Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1875-05-07

ceding 10 any possible canal, so constructed,
a capacity for 500 tons,or even eco tons, and
you still have only large canal, requiring
transhipment from the large lake craft, and
entirely unavoidable, untitled and made
quate for the passage of large boats and car
goes The enlargement Of the canal to this
size would be enormously expensive, and to
the size Of ship canal, if that were physi-
cally possible, would be utterly impractical
bic from the enormity of its cost. The
length of canal, 202 miles, with the low
rate of speed practicable, also really and
practically takes this route out of the cate
CORY, and this same objection applies with
still greater force of course to the Erie.
While engineers have certified to the sui-
| fciency of water for the Oswego enlarged
to capacity for boats of 400 tons, it has
nowhere been shown that there is capaci-
ty for ship canal of dimensions sufficient
to pass vessels oil 600, ,200 or 800 tons
which the Champlain ship canal would be
constructed to DO, and there is hardly a
doubt that lack of supply of water would be
an insuperabe obstacle to the construction
of an Oswego ship canal as well as Erie
ship canal. But that it would be sound
policy for the State to enlarge to the utmost
extent all the existing modes Of transit and
furnish all the facilities practicable, am
fully convinced and would therefore advo-
cate them, for their construction and en-
ployment even to their full capacity would
in no wise initiate against the construction
of the proposed ship canal from Lake Cham
plain to the Hudson, which believe to be
the crowning work of our great system OF
internal improvements, and the only possible
Init Of fl,o of frr
an outlet for the teeming granaries of the
West, so capacions that it can never be over
taxed, 50 speedy and certain that It can
never be surpassed by any other route.
The representations made by the Jealous
advocates of other routes, and in particular
by those urging the Oswego route, are filled
with inaccuracies which require to be recti-
fad The admission into the reports OF the
Senate committee and other official docu-
ments gives them a currency and quasi
official Endorsement which requires their re-
futstion. 1t is necessary TO call attention
to these matters before proceeding TO make
comparison Of the merits of the various
routes, in which comparison, while correct
ing the erroneous statements and peryerslons
of fact, we shall take the distances, lock-
ages, etc, from the statements of the Erie
and Oswego routes.
The first Misrepresentation Is with regard
to the length of canal to be traversei on the
Caughnawaga route from The West. because
the business 10 be transacted Is from the
Vest, and the addition of every mile OF ca
nal would add to the hHie and necessarily the
c0sf of transit. Now. in Transporting the
products of the great West to market,
vessels Of 900 tons leaving Duluth or Chi
cago pass through the great lakes and s..
Lawrence river and arrive at the entrance to
the proposed Caughnawaga Canal having
only passed through thirty miles of canal
lthe Welland enlarged, instead of sixty-iiyo
and a half, as stated in Mr.. McAlpine'> re
port to the Osweso Committee, and inserted
at length in the Window Senate Committee
Report. The inaccuracv in this case con-
sists in including thirty-fve and haifmiles
, Of the ST. Lawrence River canals, which
boats from The NeN do not have to use, it
being necessary to use them only on the
return tIip, owing 10 the force and rap.iIty
Of the current. and, therefore. these canals
are wrongfullv used rs a factor IN making
up statement Of the time consumed in
making trip from the great .akes TO New
York. Admitting the correctness OF the
statement that vessels must pass through
these canals, and still it viii be demonstra-
ted that the Caughnawaga route Is the most
favorable for rapidity Of transit As well as
excelling in all other respects all the other
existing and proposed routes. The Richclleu
River. above St. Johns, Is 4 broad, deep
river and Just as free from let and hindrance
in navigation As Lake Champlain itself.
Again, in the statements furnished by the
advocates Of the Oswego route, the number
of locks on the Caughnawaga route Is mis-
stated Instead of four locks the twenty
nine feet lift on CauGhnawagl canal VIII
only require two locks.
Again, on the proposed ship canal from
the Hudson to Lake Champlain they state
the lift from the lake to the river to be
eighty-three feet eight inches, while in
reality 1t is only twenty-eight feet. and, as
proposed to be constructed, would only be
thirty-nine feet, lift which, in no event,
would require over four locks, while they
state the number at eight.
The object of these misrepresentation will
appear obvious when it Is stated that the
time consumed in making lOckages i count
ed As a mile Of canal for each lock, and in
this manner quite an unfair difference Is
made to appear to the disadvantage OF the
Caughnawaga route.
But with all these misstatemcnt- they can
scarcely give an appearance of advantage to
! their route, shorter, indeed, in the actual
distance 10 be trayersei, bat immensely
longer in the line Of canal to be passed
through.
There are other unfair statements which,
in the course of remarks upon the tables OF
comparative distances. will receive atten-
tion, but the greatest inaccuracy, and the
one most calculated to mislead, is the unfair
assumption of an equal rate Of speed being
practicable on the TWO routes, and making
comparisons and deducing results from tins
unwarranted assumption.
Now, for the existing canal, or for any
canal that may be constructed on the Os-
wego route, it is very questionable whether
a higher rate Of speed than three miles an
hour can be sustained without injury to the
banks, while on the large water ways OF the
Caughnawaga route vessels can, without
difficulty, maintain the same rate OF speed a
on the lakes and rivers, that Is, nine miles an
hour, bat, for the purpose OF comparison
with existing routes, we shall call II SIX
miles. The simple statement shows that
much greater rapidity Of transit Is practlc-
able on this route than by any other, and
that as far as rapidity of transit is concern
ed the solution of the problem in this re
spect is by the Champlain ship canal route
4 careful examination of the map OF
transportation routes from the Mississippi to
the scaboard which accompanies this report,
will satisfy any candid and appropriated
person that the natural route for great
water way Is the Champlain shin canal, and
that it Is moreover. the only possible route
Existing routes may be increased IN capacity,
but can never, by any possibility, do more
than = small portion Of this immense basi-
ness. while the Champlain ship canal and
Hudson River Improvement, constructed
upon proper scale, will ha &c capacity
sufficient not only to DO all this immense
business now Offering, but for business OF
immensely greater volume even. and with
the other avenues provided would seem to
make ample provision for many years IN the
future. Space forbids my entering IN detail
into minute examination of the relative
advantages of the various routes, but, as
bearing ON the questions, | will quote the
following from Hon. W. j. McAlpine,s re
mort to Montreal IiaTbor Commis sion, March
"a, 1858:
.sTb,t tn, deterrni nation Of the question of the
best route FOR the water borne trade Is
suced TO a comparison between the routes tnr9dsn
the state cf New York and that along the st. Law
renee With this view the cost OF transport on tue
Erieand Oswego canals is taken as Il they were
Os5s) enlarged throughout. 4, eau y lila"a-S -,
canal from the St. Lawrence TO Lake Chimplaih
Will be considered as completed oi the same scale
as the ST. Lawrence canal, and the 'h&ihp @
canal m he REGARDED also enlarged 10 the sams
Dimensions The locks on the "eil1nd anu 81
Lawr.nc, canals will be Considered as also en-
I'm comparing the routes thr0ngh the STATE o'
New York with each other, and the ST. LlWreaeo,
il is necessary TO observe that by the way OF builo
and O.wegl a transhipmsnf must be made from the
AXE vessel 10 canal roats and that the extra eo.s
OF canal transport and heavy tolls nust oe
Ia those rates while by the way oi Lake ChaihplA
10 New York and by the st. Lawrence no tranSAip-
rnenf Is REQ 1red and the cost o; transport Will DC
very much reduced. E, ,r;ll Ia
"from the computations we have made y VIII % pe
seen that the cost Of transport TO New crk Dy te
way OF the ST. Lawrence and pr opposed CauShnawh-
"a canal aud enlarging Cha mpiain eaiai l1r of-
dInary vessels. is less than by the way OF osWeso