Line Development 137 approximated that level of risk.4 An alternative pattern of development was described by Hunter as typical of lines on the Ohio-Mississippi system. There, lines were alliances of independent entrepreneurs working either on a co-operative basis or by formal written agreements between several boats to run in formation, and possibly set uniform rates, jointly advertise or even in some cases pool profits. However, according to Hunter, these arrangements rarely lasted for long, sometimes not even a full season. There was little incentive for proprietors to stay "in line" when they as individuals were losing money, or when breakdowns delayed their departure until it conflicted with the next in line. This situation changed after the Civil War as incorporated firms came to dominate the Ohio- Mississippi trades as well.5 What follows is a regional case study of the passenger steamboat trade between the foot of practical navigation on the upper St Lawrence, along the north shore of Lake Ontario to an upper terminus which shifted over the years from Niagara to Toronto and then on to Hamilton. The number of lines working this route varied over the years from one to three, sometimes splitting the service at Kingston and occasionally competing with each other. However, even when the trade was divided, a similar organizational pattern was established on the upper and lower routes. It is hoped that the experience of these lines, over a 46 year period may prove a useful starting point for a comparative analysis of line development on the shorter, coastal and inland lake and river steamboat trades. 4 R.C.B. Risk, "The Nineteenth-Century Foundations of the Business Corporation in Ontario," University of Toronto Law Journal 23 (1973),270-2; Davies, 185. 5 Hunter, Steamboats on Western Rivers, esp. 321-35.