| over the River." The Maryland Proprietary Government disbanded in April 1774, and the War
of Independence prevented the project from proceeding further at that time."
Resurgence of Interest in the Potomac Route to the West
Following the peace of September 1783, there was a resurgence of interest in improving
the Potomac route to the West. In November 1783, Charles Beatty and Normand Bruce, friends
of Johnson, reported to the Maryland General Assembly that, for the cost of $92,000 and in two
years. obstructions to navigation by light vessels could be removed from the River between Fort
Cumberland and the Great Falls." The legislature took no action at that time but, as one
nineteenth century Maryland historian observed, "the people discussed the subject with much
animation and interest among themselves and in the public press."4s
1' Johnson wrote to Washington on May 10, 1772 that "I fear our Governor is still under
an impression that a concurrence by our Assembly in a scheme with yours for clearing
Potowmack may weaken the proprietary claim of jurisdiction over that River and consequently
that he is not at liberty to assent to such Bill tho' I believe in his own judgment clearing the River
is an object which deserves immediate attention and that he wishes to see it effected."
Delaplaine, supra note 30, at 73.
1'' Washington later wrote to Thomas Jefferson about the failure of this earlier project,
stating that the plan "was in a tolerably train when I set out for Cambridge in 1775, and would
have been in an excellent way had it not been for the difficulties which were met with in the
Maryland Assembly; from the opposition which was given (according to report) by the Baltimore
Merchants; who were alarmed, and perhaps not without cause, at the consequence of Water
transportation to George Town of the produce which usually came to their Market." 27 John C.
Fitzpatrick, The Writings of George Washington 373, 374 (1938) (Letter from Washington to
Jefferson of 3/29/1784) [hereinafter "27 Fitzpatrick"]; Delaplaine, supra note 30, at 83, 386.
John Balledine, a lead subscriber of the company, published a notice in the Virginia Gazette in
October 1775 attributing the failure of the project to the "the Necessity of a Maryland Act of
Assembly co-operating with one passed in Virginia, and which I have not yet been able to
obtain . . . ." Virginia Gazette, Oct. 28, 1775.
'a Scharf, supra note 22, at 519; Delaplaine, supra note 30, at 385.
15 Scharf, supra note 22, at 519.
|
