Court-a gentleman equally distinguished for strength of understanding and purity of heart:

STATE OF NEW YORK, In Senate, March 13, 1810.

WHEREAS, The agricultural and commercial interests of this State, require that the inland navigation from Hudson river to Lake Ontario and Lake Erie be improved and completed, on a scale commensurate to the great advantages derived from the accomplishment of that important object: and

WHEREAS, It is doubtful whether the resources of the Western Inland Lock Navigation Company are adequate to such improvement: Therefore,

Resolved, (if the honourable the Assembly concur herein), that Gouverneur Morris, Stephen Van Rensselaer, De Witt Clinton, Simeon De Witt, William North, Thomas Eddy, and Peter B. Porter, be, and they are hereby appointed commissioners for exploring the whole route, examining the present condition of the said navigation, and considering what further improvements ought to be made therein; that they be authorized to direct and procure such surveys as to them shall appear necessary and proper in relation to the objects; and that they report to the legislature at their next session, presenting a full view of the subjects referred to them, with their estimates and opinions thereon. And

WHEREAS, Numerous inhabitants of the counties of Oneida, Madison, and Onondaga, have by their petitions, represented that, by reason of the spring freshets, the Oneida lake is usually raised so high, as to inundate large tracts of land adjacent thereto, which are thereby rendered unfit for cultivation, and highly injurious to the health of the neighboring inhabitants; and that the said evils may be easily remedied by removing a bar, and deepening the channel at the outlet of the said lake: Therefore,

Resolved, (if the honourable the Assembly concur herein) that the commissioners above named be and they are hereby directed, to examine the subjects of the said petitions, and to report to the Legislature their opinions as to the practicability of the expense and the effects of removing the bar and deepening the channel at the outlet of said lake.

By order,

S. VISSCHER, Cľk.

IN ASSEMBLY, March 15, 1810.

Resolved, That this house do concur with the honourable the Senate in their preceding resolutions.

By order,

J. VAN INGEN, Cl'k.

Senator Pope of Kentucky, in 1810, introduced a bill in the Senate of the United States, designed to facilitate communication by canals between different parts of the country. He proposed a union of the waters of the Hudson with Lakes Erie, Ontario and Champlain. On February 8, 1810, Peter B. Porter of New York presented a resolution in the House of Representatives, authorizing the appointment of a committee to examine into the expediency of appropriating lands for the opening of roads and canals, and supported the resolution by a well prepared speech setting forth the advantages to accrue to the country from proper internal communications. Thereupon a committee of twenty was appointed, of which Mr. Porter was chairman, and a bill was reported by that committee "for the improvement of the United States by roads and canals," among which was a provision for "opening canals from the Hudson to Lake Ontario, and around the Falls of Niagara."

Both the bill of Senator Pope and that of Congressman Porter failed of passage.

On April 8, 1811, an Act was passed, empowering the above named commissioners together with Robert R. Livingston and Robert Fulton "to make application in behalf of this state to the Congress of the United States, or to the Legislature of any State or Territory, to coöperate and aid in this undertaking, and also the proprietors of the land, through which such navigation may be carried, for cessions or grants to the people of this State" and for other purposes. That commission made its report to the Legislature on March 14, 1812, in which they say that the states of Tennessee, Massachusetts and Ohio acted favorably on the project, and the Committee of Congress also determined upon a favorable report; but when the report was formulated by a sub-committee, it received only four votes out of thirteen and Congress failed to give the matter its support, notwithstanding the fact that President James Madison, on December 23, 1811, sent a special message to Congress, transmitting a copy of the Acts of the Legislature, and stated in his message that

"The utility of canal navigation is universally admitted. It is not less certain, that scarcely any country offers more extensive oppor

tunities, for that branch of improvements, than the United States; and none, perhaps, inducements equally persuasive to make the most of them. The particular undertaking contemplated by the State of New York, which marks an honorable spirit of enterprise and comprises objects of National, as well as more limited importance, will recall the attention of Congress to the signal advantages to be derived to the United States from a general system of internal communication and conveyance; and suggest to their consideration whatever steps may be proper on their part, towards its introduction and accomplishment. As some of those advantages have an intimate connection with arrangements and exertions for the general security, it is a perod calling for these that the merits of such a system will be seen in the strongest lights."

VIII. LEGISLATIVE PROGRESS THE DECISIVE VOTE.

On June 19, 1812, an Act was passed by the Legislature authorizing and empowering the commissioners mentioned in the Act entitled, "An Act to Provide for the Improvement of the Internal Navigation of the State," passed on the 8th day of April, 1811, who were Gouverneur Morris, Stephen Van Rensselaer, De Witt Clinton, Simeon De Witt, William North, Thomas Eddy, Peter B. Porter, Robert R. Livingston and Robert Fulton, "to purchase all the rights, interest and estate of the President, Directors and Stockholders of the Western Inland Lock Navigation Company in the State of New York, of, in and to the inland waters of the State, together with the locks, canals, lands and other property" held by the president and directors of said company, upon such terms and conditions as they, the commissioners, should deem reasonable, and in case of such purchase they were required to take the charge and management of said locks, canals, lands, and all other property and to exact the same tolls to the use of the people of this State as were received by the former owners of such canals and to make all rules and regulations as they might deem proper. This authority, however, was to be exercised conditionally only upon their obtaining satisfactory information from some experienced engineer that the accomplishment of the contemplated canal was practicable and when the commis

sioners shall be authorized by the act of the Legislature to commence operations for opening said canal.

By the second section of said Act of June 19, 1812, the cominissioners were authorized to procure voluntary cessions or grants of any lands for the proposed inland navigation from Lake Erie to the Hudson river.

By the third section of said act, they were authorized and empowered to borrow a sum of money not exceeding five millions of dollars, at six per cent., upon a loan for not less than fifteen years. And they were authorized to pledge the faith of the State for the payment of principal and interest. A proposed bill was formulated to be presented to Congress but never passed.

The Seneca Lock Navigation Company was incorporated under chapter 144 of the Laws of 1813 for the purpose of improving the navigation between Seneca and Cayuga lakes. The company went on and built its locks and constructed its works, but subsequently under chapter 271 of the Laws of 1825 the construction of the Cayuga and Seneca canal was authorized and the State acquired all the stock, property and privileges of the Seneca Lock Navigation Company. The State has ever since continued to operate that canal and a detour has been made in the original route of the new barge canal up the Seneca river within a few miles of the Cayuga and Seneca lakes for the purpose of bringing them ultimately into communication with it.

Again on March 8, 1814, the commissioners made another report to the Legislature, in which they set forth the results of further investigations and their belief "that communication between Lake Champlain and Hudson river may easily be effected," and concluded the report with an extract from a letter of the eminent English engineer, William Weston of the Inland Lock Navigation Company, in which he says:

"Should your noble but stupendous plan of uniting Lake Erie with the Hudson, be carried into effect, you have to fear no rivalry. The commerce of the immense extent of country, bordering on the upper lakes, is yours forever, and to such an incalculable amount as would baffle all conjecture to conceive. Its execution would confer honor on the projectors and supporters, and would in its eventual

consequences, render New York the greatest commercial emporium in the world, with perhaps the exception, at some distant day, of New Orleans, or some other depot at the mouth of the majestic Mississippi. From your perspicuous topographical description, and neat plan and profile of the route of the contemplated canal, I entertain little doubt of the practicability of the measure. Perhaps this is the only question which the Legislature should be particularly anxious to have resolved. The expense, be it what it may, is no object when compared with the incalculable benefits arising therefrom, though doubtless, it will deserve attention, that the money granted liberally be wisely and economically expended."

To the report is annexed a schedule of cessions of land agreed to be made to the People of the State by the Holland Land Company and others. During the War of 1812-1814, several attempts were made to repeal several sections of the Act of June 19, 1812, which was not accomplished until the session of 1814.

Robert Fulton, writing under date of February 22, 1814, to Gouverneur Morris, on the advantages of the proposed canal from Lake Erie to the Hudson river, says:

"As I passed three years at various canals in England, to obtain practical knowledge on the manner of constructing them, and to make myself familiar with their advantages, and was well acquainted with some of the best engineers, I know this calculation to be correct. Hence one cent per ton per mile, is one dollar a ton for 100 miles, while the usual cost of wagoning is one dollar and sixty cents per hundredweight for 100 miles, or thirty-two dollars a ton. It consequently follows, that on a canal, a ton weight could be boated 3200 miles for the sum now paid to wagon it 100 miles; and the persons at 3200 miles from a good seaport, would have all the advantages of trade, or of bringing their product to market, which those who reside only 100 miles from market now enjoy, provided the canal were toll free. . . . From this one cent per ton per mile I will draw some interesting calculations on the present price of freight in sloops on Hudson's river, between New York and Albany, and show that it could be done much cheaper by a canal; the proof of them will be conclusive, that if a canal can give advantages superior to sloop navigation on Hudson's river, which is one of the most rectilinear and best in the world, the benefits to be derived from the one contemplated must be vastly superior to every kind of road, river or lake communication from Lake Erie to Hudson's river."