Historic Pelham

Wednesday, December 20, 2017

Early Organization of Pelham's First "Horse Railroad" in 1884

Archive of the Historic Pelham Web Site.
Home Page of the Historic Pelham Blog.

Order a Copy of "Thomas Pell and the Legend of the Pell Treaty Oak."

Prior to the opening of Pelham's Bartow Station on the Branch Line in the early 1870s, a stage coach line established by a man named Robert Vickery traveled from City Island to Mount Vernon. In about 1873, so-called horse cars replaced the stage coach line. When the horse car line first began, it was owned by Judge Henry DeWitt Carey, a banker.

The first horse car line involved a car pulled by a single horse. According to one source, "it left Belden Point and stopped at three locations on the island - Horton, Fordham, and Bridge Streets. People desiring to travel to New York City would then take the horse car to Bartow Station, pay a 5¢ fare to Westchester County and board a trolley to 177th Street, where they would make another connection to the Battery." See Scott, Catherine A., Images of America: City Island and Orchard Beach, p. 48 (Arcadia Publishing 1999; reissued 2004). The cars looked much like trolley cars. Later, beginning in the mid-1880s, the horse cars were replaced with a "horse car railroad" that ran on tracks, but were pulled by a pair of horses. Indeed, for sixteen years the two principal horses used to pull the horse cars were known as "Bob" and "Harry".

When the time came to convert the simple horse car line to a horse railroad line, two things had to happen: (1) the commissioners of highways of the Town of Pelham had to approve the laying of tracks; and (2) either a majority of adjacent property owners had to consent to installation of the line or a court had to find the horse railroad to be "necessary."

In 1883 and 1884, plans were underway to build a horse railroad from Bartow Station on the New Haven Branch Line and the southern tip of City Island. On August 30, 1884, two companies were chartered, each to build half of the line. The Pelham Park Railroad Company was created to build the tracks on the mainland from Bartow Station to Marshall's Corner (i.e., to the City Island Bridge) a distance of about 1-1/2 miles. The City Island Railroad Company was incorporated to build the tracks from Marshall's Corner to Brown's Hotel near the southern tip of City Island. There reportedly were plans to merge the two companies after the horse railroad tracks were constructed.

Only a month or so after the two companies were chartered, they submitted reports effective as of September 30, 1884 for inclusion in the Second Annual Report of the Board of Railroad Commissioners of the State of New York. Though the two reports indicated that little progress had yet been made, they shed interesting light on the status of the organization of the two horse railroads that then were planned to connect Bartow Station with City Island almost to its very southern tip.

The two companies had interlocking directorates. Indeed, the two boards of directors were comprised of the same seven members on each -- five of whom were from Pelham Manor with one from New York City and another from Long Island City. Two of the directors from Pelham Manor served as President and Secretary and as Treasurer and Superintendent of both companies (John B. Miller and W. R. Hamberton, respectively). The other three Pelham Manor directors were members of the Miller family: C. M. H. Miller, M. E. Miller, and Albert A. Miller. The director from New York City was Inglis Stuart. The director from Long Island City was Eliphalet N. Anable.

The City island Railroad was able quickly to secure the necessary consents of the local authorities and local property owners to the construction of its line on City Island. Indeed, the company so represented in its report to the Board of Railroad Commissioners as of September 30, 1884.

The Pelham Bay Park Railroad, however, was having trouble. It reported that as of September 30, it had "been unable, as yet, to obtain the consent of the requisite number of property-owners along its line." It further noted that no work could begin until it obtained the necessary consents. The City Island Railroad thus reported that "no work has been done because of the inability of the Pelham Park Railroad Company, whose road is necessary as an outlet to this road, to obtain the consent of the property owners along its line."

Both companies issued $50,000 in capital stock. As of September 30, 1884, both companies had unpaid subscriptions to purchase $42,250 of the stock.

Pelham, it seemed, would have its Horse Railroad. It was not quite ready, however, during the fall of 1884.

Undated Postcard View of Bartow & City Island Horse Railroad Car

at the First Bartow Train Station that Was Replaced With a Lovely

Stone Station Designed by Cass Gilbert and Built in About 1908.

NOTE: Click on Image to Enlarge.

*          *          *          *          *

"PELHAM PARK.
(Date of charter, August 30, 1884.)
NOT IN OPERATION.
-----

This company has been unable, as yet, to obtain the consent of the requisite number of property-owners along its line. Work will be commenced as soon as the consents are obtained.

No assessment has been levied upon the subscribers, except the first one of ten per cent ten per cent on $1,000 per mile as required by law, it being deemed inexpedient to call in any further sum until it is needed.

STOCK AND DEBT.

Capital stock as by charter.............................$50,000.00
Capital stock, amount now..............................50,000.00
Amount of stock subscribed............................42,250.00
Total amount now paid in of capital stock..... 2,000.00
The amount now of floating debt.................... 100.00

[Page 1072 / Page 1073]

PELHAM PARK.

COST OF ROAD AND EQUIPMENT.

For land, buildings and fixtures, including land damages....$137.59

CHARACTERISTICS OF ROAD.

Length of road, main line, from Bartow station,
Pelham, to Marshall's corner, about.......................................1.50 miles.

GENERAL BALANCE SHEET, SHOWING CONDITION OF ACCOUNTS AT THE CLOSE OF BUSINESS SEPTEMBER 30, 1884.

Assets.

Construction account..............................................................     $137.59
Accounts receivable............................................................... 42,050.00
Cash on hand..........................................................................        162.41

Total..........................................................................................$42,350.00

Liabilities.

Capital stock............................................................................$42,250.00
Accounts payable...................................................................        100.00

Total...........................................................................................$42,350.00

NAMES AND RESIDENCE OF OFFICERS OF THE COMPANY.

Names of Directors.                                                 Residence.

ELIPHALET N. ANABLE........................................Long Island City, N. Y.
INGLIS STUART......................................................New York City
JOHN B. MILLER.....................................................Pelham Manor, N. Y.
C. M. H. MILLER......................................................Pelham Manor, N. Y.
M. E. MILLER...........................................................Pelham Manor, N. Y.
ALBERT A. MILLER...............................................Pelham Manor, N. Y.
W. R. HAMBERTON...............................................Pelham Manor, N. Y.
President and Sec. .... JOHN B. MILLER............Pelham Manor, N. Y.
Treasurer and Supt.....W. R. HAMBERTON........Pelham Manor, N. Y.

Communications intended for this company should be addressed to the company, Pelham Manor, Westchester county, N. Y."

Source: Second Annual Report of the Board of Railroad Commissioners of the State of New York for the Fiscal Year Ending September 30, 1884 -- Transmitted to the Legislature January 12, 1885, Vol. II, pp. 1072-1073 (Albany, NY: Weed Parsons & Co., 1885).

"CITY ISLAND (Pelham).
(Date of charter, August 30, 1884.)
NOT IN OPERATION.
-----

This company has obtained the consent of the local authorities and property owners to the construction of its line, but no work has been done because of the inability of the Pelham Park Railroad Company, whose road is necessary as an outlet to this road, to obtain the consent of the property owners along its line.

No assessment has been levied upon the subscribers except the first one of 10 per cent on $1,000 per mile, as required by law, and it is not probable that there will be any further assessments until the Pelham Park Railroad Company is ready to construct its line.

STOCK AND DEBT.

Capital stock as by charter.................................$50,000.00
Capital stock, amount now.................................   50,000.00
Amount of stock subscribed..............................    42,250.00
Total amount now paid in of capital stock.......          200.00
The amount now of floating debt......................         103.75

COST OF ROAD AND EQUIPMENT.

For land, buildings and fixtures,
   including land damage...............................    149.33

CHARACTERISTICS OF ROAD.

Length of road, main line, from Marshall's
   Corner, Pelham, to Brown's Hotel, Pelham..... 1.5 miles.

GENERAL BALANCE SHEET, SHOWING CONDITION OF ACCOUNTS AT THE CLOSE OF BUSINESS SEPTEMBER 30, 1884.

Assets.

Construction account..............................................    $149.33
Accounts receivable................................................42,050.00
Cash on hand...........................................................      154.42

Total..........................................................................$42,353.75

Liabilities.

Capital stock...........................................................$42,250.00
Accounts payable..................................................        103.75

Total..........................................................................$42,353.75

NAMES AND RESIDENCE OF OFFICERS OF THE COMPANY.

Names of Directors.                                 Residence.

ELIPHALET N. ANABLE..................................Long Island City.
INGLIS STUART................................................New York City.
JOHN B. MILLER...............................................Pelham Manor, N. Y.
C. M. H. MILLER................................................Pelham Manor, N. Y.
M. E. MILLER.....................................................Pelham Manor, N. Y.
ALBERT A. MILLER.........................................Pelham Manor, N. Y.
W. R. HAMBERTON.........................................Pelham Manor, N. Y.
Pres. and Sec.............JOHN B. MILLER.........Pelham Manor, N. Y.
Treasurer and Supt....W. R. HAMBERTON....Pelham Manor, N. Y.

Communication intended for this company should be addressed, City island Railroad Company, Pelham Manor, Westchester county, N. Y."

Source: Second Annual Report of the Board of Railroad Commissioners of the State of New York for the Fiscal Year Ending September 30, 1884 -- Transmitted to the Legislature January 12, 1885, Vol. II, p. 988 (Albany, NY: Weed Parsons & Co., 1885).

* * * * *

I have written about the City Island Horse Railroad on numerous occasions. For a few examples, see:

Thu., Jan. 22, 2015: Lawsuit in 1884 Cleared the Way for Construction of Horse Railroad from Bartow Station to Lower Part of City Island in Pelham.

Mon., Sep. 22, 2014: New York City Sport Fishermen Travel the Horse Railroad in 1886 to Fish in Pelham.

Mon., Jul. 18, 2011: City Island Horse Railroad Temporarily Shut Down in 1892 Over Cruelty Concerns.

Thu., May 13, 2010: More on the Early History of the Pelham and City Island Railroad.

Tue., May 4, 2010: Questions Regarding the Trolley Franchise from Bartow Station to the Tip of City Island Arose in 1915.

Mon., May 3, 2010: Efforts To Reorganize the Operators of the City Island Horse Railroad and Monorail in 1914.

Fri., April 30, 2010: "Truly, An Illuminating Little Passage in the History of New-York!" - Efforts to Develop Shore Road Trolley Line in 1897.

Thu., April 29, 2010: City Islanders Complain and Force the Operators of Their Horse Railroad to Agree to Replace Antiquated Cars in 1908.

Wed., April 28, 2010: Efforts by the Pelham Park Horse Railroad to Expand and Develop a Trolley Car Line on Shore Road in 1897.

Tue., April 27, 2010: New York City's Interborough Rapid Transit Company Sued to Foreclose a Mortgage on the Horse Railroad in 1911.

Mon., April 26, 2010: Public Service Commission Couldn't Find Marshall's Corners in 1909.

Fri., March 5, 2010: Construction of the City Island Horse Railroad in 1887.

Thu., March 4, 2010: Beginnings of Horse Railroad - News from Pelham and City Island Published in 1884.

Wed., March 3, 2010: 1879 Advertisement for Robert J. Vickery's City Island Stage Line, A Predecessor to the City Island Horse Railroad.

Tue., March 2, 2010: 1901 Report Indicated that The Flynn Syndicate Planned to Buy the Pelham Bay Park & City Island Horse Car Line.

Mon., March 1, 2010: Flynn Syndicate Buys the City Island Horse Car Line in 1907 to Incorporate It Into Electric Trolley Line.

Fri., February 26, 2010: 1913 Decision of Public Service Commission to Allow Reorganization of City Island Horse Railroad for Electrification.

Thu., February 25, 2010: Photograph of Patrick Byrnes and Article About His Retirement of the City Island Horse Car in 1914.

Wed., February 24, 2010: Attempted Suicide of City Island's Long-Time Horse Car Driver

Wed., February 3, 2010: Early Information Published in 1885 About the Organization of the "City Island Railroad", a Horse Railroad from Bartow Station to City Island

Tue., February 2, 2010: Information About the Pelham Park Railroad at its Outset

Fri., January 22, 2010: 1884 Account of Early Origins of Horse Railroad Between Bartow Station and City Island.

Mon., January 4, 2010: 1888 Local News Account Describes Altercation on the Horse Railroad Running from Bartow Station to City Island.

Wed., December 2, 2009: Accident on Horse-Car of the Pelham Park Railroad Line in 1889.

Thu., December 31, 2009: 1887 Election of the Board of Directors of The City Island and Pelham Park Horse Railroad Company.

Tue., September 1, 2009: Pelham News on February 29, 1884 Including Talk of Constructing a New Horse Railroad from Bartow to City Island.

Wed., Jan. 04, 2006: Another Post Card Image of the Horse Car That Ran Between Bartow and City Island.

Fri., Dec. 30, 2005:  Subdivision Development Map Created in 1873 for Bartow Village in the Town of Pelham.

Mon. Dec. 12, 2005:  19th Century Subdivision Map of Planned Bartow Village.

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

Thu., June 23, 2005: Horse Cars Come To City Island in the Town of Pelham in the 1880s.

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

Archive of the Historic Pelham Web Site.

Home Page of the Historic Pelham Blog.

Order a Copy of "Thomas Pell and the Legend of the Pell Treaty Oak."

Labels: 1884, City Island, City Island and Pelham Horse Railroad. Pelham Park Railroad Company, City Island Bridge, City Island Railroad Company, Horse, Horse Railroad, Horses, Transportation

Wednesday, September 20, 2017

1873 Committee Report on Proposal to Have Westchester County Purchase City Island Bridge

Archive of the Historic Pelham Web Site.

Home Page of the Historic Pelham Blog.

Order a Copy of "Thomas Pell and the Legend of the Pell Treaty Oak."

In 1872, the Board of Supervisors of Westchester County appointed a special committee to study and prepare a report regarding whether the county should purchase (and take over) City island Bridge between the mainland and City Island, then a part of the Town of Pelham. The initiative was pushed by Pelham Town Supervisor Benjamin Hegeman who served as supervisor from 1861 until 1873. Today's Historic Pelham article provides background and context for the report issued by the special committee.

Today we seem to think nothing of hopping onto I-95 with an EZ-Pass and paying tolls to travel the highway, cross the Tappan Zee, and -- frankly -- travel throughout the region. Things were similar in the 19th century, though Westchester County decided to do something about it.

In the 19th century there were tolls everywhere in the region as well. The Harlem Bridge was a toll bridge. Pelham Bridge was a toll bridge. The Westchester Turnpike and Post Road, otherwise known as the section of today's Boston Post Road that passes through Pelham Manor, was a toll road. Other bridges and highways in the county required tolls as well.

The people of Westchester were not happy about it. Thus, Westchester County pursued a lengthy initiative to open its bridges and thoroughfares to free use. It rebuilt the Harlem Bridge and removed the toll. It purchased Pelham Bridge from stockholders and made it a free bridge. It purchased the Westchester Turnpike and Post Road and opened it to the public. And, in 1872 and 1873, it considered purchasing City Island Bridge, then a toll bridge that exacted cash from every Pelhamite who used the bridge to get to and from their homes and businesses on the island.

On December 8, 1872, during a meeting of the Board of Supervisors of Westchester County, Pelham Town Supervisor Benjamin Hegeman proposed a resolution to appoint a committee of three people to prepare a special report to the board regarding "the propriety and expediency of purchasing the City Island Bridge." Under the Board's rules, the resolution was laid over until the following day. The following day, the Board of Supervisors adopted the resolution.

Several days later, on December 23, 1872, the Chair of the Board of Supervisors, F. M. Carpenter, announced that he had appointed three members to the Special Committee to prepare a report on whether to purchase the City Island Bridge. They were Odle Close (Supervisor of the Town of North Salem), Edmund G. Sutherland (Supervisor of White Plains), and George W. Davids (Supervisor of New Rochelle).

The Committee worked for the next two weeks to study the matter, come to its conclusions, and prepare its special report. The matter, however, was controversial and the Committee could not reach a consensus. The Supervisors of White Plains (Mr. Sutherland) and New Rochelle (Mr. Davids) supported purchase of the City Island Bridge to make it free. Supervisor Close of North Salem apparently opposed such a purchase.

On January 4, 1873, a "majority" of the Committee (i.e., the two members who supported purchase of the City Island Bridge) presented a report to the full Board of Supervisors. The brief report, quoted in full below, sheds fascinating light on the history of the City Island Bridge.

The report noted that City Island had a population of about one thousand. It noted the economic importance to the County of the small island in the Town of Pelham. It emphasized the importance of the oyster and ship building industries on the island and further noted that of the roughly 300 acres of land on the island, 250 acres were devoted to farming with a great deal of "gardening" on the remaining 50 acres.

The report recounted a little of the history of the City Island Bridge. It noted that the City Island Bridge Company was chartered in 1864 by an act of the State Legislature with a capital stock of $50,000. Of that capital stock, the company issued $33,700 worth of shares to fund construction of the first wooden City Island Bridge which opened on July 4, 1869. The bridge cost $33,689.98 to construct. A majority of the stock was purchased by Pelham residents. The remainder was bought by residents of Westchester County, New York City, and Brooklyn. According to the report, the non-Pelham residents bought the stock "not as a valuable investment, but to afford a relief to the people of Pelham in getting to and from City Island, which is a portion of said town."

The report recounted the recent history of the County in acquiring and opening to the public toll bridges and toll roads throughout the County. It then concluded that:

"The town of Pelham has been called upon to pay its equal share, according to the taxable property of its inhabitants, of the expenses incurred in the purchase for erection and and repair of turnpikes and bridges, without enjoying an equal share of the benefits derived therefrom. The undersigned are therefore of the opinion that the people of Pelham are justly entitled to relief at the hands of the County from the onerous and oppressive special taxation in the form of heavy tolls which they are called upon to bear in passing from one part of said town to another part of it. No other town in the County is situated like the town of Pelham, it being divided by a body of water which cannot be crossed in the absence of a bridge except by a ferry boat or other vessel. In view of these facts and circumstances the undersigned do not hesitate to recommend the purchasing of City Island Bridge, providing it can be purchased at a sum not exceeding $25,000, one half of the purchase money to be advanced by the County and the other half by the town of Pelham."

In effect, the report concluded that unlike most other toll roads and toll bridges acquired by the County and made free, the City Island Bridge would be acquired by the Town of Pelham and Westchester County. Pelham residents, therefore, would pay more than other residents of the County for maintenance of the bridge since a portion of both their County and Town taxes would pay for such expenses.

The report concluded by recommending passage of the following proposed resolution:

"Resolved, That the Senator from this District and the Members of Assembly from the County be and they are hereby requested to procure the passage of an Act at the ensuing session of the Legislature, to authorize the Board of Supervisors of this County to purchase, at their discretion, City Island Bridge, at a cost to said County not exceeding $12,500, provided the town of Pelham shall pay the balance of the cost of said purchase, and that the said Act also provide for the issue of the bonds of the County and the bonds of the town of Pelham necessary to cover the amount of said purchase."

Immediately upon presentation of the Special Report by the Committee, Odle Close of North Pelham moved that consideration of the report by the Board of Supervisors "be indefinitely postponed." The Board voted 14 to 4 in favor of postponing consideration "indefinitely."

This initiative to have Westchester County and Pelham purchase the City Island Bridge and make it free withered on the vine.

"Old City Island Bridge" Source: "Chapter XX: City Island"

in History of Bronx Borough City Of New York Compiled for

The North Side News By Randall Comfort, p. 59 (NY, NY: North

Side News Press: 1906). NOTE: Click on Image to Enlarge.

* * * * *

"WEDNESDAY, December 8 [sic; should be 18], 1872.

Board met pursuant to adjournment. . . .

Mr. HEGEMAN presented the following resolution:

Resolved, That a Committee of Three 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 City island Bridge, connecting said City Island with the main land in the town of Pelham.

Laid over under the rule."

Source: ANNUAL SESSION OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF WESTCHESTER CO., p. 342 (1873).

"THURSDAY, December 19th, 1872.

Board met pursuant to adjournment.

Present -- F. M. CARPENTER, Esq., Chairman, and a quorum of members. . . .

2 O'CLOCK P. M.

Board reassembled.

Present -- F. M. CARPENTER, Esq., Chairman and a quorum of members.

Mr. HEGEMAN called up the resolution presented by him yesterday, relative to City Island Bridge, whereupon said resolution was considered and adopted. . . ."

Source: ANNUAL SESSION OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF WESTCHESTER CO., p. 361 (1873).

"MONDAY, December 23, 1872.

Board met pursuant to adjournment. . . .

2 O'CLOCK, P. M.

Board re-assembled. . . .

The Chair announced the following Special Committees:

On City Island Bridge, Messrs. Sutherland, Close, and Davids.

Source: ANNUAL SESSION OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF WESTCHESTER CO., p. 371 (1873).

"SATURDAY, January 4, 1873.

Board met pursuant to adjournment. . . .

1 1/2 O'CLOCK, P. M.

Board re-assembled. . . .

[Page 448]

Dated January 4, 1873.

CHARLES E. JOHNSON,
Clerk of the Board of Supervisors.

Mr. SUTHERLAND, from Special Committee on purchase of City Island Bridge, presented the following report thereon:

To the Board of Supervisors:

The undersigned, a majority of the Special Committee to whom was referred the question of the propriety of purchasing City Island Bridge, respectfully report, that they have had the matter under consideration, heard parties in relation thereto, and from the evidence presented and the circumstances of the case, have arrived at the following conclusions.

First -- That the City Island Bridge Company was chartered by an act of the Legislature of 1864, with a capital stock of $50,000, with the privilege of extending the amount to _________. [Left blank in the original.] That a majority of the stock was taken by a few liberal and public spirited residents of the town of Pelham, and the balance by persons in various sections of the County, and in New York and Brooklyn, who were induced so to subscribe therefor, not as a valuable investment, but to afford a relief to the people of Pelham in getting to and from City Island, which is a portion of said town.

Second -- That City Island, between which and the main land of said town the bridge is located, contains a population of about 1,000 persons, a portion of whom are engaged in the oyster business, one of the important industries of the country, and another

[Page 448 / Page 449]

449

portion in ship building. The Island contains about 300 acres, and 250 of which are devoted to farming purposes, and gardening is also carried on in the Island to a large extent.

Third -- That City Island Bridge was erected at a cost of $33,689.98, and was completed and opened for use on the 4th day of July, 1869, as a toll bridge. It is built of the best timber, and is a substantial structure. The shares of stock issued amount to $33,700.

Fourth -- The policy of the County, some years since initiated of opening our bridges and other thoroughfares to free use and travel, is in the opinion of the undersigned a wise policy, for obvious reasons which need not be here enumerated. The Harlem Bridge, formerly a toll bridge, is now a free bridge, it having been rebuilt at the expense of the Counties of Westchester and New York. Pelham Bridge, also formerly owned by an incorporated Company, exacting toll for passing over it, has been purchased from the stockholders, paid for by the County, and is now a free bridge. The Westchester Turnpike and Post Road has likewise been purchased from the stockholders, and paid for partly by the County, and partly by the town, through which it passes, and its toll gate removed. The Five Mile Turnpike in the upper part of the County was also purchased from the stockholders and made a free public highway. The Central Bridge over Harlem River was erected at a joint expense of the Counties of Westchester and New York -- the Westchester portion of said expense being borne partly by the towns of Morrisania and West Farms, and partly by the County at large. City Island Bridge is the only bridge or thoroughfare in the County of Westchester on which tolls are now exacted from our citizens.

Fifth -- By a special Act of the Legislature passed in 186_, [Left blank in original] the bridges over the Croton River, including its branches, were thenceforth made a charge upon the County at large, and many thousands of dollars

[Page 449 / Page 450]

450

have been expended in the construction of iron and other costly bridges over that river, and no session of the Board of Supervisors passes in which more or less money is not required to be expended in the repair and superintendence of these expensive structures.

Sixth -- The town of Pelham has been called upon to pay its equal share, according to the taxable property of its inhabitants, of the expenses incurred in the purchase for erection and and repair of turnpikes and bridges, without enjoying an equal share of the benefits derived therefrom. The undersigned are therefore of the opinion that the people of Pelham are justly entitled to relief at the hands of the County from the onerous and oppressive special taxation in the form of heavy tolls which they are called upon to bear in passing from one part of said town to another part of it. No other town in the County is situated like the town of Pelham, it being divided by a body of water which cannot be crossed in the absence of a bridge except by a ferry boat or other vessel. In view of these facts and circumstances the undersigned do not hesitate to recommend the purchasing of City Island Bridge, providing it can be purchased at a sum not exceeding $25,000, one half of the purchase money to be advanced by the County and the other half by the town of Pelham.

To this end the undersigned recommend the passage of the following resolution:

Resolved, That the Senator from this District and the Members of Assembly from the County be and they are hereby requested to procure the passage of an Act at the ensuing session of the Legislature, to authorize the Board of Supervisors of this County to purchase, at their discretion, City Island Bridge, at a cost to said County not exceeding $12,500, provided the town of Pelham shall pay the balance of the cost of said purchase, and that the said Act also

[Page 450 / Page 451]

451

provide for the issue of the bonds of the County and the bonds of the town of Pelham necessary to cover the amount of said purchase.

All of which is respectfully submitted.

E. G. SUTHERLAND, }
} Special Com. on Purchase of City Island Bridge.
GEO. W. DAVIDS. }

Mr. CLOSE moved that the consideration of said report be indefinitely postponed.

The Chair put the question upon the motion and it was determined in the affirmative -- ayes 14, nays 4.

On motion of Mr. CLOSE the Board adjourned until Saturday, January 18th next, at 10 1/2 o'clock, A. M."

Source: ANNUAL SESSION OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF WESTCHESTER CO. pp. 448-51 (1873).

* * * * *

To learn more about the City Island Bridge, early efforts to develop a bridge from the mainland to City Island and about Benjamin Palmer, Samuel Rodman, and others involved in efforts to build such a bridge, see the following.

Fri., Jun. 09, 2017: The Big Picture: Controversy in the 1880s Over Who Should Pay to Rebuild or Replace City Island Bridge.

Mon., Jun. 05, 2017: For Once, Pelham Manor Mainlanders Told City Islanders "No" in 1883.

Mon., Aug. 08, 2016: More on Unsuccessful Efforts in 1884 by Town of Pelham to Replace the Wooden City Island Bridge.

Wed., Jul. 20, 2016: Bill Introduced in 1884 to Authorize the Town of Pelham To Build a New City Island Bridge.

Wed., May 06, 2015: Another Interesting History of City Island Published in 1901.

Fri., Mar. 13, 2015: An Important History of the City Island Bridge Built in 1868 and the Way Brothers' Ferry That Preceded It.

Mon., Dec. 15, 2014: Brief History of City Island Including the Legend of the Macedonia Hotel with Photographs Published in 1906.

Thu., Dec. 04, 2014: Park Department Commissioners Condemned -- But Didn't Close -- the "Dilapidated" City Island Bridge in 1894.

Tue., Oct. 07, 2014: Legislative History of the 1775 Statute Authorizing Construction of City Island Bridge.

Fri., Oct. 03, 2014: 1775 Statute Authorizing Construction of City Island Bridge.

Tue., Jul. 22, 2014: Stories of City Island Bridge Published in 1892.

Wed., May 28, 2014: Description of City Island in the Town of Pelham Published in 1868.

Wed., Mar. 10, 2010: 1899 Article About City Island's New Bridge Describes History of Area and Includes Wonderful Images.

Wed., Dec. 05, 2007: Photograph of the Old Wooden City Island Bridge.

Tue., Dec. 26, 2006: 1775 Statute Authorizing Samuel Rodman and Benjamin Palmer to Build City Island Drawbridge.

Tue., May 02, 2006: Benjamin Palmer's Advertisement in 1756 To Raise Subscriptions To Fund a Free Bridge From Manhattan.

Wed., May 17, 2006: More About Benjamin Palmer's Involvement With Raising Funds for a Free Bridge from Manhattan.

Fri., May 05, 2006: 1763 Announcement That City Island in the Manor of Pelham Has Been Laid Out in Lots for Sale.

Mon., May 15, 2006: Resales of Lots in the 1760s on the Island Known Today as City Island.

Thu., Apr. 19, 2007: An Account of How Soldiers Were "Recruited" in Pelham in 1758 for the French and Indian War.

Mon., Jan. 29, 2007: Palmer Family Offers One Thirtieth of City Island for Sale in 1785.

Archive of the Historic Pelham Web Site.

Home Page of the Historic Pelham Blog.

Order a Copy of "Thomas Pell and the Legend of the Pell Treaty Oak."

Labels: 1872, 1873, Benjamin Hegeman, Bridge, City Island Bridge, Transportation

Friday, June 09, 2017

The Big Picture: Controversy in the 1880s Over Who Should Pay to Rebuild or Replace City Island Bridge

Archive of the Historic Pelham Web Site.

Home Page of the Historic Pelham Blog.

Order a Copy of "Thomas Pell and the Legend of the Pell Treaty Oak."

Recently I wrote about a pair of lawsuits brought by George H. Reynolds, President and Chairman of the Executive Committee of the Pelham Manor Protective Club, in 1883 against Town of Pelham Supervisor James Hyatt and the Westchester County Board of Supervisors to stop a tax levy against Town of Pelham residents to fund construction of a new City Island Bridge. See Mon., Jun. 05, 2017: For Once, Pelham Manor Mainlanders Told City Islanders "No" in 1883. It turns out that the pair of lawsuits was part of a much broader and lengthier dispute over who, precisely, should fund replacement of the decrepit City Island Bridge.

The story seems to begin in 1882 when Pelham became locked in a battle with its next door neighbor, Mount Vernon. Mount Vernon sought authorization to construct a new sewer system and, craftily, omitted from its proposal precisely where its sewerage outlets would empty. City Island and Pelham mainlanders knew, of course, that Mount Vernon most likely would route such outlets into the Hutchinson River that served as the boundary between Mount Vernon and Pelham. Such an outcome would endanger oystering, fishing, bathing, and recreational facilities at City Island, in Eastchester Bay and along the Pelham coast. All of Pelham rose up to fight the sewerage plan and handily defeated it, leaving Mount Vernon to return to the drawing board.

The following year, however, it was Mount Vernon's turn to seek sweet revenge against its neighbor. The aging, decrepit, and downright dangerous City Island Bridge that connected mainland Pelham to little City Island needed to be replaced at a proposed cost of $20,000. Pelham, quite simply, could not afford the cost. Moreover, its taxpayers -- particularly those on the mainland -- balked at increasing the Town tax levy to fund the project.

The Town of Pelham was able to get a bill proposed in the New York State Assembly to shift responsibility for the City Island Bridge to Westchester County. According to the thinking of the Town, City Island was a regional recreational and vacation destination that served all of Westchester County. Thus, it was only fair for the taxpayers of all of Westchester County to fund construction of a replacement City Island Bridge.

The Yonkers Gazette was the first to raise an alarm regarding Pelham's shenanigans. It published a story reporting that Pelham was trying to shift responsibility for the City Island Bridge to Westchester County. The Chronicle of Mount Vernon quickly took up the cudgel to oppose the Pelham proposal pending in the State Assembly. The Chronicle wrote indignantly:

"People who live in glass houses had better not throw stones. The people of this village didn't ask the people of City Island to pay one cent toward the construction of our sewers but the people of City Island ask the people of this village to pay a lot of the cost of rebuilding and keeping their bridge. If any should object, it strikes us that the people of Mount Vernon and other parties [should]."

Within a short time, the State Assembly reported the bill to transfer responsibility for the City Island Bridge to Westchester County "Adversely." The proposed bill died with no further action.

As noted in the recent article "For Once, Pelham Manor Mainlanders Told City Islanders 'No' in 1883," left with no alternative the Town of Pelham proposed to levy taxes against all Pelham taxpayers to raise $25,000 to fund construction and subsequent maintenance of a new City Island Bridge. The pair of lawsuits by George H. Reynolds followed and, eventually, blocked the proposed tax levy increase.

The old wooden City Island Bridge was in such sad and dangerous shape, however, that the Town Board of Pelham, controlled by City Island Democrats, refused to give up. After the lawsuits filed by George H. Reynolds blocked the proposed tax levy, the Town went back to the State Assembly and arranged proposal of a bill to allow the Town to issue bonds to fund replacement of the City Island Bridge. That way, of course, annual repayment of portions of the principal and interest could be spread over a lengthy period of time so that Pelham taxpayers could more easily digest the necessary annual tax levy increase needed to service the bonds. I have written about this development before. See Wed., Jul. 20, 2016: Bill Introduced in 1884 to Authorize the Town of Pelham To Build a New City Island Bridge. See also Mon., Aug. 08, 2016: More on Unsuccessful Efforts in 1884 by Town of Pelham to Replace the Wooden City Island Bridge.

Once again, the initiative went nowhere. The dangerous wooden City Island Bridge retained signs warning that it was too dangerous to cross for many, many more years as City Islanders, horse railroad cars, and visitors crossed back and forth. Moreover, in 1894, Park Department Commissioners actually condemned the bridge. See Thu., Dec. 04, 2014: Park Department Commissioners Condemned -- But Didn't Close -- the "Dilapidated" City Island Bridge in 1894. Yet, it was not until City Island, the City Island Bridge, and the area on the mainland adjacent to City Island were annexed in the mid-1890s that plans for replacement of the dangerous old bridge took flight.

New York City opened the iron City Island Bridge that replaced the old wooden bridge on July 4, 1901. It took almost three years to build and cost $200,000.

"Old City Island Bridge" Source: "Chapter XX: City Island"

in History of Bronx Borough City Of New York Compiled for

The North Side News By Randall Comfort, p. 59 (NY, NY: North

Side News Press: 1906). NOTE: Click on Image to Enlarge.

* * * * *

Below is the text of a number of articles that relate to the subject of today's Historic Pelham article. Each is followed by a citation and link to its source. Some of the items quoted below reference the bridge as "The Pelham Bridge." These references are incorrect. The nearby Pelham Bridge spans Eastchester Bay and does not connect to City Island. The dispute in the 1880s involved responsibility for the City Island Bridge.

"THE PELHAM BRIDGE [Sic -- Should be "THE CITY ISLAND BRIDGE"]

The following article appeared in the Yonkers Gazette.

During a late session of the Board of Supervisors, a resolution to make the Pelham bridge a county charge was offered and referred to the judiciary committee, never saw light again, and it was hoped a very large majority of those most interested that this would be the last of an attempt to saddle the expense of a new bridge, entirely in the town of Pelham, upon the county at large. But no, the matter has come up again -- this time in the state legislature, where Hon. S. W. Johnson has offered a bill to make the Pelham bridge a county bridge. This bridge is now so old and dilapidated, that notices have been posted at either end, warning the public that it is not safe to cross it. A new bridge will cost about $20,000. If Mr. Johnson gets his bill through and the governor sign it, the new bridge will cost the seven towns in the county, the amounts set down in the table below. And in addition will cost the county, for its care and painting, for the first four years after its erection, some $5,000 more. The share of Yonkers in this expense will be, for the cost of the bridge, $3,842, and for the succeeding four years about $700 more. The county ought not to be compelled to pay for this bridge any more than it should pay for the erection of bridges in the city of Yonkers. Let Pelham build and pay for its own bridge.

Towns Percent of tax Of $20,000
paid by each town. town pays--
Bedford.....................3.06 612.60
Cortlandt...................7.18 1,436.00
East Chester.............5.93 1,186.00
Greenburgh.............17.94 3,588.00
Harrison.................. 1.72 344.00
Lewisboro................ 1.32 264.00
Mammaroneck........ 1.82 364.00
Mount Pleasant....... 4.55 910.00
New Castle............. 1.66 332.00
New Rochelle.......... 4.73 946.00
North Castle............ .99 198.00
North Salem............ 1.90 380.00
Ossining.................. 5.78 1,156.00
Pelham.................... 1.95 390.00
Poundridge.............. .57 114.00
Rye.......................... 6.13 1,226.00
Scarsdale................ 1.03 206.00
Somers.................... 2.03 406.00
Westchester............ 5.97 1,014.00
White Plains............ 3.35 670.00
Yonkers................... 19.21 3,842.00
Yorktown................. 2.08 416.00
_______ ________

100.00 20,000.00

Now if we were disposed to act toward the people of City Island in a retaliatory spirit, if we were inclined to treat this proposition of theirs as they did our last year in relation to our system of sewerage, we would call an indignation meeting, denounce this measure as an outrage on taxpayers of the county and appoint a committee to go to Albany to defeat their bill. People who live in glass houses had better not throw stones. The people of this village didn't ask the people of City Island to pay one cent toward the construction of our sewers but the people of City Island ask the people of this village to pay a lot of the cost of rebuilding and keeping their bridge. If any should object, it strikes us that the people of Mount Vernon and other parties [should]."

Source: THE PELHAM BRIDGE, The Chronicle [Mount Vernon, NY], Jan. 26, 1883, Vol. XIV, No. 697, p. 1, col. 6.

"LET THE GALLED JADE WINCE!

TO THE EDITOR OF THE CHRONICLE.

The article copied into your valuable journal from the Yonkers Gazette entitled 'Pelham Bridge,' and your editorial comments on the same are extremely unjust. It is very evident that neither your 'esteemed contemporary,' yourselves or 'that very large majority most interested, &c.,' know anything about the facts of the case. In my criticism thereon, I will confine myself to the facts, and will not enter into a discussion on the merits of the 'Mount Vernon Sewer question,' which is wholly foreign to the subject, and in no sense a parallel case. The sewer is to benefit Mount Vernon alone, while doing actual injury to its neighbors, the towns of East and Westchester, Pelham, City Island, &c., whereas the 'City Island Bridge' is used by and benefits the people of the whole county, and the very gist of the application for this bill is that it is for the benefit of the people of the whole county, or at least a majority of the people of the county, irrespective of town lines and not the town of Pelham alone, (and here lies the difference).

The injustice of compelling the town of Pelham alone to maintain this bridge is simply monstrous, and must so strike any person capable of forming an honest unbiased opinion. Here is a bridge, as the petition shows, used almost wholly by the people of other towns, which this little town, Pelham, is expected to keep in repair at its own expense. The proposition is absurd. It is but fair and just that those who use it, should bear their portion of its expense. The people who most use the bridge, as is clearly shown by the petition, come from towns who pay $8,000 of the $20,000, which the 'Yonkers Gazette' says will be the cost of the bridge, (but the fact is it will not cost one half of that amount), and they certainly should pay for it, in proportion to their use of it. The people from the upper part of the county probably were not aware until the introduction of this bill of the existence of such a bridge and opposition from this direction might, with some show of reason, have been expected; but from Mount Vernon and Yonkers, I grieve to say it, comes with very bad grace.

How often have its people in the heat of summer enjoyed the cool breezes of City Island with its clean waters to bathe in and its delicious oysters to tickle the palate; and will they have it said that they enjoy these delights at the expense of their neighbors?

Should this effort to obtain justice be defeated, there are two courses left for Pelham to adopt, one to restore the bridge to a toll bridge, and the other to go to the legislature and ask for a bill to put up a handsome, permanent, iron structure at a cost of $50,000 or $60,000, which will be an ornament to the county, and have the county pay for it. The county is now paying for dozens of bridges, which, according to your theory, should be paid for by the towns themselves.

Pelham, January 27th, 1883.

FAIRPLAY.

The article from the Yonkers Gazette, concerning the City Island bridge, which we republished last week with a few comments of our own, less evidently caused the galled jades, who hoped to saddle their heavy burden on the county at large, to wince and wax wroth. Out distinguished correspondent, who took so active a part in defeating the Mount Vernon Sewer Bill last year, says that the improvement our people sought then, and the one he seeks now, are in no sense parallel. It makes a great difference, we admit, whether our ox gores his bull, or his bull gores our ox. We also admit that the two cases are in one sense not parallel; we propose to pay for our improvement out of our own pockets, and he proposes to pay for his improvement out of his neighbors' pockets. He objects to letting us make our own improvements at our own expense, and at the same time asks us to let him make his improvements at our expense.

He says that the City Island bridge benefits the people of the whole county. What silly audacity! Of what use is that bridge to the people of Peekskill, Bedford, Katonah, Sing Sing, Tarrytown, and nine-tenths of the county. We might just as well ask the people of the county to pay for the flag-walks and cross-walks in the streets of Mount Vernon; they are used by one hundred people in a day, where the City Island bridge is used by one. What is there about a bridge, which should make that a charge on the whole county, any more than other improvements? If the county is to pay for bridges, why not for roads, street lamps, etc., etc. This town is now burdened with a debt of hundreds of thousands of dollars for boulevards. We never asked the county to take this burden off of our backs. The load was heavy, we were robbed right and left, but we never begged or squealed, or tried to shift our burden on some one else's back. Take the Boston Post road for an illustration. It is used by ten outsiders for every one of our own people who use it. According to the argument of our distinguished correspondent, the county at large should pay for this road. Indeed, our position is much stronger than his, for this reason: most of those who travel on the Boston Post road, simply pass through a corner of our town on their way from one place to another outside. We get very, very little benefit in the way of trade or otherwise, from their use of this road, while every one who travels over the City Island bridge, goes either to or from City Island, and those who use the bridge and are not residents of the Island, seldom go there except for business or pleasure, and in either case, the residents get a benefit. Our correspondent says that 'the very gist of the application for this bill is, that it is for the benefit of the people of the whole county, or at least, a majority of the people of the county.' Since that is the gist of his application, the bill should never pass, for the bridge is not, and never was for the benefit of the whole county, or a majority therein.

Our correspondent says it is monstrous to compel the town of Pelham alone to maintain this bridge. It is no more monstrous than it is to ask the village of Mount Vernon alone to maintain its streets, avenues, sidewalks, and street lamps. If our people alone use our streets and sidewalks, they of course should pay for them; if we can induce other people to come here and use our streets and avenues, we know it will almost invariably pay us to do so, and hence we cheerfully bear the expense. The same rule applies equally as well to City Island and her bridge.

Our distinguished correspondent says that people in the heat of summer, go to City Island and bathe in its clean waters, drink its cool breezes and tickle their palates with its delicious oysters; and then working himself up into a fine frenzy, he exclaims: 'and will they have it said that they enjoy these delights at the expense of their neighbors!'

We hope not! If any man tickles his palate with City Island oysters, he should pay for them; if he bathes in her clean waters, he should remunerate the City Islanders for the bath; if he drinks in the pure air of City Island, he should pay for it by the bottle, but we don't see why he should pay for getting to City Island to pay for these delicacies. If he should, we don't see why those who don't go should also be compelled to enable him to go there. If the City Islanders, who deal in 'palate ticklers,' 'clean, sound water,' and 'cool breezes,' don't think it will pay to make the road thereto free, let them exact toll of those who go to City Island for such luxuries; then the people of Peekskill, Bedford, Sing Sing and other places, who never have and never will know what it is to have their palates tickled, their bodies purified and their lungs expanded with the articles of City Island's commercial enterprise, will not have to pay for not going to get what they never have, and never will see, smell, feel or taste."

Source: LET THE GALLED JADE WINCE!, The Chronicle [Mount Vernon, NY], Feb. 2, 1883, Vol. XIV, No. 698, p. 2, col. 3.

"The New City Island Bridge.

Should City Island bridge become a County charge, a new bridge will have to be built, and it will cost about $20,000. If the bill to build this bridge should pass the Legislature now in session, each town will have to pay according to this table:

Towns Percent of tax Of $20,000
paid by each town. town pays--

Bedford.....................3.06 612.60
Cortlandt...................7.18 1,436.00
East Chester.............5.93 1,186.00
Greenburgh.............17.94 3,588.00
Harrison.................. 1.72 344.00
Lewisboro................ 1.32 264.00
Mammaroneck........ 1.82 364.00
Mount Pleasant....... 4.55 910.00
New Castle............. 1.66 332.00
New Rochelle.......... 4.73 946.00
North Castle............ .99 198.00
North Salem............ 1.90 380.00
Ossining.................. 5.78 1,156.00
Pelham.................... 1.95 390.00
Poundridge.............. .57 114.00
Rye.......................... 6.13 1,226.00
Scarsdale................ 1.03 206.00
Somers.................... 2.03 406.00
Westchester............ 5.97 1,014.00
White Plains............ 3.35 670.00
Yonkers................... 19.21 3,842.00
Yorktown................. 2.08 416.00
_______ ________

100.00 20,000.00

Source: The New City Island Bridge, Eastern State Journal [White Plains, NY], Feb. 9, 1883, Vol XXXVIII, No. 44, p. 3, col. 2.

"NEW YORK LEGISLATURE.
-----
ALBANY, February 15. . . .
Assembly. . . .
BILLS REPORTED. . . .

Adversely -- Relative to the maintenance of the City Island Bridge in Pelham Westchester County. Agreed to. . . ."

Source: NEW YORK LEGISLATURE -- ALBANY, February 15, The Evening Post [NY, NY], Feb. 15, 1883, 4th Edition, p. 1, col. 6.

[Though the article below clearly relates to the actual Pelham Bridge (as opposed to the City Island Bridge), it is transcribed here to show the burden Pelham faced in maintaining such bridges and roads during the 1880s.]

"PELHAM.

We have seen deplorable roads in our own town but after passing over that portion of the road, between Lockwood's Bridge and Prospect Hill, we yield the palm to the town of Pelham. The people in that part of the town justly complain of the inattention given to their roads, particularly this one, which, being the post road, is the great thoroughfare between New York and New Rochelle, and also between Mt. Vernon and City Island, and should therefore be kept in better condition.

The repairs to Pelham Bridge were commenced on Monday last, by Mr. Henderson and the draw's now turned off. A temporary foot bridge has been built for pedestrians, but vehicles cannot cross. The inconvenience to the public is very great and Mr. Henderson will push the work of repairing the bridge to the utmost. It will probably take about three weeks to complete the work, but Mr. Henderson expects to have the repairs far enough along in two weeks, so that the bridge may be used."

Source: PELHAM, The Chronicle [Mount Vernon, NY], Jul. 13, 1883, Vol. XIV, No. 721, p. 3, col. 3.