Schuylkill and Susquehanna Navigation Company

Schuylkill and Susquehanna Navigation Company
Company type	Limited liability company
Industry	Transportation, Infrastructure, Canal construction
Founded	September 29, 1791; 235 years ago in Pennsylvania, United States
Founder	Robert Morris (president)
Fate	Merged into the Union Canal Company in 1811
Headquarters	Philadelphia, United States
Key people	Robert Morris (president), Tench Francis Jr. (treasurer), Timothy Matlack (secretary), James Brindley (engineer), William Weston (engineer)
Products	Canal navigation improvements, waterway construction

The Schuylkill and Susquehanna Navigation Company was established as a limited liability entity in Pennsylvania on September 29, 1791. Its objective was to enhance navigation along the Susquehanna and Schuylkill rivers by clearing waterways and constructing dams, linked by a proposed four-mile summit canal near Lebanon, Pennsylvania. This initiative sought to establish a continuous navigable waterway from Philadelphia to Lake Erie and the Ohio Valley.

18th century

The engineering strategy entailed constructing a canal ascending the Schuylkill River to Norristown, improving river navigation up to Reading, then extending a canal segment from Reading to the Susquehanna River through Lebanon. A significant challenge was the four-mile summit crossing between Tulpehocken and Quittapahilla creeks, bridging two distinct watersheds. The canal was designed to ascend 192 feet over 42 miles to reach the summit level, then descend 311 feet over 34 miles to the Schuylkill River, marking it as the United States’ first summit-level canal.

Nonetheless, the 1794 design was flawed due to an inadequate water supply at the summit and limited technology for water retention. Although reservoirs and pumping systems were later added by the Union Canal, these improvements proved insufficient. By 1795, the venture had failed commercially, causing Philadelphia to lose its early advantage in water transport to New York, which surged ahead after the Erie Canal's opening in 1825.

The concept of linking the Schuylkill and Susquehanna rivers originated with William Penn in 1690, who envisioned a secondary settlement on the Susquehanna connected through waterways. Throughout the 18th century, multiple surveys and proposals emerged, including efforts by the American Philosophical Society and state-appointed commissions. In 1790, Pennsylvania authorized comprehensive river surveys exploring various routes for navigation enhancements.

Leadership in these efforts came from the Society for Promoting the Improvement of Roads and Inland Navigation, headed by financier Robert Morris. In 1791, they proposed a canal connecting Philadelphia with Pittsburgh via a summit-level crossing near Lebanon. This led to forming two corporations: Schuylkill and Susquehanna Navigation Company (1791) and Delaware and Schuylkill Navigation Company (1792), both under Morris’s presidency.

The company’s charter mandated an extensive eminent domain process for land acquisition with compensation for damages. Early governance included prominent Philadelphia businessmen such as Robert Morris (president), Tench Francis Jr. (treasurer), Timothy Matlack (secretary), John Nicholson, Samuel Powel, William Smith, Henry Drinker, Walter Stewart, Samuel Miles, Robert Hare, Samuel Meredith, George Clymer, William Bradford, George Latimer, and John Donaldson. Notably, George Washington held one share of stock.

At its inception in December 1791, stock subscriptions far exceeded expectations but were later reduced through a lottery system. The financial panic of 1792 strained liquidity; subscribers frequently paid with notes rather than cash. The company operated amid speculative real estate development dubbed "Philadelphia Fever," with leaders like Morris heavily involved in land speculation tied to infrastructure projects.

Engineering expertise was scarce; while surveys were conducted by individuals such as John Lukens and David Rittenhouse, canal-specific experience was limited except for James Brindley—nephew of renowned British canal engineer James Brindley—who was engaged in 1791 to reassess the summit route and evaluate water availability.

Brindley’s report during summer 1791 confirmed adequate water within a four-mile radius of the summit area. Subsequently hired as canal engineer in 1792 alongside superintendent Col. Thomas Bull, they commenced construction staking despite opposition from German-speaking locals resisting land seizures under eminent domain.

To bolster technical proficiency, British engineer William Weston was recruited late in 1792 through Patrick Colquhoun’s influence. Weston introduced advanced surveying tools and received an annual contract of £800 for up to seven months per year—a salary later increased as his responsibilities expanded geographically.

By early 1793, approximately one hundred laborers were engaged in excavation; however, unforeseen rock formations escalated costs and complexity. Weston modified plans by deepening the canal cut while narrowing its width to reduce expenses. Although nearly four miles of canal prism and several locks were completed by late 1793, litigation over land rights significantly delayed progress.

Labor shortages led regional infrastructure projects to collaborate on wage standardization and recruit workers from New England under joint agreements coordinated by Isaac Roberdeau.

Construction encountered further obstacles including violent local resistance known as the Myerstown Riots—rooted in ethnic tensions between predominantly Scots-Irish or Irish canal workers and German residents opposing land appropriations.

Between 1793 and 1794, external disruptions such as Philadelphia’s severe yellow fever outbreak hindered operations and fundraising activities. By mid-1794, financial resources were exhausted despite partial completion of canal sections and locks.

Weston’s final accounting reported expenditures totaling £8,526 for about four miles of canal with five locks completed; nonetheless, insufficient funding forced abandonment in early 1795. Remaining assets were liquidated or transferred to affiliated companies; construction permanently halted.

Following this project’s end, Weston worked with General Philip Schuyler’s Western Inland Lock Navigation Company in New York for four years—a venture that laid foundational groundwork for the Erie Canal—with Benjamin Wright serving as chief engineer under Weston.

In summary, despite ambitious vision and strong leadership from founder Robert Morris alongside other key officers, the Schuylkill and Susquehanna Navigation Company faltered due to summit crossing technical difficulties, financial instability amid speculative markets, labor conflicts, and external crises—ultimately failing to complete what would have been a vital infrastructure link enhancing Philadelphia’s inland trade dominance during early American industrial expansion.

19th century

Although construction was interrupted and Weston's role as canal engineer ended, the company averted foreclosure by liquidating surplus land, including entire farms, to preserve its holdings and water rights. The corporate charter, initially set to expire in 1801, was extended through 1820. In 1807, Charles Gottfried Paleske became a member of the Board of Directors and, together with James Milnor, Robert Brooke, Isaac Roberdeau, and John Scott, conducted inspections of company infrastructure. They found the locks well-maintained but observed significant deterioration in the bridges. Paleske was elected president in 1808, with Joseph S. Lewis appointed as treasurer. The following year, the directors suggested a merger with the Delaware and Schuylkill Canal company; by 1811, these entities combined to form the Union Canal Company under Paleske’s leadership. This newly formed company acquired authority to extend its reach to Lake Erie, construct turnpikes, and hold exclusive rights to operate a lottery until raising $400,000.

By 1885, competition from railroads, flawed planning decisions, and geological difficulties caused by Lebanon County’s carbonate bedrock led to the Union Canal being sold at a sheriff’s sale. Had the original Schuylkill and Susquehanna Navigation Company completed its canal in 1794–95 as planned, it likely would have encountered similar obstacles. From its inception in 1791 until the merger finalized in 1828, these initiatives represented foundational developments in American civil engineering expertise.

Legacy

George Washington stressed the strategic necessity of enhancing waterways to link the Eastern seaboard with western territories, understanding that political cohesion and economic prosperity hinged on creating trade routes via rivers and canals. In the late 1700s, transporting goods overland was prohibitively expensive compared to waterborne shipping; it was often cheaper to import products from Europe than to transport them short distances by road within America. For instance, moving freight 75 miles by wagon cost more than twice what it did to ship those same goods across the Atlantic Ocean.

Between 1789 and 1820, Philadelphia’s commercial community concentrated on central Pennsylvania and the Susquehanna River basin, which drained roughly two-thirds of the state. Nevertheless, much of this commerce bypassed Philadelphia entirely, flowing instead toward competing ports such as Baltimore and Albany. It was estimated that half of the agricultural produce shipped down the Susquehanna River reached Baltimore rather than Philadelphia. Prominent business figures like Samuel Breck and William Duane argued that linking the Schuylkill and Susquehanna rivers would protect and expand Philadelphia’s commercial interests. Breck emphasized the importance of the critical "golden link" between Reading and Middletown as essential for connecting western markets directly to Philadelphia.

The Schuylkill and Susquehanna Navigation Company sought to create this crucial connection by constructing a summit crossing at Lebanon, Pennsylvania. In response to these needs, Pennsylvania enacted legislation in 1791 allocating funds for river navigation improvements, turnpike construction, and corporate canal projects. While turnpike roads such as the Philadelphia and Lancaster Turnpike were expensive yet moderately successful in reaching the Susquehanna River at Columbia, efforts to improve river navigation largely failed due to unsuitable waterways. Corporate canals—including those subsidized by the state like the Schuylkill and Susquehanna Navigation Company—achieved limited progress until around 1821 and ultimately demonstrated the necessity for direct state involvement.

The shortcomings of these early infrastructure ventures enabled New York’s Erie Canal to seize commercial supremacy by overcoming natural obstacles that Pennsylvania could not surmount. By 1795, Philadelphia had lost its initial advantage in water transportation; despite vigorous attempts to maintain market share—40% higher than New York’s in 1796—by 1825 Philadelphia’s trade volume was 45% less than New York’s following the Erie Canal’s inauguration. This shift marked a pivotal moment in regional economic influence and underscored how strategic investment in infrastructure is vital for business expansion and competitive positioning.

Philadelphia as a Major American City

Philadelphia's inability to finalize the crucial "golden link" prior to New York City's inauguration of the Erie Canal played a major role in diminishing its commercial dominance.

References

Bibliography

Augunst, Dean (1966). Two Canals of Lebanon County. Lebanon County Historical Society Papers, Vol. 65, No. 1.
Churella, A. J. (2012). The Pennsylvania Railroad, Volume 1: Building an Empire, 1846-1917. University of Pennsylvania Press; Chapter 1.
Gibbons, Edward J., and Edward S. Gibbons. The Building of the Schuylkill Navigation System, 1815–1828. Pennsylvania History 57.1 (1990): 13–43.
Kirby, Richard Shelton. William Weston and his Contribution to Early American Engineering, Transactions of the Newcomen Society 16.1 (1935): 111–127.
Klein, Theodore B. The canals of Pennsylvania and internal improvements. Wm. Stanley Ray, 1901.
Maclay, Samuel. Journal of Samuel Maclay: Surveying West Branch Susquehanna and Allegheny Rivers, 1790. Gazette and Bulletin Print House, 1887.
Shaw, Ronald E. Canals for a nation: the canal era in the United States, 1790–1860. University Press of Kentucky, 2014.
Swank, James Moore. Progressive Pennsylvania: Industrial Development and Transportation Systems. JB Lippincott, 1908.