[_Written by Mr. Tilden on September 4-5, 1885, in Answer to Queries
on the Subject by Mr. Dana._]
"_Q. 1._ Would not the expense of deepening the canal, so as to
add two feet to the depth of water, be very great? I understand
that now, for a great part of its course, the bottom of the canal
is composed, for about a foot depth, of clay and hydraulic cement
packed closely, so as to prevent leakage; and would not the expense
of taking this up and replacing it, after the bottom was dug up, be
more serious than any calculation has yet allowed?
"_A._ The idea of increasing the depth of the canal two feet is a
gross exaggeration of what is possible or proper to do.
"To build up the banks two feet would necessitate building up the
locks. To excavate the bottom two feet would be impracticable.
"At page 23 of my Message for 1873 it was stated: 'The waterway was
practically never excavated in every part to its proper dimensions.
Time, the action of the elements, and neglect of administration all
tend to fill it by deposits.' There is no doubt that the sides of
the waterway have been changed, and the slope filled in with silt,
narrowing the bottom of the canal, so that it is only in the middle
that the proper depth is approached, and inconvenience is felt in
one boat passing another.
"My suggestion was to bring up the canal to an honest seven feet.
All the structures of the canal were adapted to that. 'Bring
it up to seven feet--honest seven feet--and on all the levels,
wherever you can, bottom it out; throw the excavation upon the
banks; increase that seven feet toward eight feet, as you can
do so progressively and economically. You may also take out the
bench-walls.'
"This suggestion looked to gaining on the long levels, when it was
found practicable, some inches increasing seven feet '_toward_'
eight feet. The suggestion was carefully limited, because in many
places you cannot change the bottom without interfering with
culverts, or carrying the excavation below the mitre sills of the
locks."
_As to the Capacity of the Erie_
"The lockages at Frankfort, during the season of 1884, were 20,800.
"The lockages in 1873 were stated on page 22 of my Message of 1875
to have been 24,960.
"'The theoretical capacity of the canal will be three or four times
the largest tonnage it has ever reached. There is no doubt it
can conveniently and easily do double the business which has ever
existed, even though the locks be not manned and worked with the
highest efficiency.'
"If that was true when the lockages were 25,000, how much more so is
it when the lockages have fallen to 20,800 as in 1884?
"_Q. 2._ How far does the fact that the lake transportation has
almost entirely passed into the hands of railroad people, affect
the probability of increasing the business of the canal, in case it
should be deepened?
"_Q. 3._ Can the canal be maintained in the face of the increasing
railroad competition?
"_A._ Total tons of each class of articles which came to the Hudson
River from Erie and Champlain Canal:
[From the Annual Report of the Superintendent of Public Works
upon the trade and tonnage of the Canals for the year 1884, page
100.]
1874 1884
Products of the forest 1,192,681 1,097,450
Agriculture 1,470,872 1,054,041
Manufactures 49,426 56,899
Merchandise 12,905 45,538
Other articles 497,228 377,259
--------- ---------
Total 3,223,112 2,631,187
"Tonnage of the canal, and of the Central and Erie railroads:
[From the Annual Report of the Superintendent of Public Works
upon trade and tonnage of the Canals for the year 1884, pages
94-95.]
1874 1884
New York Canals 5,804,588 5,009,488
New York Central R. R. 6,114,678 10,212,418
Erie Railway 6,364,276 [35]16,219,598
----------- -------------
18,283,542 31,441,504
[35] Of this amount, 5,147,660 tons is the tonnage for twelve months
of the N. Y. P. & O. R. R. Co., leased by the Erie.
"The railroads have competed successfully with the Erie Canal, and
have carried off all the increase in the tonnage. Notwithstanding
the State has ceased to charge tolls, and has imposed an annual tax
of $700,000 upon the taxpayers to maintain the canals. The Erie
Canal has failed to keep up its business. It holds on to a portion
of the lumber, and of the grain.
"There seems to be no probability that the Erie Canal will regain
any portion of the business it has lost.
"None of the grand schemes by which it is proposed to enlarge
or improve it can, to any appreciable extent, cheapen the
transportation. They will simply waste the money of the taxpayer,
and revive the system of contracting, jobbery, and fraud.
"The advantage of lengthening the locks so as to pass two boats
at once, when there is plenty of time to pass four times the
boats which the tonnage requires, is doubtful, and is at least
inconsiderable. It can only pretend to save five minutes in a
lockage, if, in fact, it will save any time.
"Unless some effectual expedient be adopted to prevent the waste of
water in locking through a single boat, it would consume three times
as much water in the long lock as in the short lock. I understand
that the superintendent thinks that ruinous mischief can be avoided,
but I have had no means of testing how the thing would work in
practice.
"In 1867, when I examined the subject, I found that on the Delaware
and Raritan they used boats of about the same dimensions as the
boats in use on the Erie, notwithstanding the locks were capable of
passing two boats at a time.
"I send my Message of 1875; my speech in the Constitutional
Convention in 1867, which contains a fuller discussion of the
subject. I send, also, the last report of the Superintendent of
Public Works on the canals.
"The statistical tables are so changed from the ancient forms that
it is difficult to get the materials for a satisfactory comparison
of the present with the former business.
"A certain portion of the business naturally belongs to the
railroads. The principles which govern this division are set forth
in the beginning of my speech in 1867. The business would naturally
be divided, and the share of the railroads would be increased as the
network of the railroads is perfected, and more and more points are
touched.
"Besides, the railroads will compete for additional business at
less than cost, charging the loss upon the paying portion of their
traffic.
"On the whole, it must be observed:
"Within the last ten years the cost of transportation by railroad
has been reduced one-half. All the improvements tending to cheapen
transportation are made by the railroads.
"As to the clamor about diverting traffic to the Canadian lines,
it is senseless. The great mass of grain brought from the West is
for local consumption. Two millions and a half of people residing
in the city of New York and its suburbs are not going to bring the
grain for their own consumption by way of Montreal. A large share
of the flour and grain carried by the New York Central is for local
consumption in New England. Formerly it came to New York city,
and was distributed from that point. It is now carried direct.
For instance, flour and grain, for consumption at Springfield and
Worcester, are carried from the point of shipment in the West direct
to those places without change of cars. They cannot be diverted.
"The Erie Canal still has a certain utility. It should be nursed
along, but without any expectation of regaining the place it once
occupied in the transportation of the country. The taxpayers of this
State will not always consent to pay a bonus of $700,000 per year in
order to get tonnage for the Erie Canal."