Historic Pelham

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.

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.

* * * * *

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.

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: 1883, 1884, City Island Bridge, George H. Reynolds, islanders, James Hyatt, Lawsuit, Legislation, mainlanders, Statute

Monday, August 08, 2016

More on Unsuccessful Efforts in 1884 by Town of Pelham to Replace the Wooden 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 an ultimately unsuccessful effort in 1884 to have the New York State legislature authorize the Town of Pelham to issue bonds to fund the replacement of the old wooden City Island Bridge built in 1868 by David Carll with a new wooden bridge. See Wed., Jul. 20, 2016: Bill Introduced in 1884 to Authorize the Town of Pelham To Build a New City Island Bridge. Further research has revealed that the story behind this ultimately unsuccessful effort to replace the old wooden bridge with a new one is more complex and more interesting than first thought. Indeed, it represents yet another example of a 19th century battle between mainlanders and islanders.

It turns out that the introduction on March 6, 1884 of a bill entitled "An act to authorize the contstruction of a bridge in the town of Pelham, Westchester county, between the mainland of said town and City island, and to authorize the acquiring of land therefor, and the issuing of bonds of the said town to pay for said bridge" was a direct response to a pair of lawsuits brought on behalf of the mainlanders to halt appropriations for the new bridge.

A brief newspaper reference published on March 7, 1884, the day after the bill was introduced, indicates that for months a Pelham mainlander had been engaged in lawsuits to stop the Town of Pelham from appropriating funds to build a new wooden replacement bridge. Indeed, Pelham Manor resident (and mainlander) George H. Reynolds initially brought two lawsuits. The first was brought against Town Supervisor James Hyatt (an islander). Reynolds filed a related action against the Board of Supervisors of Westchester County.

Plaintiff Reynolds sought relief to block Town of Pelham appropriations of $25,000 for a new City Island Bridge and $1,750 "for road purposes." Initially, on December 12, 1883, the New York Supreme Court entered an order against Reynolds and in favor of Town Supervisor James Hyatt in the first action. Although the record is a little vague, it appears that on March 1, 1884, the New York Supreme Court entered final judgments in the two lawsuits granting mainlander Reynolds the relief he demanded. Consequently, "[t]he appropriations of $25,000 for a new bridge at City Island and $1,750 for road purposes are annulled by these judgments."

George Huntington Reynolds was a nationally-renowned steam engineer and inventor known for designing the steam engine for the now-famous USS Monitor that fought in the first battle of the ironclads during the American Civil War. Reynolds lived with his family in Pelham Manor for many years. He was an active member of the Pelham Manor Protective Club and served as President of the local school board for eight years. He built a palatial home in the Manor that no longer stands. He was one of the nation's preeminent mechanical engineers and was involved in many projects that are stories in and of themselves. Late in life he moved to Connecticut, but various of his children and grandchildren remained in Pelham and surrounding areas for many years.

George Huntington Reynolds in Photograph Published in 1903.

Source: Commemorative Biographical Record of Tolland and

Windham Counties Connecticut Containing Biographical Sketches

Of Prominent and Representative Citizens And Of Many Of The

Early Settled Families -- Illustrated, plate between pp. 188-89

(Chicago, IL: J. H. Beers & Co., 1903). NOTE: Click on Image

To Enlarge.

In short, it seems that in 1883 and 1884, City Island resident and Town Supervisor James Hyatt led an initiative on behalf of City Islanders to fund replacement of the old wooden City Island Bridge by spreading the cost of the bridge replacement across all Pelham taxpayers. Thus, the Town Board appropriated $25,000 to build the new wooden bridge. Mainlander George Huntington Reynolds, in turn, opposed that initiative and successfully sued to block the town appropriations to fund replacement of the old bridge and to fund certain unspecified road work. Shortly after final judgments were entered in favor of Reynolds in his two lawsuits against the Town Supervisor and the Westchester County Board of Supervisors, it would appear that the islanders initiated the legislative effort to authorize the Town of Pelham to issue bonds to fund replacement of the bridge about which I previously have written.

Undated Photograph of the Old City Island Bridge

Built by David Carll. NOTE: Click on Image to Enlarge.

* * * * *

Below is the text of a newspaper article referencing the lawsuits brought by George H. Reynolds. It is followed by a citation and link to its source.

"PELHAM AND CITY ISLAND.

The women have occupied the time of the justices' courts this week. Verdict, no cause of action.

It is reported that Mr. Wm. Belden has obtained a charter to build a horse railroad between City Island and Bartow.

Two weeks ago, Mr. James H. Weaver started off on a trip for the benefit of his health, the objective point being California. On Monday last, he was heard from in Mexico.

Considerable anxiety is manifested on City Island, as to the whereabouts of Pilot Geo. W. Scofield. He passed Bartlet Reef light, last Friday morning, at nine o'clock, in charge of a vessel, since which time nothing has been heard of him.

Mr. and Mrs. George Banta celebrated their twentieth wedding anniversary, on Monday evening last. On the same evening, Dr. M. Cromen celebrated the anniversary of his birthday. Scores of friends aided in making both events pleasurable.

At the sale of lots held on Friday last, by Messrs. Jenkins & Cameron, the purchasers were, John Bowman, two lots; Thomas Collins, one lot; Jacob Brady, one lot; Geo. Booth, two lots; M. Mulligan, two lots. One lot was knocked down to Joseph May. [Illegible] will be resold to-day.

On the 12th of December last a judgment was rendered by the Supreme Court in favor of James Hyatt, Supervisor, the defendant in the action brought by George H. Reynolds against him. On Saturday last the plaintiff's attorney entered an order reversing this judgment and giving judgment for the plaintiff. Another order was also entered in the suit of Reynolds against the Board of Supervisors of Westchester County, being final judgment for him for the relief demanded in the complaint. The appropriations of $25,000 for a new bridge at City Island and $1,750 for road purposes are annulled by these judgments.

The Commissioners of Highways of the Town of Pelham, have given notice that they will apply at the annual town meeting for a vote authorizing the raising of $5,735, for the purpose of repairing roads and bridges, to be expended as follows:

Repairing culverts Pelhamdale avenue near Boston Turnpike.....$25.00
Repairing culverts, Washington avenue near Union street.....25.00
Pelham lane, repairing and grading.....50.00
Pelham road [repairing and grading].....50.00
Boston turnpike [repairing and grading].....100.00
Pelhamdale ave., bal. due for repairing.....58.00
Wolf's lane [bal. due for repairing].....85.00
Old Boston road [bal. due for repairing].....75.00
Fifth avenue [bal. due for repairing].....67.00
Fourth street [bal. due for repairing].....65.00
City Island road [bal. due for repairing].....135.00
Culvert, City Island road [bal. due for repairing].....15.00
Shore road, balance due for repairing.....96.00
Pelham lane [balance due for repairing].....125.00
Culvert Pelham lane [balance due for repairing].....10.00
Boston turnpike [balance due for repairing].....125.00
Main street [balance due for repairing].....255.00
Culvert, Fordham ave, west of Main st. balance due for repairing.....50.00
Planking City Island bridge, bal. due.....65.00
Main street, repairing and grading.....280.00
Fordham ave., west of Main street, repairing and grading.....100.00
City Island road, repairing and grading.....300.00
Wolf's lane [repairing and grading].....100.00
Old Boston Road [repairing and grading].....50.00
First avenue, [repairing and grading].....30.00
Second do [i.e., ditto] [repairing and grading].....20.00
Fourth do [repairing and grading].....35.00
Sixth do [repairing and grading].....50.00
Seventh do [repairing and grading].....50.00
Second street [repairing and grading].....20.00
Third do [repairing and grading].....25.00
Pelhamdale ave., [repairing and grading].....90.00
Repairing culverts, Pelhamdale avenue near Old Boston road.....40.00
Bluestoning Pelhamdale ave. and Wolfs lane, south of Pelhamville depot,.....1000.00
Bluestoning City Island road, between Shore road and City Island bridge.....1000.00
Main st., between Ditmars and Cross streets, raising grade.....1000.00

Whether all these repairs are necessary or not we do not pretend to say. The Commissioners of Highways doubtless think they are else they would not ask for the money, but if there is one appropriation that should be granted more than another it is certainly that one for repairing and grading City Island road and the one for bluestoning that portion of the road from City Island bridge to Marshals corner. This piece of road has been for weeks past, literally in an impassable condition and no one could be more deeply impressed with the necessity of repairing it than the writer. From the nature of this piece of road it would be a useless expenditure of money to attempt to repair it, by the method ordinarily employed, of putting clay or sand upon it."

Source: PELHAM AND CITY ISLAND, The Chronicle [Mount Vernon, NY], Mar. 7, 1884, Vol. XV, No. 755, p. 3, cols. 4-5.

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: 1883, 1884, Board of Supervisors, Bond, Bridge, City Island Bridge, George H. Reynolds, James Hyatt, Law, Lawsuit, Legislation, Statute, Westchester County Board of Supervisors

Wednesday, July 20, 2016

Bill Introduced in 1884 to Authorize the Town of Pelham To Build a New 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."

New York City has constructed a temporary bridge adjacent to the old City Island Bridge that opened July 4, 1901. It took almost three years to build and cost $200,000. The city's Department of Transportation is in the midst of demolishing the old City Island Bridge and constructing a new bridge to replace it after years of controversy over the original proposed design for a soaring, 18-story cable bridge intended to evoke a massive sail. The new City Island Bridge that will be constructed follows a simple causeway design more in keeping with the character and nature of the island.

Rendering of the Proposed City Island Causeway Bridge

To Be Built as Replacement for the Old City Island Bridge

Opened in 1901. NOTE: Click on Image to Enlarge.

The history of the ferries and bridges that have connected City Island to the mainland for nearly two hundred fifty years is long and storied. Part of that history involves the bridge built in 1901 that replaced an earlier bridge built by David Carll of City Island in 1868.

By the mid-1880s, that old City Island Bridge completed in 1868 had become a decrepit, dangerous, and dilapidated eyesore. The bridge originally was built from the timbers of an ancient decommissioned ship known as the North Carolina, cobbled together with a draw that was taken from the old Harlem Bridge when that bridge was replaced. As one account put it so succinctly, even when newly-built in 1868, the City Island bridge was "nothing but a second hand affair."

Interestingly, in 1884 there was an effort to authorize the Town of Pelham to issue bonds to fund the replacement of the old wooden bridge with another wooden bridge. It appears that with New York City assembling parkland on the mainland with plans to form Pelham Bay Park at the time, the initiative withered on the vine. The iniative, however, provides an interesting glimpse of the importance of the City Island Bridge to the Town of Pelham at the time, as well as the process that would have been followed had the wooden replacement bridge become a reality.

On March 6, 1884, a member of the New York State Assembly, S. W. Johnson, introduced a bill entitled "An act to authorize the contstruction of a bridge in the town of Pelham, Westchester county, between the mainland of said town and City island, and to authorize the acquiring of land therefor, and the issuing of bonds of the said town to pay for said bridge." By unanimous consent, the bill was read a first and then a second time. It immediately was referred to the Committee on Roads and Bridges for analysis.

That month, the full text of the bill was reproduced in a local newspaper. That text is reproduced in its entirety below. The bill authorized the Town Board of Pelham to issue up to $20,000 in bonds paying up to 5% interest per annum to fund the construction of a wooden draw bridge to replace the old City Island Bridge built by David Carll. The bill further authorized the Town Board to buy land on the mainland and on City Island necessary for the bridge and, in the event owners would not sell such land, then the Town could buy such land "in the same manner and by like proceedings, as railroad corporations are authorized by law to acquire land in cases in which they are unable to agree with the owners."

The bill further would require that the bridge be a public bridge with no tolls charged. The bill further provided a detailed process for reporting by the Town of Pelham on the status of repayment of such bonds to retire the debt.

It was not until after the City of New York annexed the region from Pelham in 1895, that efforts to replace the old wooden City Island Bridge gained traction. The city began construction in 1898, opening the new bridge (that is now being demolished) on July 4, 1908.

Undated Photograph of the Old City Island Bridge Built

by David Carll. NOTE: Click on Image to Enlarge.

Undated Photograph of the Old City Island Bridge Built

by David Carll. NOTE: Click on Image to Enlarge.

Undated Post Card View of the Steel City Island Bridge Opened

in 1901, Circa 1920s. NOTE: Click on Image to Enlarge.

* * * * *

"AN ACT

To authorize the construction of a bridge in the town of Pelham, Westchester Co., between the mainland of said town and City Island, and to authorize the acquiring of land therefore, and the issuing of bonds of the said town to pay for said bridge.

The people of the State of New York represesented in Senate and Assembly do enact as follows:

Section 1. The Town Board of the town of Pelham, in the county of Westchester, is hereby authorized and empowered to construct, or cause to be constructed, a wooden draw-bridge, at a cost not exceeding twenty thousand dollars, across and over that branch or arm of Long Island Sound at the narrows, so called, between the mainland of said town and the Island known as City Island, also in said town of Pelham : Said bridge to comence, at or near the place on the mainland aforesaid where the present bridge begins, and to extend across said branch or arm of Long Island Sound to the place or near the place on City Island where the present bridge terminates. The said Town Board is hereby further authorized, for and on behalf of, and in the name of said town, to take and hold, in the manner hereinafter mentioned, so much land, at or near each end of the said bridge, as may be necessary for the erection of the said bridge and the piers, abutments, and other appurtenances thereof, and for all necessary approaches leading to and from the same. The said bridge shall be constructed with a draw, to open at least forty feet, so as to permit vessels with standing masts to pass through the same.

Section 2. It shall be lawful for the said Town Board, for and in behalf, of the said town to purchase such land, at and near each end of the bridge at the mainland and on City Island, as may be necessary for the purposes of said bridge, and to enter upon and take possession of the same. Such land to be purchased of the owners thereof at a price mutually to be agreed upon; and if, for any reason, the said board are unable to agree with the owner or owners for the purchase of any real estate so required for the purposes of said bridge, the said Town Board shall have the right to acquire such real estate for, and in the name of, the town, in the same manner and by like proceedings, as railroad corporations are authorized by law to acquire land in cases in which they are unable to agree with the owners of the same. The said board is also hereby authorized, for and in behalf of the said town, to use and occupy so much of the bed of the stream of the said sound, and the land between high and low water mark, as may be necessary for the purposes of said bridge and the piers, abutments and appurtenances are to be so constructed and used as not to hinder or delay navigation.

Section 3. Such bridge when erected, shall always be a free bridge for the use of the public, and all vessels shall have the right to pass through the draw thereof without toll.

Section 4. The construction of said bridge shall be under the management and control of the said Town Board of the town of Pelham, or of a committee appointed thereby, who shall receive no compensation for such supervision, management and control as aforesaid.

Section 5. The supervisor of the said town of Pelham, by and with the consent of the town board, or of a majority of the members thereof, is hereby authorized and empowered to borrow, upon the credit of said town, the sum of twenty thousand dollars to pay for the construction of such bridge, the drawing of plans and specifications therefor and other necessary incidental expenses, and to secure the sum so borrowed and the interest thereon, the said supervisor is hereby authorized and empowered to issue coupon bonds, by and with the consent of the said town board, as hereinbefore provided, in the manner and to the amount hereinafter provided.

Section 6. The said bonds shall be signed by the Supervisor and the Town Clerk of said town, and issued for an amount not less than two hundred and fifty dollars each, and not more than one thousand dollars each : the sum of two thousand dollars only, of the money so borrowed, as hereby authorized, shall become due and payable on the first day of May in each year. A record of all bonds, so issued, shall be kept by the Town Clerk, of said town, in a book to be kept by him for that purpose; showing the date and amount of each bond, when the same becomes due and payable; the amount of principal and interest paid and remaining unpaid, and all particulars in relation to the issue, sale and redemption thereof.

Section 7. Said bonds shall bear interest at a rate not exceeding five per cent. per annum, payable annually, and shall be sold for not less than their par value; and the premium, if any, which may be received thereon, shall be applied in payment of the interest first becoming due thereon, and the amount of such premiums shall be deducted from the sum authorized to be levied and collected, as provided in the ninth section of this act.

Section 8. The supervisor of the said town shall at the time of making his annual accounting, as provided by law, make a full and true report of all bonds so issued and outstanding and unpaid, the number date and amount thereof, and the amount of interest paid during the year : for all of which payments of bonds and interest the proper vouchers must be presented with said report, and said report shall be entered in full by the said town clerk in the book to be kept by him for that purpose.

Section 9. During each and every year, while any of said bonds remain unpaid, it shall be the duty of the Board of Supervisors of the County of Westchester to cause to be levied and collected, according to law, from the taxable property and inhabitants of the town of Pelham, over and above the expenses of collecting the same, and at the same time and in the same manner in which the taxes of said town for other town purposes shall be levied and collected, such sums as will be sufficient to pay the amount of interest, due or becoming due in any one year, on said bonds; together with and in addition to an amount not exceeding two thousand dollars in any one year, to pay the principal of such of the bonds as may become due and payable during the year; the amount so levied and collected, as provided in this section, shall be in addition to the other sums authorized or required by law to be annually levied and collected, as provided in this section, shall be in addition to the other sums authorized or required by law to be annually levied and collected from the taxable property and inhabitants of said town.

Section 10. All acts or parts of acts inconsisent with the foregoing act are hereby repealed.

Section 11. This act shall take effect immediately."

Source: AN ACT, The Chronicle [Mount Vernon, NY], Mar. 28, 1884, Vol. XV, No. 758, p. 1, cols. 4-5.

"THURSDAY, MARCH 6, 1884.

The House met pursuant to adjournment. . . .

By unanimous consent,

Mr. S. W. Johnson introduced a bill entitled 'An act to authorize the contstruction of a bridge in the town of Pelham, Westchester county, between the mainland of said town and City island, and to authorize the acquiring of land therefor, and the issuing of bonds of the said town to pay for said bridge,' which was read the first time, and by unanimous consent was also read the second time, and referred to to committee on roads and bridges."

Source: Journal of the Assembly of the State of New York: At Their One Hundred And Seventh Session Begun and Held at the Capitol, in the City of Albany, on the First Day of January, 1884, p. 423 (Albany, NY: Weed, Parsons & Co., 1884).