Walhonding Canal - Railroad Controversy

Railroad Controversy

Traffic began to slow as other modes of transportation began to improve and need for the canal dwindled. In 1889, the Pennsylvania Company organized the Walhonding Valley Railroad that would follow the route of the canal from Coshocton to Loudonville. The Walhonding Valley Railroad was soon consolidated with the Northwestern Ohio Railroad, which formed the Toledo, Walhonding Valley and Ohio Railroad. The railroad was completed four years after the organization of the Walhonding Valley Railroad and it used some canal property on its right-of-way as it built the railroad, an action which led to a legal dispute.

Allegedly, the Pennsylvania Company had not obtained a warrant from the state in the early 1890s to use the abandoned canal property, though the railroad's attorneys stated that the Ohio Board of Public Works had given them a permit. No record of such a permit existed in the board's transactions, however. The Ohio Canal Commission and a legislative committee both investigated the proceedings in late 1892 and early 1893 and concluded that the railroad was occupying the state's canal property without permission. In the spring of 1893, the Ohio Legislature finally passed a resolution that directed the Ohio Attorney General, Republican John K. Richards, to bring proceedings in ouster against the Walhonding Railroad Company. The state's Canal Commission adopted a similar resolution in March 1893, asking Richards to bring suit in this case. An article in The New York Times reported that as of September 3, 1893, the railroad had been occupying the state's canal property for more than a year and it had been six months without an action on the part of Attorney General Richards or the Republican-controlled Board of Public Works. The New York Times article used this example as a means to illustrate how the author believed Republican control of the state government of Ohio was leading to corruption and destruction of public works.

A suit was finally brought against the railroad company (by now the Toledo, Walhonding Valley and Ohio Railroad) by Attorney General Richards and was taken to the Supreme Court of Ohio. In order to settle the dispute, the legislature stepped in and passed an act (House Bill number 560) on May 14, 1894 that affirmed an agreement between the railroad and the canal commission. In the agreement, the railroad received the perpetual right to maintain its existing right-of-way on the berme bank of the canal and existing bridges over the canal for the sum of $5,000 in rents and tolls to the state. In return for this agreement, the state was allowed to at any time request the railroad move its right-of-way or raise the height of its bridges over the canals to the standard height of 10 feet (3.0 m) to allow for proper canal traffic.