More on the Early History of Pelham Bridge Including Ownership of the Bridge Between 1834 and 1860
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: 1829, 1831, 1834, 1841, 1842, 1857, 1860, 1861, Eastchester Bay, Eastchester Bridge Company, George Rapelje, Hutchinson River, Pelham Bridge, Transportation
posted by Blake A. Bell @ 7:19 AM
0 comments
