Jasper County Democrat, Volume 19, Number 91, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 10 February 1917 — Gifford vs. Ryan Ditch Review. [ARTICLE]

Gifford vs. Ryan Ditch Review.

Havihg read with interest the able and concise epistles of Alter, Yeoman, Hoad, Halleck, et al, I feel impressed, impelled and inspired to offer my mite of evidence on the best, quickest and most efficient, method of reclaiming the Gifford marsh country; or rather to sanction, corroborate or approve of what has been said by these heroic sages of drainage. Possibly someone in the lobby may ask where I “come in at,” in this representative discussion of . wet or drv. Some representative of the ‘ < ®©c]cwise route” may call for my credentials before I am nermitted to mount the platform; scale the stage; or ascend the rostrum in defense of the basic principles of this modem iplan of swamp lands reclamation. By way of self defense I will say that 64 years ago this valentine, I was bom at Tailholt on the Pinkamink at the questionable outlet of the great basin in question, near the point where the Davisson, mill was built. At this , time (1853) Air. Haddock owned the mill and in connection a small still where he made whiskey and other cheering drinks. . . I have served as county surveyor of Jasper county three ■ terms, surveyed many sections of land in and about the marsh, surveyed and leveled ditch No. 77, when it was first established; runthe levels over the Helvis, Iliff’s slough, Stump slough, and many others in this drainage system; took muck-soundings on the Iroquois; rock-soundings on the Pinkamink and many other places in the country; made a specialty of the geological

strata, the drift disturbances ..nd ojla-' cial stria, and estimated the voluijie ■ and velocity of all the streams of the county. This is my puny plea for a n'or position on the platform to plead and perchance protect the pelts of the poor people along the Pinkamink, and thus by dint of the balance of power sway an<t influnc the minds of the people from the rocky problem of the Pinkamink to the sane solution via the old glacial moraine which was nature’s original outlet for these extensive marshes. Now for the benefit of those who have become lost in the maze of testimony or neglected to, keep a file of all the articles of this discussion or had no time to follow the long story of facts and figures, I wish to present a review, a brief, a summary, a synopsis, a short form, ,a concise statement containing the gist of the matter in a nutshell, viz: The Haddock or Gifford marsh is the true Jiurse of the Iroquois river. The original outlet was to the southwest instead of the Pinkamink. After this outlet became closed, a lake was formed with a rim overflow in three or four directions. The ground surface of the marsh is practically levei. During -freshets the Kankakee river has always thrown some water over into the Gifford marsh until the recent improvement. The St. Joseph' river once flowed down the channel of the Kankakee until chocked by vegetation like theNroquois, after which it was turned Abruptly north and flowed into Lakeutfichigan. The surface of the water in the Kankakee river at»Shelby, at a medium stage, is on a level with the depot platform at Rensselaer. The distance by the Pinkamink outlet is 7.7 miles longer than the Gifford route. The Pinkamink 'route would require 6 miles of solid rock excavation, J the Gifford none. The proposed Pinkamink or Ryan ditch gives only a 6 foot depth in the center of the marsh while the Gifford route gives a 12 foot depth. The Gifford route has twice the fall per mile. The Ryan ditch will cost $201,611.60. The Gifford will cost but !j>75,000. There will be many more angles and curves in the Ryan than in the Gifford. The Ryan ditch is set for a 15 foot bottom through the marsh, the Gifford will have a 30 foot bottom. The preliminary expense will ibe much less in the Gifford than in the Ryan. The Stump slough district, the Copperas creek district, and the main area comprising a total of 130 square miles, should all be drained through the Gifford outlet except a slight overflow on the eastern border. There should be a light improvement made down - the Pinkamink for the benefit of adjacent farms. Mr. Gifford would have obtained perfect drainage for the whole marsh down the Helvas had he used a larger dredge. This he planned to do, but two years were spent on the scheme of a suction dredge, after which his money, time and attention were absorbed in the railroad scheme for several years, then before he could resume his great drainage plan he received a summons from the master, and had to answer the call, leaving unfinished the work that was in his heart to do. Benjamin J. Gifford was a master mind, a great architect, and had his plans so definitely marked out that we are enabled to follow them with ease. He was right when he said the marsh could nst be drained down the Pinkamink. He was right when he said that a cut north of Rensselaer could be made cheaper than down the old rock channel. He was right when he said that eventually’the whole district would be drained down ’the Helvis. He was right when he said that in time every acre of the marsh would be intensively cultivated. He was a sage, a savant, a martyr to the cause and a benefactor to the people. May his name ever be kept fresh in the minds of the people in days to come when results prove the wisdom of his efforts. BILL BAT.