OCR Text |
Show LAND GRANTS FOR RAILROADS AND INTERNAL IMPROVEMENTS 347 ternal appropriations was the authorization for surveys which ordinarily preceded all other action. On March 2, 1826, Congress appropriated $20,000 for a survey for a canal across Florida, which, however, was not to be followed up for a century; it was to be many years before Florida had gained sufficient population and representation to compete with the fast growing states of Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, and Alabama for attention to its needs.18 Ohio, the most populous and fastest growing state west of the Alleghenies, was first caught in the craze for canal building in the early 1820's. Reports of the almost miraculous effect of the Erie Canal on communities along its route, the ease with which money for canals could be raised, and the promise of high return on land investments led Ohio landlords like Thomas Worthington, shippers like Ebenezer Buckingham, and traders, farmers, and merchants to think canals could bring the same good fortune to Ohio. In 1825 the state adopted a canal building program calling for canals from Portsmouth on the Ohio to Cleveland by way of the Scioto, the Muskingum, and Cuyahoga Rivers and from Cincinnati up the Miami River to Dayton with the hope at some later time of extending the Miami Canal north to Lake Erie. The two main canals were begun promptly, the money being easily raised without Federal aid. By 1832, 399 miles of canal had been completed at a cost of $5,145,000. While the expectations of growth, rise in land values, and economic expansion may have been somewhat exaggerated, the favorable effect of the canals upon the development of Ohio led the state into a much larger construction program in 1836 and 1837.19 One other projected canal in Ohio, which had less political support in that state and was actually an Indiana enterprise, did receive a Federal land grant in 1827. The Wabash and Erie Canal was planned by Hoosier promoters to connect the headwaters of the Maumee and the Wabash Rivers and thereby provide water transportation from Lake Erie to the Ohio River. Though Indiana contained only 147,178 people in 1820, they were as enthusiastic about canals as were the people of Ohio and New York. They first persuaded Congress in 1824 to grant a strip of land 360 feet wide through the public lands as a route for a canal to connect the Wabash with Lake Erie.20 The act also reserved from sale each section of land through which the canal "may pass" but in another section it declared that "nothing in this act. . . shall be deemed to imply any obligation on the part of the United States to appropriate money to defray the expense of surveying or opening said canal." Yet less than 3 years later Congress authorized its first land grant, other than the equivalent of a right-of-way, to Indiana for the Wabash and Erie Canal. It consisted of one half the land in alternate sections for a distance of 5 miles on each side of the canal "from one end thereof to the other."21 This was a most indefinite measure for it did not make clear where the canal was to begin or to end. Unlike later land grant measures, the grant for the Wabash and Erie did not specify whether odd or even sections were to be selected by the state nor did the act require the double-minimum price for the reserved land within 5 miles of the route. The canal was to be commenced within 5 years and completed in 20. If not then completed, the state would be required to reimburse the United States "the amount of any lands previously sold," although the titles of purchasers from the state were to be valid. An odd feature of the grant that soon became apparent was that a portion would be in the State of Ohio, though the grant was specifically given Indiana. An agreement was worked out in 1829, after Congress had authorized such action, whereby Ohio was to receive the land granted for the canal within its borders and would build the canal from 184Stat. 193. 19 Scheiber, "Internal Improvements and Economic Change in Ohio." 20 Act of May 26, 1824, 4 Stat. 47. 21 Act of March 2, 1827, 4 Stat. 236. |