New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1884-02-13
CANAL IMPROVEMENTS.
SEEKING TO LENGTHEN LOCK NO. 40.

A PLAN TO ALLOW TWO BOATS TO PASS THROUGH
LOCK AT TIE SAME TINE.
[fRoM THE REGULAR CORRESPONDENT OF THE rEisuSE'i
A1nAyY. Feb. 1.-THE Assembly to-day con-
sidered for three hours an apparently insignificant
bill. but which in theopinon of ex-Speaker Little
John is the most important measure before the
Legislature II simply providesfor the lengthening
of lock No. 49, on the Erie Canal at Utica,
so that two boats may be put through the
lock at the Same moment. The sum OF
900 Is appropriated for the purpose.
The object of those who favor the bill is to make
an experiment. to learn IL two boats can be passed
through lock at the same time, and the number
of minutes that will be gained by the operation.
There are seventy-one locks on the Erie Canal.
1t is claimed that if two boats could beput through
these locks at the same time, two days time
would be saved in the present trip of a canal boat
from Buffalo to New-York. The enlargement OF
seyenty-one locks would, it 10 estimated, entail
upon the State an expenditure Of 100000.
REMARKS IN FAVOR OF THE IDEA
The most prominent figure in the debate was
George Clinton, grandson of De Witt Clinton. Nat
urally Mr. Clinton favored the bill. He was sup
ported by De Witt Clinton Lltlejohn, representing
the interests of those who live along the line of the
Oswego Canal Speeches in behalf Of the bill were
made by Messrs Howe, House and Haggerty, OF
New-York by ex-Speaker Hustled, of Westchester
County. and by Mr.. Hunt, of Jefferson County.
Mr. Howe made a strong presentation OF the
argument that the canals, by their competition,
keep down railway charges.
The opposition came from Mr.. Boynton. OF Essex
County, of the non-canal counties ana from MI
Shoemaker, of OnOndaga County. Their argument
was that the State had assumed great burden Py
making the canals free, the maintenance OF the
canals thereby being accepted, and therefore II
ought not be asked to make further expenditures
IN that direction. 1t was too soon, in their opinion
for the State to accept new policy, namely that
of enargng the locks, then enlarglng the canals
and then having ship canal. -,
Mr. Lttlejohn argued that tho lengthenlng OF the
locks would diminish the cost of transporting goods
and grain on the canals. He was decidedly tn favor
of modern improvements on the canals. lie re-
membered the time when the small locomotives on
the New-York Central Railroad only drew ifteen OF
sixteen cars Now the Great M0gul engines drew
forty or fifty cars II the canals wero TO compete
with the railroads they must be improved.
THE INCREASE OF TONNAGE PROBLEM.
George Clinton said that it was patent that the
tonnage of the canals must be increased in order to
keep the Erie Canal alive. The manner IN which
it must be increased was the problem. One method
was to enlarge the prism of the canal; the other
was TO enlarge the locks It would involve the
State in prOdgOus expense to enlarge the prism.
The friends of the canals were not asking for that
now They asked a much simpler thing; that the
amount of grain could be carried by steamer and
its consOrt and there would be saving OF one
quarter of the expense. He that 1t came with
an i'll grace from the nOn-canal counties to oppose
the bill, when much of their State taxation was
paid by the canal counties
The bill was then ordered to third reading. 1t
was evident from the vote that the bill Will be
passed by the Assembly.