REPORT 
 
 OF THE 
 
 SELECT COMMITTEE 
 APPOINTED TO CONFER WITH THE AUTHORITIES 
 
 OF THE 
 
 STATE OF HEW YORK, 
 
 RELATIVE TO A CONNECTION OF THE 
 
 •-WJJ3E 
 
 OF 
 
 NEW YORK AND PENNSYLVANIA. 
 
 Mr. PEMOSE, Chairman. 
 
 READ IN SENATE, MAY 15 , 1839 . 
 
 HARRISBURG: 
 PRINTED BY E. GUYER. 
 
 1839 . 
 

 
 £P 
 
 iri 
 
 3 : 
 
 REPORT. 
 
 i 
 
 I he committee appointed to proceed to Albany and consuls 
 with the constituted authorities of the State of New York, to 
 ascertain their views and wishes in relation to a connection of the 
 public works of that State, with the North Branch canal, report: 
 
 That during the late recess of the Legislature, and in discharge of 
 the duty committed to them, they repaired to the city of Albany.— 
 On their arrival they addressed the following note to his Excellency 
 Governor Seward. 
 
 Albany, April 9th, 1839. 
 
 The undersigned have the honor to inform his Excellency Gover¬ 
 nor Seward, that they were appointed a committee by the Senate of 
 Pennsylvania to consult with the constituted authorities of the State 
 of New York, “in order to ascertain their views in relation to a con¬ 
 nection between the North Branch division of the Pennsylvania 
 canal” and the Chenango or Chemung canals, or both, and that they 
 are now in this city in execution of the duty committed to them. 
 
 Your Excellency is no doubt aware, that the Commonwealth of 
 Pennsylvania has been, for several years past, engaged in the con¬ 
 struction of what is called the North Branch division of the Pennsyl¬ 
 vania canal, that a large portion of that canal has been finished, and 
 that the greater part of so much as is yet to be made, between the 
 present point of termination in the Wyoming Valley and the line 
 between the two States, is under contract. 
 
 Several millions of dollars will be required to complete this canal 
 to the State line, but without a connection with the public works 
 of the State of New York, the canal, when completed, would 
 be, comparatively speaking, as unprofitable, as, if the connection be 
 made, it will be highly beneficial, as well to the State of New York 
 
 \ 
 
able commerce in, and interchange of those great staples—coal, plas¬ 
 ter and salt. 
 
 The undersigned respectfully invite the attention of Governor 
 Seward to this subject, and his consideration of the proper action to 
 obtain such a conference with the constituted authorities of the State 
 of New York in reference to it, as their appointment warrants, and 
 the great importance of the object to the interests of both States re¬ 
 quires. 
 
 The undersigned have the honor to offer to Governor Seward the 
 assurance of their highest respect. 
 
 Governor Seward with a promptness and courtesy highly gratify¬ 
 ing to your committee, immediately transmitted to the legislature, a 
 message announcing their arrival, and inviting the adoption of such 
 measures as the irnpoitance of the subject, and a 4 ‘becoming comity 
 towards the enlightened and enterprizing Commonwealth of Pennsyl¬ 
 vania” required. 
 
 The Senate and House of Assembly, with equal promptness, ap¬ 
 pointed a joint select committee, the Honorable Messrs. Dickinson, 
 Maynard and Jones, on the part of the Senate, and the Honorable 
 Messrs. Lewis, Clark, Hawley, Denniston and Porter, on the part 
 of the Assembly, “to confer with the delegation of the Pennsylvania 
 Senate,” in relation to a proposed connection of the public works of 
 New York and Pennsylvania. 
 
 This committee, constituted of gentlemen whose urbanity and in¬ 
 telligence were alike complimentary to our State, and the body we 
 had the honor to represent, met your committee and held with them 
 a conference on the interesting subject entrusted to them. In that 
 conference your committee verbally presented to the consideration 
 of the honorable committee of the Legislature of New York, the 
 weighty considerations in favor of the proposed connection between 
 the public works of the two States, and were invited to put in writ¬ 
 ing the views which they had thus given. 
 
 In consequence of this request your committee addressed to the 
 New York delegation the following communication. 
 
5 
 
 Albany, April 12, 1839. 
 
 Gentlemen la our conference of yesterday, on the subject of a 
 connection between the North Branch division of the Pennsylvania 
 canal and the canals of the State of New York, by the Shenango or 
 Chemung canal, or both, we had the honor to present to your con¬ 
 sideration facts bearing on this question, which at your request we 
 1 now submit in writing. 
 
 Prior to the session of 1835-6 of our State Legislature, the North 
 Branch division had been completed to the Lackawanna, near the 
 head of the Wyoming valley, and within what is called the Northern 
 Coal Field. So far it furnished for the coal of that region a prospect 
 of a market to the south on the waters of the Chesapeake bay. At 
 this point the policy of the State hesitated and paused ; but at the ses¬ 
 sion of 1835-6, it was determined to complete the North Branch di¬ 
 vision to the line separating the two States, and to look to a connec¬ 
 tion with your public works for a more natural and convenient market 
 for our coal, and for a return of a valuable commerce in the salt and 
 plaster of the State of New York. The approach made, at a great 
 t expense, by your State to the same point, by the construction of the 
 
 Chenango and Chemung canals, leaving a distance, in the case of the 
 former, of forty, and in the latter, of but twenty miles, between the 
 n proposed termination of the North Branch canal and those canals re¬ 
 spectively, justified the belief that New York intended to form 
 these connections, and had in view the mutual benefits which induced 
 Pennsylvania to adopt this policy. 
 
 From the Lackawanna to the State line the distance is ninety-four 
 miles, on which sixty-three miles of this canal have been put under 
 contract, and about one million of dollars have been expended. To 
 finish the entire line will require a further expenditure of about two 
 millions of dollars. Should New York refuse to connect with our 
 public works, this portion of the North Branch canal would probably 
 be as unprofitable to Pennsylvania, as the Chenango and Chemung 
 canals, without such connection, are likely to be to New York, and 
 ’ hence the importance to Pennsylvania of ascertaining, before she pro¬ 
 
 ceeds further with the prosecution of this work, “the views of the con¬ 
 stituted authorities” of the State of New York on the subject. Should 
 she prosecute the work with vigor, it may, and no doubt will be com¬ 
 pleted in two, or at most in three years; but if your State refuse the 
 connection, it is obvious that it will be but prudent on the part of 
 ours, to suspend the further expenditure of money on the work. 
 
6 
 
 To meet the objection which a narrow policy might suggest, that 
 by this connection Pennsylvania may take from New York a portion 
 of the western trade, which the latter now enjoys, we had the honor 
 of suggesting that the greater distance between Buffalo and Philadel¬ 
 phia, and the same place and New York, independent of the embar¬ 
 rassment to trade which the transhipment to a rail road at Columbia 
 presents, went to show that apprehensions on that score were not 
 well founded. These distances, as nearly as we can ascertain them, 
 
 are as follows : 
 
 Miles. 
 
 From Buffalo to Montezuma, 150 
 
 From Montezuma to Elmyra, through the Chemung canal, 82 
 
 From Elmira to the State line, 20 
 
 From the line to Lackawanna, 94 
 
 From Lackawanna to the junction of the North and West branch, 70 
 From the junction to Juniata, 39 
 
 From Juniata to Harrisburg, 16 
 
 From Harrisburg to Columbia, 29 
 
 From Columbia to Philadelphia, by rail road, 82 
 
 Distance by the Chemung canal, 582 
 
 From Buffalo to Utica, 250 
 
 From Utica to Binghamton, 96 
 
 From Binghamton to State line, 40 
 
 From State line to Philadelphia, 351 
 
 Distance from Buffalo to Philadelphia by the Chenango canal, 737 
 
 i 
 
 v 
 
 The distance from Buffalo to New York, through the Erie canal, 511 
 
 Showing, independent of other considerations, among which is the 
 steamboat navigation from Albany, in contrast with the rail road 
 transportation from Columbia, a difference in distance in favor of 
 New York. 
 
 But we had the honor of turning our attention to a view more con¬ 
 genial to the enlightened government of our State, which has a regard 
 to the mutual benefits which will be conferred upon both communi¬ 
 ties by the proposed connection. Our Northern coal field, although 
 within the territorial limits of Pennsylvania, by its position, if proper 
 means are used to make it available to New York, may be considered 
 as belonging, in its use and advantages, rather to the latter than the 
 
1 
 
 former, although of course the consumption of coal in New York 
 must be of advantage to Pennsylvania. 
 
 In order to show the amount of advantage which New York would 
 derive by the proposed connection, from the coal trade upon her public 
 works, we presented facts bearing on the question in one aspect, the 
 amount of revenue she was likely to receive from this trade in tolls 
 upon her canals. When these connections are made, the distance by 
 the Chemung canal from the line to Buffalo, will be 252 miles. 
 From the same point by the Chenango canal to xiibany, 246 
 
 We assumed, that in the course of ten years, the transportation of 
 coal by these connections, on the canals of New York, would be 
 equal to the transportation of one million of tons per annum, a dis¬ 
 tance of two hundred miles. This, at the rate charged on the Penn¬ 
 sylvania canals, six mills per ton per mile, will produce to your 
 State the very large sum of $1,200,000 per annum; not very far 
 from the gross revenue now derived from your Erie and Champlain 
 , canals. 
 
 In order to show that this estimate was not extravagant, we refer- 
 s red you to the following facts : 
 
 The population of the State of New York at the last census, was 
 2,174,517. The population of London is 1,800,000; and the con¬ 
 sumption of coal in the city of London, was, in the year 1832, 
 2,139,078 tons, while the consumption of Great Britain is variously 
 estimated at from twenty-two to thirty millions of tons per annum. 
 When we take into view the rapidly increasing population of your 
 State, the almost equally rapid consumption of wood, the multiply¬ 
 ing uses to which coal is applied and applicable, the supply of the 
 great regions round our inland seas, to which by your canal there 
 will be access, and the consumption in the steam navigation of the 
 lakes and the ocean, we are persuaded that the estimate made is not 
 extravagant. Considering this aspect of the question, regard must 
 also be had to the tolls on other articles of commerce between the 
 two States, more particularly the articles of plaster and salt, the use 
 of which in Pennsylvania is of course very extensive. Further to 
 support this view of the question, we submitted a comparison be- 
 v tween the ascertained value and productiveness of canals, depending 
 on agriculture and ordinary commerce, and those which may be call¬ 
 ed coal and iron bearing canals. 
 
 By a “ share list,” published in London, in October, 1833, the 
 
8 
 
 following marked difference may be discovered in the value of the 
 two descriptions of canals. 
 
 British Canals on which Coal is not Carried. 
 
 Name. 
 
 Share. 
 
 Selling price. Dividend. 
 
 North Walsham and Dilham, 
 
 £ 50 
 
 £io 
 
 
 Oakham, 
 
 130 
 
 44 
 
 
 Wey and Arun,* 
 
 100 
 
 32 
 
 
 Portsmouth and Arundal ,* 
 
 50 
 
 10 
 
 
 Regent, 
 
 100 
 
 16 
 
 
 Grand Surrey, 
 
 100 
 
 22 
 
 
 Bassing Stroke, 
 
 100 
 
 5.5 
 
 
 Cray don, 
 
 31.2! 
 
 1 
 
 
 Thames and Medway, (old stock,) 
 
 30.4! 
 
 1 
 
 
 (new stock,) 
 
 100 
 
 0 
 
 
 Great Caledonia, in Scotland, across the island, lock 20 by 40, 
 
 and 172 feet long, carrying a frigate of thirty-two guns, and 
 
 a mer- 
 
 chant vessel of one thousand tons, 
 
 cost £986,924 | tolls in 
 
 1829, 
 
 £2,575 4s. Qd .; expense £4,573 Os, 
 
 . lid. 
 
 
 
 British Canals upon which Coal is transported. 
 
 
 Name and cost. 
 
 Share. Selling price. Dividend. 
 
 Grand Junction, $8,888,888, 
 
 £100 
 
 <£245 
 
 £12 
 
 Leeds and Liverpool, 
 
 100 
 
 470 
 
 20 
 
 Coventry, 
 
 100 
 
 600 
 
 32 
 
 Neath, 
 
 107 
 
 290 
 
 15 
 
 Swansey, 
 
 100 
 
 220 
 
 12 
 
 Cromford, 
 
 100 
 
 300 
 
 18 
 
 Glamorganshire, 
 
 100 
 
 290 
 
 12* 
 
 Oxford, 
 
 100 
 
 595 
 
 32 
 
 Forth and Clyde, 
 
 100 
 
 545 
 
 25 
 
 Stafford and Worcester, 
 
 140 
 
 610 
 
 32 
 
 Somerset, 
 
 50 
 
 170 
 
 11 
 
 Mersey and Irwell, 
 
 100 
 
 640 
 
 37! 
 
 Duke of Bridgewater’s canal cost $1,555,555 ; yields an income 
 per annum equal to its original cost. 
 
 * These two canals connect London and Portsmouth, the depot of the British 
 
 navy. 
 
9 
 
 In Ireland, the Grand canal between Dublin and the river Shan¬ 
 non, and the Royal canal from the same city to another point on the 
 same river, the former one hundred and fifty-six miles in length, and 
 the latter eighty-three miles, both passing through a rich agricultural 
 country, with a dense population, do not pay in tolls enough to de¬ 
 fray expenses. 
 
 The canals in France, depending upon agriculture and ordinary 
 commerce, are unprofitable in tolls, however beneficial to the coun¬ 
 try in other respects. A similar difference between the canals thus 
 contrasted, is discovered in Pennsylvania. 
 
 Our main line, or Juniata division, has as yet yielded but three 
 per cent, on its cost, while the Delaware division, on which the coal 
 of the Lehigh is carried to Philadelphia, has exceeded five per cent. 
 The difference is still more striking in the case of the Lehigh navi¬ 
 gation and Schuylkill navigation; the former canal, forty-six miles and 
 three fourths in length, was finished in 1819, at a cost of $1,000,000; 
 it extends from Easton, on the Delaware river, to the company’s coal 
 mines at Mauch Chunk. The shares of the stock of this company 
 are fifty dollars, and they sell in the market at eighty-seven dollars. 
 The Schuylkill navigation, from Philadelphia to Port Carbon, one 
 hundred and eight miles in length, was finished in 1824, at a cost of 
 $2,966,180; the shares are fifty dollars, and have sold for one hun¬ 
 dred and seventy dollars. The company has p divided twenty-five per 
 cent, on their stock. That is the maximum of dividend to which by 
 their charter they are permitted to go. 
 
 The facts we submit form a powerful argument in favor of the 
 connection between the works of the two States; and we would re¬ 
 spectfully add, that although we consider the argument drawn-from 
 them conclusive, upon the question of mutual and equal benefit to 
 both States, we would do violence to our own feelings of high re¬ 
 spect for the intelligence of New York, if we did not advert, which 
 we ask leave to do, to a higher consideration bearing upon this 
 subject, than the mere question of the amount of tolls which New 
 York will receive when these connections are made. This con¬ 
 sideration is of the benefits which will be conferred upon the people 
 of the two States, in the increased means of subsistence, comfort 
 and civilization, which will be brought within their reach. The 
 stone coal has been well regarded by those who have properly con¬ 
 sidered the subject, as the basis of the wealth and power of Great 
 
10 
 
 Britain, and her mines of this product, as a “ source of greater riches 
 than ever issued from the mines of Peru, or from the diamond grounds 
 at the base of the Neela Mulla mountains.” New York and Penn¬ 
 sylvania, by connecting their public works, will share in this great 
 source of individual and national wealth, and reciprocate in the inter¬ 
 change of great staple commodities, the mutual benefits and advan¬ 
 tages which, from their natural position and circumstances, they seem 
 destined to impart to each other. It is not simply with reference to 
 income to these States respectively that the question is important; it 
 is of more consequence in view of the comforts and means of subsist¬ 
 ence which are to be produced to a numerous population of free 
 people which will inhabit them. 
 
 Will you allow us to say that the pleasant intercourse with the 
 representatives of your great State, in the different branches of her 
 government, which our visit to Albany has permitted us to have, 
 occasions, on our part, an increased interest in every new bond of 
 connection between the two States. 
 
 We have the honor to be, 
 
 Very respectfully, your obedient servants, 
 
 CHARLES B. PENROSE, 
 WM. PURVIANCE, 
 
 W. T. ROGERS, 
 
 P. S. MICHLER, 
 
 E. KINGSBURY, Jr. 
 
 Committee of the Senate of Pennsylvania. 
 
 To the Hon . Messrs . Dickinson, Maynard and Jones, and the 
 Hon. Messrs. Lewis, Hawley, Clark, Denniston and Porter, 
 Committee of the Senatt? and House of Assembly of the State of 
 New York. 
 
 The joint select committee of the New York Legislature being ap¬ 
 pointed for the purpose of conference merely, did not consider them¬ 
 selves warranted by the terms of their appointment, to express an 
 opinion on the subject of the conference, or to advise the Legislature 
 of that State what action they judged to be expedient. But at the 
 request of your committee for such information as to the views of 
 the honorable bodies which they represented, as they might be able to 
 communicate, they with that candour and courtesy which marked 
 their intercourse with your committee, informed them that there ex- 
 
11 
 
 
 isted in the Legislature a diversity of opinion on the subject of the 
 proposed connection of the works of the two States. That while a 
 part of these honorable bodies were decidedly in favor of the connec¬ 
 tion and the adoption of measures for its immediate construction, 
 there was another portion as decidedly opposed to it, and who enter¬ 
 tained the belief that to permit it to be made at all, would be injuri¬ 
 ous to New York, by diverting a large part of her western commerce 
 from her great commercial metropolis to ours. Another poition of 
 the Legislature regarded the connection with favor, but were of 
 opinion that it was inexpedient for New York at present to act on 
 the subject. 
 
 The chairman of the joint select committee, however, who was 
 himself decidedly in favor of the immediate construction of the con¬ 
 nection, said that the information which he had communicated, was 
 given to meet our request, rather as the individual opinion of the 
 members of the joint select committee, than as an official communica¬ 
 tion. 
 
 Your committee in the same spirit declared, that they entertained 
 the belief that upon the favorable action of the State of New York, 
 would depend the prosecution by Pennsylvania of a work, the value 
 of which depends in a great degree upon that action. 
 
 Your committee said that they did not know the peculiar situation 
 of the State of New York in reference to her system of internal 
 improvements, and that Pennsylvania did not desire to present any 
 question, which might occasion embarrassment, by asking for imme¬ 
 diate action, but that it seemed to your committee to be but just as 
 well as prudent, before Pennsylvania proceeded with the further ex¬ 
 penditure of money on the North Branch canal, to obtain from the 
 Legislature of New York a resolution, pledging the faith of that 
 State to make the proposed connection. That it was the opinion of 
 your committee that the Legislature of Pennsylvania would be satis¬ 
 fied with such a resolution, and would, if it were passed, proceed to 
 the completion of this canal. 
 
 Having accomplished, as far as it was practicable, the purpose of 
 their appointment, your committee left Albany. 
 
 Since that time the joint select committee by their chairman, the 
 Hon. Daniel S. Dickinson, on the fourth day of the present month* 
 made in the Senate the following report: 
 
12 
 
 May 4, 1839,. 
 
 Report of the joint select committee appointed to confer with the 
 delegation of the Pennsylvania Senate , in relation to a proposed 
 connection of public works of the States of New York and Penn¬ 
 sylvania. 
 
 Mr. Dickinson, from the joint select committee appointed by a con¬ 
 current resolution of the 9th of April last, to confer with the honora¬ 
 ble delegation of the Pennsylvania Senate in relation to a proposed 
 connection of public works of the States of New York and Pennsyl¬ 
 vania, reports: 
 
 That in pursuance of said resolution they waited upon the highly 
 intelligent delegation from the Pennsylvania Senate, consisting of the 
 Hon. Charles B. Penrose, Speaker of that body, and the Hon. 
 
 Messrs. Purviance, Rogers, Michler and Kingsbury, members there¬ 
 of, who were delegated to confer with and ascertain the views of the 
 constituted authorities of the State of New York upon the subject of 
 connecting the public works of New York and Pennsylvania by the 
 junction of the North Branch division of the Pennsylvania and the 
 Chenango or Chemung canal, or both of them, at the State line, in 
 the valley of the Susquehanna, near Athens, in the State of Pennsyl¬ 
 vania. The North Branch division of the Pennsylvania canal has 
 been completed up the Susquehanna river as far as Lackawanna, near 
 the head of the Wyoming valley, and within the inexhaustible coal 
 fields of that region. Lackawanna is ninety-four miles distant from 
 the State line, the point of the proposed connection with the canals 
 of this State. 
 
 It seems that the Legislature of Pennsylvania during the session of 
 1835-6, in the belief that New York would eventually extend her ca¬ 
 nals to the proposed point of junction, in case she could there con¬ 
 nect with the canals of Pennsylvania, determined to extend and com¬ 
 plete the North Branch division up the river to the State line, and 
 for the purpose of calling the attention of this State to the subject, 
 and giving strong evidence of the intentions of Pennsylvania, the con- 4 
 
 struction of the canal was commenced near the point of the proposed 
 connection. 
 
 About sixty-three miles of this canal have been placed under con- ^ 
 tract, and about one million of dollars have been expended upon its 
 construction; but inasmuch as it will require two millions or upwards 
 more to complete the extension, and as it will be of little general 
 
13 
 
 utility and afford a tiifling income, unless connected with the canals 
 of this State, a more prudent and cautious policy has induced that 
 State to pause and learn the views of the constituted authorities of 
 this State before proceeding further with the said extension. In 
 short, they avow it to be the intention of the Legislature of Pennsyl¬ 
 vania, so far as they understand its sense, to abandon the proposed 
 extension, unless this State shall indicate her intention to extend the 
 Chenango or Chemung canals, or both of them at some future period; 
 in such case, they express the belief that the Legislature of Pennsyl¬ 
 vania will at the coming session, commencing the 7th of the present 
 month, make an appropriation for the completion of said extension, 
 and that the same will be finished with all convenient speed, proba¬ 
 bly in the course of two years. 
 
 At the request of the joint committee, the Pennsylvania delegation 
 submitted to them a brief, but able and interesting communication 
 upon the subject of the proposed connection of the public works of 
 the two States, embodying within a small compass, much valuable 
 information, placing the mutual advantages to be derived by the con¬ 
 nection, in a strong and convincing light, which communication is 
 herewith submitted. 
 
 The power delegated to the joint select committee was confined, 
 in the terms of the resolution appointing them, to that of a mere con¬ 
 ference , and the discharge of their duty does not, in their opinion, 
 necessarily require of them any thing further than to report the result 
 of their interview with the Pennsylvania delegation. 
 
 The committee, however, beg leave to submit that the subject of 
 the proposed connection is one eminently deserving the early consid¬ 
 eration of the Legislature. It is obvious that at a comparatively 
 small expenditure, the public works, now unproductive and a heavy 
 tax upon the State, may be rendered much more valuable, if not a 
 source of revenue ; and the internal trade, consisting of an exchange' 
 of the salt and plaster of New York, for the coal and iron of Penn¬ 
 sylvania, independent of the increased tolls and salt duties, which will 
 be paid into the treasury, cannot fail to advance the interests of all 
 classes, in a large section of the State. Fuel is already an article ob¬ 
 tained with some difficulty, and at an expense which has become bur- 
 thensome in the cities and villages of the middle and western parts of the 
 State. The forest is fast receding before the blows of the axemen, 
 and it is perfectly obvious that in a short time, coal will be used not 
 
14 
 
 only for fuel in all such places, but for manufactures, at the salt 
 works, and for propelling locomotives upon rail roads and machinery,, 
 
 The rich mineral treasures of these States are of themselves alike 
 inexhaustible sources of wealth; but their value and utility must be 
 increased to an incalculable extent, by increasing facilities for their 
 cheap transportation through the interior and consequent ready ex¬ 
 change. 
 
 The policy of uniting the works of Pennsylvania and New York, 
 is opposed, by some, upon the ground that it will tend to divert the 
 trade of the west and of the interior, from the city of New York to 
 that of Philadelphia. From the facts stated in the annexed communi¬ 
 cation, showing the inward distance and necessary transhipments on 
 the Philadelphia route, it would seem that if trade is so diverted, it 
 must be very limited in amount. It is, doubtless, the only objection 
 which can be urged against the proposed connection. But if it shall 
 be found to be outweighed by more than corresponding advantages, 
 arbitrary and imaginary boundaries should not alone prevent the con¬ 
 struction of a work, otherwise desirable and advantageous. 
 
 The committee deeply regret that circumstances beyond their con¬ 
 trol, have prevented their giving to this subject the attention which its 
 importance demands, and which the courtesy of the delegation, with 
 whom they were appointed to confer, has invited and merited. 
 
 They deem it due to that branch of the Legislature of a sister State, 
 represented by said delegation, as well as to the gentlemen composing 
 the same, that the sense of this Legislature be expressed upon the 
 subject of the proposed connection of public works ; and although it 
 is not within their province to advise what action should be had in 
 the premises,, to the end that the Legislature may express its opinion, 
 they have proposed resolutions which they ask leave to introduce. 
 
 RESOLUTIONS. 
 
 Resolved , (If the Assembly concur,) That it is expedient to com 
 nect the public works of this State with those of Pennsylvania, at some 
 convenient period, by uniting the Chenango or Chemung canal, or 
 both of them, with the North Branch of the Pennsylvania canal, at 
 the State line near Athens, in the State of Pennsylvania. 
 
 Resolved , That his excellency the Governor be requested to trans¬ 
 mit a, copy of the foregoing resolution to the Governor of Pennsyl 1 
 
15 
 
 vania, with a request that the same be laid before the Legislature of 
 that State. 
 
 Your committee are informed, by a letter received from the Hon. 
 D. S. Dickinson, that he had exerted himself daily, after these reso¬ 
 lutions were introduced, to get action upon them, but without success. 
 That he repeated this effort on the 7th instant, that being the last 
 day of the session, when the unanimous consent of the body is ne¬ 
 cessary to take up such resolutions, and the objection of one of the 
 Senators again defeated the attempt, and the Legislature adjourned 
 sine die , without having considered them. 
 
 Your committee understood that their Legislature passed a bill 
 for a survey of the Chemung, of the particular provisions of which 
 jthey are not informed, and that a bill which was pending in the 
 House of Assembly, for the extension of the Chenango canal, was 
 not acted on, and remained, at the adjournment, among the unfin¬ 
 ished business of the session. 
 
 Your committee cannot close their report without adverting to the 
 distinguished courtesy and respectful consideration with which they 
 were received by the constituted authorities of our great sister State, 
 who, no matter what may be the view entertained with regard to the 
 interests of that State on the subject of the proposed connection, 
 evinced that friendly feeling and courteous comity which should ever 
 prevail between our sisterhood of republics. 
 
 However this may have contributed to the personal gratification 
 of your committee, it is due to the Senate which they had the honor 
 to represent, as well as our sister State, that the amicable and candid 
 spirit with which your committee was received and treated, should 
 be the subject of respectful reference, as it always will be a source 
 of pleasant recollection of personal kindness to the members of your 
 Committee. They submit the following resolution : 
 
 Resolved, That the committee be discharged from the further con¬ 
 sideration of the subject. 
 
 *