had lost the confidence of the public, and, with a few exceptions, of
the proprietors themselves. The reason for this state of sentiment can
easily be shown. The general depression of business on account of the
embargo and the war of 1812 had its effect upon the canal. In the deaths
of Gov. Sullivan and Col. Baldwin, in the same year, 1808, the
enterprise was deprived of the wise and energetic counsellors to whom it
owed its existence.
The aqueducts and most of the locks, being built of wood, required large
sums for annual repairs; the expenses arising from imperfections in the
banks, and from the erection of toll-houses and public houses for the
accommodation of the boatmen, were considerable; but the heaviest
expenses were incurred in opening the Merrimac for navigation. From
Concord, N.H., to the head of the canal the river has a fall of 123 ft.,
necessitating various locks and canals. The Middlesex Canal Corporation
contributed to the building of the Wiccasee locks and canals, $12,000;
Union locks and canals, $49,932; Hookset canal, $6,750; Bow canal and
locks, $14,115, making a sum total of $82,797 to be paid from the income
of the Middlesex canal.
The constant demand for money in excess of the incomes had proved
demoralizing. Funds had been raised from time to time by lotteries. In
the Columbian "Centinel & Massachusetts Federalist" of Aug. 15, 1804,
appears an advertisement of the Amoskeag Canal Lottery, 6,000 tickets at
$5, with an enumeration of prizes. The committee, consisting of Phillips
Payson, Samuel Swan, Jr., and Loammi Baldwin, Jr., appealed to the
public for support, assuring the subscribers that all who did not draw
prizes would get the full value of their money in the reduced price of
fuel.
In 1816 the Legislature of Massachusetts granted the proprietors of the
canal, in consideration of its usefulness to the public, two townships
of land in the district of Maine, near Moosehead lake. This State aid,
however, proved of no immediate service, as purchasers could not be
found for several years for property so remote. Appeals to capitalists,
lotteries, and State aid proved insufficient; the main burden fell upon
the stockholders. In accordance with the provisions of the charter,
assessments had been levied, as occasion required, up to 1816, 99 in
number, amounting to $670 per share; and the corporation was still
staggering under a debt of $64,000. Of course, during all this time, no
dividends could be declared.
Under these unpromising conditions a committee, consisting of Josiah
Quincy, Joseph Hall, and Joseph Coolidge, Jr., was appointed to devise
the appropriate remedy. "In the opinion of your committee," the report
reads, "the real value of the property, at this moment, greatly exceeds
the market value, and many years will not elapse before it will be
considered among the best of all practicable monied investments. The
Directors contemplate no further extension of the canal. _The work is
done_, both the original and subsidiary canals.... Let the actual
incomes of the canal be as great as they may, so long as they are
consumed in payment of debts and interest on loans, the aspect of the
whole is that of embarrassment and mortgage. The present rates of
income, if continued, and there is every rational prospect, not only of
its continuance, but of its great and rapid increase, will enable the
corporation--when relieved of its present liabilities,--at once to
commence a series of certain, regular, and satisfactory dividends." They
accordingly recommended a final assessment of $80 per share, completely
to extinguish all liabilities. This assessment, the 100th since the
commencement, was levied in 1817, making a sum total of $600,000,
extorted from the long-suffering stockholders. If to this sum the
interest of the various assessments be added, computed to Feb. 1, 1819,
the date of the first dividend, the actual cost of each share is found
to have been $1,455.25.
The prosperity of the canal property now seemed fully assured. The first
dividend, though only $15, was the promise of golden showers in the near
future, and the stock once more took an upward flight. From 1819 to 1836
were the palmy days of the canal, unvexed with debts, and subject to
very moderate expenses for annual repairs and management.
It is difficult to ascertain the whole number of boats employed at any
one time. Many were owned and run by the proprietors of the canal; and
many were constructed and run by private parties who paid the regular
tolls for whatever merchandise they transported. Boats belonging to the
same parties were conspicuously numbered, like railway cars to-day. From
"Regulations relative to the Navigation of the Middlesex Canal," a
pamphlet published in 1830, it appears that boats were required to be
not less than 40 ft. nor more than 75 ft. in length and not less than 9
ft. nor more than 9-1/2 ft. in width. Two men, a driver and steersman,
usually made up the working force; the boats, however, that went up the
Merrimac required three men, one to steer, and two to pole. The Lowell
boats carried 20 tons of coal; 15 tons were sufficient freight for
Concord; when the water in the Merrimac was low, not more than 6 or 7
tons could be taken up the river. About 1830 the boatmen received $15
per month.
Lumber was transported in rafts of about 75 ft. long and 9 ft. wide; and
these rafts, not exceeding ten in number, were often united in "bands."
A band of seven to ten rafts required the services of five men,
including the driver. Boats were drawn by horses, and lumber by oxen;
and "luggage boats" were required to make two and a half miles an hour,
while "passage boats" attained a speed of four miles. Boats of the same
class, and going the same way, were not allowed to pass each other, thus
making "racing" impossible on the staid waters of the old canal.
Whenever a boat approached a lock, the conductor sounded his horn to
secure the prompt attention of the lock-tender; but due regard was paid
to the religious sentiment of New England. Travelling in the canal being
permitted on Sundays, "in consideration of the distance from home at
which those persons using it generally are, it may be reasonably
expected that they should not disturb those places of public worship
near which they pass, nor occasion any noise to interrupt the
tranquillity of the day. Therefore, it is established that no
_Signal-Horn_ shall be used or blown on Sundays."
The tariff varied greatly from year to year. In 1827 the rate from
Lowell to Boston was $2.00 the gross ton; but many articles were carried
on much lower terms.
On account of liability of damage to the banks of the canal, all
navigation ceased at dark; hence, at every lock, or series of locks, a
tavern was established. These were all owned by the corporation, and
were often let to the lock-tender, who eked out his income by the
accommodation of boatmen and horses. The Bunker Hill Tavern, in
Charlestown, situated so as to accommodate both county and canal travel,
was leased, in 1830, for $350; in 1838, it let for $500. The Horn Pond
House, at Woburn, in 1838, was leased for $700. In 1825, a two-story
dwelling-house, 36 X 18, built at a cost of $1,400, for the
accommodation of boatmen and raftsmen, at Charlestown, rented, with
stable attached, for $140. In all these cases, the real estate was
supposed to pay ten per cent.
Some of these canal-taverns established a wide reputation for good
cheer, and boatmen contrived to be overtaken by night in their
vicinity. Sometimes fifteen or twenty boats would be detained at one of
these favorite resorts, and a jolly crowd fraternized in the primitive
bar-room. The temperance sentiment had not yet taken a firm hold in New
England. "Flip" was the high-toned beverage of those days; but
"black-strap," a compound of rum and molasses, sold at three cents a
glass, was the particular "vanity" of the boatmen. In the smaller
taverns, a barrel of old Medford, surmounted by a pitcher of molasses,
scorning the flimsy subterfuges of modern times, boldly invited its
patrons to draw and mix at their own sweet will. "Plenty of drunkenness,
Uncle Joe, in those days?" we queried of an ancient boatman who was
dilating upon the good old times. "Bless your heart, no!" was the
answer. "Mr. Eddy didn't put up with no drunkards on the canal. They
could drink all night, sir, and be steady as an eight-day clock in the
morning."
When the feverish haste born of the locomotive and telegraph had not yet
infected society, a trip over the canal in the passenger-packet, the
"Governor Sullivan," must have been an enjoyable experience. Protected
by iron rules from the dangers of collision; undaunted by squalls of
wind, realizing, should the craft be capsized, that he had nothing to do
but walk ashore, the traveller, speeding along at the leisurely pace of
four miles per hour, had ample time for observation and reflection.
Seated, in summer, under a capacious awning, he traversed the valley of
the Mystic skirting the picturesque shores of Mystic pond. Instead of a
foreground of blurred landscape, vanishing, ghostlike, ere its features
could be fairly distinguished, soft bits of characteristic New England
scenery, clear cut as cameos, lingered caressingly on his vision; green
meadows, fields riotous with blossomed clover, fragrant orchards, and
quaint old farmhouses, with a background of low hills wooded to their
summits.
Passing under bridges, over rivers, between high embankments, and
through deep cuttings, floated up hill by a series of locks, he
marvelled at this triumph of engineering, and, if he were a director,
pictured the manufactories that were to spring up along this great
thoroughfare, swelling its revenues for all time.
The tow-path of the canal was a famous promenade. Upon Sunday
afternoons, especially, numerous pedestrians from the dusty city
strolled along the canal for a breath of fresh air and a glimpse of the
open country, through the Royal estate in Medford, past the substantial
old-fashioned mansion-house of Peter C. Brooks, as far, perhaps, as the
Baldwin estate, and the birthplace of Count Rumford, in Woburn. "I love
that old tow-path," said Uncle Joe. "'Twas there I courted my wife; and
every time the boat went by she came tripping out to walk a piece with
me! Bless you, sir the horses knew her step, and it wan't so heavy,
nuther."
Meanwhile, under the direction of Caleb Eddy, who assumed the agency of
the corporation in 1825, bringing great business ability and
unquenchable zeal to his task, the perishable wooden locks were
gradually replaced with stone, a new stone dam was built at Billerica,
and the service brought to a high state of efficiency. The new dam was
the occasion of a lawsuit brought by the proprietors of the Sudbury
meadows, claiming damages to the extent of $10,000 for flooding their
meadows. The defendants secured the services of Samuel Hoar, Esq., of
Concord, assisted by the Hon. Daniel Webster, who accepted a retaining
fee of $100 to "manage and argue the case in conjunction with Mr. Hoar.
The cause was to have been tried November, 1833. Mr. Webster was called
on by me and promised to examine the evidence and hold himself in
readiness for the trial, but for some time before he was not to be found
in Boston, at one time at New York, at another in Philadelphia, and so
on from place to place so that I am satisfied no dependance can be
placed with certainty upon his assistance, and," plaintively concludes
the agent, "our $100 has gone to profit and loss account."
On the other side was the Hon. Jeremiah Mason, assisted by Franklin
Dexter, Esq. This case was decided the following year adversely to the
plaintiffs.
With the accession of business brought by the corporations at Lowell,
the prospect for increased dividends in the future was extremely
encouraging. The golden age of the canal appeared close at hand; but the
fond hopes of the proprietors were once more destined to disappointment.
Even the genius of James Sullivan had not foreseen the railway
locomotive. In 1829 a petition was presented to the Legislature for the
survey of a railroad from Boston to Lowell. The interests of the canal
were seriously involved. A committee was promptly chosen to draw up for
presentation to the General Court "a remonstrance of the Proprietors of
Middlesex Canal, against the grant of a charter to build a railroad from
Boston to Lowell." This remonstrance, signed by William Sullivan, Joseph
Coolidge, and George Hallett, bears date of Boston, Feb. 12, 1830, and
conclusively shows how little the business men of fifty years ago
anticipated the enormous development of our resources consequent upon
the application of steam to transportation:--
The remonstrants take pleasure in declaring, that they join in the
common sentiment of surprise and commendation, that any
intelligence and enterprise should have raised so rapidly and so
permanently, such establishments as are seen at Lowell. The
proprietors of these works have availed themselves of _the canal_,
for their transportation for all articles, except in the winter
months ... and every effort has been made by this corporation to
afford every facility, it was hoped and believed, to the entire
satisfaction of the Lowell proprietors. The average annual amount
of tolls paid by these proprietors has been only about four
thousand dollars. It is believed no safer or cheaper mode of
conveyance can ever be established, nor any so well adapted for
carrying heavy and bulky articles. To establish therefore a
_substitute_ for the canal alongside of it, and in many places
within a few rods of it, and to do that which the canal was made to
do, seems to be a measure not called for by any exigency, nor one
which the Legislature can permit, without implicitly declaring that
all investments of money in public enterprises must be subjected to
the will of any applicants who think that they may benefit
themselves without regard to older enterprises, which have a claim
to protection from public authority. With regard, then, to
transportation of tonnage goods, the means exist for all but the
winter months, as effectually as any that can be provided.
There is a supposed source of revenue to a railroad, _from
carrying passengers_. As to this, the remonstrants venture no
opinion, except to say, that passengers are now carried, at all
hours, as rapidly and safely as they are anywhere else in the
world.... To this, the remonstrants would add, that the use of a
railroad, _for passengers only_, has been tested by experience,
nowhere, hitherto; and that it remains to be known, whether this is
a mode which will command general confidence and approbation, and
that, therefore, no facts are now before the public, which furnish
the conclusion, that the grant of a railroad is a public exigency
even for such a purpose. The Remonstrants would also add, that so
far as they know and believe, "_there never can be a sufficient
inducement to extend a railroad from Lowell westwardly and
northwestwardly, to the Connecticut, so as to make it the great
avenue to and from the interior, but that its termination must be
at Lowell_" (italics our own), "and, consequently that it is to be
a substitute for the modes of transportation now in use between
that place and Boston, _and cannot deserve patronage from the
supposition that it is to be more extensively useful_...."
The Remonstrants, therefore, respectfully submit: First, that there
be no such exigency as will warrant the granting of the prayer for
a railroad to and from Lowell.
Secondly, that, if that prayer be granted, provision should be made
as a condition for granting it, that the Remonstrants shall be
indemnified for the losses which will be thereby occasioned to
them.
This may seem the wilful blindness of self-interest; but the utterances
of the press and the legislative debates of the period are similar in
tone. In relation to another railroad, the "Boston Transcript" of Sept.
1, 1830, remarks: "It is not astonishing that so much reluctance exists
against plunging into doubtful speculations.... The public itself is
divided as to the practicability of the Rail Road. If they expect the
assistance of capitalists, they must stand ready to guarantee the
_percentum per annum_; without this, all hopes of Rail Roads are
visionary and chimerical." In a report of legislative proceedings
published in the "Boston Courier," of Jan. 25, 1830, Mr. Cogswell, of
Ipswich, remarked: "Railways, Mr. Speaker, may do well enough in old
countries, but will never be the thing for so young a country as this.
When you can make the rivers run back, it will be time enough to make a
railway." Notwithstanding the pathetic remonstrances and strange
vaticinations of the canal proprietors, the Legislature incorporated the
road and refused compensation to the canal. Even while the railroad was
in process of construction, the canal directors do not seem to have
realized the full gravity of the situation. They continued the policy of
replacing wood with stone, and made every effort to perfect the service
in all its details; as late as 1836 the agent recommended improvements.
The amount of tonnage continued to increase--the very sleepers used in
the construction of the railway were boated, it is said, to points
convenient for the workmen.
In 1832 the canal declared a dividend of $22 per share; from 1834 to
1837, inclusive, a yearly dividend of $30.
The disastrous competition of the Lowell Railroad was now beginning to
be felt. In 1835 the Lowell goods conveyed by canal paid tonnage dues of
$11,975.51; in 1836 the income from this source had dwindled to
$6,195.77. The canal dividends had been kept up to their highest mark by
the sale of its townships in Maine and other real estate: but now they
began to drop. The year the Lowell road went into full operation the
receipts of the canal were reduced one-third; and when the Nashua &
Lowell road went into full operation, in 1840, they were reduced another
third. The board of directors waged a plucky warfare with the railroads,
reducing the tariff on all articles, and almost abolishing it on some,
till the expenditures of the canal outran its income; but steam came out
triumphant. Even sanguine Caleb Eddy became satisfied that longer
competition was vain, and set himself to the difficult task of saving
fragments from the inevitable wreck.
At this time (1843) Boston numbered about 100,000 inhabitants, and was
dependent for water upon cisterns and wells. The supply of water in the
wells had been steadily diminishing for years, and what remained was
necessarily subject to contamination from numberless sources. "One
specimen which I analyzed," said Dr. Jackson, "which gave three per
cent, of animal and vegetable putrescent matter, was publicly sold as a
mineral water; it was believed that water having such a remarkable fetid
odor and nauseous taste, could be no other than that of a sulphur
spring; but its medicinal powers vanished with the discovery that the
spring arose from a neighboring drain." Here was a golden opportunity.
Eddy proposed to abandon the canal as a means of transportation, and
convert it into an aqueduct for supplying the City of Boston with
wholesome water. The sections between the Merrimac and Concord at one
extremity, and Charlestown mill-pond and Woburn at the other, were to be
wholly discontinued. Flowing along the open channel of the canal from
the Concord river to Horn-pond locks in Woburn, from thence it was to be
conducted in iron pipes to a reservoir upon Mount Benedict in
Charlestown, a hill eighty feet above the sea-level.
The good quality of the Concord-river water was vouched for by the
"analysis of four able and practical chemists, Dr. Charles T. Jackson,
of Boston; John W. Webster, of Cambridge University; S.L. Dana, of
Lowell, and A.A. Hayes, Esq., of the chemical works at Roxbury." The
various legal questions involved were submitted to the Hon. Jeremiah
Mason, who gave an opinion, dated Dec. 21, 1842, favorable to the
project. The form for an act of incorporation was drawn up; and a
pamphlet was published, in 1843, by Caleb Eddy, entitled an "Historical
sketch of the Middlesex Canal, with remarks for the consideration of the
Proprietors," setting forth the new scheme in glowing colors.
But despite the feasibility of the plan proposed, and the energy with
which it was pushed, the agitation came to naught; and Eddy, despairing
of the future, resigned his position as agent in 1845. Among the
directors during these later years were Ebenezer Chadwick, Wm. Appleton,
Wm. Sturgis, Charles F. Adams, A.A. Lawrence, and Abbott Lawrence; but
no business ability could long avert the catastrophe. Stock fell to
$150, and finally the canal was discontinued, according to Amory's Life
of Sullivan, in 1846. It would seem, however, that a revival of
business was deemed within the range of possibilities, for in
conveyances made in 1852 the company reserved the right to use the land
"for canalling purposes"; and the directors annually went through with
the form of electing an agent and collector as late as 1853.
"Its vocation gone, and valueless for any other service," says Amory,
"the canal property was sold for $130,000. After the final dividends,
little more than the original assessments had been returned to the
stockholders." Oct. 3, 1859, the Supreme Court issued a decree,
declaring that the proprietors had "forfeited all their franchises and
privileges, by reason of non-feasance, non-user, misfeasance and
neglect." Thus was the corporation forever extinguished.
* * * * *
THE TAVERNS OF BOSTON IN YE OLDEN TIME.
BY DAVID M. BALFOUR.
The first tavern in Boston was kept by Samuel Coles. It was opened in
March, 1633, and stood near the south-west corner of Merchants row and
Corn court, with an area in front on Merchants row and also on Fanueil
Hall square, which in latter days have been covered with buildings. It
was destroyed by fire during the early part of the eighteenth century,
and the older portion of the present edifice was erected in 1737, which
has been enlarged on the northerly side. It was towards the close of the
last century known as the "Brazier Inn," and was kept by a widow lady of
that name. It is now known as the "Hancock House," and is kept by a
stalwart Scotchman named Alexander Clarkson. Gov. Vane held a council in
the south-westerly room in the second story with Miantonomoh, the
Narragansett chief. The same room was subsequently occupied by Lafayette
in 1773, and afterwards by Talleyrand in 1798.
The State Arms Tavern was built in 1645, and stood on the south-east
corner of State and Exchange streets. It was occupied as the
custom-house just before the Revolution.
The Star Inn was built in 1645, and stood on the north-east corner of
Hanover and Union streets. It was first kept by Thomas Hawkins, and
afterwards by Andrew Neal, a Scotchman. The Scots' Charitable Society,
of which the landlord was a member, frequently held its meetings there.
The Roebuck Tavern was built in 1650. It stood on the east side of
Merchants row, between Clinton and North streets. It was believed to
have been built by a descendant of Richard Whittington, the Lord Mayor
of London in 1419, who was famed for his love of cats.
The Ship Tavern was built in 1651, and stood on North street, just
beyond the corner of Fleet street. John Vyall kept it in 1663, and it
was at one time called "Noah's Ark." The peace commissioners sent over
by Charles II. held their sessions there. It was demolished in 1866.
The King's Arms Tavern was built in 1654, and stood on the southeast
corner of Washington and Brattle streets, opposite the Samuel Adams
statue.
The Red Lion Tavern stood on the north-west corner of North and Richmond
streets. It was built in 1654, and kept by Nicholas Upsall, a Quaker,
who was persecuted, imprisoned, and banished for his faith. Near this
spot the devastating fire of November 27, 1676, broke out in one
Wakefield's house.
The Blue Anchor Tavern stood on the site of No. 254 Washington street.
It was built in 1664, and kept by George Monck.