Pittsburg dispatch. [volume] (Pittsburg [Pa.]) 1880-1923, 1891-05-09
COMMERCE BOOMER
The Great Ship Canal Project
viii Not Hurt CIeve-
land Nor
DEnIINE Dali WhV EPEIHuTe
REDUCE RAIL WAY FREIGHTS
A Reckless Opponent Cleverly Hauled
Over the Goals.
TIE LEGISLATURES MUST WAKE Up
And Push the Printing Of the Maps and
Reports at Hand.
FACTS FOR IRON MEN TO STUDY

MuC0 10 tue buTp anu regret OIL many
who have admired the zeal and ability with
which the Marine ReuieaU, of Cleveland, has
heretofore advocated every measure promis-
ing advancement of the interests of the
marine of the great lakes, the journal in
question has from the outset antagonized the
Lake Erie and Ohio River Ship Canal
project. The Revieio has not explained the
grounds upon which its antagonism is based;
but, presumably. it imagines that were
canal such as that proposed actually in ex-
istence and handling the traffic for accom-
mediation of which the waterway in ques-
ton is to be constructed, the consequent
diversion of "lake and rail' freights from
Cleveland and other Lake Erie ports at
which the material that would go by canal
is now handled, would, not only primarily
but continuously, detrimentally affect those
ports.
The Reriew has unadvisedly asserted that
establishment of a canal, such as that
recommended by the Pennsylvania Ship
Canal Commission, is entirely unfeasible;
that is to say, impossible; and that not one
person with q competent understanding of
the situation generally, will indorse the
canal scheme; but is evidently fears that
canal of some sort will be built, and that
such canal, even if inadequate to handling
large traffic, will be effective as a means
. for depressing rail rates, and will thus
damage the railways, and in doing that
will injuriously affect the interests of Cleve-
land and Erie.
Facts for Thoughtful Readers.
The Review is avowedly "devoted to lake
marine interests" and if it lives up to its
professions has q watchful care for the in
terests of Erie, as well as for those of Cleve-
land. Although among the contributors to
the maintenance of the journal in question,
Erie is conspicuous by her absence"
Ashtabuls harbor and Fairport are dis
tinctly appurtenances of the railways. They
are simply entrepots established by the
railways for railway uses, and are not in
any respect to be classed with Cleveland
and Erie. The entrepots aforesaid are
merely instrumentalities in railway service.
The maintenance of an entrepot, or transfer
station, is a tax on through traffic. The ex-
pense necessary to maintenance of the entire
pots in question is borne primarily by the
railways, but ultimately by the consignees
of the ireightsi that is to say, the ore and
coal handled at those points. Railway
dock charges at Ashtabula average about
II cents per ton of ore forwarded thence.
Ashtabula Harbor and Fairport are the
lake ports, not OF Northeastern Ohio, but Of
the Mahoning and Shenango valleys, and OF
Allegheny county, Pennsylvania. Cleveland
and Erie likewise serve the iron-making
districts above named as lake ports. or the
tonnage handled. in and out, at the port of
Cleveland in 1889, fully 20 per cent. Cor
9, ,534 100 net tons), went to or came from the
two valleys and the Pittsburg district, re-
spectivelv.
OF the total tonnage handled in and out
of the port Of Erie IN 1889, something more
than 81 per cent. went TO or came from the
Shenango Valley and the Pittsburg district,
respectively.
OF the aggregate of S,I27. .724 net tons of
iron ore received at Ashtabula harbor and
Fdirport in 1882 practically the whole
went to the Eastern Ohio and Western
Pennsylvania iron-making districts above
named; OF the 2 591, 563 net tons of ore
actually shipped inland by rail, from the
two ports last named, In 1889, more than 98
per cent went TO those districts. And the
coal shipped from Ashtabula and Fairport.
respectively, is Pennsylvania coal. OF the
coal shipped from the port of Cleveland in
1880 nearly 70 per cent. was Pennsylvania
coal.
A Nut for Cleveland to Crack.
In event of a total annihilation of the
traffic In coal and iron ore between the
Pittsburg, Monongahela, Shenango-Ma-
honing district and Lake Erie ports, the
business of Fairport and Ashtabula harbor
would be entirely wiped out. Retaining
its lumber trade with Eastern aud South
eastern Ohio, the port of Cleveland would
be left with about SO per cent. of its present
tonnage. The port of Erie, however, would
continue business with about SO per cent, of
It's present tonnage.
This is d fair illustration of the degree to
which the business of each of the lake ports,
above named is reierable to the existence
OF the iron-making and coal producing in
dustries of Western Pennsylvania and the
MahOning Valley.
We do not in the least overlook, nor un-
dervalue, the fact that the city of Cleveland
is the seat of great manufacturing indus
tries OF various sorts, and that its lake trade
is only one of the bases of its growth and
prosperity. In this regard, however, Erie is
more independent of her port than Is Cleye-
land. Moreover, the business of the port of
Erie, as above indicated, does not depend as
largely as that of Cleveland does upon COM
merce between Western Pennsylvania and
the ore-producing Northwest.
The principal market for the products of
some of the more important manu- featuring
establishments of Erie and of Cleveland,
is in the iron-making and coal-produc-
ing region of which, as aforesaid,
Erie. Cleveland, Fairport and Ash
tabuIa harbor are the lake ports; and
these, and indeed all the manu- acquiring
establishments in question, let. their mar
kets be where they may, would be injurious
ly affected by decline of the industries OF
that region.
Nobody. facing the facts here stated, will
deny that the prosperity of Cleveland and
Erie, and of Cleveland particularly, de-
pends largely upon the maintenance of the
iron industries of the two valleys and Pitts
burg; but the Marine ReuieiO denies, and
those who have, ike it, thus far neglected
the opportunities offered them for fully ex-
amining the situation" also deny: First,
that there is any ground for apprehending |
serious decline OF production of iron in |
the district in question; second, that ship |
canal, such as that projected, would, or |
could, better the position of the iron max |
ers; and third, that construction of such |
ship canal, to extend from Lake Erie to the |
upper Ohio, is feasible, anyway.
The Legislature should Wake Up.
The Commission of the Commonwealth of |
Pennsylvania charged with the duty Of |
determining the feasibility of connecting |
the waters of Lake Erie and the Ohio river |
by q ship canal" entered upon its duties in \
October, 1889, and on the 10th Of February, /