USA > Massachusetts > Middlesex County > Westford > Town of Westford annual report 1914-1919 > Part 39
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
The third site, on the road toward Westford Common, is the small triangle in front of the public hall of Graniteville. This location is less attractive than either of the preceding ones. The tringle is small, the hall is very close to the sidewalk, and should the building ever be enlarged it would be apt to crowd the monument and destroy what little attractiveness the setting may have acquired in the meantime.
The fourth site is the immediate vicinity of the waiting place for the street cars at Graniteville. The placing of a monument here would call for the design of a suitable car waiting place at this point, with possibly a platform raised one or two steps above the roadway, and with a long low stone seat placed across the retaining wall at the back. On this wall would be placed the tablet commemorating the participation of the men of Granite- ville in the war. This location, the least attractive of all at the present time, has the advantage of being used by a great many people every day. A memorial placed here, in proper setting, would greatly improve the character of that immediate portion of the highway, and would have the advantage in one sense of being seen by a great many people, as well as giving a certain dignity to a section now in need of improvement.
I would recommend that the type of monument for the first three locations in Graniteville be that of a Greek stele-a thin perpendicular slab of stone, with the inscription and names either carved on the surface, or of bronze letters set into the face. This is a simple and dignified form of monument, used as a memorial since the time of ancient Greece, and one which adapts itself very well to any of the three locations which I have just described.
52
In regard to the treatment of the setting for the memorial, there should be a small amount of work done in each case, no matter which site is finally selected, in the way of regrading and the planting of a few shrubs. The first site would require less work along these lines than any one of the others, while the fourth one suggested would require practically no planing for its effect. I have attached herewith a sketch showing the general character of this monument as located on the first site-also suggestions for the treatment of the waiting platform and its memorial.
WESTFORD.
The memorial at Westford should manifestly be located on the town common. The Common is a very attractive triangular piece of land. Much of its interest, not only to the townspeople of Westford but also to visitors, lies in its general simplicity. The double row of trees, extending almost around the edge, is an attractive feature. The Common, however, at the present time, suffers somewhat from a general appearance of not being well cared for. This is undoubtedly due to lack of funds to keep it in repair; and I strongly recommend that your Committee appropriate a sufficient portion of the money available for a memorial, to the improvement and maintenance of Westford Common.
The green offers an admirable site for a memorial. In view of the fact that the Civil War memorial-the statute and pedestal totalling 12 or 15 feet in height-is just beyond the southwest corner, it does not seem to me that a similar statute should be placed on the Common itself, but rather that it should take the form of a permanent flag pole base, or some similar structure. The present flag pole, while not especially unattractive as tem- porary flag poles go, might be very much more dignified if given a suitable, permanent base. The temporary bandstand in the northwest corner is not particularly noticeable to anyone passing by the Common ; while a permanent bandstand or similar struc- ture would undoubtedly be more attractive than the present one, the cost for such a building would be larger than I feel the results justify. I would therefore recommend that your Com- mittee seriously consider, first, the design and erection of a permanent flag pole base on the Common, to be located approxi- mately as shown on the accompanying sketch plan; second, that a portion of the money available for the war memorial for
53
Westford be applied for improvement and upkeep of the Com- mon ; third, that another portion of these funds be used for the erection of a suitable tablet in the Town Hall commemorative of Westford's participants in the World War. This tablet should be similar in design to the Civil War tablet now in place in the entrance corridor of that building.
In regard to the steps that should be taken for the general improvement of the appearance of the Common, I would rec- ommend that the area in the center, inside the row of trees, be plowed, harrowed and regraded, so as to form a relatively smooth surface, then seeded to grass. If the soil is not particularly good, it should be enriched with bone meal at the rate of approximately 800 lbs. to the acre. This plowing and regrading will improve the general appearance of the surface by doing away with the present hollows and irregularities. It will mean that the walk from the Post Office to the northwest corner would probably be done away with temporarily, and in replacing it I would suggest a walk of large flag stones, either of slate or artificial stone stained a dark color to harmonize with the turf.
I feel that at present the edges of the Common where they join the highway are somewhat irregular, and that a definite curb line around the three sides would help very materially in the general appearance of the green. I would therefore suggest that the town put in a rough granite curb, 6-8" in height, around the three sides of the Common.
The question was asked at the time of my visit as to the advisability of moving some of the trees now encircling the Common, thus thinning out the surrounding mass of foliage at various points. I feel that to attempt to move the existing trees would be a mistake. In the first place it would be very difficult to handle such large trees and make them live after transplanting. Their roots are undoubtedly grown in with those of the sur- rounding ones, and a great deal of cutting would have to be done before they could be transplanted. In the second place, the trees have grown so elose together throughout their life time that the removal of one or more from the row would leave large bare gaps in the masses of foliage, and I doubt very much if the branches on the trees that are left in place would ever grow in sufficiently to fill the vacancy left by the removal of any tree in that row. It is like developing a good sized hedge and then cutting out several plants from its midst at various points. The gaps thus made are very difficult to take care of, and it is seldom, if ever, that a hedge
54
is ever restored to its former attractiveness. I look upon the close row of trees surrounding Westford Common as just such a hedge,-a solid mass of green enframing the triangular plot of turf and making a most attractive enclosure, particularly when seen down through the lines of parallel tree trunks.
The effect of the removal of trees from a close planted row is well shown along the west side of the Common, where a number of trees were removed for one or more reasons within a few years. The present double row at this end does not have anywhere near the same effectiveness in appearance as those on the other two sides. The trees look one-sided and awkward, the vista between the tree trunks appears broken and incomplete and the effect is not to be compared with that of the south and north sides.
I would recommend that the town, in its improvement of the Common, devote some of the funds not only to the care of the existing trees, but to the planting of a third and inner row around the Common, as well as filling out the double row at the western end. This third and inner row, preferably of American elms, would in time take the place of the double row of maples which are now in their prime and will probably be gone in the next 30 to 50 years. I feel sure that your entire Committee will agree with me that the Common on losing its present mass of trees will lose a great deal of its charm and interest, and would urge you to take the necessary precautions.
The double row of trees offers very interesting vistas and I feel that these should be made use of in the new development of Westford Common. I would further suggest that walks be built on the north and west sides between these rows of trees along which seats may be placed and the attractiveness of the shade emphasized. These walks should not be made of brick or gravel or cement, as any such construction to be at all permanent would require a foundation course which might seriously inter- fere with the tree roots. A line of large flag stones, approxi- mately three feet square and six or eight inches in thickness, either of blue stone or artificial cast stone stained some dark pleasing color, so placed as to allow three or four inches of turf between them, would be a more suitable and attractive walk down through the vista than the hard and definite lines of the usual type of sidewalk.
Similarly, I would suggest that the walk on the west side be reconstructed along these lines and put inside of what was once the double row of trees across that end, instead of outside
55
of them as at present-where the pleasant effect of the vistas is quite lost.
The diagonal path, too, leading across the Common to the Post Office, might also be of a similar character, but with smaller flag stones. These stones, if blue stone is not available, could be cast with little trouble by the town engineer or builder from local gravel and with only five or six forms of simple box-like construction. The exposed surface should, of course, be washed to expose the right amount of aggregate and to give the stone an agreeable texture before the concrete hardens. These stones would be relatively inexpensive, particularly if made from local material and cast from only a few forms. Work on them could be started in the fall and completed in the spring, casting only a few at a time.
With regard to the location of the memorial, I would suggest that it take the form of a permanent flag pole base, to be located slightly east of the center of the triangle and approximately as shown on the accompaning sketch plan. Such a flag pole base should be of artificial stone, simple in design, but giving oppor- tunity for an inscription and lists of such names as the town may wish to place upon it, either in letters cut on the surface or bronze or some other metal applied to it. The base could un- doubtedly be cast in sections from the working drawings and then assembled on the ground. The pole itself would be of wood, and I see no reason why the present flag pole cannot be utilized.
The setting for such a flag pole base would be the Common as a whole and I feel that no planting immediately about the base itself is called for. I would suggest, however, that your Com- mittee consider the question of removing the town scales from the east end of the Common, as these now obstruct the view to anyone coming from Lowell, and I feel that the appearance of the green would be greatly improved by placing them either at one side of the road or the other. The accompanying sketch plan, showing the Common, the treatment of the walks and the proposed location for the flag pole is only approximate, and should not be taken as anything more than a suggestion of the ideas stated in this report.
In closing my recommendations to your Committee I cannot urge you too strongly to take ample time for your deliberations. A true memorial stands for all time ; much may be sacrificed and but little gained by hurrying decisions on such subjects. What- ever forms your Committee may decide to recommend to the
56
towns of Forge Village, Graniteville and Westford that their recognition of those who gave their services to the country should take, the memorial spirit should prevail,-because a memorial is the symbol of an ideal.
Respectfully submitted, BREMER W. POND.
The cost of the improvements recommended in this Report is estimated to be approximately as follows:
Monument for Forge Village, including improvement of site $ 400.00 Monument for Graniteville, to be located on site No. 1 1,000.00
Improvement of Westford Common. 1,000.00
Flagpole on Westford Common 3,000.00
Tablet in Town Hall, Westford. 100.00
Total $5,500.00
These figures are only approximate, as no definite idea of the cost of such work can be given till actual designs are under way; but I hope they will serve to give your Committee some idea of the probable total expenses and relative costs of the various suggestions.
November 28, 1919.
Mr. Edward M. Abbot,
Westford, Massachusetts.
Dear Mr. Abbot :
With reference to the conference Tuesday forenoon in my office with you and Mr. Harrington, over certain details of my Westford report, I enclose herewith some photographs and sketches to further illustrate some of the points we discussed ; as for example, a flag pole base of artificial stone and another of bronze, which, however is too elaborate in design to be suitable for the Westford Common, but nevertheless has some suggestions with regard to treatment of the base, etc. Also one or two photographs showing, in a way, the kind of flag stone walk which I feel should go between the rows of trees encircling the Common.
57
In regard to these walks, if split, seam-faced granite can be obtained in irregular pieces, similar to what I have shown on the enclosed sketch plan, I feel that it would be preferable in design as well as less expensive than the large fairly square slabs of the same material. This walk should be from three and a half to four feet in width, on a foundation of gravel or cinders, and, as I have tried to bring out in a cross-section, only one face of the stone need be fairly smooth. In fact if the under side is quite irregular it will make no difference whatever in the appear- ance or durability of the walk itself. The spaces between the stones can be of varying width, from a half inch to two and a half or three inches, and grass and clover seed-the latter predomi- nating, should be sown in these spaces.
In regard to the curbing for the triangular plot in Forge Village, I think it would be very advisable to have some sort of definite boundary to the site, not only to emphasize it a little more strongly, but particularly as a safeguard against possible damage from teams and automobiles that would be likely to run onto the curb and spoil the possibility of that well kept appearance which such a monument should certainly have. This curb should not be of carefully cut granite, as a nicely finished stone would be out of keeping with the rough boulder itself, and would suggest a more finished type of treatment than is at all appropriate. I would recommend pieces of split granite such as are frequently used as rather rustic copings for stone walls- bloeks varying from six to eight or ten inches in thickness, fifteen to twenty-four inches in depth and from two and a half to five feet or more in length. The curb should be so placed as to raise the level of the ground in the triangle at least six inches above the edge of the roadway. The general area of the plot itself, further- more, should be graded to slope slightly down toward the road on all three sides, making the position where the boulder is to set some six inches higher than the top of the curb along the three sides of the triangle.
As to the flag pole base, the suggestion that it be made of granite, rather than artificial stone, is a good one provided your Committee is willing to pay the greater sum which I feel sure such material would cost. The base, whether circular or octa- gonal, would undoubtedly have to be made in sections and segments, then fitted together on the ground. The cutting of large pieces of granite of the peculiar shape called for, would I am sure, be more expensive than the casting, for example of
58
eight similar sections and segments in artificial stone, as only one mould would be necessary for any one group of segments. Then too, as I explained to you in our conference, it would be easier to get sufficient strength to hold the flag pole rigid in the nar- rower part of the base by means of the steel tie and reinforcing rods in artificial stone than it would be in natural granite within the same given space ; in other words, the flag pole base of granite could not be as tapering or thin near the junction of the pole and base as would be possible in artificial stone.
As to the wearing qualities and appearance of the two, I feel they would be very similar; anyone acquainted with stone can always tell the artificial from the natural product, particu- larly if examined close at hand, but it is possible to get such a finish on artificial stone that at a distance it has practically the same appearance as a crandalled surface of granite. The com- bination of a brick paved platform with either a granite or artificial stone base for the flag pole would be equally satisfactory, and in the matter of color, the one again would very closely resemble the other-in fact could be made practically the same.
In regard to a curb about the Common, I would urge that one be put in similar in character to the curb around the triangle in Forge Village, if your Committee has money available. I do not feel it to be as important in the redesign of the Common, however, as the matter of regrading or the building of the rough flag stone walk around the three sides. In our conference Tuesday you mentioned the fact that some members of the Committee feel that a curb would formalize the Common. I feel that question de- pends on the character of the curb. For example, such a curb as surrounds the Civil War monument plot, would be inappro- priate to go around the edge of the Common ; it is too well finished and too formal. On the other hand, a rough coping of dark or irregular colored granite with no carefully finished edge, does not suggest formality, but I feel would give a rather definite outline to the area in question. It would also make a better finish for the section of turf between the trees and the roadways than is possible under the present conditions. The double line of trees around the Common gives in one sense a feeling of formality to the area, but I do not think that such a curb as I have tried to describe would increase this appearance to such an extent that it would lead one to expect a formal treatment of the interior area.
59
The paved gutter around the Common would be in one sense a substitute for the curb, but a gutter unless actually needed to take care of surface drainage is inappropriate and not suitable as a bounding line; it is too broad and apt to become filled in sections with leaves, silt or even grass and weeds. To look well a gutter must be constantly maintained, and the more especially if there is not enough slope or pitch to it so that the storm water washes it out frequently. The changes in grade around the Common are so slight, as I recall them, that the gutters would have to be taken care of rather frequently by the town to keep them clear. An unkempt and untidy gutter is no attraction to any street and the question of maintenance costs should be con- sidered by your Committee before making any decision in the matter.
I trust this letter and the enclosed photographs will answer the questions which have arisen in the minds of your Committee, but if you need any further explanations or diagrams I shall be glad to forward them.
Very truly yours,
BREMER W. POND.
60
The Following is a List of World War Veterans and Nurses
Private Edward M. Abbot,
54th Training Battery, Camp Zachary Taylor. Seaman Francis C. Allard,
United States Navy.
Private Frank Araskey,
Development Batt., 12th Div., Camp Devens.
Private Arthur C. Arvanites,
Camp Devens.
Sergt. Seth W. Banister,
166th Aero Squadron, A. E. F.
Private Edward Bechard,
U. S. Regular Army, A. E. F.
Private Leo K. Bechard,
U. S. Regular Army, A. E. F.
Private Walter O. Beebe,
Co. F, 7th Ammunition Train, A. E. F.
Sergeant Leroy E. Bicknell,
Co. D, 3rd Division, 9th Machine Gun Battalion, A. E. F. Private Arthur C. Blaisdell,
3rd Co., Utility Depot Quartermaster Corps., Camp Devens. Private Chester E. Blaisdell,
71st Artillery Replacement Depot, Newport News, Virginia. Corporal Frank L. Blaisdell,
3rd Co., Utility Department Quartermaster Corps., Camp Devens.
Private Walter L. Blanchard,
Co. G, 304th Inf., A. E. F.
Private Ralph H. Bonnell,
S. A. T. C., Co. E, Harvard College, Cambridge, Mass. Private George Boscu, Depot Brigade, Camp Devens. Private Harry Brooks,
Co. 23rd, 152nd Depot Brigade, Camp Upton, N. Y.
Private J. Norbert Brulé. Died in France.
Co. B, 305th Field Artillery, A. E. F.
61
Private Alexander Brunnelle,
Co. I, 301st A. T., 76th Div., A. E. F.
Sergeant William F. Buckingham,
Headquarters, 2nd Div., A. E. F. Private Ernest L. Burland, Medical Corps., A. E. F.
Junior Lieutenant Alexander A. Cameron,
U. S. Naval Station, San Pedro, California. Sergeant Donald F. Cameron, S. A. T. C., Harvard College, Cambridge.
Private Joseph A. Carpentier,
Battery E, 76th F. A., 3rd Div., A. E. F. Private Frank Charlton, Co. 46th, 12th Batt., Camp Devens.
Private Raymond V. Charlton,
1st Regt. Supply Co., Camp Jackson.
Wagoner John E. Clement,
Co. D, 301st Ammunition Train, 76th Div., A. E. F. Private Albert C. Collins,
Depot Brigade, Camp Devens.
Private Harold Connell,
2nd Co., U. S. D. B. Guard, Ft. Leavenworth, Kansas. Private Joseph F. Costello,
Battery 303rd F. A., A. E. F.
Private Thomas Costello,
Co. A, 58th Inf., 4th Div., A. E. F.
Private Dolard Cote, Camp Devens.
Seaman Frederick L. Couchaine,
Fireman, U. S. N., U. S. S. New Jersey.
Private William F. Couchaine,
Co. B, 326 Field Signal Batt., 7th Army Corps, A. E. F. Private Alfred J. Couture,
Headquarters, 101st Inf., A. E. F.
Private Henry Couture, Co. B, Ordnance Dept., Annapolis.
Private Clarence H. Dane,
Battery A, 3rd Reg. F. A. R. D., Camp Jackson. Seaman William Davis, U. S. Navy. Seaman Fred W. Defoe, U. S. S. New York.
62
Lieutenant Emerson De Roehn.
Private John E. De Roehn.
Private Frederick C. Downing, Battery C, 73rd C. A. Corps., A. E. F. Wagoner Gastaf Eliason, Co. A, 60th Regt., 5th Div., A. E. F. Private James Elliott, Troop M. 1st U. S. Cavalry.
Private Matthew F. Elliott,
Co. K, 104th Inf., 26th Div., A. E. F. Private Ralph Estey, Canadian Service.
Private Maurice Flagg,
336th F. A., 162nd Batt., 87th Div., A. E. F.
Private Arthur Fletcher,
U. S. Cavalry, Fort Ethan Allen.
Ensign Harold H. Fletcher,
U. S. Naval Aviation Detachment, Seattle, Wash.
Junior Lieutenant Ralph A. Fletcher, U. S. Naval Aviation Detachment, Seattle, Wash. Private Andrew Frascarelli, Camp Devens.
Chief Machinist Mate William C. Furbush, Torpedo Boat Tucker.
Private Claude E. Gladu,
A. F. F. Chief John B. Gray,
Chief Radio Elec., U. S. Naval Radio School, Cambridge. Private Artemus G. Griffin,
Co. B, S. A. T. C., Mass. Agricultural College.
Private Charles M. Griffin, Jr.,
2nd Batt., F. A. Replacement Regt., A. E. F. Private Eugene Guichard,
Headquarters, 101st Inf., 26th Div., A. E. F. Corporal Jacob Halko,
Co. A, 74th Inf., 12th Div., Camp Devens.
Private Edward T. Hanley,
U. S. Training School, U. S. Navy.
Seaman A. Fredolph Hansen,
Chief Boatswain's Mate, U. S. S. Shawmut.
Private Victor George Hansen,
10th Co., C. A. C., Fort Strong.
63
Corporal Jesse C. Heald, Quartermaster Corps, Camp Devens. Seaman Edward Healy, U. S. Navy, R. F. Private Fred S. Healy, S. A. T. C., Lowell. Private Henry J. Healy, Base Hospital, A. E. F. Private John A. Healy, Co. A, 301st Am. Train, A. E. F. Private Joseph A. Heroux, Co. E, 308th Engineers, A. E. F. M. M., 1st Class, Albert W. Heywood, U. S. S. R. 20. Private Arthur G. Hildreth, Camp Devens.
Corporal Clarence E. Hildreth,
199th Aero Service, A. E. F.
Corporal Harold W. Hildreth, 28th Engineers, A Co., A. E. F. Private Leon F. Hildreth, 28th Engineers, C Co., A. E. F. Corporal John Hobson, Co. E, 301st Engineers, A. E. F. Seaman Thomas A. Hughes, U. S. N. R. F. Private Paul Jasmin, Camp Devens.
Private Justin Jenkins, 102nd Battery F, A. E. F.
Sergeant Major Frank C. Johnson, 306th Train Headquarters, A. E. F. Private Percy Kilminister, 366th F. A., Fort McKinley. Private Alec Krives, Camp Devens.
Private Napoleon J. Lanctot. Died in France. Co. M, 101st Inf., A. E. F. Private Adlard Langley. Died in France. 95th Aero Squadron, A. E. F. Private Herman Lawton, Camp Devens.
64
Corporal John McDonald,
148th Co., 2nd Regt., Med. Corps.
Seaman James J. McKniff,
U. S. Navy. Private Emile Meloit,
Co. L, 306th Inf., 77th Div., A. E. F.
Private Thomas Merrick,
Co. M, 5th Cavalry, U. S. A., A. E. F.
Private William H. Mills,
Co. K, 104th Infantry, A. E. F.
Private Albert Momenie, Co. C, 104 Infantry, 26th Div., A. E. F. Private Fred Moore, Camp Devens.
Electrician Joseph Murphy,
U. S. Navy, Wireless Operator.
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.