which is empowered to -purchase the water companies’ properties and to administer them in the -public interest. These companies claim £47,000,000 for their properties. -The ratepayers pay them £3,000,000 annually for their water, and the -companies pay £30,000 annually for the greater part of the water which -they draw from the Thames. - -[Illustration: BLACKWALL REACH.] - -The figures are as follows:— - - Gallons per day. - From the River Lea 52,500,000 - ” wells in the Lea Valley 40,000,000 - ” wells in the Kent Co.’s district 27,500,000 - ” the River Thames 185,000,000 - - Total 305,000,000 - ----------- - -So that two-thirds of London’s water supply comes from the Thames; and as -the other sources named above cannot be expanded for future requirements, -it is evident that for the increasing demands of London either the Thames -or some more distant source must be looked to. - -The Royal Commission on the water supply of London estimated that in -1941 these requirements will reach 423 million gallons per day, so that -at that date 303 million gallons must be obtained from the Thames or -elsewhere. - -Now if the Thames is dockised, and the tides kept out of the river, it is -evident that much less upland water than is now considered necessary will -suffice to keep the river lake fresh and clean, because all sewage and -effluents entering the river will be carried directly down to Gravesend; -there will be no muddy foreshores and no stirring up of the river mud by -the tidal scour. - -The river will be, in fact, in exactly the same circumstances as most -large lakes—that is, a large body of fresh water, having a main inlet of -fresh water at one end, many small inlets along its banks, and one main -outlet at its lower end at Gravesend. Such lakes abound all over the -world: they are the purest of all waters and never become stagnant. - -It is proposed, therefore, that the Thames lake should be regarded as a -storage reservoir, so far as water supply is concerned. It will contain -sufficient for 320 days’ supply, even at the estimated requirements of -1941; for to whatever extent its waters may become contaminated at and -below London, these pollutions cannot work back up the river towards -Teddington. It follows, therefore, that between Teddington and London -water may safely be drawn off for town supplies, or the supply may be -taken as now from above Teddington. - -An inspection of the table of flow over Teddington Weir on page 3 will -show that in the winter and spring enormous quantities of water, above -the quantity considered necessary for scouring the river, flow down and -are lost. - -A minimum flow of 200 million gallons is fixed by law as the amount -needed in summer to keep some sort of cleanliness in the lower river; -but in January ten times this amount flows away. It is only for a short -time in the months of August or September that the natural flow over -Teddington Weir—including the water drawn by the water companies—is a -little below 423 million gallons daily, and in those months the surplus -might be taken from below the weir without affecting the river materially. - -If this be objected to, however, there is another remedy available. The -Upper Thames may be used as an aqueduct to convey a larger supply, to be -derived from neighbouring watersheds or from wells, the water so obtained -to be regulated to meet the requirements, enabling a sufficient amount to -be run over the weir to keep the lower river in motion at its upper end. -Further down, the small but numerous affluents and springs will keep the -river in motion, as they are not affected by the Teddington flow, but -give a continuous supply to the river. Mr. Topley, the eminent geologist, -in his evidence before the London Water Commission, 1892, stated that -there are outside the Thames basin large areas from which water could be -obtained, such as East Kent, West Suffolk, Norfolk, Hampshire and Wilts. - -It is evident that in this way an enormous prospective outlay for a -supplementary water supply for London in the near future may be obviated, -and that without adding to the existing plant of the water companies the -new Water Board may inherit free of cost a future source of supply which -will make their purchase of the London Water Companies’ stocks a good -investment and a cheap one for the ratepayers. - - -_Rail and Road Communication at Gravesend._ - -The possibilities of this scheme are not exhausted, as there remains to -be mentioned the opening of railway communication across the river by a -tunnel under the dam and of road communication by a roadway over the dam. -These are clearly shown in the accompanying Figs. 4, 5 and 6. - -[Illustration: Fig. 4. - -SECTION OF THE THAMES FROM TEDDINGTON TO GRAVESEND - -SHOWING PROPOSED PERMANENT MEAN WATER LEVEL AND TIDAL SECTIONS.] - -[Illustration: THE THAMES FROM LONDON TO GRAVESEND.] - -[Illustration: THE THAMES ESTUARY.] - -The tunnel will be constructed in the foundation of the dam, and the road -formed on the top of the dam, and provided with opening bridges across -the locks. - -A glance at a railway map will at once show the strategic value of the -railway route thus opened up between the Midlands and the North, and -Dover and the South Coast, avoiding the conjested London lines; also for -national and military direct traffic between the Government arsenals and -the Colchester and northern routes and depots. All the northern lines -will thus have access by the Tilbury line to the continental routes. - -[Illustration: Fig. 5.] - - -_National and Military Aspect of the Scheme._ - -The Port of London above the barrage will be the finest and safest -harbour we possess for the fleet, having an immense deep-water -protected area. The barrage can be fortified, and will constitute the -most effective prevention against any foreign invasion by way of the -Thames estuary. The tunnel and roadway will be of great service in this -connection also. - - -_The Depletion of the Thames Basin._ - -This, which has been increasing for many years, is becoming a serious -matter, and has attracted much comment. One of the advantages that will -be obtained from the barrage will be the raising of the underground -water-levels in the chalk and other strata of the Thames basin. In this -way a permanent improvement in the water supply by wells throughout this -large area will result. - - -_Minor Advantages._ - -Among these may be mentioned:—No further scouring of bridge or other -foundations. No backing up of the foul waters of the small tributaries, -such as the Lea, Barking Creek and others. Improved living conditions -and reduction of disease, especially in the neighbourhood of the river, -resulting from the cessation of ebb and flow, of smells and exposure of -mud banks. Increased value of properties bordering the river. Fixed piers -for passenger steamers. - - -_Works and Construction._ - -Fig. 7 is a general plan showing the barrage in relation to Tilbury and -Gravesend shores. - -Fig. 5 is a cross section of the river showing the vertical dimensions -and contours. - -Fig. 6 shows a section and details of construction. - -Generally it is proposed to form the barrage of mass concrete, faced with -granite on all exposed faces. The tunnel will be formed in the solid -monolith as the work proceeds, and afterwards connected north and south -with the existing railways. The foundation is in the chalk. The method -of construction will be by cofferdam, to enclose an area sufficient for -the walls and locks, which, when completed, can be opened for the up and -down traffic of the river while the construction of the weirs and sluices -is proceeded with. The sluices will be left open for the free passage of -the tides until the closing of the barrage, which will take place at high -water of a Spring tide. - -[Illustration: Fig. 6. - -SECTION OF BARRAGE.] - -The locks will be worked electrically from a power-house built upon the -central pier of the locks; the power to be obtained from dynamos operated -by the fall of part of the water flowing over the dam. A pilot tower will -be fixed from which the river traffic will be signalled and regulated, -and the locks, movable bridges, etc., controlled. - -The locks as shown are four in number, each provided with internal gates -in addition to the outer ones, in order that these locks may be worked in -long or short lengths to suit the traffic. The lengths provided in this -way will be 300 ft. 500 ft., 700 ft. and 1000 ft., and the widths 80 ft. -and 100 ft. It is not likely that these dimensions will ever be exceeded -by steamships. - -The number of vessels passing up and down the river per day averages 220, -but few of these exceed 300 ft. in length. It will be easy to lock this -number up and down, or three times the number with this series of locks, -one important advantage to the shipping being that, instead of waiting -tides at Gravesend, each vessel as she arrives, at any hour, can be -locked in a few minutes, up or down, without waiting. - -Special provision will be made for rapidly and safely passing into and -out of the locks with the use of power capstans and gear. The sluices -will be of steel, sliding in roller guides, balanced and operated each by -its own motor. - -At or near low water a large volume of water will be sluiced into -the lower river to scour the approach to the locks as often as found -necessary. - -A system of signalling from the Upper Thames to the barrage will be -employed to notify any heavy rainfall or freshet coming down the river, -so that by lowering the sluices water may be rapidly discharged to -maintain the required level in the river, and at certain fixed dates it -may be desirable to let down the water-level for a fixed time to allow of -the repairing of dock entrances, walls, and other river-side works. - - -_Financial._ - -The estimated cost of the barrage complete is £3,658,000, including -compensations and other contingencies. A toll of ¾d. per ton on the -shipping passing up and down will pay the interest on this sum. This ¾d. -per ton additional toll will, it is estimated, be many times compensated -for by reductions in the river and dock dues and other expenses, as -below:— - - SAVINGS EFFECTED BY DOCKISATION. Per Annum. - £ - Dredging in the river 200,000 - Repairing banks, campsheds and groynes 10,100 - Mudding in all docks 50,000 - Cost of operating dock entrances and pumping 70,000 - Saving in time of vessels ascending and descending - the river 225,000 - Saving in towage 20,000 - ” barging 185,000 - ” warping, buoying, lying off, etc. 20,000 - ” management of river 70,000 - -------- - Total annual saving £850,100 - -This is equal to a reduction of 6·8d. per ton on the tonnage of shipping -(30,000,000) entering and leaving the Port, or equal to 7½ times the -interest on the cost of the barrage. - -To the credit of the barrage must also be set the removal from the -prospective future of enormous outlays contemplated for:— - - £ - Purchasing docks, estimated at 30,000,000 - Improving ditto and dredging river 7,000,000 - Cost of a water supply from Wales or other source 24,000,000 - ----------- - Total £61,000,000 - ----------- - - -_The Port of London Bill, 1903._ - -This measure is the Government’s attempt to put into law the -recommendations of the Royal Commission on the Port of London, 1902, -but with amendments. It is proposed to purchase the entire docks and -warehouses, leaving the wharves to run on their own resources; to create -a Port Trust to control the entire river and docks; to charge the -loan for purchase, etc., upon the London County Council—_i.e._, about -£35,000,000: and to dredge the river to about 30 ft. at low water up to -the principal dock entrances. - - -_Dredging the River._ - -Apart from its cost and the grossly unfair policy of financing and -running the docks against the wharfingers, it is evident that this -scheme is based upon the possibility of dredging the river to the depth -required. Fig. 8 is an actual section of the river, showing the proposed -dredged channel as compared with a dockised river. - -It seems incomprehensible that any expert authorities should have advised -the Government that the river can be effectually dredged. The fact is -that it is quite impossible to dredge it to the required depth of about -15 ft. below the present bottom, because experience has shown that with -such a river and scouring current the channel will fill up again nearly -as fast as it is dredged, the material coming from the foreshores and -the estuary. This will give rise to dangerous slipping in of river banks -and walls. The estimates of the cost of this dredging (£2,500,000) are -therefore entirely misleading. - -The present bottom is formed and stands at the natural angle of repose -for its present volume, width and currents, and any great interference -with this contour such as is proposed—with slopes of 7 to 1—will not -stand, the general slope of its bottom now being from 20 to 50 to 1. The -Port Trust that undertakes this will find itself spending enormous sums -annually in continuous dredging and repairing banks and in compensating -owners; all, of course, added to the annual cost of maintenance and to -the dues, or charged to the ratepayers. - -Glasgow and the Clyde have been instanced as examples of what can be -done by dredging. But the Clyde below Glasgow is not a river comparable -with the Thames below Gravesend, but an estuary with a very moderate -current and tidal range of from about 4 ft. to 10 ft., and the dredging -has merely made and kept open a channel in this estuary. The Thames, on -the other hand, is a narrow river with a strong scouring current and a -range of tide of from 16 ft. to 21 ft. Further than this, Glasgow has -spent seven millions in this work, and has to pay large sums to keep the -channel open, dredging nearly a million cubic yards every year. - -But there are other difficulties. When the river has been deepened -as proposed, the tidal volume will be increased about one-third, and -therefore its current strengthened and increased, probably two knots per -hour. What is worse, the tidal range will be increased proportionately, -which means that the high tides will be higher—probably 3 ft. or more—and -the low tides lower, by a similar amount, than now. Spring tides may be -expected to run the river nearly dry at low water above London Bridge. -Results—frequent inundations of waterside districts, more grounding -at low water, and more dangerous navigation. Such results have always -followed increased tidal volume. - -[Illustration: Fig. 7.] - -[Illustration: Fig. 8. - -_Section of the Thames below Blackwall shewing Proposed Dredged Channel -compared with a Dockised Channel._] - -But a dredged channel is necessarily a narrow one (see Fig. 8), and ships -will have to negotiate the sharp bends in a narrow channel and against -a stronger tide, and also to swing at anchor, for which a wide area is -necessary. - - -_Objections against Dockisation._ - -Although this proposal has been mooted for some time past, scarcely -any valid objection has been brought forward, but such as have been -mentioned are mostly based on misconceptions. - -One writer thought the river would become stagnant. As a matter of -fact the sources of stagnation would be carried down the river by the -fresh-water flow continuously, and there is no more reason to anticipate -stagnation in the lower river than the upper river, where it has for ages -been held up in the same way by numerous dams. - -Another writer talks of the “cleansing power of the tides,” and it is a -pity to see greater authorities, who ought to know better, speaking also -in this way. It has been abundantly proved that the tides—as far as a -clean river is concerned—are wholly detrimental. They back up twice daily -the natural drainage of the river for five hours, and keep it in solution -and circulation for forty-five days before removing it, the effect being -exactly similar to backing up in a sewer. - -[Illustration: THE POOL BELOW TOWER BRIDGE.] - -It has also been suggested that the sewage effluents discharged into the -river at Crossness and Barking may cause the river below to become foul. -Here again is misconception. The effluents—after precipitation of the -solids, which is chemically effected, and the carrying out to sea of the -resulting sludge to the amount of two million tons annually—contain very -little impurity (only seven grains per gallon), and it has been proved -by Dr. Dupré that 9/10ths of this becomes oxidised and absorbed in the -large volume of water between the discharge and Gravesend. It is well -known that in the case of “sewage effluents poured into a sufficiently -large volume of otherwise comparatively pure water, the dissolved organic -matter contained in it disappears with remarkable rapidity” (Sir Alex. -Binnie). - -Another critic suggests that the lower river will soon silt up under -the new conditions. Most persons—seeing the filthy state of the -water—naturally think there must be a large deposit from it. But it has -been shown that this suspended matter is the result of tidal currents -keeping the mud stirred up everlastingly. An examination of the affluents -of the Thames shows that they contain very little suspended matter, and -therefore when the locked Thames has deposited its charge of suspended -matter any future soilage must come from its affluents—that is, from the -upland waters and the sewage effluents, which latter will only affect it -below the point of their discharge. - -A calculation from official data of the quantities actually now passing -into the Thames, from all sources, gives less than 1/10th of an inch -annually over the river bottom; so that in ten years the deposit will -not exceed 1 in., even without any improvement in the prevention of -pollution. It has been estimated by Dibdin that the sewage outfalls could -be removed to Gravesend, below the barrage, for the sum of £4,000,000. - -But the condition of these effluents is commonly much exaggerated. The -total annual discharge of suspended matter at 7 grains per gallon (as -given by Dibdin) amounts to 32,000 tons per annum, but much of this -becomes chemically combined with the river water and some remains in -suspension till it passes Gravesend, leaving only a small quantity to -deposit in the river. A single dredger can remove 600 tons per hour; -therefore a few hours’ work will remove the whole quantity. - -A more valid objection at first sight is that ships and barges will lose -the motive power of the tides up and down. This would appear, however, -to be a very beneficial loss, because at the same time they will avoid -the tide-waiting and waste of time which add considerably to the cost of -transit. But against this loss must be set the fact that most ships now -have steam power and can make their own destination, while tugs will be -able to handle much larger fleets of barges than is now possible in the -tide-way, and at all hours of the day. Sailing vessels will be able to -sail up and down, which they can only do now with the aid of the tide. - -Another suggestion is that when the barrage has closed the river the -tides below it may accumulate to a higher level and overflow the -low-lying lands below Gravesend. This is, however, a mistake, the fact -being that with a reduced tidal volume and momentum in the estuary the -tidal range will be reduced, there being no river to fill up, the high -tides will be lower and the low tides higher than formerly. - -Finally, a word or two as to the vague idea that seems to be in the minds -of most people accustomed to tidal rivers—that in some mysterious way the -tides by their continual movements are beneficial, keeping the air in -motion, etc. All this is pure imagination and arises probably from living -on the banks of a tidal river, for most rivers are non-tidal. There -happen to be round our coasts some phenomenal ranges of tide; hence the -resort to docks, which are almost unknown in other countries. The ranges -of their tides being small, docks are not needed, and scarcely any tides -occur in their rivers, which, however, are far cleaner than the Thames. - -There are of course some low-lying lands bordering the river the drainage -from which will have to be pumped into the river. This is, in fact, -partially done now, but the matter is a small one. - -Prof. Flinders Petrie, in a letter to the _Times_, is strongly in favour -of this proposal, and looks to it to relieve the squalor of the East End, -with its crowded and unhealthy living, by extending the manufacturing -districts down the river banks, providing a belt of factories along -each bank and a belt of garden villages behind them, with fast lines of -railway to Town between. - -To carry out the proposals of this article, a committee has been formed -to bring the subject before the notice of Parliament and of the public, -and it is suggested that a Board of Harbour Commissioners should be -formed, somewhat on the lines of the Port of London Bill of last Session. -The new Board would be constituted under the usual Commissioners’ Acts to -control the entire Lower Thames, taking over the powers of the existing -authorities, but without any interference with the docks, the warehouses -or the wharves, the business of which, if the river is rendered properly -navigable, could be carried on without making any demands upon the rates -of London. - -A new era of prosperity would then open up for the trade of London, and -its Port would become the finest in the world, with the largest business -attached to it. - -The committee will include many influential gentlemen connected with -and interested in the improvement of the Port of London. The scheme -originated with Mr. Jas. Casey, M.I.N.A., and the author is responsible -for the engineering details, as also for the information set forth in the -foregoing article. - -[Illustration] - - - -***END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE GREAT THAMES BARRAGE*** - - -******* This file should be named 62224-0.txt or 62224-0.zip ******* - - -This and all associated files of various formats will be found in: -http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/6/2/2/2/62224 - - -Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions will -be renamed. - -Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright -law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works, -so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United -States without permission and without paying copyright -royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part -of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm -concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark, -and may not be used if you charge for the eBooks, unless you receive -specific permission. If you do not charge anything for copies of this -eBook, complying with the rules is very easy. You may use this eBook -for nearly any purpose such as creation of derivative works, reports, -performances and research. They may be modified and printed and given -away--you may do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks -not protected by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the -trademark license, especially commercial redistribution. - -START: FULL LICENSE - -THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE -PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK - -To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free -distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work -(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full -Project Gutenberg-tm License available with this file or online at -www.gutenberg.org/license. - -Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works - -1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to -and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property -(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all -the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or -destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your -possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a -Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound -by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the -person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph -1.E.8. - -1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be -used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who -agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few -things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See -paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this -agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below. - -1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the -Foundation" or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection -of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual -works in the collection are in the public domain in the United -States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the -United States and you are located in the United States, we do not -claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing, -displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as -all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope -that you will support the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting -free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm -works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the -Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with the work. You can easily -comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the -same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg-tm License when -you share it without charge with others. - -1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern -what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are -in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, -check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this -agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, -distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any -other Project Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no -representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any -country outside the United States. - -1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: - -1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other -immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear -prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work -on which the phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the -phrase "Project Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, -performed, viewed, copied or distributed: - - This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and - most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no - restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it - under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this - eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the - United States, you'll have to check the laws of the country where you - are located before using this ebook. - -1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is -derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not -contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the -copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in -the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are -redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply -either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or -obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg-tm -trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted -with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution -must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any -additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms -will be linked to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works -posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the -beginning of this work. - -1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm -License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this -work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm. - -1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this -electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without -prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with -active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project -Gutenberg-tm License. - -1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, -compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including -any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access -to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format -other than "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official -version posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site -(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense -to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means -of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original "Plain -Vanilla ASCII" or other form. Any alternate format must include the -full Project Gutenberg-tm License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. - -1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, -performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works -unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing -access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -provided that - -* You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from - the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method - you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed - to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he has - agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid - within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are - legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty - payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in - Section 4, "Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg - Literary Archive Foundation." - -* You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies - you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he - does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm - License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all - copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue - all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg-tm - works. - -* You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of - any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the - electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of - receipt of the work. - -* You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free - distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works. - -1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work or group of works on different terms than -are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing -from both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and The -Project Gutenberg Trademark LLC, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm -trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below. - -1.F. - -1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable -effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread -works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project -Gutenberg-tm collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may -contain "Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate -or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other -intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or -other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or -cannot be read by your equipment. - -1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right -of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project -Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all -liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal -fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT -LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE -PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE -TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE -LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR -INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH -DAMAGE. - -1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a -defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can -receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a -written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you -received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium -with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you -with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in -lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person -or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second -opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If -the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing -without further opportunities to fix the problem. - -1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth -in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS', WITH NO -OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT -LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. - -1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied -warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of -damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement -violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the -agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or -limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or -unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the -remaining provisions. - -1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the -trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone -providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in -accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the -production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, -including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of -the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this -or any Project Gutenberg-tm work, (b) alteration, modification, or -additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any -Defect you cause. - -Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm - -Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of -electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of -computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It -exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations -from people in all walks of life. - -Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the -assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's -goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will -remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure -and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future -generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see -Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at -www.gutenberg.org - -Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation - -The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit -501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the -state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal -Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification -number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by -U.S. federal laws and your state's laws. - -The Foundation's principal office is in Fairbanks, Alaska, with the -mailing address: PO Box 750175, Fairbanks, AK 99775, but its -volunteers and employees are scattered throughout numerous -locations. Its business office is located at 809 North 1500 West, Salt -Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up to -date contact information can be found at the Foundation's web site and -official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact - -For additional contact information: - - Dr. Gregory B. Newby - Chief Executive and Director - gbnewby@pglaf.org - -Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg -Literary Archive Foundation - -Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide -spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of -increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be -freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest -array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations -($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt -status with the IRS. - -The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating -charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United -States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a -considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up -with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations -where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND -DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular -state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate - -While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we -have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition -against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who -approach us with offers to donate. - -International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make -any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from -outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. - -Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation -methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other -ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To -donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate - -Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. - -Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project -Gutenberg-tm concept of a library of electronic works that could be -freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and -distributed Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of -volunteer support. - -Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed -editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in -the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not -necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper -edition. - -Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search -facility: www.gutenberg.org - -This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, -including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to -subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks. - |