OHIO
Archaeological and Historical
QUARTERLY.
THE OHIO VALLEY
HISTORICAL ASSOCIATION.
Fifth Annual
Meeting, Pittsburgh, Pa.,
October 30-November
1, 1911.
THE "NEW ORLEANS" CENTENNIAL.
Robert Fulton, who had profited by the
experiments and ex-
periences of John Fitch and James Rumsey
a score or more years
before, made a successful trial with the
steamboat Clermont on
the Hudson River in 1807. The success of
the Clermont on the
New York river inspired her owners,
Fulton, Livingston, and
Roosevelt, with the belief that the
western rivers, the Ohio and
Mississippi, would furnish another field
for a similar profitable
venture. So they sent the junior partner
of the firm, Nicholas
J. Roosevelt, to Pittsburgh to
investigate the matter. He had
just been married and took his bride
with him. The young
couple had a novel honeymoon, journeying
on a house boat to
New Orleans. During this voyage Mr.
Roosevelt made many
observations of the Ohio and Mississippi
Rivers, their currents
and difficulties in the way of
navigation. He found no encour-
agement from any person during his
entire voyage. Everyone
predicted that while a steamboat might
navigate the placid waters
of the Hudson and might perhaps go down
the Ohio and Missis-
sippi Rivers at a great risk, yet she
would never be able to run
back against their swift currents.
However, so confident was he
of success that on his way to New
Orleans he secured several
coal mines along the Ohio from which he
expected to supply
the steamboat he intended to bring along
later. Reaching New
Vol. XXII-1.
(1)
2 Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications. Orleans, the couple took ship for New York where, upon hear- ing his report, his partners, Robert Fulton and Robert R. Living- ston, commissioned Mr. Roosevelt to return to Pittsburgh and build a steamboat. This boat was launched on March 17, 1811, near the present site of the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad depot in Pittsburgh. VOYAGE OF ORIGINAL NEW ORLEANS. On October 20, 1811, the boat, which was called the New Orleans, left Pittsburgh carrying Mr. and Mrs. Roosevelt, as passengers. Mrs. Roosevelt's friends besought her not to make |
|
the voyage because of its alleged great dangers and the disasters which it was generally predicted would overtake the venture, but she gave no heed to these petitions and made the entire voyage to New Orleans. When Louisville was reached it was found that there was not sufficient water for the boat to pass the falls, so she steamed back up the river to Cincinnati. This feat created a great sensation as it proved that the boat could run up the Ohio almost as easily as she could run down. The voyage was replete with sensations. There was a comet visible at the time and when the New Orleans steamed into Louisville near midnight the unwonted noise it made caused the report that the |
Ohio Valley Hist. Ass'n, Fifth Annual
Meeting. 3
heavenly visitor had fallen into the
Ohio. A little later, while
the boat was still on the Ohio occurred
the great New Madrid
earthquake. When the New Orleans reached
the stricken town
of New Madrid some of the surviving
inhabitants thought
she was an evil spirit while others
sought to take refuge on her.
One day hostile Indians in canoes
pursued the New Orleans
but were easily distanced. That night
Mr. Roosevelt was aroused
by cries which he thought portented an
attack by the savages
but were caused by the discovery that
the boat was on fire. The
flames were extinguished and the New
Orleans finally reached
New Orleans in safety, bringing with her
a new passenger in
the shape of a child born to Mr. and
Mrs. Roosevelt during the
voyage.
The New Orleans never returned to
Pittsburgh, being used
for a packet boat between Natchez and
New Orleans. Once she
was sunk and finally damaged but was
rasied and rebuilt.
HISTORY OF THE CELEBRATION.
The idea of celebrating the centennial
of the beginning of
steamboat navigation on the western
rivers was introduced by
Professor A. B. Hulbert of Marietta
College at a meeting of
the Ohio Valley Historical Association
at Cincinnati in 1909.
Dr. William J. Holland, Director of the
Carnegie Museum,
Pittsburgh, a member of that
Association, and also of the His-
torical Society of Western Pennsylvania,
mentioned the matter
to the Secretary of the latter
organization, Burd S. Patterson,
who at once warmly espoused the idea. As
a result a commit-
tee of the Historical Society of Western
Pennsylvania, with Dr.
Holland as Chairman, W. H. Stevenson
Vice Chairman, and
Mr. Patterson Secretary, was appointed
by the late T. L. Rod-
gers, then President of the Society, to
co-operate with the Ohio
Valley Historical Association in
planning the celebration. At
a banquet given by the Historical
Society of Western Pennsyl-
vania on February 17, 191O, at the
Monongahela House, Pitts-
burgh, within a stone's throw of where
the original New Orleans
was launched, Dr. I. J. Cox of
Cincinnati, the then President
of the Ohio Valley Historical
Association, spoke earnestly for
4 Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications. |
|
Ohio Valley Hist. Ass'n, Fifth Annual
Meeting. 5
the proposed celebration as did also Dr.
Holland and others,
with the result that the Society
unanimously endorsed the idea.
The matter was presented to the congress
of historical so-
cieties held at Indianapolis in
December, 1910, by Mr. Patterson
and Professor Hulbert and was approved.
It was agreed that
a committee on the celebration should be
formed with Mayor
William A. Magee of Pittsburgh, a member
of the Historical
Society of Western Pennsylvania as
general chairman; that there
should be a literary program committee
whose chairman should
be Professor Archer Butler Hulbert of
Marietta College, Presi-
dent of the Ohio Valley Historical
Association, and also a Pitts-
burgh local executive committee whose
chairman should be Wm.
H. Stevenson, now the President of the
Historical Society of
Western Pennsylvania but at that time
chairman of its executive
committee. At a banquet of the
Historical Society of Western
Pennsylvania held March (1911), to
celebrate the centennial
of the launching of the New Orleans,
President Hulbert and
others advocated the celebration. One of
the speakers at this
banquet was Hon. Theodore E. Burton,
United States Senator
from Ohio and Chairman of the National
Internal Waterways
Commission.
PITTSBURGH CITY COUNCIL ACTS.
In July, 1911, upon the recommendation
of Mayor Magee,
and with the strong approval of City
Controller Eustace S. Mor-
row and Mr. A. J. Kelly, Jr., then
chairman of the Finance
Committee, the Pittsburgh Council
appropriated fifteen thousand
dollars for the celebration. At the same
time council appropriated
a similar sum for the entertainment of
the National Rivers and
Harbors Committee. These two acts showed
that Pittsburgh's
new council of nine business men was
fully alive to the advan-
tages and needs of waterway improvement.
Mayor Magee appointed an Executive
Committee to take
charge of the celebration. This
committee, at the suggestion of
Secretary Patterson, approved of the
idea of building a replica
of the New Orleans and having her repeat
the voyage of her
prototype. It was originally proposed to
have the celebration
begin on October 27th, the one hundredth
anniversary of the sail-
6 Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications.
ing of the original New Orleans from
Pittsburgh, but in order
to secure the presence of President
William H. Taft, the dates for
the celebration were changed to October 30th,
31st, and No-
vember 1st, 1911.
The New Orleans was assigned the post of
honor in the
great steamboat parade scheduled as the
chief feature of the
celebration on the afternoon of October
31st. Following the
close of the celebration at Pittsburgh,
the New Orleans, on the
morning of November 2nd, commenced her
voyage.
DESCRIPTION OF THE NEW BOAT.
The New Orleans is, as nearly as
possible, an exact replica
of her prototype of one hundred years
ago. She is 138 feet long,
by 261/2 feet wide and 7 feet deep. She
draws 2 feet of water;
she is a sidewheeler propelled by two 12
x 24 separate reversible
engines of 160 combined horse power; she
has two flue boilers
each 22 feet long by 36 inches in
diameter; she has also two
masts for sails which the projectors of
the original New Orleans
felt might be required in an emergency.
Her construction was
rapid. Her plans were approved on August
1, 1911, and keel
laid August 5th, the launching taking
place on August 31st. She
was christened by Mrs. Alice Roosevelt
Longworth on October
31st, in the presence of President
William H. Taft and other
distinguished men. Mrs. Longworth is a
great grand niece of
Nicholas J. Roosevelt, one of the owners
of the original New
Orleans; ex-President Theodore Roosevelt
being a grand nephew
of the builder of the original boat.
Among the guests of the
occasion were Mrs. Alice Crary
Sutcliffe, a descendant of Robert
Fulton, and Rev. C. S. Bullock, a
relative of Robert Livingston.
The first session of the Fifth Annual
Meeting of the Ohio
Valley Historical Association was held
in the Lecture Room,
Carnegie Library, Monday afternoon,
October 30th, 1911. The
Chairman, Prof. Henry B. Temple, of
Washington and Jefferson
College, being introduced by the
President of the Association,
Prof. Archer Butler Hulbert of Marietta
College.
The first paper "The Influence of
the Ohio River in West-
ward Expansion," by President Edwin
Erle Sparks, of Penn-
Ohio Valley Hist. Ass'n, Fifth Annual
Meeting. 7
sylvania State College, excellently
fulfilled its purpose of form-
ing a general introduction to the
sessions of the three-days meet-
ing.
THE INFLUENCE OF THE OHIO RIVER IN
WESTERN
EXPANSION.
BY EDWIN
ERLE SPARKS,
President Pennsylvania State College.
Of the five great continents on the
globe, three have been con-
quered, have been opened and have been
civilized within the span of
recorded history. It is possible,
therefore, to make a comprehensive
study of the point of attack and the
progress of the march across the
continents of North and South America
and of Africa. Points of re-
sistance and points of difference are
found in making such comparison.
Naturally the point of attack is from
the coast, and the line of march
is inland. But here the similarity
ceases; natural and local charac-
teristics begin to show their force in
variations. The general line of
progress in Africa has been from the
North to the South, and a counter
movement from the South to the North,
with a side line from the
west. The main direction in South
America has been from the South-
east to the Northwest, and from the East
to the West, with a slight
progress from the North toward the
South; but in either of these
continents has there been a general,
marked and definite line of ad-
vance.
North America, on the contrary, has ever
maintained one line
of advance, one direction of
progress-from the East to the West.
"Hold Westward, Pilot" cried
the persistent Columbus, and in that con-
fident command he gave the watchword for
four hundred years of
North American advance. "Westward
the course of empire takes its
way" said the equally persistent
Bishop Berkeley in his missionary
vision of christianizing the heathen in
the new world. "Westward lies
the domain of England" said the
ambitious Governor Spottswood, of
Virginia, in attempting to establish the
claim of his king to the Trans-
Alleghenian lands. "Go West, young
man," said Horace Greeley, the
sage of the New York Tribune, in
attempting to find a remedy for
crowded conditions and social unrest in
the settled Eastern States.
"Our manifest destiny is from the
Atlantic to the Pacific" said William
Henry Seward, in calling up the vision
of the Western expansion, which
gave to our domain, eventually, both
Oregon and Alaska.
Omitting as insignificant the detached
settlements of the Spanish
and Russians on the Pacific Coast, the
conquest of the North American
8 Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications.
continent in Canada, the United States
and Mexico has been accom-
plished by a due East to West movement.
That of Mexico preceded
the others because of the easy
conditions of life; that of Canada and
the United States progressed with
slower, but almost equal pace where
climatic conditions were more severe.
The progress of the Dominion,
hindered for a brief space by the Great
Lakes lying directly in the
path, kept pace in the latter days with
the States, and the two arrived
upon the Pacific coast almost
simultaneously so far as transportation,
cultivation and the spread of
civilization are concerned.
In his enthusiasm over the continual
advance of the American
people, De Toqueville, the French
philosopher, declared more than seventy
years ago that they seemed to be driven
onward by the relentless hand
of God. No conquest of a continent was
ever made in so brief a
period. The American frontier of Daniel
Boone, pushed across the
Allegheny Mountains to Kentucky, in the
decade contemporary with
the Revolutionary War; adventurous
Americans were pushing the
French traders out of the Illinois
country during the decade follow-
ing; the next ten years saw the
annexation of the vast trans-Mississippi
tract, known as "Louisiana;"
the next saw the opening of the Ohio
and Mississippi Rivers to steam
navigation; the next witnessed the
founding of the City of Chicago; the
next the opening of the Santa Fe
Trail. During the following decade the territory
of Utah was estab-
lished, and the next brought in the
State of California; within the
second decade following the Pacific
Railway was completed, and ten
years later the available public lands
had been exhausted, and Indian
reservations were being opened to
satisfy the demand for homes in
the West. The conquest of the continent
was now complete.
What caused this rapid advance, this
onward march as if toward
a definitely determined goal? Many reasons have been advanced,
probably all true; but this gathering
calls for the consideration of only
one. We are met here on this notable
occasion, and are devoting
almost a week of festivities to a proper
celebration of one factor in
this national progress-the influence of
waterways. To this topic are
confined the many worthy addresses, of
which this is simply the fore-
cast.
It is most fitting, my friends, that
this celebration should take
place at Pittsburgh, at the headwaters
of the stream which conduced
most largely to the westward expansion,
which lay directly along the
path of progress for many hundreds of
miles. Pittsburgh shares with the
Cumberland Gap the title of
"Gateway to the West." To it turned
thousands of hearts, dissatisfied with
conditions in the older states,
sublime in the courage with which they
faced unknown dangers, ideal
in the fortitude with which they gave
themselves to the task of plant-
ing a continent. Welcome to their
nostrils was the smell of the freshly
upturned virgin soil; soothing to them
was the coolness of the primeval
Ohio Valley Hist. Ass'n, Fifth
Annual Meeting. 9
forests' depths; inviting to their
turgid muscles was the feel of the axe's
handle, or the horns of the plow. The
rivers were the ready made
highways for these pioneers.
Geographically, the Ohio River holds a
place in American History
which none can dispute. Its only
possible rival as an East and West
thoroughfare is the St. Lawrence; but
the mouth of the St. Lawrence
lies far toward the North; it is blocked
by ice during a large part of
the year; its course is marked by rapids
and cataracts; and in the
formative days of American travel it was
held by a hostile people.
Its head was a series of inland seas,
which are now become of ines-
timable value to commerce in the use of
steamships, but which were
dangerous and forbidding to the
flat-boatmen and the rafter.
The Ohio River, on the contrary,
traversed a valley of surpass-
ing beauty. It lay guarded on either
hand by an expanse of American
territory; its climatic surroundings
were ideal during a large part of
the year; its drainage basin was covered
with timbered tracts which
insured a good stage of water. Toward
the East its head waters were
almost touched by the noble Potomac on
the South, or by the broad
expanse of Lake Erie on the North;
toward the West it found open-
ing in the great artery of the
Mississippi, which traversed the body
of the continent. Scarcely a mile of its
banks was not fertile, and
upon either hand, stretching away into
the interior, lay thousands upon
thousands of square miles of territory
inviting to the settler. Numer-
ous tributaries afforded ready access to
these lands, whilst waterfalls
were sufficiently numerous to supply
power for converting grain into flour
and forest trees into timber.
Just above the mouth of the Ohio was the
mouth of the Missouri,
and here transportation found another
ready made road penetrating
the far Northwest with a tributary which
was navigable for flatboats
to the heart of the Kansas prairies.
Thus, in the providence of God,
American expansion found a chain of
waterways, extending almost
in a straight line, with a few
variations, from the Atlantic Ocean to
a point midway of the continent. This
great chain varies only a few
degrees of latitude from beginning to
end; it is not paralleled in any
continent; and it is approached only in
the Nile and Niger of Africa.
If the length of the Amazon is
considered, climatic conditions must
also be taken into account. Here,
indeed, was the stage set for the
most thrilling drama in the mind of the
historian, and scholar-the
making of a nation.
The marked growth of the City of
Pittsburgh, we are likely to
attribute to the coal and iron industry,
and to forget the importance
of her situation at the vantage point of
internal transportation. She
was the great factor in working out the
question of internal improve-
ments, and plays a consequent part in
the larger question of the loose
construction of the American
Constitution and the adoption of a
10 Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications.
paternalistic policy by the national
government. These potent matters,
extending to the very foundation of our
national fabric, are closely
connected with the history of the
navigation of the Ohio River, and
are to form topics for discussion during
these sessions.
One hundred years have brought vast
changes to this City. It
is doubtful to-day whether French
workmen would have to be imported
for shipyard laborers in this vicinity,
or whether it would be necessary
to send to Philadelphia for a steam
engine and transport it in pieces
over the mountains, to be assembled
here, in order to propel a vessel,
as was done one hundred years ago; nor
would the appellation of "the
steamboat" be sufficient to
designate a particular craft at present. A
century ago, "the steamboat"
started for New Orleans; today scores
of steamboats depart for various
parts. But in the midst of this
prosperity let us take time to cast the
mind back to primitive days,
and to do honor to those brave hearts
who had the prophetic vision
and the lofty courage to bring things to
pass.
I will not dwell upon the specific part
played by the Ohio River
and by Pittsburg; these will be brought
out in succeeding papers. Mine
only is the part to give a comprehensive
glance at the situation; to
indicate, if possible, the significance
of this celebration and its relation
to the whole of the nation's history. In
this sense I must congratulate
the local historical societies upon
their initiative, energy and foresight
in calling attention to the true
significance of this occasion, to remind
the public that immaterial as well as
material factors are important
in life, and to call our attention to
the fact that a people which does
not reverence its past fails in its
higher aspects of life no matter how
prosperous it may be in its financial
interests. I must also congratu-
late the energy and foresight of the
public spirited men of Pittsburgh-
the former and the present "Gateway
to the West"-for supporting the
historical aspects of this celebration
and recalling to our minds the
glorious past and the stimulating deeds
of those unspectacular, unsung,
and sometimes unhonored heroes of the
past-the frontier pioneers
of America.
President Sparks was followed by Prof.
Dyess of the
University of Pittsburgh.
WASHINGTON, PITTSBURGH AND INLAND
NAVIGATION.
By PROF. DYESS.
Washington, Pittsburgh and Inland
Navigation! Such is my sub-
ject, made up, you may think of diverse
parts, with scarcely any re-
lation, the one with the other. It is
not so. Washington in a very
Ohio Valley Hist. Ass'n, Fifth Annual
Meeting. 11
true sense is the Father of Pittsburgh
and in an equally true sense, is
the Father of Inland Navigation and the
fortunes of Pittsburgh and
Inland Navigation, as illustrated by
this anniversary, are inextricably
joined together.
Washington is the Father of Pittsburgh.
It is the good fortune of
Pittsburgh to have many illustrious
names associated with the first
chapters of her history. For this spot,
upon which we stand, Pitt
planned, Washington fought, Wolfe
fell. No more illustrious three
can be found in the long story of our
race. But the connection be-
tween Washington and Pittsburgh is a
more intimate one-a nearer
and dearer relation than between
Pittsburgh and Wolfe or even that
between the city and him, from whom it
gets its great name. Pitts-
burgh was a child, which gave great
occasion for expenditure of time
and energy; of brain sweat and body
sweat, and was dear accordingly.
For this place, as the key of the
empire, which Washington foresaw,
in the West, he endured toil and
trouble, suffered hardships, risked life
and limb. Around this city his most
sanguine hopes for himself and
his country clustered. No other city-not
New York nor Philadelphia,
nor Boston nor the fair capital on the
Potomac held such a place in
his thoughts and feelings. May we not
then, I ask, regard him, who
was the father of his country as in some
special sense the father of
Pittsburgh?
Washington is the father of inland
navigation. I might expand that
statement and say that he is the father
of inland communication. Directly
or indirectly, he is associated with
every form of transportation to
or from
Pittsburgh until we reach the automobile. After the most
primitive fashion, he followed the trail
of the buffalo and the deer,
the red savage and the white hunter.
Again in 1755, he comes over
the rough road, which the skill of
Gordon Braddock's engineer has pro-
vided. In 1758, because of his knowledge
and experience, he is a some-
what protesting but great part of the
Forbes expedition. In 1784, he
makes that noteworthy expedition to find
a possible route for canal
or portage between the head waters of
the Ohio and Potomac. By
his anticipation of the success of
"mechanical contrivances" in over-
coming the current of great streams, and
by the help and encourage-
ment he gave to Rumsey may we not
associate his name with the
event we commemorate today? The Potomac
and James companies
largely failed, but their very failure
were the first chapters in the
history of the National Road from
Cumberland to Brownsville; of the
Chesapeake and Ohio canal; of the
Baltimore and Ohio R. R., and,
with the late Prof. Herbert Adams, of
Johns Hopkins University, we
say that Washington is the father of
each of them. All inland com-
munication owes much to Washington.
"For fifty years," says Professor
Hulbert, with reference to Washington's
letter to Governor Harrison
in 1784, "until President Jackson
vetoed the Maysville Road bill, the
12 Ohio Arch. and Hist.
Society Publications.
impetus of this appeal, made in 1784,
was of vital force in forming
our National economic policies."
May we not then speak of Wash-
ington of the father of inland
navigation in this country? But of this
I will speak later.
The attitude of the American people
toward George Washington
during the last 100 years has been
two-fold, and may be summed up
in the two words-deification and disparagement.
The deification arose,
partly from the natural tendency of
every age and time to magnify its
founders and heroes; partly because of
the strange sensitiveness of the
earlier American historians, which led
them to correct whatsoever in
Washington they thought unworthy the
father of his country. Wash-
ington's spelling, grammar, idiomatic
language, idiosyncrasies-all suffer
charge or are improved off the earth.
The result is a wooden image,
a lay figure, an Olympian colossus
without human weaknesses because
without humanity. The worst of this is
that it leads by a natural pro-
cess to the reaction of disparagement.
We are told that Washington,
because of social position, because of a
rich wife, because of the
political necessity that
commander-in-chief should come from Virginia,
was made a general; that he won the
contest rather through the strange
inaction of British generals than
through his own ability; that in the
presidency, he ruled through Jefferson's
and Hamilton's aid; that he
was, in short, a worthy, uninteresting,
commonplace sort of person,
who had fortune thrust upon him rather
than attained it by his own
labors of genius. The first view is
summed up by Mark Twain. He
says that he (Twain) is a greater man
than Washington. Washington
could not tell a lie; Mark could-but
wouldn't. The second is illustrated
by the reply of old John Burns, whom
Washington is persuading to
sell to the U. S.-"Who would you
have been if you hadn't married
the rich Widow Custis?" The first
robs us of the man; of that which
makes Washington bone of our bone, flesh
of our flesh; of that which
makes his character and career both an
inspiration and example. The
second robs us of the hero, and woe to
that nation which is without
heroes, without ideals, without
achievement and therefore hastening to
decay.
I am not here to present a brief for
Washington's greatness as
a whole. Of the famous or hackneyed
saying: "First in war, first in
peace, first in the hearts of his
countrymen," the last part has been
untrue for more than fifty years. The
service rendered has been a
mere lip service, a respectable cant
without knowledge and therefore
without heart. As to phrase "first
in war," the matter is to be decided
by the expert. He has pronounced
Washington a military genius. Or
the matter is to be determined for the
mass of men-those who are
not experts by the war Washington
impresses himself upon our imagina-
tion, the mental picture we are
compelled to draw of him.. Let me
in a few words taken from Professor
Trent, of Columbia University,
Ohio Valley Hist. Ass'n, Fifth Annual
Meeting. 13
tell you what that would be if only we
had adequate knowledge of
this, the first and greatest American.
Professor Trent says: "I think
rather of the Bereker rashness and
daring displayed at Ft. Duquesne
and Monmouth and I recall William the
Conqueror at Hastings; I
see Washington cross the Delaware, I see
him at Valley Forge and I
recall Hannibal upon the Alps; I see him
turn a ragged band of suspici-
ous New Englanders into trained soldiers
ready to die for him and I
recall no less a man than Caesar; I see
him put down the Conway
cabal and reduce Congress, to do his
bidding, and I recall Marlborough;
I see him quell Lee with his fiery eye
and biting words and I somehow
recall Cromwell; I hear him, later in
life, burst forth into grief and
imprecation at the failure of St.
Clair's expedition and I recall Augustus
Caesar; I see him in his tent, brooding
over the treason of Arnold
and weighing the claims of mercy and
justice in the case of Andre
and I recall only his own imperial
self."
As to the phrase "first in
peace," the man who picked the brains
of Jefferson and Hamilton-they were
worth picking and Washington
did it as a master, rejecting what he
would-who recognized the
unifying force in National life of the
American University; who fore-
saw this great empire in the West as no
other man of his day and
generation did-not to mention a hundred
other things-has a pre-
eminent claim to statesmanship. But it
is of another aspect of that
phrase "first in peace" that I
wish to speak.
It is a truism to say that the larger
part of American brains and
brawn, energy and enthusiasm has gone
into the material expansion
and upbuilding of the country. Of
necessity it has been so. It is but
an application of the great law of
supply and demand. There were
mountains to level, forests to fell,
rivers to clear, canals to dig, steam-
boats to invent, perfect and build. It
is a mark of virility not de-
cadence that the men to do the work were
forthcoming. Personally,
I would rather the Hamiltons and
Websters of this generation had
studied law and gone into politics-the greatest of all professions
rather than become captains of industry.
But let us not disparage the
greatness of the man of affairs. If it
be great to carry out the primal
command "go forth"
"subdue" and have "dominion" over the earth's
forces--the keynote to a large part of
history--then are these men
great. If greatness be measured by
beneficence; if he be a benefactor
who makes two blades of grass grow where
one grew before, how
great are those men, who have opened up
continents, joined together
oceans and meliorated the lot of
countless thousands. It is a greatness
which the intelligent twentieth century
man associates with the names
South Africa, Suez, Panama-the greatness
of Cecil Rhodes, Ferdi-
nand de Lesseps and Theodore Roosevelt.
Washington was not only a soldier, and a
statesman. He was
this and added to this, a man of
affairs; for his day a captain of
14 Ohio Arch. and Hist.
Society Publications.
industry; what Prof. Hulbert calls him
"the first Commercial Ameri-
can" and in this at least, he was
far more typical than that typical
American Abraham Lincoln. Washington's
insight into the possibilities
of this Western country in its racial,
commercial and political aspects
is repeated in the insight of Cecil
Rhodes with the possibilities of South
Central Africa. His dream of a waterway,
connecting the Ohio and
Potomac prefigures on a smaller scale
the two great interoceanic canals
of the 19th and 20th centuries-on a
smaller scale but one commen-
surate with his country. If we could
only bring home to our conscious-
ness this aspect of Washington's
character, it would not only give us
a renewed and stimulated sense of his
greatness but it would restore
to us in a large measure the man instead
of the priggish myth which
serves as a portrait to so large a
portion of his countrymen. There
can be no better illustration of this
side of Washington's life than his
relation to inland navigation.
As early as 1753 and 54 this wonderful
boy had paid attention
to the obstacles impeding the navigation
of Potomac. Was some
thought of communication by water
between East and West floating
in his mind? At any rate by 1759, he is
ready to impart privately, to
the members of the Virginian Assembly,
his thoughts and plans regarding
a union of the Potomac with the Ohio.
Such ideas were rendered
impracticable for the moment by the
closing of the Western country to
settlement by the proclamation of 1763.
In 1768 the treaty of Ft. Stan-
wix reversed these conditions. In 1770
Washington wrote to Thos.
Johnson about the improvement of the
Potomac in order that Virginia
and Maryland may capture the
"valuable trade of a rising empire."
In 1774 the matter was brought before
the legislatures of both Maryland
and Virginia, but the increasing turmoil
of the approaching Revolution
prevents adequate consideration and
action. Scarcely are the storms
of war over when the old dominant
interest revives. Before peace is
declared, he makes his expedition up the
Mohawk to "while away the
time" he modestly declares, but as
his correspondence afterwards shows
with a keen eye to the possibilities of
a future Erie canal. Very soon
after his return to Mt. Vernon to live
under his own "vine and fig
tree," on September 1, 1784, he
sets out on a new western trip, again
modestly announcing that its whole
purpose is to visit his lands and
tenants. The entry in his diary of the
3d of September records and
the whole diary proves that the real
purpose is "to obtain information
of the nearest and best communication
between the Eastern and Western
waters; and to facilitate as much as in
me lay the Inland Navigation
of the Potomack." Not only is
Washington interested in a route but
he is keenly alive to the necessity of
improvement in the vessels which
shall ply on that route. The diary of
the 6th of September records
the examination of a model boat,
constructed by the "ingenious Mr.
Rumsey" for ascending rapid
currents by mechanism. Washington
Ohio Valley Hist. Ass'n, Fifth Annual
Meeting. 15
under injunctions of secrecy, witnesses
an experimental trial and then
and there becomes the patron of Rumsey,
giving him soon after high
position under the Potomac Co. The
importance of this fact in con-
nection with this anniversary is evident
from the fact that Rumsey's
"mechanism" soon gave way in
his own mind to the use of steam. Two
years after he propells a boat on the
Potomac by steam and in 1792
launches a steamboat on the Thames and
is thus one of the fathers
of steam navigation. I cannot for want
of time follow the expedition
further but fortunately its results so
far as Washington's mind is con-
cerned, are summed up in the letter to
B. Harrison, dated October 10,
1784--a letter sent at once to the
legislature, becoming thus a state-
paper-a state paper only inferior in its
importance to such funda-
mental acts as the Declaration, the
Constitution, the Ordinance of 1787,
and the Emancipation Proclamation. The
last chapters in the story
of its influence have not yet been
written.
In this letter Washington enumerates the
advantages of a canal
connecting the head waters of the
Potomac and Ohio to be sup-
plemented by a canal from the Ohio to
Lake Erie. He says the tide
waters of Virginia are 168 miles nearer
Detroit than that of St. Law-
rence; 176 miles nearer than that of the
Hudson at Albany; states
that Pennsylvania is contemplating the
opening of a canal from Toby's
creek, 95 miles above Ft. Pitt and the
west branch of the Susquehanna,
with a canal between the Susquehanna and
the Schuylkill. The difficulty
and expense of this he recognizes, but
says in words which are a
challenge to the Pittsburgh of to-day
"a people, however, who are
possessed with the spirit of commerce,
who see and who will pursue
their advantages, may achieve almost
anything." He says-that New
York will do the same, "no person,
who knows the temper, genius and
policy of those people as well as I do,
can harbor the smallest doubt."
Next Washington speaks of the obstacles,
viz: the jealousy of different
states and of one part of a state for
another; the present heavy taxa-
tion; absence of financial resources;
that trade advantages are remote;
that a sufficient spirit of commerce is
not found in Virginia, all of
which he seeks to overcome by wise
arguments. The political argu-
ment I quote in full or nearly so.
"I need not remark to you sir that
the flanks and rear of the U. S. are
possessed by other powers and
formidable ones too; nor how necessary
it is to apply the cement
of interest to bind all parts of the
Union together by indissoluble bonds,
especially that part of it which lies
immediately west of us with the
Middle States. For what ties, let me
ask, should we have upon those
people? How entirely unconnected with
them shall we be? And what
troubles may we not apprehend if the
Spaniards on their right and
Great Britain on their left, instead of
throwing stumbling blocks in
their way as they now do, should hold
out lures for their trade and
alliance? What when they get strength, which will be sooner than
16 Ohio Arch. and
Hist. Society Publications.
most people conceive (from the
emigration of foreigners, who will
have no particular predilection toward
us, as well as from the re-
moval of our own citizens), will be the
consequence of their having
found close connections with both or
either of those, in a commercial
way? It needs not in my opinion the gift
of Prophecy to foretell. The
Western settlers, (I speak now from my
own observation), stand as
it were upon a pivot. The touch of a
feather would turn them any
way." Again speaking of the
proposed canal, he says, "The Western
inhabitants would do their part towards
its execution." "Weak as they
are they would meet us at least half
way."
The effect of this letter is almost
immediate. The Potomac and
James Companies are formed, Washington
being chosen President of
the former. The State of Virginia in
recognition of Washington's ser-
vice, voted him shares in both
companies, which he refused to accept
unless for educational purposes. He thus
disposed of them in his will.
Work was begun in the Potomac and
pressed vigorously but Wash-
ington is called once more by the larger
necessities of the Nation from
the work so near his heart. The work was
not a failure - it is living
to-day and ought to bring Washington
close to the hearts of the
people of this eastern Mississippi
valley. May we not then say that
the man to whom this section was a
matter of anxious concern from
his earliest manhood to his latest years,
who dreamed this scheme
of inland navigation, who planned the
canal yet to be between Lake
Erie and Pittsburgh, who built the first
grist mill west of the Alle-
ghenies, who first experimented with
western Pennsylvania coal, may
well be called the Father of Pittsburgh
and of inland navigation.
The third paper on the Monday afternoon
program was by
Miss H. Dora Stecker of the University
of Cincinnati.
CONSTRUCTING A NAVIGATION SYSTEM IN THE
WEST.
BY H. DORA STECKER.
On account of the large scope of the
subject, it has seemed pref-
erable to treat only a single incident
in the early history of the steam-
boat in the west, that is, the endeavor
of the Fulton and Livingston
interests to build up a system of
navigation based on exclusive privi-
leges granted by states, similar to
those given them by the state of
New York, and even this treatment must
necessarily be brief and
desultory. Indeed, for a proper handling
of this one phase, an introduc-
tion dealing with the origin of this
system of state grants, with our
early patent law, and with the legal
contests which arose therefrom,
Ohio Valley Hist. Ass'n, Fifth Annual
Meeting. 17
would have been advisable. The
controversies over the right to un-
restricted navigation were carried to
the state legislatures, and to Con-
gress, and were ultimately pronounced
upon by the Supreme Court, in
the well known case of Gibbons vs.
Ogden. The situation in the
west was adjusted much earlier than in
the east, and in a way was
only its reflex.
Aside from constitutional and legal
considerations, at the bottom
of any discussion of the steamboat
should be its economic effects.
These probably constitute its prime
importance.
Any of these phases of the subject would
have more than filled
the time allotted to the speaker; hence
the writer's limited treatment
of so large a topic.
Although the invention of the steamboat
had been perfected pri-
marily with a view to the navigation of
the Mississippi, the latter
river was only one link in a general
system which was intended, by
the projectors, Messrs. Fulton and
Livingston, to embrace the whole
country. In April of 1813 Fulton wrote
Jefferson: "When peace re-
turns, or in four or five years from
this date I shall have a line of
steamboats from Quebec to Mexico and to
St. Mary's. The route is
up the St. Lawrence, over Lake
Champlain, down the Hudson to
Brunswick, down the Delaware to
Philadelphia, by land carriage to
Pittsburgh, down the Ohio and
Mississippi, to Red River, up it to
above Natchitochez, the total land
carriage about 500 miles, the other
route to St. Mary's, land carriage not
more than 200 miles. The most
of these boats are now
constructing."
In order to insure the permanency of
such a system, it was con-
sidered advantageous, where possible, to
obtain exclusive rights from
the different states, of entering their
waters by steamboat. This practice
took its rise in the system which had
prevailed among the individual
states, before the adoption of the
Constitution, of rewarding inventors
or authors by letters patent, but after
the formation of the new govern-
ment this function was considered as
having passed into the hands of
Congress. However, in 1798, Chancellor
Livingston, who later becomes
the colleague of the inventor Fulton,
had revoked in his favor, by the
state of New York, an act of
encouragement for the navigation of its
waters by steamboat, which had been
granted eleven years before to
John Fitch, and which was considered
inoperative on account of Fitch's
failure to produce a steamboat on the
waters of New York, Subse-
quent acts, extending the time for
completing a steam vessel and con-
taining penalties against the invasion
of the privileges conferred, were
passed from time to time in favor of the
Chancellor and his associates.
This procedure on the part of a state
rendered a United States patent
of relative minor importance, as the
state grant excluded from the
Vol. XXII - 2.
18 Ohio Arch. and Hist.
Society Publications.
waters of the state concerned all boats
driven by fire or steam except
those of the men for whose benefit the
act had been passed.
Close upon the heels of the success of
the Clermont, Fulton found
himself opposed on all sides, on the one
hand by a group of older
inventors who had been working on the
problem of the steamboat for
twenty years, notably John Stevens and
William Thornton, and on the
other by a group of men who were anxious
to compete with him in
a business rivalry on the Hudson and the
other waters of New York.
To protect himself against the first,
Fulton had taken out a United
States patent for his invention in
February of 1809, although he was
here preceded by the Superintendent of
the Patent Office himself, Dr.
William Thornton, an ardent and
disappointed member of the old Fitch
company, which had built a steamboat for
the Mississippi and had
made all preparations for establishing
such navigation west of the
Alleghenies at the time of the opening
of the Northwest territory.
Yet the New York grant afforded better
security than the patent, as
the validity of Fulton's claim to his
invention was challenged from
the first, and a bitter controversy
engendered, due largely to the loose
methods then prevailing of issuing
patents indiscriminately by the gov-
ernment and of then throwing the onus of
the decision upon the courts.
The same privileges conferred by the
state of New York were
undoubtedly desired from the other
states, particularly from those in-
volving the western rivers. Indeed, even
before the survey trip of
Mr. Roosevelt down the Mississippi in
1809, preliminary to building
the New Orleans, it was known
that an effort would be made to have
the legislature of the Territory of
Orleans grant exclusive rights for
the waters within its jurisdiction,
thereby obtaining control of the ob-
jective point of all downward
commerce-New Orleans; and in October
of 1808 Dr. Thornton, the bete noir of
the Fulton Company, sent in a
letter of protest to the Collector of
the Port at New Orleans on this
subject:
"I have lately heard," says
he, "that Mr. Fulton and Mr.
Livingston of New York intend to apply
for a Patent [i. e. a state
grant] to the Assembly of N. O. I have
already a Patent in
conjunction with some others, from the
United States & also
the King of Spain for the navigation of
the Miss. with steam-
boats [Thornton was referring to the
affairs of the Fitch Co.,
whose moving spirit he had been], but in
consequence of alterations
made by the Co., in the apparatus,
during my absence, the Scheme
was ruined, & I determined to wait
until the Patent expired [this
in reference to Fitch's United States
patent for his invention, con-
ferred in 1791]. I am desirous of
establishing Boats to ascend the
Miss. I consider it against the laws of
the Union for a State to
grant a Patent now to any Individual;
but in consequence of the
Influence of these Gentlemen in the
State of New York they have
Ohio Valley Hist. Ass'n, Fifth Annual
Meeting. 19
obtained a Patent there for 25 years,
which though in my opinion
nugatory & inefficient, will
certainly create disputes and tend to
lessen the competition so essential to
the public good-Lest an at-
tempt be made to monopolize the Miss.
also & thereby make ad-
venturers of small fortune afraid to
risk an opposition, I am in-
duced to trouble you with a few lines to
desire you to make the
Subject known immediately and defeat a
measure so highly in-
jurious to the public. I beg you to urge
a regular Protest against
and patent for Steamboats from the
legislature of New Orleans.
If those gentlemen have invented
anything new they can have a
Patent from the United States for the
same for fourteen, not
twenty-five years, but knowing that it
is not new they wish to
obtain exclusive rights from particular
states, which, however, are
certainly contrary to the spirit of the
Constitution."
Whether Thornton's letter at this
particular time had its desired
effect is not evident, although the act
referred to was not passed until
April of 1811; but no doubt the series
of protests against granting this
type of monopoly which he poured into
the various legislatures must
have borne fruit.
In regard to steamboat activities in the
west, during Mr. Roose-
velt's survey of the river it was
publicly advertised that two companies
would be formed by Messrs. Fulton and
Livingston, one for the Ohio,
the other for the Mississippi, provided
certain "indulgencies" were
granted; and during the session of
1809-10 petitions were presented to
both the legislatures of Ohio and
Kentucky, which, after setting forth
the advantages resulting from steam
navigation, requested that ex-
clusive rights, after the manner of
those conferred by the state of
New
York, should be bestowed upon the petitioners. In the Ohio
house a bill was favorably acted upon,
and on the 26th of December,
1809, sent to the Senate for
concurrence; but here it was voted down.
Thus one state expressed itself as
opposed to this principle, however
advantageous the steamboat might prove
to be. The following month
Mr. Breckenridge, in the Kentucky House,
gave the report of the com-
mittee to whom the question had been
referred, going over the situation
as follows:
"The petitioners state that they
have discovered a certain method
of propelling boats by fire or steam;
that their plan has been in actual
operation upon the waters of the state
of New York for more than two
years, and their boat performs a voyage
of 160 miles in 34 hours.
The petitioners represent that the
difficulty and expense of this mode
of navigation is very great; and
although they have obtained from the
congress of the United States a patent
for their invention [this having
been only the February preceding], the
time for its enjoyment is too
short. They propose they shall, within a
given time, erect a boat or
20 Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications.
boats, on the Ohio, or Mississippi
rivers; that for the first boat so
erected, the legislature of this state
shall extend to them its protection
for twenty years; and for every other
boat five years, but in all not
to exceed thirty years. That their boat
shall perform any given voyage,
on the Ohio, or Mississippi rivers, in
one-third of the time that such
voyage is now usually performed by
vessels navigating those waters,
and that their charge for freight shall
be one third less than the present
general price for freight. The
petitioners pray, for that for the viola-
tion of any of the immunities granted
them by this state, the legislature
will impose certain penalties and
forfeitures."
In regard to the foregoing statements
the committee raised the
following questions:
1st. Would not the interference on the
part of Kentucky in the
manner proposed infringe upon the power
delegated to congress by
the constitution?
2. Would it be politic to grant such
exclusive privilege for such
a length of time?
"Upon the first question," the
report continues, "your committee
are clearly of the opinion that the
constitution of the United States
prohibits the state legislatures upon
such subjects and in a manner
contemplated by the petitioners. By the constitution of the United
States Congress are invested with 'power
to promote the progress of
science and useful arts, by securing for
limited times, to authors and
inventors, the exclusive right to their
respective writings and discoveries.'
* * * * The
petitioners have, under the law, applied, and obtained
a patent for their invention, and the
object of the petition is an exten-
tion, for more than double the time, for
the enjoyment of the exclusive
rights, acquired by their patent. Your
committee deems this unjust, and
contrary to the laws of the United
States.
"Upon the second question your
committee have but little hesita-
tion in declaring, that to grant the
prayer of the petition would be
impolitic.
"At this time the chief part of our
surplus produce and manu-
factures descends the Ohio and
Mississippi rivers for a market. The
natural course of things would seem to
require, that by the same channel
we should receive all the importations
that are necessary for the con-
sumption of this [western] country. It
is believed that this period
is not very distant. The importance of
this species of commerce, to
the western people, is too great and too
obvious to require comment.
It would therefore be dangerous and
impolitic to invest a man or set
of men with the sole power of cramping,
controlling, or directing the
most considerable part of the commerce
of the country for so great
a period." And so the petition was rejected.
Yet notwithstanding this failure to
obtain exclusive control of
the Ohio, the Ohio Steamboat Navigation
Company was organized, and
Ohio Valley Hist. Ass'n, Fifth Annual
Meeting. 21
preparations made for the construction
of the New Orleans. At least
the Mississippi, with its vast
tributaries, was still an object of prime
importance for control, and in August of
this year, 1810, we are told
by Fulton, himself, petitions for such
rights were sent to Governor
Claiborne, of Orleans Territory, to the
Governor of Mississippi Terri-
tory, to the Governor of Upper Louisiana
Territory, and to the Governor
of Tennessee. This would practically
cover the remaining waters. In
a letter to Governor Howard, of Upper
Louisiana Territory, it was
represented that a capital of $200,000
was required to extend navigation
on the Mississippi, for which
subscriptions could not be raised unless
the subscribers were assured of adequate
protection in their rights,
the patent law being inadequate.
Appended to the petition was the
act which they desired passed in their
favor. This request was laid
before the Territorial Legislature, but
postponed, the only information
extant on the subject being a small
marginal notation to this effect
on the original petition. Yet
notwithstanding these widespread applica-
tions, they all ultimately failed of
their purpose except that made to
the Territory of Orleans, or, as it was
lager to become, the state of
Louisiana. In March, 1810, the
inhabitants of this territory had ap-
plied for admission to the Union, and in
the summer of this year
Governor Claiborne found it necessary to proceed to Washington.
Here he and the territorial delegate,
Julien Poydras, one of the in-
fluential men of his district, were
approached by friends of the steam-
boat measure, resulting in a visit by
the Governor to the patentees in
New York. In consequence the petition
was submitted to the legis-
lature of the Territory of Orleans, in
the spring of the following year,
with the accompanying message:
"Gentlemen of the Legislative
Council and of the House of Repre-
sentatives:
"I now lay before you the petition
of Robert R. Livingston and
Robert Fulton, two distinguished
citizens of the United States, praying
you to 'grant them the exclusive right
to navigate the waters of this
Territory with boats moved by steam or
fire,' on certain conditions.
Of the power of the Legislature to
conform to the prayers of the
petitioners I have no doubt; but as to
the expediency of doing so, you,
Gentlemen, can best determine. During my
journey through the Middle
and Northern States, the past summer, I
noticed with great pleasure
this new and useful mode of improving
the navigation of our Rivers;
and I feel confident that the
introduction of steamboats on the Missis-
sippi and its waters would greatly
conduce to the convenience and
welfare of the Inhabitants of this
Terr." In notifying the patentees
of the passage of the act desired,
Claiborne assured them of his prompt
co-operation in promoting any measure
essential to their security and
necessary to prevent intrusion upon
their rights.
Not looking at the matter from a
constitutional standpoint, it
22 Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications.
was difficult for this district to let
pass so splendid an opportunity for
facilitating the carrying trade of the
whole west, holding, as it did, its
outlet. The attitude taken by Orleans
was that this system promised
an immediate and adequate means of
developing her resources, and
her waters were the gateway through
which the other western states
must come. But the point was not well
taken, for the Fulton Company,
with all its promise, was not able to
put out enough steamboats on
the Ohio and Mississippi in order to
exclude those men who were
willing to enter the field against them;
and the effect of the Louisiana
act was merely to dwarf the revived commerce
arising after the close
of the war of 1812. The Hudson at this
time did not as yet have the
benefit of steam navigation for its
freight-the sloop owners had com-
pelled the monopolists to confine
themselves to passengers-but on the
Mississippi the situation was entirely
different; and the attempt to
limit commercial intercourse to the five
or six boats which were all
that had been built by the Fulton
Company, at Pittsburgh, could only
have been futile.
It was evident that men were willing to
try steam navigation in
these parts. Independent builders were arising, and groups of men
along the river were willing to embark
in the venture. In September,
1811, we find the petition of Oliver
Evans, a pioneer steam engine
manufacturer of Philadelphia, before the
legislature of Tennessee, point-
ing out that with a new mode of
construction it was not necessary
to build boats of the costliness of the
Fulton type. Indeed, Evans be-
gan a boat at Pittsburgh, which he was
later to run on the Ohio.
When Mr. B. H. Latrobe, the successor to
Mr. Roosevelt, arrived at
Pittsburgh, in the fall of 1813, to take
charge of the affairs of the
Ohio Steamboat Navigation Company, he
had to compete with a rival
company which had already begun work.
This consisted mainly of
Quakers, we are told, centering about
Brownsville, and they also had
adopted a cheaper type of building.
Instead of the large sea vessel,
these men were putting out fragile,
barge-shaped boats, of very small
tonnage, merely an adaptation of the
crafts used on the western rivers,
which could run the year 'round, and a
line, all the way from Browns-
ville to New Orleans was being
established. Beginnings of independent
boat building were also arising at other
quarters. Subscription papers
were passing along the towns on the
Ohio; a company, under Dr. Ruble,
was being organized at Louisville;
Oliver Evans had returned to the
field; and by 1816 the Gallatin
Steamboat Company was incorporated
by the Legislature of Kentucky. In spite
of the difficulties of getting
a boat together at any point outside of
Pittsburgh, since in the west
steam machinery was as yet a negligible
quantity, the hopes of the
various mercantile centers were running
ahead of this drawback, and
the press was expatiating on the
advantages to be derived by direct
importation by way of New Orleans,
instead of over the mountains.
Ohio Valley Hist. Ass'n, Fifth Annual
Meeting. 23
When, in 1815, the
"Enterprize" arrived from below, thereby demon-
strating that the river could be steamed
as far as the falls of Ohio,
schemes burst into full blaze for
severing the economic dependence of
the West on the merchants of the East,
when the first of a series of
seizures of independent steamboats took
place at New Orleans. After
the Battle of New Orleans the
"Enterprize," on the eve of her de-
parture up the river, was seized by the
representatives of the monopoly
on account of entering the waters of
Louisiana without operating under
their license, and although Captain
Shreve had given bail and was
allowed to depart with his vessel
without waiting for the trial, this
procedure aroused great indignation.
Efforts had been made to keep
these boats out of the Ohio by claims of
infringement on the Fulton
type of boat, their points of
resemblance, being merely the wheel. The
men who desired to build steamboats,
particularly those constituting
the importing and exporting companies
which were forming, were in-
timidated, in addition, by various
patent claimants, who, in an attempt
to break the power of the New York
monopoly, used this means to
attack it, and threatened, in common,
with the monopolists, to prose-
cute all who did not operate under their
various licenses. Thus the
westerners were placed between the fire
of adopting any feasible type
of vessel, and of daring to enter the
waters of Louisiana; and the
seizure of the "Enterprize"
only added to the embarrassment. The
latter vessel, though but a fragile
barge, by way of answer to her
seizure, made the first ascent of the
Mississippi that had up to that
time been accomplished. Mass meetings
were held at Louisville and
other points, and the legislatures of
Ohio and Kentucky appealed to for
aid. Suggestions were made that the
legislatures advance funds for
defending some one who would venture a
test suit on patent rights,
or publicly aid in purchasing these
rights from the real proprietors, so
that steam navigation should not be
retarded. An importing company
had been formed at Cincinnati for direct
importation from England,
and Congress had been asked to establish
ports of entry at this point
and Louisville. In addition, Kentucky,
declaring that its prosperity de-
pended upon exportation and importation
by way of the Mississippi,
exempted all merchandise so imported
from state taxation for five
years.
In February, 1816, the legislature of
Ohio, in response to an appeal,
passed a resolution asking that their
senators and representatives in
Congress exert their influence in
obtaining a settlement of the con-
flicting claims set up by the various
inventors, who had carried their
cause to Congress in an effort to
prevent the Fulton patent from be-
ing renewed. In addition they were
requested to institute an inquiry
as to whether the legislature of the
Territory of Orleans had not ex-
ceeded their constitutional powers by
enacting the state monopoly.
24 Ohio Arch. and
Hist. Society Publications.
The situation over the patent rights was
ludicrously described in
a local paper:
"You purchase of Fulton, Livingston
prosecutes you. You pur-
chase of Livingston, Fulton prosecutes
you. There you are, after being
chained and baited by their lawyers, to
be again muzzled and worried
by Mr. Evans' standing, legitimate
counsellors; and if you escape death,
or are not quite torn to pieces-at last
my lord Fairfax, by his attorney,
Mr. Robinson, unkennels another pack,
and should the poor adventurer
afterwards have a limb left, or a drop
of blood to be sucked, ten to
one but Fitch himself would arise from
the grave to annihilate him."
Timber for the building of a steamboat,
this Cincinnati writer
complains, has been lying in the
shipyard for months, and but for the
patent rights conflict, there would have
been a boat plying between
Cincinnati, Louisville and Pittsburgh,
but the owner was not fond
of lawsuits, and since the seizure of
the "Enterprize" was waiting on
some action from the members in
Congress.
In January, 1817, the legislature of
Kentucky adopted a resolution
against the action of Louisiana which
contained something of the old
tenor, when the Kentuckians were ready
to march down upon the
Spaniards and demand by right of force
the free navigation of the
river:
"Whereas," this resolution
held forth, "the citizens of the United
States possess the inalienable right of
navigating the great waters which
communicate with the ocean; and the high
destiny to which the author
of nature seems to invite the peoples of
these states depends upon the
security of that right from all
violation, and the honor as well as
dignity of every state commands her to
assert with vigilance the rights
of those subject to her sovereignty:
"1st. Be it therefore resolved by
the general assembly of the
Commonwealth of Kentucky, That they have
viewed with the deepest
concern, the violation of the right
guaranteed by the federal constitu-
tion and the laws of Congress, to
navigate the river Mississippi, in
the seizure of the steamboat
"Enterprize," under the pretended authority
of a law enacted by the legislature of
the late territory of Louisiana;
"2d. Resolved, That they will maintain inviolate by all
legitimate
means the right of her citizens to
navigate said river, and its tributary
streams;
"3rd. Resolved, That the government
of Pennsylvania, Virginia,
Tennessee, Ohio, Louisiana and Indiana,
be respectfully requested to co-
operate with this, to prevent by
appropriate means the recurrence of
an evil so much to be deprecated;
"4th. Resolved, That our senators
and representatives in Congress
be requested to exert themselves to
procure the adoption of such measure
as they may deem best calculated to secure the navigation of the said
river."
Ohio Valley Hist. Ass'n, Fifth Annual
Meeting. 25
Yet in Congress it was decided that the
matter did not lie within
its province, but should be settled by a
judicial inquiry.
On account of the outcry raised against
the action of the monopoly,
a resolution was introduced into the
Louisiana legislature to inquire
into the expediency of repealing the
obnoxious measure. The report
of the committee of commerce and
manufactures, embodying this in-
quiry, avoided the larger and more vital
issue of the effect of this
act on the commerce of the country
depending on the Mississippi, and
contented itself with recounting the
benefits which steam navigation
had conferred on the state of Louisiana,
particularly in the way of
reducing the price of freight between
New Orleans and Natchez. "In-
deed," it said, "your
committee, far from thinking it useful or necessary
to repeal the charter of the company,
do, on the contrary, think they
ought to be encouraged by all possible
means." They pointed out that
the west would draw its manufacturing
products from the Atlantic
states exclusively through New Orleans,
and that the surest means
to attain this end would be to encourage
the company which would
best secure its success. Governor
Claiborne, himself, published an open
letter narrating his connection with the
whole affair; and as a corollary
to their report, the legislature, during
the next month incorporated the
Atlantic Steam Coasting Company, for the
purpose of establishing a
steam packet between New York and New
Orleans. This company was
given the exclusive privilege of
entering the Mississippi from sea by
steamboat, for a term of twenty years,
it holding the right of entering
the waters of Louisiana by permission of
the Fulton interests, which
were, no doubt, concerned in this
establishment of a steam connection
with New York. Thus Louisiana meant to
hold the key to the com-
merce of the west by both river and sea.
Yet could this growing com-
merce be immediately accommodated by the
new mode? "They talk of
an outlet for the western produce and
the importation of foreign mer-
chandise to annihilate the connection
with the Eastern cities," com-
plains a critic of the action of the
Louisiana legislature in failing to
repeal the monopoly. When? Why, forsooth,
when Livingston and
Fulton build boats enough in their own
good time and pleasure to
accommodate the millions of
subjects who would (if their grant hold
good) be dependent on them for the
privilege of riding to New Orleans
in a steamboat."
Indeed this threat of severing the
commercial dependence on the
Eastern states seemed valid, since the
steamboat made it possible to
import by way of sea cheaper than across
the mountains, thus obviating
the heavy cost of exchange. It was
pointed out that the balance of
trade would be diverted into one's own
section, for with the draining
of specie eastward, which had been the
practice heretofore, the west
considered that as yet it had no
merchants in the real sense-"only
mere packers of goods and of cash;"
yet it was predicted that the
26 Ohio Arch. and
Hist. Society Publications.
day would come when the scepter of
empire would be swayed by
western hands. Indeed the utterances of
the time indicate that a bitter
sectional feeling existed on account of
the inability of the westerners
to supply themselves with the
manufactured products that they needed.
They suspected that every internal
improvement contemplated for their
parts was meant to divert their trade
eastward. "It was not until the
moment that the steamboat of the
Mississippi interfered with the East-
ern brethren and the Eastern brethren
were alarmed for fear of losing
our trade," they said, that the
Cumberland road was being finished.
Yet in unrestricted steam navigation
they thought they saw a solution
of this undesirable state of
dependence. Indeed, it was predicted,
whenever the obstructions at the falls
of the Ohio and the imposition
of the conflicting claims over patent
rights were put an end to, freight
by steamboats to Pittsburgh would not
exceed 2½ cents from New Or-
leans.
In the trial of the
"Enterprize," which was held in 1816, the pre-
liminary advantage was lost by the
members of the monopoly, it being
held by the lower court that the
territorial legislature had exceeded its
authority in granting this privilege,
but the case had been appealed.
Indeed, one of the fundamental
provisions of the enabling act for ad-
mitting the territory as a state had
been the insertion of an ordinance
into the constitution providing for free
navigation. In the fall of the
year, Captain Shreve, who had been
seized with the "Enterprize," de-
termined to fight out his cause, and
brought down his new boat, the
Washington; but this, too, was seized. However, the court granted
Shreve the right to sue for damages in
case his opponents lost their
cause, and with this decree the suit was
withdrawn against him, also
the appeal which had been made from the
decision regarding the "Enter-
prize." Yet the difficulty was not
over. The whole controversy culmi-
nated in April of 1817, when a series of
trials took place at New
Orleans which aroused the highest
interest. Suits were brought against
the owners of the Washington, the
Oliver Evans, and the Franklin, and
a forfeiture of the boats and $5,000
damages for each infringement
of the state right demanded. The cases
were heard in open court, before
Judge Hall of the United States District
Court, but unfortunately the
arguments have failed to come down to
us. However, after hearing
both sides, Judge Hall handed down the
decision that the court had
no jurisdiction in the matter and
dismissed the petitions of the plaintiffs
with costs, practically throwing the
victory with the independents, and
showing that the courts were out of
sympathy with the measure. The
same decision was given in all three
cases, and this practically solved
the question for the time being,
although suit was again instituted against
the boat Constitution (formerly
the Oliver Evans) in the fall of that
year. Although the action against the Constitution
dragged on for some
time, we have no record of the freedom of
navigation being interfered
Ohio Valley Hist. Ass'n, Fifth Annual
Meeting. 27
with after the first half of the year
1818, the state grant remaining on
the statute book a dead letter, and the
whole matter receiving adjudica-
tion by the decision of Chief Justice
Marshall in 1824, in the well
known case of Gibbons vs. Ogden. Even
before the trials of April,
1817, boats had been springing up
everywhere. By 1819, there were over
sixty in western waters, and from this
period the west, with the changes
wrought by the introduction of the
steamboat, may be said to have
entered upon her second stage of
existence. The day of the licensed
company was over-and the period of free
competition among steam-
boats inaugurated. What this meant in
hastening internal improvement,
in stimulating domestic manufacture, in
welding the west into an
economic unit, is another chapter in the
history of the steamboat.
Monday evening was given over to a
Waterways Meeting
under the auspices of the Historical
Society of Western Penn-
sylvania, impromptu addresses being
delivered by Mayor Magee
and Governor Tener. The main address of
the evening was by
Col. John L. Vance.
OHIO RIVER IMPROVEMENT, AND LAKE ERIE
AND
OHIO RIVER SHIP CANAL.
By JOHN L. VANCE.
Every step in the progress of the
improvement of the Ohio River
has received the approval of the
Congress and the recommendation
of the Engineers of the United States
Army after careful surveys and
examinations of the river from its
source to its mouth.
A special Board appointed under direct
authority of Congress,
followed by the Board of Review--both
boards composed of experi-
enced officers of recognized
ability-made reports recommending the
improvement of the river by locks and
movable dams to provide nine
feet of water.
In closing its official report, the
Special Board said: "In view
of the enormous interests to be
benefited by continuous navigation on
the Ohio River, and the great
development which may be expected
from such increased facilities, the
Board is of the opinion that the
Ohio River should be improved by means
of locks and movable dams
to provide a depth of nine feet from
Pittsburgh to Cairo."
And the Board of Review reported:
* * * "For these reasons the Board
is of the opinion that the
improvement of the Ohio River by locks
and movable dams so as to
28 Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications.
secure a depth of nine feet as
recommended in the report of the Special
Board is worthy of being undertaken by
the United States.
"In making this recommendation the
Board realizes that it is
suggesting a plan for river improvement
on a scale not hitherto at-
tempted in this country; but *
*
on account of the large com-
mercial development of its shores and
its connection with the lower
Mississippi, now maintained in a
navigable condition, the Ohio River
is, in the opinion of the Board, the one
river of all others most likely
to justify the work."
These reports received the strong
endorsement of the Chief of
Engineers of the Army and the Secretary
of War in transmitting
them to Congress.
Fifty-four locks and movable dams are
required to provide nine
feet of water at all seasons of the year
from Pittsburgh to Cairo-
nearly 1,000 miles.
Twenty-three of these locks and dams are
completed or in process
of construction, leaving thirty-one to
be provided for by appropriations
by Congress.
Sixty per cent of the sites for the 54
locks and dams have been
secured; all the sites have been
practically fixed; the money has been
appropriated to complete the purchase of
all, and the Government
is moving as rapidly as possible to
obtain titles thereto.
In the report accompanying the river and
harbor bill presented
to the House of Representatives on the
11th of February, 1910, the
Committee on Rivers and Harbors stated:
"The improvement of the
Ohio River is of great importance, and
has been specially recommended
by the President of the United States.
The Committee has thought
it proper to provide that this important
work should be prosecuted at
a rate which will insure its completion
within a period of twelve years."
The tremendous importance of the
improvement of the Ohio-
to which direct expression was given by
the Committee - was emphasized
by President Taft, in a carefully
prepared address delivered at Cincin-
nati on the 21st of September of last
year, in which he uttered these
emphatic words: "I earnestly hope
that the time may come in the not
distant future when the plan for
completing this Ohio River improve-
ment shall be changed so as to make the
time six years for completion
instead of twelve."
Those who know something of the
importance of the Ohio Valley
and that which will follow the
completion of the work now in progress
for the improvement of the river, will
join with our honored Chief
Magistrate in the hope he expressed.
How many know the resources of the six
states bordering the
Ohio and directly tributary to it?
This valley is, to-day, the greatest
manufacturing center of the
country. From Pittsburgh to Cairo, on
either bank and on both banks,
Ohio Valley Hist. Ass'n, Fifth Annual
Meeting. 29
the traveler on one of the many steamers
traversing the Ohio finds
himself never beyond the sound of the
hammer or the forge, nor be-
yond the sight of the smoke issuing from
the monster stacks of im-
mense manufacturing establishments.
At the head of the Ohio is situated this
marvelous city of Pitts-
burgh-to-day the greatest manufacturing
center of the world-with
a tonnage of 150,000,000 tons last year,
greater by far than the com-
bined tonnage produced or originated by
Philadelphia and Baltimore
and Boston and Greater New York.
For miles above Pittsburgh, along the
improved Monongahela,
it is one succession of manufacturing
plants-the marvel of the whole
world in extent, in number of employes,
in value of product and
capital. And as it is there, so it is
along the Ohio, below, and the
passenger on an Ohio river steamer is
lost in amazement over the stu-
pendous products of the Valley.
In this Valley we have the coal that
supplies our own demands
and the southern markets and the
steamships that leave the ports 2,000
miles below; and the products of her
factories reach the entire world.
And more: Our Valley, in advantages and
possibilities, is the
richest on earth. In climate, in
location, in soil, in iron, in salt, in
steel, glass, and pottery products; in
gas, in timber, in stone, in water-
power, and in manufacturing industries
in general; in enterprise, edu-
cation and intelligence, it has no
superior.
As an agricultural valley we challenge
the United States, as we
challenge the world.
It is not alone beyond the Mississippi
that agriculture has her
seat and her empire. It is not alone in
the great Northwest nor the
productive Southwest nor the fertile
South. The six Ohio River States,
where the forge and the mill are never
idle, where smoke obscures
the sky, and on whose rivers the
steamers ply their busy trade-these
States challenge all sections of the
country in their agricultural products.
In one year alone the value of the farm
products of these States reached
a total of approximately five billion
dollars--more than the combined
value of any other six or twelve States
in the Union.
What, indeed, would the development of
these six States be, with
the Ohio River open the year 'round and
navigable the year 'round,
to pour their treasures into the lap of
the markets of the world!
But still more: The six Ohio River
States pay into the Treasury
of the United States more than one full
half of the entire internal
revenue collected in the whole nation.
But we have the wealth, and
we have the money, and are not
complaining.
The entire wealth of the country is
estimated in round numbers
at one hundred billion dollars, and it
is with genuine pride that the
six Ohio River States find themselves
credited with 30 billion dollars,
or nearly one-third of the total wealth
of the whole country, with all
30 Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications.
the other states and territories
required in the making up of the
remaining two-thirds.
But enough of figures, however
interesting they may be, as well
as conclusive evidence of the supreme
importance of the Ohio Valley
and the Ohio River.
This river is not the only water way in
which the six states of our
inland empire are interested. They want
to connect the Ohio and
Mississippi and the Hudson by a continuous
navigable water way.
And this may be done by the construction
of the Lake Erie and Ohio
River Ship canal--a proposed canal of
103 miles in length. Thus
would be secured 2,700 miles of unbroken
navigable channel, from
New Orleans to New York, of which 2,000
miles from New Orleans
to Pittsburgh, will be nine feet in
depth, and 700 miles, from Pittsburgh
to New York, will be 12 feet in depth.
This is the shortest route by
300 miles than the only other possible
route between the Gulf and the
Hudson, and can be realized at an outlay
that is imperatively de-
manded when the existing tonnage to be
served and the economy intro-
duced are considered.
The building of the connecting
water-link between the Ohio and
Lake Erie will give unbroken navigation
between 24 states in the Union,
and serve directly the territory where
now exists the densest tonnage
movement in the world, and have the
ability to introduce economy in
transportation by it in the ratio of not
less than 5 to 1 over railway
movement.
This project is in control of
Pittsburgh, and her progressive busi-
ness interests will carry it to speedy
and successful completion.
* * * * *
The rivers of our continent are the
natural arteries through which
the trade of the country is intended to
pass; and it is the duty of the
Government to improve these free public
highways in every way pos-
sible, because all classes of citizens
will thereby be benefited.
The Ohio is preeminently a national
water way. As it flows be-
tween its banks on its course to the
Gulf, it does not tell of Pennsyl-
vania, or Ohio, or West Virginia, or
Kentucky, or Indiana, or Illinois.
While it adds to the wealth and grandeur
of these great common-
wealths, above and surpassing all else
it tells the story of a nation
united; of a country that all of us
love, a country with one Constitution
and one flag, a country of peace and at
peace with all the world, a
country with one aim and one destiny, a
country united, one and indi-
visible now and forever.
Those who have labored many years for
the permanent improve-
ment of the Ohio were not building alone
for the present generation,
but for those who come after they are
gone. In this work have been
Ohio Valley Hist. Ass'n, Fifth Annual
Meeting. 31
engaged strong and able men at all
points along the river. Pittsburgh,
ever at the front in enterprise, has
contributed her full share.
It is our good fortune to have homes in
this Valley, dear to many
of us as our birthplace, and to all of
us by fond memories and cherished
associations. We, who love the Valley
and the River, here pay tribute
to all who have labored for, and through
their labors have advanced.
the improvement of the greatest channel
of commerce in the world.
They have been governed by no selfish
purpose, but by a noble, un
selfish desire to benefit our homes, to
make more prosperous our Val-
ley, to leave to their children and to
generations yet unborn a heritage
rich in commerce, their valley teeming
with intelligence and populous
with contented men and women-with more
schools, more churches,
more of all that makes life desirable
and that adds to the sum of
human happiness.
Another speaker of the evening was the
nearest descendant
of Robert Fulton, Rev. C. Seymour
Bullock, of Fall River, who
spoke as follows:
Mr. Chairman: His Excellency, the
Governor, Your Honor, the
Mayor; Ladies and Gentlemen: I am happy
in bringing to you, unof-
ficially, the greetings of a New England
city that has just secured for
itself a State appropriation of one
million dollars to improve its al-
ready magnificent harbor.
More and more are we coming to realize
that the future of our
country depends upon the conservation of
its natural resources and
the development and utilization of its
waterways as avenues of trans-
portation. The total bankage of the
rivers of Europe is but 34,000
miles while the river banks of streams
east of the Rocky Mountains,
that are 100 miles long and navigable,
will total more than 80,000 miles.
On our Great Lakes in one year we
carried freight with a total ton-
nage sufficient to tax the carrying
capacity of a train of cars of or-
dinary size that would completely belt
the globe. If the engine of that
train were to pull out from Boston it
would pass thru San Francisco,
cover the Chinese Empire and Turkestan
and Persia, bridge the Med-
iterranean and the Atlantic and speed on
again almost to Salt Lake
City with its train of loaded cars
before the caboose left Boston. Mr.
Chairman, that is something of a freight
train!
With no such system of inland seas the
European countries are
fast outstripping us in the race for
commerce. France and Germany
have developed or are developing systems
of internal water communi-
cation on a basis of one mile of
waterway to each twenty-five miles of
territory. Already France has 3,021
miles of canals in operation, while
Germany, aside from the Kaiser Wilhelm,
has 15,011 miles of canals
and 1,500 miles of canalized rivers.
32 Ohio Arch. and Hist.
Society Publications.
I realize, Mr. Chairman, that although I
am talking of water, this
is a dry subject, but I want to show
that we are all interested in
what is being done by others. No man can
be made to take much in-
terest in any subject until he sees that
it concerns his pocketbook.
This is especially true of an American.
"France sings the lily, England
sings the rose,
Everybody knows where the shamrock
grows;
Germans sing the Rhine, with its
many-castled hills,
But the Yankees sing in chorus of the
"long-green" bills.
When the New Yorker saw that the Erie
canal ran through his
back yard and into his pantry and set
the price on each mouthful of
bread, then the New Yorker voted
$101,000,000 to deepen and enlarge
the canal that brought his flour from
the West, for the West had been
feeding him since the year 1833 when the
first cargo of flour was sent
from
near Sandusky, Ohio. The Erie canal sets the maximum that
the New York Central railroad may charge
for transporting the produce
of the West. In other words, on account
of the Erie Canal the New
York Central railroad can charge only so
much per bushel or per barrel
for carrying wheat or flour if it is to
get any to carry and this sets
the rate for the Pennsylvania and the
Baltimore and Ohio and the
Chesapeake and Ohio so that what we have
to pay for bread and what
the man in the West has to pay for shoes
and cotton goods depends upon
what the State of New York sets as a
rate for the Erie Canal.
But what has this to do with
Pittsburgh? Much every way.
There is a place out yonder on the shore
of a lake that was built
up with money made here in Pittsburgh.
The coal dug from these hills
was mixed with brain-sweat and
brow-sweat and to this was added
ores from mines at the north till there
ran from the furnaces streams
of molten gold. With that gold other
furnaces were built nearer to
the mines whence came the iron with the
result that steel can now be
made at Gary for less than it can be
made in Pittsburgh and when the
barge-canal across New York state is
ready, the finished product of the
Gary mills can be put down in New York
City, or swung on board
some ocean-going vessel in New York
harbor, for $2.75 or $3.00 a ton
less than the steel that is made in
Pittsburgh.
We are not going to argue the question
as to whether the railroads
are charging too much for the
transportation of the iron ore from the
lake to the furnace. Either one of two
things is true-the railroads
cannot afford to carry the raw material,
or the finished product, for
less than they are now charging and
therefore should not be expected
to do it, or else they do not intend to
carry either for less money and it
is therefore useless to ask them to do
it. In either case the fact remains
the same and it still costs $1.25 a ton
to get ore from the lake-port to
Ohio Valley Hist. Ass'n, Fifth Annual
Meeting. 33
Pittsburgh and it takes about two tons
of iron ore to produce one ton
of steel and these conditions will
prevail in Gary's favor until by
digging a ship-canal from the
Ohio-Pittsburgh to the Lake shall be made
a seaport with direct communication with
all the world.
The same conditions faced Manchester,
England, that now faces
Pittsburgh. Vacant stores along the
highways of trade! Tenantless
houses on streets that had throbbed with
life! These told the story
as the hectic flush on the cheek of a
consumptive tells of the havoc
being wrought within. Manchester was
dying of proximity to Liver-
pool and then Manchester dug a canal
351/2 miles long, with a lift of
60½ feet above the level of the sea, and
became a sea-port. It cost $85,000,-
000 to do it but in a year's time
100,000,000 tons of freight passing through
the canal demonstrated the wisdom of
that expenditure. Breslau, too,
faced similar conditions. For years
Breslau, a city on the river Oder,
having half a million inhabitants, was
the chief city of that region,
but in 1895 the State of Prussia opened
the canalized Oder to Kosel,
with its extensive artificial harbor,
and the next year Kosel was
shipping 1,300,000 tons of coal while
Breslau's tonnage had fallen from
2,150,000 tons to less than 1,000,000
tons. Then Breslau woke up and
built new docks with every up-to-date
appliance for the handling of
freight and soon regained its lost
prestige.
Mr. Chairman, I am here tonight
participating in the festivities
that celebrate a century of steam
navigation on the Ohio rivers. The
steamboat of to-day is a growth. No great invention ever leaped,
Minerva-like, full-fledged from the brow
of genius. Devices that have
meant much for the world's progress have
come first to some one man
as an inspiration and have then been
hammered into shape and com-
mercial utility on the anvil of intense
thought. I regret that my friend
Fitch of Greenville is not here tonight
that you might look upon a
descendant of the man who first
successfully propelled a boat by the
power of steam. The original steamboat
crank hailed from the State
that is now my home. It was the waters
of the Ohio that most in-
terested John Fitch who wrote in 1788 to
Alexander Hamilton to
enlist his sympathies for a steamboat
line from "Fort Pitt to the shores
of Kaintuck". Others came and
reaped the benefits of Fitch's radical
scheme and I am here as one of the collateral
descendants of the man
who put the money into the
proposition-the poorest one of all the
representatives-proud of the
achievements of the hundred years, and
full of hopes that before the last hour
shall be struck for me on the
horologue of time, I may come into
Pittsburgh from the Great Lakes
by a canal that would open a new era for
this city and prove a blessing
to every hamlet, town and county through
which it shall pass.
Vol. XXII - 3.
34 Ohio Arch. and Hist.
Society Publications.
On Tuesday afternoon the replica of the New
Orleans
was spectacularly christened. This boat
was built by the City
of Pittsburgh through the agency of the
offices of the Historical
Society of Western Pennsylvania.
While a deafening roar caused by the
blowing of hundreds
of steam whistles and the hurrahs from
more than 50,000 throats
reverberated through the valleys
surrounding Pittsburgh, Mrs.
Alice Roosevelt Longworth, standing near
President Taft, broke
a bottle of domestic wine over the
replica of the first steam
propelled vessel to plow through the
western waters and said:
"I christen thee New
Orleans." This was the marking of the one-
hundredth anniversary of steam
navigation on the Ohio. The
wine was very lively, and when Mrs.
Longworth broke the bottle,
the champagne sprayed her from head to
foot and all those per-
sons nearby were liberally sprinkled.
Mrs. Longworth laughed,
although her furs were drenched. The
christening of the good-
looking craft took place at the
Monongahela wharf in view of
one of the largest crowds that ever
assembled there. Not only
was the crowd the largest, but the
display of river craft was
by far the best ever seen in this
section. With their noses pushed
against the wharf, 45 steamboats filled
the place between the
Smithfield street and the Wabash
railroad bridges. Each was
gayly decorated with flags and hunting
and streaming banners.
All the buildings along the water front
were similarly decorated.
The New Orleans, which was gayly
decorated with the nation's
and Pittsburgh's flags, occupied a
prominent place. The sight
was an inspiring one.
President Taft, in charge of the
reception committee, left
the Hotel Schenley about 1:40 o'clock
and drove over Grant
boulevard to the downtown. The ovation
tendered him all along
the route was warm. In the outlying
districts, the crowds were
scattered, but upon arriving at
Thirty-third street and the boule-
vard, more than 500 people had
assembled. Every person in
the crowd held a flag. They waved these
banners and cheered
lustily.
At Grant school in Grant street, near
Seventh avenue, about
500 school children and their teachers
filled the fire escapes.
All waved flags and sang as the party
passed. Mr. Taft recog-
Ohio Valley Hist. Ass'n, Fifth Annual
Meeting. 35
nized the cheering by standing upon his
automobile and waving
his hat. Grant street, Fifth avenue and
Wood street were lined
with thousands.
The moment the automobile bearing the
President appeared
in Water street, it was the signal for
the beginning of one of
the greatest ovations ever extended a
nation's chief executive
in this day. Every boat tooted whistles,
as did locomotives and
factories. The spectators cheered. People on the surrounding
hillsides took up the cry. Factory
whistles for miles along the
rivers were blown.
When Mr. Taft stepped from his
automobile to board the
Virginia the cheering was renewed. Again, when he stepped
aboard the New Orleans, it was
taken up with renewed vigor.
The cheering and the blowing of whistles
lasted for fully 17
minutes.
As the ovation subsided somewhat, Mrs.
Longworth christ-
ened the unique vessel and the cheering
was again taken up.
Finally Mayor William A. Magee walked to the front of the
New Orleans and introduced Mr. Taft. While only a small por-
tion of the large crowd could hear him,
those who could not
maintained silence.
President Taft's remarks on the
"New Orleans."
We are met to celebrate the opening of
steamboat commerce upon
the Ohio River; not only that commerce
of 100 years past, but also of
that greater commerce soon to come in
which Pittsburgh is to enjoy the
greater part. In order to justify the
expenditure of public moneys in
river improvement there ought to be
enough of traffic to warrant the
expenditure. In reference to the
improvement of the Ohio there is ample
commerce to satisfy this requirement,
and the tonnage justifies the appro-
priations made and forthcoming to make the
river more suitable. Con-
gress has designated $63,000,000, and
intimated that it will authorize
the expenditure at the rate of
$12,000,000 a year for that purpose.
But the interest of this great gathering
in the improvement and
throughout the country suggests to me
that it is most fitting that the
name of Roosevelt will ever be
associated with the beginning of this
new commerce as it was connected with
the start of the old and figured
prominently. It was the broad action of
a Roosevelt which made the
Panama Canal possible. It is not
possible for me to talk and be heard
by a square mile of people, and hence I
will not detain you in positions
36
Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications.
of discomfort longer. I congratulate
Pittsburgh on the magnificence of
this demonstration and wish her well in
gaining the commerce soon to
come. Goodbye.
Immediately after the President's
address the committee-
men accompanied him back to the Virginia.
He was taken to
the pilot house. From that point of
vantage he viewed the great
throng, declaring it to be the greatest
gathering he had seen
during his travels through the United
States on his present trip.
The New Orleans slowly moved from
its moorings to mid-
stream amid a renewed roar of whistles
and cheers. Turning its
prow down the Monongahela river, it
began its cruise down the
river. The flagship, the Virginia, followed
closely. Then came
scores of other large boats laden with
passengers. Immediately
behind them came hundreds of smaller
craft.
With the New Orleans leading the
way, a trip down the
Monongahela and up the Allegheny river
as far as the Sixth
street bridge and then down the Ohio to
the penitentiary was
taken. Arriving at the penitentiary the Virginia,
which had pre-
viously passed the New Orleans, turned
and started back, thus
permitting the other boats to pass in
review.
President Taft took up his position in
the rear of the pilot
house on the third deck. The members of
the reception com-
mittee and other invited guests were
with him. As each boat
slowly passed, those on board gave him a
rousing reception.
All along the river banks thousands
cheered as the boat made
its way through the water. Employes in
the various numerous
shops and mills laid down their tools
and hurried to the tops
of the buildings to cheer.
The Virginia returned to the
Monongahela wharf at 5:10
o'clock and the President and his party
returned over the boule-
vard to the Hotel Schenley. He rested
there until 7 o'clock.
The boats that took part in the pageant,
besides the New
Orleans and the Virginia, were the Exporter, Swan,
Coal City,
Kanawha, Charles Brown, Sam Clark,
Cruiser, Fallie, Tornado,
Crescent, Volunteer, Helen White, G.
W. Thomas, B. F. Jones,
Jr., Clyde Juniata, A. R. Budd,
Vulcan, Braddock, Henry Laugh-
lin, Robert Jenkins, Jim Brown,
Charlie Clark, T. P. Roberts,
Alice, T. J. Wood, Carbon, Clipper,
Cadet, Crusader, Diamond,
Ohio Valley Hist. Ass'n, Fifth Annual
Meeting. 37
Steel Queen, Lee H. Brooks,
Slackwater, Frank Tyler, Margaret,
Return, Frank Fowler, Troubador,
Sunshine and Emily Jung.
The fleet was in command of Capt. James
A. Henderson.
The New Orleans was in command of
Melville O. Irwin, mate;
Thomas Walker, engineer, and T. Orville
Noel, steward.
Fortunately for those in attendance at
the Fifth Annual
Meeting, the Pittsburgh Chamber of
Commerce took the oppor-
tunity of President Taft's presence to
hold Tuesday evening its
annual banquet. The Historical Society
of Western Pennsyl-
vania generously provided tickets to all
members of the Ohio
Valley Association present in the city.
The banquet was held
in the Memorial Hall and the banquet
room presented a scene
of unusual beauty. The event of the
evening was the long-to-be-
remembered reply of President Taft to
the address of Congress-
man Littleton who advocated the repeal
of the Sherman Anti-
Trust law. These addresses have become
historic, but as they
are foreign to the subject of Western
history and the occasion
of the "New Orleans"
centennial, they are omitted from this
report.
Hon. Job E. Hedges followed President
Taft; speaking on
"The Third Party to the
Contract" as follows:
Much of the present day discussion is
wide from the mark, so
far as helping the solution of problems
is concerned, and especially so
if the endeavor is made to square it
with governmental tradition. I
do not believe that the foundation
stones of the Republic are crumbling.
I do not believe that the life of this
great Nation hangs in the balance.
I do not believe that vice has a
strangle hold on virtue, and that there
are only one or two men who can pull
vice off. When the adviser
on political and social problems becomes
so didactic that he is mentally
lonely, his diagnosis may be logical and
learned, but is useless in ad-
ministering his own remedy. The
impediment, if any, the danger, if
any there be, to a republican form of
government is its size and the
fact that by virtue of its very numbers
fewer people have the oppor-
tunity to make themselves felt by virtue
of the fact that they are limited
in their opportunities for discussing
the same topic at the same time
with others of the same belief, or those
whose belief they propose to
affect.
So great has governmental influence
become, so far-reaching, that
the law may be either a scourge or a
remedy. It seems to have escaped
38 Ohio Arch. and Hist.
Society Publications.
popular contemplation that a man has a
duty to Government outside
of statute law, and outside of the
strict phrasing of the Constitution.
Under a Government with an unrestricted
male franchise such as ours,
it is impossible to think of a contract
which comes under the provisions
of law where the parties thereto do not
bear a political relationship to
all the rest. In other words, there is
always a third party to the con-
tract, and that third party represents
the rest of the Nation. In part
or in its entirety that contract must be
determined if there is anything
whatever in the duty of man to
government, according to whether after
the competitions between the contracting
parties have been phrased, the
result of that contract would be to the
detriment of the people at large.
We are getting away from the moorings of
simple things. We
are confused by the element of size and
numbers. We are disturbed
by the terrific power of personal
influence, and what can be done with
it and money. If we will but admit that
men like power, that men like
to accumulate, that men like influence,
that competitions may be so in-
tense that a man may think the Golden
Rule, but be so out of breath
he cannot utter it, we have gone far
toward solution. We are deceived
by proposed self-immolations on the
altar of government, by panegyric
on behalf of the common people, which is
supposed to bring about an
uprising. Men devote themselves
rhetorically to the interests of others,
and shed tears over the sadness of the
misfortune when they would
not contribute a dollar to the person
who is suffering.
There is a day far beyond the
Constitution and statutes in this
country, and it is a duty which if
recognized politically means nothing
more nor less than the practical
adoption of the Golden Rule. It is
well to practice virtue because it is
virtue. If we cannot get on as
high a plane as that it is better to
practice virtue from selfish reasons
and reasons of utility rather than not
to practice it at all.
Present conditions are the direct
results of the failure to observe
these two simple platitudes. Until every
election results in an expression
of opinion which means the actual
expression of actual people actually
living the part of citizens, law is a
guess and its enforcement a gamble,
and discussions as to its wisdom more or
less academical. Many men
before the public today are acting as if
they thought they were a
special providential dispensation.
Others appear to think and to act as
if our national existence was to close
with the closing of their eyes.
The human problem here is not the
problem of the poor and the suf-
fering, cost of high living, or the cost
of any living. It is the attitude
of mind and the conduct of people of
intelligence, refinement, wealth
and social position in their
relationship to the Government and the obli-
gations they will admit as a matter of
ordinary selfishness in working
out the life of this great nation.
Financiers tell us that capital is timid
and business predicated on
confidence. Yes, that is true. Business
depends, however, more upon
Ohio Valley Hist. Ass'n, Fifth Annual
Meeting. 39
the confidence of the general public in
the man who controls the capital,
and its belief in his integrity
individually than it does in the contribu-
tion of a few dollars per capita, which
when lost makes up the added
capital of the leader of finance. I read
the other day that business was
at a standstill because of some decision
that had been rendered in con-
nection with a law called the Sherman
law, and the article went on to
say that no business could be done until
there was a law passed which
stated specifically what could not be
done in business, and that nothing
should be left to the so-called rule of
reason.
It seems to me that nothing is so safe
for the people at large
as a general proposition. If the highest court says what may not be,
and leaves to the lower court the
function of determining how the
"may not" be avoided, that is
about all that law can do. The hazard
of business can never be reduced to an
absolute certainty for one side
of the problem, when the advantages are
with it, and have the other
side take all the chances. The functions
of government are too much
relied on by the people and the people
rely too much on the penal code
to determine what they shall not do, and
too little on a sense of obliga-
tion of each man toward the public to
determine what they should do.
The third party to the contract is never
absent from its interpretation
and never should be.
With increasing numbers of population
this duty is to become
more and more apparent, and if the final
contest is to place upon the
statute books a law to give rights to
one class or that makes a distinc-
tion of rights, the inference is that
there is no equality of right; although
we know that there is no equality of
opportunity, the result will be
confusion, and, from that, confusion
worse confounded.
The only permanency in public opinion
and the only virtue that can
come from it, and which is a final and
lasting benefit is that kind of an
opinion which is formed regardless of
publicity, but by virtue of which
men of prominence and potential force
will refrain from doing what
they would not do if they were certain
that the entire public understood
the entire problem before they attempted
to work it out.
The prosperity of the country as such,
its uplift and moral growth
depend at this moment more upon the
people who are decrying the force
of law; who have all the advantages of
social, financial and intellec-
tual position, and who seem to be afraid
to enter into the competitions
of life without having every chance in
their favor, than they do upon
any other class of the community. The
man whose earning power is
limited to his hands, or who is forced
to walk in some of the plain
paths of life, however much he may yearn
to influence public opinion,
and therefore governmental functions, is
practically limited to casting
a "no" vote on something
submitted for his approval or disapproval.
The affirmative part of our national
life is passing away, and is passing
away because men will not stop to think
that most every human, bar-
40 Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications.
ring a man's relationship to the God who
made him and the home over
which he presides, has a political
significance.
You might as well talk of removing
politics from business as to
talk of asking the sun to stop shining,
as long as a human being votes
upon the election of a man who will vote
for a law there is always
politics, and there always should be
politics. Instead of there being
too much politics in this country there
is too little politics in this country.
It is not a question of the volume of
political activity so much as it
is a question of the quality of it. If
we could amend the Constitution
and disfranchise the man who did not
vote, strike dumb the man who
criticises another for doing what he
does, and split the tongue of the
man who agitates the people for the
purpose of selling that agitation
at so much per year, some problems would
now disappear as the mist
before the sun.
Wednesday morning the chairman Harry
Brent Mackoy
called the meeting to order and
introduced Professor Callahan
of West Virginia University:
THE PITTSBURGH-WHEELING RIVALRY FOR
COMMERCIAL
HEADSHIP ON THE OHIO.
BY JAMES MORTON CALLAHAN,
Professor of History and Politics, W.
Va. University.
The Wheeling Bridge Case in the Supreme
Court in 1849-52 and
1854-56 is as interesting through its
relations to the industrial history
of the period as it is from the
standpoint of constitutional questions
involved. Its study introduces us to the
earlier rivalries of coast cities
to secure the trade of the West, the
systems of internal improvements
planned to reach the Ohio, the
development of trade and navigation
and the extension of improvements and
regulations by Congress on
the Ohio, and the rivalries of
Pittsburgh and Wheeling to obtain the
hegemony by lines of trade and travel
converging and concentrating at
their gates.
Pennsylvania was early interested in
plans of internal improvements
to connect Philadelphia with Pittsburg
and the free navigation of the
Ohio. Occupying a central position,
resting eastward on the Atlantic,
north on the Lakes, and flanking on the
Ohio which connected her with
the Gulf and the vast region of West and
South, she had advantages
over other states for both foreign and
domestic commerce. These ad-
Ohio Valley Hist. Ass'n, Fifth
Annual Meeting. 41
vantages she cultivated from the
earliest period. In 1826, influenced
by the improved conditions of steam
navigation on the western waters,
by the effects of the Cumberland road in
diverting to Wheeling much
of the westward travel which had
formerly passed down the Monon-
gahela to the Ohio at Pittsburg, and by
the success of the Erie Canal
which also diverted travel and trade
from Pittsburg, she began a system
of canals to connect the Atlantic and
the Lakes which had begun to
bring to her western gates the commerce
from the Gulf and the Mississippi
and at great expense and sacrifice she
forced her way westward, from
the end of the horse railway at
Columbia, up the Juniata to Hollidays-
burg. Then, in 1835 by an inclined plane
portage railway for thirty-eight
miles across the Appalachians at the
base of which other enterprises
halted, she connected with the western
canal from Johnstown to Pitts-
burg. Over this route she transported
both passengers and goods-
carrying to eastern markets the rice,
cotton and sugar of the South,
the bacon and flour of the West, and the
furs and minerals of the
Northwest. In 1844 her connections with
the Ohio were improved by
a packet line established between
Pittsburg and Cincinnati. By 1850,
these improvements, together with her
interest, in a slack water naviga-
tion from Pittsburg to Brownsville and
up the Youghiogheny to West
Newton, and the importance of the ship-building
industry at Pittsburg,
made her watchful of the problems of
navigation on the Ohio. At the
solicitation of her legislature, and to
meet the needs of growing com-
merce, Congress beginning its policy of
improvement of Ohio navigation
in 1824, had appropriated large sums (by
1850) to remove obstructions
in the river.
In the meantime Wheeling, whose growing
importance had received
its first stimulus from the completion
of the Cumberland Road to the
Ohio in 1818, threatened to rival Pittsburg
in prosperity, wealth and
greatness, and to become the head of
navigation on the Ohio as well as
the western terminal of the first
railway to reach the western waters
from the East, and a center of other
converging lines from both East
and West. After persevering efforts of
nearly a quarter century she
scored her greatest victory by securing
the route of the Baltimore and
Ohio Railway whose charter of 1827 had
prohibited the termination of
the road at any point on the Ohio below
the Little Kanawha and whose
engineers on reconnaisance and surveys
in 1828 had considered several
routes terminating on the Ohio between
Parkersburg and Pittsburg.
Coincidently, after the unsuccessful
efforts of over half a century, she
secured the first bridge across the
Ohio-a structure which she regarded
as a logical link and incidental part of
the national road, and a fulfill-
ment of the provisions of the act of
1802 by which Ohio had been
admitted as a state, but which Pittsburg
regarded as an injury to
navigation-obstructing it much more
effectively than Congress had been
able to improve it by her recent
expenditures of public money.
42 Ohio Arch. and Hist.
Society Publications.
The story of the efforts to obtain the
bridge is a long one, re-
flecting the industrial progress and
energy of the West and the evolu-
tion of national policies, and
punctuated with the spice and pepper of
rival memorials and resolutions. In 1816
during the construction of the
national road from Cumberland to the
Ohio, the legislatures of Virginia
and Ohio incorporated the Wheeling and
Belmont Bridge Company and
authorized it to erect a bridge which,
however, was to be treated as a
public nuisance liable to abatement if
not constructed so as to avoid
injury to navigation. Unable to raise
funds necessary for the work,
the Company in 1830 asked for a national
subscription to the bridge,
and its request received a favorable
committee report in the House1
Two years later citizens of Pennsylvania
submitted to the House a
memorial against the erection of the
bridge.2
Under the old charter of 1816 the
company in 1836 built a wooden
bridge from the west end of Zane's
Island to the Ohio shore, leaving
the stream east of the island free to
navigation. At the same time
petitions to Congress backed by
resolutions of the Ohio legislature,
urged the construction of the bridge
over both branches of the stream
in order to facilitate trade and
travel-and to prevent inconvenience and
delay in transporting the mails by
ferry, which was frequently obstructed
by ice and driftwood and especially so in
the great floods of 1832. A
congressional committee on roads and
canals made a favorable report
recommending the completion of the
Cumberland road by the erection
of the bridge3; but the
objection was made that the bridge might prove
an obstruction to the high chimneys of
the steamboats whose convenience
Congress did not think should yield to
the benefits of the bridge. In
1838, government engineers, after a
survey made under the direction of
the war department, presented to
Congress a plan for a suspension bridge
with a movable floor which they claimed
would offer no obstruction to
the highest steamboat smoke-stacks on
the highest floods,4 but the plan
was rejected. In 1840 the postmaster
general recommended the construc-
tion of the bridge in order to provide
for safe and prompt carriage of
the mails-which had been detained by ice
from seventeen to thirty-two
days each year5; but his
recommendation was buried in the archives.
Early in 1844, Pennsylvania, awakened by
the fear of plans to make
Wheeling the head of navigation, became
more active in her opposition
to what seemed an imminent danger to her
interests and the interests
of Pittsburg. By action of her
legislature she opposed the request of
Wheeling and the Ohio legislature for
national appropriations to con-
1House Rep. 339 and 349, 21-1, vol. III.
2 House exec. docs. 188, 22-1, vol. V.
3 Rep. Corn. 672, 24-1, vol. III. Rep.
Corn. 135, 24-2, vol. I.
4H.
Docs. 993, 25-1, June, 1838.
5 Cong. Globe, vol. 25, p. 973.
Also see House Does. 137, 29-1,
vol. IV.
Ohio Valley Hist. Ass'n, Fifth Annual
Meeting. 43
struct the bridge, and soon took new
steps to secure the construction
of a railroad from Harrisburg to
Pittsburg.6 The House committee on
roads and canals, deciding that the
bridge could be constructed without
obstructing navigation, reported a bill
making an appropriation and sub-
mitting a plan of Mr. Ellet for a simple
span across the river at an
elevation of 90 feet above low water,
but those who spoke for Pennsyl-
vania urged the specific objection that
90 feet would not admit the pass-
age of steamboats with tall chimneys,
and defeated the bill. In vain did
Mr. Stoenrod, the member from Wheeling,
propose hinged smokestacks
for the few tall chimneyed boats and
press every possible argument in
favor of the bridge.7
Opposition increased after 1845 with the increase
in the size of the Pittsburg steamboat
smokestacks-an improvement by
which speed power was increased through
increased consumption of fuel.
Baffled in her project to secure the
sanction and aid of Congress
for a bridge which Pennsylvania regarded
as a plan to divert commerce
from Pittsburg by making Wheeling the
head of navigation, Wheeling
next resorted to the legislature of
Virginia in which the remonstrating
voice of Pennsylvania could not be
heard. On March 19, 1847, the
Bridge Company obtained from the
legislature a charter reviving the
earlier one of 1816 and authorizing the
erection of a wire suspension
bridge-but also providing that the
structure might be treated as a com-
mon nuisance, subject to abatement, in
case it should obstruct the navi-
gation of the Ohio "in the usual
manner" by steamboats and other crafts
which were accustomed to navigate it.
Under this charter the company
took early steps to erect the bridge. At
the same time, and coincident
with the beginning of construction on
the Harrisburg and Pittsburg
railway at Harrisburg under its charter
granted by the Pennsylvania
legislature on April 13, 1846, she
managed to secure a promise of the
western terminal of the Baltimore and
Ohio railway--which after a
long halt at Cumberland received a new
charter from the Virginia legis-
ture8 and prepared to push
construction to the Ohio ahead of the Penn-
sylvania line.
The possible strategic and economic
effects of the Baltimore and
Ohio terminal at Wheeling increased the
activity of Pittsburg against the
bridge, which the engineer of the
Pennsylvania and Ohio railway openly
declared was designed as a connecting
link between the Baltimore and Ohio
and the state of Ohio -by which Wheeling
was also endeavoring to make
6 House Docs. 95, 27-3, vol. III; ibid
67, 28-1, vol. III. Sen. Doc. 84,
28-1, vol. I.
7House Rep. 79, 28-1, vol. I. Also see
42 Ohio Laws, 269; 29 Pa
Laws, 487 and 31 Pa. Laws, 591.
8 See U. S. Supreme Court Reports, 16
Howard, 314-354, A. J. Mar-
shall v. The B. and 0. Railroad.
44 Ohio Arch. and
Hist. Society Publications.
herself the terminal of the Ohio
railways which Pittsburg sought to
secure.9
A determined struggle followed. Before
its cables were thrown
across the river, the Bridge Company
received legal notice of the
institution of a suit and an application
for an injunction. The bill of
of Pennsylvania, filed before the United
States supreme court in July, 1849;
charged that the Bridge Company under
color of an act of the Virginia
legislature, but in direct violation of
its terms, was preparing to construct
a bridge at Wheeling which would
obstruct navigation on the Ohio and
thereby cut off and divert trade and
business from the public works of
Pennsylvania, and thus diminish tolls
and revenues and render its improve-
ments useless.10 In spite of
the order of Judge Grier (August 1, 1849),
the Bridge Company continued its work,
and in August 1849, Pennsylvania
filed a supplemental bill praying for
abatement of the iron cables which
were being stretched across the river.11
The Bridge Company continued
to work and completed the bridge. The
state treasurer of Pennsylvania
reported that it threatened to interfere
with the business and enterprise of
Pittsburg whose commercial prosperity
was so essential to the productive-
ness of the main line of the
Pennsylvania canal. In December 1849,
Pennsylvania filed another supplemental
bill praying abatement of the
bridge as a nuisance, representing that
the structure obstructed the
passage of steamboats and threatened to
injure and destroy the ship-
building business at Pittsburg. With no
appeal to force (such as had
recently occurred on the Ohio-Michigan
frontier), or blustering enactments
of state sovereignty, or threats of
secession, she sought a remedy by in-
junction against a local corporation. In
January 1850, the Pennsylvania
legislature unanimously passed a
resolution approving the prosecution
instituted by the attorney-general. At
the same time the Bridge Company
secured from the Virginia legislature
(on January 11, 1850) an amendatory
act declaring that the height of the
bridge (90 feet at eastern abutment,
931/2 feet at the highest point and 62
feet at the western abutment above
the low water level of the Ohio) was in
conformity with the intent and
meaning of the charter.
In the presentation of the case before
the supreme court, the at-
torney-general of Pennsylvania and Edwin
M. Stanton were attorneys
for Pennsylvania and Alex. H. H. Stuart
and Reverdy Johnson for the
Bridge Company.
The counsel for Pennsylvania urged that
the bridge had been erected
especially to the injury of Pittsburg
(the rival of Wheeling in com-
merce and manufactures), whose six
largest boats (those most affected
9Cong. Globe, vol. 25, p. 1049;
Pittsburg Gazette and Commercial Jour-
nal, June 30, 1849.
10 U. S. Supreme Court Reports, 9
Howard, 647.
11 Ib., 11 Howard, 528.
Ohio Valley Hist. Ass'n, Fifth Annual
Meeting. 45
by the bridge) carried between Pittsburg
and Cincinnati three-fourths
of the trade and travel transported by
the Pennsylvania canal. "To the
public works of Pennsylvania the injury
occasioned by this obstruction
is deep and lasting," said Stanton.
"The products of the South and West,
and of the Pacific coast, are brought in
steamboats along the Ohio to
the western end of her canals at
Pittsburg, thence to be transported
through them to Philadelphia, for an
eastern and foreign market. For-
eign merchandise and eastern
manufactures, received at Philadelphia,
are transported by the same channel to
Pittsburg, thence to be carried
south and west, to their destination, in
steamboats along the Ohio. If
these vessels and their commerce are
liable to be stopped within a short
distance as they approach the canals,
and subject to expense, delay and
danger, to reach them, and the same
consequence to ensue on their
voyage, departing, the value of these
works must be destroyed."12
The Bridge Company, through its counsel
admitting that Pennsyl-
vania had expended large amounts in
public improvements terminating
at Pittsburg and Beaver, over which
there was a large passenger and
freight traffic, alleged the exclusive
sovereignty of Virginia over the
Ohio, submitted the act of the Virginia
legislature authorizing the erec-
tion of the bridge, denied the corporate
capacity of Pennsylvania to in-
stitute the suit, and justified the
bridge as a connecting link of a great
public highway as important as the Ohio,
and as a necessity recognized
by reports of committees in Congress. It
cited the example set by
Pennsylvania in bridging the Allegheny,
in authorizing a bridge across
the Ohio below Pittsburg at thirteen
feet less elevation than the Wheel-
ing bridge, and in permitting the
bridging and damming of the Monon-
gahela by enterprising citizens of
Pittsburg under charters from the
state. It declared that the bridge was
not an appreciable inconvenience
to the average class of boats and would
not diminish the Pittsburg
trade, and suggested that the chimneys
of steamboats should be short-
ened or put on hinges for convenience in
lowering. It also contended
that the bridge was necessary for
transporting into the interior the
passengers and much of the freight which
would be diverted from the
streams by the greater speed and safety
of railroads which would soon
concentrate at Wheeling.
The court, accepting jurisdiction,
appointed Hon. R. H. Walworth,
a jurist of New York, as special
commissioner to take testimony and
report. The report indicated that the
bridge obstruction would divert
part of the total traffic (nearly fifty
millions annually) from lines of
transportation centering at Pittsburg to
the northern route through New
York or to a more southern route. Of the
nine regular packets which
passed Wheeling in 1847, five would have
been unable to pass under the
bridge (for periods differing in length)
without lowering or cutting off
12 U. S. Supreme Court, 13 Howard, 538.
46 Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications.
their chimneys. The passage of three of
the Pittsburg-Cincinnati packets
had been actually stopped or obstructed.
One, on November 10, 1849,
was detained for hours by the necessity
of cutting off the chimneys.
Another, the Hibernia, on November 11,
1849, was detained thirty-two
hours and was obliged to hire another
boat to carry to Pittsburg the
passengers except those who preferred to
cross the mountains via Cum-
berland. Later she was twice compelled
to abandon a trip-once hiring
another boat, and once landing her
passengers who proceeded east to
Cumberland. Two accidents had also
occurred.
The report indicated a preponderance of
evidence against the safety
of lowering the chimneys, which at any
rate was regarded as a very slow
and expensive process. Although the
commissioner recognized that it
would be a great injury to commerce and
to the community to destroy
fair competition between river and
railroad transit by an unnecessary
obstruction to either, and recognized
the propriety of carrying railroads
across the large rivers if it could be
done without impairing navigation, he
concluded that the Wheeling bridge was
an obstruction to free naviga-
tion of the Ohio. Of the 230 boats on
the river below Wheeling, the
7 boats of the Pittsburg-Cincinnati
packet line were most obstructed
by the bridge. They conveyed about
one-half the goods (in value) and
three-fourths of the passengers between
the two cities. Since 1844, they
had transported nearly a million
passengers.
The Wheeling Bridge Company complained
that Mr. Walworth had
given the company no chance to present
its testimony.
The decision of the court was given at
the adjourned term in
May, 1852. The majority of the court
(six members) held that the
erection of the bridge, so far as it
interfered with the free and unob-
structed navigation of the Ohio, was
inconsistent with and in violation
of acts of Congress, and could not be
protected by the legislature of
Virginia because the Virginia statute
was in conflict with the laws of
Congress.
Justice McLean who delivered the opinion
of the court held that
since the Ohio was a navigable stream
subject to the commercial power
of Congress, Virginia had no
jurisdiction over the interstate commerce
upon it, and that the act of the
Virginia legislature authorizing the
structure of the bridge so as to
obstruct navigation could afford no
justification of the Bridge Company.
However numerous the railroads
and however large their traffic, he
expected the waterways to remain the
great arteries of commerce and favored
their protection as such instead
of their obstruction and abandonment.
The decree stated that unless
the navigation was relieved from
obstruction by February 1, 1853, the
bridge must be abated.
Chief Justice Taney dissented on the
ground that since Virginia
had exercised sovereignty over the Ohio
and Congress had acquiesced
in it, the court could not declare the
bridge an unlawful obstruction
Ohio Valley Hist. Ass'n, Fifth Annual
Meeting. 47
and the law of Virginia unconstitutional
and void. He preferred to leave
the regulation of bridges and steamboat
chimneys to the legislative de-
partment. Justice Daniels, also
dissenting, declared that Pennsylvania
could not be a party to the suit on the
ground stated in the bill (diminu-
ation of profits in canals and other
public improvements many miles
remote from the Wheeling bridge) and
that the court could take no
jurisdiction in such cases of imperfect
rights, or of merely moral or
incidental rights as distinguished from
legal or equitable. "And," said
he "if the mere rivalry of works of
internal improvement in other states,
by holding out the temptation of greater
dispatch, greater safety, or any
other inducement to preference for those
works over the Pennsylvania
canals, be a wrong and a ground for
jurisdiction here, the argument
and the rule sought to be deduced
therefrom should operate equally.
The state of Virginia which is
constructing a railroad from the seaboard
to the Ohio river at Point Pleasant,
much further down that river than
either Pittsburg or Wheeling, and at the
cost of the longest tunnel in
the world, piercing the base of the Blue
Ridge Mountains, should have
the right by original suit in this court
against the canal companies of
Pennsylvania or against that state
herself, to recover compensation for
diverting any portion of the commerce
which might seek the ocean by
this shortest transit to the mouths of
her canals on the Ohio, or to
the city of Pittsburg; and on the like
principle, the state of Pennsylvania
has a just cause of action against the
Baltimore and Ohio railroad for
intercepting at Wheeling the commerce
which might otherwise be con-
strained to seek the city of
Pittsburg."13
Justice Daniels, intoxicated with the
recent effects of the develop-
ment of railroads, directed considerable
attention to the reigning fallacy
which Pennsylvania urged upon the
court-that commerce could be
prosecuted with advantage to the western
country only by the channels
of rivers and through the agency of
steamboats whose privileges were
regarded as paramount. He urged that the
historical progress of means
of transportation exposed the folly and
injustice of all attempts to
restrict commerce to particular
localities or to particular interests.
Against the narrow policy of confining
commerce to watercourses whose
capacity was limited by the
contributions of the clouds, he urged the
superiority of railroads for speed,
safety, freedom from dependence on
wind or depth of water, and unifying
power in interfluvial regions.
Plans were proposed by the defendant's
counsel to remove the
obstructions to navigation at less
expense than the elevation or abate-
ment of the bridge, and the court (March
3, 1852) referred the plans
to J. McAlpine who made a report on May
8, 1852.
The majority of the court, looking only
to desired results and
not to methods, then agreed that the
former decree would permit the
13U. S. Supreme Court Reports, 13 Howard, 661.
48 Ohio Arch. and Hist.
Society Publications.
Bridge Company to remove the obstruction
by a two hundred foot draw
in the bridge over the western branch of
the river. Justice McLean
then delivered the opinion of the court
in which he stated that the right
of navigating the Ohio or any other
river does not necessarily conflict
with the right of bridging it; but he
declared that these rights could
only be maintained when they were exercised
so as not to be incom-
patible with each other. If the bridge
had been constructed according
to the language of the charter, he said,
the suit could not have been
instituted.
Defeated before the courts, Wheeling
took prompt steps to save
the bridge by action of Congress. In her
efforts she received the co-
operation of one hundred and twenty-one
members of the Ohio legis-
lature who (in April, 1852) petitioned
Congress to protect the bridge by
maintaining it as a mail route-and also
by resolutions of the Virginia
and Indiana legislatures.14 She even had the sympathy of
thirty-six
members representing the minority of the
Pennsylvania legislature, who
presented a petition in favor of
protecting the bridge.15 On July 8, the
committee on roads made a favorable
report asking Congress to declare
both bridges post roads and military
roads and to regulate the height
and construction of chimneys of
steamboats navigating the Ohio.16 On
August 12, an adverse report was made on
a resolution of the Penn-
sylvania legislature. In the debates
which followed (from August 13
to August 18)" the advocates of the
bill included: (1) those who felt
that the entire proceeding against the
bridge originated in Pittsburg's
jealousy of Wheeling, (2) those who felt
that the recent decision of
the supreme court was a strike against
state sovereignty, and (3) those
who (favoring the encouragement of
better facilities for travel) as-
serted that within two years one could
travel from New York to Cin-
cinnati via Wheeling bridge as quickly
as one could now pass from Cin-
cinnati to Wheeling in either of the
seven tall chimneyed Pittsburg
packet boats, and with no danger of
stoppage of transportation alter-
nately by low water and frozen water.
Some of them who opposed the bill
regarded the proposed legis-
lation in favor of the bridge as giving
a preference to boats bound to
Wheeling over those bound to Pittsburg
and as a strike at the pros-
perity of Pittsburg. Others in
opposition directed attention to the fact
that bridges adapted to railroad
purposes could be erected near Wheeling
without obstruction to navigation and
that the Ohio Central railway and
the Baltimore and Ohio, which had
recently intended to connect at
14 H. Misc. Docs. 50, 32-1, vol. I. Sen.
Misc. Docs. 103, 32-1, vol. I.
H. Misc. Docs. 63, 32-1, vol. I.
15 Cong. Globe, 32-1, p. 602.
16 H. Reports 158, 32-1, vol. I.
17 Cong.
Globe, 32-1 vol. 25, pp. 967-968, 972, 974, 1037-1049, 1041, 1044,
1047, 1065 and 1068.
Ohio Valley Hist. Ass'n, Fifth Annual
Meeting. 49
Wheeling, had found a more convenient
point four miles south of
Bogg's Ferry where a bridge could be
constructed at sufficient height
to avoid the objection taken by the
supreme court to the bridge at
Wheeling.l8
The bill passed the Senate on August 28
by a vote of 33 to 10,
and the House on August 30 by a vote of
92 to 42.19 On August 31,
before the time designated for the
execution of the decree of May,
1852, it became an act of Congress
legalizing in their existing conditions
the bridges both of the west and the
east branch, abutting on Zane's
Island. It declared them to be post
roads for the passage of United
States mail, at the same time requiring
vessels navigating the river to
regulate their pipes and chimneys so as
not to interfere with the eleva-
tion and construction of the bridges.
The Bridge Company relied upon this act
as superseding the effect
and operation of the decree of May,
1852, but Pennsylvania insisted
that the act was unconstitutional. The
captain of one of the Pitts-
burg packets showed his displeasure by
unnecessarily going through the
form of lowering his chimneys and
passing under the bridge with all
the forms of detention and oppression.20
Meantime the rival railroads had been
pushing westward to con-
nect the rival cities of the Ohio with
rival cities of the East. The
original line of the Pennsylvania whose
construction began at Harris-
burg in July, 1847, was opened to the
junction with the Allegheny
Portage railway at Hollidaysburg at the
base of the mountains on Sep-
tember 16, 1850.21 The Baltimore and
Ohio, notwithstanding delays in-
cident to the difficulties experienced
in securing laborers was opened for
business from Cumberland to the foot of
the mountains at Piedmont
on July 5, 1851. The western division of
the Pennsylvania line from
the western end of the Portage railroad
at Johnstown to Pittsburg
was opened on September 22, 1852, and a
through train service via the
inclined planes of the Portage railway
was established on December
10, following.
By the beginning of 1853, Wheeling
seemed to have won new ad-
vantages over Pittsburg through the
strategy of prospective railway lines
and new steamer lines which induced the
belief that Pennsylvania with
her foot on the Ohio was but at the
threshold of the promised land.
The B. & 0. won the race to the Ohio
by a single continuous track
over which through train service was
established from Baltimore to
Wheeling in January, 1853. To connect
with it at Wheeling the Wheel-
ing and Kanawha packet line was
established by the Virginia legisla-
18Cong. Globe, 32-1, vol. 25, p. 975.
19
Ib. 32-1, vol. 24, pp. 2442 and 2479.
20Wheeling
Intelligencer, Feb. 23, 1853.
21 H. V. Poor, Manual of Railroads,
1881, p. 258.
Vol. XXII - 4.
50 Ohio Arch. and Hist.
Society Publications.
ture and the Union line of steamboats
was established between Wheeling
and Louisville.22 At the same
time steps had been taken to construct
several other prospective railways which
would naturally converge at
Wheeling.23 These included
the Hempfield to connect with Philadelphia,
a line from Columbus, a line from
Marietta, and also a line from
Cleveland which was expected to become
an important point in case
the proposed treaty of reciprocity with
Canada should become a law.
While the James River and Kanawha canal
and the Covington and Ohio
railway still hesitated to find a way
westward across the mountains
farther south, and before the construction
of the Northwestern Virginia
railroad from Grafton to Parkersburg,
Wheeling especially expected
to divert the trade of southern Ohio,
Kentucky and Tennessee and to
center it at Wheeling. Wheeling was also
favored by cheaper steamer
rates to the west and by the dangers of
navigation between Wheeling
and Pittsburg at certain periods of the
year. Early in 1854, New York
merchants shipped western freight via
Baltimore and Wheeling. Oysters
too, because of the bad condition of the
Pennsylvania line of travel
were shipped via Wheeling to Cleveland
and Chicago.24
Pittsburg, however, undaunted by the
chagrin of defeat, and with
undiminished confidence in her ability
to maintain her hegemony of
the upper Ohio and the West, prepared to
marshal and drill her forces
for final victory by efforts to regain
ground lost and to forestall
the plans of her rival by new strategic
movements. She declared that
Wheeling was outside the travel line.
She stationed an agent at Graves
Creek below Wheeling to induce
eastward-bound boat passengers to
continue their journey to Pittsburg and
thence eastward via the Penn-
sylvania line of travel in order to
avoid the tunnels and zigzags, and
the various kinds of delay on the B.
& O.-to which the Wheeling
Intelligencer replied by uncomplimentary references to the slowness
of
travel over the inclined planes and flat
rails of the Pennsylvania Central
railway.25 Through her mayor
and her newspapers she warned travellers
against the danger of accidents on the
B. & O.-to which Wheeling
replied that the frightful accidents on
the Pennsylvania line hurled more
people into eternity each month than had
ever been injured on the
B. and 0. She also endeavored to
prejudice travelers against the Union
line of steamers, complaining of its
fares and food, and also of the
reckless racing encouraged by its
captains who had bantered the boats
of other lines for exhibitions of
speed.26 She was also accused of using
her influence to secure the location of
the route of the Pittsburg branch
of the Cleveland road, on the west shore
of the Ohio, from Wellsville to
22Wheeling Intelligencer, Feb. 12 and 26, 1853.
23 Ib. Sept 1852.
24 Wheeling Intelligencer, Jan. 20 and
March 2, 1854.
25 Ib. March 7, 1853.
26 Ib. April 1, 1853.
Ohio Valley Hist. Ass'n, Fifth Annual
Meeting. 51
Wheeling, causing Brooke and Hancock
Counties to threaten secession
from Virginia.
As a strategic movement against the
proposed Hempfield road, by
which Wheeling hoped to get not only
direct connection with Philadel-
phia, but also a connection with the
Marietta road, Pittsburg resuscitated
a movement in favor of the Steubenville
and Pittsburg railway and
revived the project of the Connelsville
route to Baltimore. She also
strained every nerve to open connections
with the New York and Erie
line via the Allegheny Valley.27
The proposed Steubenville and Pittsburg
railway, especially, was
strongly opposed by Wheeling by whom it
was regarded as a project to
cripple her by diverting her trade.
Largely through her influence,
Pittsburg's attempt to secure a charter
from the Virginia legislature for
the road for which she proposed a bonus
on every passenger, was
defeated in the lower house by a vote of
70 to 37, and later failed to
secure the approval of the house
committee.28 When the promoters of
the road tried the new plan of getting a
route by securing the land in
fee with the idea of rushing the road
through in order to get the next
Congress to declare it a post road, the
Wheeling Intelligencer declared
that Congress would not dare thus to
usurp the sovereignty of Vir-
ginia.29 An injunction
against the road was proposed, and in order to
prevent the construction of the railway
bridge at Steubenville a plan to
construct a road from the state line through Holliday's Cove and
Wellsburg was considered.30
From the consideration of plans to
prevent the construction of the
Steubenville bridge above her Wheeling
turned to grapple with a more
immediate danger of ruin which
threatened her by a proposed connec-
tion of the B. and 0. and the Central
Ohio railway at Benwood, four
miles below her. This she claimed was in
violation of the law of 1847
granting a charter to the B. and 0.;
and, to prevent it, she secured an
injunction from Judge George W. Thompson
of the Circuit Court-
causing the State Journal of
Columbus to place her in the list with
Erie, Pa. (which had recently attempted
to interrupt travel between
east and west), and to assert that the
Benwood track case was similar to
the Wheeling Bridge case An attempt was
made to secure combination
and cooperation of the railroads to
erect a union bridge in Wheeling to
replace the old structure.31
Meantime, transportation facilities
improved on the Pennsylvania
27 Wheeling
Intelligencer. Dec 15, 1852. and January 1853; also Feb-
ruary 8, 1853.
28 Ib. February 23, 1853 and February 1,
1854.
29 Ib.
May 13, 1853.
30 Ib. November 9, 1853 and April 3,
1854.
31 Wheeling Intelligencer, October 1854,
January 1855; March 17,
June 8 and June 19, 1855.
52 Ohio Arch. and Hist.
Society Publications.
line after the mountains were conquered
by a grade for locomotives.
The mountain division of the road, and
with it the whole line, was opened
on February 15, 1854, and by its cheaper
rates soon overcame the ad-
vantages which New Orleans had held in
attracting the commerce of the
West.32 Pennsylvania promptly
passed a bill (1854) authorizing the sale
of her unproductive public works, and
abandoned her portage railway
across the mountains. Three years later
(1857), she sold to the Penn-
sylvania railway the main line of the
system of public works undertaken
in 1826, including the Philadelphia and
Columbia railway.33
Coincident with the determination of
Pennsylvania to dispose of
her unproductive public works, the old
Wheeling bridge over the main
branch of the stream was blown down by a
gale of wind (in May, 1854)
and was promptly removed to avoid
obstruction. Some regarded the
disaster as a just judgment for trespass
upon the rights of others by
Wheeling in order to make herself the
head of navigation. The Pitts-
burg Journal, edited by the
ex-mayor of the city, gloated over Wheeling's
misfortune.34 The Pittsburg and Cincinnati packet Pennsylvania,
in
derision, lowered her chimneys at the
place recently spanned by the
bridge. Her second offense, a few days
later, exasperated the indignant
crowd on shore and induced the boys to
resort to mob spirit and to
throw stones resulting in a hasty
departure of the vessel; but further
trouble was avoided by an apology from
the captain and the wise advice
of older heads.
Another and a final Wheeling Bridge case
before the Supreme Court
(arising in 1854 and decided in April,
1856,)35 resulted from the decision
of the company to rebuild the bridge.
When the company promptly
began the preparations for rebuilding,
Pennsylvania, stating that she
desired to secure a suspension of
expensive work until the force and
effect of the act of Congress could be
judicially determined, asked the
United States Supreme Court for an
injunction against the reconstruc-
tion of the bridge unless in conformity
with the requirements of the
previous decree in thecase. Without any
appearance or formal opposition
of the company, the injunction was
granted (June 25, 1854,) during
vacation of the court, by Justice Grier
whom the Wheeling Intelligencer
called the Pittsburg judge of the
Supreme Court. The Intelligencer
regarded the question as a grave one,
involving the sovereign authority
of Virginia and a direct law of
Congress, and illustrating the aggressions
of the Supreme Court, which it feared
were becoming daily more alarm-
ing. Charles Ellet, the engineer on whom
the injunction was served,
promptly announced that he expected to
have the bridge open for traffic
in two weeks, and the bridge company
asked Congress to investigate
32 Star of the
Kanawha Valley, January 9, 1856.
33 H. V. Poor, Manual of Railways, 1881,
p. 258.
34 Wheeling
Intelligencer May 20 and 22, 1854.
35 U. S. Supreme Courts, 18 Howard,
421-459.
Ohio Valley Hist. Ass'n, Fifth Annual
Meeting. 53
charges against Judge Grier to the
effect that he had invited bribery.36
The new suspension bridge was opened as
a temporary structure on
July 26 at an expense of only $8,000.
The injunction having been disregarded,
Pennsylvania asked for
attachment and sequestration of the
property of the company for con-
tempt resulting from disobedience of the
injunction of Justice Grier.
At the same time, the company asked the
court to dissolve the injunction.
Pennsylvania insisted that the act of
Congress was unconstitutional and
void because it annulled the judgment of
the court already rendered and
because it was inconsistent with the
clause in Article I, Section 9, of the
Constitution against preference to the
ports of one state over those of
another.
Justice Nelson, in delivering the
decision of the court on the latter
point, said: "It is urged that the
interruption of the navigation of the
steamboats engaged in commerce and
conveyance of passengers upon the
Ohio river at Wheeling from the erection
of the bridge, and the delay
and expense arising therefrom, virtually
operate to give a preference to
this port over that of Pittsburg; that
the vessels to and from Pittsburg
navigating the Ohio and Mississippi
rivers are not only subjected to
this delay and expense in the course of
the voyage, but that the obstruc-
tion will necessarily have the effect to
stop the trade and business at
Wheeling, or divert the same in some
other direction or channel of
commerce. Conceding all this to be true,
a majority of the court are
of the opinion that the act of Congress
is not inconsistent with the
clause in the constitution referred
to--in other words, that it is not
giving a preference to the ports of one
state over those of another,
within the true meaning of that
provision. There are many acts of
Congress passed in the exercise of this
power to regulate commerce,
providing for a special advantage to the
port or ports of one state
(and which very advantage may
incidentally operate to the prejudice of
the ports in a neighboring state) which
have never been supposed to
conflict with this limitation upon its
power. The improvement of rivers
and harbors, the erection of
light-houses, and other facilities of com-
merce, may be referred to as
examples."37
The court decided that the decree for
alteration or abatement of
the bridge could not be carried into
execution since the act of Congress
regulating the navigation of the river
was consistent with the existence
and continuance of the bridge-but that
the decrees directing the costs
to be paid by the bridge company must be
executed. The majority of
the court (six members), on the grounds
that the act of Congress
afforded full authority to reconstruct the bridge, directed that the
motion for attachments against the
president of the bridge company and
others for disobedience and contempt
should be denied and the injunc-
36
Wheeling Intelligencer July 1 and July 17, 1854.
37 U. S. Supreme Court Reports, 18
Howard, 433.
54 Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications.
tion dissolved; but Nelson agreed with
Wayne, Grier and Curtis in the
opinion that an attachment should issue,
since there was no power in
Congress to interfere with the judgment
of the court under pretense
of power to legalize the structure or by
making it a post road.
Justice McLean dissented, feeling that
the principle involved was
of the deepest interest to the growing
commerce of the West, which
might be obstructed by bridges across
the rivers. He opposed the idea
that making the bridge a post road
(under the purpose of the act of
July 7, 1838,) could exempt it from the
consequences of being a nuisance.
He regarded the act of Congress as unconstitutional
and void; and,
although he admitted the act might
excuse previous contempt, he
declared that it could afford no excuse
for further refusal to perform
the decree.
A sequel to the preceding case arose in
the same term of court
(December, 1855,) on motion of the
counsel for the bridge company for
leave to file a bill of review of the
court's order of the December term
of 1851, in regard to the costs. The
court had already determined that
the decree rendered for costs against
the bridge company was un-
affected by the act of Congress of
August 1, 1852; but the court
declining to open the question for
examination declared "there must be
an end of all litigation."38.
The later history bearing upon the
subject here treated-the later
regulation of the construction of
bridges across the Ohio under act of
Congress, the later opposition which
found expression against the con-
struction of bridges such as the
railroad bridges of Parkersburg and
between Benwood and Bellaire39 (which
were completed in 1871), the
decline of old local prejudices and
jealousies, and the rise of new problems
of transportation resulting from the
extension of railways, cannot be
considered within the scope and limits
of this monograph.
Professor Callahan was followed by
Editor Wiley of Eliza-
beth, Pa.
SHIP AND BRIG BUILDING ON THE OHIO
AND ITS TRIBUTARIES.
BY RICHARD T. WILEY.
The coming of the steamboat on the
western rivers was soon
followed by the end of a movement in the
commerce of the region,
which seems strange as we compare it
with present-day conditions and
activities. To think of Pittsburgh and
the river towns of the Ohio basin
38 U. S. Supreme Court Reports, 18
Howard, 460-463.
39 Wheeling Intelligencer, April 13 and
April 20, 1869.
Ohio Valley Hist. Ass'n, Fifth Annual
Meeting. 55
as seaports seems like a wild flight of
the imagination, yet that is what
they were in effect at the beginning of
the Nineteenth Century and for
a few years thereafter. Strange as it
may seem, sea-going vessels of
large tonnage for the time, sailed from
various settlements on the
Ohio, Monongahela and Allegheny rivers,
while these were yet hardly
more than frontier outposts, following
the rivers to the Gulf of Mexico,
and proceeding thence to ports in
various parts of the world, in both
hemispheres, laden with the products of
this region. And the building
and equipment of these vessels became an
important industry of various
river towns. Can it be now that with the
deepening of existing water-
ways and the opening of a deep water
connection between the Great
Lakes and the Ohio, history is about to
repeat itself, and again sea-
going vessels be seen in our local
waters?
The story of this wonderful development
of a few years in the
early days has never been adequately
told, and can only be touched
on in its most conspicuous features in
this paper. Much time and
effort, search and research, have been
given in an effort to trace it back
to its very beginning; and while much
interesting material has been
unearthed, it cannot be said with
certainty that the beginning has been
reached. The search has been a
fascinating one, with rewards by the
way, of facts discovered here and there,
and the incentive always of
hinted facts just beyond. A number of
claims have been made in the
past, with a positiveness which seemed
to be warranted by the informa-
tion at hand, that this or that ship was
the first to sail these western
waters, only to be shown by the
uncovering of further information to be
in error. Of this more anon.
It would seem that this transportation
development of the time
was an evolution, even though a
comparatively rapid one, rather than
something which had its genesis suddenly
in the building and sailing of
some particular vessel. Navigation of
these rivers began with the red
men and their canoes, which were of two
types -the
dugout, made by
shaping and hollowing out a log into
boat form, and the bark canoe,
made by carefully peeling the bark in
one piece from a large tree trunk,
shaping it to pointed prow and stern and
pitching the seams to make
them impervious to water. A third type
of Indian canoe, made by
stretching skins of animals over wooden
framework, does not seem to
have been much, if at all, in use among
the Indians of this region.
The first white men who came to the
western country followed
the models provided by the Indians and
made themselves canoes of
dugout logs for navigating the streams,
but they soon improved on the
primitive pattern, and the first advance
was the pirogue. With better
tools and facilities for shaping it than
the Indians could command, the
whites employed much larger tree trunks
for the making of these craft,
and sometimes joined two great logs for
the making of one pirogue,
forming a boat capable of floating a
considerable weight, be it of persons
56 Ohio Arch. and
Hist. Society Publications.
or of merchandise. The bateau was the
next development. It was a
freight boat, built of planks, square at
each end and widest at the
middle. Its ultimate development is seen
in the coal and freight barges
on our rivers to-day. The flatboat was
the usual conveyance of the
emigrant down the rivers, in his
migration to the west. It also was
built of planks, with the seams caulked,
was square and flat bottomed,
and was roofed over for the protection
of the people, their animals and
goods. This craft, though unwieldy, was
capable of carrying large
loads. The modern coalboat is its lineal
descendant. The keelboat,
which finally came largely into use as
the river packet of the day, alone,
of all the craft described, followed the
established plans of marine arch-
itecture, having a ribbed frame, planked
over in straight lines and curves,
after the manner of shipbuilding. Its
name really gives a very good
hint of its form and manner of
construction, which was much like that
of the canal boats of later days,
pointed at prow and stern, and having
a low cabin.
While paddles, oars, poles and cordelles
were used on these various
types of craft as the ordinary means of
propulsion, they nearly all
carried masts and sails for use when
these could be employed to ad-
vantage. Note the two facts-the
development of types into a marine
form of construction, with keel and
ribs, along with the use of sails-
and the step was a short one to ships
for plowing the main.
All of the information at hand seems to
indicate that the beginning
of the building of ships in the Ohio
basin was in the last few years of
the Eighteenth Century. Some careful writers
have been misled by a
paragraph in Harris's Directory of
Pittsburgh, into giving 1792 as the
time of the first ship-building
operations at that city, but it will be
shown that there was an error in the
date quoted by Harris, the
operations to which he refers having
been begun ten years later than
the date given by him. Here is the
quotation referred to. (Note par-
ticularly the dates and the names of
vessels.)
"In the year 1792 a French company
of merchants under the firm
of Tarascon, Berthoud & Co., came
from Philadelphia and commenced a
large establishment at this place They
brought with them about twenty
ship carpenters and joiners, and the
first summer built the schooner
Amity of 120 tons and the ship
Pittsburgh of 250 tons. Having sent out
caulkers, riggers, captains, mates and
sailors, they were fitted out com-
pletely for sea; and the following
spring the schooner was sent to St.
Thomas and the ship to Philadelphia,
both laden with flour. The second
summer they built the brig Nanina, of
200, and the ship Louisiana, of
350 tons. The ship was sent direct to
Marseilles; the brig was sent out
ballasted with stone coal, which was
sold at Philadelphia for 371/2 cents a
bushel. She also had a quantity of staves, heading,
hoop-poles, etc. The
year after they built the ship Western
Trader, of 400 tons. This com-
Ohio Valley Hist. Ass'n, Fifth Annual
Meeting. 57
pany were the first to introduce the
navigation of the Ohio with keel-
boats."
Against this put the following, from
"Pittsburgh's Hundred Years,
by the careful local historian, George
H. Thurston, published in 1888:
"The building of sea-going vessels
was established at Pittsburgh by a
French gentleman, Louis Anastasius
Tarascon, who emigrated from
France in 1794, and established himself
at Philadelphia as a merchant.
In 1799 he sent two of his clerks,
Charles Brugiere and James Berthoud,
to examine the course of the Ohio and
Mississippi from Pittsburgh to
New Orleans, and ascertain the
practicability of sending ships, and
clearing them ready-rigged, from
Pittsburgh to the West Indies and
Europe. The two gentlemen reported
favorably, and Mr. Tarascon
associated them, and his brother, John
Anthony, with himself, under the
firm of John A. Tarascon Brothers, James
Berthoud & Co., and immedi-
ately established at Pittsburgh a
wholesale and retail warehouse, a ship
yard, a rigging and sail loft, an anchor
smithshop, a block manufactory
and all other things necessary to
complete sea-going vessels. The first
year, 1801, they built the schooner Amity,
of 120 tons, and the ship
Pittsburgh, of 250 tons, and sent the
former, loaded with flour, to St.
Thomas, and the other, also loaded with
flour, to Philadelphia, from
whence they sent them to Bordeaux,
France, and brought back a cargo
of wine, brandy and other French goods,
part of which they sent in
wagons to Pittsburgh, at a carriage of
from 6 to 8 cents a pound. In
1802 they built the brig Nanina, 250
tons; in 1803, the ship Louisiana,
300 tons; in 1804, the ship Western
Trader, 400 tons."
Original documentary evidence now at
hand shows that neither of
the writers above quoted was entirely
accurate, though the later one
was approximately so. Almost complete
files exist, for the period under
consideration, of the Gazette and
the Tree of Liberty, two weekly news-
papers published at Pittsburgh, and are
now preserved in the Carnegie
Library of that city. One or both of
these note the launching of all
the vessels above named, in the order
there given. But the Amity, instead
of having been built in 1792, as Harris
says, or in 1801, as given by
Thurston, was evidently constructed in
1802, for her launching on the
23d of December of that year is noted in
the local news record. The
ship Pittsburgh was launched in
February, 1803; the brig Nanina,
January 4, 1804; the ship Louisiana,
April 6, 1804, and the Western
Trader, in May, 1804, as noted in the
current news record.
It is inconceivable, of course, that the
names and practically the
tonnage of vessels should be duplicated
in the same yard, in a series of
five, within ten years, so it is very
evident that the date given by Harris
as the beginning of operations by this
firm was one decade too early.
Other things in the record make this
indubitable. In the same newspaper
files already quoted from, first
appears, in the autumn of 1801, adver-
tising of the mercantile house of James
Berthoud, while in September,
58 Ohio Arch. and Hist.
Society Publications.
1802, notice was given the public that
"the house of James Berthoud will
hereafter be known by the firm of
Tarascon Brothers, James Berthoud &
Co." Further evidence of the
unreliability of the Harris publication is
found in the statement that "this
company were the first to introduce
the navigation of the Ohio with
keelboats," for advertising of the period
shows that these were being built and offered
for sale at Pittsburgh and
various places on the Monongahela river
from four to six years before
the early date erroneously given by
Harris as the time of the founding of
the Tarascon-Berthoud house.
But this concern was not the first one
to build maritime vessels in
the Pittsburgh region or on the Ohio,
though it is probable theirs was
the first establishment in the western
country having facilities for their
building and complete outfitting. Note
is made in the papers already
quoted from of the building of the Dean,
a vessel of 180 tons, at a point
on the Allegheny river, eleven miles
above Pittsburgh, in the year 1802.
This vessel sailed from Pittsburgh in January, 1803, for Liverpool,
England, the intention being to take on a
cargo of cotton at the mouth
of the Cumberland river. This was more
than three months before the
sailing of the Amity and Pittsburgh from
Pittsburgh.
The claim has long been made that the
first sea-going vessel to be
built on the western rivers and to pass
down these to the sea was the
schooner Monongahela Farmer, a vessel of
92 tons' burden, built at
Elizabethtown, now Elizabeth, on the
Monongahela. It has figured as
such in history and story, and the
present writer confesses to having, in
full belief of its correctness, done
somewhat to perpetuate what there
is now good reason to believe was an
error. This vessel was built in
the year 1800, and was launched April
23, 1801, by the Monongahela
Company, an organization of farmers of
the vicinity. It was loaded
with flour and sent to New Orleans,
becoming later a packet between
that city and the West Indies. The stock
of the company was in twenty
shares of one hundred dollars each, and
was owned by twenty farmers.
The owners of the vessel also owned its
cargo. It sailed in May of the
same year, touching at Pittsburgh on the
13th. It was detained at the
Falls of Ohio (Louisville) for more than
six months by low water, not
reaching New Orleans until the beginning
of 1802. Very complete
records of this vessel and her voyage
were preserved in a printed descrip-
tion of her materials and construction,
the letter of commission and
instruction to her commander and letters
from him on the way. The
commander was Capt. John Walker of
Elizabeth. For three-quarters of
a century boat building operations were
carried on by the Walker
family at Elizabeth, and representatives
of it are still there and at
various other places in the country. It
has constantly been maintained
by these Walkers that their forebear
sailed the first ship down the inland
waters. He survived until 1856, and his
son John died in Colorado
Ohio Valley Hist. Ass'n, Fifth Annual
Meeting. 59
within the past year, so the span of
these two lives covered the century
and more since the events under
consideration.
Did the honor of being the first belong
to the Monongahela
Farmer? The Tree of Liberty has
this note in its issue of March 28,
1801: "Now riding at anchor in the
Monongahela, opposite this place,
the schooner Redstone, 45 feet in keel,
built at Chester's ship yard, near
Redstone, by Samuel Jackson &
Co.--with masts, spars, rigging, &c.,
of the growth and manufacture of this
western country." This was
nearly four weeks before the launching
of the Monongahela Farmer, and
more than six weeks before her sailing.
No further record can be found
of the schooner Redstone - when she sailed,
for what port or the nature
of her cargo. Her departure from
Pittsburgh may, of course, have been
subsequent to that of the Monongahela
Farmer. The "Chester ship yard,
near Redstone," is doubtless
identical with that referred to in an adver-
tisement in the Pittsburgh Gazette in
its issue of October 7, 1786, which
announces that "Joseph Chester,
boat builder, opposite the mouth of
Little Redstone, nine miles below Big
Redstone, makes all kinds of keel
and other boats, in the most improved
manner, and at shortest notice."
The mouth of Little Redstone creek is
the site of the present borough of
Fayette City, and Allenport, on the
opposite side of the Monongahela,
was, without doubt, the site of the
Chester yard.
The ship which seems to have the best
title to priority over the
Monongahela Farmer of any which have
figured in the records up to
this time is the St. Clair, built at
Marietta, Ohio. Different authorities
assign the years 1798, 1799 and 1800 as
the time of her construction.
That she was built about the end of the
century and sailed for Havana,
Cuba, with a cargo of pork and flour,
under command of Commodore
Abraham Whipple, of Revolutionary fame,
is generally agreed, though
Thurston speaks of the commander as
Commodore Preble. The present
writer has been unable to find any
documentary evidence, coming down
from the time, which fixes the date
definitely, as in the cases of vessels
already considered. The spring of 1800
is the time which has most
favor as that of the sailing of this
vessel. Prof. Archer Butler Hulbert,
of Marietta, an accepted authority on
matters of history of the Ohio
Valley, referring to it in his excellent
work, "The Ohio River, a Course
of Empire," says: "It was in
the year 1800, probably, that the first
ocean-rigged vessel weighed anchor on
the Ohio for the sea," and in the
same work he refers to the Monongahela
Farmer as "the first [ship]
to descend the Ohio of which we have any
clear record."*
In the year 1797, when war was
threatened between the United
States and France, Congress authorized
the building of two armed
*Prof. Hulbert quotes as his authority
for the time of the St. Clair's
sailing, Hildreth's Pioneer History,
issued in 1834, and an inscription on
the tombstone of Commodore Whipple.
60 Ohio Arch. and
Hist. Society Publications.
galleys for the defense of the lower
Mississippi. These were built and
launched at or near Pittsburgh, the
President Adams in 1798 and the
Senator Ross in 1799. Major Isaac Craig,
writing at the time, spoke of
the first as "as fine a vessel of
her burden and construction as the United
States possesses," and the second
as "certainly a fine piece of naval
architecture, and one which will far exceed
anything the Spaniards can
show on the Mississippi." But these
were never intended to be sea-
going craft and probably were never in
salt water.
And now to return to the claim long made
that the first sea-going
vessel built west of the Allegheny mountains
sailed from Elizabeth and
was commanded by Capt. John Walker.
Various county and other his-
tories have accepted the correctness of
this claim. Thus Thurston, in
"Allegheny County's Hundred
Years," published in 1888, says: "Alle-
gheny County is more than historically
connected in a general way with
the history of steamboat building.
Elizabeth is the point where was
built, at the close of the Eighteenth
Century, the first sea-going vessel
to navigate the western waters, and
Pittsburgh is the place where the
first practical steamboat was
constructed." Warner's and other histories
of Allegheny County make like claims,
basing them on earlier publica-