Erie Canal Commission
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Erie Canal Commission, formed in 1810, was a group of prominent men that oversaw the affairs of the Erie Canal, from the initial idea proposed to the New York State legislature up until the final days of construction.
[edit] Origins of the Erie Canal Commission
As the United States expanded into western New York and the Northwest Territory, the Great Lakes became an essential part of the system of waterways, on which merchants did most of their shipping. The easiest way from the Great Lakes to the Atlantic Ocean and Europe was by way of the St. Lawrence River, and unfortunately, this was controlled mainly by the French from Canada. After examining the Mohawk River, another viable that several men proposed was a canal from the Great Lakes, through New York, to the Hudson River. In addition to the control of shipping in North America, the United States would successfully tie the western territories to the eastern states, thus creating a more unified nation. This, however, proved to be such an enormous undertaking, it was necessary to appoint a Commission to oversee the entire project.
The origins of the Commission can be traced back to two men: Thomas Eddy and Jonas Platt. Eddy was the treasurer of the Western Inland Lock Navigation Company, which was established with the purpose of developing a navigable route up the Mohawk River to Lake Ontario. When he found his company in financial trouble, he drew upon the idea first proposed by New York Representative Joshua Forman of building a canal, rather than trying to navigate the rivers. He turned to his friend Platt, a State Senator and leader of the Federalists in New York, and the two of them decided propose the idea of creating small group of highly influential commissioners to explore two possible routes of a canal – one to Lake Ontario and one to Lake Erie. They would take their findings and report back to the state legislature after their expedition out west. In order to get permission for this commission, Platt and Eddy knew that the each man had to command a certain amount of power and respect, but the whole group had to be politically balanced between Federalists and Republicans. On March 13, 1810, Platt presented his bipartisan Canal Commission to the State legislature, and received overwhelming support.
[edit] Original Bipartisan Commission
There were four Federalists. In addition to Thomas Eddy, there was Gouverneur Morris, Stephen Van Rensselaer, and William North. Gouverneur Morris, the eldest and most famous of the entire Commission, had been an early advocate for a canal to the west as well as a prominent figure during the Revolution and a representative to the Constitutional Convention. Stephen Van Rensselaer, New York’s largest landowner, had been a quite popular politician in New York, serving on the State Assembly, on the State Senate, and as Lieutenant Governor. Finally, William North was heir to a wealthy estate in New York and a highly respected Revolutionary veteran.
To balance out the Federalists, there were three Republicans: Simeon De Witt, Peter Porter, and De Witt Clinton. Simeon De Witt, the Surveyor General of New York and De Witt Clinton’s first cousin, had been involved with the idea of a canal since Joshua Forman’s initial proposal. Peter Porter was the leader of the “Martling Men,” who were technically Republicans but opposed to De Witt Clinton. He was a congressman from western New York, who had a business and property that had much to gain from a canal. While all the others were integral parts of the Commissi on, De Witt Clinton was the most important man and it was with his consent that the project could move forward. Already a wealthy politician who had helped design the grid system for New York City with Morris, Clinton embraced the canal and made it the focus of the rest of his public career until his death in 1828.
[edit] Expedition and Survey to Determine the Best Route
In June 1810, the commissioners were prepared to head west to survey the land to determine a possible route for their canal. Though Gourverneur Morris was president of the Commission, the title was mainly ceremonial because all the members looked to De Witt Clinton for leadership. All of the members except Van Rensselaer and Morris, who traversed the whole state by carriage, traveled up the Mohawk River and as far west as possible by water, where they met up with two amateur surveyors, James Geddes and Benjamin Wright. From there, they traveled the final one hundred miles from Lake Seneca to Lake Erie by carriage. De Witt Clinton kept a journal for the entire journey, in which he closely documented their adventures.
After much deliberation, the Commission turned their findings into a report that they submitted in March of 1811. Rejecting Peter Porter’s idea of running the canal to Lake Ontario, then another through his lands to Lake Erie, the commissioners decided that the canal had to run straight to Lake Erie. Otherwise, the St. Lawrence River would still be a primary route of transportation and the West would not be connected to the East. They also rejected Gourverneur Morris’ proposition of a natural waterway created by the overflow of Lake Erie in favor of an entirely artificial waterway. The final and most important section of the report demanded public financing and control of the canal by New York State. Citing past failures such as Thomas Eddy’s company, and George Washington’s Patowmack Company, the Commission stated that such large endeavors were too expensive for the private sector.
[edit] Response to the Report
In response to this report, the legislature passed the first of many laws governing the canal. The bill added Robert Fulton and Robert Livingston to the Commission. Fulton had developed the first steamboat that ran a long the Hudson River and Livingston was his business and engineering partner. It also gave the commissioners $15,000 to finance further activities and granted them permission to take all the necessary steps to finance the entire project.
Eddy and Fulton looked for engineers to design the project. De Witt and Van Rensselaer sought land cessations for the path of the canal. Livingston, with the help of Clinton, devised a plan to secure national assistance. Morris and North looked for the best way to borrow money. The largest duty, however, was assigned to Clinton and Morris, who went to Washington, D.C., to solicit aid from President Madison and the Federal Government. Unfortunately, after failing to obtain any funds from the government, their situation only got worse with the War of 1812.
[edit] War of 1812
With the outbreak of war, Van Rensselaer became the head on the New York militia, and Clinton became the Presidential candidate opposing James Madison and the war. In addition, despite allowing the Commission to create a fund for financing the canal in 1812, the State legislature repealed the act in 1814, rendering the board of commissioners essentially helpless.
Finally, after the United States made peace with Great Britain, officials could turn their attention towards the canal, which they did in a public meeting in New York City on December 3, 1815. The board sparked interest by emphasizing the benefits the city would receive from their canal. New York City would become the biggest port on the eastern seaboard with its connection to the Great Lakes and western territories. Despite minor setbacks, the meeting was a huge success. Even though President Madison vetoed a bill that provided funding for one quarter of the canal, the Commission convinced the State legislature to go ahead with construction, which they did on July 4, 1817.
[edit] New Appointments to the Commission
In 1816, the legislature passed a bill that provided more funds for the project, but more importantly, it appointed new members to the Canal Commission. In addition to Van Rensselaer and Clinton, Joseph Ellicott, Myron Holley, and Samuel Young joined the board. Ellicott was well informed about the lands in western New York as well as being an agent of the Holland Land Company, which would donate 100,000 acres(400 km²) to Erie Canal. Holley, a State assemblyman, was a supporter of Clinton and government-financed public improvements. Young had written A Treatise on Internal Navigation, a comprehensive study of canals in Great Britain and Holland.
Unfortunately, this type of rearrangement foreshadowed the political struggle that plagued the Commission until its functional end, with the removal of Clinton. Once opposed by Clinton’s political enemies, the Bucktails, led by Martin Van Buren, the Erie Canal became a cause championed by all parties. The universal support allowed for efficient construction that was only facilitated when the Commission decided to restrict its authority to the actual construction and let a newly formed board named the Commissioners of the Canal Fund handle all the financial aspects of the project. This board consisted of the New York State Comptroller, the treasurer, the Secretary of State of New York, the New York State Attorney General, the surveyor general, and the Lieutenant Governor of New York.
[edit] Political Struggle: Clinton vs. the Bucktails
Now, with the entire project so caught up in politics, with every party attempting to receive credit, there was a struggle to gain control over the Commission, still firmly held by Clinton in 1817. In 1818, Ellicot resigned from the Commission citing poor health, and to replace him, Clinton nominated one of his strongest supporters Ephraim Hart. Recognizing Hart’s political allegiance, the Bucktails nominated a Clinton opponent Henry Seymour, who eventually won the spot.
The Commission slipped even further out of Clinton’s control in 1821, when the Bucktail-controlled State legislature passed a bill that provided two million dollars in funding for the canal, as well as the appointment of another commissioner. As governor of New York, Clinton had to sign off on the bill so he was not seen as blocking the necessary funds. The Bucktails promptly appointed William C. Bouck, a staunch Clinton opponent.
[edit] Clinton’s Downfall and the End of the Commission
The final blow to Clinton as well as the Erie Canal Commission came on April 12, 1824 when his opponents succeeded in ousting him from the Commission. Despite words of support in the State Assembly, they voted him out and Clinton stepped down after being a commissioner from the beginning and its president since 1816. The existence of the Commission in its original form came to an end around 1830 when the State legislature changed it into the Canal Board, which incorporated the Commissioners of the Canal Fund. With the majority of the construction complete, the Canal Board oversaw the upkeep and repairs needed in the future.
[edit] References
- Bernstein, Peter L, Wedding of the Waters, New York: W.W. Norton and Co., 2005.
- Cornog, Evan, The Birth of an Empire: DeWitt Clinton and the American Experience, 1769-1828, New York: Oxford University Press, 1998.
- Shaw, Ronald E, Erie Water West: A History of the Erie Canal, 1792-1854 Lexington, Kentucky: The University Press of Kentucky, 1990.
