Historic Pelham

Presenting the rich history of Pelham, NY in Westchester County: current historical research, descriptions of how to research Pelham history online and genealogy discussions of Pelham families.

Friday, October 14, 2016

Early History of Pelham's Ancient Shore Road, Long an Important Pelham Thoroughfare Along Long Island Sound


Today there is a very short stretch of roadway at the end of Pelhamdale Avenue parallel to Long Island Sound that runs a few hundred yards within Pelham Manor known as Shore Road.  Shore Road continues into Pelham Bay Park, once part of the Town of Pelham, to Pelham Bridge and beyond.  The roadway is ancient.  Indeed, much of it is prehistoric.  This is the story of its early history.

Pelham Portion of Shore Road Began as Native American Trail

The Pelham portion of Shore Road (including that portion within Pelham Bay Park, once part of Pelham), began as an Indian trail.  A number of scholars have traced the origins of this ancient Native pathway.  You must use your imagination a little to understand how this trail began.  

In long ago times, if a Native were making his or her way from the mainland above Manhattan trying to proceed on the mainland parallel to Long Island Sound, that Native would reach the mouth of today's Hutchinson River at Eastchester Bay which could not be crossed.  The Native would have had to continue on the mainland along today's Hutchinson River on the side opposite from Long Island Sound all the way upriver to the first shallow location where it might be waded across at low tide.  That location is the place where the original Old Boston Post Road crossed the Hutchinson River (where today's Colonial Avenue crosses the Hutchinson River).  

In those days, Natives would ford the river at that spot.  From there they could proceed toward Long Island Sound.  The pathway followed today's Colonial Avenue a few hundred feet to the roadway known today as Wolfs Lane.  The Indian pathway then followed today's Wolfs Lane through today's Village of Pelham Manor, roughly parallel to the Hutchinson River until it reached a little jog and proceeded along today's Split Rock Road.  Split Rock Road was an important part of the ancient pathway.

The Native footpath followed today's Split Rock Road across the New York City Boundary, continuing across today's New England Thruway into today's Pelham Bay and Split Rock Golf Course Property, headed toward today's Shore Road.  The Split Rock Road portion of the pathway, followed by a Native trying to get to Long Island Sound, reached a junction with a pathway parallel to the Sound (today's Shore Road) at about the spot known today as the driveway entrance to the clubhouse for the Pelham Bay and Split Rock Golf Course complex.  At that junction, of course, a Native could turn left or right (that is, could turn north or south) on what we know today as Shore Road.  If the Native turned left (north), travel would proceed toward today's Pelham Manor border with New Rochelle beyond.  If the Native turned right (south), travel would proceed toward today's Rodman's Neck (also known as Pelham Neck) and Pelham Bridge.

Why Was the Native American Trail Known Today as Shore Road There?

Why was the Native American trail that we know today as Shore Road there in the first place?  First and foremost, of course, it allowed travel along the edge of Long Island Sound without traveling by dugout canoe in waters that could be icy or treacherous during storms.  It is also evident that the path connected a number of Native American villages, encampments, and gathering places along Long Island Sound waters in the area.  

For example, a known Native American village once stood along today’s Shore Road not far from the driveway entrance to today’s Bartow-Pell Mansion. There also is evidence to the north of that location of a major encampment or village near Roosevelt’s Brook.  Roosevelt's Brook is the area we all know where today's Shore Road dips (and, thus, frequently floods) shortly after one leaves Pelham Manor traveling into Pelham Bay Park.  The encampment or village was in the area of Pelham Bay Park immediately adjacent to the Pelham Manor boundary at Shore Road. This is the "northern section" of Pelham's Shore Road near Christ Church and the New Rochelle border.  

Additionally, Native American burials have been excavated at the other end (the southern end) of today's Shore Road near and on Pelham Neck.  Furthermore, 17th century documents make clear that Native Americans planted corn in that area. 

Moreover, between the northern end and the southern end, shell middens (indicative of Native occupation) may still be found on the shoreline near Bartow-Pell and have been identified along the shoreline up and down Shore Road in Pelham Bay Park. This author has explored such shell middens over the years.  

With such Native occupation well-evidenced up and down Shore Road, it should come as no surprise that there was a pathway parallel to the waters of Long Island Sound on the mainland that ran between, and connected, all these locations.  That pathway is known today as Pelham's "Shore Road."

The Native American Footpath Grew Into a Rough Roadway During Colonial Days

The pathway along Shore Road seems to have grown into an unpaved rural roadway during colonial days. There is evidence, for example, that Pelham Founder Thomas Pell’s nephew and principal legatee, John Pell, built a home along the roadway in the early 1670s. See Mon., Nov. 03, 2014:  More on the 17th Century Location of the Manor Home of John Pell of the Manor of Pelham. With no bridge over Eastchester Bay at the time, to proceed to New York City by land, John Pell would have had to leave his home near today's Bartow-Pell Mansion Museum, proceed north on the rough roadway to its juncture with what became known as Split Rock Road and proceed up that rough roadway onto what is known today as Wolfs Lane until reaching the wading ford where the Hutchinson River was shallow enough to cross (where today’s Colonial Avenue crosses the waterway) and then proceed on the old Boston Post Road toward New York City.

Revolutionary War Maps Clearly Show Shore Road

Early colonial maps prepared during the Revolutionary War clearly show what we know today as Shore Road.  One example is a map prepared by British engineer Charles Blaskowitz in 1776 entitled "A survey of Frog's Neck and the rout[e] of the British Army to the 24th of October 1776, under the command of His Excellency the Honorable William Howe, General and Commander in Chief of His Majesty's forces, &ca, &ca, &ca."  A detail from that map appears immediately below, followed by a brief discussion.



Detail from 1776 Blaskowitz Map Showing Today's Shore
Road in the Upper Right Quadrant Proceeding Off the
Map Toward New Rochelle.  The Roadway that Became
Split Rock Road Can Be Seen Branching Off the Roadway.
Source:  Blaskowitz, Charles, A Survey of Frog's Neck and
Majesty's Forces, &ca, &ca, &ca. (1776) (Library of Congress
Geography and Map Division, Call No. G3802.T57S3 1776 .B5).
NOTE:  Click on Image to Enlarge.

Shore Road may be seen in the upper right quadrant of the Blaskowitz Map detail above.  It disappears off the page headed toward New Rochelle as the map ends at that spot.  When the road reaches the upper portion of Pelham Neck (today's Rodman's Neck), it dips downward, following what is known today as Orchard Beach Road headed toward Eastchester Bay.  Before the roadway reaches the upper portion of Pelham Neck on the map, the roadway once known as Split Rock Road may clearly be seen branching off of Shore Road.

The Roadway Becomes More Important with Construction of the First Pelham Bridge

True development of a major roadway parallel to Long Island Sound seems to have been prompted principally by early efforts to build the Pelham Bridge over the Hutchinson River where it flows into Eastchester Bay.  Such a bridge was built by early 1815 but, within months, was destroyed by an “extraordinary storm and flood.” [Citation to Historic Pelham Blog article.] There were, however, proposals to rebuild the bridge by August 1, 1817. Though the proposals do not seem to have come to fruition, it was about this time that a company named the “Westchester and Pelham Turnpike Road Company,” was incorporated on April 5, 1817. According to one historian, “The Shore Road was made into a real road by the Westchester and Pelham Turnpike Co., incorporated April 5, 1817.” Barr, p. 51.

Lockwood Barr may have overstated the point a little.  It appears that the Westchester and Pelham Turnpike Road Company was incorporated to build a road from the causeway at the Village of Westchester (near today's Westchester Square in the Bronx) to the Pelham Bridge -- not beyond the Pelham Bridge onto today's Shore Road between the bridge and the Pelham Manor border.  In any event, it is clear that construction of the road between the Village of Westchester and Pelham Bridge connected Pelham to what were then more populated portions of lower Westchester County, making the colonial roadway known today as Shore Road in Pelham Bay Park all the more important.  

The roadway built by the Westchester and Pelham Turnpike Road Company came to be known as the "Westchester Turnpike."  Occasionally, portions of today's Shore Road between Pelham Bridge and the Pelham Manor border were also referred to as Westchester Turnpike.  See, e.g., SUPREME COURT -- John Hunter, Plaintiff vs. Robert R. Hunter, Deforciant [Legal Notice], New-York Evening Post, Nov. 19, 1818, p. 3, col. 2 (referencing "the highway leading from the Westchester turnpike road in Pelham to Rodman's Neck, (so called)").  

Construction of New Pelham Bridge in 1834 Further Increased the Importance of Shore Road

Clearly, by 1834, Pelham citizens were clamoring for an improved bridge connection between Throggs Neck and Pelham over the Hutchinson River at Eastchester Bay.  Pelhamites petitioned the State of New York to authorize George Rapelye of Pelham to build a new bridge connecting the Westchester Turnpike leading to the Village of Westchester with Shore Road in the Town of Pelham.  See Wed., Oct. 12, 2016:  More on the Early History of Pelham Bridge Including Ownership of the Bridge Between 1834 and 1860.  

Once that new Pelham Bridge was completed, Shore Road in Pelham became all the more important and, indeed, began to see increased traffic.  The unpaved roadway grew to be a constant headache for the Town of Pelham.  City Islanders controlled Town Government and maintained tight purse strings when it came to maintaining roadways on the mainland.  Consequently, there are constant references to begrudging appropriations to maintain the roadway that was becoming increasingly busy.

Shore Road Takes the Shape We Know Today

It was not until 1869 that Shore Road took the shape that we know today.  On May 6, 1869, New York enacted a statute authorizing work to begin immediately on a large section of roadway referenced as Eastern Boulevard including today's Shore Road in the Town of Pelham.  According to one newspaper account:

"The people on the Sound and shore from Pelham [to] Morrisania are perfectly jubilant over the idea of having their long neglected district opened by means of one of the most magnificent boulevards in Westchester county.  The line of the road is to commence at Pelham bridge, following and widening the old Pelham road as far as the residence of John Hunter; thence in a southerly direction through the lands of John Farnham and John Van Antwerp to the Arnow homestead, on Willow lane; by and along Willow lane, following the same and widening it to 100 feet, its entire length to Schuylerville, at McGroey's Hotel, on the Fort Schuyler road, then crossing the same and running in a direct line to the southerly side of the Oakland (Ferris!) Nursery, on Westchester creek.  A drawbridge one hundred feet wide is to be built here to cross into Unionport, following Sixth street and widening the same; thence through Unionport and the lands of Francis Larken, Bradish Johnson and R. H. Ludlow, to the southern boulevard at Morrisania, thus making a splendid drive, on a road one hundred feet wide, direct from the new Harlem bridge."  (See full article quoted below.)

With completion of this work, that section of the roadway known today as Shore Road, though still unpaved, looked much like it looks today -- a beautiful drive along Long Island Sound.  

*          *          *          *           *

April 5, 1817:

"CHAP. CLVII.

AN ACT to incorporate the Westchester and Pelham turnpike road company.

Passed April 5, 1817.

Associates.

I.  BE it enacted by the people of the state of New-York, represented in senate and assembly, That Herman Le Roy, Thomas C. Taylor, William Edgar,, and all such other persons as shall associate for the purpose of making a turnpike road, to begin at the causeway leading from the village of Westchester to Throgsneck, at some point east of the bridge over Westchester creek, and to run from thence on the most convenient route to the bridge lately erected over the mouth of Eastchester creek, be and they are hereby created a body corporate and politic, in fact and in name, by the name of "the Westchester and Pelham Turnpike Road Company,' 

Powers.

and by the name shall have continual succession, and be persons capable in law of suing and being sued, pleading and being impleaded, answering and being answered unto, defending and being defended, in all courts and places whatsoever, in all manner of actions, suits, complaints, matters and causes, and by the same name and style shall be in law capable of purchasing, holding and conveying any estate, real or personal, for the use of the said corporation:  Provided, that such estate, as well real as personal, so to be purchased and held, shall be necessary to fulfil [sic] the end and intent of the said corporation.

Shares.  Commissioners to receive subscriptions

II.  And be it further enacted, That the stock of the said company shall consist of one hundred shares, of thirty dollars each; and William Bayard, Thomas C. Taylor and Benjamin W. Rodgers are hereby appointed commissioners to receive subscriptions for the said stock, in the manner directed in and by the act, entitled 'an act relative to turnpike companies,' passed the 13th day of March, 1807.

Tolls.

III.  And be it further enacted, That it shall be lawful for the company hereby incorporated, to exact and receive at the gate or turnpike to be erected on the said road, the following rates of toll, to wit:  for every score of sheep or hogs, six cents; for every score of cattle, horses or mules, twenty cents; for every chair, sulkey, chaise or other two wheel pleasure carriage, with one horse, six cents; for every horse rode, three cents; and for every horse led or driven, two cents; for every stage waggon, chariot, coach, coachee, phaeton or other pleasure carriage, drwn by two horses, twelve and an half cents, and six cents for every additional horse; for every cart or waggon, drawn by one horse, six cents; for every cart or waggon, other than stage waggons, drawn by two horses, mules or oxen, eight cents, and two cents for every additional horse, mule or ox; for every sleigh or sled, if drawn by not ore than two horses, mules or oxen, six cents, and for every additional horse, mule or ox, once cent.

Rights.

IV.  And be it further enacted, That the company hereby incorporated shall have all the rights, privileges and immunities, which are given and granted in and by the aforesaid act relative to turnpike companies, and shall be subject to all the conditions, provisions and restrictions therein contained."

Source:  40th Sess., CHAP. CLVII., An Act to Incorporate the Westchester and Pelham Turnpike Road Company Passed April 5, 1817 in Laws of the State of New-York Passed at the Thirty-Ninth, Fortieth and Forty-First Sessions of the Legislature, Commencing January 1816, and Edning April 1818, Vol. IV, pp. 160-61 (Albany, NY:  Printed for Websters and Skinners, by the Printer to the State, 1818).

July 3, 1817:

"NOTICE is hereby given, that an election of Directors in the Westchester and Pelham Turnpike Road Company will be held at the office of Thomas C. Taylor, situate at No. 41 Robinson-street, in the third ward of the city of New-York, on the first Monday of August next, at the hour of 12 o'clock at noon; at which time and place the subscribers of shares in the said company, are notified to attend accordingly. Dated this 3d day of July, 1817. 

WM. BAYARD,         ) 
B.W. ROGERS,       } Commissioners. 
THOS. C. TAYLOR, ) 

july 3-law4w" 

Source:  NOTICE, Commercial Advertiser, Jul. 3, 1817, p. 3. The same notice also appeared on July 16, July 17 and July 22. See NOTICE, Commercial Advertiser, Jul. 16, 1817, p. 4; NOTICE, Commercial Advertiser, Jul. 17, 1817, p. 4; NOTICE, Commercial Advertiser, Jul. 22, 1817, p. 4.

"In 1817, Hermann Le Roy, Thomas C. Taylor, William Edgar and their associates were incorporated as a turnpike company to make a turnpike road beginning at the causeway leading from the village of Westchester, at some point on the east side of the bridge over Westchester Creek, and to run from thence in the most convenient route to the bridge lately erected over the mouth of East Chester Creek and were to be known as the 'Westchester and Pelham Turnpike Road Company.'

The Boulevard running from Pelham Bridge to the bridge south of Westchester village causeway is of recent origin, but the road which runs from Westchester village to the Bronx at the south end of the village of West Farms was originally known as the Westchester turnpike.  The road known now as the East Chester road, extending from the Bleach to the East Chester line, and sometimes called the Boston road, is a continuation of the Coles road mentioned in the chapters on West Farms and Morrisania."

Source:  Scharf, J. Thomas, History of Westchester County, New York Including Morrisania, Kings Bridge and West Farms which Have Been Annexed to New York City, Vol. 1, Part 2, p. 815 (Philadelphia, PA:  L. E. Preston & Co., 1886).  

May 8, 1869:

"THE EASTERN BOULEVARD.
-----

The people on the Sound and shore from Pelham [to] Morrisania are perfectly jubilant over the idea of having their long neglected district opened by means of one of the most magnificent boulevards in Westchester county.  The line of the road is to commence at Pelham bridge, following and widening the old Pelham road as far as the residence of John Hunter; thence in a southerly direction through the lands of John Farnham and John Van Antwerp to the Arnow homestead, on Willow lane; by and along Willow lane, following the same and widening it to 100 feet, its entire length to Schuylerville, at McGroey's Hotel, on the Fort Schuyler road, then crossing the same and running in a direct line to the southerly side of the Oakland (Ferris!) Nursery, on Westchester creek.  A drawbridge one hundred feet wide is to be built here to cross into Unionport, following Sixth street and widening the same; thence through Unionport and the lands of Francis Larken, Bradish Johnson and R. H. Ludlow, to the southern boulevard at Morrisania, thus making a splendid drive, on a road one hundred feet wide, direct from the new Harlem bridge.  The act passed the Legislature on Thursday, and by the terms of the bill the work is to commence immediately.  The commissioners, Abraham Hatfielld, Thos. Jay Byrne, Wm. Watson, George Cooper and Hugh Lunny, have called a meeting, to be held at the office of Judge Byrnes, in Westchester, on Thursday next, the 13th inst., to organize and appoint officers and take action at once in furthering the work to completion.  The road is to cost $20,000 per mile; and the commissioners are authorized to raise the amount by issuing bonds of the town, payable in equal portions yearly for twenty years.  The work will be finished by the 1st of Septembert next, when a perfect 'belt boulevard' of Westchester county will be completed -- i.e., this boulevard through Unionport connects with the Southern Boulevard at Morrisania, the Southern Boulevard with the Great Central Boulevard at Fordham, it, in turn, running to Yonkers and White Plains.

The rise in value of property already is fabulous on the entire line of the road both at Throg's Neck and Unionport, the demand for lots at the latter place being almost incredulous.  Two hundred per cent would be a low estimate of the advance in real estate since the news first came of the passage of the bill.  Taken in connection with this that the Portchester and Second Avenue Railroad bill, passed a day or two since, received the Governor's signature and became a law, it is not difficult to estimate the sudden importance of landowners or the elation of the masses.  In order to display action in the latter matter the directors have called a meeting for Wednesday next, with a view to not only break ground but to put six squads of laborers to work at once, for they declare it to be their determination to have the cars running through Unionport to New York six months from the first day of June.

And now that facilities for travel to and from the city have at last been opened the people may speedily expect to see Westchester, long noted for its beauty picturesqueness and salubriousness of climate, become one of the most famous and fashionable summer resorts in the State.  Persons doing business 'in the city' have long felt the need of and desired just such a romantic spot as this, where they can remove their families during the hot summer months and enjoy with them the soft, balmy air, good bathing, &c., without the fear of fever and ague, or incurring the mosquito plague."

Source:  THE EASTERN BOULEVARD, The New York Herald, May 8, 1869, p. 10, col. 2.

“In a region possessing such an extent of waterfront as Long Island sound and East river, the bay and its tributary inlets, with such excellent water-highways as the Hudson, the Raritan, and the Passaic, it might seem that the easiest and most popular method of travel would have been by canoe. But while the dugout was doubtless a favored means of transit, it had its limitations, by ice and storm, and by exposure to hostile attack. Thus the waterways are found to have been paralleled by paths of great length and common usage; such as the Shore path extending along the north shore of the Sound. . . .” 

Source:  Bolton, Reginald Pelham, “Indian Paths in the Great Metropolis” in Hodge, F.W., ed., Indian Notes and Monographs – A Series of Publications Relating to the American Aborigines, pp. 1 & 21 (NY, NY: Museum of the American Indian Heye Foundation, 1922). 

“Two blocks beyond the crossing of the Hutchinson River [where today’s Colonial Avenue crosses the Hutchinson River], in the village of Pelham Manor, there diverged from the Shore path another trail which led southwardly to Anns hook, or Pelham neck, and thus came back within the boundaries of the metropolis. . . . It became known as, and is still in part called Wolf’s lane, as far as the later or New Boston post-road. Its course on the opposite side of that road was recently traced by William R. Montgomery, of Pelham Manor, by means of the old bowlder fences and line of trees which he found in vacant lots, extending to the Split Rock road (once miscalled Prospect Hill road, but happily renamed), which is the continuation of the line of this old Indian pathway. 

The line of this old trail passes the Split Rock, crossing the brook near the site (22) of Ann Hutchinson’s cabin (pl. xv). [sic] It dips under the New Haven Railroad’s Harlem Branch, just east of which it meets the modern Shore road or parkway. Here it doubtless branched north and south. In the former direction it led to the nearby site (103) of a considerable native station situated close to the entrance gate and driveway to the one-time Bartow estate. . . . A trail appears to have extended farther north along the shore-line of Pelham bay. It doubtless connected with a wading place used by those natives who visited or lived on Hunter island (25), and with those who were resident at a station (24) at Roosevelts brook, which runs into the Sound just below the boundary of the city and Pelham Manor, both of which localities bear abundant evidence of native occupancy. . . .” 

Source;  Bolton, Reginald Pelham, “Indian Paths in the Great Metropolis” in Hodge, F.W., ed., Indian Notes and Monographs – A Series of Publications Relating to the American Aborigines, pp. 123-25 (NY, NY: Museum of the American Indian Heye Foundation, 1922).

“The Shore Road was made into a real road by the Westchester and Pelham Turnpike Co., incorporated April 5, 1817.” 

Source:  Barr, Lockwood Anderson, A Brief, But Most Complete & True Account of the Settlement of the Ancient Town of Pelham Westchester County, State of New York Known One Time Well & Favourably as the Lordshipp & Manour of Pelham Also The Story of the Three Modern Villages Called The Pelhams, p. 51 (The Dietz Press, Inc. 1946). 

“There are several undated maps showing Pelham and New Rochelle--being pages from books of real estate maps. Some of these maps can be dated after 1848 , for they show the main line of the New Haven Railroad, but surveyed before 1873, since they do not show the Harlem Branch Line. These maps show the boundary line clearly. The Shore Road has been widened and shifted since these maps were drawn.” 

Source:  Barr, Lockwood Anderson, A Brief, But Most Complete & True Account of the Settlement of the Ancient Town of Pelham Westchester County, State of New York Known One Time Well & Favourably as the Lordshipp & Manour of Pelham Also The Story of the Three Modern Villages Called The Pelhams, p. 73 (The Dietz Press, Inc. 1946).

“From the tip of Pell's Point--where is now the Causeway to City Island--there was an Indian trail up to the Shore Road. There it connected with the trail skirting the ridge parallel to the Hutchinson River-- later Split Rock Road and Wolf Lane--up to the head of the Hutchinson Valley. When New York City developed Pelham Bay Park, famous old Split Rock Road was dosed and destroyed.” 

Source:  Barr, Lockwood Anderson, A Brief, But Most Complete & True Account of the Settlement of the Ancient Town of Pelham Westchester County, State of New York Known One Time Well & Favourably as the Lordshipp & Manour of Pelham Also The Story of the Three Modern Villages Called The Pelhams, p. 83 (The Dietz Press, Inc. 1946).

“When the Town of Pelham was erected in 1788 there were then three old roads--originally Indian Trails--all near the outer edges of what is now the Village of Pelham Manor. These were: (1) the outside Shore Road, from the mouth of the Hutchinson River to the "Boat Landing," on the Sound near Glen Island in New Rochelle, (2) the Old Trail, which became Split Rock Road and Wolf Lane, parallel to the Hutchinson River, and (3) Westchester Path, from East Chester to New Rochelle. This was later known as Kings Highway in New Rochelle, and The Post Road in the Pelhams (now Colonial Avenue). In the early days there was no trail corresponding to the present Boston Post Road through Pelham Manor. When the Beech Tree Lane section of Pelham Manor was developed in 1926-27 there still remained an outline of an old dirt road, parallel to Park Lane, which could be traced by the line of Beech trees and old walls made of great glacial boulders, from Manor Circle down the valley of Nellie's Brook, to the Shore Road at a point just north of Hunter's Island.” 

Source:  Barr, Lockwood Anderson, A Brief, But Most Complete & True Account of the Settlement of the Ancient Town of Pelham Westchester County, State of New York Known One Time Well & Favourably as the Lordshipp & Manour of Pelham Also The Story of the Three Modern Villages Called The Pelhams, p. 117 (The Dietz Press, Inc. 1946).

“John Hunter of Hunter's Island, in his will dated May 13, 1852, disposed of his large farm known as the Provost Farm, on the Mainland, in the Town of Pelham, at the Hutchinson River near the point where the Boston Post Road crosses the River. Hunter recognized the necessity of granting right of way and access from the Shore Road to that farm--across a second farm he owned, known as the Sackett Farm. So, in his will, he provided: ‘. . . right of way with Cattle and teams over the lane now used by me across my farm, commonly called and known as the Sackett Farm, situated in the said Town of Pelham, opposite Hunter's Island and between the farms of Mr. Thacker and Elbert Roosevelt, and also right of way from said lane through the woods of Said Sackett Farm to and from the Provost Farm. . .’” 

Source:  Barr, Lockwood Anderson, A Brief, But Most Complete & True Account of the Settlement of the Ancient Town of Pelham Westchester County, State of New York Known One Time Well & Favourably as the Lordshipp & Manour of Pelham Also The Story of the Three Modern Villages Called The Pelhams, pp. 117-18 (The Dietz Press, Inc. 1946).


Labels: , , , , , , , , , ,

Wednesday, October 12, 2016

More on the Early History of Pelham Bridge Including Ownership of the Bridge Between 1834 and 1860


By 1860, Westchester County had begun to spend substantial sums on the repair and maintenance of Pelham Bridge even though it did not own the bridge. In fact, In 1860, the bridge was operated as a private toll bridge owned by Lawrence G. Fowler who had succeed to the 30-year franchise granted in 1834 to George Rapalje to operate the bridge until April 15, 1864.

Westchester County understood the critical importance of the Pelham Bridge which connected more populated regions of lower Westchester County with important shoreline communities such as Pelham, New Rochelle, Larchmont, and Mamaroneck. Unhappy with the continuing need to assist with repairs and maintenance of the bridge and contemplating the possibility of entirely replacing the decrepit bridge, Westchester began efforts to acquire "perfect title" to the bridge.

Difficulties Followed the Pelham Bridge From 1829 Until 1831

By 1829, something seems to have changed regarding Pelham Bridge.  On March 30, 1829, a petition was presented to the New York Assembly on behalf of the Eastchester Bridge Company "seeking leave to surrender their corporate rights."  

Almost immediately, on Friday, April 3, 1829, a bill was reported for the "relief" of the Eastchester Bridge Company.  

Within a short time, the legislature released a report on the petition for the relief bill.  The following is a citation to that report, that I have not yet been able to access:

"Eastchester Bridge Company
1829.  Rept. re. petition of Eastchester Bridge co. praying leave to surrender corporate rights and remove materials composing bridge.  (Assem. jol. 52 sess. 1829:  944-945.)"

Source:  Hasse, Adelaide R., Index of Economic Material in Documents of the States of the United States -- New York 1789-1904 Prepared for the Department of Economics and Sociology of the Carnegie Institution of Washington, p. 83 (NY, NY:  Carnegie Institution of Washington, Nov. 1907).

At about this time, an odd situation developed.  In 1831 an as-yet unexplained criminal information (a formal criminal charge which begins a criminal proceeding in the courts) was issued under the direction of the New York Attorney General in a case styled "The People vs. The President and Directors of the Eastchester Bridge Company."  An effort was made by the Sheriff of Westchester County to serve the criminal summons on unidentified individuals then serving as President and Directors of the company, but none could be found within the county.  More significantly, a legal notice published at the time stated "it cannot be ascertained that there now are, or within one year last past have been, any officers of the said corporation" suggesting, of course, that the company was defunct and no longer operating in any fashion.  Consequently, a local court authorized service on the group by publication in local newspapers.  For now, we are left to speculate regarding the nature of this intriguing criminal action against the President and Directors of the Eastchester Bridge Company. However, the picture that emerges is that the company that purportedly still owned the right to operate a toll bridge across the Hutchinson River at Eastchester Bay was nowhere to be found, likely prompting local citizens a short time later to petition the legislative authorities of New York State to authorize George Rapelje to construct a new Pelham Bridge.

Ownership Since 1834

On April 2, 1834, the Committee on Roads and Bridges of the New York State Senate issued a report on a petition received from residents of Westchester County to permit Pelham resident George Rapelje to construct a toll draw bridge over Eastchester Creek. The report provides an interesting glimpse of a portion of the history surrounding efforts to construct bridges over Eastchester Creek to shorten the distance from New York City and surrounding areas to Pelham. After authorization by New York State, George Rapelye built the bridge and operated it as a private toll drawbridge under the 30-year franchise scheduled to expire on April 15, 1864.

Upon the death of George Rapelye (sometimes "Rapalje"), on November 30, 1841 the executors of Rapelye's estate sold Pelham Bridge and the franchise to operate it as a private toll road to James M. Post. The following year, 1842, James M. Post duly assigned and transferred his right, title and interest in the bridge and its associated franchise to Ann E. Cavins and Wm Cavins. The Cavins owned and operated the toll bridge until May 1, 1857 when they sold it to Lawrence G. Fowler who stll owned the bridge in 1860.

Westchester County Board of Supervisors Arranges Purchase in 1861

By 1860, the Westchester County Board of Supervisors was growing tired of appropriating taxpayer money to help maintain and repair the increasingly-important Pelham Bridge -- a private toll bridge that was not owned by the County.  Westchester knew that the bridge needed to be replaced but, of course, was unwilling to fund such replacement unless it owned the structure.  Accordingly, efforts began to lobby the State of New York to authorize Westchester County to acquire Pelham Bridge.

On February 15, 1860, the New York State Senate passed a bill to authorize Westchester to buy Pelham Bridge.  The Assembly soon did the same and, on April 5, 1860, New York enacted into law a statute authorizing the purchase.  The statute stated:

"The board of supervisors of the county of Westchester are hereby authorized and empowered, at their annual session, in the year one thousand eight hundred and sixty, to purchase the bridge over Eastchester creek, in the said county, commonly known as the Rapelyea or Pelham bridge, upon such terms as they may agree upon with the lessee of said bridge, not exceeding the sum of four thousand dollars. . . . The said bridge, if purchased by the said board of supervisors, shall be forever a free bridge, and a charge upon the said county of Westchester."

For the next twenty months, the Westchester County Board of Supervisors worked to appropriate the funds necessary to purchase Pelham Bridge.  There was a study of the title to the bridge.  There were presentations over the value of the bridge and the cost to replace it.  There were successive votes related to whether to purchase the bridge.  And, in the midst of all this, the Board continued to authorize payments to fund maintenance and repair of the decrepit structure.

On November 20, 1861, the Westchester County Board of Supervisors finally took action.  According to its records, on that date:

"Mr. McClelan moved that the resolution levying $3,000 on the County to pay Lawrence G. Fowler for Pelham Bridge, be taken from the table. Carried.  On motion of Mr. Lane, the written Report of the District Attorney was accepted and ordered on file.  The question on the adoption of the resolution levying $3,000 to pay Lawrence G. Fowler for Pelham Bridge, was then taken, and decided in the affirmative: a majority of all the members elected to the Board voting in favor thereof." 

Finally, on December 4, 1861, the Westchester County schedule of accounts reflected the critical appropriation by the County of $3,000 to purchase Pelham Bridge.  The process had begun to take title and replace the bridge.

*          *          *          *          *

March 30, 1829:

"IN ASSEMBLY, 
Monday, March 30. . . . 

Petitions:  . . . of the Eastchester bridge company, for leave to surrender their corporate rights. . ."

Source:  IN ASSEMBLY, Daily Albany Argus [Albany, NY], Mar. 31, 1829, p.2, col. 4.

"IN ASSEMBLY,
Friday, April 3. . . . 

Mr. DAYTON, from the select committee, reported a bill for the relief of the Eastchester bridge company. . . ."

Source:  IN ASSEMBLY, Daily Albany Argus [Albany, NY], Apr. 4, 1829, Vol. IV, No. 1072, p. 2, col. 5.

March 3, 1831:

"IN SUPREME COURT, 3d March, 1831 -- The People, vs. The President and Directors of the Eastchester Bridge Company.  G. C. Bronson, Attorney General.

On filing an affidavit, and on motion of the attorney general, it appearing to the court that the writ of summons issued upon the information in the nature of a quo warranto filed in this cause, hsa been duly returned by the sheriff of the county of Westchester, not served, by reason that no officers of the said company could be found within the said county; and it also appearing to the court that the said writ was directed to the said sheriff of Westchester where the principal place of business of the said company was situated, and that, upon inquiry, it cannot be ascertained that there now are, or within one year last past have been, any officers of the said corporation; -- It is ordered, pursuant to the statute in such case made and provided, that a copy of this rule be published for four weeks successively in the state paper.  And it is further ordered, that the defendants appear and plead to the information filed in this cause within twenty days after the last publication of this rule, or in default thereof, that the attorney general, on filing an affidavit of the due publication of the rule, be entitled to enter the default of the defendants, and to proceed to judgment thereon, in like manner as if the writ had been returned duly served.  (A copy.)

JNO. KEYES PAIGE, Clerk.

mr 5-dlt 9IT6"

Source:  IN SUPREME COURT [Legal Notice], Daily Albany Argus, Mar. 5, 1831, p. 3, col. 2.    

February 15, 1860:

"NEW YORK LEGISLATURE.
-----
Senate.
ALBANY, Feb. 15, 1860. . . . 

The bill to incorporate the New York Homeopathic College was passed.

Also the bill authorizing the Supervisors of Westchester county to purchase the Pelham Bridge. . . ."

Source:  NEW YORK LEGISLATURE -- Senate, The New York Herald, Feb. 16, 1860, p. 10, col. 5.  

April 5, 1860:

"Chap. 168. 

AN ACT to authorize the board of supervisors of the county of Westchester to purchase the Rapelyea or Pelham bridge. 

Passed April 5, 1860; three-fifths being present. 

The People of the State of New York, represented in Senate and Assembly, do enact as follows: 

May purchase bridge over Eastchester creek. 

SECTION 1. The board of supervisors of the county of Westchester are hereby authorized and empowered, at their annual session, in the year one thousand eight hundred and sixty, to purchase the bridge over Eastchester creek, in the said county, commonly known as the Rapelyea or Pelham bridge, upon such terms as they may agree upon with the lessee of said bridge, not exceeding the sum of four thousand dollars. 

Bridge to be forever free 

[Section] 2. The said bridge, if purchased by the said board of supervisors, shall be forever a free bridge, and a charge upon the said county of Westchester." 

Source: "Chap. 168.  An Act to Authorize the Board of Supervisors of the County of Westchester to Purchase the Rapelyea or Pelham Bridge" in Laws of the State of New York, Passed at the Eighty-Third Session of the Legislature, Begun January Third, and Ended April Seventeenth, 1860, in the City of Albany, pp. 270-71 (Albany, NY:  Weed, Parsons and Company, 1860).

Wednesday, November 14, 1860:

"Mr. Lockwood offered the following resolution, which was adopted. 

Resolved, That a Committee of Three, to be compose of one from each Assembly District, be appointed by the Chairman of this Board to inquire into and report to this Board as to the propriety and expediency of purchasing the Rapelye or Pelham Bridge, as authorized by the last Legislature, passed April 5th, 1860." 

Source: Proceedings of the Board of Supervisors of the County of Westchester, At the Annual Meeting, at White Plains, For the Year 1860, Edmund G. Sutherland, Clerk, p. 9 (Yonkers, NY:  Office of The Yonkers Herald, 1861).

Thursday, November 15, 1860:  

"Mr. Robertson moved to re-consider the vote on the adoption of the resolution offered yesterday by Mr. Lockwood, authorizing the Chairman to appoint a Committee of Three, composed of one from each Assembly District, to inquire into and report to this Board as to the propriety and expediency of purchasing the Rapelye or Pelham Bridge. 

The motion to re-consder was carried; whereupon, 

On motion of Mr. Robertson, the resolution was amended, so as to authorize the appointment of 'a Committee of Six, consisting of two from each Assembly District.' 

The resolution, as amended, was then adopted." 

Source: Proceedings of the Board of Supervisors of the County of Westchester, At the Annual Meeting, at White Plains, For the Year 1860, Edmund G. Sutherland, Clerk, p. 11 (Yonkers, NY: Office of The Yonkers Herald, 1861).

Thursday, November 15, 1860, 2:00 p.m.:

"The Chair announced the following 

Committee on the Purchase of Rapelye or Pelham Bridge: 

2d District -- Alsop H. Lockwood, William L. Barker; 3d District -- Forst Horton, Hezekiah D. Robertson; 1st District -- William Cauldwell, Charles Bathgate." 

Source: Proceedings of the Board of Supervisors of the County of Westchester, At the Annual Meeting, at White Plains, For the Year 1860, Edmund G. Sutherland, Clerk, p. 14 (Yonkers, NY: Office of The Yonkers Herald, 1861).

Friday, November 16, 1860:

"Mr. McClelan offered the folloing resolution, which was adopted: 

Resolved, That the Committee appointed to negotiate for the purchase of Pelham Bridge, be and they are hereby directed to ascertain and report to this Board -- 

The duration of the Charter thereof, the time when it will expire, and to whom it will revert: 

The present cash value thereof, whether the same is in good order, what repairs, if any, are necessary, and the probable cost thereof: 

Also, whether said Bridge is erected agreeably to the provisions of the Charter thereof; and if not, in what particular: 

And that the said Committee, in order to acquire said information, are hereby empowered to employ one or more competent persons, (if deemed necessary,) to aid them in arriving at a proper and just conclusion." 

Source: Proceedings of the Board of Supervisors of the County of Westchester, At the Annual Meeting, at White Plains, For the Year 1860, Edmund G. Sutherland, Clerk, pp. 19-20 (Yonkers, NY: Office of The Yonkers Herald, 1861).

Wednesday, December 5, 1860:

"Mr. Lockwood, from the Special Committee on the purchase of Rapayle [sic] or Pelham Bridge, presented a Report thereon, which was read as follows, and entered on General Orders, (No. 27:) 

To the Honorable the Board of Supervisors of the County of Westchester: 

The undersigned Committee, to whom was referred the resolution of this Board to enquire into and report to this Board as to the propriety and expediency of the purchase, by this Board, of the bridge known as the Rapelye or Pelham Bridge, for the purpose of making the same a free bridge, would respectfully report that your Committee have examined said bridge, and after consultation with others in relation to the same, would recommend the purchase of said bridge, for the purposes therein named, believing the demands of the public require the same to be made a free bridge; and wheras your committee find some defect in the present Act, passed April 5, 1860, authorizing this Board to purchase said bridge, would recommend the adoption of the following resolution: 

Resolved, That this Board purchase the Pelham or Rapelye Bridge, as soon as a good and sufficient title can be given for the same -- said title to be examined by the District Attorney of this County, and pronounced by him as perfect -- and that the County Treasurer be directed to pay fo the same out of any monies in his hands, not otherwise appropriated, to an amount not exceeding the sum of $3,000; and that the District Attorney be requested to give his earliest attention to the same. 

WHITE PLAINS, Dec. 1, 1860. 

A. H. LOCKWOOD,       ) 
FROST HORTON,         ) 
Wm. CAULDWELL,        } Committee on Pelham Bridge. 
CHARLES BATHGATE  ) 
H. D. ROBERTSON,      ) 
Wm. L. BARKER,           ) 

General Orders, No. 27." 

Source: Proceedings of the Board of Supervisors of the County of Westchester, At the Annual Meeting, at White Plains, For the Year 1860, Edmund G. Sutherland, Clerk, pp. 110-11 (Yonkers, NY: Office of The Yonkers Herald, 1861).

Thursday, December 6, 1860:

"Mr. Lockwood, from the Special Committee on the purchase of Rapalye or Pelham Bridge, reported, as amended by the Committee, the Report of Said Committee, (see General Orders No. 27.) 

Mr. McClelan offered the following resolutions as a substitute for the resolutions reported by the Committee: 

Resolved, That this Board deem it inexpedient at the present time, taking into consideration the large appropriations made by this Board, to purchase Pelham Bridge. Therefore, 

Resolved, That our Senator and Members of Assembly be requested to procure the passage of an Act authorizing the Board of Supervisors of this County to assume the control of, and maintain and support Pelham Bridge, after the Charter thereof shall have expired. 

The question was taken on the substitute, and decided in the negative -- ayes 4, nays 19, as follows: 

Ayes. -- Messrs. Flagg, Hallock, Hopper, and McClelan. 

Nays. -- Messrs. Baker, Barker, Bathgate, Cauldwell, Davids, Hatfield, Horton, Lippencott, Little, Lockwood, J. E. Marshall, W. Marshall, Jr., Miller, Mills, Robertson, Secor, Sutton, Tripp, and Twitchings. 

The questions was then taken on the adoption of the Report, and decided in the affirmative -- ayes 18, nays 5 -- as follows: 

Ayes -- Messrs. Baker, Barker, Bathgate, Cauldwell, Hatfield, Horton, Lippencott, Little, Lockwood, J. E. Marshall, W. Marshall, Jr., Miller, Mills, Robertson, Secor, Sutton, Tripp, and Twitchings. 

Nays -- Messrs. Davids, Flagg, Hallock, Hopper, and McClelan. 

On motion, the announcement of the result of the vote was suspended until the absentees could be sent for. 

Mr. Hunt coming into the room, the call of the absentees was demanded, and the Clerk accordingly proceeded to call. 

On the name of Mr. Hunt being called, Mr. Hunt declined to vote, for the present, and until he could examine into and ascertain the merits of the question. 

Mr. Baker moved that Mr. Hunt be excused from voting. 

Debate was had thereon. 

Mr. Robertson moved to lay the motion on the table. 

Carried. 

The absentees were again called, Mr. Hunt still not answering. 

Mr. Robertson moved to take from the table the motion to excuse Mr. Hunt, and demanded the ayes and nays. 

The Clerk called the ayes and nays, and a call of the absentees being demanded, the Clerk called the absentees. 

Mr. Hunt not answering to his name when it was called on the calling of the absentees. 

Mr. Baker moved that Mr. Hunt be excused from voting. 

Debate was had thereon. 

On motion of Mr. Cauldwell, Mr. Hunt was heard in relation to his refusal to vote. 

The motion was then put to excuse Mr. Hunt from voting on the motion to take from the table the motion to excuse him from voting on the motion to adopt the Report of the Committee, and carried. 

The Clerk then announced the result of the vote on the motion to take from the table the motion to excuse Mr. Hunt from voting on the motion to adopt the Report -- ayes 17, nays 5 -- as follows: 

Ayes -- Messrs. Baker, Barker, Bathgate, Cauldwell, Davids, Hallock, Hatfield, Lippencott, Lockwood, McClelan, J. E. Marshall, Miller, Mills, Robertson, Secor, Sutton, and Twitchings. 

Nays -- Messrs. Flagg, Hopper, Horton, W. Marshall, Jr, and Tripp. 

The question recurring on the motion to excuse Mr. Hunt from voting on the motion to adopt the Report of the Committee -- and debate having been had thereon -- it was decided in the affirmative -- ayes 15, nays 8 -- as follows: 

Ayes -- Messrs. Baker, Barker, Bathgate, Cauldwell, Davids, Flagg, Hatfield, Lippencott, Little, McClelan, W. Marshall, Jr., Mills, Sutton, Tripp, and Twitchings. 

Nays -- Messrs. Hallock, Hopper, Horton, Lockwood, J. E. Marshall, Miller, Robertson, and Secor. 

The Clerk then announced the vote on the adoption of the Report -- (as above,) -- ayes 18, nays 5." 

Source: Proceedings of the Board of Supervisors of the County of Westchester, At the Annual Meeting, at White Plains, For the Year 1860, Edmund G. Sutherland, Clerk, pp. 131-32 (Yonkers, NY: Office of The Yonkers Herald, 1861).

Thursday, December 6, 1860, 2:00 p.m.:

"Mr. Lockwood, from the Special Committee on the purchase of Rapalye or Pelham Bridge, presented a Supplemental Report, which was read as follows: 

To the Honorable the Board of Supervisors of Westchester County. 

The undersigned Committee, to whom was referred certain resolutions of enquiry, offered by the Supervisor of Eastchester, beg leave respectfully to report that, upon examination, your Committee find that on the 15th day of April, 1834, an Act was passed by the Legislature of this State, authorizing Rapelye, his heirs and assigns, to build a Toll Bridge over the Eastchester Creek; such charter to continue for the full term of thirty years, which charter will expire on the 15th day of April, 1864; and that on the 30th day of November, 1841, said Bridge was sold by the executors of George Rapelye, then deceased, to James M. Post; and that on the ___ day of ___, in the year 1842, the said James M. Post duly assigned and transferred his right, title and interest to Ann E. Cavins and Wm Cavins; and that also on the first day of May, 1857, the said Ann E. Cavins and William Cavins duly assigned and transferred all their right, title and interest in said Bridge to Lawrence G. Fowler, the present owner of said Bridge. 

Your Committee are, at present, unable to inform this Board whether said Bridge was constructed in strict compliance with said charter, but that pursuant to said charter, the Judges of the Court of Common Pleas, of Westchester County, have appointed a Committee to examine said Bridge, after its completion, and if, in their judgment, the same was built pursuant to said charter, the said Judges were directed to file a certificate with the Clerk of the County, to whose files your Committee would respectfully refer. 

Your Committee would further report that in their judgment, and from the best information your Committee have been able to obtain, consider the said Bridge worth at least the sum of $5,000. That the same could not now be built for less than $12,000. 

And as far as your Committee have been able to ascertain, they would respectfully report that, in their opinion, the present structure would revert to its present owner, who would have full power to remove any and every part of the same, and the County of Westchester put to an expense of rebuilding said Bridge, or be compelled to purchase the same at, perhaps, an exorbitant price. 

All of which is respectfully submitted. 

Dated December 7, 1860: 

A. H. LOCKWOOD,       ) 
Wm. L. BARKER,          ) 
Wm. CAULDWELL,       } Special Committee on Pelham Bridge 
FROST HORTON,         ) 
CHARLES BATHGATE, ) 
H. D. ROBERTSON,      ) 

On motion, the Report was adopted -- ayes 20, nays 1 -- Mr. McClellan voting in the negative." 

Source: Proceedings of the Board of Supervisors of the County of Westchester, At the Annual Meeting, at White Plains, For the Year 1860, Edmund G. Sutherland, Clerk, pp. 136-38 (Yonkers, NY: Office of The Yonkers Herald, 1861).

Wednesday, November 13, 1861:  

"Messrs. Badeau, Hatfield, Lippencott, Robertson, and Hopper, made explanations and remarks on the condition and in relation to the repairs on Pelham Bridge. 

Mr. Badeau thereupon offered the following resolution, which was adopted: 

Resolved, That there be a Committee of Three appointed by the Board to examine the repairs on the Pelham Bridge, and report what further repairs, in their opinion, are necessary at this time. 

The Board thereupon appointed the following Supervisors as such 

Committee -- Messrs. Purday, Brown, and Valentine. 

On motion of Mr. Cauldwell, 

Mr. Badeau was added to the Committee." 

Source:  Proceedings of the Board of Supervisors of the County of Westchester, At the Annual Meeting, at White Plains, For the Year 1861, Edmund G. Sutherland, Clerk, p. 7 (Yonkers, NY: Office of The Yonkers Herald, 1861).

Tuesday, November 19, 1861:

"Mr. Lippencott. from the same Committee [Committee on Roads and Bridges], presented a Report on the bill of Abraham Hatfield and Samuel Lippencott, for materials, labor, and disbursements, on Pelham Bridge, which was read as follows: 

To the Honorable the Board of Supervisors of the County of Westchester: 

The Committee on Roads and Bridges, to whom were referred the bills of Abraham Hatfield and Samuel Lippencott, for work done and materials furnished for Pelham Bridge, respectfully report that they have examined the bill of Abraham Hatfield, with the vouchers therefor, and find it correct. The sum paid by Mr. Hatfield, amounts to one thousand two hundred and forty-nine dollars and sixty seven cents

.....................$1,249.67 

The amount received by A. Hatfieild, from the sale of the old lumber is

........................... 79.50 

The balance due Mr. Hatfield from Co. is therefore $1,170.17 

They have also received the bill of Samuel Lippencott, (with the vouchers therefor,) amounting to the sum of four hundred and seventeen dollars and seventeen cents, ($417.17,) and find it correct. Your Committee therefore recommend the passage of the following resolution: 

Resolved, That there be levied, assessed and collected on the real and personal property of the County of Westchester, the sum of one thousand five hundred and eighty-seven dollars and twenty-four cents, to pay the bills of Abraham Hatfield and Samuel Lippencott for services rendered and materials furnished for Pelham Bridge. 

All of which is respectfully submitted. 

Dated November 19, 1861. 

SAM'L LIPPENCOTT,   ) 
II. D. ROBERTSON,      } Committee on Roads and Bridges. 
A.B. REYNOLDS,         ) 

(General Orders No. 3.)"

Source: Proceedings of the Board of Supervisors of the County of Westchester, At the Annual Meeting, at White Plains, For the Year 1861, Edmund G. Sutherland, Clerk, pp. 52-53 (Yonkers, NY: Office of The Yonkers Herald, 1861).

Tuesday, November 19, 1861, 2:00 p.m.:

"Mr. Mills presented the Report of William H. Pemberton, District Attorney, on the title to Pelham Bridge. 

Mr. Purdy moved to refer the report back to the District Attorney, with the request that he make it conform to the terms of the resolution of the last Board under which the report was made. Carried." 

Source: Proceedings of the Board of Supervisors of the County of Westchester, At the Annual Meeting, at White Plains, For the Year 1861, Edmund G. Sutherland, Clerk, pp. 69-70 (Yonkers, NY: Office of The Yonkers Herald, 1861).

Wednesday, November 20, 1861:

"Mr. Hatfield offered the following resolution: 

Resolved, That there be levied and assessed on the County of Westchester, and collected, the sum of $3,000, to pay Lawrence G. Fowler for Pelham Bridge, as per certificate of Henry Willets, County Treasurer. 

On motion of Mr. Robertson, the resolution was laid on the table. 

Mr. Badeau moved that a Committee of Three be appointed to wait on the District Attorney, and request him to appear before the Board and give his opinion in relation to the title to Pelham Bridge. Carried. 

The Chair announced, as follows: 

The Special Committee to wait on District Attorney, &c. -- Mr. Badeau, Mr. McClelan, and Mr. Tripp." 

Source: Proceedings of the Board of Supervisors of the County of Westchester, At the Annual Meeting, at White Plains, For the Year 1861, Edmund G. Sutherland, Clerk, p. 70 (Yonkers, NY: Office of The Yonkers Herald, 1861).

Wednesday, November 20, 1861:

"The Special Committee to wait on the District Attorney and request him to appear before the Board and give his opinion in relation to the title to Pelham Bridge, reported that they had performed the duty assigned them, and that the District Attorney was now present. 

On motion, the report was accepted, and the Committee discharged. 

The District Attorney, upon being requested by the Chairman to state whether a good and sufficient title to Pelham Bridge could be conveyed by Lawrence G. Fowler to the County, replied that he had examined the title and pronounced it perfect, and that the County would, by the purchase of the bridge from Mr. Fowler, obtain a good and sufficient titled to it. 

Mr. McClelan moved that the resolution levying $3,000 on the County to pay Lawrence G. Fowler for Pelham Bridge, be taken from the table. Carried. 

On motion of Mr. Lane, the written Report of the District Attorney was accepted and ordered on file. 

The question on the adoption of the resolution levying $3,000 to pay Lawrence G. Fowler for Pelham Bridge, was then taken, and decided in the affirmative: a majority of all the members elected to the Board voting in favor thereof." 

Source: Proceedings of the Board of Supervisors of the County of Westchester, At the Annual Meeting, at White Plains, For the Year 1861, Edmund G. Sutherland, Clerk, p. 71 (Yonkers, NY: Office of The Yonkers Herald, 1861).

Wednesday, November 20, 1861: 

"General Orders No. 1 -- being the Report of the Committee on Roads and Bridges, on the bill of William G. Livingston, for survey and map of Pelham Bridge -- was taken up, considered , and adopted: a majority, of all the members elected to the Board voting in the affirmative. * [Footnote * states: "* -- See Clerk's Note to the Committee's Report."] . . . 

General Orders No. 3 -- being the Report of the Committee on Roads and Bridges, on the bills of Abraham Hatfield and Samuel Lippencott, for labor and disbursements on Pelham Bridge -- was taken up, considered, and adopted: a majority of all the members elected to the Board voting in the affirmative." 

Source: Proceedings of the Board of Supervisors of the County of Westchester, At the Annual Meeting, at White Plains, For the Year 1861, Edmund G. Sutherland, Clerk, p. 74 (Yonkers, NY: Office of The Yonkers Herald, 1861).

Schedule of County Accounts, December 4, 1861: 

"APPROPRIATIONS. . . . To pay Lawrence G. Fowler, for Pelham Bridge. 3,000.00" 

Source: Proceedings of the Board of Supervisors of the County of Westchester, At the Annual Meeting, at White Plains, For the Year 1861, Edmund G. Sutherland, Clerk, p. 190 (Yonkers, NY: Office of The Yonkers Herald, 1861).



"Pelham Bridge in 1865 From a sketch by W. J. Wilson"
Source: Jenkins, Stephen, The Story of the Bronx From
the Purchase Made by the Dutch from the Indians in
1639 to the Present Day, Opposite p. 318 (NY and 
London: G.P. Putnam's Sons The Knickerbocker Press,
1912).  NOTE:  Click on Image to Enlarge.

*          *          *          *          *

Below are examples of previous postings that address the histories of the various Pelham Bridges that have spanned Eastchester Bay for the last two centuries.

Tue., Oct. 11, 2016:  Is It Possible The First Pelham Bridge Built in About 1815 Was Repaired After Near Destruction by a Storm?

Wed., Oct. 1, 2014:  Bridge Keepers of the Pelham Bridge from 1870 to 1872.

Mon., Jul. 21, 2014:  Image of the Second Pelham Bridge Built in 1834 From a Sketch Created in 1865.

Thu., Jul. 17, 2014:  Sabotage Brought Down the 70-Ton Draw Span of Pelham Bridge in 1908 and Delayed its Opening

Tue., Jun. 10, 2014: Construction of the Concrete Arch Pelham Bridge.

Mon., May 12, 2014: The March 6, 1812 New York Statute Authorizing Construction of the Pelham Bridge.

Tue., Sep. 22, 2009: Names of Early "Keepers of Pelham Bridge" Appointed by Westchester County.

Thu., Jan. 08, 2009: Another Brief History of The Pelham Bridge.

Thu., Jan. 1, 2009: A Brief History of Pelham Bridge.

Wed., Jan. 2, 2008: New York State Senate Report on Petition by Inhabitants of Westchester to Allow Construction of Toll Bridge Across Eastchester Creek in 1834.

Tue., Aug. 28, 2007: The Laying Out of Pelham Avenue From Fordham to Pelham Bridge in 1869.

Wed., Jul. 4, 2007: 1857 Real Estate Advertisement for Sale of the Pelham Bridge.

Fri., Jul. 22, 2007: 1857 Real Estate Advertisement for Sale of "Country Seat" at Pelham Bridge.

Fri., May 18, 2007: Celebration at Pelham Bridge in 1872.

Wed., May 16, 2007: Board of Supervisors of Westchester County Vote to Build New Iron Bridge to Replace Pelham Bridge in 1869.

Tue., May 15, 2007: The Owner of the Pelham Bridge Hotel Sold it for the Princely Sum of $22,000 in 1869.

Mon., May 14, 2007: Plans to Widen Shore Road in the Town of Pelham in 1869.

Fri., May 11, 2007: A Sad Attempted Suicide at Pelham Bridge in 1869.

Thu., Dec. 08, 2005: The First Stone Bridge Built Across Eastchester Creek in Pelham, 1814-1815.

Thu., Aug. 18, 2005: The Opening of the New Iron "Pelham Bridge" in 1871.

Tue., Aug. 9, 2005: Cock Fighting at Pelham Bridge in the 19th Century.

Thu., Jul. 21, 2005: Today's Remnants of the Bartow Station on the Branch Line Near City Island.

Tue., Jun. 28, 2005: The Hotel and Bar Room at Pelham Bridge.

Thu., Mar. 24, 2005: The Bartow Area of Pelham in the 19th Century: Where Was It?

Wed., Mar. 23, 2005: Prize Fighting at Pelham Bridge in 1884.

For more about the Pelham Bridge and its history, see Pelham Bridge, Wikipedia The Free Encyclopedia, available at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pelham_Bridge (visited May 6, 2014).

Archive of the Historic Pelham Web Site.

Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,