(No. 5.)

Mr. Starkweather's Deposition.

IN COMMITTEE-Present as above.

Asa Starkweather, a witness produced on the part of Jacob Trumpbour, the memorialist, being sworn, deposes as follows: 1Q. Where do you reside, and what is you profession or occupation?

A. I reside in Livingstonville, in the county of Schoharie. My business is land surveying, and that of land agent.

2. Q. How long have you been a professional and practical surveyor ?

A. A little rising of thirty years.

3 Q. Do you know William C. Bouck, an acting Canal Commissioner; and if so, how long have you known him?

A. I know him, and have known him since 1806, or thereabouts.

4 Q. Did you at any time receive a letter from Mr. Bouck on the subject of surveying the canals of this State, have you that letter and will you produce it?

A. I did receive a letter from Mr. Bouck, and now produce it. The following is a copy of said letter:

"West-Middleburgh, Oct. 13, 1828.

"DEAR SIR, "The Legislature have placed at the disposal of the Canal Commissioners $5000 for the purpose of making a survey and map of the line of the Erie and Champlain canals. By a reference to the act you will see what is required. They have received one proposition for making this survey, &c., and will probably not determine the question until next winter. Under the impression that you might be anxious to engage in this service, I give you this information.

"I am yours, with great respect, &c.

“A. STARKWEATHER, Esq."

"WM. C. BOUCK.

5 Q. Are you acquainted with the hand writing of Mr. Bouck; and if so, do you believe the letter produced by you, and marked as Exhibit D, to be in his hand writing?

A. I do know his hand writing, have seen him write, and believe the letter to be in his hand writing.

6 Q. Did you, after the receipt of this letter, and if so, when and where, have a conversation with Mr. Bouck on the subject to which the letter alludes?

A. I had a conversation with him at his own house, at WestMiddleburgh, now Fulton, in the winter following the date of this letter, on the subject of surveying the canals.

7 Q. Did Mr Bouck in that conversation explain to you the manner in which the canals were expected to be surveyed?

A. He did.

8 Q. Will you state what manner as particularly as possible? A. The survey was to be made to include all the ground encumbered by making the canal, or setting back water; to note all lot lines, town lines, county lines, and to bound and describe such lots as the State had purchased for toll-gatherers or collectors, and such uses of the canal.

9 Q. Was any thing said about lines being run and designated on the ground upon both sides of the canals; and if so, what?

A. I distinctly understood that lines were to be run on both sides of the canals.

10 Q. Did Mr. Bouck say any thing about the sufficiency of the appropriation made for the purpose; and if so, what?

A. He did, and said he had been informed by surveyors that the sum was insufficient amply to compensate for the work to be done. 11 Q. Did you understand from Mr. Bouck what proposition he referred to in his letter to you; and if so, whose?

A. I understood from Mr. Bouck it was a proposition made for the survey of the canals, and by Jacob Trumpbour.

12 Q. What did Mr. Bouck say upon the subject of receiving propositions, and the manner in which they would be disposed of? A. He said he was not at liberty to disclose the proposition of one surveyor to the other, and they would be laid before the Canal Commissioners, at a meeting, and for their benefit.

13 Q. Was any thing said about surveyors having been written to; and if so, what?

A. He said several surveyors in this State had been written to, and he expected there would be several propositions for surveying the canals.

14 Q. Did Mr. Bouck state to you what ought to be the form or character of the propositions; that is, whether they should be definite or might be conditional?

A. He stated that it must be definite, but within the sum of five thousand dollars, limited for making and completing the surveys.

15 Q. Did you subsequently learn that the surveying of the canals had been let; and if so, from whom did you get the information, and to whom were they contracted?

A. I understood William C. Bouck, in a subsequent conversation, that the surveying of the canals had been let to Jacob Trumpbour and a Mr. Hutchinson.

16 Q. At what time was this last conversation?

A. It was in the fore part of the summer season of 1829, at a meeting of the Canal Commissioners, in the city of Albany. My impression is it was about the ninth of June, or a little after.

17 Q. Did you request Mr. Bouck to procure from any person, and if so, whom, an estimate of the probable expense of making the returns and maps of the surveys to be made?

A. I did.

I did. He suggested to me that the style and workmanship of David H. Burr, would probably be satisfactory to the Canal Commissioners. I asked the favor of him to inquire of Mr. Burr what he would ask for making the maps and copying the fieldbooks.

18 Q. Did Mr. Bouck engage to do it?

A. He did.

19 Q. Did you obtain an estimate from Mr. Burr; and if so, what was its amount?

A. I obtained an estimate of Mr. Burr. The precise amount I forget; it was, however, more than two thousand dollars.

20 Q. (By Mr. Hogeboom.) What was the object of making that inquiry?

A. To ascertain whether I could afford to make the actual survey and still pay that amount for making the maps and field-books out of the appropriation.

21 Q. (By the Chairman.) At what time did this conversation about the maps take place?

A. In the winter of 1829, at my first interview with Mr. Bouck. ASA STARKWEATHER.

IN COMMITTEE-Present, the Committee and the Memorialists. Additional deposition of Asa Starkweather.

Asa Starkweather, a witness, produced on the part of Jacob Trumpbour, the memorialist, being sworn, deposes as follows:

22 Q. Have you examined the respective plans of survey adopted by Jacob Trumpbour and Holmes Hutchinson, in surveying the canals of this State, as exhibited in the maps and field notes before the committee?

A. I have partially.

23 Q. Look at the Revised Statutes, part one, chapter nine, title nine, section four, and state which of those plans you, as surveyor, consider most conformable to the requirements of that section, and the reasons upon which your opinion is founded? (Ob. jected to.)

A. If the intention was that the boundaries of the land of the State should be designated so as to distinguish it from the lands belonging to individuals, the plan of Jacob Trumpbour is best calculated to effect that object; but if it was merely to make a map of the premises in question, the plan of Mr. Hutchinson is more simple, and performed with less labor, but would have no preference in point of

accuracy.

24. Q. Admitting the object was that the boundaries of the land of the State should be designated so as to distinguish it from the lands of individuals, then why do you prefer Judge Trumpbour's plan ?

A. By running upon the exterior bounds, setting stakes, marking trees, or whatever happened to be in the line, would leave the bounds visible on the land for the benefit of adjoining occupants, and by taking check lines across, would from time to time, as often as taken, enable the surveyor to ascertain the correctness of his work thus far.

25 Q. Do you consider the plan pursued by Jacob Trumpbour conformable to the description of survey which you received from William C. Bouck, Acting Canal Commissioner, at the time you enquired of him how the work was to be done? (Objected to on the part of Mr. Hutchinson.)

A. I do, and as a further reason to the previous question for prefering Judge Trumpbour's plan of survey: By running upon his plan, (the exterior lines,) it enables him to include precisely the ground described as State property, which it would be difficult to do upon Mr. Hutchinson's plan of cross sections, unless stakes, flagstaff, or some visible monuments were on the bounds set, to enable a surveyor or a competent person to range from station to station to see whether it would include all the property belonging to the State and no more, and this would especially occur on curved lines.

26 Q. Can you, from Hutchinson's map and field book, without further survey or measurement, ascertain the situation or extent of any encroachments upon the State land?

A. I think not.

27 Q. Upon the plan pursued by Jacob Trumpbour, when his maps and field books are compiled, may the situation and extent of every encroachinent existing at the time the survey was made be ascertained?

A. It can.

Cross-Examined.

28 Q. Do you intend to say in your direct examination, that lines can be measured in the ordinary mode of chaining, as by Mr. Trumpbour's plan, in the lines of the exterior bounds of the canal, where there are woods, thick brush, swamps, marshes, rocks, as at Little-Falls and other places, where the out bounds of the towingpath are in the bed of a river, with as much accuracy as the measurement can be done along the even surface of the towing-path, as in Hutchinson's survey?

A. I think not. Without extraordinary pains it could not.

29 Q. Would there be any difficulty in ascertaining precisely the ground described as State property, when making the survey on Hutchinson's plan, if stakes and flag-staffs were set at every angle in the outer boundaries?

A. There would be more difficulty in surveying a canal than a turnpike road, if done by one surveyor; as I conceive it would be necessary for a surveyor or competent person to see that the stations were at proper distances, and to range from station to station on the out bounds, so as to judge whether the stations included the State property and no more. The difficulty by one surveyor would be the crossing the canal from side to side to arrange those, to determine the situations of the stations, and to set them.

30 Q. If such stakes and flag-staff were set by competent persons, other than a surveyor, would the difficulties mentioned in your answer to the last question occur

A. They would not if the angles were not too wide apart.

31 Q. (By the committee.) Can you, on the plan of Mr. Trumpbour's survey, without further measurement, ascertain the exterior bounds of the State property on a line of a mile in length, without stakes being set in such line?

A. If the survey was properly made, and the field book or notes regularly kept, it may be done by a traverse with the compass without measurements.

32 Q. Can you, without further measurement or calculations, give the courses and distances of the out lines of the land taken for the canal from any farm; for instance, that of Walter Osborn, by Mr. Trumpbour's survey?

A. A calculation would be necessary.

33 Q. How would you make that calculation? State particularly. On the principles of latitude and departure, the courses and distances on each side of the canal from the lot line to the check line being given, and the course and distance of the check line being also given, we then have three sides of the field given to find the fourth. The same problem applies to each part of the farm on both sides of the check line.

34 Q. By what rule would you ascertain the distance across the canal, and how would you do it?

The rule for ascertaining the length and course of the closing line is particularly given in Moore's Survey, and also in Gibson's, where it is distinguished as the Pennsylvania method of computing contents. The latitude and departure of the sides given when summed up, the difference of their footings represents in chains and links the two legs of a right angle triangle. The hypothenuse of which is the length of the lot line across the canal, and is the distance required.

35 Q. Suppose the nearest check line to be one mile distant from the lot line, would you be certain by your calculations that you obtained the lot line exactly?

A. It would be considered extraordinary, rather than otherwise, if the northings and southings, or eastings and westings, should exactly balance, but the inaccuracy is in the practice and not in the rule.

36 Q. How great may the variation be in the length of the lot lines so found, from surveys as they are ordinarily made?

A. A small variation is allowed, and the variation may be in proportion to the size of the lot enclosed. In a lot of one hundred and sixty acres, the variation ought not to exceed twenty-five links, and that would be called a good survey. A mile in length, one chain wide, would be eight acres, and the variation would be a proportionable part. If the ground was very rough it might be a little more as to the proportional part; I mean as to the contents or quantity of the land surveyed.

37 Q. In stating, as you have, Mr. Hutchinson's method of survey has no preference in point of accuracy, is the committeee to understand that you consider the measurements by chain and compass along the out lines as accurate as those made by the same instruments upon the towing-path?