711.42157 Sa 29/164

The British Ambassador (Howard) to the Secretary of State

No. 228 WASHINGTON, March 12, 1924. SIR: I have the honour to inform you that the Government of Canada have had under consideration the contents of the note which you were so good as to address to Mr. Chilton on the 27th ultimo in connection with the proposed improvement of the St. Lawrence River Waterway, and they concur in the suggestion of the Government of the United States that two additional engineers be appointed by each Government to the Joint Engineering Board whose membership will thus be increased to six, three members thereof representing the United States and three representing the Dominion of Canada. The Canadian Government desire me to express regret, however, that, owing to the death on the 3rd ultimo of Mr. W. A. Bowden, the late Canadian member of the Board, all three Canadian representatives will have to be new appointees.

The Dominion Government have noted the proposal of the United States Government that the national committees to be appointed by the two Governments concerned should meet from time to time for the purpose of formulating the terms in which the matters to be enquired into by the enlarged Joint Engineering Board should be defined. In this connection I would point out that the intention of the Dominion Government in constituting a national committee is that the body in question should be advisory to the Government of Canada, and it is felt that to impose upon this body, at all events at the outset, the duties suggested would be inconsistent with the purpose which it is intended to serve and would change the character of the said body from one primarily national to one of international significance. The Government of Canada consider that the terms of reference can, at least in the first instance, be settled quite adequately and in all probability more promptly in the manner set forth in the note which Mr. Chilton had the honour to address to you on January 30th last, and they desire me to express the hope that the Government of the United States will concur in this view. Immediately upon being advised to that effect the Government of Canada will be ready to appoint a technical officer for the purpose named, and in the event of the Government of the United States considering the appointment of more than one such officer to be desirable, they would have no objection to making an additional appointment.

The Government of Canada are entirely agreeable to the inclusion in the first instructions to the enlarged Joint Engineering Board of the two fundamental questions referred to in your note under reply,

namely, whether the scheme for the improvement of the St. Lawrence Waterway which the Engineering Board submitted in their report of June 24th, 1921, is practicable and whether the estimates of the costs put forward by the Board require revision. On their part, the Dominion Government would suggest that amongst other matters, the Board should be directed to enquire into the extent to which the water levels in the River at and below Montreal, as well as the River and lake levels generally may be affected.

The Dominion Government desire me to suggest that, subject to the concurrence of the United States Government, this correspondence may be released on the night of Friday the 14th instant for publication simultaneously in Washington and in Ottawa on the morning of Saturday the 15th instant, and in these circumstances, I have the honour to request that I may be favoured with the views of the United States Government on this matter as soon as possible. I have [etc.] ESME HOWARD

711.42157 Sa 29/179

The Secretary of State to the British Ambassador (Howard)

WASHINGTON, April 28, 1924.

EXCELLENCY: In your note of March 12, 1924, you informed me further in regard to the views of the Canadian Government with reference to the proposal for joint action by the United States and Canada for the improvement of the St. Lawrence River between Montreal and Lake Ontario for navigation and the development of water power.

In pursuance of the intention of this Government, as stated in my note of February 27, 1924, the President has appointed a national committee of nine members having as its Chairman the Honorable Herbert Hoover, Secretary of Commerce, which will act as an advisory committee to this Government on all questions that may arise in the consideration of the project.

While regretting that the Canadian Government does not desire that the committees for the two Governments shall meet in joint conferences, at least at the outset, to prepare instructions for the enlarged joint engineering board and to consider the broader aspects of the project for the proposed development of the St. Lawrence waterway, this Government would be grateful if you would inform the Canadian Government that the National Committee for the United States will be prepared at all times to meet in conference with the Canadian Committee in the event that circumstances should develop which in the view of the Canadian Government would cause it to appear that joint conferences by the two committees or by rep

resentatives of the committees might be desirable for the consideration of any questions arising in connection with the project.

This Government is pleased to note that the Canadian Government concurs in its suggestion that the enlarged Joint Engineering Board shall consist of six members, three representing the United States and three representing Canada, and to accept the proposal of the Canadian Government that two technical officers be appointed by each Government for the purpose of formulating the terms in which the matters to be inquired into by the Board shall be defined. The United States will be represented on the Joint Engineering Board by Colonel Edgar Jadwin, Colonel William Kelly, and Lieutenant Colonel George B. Pillsbury, Corps of Engineers, United States Army. Colonel Jadwin and Lieutenant Colonel Pillsbury will also act as technical officers for the United States to formulate in collaboration with the technical officers to be designated by the Canadian Government the instructions which will be given to the engineers.

This Government is also pleased to note the acceptance by the Government of Canada of the proposal of this Government that there shall be included in the first instructions to the Joint Engineering Board the two fundamental questions, whether the scheme for the improvement of the St. Lawrence River waterway which the Engineering Board submitted in its report of June 24, 1921, is practicable and whether the estimates of the costs of the project made by the Board require revision, and to agree to the suggestion made by the Dominion Government that amongst other matters the enlarged Board shall be directed to inquire into the extent to which the water levels in the St. Lawrence River at and below Montreal, as well as the river and lake levels generally, will be affected by the execution of the project.

It will, of course, be understood that the instructions drafted by the technical officers will be subject to review and approval by the appropriate officials of the respective Governments before they would be given to the Board of Engineers by the Governments in conformity with the remark made on that point in my note of February 27, 1924. In connection with such review and approval, the instructions drafted by the technical officers will be submitted by the officers for the United States to the National Committee for this Government.

This Government would be pleased to be informed at the early convenience of the Canadian Government of the names of the technical officers appointed by that Government in order that the officers for the two Governments may make arrangements with as little delay as possible to collaborate in the drafting of the instructions

for the joint engineering Board. This Government would also be pleased to be informed in due course of the names of the Canadian members of the Joint Engineering Board.12

Accept [etc.]

CHARLES E. HUGHES

PROTESTS BY THE CANADIAN GOVERNMENT AGAINST FURTHER DIVERSION OF THE WATERS OF THE GREAT LAKES

711.4216 M 58/20

The British Chargé (Chilton) to the Secretary of State

No. 1111

WASHINGTON, December 29, 1923. SIR: My attention has been drawn by the Government of Canada to the fact that about the month of June last the Government of the United States were granted an injunction restraining the Sanitary District of Chicago from diverting water from Lake Michigan, but that this injunction would not take effect for a period of six months in order to allow time for the Sanitary District of Chicago to appeal to the Supreme Court of the United States. I understand that such an appeal has been lodged but that the Supreme Court has not yet acted upon it.

I have the honour to inform you that the Government of Canada have received numerous communications from various bodies and interests directly concerned with this question, protesting against this diversion of water from Lake Michigan and I would further explain that, owing to the injurious effects of such diversion both upon navigation and water power, the Dominion Government still maintain their attitude of opposition as already explained to the United States Government in Sir Auckland Geddes' note No. 285 of April 22nd, 1921,13 and previous correspondence.

In these circumstances, the Governor General of Canada has asked me to enquire the present status of the legal proceedings instituted by the Government of the United States with a view to preventing any increase in the diversion of water from Lake Michigan, and to add that the Dominion Government confidently hope that these legal proceedings will be vigorously pressed by the United States Government.

I have [etc.]

H. G. CHILTON

"For further details, see Report of Joint Board of Engineers on St. Lawrence Waterway Project (Ottawa: F. A. Acland, printer to the King's Most Excellent Majesty, 1927).

13

'Not printed; see Correspondence Relating to Diversion of the Waters of the Great Lakes by the Sanitary District of Chicago, from March 27, 1912, to October 17, 1927 (Ottawa: F. A. Acland, printer to the King's Most Excellent Majesty, 1928), p. 21.

711.4216 M 58/22

The British Chargé (Chilton) to the Secretary of State No. 144 WASHINGTON, February 13, 1924. SIR: I have the honour to inform you that the Government of Canada have recently noted that a special Committee of the United States Senate has been appointed by the Vice-President to investigate the problem of a nine-foot channel in the waterway from the Great Lakes to the Gulf of Mexico and to enquire into the navigability of the Mississippi, Ohio and Missouri rivers, with a view presumably to exploring the possibility of establishing direct maritime communication between the Great Lakes and the South Atlantic and Pacific Oceans. The Dominion Government further understand that certain legislation now before Congress proceeds, after defining the nature of the work to be undertaken in the stretch above mentioned, to confer upon the Sanitary District of Chicago the legal right to divert for sewage dilution and navigation purposes, 10,000 cubic feet of water per second from Lake Michigan upon condition that the said district shall pay into the Treasury of the United States such sums as may be estimated to be its reasonable share of the cost of constructing compensating works at several points for the purpose of controlling and restoring to the lakes in question the levels lost by reason of this diversion of water.

In this connection, the Dominion Government observe that no provision is made for the restoration of the levels of the St. Lawrence River from its head to tidewater. In other words, the restoration to be provided in the legislation above-named is to be in the waters where United States navigation predominates but no such restoration is provided for the waters so extensively used by Canadian shipping.

Reports submitted to the Canadian Government during recent months refer not only to the loss of levels that affect navigation, but also to the diversion of water for power purposes both in the international stretches where compensation may be determined and in the international stretches below Cornwall in the Province of Quebec. In that regard, Lord Byng of Vimy desires me to point out that the limit of 10,000 cubic feet of water per second, as contemplated by the proposed legislation, is about 1,500 cubic [feet] per second more than is being diverted at present, and His Excellency considers it possible that the proposed legislation may mean that 10,000 cubic feet per second is allowed for diversion and power at Lockport, while additional water power will doubtless be required for lockages.