J.ETTERS OF CHARLES B. SHAW, Engineer of Covington and Ohio
Survey, and E. FONTAINE, President of Virginia Central
Railroad Company, in reply to Col. GARNETT, on the subject of
a connection between Richmond and the Valley cf the Ohio,»
d
To Col. C. F. M. Garnett,
Engineer of the Virginia and Tennessee Railroad:
Office Va. Centra^ Railroad, )
Richmond, Jan^_22d, 1851. }
Dear Sir—
I regret that it has become necessary to conduct this
correspondence. In your letter addressed to me, in the Whig of this
morning, dated the 17th of January, you say that you thought it your
duty to show that the central line of communication with the Ohio
from Richmond, was inferior to the New River route. Whilst it does
not seem to me that there was any obligation on you to undertake to
expose objections to the Central Railroad, yet, if you felt called on to
do so, in a published report, all will agree that I would have failed in
that vigilance which I am expected to practice over the interests of the
Centrad Road, if 1 had not noticed your report ; but, if the subject must
be discussed, I am glad that it can be done with personal courtesy and
good feeling, and I will certainly endeavor to follow your good example.
You profess to cherish a deep seated devotion to the best interests of
Virginia, as the main spring to your solicitude on this subject. I am
very far from questioning your patriotism. I accord it to you in all sin¬
cerity, but you can hardly expect that fact to. weigh much in determi¬
ning the merits of the question, as myself and other friends of the cen¬
tral line have as good claim to get the benefit of that argument as you
or any one can have. I have a large family and some property here—
all that I have y or ever expect to have y is, and will be, of Virginia ; but
our mutual attachment to our common mother, is of no consequence in
this question.
The most prominent part of your argument is on the point of excep¬
tional grades ; that subject, and the question of the width of track'.or
"guage," being professional, I shall advert to very briefly, leaving' to
Mr. Shaw to answer more in detail the objections you have urged to
his views. Before I do, that however, I will remark, that your posi¬
tions in relation to the difficulties in the way of completing the Central
line, whether they refer to the time necessary, or the means, seem to
me equally untenable with those advanced in your report.
We are not discussing the cost of the Blue Ridge tunnel. I cannot
comprehend what that has to do with the subject, unless (which I can,
hardly believe) the friends of the Virginia and Tennessee Road mean
to raise the question of its discontinuance. If the whole cost of the
2
Central Rail Road from Richmond to the mouth of Greenbrier is to be
considered, then the cost of the canal to Lynchburg must be added to
your route, as you refer to that as giving you connection with Rich¬
mond ; the South Side Road requiring, as you say, by their report,
$600,000 to complete it ; but I do not understand that to be your de¬
sign.
In your report you assumed that your line was complete, or possess¬
ed the means of completion to Christiansburg, leaving 77 miles to get
to the mouth of Greenbrier. The object, I supposed, was to enquire
into the difficulties in the way of each line reaching the mouth of Green¬
brier ; that is, the time necessary, and the prospect of obtaining means ;
I therefore thought it was not fair to locate the completion of the Cen¬
tral Road. 16 miles west of Charlottesville," on the east side of the
Blue Ridge, when all the cost of passing the mountain was provided
by the State, the work being in a course of successful construction,
and the gradingiof the company's work nearly completed to Staunton,
to say nothing of the means in hand to grade a large portion of the
line between Staunton and Covington ; and I cannot perceive the jus¬
tice or propriety of your saying in this letter " Richmond must make
92| miles more of Rail Road and spend $1,855,000 more, to reach the
mouth of Greenbrier by way of Staunton, than would be required by
way of Christiansburg"—this seeming still to be based on the assign¬
ment of a point 16 miles west of Charlottesville, as the limitation of
our means of completion.
Richmond should not be startled by the announcement of having to
spend so large a sum. How she is in any way bound for it I do not
know. Surely the State is able, and no doubt intends to complete the
tunnel, and the Company will complete the road from Waynesborough
to Staunton. • •
The important question—the real question is, which line, when com¬
pleted, will secure the trade and travel, and develope the greatest ad¬
vantages to the State ?
But how will the matter stand as to time of completion and probable
means ? The distance from Christiansburg to the mouth of Greenbrier
is _ 77 miles.
From Covington to White Sulphur Springs being the Cen- } t(
tral route to same point ' ( /f>
. Governor Johnson has recommended that this work should be exe¬
cuted on State account to connect vjith the Canal. The Virginia and
Tennessee company expect to raise two-fifths to construct the New
River branch ; each being about the same distance, which may be ex¬
pected to be done first? As this line from Covington, west, has always
been regarded so important to the State, as to be often suggested as a
State work—it will not be considered presumption in the friends of the
Central Railroad to expect that it will be constructed on State account.
While this is being done, thejine between Staunton and Covington
can be completed, being only 70 miles, 20 of which are now under
contract. It appears, then, that so far as the means relied on are con¬
cerned, and the time necessary for completion, it is probable the Cen¬
tral line will reach the Ohio first.
The cases you refer to, of the abandonment of what you style ex-
3
vcptional grades, and substitution therefor of grades within the com¬
pass of Locomotive power, are not analogous, and therefore do not by
any means prove that there would ever be hereafter any practical diffi¬
culty experienced in working the section at the crossing of the Alle*
ghany. Because it was found best to incur considerable expense to
get clear of inclined planes and grades where horse power was used, it
does not follow that we should find any difficulty on grades of only
92 and 105 feet to the mile, these being grades on which a Locomo¬
tive can be used.
To create distrust as to the practical value of assistant power, on
grades of 92 and 105 feet, you mention the abandonment of " a series
of inclined plams worked by stationary power" in Pennsylvania-
worked by stationary not assisting Locomotive power—you Tefer to an
inclined plane in South Carolina, worked by a rope attached to the
load around a drum—also to the old high grade on the Baltimore and
Ohio Railroad at Parr's ridge, where, I think horses drew up the trains.
These cases have no sort of analogy to the Pass of the Alleghany. In¬
clined planes, and ropes with drums, are attended with extreme danger,
and were doubtless abandoned on that account. I am not prepared to
name the precise grade of these planes, but I suppose of many hundred
feet, far beyond the application of Locomotive power. The cases of
the Albany, Schenectady and Erie road, in New York, 1 presume, are
of the same -character ; it cannot, therefore, be contended that expe¬
rience has decided against exceptional grades where Locomotive power
can be used.
The case of the Boston and Albany road, is still more inapplicable
as an illustration of your position. The new road is not being built
by the Boston and Albany company, on account of 82 feet grades on
their present road, with any intention of substituting it for the old one.
The projectors are different parties ; rivals contending for the same
trade. They may have some faint hope of success, as the new is the
shortest, but the 83 feet grades are worked with so much success, that
I have been told, the new company have but little prospect of sup¬
planting them.
The use of assistant Locomotives to overcome obstacles of any kind,
is no untried experiment. If you have to encounter a heavy grade, or
an unusual accumulation of snow or ice, impeding the progress of
the train, the practice fo the same in each case ; there is, therefore, no
difficulty in understanding how the assistant Locomotive will answer
at the Alleghany. The daily resort to them every where to get over
ice and snow, such as we have had with us recently, being far worse
than 105 feet grade, illustrate very plainly how they would answer.
If, however, it is necessary to refer to cases where they are constantly-
used to overcome high grades, I refer you to the Baltimore and Ohio
Road crossing the Alleghany with 116 feet grade, and the Greensville
Road coming up from the Roanoke with grades of 90 feet. At this
point the same Locomotive divides the load and makes two or more
trips up the grade until the whole train is gotten up, but it would be
better to have the second Locomotive to assist.
On the Central line, between tho Ohio and the Alleghany, no grade
exceeding 20 feet to the mile, occurs for 200 miles, bringing us to tho
4
western base of the mountain, then two miles of 90 feet to the summit,
and descending five miles at 105 feet to the mile. From the eastern
base going to Covington, ito grade over 40 feet. It. will therefore be
easily understood that, a single heavy class locomotive aiding on the
seven mile section of the Alleghany, will enable the locomotive coming
from the Ohio, to do about as much as if there was no. grade on the
■whole route over 40 feet to the mile.
According to your own rule of calculating the power of an engine on
different grades, a similar engine on your CO feet grades, will draw little
more than half of what it cau on the 40 grades of the Central Road.
It will be seen therefore, that the cost of transportation of heavy freight
can be greatly reduced on the Central line, by incurring the trifling
expense of keeping one heavy engine in addition at the Alleghany , the
price of which would be about $8000. Let the heavy tonnage be de¬
livered to the canal, at Covington ; it will then receive patronage 90
miles further west than at Lynchburg, and a Tate of charge might be
adopted which the Virginia and Tennessee Road could not afford. 1st,
because the grades of the Road would forbid the transportation of freight
at very low rates ; and 2ndly, because it could not receive an amount
of travel sufficient to sustain it, and which would be found indispensa¬
ble unless it was allowed very high rates for freight. Thé Central
Road on the other hand, passing through the heart of the Virginia
. Springs, would receive an amount of travel in addition to the through
passengers, which would enable it to dispense with profit from the trans¬
portation oí' freight.
You express the opinion that the use of the 4 feet Si inch guage or
width of track, has been a great curse to Virginia, and that the Virginia
pnd Tennessee road, being five feet wide, is a strong reason why that
road should be extended to the Ohio, instead of the Central road.
Engineers differ as to which is the best width. Some of the most pro¬
fitable roads in this country have the 4 feet 8.^ guage ; and if there was
not very high authority differing with you, it would be difficult to make
it appear that 3^ inches in the width of a track could produce such very
important results. The Great Western road from Boston to Albany,
doing among the largest and most profitable business of any road in
this country, is of that width. So are all the other roads in Massa¬
chusetts. The Baltimore and Ohio is of that width. The Hudson
River road, in New York, recently built, at the cost of twelve millions
of dollars, with the full benefit of experience^ I am informed, is also 4
feet S^. We may therefore be induced to doubt whether that width is
deserving of such decided condemnation.
If, however, it should be conceded, amidst these conflicting opinions,
that there was, some small advantage in a 5 loot guage, the guage of
the Central Railroad ought to be used in the connection with the Ohio,
for this conclusive reason, that the roads in Kentucky and Ohio, the
{States with which we are aiming to connect, are all of the same width
of the Central road, 4 feet Scinches.
You think there is danger of the Western trade leaving the Central
road at Staunton, and going to Baltimore ; if there be any just ground
for that apprehension, how do you expect to prevent it going there by
"the air line" from Cincinnati? Richmond is 82 miles nearer to
5
Staunton than Baltimore is ; if, with that advantage, and all the evils
of transhipment against Baltimore, Richmond cannot keep the trade of
the great West on the Central road, how do you expect to attract it to
Richmond from Cincinnati, by way of Lynchburg, when the distance
is about the same from that city to Baltimore as it is to Richmond,
each being about 600 miles? If you feel satisfied that Baltimore can¬
not absorb the trade of the West from Cincinnati in an equal contest
with Richmond as to distance, I think you are compelled to admit that
it will not be attracted from Staunton over an increased distance of 82
miles, with the snperadded disadvantage of transhipment.
Major Gwynn, in his late report to the James River and
Kanawha Company, makes it from Cincinnati to Bal¬
timore, by Park er sou rg, (perhaps 20 miles too short,
Cincinnati to Point Pleasant by Railroad
survey, - - - - 156 miles.
Point Pleasant to the mouth of Greenbrier
by Railroad survey, - - 152 miles.
Mouth of Greenbrier to Richmond, by
your estimate, which, I find, is 7 miles
too short, .- ... 278 miles.
From Staunton to Baltimore, via Winchester,
From Staunton to Richmond, - -
Richmond nearer to Staunton than Baltimore is, - 82 miles.
Let ns suppose the produce of the West in the cars of the Central
Road at Staunton ; if the battle is to ensüe with Baltimore, which is
alluded to, will it not be an easy victory for Richmond? If it goes to
Baltimore it will have an increased distance of 82 miles to encounter,
besides the delay , damage and expense of transhipment. It must be
remembered that the Central Ra ad will not very readily surrender the
trade when once in its cars, if it can do anything lawfully to retain it.
There is much it can dp, which it is not necessary to enumerate.
There is another important fact to he considered : the heavy tonnage
will no doubt be transferred to the Canal at the point of connection ; I
allude to the Flour, Bacon, Hemp, Iron, Coal, &c., which will, from
every consideration, belong to the Canál, because it ought to be carried
at rates that will not be very profitable to a Railroad. Baltimore, in
any event, will struggle in vain for trade once embarked on the Central
Road.
I will close this letter with a table of distances, from which it may
be judged which of these two lines is most likely to bring the trade of
the far West to Richmond ; which of the two has the best prospect of
getting that revenue from travel which is admitted by all to be neces¬
sary to enable a road to transport freight at rates low enough to get it
at Cincinnati, when the "battle ensues between Baltimore and IP
mond," when there will be competition for it, through the vario,
channels of Rail Roads and Canals leading to Northern markets :
From Cincinnati, via Parkersburg, to Baltimore, say 600 miles,
From Cincinnati to Point Pleasant, by Railroad sur¬
vey, ...... 156 „
From Point Pleasant to Greenbrier river, by Railroad
survey, 152
580 miles.
586 miles,
218 miles.
136 miles.
6
• • /
From Greenbrier river, by your report, to Cbristiansburg, 77£
From Christiausburg to Lynchburg, by same report, 86
From Lynchburg to Junction of Danville Road, (See
Rep. of S Side Road,) - 67^
From Danville Junction to Richmond, - 55"
From Cincinnati to Richmond, via Lynchburg and Ohris-
tiansburg, - - - . - - 593 miles.
It seems the distances differ but little, not enough to affect the trade-
if the charge for freight was very low on a competing line, and in this
comparison I have placed Baltimore 20 miles farther than Major Gvvynn.
From Cincinnati to Baltimore, via Lynchburg and
Richmond, according to Major Gwynn, - - 760 miles.
From Cincinnati to Baltimore by Parkersburg, - 600 miles.
160 miles.
Increased distance from Cincinnati to Baltimore by the Virginia and
Tennessee Railroad is 160 miles, which settles the question that it can
get none of that travel.
From Cincinnati to Washington, via Lynchburg apd
Richmond, - - - - - - 720 miles.
From Cincinnati to Washington, via Baltimore and
Ohio road, - - - - 622 miles.
98 miles.
Increased distance to Wäshington from Cincinnati by Lynchburg
and Richmond 9S miles, and, therefore, none of the Washington travel
will come by that route. It seems to me, looking at these facts, there
is but a poor prospect of getting revenue enough from travel on the
New River branch to enable the company to put the freight at rates low
enough to attract it.
Now let us see how it will be with the Central line.
From Cincinnati to Washington, via Parkersburg, as
above, - - - - - 622 miles.
From Cincinnati to the mouth of Greenbrier, 308 miles.
From Greenbrier to Staunton, via Covington, 146 miles.
From Staunton to Gordonsville, - 60 miles.
From Gordonsville, via Orange and Alexandria
road to Washington, - - 94 miles.
From Cincinnati to Washington by Central
line, - - - - - - 608 miles.
14 miles.
Nearer by 14 miles by the Central than the Baltimore and Ohio road.
This advantage of distance, added to that of climate and grades,
must bring all the Washington travel over the Central Route , and as
Washington city must always be a point of attraction for passengers
going farther North, it may be expected that the Central line can enter
into a fair competition for all the Western travel, making a fair allow¬
ance for the advantage it possesses over the Baltimore Road upon the
principle of equating grades.
. T
The revenue which the Central Road must draw from the multitudes
visiting the various mineral springs of Western Virginia, will be an
amount difficult to estimate. Without stating my own impressions as
to the value of this resource for revenue, I think it is apparent that the
Central line has much the best prospect of being likely to get sufficient
profit from passengers to enable it to bring freight at those low rates
which are necessary to secure it for Virginia.
Yery respectfully,
E. FONTAINE.
From the Whig January 24.
The allusion contained in an article in your paper of Wednesday, from
the pen of Col. Garnett, to recent communications of my own ; and the
arguments—if they may be so termed—of that article, are not, as he
perhaps supposes, the closing of the debate between us, on the subject
of railway gradients.
The gallant Colonel has not yet broken a lance 011 the body of my
argument ; but fighting like one who beateth the air, has but encoun¬
tered a phantom of his own raising ; and as Falstaff slew the already
dead Percy, " with a new wound in the thigh," so has lie done renew¬
ed murder on the antiquated and abandoned system of inclined planes
with stationary power.
Not heingable, as I shall presently show, to meet the issues proposed
by me, he has contrived a false issue, in affecting to suppose that in
the exceptional grades of the Alleghany, mentioned in my recent com¬
munications, there was intended to he an application of this disused
plan.
An ordinary citizen—to say nothing of an engineer—must have been
in a Rip Van Wynkle slumber in regard to railway progress, not to have
learned that that sort of exceptional grades, as the Colonel calls them,
has been long dead or forgotten , or deserved to be so.
Any candid reader of my reports of the last and the present year, can
perceive at once that there is not the slightest ground for such a mis¬
take ; and I cannot do such injustice to the real good sense of Colonel
Garnett, as to believe that my meaning was ever so misapprehended by
him
The proof that no reference was had in my rç ports to the old station¬
ary system, so ingeniously confounded by Col. Garnett, with my men¬
tion of exceptional grade, will at once be found in the subjoined quo¬
tations from my report of last year. In them also will be found the
evidence—though Col. Garnett may not know, as he says, how assist¬
ant power on an exceptional grade will work, because he " is not aware
that it has ever been tried at any place in our whole country, where
there was a large trade to accommodate"—-that súch applications of
power haa^e been for some years successfully made in Great dritain, and
have entirely supplanted the old method of stationary power.
Unless ave suppose the laavs of gravity and mechanical resistance to
be different in this country, we may be satisfied to proceed at once in
imitation of the very extended and successful use of assistant locomo¬
tive power at certain points of railways. It can no longer be considered
an experiment. '
8
The Railway Department of the Board of Trade, was constituted,
by minute of the Lords of the Committee of the Privy Council for
Trade, for the transaction of railway business. This body made a re¬
port to Parliament in 1845, on the railways of the Manchester and
Leeds district.
From this important document, which is still in my possession, my
last year's report made sundry quotations ; and that legislators and
others interested in a true solution of this question, may not be con- ,
fused by sophisticated or uncandid statements, I will here repeat such
portions as will show that my real meaning ought not to have been
mistaken, and that my facts can be substantiated.
The parliamentary repoft observes (see my own report last year, As¬
sembly Doc. No. 18, page 470, near the bottom.) " It is important to
ascertain, by reference to actual practice, the results which have al-
already been arrived at, aud which must he taken as starting points to
guide us in the consideration of any new scheme." •
" The Lickey incline on the Birmingham and Gloucester Railway,
is a conclusive proof that a gradient of 1 in 37^, (nearly 141. feet per
milej) for a length of 2 miles, 3 chains, may be worked by the aid of
an ougine constructed for the purpose, without serious inconvenience
to an extensive traffic. It is also proof that such an incline maybe
descended without, danger by the force of gravity regulated by the ac¬
tion of brakes."
u The Sutton incline of 1 in S3, on the Liverpool and Manchester
Railway, is surmounted by the ordinary trains of that railway, whose
traffic is of a very heavy description, with a single locomotive."
" The use of a stationary engine for ascending the incline on the
Manchester and Leeds Railway, from the Victoria station, which is 1
in 59 for 1000 yards, and 1 in 49 (nearly 110 feet per mile) for 640
yards, has been in a great measure discontinued, the ordinary goods-
engine being found.capable of taking up it heavy passengers and good
trains of not less than 80 tons."
" On the Glasgow and Edinburgh Railway, stationary power has
also been discontinued, the locomotive engiqe being found a more effi¬
cient and economical substitute on the Glasgow incline of 1 in 42 (125
feet per mile) for 1|- miles ; and recently the locomotive engine lias been
equally substituted for stationary power upon the inclined plane of the
London and Birmingham railway, from the Euston square terminus to
Camdentown, parts of* which are at 1 in 66, and 1 in 75."
" Many other facts of a similar nature might be quoted, but the above
seem quite sufficient to establish the general proposition."
" 1. That gradients of from 1 in 50 to 1 in 100, are perfectly practi¬
cal to the ordinary locomotive, with moderate loads."
{c 2. That gradients up to 1 in 37 J, or higher, may be surmounted
1 by heavy trains with the aid of an assistant engine of peculiar con¬
struction M
These quotations will show that I have not announced, as Colonel
Garnelt aifects to think, any new or imperfectly tried principle. I
therefore pass by, as not relevant to our discussion, his list of railways
having stationary assistant engines. Nearly twenty years since, in
common with other engineers, I thought them deserving examination,
9
and visited those at the North for that purpose. I know no railway
here in Virginia on which the grade has exceeded 70 feet to the mile,
except one of Gol. GarnetCs—the Greensville and Gaston—where the
grade is 92 feet per mile for about 1 mile. Here the trains used to be,
and are still in all probability, propelled by successive operations to a
temporary depot at the head of the plain. I presume an assistant en¬
gine of the requisite force was not used because the traffic was not
sufficiently active to keep it at full work.
One eminently practical and experienced engineer, Mr. Latrobe, of
the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad, has not scrupled, in obedience to the
convictions effected by these English—(not Yankee) experiments—to
embrace in the space of 52.4 miles, 33£ miles continuous gradients of
from 5 to 10 miles each, with a rate of grade varying from 100 to 11G
feet per mile.
Col. Gamett asks, "would not every man suppose that Mr. Shaw
had intended giving a fair comparison of the grades on the two lines
connecting Richmond with the mouth of Greenbrier ?" He then makes
sundry statements in regard to the grades between Staunton and Cov¬
ington, and on the Blue Ridge Railroad, calculated to draw the public
aside from considering the proposition made to him twice before, and
which I here repeat, to compare the profiles on both lines, and to equate
the distances according—to use his own language again—" to the rule
generally used fer assigning to a certain amqunt of ascents and de¬
scents on a road their equivalent in distance." If he wishes to estab¬
lish the superiority in grade of his road, he must accept this issue, or
stand before the community the defeated party.
I never pretended to make this "fair comparison" as alleged against
me between the Virginia and Tennessee and the Central Roads
throughout ; I only invited Col. Garnett to do so—believing, as I still
do, from a good general knowledge of both lines, that the Central
Railroad is the better line of the two even to Richmond.
I did make such comparisons as demonstrate that, even were the
Virginia and Tennessee better in grade, the whole Western travelling
towards Washington and Baltimore would prefer the Central line ; and
such morever as show that in connection with the James River Canal,
the* Covington and Ohio Railroad will effectually deprive the Virginia
and Tennessee Railroad of the tonnage traffic. I trust I need not re¬
peat that argument. It is before the public in another document.
The Colonel concludes his article by a little flourish regarding the
<e curse" inflicted on the country by the Yankee pioneers in railways,
in the adoption of the narrow guage of 4 feet 8| inches, instead of that
proposed by himself of 5 feet.
If the question had been, as in England, between guages of 4 feet
8^ inches and seven feet, it might have seemed (as it does not now) to
be worth due enquiry. Those who have examined this guage ques¬
tion will be at a loss to perceive any advantage in the little difference
of 34 inches—except it be to subject to a break of guage, any connec¬
ting line, (the Central, for instance at the mouth of Greenbrier,) and
thereby create an inducement to take an otherwise disadvantageous
line like the Virginia and Tennessee.
Is Col. Carnett not aware of the decision of the Guage Committee
10
in favor of the " narrow guage" of 4 feet 8|, in the controversy of Ste¬
phenson and Brunei. The former, the greatest of living engineers,
persists in inflicting on his country the curse which Col. Garnett, with
such patriotic zeal, deprecates for poor old Virginia. If Col. Gamett
wishes to revive, in this country, the question which certainly was not
settled according to his views in England, and thinks the difference of
3.V inches worth a controversy, I am prepared to engage in it, and to
show that uniformity of guage is much more important. I adopt the
views expressed in that facetious publication, the "Dialogue of the
Ouages," and am content to bear all the stigma of sympathy, on this
question, with "Yankees," and with the architect of that triumph of
modern art, the Britannia Tabular Bridge.
I hope that I shall not be deemed by Col. Garnett, to have departed
from the courteous mode of discussion which he has, in accordance
with his known disposition, prescribed to himself, and that nothing
herein may be considered to detract from the high consideration in
which he is held, both professionally and as a gentleman, by
CHAS. B. SHAW.
Richmond, Jan. 22, 1852.
Office Va. Central Rail Road, )
* Richmond, Jan. 30th, 1852. )
To Col. C. F; M. Garnett :
Dear Sir—
In this reply to yourcommuniction of the 26th, addressed
to me in the Whig of yesterday, which will probably be the last in a
correspondence, the necessity for which, seems to be mutually regret¬
ted, perhaps I ought to acknowledge the rather equivocal compliment
contained in your first paragraph.
If my " armour is always bright, and lance always in rest," they are
used under a sense of duty only for defence, and. not for attack, as I
am sure you will acknowledge is the case in the present instance.
{¿a The accompanying letter from Mr Shaw, has precluded the neces¬
sity of my saying much on this occasion, but it is proper to observe,,
that your letter is in effect a concession of two very important contro¬
verted points, viz : that the New River branch cannot get the support
of the western travel, and that Baltimore cannot divert from the Cen¬
tral Road the trade of the west when it reaches Staunton, and lest I do
you injustice, I will quote from your own words.
Keterring to the New River line, you say, " It has ever been my
opiuion that very little travel could he drawn from Ohio by this Rail¬
road, except that for the Virginia Springs, and that which necessarily
follows the trade." I think it has been conclusively shown, that the
large capital of the northern cities competing for the western trade, will
attract it, unless the Virginia Road is in possession of an amount of
travel capable of sustaining it, dispensing with profit from freight.
Although it is true that travel will follow trade, yet in this case the
trade will follow the travel, or in other words, will go on that road
whose position will ensure an amount of travel, sufficient to enable it
to j arry freight without pr ofit, and as you expect but little travel from
Il
Ohio, you cannot afford to carry "the trade," and therefore will not
have the trade for the travel to follow."
In Mr. Shaw's report to the Board of Public Works, it is shown
that the New River road is at an average distance of 50 miles from ten
of the principal Springs ; and therefore cannot accommodate that trade,
while the Central road passes immediately by the most important of the
whole, the White Sulphur, and is at an average distance of eight miles
only from the same ten Springs.
On the subject of trade leaving the Central Road you say, " I do
not think it very probable that the cheap tonnage would leave the Central
Road at Staunton for Baltimore." But you go on to express the opi¬
nion that "facilities for shipping," command of capital, (fee., would
"almost certainly enable Baltimore to supply the merchandise to this
country,"—that " 82 miles extra distance to Baltimore will not protect
the wholesale merchants of Alexandria, Richmond, Petersburg and
Norfolk?" If you are right in this latter opinion, what becomes of the
bright visions of the future greatness of Petersburg and Norfolk ? How
are these cities to be built up by the Virginia and Tennessee Road. If
it cannot se;ure to them the wholesale business, it ought not to desire to
supplant the Central Road. If your Road could be sustained by travel,
and bring the trade of the West at sufficiently low rates to secure a
large amount of it, the fixed laws of commerce would direct capital to
those cities, and tjhey would enjoy a wholesale business.
The friends of the Central Road are not disposed to surrender so
quietly to Baltimore ; they are prepared to unite in a great effort to
secure for Virginia that share of the import and export trade which her
position entitles her to expect. They hope to accomplish it in part, by
making their road a channel of cheap transportation of the heavy produc¬
tions of the West, and thus to invite capital which is a necessary agent
in this work. They wish to increse the wealth of Richmond to enable
her to open the navigation of James river, or to build a Railroad to some
point below the wcrst bars, in Charles City county, thus making Nor¬
folk the great sea port for the South, or if York river is the best outlet,
to make a road in that direction.
I am really very tired with this discussion, but hope it will have the
effect of eliciting the truth on the subject involved, and I will dismiss
it, assuring you, that you are mistaken if you suppose there is any dis¬
position on ray part to withhold information about the grades of our
line between Covington and Richmond ; but I think the manner in
which you refer to the grades, as being 70 and 80, between Staunton
and Covington, and 7,0 and 75 for 11 miles at the Blue Ridge, is calcu¬
lated to produce a false impression. It might be inferred that the maxi¬
mum grades mentioned, occurred as well against the heavy as the light
trade, which is not the fact. It is important also to know whether
these grades are on curves or straight lines.
The highest grade between Covington aud the Summit at the Blue
Ridge, going Eas,t, .will be 70 feet, and going West 80. There is a 75
feet grade, ascending the Blue Ridge going YVest, but it is on a straight
line, which is more favorable than a much lower grade on a curve ;
from the Blue Ridge to Richmond, the grades are light, and taking the
12
Whole together, I believe will be found much more favorable than on
the competing route.
For the rest, I will refer to Mr. Shaw's letter, which follows.
Very respectfully, E.FONTAINE.
To Col. E. Fontaine ;
it
Dear Sir—As Col. Garnett's letter to you in this morning's Whig,
makes some little complaint of his having to encounter, single-handed^
both yourself and me, it 'may perhaps meet your approbation, that the
less forrhidable antagonist should appear in defence of our position.
Professional controversies are always distasteful to the public.
They are very little read, because, frequently, of their not being un¬
derstood by unprofessional readers, but oftener, because of the preju¬
dice entertained against even the best intentioned controversalist—the
public being disposed in all controversies to accuse advocates of the
wish rather to present themselves than their cause.
Of this I am so convinced that, but for the mention of me and my
argument, I should have been disposed to rest the case without further
debate.
I shall do so now in a brief récapitulation of what I consider we
have jointly proved against the rival interest—adverting, in conclusion,
to one or two striking inconsistencies in Col. Garnett's argumentation.
Every point raised by him is debateable, but let a few suffice as a
sample of the weakness of his position :
1. We have proved that the distance from the mouth of Greenbrier
to Washington and Baltimore is 108 miles shorter by the Central than
by the Virginia and Tennessee Railroad.
2. That the distance from Cincinnati to Washington is 14 miles
shorter by the Central than by the. Parkersburg branch of the Baltimore
and Ohio Railroad.
3. That the distance from Staunton to Baltimore is 82 miles longer
than from the same point to Richmond.
4. That from Staunton to the Capes of Virginia, by way of Rich¬
mond, is 182 miles shorter than by way of Baltimore.
5. That the distance from Cincinnati to Baltimore, by the Baltimore
and Ohio road, thcugh a very few miles shorter in measured distance,
is at least 50 miles longer, in equated distance, than by the Virginia
Central road.
6. That with the use of two assistant locomotives at the Alleghany
Mountains, which will create a' very small additional charge on the
through traffic, 7 engines will do on the Covington and Ohio road, the
work of 10 engines on the Virginia and Tennessee road.
7. That in connection with the cheap transportation of the Canal
from Covington to Richmond, this route would command all the heavy
tonnage.
8. That the proposed New river branch of the Virginia and Tennes¬
see Railroad cannot at all accommodate the Springs travelling as the
Central would do.
9. That, in consequence of its presenting the very best route from
13
West to North, the Central must command the through trafile, both in
goods and passengers, in a competition with the Virginia and Tennes-
*see road ; and,
10. That, the tonnage, even by Col. Garnett's admission, will not
leave the Central line at Staunton for Baltimore, the distance being 82
miles shorter to Richmond.
I do not agree with Col. Garnett, that in spite of all the above enu¬
merated advantages, the Virginia towns must concede the contest for
the import trade to Baltimore. Such a conclusion would be very dis¬
heartening to Southern enterprise. Moreover, if the Central Road,
with the aid of the Canal, should fail in this object, how can the Vir¬
ginia and Tennessee Railroad expect to accomplish it?
As respects the guage question, Col. Garnett has certainly made the
best argument possible for his guage, though he has failed to establish
the proposition with which he set out, viz : that the difference in guage
of 3.^ inches is a curse to the State. He seems now only to be trying
to prove that the State is cursed to the amount of IS per cent. That
is, however, by no means evident Light engines and frequent light
trains are getting now to he the fashion on active lines, as the Central is
expected to be 5 and increased width oí track will involve the use of
longer as well as broader, and consequently of heavier engines. These
can neither start nor stop with the ease and expedition required by the
local traffic, and will require also a heavier and more expensive super¬
structure.
I shall exhibit to the Committee of Roads, proof that bridges to con¬
nect the railways of Pennsylvania and Virginia with those of Ohio, arc
confidently expected, and that meanwhile the use of swing bridges will
accommodate the trade ; and that they suppose and require uniformity
of guage on the two sides of the river.
The inconsistencies in Col. Garnett's mode of arguing consist, .
1st, In insisting that the, difference in measured distance is of impor¬
tance, until he finds, contrary to his expectation, that it is against his
road, when, all at once,it becomes a matter of small moment.
2nd, In claiming for the Virginia and Tennessee Road a great advan¬
tage over the Central, on the ground that at a few points there might
be inferiority to a small amount in grade ,• and that consequently, the
shorter distance on the Central would not avail it in competition with
the Virginia and Tennessee road : while at the same tiïne, he argues
that all the travelling destined for Baltimore, u will find its nearest route
by Parkersburg," though he admits the fact that this latter route ¡s
encumbered with a large amount of grade as high as 116 feet permffcy
By some new process of .reasoning, he seems to argue that this latter
disadvantage, being " a matter of necessity, and not of choice," is not
of much consequence.
This argument against Col. G's consistency might be expanded, hut
brevity is now my professed object. I am glad to find that the com¬
parison of grades which he would have the public suppose that I de¬
cline, though I have several times proposed it to him, is at last directed
by the Legislature. The Central Road has nothing to fear, though
gome of its grades may exceed the limit on the Virginia and Tennessee
road : the latter road is so far surpassed in goodness of grade on the
Covington extension westward.
14
As the public is probably by this time tired of us, 1 would recom¬
mend that we commit our case to the Legislature.
Yours with esteem,
CHAS. B. SHAW.
Richmond, January 29, 1852.
Prom the Whipj of February 5, 1852.
To Col. C. F. M. Gaknett :
Office Va. Central Railroad Go. )
Richmond, February 4th, 1852. J
Dear Sir : The correspondence between us seemed to be brought
to the desired conclusion, at the date of my last, by the establishment
of the most important points embraced in the discussion, and what I
regarded a concession on your part of two material issues involved,
viz : the inability of your road to get Western travel, and that Balti¬
more could not draw from the Central line the cheap agricultural ton¬
nage. Yon have thought it proper to endeavor to relieve yourself of
the effect of that concession by an explanation, which induces this brief
answer.
You still admit, that c( corn, wheat and flour would not be apt to
go to Baltimore •" but apprehend that bacon, lard, and butter would.
I believe no fact is better established, than that Richmond is a better
market for these articles than Baltimore ; a large portion of the bacon
sold in this market is first carried to Baltimore from the West, for want
of a direct channel to Richmond, and is then brought here and sold at
a profit. Flour, which you concede will not be taken from Richmond,
exerts a great influence m giving direction to other subjects of trade :
Being the most prominent article of agricultural production, where that
seeks a market, the groceries and dry goods must be procured in return.
For this reason, flour is transported from Albany to Boston, 200 miles,
at the unprofitable rate of 25 cents per barrel ; other trade which fol¬
lows in its vortex, remunerating the Railroad and enriching the city of
Boston. Give us the wheat, corn, and flour, and the rest will follow.
That yourself and other friends of the New River line should persist
in thinking it the best connection with the Ohio, in spite of the many
decisions of high authority against you, is one of the most remarkable
instances of self delusion I have ever known.
1st. The present Governor of the Commonwealth, in his first mes¬
sage to the Legislature, although recommending a very extended sys¬
tem of internal improvement, altogether omitted to notice it.
2nd. The Board of Public Works, through their President, Gov.
Floyd, whp is distinguished for his patriotic devotion to an enlarged
and liberal scheme of improving the State, has made a report on this
subject, and although specially enumerating the great works of the
S ate, which ought to he made, has merely mentioned the Christians-
burg and Greenbrier Railroad, as a branch that is feasible. In each
of these, the Central Railroad occupies a prominent place, Governor
Johnson placing it before all others.
3rd. At an early period of the present session of the Legislature, a
committee of twenty-one, taken from the body of the State, wa?
15
appointed to consider what works were entitled to the countenance and
support of the Commonwealth. They too, it seems, have been unable
to appreciate your road as you do, and recommend no appropriation tor
it, whilst they give pre-eminence to the Central line, by recommend¬
ing that portion from Covington to steam navigation, on the Kanawha,
to be made on State account.
4th and last, but not least. The petition of the Virginia and Tennes¬
see Company for aid to make the Ñew River branch, was referred to
the regular standing " Committee on Roadswho rarely ever refuse to
report to the House any bill which its patrons may prepare, though they
may intend to vote against it ; but in this instance they declined doing
so, being unwilling, I presume, that it should have even the slender
basis of such indirect sanction on which to rest, without intrinsic merit.
In this state of public sentiment, it is to be regretted that the friends
of the Virginia and Tennessee road should expect the claims of the
Central road to he surrendered, or even postponed, to let the Christians-
burg and Greenbrier take precedence.
On whatever line Virginia adopts to connect her commercial cities
with the great West, much of the heavy tonnage will have to be car¬
ried with very small profit, if not without profit, to insure that trade.
Most Railroads in this country, which are designed to sustain commer¬
cial cities, are constrained, by the force of competition, to transport
heavy staple productions at rates so low that they would gladly trans¬
fer them to some friendly co-operating line, which is capable of trans¬
porting them at cheaper rates. The Baltimore and Ohio Railroad would
gladly give up the transportation of coal, (I presume,) but the city of
Baltimore needs the coal trade. The Boston and Albany road would
not carry flour 200 miles for 25 cents, but the road is owned mainly by
Boston merchants, and they require that sacrifice for the benefit of their
city 7 and I think the interest ot Virginia cities will require a rate of
charge on heavy tonnage, lower than the New River branch can afford,
without the aid of the Ohio travel, which it cannot get.
The Central road will not only have a heavy travel to Washington,
and the Springs travel, still more profitable, to supply revenue, but its
connection with the canal 00 miles west of yours, with its julinggrades
of 40 feet to that point, against yours of 60, gives it an advantage of
controlling importance as a channel of cheap transportation. Just at
that point, where the interest of commerce might demand a rate of toll
on heavy louage, too low for profit on a railroad, the canal is ready to
receive it.
The mutual influence of the Virginia Springs and this line of Rail¬
road on each other is not easily over estim ited. Thirty thousand will
not limit the number of persons who will annually seek to enjoy the
unrivalled and unnumbered attractions of these retreats of health and
pleasure. $301),000 to $500,000 annually expended iu that region
would give an irresistil le impulse to its now dormant agricultural and
manufacturing capacities, and these being developed, would again
swell the profits of the Road, by the natural results of increased popu¬
lation and production.
When this Road is built it may be relied on as one of the certain
sources of relieving the State from taxation.
Very respectfully, E. FONTAINE.
AUG - 51*"*