USA > Massachusetts > Essex County > Georgetown > Georgetown: story of one hundred years, 1838-1938 > 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
In 1882 the town began to get uneasy over "the long continued delay on the part of the trustees of the Perley School Fund in establishing a school." Immediate action was re- quested in town meeting. Six years later the town started official action for a new library building, asking the trustees of the library to procure plans and obtain proposals. The com- mittee comprised Sherman Nelson, W. N. Harriman, Sylvester Donoghue, H. Howard Noyes and Alfred B. Noyes. In that year also the town rejected an article in the warrant in regard to celebrating the fiftieth anniversary of its incorporation.
In the following year, J. P. Jones reported for the Library trustees that the fund was not large enough to proceed with a new building but the town gave its committee a new lease of life, asking that body to see what could be done with $10,000. Sherman Nelson reported for the Library committee, the result of an investigation. A suitable building could be erected for $9250, good for fifty years, and including fire-proof vaults and quarters for the town officers. The town voted to proceed at once. Several lots had been reported as available, as follows: Lincoln Park, 11/2 acres, for $700; Isaiah Perkins lot, corner of North and Pleasant Street, $400; H. P. Chaplin lot, 65 feet front, running back to Middle Street, $2200; Carleton lot, Main Street, 48-foot front, $850; Little's Block, $16,000; Union Square, owned by the town; Holmes' lot, corner of Pond and Prospect Streets $1000; Moulton lot, Main Street. The town was overwhelmingly in favor of the Isaiah Perkins lot, and asked the trustees to carry out the wishes of the town.
Under date of June 14, 1885, the town clerk recorded the burning of "the great octagonal barn built by Samuel Little," on the farm that has ever borne that name. That fire, the most spectacular ever known in this locality, was seen far out to sea. Burning shingles were blown to the eastern limits of the town and numerous houses caught fire. It was a wild night and in the memory of many persons living in the town today. The burning of the old Cheney house together with a barn owned by William S. Wheeler, Thurlow Street, a few hours before, added to the excitement.
It was in 1891 that the lively controversy over the employment of a superintendent of schools first came up. It is hard to realize that such a forward step in public school education should have caused such bitterness. A motion by Fred S. Hardy at the annual town meeting of that year that Georgetown join with Groveland, Newbury and West Newbury and appropriate $250 as its share of the salary of the superintendent, was voted down. This defeat was immediately followed by the resignation of Mr. Hardy and Lewis H. Giles from the school committee. The selectmen appointed W. S. Simons and A. B. Comins to the vacancies. Two years later, however, the town accepted the legislative act authorizing the employment of a superintendent.
Page Forty-five
Another matter to agitate the citizens who were always jealous of the town's natural resources was embodied in the petition of the city authorities of Newburyport to take water from Pentucket and Rock Ponds. The question came up in a special Town Meeting March 20, 1893 and the vote was overwhelmingly against the petition which had been filed in the Legislature. A committee was appointed to combat it. The city, realizing the power of the opposition, withdrew the petition. The question never came up again.
STREET RAILWAY SERVICE
What appeared to mark a new birth for Georgetown was the prospect of street railway service to contiguous towns and cities by the petition filed with the selectmen by the directors of the Haverhill, Georgetown and Danvers Street Railway Company seeking permission to construct tracks from Groveland line, through West Main Street and Central Street. The directors signing the petition were Walter M. Brewster, Warren W. Potter, Merrill B. Bailey and Hamilton L. Perkins. This venture was the result of special legisla- tion which granted the company the right not only to carry passengers but freight, the fran- chise being as broad as that of a railroad corporation. The chartered line was nearly twenty miles in length, extended through or into seven cities or towns and formed with connecting systems a continuous line between important factory and commercial centers. The Legis- lature had repeatedly rejected all proposals to grant street railways the right to do a freight business. The petition of the railway to the Railway Commission for leave to cross the Boston & Maine tracks at grade was rejected. The railway was built and in the summer of 1896 the town resented the inconvenience to patrons by the enforced stopping of the cars at Weston's crossing. The Boston & Maine remained adamant and the result was the unsightly trestle which later gave way to a roadway over the tracks, as we see it today.
The first street railway cars came into Pentucket Square as the southern terminus, but a year later the company petitioned for rights of way down North Street. This was a great disappointment to the residents of Central Street who presented a petition in favor of the original plan. Two years later another street railway company appeared on the scene. The Georgetown Rowley and Ipswich Street Railway Company, having as directors Ed- mund B. Fuller, Arthur Bishop, Benjamin Pearson, Jr., Lewis R. Hovey, Charles O. Barnes and William B. Ferguson, petitioned for rights through North Street. The road was con- structed and for years it was extremely popular. But the street railway situation was kept to the fore by such companies as the Essex County Street Railway Company, which peti- tioned for rights on Central Street, and by a petition by The Association for the Formation of the Haverhill, Danvers and Ipswich Street Railway Company, which would start its line at the Groveland line and proceed over private land to Main Street to Georgetown Square and thence on the westerly side of Main Street to the Rowley line.
Suddenly in 1897 the Peabody Library question began to cause trouble when the town voted for action to merge the expense fund with the building fund. The old Library building was not only ill-adapted for library purposes but was regarded as occupying one of the worst possible sites in town. The trustees voted against such a merger of funds, but the citizens were obdurate and named a building committee to proceed with the erection of a building. This committee comprised O. B. Tenney, Sherman Nelson, Jophanus Adams, H. N. Harriman, Samuel T. Poor, O. S. Butler, C. O. Noyes, Harold F. Blake, James Watson, Stephen Osgood and Joseph E. Bailey. At a special town meeting later in the same year all previous votes were rescinded. Next year the matter came to a head when Milton J. Tenney and Lucy Tenney Brown offered the town Lincoln Park as a gift for the new building. The town instructed the Library trustees to appraise a cash value on the land and place it to the credit of the building fund.
At the March meeting in 1899 the town voted again to take the necessary steps for the erection of the new Library. Another building committee was appointed, comprising Page Forty-six
Samuel T. Poor, H. Howard Noyes, Jophanus Adams, Harold F. Blake, Sherman Nelson, Roger S. Howe, Rev. David C. Torrey, Rev. C. Julian Tuttle, Rev. Fr. L. W. Slattery, Rev. J. H. Davis, Rev. Frank P. Estabrook, Milton S. Tenney and James Watson. The long controversy then started over the Library was marked by intense bitterness, every important step in the preparation of plans, the choice of an architect, and in construction of the building being vigorously fought.
The Town Hall had burned in the winter of 1898 and the following year saw an agitation, though not at all active, to rebuild. The selectmen were authorized to investi- gate. On March 12, 1900 the citizens voted to expend not more than $15,000 for a new building on the old site and named the selectmen and two others, Sherman Ivelson and Roger S. Howe, to bring in a report at a special Town Meeting. This meeting convened on May 18, 1900 when C. O. Noyes presented a report that the committee could not agree on plans. As opposition to immediate action developed the matter was postponed to the next annual town meeting and then indefinitely postponed.
LIBRARY QUESTION AGAIN
For four years the Library question smouldered, for it was not until the annual Town Meeting of March 2, 1903, that the matter came up again, on an article by Daniel W. Spofford and others, that the town rescind its choice of Lincoln Park for a Library and build a Library with Town House combined on the old Town House lot. The article was passed over, and the town voted that the trustees of the Public Library, together with the selectmen and the town clerk, be a committee to investigate the subject of location and prepare a statement of the various votes passed by the town on the Library question and report at a special town meeting not later than April 2.
The special Town Meeting was held on March 30, 1903 and the town voted to rescind action on the appointment of the committee, and on motion by Daniel W. Spofford, seconded by Dennis Donoghue, the town voted against the Lincoln Park site for the new Library building: Yes, 109; No, 49. On the question of accepting the Town House lot as a site, an informal vote resulted in a tie, 73 to 73. On motion of O. B. Tenney it was voted, Yeas, 137; Nays, 5, that the Pentucket House property be purchased for a Library site provided the price was not more than $2800. At an adjourned meeting a letter was read from Edward H. Barry that he would sell the property for $2800 at any time before May 1, 1903. The town then voted, on motion of Harold F. Blake, that the property be purchased. Only seven were in opposition.
Decision to take over the Pentucket House was followed by practically a unanimous vote that the trustees, together with six other persons chosen by ballot, should constitute a building committee, buy the hotel and superintend construction. The committee was given absolute authority in the erection of the building, subject only to instructions by vote of the town and by the letter of gift. O. B. Tenney sought to bind the committee to a building of brick and stone, two stories high, and providing for a hall to accommodate 350 persons, together with a room on the lower floor for the town officers and a safety vault for the town records. That motion was laid on the table.
The Library question had become a tough bone of contention and another special Town Meeting was held on April 6, when it was voted to take up O. B. Tenney's previous Town Hall-Library motion in sections. They were all adopted. Quite naturally, the Library trustees wondered if the combination building would come within the provisions of the letter of gift from Mr. Peabody, and on motion of Harold F. Blake it was voted that the building committee be authorized to employ legal counsel. O. B. Tenney failed to secure approval of a motion that the town appropriate $10,000 to be donated to the expense fund of the Library.
Another special Town Meeting on June 9 was more lively than the others. The citi- zens had had time to consider the complications involved in the attempt to combine a town
Page Forty-seven
hall and a library, as well as to consider the site itself. Their temper was high, and so they voted to rescind all previous actions, such as the appointment of the building committee, and the choice of the site. On motion of Sylvester A. Donoghue it was voted that the trus- tees of the Library be constituted a committee to superintend the construction of a new building on a lot to be chosen later by the town. A motion by Harold F. Blake that the town buy the Chaplin property, corner of Clark, Andover and Central Streets, at a price not exceeding $1800, and erect a building to cost not more than $15,000, was lost. O. S. Butler then fought for the Pentucket House lot but failed.
CENTRAL SCHOOL STARTED
The Library question was inactive as far as official action was concerned, during the summer, for another equally important matter had come to a head-the question of con- solidating the public schools and erecting an eight-room central schoolhouse. At the annual Town Meeting of March 7, 1904 the citizens had little trouble with the school question, voting $20,000 for the building. The committee in charge comprised George W. Noyes, Samuel K. Herrick, S. A. Donoghue, James Watson and Lewis H. Giles.
But the Library matter came up anew in view of a letter of gift from the owners of Lincoln Park as the site of the new Library building. The town accepted the gift and voted that the Library trustees be instructed to erect a building there at a cost of not more than $15,000. The vote was: Yeas, 92; Nays, 32. For a while this question seemed on the quiet way of fruition, but the agitated opponents of both Library and school kept up their battle. They had special Town Meetings called for Saturday, April 16, 1904, and for May 4, at which they attempted to rescind all action previously taken on the Central School building, but failed. There was a breathing spell up to August 27 when both the school and the Library question was agitated afresh in Town Meeting, the articles asking the town to rescind the school votes, action in regard to building the new Library and to consider again the purchase of the Pentucket House site. Discussion was in progress when somebody moved to adjourn and it was carried.
Another special Town Meeting quickly followed on school and Library matters, but the only business was the reading of a report by the Central School committee, which was accepted. On October 29 the town met again when William Bray asked many questions of the committees for both Library and School. Contracts had been let in both cases, and at this meeting the long-continued and sensational controversy over the Library book- stacks had its start. It was voted that a committee of five be named to investigate the book- stacks, but before the committee was appointed it was voted to reconsider and lay the matter on the table.
Trouble over legal matters had developed and a special Town Meeting was called for November 12, 1904 in regard to a claim for damages filed by Purden & Little, architects. The chairman of the selectmen was authorized to ascertain the grievances and employ counsel if he saw fit and report in two weeks. At this meeting Chairman C. O. Noyes reported that the claims could be settled for $425 and it was voted to settle. Mr. Bray held the floor again on the bookstacks, and a committee comprising Allen P. Spofford, Daniel P. Bond, William Bray, Prescott Poor, J. D. Hayes, L. S. Gifford, Dennis Hayes and J. J. Molloy was named to investigate.
LIBRARY COMMITTEE REPORTS
The records give but little insight into the fiery battle raging over the Library mat- ters and those who have no memory of the many town meetings can by no means visualize the situation. The special Town Meeting of December 27, 1904 must have been spirited, especially over the article to see if the town would vote to discharge the architects and also remove one or more members of the board of trustees of the Library. The only positive action taken was the appointment of another committee and adjournment to January 10, when the committee reported. In that report the committee said:
Page Forty-eight
"As to the price paid for the bookstacks, your committee feels that if the trustees had been permitted to examine samples or meet with representatives of firms who offer stacks for sale, they could, and undoubtedly would have selected for the Peabody Library, such stacks as are in use in nearly every library in New England, and the quality would have been as good, and the price not more than one-half that contracted for by them, of the Ohio Company. The committee intended to go to the bottom of the bookstack pur- chase, and reveal if possible what the town ought to know; but we were stopped by the discovery of a matter of much more importance, in our opinion, when we found that the trustees of the Peabody Library had wilfully violated the trust reposed in them by their fellow citizens.
"To substantiate these statements we would respectfully submit the following:
"At a meeting held March 12, 1904 the town passed the following vote under Article 12. 'That the town accept the lot known as Lincoln Park as a gift from the donors as a site for the Library Building, and that the Trustees of the Peabody Library be in- structed to erect a library building on that lot at a cost not to exceed $15,000 ready for occupancy.' A yea and nay vote was taken on this motion and the result was, Yeas 92; Nays 32.
"On August 18, 1904 the trustees signed a contract with Mr. E. H. George, involv- ing the Library fund to the extent of $14,998. On September 15 they signed another con- tract with Mr. George involving this fund to the extent of $1161, making a total of $16,159. Since then they have contracted for the following: Bookstacks, $1599; heating apparatus, $448; wiring for electric lights, $100; grading already done, $162.78; water supply, $22; Total, $2331.78. Added to Mr. George's contract makes a total of $18,491.78. Now add the architect's commission of 5 per cent, which is $924.53 and you have a total of $19,415.31, without any estimate on the necessary interior furnishings aside from bookstacks and without any estimate of the cost of a gas machine and piping and fixtures for the same, and without any estimate of the grading yet to be completed.
"In view of this surprising state of affairs your committee decided it of but little importance to the town what price was agreed upon for these bookstacks, because, as be- fore stated, the trustees having previously awarded to Contractor George for the erection of a building a sum more than equal to the entire appropriation voted by the town, leaving the bookstacks, architects' commission, and all other bills to be paid by themselves, and we hereby recommend that the town do not interfere with their doings."
Respectfully submitted, C. O. Noyes, Justin F. White, William Bray, Allen P. Spofford Leon S. Gifford, Daniel P. Bond
The trustees were asked to speak in regard to the report. Sherman Nelson of the board said it was practically correct, but wished to say a word in regard to the interpreta- tion of the word "occupancy," he claiming, on behalf of the trustees, that it meant the building alone without furnishings of any kind and architects' commission not included. O. B. Tenney said he relied upon the dictionary for the true meaning of the word and thought it meant the building completely furnished ready to move the books into and with all the facilities for distributing same to patrons in the case of a library, this latter view being in all probability that intended by the town when voting the appropriation.
Row OVER BUILDING FUND
William Bray made the following motion, seconded by D. W. Spofford. "I move that Messrs. Chauncy O. Noyes, Walter M. Brewster, Andrew M. Abbott, Roger S. Howe and Charles E. Tyler, be a committee with authority to employ counsel, and, in behalf of the town, to take all legal and necessary measures for the transfer of the Building Fund
Page Forty-nine
now in the custody of the trustees of the Georgetown Peabody Library, into the town treasury; and after such transfer is made the town shall never expend or use any part of said building fund or the income therefrom except in payment for the construction of the new library building, or the maintenance or support of said library, or for the maintenance and support of the present library. The motion was carried. Mr. Brewster asked to be excused from the committee. It was voted that the same committee which had reported be continued in office until after the next annual meeting in March, and that they report any further information they receive."
At the annual Town Meeting of March 6, 1905 the committee on transfer of the Library building fund reported and the report was accepted and the committee continued in office. But a week later the town, at an adjourned meeting, voted to reconsider the vote whereby it had accepted the report of the trustees of the Library. The motion was made by Mr. Bray, seconded by D. W. Spofford and amended by O. B. Tenney, the amend- ment being adopted, as follows: "That inasmuch as the Board of Trustees of the George- town Peabody Library, who served during the year ending March 6, 1905 have rendered a report regarding the expenditure of the building fund of said Library, very misleading and almost entirely devoid of fact, it is moved that said report be rejected and condemned, and that this vote be spread upon the records of the town; it being understood that this vote shall apply only to that part of the Trustees' report as printed in the town report, signed by E. S. Fickett, as president of the Board of Trustees, and not to the financial part of the report." The vote was adopted.
It was also voted that the report of the Committee on the transfer of Library Funds be read and spread upon the records of the town. The committee had written to the trus- tees of the Library that they meet with the committee and received a reply from Rev. L. W. Slattery, secretary of the board, that on advice of counsel they must refuse to comply with the request. The committee, comprising C. O. Noyes, C. E. Tyler, William Bray, I. S. Dodge and J. F. White, clerk, went to Lawrence to consult Hon. W. S. Knox, as counsel, and Mr. Knox gave it as his opinion "that the entire title, custody, control of the fund, is in the inhabitants of the town, and can be managed in whatever way they see fit." Mr. Knox further stated his opinion that if the trustees had exceeded their $15,000 appropri- ation for the erection of a building complete, such contract would be void. The words "ready for occupancy," Mr. Knox stated, meant a completed Library ready for use.
The town records state that Samuel T. Poor resigned from the Library board and Edward S. Fickett from the school committee.
LIBRARY IN THE COURTS
From what had gone on week after week, with the many Town Meetings and the deep-seated resentment among opposing factions, there had been constructed the founda- tions for even more stirring events to come. All along it had been evident that the Peabody Library trustees, who had been subjected to so much criticism, would seek court action to clear up the points at issue. They filed suit against the town and the case was called for the first Monday in May, 1905, at Salem. The trustees filing the suit were Sherman Nelson, Samuel T. Poor, H. Howard Noyes, Edward S. Fickett, Jophanus Adams, Joseph Bailey, Rev. Warren F. Low, Rev. Lawrence W. Slattery, Rev. H. E. Lombard and D. Frank Atherton.
While the case was before the courts there were other municipal matters of deep concern for the voters. A happy culmination of thought and work was the completion of the Central School within the appropriation of $20,000. The Georgetown Gas Company had been granted locations in the streets for its gas service (a project of only a few years), a committee had been appointed to investigate a "comprehensive, systematic and economical lighting of its streets," and the selectmen had been authorized to investigate the possibility of changing the Brick Schoolhouse into a Town Hall.
Page Fifty
Two years elapsed. The suit in equity had dragged along to an end, first in the Superior Court and then in the Supreme Judicial Court. The decision was in substance as follows: that the contracts for the erection of the Library building between the defendant George and the plaintiffs, namely, the Board of Library trustees for 1904, be declared valid and binding on the town for all amounts justly due thereon; that the plaintiffs account for and pay into the treasury of the town the building fund, so called; that the said building fund be held by the town; that the town pay to George the balance due him on his contracts; that the balance of the fund, if any, be held by the town, to be drawn upon from time to time by action of the trustees for the time being under the trust.
The points of law in contention, as the records state, were both sustained and decided in favor of the town; first, that the legal voters, by a two-thirds majority had a right to limit the amount to be expended on a Library building; second, that the Peabody Library fund should be placed in the town treasury. The contracts made by the building committee in excess of $15,000 were made binding on the fund by a subsequent vote of the town ac- cepting the financial report of the trustees for 1904, thereby saving the building committee from personal liability for their mistake, in not following the wishes of the voters as ex- pressed at the annual meeting of March, 1904.
Another court action against the town was reported. The Library trustees of that year had settled all claims that had come to their notice except the bill of the General Fire- proofing Company of Youngstown, Ohio, for bookstacks. They had seen no contract with that firm and the bill had not been approved by the building committee. It was voted by the town to continue the committee chosen to investigate the bookstacks and empower them to employ counsel to protect the town.
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.