USA > Massachusetts > Suffolk County > Boston > Municipal history of the town and city of Boston during two centuries : from September 17, 1630, to September 17, 1830 > Part 9
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
The most extensive plan the Committee of the City Council dared, at that time, to propose, embraced only the space between the street leading to Bray's Wharf and Ann Street, bounding westerly on a line running in the direction of the eastern side of Merchants' Row, four hundred and twenty feet. The distance to which the parallelogram, of which this line was the base, should extend, casterly, was limited to the east end of Codman's Wharf.
Feet.
The space between these lines it was proposed to divide into two ranges of store-lots, each 55 feet wide, . 110
One range for a market house, 50 feet wide, the centre of which was to coincide with the centre of Faneuil Hall, . 50 And two streets, 80 feet wide, on each side of the proposed market house, .
160
And two streets on the outside of each range of stores, each being 50 feet, . . 100
420
The subsequent great extension to the eastward, and also that included in the space southward to Butler's Row, and the inter- mediate estates, according to the original project, were not then by any one deemed possible. Even this plan, so limited in com- parison with the one ultimately effected, was condemned, in public and private, as far beyond the resources of the city.
The titles to all the estates in the above space were now in- vested in, or secured for, the city, with the exception of three four- teenth parts of the estate belonging to the heirs of Nathan Spear, which the proprietors refused to dispose of on any terms. This estate lay, as the annexed plan will show, in the centre of the space required for the proposed improvement ; and it was not pos-
80
MUNICIPAL HISTORY.
sible to place the centre of the market house in coincidence with the centre of Faneuil Hall, without crossing that estate, almost in its whole length ; and there being some legal questions, applica- ble to taking lands for a market, which did not apply to taking lands for streets, it was deemed advisable by the City Council to place the market house as far as possible beyond the sphere of the Spear estate. The plan of placing its centre opposite the centre of Faneuil Hall was therefore abandoned, and it was resolved that the northern line of the two edifices should be made coinci- dent; a circumstance often mentioned with regret, as a mistake, by those who are ignorant of the obstacles which rendered the present relative position of the market house expedient. After having entered into contracts, or other satisfactory engage- ments with all the adult proprietors, whose lands were essential to success, with the above exceptions, and obtained elevations, ground plans, and estimates of a market house and the proposed adjacent stores, on the eighth of December, 1823, the Mayor called together the Committee. Great diversity of opinion was evineed at this meeting ; and, after long deliberation, the fear of involving the city in debt prevailed, and it was unanimously agreed, in the first place, to attempt to associate the proprietors of the land in the project, to be effected at common risk and profit. Should this offer be declined, it would be apparent that the improvement must be executed, if at all, by the energy and resources, exclusively, of the city ; a circumstance which, it was hoped, would unavoidably produce unanimity among the citi- zens. With these views, the Mayor, as Chairman of the Com- mittee, made a report of the above date, in which the importance and necessity of the undertaking are stated ; the plan and eleva- tions communicated ; the impracticability of uniting the opinions of the citizens in favor of purchases to so great an amount, with- out a previous exposition, asserted ; the impossibility of making those purchases on its account, after such development, intimat- ed; and, after declaring the opinion that a full exposition of their plan should be made to the public, proposed to invite the proprie- tors to become interested in the project, in the proportion of their existing rights; to state what the city would give, in addition to its right in the dock and streets, for the land reserved for streets and a market. Their report concludes with recommending an order, to be passed by the City Council, authorizing a joint
1
81
CITY GOVERNMENT.
committee of that body to enter into a negotiation with the proprietors of the land adjoining the market, and with other citizens, to unite with the City Council in one general plan of improvement in that vicinity, on terms specified in the order.
That order was passed by the City Council on the eighth of December, 1823; and a committee, consisting of the Mayor, and Messrs. Child, Benjamin, and Patterson, of the Board of Aldermen, and Messrs. Dexter, Silsby, E. Williams, Brooks, Russell, Winslow, and Tappan, of the Common Council, were accordingly appointed.
On the tenth of that month the Committee prepared and trans- mitted to the several proprietors of land three propositions, con- formable to the authority given by the City Council. By the first, they were invited to combine and throw their estates into a common stock with the estates belonging to the city, the whole to be appraised at their real value by commissioners mutually to be chosen, who were to be authorized to lay out the estates on a plan specified, and to divide the whole interest into shares, in proportions conformed to the appraisement, and to make sales for the best interests of the concern, the city to be considered as a proprietor for the amount of its estates, but streets and lanes, given or taken, not to be considered in any estimate. The same Commissioners to be authorized to appraise the land reserved for a market, and to decide what the city should pay to the general concern for that interest, considering all circumstances. This sum was to be divided between the proprietors, like the proceeds of the sales, according to their respective shares. The second proposition requested the proprietor, who dissented from the pre- ceding, to state his willingness to sell his land at an appraisement to be made by five or seven disinterested persons, mutually chosen; the city declaring its willingness to consent to such appraise- ment, upon the single condition that the result should only be obligatory in case of the ultimate success of the general project. The third proposition invited any proprietor, who declined con- curring in either of the preceding propositions, to transmit to the Mayor the terms on which he would be willing to sell his land to the city, with the assurance on the part of the city, that either they will be accepted, or a counter-proposition made on its part, limited only by the single condition expressed in the second pro- position. The proprietors were requested to give an answer
1
1
82
MUNICIPAL HISTORY.
within ten days, and the opinion and earnest wish of the city authorities were expressed, that the whole arrangement might result in uniting the accommodation of the city with the advance- ment of the interests of the proprietors.
These various propositions were submitted to the proprietors with a view to test their dispositions and to foreclose any future complaints against those measures, to which it might become necessary for the city finally to resort. The prejudices and inte- rest hostile to the prosecution of the improvement by the funds of the city, rendered it expedient to evidence a disposition to admit private citizens into a share in the concern, and particu- larly the proprietors of the land, should such a disposition be met by a corresponding disposition in any of those individuals, they might be considered and accepted, or rejected, according to their nature. Should no such corresponding disposition appear, then the city authorities would be justified in proceeding on the basis of the city funds and powers, as being obviously the only remain- ing mode of effecting the improvement.
No proposition was received from any one, on the basis of throwing the estates into a common stock ; nor any upon that of selling estates to the city by appraisement. Several of the proprietors, however, expressed their willingness to sell, but the prices demanded by some were deemed exorbitant, and two or three of them refused absolutely to sell at any rate, declaring that they had interests in other parts of the city, which they apprehended would be injuriously affected by the proposed alter- ations in the vicinity of Faneuil Hall, and that they would enter into no negotiation, nor make any offer upon the subject.
The Committee, therefore, reported on the twenty-ninth of December, 1823, that the prices demanded by the owners of estates in the vicinity of Faneuil Hall Market were generally such as to render it inexpedient to proceed further in an attempt to negotiate, and recommended resolutions, which were adopted by the City Council, appointing a committee to apply to the State Legislature for " such an extension of the powers of Sur- veyors of Highways, as may enable the city to become possessed of such estates in the vicinity of Faneuil Hall Market as the said Surveyors may deem it expedient for the city to possess for the public use, under such limitations, restrictions, and provisions, as the constitution enjoins, and as regard for the interests of the
£
.
83
CITY GOVERNMENT.
public, and respect for the rights of individuals shall dictate. Resolutions to this effect were passed in both branches of the City Council, and the same Committee were authorized to apply to the Legislature for such powers.
On the twelfth of the ensuing January, the Committee so appointed made a report, and submitted to the City Council the draft of a memorial to the Legislature, recommending, however, that previously to thus applying to the Legislature, the whole subject should be laid before the inhabitants of the city for their sanction.
This recommendation was made in consideration of the great- ness of the effect of this contemplated project on the relations of real property in all that circle of territory, from the Town Dock by the head of Ann Street, and the Mill Creek to Exchange Wharf; the whole of which would be, it was apparent, advantageously affected by the improvement. As the powers about to be asked of the Legislature, though the same in nature with the ordinary powers of surveyors of highways, were yet much more extensive in degree, and would have a direct action upon private rights, and as loans to a considerable amount would be requisite, in case the improvement was authorized, it seemed expedient, con- sidering the great range of these relations, that the real senti- ments of the citizens should be formally and satisfactorily ascer- tained.
'The project had thus far appeared to be received with very general approbation ; but it was thought that if the result of the proposed appeal to the citizens, in general meeting, should show that they really entertained such views of their own interest, great encouragement and support would be given to the City Council in their future measures. Should, however, the result indicate that the general opinion was opposed to the contem- plated improvement, it was desirable that the fact should be known before proceeding farther on the subject.
These views of the Committee were approved by the City Council, and at a general and very full meeting of the inhabit- ants, on the sixteenth of January, 1824, the following questions were submitted to them. 1st. Is it expedient that Faneuil Hall Market should be extended towards the Harbor, between Ann Street and the street leading to Bray's Wharf, in such direction as the City Council, upon a view of all the circumstances of that
-
-
84
MUNICIPAL IHISTORY.
vicinity, shall deem most for the public interest ; and that the City Council be requested to cause the same to be effected accordingly ? 2d. Is it expedient for the City Council to apply to the Legislature for such an extension of the powers of the Surveyors of Highways, as the circumstances of the contempla- ted project above-mentioned may make necessary, under such limitations and restrictions as the constitution requires, and as respect for private rights may dictate ?
At this meeting the subject was debated with warmth, and opposed by several citizens of wealth, talent, and eloquence. In its support, the Mayor stated the views entertained by the City Council, produced a plan of the general improvement contem- plated, embracing a ground view and an elevation of the pro- posed stores and market house ; - the former extending no further than to the easterly end of Codman's Wharf, being only four hundred and fifty feet in length, and not passing in an easterly direction beyond the ancient southwesterly line of the dock, and- was limited to the space between the lane leading to Bray's Wharf and Ann Street, having the market house fifty feet wide, with a sixty-five feet street on its north side and a sixty feet street on its south side. The market house was proposed to be only one story in height, of wood, open on all sides, supported by a double row of pillars, like the market houses in Philadelphia, and bearing no comparison with the plan which was subsequently executed. It was, however, opposed as being impracticable, from its extent and expense, and was opprobriously denominated "the mammoth project of the Mayor." It was denounced as laying the foundation of a city debt, " which neither the present inhabitants of Boston, nor their posterity, would be able to pay." It was said that sehemes of this kind had better be left to the enterprise of individuals, who do them better and cheaper than corporations. It was denied that a great market was wanted.
'To these and other arguments adduced in opposition to the project, a very few plain statements were opposed, explaining its necessity, feasibility, and expedieney, and showing that it would probably create the means for indemnifying the city for the expenses which its prosecution would occasion. These general considerations, aided by the strong conviction which the embar- rassed and inconvenient state of the existing market had im- pressed on the minds of the citizens in general, seconded by the
-
85
CITY GOVERNMENT.
strong desire prevalent throughout the whole northern section of the city for the widening of the Roebuck Passage, and above all, the certainty that this improvement, from its locality, would, if carried into effect, result in producing important changes, favor- able to the value of real estate in that division of the city, caused the arguments in favor of the project to have a weight and influ- ence which neither the talents, nor the respectability of those who resisted the proposition, could successfully counteract. Both questions were carried in the affirmative by great majorities, and as was asserted at the time, by at least three to one.1
In conformity with this expression of the public opinion, a full memorial, stating the advantages resulting to the country and the city from the proposed project, was presented to the Legislature, and on the twenty-first of February, 1821, an act was passed " authorizing the extension of Faneuil Hall Market in Boston." The principles of that act were contested, both before the Legis- lative Committee and in the Legislature itself. At one period the chance of success seemed so dubious, that the Mayor pre- pared, on his own responsibility, a short pamphlet, and caused it to be distributed to the members of the Legislature, elucidating, very briefly, the questions in controversy. It however finally passed in both branches, with no inconsiderable majorities.
On the first of March, the Committee on the extension of Faneuil Hall Market reported to the City Council the act they had obtained from the Legislature, and suggested the course of proceedings which they now deemed it proper for the City Coun- cil to adopt, in the form of distinct resolutions, which were accordingly passed by the City Council on that day. By the first of these resolutions, the conditions of the act of the Legisla- ture, on which the powers granted depended, were complied with by the formal declaration of the City Council, "that the public exigencies required that the limits of Faneuil Hall Market should be extended " between Ann Street on the north, a line drawn from the cast end of Faneuil Hall on the west, the south side of Faneuil Hall and the lane leading to Bray's Wharf on the south, and the harbor on the cast. By the second, the direction in which the market should be extended, was referred for future consideration. By the third, a joint committee was appointed
1 Columbian Centinel, 17th January, 1824.
1 8
86
MUNICIPAL HISTORY.
to consider whether the land requisite for the improvement should be acquired by purchase or by virtue of the powers granted by the Legislature ; and, in the latter case, to report the particular direc- tion in which the extension should be effected. Should the mode of purchase be selected by the Connnittee, they were then anthor- ized to proceed to make the purchases, three fourths of the Com- mittee concurring in such purchase, and signing a vote to that effeet ; their powers of purchasing being limited to the sum of five hundred thousand dollars. This sum was inserted in the Common Council, by a majority of only one, (yeas 19, nays 18.) By the fourth, the Committee were authorized to borrow, at five per cent., for the payment for the estates purchased, a like pro- portion of the Committee being required to sanction in writing the terms of any loan. By the fifth, the Mayor and Treasurer were empowered to sign and countersign certificates of such loans ; the joint Committee who reported the resolutions being authorized to carry them into effect.
This Committee, consisting of the Mayor and Messrs. Child, Patterson, and Benjamin of the Board of Aldermen, and Messrs. Dexter, Silsby, E. Williams, Brooks, Russell, Winslow, and Tappan of the Common Conneil, had its first meeting on the sixteenth of March, 1824, and gave a general authority to the Mayor to purchase three of the principal estates (Codman's, Wheaton's, and Miller's) at rates below what those proprietors had previously demanded.
On the twenty-sixth, the Mayor reported the rejection by those proprietors of the offer made by the Committee. The proceed- ings were then postponed, and the Mayor was authorized to pro- ceed in the negotiation at his discretion, subject to the approval of the Committee.
At this period, great difficulties appeared in the way of the project. Two of the Committee declared themselves decidedly opposed to proceeding on the scale contemplated, and presented calculations to show that the project would result in a debt of at least five hundred thousand dollars. These were met by counter calculations, which were satisfactory to the other mem- bers of the Committee ; and as on the first of May, the conditional contracts obtained by the Mayor of the several proprietors would terminate, a decisive course of measures now became necessary. On the ninth of April, therefore, the Committee authorized the
87
CITY GOVERNMENT.
Mayor to purchase the estates at the prices at which any of the proprietors were under contract to sell. This authority that officer immediately proceeded to execute, and from this time the operations, with reference to this improvement, were efficiently commenced ; a debt of more than forty-eight thousand dollars was now contracted, nearly twenty thousand feet of land, besides wharf rights secured, and a general authority further to negotiate having been vested in the Faneuil Hall Committee, the City Council closed its labors on this subject for the second year of the city.
CHAPTER VII.
CITY GOVERNMENT. 1823-1824.
JOSIAH QUINCY, Mayor.
Proceedings relative to the House of Industry - Opposition of the Overseers of the Poor to the Removal of the Inmates of the Alshouse - A House of Cor- rection erected at South Boston - Attempts to Conciliate the Overseers of the Poor - Its Effects - Liberty to use the Cellars of a Church for Burial denied - Department of Police.
Ar the commencement of the second administration of the city in May, 1823, it had become apparent that the House of Industry was destined to sustain an unqualified opposition from the Overseers of the Poor, and a decided support from a major- ity of the City Council.
When the Committee for erecting the House of Industry, under the town government, first visited the Almshouse in Leverett Street, in April, 1821, they were convinced that the edifice and the land round it were wholly inadequate to the pre- sent and future exigencies of the community. These facts were admitted by the Overseers of the Poor themselves, and also by the Superintendent of the Almshouse. All the particulars of its want of adaptation to moral effect and discipline cannot here be stated. The Committee, therefore, after obtaining authority and appropriations, purchased, as already stated,1 sixty-three acres of land at South Boston, and erected the House of Indus- try, with accommodations to effect a complete separation of the sexes, with every arrangement for the comfort, health, and em- ployment of the respectable classes of the poor, and with distinct apartments for the insane. And they anticipated that the sale of the house and land in Leverett Street would probably indem- nify the town for this expenditure at South Boston.
These arrangements of the Committee of the House of Indus-
1 See ch. iii. p. 38.
1
89
CITY GOVERNMENT.
try received the sanction of the inhabitants at the last town meeting ever held in Boston. And their opinions and views were confirmed by the Report of the Committee of the first City Council, of which the Mayor, John Phillips, was Chairman.1 But to the Overseers of the Poor this whole plan was obnoxious. They did not estimate the estate in Leverett Street at so high a value as the Committee, and although they acknowledged the inadequacy of the Almshouse, its location near the centre of business facilitated the performance of their duties, and they did not regard inconveniences to which they had been long inured with the same feelings of disapprobation as did those to whom they were new. They sympathized in the prejudices of the more respectable inmates in favor of the present location, and were unwilling to deprive them of the humble comforts and pleasures obtained, by permission, once a week to stroll about the streets and visit the families and receive the charities of their former friends.
These, and perhaps other motives of a less distinct character, led to a course of opposition, which, during the first year of the city government, prevented the House of Industry from going into operation, and occasioned also a long series of embarrass- ments to the second administration. On the first of May, 1823, when the Chairman of the Committee of the House of Industry was inaugurated Mayor of the city, he recommended to the City Council to take early measures to carry that institution into effect, and a joint committee 2 was raised on the subject, of which he was appointed Chairman. On the twelfth of May, the Committee reported that it was expedient to put the House of Industry into operation as soon as possible ; and eight thousand dollars were immediately appropriated towards its completion.
This report was based upon a statement annexed to it, repre- senting the advantages of supporting the poor on an extent of land sufficient to enable them to raise at least their own provi- sions, and on the total inadequacy of the Almshouse in Leverett Street to the objeets of such an institution, since its restricted limits gave its inmates a pretext to obtain leave to wander about the city every week, where some of them found means to gratify their propensity to intoxication, to beg, or to steal, of
-
-
1 See ch. iv. p. 51. 2 See ch. v. p. 62.
8*
90
MUNICIPAL HISTORY.
which the records of the Municipal Court contained melancholy evidence.
On the nineteenth of May, in conformity with the act of the Legislature, authorizing the City Council to appoint the Direct- ors of the House of Industry, the first Board 1 was chosen, who proceeded forthwith to complete the arrangements for that insti- tution. And on the twenty-eighth of July, the Directors gave notice that the House of Industry was prepared to receive the inmates of the Leverett Street Almshouse. For the adoption of measures to remove a part of them to South Boston, a joint committee of the City Council,2 was appointed to meet the Board of Overseers of the Poor. After several interviews it became evident that if the City Council were not to receive a decided opposition to the proposed transfer, they were to have no assistance from the Overseers. It was also found that the inmates of the Almshouse had generally imbibed gross and un- founded prejudices against the House of Industry, in addition to the dislike which paupers, accustomed to be supported in com- parative idleness, naturally felt towards an institution in which work was to be required of them.
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.