The Story of Mary Blizzard, a Pelham Squatter on an Island in Eastchester Creek

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 about 1867, Mary A. Blizzard took over a tiny little island in Eastchester Creek.  She didn't own the one-acre island and made no pretense to try to gain title to the land.  She simply began building on the island adjacent to Pelham Bridge.  No one seemed to object.  She built several buildings including a hotel and connected buildings on the southern end of the island and a boat-house on the northern end.

The little hotel and boathouse became a destination for anglers and sporting types who came to Pelham, usually from New York City, to fish and hunt.  As the years passed, Mary Blizzard continued to improve the island, the hotel, and the boathouse.  

Members of the Blizzard family owned a good deal of land in the region from today's Westchester Square through much of the Pelham Bay area.  Indeed, David Blizzard operated a hotel built on pilings adjacent to Pelham Bridge during the 1870s.  Known colloquially as "Blizzard's," the establishment became known as the Grand View Hotel.  It seems likely that the hotel Mary A. Blizzard and Blizzard's (aka the Grand View Hotel) were one and the same, but extensive research efforts have not yet resolved this issue which remains confused because there were a surprisingly large number of hotels situated at the Pelham Bridge during the late 19th century.

Another important clue that suggests the two may have been one and the same is the following.  Mary A. Blizzard was an aunt of a man well known to readers of the Historic Pelham Blog:  William John "Jack" Elliott.  Jack Elliott managed the Grand View Hotel at Pelham Bridge for a time.  To learn more about Jack Elliott and the Grand View Hotel at Pelham Bridge, see:

Tue., Aug. 02, 2016:  More Research Regarding the 19th Century Grand View Hotel at Pelham Bridge.

Thu., Jan. 21, 2016:  Research Regarding David Blizzard's 19th Century Grand View Hotel at Pelham Bridge. 

Fri., Jul. 29, 2016: Shooting Death at the Grand View Hotel at Pelham Bridge in 1892.

In the 1880s, of course, New York City began assembling the lands necessary to form Pelham Bay Park.  Among those lands was the tiny little island on which Mary Blizzard's hotel and boathouse stood.

Because Mary Blizzard could not establish title to the island, the Commissioner of Estimate charged with valuing such properties and awarding the fair value for the properties taken by New York City to the properties' owners valued the island and its buildings but awarded the estimated amount to "unknown persons."  The Commissioner of Estimate valued the land of the island at $5,000 and the buildings that stood on the island at $8,350 for a total of $13,350 (about $450,000 in today's dollars).  Mary A. Blizzard immediately filed a petition seeking an award of the $13,350.

A referee heard the matter and concluded that Mary's possession of the property for more than twenty years constituted sufficient evidence that she was the rightful owner for purposes of receiving the money.  Mary Blizzard then petitioned the New York Supreme Court, General Term in the First Department seeking a confirmation of the referee's report in her favor.

The Court denied the petition, thereby ruling in favor of New York City.  The Court found that Mary Blizzard was a mere "squatter" whose use of the island failed to rise to the level necessary to establish the requirements of "adverse possession" under New York law -- a doctrine whereby someone who takes possession of another's real estate and claims title to the real estate exclusive of the right of any other actually takes title to the property after the passage of a sufficient period of time.  The Court ruled "It appears from the evidence taken in this proceeding that the taking of possession by the petitioner was not, in its commencement, hostile to the true title, and it does not appear when the petitioner commenced to claim title to the premium exclusive of any other right, if she ever did so; and as under no circumstances can possession be deemed adverse until this condition of affairs is made to appear, it is not in proof that there was any adverse possession of the petitioner for 20 years."

Mary Blizzard and her lawyer immediately turned to the State of New York where they were able to obtain special legislation entitled "AN ACT for the relief of Mary A. Blizzard" passed by the State Legislature and signed into law by the Governor on May 2, 1892.  The act required the Comptroller of the City of New York to advertise for seven weeks seeking to have anyone else who claimed and could prove title to the little island to come forward and so prove or the money would be paid to Mary Blizzard.

Eventually Mary Blizzard received substantial compensation not only for her little island and hotel, but also for other properties she owned that were taken by New York City as part of the creation of Pelham Bay Park.  Mary Blizzard became a wealthy woman with an estate worth $110,000 at the time of her death in July, 1912 (about $2.84 million in today's dollars).

Mary's story did not end with her death.  Mary left her entire estate to her "favorite nephew," Jack Elliott.  Jack went on one of the greatest benders ever seen in the history of Pelham -- indeed, a bender that may have killed him!  

Despite his past, by 1912 Jack Elliott was known as a responsible family man -- married with two sons.  When he received the fruits of his aunt's estate he took off, leaving his wife and sons behind.  He spent profligately.  He moved from roadhouse to roadhouse buying drinks for all and leaving tips of hundreds of dollars for barkeeps, cabbies, and others everywhere he went.  In only two months, Jack Elliott spent $75,000 (about $1.93 million in today's dollars).  Within a short time thereafter, Elliott spent $90,000 of the money left to him by his aunt.  Elliott was known to pick up a $150 bar tab for his pals, toss a $500 bill at the bar tender, then walk out without waiting for change.

Elliott's wife and sons, of course, were aghast and resorted to the courts.  They filed every conceivable claim they could muster against Jack Elliott.  They charged him with "abandonment, non-support, insanity, and everything else they could think of."  However, first they had to serve Jack Elliott with process.

Eventually, they used an army of process servers to present Jack Elliott with legal papers.  Elliott slipped out the back doors of many roadhouses avoiding such process servers.  By attaching various bank accounts, the family was able to slow Elliott's spending, but he maintained so many accounts that they could not stop his reckless ways.  


Finally, the army of process servers closed in on William John "Jack" Elliott.  According to one account, the process servers "established a line across Westchester County, particularly over the Pelham Parkway.  Guards were doubled and the party began to close in."  

The process servers, however, never got to Jack Elliott.  One fine morning they tracked the happy fellow to a roadhouse known as Bradley's only to learn that Jack Elliott had dropped dead of "apoplexy" (i.e., a stroke) at the age of 50.  Jack Elliott's days of profligate spending were over.  
     

Detail from Engraving Published in 1884 Showing Pelham Bridge. Structures

in the Background May Possibly Include Blizzard's Grand View Hotel, But This

Is Not Known With Certainty. Source: "PELHAM PARK, NEW YORK. --

DRAWN BY CHARLES GRAHAM.", Harper's Weekly, Vol. XXVIII, No. 1442,

1884, pp. 514 & 521. NOTE: Click on Image to Enlarge.

*          *          *          *          *

"In re MAYOR, ETC., OF CITY OF NEW YORK.
In re BLIZZARD.
(Supreme Court, General Term, First Department.  February 18, 1892.)

ADVERSE POSSESSION -- RIGHTS OF SQUATTER.

A woman, finding a small island in Westchester creek [sic], near New York city, unoccupied, entered thereon without claim or color of title, record or otherwise, erected buildings thereon, and remained in possession for 20 years.  Held that, being a mere squatter, she could not obtain title by adverse possession.

Proceedings by the mayor, alderman, and commonalty of the city of New York to acquire lands under Laws N. Y. 1884, c. 512.  Mary A. Blizzard filed a petition therein, claiming a portion of moneys awarded by the commissioner of estimate to unknown persons.  Petitioner moves to confirm the report of a referee in her favor.  Denied.

Argued before VAN BRUNT, P. J., and BARRETT, J.

W. R. Lambertson, for petitioner.  C. D. Allendorf, for the city.

VAN BRUNT, P. J.  The commissioners of estimate, by their report in this proceeding, awarded the sum of $13,350 to unknown owners for parcel 691, in Pelham Bay park.  Of this, $5,000 was made for the land, and the balance, $8,350, for the buildings.  The petitioner claims to have been the owner of parcel 691 at the time of the confirmation, and of the report of the commissioners in said proceedings, and the referee has so found.  Her claim of ownership is not based upon any record title to said premises, but is founded wholly upon possession and occupancy of said property for a period of more than 20 years.  The parcel stands in an island in Westchester creek [sic], and is divided into two parts, which may be described as the northerly and southerly parts of the island, the dividing line being a public highway extending the whole length of the island, upon each side of which highway there is and was at the time the claimant went into possession a substantial stone wall or fence.  The petitioner went into possession of the southerly portion of the island more than 20 years prior to the confirmation of the report, and erected an hotel and buildings connected therewith, and has ever since remained in possession thereof.  Her entry does not seem to have been under any claim of title, and her occupation has been that of a squatter.  It is true that upon her examination she stated that she took possession of this property, claiming title thereto.  But it is apparent from her cross-examination that she made no claim of title at the time of her entry; but, to use her own language, she 'just squatted there, as it were.'  It further appeared that she had no record title to said premises, either by way of deed, grant, devise, or writing of any kind.  Her only acts of ownership in respect to the northerly portion of the island consisted in building a boat-house, and planting oysters and clams in the waters adjacent to the island.  Upon these facts the referee reported that the petitioner was entitled to the award made for the island in question.  In this, we think, he clearly erred.  It is plain that whatever the possession of the petitioner was, it was not under any claim of title, nor does it appear that she ever asserted ownership except by being in possession.  Under the definition of adverse possession, such possession, to be adverse, must be under claim of title; and naked possession, unaccompanied by such claim, can never ripen into a good title.  It necessarily follows that, where possession is under a claim of title, it must be made under some distinct claim of title, and not by a mere general assertion of ownership, without reference to any source from which such ownership can arise.  In other words, a mere squatter can never obtain title by adverse possession.  In order that possession of land shall be adverse, it must be shown that the land is held in hostility to the true owner's claim of title thereto.  It appears from the evidence taken in this proceeding that the taking of possession by the petitioner was not, in its commencement, hostile to the true title, and it does not appear when the petitioner commenced to claim title to the premium exclusive of any other right, if she ever did so; and as under no circumstances can possession be deemed adverse until this condition of affairs is made to appear, it is not in proof that there was any adverse possession of the petitioner for 20 years.  In view of the conclusion at which we have arrived in regard to the main question involved, it is not necessary to discuss the distinction between the nature of the possession of the northerly and southerly half of the island.  Upon the whole case we think that the claim of the petitioner is defective in establishing a right to the moneys which have been awarded for the taking of the premises in question."

Source:  In re Blizzard, 18 N.Y. Supp. 82-84 (Gen. Term, 1st Dep't, Feb. 18, 1892).  

"CHAP. 430.

AN ACT for the relief of Mary A. Blizzard.

APPROVED by the Governor May 2, 1892.  Passed, three-fifths being present.

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

Advertising for claimants to awards.

SECTION 1.  The comptroller of the city of New York is hereby directed to advertise once in each week for seven successive weeks, as soon as practicable after the passage of this act, in a daily newspaper published in the said city for claimants to the awards now in his custody made for the parcel known as parcel number six hundred and ninety-one, Pelham Bay Park, made to 'unknown owners,' by the commissioners of estimated appointed under and pursuant to the provisions of chapter five hundred and twenty-two of the laws of eighteen hundred and eighty-four.

Payment of amount to M. A. Blizzard

[SECTION] 2.  If no other claimant shall appeal and prove title to the said awards to the satisfaction of the said comptroller within three months after the first publication of said notice, then the said comptroller is hereby authorized and directed to pay over the amount of said awards to Mary A. Blizzard of the town of Pelham, the present occupant of the said premises.

Release of city from liability.  Suits, etc., against city barred

[SECTION] 3.  Upon the completion of the advertising, as herein provided for, and upon the expiration of the said limitation, and upon the payment of the said awards to Mary A. Blizzard, the mayor, aldermen, and commonalty of the city of New York shall be forever released and discharged from any liability to any person or persons whomsoever for the said award or any part thereof, and any suit, action or special proceeding which may thereafter be brought against the said mayor, aldermen and commonalty of the city of New York to recover the said awards or any part thereof shall be deemed to be barred by the limitations of this act.

[Section] 4.  This act shall take effect immediately."

Source:  CHAP. 430 -- AN ACT for the relief of Mary A. Blizzard, The General Statutes of the State of New York for the Year 1892, p. 1035 (Albany, NY:  Weed, Parsons and Co., 1892).  

"A WOMAN SQUATTER.
-----
She Occupies an Island, Builds a Hotel and Tries to Sell the Property.

Mrs. Mary A. Blizzard is in a fair way to acquire property rather easily obtained.  More than twenty-five years ago she squatted on an island in Eastchester Creek, about an acre in area.  This land is now in Pelham Bay Park.  She built a hotel there valued at $8,350, the surrounding land being set down as worth $5,000.  When the city took possession of the Pelham Bay Park property Mrs. Blizzard put in a claim for payment of $13,350, but as she could give no title, the city refused to settle with her.  She brought suit in the courts, relying on her undisputed possession of over twenty years, but the general term decided against her.  A bill was passed by the last Legislature for Mrs. Blizzard's relief.  Under it the comptroller will advertise for owners.  If no one but Mrs. Blizzard appears her claim will be paid."

Source:  A WOMAN SQUATTER -- She Occupies an Island, Builds a Hotel and Tries to Sell the Property, The Hartford Courant [Hartford, CT], May 6, 1892, p. 7, cols. 1-2. 

"SUDDENLY RICH, SPENT $75,000 IN 2 MONTHS
-----
Widow Appointed Executrix of $25,000 Estate 'Jack' Elliott Left.
-----

In an effort to save for his family the remainder of the estate of William J. Elliott, better known as 'Jack' Elliott, who spent $75,000 in two months, his widow was appointed executrix yesterday.  Elliott reduced a fortune of $100,000 to $25,000 by lavish spending.  

Elliott died suddenly of apoplexy on Friday last in a roadhouse in Port Chester just before a warrant was to be served on him for abandonment.  He was buried the Sunday following in the Blizzard homestead, Pelham Bay.  Other legal proceedings having failed to check Elliott in his mania for throwing away money, his wife had decided to have him arrested for abandonment in hope of having him removed to a sanatorium.

Until last July, when Elliott's aunt, Mary Blizzard, died, he was a model as a family man.  He, his wife and two sons lived happily in the Pelham Bay homestead.  By the death of his aunt he inherited the greater part of her fortune.  Then came a whirlwind change in Elliott's life.

Frequented by Astor.

Six or seven years ago 'Jack' Elliott owned and conducted the Pelham Bay Park Hotel, a roadhouse frequented by Colonel John Jacob Astor and others who figured in finance and society.  He made hundreds of friends.

About April, 1912, Elliott's aunt was awarded $75,000 from the city for Pelham Bay property.  She died in July.

On August 1 Elliott got $40,000 in cash, part being the city's award money and part from his aunt.  In less than fifteen days this money was nearly all gone.  He is said to have spent $500 a night, his wine bill for a week running over $1,000.  At different times he drew on his inheritance liberally.

Elliott's relatives and friends became alarmed.  Bennett E. Siegelstein, attorney, in No. 90 Nassau street, formerly Assemblyman from the old Eighth district, was engaged by Mrs. Elliott to see what could be done.  Three writs of attachment failed of their purpose.

Entertained the 'Boys.'

Elliott disappeared from his home, but his sons found he was living in the Colonial Hotel, Eighth avenue and 125th street.  Automobile trips from the hotel to roadhouses were features of entertainment for the boys as he called his friends.

In September, Siegelstein got a writ for the appointment of a receiver and an injunction to tie up the property Elliott kept him busy trying to find him.

Elliott deposited in the Nassau Trust Company on August 9 $26,000, but by the time the lawyer could get an attachment against the bank $14,000 had been drawn and spent by Elliott.

Elliott's widow was Sarah E. Doherty.  She was wealthy in her own right."

Source:  SUDDENLY RICH, SPENT $75,000 IN 2 MONTHS -- Widow Appointed Executrix of $25,000 Estate "Jack" Elliott Left, N.Y. Press, Sep. 25, 1912, p. 7, col. 5.  

"SPENT $90,000 IN TEN MONTHS, THEN HE DIED.
-----
Jack Elliott Didn't Go Near White Light District With His Roll.  --  Windfall From His Aunt.
-----

How to spend $90,000 in New York City in ten months and not go near Broadway and Forty-second street was told in detail last Tuesday about the time letters of administration in the estate of William J. Elliott were awarded to Sarah E. Elliott, the widow.

Elliott, universally known as Jack, was the man who did the spending.  He dropped dead at Bradley's roadhouse, Port Chester, September 20.

Bennett E. Siegelstein, attorney for the estate, told the story after the letters had been awarded.  He undid a large bundle of papers and pointed to about five check books which had been reduced almost to the covers.

'Those check books and the balanced bank books tell the story of how Jack Elliott spent $90,000 in this short space of time,' he said, 'and they show that out of $110,000 cash a year ago not more than $15,000 remains.  It also shows that at the moment he dropped dead he was just drawing another check for $500, which had become his average daily expenditure.'

Then Mr. Siegelstein illuminated his subject, Jack Elliott, about 50 years of age, was a member of the Blizzard family, which owned much of Pelham Bay  conjointly with the Doherty family.  He married Sarah E. Doherty nearly thirty years ago.  Elliott for years ran the Pelham Bay roadhouse, known to automobilists and drivers.  He was a steady family man.

Elliott had two sons, David, now 25, and Julian J., 20 years old.  The sole living representative of the old Blizzard family up to April of this year was Miss Mary A. Blizzard, and Jack Elliott was her favorite nephew.

When the city took part of the property for Westchester Square and then took some more for the bridge she got about $110,000 in cash, leaving more to come.

Miss Blizzard turned this money over to Jack, and when she died in April her will left everything to him.  At the time he got the money Elliott was living with his family in the old Doherty homestead up on the bay.  He started out to drink wine and to have all his friends and neighbors drink with him.

The family remonstrated and Elliott left home.  They complained, and he got a revolver threatening to use it on anyone who tried to stop him.  Inside of three months he was going strong and at the end of six months he was the most popular man from Port Chester to 125th street.  He had wine before he got up for breakfast, between meals and at all meals.  Also every one who came near him had it.

One night he went into the Colonial, according to Mr. Siegelstein, and ordered wine for everybody.  The bill ws $150.  He tossed over a $500 bill and walked out without waiting for change.  He had a regular arrangement with the taxicab men, who would charge him $25 for going from the Colonial to a Pelham Bay roadhouse.  His usual procedure was to tell the chauffeur to keep the change out of a $100 bill.

Elliott, it is said, met some Italian labors one day working on a new building.  He got their dinner buckets and filled them with champagne by permission of the owners.  The Contractor had his bricks laid to grand opera the rest of the day, and the inspector condemned the job at that.

His family got after the man in real earnest about the end of July.  They went to court and Mr. Siegelstein got an order to show cause why he should not be restrained from spending his money.  They wanted him locked up for observation.  A process server could not get within half a mile of him.  A process server would come in the front door and Elliott would take a taxicab from the back door to go whizzing to the next roadhouse.

The sons who led in the search came upon their father one day and tried to get him to go with them.  They were holding him by conversation until an officer could arrive.  He gave them $1,500 and told them to buy a motorboat, then vanished.  A process server chased the man down to a house in East Eighty-fourth street owned by the estate, but not yet turned into money.  The process server was greeted by a dog which bit him.  While the process server was attending to the dog, Elliott was flying uptown in a convenient taxi.

Then the family got real busy.  They got a summons, a warrant, an injunction, a mandamus and a few other writs in the hope of getting the man on something.  They charged him with abandonment, non-support, insanity, and everything else they could think of.  The company of process servers did not fare any better than the original scouts.  They were always close on the trail, but the man was ahead of them.

Finally they established a line across Westchester County, particularly over the Pelham Parkway.  Guards were doubled and the party began to close in.  They arrived at Bradley's that morning of the 20th to find the search ended.  The doctors said that apoplexy had ended the man's career.

Nobody seems to have been particularly hurt by the man's weird career of prodigality.  The estate is still large in property.  The city still owes $15,000 and Mrs. Elliott has the Doherty estate in addition."

Source:  SPENT $90,000 IN TEN MONTHS, THEN HE DIED -- Jack Elliott Didn't Go Near White Light District With His Roll  --  Windfall From His Aunt, Dobbs Ferry Register [Dobbs Ferry, NY], Sep. 27, 1912, Vol. XXX, No. 39, p. 5, col. 3.  

"Spent $75,000 In Two Months.

New York, Oct. 15.  --  In an effort to save for his family the remainder of the estate of William J. Elliott, better known as 'Jack' Elliott, who spent $75,000 in two months, his widow was appointed executrix.  Elliott reduced a fortune of $100,000 to $25,000 by lavish spending.

Elliott died suddenly of apoplexy in a roadhouse in Port Chester just before a warrant was to be served on him for abandonment.  He was buried the Sunday following in the Blizzard homestead, Pelham Bay.  Other legal proceedings having failed to check Elliott in his mania for throwing away money, his wife had decided to have him arrested for abandonment in hope of having him removed to a sanatorium.

Until last July, when Elliott's aunt, Mary Blizzard, died, he was a model as a family man.  He, his wife, and two sons lived happily in the Pelham Bay homestead.  By the death of his aunt, he inherited the greater part of her fortune.  Then came a whirlwind change in Elliott's life."

Source:  Spent $75,000 In Two Months, Journal and Republican and Lowville Times [Lowville, NY], Oct. 17, 1912, Vol. 53, No. 49, Sec. 2, p. 9, col. 2.

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 Research Regarding the 19th Century Grand View Hotel at Pelham 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."

The Grand View Hotel once was located near the northeasterly end of the Pelham Bridge overlooking Eastchester Bay.  Although there is some confusion today regarding exactly where the hotel stood, according to an account published in 1882:  "the yellow roadhouse . . . rests on piles over the Pelham river at the north end of Pelham bridge."  POLITICS LEADS TO MURDER -- John Elliott Shoots John Hiney in the Pelham Bridge Hotel, The World [NY, NY], Nov. 8, 1892, Vol. XXXIII, No. 11403, p. 1, cols. 6-8.

David Blizzard was the proprietor of the Grand View Hotel during most of the 1870s.  Known for many years, informally, as "Blizzard's," the hotel was extremely popular with excursionists and fishermen.  During the early 1880s, a man named John Elliott (also known as Johnny and Jack) became the proprietor of the hotel.  

I have written before about the Grand View Hotel at Pelham Bridge.  See, e.g.:

Thu., Jan. 21, 2016:  Research Regarding David Blizzard's 19th Century Grand View Hotel at Pelham Bridge.  

 Fri., Jul. 29, 2016:  Shooting Death at the Grand View Hotel at Pelham Bridge in 1892.

Detail from Engraving Published in 1884 Showing Pelham

Bridge.  Structures in the Background Likely Include

Blizzard's Grand View Hotel, But This Is Not Known With

Certainty. Source: "PELHAM PARK, NEW YORK. -- DRAWN

BY CHARLES GRAHAM.", Harper's Weekly, Vol. XXVIII, No.

1442, 1884, pp. 514 & 521.  NOTE:  Click on Image to Enlarge.

Clearly the Grand View Hotel was a grand and beautiful location that was the scene of many grand and lavish parties.  For example, a party held at the hotel on September 26, 1872 and hosted by Griffith Thomas was among "the most brilliant . . . ever witnessed in Westchester County."  According to one account:   "140 variegated lanterns illuminated the arched platform of the hotel, on which the guests assembled, and while the New Rochelle Brass Band filled the air with delightful music, magnificent fireworks were set off in front of the balcony, where his lovely wife and her lady friends were seated.  The supper was delicious, the table was splendidly arranged and elegantly decorated with choice flowers."  (See complete account quoted in full below.)

In 1890, the Park Board of New York City announced that although they would raze a number of structures in Pelham Bay Park and other city parks, they planned to spare the Grand View Hotel at Pelham Bridge.  According to one report, the Board believed "[m]any of the buildings are badly cared for, and [it was] recommended the removal of many of them and an increase in the rental of those that are to remain.  The latter include the Grand View Hotel at the northerly end of the Pelham Bridge. . ."  (See complete account quoted in full below.)

In 1899, proprietorship of the Grand View Hotel passed to Fritz Rumpf, who succeeded John Elliott.  Rumpf took opened his hotel on April 1, 1899.  It was described at the time as a "new hotel and summer resort at Pelham Bridge . . . [that] is one of the best equipped hotels along the shore road and was formerly conducted by 'Jack' Elliott."  (See complete account quoted in full below.) 

*          *          *          *          *

Below is the text of various articles that form the research documented in today's posting to the Historic Pelham Blog.  Each is followed by a citation and link to its source.

"ON LAST THURSDAY EVENING A SUMPTUOUS Entertainment was given by Mr. Griffith Thomas, at the Grand View Hotel, Pelham Bridge, kept by Blizzard & Mahony, and on this occasion, as on all others, his generosity was boundless, and the whole affair was the most brilliant we ever witnessed in Westchester county; 140 variegated lanterns illuminated the arched platform of the hotel, on which the guests assembled, and while the New Rochelle Brass Band filled the air with delightful music, magnificent fireworks were set off in front of the balcony, where his lovely wife and her lady friends were seated.  The supper was delicious, the table was splendidly arranged and elegantly decorated with choice flowers.  But its chief ornament ws Mrs. Thomas, in her surpassing beauty, void of that haughty consciousness that is so painfully perceptible in Nature's favorites, reminding us of Raphael's Madonna.  Mr. Thomas is a very wealthy gentleman, and, being one of Nature's noblemen, the wealth could not have fallen into better hands.  His sole happiness appears to be centred in making others happy, and his kind deeds will be remembered long after he has joined his loved ones, gone before him to a happier land than this."

Source:  [Untitled "Special Notice" Advertisement], N.Y. Herald, Oct. 2, 1872, No. 13191, p. 1, col. 2 (Note:  Paid subscription required to access via this link).   

"WEST CHESTER. . . 

The Grand View Hotel at the bridge, under the management of John Elliott, appears to be popular and prosperous.  It appears to be a favorite resort for politicians of New York, and last week was favored with a visit from the Park Commissioners, and several of the Aldermen, while Alderman Duffy and a large party of friends engaged the attention of the host another day.  On Wednesday another large party in a six horse stage, visited the house, and went away late in the day, after having had a very pleasant time, greatly pleased and promising another visit."

Source:  WEST CHESTER, New Rochelle Pioneer, Jun. 9, 1883, Vol. XXIV, No. 11, p. 2, cols. 3-4.  



"BUILDINGS IN THE NEW PARKS.

President Gallup made a report at yesterday's meeting of the Park Board on the various buildings in the new parks.  It set forth that the annual income of the department for rentals of the buildings is $12,000, about one-half the amount expended in keeping the roads in repair.  Many of the buildings are badly cared for, and he recommended the removal of many of them and an increase in the rental of those that are to remain.  

The latter include the Grand View Hotel at the northerly end of the Pelham Bridge, the Schuyler house, Steers's house, Jones's place, and Marshall's place in Pelham Park, the Old Country Club house at Bartow Station, stone houses on Hunter's and Twin Islands, the Lorillard mansion in Bronx Park, and the Van Cortlandt mansion, Disbrow house, and Tremper house in Van Cortlandt Park.  No action was taken on the report."

Source:  BUILDINGS IN THE NEW PARKS, N.Y. Times, Jul. 17, 1890, p. 3, col. 4 (Note:  Paid subscription required to access via this link).  

"--Fritz Rumpf, formerly proprietor of Music Hall, will open his new hotel and summer resort at Pelham Bridge to-day.  The Pelham Bridge Hotel is one of the best equipped hotels along the shore road and was formerly conducted by 'Jack' Elliott."

Source:  [Untitled], The New Rochelle Pioneer, Apr. 1, 1899, p. 5, col. 4.  

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."

Shooting Death at the Grand View Hotel at Pelham Bridge in 1892

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."

There have been a host of sensational crimes committed in Pelham during the last 350 years.  Perhaps the earliest was in about 1760 when a "Great Rapier" and a silver tankard that once belonged to Pelham founder Thomas Pell were stolen from one of his descendants, Joseph Pell (b. 1740; d. 1776) and were pawned in New York City where they vanished.  I have written about many such crimes and have collected information on other sensational and notorious crimes about which I have not yet had the opportunity to write.  

In 1892 there was a shooting in the Grand View Hotel at Pelham Bridge that led to the death of a young man.  The shooting arose from a "political quarrel" and attracted sensationalist attention from newspapers throughout the region.  The National Police Gazette even published a series of sketches that depicted the shooting and events surrounding it (see below).  Today's posting to the Historic Pelham Blog documents the shooting and the interesting events that followed the episode.

On the eve of local elections in Westchester County in early November, 1892, Westchester residents were closely following the campaign for County Register.  The Republican candidate for the position was William V. Molloy.  The Democrat running for the office was William G. Graney.  

William John Elliott, who was known as John, Johnny, and Jack, was born on Throggs Neck.  His father drove a stage coach between Throggs Neck and Harlem before the advent of the railroad.  In the early 1880s, John Elliott became the proprietor of the Grand View Hotel at Pelham Bridge.  Elliott was involved in local politics and the Grand View Hotel quickly became a favorite of local Democrats and New York City officials including New York City Aldermen.

Elliott was a sporting man who enjoyed prize fights, pigeon shoots, and betting.  The Grand View Hotel became the site of a number of illegal prize fights during his tenure.  Following one such prize fight, Westchester County authorities issued a warrant for Elliott's arrest.  The man who executed the warrant and arrested Elliott was Deputy Sheriff William V. Molloy.  Consequently, Elliott hated Molloy, the man who was the Republican candidate for County Register in the 1892 election.

Elliott had a good friend named John Hiney who was born only two blocks away from where Elliott was born on Throggs Neck. Hiney was unmarried and was 23 years old in 1893.  He lived with his mother and took care of her.  He was employed as a night watchman and, thus, carried a pistol.

On the evening of Sunday, November 6 -- two days before the county elections -- Hiney went out with his closest friend, John B. Colford.  Colford was a commission horse dealer who had worked for James M. Waterbury his entire adult life, as had his father.  Colford got his friend, John Hiney, the job serving as a night watchman for James M. Waterbury.  The two men attended a political meeting in the Town of Westchester and then went out drinking together.  Some accounts said Hiney drank only ginger ale and sarsaparilla, but others indicated plainly that he had a lot to drink that night.  

Colford and Hiney were avid Democrats.  Indeed, Colford was described as "something of a political boss" and Hiney was "a member of the Democratic Town Committee."  Colford, however, chose to support Republican William V. Molloy in the local race for unexplained "personal reasons."  Indeed, at the political meeting he attended in the Town of Westchester on November 6, 1893, he was denied the position of Committee Treasurer to penalize him for supporting Republican William V. Molloy in the local race.  

According to one account, Colford's close friend, John Hiney, merely "followed his friend in supporting the Republican."  In contrast, John Elliott, proprietor of the Grand View Hotel, hated Molloy and, thus, supported Democrat William G. Graney in the race for Westchester County Register.  

After drinking on the evening of Sunday, November 6, Colford and Hiney met a group of Molloy supporters who were out "electioneering" and agreed to join them at the Grand View Hotel for more drinks.  Colford and Hiney arrived at the hotel first and announced to the crowd and to the proprietor, John Elliott, that a group of Molloy supporters was about to "descend" on the place.  Elliott became upset, protesting that Colford and Hiney knew that he hated Molloy.  According to one account, at about that time "[t]he others came up and there were drinks all around.  In the course of the night they drank pretty near everything from beer to champagne."

During much of the evening, the men in the hotel bar argued politics, centered around the Molloy versus Graney race for County Register.  The hotel proprietor, Elliott, bet Colford $50 that Graney would win the race.  Both men gave the money to support their bets to John Hiney to serve as the stakeholder.

One of the men in the bar that night was Oliver ("Ollie") Molloy, a brother of the Republican candidate William V. Molloy.  At one point Elliott began arguing with Ollie Molloy about his brother and became enraged.  Elliott became abusive from behind the bar.  Colford stepped behind the bar to tell Elliott that it was not Ollie Molloy's fault that his brother had arrested Elliott previously.  Elliott took the approach as a threat and the two men began to scuffle.  Elliott shoved Colford from behind the bar and raced upstairs where he grabbed a loaded revolver.

Stories of what happened next diverge at this point.  It appears that while Elliott was upstairs, John Hiney pulled out his night watchman's revolver.  When Elliott returned to the bar, he was carrying his pistol.  He shouted "John Hiney, you've got a gun.  You want to get out of here quick!"  Elliott then raised his pistol and fired toward Hiney who ducked and ran out of the bar.  Elliott then turned and with the butt of his pistol smashed it into the head of Hiney's friend, Colford, who fell senseless to the floor.  

Once Colford recovered, he went to his wagon and began a trip toward home.  Down the road he ran across Hiney walking quietly home.  Hiney climbed into the wagon and looked fine, but mentioned he was so frightened that he felt badly.  Colford drove him to his home and left him to walk the few paces to his door.  Colford departed shortly before Hiney collapsed in front of his own house.  

Later in the night he was found by a passerby and taken inside where it was discovered he had been shot in the right side.  The bullet passed through his right lung and lodged in his torso on his left side.  Though a doctor was called, the wound was mortal.

As Hiney lingered near death, a local constable was contacted.  He proceeded to the Grand View Hotel and arrested Elliott.  He took him to Hiney's home where Hiney's mother, sisters, and brothers held vigil.  Elliott turned his eyes away and the constable took him to White Plains where he was locked up until a Grand Jury could consider the case.  Elliott immediately hired attorney Martin Keogh of Pelham to handle his case.  

The Grand Jury heard the evidence and concluded that the evidence in support of self defense was overwhelming.  The Grand Jury refused to return an indictment against Elliott.

John Hiney's mother, Mary Ann Hiney, would have none of it.  She promptly filed a civil lawsuit against John Elliott in state court seeking $5,000 in damages "for loss of support &c."  The civil jury trial was held in early October, 1893.  The jury deliberated for a total of twenty four hours and finally returned a verdict for the defendant, John Elliott, finding that he acted in self defense.

By the way, John Elliott's favored candidate, the Democrat William G. Graney, lost the election for County Register on November 8, 1892.  Tragically, John Hiney never learned the results of that election.  Instead, he lost his life. 

*          *          *          *          *

"POLITICS LEADS TO MURDER.
-----
John Elliott Shoots John Hiney in the Pelham Bridge Hotel.
-----
THE MURDERER SAYS IT WAS DONE IN SELF-DEFENSE.
-----
A Row Occurred Over the Contest for Register in Westchester Late Sunday Night -- Hiney Drew a Pistol to Protect His Friend Colford, When Elliott Shot Him -- Elliott Surrenders and Is Now in White Plains Jail.

They say in Westchester that 'Johnny Elliott is terrible quick with a pistol.'  He bore out this reputation on Sunday night when he fatally shot John Hiney, whom he had known all his life.  It began in a friendly discussion of politics, or rather of candidates.  It ended in murder.

William John Elliott was born in Throgg's Neck, the village which is really a part of Westchester.  His father, Alec Elliott, used to drive a stage from Throgg's Neck to Harlem before there was a railroad.  Old-timers remember that the elder Elliott was forced to leave the country during war times.  One day he beat Sergt. Dolan, who was stationed at Fort Schuyler.  When Dolan returned to the barracks the men on post asked him who had beaten him.  Dolan told them.

The men left their posts and went to Elliott's house.  They demanded admittance.  A voice said that Elliott was not there.  They fired throught the window.  Elliott's niece, a beautiful young woman was killed.

'Johnny' Elliott, as every one calls him, was a tiny boy then, and John Hiney hadn't been born.  The two men were born within two blocks of each other.  They grew up together and have always been good friends.  Hiney's father was a stone mason.  He died when John was a baby, and Matthew Colford was made his guardian.  As 'Johnny' Elliott grew older he displayed sporting tastes, coupled with a capacity for making money.  Hiney was staid and serious.  He lived with his mother.  He was only 23.  Elliott is 5 years older.

Eight or nine years ago Elliott leased the yellow roadhouse, which rests on piles over the Pelham river at the north end of Pelham bridge.  It is now a part of Pelham park.  The road-house is called the Grand View Hotel.  It is popular with fishermen and with people who drive along Pelham road.  It is about 2 miles from Westchester.  In the old days it was more of a sporting place than it is now.  Many prize fights have taken place there.  The fight between Le Blanche, the Marine, and Henry took place there.  That fight plays an important part in this murder.

A warrant was sworn out for Elliott's arrest because of this fight.  It was place in the hands of William V. Molloy, a deputy sheriff, to serve.  Elliott was arrested, and it was an expensive arrest for him.  But of late years Elliott's place has been more quiet.  The young proprietor has indulged his sporting tastes elsewhere.  He has always lived at the hotel.  With him are his wife and two children and his aunt.  Mrs. Byzzard [Editor's Note:  Could this be a mistaken corruption of "Blizzard" who once ran the Grand View Hotel?], who cared for him.

Hiney was unmarried.  He always said that he had his mother to care for.  Two years ago he was made night watchman for James M. Waterbury, who has a big estate in Westchester.  There was no more popular young man in the town of Westchester than Hiney.  He was very quiet.  No one ever knew him to get into trouble.  Last year he ran for Constable and he ran 200 ahead of his ticket.

Hiney's warmest friend was John B. Colford, a commission horse dealer, who enjoys an enviable reputation.  He has worked for Mr. Waterbury all his life, as did his father before him.  Colford buys horses for all the rich men in the vicinity.  It was through him that Hiney got his job as night watchman.

Hiney and Colford are both Democrats.  Colford is something of a political boss.  Hiney was a member of the Democratic Town Committee.  This year Colford has warmly supported William V. Molloy for the position of County Register.  Molloy is a Republican, a member of the railroad contracting firm of Molloy Bros., of New Rochelle.  Colford supported Molloy for personal reasons.  Hiney followed his friend in supporting the Republican.  

On Sunday night Colford drove Hiney down to the town hall of Westchester to attend a meeting of the Town Committee.  Before they went there they drove to the Morris Park race-track.  There were three or four rounds of drinks, but Hiney took ginger ale and sarsaparilla.   Then the two friends went into the village.  While Hiney was in at the meeting Coloford went across the street.  After a while Hiney came out and told Colford that he was not to be made treasurer of the committee, as was planned, because he was going to vote for Molloy for Register instead of W. G. Graney, the Democratic nominee.

Colford had just met four New Rochelle men who had started out early in the day on an electioneering trip in the interest of Molloy.  These four were Oliver Molloy, William V. Molloy's brother, and a member of the firm of Molloy Bros.; Daniel H. Hynes, a saloon keeper in New Rochelle and the agent of the Yuengling Brewing Co.; John Farley, another New Rochelle saloon keeper, and William Quinn, who is a brother-in-law of Gen. Sickles.  They had a few drinks together and then went into a restaurant and had something to eat.  About 9 o'clock the four New Rochelle men started home in the coach in which they had been riding all day.  Colford and Hiney started in the former's yellow-wheeled wagon.  They met at the gate leading into Mr. Waterbury's grounds, about a mile from Elliott's road-house, and it was suggested that they go in there and have a drink.  Colford and Hiney reached there first, because they had a fast horse.  When they went in Elliott was in the saloon, which is in the back part of the house.  When Colford went in he remarked that there was a Molloy crowed descending upon the place.  Elliott replied that they knew he was against Molloy.  The others came up and there were drinks all around.  In the course of the night they drank pretty near everything from beer to champagne.

The talk was upon politics.  The candidates for Register were the most discussed.  The Molloy who is the candidate is the same Molloy who arrested Elliott as a deputy sheriff.  Elliott hates him cordially.  In the course of the talk Elliott drew several $1,000 bills from his pocket and offered to bet Colford one of them or any part of it that Graney would be elected.  Colford replied that he couldn't bet that much.  He said he had never before seen a $1,000 bill.  Finally they bet $50.  The money was placed in Hiney's hands as stakeholder.

Up to this point the stories agree.  From this point on there is a divergence.  That of Colford seems to be the straightest and clearest.

'Everything had been very pleasant and comfortable,' he said yesterday.  'No one had the slightest idea of any trouble.  We had been talking warmly but there was no personal feeling.  After a whilte Elliott began talking roughly to Molloy.  He was behind the bar and Molloy was in front of it.  The rest of us were along the bar.  Elliott was villifying Molloy frightfully.  'Olly' Molloy is a college-bred man and he isn't used to the rough ways of politics.  I thought that Elliott was going it too strong.  He had talked until he was in a terrible rage.  I started back of the bar to try and draw his attention from Molloy.

'I took him by the arm and started to say that it was not 'Olly's' fault that his brother had arrested him, when Elliott turned on me and said:

'You're trying to do me, are you.'

'He grappled with me.  That made me mad and there was a scuffle.  He pushed me out from behind the bar.  Hiney was standing next to it, beside the ice-box.  Then Elliott rushed upstairs.

'In a few seconds he came down again with a revolver in his hands.  He said 'John Hiney, you've got a gun.  You want to get out of here quick!'  Hiney had a revolver.  In his capacity as night watchman he carried a pearl-handled one, which I gave him myself.  Earlier in the evening he had taken the revolver from his pocket and laid it on the bar in order to find some change in his pockets with which to pay for drinks.

'Almost before the words were out of Elliott's mouth he fired at Hiney, who turned and ran out.  Then Elliott turned towards mem and struck me over the eye with the butt of the revolver.  I was knocked senseless.  When I recovered consciousness Hynes was saying, 'I hope you didn't hit him,' and Elliott replied, 'Did I ever shoot at anything I didn't hit?'

Elliott has the reputation of being one of the finest pigeon shots in the country.  Colford went on to say that when he regained his senses the others were looking to see if they could find where the bullet struck.  He went out directly, climbed into his wagon and started home.

'It was as cold-blooded a murder as was ever done,' said Colford in conclusion.

'Elliott killed the man in self-defense,' said Daniel Hynes when he was asked about the affair.  'We had been talking politics and it was all pleasant enough until Colford went behind the bar.  Then Elliott had some words with Colford.  The two grappled and Elliott pushed Colford from behind the bar.  Then Elliott went out and got his revolver.  He told Hiney to get out.  Hiney had been flourishing a revolver about earlier in the evening.  I was dead leary of him myself.  Hiney didn't go and Elliott fired.  Then Elliott turned and knocked Colford down.

After Colford went out Elliott fired a shot at the wall to see if we could find the mark of the bullet.  We could find no trace of the first bullet.  We stayed at Elliott's for several hours after the shooting.  We didn't think that Hiney had been shot.  He didn't act like it after he went out.'

I may be remarked, paranthetically [sic], that Hynes is a saloon-keeper and something of a sporting many himself.  In New Rochelle he is known as 'Pop' Hynes.  He is a large, powerful and fine-looking young man.  For the other New Rochelle members of the party Molloy's story rather inclines to that of Colford, while Farley, who is also a saloon-keeper, thinks that Hynes has it about right.  All of those who were there say that they were not drunk.  Taking into account the number of drinks they took during the evening, most people would arrive at a different conclusion.  It will take a trial to settle the disputed points.

Strangest of all is the story of Hiney after the shooting.  When he ran out of the saloon he started to walk homme.  He had not the slightest idea that he had been shot.  Colford, in his wagon, caught up with him.  Hiney climbed in, and the two drove along together.  Hiney said he was very much frightened, which he thought accounted for his uncomfortable feeling.  It never entered Colford's head that Hiney was wounded.  He let the young man out of the wagon almost at his house -- they live only a block apart.  Colford went on home.  Hiney walked scarcely twenty feet when he fell to the ground fainting.  There Joseph Sterrett found him before midnight and took him home.  Dr. Dennen came.  He found that the bullet had entered the right side, just below the nipple.  It passed through the right lung and buried itself in the left side.  He saw that Hiney could not live.  At 3 o'clock Justice Skennion was summoned and he took Hiney's ante-mortem statement.  At 5 o'clock Constable Bradley was told of the shooting and he started for Pelham Bridge.  He found Elliott in bed.  Together they drove down to Throgg's Neck.

Constable Bradley took Elliott into the room where Hiney lay dying.  The mother was there, the sisters and the three brothers.  They looked at the pale white face on the pillow and the rugged one of the man who turned his eyes away.  Hiney said Elliott was the man who shot him.  Then Constable Bradley took Elliott to the station at Westchester and from there to the jail at White Plains.  Hiney lingered until 1.30 o'clock in the afternoon, when he died.

Elliott made a statement to Justice Skennion and Constable Bradley.  He said that he shot Hiney in self-defense.  He said that Colford and Hiney came into his saloon to pick a fight.  He asked Colford if he came there to do him up and Colford said he did.  Then Colford went behind the bar and picked up a bottle.  Elliott says he saw Hiney flourihsing a revolver and he made up his mind that they were bound to kill him.  He says he made up his mind that he had to protect himself.  He ran upstairs and got his revolver.  When he came down Hiney was standing alongside the door with his gun in his hand showing through the pocket of his overcoat.  Elliott continued:

'I said to him, You get out of here, John Hiney, you've got a gun.'  Hiney didn't go so I fired at him.  I didn't know whether I hit him or not.  He turned and ran out.  After I fired I knocked Colford down.'

Elliott was pretty badly broken up over the shooting when he heard that Hiney was dead.  He wasn't apprehensive, however.  He is certain that he will get out of it all right.  One of the first things he did after he landed in the White Plains Jail was to engage Martin J. Keogh to defend him."

Source:  POLITICS LEADS TO MURDER -- John Elliott Shoots John Hiney in the Pelham Bridge Hotel, The World [NY, NY], Nov. 8, 1892, Vol. XXXIII, No. 11403, p. 1, cols. 6-8.  


"A FATAL QUARREL. -- In a quarrel Sunday evening before election at Pelham Bridge, John Hiney was fatally shot by John Elliot [sic].  Reports as to the origin of the affray, and the circumstances connected with it, are very conflicting.  Some of the parties present claim that Elliott is solely to blame, while others allege that he only acted in self-defense.  Elliott is a sporting man and a crack pigeon shot.  He keeps a hotel at Pelham Bay Park, leased to him by the Park Commmissioners.

It is a resort for the sports of that part of the county.  The politicians too make it a rendezvous to compare notes.  On Sunday night John Colford and John Hiney of Westchester got into a quarrel there with Elliot.  They were friends of William V. Molloy, the republican candidate for Register.  While they were arguing and quarreling, several of Molloy's friends came in from New Rochelle.  It is said that they all formed to talk Elliot down, and Elliot fearing violence, went to another room and get [sic] his revolver.  When he came back in the bar-room Elliot says he saw Hiney apparently awaiting him and holding a revolver in his hand.  He raised his pistol and fired at Hiney.  The ball entered his left breast, inflicting a fatal wound.  As he fell to the floor, Elliot went up to Colford, and without any warning knocked him down.  Then Hiney and the witnesses of the shooting dispersed.  

Strangest of all is the story of Hiney after the shooting.  When he ran out of the saloon he started to walk home.  Colford in his wagon caught up with him.  Hiney climbed in, and the two drove off together.  Hiney said he was very much frightened, which he thought accounted for his uncomfortable feeling.  It never entered Colford's head that Hiney was wounded.

He left the young man out of the wagon almost at house.  They lived only a block apart.  Colford went on home.  Hiney walked scarcely twenty feet when he fell to the ground fainting.  There Joseph Sterrett found him before midnight and took him home.  Dr. Denneg [sic] came.  He found that the bullet had entered the right side, just below the nipple.  It passed through the right lung and buried itself in the left side.  He saw that Hiney could not live.  At 3 o'clock Justice Skennion was summoned and he took Hiney's ante-mortem statement.  At 5 o'clock Constable Bradley was told of the shooting and he started for Pelham Bridge.  He found Elliot in bed.  Together they went down to Throgg's Neck.

Constable Bradley took Elliott into the room where Hiney lay dying.  The mother was there, the sisters and the three brothers.  They looked at the pale white face on the pillow and the rugged one of the man who turned his eyes away.  Hiney said Elliot was the man who shot him.  Then Constable Bradley took Elliot to the jail at White Plains.  Hiney lingered until 1.30 o'clock in the afternoon, when he died.

David H. Hunt with Martin J. Keogh and the great New York criminal lawyer, Howe, are employed to defend Elliott.

He claims he shot in self-defense, believing his own life to be in danger John Hiney, the man who was shot, had for some time been a watchman for James M. Waterbury of Westchester, and on account of his business was in the habit of carrying a revolver."

Source:  A FATAL QUARREL, The Eastern State Journal [White Plains, NY], Nov. 19, 1892, Vol. XLVIII, No. 34, p. 3, col. 6.  

"ELLIOTT MURDERS HINEY.
-----
A Fatal Political Discussion in Westchester.
-----
DIDN'T KNOW HE WAS HIT.
-----
Bitter Feeling Since the Dempsey-Le Blanche Fight.
-----
SAYS IT WAS SELF-DEFENSE.
-----

'Johnny' Elliott, a well-known sport of Westchester County, N. Y., shot and mortally wounded John Hiney in Elliott's road house near the Pelham bridge, on Sunday night last, during a political quarrel.  The two men had always been friends.

William John Elliott was born in Throgg's Neck, the village which is really a part of Westchester.  His father, Alec Elliott, used to drive a stage from Throgg's Neck to Harlem before there was a railroad.  Old-timers remember that the elder Elliott was forced to leave the country during war times.  One day he beat Sergt. Dolan, who was stationed at Fort Schuyler.  When Dolan returned to the barracks the men on post asked him who had beaten him.  Dolan told them.

The men left their posts and went to Elliott's house.  They demanded admittance.  A voice said that Elliott was not there.  They fired throught the window.  Elliott's niece, a beautiful young woman was killed.

'Johnny' Elliott, as every one calls him, was a tiny boy then, and John Hiney hadn't been born.  The two men were born within two blocks of each other.  They grew up together and have always been good friends.  Hiney's father was a stone mason.  He died when John was a baby, and Matthew Colford was made his guardian.  As 'Johnny' Elliott grew older he displayed sporting tastes, coupled with a capacity for making money.  Hiney was staid and serious.  He lived with his mother.  He was only 23.  Elliott is 5 years older.

Eight or nine years ago Elliott leased the yellow roadhouse, which rests on piles over the Pelham river at the north end of Pelham bridge.  It is now a part of Pelham park.  The road-house is called the Grand View Hotel.  It is popular with fishermen and with people who drive along Pelham road.  It is about 2 miles from Westchester.  In the old days it was more of a sporting place than it is now.  Many prize fights have taken place there.  The fight between Le Blanche, the Marine, and Henry took place there.  That fight plays an important part in this murder.

A warrant was sworn out for Elliott's arrest because of thise fight.  It was place in the hands of William V. Molloy, a deputy sheriff, to serve.  Elliott was arrested, and it was an expensive arrest for him.  But of late years Elliott's place has been more quiet.  The young proprietor has indulged his sporting tastes elsewhere.  He has always lived at the hotel.  With him are his wife and two children and his aunt.  Mrs. Byzzard [Editor's Note:  Could this be a mistaken corruption of "Blizzard" who once ran the Grand View Hotel?], who cared for him.

Hiney was unmarried.  He always said that he had his mother to care for.  Two years ago he was made night watchman for James M. Waterbury, who has a big estate in Westchester.  There was no more popular young man in the town of Westchester than Hiney.  He was very quiet.  No one ever knew him to get into trouble.  Last year he ran for Constable and he ran 200 ahead of his ticket.

Hiney's warmest friend was John B. Colford, a commission horse dealer, who enjoys an enviable reputation.  He has worked for Mr. Waterbury all his life, as did his father before him.  Colford buys horses for all the rich men in the vicinity.  It was through him that Hiney got his job as night watchman.

Hiney and Colford are both Democrats.  Colford is something of a political boss.  Hiney was a member of the Democratic Town Committee.  This year Colford has warmly supported William V. Molloy for the position of County Register.  Molloy is a Republican, a member of the railroad contracting firm of Molloy Bros., of New Rochelle.  Colford supported Molloy for personal reasons.  Hiney followed his friend in supporting the Republican.  

On Sunday night Colford drove Hiney down to the town hall of Westchester to attend a meeting of the Town Committee.

Upon their return when about a mile from Elliott's road-house, it was suggested that they go in there and have a drink.  

The talk was upon politics.  The candidates for Register were the most discussed.  The Molloy who is the candidate is the same Molloy who arrested Elliott as a deputy sheriff.  Elliott hates him cordially.  In the course of the talk Elliott drew several $1,000 bills from his pocket and offered to bet Colford one of them or any part of it that Graney would be elected.  Colford replied that he couldn't bet that much.  He said he had never before seen a $1,000 bill.  Finally they bet $50.  The money was placed in Hiney's hands.

Up to this point the stories agree.  From this point on there is a divergence.  That of Colford seems to be the straightest and clearest.

'Everything had been very pleasant and comfortable,' he said afterwards.  'No one had the slighest idea of any trouble.  We had been talking warmly but there was no personal feeling.  After a while Elliott began talking roughly to Molloy.  He was behind the bar and Molloy was in front of it.  The rest of us were along the bar.  Elliott was villifying Molloy frightfully.  'Olly' Molloy is a college-bred man and he isn't use to the rough ways of politics.  I thought that Elliott was going it too strong.  He had talked until he ws in a terrible rage.  I started back of the bar to try and draw his attention fromm Molloy.  

'I took him by the arm and started to say that it was not 'Olly's' fault that his brother had arrested him, when Elliott turned on me and said:  

'You're trying to do me, are you.'

'He grappled with me.  That made me mad and there was a scuffle.  He pushed me out from behind the bar.  Hiney was standing next to it, beside the ice-box.  Then Elliott rushed upstairs.  

'In a few seconds he came down again with a revolver in his hands.  He said:  'John Hiney, you've got a gun.  You want to get out of here quick!' Hiney had a revolver.  In his capacity as night watchman he carried a pearl-handled one, which I gave him myself.  Earlier in the evening he had taken the revolver from his pocket nd laid it on the bar in order to find soe change in his pockets with which to pay for drinks.

'Almost before the words were out of Elliott's mouth he fired at Hiney, who turned and ran out.  Then Elliott turned to me and struck me over the eye with the butt of the revolver.  I was knocked senseless.  When I recovered consciousness Hynes was saying 'I hope you didn't hit him,' and Elliott replied, 'Did I ever shoot at anything I didn't hit?'

Elliott has the reputation of being one of the finest pigeon shots in the country.  Colford went on to say that when he regained his senses the others were looking to see if they could find where the bullet struck.  He went out directly, climbed into his wagon and started home.

Strangest of all is the story of Hiney after the shooting.  When he ran out of the saloon he started to walk home.  He had not the slightest idea that he had been shot.  Colford, in his wagon, caught up with him.  Hiney climbed in, and the two drove along together.  Hiney said he was very much frightened, which he thought accounted for his uncomfortable feeling.  It never entered Colford's head that Hiney was wounded.  He let the young man out of the wagon almost at his house -- they live only a block apart.  Colford went on home.  Hiney walked scarcely twenty feet when he fell to the ground fainting.  There Joseph Sterrett found him before midnight and took him home.  Dr. Dennen came.  He founded that the bullet had entered the right side, just below the nipple.  It passed through the right lung and buried itself in the left side.  He saw that Hiney could not live.  At 3 o'clock Justice Skennion was summoned and he took Hiney's ante-mortem statement.  At 5 o'clock Constable Bradley was told of the shooting, and he started for Pelham Bridge.  He found Elliott in bed.  Together they went down to Throgg's Neck.

Constable Bradley took Elliott into the room where Hiney lay dying.  The mother was there, the sisters and the three brothers.  They looked at the pale, white face on the pillow and the rugged one of the man who turned his eyes away.  Hiney said Elliott was the man who shot him.  Then Constable Bradley took Elliott to the station at Westchester and from there to the jail at White Plains.  Hiney lingered until 1:30 o'clock in the afternoon, when he died."

Source:  ELLIOTT MURDERS HINEY -- A Fatal Political Discussion in Westchester, The National Police Gazette [NY, NY], Nov. 26, 1892, p. 7, cols. 1-2.  

"The grand jury found no bill against John Elliott, the proprietor of the road house at Pelham bridge, who shot and killed John Hiney in a quarrel at Pelham Bay Park on the Monday night before election.  He claimed at the time that he shot in self defense when he saw Hiney had a revolver in his hnd and was in  temper to use it.  The grand jury took that view of the case and he was discharged from custody.  This act of violence seems to call for such legislation as will prevent the carrying upon one's person fire arms.  Hiney had a pistol in his pocket and exhibited it and was shot down by Elliott under the apprehension that it was intended to do him harm.  The testimony showed that 'drink' had been indulged in freely and wherever this is a condition the deadly revolver is a dangerous accompanient.  There certainly should be some effective legal method to prevent the carrying upon one's person death-dealing fire-arms."

Source:  [Untitled], The Eastern State Journal [White Plains, NY], Nov. 26, 1892, Vol. XLVIII, No. 35, p. 2, col. 1.  

"Goes Scot Free.

The Grand Jury failed to find any indictment against Jack Elliott, the keeper of a road house at Pelham Bridge, who, during a political quarrel, recently, shot and killed John Hiney.  

When he was arrested he said he shot in self-defence, seeing Hiney with a revolver in his hand and in a temper to use it.

Since the shooting he has been 'committed to White Plains Jail,' but spent little time in it.  He had the free run of the Sheriff's office, and went to a hotel to his meals.  He was continually boasting of his 'pull' with the Democratic politicians.  It seems to have stood him in good stead.  He is discharged."

Source:  Goes Scot Free, The Yonkers Statesman, Nov. 23, 1892, Vol. X, No. 2770, p. 4, col. 4.  

"GENERAL NEWS NOTES . . . 

At White Plains, N. Y., Mrs. Bridget Hiney, mother of the young man who was shot and killed in an election quarrel on November 6 by John Elliott, proprietor of the Pelham Bridge hotle, has sued Mr. Elliott for $5,000 damages for the loss of her son's support.  The grand jury refused to indict Elliott for the shooting."

Source:  GENERAL NEWS NOTES, Hammondsport Herald [Hammondsport, NY], Feb. 1, 1893, Vol. XIX, No. 40, p. 1, col. 1.  

"COUNTY NEWS. . . 

--Mrs. Bridget Hiney, of Pelham Bridge, has sued 'Jack' Elliott, a sporting man and proprietor of the Pelham Bridge Hotel, for $5,000, for the loss of her son's services.  On the Sunday preceding the election last November, Elliott and John P. Hiney, the widow's alleged support, got into a quarrel at the Pelham Bridge Hotel over the relative merits of William Molloy and William Graney, the republican and democratic candidates for register.  In the war of words Elliott shot and killed Hiney; hence the civil suit.  An attempt to indict Elliott failed."

Source:  COUNTY NEWS, The Eastern State Journal [White Plains, NY],. Jun. 10, 1893, p. 3, cols. 3-5. 

"COURT PROCEEDINGS. . . . 

Mary Ann Hiney vs. John Elliott. -- Mary Ann Hiney, of Pelham, as the administratrix of the estate of her son, John Hiney, who was shot and killed Nov. 6th, 1892 by 'Jack' Elliott, a well known hotel keeper at Pelham Bridge, brought this action under the statute to recover $5,000 damages for loss of support, &c.  After twenty-four hours' deliberation, the jury brought in a verdict for the defendant.  The evidence was so strong in support of the theory of self defense that the grand jury failed to indict Elliott, and hence this civil suit was brought.  The trial was ably conducted.  Mr. Hunt in summing up for the defense showed that he was an orator as well as a skillful lawyer.  Messrs. Emmett & Morris appeared for the plaintiff.  The verdict was a complete vindication of Mr. Elliott's act."

Source:  COURT PROCEEDINGS . . . Mary Ann Hiney vs. John Elliott, The Eastern State Journal [White Plains, NY], Oct. 7, 1893, Vol. XLIX, No. 28, p. 2, col. 3.  

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."