That represented is about 25 ft. high.

The author has now concluded the consideration of earthwork dams, and proposes making a few remarks upon those of masonry or concrete, with reference to some of the most important, as shown on the diagrams. Their stability, unlike those of earthwork, may be considerably increased where the contour and nature of the ground is favorable by being curved in plan, convex toward the water, and with a suitable radius. They are especially suitable for blocking narrow rocky valleys, and as such situations must, from the character of the ground, be liable to sudden and high floods, great care is necessary to make sufficient provision for overflow.

When of masonry, the stones should be bonded, not merely as they would be in an ordinary vertical wall, where the direction of the stress is perpendicular, but each course should be knit in with that above and below it in a somewhat similar manner to what is termed "random" work. And lastly, if hydraulic mortar be used, a sufficient time should elapse after construction before being subjected to strain, or in other words, before water is allowed to rise in the reservoir. For this latter reason, and also the liability to damage by sudden floods during the progress of the works, dams of Portland cement concrete, on account of their quick consolidation, possess advantages over those of hydraulic masonry apart from the necessity in the latter instance of constant supervision to prevent "scamping" by leaving chinks and spaces vacant, especially where large masses of stone or Cyclopean rubble are used.

Again, should the dam be drowned by flood during its erection, no harm would accrue were it composed of Portland cement concrete, whereas should it be of hydraulic mortar masonry, the wall would probably be destroyed or, at all events, considerably injured by the mortar being washed out of the joints. Portland cement, however, is only suitable for situations where the foundation is absolutely firm, as, should there be the slightest settlement, fissures would certainly be produced.

As regards foundations, the dam of the Puentes reservoir in Spain is somewhat remarkable - see Fig. 12. Its height is 164 ft., and the profile or cross section is of precisely the same character as that of the Alicante dam, the latter being 135 ft. in height, 65 ft. wide at the crest, and 65 ft. at the base, and erected about 300 years ago. At the Puentes dam the flanks of the valley were reliable, but, as must be frequently the case in such situations, the bed of the valley was composed to a great depth of gravel, debris, and shaky strata. The difficulty was overcome by throwing an arch, or arches, across the valley, the abutments being formed by the solid rock on each side, and building the dam upon this arching and filling in below the latter down to a sufficient depth with walling.

Bearing in mind the sudden and great floods to which dams constructed in such situations must be subjected, and, if the valley be very narrow, the probability that sufficient space at the side for a by-wash will be difficult to obtain, it would seem reasonable that in the calculation for their section allowance should be made for the possible condition of the whole length of the dam being converted into a weir, over which the waters may flow without risk of injury to the dam, to a depth of, say, at least twice that ever probable.

The topping of dams by floods is not uncommon, and if the extra strain thus induced has not been allowed for, their destruction is nearly certain, as instanced in more than one case in Algeria, where, although the average rainfall is only 15 in. yearly, a depth of 6¼ in., or more than one-third of the annual total, has been known to fall in twenty-four hours.

The Habra dam - see Fig. No. 13 - completed in 1871, was destroyed by a sudden flood of this kind in December, 1881. This reservoir, with a storage capacity of 6,600,000,000 gallons, was intended for the irrigation of a cultivated bordering on the Mediterranean and the storage of floods. The height of the dam was 116.7 ft. and was provided with a by-wash of 394 ft. in length, and outlets for irrigation formed by four cast iron pipes of 31½ in. diameter through the dam. It was composed of rubble set in hydraulic mortar, the latter composed of two parts of sand to one of hydraulic lime.

For getting rid of the large deposits of sand to which all reservoirs in that country are liable, two scouring outlets were provided of the same description as those in the old Moorish dams. The profile was calculated from Delocre's formula, and was correct in this respect, supposing the by-wash to have been sufficient. But as it was otherwise, and the flood swept over the crest to the depth of about 3 ft., the enormous extra strain thus induced overthrew the dam and caused the destruction of several villages and the death of 209 persons. It must be mentioned that when the reservoir was filling, the water percolated through the masonry, giving the face wall the appearance of a huge filter, which at the time was attributed to the porous nature of the sandstone used in construction, but which more probably was due to the washing of the green mortar out of the joints.

At the Hamiz dam, also in Algeria, the water was admitted in 1884, but it showed immediately signs of weakness, so that the water had to be run out and an immense retaining wall erected to strengthen the main dam. Algeria seems to have been singularly unfortunate as regards the success of works of this description. Water was admitted to the Cheurfas reservoir in January, 1885, and it at once began to make its way through permeable ground at one end of the dam. The flushing sluice in the deepest part of the dam had become jammed, so that the pressure could not be relieved, and in February 30 ft. length of the dam was carried away, causing a flood in the river below. At some distance down stream was the Sig reservoir. The flood rushing down, topped this dam by 18 ft. and overthrew it also.