Mr. GUTHRHE. I became convinced that it was not best for the Jeffersonville rajlr and the Louisville and flushvmewailioa to build a bridge at Louisville at present. congress required it to be 90 feet above low water mark. At the falls the highest rise of the water is 44 feet. It. rose to that extreme height only 3 timesin the memory of the oldest citizens there, in 1792, in 1831, and in 1847. Of course, if you build bridges 60 feet above highwater mark, they must be some height above the bank of the river, and you must have an embankment on each side for nearly half a mile in order to get the propger elevation of the bank and then carry the ridge of the properheight to the center of the river. My conclusion is that a proper continuoue span bridge can be built as cheaply as a safe bridge with draws, and that it is much better for the company because vessels dese ending the river willpget on to a drawbridge in some way or other and the companies wilI have suits continually with the owners of boats and the owners of cargoes. If on build a continuous spau bridge of such a 8 that vessels can pass under it from above and from below you get clear of nearly all difficulties of litigation and all difficulties from negligence, some watch man not bein in his place mud it is almost impossible to cop them in place at all times an as the boats run through the night there is great difficulty from this cause. think the suggestion of the Senfrom Missourias to an investigation by engineersto ascertain whether the bridges across the mistissippiriver should be drawbridges or continuous s an bridges is very proper. I think over! brige engineer will tel you that he can “lithe bndgejustas well as he can make the Melltltifiwtho powar of a good builder to make a good job of either kind of bridge; but drawbridges do not keep up like continu ous span bridges, and even ifa continuous span bridge should cost a little more than the other, in my judgment that expense is compensated by saving after troubles which the drnwbridge would entail upon the company. If we had had a charter allowing us to build the Louisville bridge 50 feet above highwater mark I think it is likely we should be at work now, or if the law had allowed us to build it 70 feet above lowwater mark we should certainly be at work this summer building the bridge. I have not asked Congress to modify that law because I left instructions for the prosecution of the investigation and the obtainin of estimates of the cost of the 2 kinds O bridges and an examination of the ground, so that we should know certainly what expense would be required whichever mode we took. We have a bridge with a draw at Nashville, and wehave had multitudes of suits growing out of it, and are having them every year. In high stages of the water vessels are frequently no longer under the power of steam, and they run against the piers, and the owners of the boats seek to hold the company liable. I rather think that experience and investigation are in favor of continuous span bridges. My own opinion has changed since I had the estimates made in relation to the bridge at Louisville, and changed very materially, and I am satisfied that a skillful engineer who takes the whole subject into consideration, as well cost now as trouble, vexation, and cost in the future, will decide in favor of continuous span bridges.