The Philadelphia - Baltimore Trade Rivalry 1780-1860

, V .., ., X, . The Philadelphia-Bali fe6re Trade Rivalry 1780-1860 JAMES WESTON LIVINGOOD COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA THE PENNSYLVANIA HISTORICAL AND MUSEUM COMMISSION HAKRISBURG, 1947 THE PENNSYLVANIA HISTORICAL AND MUSEUM COMMISSION CHARLES J. BIDDLE, Chairman FRANCES DORR AN CE A. ATWATER KENT, JR. THOMAS MURPHY EDGAR T. STEVENSON CHARLES G. WEBB RICHARD NORRIS WILLIAMS, 2o FRANCIS B. HAAS, ex oflicio Superintendent of Public Instruction DONALD A, CADZOW, Executive Director SYLVESTER K. STEVENS, State Historian TRUSTEES EX OFFICIO JAMES H. DUFF Governor of the Commonwealth G. HAROLD WAGNER, Auditor General RAMSEY S. BLACK, State Treasurer 11 PREFACE The rivalry between Philadelphia and Baltimore for the trade of the Susquehanna Valley is an episode of American history which recurred many times in all parts of the country. The first settlers along the sea coast were dependent upon ocean transportation to Europe. Later waves of advancing settlements were in like manner dependent on rivers, roads, canals, and railroads to get their raw materials and semi-finished goods to market and to obtain other goods produced in distant regions. This was especially true during the early stages of development when local products and commodities were likely to be bulky in character, of low value in relation to their bulk, and in some cases perishable. The economic life of the new settlement was dependent on transportation since surpluses could not be marketed at home where all neighbors tended to have a satisfactory quantity of local products. Just as the producers were dependent on transportation media, so too wf re the merchants of the seaport cities who had ready orders for grain, flour, whiskey, iron, lumber, coal, etc. The cities needed hinterlands that would furnish these commodities and also buy return goods, which meant double profits for the city tradesmen. Since the interior had limited funds as well as inexperience in business methods, it was only natural that the initiative for improved transportation and the funds invested in it, came from the seacoast metropolitan centers. The desire for better trading arrangements naturally became keenest when rival cities found that their hinterlands overlapped. Philadelphia and Baltimore both hoped to in crease their trade both looked to the Susquehanna farmers and artisans as potential producers and consumers. Since trade and transportation are but two sides of a single question, the rivalry for trade between the two cities soon expressed itself in an ambition to extend internal improve ments into the valley. The history of the struggle between the two rival cities is thus one of trade and transportation. As such it was of interest to every man of the region involved in that day. It is the story of hopes and ambitions of blueprints, politics, finance, construction and of trade carried over the different transportation avenues constructed. In dealing with this story it has been deemed advisable to treat the subject topically rather than chronologically in spite of the limitations of the former method. It is impossible to arrive at definite conclusions as to which city was victorious during the part of the tournament reviewed. Statistics of the amount of goods which flowed from the Susquehanna Valley to each are iii channels of trade become more complex it is very. djipQwlt to follow even a single shipment from its originto its final mar4ci. Jioreover, by the latter years of this study the influence of the growing western trade overshadowed that of the Susquehanna Valley and caused prime attention to be turned away from this arena. This volume is nothing more in its ambitions than a preliminary survey and as such its shortcomings are obvious...