A careful study of the influence of the Erie Canal upon the great commonwealth which built it has been made by Mr. Julius Winden, and the results of his investigation, important and interesting, have been placed at the disposal of the present writer.[42] The entire region affected by the canal, from New York City to Buffalo, is divided by Mr. Winden into three sections; the first covers the Hudson River valley from the mouth of the Mohawk to the sea; the second includes the Mohawk Valley from the Hudson to Utica where the canal left the valley; the third extends from the Mohawk to Lake Erie. The sections are designated, respectively, as Section A, Section B, and Section C. Again, each section is divided into three classes; Class I includes the land within six miles of the canal route; Class II includes all land between six and twelve miles from the canal route; Class III includes all land within the counties tapped by the canal lying at a greater distance than twelve miles from its course. Mr. Winden first discusses the effect of the canal on the population of the counties through which it ran, and thus summarizes his results:
“Of the three sections considered, we have found one, Section A, with a certain condition of the population due to the influence of an old waterway, the Hudson river. Population was concentrated along the banks of the river and decreased as the distance from the river increased. The extension of this waterway into new and broader fields resulted in a very great increase of the concentration of population on the banks of the stream, but had little or no influence on the population at a distance of six or more miles from it.
“The second region, Section B, presented conditions very similar to the one preceding. It was influenced by an old waterway, the Mohawk River, but this waterway was not very serviceable. The population was concentrated along the course of the waterway, but not as markedly as in Section A. An increase in the serviceability of the waterway and an extension into new fields had the effect of concentrating the population along the course of the waterway much greater than in Section A. The region six or more miles from the waterway was little affected or none at all.
“In the third region, Section C, we found a new region, having no waterway and having less population per square mile where a waterway was to be made than the region a short distance from the future course of the waterway. The effect of the waterway was to increase the population very rapidly along its course and produce a great concentration of population there. In the remote region the population was also greatly increased. We also notice that this concentration of population in Class I along this watercourse tended to mass into cities.”
The per capita valuation of property next engages attention and the result is thus outlined:
“As before mentioned Section A was an old well-settled region during this period, and although property had a tendency to mass along the banks of the Hudson and gradually to diminish as the distance from the river increased, still this increase of the valuation of property advanced much more slowly than the increase in population.
“Section B was an old and well settled region, but it was not as old as Section A. Here valuation massed along the canal but it did not increase as rapidly as the population, still it increased more rapidly in proportion to the increase of population than did Section A.
“Section C was a new region where the increase in valuation kept pace with the increasing population and even exceeded it.
“A re-invigoration of an old region by increased commercial advantages such as the Erie canal provided for in Sections A and B results in an increase of property within about six miles of that commercial route, but it has little effect outside of that limit. This increase of property, however, does not keep pace with the increase in population, i.e. property in this case is more stable and unchangeable than population. On the other hand, in a new region never having felt the influence of a commercial route such as the Erie Canal, property within about six miles of the route increases as rapidly and even more rapidly than the population. This increase of property is not confined within the six mile limit, but extends much farther away from the route than it does in an old well-settled region having previously felt the influence of a commercial route. Thus the extension of a waterway into new fields is beneficial to the region along the banks of the old waterway, but affects the territory a distance from the route little or none at all; while a waterway extended into a new region is of very great benefit to the region immediately along the route and it is also beneficial, to a less degree, to the remote regions. It must be remembered that a waterway is different from a railroad, in that material can be shipped at almost any point, while a railroad has certain stations were material can be shipped; thus a waterway’s influence is continuous along the line, while the influence of the railroad is at points where there are stations.
“In the distribution of real and personal property in 1835 very significant results are shown. In Class I of Section A the real property per capita was $150.22 and the personal property was $49.11; in Class II the real property was $195.96 and the personal $34.34; in Class III the real property was $166.49 and the personal was $37.22. The least real property per capita and the least personal property per capita was in Class II, and Class III was second in both. In Class I of Section B the real property was $133.81 per capita and the personal $49.71; in Class II the real property was $108.92 and the personal $17.41; in Class III the real property was $90.68 and the personal $13.34.