+ 
 
 ERSUTK, 
 
 LIBRARY 
 
 OHIO STATE UNIV 
 
 gm 
 
 *~ 
 Tees 
 ri . 5) Me 
 ‘spain 
 
 a 
 
 viet 
 
 ee, 
 
: Report of 
 The Legislative 
 ~ Canal 
 
 (Commission 
 
REPORT 
 
 OF 
 
 THE LEGISLATIVE CANAL 
 COMMISSION 
 
 MEMBERS: 
 
 Wm. A. WEyYGANDT, Chairman. 
 Jas. R. CrarKk, Secretary. 
 
 FE. J. Hopp.e. 
 
 Jacos J. WISE. 
 
 CULBERTSON J. SMITH. 
 
 Guy DETRICK. 
 
 CoLumBus, Ono: 
 Tue F. J. Heer Printine (0. 
 1914. 
 
BCS oe 
 
 Page 
 MIE EHO CHUL O Ditercean Meat ans ceeds: orice oh sts odd gern Ssiche 5 See tveve’s. cia stake & Saat RM es 5 
 HEM MGS CR ES ULOM Not cantar ies aires kh ce oe aa ooo hee ee 6 
 IPERS Grill. (Ckosaye litte yahe cee teeiccs sce co: ARN Ree LeeEMe IN a Dba i a eae lek oi) 7 
 OI Comme em) Cobar estan ten ats eta cape isn Matus scat tee as: cis SiG RE ee 7 
 MVEA TIN Hee UTC aP ale Cre ar ceeniahah cn niekane S Mohini She eechrod, «eo cud cates oe OO aie Ae ee 8 
 EPEC CMU bSmeIC EEX DEN UITULOS aridin crea ccatche Oils eekew kee ee ace ee ee 8 
 METIS Ulm Oleg LOND CTU Vsewtvas ster Geers, c ctateucie oaks lascde celees odes dov ol OC Ree ee arate 9 
 ore ena MCE PC TEAL fest ls cei ape F 2 o She gine doa Lea divsh Shad oe oT ee 10 
 re emis cemey e (ACEO Sho So. yb a Soa yie «Siar eoaks ob cs cle wade be bee ae 10 
 Peretti CANALS te aso tola es 5. Sst bearer onidie's dae 2d EUS AO abit 
 UE SS aE SU) cet A Sa ee cp PS aed, Ve 3 
 eee eA MEOR INORG cao OO Ae aos. dca Se 8's Dolce eek Se A es 14 
 Peel AuULuMe Ee TOperty OWNers.... ool. sc. a desc nes kee eles dike 16 
 Rema TICA RIED a ee Petry cis bo se Shek boos doe a bees 16 
 Pe ee enn alee kis ald ys Gbigls 4a ee Gk a cio eL RAE ee ee 21 
 ETL bs SE EES En Ser Ce gre ore a ee 23 
 
 2 3 
 
 159254 
 
REPORT OF THE LEGISLATIVE CANAL COMMISSION. 
 
 To the HonoraBLE JAMES M. Cox, Governor of Ohio: 
 
 The Joint Legislative Commission, created pursuant to Senate Joint 
 Resolution No. 32, providing for an investigation of the Ohio canals 
 for the purpose of recommending a policy for the future use of said 
 canals. herewith submits the following report: 
 
 The Joint Legislative Commission, at the call of its duly appointed 
 chairman, Wm. A. Weygandt, after holding several preliminary meet- 
 ings at Columbus, met at Cleveland, Ohio, and began its work under 
 said resolution by holding a public meeting at the City Hall. At this 
 meeting a policy for the future use and disposition of the canals was 
 discussed. Afterwards, on the same day, the Commission spent some 
 time in inspecting the Ohio and Erie Canal in Cleveland and vicinity, 
 and on the following morning, August 12th, resumed its work by in- 
 specting the canal from Cleveland to Akron, and on the evening of 
 that day held a public meeting with the citizens of Akron. The Com- 
 mission each day thereafter, as it moved from place to place, carefully 
 inspected the canal, observing its condition as affected by the recent 
 floods, as well as its use as a factor in the transportation of freight 
 products. The Commission further made careful inquiry at all points 
 concerning the extent of the state’s rights in all leases with the users 
 of the water of the canal, as well as leases pertaining to state lands. 
 
 The primary object in viewing the canal property was to determine 
 the revenue accruing to the state at the present time under its leases 
 and to learn public sentiment with reference to a future policy for the 
 canals. The Commission endeavored to ascertain the probable volume 
 of freight for transportation as well as what increase in revenue might 
 be expected from the users of the water and other state property. 
 
 A daily schedule or itinerary had been prepared for the use of the 
 Commission by Superintendent of Public Works, John I. Miller, and 
 at every place therein designated for the holding of a public meeting, 
 and at many places not therein specified, meetings were held. Every 
 public meeting was well attended and the canal question in all of its 
 phases freely discussed, both for and against the retention of the 
 canal property by the state, as well as the uses to which it might be 
 put. A wide diversity of opinion was expressed. A strong sentiment 
 for a barge canal was found in the western part of the state along 
 the Miami and Erie Division, while only a few were fayorable to the 
 same proposition along the Ohio and Erie Division. 
 
 5 
 
6 
 
 The Commission continued on its tour over the two divisions of 
 the system from the 11th day of August until the 31st day of August, 
 1913, at which time the work of inspection was completed at Toledo. 
 
 At all hearings the Commission was informed that the canal in 
 its present condition is useless as a means of transportation and much 
 objection was found in various places to stagnant water in the canal. 
 While some favored abandonment of the canal for transportation, 
 comparatively few favored the state’s disposing of the right-of-way. 
 
 Valuable assistance and information were given the Commission 
 by the Superintendent of Public Works, John I. Miller, and the Com- 
 mission, in framing its report, acknowledges its appreciation of the same. 
 Many other persons furnished the Commission valuable facts and sug- 
 gestions, for which appreciation is hereby expressed. 
 
 EXTENT AND DESCRIPTION. 
 
 The canal system of Ohio at present consists of the Ohio and Erie 
 and the Miami and Erie Divisions, and the lakes and reservoirs at 
 various points in the state, but most particularly those at the summit 
 levels of the two divisions, 
 
 The Ohio and Erie Canal, from*Cleveland to Dresden, is 149 miles 
 in length, and has 75 locks between said points. The Miami and Erie 
 Canal, extending from Toledo to Cincinnati, is 244 miles in length, 
 aud has 95 locks between said points. 
 
 The lakes and reservoirs at the summit level of the Ohio and Erie 
 Canal cover an area of approximately 2,200 acres, from which the 
 water is supplied to feed the canal. Buckeye Lake furnishes water for 
 the hydraulic which extends to Newark. The Ohio and Erie is also 
 supplied with water from various dams in the Tuscarawas and Wal- 
 honding Rivers. 
 
 The minimum width of the Ohio and Erie Canal on the water line 
 is 40 feet with an average depth of 4 feet. In numerous places, how- 
 ever, the canal is 100 feet wide and 6 and 7 feet deep. <The average 
 right-of-way is approximately 85 feet. 
 
 In ‘addition to the above, the Ohio and Erie Canal includes the 
 following: 
 
 From Trinway to Lockbourne, approximately 50 miles; from Car- 
 roll to Nelsonville, 40 miles; from Columbus to Portsmouth, 100 miles; 
 from Roscoe to Six-Mile Dam, a section of the Walhonding Canal, 6 
 miles. 
 
 The Ohio Canal from Trinway to Lockbourne has been abandoned 
 except that portion from Newark, through Buckeye Lake, to Lock- 
 bourne. The portion from Carroll to Nelsonville and from Columbus 
 to Portsmouth was abandoned by act of the legislature in 1911. The 
 
 pee ee ee 
 
 ee 
 
 Pay 
 
Six mile stretch from Coshocton to Roscoe is maintained for hydraulic 
 purposes. 
 
 From Defiance to Cincinnati, the minimum width of the Miami and 
 Erie Canal at the water line is 40 feet, with an average depth of 4 
 feet. From Defiance to Toledo, the minimum width at the water line 
 is 50 feet and the depth is 5 feet. However, the latter portion of the 
 canal is 60 to 70 feet wide on the water line a greater part of the dis- 
 tance, and many places more than that, and has a depth of as much 
 as 10 feet, especially from Grand Rapids to Waterville. The section 
 of canal from Defiance to Toledo is by far the most suitable for trans- 
 portation purposes and could be improved for-such purposes with less 
 expense than any other section of the state public works. If any portion 
 of the canal system of the state were to be developed for transportation 
 purposes here is where it should begin, for two important cities are 
 connected, the waterway is broad and deep and there is a possibility that 
 within a limited number of years this section of the canal will become 
 a part of a barge or ship canal that is being proposed between Toledo 
 and the southern end of Lake Michigan by way of Defiance, Ohio, and 
 Fort Wayne, Indiana, and for which the federal government has pro- 
 vided preliminary surveys. 
 
 The Commission suggests that if the General Assembly deems it 
 best to improve any sections of the canal for transportation purposes 
 on its present basis, that the sections of the Ohio-and Erie, known as 
 Summit Level, from Akron to Barberton, and of the Miami and Erie, 
 from Toledo to Defiance, and from Dayton to Cincinnati, be set apart 
 for navigation for a period of not less than fifteen years. 
 
 The length of the canal from Defiance to Cincinnati 1s 189 miles; 
 from Defiance to Toledo, 55 miles. The average property width of 
 the Miami and Frie is 100 feet. 
 
 The Miami and Erie Division includes, besides the main water- 
 ways, the Sidney feeder, which runs from Fort Jefferson to Lockington, 
 a distance of 14 miles; the St. Mary’s feeder, a distance of 2 miles. 
 The reservoirs consist of the St. Mary’s Reservoir, with an area of 
 15,000 acres, the Loramie Reservoir, a 2,400 acres, and Indian Lake, 
 with 6,500 acres. ‘ 
 
 It is apparent from this brief statement that the holdings of the 
 State of Ohio in its canals, lakes and feservoirs, are very extensive and 
 valuable. The canal authorities of the state roughly estimate the value 
 of the public works of Ohio at $15,000,000. 
 
 PHysIcAL CONDITION. 
 
 Ohio and Erie—From Cleveland to Brecksville, a distance of 17 
 miles, a good head of water. From Breksville to Lock No. I2'in the 
 City of Akron, the canal is practically destroyed, a distance of 16 miles, 
 
 *3 
 
8 
 
 Breaks are in the canals at Peninsula and Boston and elsewhere. The 
 spring flood was the cause of this. The Summit Level, from Lock 1 in 
 Akron to Massillon, a distance of 21 miles, has a supply of water. 
 From Massillon to Zoar Dam, a distance of 18 miles, there is no water. 
 This stretch passes through Navarre and Bolivar. From Zoar Dam to 
 Sugar Creek, a mile below Canal Dover, 11 miles in length, there is a 
 good supply of water. From the latter point to Roscoe Aqueduct, a dis- 
 tance of 42 miles, no water. From Six Mile Dam to Dresden, a distance 
 of 24 miles, a fair supply of water. 
 
 Miami and Erie — At present the Public Works Department is re- 
 constructing a dam two miles north of Middletown following the 
 destruction of the dam by flood, and when this is completed the Miami 
 and Erie Canal will be-in first-class condition from Middletown to 
 Cincinnati for the purpose of supplying water. From Tadmore, the 
 west end of Miami Aqueduct, 8 miles above Dayton, there is no water 
 in the canal, nor has there been for a number of years. The bed of 
 the canal is well sodded, and is an indication of what an abandoned 
 canal would be with all the water drained from it. There is no water 
 in the canal from Miamisburg to two miles north of Middletown, ten 
 miles. 
 
 At the present time, in the Summit level from Loramie to Lock- 
 ington, a distance of eighteen miles, there is no water, owing to two or 
 three large breaks made by the last flood. fl ffl 
 
 From Defiance to Independence Dam, a distance of 7 miles, and 
 from Texas Lock to Providence, a distance of 4 miles, the canal is 
 a part of the river. On this division of the canal, from Defiance to 
 Toledo, an excellent supply of water is furnished by the dams in the 
 Maumee River, one at Independence and the other at Grand Rapids. 
 The canal al! the way from Defiance to Toledo is well supplied with 
 water. 
 
 Attached as Exhibit “A” to this report is a statement from John 
 I. Miller, Superintendent of Public Works, showing in detail the physical 
 condition and extent of the Ohio and Erie Canal and the Miami and 
 Erie Canal, and its lakes and reservoirs. 
 
 RECEIPTS AND EXPENDITURES. 
 
 The original cost of construction of the canals has been com- 
 puted at $15,967,625.69. The total expenditure from the year 1827 to 
 1912, inclusive, for superintendence, repairs and cost of collection was 
 $13,432,568.61. Add to this $1,309,000 for the rebuilding of locks, 
 dredging of the canals, etc., on the Ohio and Erie and the Miami and 
 Erie divisions, in 1906 and succeeding years, and the result is $14,741,- 
 568.61, being the total sum expended on the canals exclusive of the 
 original cost of construction. These figures make the total cost of the 
 
9 
 
 canal system in the State of Ohio for construction, superintendence, 
 repairs and cost: of collection, $30,709,194.30. This does not include 
 the cost of operation for the year 1913. 
 
 The total receipts from the canals from 1827 to 1912, inclusive, 
 have been $17,555,160.15, leaving a balance of $13,154,034.15 on the 
 debit side of the account. To off-set this difference is the present value 
 of the canal property which is owned by the state. 
 
 The total revenues collected by the department from all sources 
 during the fiscal year 1913 were $241,124.14, as compared with $139,- 
 810.20 for 1912. 
 
 Included in these totals is $67,982.07 for land sold in 1913 and 
 
 $6,536.00 for land sold in 1912, leaving the net receipts from land 
 
 rents, water and miscellaneous sources at $173,142.07 for 1913, and 
 $133,305.20 for 1912. Of these revenues $78,974.27 were paid into the 
 General Revenue Fund of the state under the act of the General As- 
 sembly organizing the department. 
 
 For all ordinary purposes the department expended $141,702.96 
 during 1913, and for extraordinary expenses paid out of canal receipts, 
 $56,550.00 was expended for damages occasioned by the flood. For 
 1912 ordinary expenses were $146,902.28. The Legislature appropriated 
 for salaries, expense and maintenance of the canals, $76,600.00 in 
 1913, and for strengthening the walls of the state reservoirs and beauti- 
 fying the state parks, $140,700.00. For rebuilding Middletown Dam 
 and for work on the Summit Level at Akron, $89,120.00 was appro- 
 priated. This expenditure was also necessary on account of flood dam- 
 ages. : ; 
 
 For a more detailed report as to the receipts and expenditures 
 for the fiscal year of 1913, the Commission refers to the annual report 
 of John I. Miller, Superintendent of Public Works, just issued. 
 
 DISPOSAL OF PROPERTY. 
 
 The location of the canal property of the state is such that the im- 
 portance of its value commands serious thought before any policy with 
 reference to its future use or disposal is adopted. The policy here- 
 tofore in vogue of selling a part of this property by piecemeal cannot 
 be too severely criticised. The Commission believes that portions of 
 the canal property which are sold or leased so that only sections con- 
 necting cities and towns of importance and marking division points 
 should be disposed of, and if any portions are offered to abutting prop- 
 erty owners, no individual section should be sold between cities or 
 towns unless all parts are sold, the purpose being to hold intact all 
 important sections of. the canals. 
 
 The Commission believes that any lateral or other sections not 
 
10 
 
 absolutely needed by the state should be leased or sold on a full value 
 bond. 
 
 In numerous instances municipal corporations have obtained con- 
 trol of valuable terminals and have surrendered the same to other 
 parties, resulting in great loss to the state. This should be carefully 
 avoided in the future. 
 
 PRESENT USE OF CANAL. 
 
 The Commission found that no transportation of freight was being 
 attempted on either the Ohio and Erie or the Miami and Erie divisions. 
 
 Owing to the damage occasioned by the recent floods, the banks of the - 
 
 canals at various points were broken, allowing the water therein to 
 escape. The most serious damage of this character was sustained by 
 the Ohio and Erie Canal, the Miami and Erie Canal suffering con- 
 
 siderably less. The locks on both canals are in a fair state of preserva- 
 
 tion, although a few are entirely beyond repair. It will be recalled that 
 the State of Ohio, some years ago, spent nearly a million dollars in 
 building new locks, and these generally are in an excellent state of 
 preservation. Some, however, were poorly built. The Commission also 
 observed that manufacturing industries at many points use the water 
 of the canals and pay a rental therefor, which rental is the principal 
 revenue received by the state. Where enough water users are not 
 located to warrant a flow of water, the Commission believes the canal 
 should be drained. 
 
 The lakes and reservoirs were found to be in excellent condition. 
 The revenues arising from the operation of pleasure boats and other 
 water craft is considerable. 
 
 The revenue accruing to the state from rentals, etc., is about suff- 
 cient at the present time to defray the cost .of maintenance of these 
 properties. 
 
 INCREASE OF INCOME. 
 
 The Commission believes that the rentals can be greatly increased 
 on many portions of the canal system and that hydraulic power can be 
 developed with advantage both to the state and to the communities along 
 the canals. Great power opportunities exist along sections of the canal 
 
 where there is sufficient fall. For instance, at Akron, between Lock 1 
 
 and the junction of the Little and Big Cuyahoga Rivers, there is a fall 
 of about 200 feet in a distance of 1,000 feet and it is estimated that 
 many hundreds of horse-power could be developed for the manufacture 
 of electrical power that could be utilized to advantage. At Lockington, 
 on the Miami and Erie Canal, there is a fall of 76 feet in a distance of 
 less than one quarter of a mile, which affords another opportunity for 
 the development of power. These are cited as instances of how the 
 state might increase its income from the water. power in its artificial 
 waterways, and the Commission recommends that this phase of public 
 
 ee 7 « , 
 Sa 2 
 
 fae Bese 
 hie wey 
 
II 
 
 works development be gone into deeper by the department. The state 
 water is also used for industrial purposes, such as steam condensing, 
 etc., which should be developed further. The total revenue from all 
 activities of the state’s canals approach is $180,000 annually and it is 
 believed that by further developing the various sources of water power 
 and water use, this can be increased in five years to $250,000 annually. 
 
 The important fact must be always kept in mind, that industry and 
 business have built its plants and factories favorable to their operation 
 and if a radical change is made these matters ought to be considered. 
 The Commission commends the hydraulic and land survey of the canals 
 of the state that is being made by the Superintendent of Public Works 
 upon the advice of the Governor. 
 
 The Commission finds that much waste land exists along certain 
 sections of the canals, lakes and reservoirs, and believef that the state 
 can with profit reclaim much of this waste land which could be made 
 fertile and profitable. 
 
 Three legal propositions of importance have presented themselves 
 for consideration by the Commission: 
 
 FEDERAL RIGHTS IN CANALS. 
 
 First: The rights, if any, of the United States Government in 
 the Miami and Erie Canal lands or right-of-way. The Commission 
 finds that the principal right-of-way of the Miami and Erie Canal from 
 Dayton, Ohio, to Toledo, Ohio, was procured through an act of Con- 
 
 gress, passed May 24, 1828, Vol. 8, Laws of the United States, as 
 follows: 
 
 “Sec. 1. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Repre- 
 sentatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
 that there be, and is hereby granted to the State of Ohio, for the 
 purpose of aiding said state in extending the Miami Canal from 
 Dayton to Lake Erie, by the Maumee route, a quantity of land, 
 equal to one-half of five sections in width on each side of said 
 
 ~ canal, between Dayton and the Maumee River, at the mouth of 
 Auglaise, so far as the same shall be located through the public 
 land, and reserving such alternate section of the land unsold to 
 the United States, to be selected by the Commissioners of the 
 general land office, under the direction of the President of the 
 United States; and which land, so reserved to the United States, 
 for less than Two Dollars and Fifty Cents per acre. The said 
 land hereby granted to the State of Ohio, to be subject to the 
 disposal of the legislature of said state, for the purpose afore- 
 said and no other: 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 
 
12 
 
 charge, whatever, for any property of the United States, or per- 
 sons, m their service, passing through the same; And, provided 
 also, That the extension of the said Miami canal shall be com- 
 menced within five years, and completed within twenty years, 
 or the state shall be bound to pay the United States the amount 
 of any lands previously sold; and that the title to purchasers, 
 under the state shall be valid. 
 
 It will be observed that there are two provisos in said provision. 
 The first has reference to the canal’s being a public highway to be 
 used free of any charge by the United States and the second is a 
 limitation upon the time in which the canal must be started and com- 
 pleted. The right, if any, of the United States in the land over which 
 the canal is constructed must come by virtue of the first proviso. The 
 act does not specifically provide for a forfeiture of the land if the 
 state fails to maintain the land as a public highway. There is a condi- 
 tional clause to the second proviso that the state shall be bound to 
 pay for the land sold if the canal shall not be completed within the time 
 specified. This provision limits the second proviso, only, and does not 
 limit the first. The canal has been completed and the state has complied 
 with the second proviso. 
 
 ~ 
 
 In People ex rel vs. The Lake Superior Chip Canal, 32 Mich. 233, it 
 is held: 
 
 “The right of the respondent company, under the legislation 
 of Congress and the State Legislature in that regard, to the 
 possession of the Portage Ship Canal, and to collect the tolls, is 
 considered and sustained, as against the claim of the state as trus- 
 tee of the United States. 
 
 The provision of the Act of Congress requiring the canal to 
 be a public highway free of toll for United States vessels is held 
 not to evince a purpose to create by the act a trust in the posses- 
 sion of the state for the United States. Similar provisions for 
 free right of passage in United States land grants for railroads 
 have never been construed as making the roads government roads.” 
 
 The act of Congress under consideration in the above cited case con- 
 tained this provision, as shown on page 236 of the report: 
 
 “And the said canal shall be and remain a public highway 
 for the use of the Government of the United States free from toll 
 or charge upon the vessels of said government or upon vessels 
 employed by said government in the transportation of any prop- 
 erty or troops of the United States.” 
 
 | 
 
 <2 ge 
 
13 
 
 It will be observed that the court holds in the above case that the 
 state does not hold the canal in trust for the United States. But the 
 court does not touch upon the rights of the United States if the canal 
 should be abandoned. 
 
 The rule of construction of grants of this nature is stated in Leaven- 
 worth L. & C. Railroad Company vs. United States, 92 United States 
 Report 733, as follows: 
 
 “The rule announced in the former decision of this court, 
 that a grant by the United States is strictly construed against the 
 grantee, applies as well to one granting special privileges to a 
 private corporation.” 
 
 Rules of construction apply only where there is doubt as to the 
 meaning of the grant or to the extent thereof. 
 
 The grant under the Act of Congress now under eonciteraoa | is not 
 doubtful. The doubt, if any, arises in the proviso. 
 
 A proviso is usually a limitation upon a grant or general provision 
 of a statute. The proviso will not be extended beyond its plain terms. 
 If the United States had desired to retain a right of forfeiture, it would 
 have so stated in plain and explicit terms. 
 
 The right secured to the United States by the first proviso is a right 
 to free tolls. It is not a condition that the state shall so maintain the 
 ‘canals forever as a public highway. 
 
 Forfeitures are not favored in law. Although grants from the gov- 
 ernment are construed in favor of the government, at this late date the 
 courts would not favor a right of forfeiture under the doubtful terms 
 of the proviso now under consideration, and which contains no specific 
 right of forfeiture. We are of the opinion that the United States gov- 
 ernment has a right to free toll on the canals so long as they are main- 
 tained as public highways; that it has parted with all its right or interest 
 in the land used for the canal; and that the state has an absolute title in 
 fee to the right-of-way of the Miami and Erie Canal secured from the 
 United States government. 
 
 RIGHTs FO DISPOSAL. 
 
 SEcoND: Has the State of Ohio the right to dispose of its canal 
 ‘property? 
 
 The State of Ohio has the same right to dispose of this part of the 
 ‘canal system as it has to dispose of the part secured under the Act of 
 1825. 
 
 Upon this proposition we also cite decisions of the Supreme Court of 
 ‘Ohio, as follows: | 
 
 Omo ex rel vs. The P.C.C. & St. L Ry. C., 52 Ohio St. pp 180 
 et seq.: 
 
14 
 
 “By force of the provision of Section 8 of the act to provide 
 for the ‘internal improvement of the State of Ohio by navigable 
 canals,’ 23 O. L. p 57, whenever the state actually occupied a parcel 
 of land for canal purposes, a fee simple title thereto at once and 
 by. virtue alone, of such occupancy, vested in the state. 
 
 “Statutes of limitation do not run against the State unless the 
 intention that they should run so is obvious. 
 
 “That the title of the state to its canal lands is one in fee 
 simple, is a question of law. The only fact to be ascertained is 
 whether the lands were, in fact, a portion. of the canal systein. 
 How the acquisition was made is not material. The mere seizure 
 and appropriation of a parcel of land for canal purposes, by force 
 of the statute under which our canals were constructed, was alone 
 sufficient to vest in the State a fee simple title to them. Now 
 could any other title than one in fee simple be received by the 
 State for lands to be devoted to a canal. A mere occupation of 
 lands by the State for canal purposes was a seizure and appro- 
 priation of it to that purpose, and to be devoted to that purpose 
 was to give to the state a fee simple title thereto. No conveyance 
 was necessary; the seizure and occupancy transferred to the state 
 the entire estate in the lands so seized and occupied, leaving to the 
 former owner simply a claim for compensation. 23 Ohio L. 56, 
 (Sec. 8) ; Malone vs. Toledo, 28 Ohio St. 643; Malone vs. Toledo, 
 RAMOS Ig 54 1. 
 
 We are of the opinion that any title to said canal lands was sur- 
 rendered by the United States Government and became vested in fee in 
 the State of Ohio at the time the state accepted the same for the reasons 
 hereinbefore stated. 
 
 RIGHT oF ABANDONMENT. 
 
 Tuirp: Upon the question of the right of the state to abandon its 
 canals or public works, we are also of the opinion that the state, owning 
 said properties in fee simple, has a right to do so, and upon this proposi- 
 tion we cite the opinion rendered in the case of Walsh vs. The Columbus, 
 Hocking Valley & Athens Railroad Company, as found in United States 
 Supreme Court Report, Vol.'176, p. 469 et seq.: . 
 
 Syllabus: 
 “By an act of Congress passed in 1828, a large quantity of land 
 was granted to the State of Ohio, for the construction of canals. 
 The Act provided that such canals, “when completed or used, shail 
 be, and forever remain, public highways, for the use of the Gov- 
 ernment of the United States.’ .The grant. was accepted. by the 
 : State; but in 1894, the State Legislature authorized the abandon- 
 
 SS tr ae 
 
T5 
 
 ment of certain canals, which had been constructed under:the Act 
 of Congress and the leasing of the same, to a railroad company. 
 
 “Held, that there was a reason to claim that the act of 1894 
 impaired the obligations of the previous contract between the State 
 and the Federal Government, and that a Federal question was 
 thereby raised. 
 
 “Held further, that in accepting the Congressional land grant 
 of 1828, there was no undertaking on the part of the state to 
 maintain the canals as such in perpetuity, and that the Govern- 
 ment was only entitled to their free use as long as they were kept 
 up as public highways, and that the act of the Legislature of Ohio 
 authorizing their abandonment as canals and leasing them to a rail- 
 way company, did no violence to the contract clause of the Con- 
 stitution. 
 
 “Feld further, that a private property owner was no party to 
 the contract between the State and the Federal Government, and 
 stood in no position to take advantage of a default of the State in 
 respect to its contract. His rights were entirely subsidiary to 
 those of the Government, and if the latter chose to acquiesce in the 
 abandonment of the canals he has no right to complain.” 
 
 Opinion: 
 
 “Tf, by the acceptance of this act of the General Assembly of 
 the State of Ohio, the State became irrevocably bound to keep up 
 the canals for all time, for the use, not only of the Government, 
 but of everyone who incidentally profited by their preservation, it 
 is impossible to escape the conclusion that their subsequent aban- 
 donment impaired the obligation of such contract. But we think 
 the Supreme Court of Ohio was clearly right in its interpretation 
 of the statute. The principal object of the act was a donation of 
 land to aid the State in works of internal improvement, which were 
 then being extensively contemplated in the new states of the West. 
 Canals, at that time, embodied the most advanced theories upon the 
 subject of internal transportation. Congress annexed as a con- 
 dition to the grant that the canals built by its aid should ‘when 
 completed or used, be and forever remain, public highways, 
 for the use of the Government.’ Counsel for the defendant in- 
 sists that, under the terms of the proviso, the obligation to main- 
 tain these canals as public highways existed only so long as they 
 were ‘used’ as such, and this was evidently the opinion of the 
 Supreme Court of Ohio. Counsel for plaintiff insists, upon the 
 other hand, with much reason, that the proviso, that ‘the. said 
 canals when completed or used, shall be and remain public high- 
 ways, marks the beginning of the time when the obligation was 
 intended to operate—that is, if the canals were completed, or with- 
 out being completed, were so far completed as to be capable of 
 
16 
 
 use, and were used, the obligation to maintain them in perpetuity 
 attached. Whatever be the proper interpretation of these words 
 * * * the dominant idea of the proviso was evidently to compel 
 the state to maintain the canals as public highways, and to allow 
 the Government free use of them ‘for any property of the United 
 States or persons in their service passing along the same.’ * * *, 
 The object of the act was to facilitate and encourage public im- 
 provements * * * (Waiving the question whether the state 
 could have abandoned the land 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. * * * There was no undertaking to keep the 
 canals up 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, and no longer than, they were maintained 
 as public highways, and that the act of 1894, leasing these lands to 
 the defendant for an analogous purpose, does no violence to the 
 contract clause of the Constitution.” 3 
 
 We are, therefore, of the opinion that the State of Ohio, being the 
 absolute owner in fee simple of its canal property, has the right, if the 
 occasion should demand, to dispose of said lands or rights-of-way and 
 execute a good and sufficient deed in fee simple to the purchasers thereof. 
 
 RIGHTS OF ABUTTING PROPERTY OWNERS. 
 
 FourtH: We are of the opinion that the owners of property abut- 
 ting on the canals have no incidental right therein if abandoned. 
 
 “Owners of lands abutting on a canal, incidentally benefited 
 by the water it affords, or its facilities for drainage, have no prop- 
 erty interest in these incidental benefits, and cannot, on such 
 ground, enjoin abandonment of the canal, or claim compensation 
 therefor.” 
 
 See Vought vs. Columbus, Hocking Valley & Athens Railroad Com- 
 pany; Walsh vs. same; Vought vs. same; Walsh vs. same; Wright vs. 
 same ; Shotwell vs. same, 58 Ohio St. Report, p. 123 et seq. 
 
 RECOMMENDATIONS OF COMMISSION, 
 
 In view of the fact that the Commission is expressly enjoined in the 
 resolution under which it acts to report upon several phases of the canal 
 question and in view also of the experience and knowledge gained upon 
 the trip-of inspection, the Commission begs leave to report the following 
 findings and recommendations: 
 
17 
 
 First: That the General Assembly request the Congress of the 
 United States to authorize an immediate survey by capable government 
 engineers to determine the feasibility of a waterway or waterways, either 
 natural or artificial or both, connecting Lake Erie and the Ohio River, 
 the depth of such waterway or waterways to be sufficient to carry boats 
 of at least ten-foot draft. In order for a cross-state deep waterway to be 
 sufficiently useful to warrant any great amount of expense, it ought to be 
 large enough to convey the same units for transportation that operate 
 on the Erie Canal in New York State, Lake Erie and the Ohio and 
 Mississippi Rivers, thus making it unnecessary to break cargoes bound 
 from the Atlantic coast to the Ohio Canal and Ohio and Mississippi 
 River ports, or vice versa. 
 
 As a matter of information, it is stated here that the Federal Govern- 
 ment, under a River and Harbor Act of August 17th, 1894, made a sur- 
 vey of three routes from Lake Erie to the Ohio River, one from Cleve- 
 land to Marietta via Zanesville and the Muskingum River, one from 
 Sandusky to Portsmouth, via Columbus, and one from Toledo to Cin- 
 cinnati, via Defiance and Dayton. 
 
 The government board of engineers, in what is known as the Chit- 
 cenden Report, stated as a result of their surveys, that a canal seven feet 
 in depth, with locks 21 feet by 150 feet, could be built on the Eastern 
 route for $12,299,372; on the Central route for $18,094,165; and on the 
 Western route for $23,011,374. The report further stated that a canal 
 ten feet deep, with locks 26 feet by 200 feet, could be built on the Eastern 
 route for $15,042,586; on the Central route for $20,784,451; and on the 
 Western route for $26,865,126. These estimates included a right-of-way 
 200 feet wide, and the paving of the canal banks for a width of 12 feet 
 on each side, for which paving an allowance ranging from $3,400,000 to 
 $4,400,000 for each canal was made. It is believed that the cost of con- 
 struction would be considerably increased at the present time because of 
 the increased cost of material and labor. 
 
 The act under which the surveys were made provided for the survey 
 of the Ohio Canal, the Miami and Erie, and such river and stream chan- 
 nels as might, in their judgment, be available for such proposed barge 
 canal to be at a width of 70 feet at the water line, seven feet deep, and 
 with a capacity for vessels of at least 280 tons. The sum of $20,000 was 
 appropriated by the general government to defray the expenses of the 
 survey, and it was expressly stipulated that the government should not pro- 
 ceed with the construction of the barge canal. The board went some- 
 what outside of the strict construction of the special law under which they 
 acted to report that a canal ten feet in depth would be feasible and prac- 
 ticable on any of the three routes except possibly on the Eastern route. 
 the only question at issue there being the water supply. The report pro- 
 vided for new reservoirs at Port Jefferson and an improved supply for 
 the Grand Reservoir at St. Marys for the Western route; for the 
 
18 
 
 utilizing of the waters of the Scioto River in Marion County for the 
 Central route, and a new reservoir in the Cuyahoga River near Kent, 
 and the enlargement of the present Tuscarawas River for the Eastern 
 Route. 
 
 The Federal Government is investigating the practicability of a barge 
 canal from Lake Erie to the southerly end of Lake Michigan by way of 
 the Maumee River, Defiance and Fort Wayne, and the National Water- 
 ways Commission, in its report, recommended that $15,000 be appropri- 
 ated for carrying out the survey. Such a canal would utilize the Maumee 
 River within the State of Ohio for a considerable distance, and from 
 Toledo to Defiance would be a part of the present Miami and Erie Canal. 
 If the Federal Government can appropriate money for this survey, why 
 not do the same for a barge canal from Lake Erie to the Ohio River? 
 
 A canal from Toledo to Lake Michigan would become an interstate 
 waterway, and the Federal Government would be expected to build it in 
 part or entirely. If in the same connection such a canal were also built 
 from Defiance to Cincinnati, the project would be a part of a canal system 
 with the main part from Toledo to Defiance, one arm extending south 
 to Cincinnati from Defiance and the other, west and north-west from De- 
 flance, making an inter-state system which the Commission believes the 
 State of Ohio, in view of its location between great waterways, would 
 be justified in asking the Federal Government to build wholly or in part. 
 
 The National Waterways Commission, in its report, states that the 
 Maumee River has been inspected by Colonel Mills, Government En- 
 gineer, and found to be capable of improvement_as far as Fort Wayne 
 at reasonable cost. This canal it is proposed to have a depth of 16 feet, 
 
 and to carry boats of 2,000 tons capacity, a type of barge designed to 
 
 pass through the Erie Canal and safely navigate Lake Erie, as well as 
 pass through the proposed canal. 
 
 Surveys have also been made by the United States Government for a 
 jarge canal from Lake Erie to the Ohio River near Pittsburgh, which 
 is another reason why the general government should also make a 
 survey for an Ohio barge canal. 
 
 If the federal government should refuse to pay all or part of the 
 cost of surveys to determine the feasibility of a barge canal, then this 
 Commission recommends that an appropriation of Twenty-Five Thou- 
 sand Dollare ($25,000) be made by the General Assembly to enable the 
 state to have the surveys made by competent and reputable engineers, 
 and to ascertain by experts the commercial feasibility of such a waterway. 
 
 The improvement of inland waterways, and especially the building 
 of canals, is receiving: more attention each year throughout the entire 
 world. The fact that such improvements are necessary is just dawning 
 upon the people at the present time. The question to be decided in Ohio 
 is whether a barge canal from Lake Erie to the Ohio River would justify 
 
1D 
 
 the expense, and this cannot be determined except by engineering 
 authorities and experts in matters of commerce. 
 
 Seconp: The Commission finds that the rehabilitation of the 
 canals of the state on the original basis or standard of construction 
 to be impracticable and highly inadvisable. It must be kept in mind 
 that the canals, as originally constructed, were of small dimensions, 
 boats used in carrying the freight were of small proportion, the motive 
 power was horse or mule, and that this method of freight transporta- 
 tion is obsolete and belongs to the past. The Commission, in arriving 
 at this conclusion, does so largely upon the inspection of the premises 
 and the sentiment of a majority of the people along the canals on the 
 original standard of construction, because the expense involved to 
 rehabilitate would be more than the benefits conferred to the state by 
 the kind of transportation that would be carried on on such a canal. 
 This important fact must be kept in mind, that a canal owned and 
 operated by the state is not built for the purpose of making money for 
 the state but it is built rather to confer advantages and relief and benefits 
 to the citizens of the state, and if this is the return, then the investment 
 is a wise one and all money spent would then be judiciously ‘spent. A 
 canal to be a factor in the shipment of freight products must be a 
 modern canal. It must be wide enough and deep enough to admit 
 the entrance of large boats propelled by motive power, adequate freight 
 depots and dockage must be constructed, terminals in large cities must 
 be built. In short, the state must attend to every detail in order that 
 it may not only compete with the railways of the state but that it will 
 afford every privilege to which the people are entitled. 
 
 Tuirp: If a barge canal is not feasible and if it is decided that 
 the canal system of the state shall not be rehabilitated on the original 
 standard of construction, the Commission then finds that the canal 
 property should be retained by the state, and that the revenue arising 
 from rentals and other sources should be made‘to defray the expense 
 of maintaining the property, and that its income can be considerably 
 enhanced and increased by raising water rentals and charges for privi- 
 leges on the lakes and reservoirs more in accordance with their real value. 
 The Commission further finds the matter of leasing a part or all the 
 property to’ private concerns for long periods to be undesirable, and 
 that no sale of any part of the canal property necessary for canal pur- 
 poses should be authorized hereafter until such time when it is clearly. 
 evident that the state cannot use its property for the good and benefit of 
 its citizens, and not until it can be disposed of for its full real value. 
 
 FourtH: The Commission recommends that the waterways, both 
 natural and artificial, be developed and improved for water power and 
 industrial purposes, wherever possible, and that the Superintendent of 
 Public Works prepare estimates showing what the cost would be of 
 constructing conduits where power rights can be developed. The Com- 
 
20 
 
 mission further recommends that the canals be drained at such points 
 wherever the revenue does not justify the cost of maintenance, thus 
 preventing them from i asietiet nuisances to the communities through 
 which they pass. 
 
 Firra: The Commission recommends that additional funds be 
 provided to fully protect and maintain the lakes and reservoirs of the 
 state which are a part of the canal system. These lakes and reservoirs 
 are objects of beauty, the scenery and surroundings are pleasant, afford- 
 ing places of recreation for thousands of the citizens of the state, and 
 by improving the lakes and reservoirs, strengthening the embankments 
 and providing safe channels, the state can offer to its citizens a place 
 of recreation equally as good and far better than is found at some of 
 the pleasure resorts located elsewhere. By so doing the revenue of 
 the state for the expense and maintenance of these lakes and reservoirs 
 would be increased, they would be made self-sustaining and the health 
 and happiness of the people promoted. The Commission especially 
 urges that steps be taken to prevent the sale of land at its reservoirs 
 at ridiculously low prices, as has been done in the past. The Commis- 
 sion further recommends that the state be empowered by the enactment 
 of additional legislation to appropriate land for park purposes in order 
 to extend its jurisdiction at the lakes and reservoirs. 
 
 SixtH: The Commission recommends that the survey of state 
 ‘lands and the platting of all the state’s property into accurate maps 
 describing the limits of such lands and the lines or adjacent property 
 now under progress be carried to completion as soon as possible. The 
 Commission recommends that these property lines be fixed absolutely 
 and permanently; that an hydraulic survey of all the sources of water 
 controlled by the state be made, as proposed by the Superintendent of 
 Public Works, and that a complete revision of all water-rental rates 
 be made as contracts now in force expire. 
 
 SEVENTH: The Commission recommends the leasing of the right- 
 of-way of any sections connecting cities to electric or steam railway 
 companies where it can be done without jeopardizing the state’s right 
 of ownership or interfering with necessary water rights; that such 
 leases be made for terms not to exceed twenty-five years, provided that 
 the compensation to be paid to the state be fixed according to a basis 
 of value commensurate with the benefits to be derived by the lessees. 
 The offer of $180,000 made to the State to lease 30 miles of the Hocking 
 Canal should be considered in the same manner. 
 
 ErcHtH: The Commission is of the opinion, in view of the pend- 
 ing proposition to build a large canal from Toledo to Lake Michigan 
 by way of Defiance, and the proposed investigation of the feasibility 
 of a barge canal from Lake Erie to the Ohio River, that the proposal 
 of the citizens of Toledo and Cleveland to divert the canal into the 
 Maumee and Cuyahoga Rivers should be held in abeyance for the 
 
21 
 present. The Commission offers no objection if any municipality desires 
 to flume or conduit the canal or its feeders, at its own expense, provided 
 the rights of the State in such property are fully protected. 
 
 NintH: The Commission recommends that the Superintendent of 
 Public Works investigate whether the State is receiving full compensa- 
 tion for the rights and privileges enjoyed by the owners of hydraulic 
 companies; also whether the State is receiving proper returns from 
 steam and electric railway, telegraph and telephone companies for the 
 use of rights-of-way. 
 
 TENTH: The Commission recommends that Loramie Reservoir be 
 created a public park subject to the same laws and regulations as other 
 state parks. 
 
 ELEVENTH: The Commission recommends that rules and regula- 
 tions relating to the control and management of all parks, lakes and 
 reservoirs be enacted into law in order to place the full power of the 
 state behind such rules and regulations. 
 
 TweLrtH: The Commission recommends that the Public Utilities 
 Commission of Ohio and the Superintendent of Public Works, jointly, 
 be empowered to appraise the state lands and waterways and fix a 
 basis upon which an adequate rental can be made, and that such a 
 sum be appropriated by the General Assembly in special session as will 
 be necessary to carry out this provision. 
 
 SUMMARY. 
 
 First: A survey to be made to demonstrate whether a sufficient 
 amount of water at the summit level is available for a modern barge 
 canal, and an investigation by experts.to determine the probable volume 
 of freight. 
 
 SEcoND: The rehabilitation of the canals on the original basis or 
 standard of construction, for navigation purposes, is impracticable and 
 inadvisable. 
 
 Tuirp: If it is found that a barge canal is not advisable and prac- 
 ticable, the State should retain the title to all of its property and keep 
 the same intact for future use. 
 
 FourtH: That the waterways of the State be developed for 
 waterpower and industrial purposes and that an estimate be made 
 showing cost of constructing conduits for such purposes; that the canals 
 be drained where the revenue does not justify cost of maintenance. 
 
 FirtH: That the lakes and reservoirs of the State be properly 
 maintained and that legislation be enacted for their further extension 
 and protection. 
 
 StxtH: A survey of the state’s lands in its canal property for the 
 fixing of boundary lines and for hydraulic purposes and for a revision 
 of water rentals. 
 
22 
 
 SEVENTH: A leasing of the right-of-way of any part or parts of 
 the canal property and the compensation therefor. 
 
 EKicutH: The advisability of diverting the canals into rivers and 
 the right of a municipality to flume or conduit the canal feeders. 
 
 NintH: To ascertain whether certain companies are paying ade- 
 quate rentals for use of water and rights-of-way. 
 
 TentH: The converting of the Loramie Reservoir into a public 
 park. 
 
 ELEVENTH: Rules and regulations relating to the control, manage- 
 ment and operation of all state parks, lakes and reservoirs. 
 
 TwetrrH: Authorizing the Public Utilities Commission and the 
 Superintendent of Public Works of Ohio to make an appraisal for 
 rental purposes. 
 
 Respectfully submitted, 
 
 Wm. A. WEYGANDT, 
 Chairman, 
 
 BK. J. Hopprs, 
 
 Jacos J. WISE, 
 
 Guy DETRICK, 
 
 CULBERTSON J. SMITH, 
 
 JAMES R. CLARK, 
 Secretary. 
 
EXHIBIT “A>”? 
 
 DATA ON THE PHYSICAL CONDITIONS OF THE OHIO 
 AND ERIE CANAL. 
 
 From Cleveland to Dresden and from Dresden to Lockbourne, 
 from Columbus to Portsmouth, from Carroll to Nelsonville. 
 The distances are as follows :— 
 
 From Cleveland to Dresdon, 149} miles; 
 From Trinway to Lockbourne, 50 miles; 
 From Carroll to Nelsonville, 40 miles; 
 
 From Columbus to Portsmouth, 100 miles. 
 
 The Ohio Canal from Trinway to Lockbourne has been abandoned, 
 except a stretch extending west from Newark through Buckeye Lake 
 to Lockbourne, which has been reserved for hydraulic purposes, a dis- 
 tance of about 20 miles. The stretch from Carroll to Nelsonville was 
 abandoned by act of the Legislature in 1911. The canal from Columbus 
 to Portsmouth was abandoned in 1911. Besides the parts enumerated 
 above there is a section of the old Walhonding Canal which extends 
 from Six Mile Dam to Roscoe, where it joins the Ohio Canal. This is 
 maintained for hydraulic purposes. Its length is 6 miles. 
 
 The specifications for the Ohio and Erie Canal, as originally con- 
 structed, provided a minimum width on the water line of 4o feet and 
 a depth of 4 feet. There are many places throughout the length of 
 this canal which are as wide as 100 feet and 6 and 7 feet deep. The 
 average right-of-way is approximately 5 rods. 
 
 The flood of 1913 wrought considerable damage to the Ohio and 
 Erie Canal. At the present time water is maintained in the Ohio and 
 Erie Canal as follows: : 
 
 From Brecksville to Cleveland, a distance of 17 miles, a 
 good head of water. 
 
 From Lock No. 12 in the City of Akron to Brecksville, the 
 canal is practically destroyed. The distance is 16 miles. There 
 are several breaks in the bank, especially at Peninsula and Bos- 
 ton. The Summit Level from Lock 1 to Massillon, a distance of 
 21 miles, has a supply of water. 
 
 From below Massillon to Zoar Dam, a distance of 18 miles, 
 there is no water. This stretch passes through the towns of 
 Navarre and Bolivar. 
 
 There is a good feed of water from Zoar Dam to Sugar Creek, 
 
 23 
 
24 
 
 a mile below Canal Dover, a distance of 11 miles. From the latter 
 point to Roscoe Aqueduct, a distance of 42 miles, no water. Six 
 Mile Dam to Dresden, a distance of 24 miles, a fair supply of 
 water. 
 
 The abandoned parts of the Ohio Canal, as above enumerated, have 
 been surveyed and platted, with the exception of a section between 
 Trinway and Lockbourne, which is now being completed. The Legisla- 
 ture in 1911 provided in the act of abandonment that the parts should 
 be either sold or leased. The Department of Public Works has received 
 proposals which are now under consideration for the disposal of parts 
 of the abandoned canal south from Chillicothe for purchase, and it 
 has received a proposal to lease a section of the Hocking Canal from 
 Lancaster to Nelsonville, a distance of approximately 30 miles, for 
 interurban purposes. A contract to that end has been formulated, which 
 waits final approval, for this strip to be leased for a period of twenty- 
 five years at a gross rental of $180,000. 
 
 The Ohio and Erie Canal system comprises the reservoirs of the 
 Summit Level covering an area of approximately 2,000 acres. The 
 supply of water to the Summit Level is furnished by these locks and 
 reservoirs. The supply at other places indicated herein where the 
 canal has water, is supplied from the various dams in the Tuscarawas . 
 and Walhonding Rivers, except Buckeye Lake. Buckeye Lake fur- 
 nishes water for the hydraulic which extends to Newark. 
 
 DATA ON THE PHYSICAL CONDITIONS OF THE MIAMI AND 
 ERIE CANAE: 
 
 The Miami and Erie Canal extends from Toledo to Cincinnati, a dis- 
 tance of 244 miles. It comprises the Sidney Feeder, which runs from 
 Port Jefferson to Lockington, a distance of 14 miles; the St. Marys 
 Feeder, a reservoir which runs from Celina to St. Marys a distance of 
 11 miles. Besides the St. Marys Reservoir, this canal system has the 
 Loramie Reservoir and Indian Lake. The Area of Lake St. Marys is 
 about 15,000 acres, the Miami Reservoir about 2,400 acres and Indian 
 Lake about 6,500 acres. | 
 
 The specifications of the Miami and Erie Canal, as originally con- 
 structed, are as follows: 
 
 From Defiance to Cincinnati, a minimum of 40 feet to the water 
 line and 4 feet deep, a distance of 189 miles; from Defiance to Toledo, a 
 minimum of 50 feet on the water line and 5 feet deep, a distance of 55 
 miles. As a matter of fact, the latter canal is 60 to 70 feet on the water 
 line and in many places as much as 10 feet deep, especially from Grand 
 Rapids to Waterville. 
 
 Two sections of the above canal, from Defiance to Toledo, have 
 
25 
 
 part of the canal in the river, viz; from Defiance to Independence Dam, 
 a distance of 7 miles, and from Texas Lock to Providence, a distance of 
 4 miles. There is an excellent supply of water on this division of the 
 canal which is furnished by the dams in the Maumee River, one at In- 
 dependence and the other at Grand Rapids. The St. Marys Reservoir 
 and the Loramic feed the canal from Loramie on the Summit Level 
 to Defiance, a distance of 71 miles. At the present time the Summit 
 Level from Loramie to Lockington has no water in it, owing to two or 
 three large breaks made by the last flood. This is a distance of 18 miles. 
 
 The Sidney Feeder enters the Miami and Erie Canal at Lockington 
 and supplies water from Port Jefferson Dam and is the outlet of Indian 
 Lake Reservoir. This feeder is carrying from Lockington at the present 
 time to Miami Aqueduct, a distance of 26 miles, and in this section last 
 named there is a dam at Piqua and at Troy. The dam at Piqua furnishes 
 part of the supply of water in the canal. The Troy dam does not. 
 
 From Lockington, the City of Piqua has an. hydraulic running 
 parallel to the canal for a distance of approximately 7 miles, which sup- 
 plies that city with part of its water. The city has a contract with the 
 state which has existed for many years and is renewable on the terms 
 originally granted. 
 
 From Tadmore, or the west end of Miami Aqueduct, which is 8 miles 
 above Dayton, there is no water in the canal. There has not been for a 
 number of years. This is due to the fact that the Miami Aqueduct never 
 was completed and there are two large breaks in the canal bank a mile 
 or two below which have existed for several years, and further, the 
 Aqueduct across the Mad River in Dayton has been out of commission 
 for many years. The dam in the Mad River, in the upper part of Dayton, 
 supplies the canal and what is called the Cooper Hydraulic through the 
 City of Dayton, and as far south as Miamisburg, a distance of 20 miles. 
 
 At the present time there is no water in the canal from Miamisburg 
 to 2 miles above Middletown, a distance of 10 miles. The water supply 
 at Middletown into the canal comes from the state dam, located 2 miles 
 above that town, which supplies the water from thence to the terminus in 
 Cincinnati, a distance of 44 miles. At the present time the Department of 
 Public Works is engaged in extensive improvement by way of extending 
 the Middletown Dam and the building of substantial head gates and 
 levee at that place where the former works were destroyed by the flood of 
 1913. When the improvements contemplated are completed that section 
 of the canal will be in first-class condition for the supplying of water 
 from Middletown to Cincinnati. 
 
 In 1911 the Legislature passed a measure which gave Cincinnati 
 permission to lease the Miami and Erie Canal from its south terminus to 
 300 feet north of Mitchell Avenue, a distance of approximately 7 miles. 
 The appraisement placed upon this was such that the city pays the state, 
 at 4%, $32,000 annual rental for the property. The last Legislature added 
 
260 
 
 a section to the former grant, which when ceded to Cincinnati, will extend 
 their grant from Mitchell Avenue to the City of Carthage, which is a 
 stretch of canal a little over one mile long. 
 
 New Locks were built on the Miami and Erie Canal from the Toledo 
 end to Defiance in 1906-8. Also at St. Marys and New Bremen ‘and 
 from Dayton south to Cincinnati a considerable amount of dredging was 
 done, also on those parts where locks were rebuilt. The locks from De- 
 fiance to St. Marys are virtually destroyed by the ravages of time. The 
 same thing is true of the locks from the south end of Summit Level, or 
 Lockington, to Dayton. The stone walls are out of alignment and are 
 growing top-heavy. The wooden gates have rotted away and have been 
 patched, while in many instances it is hard to tell what the original ma- 
 terial was. The feeder extending through Port Jefferson Dam, through 
 Sidney to Lockington, needs a new aqueduct over Plum Creek and should 
 be dredged out. 
 
 Last year and the year before the Miami and Erie Canal was dredged 
 from Lake St. Marys almost to Delphos. The level from Grand Rapids 
 to Maumee was dredged at the same time and dredging was done be- 
 tween Hamilton and Lockland. The average right-of-way from De- 
 fiance to Cincinnati is 5 rods. The average right-of-way from Defiance 
 to Toledo, where there is canal, is almost double that. 
 
 New dams were built in the last 8 years as follows: 
 
 Grand Rapids, Middletown and Indian Lake. The dams at Port 
 Jefferson, Piqua and Independence are made of wood and are showing 
 signs of age, and no doubt will need rebuilding in the near future. 
 
| - 
 t 
 ~ 5 ' I 
 t > 
 ie J 
 P ‘ 
 ‘ 
 in mrs i. * 
 = i ~ y 
 i ¢ ' 
 } Fag 
 sa . 
 + A 
 a , 
 
 wa” fal 
 
 oe 
 bas 
 . 
 
yuan 
 
 , a 
 
“5 
 
 she: 
 
 Byes 
 
 ak 
 
 a 
 
LIBRARY 
 
 OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY, 
 
4 
 
 F ia < ? ‘ 
 fers oy 
 ‘\ 
 
 a 
 
 me fie eT er: od 
 The Ohio ii Univ 
 
 MIM in 
 
 8, 
 
 ‘ : _ REPORT OF he LEGISLATIVE am, coumissi L 
 
 THE O / O STATE 
 
 7 Il ii i