The following text may have been generated by Optical Character Recognition, with varying degrees of accuracy. Reader beware!

i2 Canada's Claim on the St. Clair Canal. An editorial in a recent issue of the Toronto Empire, which is among the strongest supporters of the present Canadian gov- ernment, presents Canada's claim on the question ofthe national ownership of the site of the St. Clair Flats canal. It will be remembered that about four years ago this question was brought up in congress by a senate resolution directing the secretary of war to investigate and report whether the channels in ordinary use on the St. Clair Flats were under American or Canadian jurisdiction. - The report of the chief of engineers admitted that a small part of the east side of the canal is in Canadian territory, but claimed that the language of the treaty of Washington prac- . tically admits entire American jurisdiction, Article 27, declaring '"'the government of the United States engages that the subjects of her Britannic majesty shall enjoy the use of the St. Clair Flats canal on terms of equality with the inhabitants of the United States." Furthermore, a map attached to the boundary coni- missioners' report, under the treaty of Ghent of 1814, shows the canal to be on American soil. It will be intevesting to note the Canadian claim, however, as this matter may come up for settle- ment through abrogation of the treaty of Washington. The Empire says: 'Ror a long period the discussion pertained to the loca- tion of the old ship channel, through which the present canal is built. That Canadians generally considered it to be on British soil is proven by the government of Canada having appropriated $20,000 (then a large amount) in 1855, to the deepening of the flats. In that year (1oth April) the secretary of the Buffalo board of trade wrote the provincial secretary of Canada asking aid and saying that on the president vetoing a bill in 1854, which proposed to give a large sum of money for the, improvement of the entrance to the old ship channel, the board itself proposed to carry on the work, but 'it was ascertained that the channel was in Canadian water and the project was therefore abandoned.' In 1858 the $20,000 was duly expended, and in 1870 the Amer- ican congress voted $70,000, after which the canal was built. It was in the latter year, and during the construction period that the seizors of the Canadian barge for smuggling in what the captain supposed to be Canadian waters re-opened the whole question and caused wide discussion. By the treaty of Ghent, 24th December, 1814, between Britain and the States, the boundary line question was referred to two commissioners to settle in accordance with the former treaty of 1783, in which the line was said to be drawn through the middle of all the great lakes, and the communications be- tween them. Under this treaty (article 6) it is declared that 'the said commissioners shall by a report or declaration under their hands designate the boundary.' Messrs. Barclay and Porter were appointed to act, and reported the boundary line as follows: 'To the northwest of and near tke island called Isle a la Peche to Lake St. Clair, thence through middle of said lake in a direction to enter the mouth or channel of the river St. Clair, which is usually denominated the old ship channel.' Evidently, from this wording, it was intended that the line should be drawn straight from near the island of La Peche to the then navigable portion of the River St. Clair. Such a line would appear to place the St. Clair flats canal in Canadian territory. Furthermore, the commissioners being instructed to designate the boundary by a report or a declaration the map which accompanies their report, and which by some curious accident makes the canal appear on American soil, is neither legal or binding evidence. 'This at least was the contention of Canada in a privy council report of the 14th of February, 1871, in which it is said that 'The maps are not receivable as evidence of the exact location of boundary line, for the contracting parties confined the commissioners' decision to a declaration or report.' Furthermore the privy council statement says: 'On the case (the barge seizure) coming to the knowledge of the government, they caused a survey of the canal to be made, and on carefully comparing its ascertained position with that of the international boundary line, as described in the report of the commissioners, appointed under the sixth article of the treaty of Ghent--the committee of council having arrived at the conclusion that the canal is wholly within Canadian territory,' Subsequently the matter was referred to the imperial gov- ernment for action, and Lord Kimberly, then colonial secretary, (27th April, 1871,) supported the Canadian contention regard- ing the maps. Said he: 'Her majesty's government are further advised that considering the character of the report, and of the reference to the map, the latter can only be referred to as illus- strating the report.' Lord Kimberly added that if the two were MARINE REVIEW. et found at irreconcilable variance, the report must prevail. It will therefore be seen that the ownership of the territory in question by the United States is very far from being an assured fact." A California Opinion of the Whalebacks. John Richards, editor of the San Francisco magazine In- dustry, entertains a poor opinion of the American Steel Barge Company's whalebacks, and has on several occasions given ex- pression to his dislike for them. Referring to the Wetmore, recently stranded, he says in the September number of In- dustries: "We have seen the Wetmore, whaleback steamer, from the side of the dock, which was quite near enough for zesthetic pur- poses, but these aside, the whole scheme seems to be chimerical. To attain some added carrying capacity the spar deck is aban- doned and housed over, thus taking away what may be called the "administrative" part of the ship, with no corresponding advantage. Nearly all the work on a ship is performed on her deck. Here is carried and operated her tackle of all kinds, and to say this must be abandoned to obtain an inclined freeboard seems poor engineering and lack of common sense. Below water there is gained, no doubt, something in carrying capacity, and certainly ought to be, to compensate for what is lost above water, not in appeatance only but in' utility and convenience. It is a barge but not aship, and we predict will become a tradi- tion instead of a success, in so far as performing the functions of a ship for deep water service. There is on the Mississippi and its tributaries a class of vessels that excel even the whalebacks ~ in the objects to which the latter seem to be directed. 'The ves- sels alluded to are called flat-boats."' "There is no Fog Above." -- (Reproduced by Marine Journal from Word on the Waters.) Twas a Summer's morn, yet never a ray Of sunshine gladdened our hearts that day, For a dense mist lay over land and sea, Enveloping all in mystery. Yet our ship was going fast ahead-- Too fast for safety, the wise ones said-- And one cried out to a sailor, 'Take heed, Were it not better to go half-speed? 'There are rocks ahead, there are quicksands nigh, And many a ship lies moored hard by." But the sailor made answer, "Never fear, There's no fog above, it is only here. "Our Skipper's aloft, and up there on high He can see much farther than you or I, And he's just signaled down, 'A1l clear ahead,' So we know its all right," the sailor said. At once I thought, what a lesson for me; When the dense mists gather o'er life's dark sea _And I tremble to think of the rocks ahead, I' remember the words that the sailor said. For I know that my Captain keeps watch above, Directing my course in His tender love; And if only He tells me the way is clear, I'll steer right onward, and never fear! A new Roberts boiler was placed in the tug Margaret J. Sanford, belonging to Ross & Sanford of Jersey City, and the boat made a trial trip last week. 'The boiler made all the steam required with natural draft, carrying part of the time 145 pounds which was all that the engine could stand. 'The boiler has been allowed 250 pounds of steam. 'I'he speed of the engine was in- creased from about eighty-eight turns "with the old boiler to about 114 with the new one, with apparently much less fuel. Two other tugs in this harbor will soon be fitted with Roberts boilers. The Roberts boilers in the freight steamer George B. Sandt and the tug Niagara have been in use now between three and four years, and the owners of both boats say that they are entirely satisfactory.--Marine Journal.