A. We had a good deal of conversation on the subject. I did not suppose he then had a fixed plan, but he was surveying on both sides. 63 Q. Would notes taken on Judge Trumpbour's plan, enable him to make returns in conformity to yours? A. There would be no very great difference, if offsets were taken to the same point. 64 Q. What was the object of your visit to Judge Trumpbour to Port Byron? A. I was returning from the west, and called to see Judge Trumpbour, to see what he was doing. I found him unwell. He was not progressing with the survey at that time. 65 Q. Was it a visit of mere civility, or did you call on business relative to the survey? A. I wished to see him relative to the survey, and see what he was doing. IN COMMITTEE-21st May, 1832. The Parties. Present, Mr. M'DONALD, Mr. HOGEBOOM, Mr. HAMMOND, Chairman. Holmes Hutchinson further examined on the part of Jacob Trumpbour. 66 Q. Was the letter marked Exhibit Q, 21st May 1832, now shewn to you, written and sent by you to Jacob Trumpbour about the time it bears date? A. It was. The following is a copy of said letter: "Horse Heads, Tioga Co. Dec. 4, 1831. "JACOB TRUMPBOUR, Esq. "DEAR SIR, "In September last, I was directed by the Canal Commissioners to proceed and finish the survey of the canals agrecable to my engagement with the State. "In consequence, however, of the lateness of the season, and being occupied with other business, I have been unable to go on with the work as intended. My object in writing this letter, is to ascertain from you whether you intend or have a wish to fulfil your engagement with me, by making the survey and maps of the western part of the Erie and Oswego and Cayuga and Seneca canals. You must be aware that this business has been delayed by you unnecessarily, and that I hold your obligations for cash lent. Should you wish to go on and finish the survey and maps, you must first execute a contract, with security that will be acceptable to the Canal Commissioners, to complete the survey and maps in accordance with our previous understanding, to conform to my survey, and the map to be made at Utica on the same scale and style of finish. I shall be happy to hear from you on this subject, addressed to me at Utica. And [A. No. 335.] 17 1 should you wish to see me, I intend being in Albany in January, and will meet you there at any time you may designate. "I hope you will favor me with an early answer to this letter; for should your previous survey not be made to conform to mine, and to meet the views of the Canal Board, and should you yet decline to fulfil your engagement, I shall make arrangements to perform my contract with the State as early as the weather will permit in the spring. "Sincerely yours, "HOLMES HUTCHINSON.” (Signed,) HOLMES HUTCHINSON. Taken and sworn in committee, 22d May, 1832. J. HAMMOND, Chairman.. (No. 28.) In Committee, May 19, 1832. Present, Mr. M'DONALD, Mr. HOGEBOOM, Mr. HAMMOND, Chairman. Joseph Henry's Deposition. Joseph Henry, a witnesss produced, sworn and examined on the part and in behalf of Holmes Hutchinson: 1 Q. Are you professor of mathematics in the Albany academy, and how long have you been so? A. I am, and have been so nearly six years. 2 Q. Have you paid particular attention to the science of magnetism? A. I have. 3 Q. Are not the relative positions or directions of lines obtained by the circumferenter by means of the magnetic meridian, as pointed out by the magnetic needle? A. They are determined by means of the magnetic meridian. 4 Q. Does the magnetic meridian coincide with the true or astronomical meridian, and how great may be the variation within the limits of the State of New-York, and in which direction, to the east or west? A. The two meridians do not coincide in all parts of the earth's surface; the variation is different in different places; the variation at Albany is now about 6 degrees west of the true meridian. Near the western extremity of this State, the needle points nearly true north; the difference is 63 degrees nearly. 5 Q. Is the variation in the same direction at different places upon the earth's surface? A. It is not. In the States west of New-York, the variation is to the east, while at Albany it is west. 6 Q. Does the variation continue uniformly the same in the same place? A. It does not, according to the observation 1 have made in connection with the Surveyor-General; within seven years, the variation has increased in Albany about three-fourths of a degree to the west. Adjourned 4 P. M. Present, the committee. 7 Q. Is the increase or decrease in the variation uniform, or is it variable, and is it not sometimes retrograde? According to all recorded observations, and my own, it is variable. From the earliest observations in this State, the variation was westward constantly, and decreasing until 1805, when it commenced increasing, and has since continued to increase. In England, for many years, the needle continually increased in its variation to the west, until about 1824, when its movement became retrograde, and is now decreasing. 8 Q. Does the variation at the same place continue the same at different hours of the day, and if not, how great is the difference? A. I am not aware that any observations in reference to that point have been made in this country; according to observations made in other countries, there is what is called a daily variation, which, according to some observations made in England, about the year 1820, amounted to a mean daily variation of about five or six minutes of a degree. 9 Q. How many feet would an angle of five minutes of a degree subtend at the distance of one mile? A. About seven feet and a half. 10 Q. Is the magnetic needle subject to be drawn from its true position in the magnetic meridian by local attraction, and of what nature is this attraction? A. It is. The principal of the disturbing causes is iron ore, under or at the surface of the earth. 11 Q. Is it subject likewise, to similar deviations from causes of an electrical character, existing within the body of the instrument? A. It sometimes happens that by rubbing against the clothes of the surveyor, the glass of the instrument becomes clectrified and attracts the point of the needle to the glass, and keeps it stationary.An experienced surveyor will however take care to guard against this occurrence. 12 Q. What are the common defects in the construction of the circumferenter; do they not consist principally in the friction at the point of support of the needle, the shape and adjustment of the needle, and the accuracy of the centerings, and divisions? A. They do. There is however a case in which an error may arise from the magnetic axis not coinciding with the axis of the needle. 13 Q. Supposing that in a circumferenter of ordinary construction, the needle were to settle precisely in the direction of the meridian, with what degree of certainty could the quantity of the angle measured be determined; or otherwise, how small a fraction of a de gree can be measured with certainty, by means of a circumferenter of ordinary construction, under the most favorable circumstances? A. Certainly within the twelfth part of a degree, and perhaps within a fifteenth; this is from my own observation. 14 Q. How great is the variation which may exist between the bearings of the same line at different times, and with different circumferenters, in the hands of different surveyors? A. I cannot tell. But if the line had been run seven years ago, at Albany, it could not differ less than three quarters of a degree, so far as the variation is concerned. Cross-examined on the part of Judge Trumpbour. 15 Q. What has been for seven years past the mean annual variation? A. Between six and seven minutes of a degree. 16 Q. You say in your direct examination that the two meridians do not coincide in all parts of the earth's surface, but the variation is different in different places, and that the variation does not continue uniformly the same in the same place; if so, would not the magnetic meridian, ascertained in one particular place, be very uncertain to calculate from, to ascertain the variaton of the magnetic needle, upon any given course in a different place? A. It would be uncertain. Direct observation in the present state of magnetic science can alone determine the magnetic variation at any particular place. 17 Q. Would it not be more safe in the location of property in different places of the earth, where permanent objects are given, to ascertain the variation of the magnetic needle by those permanent objects, than to be dependent upon the true meridian in all re-surveys to be made in the neighborhood of such permanent objects. A. It is best to depend as little as possible upon the magnetic neelle, and to be governed by permanent objects noted in the preceding survey. 18 Q. (By the committee.) Could the true astronomical meridian be determined without the aid of celestial observations of some body having a determinate place in the heavens? A. No. 19 Q. Suppose you were to run a new line, how would you do it, by the magnetic needle or the true meridian? A. If I were to run a line with a common circumferenter, I would run it from point to point, as the needle directed, and mark such permanent objects as might be found in its course; if none existed on the line, I would take an angle and distance from each extremity to such permanent objects as were near, as surveyors generally do, so that it might be retraced without regard to the magnetic variation at any future time. By this means, the line would be rendered independent of the variations of the needle. JOSEPH HENRY. Taken and sworn in committee, May 23, 1832. J. HAMMOND, Chairman. (No. 29.) Jacob Trumpbour's Deposition. IN COMMITTEE-Present, Mr. HAMMOND, Chairman, Mr. M'DONALD, Mr. HOGEBOOM. Mr. Viele, of counsel for Jacob Trumpbour, moved to examine him under oath, as Mr. Hutchinson had been examined. This is objected to on the part of Mr. Hutchinson, and his counsel, Mr. Livingston and Mr. Cheever, who contend that he is not entitled to present his statement under oath, and protested against this motion. Jacob Trumpbour, one of the memorialists, being duly sworn, deposeth and saith as follows: 1 Q. Before you presented your first proposition for surveying the canals, did any, and which, of the Canal Commissioners, state to you the manner in which the proposition ought to be made; and if so, how? A. Before my first proposition was submitted, I had an interview with the acting Canal Commissioners. Col. Bouck stated that the proposition must be made for a specific amount. This interview was sometime in the winter of 1828. 2 Q. Was this statement made in the presence of Mr. Seymour? A. I do not recollect. I think he was not present. 3 Q. Did you at any time authorise or request Col. Bouck or Mr. Seymour to apply to Holmes Hutchinson for a division or participation in the contract for surveying the canals? A. I have no recollection that I ever did, but to the contrary I know that it was suggested by one or the other, or both of them, I cannot say which, that a division might be made. 4 Q. In the interview between you and Holmes Hutchinson at Kingston, in April, 1829, was any plan for the surveying of the canals stated or submitted to you by him? A. There was not. 5 Q. Did you in that interview suggest and explain to him the plan afterwards pursued by you? A. I did fully. 6 Q. Were any, and what objections, suggested by him at that time? A. 7 Q. None that I recollect. Was any memorandum written by Holmes Hutchinson, purporting to require a conformity on your part to his plan of survey, offered or submitted to you during that interview? [This question is objected to by the other side.] A. There was not. 8 Q. Was there during that interview any memorandum or writing relating to the agreement between you, about the survey of the canals or any of its terms, drawn by Holmes Hutchinson and submitted to you? |