Spirit of Jefferson. [volume] (Charles Town, Va. [W. Va.]) 1844-1948, 1885-11-24
Cutting off Water from the
Chesapeake and Ohio Canal.

The Washington correspondent of
the Baltimore Sun writes to,that paper
as follows:
" Reports have beenput in circula-
ton that the Chesapeake and Ohio
Canal is to be run high and dry be-
cause the purchasers of the govern
ment property at HarPer's Ferry in
tend to shut off the water from the
canal. Several of the statements
which have been made concerning this
matter are rather sensational. The
facts are understood to be as follows:
The purchasers of the Harper's Ferry
property, who are said to have album
dant capital, have announced the
purpose to establish extensive mills
for the manufacture of wood pulp
paper. and their operations, they saw.
will be such as to require the use of
the entire water power, which is said
to be equal, if not superior, to that
at any other available point in the
United States. When the government
acquired the Harper's Ferry property
1T built dam which diverted the
flow of water to the Virginia side.
The government acquired the entire
water power, and has always claimed
and exercised absolute control over
it. When the recent sale was made
1T was with the understanding that
purchasers should succeed to all the
right and title of the government.
Some time since the new owners made
test of the flow of water and ascer-
tanned that when the feeder of the
canal was open the depth of water on
the Virginia side was diminished sew
eraI feet-equal to thousand-llorse
power. They therefore notified the
canal company of their intention to
exercise the right to control the entire
water power. The canal company,
through its president, replied, deny
ing the right as claimed, and serving
notice that if the water was cut off
from the canal, or any attempt made
to interfere with its flow through the
canal feeder, a suit for criminal
damages would be instituted in the
courts of the United States. The So
licitor of the Treasury, Judge McCue,
who acted as the agent of the govern
ment in the sale of the property, said
to-day there can be no question that
the canal company has heretofore
only used the water by sufferance of
the government, and that it has no
right to the continued use except by
permission of the purchasers from the
government. One of the statements
made about the matter is that the dis
pute is now pending before the So
licitOr for decision, but Judge McCue
said this was an error. The govern
ment has made the sale and handed
over possession and title. When the
owners are ready to begin operations,
which it's supposed will be very soon,
they will if they so choose, cut the
water off from the canal. Undoubt-
edly the canal company will have the
right to appeal to the courts for a
settlement of the question. But if
decided against the canal, as the So
| licitOr seems to think there is no doubt
will be thc case, it does not necessarily
| involve that the canal will have TO put
its boats on wheels, for it has another
feeder several miles above Uarpcr's
Ferry, about which there is no dis
.pute. 1t is supposed the canal will
rest its case upon the fact that the
Maryland line extends to the Virginia
shore, just as the District of Columbia
line does opposite this city; but as
the United States held and exercised
its right for seventy years and more,
| this point would not seem to be of
much avail"