History of Westchester county : New York, including Morrisania, Kings Bridge, and West Farms, which have been annexed to New York City, Vol. I, Part 198

Author: Scharf, J. Thomas (John Thomas), 1843-1898, ed
Publication date: 1886
Publisher: Philadelphia : L.E. Preston & Co.
Number of Pages: 1354

USA > New York > Westchester County > History of Westchester county : New York, including Morrisania, Kings Bridge, and West Farms, which have been annexed to New York City, Vol. I > Part 198

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).

that time at the Archer house, which lay just under the guns of the fort. The old house is standing to- day and traces of Fort Number Eight are to be found on Mr. Schwab's lawn. The gallant Armand in the same year made a raid and capturcd Captain Cruger of Bearmore's corps.1 During 1780 the township was the scene of constant military manœuvres. In February of that year a body of British cavalry crossed the East River on the ice from Long Island to West- chester. 2 Arnold also began to fit ont a boat expedi- tion in Spuyten Duyvil Creek, which, however, was never carried ont. De Lancey was making continual raids from Fordham and Morrisania on the adjoining conntry, and the Americans were constantly retaliat- ing, at one time having gone so far into the territory as to destroy a pontoon bridge which the enemy had thrown across the Harlem at Morrisania and carried off' large numbers of cattle.3

The last important military movement in West- chester township was Washington's grand reconnois- ance, in 1781, in company with Connt Rochambeau and other French officers. It was part of his plan of wresting New York City from the British, or else forcing them to draw upon their troops in the Sonth for the protection of the city. The French forces, which had landed at Newport, were marched across the country and joined Washington on the Hndson, and it was intended that both armies should move down the river to the vicinity of New York, and there, in conjunction with the flect of De Grasse, undertake the capture of the city. The project miscarried because the British were more strongly re-enforccd than had been anticipated; but Lin- coln, who had come down from Tarrytown, suc- ceeded in getting his men into Fort Independence, just over the lower line. The enemy discovered him and an irregular skirmish ensued. De Lauznn, the French general, who was co-operating, was at that time at East Chester and heard the firing of the guns. His part of the programme was to surprise de Lancey at Morrisania, bnt finding that the enemy were on the alert he hastened to Lincoln's support, at Fort Inde- pendence. Washington, who, in the mean time, had the main body of the army under his command at Valentine's Hill (near the present depot of the New York City and Northern Railroad Company, at Soutlı Yonkers), also advanced. The British retreated by their boats across Harlem River.

Washington determined that he would reconnoitre their works, at all events. On July 21st Lincoln and Chastellereux made a reconnoisance of the works to the north of New York Island. Some advanced by the old Albany road, some down the Saw-Mill Valley, and the third column by the East Chester road. Scam- mel's light infantry was in advance, to prevent in- telligence of the general movement spreading. Shel-

1 Heath's " Memoirs," 215, 223, 228.

2 Ileath, 232.

3 Ileath's " Memoirs."

795

WESTCHESTER.

don's cavalry and the Connecticut troops were to go to the eastward of Westchester township aud scour Throgg's Neck ; his infantry and the Count De Lau- zun's lancers were to scour Morrisania. The main body arrived at Fort Independence at daybreak. The British on New York Island did not seem to know what was going on. While the troops kept the enemy in cheek, Washington and Rochambeau, accompanied by the engineers of their staff's and with an escort of dragoons, reconnoitred the British position. A map prepared by Washington's engineer, now at the His- torical Society Library in Second Avenue, with its pencil-marks and memoranda, brings the whole move- ment down almost to an eye-witness standpoint. They rode across country from the Hudson to the Sound. The British shelled them from several points, but the cortege proceeded leisurely on their business.1

Nothing more of much moment seeus to have oc- curred in Revolutionary times within the bounds of Westchester township. Soon the surrender at York- town and the treaty of peace with Great Britain en- abled the sturdy yeomen of Westchester to behold the last scene in this drama of war, when Washing- ton, with his escort, erossed Harlem River to witness the evacuatiou of New York by the British.

HARLEM RIVER.

The conveniences afforded by the Harlem River for navigation had much to do with the early settlement of the west side of Westchester County. It is an estu- ary of East River, which is itself an arm of the sea, and its southerly or main outlet and its communication eastwardly with Bronx Kills afforded the Dutch and English pioneers easy routes of water communication with New York and between the plantations and in- choate towns on the water front. As very many of the subjects both of the King and the Prince of Orange came from the coast towns of England and Holland, there were among them plenty of meu who knew how to build, equip and sail a boat, and so they were scarcely warm in their new homes before their sloops and peri- augers stemmed the Harlem, and their white wings amazed the Indian aborigines. The sole obstacle to this land-locked navigation was the third outlet of the Harlem,-the dangerous Little Hell Gate, where the menaciug black rocks and angry whirlpools obstrueted the passage between Randall's and Ward's Islands.

Prior to 1814 the river was navigated by smail craft, but in that year Robert McComb obtained from the Legislature permission to throw dams across the stream at Eighth Avenue and King's Bridge, and iu 1838 the New York water commissioners attempted to impose another obstacle to free navigation by carry- ing the Croton water over to the city reservoirs on a solid embankment. 2 The importance of the river led,

in 1827, to the formation of the Harlem River Canal Company, which, on April 16th of that year, was in- corporated to construct a canal from Spuyten Duyvil Creek to Harlem River, and to improve the navigation of the river so as to form a navigable channel from it to the East River. The enterprise was abandoned because the company thought there was no money in it. At various sessions in 1836, 1837 and 1838 the Common Council of the city of New York discussed the advisability of taking up in some shape the work that the company had dropped, and received from Engineer George C. Schaeffer a report recommending improvements, substantially the same system as that proposed in recent years by the United States engineers. Although Mr. Schaeffer estimated the cost of the work at only eighty-six thousand dollars, the Council was timid about entering into it, and for eighteen years nothing was done, and the river re- mained closed to thorough navigation by McComb's Dam until the obstructions were removed by the foree of public opinion and the action of the citizens in the neighborhood. In 1855, at the request of the city authorities, the Legislature authorized the Governor to appoint a special commission to establish pier and bulkhead lines on Harlem River, and in 1858 this task was completed under the supervision of General Totten, United States army, Professor Bache of the Coast Survey, and Captain Davis, United States navy. In their report they laid emphatic stress upon the importance of the preservation of the navigation of ilie Harlem to accommodate the wants of the city and Westchester County. " The distance from Hud- son River to Hell Gate by this passage," they wrote, "is eight and a half miles. Its easy access from the Sound and moderately easy access from New York Harbor and its quict interior, would seem to make it a desirable thoroughfare for vessels passing front Long Island Sound to the Hudson, and in certain eases even for those passing between New York Har- bor on the East River aud the Hudson."

This report was not fruitful of any results. Ou March 30, 1857, the State Legislature passed resolu- tions urgiug Congress to take measures to clear out the obstructions at the expense of the United States, to which no attention was paid. In 1860 Engineer J. McLeod Murphy surveyed the river, at the instance of the commissioners of New York County, and recom- mended a canal from Fordham Landing to Spuyten Duyvil Creek, as was outlined by Schaeffer nearly a quarter of a century previously, but he put the whole cost of the improvement up to one hundred and ninety-nine thousand eight hundred and thirty- seveu dollars. In 1863 the Hudson and Harlem River Canal Company was incorporated, and its engineer, Isaac D. Coleman, reported in favor of one canal, on Sehacffer's plan, and another, through the northern end of Randall's Island, following the course of Bronx Kills, so as to open a passage eastward for vessels coming through the Harlem by which they might

1 Irving's "Life of Washington," vol. iv., chap. xxii. Putnam's Ed., 1857.

" The history of the proceedings which led to the removal of McComb's dam and the thwarting of this plan of the water commissioners will be found in subsequent pages of this chapter.

796

HISTORY OF WESTCHESTER COUNTY.

avoid the dangers of Hell Gate. The company twice procured an extension of its charter, but, as it never took any further steps, its grant became forfeited in 1870.

In 1866 the commissioners of Central Park, who were then charged with the duty of improving the river and supervising the erection of bridges, made an elaborate report to the Common Council on the sub- ject. Andrew H. Green, then controller of the Park Department and afterwards of New York City, commenting upon it, said, "It needs but a short look into the future to see this river busy with the craft that are to supply the thriving population on both its banks. As a water-way for commerce this estuary has the advantages of the Thames and the Seine." He pointed out that the improvements must be undertaken by public instead of private enterprise, and forecasted the course of legislation which has placed under governmental control the improvement of the river.

As a consequence of this continual agitation and suggestion, Congress, in 1874, passed an act directing an examination and survey to be made, and in Feb- ruary, 1876, General Newton made a report favoring the establishment of an open water-route between the Hudson and the Sound by way of Spuyten Duyvil Creek, a cut through Dykman's meadows, and thencc to the Harlem River. He estimated the cost at three million three hundred and twenty-one thousand dollars. Proceedings for the acquisition of the right of way are nearly complete, and before long, in a few months, perhaps, the work of construction will be begun.1

BRIDGES OVER IIARLEM RIVER.

KING'S BRIDGE .- In another part of this volume is noted the ferries at Harlem and Spuyten Duyvil kept by Johannes Verveelen. In 1712, Frederick Philipse, of Yonkers, was authorized to construct the present bridge at King's Bridge, and it was ever afterwards the principal passage to the mainland.

FARMERS' BRIDGE .- The origin of the Hadley or Farmers' or Dyckman's bridge is, to a certain extent, unknown. Perhaps it is the "causey " or " cause- way " mentioned in the early history of Fordham. It is said to have been in existence before the Revolu- tion. It is shown on many of the old military maps of the vicinity, published during 1776, and is sup- posed to have been built by the proprietors or people of the Manor of Fordham, to enable the inhabitants of that place to obtain more ready access to the city and save them a detour to get upon the State road, leading to Yonkers and Albany, via King's Bridge.

It was for a century kept in order by the city au- thorities of New York, as the authorities in West-

chester County contended that as the whole of it was within the limits of New York County, it was the duty of the city corporation to keep it in repair.2

It is in contemplation by the city authorities to dis- continue this bridge and King's Bridge, and erect either a tunnel or one large bridge at the upper end of Manhattan Island, but as yet the plans for this change are not perfected.

Between the Farmers' Bridge and the High Bridge commissioners are about erecting a new bridge, span- ning the stream and extending from Aqueduct Avenue on the Westchester shore to the Tenth Avenue on tlic Manhattan Island side. This bridge is to be built in pursuance of the Laws of 1885, and is to be a masonry structure with an arch spanning the entire channel of the river, over one hundred feet above high water-mark. The contract is about to be let.

THE CROTON AQUEDUCT OR HIGH BRIDGE .- The high bridge which crosses the Harlem River at the northwest corner of Morrisania was built as an aqueduct to convey the water of the Croton River to the reservoirs of New York City. It spans the Har- lem where that stream has a width of six hundred and twenty feet and its banks an elevation of one hundred feet. The original design of the engineers was to con- vey the conduit across the river by means of a stone embankment, broken by a high arch, through which the water would flow in a syphon, but the objections of the property-holders in the vicinity caused the bridge plan to be adopted. The aqueduct has fifteen arches, eight of which are on the river bottom. They are each eighty feet in width and one hundred feet high above flood tide. The seven shore arches have each fifty feet span. To reach the foundation of each pier a coffer-dam was built and pumped out until the sand bottom was excavated and the solid rock laid bare or a firm pile foundation prepared on which the ma- sonry was laid. Above the roof of the arches the huge iron pipes which carry the water are fixed on wooden sills, and above them is the foot-way of the bridge. As the elevation of the arches is less than that of the Croton Aqueduct, a system of syphons and gate houses receives the water at the east side and discharges it at the west. The aqueduct was in working order on July 4, 1842, but the bridge was not completed until six years and six months afterward. Its extreme height above the river surface is one hundred and fourteen feet, two inches. It is constructed of sound gneiss, equal in durability to granite. The cost of the aqueduct was $8,575,000, including purchases of land and extinguishment of riparian rights. This figure was within five per cent. of the estimates of Chief Engineer Jervis. To it, however, must be added $1,800,000, the cost of distributing pipes, the interest, the expense of placing the loans, etc., which bring the total up to $12,500,000.3

1 The authorities for above : The various Reports alluded to in the author's possession, Proceedings by Common Council, Board of Alder- men, Acts of New York Legislature, Proceedings Commissioners of Cen- tral Park, and private memoranda. Thanks are due to Captain Tuomey, clerk of the Board of Aldermen of New York City, for valuable assist- ance, as many of the documents referred to are rare and difficult to find.

2 Proceedings of Board of Supervisors N. Y. Co., April, 1835.

3 Schrampke's account of the Croton Aqueduct.

797

WESTCHESTER.

The following inscription appears on the mason work of the structure :

" AQrEnCer BRIDGE.

Finished Doce.uber 31st. 1848.

Philip Hone, Nathamel Weed, M. O. Roberts, J. H. Hobart Haws, A. C. Kingsland,

Water Conunissioners.

John B. Jervis, Chief,

P. Hastie, Resident,

Engineers,

E. 1I. Tracy, Assistant,

1. Vervalen, Inspector of Masonry.

George Law, Samuel Roberts, Arnold Mason,

Contractors."

On the gate-houses at either end is the inscription- " 1848."

The bridge as originally constructed carried two iron pipes three feet in diameter, but in 1860 it was improved by adding a large pipe seven feet in diame- ter, which lies between the two smaller pipes.

The side walls of the bridge were raised at the same time and the pipes were covered with a brick arch, on the top of which is a promenade, from which a view up and down the Harlem is obtained, which is one of the most attractive in the vicinity of New York. This improvement is commemorated by a bronze tablet let into the walls of the gate-houses on both the New York and Westchester sides of the river, reading as follows ::

" The Improvement of this bridge by adding the large pipe, raising of the side walls and covering the whole work with an arch was com- menced October, 1860. The new pipe was put in operation December, 1861. The masonry completed in 1863.

" Croton Aqueduct Board.

" Thomas Stephens, President Commissioner ; Thomas B. Tappen, As- sistant Commissioner to Dec. 4, 1862 ; Alfred W. Craven, Commissioner and Engineer-in-chief ; Engineers: George S. Greene, Engineer in-charge to Feby. 31st, 1862 ; Wm. F. Dearborn, Engineer-in-charge from Feby. 1st, 1862 ; Contractors, Thomas F. Rowland, for the pipe ; J. P. ('um- mings, for the masonry."

THE CENTRAL BRIDGE OR MACOMB'S DAM .- In 1800 the mayor, aldermen and commonalty ecded to Alexander MeComb and his heirs and assigns, " All that certain picce or parcell of land covered with water situated in the 7th Ward (now 12th Ward) of the city beginning at the West side of Kingsbridge at low water mark on the north side of the river, creek or run of water called Spuyten Duyvil; thence running along the creek westerly at low water mark one hundred feet ; thence crossing the crcek to a place at low water mark one hundred feet from Kingsbridge; thence along the creek casterly at low water mark to Kingsbridge and thence along the West side of the bridge to the place of beginning." A passage-way fifteen feet along the course of the creek was reserved to be kept clear, open and unincumbered, so that all small boats and craft might freely and without obstruetion pass and repass the same, with a right on

the part of the corporation to re-enter and dispossess Macomb or his successors in case he failed to comply with the condition. It seems, however, that Macomb did not keep the passage-way open. He erected a tidal grist-inill west of the bridge, and in 1855 it was still standing. Macomb was to pay twelve dollars and fifty cents per annum rent. In 1834 Macomb eeased to pay rent, but in 1854 his heirs came forward and paid up all arrears. In 1855 a committee of the Board of Supervisors recommended that the old mill be declared a nuisance and the grant forfeited, as it was evidently an improvident and void grant from its inception. During 1855 the proprietors were about fitting it up as a hotel, as it had then ceased to be used as a mill, but about that time a heavy gale of wind blew it over.1

But the supply of water at the tide-mill at King's Bridge was inadequate, for as early as 1813, Macomb obtained a grant to build a dam across the Harlem River from Bussing's Point, on the Harlem side, to Devoe's Point, on the Westchester side, so as to hold the waters of the river for the benefit of the mill at King's Bridge, thus practically making a tidal mill- pond between the present side of the Central Bridge at Seventh Avenue and old King's Bridge. This erection was known for years as " Macomb's Dam."

The aet required that it should be so constructed as to allow the passage of boats and vessels accus- tomed to navigate the river, either by means of a gate-lock, apron or other contrivance, and that Ma- comb should always have a person in attendance, so that no unnecessary delay should happen to persons wishing to pass with their boats. The Common Council ratified the grant and upon it a lease was issued to Macomb, his heirs and assigns forever, of all the lands under water required for the purpose and also a considerable amount of upland on the Manhat- tan Island side, embracing a valuable gore between the road leading to the dam and Seventh Avenue. Forfeiture for non-payment of rent was provided in the lcase. The annual rental was the same as for the mill at King's Bridge, and was in arrears for many years, but in the mean time Macomb and his succes- sors levied toll on all vehicles and persons who passed over the bridge, and continued to do so down to the time of the erection of the present Central Bridge.

But it appears that this unauthorized toll-bridge and obstruction to the navigation of the river was resisted by the people on both sides of the river. In 1839 Charles Henry Hall, Thomas W. Ludlow, Rob- ert Morris, of Fordham, his son, Lewis G. Morris, of the same place, Lewis, Gouverneur and William II. Morris, of Morrisania, the Valentines, Berrians, Devoes and others and even citizens of the village of Westchester, and most of the farmers in the vicin- ity, determined that the dam should at least be so

1 Docs. Board of Supervisors of N. Y. County and personal information fruin Isaac Michael Dyckman, of King's Bridge.

798

HISTORY OF WESTCHESTER COUNTY.

constructed that it would afford an unobstructed pas- sage for vessels. Public meetings were held,1 the best legal talent retained, and money was raised to protect the full navigation of the river.

Lewis G. Morris, then quite a young man, was by the votes of his associates entrusted with the leader- ship of the fight. In order to bring the question, if necessary, within the jurisdiction of the United States Courts, it was determined that a vessel laden with a cargo from a neighboring State should ascend the river and demand passage way through the opening which the grant had directed should be kept for ves- sels, but which Macomb and his successors had ne- glected to provide. Mr. Morris therefore built a dock on his place about a mile north of the present site of High Bridge and chartered a periauger, called the " Nonpareil," with a cargo of coal on board consigned for delivery at Morris Dock. He arrived with his boat at the dam one evening at full tide and demand- ed of Feeks, the toll gathierer, that the draw or pas- sage-way be opened; of course Feeks could not comply. Some flat boats which had been provided had on board a band of one hundred men; and Feeks not opening the draw, Mr. Morris with his meu forcibly removed a portion of the dam, so that the "Nonpareil " floated across. From that time a draw was always kept in the bridge, but for many years the passage was very difficult, the tide being so strong that it was only possible to pass at slack water.

The Renwicks had succeeded the Macombs to the rights in the dam. At first an attempt was made to indict Morris for disturbing the public peace, but by the advice of the recorder and district attorney it was

1 The frec navigation of the Harlem River hil always been an import- ant question with the people of the south western section of Westchester County. On March 3, 1838, the land-owners of the town of Westebester held a meeting at Christopher Walton's store, at Fordham Corners, and appointed a committee to memorialize the General Assembly in opposi- tion to the low bridge which it was proposed to build, without a draw, to convey the Croton water supply into New York City. The same com- mittee was instructed to ascertain the best method of removing the ob- structions in the river at Macomb's dam and Cole's bridge. The memorial stated that the signers had been informed that the water commissioners intended to carry the Croton water across Harlem River by inverted sy plions built over an embankment of stone, filling up the whole of the natural channel, and with only one arcbway on the New York side only eighty feet in height, instead of by an aqueduct bridge, which had al- ready been planned, one hundred and twenty-eight feet above the tide. with arches of eighty feet span disposed across the entire width of the river. The city of New York might by the low bridge plan save $509,718, the high bridge having been estimated to cost $935, 745, and the inverted syphon plan would cost but $426,027 ; but the memorialists claimed that their rights to the navigation of the river would by the latter plan be totally destroycd. They showed that prior to the obstructions of Ma- comb's dam and Cole's bridge the Harlem was navigated to Berrian's Landing and tbat their ancestors and some of themselves had used the Harlem to sbip their produce to market. They also showed that at that early day surveys for the improvement of the navigation of the river had been made at the instance of the corporation of New York; that Macomb had been guilty of violating his grant by not putting a draw in his dam, and asked the Legislature to compel tbe water com- missioners to direct such an erection across the river as would not impede navigation. Counsel were employed, who gave an opinion that tbe peo- ple had a right to remove the existing nuisances by force, and the result was Mr. Lewis G. Morris' forcible passage of McComb's dam, as else- where related in this chapter.

determined he had a right to demand passage for his vessel. The Reuwicks then brought suit in the Su- perior Court to recover from Morris the damages for his alleged trespass, but on the trial the judge charged the jury that the dam as built was a public nuisance and that any one had a right to abate it. An appeal was then taken to the Supreme Court and there Mr. Justice Cowen held likewise. Not coutent with this decision, the Renwicks carried the suit to the Court of Errors on appeal, where all the judgments below were affirmed.

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.

History of Westchester county : New York, including Morrisania, Kings Bridge, and West Farms, which have been annexed to New York City, Vol. I, Part 198

Author: Scharf, J. Thomas (John Thomas), 1843-1898, ed Publication date: 1886 Publisher: Philadelphia : L.E. Preston & Co. Number of Pages: 1354

Author: Scharf, J. Thomas (John Thomas), 1843-1898, ed
Publication date: 1886
Publisher: Philadelphia : L.E. Preston & Co.
Number of Pages: 1354