USA > Washington DC > Washington DC > The chronicles of Georgetown, D.C., from 1751-1878 > 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
1
رشاوى جنسية
81
FALLS BRIDGE.
gated this canal. In 1825, an assignment of all the right, title, claim, and franchise, of the Potomac Canal Company, was made to the Chesapeake & Ohio Canal Company, and being vested with all the privileges of the Potomac Canal, the Chesapeake & Ohio Canal Company made the bed of the Potomac Canal as a part of its own structure ; which surrender is recorded in liber W. B., No. 33, page 58. The boats that navi- gated the old Potomac Canal, only carried from eighty to one hundred barrels of flour; the boats now navi- gating the present canal, will carry from one thousand to twelve hundred barrels of flour or one hundred and twenty tons of coal.
FALLS BRIDGE.
Falls Bridge is located at the Little Falls of the Potomac River, three miles above town. From a carefully prepared profile drawing in the office of Col- onel Theodore B. Samo, the channel at this point is shown to be very deep, the bottom rocky and uneven, the current swift and running close to the Virginia shore. The long stretch of rock flats, nearly five hundred yards in width, between this channel and the canal on the District side, is seldom covered with water, except in times of freshets. Immediately be- low the Little Falls the depth of water is over eighty feet, and continues very deep until the Aqueduct is reached.
In order to understand how the Falls Bridge was originally built, it will be requisite to refer to the Leg- islature of Maryland. The Legislature of Maryland,
82
FALLS BRIDGE.
by an act of 1791, chapter 81, incorporated the George- town Bridge Company, for the purpose of erecting a toll bridge at the Little Falls of the Potomac River ; and subsequently, by an act of 1795, chapter 44, on petition of that company, authorized them to construct a road from the bridge to Georgetown; which said road was declared to be " a public highway forever, and kept in repair by said company." Afterwards, upon the destruction of the bridge in February, 1811, Congress authorized the company to make a new as- sessment upon its stockholders to rebuild the bridge and keep the same in repair, together with the road leading thereto from Georgetown. The bridge and road were constructed by the same company, chargea- ble upon and to be kept in repair by the same com- pany, for the use of the public. It was under this state of circumstances, that Congress, in pursuance of its general policy to make the road and bridges lead- ing to and through the District of Columbia free to all, passed the act of 1833, chapter 66, appropriating a sum of money, to enable the Corporation of George- town, among other things, to make a free turnpike road to the District line on the Virginia side of the river, and to purchase of the present proprietors, and make forever free a bridge over the Little Falls of the Poto- mac River; coupling with its bounty, the condition, " that before the said sum be paid over to the said cor- poration, it shall pass an ordinance to make said road and bridge free, and to be kept in repair by said cor- poration."
This bridge, built of timber, was supported by im-
83
FALLS BRIDGE.
mense cable chains stretching from pier to pier, from which the term " Chain Bridge," is derived. In 1832, during the winter of that year, the Falls Bridge, com- monly called the Chain Bridge, was taken down by the bridge company, on account of the great accumu- lation of ice in the river and the banking of the same against the bridge. The chronicler remembers seeing the flats, lying between the tow path of the Chesapeake & Ohio Canal and the river, being banked up with ice, mountains high, and so covered with debris and drift wood, that persons who went fishing at the Little Falls in the month of May or June, could always find a lump of ice to put into a bucket of water. This bridge was replaced by a more substan- tial structure, and paid for out of the one hundred and fifty thousand dollars given to the town by Con- gress, which remained a thoroughfare for a number of years, until carried off by an ice freshet during the winter of 1840, when the corporation built a new bridge of timber four hundred feet long, and costing thirteen thousand five hundred dollars, which lasted until destroyed by the ice freshet of April, 1852, but. was afterwards rebuilt.
In 1842, Congress extended the jurisdiction of the Corporation of Georgetown, so as to include the bridge which had then just been constructed, by that corporation, at the Little Falls. This act provides, " that as often, and so long, as said bridge shall here- after, from any cause, be impassible, it shall be lawful for the proprietors of land on both sides of the river through which the ferry road, to connect with the
84
FALLS BRIDGE.
Falls Bridge turnpike, shall pass, and they are hereby authorized and empowered to establish and keep a ferry, &c."
In 1858, Congress, by an act making appropriations for sundry civil expenses of the government, placed the bridge under the protection of Georgetown, with power to regulate the speed of travel, and the pass- age of droves of cattle over the same, but expressly forbid that any tolls should be charged.
In 1860, an appropriation was made to reimburse the Corporation of Georgetown for money advanced towards the construction of the Little Falls Bridge.
In a report made by General Michiler to the Secre- retary of War in 1869, upon the subject of " a rail- road bridge across the Potomac River, and the chan- nel of the river," considerable statistical information is given concerning the bridges in this District, and regrets expressed that but few of the reports, plans, and estimates of the different bridges are now to be found among the archives of the several departments, and that the most important facts concerning these works, aside from the various amounts appropriated and expended on them, are only to be obtained from the Statues at Large.
The Falls Bridge, since its partial destruction by the freshet on the first of October, 1870, various appro- priations have, from time to time, been made for its repair, &c., but such expenditures proving to be un- satisfactory by reason of the floods, Congress, by an act approved June 10th, 1872, appropriated one hund- red thousand dollars for rebuilding the Falls Bridge,
-
85
FALLS BRIDGE.
with a proviso that it " shall be rebuilt as a substan- tial iron structure, upon plans approved by the chief of engineers of the army, and under his supervision and direction." Proposals were advertised for, and finally the bid of a bridge building firm from Con- necticut was accepted. These parties forfeited their rights by delay, and the contract was then made with Messrs. Clarke, Reeves & Co.
So disastrous hitherto have the floods been to the bridges here, that General Babcock has taken the pre- caution in this instance, of having all the old piers raised two feet additional, thus giving more elevation, and affording more room for the ice and drift-wood.
The plan for the new bridge selected by General Babcock as best adapted for this site, is what is known as the " Murphy Whipple Truss." It is divided into eight spans; two of one hundred and sixty feet, and six of one hundred and seventy-two feet each. The entire length is one thousand three hundred and fifty- two feet. The spans are separate and independent of each other, resting on cast-iron bridge seats, securely anchored to stone copings; one end of each span is fixed, and the other rests upon friction rollers pro- vided for the expansion and contraction of the iron. The trusses are twenty-eight feet in depth and placed twenty-two feet apart from centre to centre. Each truss of one hundred and seventy-two feet span is di- vided into twelve panels, and each truss of one hund- red and sixty feet into eleven panels of fourteen and one-half feet each. The upper cords, main and inter- mediate posts, are formed of Phoenix column iron, and
12
86
FALLS BRIDGE.
the lower cords, main and intermediate ties of the forged links, without welds. The posts are fitted to cast-iron caps and seats, the bottoms of the former and the tops of the latter being truly turned for that purpose. Turned wrought-iron pins, three inches in diameter, lock in one connection the caps of the col- ums and the diagonal ties, also the bottom cords, the seats of the columns, the diagonal ties, and the floor beam suspenders. The floor beams are fifteen-inch Phoenix rolled beams, and the floor joists and flooring are of the best North Carolina pine, three inches thick and not over six inches wide, with edges sawed straight, laid close, and securely spiked. There is no side walks, but an iron railing four feet high, placed on either side of the carriage way, and to prevent col- lison during the dark nights, it was deemed necessary to light the bridge. Four sixteen-inch railroad reflec- tors were purchased and placed on the bridge, two to light the approaches, and two in the middle of the structure. The width of the broadway is twenty feet, and the bridge is proportional so as to safely carry in addition to the weight of the structure, one hundred pounds for each square foot of roadway, and the max- imum strain produced by this load is ten thousand pounds per square inch of section, or about one-sixth of its ultimate strength. The contract price for the entire work was ninety-four thousand dollars, which was paid by instalments as each span was completed. The work was begun about the Ist of January, 1874, and finished during the same year.
87
MILITARY COMPANIES.
Many of our citizens remember the military com- panies which existed in our town many years past, when the disposition to be a soldier was predominant in the human mind. At that time a law of Congress, passed 3d March, 1805, made it obligatory for all male citizens between the age of eighteen and forty-five to muster once a month certain months in the year, and on failure, were liable to a fine of five dollars for neg- lect of duty. The consequence was, many military companies were formed which flourished for a while until tired of parade duty, when they dissolved, and returned their arms to the United States.
The chronicler will here mention, from memory, the names of the different companies organized in Georgetown :
Morgan Rifles, Infantry, commanded by James Thomas; Green's Rifles, Infantry, commanded by Wm. Jewell; Blue's Muskets, Infantry, commanded by Thos. Corcoran ; Artillery Company, commanded by Win. W. Corcoran; Artillery Company, commanded by John Kurtz; Boys' Company, commanded by Lloyd Beall; Troop of Horse, commanded by Thos. Turner; Potomac Dragoons, commanded by John Mason; Troop of Horse, commanded by Wm. Stewart ; George- town Guards. commanded by Jeremiah Bronaugh ; Invincibles, Infantry, commanded by Levin JJones; Independent Grays, Infantry, commanded by Clement Smith; Morgan Rifles, Infantry, commanded by R. Emmet Duvall ; Independent Grays, Infantry. com- manded by James Goddard; Potomac Light Infantry, commanded by J. MeHenry Hollingsworth; Carring-
88
MILITARY COMPANIES.
ton Home Guards, commanded by James Goddard ; Anderson's Rifles, commanded by Charles H. Rodier.
The form of a notice to muster was as follows :
GEORGETOWN, May 1, 1826.
" SIR: You are notified to attend a battalion parade on the 20th instant, on the grounds immediately north of the residence of Col. James Thompson, at ten o'clock A. M., uniformed according to law.
W. W. CORCORAN, Captain."
Uniform : Blue coat, white pantaloons, white vest, black hat, black stock or cravat.
To GEORGE SHOEMAKER."
Captain Corcoran thought that Shoemaker, although a member of the Society of Friends, would make, by drilling, as good a soldier as General Green of the revolution, who belonged to the same society; but Shoemaker demurred to the notice, and pleaded that he was a public functionary-holding an office as flour in- spector of. Georgetown-and therefore was exempt from military duty.
The students of Georgetown College formed them- selves into military companies prior to the war. The Senior Cadets were organized in 1851, and the Junior Cadets in 1855, and were supplied with arms by the United States. They occasionally paraded the streets of our town; and by their soldierly appearance, and the promptitude and precision of their march and ma- nœuvres, attracted the attention of our citizens as well- drilled companies. They, too, like all our military companies, have passed away, and base ball and boat clubs have been substituted in their place.
89
CONTESTED ELECTIONS.
We have had some close elections in our town ; oc- casionally two candidates receiving the same number of votes for the board of common council, neither be- ing elected. Another election would have to be held over again. This event occurred at the election held on the 4th Monday in February, 1853, for aldermen and common council, when two candidates for the council, Jenkin Thomas and Peter Berry, received an equal number of votes; neither being elected, a new election was ordered by the. mayor, when Peter Berry was elected. The mayor of the town being the highest officer, more enthusiasm was manifested when two candidates were running for the mayoralty. In this year, 1853, Henry Addison and William McKenny Osbourn were the candidates before the people for the office of mayor. Addison received two hundred and sixty-four votes, and William MeKenny Osbourn two hundred and sixty-one, showing a majority of three votes in favor of Addison. The friends of Mr. Os- bourn were anxious to have the votes examined and counted over again, but were precluded by the return made by the judges of elections. In 1859 another election was held for the mayoralty, Richard R. Craw- ford being one of the candidates, and Henry Addison the other. The following opinion of Supreme Court of United States contains a clear and condensed state- ment of the case, and it is, therefore, given without abridgment. By virtue of this opinion, Mr. Crawford was restored to the mayoralty for the unexpired re- mainder of the term thereof, and recovered the amount of the salary for the time he was deprived of the office.
90
CONTESTED ELECTIONS.
THE UNITED STATES, on the relations 7 -1
of R. R. CRAWFORD, PUIf in Error, vs.
HENRY ADDISON.
7 No. 104. December Term. 1867.
This action is brought in the name of the United States, but is prosecuted, in fact, for the benefit of R. R. Crawford, who was the relator in a proceeding in their name to oust the defendant, Addison, from the office of mayor of Georgetown. Crawford was mayor of that city on the fourth Monday of February, 1859, and had been mayor for the two preceeding years. At the election for his successor, he was re- turned by the judges as elected for the two ensuing years, and presented himself before the joint conven- tion of the councils of the city and offered to take the oath of office prescribed by the charter. But, upon counting the votes cast for the different candidates, the councils declared that the defendant, Addison, was elected, and he was accordingly sworn into office, and entered into the discharge of its duties. A proceed- ing by quo marranto was immediately instituted by the United States, on the relation of Crawford, in the cir- cuit court of the District, to determine the right of the defendant to the office into which he had been in- stalled. It is unnecessary to detail the various steps taken in the proceeding. It is sufficient that they re- sulted in a judgment of ouster against the defendant. To review this judgment he immediately sued out a writ of error from this court and tendered the bond in suit. This bond, the circuit court held, operated as
91
CONTESTED ELECTIONS.
a supersedeas, and refused the prayer of counsel for process to enforce the judgment. Application was then made to this court for a mandamus to the circuit court to compel the issue of process, notwithstanding the writ of error and bond. Counsel for the relator contends that the case was not one in which a writ of error would lie; that, to authorize the writ, the matter in dispute must have a pecuniary value of at least one thousand dollars; that the matter in dispute was a public office of personal trust and confidence, which was not the subject of pecuniary estimation ; that the salary annexed was not to be considered as the value of the office, but as an equivalent for the services to be rendered, and even that was payable in monthly instalments; and that a mandamus should accordingly issue, especially as the term of office would expire about the commencement of the ensuing term of the court to which the writ of error was returnable. The counsel of the defendant, on the other hand, insisted that the pecuniary value of the office was determined by the salary annexed, and, as it amounted to a thou- sand dollars a year, the court had jurisdiction to re- view the judgment on writ of error, and that the bond stayed process on the judgment. And so the court held, and refused the mandamus.
In January, 1861, the writ of error was dismissed, and on the 21st of that month the judgment of ouster against the defendant, Addison, was enforced, and the relator was installed in office. He then brought the present suit on the bond. By the judgment of ouster against Addison, his right to the office of mayor was
92
CONTESTED ELECTIONS.
determined ; the relator thereupon became entitled to the office, either by virtue of the declaration of the judges who had returned him elected, or by virtue of that provision of the charter, which enacts "that the mayor shall hold over until his successor is elected." By the writ of error and the suspension bond, the en- forcement of the judgment was prevented, and, until the writ was dismissed, the relator was excluded from the office and deprived of the salary annexed to it. The amount of the salary received by the defendant, Addison, during the period of such deprivation, con- stitutes, under the decision in the mandamus case, the measure of damages which the plaintiff' is entitled to recover upon the suspension bond.
The second instruction to the jury, which the plain- tiff requested, correctly presents the law of the case, and should have been given. The rule which meas- ures the damages upon a breach of contract for wages or for freight or for the lease of buildings, has no ap- plication. In these cases the party aggrieved must seek other employment or other articles for carriage or other tenants, and the damages recovered will be the difference between the amount stipulated and the amount actually received or paid. But no such rule can be applied to public officers or personal trust and confidence, the duties of which are not purely minis- terial or clerical. An attempt is made to avoid the liability of the defendant, Addison, by showing that, on the trial of the quo warranto, the jury in the first instance returned a special verdiet, to the effect that there was a tie in the votes cast for him and the re-
93
BANKS. .
lator respectively. This verdict is not evidence of the fact, for it was not received by the court or in any way made a matter of record. With the assent of the at- torney of the defendant, the Court directed the jury to retire to their room and consider their verdict. They did retire, as directed, and returned the verdict upon which the judgment of ouster was entered.
BANKS.
The Central Bank of Georgetown and Washing- ton was located in house No. 88 Bridge Street, now occupied by Joseph Birch, and formerly by the Poto- mac Insurance Company. The bank was chartered by an act of Congress, passed March 3d, 1817, but was of short duration, as, on the 2d March, 1821, Congress passed an act " that it shall be lawful for the Central Bank of Georgetown and Washington to proceed forthwith to liquidate and close all the concerns of the corporation ; and after paying and satisfying all the debts, contracts, and obligations of the corporation, to divide the capital and profits which may remain among the stockholders;" and for this purpose, all powers granted to said corporation were continued for five years longer, when the institution ceased to exist.
UNION BANK.
The Union Bank was located on the north side of Bridge Street, between Congress and High Streets, and was chartered by Congress on the 11th day of March, 1811, by the name of the " President and Directors of the Union Bank of Georgetown." The 13
94
BANKS.
capital stock of the bank was five hundred thousand dollars, divided into shares of fifty dollars each. Rob- ert Beverly was president, and David English cashier. The bank did business until 1840, when it ceased to exist, and went into liquidation.
BANK OF COLUMBIA.
The Bank of Columbia, located on the hill, on the north side of Bridge Street, between Market Street and Bank Alley, was chartered by the Legislature of Maryland December 28th, 1793, by the name of the " President, Directors, and Company of the Bank of Columbia ;" the stock to consist of ten thousand shares of one hundred dollars each, making the capital stock one million of dollars. By the 14th section of the act of incorporation, " if any person did not pay his note, bond, or obligation, negotiable and payable at said bank at the maturity of the same, within ten days after demand of payment, then the bank, on sending the note or obligation to the clerk of the court, with proof of demands of payment, might have judgment entered against the delinquent debtor and execution issued to make the money." People in our days would not like any banking institution to have such power over their property. By the act of Congress, passed March 2d, 1821, the 14th section of the act of Maryland, incorporating the Bank of Columbia, was repealed.
When the bank failed, in 1826, it created consider- able excitement in the community. Those who held the notes of the bank found them worthless in their
العقل عار
95
BANKS.
hands. Those who owned stock in the bank and lived upon their dividends found their income gone. Those who had money deposited there discovered that it was lost. It is said that the United States had on deposit with the bank four hundred and sixty-nine thou- sand dollars, which was swallowed up in the gen- eral wreck of the institution. The chronicler re- members seeing, in a newspaper, the picture of a white cow representing the bank, with an official holding her by the tail, another holding her by the horns, the board of directors running off with the pails of milk, while the runner of the bank was feeding her with brick-bats and crying out that she would not eat.
BANK OF COMMERCE.
The Bank of Commerce was located on Bridge Street, in the building formerly occupied by the late Union Bank. It was an unincorporated institution, being a partnership between John L. Dufief, Samuel Fowler, Timothy O'Neal, Richard M. Boyer, Richard Pettit, William T. Herron, Susan Ireland, Charles E. Rittenhouse, and Hugh B. Sweeny. The parties above named, signed an agreement to conduct and establish an exchange and banking business in Georgetown, under the name of the "Bank of Commerce." The bank was organized on the 9th day of December, 1851, and the amount of capital paid in was seventy-six thousand three hundred dollars. It subsequently had a branch in Washington City, under the name and title of Sweeny, Rittenhouse & Co. The business of the bank was not prosperous, and, on the 1st day of December, 1864, the copartnership was dis-
الوص الــ
96
BANKS.
solved by mutual consent, and a process of settle- ment is now being had in court between the copart- ners, in the equity cause of Hamilton G. Fant, com- plainant, vs. John L. Dufief and others, defendants, to which the reader is referred for a more extended his- tory.
FARMERS AND MECHANICS' NATIONAL BANK.
The Farmers and Mechanics' National Bank of Georgetown was originally a partnership concern en- tered into by sundry persons on the 1st Monday of February, in the year 1814, under the name and style of the "President and Directors of the Farmers and Mechanics' Bank of Georgetown." On the 3d of March, 1817, a charter was granted by Congress under the name and style of the " Farmers and Me- chanics' Bank of Georgetown," with a capital stock of five hundred thousand dollars, divided into shares of twenty-five dollars each. The bank continued to do business under its charter, which was extended by act of Congress passed in 1821 to 3d March, 1836, when its charter being about to expire, the board of direct- ors petitioned Congress for a renewal of the same. In their petition they say : "Your memorialists beg leave to mention one fact which ought, and they doubt not, will bespeak favors to this institution. The fact to which we allude is that, during the war of 1812, when our national credit was stricken be- yond measure, the means and resources of this institu- tion were tendered to and accepted by our Govern- ment ; that during that dark period she never denied the call of her country, but from time to time advanced
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.