USA > New Jersey > Essex County > The first county park system : a complete history of the inception and development of the Essex County parks of New Jersey > Part 10
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
125
PARK SITES CHOSEN
to the centres of population of the county, was thus lost to the public; and the value and loss to the park system is, I believe, difficult to estimate.
SOUTH MOUNTAIN RESERVATION.
Large reservations of natural scenery have become one of the attractive features of a modern park system. Nor is the movement confined to localities especially acquired or reserved for park uses. The general government, and many of the States, have of late years included in their forestry reservations large areas of timbered lands, with the object at the same time of conserving also the feature for recrea- tion and attractive natural environments. The movements toward the preservation of the big trees (Sequoia Washing- tonian) of California; for a natural park and forest re- serve along the Appalachian Mountains; and the White Mountain forest reservations in New Hampshire, are some of the better known efforts in this direction. In the Massa- chusetts Metropolitan Park's system the great Blue Hills reservation, with its more than 4,000 acres of beautifully wooded slopes and valleys; and the Middlesex Fells on the other side of Boston, with its 1,800 acres of timber lands, lakes, open fields, etc., are recognized as special attractions there, as have become Van Cortland and Pelham Bay Parks in New York, Epping Forest, outside of London, and the many other outlying natural reservations lying wholly · without the large cities.
The Essex Park Commission of 1895, like the preceding commission, was in favor of a liberal acquirement of these lands in such a reservation for the park system here. There was but one location which in size, relative convenience, varied topography and attractive natural and wooded feat- ures, seemed to meet the requirements. That was the exten- sive tract between the apex of the First and Second Moun- tains, and principally south of the Northfield road. Former Commissioner G. W. Bramhall had always advocated this proposed reservation. In September, 1895, he was requested to assist the commission. Up to that time it had not been
126
FIRST COUNTY PARK SYSTEM
the intention of the commission to extend the lines of the reservation south of South Orange avenue. This was the view of the first commission, although the subject of the southern limit of the proposed park had been left in abey- ance. At the board meeting of September 6, 1895, Mr. Bramhall was present. The result of the conference was that he was authorized to make purchases on behalf of the commission of such lands between the mountains or includ- ing the crest of the First Mountain south of South Orange avenue, as he could acquire and would recommend within an expenditure of $20,000. This action was the beginning of an acquirement of one of the finest reservations of nat- ural scenery in the country, and in comparison with the population of Essex County is proportionately one of the largest to be found in any of the park systems. In Feb- ruary, 1896, the lines of the reservation were still farther extended in Millburn, and the closing of several of the land options secured through Mr. Bramhall was authorized. Later, in August, the lines were extended and purchases were authorized for practically the whole length of the val- ley and of the First Mountain to the south, and from the crest of the First Mountain to the sky line of the Second Mountain. The lines of this reservation as agreed upon in the official map then, as now, contain about 2,500 acres, and the cost has been approximately, within the estimates of December, 1896-about $250,000.
When in August of that year, the announcement was made that there was to be "a 2,000-acre mountain park," the project was referred to in some of the papers as "an ideal site for a public park," and Frederick L. Olmsted's remark that "he thought it one of the best locations for a park that he had ever seen," was freely quoted. The reservation is about three and three-quarter miles in length north and south and has an average width of about one to one and one-quarter miles. Its natural beauties are greatly ac- centuated by the water effects of the two reservoirs of the city of Orange water supply. These reservoirs cover a maximum area of about seventy acres, and, being located
127
PARK SITES CHOSEN
in the valley, along the West Branch of the Rahway river, make an added attraction from many viewpoints within the reservation.
WEEQUAHIC, OR WAVERLY PARK.
The first that was heard of a Weequahic Park was the suggestion from Commissioner Murphy, soon after the or- ganization of the Park Board in 1895, which was in effect that that was "one of the best locations for a park in the county." The first commission had, as indicated in a pre- ceding chapter, treated the possibility of a park there, and without any pre-formed prejudice, with scant courtesy. If for no other reason, the mosquito pre-emption and unre- stricted occupancy of the tract was thought a sufficiently serious matter to negative any favorable consideration of locating one of the county parks there. Moreover, the un- certainty as to the large cost and as to the future of the springs that fed the lake and water supply; the direct proximity to Elizabeth and Union County-neither of which would, under a county park plan for Essex, contri- bute to the large cost of acquiring or expenses of maintain- ing a park there-were all factors in the decision that, for many reasons, other park sites more within the county were deemed preferable. That Mr. Murphy entertained a decid- edly different view, was apparent almost from the first meet- ing of the second commission.
On July 18, 1895-only the three Newark commissioners present-he offered a resolution that "the landscape archi- tects and engineers be requested to prepare a map, indicat- ing their best judgment as to the lines for a park at Waverly." Later, as the subject was discussed, the proposi- tion was not enthusiastically received. Messrs. Barrett and Bogart had not thought well of the Weequahic district in their earlier investigations and reports as experts to the first commission. The situation, however, had now changed, there being in the board an aggressive element in favor of the scheme to locate a park there. With the exception of Commissioner Murphy's ardent advocacy of the project
128
FIRST COUNTY PARK SYSTEM
there appeared to be little interest in the subject, either within or without the commission. During the autumn (1895) it continued to be a frequent topic for discussion at the board meetings. The land agents were requested to as- certain at what prices land that might be needed could be ' secured. Their reports indicated that the cost would be large, and that, if a park was established there, it "would come high." Finally, on October 28, the report from the architects and engineers was received. It was very moder- ate in tone and conservative in character. Of Weequahic Lake they wrote :
"We feel that it is our duty to say that this lake and its surroundings can, in our opinion, be made an attractive and valuable adjunct to the park system, at a moderate cost, and that it will, when so improved, provide what is desirable in this section of the county."
This was, I believe, the first expert opinion making any favorable reference to that park site which had been re- ceived. It seemed to modify the convictions of some of the board who had entertained adverse views on the question. I am free to admit that the report brought up in my mind the question as to whether I had not been mistaken in the conclusions I had before formed from the examinations of the tract and of the surroundings. The project still made slow progress in the commission, notwithstanding this re- port and the urgent advocacy of Mr. Murphy.
In November, 1895, it was decided to acquire some of the property-the Cooper tract, the Ougheltree farm and land belonging to Daniel Price-in the Waverly district, but not including Wecquahic lake, upon which the land agents had obtained options. The estimated total cost of the land within the lines of the architect's map that had been tenta- tively agreed upon was, at this time, $180,000.
FAIR ASSOCIATION'S STOCK.
One of the stumbling blocks in the way of making prog- ress in either direction toward any definite result was the
129
PARK SITES CHOSEN
property of the New Jersey Agricultural Society, better known as the Waverly Fair Association. This property con- sisted of a number of acres, a racetrack and the usual para- phernalia of country fair grounds, and was the focal point of the district. The association owning the property had had financially a varied and varying career since its incor- poration in 1858. In good seasons the receipts might result in a dividend on the $90,000 of capital stock of perhaps five per cent. With bad weather and poor attendance, an assess- ment on the stockholders for the deficiency growing out of the light receipts was not an uncommon occurrence. As a result of these conditions, the price of the stock had for years, up to 1895, oscillated between 30 and 60, or, in ex- treme cases, 80. Transactions were few and far between, and if a holder must sell he was usually at the mercy of the buyer, somewhat after the order of the unsuspecting merchant of old who once met that world-renowned indi- vidual who demanded "the pound of flesh."
There were 3,600 shares of the stock, of a par value of $25 per share. It was "well distributed." Nine stock- holders, however, with their combined holdings, controlled the association. They held the majority of the stock. These stockholders of record at that time were: P. Ballantine & Sons, 60 shares ; Franklin Murphy, 186 shares ; E. A. Dodd, 70 shares; E. B. Gaddis, 122 shares; H. H. Isham, 721 shares; L. H. Jones, 230 shares; G. B. Jenkinson, 109 shares; Jacob Skinkle, 125 shares, and E. A. Wilkinson, 139 shares.
This was the situation when it was reported in the papers that in all probability there would be a park at Weequahic. As the indications and reports grew more favorable, the price of the Waverly Fair Association stock increased pro- portionately in value. What would have been considered a good sale, at 60 or 65, at the time the reports were first emitted, was no longer a fair price. The stock was soon re- ported "worth par and none of the large stockholders would sell for a penny less." The history of this enterprise was not known in the Park Board rooms-certainly not to all
130
FIRST COUNTY PARK SYSTEM
of the members-when a proposition to make some of the land purchases in that locality was agreed to.
Some of the commissioners firmly declined the proposi- tion of paying par for the stock. It was agreed that an effort should be made to acquire it at a price nearer the current value. Negotiations were in consequence suspended. Those anxious to sell the stock, after three years of "great expectations," got tired of waiting, and the Fair Associa- tion directors finally gave an option, No. 415, for the Park Board to consider. The association delegated E. B. Gaddis and H. H. Isham to close the sale, and on March 13, 1899, they had a conference with the commission on that subject.
The question then before the board was: Would it be better to pay something like the asking price for the fair association stock, or go through an expensive and tedious litigation in an effort to acquire it. The former plan, on the recommendation of those in the board who were under- stood to be well informed on the subject, was agreed upon, and, in March, 1899, $75,000 of the available park funds were thus disposed of.
The proposition to locate a park at Waverly had, in the meantime dragged along, and apparently evoked but little public interest in any direction. A small delegation from Clinton Township appeared before the commission at the meeting November 19, 1896, and spoke in moderation in favor of "park improvement of the district about Wee- qualiic." This was the only delegation or petition favoring the park there that I can now recall or find record of. The adverse comments were not so limited. Reference has al- ready been made to the statement of the West End Improve- ment Association's delegation at the hearing March 12, in opposition to the "Waverly park site." The press was also non-responsive; or, if any comments were made when the announcement was given out that a Weequahic Park was no longer a matter of doubt, they were either distinctly con- servative or positively chilling. One of the leading papers asked editorially if "mosquito bars were included in the purchase." One of the old established New York papers
131
PARK SITES CHOSE
referred to "the State fair grounds and Lake Weequahic, with its eighty-five acres of watery expanse," and said: "As this park will be nearer Elizabeth than Newark, Union County citizens are rejoicing at the philanthropy of the Essex commissioners."
My own convictions were quite fully stated in a letter to Commissioner Murphy, dated Saturday evening, May 23, 1896, which was as follows :
"Dear Mr. Murphy: Mr. Peck and I have spent the afternoon looking over "West Newark," Weequahic and the southern parkway question. The situation troubles me. A double track on Elizabeth avenue at once disposes of any prospect of making a park in that vicinity a part of a cred- itable connective park system. It is the only avenue avail- able or worth considering for parkway purposes. The width is only fifty or sixty feet between the curb lines. Another track there will make it merely a tramway thoroughfare, like Frelinghuysen avenue-both dangerous and unsightly -and preclude any thought of ever making it a parkway approach.
"If the Board of Works will grant the franchise regard- less of facts or conditions, we have then to meet the situa- tion of a site for an important park of the county system, isolated from suitable driveway approach from the great center of population of the county, bounded on both longi- tudinal sides by railroads ; a swamp tract with most unat- tractive features at one end, and a cemetery and Union County line at the other-with a large area of swamp in the center, the expense of dredging which opens up a perfect kaleidoscope of possibilities as to cost which no man can now determine.
COMPLICATIONS IN THE SITUATION.
"I cannot be frank with you as my colleague and asso- ciate in this enterprise without expressing to you these im- pressions as I looked over these conditions to-day. I was forcibly reminded whether the adverse report of four of the
.
132
FIRST COUNTY PARK SYSTEM
architects of the first commission, and the unfavorable criti- cism we have thus far received since the location has been under consideration, may not be correct and well founded. If the selection be not judicious, the public will soon find it out as they study these very conditions, and the whole enterprise thus imperiled.
"The situation is complicated, too, by the action of the traction people, the Fair Association, and the speculators in the adjoining property.
"As I read the signs of the times, the people are becoming very suspicious of corporate control of boards transacting public business, and this of itself makes the situation a deli- cate one, both as to thè avenue and the association property.
"The natural park lands, such as the Nye property to the north and west, also north of Clinton avenue toward the West Newark sites recommended, appear more desirable as to location and parkable features, and come nearer meeting the requirements of the petition we have received; also of the park system. In those locations, too, the ratables would be largely increased in every direction by park acquirement.
"These conditions have never impressed me so forcibly as they did to-day. Mr. Peck will tell you of his own impres- sions, and I believe they were on similar lines.
"I wish to act most heartily with whatever is determined upon as best by the majority of our board, but I feel that this is a subject of great importance and should have very careful consideration under the conditions as we now find them.
"I enclose clipping giving some data showing reasons why our traction friends do not feel that they 'can afford' to give up these valuable and available thoroughfares.
"Sincerely yours, "FRED. W. KELSEY."
A SERIOUS QUESTION.
When the practical work of improving the Weequahic reservation was taken up by the Park Board, in 1899-1900, a serious question arose as to the treatment of the lake. In
133
PARK SITES CHOSEN
1896 the engineers of the department had advised that the raising of the lake for the purpose of improving the appear- ance of the surface and retarding the growth of rushes, etc., from the bottom, was of doubtful utility. On May 14, 1900, Engineer M. R. Sherrerd, in a special report to the commission, recommended the raising of the lake level five feet by obstruction to be placed in the outlet. The landscape architects, in their report at the same time, emphatically disapproved of this plan of treatment, stating at length the legal, engineering and esthetic objections. It would be experimental, they contended. Percolation of the water through the raised banks might make the result uncertain. It would "inevitably destroy the handsomest and most val- uable part of the beautiful fringe of fine forest trees now existing most of the way around the lake." The resulting loss of water flowing from the lake, under the binding con- tract between the Park Commission and the Lehigh Valley Company of June 4, 1897, and with the Pennsylvania Com- pany, that the commission would "not directly or indirectly do, or cause to be done, anything which would in any man- ner interfere with the natural flow of the waters of said Bound Creek," should the raising the lake seriously dimin- ish or stop the overflow, would make the Park Commission "liable to prosecution."
As the loss of water from raising the lake five feet was by the engineer estimated at 550,000 gallons per day of a nor- mal minimum flow of only 1,500,000 gallons daily, the point thus raised may at any time become a most serious one, and result in heavy claims for damages against the county.
COST OF PARK.
The estimated cost of dredging and properly treating the banks of the lake at its natural level was $250,000 : and for raising the lake five feet, cleaning out the bogs, etc., with the destruction of the best part of the wooded banks and the prospective litigation with the railroad companies in- volved in this plan of treatment, was $50.000.
134
FIRST COUNTY PARK SYSTEM
It was, therefore, largely a matter of Hobson's choice with the commission as to which horn of the dilemma should be taken. The matter was held in abeyance and left unde- cided for years. Commissioner Bramhall, who had pre- viously taken an active interest in the question, afterward wrote a formal letter to the board protesting against the lake raising level plan. That plan was, however, adopted, and, at the Park Board meeting August 9, 1904, bids were received for removing the bogs and other growth from the lake. These bids were for amounts from $32,000 up to $97,500. The contract was awarded to P. Sanford Ross at his bid of $32,000, and the work began in October, 1904. The lake water is now at the raised level and the bog clean- ing contract is practically finished. This lake and the sur- rounding bog marsh comprise about eighty acres. When dredged and portions of the borders filled in, the lake area proper will be between fifty and sixty acres.
The old race track of the fair association is used under a nominal lease by the Road Horse Association. The "play stead" is used, as was intended (mosquitoes permitting), for athletic sports.
The cash expenditures for land for the Weequahic reser- vation, including the $75,000 to the fair association, grew from the estimated cost in 1895 of $180,900, to the cash expenditure up to December 31, 1901, of $243,563. The improvements up to that time had cost $67,258. Large ex- penditures have since been made, and must continue to be made, before this park of 265 acres can well or effectively answer, to any marked advantage, the purpose for which it was acquired.
L
CHAPTER VIII.
SELECTION OF ORANGE PARK.
THE Orange or Triangle Park, the last of the county parks not already referred to, has a unique history, quite unlike the other seven locations described. The selection of the Orange Park involved a continuous contending of differences between the commissioners themselves on the one side, and the almost unanimous sentiment of the public on the other side. That those favoring the project finally won, after two years of persistent effort, was the outcome of an incident which may be of interest here.
As a prelude, however, it may be well to give a very brief history of the events leading up to this conclusion. Nearly forty years ago, after the triangle bounded by Central ave- nue, Harrison street, East Orange, and Center street, Orange had been formed by the opening of these streets, it was a favorite topic for discussion among those in the Oranges who had a spirit of civic pride and forethought for the future, to refer to this tract as a place for a public park, which would be much needed in the time to come, and which, from its topography, would be one of the most at- tractive of parks, at a comparatively small cost. Although the central portion of the tract was low, swampy, marsh land, this was surrounded on each of the larger sides of the triangle with gentle slopes to higher ground the entire dis- tance. Among the pioneers of civic betterment at that time who continued to refer to the desirable improvement were Llewellyn Haskel, Mr. and Mrs. Ross Browning, of Llewellyn Park, and Edward Gardner, then proprietor of the Orange Journal. Some of the articles published in The Journal many years ago on this subject, show how clearly
135
136
FIRST COUNTY PARK SYSTEM
and correctly these early advocates of the Triangle Park saw the possibilities which have, by latter events, become actualities.
While this discussion was going on, nothing toward prac- tical results then came of it. These advanced thinkers were, like so many of their class, a little ahead of their time in the agitation, and it was, therefore, left for the first Park Commission of 1894 to take up the question where their pre- decessors in advocating the project had left it. With the first commission there was no difference in conviction, either in the minds of the commissioners or of the land- scape experts as to the desirability of establishing a park there; indeed, the reasons, as they then appeared, in favor, were so many and so ample as to have left no question of doubt, that I had ever heard expressed, upon that question.
OPPOSITION TO PARK LOCATION.
When the second commission of 1895 was appointed, an entirely different situation was presented. For some reason which I have never been able to fully account for, the two new members of the board, Messrs. F. M. Shepard and Franklin Murphy, were radically and persistently opposed to the project. When, during the summer of 1895, the sub- ject was referred to as one that in all probability would require the attention of the commission at a later time, the triangle was slightingly referred to in the commission as "a back door park." When later the petitions began to come in, urging favorable action, the opposition gradually in- creased, instead of the reverse.
In September a long petition was earnestly presented by a citizens' committee from East Orange and Orange. This document recited the reasons for the park-the natural ad- vantages, the proximity to dense populations, the attitude of public opinion in favor of it, the reasonable cost, etc. The communication bore the signatures of Frank H. Scott, chairman ; William Pierson, L. D. Gallison, W. S. Macy, I. Pavard Dodd, E. V. Z. Lane and R. W. Hawkesworth. It
137
SELECTION OF ORANGE PARK
was followed in December by one from the city officials of Orange, as follows :
"Orange, N. J., Dec. 20, 1895.
"Honorable Park Commissioners of Essex County, Newark, N. J .:
"The undersigned members of the city government of Orange, N. J., would respectfully recommend to your honor- able body the favorable consideration of the proposed plan for a park to be located in the triangle between Central avenue, Harrison street and Center street. The natural ad- vantages of the situation, with its unfailing springs of clear water, must be evident to you, and its location as a link be- tween two of our county roads, namely, Central avenue and South Orange avenue, will readily appear as a feasible part of your system of parkways belonging to the county. Hop- ing you will find it possible to carry out this recommenda- tion, we remain,
"John Gill, Mayor of Orange; Louis D. Gallison, Pres- ident of Common Council; Hugh J. Brady, Henry G. Miller, Irving M. Genung, Edward S. Perry, W. H. Hen- derson, Daniel McCarthy, Joseph D. Holmes, Charles A. Meigs ; Members of Common Council, Orange, N. J."
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.