top of page

A Lesson in Failure: The Farmington Canal

Ben Simon, '24

Issue: 1

With the onset of the Transportation Revolution at the turn of the nineteenth century, canal craze swept over the United States. Following the Louisiana Purchase, the United States had doubled in size, and it soon became clear that a vast and reliable transportation system was necessary to create a dependable network of infrastructure throughout the nation. Additionally, the popularity of Henry Clay’s American System led to a newfound interest in financing transportation systems to establish routes between trade centers throughout the United States. Amidst the enthusiasm for transportation, the Erie Canal began construction in 1817. Traversing 363 miles and connecting Lake Erie to the Hudson River, the Erie Canal was considered to be one of the great architectural achievements of early America, inspiring many. Among those influenced by the Erie Canal, as well as America’s newfound focus on the development of a system of infrastructure around the states, was a group of New Haven businessmen, led by James Hillhouse. Hoping to participate in the spoils of the Transportation Revolution, Hillhouse advocated for the creation of a canal throughout Connecticut. Initially, the plan was for the canal to connect to a broader system of canals throughout New England. However, this idea never culminated, and all of the other proposed canal projects eventually fell through. Led by James Hillhouse, seventeen representatives from various towns met to make plans for a canal that would split through Connecticut and compete with the port of Hartford. Eventually, the leaders came together with a plan for the finance and construction of a canal that would run from New Haven to Farmington, and the state legislature was persuaded to issue the charter for the formation of the Farmington Canal Company. In the end, the Farmington Canal was fifty-six miles long and consisted of a system of locks, bridges, and aqueducts that reflected the engineering of the time.[1]

Screenshot 2024-02-27 at 9.58.35 AM.png

Appendix A [53]

Almost instantaneously, the announcement of the project garnered excitement statewide. To commemorate the official opening of the first portion of the Farmington Canal, Connecticut residents from all across the state, as well as several Massachusetts businessmen, gathered to attend the opening ceremony. As thousands watched on, the James Hillhouse sailed down the canal stream with many looking on in awe. Over the coming years, the James Hillhouse became the most esteemed boat to sail the canal and was seen as an encapsulation of the spirit of the entrepreneurship and innovation that supporters envisioned in the Farmington Canal. One such account in 1828 described its acclaimed reputation:

Of all the boats that have battled with the raging tide of the old canal not one has so wide and famous a reputation for passenger comforts and prompt movements as the staunch old James Hillhouse and her genial captain. Not one has so nicely fitted up cabins as the gentlemen's cabin aft and the ladies' cabin forward as she had, and not one captain on the surging seas of the canal had such a ringing, convincing voice, when he shouted, 'Bridge! Bridge!' as Captain Dickinson.[2]

The James Hillhouse exemplified the enthusiasm for the canal, and expectations were set impossibly high as the excitement surrounding the project continued to grow. Many saw the Farmington Canal as Connecticut’s chance to earn nationwide attention with a project that could rival the Erie Canal at a fraction of the cost. In an 1822 report by engineer Benjamin Wright, he described the optimistic sentiment surrounding the construction of the canal: “The terrain is favorably formed for a great work of this kind and a canal may be formed for considerable less expense per mile, than the cost of canals now in the making in the state of New York.”[3] Many also saw the economic prospects of the business venture. After the release of the canal charter, the Farmington Canal became the hottest stock in Connecticut. The New Haven Register even labeled the investment as “The best stock in New England."[4] Hyperbole surrounding the canal was commonplace, and local leaders made many unattainable promises to the residents of Connecticut about the potential capabilities of the project. However, in the end, Connecticutians were disappointed with the Farmington Canal project, as the project was plagued with problems of local resistance and construction problems, which led to substantial financial difficulties. Still, to an extent, the Farmington Canal was able to deliver on some of the high expectations for its future. Over the coming decades, the Farmington Canal was successful in spreading culture, stimulating growth, and providing opportunities for labor advancement in towns throughout Connecticut.


Success

​

The heart of the Farmington Canal project was located in New Haven. From its inception, the canal was created to establish New Haven as a prosperous port city that would act as the middleman between Long Island Sound and the rest of Connecticut.[5] As a result, three-quarters of the canal’s stock was located in New Haven.[6] However, the canal’s major beneficiary was ultimately the small towns that ran alongside the canal. In Hamden, many businesses emerged alongside the canal, including factories for carriage parts established by local businessmen Elam Ives and Charles Brockett.[7] In Cheshire, a spoon shop, coffee-mill factory, tannery, plaster mill, and hairpin factory all formed near the canal.[8] Plainville largely owed its existence to the Farmington Canal. Prior to the canal, Plainville was simply a remote farming area. However, soon the Welch and Whiting families created a basin, store, and lumber yard alongside the canal, which led to the founding of the town of Plainville.[9] Unlike the other towns, Bristol had already established its economy as the clock-making capital of America. However, business had been struggling and the population was rapidly declining as many left in search of economic opportunity elsewhere. With the construction of the Farmington Canal, Bristol was revitalized by its connection to Long Island Sound, which gave greater access to major markets along the Atlantic coast. Soon, Bristol was able to reverse its population decline with its newfound financial prosperity.[10] Additionally, areas such as Beachport, Milldale, Plainville, Simsbury, and East Granby all owed their creation to the Farmington Canal.[11] Time and time again, the Farmington Canal both boosted the economies of existing towns and established brand-new communities.


In addition to the cultivation of towns, the Farmington Canal also created close ties between markets throughout Connecticut. Rather than using the slow and ineffective system of toll roads that spread throughout Connecticut, passengers began to use the canal to travel quickly and efficiently between towns, and subsequently a steady flow of human traffic between communities. Locals frequented the various passenger boats, as depicted in John Warner Barber’s famous painting, which cut travel times by 75%.[12] With its constant stream of passenger traffic, the canal spread ideas between towns along the canal. Business ties were made, newspapers circulated information, and people began to venture much further outside of their own towns. From the movement of people and ideas, towns became increasingly interdependent. Citizens no longer felt as if they were simply members of their towns, but rather they were part of a much greater community throughout Connecticut.[13] Consequently, a greater sense of collective Connecticut identity was cultivated as towns grew more interconnected.


Prior to the construction of the Farmington Canal, white Anglo-Saxon Protestants made up most of Connecticut. However, with the construction of the Farmington Canal, the demographics would begin to shift. Lacking the heavy machinery and technology to efficiently excavate the canal, a large labor force was needed to dig out the canal by hand, and this was largely filled by Irish Catholic immigrants who were in pursuit of economic opportunity and better lives. Upon their arrival, the Irish laborers introduced Catholicism, and in doing so spread ethnic diversity to an otherwise largely homogenous Connecticut.[14] However, the Irish workers were met with segregation and persecution following their migration. In a Connecticut Irish newspaper, one account detailed the discrimination that he felt:
 

There is perhaps nothing more common than to hear Irishmen spoken of in America with pointed disrespect. The whole national character, is seemingly viewed with the most determined hostility, hatred and contempt. No matter how exalted the virtue, or elevated the mind, the circumstance of birth, is sure evidence of infamy. The character of Irishmen is viewed through the clouded medium of a prejudice as base and unnatural as it is barbarous and cruel. [15]

Screenshot 2024-02-27 at 10.04.48 AM.png

Appendix B [54]

Irish laborers often endured harsh working conditions and long days, and they were rewarded with lesser pay as opposed to their non-Irish counterparts. Still, despite the mistreatment they were faced with, the migration of Irish laborers to work on the Farmington Canal established the presence of Irish Catholics throughout Connecticut, which would last for generations to come. 


Beyond the Irish laborers, local unskilled laborers were given work opportunities with the construction of the canal. Furthermore, the construction used materials from local sources that gave a strong boost to the local economy. For example, engineers utilized locally produced cement throughout the project, sustaining local manufacturers with thousands of dollars worth of material purchases.[16] In addition to the generation of Irish laborers, the Farmington Canal also bred a generation of engineers and political leaders that left a lasting impact on Connecticut. Many of these engineers originated from the Erie Canal but remained in Connecticut long after the project. Many later used their skills to construct the New Haven and Northampton Railroad, as well as many other infrastructure projects throughout Connecticut.[17] One such engineer that the canal brought to prominence was William Lanson, an African-American entrepreneur who was tasked by James Hillhouse to design and construct the New Haven portion of the Farmington Canal. James Hillhouse himself was also cemented as a political hero of Connecticut with his constant support of the canal project through its ups and many downs.[18] From the lower class to the upper class, the Farmington Canal had profound impacts on the labor economy of Connecticut.


Briefly, the canal even entered an era of profitability. In what became the glory years of the canal, in the beginning of the 1830s the profits from the trade of the canal outweighed the expenses of repairs, and the project became fruitful. In an account by Thomas J. Stafford, he described the period: “During these several years [1830-1836], there was a steady stream of business on the canal...Throughout this period, the facilities for transportation gave a perceptible impulse to the business of New Haven, and to several towns on the line of the canal.”[19] However, these years were inadequate to make up for prior years of deficits. Soon, the canal’s brief golden era came to an end, and a decade later the canal project would end.

 

Failure

​

Prior to the construction of the Farmington Canal, the breaking ground ceremony took place. Hundreds of people gathered to watch Governor Oliver Walcott break the soil with his shovel to mark the start of the canal project.[20] However, in what would be a premonition of things to come, the shovel was unable to dig the ground and the handle broke.[21] Less than three decades later, the canal permanently closed. The Farmington Canal ultimately failed because of resistance and competition from local groups and construction difficulties, which led to financial difficulties. Combined with the emergence of the Railroad Era, the Farmington Canal ceased operations in 1848.

​

Screenshot 2024-02-27 at 10.08.47 AM.png

Appendix C [55]

From its inception, the Farmington Canal project was chronically underfunded by the Connecticut government, and as a result, many shortcuts were made. Every decision of the construction, including the selection of material, locks, and bridge designs, was shaped by the financial constraints that the project was put under.[22] In its design, the idea of being cost-effective was often put ahead of functionality at many points, which led to high repair costs. By 1830, the project had already amassed $144,000 in repair costs.[23] When explaining the decision to use wooden locks, Chief Engineer Benjamin Wright described "wooden locks in the first instance, as more economical.”[24] Through much of the construction, the project imported cement that was not strong enough to sustain the water pressure of the canal. Though eventually water-proof cement was innovated to solve the problem, much leakage occurred as a result of the cheap cement.[25] Many of the canal's engineers predicted the lack of water to be a problem for the functionality of the canal. Instead, the excess of water proved to be a larger obstacle.[26] Overall, the canal was inadequately built to handle Connecticut’s weather conditions, which caused frequent delays and a substantial amount of repairs. From the years 1836-1839, the Farmington Canal Company spent more in repairs for damage than the revenue that they earned in that same period.[27] In addition, the construction was very slow and tedious, and many of the optimistically set construction deadlines were passed without much progress. By 1828, for example, the year that construction was promised to be completely finished, much work was still to be done at many points on the canal, and the process became even more drawn out and resource-heavy.[28] Overall, problems with the construction tormented the functionality of the Farmington Canal, and many repairs and closures were necessary over the decades.


Another detriment to the success of the Farmington Canal was competition from the Riverites. Throughout the project, a group of businessmen predominantly based in Hartford that referred to themselves as the “Riverites” devoted their time and resources to ensuring that the Connecticut River remained the state’s supreme trade route.[29] The Connecticut river largely ran parallel to the Farmington Canal and gave access to Long Island Sounds to the port of Hartford. Hence, a major motivation in New Haven’s construction of the Farmington Canal was to steal much of the trade that made Hartford so successful as a city.[30] However, the Connecticut River, unlike the Farmington Canal, was not susceptible to washouts and suspended service and was generally more dependable for trade.[31] In response to competition from the canal, the Riverites improved navigation on the Connecticut River. Following the Farmington Canal’s construction, in 1829 the Riverites constructed the Enfield Canal between Springfield and Hartford to avoid shallows and falls in an effort to avoid losing traffic to the Farmington Canal.[32] The Connecticut Riverites were also at the natural advantage of having greater access to New England, including Springfield, Massachusetts, and even portions of Canada. The Farmington Canal, however, was never connected to the rest of New England, since the initially promised canal system throughout New England never materialized. Many at the time believed that the Farmington Canal was never in a position to compete with the Riverites in the first place: “Indeed, the New Haven and Northampton Company was not in a situation to content for the trade of the valley of the Connecticut river with much vigor, till 1845, and by this time Massachusetts had granted charters for railroads to run in a parallel direction in the same region.”[33] Ultimately, the Riverites won out over supporters of the canal, and the Connecticut River remained as Connecticut’s premier trade route. 


Aside from the Hartford Riverites, local farmers served to be a major obstacle throughout the project. When the canal was mapped out, the path ran through the land of many Connecticut farms. Thus, much of the funding was spent to give financial compensation to the farmers whose land was encroached upon by the project.[34] At the canal’s inception, the founders were aware of the heavy expenses that would be incurred from dealing with the local farm owners, but they believed their funds and resources would be sufficient to deal with them.[35] However, the leaders greatly underestimated the extent to which local farmers would interfere with the canal. Though the canal leaders promised to pay full compensation for every property that was damaged during the construction, the process of settling with every landowner was long, tedious, and resource-intensive. One such settlement occurred with farm owner Mr. E Sanford: “Dear Sir, Your letter addressed to me, under the date of 12th June, I have laid before the directors of the Farmington Canal Company, and they have directed me to say that of settlement with Mr. E. Sanford has since agreed on, respecting the damage.”[36] In the case of Sanford, he would not receive any compensation until that winter. Ultimately, the canal leaders did not deliver on their promise, and many farmers were left upset. When landowners felt that their settlements were inadequate, they often took the Farmington Canal Company to court, which resulted in thousands of dollars in court fees and financial payouts.[37] Even still, many farmers remained unhappy after not receiving the settlements they thought they were owed and resorted to vandalizing the canal in protest. Many mysterious unexplained accidents that occurred throughout the project were likely related to the dissatisfied landowners.[38] After an argument with the farm next door, one such farmer diverted the flow of the canal to flood his neighbor's field, destroying all of his crops and causing major repairs and delays.[39] Throughout, local farmers remained a constant barrier to the canal, which ultimately aided the downfall of the project.
 

Screenshot 2024-02-27 at 10.12.38 AM.png

Appendix D [56]

During the onset of the Farmington canal project, engineer Sir Isaac Mills asserted his confidence in the canal’s ability to shoulder all of its expenses: 

There is perhaps nothing more common than to hear Irishmen spoken of in America with pointed disrespect. The whole national character, is seemingly viewed with the most determined hostility, hatred and contempt. No matter how exalted the virtue, or elevated the mind, the circumstance of birth, is sure evidence of infamy. The character of Irishmen is viewed through the clouded medium of a prejudice as base and unnatural as it is barbarous and cruel. [40]

This confidence that was held by many of the founders of the canal was short-lived, and quickly the project was plagued with financial difficulties that endured until its closure. Initially, the canal was expected to cost roughly $420,000 in total, but by the end of the project, the costs over doubled the expected expenses, with a final cost of $1,089,425.[41] Following the canal’s glory years, from 1836 to 1840 the costs of the canal began to exponentially overshadow the profits of the canal, and the canal lost over four times what it was made, collecting $39,199.92 while dispensing $181,367.67 in costs.[42] At one point, the canal’s need for money extended all the way to Congress, where a proposed grant would have given $155,000 to the canal to help with its financial difficulties. However, despite James Hillhouse’s best efforts in the senate, the grant never passed.[43] Originally, the Farmington Canal Company attempted to finance the project using subscriptions from the companies and people using the canal.[44] This form of payment soon proved to be inadequate to cover the costs.[45] During its existence, the Farmington Canal never received enough federal funding to sustain itself through its overall lack of profits, and in combination with the local resistance, competition with the Connecticut River, and the large amounts spent on construction and repairs, the project as a whole never turned the profit that was promised at its inception.[46]

Screenshot 2024-02-27 at 10.39.52 AM.png

Appendix E [57]

Shortly after the creation of the Farmington Canal, railroads began to sweep the nation. It soon became evident that railroads were more cost-effective and efficient than canals, and the era of canal craze came to a close. In 1838, investors, tired of the deficit that had been turned by the failures of the Farmington Canal, decided to salvage their money and petition for the formation of a railroad alongside the canal. Nine years later, construction commenced for the New Haven and Northampton Railroad.[47] While the construction and maintenance of the canal commanded a price of over a million dollars, the construction of the railroads cost only $186,000.[48] As opposed to the Farmington Canal’s drawn-out construction process, the railroad was finished within a year. The New Haven and Northampton Railroad, also known as the Canal Line, opened in January 1848.[49] Learning from the Farmington Canal Company’s ill-fated relationships with local land owners, the Canal Line invited locals with a free ticket “to take a ride over the Road, any day most convenient to themselves.”[50] Within the same month, the Farmington Canal terminated all operations and closed permanently. Notably, the canal course perfectly laid out a pathway for the railroad, which simplified the construction of the railroad line significantly.[51]

Screenshot 2024-02-27 at 10.42.23 AM.png

Appendix F [58]

Screenshot 2024-02-27 at 10.44.11 AM.png

Appendix G [59]

The Farmington Canal widely failed to deliver on its promises. The project was chronically tormented by resistance from local landowners, construction failures, and competition with Riverites, all of which sparked financial difficulties before the canal was completely replaced by the Canal Line. Nevertheless, the canal managed to cultivate communities, spread culture, stimulate economic activity, and provide opportunities for the working class and upper class alike. Yet to truly see the impact of the Farmington Canal project, one must see a far greater picture. Following the opening of the Canal Line, the railroad was continuously repurposed as the ownership changed constantly. Decades later, after the eventual abandonment of the railroad, the project was repurposed once again during the “rails to trails” movement, which sought to turn abandoned railways into multipurpose public paths. In the present day, the Farmington Canal Heritage Trail extends from New Haven to Southington, with more portions of the path expected to open soon. The trail is frequented by many locals and provides a natural, tranquil environment for residents around Connecticut. Local resident Abby Roth described the trail: “It activates space, enables safe, sustainable transportation, preserves history, and provides a beautiful space that at spots feels very rural and at other locations like here has the vibrancy of an urban setting.”[52] The success of the Farmington Canal Heritage Trail, as well as the New Haven and Northampton Railroad, would not have been possible without the brief existence of the Farmington Canal project at the beginning of the 19th century. Thus, the Farmington Canal demonstrates how a short-lived infrastructure project that was widely considered to be a failure can be repurposed to leave a lasting impact on its community that is still felt to the modern day.

Bibliography

Barber, John Warner. Canal boat drawn by three horses. University of Connecticut Libraries. Accessed October 28, 2022. https://digitalcatalog.chs.org/islandora/object/40002%3A11356.


Bender, Daniel Eric. An Uneasy Peace: Irish Labor on the Farmington Canal. New Haven, CT: Yale University, 1995.


Board and Directors of Farmington Canal Company. Report, "List of Subscribers to Canal Stock," 1825.


Breen, Thomas. "Farmington Canal Construction Celebrated." New Haven Independent (New Haven, CT), September 13, 2021. Accessed April 2, 2023. https://www.newhavenindependent.org/article/farmington_canal_iv.


Connecticut Writers' Project. Boats Across New England Hills: the Story of the Farmington Canal. 1941.


Farmington Canal Company. Act of Incorporation. New Haven, CT, 1822.


Farmington Canal Company. Assessment of Damages. New Haven, CT, 1828.


Farmington Valley Trails Council. "History - Farmington Canal Heritage Trail & Farmington River Trail." Fchtrail.org. https://fchtrail.org/history/.


Federal Writers Project. "A Map of New England Canals Showing Proposed and Constructed Canals." Map.


Goodrich, James. Letter to Willem Leffingwell, July 18, 1828.


The Great Fill Over Ten-mile Brook at Milldale. Photograph.


Guignino, George M. "The Farmington Canal 1822-1847: An Attempt At Internal Improvement." TeachersInstitute.yale.edu. Accessed January 26, 2023. https://teachersinstitute.yale.edu/curriculum/units/1981/cthistory/81.ch.04/6.


Kingsley, Joseph L. "Canal Boat Line and Steamboat to Cheapside." New Haven and Northampton Daily, April 1, 1843.


Ticket for Simeon Baldwin, January 19, 1848. Canal Railroad.


Library of Congress. The Beginnings of American Railroads and Mapping. Accessed March 30, 2023. https://www.loc.gov/collections/railroad-maps-1828-to-1900/articles-and-essays/history-of-railroads-and-maps/the-beginnings-of-american-railroads-and-mapping/.


Mills, Isaac. Letter, "Sir, The subject of making a canal from the tide waters of New-Haven harbour to the north line of the state, through the town of Farmington ... has excited much interest," January 14, 1822.


National Park Service. Farmington Canal (New Haven and Northhampton Canal). National Park Service, 1985.


National Railway Publication Co. "National Railway Publication Co." Map. 1877. Accessed March 30, 2023. http://alabamamaps.ua.edu/historicalmaps/railroads/New%20Haven%20and%20Northampton%20RR.htm.


New Haven Museum and Historical Society. Farmington Canal Spade.


The New Haven Museum and Historical Society. William Lanson and the Farmington Canal.


New Haven Register (New Haven, CT), July 1825.


New Haven Register (New Haven, CT), April 22, 1826.


New Haven Register (New Haven, CT), May 10, 1828.


New Haven Register (New Haven, CT), June 28, 1828.


Purdy, T.C. 1880 Census: Report on the Canals of the United States. Washington D.C., 1883. Accessed March 30, 2023. https://www2.census.gov/library/publications/decennial/1880/vol-04-transportation/1880v4-14.pdf.


Ratliff, Thomas M. No Common Profits; A Business Analysis of the Failure of the Farmington Canal. Central Connecticut State University, 1993.


Stafford, Thomas J. An Account of the Farmington Canal Company. New Haven, CT, 1850.


Stodart & Currier. "Map of Farmington & Avon. Lithog. of Stodart & Currier." Map. Accessed October 27, 2022. https://connecticuthistory.org/farmington-canals-ground-breaking-today-in-history/.


The Truth Teller, July 9, 1825.


Wright, Benjamin. Letter, 1822.


Sywak, Zofia. Farmington Canal Papers: New Haven Colony Historical Society, 1977.
 

Footnotes

[1] See Appendix A.


[2] Connecticut Writers' Project, Boats Across New England Hills: the Story of the Farmington Canal (1941), [10].


[3] National Park Service, Farmington Canal (New Haven and Northampton Canal) (National Park Service, 1985), [34].


[4] New Haven Register (New Haven, CT), April 22, 1826.


[5] Connecticut Writers' Project, Boats Across, [8].


[6] Ibid, [27].


[7] National Park Service, Farmington Canal, [37].


[8] Ibid.


[9] Ibid.


[10] Ibid, [38].


[11] Ibid.


[12] See Appendix B.


[13] National Park Service, Farmington Canal, [36].


[14] Daniel Eric Bender, An Uneasy Peace: Irish Labor on the Farmington Canal (New Haven, CT: Yale University, 1995).


[15] The Truth Teller, July 9, 1825.


[16] Connecticut Writers' Project, Boats Across, [19].


[17] National Park Service, Farmington Canal, [2].


[18] The New Haven Museum and Historical Society, William Lanson and the Farmington Canal.


[19] Thomas J. Stafford, An Account of the Farmington Canal Company (New Haven, CT, 1850).


[20] New Haven Museum and Historical Society, Farmington Canal Spade.


[21] See Appendix C.


[22] National Park Service, Farmington Canal, [3].


[23] Thomas M. Ratliff, No Common Profits; A Business Analysis of the Failure of the Farmington Canal (Central Connecticut State University, 1993).


[24] National Park Service, Farmington Canal, [34].


[25] Connecticut Writers' Project, Boats Across, [18].


[26] New Haven Register (New Haven, CT), June 28, 1828


[27] Connecticut Writers' Project, Boats Across, [22].


[28] New Haven Register (New Haven, CT), May 10, 1828.


[29] Connecticut Writers' Project, Boats Across, [24].


[30] George M. Guignino, "The Farmington Canal 1822-1847: An Attempt At Internal Improvement," TeachersInstitute.yale.edu, accessed January 26, 2023, https://teachersinstitute.yale.edu/curriculum/units/1981/cthistory/81.ch.04/6.


[31] Ibid.


[32] Connecticut Writers' Project, Boats Across, [27].


[33] Thomas J. Stafford, An Account of the Farmington Canal Company (New Haven, CT, 1850).


[34]  Guignino, "The Farmington Canal," TeachersInstitute.yale.edu.


[35] Letter by Isaac Mills, "Sir, The subject of making a canal from the tide waters of New-Haven harbour to the north line of the state, through the town of Farmington ... has excited much interest," January 14, 1822.


[36] Letter by Farmington Canal Company, "Assessment of Damages," 1828.


[37] Connecticut Writers' Project, Boats Across, [12].


[38] Guignino, "The Farmington Canal," TeachersInstitute.yale.edu.


[39] See Appendix D.


[40] Letter by Mills, "Sir, The subject."


[41] T.C. Purdy, 1880 Census: Report on the Canals of the United States (Washington D.C., 1883), [31], accessed March 30, 2023, https://www2.census.gov/library/publications/decennial/1880/vol-04-transportation/1880v4-14.pdf.


[42]Bender, An Uneasy Peace.


[43] Ratliff, No Common.


[44] See Appendix E.


[45] Zofia Sywak, Farmington Canal Papers (New Haven Colony Historical Society, 1977).


[46] Farmington Valley Trails Council, "History - Farmington Canal Heritage Trail & Farmington River Trail," Fchtrail.org, https://fchtrail.org/history/.


[47] Guignino, "The Farmington Canal," TeachersInstitute.yale.edu.


[48] Ibid.


[49] See Appendix F.


[50] See Appendix G.


[51] Library of Congress, The Beginnings of American Railroads and Mapping, [1], accessed March 30, 2023, https://www.loc.gov/collections/railroad-maps-1828-to-1900/articles-and-essays/history-of-railroads-and-maps/the-beginnings-of-american-railroads-and-mapping/.


[52] Thomas Breen, "Farmington Canal Construction Celebrated," New Haven Independent (New Haven, CT), September 13, 2021, accessed April 2, 2023, https://www.newhavenindependent.org/article/farmington_canal_iv.


[53] Stodart & Currier, "Map of Farmington & Avon. Lithog. of Stodart & Currier.," map, accessed October 27, 2022, https://connecticuthistory.org/farmington-canals-ground-breaking-today-in-history/.


[54] John Warner Barber, Canal Boat Drawn by Three Horses, University of Connecticut Libraries, accessed October 28, 2022, https://digitalcatalog.chs.org/islandora/object/40002%3A11356.


[55] New Haven Museum and Historical Society, Farmington Canal Spade.


[56] The Great Fill Over Ten-mile Brook at Milldale, photograph.


[57] Report by Board and Directors of Farmington Canal Company, "List of Subscribers to Canal Stock," 1825.


[58] National Railway Publication Co., "National Railway Publication Co.," map, 1877, accessed March 30, 2023, http://alabamamaps.ua.edu/historicalmaps/railroads/New%20Haven%20and%20Northampton%20RR.htm.


[59] Ticket for Simeon Baldwin, January 19, 1848, Canal Railroad.
 

bottom of page