Take the Money and Run: Pelham Town Supervisor Sherman T. Pell and the Worst Political and Financial Scandal in Pelham History

Archive of the Historic Pelham Web Site.
Home Page of the Historic Pelham Blog.
Order a Copy of "The Haunted History of Pelham, New York"
Order a Copy of "Thomas Pell and the Legend of the Pell Treaty Oak."

Small town scandals inevitably set small town tongues wagging.  Pelham tongues were wagging from Pelhamville to City Island during the spring and summer of 1893.  Democrat Sherman T. Pell, who had just completed seven years of service as Town Supervisor but recently had been defeated in his bid for reelection, had disappeared.  So too, it seems, had much of the Town’s money.  Rumors swirled.  Pell was on the run.  Pell was in Pittsburgh.  He was in Florida.  He was in South America. 

This is the sad story of the worst political and financial scandal in Pelham history.  It involved Sherman T. Pell who took the money and ran. 

Background 

Sherman T. Pell was a son of Samuel Pell.  Samuel Pell, in turn, was a descendant of John Pell, so-called Second Lord of the Manor of Pelham (the first of the Pell family to reside, permanently, in the Manor of Pelham).  According to one account, by 1850 Samuel Pell lived on City Island in the Town of Pelham working as an oysterman.  Known as “Captain Pell”, he married Elizabeth Scofield and built a Second Empire style home that still stands at 586 City Island Avenue.  The couple had twelve children including Sherman T. Pell, the oldest son (born in 1853).  

The Samuel Pell House that Still Stands at 586 City Island Avenue,

Built in About 1876.  NOTE:  Click on Image to Enlarge.

It is believed that before his marriage Sherman T. Pell lived for a short time in the Samuel Pell House after it was built in about 1876.[1] Shortly after Samuel Pell built his beautiful home, Sherman T. Pell married Alzina Aurelia Rowland.  The couple had two children.

Detail from a Samuel Pell Family Photograph Showing a Young

Sherman T. Pell Standing Behind His Mother, Elizabeth Scofield

Pell, at About the Age of Fourteen.  This May Be the Only Surviving

Photograph of Sherman T. Pell.  NOTE:  Click on Image to Enlarge.

As a young man, Sherman T. Pell worked as a “provision merchant” in the South Street Seaport.[2]   His firm, Seymour & Pell located at 237 Front Street in New York City, seems to have run into some difficulty in 1883.  In an account entitled “Business Embarrassments”, The New York Times reported: 

“Bradford S. Seymour and Sherman T. Pell, comprising the firm of Seymour & Pell, wholesale provision-dealers at No. 237 Front-street, made an assignment yesterday to Henry C. Henderson, giving a preference to [Sherman Pell’s father] Samuel Pell for $7,807.15.  They succeeded J. W. Norris & Co., in September, 1879”[3] 

According to another account, thereafter Sherman Pell “entered the real estate business.”[4] 

Sherman Pell Enters Pelham Politics 

Sherman Pell reportedly was popular in Pelham.  People remarked that he carried the town “in his pocket.”[5]   In 1885, Pell ran as a Democrat against Republican Robert H. Scott for Town Supervisor of Pelham.  The election was a close one.  Scott beat Pell by ten votes.[6] 

The following year, Sherman Pell ran once again against Republican Robert H. Scott for Town Supervisor.  The election was even closer than the previous one.  On March 30, 1886, Sherman Pell won the election by a single vote, but not without the shadow of scandal. 

Pell’s Republican opponent announced that he intended to contest the election.  He alleged that Democrats had imported non-resident paupers from Hart Island to vote for Pell.  According to one account, Scott said he would contest the election results “on the ground that 25 persons who voted for Mr. Pell were brought over from Hart’s Island, and that two-thirds of them were New-York paupers having no right to vote.”[7] 

Election authorities declared Pell the winner of the 1886 election.  Pell then worked tirelessly to consolidate his political power.

The Postmaster Flap 

Soon Sherman T. Pell became known as “The little Democratic Napoleon of Pelham.”[8]   He called in political favors and had himself appointed as local postmaster by the Democrat Grover Cleveland administration after he worked tirelessly toward Cleveland’s first term victory.[9] 

The ham-handed way Pell gained the postmaster’s position and its $1,600 salary (about $56,000 in today’s dollars) upset most of the Town of Pelham.  At the time, the acting postmaster was a popular City Island resident named James Hyatt.  According to one news report, in seeking the appointment, Pell called in favors owed him by ex-Assemblyman Billy Catlin of Rye who was well-known to President Cleveland and had done him “valuable service.”[10] 

When Pelhamites learned what Pell was trying to do, they circulated a petition opposing Pell’s appointment and asking that the acting postmaster, James Hyatt, be appointed permanently.  According to one report, 190 of the 238 voters on City Island signed the petition.[11] 

The petition was presented to the Grover Cleveland administration.  Cleveland promptly appointed Sherman T. Pell as postmaster, effectively ending James Hyatt’s employment.  Pelhamites were “indignant at the insult which the President has put upon them by his deliberate disregard of their wishes.”[12] 

Not long afterward, another local dispute foreshadowed what was to come.  Sick of Pell’s heavy-handed tactics, Town officials began calling for an investigation of him in 1890.  A New York City newspaper, writing of the dispute, stated: 

“Justice of the Peace John P. Hawkins accused Supervisor Sherman T. Pell of trying to ‘boss’ the town, of mismanaging its finances, failing to report his transactions to the Justices, and acting generally in so negligent a way that the tax rate has been raised very materially.”[13] 

A group of Pelham residents decided to act.  Twenty-five of them filed a special petition to commence a proceeding before New York Supreme Court Justice Bartlett seeking “a summary investigation of the financial affairs” of the Town on the grounds that “public moneys are being unlawfully and corruptly expended.”[14] Justice Bartlett promptly dismissed the proceeding, finding that the petition was based on mere rumors and lacked the factual allegations necessary to support entry of an order directing an investigation of Town of Pelham finances.[15] 

Sherman Pell had defeated his opponents again.  That said, local residents were sniffing around the edges of his administration and Town finances.  Pell, however, was emboldened.  He sued one of the principal proponents of the petition, John F. Scheller of City Island, for defamation, seeking $10,000 in damages.[16] 

First the provisioning business failure, then allegations of voting fraud, then calling in political favors to destroy a man’s livelihood for his own benefit, claims that Pell acted as a Democrat “Boss” who was mismanaging Town finances, failing to report financial transactions, and driving up the Town tax rate, and now a court proceeding asking for a financial investigation of Pell – what might be next?  Pelham soon would learn. 

The 1893 Town Supervisor Election 

For the next couple of years, Pell secured successive, close (and some would say “suspect”) reelections to retain his position as Town Supervisor.[17]   In 1893, however, Pell faced stiff competition in his reelection bid from Republican William McAllister.  The 1893 Town Supervisor election turned out to be Pelham’s own version of the hanging chad dispute that marked the 2000 U.S. presidential election. 

On Tuesday, March 28, voters in Pelham went to the polls to choose between Pell and McAllister.  Early the next morning, The New York Times reported that Democrat Sherman T. Pell had won the election.[18] 

The following day, however, the Times retracted its report, saying “William McAllister, Republican, was elected in the town of Pelham, instead of Sherman T. Pell, Democrat.”[19]   Subsequent reports indicated that on election night, “the count showed that Mr. McAllister had been successful by a narrow margin of two or three votes."[20]   Pell demanded a recount. 

Two constables reportedly guarded the ballots for nearly a week “to prevent their being tampered with.”[21]   On April 6 a recount gave Sherman T. Pell an incredible sixty-five vote lead.  According to one account: 

“An examination of the ballots to-day showed that the apparent majority of Mr. McAllister had been caused by an error on the part of some of the Inspectors.  In many cases the Inspector in detaching the numbered stubs had failed to follow the scored line, and in this way had torn into the tickets and thus cut off Mr. Pell’s name.  The recount gives Mr. Pell a majority over Mr. McAllister of sixty-five votes.”[22] 

Pelham Republicans cried foul and demanded another recount.  When the Town Board (led by Sherman T. Pell) refused, the Republicans applied to New York Supreme Court Justice Jackson O. Dykman (also known as J. O. Dykman) in White Plains for an order directing such a recount.  Justice Dykman issued the order, but four members of the Town Board still refused to conduct the recount:   Sherman T. Pell, John P. Hawkins, Charles Wand, and Ethan Waterhouse.[23] 

Justice Dykman had a simple solution to the standoff.  He imposed $250 fines against each of the four men, held them in contempt of court, sentenced them to imprisonment for thirty days in the county jail and issued arrest warrants to be executed by the Sheriff.[24]   Soon the Republican candidate, McAllister, was declared the winner. 

It turned out that there was a significant reason that Pell had orchestrated such a vigorous scam to retain his elected position.  He had been engaged in a fraud involving Town funds for years.  The jig was up.

Where Is Mr. Pell? 

In early May, William McAllister called on ex-Supervisor Pell and asked for the Town’s account books and moneys.  According to McAllister, “Mr. Pell then stated that he would deliver all books, vouchers, and moneys to me on Thursday, May 18.”[25] 

McAllister dutifully appeared on Mr. Pell’s doorstep on May 18.  McAllister later told one reporter: 

“’his wife informed me that he had sent her a message from New-York City by his brother, Henry Pell, stating that he was compelled to go to Pittsburg on business and thus could not keep his appointment with me.  I have called at Mr. Pell’s residence every day this week, and his wife has stated to me that she had received no word from her husband, and that she did not know where he was.  I hope Mr. Pell will return and thus put an end to the various ugly rumors that have been put in circulation.  If he does not return we will be compelled to take legal measures.  What these measures will be I cannot say, as the matter is now in the hands of my counsel, Martin J. Keogh.’”[26] 

Ex-Supervisor Pell had provided a $10,000 bond in support of the good faith discharge of his fiduciary duties as Town Supervisor.  There were several additional bondsmen including his father, Samuel Pell.[27]   Soon the additional bondsmen wished they had never agreed to bond Sherman Pell’s performance of his duties.  Indeed, Samuel Pell eventually was required to sell his house as a consequence of his son's dishonesty.

The newly-installed Town Board tried its best to audit Sherman T. Pell’s accounts.  Initially the Board concluded “there was an apparent balance of moneys in his hands of $1,700.”[28]   According to one report: 

“Nobody knows where that money is, nor does anybody know where Mr. Pell is.  He has been away from home for several days, and his counsel is reported to have said that he is in Florida looking after legal matters connected with the Carll estate which have arisen through a recent decision of the Court of Appeals giving a grant of land under water. In the absence of the ex-Supervisor’s books it is impossible to say how much he has taken in since his account was audited and how much he ought to turn over to his successor.  He officially receives the taxes collected by the Receiver of the town, back taxes, excise moneys &c.  The amount is variously estimated at from $8,000 to $10,000. It is not supposed that the town will lose anything, even if Mr. Pell is unable to meet the demands made upon him by the Town Board, as one of his bondsmen is James Hyatt, a wealthy City Island butcher.  Mr. Hyatt was Mr. Pell’s predecessor in office. [sic]”[29] 

Another report indicated that an audit of Pell’s accounts on March 27, 1893 showed a cash balance remaining in his hands of $8,585, but it was believed that “the total at this date will considerably exceed that sum.”[30] 

Little did they know the extent of Sherman T. Pell’s defalcations.

The Scandal Grows Darker 

By June 10, 1893, the extent of Pell’s scheme was becoming clearer.  For years Pell had executed notes on behalf of the Town, forged the signature of the Town Clerk, and sold the forged bonds on Wall Street to obtain funds ostensibly on behalf of the Town.  According to a variety of reports, in this fashion he raised amounts that totaled between $30,000 and $100,000.[31]   All of the money – and Pell – remained missing.  Moreover, Sherman T. Pell left his wife behind.  He also left his father, Samuel, and his brother, Percy, holding the bag.  They were two of his bondsmen who had provided $10,000 bonds to secure the honest performance of Sherman Pell’s duties as Town Supervisor. 

Pell’s scheme was devilishly simple.  State law at the time required the collectors of taxes in the various Towns of Westchester County to provide Town Supervisors with a sworn statement of unpaid taxes owed by Town taxpayers.  On or before May 1 each year, each Town Supervisor was authorized “to borrow, upon the credit of the town, a sum not exceeding the amount of the unpaid taxes” reported by the collector for use of the Town.[32]   Pell dutifully arranged for such borrowings from a single bank each year with the full knowledge and participation of the Town Clerk.  However, he also went to other banks and presented multiple sets of forged “certificates” for the same authorized amounts of unpaid taxes (i.e., municipal bonds) that he sold to different banks to avoid detection.  In this fashion he collected tens of thousands of dollars about which no one in Pelham knew until it was too late. 

As things turned out, Pell’s house of cards had begun to collapse more than a year before he lost the election in March 1893.  Broadway Savings Institution of the City of New York acquired seven of the forged notes.  In February 1892, the bank commenced an action against the Town of Pelham seeking $6,800 payment on the seven notes.  The summons in the action reportedly was served on then Supervisor Pell, but he “put in no defense and judgment was taken against the town by default and was entered April 2, 1893.”[33] 

These seven notes were not the only ones Pell had forged.  By June 10, the Town of Pelham was aware of seven additional notes held by Broadway Savings Institution of the City of New York totaling an additional $7,600.  Other banks in Westchester County held even more such notes.  As The New York Times reported on June 11, 1893, “the financial affairs of the town are beginning to look worse than most of the townsfolk had expected.”[34] 

Supervisor McAllister was the first to discover the extent of Pell’s scheme.  Shortly after he became Town Supervisor, he learned of the default judgment entered against the Town.  He obtained copies of the notes and viewed the originals in the bank’s possession.  He arranged for the bank to show the original notes to the Town’s counsel and to the Town Clerk who confirmed that the “signatures” were forgeries.[35] 

Lawsuits Fly 

The Town of Pelham applied to New York Supreme Court to set aside the default judgment entered against it on the grounds that the notes were unlawfully issued and that the Town Clerk’s countersigning signatures were forgeries.  The Court set aside the default judgment and reopened the case for further proceedings.[36] 

The bank, in turn, commenced at least one additional lawsuit against the Town of Pelham on the seven additional notes.[37]   Other banks sued to recover on other notes.  In late July or early August 1893, the Town of Pelham filed a civil action against Sherman T. Pell, Samuel Pell and Percy W. Pell to recover on the $10,000 bond.[38] 

Bondsman Samuel Pell, Sherman’s father, saw the handwriting on the wall.  He sold his home to one of his daughters shortly before the Town of Pelham sued him on the bond.  According to one account: 

“On June 30th [1893], a little over a month before the Town of Pelham brought suit against him and Percy for $10,000, Samuel Pell sold [his house on City Island] and the lots on the west side of Main Street to his daughter Lydia Scofield, who had inherited considerable property from her late husband and had developed an extensive and successful real estate business.”[39] 

Initially, a verdict was rendered against the Town of Pelham finding the Town liable to Broadway Savings Institution of the City of New York to pay off seven notes worth $7,600, $85 interest and an additional $250 “allowance.”[40]   An appellate court quickly overturned that decision, directing that a new trial be held.[41] 

Things got even more interesting when New York City annexed portions of Pelham including City Island in 1895.  New York City assumed the “debts” represented by the forged bonds and took over the defense of the actions by the Broadway Savings Institution and several other savings banks seeking payment on the notes.  According to a report published in 1898, the case was tried before Justice Smith of the New York Supreme Court in the spring of 1898 and a verdict was rendered in favor of the City.[42]   This meant the banks would have to bear the losses.

Conclusion 

Sherman T. Pell, as they say, was never heard from again.  A news account published years later in 1906 claimed that Pell was “said to have died in South America a few years later, a penniless tramp.”[43]   Other accounts suggest that he fled to Florida though nothing more was heard of him.[44] Sherman Pell's wife, Alzina Aurelia Rowland Pell, soon moved to Brooklyn, then to Belvedere, California, and died in Los Angeles in 1929.  Census records for the intervening years before her death list her as a "widow."

Captain Samuel Pell, Sherman Pell’s proud father who had been forced to sell his beloved home on City Island, died in 1894 shortly after the scandal broke.[45]   Pelham weathered the defalcations and dishonesty of Sherman T. Pell, apparently without serious financial loss.  But the scheme did have an impact on Pelham.  Among other things, construction of the original firehouse located in Pelhamville (on Fifth Avenue on today’s parking lot next to the present firehouse) was delayed until early 1895 because another appropriation had to be made and levied in taxes due to financial uncertainties created by the scandal.[46]

ENDNOTES

[1] New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission, Samuel Pell House, 586 City Island Avenue, Borough of the Bronx, Built c. 1876,  p. 3 (Oct. 29, 2002) < http://s-media.nyc.gov/agencies/lpc/lp/2115.pdf > (visited Nov. 23, 2019). 

[2] Id. 

[3] Business Embarrassments, N.Y. Times, Apr. 14, 1883, Vol. XXXII, No. 9861, p. 8, col. 2 < https://www.newspapers.com/image/20489199/ > (visited Nov. 23, 2019).  See also Business Troubles, The Brooklyn Union [Brooklyn, NY], Apr. 19, 1883, Vol. XX, No. 183, p. 1, col. 8 < https://www.newspapers.com/image/541840896/ > (visited Nov. 23, 2019). 

[4] Samuel Pell House, supra, n.1, p. 3. 

[5] No Tidings Yet of Mr. Pell, N.Y. Times, May 28, 1893, Vol. XLII, No. 13,029, p. 9, col. 7 < https://www.newspapers.com/image/20536988/ > (visited Nov. 23, 2019). 

[6] City and Suburban News – Westchester County, N.Y. Times, Apr. 2, 1885, p. 8, col. 5 < https://www.newspapers.com/image/20355513/ > (visited Nov. 23, 2019). 

[7] Westchester County, N.Y. Times, Apr. 3, 1886, Vol. XXXV, No. 10,791, p. 8 col. 3 < https://www.newspapers.com/image/20503908/ > (visited Nov. 23, 2019). 

[8] City Island, The Daily Argus [Mount Vernon, NY], Dec. 16, 1892, p. 1, col. 7 < https://fultonhistory.com/Newspaper%2018/Mount%20Vernon%20NY%20Daily%20Argus/Mount%20Vernon%20NY%20Daily%20Argus%201892/Mount%20Vernon%20NY%20Daily%20Argus%201892%20-%200853.pdf  > (visited Nov. 23, 2019). 

[9] National Capital Notes, Democrat and Chronicle [Rochester, NY], Apr. 19, 1888, p. 1, cols. 4-5 < https://www.newspapers.com/image/135100307/ > (visited Nov. 23, 2019); Lord Pell’s Descendant Gets an Office, The Evening World [NY, NY], Apr. 19, 1888, Evening Edition, p. 1, col. 3 < https://www.newspapers.com/image/50639419/ > (visited Nov. 23, 2019). 

[10] City Island’s “Reform” Postmaster, New-York Tribune, May 4, 1888, Vol. XLVIII, No. 15,146, p. 10, col. 3 < https://www.newspapers.com/image/85633796/ > (visited Nov. 23, 2019). 

[11] Id. 

[12] Id. 

[13] Pelham’s Little Row, The Sun [NY, NY], May 23, 1890, Vol. LVII, No. 265, p. 2, col. 5 < https://fultonhistory.com/Newspaper%209/New%20York%20NY%20Sun/New%20York%20NY%20Sun%201890%20Feb-July%20Grayscale/New%20York%20NY%20Sun%201890%20Feb-July%20Grayscale%20-%201382.pdf > (visited Nov. 23, 2019). 

[14] Pelham Won’t Be Investigated, The Brooklyn Daily Times [Brooklyn, NY], Aug. 20, 1890, p. 1, col. 8 < https://www.newspapers.com/image/555837424/ > (visited Nov. 23, 2019). 

[15] Id. 

[16] Campaign Lies and Libels, The Standard Union [Brooklyn, NY], Apr. 3, 1891, Vol. XXVIII, No. 7, p. 2, col. 4 < https://www.newspapers.com/image/542270223/ > (visited Nov. 23, 2019). 

[17] See Barr, Lockwood, 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 & MANNOUR OF PELHAM ALSO THE STORY OF THE THREE MODERN VILLAGES CALLED THE PELHAMS, p. 172 (Richmond, VA: The Dietz Press 1946) < https://www.ancestry.com/interactive/21802/dvm_LocHist007642-00057-0 > (visited Nov. 23, 2019) (noting that Sherman T. Pell served as Supervisor from 1886 to 1893).  See also Elections in Westchester County, The Sun [NY, NY], Mar. 28, 1888, Vol. LV, No. 210, p. 2, col. 7 < https://www.newspapers.com/image/79114460/  > (visited Nov. 23, 2019); Westchester Elections, N.Y. Times, Mar. 27, 1889, Vol. XXXVIII, No. 11,724 p. 4, col. 6 < https://www.newspapers.com/image/20380735/ > (visited Nov. 23, 2019) (indicating Pell had been reelected Town Supervisor as a “Democrat”); Democrats in a Majority – Result of the Town Elections in Westchester County, N.Y. Times, Mar. 30, 1892, Vol. XLI, No. 12,666, p. 1, col. 3 < https://www.newspapers.com/image/20521661/ > (visited Nov. 23, 2019) (noting that early returns indicated that Sherman T. Pell likely had been reelected Town Supervisor on the Independent and Republican tickets); County Legislators 1892-3, The Daily Argus [Mount Vernon, NY], Apr. 5, 1892, Vol. 1, No. 4, p. 2, col. 1 < https://fultonhistory.com/Newspaper%2018/Mount%20Vernon%20NY%20Daily%20Argus/Mount%20Vernon%20NY%20Daily%20Argus%201892/Mount%20Vernon%20NY%20Daily%20Argus%201892%20-%200014.pdf > (visited Nov. 23, 2019) (providing a “correct list of the Supervisors elected” including “Pelham – Sherman T. Pell, Dem.”). 

[18] See Westchester Elections – Supervisors and Town Officers Chosen – Sharp Contests, N.Y. Times, Mar. 29, 1893, Vol. XLII, No. 12,978, p. 5, col. 2 < https://www.newspapers.com/image/20507176/ > (visited Nov. 23, 2019). 

[19] Westchester County Supervisors, N.Y. Times, Mar. 30, 1893, Vol. XLII, No. 12,979, p. 9, col 3 < https://www.newspapers.com/image/20508111/ > (visited Nov. 23, 2019). 

[20] See Trouble at City Island, The Evening World [NY, NY], Apr. 6, 1893, p. 4, col. 2 < https://www.newspapers.com/image/78944284/ > (visited Nov. 23, 2019).  See also Mr. Pell Is Supervisor of Pelham, N.Y. Times, Apr. 7, 1893, Vol. XLII, No. 12,986, p. 5 col. 4 < https://www.newspapers.com/image/20513235/ > (visited Nov. 23, 2019). 

[21] Id. 

[22] Id. 

[23] Pelham Citizens To Be Fined – Judge Dykman Declares Them in Contempt for Not Recounting the Town Vote, N.Y. Times, Apr. 30, 1893, Vol. XLII, No. 13,005, p. 3, col. 4 < https://www.newspapers.com/image/20525216/ > (visited Nov. 23, 2019). 

[24] Id. 

[25] Ex-Supervisor Pell Missing – Considerable Money of the Town of Pelham in His Hands, N.Y. Times, May 27, 1893, Vol. XLII, No. 13,029, p. 10, col. 6 < https://www.newspapers.com/image/20536372/ > (visited Nov. 23, 2019). 

[26] Id. 

[27] Id.  See also No Tidings Yet of Mr. Pell, N.Y. Times, May 28, 1893, Vol. XLII, No. 13,029, p. 9, col. 7 < https://www.newspapers.com/image/20536988/ > (visited Nov. 23, 2019). 

[28] Id. 

[29] Id. 

[30] Ex Supervisor Pell Missing, Buffalo Evening News [Buffalo, NY], May 27, 1893, Vol. XXVI, No. 41, p. 5, col. 3 < https://www.newspapers.com/image/327111418/ > (visited Nov. 23, 2019).  Other reports suggested up to $28,000 in Town cash was missing.  See News In Brief, The Standard Union [Brooklyn, NY], May 27, 1893, p. 8, col. 7 < https://www.newspapers.com/image/542157609 > (visited Nov. 23, 2019). 

[31] Compare Pells of Pelham Sued – The Town Wants Them To Pay $10,000 on a Bond They Gave for a Relative, N.Y. Times, Sep. 8, 1893, Vol. XLII, No. 13,118, p. 8, col. 3 < https://www.newspapers.com/image/20386157/ > (visited Nov. 23, 2019) (stating “In May Pell absconded, and the town believes he took with him $30,000 belonging to the Public Treasury”) with “Honest John Shinn” Short – Ex-Supervisor of Pelham’s Accounts out $17,971, N.Y. Times, Jun. 20, 1906, Vol. LV, No. 17,679, p. 1, col. 2 < https://www.newspapers.com/image/20356428/ > (visited Nov. 23, 2019)  (stating that Sherman T. Pell “forged the Town Clerk’s name to $100,000 worth of bonds and sold them in Wall Street”).

[32] Broadway Sav. Inst. of City of New York v. Town of Pelham, 83 Hun 96, 63 N.Y. St. Rep. 814, 31 N.Y.S. 402, 402 (App. Div. 2nd Dep’t 1894) (citing the provisions of Chapter 193, Laws 1877, entitled “An act to amend chapter 610 of the Laws of 1874 entitled an act to authorize the sale of lands for the nonpayment of taxes and for the collection of unpaid taxes in the several towns of the county of Westchester”). 

[33] Signatures Were Forged – Affairs of Ex-Supervisor Pell of Pelham Assume a Darker Aspect, N.Y. Times, Jun. 11, 1893, Vol. XLII, No. 13,041, p. 8, col. 4 < https://www.newspapers.com/image/20543424/ > (visited Nov. 23, 2019). 

[34] Id. 

[35] Id. 

[36] Id. 

[37] Id.  See also Suit Against the Town of Pelham, N.Y. Times, Jun. 1, 1893, Vol. XLII, No. 13,033, p. 8, col. 4 < https://www.newspapers.com/image/20539034/ > (visited Nov. 23, 2019). 

[38] See Pells of Pelham Sued – The Town Wants Them To Pay $10,000 on a Bond They Gave for a Relative, N.Y. Times, Sep. 8, 1893, Vol. XLII, No. 13,118, p. 8, col. 3 < https://www.newspapers.com/image/20386157/ > (visited Nov. 23, 2019); Samuel Pell House, supra, n.1, p. 3. 

[39] Samuel Pell House, supra, n.1, p. 3. 

[40] See Town of Pelham Must Pay, N.Y. Times, Mar. 31, 1894, Vol. XLIII, No. 13,267, p. 9, col. 6 < https://www.newspapers.com/image/20449806/ > (visited Nov. 23, 2019). 

[41] See Broadway Sav. Inst. of City of New York v. Town of Pelham, 83 Hun 96, 63 N.Y. St. Rep. 814, 31 N.Y.S. 402, 402 (App. Div. 2nd Dep’t 1894). 

[42] Old Town of Pelham Bonds – Indebtedness Assumed by the City Declared Fraudulent and Void, N.Y. Times, Jun. 7, 1898, Vol. XLVII, No. 15, 103, p. 12, col. 4 < https://www.newspapers.com/image/20612745/ > (visited Nov. 23, 2019). 

[43] “Honest John Shinn” Short – Ex-Supervisor of Pelham’s Accounts out $17,971, N.Y. Times, Jun. 20, 1906, Vol. LV, No. 17,679, p. 1, col. 2 < https://www.newspapers.com/image/20356428/ > (visited Nov. 23, 2019). 

[44] Samuel Pell House, supra, n.1, p. 3. 

[45] Obituary Notes, N.Y. Times, Mar. 30, 1894, Vol. XLIII, No. 13, 292, p. 5, col. 2 < https://www.newspapers.com/image/20449192/ > (visited Nov. 23, 2019). 

[46] Village of Pelham, Village of Pelham Online:  Village News – Interviewed in 1935 Mr. Edinger Told An Interesting Story (visited Apr. 24, 2005) http://www.villageofpelham.com/home/00-00-35.shtml (an archived copy of the article is available via the Way Back Machine via https://web.archive.org/web/20030304032321/http://www.villageofpelham.com/home/00-00-35.shtml) (visited Nov. 23, 2019).

Archive of the Historic Pelham Web Site.
Home Page of the Historic Pelham Blog.
Order a Copy of "The Haunted History of Pelham, New York"
Order a Copy of "Thomas Pell and the Legend of the Pell Treaty Oak."

More on the Town of Pelham's Consideration as a Potential Site for the 1893 World's Fair Eventually Held in Chicago as the Columbian Exposition

Archive of the Historic Pelham Web Site.
Home Page of the Historic Pelham Blog.
Order a Copy of "The Haunted History of Pelham, New York"
Order a Copy of "Thomas Pell and the Legend of the Pell Treaty Oak."

In 1889, Americans already were preparing for the 400th anniversary of the arrival of Christopher Columbus in the Americas in 1492.  A grand "World's Fair" was planned to open in 1892 as part of the "Great Columbus Celebration" in honor of the 400th anniversary. 

Eventually the event opened as the "World's Columbian Exposition," a world's fair held in Chicago.  Although dedication ceremonies were held on October 21, 1892, the fairgrounds were not ready for the public.  Thus, the World's Columbian Exposition did not open to the public until May 1, 1893.  Consequently, the Exposition often is referred to, informally, as the "1893 Chicago World's Fair."  It also is referred to as the 1892 World's Columbian Exposition and the 1893 World's Columbian Exposition. 

In 1889, organizers of the upcoming Exposition were still searching for a site on which to build the fairgrounds.  Believe it or not, the Town of Pelham was in the running as a possible fairgrounds site for the World's Fair.

I have written about consideration of the Town of Pelham as the site of fairgrounds for the World's Fair before.  See Tue., May 30, 2017:  Parts of the Town of Pelham Were Considered as a Site for the 1893 World's Fair.  Today's Historic Pelham article provides more information about early efforts to tout Pelham as the site for the fairgrounds.

At least as early as the summer of 1889, New York City Mayor Hugh John Grant -- who remains the City's youngest Mayor ever even to this day -- already was working to attract the planned World's Fair to the New York City region.  That summer he reached out to five hundred notable New Yorkers to attend a massive meeting to begin planning New York's bid to attract the extravaganza.  

One of the first issues the group had to confront was the site of the massive World's Fair.  The event was expected to be so massive that there seemed to be a broad consensus that it could not be hosted on Manhattan island.  Although there were suggestions that Central Park might be a suitable site, the news media was quick to object.  One newspaper wrote:

"Central Park is not to be thought of.  Any serious proposition to turn that beautiful breathing place into a big fair ground would probably kill the whole project.  The people want Central Park for themselves, and won't give it up."

Attention quickly turned to the three new parks on the mainland north of Manhattan:  Van Cortlandt Park, Bronx Park, and Pelham Bay Park (then part of the Town of Pelham before New York City annexed the region in 1895).  Most agreed, as one newspaper put it, that Pelham was:

"delightfully situated for such a purpose as a grand world's fair.  Its area is more than twice that of Central Park.  It contains 2,700 acres of undulating land, with a water front of at least five miles on Long Island Sound.  The question of drainage is one of much importance in the case of a great fair ground, and that is already solved by nature at Pelham Bay.  The whole Park drains naturally into the deep water along its five miles of picturesque shore."

Pelham Bay Park was sufficiently large for the fair.  Its picturesque shore front offered important opportunities for water activities associated with the fair.  Additionally, Eastchester Bay and Pelham Bay offered important transportation opportunities.  The construction of docks there would permit the transport of goods for the fair.  As one article, quoted in full below, noted:  "Ships from all parts of the world could go right up to a dock at Pelham Bay and land their cargoes close by the exhibition buildings."  Moreover, fair visitors could be ferried cheaply to the site via waterways from all over the region.  The same article stated:  "If visitors to the fair preferred going by water, they could not desire a more delightful trip than up the East River and through the waters of the Sound into Eastchester Bay or Pelham Bay itself.  This trip can be made from the Battery within an hour, and the fare need not be more than 10 or 15 cents."  Proponents of the plan further emphasized that the New Haven Branch Line that ran through Pelham also offered important transportation alternatives to and from the site.

Some, however, objected that New York should host the fair within its city limits -- not within the limits of the adjacent Town of Pelham.  Proponents of the plan dismissed such objections with an interesting observation. As one newspaper put it:

"The objection that Pelham Bay Park is outside the city limits probably will not exist in 1892.  Before the great fair was talked of at all, it was intended to ask the Legislature to extend the city line eastward from the Bronx River to the Sound, and thus take in the beautiful new Park, and the request will probably be made when the next Legislature meets."  

Of course, New York City's efforts to annex the Pelham Bay Park region from the Town of Pelham did not bear fruit until 1895 -- long after the World's Fair ended.  Nevertheless, even in the late 1880s (and earlier), all expected the new park to be annexed by the city.

Of course, efforts to hold the fair in the Town of Pelham failed.  Eventually, the exhibition was held in Chicago and was wildly successful.  For a time, however, the world watched as New York City notables discussed the little Town of Pelham as a possible site for the World's Columbian Exhibition.

"Bird's Eye View of the World's Columbian Exposition, Chicago, 1893"

Showing What the Area in Pelham May Have Looked Like Had Pelham

Bay Park Been Chosen as the Site. NOTE: Click on Image to Enlarge.

*          *          *          *          *

Below is the text of a newspaper article published on July 21, 1889 that forms the basis of today's Historic Pelham Blog article.  The text is followed by a citation and link to its source.

"The Proposed Great Fair.

Mayor Grant's call for a meeting of 'representative citizens' to consider the question of a great world's fair in 1892, gives that question what may be called a boom.  Mayor Grant sees Mr. McAllister and goes him a hundred better, for his call is issued to 500 New Yorkers, instead of 400.  All of the 500 probably will not respond, for several are at the other side of the Atlantic, looking at the great show in Paris and having a good time in other ways, and many more are at summer resorts at home, and may not care to leave them just to attend a meeting.  But a sufficient number of representative citizens will doubtless come together to consider the question in a practical and serious way.  At the moment it seems highly probable that the idea of getting up a great fair for the 400th anniversary of the discovery of the land of the free and the home of the brave will be carried out.  And should it be carried out, the show will certainly be on a magnificent scale, very different from the Crystal Palace affair of 1853, though that was considered a great thing then.  One of my favorite early recollections is that of seeing President Franklin Pierce ride up Broadway at the head of a great procession to perform the important function of opening that exhibition, and I have a vivid remembrance of a sideshow near by, in which an armless young woman astonished me beyond measure by writing visiting cards with her toes, or rather with a pen held between two of them; also of a rickety 'observatory,' likewise near by, from the top of which, after one had climbed up to it, a pretty fair view of New York and a good deal of the surrounding country could be had.  The Crystal Palace Fair was held in Reservoir Square, now Bryant Park, at Sixth Avenue and Forty-second Street.  There was no Central Park then and above Forty-second Street there were very few houses.  The population of New York was about one fourth of what it is to-day.  The great metropolis of to-day was hardly imagined.  Should the outcome of the meeting called by the Mayor be the appointment of a committee to make arrangements for a really great fair, it is to be hoped that men with axes to grind won't get the thing into their own hands.  Satisfactory results certainly need not be expected if they do.  Several years ago a movement was started for a grand centennial international exhibition in 1889, but the men with axes to grind spoiled the whole business.  After the appointment of a committee the next step will be the raising of money.  Millions will be needed.  It is already proposed that the city shall subscribe generously, and then the State, and next the United States.  All right, if they are willing.  There will be use for every dollar.  And it may be expected, as a matter of course, that a good many dollars will go astray.

The Question of a Site.

Next after determining upon the fair itself will come the question of a suitable site for it.  Central Park is not to be thought of.  Any serious proposition to turn that beautiful breathing place into a big fair ground would probably kill the whole project.  The people want Central Park for themselves, and won't give it up.  It is more than likely that the fair won't be held on Manhattan Island at all.  A site for it will probably be selected in one of the new parks north of Harlem River.  Three of these are mentioned as offering suitable grounds -- Van Cortlandt Park, Bronx Park, and Pelham Bay Park.  The latter would be decidedly the best.  Pelham Bay Park is delightfully situated for such a purpose as a grand world's fair.  Its area is more than twice that of Central Park.  It contains 2,700 acres of undulating land, with a water front of at least five miles on Long Island Sound.  The question of drainage is one of much importance in the case of a great fair ground, and that is already solved by nature at Pelham Bay.  The whole Park drains naturally into the deep water along its five miles of picturesque shore.  Another important question is that of facilities for the delivery of goods for exhibition.  Ships from all parts of the world could go right up to a dock at Pelham Bay and land their cargoes close by the exhibition buildings.  New York City itself could not offer better facilities in this respect.  Pelham Bay is about 12 miles from Union Square.  It can be reached by rail from Harlem in about 10 minutes.  The Westchester branch of the New York & New Haven Railroad runs through the Park.  If visitors to the fair preferred going by water, they could not desire a more delightful trip than up the East River and through the waters of the Sound into Eastchester Bay or Pelham Bay itself.  This trip can be made from the Battery within an hour, and the fare need not be more than 10 or 15 cents.  The objection that Pelham Bay Park is outside the city limits probably will not exist in 1892.  Before the great fair was talked of at all, it was intended to ask the Legislature to extend the city line eastward from the Bronx River to the Sound, and thus take in the beautiful new Park, and the request will probably be made when the next Legislature meets.  Pelham Bay Park is by all odds the best place for the great fair, and it ought to be selected without hesitation.  But the first thing is to organize for the fair itself, and that is likely to be done very soon."

Source:  The Proposed Great Fair, Buffalo Courier [Buffalo, NY], Jul. 21, 1889, Vol. LIV, No. 202, p. 9, cols. 4-5.

Archive of the Historic Pelham Web Site.
Home Page of the Historic Pelham Blog.
Order a Copy of "The Haunted History of Pelham, New York"
Order a Copy of "Thomas Pell and the Legend of the Pell Treaty Oak."

More About The Pelham Manor Tribune (1893 - 1896), One of the Earliest Newspapers Published in Pelham

Archive of the Historic Pelham Web Site.
Home Page of the Historic Pelham Blog.
Order a Copy of "The Haunted History of Pelham, New York"
Order a Copy of "Thomas Pell and the Legend of the Pell Treaty Oak."

The Pelham Manor Tribune was one of the earliest newspapers published in the Town of Pelham, second only to The Gazette (published in 1890).  The Pelham Manor Tribune circulated between November 1893 and January 1896 only a couple of years after the founding of the Village of Pelham Manor in 1891.  I have written about The Pelham Manor Tribune on a number of occasions.  See, e.g.:

Fri., Jul. 22, 2005:  Editorial from the Pelham Manor Tribune Published on October 1, 1894.

Tue., Apr. 20, 2010:  Brief Announcement that the Pelham Manor Tribune Commenced Publication in 1893.

I also have written about early newspapers published in the Town of Pelham.  See the extensive bibliography with links to such articles at the end of today's Historic Pelham article.

Today’s Historic Pelham article provides a more detailed history of The Pelham Manor Tribune as well as information about its editor and the Pelham Manor family that supported the nearly three-year venture.

Introduction

The Pelham Manor Tribune began in November, 1893.  Indeed, on November 18, 1893, the New Rochelle Pioneer published a brief "welcome" to The Pelham Manor Tribune, stating "We desire to welcome to our exchange list, a new contemporary in the person of the Pelham Manor Tribune. The Tribune is devoted to the local news of the Manor, and is issued bi-weekly."  Source: [Untitled], New Rochelle Pioneer, Nov. 18, 1893, Vol. XXXIIII, No. 33, p. 4, col. 2.   

The fact that the New Rochelle Pioneer welcomed the new Pelham Manor newspaper should come as no surprise.  Though published and circulated in Pelham Manor, the new newspaper was printed in New Rochelle by the presses of the New Rochelle Pioneer.  It should be noted that, perhaps in recognition of the creation of a new newspaper on the "mainland" part of the Town of Pelham, only a few weeks later City Islander Orrin F. Fordham established The City Island Drift, a weekly community newspaper “devoted to the interests of the Town of Pelham and City Island.”

Pelham Manor resident William George Landsman Beecroft founded The Pelham Manor Tribune.  He was, of course, a member of the prominent Beecroft family of the Village of Pelham Manor.  See Fri., Nov. 11, 2016:  John Robert Beecroft and the Beecroft Family of Pelham Manor.    Born in 1874, at the time he founded the paper William G. L. Beecroft was eighteen years old.  The masthead of his newspaper included a slogan that summarized his philosophy as a journalist:  “This paper will be the friend of the Village in morals and truth, independent of party prejudice.” 

Who Was William George Landsman Beecroft?

Information about William George Beecroft:

Photo and basic info:  http://becraft.info/becraft/i6602.htm#2

William George Landsman Beecroft was the second child of John Robert Beecroft and Elizabeth Corbett who were married on January 16, 1872 in Chicago, Cook County, Illinois.  William was born there on August 16, 1875.  His father emigrated to the United States from England in the 1860s and became an early and prominent resident of the settlement of Pelham Manor as he and Elizabeth raised William and other young members of the family.  Like his son William would be later, John Robert Beecroft was a journalist.  For a few years following his arrival in the United States he was employed with the publisher A. S. Barnes & Company in Chicago and as a manager of the Scribner Publishing Company of Chicago.  In May, 1879 he joined the Century Company, became an editor of the Century Magazine and thereafter moved his family to New York where the family lived in Flushing Queens.  In about 1881, John Robert Beecroft and his wife moved their family to Pelham Manor.   

John Beecroft was an active member of the community.  In addition to his service as a School Board Trustee and as President of the School Board, he also was an active member of Christ Church in Pelham Manor, located virtually across the street from his home.  He served as a Warden of the Church.  He also was a member of the New York Athletic Club, The Church Club, The Polo Club, and the Congregational Club.  He also was a Free Mason with the Huguenot Lodge, F. and A. M. of New Rochelle.

The couple’s son, William, and his three brothers became known throughout Pelham as the “Beecroft Boys” as they grew up in the little settlement.  By the 1890s the family lived in the home that still stands at 1382 Pelhamdale Avenue.

The Beecroft Family Home that Still Stands at 1382 Pelhamdale

Avenue Where The Pelham Manor Tribune Was Prepared for

Printing.  Portions of the Home Are Believed to Have Been Built

in About 1790.  NOTE:  Click on Images To Enlarge.

The Brief Life of The Pelham Manor Tribune

William G. L. Beecroft founded The Pelham Manor Tribune in November, 1893.  He served as editor while one of his younger brothers, Edgar Beecroft, played the day-to-day operational roles of Advertising Manager (and, later, Manager).  William’s older brother, Fred, served as a “business manager” of the venture during summer vacations when he returned home from college.

Truth be told, as one account has noted, “the entire Beecroft family” was involved in the venture.  The venture operated out of the family home at 1382 Pelhamdale Avenue although the newspaper was physically printed in New Rochelle.  The subscription rate was fifty cents per year.  In addition to revenue derived from at least a hundred subscribers, the newspaper sold advertising bought principally by New Rochelle merchants and, occasionally, by New York City merchants.  Advertisers included Daniel J. Kennedy, a “general contractor of sheet metal and hot air work;” Coutant’s Drug Store in New Rochelle, J. L. Eick, a horse harness and collar maker who also was a carriage trimmer; E. Lamben, a dealer in “fancy groceries;” Kusche’s Ideal Market; William Downing, a horse shoer; Huyler’s Candy Store in New York City; and George T. Davis, an undertaker and embalmer. 

After the short run of only two years and two months, on January 4, 1896, William George Landsman Beecroft announced that the issue would be the newspaper’s last.  In an editorial that appeared in that January 4 issue, Beecroft wrote:

“With this issue we present our last attempt at journalism in Pelham Manor.  We sincerely hope that our subscribers have derived as much pleasure from reading our simple little sheet, as the editor has enjoyed writing it.  We have several reasons for allowing the Tribune to sink into [archives], important among which is the fact that Pelham Manor is not yet a large enough field to make the conducting of a newspaper a financial success.  For, although we have enjoyed almost three years of prosperity, we are obliged to admit that our advertisers have patronized the Tribune more on account of the enterprise than because of the benefits which they might derive from advertising in its columns. Another, and by no means secondary reason that makes a newspaper unprofitable in Pelham Manor, is that some of the people do not seem to appreciate the fact that a newspaper in a small village, is a great enhancement to property value and consequently do not give the paper the support it deserves.  If there are any of our subscribers who feel that their fifty cent investment has not been a profitable one, their money will be returned on application.  It has been the endeavor of the management to present a sheet free from scandal and small talk, and to include within its pages only such material as could be read by our youngest reader to advantage.  How far we have succeeded we leave to you, but we can say that in our three years of existence, we have never had a single complaint, nor has the editor ever been horse-whipped (the fate of many an editor).  Kind reader, au revoir.”

With that, the first newspaper published in the Town of Pelham folded.

William George Landsman Beecroft, Founder and Editor of

The Pelham Manor Tribune, in an Undated Photograph (Ca.

1910).  NOTE:  Click on Image to Enlarge.

After closing The Pelham Manor Tribune, William G. L. Beecroft continued his work in the field of journalism as dramatic editor of the New York Press.  He interrupted his work to join the United States Naval Reserve on May 14, 1898 to serve a one-year term during the Spanish American War.  He served during the War on the USS Jason, the last of the monitors, though he saw no action.  With the end of the war he received an early honorable discharge September 6, 1898.

Record of Military Service of William George Landsman Beecroft

During the Spanish American War.  Source:  Abstracts of Spanish

American War Military and Naval Service Records, 1898-1902.

Series B0809 (34 Volumes), New York State Adjutant General's

Office, New York State Archives, Albany, New York.  NOTE:

Click on Image to Enlarge.

On Wednesday, June 24, 1903, Beecroft married Frederika Bette Schmidt.  See “A DRAMATIC EPISODE” in The Fourth Estate, No. 487, p. 4, col. 4 (NY, NY:  Jun. 27, 1903).  The couple had at least six children:  William George Landsman Beecroft Jr., Elizabeth Valerie Beecroft, Richard Edgar Beecroft, Barbara Beecroft, Emily West Beecroft, and Mary Jane Beecroft.  

According to an article in The Pelham Sun (quoted in full below), after working as the dramatic critic of the New York Press, Beecroft did syndicate work under Ervin Wardman.  Beecroft was an avid sportsman and outdoorsman.  He became a writer for the leading outdoors magazine at the time, Forest & Stream.  He became the corporation secretary and, then, an editor of Forest & Stream .  (The magazine later was bought by Field & Stream magazine.)  Thereafter he became, for a short time, an advertising agency executive associated with Maclay & Mullally, Inc., a general advertising agency headquartered in New York City.  There he had charge of the department of general advertising.  Source:  “Ad Field Personals” in The Editor & Publisher, Vol. 49, No. 37, p. 25, cols. 1-2 (NY, NY:  Feb. 24, 1917).  

During World War I, Beecroft worked for the Hercules Powder Company.  After the war, Beecroft was appointed editor and general manager of the American Banker.  Source:  “Change on American Banker” in Editor & Publisher, Vol. 52, No. 18, p. 30, col. 2 (NY, NY:  Oct. 2, 1919).  He moved his family to Darien, Connecticut.

Beecroft worked at American Banker until 1920 when he retired.  When Beecroft finally retired from journalism, he became a fruit farmer with a farm on West Chestnut Avenue in Vineland, New Jersey.  According to family tradition, his son Richard Edgar Beecroft was a sickly child.  When doctors told the family that the child needed "country air," Beecroft retired from journalism and moved to the Vineland, New Jersey farm.  

William Beecroft died in January, 1924 as the result of a tragic accident.  His wife taught at the New Jersey State School for the Feeble Minded Woman.  He and his wife were scheduled to attend a fund-raising entertainment at the school.  An acquaintance named Matt Unsworth, a mason by trade, gave the couple a ride in his truck to the school.  Because the mason's truck was so dirty, William stood in the rear of the vehicle to keep his clothing from getting dirty.  On the way to the school, the driver swerved to avoid debris in the roadway.  William was thrown from the truck and badly injured.  He was taken to the hospital in Vineland where he died two days later.  He was buried in Oak Hill Cemetery, Vineland, Cumberland County, New Jersey.

Role of The Pelham Manor Tribune in an Interesting Legal Dispute Near the Newspaper’s End

In 1896, the tiny four-page newspaper played an interesting role in a legal dispute between a group of Pelham Manor residents, led by the Secor family, who opposed trolley lines in the Village of Pelham Manor and a trolley car company and other Pelham Manor residents who favored such trolley lines.  Indeed, a number of Pelham residents fought bitterly to keep trolley tracks out of Pelham Manor. There were at least two lawsuits that resulted in reported decisions in which Pelham Manor residents sought to block construction of the Toonerville Trolley tracks through Pelham Manor along Pelhamdale Avenue.  One was McLean v. Westchester Electric Ry. Co., et al., 25 Misc. 383, 55 N.Y.S. 556 (Sup. Ct. Kings Co. 1898).  The other was Anna M. Secor v. Board of Trustees of Village of Pelham Manor, et al., 6 A.D. 236, 39 N.Y.S. 993 (App. Div. 2d Dep’t 1896).  The second suit involved arguments concerning publication of notice in The Pelham Manor Tribune.  I have written before about the monumental fight to block trolley lines in the Village of Pelham Manor.  See Tue., Apr. 19, 2005:  Pelham Manor Residents Fight Construction of the Toonerville Trolley Line. 

https://historicpelham.blogspot.com/2005/04/pelham-manor-residents-fight.html  Interestingly, the lawsuit that concerned The Pelham Manor Tribune provided interesting insight regarding both the tiny Village of Pelham Manor and its tiny four-page newspaper. 

In 1895, the Westchester Electric Railway Company submitted an application to the Board of Trustees of the Village of Pelham Manor to permit it to lay trolley tracks through the village along Pelhamdale Avenue.  On December 2, 1895, the Board took the matter under advisement but adopted a resolution setting January 4, 1896 as the date the application would be considered.  To comply with statutory notice requirements, the Board arranged for publication of notice of the hearing on the railroad company's application for four successive weeks in the weekly local newspaper, The Pelham Manor Tribune.  Thereafter, the Board of Trustees approved the application of the Westchester Electric Railroad Company.

Anna M. Secor -- whose family owned a large tract of land in Pelham Manor -- commenced an action and obtained an injunction prohibiting the railroad company from "acting upon the consent granted by" the Board of Trustees and restraining the Board from further acting on the application of the railroad company "until they have published the notice as required by statute."  

The statute at issue required that in the case of a village like Pelham Manor without a daily newspaper, public notice most be provided "for fourteen days" in "a newspaper published therein, if any there shall be, and if none, then daily in two daily newspapers if there be two, if not, one published in the city nearest such village or town."  Anna Secor, through her lawyers, argued among other things that although The Pelham Manor Tribune was distributed in Pelham Manor, it was not published in Pelham Manor since it was printed in New Rochelle.  The Court rejected the argument, holding that "We think that there has not been established any substantial departure from the requirements of the statute, and a case was not made warranting the interference of the court by injunction. The order should be reversed, and the injunction dissolved, with $10 costs and disbursements."

In other words, after the tiny newspaper closed its doors forever, the Appellate Division, Second Department of the State of New York held in a judicial decision that the little publication was, indeed, a newspaper. . . . . . . . 

*          *          *          *          *

Below are transcriptions of some of the items on which today's Historic Pelham article is based.  Each is followed by a citation and link to its source.

“Courage and Chivalry Were Attributes of Pelham’s First Newspaper Editor

-----

Examples of The Pelham Manor Tribune, First Newspaper in Pelham, Give Interesting Picture of the Gay Nineties in Residential Suburb.

-----

A courageous and chivalrous journalist was William G. Beecroft, founder and editor of The Pelham Manor Tribune, Pelham’s first newspaper, two issues of which came to The Pelham Sun this week. 

For three years from 1893 to 1896 Pelham Manor had a newspaper of its own, and it did a good job serving the entire community.

In going through papers left by the late Mr. Alfred L. Hammett of Pelham Manor, members of his family found two issues of The Pelham Manor Tribune, dated December 28, 1895 and January 4, 1896, which Mr. Hammett had preserved.  They were given to Building Inspector Clyde F. Howes who is a collector of old Pelham Manor relics, and Mr. Howes permitted The Pelham Sun editor to make a study of them. 

This led to some interesting research.  From Village Attorney Edgar C. Beecroft we learned that the Tribune was founded by his brother, the late William G. Beecroft, who was at the end of his teens when he decided that the small residential community was ripe for a journalistic venture. 

Editor Beecroft nailed to his ‘masthead’ the following ‘This paper will be the friend of the Village in morals and truth, independent of party prejudice.’  Perusal of the copies of the small newspaper gives no evidence that he did not keep faith with this platform.

At times, according to Village Attorney Beecroft, the entire Beecroft family were members of the [venture].  Fred, another brother, also since deceased, became business manager during the Summer vacations from college.

‘In fact I remember that I was named as advertising manager at the time,’ said the Village Attorney.

The subscription rate was fifty cents per year and the circulation [illegible] hundred copies.  The office of the publication was in the Beecroft home, and the four page newspaper was printed in the office of the New Rochelle Pioneer.

Editor Beecroft apparently had a delightful sense of humor.  In his editorial column of the issue of December 28, 1895 we read the following:

‘Now that war with England is imminent shall Pelham Manor shirk its [duty]?  Certainly not!  Let our [illegible] fire department be organized in a company of home guards now.  Nothing could so effectively throw ‘cold water’ on any part of the Britishers to invade an otherwise peaceful domain.  ‘Upwards and at ‘em.’

The same issue contains a reference to the efforts of villagers to organize a skating clb and to flood the courts for their pond.  Editor Beecroft offers the following poetic [vision]:

‘In his overcoat with cushions Willie’s going out to skate,

He will need the yielding softness when he cuts the figure eight.’

The editorial pen was not without another instinct particularly [illegible] of a meeting of a [dancing class] which was ‘so successful that a cotillion is being discussed.’  Editor Beecroft reports that of his visiting friends realize ‘Every woman on the floor [will be lovely] and a good dancer.’

The united [illegible] of Pelham also warmly advises this sentiment, adds the chivalrous editor.

The editor was also an epicure:

‘On Friday night at the close of the dancing class, a party of dancers adjourned to Mr. Beache’s residence to enjoy one of Mrs. Beache’s gourmand Welsh rarebits.  The rarebits [illegible] in Mrs. Beache’s [illegible] and the [illegible] have been good [illegible] hungry appearances.  When the onslaught of the smokers had subsided.  The unanimous vote of the party was that they had spent an exceedingly pleasant evening.’

Civic enterprise on the part of local officials is shown in the five lines of one item:  ‘After a long fight the railroad company has decided to erect a sixty-foot bridge over Pelhamdale avenue.  This is largely due to the efforts of James F. Secor, our road commissioner.’

[Illegible] Began the ‘Toonerville Trolley’

Those were the days before the trolley car came to Pelham Manor.  In fact the big issue of the day was the franchise which was being brought by the Westchester Electric Railroad Co. for the extension of its line in Pelham Heights, through Colonial and Pelhamdale avenues to the Shore Road, the line which later became affectionately known as the original ‘Toonerville Trolley.’

Editor Beecroft had called attention of his readers to the fact that there was nothing in the franchise to prevent the use of horse cars on the line.  To this John M. Tierney, counsel for the railroad company in a very political letter to the editor, called attention to the fact that the railroad company intended to operate by electric rail, and that the officers [illegible] to have incorporated the trolley line would not be operated by horse power.

‘The road in Pelham Manor is intended to be operated in connection with the present system running to Mount Vernon and with the system authorized to be built in New Rochelle and leading down to the City of New York, and it must be self-evident that horses could not be used’ stated the attorney.

The small paper contains a substantial amount of advertising, mainly from New Rochelle merchants.  There’s one from D. J. Kennedy, ‘general contractor of sheet metal and hot air work,’ who gives a New Rochelle office address, but reminds the readers that he is a resident of ‘Pelhamville.’  That’s none other than Dan Kennedy now a village trustee of North Pelham.

Other advertisers that old timers will delight in recalling are Coutant’s Drug Store which advertises ‘Be sure and Call in before purchasing;’ J. L. Eick, harness and collar maker, also a carriage trimmer.  E. Lambden, dealer in fancy groceries; Kusche’s Ideal Market which offers ‘special rates to Yachts, Hotels and Large Consumers;’ William Downing, practical horse shoer, and Huyler’s candy store in New York City.

Wares Department store in New Rochelle advertises a ‘January Skirmish, with Magazines filled with goods and guns loaded with bargains.  Our forces are ready to attack the enemy – stagnation.  Our band plays lively music to the tune of small profits.  You must join the pursuit quickly or you miss getting gowns, drawers, skirts, corset covers, shirts, infants’ slips at the cost of the muslin.  Nothing for work or material, War, War, to the end.  This January Sale is to end all odd lots at Wares.’

George T. Davis, undertaker and embalmer, is another modern advertiser.

A Gay Nineties New Year Eve

We find that James Wilkinson and Mrs. Howard Scribner led the cotillion at the Manor Club New Year’s Eve dance.

From 8.30 until midnight the dancing was informal.  When the hands of the watch indicated five minutes to twelve each dancer was presented with a tin horn, with explicit instructions as to how and when the instrument should be manipulated, but the horns and bazoos [sic] were no sooner ‘floated’ that pandemonium reigned.  When the clock struck twelve all joined in singing Auld Lang Syne, after which the cotillion was begun.

‘The figures were simple but extremely pretty, one figure being the lantern figure.

‘The house was beautifully decorated with evergreens, holly and mistletoe.  Rugs were tastefully arranged in the alcoves.  Half the cardroom was turned into lemonade well, while the other half was so arranged as to make a beautiful place to sit out dances.  The new house committee, Mrs. Roosevelt, Mrs. Gilliland, Mrs. Thornton, Mrs. Holmes and Mrs. Secor, certainly deserve much credit for engineering such an enterprise.’

There was grave concern about education in January 1896.  The chief problem was whether the registration at the old Prospect Hill School which was situated on Jackson avenue, was sufficient to warrant the addition of a second teacher.  We read the following:

‘School Trustee Beach submits to us the following statistics obtained from recent canvass of the village by the School Board:

‘Number of eligible school children, 79; at private schools, 35; at Prospect Hill School, 26; at no school, 18.  Probably 25 more pupils would attend the Prospect Hill School were added facilities given.  The canvass is not complete, as several citizens declined to express an opinion.  The above figures show that another year should not pass without an additional teacher to instruct the higher grades.  The School Board considers the present teacher Miss Cowles entirely competent.  Her time, however, is entirely taken up by the average number of 20 children now attending the school.

There are frequent references in the social notes to the old resident families of the Manor, the Blacks, the Secors, the Roosevelts, the Barnetts, and the Gillilands.

Valedictory

However, Editor Beecroft found that village journalism in the Gay Nineties was an unprofitable task, so after three years, he found it necessary to suspend publication.  The following editorial published on January 4, 1896 is the valedictory of a member of the Fourth Estate, who would have set a pattern for courageous journalism of today had his venture continued through the years:

‘With this issue we present our last attempt at journalism in Pelham Manor.  We sincerely hope that our subscribers have derived as much pleasure from reading our simple little sheet, as the editor has enjoyed writing it.

‘We have several reasons for allowing the Tribune to sink into [archives], important among which is the fact that Pelham Manor is not yet a large enough field to make the conducting of a newspaper a financial success.  For, although we have enjoyed almost three years of prosperity, we are obliged to admit that our advertisers have patronized the Tribune more on account of the enterprise than because of the benefits which they might derive from advertising in its columns.

‘Another, and by no means secondary reason that makes a newspaper unprofitable in Pelham Manor, is that some of the people do not seem to appreciate the fact that a newspaper in a small village, is a great enhancement to property value and consequently do not give the paper the support it deserves.

‘If there are any of our subscribers who feel that their fifty cent investment has not been a profitable one, their money will be returned on application.

‘It has been the endeavor of the management to present a sheet free from scandal and small talk, and to include within its pages only such material as could be read by our youngest reader to advantage.  How far we have succeeded we leave to you, but we can say that in our three years of existence, we have never had a single complaint, nor has the editor ever been horse-whipped (the fate of many an editor).  Kind reader, au revoir.’

‘What became of Editor Beecroft?’ we asked the Village Attorney.  ‘Was the Tribune his only journalistic venture?’

‘No sir,’ said Mr. Beecroft.  ‘Will went on to become the dramatic critic of the New York Press, and later he did syndicate work under the late Ervin Wardman, who was formerly publisher of the Press.  He retired to farming and when he died five years ago, he was a prosperous fruit farmer of Vineland, New Jersey.’

Court Said It Was A Newspaper

There was some who laughed at the little Tribune, said Mr. Beecroft.  ‘But there’s a legal decision which proves that it actually was a newspaper.  There was one group which opposed the trolley.  Line, so they tried to block it on the ground that the legal notices were not properly advertised, charging that the Pelham Manor Tribune was not a newspaper nor was it actually printed in the village, such requirements being necessary.  The Supreme Court in a decision declared that The Pelham Manor Tribune was a newspaper and inasmuch as its office of publication was in Pelham Manor, the publication of the notices complied with the law, so the motion of the opponents was denied.”

Source:  Courage and Chivalry Were Attributes of Pelham’s First Newspaper Editor -- Examples of The Pelham Manor Tribune, First Newspaper in Pelham [sic], Give Interesting Picture of the Gay Nineties in Residential Suburb, The Pelham Sun, Dec. 9, 1938, Vol. 28, No. 36, p. 15, cols. 1-3. 

“SECOR v. BOARD OF TRUSTEES.

(6 App. Div. 236)

SECOR v. BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF VILLAGE OF PELHAM MANOR et al.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.  June 23, 1896.)

1.  STREET RAILROADS – CONSENT OF LOCAL AUTHORITIES – PUBLICATION OF NOTICE.

Laws 1890, c. 565, § 92, as amdned by Laws 1892, c. 676, provides that, where application is made to the local authorities for consent to build a street railroad, such authorities shall publish notice thereof daily, if in a city, for at least 14 days, in two of its daily newspapers, and if in a village or town, for at least 14 days in a newspaper published therein, if any there shall be, and, if none, then daily in two daily newspapers, if there be two, -- if not, one, -- published in the city nearest such village or town.  Held, that the statute does not require daily publication of the notice in the village or town where no daily paper is published, but publication for the prescribed length of time in a weekly paper in the village where no daily paper was published is sufficient.

2.  SAME – PLACE OF PUBLICATION OF PAPER.

Where the publishers of a newspaper have their office in a village where they mail and circulate the paper, it is published in the village, though it is printed elsewhere.

3.  SAME – PROCEDURE – DISCRETION OF BOARD.

Laws 1890, c. 565, § 92, as amdned by Laws 1892, c. 676, which provides that public notice shall be given of the time and place when an application for consent of the local authorities to the construction of a street railway will be considered, by failing to provide when and how the hearing shall be had, leaves that matter in the discretion of the board.

Appeal from special term, Westchester county.

Action by Anna M. Secor against the board of trustees of the village of Pelham Manor and others to set aside, as null and void, a certain resolution of defendant board of trustees purporting to grant to defendant railroad company the right to construct a street surface railroad on certain streets in defendant village.  From an order continuing an injunction pendente lite, defendants appeal.

Reversed.

Argued before BROWN, P. J., and CULLEN, BARTLETT, and HATCH, JJ.

Jabish Holmes, Jr., and John M. Tierney, for appellants.

William Vanamee, for respondent.

HATCH, J.  The injunction order herein restrains the board of trustees of said village from acting upon the application of the Westchester Electric Railroad Company for leave to lay its tracks in the village until they have published the notice as required by the statute, and restrained the said railroad company from acting upon the consent granted by said board of trustees.  Upon oral argument the injunction was sought to be sustained upon the ground that the consent which was given by the board to the railroad company was so given without the public hearing, or without sufficient opportunity for such hearing, as contemplated by the statute, and also upon the ground that the publication of the notice of hearing as required by the statute had not been complied with.  It was then practically conceded that the length of time during which said notice was published was sufficient, if it had been made in a paper con- [Page 993 / Page 994] templated by the statute.  Reflection seems to have convinced counsel that he was overhasty in making this concession, as we find the point urged as error upon his brief submitted since the oral presentation was made.  The record discloses that a proper application was made by the railroad company, and that the board of trustees took the matter under advisement on the 2d day of December, 1895, and thereupon adopted a resolution fixing the 4^th day of January, 1896, for the first consideration of the application, and directed that public notice be given by publication for at least 14 days in the Pelham Manor Tribune.  It is not disputed but that publication was made in this newspaper for four successive weeks following the adoption of the resolution, or but that the matter thereof was in compliance with law.  The point made is that the paper was not published in the village of Pelham Manor; that publication in such paper was not the publication contemplated by the statute.  The stature which regulates this proceeding is section 92 of the railroad law (Laws 1890, c. 565, as amended by Laws 1892, c. 676).  It reads:

‘The application for the consent of the local authorities shall be in writing, and before acting thereon such authorities shall give public notice thereof and of the time and place when it will first be considered, which notice shall be published daily in any city for at least fourteen days in two of its daily newspapers if there be two, if not, in one, to be designated by the mayor, and in any village or town for at least fourteen days in a newspaper published therein, if any there shall be, and if none, then daily in two daily newspapers if there be two, if not, one published in the city nearest such village or town.’

The first clause of the statute evidently relates to cities, and contemplates that, as they there have daily newspapers, publication shall be made therein for 14 days.  It seems equally clear that daily notice is not required or contemplated in a village or town, for when it speaks of them it omits the word ‘daily,’ and simply requires publication in a newspaper published therein.  If any other construction should obtain, many villages and towns could make no compliance with the statute.  If there existed a weekly newspaper, a notice published therein would be invalid, while, if they proceeded to publish in an adjoining city, they would be met by the provision that this course is only permissible when no newspaper is published in the village or town.  The conditions being so essentially different between village and city, the statute takes cognizance thereof, and provides for daily publication in one, and publication for 14 days in the other.  The notice was published once a week for four consecutive weeks, beginning December 15, 1895.  This was sufficient, so far as length of notice is concerned, as it covered a period in excess of 14 days.  A publication once a week answered all the requirements of the statute.  In re Bassford, 50 N. Y. 509; Wood v. Knapp, 100 N. Y. 109, 2 N. E. 632.  The evidence is abundant to show that the newspaper in which the notice was published was one which answered the requirements of the law.  It was printed in New Rochelle, but the place of business of its publishers, the mailing list, and place where it was mailed and circulated, was t the village of Pelham Manor.  It was not published where it was printed, for it was not there circulated and given out to the public, which [Page 994 / Page 995] is the essential thing necessary to constitute a publication.  Bragdon v. Hatch, 77 Me. 433, 1 Atl. 140; Ricketts v. Village of Hyde Park, 85 Ill. 110.  The statute providing for public notice of the time and place when the application will be considered by the board evidently contemplates that a hearing shall be had, by the board, of the persons interested.  When and how this hearing shall be had is not provided in the statute.  The method of procedure must therefore rest very largely in the discretion of the board, and while the courts would not tolerate an abuse of discretion which arbitrarily excluded a fair and reasonable hearing, by the board, of interested parties; yet when it appears that parties have had a hearing, and reasonable opportunity has been given for the hearing of all, the court ought not to interfere and restrain action by the board unless it be clearly shown that this right has been unnecessarily denied, and that actual prejudice and damage has resulted, or will result, to the party seeking redress.  In the case before us it appears, without dispute, that, when the board met, interested parties were heard for and against granting the application, and the minutes of the board recite that, after hearing many citizens (naming them), no other citizen apparently wishing to be heard, Mr. Roosevelt moved that the public hearing be closed, and that the board proceed with business.  Duly seconded and carried.’  The resolution which the board subsequently adopted recited that the public notice was given and a public hearing had in pursuance thereof, ‘whereat all persons so desiring were given an opportunity to be heard, and were heard.’  These recitals are not essentially disputed.  The affidavits in opposition do not dispute the substantiated fact of the recital, which clearly establishes that the public meeting contemplated by the statute was held, and that fair opportunity for the expression of views was given.  Assuming the fact to be that the public hearing was not formally closed at the first meeting, but was adjourned from time to time, and at such times interested parties were further heard, does not at all militate against our conclusion.  There was no obligation resting upon the board, nor was there command of the statute, that they should continue to adjourn for the purpose of hearing interested parties, or that interested parties acquired the right to be heard because the board adjourned without taking formal action upon the application.  We do not say that there may not be circumstances which would require interference by the court even though hearing had been once had, but they do not exist here.  There is nothing which appears in these papers to show that any one has been prejudiced or damaged by the action which the board took, or that any one was prejudiced because the board did not further hear them.  All that is asserted of damage to any one is that, by tearing up the street and laying the tracks, plaintiff will be injured.  This injury she will even though no infirmity attends upon the grant.  It is not occasioned by failure to further hear interested parties, for it is not made to appear that this failure, if failure it be, has changed or affected in the slightest the action of the board, or would have done so.  When the board granted the application, all the trustees were present; and they were authorized then to perform [Page 995 / Page 996] any proper official act, and consequently authorized to pass the resolution which they did.  1 Dill. Mun. Corp. (4^th Ed.) §§ 263, 264; 1 Beach, Pub. Corp. §§ 265-271.  We think that there has not been established any substantial departure from the requirements of the statute, and a case was not made warranting the interference of the court by injunction.

The order should be reversed, and the injunction dissolved, with $10 costs and disbursements.  All concur.”

Source:  Anna M. Secor v. Board of Trustees of Village of Pelham Manor, et al., 6 A.D. 236, 39 N.Y.S. 993 (App. Div. 2d Dep’t 1896).

*          *          *          *          *

I have written extensively about early newspapers published in the Town of Pelham.  Below are citations and links to various such Historic Pelham articles published in the last few years.  

Mon., Feb. 05, 2018:  News From the Pelham Press of June 4, 1897.

Wed., Jan. 31, 2018:  News from the Pelham Press Printed on May 21, 1897.

Tue., Dec. 05, 2017:  News from the February 2, 1903 Issue of The Pelham Republican.

Mon., Oct. 16, 2017:  An Editorial from Early Pelham Newspaper The Register Published in 1906.

Fri., Sep. 29, 2017:  Professor David A. Van Buskirk's Scandalous Musicale in North Pelham in 1897 (transcribing "PELHAM 30 YEARS AGO" that reproduced news from the Pelham Press published Jan. 23, 1897).

Tue., Aug. 30, 2016:  News Reported by the Pelham Press on February 13, 1897.

Wed., Oct. 07, 2015:  The Week that Was in 1896: Pelham Press News of Pelham, November 19, 1896 to November 25, 1896.

Mon., Aug. 04, 2014:  A History of Newspapers Published in Pelham. 

Thu., Jun. 26, 2014:  A History of the Early Years of The Pelham Sun, A Pelham Newspaper Institution. 

Mon., Sep. 05, 2005:  The Pelham Republican:  Official Newspaper of The Villages of Pelham and North Pelham in 1902. 

Mon., May 23, 2005: Thomas M. Kennett, Long Time Editor of The Pelham Sun. 

Fri., Apr. 01, 2005:  The Earliest Newspaper in Pelham?

Archive of the Historic Pelham Web Site.
Home Page of the Historic Pelham Blog.
Order a Copy of "The Haunted History of Pelham, New York"
Order a Copy of "Thomas Pell and the Legend of the Pell Treaty Oak."