00000196 |
Previous | 196 of 866 | Next |
|
small (250x250 max)
medium (500x500 max)
Large
Extra Large
large ( > 500x500)
Full Resolution
All (PDF)
|
MARYLAND CANAL COMPANY. 165
At this time the main object of the people of the State, and particularly
of the City of Baltimore, was to secure the completion of the canal to Cumberland, and a connection with the City of Baltimore. These objects were
steadily kept in view by the State, in its early legislation in regard to the
Chesapeake and Ohio Canal; but the spirit with which the Baltimore Convention had originally insisted on, and advocated that enterprise, had passed
away between the time of Dr. Howard's survey and the presentation of his
report. When General Bernard's report was transmitted to Congress, December
7th, 1826, showing the immense cost necessary for the construction of the
Chesapeake and Ohio Canal, it produced for a time the most paralysing effect
on the public mind generally in reference to the subject, and all hopes of
accomplishing this desired object by its means, were at once abandoned.
It is true, a revision of the survey of General Bernard was subsequently
undertaken by James Geddes and Nathan S. Roberts, chiefly for the purpose
of abating the estimates, and in their report they placed the cost of the
eastern section of the canal at about one-half of the amount indicated as
necessary by General Bernard and his colleagues in the United States' Board.
This report was hailed with joy and congratulations by a number of the
friends of the canal, yet the belief remained generally unaltered that the
Chesapeake and Ohio Canal, if constructed as originally projected, would, not
fall much within the expense estimated by General Bernard. The people of
Baltimore, sharing then this latter opinion had but one course left; and they
adopted the railroad system, which by this time had attracted public attention in Europe and America, as free from all those difficulties, that rendered
the execution of the canal more than doubtful, or, if executed, would still
render it inefficient to accommodate the great commerce, of which it was
intended to be the channel.
A meeting of a number of the citizens of Baltimore was accordingly held
on the 12th of February, 1827, two months after the report of General
Bernard, " to take into consideration the best means of restoring to the City
of Baltimore that portion of the western trade which had lately been diverted
from it," when various documents and statements, illustrating the efficiency
of railroads, were produced and examined, and a committee composed of
Philip E. Thomas, Benjamin C. Howard, George Brown, Talbot Jones,
Joseph W. Patterson, Evan Thomas and John V. L. McMahon was appointed
to take the subject into consideration. The committee reported at an
adjourned meeting, held on the 19th of the same month, recommending "that
measures be taken to construct a double railroad between the City of Baltimore and some suitable point on the Ohio River, by the most eligible and
direct route," and that a company should be incorporated for the purpose.
This report was unanimously accepted, and resolutions in accordance with it
were at once adopted. The following committee was then appointed to petition the Legislature for a charter: Charles Carroll, of Carrollton, William
Patterson, Isaac McKim, Robert Oliver, Charles Ridgely, of Hampton,
| Title | History of Maryland - 3 |
| Creator | Scharf, J. Thomas (John Thomas) |
| Publisher | J. B. Piet |
| Place of Publication | Baltimore |
| Date | 1879 |
| Language | eng |
| Type | Books/Pamphlets |
| Title | 00000196 |
| Type | Books/Pamphlets |
| Transcript | MARYLAND CANAL COMPANY. 165 At this time the main object of the people of the State, and particularly of the City of Baltimore, was to secure the completion of the canal to Cumberland, and a connection with the City of Baltimore. These objects were steadily kept in view by the State, in its early legislation in regard to the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal; but the spirit with which the Baltimore Convention had originally insisted on, and advocated that enterprise, had passed away between the time of Dr. Howard's survey and the presentation of his report. When General Bernard's report was transmitted to Congress, December 7th, 1826, showing the immense cost necessary for the construction of the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal, it produced for a time the most paralysing effect on the public mind generally in reference to the subject, and all hopes of accomplishing this desired object by its means, were at once abandoned. It is true, a revision of the survey of General Bernard was subsequently undertaken by James Geddes and Nathan S. Roberts, chiefly for the purpose of abating the estimates, and in their report they placed the cost of the eastern section of the canal at about one-half of the amount indicated as necessary by General Bernard and his colleagues in the United States' Board. This report was hailed with joy and congratulations by a number of the friends of the canal, yet the belief remained generally unaltered that the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal, if constructed as originally projected, would, not fall much within the expense estimated by General Bernard. The people of Baltimore, sharing then this latter opinion had but one course left; and they adopted the railroad system, which by this time had attracted public attention in Europe and America, as free from all those difficulties, that rendered the execution of the canal more than doubtful, or, if executed, would still render it inefficient to accommodate the great commerce, of which it was intended to be the channel. A meeting of a number of the citizens of Baltimore was accordingly held on the 12th of February, 1827, two months after the report of General Bernard, " to take into consideration the best means of restoring to the City of Baltimore that portion of the western trade which had lately been diverted from it," when various documents and statements, illustrating the efficiency of railroads, were produced and examined, and a committee composed of Philip E. Thomas, Benjamin C. Howard, George Brown, Talbot Jones, Joseph W. Patterson, Evan Thomas and John V. L. McMahon was appointed to take the subject into consideration. The committee reported at an adjourned meeting, held on the 19th of the same month, recommending "that measures be taken to construct a double railroad between the City of Baltimore and some suitable point on the Ohio River, by the most eligible and direct route," and that a company should be incorporated for the purpose. This report was unanimously accepted, and resolutions in accordance with it were at once adopted. The following committee was then appointed to petition the Legislature for a charter: Charles Carroll, of Carrollton, William Patterson, Isaac McKim, Robert Oliver, Charles Ridgely, of Hampton, |
