-
i
i
º I | | | | | | | | | | i; ; ; ; ; iſ
Hilº
†
º
--
=
:
-
-
d
-
-
º-
Pºſº ATACV CANACſ.
{}F
ENGINEE
- \,: Jºzº
*- ºwnwººyº
C- - **- º tºº
iTITIIITITIIIITſºſillſ
A *
:
Tiff
Fiſſººf
-
#
–
i















Why Was Wright's Report on the
Everglades Suppressed?
The following statement of facts is submitted by J. O.
Wright, Chief Drainage Engineer, in charge of the recla-
mation of the Everglades, in reply to a letter Written by
C. G. Elliott, Chief of Drainage Investigations, U. S. De-
partment of Agriculture, Washington, D. C., addressed
to Hon. James Wilson, Secretary of Agriculture, under
date of November 11, 1911. This letter of Elliott's Was
published in the Jacksonville Metropolis, December 15,
1911.
STATEMENT.
In 1906, Elwood Meade was Chief of Irrigation and
Drainage Investigations; C. G. Elliott was in charge of
the drainage work and I was Supervising Drainage En-
gineer.
ELLIOTT DECLINES TO UNDERTAIKE THE INVESTIGATION
In July, 1906, Meade came to the room where Elliott
and I were at work, and addressing Elliott said, “the Sec-
retary has authorized our office to make an investigation
and report on the Everglades of Florida.” Elliott, offering
all kinds of objections to the undertaking, said: “The
work was too big for our office”; “That the drainage was
not feasible; That the land was of doubtful value, etc.”
After discussing the matter for a short time, Meade ab-
ruptly turned to me and said: “Wright, is this project too
big for you to handle?” I told him it was not, and that
I would like to undertake the work. Meade remarked, “It
O
4–
is up to you” and left the room. Elliott seemed quite dis-
pleased, and from that day to this he has never ceased to
“knock” the project when an opportunity presented itself.
ELLIOTT HAS NEVER SEEN THE EVERGILADES.
In 1904, Elliott visited Dania and Miami, and went
Out toward the margin of the Everglades, but he has never
been into the Everglades proper, and has no knowledge
about them that would be accepted in a court at law—his
evidence is all “hearsay.”
A few days after the conversation referred to, Meade
called me to his office and we discussed the plan of survey
at length. He directed me to make a complete examina-
tion and report. I called to my aid an office assistant,
and had him make a map of the peninsula of Florida on a
large scale, and I set to work to collect all the reports
and documents that had been issued on the Everglades.
I studied these and recorded all engineering data of value
on the skeleton map for future reference.
WRIGHT GOES TO THE EVERGILADES.
In November of that year I went to the State capital, at
Tallahassee and spent four days, and got all the informa-
tion I could secure there. I discussed the project with
Governor Broward. I then went to Ft. Myers and up the
Caloosahatchee River to the western side of the Ever-
glades. I spent several days in examining the conditions
there, and then went to Ft. Lauderdale and Miami. Gov-
ernor Broward met me there and we made an excursion
into the eastern part of the Everglades; the object of this
trip was to plan for the field work that was to be done.
On my return to Washington I reported to Meade, and he
directed me to send out a party of engineers to commence
the survey. Such a party was placed in the field and
worked under my directions until the following May.
3
During this period, the work was frequently discussed
about the office and Elliott usually spoke of it in a dis-
paraging way. He took no special interest in the work
and never failed to criticize it when opportunity offered.
MEADE RESIGNS AND ELLIOTT BECOMES CHIEF.
In the summer of 1907, Meade resigned and Elliott be-
came Chief of Drainage Investigations. In the fall of
that year I secured the permission of Elliott to continue
the work in Florida. I explained to him that it was the
largest project in the United States, and was of sufficient
importance to justify my spending considerable time on
the ground. He gave his consent reluctantly, and I went
to Florida with a field party, in December, 1907, and
remained until May, 1908. During this time I personally
explored every part of the Everglades that was accessible;
had lines of levels run, soundings of the depth of muck
made; made a complete survey of Lake Okeechobee and
examined every stream that ran into or out of the lake.
I examined the country around the lake to determine the
extent and character of the watershed. I entered every
place on the margin of the 'glades, where any land was in
cultivation, to see the kind of soil and crops that were
grown. I talked with people who had hunted or explored
any part of the 'glades or had any experience in culti-
vating similar soil in that locality. I visited the Disston
sugar plantation at Kissimmee and saw the effect that
drainage had had on the muck land in that section.
I returned to Washington, in May, 1908, and set about
the writing of a report. I studied the problem from an
engineering standpoint and worked out a plan of drainage
to meet the special conditions as I had found them.
ELLIOTT GOES TO EUROPE ON HIS VACATION, AND
- wrighT LECTURES ON DRAINAGE.
During the summer of 1907, I was sent out to accom.
4 -
pany Congressman Small and Congressman Godwin
through their congressional districts in eastern North
Carolina, to deliver a series of addresses on the subject
of drainage. I was also sent west on department business.
These engagements, and other work imposed upon me,
by the department, kept me busy during the summer and
I had no time to devote to the writing of the Everglades
report.
ELLIOTT'S HONOWLEDGE OF FILORIDA POLITICS.
In Elliott’s letter to Secretary Wilson, he says:
“I went to Europe in June of 1908, and left instructions
with Wright to proceed with, and finish the Everglade
report; upon my return in September, I found, to my sur-
prise, that the preparation of the report had ceased upon
my departure, and that it was no further along than
when I left. In answer to my request for an explanation,
Wright replied that Governor Broward, of Florida, would
undoubtedly be defeated in the coming election, and that
the succeeding administration would probably have no
interest in the Everglades project, and he did not think
it worth while to complete the report.”
This is a rather lame excuse. Elliott knew that Broward
could not succeed himself as Governor, and that he had
been defeated as a candidate for the U. S. Senate, at the
primary in June, before Elliott left for Europe.
During the summer and fall I had other duties assigned
me by the department that kept me from writing on the
Everglade report. Among other things, I wrote a com-
prehensive drainage law for the State of North Carolina,
which was adopted by the legislature of that State at the
session of 1909. The same law has recently been adopted,
with slight amendments, by the State of Georgia.
5
WRIGHT COMPLETES HIS REPORT.
During the winter I found time to complete the report
and delivered it to Elliott February 25, 1909. This report
comprises 25,000 words of reading matter, together with
numerous tables, profiles and photographs to illustrate
and explain the text. This report is not written in a
“graphic and popular manner” as claimed by Elliott, but
is a plain statement of facts secured in the investigation—
a logic discussion of the drainage problem, and a concise
presentation of the plan recommended. In this report
the truth and the truth only, was 'set out. The informa-
tion presented was secured under my own personal direc-
tion or was taken from some authoritative source, and I
knew it to be absolutely correct and reliable. Facts relat-
ing to climate, soil and vegetation were presented, just as
I found them, and the reader was left to draw his own
conclusions. -
PLAN OF DIRAINAGE.
The drainage problem which is the gist of the whole
matter, was carefully worked out along conservative lines.
The rainfall at Kissimmee, Ft. Myers, Jupiter, and Miami
for a number of years, was obtained from the records of
the U. S. Weather Bureau, and the probable rainfall in
the Everglades was predicated upon the precipitation at
these stations. The number and size of the canals neces-
sary to remove this rainfall was computed and their ten-
tative location shown on a map accompanying the report.
Elliott criticized this part of the report and finally re-
wrote it, but he obtained the same results that I had
reached. The number and size of the canals as computed
by him, and their discharge capacity, are just the same as
those recommended in my original report. Elliott, after
all his discussion and revision, simply changed the phrase-
{}
ology of this portion of my report, and left the results as
I had Îlem.
ADVANCED INFORMATION GIVEN OUT.
In the spring of 1909, Henry Clay Hall, of Colorado
Springs, came to Washington and asked to see the report
I had Written. Elliott gave him the report to read and he
asked permission to make a copy of it. This privilege was
denied him. A day or two later, he appeared with an
order from Secretary Wilson, directing Elliott to give hum
a copy of that portion of the report, dealing with the
drainage problem. About sixteen pages, taken from the
body of the report I had prepared, were copied and sent
to Mr. Hall, together with a map showing the location of
the canals.
After this extract of the report had been given to Mr.
Eſall, I said to Elliott “I think the same information that
has been given to Hall, should be sent to the Trustees of
the I. I. Fund.” He objected to doing this, but after dis-
cussing the matter, finally decided it would be the proper
thing to do, and sent to the Trustees the extract from the
report that had been given Hall.
ELLIOTT'S STATEMENTS ARE CONTRADICTORY.
In a letter to Secretary Wilson, he says: “In February,
1909, the Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement
Fund of Florida, requested a report of our investigations,
particularly the part relating to the plan of drainage
which the Department would recommend. On March 6,
an extract from the forthcoming report, dealing with that
phase of the problem was, with your permission, trans-
mitted to the Board in typewritten form, accompanied by
a photograph copy of the map which had been prepared,
with the request that it not be made public until the com-
plete report became available for distribution. At the
7
request of the State Board a copy of the same report was
transmitted, with your permission, to Henry Clay Hall,
Colorado Springs, Colorado, the Board having stated that
this gentleman represented a syndicate which was nego-
tiating with the State for the purchase of Everglades
lands.” The following is a copy of a letter written by
Elliott to the Trustees:
(COPY.)
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE,
OFFICE of ExPERIMENT STATIONs,
Washington, D. C.
Drainage Investigations.
March 6, 1909.
Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Fund,
Tallahassee, Fla.
Dear Sirs:—
This Office has recently furnished Mr. Henry C. Hall of
Colorado Springs, Colo., attorney for a land syndicate
which has purchased a large tract in the Everglades, an
extract from the forthcoming report of this Office upon
the Investigations of the Everglades. The extract relates
entirely to the plan proposed for draining the Everglades,
the estimated cost of the work, and is accompanied by a
photograph copy of a map which shows the watershed
area and the location of the proposed ditches. In order
that you may have the same information which has been
given to Mr. Hall, we are sending you under a separate
cover a duplicate copy of the report and map, with the
understanding that the information contained therein be
not made public until the appearance of the complete re.
port which is in course of preparation.
Yours sincerely,
(Signed) C. G. ELLIOTT,
Chief of Drainage Investigations.
8
The minutes of the Trustees do not show that they re-
quested this extract from the report to be sent to them
or to be given out as advanced information to a land Syn-
dicate.
On March 11, 1909, Governor Gilchrist asked permission
from Secretary Wilson to publish this extract and it was
granted. The State had several thousand copies printed
in pamphlet form and distributed as an extract from the
forthcoming report. The plan of drainage recommended
in this report was adopted by the State and is now being
rapidly carried out. Five of the canals recommended are
under construction and a contract for the sixth will be
let in a short time. -
REPORT REVISED FOR PUBLICATION.
Sometime during May, 1909, the report which I had
completed in February was passed on to the board of
CenSOrs for revision. -
This particular report fell into the hands of a clerk,
who had recently come from some position in New York.
He was not an engineer, had had no field experience, and
had never seen the Everglades. He proceeded—probably
under suggestion from Elliott, to rearrange the subject
matter; to eliminate a great deal of important informa-
tion; to change my phraseology so as to give it a different
meaning from that intended and to draw conclusions not
warranted by facts. I protested vigorously against these
unwarranted changes and succeeded in having some of
them struck out. With twenty years active experience in
the field as a drainage engineer and six months in Florida
studying the reclamation of the Everglades, I felt that I
knew more about the subject than a mere office clerk or
an engineer who had never seen the Everglades. I desired
to get a full and comprehensive statement of all the facts
about the Everglades before the public in such a way, that
9
a layman could comprehend them. Such a report at that
time would have been of inestimable value to the State,
and to those contemplating the purchase of land in the
State. -
REPORT FINALLY FREACHES THE PRINTER.
Sometime during the summer of 1909 the report was
printed and the page proofs submitted to me. It was not
entirely satisfactory, but as hundreds of requests had
been received by the Office, asking for a copy of this report,
I offered no further objection to its being issued in its
present form.
REPORT HELD UP.
In the fall of 1909, I was again detailed to accompany
Congressman Small and Congressman Godwin on another
lecture tour through their congressional districts. At
the close of these meetings I was directed to go to Louisi-
ana and accompany Congressman Ransdall through his
district and deliver a series of lectures on drainage. I
was away from the office until the middle of October, and
on my return expected to find the report ready for dis-
tribution. On inquiring about it, I was told by Mr. More.
house, office engineer, that the report was being held up.
Asking the reason he said I would have to see Mr. Elliott.
I asked Elliott why the report was held up. He had
no good reason to give, but when pressed for an answer he
finally said an engineer, Mr. Wheeler, from California, had
been down to the Everglades and on his return stopped at
Washington and raised some question as to the plan of
drainage. While in Louisiana, I received a letter from
Mr. Wheeler stating he had been to the Everglades, and
would stop in Washington, and wanted to see me and dis-
cuss some features of the drainage plan. Wheeler's criti.
cism was a technical one concerning the amount of mois-
1()
ture muck Soils would hold, and the discharge capacity of
Some of the canals. His criticism did not refer to the fer-
tility of the soil, the climatic conditions, the kind of crops
that could be grown and the many other facts of Vital in-
terest to the prospective land purchaser. The part of the
report he criticised had already been given out and widely
Öistributed.
THE REPORT IS STILL HELD UP.
During the next two months no move was made to pub.
lish the report. Numerous letters were received from all
parts of the country asking for a copy of the report, or
wanting to know how soon it would be published. It
was in answer to these numerous inquiries that Elliott
had prepared a circular letter purporting to give correct
information concerning the Everglades. This circular was
misleading and was promptly surpressed by Secretary
Wilson when his attention was directed to it. In certain
newspaper articles, this circular has been referred to, as
my report. I wish to state that I had nothing whatever
to do with its preparation.
ELLIOTT WANTED WRIGHT TO STULTIFY HIMSELF BY
CHANGING HIS REPORT.
In December, 1909, Elliott requested me to rewrite the
report and handed me certain notes, indicating what the
report should contain. I looked them over and informed
him that they were not supported by the facts, secured by
me, in the investigation. I offered, however, to write any.
thing he might direct, but told him it could not go out
over my signature. He took the report and said he would
rewrite it. -
why wRIGHT CHANGEs POSITIONs.
There seems to be some curiosity as to why I resigned
my position with the government to accept the office of
11
Chief Drainage Engineer for the State of of Florida. It
has even been hinted that I conspired with the State offi-
cials, agreeing to make a favorable report as a considera-
tion for a position as their engineer.
When the drainage district was created, certain ſand
companies owning large tracts of land in the drainage
district, brought suit in the Federal Court, to prevent
the collection of the drainage tax.
On January 31, 1910, Wm. S. Harvey, of Philadelphia,
Pearl Wight, of New Orleans, W. F. Coachman, of Jack-
sonville, and J. E. Ingraham, of St. Augustine, represent-
ing the litigant land companies, met with the Trustees, in
Tallahassee, for the purpose of compromising the pending
suits and providing funds for carrying on the drainage
work. During this conference, I received a telegram, ask-
ing if I would consider a proposition to take charge of
contract work draining the Everglades; if so, to state
what salary I would accept. Up to this time I had never
applied directly to anyone for a position of any kind in
connection with this work. I accepted the position ten-
dered me because it placed me in charge of the largest
drainage project in the United States.
It is not an uncommon thing for a drainage engineer to
resign his position with the government to accept a better
one. Since Elliott has been Chief of Drainage Investiga-
tions (about four years), the following regularly appoint-
ed engineers, under civil service, have resigned to accept
better positions, or because of the unfair treatment of
Elliott: J. F. Stewart, S. M. Woodward, A. E. Morgan,
W. J. McEthrin, C. F. Brown, Lawrence Brett, L. L. Hid-
inger, W. M. Lynde, Omer Fairley, George Boyd, Herman
Elliott, and E. A. Griffin. The only engineers, who were
with the office when Elliott became Chief, and have re-
mained until this time are: H. A. Kipp, D. G. Miller and
F. F. Shafer. I cite the above facts to show that I am not
the only engineer who resigned a government job.
12
SOMEONE CEHANGES THE WERIGHT REPORT.
After the U. S. Senate had passed a resolution author-
izing the publication of Acts, Reports and other Papers,
State and National, relating to the Everglades, the Clerk
of the Committee on Printing, submitted to me certain
documents secured from the Office of Drainage Investiga-
tions, requesting me to identify and point out my original
report. On looking them over I found that the original
report, as revised by the editorial department, and ac-
cepted by me, had been greatly modified and changed
since it had been printed. My name had been stricken
out in many places and Elliott's name substituted instead.
Page after page had been stricken out, and new matter
furnished to take its place. Summaries had been made
and conclusions drawn that were untrue and misleading.
I, fortunately, had retained a carbon copy of my original
report and could point out definitely the changes that had
been made. This new matter was rejected and the report
was restored to the form in which it was originally
printed.
OBJECT OF THE REPORT.
The real aim of the department in making the investi-
gation and report was to work out a plan of drainage for
the Everglades, and to give all the facts relating to their
reclamation and settlement to the general public.
The plan of drainage provided was agreed to by Elliott;
was transmitted by him to the Trustees and is now being
carried out by the State. It was my desire to give all the
facts, relating to the Everglades, to the public, whether
they were favorable or unfavorable to their reclamation.
I have been streuuously opposed to any misstatement con-
cerning the Everglades, whether made by a land agent or
in a government report.
Elliott's motive in suppressing this information to the
13
public can only be surmised. He could find time to make
extended trips to the Pacific Coast and throughout the
middle West, but could not be induced to visit the Ever-
glades. This was the largest project being considered by
the government and should have been personally inspected
by him. When he questioned the accuracy of the facts
presented, it was his duty to have made a personal exami-
nation to determine the truth. It was not lack of time
that prevented, but lack of interest in the project. Had
this territory been in the middle or far West, I am satis-
fied that it would have received Elliott’s most hearty en-
dorsement.
OUTSIDE INFLUENCE.
Elliott and Secretary Wilson can tell what outside in-
fluence was brought to bear for the suppression of this
report. With the exception of the extract that had been
given out in March, 1909, no one outside of the office knew
what the report contained. No one knew whether it was
favorable or unfavorable to the project unless the infor-
mation had been secretly imparted. I have seen hundreds
of letters asking for a copy of the report, but have never
seen even one asking for its suppression. No one but Elli-
ott ever suggested to me the kind of report I should make.
I have no land in Florida and have no interest in any land
company doing business in the State. I am not responsi-
ble for any statements they may make about the Ever-
glades. If they are promoting fraudulent schemes, I pre-
sume there are ample statutes to suppress them; if not,
Congress should pass the necessary laws at once.
RECENT CONCLUSIONS.
I have been over the Everglades more than a dozen
times since the report was, written. I have studied the
problem as presented from all standpoints, and am more
14
firmly convinced than ever that the plan of reclamation
adopted by the State and now being carried out is the
best and most economical one that could have been
Selected. \
All the engineers from the time of Buckingham Smith
(1848) to the present day, who have examined this terri-
tory and suggested a plan of drainage have recommended
the cutting of certain canals from Lake Okeechobee to
tide water; and the opening up of the small streams along
the margin of the Everglades. (See Senate Document No.
89, pages 36, 49, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 62 and 66, for the
report of these engineers).
The only engineer who proposed reclaiming the Ever-
glades in small areas by surrounding them with a dyke
and pumping out the rainfall, is C. G. Elliott. (See sep-
arate No. 9 Office of Drainage Investigations, pages 714
to 717, or Senate Document No. 89, page 96).
The plan now being carried out will lower the level of
Lake Okeechobee, thereby creating a storage basin cover-
ing approximately 500,000 acres, 3 feet deep; which, to-
gether with the discharge capacity of the canals, will pro-
tect the Everglades from overflow. This work is now
under contract to be completed July 1st, 1913.
A contract has recently been let to open three of the
streams flowing out of the Everglades on the east side.
Others will be opened as the necessity therefor becomes
apparent. s
A great deal has been said about the Everglades burn-
ing up. Will this happen? All soil is composed of vege-
table and mineral matter. If robbed of all its moisture
and sufficient heat is applied, the vegetable matter in any
soil will burn. The soil of the Everglades is no exception.
If all the moisture is taken away and sufficient heat is
applied it will burn. The plan of reclamation adopted
does not propose to take away from this muck soil all
the moisture it contains. The plan provides for the con-
15
struction of a series of locks and wing dams in the canals
at proper intervals to hold the soil water in the Ever-
glades at the height best suited for the growth of crops.
Lake Okeechobee will serve as a never-failing reservoir to
keep the canals supplied and the sluices in the dams will
regulate the stage of water in the canals. Under this plan
of reclamation, there is no possibility of the Everglades
catching fire and burning up. Because of the highly
favorable natural conditions, there is no other large body
of land in the United States that can be drained or irri-
gated at so small a cost per acre as the Everglades of
Florida. -
- Respectfully submitted,
J. O. WRIGHT,
Chief Drainage Engineer.
Tallahassee, Florida, Dec. 28, 1911.
T. J. APPLEYARD, State Printer.
ſº. -º
ºftºp
F. Mºº
Tallahassee, Fla.
3 9015 02121 4062