444 - HISTORY OF TOLEDO AND LUCAS COUNTY
CHAPTER VIII.
TOLEDO'S CANALS. - THE MIAMI AND ERIE, AND THE WABASH AND ERIE.
IT is difficult to determine to which of the two great agencies of transportation-water and rail-Toledo is most indebted for her exceptional growth in trade, population and other elements of advancement. Without doubt, the first improvement which materially operated in shaping and fixing her future, was the rude and imperfect Railway, which supplied the first connection and channel for trade between her and the interior. Small as that beginning really appears in the presence of the wonderful advance since made in like improvements, its potency for Toledo's prosperity could hardly be overestimated, since through its agency the trade of the richest and best improved portions of Michigan was at once secured, despite the prejudice engendered by the bitter question of boundary and the no less bitter jealousy and competition of the rival City of Monroe. The effectiveness of such support to Toledo is clearly seen in the fact, that to all such adverse feeling, was added the completion of a Railway furnished by the State of Michigan for the avowed purpose of diverting to points within its limits the trade which the once despised Erie and Kalamazoo Road was attracting to Toledo.
And yet, back even of that little Railway, and as the chief incentive to its construction, stood Toledo's water connections-existing and prospective. From the first, the map of the Western country and the position of Toledo thereon, constituted the latter's chief strength it being conceded that she held the key to the traffic of the Maumee River, which question, for a time stoutly disputed, was ere long clearly settled in her behalf. It was Toledo's advantages with reference to an Eastern outlet for trade, that constituted the chief attractions for the trade seeking such outlet. The Erie and Kalamazoo Railway, first, and the Canals next, alike bad their source in the great course for trade supplied by Lake Erie and the Erie Canal. At the earliest stage of Western settlement, an intelligent person could not survey Toledo's position at the Western extremity of Lake Erie, consider the vast territory naturally tributary to her, and fail to be impressed with a sense of what nature had done for her. To such view was Toledo indebted for the great Canal improvements which so soon followed her pioneer Railway.
Anything like a full history of the construction of the Canals which constitute so important a part of Toledo's material growth and prosperity, would be excluded here from lack of space. Hence, only brief statements of facts can be given. This course is in a measure made proper by the fact, that the brief historical sketch of Ohio, in this volume, includes a statement as to the origin and construction of the several Canals in the State.
The question of the first suggestion of Canal connection of Lake Erie and the Wabash River, has been discussed at different times, with different claimants for the distinction. In 1817, the idea of the Canal is said to have been suggested, and steps taken in Indiana toward its construction. A book entitled " A History of the Late War in the Western Country," and published in 1816, in a chapter on Fort Wayne, said
The Miami is navigable for boats from this place to the Lake, and the portage to the nearest navigable branch of the Wabash is but 7 or 8 miles, through a low marshy prairie, from which the water runs both to the Wabash and the St. Mary's. A ('anal, at some future day, will unite these Rivers, and thus render a Town at Fort Wayne, as formerly, the most considerable place in that country.
In a letter to the Western Emigration Society, and said to have been written in 1817, and published in the Western Spy (Cincinnati), in 1818, Maj. Benj. F. Stickney, then acting as Indian Agent at Fort Wayne, made this reference to the same subject:
The Miami River of the Lake is formed by a junction of St. Mary's and St. Joseph's Rivers at Fort Wayne; pursues a general course Northeast, with its meanderings about 170 miles, discharging into Maumee Bay. This River is navigable for vessels drawing 5 to 6 feet of water to Fort Meigs, 16 miles from its mouth, and for smaller craft to its head. Although it is not large, yet, in connection with the Wabash, the importance of its navigation will not be exceeded by any discharging into the Northern Lakes or the Ohio River. The Wabash pursues a diametrically opposite course to its junction with the Ohio. At the highest waters of those Rivers, their waters are united at the dividing ridge, and you may pass with craft from one river to the other. There is a wet prairie or swamp, covered with grass, that extends from the headwaters of the Wabash to the St. Mary's, and discharges its water into both Rivers about 7 miles from one to the other. At low water this swamp is 0 to 10 feet above the water in the Rivers. It is composed of soft mud that can be penetrated 20 feet with a pole. Of course, it would be a small expense of labor to connect the waters of these two Rivers by a Canal that would be passable at the lowest water. Those Rivers will be the great thoroughfare between the Lakes and the Mississippi; and, of course, will constitute an uninterrupted navigation iron the Bay of St. Lawrence to the Gulf of Mexico, except the short portage at the Falls of Niagara.
CANALS. - 445
It is claimed for Captain James Riley, that he was among the very first, though probably not the first, to point out the importance and feasibility of the connection of the navigable waters of the Wabash and Maumee Rivers by means of a Canal. That gentleman will be remembered by many readers as the celebrated traveler among the Arabs of Barbary, Northern Africa, whose "Narratives" of his operations and experiences in that region about 1816, were extensively read upon their publication in 1836. Returning to this country, he came to the West in 182(1, in the capacity of United States Surveyor of Lands. He then purchased seven tracts of land at the Rapids of St. Mary's River, called the Devil's Race Ground," adjoining the Indiana line. In a letter of November 24, 1819, Capt. Riley said :
In high stages of water a portage of only 6 miles carries merchandise from the head of the Maumee into navigable waters of the Wabash (and vice versa.) from whence, floating with the current, it may go either to supply the wants of the interior country or proceed South to New Orleans, or North to Lake Erie. The Little Wabash rises in a swamp, which might supply water sufficient for purpose of Canal navigation.
Writing from Fort Wayne November 20, 1820, to Edward Tiffin, Surveyor General, Capt. Riley said:
Having my chain, compass and level with me, I went yesterday towards the Southwest about 1 ½ miles to the St. Mary's, crossed that stream and measured the distance from that River to Little River-a branch of the Wabash-and navigable in times of high water (without improvement). The distance is not quite seven miles, is a perfect level, and then its descent to the portage or navigable point of Little River is about 3 feet, and the course is South 50' West. From the summit level to the St. Mary's, is a fall of about 20 feet. Two locks would therefore be sufficient, and the whole expense of a Canal uniting the Northern Lakes with the Mississippi and Missouri Rivers, at this point would not be beyond the means of a few individuals of enterprise and ordinary capital.
As already stated, the matter of' Canal construction and location, was prominent in the Ohio-Michigan boundary question, and was materially delayed by that dispute. Different plans, meantime, were under discussion. In the case of the Wabash Canal, it was proposed in 1834, to employ slack-water for navigation, by so improving the Maumee River with dams and locks, as to make it navigable for steamboats from the Bay to Defiance, and for Canal boats thence to Fort Wayne. The comparative advantages of horse and steam power for towing Boats was then discussed. It was suggested that '' a Steamboat could tow two Canal Boats with their horses on board from Defiance to the head of the Rapids (32 miles) cheaper than horses could tow them on a forty-feet wide Canal."
The boundary question settled, the work of Canal construction was at once entered upon with vigor. In May, 1837, contracts were let for the portion between Manhattan (below Toledo) and the head of the Rapids of the Maumee River (now Grand Rapids), to the following named contractors
E. S. Dodd & Co., Thos. Carr, P. Gamon, Griffith, McElvaine & Co., F. D. Cochran, James M. Spafford, Hiram Steele, A. Shepler, D. C. Doane, Jones & Barker, A. B. & H. Barker & Co., B. Kemper. McBride, Camp & Co., S. Searing, Jesse Vincent, and Myers & Yates.
In this connection it may be proper to state, that the matter of " prohibition " as to the use of intoxicating liquors, became a practical question with contractors on the Canal. This was specially so with those on the sections " in rear of the Town," (now between the Court House and the High School building) who issued the order that no man in the use of liquors should have employment at their hands. The result was, that while the men on other jobs where liquors were used, suffered much from sickness, those above named were almost wholly without such experience.
During the construction of the Reservoir in Paulding County, about 1842, a different policy was adopted. What were termed "jiggers," were dealt out to laborers before each meal. The men passed under a rope, one at a time, and received 12 ounces of whisky each. At about 9:30 A. M., and 4:30 P. M., like supplies were taken to the men at their work. Such were deemed necessary from the character of the water there used.
While the matter of the terminus of the Canal was under consideration by the State authorities, the point most important lay between what were known as "High Level" and " Low Level." The local bearing of this question is explained in the fact, than the plan of High Level consisted in continuing the Canal from the head of the Rapids of the Maumee River to Toledo, on the West bank, and entering the River at that point; while the other proposition was to terminate the Canal by locking into the River at Maumee. The issue thus raised between Toledo and Maumee and Perrysburg, enlisted the deepest interest of these Towns. Toledo claimed, that the extension to that place was absolutely necessary to the success of the Canal. While the question remained undecided, a meeting of the citizens of Toledo was held, to take action in the premises, when a memorial, prepared by Andrew Palmer, was adopted, in which were set forth " reasons why the Canal should be located upon the plan of the High Level." Among these were the following
1. That at Toledo "perfect navigation for all classes of Lake vessels unquestionably ceases." 2. That at the mouth of Swan Creek, were two excellent basins for Canal boats. 3. That the water power to result from such location of the Canal would be more valuable, than if distributed on the line of the Canal from the foot of the Rapids. 4. That the navigation of the River above Swan Creek was difficult and hazardous-the channel narrow and crooked, with islands, shoals, rocks and shifting bars, interposing
446 - HISTORY OF TOLEDO AND LUCAS COUNTY.
serious obstacles, without sufficient water to float the larger class of vessels. In this connection, it was stated that there were then in use on the Lake vessels of 200 to 300 tons burthen, which, when full loaded, required nine to ten feet of water, which could not be had above Toledo. 5. It was strongly urged for the " High Level," that during the boundary contest, it had been uniformly urged by the Ohio authorities "that the lower section of the River was indispensably necessary for the judicious termination of the Canal "it being claimed that to stop the work at MauMee, would convict the State of bad faith and " trifling." 6. It was stated, that the interests at the foot of the Rapids could be fully met by locking into the River at Maumee, which was afterwards done. In conclusion, it was stated, that if the Canal should be terminated at Maumee, an error of judgment would be committed which would be in a measure irretrievable; while an unjust and odious monopoly in the local benefits of the Canal would be caused, and the public interest in individual and local competition be lost.
What may or may not have been the influence of this showing with the Board, cannot be stated; but it is suggestive, that the plan therein urged was adopted, with the single addition of the continuance of the Canal to Manhattan. This memorial was approved by many non-resident owners of Toledo real estate, including Micajah T. Williams of Cincinnati, Elisha Whittlesey of Trumbull County, and Joshua R. Giddings of Ashtabula.
So much for Toledo and the " High Level." It is no more than fair that the "Low Level " be beard here. Its claims were set forth as follows:
1st. The business men of the Upper Maumee would rely on their own resources in the shipping business, and would necessarily bring their trade to the point where Lake navigation terminated. 2d. The experience of 100 years showed that the foot of the Rapids of the Maumee was that point. 3d. Freights from Buffalo to Maumee were the same as to Toledo or Manhattan ; thereby saving to shippers 15 miles of Canal navigation, with its tolls and charges. 4th. The Towns at the foot of the Rapids had the important advantage in being near where the River could be bridged with safety and without injury to navigation -a consideration which must have the effect to bring great public improvements, as Turnpikes and Railroads, to that locality. " The impossibility of bridging-the difficulty of ferrying-the certainty of transhipment-and the total prevention of crossing the River for frequently long periods every season, must present an insurmountable obstacle to the termination of any such public work at any place below the foot of the Rapids."
These points are now chiefly valuable, as showing the ideas of the modes and methods in trade which were current at the time in question ; so many of which, not excepting that in regard to bridging navigable streams, have disappeared under the changed current of events.
It may not be out of place here to say, that among the older citizens are now some who think it would have been as well, if not better for Toledo, bad the Harris line been established and the City placed in Michigan. In such case, the Canals, would have entered the River at Maumee, which fact, as already stated, operated largely at Toledo to the support of Ohio's boundary claim. Subsequent experience has greatly modified that view. The increased tonnage of Lake shipping very soon after the opening of the Canals, made Toledo the only point of connection with the River, which would have been the same with that City in Michigan. Commerce is not controlled by boundary lines. With such facts, is the consideration that in Michigan, Toledo would have been the favorite port of the State, and as such received benefits not within the power of Ohio to grant. All this, however, is matter for speculation, only.
The Ohio portion of the Wabash and Erie Canal, is but 18 miles in length, extending from the junction with the Miami and Erie Canal, in Paulding County, to the Indiana State line.
That portion of the work not previously constructed-from the head of the Rapids of the Maumee River to the Indiana State line-was let October 25, 1837, in 89 Sections, commencing at the Rapids, to the following contractors in the order given :
Brubacher & Waterhouse, Forsyth, Hazard & Co., Samuel Mapes, Clems, Alden & Co., Mooney, Wair, Sturgis & Co., Francis D. Cochran, Spafford, Lawrence & Co., Saylor, Jones & Keep, Mudge, Curtis & Co., Peter Walsh & Co., Thomas Ellis, H. H. Sierman, Eltanan Gray, A. F. Patrick & Co., James Drummond Almon Eggleston, Andrew Spafford, Goettell & Hall, John Swift, Murphy & Sheridan, A. L. & W. Teffers & Co., Robertson & Kenney, William Thompson, Daily & Flinn, S. H. Steedman, James Sheburn, Wm. B. Lawrence, Jonathan Cook, Thomas Newcomb & Co., Peter Murphy & Co., Elijah Ellis, Libbey, Eddy & Co., Gardner, Libbey & Co., Smith, Chamberlin & Co., William Young.
Leander Ransom, Acting Commissioner, was in charge of the work, with Samuel Forrer as Civil Engineer. The Resident Engineers at that time, were Andrew Young, at Maumee City, and William Wall, at Defiance.
In February, 1839, Sections 48 and 73, inclusive, and 101 were let to the following parties
Ogden Mallory, Cannon & Carrs, Steedmans & Co., R. P. Harriman, Henry Richards, Harrington & Davis, Dodd & Morehouse, A. F. Patrick & Co., Bernard Kemper, Martin, Morgan & Co., Patrick & Short, D. C. Doan, H. & A. Doolittle, D. C. Middleton, Guy C. Noble, Benajah Barker, Henry Leonard, J. A. Brewer, Henry Carhart & Co., James B. Steedman, A. L. Telfers & Co., Clems & Co., Marcelious & Co.
This work was between the head and the foot of the Rapids of the Maumee.
The portion of the Wabash Canal between Fort Wayne and Logansport was opened in 1838. Among the rates of toll then charged, were the following:
Per 1,000 lbs. per mile-Flour, Wheat, Whisky, Domestic Animals, Lard, Butter, &c., 1.8 cents; Mineral Coal, 5 mills ; Linseed Oil, Paper, Window Glass, &c., 2.4 cents ; Bar Iron, Nails,
CANALS. - 447
&c., 4.8 cents ; Merchandise, 4.8 cents ; Stone, for building purposes, 9 mills; Lumber, per 1,000 feet, 2.4 cents ; Bricks, per 1,000, 4.8 cents ; Timber, 100 cubic feet, 2.4 cents ; same in rafts, 5 cents ; Wood for fuel, per cord, in Boats, 2.4 cents ; Freight Boats, 1.2 cents per mile ; Passenger Boats, 0 cents per mile; on Passengers of 12 years and over, 1.2 cents per mile.
In May, 1838, the contractors on the Miami and Erie Canal within Lucas County had no pay for five months, and they had 2,000 laborers in their employ. The contractors, for a long time, had been compelled to pay off in borrowed Michigan " Wild Cat" bills, which in time became uncurrent, causing great distress to all concerned. Payments were made in June following.
The Wabash and Erie Canal was opened from Lafayette to Toledo, in May, 1843. The arrival at Toledo of the first Boat (the Albert S. White), May 8th, was made the occasion of public recognition, in a dinner to the Captain and crew of the Boat at the Ohio House. Judge H. D. Mason was President of the day, and introduced the exercises at the close of the dinner with a few remarks. He was followed by the orator of the occasion, George 13. Way. Addresses were also made b M. H. Tilden, B. F. Stickney, John Fitch, Heman Walbridge and others, attended by sentiments and music. In the evening a party assembled at the Indiana House, where the time was spent pleasantly.
Under date of April 18, 1844, the Blade announced the arrival of " a large fleet of Canalboats from Lafayette," within the previous four days, bringing the following articles: 410,598 pounds of bacon ; 471,922 pounds lard ; 41,949 barrels ashes; 3,983 bushels wheat; 1,445 barrels pork ; 860 barrels flour. The property was mostly advanced on during the previous Winter, and was consigned to an Eastern market. On the (late stated 3,000 bushels wheat were sold in Toledo at 82 cents, free on board Lake vessel. Orders were in the market for wheat at 87 cents, deliverable in Buffalo. The receipts by rail (Erie and Kalamazoo Road) for the preceding week, amounted to 1,580 bushels of wheat, and 890 barrels flour.
The first arrival at Toledo from Cincinnati, via the Miami and Erie Canal, took place June 27, 1845.
Abner L. Backus was appointed Canal Collector at Maumee City, in April, 1844.
In August, 1847, State Engineers surveyed Swan Creek on its East side with reference to the location thereon of a tow-path for Canal Boats. The reason given for choosing that side, was, that the West side was occupied by different establishments, including the Distillery of Kraus, Roemer & Co.; the Lumber Yard of Joel W. Kelsey ; the new Warehouse of Fitch & Co.; the Boat Yard of Mr. Arnold, where one Lake craft and several Canal Boats were in progress.
June 28, 1847, the packet boat Empire, Captain Wiggin, left Dayton by the Miami and Erie Canal, and arrived at Toledo on the morning of the 30th. The Blade contained a card from passengers on the trip, expressing their high appreciation of "the comforts and accommodations furnished to them on the boat," etc. Among the signers to the card were Governor Wm. Bebb, Ex-Governor Thomas Corwin, Robert C. Schenck, John G. Lowe, H. G. Phillips, J. Wilson Williams, Edmund Smith, Edward W. Davies and A. H. Dunlevy-most of them residents of Dayton. The time occupied by the trip was 48 hours. That was considered " fast traveling." By rail the distance has since been made in 3 1/2 hours.
The following statement by Jones & Taylor, merchants, at Cincinnati, of goods received by them at the dates named, shows something of the condition of transportation between that City and the East in 1845 (two years after the opening of the Miami and Erie Canal) :
Received September 27, 1845, by Canal-boat connected with Griffith's line via Toledo, sundry packages of dry goods, 7,027 pounds, at $1.15 (per 100) from New York to Cincinnati; amount of cost, $82.88, covering all charges.
Received September 29, 1845, by Steamer Ohio Mail, sundry boxes merchandise through the Pennsylvania Canal, weighing 5,824 pounds, on which the freight (40 cents from Pittsburg) and charges amount to $170.62, or $2.94 per 100.
As the result of interruptions in transportation, caused by breakage in the Miami and Erie Canal, in 1845, the cost of transporting a barrel of flour from Cincinnati to New York via Toledo, advanced from $1.15 to $2.00.
The journey from New York to St. Louis via Buffalo, Toledo, Lafayette and Terre Haute, was made in October, 1847, in " the short space of eight days." The traveler went to Albany by steamer; thence to Buffalo by cars ; to Toledo by "one of the floating palaces of Lake Erie ;" to Lafayette by " one of Doyle & Dickey's fine packets;" and thence in three days' time in " one of I. & P. Vortices' fine postcoaches."
The editor of the Blade, in a letter dated "Packet Erie, off Defiance, March 27, 1848," after referring to Captain Wiggam as " a gentlemanly, accommodating man, who kept order on his boat and a good table," said: "After all, the Packet, though not so rapid, is preferable to the Railroad. The eating, sleeping, and, in short, all the comforts and conveniences except rapidity, are greatly superior. As to speed, they do well, too, and make a pretty good advance in 24 hours."
The Canal tolls at Toledo in 1847 amounted to $63,869, a gain of $13,831 over 1846. The number of boats in commission at Toledo was 417, with an unusual number being built.
The number of Canal Boats clearing from Toledo, 1848, was 3,753; their aggregate ton-
448 - HISTORY OF TOLEDO AND LUCAS COUNTY.
nage, 142,071,204 pounds; tolls paid, $117,220.25.
The steam Canal packet Niagara arrived at Toledo on the morning of September 24, 1849, having left Cincinnati on the evening of the 19th, stopping at all points intermediate.
The first arrival of a Canal boat at Toledo from Terre Haute, Indiana, was that of the E. A. Hannagan, Captain Robinson, November 5, 1849.
The pioneer Canal-Steamer of the West, is believed to have been the Scarecrow, which left Toledo in November, 1859, for Franklin, with a cargo of lumber. She was about the size of an ordinary Canal Boat, and for power had a small portable engine, similar to those used on pile-drivers. From the fly-wheel a belt extended down to a pulley in the stern, to which a propeller-wheel three feet in diameter was attached.
The Canal Propeller Union, Captain Wm. Sabin, arrived at Toledo, May 25, 1862, from Lafayette, with a cargo of 1,750 bushels of wheat, and having in tow a Canal Boat with 2,050 bushels grain, 20 barrels pork and two casks ham, the whole cargo being 115 tons. The time of the trip was 5 days, 22 ½ hours, of which 19 hours was occupied in stopping, making the running time 5 days, 3 ½ hours, for 204 miles, or 1.62 miles per hour. Her best time was 5 miles per hour.
No more direct and determined contests for supremacy in trade have occurred in the West, than were those long existing between the Canals and the Railways of Ohio. They were waged for life, and led to some remarkable results. Wherever the two agencies in trade came in competition, rates were made very low ; but relieved of such competition, it was in many cases the policy of Railways to compel noncompeting points to make good the losses sustained at competing points. Two or three cases in point may be cited. At one time, the price for transporting wheat from Tontogany, Wood County, to Toledo (23 miles), over the Cincinnati, Hamilton and Dayton Railway, was 7 cents per bushel; while, by same Road, from Troy, Miami County, 99 miles further South, the price was but 6 cents per bushel-the explanation being that Troy was on the line of the Miami and Erie Canal, while Tontogany was dependent wholly on the Railway for facilities. About the time of the foregoing case, the rate for transportation of wheat by the Wabash Railway to Toledo from Emerald (61 miles in distance) was 14 cents per bushel ; while the rate by the same Road from Lafayette to Toledo (203 miles) was but 12 cents Lafayette being on the Wabash Canal, and Emerald without such competition. Like results from competition between rival lines of Railway are seen on many hands; but rarely in as great degree as between Railway and Water routes. This was no doubt due to the fact, that success in such extreme competition was more hopeful with Railways when waged against Water lines of traffic.
This contest was not without vigorous resistance on the part of the Canal authorities from the aggression of Railways. In 1852, the Ohio Board of Public Works first took definite steps in that direction. At that time, the chief competition was between Cincinnati and Dayton, and between Dayton and the Lake-in the former case the Cincinnati, Hamilton and Dayton, and in the other the Mad River and Lake Erie (now Indianapolis, Burlington and Western) Road, competing with the Miami and Erie Canal. For a time, the Board had undertaken to maintain the traffic of the Canal by reductions in tolls ; but the Railroads met these with corresponding reductions. Such policy not meeting the purpose, the Board deemed itself compelled to resort to more thorough means. These it found in a plan for preventing Railroads from crossing the Canals of the State. The Board then consisted of A. P. Miller, Geo. W. Manypenny and James B. Steedman. In March, 1852, the Ohio House of Representatives called upon the Board to report by what authority Railroad Companies have been permitted to erect bridges over the Canals of the State forth e passage of cars ; the means adopted by such Companies to obtain the transportation of freight, which, at proper rates for transportation, would pass upon the Canals ; what effect the removal of such bridges would have upon said Roads; and whether any legislation be necessary for the removal of said bridges." In replying to this call, the Board discussed the subject at some length. It declared all such bridges to exist without authority of law ; spoke of the competition with the Canals as most damaging to their traffic, and detailed facts to show this; and then set forth the remedy for the evil which the Board would advise, to wit
There are many ways in which they (the Railroads) can be reached. Let the State repeal all the criminal laws which protect these Roads from depredation, and the Companies would soon sue for mercy. So, the removal of all the bridges erected by them without authority across the Public Works of the State, would so increase the expenses of transportation upon Railroads, and so delay travel, as to cause them to submit to a system of freightage required by their own true interests and the interests of the State. This Board has already passed an order for the removal of these bridges by the first of June next. We have also ordered our Engineers and Superintendents to prevent the erection of any more bridges across the Canals by Railroad Companies. We would also suggest the propriety of passing a law prohibiting Railroad Companies from shipping produce, merchandise or other articles from within 20 miles of the Canals, at less freight per mile than the highest rate charged for transportation on any other part of the Road.
The report of the Board closed as follows:
If these Railroads would be content with doing their legitimate business, both they and the Canals
CANALS. - 449
might prosper; but unfortunately they are owned and controlled mostly by foreign capitalists, who feel no sympathy with the people of the State or its prosperity, and are guided only by the hope of large dividends. Against the efforts of these capitalists, the State should early erect barricades, and carefully guard them, or it will soon find, when too late, the Public Works are entirely at their mercy.
In the course of construction of the Central Ohio Road, which had been finished from Newark to Zanesville, the Board of Public Works, through Mr. Manypenny, in charge of the Canal at the latter point, interfered and filled in a pit dug for an abutment for a bridge over the Canal, and threatened to employ force to prevent further steps toward such structure by the Railroad Company. Whereupon, that Company applied to Judge R. C. Hurd, of the Licking Common Pleas Court, for an injunction, restraining the Board from further interference. The question was decided by Judge Hurd, in an opinion of some length, in which he reviewed the material facts and law of the case. He held, that the right granted by the Legislature to the Railroad Company'' to construct a Railroad " on a certain line, with °' the right to enter upon land, to survey and lay clown said Road," included the right to build the bridges necessary to the Road on such line, and that Canals were no exception in such case. Hence, it was not necessary that the Board of Public Works be consulted as to the construction of' bridges over Canals, but had " the right to select their ground and proceed to erect their work, wholly independent of the Board ;" the only limit to such right being, that the bridges "should not destroy or substantially or unnecessarily obstruct the proper and accustomed use of the Canal," which point was to be decided, not by the Board, but by the Courts.
This contest, to a greater or less extent, has continued, with pretty constant advance of the Railways upon the domain of the Canals, until the struggle seems nearing its end. Several years ago, the Indiana portion of the Wabash and Erie Canal was abandoned throughout. The Section between the Indiana State line and the junction with the Miami and Erie Canal, was in operation until the close of the season of 1886, its chief' traffic being timber and wood. For some years past the people of Paulding County, living in the vicinity of the Reservoir upon which this Canal depended for water, had been strongly opposed to the continuance of that body of water, on the ground of its deleterious effect upon the health of the surrounding country, and had appealed to the State authorities of Ohio for the abatement of the same as a nuisance. Such request not being complied with, parties unknown during the present year (1887) so far destroyed the banks of the Reservoir as to render it useless, and to deprive the Wabash branch of means indispensable to its operation.
The Miami and Erie Canal (Toledo and Cincinnati) is still operated throughout, though with marked diminution of traffic. It yet transports to Toledo a portion of the produce grown on its line in the region of St. Mary's, as it does more or less of local freights on the Southern half' of its line ; but the aggregate is in marked contrast with the traffic of former years. The Section of this Canal between the locks in Toledo and the connection with the River at Manhattan was vacated in 1870. Its traffic had never been such as, on the score of business to warrant its construction. The River connection at Maumee was even more disappointing in its results, and many years since was practically abandoned.
The extent and directions of the loss of Canal traffic at Toledo are indicated by the following table, showing the amounts of receipts and shipments at that point during the years 1863 and 1864, and for the year 1886 :
COMPARATIVE RECEIPTS.
1864. 1863. 1886.
Flour, bbls 241,130 247,259 4,710
Wheat, bus 1,942,970 1,942,970 767,712
Corn, bus. 246,215 248,131 69,911
Oats, bus 19,112 16,562 8,760
Pork, bbls 14,965 26,877
Bides, lbs 14,290 59,485
Lard, lbs 627,609 1,765,632
Oil Cake, lbs 2,139,675 2,759,841
Staves, No 963,191 1,064,222
Lumber, ft 6,306,000 2,449,418 519,600
Timber, cub, ft 270,277 40,165 149,200
Wood, cords 4,486 2,999 4,196
Wool, lbs 50,619 15.729
COMPARATIVE SHIPMENTS.
1864. 1863. 1886.
Barley, bus 2,906
Wheat, bus 58,003 21,806 22,615
Iron, lbs 111,271 714,991 2,000
Iron Ore, lbs 4,058,880
Ice, lbs 23,514,000
Powder 34,836
Coal, lbs 2,506 25,52 606,000
Salt, lbs 50,659 70,942 3,908
Lath 4,925,000 4,665,000 1,097,000
Shingles 8,781,000 8,616,000 545,000
Lumber, ft 27,431,312 18,255,713 2,068,100