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 8
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
"The act under which the bonds are issued requires the annual levy of a county tax sufficient to meet interest and principal when due. A county tax for any purpose is entitled to priority in payment over local taxes for munici- pal purposes.
"Sealed proposals will be received by the Finance Com- mittee of the Board of Chosen Freeholders, at a meeting, to be held by said committee, at the freeholders' room, in the courthouse, at Newark, N. J., on Tuesday, July 30, 1895, at 3 o'clock P. M., which meeting will remain open until 3:30 P. M. Proposals should be :
"1. For the whole of said bonds, to be issued at once.
"2. For $1,000,000, to be now issued.
"3. For the whole amount, to be issued in instalments . of not less than $500,000 during a period not exceeding three years.
"4. For any part of said bonds.
"The purchaser to pay the interest accrued on said bonds to the time of delivery.
"Under the statute, no bids can be received at any other time or place.
"The Finance Committee reserves the right to reject any and all proposals, if in its judgment the interest of the county requires such action."
100
FIRST COUNTY PARK SYSTEM
Of the responsible bids received, the United States Mort- gage and Trust Company offered 101.25 for a million bonds at four per cent. interest ; J. & W. Seligman, 100.34 for a million of the 3.65 bonds-$500,000 payable on delivery of the bonds and $500,000 six months later; New York Life Insurance Company, "par flat for a million," $300,000 on delivery and $100,000 per month thereafter; Vermilye & Co., 100.77 for a million, averaging thirty years' maturity ; and the Howard Savings Institution, par for $50,000 of the bonds as advertised.
The award was made to Vermilye & Co. and the $1,008,400 proceeds were received by the freeholders in a certified check for that amount on August 26, 1895; $945,000 was paid over to the Park Commission five days later, $55,000 having been previously received. And thus was closed the first transaction whereby a 3.65 rate of interest bond issued by a county at par had, so far as could be ascertained up to that time, been sold.
In commenting upon this sale, The Call said editorially : "The sale of a million of county bonds bearing interest at $3.65 per $100 at a slight premium showed that the Park Commission and freeholders of the Finance Committee who worked together in this matter had gauged the bond market pretty accurately in fixing the interest."
While this observation was no doubt correct, it was the suggestion made by Mr. Morgan, in the interview as stated, which resulted in a direct saving to the people of Essex County in their taxes for the thirty years' average life of the bonds, of $3,500 per year in the interest charge alone ; and the particulars are here narrated, as having an important bearing, as will be mentioned in a succeeding chapter, at that juncture of park affairs.
ACQUIRING PARK LANDS.
With an abundance of cash in bank-these funds having been promptly deposited in various county banks and trust companies of accredited standing, subject to call and with interest at two per cent .- the commission proceeded as
101
THE FIRST $1,000,000
rapidly as possible with the acquirement of park lands and other work of the board. The land agents were requested to expedite purchases. The counsel was authorized to begin condemnation proceedings, directly owners were found who would not sell at a fair price, or in cases where such action was found necessary to correct or complete title. The com- mission held frequent meetings, often twice a week, to pass upon those questions and to determine the boundary lines of each of the parks as soon as a location for a park was decided upon. In almost every instance these locations, after they were determined, brought up anew the question as to extensions.
As has already been stated, the first outlines of the Branch Brook Park, agreed upon July 30, 1895, extended only so far as Park avenue on the north and to Orange street on the south. Almost immediately afterward exten- sions in both directions were under consideration. . No sooner had the official map for the East Side, or "Down Neck," Park been prepared, than petitions and delegations from that section asked that the park area there be enlarged. This result followed quite generally, and as the majority of the board had determined upon the plan of dealing with each of the park sites separately, rather than as a part of the system as a whole, the importance of each location was unduly magnified accordingly. In order to give the reader a correct view of the progress of this work, perhaps an ac- count of the selection of each of the parks in something like the order of their location may here be of interest.
While a number of the park sites as afterward chosen were under consideration simultaneously, a final decision was more readily evolved with some than with others, and these decisions, in a few cases, were deferred for many months.
The same day (July 30, 1895) that the commission accepted formal control of the reservoir property, the land- scape architects and engineers were requested to prepare a map indicating their best judgment as to the lines for a park with the sixty acres transferred by the city of Newark
102
FIRST COUNTY PARK SYSTEM
as a nucleus. At that time the estimated cost of the land and buildings, between Fifth avenue and Orange street, above mentioned, was $361,685. It soon became apparent that a creditable "Central Park" for Newark and for the county could not be established within those lines. By January, 1896, the Sussex avenue extension and the block east of Clifton avenue, the Garside street addition had been included. The questions as to these additions were not long pending.
BRANCH BROOK PARK EXTENDED.
The extension from Park avenue to Bloomfield avenue was a more serious matter. A large acreage of city lot property was involved and the estimated cost was nearly $300,000. Such an expenditure, together with the cost of improvement, would make a heavy drain on the available funds, before the needs of the other portions of the county could be considered. The proposition was finally carried, however, and on January 9 that liberal extension through to Bloomfield avenue was also included in the Branch Brook Park.
But the lines were not to stop there. Pressure had been brought upon the commission to carry the northern limits of the park still farther. North of Bloomfield avenue and east of the Morris Canal on the line of the park, the land was mostly low, swamp property, impossible of improve- ment without draining, and until thus improved, practi- cally worthless. In the springtime, or during a rainy sea- son, many acres there were practically as impassable to a person on foot as the jungles of Africa. In the spring of 1896 the commission made two or three tours of inspection there, but no one would take the risk of sinking in the swale by attempting to explore the inner recesses of the waterlogged tangle of grassy bumps and hummocks, then known as the old Blue Jay Swamp.
On December 4, 1896, this northern extension matter was the special order of business. Commissioner Murphy had offered a resolution the July previous that the northern
103
THE FIRST $1,000,000
boundary of the park be at the old Bloomfield road. At the meeting of December 2, this resolution was offered: that "all speeches be limited to five minutes, and only two speeches be permitted from the same person." An amend- ment to the main resolution that "the territory between Bloomfield avenue and Fredonia avenue be treated as a ! parkway," was lost-2 ayes, 3 nays; likewise by the same vote an amendment providing that the cost of land in the property extension should "not exceed $150,000." This 130-acre tract, estimated to cost $160,000, was thereupon added to what seemed then, and has since proven, an al- ready heavily ballasted financial load; although the re- deemed land and the present attractive features of the northern section of the Branch Brook Park of to-day afford some compensation alike to the public and those responsible for the accession.
The financial part of this undertaking kept full pace with, or quite outran, the acreage accumulations. The es- timated cost of $361,685 of June, 1895, had, at the close of 1896, mounted to an actual cash expenditure for land alone of $850,687 ; and a year later to $1,129,086, or nearly one- half of the entire county park appropriation for this one park of 278 acres. There were very many buildings ac- quired with the land purchased, especially in the portions of the park south of Fifth avenue; but these, mostly inex- pensive residences, realized but little. At an auction sale on April twenty-fifth, these houses were disposed of at from a few dollars to a few hundred dollars each, and the costly experience of making public parks from improved city lot property was again exemplified. Only about $16,000 was realized from the buildings in this park, that had cost more than $500,000.
HURRYING THE IMPROVEMENTS.
Concurrently with the consideration of park sites came the question of beginning park development. All the com- missioners were anxious that the practical work of improve- ment should proceed. The public reflected this sentiment
104
FIRST COUNTY PARK SYSTEM
through the press in urging that "something be done." It was now April, 1896. The commission had been in office a year ; a million of dollars had been available for months, and why should not the work go forward? On April 11 the landscape architects and engineers were "requested to for- mulate a plan for the improvement of Branch Brook Park and for employing 200 men." By May 25 sufficient pro- gress had been made to invite proposals, to close June 3, for the work, and to pass a resolution "that this work be done through contractors, who will agree to employ upon it citizens of Essex County on a basis of cost, and at such compensation as can be agreed upon by such contractors and the commission."
The plan of giving preference to residents or business houses within the county, other conditions being equally favorable, had already become an established rule of the board. The work to be done was in what is now known as the southern division of the park, south of Fifth avenue. A number of proposals-more than twenty-were received. They were as varied in specifications and offerings as were the qualifications and facilities for doing the work of the various bidders. The bids ranged from the offerings of a few horses and carts to those proposing to do all the work complete. After a moderately successful effort to properly classify these complex propositions, the rejection of all bids was deemed the only solution that could be properly made.
The meeting when the bids were opened was, as usual, in executive session. There was, in this unofficial and unbusi- ness-like procedure, no discourtesy to any of the bidders; none was thought of or intended. Nor, so far as I can now recall, would any of the commissioners at that time have been likely to have objected to the presence of the public. The bids were called for in the regular course of business, and no occasion for secrecy could or did exist.
The fact was that, owing to the topography and peculiar situation of that property, it was a most difficult matter to draw any specifications for contract work, as a whole, that would give the commission, through the architects and
105
THE FIRST $1,000,000
engineers, the necessary reservation for directing the work -a matter so vitally important in park improvements of that character.
UNDER ENGINEER'S SUPERVISION.
In the second communication inviting bids, this right of direction by the engineer in charge was noted in the speci- fications and "any work directed by the engineer should be included." It was also provided that all "tools, machinery, etc., must be satisfactory to the engineer," and that bids should state "upon what percentage of payments actually made to the employés and for materials" the contractor would undertake the work.
Six bids from all those to whom this communication was sent were received. These were also opened at an executive session of the board. The contract was, on the same day, June 9, 1896, awarded to the Messrs. Shanley, whose bid, all things considered, appeared to be the most favorable. All the commissioners, I believe, concurred in this view, which was also in accord with the recommendations of the chief engineer. As soon, however, as the action became known, there was a "hue and cry" directly.
Whether right or wrong, the commission was taken se- verely to task, both by some of those whose bids had been rejected and by the press. One of the bidders in a published letter wanted to know: "Are not the books and records of the Park Commission public documents and open to inspec- tion at any reasonable hour ? Are not any moneys expended by the Park Commission under such contract expended con- trary to law, in direct violation of chapter 181, laws of 1894 ?"
COULD NOT SEE BIDS.
The writer went on to say that he had "called at the office of the Park Commission and asked to see the twenty-three bids received June 3," and "was informed by the secretary,
106
FIRST COUNTY PARK SYSTEM
Mr. Church, that they were not for the public and could not be seen."
One of the leading Newark papers, in commenting editor- ially upon the incident, said: "The Park Commission should be compelled to expose to public view the contracts made. To keep confidence with bidders is one thing, but to let the public know the facts regarding actual business com- pleted is a duty which admits of no argument. Every de- tail of such an arrangement should be available. The com- mission are occupying themselves with expenditure for the public of money from the public, and owe official existence to the public ; confidence reposed in the public would seem to be nothing more than a report of a servant to a master."
Another editorial criticism pointed out that "the bids relate to public business, and any citizen who asks for the privilege of making examinations of them at a reasonable time and in a proper manner should be accommodated. The park commissioners ought to understand that they are pub- lic officials and that the fact that they are men of standing in the community and have had reposed in them a great trust, does not mean that they should be permitted to trans- act public business as if it were a matter entirely personal and private to themselves."
And again : "The people of Essex County do not desire to have two standards set up for the conduct of public boards and officers. They do not want to have some so ex- clusive or so lofty in their own esteem that open records and open meetings are intolerable to them. As men active in public life, the members of the commission will make a grave error if they try to assume any such position as that."
These cogent and convincing reasons were so thoroughly in accord with my own convictions that I soon afterward gave notice that later in the year, when the park locations were more definitely determined and the needed purchases to establish value in each park were made, I should offer a resolution providing for all regular meetings of the board to be held in open session. Such a resolution was accord- ingly offered, and before the following April-at which
107
THE FIRST $1,000,000
time my term of office as commissioner expired-it was two or three times called up for action, but each time "went over" by request.
SECRET SESSIONS DISFAVORED.
While the discussion on the bids during June and July, 1896, was going on, at least some of the commissioners ap- peared to be impressed by the circumstances occasioning the adverse comments on secret sessions. This is shown by a statement made by myself after the board meeting July 22, 1896, in response to an inquiry from the News as to the attitude of the commission regarding these executive ses- sions, and published the day following. This statement was in part as follows :
"We have about concluded all that part of our work wherein we considered that the interests of the county might suffer by premature publication, and I know of no reason why our meetings should not be open to the public hereafter. We are simply the agents of the taxpayers, who have placed at our disposal the expenditure of $2,500,000. While our selection may have been due to confidence reposed in our judgment, it is natural that the public should express anxiety as to the manner in which we are executing the trust. By affording every facility in this direction, we will remove all causes for criticism and make our relations with the public more pleasant.
"It is admitted that much of our work was of a character that would suffer by premature publicity.
"We considered that the interests of the county would be best served by conducting our negotiations for property quietly and without publicity, which might tend to cause ex- orbitant prices to be demanded in certain sections. Now our labor in that direction is about complete. We have nearly all the land necessary for the Branch Brook and the East Side parks. The same may be said in reference to the Eagle Rock, South Orange Mountain, and Waverly parks, and options have already been tendered on land for a West Side Park. The balance of our work, in my opinion, can be
108
FIRST COUNTY PARK SYSTEM
more advantageously conducted in the same line as that fol- lowed by other city and county boards, and for that reason our meetings hereafter should be open."
The article continued : "The speaker's sentiment was echoed by other commissioners, and Mr. Munn says he is satisfied that in the near future all the business of the board will be transacted publicly."
In the first report of the "board of commissioners" for 1896, issued early in the year 1897, the following paragraph (pages 3 and 4) appears : "The sessions of the commission have always from the beginning been held twice each week and have hitherto been executive in character. The com- missioners feel that, as custodians of a public fund, it was necessary for them to adopt such a course as long as the pur- chase of land formed the chief topic of discussion."
When I afterward presented the resolution to carry this sentiment for open meetings of the board into practical effect, it was objected to by two of the commissioners, Messrs. Murphy and Shepard, as was the case whenever the subject of passing on the resolution was brought up. This resolution was left with other commission papers in the drawer of the board-room table at the place I occupied when my term expired, the April following. Why there was ob- jection or why this resolution, or one of similar purport, has never been favorably acted upon, I have never known. Perhaps some future historian of the parks may ascertain, and elucidate this question.
LABORERS' WAGES FIXED.
Another incident that attracted much attention at the time, and may here be of interest, was the action of the com- mission in June, 1896, in making it a condition in the con- tracts for work on the park that "laborers be paid $1.25 and foremen $2.50 per day respectively, and for cart, horse and driver $2.50 and for double team and driver $4.25 cach per day," and in notices to contractors that "the rates to be paid for services be fixed and approved by the commission."
There was, at that time-the summer of 1896-a very
109
THE FIRST $1,000,000
large contingent of laborers in Newark, as elsewhere, out of employment. The Presidential election was pending, and the great struggle between the Mckinley and Hobart sound money forces and the persistent advocates of a silver cur- rency, under the leadership of W. J. Bryan, was going on and had already resulted in an extended business depres- sion. The labor situation was still farther depressed by the continuous arrival of hordes of emigrants, especially Ital- ians, many of whom found their way immediately to Essex County. The commissioners understood that this class of labor was then being employed by contractors on railroads and other large works at prices as low as ninety cents to $1 per day. They wished to have the work done as cheaply as it could be done, and done well, and at the same time to insure the laborers receiving whatever rate was paid. This would prevent the large margin, which, without some such restriction, might be exacted; as in cases then occurring where the contractor would be paid the contract price (of perhaps $1.25 per day), but actually pay the laborer much less.
In establishing the prices noted, the commission intended that they should be the fair current rates for the service named. This view was not shared by some of the other public boards, and the action was severely criticized by some of the labor representatives.
The Board of Freeholders at the meeting June 11, 1896, voted down a drastic resolution offered by one of the mem- bers protesting in vigorous language against such a restric- tion "in fixing the pay of the laborers on county park work at $1.25 per day, as we do not believe good men should be compelled to work for so small a compensation." There was a lively discussion over the resolution. Freeholder Medcraft denied that he had offered the resolution "for elec- tion purposes" on his own behalf. Mr. Condit suggested that "if the Park Commission should pay any more than the market prices for labor, they would be doing wrong, and taking money wrongfully out of the pockets of the taxpay- ers ; and the rate per diem of wages was evidently the mar-
110
FIRST COUNTY PARK SYSTEM
ket price for labor, or they would not be able to get men to work for the figure named." When it was farther brought out that the passage of such a resolution would be an open criticism of one county board upon the official action of another public body of the same county constituency, oil was poured on the troubled waters and the resolutions were defeated.
OIL ON TROUBLED WATERS.
When there came to be a better understanding on the part of the objecting officials, the labor leaders, and labor unions, the agitation ceased, and the work, under the contract, in- cluding the specifications that had occasioned the discus- sion, went smoothly on to completion.
In the initial work at Branch Brook Park, there was a question in which another public board was directly con- cerned, that did not work out so readily. This was the authoritative closing of the streets ; and later, the matter of transferring to the commission other land under control of the Newark Board of Street and Water Commissioners, besides the reservoir property within the park limits, which soon became a part of the same negotiations. Still later, in 1897, the construction of the Millbrook sewer, directly through the southern portion of Branch Brook Park, was for many months a bone of friendly contention between the Newark board and the Park Commission.
Incidentally, too, the question arose as to the payment of assessments due the city on land acquired by the commis- sion. On June 23, 1896, Mayor Seymour wrote the Park Board as follows :
"During the last week a number of bills for assessments for city improvements, levied against property, have been returned to the city comptroller with the statement that the property benefited has been purchased by the Park Board. An investigation shows that, while the improvements were made prior to the date of purchase by your honorable body, the assessments were not confirmed until after title had been taken by the commission.
111
THE FIRST $1,000,000
COURTS AGAINST ASSESSMENTS.
"I am advised that under the decision of the courts these assessments cannot be collected. So far the losses discov- ered aggregate $1,000.
"This matter you will understand is a serious one to the city. Believing, however, that an adjustment can be made satisfactory to you and the county of Essex, I respectfully request that you attend a conference in my office Friday morning at 10 o'clock. An invitation has also been sent the counsel of your board.
"Pending the conference, the ordinance of the Board of Street and Water Commissioners vacating certain streets for park purposes will be held under consideration.
"Very truly yours, "JAMES M. SEYMOUR, Mayor."
There was apparently no objection made to closing the streets, but, as this letter indicates, both boards were, so to speak, fencing for position. There were questions both of ethics and equity involved. The city officials were naturally desirous of recovering if possible on the assessments as they appeared on the official books, and to obtain as large a con- tribution as could be secured toward the costly sewer. The courts had ruled out the assessment claims as against the commission, but they were not omitted as a factor in the negotiations. After various conferences, $40,000 was the proportion or share the city officials asked the commission to contribute toward the Millbrook sewer expense.
The commissioners contended that the assessment matter was in no way under consideration; that the expenditures for park improvements were of great benefit to the city ; and that to divert public funds from the purpose thus designated to pay for municipal necessities such as drainage, would be an unwarranted procedure, and, under the circumstances then existing, on the principle of "robbing Peter to pay Paul."
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.