The following tribute, from his friend Governor Clinton, inviting him to participate in celebrating the completion of the Erie canal, bespeaks the extent had importance of the services Judge Platt has rendered, and the high sense entertained of them by his fellow-citizens.

--------------------

Letter from De Witt Clinton to Jonas Platt, Esq. At Utica.

ALBANY, Sept. 29, 1823.

MY DEAR SIR,

On the 8^th of October the first canal boat will pass into the Hudson at this place, and a celebration will take place under the direction of the citizens and corporation of Albany, correspondent with this auspicious event. Your signal services in initiating, and promoting, our great system of internal navigation will be remembered to your honour when we are no more.

Your presence at the celebration will be highly gratifying to your numerous friends, and to none more than to

JONAS PLATT, Esq.

--------------------

Letter from Jonas Platt, Esq. to David Hosack, M.D.

NEW-YORK, May 3, 1828.

DEAR SIR,

It affords me great pleasure to comply with your request, in furnishing some particular facts, within my own knowledge and personal observation, relating to the origin and progress of the Erie Canal.

The operations during the war of 1756, and particularly the transportation of the army and military stores in two expeditions, the first under Colonel Bradstreet, and the other under General Prideaux, on the route of the Mohawk and Wood Creek, Oneida Lake and its outlet, to Lake Ontario, demonstrated the practicability and importance of inland navigation from Schenectady to Oswego. The same channel of conveyance was in constant use by the fur-traders, from the peace of 1763, till the revolutionary war of 1775. - It was then also well known, that with slight impediments, there was an easy communication for batteaux, from the outlet of Oneida Lake to the Cayuga and Seneca Lakes. That any person, since that period, should arrogate the merit of discovering or projecting that channel of inland navigation, is absurd and ridiculous.

The efforts of Christopher Colles, immediately after the peace of 1783, to improve that navigation by means of dams and locks, were highly commendable. And the subsequent operations of the Western Inland Lock Navigation Company, in following up that plan of improvement, by canalling around the Little Falls, and in connecting the Mohawk and Wood Creek, by a short canal link of one mile and a half, were evidence of patriotic zeal for public improvements. But it is a truth which ought not to be disguised, that the gross errors which were committed by the advocates of that scheme, in their estimates of the expense, and of the profits and advantages of those improvements, resulted in a complete failure of the benefits promised by its projectors. The whole operations of the Northern Inland Lock Navigation Company, were condemned and abandoned as utterly useless. Certain I am, that instead of facilitating, and encouraging subsequent canal operations, the history and experience of the Northern and Western Inland Lock Navigation Companies, were powerful impediments to the enterprise of the Erie Canal. I shall never forget my embarrassment, in answering the appalling argument of the venerable John Tayler in the senate. "General Schuyler and Mr. Weston," said he, "were as wise and skilful as any of the new projectors. We know, and the fact is upon record, that all their calculations of expense and of tolls were not only erroneous, but they erred more than 200 per cent. in their estimates. What confidence, therefore, can we place in the opinions and estimates of the new projectors, who recommend a canal over mountains and valleys of 360 miles in extent?"

On the 4^th February, 1808, on motion of Joshua Forman, a joint resolution passed the legislature, directing the surveyor-general to cause a survey "of the most eligible and direct route for a canal to open a communication between the tide waters of the Hudson River and Lake Erie; to the end that congress may be enabled to appropriate such sums as may be necessary to the accomplishment of that great national object." And the surveys were directed to be transmitted to the President of the United States: and there, as might have been expected, the matter ended. That effort evinced much patriotic zeal, but the state of New-York has reason to rejoice that the effort proved abortive. Next to the surrender of state sovereignty, it would have proved the greatest sacrifice which the state could have made.

As to the merit of the first design of a canal directly from Lake Erie to the Hudson, it belongs, in my opinion, exclusively, to no person. It was gradually developed to the minds of many who were early acquainted with the geography and topography of the western region of this state. I knew, in common with thousands, at an early period, that there was a remarkable gap in the continental ridge of high lands, at the summit of the Mohawk at Rome. I knew, from the estimates of Charlevoix and others, that Lake Erie was elevated about three hundred feet above Lake Ontario; and from Mr. Weston's levels and estimates from Albany to Oswego, I knew that Rome was about 140 feet lower than Lake Erie. And these grand outlines led the inquiring mind to the conclusion, that a canal directly from Lake Erie to the Hudson was practicable, if a sufficiency of water could be obtained upon every intervening summit. My knowledge of that region rendered it probable, that the remarkable succession of small lakes, throughout the western district, known to be at a great elevation above Lake Ontario, and discharging into it, might be used to feed a canal from Lake Erie; and the general surface and conformation of the country seemed favourable to such an operation. I saw the general capabilities of the natural features of the country; and if practicable, my mind and heart were expanded with a glow of sublime enthusiasm, in contemplating the magnitude and importance of the work, as a channel of commerce, and as a ligament of union between the eastern and western states.

In this state of mind and opinions, I was elected to the senate of this state, in 1809; and early in the session of the ensuing winter, my friend Thomas Eddy, called on me at Albany, to solicit my aid in the passage of a law, to employ commissioners to explore a route for a canal, from Oneida Lake to Seneca River, with a view to authorize the Western Inland Lock Navigation Company to make such a canal. After hearing a full exposition of his plan, I told him, I rejoiced to find him moving in that field of inquiry; that I feared he would consider my ideas visionary and extravagant, but that I had much to say to him on that subject. I then unfolded to him the plan of instituting a board of commissioners (without reference to the Western Inland Lock Navigation Company,) to examine and survey the whole route from the Hudson to Lake Ontario, and to Lake Erie also; with a view to forming a canal, independent of the beds of rivers, and using them as feeders merely. Whether the canal should be made directly to Lake Erie, without descending to and ascending from Lake Ontario, must depend on the result of the surveys, and the estimate of the comparative expense and advantages. I also expressed to him my decided conviction, that no private corporation was adequate to, or ought to be entrusted with, the power and control over such an important object. I also told him, that the Western Inland Lock Navigation Company had disappointed public expectation; and that it would be inauspicious to present any projèt which should be subject to that corporation.

The mind of that prudent and excellent man seemed startled at the extravagance of my proposal. His first impression was, that it would be thought so visionary and gigantic, that the legislature would not even deem it worthy of consideration or inquiry. We spent nearly the whole night in discussing the subject, and at the close of our interview, it was agreed, that I should prepare a resolution conformable to my views; and that he should call on me again early next morning, and consider of it. He did so; and his mind then fully embraced the subject. He expressed his cordial approbation of the plan, and assured me of his support.

Mr. Eddy and myself then designated for commissioners, Gouverneur Morris, De Witt Clinton, Stephen Van Rensselaer, Simeon De Witt, Benjamin Walker, Peter B. Porter, and Thomas Eddy. Our object was to balance the opposing political parties as nearly as possible, and to combine talents, influence, and wealth in constituting this board; and as De Witt Clinton was then a member of the senate, possessing a power influence over the dominant party in the state, it was considered by Mr. Eddy and myself, of primary importance to obtain his co-operation. We accordingly requested an interview with Mr. Clinton, and unfolded to him our plan, and the prominent facts and considerations in support of it: and I distinctly remember, that in showing him the names of the persons we had proposed as commissioners, I stated to Mr. Clinton, that we had selected men of wealth and public spirit, with an expectation, that they would bestow their time and services without compensation; so that we might then only ask an appropriation for the expenses of the engineers and surveyors, who were to be employed by the commissioners.

Mr. Clinton listened to us with intense interest, and deep agitation of mind. He then said, that he was in a great measure a stranger to the western interior of our state; that he had given but little attention to the subject of canal navigation, but that the exposition of our plan struck his mind with great force; that he was then prepared to say, that it was an object worthy of thorough examination; and that if I would move the resolution in blank, (without the names of the commissioners,) he would second and support it.

Stephen Van Rensselaer and Abraham Van Vechten were then members of the House of Assembly. I immediately called on them, and showed them the proposed resolution, and the names intended to be inserted in it as commissioners: but Mr. Van Rensselaer requested that his friend William North might be added as a commissioner, or substituted for one of the others. I then went to the senate chamber, and moved the resolution of the 12^th March 1810, (as the journal will show) with an introductory speech. Mr. Clinton seconded and supported it; and the resolution (in blank) was unanimously agreed to. Next morning, I moved to insert the names of Gouverneur Morris, De Witt Clinton, Stephen Van Rensselaer, Simeon De Witt, William North, Peter B. Porter, and Thomas Eddy, who were unanimously agreed to in the senate, and the concurrent resolution was on the same day, unanimously adopted in the Assembly.

Mr. Colden in his Memoir, (page 34,) has omitted the names of De Witt Clinton and Simeon De Witt; and he says that the resolution moved by me was brought forward "on the suggestion of Thomas Eddy." If he had conferred with Mr. Eddy, he would not have fallen into that error. An interesting Memoir of the Canal, left by Mr. Eddy, never published, but now in the possession of his family, substantially accords with the statement I have here given. Mr. Eddy's suggestion to me was, to appoint commissioners to examine and report a plan for extending the navigation from Oneida Lake to Seneca River, with a view to enlarge the powers of the Western Inland Lock Navigation Company for that object. My answer was, that the survey and inquiry should be extended from the Hudson to Lake Ontario and Lake Erie, with a view to a canal independent of the beds of rivers; and that the enterprise if practicable, should be undertaken by the government, for the benefit and at the expense of the state. Mr. Eddy abandoned his project and adopted my suggestion.

From that period Mr. Clinton devoted the best powers of his vigorous and capacious mind to this subject; and he appeared to grasp and realize it, as an object of the highest public utility, and worthy of his noblest ambition.

The commissioners all entered with zeal, upon the duties assigned to them; and during the summer of 1810, they explored, with scrutinizing observation, the surface of the country, with the lakes and rivers connected with the design; and in the winter of 1811, they made a unanimous report in favour of a canal from Lake Erie to Hudson's River, with an estimate of the expense. That splendid report was from the pen of Gouverneur Morris, and is before the public.

General Morgan Lewis came into the senate in 1811, and then, and ever afterwards, gave his warm and decided support to the canal; and during the session of 1811, Robert R. Livingston and Robert Fulton were added to the board of canal commissioners, which brought a powerful reinforcement of talent and influence in aid of the contemplated work.

During the summer of 1811, the commissioners prosecuted their labours of surveys and levels; and in the course of a written correspondence between Mr. Morris, as president of the board, and myself, during the years 1811 and 1812, it was agreed that I should introduce a bill into the senate at the next session, authorising the canal commissioners to borrow five millions of dollars in Europe, on the credit of this state, as a fund for prosecuting the work. In the extra session of June, 1812, such a bill was accordingly introduced by me, and was carried into law, by a small majority, in each house. But in consequence of the war between the United States and Great Britain, of which the duration and consequences could not be foreseen, the bold measure of borrowing five millions for the canal, was deemed inexpedient; and by a nearly unanimous consent of both houses, the law for that purpose was repealed in April 1814; and during the war, the projèt of the canal was utterly abandoned.

Soon after the war ended, a consultation was held between Mr. Clinton, Thomas Eddy, and myself, in the city of New-York, for the purpose of reviving the enterprise of the canal, and for organizing and animating its friends throughout the state. It was agreed that cards of invitation should be addressed to about one hundred gentlemen of that city, to meet at the City Hotel to consult on measures for that object. A meeting was held accordingly, at the City Hotel, in the autumn of 1815, of which William Bayard was chairman, and John Pintard was secretary. According to previous arrangement, an address was made to the meeting by myself, in which I endeavoured to show that the object was identified with the best interests of the state; and that the city of New-York was peculiarly interested in its accomplishment. In that address, I also pointed at the stupendous project of a canal, on an uninterrupted inclined plane, which had been unfortunately proposed in the first report of the commissioners, and I urged the expediency of a formal and public abandonment of that plan, for the simple mode (afterwards adopted) of following the general surface of the country in its undulations. After discussion, a resolution was then passed, approving the object, and appointing a committee, consisting of De Witt Clinton, Thomas Eddy, Cadwallader D. Colden, and John Swartwout, to prepare and circulate a memorial to the legislature in favour of the Erie Canal. A memorial was drawn and published accordingly. It was from the pen of Mr. Clinton, and evinced a perfect knowledge of the subject, with a sagacious discernment of its beneficial results to the state and to the nation. If Mr. Clinton had left no other evidence, that memorial alone is sufficient to entitle him to the character of an accomplished writer, an enlightened statesman, and a zealous patriot.

The friends of the canal throughout the state, rallied under the standard of that memorial, and meetings were soon held in Albany, Utica, Geneva, Canandaigua, and Buffalo, to second and support the efforts of the meeting in New-York; and a vigorous impulse was given to the public mind in favour of the arduous enterprise.

Powerful and appalling obstacles, however, were presented, in the honest doubts and fears of many sensible and prudent men; in the rival and hostile local interests of various sections of the state; and in the political cabals, and personal hostility to Mr. Clinton, who had boldly identified himself with the canal, and staked his public character on the issue of the experiment. The leading advocates of the canal, were objects of ridicule throughout the United States: hallucination was the mildest epithet applied to them.

The year 1816 was employed in the examination of physical obstacles, and the modes of obviating or surmounting them; in conciliating public opinion in favour of the object, and in devising a system of finance, to meet the vast expenditures which it involved. The full force of Mr. Clinton's mind was devotedly applied to these objects.

In April 1817, the first decisive act of the legislature was passed for commencing the work. By this act, the commissioners were directed to make the middle section of the canal, from Seneca River to the Mohawk, and a suitable appropriation of funds was made for the purpose.

The bill passed each house by a very small majority. But after its passage through the senate and assembly, it was subjected to another severe ordeal in the council of revision. Lieutenant-Governor Tayler, as acting Governor, was then president of the council, and had ever been distinguished as one of the ablest and most formidable opponents of the canal. The other attending members of the board were, Chancellor Kent, Chief Justice Thompson, Judge Yates and myself. After reading the bill, the president called on the chancellor for his opinion. Chancellor Kent said he had given very little attention to the subject; that it appeared to him like a gigantic project, which would require the wealth of the United States to accomplish it; that it had passed the Legislature by small majorities, after a desperate struggle; and he thought it inexpedient to commit the state, in such a vast undertaking, until public opinion could be better united in its favor.

Chief Justice Thompson was next called on for his opinion. He said he cherished no hostility to the canal, and he would not inquire whether the bill had passed by large or small majorities, and as the legislature had agreed to the measure, he would be inclined to leave the responsibility with them; but, he said, the bill gave arbitrary powers to the commissioners over private rights, without those provisions and guards, which, in his opinion, the spirit of the constitution, and the public safety required; and he was therefore opposed to the bill.

Judge Yates was a decided friend of the canal, and voted for the bill. My heart and voice were ardently engaged in support of the measure, which now seemed at a fatal crisis.

The president of the council panted with honest zeal to strangle the infant Hercules at its birth, by his casting vote in the negative. A warm and animated discussion arose; and afterwards a more temperate and deliberate examination of the bill and its provisions, obviated in some measure, the objections of the Chancellor and the Chief Justice. Near the close of the debate, Vice-president Tompkins came into the council chamber, and took his seat familiarly among us. He joined In the argument, which was informal and desultory. He expressed a decided opinion against the bill; and among other reasons, he stated, that the late peace with Great Britain was a mere truce; that we should undoubtedly soon have a renewed war with that country; and that instead of wasting the credit and resources of the State, in this chimerical project, we ought immediately to employ all the revenue and credit of the state, in providing arsenals, arming the militia, erecting fortifications, and preparing for war. "Do you think so, sir?" said Chancellor Kent. "Yes, sir," was the reply; "England will never forgive us, for our victories on the land, and on the ocean and the lakes; and my word for it, we shall have another war with her, within two years." The Chancellor then rising from his seat, with great animation declared, "if we must have war, or have a canal, I am in favour of the canal, and I vote for this bill." His voice gave us the majority; and so the bill became a law.

"If that bill had been rejected by the council, it could not have been carried by two-thirds of the Senate and Assembly; and from the personal hostility to Mr. Clinton, the great champion of the canal, combined with other causes of opposition, it is probable, that this magnificent enterprise could never since have obtained the sanction of the legislature. At no future period could the work have been accomplished at so small an expense of land, of water, and hydraulic privileges. Rival routes, and local interests, were daily increasing and combining against the projèt: and in my estimation, it was one of the chief grounds of merit in the advocates of the Erie canal, that they seized on the very moment most proper and auspicious for that immortal work.

As to the subsequent measures and operations, till the successful completion of the Erie and Champlain Canals, with the firm, bold, and efficient support, uniformly given by Governor Clinton, they are matters of history and of public record.

Whether the early projectors adopted and pursued the means best calculated to promote and effectuate the object, the public must judge. My humble efforts have been rewarded, by seeing the great work accomplished with complete success: and I have also the proud satisfaction of reflecting, that my name has never appeared among the clamorous competitors for fame or public gratitude.

I have only to beg you, to excuse the egotism of this memoir. My apology is, that a compliance with your request, seemed to render it indispensible.

Jonas Platt was not in the Revolutionary War but his father, grandfather and brother (all named Zephaniah) were. His father, Zephaniah, Jr., served as a Colonel, a Delegate to the Provincial Congress, member of the Dutchess County Committee, and of the Associated Exempts from the State of New York. His grandfather served as a P.S. from New York.

Jonas Platt received his education in a French Academy in Montreal, Canada. He then studied law and was admitted to the bar in 1790. He practiced his profession in Poughkeepsie, NY for a very short time and was in Whitesboro in 1791. He was County Clerk of Herkimer County from 1791 to 1798.

When Oneida County was created he assumed the same post there, where he served until 1802. During this period he also served in the New York State Assembly in 1796.

On April 1, 1793 he was on a Committee of Resolutions in the formation of The Untied Presbyterian Societies of Whitestown and Old Fort Schuyler. On March 23, 1799 he became one of the original members of the Aqueduct Association of the Village of Whitesboro. He also became one of the Trustees of the Presbyterian Church. he was one of the pioneer lawyers in the state of New York west of Johnstown.

His political preference was that of the Federalist Party and he served as a Federalist in the 6th Congress March 4, 1799 - March 3, 1801. He then resumed the practice of law and entered into a partnership with Arthur Breese (q.v.). He was the first Congressman who resided in what is now Oneida County.

He was appointed an associate judge of the Supreme Court in February of 1814 and during his term of office he presided over 250 cases - 101 of which were jury trials. He held this office until 1821 when the new State Constitution legislated the office out of existence. He was a member of the Convention in 1821 which framed the new constitution.

He was elected by the Federalists in 1809 to the New York State Senate where he served until 1813, during which time he was very active in promoting legislation to look into the construction of the Erie Canal.

In 1810 Jonas Platt was the Federal Party's candidate for Governor, but he was defeated by Daniel D. Tompkins. In the year 1811 he became associated with many prominent men, among whom were Seth Capron, Thomas R. Gold, Newton Mann, Theodore Sill and William G. Tracy in the manufacturing of woolen goods. On January 12, 1813 he was appointed a member of the Council of Appointments.

He had a length career in the New York State Militia. Following the erection of Herkimer County, the Governor formed a militia of Herkimer County into a brigade. Jonas Platt was made Captain of a trip of horse in this brigade, which position he held until the formation of Oneida County in 1798, when he assumed a similar position in the Oneida County Militia.

In 1800 he was appointed Brigadier General of the 2nd Cavalry Brigade. He held this position until 1811 when he resigned.

His first home was a log cabin which he erected on the corner of Mohawk and Main Streets.

Evidently at some time during his service in the State Legislature he moved temporarily to Albany, as the records of the Presbyterian Church, Whitesboro, state thusly: Sept. 19, 1817, Jonas Platt and his wife, formerly members of this church, were received again by letter from the First Presbyterian Church in Albany.

Jonas Platt married Helen Livingston in 1790. She was the daughter of Henry and Susan (Conklin) Livingston. Jonas and Helen had eight children, two sons and six daughters.

The wife and daughter of Jonas Platt were evidentally civic minded, as wife Helen, and daughters Susan, and Cornelia are listed as members of the Female Charitable Society of Whitestown.