62 d Congress 1 SENATE i Document Sd Session J \ No. 959 INTERNATIONAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT MESSAGE FROM THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES TRANSMITTING IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT OF AUGUST 24, 1912, THE REPORT OF THE AMERICAN COMMISSIONERS OF THE INTERNATIONAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION AND RECOMMENDING APPROPRIATION FOR THE CONTINUANCE OF THE WORK OF THE COMMISSION December 3, 1912.—Read; referred to the Committee on Appropriations and ordered to be printed with illustration WASHINGTON 1912 • \ V t r MESSAGE. 7b the Senate and House of Representatives, The act inakin" appropriations for sundry civil expenses of the Government approved August 24, 1912, provided for the International Waterways Commission in the following terms, viz: V\_ For continuing until December thirty-first, nineteen hundred and twelve, the work r of investigation and report by the International Waterways Commission, authorized by section four of the river and harbor act approved June thirteenth, nineteen hundred and tw'o, $10,000: Provided, That report as to the progress of the work be made by the ^ American Commissioners to Congress at the beginning of the next session. ^ The American commissioners have rendered a full report of all p their acts, up to this time, which I herewith transmit. It appears ^ from this re])ort that the commission still has two pieces of work to ^ complete before it can properly go out of existence. ^ One is its final report upon a dam at the outlet of Lake Erie, a difficult and important question upon which it has expended a vast amount of labor. It should be allowed to finish this work, to clear the , 'ground for its successor, the International Joint Commission, which ^ will consider all future questions of this nature. I am informed that _ the report has been delayed, and may be further delayed, by the ill- ^ ness and absence in Europe of one of the Canadian engineers, but that ^ it can probably be completed within a few months, certainly before ^ the completion of the other piece of unfinished work, i The other is to ascertain and reestablish, to mark upon the ground, 'and to delineate upon modern charts, the location of a portion of the J international boundary between the United States and Canada, which work was specifically assigned to the International Waterways Com- y mission by Article IV of the treaty between the United States and Great Britain, dated April 11, 1908. This work, the commission states, can not be completed by December 31, 1912, but will require .^from a year to 15 months more time beyond that date. ■ J The work of the commission has been of a high order, and has been prosecuted with diligence. International courtesy, as well as treaty ^obligations, require that the commission be allowed to complete its ^work. I recommend that the items to be found in the estimates for (fjits support during the second half of the current fiscal year, and for a part of the next fiscal year, receive the favorable consideration of t^yCongress. ^ Wm. H. Taft. ^ The White House, December 8, 1912. 3 Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2019 with funding from University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign Alternates https://archive.org/details/progressreportme00inte_0 PKOGRESS REPORT. International Waterways Commission, Office of Chairman, American Section, ^yasllin(Jton, D. 0., November 27, 1912. The Secretary of War, Washington, D. C. vSir: 1. The act making appropriations for sundry civil expenses of the Government, approved August 24, 1912, contained the following item, viz: For continuing until December thirty-first, nineteen hundred and twelve, the work of investigation and report by the International Waterways Commission, authorized by section four of the river and harbor act approved June thirteenth, nineteen hundred and two, $10,000: Provided, That report as to the progress of the work be made by the American commissioners to Congress at the beginning of the next session. In compliance with tliese instructions the American commissioners have the honor to submit the following report for transmission to Congress. 2. The International Waterways Commission originated with sec¬ tion 4 of the act of Congress making appropriations for rivers and harbors approved June 13, 1902, which reads as follows: That the President of the United States is hereby requested to invite the Govern¬ ment of Great Britain to join in the formation of an international commission, to be composed of three members from the United States and three who shall represent the interests of the Dominion of Canada, whose duty it shall be to investigate and report upon the conditions and uses of the waters adjacent to the boundary lines between the United States and Canada, including all of the waters of the lakes and rivers whose natural outlet is by the River Saint Lawrence to the Atlantic Ocean, also upon the maintenance and regulation of suitable levels, and also upon the effect upon the shores of these waters and the structures thereon, and upon the interests of navigation by reason of the diversion of these waters from or change in their natural flow; and, further, to report upon the necessary measures to regulate such diversion, and to make such recommendations for improvements and regulations as shall best subserve the inter¬ ests of navigation in said waters. The said commissioners shall report upon the advisa¬ bility of locating a dam at the outlet of Lake Erie, with a view to determining whether such dam will benefit navigation, and if such structure is deemed advisable shall make recommendations to their respective Governments looking to an agreement or treaty which shall provide for the construction of the same, and they shall make an estimate of the probable cost thereof. The President in selecting the three members of said commission who shall represent the United States is authorized to appoint one officer of the Corps of Engineers of the United States Army, one civil engineer well versed in the hydraulics of the Great Lakes, and one lawyer of experience in questions of international and riparian law, and said commission shall be authorized to employ such persons as it may deem needful in the performance of the duties hereby imposed; and for the purpose of paying the expenses and salaries of said com¬ mission the Secretary of War is authorized to expend from the amounts heretofore appropriated for the Saint Marys River at the Falls the sum of twenty thousand dollars, or so much thereof as may be necessary to pay that portion of the expenses of said commission chargeable to the United States. 3. The invitation here authorized was duly eomnninicated to the Government of Great Britain by the American ambassador in London, by letter dated July 15, 1902, and was accepted by letter from the 5 6 INTERNATIONAL WATERWAA'S COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. British foreign office dated June 2, 1903. The American members were appointed October 2, 1903. They were Col. O. H. Ernst, Corps, of Engineers, United States Army (now brigadier general, retired); Mr. George Clinton, of Buffalo, N. Y., and Prof. Gardner S. Williams, of Ithaca, N. Y. In 1905 Prof. Williams resigned and was succeeded by Mr. George Y. Wisner. Mr. Wisner died in 1906 and was suc¬ ceeded by Prof. Eugene E. Haskell, of Ithaca, N. Y., dean of the civil engineering department of Cornell University. There was a delay of several years in the appointment of the Canadian members. Finally on the 10th of January, 1905, the following-named gentlemen were appointed, viz: Mr. J. P. Mabee, K. C., Dr. W. F. King, chief astron¬ omer of the Dominion, and Mr. Louis Coste, C. E. Subsequently, in November, 1905, Mr. Mabee was appointed judge of the supreme court of judicature for Ontario and was replaced on the commission by Mr. Geo. C. Gibbons (now Sir George C. Gibbons, K. C.), and in February, 1907, Dr. King resigned and was replaced by Mr. W. J. Stewart, chief hydrographer of the Dominion. 4. The American section held its first meeting in Washington, D. C., May 10, 1905. The written instructions which it received from the United States Government are contained in the following letter: Department of State, Washington, April 15, 1905. Sir: Referring to your letter of the 10th ultimo, asking as to the instructions which may be required by the American commissioners appointed under section 4 of the river and harbor act of 1902 (32 Stat. L., 373), especially in regard to a question which you state is likely to arise concerning the scope of the commission’s investigation, the Canadian members appearing to be disposed to regard it as taking in all waters adjacent to the boundary line, whether part of the Great Lakes or not, I have to state as follows: The wording of the law will be seen by reference to the inclosed copy. The depart¬ ment’s opinion is that the words “including all of the waters of the lakes and rivers whose natural outlet is by the river St. Lawrence to the Atlantic Ocean” are intended as a limitation on what precedes them, and that the investigation and report should cover only such waters, omitting the lower St. Lawrence itself as well as all other waters not discharging naturally through it. The broader interpretation given to the act by the Canadian authorities should be rejected, if for no other reason on account of the smallness of the appropriation for the support of the American section. Congress could hardly have intended to provide with a sum of $20,000 for the expenses incident to an investigation extending to the Pacific coast, and possibly embracing the Alaskan boundary as well. A portion of the report of the chairman of the River and Harbor Committee, when reporting the bill (copy of act herewith), treats of section 4, and would appear to limit the scope of the investigation to the Great Lakes system. When the ground to be covered has been defined, the law itself appears to be suffi¬ ciently detailed to serve as instructions to the American commissioners. It seems sufficient, therefore, at the present stage to inform you and the other mem¬ bers of the American section of the views held by the Department as to the scope of the investigation and report, and to request the American commissioners to assemble and organize as soon as possible after the 20th instant, at this capital, and to submit, after discussion, their own recommendations as to further procedure. I inclose, also, for your information copies of letters from Col. Ernst and Prof. Williams in regard to the place of meeting of the commission. Copies of your letter of the 10th ultimo, and of this, the department’s reply, have been addressed to Col. Ernst and Prof. Williams for their guidance. I am, sir, your obedient servant, F. B. Loomis, Acting Secretary. Geo. Clinton, Esq., Commissioner of the United States, International Waterways Commission, 1012 Prudential Building, Buffalo, N. Y. INTERNATIONAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. 7 In a conference with the honorable Secretary of War, it was decided by him that the work of the commission should be under the War Department. Subsequently the Secretary of AVar gave instructions that the Department of State be furnished with copies of all of^the commission’s reports. 5. On the 25th of May, 1905, the full commission held its first meeting in AA'ashington, 1). C. A difference soon arose as to the scope of the investigation to be undertaken. The Canadian members desired to consider all international waters between the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans, and interpreted the act of Congress originating the commission to give them authority to do that, while the American members were by their instructions limited to the waters forming part of the Great Lakes system. It was decided that further proceed- mgs be deferred until further instruction be received from the two Governments. The fmal result was that the instructions to the Amer¬ ican members were left unaltered, and the Canadian members were authorized to proceed with the work of the commission within the field prescribed to the former. The full commission held its second meetmg at Toronto, June 14, 1905, upon which date it may be said that the work of the commission began, although it was some months later when their offices became available. 6. Some of the rules of procedure adopted were the following: The offices of the Canadian section were to be established in Toronto and those of the American section in Buffalo. Meetmgs of the full commission were to be held in one or the other city as should be found most convenient, but usually alternating between the two. At meetings of the full commission held on American territory the chairman of the American section should preside, and at meetings held on Canadian territory the chairman of the Canadian section should preside. To enable all persons to appear before the com¬ mission or to address it, who might wish to do so, public notice of all meetmgs was to be given as long in advance as possible through the press of the principal cities of the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence system. Stenographic notes were to be taken of the proceedings of all public meetings, but in order to insure greater freedom of dis¬ cussion they were to be omitted at executive sessions. At first the intervals between the meetmgs were irregular, but later on it was found best to adjourn each meetmg to some fixed date about one month in advance. 7. Through the courtesy of the honorable Secretary of the Treas¬ ury excellent quarters in the Federal building in Buffalo were assigned to the use of the American section, completely furnished and ar¬ ranged with temporary partitions to suit its convenience in every respect. These rooms became available September 11, 1905. Sub¬ sequently a branch office was established in Wasliington in a room rented for the purpose. The section was fortunate enough to secure the services, as secretary, of Mr. L. C. Sabin, a hvdraulic engineer of many years’ e:^erience in the service of the Government on the Great Lakes. He reported for duty August 1, 1905. He resigned one year later to accept the position of superintendent of the Sault Ste. Marie Canal and was succeeded by Mr. W. E. AATlson, an accom¬ plished hydraulic engineer, who had also had experience in the Government service on the Great Lakes. In perfecting its organ¬ ization the American section kept in view the necessity of collecting. 8 INTEENATIONAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. arranging, and studying all of the complicated data bearing upon the technical subjects which it had to consider, which were mainly of an engineering character. Its staff and its offices were selected and arranged accordingly. 8. Among the questions brought to the attention of the commis¬ sion at its earlier meetings beside the one specifically mentioned in the law, ^Hhe advisability of locating a dam at the outlet of Lake Erie,” were the following, viz: (a) The uses of the waters at Sault Ste. Marie for power purposes and the regulations necessary to insure an equitable division of the waters between the two countries and the protection of the naviga¬ tion interests. (b) The uses of the waters in the Niagara Kiver for power purposes and the regulations necessary to insure an equitable division of the waters between the two countries and the protection of Niagara Falls as a scenic spectacle. (c) The alleged differences in marine regulations of the two coun¬ tries with respect to signal lights, and the advisability of adopting uniform signals for both countries.^ (d) The diversion southward by the Minnesota Canal & Power Co., of Duluth, of certain waters in the State of Minnesota that now flow north into the Rainy River and the I^ake of the Woods. (e) The effect of the Chicago Drainage Canal upon the levels of Lakes ^Rchigan, Huron, Erie, and Ontario, and upon the River St. Lawrence. (/) Delimiting the international boundary on the international waterways and delineating the same on modern charts. ig) The su])pression or abatement of illegal fishing on the Great Lakes. (h) The location and construction of common channels. (i) Regulations to govern navigation in narrow channels. (j) Protection of shores from damage due to deepening of chan¬ nels and increased speed. As some of these questions did not come under the jurisdiction of the commission as constituted they have not been the subject of special reports. Other questions subsequently arose from time to time, as will appear hereafter. NIAGARA RIVER. 9. Upon taking up the subject of the Niagara River the commis¬ sion found that great amounts of capital had been, and were con¬ tinuing to be, invested in power works at Niagara Falls by private corporations under the authority of the State of New York or of the Province of Ontario. Many millions of dollars had been expended in the works themselves and many millions more in the industrial enterprises to which they furnished jiower. In addition to the five principal corporations actually engaged in the development of water power, there were several other corporations preparing to engage in that work under franchises some of which had been granted and others of which were being sought for. The total destruction of Niagara Falls as a scenic spectacle was threatened. It seemed de¬ sirable that this movement should be checked without delay, and as 1 It was found, upon investigation, that no difference existed, the Canadian Government having adopted the regulations established by the United States. INTEHXATIONAL WATERWAYS COM MISSION PROGRESS REPORT. 9 the oolloftioii of all the data and the j)reparati()n ot a lull rej)ort would re((uire time, the commission at its meeting of October 28, 1905, ])assed the following resolution, of which cojues were sent to the Secretary of War of the United States and the minister of |)ublic works of Canada, viz: Resolved, That this commission recommends to the Governments of the United States and Canada that such steps as they may regard as necessary be taken to prevent any cor])orate rights or franchises being granted or renewed by either Federal, State, or Provincial authority for the use of the waters of the Niagara River for power or other purposes until this commission is able to collect the information necessary to ■enable it to report fully upon the “conditions and uses” of those waters to the respec¬ tive Governments of the United States and Canada. 10. By March, 1906, the information necessary for a report had been collected, public hearings had been held, and an original map of the locality, specially constructed for the purpose, had l3een pre¬ pared, when Congress passed the following joint resolution, aT)proved March 15, 1906, viz: Resolved hy the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the members representing the United States upon the international commission created by section four of the river and harbor act of June thirteenth, nineteen hundred and two, be requested to report to Congress at an early day what action is, in their judgment, necessary and desirable to prevent the further depletion of water flowing over Niagara Falls; and the said members are also requested and directed to exert, in conjunction with the members of said commission represent¬ ing the Dominion of Canada, if practicable, all possible efforts for the preservation of the said Niagara Falls in their natural condition. Tlie American section accordingly submitted a report, dated March 19, 1906. It was published as Senate Document No. 242, Fifty- ninth Congress, first session. It was subsecpiently concurred in sub¬ stantially by the Canadian section, and the joint report of tlie full commission, dated May 3, 1906, was published as Senate Document No. 434, Fifty-ninth Congress, first session. 11. The report of March 19 was followed by an exhaustive inves¬ tigation of the subject by the Rivers and Harbors Committee of the House of Rejmesentatives, who, during several weeks, held public hearings in Wasliington, at whicli all persons interested were given an o])portunity to be heard, and who sent a subcommittee to Niagara Falls, where a tliorough inspection of the works was made, and where also there was a public hearing. Tlie result was a confirmation of the rejiort in all essential particulars. 12. An ‘‘act for the control and regulation of the waters of Niagara River, for the preservation of Niagara Falls, and for other purposes,” apjiroved June 29, 1906, was then passed by Congress. It authorized the Secretary of War to grant jiermits for the diversion of water on the American side, and for the transmission of electrical ])ower from Canada, under certain jirescribed conditions and to certain pre¬ scribed limits. The total amount authorized being considerably less than the amounts apphed for by the power comjianies, a more detailed investigation, which should embrace jiarticularly the commercial and financial side of the power-producing industry at Niagara Falls, became necessary to insure an equitable division of the amounts au¬ thorized. Capt. Charles W. Ivutz, Corps of Engineers, United States Army, was detailed by the Secretary of War to make the investiga¬ tion, his re])orts to be submitted to the American section for review and recommendation. Under these instructions the American sec¬ tion submitted two reports, dated September 29, 1906 (Aj)pendix 10 INTERNATIONAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. A), and November 15, 1906 (Appendix B), respectively. Special difficulties having arisen in granting a permit for the diversion of water from the Erie Canal, the American section, under instructions from the Secretary of War, caused a map of Lockport, N. Y., to be prepared, and new measurements of flow to be made at that place, and under date of March 5, 1907, submitted a special report with a form of permit. (Appendix C.) 13. Other reports relating to power development in the Niagara River were dated September 9, 1907, and March 3, 1908. The first was by the American section, and related to a letter from the Niagara Falls Hydraulic Power & Manufacturing Co. to the Secretary of State, in connection with the treaty then under negotiation with Great Britain. (Appendix D.) The second was by the full commission, and related to a bill to authorize the diversion of water below the Falls, which had been referred to the commission by the Rivers and Harbors Committee of the House of Representatives of the United States. (Appendix E.) 14. During the summer of 1908 the works of the Niagara Falls Power Co. were shut down on three occasions, and upon one of these occasions the works of the other power company on the American side, the Niagara Falls Hydraulic Power & Manufacturing Co., also were almost completely shut down. The commission having been notified in advance took advantage of the opportunity to observe the effect upon the river and the Falls of the diversion or nondiversion of the considerable body of water used by those companies. By its direction its American secretary installed water gauges at various points at and above the Falls and had them observed before, during, and after the shutdowns, and afterwards discussed his observations in a report. The conclusions which he reached were that the diversion of 8,000 cubic feet per second through these plants lower the level of Niagara River at Grass Island near the intake of the Niagara Falls Power Co. about 31 inches; near the Ontario intake on the Canadian side about IJ inches; and at Prospect Point, the crest of the American Falls, about four-tenths of an inch. The observations are a valuable contribution to existing knowledge of the effect of power diversion upon the Falls. SAULT STE. MARIE. 15. Upon taking up the subject of the uses of the waters at Sault Ste. Marie for power pur])oses the commission found that on either side of the rapids was a navigation canal, constructed by the United States and Canadian Governments respectively. The traffic through those canals had reached enormous proportions, far exceed¬ ing that of any other two canals in the w^orld, and was rapidly increasing. After providing liberally foi' the service of these canals there remained available for powder purposes a volume of water which was large, but was not large enough to provide for all of the schemes of development wdiich had been projected. On the Canadian side a private corporation was operating one power canal and had projected another, which, together with the first, would take about half the surplus flow of the rapids. On the Amei’ican side a j)Ower canal had been constructed by a private corporation, leaving the St. * Marys River above the rapids, passing through the city of Sault Ste. INTERNATIONAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. 11 Marie, Midi., and rejoiniii" the river about a mile below tlie rapids, thus constituting a new and separate outlet to Lake Supeiior. 1 he ultimate capacit}^ of this canal was about half the surjdus How of the rapids, though only onc-quarter of its capacity was actually in use. On the American side, also, power woi-ks in the bed of the stream wei*e in o])eration, using a moderate volume of water, but they were being altered and improved so as to increase their capacity, and it was not clear that their owners could not claim a legal right to half the sur])lus flow of the rapids. It was evident that some under¬ standing must be reached by which there should be an equitable division of the surplus water between the two sides of the inter¬ national boundary, and that until that was done further dev(dopment should be reduced to a minimum. Moreover, the works affected the level of Lake Superior and the vast navigation interests dependent thereon, and it w^as desirable that the regulations to govern their operation should be known, so far as w'as then jiossible, in advance of their construction. The commission therefoi-e passed at its ses¬ sion of October 28, 1905, the following resolution, of which copies were sent to the Secretary of War of the United States and the min¬ ister of public works of Canada, viz: Resolved, That in the opinion of this commission no further rights or privileges should be granted or conferred regarding the uses or diversions of the water flowing out of Lake Superior by either the Government of the United States or Canada, until all data and information are in the hands of the commission that may be ne( es- sary to enable it to make suggestions for regulating the excess of these waters, or that, if such rights or privileges be granted, they be subject to any regulations that may be adopted by both Governments. 16. On the 3d of Ma}^ 1906, tlie commission submitted to the two Governments a joint report upon the conditions existing at Sault Ste. iMarie, in wdiich wwe the following recommendations, viz: (а) That no permit shall be granted for the use of the waters of St. Marys River, or for the erection of structures in, under, or over, or the occupation in any manner of, the said waters until plans have been submitted to the commission for its inves¬ tigation and recommendation, and the use of the waters under such permits shall not be allowed except upon compliance with the rules hereinafter recommended. (б) The commission further recommends that no grants, permits, or concessions should be made which directly or by operation of law may in any manner affect the right of the United States or of Canada to control the bed of the St. Marys River below high-water mark, and especially that none should be made which, legally or equitably, may be the means of adding to the expense of acquiring lands or rights for the purpose of making improvements in aid of navigation, or which may give an equitable right to compensation in case of the removal of structures in said river. Xc) That steps be taken to increase the lockage facilities at Sault Ste. Marie with¬ out unnecessary delay. {d) That the Governments of the United States and Canada reserve all water necessary for navigation puiposes, at present or in the future, and the surplus shall be divided equally between the two countries for power purposes. (e) As the commission regards the interests of the United States and Canada in the pieservation of the lake levels and in the improvement of the channels and the conservation of the water supply for purposes of navigation as identical and as incapable of efficient protection without joint and harmonious action on the part of the two Governments, it recommends that the rules hereinafter set forth be adopted and that a joint commission be created to supervise their enforcement, or that such powers be vested in the existing International Waterways Commission, subject to such restrictions and reservations as may be deemed advisable. The report was transmitted by tlie Secretary of War to the Sec¬ retary of State with the following indorsement, dated May 14, 1906, viz: Respectfully referred to the Secretary of State with a request that after the report be read it be forwarded to the President as a basis for negotiations looking to the 12 INTEKNATIONAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. adoption of a treaty carrying into effect the recommendations of the International Waterways Commission, the report of which is approved so far as this department is concerned. Embodiec] in the report were a series of rules and regulations to govern the use of water at the Sault. They were based upon the regulations already established for the American side by the Sec¬ retary of Wai' of the United States, but were extended in their appli¬ cation, and, like them, they recognized the following principles as fundamental: (1) Levels must be maintained; (2) navigation must be protected; (3) the public must reserve the right to use any portion or all of the natural flow in the future; (4) the use of the water is not granted to the power companies in any fixed quantity or for any fixed length of time, but the Government may enter upon the property and shut off the flow in whole or in part at any time to the extent necessary to maintain water levels. The enforcement of these rules involved the creation of a permanent international com¬ mission, and it was not until the creation of the International Joint Commission by the treaty between the United States and Great Brit¬ ain, dated January 11, 1909, that it became practicable to put them in force. At the same time the creation of that commission relieved this commission of all further consideration of the subject. A full copy of the report of May 3, 1906, is hereto appended. (Appendix F.) MINNESOTA CANAL & POW’^ER CO. 17. The Minnesota Canal & Power Co., a corporation organized under the laws of Minnesota, proposed to construct reservoirs in the Birch Lake Basin in Minnesota, in which water was to be stored and from which it w^as to be released as needed and conducted by artificial and natural channels southward to Duluth, where it was to be employed in generating electrical power. The natural drainage of the Birch Lake Basin is northward into Kainy River, Lake-of-the- Woods, Winnipeg River, Winnipeg Lake, and finally into Hudson Bay, the water thus forming a part of the international boundary and finally entering territory which is exclusively Canadian. The company applied to the Department of the Interior for permission to use certain public lands by flowage and otherwise and to the War Department for approval of certain structures designed to impound the water. Opposition to the scheme was offered by citizens of Canada through the British ambassador at Washington, and the Secretary of State by letter to the Secretary of War, dated May 14, 1906, requested that the matter be referred to this commission for an expression of its view^s. On the 15th of November, 1906, the commission rendered a joint report to the two Governments, which closed with the following recommendations, viz: (а) The commission would therefore recommend that the permit applied for be not grant id without the concurrence of the Canadian Government. (б) As questions involving the same principles and difficulties liable to create friction, hostile feelings, and reprisals are liable to arise between the two countries affecting waters on or crossing the boundary line, the commission would recommend that a treaty be entered into which shall settle the rules and principles upon which all such questions may be peacefully and satisfactorily determined as they arise. (c) The commission would recommend that any treaty which may be entered into should define the uses to which international waters may be put by either country without the necessity of adiustment in each instance, and would respectfully suggest INTERNATIONAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. 13 that such uses should be declared to be: Use for necessary domestic and sanitary purposes; service of locks used for navigation purposes; the right to navigate. (d) The commission would also respectfully suggest that the treaty should prohibit the permanent diversion of navigable streams which cross the international boundary or -which form a })art thereof, except upon adjustment of the rights of all parties concerned by a permanent commission and with its consent. A copy of the report is hereto appended. (Ap})endix G.) RAINY RIVER AND RIVER ST. JOHN. 18. On the 2d day of ^fay, 1907, the Canadian Government referred to the commission certain documents relating to the Rainy River and on the 9th of May certain other documents relating to the River St. John. Neither of these rivers being tributary to the Great Lakes and St. LawTence system, neither of them came within the limits pre¬ scribed to the American members under the instructions which they received in 1905. In deference to the Canadian Government, however, the question of jurisdiction was submitted for the consideration of higher authority by letter to the Secretary of War, dated November 6, 1907. The ])revious instructions were not altered, and the questions concerning these rivers were not considered. RICHELIEU RIVER. 19. The IGchelieu River connects Lake Champlain in American territory with the St. I^awrence River in Canadian territory. The International Development Co., a corporation organized under the laws of Canada and also under the laws of New Jersey, proposed to deepen the Richelieu River and regulate its flow so that there should be a uniform discharge of 9,000 cubic feet per second throughout the year. For this purpose it proposed to use Lake Champlain as a reservoir, in which surplus water was to be stored during the wet season and from which it was to be released during the low-water period. The works were to be located in Canadian waters, but would have an important effect upon American waters, including Lake Champlain. Under date of November 2, 1906, the comj)anv made application to the War Department of the United States for per¬ mission to construct the works, which a])phcation was referred by the Secretary of War to the chairman of the American section by indorsement of November 6, 1906, and was by him laid before the commission. The commission found that a uniform flow of 9,000 cubic feet per second could not be maintained at all seasons and in all years without giving to Lake ChamjJain a range between the extreme high and extreme low water which it deemed inadmissible, but that it would be possible to plan works which would not injuriously affect Jjake Cham])lain and would materially improve the conditions of flow in the Richelieu River. Under date of November 15, 1906, it submitted a joint report to the two Governments (Appendix U), from which the following is an extract, viz: As Lake Champlain is wholly within the territory of the United States, and the pro])osed works are wholly within Canadian territory, the international questions raised are of some moment. It is in our o])inion not desirable that either nation should obstruct the natural floAv of streams crossing the international boundary to the injury of public or private rights in the other. It is manifest, therefore, that the a])])licants should furnish conclusive evidence that private rights in the States of New York and 14 INTEENATIONAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. Vermont adjoining Lake Champlain will not be injuriously affected by the alteration of the lake level as proposed, and that as the Secreary of War of the United States has control of the interests of navigation on Lake Champlain, the said work should not be undertaken without his permission, and should be operated under such regulations as he may direct, with a view to the maintenance of the level of the said lake as the interests of navigation thereon may require. It would be possible to plan works adapted to the conditions, and in our opinion such works should be permitted, pro¬ vided they do not interfere with private interests in the United States and meet with the approval of the Secretary of War as suggested. We respectfully submit that in any treaty to be had between the two nations in relation to the use of international waters the principles above suggested should have consideration. We would further suggest that the applicant’s Canadian act of incorporation should be amended, so as to provide that the maintenance of the works sought to be erected shall be conditional at all times upon compliance with all regulations imposed by the Secretary of War of the United States of America from tune to time for the preservation of the levels of Lake Champlain. 20. Under the direction of the department of public works of Canada, a report was prepared in 1902 upon the subject of damage by overflow of the Richelieu River and a plan was submitted for correcting the evil. At its session of 1906, the Canadian Parliament appropriated 110,000 for beginning the works proposed. The latter were to be entirely within Canadian territory, but inasmuch as they might affect the interests of the United States or of its citizens upon Lake Champlain, the Canadian Government before beginning the work referred the matter to the International Waterways Commission. The matter was considered by the commission at its session of October 24, 1907, and the following resolution was passed, of which copies were sent to the Secretary of War of the United States and the minister of public works cf Canada, viz: ' Whereas certain valuable lands in the valley of the Richelieu River, the outlet of Lake Champlain, are subject to damage by overflow; and Whereas a plan for the reclamation of said lands, submitted by Resident Engineer J. B. Michaud, April 7, 1902, to the Canadian Government, was referred by that Government to the International Waterways Commission under date of May 6, 1907; and Whereas the international question involved relates only to the effect of the proposed works upon the interests of the United States or of its citizens upon Lake Cham¬ plain; and Whereas the average level of Lake Champlain is 96.1 feet above tide water, and the monthly mean level during floods is about 100, Resolved, That it is the opinion of the International Waterways Commission that the works proposed can be constructed without injury to the interests of the United States or its citizens upon Lake Champlain, provided a movable dam be constructed at St. Johns, and so operated that the flood waters of Lake Champlain shall be allowed to rise to a monthly mean level of 97 and the level of the lake shall thereafter be main¬ tained at or above 95. CHICAGO DRAINAGE CANAL. 21. On the 4th of January, 1907, the full commission submitted to the two Governments a report upon the Chicago Drainage Canal, which closed with the following summary and recommendations: SUMMARY, (а) Chicago obtains its water supply from Lake Michigan, and to avoid polluting it must either dispose of its sewage otherwise than in the lake or place its intakes for water at a great distance from the city. (б) The topography of the country favors the discharge of the sewage into the Des Plaines River, a tributary of the Mississippi, through two depressions in the divide which separates that river from Lake Michigan. (c) The slope on the lake side of the divide is drained by two streams, the Chicago River and the Calumet River, into which the sewers of the city empty. By a cut INTERNATIONAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. 15 through the northerly depression the flow of the Chicago River has been reversed and diverted into the Des Plaines River instead of into Lake Michigan, and by a cut through the southerly depression the same process can be applied to the Calumet River. {d) To make this reversal effective the channels must be large enough to take all the water which falls u])on the respective drainage areas during the most violent rain storms. This amount is estimated at 10,000 cubic feet per second for the Chicago River and 15,700 cubic feet jier second for the Calumet River. (e) The city of Chicago was originally built upon the Chicago River, and that stream now drains the richest and most populous jiart of the city. It is now spreading over the Calumet region. (/) In 1889 the plan of diverting the Chicago River into the valley of the Des Plaines was definitely adopted and the Chicago Drainage Canal was undertaken. It was designed to carry 10,000 cubic feet ])er second. Though not entirely completed, it has been in use since January, 1900. The amount expended upon the canal and accessory work is about $41,000,000. (g) The Illinois law which authorized the canal required a flow of 333 cubic feet per second for each 100,000 of population in order to render the sewage inoffensive. This amount of dilution is probably not excessive. It is reasonable to expect a popu¬ lation in a future not remote of five or six millions or more, involving the diversion by this standard of some 20,000 cubic feet per second. The Chicago River with its 10,000 cubic feet provides for a population of 3,000,000. The present population of the city is about 2,000,000. (h) It is now proposed to apply to the Calumet River a treatment similar to that applied to the Chicago River, viz, to reverse its flow, so that instead of discharging into Lake Michigan it shall discharge into the Des Plaines, but for a part of the new route it must follow the drainage canal already excavated for the Chicago River. (i) Although the Chicago Drainage Canal was designed to carry 10,000 cubic feet per second, it is found to have, in its completed rock portion, an actual capacity of 14,000 cubic feet. This additional capacity fixes the amount which it is proposed to divert from the Calumet at 4,000 cubic feet per second. Any greater amount from the Calumet will overtax the drainage canal at the expense of the richest part of Chi¬ cago and for the benefit of a suburban part. (k) The diversion of only 4,000 cubic feet will not be effective at all times, since a much larger amount must be diverted from the Calumet during heavy rainstorms if the lake is to be protected. Moreover, it provides for a population not exceeding 1,200,000, which number will probably be exceeded at a date not far distant. (l) The large channels necessary to provide for the contingencies of rainstorms are capable of discharging a volume of water largely in excess of sanitary requirements during the greater part of the year, but the development of water power creates the demand that they be employed to their full capacity throughout the year. (m) The diversion of large bodies of water from Lake Michigan for supplying the drainage canal has not been authorized by Congress, but there appears to be a tacit general agreement that no objection will be made to the diversion of 10,000 cubic feet per second, as originally planned. (n) The diversion of 10,000 cubic feet per second will lower the levels of Lake Michigan-Iluron, Lake St. Clair, Lake Erie, Lake Ontario, and the St. Lawrence River, besides the important connecting channels, the Detroit and St. Clair Rivers, by amounts varying from 4^ to 6^ inches for the different waters, and the diversion of 14,000 cubic feet will lower them from 6 to 8^ inches. The diversion of 20,000 cubic feet will lower Lake Michigan-Iluron about 13 inches and Lake Erie about 11 inches. (o) The lake traffic which passed through the Detroit River in 1905 was about 58,000,000 tons, valued at about $615,000,000. It is increasing annually with, mar¬ velous rapidity. The records for the year 1906, so far as they are made up, indicate that the number of tons which passed through the Detroit River in 1906 exceeded 65,000,000, valued at $690,000,000. The lowering of the water surface has a very injurious effect upon this traffic and upon that of the Welland and St. Lawrence Canals. Chicago being one of the principal lake ports, there will be very few communities which will feel the injury more than she will. (p) The cost of restoring the depth in the harbors of the Great Lakes and the chan¬ nels between the lakes is estimated at $10,000,000, and of restoring it in the Welland and St. Lawrence Canals at $2,500,000. This expenditure would not prevent very serious annoyance to the navigation interests during the execution of the remedial works, which would occupy several years. In Lake St. Clair, navigation of the open lake would be replaced by that of an artificial channel or canal with submerged banks. (g) The extension to the Calumet region of the method of sewage disposal already applied to the Chicago River is not necessary to preserve the health of Chicago, there bemg other and better methods available for the Calumet region. The final cost of 16 INTEENATIONAL WATEKWAYS COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. these methods is somewhat greater than that of the one proposed, but the works can be developed as the population increases, and only a part of their cost need be incurred at present, while their greater efficiency justifies the increase of final cost. (r) The diversion of 10,000 cubic feet of water per second at Chicago will render practicable a waterway to the Mississippi River 14 feet deep. Any greater depth must be obtained by the abstraction of more water from Lake Michigan and at the expense of the navigation interests of the Great Lakes and of the St. Lawrence Valley. (s) The effect upon Niagara Falls of diverting water at Chicago is of secondary importance when considering the health of a great city and the navigation interests of the Great Lakes and of the St. Lawrence Valley, but it is proper to note that the volume of the Falls will be diminished by the full amount diverted at Chicago. RECOMMENDATIONS. (t) The waters of Lake Michigan in the United States, the waters of Georgian Bay in Canada, and the waters of Lake Superior, partly in the United States and partly in Canada, all form sources of supply of the Great Lakes system, finding their way by the St. Lawrence to the sea. All are interdependent, and there can be no diversion from any of them without injury to the whole system. By Article XXVI of the treaty of 1871, it is provided that ‘‘navigation of the River St. Lawrence, ascending and descend¬ ing from the forty-fifth parallel of north latitude, where it ceases to form the boundary between the two countries, from, to, and into the sea, shall forever remain free and open for the purposes of commerce to the citizens of the United States, subject to any laws and regulations of Great Britain, or of the Dominion of Canada, not inconsistent with such privileges of free navigation.” It is desirable that in any treaty arrange¬ ment the waters of Lake Michigan, Georgian Bay, and all other waters forming part of the Great Lakes system should be declared to be “forever free and open for the purposes of commerce” to the citizens of the United States and the subjects of His Britannic Majesty, subject to any laws or regulations of either country not incon¬ sistent with such privilege of free navigation. (u) The preservation of the levels of the Great Lakes is imperative. The interest of navigation in these waters is paramount, subject only to the right of use for domestic purposes, in which term is included necessary sanitary purposes. In our report of November 15, 1906, upon the application of the Minnesota Canal and Power Company to divert certain waters in Minnesota, we recommended among other things: “That any treaty which may be entered into should define the uses to which inter¬ national waters may be put by either country without the necessity of adjustment in each instance, and would respectfully suggest that such uses should be declared to be— “Uses for necessary domestic and sanitary purposes. “Service of locks for navigation purposes. “The right to navigate.” It is our opinion that so far as international action is concerned a treaty provision of that kind is all that is required in this case. We accordingly renew our recommenda¬ tion of November 15, 1906, just quoted. (v) A careful consideration of all the circumstances leads us to the conclusion that the diversion of 10,000 cubic feet per second through the Chicago River will, with proper treatment of the sewage from areas now sparsely occupied provide for all the population which will ever be tributary to that river, and that the amount named will therefore suffice for the sanitary purposes of the city for all time. Incidentally, it will provide for the largest navigable waterway from I.ake Michigan to the Mississippi River which has been considered by Congress. We therefore recommend that the Government cf the United States prohibit the diversion of more than 10,000 cubic feet per second for the Chicago Drainage Canal. Two editions of this report were printed as a War Department document, and were distributed to all persons applying for them. A copy is hereto appended. (Appendix I.) INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARY IN LAKE ERIE. 22. In tjie month of August, 1906, a large number of nets were placed in Lake Erie by the Keystone Fish Co., of Erie, Pea., near the middle of the lake, but on what they claimed was the Ameri- can side of the boundary. Most of these nets were promptly seized and confiscated by the Canadian yessel Vigilant. The commander INTERNATIONAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. 17 ■ : of the Vigilant thou })ro|)oso(l to the Aiuoricau hshemioii to show P tlieni tlio l)ouii(lary, and aid them in marking it with buoys so that Ij they might always remain on their own side of the line if they de- ^ sired to do so. The proposal was forwarded to the Secretary of State and by liim to the Secretary of War, under date of September 5, 19()G, with the re([uest that it— be referred to the International Waterways Commission with the inquiry whether it " is known that the American and Canadian cluirts of the locality agree as to the dis¬ tance to be logged from the gas buoy at Erie to the boundary line on the usual fishing grounds. 23. The commission having collected the various official charts ui)on which the boundary in Lake Erie is marked, proceeded to reduce them to the same system of ])rojection and the same scale in 1 order to comjiare them. It was found that the boundary as laid down on the United States hydrographic chart differed widely from < that on the British Admiralty chart. They both derived their authoritv from the treaty" of Ghent. The map on file with the , treaty was also reduced to the same sy^stem of })rojection and the same scale as the others, and having been compared with the accu- j rate modern charts of the United States Lake Survey, was found to ' be very" far from correct. It was so inaccurate that no two persons ‘i would probably transfer the boundary line marked thereon to a ■ modern chart in the same way, and was therefore worthless for its purpose. The only guide for the location of the boundary line in ■ Jjakc Erie, except at the eastern and western extremities, is in the j expression in the text of the treaty", “through the middle of said lake.^’ I Under that description a variety of lines may be laid down. ! 24. Under date of Januaiy 4, 1907, the commission submitted to ' the two Governments a report which closed with the following con¬ clusions and recommendations, viz. The commission therefore concludes: t (a) Tliat the international boundary line on Lake Erie can not be ascertained with • any accuracy from existing data. (b) That the American and Canadian charts of Lake Erie, namely, the hydro- graphic and British Admiralty charts, do not agree as to the distance to be loggeddrom the gas buoy at Erie to the boundary line on the usual fishing grounds. , The commission would respectfully recommend: (a) That the enthe boundary line from the point where the forty-fifth jiarallel of north latitude meets the middle of the St. Lawrence River, through that river,' the Great Lakes and connecting waters, in accordance with the true intent and meaning I of the treaties of 1783, 1814, and 1842, be located to accord as nearly as possible with the lines fixed by the commissioners appointed under the treaty of Ghent and the treaty of 1842, to be delineated upon modern charts, and be so described by refer¬ ence and fixed monuments, where necessary, that it can in the future be relocated at any given point by survey. 1 (b) That the location, delineation on modern charts, and monurnenting of the ' boundary line ])roceed under the direction of this commission or another international commission to be appointed, and that when it is located, laid down on modern charts ' and monurnented, it be finally fixed and determined by treaty accordingly. ‘ (c) That this commission be authorized to locate, lay down upon a modern chart, and monument the boundary line through Lake Erie. A copy of the rejiort is hereto appended. (Appendix K.) The furtlier connection of this commission with the boundarv has been of an executive cJiaracter under a special provision of the treaty be- , tween the United States and Great Britain dated April 11, 1908. It will be described farther on. S. Doc. 959-62-3-2 I 18 INTERNATIONAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. BUFFALO INLET PIER. 25. At its session in Buffalo on the 26th of June, 1906, representa¬ tives of the city appeared before the commission and requested its approval of the location of a new inlet pier for the city waterworks, which it was desired to place in the international waters on the Canadian side of the boundary. Although the question had not been regularly brought before it by higher authority, the commis¬ sion thought it proper, with a view to avoiding delay, to pass the following resolution, viz: That in the opinion of the International Waterways Commission, the tunnel and inlet pier proposed to be constructed in Lake Erie by the city of Buffalo for the pur¬ pose of furnishing a pure-water supply to the city, can be built without injury to navigation or other public interests, and it is recommended that permits for the con¬ struction of these works be granted, with the proviso that the inlet pier be kept prop¬ erly lighted at night at the expense of the city. DETROIT RIVER. 26. The })lans of the Detroit River Tunnel Co. for the construction of a tunnel under the Detroit River having been referred to the com¬ mission, it passed, at its session of March 7, 1906, at Toronto, the following resolution, viz: That the International Waterways Commission approve of the plans of the con¬ struction of a tunnel under the Detroit River prepared by the Detroit River Tunnel Co. and submitted to the commission by the Chief of Engineers of the United States Army under date of February 13, 1906, and by the minister of marine and fisheries for Canada under date of November 16, 1905, the construction to be carried on on the American side under the regulations contained in the report of the Board of Engineers of the United States Army of date .lanuary 26, 1906, and that the same be carried on on the Canadian side under regulations to be fixed by the minister of public works and the minister of marine and fisheries. 27. On the 2d of June, 1909, a letter was addressed to Lieut. Col. C. McD. Townsend, Corps of Engineers, United States Army, the ofhcer in charge of the channel improvements in the Detroit River, by Mr. H. J. liamb, engineer in charge, department of public works, Canada, inquiring by what authority the United States was deposit¬ ing material in Canadian waters in the construction of tlie Living¬ stone Channel, Detroit River. This letter was forwarded by Lieut. Col. Townsend, with his letter of June 3, to the Cliief of Engineers, and by request of the latter was referred to the International Waterways Commission by the Acting Secretary of War, by indorsement dated June 16, 1909. At its meeting in tluffalo, fluL 14, 1909, the com¬ mission adopted the following resolution, viz: Whereas the enlargement of the navigable channel in the Detroit River, now being made by the United States Government west of Bois Blanc Island, is of great benefit to the navigation interests of Canada as well as of the United States; and Whereas the excavation for said channel and the dumping grounds are partly in Canadian waters; and Whereas the consent of the Canadian Government to such use of its waters has not been given; Resolved, That in the opinion of the commission application should be made with¬ out delay to the Canadian Government by the United States Government for formal permission to excavate the channel where that work is now progressing, and that such application, when received by the Canadian Government, should be granted, pro¬ vision being made that the dumping grounds in Canadian waters should be located under the direction of the minister of public works of Canada. INTERNATIONAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. 19 Tlic matter was then brought to the attention of the I)e])artment of State and by that de])artment to the attention of his excellency the British ambassador at Washington. The desired ])ermission was granted ])y the Canadian Covernment upon the condition named in the resolution that ‘‘the dumping grounds in Canadian waters be located under the direction of the minister of public woi-ks of Canada/’ and with the proviso “that such permission is given without ])rejudice to the possessory rights of Chinada as defined by the ma])S and decla¬ rations of the commissioners under the treaty of Ghent, made at Utica on the 19th of June, 1822, and provided also that the dumping of material should not ])rove in any way a detriment to the safe navi¬ gation of the Detroit Kiver.” Notice of this action was sent to the I)e])artment of State by the British ambassador in his letter of September 17, 1909. ST. LAW PENCE RIVER. 28. Under date of JMay 28, 1906, !Mr. Smith L. Dawley, of Ogdens- burg, N. Y., addressed a letter to the Secretary of War, applying for permission to construct dikes, retaining walls, and such other struc¬ tures in the St. Lawu'ence River near Ijong Sault Island as should be necessary to create an “attractive summer resort with navigable ap])roaches thereto, and the development of a water powder.” By indorsement dated June 2, 1906, the pa])er was referred to the com¬ mission. On the 4th of January, 1907, the commission adopted the following resolution, of wdiich a copy was forw-arded to each Gov¬ ernment, viz; Whereas Mr. Smith L. Dawley, of Ogdensbuig, N. Y., submitted to the honorable Secretary of War of the United States, under date of May 28, 1906, an application for permission to construct at Long Sault Island, in the town of Massena, St. Law¬ rence County, N. Y., dikes, retaining walls, and such other structures as might bo necessary to create “an attractive summer resort with navigable approaches thereto, and the development of a water power, entirely in that portion of the St. Lawrence River that is within the United States, ” which application was referred to the International Waterways Commission by indorsement of the Secretary of War, dated June 2, 1906; and Whereas the application did not furnish information sufficient to justify a recom¬ mendation in the matter, and the efforts of the commission to obtain such informa¬ tion from Mr. Dawley have thus far been without success; and Whereas the commission now learns that Mr. Dawley has transferred his rights at Long Sault Island to the Pittsburgh Reduction Co., and it is the opinion of the commission that if any permit for the construction of works at this place is to bo granted it should be dealt with upon a direct application from the beneficiary; therefore be it Resolved, That the International Waterways Commission recommend to the honor¬ able Secretary of War of the United States that the application of Mr. Smith L. Dawley be denied. 29. Under date of April 4, 1906, the minister of public works of Canada referred to the commission a letter addressed to him bv the Calvin Co. (Ltd.), a Canadian corporation, protesting against the closure hy a dam of tlie south channel at Long Sault Island, which it understood was contemplated hy the Massena Water Power Co., an American corporation. It was found that the latter com¬ pany had taken no ste])s to ])rocure the necessary authority from the United States Government. 30. On the ISth of December, 1908, the Canadian department of public works referred to the commission an application of tlie Cedar Rapids Manufacturing & Power Co. to the Canadian Government for 20 INTEENATIONAL WATERWAYS COMAIISSIOIvT PROGRESS REPORT. permission to build works in the St. Lawrence River at Cedars, in the county of Soulanges, for the purpose of developiug electric power. At this place both banks of tlie St. Lawrence River are Canadian territory, but power worlvs in the bed of the stream affect the navi¬ gation interests of the entire river. On the 13th of April, 1909, the commission submitted a report upon the subject to the minister of public works of Canada, of which copies were sent to the Secretary of State and Secretary of War of the United States. A copy of this report is Iioreto appended. (Appendix I^.) 31. By letter dated December 24, 1909, the Committee on Rivers and Harbors of the House of Representatives of the United States transmitted to the commission a copy of a bill to provide for the construction of certain dams, locks, canals, and other structures in the St. I^awrence River near Long Sault Island, for the development of power, and requested the opinion of the commission thereon. The subject of legislation to authorize power development at this place was not a new one. A bill of similar tenor had been referred by the Secretary of War to the commission in 1907, and was the sub¬ ject of public hearings April IS and again October 24 of that year, but action was deferred under instructions from the prime minister of Canada to the Canadian section, to the effect that the minister of railways and canals had the matter under investigation, and that it would be inadvisable for the commission to deal with the matter until the investigation was completed. The subject received con¬ sideration from time to time in 1908 and 1909, public hearings being held in Toronto, November 21, 1908, and in Buffalo, February 26, 1909, but the Canadian members were not ready to join in a report, and on our side it was understood that the plans for the proposed works were not entirely perfected and that legislation would not probably be enacted within the near future. The letter of December 24, 1909, above mentioned, from the Committee on Rivers and Harbors reviving the subject was considered by the commission at its meeting in Buffalo, January 8, 1910. The Canadian members desired time for further consideration and particularly time enough to hold another public hearing in Canada. They stated that the objection of the prime minister of Canada to consideration of the subject had been withdrawn. The desired public hearing was held at Toronto on the 8th and 9th of February, 1910, but again the Canadian members desired time for further consideration, and action was deferred until the next meeting. At a meeting held in Buffalo, March 11, 1910, the subject was again considered, but the Canadian members were still not prepared to join in a report. By this time the session of Congress was so far advanced that no further delay was permissible if the report was to be of any service to the Committee on Rivers and Harbors. The American members felt compelled to ex]>ress their own views, and did so in a letter dated March 11, 1910. (Appendix M.) Subse¬ quently there was another public hearing at Toronto, April 15, 1910, but the commission took no action. DAM AT THE OUTLET OF LAKE ERIE. 32. The organic act creating the commission prescribed as one of its duties that it should ^L'eport upon the advisability of locating a dam at the outlet of Lake Erie with a view to determining whether such dam will benefit navigation.’^ It so happens that the term INTERNATIONAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION EROCiRESS REPORT. 21 * ‘ dam” may a])ply to various works oi wliicli the cliaractc'r and object are very diHerent. At the time of ])assing tlie act Congress had before it the report of the board ot engineers iij)on dee}) waterways between the Great J^akes and Atlantic tidewaters, dated June 30, 1900, in which it was recommended that tlie level of Jjake Erie be ■‘‘regrdated”—that is, that its oscillations b? reduced—by means of a submerged weir in connection with a set of sluice gates })laced at its outlet near the head of Niagara Kiver. It seemed })robable that this was tlie kind of works which Congress had in mind when using the term ”dam.’' Their object would be to raise the low-water surface of the lake without raising the high-water surfav^e. But the term ‘Clam” may also be ap}')lied to a submerged weir without sluice gates, the object of which would be sim})ly to raise the level of the lake without reducing its oscillations. The low-water surface would be raised, but so would the high-water to nearly an equal amount. To distinguish works of this kind from those designed to ‘"regulate’’ the lake, they may be called “compensating works.” 33. The Great Lakes, with their connecting channels, constitute the most important system ot inland navigation in the world. The traflic which passed through Detroit River, its busiest link, in 1907, amounted to 71,220,895 tons, valued at about $700,000,000 (the traffic of the most important river in Euro})e, the Rhine, was, in 1905, about 4,000,000 tons). About 80 per cent of this traffic is carried in large freight carriers which are loaded down to the greatest draft that can be carried into the harbors or through the channels between the lakes, but could be loaded much deeper if the depth of water permitted. Some of the larger of these vessels carry an additional load of 85 tons for each inch of additional draft. Every inch added to the available depth of water would therefore be of material benefit to commerce. 34. The Great Lakes constitute a series of enonnous natural reservoirs, each of which serves to regulate the flow in the river constituting its outlet and to maintain the lakv^^ below. They are interdependent. The study of one, to be com])lete, must include the study of all. The total area drained by them is about 287,688 square miles, an area considerably larger than the German Em])ire. Of this total about one-third is occupied by the lakes themselves— that is, devoted to reservoir })ur})oses. The result is a uniformity of level and a liniformity of flow wliich are truly wonderful—a ])er- fection of regulation wliicli no work of man eYer did or ever will a})})roach. dlie ({uestion ])ropounded was. Could he add to any im])ortant extent to the degree of regidation which nature ])rovided? Enormous forces were to be dealt with, and the residts were to be measured in indies. Tlie subject was therefore as difficult as it was im|)ortant. 35. Soon after the organization of the commission, a committee of two of its engineer members was apiiointed to collect all of the available data and to make an hydraulic analysis of the general regu¬ lation of all the lakes. It was well known at the outset that this would be a long and laborious task, but it jiroved to bo more so than was expected, and the death of a member of the committee, Mr. Wisner, in 1906, was the cause of considerable delay. All existing records of water-level observations and discharge measurements made since 1860 were collected, analyzed, tabulated, and studied. Bv the end of 1909 the commission was able fioni these studies to 22 INTERNATIONAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. form an opinion as to the first kind of works covered by the term ‘^dain”; that is, regnlating works. The conclusions then reached were that only a very moderate degree of improvement in regulation over what nature provides is practicable in aii}^ of the lakes, and that such as it is, this improvement is obtained at the expense and to the injury of the navigable channels below. In the case of Lake Erie, it would be possible to raise the extreme low-water stages about 1 foot, and this in turn*would raise the low-water stages of Lake St. Clair about 0.61 foot, and of Lake Huron-Michigan about 0.27 foot, all without appreciable increase in the extreme liigh stage. But in doing this the low-water stage of Lake Ontario would be lowered about 4^ inches, the available depth in the St. Lawrence canals would be diminished about 7f inches, and the city of Buffalo would suffer by increased damage from floods and from a postponement of the date of opening navigation in the spring. The question of damage to vested rights was thus introducecf in a ])articularly intricate form. While the advantages cf regulation might outweigh the disad¬ vantages if the persons who were to benefit from the former were identical with those who were to suffer from the latter, the difference was not great enough to justify the two Governments in entering upon tlie vexatious question of damages. The commission therefore decided to recommend that the regulation’^ of Lake Erie be not undertaken and to proceed to the consideration of the other kind of works covered by the term ‘Liam,” or compensating works. As this would require surveys and investigations which would cover manv months, it decided also to submit to the two Governments without further delay the data which it had collected and the con¬ clusions wliicli it had reached concerning one branch of the subject committed to it. This it did in its report dated January 8, 1910. The report was forwarded to Congress b}^ the President and was pub¬ lished as House Document No. 779, Sixty-first Congress, second ses¬ sion. An edition was printed also for the use of the commission, at the joint expense of the Canadian and American sections. The report is accompanied by 42 tables, many of them of elaborate char¬ acter, and b}^ 29 plates. An examination of it will give an idea, though a faint one, of the amount of time and labor expended upon it. 36. There remained to be considered the other kind of works covered by the term ‘Liam,” or compensating works. The Niagara Biver at its extreme upper end is an important safety valve for the protection of Buffalo from the effect of storms upon Lake Erie, and should not bo obstructed by a dam, but it was believed that some¬ where in the river between Lake Erie and the Falls a submerged dam might be placed which would greatly benefit the navigation of the waters above without injury to those below, and vdth only minor damages, if any, to the adjoining lands. Without any attempt to ^‘regulate” Lake Erie, the general level of the lake might be raised sufficiently to compensate tor the damages heretofore inflicted by the Chicago Drainage Canal and other deteiiorating influences. To determine the best site for such a dam it has been necessary to make additional surveys. To determine the best form for this dam, which must be of the submerged type, a large number of expeiiments uj)on several different forms was necessary. These experiments were made at the hydraulic canal of the college of civil engineering of Cornell University, the use of which was given free of expense. The INTERNATIONAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. 23 results of these ex])eriiiients were very satisfactory and they will be given in the re])ort soon to he submitted. It was hoped that this work would he completed and a final re])ort rendered before this time, hut the illness of a member of the committee, Mr. Coste, and his absence in Europe, has caused an unexj)ected dela}". INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARY. 37. On the 11th of April, ]90(S, a treaty was signed between the United States and Groat Britain providing for the more com})lete defi¬ nition and demarcation of the international boundary between the United States and the Dominion of Ganada. It covered the entire houndary from the Atlantic to the Pacific Oceans, hut it pi escribed different agencies for doing the work in different parts of the line. Each Government was to “Gijipoint without delay an expert geog¬ rapher or surveyor to serve as commissioner” for the ])urpose of doing the work in the various portions of the line except the portion described in Article IV. That article reads as follows: The high contracting parties agree that the existing International Waterways Com¬ mission, constituted by concurrent action of the United States and the Domini<^n of Canada, and composed of three commissioners on the part of the United States and three commissioners on the part of the Dominion of Canada, is hereby authorized and empowered to ascertain and reestablish accurately the location of the international boundary line beginning at the point of its inters'^ction with the St. Lawrence River near the forty-fifth parallel of north latitude, as determined under Articles 1 and VI of the treaty of August 9, 1842, between the United States and Great Britain, and thence through the Great Lakes and communicating waterways to the mouth of Pigeon River, at the western shore of Lake Superior, in accordance with the descrip¬ tion of such line in Article II of the treaty of peace between the United States and Great Britain, dated September 3, 1783, and of a portion of such line in Article II of the treaty of August 9, 1842, aforesaid, and as described in the joint report dated June 18, 1822, of the commissioners appointed under Article VI of the treaty of Decem¬ ber 24, 1814, between the United States and Great Britain, with respect to a portion of said line and as marked on charts prepared by them and filed with said report, and with respect to the remaning portion of said line as marked on charts adopted as treaty charts of the boundary under provisions of Article II of the treaty of 1842, above men- tioii'^d, with such deviation from said line, however, as may be required on account of the cession by Great Britain to the United States of the portion of Horse Shoe Reef in the Niagara River necessary for the lighthouse erected there by the United States in accordance with the terms of the protocol of a conference held at the British foreign ollice December 9,185.0, between the representatives of the two Governments and signed by them agreeing upon such cession; and it is agreed that wherever the boundary is shown on said charts by a curved line along the water the commissioners are authorized in their discretion to adopt, in place of such curved line, a series of connecting straight lines, defined by distances and courses, and following generally the course of such curved line, but conforming strictly to the description of the boundary in the existing treaty provisions, and the geographical coordinates of the turning points of such line shall be stated by said commissioners so as to conform to the system of latitudes and longi¬ tudes of the charts mentioned below, and the said commissioners shall, so far as prac¬ ticable, mark the course of the entire boundary line located and elefined as aforesaid, by buoy^ ‘D^d monuments in the waterways and by permanent range marks estab- lishe^d on the adjacent shores or islands, anel by such other boundary marks and at such points as in the judgment of the commissioners it is desirable that the boundary should be so marked, and the line of the boundary defined and located as aforesaid shall be laid down by said commissioners on accurate modern charts prepared or adopted by them for that purpose, in quadruplicate sets, certified and signed by the commissioners, two duplicate originals of which shall be filed by them with each Government; and the commissioners shall also prepare in du]>licate and file with each Government a joint re})ort or re})orts describing in detail the course of said line and the range marks and buoys marking it, and the character and location of each boundary' mark. The majority of the commissioners shall have power to render a decision. 24 INTERNATIONAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. The line so defined and laid down shall be taken and deemed to be the interna¬ tional boundary as defined and established by treaty provisions and proceedings thereunder as aforesaid from its intersection with the St. Lawrence River to the mouth of Pigeon River. By tliis article the “existing International Waterways Commis¬ sion” was required to ascertain and reestablish, to mark upon the ground, and to delineate upon accurate modern charts, the location of that portion of the boundary which passes through the Great Lakes system, l)eginning at its point of intersection with the St. Lawrence liiver near the forty-fifth parallel of latitude and extending through the St. Lawrence River and the Great Lakes and communicating waterways to the mouth of Pigeon River at the western shore of Lake Superior. As the “existing International Waterways Commission” is, and by law must be, composed mainly of engineers, there was in this provision no violation of the rule that the work must be done by experts. 38. By letter dated May 21, 1908, the Secretary of State made known to the American section the provisions of Article IV of the treaty, and directed them to act under and report to the Department of State in the performance of their duties under that article. The subject was considered by the commission at meetings held in Buffalo June 2 and in Toronto June 23, 1908, and at the latter meeting a preliminary report, submitting a project for the work with an approxi¬ mate estimate of cost, was prepared and forwarded to the Secretary of State of the United States and the minister of public works of Can-' ada. (Appendix N.) 39. In this project the estimate of cost was spoken of as a “rough estimate” and no estimate of the time required was given. The esti¬ mate of cost was for special work under the treaty and did not include the funds needed for the support of the commission itself, which were provided by appropriations for another department of the Govern¬ ment, the War Department. Its amount was $160,000, which being equally divided made a charge of $80,000 to each country. As the work approaches completion it is found that this estimate was remarkably near the true cost, but owing to a necessary increase of the salaries paid to employees it must be increased $10,000, or $5,000 for each country. 40. The most important recommendation contained in the project was that a new set of charts be constructed specially for the purpose of delineating the boundary. The charts of the United States Lake Survey are the most accurate modern charts existing of the region under consideration and they represent the highest type of surveying skill, but it was found that thev were unsuitable for the delineation of the boundary for the following reasons, viz, the scales of these charts which vary considerably are not the most convenient for this purpose, being in some cases so small that the boundary could not be shown clearly. The size of the sheets is not uniform, making it impossible to prepare a neat portfolio with easy reference, such as is required for a record of such importance as that of the boundary. They contain an immense amount of detail whicli is of no use in connection with the boundary and would serve only to obscure it. The geographical coordinates used in constructing the charts were ascertained with the greatest precision attainable at the time, ])ut these have in recent years been the subject of revision. 4 he triangulation of the Lake INTERNATIONAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. 25 Survey has heen coimected with that of tlie Coast and Geodetic Survey and from this connection has heen derived tlie Lhiited States standard orted and received instructions at every meet¬ ing of the full comnTission. The expert employees were taken from both countries in equal mnubers as far as possible. There was much difhculty in finding suitable persons as engravers. 43. ddie greater j)art of the data for the new charts were to be found in the Engineer Bureau of the War Department. Ihider the authoritv of the wSecretarv of War, the C hief of Engineers, I nited 26 INTEKNATIONAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. States Army, placed at the disposal of the commission the original large scale manuscript charts constructed in the office of the Lake Survey, and other records of his bureau. The commission has been constantly in correspondence with that bureau, and we desire to acknowledge the promptness and courtesy of the two successive Chiefs of Eengineers, who have lield office since the work began, Gen. W. L. Marshall and Gen. W. H. Bixby, in answering all of its calls for information. Much valuable information was obtained from the Canadian Hydrographic Survey. It was found necessary, however, to send out surveying parties to make a considerable number of de¬ tached surveys to supplement the information on record. The com¬ mission has made 16 separate surveys in all, some of them, as the Niagara River, from Lake Erie to the Falls, being quite extended. It is believed that but little more field work will be necessary. 44. The work upon the charts is of two kinds, viz., constructing or drafting work, and cutting the copper or engraving work. In the following table is given the state of completion of each kind of work upon each chart on the 1st of November, 1912: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 IG 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Per cent completed Nov. 1, 1912. Chart. Scale. Engrav¬ ing. Drafting. • St. I>awrence River. 1: 20,000 1: 20,000 1: 20,000 1: 20,000 1: 20,000 1: 20,000 1: 20,000 1: 60,000 1:300,000 1: 20,000 1: 10,000 1: 20,000 1:300,000 1: 60,000 1: 20,000 98 100 .do. 98 100 .do. 98 100 .do. 98 100 .do. 98 100 .do. 98 100 .do. 98 100 Eastern end of Lake Ontario. 90 90 Lake Ontario. 55 Nias^ara River. 98 100 .do. 98 100 .do. 98 98 Lake Erie. 98 98 Western end of Lake Erie. 98 100 Detroit River. 98 100 .do. 1: 20,000 1: 60,000 1: 20,000 1: 20,000 1:300,000 1: 60,000 1: 20,000 1: 20,000 1: 20,000 1: 10,000 1: 20,000 1: 60,000 1:.300,000 1: 20,000 98 100 Lake St. Clair. 98 100 St. Claii Ri\er. 98 100 .do. 98 100 Lake Huron. 20 North end of Lake Huron. 70 100 St. Marys River. 98 100 .do. 98 100 .do. 98 100 .do. 95 98 __do. 98 100 Eastern end of Lake Superior. 98 100 Lake Superior. 95 Pigeon Bay. 90 100 Index. 10 100 Total. 83.7 95.1 About 84 per cent of the total work of engraving and about 95 per cent of the total work of drafting upon aU the charts was completed November 1, 1912. 45. A decision as to the actual location of tltc boundary is being reached by successive steps, and can not be made final until the new charts are completed. The engineer members of the commission pre])ared a tentative delineation of the line on the existing charts, replacing the curves in the old line by a series of straight lines, which they presented to the commission at its meeting of December - ■ I • > t r> K - '•-< f • .y' * ^ A ■ r * - ■ / .»•'. ■ ■■' * ■i ./ ... ■ ’■■ < ^ . rj 1^ %-r-- :' ■ ’ - . ■ ^ ’ ♦ * .r % ■t ■j ’:•• , * ■; • ■- ■■ - ■ » . -■ ' ::i —A - vt • '■* ' ,' '' i'V I "■ ^' ,'• ' ■ .* ' ,r ^ • > >1’ ■••X ■■^•.••V* \aJ :. t % \ S ■ . 4 I*,, • ^ * - ’ • ■■ . r ■■>'.alM .■ c* , r ■ Tv- - \ ■• • - 4' ‘ •* ; V■■ ■;•■ i2^. ■ \y~ ■■' ‘ ■ ^ .•■ ■ • ** W'i BCL^ '• , ,■ *•- ** ■ • . ..V • ;. . ■* tr * •■ *\* - T ' ^-v -*' ■-• 7' ■ ■ ** ''•■ V ■ V*.- ‘ --r. ■_P" -. ,*5'* V■ ,■ ■ .-'. ••’'•->.■>•. •,. ^y.' :'y ^ fjty : ■■ vv: ■ . -'s j>v'‘‘':.., ,v Vt- X ‘N . \ ^ ^ '"ffUSOfr %. w .4 - ^ I - \ » * • ,* i * • •• fif:^0•:.v:vr: ^ •; 'V • , r ’M. . _ ■ *. - .• t.. - V ■ «•,'' >• A* »■«*'. ’4 ^'^* ’'■ • • '• ■ 11' * ^ \» t ’ ' ■ *•>-. r.. .-.3. . ' * ■’, ■'.: ■. . . • ' '■'V'fX* ' ■''* — r ^ 1 * , •<-' .* , /:!:■ ' ' /.i- »♦ ■ iK V • ■ • ''4 < .• '!? , PT. . Senate Document No. 959, 62-3. Plate I. TYPICAL MONUMENT. Hciftht above ground, 2 feet G inches; diameter at base, 2 feet; diameter at top, l foot 6 inclies; radius of liemisidierical top, inches; foundation to extend 5 feet below surface of ground; material, concrete; copper pin inserted in the top to mark the i>oint Avith precision. INTERNATIONAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. 27 23, 1908. It was intended as a ])reliminary study, and no action was taken except to consider and discuss it. As the work of constructing the charts ])rogrcsse<.l it was found desirable to know approximately the location of the boundary before the completion of the cop])erplates in order to avoid cutting the soundings in a way which would interfere with the clear delineation of that line. It seemed ])ossible to make a location upon existing charts which would answer these requirements and woidd be another ste]) toward the future final location. At its sessions of August 3 and 4, 1909, the commission went over the existing charts with great care, having before them the re])ort dated June 18, 1822, of the commissioners ap])ointed under the treaty of Ghent, llecemher 24, 1814; also the Webster-Ashburton treaty of August 9, 1842; also the protocol of a conference held at the British foreign office December 9, 1850. They tentatively agreed upon a line which they fixed u])on the old charts as accurately as the scale of the charts woidd ])ermit, with the understanding that at any time thereafter, either side should he at liberty to ])ropose alterations. Later on, as the new charts reached a sufficiently advanced stage, proofs were struck off, and the tentative line was transferred to them. The necessity of a revision at some places then became evi¬ dent. When the work of marking the boundary u])on the ground was taken u]), the desirability of ailditional changes appeared. These changes have been made from time to time, until now it may be said that the line has been agreed u])on excejit at three ])laces—Niagara Falls, Lake St. Clair, and Saidt Ste. Marie. Although the tentative agreement a})])lies to these places also, there are some differences which may cause the question to be reo])ened. 46. ^fuch study was given to the form and character of the monu¬ ments to be used in marking the boundary iqion the grouml. In the climate of the Great Lakes a buoy is a tenqiorary device which, if used, must he taken iqi at the end of navigation in the autumn and re])laced in the s])ring, and can be enqdoyed only by some permanent organization. Permanent monuments alone are available for this commission. Manifestly it is not exjiedient to jdace such monu¬ ments upon the turning jioints inasmuch as these points are all in water, where m many cases the monuments would be obstructions to navigation, and where they would often be very costly to build on account of great de])th. It was decided to ])lace them on shore, one .as near as ])racticable to each turning point. With the range and distance of the turning ])oint known it will be easy to find it when¬ ever it may be necessary to know it with precision. After careful investigation it was decided to build the monuments of concrete, in the form of the frustrum of a cone with a hemis])herical top. The height above ground is 2 feet 6 inches; diameter at base, 2 feet; diameter at top, 1 foot 6 inches; radius of hemisjiherical to]), 9 inches; foundation to extend 5 feet below the surface of the ground, co])- per ])ui is inserted in the top to mark the })oint with ])recision. Each monument has a se])arate number cast in its side at the time of fabri¬ cation. A ])hotogra})h of one of these monuments is inclosed. 47. The work of ])lacing the monuments was begun upon a small scale on the St. Lawrence Kiver in eluly, 1910. It was ex])erimental and resulted in demonstrating the neatness and clfectiveness of the type adoj)tcd. It was pushed with vigor during the seasons of 1911 and 1912, and was completed in September of the latter year. 28 INTERNATIONAL WATERWAYS COAIMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. The niunbor of nionumonts ])laced is 88 on the St. La’s\Tcnce River, 34 on the Niagara River, 58 on the Detroit and St. Clair Rivers, 43 on the St. Alarys River, and 4 on Pigeon Bay, or 227 in all. 48. In attempting to connect these monuments with the old surveys it was found that a large number of the old station marks left by the Lake Survey had disappeared, and that it was necessary to connect the monuments bv a new triangulation svstem. The field parties were organized so as to take the necessary observations in connection with building the monuments. It is necessarv to work up these notes, and compute therefrom the geographical posi¬ tion of each monument before it can be placed upon the chart. Considerable progress has been made in this work, but it will prob¬ ably require the greater part of the current year to complete it and after its completion some months more will be required to place the results upon the charts. FURTHER DUTIES OF THE COMMISSION. ^ 49. From the foregoing recital it appears that many questions have arisen and been considered which were not anticipated when the commission was created, except in a very general way. It was expected that questions generally resembling these would arise, but exactlv what they would be was not known. It seems certain that similar questions will arise hereafter. All such questions will be considered by the International Joint Commission created by the treaty between the United States and Great Britain, dated Jan¬ uary 11, 1909. That commission takes the place of the Interna¬ tional Waterways Commission in the consideration of all new ques¬ tions. The latter has therefore completed the work for which it was originally organized, except its final report upon a dam at the outlet of Lake Erie. It has assumed that it would be allowed and expected to complete its work upon that subject, the difficulty and im})ortance of which have been explained in an earlier part of this report. There are not two commissions covering the same ground, but rather one commission retiring from a field which it has long occupied and clearing the ground for its successor. 50. Quite distinct from the duties of investigation and report assigned to the commission when it was originally organized are the executive duties assigned to it by Article IV of the treaty between . the Lhiited States and Great Britain, dated April 11, 1908. The treaty is specific in designating the ‘Existing International Water¬ ways Commission’’ as the agency by which a certain specified por¬ tion of the boundary is to be defined, delineated upon charts, and marked upon the ground. For this purpose the International Joint Commission does not take the place of the International Water¬ ways Commission. Tlie work is mainly engineering work, and should be, as it is, in the hands of a commission composed mainly of engineers. 51. The commission therefore has two pieces of work to com¬ plete before it can with propriety go out of existence; one its final report upon a dam at the outlet of Lake Erie and the other its work upon the boundary. International courtesy requires that the American members be allowed to join in completing the former, and treaty obligations as well as international courtesy require the same regarding the latter. INTERNATIONAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. 29 52. The Aniericaii meinbers have rendered annual re])orts to tlie Secretary of War since their organization and to the Secretary of State also since ]9() and intent of the law would seem to be carried out if a permit be granted to the Lock- ! port Hydraulic Co. for the diversion of 500 cubic feet per second, and no other permits , be granted. ^ The question arises, what will be the effect upon the interests of the Lockport Hydraulic Co. of granting a permit to divert only 500 cubic feet per second. It is r using 1,000 cubic feet, of which one-half is at times required for navigation purposes \ and is returned to the canal for that purpose. But not all of that aniount is required ) for navigation purposes throughout the year. Leakage and evaporation in the 60-mile I level will be less in the winter than in the summer, and the contributions from the I tributaries of that level will be greater during a wet season than during a dry one. j The differences are variable and can not be specifu'd. To enable the company to use i the full 1,000 cubic feet which it is now using, it will be necessary either to assume that the amount required for navigation purposes is constant, or to grant it a ])ermit for more than 500 cubic feet "jicr second. The objections to the former alternative ) seem to us of less importance than those of the latter. It is impossible to measure this 38 INTEENATIONAL WATEKWAYS COMMISSION PKOGEESS EEPOET. water with absolute precision. All of the numbers used are approximations, and it must be assumed that this was understood by the lawmaking power. Considered in connection with the preservation of Niagara Falls, which was the object of the law, the total quantities involved are small, and the difference in the amounts required for navigation purposes at different seasons may be said to be insignificant. We have therefore assumed that the amount to be allowed for navigation purposes would be 500 cubic feet per second and would be constant throughout the year. It is desirable that if a Federal officer be charged with enforcing the terms of the permit he be informed of this understanding. We inclose a form of permit which we recommend for adoption. It has been pre¬ pared after a public hearing in Buffalo, at which all parties in interest were given an opportunity to be heard. It grants 500 cubic feet per second to the Lockport Hydraulic Co., which added to the 8,600 cubic feet allotted by the honorable Secretary of War to the Niagara Falls Power Co. and the 6,500 cubic feet allotted to the Niagara Falls Hydraulic Power and Manufacturing Co., make up the total 15,600 cubic feet per second available under the law. Yours, very respectfully, 0. H. Ernst,^ Brigadier General, U. S. Army, Retired, Chairman of American Section , George Clinton, ’’Member. E. E. Haskell, Member. Hon. Wm. H. Taft, Secretary of War. PROPOSED FORM OF PERMIT TO LOCKPORT HYDRAULIC CO. FOR DIVERSION OF WATER AT LOCKPORT, N. Y. Whereas by section 2 of an act of Congress approved June 29,1906, entitled “An act for the control and regulation of the waters of Niagara River, for the preservation of Niag¬ ara Falls, and for other purposes, ’ ’ it is provided that the Secretary of War is authorized to grant permits for the diversion of water in the United States from the Niagara River or its tributaries, for the creation of power to individuals, companies, or corporations which are now actually producing power from the waters of said river or its tribu¬ taries in the State of New York, or from the Erie Canal, to an amount not exceeding in the maxunum 8,600 cubic feet per second to any one individual, company, or cor¬ poration, and not exceeding an aggregate amount of 15,600 cubic feet per second; and Whereas waters are being diverted from the Erie Canal for the creation of power by the Lockport Hydraulic Co., a corporation organized under the laws of the State of New York, at Lockport, N. Y., by the abstraction of approximately 1,000 cubic feet of water per second from above the locks at said place, which water is returned to the Erie Canal below the locks, of which total quantity 500 cubic feet is required for navigation purposes and the remaining 500 cubic feet is not required for navigation purposes; and Whereas the said waters not required for navigation purposes, after being returned to the canal below the locks, are again diverted from the canal and are used for power purposes by various persons and corporations located upon Eighteenmile Creek, at and below Lockport, and at Middleport, at Medina, at Eagle Harbor, at Albion, at Holley, and at other places, and are not returned to the canal, many of the persons or corporations on Eighteenmile Creek using the same water in succession, one after the other; and Whereas application has been made to the Secretary of War by the Lockport Hydraulic Co. for permission to divert 500 cubic feet per second from the Erie Canal at Lock- port above the locks, and application has been made by various persons and corporations to divert various amounts from the Erie Canal below the locks; and Whereas the diversion of water from the Erie Canal below the locks is not properly the diversion of water from the Niagara River or its tributaries, since said water diverted below the locks has already been diverted from above the locks and has been used for power purposes: Now, therefore, this is to certify that the Secretary of War hereby grants permission to the Lockport Hydraulic Co., said applicant, to divert waters of the Niagara Riverand its tributaries from the Erie Canal at Lockport, N. Y., above the locks, for power pur¬ poses, not exceeding 500 cubic feet per second; it being distinctly understood that INTERNATIONAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. 39 the waters so diverted sliall be returned to the canal below the loc-ks, and that this permit shall inure to the benefit of all persons and corporations now using said water for power purposes, whether lessees of the applicant or having the right to be furnished by it with water, and including the persons and corporations now diverting water as aforesaid from the Erie Canal at Eighteenmile ('reek, Middleport, ^Medina, Eagle Harbor, Albion, Holley, and other places on the lower level. This permit is granted upon condition and with the understanding that it does not confer upon the applicant or said other persons or corporations any authority whatever to divert water from the Erie Canal without the consent of the fState of New Y ork, and that this permit is subject to any and all regulations which may be ini posed upon the diversion of water from said canal by said State; and, further, that this permit is made subject to the jurisdiction of said Stiite to alter, improve, or abolish the aiid canal and prevent the diversion of any water whatever therefrom, and this permit shall not be taken to impose any obligation whatever upon the said State or the authorities thereof. It is intended to confer, only so far as the Federal Government is concerned, and the Secretary of War is authorized, the right to take the water and to claim immunitv from any prosecution or legal obligation under the first section of the act approved June 29, 190(5, above mentioned. APPENDIX 1). Report upon the Request of the Niagara Falls Hydraulic Power A: Manu- P'ACTURING Co. THAT THEY BE PROTECTED IN ThEIR RiGHTS IN AnY FrEATL Negotiated with Great Britain, by the American Members, September 9,1970 International Waterways Commission, Office of Chairman, American Section, Washington, D. C., September 9, 1907. Sir: The American members of the International Waterways Commission hawe the honor to return herewith the letter dated July 25, 1907, addressed to yourself by the honorable Secretary of State, inclosing a letter dated June 5, 1907, which he had received from the president of the Niagara Falls Hydraulic Power & Manufacturing Co., which letter, with its inclosures, was referred to us for report. The Niagara Fhlls Hydraulic Power & Manufacturing Co. represents that as the riparian owner it has the right to divert water from the Niagara River for the develop¬ ment of power, a right which it has been exercising for many years; that in the year 1896 this right was specifically recognized, declared, and confirmed by the State of New York, but the quantity of water to be diverted was at the same time restricted to the amount which could be drawn through a canal 100 feet wide, flowing with a depth of 14 feet, an amount computed to be 9,500 cubic feet per second under the plans adopted for the works; that its works have been planned, and their construction nearly completed, with a view to the use of this full amount, costing over $5,000,000; that under recent legislation of Congress it is for the present restricted to the diversion of 6,500 cubic feet per second, which restriction, if made permanent, will subject it to heavy pecuniary loss; and that it is commonly understood that the United States and Great Britain are negotiating, or about to negotiate, a treaty affecting, among other things, the diversion of water from the Niagara River for the development of power. The company asks that its right to divert water to the extent of 9,500 cubic feet per second be protected and secured to it by a suitable provision in any treaty which may be made. The situation is fairly stated by the company, and the request seems to us reasonable. It is consistent with the recommendations contained in our report of March 19, 1906, which read as follows, viz; “If the Falls are to be preserved it must be by mutual agreement between tbe two countries. As a step in that direction we recommend that legislation be enacted which shall contain the following provisions, \flz: . . , t “(a) The Secretary of War to be authorized to gi’ant permits for the diversion ot 28,500 cubic feet peV second, and no more, from the waters naturally tributary to Niagara Falls, distributed as follows; mbiofeet “Niagara Falls Hydraulic Power & Manufacturing Co. “Niagara Falls Power (M.. -.■ “Erie Canal or its tenants (in addition to lock service) “Chicago Drainage Canal. 9,500 8,600 400 10,000 40 IXTEKNATIOXAL WATERWAYS COMMISSIOX PROGRESS REPORT. '‘(b) All other diversion of water which is naturally tributary to Niaj^ara Falls to be prohibited, except such as may be required for domestic use or for the ser\dce of locks in navigation canals. “(c) Suitable penalties for \dolation of the law to be prescribed. “(d) The foregoing prohibition to remain in force two vears, and then to become the permanent law of the land, if, in the meantime, the Canadian Government shall have enacted legislation prohibiting the diversion of water which is naturally tribu¬ tary to Niagara Falls in excess of 36,000 cubic feet per second, not including the amounts required for domestic use or for the service of locks in na^dgation canals. It is assumed, however, that an understanding upon this subject would be reached by treaty. “The object of such legislation would be to put a stop to further depletion of the Falls, and at the same time inflict the least possible injury upon the important inter¬ ests now dependent upon this water power. The amount “to be diverted on the Cana¬ dian side has been fixed with a view to allowing to the companies on that side the amounts for which they now have works under construction, which are: . Cubic feet. “Canadian Niagara Power Co.. 9 500 “Ontario Power Co. \2 QOO “Electrical Development Co. ll'200 “Niagara Falls Park Railway Co. l’ 500 “Welland Canal or its tenants (in addition to lock serWce). l’ 800 “One of the effects of such legislation would be to give to Canada the advantage of diverting 7,500 cubic feet per second more than is diverted in the United States. The advantage is more apparent than real, since the power generated on the Canadian side will to a large extent be transmitted to and used in the United States. In the negotiation of a treaty, however, the point should be considered.” These recommendations were not adopted bv Congress without qualification. In the act approved June 29, 1906, the quantity of water authorized to be diverted on the American side at this time is less than that recommended, and it is only under certain contingencies that additional amounts may be diverted hereafter. The act is a temporary measure designed to apply an immediate remedy to e^dls of which the final remedy must be found in a treaty. Congress did not finally deprive itself or even the executive under certain contingencies of authority to increase the amount. \\Uether the power to authorize the diversion of 9, 500 cubic feet per second by the Niagara Falls Hydraulic Power & Manufacturing Co. is ever to be exercised or not, it would seem wise for the United States to retain the power in making its agreements with Great Britain. Yours, very respectfully, 0. H. Ernst, Bng. Gen., U. S. Ai'my, Retired, Chairman. > The Secretary of War, Washington, D. C. George Clinton, Member. E. E. Haskell, Member. APPENDIX E. Report upon the Diversion of Water at the Whirlpool Rapids Below the Falls in Niagara River by the Commission, March 3, 1908. International Waterways Commission, Office of American Section, Buffalo, N. Y., March 3, 1908. Hon. T. E. Burton, Chairman Committee on Rivers and Harbors, House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. Sir: In compliance with the request contained in your letter of the 19th instant the International ^Yaterways Commission have the honor to submit the following remarks upon the bill H. R. 25546, Fifty-ninth Congress, second session, introduced in the House of Representatives February 8, 1907, and referred to the commission in May last. The bill authorizes the Lower Niagara River Power & Water Supply Co. to diveit watei fioni the Niagara River below the Falls to an amount not exceeding 40,000 cubic feet per second. ° INTERNATIONAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION PRO(iRESS REPORT. 41 In our report to the two Governments, dated May 3, 19{)(), we recommended that the total amount of water to be diverted from the Niagara River above the Falls should not be allowed to exceed 64,500 cubic feet per second, of which 28,500 cubic feet, including 10,000 cubic feet for the Chicago Drainage Canal, was to be diverted on the American side and 36,000 cubic feet on the Canadian side. These numbers were fixed by the special conditions of the case and are not to be taken as a guide in fixing the amount of water which may properly be diverted from the Niagara River else¬ where or in dividing it between the two countries. The preservation of the rapids of Niagara River above and below the whirlpool is in our judgment of nearly as great importance to the aesthetic education of the people as is the preservation of the Falls themselves. In both cases their grandeur is dependent u])on their volume. In this case it is not necessary, and in our judgment it is not expedient, to allow the diversion of an amount which shall in any sense be experimental. It is our opinion that about 40,000 cubic feet per second can be diverted without perceptible injury to the rapids and that any amount greater than that will approach the danger line more and more nearly according to its volume. We therefore recommend that no more than 40,000 cubic feet be diverted on both sides of the river, taken together. The general rule which should govern the diversion of the water between the two countries is that each side should be entitled to one-half. In the absence of a treaty between the two Governments to regulate the diversion of water from the Niagara River, Congress should not, in our judgment, dispose of more than half of the total; that is, in this case, 20,000 cubic feet per second. If no other company is to be pro¬ vided for, there seems to be no objection to the passage of the bill referred to us, after cutting down the quantity of water to be allowed to 20,000 cubic feet per second. Very respectfully, O. H. Ernst, Brig. Gen.^ U. S. Army, Retired, Chairman, American Section. George Clinton, Member, American Section. E. E. Haskell, Member, American Section. Geo. C. Gibbons, Chairman, Canadian Section. Wm. J. Stewart, Member, Canadian Section. Attest: W. Edward Wilson, Secretary, American Section, APPENDIX F. Report upon the Conditions Existing at Sault Ste. Marie, with Rules for the Control of the Same, Recommended by the International Waterways Commission. Buffalo, N. Y., May 3, 1906. The honorable the Secretary of War of the United States and the honorable the Minister of Public Works of Canada. The International Waterways Commis.sion has the honor to submit the following report upon the conditions existing at Sault Ste. Marie, with rules for the control of the same. Upon the organization of the International Waterways Commission it found the most pressing matter coming within its jurisdiction was the regulation of the use by private corporations of the waters of St. Marys River in connection with the control of those waters for the protection of navigation at present and in the future. The commission, therefore, proceeded to an investigation of the local conditions by special committee and the study of all data obtainable. After thorough consideration of all the information which could be obtained, and after hearing all parties interested in the use of the waters at Sault Ste. Marie, including navigation interests, the commis¬ sion is satisfied that the rules recommended herein, governing the use, or interference with the natural flow, of those waters, will do entire justice to private interests, and, at the same time, fully protect commerce and navigation. The extent of the commerce on the Great Lakes is well illustrated l)y the official statistics of the amount of freight which passed the locks at Sault Ste. Marie during the season of navigation of 1905, which amounted to more than 44.000,0(X) net tons. To 42 INTEENATIOXAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. this should be added the local tonnage, which is considerable, and the large traffic between ports on Lakes Michigan and Huron and the East, making a total lake traffic of between 50,000,000 and 60,000,000 tons. The immense importance of transporta¬ tion by the Great Lakes, and the consequent necessity of protecting and facilitating it in the interest of the public, becomes apparent when we consider that the ability to transport by lake must have resulted during the season of 1905 in saving many millions of dollars. The average rate for transportation of Lake Superior freights in 1905 was $0.00085 per ton-mile, while from the best information obtainable the trans¬ portation rate by rail between Lake Superior points and the East is not less than $0,004 per ton-mile. The ton-mile saving over railroad transportation was, therefore, at least $0.00315. The average haul of the freight mentioned was 833.3 miles. The total number of tons of freight that parsed the Sault locks in 1905 was 44,270,680, and it follows that in this year there was an aggregate saving through lake transportation on Lake Superior, through freight alone, of approximately $116,000,000. In other words, by transporting the Lake Superior freight on the Great Lakes, $116,000,000 was saved, in 1905, to the producers of raw materials, the manufacturer and the consumer, and the saving to manufacturers has made it possible for them to supply the home markets and compete in those of foreign countries. The growth of commerce upon the Great Lakes in the past years, and its prospective immense increase in the future, ha:, convinced the commission that steps should be taken, not merely to preserve the lake levels, but to retain absolute control of all waters which go to maintain those levels, and of all lands which may be useful or necessary, at present or in the future, to increase navigation facilib'es. The Com¬ mission is, therefore, decidedly of the opinion that the Governments of the United States and Canada should act in unison in controlling, absolutely, any and all diver¬ sions at Sault Ste. Marie, so that the waters of the river may be available at any time when needed for na^dgation. ST. MARYS RIVER. Our investigation of conditions at Sault Ste. Marie developed the following facts; The St. Marys Kiver forms the connecting channel between Lake Superior and Lake Huron. In its length of 64 miles the total fall has varied, in recent years, from 21 to 23 feet; of this total fall, from 18 to 20 feet is found in a distance of three-fourths of a mile at the rapids at Sault Ste. Marie. The entire run-off of the Lake Superior drainage basin, having an area of 76,100 square miles, passes the St. IMarys River, giving an average discharge of about 70,000 cubic feet of water per second. As this river forms the only means of water communication between the important industries of the Lake Superior regions and the eastern markets, the advisability of its improve¬ ment for na\dgation purposes was early recognized. In 1855 the first canal and’lock capable of passing lake vessels was completed, at a cost of about $1,000,000. There were two tandem locks, each 70 feet wide, 350 feet long, ha\ing a lift of about 9 feet each, with a depth of 11J feet of water on the miter sills. The great increase in the number and size of boats passing through the St. Marys River necessitated the con¬ struction, in 1870, of the Weitzel Lock. This lock, completed in 1881, and still in service, is 515 feet long, 80 feet wide in the chamber, and has about 14 feet of water over the miter sills at ordinary low-water level. The increase of lockage facilities did not accommodate the rapid increase in the size and number of vessels necessitated by the constant and great increase of the com¬ merce which passed through the river, and as a result it became necessary to construct another lock on the American side. Accordingly, what is known as the Poe Lock, was built. It has a chamber 800 feet long, 100 feet wide, and a depth of about 19 feet at ordinary low water. It was supposed the Poe Lock would accommodate the commerce of Lake Superior for many years. But it, together with the Weitzel Lock and the Canadian Lock, here¬ inafter described, has at times proved inadequate for proper dispatch of the lake vessels passing the rapids, and it is quite e^ddent that in the near future further lockage facilities must be furnished to meet the demands of commerce. On the Canadian side of the river a lock 900 feet long, 60 feet wide, and ha\dng about 19 feet of water on the miter sills at ordinary low water, has been constructed. It was completed before the Poe lock. There are several vessels now navigating the lakes which this lock can not accommodate, their beam being 60 feet or more. The improvement of the St. Marys River below the locks has been almost continu¬ ous, and consists of the clearing of channels, and the construction of the so-called “Hay Lake Channel.” An available depth of from 17h to 19 feet, depending on the stage of water, has been obtained. At present the United States Government is engaged in deepening the channels to a depth of 21 feet at low water, and in constmcting a new channel through the West Xeebish, which will furnish an additional passage INTERNATIONAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. 43 connecting Hay Lake with Mud Lake. This channel will have a least width of 300 feet and low-water depth of 21 feet, or sufficient to accommodate all vessels now- navigating the river. These improvements have cost the Government of the United States about .$14,000,000, and the government of Canada about .$5,000,0(W. The increase in the size of vessels navigating the lakes has been rapid. In 1890, lake vessels reached a length of 300 feet, in 1896 400 feet, in 1902 500 feet, and 6 vessels 600 feet in length will be put in service during 1906. In 1904, there were only 40 boats in the Lake Superior trade, with a capacity of 8,000 tons or more, while 32 addi¬ tional vessels will be in commission during 1906, none of which will have a cargo ' capacity of less than 8,000 tons. The combined cargo capacity of these 32 new boats will be'about 338,000 tons for a single trip, and they will constitute an addition of about 20 per cent to the carrjdng capacity of the fleet engaged in the transportation of ore from Lake Superior. i • • u The quantity of freight passing to and from Lake Superior has doubled twice in the past thirteen years, it being 44,270,680 tons in 1905, about four times what it was in 1892. The value of the cargoes passing the Sault canals in 1905 was .$416,965,484, L iron, including ore and manufactured iron, constituting 27 per cent of this value, and cereals 28 per cent. ... , . , It is estimated that the present lockage system is capable ot gnung what may be • considered reasonably prompt service if not required to pass more than 50,000,000 tons during the season of na\dgation, but if called upon to pass more than 60,000,000 tons, delays, which are not infrequent now, will become excessive, and cause great financial loss. In \dew of the past growth of this commerce, it is extremely hazardous to predict its extent in the future, but a conservative estimate indicates that before ) another lock can be completed the limit of traffic for prompt service will have been past. In this connection we would call attention to the fact that the largest classes of boats existing, and now being rapidly built, are already restricted in carrying capacity - on account of deficient available depth of water, and are subject to delays because not I more than one of them can be passed through the largest lock at one time. In addition t to this manv of the largest boats now navigating the Lakes are limited to the ^ise of ‘ the Poe and Canadian locks on account of their size. The rate of increase on traffic and in the size of boats in the future, judging from the experience of the past and the I predictions of those conversant with the subject, will make the present lockage sy^em 1 inadequate before lockage facilities can be increased. The loss financially which would result from not furnishing means of passage around the rapids adequate to the demands of commerce, or, in case of accident to any of the existing locks, from delay until repairs could be made, would be incalculable. . . , The canal leading to the American locks from the upper river is 4,200 feet in length, and has an average cross section of about 5,000 square feet. Its width at the nar¬ rowest part is only 108 feet, it being crossed at that place by the sAving span ot the International Bridge. The sides of this canal are frequently lined with vessels await¬ ing down passage when vessels are leaving the locks to pass into Lake Superior. The maneuvering of boats going in opposite directions in such a narrow passage is ^ ery difficult, and is accompanied by possibility of accident. The conditions are seriously aggravated by a strong current, which occurs in the canal whenever the locks are filled. Plans have been made by the United States Government for enlarging this canal, doubling its width at the narrowest place and increasing the width at other points. This would relieve the situation at present, but it is quite apparent that provision I should be made for further widening, so that when a new lock shall have been con¬ structed two or more locks may be filled at the same time without creating a violent current. This will necessitate the acquisition of more land on the river side than is now owned by the United States. The Canadian canal is about 6,000 feet long, from 143 to 156 feet wide, and something i over 22 feet deep. The Canadian lock above mentioned is at the eastern extremity of this canal. The same general considerations apply to this canal and lock that we ^ have presented in connection with the American canal and locks. ' WATER-POWER DEVELOPMENTS. The development of the power of the St. Marys rapids has been projected and carried on by practicallv two interests: The Chandle'r-Dunbar and allied interests and the ' Lake Superior Corporation with its subordinate companies, the Lake Sui)erior Power Co. and the Michigan Lake Superior Power Co. . ., , i ^ o In 1883 William Chandler was granted letters patent for a strip ot land about 3,UW * feet in length, lying along the north side of the St. Marys Falls Canal, inljoming the ‘ rapids on the American side of the river. In 1887 the Edison Sault Light & Po^^^r Co. was organized f(vr the pur])ose of developing water ])ower at this ]>oint, and the I 44 INTERNATIONAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. following year a canal, about 2,200 feet long, was dug through this property, the power developed being used locally, largely for electric lighting. In 1889 a permit was grant ed the above company by the Government of the United States to extend its tailrace by -connecting the lower end of the embankment with island No. 3, and in 1893 a permit was given for joining islands Nos. 3 and 4, which lay in front of the lands owned by the United States, thus providing for a tailrace to enable the companv to utilize a somewhat greater head than the fall naturally existing in front of the lands located by Mr. Chandler. ^ In 1892 a permit was granted by the Secretary of War to the Edison Sault Electric Co., the lessee of the Chandler-Dunbar Co., to build an embankment dam from the third pier of the International Bridge, extending downstream. The completion of this dam or dike ])rovided a more commodious headrace, and the water power developed has been increased since that time as local needs demanded. In 1901 this permit was modified to provide for the building of a new power house in front of the lands located by Mr. Chandler, and the construction of a new tailrace outside of island No. 3, belonging to the United States, on condition that the company should ‘‘abandon the tailrace now used on the inside of island No. 3 and relinquish to the United States all rights of the company between said island and the shore.” In 1903 this permit was again modified so as to allow the company “to build far¬ ther out into the rapids of St. Marys River,” to remove the power house and a portion of the embankment dam now in use, and to construct a larger power house and longer wall to inclose a fore bay, and to construct a wider tailrace. Work under this last permit was commenced in the srping of 1905, and is now in progress. The available head of water on the present works is about 9 feet. The power devel¬ oped by the turbines is about 750 horsepower. The amount of water used in this development is about 1,400 cubic feet per second, including leakage. The natural fall in the rapids in front of the shore holdings of the company was found to be about 9 feet when it was measured in the fall of 1903. The building' in 1892 of the dike above mentioned, under permit of that year, obstructed the flow through the rapids under two spans of the International Bridge, shutting off a water area about 1,915 square feet in cross section. M ork is now progressing under the permits granted by the War Department of the United States, and it is expected that a head of about 13 feet will be obtained, furnish¬ ing 4,700 mechanical horsepower by the consumption of 4,000 second-feet. The interests constructing these works claim the right to do so, not only uncler the permits granted, but, so far as the occupation of the bed of the rapids opposite the Chandler lands is concerned, by virtue of asserted riparian rights appurtenant to the ownership of the adjacent shore. In a litigation now pending, brought by the United States against the Chandler-Dunbar Water Power Co. in the western district of Michi¬ gan, the district court has decided that the ownership of the shore lands carries with it the title to the bed of the river, inluding islands Nos. 1 and 2, and from this it follows that the right to erect structures in the river to utilize the waters of the river for power purposes as it flows past the riparian owners’ land, exists, subject merely to the restric¬ tion that the structures must not, directly or indirectly, injuriously affect navigation. The Lake Superior Corporation, through its subordinate companies, the Lake Superior Power Co., organized under the laws of the Province of Ontario, and the Michigan Lake Superior Power Co., organized under the laws of the State of Michigan, has con¬ structed canals on both sides of the river, with works for the development of power. On June 30, 1888, “the Sault Ste. Marie Water, Gas, and Light Co.” was incorporated on the (’anadian side under the revised statutes of Ontario, chapter 164. By act of 1889 the name of the company was changed to “The Ontario Water, Light, and Power Co.,” and it was given power to build dams across the inland channels or rapids of St. Marys River or any branch thereof within the Province of Ontario, and to construct such other works as might be necessarv to supply them with the water needed for their operations, such rights to be exercised only with the consent of the Crown or the individual affected. After ])artially completing a water power canal this company became financially embarrassed and w^as not able to continue the undertaking. In 1895 Francis H. (Tergue and his associates took over the property of the old com¬ pany, including fnpchises for supplying the town with electricdighting, water, and street-railway privileges. At the same time the name of the company was changed to “The Lake Superior Power Co.,” and in 1896 a portion St. Marys Island oppo¬ site the rapids was granted to the company in exchange for certain other lands in the town of Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario. The Lake Su])erior Power Co. also acquired other lands in the vicinity north of the Canadian Ship Canal, and at once began the development of water power. “The Consolidated Lake Superior (’o.” was formed in 1901 to consolidate and control the interests of this conpxinv. The Michigan Lake INTERNATIONAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. 45 Superior Power ('o., and many olhern, and in 1904 it wat^ reor«:anized under the name of “The Lake Superior ('or])oration.” The canal of the Lake Su])erior Power ('o. is about 220 feet wide at the water line and 12.^ feet deep at the head gates, changing gradually to a prism 80 feet wide and 15^ feet dee]) at the ])ower house. The })resent ])lant is develo])ingabout 11,000 horse¬ power at the turbine shafts. The average amount of water used has been estimated at about 7,000 cubic feet per second, with a maximum of 8,800 cubic feet ])er second when all wheels are running at full capacity. In building its works this company occuj)ied the bed of a small stream, running be¬ tween the islands on the north side of the river, having a water cross section estimated at 1,(508 scjuare feet. This com])any, with its allied com})any, the Michigan Lake Superior Power Co., to be described below, has also erected remedial works on the Canadian side of the river above the ninth and tenth spans of the International Bridge, being the two spans nearest to the (’anadian shore, making it possil)le to nearly stoj) the flow of water under those spans. The same company has projected a second canal of much larger caj)acity, work uj)on which has not been begun. About 1887, the St. Mary’s Falls Water Power (’o. began excavation for a canal through the town of Sault Ste. Marie, Mich., from a point above the ship canal, to con¬ nect with the river below the locks. This company failed and its right of way was purchased by the Michigan Lake Superior Power Co., incorporated under the laws of Michigan, one of the allied comj)anies subseciuently forming the Consolidated Lake Superior Co. The Michigan Lake Superior Power Co. has constructed a canal over 2 miles in length with a cross-sectional area of about 4,300 square feet, extending from above the upper end of the St. Marys Falls Ship Canal to a point about a mile below the locks, where it del)Ouches into the lower river. Pursuant to the provisions of the river and harbor act, approved June 13, 1902, the Secretary of War of the United States, under date of December 12, 1902, granted the Michigan Lake Superior Power Co. a permit for the diversion of the waters of the St. Marys River through its canal, subject to prescril)ed regulations, based upon the main¬ tenance of proper water levels, including the erection of remedial works. The remedial works have been partially constructed, but owing to the fact that they have not been completed, and to the fact that repairs to the company’s ])ower house and forebay are needed the full capacity of the canal, 31,200 second-feet, is not used, 8,500 second- feet being the estimated amount actually utilized at present. The remedial works, so far as completed, are those above mentioned, partially covering the spans 9 and" 10 of the International Bridge on the Canadian side. nYDR.\ULIC CONDITIONS. The head of the canal at St. Marys rapids is situated about 14 miles below Point Iroquois, which may be considered the head of St. ^larys River. In this 14 miles there is a fall of only about 0.4 foot. As this slope is so slight it is practically constant for all stages of water level, and the mean level of Lake Superior is directly affected by anv changes in level that may ocrur in St. Marys River above the rapids. The lowest monthlv mean level of St. Marvs River above the locks, within the past 33 years, was in March, 1879, the level being (500.38 feet above mean tide at New York. Since that y^ear it has never been below (501 feet during the months of the navigation season, May to November. Since 1893, there has been l)ut one month during the navigation season when the mean level fell below 601.7 feet. Since 187(5, the mean level has never been above (503.2 feet. Previous to the building of the International Bridge in 1887 the channel of St. Marys River at the rapids consisted of the main channel and four small streams running between the islands near the Canadian side. At a water level of 601.7 feet, the cross- sectional area of these streams previous to obstruction is estimated to have been aliout 13,452 square feet for the main channel and 2,0(54 square feet for the small streams, giving a total area of section of 15,516 square feet. This cross section has l)een ob¬ structed from time to time 1)\' the following works: In 1887 the International Bridge was built across the rapids near the head. The piers placed in the ra])ids cut off an area of section of about 1.133 square feet. During the building of the bridge, and subsequently, fills have l)een made near the end of the bridge, causing a further obstruction estimated at al)Out 1,139 square leet, including three of the small streams above mentioned, and making a total estimated area of section obstructed by the bridge of about 2,272 square feet. The Iniilding, in 1889. of the canal sulisequently purchased by the Lake Superior Power t'o. on the (^inadian side, obstructed the fourth of the small streams meiitioned above, estimated to have had an area of 1,(503 square feet. Subsequently this com- 46 INTEKNATIONAL WATEKWAYS COMMISSION PEOGRESS REPORT. pany, in connection with the Michigan Lake Superior Power Co., constructed remedial works across spans 9 and 10 of the bridge, span 10 being completely closed and span 9 being closed by Stoney gates, which may be opened if necessary. The cross-sectional area of span 10 so obstructed was about 724 square feet, and of span 9, 1,649 square feet, giving a total cross section of obstruction of 2,373 square feet for remedial works, or 3,976 square feet if we include the small stream mentioned above. The dike built by the Chandler-Dunbar Water Power Co. in 1892 closed the area under the first two spans of the bridge with a total water cross section of about 1,915 square feet. The total area thus obstructed l)y all works amounts to 8,163 square feet, or more than one-half of the original cross section. The total area of cross section obstructed previous to the constriu-tion of the remedial works was 5,790 square feet . The first effect of these various obstructions was to reduce the discharge of the river, although the flow through the channels not obstructed was somewhat increased. If no diversion were made, the discharge over the rapids being diminished, the mean w^ater level would eventually rise to such a height as to give a discharge through the restricted cross section equal to that which would have taken place through the original cross section at the lower level. The elevation of the water surface would then fluctuate about this new higher mean level-miK'h the same as it did before about the lower mean level. The decrease in discharge, due to the obstructions mentioned above other than the remedial works, may be roughly estimated as follows for stage 601.7 feet; Second-feet. Flow intercepted by International Bridge piers and fills. 7, 000 Chandler-Dunbar Co. 7, 500 Works of Lake Superior Power Co. 4, 500 Total.. 19,000 Since to determine the discharge of the river by oliservations from the International Bridge, the section upon which most of the observations for discharge have been made, involves estimating the amount of water used by the locks and the several power com¬ panies, in order to arrive at the total discharge, the results of the discharge measure¬ ments are not always accordant. These observations for discharge have not extended over as wide a range of level as could be desired to give a good determination of the rate of change in discharge for change in stage. From a consideration of the published results, however, it appears that previous to the placing of the remedial works at spans 9 and 10 of the bridge, that portion of the discharge of the river passing the rapids alone was 66,500 second-feet, at elevation 601.7 feet, and 80,400 second-feet, at elevation 602.7 feet. If these discharges are correct^ a rise in the water surface of 1 foot corre¬ sponds to an increase in discharge of 13,900 second-feet and the effect of placing obstructions cutting off 19,000 second-feet would therefore be to eventually raise the mean lake level approximately 1.4 feet. Only a portion, perhaps not more than half, of this obstruction has actually been effective, for the reason that it takes place slowly and that the obstruction has not been complete since the channels have been replaced by^ the power canals through which the water is allowed to pass. As the result of observations of discharge made in 1899 and 1902 by the officers of the United States Lake Survey, equations were determined representing the flow in the rapids, first, in spans 3 to 10, inclusive, or previous to the construction of the remedial works, above spans 9 and 10, on the Canadian side of the river, and second, in spans 3 to 8, inclusive, or after the remedial works were in place. From these equations it appears that previous to the placing of the remedial works the discharge at 601.7 feet was 66,485 cubic feet per second, and that with the remedial works in place, the dis¬ charge at this stage is 56,880 cubic feet per second, giving a diminished discharge, due to the placing of the remedial works of 9,605 cubic feet per second at-this stage. The total flow stopped by the obstructions placed by the various companies may then be summarized as follows for stage 601.7 feet: Second-feet. Bridge. 7, 000 Chandler-Dunbar Water Power Co.. 7, 500 Lake Superior & Michigan Lake Superior Co. 14,100 Total. 28,600 The present uses of water are estimated to be as follows: Second-feet. Government canals. 600 Chandler-Dunbar Water Power Co... 1,400 Lake Superior & Michigan Lake Superior Power Co. 15, 500 Total 17,500 intp:rxatioxal waterways commissiox progress report. 47 Previous to the placing of the remedial works of the Lake Superior ))ower companies ' above spans 9 and 10 of the International Bridge the discharge of the river at elevation j 601.2 was probably about 61,000 second-feet. Although the discharge may have fallen below tliLs figure for a few months in years of low water, it may be taken as the I ordinary low-water discharge. Of this amount not less than 4,000 second-feet should be reserved for the use of locks and the passage of logs. The Michigan Lake Su])erior Power Company has a canal designed to take a maximum of 31,200 second-feet; the I Chandler-Dunbar Water Power Co. has works under construction designed to use I 4,000 second-feet, and contem])lates still further development. The Lake Su])erior Power Company’s ])re8ent works are suthcient to use at least 9,000 second-feet, and , further develo})ment is contemj^lated, ])resumably to the extent of using one-half of ' the surplus waters of the river. It is ap})arent, therefore, that the actual ])re8ent use of water for power purposes is nearly equal to the amount of flow obstructed by the works of all the power develop¬ ment companies (“onsidered as a unit, and it is clear that the amount of water required for the proposed additions to ])resent ])ower developments is so great as to call for complete control of such extensions by an international commission. ' At present the duty of maintaining the water level above the rapids rests upon the Michigan Lake Su])erior Power Co.;"the act of Congress a])proved June 13, 1902, au¬ thorizing this company to divert water from St. Marys River, with the consent of the Secretary of War and the Chief of Engineers, specifically ])rovides that the level of Lake Sujterior shall be maintained at the ex])ense, if need be, of the works of this company. With the knowledge that plans for enlarging the works of the ])Ower com¬ panies were projected. Congress, in the same act, provided for an investigation of the j conditions with a view to an agreement looking to international control and regula¬ tion. The commission has used the rules and regulations under which the Michigan Lake Superior Power Co. was permitted by the Secretary of War of the United States to divert the waters of the St. Marys River as a basis for the new rules now recom¬ mended, adapting them to the wider application now necessary. RECOMMENDATIONS. I The commission would respectfully recommend: 1 . That no permits shall be granted for the use of the waters of the St. Marys River, I or for the erection of structures in, under, or over, or the occupation in any manner of the said waters until plans have been submitted to the commission for its investigation and recommendation; and the use of the waters under such permits shall not be allowed except upon compliance with the rules hereinafter recommended. 2. The commission further recommends that no grants, permits, or concessions should be made which, directly or by operation of law, may in any manner affect the , right of the United States or of Canada to control the bed of the St. Marys River below high-water mark, and especially that none should be made which, legally or equitably, may be the means of adding to the expense of acquiring lands or rights for the purpose of making improvements in aid of navigation, or which may_ give an equitable right to compensation in case of the removal of structures in said river. 3. That steps be taken to increase the lockage facilities at the Sault Ste. Mane without unnecessary delay, 4. That the Governments of the United States and Canada reserve all water neces¬ sary for navigation ])urposes, at present or in the future, and the surplus shall be divided equally between the two countries for power purposes. ^ i • i, 5. As the commission regards the interests of the United States and Canada in the preservation of the lake levels and in the improvement of the channels and the con¬ servation of the water supply for purposes of navigation as identical and as incapable of efficient protection without joint and harmonious action on the part of the two Governments, it recommends that the rules hereinafter set forth be adopted, and that a joint commission be created to supervise their enforcement, or that such powers be vested in the existing International Waterways C’ommission, subject to such restric¬ tions and reservations as may be deemed advisable. The commission has adopted unanimously the following resolution: , i tt • ^'Resolved, That this commission recomniends to the Secretary of War of the United States and the Minister of Public Works of Canada the following rules to govern the use of water at the Sault Ste. Marie: o nr -o* “1. No person shall place any structure in, over, or under the St. Marys River, nor shall any person place any obstruction in said river, or make any excavation in the bed thereof, or divert water therefrom, until plans for the work shall have been sub¬ mitted to an international waterways commission, nor until consent shall have been by th© SGcrGtery of Wsir of tho Unitod StotGs and tho Ministor of Public \Vorks of Canada. All work must he donG in accordancG with plans approvGd by such com- 48 INTEKNATIONAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. mission, and subject to its supervision and inspection; and no water shall be used or diverted until the completed work shall have been approved by the commission. “2. Persons now using or diverting the waters of St. Marys River for power purposes shall forthwith submit complete plans of all their works existing and proposed, and until such plans have been approved by the commission they shall not use or divert the waters of said river in excess of the amount now actually used or diverted by them. “3. Plans for work contemplating the use or diversion of water must include such remedial and controlling works as may be necessary to maintain levels. Such works ■ must provide for (1) compensation equal to the amount of water to be used or diverted, (2) complete stoppage of flow through canals and works, (3) passage of the amount of water naturally flowing through the section occupied by the remedial works, (4) passage of logs over the rapids. “4. The level of St. Marys River above the rapids, shall be maintained between the elevations 601.7 and 603.2 feet above mean tide at New York, according to the system of levels established by the United States Government in 1903, and defined by a bench mark on the coping of the Weitzel Lock at Sault Ste. Marie, Mich., the elevation of which is 606.069 feet. The approval of plans of works by the commission and the consent of the Secretary of War and Minister of Public Works to construct works or to use or divert water shall in no way relieve the owners and persons operating such works from the duty of maintaining said level. “5. Nothing herein contained shall be held to affect any existing riparian or other rights, or the existing remedies therefor, or any action at law or in equity now pending. All remedies herein provided shall be cumulative and shall be without prejudice to any other remedies for failure of persons operating under permits to maintain the levels for navigation purposes. Nothing herein contained shall be held to affect the exercise of the right of any executive officer of either the United States or Canada, acting under the laws of his respective country, to prevent the placing or to cause the removal of any obstructions in St. iMarys River, or to otherwise preserve or restore the navigability of any part thereof. “6. Persons using or diverting the waters of St. Marys River shall operate under the following regulations; “(a) The general superintendent of St. Marys Fall Canal, under the orders of the engineer officer in charge on the American side and a resident officer appointed by the Canadian Government on the Canadian side, shall form a board whose duty it shall be to see that these regulations, and any others that may hereafter be made by proper authority, are duly obeyed. The officers of this board and their deputies shall have access to all the power works at any time, and all said power works, which term includes canals, escape valves at the power houses, head gates, and remedial works, shall be operated in accordance with the orders of the said board, and said board shall have power to assume entire control of said works, or any of them, whenever it considers such action necessary in the interests of navigation. ‘'(b) Should the monthly mean level fall below 601.7 feet for any calendar month, the flow through the power works shall be reduced to such an extent as to restore the monthly mean level to 601.7 feet. Should the monthly mean level remain below 601.7 feet for six consecutive months, all flow through the power works shall be stopped until the monthly mean level shall again be above 601.7 feet. Should the monthly mean level fall below 601.2 feet, all flow shall likewise be stopped until the monthly mean level shall again be above 601.2 feet. “(c) Should the monthly mean level rise above 603.2 feet the flow through the power canals and remedial works shall be increased to their maximum capacity, and shall so continue until the monthly mean level shall be less than 603.2 feet. “(d) Should the power canals, remedial or controlling works be found not to be of the capacity to produce the regulation required, the persons using the water shall alter their works at their own expense as soon as possible, so as to allow more to flow, in a manner approved by an international commission. “(e) Should currents detrimental to navigation be developed by the operation of any power works the persons operating such works shall alter them or construct such other works as an international commission may consider necessary to remedy the evil, all in a manner to be approved by said commission. “(f) The board mentioned in regulation (a) shall have power to determine whether the conditions mentioned in any of these regulations have arisen to call for the applica¬ tion of said regulation, and its determination shall be final; and said board shall have power to apply to any power works such special regulations as they may deem neces¬ sary in the interests of navigation. “(g) If remedial works be used for the passage of logs or rafts, the gates must be operated at the expense of the persons owning or operating the works whenever needed. INTERNATIONAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. 49 “7. Wherever powers of officers are mentioned in these rules it is understood that the Governments of the United States and Canada reserve the right to vest such powers in, and confer others upon, other officers or the international commission. “8, It is further understood that the Governments of the United States and Canada reserve the right to amend, add to, or abolish these rules or any of them by joint action, and that they may vest the power so to do in the international commission. “9. In the event of any person subject to these regulations refusing or neglecting to obey, abide by, or conform to any ruling, direction, or order of the commission, or of the board mentioned in regulation (a), such commission or board may, through their officers, servants, or agents, at once shut off the supply of water to such person, or to take such steps to compel compliance with such ruling, direction, or order as the commission or said board may deem proper. “10. Persons owning or operating power canals or works shall not be entitled to . damages or compensation from the Governments of the United States or Canada in any case whatsoever, for any act or acts done by them or either of them, or by their , officers or agents at any time, in executing or enforcing these rules, or in exercising ^ .the right to control or suspend the flow of water through canals or remedial works, or I both, or in revoking or annulling any permits of grants which may have been or shall ; hereafter be issued or made to such persons. “11. For the purpose of construing these rules the word ‘p^i’son’ or ‘persons,’ shall be taken as including natural persons, corporations, associations, and partnerships whenever they are used, but shall include the Government of the United States or that of Canada. ‘ George C. Gibbons, i . Chairman, Canadian Section. i ■ W. F. King, I Commissioner. * Louis Coste, t, Commissioner. ! ■' Thomas Cote, Secretary, Canadian Section. ' 0. H. Ernst, Colonel, Corps of Engineers, U. S. Army, Chairman of American Section. > George Clinton, !' Commissioner. Geo. Y. Wisner, 1; Commissioner. .L L. C. Sabin, ^ Secretary, American Section. The honorable the Secretary of War of the United States, and , ^ The honorable the Minister of Public Works of Canada. APPENDIX G. "Report upon the Application of the Minnesota Canal & Power Co. for Per¬ mission TO Divert Certain Waters in Minnesota from their Natural Flow, which is into Boundary Waters, by the Commission, November 15, 1906. Buffalo, N, Y., November 15, 1906. The International Waterways Commission would respectfully report that it has I investigated as fully as existing data would permit the matters involved in the ap¬ plications of the Minnesota Canal & Power Co., of Duluth, Minn., for the approval of * its plans and structures to divert water from the Birch Lake drainage basin in St. Louis and Lake Counties, Minn., and the use of certain public lands of the United States in said counties, and that it has heard the parties interested in said applications and those opposed. The physical data, outside of those furnished by the applicant, are few and not sufficient to show all the conditions existing. The applicant, how¬ ever, has furnished maps and data which are not seriously contested by those opposing the applications, and they are considered sufficient to warrant the conclusions at which the commission has arrived as set forth in this report. The application to the Secretary of War of the United States is for the approval of certain plans for structures which will impound the waters of the Birch Lake drainage basin, and divert them from that basin to Lake Superior, and for authorization to erect such structures and divert the waters. S. Doc. 959-62-3-4 50 INTERNATIONAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. The application to the Department of the Interior is for permission to use certain public lands, by flowage and otherwise, for the purpose of creating electrical power at Duluth on Lake Superior. The Minnesota Canal & Power Co. proposes to divert water from the Birch Lake drainage basin, which is naturally tributary to the Rainy River, Lake of the Woods, Winnipeg River and Lake, and finally to Hudson Bay. The quantity of water to be so diverted is mentioned in some of the documents before the Commission as 600 cubic feet per second, but the company does not propose to limit itself to that amount if it be found, after the completion of its works, as now planned, that a greater quantity can be obtained without injury to navigation in¬ terests. With 600 cubic feet per second about 30,000 electrical horsepower can be generated for use in Duluth and the mining regions of Minnesota. The subject matter under consideration was called to the attention of the Canadian section of this commission by the honorable the secretary of state for Canada, in a letter dated January 6, 1905, in which, among other things, in stating the subjects that might come before the commission for its consideration, be mentions “the pro¬ posed diversion southward by the Minnesota Canal & Power Co., of Duluth, of certain waters in the State of Minnesota, that now flow north into the Rainy River and the Lake of the Woods.” The same matter was called to the attention of the American section by a letter from the Minnesota Canal & Power Co., dated March 10, 1905, ad¬ dressed to the chairman, in which the company referred to the application of the power company pending in the Interior Department, stating that it was advised that one of the subjects which would come before the commission for consideration is the proposed diversion southward of certain waters in the State of Minnesota that now flow north into the Rainy River and the Lake of the Woods, and requesting that the matter be brought before the commission at the earliest practicable moment. At a meeting of the commission held June 15, 1905, this matter was laid over for the reason that other and more pressing matters required the attention of the commission and for the further reason that the jurisdiction of the commission over any waters except those in or tributary to the Great Lakes and the St. Lawrence River had been placed in doubt by the construction given by the Government of the United States to the act of Congress under which the commission was organized. The subject matter having now been referred to the commission by the honorable the Secretary of War of the United States and the honorable the secretary of state for Canada, we regard our jurisdiction as fullv established. The Minnesota Canal & Power Co. is a corporation organized under the laws of the State of Minnesota with power to erect the works for the construction of which authori¬ zation is sought from the War Department of the United States, and with certain powers of eminent domain. It has heretofore brought proceedings in the district courts of ^Minnesota for the purpose of putting into exercise the right of eminent domain and of condemning property and rights of persons who may be affected by the carrying out of its plans. The result of these proceedings has been an appeal to the supreme court of Minnesota, which has decided that the waters which would be affected by the carrying out of the power company’s plans are public navigable waters, and that the statutes under which the comp'an'jr'is''organized do not, as an incident^ to the construction of a canal and the creating of a water power, authorize a corporation to withdraw and divert waters from public navigable lakes and streams to such an extent as to interfere with present or future navigation,^ and by means of canals carry it over a divide and discharge it into a different drainage area, thus permanently withdrawing it from its natural course. This decision resulted in holding that the proceedings taken by the company to condemn property and rights of individuals must be dismissed, . . The court says that “in view of the presumption in favor of the rights of the indi¬ vidual, the State and Federal prohibition against the obstruction of navigable waters, the rule that the rights of the State in such waters are sovereign and not proprietary, that they are held by the public as highways and can not be alienable, the possible effect upon the rights of riparian proprietors in the Province of Ontario, the fact that the doctrine of the appropriation of waters adopted in some of the Western States does not prevail in Minnesota and is not recognized by the conventional law of nations, the treaty relations between the United States and Great Britain with reference to the boundary Waters between the United States and Canada, and that the taking of the waters would interfere with streams and lakes which are already devoted to public uses, which can only be done under express statutory authority, it is constrained to hold that the appellant is not authorized to condemn the interests sought to be condemned. The applicant, assuming that the decision of the supreme court adverse to it would be adhered to only upon the ground that its petition included private as well as public uses, has filed another petition making the purposes for which condemnation will be sought wholly public and has begun new condemnation proceedings. INTERNATIONAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. 51 Objections and protests have ])een filed with the coinniission on behalf of various interests o])posed to the <>:rantin<>; of (he (’anal A Power ('o.’s ap])lication. These objections may be divided into two classes: First, objections made by parties claiming that they have interests and ])roperty rights in the State of Minnesota which will be affected by the carrying out of the Canal ct Power Co.’s ])lans, and, second, objections made by ])arties having interests in the boundary waters in the State of Minnesota and in Canada which it is claimed will be affected by the ])roposed diversion of the waters of the Birch Lake drainage area. The first class of objectors includes Frederick B. Spelman, who claims to be the owner in fee of valuable water rights on Birch River; the Northeastern Minnesota Power Co., a corporation organized under the laws of the State of Minncwsota for the purj)ose of generating electricity by water ])ower, and distributing and selling the same, which claims that it is the owner of certain real estate in Lake County, ^linn., bordering upon KawLdiiwi Falls; the St. ('roix laimber Co. and the Fall Lake Boom Co., corporations organized under the laws of the State of Minnesota, which, acting together, are engaged in the manufacture of lumber in the State of Minnesota and using, for the pur])ose of bringing logs to the mills of the lumber company, waters whicli would be affected by the diversion contemplated by the Canal & Power ('o., and which com])anies also have certain property interests in Minnesota; and Lazarus Silverman, re])resenting the Enterprise Iron & Land Co., which has valuable land and water right interests in Minnesota. It is understood that the interests of the last-named comj^any are owned or con¬ trolled by the Northeastern Minnesota Power (,'o. Others having interests in the United States are the lio])e Land Co., the Higgins Land Co., and the Higgins Wild Cat Co., who object on the ground that the reservoir proposed will flood their lands, and the Duluth & Iron Range Railroad Co., which protests against the projected work as being “an imi)roper and unwarranted use of the international waters.” The property rights and interests of all these parties will be injuriously affected, to a greater or less extent, in case the Minnesota Canal & Power Co. is permitted to impound the waters of the Birch Lake drainage basin and divert them to Lake Suj)erior from the streams flowing into the boundary waters. The commission, however, is of the opinion that the rights and interests of these parties can be properly ]n’otected under the law's of the State of Minnesota. We therefore conclude that their objections do not present any international (piestions, and such questions alone the commission considers as having been referred to it. ' The second class of objectors includes the corporation of the town of Fort Frances, in the Province of Ontario, which claims to have valuable navigation advantages upon Rainy River, long recognized as an international waterway; the Koochiching Co., a cor])oration organized under the laws of the State of Iowa, the owner in fee simple of a section of land bordering on Rainy River at Koochiching Falls, opposite Fort Frances; the Rainy River Improvement C’o., a corporation organized under the laws of the State of Minnesota for the purjjose of improving the navigation of the boundary waters by means of dams and canals to be constructed at Koochiching Falls and elsewhere, for the development of water power at the Koochiching Dam, and for the transportation of logs; and Edward W. Backus, of IMinneapolis, who has entered into a contract with the government of Ontario by which he has agreed to construct a dam across the Rainy River and develop power at the Koochiching Falls, which agreement is now understood to be assigned to the Ontario & Minnesota Power Co., a corporation organized under the laws of Canada. It is understood that the Koo¬ chiching Co., the Rainy River Improvement Co., Edward W. Bachus, and the Ontario & Minnesota Power Co. are associated and are acting in concert. The Rainy River Navigation Co. and the city of Winnipeg also object to the proposed diversion. These interests strenuously object to the carrying out of the plans of the Minnesota Canal & Power Co., claiming that diminution of water, by reason of the proposed diversion in the streams which they proposed to utilize, will greatly injure their navi¬ gation interests and their ability to produce electric powej'. In addition to these objections of individuals, the Canadian Government, acting upon a memorial of the municipal cori)oration of Fort Frances, addressed to the Canadian minister of marine and fisheries, brought the proposed diversion to the attention of the British ambassador at Washington for his information and such action as might be possible in the premises. A copy of this memorial is hereto attached marked “Gi.” Upon receipt of the communication from the Canadian Government the BritLsh ambassador presented the matter to the. Secretary of State of the United States on January 3, 1905, requesting that the proposed diversion be not carried out pending the meeting of this commission. At a hearing before the commission held at Buffalo on the 26th of June, 1906, Col. Anderson, chief engineer of the department of marine and fisheries of Canada, 52 INTEENATIONAL WATEEWAYS COMMISSION PEOGEESS EEPOET. and Mr. J. G. Sing, engineer in charge of the Rainy River district of the department of public works of Canada, appeared and opposed the proposed diversion on the ground that it would be detrimental to Canadian interests, and especially to naviga¬ tion upon the boundary waters. At a meeting of the commission, held in Toronto on the 24th day of July, 1906, written objections were presented as follows, viz: A resolution of the municipal council of the town of Kenora, Canada, a copy of which is hereto annexed, marked “Gs”; a letter from Mr. George A. Graham, manager of the Rainv River Navigation Co., a copy of which is hereto annexed, marked “Gg,” a resolution of the Kenora Board of Trade, a copy of which is hereto annexed and marked “G 4 ;” and a written statement by Mr. Sing, hereto annexed, marked “G. 5 ” At a meeting of the commission, held at the city of Chicago, Ill., on the 17th day of October, 1906, H. X. Ruttan, city engineer of the city of Winnipeg, Canada, ap¬ peared before the commission in opposition to the application of the Minnesota Canal & Power Co. After stating that the probable head available for power purposes between Rainy Lake and Lake Winnipeg, on the Winnipeg River, approximates 300 feet, that the discharge of Winnipeg River at Point Du Bois Falls, in the Pro\unce of Manitoba, was 19,000 cubic feet per second in March, 1906, and that the discharge in extreme low water might reach a minimum of 17,000 cubic feet per second; that works had been completed and were in course of construction between Rainy Lake and Lake Winnipeg, aggregating, approximately, 150,000 horsepower, invohung an expenditure of between $15,000,000 and $20,000,000, and that many additional powers are projected, some of which will no doubt be constructed; that the city of Winnipeg has a population of 100 , 000 , which is rapidly increasing, and has voted to construct a water power at Point Du Bois, at a cost estimated at $3,125,000 for preliminary development, Mr. Ruttan, on behalf of the city of Winnipeg, objected to the diversion of water which naturally belongs to the Winnipeg watershed. The action of the British Ambassador, at the request of the Canadian Government, together with the fact that the rights and interests of Canadian citizens will be affected by the carrying out of the plans of the Minnesota Canal & Power Co., and the fact that navigation of boundary waters will be to some extent injured if such plans are put in operation, presents international questions which, in the opinion of this com¬ mission, will be involved in many other instances of boundary streams between the two countries, and require the most careful consideration. In order that there may be no question as to the exact intent of the commission in giving its conclusions, it is deemed best to state with as much exactitude as possible the existing conditions which give rise to the questions to be disposed of. The commission finds the physical conditions of the locality to be as follows: The Birch Lake drainage basin is situated in the counties of St. Louis and Lake, in the State of Minnesota, the border of the basin being only about 14 miles from Lake Superior. This drainage basin contains a chain of small lakes, the largest of these, known as Birch Lake, l}ung near the western border of the basin. A portion of the drainage of this basin flows westerly through the North Kawishiwi River and Farm Lake to Garden Lake, with a fall of about 56 feet in a distance of 9 miles; another portion flows southwesterly through the South Kawishiwi into Birch Lake, and thence northerly through Birch River and White Iron Lake to Garden Lake, the distance traversed by the waters along this route being about 24 miles. Passing Kawishiwi Falls, the waters continually increasing in volume, flow through Fall Lake over the Pipestone Falls to Basswood Lake, lying on the international boundary between the United States and Canada; the waters thence flow in a general northwest¬ erly direction through Crooked and Iron Lakes, Lac La Croix, Nam.akan River and Lake, to the Rainv Lake, and thence through Rainy River to the Lake of the Woods. From Basswood Lake to the Lake of the Woods the waters flow along the international boundary line with the exception of about 20 miles, where they traverse the Namakan River entirely in Canadain territory. Within 2 miles of the western end of Birch Lake, and separated from it by a low di\ude, rises the Embarrass River, its waters flowing southwesterly through Sabin, Embarrass, and Esquagamau Lakes into the St. Louis River, and thence into St. Louis Bay and Lake Superior. The St. Louis Bay and River form a portion of a boundary between Minnesota and Wisconsin, and are navdgable from Lake Superior to Fond du Lac, Minn. From Fond du Lac to Colquet the St. Louis River is unna\'igable, there being a fall of approximately 600 feet in a distance of 14 miles; above the latter point it is used to float logs, about 25,000,000 feet, it is said, being transposed annually. The natural waterway from Birch to Rainy Lakes may be described as a series of pools of greater or less extent connected by short and shallow channels containing rapids or falls. The pools or lakes are capable of floating lo^s and are in general navi¬ gable by small steamboats, but the connecting channels are, in their natural condition, not navugable save by canoes or small boats and in places are wholly unna\'igable, ! INTERNATIONAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. 53 I some of them being even incapable of floating logs, except at times of high water. " The channels connecting Birch Lake with the lakes directly north are of this character, I and a dam has been erected at the outlet of Birch Lake for the purpose of raising the water and floating logs over the rapids by means of the greater flow made available by opening gates; and at the outlet of Garden Lake a roll dam has been built to serve a similar purpose. Na\dgation upon Birch Lake is confined to canoes and rafts of logs which are towed I by a small tug called a log puller. This tug was built upon the lake and under present natural conditions is confined to its waters. Similar conditions prevail on White Iron ’ and Garden Lakes, the pools next below or north of Birch Lake, a steam log puller being operated on each. About 20,000,000 feet of logs are said to be transported annually from Birch Lake and vicinity to a sawmill on Fall Lake. Between Birch Lake and Rainy Lake the only through navdgation is by canoes and it is said that there are no less than 18 places at "which portages are required by reason of the waterfalls and rapids. Basswood and Crooked Lakes, Lac la Croix, and Xamakan Lake are all na\’igable, I and it is understood that they are not only used for the floating of logs, but that one or f more small tugs or log pullers are in use upon each of them, although through naviga- I tion by boats is not possible. There have been at least two small steamboats operating [ on Basswood Lake, having a gross tonnage of 3 and 10 tons, respectively. Rainy Lake is a navigable waterway and several steamboats of small tonnage are operating upon it. There are two points in this lake restricting the navigable depth. One of these is known as the Brul4 Narrows, about midway of its length, and the other is at Pithers Point, at the outlet of the lake and just above Koochiching Falls. The ^ depth at these points in ordinary low water is about 7 feet, and it is understood that r there have been years when the larger boats were laid up on account of low water. [ The allied interests represented by the Rainy River Improvement Co., on the Ameri- . can side, and the Ontario & Minnesota Power Co., on the Canadian side, are engaged in building dams at Fort Frances, above Koochiching Falls, for the purpo^ of improv- ’ ing the water power and thereby incidentally improving the na^dgability of Rainy ’ Lake by raising the elevation of its water surface. There are two, and possibly more, steamboats operating on Rainy River, and making i regular trips between Fort Frances, at the Koochiching Falls, and Rat Portage, on the Lake of the Woods, and touching at way ports. The only improvement made by the United States Government on any of these waterways is at the harbor of Warroad, Minn., which has been improved to a depth of 7 feet beiow the stage of water at the time of making the survey. The elevation of the Lake of the Woods, and consequently the depth of the water in the harbor, is controlled by the operation of the Keewatin Dam at Rat Portage, which is operated under the du*ection of the Canadian Government. The Annual Report of the Chief of Engi¬ neers, United States Army, 1904, gives the following statistics regarding the commerce of the town of Warroad: “The town of Warroad, now 4 years old, has a population of 700, and the adjacent country is rapidly filling up with settlers. The imports of M arroad increased from 254 I tons in 1900 to 2,754 tons in 1904. During the same period the exports increased from 1,215 tons to 9,929 tons.” In the report of 1905, the following statement is made: “The town of Warroad, now 5 years old, has a population of about 1,000, and the I adjacent country is rapidly filling up with settlers. “Up to this time Warroad Harbor has had no regular lake traffic, the condition of the entrance to the harbor not having been such as to permit it. “On Lake of the Woods there are at present 25 or more registered Canadian boats, ranging from 30 to 486 tons burden, some of which occasionally visit M arroad Harbor when conditions are favorable. “The United States boats connected with Warroad Harbor are the propellers Na-ma-puk and Knute Nelson, the former about 36 feet and the latter about 80 feet long. The Canadian Government has made slight improvements above the Lake of the ' Woods, and an agreement has been made between the Commissioner of Crown Lands for the Province of COntario and E. W. Backus, who subsequently transferred his rights to the Ontario & Minnesota Power Co., whereby in return for certain water-power privileges the latter is.required to construct a dam at Koochiching Palls to be subject . to the control of the Government, making it possible to maintain the water level in Rainy Lake at or above the present extreme high-water stage. The country traversed by the waterway leading from Birch Lake to Rainy Lake is ‘ in general rough and unimproved. The timber consists of white and Norway pine, spruce, and less valuable woods, typical of Lake Superior forests. The pine is being rapidly cleared from some of the larger tracts. The ^ ermilion and Mes.ibi iron dis¬ tricts cross the territory between Birch Lake and the boundary line, and the soil is shallow and not well suited to agriculture. 54 INTEKNATIONAL WATEKWAYS COMMISSION PEOGKESS KEPORT. The population, in 1900, of the townships bordering the waterway from Birch Lake to and including Basswood Lake, did not exceed 4,000, the town of Ely haying a population of 3,717. This sparse population depends largely upon the mining and timber industries of the locality. The population of the townships on the American side bordering the waterway from Basswood Lake to and including the Lake of the Woods, and covering about 200 miles of shore line, was only about 600 according to the census of 1900. The country bordering the Lake of the Woods on the Canadian side is fairly well settled. On the American side it is wilderness composed largely of Indian reservations, portions of which have been thrown open to settlement. The vicinity of Warroad has been recently so opened. ^ At several places along the waterway from Birch Lake to Rainy Lake develop¬ ment of water power is possible, but at most of them it is not commercially feasible at present, for the following reasons: A considerable fall is not usually concentrated at one point but is distributed over rapids; the flow is not uniform, but is very small during the dry season, and, unless the waters of the flood season are impounded, the extent of the possible continuous development is restricted by the low-water flow; the construction of reservoirs would entail a heavy expenditure in proportion to the possible development; the demand for power in the vicinity is extremely limited. The Kawishiwi Falls may be an exception to this general rule, and the develop¬ ment of this power may be commercially practicable in the near future, if not at present. In this case there is a fall of about 65 feet in three-quarters of a mile between Garden Lake and Fall Lake; and by the construction of a reservoir system similar to that proposed by the applicant, there would be available about 6,000 theoretical horsepower. A market for this power could probably be found at Ely and in the mines in the locality. Between Birch Lake and White Iron Lake there is a natural fall of about 28 feet. If the north Kawishiwi outlet of Birch Lake were closed by a dam, and an extensive reservoir system constructed similar to that proposed by the applicant, there would be available at this point about 2,500 theoretical horsepower. Below Kawishiwi Falls and between the outlet of Fall Lake and Basswood Lake there is a fall of about 15 feet in less than 3 miles. By using 820 cubic feet per second, which is the minimum flow plus the amount of water to be diverted, there would be available about 1,500 theoretical horsepower. The value of the three water powers last mentioned, whether present or prospective, would be practically extinguished by the applicant’s proposed works, but, as before stated, the rights of their owners can be properly protected under the laws of Min¬ nesota. At Koochiching Falls in the Rainy River, just below the outlet of Rainy Lake, there is a natural fall of about 23 feet in a short distance. The minimum discharge of the river has been estimated at 3,500 cubic feet per second. This volume would give about 7,800 theoretical horsepower without storage, and by raising the water level of Rainy Lake 5 to 7 feet by means of dams above Koochiching Falls it would be possible to double this development. Even this would permit the utilization of less than half of the average outflow. Unless an extensive reservoir system is constructed, therefore, including the lakes nearer the headwaters, at least one-half of the waters of the basin tributary to Rainy Lake, or more than ten times the quantity of water proposed to be used by the applicant, will serve no useful purpose for power develop¬ ment at this point. The improvements for which the applicant now asks approval are as follows: To erect a dam at the mouth of Gabbro Lake to impound water in the lakes tributary thereto and form what is called the Isabelle reservoir; to erect a dam in the North Kawishiwi River to impound the waters in the. lakes and streams tributary to Birch Lake naturally flowing westerly into White Iron and Garden Lakes; to erect a dam in the South Kawishiwi River, which, in connection wdth the dam last men¬ tioned, will form the Kawishiwd reservoir; and to erect a -dam in Birch River at the outlet of Birch Lake to impound its waters and form the Birch Lake reservoir. The company; proposes to cut a canal from the west end of Birch Lake, a distance of about 6 miles, across the divide to the head’vvaters of the Embarrass River and to erect controlling works at the entrance to this canal to regulate the flow of water from Birch Lake into the Embarrass River Canal. From a point in the St. Louis River above Cloquet it proposes to dig another canal about 24^ miles long to a point in the city of Duluth where the bluff is about 600 feet above the w^ater level of Lake Superior, and to lay pipes from the westerly end of this—the St. Louis River Canal—to the power house of the company to be erected on the shores of St. Louis Bay. It is proposed to divert at least 600 cubic feet of w^ater per second from the Birch Lake reservoir into the Embarrass Canal and River, and thence into the St. Louis River, and to take the same amount from the latter into the St. Louis River Canal and convey it by canal and pipes to the turbines located in the company’s power house, IXTEKXATIOXAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. 55 ' thereby developing about 30,000 electrical horsepo\yer, llie amount of water diverted and of power created to be increased hereafter if circumstances ])ermit. The amount of water tlie com])any proposes to divert from the natural channels ' leading to llasswood Lake, and thence along the international boundary, is estimated ■ to be about 37 ])er cent of the water tributary to Lasswood Lake, 4 per cent of that tributary to Rainy Lake, and 2.4 ])er cent of that tributary to the Lake of the ^\■oods. The data available covering the hydraulic conditions are inadequate for an accurate analysis of the effect of the works proposed by the company, since the distribution of ■ the sup])ly and the discharge of the outlets of the several lakes throughout the year have not been determined. The effect on the navigable depth of Rainy Lake and the ^ waterway below that point would be very slight under natiiral conditions, and become still less important by reason of the fact that the elevation of Rainy Lake will be controlled by the Koochiching dam, when conqileted, as the elevation of the Lake of the Woods is now controlled by the Keewatin dam. The company offers no objec¬ tion to the suggestion to conserve navigation interests by the construction of such remedial works as may be necessary. While the data are insufiicient to determine the extent of the remedial works required, they are sufhcient to warrant the belief that full compensation is possible. ... The minimum discharge from Rirch Lake drainage basin is estimated by the engi¬ neers of the com])any to be about 220 cubic feet per second, and the average discharge * about 975 cubic feet per second. The reservoir system created by the dams pro])osed by the com])any will permit of storing a portion of the waters during months of excessive supply for use during the remainder of the year when the natural su])ply is deficient. , , . , . From April to June, inclusive, the supply to the lakes is greatly in excess ot the natural discharge, and in July, August, and September the supply in a year of ordinaly precipitation is probably in excess of the amount to be withdrawn by the apjilicant. It would appear, therefore, that the reservoirs might in general be ke])t full untn October 1. The reservoirs proposed by the applicantare suflicient to store 8,019,000,000 cubic feet of water and it is claimed that this capacity might be doubled by an exten¬ sion of its works without interference with other watersheds draining north. If the proposed smaller capacity reservoirs were full on October 1, the applicant could withdraw its own supply entirely from the reservoirs for five months and still permit the natural supply of the lakes during this low-water period to flow into the Present channel. Under such conditions the usual low-water discharge of Birch and Aorth Kawishiwi Rivers would be depleted by the amount of water now supplied by the lakes tributary to them, namely, by the natural decrease in stage of those lakes duiing low water. It would be possible to require the company to maintain at all times a flow in the natural channel equal to the present estimated minimum discharge, without disastrouslv affecting the applicant’s j)lans. . , i i The lakes could be held at or above the present elevation by a dam properly con¬ structed at the outlet of each, and the future improvement of the stream, in generab bv locks and dams, would not be impaired when prospective commerce demands such a step. In order, however, to accommodate the commerce now existing or in pios- pect between adjoining lakes above Rainy Lake, namely, the transportation ot logs over rapids and falls, the gates in these dams would have to be operated with regard to the necessities of commerce rather than to serve the interest of the ap})licant, and should be so operated. ^ • t- ^ In a reiiort upon this subject addressed to the Chief of Engineers, United btates Armv, bv Maj. Cleo. McC. Derby, May 24, 1905, Idaj. Derby enumerated the con¬ ditions under which he considered the application should be granted, and the a])pli- cant appears to be willing to accept these conditions, which include the lolloiMiig. “The Minnesota Canal & Power Co. should construct and maintain a dam or dams in Lake Namakan, or at some other point or points above Rainy Lake, so as to impound and store during periods of high water, when it would otherwise go to \yaste, an amount of water equal to the entire amount diverted from the watershed of Rainy Lake, releas¬ ing this water into Rainy Lake from time to time as the interests of navigation in Rainy River and above may require, in accordance with regulations to be made by the Secretary of War. , • ^ i i “The Minnesota Canal & Power Co. should construct and maintain such acklitional dams as may be necessary to maintain Basswood Lake and the other lakes between Birch Lake'and Rainy Lake at or above their mean level; and should release Irom all such dams from tinie to time such amount of water as may be necessary to sluice logs from one lake to the next, and for other interests cf navigation, in accordance with regulations to be made by the Secretary of War; , , •. f i It is (luite apparent that the interests to be promoted at the futy of Duluth, and at the Minnesota mines, by the generation and transmission ot electricity, il the 56 INTERNATIONAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. diversion be permitted, will be very great, the amount of horsepower which will be available being about 30,000. The canal which the applicant proposes to construct, and the improvement of the lakes and streams south of the Birch Lake drainage area, will furnish additional aids to navigation, particularly for the transportation of logs out in the forests within that area. INTERNATIONAL ASPECT OF QUESTIONS INVOLVED. The proposed diversion, so far as it would affect navigation upon boundary waters, presents a serious objection to the granting of the permit asked. By the terms of Article II of the treaty of 1842 between the United States and Great Britain, the boundary line from a point in the Neebish Channel, where the com¬ missioners appointed under the sixth article of the treaty of Ghent ended their labors, was defined westward to the Rocky Mountains. In that article there is added to the description this sentence: “It being understood that all the Avater communications and all the usual portages along the line from Lake Superior to the Lake of the Woods, and also Grand Portage, from the shore of Lake Superior to the Pigeon River, as now actually used, shall be free and open to the use of the citizens and subjects of both countries.” This clause secures to Canada free and unobstructed navigation of the boundary waters from which the proposed diversion is to be made. In the opinion of the commission it secures to Canada, by necessary construction, the right to navigate those waters in any manner which the natural flow will permit. Any interference with the natural flow which decreases the navigable capacity of Basswood Lake, Rainy River, Rainy Lake, or the Lake of the Woods is a violation of the letter and spirit of the treaty, and the extent of the interference is not important. If the navigable capacity is injuriously affected, Canada has the right to object. Nor does the possibility of restoring and regulating the flow in the boundary waters mentioned, by remedial works, confer any right to lessen the navigable capacity, for such works will have to be constructed in part in the Dominion of Canada and this can not be done without Canada’s consent, nor can the burden of constructing such works be imposed upon her. The commission is aware that the clause of the treaty of 1842. quoted, has received a different construction from that which we place upon it. It has been said that the phrase “as now actually used” applied to the use of the waters, and that, as at the time the treaty was entered into those waters were used for conoe navigation only, the treaty secured the right of canoe navigation and nothing more. This construction seems to us erroneous. The language of the clause secures the free and open use of the waters specified and the use of Grand Portage, as it was then “actually used.” We deem it quite^ clear upon the face of the treaty that this was the intention of the treaty powers. The clause we are considering is divided into two subjects: One is the free and open use of the water communications and usual portages, and the other is the use of Grand Portage, and the subject matters are separated by the expression “and also,” which would seem clearly to make the expression “as now actually used” relate to the Grand Portage, inasmuch as that is introduced by the expression, “and also.” This construction would seem to be supported by the conditions existing at the time the treaty ivas negotiated and also by the obvious purpose of the treaty. When the treaty was entered into, the navigable waters on the boundary line west of Lake Superior were connected by portages which ivere reasonably well defined and which naturally would be followed, but the Grand Portage, extending from Lake Superior overland to the Pigeon River, was of great length and subject to considerable change in accordance with the views of those who might use it from time to time. It was clearly necessary to define the Grand Portage by some description in the treaty, and this was done by inserting the phrase “as now actually used.” It was evidently the intention of the treaty-making powers, in defining the boundaries, to secure to both countries the free and open use of the boundary waters for interior communication and transportation, and it would seem to be a narrow construction of the clause in questioii which would assign to those powers the intent to limit the right of com¬ munication and transportation to canoes, for this would place them in the position of utterly ignoring future conditions and practically destroying the value of the water¬ ways as means of communication. The broader and proper construction, in the opinion of the commission, is that the intent was to preserve to both countries the “free and open use” of the boundary waters, in any manner that they could be made of use for the purposes mentioned. In the opinion of the commission, therefore, the permit to permanently diA^ert Avaters Avhich AA'ould supply the boundary lakes and streams ought not to be granted without the concurrence of the Dominion of Canada. r INTERNATIONAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. 57 Aside from the effect of the treaty of 1842, there are other considerations which lead the commission to the conclusion that the permit applied for should not be granted without the concurrence of Conada. The proposed diversion will, to some extent, injuriously affect riparian rights upon the Canadian side of the boundary waters, will also affect the water supply of the Jsamakan River, and other waters, wholly in Canada. The principles involved in arriving at this ('onclusioii do not impugn the right of the United States to grant the permit, but they are of such great im})ortance, and of such widespread application, that the commission believes they should be settled and applied for both countries. As the necessity for an enormous increase in the appropriation of water wholly within one country, has given rise in later years to conditions which never existed before, recourse to authorities upon international law for direct precedents is useless, but there are certain principles of international law which have a direct bearing upon the question under consideration and which should, in the opinion of the commission, be sufficient for their solution. It can hardly be disputed that, in the absence of treaty stipulation, a country through which streams have their course or in which lakes exist can, in the exercise of its sovereign powers, rightfully divert or otherwise appropriate the waters within its territory for purposes of irrigation, the improvement of navigation, or for any other purpose which the Government may deem proper. This principle was lucidly stated by Mr. Harmon, Attorney General of the United States, on the 12th of Decem¬ ber, 1895, in a communication to the Secretary of State. (Opinions of Attorney General, vol. 21, p. 274.) The question submitted to the Attorney General by the Secretary of State involved the right to appropriate the waters of the upper Rio Grande for irrigation purposes, to the injury of residents of Mexico, and, in giving his opinion, the Attorney General laid down the .law as follows; “The fundamental principle of international law is the absolute sovereignty of every nation as against all others within its own territory.” He then quoted from Chief Justice Marshall’s opinion in Schooner Exchange v. McFadden (7 Cranch, p. 136), the following excerpt: “The jurisdiction of the nation within its own territory is necessarily exclusive and absolute. It is susceptible of no limitation not imposed by itself. Any restric¬ tions upon it, deriving validity from an external source, would imply a diminution of its sovereignty to the extent of the restriction, and an investment of that sover¬ eignty to the same extent in that power which could impose such restriction. “All exceptions, therefore, to the full and complete power of a nation within its own territories must be traced up to the consent of the nation itself. They can flow from no other legitimate source.” Great Britain also has insisted upon the same principle in the matter of the naviga¬ tion of the lower St. Lawrence. The history of the ])ositions taken by the United States and Great Britain need not be recited, but it will be noted that Great Britain did not recede from her position and simply conceded by treaty the right of navigation upon certain concessions being made by the United States. It would seem, therefore, to be settled international law, recognized by both coun¬ tries, that the exercise of sovereign power over waters within the jurisdiction of a country can not be questioned and that, notwithstanding such exercise may take a form that will be injurious to another country through which the waters of the same streams or lakes pass, it can not be rightfully regarded as furnishing a cause of war. But where the citizens of a country are injured by such exercise of sovereignty, inter¬ national law recognizes (unless there is urgent necessity for its exercise) that there is a breach of comity which entitles the country whose citizens or subjects are injured to retaliate. Sir llobert Phillimore, in his “Commentaries upon International I,aw” (edition of 1879, pp. 12 and 131, clearly draws the distinction between the international duties of Governments as they affect public interests and as they affect private interests. He states the international law as follows: “ The obligationes juris privati inter gentes are not, as the obligationes juris publici inter gentes are, the result of legal necessity, but of social convenience, and they are called by the name of comity— comitas gentium. “It is within the absolute competence of a State to refuse permission to foreigners to enter into transaction -with subjects, or to allow them to do so, being forewarned that the municipal law of the land will be applied to them; therefore a breach of comity can not, strictly speaking, furnish a casus belli, or justify a recourse to war, any more than a discourtesy or breach of a natural duty, simply as such, can furnish ground for the private action of one individual against another. “For want of comity toward the individual subjects of a foreign State, reciprocity of treatment by the State whose subject has been injured is, after remonstrance has been exhausted, the only legitimate remedy; whereas the breach of a rule of ])id)lic international law constitutes a casus belli, and justifies in the last resort a recourse to war.” 58 INTERNATIONAL WATERWAYS COMAIISSION PROGRESS REPORT. It would seem that comity would require that, in the absence of necessity, the sovereign power should not be exercised to the injury of a friendly nation, or of its citizens or subjects, without the consent of that nation. The common law protects riparian owners against permanent diversions of water which injuriously affect their rights, and this law is founded upon principles, not merely of social necessity, but of justice and right. While the common law is not a part of the law of nations, its principles so far as they are founded in justice and equity, ought, where practicable, to be applied by nations acting in their sovereign capacity. The Department of State of the United States has adopted this principle in the past, and although the application was made in the case of conflicting riparian rights on a boundary stream, yet the commission can see no sound distinction between the position taken by the Government of the United States in the case referred to and cases of diversion of water wholly within one country where the diversion injuriously affects riparian owners in another country. This application of the common law was made by Mr. Evarts, Secretary of State. It was complained that Mexicans upon the Rio Grande in the neighborhood of El Paso were diverting so much of the waters of the river for irrigation purposes as to seriously affect the amount which could be obtained by citizens of the United States for a like purpose. Mr. Evarts in a communication to Mr. Navarro, the Mexican minister (June 15, 1880), directs his attention to the complaints and, after referring to the abstraction of water by the Mexican popidation for irrigation purposes, says: “As this is not only in direct o])position to the recognized rights of riparian pro¬ prietors, but is also contrary to that good feeling and harmony which ought to exist between colaborers in peaceful pursuits, and might, moreover, if permitted to con¬ tinue, result in bitter feeling and possible breaches of the peace, I most earnestly request, in these high interests, that you will have the goodness to bring the matter to the attention of your Government with a view to procuring a cessation of the annoyance complained of.” (Vol. 1, p. 63, Wharton’s International Law Digest.) IMr. Earnham, while somewhat overstating the law, in his work on “Waters and Water Rights” (edition of 1904, vol. 1, p. 29), forcibly enunciates the principles which should obtain, citing authorities: “A river which flows through the territory of several States or nations is their common property. Each is entitled to its navigation throughout its whole extent, so far as it can be exercised without injury to the rights of othels. It is a great natural highway conferring, besides the facilities of navigation, certain incidental advantages such as fishery and the right to use the water for power and irrigation. Neither nation can do any act which vdll deprive the other of the benefits of these rights and advantages. “The inherent right of a nation to protect itself and its territory would justify the one lower down the stream in preventing by force the one further up from turning the river out of its course, or in consuming so much of the water for purposes of its own as to deprive the former of its benefit. Conversely, the upper owner would have a right to prevent an obstruction of the stream which would prevent fish from ascending to its shores, or interfere with its rights of navigation. To prevent resort to force, courts of arbitration Avoidd protect these rights, and the courts of the re¬ spective nations will prevent acts on the part of their own subjects which interfere with the rights of subjects of other States. And courts having a supervisory jiiris- diction over the act of the political department of government will prevent acts by that department which will injure the rights of neighboring States. The gifts of nature are for the benefit of mankind, and no aggregation of men can assert and exercise such rights and ownership of them as will deprive others having equal rights, and means of enjoying them, of such enjoyment. The acts of nations must be gov¬ erned by principles of right and justice. The days of force and self-aggrandizement at the expense of neighboring nations are past, and the common right to enjoy the bountifid provisions of Providence must be preserved.” Messrs. Jeremiah Smith and George B. French very fully and ably discuss in the Harvard Review, November, 1894, volume 8, No. 3, the power of a State to divert an interstate river. They said: “Because Massachusetts can compel a sale of property in Massachusetts, it does not follow that it also can compel a sale of property in New Hampshire. Massachusetts has not the power to compel a New Hampshire riparian proprietor to sell his right (annexed to and arising out of his New Hampshire land), that the water of the river should continue to flow to his land. A State can not exercise the power of eminent domain extraterritorially. ]\Iassachusetts can not condemn land in New Hampshire. Massachusetts can not, as against a citizen of New Hampshire, authorize the doing of an act in Massachusetts which will residt in the taking of property rights in New Hampshire. Massachusetts could not authorize the building of a dam in Massachu¬ setts which would flood land in New Hampshire. INTERNATIONAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. 59 “By parity of reasoning, Massachusetts could not authorize the construction of an aqueduct or canal in Massachusetts which would divert water from a stream naturally flowdng to New Hampshire. The right infringed by flooding New Hampshire land may be called absolute ownership. The right infringed by diverting water from the New Ham])shire land mav be called an easement. The consecpience in the one case may be positive, and in the other case negative. IBit in each case it is a ])roperty right that is infringed; and the consequence is as direct ip the latter case as in the former. * *' * Massachusetts, even if an entirely distinct and independent sovereignty—even if standing to New Hampshire in the relation of France to S]>ain— would not’have a right, under the rules of international law, to do this act. The law of nations recognizes no such right, even between States wholly foreign to each other. * * * IMassachusetts, instead of merely denying New Hampshire’s right to use, in Massachusetts, that part of the river which naturally flows through Massa¬ chusetts, is, in effect, denying New Hamp.shire’s right to use, in Neiv Hampshire, that part of the river which’naturally flows through New Hampshire. Massachusetts, instead of saying to New Hampshire’: ‘You shall not hereafter use, in Massachusetts, that part of the common river which flows through Massachusetts,’ makes a far more startling declaration. :Massachusetts says to New Hampshire: ‘You shall not here¬ after have the use of the river, even within your own borders, for Massachusetts denies your right to have any part of the river flow through New Hampshire. These principles were applied in the Holyoke M ater Power Co. v. Connecticut River Co. (22 Blatch., 131; 20 Fed., 71). In this case the plaintiff.claims that its property located in Massachusetts would be injured by the defendants raising a dam in the State of Connecticut. The defendant justified under powers given it bv the State of C^onnecticut, claiming that its proposed structure was in aid of navigation. A permanent injunction was granted enjoining the defendant. . . The court, after holding that the State of Connecticut had junsdiction over lands within its boundaries, says: “As Connecticut has no direct jurisdiction or control over real estate situate in another State, it can not indirectly, by virtue of its attempted improvement of its own navigable waters, control or subject to injury foreign real estate. If this resolution -is a bar to an action for any consequent injury to land or to rights connected with land in :Massachusetts, Connecticut is acting extraterritorially.” CONCLUSIONS. The commission has arrived at the following conclusions: 1. Mliile the work proi)osed l.w the ap])licant will be of great advantage to the interests served, it will interfere with public and private interests in Canada, and the commission sees no public necessity for it. 2. The proposed diversion will injure the interests of various classes of persons, namely, residents of the United States having property rights in the State of Minne¬ sota, residents of the United States having property rights and interests in Canada and in the boundary waters, residents of Canada having property rights and interests in Canada, and municipalities in the Dominion of Canada. The rights and interests which will be affected are divisible into two classes, namely, those which depend upon navigation directly or indirectly and those which depend upon the use of waters of the various streams and lakes for power purjioses. 3. The proposed diversion will affect injuriously navigation upon the boundary waters between the United States and Canada, above mentioned, and upon navigable waters in Canada connecting said boundary waters; but, 4. So far as water-power interests on the international boundary or in Canada are concerned, which depend upon the supply from the Birch Lake drainage area, although remedial works at locations above Rainy Lake may be constructed, the total amount of water which can be stored and used for power purposes upon the boundary and connecting waters located wholly in Canada will be diminished.^ 5. The applicant, the Minnesota Canal & Power Co., of Duluth, Minn., under the decision of the supreme court of Minnesota, above cited, apparently has not the power to utilize the permit it seeks to obtain, but possibly may acquire that power. It would seem, therefore, that the permit which the applicant seeks, ought not in any case to be granted before it secures authority under the laws of Minnesota to utilize it. G. That the rights and interests of the residents of Minnesota which may be affected by the proposed diversion are of so much less importance than the interests which wMl be promoted by the proposed works of the applicant that they do not furnish a suffi¬ cient reason for refusing the permit sought, inasmuch as full compensation must be made to such persons under the laws of Minnesota. 7. Neither the State of IMinnesota nor the United States can provide the adequate means by which money compensation can be ascertained and made to the owners 60 INTERNATIONAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. of the interests in Canada which may be injured, and it follows that individuals sus¬ taining injury would be relegated to litigation. This is a violation of the principle of law that private property shall not be taken for public use, unless provision for com¬ pensation can be made without litigation and its attendant delays and expense. 8. So far as remedial works are concerned, it is sufficient ot say that there is no juris¬ diction in the United States or in the State of Minnesota to provide for or permit the erection of the necessary remedial works in Canada. 9. That although it might be advisable to grant the permit applied for, in case the applicant shoiild acquire the powers necessary to utilize it, if objections arising from international relations did not exist, treaty provisions, international comity, and the impossibility of providing just means of assuring adequate compensation for injury to interests in Canada, or of preserving navigation unimpaired on the boundary streams, without concurrent action of both Governments concerned, lead us to the conclusion that the permit should not be granted unless the full protection of all interests not cared for by the laws of Minnesota be secured by concurrent action of the United States and Canada. RECOMMENDATIONS. 1. The commission would, therefore, recommend that the permit applied for be not granted without the concurrence of the Canadian Government. ^ 2. As questions involving the same principles and difficulties, liable to create fric¬ tion, hostile feelings, and reprisals, are liable to arise between the two countries, affecting waters on or crossing the boundary line, the commission would recommend that a treaty be entered into which will settle the rules and principles upon which all such questions may be peacefully and satisfactorily determined, as they arise. 3. The commission would recommend that any treaty which may be entered into should define the uses to which international waters may be put by either country without the necessity of adjustment in each instance, and would respectfully suggest that such uses should be declared to be: (а) Use for necessary domestic and sanitary purposes. (б) Service of locks used for navigation purposes. (c The right to navigate. 4. The commission would also respectfully suggest that the treaty should prohibit the permanent diversion of navigable streams which cross the international boundary or which form a part thereof, except upon adjustment of the rights of all parties con¬ cerned by a permanent commission, and with its consent. All of which is respectfully submitted. O. H. Ernst, Brigadier General, U. S. Army, Retired, Chairman American Section, George Clinton, Member. E. E. Haskell, Member. Geo. C. Gibbons, Chairman Canadian Section. W. F. King, Member, Louis Coste, Member. To the honorable the Secretary of War of the United States, and To the honorable the Minister of Public Works of Canada. Gj. Fort Frances, Ontario, March 17, 1904. ^ The memorial of the undersigned municipal corporations, persons, and corpora¬ tions respectfully showeth: That at the height of land in St. Louis and Lake Counties, in northern Minnesota, the waters from Birch Lake and White Iron Lake, and the streams running out thereof, and the immense watershed thereof, run northward and ultunately into Rainy Lake, and from there into Rainy River, passing into the Lake of the Woods. That the water from this source forms by computation 7 per cent of the water pass¬ ing out of Rainy Lake over Alberton Falls at Koochiching. That the water system of Rainy Lake, Rainy River, and the Lake of the Woods have long been established as a commercial highway. That from the Canadian ports of Rat Portage and Fort Frances two large and well-equipped passenger and freight INTERNATIONAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. 61 lines ply daily during the season of navigation, forming the means of water communi¬ cation between the (’anadian ports of Rat Portage, Rainy River town, Roucherville, Rarwick, Emo, Rig Forks, Little Forks, Lsherwood, Fort Frances, Rears Pass, Seine River, and Mine Center, and forming along a considerable part of such route the only vehicle of passenger ami freight communication. That the most important section of the 200 miles of navigation is the Rainy River, flowing through what is rapidly becoming a thickly populated and i)rosperous valley for some eighty odd miles, with towns rapidly building up at close intervals on its banks, dependent almost wholly on the river route for their mercantile and manufacturing interests. That the fine class of steamboats plying on this water is already in certain portions of the summer ham])ered by low water on the rapids and shoals of the river, and the pro])rietors of the regular steamboat lines have been earnestly petitioning for such improvement being made on the river as would remove such disability, a disa¬ bility that com])els the withdrawal for considerable intervals during each summer of some of the large and deeper draft steamboats. That in view of the fact that navigation is already suffering for lack of ade¬ quate water in portions of Rainy River and in portions of Rainy Lake, your memorialists are surprised and alarmed to learn that active steps are being taken by a corporation named the Minnesota Canal & Power Co., of Duluth, Minn., to obtain the authorization of the Federal Government of the United States, through the Commissioner of the General Land Office, at Washington, to construct a dam or dams and canal to divert all the waters of the Rirch Lake and White Iron Lake watershed hereinbefore referred to, into the Emgarrass River, and by it into Lake Superior, thus diverting from and robbing this long-established international water¬ way of Rainy Lake and River of the large proportion mentioned of its tributary waters. That if permission is given by the Federal Government of the United States to the project of the said Minnesota Canal & Power Co., a disastrous injustice will be * done to establish Canadian and American navigation companies that are using the water highway of Rainy Lake and River and to the manufacturing towns along the river, both on the Canadian and United States sides. And a most dangerous precedent will be established the consequences of which can hardly be estimated if any attempt to interfere with or divert from their natural flow be permitted of any portion of the waters of the great watershed lying between the Lake Superior slope and the northern slope. , 1 i £ Your memorialists would therefore most earnestly pray that the Government ot Canada should, in the interest of this important international navigation route, at once communicate with the Federal Government of the United States and take prompt and active measures to avert the disastrous consequences of permission being unwit¬ tingly given by the General Land Office at Washington to any scheme to interfere with or divert any portion of the waters tributary to the international waterways aforesaid. W. J. Keating, Mayor of Fort Frances. F. II. Warner, Clerh of Fort Frances. The Minister of Marine and Fisheries, Dominion of Canada, Whereas it has been reported that proposals have been made to divert from their present course certain lakes and streams in northern Alinnesota, which lakes and streams now form a part of the supply of waters of Rainy Lake and River and the Lake of the Woods; and Whereas the division of these waters from their natural course is apt to cause a very material lowering of the waters of these lakes and river, thus entailing heavy losses to hydraulic-power consumers, steamboat owners, and lumbermen who have invested their capital under existing conditions: Therefore Be it resolved, That this municipal council of the town of Kenora do protest most emphatically against any interference with the natural flow of these waters, and that a copy of this resolution be forwarded to the honorable secretary of state for Canada, and to the chief engineer of the Deep Waterways Commission. . . i We hereby certify the foregoing to be a true copy of resolution of the municipal council of the town of Kenora, adopted at meeting held July 4,1906. A. Carmichael, Mayor, D. II. CuNiE, Clerk. 62 INTEKNATIONAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. G3. Rainy River Navigation Co. (Ltd,), Kenora, Ontario, July 6, 1906. Dear Sir : Mr. Carmichael, our mayor, has informed me that you wished to know what effect the diverting of any water naturally feeding the Lake of the Woods would have on the business of our company. To this matter I have given a great deal of attention, and have followed the course of the water supply of Rainy River very carefully, and I am convinced that the water supply is not sufficiently great to allow of the diversion of any of the water without causing very serious loss to the transportation business. Of course 1 am not an engineer and can not give you any figures with reference to this matter, but I can tell you from long practical observation that it would be a great detriment to navigation should any water be diverted, as there is none to spare. I trust that our Government will object strenuously to any diversion of the headwaters of the Lake of the Woods. Yours, truly, Geo. A, Graham, Manager. J. Y. Sing, Esq,, Engineer in Charge Department Public Worhs, Toronto. G4. [Extract from minutes of meeting of th^ board of trade of the district of Rainy River.] Kenora Board of Trade, Kenora, Canada, July 4 , 1906. Whereas it has been learned by this board that an application has been made by the Minnesota Canal & Power Co. for privileges to divert water from the Birch Lake draining basin in the State of Minnesota to Lake Superior; and Whereas, this board is assured that such diversion of the said water will have a serious effect upon the navigation of Rainy Lake and Rainy River by rendering impossible the present means of transportation for boats and vessels now plying upon the said waters, with a resultant heavy but undeserved loss to the owners of same and a heavy blow to the trade and commerce of the district adjacent to said waters, and to the people relying upon the same, not only by means of navigation, but for power for manufacturing purposes; Now, therefore. Be it resolved. That this board do hereby protest most emphatically against the diversion of the said waters as aforesaid, and would urge that the present levels of the said waters, having been adapted to existing requirements of navigation and the creation of electrical power, should be maintained. And that a copy of this resolution be forwarded to the honorable the minister of public works and the member of this election district, J. P. Earnply, President. J. Dean, Secretary. Gg. Toronto, July 21, 1906. Gentlemen: I have the honor, in accordance with directions received from your honorable body during your recent meeting in Buffalo, to submit the following state¬ ment regarding the application of the Minnesota Power & Canal Co. to divert the flow of certain waters forming the boundary between the United States and Canada, adjoin¬ ing the State of Minnesota and Province of Ontario. I feel it would not be fair for anyone to pass censure upon several of the technical arguments that have been advanced by the Minnesota Power & Canal Co. in support of their application to divert waters from the drainage basin of Birch Lake, unless any censure so passed was based upon exact knowledge resulting from special surveys and examinations of the territory likely to be affected by the diversion of said waters. Not possessing full data, resulting from such special surveys and examinations, I have considered it more profitable for the purposes of your honorable commission to express my views in the following manner: ‘Permit me to make a few general remarks, and, first of all, let me say that deductions made from technical data and calculations designed to exhibit the very small effects INTERNATIONAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. 63 which the additions or subtractions of i)odies of water may have upon the levels of certain other bodies of water in nature are deductions which experience in actual cases has sometimes faih'd to substantiate. As is w(‘ll known, the changes our climate is manifestiiic;, the denudation of timber lands, es]H'cially in localities such as the districts surrounding: Rainy Lake, Lake of the Woods, and like influences, directly affect‘the run-off from the water¬ sheds; and the volume of water discharged from watersheds may, in time, become so changed as to materially, and disadvantageously affect the navigable pro])erties of any waterways to which such watersheds contribute their su])ply. When one ap])reciates the fact that a variation of a fraction of a foot in the depth of a waterway may be the factor which determines whether or not boats are able to navigate a certain"channel, one can hardly be content to regard, without apprehen¬ sion, the total removal of waters which are capable of rendering even small aid to navigation at times wdien that aid may be most necessary. And, while it may be argued, (hat if waters are diverted from certain channels so that the levels in those channels are detrimentally affected, then other waters, elsewhere may be reservoired so as to compensate for the effects of said diversion; nevertheless, one must consider whether or not it be wise to thus utilize stored waters to relieve an artificially created condition, when the future might po.ssibly disclose a set of natural conditions that could only be relieved through the em])loyment of these same systems of reserA'oirs. It is a sense of the important bearing of the facts set forth in these remarks that cause me to say that in my judgment the absolute diversion by the Minnesota Canal & Power Co. of the waters they desire, and which now contribute to the flow' of waters in Rainy Lake, and the Lake of the Woods, and Rainy River, is a procedure which must disadvantageously affect the navigable properties of waterways which form part of the international boundary between Canada and the United States. In su])port of this opinion I beg, respectfully, to submit the attached letters, which express the views of parties whose interests are closely allied wdth the commercial navigation of some of these boundary waters. It is apparent from these communications that parties interested in the navigation of Rainy Lake, Rainy River, and the Lake of the Mhods view wdth much apprehen¬ sion a proposal to divert waters after the manner proposed in the application of the Minnesota Canal & Power Co. There is, however, a phase of the discussion arising from the application of this company which has appeared to me worthy of more serious and full consideration than, so far as I am aware, it has already had. That phase is the possible effect which the diversion of the w^aters of Birch Lake drainage basin will have upon Basswood Lake and the water courses interconnecting it with Rainy Lake. It may be recalled that in addition to the water route from Lake Superior westward via the "Grand Portage and the international boundary there is the Canadian water route which has been traversed by many, and with troops and supplies by the Red River expedition in the early seventies. Entering this Canadian route at Thunder Bay, one proceeds either by the old canoe route of the Hudson Bay Co. or by the Dawson route to Lac des Mille Lacs, thence onward via the chain of waters to the international boundary, joining the boundary at Lac La Croix. From Lac La (hoix to Rainy Lake water transportation, comparatively good for this territorv, is met with. Now Basswood Lake, which is capable of being navigated by small steamers, also forms part of the international boundary lying to the east of Lac La Croix, and the waters of Lac La Croix are largely contributed to by the flowage through and from Basswood Lake, which lake in turn is chiefly fed from the waters which flow into it from the Birch Lake drainage basin. i t i The question therefore arises. What effect will the diversion of these Birch Lake waters have upon the levels in Basswood Lake, in Lac La Croix, and in those other waters which constitute the highway of water transportation to Rainy I.,ake, Rainy River, Lake of the Woods, and'on to" Lake Winnipeg? , r In the course of the discussions which have taken place with respect to the appli¬ cation of the Minnesota Canal & Power Co., the applicants have undertaken to show that the removal of the volume of water which they desire to divert from the waters which now contribute to the flowage along the international waterway would ha\e a comparatively small effect upon the levels of Rainy Lake and the Lake of the Woods, owing chiefly to the large areas of the watershed and great storage capacities of these bodies of water. ' While it may be true that the area of watershed, viz, 670 square miles, correspond¬ ing to the volume of water, viz, 600 cubic feet per second, proposed to be diverted 64 INTERNATIONAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. by the Minnesota Canal & Power Co., is, according to the data supplied by this com¬ pany’s engineers, approximately only 4 per cent of the total area tributary to Rainy Lake and approximately only 2.3 per cent of the total area tributary to the Lake of the Woods, yet this area of 670 square miles, corresponding to the proposed diversion, is ap])roximately 37 per cent of the total area tributary to Basswood Lake. In the absence of data giving the annual range of water levels on Lac La Croix and Basswood Lake, I am unable to indicate the amount of the changes in levels which the proposed diversion of Birch Lake waters would entail. It seems evident, however, that a diversion of the waters of the Birch Lake drainage basin to the extent just stated, of 37 per cent of the total area tributary to Basswood Lake, would undoubtedly have an immediate and great effect upon the levels in Basswood Lake; and this effect would probably be noticeable to navigators along the water courses connecting Basswood and Rainy Lakes. In other words, it might be affirmed that part of a great system of waterways, of more or less navigable waters, would be detri¬ mentally affected by diverting from their flowage the waters proposed to be diverted by the Minnesota Canal & Power Co. Again, when we consider the vast energies and sums of money which have actually been spent and which annually are being expended by nearly all countries upon their internal waterways and canals, and when we consider also the chain of waters connecting—through many portages it is true—Lake Superior with the West, it might be too hasty a conclusion for anyone to state that, for navigation purposes, these waters might not be much improved. If such improvement is ever to take place, might it not require all the water naturally shedding from the territory through which this great waterway passes? Capitalists are reported to have already proposed the canalization of the waters lying between Lake Superior and Lake Winnipeg. In the particular territory under discussion railway traffic through Fort Frances and Kenora could be better regulated if the waterways along the international boundary were kept open for the best water communications they were able to afford. Clearly, if enterprises such as the Minnesota Canal & Power Co. could obtain the right to divert waters from channels having present, and admitting of future, improved navigation, then through such precedent much of the safeguard to the interests of navigation would be removed. In conclusion I may say that I find myself unable to report with favor upon an application such as has been made by the Minnesota Canal & Power Co. until such time as it would be demonstrated that the interests of navigation in future would not be compromised by the removal of waters diverted after the manner in which the Minnesota Canal & Power Co. propose to divert part of the waters which naturally and materially contribute to the flowage in the navigable channels of the interna¬ tional waterway between Canada and the United States. In speaking of the canalization of the waters between Lake Superior and the Lake of the Woods I find, upon reference to the report of the engineers who made the survey, that there are 311 miles of navigable waters between the summit near Lake Superior and the Lake of the Woods, and by the proper arrangement of a series of stop-log dams and the construction of locks these waters can be fully utilized for transportation purposes. The navigation, as proposed, would entail very little canal work, as the cutting would not amount to more than 1 mile in the entire distance of 311 miles. In the development of this route there is, under the present natural conditions, plenty of water, if conserved judiciously, for feeders, but it would not be safe to allow a diversion of any portion of the flow in an opposite direction to that intended by nature. The total cost of opening up this route has bee n estimated at $1,500,000 by the engineers who made the survey. This waterway, if fully developed, would prove a safeguard against excessive rates being charged on any railway that might parallel it. I have the honor to be, gentlemen, yours obediently, J. G. Sing, Engineer in Charge. To the Chairman and Members op the International AVaterways Commission. Thomas Cote, Secretary^ Canadian Section, International Waterways Commission, Toronto, Canada. INTERNATIONAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION PROCiHESS REPORT. 65 APPENDIX II. Report upon the Application of the International Development (Jo. for Permission to (’onstruct Regulating Works in the Richelieu River, by THE ('OMMISSION, NOVEMBER 15, 1906. Inter.national W aterways Commission, Office of American Section, 328 Federal Building, Buffalo, N. Y., November 15, 1906. To the honorable the Secretary of W'ar of the United States and to the honor¬ able the Minister of Public W^orks of Canada: The International W aterways Commission has the honor to submit the following report on the ap])lication of the International Development Co. for permission to con¬ struct regulating works in the Richelieu River, referred to it by indorsement of the honorable Secretary of War of the United States, dated November 6, 1906. The applicants are the assignees of a charter granted by special act of the Parliament of the Dominion of Canada to the Lake Champlain & St. Lawrence Ship Canal Co. (statutes of Canada, 1898, chapter 107), which has been extended by two enactments, the last of which, in the year 1905 (statutes of Canada, chapter 116), extends the time for commencing the works of the company to the year .1908. No plans of the proposed works have been submitted, and it is understood that none have been made. The works are to be located in Canadian territory and can be built only with the authority and approval of the Canadian Goveunment. It is supposed that proper plans will in due season be submitted to that Government. The works will, however, affect the levels of Lake Champlain, and may thus seriously affect the navigation or property interests of American citizens oti that lake. The company submits a preliminary statement showing in general what is proposed to be accomplished, and the supposed effect upon Lake Champlain, with a view to ascer¬ tain what the attitude of the Luiited States Government will be toward the enter-' prise, and it is that which has been referred to us. It is ascertained from this statement that for navigation and power purposes a continuous flow of not less than 9,000 cubic feet per second is desired in the Riche¬ lieu River. The average annual flow is greater than this, being about 12,700 cubic feet per second. The low'-water discharge is about 3,800 cubic feet per second and there are periods, sometimes extending over six or eight months, when the discharge is continuously less than 9,000. It is proposed to store up in Lake Charnplain during the high-water season enough of the surplus water to supply the deficiency during the low-water season. For this purpose regulating works are to be constructed in the Richelieu River by which the level of Lake Champlain will be maintained at a minimum of 97 feet above tide at New York; and it is stated that these works will- not under any circumstances raise the high-water level of Lake Champlain above “the present high-water mark,” given as 101.5. Thus it is proposed to give the lake a range of 4.5 feet. On page 324 of the report of the Board of Engineers upon Deep \\ aterways between the Great Lakes and the Atlantic Tide Waters is a tabular statement of the monthly mean discharge of Lake Champlain for the years 1875 to 1898, inclusive. An examina¬ tion of this table shows that the period which gave the lowest discharge extended from September, 1882, to March, 1883; that which gave the next lowest extended from September, 1876, to March, 1877; that which gave the third lowest extended from September, 1883, to February, 1884; and that which gave the fourth lowest extended from August, 1894, to March, 1895. During these periods the amount flowing was less than 9,000 cubic feet per second, and in order to maintain that flow it would have been necessary to draw, from water previously stored for the purpose, the difference between 9,000 cubic feet and the amount which actually flowed. Cubic feet. % n Deficiencies for the first period. ^8, 803, 840, 000 Deficiencies for the second period. 55, 572, 480, 000 Deficiencies for the third period. 51, 278, 400, 000 Deficiencies for the fourth period. 46, 759, 680, 000 The area of Lake Champlain is 436.7 sciuare miles, or 12,174,497,280 square feel. The depth required to store the deficiency during the first of the above periods is 4.81 feet; that for the second period is 4.56 feet; for the third period it is 4.21 feet; S. Doc. 959-62-3-5 66 INTERNATIONAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. and for the fourth period it is 3.84 feet. Adding 1.25 for evaporation in eight months, these depths become 6.06, 5.81, 5.46, and 5.09, respectively. The range proposed, 4.5 feet, will therefore not be sufficient to provide 9,000 cubic feet per second through¬ out the low-water season in very dry years. A range much greater can not be admitted without inflicting damage either upon the riparian owners or the navigation interests of Lake Champlain. In determining what is a proper high-water and what a proper low-water stage in this connection it is not fair to take the extremes which the lake may have reached at long intervals in its history. A high-water stage reached once in 20 years, for example, might inflict damage to property without destroying it, while if reached every year it might cause complete destruction; likewise the obstruction to navigation caused by an extreme low-water stage would be greatly multiplied if repeated every year. The table on page 323 of the Report on Deep Waterways quoted above gives the monthly mean stages of Lake Champlain from 1875 to 1898. The highest stage there recorded is 100.13 for the month of April, 1896. Upon only two other occasions did the^ stage reach 100. To raise the level above 100 regularly every year would be to inflict an injury upon the riparian proprietors. The mean elevation of the lake for the entire period was 96.10. The lowest stage reached was 93.65. During seven years it did not fall below 95. To allow the lake to be drained below 95 every year would be to inflict injury upon the navigation interests. The limits between which the lake should be regulated are therefore 100 as a maximum and 95 as a minimum, notwithstanding that the reserve of water will not in very dry years be sufficient to supply 9,000 cubic feet per second. As Lake Champlain is wholly within the territory of the United States and the proposed works are wholly within Canadian territory, the international questions raised are of some-moment. It is, in our opinion, not desirable that either nation should obstruct the natural flow of streams crossing the international boundary to the injury of public or private rights in the other. It is manifest, therefore, that the applicants should furnish conclusive evidence that private rights in the States of New York and Vermont adjoining Lake Champlain will not be injuriously affected by the alteration of the lake level as proposed, and that as the Secretary of War of the United States has control of the interests of navigation on Lake Champlain,,the said work should not be undertaken without his permission, and should be operated under such regulations as he may direct with a view to the maintenance of the level of the said lake as the interests of navigation thereon may require. It would be possible to plan works adapted to the conditions, and in our opinion such works should be permitted, provided they do not interfere with private interests in the United States and meet with the approval of the Secretary of War as suggested. We respectfully submit that in any treaty to be had between the two nations in relation to the use of international waters the principles above suggested should have consideration. We would further suggest that the applicant’s Canadian act of incor¬ poration should be amended so as to provide that the maintenance of the works sought to be erected shall be conditional at all times upon compliance with all regulations imposed by the Secretary of War of the United States of America from time to time for the preservation of the levels of Lake Champlain. All of which is respectfully submitted. O. II. Ernst, Brigadier General, United States Army, Retired, Chairman, American Section. George Clinton, Member. E. E. Haskell, Member. Geo. C. Gibbons, Chairman, Canadian Section. W. F. King, Member. Louis Coste, Member. INTERNATIONAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION PROCURESS REPORT. 67 APPENDIX 1. Report upon the (.'hicago Drainage ('anal, by the Commission, January 4, 1907. International Waterways Commission, Toronto, Ontario, January 4, 1907. The honorable Secretary op’ War of the United States and the honorable Minis¬ ter OF Public Works of Canada: The International Waterways Commission has the honor to submit the following report upon the Chicago Drainage ('anal: 1. The headwaters of the Illinois River, an important tributary of the Mississippi, approach within 10 miles of Lake Michigan near its southerly end, where stands Chicago. The river, called here the Des Plaines, is separated from the lake by a low and narrow divide running nearly north and south. In the divide are two depressions, about 8 miles apart, in which the height is only about 10 feet above the surface of the lake. The area eastward of the divide is drained by two streams, the Chicago and the Calumet Rivers, which em})ty into Lake Michigan. The city of Chicago was originally built on the Chicago River and, although it is now spreading into the Calumet region, it was for many years drained exclusively by the Chicago River, and its princi])al parts are now so drained. This river constitutes the main sewer of (.'hicago. The lake furnishes the city’s water supply. To prevent the pollution of the water suy)})ly by sewage has always been the most iiuportant municipal problem with which Chicago has had to deal. Its solution has from a very ( early day been found in diverting a part of the river’s flow into the valley of the Des Plaines through the most northerly of the two depressions mentioned above. The Illinois and Michigan Canal, which was opened to navigation in 1848, was at once utilized for this pur})ose, and all subsequent improvements consisted in efforts to force more sewage through that canal until, in 1889, it was decided to build a new and greatly enlarged channel which should completely divert the ('hicago Ri^ er from Lake Michigan and draw from that lake a body of pure water large enough to make the sewage inoffensive to the communities by whose doors it must pass. 2. Before embarking upon this work the city in 1886 appointed a commission of three engineers “to consider and report on any and all things which relate to the matter of water supjdy and drainage of the city of Chicago.” In January, 1887, the commission submitted a report to the mayor and city council of Chicago (copy appended marked U), which it styled a preliminary report. It intended to submit an additional or final report in which the data upon which its conclusions were based should be given in greater detail, but such additional report was never submitted. After remarking that “almost every conceivable way of dealing with these questions had been suggested and in some form applied during the past thirty years, ” the comm ission stated that ‘ ‘among the possible methods of getting rid of the Chicago sewage there are but three that have been deemed worthy of consideration, namely, a discharge into Lake Michigan, a disposal upon land, and a discharge into the main river.” It con¬ sidered the first method too expensive, involving as it does a wide separation between the outlets of the sewers and the intakes of the water supply. It pronounced the second inapplicable to the metropolitan district as a whole, under the topographical conditions existing, but thought that it might be employed for the extreme northern and southern parts, the latter including the Calumet region. It recommended the third method. It was uncertain as to the quantity of water required to dilute the sewage so as to make it inoffensive, but in order to prepare an estimate of cost it was compelled to assume some approximate size of channel, and it did assume a size large enough to discharge 600,000 cubic feet per minute, that being the estimated amount of water falling u])on the area tributary to the canal during storms and not otherwise disposed of. It includes the drainage basins of the upper Des Plaines and of the Chicago Rivers, but not that of the Calumet River. With a channel of less dimensions in times of storms and floods the Chicago River would not be fully diverted into the Des Plaines, but would back up into Lake Michigan. The result was a supply of 24,000 cubic feet per minute for each 100,000 people in a population of 2,500,000, the population which the commission thought it desirable to provide for, and the opinion was expressed that this would equal the maximum requirements. 3. Following this report the Illinois Legislature passed an act approvedMay 29, 188J, ‘ ‘to create a sanitary district and to remove obstructions in the Des Plaines and Illinois Rivers,” of which the twenty-third and twenty-fourth paragraphs read as follows, viz: ‘ ‘Paragraiih 23. If any channel is constructed under the provisions hereof by ireans of which any of the waters of Lake Michigan shall be caused to pass into the Des Plaines or Illinois Rivers, such channel shall be constructed of sufficient size and capacity to produce and maintain at all times a continuous flow of not less than 68 INTERNATIONAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. 300,000 cubic feet of water per minute, and to be of a depth of not less than 14 feet, and a current not exceeding 3 miles per hour, and if any portion of any such channel shall be cut through a territory with a rocky stratum where such rocky stratum is above a grade sufficient to produce a depth of water from Lake Michigan of not less than 18 feet, such portion of said channel shall have double the flowing capacity above provided for, and a width of not less than 160 feet at the bottom capable of producing a depth of not less than 18 feet of water. If the population of the district draining into such channel shall at any time exceed 1,500,000, such channel shall be made and kept of such size and in such condition that it will pro¬ duce and maintain at all times a continuous flow of not less than 20,000 cubic feet of water per minute for each 100,000 of the population of such district, at a current of not more than 3 miles per hour, and if at any time the General Government shall improve the Des Plaines or Illinois Rivers, so that the same shall be capable of receiving a flow of 600,000 cubic feet of water per minute, or more, from said channel, and shall provide for the payment of all damages which any extra flow above 300,000 cubic feet of water per minute from such channel may cause to private prop¬ erty so as to save harmless the said district from all liability therefrom, then such sanitary district shall, within one year thereafter, enlarge the entire channel leading into said Des Plaines or Illinois Rivers from said district to a sufficient size and capacity to produce and maintain a continuous flow throughout the same of not less than 600,000 cubic feet of water per minute, with a current of not more than 3 miles per hour, and such channel shall be constructed upon such grade as to be capable of producing a depth of water of not less than 18 feet throughout said channel, and shall have a width of not less than 160 feet at the bottom. In case a channel is con¬ structed in the Des Plaines River, as contemplated in this section, it shall be carried down the slope between Lockport and Joliet to the pool, commonly known as the upper basin, of sufficient width and depth to carry off the water the channel shall bring down from above. The district constructing a channel to carry water from Lake Michigan of any amount authorized by this act may correct, modify, and remove obstructions in the Des Plaines and Illinois Rivers wherever it shall be necessary so to do to prevent overflow or damage along said rivers, and shall remove the dams at Henry and Copperas Creek, in the Illinois River, before any water shall be turned into the said channel. And the canal commissioners, if they shall find at any time that an additional supply cf water has been added to either of said rivers by hny drainage district or districts, to maintain a depth of not less than 6 feet from any dam owned by the State to and into the first lock of the Illinois and Michigan Canal at La Salle, without the aid of any such dam, at low water, then it shall be the duty of said canal commissioners to cause such dam or dams to be removed. This act shall not be construed to authorize the injury or destruction of existing water-power rights. “Paragraph 24. M^hen such channel shall be Completed, and the water turned therein, to the amount of 300,000 cubic feet of water per minute, the same is hereby declared a navigable stream, and whenever the General Government shall improve the Des Plaines and Illinois Rivers for navigation, to connect with this channel, said General Goyernment shall have full control over the same for navigation purposes, but not to interfere with its control for sanitary or drainage purposes.” By this act a flow of not less than 20,000 cubic feet per minute is required for each 100,000 inhabitants and provision is made for a population of 3,000,000. The evi¬ dence before the legislative committee which framed the bill as to the quantity required was contradictory. The amount fixed for dilution of the sewage was a mini¬ mum. (See Appendix I 2 .) 4. Under this act the Sanitary District of Chicago was organized, embracing all of the city north of Eighty-seventh Street and some 43 square miles of Cook County outside of the city limits. The total area of the district was 185 square miles, and did not include the Calumet region nor the north shore. The trustees held their first meeting January 18, 1890. The Chicago Drainage Canal was then constructed, water being turned into it for the first time in January, 1900. It was not then, and has not since been, completed to its full capacity as designed. In places where the excavation was in rock the full dimensions of the prism were taken out, but in earth a considerable volume was left to be removed by the easy method of dredging hereafter. When fully completed it was designed to have a capacity of 600,000 cubic feet per minute, or 10,000 cubic feet per seconcl, flowing at a velocity of 1.25 miles per hour in earth and 1.9 miles per hour in rock. 5. The canal is 28.05 miles in length. For a distance of 7.8 miles from its junction with the Chicago River at Robey Street its dimensions are 110 feet width at bottom, side slopes 1 on 2, depth of water 22 feet at low stage of Lake Michigan, with a grade of 1 in 40,000, the material being earth. This section is eventually to have a width of 200 feet at bottom. INTERNATIONAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. 69 6. For a farther distance of 5.3 miles, although the material is principally earth, *: the dimensions are 202 feet width at bottom, side slopes 1 on 2, minimum depth of I water 22 feet, with a grade of 1 in 40,000. This section is completed, i 7. For the remaining 15.95 miles the canal is excavated wliolly or partially in rock. Wliere the natural rock does not come to the surface walls of masonry have been built upon the rock surface, thus artificially carrying it to a height 5 feet above datum. • The dimensions here are 160 feet width at bottom, 162 feet width at top, minimum depth of'water 22 feet, with a grade of 1 in 20,000. This section also is completed. 8. The controlling works are situated near the town of Lockport at the western ' end of the canal. They consist of a bear-trap dam 160 feet wide, with a vertical play of 17 feet, and of seven sluice gates of the Stoney type, each 30 feet wide and having a vertical play of 20 feet. These works provide a very efficient means of controlling the flow of water through the canal. 9. The project of the sanitary district for the disposal of sewage by the canal ' when completed is briefly as follows; All sewers will discharge into the Chicago River, either directly or through intercepting sewers. From the mouth in Lake f Michigan to the point where the North and South Branches unite the river will flow 8,000 cubic feet per second, less such quantity as may be pumped into the upper por- ' tion of the North Branch, which under the original project was 200 cubic feet per second admitted through a conduit at PTillerton Avenue. From this point the com¬ bined flow will be 8,000 cubic feet to the point where the South P'ork enters the South Branch, where it will be increased to 10,000 cubic feet by water pumped from Lake ' Michigan at Thirty-ninth Street and flowing through a large conduit in Thirty-ninth Street to the South Fork. The volume which will finally enter the canal under this i project will be 10,000 cubic feet per second. ] 10. The channel of the Chicago River is not large enough to transmit that volume from the lake to the canal except at velocities which are an obstruction to navigation. J The amount which the Secretary of War has thus far permitted the sanitary district to pass through the river is 4,167 cubic feet per second. In order to obtain authority for a larger amount the trustees have undertaken to enlarge the channel of the river and have accomplished a large amount of work in that direction. 11. By act of the Illinois Legislature in 1903 the sanitary district was enlarged by annexing thereto the north shore district, containing 78.6 square miles, and the Calu¬ met district, containing 94.48 square miles. The total area of the sanitary district is therefore now 358.08 square miles. The same legislature authorized the develop¬ ment of the water power created by the diversion. ^ • r 12. The plans for the north shore region involve two additional conduits from the lake to the North Branch of the Chicago River, one at Lawrence Avenue, into which 583 cubic feet per second, and one at Wilmette, into which 1,000 cubic feet per second, are to be pumped. As this water is to form a part of the 10,000 cubic feet originally to be taken out through that river, it does not add to the amount of water to be taken from Lake Michigan. 13. The plans for the Calumet region involve a treatment of the Calumet River similar to that of the Chicago River. The river is to be diverted into the Des Plaines Valley. For this purpose a new channel is to be cut through the southerly depres- ’ sion in the divide, and to join the present drainage canal at Sag, about 11 miles from the controlling works at Lockport. From Sag to Lockport the drainage^ canal must carry the flow from the Calumet River in addition to that from the Chicago River. * It was designed to accommodate the latter river alone, or 10,000 cubic feet })er second, [ but improved methods of excavation, particularly channeling in rock, gave it a greater capacity than was computed; and the hydraulic formulae with which its dimensions were figured, being adapted to smaller streams, gave results which proved to be too large. It is fouiKrthat the portion completed in rock, which includes the reach from Sag to Lockport, will carrv an amount stated by the chief engineer to be 14,000 cubic feet per second. The difference, 4,000 cubic feet per second, is the amount which it is proposed to divert from the Calumet River. For this purpose it is proposed to excavate a channel having in earth a bottom width of 72 feet, with side slopes 3 on 5, and in rock a bottom width of 90 feet with vertical sides, the depth iii both cases to be 25 feet. , . i .uu 14. Work in the territory annexed in 1903 has been limited to surveys, and the preparation of plans, and the expenditures in that territory have been small. The * amount expended upon the drainage canal and accessory works, including the above, . to December 31, 1905, is .$40,873,629.71; in addition to which $1,556,226.56 has been ^ expended for the development of water power and .$7,290,101.27 has been paid out for interest. For a financial statement more in detail, see Appendix I3, 15. Although the primary object of the Chicago Drainage Canal was the discharge *• of Chicago sewage its function as a channel for navigation was kept in view from the 70 INTERNATIONAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. m beginning. All of the bridges over it are drawbridges "with ample openings. A provision of this kind, as well as the care exercised to make the sewage inoffensive by liberal dilution, was necessary to conciliate the interests in the valley of the Des Plaines and Illinois Rivers, which would otherwise be adversely affected. It can hardly be doubted that the canal will eventually form a part of an improved waterway between the Great Lakes and the Mississippi River, though its full depth will probably not be required for that purpose. Congress has not adopted any scheme for this improvement, but by its direction a survey was made, and plans with estimates for a waterway 14 feet deep were submitted, by a board of engineers in a report dated August 26, 1905. The board found that for a distance of about 100 miles from Chicago the improvement must be with locks and dams, and as the quantity of w^ater required would be merely that needed for the service of locks and other incidentals, the extent of the improvement or depth which could be obtained in that part of the route was without limit so far as it depended upon the amount of water available. For the remaining distance, about 223 miles, the improvement would be an enlargement of the open channel and the degree to which it was practicable was entirely dependent upon the quantity of water flowing. The board assumed that the Chicago Drainage Canal would eventually be permitted to take 10,000 cubic feet per second from Lake Michigan, and it expressed the opinion that with that volume added to the natural low-water discharge of the Illinois River a depth of 14 feet in the open channel could be maintained; also that if a much greater depth was to be secured a much larger volume of water must be taken from Lake Michigan. 16. In the neighborhood of Lockport the natural level of the ground falls aw’ay rapidly and excellent facilities are found for the development of water power. Under the^ kState legislation of 1903 the sanitary district is now engaged in utilizing this incidental advantage of the drainage canal. The plans provide for an extension of the canal 10,700 feet between concrete walls and earth and rock embankments to the site selected for the power house and for the excavation of a tail race 6,800 feet long, 160 feet wide, and 22 feet deep. If the maximum quantity of water which the sanitary district now claims to be necessary for sanitary purposes—14,000 feet per second—be utilized it will be possible to dpelop about 40,000 electrical horse¬ power under a head of 34 feet. With 10,000 cubic feet per second about 28,000 horse¬ power can be developed. A power house is being erected which will accommodate 8 turbines, each capable of generating 5,000 horsepower. 17. The sanitary district has acquired land on both sides of the canal throughout its length, the width of the strips varying from 200 to 800 feet. This land is offered to manufacturers at moderate prices, and it seems probable that they will in the course of time be attracted thereto, particularly after arrangements for furnishing them with cheap power from Lockport are completed. 18. The diversion of large bodies of water from Lake Michigan for supplying the drainage canal has not been authorized by Congress. The plans of the sanitary district, except those for the enlargement of the Chicago River, have not been sub¬ mitted to any Federal authority for approval. It was only after the opening of the canal that application was made to the Secretary of War for permission to divert the quantity of water required by the State law. The secretary granted permission for such quantity as would pass through Chicago River without detriment to naviga¬ tion, a quantity considerably less than that required by the State law\ After experi¬ menting with various amounts it was fixed at 250,000 cubic feet per minute, or 4,167 cubic feet per second, and that is the amount now authorized. It is “subject to such modification as, in the opinion of the Secretary of War, the public interests may from time to tune require. ” Copies of all the permits granted by the Secretary of War in this connection will be found in Appendix I 4 . 19. In the expenditure of $40,000,000 for the drainage canal the people of Chicago,, with its population of 2 , 000 , 000 , incurred a burden equivalent to that due to an expenditure of $1,600,000,000 by the United States, with its population of 80,000,000— that is, enough to build eight or more Panama canals. It w'as a very serious effort and has commanded the admiration and sympathy of all observers. The diversion of 10,000 cubic feet per second from Lake Michigan affects other interests adversely, but these interests have withheld their opposition, seeming to believe that some such amount was necessary, and apparently willing to contribute their share to pro¬ tect the lives and health of the peo])le of a great city. The plans calling for that amount have been under public discussion for some years. Although withholding fornial approval, the Federal authorities have taken no steps to prevent their exe¬ cution. Congress has called for a plan and estimates for an improvement of the waterways connecting with it, the scope of which is fixed by that amount. There appears to be a tacit general agreement that Chicago needs or will need about 10,000 cubic feet of water per second for sanitary purposes and that the city should have it without further question. I i INTERNATIONAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. 71 20. It was not generally known until after the publication in March last of the t report of the American section of this commission upon Niagara Falls that an amount i' greater than 10,000 cubic feet per second would be asked for. In that report, subse- [; quently concurred in by the Canadian section, it was recommended that the diversion r of 10,000 cubic feet be allowed. The preservation of Niagara Falls alone was con¬ sidered, and that in the light of the tacit agreement above described. It was sup¬ posed at the time that this was all that Chicago needed, but the recommendation gave offense to the officials of the sanitary district, and the further demand then came out in the form of appeals to the committees of Congress and to the Secretary of State. ' It is necessary now to take up the question anew, and, after cons^ering it in all its bearings, to reach some conclusion as to whether there should be a lirnit to the amount of water’to be diverted at Chicago, and, if so, as to what that limit is. 21. That the abstraction of water from Lake Michigan has a tendency to lower the level of that lake and of all the waters to which it is tributary is self-evident; but the ■ exact effect of abstracting a given amount can be ascertained only from prolonged observation of the natural outlets under the varying conditions to which they are subjected during a series of years. An elaborate investigation of this subject was made under the office of the United States Lake Survey in Detroit, the results of which were 1 published in the annual reports of the Chief of Engineers for 1900, page 5401; for 1902, r pages 2779 and 2825; and for 1904, page 4120. Further observations are needed to be made when the difference of level between Lake Erie and Lake Huron is greater or less than when the existing observations were made, but the results obtained from the ' latter are believed to be reliable within one-tenth of a foot. The amounts by which the mean level, as derived from observations of the last 46 years, of the various waters i will be lowered by a discharge of 10,000 and also by 14,000 cubic feet per second are ' given in the following table: Location. Water level lowered by diversion at Chi¬ cago of— 10,000 cubic feet per second. 14,000 cubic feet per second. Foot . 0.52 .45 .45 .35 .40 Foot . 0.70 .64 .64 .49 .56 From this table it appears that all the waters, including Lakes Michigan and Huron, Lake St. Clair, Lake Erie, Lake Ontario, and the St. Lawrence River, besides the important connecting channels, the Detroit and St. Clair Rivers, will be lowered by ’ amounts varying from 4^ to 6^ inches for 10,000 cubic feet and from 6 to 8^ inches for 14 000 cubic feet per second. The length of time required to produce this effect is about 5 years; about half of it will be produced at the end of 18 months. The above ■ figures give the effect at average level; they are much more considerable during low- water periods. • , i u t 22. Variations in the level of the lakes’ surface, due to winds and to change oi barometric pressure, are frequent and irregular and at times violent, \ariations of more than 6 inches are very common, often occurring hourly for many hours in suc- * cession, while variations of 2 or 3 feet within an hour are not uncommon. Besides these irregular variations there is a regular annual variation due to difference in raiii- , fall, evaporation, and run-off, the water level being highest in midsummer and lowest in midwinter. The levels are affected also by the greater or less severity of the winter and the consequent greater or less decrease in the discharging capacity of the outlets by ice. In order to study the annual oscillations it is necessary to eliminate the irregular oscillations, and that is accomplished by using the average levels for a month. Using the monthlv mean levels it is found that the regular fluctuation in Lake Huron- * Michigan usually does not exceed 2 feet in any one year, but in a long series of years there is a great difference in the height to which high water will rise. highest hi"h water (monthly mean) recorded for that lake was in June, 1886, and the lowest high water in June, 1896, the difference between the two being over 3^ feet. The first ‘ is what navigators of the Great Lakes call a high-water year and the second a low-water year. 72 INTEKNATIONAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION PEOGEESS EEPOET. 23. It is evident that the average level of the lake may be lowered considerably without the change becoming immediately apparent, and that fact has been used as an argument to prove that the lowering caused by the Chicago Drainage Canal is of no consequence to those interested in navigation. Since they can not see it they will not know it and will not feel it. The argument is fallacious. It is true that they can not see it immediately, but they will soon feel it and will know it through the most costly ineans of acquiring knowledge—the injury to their material interests. The oscilla¬ tions will remain the same as before, but low water will fall lower and high water will rise less high. The average draft of vessels must be diminished by the amount that the average level is lowered unless the depth be restored by remedial works. 24. The most important lake trafhc is now carried on in large freight carriers which are loaded down to the greatest draft that can be carried into the harbors or through the channels between the lakes. With the depth now available they are usually loaded to a draft of about 19 feet, but careful watch is kept on the stage of the waterways and advantage is taken of any temporary increase of stage to load the vessels deeper. In the modern vessel each inch of increased draft adds about 50 tons to the carrying capacity. To lower the water surface 6 inches is to reduce the capacity of the vessel about 300 tons. If the freight rate on iron ore be taken at 55 cents per ton, exclusive of the cost of loading and unloading, and the number of trips during the season at 22, there appears a loss of over $3,600 for the season for each vessel. The number of ves¬ sels navigating the Great Lakes which draw 19 feet or more is 417, and their tonnage is 1,541,414 tons, which is about three-quarters of the total tonnage of the Great Lakes. It is a conservative estimate that the loss to the navigation interests resulting from a reduction of 6 inches in the depth of water is $1,500,000 per annum, which, capitalized at 4 per cent, amounts to a loss of $37,500,000. With a greater reduction of depth the resulting loss would be proportionately greater. The number of deep-draft vessels and the share of lake traffic which they carry is increasing each year, while the lake traffic itself is increasing with marvelous rapidity. The total number of tons of freight which passed through Detroit River in 1905 was about 58,000,000, valued at about $615,000,000. The records for the year 1906, so far as they are made up, indicate that the number of tons which passed through the Detroit River in 1906 exceeded 65,000,- 000, valued at $690,000,000. The loss wdll be even greater in the future than it is now It is quite certain that the loss will not pass unnoticed, and that the Governments will be compelled to restore the depth either by additional excavations or by regulating works. 25. Careful estimates have been made of the cost of deepening the channels between the lakes 1 foot. To deepen the Detroit River is estimated to cost $4,115,430. In Lake St. Clair the full depth of the lake is now utilized, and any lowering of its surface involves the excavation of an artificial channel entirely across the lake, a distance of 18 miles, of which it has been necessary heretofore to artificially deepen only one-third. To deepen the channel here and at certain shoal places in St. Clair River and at the foot of Lake Huron is estimated to cost $1,080,720. It results in replacing open lake navigation by canal navigation for a distance of 12 miles in Lake St. Clair, a decided disadvantage. 26. The data are not at hand for an accurate estimate of the cost of restoring the depths in the harbors of the Great Lakes, but an approximation may be reached from a consideration of the cost of improvements heretofore made. The depth to be gained being small, the cost will not vary largely, whether that gciin be a few inches more or less. The United States has improved 35 harbors on Lakes Michigan, Huron, and Erie, and has expended thereon about $20,000,090, of which about one-quarter was for maintenance. The average increase of depth is 10 feet and the cost per foot of increase was therefore about $1,500,000, but as the cost of a small increase would be much greater per foot than an increase of 10 feet, and as several harbors on Lake Ontario are to be added, the cost per foot in this case would probably be not less than $2,000,000 for harbors in the United States. The Canadian Government has improved over 50 harbors on Georgian Bay, Lakes Huron, St. Clair, Erie, and Ontario. A large amount, say $3,000,000, must be added for increasing the depth of these harbors. 27. The depth in the Welland Canal and in the six canals employed to overcome rapids in the St. Lawrence River is now 14 feet, of which everv inch is needed. At the head of the Cornwall aanxl in the St. Lawrence River the abstraction of 14,000 cubic feet of water per second at Chicago will lower the surface about 6f inches at mean level and much more at low water. To restore the depth in these canals involves the reconstruction of all the end locks and deepening the approaches thereto and is estimated to cost $2,500,000. 28. The total cost of restoring the depth in the harbors of the Great Lakes and the channels between the lakes is therefore roughlv $10,000,000, and of restoring it in the Welland and St. Lawrence Canals is $2,500,000 additional, or $12,500,000 in all. “ INTERNATIONAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. 73 29. The shores of the Great Lakes are very far from being fully developed, and it is highly probable that many harbors not now in existence remain to be created, or if in ! existence remain to be im])roved. The lowering of the lakes’ surface increase the e allowed to dis¬ charge directly into the river. The water supply would have to be brought from Grosse Point in large conduits to the several pumping stations scattered over the city and its present suburbs. The circulation of the water in the Chicago River and branches would have to be main¬ tained practically as it is at present, because the removal merely of the dry-weather flow of sewage would not altogether preAmnt its pollution. DISPOSAL OP LAND, We shall not at this time enter into a general discussion of the principles underlying land purification of sewage or make historical references showing the succe.ss or ill success of the method as practiced elsewhere. We will simply state that with good management under ordinarily favorable conditions a disposal on land proves satis¬ factory, so far as the purifications of the sewage is concerned, and that with proper conditions in the way of good markets and a favorable soil and climate sewage farms can be operated on a large scale after the sewage is delivered upon the same without financial loss. In speaking of a sewage farm of the magnitude required for the metropolitan area of Chicago, it is not understood as being land devoted primarily to the raising of crops, using the sewage only^ when and where it would most promote the growth of vegetation. The primary^ object would be the purification of the sewage on an area of land as small as could serve the purpose. Technically speaking, the seAvage disposal would be by means of intermittent filtration rather than irrigation. To cany out such a scheme for Chicago involves the following: (1) The acquirement of sufficient land suitable for the purpose, (2) A comprehensiA^e sy'^stem of intercepting and collecting seAvers carrying the sewage to the farm. (3) " Pumping works of a capacity to handle all the dry-weather flow of sewage and a certain proportion of storm water. (4) A thorough underdrainage, leveling, and preparing of beds for the filtration areas. I , INTERNATIONAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. 83 (5) A system of underground conduits and surface carriers for distributing the sewage over the ground and a system of open ditches for removing tlie ])uri(ied water to the I nearest water courses. , (fi) Ihiildings, roads, and a complete farming outfit. ! ’ (7) An organization for properly distributing the sewage, for carrying on the farming operations, for conducting the business of dis])osing of the crops in the best market. In making estimates for the size of intercepting sewers, conduits, pumps, and area of land required we have used as a basis a population of 2,500,000 peopl(\ Avith an average ! dry-weather sewage discharge of 150 gallons, or 20 cubic feet, per head daily, and made r provision for storm water equivalent to one-lifth of an inch in 24 hours over all portions of the district now drained or likely to be drained l)y a combined system of sewers, allowing surplus water to escape into the rivers and lakes. The dry-weather flow of sewage would therefore be 50,000,000 cubic feet per day, and I the maximum flow of storm water 05,000,000 cubic feet per day, making a total maxi- [. mum discharge of 115,000,000 cubic feet. I From an examination of rainfall tables we conclude that the annual amount of storm [| water that would be carried off by such an intercepting system would range from 9 to 12 1 inches, an average of which in round numbers may be taken at 40,000 cubic feet per acre per annum over the area drained by a combined system of sewers. It is practi- , cable, however, to exclude the storm water from the sewers over a large portion of the future cdty by adoiiting the separate system of sewerage. The area north of the town of Jefferson and of the middle of Lakeview may be treated to advantage in this way, and . also a large portion of Hyde Park, Lake Calumet, and other adjoining towns. Assuming that the area which does not allow the storm water to be entirely excluded . is 140 square miles, the average daily amount becomes 10,000,000 cubic feet, which 1 gives, when added to the sewage. 60,000,000 cubic feet, or 24 cubic feet per head of population per day to be provided for on the farm. As the amount of land required to purify sewage can only be determined by experi- ' ence, and as this has been very limited in our own country, we are forced to rely maiidy i upon that of Europe. Without going into details at present, we will simply state that I t a fair consensus of this experience justifies us in the conclusion that from 10,000 to 15.000 acres of land would be required to dispose of the sewage from the entire metro- j politan area. ! The only available territory for sewage filtration in the neighborhood of Chicago con- * sists of two sandy ridges in the town of Thornton, extending across the State line into Indiana, and in a sandj'^ ridge crossing the town of Niles. The soil is quite favorable, but the character of the surface is such that the necessary pre})aration to make it suit¬ able for filtration beds would be comparatively expensive. An enormous cost is, how¬ ever. represented by the fact that the sewage would have to be collected by large inter¬ cepting sewers, lifted altogether some 90 feet, and carried about 20 miles before reach¬ ing the farms. We therefore consider such a project entirely impracticable. The land treatment can only be seriously thought of in connection with the sewage disposal from the smaller areas mentioned above and comprising the extreme northern and southern parts of the future metropolis. The drainage of parts of Evanston, Lake- view, and Niles might be taken to the sandy ground in the latter towm, and that of the Calumet region to the sandy ridges in Thornton, should this method l.)e found most advantageous when compared with others. The preliminary investigation made for this purpose consisted in an examination of I the grounds, in the projection of a farm, and in an estimate of the cost of preparing the same and delivering the sewage to it by intercepting sewers and conduits. DISCHARGE OF THE SEWAGE INTO THE DES PLAINES RIVER. A third solution of the drainage problem is rendered practicable by the fact that the 1 divide between Lake Michigan and the ^lississijjpi Valley lies about 10 miles west of Chicago, with so slight an elevation that it is not a difficult matter to carry the sewage f from the city westward into the Des Plaines River, and thence into the Mississippi , River. The method of disposal, as previously explained, is in fact mainly the present one, most of the sewage now being carried across the divide l)y the Illinois and ^lichi- gan Canal. There are two low depressions between the future metropolis and the Des Plaines River—the Mud Lake Valley, ivith the present canal, and the Sag Valley, west of Lake Calumet. Neither is more than 10 feet above the lake, nor do they present any engi¬ neering difficulties for canal construction. It is therefore quite feasible to carry all the . drainage from the territory ultimately to be occupied by the metropolis, extending from Lake Calumet to Evanston, into the MissLsip])i Valley through these depressions, avoiding thereby all possible lake pollution and permitting the supply of water to be drawn from any number of convenient points in front of the city. 84 INTEENATIONAL AVATERWAYS COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. The possibility of this solution was recognized as early as 185(3 by Mr. E. S. Ches- brough, and the iiret stej) toward its adoption was taken, as already mentioned, by turn¬ ing the sew^age into the Illinois and Michigan Canal. Not until quite recently, how¬ ever, has it become practicable to consider the construction of a special waterway for sewage removal, because when the population was smaller the expense of the under¬ taking was too great. The sanitary requirements demand a flow of water large enough to dilute the sewage sufficiently to make it inoffensive along the river at all times. Beyond this, any increase in the size of the channel to provide for the storm water which naturally enters it should be kept at a minimum. A glance at the map and an examination of the ground show the possibility of diverting the greater part of the storm water from the metropolitan district without serious difficulty. Both branches of the Calumet Eiver can be diverted west of the Indiana State line into Wolf Lake, and thence into Lake Michigan. The Des Plaines River can have its flood waters diverted into the North Branch near the north line of the town of Jefferson, and the combined waters can be led from Bowmanville directly into the lake. Salt Creek, a branch of the Des Plaines River, can readily lie turned southwardly near Western Springs, through a water course known as Flag Creek, at one time evidently its old bed, discharging into the Des Plaines opposite Sag, and thus reducing the necessary storm-water capacity in the new channel between Sag and Summit. In order to determine the jirobable quantity of flood water which can thus be excluded, it w'as necessary to ascertain the maximum flood discharges from all the watersheds in question. This requiiement called for a gauging of Des Plaines, North Branch, and Calumet Rivers; a gauging of the rainfall, which is a measure of the .stream flow; a survey of the watersheds; and an examination of the river channels. It was also necessary to make a reconnoissnace of all possible lines for diverting the Des Plaines, North Branch, and Calumet Lavers, and Salt Creek, and a survey of those which were most important. The results indicate that each one of these diversions is both practical and econom¬ ical. By adopting the “separate system” of sewerage for the territory lying north of the proposed Bowmanville channel, the surface drainage from this territory can be safely turned into the lake. A second branch of the investigation extends to the elements governing the proper size of the waterway from which a large proportion of the storm water has been excluded. The area still draining into it will consist largely of paved streets and roofs, allowing of no absorption and shedding the water rapidly. It requnes a careful con¬ sideration to determine the maximum quantity of w^ater that may enter the proposed channel, and for which an ample allow^ance must be made to prevent a back flow of the polluted w^ater to the lake. The proper degree of sewage pollution in the new channel demanded a careful inves¬ tigation. MRen sew^age is mingled with a sufficiently large ciuantity of w^ater it not only becomes inoffensive, but readily finds the oxygen which gradually purifies it. When the surface is covered wdth ice a gieater dilution is necessary for this purpose than at other times when there is a constant replenishment of oxygen from the air. The proposed w^aterway should, of course, provide immunity from offense at all times. The information upon wdiich definitely to decide this question will be given in the final report, as the data have not yet been all collected, owing to the necessity of making actual tests of the oxidization of the canal water under the ice, wffiich is being done for the use of the commission by Dr. J. 11. Rauch, secretary of the State board of health. The summer conditions are presented in his late report on the water supply and sewage disposal of Chicago. The result of these analyses will be compared with those of other streams that are also polluted with sew^age, in order to show the rate of oxidization with varying degrees of dilution and aeration. For the purpose of estimating the cost of the water channel we have assumed 3,600 square feet for the cross section and a velocity of the water 3 feet per second, or 2 miles per hour. This gives a discharge of 600,000 cubic feet of water per minute, or 24,000 cubic feet for each 100,000 persons, which we believe equal to the maximum require¬ ments of a population of 2,500,000 people. A third branch of the inquiry covers the selection of routes for the proposed canals. Between Chicago and Summit three lines are practicable—one followmg the West Fork and Ogden ditch, and another extending from the southwestern end of the South Fork in a westerly direction to the Ogden ditch, and thence to Summit, and a third being an enlargement of the present canal. We are of the opinion that eventually both the first and second of these lines should be adopted, but that the second one should be built first in order to secure cii’culation in the South Fork. From Summit westward the bed of the river and the present canal were the only lines to be con¬ sidered. The best location has not yet been finally determined. j INTERNATIONAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. 85 For the drainage of the Calumet region a sim])le inspection shows that a canal should start from the river at the southern })oint of Blue Island and extend almost directly westward to the Des Plaines Valley at Sag. , , , , e x A fourth branch of the inquiry relates to the study of such data as have reference to securing a proper circulation for the waterways within the city. To throw light upon this iioint the variations of the lake level have been recorded since last spring by means of an automatic gauge, indicating an almost continual fluc¬ tuation averaging several inches, and recurring at periods of about 20 niinutes. During a low pressure of the atmosphere the amplitude of these oscillations increases, and not infrequently reaches several feet. The accompanying diagram ^ shows the level of the lake on xAugust 16, 1880, at a time when an area of low barometer Passed over it. From 6.40 a. m. to 6.55 a. m.—that is, in 15 minutes—the water fell 2 feet 10 A rising level causes an inflow to the river and drives the water of the latter into the slips, where it deposits a portion of its suspended sewage matter and beconies foul. A falling level reverses the flow, and the slips empty their foul watei into the iivei and lake. During heavy fluctuations of the latter, such as the one referred to above, it has been traced more "than a mile in the direction of the As the proposed canal from Bowmanville to the lake will lower the water of the North Branch at this point to the lake level, provision must be made for its cnculatioii The size of the Fullerton Avenue conduit is not suflicient to furnish the water required for a current in both directions, nor would such an arrangement be satisfactory or economical. It will lie necessary to establish a flow toward the South Branch from the lake opposite Bowmanville in order to prevent a future lake pollution by the posed channel. This can be accomplished by placing a lock in the North Branch at any point that may be found most deshable and raising the water at the same time about 1 foot. If such a lock is placed at Fullerton Avenue, the present pumping works, with slight modifications, can be utilized. , . , i + Finally, it must be mentioned that circulation can be secured in the proposed water¬ ways of the Calumet region, into which the sewage is discharged, by a gravity flow from Lake Michigan into the Des Plaines Valley through Lake Calumet and the bag. The detailed features of this project have not yet been wholly matured, tlie estimates of cost being based on a channel having a capacity of 1,000 cubic feet per second. COMPARISON OF PROJECTS. In the foregoing we have outlined the main features of the only three feasible nieth- ods of disposing of the metropolitan sewage, and have given the results of the investiga¬ tion reached to date. A general conclusion as to the preferable method may be given at present, and also an approximate estimate of cost. But we are not able as yet to give either conclusions or detailed statements of the probable expense regarding a parts of the proposed work, and must defer them until the final repoit. In comparing the projects we will first mention their probable cost and then then relative advantages. . ,aaa • The discharge of the sewage into the lake from a population of 2,500,000 in the man¬ ner described above, including the extra expense, otherwise not necessaTy of taking the water supply of Grosse Point, would cost at least $37,000,000, wit^ _ expense for interest and operation of at least $2,400,000. It would requiie an iinm diate investment of about $20,000,000. at ,• i i vAmiirA nn To dispose of the entire metropolitan sewage by filtration on investment of about $58,000,000, with an annual expense of over $3,000 000 for interest, pumping, and maintenance, after deducting the profit from the Luld be necessary to invest at once about $34,000,000. Land disposal for the sewage from the Calumet region alone, with a future population of 300,000 would require an investment of about $4,000,000 and an annual expense of at least $250,000. Finally, the cost of the Des Plaines project is approximately estimated as lollops- 1. A channel from the South Fork to Joliet of the capacity heretofore given will cost between $17,000,000 and $21,000,000. , at t) QaIi 2. A diversion of the flood waters of the Des Plaines, the North Branch, and Salt Creek will cost between $2,500,000 and $2,800,000. fticinnnn 3. Pumping works and locks for the North Branch will cost about $150 000 4. A separate system of sewers to collect the sewage now discharged direct y lake and to carry it into the river will cost about $600,000. 5. A channel from Lake Calumet to Sag will cost between $2 o00,000 f 6. A diversion of the flood waters of the Calumet River will cost between $3o0,000 and $400,000. _ 1 Omitted; printed in House Ex. Doc. No.2G4, 51st Cong., 1st sess. 86 TNTEENATIOXAL WATERWAl’S COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. The total cost of the Des Plaines drainap^e project would therefore be, for the main ^20,250,000 and 124,550,000; for the Calumet district, between 13,400,000. The annual cost, including interest, etc., is estimated at about 11,300,000 per annum. The pollution of the lake can be decreased and the present condition of the Chicago xviver, and particularly of the South Fork, can be improved by the immediate con- following works, which, with the exception of the pumping works at the South Fork discharging into the Illinois & Michigan Canal, are all a part of the final plan: ^ 1. Channels diverting the flood waters of the Des Plaines, North Branch, and Salt Creek, as described above. 2 A modification of the Fullerton Avenue pumping station and the construction of locks tor the purpose of getting circulation in the North Branch. 3. A separate system of sewers to collect the sewage now flowing into the lake fro m the south division and to discharge it into the South Fork. 4 A waterway extending from the western end of the South Fork to the Illinois & Michigan Canal, with a new pumping station to promote circulation. ^ 5. By raising the banks of the canal and by removing deposits this capacity can be incieased 40 per cent at a small cost, and thus provide for a greater flow of water in the same. The cost of the works comprised under these five items is estimated to be between $5,000,000 and $5,500,000. They could be finished in three years, and would greatly lessen the liability of polluting the water supply, while the sewage would be disposed ot in the best practicable manner until the final completion of the Des Plaines project. It therefore appears that this project is decidedly the least expensive one for the present as well as for the future. Besides the economical advantage of the Des Plaines scheme, its superiority is still further emphasized by advantages of another kind. The proposed canal will, from its necessary dimensions and its regular discharge, produce a magnificent waterway between Chicago and the Mississippi River, suitable for the navigation of boats having as rnuch as 2,000 tons burden. It will establish an available water power between Dockport and Marseilles fully twice as large as that of the Mississippi River at Minne¬ apolis, which will be of great commercial value to the State. The Calumet region will be much enhanced in value by having a direct navigable channel to the Des Plaines River and by a lowering of the flood heights of Calumet Lake and River. Within the city the water of the Chicago River and its South Branch will get a much better circu- ation if it flows by gravity than if it has to be pumped, the necessity for which would remain even if the sewage should be discharged through intercepting sewers, either into the lake or upon land. Upon either of the latter conditions an occasional over- rmw from the sewers into the river during heavy rains would be more objectionable than a constant discharge of sewage into a more rapidly flowing stream. Flood waters entering the lake by way of the Chicago River would carry into it much filthy matter, either suspended or deposited, notwithstanding the existence of intercepting sewers but the proposed diversion of such waters before reaching the populated districts will mr all time obviate this undesirable occurrence. Lowering the level of the North Branch at Bowmanville by its diversion to the lake will be equivalent to raising the low prairie extending toward Evanston and Niles and greatly benefit parts of these towns. THE WATER SUPPLY. conclusion that the sewage of the city should be discharged into f^fsissippi \ alley the question of water supply is materially simplified, because tPe lake will then at all times furnish good water wherever intakes are desired for an extension of the works. ^ The preliminary inquiry made with a view to ascertain the main features of an increased supply comprised, first, a compilation of data concerning the existing works both in Chicago and its suburban towns, which were collected mainly through the courtesy of the respective authorities; and, secondlv, a study into the most econom- ical method of distributing the water over the metropolitan area. The following is a brief description of the existing works: ^ The present intake for the public water supply of Chicago is located in Lake Mich- ^an, about 2 miles from shore, and the water is conducted to the city in two circular brmk tunnels 5 and 7 feet in diameter. They extend parallel to each other under the bed of the lake, and 50 feet apart, to the north pumping works, where they are con¬ nected and where the 5-foot tunnel terminates. The 7-foot tunnel is continued under ^ distance of 20,500 feet, to siipplv the west works, on Ashland Avenue and Twenty-second Street. ! INTERNATIONAL WATEKWAIS COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. 87 I The tunnels from the source to the shore are built at a dejjth of 80 feet below city I datum, or low water in the lake, and the 7-foot tunnel is continued on the same level 1 for a distance of about 11,500 feet, where, to avoid rock excavation, it is inclined upward until, at the west pumping station, the top is but 21 feet below city datum. The economical capacity of the two tunnels is between 90,000,000 and 100,000,000 gal- ,■ Ions per dav, or less than the present average daily consumption of water. Their maximum capacity is reached when delivering about 150,000,000 gallons per day, which is now nearly equaled by the demand during the hours of greatest consumption, ^ and at the present rate of increase it is estimated that during the summer of 1887 the maximum demand for water will be at the rate of 145,000,000 gallons per day; during 1888,150,000,000 gallons per day; during 1899,167,000,000 gallons per day; and in 1899, 180,000,000 gallons per day. . To provide against accident or obstruction from ice or other cause in the main tun¬ nels, and to provide against an inadequate supply in the near future, which appeared inevitable, a new tunnel is in progress of construction. The intake is located 1,500 feet from shore, and connection is made with the other tunnels at the north pumping 1 works. , The distribution of the water is effected by pumping it directly into the water mains , at the north and west stations. At the north works the three tunnels are so arranged and constructed that any one of them can be emptied when desired for repairs or clean- incr and both the pumping stations still be supplied with water from the other tunnels. . The total pumping capacity of this station is at present 67,000,000 gallons per day, but it will be increased to 91,000,000 gallons per day as soon as the new pumps now in I process of erection are in operation. I The connections between the pumps, standpipes, and the distribution mains at i these works have become so complex by the successive additions to the plant that an • unnecessary loss of head is the consequence. As this can be remedied to some extent without great expense, we recommend that it be done at the first favorable opportunity. I 'fbe station being on the shore of the lake is not centrally located with reference to f any part of the city, which renders it necessary to use a greater length of mam pipe, with a consequent loss of pressure, to reach the consumers than would otherwise be { the case. The total pumping capacity of the west side station is 60,000,000 gallons ' per day, and the connections between the pumps, standpipes, and mains are simple ‘ and effective, and the loss of pressure from this cause is a minimum. The location ' is better adapted to secure economical and satisfactory results than that of the north works, and with reference to additional pumping stations, which will later be neces¬ sary in other parts of the city, these works are well situated. _ The following table compiled from the annual reports for 1884 and 188o gives a detailed comparison of the cost of pumping at two stations, anthracite coal being used at the north side and good bituminous coal at the west side: Cost of pumping 1,000 f 00 gallons 1 foot high} Nature of expenditures. 1884 1885 North side. West side. North side. W est side. Raloripc . so.01488 .05;U3 .0(X)64 . 0032:i SO.02022 .02855 .00186 .00417 $0.01560 .04590 .00057 .00133 SO.01667 . 02482 .00160 . 00401 Miscellaneous. Total -. .07188 .05480 .06:140 .04710 * 1 Here appears a “diagram showing water pressure in the Chicago water pipes,” not here reproduced. The hydraulic merits of the system are shown on the diagram of water pressures from a survey made in December, 1886. The pressures have all been reduced to a common height above city datum and to a uniform height of water at the works. ‘ That diagram shows a greater loss of head in the vicinity of the north side station than at the west side. This is accounted for by the complex arrangements heretofore mentioned and also by the relatively small area of mains, being only 16^ square feet ' at the north side and over 21 square feet at the west side. Nearly equal cpiantities of water are pumped at each of the stations during the middle of the day. If r if 88 INTEIiNATiOXAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. The following table shows the pumping capacity of all the suburban towns having a public water supply and the pressure ordinarily maintained at the works. With the exception of South Evanston, all take water from Lake Michigan: Locality. Individual pump capacity. Total pumping capacity per day. Ordinary head at Pumps. Capacity ^ per day. pump, in feet. Hyde Tark. Gallons. 2 1 3,000,000 1 ; 12,000,000 2 4,000,000 2 2,000,000 1 1 5,000,000 1 i 3, 000, 000 1 2,000.000 1 3,000,000 Do. 18,000,000 1 no 1 Kn Lake. to ioU Do. 12,000,000 inn inn Lake View. lUU to lyu Do. 10,000,000 QO Do. 92 09 Village of Evanston. 3,000,000 Total. 11 43,000,000 At the artesian well supplying the village of South Evanston there is a head of about 53 feet. The pressure at different parts of the pipe system is very irregular. In Hyde Park it varies from 165 feet at the pumps to 10 or 12 feet at Forty-third Street. In the town of Lake the average head at the town hall is reported about 10 feet, with 188 feet at the pumps. In Evanston, South Evanston, and Lake View the difference of head in various parts of the villages is not very great. The following table gives a comparison of the consumption and cost of water in Chicago and the suburban towns: Locality. Year. A verage head at pumps. Average daily pumpage. Cost per 1,000,000 gallons, delivered. Cost of pumping 1,000,000 gallons 1 foot high. Chicago (north side). Chicago (west side). Evanston (village). Lake V iew. 1885 1885 1880 1886 1886 1886 113 105 113 38,369,134 53,280,880 ■ 787,000 1, 983,000 7,292,023 3, 410,000 $7.17 4.95 17.00 11.85 8.80 8.92 .$0.06034 .04071 .15000 .05400 Town of Lake. Hvde Park. 163 The second point of inquiry was a study into the most economical method of dis¬ tributing the water oyer the metropolitan area. We will at present refer to it but very briefly, mentioning only such conclusions as pertain to the immediate demands and leaving a fuller discussion of the details of this important question to the final report. The comparatively level area upon which the city is located, and the practicability of taking the water from the lake along the city front at any desired point, after the sewage has been diverted, permits the most economical distribution to be ascertained by mathematical investigation to a much greater degree of exactness than is usually possible. It is found to be less expensive for the densely populated areas to have pumping stations about 2 or 3 miles apart, because the loss of head and cost of mains and pump¬ ing to obtain the least allowable pressure are thus reduced to a minimum. In plan¬ ning new works this fact should be considered and locations so selected that they will be advantageous for the future as well as for the present. The localities which we believe to be most suitable for additional pumping stations are near Twelfth Street, in the central part of the city; near the Union Stock Yards; near Humboldt Park, and near Fullerton and Racine Avenues. When it is considered that at the present time the pumps are delivering during the busy part of the day at the rate of 120,000,000 gallons in twenty-four hours, which is nearly the maximum capacity of all the machinery, and that even with this large consumption of water it is impossible in some parts of the city to obtain water in the INTERNATIONAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. 89 X iecond story of the buildings, it becomes evident that an increased supply is impera- r tively required, and being a work of years to build new tunnels, inlets, buildings, and Ij machinery, the necessity of deciding upon the location of the now works as soon as I possible is readily seen. The locality which is suffering most from the want of water I is the business section and the south part of the city, the lowest pressure extending j, from Twelfth Street to the city limits. It will become necessary in the future to have \ two stations in this territory—one between Harrison and Twelfth Streets and the other to be somewhere east of the Union Stock Yards. We are strongly of the opinion I that of the two stations it will be advisal)le and most advantageous to build the one north of Twelfth Street first, for the following reasons: 1. It will require a shorter tunnel from the lake to the proposed station and less expenditure for main discharge pipes to connect with the present system than would I be the case with the proposed southern station. This is equivalent to less cost and . a saving of time in construction. 2. If the southern station is built first it will require mains of larger capacity lead¬ ing toward the city than will be ultimately necessary when the central station is built. ^ 3. The location recommended is near the center of the greatest consumption of water, and will be a gain not only in obtaining greater pressure in the business district, [ but in removing the cause for complaint on the south side by increasing the pressure I so that the water will flow to the upper floors of the highest dwellings. I 4. All other parts of the city will gain by the construction in this location, as the f north and west works will be relieved of the enormous drain upon them to supply I water for the business part of the city. They will be better able to give a good head jj on the north and west sides, where the population is increasing very rapidly, and n which will very soon be in the same unsatisfactory condition as now obtains in the southern end of the city unless relief is afforded in the manner indicated. The other pumping stations will gradually become necessary as the popula,tioii increases, and for a population of 2,500,000 there will be a need for a total combined j capacity of 375,000,000 gallons to provide for a daily consumption of 150 gallons per ’ head. With several intakes and tunnels the danger from stoppage of the water supply by ice or accident will be reduced to a minimum, as it is not probable that j more than one of them would be so endangered at the same time. I We believe that a submerged intake will afford a more reliable and safer structure, ] so far as injury from passing vessels and stoppage by ice are concerned, than a structure projecting above the warer. With the sewage kept out of the lake there is no need of locating the intake farther than 2 miles from the shore, where water can be obtained siifhcieiitly free from sus¬ pended earthy matter, and where a depth of about 30 feet is generally found, which is the least depth desirable for a submerged inlet. GENERAL REMARKS. After presenting the results thus far gained, indicating the general solution of the Chicago drainage and water-supply problem, it remains to point out certain facts which may be useful in discussing some of the legal measures required to carry out the proposed work. We desire to state that in order to reach the best results it is impera¬ tive to have all the main drainage works, such as intercepting sewers, waterways, and I pumping stations, executed and maintained under a single management. It would be economical also to design and operate the main works for supplying water to the entire metropolitan area on a uniform plan and under one management, for the same reason that it is economical to keep the north and west side pumping works under one control, thus giving facilities as far as practicable for a supply proportioned to the demand to the entire metropolitan area, including the towns not bordering on the lake. ' We do not wish to imply, however, that such a genera] authority need necessarily extend further than to the construction and maintenance of the tunnels and conduits ' furnishing water to the respective pumping works. ‘ Regarding the limits for metropolitan drainage, the investig-ation has shown, as already indicated, that topographical conditions clearly define two districts for the future metropolis. The main district extends from the line of Eighty-seventh Street on the south to the north line of Evanston and from the lake westward to the Des Plaines i River. Its sewage is collected into one channel and discharged into the Des Plaines Valley at Summit. The Calumet district extends over the natural drainage area of ('alumet Lake and River south of Eighty-seventh Street, and has its outfall channel ‘ running from Blue Island to Sag. The iinal report will contain several maps, showing certain features of the metropoli¬ tan area, namely, the distribution of the population in 188(5, the existing works and main distribution pipes for water supply, and the existing main sewerage works and 90 INTEKNATIONAL WATEKWAYS COMMISSION PKOGKESS REPOKT. 5-foot contour lines over nearly the entire area. It will also contain maps and pro¬ files of the proposed waterways and storm-water diversion channels mentioned in the present report, and a map showing the lines of the main collecting and intercept¬ ing sewers of the proposed drainage districts, and also the lines of new tunnels and the general distribution of the water supply. In carrying on the present investigation its various branches are placed in charge of the following gentlemen, of whose ability and industry we desire to make special men¬ tion: Mr. L. E. Cooley, principal assistant, had special charge of the hydrographic work; Mr. Charles H. Swan, of the sewage disposal on land; Mr. Francis Murphy, of the topographical work; Mr. O. Guthrie, of the river pollution, land damages, etc., and Mr. T. T. Johnson, of the water supply, sewerage, and miscellaneous work. Respectfully submitted. Rudolph Hering, Chief Engineer. Benezette Williams, Samuel G. Artingstall, Consulting Engineers. Appendix Ig. Chicago, June 29, 1906. Dear General: On May 28 I replied at length to your inquiries of May 26 concern¬ ing the final report of the Drainage and Water Supply Commission and the disposition of the materials which had been collected. Under date of May 31 you now ask for— “The sanitary authority upon which rests the requirement of the Illinois State law that 20,000 cubic feet per minute must be diverted into the Chicago Drainage Canal for every 100,000 inhabitants.” And again— “How much water is really required to dilute the sewage?” The proper answer to your questions involves a review of the considerations which determines the ratio of dilution in the sanitary district law and the justification for the same. I have therefore delayed this answer in order to consult original documents and memoranda. I have not undertaken to refer exhaustively to my records, as I am pressed for time, and my memory is entirely clear upon the essential facts. The essence of the law is contained in sections 20 and 23 of “ An act to create sanitary districts and to remove obstructions in the Des Plaines and Illinois Rivers” (passed May 29, 1889, in force July 1,1889). Section 20 states: “Any channel or outlet * * * shall be of sufficient size and capacity to produce a continuous flow of water of at least 200 cubic feet per minute for each 1,000 of the population of the district drained thereby, and the same shall be kept and maintained of such size and in such condition that the water thereof will be neither offensive or injurious to the health of the people in this State.” Section 23 states: “ Such channel shall be made and kept of such size and in such condition that it will produce and maintain at all times a continuous flow of not less than 20,000 cubic feet of water per minute for each 100,000 of the population of such district.” Section 23 states further: “Such channel shall be constructed of sufficient size and capacity to produce and maintain at all times a continuous flow of not less than 300,000 cubic feet of water per minute, * * * and if any portion of any such channel shall be cut through a territory with a rocky stratum * * * snch portion of said channel shall have double the flowing capacity above provided for.” You will see that the law insists on a sanitary condition, and that the flow of water shall be continuous (at all times), and that the minimum dilution shall be (not less than) 20,000 cubic feet of water per minute for each 100,000 people. This indicates that the general assembly did not regard the ratio of dilution as a jiositive determina¬ tion, and this accords with the facts. You will note further that the channel was to be cut through the rock with a minimum capacity of 600,000 cubic feet per minute, and that the channel in the clay was to be subject to progressive enlargement from a capac¬ ity of 300,000 cubic feet per minute with the growth of population above 1,500,000. As a matter of fact, the rocky stratum extended from Lockport to Summit, and the channel was actually constructed of the larger capacity, leaving only 7.76 miles between Summit and the waters of the Chicago River for future enlargement. When the channel was opened January 17, 1900, the population of the district exceeded 1,500,000 and was, in fact, 1,637,972 by the Federal census of 1900. By act of the general assembly in 1903 the district was enlarged, and the population by census, within the new boundaries, was 1,775,596. I had everything to do in determining the prime essentials of the sanitary district law above quoted. I projected the work in its substantial outlines in a report which [ [I INTERNATIONAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. 91 I drafted for tlie oomniittoe of the Citizens’ Association in September, 1885. (Ossion ^ Giitlirie, Dr. Frank Reilly, and Lyman E. Cooley were a subcommittee to examine the situation and report.) As chief assistant to the Drainage and Water-Supply Com- ; mission in 1886-87, 1 had charge, among other things, of the canal solution. " I was consulting engineer to the State board of health in 1887-1889, and again in 1891 while its i elaborate chemical investigation of the stream between Lake Michigan and St. Louis • was under way. I was consulting engineer to the joint committee of the legislature (mayor of Chicago, ex ofhcio, chairman) that framed the sanitary district act, and as such determined the features of the law referred to. 1 later represented before the ' general assembly the several organizations of ('hicago which were engaged in pro¬ moting legislation. The state of our information in 1887 in regard to dilution and the capacity of channel required is discussed at some length in my testimony of April 7, 1887, before the joint committee of the general assembly. A few hundred copies of this were printed, but I ' do not know where an extra copy is to be had. I refer to this especially because it is the only published matter of that period after the preliminary report. I will also ^ refer you to an elaborate paper which discusses the subject matter, read on June 10, 1896, before the National Conference of State Hoards of Health at Chicago. This was published by the secretary at Columbus, Ohio, and is hard to get. There were, of ‘ course, many fugitive and fragmentary discussions not considered worthy of preser¬ vation. You will note in the preliminary report and in later testimony tliat the Drainage and Water-Supply C'ommission refers to a dilution of 24,000 cubic feet per minute as ample for a sanitary condition, and I believe that Mr. Hering, the chief of that com- i mission, has stated tliat was his personal view of the requirements. As a matter of ) fact, the capacity of the channel was fixed at that time at 600,000 feet as required to ' remove the flood water from some 420 square miles of territory (after the diversion of I the Upper Des Plaines River), and prevent the same from backing into the lake. I The basis of population used in considering land disposal and other alternative solu- i tions proposed was 2,500,000, and this figure was applied to the proposed channel . capacity, giving the ratio of 24,000 cubic feet per minute for each 100,000 people as above stated. At that time only preliminary consideration had been given to the i question of dilution, as the chief force of the investigation had been applied to other ' alternative solutions. I think it is also in evidence before the joint committee of the general assembly in 1887, by Dr. Rauch, secretary of the State board of health, that 14,000 cubic feet per minute would be sufficient. Dr. Rauch had undertaken an investigation of the subject preliminary to the elaborate studies of 1888-89. After the adjournment of the legislature and the failure of the Hurd bill in 1887, little further attention was given to the matter until it was taken up by the special committee appointed to frame a law and report to the next general assembly. This committee had several hearings and developed much diversity of opinion. Personal opinions ranged from 14,000 feet per minute to 30,000 feet, and some wished to leave the matter entirely open. As no agreement could be reached, the whole subject was referred to the consulting engineer late in 1888, and after a painstaking ! investigation he reported, and the results were embodied in the draft of the bill and subsequently became law. The data available are referred to as follows; * “Special investigations of the filth-producing industries of Chicago, and an elabo- ’ rate investigation of the Chicago River and branches in the autumn of 1886, and after the flood of 1887, also the Illinois and Michigan Canal; a careful investigation of the history and condition of sewage in the Des Plaines and Illinois Rivers for the 15 I years prior to 1887, between Joliet and La Salle; the chemical investigations by the i State board of health over the route from Lake Michigan to the city of St. Louis, and of tributary streams, and a special investigation of the conditions produced by the , distillers at Peoria and Pekin.” The above data were probably more ample than had ever been brought before to- the consideration of a similar problem. In addition, there were the following docu¬ ments: Reports on the condition of the Seine at and below Paris; reports on the sewage-disposal works at Berlin, then being inaugurated: three reports by parliamen- I tary commissions on river pollution in Great Britain; reports on })ollution of streams by the State board of health of ^lassachusetts; reports by Dr. Chandler on the pol- ! lution of the Passaic River, N. J. In addition, the consulting engineer had made special notes on the low-water con¬ dition of the Ohio River and of the Upper Mississippi River and on several other ' streams, in comjrarison with population. 92 INTERNATIONAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. The genera] result arrived at was that 14,000 cubic feet per minute would be ade¬ quate for a normal city population such as usually obtained in New England and in Europe, but that this ratio should be increased about 50 per cent on account of the special industries characteristic of Chicago and the quality of her site—^flat topography, with impermeable subsoil. At that time—and we still have great industries based on animal and other organic products—the wastes coming from the stockyards and ren¬ dering establishments alone were estimated as the sewage equivalent of a normal city of 700,000 people. Every effort had been made, and is still being made, to utilize these organic wastes, and great progress had been made in the previous 20 years, but nevertheless it was thought wise to provide sufficiently for all conditions rather than subject any industry to special burdens. These considerations raised the dilu¬ tion ratio to 20,000 cubic feet per minute as a minimum, and it was so recommended. At that time we had distilleries in Chicago which were serious offenders, but they have since closed down. I examined the distilleries at Peoria in 1891, when 40,000 head of cattle were fed on the slops, and I found that the fish were destroyed for 24 miles down the river in the low-water season. It was noted that the conditions were worse when the raw slops were run directly into the river, as the cattle were not then present to reduce the decomposition by several stages. In this industry I understand that these wastes are now evaporated and pressed into cake and sold for stock food. In the rendering business there is a highly concentrated effluent from the tanks, which would resemble consomme if it were filtered and deodorized, and this has defied all chemical science for its salvation. Hopes were entertained of converting it into commercial ammonia by destructive distillation, but this did not prove practi¬ cable on a commercial scale. I believe that sometime these valuable wastes will be commercially utilized, and when this is done a great burden will be taken off the Chicago Drainage Canal. It seemed to me that if it was not possible to make an eco¬ nomic use of these concentrated effluents, the profitable disposal of household sewage with the enormous volumes of water used in American cities was absolutely hopeless. At that time the sentiment of sanitarians was very strongly against what we proposed as a barbarism. The experience of nearly 20 years since has fully borne out the noneconomic character of sewage-disposal works, and the Chicago solution has come to be accepted as rational where the conditions permit. I was not satisfied with our data in j*egard to the stockyards district, and when chief engineer of the sanitary district in 1890 I undertook a special chemical investi¬ gation, continued over a period of time, of every outfall entering the South Fork. The work was completed, but I ceased to be chief engineer before the results were fully worked out. At the same time I made a continued series of chemical analyses of the Illinois & Michigan Canal, which was then being operated to a capacity of over 50,000 cubic feet per minute. These investigations cost some |6,000. 1 became satisfied that I had not overestimated the special source of filth. It was my intention to carry the inquiry over the entire city and do what had never been done before— ascertain the sewage of a great municipality as a whole. If I had had my way in the matter we would have had more positive data as to the sewage equivalent and the volume of Lake Michigan water required. Our boards of trustees have not since encouraged the resumption of any such work, and indeed it has been regarded as needless by those in authority after the sanitary district law had been passed and the work actually entered upon. No extended investigations were again undertaken until the biological and chemical examinations of 1899 and 1900 were made by the cooperation of the health depart¬ ment of the city of Chicago, the Chicago University, and the University of Illinois. This investigation was instigated by Dr. Frank W. Reilly, then and now assistant health commissioner of Chicago, after consultation with the writer. _ Dr. Reilly was assistant secretary of the State board of health during the investigations of_ 1881- 1885, and in 1886 collated the results of Prof. J. H. Long’s chemical examinations of the contents of the Illinois & Michigan Canal and of the Illinois River and its tribu¬ taries as far south as Peoiia. These examinations were projected by Dr. J. H. Rauch, secretary of the State board, and were directly supervised by Dr. Reilly. His study and collation of Prof. Long’s analyses demonstrated that all trace of Chi¬ cago sewage pollution disappeared in a flow of 48 miles from its source—-that is, between Bridgeport at the entrance of the Illinois & Michigan Canal and the town of Chan- nahon on the Des Plaines River, after this stream had received the discharge from the canal. This demonstration completely upset the time-honored dictum of previous water analyses “that no river on earth is long enough to purify itself after it has become contaminated with organic wastes.” Six years later, in 1892, Pottenkofer fully corroborated Dr. Reilly’s demonstration. Dr. Reilly and myself were associated in all the early promotion of the sanitaiy project, and he is the only person that I know upon whom you can call for a history of the subject matter of this letter. Ij INTERNATIONAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION PRO(}RESS REFORT.v 93 ; The biological examinations were entirely confirmatory of the results of the investi- gations of 1888-89, but have the merit of less confusion in interpretation. The State 1] board of health has since recompiled and extended the results of its stream examina- J tions, and published a report in 1903. The University of Illinois has been making for several years past a biological inve.stigation of the waters of the Illinois River, [' but with no special reference to the matters under consideration. I do not refer to ■> data of an ex parte character gathered in the Chicago-St. Louis suit recently decided I by the IJnitecf States Supreme Court. None of this later material nor the added experience and reflection of nearly 20 ^ years has changed my mind in regard to the ratio of dilution as given in 1888 and incor¬ porated in the sanitary district law. I do not think I could make a better determina¬ tion at this time. I i’eel bound to say, however, that we have not yet had the final demonstration of experience. We shall not positively know until the intercepting : sewer system is completed and in operation, the South Fork in active circulation, * and also the North Rranch, so that the canal receives the entire output of the city north of Eighty-seventh Street in a coni])aratively fresh condition. I have been appre¬ hensive that these contributions would be made before the Chicago River is sufliciently ^ improved to furnish the necessary volume of water to promptly dilute the same. The i analyses show a higher ratio per capita for chlorine and nitrogen, but this was antici- * pated. They also show a large proportion down the old canal, which, owing to the sit- ’ nation of its'inlet, receives largely the output of the South Fork, but this was also ' anticipated. The evidence as to chlorine is to be taken with caution on account of the \ large use of salt in many of our industries, but the indications are that Chicago sewage may be even richer than I had presumed in eomparison with the sewage of normal y cities. I have no forebodings, however, other than as to the policy which may be })ur- sued by the authorities of the sanitary district. Based on the advice of the consulting engineer the law is abundantly cautious in stating the ratio of dilution and the capacity of channel as minimums and in insisting on a continuous flow, but unhappily there J has been a disposition in many quarters to interpret these minimum lequirements as maximums. I You will find in the testimony of 1887 and the paper before the National Conference f of State Boards of Health in 1890, persistent reference to the necessity of maintaining j the flow in the wintei time. The investigations show clearly that the sewage travels I farther down the stream in (he winter season and is more dangerous to fish life when the oxygen can not be renewed owing to an ice cover. The necessity for dilution is then ! paiamount. In the original studies of an economic channel, made under my direc¬ tion, first by William A. Lydon in 1886-87, and later by Thomas T. Johnston in 1890-91 I the carrying capacity of a channel covered by ice was fully considered. On the > present channel the capacity will be reduced by nearly 40 per cent, or to something over 60 per cent of the capacity of an open channel. In making the studies for the main channel we adopted the most conservative coefficients. The channel depth was made nominally 22 feet, with an allowance of over 2 feet for fall between the lake and the head of the channel at Robey Street, but it was understood that any proper improvement of the Chicago River and by other inlets would give a depth of 24 feet or more. The channel itself was made of better . character than originally anticipated, owing to the use of the channeling machine. The effect has been to give a channel of nearly 40 per cent greater capacity than the minimum stated in the law. It was my hope and intention to produce a channel I 30 feet deep, with a capacity of 1,000,000 feet, but I was not able to reach farther than 1 have stated. Under the original theory the channel is not sufficient: even now to carry 600,000 feet of water per minute under an ice cover. It has been ingeniously answered that this objection could be removed by the use of ice boats, but 1 have a mental resistance to t’ all solutions of sanitary problems that are not automatic in action, for sooner or later ^ they go awry, to the prejudice of the public health. It is fair to say, however, that thus far little ice has formed upon the main channel, and that the flow has been little interfered with from this cause. This has been attrib- ' uted to the large volumes of warm water from households and from manufacturing plants, and it is supposed also that active sewage decomposition may have some¬ thing to do with it, and, further, that a surface film of oleaginous matter may afford some protection. Perhaps these explanations are after the facts and therefore spec- i Illative. Whatever may be the cause, the effects should be relatively less when the channel shall be carrying the full volume. And, again, the grand law of average will give us more severe winters than we have been having since the channel was opened. The estimates of the carrying capacity of the main channel are based as follows (report of expert commission; see proceedings of board of trustees of sanitary district, I June 19, 1901, p. 7248): ^)4 INTERNATIONAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. “Within the past two weeks the results of special observations made since this com¬ mission was organized, and other relevant data, has enabled an approximate determi¬ nation of coefficients by which to determine the capacity of the main chaimel under the conditions specified. To determine these matters finally, however, requires a special set of observations under better weather conditions and with the canal operated for this purpose.” The expert commission of 1901 estimated the capacity of the channel on a depth of 24.4 feet at Willow Springs, at 836,280 cubic feet .per minute, in conjunction with a radical improvement of the Chicago River such as would furnish the entire supply of water without detriment to navigation. The same commission estimated the capacity on a depth of 24.2 feet at Willow Springs, at 827,040 cubic feet per minute, in conjunc¬ tion with a moderate improvement of the Chicago River north of Sixteenth Street and an inlet direct to the lake adjacent to Sixteenth Street on the south. In both cases the lake was assumed at Chicago datum, or low water of 1847. Both of these treatments were in harmony with the theory of the law and the original project. The sanitary district has adopted, at least for the present, a channel through the Chi¬ cago River 200 feet wide, which the expert commission estimated would carry 390,000 feet of water per minute without detriment to navigation. 1 understand that it is expected to feed to the channel 600,000 feet through the Chicago River and the Thirty- ninth Street conduit, and that one-fifth of this is to come by way of the conduit and the South Fork. I understand further that it is proposed to construct a channel from the Calumet region through the Sag, with a capacity of some 240,000 feet of water per min¬ ute. The total is 840,000 per minute, or the i4,000 feet per second which has been mentioned in the hearings at ^^'ashington and before your commision. You will note in the testimony of 1887 that the considerations which originally fixed the channel at a capacity of 600,000 cubic feet per minute was the flood volume from an area of 420 square miles. Assuming the channel to have a capacity of 840,000 cubic feet per minute, the flood equivalent would represent a territory of not over 700 square miles. To add more territory is sure to result at some time in the backing of the waters into the lake. Sewage pollution is to be regarded as most dangerous when the sewage is carried out in a fresh condition during floods and when the city is virtually taking a bath, and it was such eruptions of flood waters from the populated area which the drain¬ age and water-supply commission sought particularly to avoid. I am therefore strenuously opposed to all propositions which propose to add unlim¬ ited territory to the present channel and which propose in any manner to sacrifice part of its capacity in the carrying of floods from upland and rural territory. All the great filth-producing industries and the great population is now tributary, and will so remain, to the Chicago River, its branches, and the main channel; and I do not think that the provision which has been made for this territory is more ample than should have been provided for a reasonable future growth. The capacity on the present scale of mini¬ mum dilution, presuming it to be sufficient, is the equivalent of a population of 4,200,000. This may not actually be realized, but I feel sure that the progressive sav¬ ing of wastes will eventually reduce the per capita output of sewage to more nearly the normal for other cities. We know that such utilization has already taken place in con¬ nection with the distilleries. We also have the police power and can compel the care of specific sources of nuisance when necessity requires; but as already remarked, such a policy in connection with our great industries has not been considered wise. I anticipate, therefore, that as conditions develop in the future, the channel may prove sufficient for five or six millions of people, provided the original plans can be carried out in their integrity. That means, however, that the capacity of the main channel shall be reserved substantially (and it has been planned and constructed on that idea) for the territory of the original district, and that only such provision shall be made for outlying territory as the actual necessities of its people require. If we study the relative growth of population and the character of the industrial development in such outlying territories, we shall be persuaded that such a policy will do no injustice and will conserve the sanitary purpose in the highest degree. What is to be the future population of Chicago no man can foresee. I think we may rest for the present on an assumption of five to six million people. In laying out the main channel its tangents were made parallel to and at a fixed distance from the Illinois and Michigan Canal where the same was possible. The idea under this location was that the old canal would maintain the reservation for future use and that the time might come when another canal alongside would be desirable. My thought in this matter was not so much an ultimate thought on the sanitary question as it was that we might wish to carry more water to the Illinois River in the interest of deeper navigation. If any such proposition is considered beyond the provision which has already been inade, the whole continent should join, and we may dismiss it from present considera¬ tion. I do believe, however, that the time will come when public opinion on this con¬ tinent will be sufficiently broad to make the best use possible of the waters of the Great t INTERNATIONAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. 95 k. • [: Lakes, in the interest of the deepest possible navigation from the Gulf of St. Lawrence ll' to the Gulf of Mexico, and I do believe that the project which Chicago has so happily f inaugurated as the incident of a sanitary necessity will come to be looked upon as a p monumental foresight. I think J have covered the subject matters of your inquiry. If you wish the docu- ments which I have especially referred to, I will loan them to you, as I do not know where duplicates are to be had. • Yours, very respectfully, Lyman E. Cooley. Gen. O. H. Ernst, Chairman of American Section, ' International Waterways Commission, Washmgton, J). C. Appendix Tg. Summary of net receipts and expenditures, sanitary district of Chicago, from organizat ion to Dec. 31, 1905. RECEIPTS. < Taxes collected for general purposes. Taxes collected for water-power development $30, 712, 708. 65 2, 014, 730. 57 ' Bond account (bonds outstanding): First issue. I Second issue. Fourth issue. f Fifth issue. Sixth issue.. Seventh issue. Eolith issue. Ninth issue.. Tenth issue.. Eleventh issue.. j Twelfth issue.. Thirteenth issue. Fourteenth issue. , Fifteenth issue.. Sixteenth issue. 700,000.00 1 , 200 , 000 . 00 1, 350, 000. 00 1, 800, 000. 00 400, 000. 00 440, 000. 00 200 , 000 . 00 190,000. 00 700,000. 00 750, 000. 00 1, 875, 000. 00 1, 600,000. 00 1, 275, 000. 00 1, 350,000. 00 1, 350, 000. 00 2,000,000. 00 Interest on bank balances. Tax levy, 1896 (warrants outstanding). Dock and land improvement and rental account (rent of land) American Crushed Stone Co. Western Stone Co. $32, 727, 439. 22 17,180, 000. 00 362, 785. 73 5, 212. 91 40,123. 78 1 , 000 . 00 3, 278. 00 Total receipts 50, 319, 839. 64 I EXPENDITURES. Right of Tvay. ■ River diversion construction. $1,000,186. 38 Bridge construction, river diversion. 142, 486. 20 Main-channel construction. 18,547,408.95 i Bridge construction, main channel. 1, 978,536. 38 Controlling works, Lockport. 331, 253. 65 » Bridge construction, controlling works. 7, 873. 35 , Joliet project. 1,309, 063. 46 Bridge construction, JoBet project. 271, 351.16 Chicago River, dredging, docking, etc. 2, 027, 221. 78 Bridge construction, Chicago River. 2,498, 383. 03 Illinois and Michigan Canal improvement at Bridge¬ port...^. 77,016.08 Thirty-ninth Street pumping station. 211, 604. 85 , Improvement of Kampsville and La Grange Dams.. 16, 920. 27 ^ Raising roadway of Brandon’s bridge. 5, 882. 68 6, 983, 944.14 I 28,425,188. 22 96 INTERNATIONAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. Water-power development. Bridge construction, water-power development Capitalization and maintenance of bridges.. Maintenance of highway bridges. Maintenance account. Interest on bonds. Interest on tax warrants. Taxes on land: Cook County. Bnpage County. Will County. $1,346,085. 92 112, 362. 44 403, 354. 60 12,613. 89 164, 775. 95 6, 821, 647. 58 468,453. 69 3,248.19 1, 209. 07 27, 310. 28 $1,458,448.36 580, 744. 44 7, 290,101. 27 31, 767. 54 Engineering department. Engineering department, water-power development.. Clerical department. Law department. Treasury department. Police department. General account. 2,064, 007. 21 97, 778. 20 173, 361. 87 1, 031,154.12 41, 832. 39 400,160. 69 867, 944.19 City of Chicago. Land damages. Marine damages. Personal-injuries account. Bridgeport pumping works... Special commission, Chicago Drainage Canal Telephone line... Telephone line repair account. W^’eir, McKechnev & Co. E. D. Smith & Co. 4, 685, 238. 67 14,079. 20 76,331. 84 9, 647. 32 4,087. 50 90, 388. 80 33,075. 97 12, 292.13 104. 00 22,118.14 2,400. 00 Total expenditures.;. Emergency funds in hands of department officials... $10,400. 00 Due from F. M. Blount, treasurer (deposit in National Bank of Illinois). 22, 043. 48 Due from John J. Hanberg, county collector. 45, 727. 38 Due from collector, town of Niles. 1, 660. 32 Balance in hands of C. L. Hutchinson, treasurer, De¬ cember 31, 1905. ^20, 050. 92 49, 719, 957. 54 599, 882.10 50, 319, 839. 64 Appendix I 4 . 1 Permit of July 3, 1896,] 4554.] IMPROVEMENT OF CHICAGO RIVER. July 3, 1896. Sir: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of 16th ultimo, requesting permission to make certain changes in the capacity of the channel of the Chicago Piver for drainage purposes at points indicated on the map accompanying the application, and in reply beg to say that upon investigation it is found that the permission requested can be granted upon the following conditions; 1. That while the general plan is approved, the sanitary district of Chicago must furnish plans in triplicate on an enlarged scale showing each proposed new bridge, each by-pass, and each new dock or wharf proposed to be built, in order that the Secretary of War may act intelligently in each case. 2. That this authority shall not be interpreted as approval of the plans of the sani¬ tary district of Chicago to introduce a current into Chicago River. This latter proposition must hereafter be submitted for consideraton. INTERNATIONAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. 97 3. That it will not cover obstructions to naviojatioii by reason of this work while in progress or when com])leted. 4. That the United States shall not be put to expense by reason of this work. 5. That this authority will exi)ire by limitation in twm years from date unless extended. Very respectfully, Joseph B. Doe, Acting Secretary of Bar. B. A. Eckhart, Esq., President the Sanitary District of Chicago, Rialto Building, Chicago, III. [Permit of May 8, 1899.] Whereas by section 10 of an act of Congress approved March 3, 1899, entitled “An act making ap])ropriations for the construction, repair, and preservation of certain public works on rivers and harbors, and for other purposes, ” it is provided that it shall not be lawful to alter or modify the course, location, condition, or capacity of the channel of any navigable water of the United States unless the wmrk has been recommended by the Chief of Engineers and authorized by the Secretary of War prior to beginning the same; And whereas the sanitary district of Chicago, a municipal corporation organized under the laws of the State of Illinois, has constructed an artificial channel from Robey Street, Chicago, to Lockport, and has heretofore been granted permission by the Secretary of War to make certain improvements in the Chicago River for the purpose of correcting and regulating the cross section of the river so as to secure a flowage capacity of 300,000 cubic feet per minute with a velocity of 1J miles an hour, it being intended to connect the said artificial channel with the west fork of the South Branch of Chicago River at Robey Street, in the said city of Chicago; And wdiereas the said sanitary district of Chicago has now applied to the Secretary of War for permission to divert the waters of the said Chicago River and cause them to flow into the said artificial channel at Robey Street, as aforesaid; And whereas the said sanitary district of Chicago represents that such movable dams and sluice gates as are necessary to at all times secure absolute and complete control of the volume and velocity of flow through the Chicago River have been constructed; Now, therefore, the Chief of Engineers having consented thereto, this is to certify that the Secretary of War hereby gives permission to the said sanitary district of Chicago to open the channel constructed and cause the w^aters of Chicago River to flow into the same, subject to the following conditions: 1. That it be distinctly understood that it is the intention of the Secretary of War to submit the questions connected with the work of the sanitary district of Chicago to Congress for consideration and final action, and that this permit shall be subject to such action as may be taken by Congress. 2. That if, at any time, it become apparent that the current created by such drain¬ age works in the South and Main Branches of Chicago River be unreasonably obstruc¬ tive to navigation or injurious to property, the Secretary of War reserves the right to close said discharge through said channel or to modify it to such extent as may be demanded by navigation and property interests along said Chicago River and its South Branch. * 3. That the sanitary district of Chicago must assume all responsiblity for damages to property and navigation interests by reason of the introduction of a current in Chicago River. Witness my hand this 8th day of May, 1899. [seal.] R. a. Alger, Secretary of B ar. John M. Wilson, Brigadier General, Chief of Engineers, U. S. Army, [Permit of April 9, 1901.] Whereas, under date of May 8, 1899. the Secretary of War granted permission unto the sanitary district of Chicago to open the artificial channel from Robey Street, Chicago to Lockport, and cause the waters of Chicago River to flow into the same, upon the following conditions, inter alia: “2. That if, at any time, it become apparent that the current created by such drain- ^e works in the South and Main branches of Chicago River be unreasonably obstruct¬ ive to navigation or injurious to property, the Secretary of War reserves the right to close said discharge through said channel or to modify it to such extent as may be S. Doc. 959—62-3-7 98 INTERNATIONAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. I demanded by naidgation and property interests along said Chicago River and its South Branch;” And whereas it is alleged by various commercial and navigation interests that the present discharge from the river into the drainage canal sometimes exceeds 300,000 cubic feet per minute, causing a velocity of nearly 3 miles per hour, which greatly endangers navigation in the present condition of the river; Now, therefore, this is to certify that the Secretary of War, upon the recommenda¬ tion of the Chief of Engineers, hereby directs said sanitary district to regulate the discharge from the river into the drainage canal so that the maximum flow through the Chicago River and its South Branch shall not exceed 200,000 cubic feet per minute. Witness mv hand this 9th day of April, 1901. [seal.] ^ Elihu Root, Secretary of War. [Permit of July 23, 1901.] The Sanitary District op Chicago, Security Building, Chicago, July 15, 1901. Sir: I have the honor to request, on behalf of the sanitary district of Chicago, that your order of April 9, 1901, restricting the flow of water through the Chicago River to 200,000 cubic feet of water per minute, may be so amended as to permit the controlling works at Lockport, the outlet of the main drainage channel, to be so regulated as to permit at that point a flow of 300,000 cubic feet of water per minute between the hours of 4 p. m. and 12 o’clock midnight. The board of trustees of the sanitary district have rigidly observed the restrictions of your order of April 9, 1901, but the result has been that the water in the main drainage channel has become greatly polluted and very offensive both to sight and smell and is working such hardship upon the valley communities as to evoke frequent protests from various cities and municipalities along the Des Plaines and Illinois valleys. By such a modification of your restricting order as is herein petitioned, it would be possible for the sanitary district to secure much better drainage of the city of Chicago and the purification of the waters of the Chicago River without any hardship or incon¬ venience whatever to the interests of navigation, as the opening of the controlling works to a flow of 300,000 cubic feet of water per minute would produce no appreciable effect upon the current of the Chicago River until three hours thereafter and would not produce the full effect until about eighth ours after the opening of the gates. There¬ fore, by again diminishing the flow at rnidnight to the requirements of your order, or to 200,000 cubic feet of water per minute, the normal condition in the Chicago River would be restored before 6 a. m. on the following day, and thus no hardship or inconvenience occasioned to the navigation interests of the Chicago River. I have the honor to be, very respectfully, yours, Alex. J. Jones, President. To the Hon. Elihu Root, Secretary of War, Washington, D. C. [Second indorsement.] Office Chief of Engineers, U. S. Army, July 22, 1901. Respectfully returned to the Secretary of War. By an instrument dated April 9, 190i, the Secretary of War directed the sanitary district of Chicago to regulate the discharge from the Chicago River into the drainage canal so that the maximum flow through the Chicago River and its South Branch shall not exceed 200,000 feet per minute. The sanitary district now asks that this order be so amended as to permit an increase of the flow into the canal to 300,000 cubic feet per minute between 4 p. m. and 12 mid¬ night, daily. It is the opinion of Maj. Willard, expressed in the accompanying letter of the 16th instant, that the request should be granted, subject to revocation by the Secretary of War in case the increase be found dangerous to navigation. I concur in this opinion and recommend that the order of April 9, 1901, be modified accordingly. G. L. Gillespie, Brigadier General, Chief of Engineers, U. S. Army. [Third indorsement.] War Department, July 23, 1901. Approved as recommended by the Chief of Engineers. E. Root, Secretary of War. INTERNATIONAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. 99 [Permit of December 5, 1901.] Whereas, under date of May 8, 1899, the Secretary of War granted permission unto the sanitary district of Chicago to open the artificial channel from llobey Street, Chi¬ cago, to Lockport, and cause the waters of Chicago River to flow into the same, upon the following condition, inter alia: “2. That if at any time it becomes apparent that the current created by such drain¬ age work in the South and Main branches of Chicago River be unreasonably obstruc¬ tive to navigation or injurious to property, the Secretary of War reserves the light to close said discharge through said channel or to modify it to such extent as may be demanded by navigation and property interests along said Chicago River and its South Branch.” And whereas the Secretary of War subsequently directed said sanitary district of Chicago to regulate the discharge of water into the Chicago Drainage Canal so that the maximum flow through the Chicago River shall not exceed 200,000 cubic feet per minute from midnight to 4 p. m., nor 300,000 cubic feet per minute from 4 p. m. to midnight. And whereas said sanitary district of Chicago has applied to the Secretary of War for permission to increase the flow between midnight and 4 p. m. daily to 250,000 cubic feet per minute, and the Chief of Engineers has recommended that the increase applied for be granted, but that the rate of flow from 4 p. m. to midnight be reduced to 250,000 for permission to increase the flow between midnight and 4 p.m. daily to 250,000 cubic feet per minute, and the Chief of Engineers has recommended that the increase applied for be granted, but that the rate of flow from 4 p. m. to midnight be reduced to 250,000 cubic feet per minute, so that the flow through the Chicago River shall not exceed 250,000 cubic feet per minute throughout the twenty-four hours of the day: Now, therefore, this is to certify that, in accordance with the recommendation of the Chief of Engineers, the Secretary of War hereby gives unto said sanitary district of Chicago permission to regulate said discharge so that the maximum flow through the Chicago River shall not exceed 250,000 cubic feet per minute throughout the twenty- four hours of the day, upon the following conditions: 1. That this permission shall be in lieu of the present authorized rates of flow as stated above. 2. That the permission herein given shall be subject to such modification as in the opinion of the Secretary of War the public interests may from time to time require. 3. That said sanitary district of Chicago shall be responsible for all damages inflicted upon navigation interests by reason of the increase in flow herein authorized. Witness my hand this 5th day of December, 1901. Wm. Cary Sanger, Assistant Secretary of War. [Permit of January 17, 1903.] Whereas, under date of December 5,1901, by an instrument supplementary to the original permission granted by the Secretary of War May 8,1899, to the sanitary district of Chicago to open the artificial channel from Robey Street, Chicago, to Lockport, and cause the waters of Chicago River to flow into the same, the Secretary of War, pursuant to authority reserved in said jiermission of May 8, 1899, gave permission to the sanitary district of Chicago to regulate said discharge so that the maximum flow through the Chicago River shall not exceed 250,000 cubic feet per minute throughout the 24 hours of the day, upon the following condition, inter alia: “That the permission herein given shall be subject to such modification as in the opinion of the Secretary of War the public interests may from time to time require.” And whereas the said sanitary district of Chicago,has applied for permission to increase the flow through the Chicago River from 250,000 cubic feet per minute to 350,000 cubic feet per minute during the closed season of navigation, in order to carry off the accumulations of sewage deposit which line the shores along said city: Now, therefore, this is to certify that, in accordance with the recommendation of the Chief of Engineers, the Secretory of War hereby gives unto said sanitary district of Chicago permission to increase the flow through the Chicago River from 250,000 cubic feet per minute to 350,000 cubic feet per minute until the 31st day of March, 1903, after which date it shall be reduced to 250,000 cubic feet per minute, as now authorized, upon the following conditions: 1. That the permission herein given shall be subject to such modifications as in the opinion of the Secretary of War the public interests may from time to time require. 2. That said sanitary district of Chicago shall be responsible for all damages inflicted upon na\dgation interests by reason of the increase in flow herein authorized. Witness my hand this 17th day of January, 1903, [seal,] Wm. Cary Sanger, Assistant Secretary of War 100 INTERNATIONAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. Appendix I5. Resolved hy the senate, the house of representatives concurring herein: 1. That it is the policy of the State of Illinois to procure the construction of a water¬ way of the greatest practicable depth and usefulness for navigation from Lake Michi¬ gan via Des Plaines and Illinois Rivers to the Mississippi River, and to encourage the construction of feeders thereto of like proportions and usefulness. 2. That the United States is hereby requested to stop work upon the locks and dams at Lagrange and at Kampsville, and to apply all funds available and future appropria¬ tions to the improvement of the channel from Lasalle to the mouth, with a view to such a depth as will be of present utility, and in such manner as to develop progres¬ sively all the depth practicable by the aid of a large water supply from Lake Michigan at Chicago. 3. That the United States is requested to aid in the construction of a channel not less than 160 feet wide and 22 feet deep, with such a grade as to give a velocity of 3 miles per hour from Lake Michigan, at Chicago, to Lake Joliet, a pool of the Des Plaines River immediately below Joliet, and to project a channel of similar capacity and not less than 14 feet deep from Lake Joliet to Lasalle, all to be designed in such manner as to permit future development to a greater capacity. Adopted by the senate May 27, 1889. Concurred in by the house of representatives May 27, 1899. Appendix Iq. Report to the International Waterways Commission on the disposal of sewage of Chicago and vicinity, hy Rudolph Ilering and George W. Fuller, December 18, 1906. New Yoek City, December 18, 1906. To the International Waterways Commission: Sirs: In response to your recent request we beg to report herewith upon several propositions connected with the question of extending the method of disposing of the sewage of Chicago and vicinity by means of dilution with Lake Michigan water. Your instructions may be briefly summarized as follows: 1. Examination into the sanitary situation at Chicago so far as it is affected by sewage disposal. 2. Latest conclusions of sanitary engineers as to the amount of dilution which is required to make sewage inoffensive. 3. Is the extension of the dilution method to the outlying territory the only way to preserve the lives and health of the people of Chicago? 4. For the Calumet area,'*are there not other methods of sewage disposal which may be applied at a cost not exceeding much, if at all, the cost of the method of dilution proposed, and which will be equally effective in preventing the pollution of the lake waters? 5. Description of the various systems of sewage disposal which are available for the Calumet area, with a statement of their relative efflciencies. 6. Statement of the approximate relative costs of the last mentioned so far as they can be given without the preparation of detailed plans. Y^ou further state clearly in your letter of instructions that you do not desire an investigation into the effect of the present method upon the navigation interests of the Great Lakes, as that has already been officially considered by yourselves. Further, you state that you accejit as a fixed fact the Chicago Drainage Canal as designed and buili, with its attendant diversion of 10,000 cubic feet per second of lake water through the Chicago River and its branches. In accordance with further instructions, we have not given consideration to questions of a legal or legislative nature. We have viewed this problem solely as an engineering proposition without regard to interstate questions and other features associated with the fact that a portion of the future metropolitan area of Chicago will obviously lie within the State of Indiana. It is further understood that under the existing circum¬ stances we are to give you our opinion without entering into such details as would be required by addiiional surveys or other field work beyond a personal inspection of the areas. INTERNATIONAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. 101 SEWAGE DISPOSAL AT CHICAGO. Drainage canal .—Nearly all of the sewage from the population of Chicago now connected with sewers is diluted with Lake Michigan water, which, since January 17, 1900, has been allowed to flow through the new drainage canal and thus reach the valley of the Illinois River. This method of disposal is the outcome of various investigations, ])articularly of a commission on the drainage and water sujiply of Chi¬ cago in 1886-87. It was formally adopted in 1889 by State legislation, creating the “Sanitary District of Chicago,” specifically providing that the volume of lake water for purposes of dilution shall be 3^^ cubic feet per second for each 1,000 of population connected with the sewers, or 20,000 cubic feet per minute for each 100,000 population. Early methods .—In early days part of the sewage of Chicago flowed directly into the lake and part into the Chicago River and its branches. From the latter a portion of the water and sewage, beginning over 35 years ago, has been pumped at Rridgej)ort into the Illinois and Michigan Canal, as is true to some extent to-day. It is under¬ stood that the old canal is to be discontinued by legislative action as soon as equivalent transportation and power facilities can be arranged for by means of the new canal. Area of sanitary district. —In 1903 an act of legislature was passed extending the area of the sanitary district from 185 to 358.1 square miles, and including the “north shore addition ” of 78.6 square miles, and the “Calumet addition” of 94.5 square miles. The area of the city of Chicago is 190.638 square miles, leaving 167.462 square miles as the area of the })resent sanitary district outside of the city limits. There are several features to be noted in connection with the method of sewage disi)osal of the city of Chicago as adopted in 1889. It had been found to be the cheapest method then available for disposing of the sewage so that it would not pollute the jiublic water supjily, which was then and is now derived from Lake Michigan through a series of intake cribs located at various distances from shore. Intercepting sewers. —To prevent such pollution it was of course necessary first to divert all of the sewage into the Chicago River. A pure-water commission was apjiointed by the mayor in 1897 to consider the question of intercepting sewers for that jiurpose. It recommended among others a large intercepting sewer to collect the sewage from the area along the lake front between Seventy-third and Thirty-first Streets, and about a year ago a 20-foot conduit was completed on Thirty-ninth Street, through which the diluted sewage from this area now passes to the south fork of the South Rranch of the Chicago River. At present there is a gravity flow of lake water ordinarily of about 40,000 cubic feet per minute. Pumps are now in process of erection by which ultimately there will be pumped through this conduit about 120,000 cubic feet of lake water per minute, or 2,000 cubic feet per second. On Twenty-second Street there was formerly a main sewer draining the area border¬ ing on the lake front between Thirty-first and Sixteenth Streets, and discharging into the lake. In 1898 the flow in this sewer was reversed so that its contents now discharge into the river. On Twelfth Street in 1898 the flow in the main sewer was also reversed. In the heart of the city, or business section, the sewers have always discharged into the river and not into the lake. The same is true of a considerable area lying north of the Chicago River and along the lake shore. To facilitate this discharge a conduit was put in service in 1880 at Fullerton Avenue, through which there has been puinped about 12,000 cubic feet of lake water per minute into the North Rranch of the Chicago River. At the present time there is no sewage entering the lake between Surf Street (just north of Lincoln Park) on the north side and Seventy-third Street on the south side of Chicago. Plans are under way for the construction of the necessary works to collect the sewage along the lake front between Seventy-third and Eighty-seventh streets and to i)ump it into sewers west of Ilalsted Street, which lead to the Chicago River. There is very little or no sewage from this area now reaching the lake, as the district is yet practically unsewered. On the north side there is an area between Surf Street and the northern city limits and between the lake shore and the ridge between the lake and the river, which now dis¬ charges sewage into the lake, but which will be diverted next summer. This sewage is to be collected by interceptors conducting it to Lawrence Avenue, where will be located a i)um])ing station and a conduit for pumping the sewage and about 35,000 cubic feet of lake water per minute into the North Branch of the Chicago River. Farther north, at Wilmette, a conduit is proposed to be built with a puinping station near the Northern Railroad bridge in Evanston, where about 60,000 cubic feet of lake water per minute will be diverted into the North Branch of the Chicago River. 102 INTEKNATIONAL WATEKWAYS COMMISSION PKOGRESS REPORT. Summary of flow to canal .—The projected flow of the lake water to the canal through the Chicago River and its branches to the drainage canal may therefore be divided and summarized as follows: Cubic feet per minute Cubic feet per second. Main stream, Chicago R ver. 373,000 6,217 2,000 200 Thirty-ninth Street conduit. 120;000 12,000 35,000 60,000 Fullerton Avenue conduit .. T.a.wrence Avenue conduit... 583 Wilmette conduit... 1,000 Total. 600,000 10,000 The volume for the main stream of the Chicago River, as above stated, is obtained by deducting the remaining quantities from the total. REQUIREMENTS FOR THE REVERSAL OP FLOW IN THE CHICAGO RIVER. The satisfactory disposal of the sewage of Chicago by means of the new drainage canal requires that, at and after heavy rainfalls, the storm water and sewage from the water¬ shed of the Chicago River shall not flow into I;ake Michigan, and therefore it is neces¬ sary to secure a practical reversal of the original flow in the Chicago River. The drainage area of the Chicago River is about 270 square miles.- Flood flows in the river have reached a maximum of about 10,000 cubic feet per second, or 600,000 cubic feet per minute, and this fact was also an important element in fixing the minimum size of the present drainage canal. As to the efficiency of arrangements for the reversal of flow, our inquiries lead us to believe that this has been accomplished in a satisfactory way. Up to the present time, and owing to the insufficient waterway of some parts of the Chicago River, the volume of Lake Michigan water going through the river has not approached the volume above stated; but there have been times when a continuous flow of the Chicago River has been toward Lake Michigan for perhaps two or three hours. This time is necessary to , properly regulate the water level at the controlling works near Lockport. POPULATION OF CHICAGO NOW SEWERING INTO THE DRAINAGE CANAL. We find that the present population of Chicago is, in round numbers, 2,000,000 people, of which between 100,000 and 200,000 reside south of Eighty-seventh Street, tributary to the Calumet district, but within the city limits. Of the remaining population, about 300,000 reside in the southern lake front district. This area is tributary to the Thirty- ninth Street pumping station, which, since about January 1, 1906, has brought about the diversion of the sewage from the lake into the South Fork of the south branch of the Chicago River. There is still an area in the northwestern part of the city north of Lincoln Park, spoken of as the northern lake front district, which drains directly into the lake. Its population may be very roughly estimated at 70,000. There is a considerable area south of Seventy-third Street and west of Halsted Street, and also a portion of the northwestern part of the city, which, are of a semisuburban character. Some portions have been provided with sewers and receive the overflow from cesspools. So far as we are able to ascertain from local officials and without making a personal canvass as to details, it appears that there are now, in round numbers, about 1,500,000 people sewering into the drainage canal. In addition to the sewage, there enters it a considerable quantity of trade wastes, notably about 2,000,000 gallons from the stock- yard district, and from quite a number of other industrial establishments, such as tan¬ neries, wool-pulling establishments, etc., as stated by the sanitary inspector in the last report of the health department. It is our understanding that the present sewage disposal project for Chicago is not intended to provide for the disposal of trade wastes now discharged into the sewers. While comparatively little has been done as yet to remove them from the sewers, we have been informed that it is proposed to take up this matter actively. INFLUENCE OF SEWAGE ON CHICAGO WATER SUPPLY. The city of Chicago receives its water supply from Lake Michigan through a series of tunnels of various lengths, ranging from about 1 to 5 miles from shore. Most of them extend from the shore about 2 miles. The total pumping capacity for this supply is INTERNATIONAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. 103 stated to be 529,000,000 gallons in 24 hours. In 1905 the average daily pumi)-age was recorded as 399,000,000 gallons. Since the removal of the sewage through the drainage canal was systematically begun, in January, 1900, the appearance of the water of the Chicago River has shown marked improvement. The effect of the drainage canal upon the hygienic quality of the public water supply may be studied in connection with the typhoid fever death rates at Chicago, which are recorded in the next table, together with corresponding death rates for a number of other American cities. It is not to be assumed that typhoid fever is entirely due to the jiollution of the public water supply at Chicago or elsewhere, as it is well known that there are other means of transmitting this disease. But its relation to the public water supply is so intimate that it gives, perhaps, the best general idea of the sanitary quality of the water, and therefore it frequently has been used as a rough means of such measurement. There are other factors beside the drainage canal to be considered carefully in con¬ nection with the typhoid fever statistics at Chicago, and some of which should be mentioned here. Prior to 1900 there was a substantial improvement in the public water supply, partly due to the extension of some of the intake cribs and tunnels farther into the lake and partly to the reversal of the flow of a number of the sewers from the lake into the river, such as those at Twelfth and Twenty-second Streets, in 1898. These are important factors in explaining the absence in the late nineties of such excessive tyi)hoid death rates as were noted at the beginning of that decade. Since the opening of the drainage canal typhoid fever at Chicago has been rather unusually prevalent at times. This was especially true in 1902-3, when it is under¬ stood, portions of the supply became contaminated after leaving the intake crib. These accidental pollutions have since been corrected. The report of the city chemist of Chicago, as given in the last annual report of the department of health, shows that on an average in 1905 the city water supply was con¬ sidered by him to be safe about 85 per cent of the time. While there has been a marked improvement in recent years in the quality of the Chicago water supply, due to the progressive elimination of sewage from the lahe, there is stiUroom for more improvement. These improvements refer to the pollution along the lake front north of Lincoln Park, which is being corrected, and to the “Calumet area” south of Eighty-seventh Street, which is now under consideration. Comparison of the annual number of recorded deaths from typhoid fever per 100.000 population at Chicago and other American cities, 1890-1905. Year. Chi¬ cago. Mil¬ wau¬ kee. De¬ troit. Cleve¬ land. Buf¬ falo. To¬ ronto. Bos¬ ton. New York. Phila¬ del¬ phia. Balti¬ more. Wash¬ ington. 1890. 83 33 18 09 44 80 43 21 64 57 89 1891. 1()0 33 13 50 56 90 33 22 64 34 86 1892... 103 31 64 59 38 40 25 14 40 42 47 T2 1893 .... 42 37 29 52 37 40 26 20 40 72 1894 . 31 26 27 29 62 20 23 17 32 49 72 1895. 32 25 24 35 28 30 32 17 40 28 69 1896 . 53 18 23 43 22 24 32 16 3 / 51 1897 . 29 11 15 23 19 18 33 16 33 3/ 42 1898 .... 38 17 18 34 29 16 34 20 51 38 64 18^ 26 17 13 32 26 19 30 16 75 30 82 1900 . 20 21 18 54 27 19 25 21 35 37 77 1901 . 29 21 20 36 27 16 25 20 33 27 67 1002 44 16 17 33 33 13 35 21 44 A'2 79 1903. 31 17 17 114 35 15 20 18 70 36 48 1^ 19 13 16 48 91 I 22 18 17 48 36 43 1905. 16 20 12 15 23 ! . 20 16 36 45 LATEST CONCLUSIONS AS TO THE REQUIRED DEGREE OF DILUTION FOR THE DISPOSAL OF SEWAGE WITHOUT NUISANCE. The disposal of sewage by dilution depends on the amount of oxygen in the diluting water being sufTicient to prevent putrefaction of the organic matter in the sewage as the latter undergoes bacterial decomposition. If the oxygen is deficient, bacterial decomposition produces what is called “putrefaction,” with its various attendivnt bad odors, such as noted for years in Chicago at “Bubbly Creek.” If there is a suth- cient amount of oxygen dissolved in the water to combine with this organic matter, decomposition goes on without any foul odors and the organic matter is reduced to inert matter in an inoffensive way. 104 IXTERXATIONAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. This question is one of balancing the amount of oxygen in a given volume of water with the amount of decomposing organic matter in the sewage, which naturally must vary greatly. There are many observations of more or less accuracy available to give figures for this relation. The Massachusetts State board of health made a special inquiry into this subject for all local rivers in 1902, with conclusions, stated on page 452 cf their annual report for that year, as follows: “The results of the investigations show that where the quantity of water available for the dilution of the sewage in a stream exceeds about 6 cubic feet per second per 1,000 persons discharging sewage, objectionable conditions are unlikely to result from the gross pollution of all the water of a stream in dry weather. Under favorable cir¬ cumstances, such as in cases where the sewage is discharged at many outlets into a large body of water, objectionable conditions may not result where the dilution is sornewhat less than 6 cubic feet per second per 1,000 persons; but objectionable con¬ ditions have resulted in all of the cases thus far examined where the flow has been less than 3.5 cubic feet per second per 1,000 persons discharging sewage into the stream.” These conclusions apply for the most part to comparatively small streams into which much manufacturing waste is discharged and upon which mill ponds are sit¬ uated. There are times when the flow of water in the drainage canal appears to have been insufficient to eliminate objectionable odors entirely. How far this may be explained by confusion on the part of the observers of the putrefactive odors emanating from the Illinois and Michigan Canal with those of the new canal, and how far it may be due to temporary reductions in the rate of flow in the new canal and river to facilitate construction work, and also to the effect of rainfalls and to old deposits in the South Fork, we are unable to say. The new canal appears to serve at present about one-half the population for which it was designed, and through it flows a volume of lake water which is variable, but which averages not far from one-half of the ultimate quantity. It is our judgment that for large canals with the trade wastes eliminated a dilution of 3J cubic feet per second for each 1,000 population connected with the sewers also receiving storm water is as low a figure as it is now possible to state. Local condi¬ tions, especially temperature, which affects bacterial activities and the coefficient of absorption of oxygen by water, and still other matters, bear upon this question, the detailed discussion of which is not now necessary. We feel certain that a dilution of 2^ cubic feet per second would cause offense at times, and probably also a dilu¬ tion of 3 cubic feet per second. FUTURE POPULATION ON AN AREA TRIBUTARY TO THE CHICAGO RIVER AND DRAINAGE CANAL WITH REFERENCE TO SEWAGE DISPOSAL. On the basis of the diversion of 10,000 cubic feet per second of Lake Michigan water, on the present assumption of 3J feet per second as being the volume to be provided for each 1,000 population connected with the sewers, and on the assumption of elimi¬ nating objectionable trade wastes, the present method of disposal may serve until the population on the drainage area of the Chicago River reaches 3,000,000 people. On the further assumption that through the Chicago River and various conduits connected with its branches there will be a flow equal to 14.000 cubic feet per second, which is the capacity of the rock section of the drainage canal, the maximum popu¬ lation which might be taken care of in this way is about 4,200,000 people. \Wth a Im-ge portion of the 270 square miles draining into the Chicago River, but not yet built up, even on a suburban basis, it is evident that in future years there will be a much greater population than now exists. W e have considered the rate of growth of Chicago from various viewpoints, notably the density of its population, and have compared its growth with that of other metro¬ politan districts. There is, of course, no way of predicting accurately how rapid will be the growth of Chicago in future years; but it is a reasonable assumption that before many years it will become a city of some five or six millions of population. It seems reasonable to infer that the population residing upon the area tributary to the Chicago River and its branches will ultimately exceed both the 3,000,000 and 4,200,000 esti¬ mates above mentioned. In other words, the present dilution method will certainly not alone for all time take care of the crude sewage of this area. There are several available methods for the purification of sewage depending upon the degree of purifaction desired, as will be noted beyond in connection with the Calumet area. It is not probable that the sewage of the old part of Chicago will ever be purified by artificial means, as it would be proportionately much more difficult and expensive to deliver the sewage to suitable sites for purification than to continue the present dilu- INTERNATIONAI. WATERWAYS COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. 105 tion method. It is different with the outlyin" districts tributary to the Chic^o River. In the future, when these districts become built up so that the population exceeds the limits above stated, the installation of sewage purification works will necessarily follow. PROPOSED CALUMET CANAL. The more essential features of this ])roposed canal, as obtained from local oflicials, may be summarized as follows: Location. —The canal would extend from a point on the Little Calumet River near Blue Island, through the Sag Valley, and enter the drainage canal near Sag Station. Territory tributary. —The total drainage area of the Calumet River is 825 square miles, of which 473 are in Indiana. Within the limits of the sanitary district of Chicago and south of Eighty-seventh Street, the area is 94.5 square miles, with a population of about 100,000 in 1900. It is stated that the ])opulation has nearly doubled within the past six years, and it is expected to reach a million people or more within a fairly short period, as the conditions for a manufacturing district are very favorable. Size. —The size of this canal, as proposed, is such as to give a flow of 4,000 cubic feet per second. Reversal oj fioxv. —The natural flow of the Calumet River exceeds 12,500 cubic feet per second. It is proposed, if suitable legislation can be secured, to construct a dam, below Thorn Creek, at the southern boundary of the sanitary district, and divert into Lake Michigan, through a channel to be built about 17^ miles east of the State line the flow of tliis streom, with a drainage area of about 587_square miles. The size of the proposed Calumet Canal is too small to secure at all times a reversal of flow of the remaining portion of the area,which is about 240 square miles. It is pro])osed to put a controlling lock on the canal east of Blue Island to prevent flood waters from this lower area entering the canal, at which times sewage entering the river on the lake side of the lock would go into the lake. The proposed c'anal is insuflicient to carry in the future all the storm flows of the Sag Valley itself. These would, at least, in part, require diversion through present or other channels. Cost. —The estimated cost of this proposed canal is §12,000,000. Population to he served. —On the assumption already stated, this canal, by dilution, would dis])Ose of the sewage of about 1,200,000 people, not including objectionable trade wastes. This makes the cost of sewage dis])Osal $10 per capita for the entire future population, or about $00 for the present population.* The sewage would for the most part reach the canal by gravity through the Calumet River, so that the cost of maintenance would be comparatively small. In passing, we may say that the Calumet area, both in Illinois and Indiana, is cer¬ tain to develop rapidly^ and its population will eventually far exceed the above figure. RELATION OF SEWAGE DISPOSAL FOR THE CALUMET AREA TO THE WATER SUPPLY OF CHICAGO. For the reasons above stated in connection with the reversal of flow, the sanitary effect upon Lake Michigan water at the Hyde Park intake and vicinity of this pro¬ posed Calumet Canal would not be nearly as effective as that of the main canal for the Chicago River territory and neighboring intakes. This fact is imjiortaiit in connection with the degree of sewage ])urification required by artificial purification works to give a sanitary effect equal to that of the proposed canal. There seems to be no doubt that at times the sewage entering the Calumet River under present conditions from this district pollutes the lake water from the Hyde Park intake crib. It may pollute the water at other intakes, but our evidence is not conclu¬ sive. In the future, when the Calumet area is built uj), it is possible that intake cribs may be built nearer to the mouth of the Calumet River than is the Hyde Park intake. In view of the fact that the proposed Calumet Canal can not keep all sewage out of Lake Michigan at times of heavy rainfall, it is important to note that the water supply of this section of ( hicago will eventually have to be purified by modern filtration works. This can be done at moderate cost, and it will be the cheapest and best solution of this promlem to filter the water supjily of this district and to purify the sewage to such a degree that the effluent will be fairly clear and nonputrescible, that is, free from dis¬ agreeable odors. With additional expense the sewage effluent (of the quality just stated) can be given a supplementary purification, making it practically free of bac¬ teria by treating it with a germicide or by filtering it according to water purification practice. . . • Under existing conditions we are firmly of the opinion that all the purification re¬ quired of the sewage of the Calumet district is to make it fairly clear and nonputrescible. 106 INTERNATIONAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. AVAILABLE METHODS OF SEWAGE DISPOSAL OTHER THAN THAT OF THE DILUTION METHOD PROPOSED FOR THE CALUMET AREA, The degree of purification of sewage by various forms of treatment differs naturally under different local conditions, but from general experience approximate results may be compared, substantially as follows; Percentage purification. Method. Suspended matter. Organic matter. Bacteria. Fine screens (30-mesh or finer). 15 10 15 Sedimentation. 65 30 Septic treatment. 65 30 (>5 Chemical precipitation. 85 50 85 Contact filters i. 85-90 65-70 80-85 Sprinkhng filters i. 85-90 65-70 90-95 Intermittent sand filters i. 95-99 90-98 98-99 1 The figures for the last three forms of treatment are on the assumption that the sewage is given some form of preparatory treatment before it is applied to the filters, and that with the sprinkling filters the effluent is allowed to settle. ^ It is to be stated that none of the first four treatments above tabulated will by itself give a nonputrescible effluent. Therefore they can be used here only in connection with some form of filtration. For large works filters can be more economically operated if the sewage is first clarified in part, as stated in connection with the above summary. The most appro¬ priate method for this preparatory or preliminary treatment is considered by most sanitary engineers in this country and abroad to consist of septic tanks, which is the expression applied to sedimentation basins in which the deposited sludge is allowed to accumulate to undergo bacterial action. There are several forms of filters, the most widely known of which in this country is the intermittent sand filter, sometimes mentioned as the so-called “land treatment” for sewage disposal. This method was considered in 1886-87 for the entire Chicago area and reported upon unfavorably on account of its being more expensive than the adopted method of dilution. Local experiencese find that a feeling appears to prevail among some persons at Chicago against land treatment of sewage, due perhaps to the unsuccessful operation of the sewage farm at Pullman, which is situated within this Calumet area. We are familiar with the facts and experiences at Pullman, and are clearly of the opinion that they are not necessarily a criterion for the Calumet area. This opinion is based partly upon the small size of particles of the soil at the Pullman farm and partly upon the fact that the farm was devoted principally to agricultural rather than sewage purification purposes. Sand areas .—We have examined the tracts of lake sand which are found in Indiana and to a limited extent in the township of Thornton, Ill. The latter areas are too limited in extent and too shallow to be considered for present purposes. The only areas of suitable porous sand for land treatment of the Calumet sewage are in Indiana. We have collected five samples of this sand for mechanical analysis, and have obtained the results as to size of sand grains. Pepresentative results average sub¬ stantially as follows: Millimeters. Effective size.. 0.15 Uniformity coefficient.'. 1. 40 If we disregard the State boundary line, a large tract of sand of a suitable character is available for the disposal of the sewage of this district. The best area lies between the Little Calumet and the Grand Calumet Rivers and extends east of Hammond for many miles. Within the past six or eight years great strides have been taken in the field of sewage purification in connection with works of wholly artificial construction. We refer par¬ ticularly to filters of coarse, firm material, such as broken stone, slag, or clinker, and usually spoken of as “coarse-grained filters,” as distinguished from fine-grained sand filters. Coarse-grained filters are of two types, spoken of as “contact filters” and “sprinkling filters,” according to the method by which the sewage is applied to them. These INTERNATIONAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. 107 filters produce an effluent which will not putrefy when they are operated at a rate far greater than that which is possible for sand filters. We shall describe briefly each of these types of sewage-purification methods and state their approximate cost of construction on suitable sites for the Calumet area, based upon unit prices in accordance with experience elsewhere. An outline is first required, however, of the intercepting sewers, pumping stations, and rising mains necessary to collect and deliver the sewage to the filter sites, of which there are several available. . , , , ^ ^ Regardless of the particular kind of filter found most suitable for the Calumet area, there are a number of features common to all methods, and which may be stated as follows: . ,1 . X • 1 1 Separate sewers. —With the adoption of sewage filters for this district we are clearly of the opinion that it would be advisable hereafter to build a separate system of sewers for domestic sewage only. Some, if not all, of the existing main sewers could be used for the removal of storm and surface water only and new sewers parallel them for sew- a<^e removal, or some of the existing sewers could be utilized for sewage remo\ab TGOiiirin^ nGW structurGS for storm-wRtGr rGmovRl. Trado w D-stGS should bo oxcludcd from all Wers. We have obviously not included in the cost of purifying the sewage any expense for the main sewers or laterals to collect it and deliver it to the interceptors. VoluTfie of sewage .—We have assumed that the sewage of this district w’'ill approxi¬ mate 130 gallons per capita daily on an average. Wdth a population of 1,200 000 the total volume of sew^age w^ould therefore be about 156,000,000 gallons daily. W e have also allowed for ground-water seepage up to 1,000 gallons per square inile per day. Interceptors.—Yor purposes of making approximate but liberal estimates of cost ot purifying the sew^age of this district, wx have prepared sketches showdng the intercept¬ ing sewers which wdll be required in order to collect the sewage of the district at four or more centrally located pumping stations. W e have assumed that these intercepting sew'ers will be built of concrete, and wfflen flowing full have a capacity of 250 gallons per 24 hours for each person resident upon the area tributary to the interceptor. Wfflen full, these interceptors have been assumed to have a velocity of 2.5 feet per second We have also assumed, after excluding that portion of the Calumet district reached by extreme high w^ater in the lake, that on an average the population con¬ tributing to the four or more pumping stations w'ould be about 20 to 25 persons per acre. On this'^basis the length and size of the necessary intercepting sewers have been obtained. , , , . Pumping stations. —For convenience we have located foiu' main pumping stations near Riverdale, Harvey, South Hammond, and South Chicago. There lyill be re¬ quired wfflen the district is built up to the extent herein considered, a total punqiing capacity of about 340,000,000 gallons daily, including necessary reserve capacity at each station. , , , , , , Septic tonits.—Regardless of the type of filter adopted, the sewage w^ould be screened at the pumping stations, and then flow through septic tanks having a capacity of eight hours’ flow on an average. These tanks would be about 12 to 15 feet deep, built of con¬ crete, and arranged in compartments, so as to facilitate septic action on the deposited sludge, but without such action taking place in the flowing sewage itself. Uw ing to the severe winter climate in this vicinity, it is our opinion that it w^ould be w'lse to cover these tanks. . , , . . Of the solid matters in suspension in the sew^age about 6o per cent would deposit in the septic tanks, and of these deposited solid matters about one-half w^ould be liquefied and gasified by bacterial decomposition. . , ^ c The sludge, wfflich would be removed at intervals of once a year or so from the tanks, is estimated to contain about 85 per cent water and to amount to about 2 cubic yards per 1 000 000 gallons. Bacterial action converts this sludge to a practically inert mass which can be pumped in thin layers onto adjoining land allowed to dry. This is the form of preliminary treatment in use in some 40 places in this country, including Plainfield, N. J., Saratoga, N. Y., Mansfield, Ohio Champaign, Ill etc It is the preliminary step in the works under construction at Columbus, Ohio, ^Ber elabo¬ rate tests of different methods were made for a period of nearly one year. It has also been adopted recently at Baltimore, Md., Reading, Pa., and Waterbury, Conn., and has been recently proposed for Paterson, N. J., in a somewhat modified form This form of preliminary treatment has been and is now extensively used in Europe with satisfactory results where the tanks are built and operated to meet local conditions as to volume and strength of sewage. u The odors from large open septic tanks are seldom noticeable a few hundred feet away. Under good management a septic effluent can be applied to sprinkling filters so that no objectionable odors should be carried one-quarter of a inile. The cost of building and operating septic tanks would be substantially the same tor all filter projects, and is considered under each as a common factor. 108 INTERNATIONAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. INTERMITTENT SAND FILTERS. This well-known method consists of applying the partially clarified sewage coming from the septic tanks to areas of porous sand, below the surface of which at depths of from 3 to 5 feet are underdrains of open-jointed pipe to convey the purified sewage to the nearest watercourse. The sewage is applied only at intervals of once a day or so to a depth of perhaps 6 inches. Between applications the sand layer is allowed to drain so that its pores may fill with air. This aeration of the pores of the sand allows bacterial processes to convert the organic matter to a large extent to harmless mineral matter. The effluent is practically free of noticeable suspended matter and objection¬ able organisms, and can be discharged directly into the nearest watercourse. This method is now in successful use in 40 to 50 places in this country where porous sand areas are available. It serves a total population of about 350,000 people. Well- known plants are to be found at Framingham, Brockton, Clinton, and Worcester, Mass.; Pawtucket and Woonsocket, R. I.; Meriden and New Britain, Conn.; Saratoga, N. Y., etc. From time to time it is necessary to rake, harrow, or plow the surface of intermittent sand filters and to remove the scum which slowly accumulates there. At intervals it is necessary to scrape off several inches of the upper portion of the sand layer when it is found that they are so clogged that harrowing and plowing no longer prevents the surface from remaining covered with sewage. With crude sewage it appears from Massachusetts evidence, especially from the tests conducted for a period of 19 years at the Lawrence Experiment Station, that it would be necessary to provide 1 acre of intermittent sand filters for each 500 persons connected with the sewers. When the sewage is given a preliminary treat¬ ment in septic tanks, and when the filters are operated under intelligent supervision, the area may be reduced so as to provide 1 acre per 1,000 persons. The most suitable natural site for sand filters for the Calumet area is to be found in the State of Indiana, between the Little Calumet and the Grand Calumet Rivers, east of the city of Hammond. It is possible to build artificial sand filters within the Calumet district, but the cost would be much greater than for any of the projects considered in this report. Based upon our knowledge of these filters elsewhere, and without considering inter¬ state complications, we estimate that the cost of installing and operating such a plant, with its various appurtenances, east of Hammond, and of a capacity of about 180,000,000 gallons daily to serve a population of 1,200,000 people, would be as follows; Estimated cost of constructing sand-filter plant and appurtenances. Intercepting sewers, pumping stations, and appurtenances, including a daily capacity of 340,000,000 gallons, and rising mains. Septic tanks, 60,000,000. gallons capacity, covered, including sludge- disposal facilities. Intermittent sand filters, 1,200 acres, with distributors, drains, office, laboratory, etc. $5, 070, 000 950, 000 3, 600, 000 . . 9,620,000 C ontingencies and supervision, 15 per cent. 443^ 000 Totul.. 11,063,000 Annual cost of operation. Pumping, fuel, labor, and repairs. |300 000 Supervision, analytical, and clerical assistants, etc. 25^000 Care of septic tanks, including sludge disposal. 36,’ 000 Care of sand filters. 48o’ 000 Supplies and miscellanies. 25’ 000 866, 000 Capitalizing the operating expenses at 5 per cent per annum there is obtained $17,320,000, which, when added to the estimated construction cost, makes a total sum of $28,383,000 for the sand-filter project. CONTACT FILTERS. These filters consist of beds of broken stone, slag, or cinders, placed in uncovered basins to a depth of from 3 to 5 feet. The size of material ranges from about one- fourth to 1 inch. INTERNATIONAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. 109 The filters are ordinarily operated upon the fill and draw plan; that is, the gate on the outlet pipe is closed until the voids of the bed are filled with sewage from the septic tanks. After filling, the filters are allowed to stand full for an hour or so, then the sewage is allowed slowly to drain out, and this cycle of ojieration is repeated once or twice a day. When the filtering material is drained the voids fill with air, and it is during these periods of draining that bacterial processes accomplish the })urification of the organic matter, which to a large degree is lodged u])on the surfaces of the filtering material as the sewage is slowly withdrawn from the bed. The rates of filling and drawing the beds may be satisfactorily controlled by a number of automatic devices on the market and which are in successful use in a number of places. Contact filters are an Phiglish adaptation of studies made some 15 years ago u])on the gravel filters by the Massachusetts State Board of Health at the Lawrence Ex¬ periment Station. These studies were begun about 13 years ago at London. As an outcome of these and numerous other investigations, contact fdters have been adopted and are in successful use for dozens of English cities, the largest of which is Manchester, wdth a population of about 600,000. In this country contact fdters have been installed for a dozen or more small cities, and numerous institutions. Perhaps the best-knowm plants are at Plainfield, N. J., Mansfield, Ohio, and Charlotte, N. C. They are especially applicable to i)rojects wdiere only a small amount of head is available and where pumping w'ould be required for sprinkling fdters. For large ])rojects, and where pumping is not a factor, recent experiences wdth sprinkling filters show that as a rule they are more economical. Notwithstanding this, contact filters have served and wdll serve a useful purpose in the field of sewage disposal in this country. Their convenience of operation makes them especially suitable for small installations. Many contact-filter plants have their beds arranged in terraces so that the sewage may be ])assed successively through two or three filters. There are a number of advantages of this arrangement, but it is not applicable to the Calumet district, owdng to the level area of the available sites. One of the advantages of the double and triple contact filters is that they may be operated from below^ during wdnter weather and thus guard against reductions in the rate of filtration due to freezing. The most available and suitable local sites are: A tract w^est of Harvey and betw een the Illinois Central and Rock Island Railroads; a tract west of Hammond and the local branch of the Fort Wayne Railroad; and a tract betw’een Lakes Calumet and Wolf. As to the rate of filtration, w^e have assumed that contact filters should be 5 feet in depth and that they wmuld satisfactorily purify the effluent from septic tanks at the rate of 600,000 gallons per acre per 24 hours. This means that 1 acre of contact filters should be provided for every 4,000 persons connected with the sewers. The eflluent from contact filters operated under these conditions would be ordinarily free from objectionable amounts of suspended matter, and the amount of organic matter w^ould be reduced so that it w^ould not ])utrefy upon standing. On an average about 15 to 20 ])er cent of the bacteria in the crude sewage would be present in the effluent. It would not be improper to discharge such an effluent as it carite from the filters directly into the nearest w^atercourse. The amount of attendance requmed for contract fdters is not great, and is covered mainly by the necessary gatemen, analysts, and foremen. At intervals all of the material w’ould have to be removed from the filters, washed, and replaced. The approximate cost of buildingand operating a contract-filter plant with all needed appurtenances of a capacity of about 180,000,000 gallons daily to serve 1,200,000 people may be estimated as follow's: Estimated cost of constructing contact-filter plant and appurtenances. Intercepting sew’ers, pumping stations, and appurtenances, including a daily capacity of 340,000,000 gallons, and rising mains. Septic tanks, 60,000,000 gallons capacity, covered, including sludge, dis¬ posal facilities. Contract filters, 300 acres, wdth all piping, appurtenances, office, laboratory, etc. §3, 300, 000 950, 000 6, 000, 000 10, 250, 000 1, 537, 500 Contingencies and supervision, 15 per cent Total. 11, 787, 500 110 INTERNATIONAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. Annual cost of operations. Pumping, fuel, labor, and repairs. $200, 000 Supervision, analytical, and clerical assistants. 30, 000 Care of septic tanks, including sludge disposal. 36, 000 Care of contact filters. 260, 000 Supplies and miscellaneous. 25, 000 Total. 551,000 Capitalizing tlie operating expenses at 5 per cent per annum there is obtained $11,020,000, which when added to the estimated construction cost makes a total sum of $22,807,500 for the contact-filter project. SPRINKLING FILTERS. % Sprinkling filters differ from contact filters principally in the method of application of sewage, which in our northern climates is discharged upon them in the form of spray from a series of fixed sprinkling nozzdes placed about 12 to 15 feet apart. The filters are usually deeper and of somewhat coarser material than contact filters. These filters also are an English adaptation of the Lawrence investigations with gravel filters some 15 years ago. The English studies began at Salford in 1892 and have resulted in the adoption of this form of filter for many of the principal cities in England, the largest of which is the metropolitan district of Birmingham, with a population of over 900,000. Some of these filters have been in successful practical operation for more than 8 years. On the Continent this method is being adopted for portions of the suburbs of Paris and Berlin. In this country this method has been studied with care at Lawrence, Mass.; Colum¬ bus, Ohio; Boston, Mass., and Waterbury, Conn. Filters of this type are now under construction at Columbus, Ohio, and Reading, Pa. They have been recently adopted for Baltimore, Md.; West Chester, Pa.; Washington, Pa., and Waterbury, Conn. They have been recommended for use also at Paterson, N. J. The important element of aeration is secured in sprinkling filters partly by applying the liquid as a spray and partly through the use of coarse material with voids of a size, so that there is a vertical circulation of air through the filtering material at all times. Suspended mineral and organic matters and some of the dissolved organic matters are retained upon the surface of the filtering material as the liquid passes in thin films over the surface of the particles. Bacterial activities reduce the organic matter to a material degree, and from time to time the remaining inert material cracks and peels and passes through the filter bed to the bottom. In order to be able to remove this accumulated matter, it is necessary to provide false bottoms for these filters. Filters of this type have been in successful use for more than 8 years without cleaning, and it is believed that under favorable conditions cleaning is not required oftener than once in 10 or 15 years. The amount of suspended matter in the effluent of sprinkling filters due to this unloading of stored material is sufficient to requme passing the effluent through settling basins, holding about two hours’ flow, before discharging into the nearest water course. The settled effluent, of satisfactory appearance and with its organic matter so reduced that it will not putrefy, usually contains less than 10 per cent of the bacteria in the crude sewage. There is a considerable range in size of broken stone and in depth of material as adopted in various large plants now built or building. Avoiding extremes, it may be stated that the depths average about 7 feet and the size of material ranges from about 1 to 2^ inches, mean diameter. We have assumed these figures for sprinkling filters for the Galumet area, to be built of broken stone at the sites already mentioned for contact filters, namely, west of Harvey, west of Hammond, and between lakes Calu¬ met and Wolf. We have carefully considered the climatic conditions at Chicago and compared them with temperatures where practical experiences with sprinkling filters have been obtained. There is no trouble from the freezing of the sprinkling nozzles through which sewage is applied under a head of 6 or 7 feet. During zero weather some frozen sewage accumulates on the surface of the filter, and at such times it is necessary to have some reserve area. We have assumed that under these local conditions one acre of sprink¬ ling filters should be provided for every 15,000 people connected with the sewers, mak¬ ing a rate ordinarily of about 2,250,000 gallons per acre per 24 hours. As was demon¬ strated at Columbus, such rates for several weeks at a time may be doubled and still obtain a satisfactory nonputrescible effluent. This rate, expressed in persons served INTERNATIONAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. Ill per acre-foot of sprinkling filter material, is only about one-half of that provided for at Columbus, Ohio, and one-third of that in several plants in England. The approximate cost of building and operating a sprinkling filter ])lant with all needed appurtenances, of a capacity of 180,000,000 gallons daily, to serve a population of 1,200,000 may be estimated as follows: Estimated cost of constructimj sprinklina filter plant and appurtenances. Intercepting sewers, pumping stations and appurtenances, including a daily capacity of 340,000,000 gallons, and rising mains. $3, 300, 000 Septic tanks, 00,000,000 gallons’ capacity, covered, including sludge- disposal facilities. 050, 000 Sprinkling filters, 80 acres, with all a])})urtenances, office, laboratory, etc.. 3, GOO, 000 Settling basins, 15,000,000 gallons’ capacity. 200, 000 8, 050, 000 Contingencies and supervision, 15 per cent. 1, 207, 500 Total. 9,257,500 Annual cost of operation. Pumping, fuel, labor, and repairs... $200, 000 Supervision, analytical and clerical assistants. 30, 000 Care of septic and settling tanks, including sludge disposal. 54, 000 Care of sprinkling filters. ■' . 110, 000 Supplies and miscellanies. 25, 000 Total. 419,000 ('apitalizing the operating expenses at 5 per cent per annum, there is obtained $8,380,000, which when added to the estimated construction cost makes a total sum of $17,037,500 for the sprinkling filter project. CONCLUSION. In recapitulating the substance of the foregoing inquiry and referring specifically to vour instructions, summarized at the outset, we conclude as follows: 1. The examination into the sanitary situation at Chicago, so far as it is affected by sewage disposal, revealed that since removing the sewage through the drainage canal the appearance of the water of the Chicago River has shown marked improvement. As regards the hygienic quality of the public water supply there has also been an improvement, due to the progressive elimination of sewage from the lake, which elimination should be completed within a few years. 2. The latest conclusions of sanitary engineers as to the amount of dilution which is required to make sewage inoffensive are that a dilution of 3^ cubic feet per second for each 1,000 persons connected with the sewers, as provided for in the enactment of the Illmois Legislature in 1889, is as low a figure as it is now possible to state. We believe that with the elimination of objectionable trade wastes and the occasional dredging of the river this amount of dilution will be sufficient to prevent offensiveness. 3. The extension of the dilution method to the outlying territory is not the only way to preserve the lives and health of the people of Chicago. The application of this method with flows of 10,000 and 14,000 cubic feet per second, respectively, for the area tributary to the present drainage canal will serve populations not exceeding 3,000,000 and 4,200,000, respectively. For greater populations other methods of sewage dis¬ posal will be required. 4. For the Calumet area, as well as other districts, there are several methods for the disposal of sewage as effective as the present method of dilution in preventing the pollution of the lake waters. 5. All of these methods involve intercepting sewers and pumping stations to collect and deliver the sewage at suitable sites. Septic tanks are used for partially clarifying the sewage, which may then be applied to any one of three methods of filters, viz, intermittent sand filters, contact filters, and sprinkling filters. All of these filters, if well built and well managed, remove the suspended and organic matters so that the effluents are practically clear and are nonputrescible. The removal of bacteria by these three types of filters averages at least 98, 80, and 90 per cent, respectively. Suc*h effluents may be discharged directly into any of the watercourses of the Calumet region. 112 INTERNATIONAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. 6. The approximate total costs, liberally estimated, without the preparation of detailed plans, for a population of 1,200,000 are as follows: A .—Intermittent sand filters. Construction. $11,063,000 Annual cost of operation, $866,000, capitalized at 5 per cent. 17, 320, 000 28, 383, 000 B .—Contact filters. Construction.$ 11 ^ 787 ^ 500 Annual cost of operation, $551,000, capitalized at 5 per cent. 11, 020, 000 22, 807, 500 C .—Sprinkling filters. Construction. | 9 ^ 257, 500 Annual cost of operation, $419,000, capitalized at 5 per cent. 8, 380, 000 17, 637, 500 The present population on the Calumet area of the sanitary district being less than 200,000 would naturally require but a portion of the cost of estimated works and of their operation to be expended at the outset. Of the available methods of disposing of the sewage of the Calumet area, other than by dilution, the sprinkling fdter method, being the cheapest, both in cost of construc¬ tion and of operation, and accomplishing an adequate degree of purification, is clearly the most advantageous one. Very respectfully, Kudolph Hering. George W. Fuller. Appendix K, Report of the International Waterways Commission on the Location of THE Boundary Line Between the United States and Canada Through Lake Erie. • Toronto, January 4, 1907. This matter comes before the International Waterways Commission by indorse¬ ment of the Secretary of War dated September 10, 1906, referring letters of the Acting Secretary of State dated September 5, 1906, and September 7, 1906, respectively. The subject matter referred is set forth in the letter of the Acting Secretary of State, dated September 5, which, after stating that the commander of the Canadian cruiser Vigilant had made a proposition to log and mark by buoys the exact international water boundary line on Lake Erie, thereby enabling fishermen to keep on their side of the line,_ and that difference of opinion exists between interested parties as to the exact location of the boundary line, asks that the matter be referred to this commis¬ sion with the inquiry whether it is known that the American and Canadian charts of the locality agree as to the distance to be logged from the gas buoy at Erie to the boundary on the usual fishing ground. After most diligent research the commission has been unable to discover any authoritative description, map, or chart, American or British, from which the location of the boundary line on Lake Erie can be determined and laid down on modern charts, satisfactorily, except from a point southeast of ^liddle Island to the mouth of Detroit River, and from a point near the mouth of Niagara River northerly. The sixth article of the treaty of Ghent, after stating that by the former treaty of peace the boundary line from the point where the forty-fifth degree of north latitude meets the St. Lawrence River to Lake Superior, was declared to be “along the middle of said river into Lake Ontario, through the middle of said lake until it strikes the Communication by water between that lake and Lake Erie, thence along the- middle of said communication into Lake Erie, through the middle of said lake until it arrives at the water communication into Lake Huron, thence through the middle of said lake to the water communication between that lake and Lake Superior,” and after stating that doubts have arisen as to “what was the middle of said river, lakes, and water communications, and whether certain islands lying in the same were within the dominion of His Britannic Majesty or the United States,” provides for a reference INTERNATIONAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. IIS of the matter to two commissioners who are instnicted by the article to designate, by a reT)ort or declaration under their hands and seals, the boundary through the said river, lakes, and water communications and to decide what islands belong to each of the con¬ tracting parties, it being provided that the decision of the commissioners should be final and conclusive. The treaty referred to in this article is that concluded in the year 1783. By Article II of that treaty the boundary line of the St. Lawrence system is described as commencing at a point where the forty-fifth degree of north latitude meets the St. Lawrence River, thence through the middle of that river and through the middle of Lake Ontario, the middle of the water communication between Lake Erie and I^ake Ontario, to the middle of Lake Erie, the middle of the water commu¬ nication between Lake Erie, and Lake Huron, the middle of Lake Huron to the water communication between that lake and Lake Superior, thence through Lake Superior northward of the Isles Royal and Phelipeaux to the Long Lake. From this it follows that the commissioners were appointed to determine the middle line of all waters between the east end of Lake Superior and the junction of the forty-fifth degree of north latitude with the middle line of the St. Lawrence River, in accordance with the true meaning of the treaty of 1783. The commissioners were appointed, and by a report dated June 18, 1822, they described the boundary line. The description is no more definite, so far as the Great Lakes are concerned, than was the treaty of 1783 (except in Lake Erie west of Middle Island), and a similar de.scription to that in the treaty is adopted in the report of the commissioners when describing the boundary line in those lakes. It is impossible from the reports to lay down with accuracy the boundary line in any of the waters covered by it. The commissioners appear to have ended their labors at the foot of Neebish Rapids in St. Marys River, not agreeing as to which channel the line should follow going north from that point. However, they filed a map showing the line from a point near the head of Sugar Island through the river to a point opposite Gros Cap and Point Iroquois, the east end of Lake Superior. In their report they state that the boundary line as determined by them “is more clearly indicated in a series of maps accompanying their report, exhibiting a correct survey and delineation of all the river, lakes, water communications, and islands embraced by the sixth article of the treaty of Ghent, by a black line shaded on the British side with red and on the American side with blue and each sheet of which series of maps is identified by a certificate subscribed by the commissioners and by the two principal surveyors employed by them.” The commissioners, as stated in their report, prepared certain maps to accompany it, which it is understood were filed in London and in the office of the Secretary of State at Washington with quadruplicate reports. The records of the Secretary of State at Washington disclose maps, properly authenticated by the commissioners and the surveyors, showing the boundary line through the St. Lawrence River and as far as a point near and southwesterly from Duck Islands in Lake Ontario, through Niagara River to a point in the nortfieasterly end of Lake Erie about north of the mouth of Buffalo Creek, in the city of Buffalo; from a point near and southeasterly from Middle Island, at the southwest end of Lake Erie, to the mouth of the Detroit River, through the Detroit River, through Lake St. Clair and the St. Clair River to Lake Huron, and through Lake Huron to and into St. Marys River as far as the foot of Neebish Rapids; also from a point about a mile above Sugar Island through the river to a point opposite Point Iroquois in Lake Superior. There are on file in the office of the Secretary of State of the United States unauthenticated maps showing what purports to be the boundary line through Lakes Onatrio and Erie. This commission has not had an opportunity to consult the maps filed in I>ondon by the commissioners appointed under the treaty, but historical research indicates that there was no map of the boundary line in I^ake Ontario from near Duck Islands to the mouth of the Niagara River, and no map of the boundary line in Lake Erie from about opposite the city of Buffalo to a point near and southeast of Middle Island, authenticated by the commissioners appointed under the treaty of Ghent; and it is clear that the commissioners did not agree upon the boundary Ime through Lake Superior, nor through the St. Marys River from the foot of Neebish Rapids to a point near the head of Sugar Island. The maps of Lakes Huron, St. Clair, and Superior are authenticated by the commissioners, but are so inaccurate that they are useless for the purpose of accurately determining the location of the boundary lines on them. By the treaty of Washington, ratified in 1842, Article II, the boundary line from the point where the commissioners under the treaty of Ghent ceased their labors, viz, at the foot of Neebish Rapids, through St. Marys River and Lake Superior to Pigeon River, at the westerly end of the lake, was described. In this article maps of St. Marys River and Lake Superior are referred to as made by the commissioners under the treaty of Ghent and as having traced on them part of the boundary line in St. Marys River S. Doc. 959-62-3-8 114 INTERNATIONAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. and the boundary line in Lake Superior to a point north of Isle Royal. These maps were made by the commissioners pursuant to Article VII of the treaty of Ghent. Reference to the records in the office of the Secretary of State discloses maps of the boundary line described in the treaty of Washington, certified by the commissioners appointed under the treaty of Ghent and by Daniel Webster, Secretary of State of the United States, and Lord Ashburton, Minister Plenipotentiary of Her Majesty the Queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, who negotiated and signed the treaty. These maps show the boundary line from the head of Muddy Lake (now known as “Mud” Lake) through the St. Marys River to a point about a mile above the head of Sugar Island, and from opposite Point Iroquios through Lake Superior to the Pigeon River. As the office of the Secretary of State of the United States is the only proper place in the United States for deposit of the report and maps prepared by the commissioners appointed under the provisions of the treaty of Ghent, the commission concludes that there is no authoritative delineation of the boundary line through I.ake Erie in exist¬ ence unless a properly certified map was filed in London by the commissioners and is to be found there now. The commission would, however, suggest that as the dimen¬ sions of the Great Lakes and the contour of their shores had not been ascertained with any accuracy at the time the commissioners appointed under the treaty of Ghent acted, it is highly improbable that any map prepared by them would be sufficient for the purpose of laying down the boundary line on modern charts. The map of Lake Erie on file in the office of the Secretary of State is an illustration. It plainly discloses that the dimensions of that lake and the contour of its shores were not known at the time it was.prepared, for the lake itself appears on the map to be about 18 miles too long and in one place to be about 16 miles wider than it actually is. with an average excess width of about 6^ miles; that is, its dimensions are so distorted that the location of the boundary line delineated upon it can not be accurately ascertained and can not be laid down upon modern charts without proceeding upon suppositions upon which it would be difficult or impossible to secure agreement by different engineers. The inaccuracy of this map is illustrated further hereafter. There are in existence two official maps of Lake Erie which show a boundary line. These are a chart prepared by the British Admiralty and a chart prepared by the Hydrographic Office, Bureau of Navigation, Department of the Navy of the United States. The boundary lines as laid down upon these maps vary greatly from each other, and neither one is so far authoritative as to be binding upon the United States and the Dominion of Canada. The British Admiralty map is projected upon the polyconic system, the scale being 1 to 400000 approximately, the hydrographic chart being laid down on Mercator’s projection. The difficulty in ascertaining the exact location of the boundary on Lake Erie from a point opposite Buffalo to the point near Middle Island arises from the language of the treaties of 1783 and 1814, as well as the language adopted in their report by the com¬ missioners appointed under the latter treaty. All these instruments define the boundary line as passing through “the middle” of the lake. The expression used is subject to various interpretations: It may mean— (а) A line being at all points equally distant from each shore. (б) A line following the general lines of the shores and dividing the surface water area as nearly as practicable into two equal parts. (c) A line along the midchannel dividing the navigable portion of the lake, and being at all points equally distant from the shoal water on each shore. It is to be observed that if the second interpretation above mentioned be adopted as governing the location of the boundary line, a question will arise, probably capable of being adjusted by compromise, as to how far the location of a line “following the general lines of the shores” would be affected by the projection known as Long Point. It is also to be observed that it may be possible to establish a line which would not greatly differ from the lines which would result from the adoption of any of the above- suggested interpretations and which would consist of the fewest possible number of straight lines. The great advantage of such a boundary is manifest as enabling fish¬ ermen and navigators to locate it with accuracy. A line can be delineated upon modern charts, by agreement between the United States and Great Britain, so as to carry out the spirit of the treaties of 1783 and 1814, accomplish a just division of the lake, and present a practical boundary consisting of a few straight lines, the location of which at any point can be accurately ascertained when necessary, and which will not be confusing to fishermen or navigators. In the opinion of the commission such a boundary is the proper one, but no engineer can project it upon modern charts until it has been settled by a joint commission, inas¬ much as it is possible to place several lines upon a modern chart, differing very con- eiderably from each other. INTERNATIONAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. 115 Accurate charts of the Great laikes, ])rojecte(l on the ])olyconic system u])()n a scale of 1 to 400,000, have been issued by the l.’nited States Lake Survey, and the commis¬ sion, for the ])uriK)se of illustrating the dilliculties in the way of ascertaining and delineating the boundary line on Lake Erie, has caused that line as laid down by the British Admiralty, together with the line as delineated by the Hydrographic Survey Ollice, to be drawn on the Lake Survey chart which accompanies this re])ort and ia marked “A.” To illustrate the absolute unreliability and inaccuracy of the ma]) of Lake Erie on fde in the ollice of the Secretary of State of the United States, the commission has prepared a copy thereof u])on a reduced scale, which, by super])ositi()n u])on the chart marked “A,” will disclose the distortion of the lake’s dimejisions and the impos¬ sibility of reproducing upon the Lake Survey chart the boundary line as it a'|)pears on that map. This reduced ma]) accom])anies our report and is marked “ B.” It is ])rojected upon the same system and as nearly as ])ossible u])on the same scale as chart, A. Map B discloses that at the time it was made the contour of the south shore of Lake Erie was ])retty accurately known, but that knowledge of the north shore was very general, for, by placing map B on chart A, the south shore line can be made to very nearly correspond, but, this being done, the north shore line ap])eoTs greatly out of ])lace. "The southwest end of Lake Erie was surveyed by the commissioners appointed under the treaty of Ghent and consequently ap])roaches correctness, but the boundary line at that end of the lake as delineated on the filed map of the entire lake can not be made to correspond with that on the certified map of the southwest end. The map of the entire lake is in fact utterly worthless and can not be used for the purpose of locating the boundary on chart A. Gomparison of the hydrographic and British Admiralty boundary lines, laid down upon their respective charts as transferred to the laike Survey chart, shows very great discrepancies; they cross and recross each other, disclosing in some places conflicting jurisdiction and in other places what a])pears to be neutral territory, over which neither country would have jurisdiction. In one place, southeast of Long Point, the line on the hydrographic chart is about 8 miles farther north than on the British Admiralty chart, showing conflicting jurisdiction, while at another point, southwest of Long Point, there is quite a long space between the lines, the hydrographic line being about 2 miles south of the British Admiralty at the widest point, thus apparently leaving a very considerable area not within the jurisdiction of either country. If we superpose ma]) B on chart Awe find still further confusioji, inasmuch as the shore line (ff Lake Erie as shown on map B can not be made to correspond with the shore line on chart A. No engineer is ca])able of reconciling these different lines u])on any theory ])resented by the descri])tion in the treaty of 1783, or by the treaty of Ghent, or by- the report of the commissioners ap])ointed under the last-named treaty, as those descriptions simply place the boundary line in “the middle” of the lake. Interpretations of these descriptions by engineers will vary in accordance with the theories which they may adopL All the authentic maps of the lakes and the water communications between thern and of the St. Lawrence are subject to the general criticism, that while most of the rivers were surveyed and an attempt was made to lay down the boundary line on them and on the lakes, the maps do not represent present conditions with sufficient accuracy to prevent serious disagreement between surveyors who might attempt to delineate the boundary line on modern ond accurate charts, and the lines surveyed were not sufficiently marked. CONCLUSIONS. The commission therefore concludes: 1. That the international boundary line on Lake Erie can not be ascertained with anv accuracy from existing data. 2. That the American and Canadian charts of Lake Erie—namely, the hydrographic and British Admiralty charts—do not agree as to distance to be logged from the gas buoy at Erie to the boundary line on the usual fishing ground. RECOMMENDATIONS. The commission would respectfully recommend: 1. That the entire boundary line from the point where the forty-fifth parallel of north latitude meets the middle of the St. Lawrence River, thrciugh that river, the Great Lakes and connecting waters, in accordance with the true intent and meaning of the treaties of 1783, 1814, and 1842, be located to accord as nearly as possible with the lines fixed by the commissioners appointed under the treaty of Ghent and the treaty of 1842, to be delineated upon modern charts, and be so described by reference 116 INTERNATIONAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. to fixed monuments, where necessary, that it can in the future be relocated at any given point by survey. 2. That the location, delineation on modern charts, and monumenting of the boundary line proceed under the direction of this commission or another inteniational commission to be appointed, and that when it is located, laid dowTi on modern charts, and monumented, it be finally fixed and determined by treaty accordingly. 8. That this commission be authorized to locate, lay down upon a modern chart, and monument the boundary line through Lake Erie. All of which is res])ectfully submitted. 0. H. Ernst, Brigadier General, U. S. Army, Retired, Chairman, American Section. George Clinton, Member, American Section . E. E. Haskell, Member, American Section. Geo. C. Gibbons, Chairman, Canadian Section. W. F. King, Member, Canadian Section. Louis Coste, Member, Canadian Section. The honorable the Secretary of War of the United States, and The honorable the Minister of Public Works op the Dominion of Canada. Appendix L. Report upon the Application of the Cedars Rapids Manufacturing & Power Co. FOR Permission to Build Power Works in the St. Lawrence River at Cedars, in the County of Soulanges, by the Commission, April 13, 1909. The honorable the Minister of Public Works, ^ Ottawa, Ontario. Sir: The application of the Cedars Rapids Manufacturing & Power Co. for permis¬ sion to build works in the St. Lawrence River at Cedars, in the county of Soulanges, for the purpose of developing electric power, was referred to the International Water¬ ways Commission by the secretary of the department of public works on the 18th of December last, with all papers relating to it. An examination of the papers in question shows that on January 6, 1906, the Gov¬ ernor General in council approved the project of the company, subject to the passing of an agreement between the company and the department of public works, so as not to impede or interfere with the navigation of the St. Lawrence River, and in which the company will bind itself to construct and maintain all other works, which in the opinion of the minister of public works, or of any engineer appointed by the minister, may be deemed necessary to restore navigation on the St. Lawrence River in the Cedars Rapids, should navigation be injuriously affected by the works of the company. The agreement in question was prepared by the law clerk of the department of public works in 1906, pursuant to the order in council of the 6th of January, and was sent to the company during that year, but it was not executed by the company, presumably because the company was not ready to undertake the works at that time. Nothing further was done in connection with this matter until October, 1908, when the solicitors of the company forwarded the draft of the agreement to the department of public works, stating that, with a few minor changes therein, the company was prepared to execute this contract. Shortly afterwards, in December, the departmental file was referred to the Inter¬ national Waterways Commission for its attention. The commission, as a whole, understands that the reference was made with a view of obtaining its opinion as to whether or not the project outlined by the company in the plan submitted to the department of public works would interfere with navigation, and in the event of interference, whether or not the agreement proposed to be executed between the company and the department is such as to safeguard the interests of navigation. No detailed plans of the works have been submitted, and only the mpst general nformation concerning the topography and hydrography of the locality is at hand. INTERNATIONAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. 117 The commission is unable to form opinions in detail as to the effect of the works, but it does not consider that fact a valid reason for reporting adversely to the scheme as outlined. It assumes that detailed plans will be submitted in due season to the minister of public works. It is of the opinion that with such plans the scheme can be carried out under the agreement between the company and the Government, a copy of which was laid before (he commission, without detriment to navigation, except possibly raft navigation. To safeguard the latter, it would suggest that a clause l)e added to the agreement, providing that if it be found necessary, in the opinion of the minister of public works, to pass the rafts through the power canal, the rafts shall have that right, and a proper slide shall be provided at the lower end of the canal. The commission also suggests that the agreement be not executed until the company shall give proper assurance of its ability, financially and otherwise, to commence and complete their works within a specified time, and comply with all the terms of the agreement in every respect. Respectfully submitted. Geo. C. Gibbons, Chairman^ Canadian Section. O. If. Ernst, Chairman, American Section. George ('linton. Member, American Section. Louis Coste. Wm. J. Stewart. E. E. Haskell, Member, American Section. Toronto, Ontario, April 13, 1909. Appendix M. Report upon the Application of the Long Sault Development Co. for Legislation to Authorize the Construction of Power Works in the St. Lawrence River, near Long Sault Island, by the American Members, March 11, 1910. Buffalo, N. Y., March 11, 1910. Hon. D. S. Alexander, Chairman, Committee on Rivers and Harbors, House of Representatives, Washinaton, D. C. Sir: The x\merican members of the International Waterways Commission have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of December 24, 1909, transmitting a copy of H. R. 14531, a bill now before Congress, and requesting the views thereon of the International Waterways Commission. Your letter was laid before the com¬ mission at its meeting in Buffalo on the 8th of January, 1910, but no action was taken, the Canadian members desiring further time for consideration, and particularly time enough to hold a public hearing in Canada. This public hearing was held at Toronto on the 8th and 9th of February, 1910, but again the Canadian members desired time for further consideration, and action was deferred until the next meeting. At a meet¬ ing held in Buffalo to-day the subject was again considered, but the Canadian mern- bers were still not prepared to join in a report. The American members feel that if the report is to be of any use to your committee at the present session of Congress it must be submitted without further delay, and they therefor submit their own views at this time, not without hope that the full commission may be able to concur in a joint report hereafter. The bill authorizes the Long Sault Development Co., a corporation organized under the laws of the State of New York, to construct certain dams, locks, canals, and other structures in the St. I^awrence River near Long Sault Island. ^ We have obtained from the company an outline of their plans. In cooperation with a Canadian corpora¬ tion—the St. Lawrence River Power Co.—it is proposed to construct a dam from the American shore to Long Sault Island, another dam from the foot of Long Sault Island to Barnhart Island, and another from Barnhart Island to the Canadian shore, thus damming the entire river and making ail of its surplus waters available for power purposes. Locks are to be introduced, and the open navigation of the rapids, which IS now available only for a part of the do^vnstream traffic, will be changed to slack- water navigation, which will be available for all traffic, whether upstream or down¬ stream. It is entirely possible that a scheme of this kind, if carried out under proper Government control, would be of great advantage to both the United States and 118 INTERNATIONAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. Canada. Under proper plans the navigation of the river might be much improved, while a large amount of cheap power would be created and made available for use on either side of the boundary. The St. Lawrence River is a great commercial highway, the importance of which is increasing with the growth of the country tributary to it. At various places the river is obstructed by rapids, as at Long Sault Island, and at these places lateral canals have been constructed ])y the Canadian Government through which the principal traffic of the river passes, a few passenger steamers using the open river on their downstream trips. As the country has developed and as the economical size of vessels has increased the facilities offered by these canals have become less and less adequate, A demand for improved facilities already exists and is sure to grow. Probably the best way to secure the wnde and deep channels required is to canalize the open river, and inci¬ dentally this method of improvement gives an opportunity to develop an important water power. Where both banks of the river are under one jurisdiction, as in the lower St. Lawrence, the difficulties to be encountered are purely engineering difficul¬ ties. Where the river constitutes a part of the international boundary, as at Long Sault Island, there are also political difficulties. In either case the primary object of damming the river should be the improvement of navigation. The levels of the pools and the height and location of the dams should be fixed with that purpose in view, the development of power being incidental and secondary. And it follows that the Government must have such control of the works after their completion as shall insure their permanency and their proper manipulation in the interest of navigation. Its control must be so complete that it may be doubted whether it can be secured without actual ownership. It is in the interest of civilization that the St. Lawrence River, where it forms part of the international boundary, should not go undeveloped, either for navigation or power. If the two Governments could unite in a scheme for canalizing it at public expense, the problem would be solved in the most satisfactory way. No such scheme is before us, and it does not seem probable that the United States Govemment having in view the more pressing demands upon its Treasury for the improvement of its navigable waterways, will in the near future be prepared to join in canalizing the St. Lawrence. If the St. Lawrence is to be improved within the present generation, it seems to us that it must be done either by the Canadian Government alone or by the enlistment of private capital. It is the latter alternative only that the bill brings under discussion. We have endeavored to find a solution which is at least practicable, if not the most satisfactory. If private capital is to be enlisted, it must be under complete Government control. The difficulties in the way of such control, which arise from the international character of the stream, are considerable, but it seems to us possible to overcome them. Among the elements of Government control are: (1) Legislation authorizing the construction of the works and prescribing the conditions necessary to protect navigation and other public interests; (2) careful scrutiny of detailed plans by the executive and require¬ ment that they conform to the conditions prescribed by the legislature; (3) super¬ vision by the executive of the construction of the works and the requirement that they conform to the approved plans; (4) establishment and enforcement of regulations for operating the works. It seems to us possible to secure cooperation of the two Governments in all these respects. It is of course impracticable for the legislatures of the two countries to act simultaneously. One must act in advance of the other; but if any law which the first may pass shall contain the proviso that it shall become operative only after the approval of the other, cooperation in legislation will be secured. Cooperation in the approval of plans, the supervision of the construction of the works, and the establishment and enforcement of regulations for operating them can be obtained through this commission by giving it executive authority; that is, by making its advice potential to the executives of the respective countries. The bill referred to us seems to recognize the necessity of cooperation between the two Governments, but it does so in a vague way, and is much less explicit than it should be. A separate section should be introduced, worded as follows: “Section—. This act shall not l)ecome operative until the Government of the Dominion of Canada shall signify to the Secretary of the State of the United States its consent to the construction of such dam and other structures: Provided, That if said consent be not given within two years from the date of this act then this act shall be null and void.” The conditions provided in the bill for the protection of navigation and other pub- lie interests are contained in a reference to two United States laws which apply to streams which are exclusively American. To make them applicable to the St. Lawrence, the following additional provisos should be introduced: And 'providedfurther, That all plans, drawings, and maps, and all deviations there¬ from and modifications thereof, either before or after completion of the structures INTERNATIONAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. 119 and all conditions and stipulations which may be imposed in connection with the erection, use, and operation of the dams and works shall first be submitted to and approved by the International Waterways Commission: And provided further, That the construction, maintenance, regulation, and operation of such structures shall be in accordance with any agreement which may be made in reference thereto between Great Britain, acting on behalf of the Dominion of Canada, and the Secretary of State of the United States, acting on behalf of the United States, with the assent of the Secretary of War.” Additional sections should be introduced as follows, viz: “Sec. . The dam or dams, and lock or locks, and other works shall be constructed under the supervision of an engineer to be designated by the Secretary of War; when completed, the title to the lock on the south side of the boundary shall be conveyed to the United States, together with perpetual right of access thereto by the officers and employees of the United States over any and all parts of said dam and over any and all apj)roaches thereto and over any and all bridges. The Long Sault Develop¬ ment Co. shall maintain said locks, dams, bridges, and approaches and make all repairs thereon in such manner and at such time as may be directed by the Secretary of War, and in case of its failure to do so the Government of the United States may main¬ tain said works and make repairs at the expense of the said company, which company shall reimburse the United States therefor. Of the power generated by the works herein authorized, an amount which in the opinion of the Secretary of War shall be sufficient to operate any lock or locks which may be constructed shall be furnished free of charge to the Government of the United States. “Sec. —. When completed the title to the dam or dams on the south side of the boundary shall be conveyed by the Long Sault Development Company to the United States, subject to perpetual right of user by the Long Sault Development Company and its successors, without payment for such use, except in case of forfeiture: Pro¬ vided, That in case the said company shall at any time violate any of the provisions of this act, or fail to comply with the directions of the Secretary of War or the Chief of Engineers, or with any conditions or regulations which may be imposed by the International Waterways Commission, with the approval of the Secretary of War, or with any conditions or regulations which may be made pursuant to any agreement between the United States and Great Britain, on behalf of the Dominion of Canada, the President of the United States may declare the said right of user forfeited, and so much of said dam or dams and their approaches, and of said bridges, as lie south of the boundary, shall thereupon become the property of the United States, free and clear of said right of user. “Sec. —. The United States shall be entitled to use the waters impounded by said dam and works for the purpose of operating the lock or locks which may be con¬ structed south of the boundary line, in such manner and at such times as the Secre¬ tary of War may require, and the United States shall at all times have the right to control the use of the dam or dams and the levels of the pool or pools formed thereby, to such extent as may be deemed necessary by the Secretary of War to provide proper facilities for navigation, and the withdrawal of water from such pool or pools for the purpose of generating power shall be subject to such regulations as may be made by the Secretary of War, or by the International Waterways Commission, with his approval, and shall at no time be such as to impede or interfere with the safe and con¬ venient navigation of the said river by means of steamboats or other vessels or by rafts or barges. “Sec. —. The Long Sault Development Company, its successors and assigns, shall construct such suitable fishways at said dam or dams as may be required from time to time by the Secretary of Commerce and Labor.” The time allowed in the bill for completing the works—fifteen years—seems to us too great. We recommend that it be reduced to five years, and that a new section be introduced as follows, striking out all of the bill after the eighteenth line on page 2: “Sec. —. The actual construction of the works herein authorized shall be begun within one year and completed within five years from the date when this act becomes operative.” The principle that after navigation is fully provided for the surplus water available for power purposes shall be equally divided between the two countries is not men¬ tioned in the bill, but should find a place there. We recommend that an additional section be introduced, worded as follows: “Sec. —. One half the power generated by the works herein authorized shall be delivered in Canada when needed there, and the other half shall be delivered in the United States when needed there, and the price charged shall be the same on either side of the boundary: Provided, That in case a market can not be found in one coun¬ try for the full share thus assigned to that country, the surplus may be temporarily 120 INTEENATIONAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. diverted to the other country, but shall be returned to the country to which it belongs when needed there.” Finally, a section should be added to the bill reserving the right to alter, amend, or repeal it. A copy of the bill altered to conform to these views is herewith inclosed. Yours, very respectfully, O. H. Ernst, Brig. Gen.., U. S. Army, Retired, Chairman, American Section. George Clinton, Member, American Section. E. E. Haskell, Member, American Section. Attest: W. Edward Wilson, Secretary, American Section. Appendix N. Project for the More Complete Definition and Demarcation of the Inter¬ national Boundary, Under Article IV of the Treaty of April 11, 1908, by THE Commission, June 23, 1908. Toronto, Ontario, ^Tune 23, 1908. The honorable the Secretary of State of the United States of America and The honorable the Minister of Public Works of the Dominion of Canada. The International Waterways Commission has the honor to submit the following report and preliminary estimate upon the work prescribed to it by article 4 of the treaty of April 11, 1908, relating to the more complete definition and demarcation of the international boundary between the United States and the Dominion of Canada. 1. The commission has decided that the series of charts be uniform in size. That a scale of 1 :20,000 be adopted for the delineation of the rivers and Pigeon Bay; that the head of the St. Lawrence River and foot of Lake Ontario, the east and west ends of Lake Erie, Lake St. Clair, False Detour Passage, and the east end of Lake Superior (Whitefish Bay) be delineated on a scale of 1:60,000; that Lakes Ontario, Erie, Huron, and Superior be delineated on a scale of 1 :300,000; and that the Niagara River from Lewiston to La Salle, and the St. Marys River from Little Rapids to Point Aux Pins, be also delineated on a larger scale of 1:10,000. The standard size of these charts to be 40 by 50 inches within the border. Based upon the foregoing, there will be required: Charts for the St. Lawrence River.■.. 7 Charts for Lake Ontario. 2 Charts for Niagara River. 2 Charts for Lake Erie. 3 Charts for Detroit River. 2 Chart for Lake St. Clair. 1 Charts for the St. Clair River. 2 Charts for Lake Huron. 2 Charts for St. Marys River. 4 Charts for Lake Superior. 3 Chart on 1 :10,000 for Niagara Falls. 1 Chart on 1 :10,000 for St. Marys Falls. 1 Total. > . 30 That these charts be projected upon the new United States standard datum, and show substantially the following: The shore line of the lakes, rivers, islands, and the mouths of the more important tributary streams; the location of all the principal cities and towns, the location of all lighthouses, and all permanent aids to navigation; and all of the hydrography avail¬ able from the Canadian and United States surveys; all of the geographical positions upon which the projections are based; the boundary line and all monuments, ranges, buoys, etc., used to mark it. Our reasons for the foregoing recommendations are based upon a careful study of the Lake Survey charts. It was found that a series of charts based upon two scales, INTERNATIONAL WATERWAYS COMMISSION PROGRESS REPORT. 121 one for the lakes and one for the rivers, would not satisfy all of the conditions. Three scales, namely, 20, 60, and 300 thousand, cover every feature of the boundary in a fairly satisfactory manner with the possible exception of the immediate localities of Niagara Falls and the St. Mary Falls. For these localities, where large power interests are located, we have adopted a chart for each on a scale of 1 : 10,000. It is possible that there may be other localities where, after further consideration, it may be advisable to delineate them on a scale of 1 : 10,000 also. It should be understood that these charts on this scale are to be extras; that is, they will cover areas that will be delineated on the smaller scale charts. It will be seen at a glance that this method would be much cheaper than to produce all of the river charts on a scale of 1 : 10,000. One of the difficulties of producing all of the river charts on a scale of 1 : 10,000 is that in certain localities they would not show enough of the territory adjacent to the river to permit of showing permanent marks and ranges. 2. Having, as above, determined upon the most suitable scales for the proposed charts, there naturally follows the question of production, not only for delineating the boundary line, but for fulfilling the terms of the treaty by making four copies, for the files of the two Governments. For the charts, the commission is of the opinion that the surveys of the United States Lake Survey can safely be taken, as they embrace all the United States shores and much of the Canadian,* and most of the missing portions of the latter can be filled in from the work of the Canadian Hydrographic Survey. The majority of the charts of the United States Lake Survey now in use were con¬ structed prior to the connection between its triangulation and that of the Coast and Geodetic Survey, from which was derived the United States standard datum, and as a consequence these charts are not in accord with that datum. In our opinion it would be quite improper for an international commission engaged in such an important work as the delineation of a boundary line to offer the public of two countries any charts not drawn from the latest information available. It therefore becomes necessary to construct new charts for the special purpose upon nearly uniform scales. The charts called for may be produced in three ways: (a) By drafting on paper, (6) by photolithography, and (c) by engraving. (a) By drafting—In this method the projection, reduction, and drawing must all be carefully drawn on paper, and from the finished sheet four separate copies would be taken singly and independently. This process would be very laborious and costly, and would leave infinite chances for inaccuracies, inconsistencies, and omis¬ sions, to such an extent that it would be almost impossible to assert that any two copies were exactly alike. In addition, most of the accuracy obtained from redrawing would be sacrificed in the various necessary transfers. (5) By photolithography—In this method one copy must be most carefully and neatly drawn in every particular for the photographer. The commission does not feel that it would be justified in adopting this method, because of the distortion that usually accompanies the use of photography. (c) By engraving are two kinds of engraving usually practiced in the production of charts, that upon stone and that upon copper, the former being cheaper and more expeditious. In this process the projection can be accurately drawn upon the stones and the details of shore line, hydrography, etc., placed directly there by reducing from the originals either by pantagraph or photography without any necessity for a finished drawing. The Commission has adopted this method of reproduction, because upon the stone the chart can be drawn more accurately than upon paper, and from this any number of charts can be printed immediately, each one exactly like all the others. In addition, if thought advisable, the charts can be preserved on these stones for all time; or they can be transferred to copper by the process now used by the Lake Survey, the copper plates preserved, and the stones sold. An approximate estimate of the chart work by this method would be $60,000. 3. Field work required for the preparation of charts: In the construction of charts for navigation purposes the two Governments have been engaged for several years. The survey of the United States shores has been completed in conjunction with a primary triangulation that extends into Canada in many places. Of the Canadian shores those of Lakes Huron and Erie have been completed, while that of Lake Superior is practically done, and wherever possible connection has been made with the triangulation of the United States Lake Survey, so that the two surveys may be taken as giving an accurate delineation of the outlines of the lakes. For an accur<^e determination of the boundary line there remains to be surveyed the whole of the north shore of Lake Ontario from False Ducks to Port Dalhousie, a portion of Lake Superior in the vicinity of Otter Head, and a resurvey of Pigeon Bay on a larger scale than has been used by the Canadian Hydrographic Survey. 122 INTEKNATIONAL WATEKWAYS COMMISSION PKOGRESS REPORT. 4. Placing of monuments, ranges, buoys, etc., to mark the boundary; The treaty calls upon the commission to mark the international boundary by monuments, ranges, buoys, etc., wherever possible. The cost of this work will depend upon the number and character of marks established. A rough estimate of cost would be $100,000, making an approximate total estimate for doing the work of $160,000. A probable estimate for expenditures the first year is $15,000 for each Government. All of which is respectfully submitted. Geo. C. Gibbons, Chairman, Canadian Section. Louis Coste, Member, Canadian Section. Wm. J. Stewart, Member, Canadian Section. 0. H. Ernst, Brigadier General, United States Army, Retired, Chairman, American Section. George Clinton, Member, American Section. E. E. Haskell, Member, American Section. Attest: Thomas Cote, Secretary Canadian Section. W. Edward Wilson, Secretary American Section. Appendix 0. Appropriations Heretofore Made for the Use of the International Water WAYS Commission. War Department. River and harbor act, approved June 13, 1902. $20,000 Sundry civil act approved June 30, 1906. 20,000 Sundry civil act approved Mar. 4, 1907. 20, 000 Sundry civil act approved May 27, 1908. 20, 000 Sundry civil act approved Mar. 3, 1909. 20, 000 Sundry civil act approved June 25, 1910. 20,000 Sundry civil act approved Mar. 4, 1911... 20, 000 Sundry civil act approved Aug. 24, 1912. 10, 000 Total. 150,000 State Department. Diplomatic and consular act approved May 21, 1908. $10, 000 Diplomatic and consular act approved Mar. 2, 1909. 20, 000 Diplomatic and consular act approved May 6, 1910. 30, 000 Diplomatic and consular act approved Mar. 3, 1911. 20,000 Total. 80,000 o --Y & -• • :,,f 1 -lAi-.v, ■■ T -- ■: • .. ^•' ■ ■«' IT' .- .^yv. S '''*.' V . ■ -• • ■•; . Vh ' .' » bC '- ^ * V ;■ m .: :'y '>-'1 -'^f ■' ' ’/.I