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
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,