I was looking for something and stumbled on this.
I've always been interested in Edenborn and this is
one more bit of info that reflects his importance in La.
First, for those not familiar, this is from Wikipedia
explaining Edenborn's ferry operation.
The Angola Transfer Company, organized in November 1906, was a
railroad car float operation that primarily ferried cars of the
Louisiana Railway and Navigation Company across the Mississippi
River between Angola and Naples, Louisiana.[1] The route was
shortened to Angola-Torras in 1928, when a joint highway-rail
bridge was built across the Atchafalaya River at Simmesport, and
the LR&N took over the Angola Transfer Company's property in 1929,
concurrently with its lease to the Louisiana and Arkansas Railway.
The L&A took absorbed the LR&N in 1934, and abandoned the car
float in 1940 after the Huey P. Long Bridge opened at Baton
Rouge.[2]
The Angola Ferry now operates nearby, carrying automobiles across
the Mississippi; its west landing is about 2 miles (3.2 km) south
of the old Torras landing of the L&A.
Below is from HERE
In 1910, the House Ways and Means committee was discussing
separating the Mississippi from the Atchafalaya/Red Rivers. The
link above quotes each interest's input on the subject.
Switch to Plain Text and use your browser's "FIND" option to locate where "railway" is mentioned.
Below are some excerpts I found. The Edenborn one is priceless.
Below, the T&P sounds off on what it thinks the LR&N should do. LOL.
Eventually, the LR&N would take do just what they suggested when
the state joined in the construction of the Simmeport car/rail bridge.
That bridge served into the 70's at La.1's one lane crossing of the Atchafalaya
River.
First, a quote from some forum I found concerning the Simmesport bridge.
Up until the late '70's this was a train and car bridge. I can remember meeting cars half way across even when the bridge tender had the vehicular gates down. And no, quad gates weren't even a pipe dream in those days. I believe an 18 wheeler could have run around what the L&A called gates.One other interesting tidbit~ this was in totally dark territory; the only way you knew if the bridge was closed for rail traffic was if a 100 watt light bulb was illuminated. When the light burned out you had to stop and walk to the bridge tender's shack in the middle of the bridge and get authority to pass over the bridge. The L&A never would put a radio on that bridge and the signal maintainer took his time in replacing the lone light bulb.Cave day RR'ing to say the least...
Now on to the Ways and Means entries:
From the T&P:
1518/18/34. Texas & Pacific Railroad Co. Favors closure of Old
River because of added wealth resulting from reclamation and
protection of lands along Red and Atchafalaya Rivers. Thinks
Louisiana Railway & Navigation Co. could secure better route by
building a bridge than it now has through Old River. (Mar. 25,
1910.)
As to the injurious effect on navigation, this will fall
principally on the railroad transfer system of the Louisiana
Railway & Navigation Co., which company transfers its trains by
water between Naples, La., and Angola, La., i.e., through the
entire length of Old River and across the Mississippi. This long
transfer through Old River can be avoided by the railroad
company's bridging the Red and bringing its western transfer
incline to the bank of the Mississippi, in which case the transfer
would have to be made across the Mississippi River only. This
would greatly improve the operation of the railroad, as it is
difficult not to have delays to trains when operating transfer
boats in a narrow and crooked stream with a very swift current.
Probably the cost of the required bridge and track extension is
the only reason why the railroad company has not already
undertaken such constructions. There are two packets making
regular trips through Old River, but these boats can use the route
through the Plaquemine Lock. There are several concerns sending
occasional tows of coal, logs, etc., through Old River, but it is
believed that all commerce, except that of the railroad transfers
can be deflected to the Plaquemine route. What would be the extent
of the interference to existing commerce caused by such deflection
it is now impossible to say. Coming now to the question of a
possible increase of flood heights in the Mississippi below Old
River, it appears to me that this is by far the most difficult
question to determine of any concerning the divorcement. Much
additional data and an extended investigation are required before
a definite expression of opinion is justified; however, in the
following paragraph a few remarks are made bearing on this matter.
7. If it was known definitely how much of the Mississippi flood is
discharged through the Atchafalaya, the question of the effect of
the divorcement on flood heights would be much nearer solution;
but the data at hand is insufficient to permit a determination of
this matter. A gage is maintained at Barbres Landing in Old River
and at Red River Landing in the Mississippi River just below Old
River—the location of the gauges being shown on the index map
referred to above.
8. Should the divorcement be undertaken, it seems to me to be
desirable not to make the cut-off in a single year. For example,
the first and possibly second years do no work; but abandon
dredging in Old River, the result probably being a considerable
building up of the bar at the head of Old River. The following
year build a sill dam, at least to low-water level, across the Old
River somewhat below the proposed site of the dam, and the same
year advance the levee lines toward the Old River, closing, say,
one-half of the gap. The following year complete the levee line
and build the dam across Old River. The object of this program
being to reduce the cost of the dam by the natural filling up of
Old River and to permit the Mississippi to adjust itself gradually
(to a slight extent at least) to the increased flow of water.
Committee On Ways And Means,
House Of Representatives, Washington, D. C, February 9, 1910.
Col. W. H. Bixby,
President Mississippi River Commission.
Dear Col. Bixby: In view of the fact that I have introduced a bill
in Congress providing for a board of engineers to investigate the
practicability of divorcing the Mississippi from the Red and
Atchafalaya Rivers, I would like very much to secure a copy of
your commission's report of December 19, 1884, as well as your
annual report for tne fiscal year ending June 30, 1895. Also I am
anxious to obtain all other reports of your commission that
pertain to the separation of these rivers.
With the assurance that I shall greatly appreciate the granting of
this request, I am, Yours, very truly,
R. F. Broussahd.
M. R. C. file 1518/13.
Mississippi River Commission,
Office Of The President,
St. Louis, Mo., February 12, 1910.
Mississippi River Commission,
St. Louis, Mo.
Edenborn: Gentlemen: The Louisiana Railway & Navigation Co. is vitally
interested in the subject of the divorcement of the Mississippi
and Atchafalaya Rivers, which subject you are now investigating.
The route of this railroad leads from the north to Naples,
H. Doc. 841, 63-2 5
a point at the confluence of Red and Atchafalaya Rivers, from
which point its passenger and freight trains are transferred
through Old River to the east bank of the Mississippi River at
Angola, and thence its rails lead southward toward New Orleans.
The closing of the mouth of Red River would make many miles of the
completed railroad useless on both sides of the river, would
necessitate the selection of a new route, a bridge over the
Atchafalaya, and the building of a new line of tracks; the exact
mileage can only be determined by survey.
We therefore enter herewith our most emphatic protest. Outside of
the direct damage above alluded to, a larger portion of the
railroad from New Orleans paralleling the east bank of the
Mississippi River would be endangered, inasmuch as the volume of
water forced down the Mississippi River would spread in much
larger volume through Thompsons Creek, Bayou Sara Creek, and other
streams emptying into the Mississippi River north of Baton Rouge.
And, as we have been reliably informed, Col. Harrod states that
after closure, the bed of the Mississippi River would have to
.take care of 1,750,000 second-feet, while the highest record here
has been 1,350,000 second-feet. An additional 400,000 secondfeet,
equal approximately to one-third of the volume, would raise the
waters to such an extent over the present capacity as the
additional cubical contents would compare with the cubical
contents of the Mississippi bed.
The raising of levees would take years to complete and the danger
of breaks in the levees would necessarily increase very much and
the damage from such breaks would be a thousandfold more
destructive than at present. We are, therefore, convinced that it
would jeopardize the railroad's physical properties. We also
believe, based on the statement from planters, that higher levees,
confining a higher flood stage, would increase the seepage
materially, inasmuch as the water against the levee and above the
normal height of the cultivated lands would remain longer than at
present and destroy or injure a large percentage of the crop,
which would be an indirect loss to this company.
The navigable waters of Red River, Little River, Tensas River,
Black River, Ouachita River, and minor streams unnavigable in
certain seasons, on which commerce finds -accommodation between
the points located on such rivers and New Orleans, as well as with
Natchez, Memphis, Vicksburg, and many upriver points, would have a
much longer mileage to cover than under present conditions, and
the most experienced steamboat captains claim that without part of
the Mississippi River waters the Atchafalaya and the Plaquemine
Bayou would not be navigable during low-water seasons.
From the above you will note the damage it would do this company
and the damage it would do to the riparian properties along the
Mississippi River from approximately Natchez to the jetties, and
we believe the cost of constructing levees so high and broad to
confine one-third more water to the Mississippi bed than
heretofore would prove so costly that such benefits as certain
sections are supposed to gain would in no manner compensate for
such cost.
As to the danger of the Mississippi River leaving its present
channel and making a shorter route to the Gulf through the
Atchafalaya, this has proven chimerical, inasmuch as the two stone
dikes placed by the United States Engineers across the Atchafalaya
in 1887-1889 and completed in 1890 are to-day in exactly the same
position and at the same level as when placed, thus proving that
the volume of water through the Atchafalaya is under perfect
control.
It has also been stated publicly that Old River, if let alone,
would close itself. This view is fallacious, because, while sand
and mud banks at the mouth of Red River at times interfere with
navigation, it is well understood that if such sand and mud banks
were left untouched, just as soon as the Mississippi rose to a
level appreciably higher than the waters in the Atchafalaya the
Mississippi River would flow over those sand and mud banks, and
would in a very short while wipe them out of existence.
The policy pursued by the United States Government, the various
States and levee districts for the past generation has been the
confinement of the waters by levees. Pursuing the building of
levees along the Atchafalaya River is certainly a problem, of
easier solution than the increasing of the levees along the
Mississippi River; therefore, we consider the best policy would be
to continue the leveeing of the Atchafalaya River, and by so doing
benefit such stretches of land that can be put in cultivation.
Nature has produced the conditions as they now exist, and we
believe nature's forces might be controlled, but not opposed.
Respectfully submitting our views to your honorable commission, we
remain, with high regards,
Respectfully, yours,
Louisiana Railway & Navigation Co., By Wm. Edenbobn.
M. R. C., file 1518/36.
Rainy day here so far. Looks like a good day to dig. More Later, Steve
If you want to explore the Torras area with Al and I, CLICK HERE
If you want to track the tracks CLICK HERE
If you want to follow a family of railroaders in that area CLICK HERE
I've always been interested in Edenborn and this is
one more bit of info that reflects his importance in La.
First, for those not familiar, this is from Wikipedia
explaining Edenborn's ferry operation.
The Angola Transfer Company, organized in November 1906, was a
railroad car float operation that primarily ferried cars of the
Louisiana Railway and Navigation Company across the Mississippi
River between Angola and Naples, Louisiana.[1] The route was
shortened to Angola-Torras in 1928, when a joint highway-rail
bridge was built across the Atchafalaya River at Simmesport, and
the LR&N took over the Angola Transfer Company's property in 1929,
concurrently with its lease to the Louisiana and Arkansas Railway.
The L&A took absorbed the LR&N in 1934, and abandoned the car
float in 1940 after the Huey P. Long Bridge opened at Baton
Rouge.[2]
The Angola Ferry now operates nearby, carrying automobiles across
the Mississippi; its west landing is about 2 miles (3.2 km) south
of the old Torras landing of the L&A.
Below is from HERE
In 1910, the House Ways and Means committee was discussing
separating the Mississippi from the Atchafalaya/Red Rivers. The
link above quotes each interest's input on the subject.
Switch to Plain Text and use your browser's "FIND" option to locate where "railway" is mentioned.
Below are some excerpts I found. The Edenborn one is priceless.
Below, the T&P sounds off on what it thinks the LR&N should do. LOL.
Eventually, the LR&N would take do just what they suggested when
the state joined in the construction of the Simmeport car/rail bridge.
That bridge served into the 70's at La.1's one lane crossing of the Atchafalaya
River.
First, a quote from some forum I found concerning the Simmesport bridge.
Up until the late '70's this was a train and car bridge. I can remember meeting cars half way across even when the bridge tender had the vehicular gates down. And no, quad gates weren't even a pipe dream in those days. I believe an 18 wheeler could have run around what the L&A called gates.One other interesting tidbit~ this was in totally dark territory; the only way you knew if the bridge was closed for rail traffic was if a 100 watt light bulb was illuminated. When the light burned out you had to stop and walk to the bridge tender's shack in the middle of the bridge and get authority to pass over the bridge. The L&A never would put a radio on that bridge and the signal maintainer took his time in replacing the lone light bulb.Cave day RR'ing to say the least...
Now on to the Ways and Means entries:
From the T&P:
1518/18/34. Texas & Pacific Railroad Co. Favors closure of Old
River because of added wealth resulting from reclamation and
protection of lands along Red and Atchafalaya Rivers. Thinks
Louisiana Railway & Navigation Co. could secure better route by
building a bridge than it now has through Old River. (Mar. 25,
1910.)
As to the injurious effect on navigation, this will fall
principally on the railroad transfer system of the Louisiana
Railway & Navigation Co., which company transfers its trains by
water between Naples, La., and Angola, La., i.e., through the
entire length of Old River and across the Mississippi. This long
transfer through Old River can be avoided by the railroad
company's bridging the Red and bringing its western transfer
incline to the bank of the Mississippi, in which case the transfer
would have to be made across the Mississippi River only. This
would greatly improve the operation of the railroad, as it is
difficult not to have delays to trains when operating transfer
boats in a narrow and crooked stream with a very swift current.
Probably the cost of the required bridge and track extension is
the only reason why the railroad company has not already
undertaken such constructions. There are two packets making
regular trips through Old River, but these boats can use the route
through the Plaquemine Lock. There are several concerns sending
occasional tows of coal, logs, etc., through Old River, but it is
believed that all commerce, except that of the railroad transfers
can be deflected to the Plaquemine route. What would be the extent
of the interference to existing commerce caused by such deflection
it is now impossible to say. Coming now to the question of a
possible increase of flood heights in the Mississippi below Old
River, it appears to me that this is by far the most difficult
question to determine of any concerning the divorcement. Much
additional data and an extended investigation are required before
a definite expression of opinion is justified; however, in the
following paragraph a few remarks are made bearing on this matter.
7. If it was known definitely how much of the Mississippi flood is
discharged through the Atchafalaya, the question of the effect of
the divorcement on flood heights would be much nearer solution;
but the data at hand is insufficient to permit a determination of
this matter. A gage is maintained at Barbres Landing in Old River
and at Red River Landing in the Mississippi River just below Old
River—the location of the gauges being shown on the index map
referred to above.
8. Should the divorcement be undertaken, it seems to me to be
desirable not to make the cut-off in a single year. For example,
the first and possibly second years do no work; but abandon
dredging in Old River, the result probably being a considerable
building up of the bar at the head of Old River. The following
year build a sill dam, at least to low-water level, across the Old
River somewhat below the proposed site of the dam, and the same
year advance the levee lines toward the Old River, closing, say,
one-half of the gap. The following year complete the levee line
and build the dam across Old River. The object of this program
being to reduce the cost of the dam by the natural filling up of
Old River and to permit the Mississippi to adjust itself gradually
(to a slight extent at least) to the increased flow of water.
Committee On Ways And Means,
House Of Representatives, Washington, D. C, February 9, 1910.
Col. W. H. Bixby,
President Mississippi River Commission.
Dear Col. Bixby: In view of the fact that I have introduced a bill
in Congress providing for a board of engineers to investigate the
practicability of divorcing the Mississippi from the Red and
Atchafalaya Rivers, I would like very much to secure a copy of
your commission's report of December 19, 1884, as well as your
annual report for tne fiscal year ending June 30, 1895. Also I am
anxious to obtain all other reports of your commission that
pertain to the separation of these rivers.
With the assurance that I shall greatly appreciate the granting of
this request, I am, Yours, very truly,
R. F. Broussahd.
M. R. C. file 1518/13.
Mississippi River Commission,
Office Of The President,
St. Louis, Mo., February 12, 1910.
Mississippi River Commission,
St. Louis, Mo.
Edenborn: Gentlemen: The Louisiana Railway & Navigation Co. is vitally
interested in the subject of the divorcement of the Mississippi
and Atchafalaya Rivers, which subject you are now investigating.
The route of this railroad leads from the north to Naples,
H. Doc. 841, 63-2 5
a point at the confluence of Red and Atchafalaya Rivers, from
which point its passenger and freight trains are transferred
through Old River to the east bank of the Mississippi River at
Angola, and thence its rails lead southward toward New Orleans.
The closing of the mouth of Red River would make many miles of the
completed railroad useless on both sides of the river, would
necessitate the selection of a new route, a bridge over the
Atchafalaya, and the building of a new line of tracks; the exact
mileage can only be determined by survey.
We therefore enter herewith our most emphatic protest. Outside of
the direct damage above alluded to, a larger portion of the
railroad from New Orleans paralleling the east bank of the
Mississippi River would be endangered, inasmuch as the volume of
water forced down the Mississippi River would spread in much
larger volume through Thompsons Creek, Bayou Sara Creek, and other
streams emptying into the Mississippi River north of Baton Rouge.
And, as we have been reliably informed, Col. Harrod states that
after closure, the bed of the Mississippi River would have to
.take care of 1,750,000 second-feet, while the highest record here
has been 1,350,000 second-feet. An additional 400,000 secondfeet,
equal approximately to one-third of the volume, would raise the
waters to such an extent over the present capacity as the
additional cubical contents would compare with the cubical
contents of the Mississippi bed.
The raising of levees would take years to complete and the danger
of breaks in the levees would necessarily increase very much and
the damage from such breaks would be a thousandfold more
destructive than at present. We are, therefore, convinced that it
would jeopardize the railroad's physical properties. We also
believe, based on the statement from planters, that higher levees,
confining a higher flood stage, would increase the seepage
materially, inasmuch as the water against the levee and above the
normal height of the cultivated lands would remain longer than at
present and destroy or injure a large percentage of the crop,
which would be an indirect loss to this company.
The navigable waters of Red River, Little River, Tensas River,
Black River, Ouachita River, and minor streams unnavigable in
certain seasons, on which commerce finds -accommodation between
the points located on such rivers and New Orleans, as well as with
Natchez, Memphis, Vicksburg, and many upriver points, would have a
much longer mileage to cover than under present conditions, and
the most experienced steamboat captains claim that without part of
the Mississippi River waters the Atchafalaya and the Plaquemine
Bayou would not be navigable during low-water seasons.
From the above you will note the damage it would do this company
and the damage it would do to the riparian properties along the
Mississippi River from approximately Natchez to the jetties, and
we believe the cost of constructing levees so high and broad to
confine one-third more water to the Mississippi bed than
heretofore would prove so costly that such benefits as certain
sections are supposed to gain would in no manner compensate for
such cost.
As to the danger of the Mississippi River leaving its present
channel and making a shorter route to the Gulf through the
Atchafalaya, this has proven chimerical, inasmuch as the two stone
dikes placed by the United States Engineers across the Atchafalaya
in 1887-1889 and completed in 1890 are to-day in exactly the same
position and at the same level as when placed, thus proving that
the volume of water through the Atchafalaya is under perfect
control.
It has also been stated publicly that Old River, if let alone,
would close itself. This view is fallacious, because, while sand
and mud banks at the mouth of Red River at times interfere with
navigation, it is well understood that if such sand and mud banks
were left untouched, just as soon as the Mississippi rose to a
level appreciably higher than the waters in the Atchafalaya the
Mississippi River would flow over those sand and mud banks, and
would in a very short while wipe them out of existence.
The policy pursued by the United States Government, the various
States and levee districts for the past generation has been the
confinement of the waters by levees. Pursuing the building of
levees along the Atchafalaya River is certainly a problem, of
easier solution than the increasing of the levees along the
Mississippi River; therefore, we consider the best policy would be
to continue the leveeing of the Atchafalaya River, and by so doing
benefit such stretches of land that can be put in cultivation.
Nature has produced the conditions as they now exist, and we
believe nature's forces might be controlled, but not opposed.
Respectfully submitting our views to your honorable commission, we
remain, with high regards,
Respectfully, yours,
Louisiana Railway & Navigation Co., By Wm. Edenbobn.
M. R. C., file 1518/36.
Rainy day here so far. Looks like a good day to dig. More Later, Steve
If you want to explore the Torras area with Al and I, CLICK HERE
If you want to track the tracks CLICK HERE
If you want to follow a family of railroaders in that area CLICK HERE