Further Improvements, 1870 - 1876

By legislative enactments, various methods of steam propulsion were authorized during 1870.   The law granted to Addison M. Farwell and associates the exclusive right to introduce and operate, for towing purposes, a system of chains or cables, laid upon the bottom of the canal.   This was known as the European or Belgian System that and had been successfully operated on various foreign canals.   But at the close of the season, the commissioners asserted that no action seemed to have been taken by the beneficiaries of these concessions.   The law authorized Norman W. Kingsley and Charles H. Gardner to construct and operate, under their patents, a system of chains, cables or rails suspended over the canal.   Another form of detached boat-scale (Reim’s), for ascertaining the weight of boats, was authorized.   All of these improvements were to be under the supervision of the canal board.   Some experiments were made in steam propulsion: the canal boat Geo. S. Barnard, capacity 200 tons, propelled by steam, making an experimental trip up the Hudson River and through the Erie Canal to Schenectady and return.   The results of the trial proved that steam could be applied to ordinary canal boats to propel them 3 miles an hour, or twice the speed of the loaded boats propelled by horses without any injurious action on the canal banks.   The State Engineer thought that the direct solution of the question of the practicability and economy of navigating the canals by steam power could be more speedily and satisfactorily ascertained by placing the matter in the hands of the canal board.   In his annual report for 1870, he reiterated his recommendation of the previous year in asking that an appropriation of not less than $20,000 be made and that authority be given the canal board to have such experiments and examinations made as would determine the best methods of applying steam to canal navigation. Heretofore the experiments had been entirely at the risk and expense of the inventors, most of whom had not been fully acquainted with the principles involved in the navigation of contracted or artificial channels.   This request brought a response from the next Legislature, which offered a prize that finally resulted in the introduction of successful steam propulsion on the canals. ^Whitford

The law authorized the deepening and improving of the canal at Black Rock Harbor in Buffalo to the extent of $80,000.   The surface width from Buffalo to the Buffalo and Niagara Falls Railroad Bridge was 150 feet.   From there to below Ferry Street there was only a restricted channel of 70 feet, with a broad channel between that and the Niagara River to the lower end of the harbor, where several large mills were located, using water from the harbor.   Without great care, water was liable to be used also directly from the canal.   Moreover, most of the water required to maintain the canal from Buffalo east to Montezuma, nearly 150 miles, passed through this 70-foot channel, thus creating a strong current, which the loaded, westbound boats could stem only with difficulty.   It was proposed to set back the dividing bank, giving a channel 150 feet wide, at an expense of $350,000.   Tumble gates, invented by George Heath, were put into locks Nos. 44 and 45, and Mr. Heath was also authorized to expend $4,000 in experiments for using the feedwater passed through the culvert between the locks by appliances for operating the lower gates and for aiding boats to draw in and out in shorter time.   The experiment was made at lock No. 37 at Little Falls.   Speaking of the tumble gates, the State Engineer said that, as the capacity of a canal was measured by its facilities for lockage and as the new gates, after having been tested for the past two or three years, had proved so successful, their general introduction for the Erie canal was desirable.   These experiments marked the beginning of the machinery that was later installed and has been used so successfully ever since.   The power used had formerly gone to waste.   Navigation opened May 10, 1870, and closed December 8, remaining open 213 days.   The tons of total movement on the canals for the season were 6,173,769, of the value of $231,836,176.   The revenues were $3,107,138.90 and the expenses were given as $1,945,635.92. The outstanding canal debt, on September 30, was $12,564,780 and the sinking fund balances to meet it were $2,149,884.61.   The canal auditor called attention to the recent prevailing practice of providing for all extraordinary expenditures in a single bill, instead of separate local bills, as had been the custom previously.   The insertion of items of appropriation for local purposes secured the mutual support of interested legislators and facilitated its passage.   During that year, such appropriations for improvements, new work and extraordinary repairs had amounted to $4,168,151.21, a sum nearly equal to the entire cost of the original Erie canal. ^Whitford

In his message covering this period, the Governor said that there had been a falling off of revenue since the preceding season, which, however, was not serious.   It was not all due to low tolls.   The competitive freights were also low. New York produced 6,000,000 bushels of wheat and consumed 21,000,000 bushels, besides corn, oats, rye and barley.   A part of the policy of 1870 had been to put the canals in thorough order.   After many years of neglect they had become obstructed and dilapidated.   It was to be hoped that in the following year revenues would be larger and expenditures less.   The average round trip had been shortened four days.   Experiments in steam navigation, he thought, should be promoted.   At the close of the season, there were still remaining some 36 miles of old wall benches in the eastern division, the Jordan, Syracuse and long levels still contained some uncompleted sections, and between Lyons and Newark only about 1/3 of bench removals had been accomplished.   It was alleged that wherever they had been removed, at least 20% had been added to the efficiency of the canal.   By the State Engineer, the division engineers, forwarders, boatmen and others whose interest brought them into contact with the canal, the change in method of repair under the new system, resulting in comparative freedom from breaks and other interruptions to navigation, was considered a marked improvement, after a season’s trial of the new plan.   The auditor, however, deprecated the increased cost of maintenance and repairs.   In view of the neglected condition of the canals under the old system, however, it may be said that additional expense for a few years was to be expected. ^Whitford

The question of accelerated speed, and consequently cheaper transportation, was at this period given a large share of attention by those interested in the success of the canals.   Steam voyages had been made, and with success, but so far at a cost which was prohibitive in comparison with the expense of animal towage.   The Belgian System, the trial of which had been authorized by legislative concession in 1870, was exhibited on a section of the canal between Albany and West Troy near the close of the season of 1871, but its results were not considered entirely satisfactory.   The suggestions of the State Engineer in regard to placing in the hands of canal officials the subject of introducing steam, as a motor power, upon the principal canals of the State, were to a certain extent carried out by legislative enactment.   The law provided for a commission of 10 eminent and practical men to test and examine inventions and devices submitted to them for propulsion other than by animal power.   George B. McClellan, Horatio Seymour, Erastus C. Prosser, David Dow, George Geddes, Van R. Richmond, Willis S. Nelson, George W. Chapman, William W. Wright and John D. Fay were named as such commissioners.   The tests and experiments were to continue throughout 1871 and also 1872, if necessary.   They were to be conducted at the expense of the parties offering devices and were to be made with boats carrying 200 tons of cargo and making an average speed of at least 3 miles per hour.   Because the Belgian System had been otherwise provided for, that system and all other systems of bank propulsion were excluded.   The commissioners were empowered, at their discretion, to make certificates of comparative degrees of perfection as to methods employed and results attained.   Certificate number one, if the only one issued, on presentation to the Comptroller, would draw a prize of $50,000.   If two certificates were issued, they would draw, respectively, $35,000 and $15,000.   If three were issued, then $30,000, $15,000 and $5,000, respectively.   The commissioners might also grant a further certificate of successful operation and probable general adoption, which certificate would draw a further sum of $50,000, if only one was issued.   If more, then the division was to be in the same proportions as in the case of the first-named certificates.   The commissioners organized at Albany in July, 1871, by electing Hon. Van R. Richmond as chairman and David M. Greene of Troy was appointed engineer of the commission.   Horatio Seymour having declined to serve, the Governor appointed Daniel Crouse of Utica to fill the vacancy.   To aid inventors, the commission by resolution informed them that the chief objective was to establish the economy of steam or other motor power as compared with animal power and that former experiments had not failed because of the injury done to banks by reason of the swell from boats or wheels, the commissioners judging that no inherent difficulty was to be expected from that source, with boats carrying 200 tons of cargo at 3 miles an hour.   The steamer A. H. H. Dawson was the only competing boat that made its appearance on the canal during the season of 1871.   While an average speed of 3 miles per hour was not made, that speed was made at various points.   Other systems of propulsion were also to be given a trial.   James Richmond and William S. Farnell were authorized to introduce the American System of cable towage, under the usual noncompetitive conditions.   The Kingsley-Gardner concession was given 3 years to introduce their system, or forfeit their rights and privileges. ^Whitford

The Assembly asked on February 6, 1871, as to the necessity and expediency of enlarging certain locks on the western division to accommodate boats of 200 feet in length by 25 feet in width.   The canal board promptly reported adversely to such enlargement, upon the ground that the canal then had twice the capacity to meet the demands of transportation; that if the locks on the western division were enlarged, the locks on the entire canal must be similarly enlarged; and that such enlargement would cost $50,000,000.   Under an Assembly resolution of February 10, the canal board reported that 7 different kinds of boat scales had been under consideration.   They recommended "Reim’s Champion Scales" for use if desired, but did not advise the discontinuance of the use of weigh locks at that time.   The machinery at lock No. 37 proved quite successful.   The feed water was applied to a waterwheel located in a well at the head of the lock.   It readily furnished power to open and close both the tumble gate and the lower miter gates and to draw boats into and out of the lock with marked ease and rapidity.   By the ordinary method with miter gates, Mr. Heath computed that it would require 29,631 cubic feet of water for a lockage using the tumble gate and the other devices, 10,815 cubic feet, or a saving of about 2/3 of the water, and in lock tenders’ wages for a season at one lock, the saving was estimated to be $450. ^Whitford

In the month of August, a scarcity of water was felt from the increased traffic and consequent loss of water by lockage.   Oriskany Creek was temporarily diverted as a feeder and by October was in use, furnishing some 4,500 cubic feet per minute.   The diversion cost about $32,000.   Later the work was permanently appropriated by the State.   The feeder was 53 miles long; the dam, 214 feet long and 8 feet high; the prism, 26 feet at waterline, 14 feet at bottom and 4 feet deep.   Complaints of a scarcity of water were heard at other points along the canal. ^Whitford

Governor Hoffman, speaking of the year 1871, said that the surplus revenues of the canal during that year were nearly double those of the previous year, while the expenditures were materially reduced.   To the sinking fund for the payment of the canal debt was carried $981,588.68.   The Comptroller’s report, covering the same period, strongly advocated still lower tolls.   By the canal auditor’s financial statement, the receipts for the fiscal year were $2,842,549.94 and the expenses, $1,658,617.25, the interest-bearing canal debt being then reduced to $11,966,420.   The tons of total movement were 6,467,888, valued at $238,767,691.   Navigation opened April 24 and closed December 1, 220 days.   194 boats were registered.   About 36 miles of old wall benches still remained on the eastern division at the close of the season. ^Whitford

So much complaint had been made of the amount and manner of expenditures upon the canals with adverse criticism of their management that on March 11, 1872, the canal board by formal resolution requested the Legislature to make a full and searching investigation into the whole question of canal management and finances, both past and present for the purpose of stopping extravagances and adopting an economical policy for their future management. ^Whitford

The Legislature passed a law providing for a Constitutional Commission of 32 members to consider and propose such amendments to the State Constitution at the legislative session of 1873, as they should consider necessary.   This was rendered necessary by the failure of the people to ratify the Constitution provided by the Convention of 1867. ^Whitford

By reason of low water in Lake Erie at times during the season of 1872, boats were compelled to go by way of Niagara River to Tonawanda, taking the canal there.   This was not only a dangerous practice, but resulted in a substantial loss of tolls between Buffalo and Tonawanda.   The extensive improvements then in progress at Black Rock harbor were expected to obviate this difficulty. ^Whitford

At the close of the season, the State Engineer reported the following condition of old wall benches: in the eastern division, under contract for removal, towpath side, 27.87 miles, and berm (a raised bank or path, especially the bank of a canal opposite the towpath side), 31.23 miles; not under contract, towpath side, 8.83 miles, berm side, 5.06 miles; in the middle division, towpath side, 6.85 miles, berm side, 13.01 miles, this being mostly on the troublesome Jordan Level, which was charged with 4.75 miles on the towpath side and 11 miles on the berm side.   The western division had but 0.91 mile, which was under contract.   The canals were open for navigation only 202 days, or from May 13 to December 1, 1872.   The tons of total movement for the year were 6,673,370, of the value of $220,913,321, which was the maximum tonnage of the canals thus far throughout their existence.   The revenues for the fiscal year were $3,078,247.96, and the payments for ordinary repairs and collections were $1,875,676.61.   The canal debt, on September 30, amounted to. $11,396,680, and the aggregate sinking funds for its payment were $1,449,978.15, leaving a balance of $9,946,701.85 unprovided for.   During this season, the Belgian or European System of cable towage made further progress, the company having laid a single cable from Buffalo to Lockport.   More elaborate and extended tests of steam towage were also made in the contest for the prize offered by the State.   12 steamers were placed upon the canal during the season, but only 3 succeeded in making the 3 round trips between New York and Buffalo, required by the rules of the commission.   The first, the William Baxter, left West Troy on her first trip west, on August 29, 1872, and ended her 3rd round trip at the same point on November 14.   Her mean speed was 3.29 miles per hour and the average coal consumption 31.04 pounds per boat-mile.   The second steamer was the William Newman, – mean speed, 2.727 miles per hour.   The third steamer was the Port Byron, – mean speed, 2.685 miles per hour.   The late date at which the preliminary trial trips were completed prevented the commission from carrying out the further tests that were considered necessary in order to warrant a decision as to whether any of the boats had fully complied with the requirements of the law.   The commission, therefore, at a meeting in February, 1873, resolved to ask the Legislature for a continuance of the offer of rewards, and an extension of 1 year in the time for competition.   The second annual report of the commission on steam towage was made to the Legislature on February 24, 1873. ^Whitford

The Constitutional Commission presented its report to the Legislature on March 25, 1873.   The committee on canals presented various amendments to Articles 5 and 7 of the existing Constitution.   A new system of management was proposed: the abolition of the office of canal commissioner and the substitution of a superintendent of public works with enlarged powers and direct responsibility.   Extra compensation to contractors, which had been the cause of much criticism, was forbidden by another amendment, and by another the constitutional prohibition to sell or dispose of certain canals was removed, the exceptions being the Erie, Oswego, Champlain and Cayuga and Seneca Canals, and the expenditures for collections, superintendence, ordinary and extraordinary repairs on these canals were limited to their gross receipts for the previous year.   The proposed amendments relating to the canal commissioners and superintendent of public works were approved by the Legislature of 1873, but were omitted in 1874.   A few years later, however, these recommendations found their way into the Constitution.   The other amendments were approved by the Legislature of 1873 and 1874 and were adopted by the people at the November election, 1874.   By some legislative method, which subsequent inquiry seemingly failed to disclose, the Black River Canal was included in the concurrent resolutions of 1873, among those to be retained as "constitutional canals."   The Attorney General thought that as it appeared there without any evidence to impeach the correctness of the resolution.   It stood on the same footing as the Erie, Oswego and Champlain canals.   In 1874, however, the proposed amendment was approved by the Legislature without the insertion of the Black River Canal, and went before the people in that form. ^Whitford

The Legislature of 1873 also assented to the proposed action of the canal board in reducing the toll rates, not to exceed 50% below the toll sheet of 1852, with liberty to change the same at the discretion of the board, during the ensuing season of navigation.   A committee of the United States Senate was in session during the year, considering the subject of "Transportation Routes to the Seaboard."   By concurrent resolution, a joint committee of 5 Senators and 9 Assemblymen was appointed to represent the interests of New York State before this committee. ^Whitford

Navigation upon the canals opened May 15, 1873, the opening being retarded to enable the completion of certain repairs.   The official closing was on December 5, a period of 205, which was still further shortened, as navigation practically ceased after November 20, over a thousand boats being frozen in, very few of which reached tidewater.   The season was one of the shortest on record, yet the receipts for tolls were nearly as much as in the preceding year.   The tons of total movement for the season were 6,364,782, valued at $191,715,500.   The number of boats registered, old and new, was 433.   The receipts from tolls for the season were $2,976,718. The revenues for the fiscal year ending September 30, were $3,082,452.04, of which toll receipts represented $3,021,603.67 and the expenses for ordinary repairs and collections were $1,459,165.24, leaving a surplus of $1,623,286.80.   The total canal debt at this date was $11,352,880, with sinking fund balances of $1,530,241.21, leaving a net indebtedness of $10,256,655.54, which includes sinking fund deficiency of $434,016.75. ^Whitford

The increasing disposition to build boats of the largest size that would pass in the lock chambers resulted in an increased detention in lockages, by reason of the inability of boats of such dimensions to force their way quickly through the restricted passage.   This was especially true in the case of heavily laden boats locking upward to the east, as at locks Nos. 47, 48 and 49.   The experiment of widening the lock chamber to 20 feet had been tried at these locks with the natural result that the time of lockage had been reduced by about ½. Commissioner R. W. Stroud, of the middle division, therefore urged that the two remaining Erie locks having an upward lift eastward should be similarly widened and tumble gates introduced, the estimate cost of which improvement he placed at $70,000. ^Whitford

Prior to 1862, it had been the legislative custom to provide for new work, including enlargement, not connected with ordinary repairs, by special appropriations for specific locations and purposes.   The law, which declared the first improvement completed, compelled the discontinuance of this plan, and thereafter work of this character had been termed extraordinary repairs.   In reply to certain criticisms, which had appeared in the newspapers, the State Engineer explained the authority of various officials over the funds for this work, saying that for the law directing the work the Legislature was responsible and for the approval of plans and estimates the State Engineer was accountable, and with their adoption the canal board was charged; also that the division and resident engineers determined the character of the work, and the canal commissioners were responsible only for issuing drafts in conformity with their estimates.   The funds for ordinary repairs, however, were entirely under the control of the canal commissioners. ^Whitford

The Legislature having extended the term of the steam towage commissioners for another year, 6 boats were brought to their attention during 1873, and public trial was held between Syracuse and Utica, of which due notice was given.   Of the performances of these boats, that of the steamer William Baxter was conspicuous, not only for the speed attained, but for the extraordinarily low rate of coal consumed – only 14.82 pounds per mile.   By reason of certain difficulties in complying with the stringent provisions of the law authorizing the experiments and tests, the commissioners finally submitted the whole matter of awards to the Legislature of 1874, with a draft of a proposed law that would do justice to the several competitors.   The Legislature, accordingly, directed the Comptroller to pay to William Baxter, upon the presentation of the certificate of the State Engineer, the sum of $35,000, if he placed upon the canal during 1874 7 steamboats in all respects like his boat the City of New York; to David P. Dobbins, in like manner, the sum of $15,000, if he placed upon the canal 3 boats like his William Newman, and to Theodore Davis the sum of $5,000, if he placed upon the canal 1 boat like his Central City. ^Whitford

The Otisco Lake reservoir was completed during 1872, and its full capacity realized during the season of navigation of 1873.   This was an important addition to the water supply of the Jordan Level, the water being taken into the canal through the Nine Mile Creek feeder.   The capacity of this reservoir was 784,000,000 cubic feet.   Few extraordinary repairs were made on the canal during the year because of the lack of funds.   Four locks on the western division were doubled.   The commissioner of the middle division reported that portions of the Erie were greatly damaged by devastating floods. ^Whitford

During the session of 1874, various legislative inquiries were made concerning existing conditions on the canals.   In reply to one of these questions, made January 7, the State Engineer furnished an estimate of the remaining wall benches and the cost to remove them.   For the eastern division, there were upon the towpath side 33.63 miles and upon the berm side 32.13 miles.   These would cost $645,948 to remove.   Of these, there were 11.94 miles of towpath and 3.62 miles of berm benches under contract for removal.   Deducting these there still remained 21.69 miles of towpath and 28.51 of berm benches, for the removal of which $485,140 would be required.   In the middle division there also remained 1.29 miles of towpath and 14.38 miles of berm benches, the estimate for which was $226,000.   The total mileage to be removed was computed at 65.87 and its cost of removal, $711,140.   Replying on February 4, to an inquiry as to the cost and revenues of feeders and dams, the canal auditor made the remarkable statement that the canal feeders and dams, from 1846 to date, had cost the State $1,600,599.81, and that the amount received for water rentals for this period of about 27 years was only $59,421.60, or a little over $2,000 a year. ^Whitford

The Legislature of 1874 did not approve the constitutional amendments relating to the abolition of the office of canal commissioner and the appointment of a superintendent of public works, but the amendments providing that no extra compensation should be allowed to any contractor, and forever prohibiting the disposal of the Erie, Champlain, Oswego and Cayuga and Seneca canals, and permitting the sale of the others, by inference, and also limiting the expenditures for repairs in any one year to the gross receipts for the previous year, were approved and, at the following November election, were ratified by the people by a substantial majority, to become effective on January 1, 1875. ^Whitford

The State Engineer at about this time called attention to the fact that as yet no really practical tests had been made to ascertain the tractive force required for moving boats under various conditions of width and depth of prism, of draft, model and tonnage of boats, either singly or in trains, and of direction and velocity of current.   A small appropriation of $2,500 was suggested to cover the expense of such contemplated tests. ^Whitford

During the season of 1874, the Baxter Steam Canal Boat Company was organized, and operated 7 boats, becoming the first organized company of its kind upon the canals.   It was considered that had the offer of the State to inventors been couched in broader terms, with fewer restrictions, the results would have been better and perhaps have opened the way to using the several thousand horse drawn boats then in existence.   The New York Steam Towage Company had also during 1872 laid a single cable from Buffalo to Lockport and with two special steamers had been experimenting for two years.   As a result, it was claimed that a single tow, carrying 1,400 tons of freight, was drawn by this system at a rate of 3 miles per hour, at as low a cost as any 200-ton steamboat. ^Whitford

Under existing laws it had been the practice for the State Engineer to prepare the plans for work, after which the canal board authorized the letting of contracts, and subsequent proceedings were entirely within the control of the commissioners.   The State Engineer, while subjected to frequent criticisms, as in the case of unbalanced bids, had no voice in the matter.   In his annual report for 1874, State Engineer Sweet asserted that the law should be so changed that the incumbent of that office should be associated with, and his approval should be an essential element in, the awarding of contracts.   In his opinion, another objectionable feature of existing laws should be remedied.   The requirement that the appointment of subordinate engineers should be subject to the approval of the commissioner in charge of the work on which they were employed, frequently led to the selection of objectionable and incompetent men.   It was urged that such appointments be made by the Engineer’s department, which was obliged to bear the responsibility for their conduct. ^Whitford

In referring to the capacity of the prism at this time, the State Engineer explained that, although the Erie canal was supposed to have been completed years before and the Legislature had, in 1862, so declared it, it had been known for a long time, especially by persons engaged in canal navigation, that the enlarged prism was not throughout its entire length 70 feet wide at its surface and 7 feet deep.   The deficiency in width, amounting in some places to 10 or 12 feet, he could not account for.   The deficiency in depth was explained by the fact that the gradual accumulation, which had been going on since the completion of the enlargement, had not been wholly removed in many places, owing to lack of time and limited means for the purpose.   There existed a need of adequate data concerning the alleged deficiencies in depth and width.   It was true that an approximate estimate had been given to the Legislature in February preceding, but an accurate survey of the whole line, with this end in view, was urgently needed, and an appropriation of $10,000 was asked for to cover the expense. ^Whitford

Navigation upon the canals opened on May 5 and closed December 5, in 1874.   At the close of the fiscal year, the aggregate canal debt was $10,230,430, while the sinking fund balances were $1,561,018.99, leaving a net indebtedness of $8,669,411.01.   The tolls for the fiscal year were $2,921,721.74, a falling off of $99,881.93.   The gross receipts were $2,947,972.91, a decrease of $134,479.13.   The expenses for the year were $1,469,466.83, an increase of $10,301.59.   The total tonnage for the navigable season of 1874 was 5,804,588, valued at $196,674,322, on which the tolls were $2,637,071.   The completion of the double lock at Lyons during the winter of 1874-5 opened the entire length of the Erie Canal to double locks.   About 7 miles of wall benches were removed on the eastern division during the season, according to the report of the canal commissioner. ^Whitford

With New York City recently freed from the grasp of William M. Tweed, the "boss" of a corrupt "ring" or "machine," the people of the state were becoming aroused by the repeated cries for general reform, including changes in canal management, to which the same term of "ring" was applied.   There appeared to no settled policy of canal management at this time.   Both systems – by contract and by commissioners – had been tried and found wanting.   It was a case of "many men of many minds."   Advocates of either system were not slow to bitterly criticise and condemn the other.   The year 1875 is still regarded by those familiar with the time, as one of the most memorable in the history of the canals.   Samuel J. Tilden, fresh from his overthrow of Tweed, had been swept into the Governor’s chair by the popular demand for reform, and early in his administration, by a special message to the Legislature, he instituted examinations into canal affairs.   In his message at the opening of the Legislature he confined his attention chiefly to matters of canal policy – such questions as concerned its material needs, rather than the investigation of alleged frauds.   In this message he clearly and ably set forth his views on the canal situation.   He considered the Erie canal and its connecting waterways as the "National pass of commerce" between the western states and the Atlantic coast, saying: "The Erie canal remains an important and valuable instrument of transport, not only by its direct services, but by its regulating power in competition with other methods of transportation."   Continuing, he said that New York had maintained a broad and liberal policy toward her canals.   They should not be considered solely as revenue producers, but rather should be managed for the needs of the commerce of the whole people.   Cheaper tolls primarily benefited the western producer.   The price of grain was fixed, even for home consumption, by the condition of the foreign markets.   Natural conditions would prevent the traffic of the canal and that of lake and ocean from becoming homogeneous, and would prescribe the style of boat best fitted to its particular channel, demanding transshipment at terminals to vessels adapted to each method of transportation.   The project so often urged within the previous ten years – of enlarging the locks and other structures, without a proportionate enlargement of the waterway, was condemned by Mr. Tilden.   He said: "That plan exhibits a singular union of injurious costliness and fatal parsimony.   It is founded on the fallacy that the use of a large boat, without reference to its adaption to the waterway in which it is to move, would be economical."   In the Governor’s opinion, to perfect the existing canal was the best policy.   This done, its capacity was considered to be ample for the traffic of the time.   The tolls then charged should be retained, as improvement funds.   No rash changes should be made in altering gates or lengthening chambers of locks.   The lateral canals were a heavy expense and for that reason the income of the Erie should be increased by improvements before discarding the existing income by further reduction of tolls.   "What the Erie canal wants," said the Governor, "is more water in the prism."   He recommended that its depth throughout be made 7 feet, an honest 7 feet, as he expressed it.   As the first step toward this end, he advised that provision be made to enable the State Engineer to obtain an accurate survey of the Erie, including "cros-sections as often as every 4 rods of its length."   This recommendation agreed with the suggestion of the State Engineer.   The Legislature did not respond to this request till the following year.   The Governor also suggested a special commission to examine and advise as to which of the laterals it would be best to dispose of, and which should be retained as feeders, but the Legislature saw fit to charge the State Engineer and the canal commissioners with this duty. ^Whitford

On February 9, 1875, the Chamber of Commerce of New York City presented formal resolutions to the Senate as to the vital necessity of bottoming out the trunk canal to the depth of 7 feet, as recommended in the Governor’s message, and asking for a survey for this purpose to be made with the least possible delay.   The resolutions further stated that any ulterior questions of enlargement of structures might safely be postponed until the required depth was obtained.   Honest and economical management should be secured, and the Governor’s suggestions concerning disposition of laterals were approved.   In both branches of the Legislature, active inquiries were made of various state officials concerning canal propositions then under discussion.   The quality of material used in doubling the locks on the western division having been criticised, the State Engineer made an examination by request of the Senate and reported favorably upon their condition. A Senate subcommittee on canals reported on terminal charges upon traffic at Buffalo and New York.   The report showed excessive terminal charges in New York for handling grain amounting to nearly 5¢ per bushel; it declared that dock facilities in New York were insufficient, which damaged canal interests; and that by a combination of insurance companies excessive rates were charged.   Terminal rates for handling grain at Buffalo were found to be less than at New York, amounting to about 1¾¢ per bushel, plus the scalper’s charges, making the total charge at Buffalo nearly 3¢ per bushel.   The testimony showed that grain could be efficiently handled with profit at Buffalo for ¼¢ per bushel.   The Buffalo Elevator Association was termed a trust and severely scored, and it was alleged that these combined grain charges of 8¢ per bushel added to 3¢ canal toll were seriously crippling the commerce of the canals.   On March 19, the canal board submitted a revised toll sheet for the coming season, making sweeping reductions, among them 1/3rd the tolls on grain and about the same on lumber.   This reduction met with legislative approval.   The Legislature also passed the constitutional amendment changing the control of the canals from commissioner to a Superintendent of Public Works, and recommended the same to the Legislature of 1876, thus forwarding the proposal of the Constitutional Commission of 1872, which had failed to come before the people with the other amendments in 1874, because the Legislature of that year had failed to approve the measure. ^Whitford

On March 19, Governor Tilden submitted to the Legislature a special message relating to the canals, in response, to numerous demands of forwarders, boatmen and others for a further reduction in tolls.   The message, however, did not deal exclusively with the question of tolls.   It strongly urged increased economy in expenditures; it called attention to the prevalent methods of letting contracts, and to the evil of unbalanced bids and "continued" contracts, and advocated stricter methods of enforcing official accountability; it recommended a return to the plan of awarding contracts through the canal board; it deprecated the practice of the canal commissioners in ceasing to act as a board and in administering the affairs of the canal, each in his separate division, as if he were an independent authority; it suggested the creation of an inspector of public works, and also of a paymaster, accountable to the auditor; and it advocated an enlarged control of the State Engineer over his subordinates.   As the Governor said later, it opened discussion on the question of rashness, waste and corruption.   In response to this message, by concurrent resolution, a joint legislative committee was created, of which three were appointed by the President of the Senate and three by the Speaker of the Assembly, to investigate and examine into the question of fraud or collusion between state officers and canal contractors.   The committee was composed of the following: Dan H. Cole, James M. Booth, John C. Jacobs, James Faulkner, Jr., Richard M. Sherman, Frederick W. Seward.   On April 5, they organized, appointing Hon. Henry Smith and Rufus W. Peckham as counsel, and their report was dated May 5, although by another enactment their time was subsequently extended through the legislative recess.   Their chief criticism was against the practice of awarding contracts on unbalanced bids and of continuing in force original contracts, rather than reletting the work, after an insufficient appropriation had been exhausted and an additional amount obtained.   The recommendations of the committee were as follows: the Legislature should make no further appropriations for "continuing" contracts; the engineering force should all be appointed by and under one responsible head; the commissioners should be forbidden to accept unbalanced bids; every contract should be for a definite amount of material and labor, and then should be closed; any continuance should be by a new letting; the canal board should be prohibited from transferring funds from one purpose to another; the engineer’s estimates and quantity sheets should not be disclosed to bidders until the contract was executed, only a list of kinds of work and required materials being exhibited (a most remarkable recommendation from the standpoint of engineer or contractor); the deposits from bidders should not be so excessive as to prohibit smaller contractors from participating; and finally, legislative changes should be in the direction of increased responsibility, there being no common head of canal officers – no common interest in the joint performance of their respective duties.   It was found that nearly $400,000 had been expended on the removal of wall benches in the eastern division alone, and the work was about 2/3 completed.   For this the division engineers were severely criticised. ^Whitford

But this was not the only investigation of canal matters.   A commission of four persons was authorized by concurrent resolution of the Senate and Assembly on March 26 and 31, respectively, to be appointed by the Governor, with the approval of the Senate, to especially examine into the matters embraced within the scope of the Governor’s special message of March 19.   These commissioners were directed to cover at least the period from 1868 to 1875, inclusive, and they might go back further if they so desired.   They were instructed to report to the Governor and to the Legislature at its next session the testimony and their recommendations, and to furnish a copy of the testimony to the Attorney General.   The commissioners appointed under this resolution were John Bigelow, Daniel Magone, Jr., Alexander E. Orr and John D. Van Buren, Jr.   Evidently the Governor considered that the exigencies of the occasion demanded this unusual procedure of having an investigating commission appointed by the Governor, especially with a joint legislative committee named for the same purpose.   Before considering the work of this commission, it is well to observe the trend of public sentiment at this time – how, from almost a frenzy of enthusiasm for all forms of canal building in the early days of their existence the feeling had variously fluctuated until now it had reached the point of extreme disaffection for all canals.   In his special message the Governor well said: "Unfortunately the abuses now practiced against our canals and their commerce are exciting strong prejudices against the great public works rather than against the wrong-doers and the wrong-doing which tend to destroy them."   It is well to remember another circumstance in connection with this investigation – that politics played a conspicuous part.   Indeed, it is known that the Speaker of the Assembly at that time, Jeremiah McGuire, of the same political affiliations as the Governor, openly charged Mr. Tilden with prosecuting this investigation in order to gain political capital.   This condition will be found more or less true of all canal investigations.   The temporarily dominant party has been so persistently assailed for its management of canal affairs, that the truth in these attacks can scarcely be separated from the falsehood. ^Whitford

The report of this commission was presented to the Legislature on February 14, 1876, several partial reports having been rendered to the Governor during the previous summer and autumn.   Upon the testimony given before the commission, several canal officials were indicted, the canal auditor was suspended from office for unlawfully dealing in canal certificates, a member of the legislature was charged with bribery and legal proceedings were urged against certain contractors.   The commissioners mercilessly censured the whole system of canal management, saying: "Our investigation was not long in revealing the fact that the canals have not been managed upon the principles which would govern any man in the administration of his private estate.   The interests of the public have been systematically disregarded.   The precautions with which the Legislature has attempted to defend this property from peculation and fraud, and secure for it faithful and efficient service, have been deliberately and persistently disregarded; while the responsibility of its agents has been so divided and distributed, as to leave the State comparatively remediless, and at the mercy of the predatory classes, who have been, if they do not continue to be, a formidable political power."   The report severely criticised the method of letting contracts, declaring that the requirement of large guarantee funds had discouraged bidders of small means and confined the work almost exclusively to large capitalists; that the acceptance of unbalanced bids had a tendency to preclude honest bidders and that the failure to enforce the forfeiture of deposits had worked to the injury of the State.   The discrepancies between quantities in preliminary and final estimates were censured, as were the long established customs of computing excavation for walls and structures at a uniform slope of one on one and of allowing a price for embankment of material obtained from excavation, when it was necessarily handled twice, even if it had not been moved the specified two hundred feet.   The report deprecated the use of vertical instead of slope walls, declaring that the latter would have been usually as serviceable and much cheaper.   It also charged that the specifications, especially in masonry work, had not been enforced, greatly to the loss of the State.   The facilities offered to contractors for legislative relief were condemned.   If the canal board had failed to cancel a contract which proved disadvantageous to the contractor, he had often appealed to the Legislature, which usually had allowed awards to cover his losses. ^Whitford

Navigation opened May 18, 1875, and was closed by ice on November 30, the Hudson River being closed on November 29.   A communication from Mr. William Baxter, concerning the progress of steam canal towing in 1875, developed the fact that with the short season of navigation between May 18 and November 25, and the interruptions caused by two breaks of 6 and 16 days, respectively, the navigable period was reduced to 169 days.   The results given by the steamboats were considered satisfactory, but better port facilities and a thorough bottoming out were asked for.   The communication was embodied in the State Engineer’s report for the year.   According to this report, about 12 miles of wall benches were removed on the eastern division during the year, leaving 51.51 miles remaining. ^Whitford

The tons of total movement during the year were 4,859,858, valued at $145,008,575.   The aggregate canal debt, September 30, was $10,086,660, and the aggregate sinking funds, $1,448,345.51, leaving a balance unprovided for of $8,638,314.49.   The rate of interest on the canal debt was then 6%.   The canal receipts for the fiscal year were $1,925,995.63.   The expenditures for ordinary repairs and collections were $1,414,456.94.   The net revenues of the canals for this year were less than for any year since 1828, and the gross receipts were lighter than for any year since 1836.   These unfavorable financial results may be attributed, in a measure, to the general depression in business, but chiefly to the ruinous competition which prevailed between the rival railroad trunk lines. ^Whitford

It was with difficulty that the canal commissioner of the eastern division had been able to open the canal for navigation in the spring.   The Legislature of 1874, had made a large appropriation for removing wall benches, but the funds would not be available until taxes were paid in 1875.   In order to gain a year’s time, contracts were let and the work was being executed during the winter of 1874-5, the contractors receiving certificates in lieu of money.   The publication of the Governor’s canal message, the agitation of the press upon the subject, the wholesale imputation of fraud against all canal work, and especially against certificates, so impaired public confidence that the contractors were unable to dispose of their certificates to banks and capitalists, and they stopped work, after several miles of old walls had been torn out.   This condition continued until within four or five weeks of the advertised time for opening the canals, when finally, after exhausting other resources, the Legislature was appealed to and furnished relief by making some of the repair fund applicable.   By extraordinary efforts the work was then pushed to completion in time for the opening. ^Whitford

In connection with supplying the western division with water from Lake Erie, the report of the engineer of that division presents some interesting historical facts.   The surveys for the first improvement of Black Rock Harbor were made in 1821, and it was constructed by uniting Bird and Squaw Islands by a pier or mole extending from the latter island to the main shore below the entrance of the canal to the basin.   In effect, this appropriated the deep channel of the river upon the American side for canal purposes, and caused the water in the canal to stand at nearly the level of the lake and 5 feet above the river level opposite. This head of water was too tempting a business proposition to be allowed to remain as it was and in 1825 the commissioners leased to Henry Kennedy for mill purposes the surplus water at the lower end of Black Rock basin for $3,100 annually.   This suicidal policy, during the very year of the completion of the canal, lost to the State what has since cost millions in the attempt to recover.   As it became necessary to use greater quantities of water serious difficulties arose from the velocity of the current and often from the want of water.   This condition was aggravated by the mills, for it was estimated that they used more water on their wheels than would supply the canal to Montezuma, 150 miles away.   The question of building an independent channel through this harbor was then discussed, but it was finally decided to construct a partition bank from the head of the harbor to Ferry Street Island, and a new wall and towpath, with 70 feet width of water.   It was later proposed to set back this wall and widen and deepen the prism, and upon these improvements a large sum of money had been expended. ^Whitford

In view of the revelations of extravagance and misconduct, as shown by the reports of the investigating commission, the Governor’s annual message in 1876 recommended retrenchment in canal management, a thorough scrutiny of all expenditures, and some disposition of the unprofitable laterals.   It also commended the action of the Legislature in approving the constitutional amendment to create a Superintendent of Public Works.   After the report of the investigating commission had been presented on February 15, the Governor sent a special message to the Senate, with several recommendations, among them being the following: that existing contracts for extraordinary repairs be canceled and appropriations for them be repealed; that $400,000 be provided for closing these contracts, upon the certificate of the State Engineer; that $400,000 be appropriated for improving the channel of the Erie to a full 7 feet and $15,000 for a survey to determine the real condition of the canal; that further funds be provided to gradually increase the depth to 7½ or 8 feet; and that the canal board be given full powers of investigation and redress in canal matters.   In commenting upon his plan for deepening the canal, the Governor said: "It would benefit the boatmen and carriers more than 1¢ a bushel remission of tolls.   It would be of more real utility to navigation than 5 or 10 times its cost expended in the average manner of so-called improvements on the public works.   But it is too simple, too practically useful, to enlist the imagination of projectors . . . and of engineers."  

In reply to a Senate resolution asking for information and opinions concerning this proposition from the Governor, the canal commissioners strongly opposed the project, saying that, without a corresponding change in structures, the gain derived from a deepened channel would be so small as to result in no substantial benefit to navigation nor any cheapening of transportation, and that the cost of adapting locks, aqueducts and culverts to the increased depth would be so large as to exclude such changes from serious consideration.   The commissioners estimated the cost of deepening the prism, without altering structures, at $4,500,000, but feared lest the proposed excavations might imperil existing walls. ^Whitford

The Legislature of 1876 earnestly undertook the work of reform, as recommended by the Governor, both in canal affairs and otherwise.   The constitutional amendment to abolish the office of canal commissioner and to create a Superintendent of Public Works to be appointed by the Governor, with the consent of the Senate, was again approved, and at the following November election was adopted by the people by a large majority.   The canal board was given the powers of investigation and redress in matters pertaining to the canals, including those of the past.   The State Engineer was empowered to appoint the regular engineers of his department, and to employ additional engineers, when necessary, with the consent of the canal board, and all of these men were required to take the constitutional oath of office.   Despite the adverse report of the canal commissioners, an appropriation of $400,000 was made for deepening the Erie and Oswego canals to a full 7 feet, and another of $15,000 for a survey to ascertain the condition of the Erie.   This act also directed the canal board to terminate such of the contracts for extraordinary repairs as in its opinion were not necessary, providing $400,000 to settle these contracts and repealing all former appropriations for this class of work that were still in force.   The report of the State Engineer and the canal commissioners, relative to the disposition to be made of the lateral canals, not having proved satisfactory, the Legislature appointed a special commission for this purpose.   Improvement in steam propulsion was encouraged by an act authorizing the setting apart of a portion of the canal in which Hugh Stevenson and Enos W. Pelonbet might experiment with their systems. ^Whitford

Thus the Governor’s reforms were carried into effect.   There followed a policy of retrenchment and of little activity in improvements, which was not broken until necessity compelled the lengthening of locks in an attempt to enable the canal to cope with increasing competition.   Concerning the general results of this period, the verdict of the standard historians of the state may be safely taken.   It is a matter of history that, though comparatively few convictions resulted from many arrests, the power of the "ring" was broken and reformation followed.   Tilden’s reform spirit left its mark upon the public conscience, throughout municipality, state and nation.   The responsibility of officials was viewed differently and there was a more rigid accountability of public expenditures. ^Whitford

Navigation opened May 4, 1876, and closed December 1   . The tons of total movement diminished to 4,172,129, valued at $113,090,379.   The canal commissioners reported it a season of excellent navigation at reduced expenses for maintenance, but of continued business depression.   During the year a careful survey of the Erie Canal was made by the State Engineer, in accordance with the Governor’s recommendation and the resulting law.   This was the survey which, 18 years later, although obviously of too remote a period to be of much use, had to be depended upon as the chief source of information for making the first estimate for what was later known as the "Nine-million improvement," when the Constitutional Convention of 1894 required such an estimate from the State Engineer within twelve days.   The canal commissioners, in 1876, reported that this survey showed that there was no need to use the money which had been appropriated to give the canal a depth of 7 feet.   Mr. John D. Van Buren, Jr., the State Engineer, taking office in January, 1876, had been a member of the investigating commission, and he brought to his department the spirit of reform, instituting a mathematical examination, which the engineer were required to pass.   That, of course, was before the day of State civil service regulations. ^Whitford

The history of the Erie canal for the next few years presents more of economic than of engineering interest.   The people of the state had become aroused to the necessity of a careful and economical control of canal expenditures and the administration of Governor Robinson stood pledged to the exercise of rigid economy in the expenses of maintenance.   Moreover, a constitutional provision limited the annual expenditures to the gross amount received during the previous year.   The Erie alone of all the canals during 1876 produced a surplus over expenditures, the amount being $508,953.14.   Owing to short crops, low rates and competition of tidewater railways, the year was one of unprecedented disaster to boating interests.   Every branch of business had been depressed.   The receipts from tolls as well as the expenses of maintenance were less than the year before.   Of about 6,000 boats on the canal system many were laid up, others ran at a loss and none at a profit.   It was urged by the Governor that only reform and retrenchment could save the canals of the state from utter ruin.   Yet the tolls must be sufficient to pay the expenses of operation and repair. ^Whitford