Testimony. in Re the Livingstone Channel

INTERNATIONAL JOINT COMMISSION

TESTIMONY. IN RE THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL

ON THE

REFERENCEOF THE GOVERNMENTSOF THE UNITED STATES AND THE DOMINION OF CANADA UNDER ARTICLE IX OF THE TREATY OF FAY 5, 1910

WASHINGTON GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1913 INTERNATIONAL JOINT COMMISSION.

UNITEDSTATES. CANADA. 3AMES A. TAWNEY, Chairman. TH. CHASE CASGRAIN?Chairman. FRANK S. STREETER. HENRY A. POWELL. GEORGE TURNER. CHARLES A. MAGRATH.

L. WHITEBVSBEY, Secretary. LAWRENCEJ. BURPEE,Secretary. 2 QUESTIONS REFERRED,

“1. Under all the circumstances and conditions surrounding the navigation and other uses of the Livingstone and other channels in the Detroit River on either side of the international boundary, is the erection of any dike or other compensatory work deemed necessary or desirable for the improvement or safety of navlgation at or in the vicinityof Bois Blanc Island inconnection with rock excavation and dredging in Livingstone Channel authorized by the rivers and harbors act of June 25,1910 (36 Stats., 655), and described in House Document No. 676, Sixty-first Congress, second session, sundry civil actof June 25, 1910 (36 Stats., 729), sundry civil actof March 4, 1911 (36 Stats., 1405), of the United States, andnow being carried out by theGovern- mytof the United States? 2. If in answer to question 1 any dike or other compensatory works are found to be necessary or desirable, will the work or works proposed by the United States and provided for in therivers and harbors actofJune 25,1910 (36 Stats., 655),and located 80 as to connect thenorth end of Bois Blanc Island to the southeast end of the existing cofferdam on the east side of Livingstone Channel o posite and below Stoney Island, be sufficient for the purpose; and if not what adgtional or other dikes or compensatory works should be constructed and where should they be located in order to serve most advantageously the interests involved on both sides of the international boundary? ” 3

THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL.

The commission met in the Federal Court Building, cityof Detroit, at 10 o'clock a. m., February 17, 1913. Present: James A. Tawney (presidin ) ; Th. Chase Cas ah, I(. C: Frank S. Streeter; Henry A. Powell, Z! C.; Charles A. &path, and George Turner. L. WhlteBusbey and Lawrence J. Burpee, secre taries. APPEARANCES. Forthe United States: Reeves P. Strickland,assistant to the Attorney General of the United States. For Canada: W. R. White, K. C.; Charles S. MacInnes, K. C. For the Province of Ontario: G. Lynch Staunton, K.C. For the town of Amherstbur : F. A. Hou h. For the Windsor & Detroit Egerr Co.: A. 53 . Bartlett. For the count of Essex: F. D. savis For the towns1 ip of Malden: J. H. Rddd. For the DominionMarine Association andshipping interests of Canada : Francis King. STATEMENT BY TEE CHAIRMAN. Mr. TAWNEY(chairman). Beforeproceeding withthe business before the commission at thismeetin it may be of interest,and ospibly instructive, to briefly state tge origin and purpose of the fnternationalJoint Commission, andthe scope of Its power and jurisdiction. ' The people inhabitingthis continent have the same common fountain of law,the same traditions, and similar institutions of government, but they live under two distinct and separate govern- mentaljurisdictions. They are responsible and owe allegiance to twoseparate and distinct sovereignties-Great Britainand the United States. The line that marks the boundarybetween these two governmental 'urisdictions extends across the continent, from the Atlantic to the bacific, a distance of more than 3,500 miles. At least 2,000 miles of this boundary is marked by navigable and nonnavigable waters, with anaggregate population inhabiting the shores of thesewaters of , a proximately six and a half millions of . These waters are tR e common property of the people of bot !rplecountries. The right to their use for sanitation and domestic purposes, for navigation and irrigation, for power purposes, or for any other lawful purpose is a right which the inhabitants of the two countries enjoy in common. In the exercise of this common propepty right, or in the use of this 5 6 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. common property, controversies between theinhabitants of the United States and Canada have arisen in the past, are now and as the demand for usethe of these boundary waterspending,or these purposes increases with the increaseof population along the boundary, these controversies will continue to arise and increase innumber. Then, too, other questions of difference between these two Govern- ments, due to the close industrial and commercial relations existing between them may, and naturally will, occasion controversies of a more or less serious character with no othermeans for their peaceable settlement than that afforded by the ordinary diplomatic channels which experience, during the last century has proved dilatory and unsatisfactory,and in thesettlement of these controversies the inhabitants of neither country have had an opportunity to personally appear and resent their side of the controversy. Actuated by tE at spirit of pro ress, that sense of fair dealing, and the desire to peaceably settle as" 1 international controversies which hascharacterized the Anglo-Saxon race formore than a centur , Great Britain and the United States negotiated andproclaimed t e treaty of January 11, 1909, for thepurpose of creating aninter- z nationaltribunal before which boththe Governments and the inhabitants of the two countries might a pear and make a plication for the ap roval by this international tnpb una1 of conternpf ated projects for t {e use of these boundary waters; affording also to those on the other side of the line affected in'unously or otherwise by such proposed use, the right to appear andi) e heard withreference to such roposed a proval. To carry out this purpose and to make the tri- {una1 an e% cient international organization for the settlementof such controversies as I have referred to, the two Governmentsby this treaty clothed this tribunal with judicialpower and ha1jurisdiction in certain cases, andwith investigative jurisdiction only, in other ide this commission as well as the inhabitants of both cases.countries, To t 8"e treaty not only defines the jurisdiction of the commission but also defines what are boundary waters, as follows: For the purpose of this treat boundary waters are defined as the waters from the main shore to main shore of tie lakes and rivers and connecting, waterways, or the portions thereof, along which the international boundary between the United States and the Dominion of Canada passes, including all bays, arms, and inlets thereof, but not including tributary waters which in their natural channels would flow from such lakes, rivers, and waterways, or the waters of rivers flowing across the boundary. Recognizing that water is probably the greatest asset possessed by anycountry; that the important chain of watersthus defined as boundary waters are the common pro erty of both Canada and the United States, and that the right to tff eir use is a right enjoyed in common by the inhabitants thereof, and that the hghest form of development cannot be had in either country without the full and pro er cooperation of the other, the two Governments in Article I11 of t!i is treaty have a that no further obstruction or diversion of thesewaters should except upon authoritythe of the UnitedStates or of of Canadawithin theirrespective jurisdictions, and then only with the approval of this International Joint Commission, which commission does not represent either the Government or the people on either side of the boundary alone, but represents both Governmonts and the people of both Governments THE LIVINGSTONE UHANNEL. 7 as such.The first paragraph of thearticle referred to reads as follows: It is agreed that, in addition to the uses, obstructions, and diversions heretofore permitted or hereafter provided for by special agreement between the partieshereto, no further or other uses or obstructions or diversions, whether temporary or permanent, of the boundary waters on either side of the line, affecting the natural level or flow of boundary waters on the otherside of the line, shall be made except by authority of the United States or the Dominion of Canada within their respective jurisdictions and with the approval, as hereinafter provided, of a joint commission, to be known as the International Joint Commission. The two Governments, recognizing their independent jurisdictions within their own territorial limits and the right of either to permlt the construction and maintenance within theirrespective jurisdlctlons of any remedialor protective works or any dams or other obstructions . of waters flowing from boundary waters or in waters at a lower level than the boundary in riversflowin across the boundary, which might raise the level of waters on the ot er side of the boundary, expressly provided by Article IV of the treatya thatsuch remedial or protective works or dams should notbe permitted on either side of the line without the a proval of the International Joint Commission, and for that, pur ose t!i ey agreed to Article IV, the first paragraph of which reads as Pollows: The High Contracting Parties agree that, except in cases provided for by special agreement between them, they will not permit the construction or maintenance on their respective sides of the boundar of any remedial or protective works or any dams or other obstructions in waters lowing from boundary waters or in waters at a lower level than the boundary in rivers flowing across the boundary, the effect of which is to raise the natural level of waters on the other side of the boundary unless the construction or maintenance theroof is approved by the aforesaid International Joint Commission. In order that the questions raised under Articles I11 and IV might be finallyand conclusively dis oscd of by the International Joint Commission, the treaty provi cpes that t,he commission shall have jurisdiction over and pass upon allcases involving the use, obstruction, or diversion of the waters with respect to which under Articles I11 and IV of the treaty the approval of the commission is requlred, and that a. majority of the commission shall have power to render a final decision in such cases. In addition to the final jurisdiction thus conferred upon the commission in all cases arising under Articles I11 and IV, Articlc X of the treaty also clothes the commission with final jurisdiction over all questions or matters of difference arising between t.he Dominion of Canada and the United States, either in relation to each other or in relation to their respective inhabitants, when such questions are referred to the commission for decision by the consent of both Gov- ernments, with the advice nnd consent of the Senate of the United States and with the advicc and consent on the part of His Majesty's Government, given bythe governor general in council. The questions which may be submitted under Article X for final decision b the commission, or the nature of the controversies or matters of dil ference between the two Governments, that may be t'hus submitted, arenot specified. Anyquestion therefore, whetherinvolving national honor or vital interest, may be submittcd to this commission under the provisions of this nrticlc, and the decision of the commission is binding upon both Governments. 8 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. The two Governments, however, b tke terms of Article IX of the treaty, reserved to themselves the rigi t to finally determine questions of difference betweent,hem which are not included in Articles I11 and IV of the treaty or which are not referred under Article X, and for the purpose of enabling the high contracting parties to reach a final determination of such questions with greater facility and with foreknowledge of the facts t,hey clothed this commission with power to investigate all otherquestions or matters of difference arising between them involving the rights, obligations, or interests of either in relation to the ot8her or of the inhabitants of the ot'her along the common frontier between the United States and the Dominion of Canada,and speciallyprovided thatsuch questions shall be referred from time to time to this commission for examination and report when either Government shall requcst that such uestions or matters of difference be so referred. It IS under ArticleCfX that the uestion has been referred to t'he commission by bot'h Governments, !hat we are here for tho purpose of investigating. The exact form of the uestion thus referred to the commission by both Governhents is as fos lows: 1. Underall the circumstances and conditionssurrounding the navigation and other uses of the Livingstone and other channels in the Detroit River on either side of the internationalboundary, is the erection of any dikeor other compensatory work deemed necessary or desirable for the improvement or safety of navieation at or in the vicinity of Bois Blanc Island in connection with the rock excavation and dredging in Livingstone Channel authorized by the river and harbor act of June 25, 1910, and now being carried out by theGovernment of the United States? 2. If in answer to question 1 any dike or other compensatory works are found to be necessary or desirable, will the work or works proposed by the United States and provided for in the river andharbor act of June 25, 1910, and located so as to connect the north end of Bois Blanc Island to the southeast end of the existing cofferdam on the east side of Livingstone Channel, opposite and below Stoney Island, be sufficient for the purpose; and if not, what additional or other dikes or compensatory works should be constructed and where should they be located in order to serve most advantageously the interestsinvolved on both sides of the international boundary? By the terms of tho reference nnd undcr the provisions of Article IX of the treaty the commission in this case is therefore authorized and directed to examine into and report upon t8he facts and circumstances of the question thus referred, together with such conclusions andrecommendations as the commission may deemappropriate. Thereport of this commission uponthis question, likeall other reports made by the commission under Article IX, will not be regarded as a decision of thc question submitted either on the facts or the law, nor will it have in my waytrhe character of an arbitral award. When thereport is finally submittedwith the recommendations of t,hc commission, the sa,mc will then be takcn up and dis- posed of directlyhy agrcement between thc two Governments. It will be seen, therefore, that in the settlement of international disa- greements or controversies through the peaceful agency of an inter- nationaltribunal co~nposedof citizens or theinhabitants of both countries Great Britain and the United States have not only taken an advanced position in the scttlernent of such controversies arising between themby peaceful agencies, butt'hat the tribunal thus created for this urposc is uniqueand the onlytribunal that has ever been createl by two nRtions for this purpose. It is the only tribunal in the world where the inhabitants of two countries have an equal opportunity to appear and have the extent of their common THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 9 right to the use of their common property adjudicated and finally determined. In view of the extentto which the boundary between the Dominion of Canada and the United States is marked by navigable and non- navi a.ble waters, and in view of the value of the use of these waters for 3omestic and sanitary purposes, for irrigat.ion and navigation, and for ower purposes, and In view of theconstantly increasing demand Por the use of these waters for these purposes, the existence of a tribunal like this in which the inhabitants on both sides of the line have an equal opportunity to appear and make application for international approval of their projects proposed in contemplation of such use, neither the necessity nor the wisdom of creating an international joint commission of this kind can be questioned by any one who desires to maintain and continue the century of peace between the twogreat English-speaking nations, which is soon to be cele- brated in both Canada and the United States on the one hundredth anniversary of the Treaty of Ghent.

LETTER OF REFERENCE.

By direction of thechairman, Mr. Burpee(secretary) read the following : BRITISHEMBASSY, Washington,October 16, 1912. SIR: I have the honor to inform you that at the requestof the Government of the United States andof the Government of the Dominion of Canada, under theprovisions of Article IX of the treaty of January 11, 1909, between the United States andGreat Britain, the questions or matters of difference set forth below, which have arisen between them, involving the ri hts, obligations, or interests of each in relation to the other, or to the inhabitants ofthe other,along their common frontier between the United States and the Dominion of Canada, are hereb referred to the International Joint Commission for examination and report upon txe facts and circumstances of the particular questions and matlers referred, together with such conclusions and recommendations as may beappropriate. The questions so referred are asfollows, namely: (1) Under all the circumstances and conditions surrounding the navigation and othel uses of the Livingstone and other channels in the Detroit River on either side of the international boundary, is the erection of any dike or other compensatory work deemed necessary or desirable for the improvement or safety of navlgation at or in the vicinity of Bois Blanc Island in connection with rock excavation and dredging in Livingstone Channel, authorizsd b the river and harbor act of June 25, 1910 .(36 State., 655), and desclibed ill House gocument 6% Sixty-first Congress, second session, sundry CIVII act of June 25, 1910 (36 Stat,s., 729), sundry civil act of March 4,1911 (36 Stats., 1405), of the Unlted States, andnow being carried out by theGov- ernment of the United States? (2) If in answer to Question (1) any dike or other compensatory works are found to be necessary or desirable, will the work or works proposed by the Uml.ed States and provided for in the river andharbor act of June 25, 1910 (36 Stats., 655), and located EO as to connect the north end.f Bois Blanc Island to the southeast end of the exiBtin cofferdam cn the east aldo of Livingstone Channel, opposite and below Stoney Islancf be sufficient for the purpose; and if not, what additional or other dikes or compensatory works should be constructed and where should they be located in order to serve most advantageously theinterests involved un both sides of theinternational boundary? I am, sir, your most obedient, humble servant(for the ambassndori, A. CLARK KERR.

DEPARTMENTOF STATE, Washington,October 16, 1912. To the INTERNATIONALJOINTCOMMISSION OF THE UNITEDSTATES AND CANADA. GENTLEMEN:I have the honor to inform ou that, at the joint request of the Gov- ernment of the United States and of the dovernment of the Domlnion of Canada, under the provisions of Article IX of the treaty of January 11, 1909, between the United States andGreat Britain, thequestions or matters of difference set forthbelow- which have arisen between them involving the rights, obligstions, or interests of each in relation to the other, or to the inhabitants of the other, along their common frontier between the United States and Ihe Dominion of Canada-are hereby referred to the International Joint Commission for examination and report upon the facts and circumstances of theparticular questions and matters referred. together withsuch conclusions and recommendations as may be approprkte. The questions so referred are a8 follows: 1. Underall the circumstances and conditionssurrounding the navigation and other uses of the Livingstone and other channels in the Detroil River on either side 11 12 THE LIVINGSTONECHANNEL.

of the internationalboundary, is the erection of any dike or other compensatory work deemed necessary or desirable for the improvement or safety of navigation at or in the vicinity of Bois 13lanc Islmd, in Connection with rock excavation and dredging in Livingstone Channelauthorized by tho river and harbor act of June 25, 1910 (36 Stats., 655), and c!cscribed in House Ihrument 676, Sixty-first Con- greas, second session, sundrycivil act of June 25, I910 (36 Stats., 729), sundrycivil , act of March 4, 1911 (36 Stats., 1405), oi the TJrrited States, and now being carried out by theGovernment of the United States'? 2. If, in answer to question 1, any dike or other compensatory works are found to be nccessnry or desirable, will the work or works proposed by the United States and provided for in the river and harbor act of June 25, 1910 (36 Stats., 655), and located 80 as to connect the north end of his I3lano Island to the southeast end of the existing cofferdam on the east side of 1,ivingsl.onc Channel, opposite and below Stoney Island, be sufficient for t,he purpose; and il not, what additional or other dikes or cornpermtory works should be construct,ed and where should theybe located in order to serve most advant.ageously t,lte interests involved on both sides of tho international boundary? I have the honor to add that the Government of ihe IJnited States will be glad to assist the commission in obtaining any information which it may desire in the course of its investigation of t,he .mattersherein referred for its examination and report. I have the honor to be, gentlemen, your obedient Mervant, ALVEY A. ADEE, Acting Secretary of State. Mr. TAWNEY.After conferring with my associates, with re ard to the manner of proceeding, it was deemed best, in view of t1 e fact that theGovernment of the United Statesproposes this improvement in the Detroit River for the benefit of navigation on both sides, that that side of the question should be presented first, and that then those who areopposed to this improvement should be heard. In that way, the Commssion will arrive at the point of conflict between the parties to this roceeding and the investigation can be confined to what may be ca led the real issue between the two Governments., It is for that reasons we would suggest, the Government of the United Stateshaving roposed that which has since beenopposed bythe Government oF Canada, that the case of the Government of ,the United States should be first heard. Then, those who wish to present their objections may do so, and we will then have the point of conflict out between the two Governments and the mhabltants of the two countries. Mr. WHITE,K. C. I wish, at thisstage, to file amemorandum which is not in the, wa,y of argument or a presentation of our case at all, but which indicates t,he positlion of Canada in this proceeding. It is because tho Dominion of Canada occupies aunique osition in connection with this t,Elat I wish now to file ths memoran cpum. It is not in any sense a controversybetween the two Governments. It is aquestion in which the wholeoople of bothcountries and the dwellers dong both sidw of the la,

STATEMENT ON BEHALF OF CANADA. Mr. White, K. C., then read the following statement on behalf of Canada : MEMORANDUM RE LIVINGSTONE CIIANNEL DIKE. The Canadian Government has beon advised that the government of the Province of Ontario is to be represented by counsel at this hearing, and as it is the only Province of Canada bordering on the Great Lakes and Lake of the Woods systems, its intorcsts and rights are of paramount importance and no doubt will receive the consideration they deserve. The Canadian Government is also aware that representations have been made to the International Jcint Commission, in oppcsition to the proposed structure, by citizens of Amherstburg and vicinity. It understandsthat these citizens arerepresented by counsel, and it feels confident that the commission wdl give the fullest consideration to their claims. Theinterest of theCanadian people in the develo rnent and improvement of the intornational waterway is evidenced P,y the fact that in the building and improvement of the canal system, and in river? lake, and harbor improvements upon this system, Canada has already expended not less than the sum of $197,464,159, and, further, large expenditures for like purposes aro now in contemplation. The Canadian Government is thus in complete sympathy w*ith the desire of the Government of the United States to improve in every possible way the navigation of international waters, from LakeSupe- rior eastward, including that portion of the Detroit Eiver now before the commission for consideration, and in this, as in all other matters of common concern, it wishes to cooperate to the fullest extent possible with the Government of the United States. It is firmly convinced, however, that apiecemeal policy in the development of navigation and other mutual interests on boundary waters is not to the ultimate advantage of the two countries; that until reports are receivod frominvestigations into the proposal to construct a submerged xeir in the Niagara River for the urpose of raising the level of Lake Erie 6 or more inches, as well as Prom other investigations; or while diversions Erom Lake Michigan, even though unauthorized, are seriously affecting the levels of the Great Lakes, theconnecting waterwa s, andthe St. Lawrence Itiver, it would appear undesirable at tl e prosent time for either Government to commit itself to a policy of compensatory works at jndipidual points in the interosted waters until some definite concluwon 1s reached as t,o the extent to which diversions from Luke Michigan are to take place. It appears from the report 01 the Chief oi Engineers, United States Army, dated the 23d January, 1!111, that the diversion from Lake Michi an at Chicago then anlount,od to abmt 7,000 cubic feet per socon$, or 8,000 cubic feet per second in CXCBSS of the ermit of the Secretary of War. It is understood thatthis large &versionstill continues and is even believotl to bo oxceodetl. 14 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. The situation developed is as follows: Chicago’s diversion from Lake Michigan.

Effect on depth at

I ” ~. Amount of water extracted. 1 Bead of Livinptone Chan- 1 Lake St. Clair.

3,000c.f. s _.___...... _.__..._..___..__._.Decrease from 1.20 to 1.60 Decreasefrom 1.60 to 1.85 inches. inches. 8,MMc. I. s __.._...... ____.__..___..___._Decreasefrom 3.27 to 4.20 Decreasefrom 4.26 to 4.93 inches. inches.

Compensating works on Detroit rive^.

Effect on depthat- Character of work. Head of Livingstone Chan- nel. Lake St. Clair.

Construction of Livin stone Channel...... Decrease 1.44 inches.. ._... . Decreasfl 0.80 inch. Construction of Bois %lanc Dike with 300- Increasc,’Z.BB inches...... Increase,’l.Minches. foot opening: Advantage gamed by new channel anddike Increase, 1.44 inches...... Increase, 0.28 inch.

It will be observed from the above tables that the proposed com- ensatory works will just about restore to the stream at the head of Livingstone Channel and will not restore to Lake St. Clair what was lost by deepening and an excess diversion of even 3,000 c. f. s. It therefore ap ears that the desirability of theimprovements” as expressed in t le reference is, under the existing conditions, open to serious question, unless the wider problem is also to receive necessary attention without delay; and the Canadian Government invites the consideration of the commission to this phase of the matter. In presentin the foregoing views the Canadian Governmentdecides to emphasize tfl e fact thatit is actuated solely by a sincere desire for the development of the entire system of waterways in the best inter- est8sof the people of the two c,ountries, and though Canada in this particular case IS not. called upon to bear any part of the cost of the proposedwork, it must be remembered that there are other vital points in theseinternational waters, the efficiency of which, now seriously impaired by what appears to be an uncontrolled depletion elsewhere, can not be improved by works of a compensatory char- act,er so as to yield the greatest results while the present situation at Chicago exists. February 17, 1913. WM. E. WHITE. C. S. MACYNNES, Counsel for the Government of Canada. THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 15 Mr. TAWNEY. Thetwo Governments have limited the investigation to the proposed improvements of t,heLivingstone Channel m the interests of international navigation, andin the investigation it would be necessary for the commission to keep as near as possible within the exactuestions which the twoGovernments have submitted, and to conZIl e our reports to those specific questions. We can not o outside the authority or the reference to the commission by both 6overnments. Mr. WHITE. We understand that fully, butwe think we will be able to show you by argument later in that the question submitted byus is important. Mr. TAWNEY.I wished just to mention the limitation which the two Governments have placed on the activities of the commission in this investigation. Mr. WHITE. We have considered that. Mr. STRICKLAND.We will proceed with our side now and take the testimony of witnesses. Mr. CASQRAIN.We will proceed to hear t,he United States, under reserve of thememorandum which ou have ut before the commission, Mr. White, onbehalf of the dominion Gpovernment. Mr. WHITE. I understand so. TESTIMONYON BEHALFOF THE UNITED STATES.

TESTIMONY OF COL.MASON X. PATRICK, LIEUTENANT COLONEL, CORPS OF ENGINEERS, UIITED S',l'ATES ARKY.

Col. Mason M. Patrick, 8 witness produced on behalf of the United States, bemg duly sworn, deposed as follows: Mr. STRIOKLAND. You reside in Detroit ~ Col. PATRIOK. Yes. Mr. STRIOKLAND. You have chaJ:"ge of all river and harbor improv&- ments in this district for the United States ~ Col. P ATRIOK. Yes. Mr. STRIOKLAND. Including Livingstone Channel ~ Col. P ATRIOK. Yes. Mr. STRIOKLAND. Are you acquamted with the conditions, through records, statistics, or otherwise, concerning the flow of water in the locality of Stony Island, down to and around Bois Blanc Island, prior to any changes made m connection with the creation of the Living- stone Channel, mcluding the level of the Detroit River and flow of currents~ Col. PATRIOK. As shown by the record I have; I am quite familiar with the flow of waters in these channels. Mr. STRIOKLAND. Have you thoroughly examined the Livingstone Channel, from above Stony Island to below Bois Blanc Island, the Arilherstburg Channel, and the currents and flow of the waters in these channels, and outside of the same, from mam shore to main shore, since the Livingstone channel has been made ~ Col. P ATRIOK. I have personally seen and examined all of the channels and, in addition, had a number of observations taken by my assistants and their reports rendered to me. Mr. STRIOKLAND. Please state whether, in your opinion, the creation of said channel has made any particular difference, in the Detroit River or ch~ed the natural" flow at or in the vicinity of Stony Island, Bois Blanc Island, or Amherstburg ~ Col. P ATRIOK. To answer that question, as I think. it should be answered, makes necessary a descrIption of the conditions that exist in the vicinity of Amherstburg, and the various channels that pass by there. Mr. STRIOKLAND. Will you kindly give them ~ Col. P ATRIOK. I think I would like to make reference to the chart if I may; it may explain things a little bit better. Answering your question: The Detroit River is about 31 miles long, flowing, of course1 between Lake St. Clair and Lake Erie. In the upper 13 miles 01 its length, down to about the head of Fig;hting Island, the water flows practically in one channel, except near Its head, of course, where there are two islands, Belle Isle and Isle au Peche. From the head of Fighting Island toO Lake Erie, 18 miles, the river flows through a 16 THE UVINGSTONB OHANBEL. 1'1 number of different channels, divided from each other by islands, the ~r ones being ~hting Island and Grosse Isle) .and a number of sm8.1lerislands in the same vicinity. The traffic wnich passes up and down the Detroit River for a number of years W8.8confine

made our observations used their methods and when I took the 205,000 cubic feetper second. When seekin different channels, I find that the percentage of the flow through t% e channels, as I determined it, and the percentage determined by the Canadians, is so closely in accord, thatit shows quite clearly that these channels wpuld carry the same waterflow, no matter what thedischarge of the river. For mnstance, the following will show the percentages as found by the measurements:

1 Percentage of flow.

"" "" " ~ - " ".___ "" Grosse Isle, Mich...... Orosse Isle Stony Island...... Livingstod? Channel...... 18.1 Limekiln Crossing...... 51.8 loo. 0 loo. 0

The discharge through LimekilnCrossing Channel now enters Lake E,rievia the two channels-Bois Blanc Island, Canada, andBois Blanc Cofferdam. The portion of this dmharge that 1s carned by each of thesechannels we found, by independentmeasurements, to be as follows : ~__ 1 Bv United States. I ._.___~

1912. 1912.

Per cent. I Per cent. Per cent. 4 Bois Blanc Island, Canada Channel...... 58.3 58.6 Bo. Bois Blanc Island, Cofferdam Channel...... 41.7 1I 41.4 39.6 jluo.oi-GiT- loo. 0 20 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. Applyinthe above (United States) ercentage to the ,mean discharge of t% e river,204,000 second-feet heport International Water- ways Commission, p. 102), we have the following results:

- ___~- .. "" ~.....

Dischargc.

"" ~". ". - Grosse Isle Mich ...... 47,500 23.3 1.77 Orosse Islo: StoneyIsland...... 13, x00 Livingstone Channel...... 37,000 18.1 3.49 Limekiln Crossing...... 105,700 51.8 2.77 Total ...... \ 204,000 100.0 1 ...... Bois Blanc, Canada ...... Bois Blanc Dam...... 44,100 ~ 1 Carefulcalculations have been made to determine the lobable effect of a dam such as that proposed between thc coffer 1;am and Bois Blanc Island, such a dam to have in it an opening about 300 feet wide toserve such navigation as may desire to ass between AmherstbuIg and oints to tho west of the island. Wit out7l burden- in the record witK the details of the calculations, the results are as fof lows, the predicted pcrccntnge of flow being applied t,o the mean discharge as above.

Predicled discharge with darn in place.

.- ~ ~ ~~ "" __- 1 tivingstono C11anne1, 300 feet 1 Livingstone Channel. 450 feet I witia. I wide.

25.9 43. 1 2.28 100.0 ...... ~.______-____ 3.14 87.013.0 3.14 ..______1 100. 0 ...... ___

The net result, as shown by the abovo tables, is an increased flow by Amhe&burg of 17,000 second-feet for the present opening in the Livingstone Channel with an increase ol velocity in this vicmitly- of approximately one-half (0.49) miles per hour, and for t8hc Iivm stone Channel 450 feet wide these qunntitics become 14,400 secon3- - feet and approximatdy 0.43 miles pel hou!,. It should he noted that while the discharge snd velocity in thc v1.cinity of Amherstburg &re increased as nhove, thcre will be a lessened discharge and a lessened velocity over Limekiln Crossing. A long series of observations has been made upon t'he levels of t'he Lakes and upon the gauge relations in this part' of the outlet of Lake St. Clair. I haveplatted on t'his map, which I will file withthe commissioners,a series of the actual observations made upon the THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 21 elope prior to thebuildin 'of theLivingstone Channel, and have shown here- erhaps I ha fbetter explain it on this chart. (Col. PatricPthen proceeded tothe benc,h andexplained to the commissioners the chart.) It was found during 1903 that when the Amherstburg gauge was 572.81, at Mamajuda, some few miles above, the level of t'he wa.ter surface would have been about 574.28 or a fallof about 1.4 feet level. That was before the dam was put in place. Wit'h the dam in place, the difference, taking the sametwo points, would have been 1.6 feet; that wassome miles abowe. When we camedown to theauges somewhat, closer to t,he damit'self and t'o Amherst,burg, the Pdierence became quite marked. At Ouelletes, which is just about the head of the channel and of course where the dam would have its greatest effect, during t,he time the dam was in place the fall from Ouelletes and down to Arnherstbur , which isroughly 3 miles-thediffer- ence of level was about 1.3 eet, while the damwas in place, and prior to t'he dam being put in laceP t'he difference was only about 0.9 of a foot. In olher words, t'K ere wasa rise of 0.4 of a fqot. At the Limekiln Crossing, which is below t.he location of the dam, the construct'ion of the damit'self raised the water there above whatit would otherwise have been, only about0.14 of a foot. After we took away the damwe had a numberof observations made and we show positively that tho condition of flow in the channel has been very nearly restored to 'ust what it was before any work was done there atall. It would tak e a longseries of observations to decide exactly what had happened, but from such mcasurements we as have been able to make since the damwas taken out we find that there has been a slight fall in the water stretches ?t Ouelletes and a slight fall also at Limekiln, and at Mamlzjuda there has been a slight fall also, In other words, the opening of the Livingstone Channelnow has ve little effect upon the r6gime of these channels, but if it had' anyat R the evidence seems to indicate that it has produced a slight loweringT of tho wator surface above and that suchlowering would increase the slope from Lake St. Clair down to this point [indicating]. The greater flow out of Lake St. Clair will result in a diminutionof the level of Lake St. Clair, but that diminution is on1 about 1 inch according to our best measurements, and is practical9 y inappreciable. If subsequent measuremonts should show that that diminution of levels had beon greater, it would make more a arent than it is at present the necessity for com ensating for the I%.lvingstone Channel as it now is. If wc open the %vingstone Channel to 450 feet, there ' will be a greatcr fall at these gauges, and consequently a greater slope from %akeSt. Clair clown to this point, a greaterdischarge there, and a greater diminution of level above. To answer specificall , I believe that it is desirable that even withthe presentopening in theE lvingstone Channel there should be a dam put mplace in order thatit may compensate for the probable increased flow, and I am perfectly satisfied that if the Livingstone Channel be opened to its greater width of 450 feet the dam will bo absolutely necessary, or, rather, such compensation will be absolutely necessary. It is freely admithx~ that thatcompcnsation can be provided elsewhere than botwocn Livingstone Channcl and Bois Blanc Island. It canprobably be provided elsewhere at lesser expense, butthere 22 THE LIVINOSTONE CHANNEL. are other considerations which convince me that this is the proper place to put such adike. Prion to the opening of the Livingstone Channel, and while the cofferdam was in place, the cross current which was observed by the board which considered the widening of thechannel had a mean velocity of 1.6 feetper second, which means littlea over 1 mile per hour. Since tho channel has been opened there has been, of course, a diminution in the intensityof this current, but mymeasure- ments show that this current now has a mean velocity of about 1.1 feet per second, speaking roughly, which means about three-quarters of a mile per hour. This current is felt, I think, by vessels navigatinp the channel after they have passed about 2,000 feet below the end 07 the dry cut, and it continues for some 2,000 feet before it final1 becomes about parallel to the direction of the Livingstone Channel Where the current is at its maximumis about 3,100 feet south of the o ening in the cofferdam, and at thisplace the current hasa velocity oF about 24 feet per second, and taking that which would really be the beginning of the velocity that would affect a passing vessel, this becomes 1.25 per second, or 0.85 mile per hour. Vessels are allowed to navigate that channel at a speed of 10 miles an hour. At thatspeed it would take avessel a littleover two minutes to pass over the portion of the channel affected by this cross current. During that time, if the vessel were merely drifting, the cross current ' would drifther to thewestward from 175 to 200 feet.The channel is only 300 feet wide; its banks are rock , and the rocks do not appear above the water surface all,at but oni y a few feet below, and in view of the rock a vessel driven over on that bank would be in greatdanger. These are the reasons for which I believe a dam is desirableand actual1 necessa Mi. STRICKLAND. &7ill the ike proposed to be constructed from the lower end of the cofferdamopposite StoneyIsland to Bois BlancIsland be sufficient to preventany injurious cross currents there Col. PATRICK.Yes; in my opinion the dam as now proposed will be sufficient to practically eliminate these cross currents from the eastward. I would like to add to what I said about the increased velocity opposite Amherstburg, and to sa that the velocity at present in the vicinityof Amherstburg, accor3 mg to my observation, and taking the normal flow of the Detroit River, the mean velocity opposite Amherstburg is about 2.54 feet persecond, roughly speaking, which comes to about 1.8 miles per hour, and theincrease of velocity in the vicinity of Amherstburg will not be more than one-half mile per hour, whch makes about 2.3 miles per hour. During the time the dam was in place the actual veloclty over Limekilncrossing, which is one of the most difficult points in thelower river, was about 3.6 feetper second, or a little over 2+ mlles psrhour. They had to contend with a greater velocity than .we hope they will experience down here in the channel after the damIS there. Mr. STRICKLAND.Will the proposed damto Bois BlancIsland compensate for the discharge through the Livingstone Channel and prevent any lowering of the water levels above ? Col. PATRICK.I believe so. Mr. TURNER.Why ? THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 23 Col. PATRICK.Simply because it puts a barrier in the stream. If you put any dam in any stream anywhere it will raise the water surface above; it will prevent the flow over that articular part of the dam that took place before your dam was t l! ere, and to that extent it will force rt into all the various channels that the water flows throughin that part of theriver. What we havedone is simply to dig a big hole right along there, and we have increased to a certain extent the cross section through which this water may flow. If we put somewhere else a similar barrier to that which we tookout, we claim we restorethe natural conditions. That is all there is to it. Mr. STRICKLAND.I will repeat the question because the question has been somewhat deviated from in the answer. Will the pro osed dam to Bois Blanc Island compensake for the discharge throug the Livingstone Channel and prevent any lowering of the water levelsx above ? Col. PATRICK.In myo inion, and based upon my calculations, the proposed dam will undouB tedly compensate for theincreased flow of this portion of the river, due to the execution of the Livingstone Channel, and will preventany lowering of water levels above. I might answer the question, sinlply, yes. Mr. STRICKLAND.Will the proposed dam to Bois Blanc Island so divert the water into the Amherstburg Channel as to increase the current at that point to such an extent as to render the harbor at Amherstburgpractically useless and cause the winte,r ice brought down by the current to destroy the docks and property along the river front of that town and render the navigationof vessels through this channel more difficult and dangerous 8 Col. PATRICK. wouldI like to divide that into three heads. The increased flow by the town of Amherstbur , due to the construction of the dam, I have already statedwill pro tiuce a maximum addition to the present flow of nbout 1,700 cubic feet per second, and a maximum increase in the velocityopposite Amherstburg of approximately one-half mile per hour. Those conditions would exist mth the Liv- ingstoneChannel at its resentwidth of 300 feet. The increases of flow and velocit will Jminish in case thechannel isopened to a eater width. fn my opinion, the maximum increase in velocit gont of Amherstbur of a little less than half a mile per hour wi 91 in no way interfere wit 1 the usc of the harbor of Amherstburg nor will it be injurious to navigationF through this partof the river. Mr. STRICKLAND.Would it cuusc the winter ice to be brought down bythe current sufficient to destroyany of thedock property at Amherstburg ? Col. PATRICK.I have been stationed at Detroit a comparative1 short s ace of time, and this is the first winter I have one throu here. f can not tcll, from my own knowledge, what t e ice con tions are at Amherstburg and can only rely upon the arecords and reports which are made to me. There will be other witnesses who have had a number of years’ experience here, and they can answer better than I can; but 1 can give my views, founded upon the records and reports made, if that will answer the purpose. Mr. STRICKLAND.I think the commission would be pleased to hear that. 24 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. Col. PATRICK.According to the best informationI caa obtain from reports made to me by m assistants under m direction, men who have been on that part o Pthe river for a num5 er of years and who have put in official reports to me. I may say further that I have examined some of the old records in the past. Mr. TAWNEY.You are speaking from the official records in your office? . Col. PATRICK.Yes; and the official reportsmade to me by my assistants. Of course the ice which passes inthe vicinity of Am- herstburg comes from Lake St. Clair and the Detroit River. Under ordinary circumstances this ice does not run in the lower part of the river until after it has become seriously weakened and so broken up that it has no injurious effect upon the docks or any other structures, or upon anchored or tied-up vessels in the vicinity of Amherstburg. There are occasions when storms occur when the ice may be broken while it is much more solid. Under SUC~circumstances the ice will run to that side of the river toward which the wind is blowing. If there be a. strong windfrom the west, as therehas beenonce or twice during the last 10 or 12 years, then the ice may be broken up and may run along the Anherstburg water front in large ieces and may do damage. But the increased flow, due to the builB ing of the dam, in my o inion, will not increase such damage nor will it have any marked eE ect upon the flow of ice in this vicinity. As a matter of fact, the flow over Limekiln Crossing, which is some little distance above Amherstbur , will be less with the dam inplace than it is now. The flow through tEi. le channels toward the westward of the Limekiln Crossing will be greaterthan it is now. It is avery reasonable assumptionthat under normal conditions the flow of ice through those other channelswill be greater than over theLimekiln Crossing, and that even under storm conditions the lesser flow over Limekiln Crossing may cause a somewhat lesser run of ice along the Canadian shore. The sum and substance of it is that I do not think it will do the slightest dama e. Mr. CASGRAIN.B believe the ice sometimes forms in the Detroit River ? Col. PATRICK.Yes, I said it came from the Detroit Riverand Lake St. Clair. In several years of records there have been practically no cases of damage at Amherstburg; in one storm the ice did injure the docks but that would take place whether the Livingstone Channel was opened or closed. Mr. STRICKLAND.In your opinion, will not the result of building tho dambe beneficial to the townof Amherstburg and other towns on the Detroit River rather than any way injurious to them? Col. PATRICK.I do not know I can say that it would have any marked beneficial effect, except in so far as the greater amount of flow assing through other channels than that which leads over the LimeL 'In Crossing; when it comes to a question of sewemge, it may, to a certain extent, actuallydiminish the amountof sewerage that now flows by Amherstburg; it may. Mr. CASGRAIN.The sanitary experts are a little skeptical about that. Col. PATRICK.I do not doubt it; I do not say it would be much benefit to Amherstburg. THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 25 Mr. STRICKLAND.In your opinion, is there any other place in thd Detroit River better suited for a dam to correct the current of that river than atBois Blanc Island? Col. PATRICK.Yes, there are other places in the Detroit River that are more suitable for a damif you consider merely the compensatory features of this project. Mr. STRICKLAND.Where are these other places, in your opinion? Col. PATRICK.I have not given enough thought to pick out the best lace of all, but robably in the American or Trenton Channel, so cal? led, a dam coul crbe placed which would providecom ensation although I think a dam placed there would have other oE jections. You can put a damover there and compensate for theflow just aswell as you can corn ensate for it here, and you could compensate for it with less cost, !ut you havethis exceedinglyobjectionable cross current. Mr. TAWNEY.You have not said very much with regard to the im ortance of this dam in its relation to navigation interests on the LaL? Col. PATRICK.No, sir; I have not. Mr. TAWNEY.That is one of the features embodied in the question submitted to us. . Col. PATRICK.I think that question is probabl best answered b calling attention to the volume of the commerce w1 ich passes througl the Detroit River. My statistics showing tho amount of commerce on the Detroit River arenow being completed, but I have gone sufficiently far toshow that the numberof vessel passages at Detroit during the last year, 1912, of navigation, amounted to about 30,080, the registeredtonnage being 59,400,000, andthe total freight carried about 75,865,000 tons.These figures arefor Detroit, There are some of these vessels that do not ass Amherstburg, but according to the other records, the number oP vessel passages up and down this part of the river during the sameperiod amounted to something over 25,000, which is one-sixth less than the Detroit figures, and presum- ablythe tonnage was about one-sixth less. It wouldmean about 25,000 vessels passing there, and probably about 65,008,000 tons of freight carried. freight Mr. TAWNEY.What is the length .of the season of navigation? Col. PATRICK.It was 242 days during the season of 1913. Between the 19th of October and the close of navigation in December last, there passed through the new Livin tone Channel over 1,200 vessels, and the greatest number that asse (p"through that channel in one day is 57. I might say there wou l)d have been more passages if the masters of the vessels had done what they were told and had gone down thare. Mr. TAWNEY.Was it on account of the cross currents they did not use the channel? Col. PATRICK.There are some of themhere who ca,n speakfor themselves on that point and I would rather take their testimony than set up my own opinion. IIowever, from my personal observations, I do know that that cross current does nffect vessels that pass through thst channel. 26 THE LIVINGSTONE. CHANNEL. Questioned by Mr. MacInnes, K. C., for Canada. Mr. MACINNES.I understood you to say that this pro osed dam it3 for twopurposes-compensation for the waterlevel and tK e correction of cross currents in that particular locallty; thatis correct ? Col. PATRICK.That is perfectly correct. Mr. MACINNES.As to the question of compensation, I understood you to say thatit was necessary to compensatefor the lowering of the waters above whichaffected the whole of the Lake system? Col. PATRICK.You understood correctly. Mr. MACINNES.And that that was no mere surmise was established to you by the fact thatwhen the cofferdam was closed there had been a rise in the waters, as contrasted with before, as far up as Lake St. Clair, as far as your observations went ? Col. PATRICK.I said that there was that rise of the water surface above due to the cofferdam. Mr. MACINNES.And that thecompensation whichwould be afforded by this damwould also extend as far or farther,as you put it, it would affect the whole of the Lake system? Col. PATRICK.That is a correct statement of the position. Mr. MACINXES.In dealing with the compensation you were dealing with a matter which affected the levels of the whole of the Lake system ? Col. PATRICK.I think you may say that it has that very broad bearinyes. Mr. ~CINNES.In dealing with the question of the cross-currents, that was a matter of this particular locality ? Col. PATRICK.It is naturaUy a local question. Mr. MACINNES.In conuiderlng this work for the purposes of compensation, what was the amount that would be obtained by the dam m respect to com ensation, or what ww your estimate? Col. PATRICK.ft is a little difficult to put that infigures. I stated that if the Livin stone Channel were opened to its 450 width and 9 the dam put inp is ace, at Ouellets and Mamajudaabove, there would be a slight increase in thelevels over the normal. By the 1903 measured slo e of the river in that part, the increased elevation for the dam an 8) the wider channel would be only about 0.04 of a foot; in other words, if the wider channel be opened and the dam be constructed as it is now proposed to construct it, I believe from my calcylations that the conditions will be restored practically to what the were before any work was doneat all on the Llvingstone Channel. dr. MACINNES.?he amount of compensation you were seeking to deal with was the amount of change that would be caused by the increase in the dam. Col. PATRICK.It would be the amount that wascaused by the increased flow through the channel. Mr. MACINNES.The question you weredealin with was the change that would be createdby this wldening of the cfl annel ? Col. PATRICK.Yes. Mr. MACINNES.And this dam would afford compensation to that extent a Col. PATRICK.That is my belief. Mr. MACINNES.So that the question your were dealing with was the question relating to the increase of the width of the cofferdam? THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 27 Col. PATRICK.The increased width of the LivingstoneChannel. I was dealing with the present width and the proposed increased width. Mr. MACINNES.And this dam would afford compensation, roughly speaking, to that extent‘1 Col. PATRICK.Yes. Mr. MACINNES.If it had been a question of compensation pure and simple, or compensation to a larger extent, was there a unanimous opinion of your board of engineers as to where compensatory works were to be laced a Col. PATRICK.Pwas not a member of that board, but so far as I read this record I do not remember that they expressed any opinion along that line. So far as my own personal opinion is concerned, if the compensatory features of this structure were to be considered alone, as I have stated already, there are a number of places where you could providecompensation besides the particular site of the dam. Mr. MACINNES.So that your opinion of this matter was formed because you were having to deal with compensation to the limited amount of the figures we have mentiond, and also to deal at the same time with this question of cross-currents. Col. PATRICK.In other words, I was trying to kill two birds with the one stone. Mr. MACINNES.And also, so far as compensation by itselfwas concerned, you were dealing with a particular amount of compensation ? Col. PATRICK.Yes. Mr. MACINNES.I do not know whether you are familiar with the ourself, but you aredoubtless aware of certain changes in lake revels which have been caused by diversion of the waters of Lake Michigan; what can you say FLS to that? Do you know about it of our own knowledge ? Col PATRICK.I can give you a verybroad answer; that any change in the naturalregime of the Lakes isgenerally reflected somewhere in the Lake system. Mr. MACINNEB.So that this diversion of the waters of Lake Michi- gan would affect the whole of the Lake level, apart from Lake Supe- rior, or possibly including Lake Superior. Col. PATRICK.I am of the opinion that any diversion at either end of the Lake system, excluding Lake Superior, any what I may call unnatural diversion, will have its effect on the entire Lake system. Mr. MACINNES.You mean by unnatural, artificial? Col. PATRICK.Yes, perhaps I should have said “artificial.” Mr. MACINNES.You are aware that suchdiversion has taken place,

5 or is taking place ? Col. PATRICK.am I aware that there is a diversion of water at Chicago on Lake Michigan. Mr. MACINNES.What is the amount of that diversion a Col. PATRICK.That I can not say. Mr. MACINNES.What is theamount of the diversion which is covered by the permit of the Secretary of War? Col. PATRICK.have I never secn the permit, but my recollection is that it is 4,167 cubic feet per second. 28 THE LIVINGSTONECHANNEL. Mr. MACINNES.Is there any other definite basis on which you, as an engineer, could tell us, apart from that? Col. PATRICK.I do not understand the question. Mr. MACINNES.Is there any otherdefinite basis as to the amountso diverted, that you, as anengmeer, could deal with, except the figures you have given ? Col. PATRICK.I do not understand that question;do you mean if I have an knowled e of the amount of the diversion? Mr. ~CINNES.fn dealing with a problem of water diversion from the Lakes, what figures would you take as an engineer? Col. PATRICK.I would seek the records which have been published and endeavor to ascertain from them what light they thre,w on the amount of diversion actually taking place. Mr. MACINNES. What would bethe datum thatyou would dealwith in this particular case as to the level of this channel in respect to the diversion from Lake Michigan; would it be the fixed amount covered by the ermit, or would it be an unascertainable amount? Col. $ATRICK. I would have to answer the questlon no, both ways. I would not make any calculation on a mere permit granted to any party to divert water. Mr. MACINNES.Could you deal with the Lake Michigandiversion in dealing with a problemof this kind, to your absolute satisfaction, without knowing definitely what that diversion was 8 Col. PATRICK.No; I would like to know what you mean by “a roblem of thiskind”; did you mean to cover theLivingstone Ehannel in that question8 Mr. MACINNES.In dealing with thechannel, would you want to deal witA a definite situation 8 , Col. PATRICK.I do not understand your question. I would have to answer it this way, if I understand It aright: If I were kaking the broadest possible view of it, I would have to consider an artificial diversionmade everywhere on the Lake system. Do you include divorsion made at Niagara in thepossibility, as well as diversion made in Chicago ? Mr. MACINNES. Quiteso; you would do that. Col. PATRICK.In dealing with it in the broadest way,I should. Mr. M~CINNES. dealing In with the Lake Michigan diversion, you told us there was nothing definite on the sub‘ect. Col. PATRICK.In dealmg with the Lake dichigan diversion alone, of my own knowledge I have very little information as to the exact state of affairs there. Questioned by Mr. STAUNTON: Mr. STAUNTON.The real reason that you desire to construct this dike, as I gather from yourevidence, is because you consider, or those who will be called upon to sustain thecase of the United States consider, that thereal danger to ships navigating the LivingstoneChannel, if the dike is not built, is Soy reason of the cross currents? Col. PATRICK.I do. Mr. SrnrrNToN. Will you tell mc whether or not during last season there were any accidents to vessels navigating that channel byreason of that cross currcnt ? Col. PATRICK.There wcre none, but I would like to elaborate that by staying that during part of last season the Livingstone Channel was THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 29 not opened, arid weatherand other conditions were exceptionally favorable. Mr. STAUNTON.Have you any records toshow thatthe vessels that did navigate the channel were affectcd sensibly by the current passing over the channel ? Col. PATRICK.I have the evidence of my own eyes. Mr. STAUNTON.What did you see ’1 Col. PATRICK.When I went down the channel aheadof the steamer Livingstone, when they opened the channel,I was watching verycare- fully. I had known of the existence of these cross currents. It had been discussed in the publicpress and other places quite extensively. I assumed that others had probably a much knowledgebetter of it than I had, because I had been here only a comparatively short time. I stood on the sternof my boat,which precededthe steamerLivingstone down, and after she struck thecross current I saw her bodily drift to the westward until she almost shut out from my view certain of the buoys and untilI said to the man standing withme, (‘ I am very much afraid she is going to strike the bank.” Mr. STAUNTON. At what rate was she proceeding? Col. PATRICK.Probably 8 miles per hour. Mr. STAUNTON.What sort of a vessel was she, deepdraft or shallow ‘1 Col. PATRICK.She is a pretty good-sized vessel and fairly deep in the water, but she was not loaded at that time and her bow was pretty high. Mr. STAUNTON. What waterwas she drawing 1 Col. PATRICK.I do not know exactly, but I should think about 15 feet; that can be answered definitely by other persons. Mr. STAUNTON.Did youmake an other observations as to ordi- nar bar es traveling in that channe i? Col.Yg PATRICK. I watched some other barges traveling in that channel, but it was alter I had taken particular pains to see, that a notice was issued calling t,hc attention of the masters of these boats to the absolute necessity for, in tho lower part of the channel,keeping well to the eastward in order to guard against this particular cross current. Mr. STAUNTON.1 wish you to tell me, if you know, what was the current over thesite of the proposed dyke before tlw building of the Livingstone Channel; did you tell us that beforc!? Col. PATRICK.I did not tell you that, arul I do not know that I can tell you. Mr. SrAumoN. Cnn you tell me whetherit has !)em decreased; I understand it has been tlecrcased by the bnilding of this channel; did I catch that 8 Col. PATRICK.KO, you caught this: While the coH’erdam was in place and while we blocked oif all the water there, thewwas a certain currentat the head of Bois Blanc Island.That current was no greaterthan the current that cxistd before the building of the cofferdam. Since the cofferdam has been taken away and the water entersthrough LivingstoneChannel, thecurrent, now at the head of Bois Blanc Island is less than when the cofferdam was in place. Mr. STAUNTON.It ought to beless k>.y reason of the Livingstone Channel. 30 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. Col. PATRICK.Oh, I do not know that it ought to be very much less. Mr. SrAUNTON. It would not bc greater? Col. PATRICK. I should think it would not be greater. Mr. STAUNTON.The watcr does not' flow from the shore ? Col. PATRICK.No. Mr. STAUNTON.So t,hnt in all probability t'he current is the normal current that existed before the building of this Livingstone Channel ? Col. PATRICK.I do not think I will answer that quite yet. Mr. STAUNTON.Probably. Col. PATRICK.Possibly. Mr. STAUNTON.What is the current at the site of the proposed dyke Z Col. PATRICK.The mean velocity of the current across the site of the proposed dyke is about 1.1 feet per second, which is, roughly, three-quarters of a mile per hour; it is the mean velocity. Mr. STAUNTON.Are there any cross currents between Bois Blanc Island and the mainland, or is it arallel with the shore? Col. PATRICK.Practically para le1 with the shore between Bois Blanc Island and the mainland. r Mr. STREETER.Some of the commissioners would like to know the . velocity. Col. PATRICK.The mean velocity is three- uarters of a mile per hour, but where the current strikes the channe3 there is an approximate velocity of about one and three-quarte,rs miles per hour. Mr. STAUNTON.Where does that current that crosses the site of the dyke cross the Amherst Channel, if it does cross it? Col. PATRICK.It does not cross the Amherst Channel at all. Mr. STAUNTON.Does it not sweep in to the shore and come out 'I Col. PATRICK.KO, thewater that flows throughthe Amherst Channel runs pretty straight down along the Canadian shore. Mr. STAUNTON.Yes, but it struck me that the water rushing in and following the sinuosities of the Canadian shore-as I understand you it turns across the head of Bois Blanc Island? Col. PATRICK.Please understand me correctly. The current that comesdown and follows t,he Canadian shore divides.This blue print shows rather clearly thestate of affairs there [Col. Patrick indicating on map];there is AmherstChannel, that is BoisBlanc Island,here is the end of the cofferdarn, most of thewater that flows to theAmherst Channelcomes here, somewhere along here there is a division, and this line shows the line of the current across the site of the proposed dike. Mr. STREETER.We would like to have it statedin the record . where it divides. Col. PATRICK.The blue print which I exhibit shows the lower or southeast corner. Beginning atthe upper end of theLivingstone Channel thepreponderance of' thecurrent is nearthe Canadian shore, although there is some water flowing over the shallow rock .areaentrance to the cofferdam. It is difficult to state precisely where the division comes between the waters which flow down the Amherstburg Channel and the waters that flow over the dike, but, approximately, this would be about halfway down the length of the cofferdam, about opposite the middle of the cofferdam. You would find there a more distinct diversion than at any other place, and at THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 31 the lower end of the cofferdam the blue print shows the Bow of water between thedam and BoisBlanc Island. It also shows thatthe floats which were started in the Amherst Channel pro er, any place below, or even as far distant above the lower end of tR e cofferdam, followed the Amherst channel down past there between Bois Blanc Island and the Livingstone Channel. Mr. STAUNTON.You do not profess tosay that there is any increased currentthere, but a current of three-quarters of a mile across that channel you say is dangerous ? Col. PATRICK.No; I do notthink you catchthat uite right. I say that themean velocity over the siteof the propose1 dike is about three-quarters of a mile per hour, and that where that current strikes the LivingstoneChannel there is a velocity,mean a velocity of one mile and three-quarters per hour approximately. Mr. STAUNTON.Is there a constant current across the channel of one mile and three-quarters? Col. PATRICK.No; it is not constant at all. Mr. STAUNTON.I want to find out what this is? Col. PATRICK.In other words, if you go down that channel you will find a cross current; that cross current will vary from anything up to one and ahalf miles or one and three-quartermlles per hour asyou go through it. Mr. STAUNTON.At some points there is a currentof water sweeping across that channel at one and three-quarter miles 1 Col. PATRICK.At some points and at some times thereis a current. It does not sweep directly at right angles across, but it is a cross current which gives a velocity of about one mile and three-quarters per hour. Mr. STAUNTON.If I go and measure it now, will I find the water crossing at some angle m that channel all day long at one and three- quarter miles per hour? Col. PATRICK.I do not know whether you would or not. Mr. STAUNTON.Do your records show that I will or do you expect I will! Col. PATRI~.I should think you probably would. Mr. STAUNTON.That is theposition you take? Col. PATRICK.Yes; that is theposition I take, that at anytime you go down that channel you will find a cross current and, dependinr the variouslevels of the gauges, depending on the variouswinds w ch are blowing, that currentwill be greater or lesser in intensity. It may not be the same intensityat anymoment. There will be, under normal conditions of wind and weather, a cross current which may be, and probably is, one and three-quarters miles per hour in Mr. STAUNTON.Do you say that in your o inion tE1aces. ere .is always or usually a cross current which will dangerous7 y affect navlgation on that channel under present conditions! Col. PATRICK.I say that inm? opinion it is absolutely necessary to provide for the safetyof navigatlon by taking such precautions wi!l as consider the most unfavorable circumstances underwhich that navi- gationcan be carried on. The most unfavorable conditions would mean stress of weather and also taking into consideration the least intelligent man that is handling a boat. To provide for the safety of navigation under these circumstances,you should take everypossible 32 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. precaution, and the building of this dam is a precaution which will shut out an appreciable danger. Mr. STAUNTON.Is this dike only to be built to make the channel foolproof ? . Col. PATRICK.Not entirely. Mr. STAUNTON.Pretty nearly entirely. Col. PATRICK.Not pretty nearly entirely. Even a sensible man, though he be not a fool, may sometimes lapse. Mr. STAUNTON.Under ordinary conditions there are no dangers in navigating that channel as it is now? It is only stress of storms or perhaps whisky in the heads of the pilots that causes the danger? Col. PATRIUK.I do not even agree with that. I say that under ordinary conditions there is danger in navigating that channel. Mr. STAUNTON.Are they real dangers under ordinary conditions? Col. PATRICK.In my opinion there are real dangers there.

AFTER RECESS. Pursuant to thetaking of the recess, the commissionresumed its hearings at 2 o'clock >. m., all the members of the commission being present except Mr. $owell. The CHAIRMAN. Gentlemen,we will now proceed. Mr. STAUNTON.Col. Patrick, you will notice from the chart that the de ths of the water along the westerly side of the channel below the co E erdam are from 5, 7, to 13 feet, and that from the corner of the cofferdam to BoisBlanc Island, where you intend to run the dike, the water is ~nuchdeeper. Is that correct? Col. PATRICK.In places it is much deeper; yes, sir. Mr. STAUNTON.It runs from 12 to 20 feet? Col. PATRICK.Yes, sir. Mr. STAUNTON. will it not cost less moncy to build your dike on the westerly side of the channel and parallel withit for the necessary distance to prevent these currents? Col. PATRICK.I hardly think it would cost less. Mr. STAUNTON.You would hardly think it mould c6st more anyway, would you ? Col. PATRICK.The trouble is that you would have to extend your dikea very much greater length if you place it parallel with the channel than would be the length of the dam from the cofferdam to Bois Blanc Island, and I am convinced that the cost of the parallel dike would be greater. Mr. STAUNTON. Whatdo your calculations show the cost of the dike is oing to bet Col. 5mmx. I can not givc you that in dollars and cents just now. I can probably obtain that information for you, however. Mr. STAUNTON.Is it a very lar e amount of money? Col. PATRICK.No: not a very Barge amount of money. Mr. STAUNTON.Would it be five hundred or six hundred thousand dollars ? Col. PATRICK.I would not like to makea guess regardingthe amount. As I say, I can obtain that informationfor you. Mr. STAUNTON. Haveyou any idea of the percentage of increased cost to build it at theplace I have spoken of? Col. PATRICK.No; I have not. I do not think I haveconsidered it on the west side at all. I have considered it on the eastern side. THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 33 Mr. STAIJNTON.You would not nocessarily build it right up to the cofferdam, would you ? (hl. PATRICK. I[ would not put it on the west side at ail. Mr. STAUNTON. I am corning to that in a moment. Do I understand you, Col. Patrick, to say that the length would necessarily be greater if you built it on the west side of the channel thanif you built It where you suggest? cod. PATRICK. I havencvcr considered building it on the west side of the channel at all. Mr. STAUNTON. So you arc! not prepwed to express an mgineer's opinion on it Z Col. PATIXICK.No; not on that, particular. point. MI. STAUNTON.Will you kindly give us any objections that you may have to building it on the west side of the channel Z

I Col. PATRICK.For the simple reason that I do not believe a spoil dike would be as effective. Mr. STAUNTON. If it were long enough and if it went do*n alon the island it would be as effective, would it not? The island woul 8 prevent a return current. Col. PATRICK.Not entirely. You haveyour current striking againstthat at that angle, and you would have a reflex current coming back across your channel. Mr. STAUNTON.But would not thereflex current be countered ri ht by the island and destroyed there? Would the current be nulliied on tirely ? 86342-13-3 34 THE LIVINQSTONE CHANNEL. co1. PATRICK.No; 1do not think so. The cross current would not be entirely nullified. Mr. STAUNTON.Is it your deliberate opinion that it is not possible to construct for all reasonable urposes as effective a barrier to that water on the west side of the cf annel as on the eastern side? Col. PATRICK.That is my decided opinion. Mr. STAUNTON.Now, you are going to leave a gap through your dike, are you not ? Col. PATRICK.Yes. Mr. STAUNTON.Will not the waterrusll through therelikea funnel? Col. PATRICK. The water will ass through that gap. Mr. STAUNTON.Will it not rusP 1 through there? Col. PATRICK.L‘Itush” is a comparative term. 1 do not think the assage through the gapwill be any faster than the currentwhich will !e !e flowing down the main channel. TheCHAIRMAN. What> would be thewidth of the opening, Col. Patrick ? Col. PATRICK.It has been proposed to leave an opening in the dike of about 300 feet wide and to permit the cross section to be about 3,600 Rquare feet.The velocity would bejust about the same as thro-ugh the main channel, a fraction over 3 feet per second, or a little over 2 miles an hour. M.r. STAUNTON.This dike wldch it is proposed to construct is for the ]purpose of counteracting or meeting the dangers that arise from the new conditions of the water ? Col. PATRICK.Yes, sir. Mr. STAUNTON.And if there it a greater diversion of water, we will say at Chicago, than is at present taking place, up to 14,000 second- feet, may it not be that this dike will be entirely inescient and useless (! Col. PATRICK.Oh, no. If such a state of affairs as that took place it would still not be utterly useless. Mr. STAUNTON.Will there be any danger if they divert 14,000 feet at Chicago ? Col. PATRICK.Yes. Mr. STAUNTON.Will uot the waterbe so low that you can not swim a boat in running water? Col. PATRICK.I think not. Mr. STAUNTON.How much will 14,000 feet reduce the water? Col. PATRICK.I have never calculated that. Mr. STAUNTON.The whole opinion that you have given was, at all events, about the difierence between these two walls, whether on the westerly side or as you pro ose? Col. PATRICK.Yes, sir. Pt, however, states my engineering opinion as to the advantages and disadvantages of the two, based upon wha,t I believe to be sufficient data. Mr. STAUNTON.And is it not also the same as regards your view that it will not in’uriously affect the Amherstburg or other channels? Clol. PATRICK.4 have expressed an opinion u on that as from an en ineering standpoint based u on data that I €elieve to support it. ki.STAUNTON. Those are the questions I wish to ask you, Col. Patrick. Mi. CABQRAIN. How muchof the proposed dike is on the Canadian side of the river, Col. Patrick ?

0 THE LIVINOSTONE CHANNEL. 35 Gol. PATRICK.The total length of the dike as proposed is about 300 feet,and of thatamount about two-thirds-Iam answering roughly-would be in Canadian territ'ory. Mr. KING.Col. Patrick, the answers you have given to the uestions last put rather indicate that the principalreason for the bui? ding of the dike, having regard to existing conditions, is to cut off the cross currents ! Is that correct ! Col. PATRICK.That is right; yes, sir. Mr. KINO. In other words, as far as compensation is concerned, that, this water now withdrawn through Livingstone Channel-the need for that is almost negligible under existing conditions. Col. PATRICK.So far as our measurements have gone and so far as we candetermine from the limited period throughwhich they have been taken, the need for the dike is almost negligible. Mr. KING.If it is so that you are excluding from our consideration the need for compensation due to withdrawaiY s, for hstance from Lake Michigan, and are confining your attention to this section of the river, when you s eak of com ensation you are referringto the need that might ariseiP the channet" is broadened to 450 feet instead of 300 feet, as it is now, at its lower end! Col. PATRICK.Yes, to this extent; thatif the chsnnelbe broadened in accordance with the approved project I am convinced that compensation will be necessary. Mr. KING. Will you please indicate, if you can, about whatdeprecia- tion in levels above you would expect If the channel is increased to 450 feet instead of 300 feet in cross sections. Col. PATRICK.The most recent calculation made from data which have been secured since the channel was o ened go very far toward confirming the predicted resultwhich woul0 follow the openmg of the channel to that width, and it is my belief that if the chanel were o ened to 450 feet, without the dam, there would be immediately a E ove the channel, or at Oulettes, a possible variation of levels from about 0.16 of a foot up, which, put in inches, means about 2 or 3 inches. Mr. MAGRATH.That is lower than before thechannel was constructed Z Col. PATRICK.Yes, sir; lower than before the channel was constructed. If you o enthis channel 450 feet wide, there will bea lowering immediatef above of probably as much as I have stated. The CHAIRMAN.B ow would that affect navigation and to what extent! Would it affect the carrying capacity of vessels 1: Col. PATRICK.Yes, it would. Theamount it would affect them woulddepend upon the character of the vessels used. It would affect them in another way,for even such a loweringas that would be extended clear up. Even as slight a lowering as that would produce greater currents m the river up above. The CHAIRMAN.Are there any accurate data with respect to the tonnage per inchof depth of water ! Col. PATRICK.There are accurate data; yes, sir; but it depends entirely u on the way in which those data are used as to the precise results. Srdinarily, a diminution of 1 inch in the loading capacity means anywhere from 50 to 75 or 80 tons for each vessel. I think those figures can be substantiated. 36 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. Mr. CASGRAIN.What is the necessity of widening the Livingstone Channel 8 Col. PATRICK.It is just like going througha somewhat narrow tunnel where both sides are concealedfrom you. In other words, down below the water comes up over the side. It is the belief of the navigator that that is so narrow that the might be driven against the sides, and the widening of the channe is merely for the sake of increasing the degree of safety in running Pthrough there. In the part that has been wtdened, of course, there are walls of rock; they are solid rock cut straight down. Mr. CASGRAIN.Are they marked by buoys? Col. PATRICK.Yes: the lines of the channel are marked by buoys. It is simply the narrowness of the channel that is involved. Mr. CASGRAIN.Do you know how wide the ship channel is? Col.~PATRICK. No; I do not know. Mr. KING.You mentioned a robable difference in levels of, say, 2 inches if that widening is carrie out in the lower end of the Living- stone cut. At what point is thats 2 inchest Col. PATRICK.I am talking- about almost immediately above the Oulettes gauge. Mr. KING.Have YOU figured- what it wouldbe at the Limekiln Crossing ? Col. PATRICK.I have not those figures here; no. That really is the im orta,nt point. That is the point where we have made most of our caI? culations. Mr. KING.You mentioned it as being possible aU the way back toward higher waters. It would be less and less? Col. PATRICK.It would be less and less. Mr. KING.Will you tell me, too, whether you are computing on the basis of a bottom width of 450 feet with shelving sides, or a straight cut all the way down? Col. PATRICK.The sides of thechannel are practically vertical. Mr. KING.HOW far down does the rock go 'l Col. PATRICK.Halfway down to LakeErie. Below thatthere is dred 'ng and the banks are not quite so steep. Mr. ING. But your propal would be a 450-foot width? Cd. EPATRICK. lhe bow 's proposition, which ha3 been approved, is a 450-foot channel all the way through to the moutih. Mr. KING.Having regard to the fact that under existing circumstances your main purpode in advocating the proposal is to obviate the troubles arising from the cross current, you suggest that com- pensationmay beworked out by thedam for thewithdrawal of water through the broader channel. Is it not a fact that once you have broadened the channel to 450 feet the dangers from the cross current would be very much lew, because a boat would have that much more leewa to work on 3 Col. PATRICK.Bite true; the danger would be leas. Mr. KING.So you can not consider the question of crxs currents and compensation together. At pregent it IS crow current only that we fear; in the future it would be the necessity for compensation. Col. PATRICK.Both will require it. Mr. KING.Have I notunderstood you correct1 when YOU day at resentit id thequestion of crow currents, anB in thefuture It wilP be the need for compensation ! THE LIVINGSTOKE CHANNEL. 37

Col. PATRICK.Yes:, undertho present conditions that, is the governing Consideration. Mr. KING.So it id fair for me to say, id it not, that one can hardly considertogether as two reasons for the building of the dam the cross current and the need for corn )e,nsn.tion? Col. PATRICK.No; I do not thin K- I c,an say that is fair. I think the two go together. Mr. KING.But not exactly to t’hc sme extent. Col. PATRICK.Not exactly to tho sumc extent. In other words, t,he cross currentis acontrolling factor under present conditions, and if you broaden the channel I believe they would probably have more e ual weight. Mr. %ING. But I supposc: you would ndniit :IS t,o the effect of the cross current, either now orhnreafter, thatan export navigator would ive pretty substmtial evidence. Col. SATRICK.I would much prefer that he should Mr. CASGRAIN.When was the 300-foot width dcci;lcd upon? Col. PATRICK.In the original project when it was first’ proposed. Mr. CASGRAIN. When was that? Col. PATRICK.The project was ndoptcdby Congress in 1907. It was reported upon favorably the year previous t,o t’hat. Mr. CASGRAIN.When was the report mattic for t,he widening of the channel ? Col. PATRICK.In 1910. Mr. CASGRAIN.What were the changes in navigation which were brou ht about; the number of ships, or things of that kind ? Cof PATRICK.In answer t)o that question I should like to ut this document in evidence. It’ is Document, KO: 676 of t>heI ouse of Representatives,Sixty-first Congress, second session. It,contains P thereport of the Board of Enginecrs rcgn,rtling thelivingstone Channel in the Detroit River. (Thedocument referred to hy Col. Patrick is marked “Exhibit No. 2 on loellalf of tho 1Jnited Sttates.”) Mr. STRICKLAND.IIave there been my test’s made concerning t,he sewage that comes from t>hecit,ies above the proposed dam ‘a Col. PATRICK.I do not know that I understand your question. Mr. STRICKLAND.ITns there been any consideration given as to the effect of the cha.nne1 in connection with the seww.ge t,hat comes from Dctroit and othcr cities? Col. PATRICK.Yes. Mr. STRICKLAND.What ht~sl~ecn the effcct’ of t’hc chmnel on the sewn e2 Coy. PATRICK.Consideration has been given to the condition which would follow the opening of the channel or the construction of the dam. The lower Detroit River is pollutotl, of course, by sewage which comes into it from both side.; of t’he st,ream;on t,he Amer- ican side, mainlyfroln Detroit and the smaller towns below, snd on the Canadian side from Wnlkerville, W’inctsor-and I believe t,here are no other red townsabove Amherstburg. Thequestion was whether or not the con:truction of the dsrn would have ti deleterious effect upon points a3 low down RS Arnherat1,urg due to 21137 increqsed amount of sewage that would flow by it, andmy lnvestlgatlons have led me to answer that question in the negative for reasons which I can give if you wish them. 38 LIVINGSTONECHANNEL. THE

Mr. SrRIcKLmD. Will you please stste them? Col. PATRICK.It is :I well-known fact that sewage entering a flowing stream through ordinary sewers, or which is carried into such a stream by surface flow, is generally confined to the shores along which it is delosited until after considerabledistances have been reached from tll e places where it enters, and that the only way that sewage from this side of the river would reach the other side would he I)y diffusion; that is! a gradual diffusion of the sewage to the other side. So if we consider merely the sewage that flows into the Detroit River from towns on the United States side, the probabilities are-or, in fact, I might say it is a,n absolute fact-that the major portion of this sewage will follow it closely down along the American side of the river and the greater portion of it will really go down through t,he so-called TrentonChannel. Wtlerl the diffusion of that sewage is considered, it must be remembered that the construction of the Liv- ingstone Channel itself h:~sopened a new route for it to follow, or at lemt a route of considerably greater size than that which existed formerly in that place. Furthermore, the velocity through the Liv- ingstone Channel to-dayis greater than at any other partof the lower river, and I believe there IS no question that the sewage from the American side that asses hy hmhersthrg to-day is less than would be the case if the Livingstone Channel were notthere. I believe, also, that even if the darn were put in place and 17,000 cubic feet more of water were sent down by Amherstburgthe percentage of UnitedStates sewage passing it down mouldbe less thanit was without the Livingstone Channel. Now, to consider the sewage on the other side of the river, that follows precisely the same way as tha,t which is deposited from the United States territory, a,nd Windsor sewage willflow down close along the Canadian shore. There is the possibility of contamination which has been suggestedfrom theItiver Canards, which flows a sluggish streaminto the Detroit River a shortdistance above Amherstburg. It is a well-known fact that where you have a smaller stream flowing into a larger one the larger stream redominates, and the less intense current is simply bent down and folP ows for a distance along the strongercurrent. If you observea stream which is discolored, as small stresms frequently me from local rains, you will find where it goes into the river it is going close down along the shore. That has been noticed in the CanardsRiver. We have followed floats down toward Amherstburg, and there hasn’t a single one gone tothe westward of Bois BlancIsland. They seem tohave been drifting right into the shore. It seems to have been proven fully to my mind that all the sewage that flows by Amherstburg would still flow there. None of it which now comes out into tbe river above goes to the west of Bois Blanc Island anyway, and, consequently,the dam, if put in place, would have no effect whatever upon the contamination of the water which asses in front of Amherstburg. The CHAIRMAN.What is t Ee distance of Amherstburg below Detroit ? Col. PATRICK.It is, I think, 18 miles. The CHAIRMAN.Col. Pat,rick, are ou familiarwith the beginning of the improvements in the Detroit giver by the Government of the United StatesZ THE LIVINGSTONECHANNEL. 39

Col. PATRICK.Only in so far as I have familiarized myself with the work by searching the records. The CHAIRMAN.What 'do the records show w,s tothe time the im rovernents began 8 801. PATRICK.About 1874 was the date of the adoption of the first roject. That project rovided for a winding channelthrough the eimekiln Crossing, whic t: was then the most serious ohstruct,ionin the Detroit River. The CHAIRMAN.On which side of the line ha,s most of the improvements been mde by the United States Government ? Col. PATRICK.The major portion of the expenditures has been on the Canadian side. The CHAIRMAN.What has been the aggregate expenditure by the United States Government on 1)oth sides of the line in the improvement of the Detroit River? Col. PATRICK. I shouldhave to look at myreports in orderto answer that question accurate1 . My recollection 1s that the aggregate ex xnditures amount to a P ,out $1 1,000,000. The (5 HAIRMAN. Is that the totd amount? Col. PATRICK.For the lower part of the river; that is my recollection. . The CHAIRMAN. Does t,hst include the Livingstone Channel? Col. PATRICK. Yes; that includes the Livingstone Channel. The CIIAIRMAN.You have mentioned the vessels paasing up and down the Detroit River. How mnny are American and how many are Canadian vessels, or what, is the relative proportion of the navigation in the Detroit Rivera Col. PATRICK. The exact percentage I do not think I have, but I know that the American-owned vessels are much grea1,er in number. The (hA1nMnN. I know they are, hitt T wanted the record to show the cxnct relation of navigation of thc, two comtriw in the Detroit Eiv er . a ('01. PATRICK. May I post.pone.answering that, quest,ion unt'il I can get my dat a ? My men are workmg 011 that to-day. Mr. Hoccrr. Was it anticipated that tho const,ruction of t,his work and the opening of t.ho cofferdam would result in the lowering of the watm levels ? Col. PATiwK. It, was calculaled t.llat,t,his work as originally planned for a ckannol300 feot, wide would result in practically no change in the levels. Mr. IIOUGH.Was it the original calculation thaL ihorc would be a lowering of tjhc water levels when tlhe cofcrtlnm was operled? Col. PATRICK. Not for a channel 300 feet wide. Mr. Houw. Rut there would be a lowering of ihc lcvels if it were 450 fcct wide'! COl. PATRICK. Yes, sir. Mr. IIOUGH. W'ordd t.he difi'crencc of 150 feet, result in a difference in the lowering of thc IoveIs ? Col. PATRICK.Yes, sir. h.Tr. IIovGrr. And n. channel .'X10 fcot, widc wo~ddhave no effect whatlever 1 Col. PATRICK.30, t)ecansa thc remains of thc cofferdam left in place and the distribution of certain material taken out of the channel itself compensated for the extra. flow through that 300 feet. 40 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. Mr. HOUGH.Then the calculations have been carried out and in the result found from the reading of the water gauges it shows that there has been no lowering of the levels by the work so far done? col. PATRICK. The measurements so far made are over a comparatively short period of time. If they show anything, they show that a slight error may have been made in the original calculation and t,hat there has been a very slight lowering. even with the 300 feet. Mr. HOUCTEJ.But, comparatively, It is negative? Col. PATRICK.Comparatively, it is negative. Mr. HOUCTH.And underpresent circumstances, as you told my learned friend, there is no necessity for the compensation there. Col. PATI~ICH.I think t,here is very little necessity for comperua- tion. Mr. HOUGH.And if there should be any necessity for it there are other places more suitable than thiswhere it could be bulit. Col. PATRICK.There are other laces equally suitable. Mr. HOUGH.And where it coul R be built at less expense? Col. PATRICK.Yes, sir. Mr. HOUGH.Will ou tell me, Col. Patrick, what t,he width of the channel is between tE e cofferdam and the main Canadianshore ? Col. PATRICK.From t,he cofferdam over to Canada is 2,670 feet. Mr. HOUGII. Is that at the widest point ur at the narrowest point? Col. PATRICK.That is upnear the head of the cofferdarn. It is somewhat wider down below. Mr. HOITGEI.It would be considerubly over 3,000 feet opposite the middle of the cofferdam. Col. PATRICK.About 3,000 hct,. Mr.. EIouaIr. I think you told us that the current going down the Limekiln Crossing was at, about 2+ miles an hour velocity; that is under normd conditions, I mean. Col. PATRICK.No; I said thd while the cofl'erdnmwas in place there was a raising of the minter up above; that while it was in place there was a current greater than 26 miles velocity. Mr. Houmr. And under present conditions 1: Col. PATRICK.Probably not nlore t,han that. Mr. Houcrr. And the I,irnekiln Crossing Channel takes a bend oppo- sitmewhat we call thc North lightship of about 20 degrees, I t,hink. Col. PATRICK.Something like that; yes, sir. Mr. HOUGH.Do you know that there is a considerable current setting in there t,o tbe east,? Col. PATRICK.'J'here is probably quito u current setting in there. Mr. HOUGH. And goingdown ut thesame rate of Zg miles an hour setsting in to the enst of that channel it has cut through the Limnl

Col. PATRICK.Between Bois Blanc Island and the main shore of Canada the percentage of flow is about 58.3. Mr. HOUGH.So that under present conditions 40 per cent, at least, of the water contained in that 3,000-foot channel goes west ofBois Blanc Island? Col. PATRICK.About that. Mr. HOUGH.Which mill be diverted in the Amherstburg Channel if the tlam is built? Col. PATRICK.Not all of it. Mr. HOUGII.Well, all but what will go t,hrough the 300-foot gap. Col. PATRICK.No. Mr. HOUGII.Where will the restof it go Z Col. PATRICK.Through the Livingsfone Channel. Mr. HOUGH.But I am talking now about the water between the cofferdam and the Canadian shore. Col. PATRICK.So am I. Mr. HOUGII.Can any of that get through the Livingstone Channel after this dam is built except through this 300-foot gap? Col. PATRICK.Your question is with regard to the water that is now going down there. When that clam is built there will not be so much water going down there. Mr. HOUGH. Where will it go Z Col. PATRICK.Through the Livingstone Channel and through the c,hannels to thewest of It; that is, some of it. Mr. HOUGEI.What I am referring to is the water now in the channel between the cofferdam and tJhe Canadian shore. Col. PATRICK.I understand that perfectly. What I mean is this: After you put the dam inplace there will not be so much water going down over the Limekiln Crossing as t,here is now. Mr. HOUGII.Do you meanthat the clam will retardthe flow from above so t)here will not be so much? Col. PATRICK.Yes. Mr. I-IOUGII.But in any went what would otherwise go throu h there would be practically dl sent t,hrough the AmherstburgChanni ? Col. PATRICK.Yes. Mr. HouaIr. ,4nd the Amhorstburg Channel at the narrowest point is, I believe, about 1,000 feet. Col. PATRICK.About that. Mr. HOUGH.Now, tllis current that you arccomplaining of will mee,t that darn practically at right, rtnglcs, will it not' ?. Col. PATRICK.When the tlam is in place there will not be any current except through the small opening. Mr. HOUGH.The dam \viU be thcre to stop t'he current? Col. PATILICK.The dam will be about' per endicular. Mr. HOUGH.And tho flow of the water wi J) be against the dam? Col. PATRICK.Yes. Mr. Houon. Andt8he action of the dam in diverting that water will cause a much greater currentthan if it wm: allowed to go through across the Livingstone Channe,l? Col. PATRICK.No; I t,hink not. Mr. HOUGH.Into the channel to which it, is diverted. I mean. Col. PATRICK.I think not, if I untlerstand the question correctly. Mr. HOUGII.Will not the pressure of the water from behind comin against that damcause it to shoot out,as it were, along the lower en 8 42 THE LIVINGSTONE CHI$NNEL. of that (like at a much greater force than if it were allowed to flow across Z Col. PATRICK.If you meant'hat there will be agreater current o posite the head of Bois Blanc Island than there is now between t Eat and Amherstburg, you are correct. Mr. HOUGH.I mean will not there be a greater current than there is anywhere in the river now at that point! Col. PATRICK.No. Mr. HOUGH. Wouldit' notact thesame as thatrebound you recent1 spoke about if it hit the wall on the west side of the dam? Col. ATRICK. You stated that this was going to hit it at practically rightF angles. Mr. HOUGII.It does not bound as much if it hits it at right angles as if it hits it obli uely ? Col. PATRICK.80; it will not follow thesame line. If you put your dam in place it will run right along the dam. Mr. HOUGIK.It will divertit,, however, into t,hat t,housnnd-foot channel and at a greater rate t8han itis going now across the Living- stonc Channel. Col. PATRICK.'l'he currcnt in t'he Amherstburg Chaunrl certainly will bc greater than t'hc (TOSS current now. Mr. IIouaIr. I m~ant'hc current following down that dam across thc Amhersthurg Chan~lel. ('01. PATRICK.It ~v-ill go right cion.41 dong thc Amherstburg Channel. Mr. I-Ioucxr. How fur is it from the wost side of it to the head of the island 1 T meall regnrdirlg the channel t

Mr. BOUGH.Where would you say would be the reatest Z Col. PATRICK.Probably somewhere in the middk e of the channel. Mr. HOUGH.You thinkthe current would notstart going fast until it got into the middle of the channel ‘1 Col. PATRICK.No; I would not say that. I am trying to put the thinsquarely and.fairly before you. In the middle of thechannel you 53 ave greater current t,han dong shore. Mr. HOUGH.I am rcferring now particularly to the current that will be diverted by this dam. That will not be in the middle of the channeluntil it gets.t,hcre, andthat will bewhat will causet,he increase. Col. PATRICK.KO, it will not. It is aphysical fact.The cause of the increase will be the dammin back and the greater slope. The dam will increase your slope and 65 ere will be a greater current. Mr. HOUGH. And you could not give an estimate as to what the greatcst velocit,y would be ? Col. PATRICK. No; I could not, tell you. Mr. HOUGH. The current, varies materially from practically nothing to 5 or 6 miles an hour, amordingto the winds ? Col. PATRICK.There are tjimes and placeswhere it goes 5 miles an hour. Mr. HOUGH:And these estimates that you have given are under normal conditions ? Col. ATRI RICK. Yes. Mr. HOUGH. I an1 spmking, of course, of this yticular place. Did 1 undcrstand you t80state, Col. Patrick, that t e cross current which you are now complaining of was diminished by the opening of the 3OO-foot cut 8 Col. PATRICK.That WAS what I stated. Mr. HOUGII. It was diminished from one and a half miles an hour, I think, to three-quarters of a mile.? Col. PATRICK.I said somet,hin less than a mile and a quarter. Mr. HOUGH. That WRS hcforc t8Ble danl was open ‘1 Col. PATRICK.Yes. Mr. HOUGII.And since the tlam has been open it has been reduced to three-quarters oi‘ a mil(!? Col. PATRICK.The m(’:~nvclocity now is about three-quarters of a mile. Mr. HOCGH. In your opinion, if the channel were completed and widened to t8hefull 4.50 fwt, n-odd it be still further reduced? Col. PATRICK.It is possiblc that the nlemvelocity would be sorne- what less under those circumstnnc:es. Mr. HOUGH. You would not venture an opinion as to how much? Col. PATRICK.No. Mr. IIOUGH.It might be possiblc that upon the completion of t>his work the danger from t,he moss current would disa,p ear entirely. Col. PArmcK. No; I (lo riot think I would be wdEng to say +at. Mr. HOUGH.You would be willing to say it mightbe possible, unless you can giveme wrne contrary opinion. Col. PATRICK.I should have to put my answer thisway: The current itself will be diminished beyond question; to what particular extent I am not prepared to say. The channel Itself, by bemg wlder, will be safer, irrespective of the strength of the cross current. There- fore, the danger to navigation will be somewhat less. THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 45.

Mr... HOUQH.. And the question of how much less is 'a matter of opinion P I Col. PATRICK.It isa matter of oninion. and I would not like to put a figure on it. Mr. HOUGH.Is the Ouellettesgauge the lowest oint, or is there less water at that point than anywhere else; or w R at is the reason for taking the gauge there3 Col. PATRICK.It is a convenient place for locating the gauge. Mr. HOUGEI.What is the depth of water there in trhe channel? Col. PATRICK.Do you mean where the gauge is ? Mr. HOUGH.No; m the channel opposlte where the gauge is. Col. PATRICK.Probably about 20 to 22 feet. Mr. HOUGH.And what is t,he usual draft of boats going through the Soo? Col. PATRICK.They are limited t)y thc depth that can be carried through the loclts. Mr. HOUGII.And is not that always less than the depth that they can load to here ? Col. PATRICK.The answer to that question is yes, but-- Mr. HOUGH.As a matter of fact, are they not governed not by the de th here, but what they can get over the Soo? 8ol. PATRICK.Yes; but the newlocks [Icing built at the So0 arc providing for 244 feet in de th being carriocl through them. Mr. IiouctIx. Of course, t gat is in the future. Col. PATRICK.So is this. Mr. IIOUOH.So, under prpsent conditions, even withthe lowering of the levels 2 or 3 inches, It would have no effect, or would be no im ediment, on the vessels going down, because they would still have to Poad to accommodate themselves to the depthof water at the canal? Col. PATRICK.No; because there are times here when the winds lower the water in the channel. Mr. I-IOUQH.But I am talking about normal conditions. Col. PATRICK.Under normal conditions; yes. The CHAIRMAN.Has Congress authorized the construction of this dike for the improvement of navigation in the Detroit River? Col. PATRICK.Yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN.When was the authority given? Col. PATRICK.In 1910. The CHAIRMAN.Upon what report, if any, was the authorization made ? Col. PATRICK.Upon thereport of theBoard of Engineers contained in House Document No. 676, Sixty-first Congress, second session, which has been introduced here. The CHAIRMAN.Rave you an knowledge as to whether or not this board took into consideration tE e relative advantages to navigation and the disadvantages to private interests on either side of the river in makin their recommendations to Congresv as to the construction of this &Eo? Col. PATRICK.I can not say of my own knowledge what matters they took into consideration, except so far as they themselves have set forth those matters in their report. The CHAIRMAN.Do you know whether they conducted any investigations orheld any hearings here in the vicinityof the Detroit River for thepurpose of ascertainmg how the people locally felt about it ? 46 THE 1.IVINGSTONE CHANNEL. Col. PATRICK.I really (lo not, know, sir. Mr. \FITITE. 1Tas any ~tIthorizationbeen given for the widening of the channel from 350 to 4.50 feet 8 Col. PATIZICR.Yes, sip.; thrat, is aut,horizcd under the same act and * basrci uponthe same report,. Inother words, thedam and the widening were the recornmendat,iolls made by thisboard, and Congress ado ted that project thc next year. ‘I’~~’(’HAIRMA~J.hrr. St,I.ic.kland,will you kindly gettogether. for the convenioncx of the cornlnlt,t,oc! a, 1llernorandum of the legislation concerning the improvcrnerrt,:: in tlw Drtroit Iiiver ? Jlr. STRICKLAND.Ym, sir. col. 1”ATRrCK. ?tin.. Chitman, t,his report of the board favored and rccomrncntied the witivning just in that portion of the Livingstone Chmnelwithin t,ht: cx)ffcrr.tiam 1 would likn to alter my answer to hlr. M Ilite’s qucstion to that estcmt. Ah. WHITE. Thtr point, i~ that it only refcrs to the part within the c‘ofl’ercia~n,and not to t,hr whole channel. Col. PATRICK.It, is not, authorized for theentirc length of the channel, but only that portio^^ within t,ho length of the cofferdam. Mr. TURNERIf the c:lrannel is only 300 feet below the cofferdam, it would notJ throw the wator out at all, would it? Col. J’ATRICK. Yes; jritst likn a funnel. It spreadsout on both sides. It will incrc.aue it, t)eyontI question. The CHAIRMAN. Col. Pat,rick, do you know what amount of money the Canadian Govcrnmcnihas c~xpendctl,if any, in the improvements on the Detroit Rivcr ? Col. YATR.ICK.I can not. answer that question.The Canadian engincer is hore and posssibjy hc can answer. it. Mr. STREETER.Have you the figures with regard to the expenditures made by the Governmcmt of the United States for improvements on the Detroit River‘1 Col, PATRICK.I will got those figures and ut them in the record. The CHAIRMAN. 1 bclic:ve. YOU said that tR e expenditures of the Government of thc Unitcd Shtw was about $11,000,000 ? Col. PATRICK. That was my recollection. The CHAIRMAN.1 think yon will find on examining the record that from tho beginning of t,hrl improvr~nentsdown to the present time the amount has been considcrnbly mort', than that. For the purpose of completingthe record, 1 wouPd liketo have y,ou submitthe total amount. tol. PAT~CIUK.1 will do t,hrti. (Lieut. Col. Patrick presented the following:)

LIVINGSTONE‘~~HANN&L---BOIS BLANC ISLAND DAM.

HISTORY OF DETROI’I’ RIVER IMPROVEMENT. I.. Before its improvement, tlle Detroit River was obstructed bya rockyridge extend- iug across the river atLimekiln Crossing on which the least channel depth atthe mean stage of Lake Erie wa.8124 feet. The roject of improvement ado ted in 1874 provided for a winding channel througlri tge Limekiln Crossing of 20 feet depth a4 the mean stage and 300 feet width. This channel was gradually widened and straqht- eued, aud in1892 a project was adopted for a channel 600 feet wide from Detroit to Lake Erie. This project of 1892 contemplated not only the widening of the channel at the Limekiln Crossing but also the removal of numerous bowlders above it and on the eastern side of Bois Blanc Island below it. TPE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 47

2. In 1902 a project was adopted for deepenin this channel to21 feet at the extreme' low-water stage of Lake Erie of 1895, and wit% the exception of the Ballards Reef crossing, just above the Limekilns, this roject has been com leted. 3. In 1907 the project was again moJified so as to pro& for two channels, the existing channel to be used by upbound vessels and a new one by those downbound. This second channel, called Livingstone Channel, is west of Bois Blanc Island, and was to havea width of 300 feet across the Limekilnridge and to Bar Point, thence800 feet to deep water in Lake Erie witha least depth of 22 feet at thelow water of 1895. 4. This project was modified in 1910 to provide for 450 feet width within thatpor- tion (about 5,600 feet length) of the Livingstone Channel inclosed by cofferdams in the vicinity of Stony Island. The Livingstone Channel project as thus modified was completed and the channel opened to navigation on October 19, 1912. The completion of this work has opened up a channel of about 23 feet depth through the Lime- kiln Crosaing ridge where originally the least depth was about 4 feet. 5. The modification of the Livingstone Channel project in 1910 provided also for the construction of a dam between the north endof Bois Blanc Island and the Stony Island cofferdam, all in accordance with the recommendations of a special board of engineers, whose report was published in House Document No. 676. Sixty-first Con- gress, second session. 6. This dam was intended to serve two purposes, (a) to cut off the current which flowed between the lower end of the Livingstone Channel cofferdarn and Bois Blanc Island and now flows across the completed Livingstone Channel below the site of the cofferdams, and (a) to compensate for the increased flow which will result from the opening of Livingstone Channel to 450 feet, a width greater than that originally glanned. The proposed dam was to be about 3,000 feet long, of which about 2,100 eet would be in Canadlan waters. 7. The report of the special board of engineers dealt more particularly with thecom- pensating features of the proposed dam, and showed that quite probably theopening of the Livingstone Channel 1,300 feet wide and without compensation other than that afforded by the portions of the cofferdam to be left in place, would result in no increased discharge, and that conditions above the channel would soon be restored to practically what theywere before this work was undertaken. Further, it showed that with.a channel wider than 300 feet, unless additional compensation were provided, there would be an increased discharge and a lowering of the water levels above thia locality. 8. Based upon this report, theCongress of the United Statesauthorized the widening of the channelto 450 feet for a portionof its length andgave its sanction to the building of the pro osed dam. This widening has been completed, but as opposition to the dam devefoped, its construction was never started and as it was impracticable to o en the channel to its increased width without compensation for the increased dis- cgarge which would follow, it has been necessary to retain in place portions of the cofferdams at the ends of the widened portions of the channel, so that its usable width is restrict,ed to 300 feet.

XECESSITY FOR PROPOSED DAM. 9. Cornpmsation.-As the conclusion of the special board of engineers that additional compensation would be needed if the channel width is made greater than 300 feet was based upon reasoning similar to that which led to the prediction that no marked change in the regimen of the river would follow the opening of the 300-foot channel, attention is invited to the results of actual obmrvations and measurements made since the channel was opened. It W~Rpredicted that at mean lake stages the discharge through the 300-foot channel would he 32,130 r. f. e. The actual measured discharge August, 1912, at Lake Erie stage 572.62 (mean st,age for 52 years 572.56) was 36,772 c. f. 8. The difference between the computed and the memured discharge, 3,642 c. f. R., is la,rgcly accounted for by the fact that owing to the increase m the dimensions of this channel under the modified project, the actual cross section was somewhat larger than that wed in the computntlons, 2nd to the furtber fact that at this dat,e the abnormal conditions above, due to the cofferdam, had not entirely dia- appeared. It was predicted that after the opening, at mean dages, the water surface at Ouellett,es gauge would vary from the normal by a plus 0.02 foot, to "0.03 foot (depending upon t,he value amigned to C in the formula V=C sq' rt' RS,) and that the change at thin gauge from the conditione noted in I909 while the cofferdam WRB in place would be -0.35 foot. The mean fall from Ouellettes to Amherstburg in 1909 was 1.17 foot,; and in August and September, 1912, it wits 0.83 foot, a decrease of 0.34 foot. 48 LIVINGSTONE THE CHANNEL.

10. These observations lend greater weight to the conclusion that additional cornpensation .will certainly be needed if ,a channel width greater than 300 feet is made available. It is freely admitted, however, that such additional compensaiton can readily be provided elrewhere than at the site of the proposed dam and atless expense, but such works at a different Fite might add to rather than lespen t,he dificult,ies of navigation in this dangerous part of tho Detroit River. 11. At the time when the dam, one of whose functions was to be the ?hutting off the cross current, was recommended this current between Bois Blanc lsland and the cofferdam had a mean velocity of about 1.59 feet per second. It, was realized that the velocity at this section would be less when the Livingatone Channel was opened, but it was thought this velocity would still be considerable and t>hatif the current were not eliminated wouldit add to thedanger of navigation throughthat partof the channel where its effect would be felt. [he mean velocityat this section as recently measured is about 1.13feet per Eecond, and experience has shown that its effect upon the Living- stone Channel is quite appreciable. Thin stat,ement is bawd upon personal observation and reports from navlptors. Jn fact, it has been found necessary to issue awarning to all vessel men to keep well to the eastward when entering that part of the channel where the effect of this current is felt, and the danger from it becomes more apparent when it is remembered that here the channel is but 300 feet wide, that its submerged banks are practically solid rock and in many places not far below the surface. 12. The harmful effect of thip objectionable and dangerous cross current can be eliminated in two ways-by building the proposed dam or by building a trainin wall or dike on the eastern side of the channel parallel to its axis. Such a dike woud probably have to be carried well down opposite Bok Blanc Island, with its length about 6,000 feet, as compared w~ththe length of 3,000 feet for the dam. Its cost would be greater than that of the dam, and, furthermore, there would have t,o be added the cost of the compensating works which would have to be provided elsewhere and probably the cost of a revetment to protect the head of the island from erosion. It would also be impracticable to leave any opening through such a dike so close to the channel, and all boa& lyingbetween Amherstburg and points to the westward of the Livingstone Channef would have to make a long detour to the southward.

DISCHARQE MEASUREMENTS AND WATER-LEVEL OBSERVATIONS.. 13. To determine the effect of formpr im rovements and of the roposed dam upon water levels and current velocities, the vofume of flow through tfe several channels in lower Detroit River WBY measured during 1909 and during August, October, and December, 1912. The results of the 1909 observations and a discussion thereof w~ll be found in House Document 676, Sixty-first Congress, second session. 14. As the levels of the Lakes are changing constantly it is im robable that any two independent measurementx of the discharge will agree exactly, gut itiR not unremon- able to assume that within limite the percentages of flow through the Peveral channels will not differ materially. 15. The measurements of December, 1912, made by the United States and those by Canada in September, 1912, gave the following percentages:

1 T)ercenta; of BOW.

By United By Canada States Decernbbr, September: 1912. 1912.

Qrosse Isle Mich ...... 23.3 22.2 Grosse Isle: Stony Island...... ,...... 6. X 6.4 Livingstone Channel...... 18.1 18.6 Limekiln Crossing...... 51.8 52.8 Total ...... 1llI.o 1M). 0 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 49 The discharge thro h Limekiln Crossing Channel now enters Lake Erie via thetwo channels-Bois Blan%dand, Canada, and Bois Blanc Cofferdam. The portion of thk discharge that iR carried by each of these channels was as follows:

I By [Jnited States. 1

1912.

Per cent. Bois Blanc Island,Channel.. Canada ...... 58.3 58.6 Bois Blanc Island, Cofferdam Channel...... ~ 41.7 41.4 Limekiln Cm8sing...... I ""x100.0 j 100.0 16. Applying the above (United States) percentages to the mean discharge of the river, 204,000 second-feet (Report International Waterways Commission, p. 102), we have the following results:

...... 2.77 Total ...... Bois Blanc Canada 61,600 Bois Blanc)Dam...... 41.7 t. to

17. Careful calculationshave been made to determine the probableeffect of a dam such as that proposed between the cofferdam and Bois Blanc Island, such a dam to have in it an opening about 300 feet wide to serve such navigation as may desire to pass between Amheratburg and points to the west of the island. Without burdening the record with the details of the calculations the results are as follows, the predicted percentages of flow being applied to the mean diwharge as above: Predicted discharge with dam, in place.

LivingstoneChunnel, :io0 1,ivingstone ('hannel, 4.50 Ieot wide. Icct wide.

Orosse lsle Mich...... 50,200 24. ti 1.~7 ~rosseISM' Stony Island...... a. 07 Livingstonlt Channel...... i?::: X?! 4.52 Limekiln Crossing...... %I, 200 2.36 .I 1 1 "_ Total ...... 2w.m 100.0 1...... "2 "" 1 "" "" _" -. "" Bois Blanc, Bois Canada...... 7R 500 X7.0 1 3.24 76 OR1 87.0 3.1.4 3OO.footopenin~iodarn...... 11:700 13.0 I :~24 3.11 I I __ 11:363 1 13.0 1 Total...... (-~o~,-j~~.~j......

The net result, as shown by the above ta.blPw, i.s an itlcreaad flow Ir)y hmllerstburg of 17,000'second-feet for the present opening in the L,ivingst,nne Chanrlel. with an increase of velocit,y in thi3 vicinit,y ol ;~pprosit~~atelyoI~c-h;tlf (0.19) [nile per tour, c 86342-13-4 . 50 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. and for the Livingstone Channel 450 feet wide these quantities become 14,400 second- feet and approximately 0.43 miles per hour. It should be noted that while the discharge and velocity in the vicinityof Amherstburg are increased as above, there wlll be a lessened discharge and a lessened velocity over Limekiln Crossing. 18. The objectionswhich have been urged to thebuildiug of thedam are as follows: (a) By increasing the current between Bois Blanc lslalld and the Canadian shore the difficulties of navigation will be increased and theharbor of Amherstburg rendered useless. (b) A greater quantity of ice will be brought clown the channel along the Amherst- burg water front injuring the docks and other water-front property. (c) The sewage and draina.ge from the riverCanard, which eutersthe Detroit River about 4 miles above Amherstburg will be prevented from following its rratural course to thewest of Bois Blanc Island, andinst,ead it will be diverted to the channel between Bois Blanc Island and the mainland, passing the waterworks intake and t,hereby endangering the healthof the inhabitants of Amherstburg. (d) The dam will prevent boah plying to and from ,4mherstburg from using the present channel between Bois Blanc Island and the cofferdarn. Taking up these objections seriatim: (a) At mesent without the dam. thedischarge Bois Blanc Island-Canadian mainland is 61,600 second-feet and the meall velocity it2.54 feet per secoud. After the dam is completed, thisdischarge will be about 78,500 second feet and thevelocity about 3.24 feet ersecond. If the LivingstoneChannel is widened to 450 leet,this discharge will ;e about, 76,000 second-feet adthe velocity3.14 feet er second. The mLtxinmn probable increase in current velocity will be therefore a&ut 0.70 foot er second, or not quite one-half mileper hour. It hardly seems robable that suci an Increase in the current velocity would add appreciably to t8e difficulties of rravigation, or in anyway interfere with the utie of the harbor of Amherstburg. (b) The only drifting ice that ever arriveq in the vicinity of Alrherstburg is that from Detroit River and Lake St.Clair. IJsually this ice does not drift with the current until warm weather has weakened it so that it is broken into srmll pieces. In this condition, with little or no wind, it flows through all the channels, and a large part of it will be carried by the Livingstone Channel. With a st,rong wind, however, these fields of broken ice follow the shore toward which the wind blows. With a strong westerly wind, ice follows the Canadian shore and along the docks at Amherstburg, even under the present conditions, witb an o en channel at the head of Bois Blanc Island. Only once during the past 16 years {as drifting ice caused damage at, Am- herstburg. Then the ice when quite firm was broken up by a westerly gale and the fields of ice followed the Canadian shore. The force of the wind piled the ice upon the north end of the docks at Amherstburg and did some damage. At that time the fields of ice extended only a short distance from shore arld there was no ice flowing west of Bois Blanc Island. The proposed dam can in no way contribute to damage caused by driftingice. The only conditiousby which such damage may becaused are as stated above, and then no ice would flow west of Bois Blanc Islaud even if this channel were open as at resent (c) The Canard River lows intothct Detroit River about 34 nliles north of Amherst- burg. This stream, with a discharge of about 1,500 cubic feetper second, flows through low marshy land, and its currentis ordinarily sluggish. During 1910 floats were placed at the mouth of the stream, followed by boats, and their courses noted. The ohser- vations show that the discharge from Canard River follows closely along the Cauadian shore to Lake Erie. Also, after every heavy rain, when Canard River water is much discolored, this muddywater may he plainlyseen extending from the Canadiau shore at Amherstburgonly about 500 feet. Apparently little or noue of this waterdis- charged by the Canard River flows to the west of Bois Blanc Island. The intake Pipe of the Amherstburg waterworks is located not more than 100 feet from the main- and shore and nearly opposite the head of Bok Blanc Island. The proposed dam can have no injurious effect upon Amherxtburg’s wat.er supply. (d).An opening about 300 feet wide may be left in the proposed dam and will be sufficlent for all traffic between Amherstburg and points west of the darn. The blue- print herewith gives certain gauge relation8 and shows clearly the backwater effect while the cofferdam was in place, causing a rise of 0.32 foot at Oullettes t,o Amherst- burg, from 0.95, as shown by the observations in 1903, prior to the building of the dam, to 1:27 feet. in 1911. The levels of 1912 indicate that the upelling of the danl has restored conditions nearly to the normal, though it will require a series of observations to determine with accuracy the effect upon the Detroit River of the opening of the new channel. Appar- ently there has been a slight, lowering of the water surface just above it, and this is objectionable. THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 51

The proposed dam to Bois Blanc Island will certainly provide a sufficient amount of compensation and permitthe Livingstone Channel to beopened to its project width of 450 feet. TESTIMONY OF CHARLES Y. DIXON. CHARLESY. DIXON,called on behalf of the United States Govern- ment, after having been ikt duly bworn, testified as follows: Mr. REEVEST. STRICKLAND.MU you kindly give your full name, Mr. Dixon, and your occupation '1 Mr. DIXON.I am a civil engineer. I a111 in locd charge of the improvements on the Detroit ltiver under the engineer officer. Nlr. SrRICKLAND. Through the records and as a result of your own experience you are acquainted with the conditions of the water levels in the Livingstone Channel at the present time ? Mr. DIXON. I am. &!r. STRICKLAND. Has tllc? creating of tlliit ChRnnd Ill8(/e any difference in the flow of the water in this locality Z Mr. DIXON.Do you mean ;LS to the wnter levels '2 Mr. STRICKLAND.Yes; and as to the, currents. Mr. DIXON.The present width of tl~eLivingstone CllonntJ has changed conditions so that there is about the same slope existing in the Detroit River now that existed prior to the Livingstone Channel improvements--that is, before the cofferdam was constructed. Mr. STRICKLAND.In your opinion, is it necessary that the thm be erected from tbe head of the cofferdam to Bois Blanc Island ? Mr. DIXON.It is necesscq t!o hnvc: $011i(! correction to cross currents exkting at that locality. A cofferdam such as you have spoken of is one means of accompllshing tlmt purpose. Mr. STRICKLAND.Is that, in your opinion, the best locality 'i Mr. DIXON.It is a ver clesirnk)le locnlity. Mr. SrRIcm,AND. Wou r"ti thttt create any strong current by theflow of t!ro watcv t~gainstit if built? Mr. DIXON.In wllat locality ? Mr. STRICKLAND.Thttt is, the water coming down the river and strikingthe (lam; would tht crentt? my strongcurrent in the Amherstburg Channel ? Mr. DIXON.There would be a. strong currrmt in the Amherstburg Channel hecausc of the amount of water diverted by that dam; but, in my opinion, the water mar the face of the tiam would be pyxcti- cally tleutl water, ant1 the current tlnrougll tllwc: would be pro,ctlcaily straight. Mr.. STRIcKr,AND. Would not ;:n opening of 300 fwt in that darn reduce the current-that is, 1111 openmg of :NO feet in the dam to let boats through 8 Mr. DIXON.It would bc less in the Arnhc?rstt>urgClu~nnel than it would be if there were no opening Irft in tllc tlzm a,t 8-11. Mr. STRICKI,AND.Have you mn.de:my observation., ns to the sewage coming clown from above Amherstburg .? Mr. DIXON.We have matle obsc.rvatmnq :IS to the flow of scwrlge coming from the Canards River. The Chnnnls River flow3 thro(l+h the low, mA,rshy land, a.ntl we lmve observed the flow from that stream by floats placet1 in its mouth. They followed the Canadian shore. Also, after every hetkvy rainstorm, when the Canards River 52 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL.

is discolored, the mutltly water may he seen extending out erhaps two-thirds of the distance across from the Canadianshore at t e head of Bois Blanc Island. R . Mr. STRICKLAND.In our opinion, would the building of thisdam deflect the ice to the ('anadinn shore to any extent ? Mr. DIXON.,So far ILH the ice is concerned, I do not think the dam would have any ef€ect on tlle amount ofice. In tlle spring tlle ice breaks up wlwn it is pretty well tlisintegratctl by the warm weather. It breaks up into small fiehls and if t1lt.w is no wind it flows through all of the chunnel.-, ant1 of course the LivingstoneChannel would carry its share of it, but with the winds hlowing the ice follows the shore toward which the! wind blows. With a strong westerlg wind thera is very littlc, if nny, iceflowing west of Bois Blanc Islantl. I know of only on(: instance wllere any serious damage was done at Amherstburg bjs: (!rifting ice. Tllat was one spring when the ice broke up at R t1n:c w11c.n there was iL strong westerly gale, and it followed rlody dong tile Cmarlian sltore anti(lid damage to the docks at thr: upper end of Andwstburg. At that time there was no ice west of Bow Blanc Ish(]. Mr. CASGRAIN. How long have you heen liere, h*h.Dixon? Mr. DIXON.I II~LVCbCPK1 Ilt:~17 yt.2.~. Mr. CASORALN.Thcn, in your opinion, for the hcnefit of navigation, a dam is tiesirablt: at tllut locuIitJr? Mr. DIXON.A darn wt>ul(!correc,t the cross currents in that locality, and to that extent woultl he beneficid to navigation. Mr. MACINNER.Did you tlcal with t,lw qwstion of compensation at all of water levels? Mr. DIXON.I assistc(l in the preparation of tlle information that Col. Patrick has submittcrl, :tnd the results that were given by him are the results of our dctluctions. Mr. NACLNNES. An11 this clam will also afford a compensation to water levels to a certaiu extent? Mr. DIXON.It will; yes, sir. Nr. ~IACINNES.If thrt wat,cr lrvels wcrc changed at this spot from other reasons, ~itt~t~from raising the water, we will say, by a submerged tlarn at Niagara Falls, or lowcretl Ly the subtrackion of the whter elsewtu~rc, youwoultl havc n clift'crrnt problem of cornpensation to .deal with ? Nr. DIXON.I t11i1lknot. WC woulti have exactly tho samc problem to face tm if t,lw stages of water hat! been created by some other force. Mr. ~~ACINNES.But thc results woulll be tliiferent, would they not ? Mr. DIXON.If we had a different slope through the river, we might obtain, perhaps, a slightly tiifferent percentage of flow through the channels. Mr. MACINNES.You ticalt with a certain problem to obtain a certain amount of compensation. If thewater's level were lower, or should become lower, you would have a question of compensation for a larger amount to deal with, would you not? Mr. DIXON.You mean if there were more water diverted and less water flowing through thz: Drtroit Riwr we would have a less diversion to rovitle for? Mr. ~ACTNNE~.You are dealing here with compensation, we will say,for 2 inches. Supposing there was a subtraction of water of THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 53

anothcr Z inolles. You would have to deal then with c,ompensating for a matter of 4 incbes. ‘lhereforc you would have a different problem before you to deal wit’h. In tho stlrncl WRY,if! the ]we] of the wate,r should bc raised by work below, we will say at the Ile,ati of Niagara Falls, then again you would have a different problem to deal with. Mr. DIXON. The conditions would he rliffcrcnt,; yes, sir. Mr. UACINNES.So that your report and your dealing with this matter has been in connection with tlle local situat,ion ? Mr. I)IXON. The situation as it was determined by our own observations, and that was under normal conditions at, the stage at which we workctl. hlr. ]XIACINNES. And you ha,vc.! dcdt wit,h it simply rmdes the circumstances that you have stated ? Nr. I~IXON.Yes, sir. Mr. STREETEI~.Mr. MacInnes, may I ask whc!ther you suggest that any works arc proposed at Ningara wldl wc~ul~laffect this stage of the watcr near this proposed clam ? Mr. MAcINNEs. I understand so. It is now under investigation by anothcr joint commission, the old Waterways Commission. Mr. STAUNTON.Mr. Dixon, I notice in your answers. t,hat you did not aorrlmit yourself ,to the statement that this location for the dike is the bestlocation. You said it was R vory desira,ble location. Now, do youdifferentiate between the bestlocation and a very desirable location’1 Mr. DIXON.Well, it; is the best location to correct cmss currents, ttnd, also, it provides for any compensation that may be needed for an increased width in Livingstone Cllannel. To that e,xtent it is the mostdesirable. If there were no prospects at all of compensation being required, then some other loc,ation might hechosen equally desirable. Mr. STAUNTON.Now, with all the knowledge that you have of the conditions that are and that may occur, if you were given an absolutely free hand to build a dike or a dam, or to put some structure in the water for the purpose of correcting the objectionable features wllich you think now exist or may hcrca,ftc?rcxist., where would you put it ? Mr. DIXON.Dealing with it as an engineeringproblem done, I would place the dike where it is now proposed. Mr. STAUNTON.Inject all the other elements tha,t you know of into the ro osition and tell me whero you would place it. d.T~IXON. I think that is a proper location for it. Ah-. STAUNTON.Well, why tlo you ualify your answer by saying, “dealing with it as anengineering pro7 dem alone” ? Mr. DIXON. Well, thereare certain reasons advanced by others that they think proper, and I do not know what weight they ought to have, but for myself I would place the dike where it is proposed. Mr. STAUNTON.You have no mental reservation whatever aboutit ? Mr. DIXON.No, sir. Mr. STAUNTON.In your opinion, there is no better place for this dike Z Mr. DIXON.That is my opinion; yes, sir. Mr. STAUNTON.In your opinion there is no other place as good for this dike’1 Mr. DIXON.That is my opinion; yes, sir. 54 THE LIVINOSTONE CHANNEL. Mr. STAUNTON.So it was not necessary for you tosay, “very desirable.” You say now it is the best thing, in your judgment? Mr. DIXON.In m judgment, it is the best. Mr. STAUNTON..iyou said that the water whrn it strikes the face of this darn will be practically dead water. Mr. DIXON.1 did not know tht I expressed it in that way. Mr. STAUNTON.You used the word “dead.” Mr. DIXON.There would be practically no current except at the opening that is left. Mr. STAUNTON.IVhcre the water strikes the dam the current will cease 11 Mr. DIXON.It will probably strike the body of almost still Jvater before it strikes the dam at all. Mr. STAUNTON.It would 19c nw~ingparallel with the dam when it struck, and therefore it would losc its force as a current entirely? Mr. DIXON.Yes, sir. Mr. STAUNTON.Wh would not that happen if the wall were put on the westerly side oP the Livingstone Channel1 Mr. DIXON.In the area which you are speaking of- Mr. STAUNTON.First, understand me. We agree that there will be no current coming off the wall of the dike proposed. It will be dead water. Now, if tho wall is put on the westerly side of the Livin stone Channel, why should therebe any current coming off that wafi Mr. DIXON.The conditions are different. At the Limekiln Cross- ing, along the side of the roposed dike, the channel will be of much greater width. There wil7 be much greater width from the cofferdam to the Canadian shore than there will be from the dike arallel to the Livingstone Channelon the west side that you s eak of and a volume of water flowing out of the Livingstone Cham$ will be practically straight, and at Limekiln Crossing this dike will be off at one side in a sort of a pocket. There will be uite an area of nearly dead water along that dike out of which will ?Iow the water through the which will o throu h there at quite a velocity. Openh8Mr. TAUNTON. $ou say t Eat the position is different and the same result, of course, will not follow. Mr. DIXON.That is it. Mr. STAUNTON.If you built a wall along the westerly side of the channel, would not that be as effective as the dike that you now pro ose to build! &. DIXON.I think not. Mr. STAUNTON.Have you an engineer’s opinion with regard to it? Mr. DIXON.The current there would deflect from the dike to a certain extent, and although, perha s, it may not be troublesome- Mr. STAUNTON(interruptmg). hich is the stronger current, the one coming down the Livlngstone Channel or thecross current? Mr. DIXON.The current coming down Livingstone Channel. Mr. STAUNTON.We have head Col. Patrick’sexplanation that when a weaker current strikes a stronger current it runs alongside of it and does not run into it. Mr. DIXON.It does deflect. Mr. STAUNTON.But he described it as running alongsido of it. He said that if you would examine a lar e river where a smaller river flows into it, you would notice that t e waters do not mingle, but run alongside of each ot

Mr. DIXON. Under present conditions the dike is not needed for compensation. Mr. KING. But,even with the Livingstone, Channel widened to 450 feet that compensation of 2 inches is not of any practical interest other than as required by the limitationsof the So0 Locks 3 Mr. DIXON.It should be considered, because it limits the draft of vessels to that amount. Mr. KING. Notwhen they are limit>etlby the So0 Locks. Mr. DIXON.By alterations in the So0 Locks the depth there will be increased. Mr. KING. You are referring now t'o the Davis locks, which are not in existence at the present time 8 Mr. DIXON. They soon will be. Mr. KING. Now, justone more t>heoretica.l question.Sup osing that a very large question of policy is in existence as to whetK er or notcompensatory works are necessary intjhe Detroit River with reference to the Niagara River, with reference to Chicago, and supposing, too, that thatquestion is one of policy as to whether it is wise to compensate at the present stagewhen a somewhat large dispute is pending as to the withdrawal at Chicago. Do you think that the making upof that 2 inches when the LivingstoneChannel is broadened to 450 feet is of sufficient importance to warrant an immediate determination of this question 8 Mr. DIXON. Some means of compensation, anyway, is needed. Mr. KING. I am asking you as an engineer and interested on behalf of the Federal Governmentof the United States in improving naviga- tionthroughout the system so far as possible do you think that, having regard for the pendency of a lar e question of policy and the question of cornpensation, it is wise at t is stage to attempt to build compensating works for the purpose of amaking good 2 inches in the river, 2 inches which have not yetbeen withdrawn by the broadening of the Livingstone Channel? Mr. DIXON.If this prospective change which ou have mentioned is liable tooccur in the near future,It might bewe% to hold this matter in abeyance to see just what thecondit'ion would be under which the dam would be then built. Mr. KING. If the prospective change is not likely to occur, is it wise at this stage to begin compensatory works which might form anelement in that discussion '1 Might it notbe better, in your opinion,to witJhhold thequestion of compensationuntil we know exactly where we are! Mr. DIXON.I think such compensation as would be provided for would have so little effect on these other questions that it would be negligible in their case. Mr. KING. To carry that a little further; does not it amount to this: That a proposition is now under consideration for a considerable expenditure of money which might not be of any particular value in thefuture in the event of thelarger compensatory work being re uired '1 %r.DIXON. I do not quite understand our uestion. Mr. KING. I am sug estin.g the ossibi99 ity o larger expenditures being required and wora s bemg bu iY t at other points in the river. 58 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. Mr. DIXON. If more compensation should be needed they could be put at other places. The expenditure that is now proposed need not necessarily be thrown away. Mr. KING. Would you not prefer, howevel, toconsider the problem as a unitat the time when the increased expenditure became necessary? Mr. DIXON.It would not seem to me so. Mr. KING. You think it should be built up on the present improvement ? Mr. DIXON.Yes, I do. In fact, it might be more desirable to make compensat,ion in different places and not all in one place. The CHAIRMAN. Whatis the difference between the level of the Detroit River and the level of the Niagura Kiver or of Lake Erie? Mr. DIXON. hpproximateiy 3 feet. The CHAIRMAN. The fallis 3 feet? Mr. DIXON.That varies somewhat, but it is Ilcarly that. The CHAIRMAN.What is the diserence hetween the fall at the outlet of Lake St. Clair and that of Lake Erie and Lake Huron? Mr. DIXON.It is about 9 feet, ap roximately, between Lake Erie and Lake Huron, and6 feet in the fa1 in the St. Clair River and Lake St. Clair. P The CHAIRMAN.In the event that a greater flowage out of Lake Michigan into theChicago Drainage Canalwere permitted thanis now authorized, why would not Compensatory works be necessary at this oint in order to c,ompensate the increased flowa e on account of the Eivingstone Channel? Would compensatorywor s be necessary here independent of that Z a Mr. DIXON.To provide for additional width of Livingstone Chan- nel; yes, sir. Mr. TURNER.Does the question of the level of Lake Michigan by reason of the drawing off of water ut Chicago affect this question of compensation at all ? Mr. DIXON.That is not a feature that is being considered here. Mr. TURNER.As an engineering problem, does it affect it at all? Mr. DIXON.No, sir. 1.tdoes affect the stage on Lake Huron and Lake Michigan; and if thestages of water onLakes Huron and Michigan wereto be held at what theywould be if there were no water drawn off at Chicago, it would be necessary to compensate somewhere in the Detroit or St. Clair Rivers, but that compensation is not bein considered in this data. It is simply compensationfor the additiona7 width of Livingstone Channel. Mr. TURNER.Suppose the water were drawn off there so as to very seriously affect thelevel; would that do away withcompensatory works here Z Mr. DIXON.KO, sir; there would be still compensation necessary. Mr. MAGRATH.If you were told that there would be about 5,000 second-feet less watei. coming downhere next year,would that change your opinion as to the character of this compensatory work that you are ro osing now Z M!. AXON. NO, sir. Mr. CABGRAIN.It would not change your opinion as to the character or nature of that work? Mr. DIXON.No, sir; we are sim ly making our deductions as to the compensation that is necessary i?or the work at this point. THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 59 Mr. MAGRATLI.But if you knew that there were to be 5,000 second- feet less coming down next year, would it have any eBect upon your present plans ? Mr. DIXON.No, sir. Mr. MAGRATII. You would still put in those works ? Mr. DIXON.Yes, sir; we would still claim cornpensation necessary €or increased width. Mr. MAGRATEI.I am tLssurning, of course, tht somethingmight happen within the next twelve months to withdraw, say,5,000 second- feet. If you knew that something was going to hap en within the next twelve months that would giva you 5,000 secon -feet less than you are getting under norrnal conditions, would it haves any effect upon your present' plan? Mr. 131x0~.No, sir; unless we werc authorized to compensate for that additional 5,000 second-feet which is not due to our own im- rovernent. If that were probable, then our plans would be changed, Fut if we were asked to only cornpensate for the additional chan e in flow that we are creatihg, our plans would rwwin ns we have su t- mitted them. Mr. KING.But your answer to Oormnissioner Magrath is this: That if at the present moment you knew that next year you would havo 5,000 sccond-feet less than you have nowflowing down the DetroitRiver your plans would not be madeexactly as you are presenting them now to the court. Mr. DIXON.Not if we were expecting to make plans to provide for that compensation. Mr. KING.You mentioned a drop of 3 feet in the Detroit River. Mr. DIXON.Approximately that. Mr. KING.In what part of the river is the greater part of that 3 foot drop2 Mr. DIXON.In the lower stretch of the rivcr. Mr. KING.Above or below the Livingstone Channel? Mr. 111x0~.Botweon the lower end of the LivingstoneChannel and the Detroit River. Mr. KING.In the event of compensator works or submerged weirs being built in the Niagsra River andLL su1 stantial raise in Lake Erie taking place, would not that have such an effect as to make up your 2 inches in raise ! Mr. DIXON,It would; yes, sir. Mr. KING.And obviate the necessity of this dike, except as to the cross current 2 Mr. DIXON.Yes, sir. Mr. HOTJGH.Would you deem it necessary to construct this dike for providing for the 2 inches which you estimate the water woul be lowered ? simpYMr. DIXON. Yes, sir. Mr. HOUGH.Under present conditions ? Mr. DIXON.The compensatory features are being considered for widening the Livingstone Channel. Mr. HOUGH.The 2 inches at the presenttime are not required for navigation purposes Z They are not required even if the channel were widened 2 Mr. DIXON.Yes. 60 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. Mr. HOUGH.At the present time with the condition that the So0 Locks are in? Mr. DIXOX:I am referring to the Detroit River; that is, to maintain levelsthem. as I found I Mr. HOUGH.Now, is there not a variation of more than 3 feet in the levels of the river caused by local conditions at times? Mr. DIXON.Do you mean between Lake St. Clair and Lake Erie? Mr. HOUGH.I mean tho variution of the water levels in the De- troit River in the vicinity of Amherstburg. Mr. DIXON.The water fluctuates greatly at times. Mr. HOUGH.From high to low, perhaps 5 or 6 feet? Mr. DIXON.From high to low, perha s 5 or 6 feet. Mr. HOUGH.And you do not pretencp to provide for anything that will meet this emergency? Mr. DIXON.Our considorat'ions all have to daal with the normal conditions. Mr. HOUGH.And under those circumstancesshipping hasto tie up absolutely, as very frequently happens Z ' Mr. DIXOX.Pes, slr. Mr. HOUGH.There is no provision that you could make that would overcome such circumstances a,s those ? Mr. DIXON.No, sir. Mr. HOUGH.You spoke about. ice jamming there doing damage, sa 15 years ago? &r. DIXON.It must have been 10 or 12 years ago. Mr. HOUGII.Do you re'collect t,hat at thattime therewas a windrow formed atthe head of the island andstretched across practically in the osition that this dike will take if it is built? Mr. 5IXOR. I do not recall that. Mr. HOUGH.And that it was this windrow acting as a dam that

I I caused the ice to floatthrough t,hltt channeland do the damage? Mr. DIXON.No, sir; as I recall it there was no ice at all along the Canadian shore; only t,llat extending out 300 or 400 feet. Mr. HOUGH.My instructions are from menwho recollect the occas- sion that the jam was caused by a windrow that took the position that this dike would take if it were built? Mr. DIXON.Their recollection is different from mine. Mr. HOUGH.What do you sa caused the ice jam at that timet Mr. DIXON.It was the wind %lowing the ice over to the shore. Mr. HOUGH.But we have the wind every day. Mr. DIXON.But you do not have the ice every day. Mr. HOUGH.Do you mean to say that in 15 years it happened only once that the wind wa,s blowing in such a direction? Mr. DIXON.Just under those conditions when the ice was broken up, when it was quite formed, by u heavy gala. Mr. HOUGH.And you attributed it solely tc the wind? Mr. DIXON.Practically; yes, sir. Mr. HOUGH.What damage did it do; do you remember? Mr. DIXON.As I recall it, the ice was piled up on the north end of the doc,k. MI. IIOUGH.It destroyed thc waterworks dock, did it not 8 Mr. DIXON.It did some damage to the buildings, I believe. Mr. HOUGH.And par:' of the dock just below that? Mr. DIXON.I do not remembrr the extent, of the damage done. THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 61 Mr. HOUGH.Have you ever seen the river Canards under certain weather conditions gomg west of Bois Blanc Island? Mr. DIXON.I have not. Mr. HOUGH.You would not say, I suppose, thatthat muddy - streak which has been referred to never goes west of the island? Mr. DIXON.I hnve known the whole river to be muddy during a very stormy period when Lake St. Clair waterhas been agitated. I have never seen the muddy streak extend westof Bois Blanc Island. Mr. STRICKLAND.The commissioners askd for some statistics as to the vessels plying the Detroit River, and I find that’ in the year 1912 there were 1,082 Americans and 168 Canadians. The aggregate of all appropriationsfor the Detroit Rivcr up to the present date amounts to $11,894,500. Mr. STREETER.That is, that money was expended by the United States z Mr. STRICKLAND.Expended by the United States. (At the request of Mr. King endfor the convenience of the witness, who had to leave the city, one of Mr. King’s witnesses was csamined here out of the ordinary course.) TESTIMONY OF CAPT. W. E. WRIGHT. Capt. W. 11. WRIGHT,a witness produced on behalf of the Dominion Marine Association, being duly sworn, deposcd as follows: Mr. KING. Irrtve you a master’s papers? Capt. WRIGHT.Yes. Mr. KING. Since when? Capt. WRIGHT.Fifteen years. Mr. KING.You are sailing what vessel? Capt. WRIGHT.The E. B. Osler. Mr. KING.She belongs to what conpny ? Capt. WRIGm. The St.Lawrence &- Chicago Navigation Co. Mr. KING.Of what city? Capt. WRIGHT. Toronto. Mr. KING.What is the size of that .boat? Capt. WRIarIT. 510 feet long, 56 feet, bearu. Mr. KING.She is ractically one of the largest, vessels in Canada? Capt. WRIGHT.T P le second largest; hcr carrying capacity is 10,000 tons. Mr. KING. You have heard the discussion before the commission; you have been in the room here Z Capt. WRIGXIT.Yes, sir. Mr. KING.With reference to the cross current which is saidto flow in betweenBois Blanc Island and the foot of the cofferdam, have you had any >ersonal expericnce of that? Capt. WRIGHT.1 went down last fall on the 4th of September. Mr. KING.That was your first trip down P Capt. WRIGHT.Yes. Mr. KING.Did you have any trouble. Cept. WRIGIIT.No. Mr. KING.The matter has been discussed at some length and I thinkyour opinion will be veryvaluable; will youtell how the current didaffect you and how readily you were able to overcome that? 62 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. Capt. WRIGHT.H spokc to scveral captainswho had been down and they told me there was a cross current when I got to the foot of the dike, and I kept over to the port side and avoided any chances of getting set over. Mr. KING.You got through all right? Capt. WRIGHT. Yes, sir. Mr. KING.Did you consider the current a serious difficulty ? Capt. WRIGHT. No; I did not think so. Mr. TAWNEY.At what rate of s ecd were you going Z Capt. WRIGHT.Eight or nine mi7 es an hour. Mr. 'TAwNEY. Did you feel the effects of any cross current, at all? Capt. WRIGHT.I can not tell very well; it was a dark night and the lights were very uncertain, and I could not tell the same as if it was daylight. If I had been ping down in daylight I would notice the efl'cct more. Mr. MAGRATH.Are you sure you were in the channel? Capt. WRIGHT.Oh, I was in thechannel all right. I think I would have known it if I had 1)een out of the channel. Mr. KING.Arc wc t,o understand that by carefully holding your vessel on to your iort side as you went down-that is, toward the eastcrn side of the !&ingstone Channel-you overcame t,heeffects of the current without any difficulty? Capt. WRIGHT.Yes. Mr. KING.You were not loaded? CaptJ.WRIGHT. No; we were light. Mr. KING.What, water were you drawing1 Capt. WRIGHT.About 14 feet aft and 4 or 5 feet forward; we hn.d our water ballast fullof water. Mr. KING.Under t,heso conctit'ions, which end of your vessel, the stern or the stem, would feel the effect of the current most? Capt. WRIGHT.The st)ern. Mr. KING.It was not set oyer suf5cientlg to cause you any difficulty ? Capt. WRIGHT.KO. Mr. KING.You mentioned the lights. Havc! you anything to say in reference to the lights. Th(. commission may not be interested in it, but] I think it is important, that wc should mention it at, thisshge. Capt. WRIGIIT.The lights were very bad and you can not see them except flickering in and out'; I had nothing to steady the vessel on. Mr. KING.Do you understand thatt,hat is t'hegeneral opinion about these light,s among navigators ? Capt. WRIGHT.Yes. Mr. RING. Do you nnderstancl that the opinion of navigators is that until proper lights are thore the channcl is dangerous at night? Capt. WRIGHT.Yes. Mr. KING.You expressed an opinion to me as to the choice you would make if you came down at night; you said you would prefer to anchor above the channel. Capt. WRIGHT.That is an opinion expressed by Capt,. Frank. EIe told me in Fort William t)hat he would not come down that channel at night; he said he would anchor in the river. Mr. KING.On a,ccount of tthe flickering lights? Capt. WRIGHT.Yes. Mr KING.And the inability to steady yourcourse by these lights? THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 63 Capt. WRIGHT.Yes. Mr. TAWNEY.What are the lights; how is the channel marked? Capt. WRIGHT.Red lights on the port side and white lights on the starboard side; they are very fast. Mr. KING.Do you mean there is an interval of li ht and then a quick occultation of the light and a long interval of 8arkness? Capt. WRIGHT.There is a long interval of darkness and a quick flash of light. Mr. KING.That is the same with all the lights, port and starboard, and navigators find them extremely difficult to go by ? Capt. WRIGHT.Yes; every one I have spoken to about.it is of' the same o inion 1 Mr. RING.That is the main complaint you have to make about the channel ? Capt. WRIGHT.Yes. Mr. KING.Are you, or is any large vessel of the Canadian fleet, interested in obtaining greater depth on the Limekiln Cr6ssing at present ? Capt. WRIGHT.Not atpresent. Mr. KING.You are limited on what draught ? Capt. WRIGHT.We are limited on the draughtof the So0 at resent. Mr. KING.Take the Limekiln Crossing; upbound and the Phit of the channeldownbound; your available draught available atthe Canadian lock at the So0 is 5 or 6 inches less upbound than down- bound ! Capt. WRIGHT.More than a foot difference; there is 5 inches difference inthe draught upbound and downboundin the Canadian lock. Mr. KING.If the Canadian lock is enough to allow a vessel 19 feet 6 going down, it is 19 feet going up Z Capt. WRIGHT.Yes. Mr. KING.If it is 21 feet or 22 feet at the Limekiln Crossing, you are not very much concerned about an immediate addition to that? Capt. WRIGHT.Not at present. Mr. KING.I suppose most of the Canadian vessels bound up go all the way to Lake Superior? Capt. WRIGHT.Yes. Mr. KING.On account of the coasting laws which make Fort Wil- liam their destination ? Capt. WRIGHT.Yes; Fort William and Jackfish. Mr. KING.Are there many cargoes carried in the Georgian Bay3 Capt. WRIGHT.Yes, quite a few. Mr. KING.Where to? Capt. WRIGHT.Midland and Depot Harbor. Mr. King. Are these large boats? Capt. WRIGHT.Large and small. Mr. KING.As to them an additional inch or two would be of some moment ? Capt. WRIGHT.Pes. Mr. KING.Any vessels for Byng Inlet for the C. P. R. are limited as to draft; the B ng Inlet Harbor is less draft? Capt. WRIGHT.%e,, it is less draft. Mr. MAGRATH.Have you cross currents alsewhere on that route? 64 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. Capt. WRIGHT. Yes; there is a cross current going into the Cana- dian locks, notas we enterthe lock but going uppast the New Ontario coal dock at the Canadian Sault there is a strong current there which comes down the St. Marys Rapids. Mr. CASGRAIN.What velocity is it? Capt. WRIGHT.I can not say. Mr. MAGRATH.Do you regard that cross current as more dangerous than that with which we are dealing now? Capt. WRIGHT. I imaginethe one atthe Sault wouldbe the stronger current, but the difference in the two places is this, that in oing into the Sault you have to go very slow, you are making the fock and you cannot go fast, whereasgoing down Livingstone Channel you can go 10 nules an hour. MT. MAGRATH.Do you know of any accident that has occurred at the Sault? Capt. WRIGHT.No. Mr.CASORAIN. Cross currentsare not unknown innavigation, are they? Capt. WRIGHT.No Mr. TAWNEY.Do you think you could safely base your judgment on the effect of this cross current by going through the Livingstone Channel only once'1 Capt. WRIGHT.That is what I say; I will probably have a better opinion if I went down in daylight. Mr. TAWNEY.Would you not have to go down more than once to form an opinion ? Capt. WRIGHT.Well, the only difference would be if the next time I went down I was going down loaded; I have never been through loaded. Mr. STREETER.You say that when you went down there this one time you kept close over to the port side? Capt. WRIGHT.Yes. Mr. STREETER.And you did that because of the warnings or suggestions of the captains about the cross currents? Capt. WRIGHT.Yes. a Mr. STREETER. How many captains had told out about, that 1 Capt. WRIGHT.I can not say exactly, roba gly about a dozen; when we were talking about it in Fort Wilyiam there were seven or eight present then, I think. Mr. KING. There was some notice issued to the effect that there was a cross current there? Capt. WRIGHT. Yes; there was a notice in the newspapers. Mr. KING. It is known to every navigator! Capt. WRIGHT.Yes. Mr. KING. Youwould be very glad of a further opportunity to test the effect of that cross current before anything is done il Capt. WRIGHT.Oh, yes. Mr. KING. You don't set up as an expert merely upon your experience in that one trip 8 Capt. WRIGHT.No. ' Mr. KING. And that simply happened to be the extent of your experience ? Capt. WRIGHT. Yes. Mr. KING.When was the channel opened? THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 65 Ca t. WRIGHT.I think it was the 10th of November, last year; at a1P events it was toward the close of the season. Mr. STRICKLAND.Do you thinkthat onc trip down would be sufficient to enableyou to state whetherthere were anycurrents there or not ? Capt. WRICHT.I think one tri down loaded would be better. Mr. KINC.You went down lig?l t? Capt. WRICHT.Yes. Mr. STRICKLAND.You do not think it would be a positive determination of the question of currents when you went down light? Capt. WRIGHT.I would prefer to have a trip down loaded before I wouldbe absolutely sure. Mr. STRICKLAND.Assuming that the lights were the same in both channels, which would youprefer to navigate, the LivingstoneChannel or the Amherstbur Channel ? Capt. WnIanT. $he Amherstburg Channcl. Mr. STAUNTON.Because you know it better,? Capt. WRIGHT.It is a wider channel and we always like lots of room. TESTIMONY OF HARRY HODGMAN. HARRY HODGMAN,of the city of Detroit, a witness produced on behalf of the United States, being duly sworn,deposed as follows: - Questioned by Mr. STRICKLAND: Mr. STRICKLAND.What is your position Z Mr. HODGMAN.I am assistant engineer of theDetroit River improvements. Mr. STRICKLAND.How long have you been assistant engineer? Mr. RODGMAN.Since 1910. Mr. STRICKLAND.Did you have any commission in the engineer’s office prior to that? Mr. €TODOMAN. I have been connected with the Detroit River improvements since 1904. -Mr. STRICLICAND.Anything prior to that? Mr. HODGMAN.No, s1r. Mr. STRICKLAND.You areacquainted with the condition of the lake levels above the Detroit River and below? Mr. HODCMAN.To a certain extent; yes. Mr. STRICKLAND.You have had under consideration the question of putting in a dam in connection with the Livingstone Channel? Mr. HODGMAN.I have not had active connection with the corn u- tation in connection with the wbrk. Of course I have known wg at was going on and been interested in it. Mr. STRICKLAND.Do you fed competent to state whether there is any necessity for this dam! Mr. HODGMAN.I consider that. it is very necessary. Mr. STRICKLAND.Why 1 Mr. HODGMAN.On account of the cross currents at resentand as comensation in case of future widening of the&vingstone Channef Mi. STRICKLAND.Which way do the currents flow? 86342-13-5 66 LIVINGSTONECHANNEL. THE Mr. HODGMAN.In the vicinity of theLivingstone Channel, and between Bois Blanc Island and thecofferdam, they cross the channel at about 30' angle. Mr... STRICKLAND. Do you know the velocity of the current at that point 'I Mr. IIoDaMAN. Yes. I was connectedwith the tests that were made. Prictically, as Col. Patrickhas said, the maximum we got was about 2.8 feet per second and from that they range to a much lesser velocity. Mr. STRICKLAND.In building this dam would it deflect the water to any extent to the Canadian shore? Mr. HODOMAN.Yes; I think it would. Mr. STRICKLAND.By the opening inthat' dam would notthat raise it some ? Mr. HODQMAN. A certain amount of discharge would go through the opening. Mr. STRICKLAND. Would it be a harmful current?

Mr. HODOMAN.Do you meanthe current in theAmherstburg I Channel ? Mr. STRICKLAND.Yes. Mr. HODGMAN.No, sir; I think not. Mr. STRICKLAND.Have youmade an observation as to the discharge of sewage from the Canadian si Je and the American side ? Mr. HODOMAN.I have not made any s ecial observations at all. I have observed in the rounds of my wor E which takes me all over the river, that there is apparently a great deal more suspension in the waters in the American Channel than in the Canadian. If you go through the Trenton Channel at certain seasons in the summer, you can see suspendedmatter in the water the same as you see specks of dust as you look into the sunlight. Mr. STRICKLAND.Do you know anything about the flow of ice! Mr. HODOMAN.I lived on the shore of the Detroit River for 15 years and I think I know as much about it as an bod in the vicinity. Mr. STRICKLAND.In your recollection, has tzere teen any ice jam in the vicinity of Amherstbur 1 Mr. HODGMAN.There has f een only one jam that has done any damage, so far as I know. Mr. STRICKLAND.Do you know the reason of that jam, what was the cause of it? Mr. HODOMAN.It was caused by the flow of thick ice that was driven along the Canadian shore by awesterly wind. Mr. STRICKLAND.Do you thinkthe erectlon of thisdam would bring the ice in there any more than it would ordinaril go ? Mr. HODGMAN.I do not know as to the quantity, f am sure; I do not think it would make any appreciable effect on the amount of damage that would be done. Mr. TAWNEY.Without reference to damage would it appreciably increase the flow of ice ? Mr. HODGMAN.The flow throughthe Amherstburg Channel is dependent ,very largely upon the wind. There is very seldom a time when the Detroit River IS full of ice. The ice follows one shore or the other as the wind blows. In case of a west wind we get ice in the Amherstburg Channel and in case of an east wind it goes down THE LIVINQSTONE CHANNEL. 67 the AmericanChannel. I donot think that the conditions that would exist after the buildingof the cofferdam would have materially changed the condition of tlungs existing at present, so far as ice 1s concerned. Questioned by Mr. I-IIouaiI: Mr. HouGIr. It would all have to go down the Cmaclian Channel if the dam was built? Mr. HODGMAN. Why? Mr. HOUGH.Except what would go through this 300-foot gap. Mr. HODGMAN.If the wind wercl from the west it would all go through the Canadian Channel. If the windwere from the east it would go tothe cast of Grosse Ile. When there ispractically no wind the ice is quite well distributed over the riva in small cakes; cakes perhaps from a srnull size to 100 feet square. Mr. HOUGII.And 40 per cent of that would go west of the island without the dam, the same as the water does? Mr. HODGMAN.Yes; I think so. Mr. HOUGII.That woulrl all have to go through the Amherstburg Channel if the dam were built? Mr. WODGMAN. Yes. Atthe same time the condition wouldbe that it would pass through the Amherstburg (Ihannel without doing damage. Mr. HOUGH. It would increase the amount 40 per cent. Mr. HODGMAN.It might. I may say in c,onnection with the ice, when it did damage in Amherstburgit took about 20 feet of my house. Mr. HOUGH.That is 15 years ago. Mr. HODGMAN.I do not think it is so long ago as that; it is the only jam, anyway, that hasdone any damage, so far as I know. Questioned by Mr. STAUNTOX: Mr. STAUNTON.What you say now is that the Amherstburg Chan- nel is practically free at all times from danger from ice? Mr. HODGMAN.Yes. Mr. STAUNTON.And that if this dike is put in there itwould make it subject to ice dangers that now do not exist? Mr. HODGMAN.KO; I think not. Mr. STAUNTON.You say 40 per c,ent more ice will go down that channel ? Mr. HODGMAN.Forty per cent moremight perhaps goclown in calm weather. Mr. STAUNTON. Forty per cent more will go down when the wind is blowing to the Canadian side? Mr. HODGMAN.No. Mr. STAUNTON.my not 2 Mr. HODGMAN.Because it always goes down that channel anyway when the wind is in that direction. Mr. STAUNTON.If there is a heavy wind there is a big current there? Mr. HODGMAN.Yes. Mr. STAUNTON.And this dike is ut in for the purpose of guarding vessels against the current which sYl oots betwem the cofferdam and the island; docs not that current pull in ice there with it ? Mr. HODGMAN. It does when there is no wind. Mr. STRICKLAND.Would not the placing of the dam there check the speed of the ice to a considerable extent 8 68 LIVINGSTONECHANNEL. THE Mr. HODGMAN.I think not. (The witness was not further cxamined.) The commission adjourned at 5 o’clock to meet again in the even- in after dinner to consider certain matters in connectionwith the re erence re level of Lake of the Woods. fThe commission tlecdcd to meet at 10 o’clock in the morning to continue the hearing of the rcferencc re Livingstone Channel.)

INTERNATIONALJOINTCOMMISSION, Detroit, Mich., Tuesday, February 18, 1913. The International JointCommission met this morningat 10 o’clock in the Federal court, pursuant to adjournment of thc previous evening, and proceaded to the further hearing of evidence in connection with Livingstone Channel. Present: James A. Tawney, presiding; Th. Chase Casgrain, K. C.; Frank S. Streeter; Henry A. Powell, K. C.; Charles A. Magrath; and George Turner.L. White Busbey and Lawrence J. Burpee, secre- t aries . TESTIMONY OF WILLIAMLIVINGSTONE.

WILLIAMLIVINGSTONE, of the city of Detroit, vcssel owner, a witness produced on bchalf of theUnited States, being dulysworn, deposed as follows: Questioned by Mr. STRICKLAND: Mr. STRICKLAND.Have you any Connection with the LakeCarriers’ Association ? Mr. LIVINQSTONE.Yes, sir. Mr. STRICKLAND.What position do you occupy in connection with the Lake Carriers’ Association ? Mr. LIVINGSTONE.President. Mr. STRICKLAND.As president of that association, have you any knowledge of the navigation of the Detroit River, the Livingstone Channel, and the Lakes? Mr. LIVINGSTONE.Yes, sir. Mr. STRICKLAND.Can you stata something about the navigationof vessels through this Livin stone Channel ? Mr. LIVINGSTONE. Wo ave in our association nearly all of the modern bulk freighters; wca have 467 or 468 steamers, the aggregate tonnage of which is about 2,100,000 registered tons. Mr. STRICKLAND.Do you know the number of vesscls which pass through this channelin the navigation season ? Mr. LIVINGSTONE.Yes, sir. Mr. STRICKLAND.Can you give information as to tllat ‘1 Mr. LIVINGSTONE.I can give it more accurately by reference to the report. From April 19 to December 16 last year, a pwiod of 242 days, there were 25,238 vessels which passedthrough theI imekiln Crossing. The Livin stone Channel was open for navigation on October 19 last year, andP rom that dateto the close of navigation 1,227 vessels passed through it. That is a total of 26,465 vessels assing throughthe DetroitRiver during the season of 1912. T is includes allthe vessels; it does not include the sand boats and tugs employed for THE LIVINGSTONECHANNEL. 69 theimprovement of the lower DetroitRiver, and there are some pleasure craft which are not counted. This is an average of 1 vessel every 13Q minutes for the entire period of navigation. Mr. STRICKLAND.What are the size of some of these vessels '1 Mr. LIVINGSTONE.They run in our fleet approximately from 400 feet to 617 feet in length. The modern vessels that we have been buildingfor the last fewyears are of thelarger size. Therewere two vessels builta year ago 617 feet long, 64 feetbeam, 32 feet molded depth, with carrying capacity for their full draft of 14,000 gross tons. They are the two largest bulk freighters in the world; that is to say, exclusively bulk freighters. When I say 14,000 tons, they could not carry 14,000 tons through the Detroit River on the present draft of water; they could carry from Escanaba to South Chicago. These vessels are 10 feet more in length and 4 feet more in beam than any othertwo steamers or1 the Lakrs. We have a number of 600-footers. Mr. STRICKLAND.Have you any statistics showing the investment in the Lakevessels passing up and down the Detroit River? Mr. LIVINGSTONE.I can not give you that now, but I could furnish it to you inside of the next three days. Mr. STRICKLAND.Can you give it ap roximately ? Mr. L~~~~~~~~~~.-Approximately,tP IC) valuc of the fleet of Lake carriers would be $120,000,000. Mr. POWELL.About $50 a ton? Mr. LIVINOSTONE. About$52 per ton, roughly speaking. Mr. STRICKLAND.As president of the Lake Carriers' Association, ' have you had any con hints about the Livingstone Channel? Mr. LIVINQSTONE.8h, yes, a greatmany c'omplaints The Liv- ingstonc Channel was 'opened October 19 last, and at the time we opened it it was intended for an entirely down-bound channel; and so as to give the mastersof our vessels a chance to become familiarized with the navigationof the channel, theywere given permission to use it as a tluy channel only until the loth of November. Col. Patrick, the United States Engineer, issued an order extending the time for it to be used at night until the 10th of November, the oh'ect of that being to allow all boats to make :L trip up :ml down tk rough the channel in daytime, before using it at night, so as to become familiarized with it. Before the channel began to bo used at night the com- plaintsbegan to comc in regartling the cross currentsand the difflculties in connection withthem. Wllon theorder came into effect to run the channel at night the complaints increased; in fact, to suchan extent that we have somemastcrs who rcfusetl to go down it at nighton account of the cross currents. Clearly understand this, Mr. Strickland, that it was ycry late when the channel wasopened. About November 25 therc a,rt: z1 greatmany of our vessels that go out of commission for the senson, so tht after the 10th of November there is quite a diminution of the fleet, so that we did not have the full pressure we would have in the middle of the season. The rule was not, so rigidly enforcetl ns it otherwise would have hen, on rxcount of the fewer vcssels bringin commission. Theobjcct of u downchannel and up cllrlnnel is practicallythis: That the great danger on the Lakes now is not so much the stress of storm and weather, on account of the way wo build our boats-I do not say there is not danger from storms-but the greater danger we 70 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. have to contendwith on the Lakes, onaccount of theenormous tonnage which has grown tosuch proportions, is thedanger of collision, so that every energy has been bent to try as far as we can to get ractically a tlouhlc clltmncl (I will put it that way) between Lake &ie and Lake Iluron. The statistics show that the Detroit River furnished 45 per cent or more of the accidents that havcoccurrod on the Lakes; some of them were of course minoraccidents. One year, I remember looking over the figures pretty carefully at that time, antl I think they ran up over 55 per cent, so that you can get some idoa of how great the danger is hore, from the fact thatthoro is no navigable stream to-day on the face oI the globe that is comparable in tho amount of tonnage which passes through it, with the Detroit River. Our average season of navigation is 240 days.With reference to tho Sault Canal tho Government keeps a record antl we keep a record of all the passings at the Limekiln Crossing. vc'o have two stations where men are employed, and itis part of thcir duty to keep a record of every boat that assos up and down, so that taking the number of vessols that passed Est year, something over 26,000, it mado an average of one vessel every 13 minutcsand a fraction, antl taking an estimatefor the amount of tonnage carried, it amounted to 270 tons of freight passing the Limekiln Crossing every minute of the 24 hours of the day, all the 240 days of opon navigation. I may add that I think it is very much to be regrettedthat your commission could nothavc been here during the mason of navigation antl have gone down and seen for yourselves. Mr. TAWNEY.I ma say we were here on tho 3d of December. Mr. LIVINGSTONE.f beg your pardon; I was absent then. Mr. TAWNEY.You spoke of the complaints made on account of the. cross currents; did your association reccive any complaintson account of the inefficiency of the lights in the channel Mr. LIVINGSTONE.Yes, sir; they called them blinkey lights, but that is not tho proper naTc for them; they arF about to be changed. Commander MacCormic recommended theso llghts and they are the same lights which are used in the Ambrose Channel outside of New York. They have been in operation thoro for some time, and he was very much taken with them; at all events, he thought they were the best lights for tho purpose, and he recommended them to the department and it seems that the department concurred. in it. I am in- clined to think, thoughI can not speakoffkially, that these lightswill be changed this spring because there have been a good many complaints about them. They were only two-fifths of a second light and about three antl ahalf seconds dark, and there were so many of them and they were not timctl cxactly together, and they wero constantly blinking. In the Ambrost: Channel, which is 1,000 foot wido, it was a very different proposition from this narrow c,hanrlcl which is only 300 feet. Mr. STRICKLAND.IIavc ou any personal ex erioncc as to currents in the Livingstone Channec haveyou observecfany at any time'2 Mr. LIVINGSTONE.Yes, sir; in a limited way. Mr. STRICKLAND.Will you tiescribc them, please '1 Mr. LIVINGSTONE.For instance, I havea little boat that I run around in a good deal in the summer time, and naturallyI have been very much interested in the Livingstone Channel and I have gone THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 71 down there a reat many times before it was opened and since it was o ened, and f noticed the cross current there. I am frank to say t f at the boat being small and light it may he more affected than a larger boat would be. But I went down with the Livingstone, which was the firstboat through the Liivirlgrrtone Channel,except the Hancock, Col. Patrick’s boat. I was in the pilot house at the time and she took quite a little sheer to the westward. In fact her stern swung over to the westwardto such an extent that for the moment I thought the wheelman was a little careless, because. I said to him rather sharply, “Steady, starboard.” There are some witnesses who will follow me, masters of ships who are the Inen behind the guns, and they can give you (lata. I have a great many complaints in theoffice from different masters of our fieet. Mr. STRICKLAND.TVere there any vessels going do& the Living- stone Channel which had tows, or will there bc 1 Mr. LIVINGSTONE.I can not answer that question exactly; I am reasonably sure that therewere some tows went down,but very few. Mr. STRICKLAND.If there should be, how would the tows act in the cross currents 8 Mr. LIVINGSTONE.If the current is particularly strong there might be a disaster. You understandone thing about the livin stone Channel, and that is this: That the channel is only 300 feet wi zie and that whena vessel oncegets in the channol it hasgot to go on; it is impossible to turn. Take a boat 600 fcet long and she swin s a little to tho port or starboard, as the case may be, antl she woul be against the bank. It is an utter impossibility for her to turn around,a and the currentis behind her and there is only one thing for hor to (lo, and that is to keep going on until she gets through; she can not stop. The result is that d one of these vessels should swingacross the channel antl the down-bound boat coming after her should crash into her and sink her it would block the whole of that channel, antl it would depend of course on the length of time she laid there before she was raised as to the amount of money it might cost navigation. Time is the essence of everything on the Lakes nowadays. What I mean by that is this, to give an illustration: We have one boat, the William C. Corey, that for 25 weeks made a round trip every week between Duluth or Two Harbors, carrying ore, loaded bound down and light going up, so that with the tremondoustonnagc: and theessence of time which cut such a figure, the loss to navigation interests,to the shipper, to the vessel owner, in case the channel was blocked there for any length of time would be an enormous amount of money. For instance, there is no place on the face of the globe where frelght is carried so cheaply as here on the Lakes. I thmk that last pear’s average was about 7 mills per ton per mile or possibly a shade over that. There is no other place on the face of the earth where freights are so low as they are here. The only way that freight can be carried for such a small amount of money-in fact they ought notto be carried so low- the only way to make a margin is to make time. There is no lace on theface of the globe either wherewe have theloading and unYoad- ing facilities which we have here. Forinstance, a boatcarrying 10,500 tons of ore was loaded in25 minutes. Mr. TAWNEY.If the Livingstone Channel were blocked, would not the boats, except those thatwere in the channel at the timeof course, use the AmherstburgChannel going down? 72 LMNGSTONE THE CHANNEL. Mr. LIVINGSTONE.Yes, sir; but for that of course there would be a eneral tie-up. %r. TAWNEY.Have you anystatements showing therelative tonnage down and the tonnage up the Detroit RiverZ Mr. LIVINGSTONE.I could furnish you with that; I can not give it offhand, but I willfile it. The upbound tonnage of course is very much lighter than the downbound tonnage,because many of the vessels run up light. The WiZZiam G. PaZmer broke all records in unload- ingthis year. In about 3 hoursand 20 minutesshe unloaded 117000 tons of ore. Mr. TURNER.If theLivingstone Channel were blockedand the vessels were required to take"the Amherstburg Channel going down, would that make a difference Z Mr. LIVING~TONE.Yes, it would mean quite a delay. We would have to have a patrol boat to as far as possible prevent two boats getting in the channel. I do not mean to say that two boats can not pass in the channel, but they mightcome with such rapidity and the danger isso great that itwould have to be handled under Government surveillance.The Canadian Government furnished a patrol boat last fall there. Mr. TURNER.I suppost: heavy weather sometimes stops thetraffic ? Mr. LIVINGSTONE. Wedo not count on that because we expect to come to anchor in fo s or weather of that kind. Mr. MAGRATII.W ?lat is themean width of tho Amherstburg Channel ? Mr. LIVINGSTONE.Tho Amherstburg Channel proper as dredged out by our Government and completed is 600 feet; you can count on that. A chain is only as strong as its weakest link, and that is the narrowest point in the channel. Mr. TAWNEY.Have you anything furtherto state, Mr. Livin stone? Mr. LIVINGSTONE.1 was going to say that relative to the tivingstone Channel I think there hasbeen possibly a little misunderstanding in a way. I asked the Committee on Itivcrs and Harbors, when the project was first brought up, for a survey by the Government engineers, what they call a preliminary survey, and in that request we asked the channel to be 600 feet inwidth. Government engineers reported on it and they reported against 600 feet, the reason being thatthey were afraid of the compensating. part of it. In other words, if the channel were drodged 600 feet m width, they thought it would require so much compensationto retain thelevel of the waters that they fcared thelevels of Lakes Huron, Erie, andMichigan might be disturbcd, and for that reason they voted aga,inst it. Later on a bill was introduced in Congress for a 300-foot channcl. Tho engineers presented three projects: A, B, and C. A is the present Livingstone Channel, the straight channel;B was a c,hannel to run throughbetween Stoney Island and Grosse Isle; plan C was to go through the Ameri- can and Trenton Channel. That channol would have bwn entirely in American waters, tlnd there was quite a sentiment on the part of some to havetho channel built entirely in Americanwaters, but in tho engineers' report it was about approximately 13- miles longer and was going to cost porhnps two and n half million tlollnrs more, andin addition to that it would not be a straight c,hnnnel; there would beseveral bends in it. TheLivingstone Channel will be a perfectly straight line. When the mat,ter was studied they decided THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 73 againstthe Trenton Channel andthought the relations between theCanadian Government and our own Government were so fra- ternal that the sentiment about whether it was in American waters or Canadian waters did not count for much, the relations between the two countries being so reciprocal, and they dccidcd in favor of putting the channelwhere it is at present. Then, when they were blasting the rock cut, somethingover a mile in length, the vessel interests knew, and it was so represented, they thoroughly understood it, that we intended lateron to get that channel widened when certain difficulties were settled in the way of compensation,and so forth. 1 presented it to the River and Harbors Committee that if the Government would widen that portion of the rock cut between the cofferdams that the Government would save money enough to more than do the additional work. In other words, when the cofferdam was taken away, if it were taken away, the work would have to be done in the wet, andwould that very largely increase the cost of it, and, in addition to that, while it was being done in the wet it would be a great hindrance to navigation. The saving was very great. For instance, I think, if my memory serves me right, that the bid for doing the work in the dry was $1.24 per cubic yard, and the bid for doing the work in the wet was $2.24 or $2.25 per cubic yard, so that the difference between the two, by having it done dry when the cofferdams were there, more than saved the amount expended; while the 450 feet in the rock cut is really of no advantage to us at the resent time, and the balance of it being more of clay and shale, wiP 1 be out of the way entirelyfor widening the channel- the other 150 feet which it is really the intention to do later on if there is no prohibition. . Mr. STREETER.You referred to plan A as being the present Living- stoneChannel; are you not incorrect about that; was notplan A in relationto the AmherstburgChannel and plan B to the Livingstone Channel ? Mr. J,IVINQSTONE. No, sir; T t'hinli 1 an1 corrcct about thnt ; the enginwrs will 1~ able to r;how thnt. 'I'hcrc wcrr f'hrw plms present>cd,A, R, n.nd C, nntl I think was tha prwrntfTivinqstonr Chnn- nel, the straight chnnncl, and I3 was the onc lwtwoon Storley Tslnnd and Grosso Ilc---:llthouph Y would not, I)(> posit>ivc ahout it,, itt may have hen A, R, and C, orn, C, and TI. 1 fi1:d on rcdcrtbncc thnt, you are correct, Gen. Streotor, W is tmhcJivingst,ono Chnnnrl. Qucstioned by Mr. MACINNES, K. C.: Mr. MACINNES.Ilnvn thcrc bccn any t1witlcntjs to nny vesscls since t'hc Iivingstono C:hnnncl WRS oponcd, 1))- rcason of htcross current ? Mr. JAVINGSTONE.1 do not, rccnll any crl, thc prwcntmoment. One vrsscl wns rcportJcd RS ha\Tinq troublr. I hnvc reporls of what t,hey claim wcro narrow csc.:rpcs. Rut wr h:1\-(1 son10 rnnstcm here anti t,hcy will give ovitlcnrv. I grnrw1lly kcpt thew ~*c>portsfor my own knowlndgr, and at, t,lw prrserlt timt T ('an not' st,nt'c\posil'ivcly about, it,. You undcrst:ultl that' thc channcl w;ls uscti vc~.ylit1tlc at night, and it being opon(d lat8cill thc sr:~sontho hnav~part, of the transportation was gent'. l'h~proport'ion of thosr who 11wd it at night, as compared with those who nsrd il, in tho claytimc, was small. 74 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. Mr. MACINNES.As .to the possible accidents you speak of, you do not know whether it was due to the cross current or to the blinking lights ? Mr. LIVINGSTONE.The claim this was due entirelyto the cross current; you get the blin E ing lights most in the regular cut. Mr. MACINNES.And you do not know definitely even to this one possible accident Z Mr. LIVINGSTONE:I do not. Mr. MACINNES.I understand thatthis cross currentstrikes the channel where it is on1 300 feet, wide? Mr. LIVINGSTONE.ds. Mr. MACINNES.I understand you also to say that if the channel were widened there wouldbe less difficulty, obviously, in dealing with currents ? Mr. LIVINGSTONE.I can not answer that question, because that is an engineering pro osition; I do not know. Mr. MACINNES.there would of.course be less difficulty in maneuver- in a vessel if it were wider! %r. TJIVINGSTONE. Surely. Mr. MACINNES. This currentis below where the cofferdam is? Mr. LIVINGSTONE.Where the cofferdam was. Mr. MACINNES.And the vessels are coming downward, this is the down channel 8 Mr. LIVINGSTONE.Yes, sir. Mr. MACINNES.So that before the vessel getsinto this current, the mariner has entered somewhat before upon the narrow channel? Mr. LIVINGSTONE. Yes, sir. Mr. MACINNES.So that when thecurrent strikes the vessel the mariner will be in a condition of anxiety in taking care of his vessel; he will have had warning some time before that he is in a difficult place ? Mr. LIVINGSTONE.Oh yes, a, man who hashad ex erience going through that channel, naturallywould know about wR ere the cross- current will strike it. Mr. MACINNES.What 1 meant was thatthe mere factthat he enters upon the narrow channel will make him take greater care 'I Mr. LIVINGSTONE.He has to take earo anyway. Mr. MACINNES.So that he will be in a position of taking greater care when he meets wit,h this current some time later? Mr. hVINGSTONE. Yes; because it iS tho duty of every master to be on deck when he goes through that channel and have command of his boat. Mr. MACINNES.It is not until after he has passed through that channel that he meets the currmt Mr. LIVINGSTONE. I do not believe 1: quite understand what you are trying to get at. Mr. MACINNES.It is not as if the c,urrcntcame upon him suddenly in the open part of navigation; when he meets the current he hasbeen dealing wit'h his ship in a narrow channel some time before. If this channel werewidened to 450 feet and if the flickering lights were made right, what would you say as to the difficulties of this cross current ? Mr. LIVINQSTONE.I can not answer that question because that is really an engineeringquestion. As to whet,her if thechannel were THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 75 widened, it would reduce the force of the cross current, I can not answer that question, I do not know. Mr. MACINNES.You have told us it would make navigation easier? Mr. LIVINGSTONE.C’crtainly, bccausc we would have more room to navigate. I would bo glad to have a 600-foot channel if that were possible. Mr. MACINNES.And the rcason why t,here was difficulty as to the wider channel was this question of compensation ‘1 Mr. JJIVINGSTONE. Yes, sir. Mr. 8fAcINNEs. You have studied the question of t>hcdiversion of the waters of Lake Michigar] at Chicago, hnvc you not’? Mr. T,IVINGSTONE.Somewhat. Mr. MACINNES.And if t,hatt diversion were lossened, these compensation works that, you s mak of, which it would be necessary for the wider channel, woulc 1 not be necessary to be put in, is tthat correct? If there was not a diversion at hke Michigan, compensation works would not be necessary even t’houghof t,he widened c,hannel to 600 feet a Mr. LIVINGSTONE.I suppose you allude to the water being reduced so many feet per second a.t the Chicago drainage canal Z Mr. MACINNES.Yes. Mr. LIVINGSTONE. Tf you mean toask me if I believe that the Chicago Drainage Canal affects the level of the Lakes, I say absolutely yes. Mr. MACINNES.And the diversion of the waters at Chicago therefore makes compensation works necessa Mr. LIVINGSTONE.I do not understan3’? that question. Mr. MACINNES.Tf you were to widen the channelcompensation works would be necessary, because there would not be a suffkient de th of water. kr. LIVINGSTONE.Yes. Mr. MACINNES.And the diversion of the water at Chicago affects the depth of the water at this spot Mr. LIVINGSTONE. Yes, sir. Mr. MACINNES. Thereforeif the diversion a,t Chicago were stopped, there would be greater depth at this point8 Mr. LIVINGSTONE. I believe so. Mr. MACINNES.Then if the channel were widened to 600 feet and we hadthis greater depth, these compensation works which you su est as an outcome must be necessary? ffr. LIVINGSTONE. I did not say that; I do not know. You asked me the question if compensation works would not be necessary. Mr. MACINNES.Yes. Mr. LIVINGSTONE.I thinkthere would be some Compensation necessary but I can not answer that question as intelligently as one of our engineers could. Mr. MACINNES. That would be a question of degree! Mr. LIVINGSTONE. Yes, sir. Mr. MACINNES.Rut if the diversion at Chicago were lessened to the same extent as the compensation that was required at this spot, obviously there would be no-difficulty in widening the channel. If, as the engineers tell us, the dlverslon wasestopped40 the same extent as compensation is necessary, then the dlfficulty disappears. . 76 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. Mr. LIVINGSTONE.I should say, from a layman's standpoint, that it would lessen it because at present the Chicago Drainage Canal is taking about 7,000 cubic feet per second. We have reason to believe, although we do not know positive1 , t'hat that sometimes runs up to 10,000 cubic feet per second. !de navigationinterests here are absolutely opposed to bhjs withdrawal of the water. I may add, by the way, that the Secretary of War has just made a decision against their taking more water than at present. Mr. MACINNER.You appeared yourself before the Secretaryof War with regard to this matterZ Mr. LIVINGSTONE.Yes, sir. Mr. MACINNES.And you protested against this diversion! Mr. IAIVINGSTONE.Yes, sir; absolutely. Questioned by Mr. KINa: Mr. KING. I hope you will understand the uostions that I ask on behalf of the Canadian mRrine, a,s realizing fu1 ly that I know we are tlavellin in t'he sameboat, and that any questions of mine are entirely !?or the purpose of ~liciting factswhich may have been ovor- looked in your previous mswors. Mr. IdVINGSTONE. 1 quite 1~~lderstand that. Mr. KING. You have stated that you apptaled at Washington on behalf of your interest,s to oppose the diversion at Chicago '2 Mr. TAVINGSTONE.Yes, sir. Our associationpassed resolutions a ainst it and Mr. Harvey G. Goulder and mJsclf and quite R number oB othor members o-I' tho twociation protested. Mr. RING.Antl all that has been done since then is the decision of the Fecretary of War limiting the amount of water? Mr. IdVINGRTONE. yes. Mr. KING. You arc uwaro that that decision of the Secretaly of War has not yet hen carried into practical effect '1 Mr. T,IVINCSTONE.I undcrstand it is going to be appealed. It is within the last thrro 01 follr wwks since he has renrleled khat decision. MI. KING.In ot,hor words, the fight is stJillon? Mr.~T,IVINGsToNE.Oh, .yes: absolutely. . Mr. KING.Antl you vt.0111d bo very sorry, pst as I would be ve,ry sorry, to do anything :~,tdl that, would peludice the intelests of navigation with refelencc to that pending discussion at Chicago? Mr. LIVINGSTONE.Furc?ly, but we might diirer as to whatt,hat would be. Mr. KING. Erractlv, but you would quite agree that we should not in any way discuss at the present time questions of compensation which might becornc prt of that discussion? Mr. hvIxGsroNE. wdl, 1 would have to believe that was so; 1 would lmve to be satisficd as to that. Mr. KING. Exactly, but if you were under the impression that the discussion of compensatory works 'at present wouldbecome an element in the ('hieago question, t,hat would somewhat influence you against, goinginto that quust,ion at this stage 1. Mr. ImINCs'i-ONI':. Wd, t,hcrc a~oa good many factors to be con- siderotl in connection with t'h:lt,. Mr. KING.That is cntircly a supposititow question. Mr. T,IvrN(;swm. I will WIISW(~I'it in this way: If I were satisfied in my own mind and h:td every retlson to believe that taking UP the THE LIVINGSTONECHANNEL. 77 question-I suppose that is the point you want to get-that taking up this question of building this intermediat,e dam would interfere in any way serious1 with the progress of the drainage canal uestion, as we call it, wouit ryd give us food for reiloction and we might1 lesitate. On the other hand, I want to say this by way of ex lanation: That from my present knowledge and present experience it" fail to see how the building of a darn on the resent site---I :tm not speaking of a specific site; I am speaking o! the intermedial proposition-that is a question forengineers to decide, whether the pomt thcyselected is the best. I assume that they have selected thebest site bccanse they have experience and they chose it after careful reflection. I fail to see how our building intermedial works at present is going to interfere with the Chicago proposition. I may he mistaken about it, but if I were convinced I would look at its difficulties. What I want to impress on your mind is this: The Limekiln Channel, as we call it, has been to the Lakes what Hell Gate used to be to New- York. It has been a barrier to navigators from thebeginning, and the. result is that it is a crucial point, where 80 per cent, of all t,he tonnage of the Lakes goes thro11 h, and, of course, thcre arc vcsscls, you undcrstxtnd, that trade to ot% er oints, which stop short of it. Mr. KING. $e all know that, I think. Mr. LIVINGSTONE. Yes, but 80 per cent gc)~through thcre, and it is a matter of the greatest interest to everybody interested in navigation, to the shippers and to the great public. The people get the benefit of all these low freight rates. The statistics show that since the first appropriation that was made for tho Great Lalms in the year 1820 the engineers have re orted to the Government that inone year there has been more savefin the reduction of freight rates than the entire money a propriated Irorn 1820 down to the present time. The importance of Eaving safe navigation there is so great that I would be very slow to concede that the importance of the one would weigh against the other. I may say again that the Lake Carriers' Rssocia- tion arc absolutely, as a unit, opposed t:) the increase of water through the Chicago Drainage Canal. That is the best answer I can give. Mr. KING. With reference to the Lirnckiln Crossing, that has been increased in width to 600 feet '1 Mr. LIVINGSTONE.Yes, sir, the easterly chttmd. Mr. KING. Has that been done recently! Mr. LIVINGSTONE.Yes, they havc just completed the work a year ago, before the Livingstone Channcl was opclncxl this year, during the past summer. Mr. KING. Was it the practice to hold up boats above and below the Limekiln Crossing '1 Mr. LIVINGSTONE.Yes. TheCanadian Government charters a boat called the McCarthy which acted as a patrol there. It depended on circrlmstances whether they would hold the boats; it depended on how t11c.y werecongested andsomewhat on theweather. A great many accidents occurred there; one boat would get temporarily on theround.

$a. KING. I asked the question with reference to an answer you gave the commission a little while ago, that if the Livingstone Chan- nel became blocked it would be necessary to establish a patrol system in the AmherstburgChannel, to hold boats up? andyou say thatwould depend on circumstances ? 78 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. Mr. LIVINGSTONE.Yes, I think we will have to have a patrol boat anyway, because we broke all records last year and I thmk we will break all records this year. Mr. KING. Having regard to that, it would not make nluc,h difference whether the Livlngstone Channcl were blocked or not? Mr. LIVINGSTONE.Oh, yes, it would make a good deal of difference in the delay, because they would have to take turns. M5. KINO. If the Livingstone Channel, by any accident, became blocked, traffic would not be tied up? Mr. LIVINGSTONE.No. Mr. KING. But it would be necessary to establish a patrol system7 and wit8hregard to the Limekiln Crossing, may I ask what length IS the Limekiln Crossing ? Mr. LIVINGSTONE.What we call the Limekiln Crossing proper is about'24 miles; it is redly more in a way. Mr. KI~.I mean the narrow cut of 600 feet? Mr. LIVINGSTONE.I am told by Col. Patrick it is about three-quarters of a mile where the heavy rock cut is, and then there has to be reckoned above and below that; Ballards Reef is part of that. Mr. KING. You say ou have no personal knowledge of whether tows have been taken Bown the Livingstone Channel? Mr. LIVINGSTONE. No, but I can get it from the office in a few minutes. I donot likemakin any statements with reference to a matter which I do not absolute7y know about. Mr. KING. At the same time you are fairly familiar with the conditions in the Detroit River? Mr. LIVINQSTONE.Yes. Mr. KING. Probably no one in Detroit is more familiar than you are, unless it be one of the engineers? Mr. LIVINGSTONE.Possibly so. Mr. KING. Do you think that theexperience of one month, say the month of November, at the very end of the season, is sufficient to afford the commission Sull evidence with regard to that channel, when you yourself are unable to sayat this moment whether any tows went down or not? Mr. LIVINGSTONE.I would not say that. Mr. KING. It would be fair if a longer period were allowed to test thenavigation in thechannel rather than to take the month of November only ? Mr. LIVINGSTOXE.It might be so to some degree, but of course the heavier the tonnage passing through there the greater the per- centagc of liability to trouble would be: Mr. KING. You suggested that withlnour ownknowledge some boats llad anchored above the channel ratE er than runit at night rl Mr. LIVINGSTONE.They may have anchored above Ballards Reef; they may anchor there because of fogs. Mr. KING. You have no personal knowledge of that? Mr. LIVINGSTONE.No; I have not; because that was not our experience, because agood many of our masters.were fearful to go in there at night, and the result was that in violatlon of the rules they went down the old channel. Mr. KING. Is it not so that their complaints were directed to the lights with reference to the navigation at night ? THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 79 Mr. LIVINGSTONE.Yes; there were greatcomplaints about the lights in the entrance to the channel. Mr. KING. And steps are being taken to correct that ’4 Mr. LIVINGSTONE.They are working at it now.When I was in Washington the other day, I found that Mr. Putnam and the lighthouse inspector of this district have been making a series of experi- ments in changing the lights. What will be done I can not say. Mr. KING.Having regard to existingconditions, you heard the proposal yesterday for a dike or embankment on the west side of the submerged cut of the Livingstone Channel extendingdown below the cofferdam ‘1 Mr. LIVINGSTONE.Yes, sir. Mr. KING. Having regard to existin conditions, do you not think that would assist very materially in t Ee navigation past these cross currents and that it would to somc extent lessen the cross current or destroy it ? Mr. hVINGSTONE. %‘ell, 1 can not answer that question; 1 do not feel competent to answer it; that is an engineering question. Mr. KING. As a navi ator of experience ou would know that such a dike on the starboari. side of the vessel tound down would afford her very substantial means of keeping in the channel, which she is without now B Mr. LIVINGSTONE.Well, all the cross currents we have had so far come from the eastward, and these vessels sheering to the westward, I would not want to enter on a discussion of that. Mr. KING. You could at least answer that the resence of such a dike past the bank of the submergod cut wou Fd be of material assistanceto vessels in the way of guidingtheir course down the channel. Mr. LIVINGSTONE.If it is merely for the purpose of guiding vessels through the channel, I do not think it is at all necessary, because we will havethat channel so thorouhly lighted that when theyget there they will have all the guide tfl ey want. Mr. KINO. I thought it was suggested that vessels were liable to get in trouble on occasions when fog is resent, and they were unable to pick up the aids to navigationon eacK side. You do not take that position ‘1 Mr. LIVINGSTONE.I take this position: That no man would think of going into that channel in a fog; he would be utterly unfit for his position if ho did. Mr. KING. Thenyou may remove that from consideration entirely. Mr. LIVINGSTONE.Eliminate fo s entirely;it 1s barely possible that a fog mi ht come on so quickf y that a man might get caught m it, but it woupr d be the exception of the rule. Mr. KINU. We can remove this from the discussion. Mr. LIVINGSTONE.Let me say this, and it is all I can say: With 40 years’ experience in the vessel business I have always found that when our United State Engineers Board hadgone into these matters carefully and made a report? just the same as they made in thiscase, ex erience later on almost Invariably demonstrated that they were rigkt. That is about all I can say about that. 80 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL.

Questioned by Mr. WHITE, K. C.: Mr. WHITE. You say'that your masters complain aboutthis channel ? hh. IAVINGSTONE. YCS, Sir. Mr. WHITE. Would notthat be very natural on the part of masters going through a new channel for the first time ? Mr. Imwwsrom. To a certain oxtent, yes. Mr. WHITE. To a vcry large cxtent ? Mr. LIVINGSTONE.Men are proverbially timid abouta new channel. Mr. WHITE. They will naturally go down the Amherstburg Channel that they know about, even in defiance of the regulations, rather than risk a channel they do not know. Mr. LIVINQSTONE. Someof them would. Mr. WHITE. A good many of them would. Mr. LIVINQSTONE.I am not prepared to say what ercentage. Mr. WHITE. Never mind about the percentage; E ut that is the horse sense way of looking at it. Mr. LIVINQSTONE.It is natural for a man with res onsibility upon his shoulders to prefer,to go the way he knows t E an the way he knows not of. Mr. WHITE. Quite so. Another question-the lateness of the season and thekind of weather which prevailed in November and Decem- ber when the channelwas opened would,to a certain extent, counter- balance and even u the crowded condition of the channel durin the summer months; t Eat is, it is easier to navigate during June, $1117, and August. Mr. LIVINGSTONE. Certainly, youwould have much more daylight to commence with. Mr. WHITE. Apart from that, the one would about even up the other, I suppose, as to the danger8 Mr. LIVINGSTONE.Pardon me, I do not understand you. Mr. WHITE. There are large numbers of vessels oing down in the summer months ??d that creates a condition of 3anger because of the crowded condltlon of the channel. Mr. LIVINQSTONE.Yes; it is congested. Mr. WHITE. Thenthat congestedcondition ceases when your boats o out of commission in December? Mr. fJIVINGSTONE. Yes. Mr. WHITE. Then comes the danger of bad weather in the channel, snowstorms, and all that sort of thing ? Mr. LIVINGSTONE. Yes. Mr. WHITE. And I ask you whether it is not a question of evening up as to the danger in that channel8 Mr.LIVINGSTONE. Do I understand you toask if I believe the difference in the weather would equalize, so as to compensate for the danger of congestion ? Mr. WHITE. Is that so? Mr. LIVINGSTONE.I should think not. Mr. WHITE. It would he1 somewhat t,o even it up. Mr. LIVINGSTONE.It mig t to some degree, surely. For instance, if boats are going down the easterly channel and there were not as many vessels passing up, the danger of collision would be lessened. THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 81

Mr. WHITE.A boat might be caught in that channel with a sudden snowstorm, aft'er it had entered the channel-is there not considerable difficulty in entering the channel? Mr. LIVINGSTONE.Do you mean the new channel ? Mr. WHITE. Yes; from what they call Ballards &eef? Mr. LIVINGSTONE.Ballards Eeef is above that channcli; tile work on Ballards Reef will be completed in May, I understand. Mr. WHITE. It is at the entrance of the Livingstone Channel? Mr. LIVINGSTONE.It is really a part of it. Mr. WHITE. Your navigators found difIiculty in getting into the channel; that was one cause of cornplaint? Mr. LIVINGSTONE.There certainly was an oktruction there. Mr. WHITE. I am not questioning the obstruction; I am talking about complaints nladc by yourmen. Mr.LIVINGSTONE. There were a greatmany cornplaints about Ballards Reef. Mr. WHITE. That was an inlportant ele~ncnt of their objection to using that channel! Mr. LIVINGSTONE.No, I think not. Would you allowme to explain. I do notwant to make a statement without )utting mv meaning clearly before the cornmission. For instance, t& cy are stdl at work on that and I think the en ineers expect to havo it done in . Herc is the dimculty with ti at channcl: It is 600 feet wide, "Yan our Government engineers, working at it, take, for instance, half of it or 300 feet; they took the easterly 300 feet and finished that and then moved over to the 500 other foet and t,he result is we only had half of the channel and with the dredges working there there was considerable obstruction. Mr. WHITE. I do not catch the idea; I do not care about the work they are doing; what I want to know is whether the men who :Ire navigatingvour ships up and down that channel,and have filed objeckions, have been actuated to anyextcnt by the difficulty of entering that Livingstone Channel through that Ballards Reef? Mr. LIVINGSTONE.I think not. Mr. CASGRAIN.Is there much freight carried in tows now? Mr. LIVINGSTONE. Thereis a great deal of it done, not so much in the nature of the general run of freight, ore and otherwise; that has been reduced t'o a very small percentage. But the lumber vessels almost invariably have tows, comprised sometimes of two and , three and sometimes as high as four. Mr. CASGRAIN.But you say that is Q small proportion now? Mr. LIVINGSTONE.Yes, as c,oncerns the tows. I remember the time when there used to be nine or ten barges after a tug. Mr. CAsaRAIN. Is that done away with? Mr. LIVINGSTONE.Yes, that is done away with. In 1866 there were only 7 per cent of steam on the whole lakes as against 93 per cent of steam at thepresent time. Last year, there were less than 4 per cent sail and 96 per cent steam, and thatincluded a few consorts. Mr. POWELL.The barges are not used on the large lakes; it is on river navigation ? Mr. LIVINGSTONE.In the lumber trade they are used on the lakes, and there aresome that are used in the ore trade but itis diminishing all the time. 86342-13"-6 82 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. Mr. POWELL.Can you give us a proximately an idea of about how far above thecofferdam is this BaB ards Reef;1s it half a mile? Mr. LIVINGSTONE.A little more than that, about three-quarters of a mile, about 4,000 feet. Mr. POWELL.I can not see how that would interferewith the entrance t,o the channel 1 Mr. LIVINGSTONE.I did not say it did. I spoke of the difficulties of navigating that part of the river on account of the ponstruction work being done on it; I did not mean to be understood In any other way. Questioned by Mr. ROUQH: Mr. HOUGH.Can you get us that information, Mr. Livingstone, re arding vessels passing through that channel withtows Z !Mr. LIVINGSTONE.Yes. Mr. HOUGH.I am instructed that vessels have gone through with as man as three tows. Mr. I":IVINGSTONE. Very likely that was so; they would be lumber vessels; that is likely so. Mr. HOU~H.Do you know the name of the vessel that is said to have met with an accident in that channelZ Mr. LIVINGSTONE.I understand it was Ward Ames thathad , difficult there,but I amnot positive about that. Mr. €&UGH. My instructions are that this accidenttook place nearly a mile below the pointwhere the cross current is said to set in? Mr. LIVINGSTONE.I did not state it as a fact;I do not want ou to attach any particularwei ht to that, because I have not looke 2it up. Some of ourmasters w'IF1 know. I canget the information later as to the location of t'he accident. Mr. HOUGH.Was it in the year 1912 that 45 per cent of the total accidents on the Great' Lakes tookplace in the Detroit River? Mr. LIVINQSTONE.No, sir; I have not the statistics for1912; it was about four years ago; it is three years agosince I had the last statistics. We have had a great manycolllsions in the Detroit River. Of course, included in that are minor accidents. For instance, on the Limekiln a vessel would get aground andbe aground a few hours or a couple of da s and then get off. hr. HOUGH.There were a great many accident8slast year on the Limekiln Crossing and Ballards Reef? Mr. LIVINGSTONE.I can get a statement as to that accurately in the course of the next three days because we have to make a regular re ort to the Government. I do not happen to haw it with me now. $4,. HOUGH.AS far as you know, no accidentswhatever occurred m the Livingstone Channel due to this cross current ? Mr. LIYINCSTONE.I can not say there did. I have had the reports of the masters as to the difficulties of the cross current they had to overcome, and how muchcare thcy had to use, andthat it was dangerous to use on that account. Mr. HOUGH.Do you think the refusal of some of your captains to go down that channel at night was notvery largely due tothe defective lighting? Mr. LIVINQSTONE.I think it wns so in some cases. Mr. HOUGH.Rather than the cross current ? THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 83 Mr. LIVINGSTONE.I would notsay that. It was dueto two causes. First,no master likes totake a st,range channel at night when he has not been there before, and, second, I am frank to say to you that I do not like the lighting of the channel. Mr. LIVINGSTONE.And in thethird place, perhapsthey were scared outof this channel by the rumors that had got abroadas to the dan erous current '1 &. LIVINGSTONE.That may have some effect unquestionably. Mr. HOUGII.And they were unnecessarily scared. Mr. LIVINOSTONE.Another thing which is making it alittle difficult is that at the entrance of the channel it is like the parting of the ways; you come down from Ballards Reef and the Amherst- burg Channelgoes to the eastward and the Livingstone Channelto the right, and there should be a lighthouse right there in the apex with a distinguishing light which can not possibly be mistaken for any otherlight. I amfrank to say that amaster goingdown there, with the multitude of lights there are there, finds it pretty difficult, in the absence of some specific light that is an object of itself and by itself, to guide him. I am trying now to get our Canadian friends to puta lighthouse there, and oneof the very material dangersof this new channel is, that as yet it is not properly indicated. We hope it will be in the spring butIt was not quite asit should be lastfall. Mi. HOUGH. And that is one of the dangers now. Mr. LIVINGSTONE.All these are factors. TESTIPONY OF CAPT. W. C. BROWN. Capt. W. C. BROWN,a witness roduced onbehalf of the TJnited States, being duly sworn, deposes as follows: Questioned by MT.STRICKLAND: Mr. STRICKLAND.Capt. Brown, me youconnected wit,h the lake traffic Z Capt. BROWN.Yes, sir. Mr. STRICKLAND.lTow long have you beon cngagetl in thelake traffic with vessels 2 Capt. BROWN.As master? Mr. STRICKLAND.Or in any other capacity? Capt. BROWN.Fift years. Mr. STRICKLAND.6hat kind of a vossol (lo you conmantl now? Capt. BROWN.I command a steamor 550 ioet long, 56 feet beam, 32 feet molded depth. Mr. STRICKLAND.What is her name! Capt. BROWN.Tho Frank 0.Ball. Mr. STRICKLANU.Between what points do you ply? Capt. BROWN.Duluth, Chicago, and Lake Erie points. Mr. STRICKLAND.Then you carry what Z Capt. BROWN.Iron ore, coal, and grain. Mr. STRICKLAND.Have you any rcm)llaction respoct,ing the Living- stone Channel Z Capt. BROWN.Yes, sir. Mr. STRICKLAND.What is it 1 Capt. BROWN. passed I through that channel three times last fall. Mr. STRICKLAND.What were your experiences in going through there; did you notice any current? . 84 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. Capt. BROWN.Yes, sir. Mr. SrRIcKLANn. Just, you tell the (:ommission about that. Capt. BROWN.Before passing through that channel I made what inquirios I could withregard to tho cross currents. I hadheard there were cross currents thore. Naturally, 1 got all the information I could.After leaving the rock cut 1 guardedagainst tihe cross currents which exist tkt the hoad of Bois Blanc Island, holding my vessel up to thoeastward. When I got down justabove the gas buoy at the up er end of' Bois Blanc my vessel c,ommenced to drift to the wostwnri. As I saw t.hat I took a range on thc upper end of thecast dike and some otherobjmt to notice how she tiid drift, and I saw thore wos quite a bit of a drift thcre and I starboardoti my wheol and held her up more to tho cast sidc of tho channel. Before I got out of that cross current I: thought my ship was at least two- thirds if not three-quarters of tho way across the channel. She had drifted from three-quarters of the width ot the channel to the eastward to throe-quarters of the width of the channel to the westward. Mr. STRICKLAND.In spite of the fact thatyou had your wheel over? Capt. BROWN.I did not hnvo mv wheel over all the time. 1 put my wheel over long enough to head hcr up and then steady her. Mr. CASGRAIN.That was thefirst timoyou went throughthe Livingstlone Channel '1 Cupt,. BROWN.Yes, sir. Mr. STRICKLAND.Did you have any different experience on other tri s through the channel 8 8apt. BROWN.The next timo 1 wont throughthe channel, I slowed my vssscl down ontering the channel to nmlm a sort of a test movement of it. I slowed her down to r?. slow gaitentering the channel. I didnot !id so much difficulty withregard to cross currents tis T diddown bolow. When 1 got downbelow m was not 20 foot from tho west bank when I got to where t K e cross currant is, going at R slow rnto of spo~d. Mr. STR~ICICLAND.What oxpcricnco did you haveon your third tri down '1 8ayt. BROWN.Tho third time, T nev~rchcclred her at all from the time entered BalIards Reof Channcl till I got out of the Livingstone Channel, and I noticotl a smallerpercontage of drift on that trip than I did beforc, alt,hough thorewas a perceptible drift at that time. Mr. SrRIcKLANI). If, forany mason, your vessel ha,d become disabled or stopped within the channel, could you have anchored ? Capt. BROWN.No, sir. Mr. STRICKLAND.And what would bo the result? Capt. BROWN.The result would be that she would drift against the west bank. Mr. STRICKLAND.Is there any danger !)f havingtrouble in the channel on account oE a fog or storm comlng up '1 Capt. BROWN.Yes; when a fog c.r snowstorm comes up it has to catch you at somo point somewhere, and it is as liable to catsh you there as at any other lace. Mr. STRICKLAND.dm your three trips through tho Livingstone Channel underfavorable weather conditions? , Capt. BROWN.Daylight at all times. Mr. STRICKLAND.And favorableweather ccnditions 'I' Capt. BROWN.Yes, sir. THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 85

Mr. STRICKLAND.Do you ever tow any bttrges aftor your steamer? Capt. BROWN.No, sir. Mr. TAWNEY. How long do you say you have been navigating the Great Lakes? Capt. BROWN.I have been navigating the Great Lakes50 years, 35 years as master. Mr. TAWNEY.You have passed through the Livingstone Channel three times ? Capt. BROWN.Yes, sir. M~:TAwNEY. Based upon yourexperience as master and navigator, is it your judgment that this channel can be not navigated with safety without some means to prevent these cross currents? Cupt. BROWN.It certainly is. Mr. STRICKLAND.What is your opinion as to navigating thatchan- nelunder unfavorable weather conditions and stronger currents; would it he more dangerous Z Capt. BROWN.I should think it would. Mr. STRICKLAND. Arethere ossibilities of weatherand currents that would make it more difficuf t to navigate theLivingstone Channel than when you went through? Capt. BROWN.Yes, sir. Mr. STRICKLAND.Would you describe something of theirchar- acter Z Capt. BROWN. There aretimes when the smoke settles down on that part of the river beyond the sulphite works, and I have seen times when you could not see from one hght to the otheror on a hazy morning. At such times as that it would be hazardous to go down that channel. In fact if I saw those conditions before I started I would not go down. Mr. STRICKLAND.It would make it more difficult to hold the center of the channel '21 Capt. BROWN.Yes. Mr. CASQRAIN.What is the area of the danger sphere in that channel; what is the length of it! Capt. BROWN. The danger sphere is about 2,000 feet. Questioned by Mr. KING: Mr. KING. The first tripdown you were taken somewhat unawares by the curerent '2 Capt. BROWN.Yes, as to the location; I did not know just where the location was. Mr. KING. And on the second trip you were experimenting on a slow speed Z Capt. BROWN.Yes, sir. Mr. KING. And on your third tripdown you had gained such experience that by keeping your boat going at a good speed you were able to overcome the currentall except whatyou call n perceptible current ? Capt. BROWN.Yes. Mr. KING.On your fourth tripdown I suppose you could do better? Ca t. BROWN.I could not do any better, because I was going full speef) with her on the third trip and I could not do any more. Mr. KmG. When you talk about a perceptible drift, how close would that take you to the west bank? 86 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. Ca t. BROWN.I did not getcloser to thewest bank than the middle; I he1iY up to the eltstward more on leaving the dike. I was east of the middle of the channel all the time until I got to the place the cross current strikes and then I got to the middle of the channel. Mr. KING.You did not get west of the middle of the channel? Capt. BROWN.Kot the third trip, because I guarded against that. Mr. KING.You don't know of any accidents that have occurred in the channel ? Capt. BROWN.Only by hearsay and by the news apers. Mr. KING.Was any boat driven up on the west Rank? Ca t. BR.OWN.No; there was a boat driven over so far that she strucR . Mr. KING.Where ? Capt. BROWN.At - the .lower end of the cross current. Mr. KING.Wha,t boat was that? Capt. BROWN.The Ward Ames. Mr. KING.Was that on her first trip ? Capt. BROWN.I do not know anything about it. Mr. KING.Is her master here ? Capt. B~OWN.Not that I know of. Mr. KING.You say it was the Ward Ames ? Capt. BROWN.Yes. Mr. KING.Do you know anything about any defect in her steering gear ? Ca t. BROWN.I never heard. I saw a newspaper article and was told Ey a gentleman here that she struck there. Mi-. CASGRAIN.Was there any investigation in that case? Ca t. BROWN.Not that I know of. All I know about it is what I hearB and I saw a newspaper article at the time. Questioned by Mr. STAIJNTON: Mr. STAUNTON.Is not the real truth that the channelis too narrow ? Capt. BROWN.No; I clo not think that is the real truth. Mr. STAUNTON.It is the straight and narrow way1 Capt. BROWN.Not altogether. Mr. STAUNTON.Do you know of any other channel as narrow as this for such a length 1 Capt. BROWN.Yes, sir. Mr. STAUNTON.Where '1 Capt. BROWN.West of this channel on the Sault River, twice that lo%%. STAUNTON.And no wider ? Capt. BROWN.No. Mr. STAUNTON.Are there anycross currents there Capt. BROWN.No, sir; it is practically in Hay Lakc. Mr. STAUNTON.Are there not some cross currents just abovc the Canadian Canalat the Saultwhere you turn and go over there? Capt. BROWN.Yes, sir; on the Canadian side. Mr. STAUNTON.Where you enter above! Capt. BROWN.Yes, sir. Mr. STAUNTON.Are the cross currents in the Livingstone Channel any greater than they are there? Capt. BROWN.Much reater, you can checkyour vessel down going into the Canadian 8ault at the upper end to a very slow rate, THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 87 barely sheerage, andshe willcome down that channeland won’t drift but very little. Mr. STAUNTON.What do you think the speed of the cross current is here? Capt. BROWN.I have no way of telling, I do not know. iMr. STAUNTON.Do you think it is greater than the speed of the current at the upper endof the Canadian Sault? Capt.BROWN. I know it is bytheaction of my vessel. rn Mr. STAUNTON.In replyto the commission you said thatthe danger zone extendsfor about 2,000 feetover thelength of the Livingstone Channel; do you mean to say there are cross currents for 2,000 feet? Cttpt. BROWN. About that. Mr. STAUNTON.Where do you think they commence? Capt. BROWN. Theycommence a very little above the northend of Bois Blanc Island. Mr. STAUNTON.How far from the end of the cofferdam? Capt. BROWN.I do not know the distance from tho cofferdam to the head of Bois Blanc Island. Mr. STAUNTON.I am told it is 6,000 feet. Ca t. BROWN. Then from theend of the coffekdam to the head of Bois 5lanc Island is 2,000 feet. Mr. STAUNTON.Assuming that is correct, how far is it ? Capt. BROWN.In the neighborhood of 1,000 feet. Mr. STAUNTON.There are nospecial dangers for the first 1,000 feet; but it is in the next 2,000 feet that the danger is? Capt. BROWN.Yes, sir. Qucstioned by Mr. WHITE, K. C.: Mr. WHITE. If that channel were widened as proposed to 450 feet and a dike put along the west side of it, would not that be some guidance in snowstorms and badweather-you would know when you were approaching the west side of the channel, better than you do now ? Capt. BROWN. The current would tell you that. Mr. WHITE. You say that conditions may arise where you can not see from one light to another and you spoke of a snowstorm in the Livingstone Channel; if there was a dike which was raised above the water on the west side of that channel, would it not be a guidance to you, a very special guidance to you in navigating your boat down the channel ? Capt. BROWN.Yes, sir, it would help. Mr. WHITE. And the result of your three trips’ experience going down thechannel is thatby taking roper methods of navigating your boat you were able to get througF, with safety? Capt. BROWN.Yes. Mr. WHITE. You went through safer the last time than the other two times? Capt. BROWN.Yes. Mr. WHITE. You gentlemen who navigateships on theGreat Lakes have a very high reputation for your skill and I know it is deserved; you oftenmeet with difficulties of a similarcharacter? Capt. BROWN.We meet with difficulties with regard to collisions and all that kind of thing. 88 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL.

Mr. WHITE. And you overcome them; that is what you are there "_fort Capt. BROWN.Yes. Mr. WHITE. So that assunling now that this commission should ermission toconstruct this dam to stop this current, you wouldrefuse I:ave no hesitationnext summer in navigating a boat down there ? m Capt. BROWN.I would not go intothat channel under any circumstances, unless the weather was favorable. Mr. WHITE. That is all right; you would not go into the Limekiln Channel unless the weather was favorable. Capt. BROWN.Yes, we go down there often when we can not see but a small distance. Mr. WHITE. That is owing to the width of the channel? Capt. BROWN.Partially so. Mr. WHITE. There arc lights and everything there and it is an old channel, and you know it for all the years you have been navigating the river8 Capt. BROWN.Yes. Mr. WHITE.And theLivingstone Channel is an unknown way and has not that a good deal to do with your objection to entering it or your timidity about entering it and risking your boat, is not that so 1 Capt. BROWN.Yes, sir; I would like to make an explanation with re ard to this right here. Br. WHITE. I am afraitl the explanations you may give will result in prolonging the examination. Capt. BROWN.No, it will give you a true ideaof the matters I have talked about with regard to that channel; it will give my feeling about it and the feeling of others. Mr. WHITE. Never mind the feeling of others; we only want your feeling about it. Capt. BROWN.Mine is the same as the others. Mr. CASQRAIN.What is the velocity of the current at the Limekiln Crossing ? Capt. BROWN. About23 miles to 22 miles per hour, I should say, without knowing positively. Mr. CASQRAIN.Don't you know positively ? Capt. BROWN.No, sir; I do not from any actual tests, I know it is about that. Mr. CASQRAIN.What is the velocity of the current at that partof the Livingstone Channel where there is a dyke on eac,h side? Capt. BROWN.In the neighborhood of 3 miles. Mr. CASQRAIN. Yousay you do not know the velocity of the cross current at th,e lower part of it 1: Capt. BROWN.I do not know tho exact velocity of the cross current, any further than my judgment with regardto the way the boat acted. Mr. STAUNTON.I am not a mariner, but I woultl have thought it would be your business to know. Capt. BROWN.It is not. We have no way of getting the velocity of these currents on board our ships. Mr. DOWELL.Do you experience any difficulty in steering these vessels in shallow water where the keel is near the bottom? THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 89 Capt. BROWN.Yes, sir. Mr. POWELL.Do youexperience difficulty of that kindin the Livingstone Channel1 Capt. BROWN.Not so much in that channel or in any channel where thero is so much water as thereis there; thereis 23 feet of water there. Mr. POWELL.How much is generally under the keel? Capt. BROWN. About4 feet. Mr. POWELL.That would not interfere with the steering? Capt. BROWN.No, not so much. Mr. POWELL.Another qucstion I would like to ask: What is the average rate of speed in running down that channel? Capt. BROWN. The average rateof speed for a bulk freighter would be about from 93 to 10 miles an hour. Mr. MAGRATII. Assuming there were no cmss currents, would you as soon navigatethe Livingstone Channel as the Amherstburg Channcl ? Capt. BROWN.Yes, sir; I would. Mr. MAGRATH.Notwithstanding the fact that the Livingstone Channel is one-half the width of the Amherstburg Channel? Capt. BROWN.Yes, sir; because there is more water antl less bends in it; it is straight. Mr. POWELL.I suppose the difficulty of hugging the eastern bank would be in nasty weather? Capt. BROWN.Yes; anti you are more apt to take a sheer if you ' keetoo close. 8r. POWELL.And thecurrent sending hcr downyou could not come back then 8 Capt. BROWN.No. Mr. POWELL. Looking at this plan, I SCY the first 1,000 feet you speak of, by this chart below the cofferdam, the channel runs to a reef and that would be the reason there is no strong cross current there. We know that the water deepens to about 20 feet antl that is the reason there is a splitting of the stream andone-half going clown the old channel and one-half going down here, and that commences the cross-current. What bothers my mind in respect to this is the narrowing of the channel. If you narrow that channel with an opening of 300 feet, the aperture in the dam would be about 1,000 feet from the new channel. With the water confined, would not thevelocity of that jetbe very great, would it not strike thebow of your vessel as it was going down and make the situation much more dangerous than itis at present ? Capt. BROWN.You would naturally suppose it would. Mr. POWELL.That is what I would suppose from my experience. Capt. BROWN.My idea of the dam there would be not to have an opening in it at all for absolute safety. Mr. POWELL. Youridea is that If there is an opening or an aperture in it at all, it enhances rather than tlecrcases the danger. Capt. BROWN. Youwould naturally think so. Mr.HOUGH. You would sooner have the darn along one side or other of the channel than to havea dam with an openingin it where it is pro osed to be located? Capt. ~ROWN.I certainly would, becausethat would be an absolute stop to thatcross current. (The witness was not further examinkd.) 90 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL.

TESTIMONY OF CAPT. F. A. WEST. Ca t. F. A. WEST, master marinerof St. Clair, Mich., a witness on beha Pf of the United States,being duly sworn, deposed as follows: Questioned by Mr. STRICHLAND: Mr. STRICKLAND.Are you master of a lake vessel? Capt. WEST. Yes. Mr. STRICKLAND.Whtit is her name 1 Capt. WEST. The William G. Muther. Mr. STRICKLAND.What is her tonnage and length? Capt. WEST. Length, 533 feet; beam, 68 feet; molded depth, 32 feet. Mr. STRICKLAND.Between what points do you ply? Capt. WEST. Between all the upper lake ports and Lake Erie. Mr. STRICKLAND.What is the nature of your cargo? Capt. WEST. Iron ore down and coal up. Mr. STRICKLAND. Haveyou been through the Livingstone Channel? Capt. WEST. I have. Mr. STRICKLAND.How rnany times ? Capt. WEST. Once. Mr. STRICKLAND.Just once? Capt. WEST. Yes, sir. Mr. STRICKLAND.At daytime or nighttime! Capt. WEST. Nighttime. Mr. STRICKLAND.What was your experience in going through that channel ? Capt. WEST. I came down that channel about 7 o’clock inthe evening. If it had not been very early in the evening I would not have undertaken to run it atall. The night was clear and in talking over the current in thatchannel with the different masters I had tried to find out what data I could u on the current. I did not check my vessel at all. I told him go fus 1 speed and take that chance rather thantake the chance 0.f drifting. As we gotthrough we passed along down the middle of the channel. I should judge perhaps one- third of the way to Bois Blanc Island I noticed her take to drifting and on account of these blinking lights there was nothing to steer the boat on and we had to steer by the compass. I held her u half down until we asset1 down 2,500 feet, and she then had sagge B past the middle of t e channel. Then I lost the current and continued on without difficulty.E Mr. STRICKLAND.What was the date of that trip? Capt. WEST. About the 12th of November. Mr. STRICKLAND.What were the weather conditions ? Capt. WEST. It was raining, but it was clear. Mr. STRICKLAND.Was there anywind ? Capt. WEST. Not to s eak of. Mr. STRICKLAND.Un Rer more unfavorable weather conditions would the danger be reater from the currents? Capt. WEST. Yes; f would not dare go that speed because I could not see. Mr. STRICKLAND.Have you towed anything through this channel? Capt. WEST. No, sir. THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 91 Mr. STRICKLAND.How about towing through there? Would it be safe ? Capt. WEST. I talked with one of thc masters that took a barge of 4,000 tons anti he said he tiraggetl the black stick all the way down while he was ldtiing to the red stick on the etut side of the bank. Mr. POWELL.Do I understand you correctly to say that the course he was steering and thecourse of the vesscl was over half ft point ? Capt. WEST. Yes. Mr. POWELL.That is not much. Capt. WEST. On my speed of nine anti n hdf you can figure how much it was. Mr. POWELL.Your salvation was putting on a,ll speed ? Capt. WEST. Yes. Mr. POWELL.And you say the danger in nasty weatller is the fear of striking the banks? Ca t. WEST. Yes, because you dare not go at that speed in bad weatR er. Mr. POWELL.The greater the speed the less the effect of the cross - currents on the vessel 'I Capt. WEST. Certainly; you are getting through it quicker. Questioned by Mr. KING: Mr. KING. The only experience you have had in going down the channel is when you went down by compass? Capt. WEST. Exactly, sir; I had nothing else t,o steer by. Mr. KING. It was at night? Capt. WEST. Yes. Mr. KING. And in daytime, under similar weather conditions, the buoys would be visible ? Capt. WEST. Yes. Mr. KING. At nightif the channel were properly lighted the buoys would be visible also ? Capt. WEST.To a better extent than at present. Mr. KING. There would be no flickering lights; if the lights were steady theywould be better. Capt. WEST. They would make a steering mark, certainly. Mr. KING. You would not use your compass? Capt. WEST. I might use it to a certain extent. I could not haad onto the lights. Mr. KING. If the lights had been visible all the time just as much as the buoys would be visible in the daytime, you could have steered by them? Capt. WEST. That would have been a he1 ; yes, sir. Mr. KING. I want to be perfectly fair an$ I want to ask you if it is notthe ractice with you tha,t if both sides of thechannel are clearly marK ed out in a straight line that you rely on these aids to navigation Z Capt. WEST. Yes, sir. - Mr. KING. As to this other vessel that went through whose tow is said to have dragged on the black stick, do you know her rate of speed ? Capt. WEST. She pulls in the Lakes 7 miles an hour. Mr. KINa. And in the channel ? Capt. WEST. He said he was pulling her full speed. 92 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. Mr. KING.Did you see her? Capt. WEST. No, I am speaking from the talk of the ca tain. Mr. KING.Did the captain of this vessel tell you that E imself? Capt. WEST. Yes, sir. Mr. KING.That is the only one you heard of 8 Capt. WEST. I wastalking with a captainlast Frida night regarding taking a large Steel Trust barge down there anc9 he had the same experience he said. Mr. KIA-G.The same experience that you had? Capt. WEST. No, the same experience as the other tow had. Mr. KING.Had he n, tow? Capt. WEST. Yes, sir. Mr. KING.And these are the only tows you have heard of? Capt. WEST.That is all. Questioned by Mr. SOUGH: Mr. HOUGH.You do notknow anything about the lengthof the tow line ‘4 Capt. WEST.No. Mr. HOUGH.And the longer the line she had out the moreshe would sag ? Capt. WEST. Yes, to a certain extent. Mr. HOUGH.It is well known that in a current coming down the Limekiln Crossing a vessel will sag practically three-quarters of the way over in some winds; a towed barge. capt. WEST. Unless the barge is light the wind does not affect the barge. Mr. HOUGH.Well, when a barge is light,do the currents affect it-it is nothing unusual to have a barge sag, and when you meet an occasion when she is liable to sag is It not customary to run with as short a line as ossible? Capt. WEST. Itl Bepends on the barge; that is, the barges will not steer well with a short line, they hare to give them a long line to steer with. Mr. HOUGH.Of course, they steer better with a long he? Capt. WEST. Yes. Mr. HOUGH.They don’t sag RS much with a short line a.s with a long line ? Ca t. WEST.The sag is there.There used to be a rule on the smalQ er barges that the steamer could pull them up, but with these large heavy barges you can not do it; ycu have to depend on the barge doing her own steering to keep up. Mr. KING.Did you talk with the master of this barge that you spoke a.b )ut ? Capt. WEST. No, I talke,d with the master of the steamer. Mr. KING.And you don’t know whether the master of the barge was not doing what he ordinarily docs when he is being towed ‘1 Capt,. WEST. I do not know. MI. KING.You do not know whether he was alive to the current EM ou would be if you were going down ? $apt. WEST. I do not know, but I should judge he would be. Mr. KING.You don’t know whether it was not a sai!or’s yarn? Capt. WEST. A man of our own line was not telling me a sailor’s yarn. THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 93

Mr. POWELL. The tendencyOF the tow is t80sheer? Capt. WEST. If the tow can stay in the center of the channel she generally goes straight. Mr. POWELL.You do notcatch my qucstion-the difficulty in a tow is the sheer, and they lengthen ihe 'line to overcome that"and the tow must depend on that; the ship herself must be kept under steerage way? Capt. WEST. Yes, sir. Mr. POWELL.In respect of these Lghts, of course, anyonewho has been through the mill knows the difficulty; I suppose you have fogs here as they have them 011 the salb water? Capt. WEST. Yes, very often the whole of the river bank is in fog and it does not extend to the land al all. Mr. POWELL.I do nc3t know how far you can see in a fog here, my experience has beenon the ocean; in the case of adense fog, how far can you see a light? Capt. WEST. That would depend on the fog. In the case of a very dense fog, we very often can not see further back than midships on the steamer. Mr. POWELL.Then you would not see a light 100 yards ahead '1 Cant. WEST. No. sir. MiPOWELL. In' the case. of dense fogs what do you do; do you anchor, or do you try to pass? Capt.WEST. If a fog overtakes us before we enter the Ballards Reef, we sto . We have got to wind around in the river; after we enter the Ba ards Reef; we have to take full chances and do the best we can. R Mr. POWELL.You have to run the gauntlet then? Capt. WEST. We have. Mr. WHITE. You don't have to do that if you have a stern anchor? Capt. WEST. I never had one. Mr. WIXITE.A stern anchor is sometimes used. Capt.WEST. They have tried them, If you undertaketo back your steamer, to use a stern anchor, you will have it slewed around the channel and she will beat herself anyway. Mr. WHITE. But a stern anchor is sometlimes used 3 Capt. WEST. Yes; if you get one to hold. There is no anchorage in that channel;it is a rock bottom. (The witness was not further examined.) TESTIMONY OF CAPT. S. C. ALLAN. Ca t. S. C. ALLAN,of Cleveland, Ohio, a witness produced on behaP f of the United States,being duly sworn deposed as follows: Questioned by Mr. STRICKLAND: Mr. STRICKLAND.Are you master of a lake vessel ? Capt. ALLAN.I am master of a modern freight steamer. Mr. STRICKLAND.How long have you been master '1 Capt. ALLAN.Seventeen years. Mr. STRICKLAND.What is the name of your vessel Capt. ALLAN.For the last four years, the 11enr.y H. Rogers. Mr. STRICKLAND.What are her dimensions? Capt. ALLAN. Six hundred feet long, 55 feet beam, 32 feet molded . depth. 94 THE LIVINGSTONE CEANNEL. Mr. STRICKLAND.You have been upthe Amherstburg Channel and down the Livingstone Channel? Capt. ALLAN.I have been up the Amherstburg Channel, but never down theLivingstone Channel. Mr. STRICKLAND.Have you any knowledge of anycurrents in connection with the Livingstone Channel? Capt.ALLAN. As regards the. current you have beenspeaking of here, at the lower end, I have had a great many complaints come to me about the cross currents down at the lower end of the cut. Mr. STRICKLAND.What is your official position in the Lake Car- riers Association ? Capt. ALLAN.I amchairman of thecommittee known asthe committee on aids to navigation. Mr. STRICKLAND. Can you tellus any of these complaints? Ca t. ALLAN.When we meet, we takeu the question of lights and Rc annels and everythinglike that, and Rw en we met inDecember lastthe question of thelighting of theLivingstone Channel and cross currents came up, md the committee found considerable fault with the cross current at the lower end of the cut. Mr. TAWNEY.Was that fault based upon actual experience? Capt.ALLAN. That was byactual experience of some of the masters and hearsayfrom others. Mr. STRICKLAND.What was the nature of these complaints; what were they about ? Capt.ALLAN. I will take it from thestandpoint of thelights; the complaint was that the flickerin light was not a proper light to light the channel, and that a fixed Bght would be better. Then of course there was the complaint down below with regard to the current and that we should have something to do away with that cross current. Mr. POWELL.I suppose they wanted ked rights throughout the channel ? Capt.ALLAN. Yes, theythought that wouldbe muchbetter than any flickering light. The flickering lights were all of the same character, andof course fixed lights would be all of the same character, but they wouldbe much better; red lights on one side and white lights on the other. Mr. STREETER.How many complaints were made, and what were they Z Capt.ALLAN. The committee is composed of 12 masters, representing different kinds of steamers. Mr. STREETER.How manycomplaints were made to the committee in December with reference to the cross currents? Ca t. ALLAN. They were only made at the meeting by the men on t fle committee. Nobody else butthe members of the committee meet there. Mr. STREETER.What were the complaints with reference to the current ? Capt.ALLAN. That the current was heavythere and set across andmade it verydangerous to navigation. Most everythingthat has been said here has been said with re ard to clear weather, but if fogs set in on you after entering the Sivingstone Channel, you would have to go slow and you could not tell where the current was, THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 95 theweather bein thick,and you would have to go slow and you would undoubtedP y ground your steamer. Mr. STREETER.Do youregard these complaints as worthy of consideration or as frivolous Z Capt. ALLAN.Worthy of consideration. Questioned by Mr. KING: Mr. KING.Your commitiee sometimes make recommendations as to the result of complaints such as that? Capt. ALLAN.Yes. Mr. KING.And ou suggest the aid to navigation that you desire? Capt. ALLAN.d do. Mr. KING.Did you make any suggestion in this case '1 Capt. ALLAN.The only suggestion we did make was thebuilding of a dike from the south corner of the east dike over to Bois Blanc Island. Mr. KING.Did you contemplate a 300-foot opening in the middle of that? Capt. ALLAN.Yes. Mr. KING.Have you considered the effect of the current through that opening ? Capt. ALLAN.That is an engineering problem. Mr. KING.It is to some extent a navigation problem; the narrower the opening and the higher the pressure behinI supaose the greater the force ? Capt. ALLAN.I do not know; I should think if you put that there and have a 300-foot opening, whatever current would go there would be thrown straight down. Mr. KING.You think it would flow straight down? Capt. ALLAN.Yes, sir. Mr. KING. Do you know, as a matterof fact, that itsan le of direction would be retty well on to the Livin tone Channel? tan you tell me what angF e the proposed dam wilB make with the Livingstone Channel ? Capt. ALLAN.I can not say. Mr. KING. It won't be at right angles? Capt. ALLAN.No. Mr. KING.It would be a fair1 acute angle? Capt. ALLAN.It would be ro%ably 25O or something like that. Mr. KING.Is it not a factt 1 at a current through the centerof that dam would impinge fairly directly upon the Livingstone Channel? Capt. ALLAN.I can not see it that way. Mr. KING.As to the building of a dike on the west side of the Livintone submerged cut, that wouldbe of material assistance, ' woul It not Capt.P ALLAN.I would not be in favor of that from the fact thatit does not stop that cross current. Your drift would be just the same when J%U are crossing, on1 when you come to the current you drift down on to thatplace to tE e west side. Mr. KING.Is it your opinion that with a dike and ex osed bank along the west side of this submerged cut there would st& be a cross current 1 Capt. ALLAN.You would still get the cross current, only the current would go up against thatdike. (The witness was not further examined.) 96 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. TESTIMONY OF CAPT. F. A.BAILEY. Ca t. F. A. BAILEY,of Vermillion, Ohio, a witness producedon beha ff of the United States,being duly sworn, deposedas follows: Questioned by Mr. STRICKLAND: Mr. STRICKLAND.You are master of a lake vessel? Capt. BAILEY.Yes. Mr. STRICKLAND.What is her name ? Capt. BAILEY.The William E. Corey. Mr. STRICKLAND.What are her dimensions ? Capt. BAILEY.Five hundred and seventy feet long, 56 feet wide, and 31 feet depth. Mr. STRICKLAND.Betwoen what points does she ply! Capt. BAILEY.Head of Lake Superior, Chicago, andLake Erie ports. Mr. STRICKLAND.What freight does she carry! Capt. BAILEY.Iron ore and coal. Mr. STRICKLAKD.Have you had any experience of the Livingstone Channel ? Capt. BAILEY.Yes, sir. Mr. STRICKLAND.Have you been through the channel? Capt. BAILEY.Yes, sir. Mr. STRICKLAND.How many times? Capt. BAILEY.Twice. Mr. STRICKLAND.Night or day ? Capt. BAILEY.Both times in daytime. Mr. STRICKLAND.Describe your first trip through and then your second trip. Capt. BAILEY.I was here on the 19th October and I was the first loaded boat to go through the Livingstone Channel. We proceeded down and when we got through this cut why we took a shoot to the westward. I did not know about the current likc these other fellows, nobody told me about it. I ran over two of the black stakes before I got her up. I did not dare starboard my wheel. I thought I could straiuhten her in the channel by going full speed. I was oing half speez at the timc, The next timeI got down it was 5 o'clocP at night and we had daylight; I would not o down at night. The first time down I wrote our mana er and toldB imI would not take a boatdown there at night and woul 8 not want to do it unless he said go ahead and do it. Mr. STRICKLAND.The second trip down did you notmicethe current? Capt. BAILEY. Oh, yes ; there was the same current, only of course I knew a little more about, it. Mr. STRICKLAND.What is your opinion about towing through that ' channel Z Capt. BAILEY.There was a tow followed us down, but she was well astern and I do not know as to that. I think it would be*quite a pro osition to get a tow down, through there. &. STRICKLAND.Would you consider t'he channel much saferif the current were taken out of it? Capt. BAILEY.Oh, yes; decidedly. THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 97 Mr. TAWNEY.In yourjudgment, based uponyour experience, would it be dangerous to navigate that channel without some rem- edying of the current 3 Capt. BAILEY.I think it is. Questioned by Mr. KING: Mr. KING.The complaint made to your owner was that you would not like to take a boat down at night on account of the drift? Capt. BAILEY.Yes. Mr. KING.You do not say that with reference to taking a boat clown in the daytime? Capt. BAILEY. 1 do IlOt. Mr. KING.And the difference at night is that you are depending on the lights rather t'llan on the stakes? Capt. BAILEY.Well, yes; of course wc will have to depend on the lights at night, but it is the only way we can tell the boat is drifting. Questioned by Mr. WHITE: Mr. WRITE.Did you have any difficulty in getting downthe Liv- ingstone Channel on your second trip8 Capt. BAILEY.No, sir. Mr. WHITE. It was broad daylight and you were able to see the buoys 1 Capt. BAILEY.Yes. Mr. WHITE.And given the same conditions at night with thelights visible, you could have taken the boat down ? Capt. BAILEY.Yes; it would be all right, but that is not the idea. The Idea is this: When we go down there theworst thing we have to contendagainst is fog; fog is the worstthing we are up against. When a fellow goes down there in a fog he has got to depend on his compass, and there isnb man who can steer down there in cross a current with his compass; he can not sce anything; , that is the difficulty you are up against. Mr. WHITE. You would not cnter a cllannol if thcre was a fog? Ca t. BAILEY.Yes; I have entered a channel when a fog was on, and fhavebeen caught in a fog wllon in a clutnnel. Mr. WHITE.You seafaring gentlemen have a pretty good idea of what thc weather is going to be ? Capt,. BAILEY.Yes; but I have been caught a good many times. Mr. WHITE.When yoil are caught you are wrecked; is that the idea ? Capt. BAILEY.Yes; I have been wrecked. Mr. WIIITE. Navigation can not be rendered absolutely free from danger 1 Capt. BAILEY.No. Mr. Wmm. If the channel were widened, would it not be a factor of saf ety ? Capt. BAILEY.It would; in rnancuvering your boat you would have t,hat much more to drift in, but!;ou still would have your cross current. Mr. WHITE.Knowing that tllere is a cross current there and knowing that channel, and knowing the pointwhere the cross current struck the channel, would you not hold your boat up and prepare for it? Capt. BAILEY.Yes; not absolutely, but that is in clear weather. 86342-13-7 98 THE LIVINGSTONE UHANNEL. Mr. WHITE.Would you not do it in any kind of weather? Capt. BAILEY.Yes; but in clear weather you would know what to do and in foggy weather you would not. Mr. WHITE. You have a compass; one of you gentlemen said he steered down wit'h a compass? Ca t. BAILEY.He held up half a point, but I would not need that to kee \er up half a point. Zr. WHITE. Would you not acquire a knowledge of all the details in that channel bygoing through It several times Z Capt. BAILEY.No, sir; youwould not. A wind to the westward means a heavy cross current there. Mr. WHITE. Then I suppose it would be necessary, in order to run the channelwith perfect safety,that there should bewind a shieldput up somewhere Z Capt. BAILEY.Oh, no. Mr. WHITE.You are trying for a water shield in the dike, and I thought you might also want a wind shield; would the wind have the same effect on the swin of your boat from one side to the other? Capt. BAILEY.Not a f oaded boat. Mr. WHITE.I suppose if you wrecked a light boat there it would be nearly as serious as far as impeding navigation is concerned as if you grounded a loaded boat Z Capt. BAILEY.No. Mr. WHITE. The wind does affect a light boat whateverway she is coming ? Capt. BAILEY.It does. Mr. WHITE.And you want to eliminate this danger of the water when you are not caring a rap about the wind; you could get her through no matter how the wind is blowing? Capt. BAILEY.Yes; but we are generally going down this channel loaded. Mr. HOUGH.'You do not navigate the Limekiln Crossing in a fog? Capt. BAILEY.Not if we can help it. Mr. HOUGH.Just the same as in the Livingstone Channel? Capt. BAILEY.Just the same thing. Mr. HOUGH.A dike along the sidewould be quite a material assistance in weatheror fogs when you can not see ? Capt. BAILEY.Yes; it would. Mr. HOUGH.It wouldanswer thesame purpose that this dike would 'c Capt. BAILEY.That I do not know; that is for the engineers. Mr. STRICKLAND.For the United States we close here. EVIDENCE ON BEHALF OF CANADA.

TESTIMONY OF WILLIAM J. STEWART. WILLIAMJ. STEWART,of the city of Ottawa, Ontario, chief of the hydrographic surveys for the Dominion of Canada, a witness, being produced on behalf of Canada, being duly sworn, deposed as follows: Questioned by Mr. MACINNES: Mr. MACINNES.You are chief of tho hydrographic survey of the Dominion of Canada? Mr. STEWART.Yes. Mr. MACINNEB. Howlong have you held that position? Mr. STEWART.Since 1893. Mr. MACINNES. How long haveyou been engaged in hydrographic work 1 Mr. STEWART.Since 1883. MI. MACINNES.It has been part of your duty to make a study of the great waterways systems? Mr. STEWART.Most of the time on the Groat Lakes; yes. Mr. MACINNES.You are also a membw of the International Water- ways Commission ? Mr. STEWART.Yes. Mr. MACINNES. Whenwere you appointed to that position 8 Mr. STEWART.In 1907 or 1908. Mr. MACINNES.In that position pu also had occasion to study these questions as to the waterways. Mr. STEWLRT. Yes. Mr. MACINNES. At the last meetingof this commission, at Wash- ington, I understand you were asked by this honorable court t,o make a report on the questlons which are now before them ? Mr. STEWART.Yes. Mr. MACINNES.And you made the necessary investigations 8 Mr. STEWART.Yes. Mr. MACINNES.And you have prepared your report? Mr. STEWART.Yes. Mr. MACINNEB.Would you give the commission the benefit of that re ort either by oral statementor by reading the material partof it 'a %I-.STEWART. After studying the problem in connection with this Livinptone Channel, I thought it necessary to get a ood deal of data m connection with the levels in the rive:. On t% e Canadian side we have not done much of that work untd the last few years, so that I was compelled to appeal to Col. Patrick for a good many of the records as to the levels of the river. Of course there are a greatmany published tables for the earlier yearsfrom 1860. For the stream measurements we placed a arty in the field in August last, and they were out in the various c Yl annels R, couple of months. 99 100 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. I may say, as Col. Patrick has already stated, that the results of khesc measurement,s agreod wry well indeedwith tho results that 4301. Patrick obtained during the season. In working out t'ho rrsults and arriving at a conclusion as to what had happcnod since t,he work of tho Livingstone Channel started in IWS, whcn thc coli'erdam was put in place, 1 find that the gaugereadings show that the water above the coil'erdam rose quite a bit; but of courso that incrmso in level was carried back through tho St. Clair and in a moderato dcgrce through Lake Huron; tho smaller amount to Lako I-Iuron, bocauso it was notthere lon enough.After the opening of thecoflordm-I think it was compf eted in July---t8hc records for Foptembor show t,hat tho water fell in the Livingstone Channel about t~hirtcon-hundredths of a foot below the record of the mean for tho 48 ycars from 1860 to 1907"that is, taking the rccords previous to any work being done on thc channel. The next quostion came up in connection with the two questions that wcrc submittedto tho commission. Thefirst question started out with tho words: " IJnder all the cirnumstnnccs connected with the navigation of the Livingstone Channel," and I took tbat part of it to mean that I might make an invest,igcA t'ion throughoutthe whole system that, would ho influenced or where anythmg could bo dono that would :rj:Tect aompcnsat~ionworks at theIivmgstonc Channel. That would mcan,Lake Superior lteing shut oiT and Ilake Ontario being shut off; that would mean taking the whole system from thc Niagara Jlivcr to t,he head of Lakc I-lllron and the head of Lake Michigan. Naturally, knowing that thcre was a llcavy diversion at Cil~ivago, I looked into the effect that! was causing at thc livingstone Chtl~rnd, Chicago, as roported in tho r(yort of thcCLlicf of Engineers of t,hcUnitod States Army, was tlltwr or four gears ago drawing owr 7,000 rllhic feet, and as hIr. Livinptonc statctl this morning, :x good many r~l'us .feel that they arc takmg !),OOO fwt or 10,000 fcct at tinws, porilaps not all the time, but at times. ITo~ovor,every drop that is t:~,l<(?n has an offcct on the levctl. Tho permission of the Soc.r-ct,aryof \Vnr allows them at Chicago to take 4,107 feot per sccond, hut, as ihcty are taking 7,000 fect I just figurcd on tlhc 3,000 foct surplus l"hcy :\.rc taking, and I find that at thc head of thr Livingstone (Ihannrl that 3,000 feet would makc :I diifcrtncc of twtwcrn 1 3 and 1 3 in4,cs. . That is to say, it practical1 cquals the amount, of tllc?.lowrrin that has beon occasioned l).y t h'o cutthrough tllr cwfl'crdaru. 'l'f!:~!, is below the mean of thc (18 ycus So tllat, if (%ic*agois comp~llctl to restore that surplus of 3,000 ft?ot, it would compcnsa,i,o for what, has gone out. That is to say, that the levcl for. the 48 years would be restored andthat would form one compcnsating work, If t.1.m Livingstone Channel be opennrd to 450 feet, as is proposed, t,lw loss of level would be very nearly 2 inches, as Col. Patxiclc stated yesterday; I agreewith him in his figures very closrly. If thc channel were opened to 450 feot, tho incrcased loss above tlw prwmt day loss would bo thrce or four hundrotlths of a foot. Mr. STREETER.Do you mean additional! Mr. STEWART.Additional to what is the loss to-da , That is !,o , it would be verynearly 2 inches, and Chicago, being ~nl- eled to close down on the 3,000 feetper second, would restlore getween 1.3 and 1.4, which would leave a compensation to be pro- pided for of about 0.6 of an imh, orvery little over half an inch. THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 101 There wcre other points to be considered in connection with the compensating works. They should be put in at the headof the chain or at thc lo~verend of the chain, as tho hcwl of the chain would be Chicago. So far as levels are concerned, practically Lakes Erie,Huron, and Idichigan are considered onc chain of navigation. Thcy are all connected withoutany canals, and what aflected the one affected tho whole. The restoring of this water at Chicago would benefit the whole lakc systxm in .that may; every lake would bo improved. In that way I considcr that would bo the best compensation we could have. I’lhe other problem that is being studiedby the corps of engincers and also by the International Waterways Commission 1s for asubmerged weir inNiagara River. That is only a study at the prwent time, but it would restore to Lake Eric 6 inches and about 1+ or 2 inches to Lake Huron. It would not do anything like thc same amount of good that l,he return of water at Chicago would do. Oomingbac~lr to Livingst~.JJ~nneland the ro osed dike, it would ram tho water at the head of the channe7r a )out 0.23, but as thooponing of the cofferdam has almady lowered itby 0.13 it would raise the waterto 0.10 orone-tenth of a footabove the mean of the 48 years. It would raise the water at the head of Bois BlancIsland 0.28, andin the Thekiln Crossing 0.37. It would improve that reach considerably. Of course that would raise the water slightly in the Amherstburg Channel, but it would have to bo something less than 0.28, as it would gradually diminish from the head of Bois Blanc Island to the foot. A word asto the curronts. Inthe AmherstburgChannel, our velocitymeasurement last summer gave us a meanvelocity at Amherstburg as 2.8 feet per second, and the estimated velocity with the dike in place would be 3.8 feet. Mr. TAWNEY.What would that be a mile? Mr. STEWART.About 1.9 miles an hour. Mr. TAWNEY.What would be the difference in the velocity? MY. STEWART.The increase in the velocity would be, with the dike in place, to the AmherstburgChannel, 0.4 footper second. That would be pretty nearly 0.3 of a mile, or a little less than one-third of a mile. Mr. TAwNEY. Do these figures correspond with the figures made out by Col. Patrick ? Mr. STEWART. I think the difference we may give the velocity there is a little less than Col. Patrick made. Mr. TAWNEY.You make the increased velocity a little less? hlr. STEWART.A little less. Mr. TAWNEY.But ractically you agree? Mr. STEWART.To at) 1 intents and urposes we agree. Mr. TAWNEY.And you both reac this conclusion from data taken indtbpendently of each other ? R MY.STEWART. Quite independently,I did not see Col. Patrick until Ii’riclay last. ivlr. POWELL.Your calculations were made independently ‘1 l[r. STEWART.Quite independently. hir. MACINNES.Would you be gpod enough to refer to the fi,oures in the memorandum to the Dominlon Government ? Mr. STEWART.There is a table in connection with this report that I will hand in. It shows the effect on the water level of Lake St. 102 THE LIVINGSTONE UHANNEL. Clair and at the head of the Livingstone Channel, due to the diversion of various kinds. Then, as to the effect of the construction of the dike, t,his shows that the opening of the IJvin stone Channel lowered the water 1.56 below that datum or mean f have adopted in my work, and the constructionof the dike will raise the water 2.76 inches; that, is, it would give a surplus of 1.2; that is, one-tenth of a foot.The Chicago diversion, 3,000 feet, meansa lowering of 1.32 inches. That figure isconservative, I think. One-half inch is the difference between the level that would come from the restoration of 3,000 feet at Chicago and the loss that would be sustained by the opening of -the 450-foot c,hannel, so thatthe lacing of thedike in the channel would be a Compensating work Por the diversion at Chicago so far as the Livingston Channel is concerned. (The commission took recess for luncheon.)

AFTER RECESS. The commission met at 2 o’clock I). m., all the members being present. The CHAIRMAN. Gentlemen,we will now proceed with the examination of Mr. Stewart. Mr. MACINNES.Mr. Stewart, when the recess was taken you were dealing with the question of cross currents in your report. Mr. STEWART.I believe I was dealing with the question of compensation. I had not quite finished on that point. I was referring to the conclusions derived regarding the proposition of putting in compensatinw works. I showed that the dlversion at Chicago made xactically &e reduction that has beenfound in the levels at the head of LivingstoneChannel when it was opened last September; that is to say, that the level there is reduced 0.56 inch below the mean of the previous 48 years and that the restoration of 3,000 feet from Chicago would restore about 0.35 inch, leavlng a deficit of 0.2 of an inch. If thechannel were o ened to 450 feet,the deficit would be 0.6 of an inch, a little over fialf an inch. I showed that in dealing with the chain oi lakes, of which the Detroit River is a portion, it is possible to compensate Tor this work in threedifferent ways, by Chicago, bNiagara, and by a dam in the placesuggested. I consider that t e stoppage at Chicago would be of greater benefit to the navigationK of Livingstone Channel from a compensating point of view than either of the others. The CHAIRMAN.Instead of “stoppage,”do you not mean the reduction to the amount that the city of Chicago first obtained, the right to use the waters of Lake Michigan, the four thousand andsome odd second feet ‘2 Mr. STEWART.I am alluding to that, Mr. Chairman. I am alluding t,o the extra quantity they took. The CHAIRMAN.The stoppage then would be the cxccss ovcr and above that amount‘2 Mr. STEWART.Yes. Of course if we could sto the whole of it we would be so much better off, but confining ourse ves to the excess of 3,000 feet, this would restore to Lake Huron quiter a large amountof water. It would improve all thechannels in the St. Clair and THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 103 Detroit Rivers and it would improve conditions in Lake Erie. If the dam be placed in Niagara Riverit will restore about 6 inches to Lake Erie, about 4 inches to Lake St. Clair, and a littleless than 2 inches in LakeHuron; nothing like what the other would.This damat Livingstone Channel is practically a compensating work for the water diverted at Chicago now and it will only benefit the Detroit River, nothing beyond that. Mr. MACINNES.When you say “the water diverted at Chicago ” I presume you mean the excess water to the extent of 3,000 feet? Mr. STEWART.Yes. Mr. MACINNES. Not thewhole excess, but an excess of 3,000 feet;. although theexcess may be more, you are dealing with just3,000 feet. Mr. STEWART.Yes; 11 there is more excess, we would be so much the better off. Mr. POWELL.That is only an assumption, Mr. Stewart. Mr. STEWART.Yes; but I do not think anyone will dispute that there is 3,000 feet at least. Mr.CASGRAIN. How are we to know thatthere are 3,000 feet excess at Chicago ? Mr. STEWART.We can obtain that information from a report published by the Chief of Engineers some two or three years ago. The Chief of Engineersstates that thc information that he has in his office in Chlcago shows that they are using 7,000 feet. It is generally believed among the engineers themselves along the Lakes that the diversion is at times considerably greater than that, and it is not supposed ever to be less than 7,000 feet. As regards the question of cross currents, we have had some measurements taken by floats. These red lines [referring to a map placed before the members of the commission] represent the line taken by the floats. You will notice that until the floats arrive at about 1,600 feet from the cofferdam the trend is practically parallel to the trend of theLivingstone Channel.After thatit gradually gets a cross current that runs more across the channel. The greatest angle of it is about 40’. The CHAIRMAN.Is that deflection to the west in that current about at the point where the deep water begins on the west side of the LivingstoneChannel? The map here shows thatthere is a wide variationin the depth of thewater. CommissionerPowell called attention this morning to the fact that in his judgment the current started just below the shoal and at the point where the deep water began. Mr. STEWART.I think that is just about where it is, Mr. Chairman. In the chart as supplied there 1s marked a big dumping ground to the southeast of the cofferdam, and until a boat arrives clear of that she does not expericnce very much cross current. She has it then at an angle ranging from 20’ to 40°, and she has that for half a mile or a little less. At the upper end of it the cross current is three- quarters of a foot per second. That would bc about half a mile an hour. Of course, that is not half a mile rightstraight across the channel. When youget farther down the velocity is found to be 2.21. That would lx a mile and u half an hour, and the component straight across the channel would be about a mile an Itour. The CHAIRMAN.Do youmean that it would be equivalent to a mile an hour straight across the channel? 104 THE LMNGSTONECHANNEL. llr. STEWART.Yes, sir; rather it would have the same effect. We mean to say thatif n vessel were on the east bank of the channelwhen shc struck the currentantl she held llcr head in the trend of the channel she would rift about three-quarters of the way across the channel. Of course, a vessel may not bold her heat1 that way. I beliove the re ulations allow 10 miles an hour, but I figured on 8 miles an hour. d1en a vessel first strikes the currcnt hcro her bow is first affectetl. It catches her bow first and cnrries it off, and ur~lcssa master is on thc lookout he is apt to be turned over, but from myexperience with the masters on the Great, Lakes, antl I lmvc been serving up here ( uite a longtimo, I believe that if any mc:n can navigate tBhcsewaters t1 ley can. lhey are very capable mcn, very efficient, anti take a grout interest in their work. I can not think that that amount of current is a serious monacc to tl~enavigation of this part of tho river. In the St. Lawrence River, helow Montreal, the Canadian Govern- ment has a ship channel thew about 160 miles long, antl thcy haw* very strong currents, far stronger currrnts than myhere. Some of them are cross currents antl some are with the vessels going down. Whcn you get half-way down the currcnts are sometimes with the vessels and sometimes agtinsthm, but it does not very often happen that we have accidents in tlle St. Lawrence Rivrr. Mr. POWELL.Are not thn stcarncrs going down somctimesbeached or grounded on the banksof tl~echannel 8 Mr. STEWART.Very seldom. I (lo not knowwhen wc havehad the channelbloclred. We havc not had itblocked for some years now. The CHAIRMAN.What is the width of the channel? Mr. STEWART.Ahout 400 feet. Mr. CASGRAIN.It is crooked? Mr. STEWART.It is winding all the way down. It is wider at the turns than it is in the channel. It is perhaps a huntlretl feet, wider at the bends than in the straight portion. That channel down there is navi ated night and thy. Some of tho pilots (lo not like to run at night, iut others do. The CHAIRMAN.How does the tonnngc compare with tho tonnage in the Detroit River? Mr. STEWART.It is not as great. Tho CHAIRMAN.How about the number of vessels ? Mr.STEWART. Theyarc not as ma.ny. Of course,here all the vessels are going in one way; there is no meeting in this part of the river. Mr. KING. Should you not qualify your answer somewhat in that regard, Mr. Stewart 3 Should you not consider the relative proportions of certain of the boats? Mr. STEWART.I do not think any of those boats have the carrying capacity of the boats on the Great Lakes. Mr. KING. I wanted the commission to understand your answer thoroughly. Tho bcam of some of thc boats is greater tlown there. Is that correct! Mr. STEWART.Yes; some of the boats areof greater beam antl they draw more water. They draw 25 feet, but that is a question of the tleptb of the channel. Mr. MACINNES. Whatis your view RS to the effectwhich a widening of this channel from 300 feet to 450 feet would have in respect to this cross current? THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 105

Mr. STEWART.It would give thi veisels a good (leal mor6 room in which tomaneuver. The cross cxrrcnt would still bc: thero, but it wo1:ltl mnlx it less tlangcrous than it is to-clay. I think that in a short timc tl~ccorps of cnginwrs will bo witlcning tdlat cllannel as they hnvo wic!c!lctl n groat rmny others. Mr. 11IAcINms. If it worc witlnnctl to 600 feet, which we untler- sta~ltlwoultl II:LVC 1)cwn tlonc if it lmtl not lmn for tllis qucstion of . conlpcnsation, what then would lw y)ur vicw :IS to this cross anrrent, ? Ah. STewAn.r. The c~urrcnt wo~~ltlstill I)(: thcre, hut thc boats w011ld hnvc more room in which to recover tlwmsclvc~s. 31r. J~ACINNES.Thnn wllnt is thrl tlangcr of tllc cnrrc'nt? Mr. STEWART.'The tlnngcr of accident woultl he lcsscnetl. Mr. MACINNES.If the channel were widened from 300 feet to 450 feet even, what would your view be as to the necessity of this work so far as the cross-current feature is concerned. Mr. STEWART.If the channel were widened there would be far less necessity for it. Mr. MACINNES.Even at it's present width, what is your view as to the necessity or desirability ? Mr. STEWART.I do not think there is altogether a necessity. I do not thinkit is goingto stop the navigation in thc LivingstoneChannel. It would be probably a very nice improvement to have, but it is not a necessity. Mr. MACINNES.That is, even at its mesent width? Mr. STEWART.Even at its present width. Many vessels have gone down there already without accident. If it were a very dangerous place those vessels would not have gone there without meeting with some trouble, and the captains have gone through there in the ve,ry worstmonths of theyear. November is a stormy rnont,h and t'he days are short. In the summer months the storms are not as great and the days are longer. We have only four or five hours of night in May, June,and July, and thc chances of accidentare greatly lessened. Mr. MACINNES.And when the captains become more experienced and have greater knowledge of this particular channel, what then? Mr. STEWART.I think they will go through just the same as they go through all the rest of them. At one time there was a great deal of objectionto navigating the approaches to the Canadian Canal. No vessel captain now hesitates to go through the Canadian Canal at the Soo. Mr. MACINNES.You saysomething in your re ort as to other works which are under consideration and which aP ect the levels of the Great Lakes system, including this articular localit,y. Will you tall the commission what those are an( P what bearing they have on this question ? Mr. STEWART. There are questions of placing submerged weirs in the St. Clair River at various points to back u the water from point to point up there and restor0 the levels of Lag e Huron. Of course, none of these weirswas to do anything below. My opinion is thut none of theseroblems should be solved by itself. If we dealwith this problem tere in the Livingstone Channel we might deal with another one, and so on, and so 011, and one would partly do the work of the other. 106 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL.

' Mr. MACINNES.Do you consider these other matters thatyou have referred toto besurrounding circumstances to a consideration of this matter? Mr. STEWART.Some of themare; the twomain ones arethe Chicago matter and the Niagara matter. Mr. MACINNES.Those you consider to be necessary toa proper consideration of this matter?

Mr. STEWART.I think they" properly - ~ come into a consideration of this matter. Mr. MACINNES.Do you consider them to be surrounding circumstances ? Mr. STEWART.Certainly I do. I neglected to state, in connection with the Niagara matter, that if Lake Erie gets 6 inches and Lake St. Clair gets 4 inches that wouldbe to take 2 inches off the fall between the two lakes. That will reduce the current slightly. Mr. MACINNEB.So if that were done that would affect not merely the question of compensation, but also this alleged danger of cross currents ? Mr. STEWART.It would improve the condition of currents. Mr. MACINNEB.It would cut off a certain amount of the slope? Mr. STEWART.It would cut off art of the slope. Mr. MACINNES.And that woul 2make less current? Mr. STEWART.Yes; the less slope the less current. The CIIAIRMAN.Mr. Stewart, aside from the objection to theconstruction of this dike which you have mentioned with respect to the withdrawal of waterin the Chicago DrainageCanal, what other objections can you see? Mr. STEWART.I do not see the necessity for it. TheCHAIRMAN. That is your own decision. Outside of the discharge at Chicago, which you have said you thought should be considered in the general plan of compensation, your own objection is that it is not necessary. Mr. STEWART. I do not think it is neccssary. Mr. STREETER.Mr. Stewart, there is one matter that I would like to have cleared up. You testified, as I understand it, that Chicago is diverting at least 3,000 second-feet more than it is permitted by the Secretary of War to do. Mr. STEWART.Yes, sir. Mr. STREETER.And you also practically agree, as I understand it, with Col. Patrick, about the cross currents down here going through the Livingstone Channel. Mr. STEWART.The cross currents are there. Mr. STREETER.Now, suppose the 3,000 second-feet being diverted at Chicago should be restored, what effect, if any, would that have onthe existing cross currents now pouringout of Livingstone Channel ? Mr. STEWART.Practically nothing. Mr. STAUNTON.Mr. Stewart, how fast is tho current crossin Liv- ingstone Channel afler it enters the waters of the channel itself ? Mr. STEWART.The stron est current crossing the channel is at a mile an hour; tha' is directP y across. Mr. STAUNTON.Then it would take a smallobject how long to cross the canal on that current, three and a half minutes1 Mr. STEWART.About three and a half minutes. THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 107 Mr. STAUNTON.How lon would it take a ship to pass through tha? current going at the rate oB 7 or 8 miles an hour 1 Mr. STEWART.At 8 miles an hour it would take between three and a half and four minutes. Mr. STAUNTON.So that a ship in order to float the whole distance would have to lie still in the current four minutes, would it not, to drift 300 feet? Mr. STEWART.Yes, but I want to draw your attention to the fact that that current of a mile and a half is not there all the time; that is the greatest current. Mr. STAUNTON.That is the maximum velocity in the channel? Mr. STEWART.That is the maximum velocity in the channel. Mr. KING. Over what area does that maximum velocity extend? Mr. STEWART. About1,000 or 1,200 feet. Mr. STAUNTON.What is the beam of the widest vessel that goes down there; do you know? Mr. STEWART.Sixty-four feet, I believe. Mr. STAUNTON.Do you know how closely a vessel could hug the eastern side of that channel safely? Mr. STEWART.She would want to kee as far off as she could. Mr. STAUNTON.But how close could sK e go? Mr. STEWART. About25 feet. Mr. STAUNTON.If she ke t a straight course, it would take her a cou le of minutes to drift cfown to the other side? $. STEWART. Yes. Mr. STAUNTON.And in some parts of the channel the current is running at the rate of a quarter of a mile an hour ? Mr. STEWART.Yes; it 1s going at that rate. Mr. STAUNTON.In many parts itdoes not get faster thana quarter of a mile an hour? Mr. STEWART.After she strikes the current,it is fully that anyway. Mr. STAUNTON.At thah rate it would take her about 10 mmutes to drift over ‘1‘ Mr. STEWART.There is ver little at a quarter of a mile an hour. Mr. STAUNTON.But it wou9 d take two or three minutes, if she were standing still, to get ovor on to that side. She has a couple of hundred feet sea room, has she not ? Mr. STEWART. She has. Mr. STAUNTON.She will not drift as fast as the current would unim- peded by the vessel ? Mr. STEWART.Yes; unless she is making dlowance for it. Mr. STAUNTON.She makes allowance forit ? Mr. STEWART.Yes; she will make allowance for it. Mr. STAUNTON.What, do you mean by “making allowance for it” ‘4 Mr. STEWART.Altering t,he head of a vessel. From what I know of the captains of the Great Lakes there are not many of them going t,o be caught napping like that. Mr. STAUNTON.You said they were afraid to cross over tothe Canadian So0 Canal on account of the current at the top. Mr. STEWART.That was some years ago. Mr. STAUNTON.Is it not a fact that within seven or eight years ca tains have decidedly objected to going over there? br. STEWART.I do not think so wlthin seven or eight years; it is farther back than that. 108 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. Mr. STAUNTON.I think I know Canadian captains that within the last seven or eight years used to take the American So0 because of the dangers over there. Mr. STEWART.I thinkit is further back than that. I havenot been up there very much within the last seven or eight years. Mr. STAUNTON.They think nothing of it now? Mr. STEWART. They think notchingof it now. Mr. STAUNTON.A capt,ain has a great vessel and a valuable cargo, and perhaps his own position is dependent upon his navigating safely from ort to port, and hedocs not want to subject himself to any posst.*P e risk in the voya.ge. That is about the size of it, is it not? Mr. STEWART.That is about the size of it. Mr. KING.Your floats which were used for the purpose of making up this chart of currents were on the surface of the water? Mr. STEWART.They were poles 10 feet long. Mr. KING. Ten feet under water ? Mr. STEWART.Ten feot under water. Air. KING.Anti they went right across Livingstone Channel? 3lr. STEWART.Right n.cross Livingstone Channel. Mr. KING.The bottom end of the poles did not go down into the exca vatecl cut a Mr. STEWART.They (lit1 not go down to the bottom of the cut. Mr. KING.Your measurements do not cover thecurrents that might llnppen to be in the submerged cut below the banks on each side a hh. STEWART. No. Mr. KING.And a considerable part of anyship goingdown is below the banks oneacll side ? Mr. STEWART.I think so. Mr. KING.So it is quite possible that the effect on the ship would not be at all identical with that on a float which does not enter into stiller waterbelow ? Mr. STEWART.It is quite possible. I think a boat going down there lightis influenced by the currents more than a boat going down loatlod. Mr. KING.A great part of her side would be in the stiller water betwoen the protecting banks ? Mr. STEWART. Ext~r:tly. Mr. KING.So that the efl'ect on the vessel would probably be less than that upon those floats as sl!own there? hlr. STEWART.Probably. Mr. KING.It is proposed, Mr. Stewart, to have a 300-foot opening in tlrc? center of the dam. The current through that opening will be swifter, will it not, than through the broader present opening from the i,.,land to the coffcrtlt~m? Mr. STEWABT.Much greater. Mr. KING.Have you anything to sl~yas to the effect of that current upon vessrtls ? Mr. STEWART.I 9,ny that it is greater, because the construction of the clan1 will raise the wn,ter considerably in the reach between the head of tllc Livingstone Channel n,nd Bois Blanc Island. Mr. KING.The level of the water on the upper sideof the dam will be considerably greater ? THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 109 110 'ITHE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL.

Mr. STEWART. That would depend upon the scope of the investigation. Thc CHAIRMAN.But suppose the commission should conclude that in the interests of navigation it would be advisable to cut off these cross currentsand recommend theconstruction of a dike; in that case would there, in ycmr judgment, be any material objection to thc construction of a dike, other than the general reason which you havc mentioned that compensation should be taken up and considered in a general proposition '1 Mr. STEWART.That is a very diffmlt question to answer, Mr. Chairman. The CHAIRMAN.You have been gathering data with regard to the increase in the uantity of water that will flow down past Amherst- bur as the resu3 t of t,he construction of the dam, have you not '1 Gr. STEWART. Yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN. IIow docs yourdata compare with that which Col. Patrick gave us yesterday as to thc increased quantity of water P Mr. STEWART. The agreementis remarkably close. The CHAIRMAN.Wow does the result gathered from your data as to the increased velocity comparewith theresult shown by Col. Patrick yesterday? Mr. STEWART.Do you mean the computed increased velocity r4 TheCHAIRMAN. Yes; computed from your data. How does that corn are with the computedincreased velocity given by Col. Patrick ? M?. STEWART.My increased velocity is a little less than his, but the difference is immaterial. The CHAIRMAN.In your judgment, would there be any material effect on theproperty on theAmherstburg side due to increased flowage of ice in consequence of the construction of the dam! Mr. STEWART.I would rather say nothing on the ice problem, Mr.Chairman. I havenot seen theAmherstburg Channel at all, and I do not know anything about.ice conditions. The CHAIRMAN.So far as increased velocity in consequence of the construction of the dike and the increased quantity of water is concerned,your calculations and the calculations of Col. Patrickare substantially the same? Mr. STEWART.Yes; I do not think it would injure Amherstburg in the slightest along thtbt line that you spoke of. Mr. CASGRAIN.In the way of increased velocity of the currents, do you mean ? Mr. STEWART.Anything that would hap en in that way I do not think would injure Amherstburg in theslig K test. Col. PATRICK.Mr. Stewart, assuming thatthere were no other diversions, or disregarding other diversions than those being made from the lakes at different points, what do you think would be the loweringimmediately above the Livin stone Channel due simply and solely to the opening of that channe? to the 450 feet? I sim ly ask that question in order to clear up what ma be in a little dout t. I figured it yesterdaas between to 2 incx es. I believed that that would be an ad Bitional lowering. Mr. STEWART.That is, you think 2 inches below the moan of the 48 years would be the lowering, using that as a datum? Col. PATRICK.Yes; but I said that with the 300-foot channel the lowering is practically nothing. THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 111

Mr. STEWART.Very little. Col. PATRICK.So I said th t the o ening to the additional width of I50 feet would robably give an inc Tl and a half or 2 inches. I just wanted toknow w1 ether or not you agree with thatfigure. Mr. STEWART.I think the figure would be 1.9. Col. PATRICK. Thatis close enough. Mr. STEWART.And I stated that Chicago would return about 1.35, leaving us about 0.6. Mr. KING. 1.9 at what point! Col. PATRICK. Just above the LivingstoneChannel ? Mr. KING. Not in the Limekiln Crossing? Col. PATRICK.No; that is a different thing. Mr. STEWART. The LimekilnCrossing would increase it much more. That increase from the construction of a dike would have very little effect on the Livingstone Channel exceptto increase the current. Col. PATRICK.You have already answered the question about the effect of the water going through the 300-foot opening. You stated that when that water reached the Livingstone Channel the current due to it would be impercept,ible. Mr. STEWART.That is my opinion. Mr. MAGRATII. I must admit that I attach a great deal of impor- tanceto any recommendations made by the United States Army engineers. I say that froma knowledge of their record andfrom their methods of investigation, but since this problem was dealt with by the board there has been injected into it a factor which I believe may not havebeen then as fully considered as it is being brought into thelimelight now. You havedoubtless seen thismemorandum which was presented by the counsel for the Dominion Government yesterday morning,in which they refer to an unauthorized anduncon- trolled diversion at Chicago. Now, I am not going to ask you to say anything as to that, but assuming that at some point above Detroit there should happen to be an uncontrolled diversion of water which j, supposed to pass this oint-and I am now dealing with princi- ples-do you think it wouf ct bo wise, from an engineering standpoint to be s ending the taxes of the eople in creating improyements in a channeF out of which there has t:. een taken an undetermined amount of water? I am s eaking now about the general principle.

Mr. STEWART.I?o you mean a diversion by the publicor by~~ private corporations '1 Mr. MAGRATII.It is immaterial to me how the diversion is made, so long as the diversion is taken from a stream that under natural conditions would be flowing past such a given Mr. STEWART.Of course, I think a di Pint*erent answer would be required in a case where a diversion is made by thepublic, than where the diversion is made by the two Governments. Mr. MAGRATH. Can you deal intelligently with engineering prob- lems affecting an improvement in a streamwhen you are in ignorance as to the extent to which that stream is being depleted ? Mr. STEWART.No engineer designing a work can make sure that his work is going to be successful if he does not know the datum to which hehas constructed the work is to remain constant. For example, all the dredging and all the work that has been done in the Livingstone channel has been done to a certain datum, and the engineers expect to geta certain datumof water. Now, if somebody goes 112 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. to work and throughsomcb construction interferes with thelevel of the water, the success of the work is im aired. It is not'efficient. Mr. MAGRATH.Would you not 6e working at sixes and sevens when you are in ignorance as to what may happen above you? Mr. STEWART.Certainly. A €ew ycnrs agowhcn the Welland Canal was under construction it was constructecl to a certain dcpth. Tho water fell, and a few years ai'ter the Chicago diversion was ured ou,t the Canadian Govcrnmcnt sct to work and deepcned the w oh of the 11 )per Wclland Canal, bccausc thcy could not get their 14 fcc:t througi thcrc that tht:y had figured on. The same thing is occurring whcrcvcr dradging is bcing carricd 011. Mr. MAGILATII.In making improvcmcnts on international watera is thereany ttrrangementbetween thetwo Ciovernmcnts whereby such roposetl improvementsarc considcrctl jointly? Of course, I woulcP 'ust as leave ask Col. Patricak these things as you, Mr. Stewart. Mr. ATEWART.Not that I know of. Mr. &hcnil.rII. Then ii not, wouldyou consitlcr that greater cffi- cicncy could bo obtained bySOMO joint consideration by the engincer- in services of both Govcrnmcnts '1 %r. STEWAKT.For thc sake of the taxpayer, I should say yes. Mr. TURNER.In referring to the Chicagopeoplc diverting 3,000 feet of water, you s oke of stopping that as com ensation. Mr. STEWART.I tf link you can prop(dy applytf mt term tocompen- sation. Mr. TURNER.Do you think it is safe to base an engineering conclusion on the proposition that if the pcoplo are stealing water the Governmcnt of tho United States is going to permit that to go on? Mr. STEWART.If the Government of the United States does not permit it to go on, then we will have the condition we want. Mr. TURNER.Do you think it is fair to say that theGovernment of the United States is oing to permit that to go on? Mr. STEWART.If t5 le Government of the United States docs not permit it to go on, then we will have the condition we want; that is exactly the point I want to make. Mr. TURNER.I understood you to say that you thought that we ought not to consider this mattcr without consitlcring all these clues- tionsin conjunction. ilere is anunnuthorized diversion; stealing water thcre, according to the ini'ormation you have. It seems to mc that an internationaltri1)unal considering what ought to be done hcre in the Detroit Rivcr ought not toassume that theGovcrnment of the United States is going to permit that to go on indefinitely. Mr. STEWART.If it is not going on indefinitely, the compensating works are not required. Mr. TURNER. The compensating works wouldbe required if you want to kccp the level up to what it wouldbe il this water were stored, would it not ? Mr. STEWART.The restoration OS thc water would bring the water up to the mcan of the 48 years. Mr. TURNER. Then this Livingstone Channeldepletes that more thanthe natural channel would deplete' it; so you haveto have compensating works, do you not? Mr. STEWART.It has been found thatthe lowering has been occasioned by the opening of the cofferdam, andto this is added the lowering due to the Chicago diversion. In the datum to which . THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 113 both Col. Patrick and myself have referred, the meanof the 48 years, there is very little of the Chicago diversion considered, because they did not commence to take waterio Chicago until 1900, and, of course, the full effect of that was not felt €or uite some t,ime afterwards. Mr. TURNER.Suppose the level of t1 e lake were 2 inches higher than it is now. A certain amount of waterwould come down the Detroit River if not interfered with at all. Now, you cut a channel like the Livingstone Channel; even with the water 2 inches higher, it would draw off the same proportion, would it not, of additional water 2 II' you wanted to prevent it, you would have to have cornpensating works, would you not? Mr. SrrE:wART. We are asked to restorethe level. 1 do nottake it that we are asked to supplymore. There are three ways that the level can be rcstorcd.One way is by stoppin the diversion at Chicago. That will bring the water back to wit 7l in a very small fraction ol what it was. That is what we call in the hkes a mean water, the average stage of the water for 48 hours. It does not seem to me that we are called upon to do any more than that. Mr. TURNER.Bs 1 understand it, compensating works are intended to compensate lor the extra amount of water that is drawn off in that large channel. Now, if we should dig the Livingstone Channel it would deplete it to the extent that it added an area to the space that the water already flows through, would it not? If you wanted to prevent that effect, you would have to have compensating works, would you not Z Mr. STEWART.I mightexplain thatin another wa . The construction of the cofferdam had the effect of raising t e water. It raised thewater there some 5 or 6 inches. If therehad z been no diversion at Chicago that water at thehead of the Livingstone Channel would have been an inch and a third higher than it was. Now, with that condition, if the Livingstone Channel had beenopened then, with no diversion at Chicago, it would have come down to the mean of the 48 years, and there would have been no question of com ensation. It would only have brought theflow down to the mean o P the 48 years. Mr. TURNER.If you wanted to prevent the flow through such a channel as the Livings tone Channel, you would have to build cofferdams to stop the flow in other directions, would you not? Mr. STEWART.A great deal of the compensation has already been done. I thinkpractically all the compensationwas done bythe coff erdam . Mr. TURNER.As I understand it, this weir in Niagara River has been reported against because of its deleterious flow. Mr. STEWART.That was the project for regulatmg thelevel of Lake Erie.That has been reportedagainst. Mr. TIJRNER.How long has this submerged weir been there1 Mr. STEWART.Two or three years. It has absolute1 no influence on the waters below. Once Lake Erie obtains itsleve 9the flow goes on the same as it ever did. It is only the question of the quantity of water that can be stored there in high water. Mr. TURNER.Do you know approximately what that will be? Mr. STEWART.No; that is for theGovernment to determine. It will be reported upon. 86342-1- 114 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. Mr. TURNER.Then it is merely speculation as to what effect that will have on this roject here '1 Mr. STEWART.hy work that is being undertaken must be inves- tigated. When myinvestigations were made as to this matter, in casting about under the terms of the question, under all of the circumstances, the matter led me to look at both ends of things. Mr. TURNER.The terms of this submissionrefer to matters on eitherside of theinternational boundary. Do you callChicago upon either sideZ Mr. STEWART.I think it is most decidedly on one side. Mr. TURNER.Do you think we ought to delay the examination of this question in order to wait until this speculative project in the Niagara River has been determined and reported upon? Mr. STEWART.I think it is a question of making inquiry all along the line as to whether this is the best placc. My opinion is that as a com ensating work it will not do the most good. 38. TURNER.Do you think that this question submits to us the matter of determining an here in the Great Lakes where compensating works can be estabF lshed ? Mr. STEWART.I think it is ossible to put that constructionon that oragraph. I think it wouP d be a misfortuneto tackle the Lakes and io a little bit of work here and a little bit of work at another

sent a special message to Congress advisin the continuance of the appropnation for the Americansectlon of the commission for 18 months, in order to enable thecommission to make its report on ths project, which is, I believe, the construction of a dam at the outlet of LakeErie. Was that the project that youwere discussing a moment ago with Mr. Turner, or was it some other project? Mr. STEWART.That was the roject. Mr. STREETER.Mr. Stewart, funderstoodyou to say that the existence of those cross currents that have been described and that affect shipping through the channel would not be in any degree affected by the restoration of the 3,000 sccond-feet at Chicago. Am I right in that understandin 2 Mr. STEWART.#is; you arc right. Mr. STREETER.If I grasp this matter correctly, TU are thinking of the diversion at Chicago only with reference to t e compensatory features of thisreference. Is that correct? Mr. STEWART.That is correct. THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 115 Mr. RIIACINNES.This question of cross currents which Mr. Streeter has just referredto would be affected, and as I understood, materially lessened, if this work at Chicago were constructed? Mr. STEWART.Certainly. Mr. MACINNES.That work would affect not merely compensation, but tho question of currents '1 Mr. STEWART.It would reduce the current. Mr. STAUNTON.I understood from you, Mr. Stewart,that this Livingstone Channel in itself had not lowered the water above to any perceptible degree. Mr. STEWART.It has not lowered it below the mean of the previous 48 years. Mr. STAUNTON.I do not care about the mean, but has it lowered the water :1 Mr. STEWART.Yes. Mr. STAUNTON. How much has it lowered it '1 Mr. STEWART.Previous to the project being started, before there was any question of the Livingstone Channel, t8he river hada certain slope, a certain level. The cofferdam was ut in there to enable the contractor to cut the channel. That raisei t'he water there about 6 inches. Mr. STAUNTON.It was 6 inches higherafter the cofferdam was put in? Mr. STEWART.Six inches higher. Mr. STAUNTON.It choked the water back to that extent so that it was 6 inches higher? Mr. STEWART. Yes. Mr. STAUNTON.Now, youtook outthe cofferdam. Didthat 6 inches disappear then ? Mr. STEWART.Yes. Mr. STAUNTON.Did an more disa pear? I understood from ou and Col. Yatrick that notK ing more t Fl an the6 inches disappearei Mr. STEWART.That needs a little qualification. The water came down more than 6 inches. Mr. STAUNTON.The rise occasioned bythe introduction of the cofferdam disappeared? That is right, is it not? Mr. STEWART.Yes. Mr. STAUNTON.Did any more than that disappear? Mr. STEWART.Yes. Mr. STAUNTON.How much ? Mr. STEWART.An inch and a half. Mr. STAUNTON.You say that the water was an inch and a half lower all the rest of the season after the cofferdam was taken out? Mr. STEWART.Yes. Mr. STAUNTON.So that it is an inch and a half shallower up there now Z Mr. STEWART.That was our gauge reading in September. Mr. STAUNTON.So it justdropped an inch and a half there. Now, does that affect navi ation Z Would you spend any money to et back that inch anda h& at that place? Suppose you hadto pay for it now; *supposeyou were interested in a. vessel that was golng down there; as a practical commercial pro osltlon would you adyse ourcompan to ut in that dikethere or Pthe purpose of gettmg gack that iqc anif a half of water? 116 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. Mr. STEWART.I would rather let somebody else do it. Mr. STAUNTON.Is it commercially worth while to spend thatmoney to restore that inch and halfa of wator above this Llvingsbono Chan- nel '1 Mr. STEWART.I would have to go to work and figure outthe amount of traffic going t,hrougSh there. I would not like t,o speak on that subject offhand. Mr. STAUNTON.You see 110 commercial value in putting in that dike, do you ! Mr. STEWART.I do not t'hink I would like to recommend it. just now. I do not think it is necessary. Mr. STAUNTON.Then there is no commercial valuo to it. Consid- ering the currents, you do not think it is necessary, because you do not think the currents create a commercial dunger? Mr. STEWART.I do not t'llink theycroate a commercial danger at all. Mr. HOUGII.Did I understand you to say, Mr. Stewart, that in our opinion the increased ice brought into the AmherstburgChannel By this dike would not injure Amherstburg a particle1 Mr. STEWART.I said I would not express any opinion on the ice question, because I have never been theqe. Mr. HOUGH.I thought you said it would not injure Amherstburg at all. Mr. STEWART.I said that the increased velocity would do no harm to Amherstburg. Mr. HOUQH. You did not express anyopinion as to the damage the increased ice might do 1 Mr. STEWART.No. . Mr. POWELL.Have yougiven your opinion asto the increased flow of water that the dam would induce in the branch of the river that flows by Amherstburg? . Mr. STEWART.Oh, yes, Mr. Powell. Mr. POWELL.How much additional do you think it would be in flowage '1 Mr. STEWART.The present flow on September 11 of last year was 66,000, and I estimate 79,000 to 80,000; an increase of about 13,000. Mr. POWELL.What is the current opposite Amherstburg? Mr. STEWART.Last summer it was 2.8 feet per second. That is about 1.9 miles er hour. Mr. POWELL.%hat was it up above, where they propose to erect the dam through that channel? Mr. STEWART.It is somewhero ahout i>hesame; possibly a little bit more. Mi. POWELL.I can not understand t,llat. Look at this map a moment. Call that a watercourse above the island and below the cofferdam. We wiU takea cross section of it. Call thisa watercourse opposite Amherstburg and we will take a cross section of that. This cross section is more than twice that one. It seems to me, Mr. Stewart, that it is going to throw water through there to the extent of 100 to 150 per cent more than runs there at the present time. Mr. STEWART.I do not know how that is explainod. We measured the water down thore last summer. Mr. POWELL.I was just taking your datato-da . You say that the current is about the same through what we ca9 1 the upper water- THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 117 course, that is, between t8he crib or the cofferdam and the island, as it is in the watercourse between Amherstburg and the island. Now, if the watercourse is twice as wide above asit is here, and the average , depth is as I have indicated, then you are throwing that much more on the Amherstburg people. I just happened to notice that in connection with your statement. Mr. STEWART.The velocity through that channelthere, Mr. Powell, bet,ween Bois Blanc Island and the cofferdam] is not at right angles to the flow of t,he stream. Mr. POWELL.That is very true, and I asked Mr. Casgrain to pass me that plan. I measured that with the actual current and got the cross section at right angles to the current, and still it works. That is why I made the allowance of from 100 to 150 per cent. Mr. STEWART.I might sa that when we measuredthe stream there last yearwe got 66,000 Peet per second through theAmherstbur channel, and through the other channel, between Bois Blanc Islan % and the cofferdam, the quantity is 42,000.. Mr. CASQRAIN.Do your figures and Col. Patrick’s figures agree as as to what you are speaking about now? Mr. Stewart. Yes, sir; The CHAIRMAN. The(practically.ata was collected independently of each other ? Mr. STEWART. Absolutelyso. Mr. POWELL.And these calculations were madelast year from actualobservation ? ’ Col. PATRICK.As accurately as it could possibly bemade, Mr. Powell. We worked outthe same result. All the flow that goes down throuh that district does not go throughAmherstburg. A great deal o it is carried in other channels. Mr. STEWART.P If the dike were put ina great deal of the water that goes now between the cofferdam and Bois Blanc Island would flow out of the other channel. Mr. POWELL.The Amherstburg people last August claimed that a very large amountof “field ice” or “cake ice,” which by the current now 1s swept between the lakeWter and that island would be forced down upon them by the current and injure their docks and their vessels. Would that be the effect? If there were ice would that be the result? Mr. STEWART.Now you are askingme to express an opinion on the ice roblem with a new condition there entirely. 8r. HOUQH.Can you tell me how those records are taken? Are they taken on the surface? I mean the records regarding the volume of water that passes down any particular channel. Are they taken in that way andcalculated from the velocity. Mr. STEWART.No; water meters were used. Without plan measurements were taken at three different points, three different depths, two-tenths, six-tenths, and eight-tenths. Mr. I-IOUQH.Then you calculate the difference inthe depth between the two channels; or is your calculation based on just the I surface flow ? As Commissione.rPowell has pointed out, theAmherst- bur channel is a great deal deeper. 8r. STEWART.It is a great deal narrower. Mr. HOUCIH.It is 600 feet wide and a thousand feet wide in one place. a 138 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. Mr. STEWART.At tho point we took the measurement it is 3,000 feet wide. Mr. HouaH. In making your calculations as to the volume did you take into consideration the factof that greater depthof water? Mr. STEWART.Certainly; we got the exact area of the depth of water at that point. Mr. HOUGIX.I suppose the fact remains then that 40 per cent of the water in that channelnow goes west of Bois Blanc Island? Mr. STEWART.Yes. Mr. MAGRATH.At the present time'1 Mr. STEWART.There is 42,000 feet in one channel and 66,000 in theother channel. I might say that the area of the cross-section at Amherstburg is 24,000 at the level we were using last year, and the area of the passage between Bois Blanc Island and thecofferdam is 47,000. One gives a flow of 66,000 feet, the smaller one, and the larger one gives a flow of 42,000 feet. Mr. POWELL.Then, instead of the general flow being the same, you would have to revise your statement, and say that the general flow is only aboutone-half or less ? Mr. STEWART.There is not very much difference. Mr. POWELL.You are mistaken there; it is less than half. Mr. STEWART.That is only the mean velocity for the component at right angles to the line of the section. If you take the regular current going through there on an angle you would get it considerably greater. Mr. POWELL.When you spoke about the current setting at a mile an hour westwardlyacross the river, whatyou meant by thatwas that the present current, according to itscourse, is equivalent to a current setting a mile an hour at right angles to the channel 8 Mr. STEWART.Yes; I mean the current going across the channel at a mile an hour; that is the maximum. Col. PATRIUK.Mr. Stewart, the attorneyasked you a while ago the question as to the amounts of water that wereflowin down now opposite Amherstburg and between the cofferdam anP Bois Blanc Island. Youanswered thatthrough the Amherstburg Channel at resentthere were flowing about 60,000 feetand between Bois !hano Island and the cofferdam about 50,000 feet. Mr. STEWART.That is correct. Col. PATRIUK.Assumin that the dike is put in place, will all of that 40,000 feet thatnow ows above Bois Blanc Island pass Amherst- bur in addition to that nowif passing there? 8r. STEWART. NO. Col. PAT~IUK.Can you tell me about what will be the additional flow by Amherstburg due to thedike, either in cubic feetor percentage 9 Mr. STEWART.13,000 or 14,000 feet. Col. PATRIUK.13,000 or 14,000 only will be the increase? Mr. STEWART.That is all. Col. PATRIUK.That will leave about 30,000 cubic feet to go else- i where.Where will that go? Mr. STEWART.It will be distributed amongst the other channels, Mr. POWELL.Will that o through the gap? Mr. STEWART.A little oP it will go through the gap. THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 119

(Thefollowing paper was submitted tothe commission by Mr. Stewart :) e To the International Joint Cowlmission. GENTLEMEN:I have the holm to submit, as requested by you, the following report upoll the questions concerning the proposed construction of a dike to connect the Stony Island cofferdam with Bois Blanc Island. This report is to be understood as derived from the remlts of the investigations worked out in the annexed memo. In the portion of the river under consideration there were originally four channels. One between Grosse Isle and Michigan. One between Stony Island and Grosse Isle. One between Bois Blanc Island and Stony Island. One between Amherstburg and Bois Blanc Island. In the channelbetweeu Bois I3lanc and Stony Islandshas been constructed a cofferdam and the Iivingstone Channel, and-it is proposed to connect this cofferdam with Bois Blanc Island. Before answering the questions let us look at the reasons for the present condition of affairs. The construction of the cofferdam treated at itshead a fictitious water level nearly 6 inches higher than the mean of the previons 47 years (see Table 3 of the memo.), called normal condition of the river. The opening of the cofferdam in July, 1912, not only removed this high water, but reduced the level of September last to If inches below the above mean or normal condition of the river (see Table 5), or only slightly lower than is occasioned by the 3,000 c. f. s. unauthorized diversion at Chicago. An additional rehson is to be found in the low-water condition of all the lakes and channels caused by the diversion from'Lake Michigan, which aggrevate the reduced level in the stretch of river under consideration. The purpose of the dike is two-fold. First, to restore the levelreduced by the openlng of the Livingstone Channel, or the unauthorized diversion at Chicago; and secondly, to block a cross current through which the Livingstone Channel has been dredged. Careful measurements of discharges through the various channels and computa- tions based upon them show that the dike would restore the abwe mentioned 14 inches and raise the level to It. inches above the normal. It will raise the water 3.4 inches at thehead of Bois Blanc Island, gradually lessening as the foot of the island is reached. The mean velocities through this channelwill be increased from 2.8 feet per second (measured in September, 1912), to 3.2 feet per second computed. The increase In level at the head of the Livin stone Channel would increase the velocity through it slightly, diminish that througi the Limekiln Crossing Channel, and, as shown above, increase that through the Amherstburg Channel, but thechanges are so slight as to be negligible. There 1s no doubt such a dike will cut off the cross current through which the Liv- ingstone Channel has been constructed, but this danger is not very evident because between the 19th of October and the end of navigation 1,227 vessels (57 in one day) passed through without accident, so that its necessity is not very pressing. In view of the narrownern of the channel between the cofferdam and Lake Erie, much of the danger from the cross current could be removed by widening from 300 to 450 feet without at present increasing the opening through the cofferdam. The proposed dike might be a nice improvement to have, yet under all thecircnm- stances surrounding the navigation of the Livingstone Channel and as more efficient means may be found for restoring levels, it is hardly advisable or neceasary. The navigation of the Great Lakes System is free and open for the vessels of both countries. Therefore both are interested, although the extent of such interest varies ' in different localities, and all areaffected by a common danger. The levels at Ballard Reef, as well as in all parts of the Great Lakes below Lake Su erior have been injuriously affected by the diversions at Chicago of, first, 4,107 c. !?s., permitted by the Secretary of War, and second, of about 3,000 c. f. s. unauthorized. As may be seen by Table 15, this latter diversion causes a lowering of levels at the head of Livingstone Channel of 1.32 inches, 80 that the level of last September could have been restored to normal by action at Chicago; There is no guarantee as to the amount of the diversion through the sanitary canal and it is, therefore, imposgble for any body of engineers to construct any work to give the maximum benefit-for instance, a work is designed and constructed upon a

c 120 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL.

definite plan or to a definite datum. As soon as it is completed some community cornea along and divertsa large quant,ity of the watcr, reducing thelevels and destroy- ing its efficiency. Therefor,?, whilst thcsc divc,wions continue the undersigned believrs thatit is ina.d- visable to deal with the prohlcm of holding up la,lre levels by small works here and thew. It, is undrr cor.sid:!rat,ion to place varioua submcrgcd wpirs in the St. Clair River to repair da.mage caused by this private corporation; works, the cost of which the general public should not be dlrd upon to bear. In addition to this, two bodicq one int,crnational,arc studying the possibility and effect of a submc’rg-d wcir iu th? Niagara Rivcr. It is brlievcd that such a work can be so designed and conrrtructod as to raise t,he mean level of Lake Erie 6 inches. It would, therefore, morc than reslore to Limekiln (Irossing and Ballard Reef the water that it has lost by thecut,ting of the Livingstone Ch:umel, and it would to mme extent reduce the cross currcnt,. It, therefore, appears that what compensation is required can be effected in two other ways, both or which will render to the citizvns of the two countrirs far greater benefits than this smell work that roncernRth:? Iktroit River only: First, to cease divcrting watcr at Chicago will confer a heavy boon to all tlw lake interests between Lake Superior and the Atlantic Ocean. Secondly, the construction of a submerged weir in th. Niagara River will give 6 inches more watrr to wrry harbor in Lake Erie and the Welland Canal and at least 4 inches to the Detroit River.

MEMORANDUM ON THE LIVINGSTONECHANNEL. The following questions relating to the improvement for the purpose of navigation of the Livingstone and other channels in theDetroit River, have been referred to the Zntrrnational Joint Commission for investigation and report: (1) Under all the cirrumstances and conditions surrounding the navigation and othcr USFB of the Livingstone a,nd other channels in the Detroit River on either side of the international boundary,is the Prection of my dike or other compensatory work dccmed necessary or desirable for the improvement or safety of navigation at or in t,he vicinity of Bois Blanc Island inconnection with rock excavation and dredging in Livingstone Channel authorized by the river and harbor act of June 20, 1910 (36 Stats., 655), and described in House Document 676, Sixty-first Congress, second amion, sundry civil act of June 25, 1910 (36 Stats., 729), sundry civil act of March 4, 1911 (36 Stats., 1405), of the United States, and now being carried out by theGov- ernment of the United States. (2) If in answer to Question (1) any dike or other compensatory works are found to be necessary or desirable, will the work or works proposed b the United States and provided for in the river and harbor act of June 25, 1910 (36 itats., 655), and located eo far as to connect the north end of Bois nlanc Island to the southeast end of the existing cofferdam on the ea&side of Livingstone Channel, opposite and below Stony Island, be sufficient for the purpose, and if not what additionalor other dikes or compensatory works should be constructed and where should they be located in order to serve most advantageously the interests involved on both sides of the international boundary. To answer the two questions submitted to the International Joint Commission on the subject of the Livmgstone Channel it was necessary to study the gauge readings at St. Clair Flats Canal, Mamajuds light, Ouellettes boat house, Limekiln Crossing, and Amherstburg, for the following periods: (1) Previous to the commencement of the im rovements in connection with the construction of the Livingstone Channel.For $is period, 1860-1907, the tables in the report of t,hc International Waterways Commission on the regulation of Lake Erie and TableIX in thereport of the Chief of Engineers U. S. Army, Appendix EEE, 1904. j2) Whilst the cofferdam was in place and closed 1909-1911. These records were obtained from the office of the U. S. Corps of En ineera at Detroit. (3) After the openin of the channel in Juneor hly, 1912. These recorda were also obtained from the U. 8. Corps of Engineers at Detroit. For the gauge records, self recording gauges were used at the main points, buL staff gauges were employed at the various measurement sections. I. Table of elevation of Lake St. Clair at Flats, 1860-1907. 11. Table of elevations of Lake St. Clair at Windmill Point, 1860-1907. 111. Table of elevations of Lake St. Clair at Amherstburg, 1860-1907. IV. Table IX, p. 4083, Report of Chief of Engineers, U. S. Army, 1904. V. Table of elevation8 of Lake St. Clair at Flats, 1908-1912. THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 121

VI. Table of elevations of Lake St. Clair at Windmill Point, 1908-1912, VII. Tablc of elevations ofT&e St. Clair at Mamajuda, broken periods. VIII. Table of elcvations of Lake St. Clair at Oucllcttrs, 1909-1912. IX. Tabk of elcvations of Lake St. (Yair at Limekiln Crossing, 1909-1912. X. Table of clcvalions of Lake St. Clair ai, Amherstburg, 1908-1912. (4) 111 addition to thcsc valuablc records, it. was nm:sg:u-y to obtain m(1asurements for discharges through thc various channclti in lhe vicinity of t~hc cut. Thcw were obtained in August a,ud Septamber by Mr. Douglas Ellis of the Scbool of MineP, Kingston,Ontario, actingunder instauct,ions from t,he CanadianHydrographic Survey. For the stream measurements two Haskcll meters wcrc used and carefully rakd. (5) A report hy Assistant Engineer Charles Y. Dixon to Lieut. Col. Townsend and publishedin House Document No. 678, Sixty-first ('ongress, second zession, states that between April 24, 1909, and July 23 gauges were maintained and simultaneous readings obtained at Mamajnda, Gibraltar, Grosse Isle, and Amherstburg, and the following relationships established: Fall from Mamajuda to Gibraltar 1.35 feet. Fall from Grosse Isle to Amherstburg 0.22 feet. During the various periods mentioned above the level of Lake Erie varied considerably, as did also the slope from Lake St. Clair to Lake Erie, so that it became neccsyary to reduce all means to a datum. For this purpose the mean level of Lake Erie atAmherstburg, 572.84, and themean fall of St. (lair Flats Canal to Amherstburg, 2.84 feet, for the period 1860-1907, were selected and all levels and slopes adjusted to thenl. The discharge measurements were reduced to the mean condit,ion for September, 1912, when it was thought the river would have settled into a steady condition after the opening of tbe Livlngst,one Channel. In studying the probable condition of the river with the proposed dike in place, the levels were solved for a.nd afterwards adjustedto the datumadopted aboveAmherst- burg. The mean levels of the various gauges in Detroit River for the period 1880-1907 were: TABLEI. Lake Erie...... 572.60 -4mherstburg ...... 572.84 Head of Amherstburg Channel...... 573.00 Limekiln Crossing...... 573.24 Ouellettes...... 573.80 Mamajuda...... 574.27 Salt Works...... 574.51 Windmill Point...... 575.40 St. Clair Flats...... 575.68 The cofferdam was completed in 1908 and closed until June, 1912. The readings of the gauges for these years were: TABLE11.

1909 1910 1911 Mean.

Amherstburg...... 571.56 572.39572.33 572.73 Limekiln Crossing...... 573.15 672.81 572.33 572.77 Ouellcttes...... 573.91 573.55 573.07 573.51 Mamajuda...... 574.28 573.95 573.90 673.46 Windmill Point...... 574.00 574.72574.58 574.96 St. Clair Flats...... 575.32 575.10 574.54 574.99 - ~" To make any comparison the following adjustments must be made: (1) The increase made necessary by raising the Amherstburg level from 572.33 to 572.84, the standard ado ted. (2) The increase to ax levels above Amherstburg to adopt the standard slope of 2.84 feet, St. Clair Flats to Amherstburg. (3) The backwaters to all levels above Ouellettes occasioned by the water being raised at that point by the construction of the cofferdam. The backwater rise m Lake St. Clair for a rise of 1 foot in Lake Erie duringa natural mean flow of the Detroit River is 0.61 foot (see par. 121 of appendix to report Inter- national Waterways Commission on regulation of Lake Erie). 122 THE LIVINOSTONE CHANNEL.

The backwater rise at Ouellettes for 1 foot in Lake Erie and0.61 in St.Clair is 0.86 foot, and thebackwater in Lake St.Clair is 71 per cent of this. Therefore under normal conditions of lake level and river slope and discharge the means of 1909, 1910, 1911 become: TABLE111. Lake Erie...... 572.60 Amherstburg...... 572.84 Limekiln Crossing...... 573.37 Ouellettes...... 574.25 Mamajuda ...... 574.67 Salt Works...... 574.90 Windmill Point ...... 575.72 St. Clair Flats ...... 576.00 showing (compare Tables 1 and 3) that the construction of the cofferdam raised the water at thehead of it (Ouellettes) above the mean of 1860-1907, 0.45 foot, at St.Clair Flats 0.32 foot, and at Limekiln Crossing 0.13 foot. The Livingstone Channel was opened about 300 feet in July,1912, and thefollowing condition recorded for September, 1912: TABLEIV. Lake Erie...... 572.50 Amherstbug...... 572.74 Limekiln Crossing...... 573.18 Ouellettes...... 573.59 Mamajuda...... 574.02 Windmill Point...... 575.18 St. Clair Flats...... 575.55 By adjustment to the standardlevel of Lake Erie and the standardslope of St. Clair Flats to Amherstburg this becomes- TABLEV. Lake Erie...... 572.60 Amherstbur ...... 572.84 Head Channel..of Amkir%burg ...... 573.00 Limekiln Crossing...... 573.27 Ouellettes...... 573.67 Mamajuda ...... 574.11 Salt Works...... 574.32 W indm ill Point.. Windmill ...... 575.21 St. Clair Flats...... 575.59 showin (compare Tables 3 and 5) that in September after the channel WM opened and Late St.Clair might be expected to have settleddown to the new conditions, as compared with the levels of the mean of years 1909, 1910, 1911, the water fell: 0.11 at Limekiln Crossing. 0.59 at Ouellettes. 0.57 at Mamajuda. 0.40 at St.Clair Flats. Compared (see Tables 1 and 5) with themean of the period 1860-1907, the water fell: 0.13 at Ouellettes. 0.12 at St.Clair Flats. and was actually higher by 0.02 at Limekiln Crossing. Using the fall St. Clair Flats to Amherstburg m a datum, the following table shows the changes to the various important gauges on the river during the various periods under consideration: TABLEVI.

Fall. 1 yz 1 1909. 1 1910. I 1911. "-1-1- "-1-1- at. Clair Flats to Amherstburg...... St. Clair Flats to Ouellettes...... St. Clair Flats to Limekiln Crossing...... THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 123

It is to benoted that whilst the relation of the fall St. Clair Flats to LimekilnCrossing to that of St. Clair Flats to Amherstburg remained nearly constant, that of St. Clair Flats to Ouellettes was changed materially whilst the cofferdam was in place and returned almost to its old relation after the channel was opened. Discharges were measured in August and September, 1912, by theCanadian Hydro- graphic Survey in thefollowing localities: 1. Trenton section, near the bridge connecting Grosse Isle with the mainland. 2. Stoney section, near the bridge connecting Grosse Isle with Stoney Island. 3. Livingstone Channel, near the middle of the cofferdam. 4. Across Limekiln Crossing & Gordon. 5. Across Amherstburg Channel, just below the waterworks. 6. Across channel between Bois Blanc and thecofferdam. Four measurements were made at each section from which the value of the coeffi- cient for that section was determined and then thedischarge for the mean September condition of lake and river computed. In Trenton section “C” was found to be...... 71.2 In Stoneysection “C” was found to be...... 81.1 In Livingstone section “C” was found to be...... 77.2 In Limekiln Crossin C” was found to be...... 81.7 In Amherstb,urg “C B’ was“ found to be...... 76.4 In Bois Blanc cofferdam “C” was found to be...... 30.3 For the condition of river as given in Table IVfor September, 1912, the discharges were computed to be: TABLEVII. c. f. s. TrentonChannel...... 45,600 StoneyChannel...... 13,200 Livingstone Channel ...... 38,260 Limekiln Crossing...... 108,000 205,000 Amherstburg ...... 66,000 Bois Blanc cofferdam ...... 42,000 108,000 It is roposed to close the Boie Blanc cofferdam channel except for an opening 300 feet wixe through which 16,000 cubic feet per second will pass. This leaves 26,000 cubic feetper second to be taken careof by the otherchannela. The effect of this will be toincrease the water level at thehead of the Amherstburg Channel to give the additional cross section required to paas the extra water. A careful com utation of the newcondition shows that to meet the contingency the water levels angflows must be: TABLEVIII. - Foot of Amherstburg Channel...... 572.69 Amherstbur gauge ...... 572.74 Head of Amierstburg Channel...... 573.10 Limekiln Crossing...... 573.43 Ouellettee...... 573.80 TABLE IX. Discharges throughchannels of the Detroit River, Amherstburg gauge 572.74, Ouellettes 573.80: c. f. s. Trenton Channel...... 48,800 Stoney Channel...... 15,900 Livingstone Channel ...... 45,000 Limekiln Crossing...... 95,300 205,000 AmherstburgChannel...... ’19,300 Gap in dike ...... 16,000 95,300 124 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. From the measured discharges in the Amherstburg Channel the value of "C" was com uted as 83.8. Aijusting these levels in Table VI11 to standard. theyshould read: TABLEX . Lake Erie...... 572.60 Amherstbur gauge ...... 572.84 Head of Amierstburg Channel ...... 573.28 Limekiln Crossing...... 673.61 Ouellettes ...... 573.90 Mamajuda ...... 574.38 Salt Works ...... 574.62 Windmill Point ...... 575.47 St. Clair Flats ...... 576.75 Showing that the construction of the dike as roposed with the present Livingstone Channel will raise the water above the levelof Eeptember, 1912: At Lake St . Clair ...... 0.18 At Ouellet.tes boathouse (head of channel) ...... 0.23 dt Limekiln Crossing ...... 0.34 At head of AmherstburgChannel ...... 0.28 It will raive it above the mean of the years 1860-1907: At Lake St. Clair ...... 0.07 At Ouelletes ...... 0.10 At Limekiln Crossing...... 0.37 At head of Amherstburg Channel ...... 0.28 VELOCITIES OBSERVED AND COMPUTED . The following mean velocities were measured in the various channels during Sep- tember. 1912. and alongside these are tabulated those expected if the dike be built: TABLEXI .

Computed Measured mean mean velocity velocity. with dike built .

_____ "" __"__ ._ Ft ,per see Ft.per see . Trenton...... 1.670 1.790 Stoney ...... 1.826 2.194 Limekiln Crossing...... 2.617 2.190 Livingstone (in cut)...... 3.151 3.761 Livingstone, through cofferdam...... 3.709 ...... Livingstone 450-foot chamel ...... 3.600 3.800 Amherstburg (op osite town) ...... 2.815 3.250 At head Amherstgurg Channel...... 2.m 2.920 At foot Amhentburg Channel ...... 2.540 3.000

The various regimens of the river may seen be in thefollowing table: TABLEXI1 .

Qaugc. 0 .f .s . .______.__ - . .. St. Clair Flats...... 576.00 575.88 575.75 575.59575.76 575.79 Windmill Point...... 575.72 575.40 575.47 575.21 575.41 575.48 Salt Works...... 574.51 574.90 574.32 574.60 574.50 574.61 Mamajuda ...... 674.67 574.27574.11 574.36 574.37 574.28 Ouellettes...... 673.89 573.67573.91 574.25573.83 573.80 Limekiln Crossing...... 573.24 573.37 573.27 573.52 573.44 573.48 Head Amhertsburg Channel...... 573.00 ...... 573.20 573.00573.20 673.16 Amherstburg...... 572.84 572.84 572.84 572.84 673.01 572.84

It ia b be noticed that the readings at Ouellettes show the greatest changes . THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 125

CROSS CURRENTS. Observations taken in September, 1912, with floats and rods 10 feet long show that cross currents from the Limekiln Crossing Channel strike the Livingstone Channel cut at about 1,600 feet south of the cofferdam at an angle of 25" with the cut and a velocity of half a mile an hour; that this current altersIts direction to 40" 1,600 feet farther south and velocity to 13 miles (p.r hour, and as it approaches Bois Blanc Island the velocity increases slightly an alters direction to more nearly conform to the trend of the cut. The regulations governing the navigation of the Detroit River limit the speed here to 8 mile; per hou; over the bottom, ind most vessels will be compelled tdmaintain this for steerage way. That is to say, a vesael will be exposed to this cross current during half a mile of her passage, or for four minutes at most. During this timeif she were exposed to the fulleffect of the maximum currebt and didnothing to counteract the effect except keep the vessel heading directly in the channel, she would drift 250 feet at most. It is to be noted, however, that when a vessel first strikes this current the bow is liable to be carried with the current, and if this tendency to swing be not quickly connteracted she will be on the other bank. With roper marking and the usual careful and intelli ent handling that vessels on the &eat Lakes receive, this cross current isno worse tian many others, a8 in the St. Mary and St. Lawrence Rivers. With the dike inplace, the velocity through the 300-foot gap will be about 3 miles per hour. At the edge of the channel the worst that could ha pen would be if the water from the gap reaches it in a trough 300 feet wide when tie velocity would be 1) miles per hour. After passing through the ga however, the water spreads out, and when it reaches the edge of the channel the velkity will be imperceptlble.

LIVINQBTONE CHANNEL OPENED TO FULL 450 FEET. The area of the cross section through the openin in the cofferdam is 10,300 square feet, withwater surface at 573.25, but if opened tok11450 feet the are&of the opening will be 12,200 square feet. The discharge under same slope will increase from 38,200 cubic feet per second to 44,000 cubic feet persecond. Thus, if the cuts in thecofferdam were to be suddenly opened to 450 feet, the dis- charee in thesection of the river would be increased 5.800 cubic feet Der second and the Gater would fall at Ouellettes 0.03 foot-an inappreciable amount.'

DIKEIN TRENTON CHANNEL. Table VI11 shows that the cloing of the Bois Blanc Channel .in September last would have raised the water at Ouellettes to 573.83, and Table IX glves the dlacharges at this level. The discharge through the Limekiln Crossing section at this same level and with no dike will be 115,000 cubic feet per second, or a total of 178,100 fqr the three channels east of Grosse Isle. Therefore, 27,000 cubic feet per second w~llbe left for the Trenton Channel, and the following would be the new levels: TABLE XIII. Amherstburg...... 572.84 Head Amherstburg Channel ...... 573.20 Limekiln Crossing...... 573.48 Ouellettes boathouse...... 573.91 Mamajuda Lighthouse...... 574.37 If, therefore, a dam or dike between some of the islands at the foot of the Trenton Channel be constructed to shut off a flow of 22,700 cubic feet per second, thv river will be in practically thesame condition as if the proposed dike were to be bulk. 126 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL . TABLEX1V.-Efect of the various works on water levels of" Lake St. Clair .

~ "" "" ...... _" ..... -. I Condition of water levels . Cause. At high At low watcr . water .

...... Inches. Inches. Opening of Livingstone Channel. lowers...... 0.184 0 .x4 0.84 1 000c . f . s . diversion at Chicago ...... 53 .55 .62 $OOO c . f . s . diversion at Chicago ...... 1.07 1 .09 1.23 3, 000 c . f . s . diversion at Chicago ...... i- 1. DO 1. ti4 1.85 4, 000 c . f . s. diversion at Chicago ...... 2 . 13 2.18 2.46 5 000 c . f .s . diversion at Chicago ....?...... 2.68 2.73 3.08 . 6:OOO c . f s . diversion at Chicago ...... 3.20 3.28 3.70 7, 000 c . f . s . diversion at Chicago ...... 3.73 3.82 4.31 8,OOO c . f . s . diversion at Chicago ...... 4.26 4.37 4.93 9,OOO c . f . s . diversion at Chicago ...... 4 .x0 4.91 5.54 IO, 000 c . f . s. diversion at Chicago ...... 5.33 3.46 ti .16 12,000~. f . s . diversion at Chicago ...... 6.40 ti . 56 7.39 14, OOO c . f . s. diversion at Chicago ...... 7.47 7.64 8.62 Construction of the dlke will raise levcl abovc low water occasioned by opening channel, lowers...... 1.08 1.08 1.08 Closing of cofferdam in 1908 raised water above meanof 1860-1907, lowers. 3.84 3.84 3 .a4

Effect of various works on water levels at head of Livingstone Channel: TABLEXV .

1 Condition of water levels . "...... Cause. At high 4t mean At low water . water . water .

" Inches . Inches. Inches . Livingstone Channel lowers 1.56 Omnine... lowers Channel of Livingstone ...... 1 1.56 1.66 1.000 c . f . s . diversion at Chicago ...... 40 .44 .62 2. 000 c . f . s. diversion at Chicago ...... 40 .88 1.04 3. 000 c . f . s . diversion at Chicago ...... 1.20 1.32 1.68 4. 000 c . f . s . diversion at Chicago ...... 1.56 1.76 2.10 4. 167 c . f . s . diversion at Chicago ...... 1.72 1.83 2.20 5. OOO c . f . s . diversion at Chicago ...... 2.05 2.20 2.60 6 000 c . f . s. diversion at Chicago ...... 2.46 2.64 3.16 7:OOO c . 1. s . diversion at Chicago ...... 2.86 3.08 3.70 8.000 c . f . s . diversion at Chicaeo ...... 3.27 3.50 4.20 9;ooO c . f . s. diversion at Chicaio. 1 ...... 3.70 3.96 4.74 10,000 c . f . s. diversion at Chicago ...... 4.10 4.40 5.20 12 OOO c . f . s . diversion at Chicago ...... 4.92 5.28 6.32 14:WO c . 1. s. diversion at Chicap...... 5.72 6.16 7.40 Construction of dike will raiselove above low water occasioned bvoDen- ing of Livingstone Channel ...... 2.76 2.76 2.76 Closmg of cofferdam in 1908 raised levcl above mean water of 1860-1907.... 1 5.40 5.40 6.40

Therefore if the Chicago divorsion had been held to the amount of the permit the gauge readings (adjusted) for September. 1912. would be: TABLEXVI . Lake Erie ...... 572.77 Amherstburg ...... 573.01 Head of Amherutburg Channel ...... 573.16 T, irnekiln Crossing ...... 573.41 Ouellettes ...... 573.83 Mamajuda ...... 574.28 Salt works ...... 574.50 Windmill Point ...... 575.41 St. Clair Flats ...... 575.79 During the Beason of 1912 of 242 days, 25,238 veseels passed throughLimekiln Crossing, and between the 19th of October and theclose of the navigation season 1,227 vessels passed through Livingstone Channel, making a grand total of 26, 465 through THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 127

DetroitRiver, or an average of 1 vessel each 13+ minutes. The tonnagethrough Detroit River was 95,000,000, each veseel carrying an average load of 3,590 ton. The largest number of vesaels passing in any one day through Limekiln Crossing was 153. On the 7th of November 57 vessels passed through Liivingstone Channel. To show that Limekiln Crossing is not the controlling factor in the navigation of the Great Lakes system, it may be pointed out, that the following depths at the Poe Lock and Limekiln Crossing pertained during theyear 1912:

1 Lock.I'oe 1 LimekilnCrossing. A ril ...... 17.'65 20.6 ...... 17.97 21 June.dy.::: ...... 18.42 21.1 July ...... 18. -59 21 August...... 18.79 21 September...... 19.04 21 October...... 1%8X 20.5 November...... 18.81 20.1 December 1-16...... 18.81 19.8

TESTIMONY OF COL. HENRY J. LAMB. Col. Henry J. Lamb, district engineer of the department of public works of Canada, called on behalf of the Dominion of Canada, after having been first duly sworn, testified as follows: The CHAIRMAN. Where do youreside, Col. Lamb ? Col. LAMB.Windsor, Ontario. Mr. MACINNEB.You are a civil engineer 1 Col. LAMB.Yes. Mr. MACINNES. And you arean officer of the public works department of the Dominion of Canada ? Col. LAMB.Yes. Mr. MACINNES. And you arethe resident engineer of that district at Windsor, I understand ? Col. LAMB.The district engineer. Mr. MACINNEB. How long have youfilled that position ? Col. LAMB. Seven and ahalf years. Mr. MACINNEB.And you are familiar with the conditions of the channels and levels of the waterways'1 Col. LAMB.Fairly familiar. Mr. MACINNEB.As to this particular locality, have you made a special study of it? Col. LAMB.Yes. Mr. MACINNES.In dealing with c'ertain uestions that have been submitted to this commission, I understan 1that you were asked to make a report. Have you made such a report 1 Col. LAMB.I have; yes, sir. Mr. MACINNES.Would you ive the commission the benefit of it? Col. LAMB.I was instructed %y the chief of engineers of the public works department several monthsago to report on this matterwhich is now before the commission, particularly with regard to the two questions involved. I subsequently discovered that it was necessary tosecure considerable data. I foundthen, also, that Mr. Stewart, the chief hydrographer of the Dominion, had been instructed to make a somewhat similar report. We joined forces and arranged with the engineer employed to secure the data forMr. Stewart to also furnish 128 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. me with the data from which we could make our calculations and subsequently submit our report. An arrangement was also entered into with the district engineer at Detroit whereby we undertook to interchangedata secured, and he verykindly furnished me with levels which could not be obtained by our department in the time available, also with levels for past periods which he possessed and we did not. In this way we have arrived at results, that is to say, the results of the calculation based on data secured. Those results arepractically similar. My resultsare also similar to theresults secured by Mr. Stewart. The sum total of the results, as regards the effect on the levels of the waters is as Col. Patrick and Mr. Stewart have already stated, that the cofferdam when built raised the level of the water. On the opening of the cofferdam the water lowered to an extent of an inch and a half lower than the mean level of the water previous to the construction of the said cofferdam. In treating the question asto the effect of the roposed dike, it became necessary, of course, to compute what thed' P erent discharges would be through the different channels after the dike, if built, were constructed. It also became necessary to investigate what the additional lowering would be by the widening of the channel in the cutto a width of 450 feet. We all arrived at the same result, that the additional lowering of the water would be, approximately, one-half an inch, and that the total lowering withthe width of thechannel in the Livingstone Channel of 450 feet would be, approximately 2 inches. The question first dealt with in my report was the question of compensation. In orderto bring the levels back to the mean, or 2 inches, higher than would obtain when additional width is given to Livingstone Channel, certain compensation was necessary. I agree that the dike as proposed would give this necessary compensation. I am of the opinion, however, that compensation could as well, if not better, be given elsewhere in these waters. I am not pre ared to state exactlywhere, but probably at theend of the Trenton 8han- nel. By constructing the dam there for compensating purposes that would not in an way be interfering with the local interests, and it would give the &sired results as regards compensation. Dealinwith the effect of the dam locally, which it became my duty to fio as Canadian district engineer, I found that the increase of current ast Amherstburg will be, approximately, if the dike be constructe$about 13,000 cubic feetper second. In other words, from the present discharge of 66,000 cubic feet per second to 79,000 cubic feet per second. This is also providing for the leaving of an opening in the dikeof 300 feet wide forthe purposeof allowing vessels which now cross the channel at that point daily to continue to use that course. The question as to whether or not this opening will allow an abso- futely safe anddesirable passage for the vessels is one regarding which I am not entirely satisfied. The current will be so strong and the channel so narrow with the currents attacking the opening at more or less of an angle that I am afraid it will make a somewhat difficult channel, so far as the use of boats is concerned. Mr. CASGRAIN.What boats use this channel? Col. LAMB. The White St.ar Line running across and oing down to Toledo and also to the adjoining islands on the other sidp e of the river. Theyare passenger boat's. Theyare goingdown theriver from THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 129

Detroit, and I am not sure o€ this point, but I think they call at points on the Canadian side on the lower Dctroit Itiver. Mr. TTOUGH. At Toledo, Sugar Island, and at Port Iluron. Ah-. CASGRA41N. Are thore ally Canadian boatsthat cross over there? Col. LAMB.Launches cross there very frqurr~t~ly;light-draft, boat,s drawing lrom 2 to 4 feet', 1 should say. The existence of a cross current is established and is shown on the planalready furnished to the conlmission. Thequestion presents itself as to the desirability or t,he necessity for this dam as a tion to the existing Livingstono Channel.1 think it will be a rotec-rnitted that a OJ'OYS currant is always undesirable, and that if protection can be given against it, i.t should be given in the interest of navigation. That this tlilre is absolutely necessary ior the safety of the navigating of the Iivingstone Channcl docs not appear to me to be yet well established. T tin1 inolinetl to believe that withan additional 150 feet of width and wit.h propcr lights, the chrrnnel may be, and probably will bo, navigated as safely as other points on the Great Lakes system. As regards the eflect of the increased current past Bmherstburg, I am una.ble to see that it :voultl interfere seriously with local ship ing at that point, butI understand that the mariners interested ca in1p ling daily at this point will give evitlenm which should be more valuable than any o inion I can ofler on this question. In regarb) to the possibility of ice causing damage to interests at Amherstburg, the increase oi current practically being slightly less than one-half mile per hour malies me t'hink that there is not likely to be much damage from this cause. I can conceive such a situation, however, as the whole of tho channel opening up between the Cana- dian shore and the proposed dike, and without any wind prevailing the additionalquantity ~vhich would then be brought down the Amherstburg Cllannol could possibly under those circumstances do someslight damage because the roportion of it which now,as I understand, crosses the head of iois Blauc Island would have to also continue past Amherstburg. hlr. AIACINNES. Arethere any other questions of levels with which you as resident engineer have been dealing which ought to be considered in conncction with this matter! Col. LAMB.In considering the question of compensation it became necessary, particularlyunder the wording of question 1, where it saysthat under all the circumstances andconditions surrounding navigation and otheruses of the Livirlgstone Channel and other channels on the Detroit River-it became necessary to consider the levels of theriver both above and below. It also becamenecessary to considerwhether or notthose levels were being affccted byany cause or made likely to be afl'ectcd. It is general knowledge, and I have had to deal more or lees with the fact in the past two or three years in conncction with tho construction of breakwaters and other structures in my district, that the levels of the lakes, particularly as was experienced in 191 1, were becoming seriously lowered; and knowing of that situation, I naturally took ;t into consideration in connection with this mutter. I wish to say that all the results which we have obtained are based upon the fact that no further interferences would be macle with the 86342-13-9 130 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. sup ly of this river. It is well known that if you interfere with an of tK e water below Lake Superior, that is,lower t,he levels, you wi9 1 naturallyinterfere with the supply of theDetroit Eiver. If you interfere with the supply, you must change the levels. If you lower the levels you havean entirely different situationto dcal with. Therefore, should there be an furthcr interference the result, which the three engineers interestedYwere engaged in obtaining, would be, in my opinion, more or less useless. Wc also know, as was stated by the previous witness, that there hashen a withdrawal from Chica o of at least 7,000 cubic Ieet per second in the lastfew years, notwit% - standing that the permit provided for only 4,167 cubic feet per second. I learned shortly alter making these calculations that on the 30th of June, 1910, an additional permitwas granted by the Secretary of War of the United States for the construction of the Calumet site canal, which, it seems to be the general opinion, would carry off an additional 4,000 cubic feet per second, although the permit itself sa s that not more than the or~gind 4,167 cubic feet er secondshall e withdrawn from Lakc Michigan. This work, I beP ievc, is now under construction, and if this additional 4,000 feet is carried off wewill then have some 11,000 cubic feet er second being withdrawn, or an entirely different situation from tYl at which we have to-day. This, I consider, seriously affects the question as to whet>her or not this dike will give the necessary compensation. Mr. MACINNES.So far as the current Is concerned, Col. Lamb, if a certain submerged weir were put in Niaga.ra, how would that affect the situation? Col. LAMB.To which currentsye you referring? Mr. MACINNES.To the cross currents. Col. LAMB.It will likely irrlprove t'hc croln-currents situation. It will lessen the cross currents to a certain extentby the improvement of the slope between Lake Erie and the heat1 of the existing Living- stone Channel. Mr. MACINNES.Is t1:i~juncertainty rzs to what the rcxl lake level is owing tothese diversions at Chicago troubling you in any way, apart from the question before this board? Col. LAMB.Yes; it is troubling us seriously in regard to the substructure of our breakwnt,ers. On Lake Erie particularly we usually have designed andbuilt our breakwaters with t~ substructure of timber. It was always nec,essnry to consider the kee ing of that timber below water so that it might not tlecay n.s it wou d if cxposed to air or wind antl wator; thatis where the water riscs antlr falls below and above the timber. We tliscoveretl two years ago that the level to which we were then mrrying the substructure of our broa.kwnter was too low, and in one or two cases we became rather exercised over this fact. Mr. STREETER.Is there any one olse who desires to ask Col. Lamb any questions ? Col. PATRICK.Col. Lmnl), you spoke of t!le possible effect of a weir near the outlet of Lnkc Eric! and its bcneficinl effect in tlle lower part of tho Det,roit River. Is it not n fact that if sur~lla wcir were-put in plwc there wodtl IN: [L nImu1;ztiva dcrt all the way up to Lake Huron and Lake Michigan, probably tluo tjo the rise of watcr surface? Would not that very shortly restore th.c slopes in the Detroit River almost to what thy now are Z ' THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 131

Col. Lme: It woul(1 irr~provesome of the cxisting shpw in the Detroit River. Col. PATRICK.Rut when the entire offect of tl~ntweir i.3 felt, will the slopcs in the Detroit River tliff'cr very materially from what they are now 1 Col. IAMB.Not very mnteridly, 1)ut there will be a slight cl-lange. Col. PATILICK.Then the ultimtltc t:ffect of such a weir on the lower Detroit Kiver wouldhe almost negligible 1, Col. LAMB.There woulci be a veiy slight change. (Colonel Lamb suhrnitte:l tlle following copy of his tletailetl report to Eugene D. Lsfleur, Esq., Chief Engineer, Department of Public Works at, Ottawa:) WINDSOR,ONTARIO, February 10, 1915. SIR: Complying with instructions contained in your letter No. 1907, dated 28th May, 1912, I have the honor to submit the following report on the two questions as referred to the International Joint Commission, relative to the proposed construction of a dam in the lower Detroit River between the head of Bois Blanc Island and the southerly endof the spoil bank on the east side of the Livingstone Channel: The two questions referred to above are- 1. Under all thecircumstances and conditions surrounding the navigation and other uses of the Livingstone and other channels in the Detroit River on either side of the international boundary,is the erection of any dikeor other compensatorywork deemed necessary or desirable for the improvementor safety of navigation at or in the vicinity of Bois Blanc Island inconnection with rock excavation and dredging in Livingstone Channel authorized by the river and harbor act of June 20, 1910 (36 Stats., 655), and described in House Document 676, Sixty-first Congress, second session, sundry civil act of June 25, 1910 (36 Stats., 729), sundry civil actof March 4, 1911 (36 Stats., 1405), of the United States, and now being carried out by the Government of the United States? 2. If in answer to question (1) any dike or other compensatory works are found to be necessary or desirable, will the work or works proposed by the United States and provided for in t,he rivers and harbors act of Jnne 25, 1910 (36 Stats., 655), and located so far as to connect. the north end of Bois Blanc Island to the southeast end of the existing cofferdam on the east; side of LivingstoneChannel, opposite and below Stoney Island, be sufficient for the purpose; and if not what additional or other compensatory works should be constructed and where should they be located in order to serve most advantageously the interests involved on both sides of the international boundary? In preparation of this report the following data has been used in the study of the gauge readings between and including Amherstburg and St. Clair Flats Canal. 1. The Report of the International Waterways Commlssion on the Regulation of Lake Erie. 2. Table IX in the Report of Chief of Engineers United States Army, Appendix EEL, 1914. 3. Gauge records takenby the United States Corps of Engineers during years 1909-10-11, while the cofferdam was in place and closed; as also records secured by the same corps after the opening of the channel in June, 1912. These records were secured through the courtesy of the United States district engineer at Detroit. The above information supplied the principal data on which the conduct of these waters could be gauged before the cofferdam WM constructed in theLivingstone Chan- nel, and duringperiod said cofferdam was closed. In order to determine the action of the waters after the cofferdam was opened in June, 1912, it was necessary to obtain a series of measurements in order to compute discharges through various channels in the river. This information was obtained by the hydrographic survey department of Canada, during themonths of Augnst and Scpt,emhr,1912, under the direction of Mr. William J. Stewart, and with the coopration of this depart,ment on the under,st,mding that the data secured would be available for the pnrposes of this report, its well as any other report whit-h this Govcrnment might call for. For the gauge records seli-recwrding g:i~ygeswere used at the main points, but staff gauges were employed at the variom rnoni:r1rcmenl, scct,ions. For the stream measurements two IIaskell meters were used and cwefully rated; and data thussecured with other plans are appended hereto, and are BR follows: 132 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL.

DISCHARGE SECTIONS.

(a) Trenton section, near l,hc bridge connecting Grosse Isle with the mainland. (b) Stoney Island, Grosse Isle section, near the bridge connecting Grosse Isle with Stoney Island. (c) LivingHtone Channel section, near middle of cofferdam. (d) Limekiln Crossing or Gordon section, at Gordon. (e) Bois Blanc,Amherstburg section, short distance below Amherstburg waterworks. (j)Bois Blanc Island and the cofferdam section. 2. Plan showing currents between cofferdam and Bois Blanc Island. 3. Plau showing tabulated resnlts of discharge measurements taken by Canadian hydrographic survey in Augntit and Se tember, 1812. 4. Profile showing slope relations unfer different conditions of the river before and after improvements, both execwted and suggested. 5. Plan showing rross sections of northand south openings through cofferdam, Livingstone Channel. In addition to above, respertfully submittedherewith is achart of the lower Detroit River, and on which are shown: 1. Location of gauges between and inchding thesalt works and Amherstburggauges. 2. Locations of dischar e measurements. 3. Livingstone Channef and its cofferdam. 4. Proposed dike between the head of Bois Blanc Island and the cofferdam of the Livingstone Channel, and for the construction of which the approval of this Govern- ment is asked. The following relaqions between the gauges at Mamajuda, Gibraltar, Grosse Isle, and Amherstburg, as established by the United StatesGovernment between 24th April and 23d July, 1909, were accepted and used: Fall from Mamajuda to Gibraltar 1.33 feet. Fall from Grosse Isle to Amherstbnrg 0.22 feet. Owing to the various conditions of the levelof Lake Erie during theperiod on which these readings were taken, and the consequent effect upon the slopes from Lake St. Clair Flats to Lake Erie, it became necessary to reduce to means all the datum. The datum accepted, and as used, is the mean level of Lake Erie at Amherstburg, elevation 572.84, and the mean fall from Lake St. Clair Flats Canal to Amherstbur 2.84 feet, and asfound tohave obtained during the period 1860-1907. All levek and do ea were adjusted to this datum. &charge measurements were reduced to meancondition for September, 1912, under theassumption that theriver had then settled intoa steady condition after the opening of the Llvingntone Channel. In determining theprobable condition of the river with the proposed dam erected, the levels were adjnsted to the datumadopted above Amherstburg. The mean levels of the various gauges in Detroit River for the period of 1860-1907 were : TABLE1. Lake Erie ...... 572. GO Amherstbur ...... 572.84 Head of Amke&tburg Channel...... 573.00 Limekiln Crossing...... 573.24 Ouellettes...... 573.80 Mamajuda ...... 574.27 Salt works ...... 674.51 Windmill Point...... 575.40 St. Clair Flats ...... 575.68 The cofferdam was completed in 1908 and closed until June, 1912. The readings of the gauges for these years were:

TABLE2.

I910 1911 Mean.

" Amherstburg...... 572.73572.39 571.86 572.33 Limekiln Crossing...... 573.15572.83 572.81 572.33 Ouellettes...... 573.91573.55 573.07 573.61 Windmill Point ...... 674.96574.72 574.06 574.58 Mamajuda ...... 574.28573.95 573.46 573.90 St. Clair Flats...... 675.32 575.10 574.54 674.99 TH E LIVINGSTONECHANNEL, THE 133

For the purpose of comparison it became necessary 1,o make the following adjustments: 1. The increase made necessary by raising the Amherstburg level from 572.33 to 572.84, the st>andardadopted. 2. The increase to all levels to adopt the standard slope of 2.84 feet, St. Clair Flats to Amherstburg. 3. The backwaters to all levels above Oncllettes occasioned by the water being raised at that point by t2heconstruction of the cofferdam. The backwater rise in Lake St. Clair for a rise of 1 foot in Lake Erie during a natural mean flow of the Detroit Riveris 0.61 foot (see par. 121 of appendix to report International Waterways Commistiion on regulation of Idee Erie). The backwater rise at Ouellettes for 1 foot in 1,ake Erie afld 0.61 in St. (’lair is 0.86 foot and the backwater in Lake St. Clair is 71 per cerlt of thia. Therefore, under normal conditions of lake level and river slopc and discharge, the means of 1909, 1910, 1911 become: r,IABLE 3. Lake Erie...... 572. 00 Amherstburg...... 572.84 Limekiln Crossing...... 573.33 Onellettes...... 574.25 Mamajuda...... 574.67 Salt Works...... 574.90 Windmill Point...... 575.72 St. Clair Flat#...... 576.00

The result of a comparimn between Tables 1 and 3 ~hows: That, the constrnction of the cofferdam raised the water at the head of the dam or at Onellettes gange above the mean level of 186(b1907,0.45 foot, at St.Clair Flats, 0.32 foot, and at LimekilnCroming, 0.09 foot. Some two months after the Livingstone Channel was opened lor a width of 300 feet, or in Septcmloer, 1912, the following levels were recorded:

TABLE 4. Lake Erie...... 572.50 Amheratburg...... 572. 74 1,imekiln Crossing...... 573.18 Ouelleftes...... 573.59 Mamajrtda...... 574.02 Windmill Point...... 575.18 St. (‘lair Flats...... 575.55 By adjustment to the RtantInrd level of Lake Erie antl the standard dope St. Clair Flats to Amherstburg, this becomes: TltTir.E 5. Lake Erie...... 572. GO Amherxtburg...... 572.84 Head of Amhers1,burg (:hannrl...... 573.00 Limekiln (Irossing...... 573.27 Ouelletles...... 573. 68 Rlamajuda...... 574.11 Salt Works...... 574.33 Windmill Point...... 575.25 St. C‘lair Flats...... 575.61 A comparison made between T~hlex3 antl 5 vhows that, in Seplemkwr, or after the opening of the Livingstone Channcl, for a width of 300 fcet, the following action had taken place: Compared with the levels of thc mean of 1860-1907: At Onellettes, wa,t,erhad fallrn 0.12 fool. At St. Clair Flats, water hxl fallen 0.07 foot. At Limekiln Groming, watcr had risen 0.03 foot. The following table illustrates the vsrioun changes in dope which occnrred on the river during the period considered, and by which it will be seen that the change effected in the relationbetween St. Clair Flats antlOuellettes gauges during the 134 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. time the cofferdam was in placc was almost entirely readjusted by the opening of the Livingstone Channel: TABLE6.

Mean Mean Sep Fall. 1860” 1910 1909 190s” 1911tamber, 1907 1912 1911?Ah ~-___-____~ St. Clair Flats to Amherstburg...... 1,000 1,0001,000 1,000 1,0001,OOO 1,000 St. Clair Flats to Ouellettes...... 666 .544 .570 .700 .554.633 .548 St. Clair Flats to Limekiln Crossing...... &59 .838 .837 .a25 .$33 ,843 .728

The following values for the coefficients of the different discharge sections in the river were determined and subsequently used in computing discharges: In Trenton section “C” was found to be...... 71.2 In Stoney section “C” was found to be...... 81.1 In Livingstone section “(1” was found to be ...... 77.2 In Limekiln Crossing “C ” was found to be...... 81.7 In Amherstburg “C” wa,a found to be...... 76.4 In Bois Blanc cofferdam “C” was found to be ...... 30.3 The discharges for September, 1912, were then found to be:

TABLE7. c. 1. s. Trenton Channel ...... 45,600 Stoney Channel...... 13,200 Livingstone Channel...... 38,200 Limekiln Crossing...... 108,000 205,000 Amherstburg...... 66,000 Bois Blanc cofferdam ...... 42,000 108,000 In considering the effect of the construction of the dike between the head of Bois Blanc Island and existing coflerdam, if an opening with an average width of 300 feet be left in this dike, and on the location as shown on chart appended, it is estimated that the discharge through the opening will be 16,000 cubic feet per second. Deducting this amount from the total flow of 42,000 cubic feet in the Bois Blanc cofferdam section leaves 26,000 cubic feet to be takencare of by remaining channels. The effect of this dike will be to raise the water in Amherstburg Channel in vicinity of the dike, and it is computed the following levels would then obtain: TABLE8. Foot of Amherstburg Channel ...... 572.74 -Amherstbur gauge ...... 572.80 Head of Am%erstburg Channel...... 573.27 Limekiln Crossing...... 573.61 Ouellettes...... 573.87 With the dam in place and the levels at Amherstburg and Ouellettes gauges at 572.74 and 573.87, respectively, September, 1912, conditions, the discharges through the river would be: TABLE9. c. f. s. Trenton Channel ...... 49,100 Stoney Channel ...... 15,900 L ivingstone Channel Livingstone ...... 45,000 Limekiln Crossing...... 95,000 205,000 ” Amherstburg Channel...... 79,000 Gapin dike ...... 16,000 95,000 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 135

Adjusting levels of table 8 to standardof mean levels of Lake Erie andAmherstburg for the period 1860-1907 they would read: TABLE10.

Lake Erie____.__._. .. -. -. -. . . . -. -. -.-. . - - ~ ------.- - -.. 572.60 Amherstbur __._-.. . - -.- - - - -. . . - -. - -. - -.- - ~..-. - - --. -. - 572.84 Head of Amk&tburg Channel.. -.- -.. -. -. - - - - -.- -.. . . - - - - 573.31 Limekiln Crossing.. -.- - -. -.. -.- -. - -.~ ~. - ~ ~ ~ -.~ - -.- 573.65 Ouellettes. -.. ~. ~ -.. -.. - - - -... - -. - ~.-..------.. - - - - - .~ ~ 573.92 Mamajuda .._.____..-. ~. ~. ~. ~... - -.. -. . . -. -.~.~ - - -.. -. ~. 574.40 Salt Works. __ __...... -. -. . -. - - - - ~..- - -. . . -. . -...... - . .- .. 574.65 Windmill Point... .. -. . . . -. -. -. . -.. . . . -. . . . ~. .. - - - -.. . .. -. 575.49 St. Clair Flats -. .-.. . -. -...... -. . .. . - - -.. . . -. - -.- ~ -.. . -. - 575.77 Comparing table 5 and table 10 shows that theconstruction of the dikeas pro osed with the present Livingstone Channel will raise the water above the level of last September, 1912-

At Lake St.Clair.". -. ~ - -.- ~ - -. . . -. ~. -. -.~.~ -. - -.- -. ~. -.- . ~ ~ 0.16 At Ouellettesboat house (head of channel). .. . . ~. -. - ~.-.-. ~. ~ - -. .24 At Limekiln Crossing____ ~.-. -.- - -. . . -.. - - - -.. . . . - -.------.~. . .38 At head of Amherstburg Channel ..__...... -. . . ~. ~. .. . .- - -...... 31 Or above the mean of 1860-1907- At Lake St.Clair _____._...... -. . -..-. . . . -. -. ~.-.~. .. -. -.- - -..09 At Ouellettes. ~.-. -. -.. . .~. .. ~. -.. ~ ~...... - ~.-. . .-. ~. . .- . 10 At LimekilnCrossing. _... -. - - - ~.~ -. . . . -. . -.. ~. - - ~...... ~ ~ - - - .37 At Headof Amherstburg Channel...... - - -. ~. -... . ~...... 28

VELOCITIES OBSERVED AND COMPUTED. The following mean velocities were measured in the various channels during Sep- tember, 1912, and alongside these are tabulated those expected to be arrived at with the dike in place: TABLE11.

Computed Measured mean mean velocity.

~~~~ ~~ ~ ~

Ft. per see. Ft. per 8ec. Trenton...... 1,670 I, 790 Stoney.. .. ._.__ ._____. .. _... .____. . __ __. __ __ ._ ...... 1,826 2194 Gordon.. .__...... ______. . __ ___._.. _...... 2,617 2: 190 Livingstone in cut...... 3,151 3,761 Livingstone through cofferdam...... 3,709 3600 Livingstone, 450 feet...... 3,600 3:370 Amherstburg.___...... 2,815 3,370 At head, Amherstburg Channel...... 3,120 3.646 At foot, Amherstburg Channel.__ ...... 3.96

The various regimens of the river may be seen in the following t.able: TABLE12.

Mean. I 1 Trenton Gauge. September1912. 30isdike. Blanc dike. 1860-1907. -1 1909-1911. 1

St. Clair Flats. _._.__.. .. ______575. e8 575.77 575.70 Windmill Point...... __ __... .___. . .. ._. 575.40 575.49 575.48 Salt Works ...... 574.51 574.62 574.61 Mamajuda...... 574.27 574.38 574.37 Ouellettes...... 573. eo 573.92 573.91 Limekiln Crossing...... 573.24 573.65 573.48 Head, Amherstburg Channel...... 573.00 573.31 573.20 Amherstburg...... 572.84 572.84 572.84 136 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL.

Cross currunts.-Data Recured in September, 1912, in an investigation of cross currents between head of lhis 131anc Island and existing cofferdam are shown platted on lan appended, and from which it will be seen t,hat croSs currents do exlst in this Ecality, and at variable angles and velocities. The effects on navigat,ion of these cross currents are treated lat,er in this report. Livingstone Channel with a full width of450 feet.-Appended hereto is plan showing cross section of opening at upper andlower ends of that portion of Livingstone Channel surrounded by cofferdams. With the opening up of this channel to its full width of 450 feet, and with theconstruction of proposed dike, it is estimated that the cross section will be increased from 10,300 square feet to 12,200,squarefeet, with a surface datum elevation of 573.25, and thedischarge under thesame slope will increase from38,200 cubic feet persecond to 44,000 cubic feetper second. The estimateddischarge through this channel if the cofferdam be built has been previousiy given in Table 9. It itfurther estimated that this additional discharge of 5,800 cubic feet through this channel would only lower t,he water at Ouellettes 0.03.

SIJMMARY. A summary of results obtained from data secured and calculations madeis as follows: 1. The levels of the wAters in this vicinity are practically the same to-day, with a 300-foot channel through the Idvingstone Channel and without the proposed dike, as theywere previous to the beginning of the construction of the Livingstone Channel. This is no doubt largely due to the compensation provided by the dumping of the " material excavated. (See p. (i of report. j 2. With the full widthof 450 feet of channel oDened uu in theLivinestone Channel within the cofferdam, and without constructiin of proposed dike, thve effect of the levels on the waters will be a lowering of approximately 2 inches below 1860-1907 datum. 3. If the dike be constructed, and witha width of channel through the cofferdams of 450 feet, the general level of the waters in vicinity will be slightly" raised. (See pp. 8 and 9 of report.) 4. With the proposed dike Constructed, the discharge throu.gh the Amherstburg Channel at the Waterworks will be increased from 66.000 cubw feet oer second to 79,000 cubic feet per second, and the cwrent increased from 2.81 feet $er second, or 1.91 miles per honr, to 3.37 feet per second, or 2.3 miles per hour. 5. That crom currents do exisl. acr0.v the head ol Ihis l3lanc Island , That t,hese crow cnrremts affect t,he Fafe nnvigalion of t,hnt porlion OF the 1,ivingi;l.one ('hannel into which they rnn does not) appear to have been yet well cst.ablished. While it is stated by a numbrr of captains who ioolr vwsels throrlgh this channel after it waR opened on Octobrr 19, 1012, that, they cxlperienced difticnlly in keeping off the west bank of channel when these crow currents st,rl1ck them, it, is noted that, before the close of navigation on December 14, 7912, some 1,227 vessel^ papscd down this channel, and as far as the writer can ascwtairl all wont t,hroagh Pafely. It does appear, however, that nnne of these vewclx passed down the channel except with favorable weather prevailing, or in other words t.he requirrment of prbiwtion against, these cross currents with nnfavorable weather conditions prevailing has not yet been t,csted. It is Ilnderstmd considprahlo exception was taken by t,he captains of the boats using t,his channel to t,hc blinking lights wed for marking this c.11annel last fall, and that a request ha:?been m:de by t.he 1,:tke Carricra' Association for the suhstitution of fixed lights for the blinking 1i;yhts. 6. At,tcni,ion i:i l)art,icrllarly drawn lo thc facti ihal. in ihe wrics of observaticns taken and compIl1,ations made it was asmmed that, IIO factor nccd be taken into consideration which would in any way affert matcrially lhtr ordinnry lc.;els of the Detroit River and in conseqllencc it was t.herciorr at~epletlthat undcr no condition would any further c1ivrr;iion frolo thc waters of Lakc hfic.hi:;an be allowctf by t,he United States Government. Since t.he data hereill rnc~nlioneclwas srcurcd and treated with, it har hen learned that hy a permit, dated :Nth Jluro, 1910, grar:ted by the United Slates Government, the construct.ion of the ('aluruct, Sag ('anal TKLS authorized, and lhat said (.anal is now under vonstrr~ci.ion. Further, that 011 ita completion an atlditional 4,000 cubic feet per second will be drawn from Lake hlichignn, thercsbp makiug a t,otal diversion of aproximately 11,000 cubic feet which will be 1al;c.n from Lake hlichigan by the dicago Drainage Canal, instead of 4,1fj7 cubic feet per second allowed by original permit. THE LIVINGSTONECHANNEL. 137

It will readily be seen that as the River St.Clair, Lake St. Clair, and Detroit River are affected by any increase or decrease of discharge.from Lake Hnron, any interference with the levels of the upper lakes will, in consequence, affect the levels of the Detroit River. It has been estimated that the diversion of 8,000 cubic feet per second at Chicago means a lowering of 34 inches in Lake St. Clair, 5 inches at Lake Erie outlet, and 44 inches at Ouellettes gauge in the Detroit River.

CONCLUSIONS. In answer to question 1on page 1of this report, itis hereby respectfully submit,ted: 1. That while it does appear, owing to the existence of cross currents at thehead of Bois Blanc Idand, that protection to navigation in t,he Livingstone Channel seems desirable in this locality, whet,her such protection is actually necessary for the safe navigation of the Livingstone Channel in this vicinity, needs yet to be established by evidenceon this point, or by actualexperience of vessels navigating this portion of the channel underadverse weather conditions. Also t,hat the consequent increase of current and discharge which would obtain in the Amherstburg Channel if the proposed dike were built is not desirable if it can be avoided without sacrificing general interests. As to the contcntion that, suchincrease of current would interfere with the safe navigation of vessels landing at Amherstburg and Bois Blanc docks, this appears doubtful, and can no doubt be better established by evidence on this point. Also, aa a compensating factor the site as proposed for this dike is not desirable, as it is estimated that thepurpose of compensation can beas well, if not better, served, and without interference to local interests, by the construction of a dam at the foot of the Trenton Channel. In answer to question 2: Compensation such as would be afforded by t,he construct,ion of this proposed dike a pears to be practically sufficient, under existing conditions, and with a 450 foot cfianrlel throu.gh the cofferdams of the Jivingatone ('hannel, providingno fulther inteference be allowed with that portion of supply to this river which is secured from Lake Michigan. The latter part of question 2 is answered above in the last paragraph.. - of answer to questicn 1. In conclusion I beg to state that an arrangement made wit,h the United States district engineer at Detroit last fall has been cmriedout, whereby a complete interchange of data and calculations haa been made between these two offices. In thisway much valuable information WBR secured for t,his dcpartment and the desired result, it is hoped, obtained of agreement between the UnitedStates district, engineer and myself as to the correctness of data andcomputations herewith prcsented. The cooperation and assistance rendered by Mr. Will1an1 J. Stewart, chief h dro rapher, Dominion Government, have also been of great value, and Mr. StewartY s sys-8- terns of deductions and calculations have been practically adopted throuzhout this report,after having been all carefullychecked by this office. However, Table 7, Table 8, and Table9 have been accepted from Mr. Stewart as correct, as they are direct findings from the Liydrographic Survey made in August and September, 1912. I have the honor t,o be, sir, your obedient. servant, H. J. LAMB, District Xngineer. EUGENED. LAFLEUR,Esq., ChiefEngineer, P. W.D., Ottuum, Ontnrio. Mr. RIACINNES.I ~youldlike to be allowed to place in thc record a copy of the opinion of JV. 11. Bixby, Chicf of Engineers of the United States Army, dxtcd February 28, 1912. (The report referred to reads as follows:) APPENDIXI.

WAR DEPARTMENT,OPFICIZ OF THE CKIEF OF ENGINEERS, Washington, February 28, 1912. Memorandum for the Secretary of War. (.A8 to the sanitary district diversion of water from Lake Michigan, through the Chicago River, Sanitary District Canal, Illinois River to the Mississippi Valley.) There are several special features of this Chicago eanitary district diversion and Illinois River power and waterway proposition which need special explanation tcl anyone studying theproposition.

I 138 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL.

For purposes of navigation alone by canal and canalized river from Lake Michigan to the Mississippi River, on the Illmois River and its headwaters and connectmg canals and to keep the locks and pools full, a diversion from Lake Michigan of less than 1,000 second-feet of water w~lleasily supply any reasonable demands and is all that will be actually necessary; and any greater diversion is a greater injury than benefit to navigation. The works of the sanitary district of Chicago originally constructed mainly for purposes of sanitation were designed to allow the diversion of 10,000 second-feet, which they now request, and they are now found tobe large enough for a total diversion of 14,000 second-feet, the additional 4,000 second-feet having been requested by them and refused by the War Department a few years ago ,(injunction suit still in progress), the extra water to be taken from Lake Michigan through the Calumet Riverand aconnecting canal following the Sag route. The amounts requested, while perhaps needed at the resent time, will not be necessary later, after the fullinstallation of the more modPern improved methods of treating sewage. The War Department, while awaiting the definite action of Congress, has so far permitted the diversion of 4,167 second-feet. The sanitary district by its own recentstatements, is understood tobe using about 7,000 second-feet. While it a pears tohave been assumed at times thatthe sanitary district will be finally atowed by the United States to divert 10,000 second-feet so long as actually necessary for sanitary purposes, tho diversion of the waters of the Great Lakes from their natural outlet EO far as desired merely for aid for power development is of doubtful legality by reason of the terms of the recent treaty between the United States and Great Britain, whichappears to require the approval of such a diversion by the International Joint Commission created pursuant to said treaty. The treaty enables riparian owners of Canada, as well as of the United States, who .consider themselves injured by such diversion, to bring suit in United States courts to protect their interests. The treaty also, although recognizing as proper the use of water necessary for sanitary purposes, provides for action, if necessary, by the commission after request from tho United St.ates Congress, or the Canadian Parliament, and no other organization has power of final decision. It is the opinion of the engineer, Lakes-to-the-Gulf Waterway Board (Jan. 23, 1911), that, in view of the righta and interests of navigation, only such water should be diverted from Lake Michigan as is indispensable for sanitation, and then only with a provision for constructlon and maintenance of pro er compensating works in the outlets of the Lakes to prevent a lowering of their levefs, and that although water thus diverted may be used inci- dentally for power urposes, great care must be exercised by the War Department, when waiving the oijections of navigation to the diversion of water for sanitary purposes, to not extend such waiver beyond the amount actually necessary for sanitation alone. Diversion of water from Lake Michigan and the St. Lawrence Basin into the Illi- nois River and the Mississippi River and the Missiesippi River Basin is seriously objectionable from many standpoints,and should bepermitted under the recent treaty with Canada only to such extent as is necessary for sanitation of the city of Chicago. The objections to such diversions of water are briefly as follows: (a) The levels of Lakes Michigan, Huron, and Erie, for the last 20 years and at the present moment, are lower than their average of the last 50 years; and their levels are now again falling. Every foot of draft in the harbors of these lakes and in the connecting rivers-St. Marys, St. Clair, and Detroit-is exceedingly valuable to navigation; and every cubic foot per second of water flow taken out of Lake Michigan in excess of its natural outflow through Lake Huron and the St. Clair River is a permanent loss to the waterflow of the St. Lawrence Basin, an& tends to injure navigation over the entirewaterway from Lake Michigan to the Gulf of St. Lawrence. While compensating works at the outlets of Lake Huron, Lake St. Clair, Lake Erie, and Lake Ontario may be possible to an extentsufficient to maintain the existing and past levels of these lakes, they will be very expensive and can not in any case prevent loss to the St. Lawrence Basin of any water diverted into the Mississipp~ Basin and any loss of water by such diversion will make necessary further expensive con- traction works or dams or dredging in St. Clair, Detroit, and St.'Lawrence Rivers in order to maintain channeldepths. Moreover, the same loss of water will permanently injure and diminish the water-power development capacity of the Niagara and St. Lawrence Rivers. (a) Moreover, the dumpage of sewage into rivers while heretofore allowable is becoming more objectionable every year and is being revented more and more every year by emactments of State legislatures throughout tie country. Chicago, with reference to the Illinois River,is in much theFame situation as Worcester, Mass., with reference to the Blackstoue River. In days long past the sewage of Worcester flowed into the Blackttone andwas carried down through the Statesof Massachusetts and Rhode Island THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 139 into Narragansett Bay. The danger and damage to the people and industries of the Blackstone River led to enactments of laws by the Massachusetts Legislature forbid- ding further sewage contamination of any of the State rivers, thus forcing the inland cities of Massachusetts to the disposal of sewage by modern improved methods based upon mechanical and chemical treatment. As Chicago and the cities along the Illi- nois River increase in population, it is to be expected that the results of the sewage contaminat,ion of the river, and the legislative action of Massachusetts will be practically duplicatedin Illinois, where the remedywill be possible at a lower cost per head of pofu!atjon; after which the diversiou of large quantities of Lake Michigan water into Illnois River, being then no longer necessnr for the sanitation of Chicago, and neither now nor then for navigation between Lake ifichigan and theMississippi River, and being alreadyof detriment and serious danger to the important interestsof navi- pionof the Great Lakes system, will nolonger have any reason for continuance except or local benefit inside the State of Illinois. (c) Looked at from the point of view of conservation of water power every cubicfoot of water diverted from Lake Michigan into theIllinois River is an economic loss to the United States as a whole, as well as to Canada, because the local conditions as regard river slope and fall are suchthat t,his wat,erif sent through the Niagara and St.Lawrence Rivers to the Atlantic can developtwice as muchpower in the Stateof New York and, at the same time, twice as much power in the Dominion of Canada as it can develop in Illinois if sent through the Illinois andMississippi Rivers to the Gulf of Mexico. From tho above it, is evident that itis of the greatest importance to the United States that thediversion of water from Lake Michigan into the Illinois Rivershould be limited to merely such amount as is actually indispensable to sanitation; and that the United States should reserve to itself the right to determine such amount every few years as local conditions change. W. II. RIXBY, Chief of Engineers, United States Army. Mr. RIACINNES.I would also like lo be allowcd to place in the record the opinion of Hon. Henry L. Stimson, Secretary of War of the United St,ates, datcd January 8, 1913, in the matter of the a plication of the trusteers of t'he Sanitary I>ist,rict of Chicago, Ill., fPor permission to divert from Lake Michigan 10,000 cubic feet of water per second. The portions of the opinion to which I would like to direct the attention of the commission are these: In a word, every dropof water taken out of Chicago neceswrily tends to nullify costly im rovements mdde under direct authority of Congress throughout the Great Lakes, an$ a withdrawal of the amount now apphed for would nullify such expenditurea to the amount of many millions of dollars, as well as inflict an even greater loss upon the navigst,ion interests using such waters (p. 7). It remains only to consider certain special ar uments that have been pressed upon me. It has been urged that the levels of the I,a%es, even if !owered, could be restored by compensating works. To a certain extent thatis true. But the very nature of this consideration offers another illustration of thc importance of having the whole question passed upou by Congress. Such compensating works can only be constructed by the authorit of Congress and at very conslder&le cost. It is not a matter which is in the lrands oTthe Secretary of War. Permission to divert water which will at one and the same time nullify the effect of pnst appropriations and make necessary similar expenditures in the future should be granted only with the express consent of the body in whose hands the making of such appropriations and the authorization of such works rests. Furthermore, in most cases such compensating works could only be constructed with the joint consent of our neighbor Canada. The United StatesGovernment alone would be unable, even if it were willing to spend its own funds, to compensate for the damage done through the lowering of these levels unless Canada were willing to join in constructing the portion of such works which would necessarily stand upon Canadian soil, The question therefore becomes not mmreiy national but international, aud this leads me to the con side ratio^^ of the nrgun~ent~which were urged by both sides in reference to the treaty with (irezt Ilritain iu respect to Canada of January 11, 1909 (pp. 9 and 10). 140 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. Then I wish also to invite the commission’s.attention to the fourth conclusion contained in t,his report, which is as follows: Fourth. That the provisions of the Canadian treaty for n settlement by joint commission of “questions or mat,t.ersof difference” between the United States andCanada offer a further reason why no administrative officer should authorize a, further diver- aim of water, mmifcvtly so injurious to Canada, against Canadian protest (p. 11). Tho CHAIRMAN. Wewill accept that, Mr. MacInnes, as a part of your case. (The decision of the Secret,ary of Was referred to by Mr. MacInnes is marked ”Exhibit No. 1 ” on behalf of t,he Dominion of Canada.) Mr. MACINNES.That closes the case so far us the Dominion of Canada is concerned. TESTIMONY OF GEORGE R. PEARSON. George R. Pearson, of Owens Sound, Canada, called on behalf of the Dominion Marine Association and ship ing interests of Canada, after having been first duly sworn, testifie c? as follows: Mr. KING. How long have you been navigating the Lakes? Mr. PEARSON.About 30 years. Mr. KING. Whatvessel are you in command of at the present time? Mr. PEARSON.The steamer Emperor. Mr. KING. Belonging to what corn any? Mr. PEARSON.The Inland Lines( P hd.). Mr. KING. What is her length? Mr. PEARSON.Five hundrad and twenty-five feet. Mr. KING. And her beam? Mr. PEARSON.Fifty-six feet; 32 feetdepth; carrying capacity about 10,000 tons. Mr. KISG. She is slightly larger than the steamer Osler mentioned yesterday ‘I Mr. PEARSON.Somewhat. Mr. KING. Have you runthe LivingstoneChannel since it was opened ? Mr. PEARSON.Once. Mr. KING. Loaded? Mr. PEARSON.Yes, sir. Mr. KING. What time of tho ear was it Z Mr. PEARSON.It was about t 3re first part of November. Mr. KING. Will you tellthe commlssion your experiences with that cross current 1 Mr. PEARSON.I found the cross curre,rlt to bo pretty heavy at the time I went through. From information that I got previous t.3 going down I ke t to tho eastward of the channel when just below the dike. By Pleading onto the cribs on the east side I counteracted the set of the current until such time as I got near the crib later on. Mr. KING. Did you get into danger m any way? Mr. PEARSOS.None wllatevcr. Mr. KING. I suppose, Mr. Pearson, it is always desirable where possible to cut off cross currents? Mr. PEARSON.Yes, sir; tho simpler the channel is the better we would like it; the stillor the water is, you have more contrcl of your boat. THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 141. Mr. KING.Would you say with reference to the present pro osal to build this dike along the island to the cofferdam that it wou Pd be a matter of additional convenience to you or a matter of additional necessity Z Mr. PEARSOX.I think it would be a convenience. I do not think it would interfere with us going down. I seemcd to dislike the entrance to the channcl more than I did the cross current. Mr. KING.The entrance above? Mr. PEARSON.The entrance above; yes. I feared it more at the time. Mr. KING.I think you told mc that you refrained from going down the chaunel on one occasion Z Mr. PEARSON.I did. That was aboutthe 24th of November. I went down there one time at nightand there were two vertical red lights there which I had never seen before, and I continued down the other course until it was too late to make a turn and I went down the Amherstburg Channel. Mr. KINO.You broke the rulas because ou had to go on ? Mr. PEARSON.I would rather take the (liyevil. I knew than the devil I do not know. Mr. KING.Where were those lights? Mr. PEARSON.Below the entrance to the channel. Mr. KING.The are not usually there? Mr. PEARSON. !r he were not there when I went down before. I spoke to the man an8 told him that these lights were confusing and asked him if they intended to allow them to remain there, and he said yes. But' he was just anchored a lit,tlc to the westward of the easterly gas buoy. Mr. KING.I suppose that the second time you do go down the ahannel, with the benefit of ths experience that you have had, you will not feel yourself in any danger? Mr. PEARSON.No; if it were better lighted. Mr. KING.I am referring, of course, to daytime. Mr. PEARSON.I would have no hesitation. Mr. KING.You have had no experience with regard to the lights in the channel Z Mr. PEARSON.Only in just noting them and in going down that night.They were so confusing that I would not attempt it,. You could not pick up the line of the dike at all. You would immediately get your eyes on a light and out it would go. You could not get any two lines at all to line up the dike. Mr. KING.Have you anything to say with reference to the proposed opening of this dike which is under discussion ? Mr. PEARSON.1 havn'tany idea what e-l€ect it mighthave. It might be hcnficial. Of course, if it shuts off any of the cross current it would be beneficial. Mr. ICING.You are not in any way opposed to the building of this dike, arc you Mr. PEARSON.In no way whatcver. Mr. KING.With rcferencc to thecurrents on t'heAmherstburg sidc, what, havc you to say as to t'hat Z Mr. PEARSON.(If wurso, I would not know anyt'hing about what effect t,hat woultl haw, or about what cffcct, it might have on the 142 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. current in the Livingstone Channcl. Jt might shut the current off altogether. It might form an cddy t,he,rc. Mr. KING.Your position is that you would rather bear those ills you have rat'her than flee to others that you know not of? Mr. PEARSON.Yes. If I had my choice of thetwo channels, I would prefer the Amherstburg Channcl because I know the currents there. Mr. KING.You are not offering any opposition to the building of the proposed dikc, are you? Mr. PEARSON. Nom whatever. If it,makcs the current less, so much the better for us. Mr. KING.But, the posit,ion you are taking is that it is not a neces- sit ? &r. PEARSON.It would not prevent me from going down providing I had to go down. If we were obliged to take that channel it would not prevent me from going down, and I do not think there would beany danger. As tothe convenience, the less currentthe better. Mr. KINO.With no adverse conditions t,o contend with last year . after thc dike was put in, and as long as you were not paying for the dike yourself, you would like t'o see It t.here? Mr. PEARSON.Yes; I would. I do nott'hink we canhave too many aids. Mr. WHITE.What would br the effect of a dike on the west side of the channel as to the navigation in that channel ? Mr. PEARSON.I should t,hink it mightshut off aortion of the current.Certainly the watcr would not' flow straigR t across. It might go a port,ion of thc way and then form an eddy, as currents do when they strike a dam. Mr. WHITE.As to your handling a boat going down there; su pose a snowstorm should come up when you were in the channel anP you had a dike which appcared above the water there on the west side of thc channel '1 Mr. YEARSON.It would be very nice to see. You can see it much easier than you could an object ahead. Mr. WHITE.It would be 1;ke a handrail in coming downstairs, I su pose! br. PEARSON.Very much on the same principle. Mr. WHITE.You canpick up your dike atAanytime or at any point below ? Mr. PEARSON.Yes; you ought to do that. Mr. WHITE. Rut you could do thatin a sliowstormwhen you would not bc able to pick up lights Z Mr. PEARSON.Certainly. TESTIMONY OF CAPT. JOHN WILLIAMS. Capt. John Williams, of the city of Toronto, Ontario, a witness roduced on behalf of thc Dcminlon Marine Sssociation, being Xuly sworn, deposed as follows: Questioned by 1111,. KING: Mr. KING.What steanlor arc you sailing? Capt. WILLIAMS.Thc .W. D. Matthews. Mr. KING.What company owns that steamer! THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 143 Capt. WILLIAMS.The St. Lawrence & Chicago Steam Navigation Co. of Toronto. Mr. KINO. What are'her dimensions? Capt. WILLIAMS.375 fcet long, 48 fcet beam, and 28 fcet depth. Mr. KING. She is too long for thelower canal? Capt. WILLIAMS.Oh, yes. Mr. KING. Are there man Canadian boats, outside of the Emperor and Osler, that are longer t t an the Mattkews? Capt . WILLIAMS. No. Mr. KINO. You ran the Livingstone Channel? Capt. WILLIAMS.Yes, on three different occasions. Mr. KING.Had you any difficulty with these cross currents? Capt. WILLIAMS.Not any. Mr. KING.None. Capt. WILLIAMS.None. Mr. KING.And you think that would fairly represent the views of masters navigating boats of 300 or 400 feet in length? Capt. WILLIAMS.Well, I would think so. Mr. KING.From your point of view, and with reference to a vessel of our tonnage, there is no need for a dike? (?apt. WILLIAMS. I should not think so, so far as my opinion goes. Mr. KINO. As to thc current in the Amherstburg Channel, have you anything to say with reference to tho addition to that current If a dike is built? Capt. WILLIAMS.I am of the opinion that itmight give 11s a current we are not accustomed to finding down around the head of the island. Mr. KING.You agree witheverything thathas beensaid with reference to the lighting of the Livingstone Channel ? Capt. WILLIAMS.Yes; these lights are wrong altogether. Questioned by Mr. HOUGII: Mr. HOUGH. The construction of that dike, in your opinion, would cause a dangerous cross current at the head of the island from the Amherstburg Channel ? Capt. WILLIAMS.Well, I thought of it in that way. Mr. HOUGH.Therc is quitc a strong current setting in to the eastward at thehead of the Limekiln Crossing now? Capt. WILLIAMS.Yes, there is a certain amount of current. Mr. HOU~II.Just at the turn around the lightships? Capt. WILLIAMS.Yes. Mr. HOUGH.And a strong current setsin to the east there? Capt. WILLIAMS.Yes. Mr. HOVGH. Have you noticed the effect of that current on your boat as you passed ? Ca t. WILLIAMS. Oh, yes; but still we are used to it and govern ourseP ves accordingly. Mr. HOUGH.!['hat current is, I aminformed, stronger thanthe currcnt crossing Livingstonc Channel ? Ca t. WILLIAMS.I would notsay that myself; I do not know whetK t?r it is or not. Mr. I~OIJGH.You told us that you did not have any trouble at all in the Livingstone Channel ? Capt. WILLIAMS.The current did not bothor me going down. 144 THE LIMNGSTONE CHANNEL. Mr. HOUGH.You have noticed a current in the upper end of the Limekiln? Capt. WILLIAMS.Yes. Questioned by Mr. STRICKLAND: Mr. STRICKLAND.In your first trip through theLivingstone Channel had you warning of the currents? Capt. WILLIAMS.Oh, yes. Mr. STRICKLAND.And .you governed yourself accordingly ? (:apt. WILLIAMS. Yes; I may say that in going down I went down very slow until I made the turn. I drove the vessel clown into the current good and hard, and then checked her down, and when I was passing the lookout station they informed me of this set to the westward at the foot of the current, and as I ot down to the foot I held the vessel over to the port hand side, anf then I decided that there was no need for it. In the two trips I made afterwards I simply went down about my business, as I would go anywhere else. Mr. STRICKLAND.We,re these trips that you made in the daytime or in the nighttime? Capt. WILLIAMS.In the daytime. Mr. STRICKLAND.And not at nighttime? Capt. WILLIAMS.And not at nighttime. Mr. KING. Is the steamer Iroquois a steamer that can get through the Wclland Canal? Capt. WILLIAMS. Yes. Mr. KING. She is full canal size? Capt. WILLIAMS.Yes. Mr. KING. What water could you draw with the Matthews? Capt. WILLIAMS.We have been loaded to a draft of 19 feet. Mr. KING. You could load dee er ? Capt. WILLIAMS.Yes; we cou Pd load to 21 feet. Mr. KING. May I put in a letter from another master,which I will read? It is perhaps not evidence, but it can go on file. It is written b the master of the steamer Iroquois, and I would like it to go on as from the master of ono of the canal draft steamers. fi& Mr. TAWNEY.You can read it. Mr. KING. The letter reads: BUFFALO,Novembw $1, 1912. Mr. A. A. WRIGHT, Toronto, Ontario. DEARSIR: Your favor of the 19th instant to hand and contents noted, and regards in to Livingstone Channel would say I have been only through it once, and until this channel is better lighted I do not intend running it at night, as thelights are too far apart, and on leaving the cut you are carried to eastward with a strong cross current until you get abreast of Bois Blanc [sland. Then I think it sets from the westward, but not so heavy, but if they would light itwell and do away with them blinkers,so a man could have something to steady his vessel on, it would not be so bad; but blinkers are not worth anything where there is no range, but I would not advise putting a dam across there, as I am afraid we would feel it then in the eastern channel, but get after them on those blinkers, as they certainly are not worth a damn. Yours, truly, P. E. ROBINSON. THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 146 TESTIMONY OF CAPT. P. J. NICHOLSON. Capt. P. J. NICHOLSON,of the cityof Windsor, a witness produced on behalf of thetown of Amherstburg,duly sworn,deposed as follows: Questioned by Mr. HOUGH: Mr. HOUGH.What is your position, Captain? Capt. NICHOLSON.I am superintendent of the Windsor & Detroit Ferry Co. Mr. HOUGH.You are also a master mariner? Capt. NICHOLSON.Yes, sir. Mr. HOUGH.For how many years? Capt. NICHOLSON.I have been master for 38 years. Mr. HOUGH.And before you took the position of superintendent of the ferry company you were commanding a large freighter? Capt. NICHOLSON.Yes, sir. Mr. HOUGH.And you are familiar with the different channels in the neighborhood of the lower Detroit River? Mr. NICHOLSON.Yes, sir. Mr. HOUGH.Prior to coming to Windsor you lived in Amherstburg for many years8 Capt. NICHOLSON.Yes, for 30 ears. Mr. HOUGH.Have you ever teen throughthe newLivingstone Channel ? Capt. NICHOLSON.Yes, sir. Mr. HOUGH.Give us your experience. Capt. NICHOLSON.I went through there with the Britannia, the second boat down at the time the channel was opened. Mr. HOUGH.The Britannia is a large passenger boat? Capt. NICHOLSON.Yes. Mr. ROUGH.What capacity? Capt. NICHOLSON.Two thousand seven hundred passengers. We had 1,550 people on board that day, the board of commerce, and the Lake Carriers’ Association. Mr. TAWNEY.What are the dimensions of the Britannia? Capt. NICHOLSON.One hundred and ninety-six feet long, 56 feet beam, and she has three decks. Mr. HOUGH.You followed theLivingstone down the daythe Livingstone Channel was opened ? Capt. NICHOLSON.Yes. Mr. HOUGH.Were you in command of the boat! Capt. NICHOLSON.We had a captain on board; I had charge of the boat. Mr. Houanr. What was your experience! Capt. NICHOLSON.We followed into the Livingstone Channel, and after we got in a little wayI had the mastercheck her down, so that if anything should happen to the Livingstone, which was the fist big boat through, that I would be in shape to stop. I did not want to be closeon toher. The Livingstone wentright on, andwhen we got down to the lower end we speeded up to half speed and we went straight on out. I stoodand watched to see if there was any sag one way or the other. When we got down about the middle of Bois 86342-13-10 146 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. Blanc Island, I walked around in front of the pilot house and the ca tain said to me: “This cross current, there is nothing to it.” 5,. HOUGH.Is that your opinion, too? Capt. NICHOLSON.That was my opinion thatday. Then I was there afterwards on the Ilancock, tho little Government boat, with the commission. We went down to the channel and came up again. Of course she was a short boat and she is liable tododge around, and when she got up close to the dyke the current was strong, but I did not see any trouble, even in her coming up. She grounded, too, down below where the cross current was said to be so bad. Mr. HOUGH.That was theday the comlnission inspectedthe channel ? Capt. NICHOLSON.Yes; we passed a steamerthat day in the channel going down to Amherstburg; she was going from Sandwich to Amherstburg. She went around the foot of the island and came up again.When we gotinto Amherstburg, after we gotonto the Hancock, I asked the captain: “Why didn’t you go down and turn around?” and he said: “I dare not take the chances of the current in the Amherstburg Channel.” Mr. HOUGH.He took theLivingstone Channel rather than the Amherstburg Channel ? Capt. NICHOLSON.Yes. Mr. Houa~r.What size is the Hancock? Capt. NICHOLSON.Three thousand five hundred tons; about 340 feet long. Mr. HOUGH.With your knowledgo of this channel, what is your idea as to the necessity of this dam for the purpose of offsetting the cross current ? Capt. NICHOLSON.I can not see any. Mr. HOUGH.We have been told that the current in tjhe Amherst- burg Channel crosses theLimekiln Crossing at about 23 miles an hour. How does that current run at thepoint where thechannel makes a turn around the lightship? Capt. NICHOLSON.Well, it runsto the eastward; it runs across from the Canada shore. Mr. HOUGH.Is it a strong current? Capt. NICHOLSON.It was a good deal stronger before they opened the Livingstone Channel than it is now. Mr. HOUGH.But it is still strong? Capt. NICHOLSLN.Yes. Mr. HOUGH.Setting in to the east of thechannel at theupper Limekiln ? Capt. NICHOLSON.Yes, sir. Mi. HOUGH.Is that, in your opinion, a stronger current than the one setting across the Livingstone Channel? Capt. NICHOLSON.I think so. Mr. HOUGH.Is that a more dangerous point, owing to the current, than any oint in the Livingstone Channel? Capt. ZCHOLSON.Why, yes, because you come up there and make a bend right there. You head up to the Ballards Reef. The channel takes a turn of about 20 dcgroos thoro. Mr. HOUGH.If this dike were built, what, in your opinion, would be the result of the additional water going into the Amherstbur Channel between Bois Blanc Island and the town of Amherstburg4 TIIE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 147 Capt. NICHOLSON.I think there would be perhaps one-half more water go down through that channel than does now. Mr. TAwNEY. Goina down through what channel ? Ca t. NICHOLSON.?he Amherstburg Channel between the island and %e mainland in frontof the town of Amherstburg. Mr. HOUGII. At what rate would it be sent into that channel as it followed the dike down ? Capt. NICHOLSON.I do not suppose there would be a great deal more current at the headof Livingstone Channel down to the headof Bois 13lanc Island than there is now, but if you narrow it down to a funnel, when you enter the Amherstburg Channel you would get a terrific current. Mr. HOUGH.What would happen to it when it left the dam around the head of the island? Capt. NICHOLSON.It would whirl around as it does at the head of the Livingstone Channel. Mr. HOUGH.Would it hit the Amherstburg Channel again? Capt. NICHOLSON. Very likely. Mr. HOUGH.Would thatbe an injurious cross current,in your opinion il Capt. NICHOLSON.Yes, sir. Mr. HOUGH.Your line of boats, I understand, call at Amherstburg and then go on to this island park direct1 op osite? Ca t. NICHOLSON.Yes, we stop at Am hylIerst urg on the way down and tR en go down below and round to Bois Blanc Island. Mr. HOUGH. Wouldit be possible to stop bound down at Amherst- burg with this additional current? Capt. NICHOLSON.I do notthink it would. While'the Livings- &one Channel was closed up and the dam across the upper end, we had just all the currentwe could handle and make our landingdown there, and besides we had a good deal of damage done. If the current happened to catch our boat and makea stern landing thewrong way she either went into something ahead or into the dock, and a great many times we dare not land at Amherstburgat all if the wind was anyways down river. We generally had to go to Bois Blanc Island and have the passen ers ferried over with a smaller boat. Mr. HOUGH.You fad to make a turn and land head on Z Capt. NICHOLSON.Yes. Mr. HOUGH.Since the Livingstone Channel has been opened up, the current is a good deal easier down there ? Capt. NICHOLSON. Yes. Mr. HOUGH.The current has not been so strong since the channel has been opened ? Ca t. NICIroLSON. Yes. It costus a good deal of money to fix our cpocks up for the four years they had that closed up there. We had to ut in tt good deal of new work. Mr. ZOUGH.If the Livingstone Channel is widened tothe full width of 450 feet, the condition will be still further improved there? Capt. NICHOLSON.It would. Mr. ~IOUGH. Thatis, without the dike. Capt. NICHOLSON.Yes. Mr. HOUGH. If it should be thought advisable to interrupt this cross current, can you suggest any betterway of doing it than by the dike proposed 'I 148 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. Ca t. NIUHOLSON.Well, if it was left to me, I would put a straight wall f;own at thewest side; dig out that 150 feet and make a straight wall down to the lake. That would be a guidance to the men thatgo down there, and it would help to strai hten the current. Mi. HOUGH.That is, if it should bet E ought necessary to straighten it? Capt. NICHOLSON.Yes. Mr. HOUGH.Have you anything further to say about that? Capt. NKIHOLSON.You o out of theLivingstone Channel now and you have nothing butt ese little blinkers. It is the fearof those blinkers that the men havea more than an thing else. Mr. HOUGH.As a matter of fact, it is li e givlng a dog a bad name. This channel had a bad name before it wasz opened? Capt. NICHOLSON.It is the idea that the lights have not improved it anyway. Mr. HOUGH.And in your opinion some of thesemariners are unnecessarily afraid of it? Capt. NICHOLSON.Yes. Mr. HOUGH.Are you familiar with the ice conditions at Amherst- burg in the winter? Capt. NICHOLSON.Oh, es; I lived there for 30 years. Mr. HOUGH.Right on ti e river bank? Capt. NICHOLSON.Yes. Mr. HOUGH.It has been suggested that the ice is in a weakened condition when it gets to Amherstburg. Mr. NICHOLSON.Not always. Mr. HOUGH.*Pretty hard Ice passes down there ? Ca t. NICHOLSON.Yes; before the built the Livingstone Channel and Rlled up the mouthof Stoney IsP and up to the eastward,a great deal of ice used to go to the westward of Bois Blanc Island. Mr. ROUGH.More went west than now Z Capt. NICHOLSON.Yes, but since they have built that so far up toward the Canadian side in the deep waters, they have forced the ice down Limekiln Crossing Channel. Mr. HOUGH.Do you mean to say there is more ice comes down the Limekiln Crossing now between the cofferdam and the main shore than formerly? Cupt. NICHOLSON.Closer along the bank; the current sets it over there and it goes down in the Amherstburg Channel. Mr. HOUGH.That ice divides now and part of it goes west of the island and part of it in front of the town? Capt. NICHOLSON.There ain’t much of it divides unless it is wide enou h so that the water has to shove it down; if it isn’t awful wide it wii all come down the Amherstburg Channel. Mr. HOUGH.Will the ice conditions be made very much worse by the construction of the dam ? Ca t. NICHOLSON.Yes. It will increase the current in there and mytl?ing that won’t block across between the head of the island and the main shore; if it goes down in there, it will carryeverything with it. Mr. HOUGII.And rrntically what ice comes downthem will be sent through the Am Eerstburg Channel in frontof the town ? Capt. NICHOLSON.Yes; they had a little run of ice this winter; it passed the island about 6 o’clock Saturday night, 6 inches deep; it THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 149

was broke up andit went down there, and you know at Amherstburg it carried awa lots of things; it carried away part of our abutment on the Bois&anc Island dock and the cribwork we put in there last winter. Mr. HOUGH. That was sent in there by reasonof the cofferdam? Ca t. NICHOLSON.It followed that channelright down and did not Rivide. Questioned by Mr. STRICKLAND: Mr. STRICKLAND.You have' not been throughthe Livingstone Channel in command of a boat yourself ? Ca t. NICHOLSON.Well, I was in charge of a boat; I was in the pilotkouse. Mr. STRICKLAND.You did not handle her ourself ? Capt. NICHOLSON. No;the captain han Bled her inside the pilot house and I was standin outside. Mr. STRICKLAND.You ad warning about the currents? Capt. NICHOLSON.Nothing a more than I had heard before, but I did not know what that big boat might do. I had 1,550 people on board my boat and I did not want to get down close to her. If her steerin gear got out of order or anythng of that kind, I wanted to be in s% ape so that I would not get into her; that is the reason I ke t back. br. STRICKLAND.Is there notquite a difference inhandling a vessel of the character you were on and one of the large freighters? Ca t. NICHOLSON.Not a great deal. A longer boat in a current handP es nicer than a short boatdoes. Mr. STRICKLAND.A9 to the ice, is not that controlled by the wind? Capt. NICHOLSON.Well, it is to a certain extent, but if there is no wind it goes down that way; it has to be blowing very hard from the eastward and then it will follow down by Grosse Ile. If there is no wind toamount to anything, it follows thenatural speedwaters down. Mr. STRICKLAND.Does not more of that go through the cofferdam than the channel ? Capt. NICHOLSON. No;300 feet does not let a very big cake of ice down and then it blocks up. Mr. TAWNEY.Your company operates these boats as excursion boats and passenger boats? Capt. NICHOLSON.Yes. Mr. TAWNEY.What is your route from Amherstburg up across to Detroit ? Capt. NICHOLSON.We go right down the east channel and come right back up that channel. Mr. TAWNEY.Do you cross? Are there any other lines that cross between the southeast corner of the cofferdam and the head of Bois Blanc Island ? Capt. NICIIOLSON.N:, lines that I know of; there may be tu 7 and barges and the like of t,hat, but there are no lines except thehite Star. Mr. STRICKLAND.Did you oppose the construction of the Living- stone Channel mhen it was first proposed? Capt. NICIIOLSON.Oh, yes; all the trouble in my mind is that the channel is not made wide enough; 300 feet is the channel we had 30 years ago. 150 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. Mr. LIVINGSTONE.If you cannavi ate it withall the ease you speak of, what is the necessity for mak ing it wider? Capt. NIcruxsoN. You takc that length of a channel and if it was 450 feet or 500 feet you would have more room if anything should ha!8rwitness was not further examinctl. TESTIMONY OF WALTER E. CAMPBELL. .. Walter E. Campbell, of Detroit, a witness roducect on behalf of the town of Amh,erstburg, being duly sworn,(f cposetl as follows: Questioned by Mr. IIOUQH': Mr. HOUGH. You are presidentof the Detroit& Windsor BerryCo. ? Mr. CAMPBELL.Yes, sir. Mr. HOUGH. Your company owns Bois Blanc Island? Mr. CAMPBELL. Yes,sir. Mr. HOUGH. That is the island they want to hook a dam on to? Mr. CAMPBELL.Yes, sir. Mr. HOUQH.You are a master mariner yourself? Mr. CAMPBELL.I havo been. Mr. HOUGH.You are familiar with the channels in the lower Detroit River? Mr. CAMPBELL. Yessir. Mr. HOUGH.Have you been through the Livingstone Channel? Mr. CAMPBELL.Yes, sir. Mr. Houcrr. Just state what you noticed. Mr. CAMPBELL.I went through the day the commission was there; I went through on the €€ancock. Mr. HOUGH.Have you anything to say regarding thecross current ? Mr. CAMPBELL.I did not notice any cross current, both going up and down, at that point. I was talking to the gentlemen mostof the time, but observing also, and I did not notice any current. Mr. TAWNEY. Do you know of anybody on the boat who did 8 Mr. CAMPBELL.I do not think so; I do not think there is much cross current there. Mr. TAWNEY.It was a pretty cold day. Mr. CAMPBELL.I do not consider there is a cross cLrrent there; I have been on the island since then and observed hundreds of boats going down, and I have not heard any man say there was a cross current in that part of the channel to bother anybody. Mr. HOUGH.You remained on the deck of the Huncock all the time ? Mr. CAMPBELL.Yes. Mr. HOUGH.You were not getting out of the weather in the cabin? Mr. CAMPBELL.No, sir; and most of the commissioners were up on the deck all the time too. Mr. HOUQH.What effect do you think this dike, if built, will have on the channel between the island and the town of Amherstburg? Mr. CAMPBELL.I think if you will reduce the channel from 2,000 feet wide at the head to 1,000 feet you will get a much increased current. You may help one channel, but .you will certainly spoil the other. Mr. ROUQH. It is improving the Livingstone Channel at the expense of the Amherstburg Channel. THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 151 Ah. CAMPBELL.I do not know that you will improve the Living- stone Channel if you leave a 300-foot opening there, because that will shoot across to theLivingstone Channel with greater force, confined to that space, than it would if it wcre all left open. There is anillustration right here in thecity of Ilctroit.Every (lay in heavy rainstorms thesewers will belch forth their waterTi0 or 100 and 150 feet outside the docks against thc current from an 8 and 12 foot sewer. You can go down anyday to the public lightingplant in Detroit antl see the effect of the watcr going out in the Detroit River from their sewers; it will run out 100 feet. If you confine the dike to a 300-foot opening, it will make a much stronger current through that 300-foot opening and it will rcach away over beyond the Liv- in stone Channel, and I think will ruin it. %Lr. HOUGII.Confining a stream in a narrow channel has a somewhat similar effect to putting a nozzle on a hose? Mr. CAMPBELL. Yes;if you confine it, and you will give it much more force. Mr. HOUGH. What direction will the current take clown this dam as fur as theAmherstburg Channel is concerned-down thedam along the head of the island into thc Amherstburg Channel-what direction will it take! Mr. CAMPBELL.The current will go to the eastward. Mr. HOUGH.You think it willgo right across the Amherstburg Channel ? Mr. CAMPBELL.In allprobabilit it will go across and hit the Amherstburg dock, the sameas it CiYoes at the Limekiln at the upper end. I am not prepared to state that. but I would naturally suppose where.you confine a channel from 2,000 feet to 1,000 feet, when it gets into that cone it is going to be a stronger current and it will raise the water. Mr. HOUGH.In your opinion, it will cause a current from the head of the island across the Amherstburg Channel to the Amherstburg dock 9 Mr. CAMPBELL.If you confinc the waters by a dike from the head of the island over to the Livingstono Channel,you have a great deal of water coming down river antl you will confine it to a 1,000-foot channel, which is the Amharstburg Channel, and that will raise the water and make a largely increased flow and increased current, and possibly increased damage, at certain times of the year anyway. Mr. HOUGH.Will this have any other effect on your property or on the island? Mi. CAMPBELL.I can not tell you whether it would have the effect of eating away the head of the island, perha s not, although I have prepared against that by building dikes outsiR e with stone that came out of the river. Mr. HOUOH.That is along the side? Mr. CAMPBELL.Yes. Mr. HOUGH.Would it have any effect on the navigation of your boat through the LivingstoneChannel ? Mr. CAMPBELL.That is what I am afraid of. I am afraid that if we had that increased amount of water going down the Amherstburg Channel, with the increased current, that it wouldbe unlikely we could stop at Amherstburg down stream. It might be all right, but in turning a large boat around in a narrow channel, which we have 152 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. to do now, it may be difficult. We have a steamboat turn around in the channel and sheis about the largest thing that can turn around, and with the increased current we might have to turn on the anchor or go below theisland. Turning on theanchor could bedone all right and it would not hurt anybody, but it would be very incon- venient. Mr. TAWNEY.In what rospect would it affect navigation generally P Mr. CAMPBELL.In the increased current you would not be capable of handling your boat with the same degree of safety ou do now. Lumber boats andtow boats coming 011 with tows would 9eel the effect of the increased current and would experience increased difficulties. Mr. TAWNEY.There has been no one representin? the navigating interests on the Great Lakes except you who has c aimed that this would affect the Amherstburg Channelso as to be a menaceto navigation. Mr. CAMPBELL.I think it would affect the Amherstbur Channe- I think it would spoil the Amherstburg Channe . I have inion of quitea number of captains,talking F to them. ed with a great many captains who sailed boats on the Great Lakes and have been down to the Livingstone Channel, and until I met Capt. Brown I failed to find one that had been bothered at all in going through the Livingstone Channel. Mr. TAWNEY.Would thisdam affect yourinterest m the Bois Blanc Island? Mr. CAMPBELL.In dollars and cents do you mean? Mr. TAWNEY.Yes. Mr. CAMPBELL.Not a penny. It would naturally mar the beauty of the river, thatis all, and as far as that is concerned it would affect themotor boats and pleasure boats. It would put something in there that is not necessary and is useless, and whicll can be done in other ways without affecting the; beauty of the river at all. Mr. TAWNEY.What would be the height of the dam ? Mr. CAMPBELL.It would ccrtainly have to come to the top of the water and more, to be effective. Mr. TAWNEY.Have you places of amusemont on the island where your boats carry the passengers to and fro Z Mr. CAMPBELL.To a certain degree there are legitimate places of amusement there. Mr. TAWNEY.I was not questioning that at all. Mr. CAMPBELL.They are notplaces like you fmd in theavorage park where they are out for your money and trying to get all they can. The amusements on our park are few and far between. The price is popular and the idea is to get as largea crowd down there as possible. We don’t want to take a man’s money all in one day, we would rather get him eight or ten times than all at once, because in that way we would get more steamboat fare. Mr. HOUGH.Ilow many poople did you carry to the park last year? Mr. CAMPBELL.I never usually tell what business we do because you may be an assessor and raise my tuxes; ossibly three or four hundred thousand passengers go down to BOIS8lanc Island in a year; at all ovents it is within a s uirrel’s jump of that, something in that neighborhood; I can not te 9you the exact number. THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 153

TESTIMONY OF CAPT. FREDERICK TROTTER. Ca t. FREDERICKTROTTER, of Amhcrstburg, Ontario, witness pro- duceB on behalf of the town of Amherstburg,being duly sworn, deposed as follows : Questioned by Mr. HOUGH: Mr. HOUGH.You are in the wrecking business? Capt. TROTTER.Tugging and wrecking. Mr. HOUGH.You were one of those who were disap ointed in not &ding some workto do the day the LivingstoneChanne !/ was opened ! Capt. TROTTER.I ex ected a job but I did not get one. Mr. HOUGH.I am aP raid the Livingstone Channel has been given a name which it does not deserve. What do you think about that? Before you answer that, may I ask if you are familiar with the channels in the lower Detroit River? Capt. TROTTER.I worked in it off and on during the construction of that channcl. Mr. HOUGH.You have been in the tugging and wrecking business for how long! Capt. TROTTER. Ten years. Mr. HOUGII. Your tugging station is at Amherstburg? Capt. TROTTER. Head uarters at Amherstburg. Mr. HOUGH. Tellus w1 at you think as to the cross current there that we have bcen talking about. Capt. TROTTER. There is a cross current thcre, but so far it has caused no damagc. Mr. HOUGH.Is thcre any reason why it should cause damage? If a boat is properly navigated by a man who knows the current is there, and knows how to avoid it, should there be any danger? Capt. TROTTER.I have never handled a largo boat through and I thinkthat question wouldbe answered by.thecaptains of the large boats. Mr. HOUGH.In any. case, I supposeyou regret to say that no accidents of any kind have happencd to assist you in your business? Capt. TROTTER.No accidentshave happened there whatever. . Mr. HOUGH. Whatis your opinion about the necessity of this dam so far as offsetting currents is concorned? Capt.TROTTER. It wouldoffset thecurrent to a certainextent but the current apparently has done no harm, there has not been enough currcnt to causc any trouble that helps me any. Mr. HouaIr. What is th‘e current in the Amhcrstburg Channel at the head of the upper lightshi for instance 8 Capt. TROTTER.At the Limetiln? Mr. HOUGH.Yes. Capt. TROTTER.It is about the swiftest current we have anywhere in the rive?; it is about as swift as you will find anywhere. Mr. HOUGH.On the chain of Lakcs? Capt. TROTTER.I would not say that, but in the Detroit River. Mr. HOUGH.Docs it set in very strongly to the east there at the up cr lightship ? 8apt. TROTTER. At the upper end of the crossing it sets in to the eastward. At the lower end it sets out to the westward. 154 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL.

Mr. HOUGH. If this dike wore built what would be tho effect of the current caused by it on the Amherstburg Channel at the head of the island? Capt.TROTTER. Well, that current which now scts to the westward, atthe lowerend of the crossin would naturally follow it down the channel more to the eastwarf It wouldbe filled to the eastward if it could not get out to the westward. Mr. HOUGH.Would that cross the Amherstburg Channel, in your opinion, Mr. Trotter ? Capt. TROTTER. It wouldcome intothe Amherstburg Channel; there is no other way for it to 0. Mr. HOUGH.I mean into t Fl e east channel that is used by the boats. ~~ ~ ? Capt. TROTTER.Yes.

Mr. HOUGH. Wouldit be strong- enough_I to cross it and strike the Amherstburg dock ? Capt. TROTTER.That is a question for an expert; I do not know. Mr. LIVINGSTONE. Didyou cver tow any crlbs through the Liv- ingstone Channel? Capt. TROTTER.I towed thefour concrete cribs which are used in the channel as lighthouses. I tugged them from the head of the dam down and placed them where they now are standing on the sides of the channel. Mr. STRICKLAND.Did you feel anycurrent while towing these cribs ? Capt. TROTTER. Yes,we felt all these currents; it was something we could not tow over 2 miles an hour. Mr. STRICKLAND.They were cross currents? Capt. TROTTER. Wewould find currents crossways. Mr. STRICKLAND.What did you do withthese cribs in order to allow for the cross currents? Capt. TROTTER.I headed my tug in the opposite direction into the current, in the diroction the current was coming from. Mr. STRICKLAND.Did you not have to take very sharp turns to cross the channel? Ca t. TROTTER.At times I did,becausc I was not making over 2 m'9 es an hour, or probably under that through the water. The current in that place 1s somewhere in that neighborhood. Mr. STRICKLAND.And any other person towing in the channel may have the same expcrience ? Capt. TROTTER.In slow towing, the slower you go the more you have to hit across. Mr. KING.It was mentioned this morning that the steamer Ward A,mss had got into trouble in the Livingstone Channel; did you ever hear of her having trouble in the channel ? Capt. TROTTER.I heard of herhaving trouble, but not in the channel. Mr. KING. What date? Capt. TROTTER.I can not say. Mr. KING. Last November? Capt. TROTTER.Somewhere after the channel had been opened. Mr. KING. Where was her troublc? Capt. TROTTER.I am not sure about the boats, but there was one boat reported as striking in the Livingstone Channel, and whenit was THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 155 sifted outit was €ound shestruck on Rallards Reef above the channel. She went down to the channel, but the damage had been done above and +she was supposedto be sinking as sheentered the channel. Whether that was the Ward Ames or not I do not know. Mr. KING. Have you heard of any other boat having trouble in the channel ? Capt. TROTTER.Any boats that striko in that neighborhood are reportedto Mr. Dickson, the engineer incharge, and I asked Illr. Dlckson this morning if any boats had hit in the LivingstoneChannel, and nothing had been reported to him. He said that one boat had been re orted to him, and that when he sifted it he found it did not hit in t Ke channel. Mr. KING.hd with regard to the only re ort thatwas sifted it waa found that the steamer had struck abovet i e channel ? Capt. TROTTER.Yes; he found out she had notbeen in the channel. TESTIMONY OF CAPT. JOHN J. BEMSTEAD.

Capt. JOHNJ. BEMSTEAD,01 the cityof Detroit, awitness on behalf of the town of Amherstburg, being duly sworn, deposed as follows: Mr. IIOUGH.You are a master manner, I believe? Capt. BEMSTEAD.Yes, sir. Mr. IIOUGH.For how long ? Capt. BEMSTEAD. Twenty-six years. Nr. ISOUCH.You have resided in Detroit for that length of time? Capt. BEMSTEAD.Yes. Nr. HOUGH. You are an American citizen '1 Capt. BEMSTEAD.Yes. Mr. NOUGH. Whatis your boat Z Capt. BEMSTEAD.The steamer Columbia. Mr. IIOUGH.That is a large passenger boat? Capt. BEMSTEAD.Yes. Mr. HOUGH. What is her carrying ca acity ? Capt. BEMSTEAD.Three thousand tffree hundredand fifty passengers. Mr. HOUGH.You run between Detroitand Amherstbarg and Island Park? Capt. BEMSTEAD.Yes. Mr. HOUGH.You are familiar with the current there ? Capt. BEMSTEAD. Notin the Livingstone Channel. Mr. I-IouaH. In theAmherstburg Channel ? Capt. BEMSTEAD.yes, sir. Mr. NOUGH. You are familiar with the situation m the locality? Capt. BEMSTEAD.Yes, sir. Mr. ROUGH. The Amherstburg current over the Limestone Cross- ing is now about 2+ miles ? Capt. BEMSTEAD. Somewhereabput that. Mr. IIOUGH.What, in your opinlon, will be the increase in current through the channel between the island and Amherstburg if the dam is constructed 1: Capt. BEMSTEAD.I think it would be fully one-third more. Mr. HOUGH. What effect will that have in handling boats in that Amherstburg Channel? 156 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. Capt. BEMSTEAD.It will have the effect, I think, to make it impossible to land at Amherstburg head down with our boats. Mr. HOUGH.If you can not land with your boat that way, you can not land with any other large boat? Capt. BEMSTEAD.No. Mr. HOUGII. What do you think mould be the course of the current diverted into the Amherstburg Channel by this dike ? Ca t. BEMSTEAD.I think it would shape across the head of the islanc1; to Amherstburg. Mr. HOUGH. You think it would go right across the Amherstburg Channel ? Capt. BEMSTEAD.Nearly. Mr. €TOUGH. And cause a dangerous condition at that point? Capt. BEMSTEAD.It would to us; we land at Amherstburg, going down, head down. Mr. I~OUGH.It would cause that danger for any boat the same asa cross current will anywhere ? Capt. BEMSTEAD.Yes, sir. Mr. STRICKLAND.Which of the two channels would you prefer to navigate ? Cmt. BEMSTEAD.I have never been downthe Livingstone., Channel. if;. STRICKLAND.You have 110 experiencc of it? Capt. BEMSTEAD.I know nothing about it. Mr. STRICKLAND.Is it not the habitof masters to head their boats against a current when landing 8 Capt. BEMSTEAD.Not :t boat running light. A boat running with a tow, of course the cross current mill take the tow out. Mr. STRICKLAND.Are not the White Star boats landed head down against the stream in making their landings? Ca t. BEMSTEAD.At Sugar Island. They are side-wheel boats and can Ro it much easier than a propeller. Mr. STRICKLAND.Do they not do it in the river while the current is strong Z Ca t. BEMSTEAD.Yes; but they are side-wheel boats and you can handP e them mucheasier than a screw boat. Mr. STRICKLAND.Will afreighter ever land with her head with the stream? Cnpt. BEMSTEAD. I haw ncvcr seen onc. TESTIMONY OF DR.HODGETTS. Dr. Hodgetts, medical adviser to the public health committee of the commission on conscrvation of Canada, a witness produced on behalf of t'ho town of Amhcrsthurg, bcirlg duly sworn, deposed as follows : Mr. HOUGH. What is your o1Goinl position? Dr. PTOIWETTS. .L 8.m rncdical adviser t'o the ublic health committee of the cmmmission of consc:-vut8iouof (hnas n. Mr. HOUGII. Have you in t,ho coursc oi your duties considered the eil'ect thnt the building of t,hisproposed tlilw will have upon the wtxter supply of t,ho town of Amhc?rstlnn.g'4 Dr. HODGETTS. Yes; I have. Mr. HOUQII.Will you give us your opinion on t'hat subjcct? THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 167 Dr. HODQETTS.I know Amherstburg during the time I have been health officer inOntario for the last 18 years.Amherstburg has always suffered more or less from typhoid fever, at times epidemic, no doubt due to the factof the sins of commission on the part of the cities and towns higher up the river. Having gone over the ground since the Livingstone Channelwas cut, I consider that with that dam placed in the position in which it is there will be an increased menace tothe health of the citizens of Amherstburg. That is, thattheir water supply will receive a greater amount of contamination than is at resent reaching it. may just be possible that the dam placed in the position it is- I dp not know, but I know that dams sometimes are placed there by engineers to revent sludge reaching steamboat channels, and it may be just possi Ele that that is placed there to keep the large amountof sludge which must come down that river from the sewage of a city the size of Detroit and Windsor and other pointsalong the river from reaching thatsteamboat, channel. Therefore that sludgo would be diverted by that dam to the Amherstburg side, and it must be of necessity. The very fact that your water supplyis polluted at times, sometimes more and sometimesless, makes it a pery dificultproblem to treat, your water supply when you are doplng it by the modern method of hypochlorit,e; it, becomes charged with sewage and you put in t8he dopeto quiet the public mind and the bacteria. Mr. STAUNTON.Do they drink the water out of the r;ver '1 Dr. HODGETTS.Unfortunat,ely this is one of the towns where they have to take the water supply fromt,he river, a river into which sewage comes from the American and Canadian sdes, and yet, according to the Ontlario law, Amherstburg to-day would really have to treat their sewage before depositing it in theriver, and yetthey are corn elled to drink the water sup ly whichis olluted with sewage up t!l at river; thatis one of the 2ifficulties we K ave at that point. Mr. HOUQH.The reason why that danger will be increased is because a greater quantity of this polluted water will be diverted in the direction of the Amherstburg intake pipe? Dr. HODQETTS.Certainly. Mr. STRICKLAND.Have you made any tests since this Livingstone Channel was created? Dr. HODQETTS.I am not the officer to make a test. The Ontario Board of Health has made tests, andI believe there is an official here to testify. Mr. STRICKLAND.You yourself have not made tests? Dr. HODQETTS.No; it is not in my department. TESTIMONY OF COL. PATRICK. Col. Patrick, of the United States Engineering Corps, a witness already examined in this case, was recalled: Mr. CASQRAIN.What is the general plan of construction of this dike, if there is any such at present Z Col. PATRICK. Thereis no mention made anywhere of any specific plans or projects except that rock is to be dumped in the water and with a sufficiently widespace t'o allow this to assume its natural course. Mr. CASQRAIN.It would abut on Bois Blanc Island, of course? 158 THE LIVINGSTONECHANNEL. Col. PATRICK.It must necessarily abut on Bois Blanc Island. Mr. CASGRAIN.Under whose supervision would this work be carried out ? Col. PATRICK.Under the supervision of the officers in charge of my ofice. Mr. CASGRAIN.That is the Corps of Army Engineers? Col. PATRICK.Pes, sir. Mr. CASGRAIN. Supposingit were necessary to repair this dike in future years, by whom and under whose supervision would that be done ? Col. PATRICK.Of course in answering that question I am ignoring to a certain extent that art of this is in Canadian waters. I assume if the United States bu&s the dike the United States would be obli- gated to keep it in repair, andit would be done under the supervision under which it was built. Mr. TAWNEY.All that may be subject to future agreement between the two Governments with respect to re air and maintenance. Col. PATRICK.Yes; as in thecase of af 1 worksin boundary waters. Mr. TAWNEY.It is subjectto an agreementmade between the two countries. Col. PATRIOK.Yes; I was gauging what they will do in the future by what has been done in the past. Mr. TAWNEY.How much of the proposed dike would be in Cana- dian territory andhow much in American territory 8 Col. PATRICK.As I stated yesterday, probably one-third would be in American and two-thirds in Canadian waters. Mr. TAWNEY.In this rojected dike there is to be an opening of 300 feet near the point oP Bois Blanc Island. What is the object of having that opening ? Col. PATRICK.One of the objections urged b Amherstburg, as I understand, was that a dike that was absolute9 y closed would prevent shi ping in that vicinity from reaching conveniently the west side of Jois Blanc Island, and as the opening had no serious effects at allon navigation through Tivingstone Channel, I said we will leave it open or part of it open through. It was meantto be a convenience for those people; that was all. (The commission adjourned at 5 o’clock in the afternoon to meet again at 10 o’clock t,o-morrow, Wednesday morning.)

INTERNATIONALJoIm COMMISSION, Detroit, Mi&., FeF’ebruary 19, 1913. The Internntionul Joint Conmlission rcsumed it’s inquiry into the referencc re the Livingstone Chnnnel at 10 o’clock this morning in the Federal courthouse, Ilctroit,Mich. Prescnt: Jarncs A. Tuwncv, presiding; Th. Chase Casgrain, K. C.; Frank S. Streeter; IItnry A. Powell, K. C.; Charles A. Magrath; Georgc Turner. L. Whit,eBusbey WA~Lz1wrcnce J. Burpec, secretaries. THE LIVINOSTONE CHANNEL. 159

TESTIMONY OF EDWARD J. PATTON. Edward J. Patton, a witness produced on behalf of the township of Morden, being duly sworn, deposed as follows: Mr. HOUGH. Whereabouts in the township of Morden do you live? Mr. PATTON.Half a mile below the town. Mr. HOUGII.On the river front? Mr. Pn.rToN. Yes; right across from Bois Blanc. Mr. HOUGH. IIowlong have you lived there ? Mr. PATTON.I have lived there since 1S80. Mr. HOUGH. What hasbeen the action of the water on the Morden shore just below Arnherstbur Mr. PATTON.At the timet EL? e waLer would bc at itslevel, you may say, it had washed the bank to a great extent,SO that theGovernment and the township of Morden also had to spend quite an amount of money. Mr. HOUGII. That is, the township of Morden joins the town of Amherstburg to the south? Mr. PATTON.Yes; about midway to Bois Blanc Island. Mr. HOUGH.These works have beenconstructed from time to time b the township and by the Government? Mr. 5ATTON. Yes. Mr. TAWNEY.Which Government ? Mr. PATTON.The Dominion Government. Mr. CASGRAIN.You live below Amherstburg? Mr. PATTON.Just half a mile below the town limits. Mr. HOUGH.What effect will additionalwaters being brought down that Amherstburg Channel have upon the Morden water front and on these works that have been constructed there ? Mr. PATTON.It would have quite an effect; on the banks should the current be increased or the water raised in any way; the washing of the boats would go right over the stonework that the Government and township have put down to prevent washing away of the banks. Mr. HOTJGH.Have you noticed any of the Ice conditionsdown there.~"" 3. Mr. PATTON.Yes. Mr. I-IOUGH.Have you ever seen the river running- fullof ice? Mr. PATTON.Oh, yk; frequently. Mr. HOUGH.It is a very common occurrence in the spring and fall to have the river running fullof ice? Mr. PATTON.Yes. Mr. HOUGH.Have you ever seen the ice windrowed there ? Mr. PATTON.Yes, a number of times; one time es ecidly in 1911 when the ferry corn ,any's Britannia went through to $oledo, I understand, to relieve t here, I was standinat my door andthey were there from two to three hours getting tB rough the windrows. Mr. HOUGH.They were two or three hours making so much head- way through the ice ! Mr. PATTON.They could not break through 100 yards. They got through the windrows and they went on. Mr. ~IOUGII.Those ico conditions would be made ~ersscby divertin a larger portion of the water and flowing ice into that channel? %r. PATTON.That is what we are afraid of. 160 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL, Mr. POWEL;.How high above ordinary high water is that retain- inwall? %r. PATTON.In a great many places it is not more than 12 or 14 inches. From what I can understand from those who put it there, it, was put there to break the swells of the largest steamers that went by and prevent them washing against the bank. Mr. TAWNEY.Tell us, if you know, what is the variation in the level of the Amherstburg Channel ? Mr. PATTON.That I can not answer. Mr. TAwmY. You have lived on the bank for a long time; have you high water at times, flood water, and so on ? Mr. PATTON.Yes. Mr. TAWNEY.In these times how much is the rise? Mr. PATTON.I have seen it rise high enough to go across the road at Elliotts Point. Mr. TAWNEY.In feet; have you any measurement at Amherstburg to show what is the rise in feet? Mr. PATTON.That wouldbe guessworkon mypart because I never took the measurements of it, but I should think it raised as much as 3 feet. Mr. POWELL.Is this field ice in large ieces or broken up? Mr. PATTON.Sometimes it will exten2 halfway across the river. Mr. POWELL.Is it heavy ice, or what? Mr. PATTON.Yes; it is heavy ice; it is broken up and floats down. Sometimes it freezes togetherand forms larger cakes, just fields of ice. Mr. HOUGH. This variation in level of 3 feet that you speak of is caused by the wind coming from different directions ? Mr. PATTON.Cross winds. Mr. STRICKLAND.In what month was the boat you spoke of caught in the ice channel ? Mr. PATTON.I have not the date andI can not tell you the month. It was the time that the Britannia and one of the smaller boats went to Toledo. Capt. Nicholson, I understand, was on board. Mr. STRICKLAND.Was it not in one of the coldest winter months? Mr. PATTON.That I can not say. Mr. STRICKLAND.Do not the winds have considerable to do with the formation of ice in the channel? Mr. PATTON.I do not know about that; I suppose it would. Mr. STRICKLAND.I mean with regard to the quantity of ice in the channel ? Mr. PATTON.I live at thelower end of Bois Blanc; I am not speaking of the western channel at all. Mr. STRICKLAND.Is not the erosion of thebanks due almost entirely to the washing from the passing boats ? Mr. PATTON.Yes; at high water. Mr. STRICKLAND.Has not the opening of the Livingstone Channel lessened the number of boats passing by Amherstburg? Mr. PATTON.Yes; it has to a great extent. Mi. STRICKLAND.Does not the retaining wall give protection from currents alonc 4 Mr. PATTON.Yes; if the water has not been raised. Mr. STRICKLAND.The walls are high enough to take care of the currents that go through there ? THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 161

Mr. PATTON.I think they arc. Mr. STRICKLAND.Is not t'he change in tllc u-atcr levols due to the storm conditions almost ent,irely '1 Mr. PATTON.That I cannot say. I know that when the wind blows st,rong from the east the water rises, and when we have a west wind it, is lower. Mr. IlOUGIr. This work does not, consist of a regular wall, such as Mr. Strickland SCC~IIISto undorutand; it, is a lot of riprap, loose stone thrown along thc shore ? Mr. I'ATT&. yes. Mr. TTOUGII. What 8.re the boats that ca,usc. the greatest- swell and greatest damage? hfr. PnmoN. It is according to tho speed; the big side-wheelers. Mr. ITOTJGII.As I understand it, those big side-wheelers are not to take tlhe T,ivingstone Channel but are to continue to go t'hrough the Amherstburg Channel; is that a fact,, Col. Patrick Col. PATRICK. They have theprivilege of going either way, if you mean a passenger boat. TESTINONY OF DR. W. FRED.PARK. Dr. W. Fred. Park, mayor of Amherstburg, a witness produced on behalf of Amherstburg, being duly sworn, deposed: Mr. ITowcIx. You are the mayor of ,Amhmstburg? Dr. PARK. I am. Mr. HOUGEI. You are also a pract'icing physician? Dr. PARK.I am. Mr. HouaH. For how many years? Dr. PARK.For about 30 years. Mr. HOWGH. Have you been medical health offlcer for a considerable part of that time? Dr. PARK.In the surrounding townships and towns; 1 have been medical hoalth officer for the different municipalities. Mr. I~O~JGII.Arc you familiar with t,he pollution of waters and the water supply 2. Dr. PARK. Yes; as mayorover R period of yearsand as health oficcr I come practically In contact with the health conditions. Mr. IIOUGH.What are the health conditions in the town of Am- harstburg '1 Dr. PARK.Probabl the most in1 ortant questions as far as health matt,ers are concerneJ we have.to 9ea1 with in the town are in connection with t hoid fever, whlch has ovcr a number of years been directly tracedye to tho sewerage pollution of the Detroit River. Mr. HOUGH. What is thetyphoid rate in Amherstburgas compared with the rate of the surrounding municipalit,ies which do not taketheir supply from therivcr ? 1 understandthat )art of the township of Anderson and Morden get their water supp 1y from the river. Dr. PARK. The t,;yphoid in that district is pra.c:tically confined to the t>own of Amherstburg and the wa.t,cr front of t,he Detroit River. Thkt is accounted for in this way: A great many of the poople in the surr0undin.g townshipsractically take their water su ply directly from tho river. They 8lg wells a short distancc from tR o river, and 86342-13-11 162 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. the amount of filhtiorl through the narrow bed of sand is not SUE- cient to eliminate all sorts of infections. I know, however, from my experience extending over 20 years, us a fact, that thereis practically no typhoid attributable t,o wellswhich are bored wells, rock wells. There are practically no surface wells in either of these townships and practically no ty hoid. Mr. HOUGI. 80,s Amherstburgtaeat it.s wn.ter in my scientific ?6:. PARK.Ycs. Arnhcrstburg treats tho wrkter by t,he chlorination process, and with refcrencc. tjo that I may say that we found in storm conditions, when largc quantities of vegetable matter are flowing in following storms,and when the water is muddy, me find that the rystem is not as efficient md that we have outbreaks of a few cases of typhoid following such conditions. The chlorination process seems to be producing good rosult,s when the water is clear. Mr. IIoua~.What effect will the construction of this dam have on trheamount of pollut8ion divertedtoward the Amherstburg mater suply? br. PARK. TO a great) oxtent,. I believe the dam will throw back practical1 all the water intoour water supply, andbeing heavily laden with eartz y matter thre will be more or less precipitatlon pract,icall on ourintake pipe. There willbe asedimentation there, and f believe it will very much increase our typhoid rate, which is already very high in proportmion to thc typhoid rate tha.t exist.s at Niagara, for example. Mr. CASGRAIN.il vood deal has been said about the Canard River. 1 would like you to $(:scribe that river. Dr. PARK. The Canard River is a sluggish river which runs back into the heart of the county of Essex, muddy in character. A good deal of swamp land exists around about it. Mr. TAWNEY. Whatis the drainage area of the Canard IZiver ? Dr. PARK.I would suppose for drainagepurposes probably 10 miles. Mr. II~UGII.It is said to drain 100,000 acres. Mr. CASGRAIN.TH theopulation dense there 8 There is quitea settlement on the CanarB River it,self. Dr. I’ARK. Tt is not,hinq more than the average moderately t,hickly populatedcountry district. The population of the township of Anderson is only 1,900. Mr. TAWNEY.How far above Amhcrstburg does the Canard River enter into the Det,roit, River ? Dr. PARK.Something in t,hc neighborhood of 5 miles. Mr. POWELI,.A couple of miles above the Limekiln Crossing ? Dr. PARK.Probably 23 or 3 miles. Mr. TAWNEY. Threemiles above the entrance t,o the Livingstone Channel ? Dr. PARK.Yes. Mr. CASORAIN.Is the water of the .liirer Canard polluted? Dr. PARK.No. In my experience of over 20 ears and being health officer of that townshi there has been practica T ly no cases of typboid reported along that wk ole distrikt over a number of years. Mr. CASGRAIN.If one of the effects of this damis to bring the water of the River Canard down osite t,he town of A-mherstburg, it would not then pollute t,he

. THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 163

Dr. PARK.It is not for that reason. I (lo notdread it on that account. T dread it because you tire less capable of sterilizing any muddywater tha,nyou are of ~t~tsrilizingwater which is clear. I think it will be an added danger, that,is all. Mr. TAWNEY.Is it not it ftwt that, this river, emptying into hhe Detroit River, generally flows down t,heshore along* the Canadian side'past Amherstburg a,nd does not gct out into t,he middle of the Detroit River? Dr. PARK.Yes, it does. I have seen it myself crossing thc head of Bois Blanc Island under certJainconditiorls. Thtm is no question but what a portion of River Canard water does ass between the head of Bois Blanc Islandand the lower end of tflc dike. Uider certain weat,her conditions, articularly east winds, it does follow along. We alwi~ysin this neighk) orhood get an enst wil1t-l before stormy weather and the wind from t,he east drives it toward the American shore. Mr. POWEL,L.Will not, two such streams run t,oget,her for miles wit'h a clear line of demarcatioll betwwn them? Dr. PARK.There is no question but that, under ordinaly circumstances you can see the two channels clearly marked. You can sre t,he muddy water flowing in the bluc water of the river every day, but undcrstorm conditions thirt water becomes practically a churned. mass. Mr. CASGRAIN.You see t,hat in the case of theOttawa and St. Lawrence Rivers where they join ; they run together for miles, and the same way wit,h t,he--". Mr. POWELL.And the samc way with the Thompson andthe Fraser. Dr. PARK.At the Limekiln Crossing the water is so churned that it ets nlbre doeply into the channel at that point. ffr. POWELL. Are they not kept apart by the difference in density of the water; would not the tendency be for this muddy current to sink to the shore down on the Canadian side without entering into the great body of water under n

Dr. PARK. It may )ossibly;most assuredly a ortion of it does. Mr. STRICKLAND.I l!ow far from the bank is ti c intake pipe at Amherstburg ? Dr. PARK.The intake pip estends something in the neighborhood of 80 feet, I think. It goes over the channel bank to the bed of the river and the8 extends a number of feet beyond the channel bank. Mr. STRICKLAND.Don’t you thillkthe increased current would benefit in the matterof sewerage ? Dr. PARK.It would simplybring larger quantities of sewage- polluted water at the intake pipe. Mi. STRICKLAND.Would it not pass down more quickly ? Dr. PARK.We pump under suction and we are bound to get it. Mr. TAWNEY.Are the1.c any other rivers or cities on the Canadian sideexcept the River Canard anti Windsor that discharge sewage into the Detroit Riveron the Canadian side? Dr. PARK.Windsor, Walkerville, ~t~ltlSandwich may be considered as one municipalit . &. TAwNEY. dhat is the population 1 Dr. PARK. The population ol the threc towns combined would be something in the neighborhood of 27,000 people. Mr. TAWNEY.Arc there any other rivers except the Canard that discharge surface drainage or sewage into the Detroit River above Amherstburg ? Dr. PARK.There are small ditches, such as Turkey Creek, and a few small ordinary drains, you may call them. Mr. POWELL.You say it would bring down largeramouut of pollution past the intake pipe for the water system of Amherstburg; you do not mean that although it would bring a larger quantity of polluted matter it would i~~crcauethe percentage of pollution in the water? Dr. PARK.I do not think so. Mr. POWELL.As you would take absolutely the same amount of water, it would make no difference to you ? Dr. PARK.Maybe not.Our town is similarto all other towns. We are taking an increased sup ly of water as we are growing. Mr. POWELL.The water wou t’d not be any more deleterious if they pumped the whole River Detroit past you than it is at present? Dr. PARK.Maybe not. * Mr. POWELL.That depends on thepercentage of deleterious matter in the water? Dr. PARE.Yes. Mr. POWELL.And that would not be increased by the increase of the current down your channel ? Dr. PARK.I do not think so. Mr. MAGRATH. Do not they treat thesewage on the Canadian side ? Dr. PARK.No. Mr. MAGRATH.What is the po ulation of Detroit? Dr. PARK.Four hundred and fty thousand or more. Mr. MAGRATH.1s the sewage treated in Detroit? Dr. PARK.No. Mr. MAORATH. What id the distance from Detroit to Amherstburg? Dr. PARK.About 18 miles. Mr. STRICKLAND.With the swifter current would there not be less sedimentation near your intake pipe? THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 165 Dr. PARK. The sedimentation would occur in that neighborhood, owing to the amount of dead water which would lie alongside of that dike.The effect of it wouldbe to form a pocket,and you are throwing the whole of the Canard water into that pocket, and sedimentation would occur there rather thau fa.rt,her down, where there is a rapid current. Mr. STRICKLAND.If the dike would increase the speed of the water, would it not carry off the sctlimentation? Dr. PARK.I do not think it would increase the speed of the water in that pocket I have referred to. More or less of the sedimentation would occur inthe ocket. Mr. STRICKLAND.fvould not that improve the condition? ‘ Dr. PARK.I do not feel so; I can not see it. I believe that the amount of sedimentation which would occur here at the bottom of the riverwould gradually become, at the foot of the Livingstone Channel, a mass of gelatinous material which would act as a source of infection. Mr. HOUGH.As I take it, the more of this pollution you take down, the more you are exposed to contagion ? Dr. PARK.Most conclusively so. Mr. HOUGH.So that although it may be even diffused in the water, there is anadditional amount of pollution broughtthere and an additional amount of danger; is that correct? Dr. PARK.I would ‘udge so. With Detroit an ever-growing city, the amount of typhoid is certainly going to be greater. For a number of years we have been able to trace our typhoid--assoon as Detroit gets a number of cases of typhoid, it is only a short period afterwards until typhoid shows up in our own county; that is notice- able all the time. TESTIMONY, OF F. A. DALLYN. P.A. Dallyn, engineer of the provincial board of health of Ontario, a witness produced on behalf of the town of Amherstburg, being duly sworn, deposed: Mr. HOUGH.Have you prepared a statementwith reference to the matters under discussion 1 Mr. DALLYN.I haveprepared a shortstatement for your convenience. Mr. HOUQH. Perhaps it will simplify matters if you read it. Mr. Dallyn then read the following statement:

STATEMENT OB F. A. DALLYN,ENGINEER OF THE PROVINCIAL I

4. The sludge discharge of combined sewers such as are used at Windsor, Walker. ville, and Sandwich is probably between 2 to 5 cubic yards per 1,000,000 gallons- The German figures are between 5 and 15 cubic yards for a somewhat stronger sewage. The per capita consumption of water in theDetroit River towns is probably between 125 to 325 United States gallons per capita per day. The German figures show the consumption to be between 30 and 60 gallons er capita per day. 5. The total sewage discharged per day into tie Detroit River amounts to approximately 135,000,000 gallons; Detrolt, 120,000,000 gallons; Windsor, 10,000,000; Walk- erville, 5,000,000 gallons. Roughly, 400 cubic yards per day---approximately 400 tons. This, I believe, is largely deposited in the area below Amherstburg. A proportion of this now flows past the town. The proposed diversion above Bois Blanc Island would increase the amount of dud e passing Amherstburg by a much greater per cent than the increase in flow, due to t%e fact that the change in thedirection of velocity would be the controlling factor rather than the actualincrease of flow. 8. Gross particles held in suspension, due to the increased velocity, will augment the present bad condition of the Amherstburg source of water supply. 7. It is not feasible by chlorination io add quantities of chlorine that will penelrate such gross particles (disintegrated faeces) which may frequently harbor pathogenic or disease-producing organismr. They increaHe the menace of typhoid and water-born infections. Mr. TAWNEY.How many samples of this water did you take in making the investigation ? Mr. DALLYN. Therewere possibly 80 samples. Mr. POWELL.Was it pretty full of bugs? Mr. DALLYN. The intestinal or anisms were present in one cro across Lighting Island pretty we1 B from one shore to the other. I&; stuff was a surface sample and there is a little more mixture as you get down. Mr. POWELL.Do mean from mainland to mainland, when you say from one shore to the other? Mr. DALLYN.Yes; the boat could not probablyget within 500 feet of either shore. Mr. STRICKLAND.Have you studiedthe currents in the several channels sufficiently to satmfy yourself where the major portion of the Detroit sewa e goes ? Mr. DALLYN.8nly from thebacterial counts; that shows pretty well where the pollution exists. Mr. STRICKLAND.Have you iven consideration tothe fact that with the dam inplace there wou? d be less water going over the Lime- kiln Crossin , with the dam in place between the cofferdam and Bois Blanc Islanf ? Mr. DALLYN.I understand from your Engineers’ report that there would be more. Mr. STRICKLAND. Notover the top. Mr. DALLYN.I understand the level would be raised, which would necessarily mcan that there would be more water. Mr. STRICKLAND.You understandthere would be morewater going over the Limekiln Crossing with the dam there ? Mr. DALLYN.Yes. Mr. STRICKLAND.And yoururlderstanding is that it is not a reversal of thatosition? Mr. DALLYN.%es Mr. STRICKLAND.‘Where is the Limekiln Crossing located ? Mr. DALLYN.I understand it is pretty well in the lower part of the channel where the cofferdam was. Mr. STRICKLAND.Is it down at the foot of the cofferdam or at the ead of it. THE LIVINGSTONECHANNEL. 167 Mr. DALLYN.I understood it was just about the foot of it. Mr. STRICKLAND.If that was the fact, by placing a dam in there, . if there would be less water going over the Llmekiln Crossing, would that change your opinion '1 Mr. HOITGH.Tt seems to me that uestion is hardly fair. Mr. DALLYN.I can not understan1 it. Mr. HOUGH. The pointis whether there is more or less water going through Amherstburg Channel opposite Amherstburgwhich will affect our water supply. The engineers all admit that more water will go through that channel than 1s going through it now. TESTIXONY OF DR. JOHNAMYOT. Dr. John Amyot, director of t.he laboratory of the provincial board of health of Ontario, a witness produced on behalf of the town of Amherstburg, being duly sworn, deposed: Mr. HOUGH.What is your official position? Dr. AMYOT. Director of the laboratory of the provincial board of health of Ontario. Mr. HOUUH.Are you familiar with the local wat,er-supply conditions around Amherstburg '4 Dr. AMYOT.In a general way only as to the pollution of the river. Onseveral occasions we haveexamined the watersupplies in our laboratory, selectled at Amherstburg from their water su ply, and we have frequently found it with organisms of the intestinaP organs. Mr. HOUGH. What is you opinion as to the effect of diverting a larger supply of sewage-polluted water into the channel from whch the mater supply of Amherstburg would be taken? Dr. RMYOT.It would increase the chances of keeping up infection, because the infecton is not always uniformlydistributed through this water. Mr. HOUGH. The more water that is diverted, the more the chances are increasedZ Dr. AMYOT.When bothwaters are of thesame class, yes. It is not, I believe a question of more pollution; it is just simply diverting a quantity of waterfrom another portion of the river-the same water-and there will bo more links in tho chain of danger. Typhoid has a much higher rate along these rivers than it has back in the country.

MEMORIAL FROM RESIDENTS OF AMIIERSTBURQ AND VICINITY.

Mr. HOUGH. There was a memorial presentmi to the commission at Amherstburg signed by resident,s of thecounty of Essex andthe township of Malden and of the township of Anderdon anti by several hundred residents of the town of Amherstburg. I think that memorial was filed with the Canadian secretary of the cornmission. Mr. TAWNEY.I wish to, suggest that if you want it in this record, you sign it and have it received and marked. Mr. TTOTTGII. Very well. Mr. CASGRAIN.Sornebodv said t,hn.t his memnrisl was signed to a great extent by school children and that itwas not a bona fide memorial; is that true? Mr. HOUGH.I think the children in the senior classes of the public schools were asked to sign it. There were quite a number of them. 168 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. Irrespective of that the petition was signed by between 1,000 and 1,200 altogether, and there are only 200 upils m that school in any event. So that I do not think it would \ e very material whether it was signed by them in any event. The petition was signed very generally and very largely and b very influential people of the town of Amherstburg and vicinity. 6ith your permission I will file a copy. (Copy filed.) To the CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OP THE JOINTCOMMISSION: The petition of the undersigned residents of the town of Amherstburg and towmihips of Anderdon and Malden humbly showeth: Whereas it has been proposed to construct a darn from the south end of the east spoils pile of the Stoney Island Dry Cut, in the Detroit River, to the head of Hois Blanc Island, opposite the town of Amherstburg,with a view of controlling crosa currenh, which might otherwise affect the navigation of the new Livingstone Channel and of maintaining the water level. And whereas your petitioners believe that the construction of the proposed dam would, by divertin a large body of water into the narrow channel between the town of Amherstburg ani Hois Blanc Island, increase the current at this point to such an extent as to render the harbor at AmherRtburg ractically useless; and ice brought down by such increased current would destroy tte docks and other propertie6 along the river front, and would render the navigation of vessels through the channel most diecult and dangerous, particularly in the case of steamers with tow. And whereas the Detroit & Windsor Ferry Co., who carry to Amherstburg and Bois Blanc upward of 300,000 pasfiengers annually, in addit,ion to other passenger and freight traffic, and the marine fueling and wrecking interesh at this town, are all obliged to use the Canadian Channel exclusively; And whereas the residents of Amherstburgbelieve that the construction of the proposed dam to the head of Bois Blanc Island will revent the Bcwerage from up-river points and the drainage of the River Canard, whicR enters the Detroit River about 4 miles above Amherstburg, from following its natural coume, which is in part at lemt to the west of Bois Blanc, and will instead divert it through the Canadlan Channel and to the intake of t2hetown waterworks plant, thereby endangering the health of the population of the three munici alities which obtain their water sup ly therefrom; And whereas this said flow orfiewerage and drainage is assuredly iiverted from the Canadian Channel aforesaid at, such winter seasons when a windrow of ice forms from the head of Bois Blanc Islancl northemtward across Eaid rhannel to t,he main shore above the town, which windrow sometimes packs practically solid to the bottom of the nver; I And whereas notwithstanding the nunlerous excavations made in the Detroit River from time to time since 1872, which have increased the depth of water through the Canadian Channel from 12 to 13 feet at that timeto 23 feet for a width of 600 feet, there has not been any ap arent lowering of the water level, but on the contrary since these excavations of the ciannel the water levelR have been higher than for several years prior thereto; And whereas the opening of t,he new Livingstone Channel ha8 notperceptibly lowered the stage of the water above. And whereas the work of enlarging the new Livingstone Channel to a uniform width of 450 feet throughout it,s entire length is ody part.ially completed, your petitioners humbly pray that no action be t,aken with respect to the proposed dam which will permaaently destroy the wenic beauty of this locality and work irre )arable injury to the town of Amherstburg unt-il the work rhall have been cwmpletedand its effect on the water levels and the current posit,ively ascertained. And your petit,ioners will ever pray. W.FREI) PARK, M. B., Mayor oJ’ Amlwstbury. TESTIMONY OF CAPT. BROWN. Cayt. BROWNrecalled. Mr. STRICKLAND.I think t,he chairman of tho commission asked last ni ht if Mr. Brown were present. He is here now. Mr. !k AWNEY. I want to say to Capt. Brown that I learned that there was a meetingof uite a numberof masters at St. Clair and that they had drawn up a f orm of plan, and after consulting with the THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. , 169 members of the commission, t,he commission is unanimous in saying thatCapt. Brownshould havean opportunity of submittingthat proposition. As I understand it is in typewritten form. If the captain desires to go now, he has an opportunit . Please state tfhe circumstances under wii ich this statement was ' prepared so thatthe commission may know whatimportance to attach to it. Capt. BROWN.On receivinga request from Mr. Livingstonto attend this meeting of the commission I at once called a meeting of 20 of ourmost representat)ive masters on the St. Clair River,in St. Clair. We talked over the situation at the lower end of the river, pro and con, and talkedit over pretty thoroughly, andwe all decided on a plan that might be ado ted down there, and which might overcome a good many of the dif I! culties arising on both sides of the river. They requestedme to put it intypewriting, andif it was necessary and asked for, to present it to thecommission. I have that statementhere. Mr. TAWNEY.Will you please read it 1 Capt. Brown read the statement as follows: To the International Joint Commission on Improvements on the Detroit River. GENTLEMEN:Aft,er being invited by Mr. Livingstone to at,tend your meeting, I at once called a meeting of a number of our representative masters, all of whom have had wide expelience in contending with the cross currents at the Limekiln Crossing. I consider the judgment of these men wort,hy of your consideration, as most of them not only had their early training in tugboats, when it was no unusual occurrence to tow six or eiqht vessels from Lake Huron to Lake Erie, but they have hadexperience that comes from navigating our largest freighters. I would, therefore, submit for your consideration the combined judgment of these masters, as follows: That, a dam or dike be built, commencing at the sout,h end of t,he east dike and extend south to a. point 3,000 feet., or thereabouts, south of the north end of Bois BlancIsland. This would possibly meet the objection of the Canadian Govern- ment and at t,he eame time prevent the st,rong current crossin the channel at the northend of theisland, a6 it would then be conducted mu81 along the dike an between the dike and the island. It was also Ptrongly suggested that, the north end of the channel be straightened from the first, gas buoy north of t,he preRent turning buoy to the north end of t,he west pier or dyke, as great, difficulty is experienced in getting our largest tows into the channel because of the cross currents drifting our ships to the westward in the Bal- lards reef channel. There iR likely to be t,rouble at this point sooneror later if a bett,er entrance a,t the north end is not provided. Yours, t,ruly, W. C. BROWN. ST. CLAIR,XICH., February I?', 1913. Mr. TAWNEY. State the numberof masters that gave consideration to this question at this meeting. 110 you know if any of the gentlemen who attended the meeting to consider these plans were practical engineers ? Capt. BROWN.No, sir. Mr. TAWNEY. Have the plansbeen considwtd or submitted to any engineer Z Capt. BROWN.No, sir. Mr. TAWNEY. From anengincering standpoint you have nothing to say with regard to the efficiency of this plan ! Capt. BROWN. Nothing whatever. Mr. TAwmY. You expressed simp1 your judgment as mariner;; of this plan being sufficieut to prevent t xe dnnger at present existing in consequence of the cross current '1 Capt,. BROWN.Yes, sir; we think it is absolutely sufficient. ARGUMENT IN THE CASE.

Mr. TAWNEY.If there is nothing further to offer in the wa of evidence in the case, the commission would be very glad to i! ear the argument of the gent,lemen re resenting the different Governments and the various interests. Be Fore you proceed, perhaps it might be well t,o consider the time that would be required as to a decislon on the pointsinvolved. Before we proceed there is one matterthat some of the members of the cornmission suggest I mightinquire about from Col. Patrick, and that is the urgency, in the judgment of t,he engineers' office in charge of the Detrolt Elver, the urgency of final decision in this mnt'ter? Col. PATRICK.I see no grave urgency for an immediate decision. No reasonabledelay, to suitthe convenience of the commission, would have any bad effect, whahver. There is no reason for the commission hurrying their decision. Mr. CASORAIN.We untlcrstood that, we should, if possible, give a decision before bhe opening of nnvigat>ion,so as to allow you to proceed this season if t8hework should be allowed. That, is t)he reason wh instead of holding our rnerting at Washington on the Ist, of ilprit according io our rule, we held a meeting hereon t.he 17th of February. (301. PATRICK.That question was asked me in Washing'ton, and I answered in this way: That I could do nothing before the opening of navigation; that delaya until this time would not affect me. I b assume, that your decision would be rendered about the openintr of navigat,ion. I am asked now if I assume that, your decision woula be rendered about that, time. Now the question is asked me whetsher any further delay will hurt anything, and 1: simply say I do not believe It will. Mr. TAWNEY.To concrete in form: I underst*and it will t,akesome litt, t'he transcript' of the record for the use of t,he sessionscommittee of the will be held at Washington on the 1st of ,4pril. Of course, the members of the commission will want to consider the rword for some few days before t,hatmeeting, so as to give their final decision. The question in my mild wtts whet,her t,he delwv unt>ilthe regular session of t,he commission on the 1st of April will be of any serious inconvenience in the event of the commission deciding to recommend the im xovements. 601. PATRICK.Whichever way t.he commission decides, I can not see that that, delay will mnkc ally differcnce.

ARGUMENTOF MR. FRANCIS KING. (At t,he request, of Mr. King, counsel for the ,DominionMarine Association, who stated that, he had to take a t'raln for the West m order to represent, his clients in another proceeding, the commission 170 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 171

accorded Mr. King the privilege of speaking tdora counsel ~*cpresent- ing the United States and t'he Dominion of Canada. Mr. KING(for the Dominion Marine Association). Gent,lemen of the International doint Commission, quite enough has been said in the course of the examination of witnesses to indicate clciarlv that the shippinginterest,s of Canada are by no means ur ently desirous of t.he proposed dike built in the Detroit River; but t ere has not been enough said, byanv means, to indicate clearlythe attitudea of the interests I represent. 1 would like to sayfirst that they are not approaching the question, and I wish heartily that I shall not approach the question, in any spirit of prejudice or op osition to the im rovement of navigation in the Detroit River. d appreciate very Eeenly the enormousexpenditure for the benefit of navigationin t,he Detroit 1Gver"expendituresmade very largely by theGovernment of t,he United States. It wouldbe the height of presumption on my part, and I may say on the part of the interests I represent, to advocate toostrongly a view inopposition tothe proposed imrovement,s desi med by the corps of engineering experts now engage r; on behalf of t'lek TTnited States Government and approved to some extent hy the vastly superior tonnageof the United States. I say that such a position would bc infinitei more foolish on my part, having regard to the fact that while our tlyeet in Canada is now comparativelysmall, howe arcsure thatin thocourse of a few years to come it wil thanisit now and will competeon a muchthe fleet of Unitedthe States. We havenot yet, hadinCanada the development of such an enormous trade as that traffic in coal up and ore and grain down, which is enjoyed by thevessels of the United States. But It 1s coming. I have on1 to saythat in the years between 1890 and 1900, the Canadian&eet of freightcarrying vessels rnultiplied itscapacity exactlytenfold, and thatit has continuedto' row steadilysince. I mention that to show that I ap rnciate fully t F10 idea that I must s eak for the Canadian Fleet of tfe future a+ well as for the fleet of t H e present.Any shortsighted policy would be extremely foolish in view of that fact. The position is simply this: That thc Dominion Marine Association for which I speak is heartily in favor of any improvements that ('an bemade in thenavigation system of theGreat Lakes, whrnit is made at the proper time and in .the proper place. To analyze for a minute the evidence presented before this commission, let us see the reasons which are suggested by the engineers who have spoken on both sides as to why this propped dike should bebuilt in the Detroit River or should not be built. In the first place, the cross currents below theupper end of theLivingstone Channel are referred to as a menace to navioation, and, in tho second place! it i.s suggested that compensation skould be made for those deteriorations In water level. I would ask the commission todistinguish very cdearly be,tween thesetwo arguments, and to accept, if possible, the view which I advance, name1 , thatthey can not beconsidered together. Col. Patrick differs $omMr. Stewart to some extent as to the amount of deterioration atthe presenttime. I think Mr. Stewart places it at about 1.3 inches and Col. Patrick, .on the other hand, stated it waspractically a negligible quantity. I understandthat Col. 172 THE LIVIXGSTONECHANNEL. Patrick is allowing for the dumping in the river of the rock which was excavated from the. up er part of the cut and from the lower part also. I would take 01. Patrick'sstatement as one which might fairly be accepted undere the circumstances, and that at present the amount of compensation necessary is a negligible quantity, and thatat presentthe arwment is onewith reference to the cross current. On the other Band, if compensation be made, it is to be madeafter the Livingstone cut is brought to 450 feet.What is the evidence regarding the cross current ?: The masters of three or four vessels of the AmericanFleet in givingevidence have stated that they have suffered the effects of the cross currents and nobody wishes tocontradict that. Thosemen, however, haveadmitted without hesitation to the court that their chief difficulty was on the first tri down, andthat having learned thetravails which beset them, t 1ey have dovised schemes to overcome them, and that while there is danger-and there is far more evidence of dan er on their part than ison the partof those who represent the Cana3 Ian Fleet- still it is a danger which can be overcome. On the other hand, the masters of the largest vessels we have in the Canadian Fleet, give the same evidence that there is a cross current, but that it is not one which they fear. Mr. STREETER.1 did not catch your last statement. Mr. KING. I said that themasters of the Canadian Fleet havegiven evidence that there is a cross current, but it is not one which they fear as a menace to navigation. The have felt it, they sa first trip, but on the first trip, with t i!l e warningin view, t K'ey On have the succeeded in overcoming the difficulty, and on the second trip there was no trouble. The master of bur largest boat tells us clearly, and I think it is really our attitude, that a dikethere, having regard merely to the cross current, would be desirable to increase the safety of navigation and to avoid the necessity for efforts to overcome the cross current, but that it is nota necessity and that he does not desire it from that point of view or consider it by any means onewhich must be built to protect navigation. If that is the attitude with reference to the cross current,; if it is one that can be safcly faced by mariners who are perhaps best able to tell this commission the effect of the cross current; supposing it istlncided in the cwurse of time to broaden the channel to450 feet, it seems to be pretty well tho tenor of the evi- denco that with that broader channel m the lower part of the Living- stone cut, the current will be very much less a menace to navigation, and the commission mightsafely come to the conclusion that the fleets of both countries could navigate down there without any serious difliculty more than such difiiculties as t,hey contond withthroughout the whole stretch of navigation. Mr. TAwNm. In that went compensation works would b~1 necessary z Mr. KING. Exactly.Rut in tlltlt event we n.1~to tlcul with the uestion of compcns:ttioll :md we to some exttnt eliminate from the Iiscussion tlw question of the cross currcnts. ow, asto compensation: At present (lol. P:r,trick mys tb:lt tlle ncccssity for compensation is a negligibla qmutity; therc is so little,dcpreciation. But he and Mr. Stewart seen~cd tottgree that in the cvrrlt of the br0n.d- enin of the cut to 450 feet, compensation may be necessary to make up-5 think Mr. Stewart's figures were---l.g inches, and I think THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 173 Col. Patrick’s figures are closely allied with that. So thttt the condition to be considered from my point of view really is the necessity for compensating 1.9 inches of depreciation in level in the event of thebroadening of theLivingstone cut to 450 feet. If that is the question which is before the eomnission, I submit respectfully that perhaps the present moment is not the time to come to a definite conclusion on that point. I say that without having had opportunity to consult with my learned friends, representing the Government of Can:da, or theProvince of Ontario. I 1~aveR oken tothcm only since I have decided upontlle courseof tho case wP lich I would resent, and I havefound them to be in accordwith the osition t K at had already beenarrived at by my clients; that is, t-f: at they are not concernedwith thecompensation at thepresent time. There are two reasons: One is that their carrying draft is limited at present in their trade by the draft :Ivailable at the locks in the Sault River. Thcir down-bound draft is 5 or 6 inches more than theup-bound draft. Last year, and in 1911, the large boats of the Anwrican fleet were using tlle Canadian locks so as to take advantage of that, so as to get all the available drafton the down-bound shi s when they could get into the locks, and therefore the water on tP le Limekiln Crossing is not a factor, and 2 inches there at present will, under normal conditions,make no difference to us. I do notwant to announce any shortsighted policy and say thatI do not care what the level is in the Detroit River. The time will come, and I hope shortly, when we will med all the water there. The time has not quite come yet, and at present, with the exceptionof these ships which onthe Cnnadian side may runup into the Georgian Bay, and there me not a great man of them, and on the American side into Lake Michigan, without 9laving. to go into Lake Superior, their capacity is determined by the avadable draft in St. Marys River. But that is not the only reason-the Dominion Marine Association is just as keenly interested as the Lake Carriers’ Association in the fight against the diversion of waters at Chicago. That is a matter that may in time come before tl& honorable commission; I do not know.At present there is apparentlya dispute between the Federal and State authorities as to whether permission given by the Federal authority shall be’strictly obeyed or whether authoritygiven by the State legislature shall govern. I do not know very much about the meritsof that uostion, but we are keen1 and deeply interested in seeing if possi9, le a decision which wi i1 prevent Chicago from diverting more water than they have already acquired the right to divert and preventing if possible the establishment of a recedent with regard to diversion in other quarters. We feel that iP that question is still in the airund not decided, if it may result that more water will be diverted, or if it may result that what is now taken improperly will be put back or made up for in some other way, then possibly the compensating work here may or may not be necessary, might or might not have to be changed or altered in some way, and might or might not be a little benefit to navigation. More than that, and I must express myself freely on tlle point, 1 fear --I merely exprcss my own view, but I know it is shared b a number of men in the association I am speaking for-I fear t 9lat compensating worksat thepresent stage would so alter the conditions 174 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. our argument in connection with the Chicago Drainage beconsiderably weakened. Data would be destroyed, a new basis for argument must be found, and when we have talked about 1 inch here and half an inch there in our argument with regard to the Chicago matter we will have to begin all over again. I would like to have it understood by the commission that an honest effort has been made by the shipping int'erests in Canada to find out how far their masttws are concerned in this question. They have sucered in having had only the month of November to find out the truth about the situation in the Livingstone Channel, and they would like a season ill which to find Itf out. The investigation that has been made by t'he intcwestu I re )resent has led tono protest whatever against tho cross r:mrr.entf. dne master only has gone so far as to say that he would like to see a dike there in order to assist him through, and that was <:apt. Pmrson, of our largest st,eamer, but even he said that it, was not a nocessity, but would be a convenience. From all the other boats, from all the canal size steamers which go as far as Montreal, there has becn urlanimity of opinion expressed that they do not ca.rc about, the cross current at present. Now there is the situation. I amsaying nothing about the disadvantagcs; gentlemen from Amhnrst~bnrg,gtmt>lemen concerned withthe flow of ice and flow of sewage, the men who have local interests of navigation in the Amherst,bulg Channel, will have u good deal to say about that, but w-e appreciate fully the force of evely one of these arguments set before the commission. The uestion arises as to whether a 300-foot opening in the center of the 3ike is going to he navigable or not, and there is fear on the part of our marme association that there may be a sufficient amount of current forced throughthere tointerfere to some extent down below. It is a questionwhether the White Star steamers will be able to passthrough that. Thedisadvantages are such that when one weighs them with the possible intangible unsettled advantages one is simply forced to the position which one of the captains yesterday very aptly expressed In saying that'he would rather fight the devil he knew than the devil he did not know, or, utting it in the words of Hamlet, we would rather bear the ills we Kave than fly to others that we know not of. One word inconclusion; I do not want . toattempt to advise the commission against an improvementin navigation, but if the commission in it's judgment comes to the conclusion that it would be better in the Interests of navigation as a whole-giving all consideration to thereponderating interest at +present of the IJnited States tonnage, aP though we are practically traveling in the same boat-then we will not be so terribly concerned by the opinion we have expressed now, not having been accepted by the commission. We wish improvement to navigation, but we would prefer to have it aft.er a little further consideration and after a further opportunity tofind out whether it is necessary. Mr. TAWNEY.In view of the statements you have made, in the event that the commission should decide to recommend this improvement to the two Governments, would the attitude of the interests you represent be then one of hostility to the Government of Canada icceptlng our opinion I Mr. KING.In answering that questJion I really cannot attempt to commit theinterests T representwithout furbher consultahion. THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 175 I am asked to express aview here; I may in the course of the coming season be instructed that there is this or that possible element, com- inginto the case which is notat present apparent, and I donot liketo say that the association I represent would not feel themselves free or bound to discuss the matter further with the Cana- dianGovernment. I think you will appreciate that I am Fair in making that statement. Mr. TAWNEY.I donot know how strongthe o position of the interests or of the movement would be; I do not Know whether it wouldgo to t,he extent of even opposing aweptance of the recommendation of the commission. Mr. KING.I am quite frank about that. The attitude which we take-and when I say we I meanan association whichcomprises inits membership the vessels engaged inthe through traffic from Montreal to Fort William, up and down the Lakes, and excluding some of the local interests which are notmembers of the association- the attitude that we take is not one of opposition to the scheme so much as of expressing a desire to have the improvement stand in abeyance for some time until we know somethin more about it. Mr. POWELL.That is, that the question shoul f be cohsidered er se as an integral part of the broader question, and that all the factors should be taken into consideration. Mr. KING.Exactly. We look at it froma broadpoint of view; a broader point of view than merely cutting off the cross current and enabling our boats to go down that part of the channel a little more easily than at present. Mr. POWELL.Then the shipping associat,ion offers no opinion on the merits of the present application? Mr. KING.Except as I have stated. Mr. POWELL.That is, that it is involved in the larger scheme and should be treated as a whole. Mr. KING.That is one element, and the other, that the commission should weigh the a parentdisadvantages named to-day with theadvantages suggestez b Capt. Livingston and the masters of certain Amerlcan vessels and consider whet'her at present the advantages, intangible and uncertain as they are, may outweigh. the disadvantages. Mr. POWELL.Have you the total amount of Canadianshipping that passes up and down here? Mr. KING.I will beglad to supply thatto the commission. I have not it with me at present. Mr. POWELL.I suppose the Canadian shipping interests say that they do not intend to be behind the Americans as soon as they can proceed with the deepening of their canal systemat the Sault,SO as to com ete on e ual terms for a share of the Lake traffic. d.KING. %or years we have been endeavoring to et the Cana- dian Government to establish another lock at the SauP t. Mr. POWELL.We have been ahead of the Americans forsome time, and now we are likely to be behind them. Mr. KING.We are commencing now on the Welland Canal system, and we will invite some of our American friends to our port of King- ston when we get the Welland Canal established. Mr. STREETER.Do you know to what extent any Canadian interest, t,he Canadian Government,or your associates, or other Canadian 176 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. interests, have made expendituresfor the improvement of the Detroit River ? Mr. KING.I have not the figures. Mr. STREETER.Is it so that certain expenditures have been made by the Canadian Government ? Mr. KING.Undoubtedly. At the same time it is admitted at once that a verylarge part of theexpenditurc made by the American ' Government has been made in Canadian waters, but I would say that it was at the instance of the association I represent t,hat we induced theCanadian Government to jay for and nlaintainthe lightshi at the southoast shoal in Lakc h-io whichwas being maintainel by American interests in our own waters. I am pcrfectly certain that thc Canadian Government, from all I have'heard recently in discussion wibh our association, is anxious and willing and is on the point of underhking every expenditure that should be made in its own waters to maintain and assist navigation. Mr. STREETER.Would it be practical t'o put into tlle report the amount of expenditure that has been made b.v Canada 1 Mr. KINQ.If the commission considers it a question at all in the case, I think the figures could be obtained; I think they could bc best, obtained from Mr. Stewart and Col. Laml).

ARGUMENT OF MR. WHITE, K. C., FOR CANADA. Mr. W. R. WHITE,K. C. (for Canada). Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the commission, you will be glad to learn t,hat I do not intend to detain you with anv very lengthy argument. I merely desire to state, in sustaining the position which we assumed at the opening of this inquir , when you were kind enough to permit me to file a memorandum, t !iat we have endeavored all along in so far as possible to restrict the inquiry to t,he position which has been assumed by the Government I represent here. Before proceeding with my argument I think it is proper and right that I should convey to my high appreclationof the careful, painstaking, absoPOUutely falr, and impartial manner in which this investlgation has been conducted. I say that notfor the purpose of saying kindly things to you gent,lemen in our presence, but in the hope that it may go out to the public as to K ow we feel mth regard to thecommission as at present constituted. In making that statement I feel perfectly sure that I am voicing the sentiments of everygentleman who has been concerned in this in uiry. $roceeding, then, I shall indicate my argument by simply saying that I propose to deal generally, on general tcrms, with t,he situation as it presents itself to the Dominion Government, and I will leave any matters of detail to my younger and abler colleaguc, Mr. MacInnes. It has been forcibly impressed uponthe Dommion Government from time to time that thls matter and all matters relating to the boundary waters and the navigation thereof, and the improvement on them from time to time, should not be dealt with in detail. It was felt that thechain of navigation, from the Great Lakes to the sea, should have every link as perfect and complete as it was possible for both countries united and devoting their energies to It to make that change. It was therefore thoughtby the Government of Canada, where a matter which upon the face of it seemed to be a purely local THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 177 matter, that it was proper to take it up, butwhere it was purl of one of the links of that great chain of navigation which could not be completed without considering t)he other things it ought to be taken into consideration in a broader light than a merely local matber. It is perfectly clear to everybody upon both sides of thc quostlion that there is really no conflict between t,he Government of Canada and theGovernment of theUnited States upon whatshould be done withthe great,highway waterways between the two countries. It is not a question of internationa,l dispute at all or of argllment, but a question inwhich boththe high contractingparties, and this commissionrepresenting both countries, should use theirbest endeavor, and the knowledge that can be got by them through their ex erts, and the knowledge they possess themselves, in evolving 8 scI? erne which will protect and continue the waterways at least in the positionin which they are at present and prevent.their being despoiled or depleted at any point a,long the great national highway waterways,whether that depletion be in tht! UnitedStatos or in Canada. In considering thisquestmion, I bubmit to yougent,lemen that this refercnce is not a reference which is purely local, because you can not consider that question intelligently without considering thewhde uestion of thewater whichflows intoand forms the channel at Rt e particular point which is under investigation. It has apeared to me, listening tothe evidence on bothsides, that if in t K e first place there had not been a depletion of the source of water sup ly at the upperend of it, that there would be practically corn arativef y slight necessity for the construction ofth1s channel in t ge first place. But certainly,whether I amright or wrong in that, the position is forced on me, that if the water supply had been left at its normal level, as shown for the last 47 or 48 years, without diversion at theother end, there would have been no necessity in any way for compensating works llero. If that bc so, then it is perfectly plain that 8s to the compensating works here, or what are called the necessary and desirableworks, would not come before ou for consideration at aU, and would not bother you inyour ci'kberations, because they would have had no application if that diversion had not taken place. Therefore, we must cot~siderwit8h regard to everywhere along the Lakes,how depletion or diversion of the watrr at one point affects the waters at other points. If you ngrco with that viow, then the DominionGovernment willbe perfectly satisfied that you are dealing with the question in a way that will be satisfact,ory to them what.ever conclusionyou may arrive at. To come to the ca,se as presented k)y thc IJnited St)al.es through Mr. Strickland,their counsel, and Col. Put,rick, it seems tome, looking at it as fairly as I possibly can, without, my projudico on0 way or the other, that the have failed to establishtheir cas(: as to the construction of this diie. In the first place, they have failed to show it is necessary, because the only reason urged for the necessity of the construction of this dike is thcimprovement of navigati9n in the Livingstone Channel. In addition to the witnesses that have been trxamined on both sides of this case as to the question of the danger of navigating this channel by the boats that are used in the Lake traffic, we find that one set of captains find little or no difficulty at all in navigating that channel, 86342-13-12 178 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. andthat others appear to havefound very slight difficult . They all managed to come throu h with absolute safety during ti e period that the channel was open rom some time in October until the close of na+igationlast year. IF would like to press verystrongly upon you, gentlemen,on the point of the necessity of the coostructionof this dike, that in addition to the witnesses called and sworn by this court, there are 1,227 silent witnesses as to the lackof danger in theLiving- stone Channel, and in that I refer to the 1,227 vessels that passed throu h it during the period from its opening in October until navigation cT osed, without, so far as we know, a sin le case of grounding or any danger or injury occurring to the vessef: s. So large a number of vessels wentthrough that channel that 57 aresaid to have gone through in one day. That I take from the Lake Carriers’ Asso- ciation reyrt. If that be so, then the necessity for the construction of that dl e is not made out. If that be the result, and there is no necessity for it, then is not that necessity more than counterbalanced by the damage and injury which will be done, on the evidence given here, as to the dischar e of sewage into the Amherstburg Channel ? Even if you come to tfl e conclusion that this is either necessary or desirable and so report, I submit that from the evidence that has beengiven here-andCa t. Livingstone himself perhapsgave as strong testimony as possibP e in the particular matterbefore the commission as to the construction of this dike-was strongly against the diversion at Chicago. I submit on behalf of the Dominion Government that we consider it exceedin ly important, of vital importance, not only to the Do- minion of 6anada, but to the whole country on both sides bordering upon the Great Lakes, to every village, town, and hamlet, and every dweller along the lakes-it is of vitalimportance that if any expenditure by either countr is to be undertaken, the uostion of the amount of diversion at C&cago should be settled. 1 submitthat that can only be settled, as far as I have looked into it-I may be entirely wrong in this--1 submit that that act of Congress. I am quite sure that if you myrequest, and put a recommendation of report you may make with regard to the construction of this dilre, it will carr with it great weight. If you will recommend, as I think you have tK e right to do, to the Federal Government that this matter of diversion should be taken up, that. the quest,ion should be settled for all time b an act of Congress and the amount of diversion fixed, then you wil 3 htrve done something for both cohntries which both countriesought to be gratefulfor. I am erfectly certain that if such representation is made by such a bo cpy as this it will receive the very greatest attention Erom both Governments. I do not wish to say a word with regard to the fact that diversidn is being made at Chicago, and which in my opinion and in the opinion of the Govern- ment I represent should be checked. I do not wish to say a word that might be misinterpreted outside. Our desire and the desire of the Government I represent is to act in absolute unisonwith the FederalGovernment of theUnited States. The entente cordiale that has existed between the two countries and which exists at present should continue with respect to these matters; we hope it will, and we believe it will, and I feel satisfied that the only point upon THE LXVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 179 which an controversy could arise is upon the diversion of the waterways anlthe necessity which arises €or compensating for that diversion at thisoint. I have to tK ank you, gentlemen,for the attentionyou have given me. Mr. POWELL. What are our rights in this channel-have we the right of free na.vigation? Mr. WHITE. Both countries have equal rights in all the boundary waters. Mr. POWELL. Thereis no power on the part of either country to discriminate against the citizens of the other. Mr. WHITE. The Cnited States halve a perfect right to navigate our waters, including our canals, and we have n right to navigate theirs; that is a joint right accorded by treaty; there is no question aboutthat. I would point, outto the cormmission t,hatpractically there isno groat hurry inproccecling with thii work, even if It is necessary. That has been shown by the evidence before you, and I would press upon you that you mi ht postpone a decision upon this matter until you see by experience !ow this Livingstone Clmnnel really does work. On thnt point it appears to depend to a certain extent upon the question of whether tehe right thing to do is to make a dike or increase the width of the channel. Mr. TAWNEY.In view of the tleliberate judgment of those who are experienced in navi ating the Detroit River, in view of the judgment of the experience engineers 21s to the possilJe d:mger to nav1- gation, do you think itw wouldbe wise that the two Ciovernnlents should wait until damage has been done before proceeding to reamove the danger, rather thm to take care of the anticipated dan er based upon the judgmentof those who have experience and know7 edge Z Mr. WHITE. I have tried to point out to t,he commission that in my judgment no captain who went into the box- erhaps only one- pronounced this as ari a.bsolutely necessary worR . I point to the number of ca tains who went into the box and declared that they had navign.teRthat chmnel with perfect safety, and the fu.ct remains undisputed that every vessel tJhatwent dotvn there durin the season of navigation, while It was open lamstyear, passed througB in safety; one vessel was said to haveJnet with an accident going through there, but it turned out upon inquiry that thatvessel was not in the channel at all when the accident occurred, but at, the entranceof the channel above, and I understand the captain of that vessel resides in Port Huron or somewhere in the vicinity of Detroit, and I would suggest to the commission that if any relia.nce is to he placed on that, it is proper that that captain should have been called. The whole volume of testimony is against there being any serious danger in that channel. All these captains are anxious to get anything that would help them in navigation, but they have all declared that they had no difficulty of any kind in running thnt channel.

ARGUMENT OF CHARLES S. MACINNES, H. C., ON BEHALF OF -THE DOMINIONOF CANADA. Mr. MACINNES.Mr Cha.irmnn and gentlemen of tjhe commission, I shall endeavor, as far as possible, not to repeat the arguments which have been so clearly put before you by my learned friend; but I shall endeavor rather to place before you briefly what appear to me 180 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. to be the main propositions involved in this question. Before doing so I would like to express to the conmission the sincere feeling of honor that I have in addressing this eonmission, and also to asso- ciate m self with the remarks of my learned friend as to the manner in whic?l this case has been dealt with-a, manner, if I may say so, which is as worthy of the great powers which this commission has and is worthy a,lso of the eminent ersonnel of the comrnission and worthy of the great interests whicE huve been committed to your charge. I would like also, on.behalf of the Canadian engineers, to express their thanks for thecoo oration and assistance which have been given tothem in dealin wit R thismatter b theUnited States engineer% The existence of t% at feeling of cordiai ity and appreciation of assistance, it appears to me, adds great weight to the remarks which were made by Commissioner Magrath, that It might be well, if it could be arranged, that such cooperation should in the future not be merely spadmodic or temporary, but should, so far as possible, be continu- ous, so that trhis commission may have the benefit of the work of engineers carried on continuously and with the fullest cooperation. 'l'he propositions here which seen1 t,o me to stand out m this case arc as follows: First, that in its local aspect no case has been made out as to the necessity, or as to the clesirability, of these works, ' whether with regard to the question of compensation of water levels or whether with regard to the question of cross currents. Secondly, that the subject rnatt,er of this reference Itas in itself a wider significance and a broader aspect, nn aspect which might be called international, but yet which, in view of that vcq coincidence of interest which the chairman referred to, might be (Jescrihetl as conational. Both nations are interested in thebroadc.r aspect, that broader aspect being the question of the water levels of thc, whole of this intcrna- tionalhighway. But,further, whatever the disposition bythis commission of the local aspectof this case may be, it is both necessary and desirable that the broader aspect should also be dealt with. The form of the questions in this case which have been submitted to you does not exclude, but rather includes, tho broader conational aspect to which I have referred. And, lastly, that the report of this coni- mission, if I may be allowctl to make a suggestion on that point, should be such that whether this broatier :mpect is dealt with or not, you probablymay not desire that SU~Ireference to it shoultl be made as to enable the q~restion beto dealt with >ltthe carliest possible moment and to give it impetus to dwling with this question which obviously is larwr than the one with whicln we arc dealing. To go somcwRat furt,her into detailas to those various point's, that is, as to the local necessity as to the hroacler aspect as to both being of necessity intertwined in this case an(! as to the forms of the questions, 1would say that inits local aspects the onusis on the applicants. The evidence has heen conflict,ing on thc question of cross currents. lhe evitlencar is reallynot conflicting on thequestion of compen- sntion. On the question of cross currents there is doubt. It surely cin not be said that, there is :my necessity as to tltsira- bility. That is another point, but tdore clrvidi~~gas to desirability it must be rernemhe,rod that on the other sit&) thre are very strong argument's against the desirability, and that, further than that, the situation is such as was shown by the evi(jence of these mariners THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 181

that the desirability arises, pimps, largely out of the ncwncssof the situation with respect to this channel. It has also been established that there is no urgency, and, as there is not that urgency, timc itself will cure whatever vestigc of clesirabilily thcrc may be. So tllat on the cvitlcnce wlrich has 1:ecm put hcforc you on this local aspect enough has not been made out to make it either necessary or desirable that this work should t)c established, or at lnast', establishcd at once; that, there is no rewxtn in its local aspect, in other words, why it should not shanti vrnt8il tin opportunity of' tlealing with tho 1,roadcr problern is had. Tlre iiirontler problt>nlis the watcr levels of the wllole of tho interlmuticl\nal highwa)-. I do not think I van put that point better than in tlle Imgu:~geof Senator Root in t11( Senat,c,the other (lay in ~lii~llhe salt1 tl4at navigat,ion ol' a particular prt of a waterway docs not stmtl hy it,srlf', but t,hat it is as muc*ll:I whole as a transcontinental rai1wb.y. Now, thcquestions wlikh aifect) tl~ewater ICW~S and which arc involved it1 this 1)roatIw asl~~t,are the (livcrsion of t,he watcrs in Lakc hiichigun at Cl~icago,untl the question of the crcction of a sublnergtxi weir nbovc NiagaraFalls. The question of thesub- merged weir would affect thtr quwtion of levels anti also tlke question of current]s. The qucstion r,,t Cl~icagowould not, as witncsses have statctl in answer toquestions I,y Conmissioner Streeter, (leal with t,he qucstion of currents pc,ssiiply, but it would fully cover the question of cornpcnsation. So, tell tl,e one hand, we have the question of the wctir nt Niagars Falls, which would cover tho question of con1 cnsa- tion, antl wc lmve at thc other cnrl the diversion in Lake Mici igan, which would, bcyontE any tlorrbl, cover the uestion of compensation. The fact as to the diversion at Chicago hasY lee11 st'ated here, and we art' well aware that wide tllrere is a pennit for only a witlldrawal of 4,000 second-feet,, t,hat CElitra.go, acc,ordir~gto tho report of the Unitcd Stmates cnginmrs,is taking at 1ewt 7,000 sccond-feet, and doubtless lnorc. Further than that, it is well known t,hat the work at Chicago woultl permit of a diversion of not less than 14,000 second-feet. That this tlangcr is not imaginmy but rcal is shown by the fact that at the hearing heforo Secret,nry Stinlson in the spring of lastyear there appeared before him in vigorous protest every large interest along the whole of this international highway, from Milwaukee to Kontreal, or, as one gentleman 1,efore Mr. Stimson put it, from Chicago to the sea.. They enteretl tl~eirprotest there and Canada was pernlitted to join in that protest. The matter was tlcalt wit,h by Mr. Stimson and immission was refused for a formal pcrmitfor an increased withdrawal from 4,000 to 10,000 feet. At the same time, that, diversion is 'going on, and unless steps are taken it will continue to go on. I understood Commissioner Turnerduring the hearings here to suggest that it may be assunmi that the Unitad States Government will take such steps as to putj an entl to this unauthorized diversion. That is an assurance that would be very comforting to all these great int,crests of the TJnitetl Ht&:s antl to the interests of Canada as well; but my suggestion is this, tlhat even though t~hat.maybe assumed, it is eminently desirahle in the interest of thosc? great industries that this commission as a body should endeavor t,o give an impetus to an effectual consideration of the question. Mr. TURNER.I wishyou would indicateexactly what influence either the Chicago diversion or the diversion at Niagara Falls ought 182 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. tohave upon thedetermination of theentire question. What spe- . cific action do you think we ought to take in view of the submission of the s acific questions to t'he commission 1 I (lo not exactly understand t le influence you think thcy ought' to have upon the cleter- tninationr of thcse questions. Mr. MACINNES.It is admittt:tl by the engineers t'hat t,hese works, so far as compensation is concerrxd, will deal with the question of water levels, and if this ciiversion at Lake Michigan did nottake place no compensation whatever would be necessary here. In other words, to do something here is perfectly futile and undesirable if it can be done in another way. As Mr. Stswart put it, a ccssation of t,hat diversion in Lakc Michigan woultl have a greater effect upon compensation t'han this dam. Mr. TURNER.Is it' your itlea that the cornmission should say that t,hcre is an unlawful diversior~of walor through the Chica o Draina e Canal and for that reason it is not desirable or nccessaly Bor this tli E e , to be built? Mr. MACINNES.My sug estion in mgartl t'o that would be this: That in your report, whet (?r the report tw to the effect that a case ' has been made out for locala necessity or desirability, there should be actcled to that, in the strongest possible language, that it is untlt,s'I 'Ira- blc for this great commission to be dealing with the question in a piecemeal local manner. In other words, if this tlivcrsion iscon- tinued, these questions woultl still be corning before you one by one, local questions here and there, whereas there is, in fact, one possible solution which would comr probably the whole ground. Mi. TURNER. Then,I understand you do not think that we should consider that for the urpose of determining whether or not this dike should be built, but tR at our report shouldbe supplemented by some recommendation wit'h reference to that ? Mi. MACINNES.That is so, but I wish t.0be understood as saying that I think it is very possible that the commission mill come to the feeling that the local case has not been made out; but whether that re ort is to that effect or not, my suggestion is that there should be a riR er to the re ort of thii cornmission that it is undesirable in the interest, not oP Canada alone, but of the interests of all parties concerned, and as I said before, it is notCanada against the United States. This commission with all its vast powers should not, I might use the expression, waste its energies in dealin with a matter which in its essence must be, and should be, dealt wita as a whole. Mr. TURNER.Mr. MacXnnes, in view of the fact that Lake Michi- gan is not within the jurisdiction of this commission under the treaty, and no specific reference is made in the questions submitted that would gire jurisdiction to the commission even for investigating pur- oses, do ou think that the commission could with propriety report gack to t i! e Govcrnment,s on a subject matter that was not within our jurisdiction or had not been referred to us 1 Mi. MACINNES.I would submit so for the reason that whether it be within your jurisdiction or not there could be no doubt that jurisdiction could be given,or that the matter could be dealt with in some other manner. Mr. TURNER.I do not doubt that jurisdiction could be given, but it would re uire the action of both Governments. Mr. MAC4 NNES. I appreciate that. THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEI,. 183

Mr. CASGICAIN. Thcre is an authority to tho effect t,hat, I,ake Michi- gan is a boundary water. Mr. MAC!INNES.Yes, sir; that is vary possible. Mr. PowmL. Therc may not be a corn rchcnsive jurisdiction, but thero is a specific jurisdiction, becausc? l!rtich: I of the t,reat,y says that so long as this treaty shall remain in forco this same right of navigation shall cxtend to tho waters of Lakc: Michigan and to all canals conr1cctir:g bourldary waters, vtc. Mr. ~~ACINNES.I v,~onld go so far in my pro osition as this: That ovcn though such a nlattnr cnultl not, he broug R t, before the commission, alt'llough ~~ndoubtctlly conltlit hy couseut,, that t,hough it were a nlattcr wit'h which t,he high cont,ract,ing parties. dono could deal, it \\-oultl 1)c olninont,ly propw ant1 lw the otdy proper ans\+or of this conmission in (loding wit,h ha1ma.tt,crs to say that it is useless for the commissioll t,o (ha1 vs.it,h thcse matters whcu another ( uite larger matter, nhich covers t>h(!m, and which can hc. tlealtwith by some propr allthorily, is still outstanding. Mr. STREETER. Thequestion of compensationin this particular case is regarded as substantially ne ligible, and it also appears that any restoration of the diversion at Cf icago would not have anyeffect upon the existence of those cross currcnts. Now, suppose the commission, after due consideration, should conclude that the existence of those cross currents was even a serious menace orof such character that their removal would greatly benefit navigation, do you see how the commissioncould properly defer considering that questionto await the develo ment of another situation whichwould not have an effect upon t R at situation at all? &r. MACTNNES. What I would say in answer tothat is this: That whether or not you would go so far as to adopt our suggestion that this matter should stand until these greater questions are dealt with, there should be such a rider to your re ort as to make it clear that itwas in the opinion of this commission cP esirable that these local questions which involve lake levels should not, be brought before this commission and asked to be dealt with until the broader question is dealt with by the proper authority. The question in itself postulates and determines the consideration of this work as a boundary work. The first question of the reference to the commission is, under all the circumstances and conditions surrounding the navi ation and other uses of the Livingstone and other channels in the 5 etroit River on either side of the international boundary, is the erection of an dikes or othercompensatory work being necessary or desirable. go that what you have before you is aquestion of compensation. That is the question which has been submitted to you, but my argument is that being a question of compensation it of necessity brin s in the wider question, the question of the water levels of the who e of the international highway. I do not know whetherI have mademyself clear toyou, Mr. Streeter, on that point, or whether itwas your suggestion that this commission should disregard the compensation aspect wholly. Mr. STREETER.Of course, I have not approached that question yet. I was trying to get your views regarding it. Mr. MACINNES.As to howwide thequestion may be, I would venture to invite the attention of the commission to the concluding language of the secondclause of the reference,as to where the 184 TIIF, I.II'IN(;STONE CHANNEL. compensatory works, if they are fount1 to be necessary or desirable, should be located in order to serve most advantageously the interests involved on both sides of the international boundary. Mr. POWELL.Do I understand you to be committing yourself to the distinction that was drawn by MI.. Stewart as between the 4,000 or 5,000 second-feet of wtlter that were authorized by the statute of the [Jnited States ant1 the excess which was unauthorized by any statute? Do you base your ttrgument on the excess as the calculations by Mr. Stewart were based '1 Mr. MACINNES.As toany diversion, the submission of Canada would be that such tlive~-sionis not permissible. Mr. J?'OWEI,I,. rndier in excess of what purport8 to be legalized or not 1 Mr. MACINNES.Q,uit,e so. Mr. POWELL.There is no distinction in l;l1.incipl:. 1 (lo not think ithas ever been suggested that Canada as ever assented tothe diversion of any water from Lake Michigan whicll would affect the levels of water in which (!anatla was interested. Mr. POWEI,I,.Then YOU would ask us to suspend action, so far as adjudication is concernd, until this whole question of the Chicago Drainage Canal is sctt1c.d '1 Mr. MACINNES.Yes, sir; or that the ridor should be in such form that it should be matle perfectly clear that it was the opinion of this commission as a whole that the entire question at Chicago should be taken up. Mr. PO~CLI,.Suppose it, isnever settled? Suppose the twohigh contracting powers II~V~settle the Chicago question; are we to suspend judgment eternally on this question? Mr. MACTNNES.No, s~r;that was not my ar ument. My argument was this: In thefirst place, I think it would t e a fair and pro er position for thiscommission to take to say that thereis no desirabifty or necessity. If, howcvc>r,the commission should be of the opinion that sucha case has notbeen made out, let the report be to effect, that but my suggestion would be that the rider should be to that report not of necessity delaying the proceedings in this matter, but that the whole uestion should be taken up. Mr. 9'Ammm. If the Dominion Govc?rnment now says we should not decide thispartic,ular question until the whole question of the level of the lakes is sublnithed to us, why did, they consent to this reference Z Mr. MACINNEB.On tho terms of tho reference, and certainly on the constmction which the Government of the Dominion of Canada put upon it, this wider qucstion is included; that under all the circumstances and conditions surrounding navigation if your report is to justify the erection of this dam as a matter of compensation, then the uestion is bound to bring in a consideration of the wider question. ? quite see the point which was macle by Mr. Streeter that if the commissioncould see its way to wholly disregard thequestion of compensation they might say that this workwas necessary or desirable on account of ('IYBS currents, but my answer was that even if that should be so therc: is a desirability for the purpose of bringing up the wider question. Mr. POWELI..I CU,II Idersband the point of view of the people of Amherstburg, but you represent the Dominion, where the only mter- THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 185 ests are those in connection with shipping and navigation. In what way is therea possible confiict betweenshipping interests of the Dominion, qmt fromthese local things at Amherstburg,and the interest of the American Navigation Association, or whatever it may be ‘1 So fa,r 8,s this portion of the river is cor~cerned, are their interests not absolutely identical ? Mr. ~IAC~NNES.Their navigntion interests; yes. Mr. POWELL.Where woultl the compensatory matter come in, then, from your standpoint 8 Mr. R~A~NNES.In this way: It is desirable in the interest of navigation,both in theIJnited States and Canada, that t’hisquestion affecting the lake levels should be dealt with. If these local matters me to be dealt with one by one without regard to that greater question, that greater question never will he dedt with. Therefore, the necessary conclusion in those premises, it seems to me, is that everything should be done to prevent the mat,ter being dealt with piecemeal, but rather to bring about dealing with the question its a whole. Sir. POWELT,. This jurisdiction is thrust upon us by both powers interested who have told us to den1 with it. The time for the high contracting parties to have thought of that was before they thrust it into this forum. Are they going to cancel our submission now and tell us not to deal with these matters? Mr. MACINNES. Thismatter came up at the request of the United States. Consent by Cannda had to be required on account of the work being in Canadian territory. It was suggested by Canada t,hat the International Joint Commission would he the proper pwt to deal wi0h it. The application is one by the United States, but f do not imagine for a moment that it was ever contemplated by the Dominion , of Canada that any action by them in respect to this question should militate against their interests in having a wider question dealt with. Mr. TURNER. Do you not think that if it had been the intention of the two Governments thrlt we should dead with this wider question that it would have been subsequent1 mentioned to us? Mr. MACINNES. Notof necessity, {Ar this reason, that one of the objects of this commission was stated by the chairman in the opening of the hearings, that an o .portunity is afforded for having the whole matter exlamed and ful9P understood. Now, the situation has developed wF lich very likely was not clear to the Governments themselves of the essential connection between the smder question and the larger question. I am not asking or suggesting to the commission that they should decide the question of the Chicago Canal. I admit that thatquestion is not hefore this con~missionas a question to be decided. My SI% estion is,however, that this commission should point out theabsolute futilitv of dealing with these local matters until the Chicago question is de& with. That is a proper answer, it seems to me, to thequestions which were put. In other words, I am not contending for a moment that thesequestions cover the disposition hy thisbody of the Chicago question, hut 1 am suggesting that this opportunity should he taken of pointing out to tho Governments that the matter must be tie:l,lt with, because vdlile it stands these local questions can not be dealt with as they should be. It seems to me that there is no answer to that argument. If the question were put in the most local possible form and the commission felt that’ no answer could be given which

8 186 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. would properly answer without. a consideration of the other matter, surely that is a proper answer to be given to the question. The CHAIRMAN.Suppose, Mr. MacInnes, thatthe Commission should find that the 0111 necessity for this improvement grew out of the cross currents, and t at the diversion of the water nt Chicago does not affect t’he solution zof that problem, would it be proper for the commission then in assing upon the question of the effectof the cross currents to also reP er to the Chicago diversion which was entirely unrelated in fact to the subjectwith which we are dealing? Mr. MACINNES.I would say undoubtedly mtl unhesitatingly yes, because this matter came before you 8,s a compensating question. Mr. TURNER. Why do you sap it comes to us purely as a compensating matter? l#h.MACINNES. got “purely,” bl1t as a compensating question. Mr. TURNER. I understand you refer to the dlke as a compensatory work. The first thingthere is a dike.Then in characterizing It further 011 they refer to it as conlpensntory work, a dike or other compensatory work belng necessary or desirable for the improvement or safety of navigation. Mr. MACINNES.hly submission is this : That there is a great opportunity 0;iven to t,his commission on this application before it not of showmg that it is merely active and energetic in dealing with matters in a small way, but of taking every o portunity of lringing up whatis, unless one closes ones eyes, the rea r question at issue. It would be perfectlyroper antl counted a,s only worthy of this commission to take up t Ris opportunity of dealing with the larger question. This Chicago matter IS one oi the largest and most important matters that affect these great interests, and I can only say that if this occasion should be the starting point, md if this commission should be the origin of an effectual consideration of this matter, then this meeting before you to-day is of no small historical significance. If such an effectual consideration can l!e brought about by the report that you are to make, it would be wlthout any undue exaggeration the wor- thiestmonument that could befound for thecelebration of that long-continued peace to which the chairman referred in his opening remarks. I sa,y that not us B mtitter of exaggerlition or in xttetltpting to deal with tlle matter too broadly, but as tile sincere feeling tllnt I lmve in this matter, antl as a sincere feeling that I untlerstanti that the Gov- ernment of Canada llas thet tilis ocewion should be taken advantage of by the commission atthe suggestion of counsel before it, nntl without offense to either of the high contracting parties involved, to have the greater question dealt with. hlr. POWELL.If we do anything in respect to tliatdam we are denying every interest that you represent, any conrpensatory works whatever. If we order the dike in it is a measure of compensatory work, ultllou h not as grcat. as you would like possibly. Now, if we ado t your p7 an, we deny e:-crytl:ing tlxt you reprcmnt. >E-. MACINNES.No, sir. If you find that this dike is nt?cessary or desirable, so report by all means. I am not suggesting anything to the contrary. I am not suggesting that this slrould be heid up, but I am asking that in that report thisoccasion slloultl be seized to have an impetus given to taking up the wider matter. Mr. CASGRAIN.You say it 1s not necessary or desirable ’1 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 187

ARGUMENT OF G. LYNCHSTAUNTON, K. C., ON BEHALF OF THE PROVINCEOF ONTARIO. Mr. STAUNTON.Mr. CYlairman and gentlenlcn of the conmission, I appear here on behalf of the Provinc-e of Ontwio. The Province of Ontario is the chief Province of the Ilominion so far cs tllis hodis concernetl. Theinternational waters wash this P1;ovince from one end to the other-from awny up at tile end of tlle Lakes down to the Provinc~of Quebec, and Minnesota, hlichignn, Illinois, New York, Ohio, and Wisconsin; all areStates oppositethis one Province of Ontario. We are, therefore, in ow Provmcc? more interested in this commission than all the Provinces of Canmla put together.The Province of Ontario is the only Province, excepting Quebec, that has any interest in this question which is now before you. Now, what is the question which is hefore you? It is whether or not, under all the circumstances, it, is rleslrable or necessary to approve of thc building of tilis cliko. I s:~y that tllis is illegal and im roper, and that the Dominion ofC'nnatln antl thc United States wiK be acting illegdly if they n,llow this work mdcrr this eviclencc:. The evidence here is tllnt if you put this dike in the position nn.mt.tl you will throw a larger qmntity of polluted water on the shores of tho Provincc of Ontario. The treaty provitles in hrtir:le IV as follows: It is furlher agreed that the waters herein defined as boundary waters and waters flowing acrom the boundary shallnot !)P polluted on either sidet,o :he injury of health or propert,y an the ot2her. The eviclence before you cstt~t)lisllesthe fact that :;t?\VtIg(?from the city of Dotroit, to a certain (legrrc, is now polluting tlre wltter wllich flows by the town of Am!lcrst?)llrg. It i.7 trut, &o, tllnt tho :scw~lge coming from tho Canathn towns and villages is :Ilso ,olluting that district,. According to the witnesncs on helialf of t!w \ 'nitetl Stntcs antl the witnesses on hol~alfof ('an:~(la, itis prove:i lwtxmd contra- diction, nncl it will be adn~itteclt)y all hantls, that tl~tmwill be a largeramount of pollutedwater tlistributetl along thatshore antl a ~ larger amount of sewage deposited in the Canadian waters than have 188 THE IJVIK'USTOXTE CHANNEL. heretoI'l)r(: 1)cc~nclf;plo'\btc~xl if ~*ouhiltl this dike. That being a fact, the Govcwnlmnts will be fying in tilo face of the treaty and Ignoring it; and I rlaiw on tw1l:;li' of tlw Province of Ontariothat neither Govt!rnrnent shall viol:,te tile provisions of this treaty. It is said by the Pariiament of Canacla that thelaw of Canada and ' of the Provincesis amended to accord withthis treaty and the Dominion Government h:rs undt~tak~ntoamend our laws inthe Province, whct,her 1egall.v or illcgally it is not for me to determine nor for me to discuss now, but, the? have ga.ineci for 11s the inestimable right to forbid tJhc great nity of Detroit, to throw its pollutionon our shores. 1 put it on t,hw.t ground alone, thtlt even if you come to the conclusion t,hat t,his is desirable or necwsary for navlgation, that you must say that under,211 t,he circumstancm it is not a proper act for the AmericanGovernnwnt to tako. One of the localcircumstances is the health of the people in thatl Province. 1 am not going to discuss now tho question of whct,hcr wo can bring in the great question of the obstruchn ofwt1tc.r by the city of ('hicngo. I submit, that under t,his tre!nt>ytjhc pcople of Amhrrsthurg can go into the courts of the State of Michigan, anti if the law is the same in Michigan as it is in Ontario, ant1 I prcrsurnc. it is, t,hey can gct an injunction against tJhe city of I)et,roit, preventing thorn from pouring their sewage into that international n-atJcr, bec:tuse t,he treatysays that if anythinthey do injurionsly a-lt'ects tlho people on the: other siclo they shall E ave a status in t'he courts of this cwuntry. I have obtained more than one injunct,ionagainst, the nitjy, ant1 I know from experience that the courts of our country will not) allotv the cities to pour their sewage into the public watters ho as to affect, t'hc health or comfort of the peo le of the ctwnt8ry. $e ap ca.r here beforo thistribunal; a uniue tribunal in the history o6 the world I think; a tribunal in whic'i, two nations meet together for t'he purpow of constituting a court which shall decide withoutfear or favor, without prejudice orwithout thought that, t,here is any int,erntl,tionnl boundary between us. You should consider this as jntlgtr.; sit,ting here to administer t,he law either of the United States orCanada, and for plrposes of this decision you should consider Canada st part of the llnitetl St,ates and the Unlted States a part, of Can:da. 'I'hw.t is t.o sav, t>hat theoretically in this tribunal we are under one flag, and being in that osition it is for you to say whethcr ornot, you t'hink itJis 1n.wful. I st1r, rnit, that you should report that under the ciraumst,ancc?sit is not proper tm construct this weir, because you have a wae out in anothcr direction. The engineers can plat-c this (lam or weir III anot,hw plaw, which mn,y not, perha in t,heir judynmrnt,, be as dcFirthl(3 a locat'ion for tho dike,but whickh be a lega lo(:at,ion, and which will n.llow t'hcm to cmrnpensate for the loss of thc wat,rr :r.ntl obvint,e the clanpr without, doing any illcgal act. If they can cornpcm?stc andohvintc t,he tlangcrs wlthoutacting illegally, or without walking roughshod over the rights of the people of this lit,tle ccmnr1anit:y trlong this shore, I say that, thy should do it,,beoaww might even In t,he hands of a government is not right, and govornmmtJ d~~~ltln,lvmys 1)rotcct,, as far ns possiblr, the private ~ni,erestsof t,he pwplo. 'Thcrc4'orc!, thc Rmcricrtn Government should not, regarding that all a,.; one cauntry for the purpose of this argument, .injuriously :LfTect the rights of its own citizens or of our citizens, THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 189 when there is another location which will allow the installation of a work which will effect the same end. I consider that my Government is the uartlian of the interests of the people of theProvince of Ontario.have believed tJhatthe statements made here that it will affect the health of those people are true and are unanswered, and we t'hirlk hat it is our duty-and I would fight just as stron ly if t'his were the Dominion Government that was making this app F?Ication- to voice those argunlents before this tribunal. Resides t,hat, we have the assistame of the interests in Detroit. Mr. Campbelkshows that it will injuriollsly affect t,hc rights of his com any. No erson has said here that it is absolutely sure that theAm R erstburg CYl annel will not be affected as a navigable stream. It has been said here that it will be injuriously affected bp this work. That is another consideration in which I am interested in behalf of the Province of Ontario, ant1 I submit, Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the commission, that if you could pms my first argument you should be absolutely clear that it. is c?stnhlishetlthat it will not injuriously affect that other channel. It has been stated that the making of this funnel t'hrough which this water will be discharged will not decrease but will increase the velocity of the flow across t,he Livinstone Chnnnd. Gent'lerncn have said that the flow will strike the channel at such an nnglc that it will not affect it at all. How (10 they know how thc currents and changes and all these differences t,hat arc' resulting from the works that are being done in this river may affect it,? Has it been established thatthis current, settin across t,his channel, will render vessels unmanageable? Nobody as ventured an opinion that it will render vessels unmanagea,ble.Those a vessels aremanageable, and as long as they are mana eable there is no danger. Certainly all the vessels that went througf there last' year were manageable. Vessels went through laden andvessels went through light,, and they were manageable. So long as they are manageable, how can there be any danger arising from that cross current? Have they shown by any wit,ness what rate of cross current will make a vessel unmanageable? We know that in a channel of a certain width a cross current of a certain velocity will affect, and has heretofore affected, vessels and will cause injuries in some waters of the world, but not one soul has gone on the witness stand and said that these currents do any harm. Mr. CASORAIN.Some of the captains who have testified here have stated that a fog might come on suddenly while they are in the channel, and if it does then these cross currents become very dangerous, because they have to slow down and the cross currents catch them and carry them over to the other bank. Mr. STAUNTON.I appreciate that.They said that is what they expect, but why have they not shown that that is so in any other channel ? They have made their statements, I believe, in absolutely good faith. I do not believe there has been u. witness on the stand who has endeavored to gloss any of his testimony or who has not been erfectlysincere, but I think not one of thosegentlemen has said tP lat their statements were based upon experience. Thcy said that thcy expected those dangers. Why did they not say that such dangers arise in places where cross current's of this velocity occur? They may be perfectly correct, but you are undertaking to decide this question on evidence, and I say that there is no evidence here, 190 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. excepting the speculation of these gentlemen, as to whether or not those dangers exist. My instructions were to say to you that it was not in the interests of the States bordering on these waters or of the Province of Ontario to in any way aid or he1 you in the solution of this question. We thought that it was in t Re interest of the Province, and the States bordering on the waters, excepting the State of Illinois, to keep this in the air as long as Mr. STREETER.Is t Plat Ossible* your present position Z Mr. STAUNTON.I am gom to state the view I take. I quite appreciate that it is not a logica position. I think if I am to be heard here at all I ou ht to try tos speak on the merits of the case, and I have endeavore t to answer this on the merits. Quite irrespective of that, a politic position for the States, excepting the State of Illinois, and the Province is not to get any solution unless they can induce the Federal authority to come to some arrangement wlth regard to the Chicago matter. Mr. STREETER. Do you think that this commission is abody to deal with that question Z Mr. STAUNTON. No; not now. I do not think there is any answer to Mr. Turner’s question. But I say that I want to lug it in so far as possible for tjhe purpose of bringing about a solution. On the case on the merits, however, I think I have a perfect answer to it in Arti- cle IV of the treaty. Mr. POWELL.You have a much stronger case under Article VI11 of thetreaty. In their wisdom the high contractingparties have seen fit to reverse the whole order of rights. They have subordinated the navigation rights to the sanitary rights,so if you make a sanitary case it would be an absolute estoppel. Mr. STAUNTON.I did not think of that, Mr. Powell, and I thank you for calling attention to it. I hope that in its decision the commission will not limit itself by holding my case to such feeble arguments as I may address to you. I hope you may take into consideration also thosepomts thatare a parent to yourselves. The first thing is the sanitary condition, an1 I ask you to make that cardinal principle predominant in your decision. I thank you, gentlemen, and I can only repeat the sentiment that has been uttered by those who have preceded me as to the respect and feeling we have toward this commission. A recess was then taken until 2.30 o’clock p. m.

AFTERRECESS.

Pursuant to the taking of the recess, the commission met at 2.30 o’clock p. In., all the members being present.

ARGUMENT OF IMB. F. IIOUGH,A. ON BEHALF OF THE TOWNSHIP OF AMHERSTBURG,ONTARIO.

Mr. HOUGH. Mr. Chairmanand gcntlemcn of theInternational Joint Commission, 1 have the honor to ~tpear before you on behalf of the municipality of the town of Am Rerstburg, a municipality THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 191 which will be affected perhapsmore than any other b the construction of this dike should it receive your approval. Tge history of the great work which is now nearing completion is well known to all of us, or should be by this time, and if the portion of the work which we know as the Dry Cut had been constructed in the same manner as the rest of the work in the river, that is by removing the excavation as it was dug by submarine drilling and dredging, this commission wouldnot be sitting here to-day to deal with the question thathas been submitted to it. Theingenuity of man, however, discovered a new way of doing this particular portion of the work, by building a cofferdam, pum 1ng it out, and then diggin the stone as you would in a quarry. %hen that plan was first ievised the engineers did not provide for any compensation which might result, and they did not consider, or did not provide for, any cross currents. It was not until the work was well under wa , untll the cofferdam was constructed, that it became apparent t9 lat something in the nature of the proposal which has been submitted to you would be reuired. $he first su gestion was that. it would be necessary to secure comensation, an(f that was the only suggestion,I think, for along time. the question of compensation that has been brought before you in the course of this hearing has become a negligible one. It has been shown by theengineers and by theevidence that thelevel of the water is practically the same now as it was for the 48 years during which the records were kept prior to the opening of this dam. It ha,s been shown further by the evidence that if it were a question of compensation, and if compensationwere necessar , there are other places more suitable than this,or at least as suitaB le, and where compensation could be obtained more cheaply than that in the position pro- . I matherefore, fairly eliminate from anything that I may Eosedave to say tt e question of compensation. The only other point is t,lmt of the effect of the cross current which is said to existand which undoubtedly does exist across tho new Livingstone Channel. The most absurd report ot abroad about the nature and effect, of that cross current long be! ore the channel was cam leted.Every vessel man on thechain of lakes was afraid of the fivingstone Channel bcfore it was ready to be opened for navigation, and when the time came to throw it open a fleet of wrecking tugsgathered there as vultureswaiting to pounceupon the first unfortunate ship that should go through that channel the moment she piled u 011 the rocks. Everybody expectedthat, to happen by virtue of wP lat had been announced and predicted, from what source I am not here to say. The William Livznptone passed through the channel in safety and the people began to wonder if all this stuff that had been said about the danger of this channel was nonsense after all. Some of the wise- reads said, “The William Livingstone is light; wait until the Corey homes along; she is loaded, and that will show the effect of the cur- cent. ” The Corey passedthrough in perfectsafety, and another andthen another boat assed through In perfect safety.Then the belief of the public ant of the people who were interested in this greatproject regarding the dangers that were said to exist as a result of the current at this point was very materially shaken. 192 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. That brings me to the first question propounded to your commission, as to whether or not,under the circumstances, this dike is necessary. I do not wish to repeat any of the argument. that has been made by my learned friends who have spoken before me, but it would seem to me that from the fact that from the 19th of October, when thechannel was opened, untilthe 15th of December, 1,227 vessels passed through that canal, ships of all kinds, some of them with tows and some with as many as three barges in tow, all in perfect safety, would be almost an answer to the question of whether or not that dike is necessary. It was brought out in the evidence that at the upper end of the Limekiln Crossing the mean current passing down was 23 miles an hour. At that point the channel takes a turn at an angle of 20 degrees. Thore is a very strong current setting in to the eastward there, a current which all mariners have been aware of ever since that channel was opened. Nobodyhas proposed to build a wall there t.0offset the current that sets in at that point. Mariners know that that current sets in at th8.t point and they are repared for it in the same way that they will know, and probabl Enow how, that a current sets in across this Livingstone Channec andthey will pre are for that,and we found that the gentlemen who had navigate$ the channel were quite easily able to do without having had any experience with it at all. There were other pointiq equ:dly as dangerous in the chain of lakes that were referred to, and in none of thcm have I ever heard of any dike or dam being constructed for the purpose of offsetting a cross current. Vessels are equipped with steam power and with rudders, and they are manned by c6mpetentmen who are compelled to take a course in navigation. Those men have to study t'hese currents and to study the charts, and theyhaveto obtain alicense for the navigation of vcssels before they are pcrmitted to take. charge of them. A man who can not avoidan ordinary circumstance suchas exists here has no business to be abroad on the high seas. Now I submitthat nothing ha.;bccrl shown here whichwould cstnblish thr fact thatt,hi:3 current can not be avoidcd by the ordinary means of navigation; and if it can, then the result must €0110~ that this dike is not necessary for the plrposcof making that channel safe. We must admit, of cour3c, that it would be a very nice thing to have absolutely still water throughout the wltulc chain of lakcs if such a thing were possible, but it is not ossiblc, and it is not necessary at this point any morc thanat anyot er point. That brings us to the sncond portionR of t2hefirst question, and that is as to the desirability oI this dike. In this connection it becomes important to consider wh:lt tho dike will bo and what effect it wlll have. If it were to hnve no effect except that for which it is intended to be constructed, then there would he 110 argument agginst its construction, but, the evidence hcrc is that it will hnve another effect. The evidence here show3 that what thateft'eet may be is as yet doubtful. Thefact that that effect is doubtful is onc of thestrongest arguments, I submit, why the dikc should not be permitted t,o be built in this position at the present time. If you gentlemen will draw a straight line along the line to bo taken by the roposed dike, another straight line along the east side of the channeP , and then a straight line on eachside of the channel opposite Amherstburg, youwill find a drawing of a domestic utensil known THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 193

as a funnel. The sides of that funnel are about 300 feet long. The upper endof the channelis about 300 feet across, and the spout of the funnel is about 1,000 feet across. That is a layman's way of arcruing that the current outof the spout mustbe greater than it is up atove. Atthe resenttime one side of thofunnel is open.The cvidence shows t 1at upward of 40 per cent, nearly half, of the water passing down east of the cofferdam goes through west of Bois Blanc Island. This dike,which will be in the neighborhood of 300 feet long and which will be a pile of stone, will, notwithstanding the 300-foot opening, close the side of &he funnel and divert the whole of that water into the Amherstburg Channel. 'I'hc: engineers suggest that the 300-foot opening will have some shelf. If it does, then the 300-foot opening is oing to be dangerous. So I take it as an cngineering work that it wiB 1 be necessary,and theywill deyiso a mcansby wings of prcventing any appreciable current passing through that 300-foot gap.Then all that water which is now permed in that 300 feet of space will be shot through the mouth of the funncl at Amherstburg, which is only a thousand fcet wide. Now the question arises as to what the result will be. The engineers have told ds that tho increase in volume OI water through that channel by reason of the dike will be 13,000 cubic feet per second. I have no quarrel with them in that respect. The engineers practically agree on that subject, and if they say 13,000 feet per second I am preparedto believe it. Butwhat I do say is this: Thoentlemen who have viewed this question from an engineering stanf point are not in the sameposition to say what the resultof that will be, so far as affects the practical navigation of that channel, as men who arc engaged in that end of the work. When it comes to a question of the practicalnavigation of aboat and the effect that acertain current will have on that boat, the man thathas been througPI1 the mill is in a better position to speak regarding that than theman who has been in college. It is one thin.. to talk about handlin a steamboat and it is another thing to handye it. The oviderlce of t e marine men here as to the effect of this dike on the Amherstburg Channela was that it would ejeck a volume of water around the head of Bois Blanc Island right across the Amherstburg Channel, and in their opinion it would render that channel dangerous and more difficult to navigate. There can be only one ob'ect in any of these works. That object we all agree on. It is to make both channels as efficient as it is ossible to make them. There is no man here or anywhere who wou d wish to make the Livingstone Channel safe at the expense of the Amherst-Y burg Channel. If that dike will destroy, or to a certain extent render more dangerous, the AmherstburgChannel, then what is to be gained, even thou h it does improve the Livingstone Channel? That matter . has been rought before you gentlemenanti has been sworn to by practical men of years of cxperience. Their evidence is notmere guesswork. It is theresult of their experience. And even thoug) it should be mere guess, is not that enough to stay theernction of this dike without any argument thatI need put up Y The effect that it has on thc Livingston Channel is, of course, of much greater importance than the effect it may have on the town of Amherstburg, which I am here to represent. That is a matterwhich 86342-13-13 194 THE LIVINGSTONECHANNEL. interests the commerce of the two countries. It interests Amherst- burg only in so far as the result of injuring the Amherstburg Channel will injure Amherstburg. The water front of Amherstburg stretches down theeast side of that channel for upward of amde. That, according to the evidence, in the season of navigation will be rendered useless to boats bound down. They willbe unable to sto at the port of Amherstburg. The result will be inconvenience and 7oss and damage to the mercantile and other interests in that town. It will be dangerous and difficult for the boats to stop bound up in the current which the marine men saywill be so increased as to render it dangerous and difficult. That brings me to the other featurewhich necessarily follows, and that is the effect this will have on the water front and on the docks in the town of Amherstburg at the opening and close of navigation when the river is full of ice. When the current comes downmore swiftly, as it undoubtedly will, it brings what is floating in the current down at the increased rate. I have before me an account of the first ice jam that Amherstburg ever had, which occurred on January 12, 1913. The account as it appeared in the newspaper is as follows:

AMHERSTBURQ HAS FIRST SERIOUS ICE JAM-DRILL BOATS CARRIED AWAY WHEN ICE, G INCHES THICK, GOESON RAMPAQE. AYHERSTBURQ,January 18. Tho burg hadits first heavyice jam in scveral yearsshortly before 3 o'clock Sunday morning when the ice, which was from 6 to 8 inches thick, went on the ram- Heavy ice piled up along the shore and along Boise Blanc Park, while a drill gE%owned by M. Sullivan, of Detroit,, broke away from her moorings and was carried by the icealmost into Lake Erie. A tug went to it,srescue and after hard work brought the drill boat back. The drill boat Destroyer, also of the Sullivan fleet, broke loose and crashed into the drill boat, Gladiator. It is said that theGladiator is leaking. The waterworks dock is also badly damaged by the heavy ice floes. The Pittsburgh Coal Fueling steamer Snowden sprung a leakat her dock at thelower end of Bois Blanc Park. The boat. is said not to be in serious shape. That is the result of the building of the cofferdam; the closing up of the greater part of the channel between Stoney Island and the main shore by the work which has been heretofore carried on in building the Livingstone Channel. That was a result which was either unfore- seen by the engineers who had charge of that work or it was treated as a matter of indifference. If that is the result now with the cofferdam extending down half-way through that stretch of water, what will be the result if it is extended, as it is to be by this dike,across the whole of that water Z It seems to me that it is not necessary to say that if ice goes down that river at a11 it must do damageto the water fronts, to the docks, and to the boathouses and the property stretched along the front of the town of Amherstburg and down into the townshi of Malden. $he next important objection that Amherstbur has to offer is the effect that this work will have on the pollution of her water sup ly, and I think perhaps that is one of the most important questionstR at men have to deal with at any period. The report made before the annual convention of the presidents of life insurance associat,ions on December 6 last showed that the typhoid rate in Detroit is higher than that in any other of the 10 leading cities of the United States. THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 195

Dr. Allan J. McLaughlin, of the United States Public-Health Service, in addressing that convention, said: No single measure in reducing typhoid fever on a large wale appr )acheti the effect of substituting a safe for a polluted water supply. A statement such as that coming from so eminent :In authority should be sufficient argument for the importance of this branch of theuestion. It has beenshown to you conclusively that addi- tiona9 pollution will be brought down across Amherstburg’s water front by the constructionof this dike. It has been shownconclusively by experts who have testified that that will increase tho danger to Amherstburg’s water supply; that it will increase the injury to the health of the people of Amherstburg.Again, without wishing to repeat argument, I want to impress upon you as strongly as I can whatmy learned friend, Mr. Staunton,said on thatsubject. It appearsto me thatthis dike underthe treaty between thetwo countries would be and should be held an illegal work. I want to remind you that Amherstburg has been using a chloronation system, and the evidence shows the effect of the increased pollutionbeing directed to the Amherstburg intake pipe onthat chloronation system will be to render it more inefficient. The next ob‘ection thatI have to present toyou is the fact that this stretch of 300 ieat of water is now navigated very largely by ownersof small craft, motor boats, and by otherswho use the channel forvari- ous purposes of business and pleasure. I submit that the man going east and west is entitled to consideration as much as the man who wants to go north and south. To say that this 300-foot gap will obviate that objection is not correct. A 300-foot ap half a mile or so against a heavy current upstreamis not much o an inducement to a man with a small boat. B The last objection, andone perhaps which as against the onrushof commerce of the present da may be given the least weight, but one to which I consider we shoui d give due consideration,is the fact that this unsightly pile of stone 300 feet long will destroy one of the most beautiful stretches of river that there is in, I would almost say, the world to-day, and this at a time when the Government of Canada is considering the establishment at FortMalden, just opposite the location of this proposed dike, of a memorial national park in commemo- ration of 100 years of peace between the two countries. That, gentlemen, is all I have to say as regards the second portion of the firstuestion. lt seems to me that withthese objections, some of whic5 we know are well founded and all of which are entitled to consideration, the dike can not be held to be desirable. I then come to the second question before the commission, anl that is, putting it tersely, if not, why not? It is not for the town of Amherstburg to submit any alternative, but the engineers who have planned this great work wlll be able to devise some other means of overcoming.this little difficulty which is said to exist here other than the one whch is at present under Consideration. It has been shown that opening 300 feet of the Livin stone Channel diminished thecross current by practically one-half. !t f the opening of the 300-foot chan- ne1 has diminished that cross current to that extent, it would seem reasonable that the opening of the channel to the full width of 450 feet would also have very material effect on it. ‘I asked Col. Patrick 196 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. what that effect would be, and he said he would not care to venture an opinion. If Col. Patrick can not give an opinion as to what the effect will be, then I submit that it is too car1 to consider this application. I submitthat wo should wait an( see the effcct on the o ening of that chamd, artd whon I say thatr wu should await this t P ect I (lo not mean that you gentlornen shoultZ wait, but I mean that tbapplication should wait. If 1 may be perrnittsd to express my opinion on it, I think that tho application on the merits, as it has been presented to-(lay, might very easily ).)e decided to-day and decided that it is not oithcr necessary or desirable. With the engineer expressing hirnself in doubt, as to thc effect that the opening of tho chanrlcl to the full witlt'h of 450 feet may have, it seems to me that this application should not bo favorably consitleretl. I do not intend to makc dtcrnativc propositions. As I say, I do not consider t'hat that is up to either me or rny client, but it has beensuggested here in ovidencc that a dike oneithcr side of the channel us st presont existing would answer the purposes. If such a dike should be nocessary to overcome these cross currents, a dike located on either side of the canal would not be subject to rnany of the objections that I havo urgctl. Those, gentlemen, arc the points that I have to present to you on behalf of the town of Amherstburg. I thank you for the consideration that you have given their prescntation, and though the position of the town may seem to be much inferior to that of other claims that there may be upon you, I know that you will give our rspre- sentations no less your careful consitleration.

ARGUXENT OF MR.REEVES T. STRICKLAND, ASSISTANT TO THEATTORNEY GENERAL, WASHINGTON, D. C., ON BEHALF OF TEE GOVERNMENT OF TEE UNITED STATES. Mr. STRICKLAND.I appreciate very much the honor of addressing the commission, and I feel that I shall he unable to li hten its labors very much.Before be inningmy argument I shou7d like to offer in evidence the act of 8ongress authorizing the construction of this dam and the works in this river. I also ask ermission to read into the record a statementcontainod in, areport oP the proceedings of the Lake Carriers' Association, which was referred tfo yesterday. The CHAIRMAN. Beforo you (lo that, ought you not to accompany the act with the report which was oxpressly referred to in the act8 Mr. STRICKLAND. That was offered by Col. Patrick yesterday. Mr. STREETER. Have you putinto t,he case that legislation by which theformer appropriations were made andthe purposesfor which they were made, so that there will be before the commission ahistory of whathas been donetoward the improvement of the river ! Mr. STRICKLAND. Thechairman of the commissionspoke to me about that on Monday, and J told him t,hat I would furnish to the commissionevery act which is referred to in connec,tion with this matter. Mr. STREETER. It may bo untlerstootl that' they are offered to the commission and are t,o be furnished later. THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNSL. 107 Mr. STRICKLAND.I wish to read into tho record a portion of the report of the meeting recently held by thc LakeCarriers’ Association, which was referred to yesterday. It reads as follows: Capt. ROBINSON.Yes. 1 think permanent lights on both sides of the channel would be preferable to t>hose1ight)s. In regard to the current there I will say that this fall I went down there once, and it was blowing about 60 nliles an hour, and I found the worst, kind of a current after I had got out, so that the current went across thepoint. It carried me away to the eastward. I had the mate up withme. We were steering up the channel, and it threw me way OFF onto the black st,a.kes;I was way to theeast,ward of it,. I had to keep pulling up, and right there where is we found our worst, current. As I said before, it was blowing a gale of at least 60 miles an hour. The channel itseli, I think, is straight. I had an idea that in thick weather there would be lots of trouble there, but I think the channel is perfectly straight,, and i€ . you go inthe middle of thechannel and get your course out, and if there wa8 no current- Mr. LIVINGSTONE.Pardon me, but the channelis absolutely straight. Capt. ROBINSON.Yea; I will say that we steered the same course when we were in t,he middle‘of the cha,nnel; all theway out. (:apt. ALLEN.Tha.t is, without the currents. Capt. ROBINSON. Without the currents.If we didn’t have the current to contend with it would be all right,. I have been under the impression that, if we got down t,here and it got smoky and foggy that some of you fellows with deep-draft boats might get intot,rouble. I a.m on a small boat. I don’t worry a great dcal. Mr. STREETER.Is that published in the printed rcport of the Lake Carriers’ Association, Mr. Livingstone 11 Mr. LIVINGSTONE.It has not been printedyet. Thai; was meeting of thecommittee on aidsto navigation, which washeld in Detroit on ?January 13. Capt.Robinson, a portion of whose testimony Mr. Strickland has just read, sails one of the So0 Line boats. Mr. STRICKLAND.I understand that the reference to the commission was throu h a letter from the Secretary of State of the United States, dated 8ctober 16, 1912, in which there were referred to the International Joint Commission for examination and report the facts and circumstances of theparticular quest>ions referred.Briefly, those questions are, first, whether a dike1s necessary for the improvement or safet,y of navigation, and, second, whether the roposed dike wouldbe sufficient. Thisentire matter was referret? th aspecial board cpnsisting of five engineers of the Corps of Engineers of tllc TJnited States Army to examineand report upon the Livingstone Channel and the Detroit River and to report upon the probable effect of widening said channel in aid of navigation.The board held meetings and viewed the .situation from many pointJs. It reported a stron current to exist between the cofferdam and Bois Blanc Island, and t at as the current is nearly at right angles to tJhe axis of the Livingstonea Channel it might, unlessrestrained, canse difficult in the navigation of that waterway; therefore, the current shoud be interrupted, and the simplest method of attaining that object is by means of a dam extending from the southeast angle nf t,he present cofferdam t’o Bois Blanc Island. Mr. STREETER. Whatwas tho date of that report, Mr. Strickland? Mr. STRICKLAND. The exact dateof the report is Oct,ober 28, 1909. Subsequently an additional report was mado which is dated January 19, 1910. In the latter report the board cleclared that the source of danger to both up and down bound commerce wou cross current, which in somewhat modified form will exist above the head of Bois Blanc Island. To eliminate this cross emrent the board has recommended the construction of the closing darn. 198 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. The recornnmdation of said board should be given much consideration as to the necessity for the proposed dike or dam, as well as the opinion of &I. Patrick, who has gone deeply into tJhe subject and who so ably testified as to thenecessity before this cornmission on Monday, establisl~~n theaccuracy of the o inion of the Board of Engineers. The conc! usions reached by CoLBatrick and byMr. Stewart on most all oink agnrc, and, if I undcrstood Mr. Stewart correctly, it appears by rl is testimony that while he did not see any necessity for the proposed dam, he did not think it would be in any way in'urious. The testimony of Mr. nixon, the assistantengineer, was to t h e sameeffect as that of Col. Patrick, that the dam was a necessity to correct the cross current, and if built would be sufficient forcompensatory purposes. As regards the question of sowage, the testimony has shown that sewage coming fromDetroit and thecitieson the Americansidefollows very closely theAmerican shore, andthat the sewage from the Canadian side follows veq+closely the Canadian shore. The building of the proposed darn will create no different situation than has heretofore existed, thesewage from each side of the river remaining close to the shoreand the icebeing largelygoverned by the wind. It is barely ossible that it will go more to the Canadian shore, and yet I think t7 le testimony shows clearly that it u-ould follow the Trenton Channel, and that there would be really no fear of any more sewage going in that direction than has gone heretofore. As I recollect the testimony inregard to the question of ice, it appears that some years ago therc was anice jam and thatsince that time there havebeen no icejams in the river except theone mentioned in thenewspa er a few months ago which Mr. Hou h, of hmherstburg, referred to. ft appears that the ice will be largeB y controlled by the winds. If the winds set in one direction, the ice will go that way. If it happens to be in the other direction, the ice will go with it, and I can not see that the ice question is a serious one in connection with the dam which is proposed to he erected. The principal feature is that of navigation on the Detroit River. There are certainseasons of the year when there are excursionvessels on the river-June, July, and August. At other seasons of the year it is mainly confined to commerce andfreight traffic, which has grown to a large extent.The downbound traffic of theDetroit River, as appears by some of the documents furnished,is 76 per cent of the t,otaltraffic, involving a carrying capacity of 75,000,000 tons of freight.During the eight months' navigation season of 1912 the records show that 7.5,000,000 tons of freight were carried down the Detroit River. The value of this freight is about $500,000,000. One and one-ltalf per cent 01' the cash value of this freight carried in a single season wotdd amount to more than the United States has spent on the lowcr Detroit River in 39 years. Channels excavated to mean water conditions frequently have less t,han their project dcpth. A decrease oi' depth of a few inches causes loss to shipping interestsby their inability to load their vessels to the draft otherwise possible, and it is stated that every inch of draft thus lost means a lessening of the cargoes carried in the largest vessels of from 60 to 100 tons. Ik%hermorcsuch a lowering upon Livingstone Channel means increased slope in the Detroit River and more rapid emptying of the reservoir lakes above. THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 199 Delaysto shipping may produce great loss. Freightis carried morecheaply by Lake steamer than any other way. The average freight ratein 191 1 was seven-tcnthsmill per ton-mile. 111 other words, Lakesteamers ca,rriec.l oneton over 14 miles for 1 cent. This freight rate is just about one-half of what it was 20 years ago, showing the benefit that ha* resulted from improvements made by the United States. The matter of this improvement by putting in this dam and the creation of the channel has becn under consideration for nearly three years. It was studied thoroughly by a board of engineers and recorn- mendations for a dike were made based upon observation and careful calculation.Observations since the opening of the cofferdam practicallyestablish the accuracy of the board'scalculations and predictions.Independent measurements and calculations made by UnitedStates and Canadian engineersagree closely. Engineers agree that the building of the dike would increase the mean veloelty near Amherstburg not more than one-hali mile per hour. This can not affect shipping injuriously. A greater portion of the discharge of the river will be carried by the channels to the west of t,he Limekiln Crossing thm at present, after the channel is completed. The only difference of conclusions between the Canadian and American engjncers is that one Canadian thinks that if the flow through the Chlcago Canal were decreased,nearly normalconditions wouldbe restored in the Detroit River, even IE the channel were opened to greatferwidth; the United Statesengineers hold that there should be local compensation for such a disturbance of local regimen if the channelwere opened to a greater width. Attor- neys and engineers for the Chicago Drainage Canal are now urging that observed lowering of lake levels are due to improvements made inthe Detroit River rather than to the flow takenthrough their canal. It would be unwise to omit supplying compensation for any work done in the lower Detroit River. It would seem from the testimony of all the witnesses and from the report of the special board of engineers that the construction of a dam is necessary, and that the proposed one would accomplish the desired effect without any serious harm to any interests. I thank you, gentlemen. Mr. LIVINGSTONE. I would like to ask permission, on behalf of the Lake Carriers' Association, to file a writ>tenstatement a little later on. The CHAIRMAN.You may file such a statement and you may make an oral statement now if you desire to do so. How soon would you be re4dy to file your writton statement 1 Mr. LIVINGSTONE. How soon would you like to have it? The CHAIRMAN. WithinIO days. Mr. LIVINGSTONE. Verywell. Mr. STREETER. There is another thing I would like to suggest, to Mr. Livingstone. It must he that there is somewherein printan official statement of the traffic on this river, a table showing the number of vessels, the amount of tonnage carried each year, going back, say, for 12 or 15 years. and the percentage of increase of traffic each year. Mr. LIVINGSTONE.There is such n table. My annual report each yearhas shown that. I wish tomake that statement' with this explanation: You understand hat all thetonnage which passes 200 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. through (,he Soo River we have t'llc official record of. What passes through trhc Canadian locks t'hc Cmatlian peo lekee account of; what passes t'hrough thc American locks our 1P.' nlt>ctl 8 tates officials kcel, an account of. I shall try to obtain t'hat information. 'the tonnage which passod through the Soo (:anal in 1912 exceeded thc tonnage which passed through in 1911 by over 10,000,000 tons. The inc,rcasc last year was more that1 the rntirc tonnagewhich passed throughthe So0 Canal in 18'30. In ot,hcr words, the traffic on the Lalres has grown with such rapidity that what has been tJhe dream of t,o-day lmbeen almost the reality of to-morrow. L did not intend to allude t,o the question of pollution, and I would not presume to place my opinion against, t,lle opinion of t'he ex erts who llitvo made that quostion thcir life work, hut I want to ca the attantion of the commission to this fact, re,garding the pollutions of thewaters; you understand we have two channels tothe Detroit Kiver; onecommences up by Grosse IslandLighthouse in Detroit River. I want to submit to the commission for their consideration that nat>urally the currentis just as rapid there as it is on the easterly side, and naturally a large amountof sewage which comes down from Dctroitand above must pass aroundt]hat American channel. It strikes t,hat, of course, before it gets to the Limekiln. Mr. QTREETER. Do you happen to know, or is there any published record, of the relation of the tonnage passing through the So0 and through the Detroit, River with that whlch asses through the canal? Mr. LIVINGSTONE. About t'hree anda ha f f times, according to the lastreport which I have. In the Detroit River we have only 240 days of navigation,and t'here the,y have 365 days. I wish to call attention, Mr. Streeter, howcver, to one pointin connection wit.h thatmatter of thetonnage. On theDetroit River here we figure only theactual tons which arecarried. In other words, if a boat goes up light we do not count that tonnage, but on the So0 Canal that is tllelr wa of collecting tolls; they count the registered tonnage of the boat. IP the boat is light it is just the same as if she is loaded; they give you the full registered tonnage of the boat. Mr. STREETER.Is there any record of the actual tonnage carried through the So0 Canal 1: Mr. LIVINGSTONE. The Department of Commerce and Labor would have such information. Mr. CASGRAIN. This statement t'hatyou wish to put in,Mr. Living- stone, will it bear upon new facts or smply comment upon the facts which have been discussed here? Mr. LIVINGSTONE. It will cover some additional facts thatw8 have 1106 a.1road.y put in. If we had known the scope that the hearings would take, we would have put them in before. Mr. WHITE.I wish t,o suggest that such a statementshould be furnished to all counsel concerned, and that they should be given an opportunit,y of answering them. The CHAIRMAN.When Mr. Livingstone sends Ius statement to the secretaries of the two sections of the commission, copies can be sent to each of the representatives interested. Mr. WHITE.And we can then have trn opport,unitJyof criticizing such statement. THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 201

Mr. TURNER.If tdlis paper which Col. Livingstonc wants to file is to set forth anynew facts, the other sideshould have an opportunity not, only t,o sce it but toanswer it. Mr. WHITE.It, may bc very possibk thnt Mr. Tivingstono's statement, may not be of such n naturc as to require any answer, but we ought to be giventdle opportunity of answering it if it does require one. Tho CIIAIRMAN.Of course, the commission desires t'o give the grmtest, latitudefor all sides to present t

DETROIT,MICH., March 7, 1913. Hon. JAMESTAWNEY, Chairman International Joint Commission, Washington, D. C. DEARSIR: On careful reflection I have decided to introduce no new matter in the following statement, butsimply, if possible, to bring out more clearly and forcibly the information covering the oints that were introduced and discussed at the hearing of our commission held ingetroil;, February 17, 18, and 19, 1913, on the question of guilding a remedial dam or dike at the Livingstone Channel in Detroit River, and in so doing I think a brief recapitulation of the inception and growth of commerce on the Great Lakes will be of somc value in connection with the subject. In 1843 Senator Norvell, first Senator from Michigan, introduced a bill in the United States Senate to grant lands for the building of St. Mary’s Canal. Henry Clay, the silver-ton uedoratorof Kentucky, one of the foremost statesmen of the Nation, bitterly opposed &e bill, declaring that anymoney or grants made for that purpose would be utterly wasted, and pronounced this great waterway beyond the farthest bounds of civilization, if not in themoon. While statistics are naturally dry, itis somewhat of a necessity to use some of them in showing or demonstrating the tremenduous increase in the tonnage of the Great Lakes during the past 57 years. In 1855, 57 years ago, the totd tonnage of Lake Superior, not only in cargo, but the shim that carried it as well. could be comfortablv stowed away in the holds of manv of the large steamers that have come into commission during Ihese recent years an& thatare daily passing through thecanal. The movement of freight to and from Lake Su erior previous to the opening of the State canal in 1855 was entirely by boat to gault Ste. Marie, where the cargoes were unloaded, then taken across the portage, 1 mile inlength, then reloaded aboard the boats. In 1851 about 12,600 tone passed over the tramway portage. During the 57 years the canals have been in commission the yearly traffic has increased from the minimum of 14,503 tons to the enormous maximum in the year 1912 of 72,472,676 tons, of which 32,824,815 tons were carried through the United States canal and 59,647,861 tons through the Canadian canal. This movement is 10,109,458 tons greater than in 1910, the revious high. record. This increase was almost as much as the entire tonnage whi% passed through the St. Mary’s Canals in 1892. Twenty-two thousand seven hundred and seventy-eight ships passed through the canals at Sault Ste. Marie in 1912. Of this number 14,916 used the United States Canal and 7,862 used the Canadian canal. It will be seen that while the number of vessels using the Canadian canal is only half the number using the American canal yet the Canadian canal carried the greater portion of the freight. This is accounted for by reason of the greater draft of water available in the Canadian lock than in the American, although there are already a number of vessels on the Lakes whose beam is too great to permit them to use the Canadian channel, and this number is yearly increasmg. The tonnage which passed through Detroit River in the year 1912 was approximately 95,00@000 tons, which exceeds all previous years, Navigation was open from April 19 to December 16, a period of 242 days. Twenty-five thousand two hundred and thirty-eight vemels passed through the Land Kiln Crossing and 1,227 vessels through the Livingstone Channel,making a total of 26,465 vessels. The Livingstone Channel, howevcr, was only opened to navigation October 19, and vessels were not required to use it until November 10. This is an average of one vessel every 13&minutes during the entireperiod of 242 days. Approximating the tonnage through Detroit Riverat 95,000,000 tom, the traffic would average 272 lons duringevery minute of the 24 hours of every day during the entireseason of navigation. As showing the enormous growth of the tonnage of the Lakcn during recent years, it maynot be amiss to state thal itwas not, until 1892 that the tonnage passing through the St. Mary’s Canals exceeded 10,000,000 tons, t.he total tonrlage pssing through in that year being 11,214,333 tons. The tonnage passing through the canal in 995 tas 15,062,580. Five years later, in 1900, il had increased to 25,643,073 tons. Fwe years 202 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 203 later, in 1905, it had increased to 44,270,680 tons. In 1912, a period of seven years later, the tonnage had increased 28,201,996 tons over 1905, a total of 72,472,676for 1912. To be added to this is all the traffic shipped from Lake Michigan, Lake Huron ports, which include Chicago, hlilwaukee, Ewanaba, Green Ray, and all intermediate porta on these lakes-over 90,000,000 tons. The value of freight tonnage pasrirlg through Detroit River in 1912 wit3 consideritbly over $800,000,000. One and one-half per cent of the value of thisfreight for the ear 1912 alone would more than equal all the expenditures on the lower Detroit Liver in 39 years. The average rate of freight for the year 1912 wus seven-tenths of B mill per ton per mile. In other words, we carried 1 ton of freight 14 miles for 1 cent.The lowest rail rate we have available is approximately 4 mills per ton per mile-over five timea the water rate. When it is estimated that a reduction of 1 mill per ton on the rail- rods of the country effects a saving of over $800,000,000to the shippers of freight, it demonstrates the fact that our waterways have acted as ;E most powerful regulator of rates, and the value of this restrictive power can not be overestimated. Such frieght rates are possible only when boats are able to run regularly and without delays, with a minimum of risk, and low insurance rates. An accident blocking any of the channels may result in serious delays and loss to many vessels. Hence, necessity for minimizing the dangers and difficulties of navigation in these waters. The average cargoes for the past 18 years-that is, from 1895 to 1912, inclusive--- show that they have increased from 1,800 grms t,ons per cargo in 1895 to 7,740 tons in 1912. It is found in active practice that t,he carrying capacity of the largest bulk freiaht- em upon the Great Lakes has been a? much as 113 tons per inch of reduced loa&ng depth per single one-way trip. This, graduated to the smallest vevsels in the bulk freight trade, would, upon a very conservative basis, average 75 tons per inch per one-way trip, 150 tons per inch per'round trip, if loaded both ways, as they frequently are, which would mean a loss of 3,300 tons per vemel for a season per inch, and so, for 467 vessels (our fleet), an approximate loss of 1,550,000 tona per inch. So, with freight rates averaging 40 cents per ton net, the loss to our vessela would, therefore, aggregate approximately $616,000 for each inch of the diminished draft. It has been suggeFted that because there are variations through cycles of time and from local barometncal forces, and because these have to he met, therefore a permanent reduction of the level of half a foot or a foot or more mav not be complained of. This we think sophistical and without merit. These same' conditions and effects may be expected with thelevels permanently reduced as the present basis with which we have to reckon. I inclme herewithclippings from my annual report, for 1912, pages 120 to 125, inclusive, which give the names,length, and tonnage of all bulk freighters in our association constructed since the year 1902. My object in going into thesestatistics is for the purpose of demonstrating and emphasizing t,he fact that there is no other navigable stream on the face of the globe that is comparable with the tremendous volume of tonnage which passes through the Detroit River. For instance, the far-famed Suez ('anal, of which so much has been said and published; the official report shows that the tonnage through the Suez Canal for 1911 was 18,324,794 net tons, and that for the first 11 months oE 1912"that is, up to December 1-was18,610,548 net tons, which shows that the amount of tonnage !assing through our Sault Ste. Marie canals wad over four timea the volume of the uez Canal. There are two othei. facts to be borne in mind in connection with thk. First, they have the full365 days in the year of navigation against our 240-only two-thirds of the year; second, they report the full registered tonnage (whether full loaded, partially loaded, or in ballast), while in our canals we report the actual amount of frelght carried, regardless of registered tonnage. When the Poe Lock was constructed, the dimemions of which were 800 feet in length and 100 feet in width, it waH planned to lock five boats through. Now, only one of our modern vessels can be locked through. We are now building two new locks at Sault, each of 1,350 feet in lengt,h, which 1s 350 feet greater t,han the locks at the Panama Canal, which are 1,000 feet. After due consideration Congress appro riated the money for the proposed dike. This was done after a re ort had been male to Congress by a board of engineers who gave the matter thoroug: study. These facts alone are sufficient to establish the necersity of the dike andof cutting off the cross current and of affordin the needed compensation when the LivingEtone Channel is opened to a greater wid%. The only real opposition to the proposed work comes from the town of Amherst- burg, and was based upon thethree clainns: (1) That the greatervelocity of the 2 04 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. current along the town front would injure its harbor and make navigation more difficult; (2) The damage done by ice would be greater; (3) The amount of sewage in the water would be greater. and hence the health of the town would be endangered. All of the engineers who ha,d studied this problem testified that the increase of thc mean velocity in thk vicinity would be not more than one-half mile per hour. Such a slight increase can not affect t,his harbor injuriously. The testimony establislled the fact, that t,he direction of the winds governed the ice movement and that the building of the dike could not increase the danger from ice. 1 may also add in this connection t.hat 1 ha,ve lived 011 the Detroit River since I was a boy and for 13 years owned a country lace on the easterly bank of Grosse Isle directly fronting Livingstone Channel. Witx a more than average knowledge of the difficulties connected with navigation at this point and without claiming to have, 80 far as engineering knowledge is concerned, technical expert knowledge, yet, in my judgment, from a practica3 point of view, I am thoroughly convinced that the point selected for the building of the dike byour engineers is by far the best for the interests of navigation that could be select,ed for that purpose. Much of the opposition of Amherstburg is based upon the belief that all water now going between the cofferdam and Bois Blanc will flow past the town. This claim is incorrect. More than two-thirds of this water will be carried by channels to the west of the Limekeln Channel and only aboutone-third of it will go by Amherstburg. Most of Detroit’s sewage is necessarily carried by channels to west of Limekiln crossing. If any part of it is carried by Amherstburg, the dam will not increase the percentage of this sewage in the water and therefore can have no harmful effects. It was testified that thewatcr supply of the town is now polluted and that typhoid fever and other water-borne diseases are revalent. There was no convincing testimony that the building of the dike woulz makeconditions any worse than they are now. Certainly the mere prohibition of the building of the dike will not lessen the amount of pollution which is now present in Amherstburg’s water, and it is evident that as time goes on the sewage from Canadian sources which follows close along the Canadian shore will increase in amount. In other words, with typhoidfever now prevalent in thetown and directlytraceable to the water supply, the town must take steps to eliminate this danger and it is in- conceivable that the building of the dike will add one dollar to the cost of the work which it is necessary for the town to do inorder to supply pure water to its citizens. Filtration plants are used in many of the principal cities of the world; by the way, one at Washington, D. C. The highest authority exists for the propositlon that it is not necessary to deplete the lakefor such purposes, since, under the modern scientific methods the water taken from the lake can be returned less a small percentage of waste in practically unpollutedcondition. If it is conceded that thepresent anti uated water system which is now being used at Amherstburg is entirely made uate ?or the proper azfeguarding the health of the community this evil instead of jecreasing will be rapidly on the increase, as, for instance, a new town, to be called Pontiac, is being built a few miles above Amherst- burg on the Canadian side for theUnited States Steel, Corporation. Theyhave already commenced preliminary work for erecting large blastand steel furnaces, whichwill, of necessity,employ thousands of men andthe expenditure of over $20,000,000. A large majority of the em loyees will reside in the immediate vicinity and thesewa e and drainage will naturafy empt into theDetroit River on the Cana- dian side an8 all of which must necessarily foEow the Canadian side of the river directly infront of the town of Amherstburg. In additionto this, there areother large manufacturing institutions thatare about to be built inthe immediatevicinity running into the millions. This, added to the large and rapidly growin Canadian towns of Windsor and Walkerville, a few miles above this point, will, of necessity, very largely increase the pollution of the water at Amherstburg, and it would seem to be imperative that the town of Amherstburg, as with many other cities of the lake distncts, must provide, in thenear future, a new, modern and up-to-date waterworks system for sewage, health, and sanitation purposes and that theimmense naw gation interests of the Great Lakes should not, in any way, be restricted on account of their failure to take prompt action in adopting modern methods for health and sanitation. The immense benefit of lake transportation to the country at large by official statistics show the saving in a Bingle season over any other method of conveyance to exceed the entire expenditures of the Government since 1820, t,hc beginning of lake improvements, and only the gravest possible question should be allowed to interfere in anyway with the ease and facility of ships handling theircargoes within some permissible time related to the expense of upkeep and o eration and we fail to see why t,hc objections raised to the building of the propose$ dike at Livingstone Channel should prevail. THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 205

It does not seem reasonable or just that the great navigation interests of the Lakes and the public at large should suffer large 108s in reduced carrying capacity of our vessels on account of the neglect or refusal on the part of any communlty to furnish modern scientific. up-to-date water systems for the preservation of the health and 1iver;r of its citizens . Respectfully submitted. WILLIAM LIVIX~STONE. President Lake Carriers' Association.

Bulk freighters constructt,d on the Great Lakes .

. Namr . Length Length hrrying over all . ~verall . apacity . " . .I(" 1902. 1903 Feet . :ross tons . Feet . 'TOSStons . A . 0 . I3rower ...... 366 4. 800 Henry H . Sill ...... 436 6. 200 G . J . Grnrnmer ...... 366 4. no0 Wisconsin ...... 434 ti. 200 E . N . Saunders ...... 400 5. 500 ICdwin E'. Holmes ...... 434 6. 200 W . HQratwick ...... 436 6. 200 17 . 1%. Squire ...... 430 6. 200 W . W . Brown ...... 366 4. 800 Winnebago ...... 234 2. 100 H . S. Wilkinson ...... 390 5. 000 John 0 . Howard ...... 241 2. 500 James Uayley ...... 436 e. 200 (.eo . 1, . Craig ...... 404 5. 600 Bransford ...... 436 6. 200 Kensington...... 380 5. ooo Etruria ...... 431 6. 200 Sonora...... 366 4. 800 1904. Sultana ...... 366 4. 800 C. W . Watson ...... 4M1 5. 500 Iimbriu ...... 440 6. 500 F . W . Hart ...... 400 5. 500 Francis Widhr ...... 436 6. 200 Wm. Nottingham ...... 4w 5. 500 Augustus €3 . Wolvin ...... 560 10. 000 A . E . Stewart ...... 376 5. 000 StLh&ra...... 494 8. OW Lueon ...... 364 4. no0 Martin Mullen ...... 436 6.200 Steel King...... 400 5. 500 Ball Ihos ...... 500 8. 000 W . F . Fitch ...... 366 4. ROO R . W . Euglnnd ...... 376 5. ooo W . C. Richardson ...... 374 4900 I L . C. Smith ...... 431 61200 . 1 1905 . J . M . Jenks ...... 434 6; 200 Harold E3 . Nye...... 40C 5. 500 Francis 1,. Rohbins ...... 400 5. 000 Pmay ...... 368 4. nw Jas . C . Wallace ...... 552 10. MM J.H.IIoyt ...... 376 Philip hfinch ...... 500 n. 000 Frank Goodyear ...... 436 i;!E Sylvania ...... 524 9. 000 Moses Taylor ...... 43E 6. 200 Amasa Stone ...... 545 10. 000 . B . Leonard ...... 40( 5. 500 L . (.. Hmnd ...... 524 g000 H . B . Hawgood ...... 434 6. 200 E . H . Gary ...... 569 10: 500 J . B . Cowle ...... 44( fi.5nn.... S . M. Clement ...... 500 Chm . Reattie ...... 2% 2. 000 socapa ...... 524 8% Thos. Adems ...... 37t 5. Lyman C. Smith ...... 545 10. 000 \\ . E . Corey ...... 569 10. 500 1903. W . A . Paine ...... 400 8. 000 W . A . Rogers ...... 545 10 000 James S . Keele ...... 25: 2. no0 Powell Stackhouse...... 524 9: 000 W . H . Mack ...... 372 4. 900 H . C. Frick ...... 569 10.500 H . W . Smith ...... 43' 6. 200 John Stanton...... 524 9; 000 Shaloa ...... 43( 6. 200 .1 . G . Butler, jr: ...... 545 10 ooo Pendennis Whlle 6' 200 Robt . Wallace ...... 25t 2. no0 ...... 436 Anna C. Minch ...... 401 5. 500 W . K . Bixby ...... 50u n' OM) Monroe C. Smith ...... 4M 5. 500 James 11 . Wood ...... 534 9' 500 C . M . Warner ...... 39 I 5. 250 James E . Davidson ...... 524 9: 000 John Lambert...... 25: 2. 800 0 . II . Russel ...... 484 7600 B L Smith ...... 1 4M 5. 500 Hoover si Mason ...... 524 9: 000 . . Peter White 524 9000 D . 0. Kerr ...... ~ 461 6. 900 ...... Saxona ...... I 43f F . J . Hecker ...... 484 7: 600 John Sharples...... 25: ;: G W.G. Mather ...... 531 9. 300 W . L . Smlth...... 40( 5. 500 Frank C . I3all ...... 55c 10 000 John Crerar ...... 25: 2. 800 f3 . F . Jones ...... 55c 10' 000 A . M . Marshall ...... 25: 2 .800 James P . Walsh ...... 50C x: 000 H . Q . Dalton ...... ~ 255 D . M . Clomson ...... 468 1901i. Louis Woodruff...... i 436 6; 200 A . D . Davidson ...... 1 255 2. 800 Jos. Sellwood ...... 545 10. cum G . C . IIowe ...... 255 2. 800 E . 1). Carter ...... 524 !I. 001) S . N . Parent ...... 255 2. no0 C . S . Hebard ...... 524 9. 000 James H. Reed ...... 468 6. 900 Loftos Cuddy ...... 545 10. 000 G . Watson French...... i 376 5. 000 Abraham Stearn...... 545 10. ooo bonoma ...... I 436 6. 200 D . Z . Norton ...... 500 x. OM) F . W . Gilchrist ...... 436 6. 200 Jno...... Sherwill ...... 5.34 9. 500 J . L . Weeks ...... 43 6 6. 200 Harry Coulby ...... 569 10. 500 R . L . Ireland ...... 438 6. 200 Harvey D . Gonlder ...... 545 10. ooo R . E . Schuok...... 436 6. 200 J . Pierpont Morgan ...... GOO 12. 000 P . P . Miller ...... 375 Henry B. Smith ...... 545 10. 000 Western Star...... i 435 ?g Sir Thomas Sharrg~essy.... 500 8. 000 Perry G . Walker ...... 436 6. 200 E . J . Earling ...... 545 10. 000 J . 0. Cilchrist ...... 1 436 6. 200 Chas . Weston ...... 569 10. 500 206 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL.

Bulk freighters eonstructed on the Great Lakes-Continued.

N am e. Length Name. Carrying Length Carrying over all. capacity. 11 Name. over all. capacity. -1 1906. 1906. FW.2. 'OS8 tons. I Feet. Dross fond Xcnry 11. Rogers ...... 600 12,000 A. E. Net,tleton...... / 645 10,OOO Wni. G. Pollock...... 440 6,500 William 1:. Wolf...... 524 .i.<<, Itiddlu ...... 552 30, (W RII~I~SI'. Itmney.. _._.__...I 440 %E Josnna W. Rhodes...... 440 6,500 Howard M. Hanna, jr...... 500 A. Y.TonTnsend...... 802 12,000 John A. Donaldson...... 400 t% Norman B. Ream...... I 600 12,000 W.R. Woodford...... I... 552 10, 000 i-lenry A. Hawgood...... 552 IO, 000 Price McKinney ...... 452 6,700 Wm. E. Fitzyerald ...... 440 6,500 J. F. Durston...... :::/ 452 6,700 1). R. Hanna...... 552 10, un Honduras...... 256 2,800 ?'el.cr A. B. Widener...... 600 12, OM) Normania...... 440 6,500 Jas. S. Dunham...... 440 6,500 51. A. Bradley ...... 480 7,500 I). J. Morrell...... 602 12, 000 Harry A. Aerwind...... 552 10, 000 Samuel blather...... 550 IO, (Kul William Livingstone...... 552 10 OOO Sheldon Parks...... 552 10,000 Adam E. Corneli~~s...... 440 6: 500 Joe S. Morrow...... 400 ti, 500 James Corri$ an ,.~ ...... 550 10,000 Cen. Qarretson ...... 540 10, 000 Daniel B. ea( ham...... 550 10 OOO W. B. Kerr...... ti05 12,000 'I'heo. 11. Wickwire ...... " 464 6: 800 Wm. P. Snyder...... 550 10 Mx, Fred C,. JIartwell...... 524 9, 000 Jas. Laughlin...... 550 10: 000 Michigan...... 550 10, ooo 1909. 550 IO, WO ...... 445 6, i00 Alva C. Dinkey...... 600 12,m 3. H.Sheadle ...... 550 l0,oOO Eugene L. Bilffington...... 600 12,000 John Mitchel...... 440 6,500 Alpena...... 374 5, OWJ Eugene Zimmerman...... 500 La Belle...... 524 Sierra...... 458 $E Andrew 6. Upson...... 400 John J. 13arlum...... 524 9 000 1907. Benjamin Noble ...... 256 2' 8043 Isaac M. Scott.. __.__ __ _. __ .. 524 9: 000 Mathew Andrews...... 552 10, 000 0. A. Tomlinson...... 524 9, 000 Hugh Kennedy...... 562 10,000 J. 9. Ashley...... 524 Q,OOO ,I. 11. Bartow ...... 524 9,000 Wm. n. Sc'hiller...... 600 12 OOO 'rhos. Lynch...... ti(M 12,000 J. 1'. Morgan, jr...... 600 12: OOO H. 1'. McIntosh...... 540 10,000 A. A. AII~US~IIS...... 524 9OOO Henry Phig,ps...... 600 12,000 Clifford F. 'Moll...... 464 6: 800 LeGrand De Graff...... 605 12,000 Shenango...... 607 12 ooo Geor e F Raker...... 6(K) 12,000 Denmark...... 460 6: 700 Charks 0. Jenkins...... 524 Hemlock...... 440 8% 1910. Wm. M. Nills...... 605 12,000 Jay C. Morse...... 552 10, ooo Leonartl B. Miller...... 524 9, 000 Odanah...... 440 6,500 John P. Reiss...... 524 9, OOO Calumet...... 440 6,500 John B. Cowle...... 545 10, OOO Cyprus ...... 440 6,400 Charles L. Hutchinson...... 524 Sa t Lake City...... 552 10,000 Josenh Wood...... 524 :: (:rete ...... 440 6,500 A. a. Byers...... 524 9, 000 Ward Ames...... 552 10 OOO Peter Reiss...... 524 J. J. Sullivan ...... 552 10' ooo Charles 8. Price...... 524 $E Edwin N. Oh1...... 440 6: 500 E. €1. Utley ...... 524 9, OOO Arthur €I.Hawgood...... 569 10,500 W. C. Moreland...... 600 12, OOO VRrona ...... 440 6,500 Ontario...... 465 6,800 W. A. Hawgood ...... 552 10 ooo Champlain...... 465 6,800 Adriatic...... 440 6: 500 Harry E. Yates...... 550 10 ooo €i. P. Bope ...... 552 10,000 St. Clair...... 465 6: 800 Elba...... 440 6,500 Theo. J. Wickwire, jr ...... 550 10, 000 FIharles W. Kotcher...... 440 6,500 W. J. Olcott ...... 605 12 000 1 homas Barlum...... 500 8 00 Wm. R. Dickson ...... 605 12: ooo Caldera...... 524 9: 000 Wm. 1'. Palmer...... 600 12 OOO Thoma8 F. Cole...... 605 12,000 Willis 1,. King...... 600 12: OOO D. 0.Mills...... 552 10,000 Norway ...... 524 9,000 Wm. B. Davock...... 440 6,500 Wilpen...... 574 11,000 1911. Milinokelt ...... 524 9,000 Wm. C. Agnew ...... 552 10, ooo John J. Roland ...... 500 8, 000 Thomas Walters...... 600 12, 000 Josiah G. Munro...... 552 10, OOO Quiney A. Shew...... 524 9, 000 Jacob T. Kopp...... 500 8, 000 The Barvester...... 545 10, OOO Charles Hubbard...... 460 6 800 C,ol. J. M. Schoonmaker.. _.. 617 14, 000 Smith Thomyonf:...... 458 RI RMI John Dnnn, r ...... ,524 1912 1908. W. F. Bn&der,x...... 617 . 14,000 LouisR. am son ...... 524 9, OCQ 13. F. Berry...... 569 10,500 Wainwright...... 440 fi, 500 POR 1913 DELIVERY. R ") mn 11 J. J. H. Brown...... 452 ."- John A. McGean...... 440 0,500 James A. Farrell...... 600 12,000 J. E. U son...... 524 9, wo Perrival Robers, jr...... 600 12, 000 Wm. Truesdale...... 452 6,700 Richard Trimhle...... 600 12 000 A. W.2 Thompson...... 524 9,000 A. C. Dustin...... 525 e: 000 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 207

IREPLY BY COUNSEL OF CANADA.

~!AKCH 20, 1913. Ilan. JAMESTAWNEY?. Chairman fnler.nutiona1 Joint Co~n~nission,"nshinqlon. SIR: Counsel for the Dominion of Canada dcsirr to reply tn R 8tatenlent filed by Mr. William Livingstone, bewin2 date il1:rrch 7, 1913, which has only recently been received, as follows: 1. The queskion of additional pollutiun of thc \?':iter wpp!y of Amhcrntburg and of other Ontario municiplities interested can properly br, left, to the counscl representing these interests, but, the underaigned oint out--- (a) That inasmuch as the pollution of txe water8 of the Detroit River by the sewage of Detroit is not evenly distributed, it is manifest tha.t a greater amount of water flowing past the intake of the water supply of the town of Amherstburg at n greater velocity would augment the dangcr t,o the hc.wlt,hof that t,own by increasing the nurnber of infected zones of water which would pass such intake and therebyincrease the number of links in the chainof danger. (b) So far as concerns the new town to be built by theUnited States Steel Corpora- tion a few miles above Amherstburg on the Canadla11side, attention is called to the fact that any danger from this Bource could and would be dealt with by the Ontario authorities under section 93 of the public-health act of Ontario, 1912, which contains stringent provisions against the pollution of any source of public water supply, and these provisions would, beyond question, be brought into force against any contra- vention of the act bya new municipality. 2. On the main question it will be remembered tha.t our submission to the commission on behalf of the Government of the Dominion of Canada was that the continued diversion by the Sanitary District of Chicago of t,he waters of Lake Michigan and thepossible further increase of such diversion was a detriment and menace t,o the navigation and other interests of both countries of such serious importance that it is essential that this diversion and the consequent lowering of t,he level of the inter- nat,ional boundary waters should be effectively considered without delay; and that. a waterway being a whole, must be dealt with as such. 3. Mr. Livingstone's memorandum contains, in our view, an admirable st,atement .of the enormous interests involved in the carrying trade of int,ernational boundary waters and presents in a most forcible manner one of the arguments against the diversion of water above referred to. 4. We desire especially to ca.11 your attent,ionto hisRtatelnent on age 5 of his memorandum that the loss per inch of the diminished draft. in the &et, of 467 veaaaels controlled by his corporat,ion alone would mean an annual loss in carrying capacity of 1,550,000 tons per inch, representing in cash $615,000 for each inchof diminished draft. 5. We submit that it must be apparent thatif one fleet alone will lose by thelower- ing of the water level, say,6 inches, $3,690,000 per annum inearning power, while the cost of operationcontinues the same, one of two thingsmust happen; either the carriers must go out of business or the rates must be increased, and such increase must, in the long run, inevitably bepaid by the consumers of both countries. 6. We request your earnest consideration of t,his phase of the sit,uation andurge most strongly that if the present diversion of water is continued and increased, as threatened, enormous loss will be sustained in the case of both countries, not on1 by the carrying trade of the Great Lakes, but also by thegrain growers and miners orthe West, and the manufacturers and coal miners of the East. 7. In conclusion we desire to repeat our argument at the hearing, that the real key to the situation lies in the prevention of further diversion of wat,er and consequent lowering of level.Once this question is finally settledthen both countriescan enter upon a sound and reasonable joint system of im roving this great waterway to the enormous advantage of both. We are convinceg that a tribunal such as this International Joint Commission, with the evidence and material placed before it in this matter, can andought to make such a report or recommendation to both Govern- ments as will inevitably lead to prompt and decided action upon the lines suggested by us at the hearing. The benefits to both countries, in our view, would be inealcu- lable. JOHN It. WHITE, C. S. MACINNEP, Counsel for the Government of [ha Dominion of Canada. 208 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL.

BANK OF HAMILTONBUILDING, Hamilton, Canada, March 24, 1915. LAWRENCEJ. UURPEE,Esq., Secretary International Joint Conamission, Uttalcn, Canada. . DEAR MR. BURPEE:I beg to acknowledge the receipt oi your letter of March 12, with the inclosures, for which please accept my thanks. I beg to iuclove you a memo- randun1 pn behalf of the Ontario goverument, whirh be kind enough to lay before the commission. Yours, faithfully, GEO. LYNCH-STAUNTON.

E~~EMORANDUMON BEHALFOF THE GOVERNMENTOF THE PROVINCEOP ONTARIO TO THE INTERNATIONALJOINTCOMMISSION. The treaty between the United State3 and Great Britain respect,ing international waterways provides: “ARTICLEIV. It isfurther. agreed thatthe waters hereitr tietined asboundary waters and waters flowing across the boundary shall not. be polluted OIL either side to the injury of health or property of the other.” It is admitted that if the dike inquestion is constructed it will cause a large additional quantity of water to pass between Bois Blanc Island and Amherstburg. It has been proved also that a large quantity oi sewage is deposited iu the river and on its shores by the city of Detroit and that such selvage is injurious to health and property. It haa further been shown that a large quantit,y oi this water charged with sewage passes between the Bois Blanc Island aud Amherstburg and that large deposits of thls sewage are thrown on the Canadian shore, and that thepeople of Amherstburg, though they chlorinate the water, suffer from periodic epidemics of typhoid fever caused by this sewage. As I recollect it, the evidence is that the dike will cause an additional quantity amounting to about 11,000 cubic feet per second of tthis polluted water to be carried overfrom the American t,o the Canadian sideand past the town of Amherstburg. F.14’. A. Dallyn, engineer of the Provincial Board of Health of Ontario, stated: (2) An increme in the amouutof water flowing past Amherstburg by diversion of the current crossing over Bois Blanc Island, would Cause more Detroit sewage to flow pa$ Amherstburg. (3) The increased flow of sewage would unquestionably iucrease the iniectivity of the source of water supply. The infectivity being entirely dependentupon the inter- mittent pressure of the specific organisms causing water-borne diseases, if more varieties of sewage pass-coming from more numerousinfected zones-then the pathogenic organisms will be more frequently present, and the typhoid rate, as well aR the general death rate, dueto disease from other water-borue infections,will increase in a much greater proportion than the proportional increase in the flow of sewage.” Dr. Hodgetts, medical adviser of the Canadian conservative commission, emphatic- ally states that theincreased quantity of sewage will increase lhe danger to health and property on the Canadian ade. It is submitted, therefore, that the building of this dike by the American Govern- ment will send alarge quantity of polluted water into the Amherstburg Channel which ‘ would otherwise pass down on the American side of Bois Blanc Island, which will of itself be injurious to health and property on the Canadian side, and its construction will therefore be a direct violation by the United States Government of that part, of the treaty quoted above. It may be argued that the fact that Detroit is already polluting the Cauadian water will excuse or allow the IJrtited States Government to iurther pollute Canadian water. Assume that itwas shown that at thepresent time noue of the Detroit sewage passes down the AmherstburgOhanuel. It could not in that case be argued, if the const,ruction of this dike would so change the course of the water as to cause polluted water to flow through the chamel, that the buildingof the dike would uot be a direct violation of the treaty. The United States is responsible for and shonld preveul the city ol Detroit sending its sewage across the boundary line, andfollows it that, if such is the dutyof the United States, It would be violatiug thc treaty, if, instead of preventing, it were to actively cauRe any of that sewage to pollute Canadian waters. It will be noticed thxt the t,reaty does not. speak of fouling waters which hitherto have been uncontaminated, but by it the United States promises that quite irrespee- tive of the previous condition of the water it will not, cast anything in the Canadian waters which would be injurious to health or propertyartd quite irrespectiveof what others may be doing on either side of the boundary. THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 209 > The evidence quotedabove proves that sending additional sewage down the channel will cause injury to health and property m-hich does not now emst. The turning of additional contaminated water onto our shores is then a distinct act injuriousto health an? property and a violation of lhe trea,ty. rhe fact that the percenta e of sewage will not be increased ii the total volume of water which will flow by Amierstbllrg does not prove that a larger quantity of sewage will not be lefton the shores than was deposited and before the coming of the increased. volume of polluted water. Whether the percentage has increased or not, the quantity of sewage deposited on the shore is increased and a greater injury inflicted on the property of riparian owners. It needs no argument to prove that the greater the quantity of filth deposited upon one’s land, thegreater the nuisance and injury inflicted on the owner. It issubmitted with confidence that it is the dutyof the United States under t.he treaty to take active measures to prevent water charged with sewage from Detroit flowing across to the Canadian side of the river, and thatif instead of so doing it takes active measures to cast more sewage into Canadian waters it is committing a direct violation of the treaty. The Provinceof Ontario therefore contendsthat the International JointCommission should report that, by reason of the fact that the building of this dike by the United States Government would cause the water on the Canadian side of the river to be polluted to the injuryof health and property, it can not indorse its construction. All of which is respectfully submitted. GEO. LYNCH-STAUNTON, Counsel for Province of Ontario. OTTAWA,March 25, 1914.

DEPARTMENTOF THE NAVALSERVICE, HYDROURAPHIC SURVEY, Ottawa, March 27, 191.1. SIR: I beg to return you the co y of Mr. Livingstone’s statement filed with the International Joint Commission, aniI have to advise you that thereis very littlecom- ment to be made on it. It is to be noticed that Mr. Livingstonesticks strictly to statistics of the carrying capacity of the lake fleet, which, asevery one knows, is enormous. As a chain is no atronger than its weakest link, so the Great Lakes waterway has no greater capacity than can be furnished by the shoalest channel. Mr. Living- stone shows what a serious matter even a slight lowering of the lakes’ surface or, what is the mme thing, decrease in depth at any local point is, without making reference to any s ecial point in the light of its carrying capacity. By regrence to Bulletin No. 21 of Survev of Northern and Northwestern Laka it will be seen that when Lake Erie is at a height of 571 the draft across Hallard Reef. Limekiln Crossing, and through 1,ivingst)oneChannel is 21 feet, but that through the St. Clair Flats Canal is only 182 feet. This shows that for the resent, at least, t,he very slight lowering that has been occasioned at Rallard Reef by the opening of Livingstone Channel is not very uerious. He does not refer to the dangerous cross currents as a protection against whirh the dike is partially tobe constructed. On this point sufficient evidence has been brought out to show that with ordinarycare and with the class of lake captains we have there is very little to befeared, and it seems to me only reasonable that the present state of affairs should receive a further testing out. Mr. Livingstone doe8 not refer at a11 to the contention set, up by t,he Canadian Gov- ernment that the whole system requim something better than the study of this one link in the chain. His associat,ion is probably more interested in the (’hicago diversion than any otheron the Great.Lakes. The water taken by thesanitary district does not only affect the Detroit River, but ever hwbor, every channel, every rmal, and every lake from the foot of the Sault S6e. &ark to the St. Lawrence River, and the return of this water would be of iufinitely greater benefit than the construction of the dike. Our depart,ment of public works has recently made an investigatiou iuto the effect on Montreal Harbor of the Chicago diversion, and they find that theextraction of 7,000 cubic feetper second makes a permanent lowering there of 63 inches. This is a feature that has npt been brought out hitherto. Very few engineers 1)elieved that the trouble was so senoua. Mr. Livingstone, in his reference to the trouble from the Bewage at Amherst,burg, infers that Amherstburg has no right to malie any objection to this work because it has 86342-13”-14 210 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL.

an antiqna1,ed walor system entirely inadeyua,te for t,he proper safeguarding of the health of thecommunity. This seems to me a litt,le bit harsh on Amherstbnrg. I would like him to explain why he considers that Amherstburg should be put to the expense of urifying the water that Detroit, Windsor, and Walkerville are allowed to ruirl. SureTy if it is up to Amherstburg to put in a modern plant it is still further up to these ot,her place8 to change their method of sewage disposal. The u stream communities have no right whatever to pollut,e the water and then expect tffe communities lower down to install expensive purifying works. If anything along the river is antiquated it is the sewage-tliHpom1 works of the 1a.rger cities. 1 do not see why Amherstburg's water systpm is antiquated, and I do not see where Amherstburgcan obtain any water supply if not from the Detroit River. In the treaty the first, use of the water is for domestic and sanitarypurposes, and this being so 1 do not see that other communities have any right to nyake snch use dangerous LO health. It is hardly necessary again to reiterate t,he fort t,hat the Canadian Government is not, opposing t,his work as a work, but it, does believe that some other agreement or arran ement for the nse of the water8 of the Great, Lakes should be made. The opening o! the Livingstone Channel has done very little harm and it has decreased the currents that existed through th- Limekiln C'rossing during the construction of the channel. As ointed out in my statement, the opening through the cofferdam, whilst not availatle for 450 feet of navigation, permits almost the tot8aIflow for a 450-foot opening, and as a careful consideration of the evidence shows t,hat itis only intended to make a 450-foot channel through the cofferdam, the usefulneus of this is not very apparent whilst tho lower channel is only 300 feet wide. very truly, WM. truly,Yours, very J. STEWART, Hydrographer. LAWRENCEJ. BURPEE, Esq., International Joint Commission, Ottuuu.

DOMINIONMARINE ASSOCIATION, Zingston, Ontario, March 14, 1915. LAWRENCEJ. BURPEE,Eel., , SecretaryInternationa Joznt Commission. DEARMR. BURPEE:I have to thank you for your letter of the 12th, inclosing a copy of Mr. Livin stone's statement, just received through the Washington office of the commission. f have had an opportunity to-day to look it over, and I must say that it is a very interesting document, containing information that is doubtless very valuable. I do not think it raises any point, however, with special reference to the questions affecting the Dominion Marine Association, and already discussed in ar u ment at Detroit, andI do not feel that, I should attempt to add anythingto what 8%; already been said. Anythin of an argumentative characterwhich appears in t.he latter part of the document %as reference to the three items on page 7 of the copy, and the Dominion Marine Association did not enter into anyspecial discussion of these items. On behalf of the association I beg to express appreciation of the opportunity given to submit any reply that we thought proper. Faithfully, yours, - FRANCI~KIN*. DOMINION MARINE ASSOCIATION, Kingston, Ontario, March 16, 1918. LAWRENCEJ. I~URPEE,Esq., SecretaryInternational Joint Commission, Oltawa. DEARMR. HIJRPEE:I have to thank you for your letter of the llth, calling to my atteution a list of Canadian shipping made during argument,atDetroit. I am sending -gu inclosed herewitha list of Canadian vessels which continually navigate the etroit R.iver. These are practically all freighters, the passenger vessels of Canadian register coming no farther south than Sarnia, with the exception possibly of a few small boats in the river. Please note that the tonnage named is the net registered tonnage, and notthe carrying capacity. Faithfully, youm! FRANCISKINO. THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL . 211 Approximate list of Canadian vessels navigating the Detroit River. showing the net registered tonnage .

" """ ~- ... "" Company . Steamer . . ~ Tonnage St. Lawrence and Chirago Steam Navigating(lo. (Ltd.), Toronl E . B . Osler ...... 4, 361 W . 11 . Matthews ...... 2, 450 (2 . R . Crowe ...... 2.34: Iroquois ...... 1;451 Jas . Carruthers...... 15, 000 Canadian Lake TransportationCo . (Ltd.), Toronto ...... Arabian...... 770 Corunna ...... 791 Nevada ...... 793 Kenorn ...... 1, 274 Regina ...... 1, 280 Ta yona ...... 1, 299 Merchants Mutual Line (Ltd.), Toronto...... A . $ . Ames ...... 1, 020 J . H . Plummer ...... 991 H . M . Pellatt ...... 1, 037 Saskatoon ...... 1,147 Yapleton ...... 1, 139 Beaverton ...... 1, 357 Canadian Lake & Ocean Navigation Co . (Ltd.), Toronto ...... Turret Court ...... 1, 197 Turret Chief ...... 1, 197 Scoltish Hero ...... 1, 3% Canadian Interlake Line (Ltd.), Toronto...... Acadian ...... 1, 457 Canaidan ...... 1, 444 D . A . Gordon ...... 1, 433 A . E . McKinstry ...... 203 1, Renvoyle ...... 1,17ti Hamiltonian ...... 1, 6G6 Also. newly builtor purchased ...... Calgarian ...... Fordonian ...... Cadillac...... Pioneer ...... Marrs ...... 2 6, 500 Also. above-named ...... Regina ...... Kenora ...... Tagona ...... Keystone TransportationCo . (Ltd.) ...... Kevstorm 3 ...... Kehort ...... 1,297.84 Keywest ...... 1,288.44 Kevbell ...... 1300 The Farrer Transportation Co . (Ltd.), Collingwood...... Codinwood ...... 3:285 Meaford...... 1'201 Canada Atlantic Transit Co . (Ltd.) Montreal ...... Newona ...... d401.15 Western SteamshipCo . (Ltd.), Torbnto...... J . A McKee ...... I WW Western Navigation Co . (Ltd.), PortWilliam ...... Kaministiquia ...... Forwarders (Ltd ) Kingston ...... Port Colhorne...... Mathews Stearnsh:p Co. (Ltd.), Toronto ...... Had [dington...... I Edmonton ...... I Yorkton ...... Easton ...... Ad.), Brorkville ...... 3en . Derbyshire ...... 987 Barnuel Marshall ...... 540 Dunburn ...... Roo 1. 431 VU1 1. 4R1 Dol 1. 222 Glenellah ...... -I 1. 453 Neepawah ...... 190 1. Rosedsle ...... 977 Stratbcona ...... 1. 465 Wahcondah ...... 996 Winona ...... 1 326 Emperor oi Midland ...... 1:629 Em eror of Fort William .... 1382 MidYand King...... 2'636 Midland Queen ...... 1:348 MidlandPrince ...... 4, 558 Em eror 4, 641 P . E . Hall xi Co., Montreal ...... ?ingbild .. 539 mleton ...... 831 Port Colhorne & St . Lawrenre Steam Navigation Co . (Lid.) Algonqnin ...... 172 1, Toronto . :...... Turret Crown (Ltd.) Toronto ...... rurret Crown ...... 1,141.95 Canadian Northwest'Steamship Co. (Ltd.) Toronto ...... Veebinp...... 1. 1x7 Parry Sound Trans. Co . (Ltd.) Toronto .. ! ...... 3eguin ...... 771 Algoma Central SteamshipCo . '(Ltd.), Ste. St . Marie ...... A Raw...... 2, 467 rh. J . Drummond ...... 1, 664 Leafield...... 1,176 Paliki ...... 993

1least At . 2 Total.roughly . 3 Sunk last year. 212 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL.

Company. Sfearner. 1 Tonnage Barge or sailing. Tonnage. I- I- I C'alvin Co. (Ltd.), Garden Island Prince Rupert...... 1,172 Burma...... 885 Simla ...... 973 Ceylon...... 908 India...... 573 Northern XavigaLion Co. (Ltd.), Doric...... 1,451 Sarnia. Ionic...... 1,030 Mmtreal Trims. C!o. ( r4td.), Mon- Advance...... 359 Augustus...... 803 treal. Fairmount...... 1,183 Melrose ...... 740 Glenmount...... 1,247 Quebec...... 9% Kinsmount...... 1,59R Selkirk...... 719 Rosemount...... 989 Winnipeg...... 681 Stormount., ...... 1,231 Hamilton...... 9GS Westmount...... 1,171 Ugava...... 1,226 Windsor...... 1,27B Montreal & Great Lakes Steam- Bickerdike...... 863 ship Co. (Ltd.), Montreal. Jacques Trans. Co. (Ltd.), Mon- C. A. Jacques...... 1,590 treal. ...I Merchants Montreal Line, Mon- City of Hamilton...... '369 treal. City of Ottawa...... X38 City of Montreal...... '468

Steam tonnage...... 128,142.38 Barge or sailing towage...... 7,918.00 Total net registered tonnage...... 136,060.38

INTERNATIONAL JOINT hMMISSION, Washington, D. C., April 3, 1913. The commission met at 10 o'clock a. m. to c,onsider and report on the Livingstone ('hannel, and upon further suggestions being made, it was decided to reopen tho hearing for the purpose of taking additional testimony. Present: James A. Tawncy (presiding) ; Th. Chase Casgrain, K. C. ; Frank S. Streeter;Henry A. Powell, I<. (1.; Charles A. Magath, George Turner-L. WhiteBusbey and Lawrence J. Burpee, secre- t aries . A pearances: For the TJnitedStates, ReevesT. Strkkland, assistant to t e Attorney General of the United States. For Canada, W. R. White, I<. C., and Charles S. Macinnes, Ii. c'. There were also presentLieut. Col. Mason M. Patrick, Corps of Engineers, United States Army; and Mr. Willianr J. Stewart, chief of the hydrographic survey ol Canada. STATEMENT OF COL. BIASON M. PATRICK. The CHAIRMAN.Col. Patrick, you were sworn atDetroit in this Livingstone (Jhannel investigation. When I met you Tuesday, here in Washington, I asked whether there was anv additional rotective works that might be recommendd by the commission t Kat would minimize thtx etfects anticip:Ltrd by the people of Amherstburgon their interests in the event of the construction of the dam or dike , mentioned in tht. rrftmxcr, J then nslced you what the effect would be of theconstruction of n wing dam extending from theCanadian shore out to t.he hmhcrst1)urg ChrLnnel. You st'atedthat you had not given the matter any consideration, but you would think it over. Subsequently you informed me that uftcr a conference with the Chief of Engineers, Gen. Bixby, it was your judgment, in which judgment he acquiesced, that the wing dam would not be efficient for that pur- THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 213 pose, and,upon further inquiry, youmade some suggestions that might be adoted for the purpose of protectingnavigation in the Livingstone Cfl annel anainst the effect of the cross currents. Will you please stateto &e commission justwhat those suggestions were with respect to :Ldike on the east or west side of the channrl for the purpose of dealing exclusively with the cross cm-rents in the Livingstone Channel? Col. PATRICK. Do you wish me to confine what I have to say to the specific questions you asked me about the dikt: on the west side? The CHAIRMAN. You mtLy state anything you wish with refcxence to minimizing the effects anticipated by the people of' Amherstburg on theirinterests, and how to (led with those cross currentsefi- cinntly or anythin in the interest of navigation. Col. PATRICK. T ere is, I think, substantial agreernent that with the Livingstone Channela openedas it is at present there is no especial necessity for anycompensating works. I think it isequally well established that if it be opened toa greater width, compensating works will be necessary, but, dealing with the question as it exists now and with the present opening in this c.llanne1, the only thing to takecare of, so far as navigationinterests are concerned, is this objectionable cross current below the lower end of theportion of work that was done in the dry. I amthoroughly aonvmced that that c,ross current is objectionable, and that it is a wise measure to take some means to mitigate its effect if it can not be entirely eliminated.From a navigation standpoint, froman engineering standpoint, and from an economical standpoint the best of all solutions is the dike pro osed from thesouthwest corner of the cofferdam to Bois BlancIs P and. There is a second wagin which that cross current can be absolutely eliminated ; that is by running st dike parallel to the channeldown along itseastern side. That would concentrate the current above the head of Bois Blanc Island and would wash it away unless it was protectedby a heavy revetment. It was suggested at the hearing in Detroit that some good might be done by placing a dike along the west side of thechannel. I hadnot at that time given any great amount of consideration to such a palliative measure, because I did not think it would ac.coxn lish its pur- ose in its entirety. Since that time I have thought oP it again and Rave talked the matter over with the Chief of Engmeers From the chart it is apparent that on the west side of 'the channel, just aboutwhere this current crosses it, there is a considerable hde or deep place in therivhr itself, and I believe that the drawof this current across the channelis made possible, or results from, thepresence of that deeper area. on the west side. So I think that if a wall or dike be built along the west side of the channel, beginning at a point below where the boats cross from Sugar Island to Amherstburgand running down a few thousand feet, it, will be a palliative measure which might be sufficient t,o counteractthe worst effects of thiscurrent. That is, my subsequent study of the matter has led me to that belief. In other words, thereare those three ways-the proposed dike from the cofferdarn to Bois Blanc Island ; the training wall running down onthe east side; and this third proposition down thewest sidc. As to the question of their economy, my estimate, which I romised to submit to the commission, by khe way, and must apo Pogize to the commissionfor havingforgotten to do so while inDetroit, 1 214 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. have since nlade up. The cost, of running tho dam over to Bois Blanc Island will be about $33,000. Mr. STREETER.That is thc proposed plant Col. PATRICK.That' WRB the proposed ; yes, sir.To run thedike downfrom the coifertlam paralle thechannel and on itseastward side, and put in any compensatfing works that might be neccssary, wouldcost, n little n~rothan double that, or about 570,000. The dikc on Lho wcstside of thechannel can be putin place for ,robably about the same cost as that of the original dike proposcvl between the island and t,he cofferdam, or probably $33,000. Mr. STREETER.And take care of compensating works Z Col. PATRICK. No, sir; it will not cncct any compensation what- evx" It wiU. sinkply bc for the purposc of mrtially eliminating the cross currents. If thc c'hannd is opened sut sequently to its greater width of 4.50 ftret, compensating works will be necessary in addition, but so long as tlw channel remains at itspresent' widt'h, conyensating works are unnecessary. The CHAIRMAN.Do you mean t'hr wholc of the channel,or just, the cofferdam, opnning thc cofferdam to its full width? col. PATRICK. If the cofferdarn portion is opened to its full width, some little componsation will, in my opinion, be necessary. I do not see that, opening the cofferdamsection to its 450-foot width now would bt anygrcat aid tonavigation. The time will come whennavigation demands the opening of that'entire channel to the full width of450 feet,and, until that time doescome, there is no great gain by opening this smaller portion of it to 450 feet. Now, as you lermltted me, to go a little further, there is another thing which I t Link might form a part, of a recommendation if the commission sees fit t'o so consider it. There was considerable testimony showing that a great deal of the difficulty .in this part of the river was due to the difficulty of entering the Llvingstone Channel at its northern end. While that is not, specifically referred to your commission in this reference, if anything is done to mitigatethe state of affairs that now exists there I assume It would come before your commission. Youwould haveto recommend theexcavation that would be necessary inCanadian or American waters. At the northern end of this channel, if a portion of the, rocky reef to the westward of theentrance can be removed,and also some of the . shoals on theeastern side can be removed,so thatthe shipping can get into it better, there will be a great advantage to shipping in that part of the river. Mr. POWELL. Thatis, they want a straight course for the entrance? Col. PATRICK.They want rather a curved course for the entrance. If they can take the angle out and come on a gent,le direction rather than an abrupt one, it would aid them greatly. Mr. CASGRAIN. Wouldthat be very expensive? Col. PATRICK.No, sir.' A portion that wouldbe removed lies in Canadian waters. I am not sure that all of it does not lie in Cana- dian waters. Theboundary line goes right across that portion of the channel excavated in the dry. Mr. TURNER.Could not that bo done by the United States without any further action on the part of Canada on the original arrangement under which this cofferdam was excavated? THE IdIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 215 * Col. PATRICK.There bas been considerablequestion as tothe UnitedStates doingthis under tJhatauthorizatlon, and I simply hoped that our commission might bo able to recolnmend that this be done an Bsettle the mutter once for all. If the recorrrmendation of Canula is needed, let as get their recommendation for it. Mr. TURNER.This reference to us contemplates a channel 450 feet wide. As I understand it, the money has been appropriated for that. Col. PATRICK.No, sir; I have to differ with you thcrr.The money was appropriated for widcning this narrowportlion of the channel to 450 fcet and for builtling t'ilis dam. Mr. TURXER.There has been 110 appropriationfor tho entire channel ? Col. PATRICK.Not for widening the channel for its entire length; no, sir. It is from the end of the cofl'erdam down to the end of the channel; down to where it was dredged. No appropriation has been madefor widening thatto any wldth rcatcr than 300 feet,and there has been no recommendation on tfl e part of the engineers as yet, but when the board recommendedthis dam u here they had in mind that the time would come when that wou7 d be neccasary. The time has not arrived, howevnr. Mr. TURNER.Whenever it should bewidened throughoutits entire length, you think compensatin works would be necessary? Col. PATRICK.I know that they w'I!? 1 be necessary. Mr. TURNER.What other alternative plan of compensating works is ossible there ? 801. PATRICK.If compensation bo not provided bv the dike, which is placed across here as "origina.llyproposid, then it "will be necessary to o somewhere else and fill in so as to diminish the cross section of t5 e river in a corresponding degree tothat in which it is enlarged. That can be done in several places and in several ways. We can go overin the Americanchannel andover in the narrow bottom of Gross&Isle; or we can come here on the ea?tern side and put a dike out in that rocky bottom which wdl diminish the cross srctlon to a certain extent. Either of thosc two plans will provide compensation. Mr. TURNER.A dike on the east side would have the same objcc- tion that is now urged to that dike at Bois Blanc Island, would it not:that is, inthrowing t'hc .. current over into the Amhorstburg Channel ? Col. PATRICK.The dike that I have been speaking of would be on theeast sideparallel to t'he channel. The& are ti0 wa s; a dike parrallel to the channnl on the cast side, or a dike para 1yle1 to the channel on thewest side. Mr. TURNER.A dilrt. parallcl to the c.hanne1on the cast' sidc would not have any effect as compensating works, would it? Col. PATRICK.None whatevor. Mr. 'rumam. 1 mean that it would not have any effect as cona- pensating works with respcct to throwing tho watx over into the Amhmstburg Channel? Col. PATRICK.It would lnswn tho flow across there and lessen tIlc flow down here [indicating on. thv chart]. In other words, it would be animprovement in the vlclnlty of Amherstburgrather than a detriment. 216 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. Mr. TURNER.A short dikc of that kind across there would be much chea er, too, t,han a diko to Bois Blanc Island, would it not? Coy. PATRICK. I would liko to answer that in this way: That the cost of the necessary compansation, considered alone, will be about the samc anywhere. Mr. STREETER.What will thatamount to? I believe you said that on the west sidc it would be $33,000. Col. PATRICK. I said that tho cost of thedikc as originally roposed fromthe cofferdam to Bois Blanc Islandwould be $33,000. f? estimate that thecost of compensating worksalone will be about $7,500. ThP CHAIRMAN.And the cost of the dikc: on the east side, I understood you to say, you est,imatad at about $70,0001 CoI. PATRICK. Thecost of the dike and including the compensating works. I bolievc in making that statement I gave the wron figure. It should be about $77,000. A dike on the east side and t e compensating works, no mattor where they are placed, will costE about $77,000, of which $7,500, plus 10 per cent of itself, is for compensating alono, and the remainder of the expenditure is for obviating tho cross currents. Mr. STREETER.Then, you suggested that the cost of the dike on tho westside, not including compensating works, wouldbe about $30,000 1 Col. PATRICK.Yes; about %30,000. Mr. STREETER.And the cornpensating works in any event would be what Z Col. PATRICK.We will say around $10,000, to be safe. The CHAIRMAN.What would the excavation thatyou suggest cost ? Col. PATRICK.I am not prepared to submit an estimate as to the cost of that this morning. The CHAIRMAN. Wouldit be very expensive ? Col. PATRICK.Not very. Mr. TURNER.Could you approximate it, so that if we do make a recommendation we would be within bounds B Col. PATRICK.It would take me a few minutes to make a few figures with regard to that. I can do it and will do so, but I have not enough data from this small chart to determine that, and I did not bringthose figures with me. I ama little careful about risking guesses, and I would rather not do it. The CHAIRMAN.Independent of what was brou ht out at thehear- ings at Detroit, haveyou had any requests fromt e navigation interests for the change that you now suggest in the channela at the head or north of the Livingstone Channel? Col. PATRICK.I have; yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN.The navigation interests have re uested that this be done independent of the cross currents and in 8ependent of the construction of the dike? Col. PATRICK.They have, sir; most vigorously. Mr. CASGRAIN.So that that would be desirable in any event. Col. PATRICK.In any event, sir. The." CHAIRMAN. Yo? really thinkit is necessary in the interestof navi ation 9 Cof PATRICK.If I were asked the question, or, in other words, if Congress directeda reliminary examination'there, I amprepared now to recommend t f at thatbe done. THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 217 Mr. POWELL.In fact, it is more of a danger than the cross current really is? Col. PATRICK.I do not know that I would quite say that,Mr. Pow- ell. It is ‘ust a case of taking care in both places. I do not know which of tJh e two places is more dangerous or where an accident is more likely to ha pen. Mr. TURNER.kpou could give us the figures, approximately, I suppose, in a short time as to the cost of that plan? Col. PATRICK.Yes; I could give you the figures, approximately, in a short time. Mr. POWELL.On your return 1: Col. PATRICK.I would like to telegraph when I get ba,ck. I should like to have a chart on which the soundings are very much more closely figured than the one herebefore I would like to make an estimate. Mr. STREETER.You mean after ou go back to Detroit ? Col. PATRICK.I could not do it ere; I have not ot the data. Mr. STREETER.Col. Patrick, do Hou, in behalf of tfl e United States Government,recommend that thet ird proposition, namely, thebuilding of a dike on the west side of thec channel, shouldbe adopted? Col. PATRICK.No, sir. I do not recommend that, Gen. Streeter. I say there are those three ossible solutions, and I rate them in their order of merit, just as I 3id a moment ago. From an engineering standpoint I rate the first a,s a dam across to Bois Blanc Island, then a dike along the east side, and then adike along the west side. They will all work to a moreor less degree. The first two will be absolute1 effective. The third, along the west side, I think will do some gooz That is all I can say. Mr. STREETER.What, in your jud ment, is the comparative merit of the first, second, and third possibifities? Col. PATRICK.The first is an absolutesolution of thequestion. The second is an absolute solution of the question at a greater cost. The third is a possible one at about the same cost as the first. Mr. STREETER.What do you mean by the words “possible solution ” ? Col. PATRICK.I am not thoroughly convinced that the dike on the west side will entirely eliminate thecross current, but I am convinced that it will mitigate or lessen it. Mr. STREETER.To a satisfactory extent 1 Col. PATRICK.To a degree. I hope it will be found that it will be to a satisfactory extent. Mr. STREETER.If you were satisfied that the dike on the west side would mitigate it to a satisfactory extentit would make some impression, I have no doubt, on the commission. Col. PATRICK.I understand that; but I do not feel that I am ustified in going quite that far. I think it will do some good, and think it may be entirely efficacious, but I am not re ared to say now that I could state positively that it would be agP so utely efficacious. Mr. STREETER.Now, as to the second solution, namely, the dike on theeast side of thechannel. In your judgment, would it absolutely correct the difficult so far as cross currents are concerned? Col. PATRICK.Absolute i y. 218 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. Mr. STREETER.What, if any,advantages or disadvantagesare there in that solution over the first one, namely, the proposed dike to Bois Blanc Island? Col. PATRICK.The much greater cost andthe fact that there would be the danger of washlng away the upper end of this island are the two features t,hat render that solution of the problem, to my mind, objectionable. Mr. TURNER.The cost would be ver much greater, would it ? Col. PATRICK.Yes; more than doub9 e. Mr. STREETER.And in your figures of $77,000 do you include the cost of the revetment? Col. PATRICK.I did not. Mr. STREETER.Would that be almost certainly necessary? Col. PATRICK.I t’hink absolutely necessary. Mr. STREETER.What is your opinion as to the cost of the revetment to the island, to protect it? Col. PATRICK.I have figured rather roughly that you would have to add $10,000 to $15,000 to that cost of $77,000 in order to provide a sufficient protection for that end of the island. Mr. STREETER.Then, the figures before us, on the second solution, would be $87,000 to $92,000’1 Col. PATRICK.They would be from $87,000 to $92,000. Mr. STREETER.How would that second solution, if adopted, leave the Amherstburg Channel, so far as any objections that have been raised are concerned ‘2 Col. PATRICK.It would not alter conditions in the Amherstburg Channel from what they are at the present time anymore than a very slight degree. Mr. STREETER.What effect would the second solution have upon thenavigation bet~ween Amherstburgand the west of Livingston, Channel ? Col. PATRICK.None, if, as would naturally be done, a ga would be left in thisparallel dike, as is proposed for thedam. $ut the current that would pass through a gap m such adike would be somewhat less in velocity than the current which would pass through the opening left in the dam as original1 proposed. The CHAIRMAN.Do I understanc you, Col. Patrick, to mean that inthis dike on theeast side of Tthe channel there would be an opening Z Col. PATRICK.There would have to be an opening in it; yes, sir. Mr. MAORATH.As to the dike on the west side, would it in any wa interfere with the navigation across the channel ? 801.PATRICK. Not in the slightest degree. Mr. STREETER.What would be the width of the opening between Bois Blanc Island and the dike on the east side of the channel under the second solution3 Col. PATRICK.The least width between the dike and Bois Blanc Island, according to this scale, would be between 600 and 700 feet. Mr. STREETER.Could smallboats easily navigat.e that channel, or would they be obli ed to go through the proposed opening ? Col. PATRICK.Sma 1 boats could navigate that channel. Mr. CASORAIN.If theF third solutlon were adopted-namely, the dike on the west side of the channel-could you state how much the velocity of the cross current would be decreased? THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 219 Col. PATRICK.No; not in anyfeet per second or any other measure. Mr. CASORAIN.Would you say it would be decreased half? Col. PATRICK.I should bo e It would be at least half, but, there is nothing that I know of by w1 ich you can calculate it. The CHAIRMAN.Is it your judgment that the current would be materially reduced ? Col. PATRICK.Yes; in myjudgment the c,urrelit wouldbe materially reduced. Mr. TURNER.Would thedike on the west side lead tonatural alterations or changes in the bed of the river which would lead to a further change in the cross current 1 Col. PATRICK.I do not think the change would lead to any change in the bed of the river. Tho CHAIRMAN.I think 3Ir. Turpr has in mind the deep place on the east side of the channel. Col. PATRICK.I do notthink they would fill. There is really so little sediment that is carried down in that stream that the conditions there are quite stable. Tho CHAIRMAN.From your knowledge, Col. Patrick, of the desire of the navigation intorests, and from your knowledge of what would be to the greatest advantageto those interests, whatwould you say as to how the navigation interests would compare the benefit derived from the openin or dredging at the upperend of the channel and the disadvantages t at might remain on account of the cross current? Col. PATRICK.a I think that if the navigation interests were offered either of the two things, that the great majorityof them would prefer the easing of the entrance at the northern end rather than the elimination of the cross current; that is, if they had to choose between them.That is my opinion. Mr. STREETER.But the protection or the safety of the navigation interests would be great1 increased by the excavation at the northern end of the channel andt % e elimination of the cross currents, would it not 8 Col. PATRICK.Beyond question. Mr. STREETER.And, in your judgment, should the navigation interests be protected by both methods, namely, the elimination of the cross currents and the easing up of the opening by the excavation at the northernend ? Col. PATRICK.I think that navi ation u I there is sufficiently important to warrant anymeasures aht at can e taken to make it safer, and I firmly believe that both of those things should be done. Mr. STREETER.Assuming that the excavation should be made to ease the northern end of t'he channel, you st>illbelieve that the cross currents must be eliminated in one way or another by these various methods suggested 1 Col. PATRICK,I do. I still believe that it would be advantageous to do something to prevent the possibility of damage done by the cross currents. Mr. POWELLHow far is it, Col. Patrick, from the point of the pro- jection above to the end of the Livingstone Channel? Col. PATRICK.The 'length of the ledge that woulcl have to be removed is approximately 2,500 feet. Mr. POWELL.You do not correctly catdl my meaning. There are sharp turns in thecourse there. How far is it from there down to the 1 220 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. entrance? I just wanted to see in what distance the vesselswould swin . eo?. PATRICK.3,300 or 3,400 feet. Mr. POWELL.A 600-footj boat would not respond t80her helm very quickly, then. Col. PATRICK.You see that with that eliminahd they can really ~~ ~ begin their turn quicker. Mr. POWELL.And as they begin they naturally go in a circle ? Col PATRICK.Yes, sir; that is the point. TheCHAIRMAN. Col. Patrick,this excavation would haveto be done on both sides of the boundasyline and in the jurisdictionof both countries, would it not 8 Col. PATRICK.As I now recollect the boundary line, it is probable that it would be in both countries. The CHAIRMAN.If it were in both countries it could be done only with the consent of both Governments? Col. PATRICK.Yes, sir; that is the reason I asked your commission to take the action I suggested. The CHAIRMAN.In your judgment thatwould be the case, and that is one reason why you asked the commission to consider it now, that this same question very like1would come to the commission by a reference similar to the one tK at we now have under consideration? Col. PATRICK.That is precise1 my reason for bringing it before you to-day. It will save time, and 3; think it will obviate a reference to you at some future date. Mr. STREETER. There isjust one more question, Col. Patrick, and I hardly know how to ut it, but I want to know, in substance, if the commission should a Kopt the third solution, namely, the dike on the west side, whether, in your juggment, the navigation interests would thereby be satisfactorily protected against the cross currents? Col. PATRICK.I have answered that question, sir, as best I could before. I hope that they will be satisfactorily protected, and I think there is reason to believe that theywould be, but untilit is actuallydone I do not think you can answer that question categoricallyyes or no. Mr. STREETER.Well, Col. Patrick, you must understtmd that if that is done, if that conc,lusion should be reached by the commission, they would have to depend largelyon the impression which you give as to the satisfactory results. Col. PATRICK.I am aware of that, and am trying to answer as best I can. I say that subsequent study has impressed me with the belief that such a dike will materially modify the velocity of that cross current or the danger from that cross current. I do not think it the best solution, but I think it a solution whlch in all probability will be a satisfactory one. That is the best I can say. Mr. POWELL.Xot only that, Mr. Streeter, but it will catch the current itself and divert it downstream much earlier than would be the case under the resent circumstances. Col. PATRICK.0P course, that is a part of the solution. The CHAIRMAN.If counsel for either of the Governments have any uestions they desire to ask Col. Patrick, t,hey have the privilege of Lngso. Mr. WHITE.Col. Patrick, regarding the question of compensation, you appear to consider that the com ensation now with the channel remainlng at thepresent width woulcf be negligible and not required. THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 221 col. PATRICK.Yes, I answered it just in that way. With the channel as it is at present opened I think t,hat there is no necessity for additional compensation. Mr. WHITE.But considering t'he whole question, if further diversion of water occurs at any other portion of tjhe great waterways, I presume other compenslttion will be required! Col. PATRICK.Not by reason of anythingthat is doneby the LivingstoneChannel. Any diversion madefrom theGreat Lakes s stem anywhere will unquestionablyreduce the volume of water t {at follows the natural channels by which those lakes empty themselves, and if the diversion is sufficient to produce a detrimental lowering of depth in the natural waterwltyd or improved harbors, it wsuld seem the part of wisdom to compensate in some way. Mr. WHITE. But taking the facts as we know them, Col. Patrick, and the fact of the diversion of water there now, and the proposed diversion, it will then become aquestion of compensation at this particular point, will it notZ Col. PATRICK.Not necessarily at this Livingstone Channel point, Mr. White. Mr. WHITE. Rut on t,he Detroit River? Col. PATRICK.Not' necessarily on t,he Iletroit' River; no, sir. Mr. STREETER.Col. Patrick, I want to ask you one more question. Do I understand that you have conferred with the Chief of Engineers, Gen. Bixby, about this third solution? Col. PATRICK.Yes, sir; I did. Mr. STREETER.May I ask if he agreed with your view that, this solution will probably be satisfactory so far as navigation interesk are concerned Z Col. PATRICK.I feel quite sure that I am warranted in saying that the Chief of Engineers coincides with my views. Mr. WHITE. St the head of Bois Blanc Island, if the dike is put down along the east side of the channel, you said it would throw more current there and robably wash away the islttnd. Col. PATRICK.Any efit)ectual method might be adopted, either by riprap mg or bg a sea wall around the island. Mr. !VI-IITE. The riprap would be very much cheaper, P suppose? Col. PATRICK.Quite probably. STATEMENT OF MR. WILLIAM J. STEWART. The CHAIRMAN.&!r. Stewart, you were sworn at Det,roit, I believe in reference to thia investigation ? Mr. STEWART.Yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN. What haveyou to say as td the prwiical results of the two last plans mentioned? Mr. STEWART.The second one proposedby Col. Patrick would check the cross current. It is along the east side. The CHAIRMAN. Theeast side of the Tivingstone C'hannel? Mr. STEWART.The east side of theLivingstone C'hannel. That would cut off %he greatest current. The CHAIRMAN. Thatwould prevent them entirely? Mr. STEWART.It would preventthenl entirely, I think. The one along the west side wwuld pretty nearly eliminate them. I do not think it is a very good solution, but it would aid them to a very large 222 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. extent. I agree with Col. Patrick on that point. One can nottell what will hap en, but I thinkit will improvethe current. The new bank put K t ere will act as a c,ushion. The waterwill come against that and turn downstream. The CHAIRMAN.Would it to any extentback the water in the current ? Mr. STEWART.It will not back it up in the Livingstone Channel. The CHAIRMAN.But in the course fromwhich it comes; say the cross carrent runs at an angle across the Livingstone Channel, and it comes upagainst this obstruction; would that obstructionhave a tendency to back the water in the direction from which it came ? Mr. STEWART. Ve,ryslightly. I think itwould raise it a little there, but not enough to make it a danger. It would narrow this outlet here for the water. Instead of letting thc water go nut here [indicating on chart], some of it would have to go out at the northern endof the dike, and some of it would have to o around there [indicating]. The CHAIRMAN.To that extent itwou Bd have z1 tendency to reduce the velocity of the cross current, would it not? Mr. STEWART.I think it would reduce the cross cnrrent. It would not reduce the strength of the current, but it would reduce it as a cross current . The CHAIRMAN.It would not affect a straight current? Mr. STEWART.The strength would be there all the same. Mr. STREETER.On what did you base your statement a, moment ago, that you did not think that wouldbe a good solution of the difficulty ? Mr. STEWART.I do not think it would cut it out altogether. With all other considerations removed, and just simply with a question of putting in a dike to stop that c,ross current, I would rather put it in where it was suggested at first. I think that is a better solutmn than this one. Mr. POWELL.This last one would be free from all the objections that were urged to the first one, that is with respect to pollution and all those things? Mr. STEWART.Yes, sir. Mr. CASQRAIN.I suppose you agree with Col. Patrick that thebuilding of the dike on the west side would materially decrease the danger arising from a cross current ? Mr. STEWART.Certainly; I think it would materially decrease the dan er. d.TURNER. In view of thetestinion of navigators whopassed through that channel last yearas to the Crifficulties that they encoun- tered or did not encynter, do you think this dike on the west side would render the channel reasonably safe for navigation? Mr. STEWART.I do; in so much as the dangers are not very bad now. I do not consider them very serious dangers, but this would decrease them. Mr. STREETER.It would largely decrease them? Mr. STEWART.I think it would largely. I do not think it would altogether, but I think it would be a great improvement. The CHAIRMAN.At Detroit, Mr. Stewart, it was your judgment that these cmss current,^ were not a serious menace to navigation? Mr. STEWART.I do not t'hink they arc, Mr. Tawney. THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. 223 Mr. POWELL.Supposing, 1\11.. Stewart, that you dropped floats from where the cross current is to some distance to the east of the Living- stone Channel, and that you dropped them after this dam or dike was built, do you think they woultl find their way substantially into the resent channel at all ? M!. STEWART.I think a good many of them would have to. Mr. POWELL.Would they go any distance into the present channel ? Mr. STEWART.no you mean into the Livingstone Channel? Mr. POWELL. Yes; into the Livingstone Channel. Mr. STEWART. They would go right throu h it. Mr. POWELL.We will take this table to flustrate. Let it be the Ii~ingst~oneChannel and say at the pointwhere the reporter is sittirl the cross current strikes it. Now, the volume of t'hat current is fixe2 in the LivingstoneChannel. You can not squeeze it together and you can not compress it,wit,hout increasing it,s height. As a matter of fact, would notthis heavy c.unent coming down t'heLivingstone Channel practicallydeflect the c,ross current so t8hatit would not enter in t,o it to any extent allat '1 Mr. STEWART. Wherewould it deflect it '2 Part of the water will go north of t,he new dike and most of it has got to go down through here [indicating]. Mr. POWELL.It will go between t'hc Livingstone Channcl and Bois Rlanc Island ? Mr. STEWART.There is a very small pla(:c t'o go there, and it is shallow water. Mr. POWELL.You say it is shallow there? Mr. STEWART.Very shallow. Mr. POWELL.About how wide is it Z Mr. STEWART.The channel is 300 feet witln, and the distance f?om the channel to t,he nearest point of Bois Blanc Island would be about 600 feet. There would be about a thousand feet between the new dike and the edge of the channel. The water will have to go through that. It will go through t'here at a pretty good s eed. Mr. POWELL.It increases in velocity in going tK rough bheret Mr. STEWART. Therewill be more cross current close to the present cofferdam than there is at present. Mr. TURNER.Would this shutting off the cross current from the west side have a tendenc to squeeze out between Bois Blanc Island so that more water woul go down there? Mr. STEWART.That is Bnearly all hard bank, rocky bottom, through there. TheCHAIRMAN. What have you tosay, Mr. Stewart,as t4 the desilabilit,y of t,he exc,avation above t'he Livingstone Channel, just immediately above the entrance of the Livingstone Channel, which was suggested by Col. Patrick 8 Mr. STEWART.Considering all the work that t,he 1Jnited States Gov- ernment has done in tJhat locality, and the very efficient manner in which it has done it, I am surprised that it has not been done before this. The CHAIRMAN.Can you give any objwtion on the part of the Canadian Government or Canadian interests fo t,he making of that excavat,ion Z Mr. STEWART.None whatever. I t,hinkit, highly desirable. I am prepared 60 recommend to the Canadian Government.to allow it to 2 24 THE LIVINGSTONE CHANNEL. be done. Of course, the construction of this ori inal dike here would give so much more water u there that it mig% t have the effect of inducing some people to ma P e greater diversions. Mr. POWELL.They would th~nkthere was some surplus to utilize? Mr. STEWART. Yes. The CHAIRMAN.Do any of yougentlemen present wish toask Mr. Stewart any questions? Mr. WHITE. I suppose, Mr. Stewart, that you would consider that these gentlemen who are diverting waternow would consider it as an excuse for a further diversion ? Mr. STEWART. Yes. The CHAIRMAN.In justice to the Governmentof the United States, and in view of the suggestions contained in these uestions, I suppose counsel understand that the Government of the 8nited Statesis now prosecuting a case in the United States courtsto make the temporary injunction permanent prohibiting the taking of an more water from Lake Michigan for the drainage canalat Chwago ti an was originally authorized. Mr. WHITE. I am sure that the Government I represent willbe glad to hear it, but you must remember that these proceedings were commencedsome years ago. We areaccustomed to doingthings much quicker in our country. I am very glad to be able to report that matter, however, to my Government. The CHAIRMAN.If there IS nothing further to offer, entlemen, the hearin with reference to the Livingstone Channel is ck osed. Mr. ~HITE.I think really all that, counsel can say is contained in the statement which we filed in answer to Mr. Livingstone’s memorandum. I would like to im ress verystrongly upon the commission that it seems to us that tKat is a document whlch deserves ver careful consideration and which strengthens theposition that we tooi u on the main question. I would like to say thw to the commission: Ttat I think your powers and your duties are very much eater than some gentlemen appear to imagine. I think you are a, fody which cancollate information and report to the respective Governments and clean u and place the Governments in a position in which they can dealwit K these matters in a diplomatic manner, and thatyou can do a great good in reporting, especially in this matter, whatis of such absolutely vital interest to the people on bot,h sides of the line. The Government that I represent feels very strongly thatnow is the criti- cal point, andyou gentlemen have the matterof a very great question in your hands. You havo the capacity of doin a great deal ofood which will redound to the benefit of parties on f)0th sides of the 7ine. Mr. STREETER. Is this hearing closed now? The CHAIRMAN. Unless there is something further to be offered on either side. Perhaps Mr. White has somethin further to say. Mr. WHITE.I do not propose to offer any Burther evidence nor to say much more to you. I think you understand and a preciate the situation and thefeeling that the Government thatI am R ere to re re- senthas with re ard toit. We thinkthat that feeling shoul8be shared b the Fe aera1 Government here. In other words, to put the matter pY ainly, Mr. ChRirmun, it is just this way: We think, whether we are right or wrong in our construction of the duties and rights of this commission, that it has a very important, dutyto perform in collecting the information and evidence and arriving at conclusions as THE LIVINQSTONE CHANNEL. 225 to what is best to be done, under certain conditions and re orting thereon to the Governments, and that then it, lies with the 8overn- ment, es ecially with reference to this inquiry, to take the matter up and dea Qwith it. The Government can then deal with the matter intelligently,because they will havethe information before them. That is where, it seems to me, your position is, and that is the advantage that ou are to both countries. It is an enormous advantage, and I thin lthat theGovernments will share thatview. Mr. MACINNES.I have nothing further to say, Mr. Chairman. Mr. STRICELAND.I have nothing further from our side. (Thereupon, at 12 o’clock noon, the commission adjourned.)

ESTIMATEDCOST OF WIDENINGENTRANCE TO LIVINGSTONECHANNEL. DETROIT, MICH., April 5, 1918. CHAIRMANINTERNATIONAL JOINTCOMMISSION, Southern Building, Washington, D. C.: Estimated cost widening at upper entranceLivingstone Channel, $200,000. PATRICK, Engineers.

DETROIT,MICH., April 7, 1915. CHAIRMANINTERNATIONAL JOINTCOMMISSION, Washington, D. C.: ’ Dike on west side of channel should start about2,800 feet below cofferdam, be about 4,400 feet long, of which about 1,200 feet at upper end in American waters; remainder on Canadian side of boundary. PATRICK,Engineers. 0 86342-13-15