Erie Canal to the “Great Prize” of Western Trade

There were two entry points to regular commerce of the upper Mid-West:  Montreal and New Orleans.  The Erie Canal would add a third.

Continuing Erie Canal Opens,
our selection from The Building of the Erie Canal essay by William H. Seward published in . The selection is presented in six easy 5 minute installments. For works benefiting from the latest research see the “More information” section at the bottom of these pages.

Previously in Erie Canal Opens.

Time: 1825
Place: New York City

Applying these general arguments in favor of inland navigation, they showed that a great chain of mountains passed through the territory of the United States and divided it into Eastern and Western America; that the former, on account of the priority of its settlement, its vicinity to the ocean, and its favorable position for commerce, had many advantages, while the latter- had a decided superiority in the fertility of its soil, the salubrity of its climate, and the extent of its territory; that to connect those great sections by inland navigation, to unite our Mediterranean seas with the ocean, was evidently an object of the first importance to the general prosperity; that the Hudson River offered superior advantages for effecting this connection, because it afforded a tide navigation through the Blue Ridge or eastern chain of mountains, and ascended above the eastern termination of the Catskills or great western chain, and that no mountains interposed between it and the great western lakes, while the tide in no other river or bay in the United States ascended any higher than Granite Ridge, or within thirty miles of Blue Ridge.

After showing the importance of ‘the’ Hudson ‘as-‘ £ natural1* – channel of trade, one hundred seventy miles in length, the petitioners showed that the canal would be virtually an extension of that channel three hundred miles through a fertile country, embracing a great population, and abounding with all the pro ductions of industry; and they asked, if this work was so important when viewed in relation to this State alone, how unspeakably beneficial must it appear when the contemplation should be extended to the Great Lakes and the country that surrounded them — waters extending two thousand miles, and a country containing more territory than all Great Britain and Ireland, and at least as much as France. After demonstrating that New Orleans and Montreal were the only formidable rivals of New York for the great prize of the Western trade, and showing the advantages in that competition which New York would derive from the proposed Erie Canal, a glowing view of its prospective benefits was presented. Leaving to her rivals no in considerable portion of the Western trade, New York, said the memorialists, would engross more than sufficient to render her the greatest commercial city in the world. The whole line of the canal would exhibit boats loaded with the various productions of our soil, and with merchandise from all parts of the world ; great manufacturing establishments would spring up ; agriculture would establish its granaries and commerce its warehouses in all directions; villages, towns, and cities would line the banks of the canal and the shores of the Hudson from Erie to New York; the wilderness and the solitary place would become glad, and the desert would blossom as the rose.

The ground was broken for the construction of the Erie Canal on July 4, 1817, at Rome, with ceremonies marking the public estimation of that great event. De Witt Clinton, having just before been elected to the chief magistracy of the State, and being president of the Board of Canal Commissioners, enjoyed the high satisfaction of attending, with his associates, on the auspicious occasion.

In his annual speech to the Legislature in 1818, he congratulated the people on the commencement of the canals, rap idly reviewed the progress already made in their construction, remarked briefly on their advantages, and earnestly urged that ‘the State was’ required to persevere, by every dictate of interest, by every sentiment of honor, by every injunction of patriotism, and by every consideration which ought to influence the councils and govern the conduct of a free, high-minded, enlightened, and magnanimous people. The Senate responded favorably to these sentiments, and the answer of the Assembly was in terms of spirited congratulation.

The commissioners made a report showing that they had engaged Isaac Briggs, an eminent mathematician, as an engineer on the middle section, and had let the work to be done in small portions by contract. At this session, laws were passed, authorizing the construction of the Chittenango Canal for navigation, and as a feeder to the Erie Canal, and an examination of the outlet of Buffalo Creek, with a view to form a harbor at the entrance of the Erie Canal into Lake Erie, and make improvements of the financial system adopted at the previous session. The act relating to the last-mentioned subject authorized the comptroller to borrow one million dollars for the general uses of the treasury, and to issue therefor stock redeemable on January 1, 1828. When this law was under consideration in the Assembly, Erastus Root moved that the power of the com missioners of the canal fund to borrow money for canal purposes should be suspended until the redemption of the stock debt to be created under the law. This was the last effort made in the Legislature to arrest the prosecution of the canals. The motion was lost, only twenty-one members voting therefor.

In 1819 Governor Clinton announced to the Legislature that the progress of the public works equaled the most sanguine expectations and that the Canal fund was flourishing. He recommended the prosecution of the entire Erie Canal. Enlarging upon the benefits of internal navigation, he remarked that he looked to a time, not far distant, when the State would be able to improve the navigation of the Susquehanna, the Allegheny, the Genesee, and the St. Lawrence; to assist in connecting the waters of the Great Lakes and the Mississippi ; to form a junction between the Erie Canal and Lake Ontario through the Oswego River; and to promote the laudable intention of Pennsylvania to unite Seneca Lake with the Susquehanna, deducing arguments in favor of such enterprises, from the immediate commercial advantages of extended navigation, as well as from its tendency to improve the condition of society and strengthen the bonds of the Union. Henry Yates Jr., in the Senate, and John Van Ness Yates, in the Assembly, on behalf of the proper committees, submitted answers concurring in the opinions expressed by the chief magistrate, and the same were adopted.

Joseph Ellicott having resigned the office of canal commissioner, Ephraim Hart was appointed in his place ad interim, and subsequently Henry Seymour was called to fill the vacancy.

More information here and here, and below.

We want to take this site to the next level but we need money to do that. Please contribute directly by signing up at https://www.patreon.com/history