USA > Connecticut > New Haven County > Waterbury > History of Waterbury and the Naugatuck Valley, Connecticut, Volume I > Part 6
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37 | Part 38 | Part 39 | Part 40 | Part 41 | Part 42 | Part 43 | Part 44 | Part 45 | Part 46 | Part 47 | Part 48 | Part 49 | Part 50 | Part 51 | Part 52 | Part 53 | Part 54 | Part 55 | Part 56 | Part 57
In his annual report for 1907, Engineer Cairns says: "The effect on the Naugatuck River of keeping out the city sewage has been marked. Since high water came and the old deposits were flushed out, the river as far as the temporary outlet presents an appearance not perceptibly different from that at points above the city."
Finally in 1908 the engineer reported that the city now had a "continuous con- crete conduit from Washington Avenue to Platt's Dam, a distance of over two miles, but also a good beginning of the purification works themselves, with main carriers, the grit and screen chambers, and the controller house substructure. The next steps will be the provision of a pumping plant and the construction of tanks and beds."
CONSTRUCTION OF THE MORRIS DAM OF WATERBURY'S MUNICIPAL WATER SUPPLY SYSTEM
37
WATERBURY AND THE NAUGATUCK VALLEY
But there the story of the city's sewage disposal plant ends. No steps have ever been taken to complete it.
In the year 1908 Engineer Cairns suggested that "it is possible to escape vio- lation of the court injunction by closing the temporary outlet through which sewage has been discharged into the Naugatuck River, conducting the stream through section 3 and allowing it to escape into the river below the dam."
But this suggestion, which required an appropriation to make it effective, was also ignored. While the sewage disposal plant is effective as far as its carriers are concerned, it is a disposal plant only in name.
A QUARTER CENTURY OF SEWER CONSTRUCTION
The problem of taking away and diverting its sewage has been one of the great problems which is now in a fair way to completion. Most of the city is sewered and construction is being pushed annually into new outlying districts. Here is the record of sewer construction for twenty-five years :
Linear Feet
1892
Linear Feet 10,280
1905
8,667
1893
5.791
1906
7,658
1894
4,074
1907
5,266
1895
6,456
1908
6,890
1896
2,068
1909
3,365
1897
3,703
19IO
10,213
1898
10,389
19II
7,083
1900
7,052
1912
14,205
190I
9,169
1913
11,153
1902
4,412
1914
6,036
1903
3,455
1915
7,216
1904
7,822
1916
6,680
This, on January 1, 1917, represented a total of 58.553 miles of trunk and lateral sewers. The history of the sewage disposal plant which provided for a main carrier to Washington Avenue will be found narrated elsewhere in this chapter. The cost of that was $440,000.00. The city has authorized another bond issue for the extension of the present main carrier from Washington Avenue to Waterville. This will take the sewage out of the Naugatuck River from Waterville to Platt's Mills and give the northwestern portion of the city effective sanitation.
THE NAUGATUCK RIVER CONSERVATION PLANS
For some years the manufacturing interests of the Naugatuck Valley have felt the need of materially increasing the summer stream flow of the Naugatuck River. This need took its first practical shape fifteen years ago, when the Gen- eral Assembly was petitioned by Charles F. Brooker, the late John H. Whittemore of Naugatuck, the late Alton Farrell of Ansonia, and others, for the right to generate power along the Naugatuck Valley. This, of course, was a purely private project, but it served to call attention to the possibilities of conservation throughout the valley.
The next step in this great project was a preliminary investigation covering the feasibility of a large water conservation plan in the valley.
At the request of the Naugatuck Valley manufacturing interests, this was
38
WATERBURY AND THE NAUGATUCK VALLEY
undertaken by Charles H. Preston, consulting engineer. For four years he made his investigations concerning possible locations of dams, approximate quantities of water available for storage, and the extent to which the Naugatuck River would be improved by such development. The men back of the project acted with extreme care and wisdom in the matter, preferring to make no move until Mr. Preston had made the most elaborate and thorough tests possible.
The four years' investigation took the shape of a great mass of figures and engineering data. The recommendations made by Mr. Preston were entirely favorable to the project. He advised the construction of a series of impounding reservoirs on three of the large tributary streams of the Naugatuck River.
The first official meeting was held in Waterbury on April 13, 1914. At this gathering, the following corporations interested were represented :
Charles F. Brooker, president, the American Brass Co., Waterbury ; Lewis A. Platt, president, Platt Bros. & Co., Waterbury ; W. H. Wooster, secretary, the Seymour Mfg. Co., Seymour ; John A. Coe, Jr., vice president, The American Brass Co., Waterbury ; Charles Miller, president, The Randolph & Clowes Co., Waterbury ; John P'. Elton, treasurer, The American Brass Co., Waterbury ; Thomas D Bradstreet, general manager, Setli Thomas Clock Co., Thomaston ; George A. Driggs, president, The American Pin Co., Waterville; Edward L. Frisbie, vice president, The American Brass Co., Waterbury : William E. Fulton, president, Waterbury Farrel Foundry & Machine Co., Waterbury.
There was a general discussion on conserving water in the upper Naugatuck Valley, in which possible developments on four different streams were con- sidered, these streams having ample watersheds and resultant volume with the following names and locations :
Hall Meadow Brook and Hart Brook, with sources in the southeasterly part of the Town of Norfolk, Litchfield County, running southerly through the Town of Goshen, into the Town of Torrington, and entering the Naugatuck River near Brandy Hill, so-called.
The East Branch of the Naugatuck River, with source in the southwesterly part of the Town of Colebrook, Litchfield County, running southerly through the Town of Winchester, entering the Naugatuck River at Torrington.
Lead Mine Brook, with source in the southeasterly part of the Town of Tor- rington, Litchfield County, passing through the Towns of Harwinton and Plym- outh, entering the Naugatuck River at "Two Mile Bridge." so-called, in the Town of Thomaston.
Of the four brooks considered. Lead Mine Brook appeared the most favorable for developing into impounding or compensating reservoirs by reason of its many natural features, such as large holding basins, highway locations, real estate values, its twenty-four square miles of watershed, constant stream flow and solid ledge rock across the entire valley, assuring excellent conditions for foundations of masonry dams.
At the meeting, the following committee was appointed "to investigate the feasibility of the scheme of developing impounding or compensating reservoirs on Lead Mine Brook, Harwinton: Lewis A. Platt, chairman, president Platt Bros. & Co., Waterbury : W. H. Wooster, secretary Seymour Mfg. Co., Seymour ; Chas. H. Preston, Jr., civil engineer, Waterbury.
Several meetings followed, at which committee's and secretary's reports were made and finally the actual survey was begun September 1. 1914. This has been throughout in charge of Mr. Preston and has been in progress for three years.
In this period the most careful rainfall and stream flow records have been taken and tables of averages have been computed. This work is to be continued
39
WATERBURY AND THE NAUGATUCK VALLEY
for another two-year period, as it is considered essential that five years of records be obtained as the basis for the design of the contemplated work.
The engineers are fairly well agreed on the site of the proposed dams in the light of the data now available.
The location of No. I dam would be approximately at the lower end of the valley, opposite, in an easterly direction, from "Two Mile Bridge," on land of the Plume and Atwood Mfg. Co.
The location of No. 2 dam would be across the properties of T. E. Negus, The Plume and Atwood Mfg. Co., and the McBeth property, about two miles north of No. I dam.
The location of No. 3 dam would be about three-quarters of a mile south of Harwinton Center on land of William McConway and others.
The average annual precipitation for twenty-eight years, 1887 to 1915, in- clusive, recorded by the late N. J. Welton, taken at Waterbury, has been 48.64 inches.
Some other precipitation records which are most interesting to this Naugatuck Valley project are those taken at Orford, N. H., on the Connecticut River, Gaylordsville, Conn., on the Housatonic River, Framingham, Mass., on the Sud- bury River, and Lake Cochituate, at Cochituate, Mass.
The straight line distance from these different points where records have been taken to proposed Reservoir No. 2, Lead Mine Brook, are Orford, N. H., 175 miles ; Gaylordsville, Conn., 25 miles ; Framingham, Mass., 100 miles, and Cochitu- ate, Mass., IT0 miles. No records are quoted for a shorter period than five years.
At Orford, N. H., in a period of five years, 1901 to 1905, inclusive, the pre- cipitation averaged 36.76 inches, with a run-off amounting to 59 per cent of such precipitation.
At Gaylordsville, Conn., in a period of five years, 1901 to 1905, inclusive, the precipitation averaged 47.86 inches, with a run-off amounting to 62 per cent of such precipitation.
At Framingham, Mass., in a period of thirty-six years, 1875 to 1911, the pre- cipitation averaged 45.13 inches, with a run-off amounting to 47.2 per cent of such precipitation.
At Cochituate, Mass., in a period of forty-six years, 1865 to 1911, inclusive, the precipitation averaged 45.83 inches, with a run-off amounting to 42.6 per cent of such precipitation.
The average precipitation and percentage of same in run-off of the four above described points is as follows :
Precipitation, 43.89 inches.
Percentage of precipitation in run-off, 52.7.
The only actual construction work done on the project so far has been a series of core borings taken on the center line of proposed Dam No. 2. These show a favorable formation of rock and were entirely satisfactory from an engi- neering point of view.
The engineers expect that work on Dam No. 2 will begin at the end of the five-year period of taking precipitation and stream flow records. This, of course, depends largely on the amount of water it will be found is available.
The project, when completed, will cost several million dollars, but it will have an enormous influence on the industrial development of the valley, giving con- tinuous and greatly increased water power, and incidentally flushing the Nauga- tuck River to a sanitary condition throughout the year.
By the development of Dam No. 2, with its drainage area of 14,060 acres, or
40
WATERBURY AND THE NAUGATUCK VALLEY
twenty-two square miles, it will be possible, with a spillway at elevation 610, to impound 3,413,917,000 gallons.
This huge reservoir would cover 316 acres, contain 10,477 acre feet, would cost with a cyclopean masonry dam $914,600, on the basis of $87.29 per acre foot.
The length of the dam across its crest from east to west side of valley would be 1,300 feet, with a maximum height of 142 feet above bed of stream.
This will set back a pond of nearly 212 miles in length, from 500 to 1,800 feet in width and varying in depth from 35 to 142 feet.
While this may appear rather a bold undertaking in the matter of dam con- struction, there is apparently no feature against such a structure, it has numerous natural facilities to favor its development, such as ledge foundation across the entire valley, plenty of good quality stone for use in the cyclopean construction, sufficient water to fill four times during each year, and a small amount of new highway construction.
THE WATERBURY-DERBY BARGE CANAL PROJECT
The appropriation by Congress of $25,000 for surveys and investigations into the cost of a proposed barge canal from Waterbury to tidewater at Derby is the first step toward Federal aid in a great project for the further industrial develop- ment of this city.
The agitation for this canal has been quietly growing for years, but its recog- nition by Congress, as worthy of preliminary survey work marks the first great step toward realization. In 1894, the men behind the project were satisfied with a proposed fifty-foot canal. Today the Government is considering a seventy- foot canal.
Engineers have in a general way estimated its cost at from $25,000,000 to $30,000,000.
As outlined by Engineer Charles H. Preston, the several heights above tide- water at Derby Junction and the different towns and cities along the route to Waterbury are approximately as follows :
Ansonia is twenty-five feet above tidewater. Seymour is ninety feet above tidewater. Beacon Falls is 120 feet above tidewater. High Rock Grove is 140 feet above tidewater. Naugatuck is 180 feet above tidewater. Union City is 200 feet above tidewater. Flats, rear of Waterbury freight yard, 262 feet above tide- water. Brown's Meadows, Waterbury, are 271 feet above tidewater. Ansonia is twenty-five feet higher than Derby Junction, Seymour is sixty-five feet higher than Ansonia, Beacon Falls is thirty feet higher than Seymour, Naugatuck is sixty feet higher than Beacon Falls, Union City is twenty feet higher than Nauga- tuck, and Waterbury is sixty-two feet higher than Union City.
The distances along the proposed line of barge canal between Derby Junction and Waterbury are as follows: Derby Junction to Waterbury is 18.50 miles. Derby Junction to Ansonia is 2.13 miles, Ansonia to Seymour, 3.84 miles; Sey- mour to Beacon Falls, 8.48 miles ; Beacon Falls to Naugatuck, 4 miles ; Naugatuck to Union City, .072 mile ; Union City to Waterbury, 4.33 miles. Other distances would be as follows: Derby Junction to Seymour, 5.97 miles; Derby Junction to Beacon Falls, 9.45 miles; Derby Junction to Naugatuck, 13.45 miles; Derby Junction to Union City, 14.17 miles. Distances toward the south would be: Waterbury to Union City, 4.33 miles; Waterbury to Naugatuck, 5.05 miles ; Waterbury to Beacon Falls, 9.05 miles; Waterbury to Seymour, 12.53 miles ; Waterbury to Ansonia, 16.37 miles ; Waterbury to Derby Junction, 18.50 miles.
By the installation of eleven locks, varying in height from twenty-one to
41
WATERBURY AND THE NAUGATUCK VALLEY
thirty feet, which are considered feasible in canal construction and operation at present, barges containing freight could be delivered through to Waterbury from tidewater or to any other town along the line of canal.
Mr. Preston ably summarizes the advantages to be obtained from the con- struction of a canal, and the following is a quotation from one of his articles on the subject :
"That a barge canal between Waterbury and tidewater would be a decided asset to the state can be appreciated, when it is shown that about three-quarers of the entire area of the state is within twenty-five miles of some part of the canal and may, therefore, be reached by motor truck over trunk line highways, con- structed and maintained on a par with any in New England. The areas covered by New Haven, Hartford, Bridgeport, Waterbury and intermediate sections, the four largest cities of Connecticut, and representing about 70 per cent of state industries, 75 per cent of state population, are within thirty miles of our proposed project.
"Many admirable factory sites would be created by the construction of a canal and hundreds of acres of land now lying dormant would be open for full develop- ment.
"Critics of our proposed canal project have brought forth the claim that to operate a canal of 18.5 miles length, with a difference in elevation of 262 feet or 14.16 feet to the mile, is not practical. In rebuttal of this statement, I will say that in the New York State barge canal, a model of the very latest design in canal construction, with a developing cost upwards of one hundred and fifty million dollars, is operating between Waterford and Crescent what is termed "The Waterford Flight," an assembled group of three locks, all within a mile's dis- tance, with a total lift of 103.5 feet.
"This is as much grade in a mile as our proposed project would average in seven miles.
"I claim the proposed barge canal between Waterbury and tidewater at Derby worthy a thorough investigation, from the following points of view :
"I. Industrial conditions in our Naugatuck Valley demand this canal in addi- tion to the New Haven Railroad.
"2. With a possibility of the sewage problem of the valley being solved, from this viewpoint alone, I claim the project worthy an investigation.
"3. With operating expenses about one-seventh the amount of those of steam railroads, it is conclusive that this barge canal would be the popular carrier.
"4. Prosperity's growth has been such that the railroads have been unable to keep astride and transportation facilities at present are 100 per cent deficient.
"5. Naugatuck River has a drainage area of 326 square miles and the annual precipitation for a long term of years is 48.8 inches, which virtually means there are annually passing down through our valley 107,000,000,000 gallons at Water- bury, 129,000,000,000 gallons at Naugatuck, 157,000,000,000 gallons at Seymour, 164,000,000,000 gallons at Ansonia, and 166,000,000,000 gallons at Derby, an overabundant amount, in my opinion, if properly conserved, to place the practi- cability of our proposed barge canal beyond the question of doubt.
"6. Waterbury has grown nearly double during the past decade, will continue to do so in the future, and in order to cope with transportation facilities we must provide an outlet by water such as are now had by New Haven, Hartford and Bridgeport."
CHAPTER IV PUBLIC BUILDINGS
OLD CITY HALL AND ITS AUDITORIUM-MAYOR ELTON REMODELS BUILDING-ITS DE- STRUCTION BY FIRE-NEW BUILDING PROJECTED-BONDS VOTED AND COMPETI- TION ENDS IN SELECTION OF CASS GILBERT AS ARCHITECT-DESCRIPTION-COST --- THE DEDICATION EXERCISES IN "OLD HOME" WEEK-SALE OF THE OLD CITY HALL PROPERTY-THE WATERBURY COURTHOUSE-DESCRIPTION-THE AGITATION FOR A FEDERAL BUILDING-HOW ITS SITE WAS SELECTED-CONSTRUCTION-DESCRIP- TION.
For fourteen years after its incorporation as a city, Waterbury's municipal meetings were held in Gothic Hall, on what is now Phoenix Avenue. The town and the city voted in 1867 to issue bonds for erecting a city hall on West Main Street, and this building served for thirty-five years when it was destroyed by an incendiary fire.
When it was planned, the city lacked not only proper accommodations for city offices and courts, but with the increasing population there was no hall large enough for the public gatherings and entertainments. Consequently the second floor was made a large auditorium with stage, in which "Uncle Tom's Cabin" alternated dates with "Hamlet." Political rallies, caucuses and fairs were held there in season, the chairs were cleared away for dances, and its use as a public hall even lasted long enough for moving pictures to be shown there. This was not primarily an amusement enterprise. Admission was by invitation for the purpose of demonstrating to possible purchasers of stock a device by which the moving picture machine and the phonograph could be synchronized. Those who attended heard grand opera stars sing the sextette from Lucia while they witnessed the actions of the singers as shown in moving pictures, while Harry Lauder marched grandly across the screen in exact time to the accompaniment of one of his songs reproduced on the phonograph. It was apparently convincing, and on the strength of it, some of the stock was sold here, but the enterprise never succeeded com- mercially. This was one of the last occasions on which the hall was used for entertainment purposes and was in the autumn of 1910.
The opening of theaters and newer halls easier of access had led to a falling off of the demand for the use of the City Hall Auditorium. As early as 1904 the receipts from rentals had fallen so low that the auditorium was regarded by those in charge of it as waste space. In addition the city departments on the main floor were badly cramped for room. The aldermen met in a chamber which had room for desks for members of the board and for a dozen spectators to sit or a score to stand. The town clerk's records were kept in a vault barely large enough for storing the books and with no accommodations for searchers.
Mayor Elton secured from the General Assembly in 1905 authority to issue bonds for $75,000 to enlarge and remodel the city hall, but it was found that the building which was planned could not be secured within the appropriation and the project was dropped. Some interior changes were made in the police station and the city hall. Towards the end of Mayor Hotchkiss' administration the project
42
43
WATERBURY AND THE NAUGATUCK VALLEY
was agitated again. After some evidence of division of opinion among the public, it was decided to spend $40,000 in making changes. The auditorium was converted into an aldermanic chamber and police drill hall, larger quarters were provided for the city clerk and city comptroller, expensive modern vaults and filing devices were installed for the town clerk's records and a portion of the basement was set apart for a public comfort station. Contracts were let late in tout and the com- pletion of the work lapped over into Mayor Reeves' administration.
The remodeling was just about completed, although some portions of it had not yet been utilized, when a fire, originating among some paint pots and builders' rubbish, not yet removed from the cellar, destroyed the building on the night of April 22, 1912.
That was a wild night for Waterbury. Half a dozen small fires broke out and there were thirteen alarms in all, the horses that drew the apparatus were exhausted with the task of dashing from one part of the city to the other, and the militia was called out to help the police watch the business district. Investigation next day showed that a number of fires had been started by an incendiary. Mayor Reeves called a special meeting of the aldermen next morning to pass resolutions offering a reward for the arrest and conviction of the firebug, providing for new automobile fire apparatus and the appointment of a commission to build a new City Hall.
Eventually, the origin of the fire was traced. Bernard C. Murray, son of a former fire official of Hartford, was arrested in Massachusetts for a trivial larceny in connection with a mysterious fire. Suspicion had been aroused in several quar- ters by his movements. He was charged with starting the fires which burned the Wilson House in North Adams and a sanitarium and several other buildings in Berkshire County, Massachusetts. He finally confessed having started the fires in Waterbury, giving an account of his movements here, after being positively identi- fied by Mrs. Minnie R. Russell, who had met him face to face in a hallway in the Chelsea rooming house on West Main Street, near the city hall, just after he had started a blaze in a closet. She claimed the promised reward but the aldermen decided not to pay it on the ground that Murray had not been arrested and con- victed of the crime. This, however, was because the Massachusetts authorities had equally good evidence against him, but declaring him insane, had committed himn to an asylum, from which he was released rather mysteriously within a year, as cured. The Waterbury American, indignant at the refusal to pay the city's reward to Mrs. Russell, raised a fund of several hundred dollars by public subscription and paid it over to her. Mrs. Russell's husband is in the employ of Price & Lee of New Haven, publishers of the Waterbury City Directory.
The city hall fire left untouched the three adjoining buildings, the old police station, the three-story brick building at Leavenworth Street and Harrison Avenue, used as a fire headquarters and first occupied on December 24, 1897, and the City Hall Annex, having the old Bronson Library Building as its nucleus and accommo- dating numerous city offices. The city hall proper, however, was non-tenable, excepting that the town clerk's office in the northeast corner was only slightly damaged. Town Clerk Robert Palmer, refusing to be separated from his newly acquired vaults, hired carpenters, made repairs and retained the use of the office until transferred to the present quarters in the city hall. The offices of the mayor. city clerk and city comptroller were removed to quarters in the Lilley Building on West Main Street, where most of the city's meetings were held. \ store on Center Street was rented for the use of the city court.
44
WATERBURY AND THE NAUGATUCK VALLEY
ERECTION OF THE NEW CITY HALL
The destruction of the old city hall necessitated immediate action for the proper housing of the city departments and for the safety of future public records. Judge Francis T. Reeves, who was mayor at the time, appointed a committee of ten to handle the situation.
This committee effected little. The sentiment was divided between rebuilding on the old site and selecting a new site for a new city hall. Several were sug- gested- the Green, the Merriman property, which was then found to be not for sale, and the present site among the others. The old site had its champions, and those favoring a new site were divided between several locations. For some time the local papers were flooded with communications from interested citizens in which the question was discussed at length. The aldermen refused to come to a decision and ordered a referendum election, but this was inconclusive. Another referendum found a bare majority voting in favor of the present site. Meanwhile, the board of aldermen sanctioned the appointment of a city hall commission, which body was to transact all business in connection with the construction of the new municipal building. The original membership of the commission was as follows: Mayor Francis T. Reeves, chairman : Patrick F. Bannon, George A. Driggs, John P. Elton, Daniel T. Farrington, alderman ; John F. Garron, Edward O. Goss, Raymond G. Hutchinson, alderman; John Hurley, alderman; Fred A. Jackle, alderman; William J. Walsh, alderman.
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.