Box 7, Folder 1: Increase Lapham Correspondence 1826-1830

13

21. Do you also know that shortly before John Bates left the canal, and while Mr. Henry was on it, but previous to his acting as engineer that the board of directors, had determined to curtail the width of the walls of the lift locks, & that they suspended the blasting of the rock, as it had been gained on, which plan was sanctioned by Judge Bates in Sept 1827. 22. Do you not know that this plan of uniting the masonry to the natural rock was the one adopted by Judge Bates in the autumn of 1827 and considered the only one in Aug 1828 when Carney Sayre & Co took their contract? 23. What was the width of blasting of the rock in the lower lock pick, in 1827 at the beginning of the season, and what was it at close? 24. Did you not understand that the width of the excavations was lessened in consequence of a determination to make the walls of less thickness than was at first contemplated, and that this was the plan on which the walls were to be built in 1827 or at least before August 20 1828. 25. Please to state the thickness of the walls, of the locks in as many places, as you can from recollections or minutes if you have them? Of the lower lift lock in particular? 26. Are the draughts of the work made by you as assistant Engineer correct or [illegible] if erroneous, how are they wrong, and how came they so? 27. Did Mr. Henry give directions to have the Lockpits excavated below bottom, and if he did not, can any charge be justly made for it? 28. In your calculations of the contents of the locks pleaste to state how much was done previous to August 20, 1828?

29. When Carney Sayre & Co. undertook the work did not the plan designate which casing cover required, and was more put on than was then contemplated? 30. The facing of the steps & back jointing of the casing being necessary to finish the work properly would it be done in a workmanlike manner, and according to the [illegible] without it, and is finishing the work, subjects of extra changes? 31. Is it not customary in making monthly or weekly estimates to leave out the unfinished work of one month or week & when finished to include it in the next? 32. Was [illegible] some designating mark made or note taken so as to know how much of the work that was daily becoming concealed or buried up had been estimated? 33. Is it not usual for contractors to complain periodical estimates, and by reasons of uniting the the masonry of the locks to the rock, not admitting of its being remeasured did not the weekly admeasurement become final as a matter of course, and unavoidable? 34. Was not the error in the curve spoken of made originally by John Bates & not by McHenry? 35. Can you say under the solemnity of an oath, that you ever heard or understood directly or indirectly that Carney Sayre & Co by their contract of Aug. 20 1828 undertook to build locks for a different construction than those now built with exceptions of the vacant space left in the lower lift lock which was to have been built up or that any one connected with the canal every suggested that larger locks or thicker walls were to be built after you came on the canal, than those now built?

15 cross interrogations continued

No. 36. Was not the only allowance you ever heard spoken of for the diminution of work, something for leaving out a part of the lower lift lock wall? 37. Did Carney Sayre & Co make arrangements for performing a much larger quantity of work than they did and what injury did they sustain by not filling up the vacant space in the lower lift lock wall? 38. From the frequent [illegible], deposits & washings and the great undulations in the rock at Sutherland and Adams job, was it not very difficult to make any intermediate calculations of the amount of excavation. 39. Is not the letter of which the following is a copy in the hand writing of David S. Bates the [illegible] Engineer in the Louisville & Portland Canal?

"Hon. President & Directors of Louisville & Portland Canal Company

Gentlemen, The many and arduous duties which I have to perform include me to ask from you as a favor, a dismission from your service, as your Engineer - I do not mean to request this to take place instantly, but at such subsequent time as will enable you or the gentlemen interested in Philadelphia to supply the part by introducing osme other persons. I will if it is in your wish, consider myself in your employ till September, or even if it should be thought necessary till the work is completed. I am induced to take this course from the difficulty with which strangers may be made to understand the nature of my engagementson the work under your direction - and also...

...the nature of the engagement which existed prior to my engagement with you. Permit me while doing this to recommend to your most favorable notice Mr. John R. Henry my present resident & Mr. Increase Lapham his assistant. Permit me also to acknowledge the frank cordiality which I have ever received at your hands, and the steady support which you have of all times given to my endeavors.

I am respectfully Your Obt. Servt. David Bates"

Endorsed as recd by the board at a meeting June 27 1828 Address Circleville (O)

No. 40. Is not the letter now produced to you signed David S. Bates dated Louisville June 24th 1828 addressed to the President & Directors of the Louisville & Portland Canal Company from which the following extract is made in the proper handwriting of David S. Bates late engineer of the Louisville & Portland Canal Comp. "I still recommend ot you Mr. Henry, whose integrity in my view remains unimpaired. - I have advised him & I beg the favor of you to advise him not to lend his ear to men whose minds are so unfortunate as to authorise them to say one thing in secret and another in public.

David S. Bates Engineer" Endorsed David S. Bates, Reports, June 29, 1829 recd. 30th"

17

Answers to cross interrogations by S.S. Goodwin

Ans. to No. 1. The answer to the first part of this cross question is contained in my answer to quesion number 1. Previously to my engagement upon the L&P Canal I had been employed upon the New York Canal under Judge Roberts & Mr. Alfred Barrister. I had also been a short time upon the Welland Canal in Upper Canada and on the Miami Canal under Judge Bates & Mr. Torrer. 2d. It was part of my duty to assist Mr. Henry in taking levels & making measurements, and sometimes to take them myself - To observe the work as it progressed and see that it was done rightly or according to order. To copy estimates &c &c. 3d. When I assisted in taking these measurements I fixed the average or ascertained the point from which to measure to give a correct result. I am not aware of their being incorrect. 4th. I usually assisted in measuring the locks by holding one end of the tape at one place while Mr. Henry held the opposite end at another place and read off the measurement. 5th. I usually but not always assisted in making the calculations of the work done by C.S. & Co. & I know of some mistakes both in measurement and calculation. 6th. It is. 7th. Some of the minutes of the measurements of the locks are preserved but it is done with so little system & regularity that it is now difficult to understand them. Some of them were written by me. 8th. I do not know of what part of the locks an account has been kept and of what part none has been kept, and therefore I cannot answer this question with precision. There is not however any two corresponding parts of the lift locks (which I have measured) which agree exactly in their dimensions. 9th. - To the first part of this cross question the answer is in the affirmative - The answer to the rest is contained in answer to Carrol's questions No. 23, 24, and 25. 10th - It is the duty of an assistant Engineer to correct his superior in errors of simple multiplication, division &c which the best calculators are liable to commit and even to correct errors in the manner in which the calculations should be made to a certain extent. But I had done this so frequently for Mr. Henry that it became troublesome at last. There are however only a few instances of which I was at the time aware that I did not correct him. 11th - I have taken measurement of the height & length of some portions of the locks since their completion, at the request of Carney Sayre & co. 12th - I did not ascertain it at all.