172 



THE FARMER'S MAGAZINE. 



RIVER-DRAINAGE. 



In a previous number we confined our observations 

 on the river-drainage of our large valleys principally to 

 the hydraulic question, saying very little about the 

 political. Let us now examine the subject from the 

 latter point of view, in order to ascertain how far the 

 respective interests of landowners, tenants, millers, 

 canal and other companies, and the general public are 

 likely to be affected by the most complete systCKi of 

 drainage that the progress of modern science will permit 

 of being carried out into practice. 



Time was when the waters of our great rivers were 

 not interrupted by mill-dams, canal sluices, bridges, and 

 other obstructions of this kind ; and in very many cases, 

 if not the majority, had they thus been left to flow in 

 the channels which they would have scooped out for 

 themselves, many a valley would have been better 

 drained than it now is. Running water has a natural 

 tendency to deepen the channel in which it flows, and 

 unless where confined between rocky shores, it will soon, 

 provided it has an ordinary fall, scoop out a bed suffi- 

 ciently deep to drain efl'ectually the adjoining lands on 

 both sides. It is only when beavers and mankind inter- 

 fere with their ninety-and-nine obstructions that the 

 reverse is experienced. No doubt, toward their con- 

 fluence with the ocean, tidal action would have a 

 damaging tendency ; but we need not dwell upon this 

 part of our story, as there are few mill-dams or other 

 conflicting interests to dispose of at so low a level. The 

 political obstacles in the way of eff'ective river-drainage 

 are almost all upon higher ground ; for were there no 

 higher levels than " high-water mark," there would be 

 neither mill-dam nor canal sluice. It is only where our 

 rivers have a fall that we find vested and other interests 

 in the way, and not only in the way of the engineer, but 

 also opposed to the water itself, thus preventing both 

 the natural and artificial drainage of our great valleys, 

 with their tributaries. 



In all national questions of the kind under considera- 

 tion pnor/^y of riff ht mmt be respected; and it will 

 readily be seen from what has just been said, that the 

 interest of the public and of the land itself must be al- 

 lowed to take precedence of that of millers, canal com- 

 panies, and others, whose rights and interests are only of 

 a secondary, and even a very questionable, if not untena- 

 ble character — untenable because diametrically opposed 

 to the public weal. At one time, or before the exist- 

 ence of railroads and steam-power, they were no doubt 

 the lesser of the two evils then experienced by the public; 

 but such a plea can no longer be advanced in their 

 behalf. Their rights, in a national sense, are long ago 

 defunct, so that their existence can only now be viewed 

 in the light of a tolerated nuisance, held under a sort of 

 Rob-Roy tenure. We would studiously avoid compar- 

 ing canal companies and millers to beavers ; but we 

 cannot shut our eyes to the fact, that there is neverthe- 

 less something circumstantially similar, not only in the 



rights they both enjoy to obstruct river drainage, but 

 also in the character of their engineering works. 

 Indeed, the removal of the latter would, in our estima- 

 tion, be a greater national sin than the removal of the 

 former, for the one would gain by the change, which is 

 more than could be said of the other. 



But is it not possible to carry oat an effective system 

 of river-drainage, and at the same time retain all the 

 water power for driving machinery and water convey- 

 ance at present in operation ? If this can be done, it 

 will then appear manifest that political rights are sub- 

 ject to examination from a different point of view ; for 

 under such a condition of the cage, if millers and canal- 

 companies are removed or lose their water-powers and 

 water conveyances, they have themselves to blame. 

 Let us, therefore, examine our subject very briefly from 

 this politico-engineering point of view, confining our 

 observations to first principles or data of general appli- 

 cation in both cases — water-power, and water-convey- 

 ance — permitting every landowner to drain into the 

 river opposite his lands on either side. 



If we suppose a river has a fall of 200 feet, and that 

 this is subdivided into 20 water powers or falls of ten 

 feet each, then by removing the lowermost fall, or the 

 one towards the confluence of the river with the ocean, 

 the river can be deepened ten feet, and the nineteen 

 falls remaining preserved for water power and canal 

 conveyance. Under such an hypothesis the tidal part of 

 the river would be deepened so as to permit the naviga- 

 tion of coasting craft inland as far as the second mill 

 upon the river ; and as this increase of depth is ten feet, 

 the fall at the second mill-dam would now be twenty 

 feet. The surface of this mill-dam could therefore be 

 lowered ten feet, without depriving the miller of any 

 water power, which would consequently give the third 

 miller twenty feet of a fall, and so on, until we reach 

 the twentieth mill-dam, which would be lowered ten 

 feet to permit of the drainage of the upper level. All 

 this is very simple engineering — at least upon paper ; for 

 under the hypothesis that a depth of ten feet below pre- 

 sent levels, with a proper width of channel, would 

 effectually drain our great valleys, the work could be 

 executed so as to keep the highest flood water many 

 feet below the surface of meadows and arable land. 



There is therefore more than one plan which may be 

 carried out in improving the river-drainage of the 

 country. Two of these have been noticed — the above 

 one of lowering mill-dams and canals some ten feet, or a 

 sufficient depth to allow of the thorough drainage of all 

 adjoining lands ; and the other, of sweeping away canals, 

 mill-dams, and every obstruction of the kind, as con- 

 templated in a former article. Besides these two, many 

 other intermediate propositions may be enumerated, 

 according to the circumstances of the different individual 

 cases. So far as we propose discussing in this paper, the 

 whole may be embraced under the above two plans— 



