This kind of fits with our yearlong look at all things canals, I hope. In past articles, I have written about how the route of the Erie Canal was changed in the village of Port Byron in 1857/58 during the canal enlargement of 1836-1862. For the village businesses that lined the canal, it was much like taking away the main street on which they had built their trade. The expected outcome was that businesses would pick up and move to the new route, but this never really occurred. Instead, today Green Street is lined with homes that have deep lots that reach back to the route of the old canal. The current alignment of streets, notably Utica and Rochester Streets, in the village still reflects the route of the first canal and how the village grew around it.

It should not be a surprise that any time that the state did anything with the canal, there were people who would claim some type of damage and press their claims in court. And so when the state moved the route of the canal, many folks sought to get their little bit of the action. Land was taken, land was abandoned, water was taken from the creek, drainage patterns shifted and so fourth. As each lawsuit was heard and either awarded or denied, a record was kept. If the damage had something to do with land, a record was made in the deed books, and these records offer a another source of information to the family genealogist.

At one time, a deed search meant a trip to the County Clerks office, but now this can all be done online through the Family Search website. The new AI full text search tool allows anyone to enter a word or phrase and search all the documents available in the record set. I pulled up the 1854 award to the family of Jeremiah B. King who had died in 1836 leaving his home to his wife Hannah. To settle the matter the state had to list all the heirs by name and a description of the land, and here we see that the King’s had a tavern, market and bakery next to the original lock, which we call Lock 60. However, as the canal was enlarged and moved, it needed King’s land for the new Lock 52, and all what King had built had to be taken down or moved. And since one of the buildings was a bakery, the oven had to be rebuilt. For all this the state awarded $3806.25, which was a lot of money. This one award tells us a lot about early Port Byron.

In 1857, both Ira Peck and James Dixon, who were both neighbors and relatives, sued the state for damages to their farms east of Port Byron. The land might be better known today as being a somewhat infamous junkyard located between Rt 31 and the canal, but in 1852 the land was taken so that the new canal could be straightened and lowered. No buildings were taken, but the state awarded Peck and Dixon almost $2000 for the taking of land and such disturbances caused by the construction. In many of the claims the clerk includes a small drawing or survey map of the land and has “Explanatory Remarks.” These maps often show neighbors and other useful features. These awards can be for as little as a few feet or for acres of land. No one seems to have passed up the opportunity to sue the state. As one might expect, this source of “free money” attracted some lawyers who wanted a share and for years after the enlargement was completed, damage suits continued to be filed. In 1860 these awards totaled over $580,000.

And, as with most things with the canals, it gets messy in the end. However messy, the records that were generated should not be overlooked by family researchers. Search for canal damage awards in Google Books, visit the Samuel Center in Port Byron to view the books that contain the awards, and be sure to check those deeds!

Our Genealogy Gatherings will resume in September, and I was excited to see that the Port Byron Library now has a new large flat screen for our (and everyone’s) use.