CHAPTER XIV
 

HE Potomac Company having signally fail¬
ed to realize General Washington's grand
idea of uniting the West to the East by
the bonds of commerce and common
interests, and having instead thereof been an
imperfect and costly method for merely lo¬
cal traffic in boats drawing one foot of water,
it became the general desire to substitute some
better method. This project took shape in
1823 and the proposition was to construct a canal
along the Potomac river to its head waters and
thence to the waters of the Ohio river. This
scheme was brought before the Legislature of
Maryland and met with general approval. The
Legislature called a Canal Convention to take into
consideration the practicability and expediency of
uniting by canal. navigation, the waters of the
Chesapeake bay with those of the river Ohio, and
to devise ways and means to effect that object.
Delegates were sent from fourteen counties in
Virginia, one in Pennsylvania, eight in Maryland
and from the three cities of the District of Colum¬
bia, Washington,  Georgetown  and Alexandria.

This celebrated convention met in the Capitol
at Washington on the 6th day of November 1823,
and reassembled on the 6th of December 1826.
Washington County was represented at the first
session by Casper W. Wever, Otho H. Williams,
Thomas Kennedy and Frisby Tilghman.—At the
second session, three years later, there were seven¬
teen delegates, Franklin Anderson, Marmaduke
W. Bo3'd, Wm. Fitzhugh, Jr., George Hedrick,
Samuel M. Hitt, Thomas Keller, Thomas Ken¬
nedy, John Reynolds, Frisby Tilghman, Matthew
S. Van'Lear, Otho H. Williams, John Blackford,
 

Thomas C. Brent, Thomas Buchanan, John R.
Dall, Wm. Gabby and David Schnebley. .The con¬
vention was presided over by Governor Joseph
Kent, of Maryland and Walter Jones, of Washing¬
ton City was the secretary. Among the delegates
"were James M. Mason, Bushrod C. Washington
and G. W. Parke Custis. At the last sitting five
counties of Ohio and twelve of Pennsylvania were
represented. There was presented to the conven¬
tion at its first sitting a communication from citi¬
zens of Belmont County, Ohio, setting forth that
the canal would in their opinion be the outlet for
all the trade of the Ohio river above the Falls,
and they anticipated a great advance in the value
of their lands when the work was in operation.
They urged its extension to the waters of Lake
Erie and believed that in that way the trade of
all the great lakes could be commanded.

After a three da3''s session and an earnest and
dignified debate the convention adopted a series
of resolutions setting forth that a connection of
the Atlantic and Western waters, by a canal lead¬
ing from the seat of the general government to the
river Ohio, regarded as a local object was one of
the highest importance to the States, immediately
interested therein, and, considered in a national
view, is of inestimable consequence to the future
union, security and happiness of the United States.
It was therefore resolved unanimously that it was
expedient that such a canal should be made. The
Legislature of Virginia had already passed an Act
on Feb. 22. 1823, incorporating the Potomac Canal
Company. That act was to be accepted as the
charter of the company with certain modifications.
Among these was a change in the name fo the