p.2 To The Editor Of The Daily News.
Sir - I observe a communication in yesterday's Globe from Mr. Cheeney Ames, President Board of Trade, Oswego, in relation to the Welland Canal enlargement. It seems that since the proposed Niagara Ship Canal round the Falls has been set aside for the present, the Oswego and Western people are again turning their attention to the Welland enlargement, to enable them to get an outlet for their increasing trade, more suitable to their wants than the Erie Canal is now. It does seem to be the desire of our Government and people to have this work done before almost any other public improvement now wanted within our waters, and which would probably increase the value of the investment already made in it. But before doing anything in the matter, would it not be well for our government to find out if any equivalent would be made by the Americans to us in doing so; for the enlargement would benefit them tenfold what it would do us, and it is more than probable that the cost would not bring in the interest for many years to come; - while our large vessels have to be smuggled over into American bottoms by degrees, because they are so much fettered in getting loads - American vessels getting always the preference, as the destination of an American vessel consigned to Kingston with grain can be changed to Buffalo or Oswego if a better market turns up during the voyage, or she may make a trip from one American port to another while a Canadian vessel is lying idle until a load to Kingston is offered.
I don't think it would be too much to ask, neither would it hurt the Americans to give us, free navigation of their waters, if we enlarge the Welland as proposed. The British Government have not lost anything by opening the coasting trade to all competitors.
Kingston, 17th February, 1869 A Ship Owner