controls the water rights in the lower ravine up to the point where Cornell University's rights begin.

The Cascadilla Company has, by vote of its directors, expressed its willingness to convey all their water rights and property rights now held, to Cornell University provided they can be assured of proper development and maintenance of the walks, outlooks, etc., by Cornell University. Mr. Robert H. Treman personally owns a house and lot on Linn street, Ithaca, the removal of which house would afford to tourists passing the ravine a beautiful view of the lower gorge, which view is now practically shut off by this house; and Mr. Treman has expressed a willingness to join in the development of this ravine by having the house removed so as to afford the view.

In a similar spirit and with even greater generosity, Mr. Robert H. Treman undertook the development of Six-Mile Creek ravine for public purposes. He owns the bed of Six-Mile Creek extending from the top of the bank on one side to the other side of the ravine, within the city of Ithaca, together with certain rights of way leading from State street to the ravine, and this ownership controls the ravine for a distance of about three-quarters of a mile up to a point where the city property begins; and the city of Ithaca owns, it is understood, another section of the ravine for a distance of about one and one-half miles up to and including the site of the city water works dam. Mr. Treman has signified his willingness to convey his property and water rights in the SixMile Creek to the city of Ithaca for a reservation and park, on the condition that the city of Ithaca assume the obligation of maintaining and preserving the Six-Mile Creek ravine as a city playground and park, and the matter is now being handled by the Board of Commerce of the city of Ithaca, which board has a plan, already worked out, to begin a campaign about April 1, 1917, to secure by popular subscription a sufficient amount to develop properly this ravine as a reservation and thus secure Mr. Treman's property for the city.

Buttermilk Falls ravine is two miles from the city of Ithaca. Access to it is by macadam road. A large portion of the ravine has recently been acquired by Mr. R. H. Treman who has had a plan prepared by Mr. Warren H. Manning for the opening up of

walks through the ravine. This plan contemplates the removal of a number of buildings, trees, etc., which have been obstructing the view of the falls and ravine from the Ithaca-Elmira State Road, the beautifying of the surroundings of the ravine by proper planting of shrubbery, trees, etc., the providing of a suitable parking space for motor cars and some provision for picnic parties, etc., all of which plans are now under process of development, part of the construction work having been already done.

Mr. Treman does not own the entire Buttermilk Falls ravine, but the upper part of it is controlled by one or two private ownerships and that of the Associated Gas & Electric Company, which controls one or two dams in the stream and has practical control of the water supply subject to certain rights below. This corporation has signified its willingness to cooperate in the development of this ravine.

Enfield Falls glen is situated about five miles from Ithaca and is reached by a macadam road. In this ravine the water descends a distance about 1,000 feet through a series of waterfalls, the upper part of the ravine being the most beautiful. This portion, together with the dam and the mill at the upper end of the ravine, is now controlled by Mr. R. H. Treman who has developed the upper portion in a simple way, providing for walks, rail-guards, etc., so that the upper part of the ravine is accessible to tourists. Further development of this ravine and the acquiring of more property adjoining it, are under contemplation by the owner.

NIAGARA FALLS

Increased Diversion Temporarily Permitted

During the past year, Niagara Falls have been the subject of many attempts at legislation having in view increased diversions of water from the river above the falls.

As explained in previous Reports, the treaty between Great Britain and the United States, dated January 11, 1909, and proclaimed May 13, 1910, provides that 20,000 cubic feet per second may be diverted on the American side and 36,000 cubic feet on the Canadian side. The Burton Act, which limited the diversions on the American side to 15,600 cubic feet per second, has expired,

but the War Department is unwilling, without expressed authority from Congress, to grant permits for a larger consumption; and the power companies have made earnest efforts to secure such authorization from the Secretary of War. The Secretary of War does not want to repeat the mistake, which, he said at the hearing before the Foreign Relations Committee on December 7, 1916, he had inadvertently made, of granting temporary permits for the diversion of 1,200 cubic feet more than the amount authorized by law, and he advocates the granting of permits up to the treaty limit of 20,000 cubic feet per second. At the hearing above referred to he pleaded for the industrial companies which were "starving" for power, while Congressman Cline, before the same committee at the same time, declared that owing to inefficient power plants" there is constant loss of 80,000 horse-power by one company" alone. If the latter statement be true, it is not unnatural for the people of the State of New York and of the United States to ask why the beauty of Niagara Falls should be sacrificed to the inefficiency of the machinery of the very companies which at the same time waste 80,000 horse-power or more and ask for more water.

Figures furnished to the American Scenic and Historic Preservation Society by United States engineers indicate that increased diversions of water on the Canadian side in the years 1912-1916 lowered the water on the west end of the Horseshoe Falls more than a quarter of a foot or, to be exact, 0.26745 of a foot; and Heaton's Annual for 1915, a Canadian publication, states that the crest of the Canadian Fall has been shortened 550 feet since 1900. When these diversions and those from the upper Great Lakes are taken into consideration, it is evident that Niagara is in a precarious condition.

Secretary Baker argues that the diversion of the water, by lessening the erosion, tends to preserve the falls. This argument should receive every respect due to its eminent source. It is dif ficult. however, to escape the idea that while the drying up of Niagara might preserve the rocks of which we have more impressive exposures elsewhere it would not preserve Niagara Falls according to the commonly accepted notion of what constitutes a waterfall.

The principal enactment by Congress concerning Niagara during the past year was the passage of Senator Wadsworth's resolution (S. J. Res. 186) giving the Secretary of War authority to issue temporary revocable permits for diversions of water above the falls to an amount which, with prior authorizations, should not exceed 20,000 cubic feet per second. The provisions of the resolution were limited to the period ending July 1, 1917. This resolution was signed by President Wilson January 19, 1917, and is Public Resolution 45.

While the resolution was pending, Congress was also considering Congressman Cline's bill (H. R. 20047) which contemplated a law giving the Secretary of War authority to grant permits for diversions up to 20,000 cubic feet per second for longer periods and under elaborate provisions designed to safeguard public interests. This bill passed the House of Representatives February 8, 1917, but did not pass the Senate.

When it became apparent that the Cline bill would probably fail of enactment, Senator Wadsworth, on February 27, 1917, offered another joint resolution (S. J. Res. 218) extending the operation of the former resolution to July 1, 1918. He urged it as an emergency measure, and argued in the Senate on March 2. 1917, that without the passage of the resolution "it will be impossible for the Navy Department to continue much longer in securing shells and armor for battleships, owing to the fact that the metal alloys which are used in the steel industries which turn out armor and shells are derived almost entirely from the electrochemical industries of Niagara Falls." The resolution, however, failed to pass.

Power Plant in State Reservation Proposed

On March 22, 1917, Hon. Ross Graves of Buffalo introduced in the State Senate, and on March 28 Hon. Alexander Taylor of Buffalo introduced in the Assembly a bill to create the Niagara Hydroelectric Power Commission. It provides that the Governor shall appoint three commissioners, to hold office for life unless they resign or are removed. The purposes of the commission are declared to be "to construct, operate and maintain a state power house on the state reservation at Niagara Falls by means of which

to generate electricity and to distribute the same at cost to the communities of western New York."

The bill also provides that the commission shall have power "to take from the Niagara river 4,400 cubic feet of water per second, returning such water to the Niagara river at some convenient point, and in addition thereto to take, with the consent of a majority of the common council of the city of Niagara Falls, New York, whatever water diversion may belong to that city for sanitary purposes or uses, and the electrical power or energy developed therefrom shall be delivered to the city of Niagara Falls, provided such city shall pay to the commission the cost of generating and transmitting such electrical power or energy." By the terms of the bill, certain cities, namely, Niagara Falls, Lockport, Buffalo, Tonawanda, North Tonawanda, Dunkirk, Fredonia and Jamestown, may apply to the commission and obtain electricity for the use of such municipalities and the inhabitants thereof for lighting, heating, power or any other purposes.

It is hardly necessary to say with respect to this bill that this Society is opposed to both the diversion of water proposed and to the location of a power plant in the State Reservation at Niagara.*

Federal or State Ownership of Power Rights

Since the making of the international treaty by which the amount of water permitted to be diverted from Niagara River above the falls is limited, there has been an almost uninterrupted controversy over the question whether the Federal Government or the respective State Governments own or have the right to control the water power rights involved in this and other streams of the country. Persons following this phase of the subject will be interested in the extension of remarks by Hon. Richard W. Austin in the House of Representatives February 8, 1917, printed in the Congressional Record of March 15, at pages 5801-5810, in which he cites opinions of the Supreme Court of the United States to the following effect:

That the ownership of flowing water and the right to regulate and control the use thereof within their borders belong exclusively

*The bill died in committee.