Method of conducting the Canal Surveys. 27 



result from the circumstance of the two outlines being surveyed at 

 perhaps different times by different surveyors with different instru- 

 ments and different assistants, and the great inconvenience of refer- 

 ring, at any future time, for the results of the measures of a given por- 

 tion of the Canal, to different field-books or to different parts of the 

 same field-book, a necessity which from the nature of the case could 

 not be avoided. 



The disadvantage of this mode, is likewise evident in another re- 

 spect. The law of the Legislature authorizing the survey, requires 

 that the maps and field-books, with all that they contain, shall be 

 sanctioned and certified by the commissioners, and for this purpose 

 before the survey can be said to be completed, the whole ground 

 must be examined by the commissioners in company with the sur- 

 veyor, and in the many instances where the opinion of the former 

 would probably differ from the latter, as to the precise extent of 

 ground proper to be embraced in the survey, alterations in the 

 measures and the field-books must necessarily be made. These 

 cannot be effected without completely deranging the previous sur- 

 veys, and requiring an entire re-survey of the objectionable portions, 

 while in the method as adopted, the necessary alterations are spee- 

 dily and easily effected by simply enlarging or diminishing the offsets 

 to the extent required. In^ tracing the outlines, moreover, by the 

 former mode, the surveyor from a natural desire to expedite his work, 

 by reducing the number of separate courses or bearings, might per- 

 haps extend his lines to an undue length, the consequence of which 

 would be, that the outlines would, in many places approach nearer 

 to, and in others recede farther from the Canal than would be 

 proper, and too much or too little ground would be embraced within 

 the survey. This would be particularly the case, upon the concave 

 and convex sides of those portions of the Canal which were the most 

 curved. In the method as pursued, this difBculty is entirely avoided, 

 The variations in the breadth of the ground embraced in the survey 

 are gradual, conforming as nearly as possible to the natural changes 

 in the surface of the ground and the requisitions of the canal. It 

 moreover completely secures to the State the possession of the spe- 

 cified breadth of ground, appropriated to the Canal, and in this res- 

 pect it accords in its practical operation with the established principle 

 that the interest of the public should always take precedence of that 

 of individuals, in all cases where the means necessary for the per- 

 fect protection of the former, are so limited, that the extreme of 



