works, a masonry structure with the waterway lined with cast Iron. In suggesting the design for the Sing Sing Aqueduct Bridge, Jervis revealed early in 1837 the approach he would take in plan- ning the building of the other major structures of the Croton sys- tem. He informed the Water Commissioners that his object was to use a "plain and substantial style of architecture," and to avoid ornamentation except that necessary to the stability and longevity of the work. It is interesting to note that the chief engineer consid- figure 18: James Renwick, Jr., Distributing Reservoir, watercolor in "Letter Book of J. B. Jervis" Courtesy Jervis Public Library. Photo: G. R. Farley ered some ornamentation necessary also to avoid the impression that insufficient attention had been given to certain important parts of the structure indicating a lack of "firmness and durability." The massive 20-million-gallon Distributing Reservoir was another exam- ple of Jervis' approach in simplicity of planning to relate design to function (figures 18 & 49). This huge stone masonry holding pond, the walls of which would average 45 feet above street level, was to be given a rather plain Egyptian style fagade. Other engineers. Including some among the Croton corps, might have built this reser- voir in the much more elaborate European Gothic architectural style that was rapidly gaining popularity in the United States. After all, the Distributing Reservoir, among all the Croton structures, was the one that would be most In the public eye, due to its location. In the preparation for and execution of such a large project with its diversity of structures, the organization and assignment of duties of the engineering corps was of utmost importance. Although the actual building work on the Croton project was done by independent contractors and as many as 5,000 laborers, the coordination and inspection of their work, as well as the running of the aqueduct line and the design of its structures, were among the responsibilities of the engineers. When the Croton project started in 1835, few examples of hierarchical organization to achieve effi- cient operation of such an Immense undertaking existed in the United States. Large corporate enterprise with its pyramidal chain of command and substantial managerial bureaucracy did not exist. Neither did government on a grand scale. Even the U.S. Army, a body that logically should have functioned with a staff organization to ensure more efficient operation, remained small and simple in operational structure. The Civil War with its immense armies would begin to change this, but that remained more than a quarter centu- ry in the future from the beginning of the Croton works. In the case of the New York City Watenworks, it was the two chief engineers, David Bates Douglass and John B. Jervis, who systematically orga- nized the engineer corps in order to accomplish the task of building the Aqueduct. Major Douglass, first chief engineer of the Croton, graduated from Yale University during the War of 1812 and was commis- sioned a Second Lieutenant in the Army Corps of Engineers. After the war, he gained additional experience as a professor of engi- neering at the United States Military Academy at West Point and in work on several canal and railroad projects. Also, in 1825, Douglass briefly observed and made notes on the building of the Erie Canal, the greatest of American waterway accomplishments at that time. But, it took Douglass several months to structure the Croton Aqueduct engineering corps for efficient, effective manage- ment and building and to define systematically the duties and responsibilities of the Engineering Department, since apparently he was preoccupied with the surveys. It was not until the end of February 1836 that he drew up twelve "specifications" in "obedi- ence" to a request from the Water Commissioners to define the tasks of the engineers and the organization of the department. Yet, when Douglass finally did rationalize the operation of the engi- neers, his plan was largely followed by his successor who directed the building of virtually the entire aqueduct. Douglass' definition of aa the duties and responsibilities of the Croton Engineering Depart- ment can serve as an example of how the project was organized and managed. After stating initially that the Water Commissioners would have general administrative overview of the project as a "Board of Directors," Douglass divided ten of the remaining eleven "specifica- tions" between the responsibilities of the Engineering Department and the particular duties of the chief engineer. According to Douglass, the Engineering Department would consist of the chief engineer and assistant engineers, rodmen (holders of the surveyor's target in order to assist in determining the necessary levels), axemen (persons who cut the brush from the line of survey) and inspectors (persons who inspected work done by contractors). The Department would administer the technical and professional duties related