The falling off in tolls from 1875 to 1901, together with disbursements during the same period, is shown in the following table: In 1903 an attempt to.secure funds needed for the maintenance of the canal was defeated by injunction in the suit of Burke v. Snively, and the canal is now without means except such as are earned from its ice privileges, sale of lands, rental of water power, and money derived from condemnation proceedings. From 1886-87 to 1899-1900 the total receipts of the canal from every source and its disbursements were as follows: The above included legislative appropriations made from time to time in spite of the constitutional provision, namely: 1879, for maintenance 1891, to renew gates and make necessary repairs in Henry and Copperas Creek locks. 1897, for repairs.. 1899, for unforeseen emergency. 1901, for extraordinary expenses 1903, for maintaining navigable conditions, etc.. For many years the canal has been practically useless as a waterway, and the traffic over it has steadily diminished until now it is practically nothing. The completion of the main drainage channel from Robey street, Chicago, to Lockport (now in course of completion to Joliet, where it will connect with the Illinois and Michigan Canal) has substituted a deep waterway paralleling the Illinois and Michigan Canal between these points and has made its use as a waterway a thing of the past, even were it not now practically filled up and abandoned. That part of the canal is to-day a burden to the State, producing an income of $11,000, which is wiped out by one single charge for operating the Bridgeport pumping station at $18,000 per annum. Its items of receipts are as follows: From Norton & Co.: For water power under 13-year lease, lot 1, block 122. $300 200 10,000 The Bridgeport pumping works were formerly operated by the city until the completion of the drainage canal, when the city abandoned their operation and the Illinois and Michigan Canal commissioners were compelled to operate them at a cost of $25,000 per annum solely for supplying water power under their contract with Norton & Co. In 1902 an electric plant was put in and paid for out of the appropriation by the legislature, at a cost of $- which is supplied with power from the Economy Light and Power Company at Joliet, by wire running along the right of way of the Illinois and Michigan Canal from Joliet to the Bridgeport pumping works. The Illinois and Michigan Canal commissioners present various arguments against abandoning the canal, namely, that it is a connecting link between Lake Michigan and the Illinois and Mississippi rivers and the Hennepin Canal, and that there is still some transportation along its route. Unquestionably the canal was important as a regulator of freight rates years ago, but is no longer so, the total number of boats reported to be running upon it in 1902 being but 41. Although originally considered important in connection with the construction of the proposed ship canal, it is no longer so. The route of the proposed ship canal will not take into consideration the existence of the Illinois and Michigan Canal. The principal argument of the canal commissioners, namely, the importance of the canal as a regulator of freight rates for transportation, admitting that it is used for any boats at all at the present time, does not affect that part of the canal which parallels the main drainage channel, as the channel has become a substitute in the matter of transportation. The right of way of the canal can be made of great utility to the sanitary district in connection with its plan of real-estate development, and a conveyance of the Illinois and Michigan right of way to the district will relieve the State of an annual drain upon its treasury and open the way for converting this right of way into a useful and income-bearing property. BRIEF. Five hundred thousand dollars were ceded by the United States to Illinois for the building of the Illinois and Michigan Canal, under the following proviso: "Provided, That said canal when completed shall be and forever remain a public highway for the use of the Government of the United States, free from any toll or other charge for any property of the United States, or persons in their service, passing through the same: Provided, That such canal shall be commenced within five years and completed within twenty years, or the State shall be bound to pay to the United States the amount of land previously sold, and that the title to the purchasers under the State shall be valid." It has been contended that the proviso constituted a contract between the State of Illinois and the United States obligating the State to forever keep and maintain the canal as a public highway. In the case of Walsh v. Columbus, Hocking Valley and Athens Railroad Company (176 U. S., 469), where a cession of lands to the State of Ohio for canal purposes was made by the Government upon a similar condition, upon the sale of the canal which operated to throw it into disuse, the contract question was raised. The clause thereof read as follows: "Provided, That the said canals when completed, shall be and forever remain · public highways for the use of the Government of the United States, free from any toll or charge whatever for any property of the United States or persons in their service passing along the same.' In passing upon the contract question the Supreme Court of the United States used this language: "The object of the act was to facilitate and encourage public improvements, but not to stand in the way of the adoption of more perfect methods of transportation which might thereafter be discovered. Had the question of internal improvements arisen ten or fifteen years later, when railways began to be constructed, it is quite improbable that the State would have embarked upon this system of canals or that courts would have aided it in the enterprise. Waiving the question whether the State could have abandoned the lands upon which these canals were built as public highways, we think it entirely clear that Congress could not have intended to tie the State down to a particular method of using them when subsequent experience has pointed out a much more practicable method which has supplanted nearly all the canals then in use. "There was no undertaking to keep up the canals for all time, and we think the proper construction of the proviso is that the Government should be entitled to the free use of the canals so long as they were maintained as public highways, and that the act of 1894 leasing these lands to the defendant for analogous purpose, it is no violence to the contract clause of the constitution." Our own court, in the case of Burke v. Snively (208 Ill., 358), discusses this question of contract with the United States, but does not decide it. This same court holds that "the canal has practically fallen into disuse for any of the purposes of transportation of either persons or property, and has been perverted to mere commercial purposes of supplying water power to those along its banks and selling privileges to cut ice from its pools. It is no longer a highway of commerce." So that the question of abandonment as a highway of commerce seems practically to have been disposed of as matters stand at present. The conveyance of the canal right of way from Chicago to Joliet would not be an abandonment but really a substituting of another highway of commerce in lieu thereof. O |