Rutland weekly herald. [volume] (Rutland, Vt.) 1859-1877, 1868-10-22

for securing the canal should be improved
We agree 10 that, believing, however, that
nothing but treaty OF navigation tech
nically SO called. should DO made; or 10
adopt phraseology better fitted Tor the
time, let us call il treaty of navigation
and transportation. The existing rights
of the respective countries 10 the use OF
the nayigable waters Of the other, cannot,
without considerable difficulty. DO asoer-
tanned by anybody outside OF the State
Department at Washington, or the For
eign Office at London; at least by any
body but an expert in the treaties between
the United States and Great Britain, and
the navigation acts Of the two countries,
But one thing is certain, and that is that
these rights were fixed before the
advent Of railroads, and when the tom
ago of the st. Lawrence and the
Northern Lakes did not amount
10 one hundrcdth part OF the present
transportation by water and railway.
SO it is fit, indeed it is necessary, to re-
consider the provisions Of existing treaties
or laws TO meet the exigencies Of the times,
To illustrate this necessity, We have only
to say that the privileges Of navigation
are now set up against the privileges OF
transportation by railway, so that We have
an absurd claim of exclusive privileges by
the less against the greater. While a dol
lars worth of freight passes by water un-
der the bridge at Rouses Point, We doubt
not that thousand times that amount
passes over the bridge by the railway
yet Canadians are claiming that the bridge
/ Is in violation Of law or prescribed rights,
and the railway subordinate 10 the soows
and RATS that pass under it.
! Ii we run this claim out to its legal con-
sequences, the railway is not only respon'
sible for all damage to vessels that choose
to.run their dirty noses Rgainst the bridge
but the bridge itself may be abated Us q
nuisance, and the vast railway conmercC
between the East and West taxed witt
the inconvenience, delay and cost OF &
ferry.
/ This claim, absurd and injurious as il
will be in effect, may possibly be within
/ the legal effect of existing laws. In any
event it is so claimed, and a case has been
brought against the Vermont Il Canada
Railroad Co. in the Courts OF the Province
of Quebec, and Judgment has been taker
against the road by default. The Rail
road Co. will OF course insist that the cas-,
belongs not to tho Judiciary Of Canada, bu
to the Governments of the United State
and Great Britain respectively Thus
will become a matterfor the consideration
of the State Department, and affor
ground for international negotiation. Yer
mont, New York, and Congress, have al
concurrcd in authorizing the bridge, an,
we do not think Secretary Seward is quit
ready to surrender it TO the dozen or SO Q
British boatmen who come occasionall
into Lake Champlain.
Still Great Britain may attempt to Sc
up claim against us, and gravely offss
it against our claim for American vessel
destroyed by rebel pirates through Britis
, default 1t is good time to reconsidC
i this subject and settle it in accordan'
with the changed condition of transport
4 ton. Let the State Department do tha
I and wave the Reciprocity question