Lynchburg Virginian. [volume] (Lynchburg [Va.]) 1829-185?, 1845-06-02
TIE viaoIEiAr.
TIE JAMES RIVER & KANAVHA I'M
IROVENENT

-
TR0VEMENT
writer over the signature III "CIintnn." has lately
written several numbers The subject Of this impuve
mpat. ! agfee with "Cnien" in 81 his opinions.
and Disagree with him in ofers; and he APPEARS IN
wish In give correct information 10 the pnplic have
concluded To punt uat few efro- which think he has
hllen intn.
aene with him in his dsapproval of The proposed
change ot mil rad from tovingipn Ia kanawha aud
substituting therefor AIeAdamaed road and lock aud
dam taypalion, and Clinton has handled this part Of
the subject 81 ably. will dismiss II with the remark
TINT. In opinion, the latter would cost Than the
lnrnef IN de ui improvement.
II Ia, huwever. the second number Of Clinton in
tend particularly IN nuiice; and AIN sorry that am
compelled 10 der With as ritter who appears IL be per
tee, inrarita and am satisfied he has bscn misle.
by the Reports ii the committees Of the Legislature,
ahn Ia epirtan, haye locked 10 but side Of The
qrn-nn Indeed have heard IL stated that the Speak
ofhoh lnnses in The last Leg stature, appointed thu
known lt,nda Il thu Deelufy al The James River and
kana"ha Company, believing they were the proper pet
suns Ia he sell cled II was usual 10 appoint tho friends
ri measure Ia perfect and bring il helo the eyis
atutf and tins committee reported ut sn late period Of
The stssion that II was impossible fur members opposed
IL lhis Rero 10 point ou lis errors aud lis do.
ci.ion=.
think thai "Clininn' aud the corumiitees of tina
ienisaiuro are mistaken in surprising that tho work
wa del 'an SIS good terms. mt better, Than either sim
liar l0ts In niher Siates,' ir Judge Wright. WIN was
hmnr viii PERHAPS uear'y all the improvements iu
the United Saies. told it could be made for from,
$4,000 10 $4,000 per milr aud at that time he wns
well acquainted With the dllieull,s each had o encoun
Ter IN ila ennsiruetn ~.
The thceapeake and Ohm Canal hpo heen ayourils
s1itet Of comparison by The pres'dul 81 The James Rv-
CT kan4eha Company in his Annual Reports; hut
he neglected tole thai ihal Canal is u much larger
dimensions and constructed IN much costly STYLE
Is vii might he compare palace log cabin M
huh hans,s TIM ouly parl ct The Chesapeake and
Ohm tanal thai could be compared with The James
River aud hanaWla ls TINT part If lhe former ab.ve
larper's teuy: and notwithstanding the difficulties
much greater lhan any part oi The James River
and ka0aNha Ganal. noln outstanding the lcks were
all o eni ste. the width Of The canal the same around
the most pteerii'us rocks and in some sections the
earth Ind IA be- bruneht from The opmse side of tho
river Ia maxi The enhankn ensyet Mr. Cabell In his
printed speech delivered IN Richmond in 1884 SAWS
that this canal was put under contract S25 900 per
mei and thans eonelnsiscly. by fair comparison Of
the Two improvements, Tim, the James River & Eannw.
In canal ought 10 b. constructed Ter less than 81 600
per mile.
The eemn iltee Of the last Legislature tell US. that
ihnfe was an nd3ane al om Got 100 per cent in tho
plee 81 cnmnon labaf and that, "mskipg this and 9TH
ef additions the work les tIlan previous estmn,esv
hui Tie committee do not tell us that The estimate o:
JUDGE Wright @ns n'.nded 10 cuver the cost of cut
slime eeka, u continuous canal, ana vt waterway
81 The eame width The eolire length # he where
ma, With The exception pl few locks ot stone Tho
locks nft 1T Nead and slime, (nnt hall 81 cosv y, IN.
bed 81 the ferr IS used re- different places and NJ
many dher different places the width ur the canal Ia
considerably reduced. The saving in these particulars
appears 10 10 he folly tqus the increased price of
labor, the average oi Which uld not have exceeded
thirty percent.
II. however. be mistaken and the canal from Rich
mond Ia l.ynehhure has been economically made and
Yet c,si between five aud six millions Of DOLLARS II il
npnsehle that the remainder " hich is fully two-
III rls) wh,n The d,ni ults cessarly be encounter
ed taken INTO calculation be- constructed for the
estimated sum ol al,60o,000. II appears TO mo that
the Arguments 81 "tlann. showing mat this improve.
menl lie flashed for $i.500 600. are conclusive.
that The canal rom Richmond 10 Lynchburg cost double
what II ought 10 have done.
Clinton speaks Of The financial embarrassments NJ
the company. These II appears TO me- were Of their
own creation. and the result Of bad management This
company bud nj Its command, when the work commen.
ced 81 900 600, Of which the State swed A..
000Hoo. which WIS pnld. IN " hole in part in Slae
honds, which oads that tine ahoye rar In tho
narket, The ollu 81 GOO. GOO of sio was taken by
corporations aud Individuals Ought this company let ma
ask. with capital Of 81 900 900 10 have suffered en-
hnrrassneni IN constructing canal li miles along thu
wiley OF tie James Ryeri think not; bu, that il
should hive leen completed Tor much smaller SUN.
less even than the estimate Of Judge Wright Aud
think, with "Glmton," that "howevcr large may have
been the expenditure Of money exceeding previons ex-
peeatan, has not arisen from the intrinsic dlirul,y
Of this Improvement" r.