The following is the letter referred to by Mr. Tibbits. It is introduced not only as useful to a full elucidation of the subject to which it relates, but as a valuable statement of facts from a gentleman who had no inconsiderable share in maturing the scheme of finance adopted by the legislature.

--------------------

Letter from the Hon. Wheeler Barnes to Elkanah Watson, Esq.

ROME, April 12, 1820,

RESPECTED SIR,

I understand that in your contemplated history of the rise and progress of canals in this state, you are desirous of assigning to the different contributors and advocates of the various projects, their due proportion of merit, and that for this purpose you wish communications. As the Hon. George Tibbits, then of the Senate, boarded at the same house with me, and as we spent many of our leisure hours together during the session of 1817, upon the subject of the canals, a friend of his has suggested the propriety of giving you some account of the part he took in contributing to the act of that year.

In the assembly journals it appears, that on the 17^th of February, the report of the canal commissioners was referred to a joint committee, of which Mr. T. was a member; that thirty days after, the committee reported, on the 17^th of March; that on the 28^th, the house went into a committee of the whole; and also on the 2^d, 4^th, 7^th, 8^th, 9^th and 10^th of April, being seven times in all; and on the 11^th, passed the bill, and sent it to the Senate. The bill accompanying the report presented by the chairman, Mr. Ford, is not on the journals, though it was printed with the report in a pamphlet form of twenty-four pages, by Websters and Skinners, in 1817. This bill you will perceive is essentially different from the one acted upon and finally adopted, and still no notice is taken in the journals of the exchange of the one for the other. By comparing them together, it cannot have escaped you, that the difference is very important, both in their details and main features. One point of difference consists in substituting for a loan of one and a half millions, an efficient and durable plan of finance, by which the commissioners could continue without further legislative aid. To Mr. Tibbits I am satisfied that the state is much indebted for this important feature.

In a government like ours, the subject of finance for such and so great an undertaking, was viewed as difficult. On it very much depended the success of the undertaking, both as to passing a law, and completing the work. Immediately after his appointment, Mr. Tibbits applied himself with industry to devise and prepare a plan, which would complete the canals without impoverishing the treasury, exhausting the funds of the state, burthening the people with taxes, or placing the canals subject to the influence of party views, or local prejudices; and the report of the committee (as to ways and means) contains the views of Mr. T. as exhibited by him to me, in his own hand writing, before the report was made. But when the bill was presented, Mr. Tibbits appeared disappointed that it did not embrace the plan of finance contained in the report. Mr. T. thereupon spent considerable time with me in preparing another bill as a substitute, which I presented to the house with the approbation of the chairman, and it was ordered to be printed. This order does not appear upon the journals; and when the house went into committee of the whole, the substitute was taken up, and was the only bill acted upon. The alterations it underwent in the house were, leaving out the section respecting the acknowledgment and recording of deeds, and the tax upon the valuations of real and personal property in those places thought to be more essentially benefited, and substituting in lieu thereof, (an motion of Mr. Duer) a tax upon the land twenty-five miles on each side of the canals. The plan of Mr. Tibbits was to establish a fund to be managed by commissioners, the income of which would raise money sufficient to complete the canals in twelve or fourteen years with seven millions of dollars, and leave a sinking fund sufficient to redeem the debt to be created, at a period not far distant from their completion. I have copies of his projects and calculations taken at the time. The bill substituted for the first, was drawn upon the principal of seven millions in twelve years, that is, to raise and expend the net sum of 584,000 dollars.

After the bill had passed the house, the alterations made by the senate, and concurred in by the house, were, striking out that sum, and inserting 400,000 dollars, and striking out the appropriation of land of the value of 600,000 dollars, or which might produce 50,000 dollars yearly for twelve years, and adding the Lieutenant-Governor as one of the commissioners of the canal fund, and borrowing money on the credit of the state, instead of the credit of the canal fund. Had the bill been adopted by the Senate, as sent them by the Assembly, without alteration, the canals might have been completed without further legislative appropriation. The first bill, instead of adopting a plan of finance, directs the commissioners to digest and present one to the ensuing legislature. There are other important provisions in the bill adopted, which I omit to notice, as the only object of this hasty sketch is, that merit may receive its due, as it regards the individual mentioned, without detracting from that of others, and to show that he is not only in profession, but in deed, a friend to this magnificent undertaking.

ELKANAH WATSON, Esq.

----------------------------------------

Transcribed from the original text and html prepared by Bill Carr, last updated 5/30/99.