these rotted in six years. It was wooden locks like these that the New Yorkers had found the Virginians building on the Potomac. The locks at German Flats and at Rome were rebuilt with brick, but the mortar was poor and they fell to pieces. Finally, at all points, the locks were built of stone. This experimenting was extremely expensive work and explains why, for a long time, no dividends could be paid. Up to December, 1804, the company had received $232,000, which was paid on 2,630 shares of capital stock. It had received $25,494 on forfeited shares. The tolls at Little Falls since 1796, when the works there were completed, amounted to $58,346; at Rome, $15,037 had been taken in as tolls. The sum of $12,500 had been received as a gift from the state. Of the total stock the state held $92,000, and the private stockholders, $140,000. In 1798 a dividend of 3 per cent had been declared; in 1813, a dividend of 3½; in 1814, a dividend of 3; 4½ per cent dividend was paid in 1815, 8 per cent in 1816, 3 per cent in 1817, and 5½ per cent in 1818. All receipts from 1798 to 1813 had been absorbed in improvements and repairs.[16]

CHAPTER II

EARLY PROMOTERS AND THEIR DREAMS

The honor of originating the plan of a canal from the Great Lakes to the Hudson will forever lie with the brilliant, visionary Gouverneur Morris. The idea must have suggested itself to other minds even if it occurred to Morris originally; this cannot be disproved; but Morris’s shoulders were broad enough for an honor too great for many, and his persistent labors in behalf of the project are altogether consistent with this verdict of a century. In 1777 Morris was known to have hinted of what we know as the Erie Canal. In that year he was sent to General Schuyler’s army at Fort Edward, then slowly retiring before Burgoyne’s advancing regiments. Morgan Lewis, then quartermaster, later governor of New York, leaves this testimony, in a letter dated May 26, 1828: “One evening in particular, while describing in the most animated and glowing terms the rapid march of the useful arts through our country, when once freed from a foreign yoke; the spirit with which agriculture and commerce both external and internal would advance; the facilities which would be afforded them by the numerous water courses, intersecting the country, and the ease by which they might be made to communicate; he announced, in language highly poetic, and to which I cannot do justice, that at no very distant day the waters of the great western inland seas would, by the aid of man, break through their barriers and mingle with those of the Hudson. I recollect asking him how they were to break through these barriers. To which he replied, that numerous streams passed them through natural channels, and that artificial ones might be conducted by the same routes.”[17]

In his diary for October, 1795, Morris describes his feeling on viewing the Caledonian Canal in Scotland; “when I see this,” he writes, “my mind opens to a view of wealth for the interior of America, which hitherto I had rather conjectured than seen.”[18] In a letter to Mr. Parish in January, 1801, he observes, after seeing a number of ships riding at anchor in Lake Erie, “Hundreds of large ships will, at no distant period, bound on the billows of these inland seas. At this point begins a navigation of more than a thousand miles [to the extremity of Lake Superior]. Shall I lead your astonishment up to the verge of incredulity? I will. Know then that one-tenth of the expense, borne by Britain in the last campaign, would enable ships to sail from London through Hudson’s River into Lake Erie.”[19]

“The merit of first starting the idea of a direct communication by water, between lake Erie and Hudson’s river,” wrote Simeon De Witt to William Darby, February 25, 1822, “unquestionably belongs to Mr. Gouverneur Morris. The first suggestion I had of it was from him. In 1803, I accidentally met with him at Schenectady. We put up for the night at the same inn and passed the evening together. Among the numerous topics of conversation, to which his prolific mind, and excursive imagination, gave birth, was that of improving the means of intercourse with the interior of our state. He then mentioned the project of tapping Lake Erie, as he expressed it himself, and leading its waters, in an artificial river, directly across the country to Hudson’s river. To this I very naturally opposed the intervening hills and valleys as insuperable obstacles. His answer was in substance, labor improbus omnia vincit, and that the object would justify the labour and expense, whatever that might be. Considering this a romantic thing, and characteristic of the man, I related it on several occasions.”[20] J. Geddes wrote William Darby, February 22, 1822, as follows: “In the year of 1804, I learnt for the first time, from the surveyor-general [Simeon De Witt] that Mr Gouverneur Morris, in a conversation between them in the preceding autumn, mentioned the scheme of a canal from lake Erie across the country to the Hudson river. The idea of saving so much lockage by not descending to lake Ontario made a very lively impression on my mind.”[21]

With canal building going on in other portions of the country, it was inevitable that the suggestion made by Morris could not down. The opportunity offered here in central New York was so favorable, that a people with only half the ambition and ability of New Yorkers would have profited sooner or later by it. Having studied the tremendous tasks undertaken by the Marylanders and Pennsylvanians, it can be understood why the Erie Canal was under consideration at a comparatively early date; the Mohawk offered a gateway through the northern foothills of the Alleghenies, and beyond lay lakes and rivers in the direct route to Lake Erie. There could be no question of water supply at the summit level; the waterways to be crossed, however, might cause the engineers no little trouble.

“I have not been able to trace,” Mr. Watson leaves record, “any measure, public or private, tending towards this great enterprize, till the 27th October, 1807, when an anonymous publication, under the signature of Hercules, appeared in the Genesee Messenger of Canandaigua, which is attributed to Jesse Hawley, Esq. now [1820] collector of the port of Rochester.”