American watchman and Delaware advertiser., 1825-11-25
RAIL ROADS AND CANALS.

In publishing the essay on Rail Roads and Ca
mails, by Baltimorean, (see WATcHMAN of Tues
day last,) the Editor oi the Boston Daily Advert
ser makes The following remarks.
! "Having so far complied with the request OF III,
writer, We owe II to our readers to point out som,
OF the mistakes in The above article. Ii is not tru,
that committee Of The British Parliament has re
ported against railways in general. On the con
trary many charters have been grained by Parlia
inent to railway Companies ard where reports hav,
been made against such grants, in the of th
Birmingham and Liverpool Company, it has beef
on local grounds, because such grants would con
fllct with the interests OF the Caaal Companies.
! Admitting the statement above to be correct, tina
a single horse will draw, at the rate of two and
half miles per hour, three times the weight on {
canal Which he will draw on rail road il should be
| remembered, that on the canal the boat must be at
tended by TWO or three men, besides the one VIII.
drives the horse but that the rail road no other
attendance is necessary than that required for the
horse and that on the railroad without requiring
any Increase OF power, the speed may be increa ed
to four, five or six miles per hour, and when steam
power is used, TO much greater rapdity.
The writer is mistaken in his suppostlon, that in
mountainous countries the expense is greater, COM
pared with canals in the same countries, than where
the country is level. The comparative advantages
OF railroads greater in mountainous, than in le
vel routes, it would be easy show by going into
lew details, both IN the expense OF construction,
and IN the facility OF passing. Who ever heard of
" ascending and descending mountains, with an ell.
ovation OF from forty to eighty degrees 7" Whate
yer is the height the ascent descent may be made
either by perpendicular lift, or plane of such
inclination as may be found most convenient and it
is hardly possible TO imagine a case where the diff
Guilty to be overcome shall be greater in the rail-
way, than in the canal. The difficulty apprehended
from the wanton destruction oil the rail way must be
in great measure imaginary. 1t there is any
ground Tor the apprehension, there is the same or
greater objection to canals 1t would be as easy to
destroy the embanhment OF canal to break
bar of malsabe iron OF the dimensions required
Tor the railroad, and the injury from breach in
an embankment, would be likely 20 be greater, than
that from the fracture of bar in the rail. road.
The writer is quite mistaken in assuming that
for the reasons which he assigns, any other rea
SONS, rail roads extended routes have been ex
pnded in England Several routes are now in pro-
gress, and one has been lately opened with great
success. If it is an objection to a-roads that
there has not been the same experience in their ia
vor, as in favor of canals the objection, far
has any weight, is likely to be removed by little
delay. We believe there are few situations in this
country, where it would not be highly improvdeht
to undertake the construction of canal, until the
projectors had made thorough inquiry to satisfy
them whether rail road would not be more eligi
BILE. 1t is possible that longer experience will
show that the present apparent advantages of rail-
roads illus0ry but the weight OF evidence is at
present strongly in their favor, particularly for ap
pcation in mountainous countries in preference to
canals"