Imagini ale paginilor

fied that the power should be mechanical and not animal.

The next question is, who should own the motive power-the state, a company or individuals?

we look, we see that the policy of this government, never to interfere with the industry of the people, is fully carried out.

It is a well established principle of our nature, as Upon this point, the undersigned entirely dissent also engrafted in our religion, that where our interest from the report of the majority. They (the majority) is our hearts will be. Wherever we find most indivithink the state should own the motive power—we, dual interest, there too we discover the greatest industhat she should not. Some of the reasons that have try and economy, and the least disposition to experiinfluenced us in coming to this conclusion, will be here ment. In proportion as individual interest is removed, given. Let it first be remarked that this is an open industry and economy retire. Business is better attendquestion. As yet it has not been decided. It is true, ed to by the principal than by an agent. The agent by an act of Assembly, passed the 15th of April last, the of an individual is more faithful than of an association Canal Commissioners were authorized to purchase and or company. In proportion as the association or comput on the road locomotives, but that act was passed, pany increases in wealth and numbers, as a general tule, not that the state should continue to own the motive industry, economy, and faithfulness in the agent diminpower, but that the road should be stocked as soon as ish. When a government is principal, strict economy possible. A report against the state owning the motive and faithfulness in the agent is seldom found. It costs power, was made by Mr. Keating on the 14th of March, an association or company more to perform a given 1834. There was not time from that to the close of piece of work, than it does an individual, and it costs the season, to make proper provisions for stocking the a government more yet. This is susceptible of proof in road, and therefore, the act of the 15th of April, innumerable instances. Our canals and rail roads are 1834, was passed. It is repeated then, notwith-proof in point, if proof is necessary. It cost the standing that act, the question is now open. It is Schuylkill Navigation Company, an improvement one necessary that it should be settled, and that as soon as hundred and ten miles long, for repairs, salaries to offipossible. cers, lock-keepers, wages, &c. for the year 1834, only Then, shou'd the state own the motive power? It is $68,110 60. If we judge from our improvements, it the nature of power, whether found in an individual, an would have cost the state a much larger sum, and the incorporated company, or a government, to extend, general government a sum yet larger. In conclusion, instead of contract its rights or privileges. This is on this point, the undersigned would add that the Little daily exemplified, and whenever it is, it should be Schuylkill Rail Road Company, satisfied that where promptly met and counteracted. It cannot be so met there is the most individual interest, there will be the by allowing the state to put herself in the way of indi- strictest economy and greatest faithfulness, have issued vidual enterprise. It cannot be counteracted by allow-proposals for contracts to carry coal from the terminaing the state to embark in what can be accomplished tion of their road to the city of Philadelphia. by her citizens. Whatever individuals are equal to, as If then, individuals or associations can place and a general rule, should be entrusted to them and to them keep the motive power upon our roads, and that cheapalone. This is so congenial, both to our feelings ander than the state, why should she undertake it? A satthe principles of our government, that arguments are unnecessary to satisfy us of its truth. If we allow the state to embark in one enterprise that can be accomplished by her citizens, where shall we stop? Will we allow her to run into every thing that can be driven to advantage? If the general government was not in the way, would we allow the state alone to export and import, because it may be profitable? Or, would it be policy that she should own all our improvements made by companies, and all our banking institutions, because they may yield a revenue? Or, should we go farther and allow her exclusive manufacturing privileg. es, because thereby she might soon be relieved from debt? Or should we go farther yet, and like some governments of old, own all the lands within our charter, and farm them out, because it might be to our advantage? The undersigned are fully of opinion, that the state should not embark in an But admitting that the state could place and keep enterprise like this, to which individuals are fully equal. the power upon the road as cheap, or even cheaper It is proper now, in the present state of our finances, than individuals or associations, still the undersigned that the rail ways should be stocked, if possible, with- would be of opinion that she should not. Whoever out drawing from the treasury. This should have owns the power, should either own the cars attached, great weight, for we have no funds now to experiment or be responsibte for all damages sustained. For the with; it becomes us to turn every dollar to the best state to own the cars and be a common carrier, would advantage. If, however, an opinion was entertained be too palpable an interference with the industry of that these roads could not be stocked otherwise than by the country. For the state to pay all damages, might the state, the expense should have no weight, for they either consume the whole revenue, or keep her harrasshave been completed in a costly and permanent man-ed by vexatious law-suits. The idea of the state bener, and must be stocked, cost what it will. Satisfied coming an insurer or carrier, is therefore, dismissed, that individuals, associations, or companies, are equal to and on its dismissal is based an argument against the this undertaking, the undersigned are anxious to save state owning the power: For if the owner of the power the state the expense and labor necessary in placing owns the cars, or is responsible for damages, most cerand keeping the power upon these roads. It is only tainly, a greater degree of produce, of skill, and faithnecessary to look around us to be satisfied that indivi-fulness, will be brought into requisition, than would be duals are equal to this. They export and import; they if he did not own the cars, or was not responsible for conduct our manufacturing and commercial interests; they have constructed extensive improvements, both Another argument against the state owning the powrail roads and canals, within this state. Individuals, er, is the indirect increase thereby of the patronage of for the general government, carry the mail. At an the Governor, already too great. If the state owns the incalculable expense, by steamboats, they transport power she must act by agents appointed indirectly by every thing upon our rivers and inland seas. Wherever the Governor. The tenure of their office depending

isfactory answer has not presented itself to the undersigned. It is said, in the report of the majority, that the state wants no profit, and that individuals must have a profit, for the motive power. This appears a fallacious argument. The state intends to charge sufficient to keep up the power and no more. The power cannot be maintained without salaried officers. This pay forms part of the expense of the motive power; and the state always pays more liberally than individuals. If individuals own the power, the pay of the salaried officers and attendants will be reduced, and consequently, the expense of the power. If individuals own the power, the profits arising from transportation, will necessarily, when there is competition, reduce, if not entirely take oi?, the cost of the motive power. This, with the State, cannot be effected, because she derives no profits from transporting.


upon executive pleasure, fealty, if we judge from the past, will become an incident. By such an increase of patronage the arm of an administration may be strengthened to the injury of this government. There is another view no less forcible; every successive change of the executive effected by the people, will be accompanied with a corresponding change in these agencies, the competent, skilled and faithful being removed, with the stupid and faithless; such will not be the case, if individuals or associations own the power. Then we will have assurances based upon individual interests, that the tried and faithful will be retained; In addition it might be urged, for it is an undoubted truth, that a more strict accountability of agents is required by individuals and associations than by the state. The further the active agent is removed from those particularly interested, the greater will be his compensation and the greater his imposition too.

Again the State should not own the power, because if owned by individuals or associations, the transportation and consequently the tolls upon these roads, will be increased. This is susceptible of entire demonstration. Man works influenced by some motive. When the acquisition of property is the object, interest is always that motive. It is our nature to desire the accumulation of property. If then individuals own the power, it becomes their immediate interest to have it always in order to keep trustworthy agents-to have the greatest number of cars possible attached to the power to run the length of the road in the shortest time that it can be done with safety and at the least possible expense.

If the State owns the power, it will add to the ease of the "salaried officer" and take nothing from his wages, if he should not consult alone the interest of the State. If individuals own the power, competition will be introduced, and the charge for attaching to the power will be reduced to the lowest possible point.

Allow the State alone this privilege and the charge stands a greater chance of being increased than dimin ished. Give this privilege either to an individual, a company or the State and the result will be the same. In proof of which, in addition to what has been said in this report, this fact is stated: the charge by the state, for power upon our rail ways is one cent per ton per mile. The charge for the same upon the Baltimore and Ohio rail road, is about a half cent per ton per mile. Upon the Baltimore and Ohio road, fuel costs about six dollars per ton, whilst upon ours it can be obtained for less than four. Upon our roads the state owns the power, whilst upon the other it is owned by the company. If competition was allowed upon our roads, their being then more individual interest, this charge would be reduced, and by its reduction the cost of transportation would be cheapened and business increased.

The business would be increased for another reason -wherever there is fair competition there is always a greater disposition to accommodate. If individuals own ed the power, a greater regard for the cars attached would be secured, because thereby their business and their profits would accumulate. By attention-by care and a disposition to accommodate, kept active by competition, the tolls must increase. But in addition to greater faithfulness upon the road, may be added, and it is no small item, the amount of busines that by the influence of the owners of the power united with the owners of the cars and of the friends of each, will be thrown upon these improvements. This last consideration is worthy of much weight, for it becomes the State to interest directly in her improvements the greatest possible number of her citizens.

It is important, in the opinion of the undersigned, that the motive power placed upon all the connecting links of the great chain of our improvement, should be furnished by the same agency. It is also important that this power should either all or none of it be owned

by the State. It is not intended by this that the State
should not own and keep up the stationary engines-
that the State must do. But it is believed to be bad
policy for the State to own the power upon part of the
road, and the balance to be rented or sold to indivi-
duals. That some of the levels upon the Portage rail way
should be sold or rented, whilst the State should own
the power upon the balance is advanced in the report
of the majority; from that opinion the undersigned en-
tirely dissent. Apart from the stationary engines, they
think the State should own none of the power. If the
State owns the power, she must, at a great expense,
purchase and keep horses sufficient to stock the short
levels upon the Portage rail way and either end of the
Philadelphia and Columbia road. But the report of
the majority maintains that the State should own the
stam power, and that the levels accommodated to ani-
mal power should either be sold or rented.
selling or renting these levels cannot be effected
without manifest injury to the whole road, as also to
our canals.


No man can form any thing like an accurate opinion of the amount that will be transported upon these roads, the present year. And if an accurate opinion cannot be formed, the levels can be neither sold nor rented profitably. If they should be disposed of, what sufficient guarantee can be given, if the lease should not be profitable, that it would not be abandoned. Those who can give security, will not embark in an enterprise as small as the stocking one level upon the Portage rail way. Abandoning a level for any period, however short, must necessarily be attended with bad consequences. It will retard transportation, affect the credit of the road, increase expenses, and diminish the receipt of tolls. These short levels, the undersigned are of opinion, can be neither stocked by the state, sold, nor rented profitably. And if they cannot, as we must systematize the manner of transporting upon our road, the idea of the state owning the power should be abandoned.

In addition to what has been said, as to the ability of individuals to furnish the motive power, it may here be stated, that they are rapidly stocking our canals, at an expense far beyond what will be required to procure engines adapted to our rail roads And as these roads are connected with our canals, the associations formed upon them, will immediately be extended to the roads. Open the roads to competition, and associations will be formed, as upon our canals, of wide influence and extended wealth.

In the opinion that the State should not own the pow. er, the undersigned are confirmed, and strengthened by the report of Mr. Keating, on this subject, made in March last. In that report it is said, "the policy (of the State owning the power) is more plausible than substantially good." Again that report says, "individuals working on their own account, under a strict supervision are obliged to pay more attention to it than could be obtained from salaried officers. The difficulty of the selection of proper officers, the dangers from the increase of patronage the want of a balancing or cheeking power to prevent injustice, are among a few of the evils incident to the con'erring this duty upon salaried officers. For such men there would be no motive (exclusive of a sense of duty,) to produce an increase of travel on the road; since the more frequently it is used, the greater would be their duties, without any additional compensation.”

With a contractor the case would be different-to him the increased travel or transportation would be a source of increased gain. It would be his duty to procure assistance on the best terms and of the best kind." Thus confirmed in the opinion, that the State should not own the motive power, the undersigned conclude by submitting the following bill as the result of their investigation.


Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa-yard, Samuel Groom, Thomas Hart, Richard Mew, tives, &c. That from and after the passage of this act, Thomas Wilcox, Ambrose Rigg, John Haywood, Hugh the Philadelphia and Columbia rail-way, and the Alle. Hartshorne, Clement Plumstead, and Thomas Cooper. gheny Portage rail-way, be and the same are hereby This deed was recently found with other interesting declared and made public highways, and shall be used documents, among the papers of one of these original as such for the conveyance of passengers and the gene- proprietors, in the possession of his descendants, in the ral purposes of transportation, as hereinafter directed. interior of Pennsylvania. It is now in the hands of a Section 2. Any individual, or association or indivi- gentleman of the bar of this State, to whom it was sent, duals, may, after the passage of this act, have full privi- with other papers, to aid him in the management of a lege to place cars upon the aforesaid rail ways, and suit in chancery. It would be well if the instrument transport them by the use of locomotive engines, except: could be procured by the State, and preserved.-Newing the section between the eastern inclined plane and ark Advertiser. the city of Philadephia, and the short levels upon the Allegheny Portage rail ways, upon which section and levels so excepted animal power may be used; and further, any individual or association of individuals may, during the season the navigation of the canals is obstucted, have full privilege to place cars upon the aforesaid rail ways, and transport them by the use of animal power: Provided always, Those persons that use the road for the purposes aforsaid, shall use no other fuel for the purpose of generating steam, than coke or min. eral coal, and shall be governed by such regulations and rules as the canal commissioners may direct and consider advisable to protect the improvements, and systematize the operations of the transporters.

Section 3. The Canal Commissioners be and they are hereby directed to have the said rail ways finished, water stations, &c. erected so as to be adapted to transportation by locomotive engines.

Section 4. The Canal Commissioners be and they are hereby directed to dispose of and sell to any individual or association of individuals, all the engines (except the stationary ones) ordered by the act of the fifteenth of April, one thousand eight hundred and thirty four-and furnish no more power hereafter for the purpose of transportation: and further, the Canal Commissioners be and they are hereby directed to take charge of all stationary engines, machinery connected therewith, and water stations, and keep them in repair, and cause a strict superintendence of the transit of all travel and commerce upon all the planes overcome by stationary engines.


JOHNSTOWN, Nov. 22, 1834. Dear Sir-I observe, by your paper, of the 18th inst. that you have been referring back to the first volume of the Pittsburgh Gazette, of the year 1787.-I was a subscriber to that paper in the year 1797 and 1798.In one of those years, I think it was, that I had a communication published in that paper, on the subject of a railway from Philadelphia to Pittsburgh.-I kept no copy of it, nor do I now know what it was like; but it would no doubt, be somewhat of a curiosity at this day. I would thank you sincerely to hunt it up and republish it in your valuable paper, to which I am now again a subscriber, and much oblige

Your obedient servant,

[blocks in formation]


On Saturday last 10 head of cattle were brought to the borough and weighed upon the hay scales. Their weights are given below.

William Mitchoner,


Thomas Hickman,


Marshall Hickman,

Samuel Worth,

Benjamin Kerns,












For the Gazette and Intelligencer. have been said that there was a post and rail fence in Messrs Editors,-Until within a few weeks it might Chestnut street, Philadelphia. Finding that you and other elderly gentlemen take delight in urbane reminiscences, I have often determined to keep that fact in recollection for my grand children, who may perhaps be great folks, and scorn the people who live so low as Broad street. The fence was at the South East corner of Schuylkill third and Chestnut, and has just been removed, in preparation, I suppose, for building. Is there another within the limits of the city?


Eight flat boats have been loaded with ice at Frank lin, Pa destined for Natchez and other ports far down on the Mississippi, where it is said to be worth 50 dollars per ton.

The Franklin Intelligencer, from which we learn the above fact, says "The boats are lined inside with boards, and filled in with coal dust between the lining and outside plank in order to keep out the heat. The ice is then cut with whip saws, in pieces about 22 inches square, and carefully stowed in the boat, after which it is covered with a thick bed of straw."

From the U. S. Gazette.


Our prediction seems to have come true, that the cold weather had not taken his final leave of us for this winter, but that it would return early in February. During his absence from the 12th of January to the 1st of February, the weather was exceedingly mild and pleasant. Some times, during the middle of the day, the Mercury would rise to sixty, but would descend in the night to various points; some nights to only forty, and others thirty; just cool enough to prevent vegetation. Friday, January 30, was a violent rain storm, with considerable thunder and lightning in the evening; after which it cleared, and became colder. On Sunday morning, February 1st, the Mercury in old Fahrenheit stood at 30. On Monday, February 2d. it stood at 22. On Tuesday morning, at 18, i. e. above 0. but 14 below the freezing point.

We had the gratification recently of examining the original deed from "Dame Eliz. Carteret" and the executors of Sir George Carteret, to William Penn and his eleven associates for the whole of East Jersey. This instrument is beautifully executed on two large sheets of parchment, the head line being illuminated or embellished in the finest style of the ancient scriveners. The The Delaware is now interrupted with ice.-Yesterconsideration money named is 3,400 pounds sterling, and the deed is dated London, Feb. 2d, 1681. The day morning commenced a snow storm which has cov→ Grantees are William Penn, Rob. West, Thomas Rud-ered our streets and roofs,




VOL. XV.--NO. 7.




Report of the Committee to whom were referred the
Message of the Governor, and Documents, relative
to the River Delaware-Mr. Read, of the City, Chair-
Read in the House of Representatives, Jan,


27, 1835.

The Committee to which were referred the Message of the Governor of the 12th December, 1834, and the accompanying Documents, relative to the use of the waters of the River Delaware,


That they have bestowed on the subject referred to them, the attentive and deliberate consideration which its importance and the interests involved in it seemed to require, and have sought from such sources as were accessible to them, all the information that could be obtained. They have been rendered the more anxious to proceed with caution and accurate information on every point to which their attention has been directed by the inadequate statement of the circumstances on the face of the documents referred to them, and by the absence of any narrative of the different stages of the negotiation, the result of which only is now submitted for the approval of the Legislature. The committee having reluctantly arrived at a conclusion adverse to the proposed ratification, do not agree with the Commissioners in the opinion that "it was useless to detail all the proceedings of the joint commissioners which led to the final result," and could have wished that the documentary evidence communicated to the Legislature, had been more complete. The history of the progress of the negociation might have had a tendency to remove the doubts and difficulties which have existed in the minds of the committee. To know what was asked and refused, might, in many respects, as matter of illustration merely, be as useful as to know what was granted, and it would have been the source of sincere gratification to the committee, had they been apprised of the precise difficulties which they presume must have prevented the more satisfactory adjustment of this business. The committee regret too, that all the materials, comprising drafts with soundings, and the result of personal and scientific observation, on which the commissioners acted, were not communicated. It is impossible to believe that the very inadequate materials referred to the committee were all that the commissioners had before them during their deliberations. They are manifestly insufficient for the safe and prudent decision of a question so vitally important to a large por tion of the citizens of the Commonwealth. A small draft of the proposed dam and sluice at Wells' Falls, was the only paper of the kind referred to the committee, or so far as they are apprised, communicated to the Legislature. Some time subsequent to the organization of the committee, on a personal inquiry made by the chairman, a series of drafts of different portions of the river was found in the office of the Secretary of the Commonwealth, which they have been left to conjecture, was the same prepared by Mr. Kneass, the former engineer, and referred to in the report of the commissioners. They are not, however, authenticated in any way.



No. 371.

In examining the report and documents annexed, the committee have been painfully struck with the apparent precipitancy with which the proceedings of the commissioners have been marked, and which, in the absence of any statement of the mode by which this compromise was decided on, cannot but be regarded as not altogether consistent with the prudent and circum. spect deliberation which the subject deserved. A comparison of dates will illustrate the meaning of the committee. The letter of instructions to Mr. Gay, the engineer, is dated at Lancaster, October 11th, 1834.Mr. Gay's report to the commissioners, made after an examination of the river at the different points, is dated at Lancaster, October 27th, 1834. It must be borne in mind, that it is on the basis of this report of Mr. Gay, that the agreement was concluded. The report of Mr. Douglass, the engineer employed by the New Jersey commissioners, is dated at Princeton, November 18th, 1834, and the final agreement now submitted for conconfirmation, was executed at Philadelphia,on the 22d of November. It is but just however, to the engineers, to state, that in their reports there is an expression of regret at the limited time allowed for examination, and whence the necessity of this haste, the committee are wholly at a loss to imagine. Mr. Kneass's report, made April, 1834, is the only one which appears to have been made after a minute and deliberate examination, and it is adverse to the arrangement agreed upon by the commissioners.

Dismissing these preliminary considerations, which the committee refer to, not as essential to a just understanding of the views they shall have occasion to pre sent, but as illustrating and enforcing the necessity of great caution in a final decision of the question, they will proceed to examine the merits of the agreement itself, with reference only to the constitutional rights and interests of all parties affected by it.

A grave question of a constitutional right, presented itself for the consideration of the committee in the outset of their deliberations, which is not referred to in the report of the commissioners. The committee are bound to believe, that the familiar principle of constitutional law to which they refer, could not have escaped the attention of the commissioners, and therefore, they the more regret that there is no allusion to the mode of solving the difficulty which it involves.— By the 10th section of the constitution of the United States, it is provided that "no state shall, without the consent of Congress, lay any duty or tonnage, keep troops or ships of war in time of peace, enter into any agreement or compact with another state," &c. The committee do not mean to intimate it as their opinion, though such might be the strict interpretation of the constitutional prohibition, that the consent of Congress is a necessary preliminary to a negotiation between two or more states, but they are entirely at a loss to imå. gine by what interpretation of explicit language, the necessity of a subsequent ratification can be obviated, or how, without the consent of Congress, in the language of the 5th article of this agreement, it can be considered" as a joint compact between the said states and the citizens thereof respectively, whenever the legislatures of the said states shall have passed laws approving of aud ratifying the same, and there after for


[ocr errors]

ever irrevocable by either of the said contracting par ties without the concurrence of the other." Whether agreement or compact," thus made and ratified without reference to the constitutional supremacy of Congress, would be void ab initio,or only voidable, is a question the committee do not pretend here to determine, but it is clear to their minds that such a submission to the Federal Legislature is requisite, and they would deem it wholly irregular to recommend the ratification of a compact in terms framed in disregard of it. The committee do not believe it would be a valid, still less an irrevocable compact, under our National charter, when ratified by the two states without the sanction of Congress. The necessity of such sanction should, the committee think, have been recognized on the face of the compact.

by the committee at once with diffidence, and with an honest conviction that they are worthy of consideration hereafter. As now presented, they have been regarded rather as matter of form than substance.

The committee will proceed to examine the compact on its merits.

The compact as made by the commissioners, contains the following provisions:

First. It is declared that the State of New Jersey may take, or cause to be taken, from the Delaware river, by means of the feeder at the head of Bull's Island, as much water as may be necessary to supply the Delaware and Raritan canal for the purposes of navigation.

Perhaps no case could occur to which the reason of the constitutional provision would more forcibly apply than that of a compact between the two states having | such an object in view as is contemplated by the agree. ment now under consideration. It is not the design of the committee in this place to anticipate their practical objections to the proposed dam at Wells' Falls. It is sufficient to state here that it is doubtful whether or not such a dam as is proposed will be an obstruction to the navigation of the Delaware. In its decision as a doubtful question, not only have the citizens of the Union at large an interest, which may be presumed to be the legitimate object of the provision of the article of the Federal Constitution, and which would be completely protected by the supervising power of Congress, but the citizens of a neighboring State within whose territory the river Delaware has its source, have, in the opinion of the committee, vested rights in its navigation | existing long prior to the formation of the constitution of the Union-the acquisition of no compact, the resulting the river, shall be let out into the river by a guard of no concession, but rights which the general law of independent sovereignties gave them, and of which confederacy and union have not deprived them. These rights, in the opinion of the committee, no ex parte negociation can impair. If, as cannot be denied, the citizens of New York have by the law of nations an interest in the unobstructed navigation of the Delaware, the rights which that interest gives them so far from being divested by the constitution of the Union, are necessarily and vastly strengthened by it.

In considering the rights of New York, as thus affected, it must further be borne in mind that should the present compact be ratified, such are its provisions, that it will be of the acts of Pennsylvania alone, as sanction ed by this compact, that New York can have reason to complain. The only advantage directly secured to New Jersey is the permission (which by the way she has already assumed in palpable violation of the agreement of 1783,) to use a certain portion of the water of the Delaware to feed the Delaware and Raritan canal. This abstraction of water it is supposed will never injuriously affect the navigation.Probably if strictly confined to canal purposes it will


But on the other hand, in order to feed her canal, Pennsylvania is to build a dam across the river, which may or may not, as time will show, prove an obstruction to the navigation. If any thing done under this agreement should prove an obstruction, it must be the Pennsylvania feeder dam, and in that event a collision between the two States of Pennsylvania and New York would ensue, far more unpleasant than the controversy which is to be adjusted by this compact, because founded in a palpable infraction of right, while New Jersey, secure in the enjoyment of its apparent innocent privilege, may easily afford to be the indifferent observer of the dispute.

The committee have been content with stating rather than illustrating these points. Had their views of the practical results of this negociation been different, these constitutional difficulties would have been regardLed as more interesting. These suggestions now are made

Second. It is declared that the State of Pennsylvania may take, or cause to be taken from the Delaware river, by means of dams and feeders at Wells' Falls, as much water as may be necessary to supply the Delaware division of the Pennsylvania canal, as far as the city of Philadelphia, should the canal be so far extended, for the purposes of navigation. The height of the dam to be constructed by the State of Pennsylvania at Wells' Falls, shall not exceed three feet above the surface of low water mark at the head of the Falls. There shall be a sluice in the dam sixty feet wide, and at least three hundred feet long, or longer if necessary, to make a secure descending navigation. The walls of the sluice as well as the dam shall be made of substantial timber crib work, filled with stones, and the upper end of the sluice walls extending in the dam shall be made sufficiently high to afford an index to watermen of the channel prepared for them. Boats or other craft ascending the river shall be admitted into the Pennsylvania canal, by locks constructed at or near the mouth of Neely's creek; and the said boats or other craft ascendlock or lift locks at the head of the Falls, free of expense. The locks shall be of sufficient capacity to admit all boats or other craft which can navigate the Pennsylvania canal. A good and sufficient channel shall be kept open above the dam of sufficient depth at low water to float said ascending boats or other craft which may pass from the said canal, to a ponding depth of water in the river, and above the suction of the said sluice, and such a tow path as may be necessary for this purpose shall be constructed.Such locks, channel and tow path, shall at all times be kept in good repair by the State of Pennsylvania.


Third. The State of New Jersey shall cause the obstructions to the navigation of the river Delaware, at Scudder's Falls, which have been placed there by the Trenton Delaware Falls company, to be removed or otherwise obviated.

The advantages which by this agreement in the view of the commissioners to be secured to Pennsylvania are:

1st. The supply of water to the level of the Delaware division of the Pennsylvania canal below New Hope.

2d. Increased facilities to the coal trade by a communication at New Hope, with the Delaware and Raritan canal leading to the New York market.

3d. The removal of the existing obstructions in the Delaware, at Scudder's Falls, illegally placed there by the Delaware Falls company.

4th. The improvement of the rafting channel and of the ascending navigation; and

5th. The adjustment of an ancient and irritating conflict of rights and interests of the two states.

The committee will endeavor to examine these pro posed advantages briefly, and in the order they have been stated.

First then as to the supply of the lower level of the canal with water. From the commencement to the close of their inquiries, the committee, though deeply impressed with the importance of this subject, have been so embarrassed by the various and contradictory

« ÎnapoiContinuă »