p. 15

First in relation to the salary and second in relation to the manner of appointment.

In relation to salary we will barely remark, that the original bill was reported with the words "not exceeding three thousand dollars per year, and would thereby have left the subject open for the direction of the Governor; but the terms "not exceeding" being stricken out, as was the case by way of amendment, rendered it obligatory on the Governor to make the appointment subject to that precise provision as to salary. It has however been satisfactorily ascertained that the office might have been filled with a salary of $2,000 and thus have saved to the canal fund $1000. A still further reduction might have been recurred, and may in future be made by merging the Territorial Engineer and the Company Engineer in one; and this brings us to the subject of appointment:

We believe it is usual in the state to confer upon the commissioners the power of appointing their engineers for the reason that being themselves in the superintendence of the work and conversant with the operative affairs connected with it, as well as having a personal knowledge of the persons employed, they are more competent to judge of their qualifications, and the manner in which they discharge their duties, than the Legislature or Executive of the State could be. If that system were adopted here it is believed that the commissioners on the part of the Territory, and the directors on the part of the company would be able to agree in the appointment of an engineer, and it will be apparent to any one that one engineer is sufficient to conduct the affairs of a canal sixty miles in length as well as a greater number.

The Engineer appointed under the act of February last did not conceive it his duty to bear an active part