IN ASSEMBLY, February 20, 1833. REPORT Of the committee on claims, to which was referred the petition of Samuel Hollister and Jesse Hollister. Mr. Russell, from the committee on claims, to which was referred the petitition of Samuel Hollister and Jesse Hollister,[praying remuneration for the diversion of the waters of the Cawasselon creek, REPORTED: The petitioners allege, that in the year 1816, they erected a saw mill on the Cawasselon creek, in the town of Lenox in the county of Madison, at an expense of about two thousand dollars, which was in successful and profitable operation when, in 1819, a portion of the waters of said stream were diverted from said mill into the Erie canal, which stream forms the peincipal feeder between Wood creek and Chittiningo; that it was then believed that the mill would be deprived of the waters of said Cawasselon creek about three months in each year, and that for the residue of the time the mill would have the benefit of the surplus waters of that stream. Upon this hypothesis the canal appraisers estimated and assessed the damages of the petitioners for the diversion of such portion of said waters, as was then thought necessary, to the amount of one thousand two hundred and fifty dollars. Founding their estimate upon the idea, too, that for the nine months in the year the works of the petitioners would be rendered more valuable by the increased quantity of water flowing thereto from the superabundance during that period on the canal. After this the petitioners, at an expense of between three and four hundred dollars, brought to their works another stream which passed off under the canal, for the purpose of supplying, in some degree, the deficiency occasioned by the aforesaid diversion, and again put their works in successful operation: That in the year 1827, the whole surplus waters which flowed from this level were sold by the State for the sum of nearly five thousand dollars, and the petitioners deprived wholly of every participation in them; by which, their works were rendered wholly useless, and have since gone to decay: That the petitioners were the owners of the land on which their works were erected, and across which land, said Cawasselon creek naturally flowed: That before the diversion of said creek into the canal, there was a deficiency of water upon this level; and that the redundance of water thereupon which has been sold, of right belonged to the petitioners. If these allegations are true, and they appear to the committee to have been well authenticated, it is obvious that the State has made a profitable operation. Before the waters of this creek were diverted, there was a lack of water on this level; but after all the stream is taken, the superabundance is sold for nearly five thousand dollars, for which the State has paid, by way of damages, $2,250, including $1,000 paid the petitioners in 1828. The actual expense which the petitioners have laid out on their works, and the improvements connected therewith, is about the sum they have received, leaving them wholly without compensation for the water and the important site for their works. The petitioners allege the last $1000 was received by them under peculiar pecuniary embarrassments; that they had incurred heavy responsibilities, lying on their aforesaid works to relieve them and when they were deprived of that source of revenue, their destruction appeared almost inevitable, and to relieve them from this pressure, they were in effect compelled to receive the said amount. From the view which the committee have taken, and the importance of the subject, they have thought it their duty to advise sending this claim again to the canal appraisers that they may do what justice shall require; they have therefore prepared a bill for that purpose, and ask leave to introduce the same. IN ASSEMBLY, February 27, 1833. REPORT Of the select committee appointed to inquire into the propriety of providing for the discharge of certain state prison convicts. Mr. Bishop, from the select committee appointed to inquire into the propriety of providing for the discharge of such convicts sentenced to the state prisons for life, who are now in confinement for offences, the punishment of which has been mitigated by the Revised Statutes, REPORTED: That in the discharge of their duties they have corresponded with the Agents of the prisons at Mount-Pleasant and Auburn, for the purpose of ascertaining the number and the names of the persons now in confinement, to whom the above resolution was intended to refer; the counties where, the judges before whom, and the crimes for which they were committed; together with the date of their conviction and the terms of their sentence. Although the resolution is confined to convicts sentenced for life, the committee were unanimous in the opinion that if any legisla tive action ought to be had on the subject, such action should extend as well to those sentenced for a term of years, the punishment for whose offences had been mitigated, as those who may have been doomed to imprisonment for life. In reply to our letters, the committee received from Messrs. Lewis and Wiltse the accompanying answers, together with abstracts from the prison books, affording all the information which we deem necessary to be presented to the Legislature. By adverting to those abstracts it will be perceived that there are a large number sentenced for longer terms than would by our present criminal code have been applied to their transgressions. The committee do not believe that the commission of crimes. should be deemed any more obnoxious because of the particular year or month in which it may be perpetrated, and they are clearly of the opinion that if the experiment of mitigated punishment, (so far as the term of confinement is to be regarded,) which we believe is being so advantageously pursued in our improved penitentiary system, were advisable at the time of its adoption, that it ought to apply, so far as may be practicable, to those already in prison, as well as to subsequent offenders; and in the true spirit of benevolence, that its blessings should be showered upon the unjust as well as the just." The committee are aware of the difficulties adverted to in the letter of Col. Lewis, which they do not deem it necessary to repeat in their report. But if the honorable the Legislature shall agree with us in the propriety of passing the annexed resolution, his excellency the Governor can doubtless obtain from the judges before whom the individuals were convicted, information which will enable him in most if not all cases, to carry into effect the object intended to be embraced in the resolution. The committee conclude by offering for the consideration of your honorable body the following. Resolved, (if the honorable the Senate concur,) as the sense of this Legislature, that the terms of imprisonment in the state prison for offences committed before the first day of January, 1830, ought to be limited by the punishment declared in and by the Revised Statutes; and that all persons now confined in either of the prisons of this State, under sentence anterior to said first day of January, ought to be pardoned when they shall have remained in prison for the period of time prescribed by the Revised Statues, as a punishment for the offences of which they were respectively convicted. Resolved, That the above resolution, with the report of the select committee and accompanying papers, be handed over to his excellency the Governor. IN ASSEMBLY, February 26, 1833. REPORT Of the committee on trade and manufactures, on the petition of Richard I. Knowlson and others, for the incorporation of the Rensselaer Glass Manufacturing Company. Mr. Halbert, from the committee on trade and manufactures, to whom was referred the petition of Richard I. Knowlson and others, praying for the incorporation of the Rensselaer Glass Manufacturing Company, REPORTED: That they have had the same under their consideration. The petitioners state that they are now in successful operation in the manufactory of glass. They ask to be incorporated with a capital of $15,000. They do not state any difficulty arising from the transacting their business in the present mode. Your committee are of opinion that the prayer of the petitioners ought not to be granted. [Assem. No. 204.] |