New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1873-03-29
BOATS Ashley ARE, ON THE CANAL AS 1T IS.

To the Edtlor OF The Tribune.
SIR: The editorial remarks on State Canal
Navigation published your issue OF the 25th inst are
timely and TO the point You might, however, have
gone still further and asserted that tho classes OF nve
lions excluded from competition for the State bounty
or properly. not specifically admitted to It, and
hence not recognized as competitors by the Commission
ers appointed under the act Of ls-are the only ones
from which any results may DO expected that will
demonstrate IL such demonstration Is possible the prae-
ticability OF substituting steam for animal power In
this class are included road steamers running the
towpath, traction tugs built to haul trains OF loaded
boats rapidly and cheapy than they can DO drawn
sngy by horses and other systems OF train traction
which, without placing any distractions In the way Of
horse boats be made render effective service In
drawing loaded boats Such systems not provided
for In the law however and the Commissioners are not
DESTROYS OF giving them chance to operate. know Of
one case in which the inventor OF practical system
OF towing boats in trains had TO get special act
on section OF the canal few miles long, and was then
required to dispense fees and gratites literally that
to have continued his experiments 10 the END OF the
season would have cost than the amount OF the
State prize which no was given to understand az inc
outset that no had no chance OF getting The truth OF
the this State bounty business was arranged
by the lobby with special object in yeW and goSd care
limitations and that systems in which the ring hso
no interest should have chance OF competing Tor the
money do suppose that one In ten OF the legs
latOrs who voted for the In good faith knew
ANYTHING about the business Of the canals or tho posi-
bity of applying steam economically 10 the movement
OF boats but fail 10 how any one who does can
read Prof Greene report without being convinced tha
II tho question OF who shall have the slOOo IS 10 DO
decided accordance with the views expressed by hn
the money will be worse than wasted A..
The question OF how steam can be adapted TO the
movement OF canal tonnage IL emneny praOtlcal one
We have the canals wide and deep as they are likely
To DO for many years come, and have the boats
some 1000 In ALTO carry the freights which follow Tn Is
route " and from the seaboard 1t as II we bad rail-
road fully equipped with freight cars but were without
any better OF moving those than by means OF
traction which shall render on the canal the same
service which the locomotive renders upon land not
some fancy system OF automatic propulsion Whcn,
while diminishing the carrying capacity or the boat
ereases its running compared with tOwage by
animal power. We want 10 know how We can move
our feet OF 1000 blunbowed boats most rapidly ana
economcay not what is the best plan upon which TO
build 5000 new TO replace the tonnage aOa
which represents invested capital OF many millions
duction OF propelng machinery. II anything has been
proved by the Of experiments with steam Ia the
Erie Canal which began in 1868 and eliminated up 70 e
close navigation last year. IL Is that steamers carrying
their own propelling machinery cannot compete Win
horseDOats But II they could we should sun nave our
present tonnage to uze and TO talk OF putting steam
engines into each boat Is absurdity There Is no
harm in trying fancy and paddle wheels "that
will not wash the banks" fish tails ducks feet, grass
hammer movements and the like IL any one has money
10 waste aud wants it in that but the only
present necessity is for system OF traction that ss
move boats as have them on the canal as s WIN
an economy both and cost compared with low
age by horses. D. ~ ~
NeS- YORK., March &c, 1878,