The senators who voted for the bill were: Edwin Bailey, Jr., Edgar T. Brackett, Walter C. Burton, Thomas C. Cullen, George A. Davis, Peter A. Dooling, Victor J. Dowling, Nathaniel A. Elsberg, John C. Fitzgerald, Samuel J. Foley, Francis H. Gates, Louis F. Goodsall, Thomas F. Grady, George E. Green, John A. Hawkins, Henry W. Hill, Luke A. Keenan, Irving L'Hommedieu, Henry Marshall, Bernard F. Martin, James H. McCabe, Patrick H. McCarren, Chas. P. McClellan, George W. Plunkitt, Spencer G. Prime, Samuel J. Ramsperger, Daniel J. Riordan, John W. Russell, William Townsend, Joseph Wagner, Spencer K. Warnick and Thomas C. Whitlock.1

If the commerce of New York continues to expand for another century in consequence of the barge canal improvement, as it has during the past century as a result of the construction of the original Erie canal, the names of these senators and the assemblymen who voted for the referendum measure of 1903, will be held in as high regard by succeeding generations as are the names of the original projectors of the canal system of this State.

In some respects the contest in the Senate was one of the most dramatic ever witnessed. It was the culmination of a movement starting with the abolition of tolls in 1882, and then for the enlargement of locks and deepening of the prism; thereafter for the improvement known as the Seymour-Adams plan; and finally the projection of the barge canal proposition. Such a movement extending over a period of two decades very naturally aroused deep interest, and its issue was fraught with extraordinary consequences to the commerce of the State.

Parliamentary contests usually involve matters that are largely temporal in character, which may be modified from year to year; but this project was fraught with momentous consequences to the State in that if it passed the Legislature and were approved by the people, it authorized a bond issue of one hundred and one millions, running over a period of eighteen years, which under a constitutional amendment

1. Ib.

then pending was likely to be extended over a period of fifty years. It so far transcended in importance all ordinary parliamentary contests that it called forth the best efforts of all who had any part in it, either in or out of the Legislature.

During the long and strenuous debate the friends of the measure were intense in their advocacy of it and were called upon to defend its engineering, its fiscal and constitutional provisions, all of which were assailed by the opponents, who were equally resolute in their attacks upon it. It was the largest measure ever submitted to or considered by a legislative body in this country, and naturally aroused the deepest interest.

The pro-canal press of the State was jubilant over the passage of the canal measure and spoke in complimentary terms of Senators Davis, Hill, Grady and Green, upon whom largely rested the burden of carrying the measure through the Senate. Much credit is also due to the other senators who, although less conspicuous in the debates, by their votes made it possible for the canal bill to pass the Senate by a large majority vote.

After the canal bill had passed the Senate, it was transmitted to the Assembly on March 25th, and a motion was made to advance it to the order of second reading; whereupon several amendments were offered by Assemblymen George M. Palmer, Edwin A. Merritt, John T. Dooling, John Pallace, Jr., William V. Cooke, Daniel W. Moran, Olin T. Nye, George H. Whitney, Charles S. Plank and Samuel Fowler. It was evident that the bill had encountered very fierce opposition in that body. Assemblyman John McKeown of Brooklyn immediately moved a call of the House, which was had. Assemblyman Palmer moved that the bill with the amendments be made a special order on second and third reading for Tuesday, March 31st, and that motion was determined in the negative. Thereupon Assemblymen Jean L. Burnett and Fred W. Hammond moved further amendments to the bill and after some discussion of the motion of Assemblyman Fowler, the bill, together with all amendments, was made a special order on second and

third reading, for Thursday, March 26th, immediately after reading the journal.

On the day named, when the canal bill was reached on the calendar, Assemblyman Palmer spoke in favor of his amendments; and after a discussion by other members of Assembly, including Assemblyman Charles F. Bostwick, of New York, the introducer of the measure, Assemblyman Robert Lynn Cox of Erie, James T. Rogers of Broome, and others, all of the Palmer amendments were voted down, as were also all other amendments to the measure that had been proposed. The oposition, however, of Assemblymen Palmer, Moran and Pallace was continued down to the final vote on the measure.

Several Republican members who had offered amendments to the bill withdrew them during the discussion, and before the final vote Assemblyman Palmer reintroduced the same amendments and insisted on a roll call on each amendment so reintroduced by him. The roll calls occupied two hours of the time of the Assembly and all of his amendments were voted down.

Assemblyman Rogers, the leader of the Assembly, in withdrawing his amendment, stated that he considered that the canal advocates were entitled to have the referendum measure submitted to the people in the form in which they had framed it, and advised all Republicans to vote down the various amendments that had been proposed. Other assemblymen took a similar position; and after a discussion running through the entire day, far into the evening, the bill passed the Assembly by 87 affirmative votes to 55 votes against it.

The bill had been reached at 11.30 o'clock in the morning. Thirty-six amendments were offered to it altogether in the Assembly and most of them were debated until 6 p. m., when voting began on the amendments and continued for two hours.

Assemblyman Cox made a strong speech on the bill, as did Assemblymen Charles W. Hinson and Anthony F. Burke, all of Erie county. The burden of the debate, however, fell upon Assemblyman Charles F. Bostwick of New

York, the introducer of the measure, who had given the bill much study during the legislative session.

At the conclusion of the vote in the Assembly, George H. Raymond of the Merchants' Exchange of Buffalo, remarked: "Today has witnessed the culmination of eight years of labor on the part of the business interests of the State to secure for all time to our people the enjoyment of a free waterway between the Great Lakes and the sea. . We are now to undertake the greatest public work ever proposed in this country and the results will be beyond the wildest dreams of its friends."

On April 7th, at 11.35 a. m., Governor Odell gave his official approval to the canal referendum measure in the presence of Senator George A. Davis and myself, and Messrs. G. K. Clark, Jr., John D. Trenor of the Greater New York Canal Association, and S. C. Mead, secretary of the Merchants' Association of New York; and it became chapter 147 of the laws of 1903 of New York.

In this connection, in justice to the Merchants' Association of New York, it may be said that that organization, comprising such well known canal advocates as Clarence Whitman, Gustav H. Schwab, James C. Eames, William A. Marble, George L. Duvall, George F. Crane, William F. King, J. Hampden Dougherty, Thos. H. Downing, George Frederick Victor, Herbert L. Satterlee, Henry R. Towne, Frank B. Squier, John G. Carlisle, S. C. Mead, and others, had rendered important service to the canal campaign as early as 1898, in defeating the Pavey resolution. It continued thereafter to coöperate with other organizations in various parts of the State in the dissemination of pro-canal literature, and was one of the leading organizations that had a part in the Canal Enlargement Association of Greater New York. It was eminently proper that its distinguished and courteous secretary was invited to be present by Governor Odell on the occasion of the approval of the referendum measure.

XXVI. THE CANAL CAMPAIGN OF 1903.

As soon as it was known that the canal referendum bill had passed the Senate and Assembly and received the approval of Governor Odell, amendments were made to the proposed constitutional amendments as to the time of their submission to the people to be voted upon; and to avoid the complications of a presidential election in 1904, they were amended so as to be submitted to the voters at the general election in the fall of 1905, and passed the Legislature in that form.

The opponents of the canal measure in the Legislature were reluctant to submit to the majority vote of the two chambers and permit the canal referendum bill to go to the people without a protest on their part. Accordingly they organized and decided to issue a declaration against the canal referendum bill, setting forth their objections to the approval of that measure by the people of the State, apparently oblivious of the fact that the matter, under the Constitution, was then merely a referendum for popular approval or disapproval. Labor organizations all over the State, realizing the industrial development to follow cheap transportation over the improved waterways, declared in favor of the measure and did much to counteract the anticanal sentiment in the interior counties of the State. These organizations were assisted later in the campaign by Mr. Warren C. Browne.

On May 9, 1903, the Merchants' Exchange of Buffalo gave a dinner to General Francis V. Greene, Thomas W. Symons, John N. Scatcherd and Edward A. Bond, members of the commission that recommended the barge canal improvement, and to the legislators of Erie county who had borne the burden of the fight in carrying the bill through the Legislature. The banquet was attended by a large number of prominent Buffalonians and distinguished citi

zens.

Herbert P. Bissell, whose father, Amos A. Bissell of Oneida county, was for years identified with canal transpor