Canallers - Captains of the Canal

Right Side: Canal Boat Traffic outside of Georgetown
NPS

Left Side: Woman steering a canal boat
NPS

 

Who are the Canallers?

The life of the canallers, also called ‘boatmen’, on the canal was one of hard work, long hours, and little pay. The daring adventure of their employment coupled with their isolation from much of the world outside of the canal made the independent-minded boatmen a rough and ready lot. They usually formed a class apart from their neighbors in the Potomac Valley, intermarrying within their own group.

Father with children on a canal boat.
NPS

Their children were frequently born and raised in the trade and generally had little exposure to the educational or social refinements of the emerging American culture of the 19th century. The boatmen were constantly brawling among themselves for precedence at locks or because of some real or fancied slur. Their life was at best irregular and unpredictable, and the “canallers” exhibited those characteristics in their lifestyles. Some dawdled along the line or amused themselves in drunken revelry, taking their time in making the run. Others were more ambitious, driving their teams and boats at full speed night and day, caring little for themselves, their mules or boats, or canal property.

The boatmen were constantly at odds with the company over toll rates and freight charges and with the lock keepers over operating procedures or personal slights. Usually, the “canallers” shunned the larger towns along the canal, for it cost too much to feed their teams, and they felt out of place. Even while wintering along the line they had their own settlements on the fringes of the towns or often quite far from them.

What kind of person was a Canaller?

The Canallers carried an independent spirit, this made managing them a challenge for the C&O Canal Towage Company. The free spirited canallers would spend their time on their boat potentially fishing, singing canal songs, and sharing stories.

Lockkeepers and Canallers spent a lot of time together. They would spend this time checking paperwork, bartering, and actively lock through a Lift Lock. The relationship between them was complicated, Lock keepers would complain about Canallers and Canallers would complain about Lock keepers. However, there were times where they banded together for a common goal. Canallers created for themselves a new type of living by transporting goods on a man-made waterway.

 

Canallers Over the Years

How did the canallers change over time as the canal company policies change?

During Canal Construction: 1830-1850

Even though the C&O Canal was not fully operational until 1850 when Paw Paw Tunnel was completed. Sections above and below the tunnel were up and running. However, the C&O Canal Towage Company was not fully prepared with policies and rules for their up and coming operation.

Although many of the “canallers” were hard working and conscientious, the canal company records are filled with references to the brawling, unpredictable, and quarrelsome behavior of the boatmen. In their relationships with each other and with company officials, they exhibited a fierce independence and contentiousness that often ignored or opposed any show of authority by the company officials.

The rigors of life in the largely agrarian and forested Potomac Valley had its effect on the brash behavior of the early boatmen. It appears that they were constantly brawling among themselves for precedence at locks, because of some real or fancied slur, or for exercise. On April 2, 1831, Daniel Van Slyke, the superintendent of the canal, reported that since the water had been admitted into the canal two weeks earlier:

"It is with great difficulty we have been able to preserve order among the boatmen, who in striving to push forward for a preference in passing the several locks are sometimes disposed to injure each other’s boats as a means of carrying their point. An unfortunate instance of this kind happened on Wednesday last at the locks on the 9th section. A strongly constructed boat ran her bow against a gondola loaded with flour, and so much injured her as to render it necessary to transship the load. But no damage was done to the cargo."

Boys on canal boat in Lock 2
Photo Credit: Chesapeake and Ohio Canal National Historical Park

Van Slyke went on to suggest that some regulations be adopted by the board to help the lock tenders preserve order

"so that the boats may pass the locks by turn as they arrive, as it frequently occurs that fifteen or twenty boats arrive at a lock within half an hour. Hence the contention for right of preference, which I believe would be allayed if it was known that they must be permitted to pass only by turn as they arrive."

During the following month, Van Slyke informed the directors that the boatmen particularly resented the priority given to the packet Charles F. Mercer in passing the locks. As this policy already had triggered angry protests, he advised the board to print the order on handbills to be left with the lock tenders and distributed among the boatmen. Unless this were done, it would be virtually impossible to enforce the policy.

The boatmen were constantly at odds with the company over toll rates and in the early days took unusual ways of expressing their dissatisfaction. W. W. Fenelon, the owner of the first packet service between Georgetown and Great Falls, staged a drunken demonstration in Georgetown in September 1831, which was reported to company officials by a local resident:

"Being at the break, at Baker’s, at about 6 o’clock, we heard a thundering noise of wild music and saw a large cavalcade (of) colors flying & having got near, it proved to be Mr. Fenelon, with his teams and crew with the colors of the Packet floating in high glee; he proceeded and paraded down Bridge Street, made a stop upon the new bridge, and refreshing himself and his crew after much music gave the word of command for High Street reeling in saddle all the way; a gang of Negroes and boys thronging the street until nearly dark. Now, sir, their ostensible object of all that fuss, is a loud complaint about the tolls, which gives him a pretext to pour abuses on the institution and bias the mind of the people at large."

The directors were irritated particularly by the quality of the boats operating on the canal. No one was willing to undertake to fulfill their dreams of steamers and double-decked packets. In fact, the boatmen generally refused to meet even the minimum requirements of the company regulations. Complaints were frequently made of iron-shod boats, leaky scows, drifting rafts, and sunken gondolas obstructing navigation.

Not only were the boats affecting the flow of traffic on the waterway, but they also were causing damage to the locks. This growing problem was reported to the board in December 1838 as follows:

"many of the canal boats navigating the canal are armed on their sides with iron, and do great damage to the locks as they pass through. Many of the stone scows (their ends being at right angles) have their corners plated with iron, and entering the locks they frequently strike the coping and other parts of the lock and do great damage. By examining the locks in Georgetown you will readily perceive what damage has already been done."

By the enforcement of regulations, the provision of dry docks, the assessment of fines, and the levy of a 100 percent rate discrimination against rafts, the company sought to drive undesirable craft off the waterway and to encourage the construction of new and larger boats. In this effort they were partly successful, assisted by the need for larger and sturdier boats to handle the growing demands of the trade. Nevertheless the lumber trade and the incidental trade of the numerous valley farmers, who after building their own craft designed to last for only one trip (usually to be sold at Georgetown for firewood), made the struggle for better boats a never ending one.

The formulation of detailed regulations for the operation of the canal adopted in July 1831 and February 1835 did not insure the orderly conduct of business on the waterway. On the contrary, every conceivable abuse was reported at one time or another. The board immediately saw the necessity of securing some definite delegation of police power from the parties to the charter in order to gain the authority to enforce its regulations.

Repeated directions for the enforcement of the rules indicate a laxness or indifference on the part of the officials and boatmen alike. Regulations which were regularly singled out for stricter enforcement were those that prohibited the use of iron-shod poles for propulsion, the navigation of the canal by boats that did not conform to the company specifications, the negligent practices that caused damage to locks, and the schemes of boatmen to defraud the company of toll payments.

The Canal is Fully Operational: 1850-1859

Many of the characteristics of the early boatmen also were exhibited by those who plied the waterway after its completion to Cumberland in 1850. The same problems of violent behavior, disregard of company regulations and property, and reckless navigation practices by the boatmen continued to plague the waterway.

On April 1, 1851, a new system of by-laws, rules, and regulations for the government, management, and operation of the waterway went into effect. Printed as a 47-page booklet, the regulations covered every facet of the canal’s operation in detail and clearly defined the monetary penalty for every offense of the boatmen. This set of regulations, which remained in effect until 1889, was the most comprehensive effort of its kind to be undertaken by the board. The booklets were printed in great quantities and distributed to every boatmen and canal official.

In the months immediately following their adoption, the new regulations appeared to have the desired effect upon the “canallers.” That this was the case was evidenced by the following report made to the company stockholders by President William Grason on June 2, 1851:

We have every reason to believe, as far as we can judge, from the short period which has elapsed since the by-laws of the company went into operation on the first of April last, that very beneficial results have, and will attend them; in the company…and producing agree of order and regularity on the past of those navigating the canal, which has heretofore not existed. Although, as was to be supposed, in any new system of regulations, some opposition would, in the outset, be manifested by those to whom any restraint would be irksome, we have reason to believe, that all well-disposed persons engaged in navigating the canal, regard these regulations as wholesome and necessary, acting both as a protection to the works, of the company, insuring more regularity, and less frequent interruptions to the navigation of the canal, and, at the same time, preventing collisions with some of the boatmen, who have hitherto been disorderly. Under all circumstances, there has been less objection than could have been expected, and the boatmen have very generally quietly acquiesced in, and readily complied with the provision of the regulations.

Few infractions of the new regulations had been reported by the officers on the line of the canal. The amount of fines that had been imposed was $140, of which $80 had been written by the directors for sufficient reasons.

Needless to say, the peaceful acquiescence to the company regulations by the boatmen did not last for long. The abrasive behavior of many of the boatmen soon became a great concern to the directors as they sought to maintain the orderly operation of the waterway. Among the most conspicuous examples of the revival of their destructive spirit were the (1) disregard of company rules and officials, (2) clamoring for access to the coal wharves on the congested Georgetown level, (3) reckless navigation practices which led to boating accidents and to the destruction of works on the canal, (4) incidents of physical violence vis-à-vis the lock tenders, (5) reluctance to meet the minimum requirements of the company regulations relative to the quality of the barges, and (6) attempts to defraud the company of its rightful tolls.

The Canal's Waning Years; 1891-1924

In 1902 the receivers took steps toward the establishment of complete control over freight charges on the waterway. The Canal Towage Company, sponsored by the canal receivers and the Consolidation Coal Company both of which were dominated by the Baltimore & Ohio Railroad, was organized along the lines first suggested by Arthur P. Gorman in the mid-1870s. The primary function of this enterprise was to provide economy and regularity in the runs of the waterway. To do this, the company supplied the boats, teams and equipment, and established a regular schedule for the boatmen to follow. Under this new arrangement, all that the captain was expected to furnish was the deck gear, the long and short fallboards, the feed, and troughs. The Canal Towage Company also cut freight rates from 65 cents per ton to 45 cents per ton and controlled the distribution of cargoes. As a result, the service and the efficiency of canal navigation were improved, but in so doing the last shred of independence for the “canallers” was destroyed. The canal lost much of its romance as the boats began to be numbered instead of named and to be uniform and utilitarian rather than colorfully individualistic.
 

Canal Boat along the towpath
Photo Credit: Chesapeake and Ohio Canal National Historical Park

Spirited, unruly, flamboyant, and lackadaisical boatmen were alike undesirable to the company, and the rougher ones were not permitted to use its boats. There was no longer room for romantic characters such as Captain John Malott of Williamsport whose mules were known for the white sheepskins with tasseled red rosettes that they wore on their tossing bell bows and whose boats were decorated with flags and political banners during campaigns. Traffic became regularized on a timetable basis.

The transition in the position of the boatmen in the changing canal scene had been in progress for some three decades. The growth of marked distinctions in canal society after the Civil War–officials, shippers, and “canallers”–mirrored in microcosm the development of the capitalist, middle, and laboring classes in the nation as a whole. The emergence of the waterway as a moneymaking, big business enterprise in the early 1870s tended to increase the difference by exerting pressure on the groups to maintain the status quo in order not to disturb the canal’s prosperity. The impact of the economic depression, which reached the canal in 1876, heightened the pressure on the boatmen. The directors insisted that the long-term benefits of maintaining the waterway as a going concern outweighed the immediate hardships to the boatmen, which might result. For this reason, strikes were crushed, wages and freight charges slashed, and canal trade regularized. The “canallers” were caught in a squeeze between the efforts of the coat companies and the canal company to reduce expenses. The coal companies, together with the boat builders, sought to increase their profits by maintaining boat rents and sale prices at high levels, reducing freight rates and calling for lower toll charges. To meet their continuing expenses, boatmen needed high freight charges. But the canal company, seeking to cut transportation costs to stay in competition with the Baltimore & Ohio and at the same time attempting to maintain tolls at a profitable level, demanded lower boat rents, sale prices, and freight charges. The Canal Towage Company represented the culmination of the late 19th century trends towards lower charges and complete control over coal transportation. Independent boatmen could not compete with the Canal Towage Company and its sponsors. A comparison of receipts and expenses of independent boatmen before the organization of the Canal Towage Company and the boats operated by that company indicates that the profits of the latter were some 42 percent greater than those of the former:

Independent Boatmen
Receipts
	90 tons @ 65 cants per ton:	$58.50
Expenses
	Boat rent:	$15.00
	Mule Hire:	$16.00
	Waybills:	$4.80
	Feed:	$5.00
		$40.80
Profit Per Trip		$17.70

 

Canal Towage Company Boats
Receipts
	90 tons @ 45 cents per ton:	$40.50
Expense
	Waybills	$4.80
	Feed	$4.00
		$9.80
Profit Per Trip		$30.70

 

There is little documentary information on the boatmen following the organization of the Canal Towage Company. The only significant problem to arise with the boatmen occurred in 1918 when the canal carried coal for the government proving grounds at Indianhead, Maryland, some 30 miles down the Potomac River from Washington. The movement of coal down the canal was held up during the early part of the navigation season by labor troubles, which were resolved in part by granting higher wages to the boatmen operating the 80-boat fleet of the Canal Towage Company,
 

Family on a Canal Boat
Photo Credit: Chesapeake and Ohio Canal National Historical Park

The only comprehensive study of the canal boatmen and their families during the operation of the waterway was undertaken in 1921 by the U. S. Department of Labor. The survey is interesting, because it offers data on the social, economic, and educational characteristics of the “canallers” in the waning years of the canal’s existence

The great majority of the captains on the canal had their wives and children with them on the boats. Of the 66 captains on the payroll of the Canal Towage Company, 59 were married men.148 Of these, 41 had their children with them during the boating season. The number of children found accompanying their families was 135 (70 boys and 65 girls), of which 48 were under 7 years of age. In addition to these children, there were 7 boys employed on the canal boats as deck hands by captains to whom they were not related. The ages of the 7 boys were as follows: one, 11 years; four, 14 years; one, 15 years; and one, 16 years.

All the captains and their wives included in the study were Native American whites. Seven of the captains and five of the wives were illiterate. One captain, who had begun boating with his father when he was five years of age, reported that altogether he had gone to school for 29 months. By the time he reached the fourth grade the children of his own age had long since completed the grammar school grades, and he was ashamed to enter classes with younger boys and girls. Regretting his own lack of education he said that when his daughter reached school age he should stop boating.

The principal activities in operating a boat on the canal consisted of driving the mules and steering the boat. It was generally the child’s job to drive the mules during the day either walking besides the mules on the towpath or riding the leader. Steering the boat by means of a “stick” which controlled the rudder could be accomplished by the pilot standing or sitting against it. Hence the mother of the family often handled the steering while attending to household tasks. Young children could steer light boats, while the older boys and men usually handled the steering chores for heavily loaded boats.
 

Child and mule
Photo Credit: Chesapeake and Ohio Canal National Historical Park

The ages of the children working on the boats ranged from 5 to 17, but those aged 14 years composed the greatest number in any single age grouping. However, the 11-year-olds composed the second highest number in any age category.

One of the boating households consisted of four persons–the captain, the assistant deck hand, the captain’s wife, and their 11-year-old daughter. The girl had been driving, steering, and doing housework on the boat for several years, but she did not like boating and was very lonesome. Her father said that she could do anything that a hired hand could do, but he felt that it was necessary to employ a man because “you have to rest once in a while.” Among other things, the captain observed that the “women and children are as good as the men” and “if it weren’t for the children the canal wouldn’t run a day.”

In 1920 most of the captains received less than $1,250 from their boat work. About twothirds of them supplemented their earnings either by winter employment or by incidental work during the season. For example, one man owned towing mules, which he hired out. Other captains secured small loads of incidental freight consisting of general merchandise, farm products, or supplies for the pleasure parks and summer campgrounds in the neighborhood of the canal. The captains were paid a uniform freight rate per ton amounting to $75 or $80 per trip.

The average size of the cabins on the canal boats was approximately 10 feet by 12 feet. All cabins had two bunks, one of which was set into the inner wall of the main cabin and the other located in the so-called “stateroom” which was partitioned off from the main cabin by a diagonal wall. The bunks were 36 inches wide–sufficient space for one person but ordinarily occupied by two. In addition to the cabin bunks, the feed box extending across the deck at the center of the boat was ordinarily used for sleeping purposes. This box, 4 feet high and 4 feet wide, provided a fairly comfortable bed by spreading blankets over the hay and other feed. It was used in some cases by the deck hands and occasionally by the children. Often in hot weather the floor of the deck was used as a bed, but some mothers stated that they were afraid to let the children sleep outside of the cabin.

In spite of the narrow berths, most families regarded them as adequate sleeping space for four persons. The feed box provided two additional sleeping places. Of the 41 families in the study, however, ten had seven members and nineteen had more than four persons. The most distressing instance of congestion existed where a family of nine lived on a boat. The mother said that she made a bed for the children on the floor, but “when you get seven down there, there ain’t room left to walk around without stepping on them.” The floors of the cabins were frequently bare, but fourteen families reported having linoleum coverings. One family stated that it was impossible to use any sort of covering as the floors leaked and were always damp.

The hours of travel on the canal were almost continuous. Fifteen hours a day was the minimum reported by any of the boat families. Eighteen hours the most frequently reported, but several families stated that they worked longer. One family had operated its boat without taking any intervals for rest. “It never rains, snows, or blows for a boatman, and a boatman never has no Sunday,” said another. “Tell we see some folks along the way, dressed up and a-goin’ to Sunday School.” One captain and his wife who reported working 15 hours a day employed no crew but depended on the assistance of two children, a girl 14 years of age and a boy of 5. The girl did almost all the driving, usually riding mule back, and the parents steered. The little boy helped with the driving but not for more than a mile or two at a time. The boat was kept moving until the girl could drive no longer; then the boat was tied up for the night. “We’d boat longer if the driver felt like it,” said the father.

Water for drinking and cooking purposes was secured from springs along the canal and stored in barrels or kegs. Water for washing clothes was obtained from the canal itself. Most of the families complained of mosquitoes.

Of the families visited for the study, five lived the year round on their boats, one having done so for eighteen years. All of the other families occasionally visited and spent the off-season in maintained houses along the canal. The dwellings were chiefly small detached wooden or log houses located in or near towns in the vicinity of the waterway within one mile of schools.

Numerous accidents had occurred among the boatmen’s children. Forty-five children had fallen into the canal more or less frequently, eleven had been kicked by mules, one had been burned, one cut with an axe, and one dragged by a mule over a lock gate. One mother reported that her four children had many accidents. The oldest had his nose broken by a kick from a mule, and, with the exception of the baby, all had fallen into the canal many times. Once when a lock tender had closed the gates too soon, the boat’s awning had been dragged off the deck taking the children with it, thus pinning them between the gate and the boat.  

 

Canaller's Abrasive Behavior

The Canal Towage Company sought to establish orderly waterway with rough canallers. 

1. Disregard of Company Rules and Officials

By the fall of 1851 there were widespread reports of boatmen who were ignoring both the company regulations and the attempts of canal officials to enforce the rules. One common case was the insistence of boat captains to use grab hooks while passing through the locks. This persistent practice, which tended to cause injury to the masonry of the locks, was considered to be of such a serious nature that the board at one time considered revoking the license of any captain who refused to comply with the regulations.

Another practice, which indicated the boatmen’s lack of respect for the company regulations and the canal officials who attempted to enforce the rules, was that of refusing to pay fines. At first this was a minor problem as evidenced by the fact that all but $10 of the total amount of $140 levied in fines during the first three months of operation under the new rules in 1851 was paid. However, by the late 1870s nearly 70 percent of the fines were never paid. One of the worst years in this respect was 1877 in which only $45.47 was collected by canal authorities out of the total of $126.52 assessed.

One of the most notorious incidents in this regard occurred in May 1874 when George Reed, captain of the Mayfield and Heiston, was fined $20 for illegally mooring his boat in the Cumberland basin. Refusing to pay the fine, he prepared to leave Cumberland with a barge cargo of coal destined for Georgetown. Because he refused to pay the fine, the collector at Cumberland would not give him a waybill. When the lock tenders at Lock No. 74 attempted to prevent him from continuing his journey until the fine was paid and a waybill was served, Reed forced his way through the lock. This event brought an additional fine of $50 and a warning from President Gorman that a repetition of such an act would result in another $50 penalty. Nevertheless, the boat was allowed to proceed to Georgetown without further hindrance. After Reed deposited his cargo in Georgetown, he was confronted by canal officials and served notice that he owed the company $120 in fines and $4.08 for a waybill. Again, he defiantly ignored the remonstrance of the agents, commenced his return to Cumberland without a waybill, and forced his way through the locks despite the protests of the collectors at Georgetown, Lock No. 5, and Harpers Ferry. When Reed arrived in Cumberland, his boat was seized with the aid of the police and confiscated until he paid the sum of $124.08.

2. Clamoring for Access to the Coal Wharves on the Congested Georgetown Level

As trade on the waterway increased, the method of expediting canal traffic on the Georgetown level soon became a major obstacle to the continued growth of business. Unloading and transfer facilities were unable to handle the increasing tonnage, which was brought to them. As a result, boats lined up in the canal awaiting their turn to unload. Not only were the delays annoying and costly to the boatmen, shippers and company alike, but the congestion on the Georgetown level was a problem in itself. The waterway was not wide enough to accommodate both the ordinary traffic to and from the basin or the aqueduct and the clamoring boatmen awaiting access to the coal wharves.
 

Canal Boat Traffic outside of Georgetown
Photo Credit: Chesapeake and Ohio Canal National Historical Park

Complaints about the congestion and confusion on the Georgetown level forced the directors to take steps to alleviate the problem. In October 1864 the superintendent of the Georgetown Division was authorized to employ a harbormaster to regulate the boats at that place.117 Further reports by Georgetown citizens of brawling among the annoyed boatmen as they struggled to achieve quick access to the coal wharves led to the board’s decision in April 1866 to invest the harbor master “with police authority to enable him more effectually to discharge the duties of his office.”

By 1871 the problem had become serious. Frequently there was a line of 60 to 80 boats along the canal bank and occasionally the string of loaded boats stretched from one half to one mile in length. As the boatmen jostled for position, some barges ran aground causing delays to the other boats.

In their frustration, many “canallers” disregarded the company regulations and began lining up two, three, and four abreast in an effort to get closer to the wharves.

Some of the more contentious boatmen attempted to get to the wharves out of turn, and when they were refused service they would moor their barges next to the unloading vessels, thereby causing jams and confusion. Two of the most flagrant examples of such practices were cases where a Maryland Coal Company boat obstructed traffic on the canal for six hours while “lying double” and another barge owned by the same company that blocked the navigation for twelve hours after trying to get ahead of eighteen boats in line at the Welch Wharf.

The board soon initiated a series of steps to relieve the congestion and to restore order, regularity, and authority in the control and movements of boats on the Georgetown level. As the harbormaster was ill equipped to control the growing problem by himself, the directors authorized the employment of an assistant.

New regulations were enacted which were strictly enforced, and a contract was let to build the Georgetown Incline Plane.

3. Reckless Navigation Practices

There were numerous instances where the reckless navigation practices of the boatmen led to accidents that caused damage both to the barges and canal structures. At times boat races were held up and down the canal–the fastest–known time for a light boat from Georgetown to Cumberland was 62 hours set by Raleigh Bender of Sharpsburg while the best-known time for a loaded boat from Cumberland to Williamsport was 35 hours set by Dent Shupp of the latter town with 128 tons of coal. To set such records the boatmen walked along the towpath feeding the mules handfuls of hay while boating and giving them feed and water while passing through a lock.

In their haste to gain time in navigation, the captain, often ignored the company regulations for passing. Hence a number of boat collisions occurred, one of the most notable involving a freight boat and a packet in July 1855. As a result of the accident, the passenger vessel was sunk and the freight boat’s captain received a stiff fine.
 

Conococheague breach, Water Pouring Over Side
Photo Credit: Chesapeake and Ohio Canal National Historical Park

The reckless maneuvering of the boatmen and their lack of concern for canal property was manifested in other ways. Over the years Aqueduct No. 3 was the site of numerous accidents as a result of careless boatmen who refused to slacken their speed to negotiate the sharp bend immediately upstream. After a number of accidents in which boats struck and damaged the sidewalls of the aqueduct, the board in March 1870 issued an order that all barges were to slack their speed at least fifty yards from the approaches of the structure. The order was printed on handbills for distribution, and a watchman was stationed at the aqueduct to see that the boatmen complied with the directive.

One of the most frequent results of the careless practices of the boatmen was the damage done to the lock gates. When the “canallers” were in a hurry, they often failed to slacken their speed sufficiently as they approached a lock. At other times, the impatient boatmen attempted to “lock through” without waiting for the service of the lock tenders. Such practices led to the numerous incidents in which the boats would strike and break the gates, thereby interrupting navigation for as much as a day until a new gate was put in.

During one 4-year period from 1877 to 1880 there were nine occasions where boatmen were fined for running into or breaking lock gates.

The negligent navigation practices of the boatmen sometimes caused greater damage to their vessels than to the canal structures. In one case, the Loretto struck the upper abutment of the Lock No. 15 and broke a hole in its side about one foot square. The boat sank, causing a 24-hour suspension of the navigation.

Many of the boating accidents were attributable to the intoxication of the “canallers.” One bizarre incident occurred in June 1873 when the American Coal Company boat Henry C. Flagg struck the gates of Lock No. 74 with such force that all four were knocked out and the vessel sank in the lock chamber, thus disrupting navigation for 48 hours. An investigation of the incident revealed that the boat had left Cumberland on the charge of two black hands, as its captain, Mr. Mulligan, was on a drunken spree in Shantytown. When the boat arrived at Lock No. 75, the lock keeper demanded a waybill, which the crew did not possess. When the hands agreed to wait until the captain arrived with the document, the tender noticed that the boat was filling with water because of several leaks. Since the hands did not have a pump, the keeper fearing the boat would sink ordered them to pull on to the short level below the lock. Soon the intoxicated captain arrived with the waybill and, disregarded the tender’s entreaty to pump out the boat, ordered his hands to get the barge moving. They dutifully pulled the boat alongside the F. C. Young, which was about to enter Lock No. 74, thereby creating a jam in the mouth of the lock. While Captain Mulligan went to a nearby store, his crew borrowed a pump and commenced to extract the water from the boat. After the crew of the F. C. Young maneuvered their boat back to loosen the jam, the crew of the Henry C. Flagg pulled their boat into the lock. No effort was made to snub the boat; thus it struck the lower lock gates and knocked them out, the upper gates slammed shut and broke, letting water from the upper level run over the boat and causing it to sink.

Many mules were also lost as a result of the negligent practices of the boatmen. One such example occurred near the brickyard on the Logwall Level in May 1873. As two boatmen were passing each other, the driver of one of the mule teams urged his animals on with a series of violent gestures. The driver theatrics frightened the team of the other boat, causing the two mules to jump over a high embankment. One of the mules was killed and the other was injured.
 

4. Incidents of Physical Violence

As the lock tenders and the boatmen came into frequent contact, there were numerous instances of fighting between the two groups. Because both the lock men and the “canallers” were independent, rough and ready individuals, the initiative for the incidents of physical violence generally appears to have been taken by the latter. At the same time, it is clear that the lock tenders were often quick tempered and eager to respond to any provocative challenge flung at them.

One of the most celebrated incidents occurred at Lock No. 75 in July 1874. The quarrel commenced when the Okonoka was “locking through” early one morning. The towline of the boat caught on the lock railing and tore it loose. Furthermore Captain John Byroad insisted on scrubbing the sides of his boat with a broom while still in the lock. As another boat was waiting, John M. Bloss, the tender, ordered him to pull the barge out of the lock. Byroad refused where upon one of Bloss’ sons opened the berm gate. The gate’s beam pinned one of Byroad’s sons against the side of the boat where he was scrubbing. An argument and fisticuffs resulted in which one of Bloss’ sons was knocked off the boat by the captain’s wife. After a flurry of rock throwing between the boys of the boatmen and the lock tender, one of the latter’s sons injured a son of the former with a club. When the tender’s boys were chased to the lock house, they returned with a revolver and double-barreled shotgun both of which misfired when they tried to use them. As the boat continued on its journey, the tender followed it all the way to Cumberland on horseback, brandishing a club and threatening that he would ‘settle up the damage Old Bitch.”

At times the mere threat of violence by the boatmen so intimidated the lock tenders that they were unable to fulfill their duties. An example of this situation took place when the lock keepers were ordered to enforce the prohibition against Sunday navigation in the late 1860s and early 1870s. When the tenders attempted to prevent some boats from passing through the locks on the Sabbath, the boatmen threatened to fight any individuals who got in their way and proceeded up the canal busting the padlocks on the lock gates as they went. When some of the lock tenders attempted to stop the boatmen, violence erupted and reports of rioting and “depredations” spread along the line. The boatmen quickly gained the upper hand in the struggle, and the company soon gave up its attempts to enforce a “Sunday Law.”
 

5. Quality of the Boats

Many of the boatmen continued to be reluctant to meet even the minimum requirements of the regulations regarding the quality of the boats operating on the canal. There were numerous complaints of leaky scows, iron-shod boats, and sunken wrecks obstructing navigation. From 1855 to 1858 some 34 barges were broken or sunk as a result of either poor construction or inattention to periodic maintenance work.
 

Many Boats on the Canal
Photo Credit: Chesapeake and Ohio Canal

While the quality of the canal boats tended to improve with the growth of trade in the post-Civil War era, there were still reports of boats sinking because of their “bad condition.”

One of the more bizarre stories in this regard was that of a boat which started sinking at Cumberland when it was loaded. The crew pumped the water out and began the trip to Georgetown, all the while pumping to keep the vessel afloat. The barge finally sank just above Lock No. 5, impeding the flow of traffic for eleven hours.

Some of the captains insisted on putting “sand streaks” along the sides of their boats in violation of the company rules, thereby causing them to get stuck in the lock chambers for more than an hour.

The problems caused by boats unfit for navigation became a critical issue by 1872 since the board was anxious to maintain an efficiently operating waterway to accommodate the expanding trade. Accordingly, a committee was appointed in that year to re-register all the vessels on the canal. At the time of registration, the vessels were to be examined to see that their dimensions and state of repair conformed to company regulations. Those boats that were deemed unseaworthy were to have their applications for registration certificates rejected.

Despite these efforts the canal faced increasing problems with leaky and sunken boats during the remaining years of its independent existence. Among the many incidents of this kind was the sinking of the Lezer Ragen at Lock No. 15 in July 1876. Leaking badly before it left Cumberland, the vessel was kept afloat by its crew until it ran into the abutments of several locks below Great Falls. As it proceeded out of the chamber of Lock No. 15, the boat sank and its bow settled down on some rocks, at the mouth of the lock, cutting a large hole in its bottom.

Similar stories abound of unseaworthy vessels throughout the period including that of the Bertha M. Young. As the boat was leaking badly, its crew convinced the steamer Scrivenes that was passing by, to tow it while they pumped the water out. When it became apparent that the pumping efforts were futile, the boat was allowed to sink one night on level no. 36 and abandoned, resulting in a delay of 36 hours to canal navigation.

During the four-year period from 1877 to 1880 the company issued twenty citations for sunken boats or vessels that required the aid of canal hands to pump water in an effort to prevent their sinking.
 

6. Attempts to Defraud the Canal Company of Tolls

At times the rebellious boatmen attempted to earn higher profits by attempting to defraud the company of its tolls. This was done most often when the boats were carrying a small cargo which could be hidden under the hatches and which did not weigh the boat down to a great extent. In May 1873 the B. L. Slack left Georgetown with 225 sacks of salt hidden under its hatches, although its waybill listed it as an empty boat. It was not until the barge reached Harpers Ferry that a company agent discovered the scheme on a tip from the mule driver that the captain was attempting to avoid the payment of $22.50 in tolls.

There were numerous other instances in which captains made an effort to conceal a portion of their cargoes from the eyes of the company collectors.
 

 

Racial Discrimination Against African American Boat Masters

An African American boy is shown leading a mule along the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal
NPS/ Harpers Ferry Center

Although African Americans had served as deck hands on canal boats since the canal had been opened to navigation, the issue of African Americans as boat captains did not arise until 1856. Apparently, several African Americans either attempted to purchase boats or were hired by the owners of large fleets of vessels to be captains of several barges in that year.

Upon the complaint of some white boatmen and local residents along the waterway, the directors requested the legal opinion of the company counsel, W. S. Cox as to the “competency of the Board to limit or prohibit the employment of free Negroes or slaves upon the canal as masters of boats.” In his report on November 7, Cox responded that according to his understanding of Maryland statute law there were no applicable acts relative to the question of African Americans as masters of boats. Accordingly, the board approved a measure on December 10 requiring that all boats navigating the canal after January 1, 1857, have “at least one white person above the age of 18 years, who shall act as master.” Although a formal declaration by the board abrogating the racial ban against African American barge masters could not be found, there was some relaxation of the policy in the post-Civil War Era. Undoubtedly, the change was a direct result of the outcome of the national conflict and the subsequent adoption of the thirteenth and fourteenth amendments to the Constitution. However, it is interesting to note that no African Americans were enrolled as barge captains on the company boat registers until January 1878, 1st. In that year, four African Americans were listed in that category as follows:

CAPTAIN	BOAT NAME	BOAT OWNER	EMPLOYER
Louis Roberson	Viola H. Weir	John T. Dixon	New Central Coal
Wilson Middleton	Dr. F. N. Davis	T. H. Davis	New Central Coal
Kirk Fields	John W. Carder	Frank Darkey	Hampshire Coal
J. M. Johnson	John Sammon	Michael Ouigley	Maryland Coal

 

Typical Experiences in the Lives of the Canallers

The following narrative offers some typical features of the lives of the “canallers.” The material is based primarily on three sources: Walter S. Sanderlin, The Great National Project: A History of the Chesapeake & Ohio Canal (Baltimore, 1946), pp. 186–188; Baltimore Evening Sun, August 9–13, 1937; and Ella E. Clark and Thomas F. Hahn, eds., Life On the Chesapeake & Ohio Canal, 1859 (York, 1975), pp. 1–48. As these sources describe the canal experiences of the boatmen from the late 1850s to the early 1900s, the following data should be considered as representative only of that period. Read an interview of two men share their childhood experience on the C&O Canal.

Preparations for the Journey from Cumberland to Georgetown

Canal Boats in Cumberland, MD
Photo Credit: Chesapeake and Ohio Canal National Historical Park

In preparing for a journey down the 185-mile length of the canal, the boatman needed to obtain feed and provisions for his family and mules. Hay and feed for the mules was purchased at various establishments across from the coat loading wharves at the basin in Cumberland, the most popular store being Coulehan’s on Wineow Street. Groceries were procured up Wineow Street at Dennis Murphy’s or John McGrinnis’ or at Coulehan’s. The usual staples taken along on a trip consisted of flour, sugar, coffee, smoked meat, and dry salt belly. As the sale of liquor was outlawed along the canal, alcoholic beverages also were purchased at the stores along the canal basin or at the numerous saloons, which operated in Shantytown around and behind the boatyards. Among the most popular drinking establishments that the boatmen frequented while waiting for a load of coal (or upon reaching Cumberland after a long journey up the canal) were Old Aunt Susan Jones’ Rising Sun Saloon, Mis’ Palmer’s Red Tin Shanty, and the bars owned by George Burns, Ed Cooney, Gus Hensel, Dora Ogle, and Cherry Clark. If the captain’s family was not large enough to provide the needed help on the boat, he made arrangements to hire a deck hand or two.

The Journey Down the Canal Begins

Paw Paw Tunnel
Photo Credit: Chesapeake and Ohio Canal National Historical Park

When all preparations were made, the captain backed his boat up to the coal chutes at the loading basin. The coal was dumped out of the railroad cars on a trestle over the chutes and passed down the chutes into the holds of the barge. After having received a waybill from the canal company collector, the boat commenced its run down the canal. A normal trip to Georgetown took about five 18–hour days. Although some boats ran all night, most tied up in groups of six or seven between 10 p.m. and 4 a.m.

The usual schedule of work both for the mules and the people was six hours of work and six hours of rest. Members of the captain’s family generally slept in the cabin if there was room. Hired hands or older members of large families slept in the hay house, which had bunks on one side and feed on the other. Some boatmen took Sunday off to attend church services in the small towns along the canal, but most of the “canallers,” who generally appeared to be an irreverent and irreligious lot, boated seven days a week if loads were available.

The Procurement of Food and Provisions on the Journey

Most everything that was needed in the way of groceries or feed could be purchased along the canal. There were numerous stores at many of the locks and in the villages in the vicinity of the canal that catered to the needs of the boatmen. In addition, most of the lock tenders raised milk cows, chickens, and gardens, the surplus of which was sold to the “canallers.” Some of the boatmen, however, carried some chickens and one or two pigs on their boats to cut their expenses. The boatmen’s diet was supplemented with fish taken from the canal.

The Role of Women on the Boats

A Woman Steers a Boat on the Canal
Photo Credit: Chesapeake and Ohio Canal National Historical Park

The duties of women on the canal boats included cooking, child rearing, steering, washing, and sewing. It was often the woman’s duty to help steer the boat and feed the mules. The cooking was done on the cabin stove, which was usually heated with burned corncobs from the stable. Some of the boats had more modern stoves, known as Star Light coal burners, made with coke tin by the Cumberland firm of William Moorehead and Lew Metz. Two of the most popular dishes among the boatmen were turtle soup made from turtles caught in the canal and blackberry pie made from berries that grew wild along the towpath. The women had their babies on the boats; if possible, the boat would stop at a town where services of a midwife could be obtained. Then the journey was resumed the following day with the man handling most of the cooking chores unless he had older children. The washing of clothes and bathing of children often was done at the side of the canal in the moonlight after the boat had tied up for the night. The sewing or mending of clothes and awnings for the barge frequently was done while the woman leaned against the “stick” that guided the boat’s rudder. If the husband died, the widow often ran the boat herself, several such examples being Mis’ Ziegler, Nancy McCoy, and Clara Dick.

The Children on the Boats

Black and white historical photo of a child secured to the canal boat using rope tied around her waist.
Photo Credit: Chesapeake and Ohio Canal National Historical Park

To prevent the little children from falling into the canal, there was usually a ringbolt in the cabin roof. The smallest children were buckled into a leather or rope harness and tied fast with a line to the ringbolt. By the age of six, most children were put to work driving the mules. Most captains got their start on the canal in that manner. The mules were driven with a four-strand plaited whip by the child walking along beside them on the towpath. The children were permitted frequently to ride the lead mule to protect their feet and to prevent them from tiring. The “canallers” children generally had little opportunity for schooling. Many times a teen-age boy was hired as a deck hand, a job for which he seldom received more than $10 per month.

Approaching a Lock

When a boat approached a lock, the steersman got out his boat horn, generally a tin bugle, and blew the three notes of “Red Rover.” Supposedly the boat horn was saying “Lock Ready! Lock Ready!” If there was no horn available, the steersman or driver, whoever had the loudest voice, would yell: “yea-a-a-a-a-a-a lock!” or “Hey-y-y-y-y-y lock!” Some boatmen used conch shells to announce their approach. During the day, the lock tender often saw the boat before he heard the call, but at night he had to be awakened.

The Mules

Preparing the Mules
Photo Credit: Chesapeake and Ohio Canal National Historical Park

The mules, many of which came from Kentucky, were broken in by hitching them to logs. New mules, or “Greenies,” often sat down and refused to move. This problem was solved by hitching several trained mules to the “sitdowners” and dragging it along until standing up was more comfortable than sitting down. The mules were hard on their shoes, and, thus, they were reshod on an average of once a month. Learn more about how mules are cared for.

Mules were generally purchased when they were 2 ½ years old. As a rule, they lasted some 15 years before they became too old and infirm to be of value. Each boatman usually kept two teams of two or three mules each with his barge. Good experienced mules often did not require a driver. They slacked off automatically by instinct when a boatman was snubbing a boat into a lock and once through a lock they took off on the cue of the steersman’s whistle. If a boatman wished to change his teams, the mules reacted to verbal commands. Generally, the mules were changed while the boat was passing through a lock–a feat that required fast work. Learn more about mule power

A short fallboard, much like a cleated gangplank, was thrown over the side of the boat when the water in the lock chamber was at its highest level, and a fresh team from the stable in the bow was herded out quickly. Reckless boatmen would change teams while the boat was moving by jumping a fresh team into the canal and swimming them to shore, while the gangplank was hurriedly thrown down on the towpath and the old team rushed on to the boat. This latter practice led to the drowning of many mules.

Dogs on the Canal

A good dog was a great help with the mules and was sometimes used to drive them. Sam Poffenberger had a bulldog named “Rough” who could swim across the canal basin at Cumberland with a towline around his neck. This was a great help when the mules and boats were separated on opposite sides of the basin

Wintering Along the Canal

When the canal got icy, a canal company scow, loaded with pig iron, started up the waterway from Georgetown to serve as an icebreaker. Homeward-bound boats, all light and heading for winter quarters, formed a procession behind the ice breaker. As many as 40 mules from the boats in the procession would be hooked to the icebreaker’s towline. The animals would haul the boat up on the ice and her weight would break a channel through which the boats would pass. The entire convoy would help pump water out of a barge if the ice broke a hole in it. The members of the procession also would hack at the ice with their axes if necessary. If a boat was frozen solid, the captain and crew closed it up and rode the mules home.

The boatmen tied up their boats as close to their homes as possible. The most popular communities where the boatmen spent the winter months were Monocacy Basin, Point of Rocks, Brunswick, Sharpsburg Landing, Williamsport, Hancock, and Cumberland. Of these communities, Sharpsburg was considered the greatest producer of boatmen over the years. A few boatmen lived on their boats year-round, and a few maintained homes where their families lived throughout the year.

In the early spring, the “canallers” would return to their boats. Before resuming navigation in the new season, they would house clean the barges, make necessary repairs, and give the vessels a fresh coat of paint. Once that work was done, the awning was spread over a portion of the deck and operations were commenced.