EARLY PROMOTERS AND THEIR DREAMS
The honor of originating the plan of a canal from the Great Lakes to the
Hudson will forever lie with the brilliant, visionary Gouverneur Morris.
The idea must have suggested itself to other minds even if it occurred
to Morris originally; this cannot be disproved; but Morris's shoulders
were broad enough for an honor too great for many, and his persistent
labors in behalf of the project are altogether consistent with this
verdict of a century. In 1777 Morris was known to have hinted of what we
know as the Erie Canal. In that year he was sent to General Schuyler's
army at Fort Edward, then slowly retiring before Burgoyne's advancing
regiments. Morgan Lewis, then quartermaster, later governor of New York,
leaves this testimony, in a letter dated May 26, 1828: "One evening in
particular, while describing in the most animated and glowing terms the
rapid march of the useful arts through our country, when once freed from
a foreign yoke; the spirit with which agriculture and commerce both
external and internal would advance; the facilities which would be
afforded them by the numerous water courses, intersecting the country,
and the ease by which they might be made to communicate; he announced,
in language highly poetic, and to which I cannot do justice, that at no
very distant day the waters of the great western inland seas would, by
the aid of man, break through their barriers and mingle with those of
the Hudson. I recollect asking him how they were to break through these
barriers. To which he replied, that numerous streams passed them through
natural channels, and that artificial ones might be conducted by the
same routes."[17]
In his diary for October, 1795, Morris describes his feeling on viewing
the Caledonian Canal in Scotland; "when I see this," he writes, "my mind
opens to a view of wealth for the interior of America, which hitherto I
had rather conjectured than seen."[18] In a letter to Mr. Parish in
January, 1801, he observes, after seeing a number of ships riding at
anchor in Lake Erie, "Hundreds of large ships will, at no distant
period, bound on the billows of these inland seas. At this point begins
a navigation of more than a thousand miles [to the extremity of Lake
Superior]. Shall I lead your astonishment up to the verge of
incredulity? I will. Know then that one-tenth of the expense, borne by
Britain in the last campaign, would enable ships to sail from London
through Hudson's River _into Lake Erie_."[19]
"The merit of first starting the idea of a direct communication by
water, between lake Erie and Hudson's river," wrote Simeon De Witt to
William Darby, February 25, 1822, "unquestionably belongs to Mr.
Gouverneur Morris. The first suggestion I had of it was from him. In
1803, I accidentally met with him at Schenectady. We put up for the
night at the same inn and passed the evening together. Among the
numerous topics of conversation, to which his prolific mind, and
excursive imagination, gave birth, was that of improving the means of
intercourse with the interior of our state. He then mentioned the
project of _tapping Lake Erie_, as he expressed it himself, and leading
its waters, in an artificial river, directly across the country to
Hudson's river. To this I very naturally opposed the intervening hills
and valleys as insuperable obstacles. His answer was in substance,
_labor improbus omnia vincit_, and that the object would justify the
labour and expense, whatever that might be. Considering this a romantic
thing, and characteristic of the man, I related it on several
occasions."[20] J. Geddes wrote William Darby, February 22, 1822, as
follows: "In the year of 1804, I learnt for the _first time_, from the
surveyor-general [Simeon De Witt] that Mr Gouverneur Morris, in a
conversation between them in the preceding autumn, mentioned the scheme
of a canal from lake Erie across the country to the Hudson river. The
idea of saving so much lockage by not descending to lake Ontario made a
very lively impression on my mind."[21]
With canal building going on in other portions of the country, it was
inevitable that the suggestion made by Morris could not down. The
opportunity offered here in central New York was so favorable, that a
people with only half the ambition and ability of New Yorkers would have
profited sooner or later by it. Having studied the tremendous tasks
undertaken by the Marylanders and Pennsylvanians, it can be understood
why the Erie Canal was under consideration at a comparatively early
date; the Mohawk offered a gateway through the northern foothills of the
Alleghenies, and beyond lay lakes and rivers in the direct route to Lake
Erie. There could be no question of water supply at the summit level;
the waterways to be crossed, however, might cause the engineers no
little trouble.
"I have not been able to trace," Mr. Watson leaves record, "any measure,
public or private, tending towards this great enterprize, till the 27th
October, 1807, when an anonymous publication, under the signature of
Hercules, appeared in the Genesee Messenger of Canandaigua, which is
attributed to Jesse Hawley, Esq. now [1820] collector of the port of
Rochester."[22] It is affirmed that these communications were not
inspired by the prophetic words of Morris;[23] they were fourteen in
number, and were contributed weekly from October, 1807, to March, 1808.
Hawley had thought out his problem with great seriousness and detail,
and had splendidly planned a canal from Buffalo to Utica, where improved
navigation on the Mohawk was to be depended upon. The cost he estimated
at five millions. It is not at all unlikely that Hawley's attention was
the more quickly attracted to this subject because of the celebrated
message of President Jefferson to Congress in this fall of 1807, just
when Hercules was writing his articles.
It was probably the general discussion of this great theme, more than
the result of any one influence, which led to the crystallization of the
movement, when on February 4, 1808, Joshua Forman, a member of the New
York legislature, from Onondaga County, offered the following bill:
"Whereas the President of the United States by his message to Congress,
delivered at their meeting in October last, did recommend that the
surplus money in the treasury, over and above such sums as could be
applied to the extinguishment of the national debt, be appropriated to
the great national objects of opening canals and making turnpike roads.
And whereas the state of New York, holding the first commercial rank in
the United States, possesses within herself the best route of
communication between the Atlantic and western waters, by means of a
canal, between the tide waters of the Hudson river and Lake
Erie,--through which the wealth and trade of that large portion of the
United States, bordering on the upper lakes, would for ever flow to our
great commercial emporium. And whereas the legislatures of several of
our sister states, have made great exertions to secure to their own
states the trade of that wide extended country, west of the Alleganies,
under natural advantages vastly inferior to those of this state. And
whereas it is highly important that these advantages should as speedily
as possible be improved, both to preserve and increase the commerce and
national importance of this state:--Resolved, (if the honourable the
senate concur herein) that a joint committee be appointed to take into
consideration the propriety of exploring, and causing an accurate
survey to be made 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." In the general appropriation bill now passed the sum of $600
was allotted to a survey of this proposed canal and the work was done by
James Geddes, whose report, at a later day, became important.[24]
Mr. Forman's motion passed, but amounted to nothing. In 1810 Thomas
Eddy, the treasurer of the old Western Inland Lock Navigation Company,
called on General Platt, a member of the New York senate, and the two
conversed seriously about the great plan which was slowly coming more
and more to the front. Platt affirmed that he would offer a resolution
in the legislature looking toward increasing public interest in the
great dream of the farthest-seeing men of New York. Perhaps the two
drafted this resolution; at least, the very next day Platt handed De
Witt Clinton a draft of a resolution. Clinton liked it. Its author
thereupon offered it in the senate and Clinton supported it and it
passed, March 13, 1810. It began: "Whereas, the agricultural and
commercial interests of the state, require that the inland navigation
from the Hudson river to lake Ontario and lake Erie, be improved and
completed on a scale commensurate to the great advantages derived from
the accomplishment of that important object: And whereas, it is doubtful
whether the resources of the Western Inland Lock Navigation Company are
adequate to such improvements:
"_Therefore resolved_, that if the honourable the assembly consent
herein, that Gouverneur Morris, Stephen Van Rensselaer, De Witt Clinton,
Simeon De Witt, William North, Thomas Eddy and Peter B. Porter, be and
they are hereby appointed commissioners for exploring the whole route,
examining the present condition of the said navigation, and considering
what further improvements ought to be made therein; and that they be
authorized to direct and procure such surveys as to them shall appear
necessary and proper in relation to these objects; and that they report
thereon to the legislature, at their next session, presenting a full
view of the subjects referred to them, with their estimates and opinion
thereon."[25] On April 5 following $3,000 was appropriated for the
expenses of the surveys called for in the above resolution.[26]
Accordingly the commissioners named explored the country between the
Hudson and Lake Erie through which the prospective waterway would run,
in the summer of 1810 with Jesse Hawley's contributions of 1807-08 in
their hands. At the next meeting of the legislature they presented an
elaborate report. It would seem that the committee had passed over the
route of the Western Inland Lock Navigation Company from Schenectady to
Lake Ontario; James Geddes, the experienced engineer who had given some
little study to the region under survey, made a map and a few rough
estimates. The report opens with the declaration that the idea of
making small rivers navigable had long ago been exploded in Europe; this
was a polite way of saying that the days of the Lock Navigation Company
were fairly numbered. The report affirms that a canal parallel with the
rivers improved by the Navigation Company (Mohawk, Wood Creek, and
Oswego) is practicable as far as Oswego Falls (Rochester). The twelve
remaining miles to Lake Ontario might well be covered by a railway.
However, the committee had another plan, that of building the canal
straight west from the Oswego to Lake Erie, avoiding Lake Ontario's
winds and waves entirely. Certain interesting commercial questions were
here involved. Even with the advantages offered by the Western Inland
Lock Navigation Company, New York and Albany could not hold their own in
competition with Montreal. Freight rates down the St. Lawrence were
marvelously cheap; fifty cents a hundredweight, only, was charged by
descending boatmen from Kingston to Montreal--one-half the early rate
from Buffalo to New York on the Erie Canal when it was at last built.
The rate of freight up the St. Lawrence was only one dollar per
hundredweight. If any point east of Niagara Falls was made the terminus
of New York's canal, it was feared that Montreal would profit by it
more, perhaps, than the cities it was intended to build up and benefit.
Mr. Geddes favored the direct route to Lake Erie by way of the
"Tanawanta" River. He advanced the following rough estimate of distances
in the direct route:
_Miles_ _Descent_
(_feet_)
Mouth of Tanawanta 10 5
Genesee River (about) 68 34
Seneca Lake 46 23
Cayuga Lake 6 3
Rome (summit) 66 33
Little Falls 38 19
Schoharie 38 19
Summit between Schenectady
and Albany (about) 24 12
Hudson River 14 7
--- ---
Totals 310 155
The actual descent would be 525 feet. Mr. Geddes's plan included
aqueducts across the Genesee River twenty-six feet high and one hundred
and fifty yards long, across the mouth of Seneca Lake eighty-three feet
high, and across the mouth of Cayuga one hundred and thirty feet high.
As a detailed survey had not been made, it was impossible to estimate
accurately the expense.
Agitation of the great question was the only tangible result of this
investigation. In 1811 Robert Livingston and Robert Fulton were added to
the committee, and a report was made to the legislature, March, 1812.
This report showed that the friends of the great waterway had resolved
to exhaust all resources before relinquishing the work. They applied to
Congress through Morris and De Witt Clinton for "Co-operation and aid in
making a canal navigation between the great lakes and Hudson's river,
which, in the opinion of the Legislature of New-York, will encourage
agriculture, promote commerce and manufacture, ficilitate [_sic_] a free
and general intercourse between different parts of the United States,
tend to the aggrandizement and prosperity of the country, and
consolidate and strengthen the Union." The legislatures of the various
states were likewise asked to lend sympathy and aid--to co-operate and
aid New York in opening the communication between the Great Lakes and
the Hudson. "... The general advantage to the whole nation," it was
urged, "is of such preponderating influence, as to render the present
object of principal, if not exclusive, concern to the national
legislature." The ways of help suggested were pecuniary assistance in
the form of loans or gifts, and a friendly voice in favor of the project
in Congress. A letter to President Madison expressed the hope that in
his annual message to Congress he would in every consistent way urge the
plan of national assistance. Accordingly in Madison's message, dated
December 23, 1812, he enclosed the act of the New York legislature
and said: "The particular undertaking contemplated by the state of
New-York ... will recall the attention of Congress to the signal
advantages to be derived to the United States, from a general system of
internal communication and conveyance.... As some of those advantages
have an intimate connexion with arrangements and exertions for the
general security, it is a period calling for these that the merits of
such a system will be seen in the strongest lights." Thomas Eddy wrote
Simeon De Witt January 9, 1812 "... accounts from Washington this days
post say that the expectations of our committee respecting aid from
Congress are very flattering--the project of a Canal from Erie to the
Hudson has many friends West of the Allegany--We are full of the news
that De Witt Clinton will be president and Munro Vice p------this is
the united wish of all parties in this City except Madisonians."
A great, comprehensive plan of national aid to local improvements was
proposed, by means of giving grants of land in Michigan to a large
number of improvement schemes in various states. Article seven read:
"_And be it further enacted_, That four million acres of land, part of
the tracts above mentioned, shall vest in and belong to the said state
of New-York, so soon as a canal shall be opened from lake Erie to
Hudson's river, not less than sixty-three feet wide on the top,
forty-five feet wide at the bottom, and five feet deep (and, if
practicable, along an inclined plane, descending not more than six feet
in a mile,) to Hudson's river, or a bason within four miles thereof; on
condition, nevertheless, that no tax, toll, or impost, shall be levied
or taken for the passage of boats not exceeding sixty feet long,
eighteen feet wide or drawing more than three feet of water on the same
canal, other than such as may be needful to pay the annual expenses of
superintending and keeping the same in repair."[27]
The war which now came on drove all plans of internal improvement from
men's minds until the struggle for honor and independence was won. The
bill quoted was never passed by Congress; a law passed by the New York
legislature in 1812, authorizing the canal commissioners to borrow five
million dollars on the credit of the state, was repealed in 1814.[28]
These had been hard years for New York.
In the autumn of 1816, Judge Platt, while holding court in New York
City, was in consultation with Clinton and Eddy concerning the canal
project, which had temporarily dropped from public attention. Though the
outlook was gloomy and discouraging, these men determined to revive
public interest in the project if it was in their power. An
advertisement was placed in the papers calling for a public meeting at
the City Hotel to consider asking the New York legislature to attack the
great problem anew. A similar call was issued at Albany for a meeting to
be held February 7, 1816, at the Tontine Coffee House, signed by ten
friends of the movement.
William Bayard was chosen chairman of the New York meeting, and the
speakers were Platt, Clinton, and Swartwout; Clinton, Swartwout, and
Thomas Eddy were appointed a committee to prepare a memorial for the
legislature. This document was drafted by De Witt Clinton and marks a
brilliant crisis in the long, wearing struggle this brave coterie of men
had made for their favorite project. New York was recovering from the
devastation and prostration caused by the war. The awakening courage of
a brave people was stirred by the appeal of Clinton's; it was so
"comprehensive a view of the immense advantages that would be produced
to the state by the completion of the canal, that copies sent throughout
the state were eagerly signed by thousands, and carried full conviction
to every mind. The project immediately became popular, and it was the
means of rousing the legislature, and produced several successive laws
in prosecuting this great work. A system of finance was drawn up by De
Witt Clinton which with some trifling alterations, was adopted by the
legislature and is now [1825] in successful operation."[29]
This memorial, in which the Erie Canal was born, and which throws much
light on the whole problem of early transportation, is given in its
entirety in the following chapter.