Page images
PDF
EPUB

Respected Friends,

Lockport, 8th Month, 19th, 1829.

I have received your favor relative to the lease you bought of Hatch & Scovill. I regret that you should have paid "heavy sums" of money for an article which I consider to you valueless.

You are aware of the situation of my lands around the locks, which originally cost me about $9,000; and you can imagine the insignificance with which one would of necessity view the proposed "offer."

For the money you have paid the state, you have your remedy by applying to the Comptroller, and citing him to an act passed April, 1828, touching the surplus water of the canal.

The money you may have paid speculators for, you of course can look up where you lost it.

I am ready to pay the state of New-York, whenever an opportunity presents, for any benefit they confer upon me. But at present I am not willing to aid in making up the wild speculations of any company, how much soever I may respect them.

Your threats I heed not. You have a right to talk; and of course when no water runs on my land, my mill will stand still until I can procure a steam engine.

I shall not be ready to receive any further propositions FROM YOU touching the water, until I shall have made such arrangements with the state as will enable me to give "good titles" to any one wishing to purchase. And you appear to be aware of the impropriety of doing any thing in this way until the water question is settled. To settle this, I have ever been ready to meet the Canal Commissioners, and I wish you to understand "DISTINCTLY," that I shall not treat with any other persons under any circumstances.

Respectfully,

To LOT CLARK, and his Associates.

L. A. SPALDING.

On the 7th day of October following, the undersigned caused to be served on Spalding a notice, that he should apply to the board of Canal Commissioners, at their next meeting at Utica, for an order to turn the water from his mill, either by passing it through the locks, or by carrying it around in a culvert into the basin below. [A. No. 91.]

2

A duplicate of this notice he also mailed to John C. Spencer, Esq. of the village of Canandaigua in the county of Outario, who, as he had been informed, was the attorney of the memorialist, from the time he first commenced his depredations upon this property, up to that period. On the 14th day of October, the undersigned appeared before the board of Canal Commissioners, consisting of Stephen Van Rensselaer, William C. Bouck, Samuel Young and Henry Seymour, and obtained the following order:

"Resolved, That the lessees of the surplus waters at Lockport be permitted to take the same, in close, safe conduits, from the head of the locks, under and along the embankments and towing paths, to such place as they shall choose to apply it in propelling machinery: Provided, that the work is done at the expense of the said lessees, and in such manner as will not, in the opinion of the Canal Commissioners, incommode the navigation of the canal, or the convenient use of the towing path: and that, in the mean time, the said surplus water shall not be drawn, to the use of any mill or mills, without the consent of the purchasers of said water: and that for the purpose of carrying this resolution into full effect the superintendent and the lock-tenders at Lockport, are hereby enjoined and required to discharge the waters through the locks at all times when practicable.

Resolved, That a copy of the preceding resolution be furnished to Walter Osborn, superintendent, and to the lock-keepers at Lockport.

I certify that the foregoing is a correct transcript from the original.

October 25, 1829.

WM. C. BOUCK, Secretary."

As the memorialist had derided the idea of obtaining such order, and appeared to act under the impression, in all the steps he had taken, that as the interest in the water had passed out of the state, they would not interfere to proteet the rights of lessees, the operation of the order was suspended until the fifteenth of December following, in hopes that he would yet see the necessity of anticipating the event, by an honorable settlement; but in this, as in all other expectations founded on a belief of his returning sanity on this subject, the undersigned was disappointed. The suspension was again misunderstood, and taken as an evidence of fear and ap

prehension, lest the act should create a popular excitement, as he had confidently predicted.

The water was then turned from the race, by closing the paddlegates; but the elements moved on as usual, according to the laws of nature. The public seemed quiet and unconcerned, and his threatened insurrection, which was to shake the mountain-ridge to its base, dwindled down into a brawl of the memorialist, and half a dozen dependants around him.

The undersigned, still feeling anxious to give repose to the difficulties, then addressed a letter to the memorialist, and Hathaway, Gooding and Bissell, who were the other proprietors of machinery propelled by the surplus water, a copy of which follows:

Lockport, Dec. 16, 1829. To Messrs. Lyman A. Spalding, John Gooding, Edward Bissell, and Sylvester R. Hathaway.

GENTLEMEN

Understanding that you claim to have a connected interest in the race or waste-weir through which the surplus waters at Lockport are carried from the head of the locks to two flouring-mills and two saw mills, and various other machinery, and the water having been shut out of the race with a view to use it in a different direction, for the purpose of availing ourselves of our interest in the water as assignees of the lease, and to bring a part of them onto lands below to propel machinery, we now propose to you to lease for the term of one year, sufficient to turn all the machinery hitherto propelled by the said surplus water, at and after the rate of fifty dollars annual rent, for enough to propel a run of stones of the size now used in your mills on 24 feet wheels; we are ready to contract with you for any quantity you shall choose, at the above annual rent, to be turned from the paddle gates into the race at the usual place above the locks; and you can then make such arrangements between yourselves as to their disposition, as you choose. If a part of you should refuse this proposition, and the others be disposed to accede to it, we will then lease to those who so accede, at and after the same rate.

We did not request the Canal Commissioners to turn those waters from the race, until all attempts to make an arrangement with Mr. Spalding had failed. Having purchased and paid for the lease,

we have no objects in view but to make it available, and have the water used in the manner most beneficial to the public.

We regret, as much as any of you can, to have such valuable machinery stand still, and are therefore induced to make this offer.

We trust you will, on a fair view of the case, deem it reasonable. If, however, you do not, and insist that you will either have your machinery stand still, or take from us this water for which we have paid a large amount of money, without any allowance, we shall still continue to ask the State to let it run where it now does, until we can prepare aqueducts to throw it on to machinery below your works. It is expected if these propositions are acceded to it will be done without delay.

Yours very cordially,

LOT CLARK,

For himself, and as attorney for
CHARLES E. DUDLEY,

BENJAMIN KNOWER, and

THOMAS W. OLCOTT.

To this letter the memorialist gave no reply; but from the others the undersigned received the following answer:

Lockport, Dec. 17, 1829.

SIR-We have examined your proposal in reference to the surplus waters of the Erie canal, and consider it fair and reasonable.

We will see Mr. Spalding immediately, and request him to join us in the lease you propose. We would much prefer having him join us; but should he refuse, we will then meet you and enter into a lease separately, for enough for four run of stones. We have always been willing the lessees of the State should have the benefit of their lease, and we are entirely ready to contract with you.

Yours respectfully,

EDWARD BISSELL & CO.
S. R. HATHAWAY.

The memorialist declined the proposition, and a lease was execu. ted to the other proprietors, of sufficient water to propel their ma chinery. The water was turned into the race for that purpose, and

the memorialist drew it to his mill. An injunction was obtained from the court of chancery, to restrain him, which injunction still remains. His mill has ever since remained idle, except when he has drawn the water in contempt of the injunction; and for this he has been brought before the vice-chancellor, on attachment, and fined, and another application remains before him, undecided, for a subsequent violation.

The foregoing are the facts in the case, and present a fair view of the suffering under which the memorialist "is so much oppressed;" suffering that springs from disappointed cupidity and the frustration of schemes formed to trample on others' rights. If ruin is before him, it is the ruin of an unholy project. While the State held this water power, he made no effort to obtain it; but when the right had passed out of the State, and it was vested in others, then a pretence is set up that he is willing to pay the State. Kennedy & Hatch owned no land in Niagara, and he would not treat with them; the present owners of the lease hold too much land, and therefore no settlement can be made. Still bent on his mad and distracted schemes of aggrandizement, unwilling to avow his real object, which is to usurp the whole without an equivalent-the most frivolous and contradictory pretences are set up ;-the sure indications of a bad cause.

Now he is willing to pay the State, if they will form a tribunal to decide between him and them, according to his own selfish notions of right and wrong-now the State or an individual can have no more interest in the water than to the air over his head. In one particular, he has been uniform. In all his communications to the lessees, he has denied their right, and refused to compromise on any terins, or to listen to any proposals: but in his letter to the comptroller and in his memorial, he has set up complaints of extortion against the lessees, and treats the subject as if they had attempted to speculate upon his necessities.

The complaint of the memorialist, that he erected his mill under the eye of the acting Commissioner, and received no intimation that he would be disturbed, though, as the undersigned has been informed and believes, without foundation in truth, would not, if true, give the least color of right, or form the slightest foundation of complaint.

« ՆախորդըՇարունակել »