In the Privy Council.
IN THE MATTER of the BOUNDARY between the DOMINION of CANADA and the COLONLY of NEWFOUNDLAND in the LABRADOR PENINSULA.
THE DOMINION OF CANADA ——— OF THE ONE PART
THE COLONY OF NEWFOUNDLAND - OF THE OTHER PART
I, George Washington Littlehales, C.E., of Washington, D.C., Hydrographic Engineer of the U.S. Hydrographie Office, make oath and say as follows :—
1. That the Hydrographie Office is an established institution of the United States of America and the Hydrographie Engineer is the Senior Scientist of that institution.
2. That I have been engaged in marine hydrography ever since graduation from the U.S. Naval Academy and for the last twenty-five years have been Hydrographie Engineer of the U.S. Hydrographie Office.
3. That the attached document, marked A, was prepared by me as a commentary on the Canadian Reports respecting the hydrography and kindred question respecting Hamilton Inlet and the tract embraced within the limits of Canadian Government chart No. 420, and that the statements therein are true according to the best of my knowledge, information and belief.
G. W. LITTLEHALES.
Sworn at Washington, D.C.,
this 23rd day of July, 1926,
J. DUTTON WAINWRIGHT,
District of Columbia.
My commission expires Nov. 20, 1929.
OBSERVATIONS BY GEORGE W. LITTLEHALES, C.E., HYDROGRAPHIC ENGINEER, UNITED STATES HYDROGRAPHIC OFFICE, IN RELATION TO CANADIAN GOVERNMENT CHART NO. 420, EMTITLED “ CANADA-EAST COAST—LAKE MELVILLE,” AND THE REPORTS OF THE HYDROGRAPHIC AND PHYSICAL OBSERVATIONS UPON WHICH THE CHART IS BASED.
I have examined the documents sent to me by the Government of Newfoundland, comprising Canadian Government Chart No. 420, entitled Lake Melville, and the reports of the hydrographie and physical observations upon which the chart is based ; and have considered them in connection with British Admiralty chart No. 375, entitled Coast of Labrador—Sandwich Bay to Nain including Hamilton Inlet, and also with the Newfoundland and Labrador Pilot, Volume II, fifth edition, published in 1917 by order of the Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty, together with its official supplements up to the 7th issue in February, 1926.
The charts and the Pilot remarks are explicit in showing Lake Melville to be a part of an inlet of the sea, accessible to heavy-draft shipping, and the physical observations from the field of survey show that it is tided throughout by dependence on the tides of the Atlantic Ocean and permanently occupied by oceanic water, which was over-spread during the season of the Canadian survey by water derived by precipitation from the atmosphere over the water-shed of which it is the catchment basin—a condition often observable in the ocean itself in localities of heavy rainfall and at the mouths of large rivers. Although the considerations of the dynamic hydrography of Rigolet Narrows would have been better subserved by stating the density of the water in situ instead of reducing the specific gravities to a standard temperature, this proceeding has not overbalanced the preponderance of the evidence of the physical observations which divests Hamilton Inlet of the characteristics of a river flowing into the ocean below the Narrows and instead confirms the traditional view that this Inlet is a marine tract all the way to the head of the tide water at the mouth of the Hamilton River.
The Narrows constitute a strait connecting two tided bodies of water each of which is alternately higher and lower than the other ; and the residual flow is that which characterizes the tidal interaction between the Atlantic Ocean and its dependent sea, the Arctic Ocean, which is less dense in its upper layers than is the Atlantic water, that is to say, the interaction is such as results when the lighter body of water has higher mean surface-level.
The tide in Hamilton Sound is of the progressive-wave type, and the tide in the Hamilton Inlet or Lake Melville is also of the progressive-wave type, while in the Narrows separating these two bodies of water there is a hydraulic movement brought about by the fact that part of the time the level of the water in the sound is higher than in the inlet and part of the time it is lower. The Narrows thus acts as a channel through which the water flows from the body having, temporarily, the higher level to the one having
the lower level. If the details of the readings of the gauges had been published in the Reports, the lines joining simultaneous heights of the tide at the two ends of the Narrows could have been plotted to show by their slope the difference of level.
While it is true that, “ in river mouths, sea water finds its way along the bottom especially during the rise of the tide,” this is to preserve a hydrostatic balance which results in the retreat of the sea water when the tide falls. But, in the arm of the sea called Lake Melville, the sea water occupies the basin permanently.
The Reports also point out as a feature of tidal rivers that “ the outward flow or ' ebb stream ' during the fall of the tide is stronger and continues for a longer time than the inward flow or ' flood stream,' which is weaker and of shorter duration because of the opposed current of the river ” ; but this also occurs when two tided bodies of water—one more saline and the other less saline—are connected by a strait, and the lighter body has the higher mean surface-level.
I have also read the “ Observations of Vice Admiral Sir Frederick C. Learmonth on the Hydrographie Survey and Reports of the Canadian Government of Lake Melville, Hamilton Inlet, and the Narrows, 1921-23,” and, in expressing concurrence in the conclusions reached therein, I would mention, in addition to the instances cited of the application of the term “ Coast ” to territories of large inland extent, the Central American territory known in political history as the Mosquito Coast.
(Signed)G. W. LITTLEHALES,