i      ^            K~
ci,~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
P'?'.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~a
hi.^      ^    ^
^      w j*   ^ 
rds       -ta *
cc..^.       ^~~~~~~t-~
car       *           fe
^-                    Fc~,
v'**     4gU^'
-<                   ^t
~-1" —i~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~*' 








THE ERIE CANAL:
ITS
ORIGIN,
ITS SUCCESS, AND ITS NECESSITY.
A PAPER
READ BEFORE THE BUFFALO HISTORICAL CLUB
FEBRUARY 3,.I868,
BY MERWIN S. HAWLEY, Es2.
PRINTED FOR PRIVATE CIRCULATION.




JOSEI'P  WARREN & Co., PRINTERS,
Courier Office, Buffalo, N. Y.




OuR GRAND ERIE CANAL has been a prolific theme
for statesmen and politicians, for orators and essayists,
during more than half a century. The visions of wealth
and greatness that would result frop its construction, to
our common country, and especially to our own State,
which filled the mind of him who first published to the
world the project of such a canal, have been eagerly
adopted by those who became its advocates. The politician at the caucus, the legislator in the Capitol, and
those occupying seats of authority, have been alike emulous of being regarded as its special champions.
Considerations of political economy, and of political
and commercial supremacy, in all their various phases,
have been urged and repeated in favor of its original'onstruction, and of its subsequent enlargement; and
of yet further enlarging and perfecting its capacity, as
the increase of its business and the wealth of the country —foretold by its projector-have demonstrated to be
necessary.
It was not so from the beginning.
The first promulgation of the project met with such
derision that its author was deemed a visionary enthusiast, and the publication of the project was nearly
strangled at its birth. The first successful movement in
regard to it in the Legislature was treated in much the
stame manner; a few hundred dollars being appropriated




4
to defray the expenses of exploring, by the affirmative
votes of some who declared that they voted for the
small amount, because it could not do any harm and
might be productive of some good. And when, after
long delay and protracted opposition, and much of that
opposition from the city which has derived a large share
of its benefits, the Act of April 15th, 1817, was passed
by the Legislature, committing the State to the canal
policy, the whole scheme narrowly escaped destruction
in the Council of Revision.
Nor did opposition to the project disappear immediately after the State entered upon the momentous work;
but the progress made by the judicious efforts of those
charged with its management, and the far-seeing policy
and self-denying labors of the chief executive officer of
the State, gradually brought the scheme into general
favor, and the story of the beginning, progress and
completion of the canal, will perpetuate honors to the
memory of CLINTON, SO long as the waters of Erie shall
flow into that channel of commerce.
The celebration of the completion of the middle section, on the 4th of July, 1820, three years from the day
of its commencement, was the culminating point where
opposition ceased or was disarmed; and the resources
of a united people were thenceforth devoted to the
accomplishment of an enterprise which was expected
greatly to increase the wealth and the happiness of all
the people, and secure to the State, in all coming time,
a high and controling position in the trade and commerce of the North American continent.
But previous to this a disposition had been manifested to learn about the "Origin of the Canal," and



5
who was its first projector, who had first proclaimed to
the world the feasibility of such a project, had pointed
out the route, had estimated tlhe expense, had foretold
the great and varied benefits that would result from it,
and had urged the importance of it upon the attention
of the public.
Colonel ROBERT TRdUP, in the Geneva Gazetle of
December 15, I819, writes:
"The successful progress of the Erie Canal and the immense benefits likely to arise from its completion, have lately exc:ted a laudable curiosity to know who was the projector of the caraL policy in
this State. A just regard to the reputation of the State, seems to
require that the projector should be favored with some decisive proof
of public gratitude."
Colonel Troup, when writing in December, 1819, maintained with much confidence that Elkanah Watson was
the projector; but as Mr. Watson, in I820, disclaimed
being the projector of the Erie Canal, claiming only
that he projected the lake canal policy which produced
the Act of March, 1792, chartering the "Western Inland
Lock Navigation Company," Col. Troup, in his letter
of February 8. 1822, addressed to the Hon. Brockholst
Livingston, to quote his own language: "Abstains from
bestowing on Mr. Watson any credit for that sublime
effort of human intellect which projected the canal route
to lake Erie," and he adds, "As this sublime effort is
pregnant with incalculable benefits to the State, I bow
with sentiments of profound respect and gratitude, to
the man whose genius had the capacity to conceive and
usher into public notice, the design of a work so stupendous."
Various claims were put forth to the honor of being
the first to "suggest" such a project, or being the first




who had "talked of it "-and for the honor of being its
first "projector"-and it is not surprising, perhaps, that
some claims of this character were made, which are not
well supported by the acts and promulgations of the
person in whose behalf the claim is made.
Many distinguished names are entitled to lasting honors for the services they rendered during the incipient
movements and the whole progress of construction, and
to none more, than to those who so successfully performed the essential part of epgineers.
In seeking for the facts on which the claim of being
the "first projector" is to be sustained, (if sustained at
all,) we necessarily look for what was said, or written, or
done by the person; and his writirigs, or other promul-.gations, made known or recorded at the time of their
occurrence, must be conclusive. And if any doubt
exist in regard to his meaning, or as to what was in the
mind of the person when making any particular expression, his subsequent writings on the same subject afford
the best explanations of which they are susceptible.
Especially will such evidences have a controling influence in our minds when seeking for the truth, over
statements made from memory only, after the decease of
the person, and twenty or fifty years after the incident
is stated to have occurred.
The Paper which I had the honor to read before this
Society on the 2:st February, i866, briefly notes-or
indicates the principal facts necessary V: a solution of
the question: Who was the first projector of the canal?
Showing that in the year 1724 Cadwallader Colden suggested that there might be found a continuous inland
water communication between the (Oswego river and
Lake Erie; that in I797 Gen. Philip Schuyler and an




7
English engineer, William Weston  had "talked of" a
water communication through the State to Lake Erie,
keeping the interior, if it were practicable, which they
doubted; showing also the facts and circumstances
relied upon to sustain the claim made by friends of
Gouverneur Morris, since his decease, that he was the
"first projector;" also showing briefly the writings of
Jesse Hawley on the subject; and the action of the
Legislature on the motion of Joshua Forman.
The Papers written by JESSE HAWLEY, and signed
"Hercules," the first of which was'-ublished in Pittsburg, Penn., in the newspaper called the Commonwealth,
on the I4th January, I807, and subsequently in the Geresee AIfesseng'er, at Canandaigua, in this State, beginning
in October, I807, and extending to:urteen numberssome of which newspapers are now in the archives of
this Society through the courtesy of the Hon. T. T.
Flagler, of Lockport, are the first publications of the project for this canal.
Those Papers, after pointing out the feasibility of a
canal on nearly the identical ling now occupied by it,
recommending its size to be one hundred feet wide and
ten feet deep, estimating its cost with great accuracy, and
in many ways urging public attention to its importance
and the propriety of an actual survey, proceed to point
out other important improvements in other States, some
of which have since' been constructed; among which
are -the Ohio Canal, the Wabash Canal, the St. Marie
Canal, to open navigation into Lake Superior, the Fox
and Wisconsin rivers connection, the Illinois and Michigan Canal, the Canal around the falls of the Ohio
river; etc.




Mr. Hawley originally "intended       to deposit those
papers in the archives of the office of the Secretary of
State, in order to preserve the evidences of his claim to
the first writings on the subject," but they are, by his will,
deposited with the Historical Society of the city of New
York.    He writes, "I claim    the original and the first
publication of the overland route of the Erie Canal."
Again Mr. Hawley writes in the Daily Democrat
newspaper of Rochester, October 6, I835, as follows:
"To THE PUBLIC.-The purport f the following letters will sufficiently explain their object. While their originals are intended to be
preserved, they are published at the present time to establish their
authenticity hereafter, and also to give the present age an opportunity to rectify any supposed errors therein. In order to aid their
circulation in this paper, extra copies will be sent to many public
men and personal friends."
The letters which followed contained various evidences of the correctness of his claim, and closed in
the Daily Democrat of October Io, I8'35, with the following:
"To THE PUBLIC.-I now reassert my claim to the original conception of the project of the overland route of the Erie Canal, * * *
and also state that the imputations to the contrary, communicated to
Dr. Hosack by some of his correspondents, were altogether inaccurate,
and must have originated-in forgetfulness or misapprehension. I do
not wish to be understood as saying that I was the first or the only
person who conceived the idea. I merely mean to say that with me
it was a native thought, without having been suggested or communicated to me by any person, and that I was the first person who wrote
and published the project."
Colonel Troup, in his letter to Brockholst Livingston,
of February 8, 1822, already referred to, says,        "In
October, I807, Jesse Hawley commenced the publication in the Ontario Messenger, of a series of essays in




favor of opening a canal to Lake Erie, which was the
first public annunciation of the present system."
Governor DEWITT CLINTON writes, " The first hint on
this subject which I have seen in print was suggested
by Jesse Hawley. * * *    On the 27th of October,
I807, he commenced a series of essays on internal navigation, over the signature of'Hercules,' in the Ontario
Aessenger, which extended to fourteen numbers." And
Governor Clinton said to Judge Benjamin Wright, "the
essays of'Hercules,' in the Ontario M essenger, were the
first suggestions in a tangible shape which he could find
of the origin of the canal."
ELKANAH WATSON, writing in 18I9, says, "I have not
been able to trace any measure, public or private, tending towards this great enterprise, (the Erie Canal,) till
the 27th of October, 1807, when an anonymous publication under the signature of'Hercules' appeared in the
Genesee Miessenger, which is attributed to Jesse Hawley,
Esq. These valuable essays continued through a course
of fourteen weekly numbers, to March 2, I808. They
are evidently original, and they display'deep research
and views vastly extended-indeed, they may be pronounced prophetic, in striking out nearly the track of
the route of the canal which has since been adopted."
Since the reading of the Paper before this Society on
the, 2Ist February, 866, hereinbefore alluded to, exceptions to the claims of Jesse Hawley have been made
by George Geddes, Esq., who, in a Paper read before
this Society, on the 4th of February, 1867, claims that
Gouverneur Morris \vas the projector of the canal; and
so confident is Mr. Geddes in the correctness of his
theory, that he seems to think it presumptuous for any
one to "claim the honor of first proposing the interior
2




10
route, without having received the suggestion as coming
from Mr. Morris;" and that objecting to the claim made
in behalf of Mr. Morris is "caviling." He also says
that "recently very groundless claims to this honor have
been revived."
The theory of Mr. GEDDES is founded upon a letter
from Governor Morgan Lewis to Hermanus Bleecker,
dated'May 26th, 1828; the letter from Mr. Morris to
John Parish, dated December 2oth, 800o; the letter
from Simeon DeWitt to William Darby, dated February
25th, 1822; the letter of James Geddes to William
Darby, dated February 22d, 1822; and the fact as stated,
that " Mr. Morris was a projector, he had seen canals in
Europe," etc.
The propositions of Mr. Geddes are ingeniously supported,'and with as much consistency, apparently, as
could be exercised, while omitting all reference to Mr.
Morris's writings, except the one letter already alluded
to; and he builds up the following quadrangular column,
that Mr. Morris told Mr. DeWitt of the project in I803;
that DeWitt told it to James Geddes in I804; that Mr.
Geddes told it to Jesse Hawley in I8o6, or as Mr.
Geddes afterwards states, in 1805; and says that James
Geddes was so impressed with the statement he had
heard from Mr. DeWVitt, that he formed public opinion,
until in I807, Joshua Forman was elected to the Assembly as a "canal man;" and to support the claim, that Mr.
Forman's election as a "canal man" was based on the
idea of a direct overland canal to Lake Erie, Mr. Geddes
quotes from the recollections of Judge Strong, now 85
years old, of what occurred in I804; from a letter written by Thomas Wheeler in 1846, giving some of his
recollections of occurrences in 1807; and some state'



ments by Mr. Gillchres, giving his recollections of I806.
All these vague statements are from recollections of
scenes many years previous, and but faint allusion to an
overland canal is made in any of them.
The promulgations of Mr. MORRIS do not sustain the
*claim that he was the projector of the Erie Canal. A
correct interpretation of what he said and wrote fails
to show that he had any conception of such a project
until the year I8io, when, as one of the seven commissioners appointed that year to make explorations, in a
consultation of all the commissioners, at Rome, July 12,
I8IO, Mr. Morris expressed himself in favor of an overland canal. Mr. Geddes says, after relating this incident, "Though Mr. Morris had been considering the
subject of a water communication from the great lakes
to the Hudson ever since I777, (thirty-three years,) and
had visited the canals of Europe, he had not arrived at any
true conception of what the face of the country would
permit of being done." And Mr. -Morris writes to
Mr. Henry Latrobe, April 25th, I8IO, advising of the
appointment of those seven commissioners, and adds,
"I hope the business may be effected in a proper manner,
- * * * but I fear our minds are not yet enlarged
to the size of so great an object."
The commissioners had with them in that tour of exploration the essays of Mr. Hawley, signed "Hercules,"
a long letter from Joseph Ellicott, giving information of
the country between the Niagara and Genesee rivers,
with an explanatory map, and the report by James
Geddes of his surveys in I808, made in pursuance of
the motion of Judge Forman; and it is probable that the
thirty-three years consideration of the subject by Mr.
Morris enabled him to perceive the value of those




12
documents, and thus prompted him to put himself on
record in favor of an overland canal to Lake Erie.
An expression of Governor SEWARD, in the introduction to his Natural History of New York, is quoted by
Mr. Geddes and others, in support of the claim in behalf
of Mr. Morris; but as Governor Seward takes a quotation from Mr. Morris's letter to John Parish, in December, I8oo, as the ground of his opinion, hle adds no
strength to the claim beyond that afforded by the letter.
CADWALLADER D. COLDEN,kin his memoirs of the canal,
gives a brief and impartial statement of the views deduced from Mr. Morris's letter to John Parish, and from
Mr. DeWitt's letter to William Darby, and comes to the
conclusion that Mr. Morris contemplated only the route
by Lake Ontario, with a ship canal around Niagara Falls,
as provided by the Act of I798, incorporating the
Niagara Company.
Under an "errata" on a fly-leaf at the end of the volume, Mr. Colden says, "It is due to Mr. Morris to
mention hat si2nce te the eioir was written, the author
has ascertained that when, in the year I8oo, Mr. Morris
suggested the practicability of enabling ships to sail
from London into Lake Erie; and when, in I803, he
spoke of tapping Lake Erie,' he undoubtedly contemplated a water communication directly from'that lake to
the Hudson."
Mr. Colden probably received this information from
some person interested and the kindness of his heart,
prompting him to honor the memory of his departed
friend, he affixed the above paragraph to a fly-leaf, apparently after a portion of the edition had been printed.
He could not have derived the information from Mr.
Morris's writings, as we shall presently see.




13
DR. HOSACK, who investigated this subject more thoroughly than any other writer, gives it as his opinion that
itis "questionable how far Mr. Morris, (notwithstanding
his conversation with Simeon DeWitt in I803,) had,
prior to ISIo, when he was appointed one of the Canal
Commissioiers, seriously contemplated any other communication between the Hudson and Lake Erie, than
the route by Oswego and Lake Ontario."
Dr. Hosack expresses some disappointment that the
family of his old friend Mr. Morris did not furnish him,
on his application, the "documents"' to sustain the views
that had been imputed to him.
Mr. Morris was a man of rare qualities. tie held
several important and honorable public positions, and
his liberal education derived improvement from his extensive travels. He is said to have been a."projector."
He had the superintendence of a large tobacco business
in Virginia, in connection with Robert Morris (who was
not a family relative); and some dealings with French
traders, which he had "projected," gave him occasion to
go to France in December, i788, to institute legal proceedings there to enforce payments.
While in France, Mr. Morris projected a sale of
twenty thousand barrels of flour, to the French government, which resulted in loss. He also projected, in
connection with some capitalists in Holland, extensive
speculations in the United States securities, which the
French Minister of Finance was desirous to realize upon,
as the troublesome times of the French Revolution began
to be felt. A very important part of his business, also,
was to find purchasers for some wild lands belonging to
himself, Robert Morris and others, lying mostly in the
State of New York, in the county of St. Lawrence.




14
Mr. Morris and M. Leray de Chaumont having realized by loans from M, Necker, thirty-eight thousand dollars on their bonds secured by lands in this country,
which investment M. Necker seems to have made for the
benefit of his daughter Madame de Stael, she prevailed
upon her father to appropriate twenty thousand dollars
for the purchase of lands in America for herself direct;
in pursuance of which a purchase of twenty-three thousand acres was made in St. Lawrence county, New York,
under the direction of M. decker, by M. Leray, with
the advice of Mr. Morris, who was consulted as being a
friend to the parties, and, owning lands in the same
vicinity, was well acquainted with their value.
Mr. Morris returned from Europe in December, I798.
In the summer of i 800 he made the journey which he
so glowingly described in his letter to John Parish, dated
at the city of Washington, December 20, I800, which
has already been alluded to. In that letter he says,
"In July last I left home to visit some property of my
own, and some which was confided to my care by others,
in the northern part of the State of New York. I went
by way of Albany and the lakes George and Champlain,
to Montreal."  From Montreal "we took boat and went
up the St. Lawrence to Lake Ontario, and along the
south side of that lake to Niagara; thence by land to
Lake Erie, and so back again." "After one days' repose at Niagara, we went to view the Falls;' * *
from the Falls towards Lake Erie, along the bank of
Niagara river, * * * we proceed to Fort Erie." "Here
* X * I saw riding at anchor nine vessels, the least of
them one hundred tons. * * * Does it not seem like
magic?  * * *    Hundreds of large ships will in no
distant period bound on the billows of those inland seas.




At this point commences a navigation of more than a
thousand miles. Shall I lead your astonishment to the
verge of incredulity? I will. Know, then, that onetenth of the expense borne by Britain in the last campaign, would enable ships to sail from London, through
Hudson's river, into Lake Erie." Writing of taxes and
finance, in the same letter, Mr. Morris says, "In I760
there was not, perhaps, ten thousand dollars of specie in
this country. At present, the banks in Philadelphia
alone have above ten millions to dispose of, beyond the
demand."
We will hope that those banks are relatively as rich
in specie funds at the present time.
The expressions here quoted, particularly that relating
to ships sailing through Hudson river into Lake Erie;
have been treated as the sure foundation of a claim to
his being the projector of the Erie Canal; although he
was well aware of the existence and operations of the
Western Inland Lock Navigation Company, for improving the navigation between Schenectady and Oswego
by the Mohawk river and Oneida lake and river, and he
was, of course, well advised of the legislative action two
years previously, incorporating the " Niagara Company,"
for the purpose of constructing a ship canal around
Niagara Falls.
The truth is, as we will soon see, that Mr. Morris
could not have had in his mind, when writing those
expressions, any other route to Lake Erie than the one
by Lake Ontario and Niagara river; for his own subsequent writings on the subject, which are clear and unambiguous, are the best explanations of any ambiguity
in the expressions just quoted.




1 6
But first, let us look at one or two other incidents that
are claimed as furnishing supporting evidence to the
theory that Mr. Morris meant the Erie Canal.
The first is of an earlier date, which is a Ietter written
by Governor Morgan Lewis to Hermanus Bleecker,
dated May 26, 1828, written in reply to a letter from
Mr. Bleecker asking him to write out his recollections
of some remarks made by Mr. Morris, when at General
Schuyler's headquarters at Fort Edward in I777.
Governor Lewis writes that Mr. Morris was sanguine
of our success in the war, "and spoke in animated terms
of the rapid march of the useful arts through our country when once freed from a foreign yoke. One evening
he announced. in language highly poetic, that at no very
distant day the waters of the great western inland seas
would, by the aid of man, break through their barriers
and mingle with those of the Hudson."
Governor Lewis was seventy-four years old when he
wrote that letter, giving his recollections of the language
used by Mr. Morris fifty-one years previously; and when
we call to mind the ardor of feelings that would naturally
arise in the mind of a youthful officer in the army on
receiving a visit from his friend and classmate, and that at
the time of writing, the canal, unthought of in those earlier days, was in the full-tide of success and popularity,
and that Governor Lewis writes entirely from recollections, and does not pretend to quote a word as being Mr.
Morris's language, we will necessarily make some allowance for his interest in behalf of his early friend, and give
such weight to the statements, as, in connection with
other evidences, they shall seem entitled to.
Another incident, stated from memory and secondhanded, some thirty years after it is said to have occurred




1T
has been related to support the claim in behalf of Mr.
Morris.  It is said to have been communicated by
S. DeWitt Bloodgood as obtained from Mr. K. K. Van
Rensselaer. It is, that at a dinner party in Washington,
soon after the date of Morris's letter to John Parish, the
locality of the seat of government was discussed, and
Newburg, on the Hudson river, was suggested as a
proper place.
Mr. Morris said, "Yes, this would have been the
place, and the members of Congress could have come
from all parts by water."  Come by water!" exclaimed
the company, " but how?"  By tapping Lake Erie and
bringing its waters to.the Hudson." " low could' you
bring them?"   i By an inclined plane."  "But that
would be too expensive." "Well, then," said he, " there
is a water-table which can be found."
This story is preobably from the lively imagination of
some ardent friend of Mr. Morris,-and its invalidity, so
far as furnishing evidence of Mr. Morris being the projector of the Erie Canal,-and the invalidity of the views
drawn from the letter of Morgan Lewis, as well as the
great mistake made, and often repeated, in claiming that
in his letter to John Parish, from which extracts have
been made, Mr. Morris foretold the Erie Canal, are all
conclusively shown by Mr. Morris himself, in his letter
to General Henry Lee, dated January 22d, ISo0. General Lee had written to Mr. Morris, on the sixteenth of
January, asking him to write out fully his views in regard to improvements of the country by additional water
communications, and Mr. Morris, after gracefully acknowledging the receipt of the letter, says, "I will
sketch out to you a general idea of what has occurred
3




18
to my observation and reflection respecting the commerce of our interior country, the political consequences
which may result from it, and the means we possess of
rendering that commerce and those consequences favorable to our Government and propitious to our future
prosperity."  And he proceeds to show the natural outlet to the ocean by the Mississippi and St. Lawrence
rivers, the political and commercial importance to the
country of iinprovements in the interior, and says:
"If we improve the means held out to us by the beneficent hand
of Nature, we may obtain for ourselves all the advantages now enjoyed by foreign and rival powers.  Nay, we may procure for our
mercantile fellow-citizens much greater advantages.  - * * The
navigation between the Hudson and LAke Ontario, by the Mohawk
and Wood Creek has been feebly and faintly aitempted by a private
company.   *      In my opinion, nothing short of the conveyance
of a vessel of one hundred tons * " * is worthy of public attention.
* * " But vou will ask me if this be possible. I answer, that as far
as I can judge from observation and information, it is not only prac-.ticable but easy, though expensive. To show this I need only say
that Lake Ontario is considerably higher than the Hudson, that the
shores of that lake and the river flowing out of it, are not high, that
it furnishes an immense but equable stream of water, and that no
mountains intervene. An inclined plane may, I believe, be found
from the Ontario to the Hudson, but to Lake Champlain it most
certainly exists."
This letter is unambiguous and shows what were the
views of the writer.   It was. written several weeks after
the date of the letter to John Parish from     which our
previous quotations were made, and it is in itself, evidence that the writer of it had no definite conception of
the interior overland route to Lake Erie.
Mr. -Morris wielded the pen of a ready writer; his
mind was clear and comprehensive, and he would never
have written that letter and omitted saying in it, any




19
word about a direct canal through the interior to Lake
Erie, if he had had any conception in his mind of the
feasibility of such a project.
Here, in all probability, is to be seen the reason why
the family of Mr. Morris declined to give Dr. Hosack
access to his writings, that the documents relating to a
Canal might all be published in his " Memoirs."
Mr. Morris was desirous of having a water communication opened that w-ould give access to the eastern
markets, from his lands and those oft his friend Madame
de Stael, lying in St. Lawrence county, without encountering the tedious journey by land, through the new and
unopened country that lay between them and the tidewaters, as his letter to General Lee clearly shows; and
his subsequent acts and writings in regard to improvements in the interior, are directed to this end.
In September, 1803, he made a journey, by way of the
Mohawk river, Oneida and Ontario lakes, to St. Lawrence county, to see his lands there. Stopping over
night in Schenectady, on his way up, he had an interview in his hotel, with Simeon DeWitt, wrho was Surveyor-General of the State; and, as Mr. Morris was
interested in procuring some improvements that would
be beneficial to his lands, and as the novel project of
locking up and around the falls of Niagara had recently
been authorized by the Legislature, and as neither the
Western Inland Navigation Company nor the Northern
Inland Navigation Company, (the latter designed for
opening communication between the northern section
of Hudson river and Lake Champlain,) were affording
facilities for business to the extent that had been expected of them; the conversation of the two gentlemen




2)
naturally turned upon improving the means of intercourse with the interior. No records are furnished us
of what they said, and as the conversation was of that
free and informal kind by which they pleasantly whiled
away the evening, it is not probable that either of them
made any notes of what was said, or expected ever to
have occasion to refer to it again.
In I822, however, the Erie Canal had not only been
projected, but after hard struggles, it was nearly completed, and was very populai throughout the State and
elsewhere; and Mr. DeWitt, in a letter, dated February
25th, 1822, to William Darby, who had requested materials to be introduced into the Encyclopedia, writes as
follows, among other things:
"A considerable discussion  -  *  * has appeared in print
about the origin of the Erie Canal, with the view of ascertaining who
is most entitled to the honor of it. * * * The merit of first starting the idea of a direct communication by water, between Lake Erie
and Hudson's river, unquestionably belongs to Mr. Gouverneur
Morris. The first suggestion I had of it was from him. In 1803, I
accidentally met with him at Schenectady. We put up for the night
at the same inn, and passed the evening together.  Among the
numerous topics of conversation to which his prolific mind and
excursive imagination gave birth, was that of improving the means of
intercourse with the interior of our State. He then mentioned the'
project of tapping Lake Erie, as he expressed himself, and leading
its waters in an artificial river directly across the country to Hudson's
river. * * * Considering this as a romantic thing and characteristic of the man, I related it on several occasions. -Mr. Geddes now
reminds me that I mentioned it to him in 1804, when he was here as
a member of the Legislature; and adds that afterwards when in company with Jesse Hawley, it became a subject of conversation which
probably led to inquiries that induced Mr. Hawley to write the essays
which afterwards appeared in newspapers, on the subject of carrying
a canal from Lake Erie to Albany, through the interior of the country
without going by the way of Lake Ontario."




21
After relating the action of the Legislature on the
motion of Judge Forman in I808, directing surveys
to be made, Mr. DeWitt continues and says, "he commissioned James Geddes to make the surveys, and
instructed him to survey two different routes for a canal
from Oneida Lake to Lake Ontario, one by way of Oswego
river, and one by Salmon river, which runs into Lake
Ontario some distance east of Oswego (in the town
of Mexico),"  Mr. Geddes was instructed next to level
around the Niagara Falls and ascertain the best line for
a canal from above the Falls to Lewiston, and Mr.
DeWitt says in the letter, " I had received such information from Mr. Joseph Ellicott *  * * as satisfied
me that a canal was practicable from the Niagara to the
Genesee river;" hence Mr. Geddes was instructed that
he need not make surveys in that section.
This letter of Mr. DeWitt's was written about nineteen
years after that interview with 1Mr. Morris in Schenectady, entirely from memory, and it does not pretend to
quote from Mr. Morris a single word, but it italicises the
words tapping Lake Erie; and during the interval of time
very much had been said and written, by many persons,
in regard to canals.
That Mr. DeWitt labored under forgetfulness or misapprehension, or else drew upon his imagination. when
writing that letter and stating that Mr. Morris spoke
of tapping Lake Erie and leading its waters directly
across the country to the Hudson, and that he is unquestionably entitled to the merit of first starting the idea of
such a canal," will appear by our following Mr. Morris a
little further on that journey. At Rome he had a conversation with Charles C. Broadhead, an engineer, on
the subject of canals, and, as Mr. Broadhead says, "Mr.




Morris inquired very particularly as to the situation and
soil of the land along the Oneida lake and the banks
of the Oneida and Oswego rivers, and the country
lying between the Oneida and Ortario lakes;" and Mr.
Broadhead continues, "if I mistake not, he spoke of the
waters of the Salmon river and Bruce's Creek, the former
empties into Lake Ontario, and the latter into Oneida
Lake.  *   *  *   It is my impression that Lake Erie
was not mentioned in this conversation. After answering Mr. MIorris's inquiries tas far as I was able, he
declared he would give five hundred dollars to be a
member of the Legislature that year, that he might get
a law passed for a canal from the Hudson river, and
I think I cannot be mistaken when I say to Lake
Ontario."
Mr. Morris here shows the same interest for improvements to communicate with his lands in St. Lawrence
county, that was indicated in his letter to General Lee,
two years previously; and in that interview with Mr.
Broadhead, is not manifested any conception of an idea
of a canal through the interior to Lake Erie, as Mr.
DeWitt, ninleteen years afterward, imagined he had done
at Schenectady.
A little further on his journey, at Three River Point,
the same views are unmistakably indicated by Mr.
Morris's writing in his diary, September 12th, 803, (for
Mr. Morris kept a diary many years.) Of a canal he
writes, "it should be taken from the head of Onondaga
river and carried on the level as far east as it will go,
and if practicable, into the Mohawk river.  *  * 
This canal, I think, should be five feet deep and fortyfive feet wide. A branch might easily he carried to
Lake Ontario,"  Not a word was written about I.ake




23
Erie, nor about a canal of any kind to any place west
of Onondaga river; and it is not to be supposed that,
considering the fluency with which Mr. Morris wrote, he
would have omitted any allusion to an overland canal to
Lake Erie, if he had had any conception of one in his
mind.
Thus we see that the ambiguity in Mr. Morris's letter
to John Parish, and the vague and romantic recollections
of Mr. )DeWitt in his letter to William Darby, can not be
reconciled with Mr. Morris's letterst his diary, and his
actions, and with his conversation with Mr. Brodheadexcept on the theory that he meant, as he wrote, a water
communication from Lake Ontario to the Hudson river;
and to this view all his writings and actions point with
entire harmony. If he used the expression, tapping
Lake Erie, in his conversation with Mr. DeWitt, he of
course referred to the project for a canal around Niagara
Falls.
James Geddes, in a letter to William Darby, of February 22,!822, says, "in the winter of 1804, I learned,
for the first time, from the Surveyor-General, that
Gouverneur Morris in a- conversation between them the
preceding autumn, mentioned the scheme of a canal from
Lake Erie across the country to the Hudson river," and
that it made a great " impression" on his mind.
This letter is written from memory, eighteen years
after the incident is stated to have occurred, and the
misapprehension under which it was written is seen in
the fact, as herein shown, that Mr. Morris could not have
mentioned the scheme of a canal from Lake Erie across
the; country, but that in 1803 he was devising a plan for
a canal from Onondaga river to the Mohawk; and also




24
down to Lake Ontario; a scheme which, in the isolated
condition of Ononcfaga county at that time was well
calculated to excite the attention of her people.
Judge Geddes was, in 1804, a member of the Legislature. Mr. DeWitt was Surveyor-General of the State,
and Mr. Morris had held several high official stations.
All of them were public men, and pzubi'z spirited men,
and it is not probable that they all would have omitted
or neglected the opportunity to bring the scheme before
the public, if they had been' impressed" with the importance of such a work as a canal through the interior
from Lake Erie, or had entertained any conception of
the feasibility of such a.project
Thus we see that tihe basis on which the claim is
founded that Mr. Morris was the projector of the Erie
Canal, proves to be unsound; and of course the structure built upon it must fail. If Mr. Morris were now
living, it is probable that his honorable impulses would
constrain him, as did Elkanah Watson, to announce that
he designed canaling between the Hudson river and
Lake Ontario, and around Niagara Fails, and did not
contemplate a direct canal through the country to Lake
Eric.
Judge Geddes and Jesse Hawley, in their letters to Dr.
Hosack, in 1828, (each one writing without the knowledge
of the other,) agree in regard to the time of their interview in Geneva, that it was "in the winter of I8o6," "the
winter before he wrote his essays;" and it is written that
the testimony of two men is true. But Judge Geddes
claims to have "perfect recollection of informing Mr.
Hawley of the project," and has "no doubt but that I
informed him the idea came from Mr. Morris." And
Mr. Hawley writes: I do not recollect that any mention




25
was made of the canal when we met in Geneva. If
there was, I presume that I first spoke of it.  *  *
I afterwards saw Mr. Geddes at his house in Onondaga,
in I 8 i, when we conversed on the subject, I believe for
the first time." And in 1835, Mr. Hawley writes: "With
me, it was a native thought —without having been suggested or communicated to me by any person.' When
Judge Geddes wrote that letter to Dr. Hosack, he knew
he was writing for history, and would be more likely to
be correct in his dates than when writing a newspaper
paragrapl in 1835, in w'hich he says his visit to Geneva
was in I805, instead of I8o6. But as we have seen, his, impression that he comnlunicated the idea of the Erie
Canal, must be confounded with the interest which he
and others naturally took in the )project of a local canal,
which Mr. Morris indicated in his diary.
The Paper read by George Geddes, Esq., maintains
that Judge Geddes was so deeply impressed with the
idea of a direct overland route for a canal-as coming
from Mr. Morris —that he did not rest, but formed public
opinion until 1807, when Judge Forman was elected to
the Legislature as a "Canal man" "on the question of a
canal across the country, not by Lake Ontario;" and says
Judge Forman was an eminent lawyer and an accomplished scholar, and his grace of person and manner
gave him much influence with his associates. He was
President of the village of Syracuse in 1825.
This accomplished gentleman, on whom the argument
of Mr. Geddes centres, wrote to Dr. Hosack on the subject of the Erie Canal, October 13, 1828, from which
letter I quote as follows:
4




26
"On taking my seat as member of Assembly for the county of
Onondaga, at the session of I807-8, my bookseller handed me several copies of'Rees's Cyclopedia,' to which I was a subscriber. I
had early been acquainted with the projected works of the Inland
Lock Navigation Company, from the Hudson river to Lake Ontario,
and had seen in the statute book an Act to incorporate a company to
lock up the Niagara Falls from Lake Ontario to Lake Erie. In reading at my leisure in the article'Canal,' an account of the numerous
canals and improved river navigation in England, I soon discovered
the relative importance of the former over the latter. Applying this
to our interior, I perceived how much more the country would be
benefited by a canal than by the wdrks contemplated; and  * * *
it occurred to me that if a canal was ever made to open a communication from the Hudson to the western lakes, it would be worth more
than all the extra cost to go directly through the country to Lake
Erie. * * *    Sitting with Judge Wright and General McNiel, my
room-mates, I broached the subject to them. At first, Judge Wright
objected that it would be folly to make a canal one hundred and fifty
miles abreast of a good sloop navigation in Lake Ontario. * * *
The subject was freely discussed. Judge Wright gave in to the plan,
and it was agreed by all that the project was of immense importance,
and that measures ought to be taken to ascertain its practicability. I
drew up the resolution, which Judge Wright agreed to second."
From   that resolution sprung the legislative action
under which the first surveys were made, by Judge
Geddes, in I808.
Judge Forman does not write as if he had been
" elected to the Assembly as a canal man, on the question of a canal across the country, not by Lake Ontario;"
but, entirely inconsistent with such an idea.       In his
argument in support of the motion which he introduced,
he pointed out nearly the same route for a canal as had
been delineated in the first number of the "Hercules"
papers by Mr. Hawley, published in Pittsburg, and in
the second number, published in Canandaigua. Judge
Forman continues:




27
"I conversed frequently during the season, with Judge Geddes,
and explained to him my views on the subject of the interior route."
-*       " " a'1 shou(ld have been satisfied, so far as I am concerned,
had not the Surveyor-General, in a letter to William Darby, given a
new turn to the investigation, * * giving an impression that my
resolution had grown out of that suggestion of Gouverneur Morris.
Mr. Morris had traveled and seen canals in other countries,
and no doubt had bright visions of the fiture improvements of this
country  *' * * butit it was nowise probable that he viewed them
as works to be accomplisled in his day, or, as a patriot, he would
have proposed the subject o the Legislature.  *  His suggestions:* - ghad no more erfect in producing the canal, thai the ancient
poet's sorng of the'Fortunate Islands beyond the Atlantic. Ocean'
had in producing'the discovery of America."
The resolution introduced into the Assembly by Judge
Forman in I8o8, resulted in directing the SurveyorGeneral to cause a "survey to be made of the rivers,
streams and waters, in the usual route of communication
between the Hudson river and      Lalke Erie, and such
other contemplated route as he may deem proper," thus
leaving the whole matter very much in his discretion;
and that Mr. DeWitt was not at this time very much
impressed with such views as he writes, in 1822, had
been communicated to him     by Morris in I803, is seen
by his instructions in regard to making that survey,
given to James Geddes, under date of June IIlth, i8o8,
already stated; which read as if he exercised the discretion given him    to promote the object which     Mr.
Morris had in view in his journey by way of Oswego, in
1803, to his lands in St. Lawrence county; for the first
thing he instructed Mr, Geddes to do was to look for
the best place for a canal from Oneida Lake to Lake
Ontario, in the town of Mexico.   And Judge Geddes is
not so nxuch impressed in behalf of an interior route to
Lake Erie as to offer any remonstrance against expend



ing the time and the money appropriated for those
surveys, almost exclusively upon the Ontario route.
And that Mr. DeWitt labored under some forgetfulness or misapprehension in regard to this matter, is conclusively shown by an incongruity he perpetrates in his
instructions to Judlge Geddes in i 08, and in his letter
to Mr. Iarby in 1822, stating in the first that "As
Joseph Ellicott has given me a description of the country
from Tonnewanta Creek to: the Genesee river * * *
it is important to have exploration continued to Seneca
river. * No leveling or survey of it will be necessary for
the present, * * * a view of the ground only, with
such information as may be obtained from others, is all
that can now be required of you." And in the letter to
Mr. Darby he says, "I had received such information
from Joseph Ellicott, etc."
That information and description of the country was
sent to Mr. DeWVitt several weeks after his instructions
were issued to Mr. Geddes, which was the i ith of June,
80o8, and Mr. Ellicott's communication of that valuable information is dated Batavia, July 3oth, i8c8, and
begins by acknowledging the receipt of Mr. DeWitt's
letter of June i3t1h, I868, in which Mr. DeWitt asks for
the information, which Mr. Ellicott then proceeds to
give.
The Legislature of 181 o appointed Gouverneur' Morris,
DeWitt Clinton, and five others, a board of commissioners
"for exploring the whole route for inland navigation from
Hudson s river to Lake Ontario and Lake Erie." That
board of commissioners entered upon their duties on
the Ist of July following, having with them the writings
of Jesse Hawxley on the subject of a canal, and other
valuable documents, as we have seen; and Mr. Morris,




29
while on that tour of exploration, on the i2th of July,
I 8Io, put himself on record for M/e first tzime in favor
of a direct overland canal to Lake Erie.
What followed, in the complex and protracted prelimina-ies, in the beginning, the progress and completion of
that gigantic work, has been delineated before this Society
on p-revious occasions.
We have seen that the canal was "projected;" and
while we cannot claim for any person that he was the
first or only one who "conceived " the idea, yet, that the
-views promulgated in the " Hercules" papers by Jesse
Hawley in I 807, were original, native thoughts with him,
and the first publication of such a project, is too well
established to need further elucidation.
After many delays and much anxiety in behalf of the
Canal, the State finally entered.upon the work of its
construction on the 4th of July, 1817, and its completion
on the 26th of October, 1825, was announced by such a
feu dej'ie as had not been previously known in any age;
and we are witnesses to-day, that the predictions of its
effects upon our country and people, made by its earliest
advocates, have been more than realized.
To recount its influence in attracting the husbandman
from all parts of the world to cultivate the rich unbroken
soil of the vast country west of us, in inviting the mechanic and the enterprizing trader, the men of science
and the political economist, to occupy that broad domain,
and organize States, build up towns and cities, and extend the blessings of civilization, would be only repeating what has many times been said.
To narrate the growth and extent of the material and
social prosperity that is traceable directly to the Erie
Canal would tax the capacity of man to appreciate them.




Not a State in what we call the West, nor one of the
many opulent cities in that region, but owes its organic
existence or its prosperity to the influence of that great
work.
In 1825 the cities of St. Louis and Cincinnati would
have smiled derisively upon any proposition that within
the ensuing generation they would be eclipsed by a city
on the southwestern shore of Lake Michigan, which
then had no existence. The cities of Chicago, Milwaukee, Toledo and others may be said to have been
born of the Canal.
Our own city, with its broad and extensive avenues,
its humane and benevolent institutions, its gorgeous
buildings, its wealth and population, and, above all, its
magnificent ships and extensive commerce, is a proud
witness of the propriety of the nndertaking, and of the
success which has followed it. The first wheat brought
to this port —two thousand five hundred bushels in. 1828
— ound no market here; the trade which the Canal inspired had not then been put into action. The arrivals
of grain and flour in a single year recently have been
equal to nearly seventy three million bushels.
The tolls paid to the State on property shipped on
the Canal from this port in any one year as late as 1840,
scarceiv exce xeded three hundred thousand dollars. They
have since exceeded three million dollars in a single year.
The benefits resulting from the Canal have been felt
and enjoyed in every county and town throughout the
State; the increase in the value of all real property
being in the aggregate many times greater than the cost
ot its construction.
The city of New York, in whose growth and prosperity we take a just pride, has derived from this Canal




greater benefits, perhaps, than any other city. Her population in 1820, being about one hundred and twenty
thousand, and at the present time over one million, the
value of her real and personal property, as recently as
I845, reported at about two hundred and forty million
dollars, and at the present time over one billion dollarsthe magnitude of her trade and commerce, her imports
and exports in the year i867, aggregate over five hundred and sixteen million dollars; her supremacy over
every other seaboard city-all attest that to her the
Canal has been, and now is, "a river of gold flowing into
her lap."
It is not the locality merely of the city of New York
that has secured to her such prosperity and enabled her
to absorb the growing business of other cities, and make
them pay tribute to her. Other seaboard cities north
and south of her have spacious harbors, and are as
accessible to all the interior country by railroads as New
York, but they have no Erie Canal tributary to them.
As the Canal has been the source of her prosperity in
years past, so it is the main reliance for her continued
enjoyment of this high position in the years to come.
No city can long maintain the controling position she
occupies in regard to the foreign commerce of the country without the supplies steadily and certainly furnished
by this initrior' and never-failing source.
The financial success of the Canal is without a parallel
in the history of similar enterprises. Besides the great
increase of material wealth it has brought to all parts
of the State, its own account of receipts and expenditures, including its construction, repairs, enlargement
and improvements, with interest to September 3oth,
I866, as reported by the Auditor of the Canal Depart



ment, shows a cash balance to its credit of about fortyone and one-half millions of dollars.
The State canal debt, which has sometimes been
urged as a formidable objection to any further outlay
upon canals, is the offspring of a laudable desire to
promote the local as well as the general interests of the
State, that has prevailed in the administration of State
affairs, and which led to the construction of various local
canals, none of which have been financially successful,
though of great and lasting benefits to the people of their
immediate locality; and the canal debt now resting upon
the State is the result of the construction of those canals,
the benefits of which pertain to the particular localities;
and those localities might reasonably be expected to be
foremost in a movement to pay off that debt by a general
and equal tax upon all the property of the State, rather
than allow the debt to be any impediment in the way of
further improving and perfecting the capacity of the
Erie Canal to the extent of enabling it to do all the
business that may be offered to it, and at such moderate
charges that no other route shall be able to compete
with it.
Since the original construction of the Canal its prism
has been enlarged and its capacity greatly improved.
The tonnage of boats navigating it was originally from
thirty-five to forty tons; now, boats of two hundred and
fifty tons make their voyage through its waters; but yet
its size is not that of one hundred feet wide and ten feet
deep, as was recommended in the essays of "Hercules."
Such a canal, with locks of corresponding dimensions,
if constructed without delay, would put to rest all question of its utility or supremacy.




00)
The great and rapid increase of the business of the
country, springing directly from the construction of the
Canal, brought into existence numerous railroad enterprises, and there are now as many as five or six through
lines of railroads engaged to the extent of their capacity
in this inland commerce; and yet so great has been the
increase of the productions of the country that, with all
the increase of facilities for'transportation, they are not
sufficient to meet the demands upon them; and in the
clamor for additional facilities and greater speed, we
occasionally hear of more railroads being projected, and
see the Canal partially overlooked or entirely ignored.
As a people, we are "faster" than were those of fifty
years ago. We think and move faster than they; we
transact more business, and amass greater wealth, and
are impatient of restraint or delays; but let us not overlook the fact that it would be physically impossible to
transact the business of this vast interior commerce by
railroads. The electric telegraph will flash our commercial messages instantaneously from San Francisco to
New York, but itcannot transport one bushel of wheat.
The fleetest horses of Arabia could not be made the
beastl of burden to perform a heavy carrying trade.
Neither can the railroads, though adapted to the speedy
transportation of persons and much of the merchandise
and products of the country, perform the immense and
heavy freighting business between the West and the
East. The main reliance is upon our Canal; and we
read with some surprise an editorial in so well informed
a newspaper as the New York Times, in July last, opposing further appropriations to the canals, and saying,
"Water transportation of every kind is rapidly losing its
influence in our trade with the interior. *  * *  Tho
5




34
day of the canals has gone by-they have accomplished
their work, and can now be relieved by the superior
system of transportation," the railroads.
We might suppose the editor had been romancing,
and expect he would next write, (after a pleasant moonlight drive through Central Park,) that the "sun" is an
old played-out institution, its heats have become too
oppressive, and we can well dispense with it. The moon
is more pleasant, and the comforts it supplies are an improvement upon the old system.
The sun is scarcely more necessary to supply those
essential elements of our existence and welfare, reflected
by the moon, than is the Canal to sustain the commercial
supremacy of New York, as well as the prosperity of the
railroads engaged with it in carrying on this commerce.
If it were possible for the city of Boston to become
the outlet of this Canal, and secure its constantly flowing
stream of supplies into her own lap, instead of enriching
New York, she would soon reinstate the Cunard steamships at her wharves, and would not feel a necessity for
inviting her neighboring merchants to meet her in convention and devise the ways and means for checking the
decline of her commercial influence and relative position.
This interior commerce, which enriches all who manage it, is too great a prize to escape the efforts of opposing and competing interests to draw it to other channels,
and we see capital and enterprise employed with such
well directed energy as merits success, to divide this
traffic with New York, and appropriate a part of the
golden stream to other and foreign cities.  The projected improvements for business on the Mississippi
river, by means of barges and of elevators at New
OKrleans, it's claimed, will draw to that channel a large




35
volume of the property that has heretofore sought an
eastern market by way of this Canal, and thus enrich
the shipping interests on that river and the city of New
Orleans, at our expense.
Our neighbors of the Dominion of Ontario were
early alive to the importance of securing a portion ofthis growing commerce, and they constructed the Welland Canal, which has for many years diverted no inconsiderable share of this flowing wealth to a foreign channel; and their efforts to this end have not abated. They
have constructed extensive lines of railroads, improved
the navigation of their rivers, and projected other works
of yet greater importance, as connected with this commerce. If they shall construct the Georgian Bay and
Toronto Canal, and make the Ottawa River Improvement to Montreal, (especially the latter,) before our Canal
is perfected by enlarging its locks and securing a greater
depth of water, they will succeed in diverting a larger
amount of our legitimate traffic than we can afford to
lose. A small portion only of shipments on Lake Ontario find their way to New York, and shipments by tle
Ottawa river route must of necessity pay their tribute to
the cities of Montreal and Quebec.
One of the leading objects in view with all those men
who early advocated the improvement of water communication between the interior and tide waters, was to
secure this commerce to our own people, and build up
our own cities with the products of our enterprise and
capital, rather than allow it to be appropriated by our
foreign neighbors., These views were deeply impressed
upon the mind of that good and loyal Briton, Cadwallader
Colden, as early as the year 1724, and they were repeated




by Sir Henry Moore, by General Washington, George
Clinton, and every other writer in favor of internal improvements, down to the time of our Canal.
We are now in the enjoyment of the high position
which the construction of the Canal was expected to
confer upon us; and the benefits it bestows on other
States, and upon the nation at large, justly entitle New
York to the appellation of the " Empire State." It has
been said, by good authority, that the struggle we recently
encountered with armed rebellion could not have been
successfully carried on but for the sinews of war, the
wealth, derived from the productions of the country,
through the facilities which this Canal afforded.
If we hlave not secured, to the full extent, the advantages which the Canal might yield to us, it behooves us
to look for the cause and apply the remedy. If any
portion of this inheritance is in danger of being wrested
from our hands by competing interests, as wise men
possessed of the ability to preserve it, we will not fail to
counteract such efforts by the legitimate means at our
command. Such danger is not to be encountered by
the competition of the railroads. The interests of these
roads and of the Canal are reciprocal. The roads would
not have come into existence but for the stimulus given
by the Canal; and now, both of the systems are to a large
extent dependent each upon the other.
It is the competition which may arise from other
water routes of transit, that may prejudice or put in
jeopardy the interests centred in our Canal; and towards
this should our counteracting efforts be directed.
Such improvements of the Canal as will secure to it a
steady supply of water to the greatest depth admissible,
and an enlargement of its locks to a corresponding




37
extent, with a schedule of tolls as low as would suffice
to pay the interest on the cost of the improvements, and
an economical administration of its affairs, would enable
the Canal to neutralize all competition and secure its
supremacy over the commerce of the northern States.
Whatevcr be the necessary expense, the importance
of such improvement demands immediate attention.
A large debt resting upon the State, incurred in the
progress of its internal improvement policy, is put forth
as a reason for withholding further appropriations for
canals. But that argument cannot apply to this Canal,
which, as we have seen, is rich in funds to the extent of
many millions of dollars.
It has also been gravely urged in the Constitutional
Convention, by a member from the city of New York, that
the State should sell the Canal! Not because it has not
accomplished all that was predicted for it, not for any
financial delinquency, but because, as stated, it is impossible to secure an honest administration of its affairs!
The philosopher who urged this proposition, doubtless
predicated his argument on the doctrine of total depravity, and he should have followed his logic to its legitimate conclusion, and proposed that the Convention be
dissolved, because constitutions and laws are worthless,
it being impossible to secure an honest administration
of them!
We cannot afford to allow the supremacy of the Canal
to be put in jeopardy. A due regard to the future
welfare of our own city will not permit it,-the agricultural interests of our State, to its remotest corners, cannot afford the risk;-the city of New York, least of all,
can afford thus to jeopardize its commanding position.
Our railroads themselves cannot afford to lose the invig



orating influence their business receives from this controling source.
Better that the present debt and the expense of further
improvements be paid by a tax on all the property of the
State, and the tolls placed at the lowest rate consistent
with the necessary current expenditures, than suffer a
diminution of the golden stream.
We are not such degenerate sons of our fathers that
we are unable to appreciate and preserve this rich heritage,-the result of their wisdom and enterprise,-and
we must carry out to perfection that which they so
auspiciously begun, and in which they achieved such
signal success, and thus secure to our successors the
benefits that will follow, and to our State the high distinction she has earned, through all coming time.