his representatives or that company, at this time make some claim, or some attempt to execute his plan? In April 1805, the grant in favor of Mr. Livingston and Mr. Fulton became extinct, in consequence of a failure to perform its conditions, and was not renewed till April 1807. Here was another interval of two years when the waters of this state were as open to Fitch, or his representatives or associates, as if no exclusive grant had ever been made. Why, within this time, was not the claim of Mr. Fitch, or of his representatives, or of his company, exhibited, or at least an intention of executing his plan manifested? The answer is obvious It was not till after this, that Fulton's first boat was seen in successful operation. For the pretensions of Fitch were unthought of till they were purchased at the price of ten dollars, from some one assuming to be his administrator, that they might be brought forward in support of a speculation on the hard earned property of Mr. Livingston and Mr. Fulton.

If, after the expiration of ten years from the grant to Fitch, no attempt was made to execute the plan for which he obtained the exclusive priv- ̈ ̈ ilege: If the project was entirely abandoned by the grantee, or those associates who might have claimed under him, there was no injustice in repealing the original grant, because no one suffered injury by such repeal. There are no technical rules of law to embarrass this part of the contre

versy. The question with respect to the repeal of the law in favor of Fitch, and the question with respect to the laws in favor of Livingston and Fulton, depend on the same considerations, what is right and what is just. The power of the legislature is undeniable: And I humbly hope, that I have shewn that the repeal of the law in favor of Fitch, was a just exercise of that power. Governor Ogden understood himself too well not to foresee the objection. that no one but Fitch or his representatives, could complain of the repeal of the first steam boat law passed by this state. To arm himself against it what does he do? He makes himself a representative of Fitch. How? Fitch, as was alleged by Governor Ogden himself, died abroad; and as was also alleged by Governor Ogden, died in poverty, leaving no property that ever was heard of. Governor Ogden, very shortly before he presented his memorial to the legislature of this state in 1814, procured a person who was, or claimed to be, a creditor or relative of Fitch, to consent to become his administrator. And some fifteen or twenty years after the de th of Fitch, administration was granted by New-Jersey, though Fitch never lived in that state, though he did not die there, and left no property within its jurisdiction or any where else. Governor Ogden then, that is thirteen years after the expiration of the time limited by the act in favor of Fitch for the duration of his exclusive priv-.

F

A

ilege, procured from the above mentioned administrator an assignment" of all Fitch's righ tto employ his steam boat in the waters of this state or elsewhere;" and the consideration expressed in the deed of assignment is the sum of ten dollars. You comment, with much good natured commisseration for my feelings, on my remark, that success in New-Jersey had convinced the petitioner that in every numerous assembly, there were men whose envy and ignorance would give a chance of success to any proposition to take from genius its credit or reward. As to the correctness of that remark, I shall let it be judged of by the reflecting observer of human nature; but I now ask you, what must have been Governor Ogden's opinion of the legislature of the state of NewYork, when he hoped to influence them by such contrivances? His appeal was to the “ justice and magnanimity of a great and powerful state:" And yet his proceedings resembled an application to some petty tribunal, in which he expected success by confounding the merits of his case with some technical forms that could have no relation to its justice. Nor was Governor Ogden totally mistaken in his calculations as to the effect he might produce by enveloping his cause in these flimsy coverings. For the committee, among the circumstances which, in their opinion, gave Governor Ogden a claim to the interposition of the legislature, mention the title which he derived by

6

an assignment from the administrator of Fitch !! Is this one of the grounds upon which Governor Ogden prayed for the interposition of the legislature—which, if I had stated fully, my "learned auditors and my unlearned readers would have discovered, that he had grounds more relative,' as well as more honorable to himself and to his cause, for anticipating success, than those which I have ascribed to him." If you intended to insinuate that I suppressed this fact with a design to conceal a part of the merits of his claim, I suspect you will now be willing to admit, that in this instance you did me great injustice. You may now be willing to believe that I omitted to notice this circumstance, only because an explanation of it would have been too long for such an occasion. And I do assure you, I feel very much obliged to you, for having given me an opportunity to set the whole merits of this part of Governor Ogden's claim in their true light.

A third objection to the exclusive right is, that the act of 1798, in favor of Mr. Livingston, was passed on unfounded suggestions-That, therefore, it was invalid, and that all the subsequent acts are so dependent on the first, that as it did not convey a valid title, none of the others could do so.

In the report of the committee of 1814, it is said "And your committee are further of opin"ion, that the suggestions contained in the act of

27th March, 1798, repealing the act granting "the exclusive right to use steam boats within "this state to John Fitch were not true in fact, "the said Robert R. Livingston not being then "the possessor of a mode of applying a steam engine to propel a boat on new and advantageous principles. And the said John Fitch, "having made a successful attempt for executing "his plan of a steam boat and having actually "obtained a patent therefor."

In the life of Mr. Fulton, there are the following passages in relation to this part of the report: "They (the committee) further reported, that the recitals in the act of 1798, granting to Robert R. Livingston an exclusive right, were not true; he not having then been in possession of a mode of applying a steam engine to propel a boat on new and advantageous principles as he had represented; and Fitch having previously constructed a steam boat, and obtained a patent for it.

"That part of the report, stating that the recitals of the act of 1797 are untrue, is much more unpardonable than the mistakes of ignorance. They say, it is untrue that Mr. Livingston was then, as these acts recite he had represented, in the possession of a mode of applying the steam engine to boats, on new and advantageous principles; because Fitch had previously obtained a patent. Does it thence follow that Mr. Livingston might not have had a mode of applying the engines to boats, different