 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
![[image of flower]](../../ima/flowXS_04.gif)
First Enlargement, 1840 - 1849 |
|
Governor Seward, in his message to the Legislature of 1840, endorsed this idea of retrenchment, but favored the plan of proceeding with as much energy as the circumstances would allow, saying: "During the severe [financial] pressure we have experienced, the industry of the citizen has been stimulated, and the wages of labor, the prices of the products of the earth, and the value of property have been sustained by expenditures in the prosecution of this [canal] system. The sudden arrest of such expenditures, and the discharge of probably ten thousand laborers, now employed upon the public works, at a time when the circulation of money in other departments of business is so embarrassed as almost to have ceased, would extend throughout the whole community, and with fearful aggravation, the losses and sufferings that as yet have been in a great measure confined to the mercantile class." Referring to the project of enlarging the canal, he said: "The act of 1835 directed the enlargement to be undertaken when the canal board should be of opinion that public interest required the improvement, and its extent was submitted to their discretion. It will not, I hope, be deemed disrespectful to remark that the first step in the great undertaking, the delegation of the legislative power to a board not directly responsible to the people, was a departure from the spirit of the constitution, so unfortunate in its consequences, that it should remain a warning to all future legislatures. The expense of the enlargement is now estimated at $23,402,863; yet the law by which it was authorized passed without any estimate having been submitted to the Legislature, and with scarcely any discussion. If completed on the present scale, the canal will surpass in magnitude every other national work of internal improvement; yet all the responsibilities in reference to the dimensions and cost of the enlargement seem to have been cast off as unworthy the consideration of the Legislature." In reference to the revised estimate for the completion of the Erie enlargement and the Black River and Genesee Valley canals, he continued: "The confidence of the people in the policy of internal improvement, has sustained a severe shock from the discovery that the state was committed by the Legislature to an expenditure of thirty millions of dollars, for the completion of three works alone, upon estimates of the same works rising only to about fifteen millions." The Governor devoted the greater part of his message to an advocacy of the canals, but admitted that "apprehensions prevail that the public credit may become too deeply involved in the prosecution of works of internal improvement." "The policy indicated by public sentiment," he said, "and demanded by the circumstances of the times and the condition of the state, is to retrench the expenditures upon our works of internal improvement and prosecute the system with moderation and economy." In regard to securing funds for public works, he said: "The existing and anticipated revenues of the canals must be, as heretofore, the basis of any new loans which the Legislature shall see fit to authorize, since taxation for purposes of internal improvement deservedly finds no advocate among the people." And he added, in a vein which showed with what confidence the canals were looked to for supplying funds: "Unlike other communities, this state borrows no money for purposes of war or defence, to pay salaries or pensions or the interest or principal of former loans, or even to endow institutions of learning, benevolence or religion. Her income is sufficient for her wants, without taxation; the value of her productive property is double the debt she owes; her surplus income is double the interest she is required to pay; and the revenues derived from her canals, if judiciously managed, will be adequate to every enterprise which the interests of the people shall demand." Whitford Mr. George W. Lay, from Genesee county, of the committee on canals and internal improvements, to which was referred so much of the message as related to canals and internal improvements, agreeing with the Governor, reported: "The present condition of the finances of the country, and the general embarrassment pervading every portion of the United States, in consequence of the deranged and unsettled state of the monetary affairs, has had a tendency alike to alarm the timid, and shake the confidence of the more cautious, in regard to the policy to be pursued in future, as to our system of internal improvements." Continuing, the report says: "The enlargement of the Erie canal to the dimensions fixed and established by the Canal Board has been for the last three years considered as a question definitely settled. It was a subject deliberately examined, thoroughly investigated and discussed, and as solemnly adopted. No trivial, transient, temporary cause now existing, ought, for one moment, to disturb or unsettle a decision so important to the interest of the people, and the prosperity and credit of our State. It is not now to be decided whether the people would have consented to adopt the several projects which have involved the State in the expenditure of the large sums of money which will be required for their completion. Had they foreseen that the estimates upon which these works were based would prove so entirely inadequate; or could they have anticipated so sudden and unexpected a revulsion in everything connected with the business and prosperity of our country, your committee are satisfied that more cautious counsels would have prevailed, and we should not now be called upon to deliberate and decide what measures should be adopted to guard the honor and credit of our State, and protect the right and property of our citizens. . . . The representatives of the people approved of the undertaking, and year after year they have given the most unequivocal demonstrations that their confidence in the utility and value of public improvements, judiciously made and carried on, remains unshaken." In spite of repeated assertions from canal officials that nothing short of an enlargement of the whole canal would afford more than temporary relief, the Assembly again raised the question of abridging the enterprise. In reply to a resolution of March 2, 1840, asking the canal board "whether, in their opinion, any change [could] now be made advantageously to the public interests in the plan, dimensions or manner of execution of the work adopted for the enlargement of the Erie Canal, so as to lessen the expense of that work; and also, how long a period of time [would] be required to complete most advantageously to the public interests, the enlargement of said canal;" the officials answered that, in their opinion, no changes ought to be made in the plan, dimensions and manner of executing the work. The object of the enlargement was to remedy those defects which had been so frequently explained. To change the plan and dimensions, they argued, would be to defeat the very object of the enterprise, namely, to cheapen transportation and to accommodate the increasing traffic. Moreover, to vary the details of existing contracts, especially after much progress had been made in their performance, would be difficult. With regard to the structures thereafter to be put under contract, the board was of the opinion that a cheaper style of masonry could be adopted for bridges, culverts and aqueducts, but such a change would impair their strength and durability. As to the time required to finish the enlargement of the canal, that would depend upon the resources of the State, and the Legislature would be able to determine in each year the amount of work that could be judiciously undertaken. Whitford Digression 1: During the legislative session of 1840, a concurrent resolution was passed,
giving consent to the construction by the Government of the United States of a ship canal around the falls of Niagara,
and requesting the Senators and Representatives of the State in the Congress of the United States to use their best
efforts to secure the passage of a bill for this purpose. The Legislatures of 1840 and 1841 were constrained to adopt a policy of retrenchment. However, they persevered in the construction of public works, but with moderation and economy, trying to guard against a dangerous increase of debt and the possibility of taxation, in order that the whole debt of the State might be kept within such bounds that the interest should not exceed the net revenue from canal tolls, and that any increase in the revenue might be applied to the payment of the debt. During 1840, a loan of $2,000,000 for the Erie, $500,000 for the Genesee Valley and $250,000 for the Black River canal was authorized, and in 1841 another loan of $2,150,000 for the Erie, $550,000 for the Genesee Valley and $300,000 for the Black River. The retrenchment restricted all operations to those necessary to render available the work then in progress and to prevent the interruption of navigation. During 1840, very satisfactory advancement was made, the season being unusually favorable, and the effect of the suspension of public works in neighboring states becoming manifest in the reduced price of almost every kind of labor and material. In 1841, however, the need of funds was more severely felt, not enough being available to complete the work within the time specified in the contracts. The gross receipts of the canals for tolls and rents for the fiscal year 1840 were $1,606,827.45 and the gross charges, exclusive of interest on loans, $586,011.87, leaving a net revenue of $1,020,815.58, a slight falling off from the previous year. The tolls and rents received during the entire season of navigation were $1,775,747.57, showing a gratifying increase of $159,365.55. The canals were navigable from the April 20 to the December 4. The depth of water and consequently the tonnage of boats was increased, thus reducing expense of transportation. The Erie enlargements were prosecuted vigorously so far as permitted by appropriations. The amount expended for this enlargement prior to January 1, 1840, was $4,669,661. The appropriations and canal revenues of that year were $2,869,171, making an aggregate for this work of $7,538,832. In reviewing the year’s work, the Governor said that the experience of the present commissioners justified the belief that the cost of the enlargement would not exceed the corrected estimates of 1839, $23,112,766. There would, therefore, be required to finish the enlargement, $15,573,934. That portion lying between Albany and Rome, said the Governor, might be completed in the spring of 1843; the part extending from Rome to Rochester by the spring of 1845; and the residue, from Rochester to Buffalo, by the spring of 1847. Whitford Again in 1841, Governor Seward advocated the policy of retrenched expenditures and perseverance in the construction of public works, with moderation and economy; also the referring of all unfinished works to competent engineers to determine what portion could be safely delayed; the establishment of what he termed a canal board to prevent erroneous estimates and inconsiderate legislation; and the limiting of all issues of stock so that the interest charges should not exceed the net canal revenues. This policy was not, the Governor said, to be regarded as one of abandonment but of retardation for the sake of economy. The Governor had made these same recommendations in his message of a year earlier. In 1841 there was introduced in the Assembly a measure which was destined to play a large part in the future financing of the canals. One writer said: "The theory that all legislative power is vested in the legislature had for many years been applied in actual legislative practice in a manner not always conducive to public interest, and which did not exhibit a clear appreciation of legislative responsibility. Some persons began to think that the legislature had too much authority, and that it should not have unlimited power to create debts, appropriate money, and impose taxes. This opinion was expressed in concrete form by a proposed constitutional amendment offered in 1841 by Arphaxed Loomis, a member of assembly from Herkimer county, and who was afterward an influential member of the Convention of 1846, which provided that every law creating a debt against the state must specify the object of the indebtedness, must be limited to one object only, which must be specifically stated, and could not take effect until approved by the people at the next general election. The prohibition did not apply to debts created for the purpose of repelling invasion, suppressing insurrection, or defending the state in war. It will be observed that the proposition did not permit the legislature to create indebtedness within the moderate fixed limit to meet emergencies, as provided by the section adopted in 1846, and which has since continued in force. The proposition is significant as an attempt to vest in the people control over all legislation creating state debts. It is known in history as ‘the people’s resolution.’ It is evident that public opinion was not yet ready for such a radical change of policy, for the proposition failed in the assembly by a tie vote of 53 to 53. In 1842 many citizens petitioned the legislature to incorporate the principles of this resolution in appropriate amendments to the Constitution. The resolution was again introduced, but was not passed, and not till 1844 did the legislature go so far as to propose amendments embracing these restrictions on legislative power." Whitford In 1842, the gross amount of tolls was $2,034,882, an increase of $259,135 over those of 1840, or about 14%. At one of the locks there were 30,320 lockages (an average of one every ten and a half minutes), or more than twelve per cent over the preceding year. They stated that "the lockages required to pass the boats had become so numerous and frequent that the channel of the canal had not sufficient capacity to pass the necessary amount of water without great delay and embarrassment; that the difficulty did not consist in any want of capacity in the locks to pass the boats, if sufficient water could be passed through the channel, but in the want of capacity of the channel itself." When the Legislature of 1842 convened, the financial affairs of the State were at a crisis. Governor Seward seems to have considered the situation less serious than it really was. Probably Governor Bouck, after a lapse of a year, was in a position to view the conditions more clearly. Governor Seward’s zeal for the welfare of the canal and his faith in its self-sustaining ability overshadowed his perception of the difficulties that threatened a continuation of work under existing conditions. In his annual message, he said that if we would preserve the inestimable benefits of inland navigation, save the treasury from embarrassment, maintain the public faith, prevent general distress, retain our commercial precedence and political influence, and guard against the dismemberment of our territory, it is necessary to complete the enlargement of the Erie Canal throughout, and with all convenient diligence. Speaking of the canal debt, he said: "Large as this sum is, there is no reason to suppose that it passes our fiscal ability. . . . The debt is large because the enterprise is great. It remains for you to decide whether the indebtedness shall be made larger, or whether you will devise a different system of finance; but if the present system and progress are continued, the entire enterprise will be accomplished in 1846. . . . The canal revenues [may] . . . extinguish the debt incurred in their construction within fifteen years thereafter; after which these great public works will continue to pour into the treasury a river of tribute." In conclusion, he said: "I recommend that all the future revenues from the National Domain shall be pledged as a sinking fund to the extinguishment of the principal of the public debts, . . . If seventeen millions of dollars are yet required to complete our public works, the system I have suggested would in 1855 discharge the whole of our present and future indebtedness. Whitford Viewed in the light of subsequent history, perhaps Governor Seward’s faith was justified and it may be that the better way would have been to have pushed the work to completion, at the expense of increasing the debt, but the State’s best financiers of the time could see no way out of the difficulty except to precipitately suspend operations and order a tax to satisfy the creditors of the State. In describing this period Governor Bouck said: "The Legislature of 1842 convened at a period of great embarrassment in the financial affairs of the State. The treasury was empty; our credit seriously impaired; the State stocks were selling at ruinous sacrifices; temporary loans were nearly at maturity; the time for the quarterly payments of interest on the public debt, amounting to more than $20,000,000, was fast approaching; contractors were pressing for payment, and the progress of the public work virtually suspended. Under such circumstances to have continued large expenditures, or indeed any not demanded by imperious necessity, or good economy in reference to the condition of the public works, and that good faith due to our citizens with whom the State had existing engagements, would in my opinion have been a wanton disregard of public duty." On March 7, 1842, Mr. Michael Hoffman, of Herkimer, from the committee of ways and means, to which was referred so much of Governor Seward’s message as related to State finances, reported to the Assembly. After carefully considering the whole financial situation, the State debt of $26,226,092.80, of which the canal debt was $19,086,466.22, the demands upon the State for the next four years and the means or lack of means for meeting those demands, the committee presented its opinion of "the necessary course and safe policy of the State," recommending that expenditures should cease, that a tax of one mill on the dollar should be levied, that the funds subject to State control should be invested in loans to meet the pressing demands of the canals and that a sinking fund should be established. In speaking of the canals, the report said that public works were already suspended; that their progress was no longer in doubt, for time, circumstances and the reckless course of the past had decided it, and had arrested that progress; that the question then was, whether by a desperate and impracticable effort to revive that progress, the credit of the State should be destroyed utterly; and that new loans for further expenditures could not be made "except on terms at once disgraceful and ruinous to the credit of the State." In its conclusions the committee was supported by the clear and frank opinions of some of the ablest financiers in the state, such as Albert Gallatin, George Newbold, John G. Palmer and C. W. Lawrence, who had given their opinions at the request of the committee. Whitford The Legislature adopted substantially the recommendations of the committee, passing an act that provided for raising a tax of one mill on each dollar of real and personal estate, thus changing a policy which had been in force since 1827. The law further enacted that the whole of the proceeds of this tax in 1842 and one-half of the proceeds in the ensuing years should go to the general fund, the other half being paid to the canal fund, and that the commissioners of the canal fund might borrow certain sums to meet the immediate demands on that fund. That part of the act which dealt the most severe blow to the canals was a clause directing that all further expenditure on the public works then in process of construction should be suspended until the further order of the Legislature, except such work as was necessary to secure navigation or to preserve the parts already done. This law was described in the Convention of 1846 and became known later in executive messages as "the policy of 1842," but among the people at large and in canal and department circles it has been commonly referred to as "the stop law of 1842." In what condition it left the project of enlarging the Erie will be seen by the subsequent reports of canal officials; how it affected the lateral canals may be learned by studying the links dealing with those branches of the system. In view of this action by the Legislature, it is of interest to observe a memorial that was presented to the Assembly on March 26, 1842, by several citizens of Niagara county, wanting the incorporation of a company which should be authorized to complete the Erie enlargement and the Genesee Valley and Black River canals, on certain conditions. Declaring their reason to be a desire to finish so important a work without interruption, to avert a tax and to place the credit of the State upon a firm foundation, they asked the privilege of forming a company, with a capital of $25,000,000, for the purpose of completing these canals by January 1, 1845, seeking in return a portion of the tolls for a limited term of years. Whitford Reviewing the events of the year, Governor William C. Bouck said, in reference to the act of 1842, that the praiseworthy and patriotic exertions of the last Legislature to relieve the State in its financial crisis was worthy of all commendation; and if the policy then adopted had resulted in some injury to individuals, it should be ascribed to necessity, rather than a willingness that any portion of our citizens should suffer detriment. He said that the policy of arresting large expenditures and providing for the prompt payment of the interest and a gradual diminution of the State debt, had exerted a salutary influence in reviving our credit. The question of a direct tax, rendered necessary by the exigency of our affairs, had been clearly approved by the people, but direct taxation, said the Governor, should not be regarded as a permanent measure of finance for the purpose of constructing public works, but as one of a temporary nature, called for by an existing emergency. All future appropriations should be made with reference to as speedy a relinquishment of the tax as public credit and the general welfare of the State would permit. He also observed that very little, if any, of the work had been undertaken for the enlargement of the Erie during 1842 that was not rendered necessary by the worn and decayed condition of the mechanical structures. As to the benefits of the improvement, he said: "Already has the transportation on the canal been much benefited by the use of the new work between Albany and Schenectady, at Phillip’s locks, and at the Little falls. At these points the navigation has been entirely relieved from the detention and delay which had been sensibly felt for several years." The low prices of labor and provisions at the time were considered by the Governor as highly favorable to a successful prosecution of the work, with due regard to the public welfare and great caution as to increasing the public debt, already too large. That the State had the ability eventually to complete all her works, which had been commenced, could not, in his opinion, be questioned. Whitford From the report of the canal commissioners for 1842, it may be noted that numerous structures requiring little to complete them were completed and put in operation during the year. These included several important aqueducts and among them the new stone aqueduct over the Genesee River at Rochester, which was brought into use in April. The bed of the river underneath was lowered to give better passage to the water by the excavation of 39,000 cubic yards of limestone. The aqueduct crosses the river by 7 arches of 52 feet span each, resting on 6 piers and two abutments, each 10 feet thick. The arched portion extends 444 feet, and the whole length, including wing-walls, is 800 feet. The waterway is 45 feet and the parapets are 10 feet thick, making width of trunk, over all, 65 feet. The height of the aqueduct is 27 feet. The structure is built chiefly of gray Onondaga limestone and contains about 17,000 cubic yards of masonry. Whitford In the spring of 1842, the double locks Nos. 3 to 18 (since known as the "sixteens"), together with the five sections of enlarged canal upon which they were situated, were operational. The report of the canal commissioners for 1842 gave full and detailed account of the condition of the whole line as it was left at the cessation of active operations. In the cities of Albany, Schenectady and Rochester there was complaint that the public had been seriously discommoded by the unfinished state of bridges on streets intersected by the canal. The large sum already expended on these structures and the small amount necessary to complete them tended to aggravate the public mind. It will be remembered that at Rome a new location had been selected. When work was suspended in 1842, the contractor had nearly completed parts of this independent line and had commenced excavation over the whole. In the summer of 1841, the exposing of muck and decayed vegetable matter from this excavation had the effect of causing many severe and some fatal cases of fever in the village. Soon after the Legislature adjourned in 1842, the citizens of Rome called the attention of the acting canal commissioner to the fact that disease had resulted from the unfinished state of the work, alleging also that the relative positions of the village and canal and the porous soil had caused the draining of most of the wells, and strenuously urging that the channel should not be left in a condition so perilous to public health. The commissioner felt himself constrained, by the act of 1842, to forbid any further progress being made. Thereupon the citizens made arrangements to complete the section as an independent line in 1843. The commissioners referred the matter to the Legislature. By concurrent resolution in March, 1844, this independent line was authorized to be brought into use by the canal commissioners, if it could be done at less cost than by the old route, repudiating any liability to the State for its construction. Whitford While the canal board, other State officials and the Legislature seem to have been in full sympathy with the policy of the Executive, there was strenuous opposition to the cessation of work by citizens along the canal. Petitions, memorials, legislative resolutions and minority reports were in evidence, urging the continuation of operations. In his message of 1844, Governor Bouck again referred to the conditions which made the act of 1842 necessary. He summed up the situation by saying: "Our necessities required loans, and they could not be made without doing something to revive and invigorate our credit. This was effectually done, not only by arresting the progress of our public works, but by resorting to taxation, and by pledging the avails of the State tax, and the surplus income of the canals, to the public creditors. Such were the objects of the law of 1842, and the wise policy of the measure has been vindicated by its happy results." He advocated placing a constitutional limit upon the public debt in times of peace, and restricting the power of the Legislature to create a debt. This was along the line of the proposed constitutional amendment introduced by Assemblyman Loomis in 1841. Horatio Seymour, then of the Assembly committee on canals, to which was referred so much of the Governor’s message as related to that subject, presented an exhaustive report that strongly condemning the policy of 1838-1842, and making the pledges and guarantees of the act of 1842 the basis of the policy recommended for the future. He showed that, if the sound financial policy that Comptroller Flagg endeavored to establish in 1836 – the policy of imposing a tax to replenish the general fund, so that the revenues of the canal might be used for their improvement – had been followed, the canal debt would not have reached the enormous sum of $23,851,575.66 at the beginning of the year 1844. Although the necessity of the enlargement had been admitted, and the propriety of imposing a tax to enable the canals to enjoy the full benefit of their surplus revenues had been urged, the creation of any debt had been decidedly opposed by the Comptroller and its evils pointed out. The policy of 1838 – of borrowing large amounts – was ruinous to the State and after a period of four years had checked the progress of the enlargement. The very magnitude of the appropriations and the vast amount of work put under contract simultaneously all contributed to increase the expense of every undertaking by the State. To show more fully the evils of this change of policy, the report considered what would have been the condition of the canals, had not this change been made. The amount of tolls for the years 1837 to and including 1843 was $11,843,524.49; the expenses, interest on debt, etc., for the same years amounted to $5,013,288.05; a surplus remained of $6,830,236.44, which would have admitted an annual revenue of more than $1,200,000 to be applied toward the enlargement of the Erie canal, a sum which the committee considered quite as large as could be advantageously and economically applied in any one year. In closing, the report said: "The issue, which has been made between improvements on the one hand and finances on the other, is a false and unnatural one. . . . We may and should have in this State a liberal system of internal improvements, furnishing the elements of and predicated upon a sound financial policy." Whitford Both in 1844 and in 1845, the canal commissioners said that, with the exception of minor improvements made under special laws for the purpose of bringing certain nearly completed sections into use, the unfinished work of the Erie enlargement remained in about the same condition as when work upon it was stopped by the law of 1842, although the loss to the State, as well as to the contractors by disintegration of the unfinished work, was considerable. Speaking of events in 1844, Judge Lincoln says: "The legislature at this session proposed a constitutional amendment confirming the pledges and guaranties of the act ‘to provide for paying the debts and preserving the credit of the state,’ passed in 1842; also an amendment limiting the aggregate debts in any one year to $1,000,000, without a vote of the people, providing for the creation of a sinking fund, and the payment of the debt and interest in eighteen years. These propositions, except the first, became a part of the Constitution . . . . of 1846." Whitford The disconnected lines of railroad running parallel with the canal were already reaching out for further privileges. The argument used for their construction had been the greater rapidity offered for passenger traffic, to which the canal was not adapted and which branch of traffic had never been a paying factor of canal revenue. Through the Legislature they obtained the right to carry freights during the season of the suspension of canal navigation, on payment to the State of canal tolls. This drew a strong remonstrance from those interested in canal traffic and an effort was made in 1845 to obtain its repeal. The committee’s report is of interest as showing the cost of the canals to the people of the State and as foreshadowing the danger of allowing this entering wedge of competition to continue. The law, however, was not repealed and the fears expressed by the petitioners and the committee were soon to be realized. As to the influences which bore upon the question of coming competition between the railroads and the canals, Judge Lincoln, adverting to the granting of the charter to the Mohawk and Hudson Railroad Company in 1826, by the same Legislature which received the felicitations of Governor Clinton on the "auspicious consummation" of the great canal enterprise, says: "The state invited into the field of transportation a rival which was destined to become its master; and then was initiated a competition to which the state was finally compelled to yield." And again he says that "during the ten years beginning with 1826 the legislature granted railroad charters, besides enacting several other laws relating to railroads. It was thus evident that the new motive power had entered on a sharp competition with the state. It did not take long to convince the statesmen of that period that stringent measures would be necessary to limit the extent of the new competition, and efforts were made from time to time, by means of the taxing power, to compel the railroad companies to contribute a portion of their earnings for the purpose of reimbursing the state for losses which the canal traffic must inevitably suffer by the new method of transportation. This new movement found its first expression in the charter granted in 1833 to the Buffalo & Black Rock Railroad Company, which required the company to pay the commissioners of the canal fund the same tolls on goods carried by it, except personal baggage, as might be charged for the same goods transported by the Erie canal, and the tolls were not limited to the season of canal navigation. Two other charters granted in 1834 contained a similar provision. Two charters granted in 1836, one in 1837, one in 1838, and one in 1839, required the payment of tolls only during the season of canal navigation. In 1840 Governor Seward, in his annual message, questioned the wisdom of imposing these tolls on railroads, and suggested that if they were to be continued they should be collected only during the season of canal navigation. In 1844,the charter of the Utica and Schenectady Company was amended so that they might carry goods "during the suspension of canal navigation in each year only" on payment of tolls. Tolls were required from several other railroad companies not previously subject to this tax, covering nearly the whole line from Albany to Buffalo." Other railroad charters followed in 1845 and 1846, imposing tolls, and in 1847 the payment of tolls was required by statute from all the companies along or near the line of the Erie and Oswego canals, nearly all of which were afterwards consolidated into the New York Central Railroad Company. The total amount of tolls paid to the State by the six railroads between Albany and Buffalo for freight transportation from November 29, 1844, to April 15, 1845, during the season of closed navigation was $10,458.24. The commissioners remark that this was about the average of one day’s tolls upon the Erie canal. An investigation was had to ascertain what, if any, further amount was due, but nothing seems to have resulted from it. Whitford In 1845, Governor Silas Wright devoted a large share of his annual message to a discussion of financial conditions, the canals forming the central theme. He advocated the proposed constitutional amendments adopted by the preceding session, but the Legislature of 1845 failed to pass these propositions again, evidently preferring to leave the whole subject to a convention, for an act was passed submitting the question of a constitutional convention to the people at the November election. If approved by them, the convention was to be held in 1846. In the opinion of the Governor, the Legislature overstepped its authority in attempting to enact a law which would provide funds for recommencing a part of the work stopped by the act of 1842. In returning the measure with his veto, the Governor explained that, although he could approve the greater part of the law, there were some provisions that, while appearing to come within the restrictions imposed by the act of suspension, really violated the spirit of that policy. Thus the Governor constrained the Legislature to abide by its former pledge to protect the creditors of the State, the measure not being passed over his veto. In 1846 Governor Wright, in speaking of the results of 1845, advocated the continuance of the financial policy with reference to the canals which had been followed since 1842. He advised the application of the canal revenues to the extinguishment of the debt, and in general expressed a hopeful view of the situation. The canal commissioners reiterated their statement of the preceding year that, with the exception of special work ordered by the Legislature to improve navigation, the condition of the canal improvements remained substantially the same as when work was suspended in 1842, although the loss to the State by disintegration of unfinished work amounted to many thousands of dollars. The canal commissioners asserted in their annual report for 1845 that to complete the system of double locks on the Erie canal between Albany and Syracuse, including the completion of certain other structures necessary to bring the locks into practical use, would require an estimated expenditure of about $295,000. 29 of the 49 locks were entirely completed; 3 more were doubled, but the old locks had not been lengthened; most of the other 17 had been started, and several were all but completed. The Legislature of 1846 asked for a further estimate for the remainder of the line, from Syracuse to Buffalo, and in their reply the commissioners gave the estimated cost of doubling all the locks, except the guard locks at Pendleton, Tonawanda and Black Rock, as $1,599,664. The gates of these guard locks were not generally closed during the season of navigation and it was not supposed that double locks at these places were necessary to give to the canal a capacity equal to that east of Syracuse. Whitford The most important feature of the year 1846 was the Constitutional Convention. The Legislature having failed for several consecutive years to approve several much needed amendments, which had been urged upon their attention by the Executive, that method of relief from existing conditions had been abandoned. Public sentiment had crystallized in the form of petitions from 24 counties of the State to the Legislature of 1844 calling for a convention, and in 1845 the question was submitted to the people, who gave the proposition their approval at the following November election, with but little opposition. The Convention met from July to October, 1846. Their chief object was the reorganization of the State judiciary system and the elimination of feudalism, still prevalent at the Hudson River, but their labors also in relation to the canals of the State, their financial policy and the harmonious blending of the numerous and conflicting interests, opinions and policies. Judge Lincoln’s close study of the canal questions before the Convention of the attitude of the participants therein and the final results renders his opinion of unusual and critical value. He says: "The debate [on canals] took a wide range, covering the whole field of canal history, and involving a discussion of policies, principles, political parties, and individuals." A few delegates, unalterably opposed to the canals, advocated their sale, but many who had been so opposed, changed their opinions upon proof of their great utility to the State. The friends of the uncompleted Genesee Valley and Black River canals, which had already cost the State the sums of $3,794,000 and $1,544,000, respectively, and which could be completed for a comparatively small amount, were able to secure their inclusion among the "constitutional" canals, which could not thereafter be alienated from the State. This was doubtless a long step toward their early completion. The canal article is thus summed up by Judge Lincoln: "The article, as a whole, preserved the credit of the state, pledged its revenues for the redemption of all state obligations, provided for the enlargement of the Erie canal and the completion of the Genesee Valley and Black River canals, authorized direct taxation to meet deficiencies, and prohibited the sale or other disposition of the canals." It clearly defined the limits of future expenditures and also provided for a generous allowance from the canal revenues toward the payment of the general expenses of the State government, without imposing a direct tax upon the property of the people of the State. This confirmed the policy of supporting and maintaining the State government chiefly from the tolls of the Erie canal, as had been done in previous years." The system of State maintenance by indirect taxation had not then attained the prominence it now has. The seventh article of the Constitution provided that from June 1, 1846, there should be set aside out of the revenues of the State canals, after paying the expenses of collections, superintendence and ordinary repairs, the sum of $1,300,000, each year until 1855, and from that time on, the sum of $1,700,000, as a sinking fund to pay the interest and redeem the principal of the canal debt; the sum of $350,000 was allocated for the general fund debt, until the extinguishment of the canal debt, and after that the sum of $1,500,000, as a sinking fund for the general fund debt. After paying these amounts from the surplus revenues of the canals, $200,000 was allotted yearly for defraying State expenses, and the remainder of the revenues might be applied to the completion of the Erie enlargement and the construction of the Genesee Valley and Black River canals. After eight years, the appropriation for the expenses of the State government might be increased, under certain conditions, to $350,000, until the general fund debt should be paid or the work of canal enlargement or construction should be accomplished; after that period, the sum might again be increased to $672,500. The new Constitution, which was framed by the Convention, was by the terms of the governing statute submitted to the people for ratification in November following, and was approved with little opposition. It went into effect January 1, 1847. Whitford Governor John Young, at the opening of the Legislature in 1847, said that the propriety of completing the enlargement of the Erie canal was a matter about which at that time there could scarcely be said to be any diversity of opinion; also that good faith forbade the abandonment of the Genesee Valley and Black River projects. "When we recur to the fact that the revenues of our canals, including the interest on cash revenues, amounted, for the year ending 30th September, 1846, to nearly $2,850,000, with what entire confidence may we not rely upon the income of the canals to protect us against taxation on account of the present State debt, and for its ultimate extinction? I speak now of the revenues to be derived from the canals in their present condition, assuming that the capacity of the Erie canal will not permit of a material augmentation of its business. Secure the trade of the great opening west, by enlarging the Erie canal, and how unimportant is our present indebtedness considered in connection with the revenues that may reasonably be expected." Undoubtedly the fact that the annual tolls from the canals had by this time increased to nearly $3,000,000 was a powerful argument to support the optimistic views of the Governor and the friends of the uncompleted Genesee Valley and Black River canals, as well as those of the Erie enlargement. The Governor also adverted to the charges of extravagant construction and expenses of superintendence on ordinary repairs, and asked the Legislature to consider a change to a system of repairs by dividing into sections and letting the repairs by contract. Such a law, he said, passed the Assembly of 1846, but failed in the Senate. Evidently the Governor did not then realize the objections to this system of repairs by contract, which were so prominent when that system came into vogue later on in the history of the canals. The canal commissioners were evidently preparing to resume operations upon the suspended work of the improvements, in view of the popular trend of sentiment in that direction. They presented revised estimates for the Erie enlargement, both on the plan of one enlarged lock by the side of the old one, and for two enlarged locks, between Albany and Syracuse; the former to cost $334,000 and the latter $639,000. The completion of double enlarged locks at Lockport was to cost $170,000; the enlargement between Syracuse and Rochester was covered by the estimates of the previous year." Whitford The last half of the year 1846 was occupied by a legislative committee in investigations generally as to fraud and extravagance in connection with prior canal construction. In addition to charges of that character relating to the Genesee Valley canal, the committee devoted much of their report to alleged unauthorized work at Black Rock harbor, and to the construction of the flight of locks at Lockport. Their report to the Legislature of 1847 is embodied in a volume of several hundred pages and was published as Assembly Document No. 100, of that year. This bears the distinction of being the first important legislative investigation of the canals. While the committee asserted that plentiful evidence of extravagant methods and more or less corrupt practices was discovered, they refrained, from lack of time, to pursue the subject far enough to formulate specific charges against individuals and only asked that an extra number of copies of their report be printed and circulated. The memorials to the Legislature of the officials most interested, in their own behalf, were also published and appear as Senate Documents Nos. 93, 94 and 109, of that year. Whitford In 1847, work was resumed on the canals of the state, the Legislature having made provision by appropriating funds from the surplus revenues, as provided by the new Constitution. In fact, more was appropriated than was realized from the tolls, and succeeding Legislatures continued this same practice year by year, anticipating a part of the next year’s revenues, till the sum amounted to several hundred thousand dollars. The Legislatures of these years seem to have been continually striving to hasten the work beyond the limitations imposed by the Constitution, until their efforts culminated in 1851 in the temporarily successful but ill-advised scheme of selling the future income as canal revenue certificates. The Legislature of 1847 inaugurated the work with the idea of primarily completing the enlarged locks, making an appropriation of $300,000 for the Erie, and directing that one enlarged lock should be built at each point where a lift lock was necessary, and then, if funds were available, a double set of locks, and after that such other work as seemed best to the canal commissioners. Another act of this year, appropriating $559,000, provided for specified structures, for doubling locks and enlarging a portion of the channel. Other laws of the year granted funds for work on some of the lateral canals. The canal commissioners, in their report for the year 1847, called attention to the scarcity of feedwater for the great number of lockages required by increasing traffic. For the Rome level they advised the use of Cazenovia Lake as a reservoir. They reiterated the statement, which they so often made since the work of enlargement first began, that the proposed doubling of the locks would not of itself increase the capacity of the canal, unless the prism also was enlarged. Whitford It is of interest to note the attitude of the half dozen railroads competing with the canals at this early period in their history. Originally franchised for passenger traffic, they were later permitted to carry freight during the winter only, and that only upon the payment of canal tolls to the State. Already they were in every possible way attempting to evade and withhold the payment of such tolls. In 1847, it became necessary to impose a punitive measure, providing a fine for non-compliance with the law, in the hope that this would bring complete returns. The matter was referred to in the annual reports of the commissioners of the canal fund for 1846 and 1847. From the latter report it appears also that the traffic of the Erie canal was increasing year by year beyond the most sanguine expectations of its friends. Inventories of the boats and craft upon the canal were taken at least three times between 1844 and 1848, by which it was shown that the number of boats had increased from 2,126 in 1843-4 to 4,191 in 1847-8, or 97%. There were in use at this date the following: 62 "packets" of 31 tons average; 621 "line boats" of 68 tons; 736 "lake boats" of 67 tons ; 319 "bull-head boats" of 72 tons ; 1,095 open "scows" of 65 tons; 1,358 decked "scows" of 69 tons; all valued at about $3,000,000. The total tonnage capacity had increased from 117,453 in 1843 to 279,260, or 141%, of which 98% was in 1847, practically after the resumption of the work of enlargement." Whitford Governor Young, in his message of 1848, advised the Legislature that the canals had yielded the enormous revenue of $3,473,484.60 for the previous fiscal year, with expenses of $643,766.08, leaving a surplus of $2,829,718.52. Out of this amount were taken contributions to the various constitutional sinking funds to the amount of $1,850,000, leaving $979,718.52, constitutionally pledged to the Erie enlargement, and the Genesee Valley and Black River canals. This entire balance had been appropriated by the Legislature of 1847. The Mexican war was then in progress, with its expenses, and the President, in the line of economy, had vetoed the river and harbor appropriations for the Great Lakes. This naturally interfered with the free development of lake traffic coming to the canal, and called forth criticism from the Governor, who took an optimistic view of the situation and urged forward the completion of the enlargement. Reviewing the canal policy of the past 12 years, the Governor gave utterance to significant words, which show how the financial situation was viewed so soon after the stringent conditions that induced the stopping of all active operations. After speaking of the necessity which prompted the enlargement of the Erie, he said: "In 1836 the State engaged in the construction of the Black River canal, to connect Lake Ontario and the Erie canal, through a broad region deprived of facilities of access to market; and also the Genesee Valley canal, designed to connect the head waters of the Ohio with the Erie canal, and make its trade tributary to New York. "The estimated cost of all these works, submitted by the proper department, was $15,475,201. The work was prosecuted, with quite inadequate appropriations, till 1838, when, by an elaborate examination of the financial condition of the State, made by a committee of the House of Assembly, it was shown that the works might be prosecuted more vigorously, because, while they were estimated to cost only about fifteen and a half millions, the revenues of the canals alone were such that, if necessary, the State might expend thirty millions of dollars, and receive full reimbursements of that sum from the canals before 1857; or even forty millions, if necessary, and be reimbursed from the same revenues before 1865, without the resort to any tax, or the diversion of any of the other revenues of the State. This calculation was based on an estimate of such a constant increase of revenues from all the canals that in 1849, ten years after the completion of the enlargement, the revenues of the canals would reach three millions of dollars. This estimate, not only in its comprehensive results, but in its minute details, has been subjected to the test of time. The enlargement has not been completed, and the year 1849 has not arrived, but the calculation has been fully verified, and the tolls have already reached to nearly the sum of three and a half millions of dollars. The State adopted, in 1838, the more vigorous policy, based on this calculation, and pursued it until 1842, notwithstanding the discovery was made, in 1839, that the cost of the canals, instead of fifteen and a half million of dollars, as at first estimated, would rise to the sum of thirty millions four hundred and forty-five thousand five hundred and eighty-seven dollars. It is now clearly seen, by the demonstration of time and experience, that if the State had firmly and prudently persevered in that policy to the end, we should now, without having paid any taxes, or incurred any necessity for taxation whatever, have had free navigation from the great lakes, through Jefferson and Lewis and Oneida counties, to Rome; and from the Allegany river, through Allegany, Livingston, and Monroe counties, to the Erie canal and the lakes; and a canal seventy feet wide and seven feet deep, with durable double locks, and firm and capacious aqueducts, from Lake Erie to the Hudson river. Thus our great system of inland navigation would have been completed and perfected; the tolls and cost of transportation on the Erie canal would have been greatly reduced; a considerable portion of the expenditure reimbursed; the remaining cost of these structures would have been discharged in 1857, and the State left in the enjoyment of revenues, even at such reduced rates of tolls, of not less than five millions of dollars per annum. Instead of occupying this high vantage ground, we are now resuming the Genesee Valley canal, which was relinquished after one third of it had been constructed – the Black River canal, suspended when one-half completed, and the enlargement of the Erie canal, abandoned when nearly one-half of the cost of the enterprise had been paid. We resume these works after having paid about half a million of dollars of damages to contractors – after having lost for five years the interest on more than fifteen millions already expended, and incurred unascertained losses from the waste of materials and the dilapidation of unfinished works and structures. But our constituents, with creditable unanimity and enlightened urgency, expect the Legislature will sanction the most energetic efforts that can be made under circumstances so peculiar to complete enterprises which are no longer of merely speculative importance, but have become, through the lapse of time, the advance of the country, and the vigorous rivalry of competitors for the western trade, indispensable to our prosperity and to the maintenance of that high ascendancy hitherto secured to us by the enlightened and energetic policy of our predecessors." Comptroller Flagg followed in much the same vein, saying: "The sum actually expended on the enlargement, exclusive of interest paid on money borrowed, is $12,989,851.76. If the policy of applying the surplus tolls to the enlargement of the Erie canal had been adhered to, the work at the present time would have been much nearer completion than it now is, and the debt of $10,122,000 for that object would not have been incurred. If the surpluses had been expended annually as they accrued, an economical application of the money would have been made, and a much greater amount of work would have been executed with the same amount of money than was practicable, where jobs to the amount of ten or twelve millions of dollars were going on at the same time. It should be understood, however, that the Legislature of 1835, did not adopt the recommendation of the Canal Board, to apply the whole surplus to the enlargement, but appropriated $300,000 of the canal tolls for the support of the government, the deficiency of the revenues of the lateral canals being then chargeable to the General Fund. In 1841, these deficiencies were made a charge on the canal tolls, and the payment to the General Fund was reduced to $200,000." Whitford By the terms of the Constitution of 1846, the office of Surveyor-General, which had existed under the government of the Province of New Netherland, was abolished and the office of State Engineer and Surveyor created, to be chosen at a general election, to hold office for two years, and to which office none but a practical engineer should be elected. The office then created has been continued to the present day. Charles B. Stuart, of Geneva, was the first incumbent, assuming office on January 1, 1848. During the last year, 1848, of Governor Young’s administration, canal matters were comparatively quiescent, after the frequent changes of policy of the previous decade. The improvements upon the Erie canal were, however, "progressing as rapidly as the limited constitutional appropriations would permit," in the language of his successor, Governor Hamilton Fish. The money was expended mainly on bringing into use the double locks yet remaining to be completed and on improvements for the better sheltering of lake craft and the transfer of their cargoes at Buffalo and Black Rock harbors. At Buffalo the work had been suspended for a time on discovering an imperfection in the title of certain lands covered by the improvements and deeded by the city to the State, as will be found in detail in the chapter describing the adjuncts of the Erie canal at Buffalo. The Legislature evidently desired hastening the completion of the line of double locks on the Erie, and sought from the canal commissioners information as to the cost. The latter, however, discouraged this movement, as it would prevent them from making some very desirable changes in alignment and in lock location, which they had planned. They requested authority to relocate certain locks between Syracuse and Rochester and to do the necessary section work to bring them into use, as well as to diminish their number, as required, for economy in maintenance. they also desired temporarily to lengthen locks between Syracuse and Rochester, and to convert Conesus lake into a reservoir for better water supply. Whitford The commissioners, at the request of a Senate resolution of February 27, 1849, explained in detail the dimensions of boats, locks and prism of the enlarged canal, which were first adopted by the commissioners, and the changes which had since been made. In the law authorizing the enlargement, the sizes of prism and locks were left to the canal board. Surveys and estimates were made and in 1836 the board adopted the plan providing for 7 feet depth of water and 70 feet width at surface; the locks were to be one 110 feet long and 18 feet wide in the chamber. The depth of the original canal was four feet, the bottom width, 28 feet, and the surface width, 40 feet; the towing-path was 2 feet above water-level and 10 feet wide; earth slopes were one on one and one-half. The first improved plans provided for a bottom 42 feet in width and the slopes were changed to one on two; the width at top of banks was 81 feet, at water surface 70 feet; at a point 3 feet below surface the width was 58 feet. Upon each side of the prism was what is termed a bench, upon which a slope wall was built, to prevent the wear of the banks by the swell caused by passing boats. This wall was carried 1 foot in perpendicular height above the surface of the water, and the banks were raised with earth 2 feet above the top of the wall. By this plan, there was nothing in the angle of the towpath to prevent the earth above the wall from being carried into the canal by the towing rope. This method of construction prevailed until work was stopped in 1842. Whitford Experience had demonstrated that the towpath had become worn down to the slope wall and the earth moved by the towing rope into the canal. The slope was thus toward the prism and the loose earth was washed in. Even stone curbing was tried and frequently thrown out by the towing rope. By this change, the difference in surface width was 30 feet, while the bottom width was increased only 14 feet. Thus the navigable width for boats drawing 6 feet of water was but 46 feet. A comparison of diagrams will at once show that the capacity of the enlarged canal for boats of 6 feet draft was but little increased over that of the old canal for boats drawing 3½ feet; and that in neither case could 3 loaded boats pass at the same time. Boats of light draft would readily ground on the bench, if nearer than 14 feet to the top of the bank, especially when the water was lowered at night. Frequent slides of the bench occurred, carrying the wall with it. In 1848, therefore, the commissioners adopted a change of plans, in which the top width between banks was 75 feet; at water-surface, 70 feet; at 3 feet below surface, 62½ feet; and at bottom, 52½ feet. A somewhat different section, with steeper banks, was adopted for the eastern division. The towpath slope wall was carried to the top of the bank, with paving in the rear of the top stone, thus passing the towing rope without damage. The towpath sloped so as to drain away from the canal. Three boats drawing 6 feet of water could pass abreast and approach much nearer to the bank. This increased the canal capacity nearly one-third; was easier, safer and required less repairing. Whitford In regard to locks, the commissioners stated that those of the old canal were 90 feet by 15 feet, both at top and bottom, admitting boats 78 feet long by 14 feet 6 inches beam. The enlarged lock was 14 feet 8 inches wide at bottom; the side walls were beveled or sloped to a point 3 feet above the miter-sill; from this point the walls were battered one-half inch to the foot, so that at a point 7 feet 8 inches above the bottom the chamber was 18 feet wide. Of the 110 feet length, 7 feet 9 inches were allowed for the upper miter-sill and bumping timber, reducing the length to 102 feet 3 inches. Of this space, the lower gates, when being opened to pass a boat out, would occupy, when one-fourth opened, 3 feet 8 inches; when one-half opened, 5 feet 6 inches; and when three-fourths opened, 6 feet 5 inches, leaving room for a boat 95 feet 10 inches long; if sharp forward, 96 feet 9 inches, and if of packet form, 98 feet 7 inches. Evidently, the boats best modeled for easy towing and capacity, and calculated to draw within a foot of the bottom, could not be more than 15 feet 6 inches in width, unless the bevel was removed, in which case boats could be 17 feet on bottom. Why this form of lock was adopted, with its beveled and battered walls, the commissioners of 1849 could not tell, but they supposed it was for the purpose of bracing the walls from within. However, they said that an examination of old lock walls, built 25 years before, showed no displacement below the waterline, only failing where frost affected them. The commissioners were then authorizing locks without bevel, and intimated that the "big bevel" would require to be removed at some future period. In the report of Charles A. Olmsted, eastern division engineer in 1850, further reference to the "big bevel" may be found. Changes in boat building had progressed more rapidly than the canal enlargement. Navigators had learned to regard capacity rather than speed in modeling their craft. Mr. Olmsted said that in 1836, at the beginning of the enlargement, the engineers, in examining the effect of the old lock walls upon their foundations, where part had been removed for repairs, found that the bank-pressure at the rear had tipped the tops forward, making a chamber narrower at the top and indenting the foundation plank beneath the face in proportion to the inclination. To secure a broader base and avoid this difficulty, the "big bevel" was adopted. Boats built after the model in use in 1850 were of 17½ feet beam at bottom, and therefore could not draw more than 4 feet of water unless the bevels were removed. On the Black River canal the bevels had been removed at the cost of $50 per lock. It was believed that on the Erie canal they could be removed for about $100 per lock. Whitford During the season of 1849, an epidemic of Asiatic cholera swept over the state, which was fatal to thousands of its people.
This interrupted commercial business to some extent and diminished transportation, yet the receipts from canal tolls
increased nearly $250,000. Cazenovia Lake was brought temporarily into use as a reservoir during
this year. The surveys begun the previous year for the remaining enlargements were continued.
In order to pass sufficient
water east to Montezuma, the commissioners made a special examination by Engineer Henry Tracy. From
his report the commissioners adopted an increased size of prism 100 feet in width at water surface by 8
feet deep, at the ridge west of Lockport.
By an act passed April 3, 1848, the office of canal auditor had been created, and by this action the commissioners were
enabled to give more of their attention to other matters and less to details of accounts, as well as to introduce a more
perfect system of accountability. The act became effective at the beginning of the following fiscal year. |
 |
|
|
|
|