n HWfflMlHwi wmmi HHB msS&ffl BsSBHHnfitttJ HjBsMSItiS BlilH&ll WsSBittBSs MM — 1 1 mmm mm mmSm - *- ilillfl Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2011 with funding from Boston Library Consortium Member Libraries http://www.archive.org/details/boston1822to192200kore Boston, 1822 to 1922 The Story of Its Government and Principal Activities During One Hundred Years By John Koren City of Boston Printing Department 1923 City of Boston, In City Council, June 25, 1923. Ordered, That the Superintendent of Printing be hereby author- ized to print a special edition of two thousand copies, bound in cloth, of the "Centennial History of Boston," and that the expense of the same be charged to the appropriation for City Documents. Further ordered, That this edition shall be distributed under the direction of the Statistics Department, and that any income received through such distribution be credited to the appropria- tion mentioned above. Passed. Approved by the Mayor, June 26, 1923. Attest : W. J. Doyle, Assistant City Clerk. 151511 4 TABLE OF CONTENTS. Page. Introductory ..... .... 5 The Winning of the Charter . 6 Boston and the Commonwealth 16 The Mayors of Boston 19 Public Health 67 Police Protection .... 75 Fire Protection 85 Water Supply . . . . 94 The Public Schools .... 102 The Public Library .... "3 Public Grounds, Parks and Recreation 118 Public Lands (^2Q> Charitable and Correctional Institutions • ( I 53 K Street Betterment .... 132 Sewer Improvements 161 Street Lighting 165 Rapid Transit 168 The Ferry Service .... 172 Bridges 175 Public Markets 177 Licenses and the License Board 179 Soldiers' Relief . . . . • 181 The Finance Commission . 182 Suffolk County 184 Boston and Its Commerce 190 The George Robert White Fund 19s The Population of Boston @p The Present City Government fi99> Statistical Tables 205 INTRODUCTORY. Hitherto the story of Boston as a municipality since its inception in 1822, with its changing forms of govern- ment and its multitudinous activities for the better- ment of conditions of living, has not been told con- nectedly. To set forth this story briefly and simply is attempted in the following pages. The frame work is strictly limited to tracing the development and undertakings of the City of Boston for a century, under successive city administrations. The things that have been done on private initiative to enrich and beautify the city, to bring light and happiness to its poor and rich inhabitants alike through the arts and educational opportunities, the place the city has in the history of our country, both in peace and war, and much else, lie wholly without our province. All these things have been told in many books to which one must look for romance and historical narrative of a general kind. Yet the story of municipal affairs is not without deep interest, for it is full of adventures and misadven- tures. Above all, the municipal story of Boston is creditable, despite those who during the hundred years have been the detractors rather than the promoters of upright city administration. Those who read this centennial municipal story may still apply to Boston the words of Emerson: "Let her stand fast by herself. She has grown great. She is filled with strangers, but she can only prosper by adhering to her faith. Let every child that is born of her and every child of her adoption see to it to keep the name of Boston as clean as the sun; and in distant ages her motto shall be the prayer of millions on all the hills that gird the town, 'As with our Fathers, so God be with us.' Sicut Patribus, Sit Deus Nobis!" Note. — This story of Boston as a municipality during a hundred years lays no claim to profound original research. The material used is for the greater part to be found in the public documents of the city and certain publications drawn from them. Therefore no footnotes have been supplied indicating sources, and no bibliography has been prepared in view of the many lists already existing and easily accessible. In form and method of presentation, the story will be sufficiently novel to those who wish to trace Boston's beginning and development into a great city. i822 — Boston — 1922. THE WINNING OF THE CHARTER. For 192 years after its foundation, Boston remained under the town form of government, which in the course of time had undergone many modifications, the while it had grown from a straggling village to a thriving seaport of about forty-five thousand inhabi- tants, who dwelt chiefly between Beacon Hill and the waterfront. Amid many vicissitudes, Boston had be- come the life-center of New England, its great mart, the principal seat of industry, the port of entry and departure of ships that plied every sea. In learning and the arts its first rank was undisputed. Boston in 1 82 1 has been truthfully described as the "most popu- lous and illustrious town in the world." But the machinery of government, although it had become more and more highly organized, had not kept pace with the external growth of the town. Years before Boston adopted its first city charter, men had become dissatisfied with the unwieldy and archaic forms of the many semi-independent boards that had jurisdiction over local affairs and had been called into being, not according to a well-conceived plan looking to the future, but to meet incidental emergencies or immediate needs. No less than four plans for incor- poration as a city had been submitted to the voters — in 1784, 1792, 1804 and 1815. But so tenaciously did the people at large cling to the old form of government that each of these charter proposals was, in turn, defeated mostly by large majorities, although the one of 1 815 failed of adoption by but thirty-one votes. It has been cited by the third Mayor Quincy as a curious coincidence that of the two plans submitted in 1784 by a committee, which included Samuel Adams and James Sullivan, the first proposed a city government consisting of thirty-eight members, the exact number provided for by an act of 1897. The alternate plan would have a single body elected one third at large The Winning op the Charter. 7 and two thirds by wards, which again was the basis of election brought forward in 1897. Throughout the struggle over the question of incor- poration, its advocates had been moved chiefly by two considerations. One was that of practical necessity; the town had grown too large to be managed by direct government. Indeed, several modifications of the old government had been put into effect. Already in 1799 the method of ward elections for certain purposes had been introduced. And in 18 13, a de facto town council had been created to choose the city treasurer and the collector of taxes. It consisted of the select- men, the members of the board of health and the overseers of the poor — in all thirty-three members, — who also formed a committee on finance. These inno- vations were among the beginnings of a change from direct to representative government. Boston had grown too large for a rule of pure democracy, which implies that the people themselves constitute the government. Perhaps a weightier reason for seeking the incorpo- ration of Boston as a city was the tangled relations of the town to the County of Suffolk. The trouble was of ancient date, for at the very establishment of Suffolk County ( 1643) it had been given a county court endowed with jurisdiction over several matters directly affect- ing the towns within its borders, including Boston. Thus it was required that all orders and by-laws of towns should be approved by the Court of Quarter Sessions, as it was called. This court also had author- ity to assess county taxes, to discontinue highways, license innholders, locate distilleries, etc., and to appoint certain local officials. While Suffolk County consisted of a large district outside of Boston, includ- ing Roxbury, Dorchester, what is now Norfolk County, and even a part of Worcester County, there may have been ample reason for giving the court executive powers that for certain purposes placed it above the selectmen of the towns. But the law remained in force until 1822, when Suffolk County consisted merely of the towns of Boston and Chelsea. The county taxes, to which Boston contributed about 99 per cent, 8 1S22 — Boston — 1922. were levied and spent under the direction of the jus- tices of the Court of Quarter Sessions over whom the town of Boston had no control since they were ap- pointees of the Governor; and there were other griev- ances against the county rule. The administration of justice had become complex and defective. It was divided among three courts; that of Quarter Sessions, a Municipal Court, espe- cially created for adjudicating violations of town ordi- nances, and a Court of Common Pleas, known as the Town Court. The conditions had grown so bad that the committee report on incorporation, which was submitted in 1821, felt constrained to say, "The present mode of administering justice in the first stages is attended with many and growing abuses; and although they have already attained to a very considerable extent, they must, unless prevented by an entire change in the system, produce eventually the most mischievous and immoral consequences." So it was in part the feeling that a municipal form of govern- ment, which would necessitate a reorganization of the courts and might correct the abuses in the admin- istration of justice, that accelerated the movement for a city charter. Thus it came about that the town meeting held on October 22, 1821, instructed a committee to "report to the town, at a future meeting, a complete system relating to the administration of the town and county which shall remedy the present evils." The com- mittee made its report in December and was there- upon enlarged and instructed "to report a system of Municipal Government for this town, with such powers, privileges and immunities, as are contemplated by the amendment of the Constitution, authorizing the General Court to constitute the City Govern- ments." It should be explained that the Constitu- tional Convention held in 1820 had, by a slight major- ity, adopted an amendment permitting the General Court to incorporate towns containing 12,000 inhabi- tants as cities. When this amendment had been secured, the final committee was appointed and in- structed as above. Among its members w r ere John The Winning op the Charter. 9 Phillips, then President of the Senate and afterwards the first Mayor of Boston; Josiah Quincy, then Speaker of the House of Representatives and later the second Mayor; Lemuel Shaw, subsequently the Chief Justice of the Commonwealth; and Daniel Webster. After a debate lasting three days, during which the committee report was amended in important respects, the charter petition was accepted on Janu- ary 7, 1822, by a vote of 2,805 Y eas to 2,006 nays. A separate vote taken on the question whether Boston should be a county by itself was practically unani- mous in the affirmative. The General Court passed the act of incorporation promptly; it was approved by the Governor on February 23, 1822; and the act, known as the First Charter, was accepted by the town on March 4, 1822, by a vote of 2,797 yeas to 1,881 nays. By this vote Boston became the first city in the Commonwealth as well as the largest; indeed, it was the only city in Massachusetts until the incor- poration of Salem in 1835. The Charter of 1822. The deep changes wrought by the first charter stand out vividly when one contrasts the cumbersome official- dom, which had grown up under the town system of government, with the city form of administration. The last town meeting elected the following officials: "Seven Selectmen, who also served as surveyors of highways; a Town Clerk; a School Committee of 12; 12 Overseers of the Poor and of the Workhouse; 30 Firewards; 20 Surveyors of Boards and other Lumber; 6 Fence Viewers; 6 Cullers of Hoops and Staves; 9 Cullers of Dry Fish; 4 Hogreeves, Hay- wards and Field Drivers; 3 Inspectors of Lime; 2 Surveyors of Hemp; 2 Surveyors of Wheat; and 2 Assay Masters. Besides, there were chosen by each ward 12 members of the Board of Health; 24 Assistant Assessors, 2 for each ward." These officials were chosen annually at ward meetings presided over by the wardens, who themselves were elective officers. The principal assessors were chosen in convention by the io 1822 — 'Boston — 1922. 24 assistant assessors. The financial policy and affairs of the town were largely controlled by the Selectmen, Overseers of the Poor and Board of Health, as a stand- ing committee on finance, which chose the town treas- urer at an annual convention. As a rule, the town treasurer was also the collector of taxes. At the last town meeting held in Boston there were elected, in all, 112 officers besides those appointed by the Selectmen or elected by each ward. The first city charter provided for the election of a Mayor, eight aldermen, chosen at large, forty-eight members of the Common Council, four from each ward, besides other elective officers referred to else- where. The City Council, or the Mayor and Alder- men, selected the other necessary officials. City and county finances were placed under a single treasurer. The county courts ceased to have a veto power over ordinances; but the General Court reserved the right to annul any ordinance not meeting with its approval. The financial, executive and administrative powers of the city government were thus vested, partly, in the Board of Mayor and Aldermen and partly in the City Council, and to be exercised by concurrent vote of both branches. Departmental heads were gener- ally elected by the City Council. The Mayor had in reality very little power except to appoint committees. He presided over the Board of Aldermen which, together with him, constituted a single board known as the Mayor and Aldermen. The charter had not omitted to admonish the Mayor to be "vigilant and active at all times in causing the laws of the govern- ment of the said city to be duly executed and put in force ... to cause all negligence, care- lessness and positive violation of duty to be duly prosecuted and punished." But the charter, almost in a spirit of irony, neglected to give him the necessary powers. The new charter did not yield the practical^results so confidently expected by its advocates^ _and for obvious reason: It was, in fact, not an effort to estab- lish a new fdrrnof government, but simply mteuded to perpetuate, so far as possible, thlT old regime in an The Winning of the Charter. ii atterii]Dt__to__£^ control. The Mayor had no power to appoint or~remove orn- cials, no veto over municipal legislation and, in general, no control of the executive work of the city except indirectly through his veto in the Board of Aldermen and the power to appoint committees. Only one Mayor, the first Josiah Quincy, tried to overcome these charter weaknesses by placing himself at the head of all the important committees of the Board of Aldermen. By this means he familiarized himself with all the details of administration and assumed greater responsibility than the charter implied. Although Mayor Quincy accomplished great things for the city as its chief magistrate, he overstepped the limits of the charter which led to severe criticism and abuse by the non -progressive elements among the citizens. The mayors following him were content to act within the narrow sphere prescribed by the charter, with the result that, until 1885, the administration of Boston was practically in the hands of the committees of the City Council. The Charter of 1854. Aside from the inherent weaknesses of the first charter, the changing conditions eventually made it necessary to improve the form of government given the city. Population had greatly increased; Boston was no longer a mere seaport of local importance, but had become the distributing point for the indus- tries of New England; and better means of communi- cation and transportation had placed it in touch with the whole country. The ' ' long winter of New England isolation" had passed; other states and cities devel- oped with amazing rapidity, and Boston was drawn closer to them. Moreover, immigration had intro- duced new elements of religion and race, so that the life of the inhabitants grew increasingly more complex ; their interests became more and more diversified; and new ideals loomed up. All these developments helped to accentuate the demand for better city service and a more liberal expenditure for municipal undertakings. These and other considerations led to a refraining 12 . iS22 — Boston — 1922. of the charter, yet very few material changes were made. The Mayor was placed outside the Board of Aldermen and given a qualified veto over the acts of the City Council, or either branch of it, in regard to expenditure of money; but a two thirds vote enabled the Council to pass a bill over the Mayor's veto. He could not disapprove separate items in an appro- priation order or a loan bill, but was given a certain power to remove officials, their election being entrusted as heretofore to the City Council. The old govern- ment by committees remained. In brief, the Mayor, under the charter of 1854, had little more than advisory power. The Charter Amendments of 1885. The urgent reasons for a revision in the form of government which led to the charter of 1854 became even more pressing within the next thirty years. The different Mayors until that time had all taken occasion to advocate a separation of the executive business of the city from the legislative. The mingling of the two had become intolerable. The charter of 1885 took the form of a few short amendments by which all the executive powers of the municipality were transferred to the Mayor, to be administered by the officials and boards of the various departments, under the supervision and control of the Mayor. Thus these officials and boards were given the general direction and control of all the executive and administrative business of Boston. The City Council was expressly prohibited from interfering in any manner with the work of the execu- tive in the way of employing labor, making contracts, purchasing materials, etc. The amendments, further- more, gave the Mayor authority to appoint all officials and members of boards except the City Clerk, Clerk of Committees and City Messenger, but made all appointments subject to confirmation by the Board of Aldermen. He was also given the power of removal for cause. Departments were prohibited from exceed- ing the appropriations made for them. All con- The Winning of the Charter. 13 tracts for public work required the approval of the Mayor, who also had the right to veto any order passed by the City Council and disapprove increases in loan bills and appropriations. Such orders could, how- ever, be passed over the Mayor's veto by a two thirds vote of the City Council. The Mayor was not to be a member of the Board of Aldermen or of the School Committee, nor could he appoint any of the committees of these two bodies. To sum up, the charter amendments of 1885 placed in the hands of the Mayor the entire charge of and responsibility for the conduct of the executive business of the city. Whatever may be said of the theory of substituting the one-man power of the Mayor for the control of city affairs by committees, the latter has proved im- practicable and dangerous in this country. It was, in fact, distrust of common councils and their com- mittees to carry on the executive business of the munic- ipal administration honestly and effectively which led to the charter changes of 1885, a distrust common to municipalities throughout the United States. The Charter of 1909. The city administration was undoubtedly improved by the charter amendments of 1885, but they left much to be desired. The provision that appointments by the Mayor should be subject to the approval of the aldermen proved a great weakness. Another weakness was that members of the City Council could not be penalized for interfering with the executive branch of the government. They could, therefore, violate with impunity the prohibition against activity in the employment of city labor, concerning contracts, 1 the purchase of materials and, generally, in all matters of public works. The interference by the City Coun- cil had gone so far that the Finance Commission of 1907 declared many of its ordinances to be inconsistent with the statutes, and that a large part of them were devoted to things with which they were expressly prohibited to interfere. i4 1822 — Boston— 1922. The Finance Commission of 1907, when entrusted with the task of framing a new city charter, sought to correct the evils which had arisen in the city adminis- tration by means of several expedients. A complete separation of the executive and legislative branches of government was sought. The appointments by the Mayor were no longer subject to confirmation by the Board of Aldermen, but all heads of departments were to be certified by the Civil Service Commission. A penalty was imposed for interference with- executive business on the part of the City Council. In regard to finances, the new charter provided that all appro- priations to be met from sources other than loans must originate with the Mayor. The City Council could no longer increase any item or add new ones. The Mayor was given an absolute veto power over all acts of the City Council, extending to a veto of any item in a bill requiring the expenditure of money and to any part of an item. The term of the Mayor was extended to four years, subject to recall at the end of two years. The new charter abolished the bi-cameral organiza- tion of the City Council and provided that it should consist of but nine members, to be elected at large for a term of three years, only three being elected each year. An entirely new charter feature provided for the appointment of a permanent Finance Commis- sion, with all the powers of the first commission, but its members were to be selected by the Governor, the idea being that a body quite independent of the munici- pal government would be able to serve as a check on waste and corruption. The charter as drawn up by the Finance Commission of 1907 was passed by the General Court of 1909, but its political features, to be submitted to the voters for their acceptance, were divided into two plans, one providing for a single legis- lative council consisting of one member from each ward, to be elected for two years, and nine members at large, to be elected for three years. Also, the term of the Mayor was left at two years. The other plan contained the recommendation of the Finance Com- mission of a single legislative chamber of nine mem- The Winning of the Charter. 15 bers, and this plan was adopted by the voters. The charter of 1909 has been amended in some respects, the principal changes being that the Mayor shall not be eligible for re-election for the succeeding term (that is, a term of four years must elapse before a Mayor can again become a candidate), the abolition of the recall of the Mayor, different dates for elections, and various changes of minor importance. 16 1S22 — Boston — 1922. BOSTON AND THE COMMONWEALTH. The successive charter amendments show very clearly a distrust of the capacity of the municipal legislature and its committees to conduct the execu- tive affairs of the city for the common good. The only alternative presenting itself has been to substi- tute the one-man power for a less responsible, or irre- sponsible, city council. But this tendency toward concentrating responsibility for city affairs has un- doubtedly acted as an incentive to the General Court to extend its control over the municipality of Boston. Occasionally, administrative mishaps or difficulties have served as an excuse for interference. The underlying principles upon which a city govern- ment is established are that, in the first place, it is an organ for local self-government; and, secondly, an administrative agency through which the state govern- ment secures within the municipality the execution of state laws of general application. Thus a municipal corporation has a two-fold function ; but just how and where the dividing line between the authority of the city and that of the state should be drawn has given rise to much dispute. From the very beginning there has been insistence on the part of the municipal authorities upon a larger measure of self-government, or complete control of municipal affairs. On the other hand, the Commonwealth has not only demanded the execution of general laws within the city, and right- fully so, but has attempted to make Boston its mere agent in carrying out matters of purely local concern and legislated accordingly. It is obvious that in much of the city's adminis- trative work, — as for instance, through the Board of Elections, the Board of Assessors, the Board of Health, the School Committee, etc., the interests of the Com- monwealth as well as those of the city must be served. In other words, some city departments are partly, but Boston and the Commonwealth. 17 not in any case wholly, concerned with the execution of state laws, while others are created simply as parts of the ordinary municipal organization for local pur- poses. On the other hand, the wisdom of establishing departments like that of the Police and Finance Com- mission as independent organizations of the state has given rise to much controversy. The complaint, however, has not been directed solely against such extensive usurpation of municipal authority, but also against efforts to control the depart- ments of the city government, and, above all, against attempts to regulate municipal expenditures and tax limits. If it cannot be said that Boston has been deprived of municipal autonomy in having charters imposed upon it, since they have always been subject to the acceptance of the voters, the situation is quite different when the more intimate details of conducting city affairs, particularly finance, are concerned. A glance at the special acts affecting the city of Boston and the towns or cities annexed to it shows beyond doubt that the Commonwealth has legislated in regard to matters that could easily have been en- trusted to local control without infringing upon its sovereignty, for they have been affairs that could have been dealt with by the city under ordinary charter powers. But it must be admitted that a very large portion of the legislative acts have been beyond municipal control because they involve interests either affecting the Commonwealth itself or territories lying outside the limits of Boston. Perhaps the one feature of state legislation affecting the city of Boston most disadvantageously has been the meddling with its financial concerns. As Mayor Matthews puts it in his valedictory address: "The treasury of the city of Boston is regarded in many parts of the State as a fund to be drawn upon by com- pulsory legislation for the benefit of the smaller towns ; and many of the representatives from this city make it their habitual concern to introduce and advocate bills for the transfer of portions of the city's money for the benefit of special interests and classes. The result is that during the annual sessions of the Legislature a i8 1S22 — Boston — 1922. large part of the work of governing this city must be transacted at the State House in the advocacy of needed reforms, and in defence of the city treasury against agrarian and class legislation." It may be noted, by the way, that the special acts relating to the city of Boston which have been passed by the General Court from 1822 to 1908 (taking no account of later years during which the acts have been published separately) cover more than thirteen hun- dred pages, in two bound volumes, and include almost every topic that can be mentioned under the head of municipal administration. The most recent tendency seems to be toward a keener desire on the part of the General Court to prescribe ways and means ofj[con- ducting Boston's city administration. Mayors of Boston. 19 MAYORS OF BOSTON FROM 1822 TO 1922. John Phillips. Born in Boston, November 26, 1770; died May 29, 1823; served during 1822. A service of twenty-five years in the General Court, during ten of which he was president of the Senate, well qualified John Phillips for the new office of Mayor of Boston. He had also served for many years as town advocate and public prose- cutor. He has been de- scribed as a man "of a rather pliable disposition, but of strict integrity and general good judgment." / Conservative tend e iic i e s led hi m_ to preserv e as much of__ the ancient regime as possible ; and it was well, for it made the transitioh~To~a city. government so much easier.' His activities were mainly confined to the organization of the administrative machinery created by the first city charter. Men who had been instrumental in securing it, and expected radical changes at once, showed some dissatisfaction with the administration of Mayor Phillips, but his conservative course was an asset rather than a hindrance in laying the proper foundations for a city government. It is of interest to observe that at the very first election of a mayor political feeling ran high. Josiah Quincy was an avowed candidate for the office, like- wise Harrison Gray Otis. Both finally withdrew their names after an acrimonious campaign full of- charges and counter-charges, and left the field open for John Phillips. The latter' s delicate health made him refuse a second term, the mayors at that time being chosen annually. 20 1822 — Boston — 1922. JOSIAH QUINCY. Born in Boston, February 4, 1772; died July 1, 1864; served during 1823-28. No one had taken a greater interest in town affairs than Josiah Quincy. It fell to him to preside at the last town,' meeting held in Faneuil ^Hall, and those who wanted an energetic Mayor, ready to take full advantag e of the p owers under the city government, found in Josiah Quincy a man admirably suited for the task. He has deserv- edly been called the Great Mayor, setting a standard of purpose and execution which has rarely been equalled. Josiah Quincy's term of administration covered a period of six years marked by lively controversies and the accomplishment of many important measures, in spite of the charter limitations under which the Mayor had to act. In order to secure the widest possible power, Quincy placed himself at the head of all the committees of the Board of Mayor and Aldermen, and did so without antagonizing his associates in a disturbing degree. t , Among the achievements under Quincy's adminis- tration were the great extention of Faneuil Hall for market purposes, and the reorganization of the de- partments of Health, Fire, and Charitable and Correc- tional Institutions. He also placed the Police De- partment on a better footing and abolished the Board of Surveyors of Highways. Indeed, Josiah Quincy's interests covered all kinds of municipal activities. He was exceedingly concerned on behalf of the public schools. Already prior to the organization of Boston as a city he had given much attention to the care of the poor, and, on becoming Mayor, put into effect several important measures for their welfare as well as for that of prisoners. Mayors of Boston. 21 A memorable event in Quincy's administration was the official visit of General Lafayette to Boston. When his last year of office drew to a close, Quincy had aroused a feeling of bitterness and even of malig- nancy on the part of many influential voters, whose private interests had suffered through his reform measures, and who could not forget the increased expenditures due to the many improvements under- taken. In addition, he had the low elements against him because he enforced laws relating to gambling, prostitution, and the sale of intoxicating liquors. In spite of all vilification, no charge could be brought against Mayor Quincy affecting his personal and official integrity. He was a strong man and had used his power to the advantage of the city, if perhaps ruth- lessly at times. Although Mayor Quincy stood for re-election in 1828, he failed to receive a majority of all the votes cast both on the first and second ballots. He then withdrew his name, stating that "no considera- tion would induce him again to accept the office." Harrison Gray Otis. Born in Boston October 8, 1765; died October 28, 1848; served during 1829-31. From early manhood, Mr. Otis had been prominent in public affairs. In his first inaugural address, he rec- ommended the establish- ment of railroad communi- cation with the Hudson river. His administration was not remarkable for any extension of municipal ac- tivities. Rather, his in- cumbency marked a period of retrenchment made nec- essary by general financial conditions. There had been a decline in the valuation of assessed property, and the City of Boston, which counted a population of over sixty-one thousand at the census of 1830, suffered from a depression that 22 1822 — Boston — 1922. Mayor Otis attributed to " over-capitalization in manu- factures." On his recommendation, the Old State House was renovated in order to provide accommoda- tions for the Mayor, Aldermen, Common Council and other officials. They took possession on September 17, 1830, the two hundredth anniversary of the settle- ment of the town. Former Mayor Josiah Quincy, who meanwhile had become president of Harvard College, delivered the address of the day. During the pre- ceding administrations the city government had been housed in the Old Stone Court House on School street. On the initiative of Mayor Otis, during the last year of his administration, the General Court passed an act which vested all the property of Suffolk County in the City of Boston. Thereafter Boston was to pro- vide and maintain all the county buildings and to pay the county charges. If the administration of Mayor Otis was not remarkable for any special advance in municipal government, he must be said to have fully maintained the standards set by Mayor Quincy. Charles Wells. Born in Boston, December 30, 1786; died June 3, 1866; served during 183 2-3 3 . In 1 83 1, two elections were held for the purpose of selecting a mayor. In the first election, the contest lay between Charles Wells, William Sullivan and Theo- dore Lyman, Jr. ; in the second, it narrowed to one between Wells and Lyman. Charles Wells won and served two terms. He had been a member of the Com- mon Council and of the Board of Aldermen, but he did not come from the same social stratum that had contributed the previous mayors, his occupation being that of a master builder. His election has been de- scribed as a protest by the middle class against "exces- Mayors or Boston. 2 3 sive" expenditures inaugurated by Quincy and main- tained by Otis. Mayor Wells' administration was, on the whole, featureless, except that expenditures con- tinued to rise and with them the city debt notwith- standing higher tax rates. "/The early thirties were years of prosperity, and it was natural that expenditures should be indulged in proportionately. Under Mayor Wells, a new court house was built, some of the principal streets extended, and the quarantine regulations were more strictly enforced owing to the prevalence of cholera in certain British provinces. Theodore Lyman, Jr. Born in Boston, February 19, 1792; died July 17, 1849; served during 1834-35. He has been described as a man "of good under- standing, enlarged by a liberal education and ex- tensive foreign travel. ' ' At all events, he was a far- sighted and able man. One of his early acts was to draw attention to the need of a better water supply. Hitherto water had been obtained from Jamaica Pond for certain parts of the city, through crude pipe lines which proved quite insufficient. Efforts had been made to study the whole subject, but without tangible results until Mayor Lyman sent a message to the City Council about the water supply, the Council, in turn, referring it to a committee of which the Mayor was chairman. But in spite of the urgency of the situation, a number of years elapsed until final action was taken on the basis of recommendations furnished by Col. Loammi Baldwin, an engineer, who had been selected to make a special investigation of the most available water supply. Mayor Lyman achieved, among other things, the 24 1822 — Boston — 1922. erection of a well-founded house of reformation, a larger development of the primary school system, and was much occupied with street extension and improve- ment. ''He did not confine his attention solely to the needs of Boston in penal reform. It is due to him that the State Reform school at Westboro for juvenile offenders, the first institution of its kind, was estab- lished (now known as the Lyman School for Boys) . To him we also owe a school of similar character for girls at Lancaster. v He interested himself in and was for many years the manager of the Farm School for Boys at Thompson's Island. Several stirring events took place under Lyman's administration. One was the destruction of the Ursu- line convent by a mob (see page 76) ; others were the demonstrations against the abolition movement, particularly the one of October 21, 1835 at which Garrison was seized by the mob, and Mayor Lyman offered his own body as a shield to Garrision against the rioters. Samuel Turrel Armstrong. Born in Dorchester, April 29, 1784; died March 26, 1850; served during 1836. He held office for about one year. During his administration the new courthouse in Court Square was completed. For the rest, the principal acts of his administration are said to have been "the erection of an iron fence for the enclosure of three sides of the Common, and the extension of the mall through the burial grounds of Boylston Street." When he retired from office, the annual expenditures stood at over $816,000 and a debt had accrued of more than $1,500,000. The tax rate was then $4.75 per thousand. Mayors of Boston. 25 Samuel Atkins Eliot. Born in Boston, March 5, 1798; died January 29, 1862; served during 1837-39. He was a Boston merchant of high character and ability. During his administration Boston was again visited by a period of depression which made re- trenchment necessary for the first two years. He did, however, succeed in putting through some im- portant administrative measures. * One was the re- organization of the Fire Department, whose lack of discipline and efficiency had been remarked upon in earlier years. During the Broad Street riot in 1837 (see page 76) the improvements brought about by Mayor Eliot came strongly to the fore. Until this time the firemen had received no compensation for their services beyond a slight amount for refreshments. Mayor Eliot saw clearly that to offer extra compensa- tion would probably induce the firemen to place them- selves under proper discipline, and that such compen- sation should not be regarded as a wage in the ordinary sense. An ordinance reorganizing the department and fixing the compensation was passed and went into operation in the fall of 1837. Mayor Eliot did not succeed, however, in his plans for reorganizing the Police Department; nor did sev- eral provisions submitted on his initiative to the voters at a special election for an amendment of the city charter win the day. Mayor Eliot, in his last inaugural address, recom- mended the erection of a new city hall and county jail, but without achieving results. A building, how- ever, was begun for the offices of Registry and Probate, and much money spent in widening and extending 26 1822 — Boston — 1922. streets. The tax rate in 1839 had to be raised on account of the great expenditures and the increase in the debt. Jonathan Chapman. Born in Boston, January 23, 1807; died May 25, 1848; served during 1840-42. At the very outset, Mayor Chapman made a reduc- tion of the city debt his principal object as chief magistrate. He achieved it by securing various re- trenchments, but the tax rate was not reduced. The city was not exactly poor, although the debt in eight- een years had risen from $100,000 to more than $1,500,000, for it owned extensive property, much of which had been improved. The current expenses of the city at the time, except those for ordinary purposes and the payment of the city debt, amounted to about $425,000 annually, of which nearly a quarter was charged to the public schools. Mayor Chapman did not favor the project of a new city hall for which land had been bought, but recommended instead that the old County Court House should be remodeled and serve as a city hall. A new building for the Probate and Registry offices had been completed, and the city government moved into its former quarters in 1841. The epochal event during Mayor Chapman's admin- istration was the establishment of steam navigation between Boston and Liverpool in 1840. The occur- rence was properly celebrated and signalized as a commercial improvement assuring great results. At the same time, the Western Railroad was completed and opened connection to the Hudson river in 184K Mayor Chapman was the first head of the Boston city administration who seemed to have been much &£& & JR^ ' f^fift -V 1 ■#* f- Wjt- ■ - ; ¥1 ' \^| Mayors op Boston. 27 concerned with the question of licenses for the sale of spirituous liquors. There was a license law in force at the time to which the Mayor was opposed. Indeed, he regarded the licensing system ' ' as wrong in principle and injurious in effect." He wished the public peace preserved as well as public proprieties, but as to the use of spirituous liquors, he would leave that to the individual, "and above all to Washingtonians" (a temperance society of that day). Martin Brimmer. Born in Roxbury, June 8, 1793; died April 25, 1847; served during 1843-44. He carried out the financial policies begun under his predecessor and gained a further reduction in the city debt. His deep interest in public education was man- ifested by the support he gave Horace Mann (see page 103). He was also a student of prison discipline and construction, and was the first to suggest the erec- tion of a new prison for the County of Suffolk to re- place the old Leverett Street Jail. It fell to Mayor Brimmer to apply to the General Court for the necessary authority to secure a better water supply from ponds in Natick and Framingham, as had been recommended some years earlier by the noted engineer, Colonel Baldwin. Thomas Aspinwall Davis. Born in Brookline, December 11, 1798; died Novem- ber 22, 1845; served during 1845. He was a candidate of a new political organization called the "Native American Party"; meanwhile Josiah Quincy, Jr., was the candidate of the Whigs, and Adam W. Thaxter, Jr., the Democratic candidate. 28 1822 — Boston — 1922. It was not until a ballot taken on February 21, 1845, after two unsuccessful attempts, that Davis received a bare majority and was elected. In his inaugural, he took pains to explain the objects of the Native American Party, which, he said, were not to create ani- mosity between the native born and foreign born, but "to place our free insti- tutions upon such a basis that those who come after us, the descendants both of the foreign and of the American citizens, may be free and independent." No event of importance happened under Mayor Davis' short administration. He sent in his resigna- tion owing to ill health after having served about seven months. It was not accepted, and he was nominally at the head of city affairs until he died in November, 1845- Josiah Quincy, Jr. Born in Boston, January 17, 1802; died November 2, 1882; served during 1846-48. At the time he took office, the city of Boston had passed through the tran- sition period from town to city, not without many trials; but the city had gained in conveniences through various kinds of service and had prospered greatly notwithstanding several years of severe de- pression. Josiah Quincy, Jr., showed many of the char- acteristics of his distin- guished father, the second Mayor of the city, and the same abounding energy. Mayors of Boston. 29 His first inaugural was devoted to the question of water supply, and his clever presentation of the subject, his energy in obtaining the cooperation of his associates in the government and action by the legislature, had the result that in a few months after his inauguration ground was broken for the beginning of what later became known as the Cochituate water supply, the name being given to Long Pond near Framingham. Three years later, the actual introduction of water from Lake Cochituate to Boston Common was cel- ebrated as a great public event. During the first term, Mayor Quincy had effected an organization of the police force and appointed as city marshal Francis Tukey who made a name for himself as an efficient officer, although he had but a very small force at his command. The license question continued to agitate the city government. The Board of Aldermen refused to issue licenses for the sale of intoxicating liquors. Still the mayor was elected for a third term. Under Josiah Quincy, Jr., the question of making extensive sales of land owned by the city came up. Authorization was obtained for filling a part of the marsh lands on the easterly side of the "Neck," known as the South Bay. Here large tracts of land were graded and made ready for sale. Before he retired from office, Mayor Quincy signed contracts for the building of the Suffolk County Jail on Cambridge and Charles Streets. Among the reforms which took place in the school system under Mayor Quincy was the abolition of the so-called double-headed system of school supervision (see page 104). In his last inaugural, Mayor Quincy called attention to the habit of citizens of escaping taxation by moving into the country by the first of May. He said, "Some of our wealthiest citizens, from their interests in agri- culture or other reasons, find it convenient to leave the city in the month of April." The custom originated long before Boston became a city. Mayor Quincy's plan for circumventing this evasion of taxes was to change the time of assessment on personal property. 30 1S22 — Boston — 1922. The law of 1852 was expected to accomplish this end, but the hope was vain, for the wealthy found other means of escaping taxes. John Prescott Bigelow. Born in Groton, August 25, 1797; died July 4, 1872; served during 1849-51. His administration has been characterized as one of "marked ability and dis- cretion." The year prior to his election, the Mayor and Aldermen had refused to license the sale of intoxi- cating liquors. Mayor Bigelow said that the at- tempt to suppress the traf- fic in this way had utterly failed; and he recom- mended the re-establish- ment of the license system. The Mayor had the sup- port of the grand jury, but when a test case in regard to licensing came up before the Board of Aldermen, the Mayor had not a single supporter. In spite of legal licenses, there was said to be 1,500 places where intoxicating liquors were sold, according to City Marshall Tukey. Mayor Bigelow was opposed to the erection of a new county jail recommended by his predecessor, and for which contracts had been made. But the Aldermen decided to proceed with the work at a reduced expense. The building was completed in 185 1 at an outlay, including the site, of about $450,000. Mayor Bigelow, like his predecessor Quincy, realized that the high rate of taxation made necessary by diverse city projects induced many of the largest owners of personal property to escape into the country at the annual period of taxation. The evil has grown since that time in spite of attempts to check it by legislative enactment. The national census of 1850 gave Boston's popula- tion as 136,881. The rapid growth was due to the Mayors op Boston. 31 opening of railroad communication with the West and steamship communication with the East. The valua- tion of all property within the city amounted to $180,- 000,500. The tax levy was $1,237,000, a rate of $6.80 a thousand; and the funded debt had increased to more than $6,000,000, including the water loans. Mayor Bigelow complained of the heavy burden the city had to bear, but the new work developed made it impossible to reduce the outlay. In the last year of his administration, Mayor Bigelow was able to state that every section of the city was sup- plied with pure water. The entire cost of the water works amounted to $4,321,000. In the same year a new almshouse on Deer Island was completed and the system of telegraphic fire alarms introduced. One of the events under Mayor Bigelow was the attempt to break up a meeting in Faneuil Hall, called to receive George Thompson, then a member of the British parliament, on his arrival in this country. Another was the refusal of the Board of Aldermen to allow Faneuil Hall to be used for a reception in honor of Daniel Webster. The refusal was made on the ground that it might cause a disturbance and aroused intense indignation. The Common Council tried in vain to mend matters by inviting Daniel Webster to address his fellow citizens in Faneuil Hall at another time. The Mayor and Aldermen con- curred later in this invitation. Politically, of course, the whole affair was a blunder, and all who had opposed Mr. Webster found themselves promptly relegated to private life. The crowning event in Mayor Bigelow's career as head of the municipality was the completion of the railroad line connecting Boston with Canada and the Great Lakes. It was celebrated in September, 1851. Benjamin Seaver. Born in Roxbury, April 12, 1795; died February 14, 1856; served during 1852-53. Two elections were necessary before Mr. Seaver was chosen, and at the second he received only one vote more than the united votes of his four opponents. He 32 1822 — Boston — 1922. had been a member of the Common Council for five years, and at the time of his election was in business as an auctioneer. Mayor Seaver applied most of his efforts to keeping down the expenditures for municipal purposes. On his recom- mendation, the Board of Land Commissioners was established in 1853, in place of a joint committee of the City Council. During the first year of his adminis- tration, the tax rate stood at $6.40 and was raised later on to $7.60, in order that all expenditures might be met from taxes. The city debt was reduced $234,000, through the sale of city prop- erty and through higher taxes. Mayor Seaver will be remembered principally through his effort to secure a building for the Public Library (see page 115). Jerome Van Crowninshield Smith. Born in Conway, N. H., July 20, 1800; died August 20, 1879; served during 1854-55. Benjamin Seaver had been nominated by the Whigs; Smith by the Native Amer- ican Party, and Jacob Sleeper by the temperance men. On the third ballot Smith was elected. He was commonly known as Doctor Smith, having taken the degree of medi- cine at Williams College. It is said that Mayor Smith "was never taken quite seriously as the Chief Magistrate." He had many schemes for the bet- terment of the city government, but did not succeed Mayors of Boston. 33 in carrying them out; and some of his ideas were of a singular, if not visionary, character. He did succeed, however, in making a certain reform in the Police De- partment. It consisted in uniting the "watch " and the police under one department in charge of a chief of police, a form of organization which was not materially changed until 1878. During Mayor Smith's administration the voters of Boston accepted the proposal for a new charter (see page 11). Alexander Hamilton Rice. Born in Newton, Mass., August 30, 18 18; died July 22, 1895; served during 1856-57. He was known as the ' ' citizens ' ' ' candidate at the election and had as oppo- nent Dr. Nathaniel Shurt- leff . He announced at the outset that his principal endeavor would be to im- prove the institutions and other affairs of the city without going into costly experiments. During his administration, the better- ment of the territory known as the Back Bay was be- gun. His activity for the betterment of public in- stitutions is told elsewhere (page 140). Mayor Rice has been described as a man of pleasing address, having a knowledge of men and affairs, ability as a speaker, and a keen sense of popular wishes. Under him, expenditures increased materially, especially by the improvement of streets and public lands, and the city debt rose in spite of large receipts from the sale of city property. Frederic Walker Lincoln, Jr. Born in Boston, February 27, 1817; died September 13, 1898; served during 1858-60. Mayor Lincoln was so greatly appreciated as an 34 1822 — Boston — 1922. administrator of municipal affairs, and had so thoroughly gained the confidence of his fellow citizens that, after having served three years, he was later elected to guide the city during the trying period of the Civil War. In the second year of his administration, the Gen- eral Court had passed an act for the annexation of considerable land on the Back Bay, which formerly belonged to the city of Roxbury. Soon after the act had been adopted by the voters, plans were made for turning a part of it into a park, the Public Garden. Mr. Lincoln appears to have been the first mayor to secure Federal co-opera- tion for the improvement of Boston harbor, which had become dangerous to navi- gation through the formation of shoals. At his insti- gation, a number of investigations were made by the United States Engineer Corps which resulted in securing the needed improvement of the ship channels. The panic of 1857 decreased the amount of taxable property, and with a tax rate of $8.60, it was necessary once more to resort to loans. The debt had increased so that it reached a total of $7,623,000. In the year following (1859) the tax rate was raised to $9.70, which made possible a reduction of the debt. Other events during Mayor Lincoln's first administration are recorded on another page. Joseph Milner Wightman. Born in Boston, October 19, 18 12; died January 25, 1885; served during 1861-62. Political feeling ran high at the time, for the clouds of war were gathering over the country. It was also a most trying period in the municipal administration. Business was depressed and retrenchment became nec- essary in all city undertakings. Mayors of Boston. 35 In his first inaugural, Mayor Wightman spoke of the necessity of retrenchment, but added that "works and measures connected with the public wants and improvements already in progress should be prose- cuted with diligence and prudence." During 1861, in spite of an outlay of a quarter of a million dollars for war purposes, the total expenditures fell off owing to extraordinary economy. The city was obliged to borrow, however, for it had reduced the tax rate to $8.90. In 1862, the rate was raised to $10.50, and the net debt was increased by over $1,000,000, due to the expenditures occasioned by the war. The total amount of municipal expenditures was $5,203,306, of which one third was for war objects. In spite of the unpropitious times for the project, Mayor Wightman recommended that a new city hall be built. He was sustained by the City Council, and the cornerstone of the new building was laid on December 22, 1862. Frederic Walker Lincoln, Jr. Second administration, 1863-66. Mr. Wightman had wished to be re-elected, but was defeated because the people felt the need of a stronger guiding hand and a more careful preservation of public moneys. On Mayor Lincoln fell the great burden of being the chief magistrate during the Civil War, and in those troublous times incidents occurred which greatly added to his tribulations, such, for instance, as the draft riot (see page 79) . At the time of the war, the relief of the poor became a particularly pressing question, and Mayor Lincoln had to make needful improvements in the methods of providing relief and preventing undue waste (see 36 1822 — Boston — 192: page 141). The most important new undertaking in A I ay or Lincoln's second administration was the build- ing of the new Chestnut Hill Reservoir. The cost of this work was over $2,000,000. The new City Hall had been finished and was dedicated on September 18, 1865, with becoming ceremony. During the last year of Mayor Lincoln's incumbency the General Court authorized the city to assess abutters who benefited by street improvements. Mayor Lincoln's admin- istration had inevitably been an expensive one, not- withstanding the efforts to keep the outlay as low as possible. The state levies, the bounty tax, and the continued rise in prices, had raised the expenditures to over $6,000,000 in 1864. It became necessary to ad- vance the tax rate to $13.30, and in 1865 to $15.80, which provided sufficient funds not only to pay the expenditures of the last mentioned years which amounted to more than $6,000,000, but to pay off $736,000 on the net debt. The expenditures rose still further in 1866, but by increasing valuations it became possible to reduce the net debt by $500,000, although the tax rate had been lowered to $13. In other words, at the end of the war the debt was only $625,000 larger than in 1861, a very great achievement, for the requirements of the war had been met in a liberal manner, and the city activities had not been dangerously curtailed. Otis Norcross. Born in Boston, November 2, 181 1; died Sep- tember 5, 1882; served during 1867. He was a. man of firmness, who had served with distinction in the Board of Aldermen, abhorred any increase in the city indebtedness, and stood firmly against vague enterprises. Mayors of Boston. 37 The most notable event under Mayor Norcross was the annexation of the city of Roxbury to Boston. The subject had long been under consideration ; and when the Legislature granted the necessary authority, the in- habitants of the two cities voted to accept the act. In January of the follow- ing year Roxbury became a part of Boston; it had at the time 30,000 inhabitants. Although Mayor Nor- cross stood for retrench- ment, the extravagance which marked affairs all over the country after the Civil War could not help affecting Boston, and the city's expenditures increased to over $8,000,000 annually. The Mayor met the situation by securing a tax rate of $15.50, so that the advance in the debt was very slight. Nathaniel Bradstreet Shurtleff. Born in Boston, June 29, 1810; died- October 17, 1874; served during 1868-70. He had been an unsuccessful candidate against Mayor Norcross. Like his predecessor, he recommen- ded strict economy. He was the first Mayor who had always belonged to the democratic party. Mayor Shurtleff 's admin- istration was greatly occu- pied with street extension and improvement made necessary in large part by the growth of South Boston and new developments in East Boston, and leading, among other things, to the building of new bridges 33 1S22 — Boston — 1922. and the establishment of ferries between East Boston and Boston proper. In 1870, Dorchester was united to Boston and added more than 10,000 to the population of the latter city. Mayor Shurtleff did not altogether succeed in trim- ming expenditures, for in the first year of his adminis- tration they rose to more than $9,000,000, while the tax rate was reduced to $12.20. This resulted in an increase in the net debt of $1,486,000. In 1869, the expenditure reached over $12,000,000, with a tax rate of $13.70, and an increase in the debt of more than $2,000,000. In his last inaugural, Mayor Shurtleff once more recom- mended economy and complained of the "costly and uncalled-for luxuriousness ' ' which had marked the city affairs in the preceding years. The debt increased to $2,430,000 in spite of a tax rate of $15.30. William Gaston. Born in Killingly, Conn., October 3, 1820; died January 19, 1894; served during 1871-72. He was called the democratic and citizens' candi- date, and had for his com- petitor, Mr. George O. Car- penter. He was a man of high character, a lawyer by profession, and was univer- sally respected, but he did not seem to have been a man of great force, for otherwise he would in all probability have been elected to a second term. The establishment of a new board of health was the chief act of the munici- pal government during his administration (see page 69). Another important event was the extension of the water system, when in 1871 the supply of water in Lake Cochituate had been found insufficient to supply the growing Wants of Boston (see page 97). From this period dated a systematic development of the water system. Mayors or Boston. 39 By a legislative act of 1871, a new city department was established, known as the Department for the Survey and Inspection of Buildings. The department had hardly been organized when the Great Fire of 1872 occurred which led to many modifications of the building laws. It was probably the dissatisfaction with the manner in which Mayor Gaston managed the Fire Department during the Great Fire that defeated him for a second term. The expenditures under Mayor Gaston rose to a very high figure, which has been ascribed partly to extravagance and partly to the demand for better service. At any rate, the expendi- tures, which had stood at more than $12,000,000 in 1 87 1, rose to nearly $15,000,000 in the following year. Part of this rise, of course, was due to the Great Fire. Henry Lillie Pierce. Born in Stoughton, Mass., August 23, 1825; died December 17, 1896; served during 1873 for ten months. Mayor Pierce had run on a non-partisan platform although nominated by the Republicans. He served only ten months, resigning his office to become a mem- ber of Congress; but they were months of anxiety and great financial burdens. The Great Fire made it nec- essary to straighten and widen the streets in the burned area, which en- tailed an enormous cost. One of his first acts was to seek the reorganization of the Fire Department. An ordinance enabled the City Council to place the department under a paid commis- sion, and authority was given the Mayor to appoint three fire commissioners, to hold office for three years. The new organization proved effective as was soon made evident by a reduction in the rates of insurance. Mayor Pierce's recommendation that the city charter be amended met with some opposition, but he was 40 1S22 — Boston — 1922. finally authorized to appoint a commission to consider the subject. A draft of a new charter was submitted, but failed to receive the approval of the City Council. Under Mayor Pierce, Charlestown, West Roxbury and Brighton were annexed to Boston by vote, the union taking effect in January, 1874. Charlestown at this time had about 30,000 inhabitants, Brighton, 5,000, and West Roxbury, 9,000. The City Council had recommended that the read- ing room in the Public Library should be kept open at certain hours on Sundays. In 1865 and 1872, orders of the same kind had been vetoed by the mayors because they regarded them as a violation of the statute regarding the observance of Sunday, and because they did not believe it would serve general public policy. Mayor Pierce, however, supported the order, which was carried into effect, thus shattering another ancient tradition. The expenditures during his mayoralty term had increased greatly on account of street improvements that could no longer be postponed, and which amounted to more than $18,000,000. There was also an advance in the debt, due in part to the annexations mentioned above. Samuel Crocker Cobb. Born in Taunton, May 22, 1826; died February 18, 1 891; served during 1874-76. Mayor Cobb was elected by a nearly unanimous vote, the first occurrence of this kind recorded in the munic- ipal history of Boston. He had experience in city affairs and was a man of pronounced courage, a firm believer in a nonpartisan administration of local affairs. He was much concerned with the establishment of public parks in different sections of Boston and instru- mental in forwarding the park movement generally (see page 120). Under Mayor Cobb, on petition of the City Council, the General Court passed an act authorizing the appointment of the Boston Water Board, to be organ- ized on the same basis as the health and fire boards. Mayors op Boston. 4i There had long been trouble over the question of issuing liquor licenses. Mayor Cobb announced in his first inaugural that he would "use all legal means to carry into effect a law which should have for its object the regulation and restraint of the liquor traffic." A license law was secured shortly afterwards, to be exe- cuted by a board of three license commissioners, to be appointed by the Mayor, with the consent of the City Council. Another innovation under Mayor Cobb was the establishment of a board of registrars of voters, to consist of three persons ap- pointed by the Mayor, with the approval of the Board of Aldermen. There had been much dissatisfaction over the manner in which election affairs were looked after. Hitherto, a ward clerk and six inspectors had been elected by the quali- fied voters of each ward to superintend elections and count the votes. Mayor Cobb was authorized to appoint three of the six inspectors in each ward, hoping thereby to do away with the frequent election scandals, but the reform was not sufficiently drastic. Finally, in 1878, the city was divided into voting precincts of five hundred registered voters in each, as nearly as possible, and the Mayor was authorized to appoint two inspectors representing different political parties. The event of greatest historical interest during Mayor Cobb's administration was the celebration of the one hundredth anniversary of the battle of Bunker Hill. It is related that on this occasion many men who had taken leading parts in the war of the rebellion, both Unionists and Confederates, met for the first time in peace. Mayor Cobb stood for strict economy, and in 1874 the tax rate was placed at $15.60 so that expenditures could be met from taxes. His attitude can be summed 42 1822 — Boston — 1922. up in his own words contained in the last address to the City Council: "The question for us, therefore, is not what expenditures and enterprises would be desirable or ornamental for the future, but what are indispensable for health, for order, for security, and for the accom- modation of such traffic as there is, for maintaining the public property in repair, and keeping the machinery of our vital institutions of education, charity and reform in vigorous operation." In 1875 and 1876 the tax rate was lowered in order to reduce the burden of taxation. Frederick Octavius Prince. Born in Boston, January 18, 1818; died June 6, 1899; served during 1877. He was a candidate of the democratic party and defeated his opponent, Nathaniel J. Bradlee, a candidate of the republican party and citizens organi- zation, by 5,000 votes. Mayor Prince had not previously been connected with the city government. Being regarded as a special representative of his party, he found some difficulty in adjusting the demands of his supporters to the best interest of the city. Like his predecessor he advocated retrenchment and succeeded in reducing the tax levy about one-half million dollars. Under him, appropriations were made for improved sewerage, a new building for the English High and Latin schools and for a Back Bay park. Indeed, one may date the development of the park system from the administration of Mayor Prince. Mayors or Boston. 43 Henry Lillie Pierce. Second administration, 1878. Dissatisfaction with Mayor Prince's administration found expression in a peti- tion of 2,500 tax payers in which they asked Mr. Pierce, who had retired from Congress, to become the citizens' candidate for Mayor. He heeded the call and had for his oppo- nent Air. Prince, who was renominated by the Dem- ocrats. The contest was very bitter. In his address to the city government, Mayor Pierce said, among other things, "While I am fully sen- sible of the defects in our present system of municipal administration, I cannot help regarding with distrust any scheme for curing them by a radical change of the New England system under which we have grown up, and which, notwithstanding its defects, has thus far produced better results than any other system that has been tried in this country." Mayor Pierce reorganized the Police Department, which at this time consisted of 7.15 men who were appointed by the Mayor with the approval of the Aldermen. The result did not prove satisfactory, and thereupon the Mayor advocated placing the police under a commission ; it was done (see page 80) . The tax rate was reduced to $12.80, owing to the continued diminution in expenditures. Frederick Octavius Prince. Second administration, 1879-81. Mr. Pierce declined a re-election, and ex-Mayor Prince again stood as a candidate of the democrats, being opposed by Colonel Charles R. Codman, nomi- nated by the citizens' group and the republicans. 44 1S22 — Boston — 1922. There was a feeling abroad that Mr. Prince had been badly used in the previous election, and the reaction in his favor which had set in brought him this time a plurality of about 700 votes. His second administration showed so far an improvement over the previous one that he was elected for a third term over the republican candidate, Solomon B. Stebbins, by a majority of more than 2,000 votes. The city government at this time was chiefly en- gaged in completing meas- ^K^v^^jk ures for municipal improve- ment that already had been ^. £ begun, among them were the improvement of the sewerage system, park con- struction on the Back Bay, the enlargement of water- works, and the erection of a new building for the English High and Latin schools. At the end of Mayor Prince's incumbency, the most important projects before the city were the erection of the new Court House, the Public Library building, and the establishment of public parks in different parts of the city. In 1880, the city government celebrated the 250th anniversary of the settlement of Boston. On this occasion the statue of John Winthrop was unveiled on Scollay square. Mayor Prince stood distinctly for retrenchment, but the prosperity beginning in 1880 created a demand for additional improvements. Expenditures increased; so did also the tax rate which reached $15.20 and enabled a reduction of the city debt. Mayor Prince did not approve of the common atti- tude toward municipal expenditures. In his inaugural, he said that the citizens of Boston were "disposed to regard many things, which elsewhere are considered municipal luxuries, as municipal necessaries, and yet they are unwilling to pay the cost of them." The president of the Common Council stated the situation Mayors or Boston. 45 He was inter- in regard to municipal expenditures clearly and con- cisely in saying, "We plan and provide for the present only. Our policy leads to temporary expedients and make-shifts." He, too, found that the demands of the citizens were too great and necessitated a cost above that to be found in other municipalities. Samuel Abbott Green. Born in Groton, March 16, 1830; died December 5, 1918; served during 1882. Mayor Green served for one year ested in promoting the public park system to which the city had been committed during the pre- vious years, and suggested that a large part of the Franklin Fund might be used by the city "for a purpose kindred to public parks." He would, there- fore, apply the income from this fund toward the "embellishment of Boston ' ' under certain conditions, believing that this would be in accordance with the expressed desire of Benjamin Franklin "and would lead the way clear to give the name of the great printer, philosopher, and statesman to one of the new parks." He also manifested interest in the public school system and public library. Under Mayor Green's administration the tax rate was $15.10, but it was not sufficient to meet the in- creased expenditures, particularly on account of outlay for the park system. Albert Palmer. Born in Candia, New Hampshire, January 17, 1831; died May 21, 1887; served during 1883. Like his predecessor, Mayor Palmer served but one year. Business had revived, but retrenchment was still 4 6 1 82 2 — Boston — 1922. insisted upon. Indeed, in his inaugural Mayor Palmer characterized economy as "the imperial word that domi- nates the hour." He was much concerned about cor- ruption in the election of municipal officers, and said it was becoming increas- ingly obvious in regard to the electoral system that ' ' with each succeeding elec- tion the greatest evil that vitiates its purity and hon- esty and imperils its use- fulness as a means to the end of good government, is the employment of money to secure the success of candidates, whether of one party or the other, in sums so large as to far exceed the limit of legitimate political expenditure." He proposed various changes in the registration laws and would not have the payment of the poll tax as a requisite to voting. Mayor Palmer complained that the government of the city of Boston was too largely in the hands of appointive officers and not of elective officers, and that most of the large municipal departments were com- mitted to the keeping of commissions. No new munici- pal undertaking was begun under him. Augustus Pearl Martin. Born in Abbot, Maine, November 23, 1835; died March 13, 1902; served during 1884. Mayor Martin remained in office for but one year. He deplored the increasing debt and the departure from the policy of pay-as-you-go. His administration was largely concerned with carrying out public works begun under preceding mayors. He declared himself in favor of electing aldermen by districts instead of on a general ticket, on the ground that under a district system u a more direct responsibility, a more accurate representation of the will of the people would be Mayors of Boston. 47 ensured, and by bringing the issue nearer home, our citizens would be incited to increased interest in municipal affairs." A noteworthy stand was taken by Mayor Martin against political interference with city employees. He found that such interference had been most disastrous in the fire and police departments, but he directed specific attention to the inroads it had made among laborers on public works, claiming that their chance to work "depended upon the ticket given or sold to them by some politician, or upon the contribution of a day's wages for political pur- poses." He would have heads of departments free to select the necessary work- men without dictation from any quarter. As he put it, 1 ' The loss to the city from the employment of un- skilled foremen and inef- ficient workmen billeted upon heads of departments cannot be measured by the current expenses of a single year." In 1884 (conse- quently while Mayor Martin was in office), the civil service law was enacted and that, together with the charter of 1885, helped improve conditions. Mayor Martin carried out vigorously the policy of meeting expenditures from taxes and reducing the debt. To bring about this desired result, a tax rate of $17 was imposed, making possible a reduction of $1,748,000 in the net debt. Hugh O'Brien. Born in Ireland, July 13, 1827; died August 1, 1895; served during 1885-88. He was the first Mayor of Boston not of native birth, and his popularity was attested to by his re-election for four consecutive terms. During the first year of his administration, the charter reforms of 1885 went into effect (see page 12). 48 1822 — Boston — 1922. Mayor O'Brien was very much concerned about proper methods of street improvements. It had been remarked by an earlier administration ' ' that the gov- ernment of Boston, from its infancy (as shown in its streets) has still within a few years been without method, depending chiefly upon the individual fancy or convenience of property owners instead of being directed by municipal authority." Mayor O'Brien said that during the previous years Boston had "ex- pended millions of dollars for widening and extending streets that could have been saved if some systematic plan had been adopted." He was instrumental, under the new charter, in bring- ing about improvements in street work of great value. Another question of great concern to Mayor O'Brien was that of the tax rate. He believed that it should be limited by law and the maximum placed at $15; but the General Court took the matter into its own hands, and the rate was fixed in 1885 at $12.80, all above the amount of $9 being for the state tax and city debt. He was actually able to keep within the prescribed tax limit of 1885, and to bring the city debt within the 2 per cent limit. Mayor O'Brien was dissatisfied with the charter amendments of 1885. His predilection was for giving the Mayor full power, saying, "If he does not do his duty, turn him out." He asked, "Why should Boston be singled out for special legislation? In other words, the citizens of Boston ought to be allowed the largest liberty in governing themselves, because they are more competent to organize departments for the efficient government of the city under such general laws." Throughout his administration, he stood firmly against interference in city affairs by the General Court. Mayors or Boston. 49 Thomas Norton Hart. Born in North Reading, Mass., January 20, 1829; served 1889-90. He was elected as a protest against the alleged par- tisanship in the city govern- ment. Among the several recommendations in his first inaugural was a re- duction of city depart- ments. They then num- bered over fifty, and some of them were not even re- quired to publish reports. He advocated the consoli- dation of the entire Street Department, the Sewer, Bridge and Lamp Depart- ments, the Health Depart- ment and the Building Department into a Department of Public Works. Furthermore, he would have all charitable institutions and relief work placed under a board of three salaried members. A number of minor changes in regard to the work of various departments were also suggested by him. The first year of Mayor Hart's administration showed a large net increase in borrowing, but the next year (1890) the net debt increased but $267,000, and the margin for borrowing was considerably extended. Nathan Matthews, Jr. Born in Boston, March 28, 1854; served during 1891-94. The best evidence of the effectiveness of Mayor Matthews' administration is contained in his valedic- tory address, which is not merely a review of his own work, but based upon patient search into the past history of municipal government of Boston. This ad- dress supplies the first general description of the city administration published since the time of Quincy's municipal history., which ended with the year 1830. So 1822 — Boston — 1922. If one should single out special features of Mayor Matthews' administration, one would perhaps give first place to his insight into the organization and functions of city government, his grasp of municipal finance, and his outspokenness in condemning what to him seemed improper or wrong. Among constructive measures affecting the govern- mental machinery itself, which were introduced by Mayor Matthews, may be mentioned the consolidation of the departments of Cambridge Bridge, Sewers and Sanitary Police with the Street Department, under a single superintendent; and the abolition of the Ancient Records Commission whose work was assigned to the City Registrar. Mayor Matthews stood distinctly for a longer term of office for the Mayor and his executive officers than had hitherto prevailed, favoring that heads of de- partments as well as subor- dinate officers should hold office until death, resig- nation, or removal. The City Council of 1892 passed an ordinance forbidding city employees to serve on political committees. An attempt to repeal the ord- inance the following year was prevented by the Mayor's veto. Thus Boston was the first, and cer- tainly remained the sole public body in the country at the time of Mayor Matthews' administration which pro- hibited office holders from serving on political com- mittees or acting as delegates to political conventions. In regard to the legislative branch of the city govern- ment, he opposed the bi-cameral system, and would substitute a single legislative body. He condemned un- qualifiedly the election of the Board of Street Commis- sioners by popular vote. Mention has been made elsewhere of the Mayor's pronounced opposition to the interference by the state in city affairs (see page 17). Accordingly, he advo- Mayors of Boston. 51 cated strongly the abolition of the State Board of Police, holding that it was "not responsible to the city govern- ment, and composed necessarily of gentlemen who, whatever their personal qualifications, are yet regarded by the majority of the voters of this city with dis- trust." He also asserted that the Police Department had never been "so mismanaged as between the years 1889 and 1893." Of Mayor Matthews' fiscal reforms there is not room to write at length. He stood steadfastly against an expansion in the city expenditures except for abso- lutely necessary purposes. During his term of four years, he vetoed 241 loans or items in loan bills involv- ing an expenditure of $2,683,375, an( i could say at the end of his administration : ' ' No loans have been issued for current expenses during the last four fiscal years." Mayor Matthews' general concern regarding ques- tions relating to public health has been noted else- where. He foresaw that the water supply from the Sudbury river system would soon reach the limit of its capacity, and he was instrumental in having the Gen- eral Court authorize the State Board of Health to make an elaborate inquiry into future sources of water supply. He was especially eager to see more attention paid to industrial education than heretofore and advocated a liberal appropriation for the establishment of the Mechanic Arts High School. The building for this branch of school work was opened in 1893. During his term, fourteen primary schools and three grammar schools were constructed while others were begun. The Suffolk County Court House was completed; the Public Library was nearly completed, and various buildings on the public parks were constructed, not to mention the different structures for the use of other city departments. Aside from making many improvements in the construction of public streets and their maintenance, including determined efforts to secure for the city an adequate compensation for the use of streets, Mayor Matthews took an active part in promoting the con- struction of the first subway. The necessary legis- lative authority was obtained in 1894 an( ^ subsequently 52 1822 — Boston — 1922. ratified by popular vote. That this momentous step was taken can in large part be attributed to the far- sighted policy initiated by the Mayor. Much attention was given to the development of the park system within the city, and the Mayor felt it advisable "that the city should lend its aid in every legitimate way to the scheme of Metropolitan park improvements." Mayor Matthews had a keen eye to the development of commercial facilities of Boston and made valuable recommendations for their extension, but it did not fall to him to engage in constructive work of this kind on a large scale. Edwin Upton Curtis. Born in Roxbury, March 26, 1861; died March 28, 1922; served during 1895. Mayor Curtis was much engaged with changes in the city departments, both as to organization and practice. He recom- mended that the park police be placed under the Board of Police, so that the entire police force might be under one head. This consolidation was effected by legislation during his term. The election machin- ery at the time was con- trolled by the Mayor, the Board of Aldermen, the City Clerk, the Registrars of Voters, and the Superintendent of Public Buildings; the details of the work, however, were in charge of the City Clerk and the Registrars of Voters. This cumber- some machinery, with its divided responsibility and great expense, Mayor Curtis would supplant by a Board of Election consisting of four commissioners selected from each of the two great political parties, to be appointed by the Mayor for a term of five years. The Mayors of Boston. 53 necessary legislative authority was obtained, and the Board of Election Commissioners took office in 1895. Aside from recommending the consolidation of the two water departments, of the Engineering and Sur- veying Departments, as well as the abolition of the City Architect's office, Mayor Curtis took a decided stand against three-headed commissions, believing that the duties of each could be discharged better and more economically by one man. He, accordingly, proposed that the Board of Fire Commissioners, the Board of Commissioners of Public Institutions, and the Boston Water Board be abolished. At the same time he would increase compensations, so as to command the services of the best men. In the course of time, all of these recommendations bore fruit. Like most of his predecessors, Mayor Curtis found it difficult under the $9 tax rate to meet the require- ments of the city, both in respect to obligations for work undertaken and to improvements demanded for ordinary purposes. Gn his recommendation, a com- mission of citizens was appointed to look into the finances of the city and make a report within three months. This commission was established and even- tually brought in a voluminous report containing many significant criticisms and recommendations, some of which were repeated by the Finance Commission, of which the committee appointed by Mayor Curtis may be regarded as a precursor. The net increase in the debt in 1895 was $3,562,000. JOSIAH QUINCY. Born in Quincy, October 15, 1859; died September 8, 1 9 19; served during 1896-99. Josiah Quincy was elected under the legislative act of 1895 for a term of two years, and re-elected in 1898. He was the third Mayor to bear the name of his family. In no other instance has the same family given more than one Mayor to Boston. As one scans the pages recording his administration, the family likeness between him and the other two Quincys is striking. The three men distinguished 54 1822 — Boston — 1922. themselves as students of the theory of municipal government and were much concerned with it; they showed the same ardent desire that the poor as well as the rich should share the benefits which a municipal administration might confer; and, above all, they were not content with passive policies, but strove for improvements and cast about for new methods and means of making municipal administra- tion more effective. The last Josiah Quincy came into office at a time when municipal expenditures had greatly increased. His immediate concern was to bring to a conclusion the public works and under- takings begun under his predecessors. In regard to finance, to paraphrase his own words, he established the policy that it was the business of the city of Boston to spend money for objects that would bring her poorer citizens some of the comforts enjoyed by the more fortunately situated. On other pages have been told at length of the many changes as well as better methods he instituted in charitable and correctional institutions, and how he experimented to this end. It was on his initiative that the system of placing city departments under unpaid boards had its beginning. No branch of the city's activities escaped his notice. His interest in school affairs was especially keen. In this connection, it may be stated that his policy regarding the School Com- mittee differed from that of most Mayors in that he would have it appointed by the Mayor, thereby plac- ing it on exactly the same basis as the other executive departments. Perhaps the memorial by which Mayor Quincy will best be remembered is to be found in the system of play- grounds and gymnasia and of more adequate public baths carried out so vigorously under him. In addi- Mayors or Boston. 55 tion to the many departmental changes brought about, he established two new departments, namely, the Print- ing Department and the Statistics Department. The first mentioned remained in an experimental stage for some time, but was finally placed on a business basis. Mayor Quincy's administration of four years was assuredly progressive but also expensive. There was a great outlay for street improvements in 1896; the subway appropriation had grown; and the schools demanded more money. Although the receipts of the city increased at the same time, it was necessary to resort to more borrowing. In 1897, the total expendi- tures of the city amounted to more than $27,000,000. Again large sums were spent for street improvement, particularly for the long neglected system of sewers. The expenditures in 1898 were $1,700,000 below those of 1897; and the increase in the net debt, $2,- 740,000. The tax rate stood at $13.60. During the last year under Mayor Quincy, there again occurred an increased expenditure for streets and schools. Dis- content with the alleged too generous outlay of public money became more and more marked, finally ending in the election of a conservative successor. Mayor Quincy has told the story of his own admin- istration in an address delivered at the seventy-fifth anniversary of the city. Thomas Norton Hart. Second administration, 1900-01. In his first inaugural of January 1, 1900, Mayor Hart, who had been elected by a plurality of 2,281 over his democratic opponent, called attention to an im- portant oversight regarding the accumulating burden of debt incurred by the Commonwealth for certain large undertakings by the metropolitan boards. Boston's share of this metropolitan debt, he stated, has never been ascertained. He thought it amounted to not less than $20,000,000, but this liability appeared no- where in the city's accounts. A communication on this subject from the State Auditor showed in 1900 a total metropolitan debt of $37,565,912, but this was a 56 1822 — Boston — 1922. state and not a city debt. The city was only liable for the payment of annual assessments. State officials apparently regarded this debt in the same light. In his inaugural of 1901, Mayor Hart discussed the confusing mixture of city, state and county govern- ment imposed on Boston, observing that this scattering of power ' ' would never have taken place had City Hall proved equal to all de- mands." According to his view, home rule for Boston could probably be realized when "playing politics" ceased and municipal con- ditions became such as to deserve it. Under Mayor Hart, the memorable settlement was effected with the Common- wealth for Boston's water supply system, which had passed into the control of the Metropolitan Water Board in 1898. It was the largest financial transaction to which the city had been a part (see page 99). In 1901, the administra- tion was occupied with the rising costs of the schools, streets, new bridges, estimated to cost $2,750,000, the working of the eight-hour law for city employees, etc. On the subject of schools, Mayor Hart said, "The transfer of government power from City Hall to the School Committee has plunged the latter into political confusion, and the financial rights of the School Depart- ment are not equal to its wants." He favored the transfer of all the real estate operations pertaining to schools to a separate department, under control of the Mayor. This suggestion was adopted, and, by an act of 1901, the Schoolhouse Department was established, with three salaried commissioners, appointed by the Mayor, who should select school sites, plan, erect, re- pair and furnish school buildings, all appropriations for such remaining in charge of the School Committee. The important project of the Charles River Basin came up for action in 1901 . Mayor Hart recommended Mayors of Boston. 57 and the City Council accepted the legislative act pro- viding for the appointment of a committee to investi- gate and report on the construction of a dam across the river between Boston and Cambridge. He favored a measure which would raise the tax to $12 and the debt limit to 2 J per cent in order that Boston might be placed on the same footing as other cities. He wanted Boston to have enough borrowing capacity to complete the work already begun and to provide for other require- ments. The General Court granted the request in regard to debt limit, but refused to raise the tax limit above $10.50. Patrick Andrew Collins. Born in Fermoy, Ireland, March 12, 1844; died September 14, 1905; served during 1902-05 (eight months of 1905). Mayor Collins took office after a distinguished public career of four years in the State Legislature, six years as Congressman, and four years as United States Consul General at London. In his first inaugural address, he said: "The chief trouble with commercial Boston is that it seeks to do all its best business in one square mile of land. The result is congestion, very high rents within that area, and somewhat ragged prospects beyond. More busin ess_c^ntr es of the first class . . . w ill jnake Bostnn^ajT gtt.pir'a.rirl a.j ggatgr c ity. For this purpose I niay*De_ counted_aii expan- sijonist_of_t he most ex treme^ type. " He favored a new city hallcosting lroin$L500,ooo to $2,000,000, worthy of the city and located at some distance from the present site, so that it might help to create a new center of activity, and he was opposed to any temporary make- shift that might bring the problem to the front again in ten years. 5S 1S22 — Boston — 1922. Mayor Collins deprecated the high debt and running expenses, and deemed rigid economy in all departments as imperative. Boston was getting back to the prac- tice of borrowing for improvements. The net debt in 1902 increased nearly $6,936,000, which was the largest advance for years. Mayor Collins remarked, "The obvious fact cannot be ignored that Boston either plunges or is rushed into deeper debt every year." He engaged an expert municipal accountant to discover and check waste, and several special reports were submitted by him. He persistently objected to need- less and questionable drafts upon the city's borrowing power for public improvements, whether demanded by the General Court or requested by the City Council. For instance, in 1902, he vetoed a loan order amounting to $2,494,300 passed by the City Council, containing over twenty appropriations for playgrounds, bath- houses, wardrooms, etc. Again, in 1905, he vetoed the City Council's approval of an act by the General Court commanding the City Hospital Trustees to erect a relief station in East Boston at an expense not ex- ceeding $100,000, the City Treasurer having been ordered to issue bonds for the amount without the approval of the Mayor. "It is doubtful," the veto stated, "whether any such insidious and sinister assault upon self-government in Boston has been hitherto attempted, but it is certain that none like it has yet been imposed upon us." On the death of Mayor Collins, September 14, 1905, Daniel A. Whelton, Chairman of the Board of Alder- men, became Acting Mayor, serving until January 1, 1906. John Francis Fitzgerald. Born in Boston, February 11, 1863; served during 1906-07. Mayor Fitzgerald had served as a member of the Common Council, as a state senator, and finally as a member of Congress. His plurality over the repub- lican opponent was 8,143, or less than one third of that of Mayor Collins in 1903. Mayors or Boston. 59 In his first inaugural address, he gave special atten- tion, among other things, to the financial burdens of the city, the escape of much personal property from taxation, the reorganization of the Street Depart- ment, the erection of a new city hall, a hospital for consumptives, the adoption of a pension system, and a largely increased installation of water meters. As a result of the Mayor's contention that the Street Department had become unwieldy and altogether too burdensome and compli- cated for a single official to manage, an ordinance was adopted in 1906 dividing it into six separate depart- ments. This ordinance was repealed in 1908. Increasing and irritating criticism of the financial conditions of the city and the methods followed by his administration led the Mayor to recommend the appointment of a finance commission to make a special investigation of munici- pal affairs by authority of the city government rather than the state. In 1907, such a commission was ap- pointed, consisting of seven members selected by seven leading commercial organizations (see page 182). It was instructed to examine into all matters pertaining to the finances of the city and to submit its final report not later than December 31, 1908. Another body, the Water Front Commission, ap- pointed by Mayor Fitzgerald in 1907, submitted an important report on needed improvements for the port of Boston, and a third commission instigated by him made a report on garbage disposal. In the last month of Mayor Fitzgerald's first admin- istration, the special reports of the Finance Commis- sion, as reproduced in the newspapers, attracted much attention, particularly the reference to certain improper municipal contracts and to the "present alarming in- debtedness of the city." 6o 1822 — Boston — 1922. George Albee Hibbard. Born in Boston, October 27, 1864; died May 29, 1910; served during 1908-09. A republican and former postmaster in Boston, he was elected for a two-year term by a plurality of 2,177 over John F. Fitzgerald. This was brought about by the candidacy of a third contestant, John A. Coul- thurst, who was nominated by the Non-Partisan and Independence League groups, and received the remarkable vote of 15,811. Mayor Hibbard's admin- istration was chiefly made notable by the investiga- tions of the Finance Commission, created by chapter 562, Acts of 1908, and expiring by limitation on Decem- ber 31 of same year. The exhaustive examination made convinced the commission and a large number of citizens that for the improvement of municipal condi- tions a new charter was imperative. In 1909 the Legis- lature enacted the Amended Boston City Charter of 1909 (see page 13). On November 2, 1909, the voters accepted the new charter by a majority of 3,894, which, among other things, provided for a city council of nine members and a mayoralty term of four years. Among the various new features of the charter not included in the popular referendum was that providing for the re-establishing of the City Record as an official weekly publication. In form and make-up this gazette was a reproduction of that issued in 1 898-1900. Mayor Hibbard's determination to give the city a non-partisan and strictly economical administration was realized in a decrease of loans from $11,292,300 for the two years 1906-07 to $8,268,300 for his term, or 1908-09, also in a notable decrease of department expenditures. An average annual increase of such expenditures, amounting to 4.3 per cent had occurred Mayors or Boston. 61 throughout the preceding ten years. Furthermore, the number of city employees (excluding the School and Police departments not in control of the Mayor) was 945 less in 1909 than in 1907. John Francis Fitzgerald. Second administration, 19 10-13. The election for a mayoralty term of four years, as provided by the new char- ter, was preceded by a strenuous contest between ex-Mayor Fitzgerald and James J. Storrow; but not- withstanding the arguments employed against Fitzger- ald and the great resources of the opposition, he was elected by a plurality of 1,402 votes. Mayor Fitzgerald had the advantage of beginning his second term under better charter provisions. Most of his first inaugural he devoted to the financial conditions of the city. The heavy burden of debt and taxation imposed by the state, the increasing cost of maintaining public institutions, and the fact that so many advantages were shared by untold thousands of nonresidents, went far, in his opinion, to show that the city govern- ment of Boston was not chiefly responsible for the extravagance pointed out by its citizens. Some important departmental changes were made by the Mayor at the outset. By an ordinance, the Department of Public Works was established, com- bining the Street, Water and Engineering departments, and placing them in charge of a Commissioner of Public Works, at a salary of $9,000 per year. Although the City Messenger and the Clerk of Committees departments had been abolished by the new charter along with the Board of Aldermen and the Common Council, the new City Council had power under the 62 1822 — Boston — 1922. charter to establish the offices it deemed necessary to the conduct of its affairs and reappointed the officials of the old City Council, but at reduced salaries. The permanent Finance Commission established under the charter had begun its official existence the year before. Between March 17, 19 10, and April 1, 191 1, Mayor Fitzgerald submitted twenty-eight official requests for investigation and report by the Finance Commission, the more important of which referred to public school methods and proposed changes, increase of teachers' salaries, etc. He gave much time to city planning, motor fire apparatus, garbage disposal, playground extension, high pressure fire system, laborers' retire- ment plan, the City Hall Annex, and to new district municipal buildings. These were the leading improve- ments his administration sought to promote. The annexation of Hyde Park occurred on January 1, 19 12. In January, 19 14, the City Planning Board, consisting of five unpaid members, was established by ordinance, and seven district buildings containing public halls, branch libraries, baths, etc., were in process of erection. James Michael Curley. Born in Boston, November 20, 1874; served during 1914-17. The new Mayor won over his opponent, Thomas J. Kenny, by a majority of 5,700. He had long expe- rience in municipal affairs as member of the old City Council, subsequently as an alderman, and lastly as a member of the City Coun- cil established by the char- ter of 1909. Still later he had been a member of Con- gress. Mayor Curley was the first in the long line of Mayors who in his inaugu- ral address devoted considerable space to the need of developing the industries of Boston and of the greater Mayors of Boston. 63 utilization of its port. Among his other recommenda- tions were: monthly conferences on city planning, in which committees representing all the leading interests should participate, the establishment of a central pur- chasing department in charge of an expert buyer at wholesale, to meet all requirements for supplies; the abolition of the correctional institutions for boys, more durable street construction, etc. Mayor Curley took a strong stand for a gradual can- cellation of the city debt by the substitution of a pay- as-you-go policy for the wasteful habit of borrowing, with its heavy annual interest charges and temptations to extravagance. In 19 15, a bill was submitted to the General Court, on his instigation, calling for increased tax rates in order to make his financial plan possible. But the opposition was too strong ; the real estate interests contended that they should not stand an increase of $2 or more in the tax rate even if an eventual advantage might accrue. A notable event during Mayor Curley 's administra- tion was the establishment of the segregated budget system to have supervision of all details and method in preparing annual appropriation schedules of the departments. The total debt (exclusive of the rapid transit loan) decreased $5,799,141; the number of city employees under the control of the Mayor was reduced by 117, while the departmental expenditures increased only 11.93 per cent, or an average of 2.98 per cent per year, as compared with 5.69 per cent average yearly increase in the preceding administration. Like many of his democratic predecessors, Mayor Curley has been a persistent advocate of home rule for Boston, maintaining that the parental oversight of Boston affairs by the General Court holds back the development of the city and is an obstacle to the. effectiveness of the municipal government. Andrew James Peters. Born in Jamaica Plain, April 3, 1872; served during 1918-21. Mayor Peters, who had represented the nth District in Congress for four consecutive terms, came to 64 1822 — Boston — 1922. the office with the prestige of the largest plurality (9,075) given a mayor since 1903. He had pledged himself to a non-partisan administration and advocated complete political freedom for city employees and their classification according to the value of their services. Decreasing revenue and increasing costs made addi- tional taxes imperative. The Mayor's request for raising the tax limit for city purposes from $6.52 to $9.52 in 1918 and 1919 was granted by the Legislature ; it was followed by an in- crease to $10.52 in 1920 and to $11 for 1921. The tax rate went up to $21.20 in 1918, and by 1921 reached the maximum of $24.70, the mounting bud- get of the School Committee since 191 8 being responsible for $3.55 of this increase. Rising tax rates were the rule throughout the country, and in most cities Boston's rate was exceeded. During Mayor Peters' administration the actual income in excess of the total estimated income was $3,769,327 in 1919, $3,817,250 in 1920, and $2,046,809 in 1921, while the net debt was reduced by $4,657,166 or, with the rapid transit debt omitted, $6,998,166. Special attention to street improvement resulted in the construction or repaving of 313 miles of roadway and 75 miles of artificial stone sidewalks. The most important single undertaking was the construction of Stuart street, a broad highway to extend from Wash- ington street to Huntington avenue. The ferry service was improved by the additon of two steel ferryboats and the repair of others; the two pumping stations of the high pressure fire service were completed ; and also new public buildings costing $1,582,000. The Mayor found that control of the charitable institutions by unpaid boards of trustees was imprac- ticable, and proposed to merge them and the Penal Institutions Department in a single institutions depart- Mayors of Boston. 65 ment, in charge of one commissioner. An ordinance to this effect was adopted by the City Council. Mayor Peters persistently contended that the munic- ipalities of the Metropolitan District, or "Greater Boston," should be consolidated in one governmental unit, maintaining that a merging of largely identical interests would bring far more civic and economic advantage to all concerned than any temporary local disadvantages. James Michael Curley. Second administration, 1922. At the dawn of the one hundredth anniversary of the incorporation of the city of Boston, former Mayor Curley was elected in a spectacular campaign over his opponents, John R. Murphy, Charles S. O'Connor, and Charles S. Baxter, by a plurality of 2,470. Mayor Curley at once made it a chief aim during his administration to work for the expansion of Boston's commerce and industry, and to that end established a Bureau of Commerce and Industry, which has borne fruit. Hitherto the municipality as such has never made the development of Boston commercially its particular duty except sporadically and without a set plan. Another new municipal venture has been the estab- lishment of a municipal employment bureau. Within two months after its creation the number of unem- ployed in the city had been reduced from approximately 75,000 to 45,000. The placement of ex-service men has been a particular concern of the new bureau, and so successfully consummated that the Soldiers' Relief Department has been able to save upward of $20,000 a month in its disbursements for the relief of the veterans of the late war. 66 1S22 — Boston — 1922. At the birth of the second century of Boston's existence as a city, many plans for the betterment of municipal conditions are being considered, but Boston has again been obliged by the General Court to live within a tax rate for city purposes of $12.25. In one hundred years, Boston has elected thirty- seven Mayors and there have been five ex-officio acting Mayors. Five Mayors have been elected for other than consecutive terms, and twenty-five were re-elected one or more terms. The Mayor longest in office was Frederick Walker Lincoln, who served seven years. Next in length of service were the first Mayor Quincy and Mayor Fitzgerald, each of whom served six years. Seven Mayors served four years, namely, Prince, O'Brien, Matthews, Quincy (the third), Hart, Curley and Peters. There are at the present writing four living ex- Mayors, Thomas Norton Hart, Nathan Matthews, John Francis Fitzgerald and Andrew James Peters. The chief events in the careers of the different Mayors are recorded in the preceding pages. A critical exam- ination of their acts, the ideals they followed in munici- pal administration, and the ability and faithfulness they brought to their great tasks, lies beyond the scope of this outline. During one hundred years the civic center of Boston has shifted very slightly from its original location. Until 1830 the Mayor and Council occupied the Old Stone Court House, also known as Johnson Hall, on School street. From 1830 to 1841 the Old State House at the head of State street served as the City Hall. From 1 84 1 until the present time, or about seventy- five years, the site of the municipal administration has remained in School street, and for more than fifty years in the present City Hall, dedicated in 1865, and its annex (completed and first occupied in 19 14) located on the only lot of land belonging to the city in Boston proper which has been continuously devoted to public uses since the early days of the town. It was at one time the site of the jail. Public Health. 67 PUBLIC HEALTH. While Boston was still a town, the Board of Health was in charge of twelve members — one elected from each ward. The first charter placed the Health Depart- ment under the City Council, which, in turn, delegated its control to three commissioners of health. •''The department itself consisted of two branches, one con- cerned with the enforcement of quarantine regulations, the other having control of sanitary conditions within the city." Josiah Quincy seems to have been the first Mayor who clashed with the Board of Health in the early days. Among other things, the question arose about jurisdiction over the streets in the matter of cleaning them. As Mayor Quincy himself told the story, "the control of carrying away the street dirt was admitted to be within the power of the Mayor and the Board of Aldermen, but of the house dirt the Board of Aldermen claimed the exclusive jurisdiction and denied the right of inter-meddling on that subject. What was house dirt and what was street dirt and whether yard dirt belonged to either and to which, began to be questions of solemn and dividing import." The differences between Mayor Quincy and the three- headed Board of Health led in 1824 to its displacement by a single commissioner:-''' (Mayor Quincy established a thorough system of street cleaning and of collecting garbage. He purchased horses and wagons to facili- tate the workj In the earlier days the street dirt had been considered the property of the farmers, "who came when they pleased, took what they pleased, in the manner they pleased." This may have been a cheap method, but it was costly from the point of view of public health. The collection of house offal was also taken over by the Board of Health; formerly it had been done by contractors. The degree of cleanliness obtained and the abatement of nuisances under Mayor Quincy had the effect of per- ceptibly lowering the death rate, which is stated to have 68 1822 — Boston — 1922. been 20 per 1,000 inhabitants in 1825, as against 23 per 1,000 for the preceding ten years. The Mayor himself was very much satisfied with the result of his efforts, for he wrote on the 20th of July, 1825, in reply to a letter from one of the city authorities of Philadel- phia, as follows: "So well regulated are our city teams and operations that, notwithstanding the excessive heat of last week, the whole number of complaints for neglect in carrying away the household, dirt in the whole city for that week was but four. J I do not believe it is possible for any city of equal population to carry into effect this species of cleaning at a less expense, or more thoroughly or to more general satisfaction." Mayor Quincy's successor bore testimony to the street cleaning campaign started by his predecessor, but characterized the sweeping and cleaning of the streets as "practised to a needless and pernicious extreme." But the citizens once having become accus- tomed to the sanitary conditions prevailing under Mayor Quincy insisted that the standards he set should be maintained. Naturally, ^these improvements cost considerable money; in other words, the expenditure for health purposes was more than doubled in a few years. An extraordinary expenditure was caused in 1832 by the occurrence of asiatic cholera which made it necessary to erect temporary hospitals. The Board of Health at that time did not appear to have attached to it regular physicians. The Health Department proceeded on the lines laid out by Mayor Quincy until 1847, when the control of the department was transferred to the Board of Mayor and Aldermen. The reasons for this change are a little obscure. Meanwhile expenditures for health pur- poses had advanced rapidly. In 1844, they stood at $33,800, but by 1859 had reached a total of $140,288. The control of the health of the city by the Board of Aldermen does not seem to have been altogether happy. Many questions of sanitary science had arisen as the city grew in population and required expert advice for their proper consideration. Previously the Board of Aldermen had only called in consulting physicians in times of emergency; but these physicians were elected Public Health. 69 by the City Council, and it naturally became difficult to secure the services of prominent men under such con- ditions. Moreover, the aldermen were not always dis- posed to accept professional advice which might run counter to their own notions and lay bare their inca- pacity as health experts. Gradually a demand was made for a change in the organization and powers of the Board of Health. Among other things, it was ascer- tained that there was no proper inspection of the sale of food unfit for consumption. Furthermore, the board of consulting physicians had attributed the high death rate of upward of 24 per 1,000 inhabitants to the lack of cleanliness in the city streets and the existence of many "pest holes." After several years of agitation an unsuccessful attempt was made in 1871 to establish a board of health which should be independent of the Aldermen. Fin- ally, in 1872, an ordinance was secured which gave the Mayor power, subject to the approval of the City Coun- cil, to appoint three persons not members of the Council, who should serve as a board of health. The new board was given all the powers previously exercised by the Aldermen relating to public health matters, except street cleaning and the collection of garbage. It was also empowered to appoint a superintendent of health, two physicians, — one for the city and the other for the port of Boston, — all subject to the approval of the Mayor. A decade earlier the city government had considered embarking upon a new venture distinctly related to public health, but not one to be controlled by the Board of Health, namely, the establishment of public baths. In i860 a special committee had been appointed "to consider and report what measures, if any, can be adopted to provide such facilities for cheap bathing as will induce all persons to avail themselves of the means provided." The establishment of public baths was at once recommended, but had to await the termina- tion of the Civil War. Six free bath houses were pro- vided in 1866, but only for use during the summer months. Mayor Shurtleff stated that the benefit from this innovation had been commended by visitors and had led other municipalities to adopt similar 70 1S22 — Boston- — 1922. measures. The cost of maintaining the public baths was at the outset a charge upon the Health Depart- ment. An added expense was a purchase in 1866 of a steam dredging machine for cleaning the docks near the outlet of the sewers. The greater efficiency obtained under the Board of Health, as established in 1873, was shown in a diminu- tion of the death rate. Among other things, the board also helped to bring about a better disposal of sewage, and thereby checking the great number of summer dis- eases arising from a defective system which menaced the health of the city, as sewers were permitted to empty into tide water on all sides of Boston. By 1887, the expenditure on account of public health had risen to about $611,000 and was almost trebled in the succeeding decade, when it reached a total of $1,763,917. The expense was to some extent offset by the receipts of the department. From the very incep- tion of the health service, the custom had been estab- lished of selling garbage, ashes and offal to advantage. There were also other sources of income. At one time the receipts from the various sources had amounted to 10 per cent or more of the total expenditure for health, but later on (1898) the sale of house offal, which had been the most important item in the receipts, was discontinued and more modern methods introduced for its disposal. In the course of years, the Board of Health had grown into a very formidable department with many func- tions. It had charge of the quarantine, the smallpox hospital, the public bath houses and certain of the public cemeteries; it attended to many matters of inspection relating to the abatement of nuisances, licensed undertakers, etc. The board also had special powers granted by legislative acts in regard to such things as defective plumbing, obnoxious vaults, etc., but its chief function was the prevention of disease of all kinds, and for this purpose it employed many physicians and inspectors. It is curious that for a long time the inspection of milk, vinegar and provisions generally was in the hands of special officials not directed by the Board of Health. Public Health. 71 Whatever may have been the defects in the working system of the Board of Health, its efforts showed results in a lower death rate due to preventable causes. Mayor Matthews in his valedictory address, in 1895, said, "The average percentage of deaths from these causes (preventable) during the last ten years has been 18.45 per cent of the total number of deaths, while during the ten years next preceding the percentage was 26.78 and the city can no longer be officially described as 'one of the most unhealthy of large cities.'" Mayor Matthews, nevertheless, found that the death rate in Boston from preventable disease was larger than in London and Paris and some other great cities and, therefore, larger than it should be. Under his admin- istration, in addition to many other measures for im- proving the health work, the metropolitan sewerage system was completed which added greatly to the sanitary measures taken for the protection of the public health. In 1893, a law was passed which gave the Board of Health power to compel the abatement of nuisances of various kinds by proceedings in equity. Among the measures inaugurated under Mayor Matthews, which had an important bearing upon the public health, was that of a better method of street watering. Previously all watering had been done by private contractors who made special agreement with house owners. The cost was excessive and led to the passage of a law which empowered any city with a population of 30,000 inhabitants to appropriate money for watering any or all of its public streets, with the proviso that any part of the expenditure might be assessed upon the abutters. Hitherto the city had expended a ridiculously small sum for street watering, the first specific appropriation for this purpose amount- ing to $50,000. The opposition to the assessment plan proved so formidable that the city was restricted to watering only the macadamized streets, leaving the rest of them to be dealt with according to the wishes of the inhabitants under the old contract system. It was not until 1897 that the city began to water all the streets. Within a four-mile radius the cost was de- frayed by special assessments ; beyond it the city bore 72 1S22 — Boston — 1922. the entire cost. This method of caring for street watering was financially so successful that the work could be carried on without any expenditure of the city's funds, but in 1900 Boston took over the entire cost and thereby lost a source of income which also contributed to the necessity of raising the tax limit from $9 to $10.50. The expenditures for public health were increased after 1896 through certain innovations which, although not under control of the Board of Health, had a very direct bearing upon public health in general. The reference is to the remarkable development of public bath houses and gymnasia under Mayor Quincy. This branch of the municipal service, in addition to affording great pleasure, contributed much to improve the conditions of cleanliness and health in many dis- tricts of the city. Mayor Quincy regarded the pro- vision of public baths as one of the general obligations of the city "to secure in some measure the enjoyment by all of at least a minimum of elementary social advantages." An additional reason for the gradual mounting of expenses for health purposes was the adoption of new methods of disposing of refuse. For many years the custom had obtained of dumping garbage at sea or selling it to be fed to pigs. Under Mayor Quincy, the process of reduction of garbage was introduced and a contract entered into with the New England Sanitary Product Company by which it should pay the city $50,000 per year for ten years for disposing of the garbage. The city also gained some income from the sale of papers and other waste under contract with the so-called City Refuse Utilization Company. The ques- tion of the disposal of the garbage and other refuse has been a bone of great contention throughout the history of the city; but it is not essentially a part of the history of the Health Service. ^-"^ The Board of Health continued to be in charge of three commissioners, appointed by the Mayor, until \ 19 14, when it was placed in charge of one executive, — - i the Health Commissioner, a "qualified physician and expert in sanitation," who was given power to appoint Public Health. 73 the four deputy commissioners provided for by the ordinance. Experience had amply shown that a three- headed commission was not only a cumbersome instru- ment of administering health duties but also one lack- ing efficiency. Another important change was the transfer of the quarantine station to the United States Public Health Service. Hitherto, Boston had been the guardian of public health, not only for its own citizens but for the state and far beyond, through its quarantine responsibilities. This involved a cost which, self -evidently, should be borne by the Federal Government. The development of public health work has made such rapid strides of late years that the protection afforded the City of Boston not only during the earlier periods, but down to quite recent times, may seem strangely inadequate. This was due in part to lack of appreciation of the necessity of health work and in part to the inefficiency of the officials charged with the execution of the different laws affecting public health, yet progress was made ; and with a better understand- ing of modern health work, the morale of those who executed the laws has been raised to a higher and higher standard. How well the city is able at the present time to safe- guard the health of the citizens is best told in the reduction of the death rate which in 1920 stood at 14.05 per 1,000 inhabitants, or about one half of the death rate prevailing in the seventies. Self -evidently, the reduction in the death rate is not to be attributed solely to health measures, for the steady improvement of hospital facilities and the better opportunities for prompt and efficient medical care have had a share in it which no one can adequately measure. To what importance the Health Department has grown may perhaps be most readily seen by mentioning that it consists at the present time of the following divisions: Medical, Child Hygiene, Sanitary, Food Inspection, Laboratory, Quarantine, Vital Statistics, Records and Accounts; the last mentioned division being in charge of the Division of Vital Statistics. The implication is not only the establishment of an elabo- 74 1S22 — Boston — 1922. rate machinery but of an expert personnel, for it is required that each head of the many divisions be specially qualified for work in his particular field. In the last twenty years the Health Department has received from regular departmental appropriations a total of $3,293,339. The expenditure of the depart- ment from 1901-02 to 1909-10, by ten-year periods, averaged $212,616. From 1911-12 to 1920-21, the ten-year average has been $329,333. In other words, the per cent of increase in the last ten-year period over the first ten-year period has been 55.63 per cent. Police Protection. 75 POLICE PROTECTION. The efforts to provide adequate protection for life and property naturally took root in the time when Boston still was a town. ! The custom had been for the selectmen to appoint each year two classes of police known as the "watchmen" and the "constables./ t> ' The watchmen were on duty at night, under the com- mand of a single captain, and patrolled the badly lighted streets with lanterns and "rattles." During the first decade of the city government, there were not more than eighteen men on duty at the same time. Ordinarily, no police protection was required during the day, and there appears to have been little demand for it even at night. The constables, although being liable to regular police duties, were chiefly concerned with serving civil processes. j The first city charter did not affect the organization of the police, except that their appointment was now vested in the Mayor and Aldermen. There was not even a notable increase in the expenditure for police protection for about ten years. KThis department of the city government, however, was reorganized by Mayor Quincy when he took office in 1823. He placed the "internal" police under a city marshal, and the "external" police, which had to do with quarantine regulations, under a single commissioner/ With a small force at his command and without adding to it, he succeeded in securing better protection against criminals than had been known for many years. During the incumbency of Mayor Wells, in 1833, the increase in population, which now amounted to about seventy thousand, made it necessary to augment the police force or the "watch," as it was still called. Mayor Wells recommended that the watch be sent on duty at an early hour, which necessitated an increase of the force. There was one special reason for this, namely, the influx of immigrants in the early thirties most of whom were Irish. As in all cases of an intro- 76 1S22 — Boston — -1922. duction of new elements of population, friction arose among the natives and the foreigners who had come to settle among them. This does not imply anything more than the ordinary racial antipathy, for the immi- grants were not accused of special criminal tendencies, but the difference in religious observances proved a prolific source of trouble and even of persecution. In this respect Boston merely witnessed what has taken place in most communities of this country when the immigrant, no matter of what creed or race, first took up his abode among strangers. The expenditures for police purposes increased from J $11,000 in 1832 to $27,000 in 1834 I n the last men- tioned year the sudden extraordinary expenditures occurred owing to an "anticipated" riot in August of that year. On the night of August 1 1 a mob destroyed the Ursuline convent in Charlestown (now Somerville). All sorts of dark stories had been circulated about this institution, which maintained a school attended almost exclusively by Protestant pupils. The outbreak was merely an indication of the survival of the religious intolerance which had marked the early colonists. It is unnecessary here to give the details of the destruction of this convent by fire; the story has so often been told. The act was denounced at a public meeting called by prominent men as "a base and cowardly act." In a resolution adopted, and after speeches by such men as Mr. Quincy and Mr. Otis, Mayor Theodore Lyman was requested to appoint a committee of citizens to investigate the affair and to bring the rioters to justice. There was excellent ground for anticipating a riot since the mob announced its intention of returning the next day for new de- struction. Several other conflicts happened which made it necessary to increase the police force. Among them was the so-called Broad street riot that took place on Sunday, June 11, 1837. It originated in the collision between a fire engine company and an Irish funeral procession. Extraordinary means were required to restore order. The police force proved inadequate, and the day was saved only by the accidental presence Police Protection. 77 in Boston of a company of mounted militia. Mayor Eliot placed himself at the head of it, and Broad street was soon cleared of the rioters. This incident espe- cially gave rise to a demand for a larger and better organized police force. In 1838, legislation was ob- tained for the appointment of officers for police duty^ only, in place of the constables. They were to be appointed by the Mayor and Aldermen and put under the control of the city marshal. This bit of legislation marked the beginning of a permanent force of day police in the city of Boston.— From 1838 to 1844, the expenditures for police pro- tection rose gradually, but hardly in keeping with the increase in population. In 1844, the total amount had reached $57,000, in round numbers. Then came a sudden increase to $73,000 in 1845, due to the reorgani- zation of the department which called for a larger force and provided for an independent night police, under the control of the city marshal. The dual system of police protection continued in effect until 1854, when the watch and the police were, combined under a chief of police. This brought the expenditures to over $173,000. After 1849, the individ- ual salaries had been added to, so that /Constables of the watch received from $1 to $1.25 and the men from $0.90 to $1 per day. A few years later both night and day police were given $2. By 1856, not only had new mem- bers been added to the force, but the erection of police stations had begun. The total force at that time consisted of two hundred and forty-six men, or one to every six hundred and fifty inhabitants. Strange as it may seem to the present generation, the policemen were not placed in uniform until 1858. It was done in order to increase their efficiency; yet the innovation met with considerable protest. But citizens, who had occasion to look for a policeman, were glad of the change which made it possible to distinguish him from an ordinary citizen, even if some held that the uniform was an old world custom and not in keeping with democratic ideas. The wisdom of providing more liberally for police protection was again demonstrated during an anti- 78 1S22 — Boston — 1922. slavery riot in Court Square when it was attempted to release Anthony Burns, a fugitive slave, who had been arrested and was temporarily confined in the city prison. In i860, when Boston had a population of more than one hundred and seventy-seven thousand, there was still another collision between the abolitionists and those who were opposed to the anti-slavery agitation. A meeting was held in Tremont Temple by the aboli- tionists to commemorate the anniversary of the execu- tion of John Brown, and to consider the question, "How can American slavery be abolished?" Many opponents of the abolitionists entered the hall, took charge of the meeting and prevented the original program from being carried out. The anti-slavery people postponed their meeting until the evening, and although there had been small riots in different parts of the city, the police had been sufficient to maintain order. But it became known that the Mayor held two companies of cavalry at their armories in case of emer- gency. This implied a lack of reliance upon the police, caused severe criticism of the then Mayor Wightman, and gave rise to the first attempt to transfer the appoint- ment of the police to the Commonwealth. A good many people favored it, even among those who had no special love for the abolitionists. The affair so agitated the public mind that a committee was appointed by the General Court to look into the conditions of the Boston police force. Public sentiment for local self-government proved so strong, however, that Boston was permitted to man- age her own police affairs until it should be demon- strated that she was incapable of so doing. The movement for the appointment of the police by the state authorities came up several times in the following years, but only to be defeated. The expenditures due to the inevitable increase in the police force and the higher rate of pay rose to $328,000 in 1863. This was the period of the Civil War and of extraordinary conditions. As the chief of police put it in his annual report for 1862, "The labors of the Police Department have been very Police Protection. 79 greatly increased by important, new and arduous duties growing out of the unnatural Civil War in which the country has been plunged by mad disorganizers and fanatics." As an instance of the extraordinary work of the police may be mentioned the part it played in quelling the draft riot of July 14, 1863, which neces- sitated an outlay of $30,000. Owing to a failure to fill military quotas by volun- tary enlistment, two assistant provost -marshals, who had been sent into a disreputable quarter of the North End to serve notice on men drafted for military serv- ice, were assaulted by the wife of one of them. The marshals fled, and the policemen who had come to the rescue were nearly beaten to death by the mob. The whole North End was soon aflame with revolt. The police were driven out of the district and took refuge in their station house. A similar riot occurred in New York two days previously and with partial suc- cess. Heartened by this news, the mob prepared for a real conflict with the authorities. Mayor Lincoln, however, was equal to the emergency ; he collected the available militia companies in the city and when the mob charged the Cooper Street Armory, a cannon shot from within scattered the mob which broke through Dock Square in order to sack a gun store. An advance guard of policemen held the mob in check until the Mayor and his military forces came up and effectively dispersed it. As a matter of safety — ■ for no one knew what the times might bring — ■ the police force was increased, in 1864, to 350 men. There was considerable dispute at this period in regard to the necessary size of the police force. Mayor Lincoln, for instance, stated in his inau- gural that the ratio of police to population was not equal to that in New York and called for more men, and a small increase was permitted. An aftermath of the Civil War was an increase in crime, as noted by Mayor Norcross in his inaugural of 1867. But his apprehensions seemed unnecessary to many, and the police force was reduced to 344 men. The expenditures for protection fell a little in conse- quence but still remained at $433,000. But popula- So 1822 — Boston — 1922. tion grew, and the city territory was extended by annexations, so that the police force could not be main- tained at the former low figure. In 1873, it consisted °f 533 officers, and the expenditures were $683,000. Still it is probable, as Mayor Pierce contended, that no city in the country of equal population was pro- tected by so small a number of policemen. Meanwhile the method of appointing police officers was modified ( 1 863) . Instead of being appointed annu- ally, which was regarded by the chief of police at that time as detrimental to discipline and efficiency, the police officers were now to hold their positions during good behavior. The Police Department had been commended for its very efficient service in protecting and restoring property at the Great Fire of 1872. Among other things, property to the value of $400,000 had been taken by persons who had attempted to carry it away, but the police recovered the greater part. Neverthe- less, great dissatisfaction was expressed over lack of discipline. Mayor Cobb stated in his inaugural of 1876 that the department would be greatly improved both in efficiency and economy by being placed in charge of a commission. Hitherto the powers over the police had been divided among the Mayor, Aldermen and the chief of the force. As a substitute, it was proposed to have the Mayor, with the approval of the City Council, appoint three police commissioners to serve for three years. This reform was finally embodied in the law of 1878, which also provided for the removal of the commissioners for cause by a two thirds vote of each branch of the City Council. The commissioners were charged with the appointment of policemen and also with the issue of liquor licenses. The new arrangement did not last very long and cannot be said to have been wholly successful. The commissioners were of necessity under political pressure, and there was a constant change in the personnel. Soon a new plan was involved and put into operation through the law of 1885, which gave the Governor authority to appoint three citizens of Boston from the Police Protection. 8i two principal political parties who should constitute the board of police. These commissioners were to serve for five-year periods. The idea underlying the new law was, partly, that by making the commissioners state appointees, they would not be so liable to political influence on part of the City Council, but especially that they would enforce the liquor law with more severity. Thus another step away from local self- government had been taken, for, although Boston was to provide accommodations for the police and pay them, it had no authority over the board of police itself. The civil service law, which had been enacted the previous year (1884), helped to make the tenure of office of the police officers more secure. Of what tremendous importance the police force had become may be gathered also from the fact that the cost of its maintenance rose from $882,000 in 1874 "to more than $1,000,000 in 1886. There were more or less successful attempts at retrenchment, resulting at times in a reduction of the force as well as a lower scale of pay; but this condition could not be continued. The heavy cost of police protection from 1875 to 1886 was chiefly due to the unavoidable increases in the force required by the expansion of public grounds and parks. As early as in 1875, it had become advisable to provide saddle horses for the police in the suburbs of the city. The steamboat "Protector" had also been pur- chased at a large outlay to enable the police efficiently to patrol the harbor. The management of the police was destined to under- go still another important modification. The final change in the law affecting the government of the police took place in 1906, when it was turned over to a single commissioner. If regret had been expressed over the control of the police through a bi-partisan board, it grew so much keener when the department was placed under a commissioner, appointed by the Governor of the Commonwealth. How strong the feeling was on the subject of taking the control of the police away from the city had many times been shown in the inaugurals of different mayors. Mayor Matthews 82 1822 — Boston — 1922. condemned without qualification the state control of the police. Mayor Quincy, in 1896, found fault be- cause the expenditures incurred by a state-appointed board were increasing in an unwarrantable manner. He would at least "limit to some reasonable percentage, corresponding to the growth of the financial resources of the city, the right of this board to increase from year to year its requisitions on the city treasury." Mayor Patrick Collins characterized the appointment of three police commissioners by the Governor, under the act of 1885, as a "violation of the first principle of home rule, and a needless and profitless wound to the pride of the first city in the Commonwealth." The control of the City of Boston by the General Court has always been resented, yet the tendency has been to increase rather than diminish it, presumably under the pretense that Boston has shown less and less ability to manage its own affairs. How, in other respects than that of the police, the General Court has taken away home rule from Boston and accompany- ing powers enjoyed by all other cities of the Common- wealth is mentioned in other places. How far the police measures of 1885 and 1906 were successful as administrative reforms cannot easily be determined and is beyond the range of this story. One notes, however, that the rise in the amount of money required by the police from 1886 to 1921 has been great. On the other hand, considerable addition of work has been placed on the police which formerly was regarded as outside of their province, for instance the listing of polls and several other special duties. The police pension system dates from 1878. The act of that year required the affirmative vote of all the members of the force and the approval of the chief of police for the retirement of anyone disabled in actual performance of duty, or who had performed faithful service for a period of not less than fifteen years; but the pension could not exceed one third of the salary they received at the time of retirement. The original pension law was made more liberal in later years, and by 1908 the outlay for pensions had risen to $131,000, or about 6 per cent of the total department expenditures, Police Protection. 83 and in 192 1 to $184,382. The invested money of the Police Charitable Fund was $207,550 at the end of 1920 and that of the Police Charitable Association, $232,005. The expenditures for police protection reached the sum of more than $2,000,000 in 1908. There were many contributing causes to this increase in outlay. Laws had been enacted authorizing the appointment of a reserve police force of such a size as the City Coun- cil should determine, the latter fixing it at 100. The maximum was again increased in 1888, and police pay was fixed at not less than $2.50 a day when on duty. It is unnecessary to follow the various changes in the strength of the police force from year to year; suffice it to note that in 1894 "the Board of Police asked the city government to provide for an increase of patrol- men from 679 to 1,000. The authority was granted, though it did not seem at the time an absolutely necessary increase. Under an Act of 1907, the force received an addition of 100 members in order that there might be granted one day in fifteen for relief from duty. Then, too, the salaries were increased which helped to swell the total expenditures. Another source of extra cost to the city was the installation of a signal system which now has become an essential part of the police machinery. In the ensuing years, several new and exacting duties were entrusted to the police. In 1908, under a legis- lative act, the police were charged with the task of investigating jury lists at the request of the Election Commissioners. In the first year of this law, nearly 8,000 citizens were investigated "with reference to their moral, mental and physical qualifications or defects" to serve as jurors. The advent of the automobile naturally increased the traffic difficulties in the city, and finally the Street Commissioners were obliged to establish rules and regu- lations for street traffic on this account to be enforced by the police. How the automobiles have augmented the difficulties in keeping traffic "moving" in later years is too obvious for special mention. But to the 84 1S22 — Boston — 1922. police it meant extra work and finally necessitated the establishment of a special traffic squad, which, of course, required an addition to the force. From 1910 to 1918 the work of the Police Depart- ment kept on its even course, except for the strenuous watchfulness and care demanded during our participa- tion in the Great War. But in 19 19 the much debated police strike took place. It had its origin in the ques- tion, "Whether the Boston Police as a body should be allowed to affiliate with the American Federation of Labor." The story of the acute crisis within the Police Department on account of this ' ' strike " is of too recent a date to be discussed in detail. Suffice it to say that it gave rise to turbulence and riots, that the militia was called upon for temporary patrol duty, and that the striking police were finally discharged from the service in great numbers, so that it became necessary to organ- ize a new force of patrolmen. From September, 19 19, till November, 1920, there were appointed 1,570 patrol- men. The three officials chiefly responsible for the "settlement" of this famous strike were the Commis- sioner of Police, the late Edwin U. Curtis, Andrew J. Peters, Mayor, and Calvin Coolidge, Governor. The total cost for police protection in 1822 was $8,899.52 and a hundred years later, $3,787,446. The numberless details of the work exacted from the Boston police cannot here be described in detail, nor can be recorded the acts of bravery and general faith- fulness to duty which has characterized the Boston police. Even in times when "muck-raking" of city departments was in fashion all over the country, the police force of Boston was credited with being clean and efficient. Fire Protection. 85 FIRE PROTECTION. The charter of 1822 did not change the old system of fire protection which existed under the town govern- ment ; the only innovation provided that the firewards should henceforth be elected by the voters, three from each ward: Thus the firewards constituted a board of thirty-six men without any head; and the old method of fighting fire prevailed. -The city had inherited from the town some loosely organized volunteer fire com- panies whose members were not under pay, but re- ceived a small stipend in premiums and allowances for their quarterly dinners. The members of these com- panies were exempt from militia and jury duty. These privileges, together with the circumstance that mem- bership in fire companies gave a certain social standing, made it comparatively easy to secure the necessary number of volunteers. The equipment consisted of hand engines, hose, ladders, buckets, etc., all of which were furnished by the city. The companies were controlled by the board of firewards, which not only had power to order citizens to assist in extinguishing fires, but also to regulate the construction of buildings and the storing of powder. The efficiency of the fire companies ''chiefly depended upon the aid of the inhabitants applied under the authority of the fire- wards. They formed lanes of bystanders who, by their direction, passed buckets of water from pumps or wells in the vicinity to the engines playing on the fire and returned them for further supply." This system had its origin in the days when the inhabitants were few and "a respect for the rights of property was general." Great conflagrations were uncommon at the time, for the buildings although mostly of wood were widely separated by gardens or yards. Insurance had not yet come into general vogue, and the occasional loss of a building aroused great sympathy in the com- S6 1S22 — Boston- — 1922. munity. "The duty of joining some fire company and assisting at every fire was, therefore, regarded as imperious. 'V It fell to Mayor Quincy, the second chief magistrate of Boston, to better the system of fire protection. Among the particular reasons for abolishing the anti- quated methods inherited from the town, Mayor Quincy mentions in his Municipal History that Boston was at the time in a transition state and so fast advanc- ing in population that ties of individual interest were diminished. Moreover, he found that "the establish- ment of insurance offices had, in most cases, transferred the loss upon capitalists; and poverty and crime, multiplying with numbers, began to regard fires as harvests, from the gleaning of which they had not principle enough to abstain." The members of the old volunteer organization resented any proposed change. "To be first, nearest and most conspicuous at fires was the ambition of the enginemen, and the use of hose, as it had a tendency to deprive them of this gratification, was opposed." In short, however brave and fearless these volunteer firemen were, they were not amenable to discipline, and when in 1823 they demanded more money for entertainment, which was refused them by the City Council, they gave notice that on the first of the ensu- ing December, they would deliver up their engines and resign their offices. They carried out this threat, but on the evening of the same day Mayor Quincy was able to announce to the City Council that new volunteer engine companies had been organized in connection with every engine and that the Fire Department of the city was in its usual state of efficiency. / Mayor Quincy thereupon proceeded to reorganize the Fire Department from top to bottom. At first he met with considerable opposition, but a fire occurred /in 1825 which in the course of a few hours destroyed 53 houses and stores and caused a loss of half a million dollars. This gave strong support to the Mayor's contention for better methods and stricter discipline. He had still to contend with many vexatious delays and opposition in different quarters. It was not until Fire Protection. 87 1825 that a law was passed abolishing the old board of fire wards and transferring its powers to a chief engineer and his assistants, all of whom were to be appointed by the Mayor and Aldermen. Meanwhile, a citizen who had been a member of one of the board of fire- wards, George Darracott, was commissioned to visit Philadelphia and New York for the purpose of study- ing methods of fire protection and organization. When the act permitting the Mayor to establish a new fire department was submitted to the voters, the contest over it was very close; in fact, the act was adopted by a majority of only 183 voters, so tenaciously did the /citizens of Boston cling to inherited methods and prejudices. The first chief engineer of the Boston Fire Depart- ment was Samuel D. Harris, who is to be remembered, aside from his efficiency in building up the department, for his refusal to accept a salary. The men still re- mained unpaid volunteer bodies, and he believed that they would more willingly trust an unpaid leader. Although the insurance companies had at first been somewhat hostile to the changes, they now showed confidence by granting substantial reductions in in- surance rates. -/From this time on the outlay for fire protection grew year by year. The fire apparatus was added to, new engine houses were erected, and a system of reservoirs throughout the city was provided for. Under the town government there had been no reservoirs to draw water from in case of a fire. After the Fire Department had been placed on a satisfactory basis, the expenditures on its account began to decline until a further reorganization of the department took place, in 1837/ The immediate cause which led to a reorganization was the Broad street riot (see page 75), in which the fire companies played a conspicuous if not altogether commendable part. When the affair was finally investigated by the City Council, the blame was found to rest about equally on the firemen and the citizens of Irish origin who were conducting a funeral and had collided with the firemen. The occurrence made evident the lack of discipline in the department. Mayor Eliot, who had quelled the SS 1822 — Boston — 1922. riot, believed that better order and obedience could be maintained with a small force of paid firemen. They were not, however, according to his suggestion, to de- vote their entire time to fighting fires, or to be con- stantly on hand for that purpose, but were to be called from their regular work as need arose. The new system did not lack opponents, for during several weeks it was necessary to maintain volunteer patrols all over Boston to guard the city against incendiaries. The allowance made by the city by way of compensation was very small, ranging until 1845 from $150 a year for assistant engineers to $65 a year for the "privates." * The chief engineer received a salary of $1,000 per year. In the latter part of the forties the gnywth of the city made necessary extra expenditures for fire protection. New engine houses were built, as well as reservoirs; and the city became more liberal in its pay to firemen. In 1845, the pay of the "privates" was raised to $80 per annum, and in 1851 it was increased to $100. After the introduction of a new water system it became superfluous to build more reservoirs specifically intended to supply fire engines with water. Still the outlay of the Fire Department grew rapidly, also in consequence of the installation of a new system of telegraphic fire alarms invented by William F.Chan- ning, a citizen of Boston. From the very first it proved its usefulness and was generally adopted elsewhere. The first steam fire engine was introduced in 1855, but was not at first regarded as practical. Several years later, however, there are records of the purchase of two additional fire engines in 1858 and of four more in 1859. The cost of fire protection at the end of the fifties amounted to $132,267 per year. During the same period the old-time hand engines were rapidly replaced by steam engines which were still drawn by men, although horses had been used to some extent in drawing the hose carts. These changes had made possible a reduction in the force of the department from 700 to 422. In i860, the transition from old to more modern Fire Protection. 89 methods of fighting fire had about been completed, and it was possible to effect further reduction in the number of the force. There was general satisfaction with the new order of things. Expenditures for fire protection increased somewhat in the first years of the Civil War on account of the larger pay given to the regular force and to the construction of engine houses. The growth of expenditures in 1868 was due to an increase in the force and equipment made necessary by the growth of the city. Then occurred an extraordinary increase from $491,394 in 1871 to $756,526 in 1872 and $812,205 in 1873. The last mentioned increase recorded the effect of the Great Fire. On Saturday evening, November 9, 1872, a fire broke out in a four-story granite block at the corner of Summer and Kingston streets. It raged until Sun- day afternoon. By that time an area of sixty-five acres had been burned over in the center of the business district and property to the value of $75,000,000 had been destroyed. For some unknown reason, there was a serious delay before an alarm was given, and when the department arrived the fire had made tremendous headway. To add to the difficulty, almost all the horses in the city had been attacked by a distemper, for lack of a better name called "the epizootic," which for over a week made them useless. The department had anticipated difficulty on this account and taken the precaution of doubling the men on guard. There was also a serious lack of water for, as at former fires, it was found that the pipes were not large enough to supply the engines with the quantity required. Help was sought from all the neighboring cities and towns, but the fire had grown beyond control. In the con- struction of buildings at that time, although many of them were of granite, the art of fireproofing was not thought of, and the mansard roof then so common made them dangerous in case of a great fire. The night and day had been one of excitement, the community was on the verge of a panic, and it was nec- essary to place the city under military rule to prevent pilfering of property and to establish order. Seven hundred and seventy-six buildings had been destroyed, 90 1822 — Boston — 1922. all but sixty-seven being of brick or stone. The city set itself bravely to the task of affording relief to the sufferers, repairing the damage done, and to taking measures of precaution against recurrence of another conflagration. Mayor Gaston appointed a committee to investigate the fire and to state what reforms were necessary. Legislation was urged for fireproof con- struction, more serviceable water hydrants with larger pipes, additional fire apparatus, more men and more powerful engines. Of course, as usual in such instances, a strong crit- icism was directed against the Chief of the Fire Depart- ment, Damrell by name, but it deserves to be recorded that his work during the fire was approved by the chief engineers of eastern Massachusetts at a meeting called to consider the conduct of the Fire Department. The fact was, as a joint standing committee of the city government reported, that the great disaster was not due to any mismanagement on the part of those in con- trol, but to the lack of an adequate water supply. The emergency seemed sufficient to make a special session of the General Court desirable and one was called forth- with by Governor Washburn, at the request of the City Council. Among the acts passed at the special session was one authorizing the insurance companies of the Commonwealth, which for the greater part had been bankrupted by the fire, to reorganize. More important was the act "for the regulation and inspec- tion of buildings, the more effectual prevention of fire and the better protection of life and property in Boston." Within a few months several other fires occurred which at other times would have been regarded as very serious, and on Memorial Day of 1873 still another fire broke out that burned over two acres of land and destroyed property to the value of $1,000,000, includ- ing many important buildings. Once more a reor- ganization of the Fire Department was demanded and especially that its control should be vested in a paid board. Mayor Pierce had recommended this step in 1873 but encountered strong opposition. Finally, and one may say, as a direct result of the fire of May Fire Protection. 91 30, an ordinance was passed which gave the Mayor power to appoint three paid fire commissioners, with the approval of the City Council, the commissioners to hold office for three years. This was a great step for- ward since the commissioners were empowered to appoint all the members of the department and to fix their rate of pay. The insurance companies showed their faith in the new method of organization by reduc- ing premiums for fire risks. The new commissioners had practically completed their work on reorganization of the Fire Department by 1874. The task, as already noted, involved a gen- eral increase in expenditures; but for several years following the outlay was kept fairly level. It is greatly to the credit of the fire commissioners that they were able to make the department more efficient without a large outlay of money. It is curious to note, however, that in 1877 there occurred not only a decrease in the force of fire fighters, but also a reduction in their salaries. Beginning with 1880, the expenditures for fire protection again arose as the growth of the city demanded an increase in the force. In the same year (1880) a pension system for the disabled and infirm firemen saw its beginnings, under authority of a legis- lative act which provided that the Board -of Fire Com- missioners, with the approval of the Mayor, might pension any member of the department who had be- come permanently disabled while on duty, or a member of the "permanent force" who had served fifteen con- secutive years and who had become incapacitated from other causes. There was also a provision for annuities to the families of firemen who were killed while per- forming their duty. The amount allowed in pensions was one half of his salary to a man who had become incapacitated while fighting fire and not more than one-third of the salary to those who had become dis- abled for other reasons. The pension system was changed by subsequent legislation, so that members of the "call" force were made eligible to pensions, provided they had served fifteen consecutive years. The allowance to the en- tirely disabled firemen was increased from one half to 92 1822 — Boston — 1922. two thirds of their salaries, while those who retired after fifteen years of service from the regular force were allowed a pension equal to not more than one half of their salaries. In addition to an eventual income from pensions to members, the Fire Department has its own special relief fund, under the control of the fire commissioner and twelve members of the department who are elected annually. In 1921, the fund amounted to $240,000. In 1880, the fire companies at the disposal of the fire commissioners consisted of so-called "call" com- panies and "permanent" ones. It was proposed to change the "call" companies into "permanent" ones, so that the entire force could be placed on a uniform basis. It was found, however, that the cost involved ($157,000) was too great, and nothing came of the project for the time being. The control of the Fire Department remained in the hands of the three commissioners until 1895. The only change had been that, under the charter provision of 1885, the power to confirm the appointment of fire commissioners was transferred from the City Council to the Board of Aldermen, but in 1895 the General Court authorized the substitution of a single com- missioner for the three-headed board. He was to be appointed by the Mayor for a term of three years without confirmation by the Board of Aldermen. There had been a good deal of legislative interference with the Fire Department on one pretext or another, and the appointment of a single commissioner did much to reduce it and to promote efficiency. Political inter- ference with the Fire Department has been charged on several occasions, also by the Finance Commission as late as 1907-08. In 1887, the department numbered 690 of whom about 300 were "call" men. In 1908 the number had arisen to about 1,000, and in 192 1 counted about 1,170. The reason for adding to the force was the system of allowing each member of the department one day off in eight. In 1905 the off duty allowance was increased to one day in five. All of these changes necessitated an increase in expenditures. Fire Protection. 93 The cost of maintaining the Boston Fire Depart- ment in 1920 was $3,223,133 (including pensions). The value of the land and building occupied by the department was $2,270,900 and of the equipment, $1,350,000. To these staggering totals the costs and investments for fire protection have grown since 1822, when the outlay for the same purpose amounted to $2,766.02. 94 i§22 — Boston — 1922. WATER SUPPLY. From the earliest times one of the most perplexing questions facing the city has been that of securing an adequate supply of wholesome water. When the first city administration was inaugurated, the citizens of Boston depended chiefly upon wells, although some water was drawn from Jamaica Pond, for already in 1795 there had been created the so-called Jamaica Pond Aqueduct Company, which had the right to lay water pipes in certain streets. In 1825, a committee, appointed to investigate "the practicability, expense and expediency of supplying the city with good, wholesome and soft water," re- ported that it was practicable and expedient to plan for this purpose, but it had qualms about incurring the unavoidable debt. It did, however, recommend the appointment of an expert, Professor Daniel Tread well, who advised that water be procured from the Charles River above the falls at Watertown and from Spot Pond in Stoneham, estimating the cost from either source at $6,000,000 or $7,000,000. /'Mayor Quincy strongly urged that an adequate water supply be secured, but favored having it done under municipal ownership, after the manner of Philadelphia, and he persuaded the City Council not to accept the offer of certain capitalists who were ready to finance the introduction of city water. He even went so far as to secure options on the water on both sides of the Charles and Neponset rivers. But he preached to deaf ears; sentiment was strongly against adding to the city debt, and he was forced to relinquish his plans. Both Mayor Otis, who followed Quincy, and Mayor Theodore Lyman, Jr. (1835), strongly favored the intro- duction of a water system. 'Under Mayor Lyman, a second survey, was made through Col. Loammi Bald- win, who recommended that water be drawn from Long Pond in Natick, the present Lake Cochituate, and Water Supply. 95 estimated the cost at $750,000. Additional investi- gations were made in 1837 by a special commission but without achieving concrete results. The panic of 1837 made it "inexpedient to adopt any measures at the present time for raising funds" for a water supply. Yet in 1838 it was urged that work be begun "because the financial stringency was, after all, but a temporary phase," and that "the contemplated undertaking would be a means of alleviating the distress of those who de- pend on labor for support." Mayor Eliot was in- structed by the Council to apply for the necessary legis- lative permission. Still the sentiment of the commu- nity was not ripe for the venture, and no action was taken. The cry in 1838 was for retrenchment and safeguarding the city's credit f" For twelve years the subject of providing a water supply had been actively discussed without any con- clusion being reached. At last, in 1844, when the finances of the city had been improved, the plans for city water were taken up in earnest. Three commis- sioners, Nathan Hale, James F. Baldwin and P. T. Jackson were appointed to perfect them and draw up estimates. They had selected Long Pond as a source of supply and calculated the cost of bringing the water into Boston, including its distribution, at about $2,600,000. The necessary enabling act was obtained from the General Court and accepted by the voters in April of 1846. Under this act, three commissioners, appointed by the City Council and holding office for three years, were to direct the building of the water works. To meet the expenses, Boston was given the right to make a water loan of $3,000,000. There was no other way of financing the project except through loans. Before the completion of the Cochituate water sys- tem, pipes were laid to Boston, so that in 1848 the citi- zens could gather on the Common to watch the streams of water which were thrown up in the air for the first time from a fountain in the Frog Pond. It is related that the water which flowed through the thirty-inch main pipe to the fountain on the Common arrived there twelve hours and eighteen minutes from the time it 96 1S22 — Boston — 1922. left Lake Cochituate. The celebration on the Common was a public affair participated in by the dignitaries of the city and of the Commonwealth, various public bodies, and the citizens generally. This was on Octo- ber 25. There was a parade and speech-making inter- spersed with music. James Russell Lowell had written an ode for the occasion, and addresses were delivered by Nathan Hale and Josiah Quincy, Jr., then Mayor of Boston. When the Lake Cochituate Water Works were com- pleted in 185 1, it was found that the total cost had been $5,184,984, without adding interest. In other words, the outlay had been double that of the original esti- mates, but at the same time the whole system was finished on a larger scale than at first contemplated, for the reservoirs of Brookline, Beacon Hill and at South Boston had been quadrupled in capacity, and the water system had been extended to East Boston. All of this meant a distinct advantage to the city, but at vastly greater cost than anticipated. The three commissioners, under whose directions the waterworks had been completed, were supplanted in 1850 by the so-called Cochituate Water Board, con- sisting of an alderman, a member of the Common Coun- cil and five citizens who were elected annually by the City Council. One of the first acts of this board was to purchase the property of the Jamaica Pond Aqueduct Corporation for about $45,000. Later on, that part of it lying outside of the city limits of Boston was sold to a new corporation. The new water board had authority to fix rates, subject to confirmation by the City Council. Before long the new water supply was found inade- quate on account of the constant enormous waste. Already in 1852 it was estimated that the per capita consumption of water in Boston amounted to 58 gallons a day, or double the quantity thought neces- sary at the outset; and by 1857 it had risen to 73 gallons per capita. (The consumption of water in Boston in 1921 was at the rate of about 125 gallons per capita.) Many unavailing efforts were made to check the waste, for the only remedy naturally lay in increas- Water Supply. 97 ing the capacity of the waterworks. The dam at Lake Cochituate was accordingly raised, and between 1865 and 1 87 1 a large reservoir was constructed at Chestnut Hill. The estimate of the cost of the last mentioned piece of construction had been $900,000, but when it was completed, exclusive of the charming driveway round it, $2,450,000 had been spent. Aside from the cost of additional construction to meet the needs of the City of Boston, new expenditures were necessary in order to supply the recently annexed ter- ritories of Roxbury and Dorchester with water. It is said that the reason these communities so readily consented to become a part of Boston was a desire to obtain a bountiful supply of water. The cry of waste continued even after the introduc- tion of water meters in manufacturing establishments and the engagement of inspectors to detect careless use. Although some good results were obtained from this method, it became imperative to seek a larger water supply. Temporary help was obtained by making a contract with the water board of Chariest own, whereby East Boston and Deer Island could be supplied from the Mystic River Reservoir, but a water famine in the not distant future still threatened. Investigations made of available sources of water within fifty miles of Boston favored the utilization of Sudbury River and Farm Pond. The project received the support of Mayor Cobb, and the engineers estimated that the cost of the undertaking would not be above eight mil- lion dollars, including damages to mill owners along the river and to others. When the hope that the Mystic waterworks would yield a sufficient volume of water had disappeared, the board was authorized to take the waters of the Sudbury River and bring them to the Chestnut Hill Reservoir. Again the General Court granted the needful authority. It deserves to be recorded that this new construction, begun in 1875, was completed in 1878 at a cost of $5,000,000 and thus far below the original estimate. Pending the new construction, Boston was enabled to secure an adequate supply through a temporary connection of new sources of water with Lake Cochit- 98 1S22 — Boston — 1922. uate in 1872. In 1874, Boston took possession of the Mystic waterworks by the annexation of Charlestown, thus gaining control of a large additional supply of water. Moreover, the Mystic system produced income sufficient to pay both maintenance and a surplus which could be used to reduce the heavy debt carried by the Mystic waterworks. This time Boston showed a special eagerness for annexation since the possession of the Mystic waterworks was a great asset. For some years following no new construction was needed. The work of distributing water went on. From 1887 until 1895, the city contented itself with building storage reservoirs. From the first it had been the intention to build such reservoirs from time to time. At the outset three were completed. How- ever, the consumption of water grew rapidly, incident to the growth of population and the waste. Some economy in the use of water had been effected and better system of inspection introduced, so that the per capita consumption fell off a little. But the spectre of a water famine rose again before the authori- ties. The addition of more basins for storing water - from the Sudbury river did not prove adequate. More- over, it was clearly seen that, in order to safeguard not only Boston against a water famine but also other cities and towns in the vicinity that were finding their supply inadequate, it was necessary to attack the whole problem from a different angle. The establishment of metropolitan districts for other purposes gave a clue to procedure in the case of the water supply. Therefore, the General Court passed an act in 1895 by which the Governor, with the advice and consent of the Council, should appoint three water commissioners who were to "construct, maintain and operate a system of metropolitan waterworks substan- tially in accordance with the plans and recommenda- tions of the State Board of Health," which had made extensive investigation of the subject at the instigation of Mayor Matthews. The metropolitan district to be served by the new water system included Boston, Chelsea, Everett, Maiden, Newton and Somerville, and the towns of Belmont, Hyde Park, Melrose, Revere, Water Supply. 99 Watertown and Winthrop. It was provided that any of the towns and cities wishing to take advantage of the metropolitan water should own water pipe systems. Other towns and cities within a radius of ten miles from the State House could be admitted upon proper application and by making an initial payment to be determined by the board. The Metropolitan Water Board was authorized to take the waters of the Nashua river above Clinton, and the necessary land for the construction of a great reservoir. It was also enabled to take over the Chest- nut Hill pumping system and all other water system to the west of the Chestnut Hill Reservoir. The Com- monwealth was to finance the project by issuing bonds at the request of the board, but not in excess of twenty- seven million dollars. Additions to this amount became necessary, however, from time to time. The first great work in connection with the Metro- politan water system was building an aqueduct 12 miles long to connect with the Boston water system. This was completed and the water introduced in 1898, but the building of the dam across the Nashua river, and filling the reservoir to its high water mark was not completed until 1907. It was a stupendous under- taking, for it involved stripping the soil for more than 6 square miles, the removal of more than 6,000,000 cubic yards of materials, and acquiring more than 12 square miles of land on which originally had been located 6 mills, 4 churches, 8 schoolhouses, 492 houses and other dwellings and 2 cemeteries. The financial transactions between the Common- wealth and the City of Boston, relative to reimburse- ment for taking over its water works, involved a vast sum of money, and is one of the largest transactions of its kind ever made in this country. The total amount finally paid by the Commonwealth for the Boston water works system was $13,923,715. When it is remembered that the various agreements entered into by the two parties extended over a number of years and involved innumerable legal questions, one can easily realize the weight of Mayor Hart's words when he said in his inaugural in 1901, referring to the ioo 1S22 — Boston — 1922. settlement of water payments without litigation, "It is doubtful whether history shows a more equitable settlement of a claim for which no precedent existed." The many delays concerning the assessment of Boston for water purposes by the Metropolitan Board, the distribution of the moneys received from the state, etc., are not properly a part of this brief sketch. When the Metropolitan water works system was finally completed, including the different reservoirs built by the city, Boston had nothing left to care for except the distributing system. This is now in charge of a special division of the Public Works Department, directed by an engineer. The Water Division, as it is called, is responsible for the care and maintenance of all pipes and appliances for the purpose of the city's water supply, including laying pipes, installing meters, plac- ing public drinking fountains and assessing water rates. The supply and distributing water mains of Boston are about 678 miles in length; over 93,000 services are actually being used, of which about 75 per cent are metered; there are nearly 10,000 fire hydrants; 150 public drinking fountains, etc. For the time being, Boston is unusually well supplied with plenty and wholesome water. But it is so diffi- cult to stop waste that it has already been stated officially that unless means be found to prevent it, the time will not be far distant before new sources of supply will have to be secured at an enormous cost. It must not be understood, however, that the intro- duction of city water from early times simply spelled "outgo." Under the first act authorizing the intro- duction of the water system in Boston (1846), it was expected that the Water Department should be put on a paying basis, and the City Council was given power to "regulate the price or rents for the use of the water with a view to the payment from the net income, rents and receipts therefor not only of the semi-annual inter- est but ultimately of the principal also of the 'Boston water scrip." During the early part of its existence as a city, Boston labored under a continual deficit on account of water expenses. From 1874 to 1895, the ex- cess of expenditures over receipts showed a gradual if Water Supply. ioi somewhat irregular diminution. Then followed six years in which receipts exceeded expenditures. During the period 1902 to 1909-10, an excess of expenditures over receipts prevailed, running as high as more than half a million dollars in a single year. But since that time the excess of receipts over expenditures has con- tinued unbroken, varying from $12,000 in the fiscal year 1910-11 to $605,000 in 1921-22. Higher water rates and less waste are responsible for this encouraging showing of management of the water supply and its distribution under municipal auspices. 1822 — Boston — 1922. THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS. The story of Boston as a center of education in a broad sense does not fall within our scope. We are solely concerned with the activities of the municipality itself in building up and maintaining a public school system. It may be said, by the way, that especially in the early days the location in and near Boston of many private schools and institutions of learning influenced to some extent the course of municipal government. The affiliation between the early Mayors and Harvard University is especially noteworthy. The citizens of Boston have always had it to their credit that they regarded expenditures for public education as one of the last to be stinted, and for the sake of the schools they were willing to forego or to postpone outlay for other purposes although the needs might be pressing. When the transition was made from town to city government, there had already been created a school system which was not radically revised for some years. As early as in 1789, a latin school and six grammar schools had been established, and from this year pro- perly dates the present school system of Boston, for then authority over general school regulations, such as the appointment of masters, fixing salaries, and other general expenditures, was transferred from the select- men to a school committee, consisting of the Selectmen and twelve other persons who were elected annually. At the incorporation of the city, the Mayor and Alder- men supplanted the Selectmen on the School Com- mittee, while the other members contiued to be elected, one from each ward. In 1835, "the composition of the School Committee was changed once more by electing to it two citizens from each ward, the other members being the Mayor and the President of the Common Council. This old "Primary School Committee," as it was called, functioned until it was abolished by the charter of 1854 which placed the entire school system in charge of a school committee, consisting of the The Public Schools. 103 Mayor, the President of the Common Council, and six citizens elected from each ward, — in all, seventy-four members. They were to hold office for three years instead of being elected annually. Boston as a municipality thus began with the Latin School and the English High School for boys (erected in 1 821), and a number of primary schools, originally established to avoid giving secular instruction in the Sunday schools. The schools of lower grade were intended for both sexes; but until 1828 girls had been admitted to them only for half of the year, that is, from April to October, but were later on permitted to attend for a whole year until sixteen years of age. The boys were required to leave the lower schools at the age of fourteen years. Measured by present day standards, the primitive characteristics of the early grammar schools were outstanding. The children were expected to have only one school book, the so- called Dillsworth's spelling book; the Testament, Psalter and the Bible sufficed as reading books; there were no copy books for writing and no slates, the cyphering being done on paper; but even this rudi- mentary equipment was regarded by some as excessive. No provision had been made for the higher educa- tion of girls until the movement began in 1825 for the establishment of a high school for females, which had to be abandoned in the face of a strong opposition. Even Mayor Quincy, who had taken an exceedingly active interest in the work of the public schools, joined the opposition on the ground that a high school for girls would be resorted to almost exclusively by daughters of wealthy parents. "The standard of public education," said the Mayor, "should be raised to the greatest desirable and practicable height ; but it should be effected by raising the standard of the com- mon schools." As a matter of fact, this high school for girls was operated as an experiment for two years. One of the most prominent men in educational work, and one who by his lectures and writings accomplished much for the schools of the period, was Horace Mann. In 1837 ne was made Secretary of the Massachusetts Board of Education. Through his activity many 104 1822 — Boston — 1922. helpful changes in the school laws of Massachusetts were made, and his influence upon the development of public school education in Boston was profound. Not until 1834 did Boston undertake to build her own primary school quarters. The growth in expendi- ture for schools rose year by year with increase of population and greater interest in education. From 1840 to 1843, expenditures for schools amounted to 26 per cent of the entire city budget. Then, as now, salaries did not keep pace with the development of the school system. The only branch of the school system in which women were employed was the primary department ; they received not in excess of $250 a year, and this included remuneration for the rent and care of the school room. During the mayoralty of Josiah Quincy, Jr. (1846-48) , new and larger school buildings, both for primary and the higher schools, were erected, and the employment of women as teachers became more common. With his aid, the "double-headed system" of supervision was abolished, under which a grammar master and a writing master had divided authority over the schools, and one master was placed in general control. The office of a superintendent of schools was created in 1851, Nathan Bishop being the first incumbent. The super- intendent was elected biennially. The succeeding Mayor, Bigelow, was less liberal in educational matters; he deplored the cost of the new buildings, saying that "the splendor of the edifice is no guarantee for the education of the pupil." Perhaps Josiah Quincy, Jr., had not been altogether wise in his building plans because the movement of population was away from the older residential districts and left certain schoolhouses with few pupils. Some of the buildings were sold in the middle of the fifties for about one-half of the original cost. Another source of outlay was for increases in the pay of primary teachers which, in 1846, was advanced from $250 to $325; but this was hardly in keeping with the increase in the cost of living. A committee appointed to investigate the subject in 1853 said that many teachers were still receiving the same com- pensation given them sixteen years earlier, although The Public Schools. 105 the salaries of teachers in other parts of the state had increased 17 per cent, and those of departmental officials in the city administration, 34 per cent. Not until 1857, after the city had taken over the care of the primary rooms, were the salaries raised at the rate of $50 a year to a maximum of $450 a year. There was also some increase in the salaries of teachers employed in the grammar and latin schools. At the end of the fifties, the per capita charge for school pur- poses was $2.39 and in another decade had reached $5.82. There were more pupils, larger amounts to be paid for instruction and supplies, as a period of high cost of living had set in which was further augmented in the course of the Civil War. Mayor Wightman referred in his inaugural of 1861 to the rapid increase in expenditures for schools and characterized it as " a subject of great concern." Many schools had been completed in the years immediately preceding, and outlay for new construction dropped to an almost negligible amount in 1863; but permanent retrench- ment was impossible. More schoolhouses were needed, and there was renewed pressure for an increase in salaries. The annexation of Roxbury, and later on of Dorchester, * made imperative new schoolhouse construction, which increased the outlay for school purposes from $643,774 in 1864 to $1,602,750 in 1869. This increase included an advance in the pay of teachers which was granted somewhat grudgingly. Since other employees in the city service had their salaries raised in 1863, it was inevitable that the teachers, whose compensation had not been changed since 1857, should ask for more pay. The reply made to them by the committee who had charge of the teachers' petition was evasive, if not to say ridiculous. The committee stated that "a reduction of prices is not to be effected by an increase of salaries and means of expenditure, but by a persistent and patriotic de- termination to purchase and expend with economy, thereby reducing the demand for consumption." The committee did, however, recommend larger pay for teachers in the lower grades. It was inevitable that other salaries should be raised in proportion. By 1867, they ranged from $650. in primary schools to 106 1S22 — Boston — 1922. $4,000 granted the head master of a high school, while the masters of grammar schools received $3,000. In general, the yearly increase allowed averaged 45 per cent. In making provisions for schools, Boston, like many other cities of rapid growth, suffered not only from an increase in population but particularly by the exodus from residential sections which were turned over to business. From time to time the city was left with empty schoolhouses on its hands and had to provide room for pupils elsewhere. Mayor Gaston, as well as his successor, Mayor Prince, was strongly opposed to new projects for school buildings. Mayor Gaston remarked, "There are limits to expenditures for even the best objects," and declared on a later occasion that in constructing schoolhouses the city had "in some instances exceeded in cost the limit best adapted to economy, efficiency and convenience." Mayor Pierce wanted to hire accommodations in the more sparsely settled portions of the city rather than to build great structures while materials and labor were so costly. How the school curricula had been increased by the introduction of new elements of education is a matter of detail which cannot be dwelt upon in this brief review. It should be stated, however, that in Novem- ber, 1858, the first Boston evening schools were estab- lished and proved successful from the beginning. In the year following, the first free public school for deaf mutes in the United States was opened in Boston. Women became eligible to membership in the School Committee in 1875. As time went on, it had become more and more apparent that a school committee of seventy-four members, as established under the charter of 1854, could not manage the schools efficiently and responsibly. By an Act of 1875, the committee was reduced to twenty-four members, to be elected by the voters, with the Mayor serving as Chairman ex officio. Under the charter amendments of 1885, the School Committee elected its own chairman, but the Mayor was allowed a partial veto over all votes to expend money. In regard to spending the money appropriated, the School Committee retained its independence. The chief question of outlay concerned the building The Public Schools. 107 of new schoolhouses. There was undoubtedly extrav- agance in construction and particularly in the demand of the communities which had been annexed to Boston. At any rate, it seemed inexpedient to spend at the rate of $2,000,000 a year as had been done in 1874. On one side, a certain portion of the public made a con- stant demand on the Mayor and City Council for retrenchment. On the other side stood the question of satisfying this desire without hurting the schools. Mayor Cobb expressed the hope, in 1875, that the out- lay for housing purposes could be much reduced be- cause the most pressing wants had already been met and particularly because "a modest architecture and a less elegant and luxurious style of finish will be found quite as serviceable." It was true that the city had more than met the requirements of the school population and had spent money for unnecessarily costly buildings. Mayor Cobb found that in 1876 there were ten thousand vacant seats in the schoolhouses. He regarded the appro- priations asked by the School Committee as extrava- gant and hoped that through its reorganization a more effective co-operation with the City Council might be brought about. Retrenchments actually took place for a few years. Money was saved by less new con- struction and by a decrease in the number of teachers through the consolidation of certain school depart- ments. Also, expenses were brought down by reduc- ing individual salaries to teachers. Thus, in the school year of 1877- 1878, salaries were reduced by seven and one-half per cent. The next move in the contention over outlay for the Boston schools was a petition to the General Court for a law limiting the expenditure of the School Committee to the amount appropriated by the City Council. That school committees in the State should have power to spend money at will was pointed out as an anomaly among the laws of a democratic government. Mayor Prince supported the committee, but Boston was unable to secure the desired legislation. Retrenchment could not last very long, however, for the population grew rapidly, especially in the southern wards of the city. More teachers were needed, which increased the ioS 1822 — Boston — 1922. expenditure for instruction, as did also the free text book law, passed in 1884. In the preceding year, the first appropriation had been made for instruction in the mechanical arts in grammar schools. Aside from the question of expenses for schoolhouses and their equipment, a constant source of irritation was the pay to be accorded teachers which had ad- vanced by very slow steps; for as late as in 1896 the maximum salary of the first assistant in , grammar schools could not exceed $1,212. The increasing cost of living made the demand for higher pay seem reason- able. The situation of the teachers at this time was really unfortunate, and the only actual advantage accorded them was to make their tenure permanent (1889), subject merely to the removal for cause by the school committee. Formerly they had been elected each year, although their re-election from year to year was almost a certainty. The status of the teachers was bettered in 1900 by the establishment of a retire- ment fund, under which old teachers, who entered the service after the act and those already in it, wishing to take advantage of the provisions of the law, were to have deducted from their salaries $18 a year toward a retirement fund. Teachers who had taught at least ten years in public day schools, or thirty years in all, were to receive a monthly payment from the fund. Later, those who had been incapacitated after teach- ing for two years in Boston were included among the beneficiaries, but under ordinary circumstances no annuity was to be paid until the beneficiary had con- tributed the amount of $540, or equal one to the annual assessments for thirty years. A later act (1908) estab- lished a pension fund entitling teachers having reached the age of 65, or all who had served in the public day schools for thirty years and twenty of them in the schools of Boston, to a pension not exceeding $180 a year. The required money was to be obtained by a tax of five cents on every thousand dollars worth of taxable property, in addition to the amount granted for school purposes. A cause of long-standing friction had been that the School Committee possessed power to make its own appropriations and frequently exceeded the amount The Public Schools. 109 voted by the City Council. The situation grew more acute when the tax limit was in force. It has been noted elsewhere that Mayor Quincy (1898) wished the School Committee to be appointed by the Mayor and thus placed on the same basis as other executive depart- ments, but there was no hope of realizing so far-reach- ing a change. Instead, a law was secured under which, before the first day of March of each year, the School Committee, by a two thirds vote of all its members, should "make appropriations for the support of the public schools of said city for the financial year, includ- ing repairs and alterations on school buildings." In other words, an itemized budget was required and the appropriation in question had to be within the tax limit, but could not for the first year exceed $2.08 in each $1,000 of the taxable property of the city. The votes of the School Committee were to be subject to the approval of the Mayor and could only be passed over his veto by the vote of three fourths of all the members. This act, which gave the Mayor a check upon the wholesale appropriations of the School Committee, was subsequently modified by legislative acts which placed the limit of expenditure at various figures. Thus, an act of 1 90 1 placed the limit at $3.40, but provided that not less than forty cents should be appropriated solely for new school buildings, lands, yards and furnishings. Earlier expenditures of this kind had been met from loans. Meanwhile certain increases in expenditures had occurred through additions to the school staff, such as the provision for medical inspection and sub- sequently for nurses to assist the inspectors. Further- more, as already noted, the pension fund made a new demand on the city treasury. The question of providing adequate accommodations for the growing number of pupils remained. The methods of meeting it were not fortunate and very costly. Instead of keeping pace with the demand for new buildings, the city would allow overcrowding for a few years and then spend a great deal of money for new accommodations. The direct result was that al- most all money for new schoolhouses, as well as for construction in general, had to come from loans. no 1822 — Boston — 1922. Now the authority to spend money for schoolhouse construction was in the hands of the City Council, to the great chagrin of the School Committee. Its com- plaints became so loud that soon after the charter revision of 1854, an ordinance was passed to the effect that no schoolhouse should be located, erected or mate- rially altered until the School Committee had been con- sulted, except by order of the City Council. Of course, the City Council, as a rule, ignored the School Com- mittee, and herein lay another cause of contention. To mend matters, legislation was passed in 1 895-1 898- 1899 giving the School Committee, subject to the approval by the Mayor, control of repairs and the erection of new buildings. This was not a happy measure and tempted the School Committee to use questionable methods. The remedy seemed to lie in establishing a separate schoolhouse department, and this was done in 1901. /""" The Schoolhouse Department consists of three com- / missioners appointed by the Mayor. Their duty is to select sites for school buildings, on the recommenda- tion of the School Committee, which designates what I — —provisions should be made. The Schoolhouse Depart- ment has, however, no power to take land as this is a privilege of the Street Commissioners, or now, of the Street Laying-Out Department. Under the law, land could not be acquired by private purchase in case the price was more than 25 per cent above the average assessed value of preceding years. The Finance Com- mission has held this condition to be unfortunate be- cause the time to make a bargain is prior to final selec- tion of the site. The Street Commissioners had fre- quently to pay a price above the assessed value as well as above prices given informally before the land was taken . Most of the loans made for schoolhouse construction were inside the debt limit. The borrowing grew from year to year. Under the authority of legislative acts of 1 901- 1 902, $1,500,000 might be borrowed in each of the three years 1903- 1904- 1905 for school expen- ditures. In all, $5,500,000 were soon borrowed and spent. This sum was thought sufficient to provide adequate school accommodations, and that thereafter The Public Schools. hi the allowance of forty cents from the tax rate would make additional loans unnecessary ; that is to say, there would then be available $500,000 for new school- houses. But the amount was found to be insufficient, and the city did not wish to take forty cents from its tax rates for new schoolhouses. New legislation was sought for permission to borrow an additional $1,500,000 inside the debt limit, and later it was pro- vided that Boston might issue bonds not exceeding $500,000 a year toward the same end. Even this liberality did not prove enough, for in later years children had been housed in portable houses or in hired rooms. How the school system has entered fields undreamed of by the founders of the city cannot be told in detail. The development in the mechanic and industrial arts has been especially notable. In 1893 the Mechanic Arts School was opened, and since then a commercial school has been constructed. More important, how- ever, from one point of view, has been the increase in efficiency of the School Committee through the special act of 1905 which reduced the size of the committee from twenty-four members to five. The measure has proved most salutary. In all Boston schools the annual registration of pupils is more than 145,000. Among the present-day school activities may be mentioned physical training courses, industrial schools (partly maintained by the state), manual training rooms in high schools, pre-vocational centers for boys and girls, home and school gardens, school kitchens, industrial schools (evening), continua- tion schools, a school for immigrants and some review schools. Under the law of 19 12, the School Committee may ~j allow schoolhouses to be used by associations and indi- viduals for social, recreation and civic purposes. These school centers, so-called, make the appeal that "every plus talent of a community be used through it for mutual benefit." The response has been gratifying. The recent agitation for better salaries to teachers has borne fruit, although their compensation is not, per- haps, in keeping with the responsibility and value of their work to the community. ^ ii2 1S22 — Boston — 1922. THE FRANKLIN UNION. An important public industrial school, "The Franklin Union," conducted by a special municipal board, "The Corporation and Managers of the Franklin Fund," was opened in 1908 in a commodious, specially- planned building, costing, with equipment, $402,718, at the corner of Applet on and Berkeley streets. The Franklin Fund is the accumulation of a bequest of one thousand pounds to "the Inhabitants of the Town of Boston in Massachusetts" made by Benjamin Franklin, in a codicil to his will dated June 23, 1789. The codicil provided that the fund, "if accepted by the inhabitants of the Town of Boston," be managed "under the direction of the Selectmen, united with the Minister of the oldest Episcopalian, Congregational and Presbyterian Churches in that Town." Dr. Franklin, who died April 17, 1790, calculated that, in one hundred years, the thousand pounds would grow to £131,000, "of which," he said, "I would have the managers then lay out at their dis- cretion £100,000 in Public Works which may be judged of most general utility to the Inhabitants. The remaining £31,000, I would have continued to be let out on interest for another hundred years." The town accepted the donation at a town meeting held June 1, 1790. In 1905, the City Treasurer received from Mr. Andrew Carnegie $408,396, an amount equal to the Franklin Fund in August, 1904, which Mr. Carnegie had agreed to duplicate. Only the annual income from this fund is used. On January 31, 1907, the amount of the "accumulated" fund available to the managers was $438,742, most of which has been ex- pended for the Franklin Union Building. The building contains twenty-four classrooms and six draughting rooms, where about 1,600 students receive instruction, the fees ranging from $4 to $15; a technical and scientific library ; and a large hall with a seating capacity of 1,000 for lectures, concerts, etc. The Public Library. 113 THE PUBLIC LIBRARY. The Public Library of the City of Boston was not the first of its kind to be established in Massachusetts, for this honor belongs to the town of Orange, which had a public library in 1846, was followed by Way land in 1850, and possibly by other towns. The General Court had given authority in 1847 to raise money by taxation for school libraries in school districts. An act of 1849 provided that any city or town might "raise money for the purchase of libraries." A third act, of 1 85 1, was more liberal in that it permitted any city or town to establish and maintain a public library with or without branches, under the regulation of the city or town authorities. This act limited the appropria- tion for library purposes to $1 for each ratable poll, and the annual appropriation for library purposes to twenty-five cents for each ratable poll. "The public library of the City of Boston was, how- ever, the first large city library to be established as a municipal institution upon the plan identical with that of the public libraries of today. It rests upon special legislation which antedated the general laws, and its founders exhibited a breadth of views which justly entitles them to be called the fathers of the public library movement." One of the first men to give an impetus to the estab- lishment of public libraries in Boston was Nicholas Alexandre Marie Vattemare, a Frenchman, who had devoted many years to the establishment of a system of literary exchanges among European libraries and museums, and came to New York in 1839 to prosecute his mission in this country. "He was originally a minor actor or impersonator with much talent as a ventriloquist," who had made it his hobby to establish a system of international exchange of books. Apparently, he bore his own expenses and had no ii4 J 822 — Boston — 1922. thought of pecuniary reward. As he did not find great public institutions to receive the book treasures he wished to bring into the country, the first need was to agitate for the establishment of such institutions. M. Vattemare finally came to Boston in 1841; two meetings of prominent citizens were held at which he explained his plans, and resulted in a committee being selected to consider his scheme. "These two meetings embodied the first public expression of the public library movement in Boston." Soon after, Vattemare sent the city authorities about fifty volumes as a gift from the city of Paris. Mayor Quincy made a suitable acknowledgment of the gift, and later, in 1849, when Vattemare had made another donation in the form of an important statistical publication, the City Council appointed a committee to solicit contributions of literature to be sent to the city of Paris as a return compliment. The committee which had been appointed to con- sider Vattemare 's proposal recommended the establish- ment of a public library; but it took time to obtain definite action. Mayor Josiah Quincy, Jr., in his inaugural address of 1848, suggested that the General Court be applied to for power to form a library; and he was directed to do so. In March of the same year the General Court passed an enabling act, authorizing the city to establish and maintain a public library for the use of the inhabitants, but with the proviso "that no appropriation for the library shall exceed the sum of $5,000 in any one year." This was the first statute ever passed authorizing the establishment and main- tenance of a public library as a municipal institution supported by taxation. Among the first to give valuable collections of lit- erary material for the proposed library was Edward Everett, who offered to present it his valuable collec- tion of state papers and other works. Another bene- factor was Robert C. Winthrop. The first money received by the library as a gift was the sum of $1,000 out of a fund subscribed as a testimonial to Mayor Bigelow for his public services. The City Council subsequently appropriated $1,000 for library purposes. ALEXANDRE VATTEMARE. THE MASON STREET BUILDING. (Location of Library, 1854-1858.) The Public Library. 115 On January 1, 1852, it was reported to the Council that "the library now numbers scarcely less than 4,000 volumes." Mayor Benjamin Seaver showed no less interest in the public library than his immediate predecessor, and on his recommendation a board of trustees was created in 1852, which forthwith took the necessary steps for making the library available to the public. Among the various gifts of money to the new library, the largest one was $50,000 from Joshua Bates. He stipulated that the money should be used for the pur- chase of books, while the city should provide the build- ing and take care of the expenses. His only condition was that the library building should be an ornament to the city and contain room for 100 to 150 persons to sit at reading tables, and that it should be perfectly free to all. Mr. Bates was born in Weymouth, Massa- chusetts, and at the age of fifteen came to Boston where he entered the counting house of William R. Gray. He became Mr. Gray's representative in London, and later was admitted to the house of Baring Brothers, London, ending by becoming its senior member. The public was generous with gifts of money and books. The public library thus founded finally ob- tained a temporary home in the Mason -Street school- house, where two rooms were assigned it. They were soon found to be utterly inadequate, and between 1855 and 1857 the first library building was erected on Boylston street at a cost of $363,000. The expenditures for ordinary library purposes were at first between $20,000 and $30,000 a year, but rose rapidly in the early seventies owing to a necessary en- largement of the main building and the establishment of branches in various parts of the city. East Boston was the first to benefit by a branch of the central library (1870). It was an experimental venture but so suc- cessful that in the next two years South Boston, Rox- bury, Charlestown and Brighton received their own branches. Beginning with 1873 the first reading room of the library, known as Bates Hall, was kept open during certain hours of Sundays (see page 40). The main library proved inadequate notwithstanding n6 1S22 — Boston — 1922. the additions that had been made to it which, it had been hoped , would afford sufficient space for a long time to come. Indeed, in 1880, Mayor Prince recommended the construction of a new building to meet the con- stantly growing needs of the library, so popular had the institution become. At his instigation a site in the Back Bay was obtained from the State, on Boylston and Dartmouth streets, but the condition was attached that a library building should be erected on it within three years. The same act also demanded that all citizens of the Commonwealth should have the right of access to the library without charge. The time limit imposed for building was extended three years. The site selected was a triangular lot, the property of a private individual, although it had been supposed to form a part of Copley square, and cost the city $200,000. Construction was not begun until 1886 on account of the prevailing industrial depression. Originally it had been thought that a building cost- ing $800,000 would be sufficient for the next fifty years; but the trustees had to content themselves with a little more than half of the amount asked for and this could only suffice for a very modest structure. The whole project for the new library building was held up for a time ; public interest was greatly aroused and demanded time for further consideration. At last an agreement was reached, and the present beautiful library build- ing was brought to its completion in 1894. The cost of the edifice ($2,450,000) far exceeded the original estimates, but no one now questions it, for it is without price. Long before the new structure was taken into use, the trustees had been incorporated and were authorized to receive gifts and donations of real and personal property. The library system of Boston consists at present of the central library in Copley square; sixteen branch libraries with independent collections of books; and fourteen reading rooms, all of which contain deposits of books from the central library. There is a daily exchange of books and cards between the library and the thirteen stations, so that persons in outlying dis- tricts can draw books from the central library without THE BOYLSTON STREET BUILDING. (Location of Library, 1858-1895.) JOSHUA BATES, The Public Library. 117 appearing there in person. The central library also supplies 191 public and parochial schools, 37 institu- tions and 59 fire company houses. More than 100,000 card holders have the right to obtain books for home use. The total number of volumes is about 1,200,000, besides newspapers and periodicals which number up- ward of 3,000. In Bates Hall (the main reading room of the central library), about 10,000 volumes are kept on open shelves for reading and reference. There is also a room set aside for young readers, a teachers' reference room, and. special facilities in con- nection with university extension courses. The fine arts department affords opportunity for copying and photographing and contains a large collection of photo- graphs of architecture, sculpture, paintings, etc. Free lectures are given during the winter season, mostly on art topics, and special assistance is offered to classes, traveler clubs, etc., and some free concerts are given. The trustees of the Public Library, five in number, are appointed by the Mayor, one each year, for a term of five years. There are forty-one library trust funds in the custody of the City Treasurer, amounting to a total of $675,372 on February 1, 1922, the annual inter- est derived being used for the purchase of books. The expenditures for library purposes in 1921-22 were $734,892. Perhaps of all the public libraries in the country none surpasses the Boston Public Library in adequate service and in the variety of its collections. No build- ing in Boston exceeds it in beauty of architecture; and its interior has become known to the world through the mural paintings and decorations by Puvis de Chavannes, Sargent and Abbey. It is a monument to intelligent municipal adminis- tration and a worthy house for immortal works in liter- ature, art and the sciences. n8 1S22 — Boston — 1922. PUBLIC GROUNDS, PARKS AND RECREATION. Boston has always guarded with jealousy the pub- lic grounds she possesses. The first charter forbade the municipal council from selling the Common with- out the consent of the voters. The low lands extend- ing to tidewater in the Back Bay, which had been pur- chased from the owners of the Ropewalk in 1824, at a cost of $25,000, were also kept intact, so that "a bounti- ful supply of fresh air might be let into the city." Beyond the Common, the Mall, and the different burying grounds, Boston had no public grounds re- quiring a constant outlay until the administration of Josiah Quincy, Jr./ 1846-48. The expenditures for their upkeep were correspondingly low, except for the cost of surrounding the Common with an iron fence ($90,000), which was in part borne by private sub- scription. Josiah Quincy, Jr., in his second inaugural, strongly advocated the need of public parks. The first large venture under him was the purchase of Dorchester Heights in South Boston at a cost of $112,000. The tract was to be used both as a park and as a site for a new reservoir. Beyond this the city government contented itself for a while with larger expenditures for beautifying the Common and the city squares in the old residential sections. With the improvement of the Back Bay came the first opportunity to establish a modern park within the city limits. Between the Boston Common and the town of Brookline lay a stretch of marsh land upward of 700 acres in extent which was covered by water at high tide. Already in 18 14 the so-called Boston and Roxbury Mill corporation had been chartered to improve the Back Bay. It built two causeways, one to the west along the present Beacon street, the other southward to Roxbury and branching off from the first. The EDWARD EVERETT. Public Grounds and Parks. 119 Roxbury causeway divided the Back Bay into two basins, the western one emptying into the eastern which was the "receiving" basin, so that tide mills could be constructed along the causeway. A second company had been chartered which, in 1832, acquired all the property and privileges of the Boston-Roxbury Company south of the Beacon street causeway. Bos- ton, wishing to drain into the receiving basin, had entered into an agreement with the new Water Power Company to that effect and had ceded it 100 acres for the privilege, with the proviso that the water in the basin should always be kept below a level needed for working the tide mills. But before long, milling by tide power became unprofitable; the Water Power Company neglected to keep the water at the proper level; and the receiving basin was filled with sew- age, threatening to become a serious menace to the public health. The only remedy was to fill in the Back Bay marsh, and as land was rapidly rising in value, the Water Power company wished to take advantage of the situa- tion. For a time the Commonwealth blocked the project. Under the old laws, individuals could claim ownership of shore land stretching to the low tide level to the extent of one hundred rods. Any land uncov- ered beyond that distance belonged to the Common- wealth. It therefore laid claims to the Back Bay lands "below the ordinary line of riparian ownership," for they promised to be of great value. Moreover, it was held that the ship channels might be injured by reducing the flow of water through a general filling in of the marshes. The negotiations between the Com- monwealth and the Boston Water Power Company resulted in the two becoming partners in the work of reclaiming the Back Bay, the latter having been con- verted into a land company (1856). But Boston had its own claims to press. An agree- ment was reached in 1856 by the three parties inter- ested whereby the Commonwealth ceded to Boston a piece of land to the west of the bottom of the Common and agreed to build a sewer across the Back Bay into the Charles river. The Commonwealth and Boston 120 1822 — Boston — 1922. were to share the cost of building a street 80 feet wide, from Beacon to Boylston streets, the present Arlington street. A later act prescribed that no buildings should be "erected between Arlington and Charles streets, except such as are expedient for horticultural purposes ; provided, that nothing herein shall render it unlawful to erect a city hall on the Public Garden." Thus Boston came into possession of its cherished Public Garden. The construction of the Public Garden, the embel- lishment of a number of small squares in the city, and the improvement of the driveway around the Chestnut Hill Reservoir, did not satisfy the increasing hunger for additional parks, although the per capita cost on this account had more than doubled and constituted 1.3 per cent of the total city expenditures. A number of leading taxpayers petitioned the City Council to reserve a large area for park purposes (1869). The sub-com- mittee appointed to hold hearings reported that it had become evident that the people wanted ' ' a large park or several small parks in Boston or the immediate vicinity." On petition to the General Court, it author- ized the purchase of the necessary lands. Unfortunately, the act did not permit Boston to manage its own affairs, for it provided for a Board of Park Commissioners, four to be appointed by the Governor and four by the City Council, who, together with the Mayor, should have power to take lands for parks at pleasure, but might not expend more than $50,000 annually for the purpose of their care and im- provement. Payment for land taken might be made by issuing bonds and assessing real estate for the benefit accruing to it. The act, which required two thirds of the legal vote of the city for its acceptance, was re- jected because of its several objectionable features; but that it did receive more than a majority of the votes cast showed how strong the desire for a larger park system had become. The next phase of the movement for a park system came in 1874, when, on the initiative of Mayor Cobb, a commission was appointed to consider the establish- ment of a park system ; it consisted of the Mayor, two Public Grounds and Parks. 121 Aldermen, three members of the City Council and three citizens at large. The commission made several recom- mendations without definite results; and, in his inau- gural of 1875, Mayor Cobb once more urged the pur- chase of land suitable for parks, believing that the period of depression gave an opportunity to buy cheaply. Again the General Court was petitioned for authority to create a park system, and an act was passed and adopted by the voters (1875) giving the Mayor authority to appoint three park commissioners, with the approval of the City Council, to serve without pay for three-year terms. They could not incur ex- penditures without previous consent of the City Coun- cil. For the rest, the Park Commission was given broad powers in purchasing land and levying assess- ments on the real estate benefited. The commission, in a report made in 1876, advo- cated the expenditure of $5,000,000 for land. Land was cheap, labor was cheap, and the improvements called for would give work to the unemployed. This was the pith of its arguments; but the plans of the commission were too large and elaborate to pass with- out a challenge; and when the project of the commis- sion had been considered by a joint special committee of the city government, it was rejected, although a small sum was appropriated for immediate use. Mayor Cobb, in his valedictory at the end of 1876, once more insisted that land for parks should be bought imme- diately, following his earlier line of reasoning. In his belief, a postponement till more prosperous times might mean the loss of a park system. In May of 1877, the Park Commission was granted an appropriation of $1,000,000 for the purchase of lands and received authorization to take certain lowlands in the Back Bay that had served as a receptacle for the sewage from Muddy River and Stony Brook, enabling them to make a park and abolish an unsanitary nui- sance. Accordingly, the commission bought 106 acres at a cost of about $460,000. The next proposal, made in 1879, was to buy certain lands in West Roxbury ; but the City Council feared to increase expenditures. Mayor Prince favored the plan. The objectors had 122 1S22 — Boston — 1922. urged that it was merely a scheme on the part of land owners in West Roxbury who wished to sell their prop- erty at an exorbitant price. The Mayor reported that in this case the land might be taken under the special powers granted the commission under the park act. The West Roxbury Park was not authorized until 1883 when it was opened to the public unimproved. Later it was given the name of Franklin Park. The subsequent development of the park system pro- ceeded rapidly so far as taking land was concerned. An extension of the parkway to Jamaica Pond through the Muddy River valley was authorized in 188 1 and $200,000 appropriated for the purpose. The Arnold Arboretum and other lands were taken in 1882. Harvard Univer- sity had owned the Arboretum, and under the new arrangement it was leased to the University on condi- tion that it care for the planting and upkeep of the grounds, the city taking care of the roads and policing. In the same year, Wood Island Park in East Boston was purchased for $50,000. In 1883, the flats between West Boston Bridge and Craigie Bridge were taken for sanitary and park objects, the idea being to build an embankment and fill in the inclosed land. In the same year the flats at City Point, South Boston, were ob- tained for conversion into what is now Marine Park. So far the land taken for parks had cost about $2,000,000. The funds were obtained through thirty- year loans authorized under the original park act. The next question was to make the land into parks. More than a million dollars was spent in developing and improving the Back Bay Park. This sum was derived from taxation. The taking by the city of these lowlands for park purposes was not only a useful sani- tary measure, but the example set by the city soon led private owners to fill in the lowlands owned by them at a great gain of valuable property. The policy of developing the park system necessarily caused vexa- tious delays; the expedient of borrowing money for the purchase and improvement of park lands was adopted. In 1886 the General Court gave permission to contract loans for five years outside the debt limit, not exceed- ing $500,000 annually, to run for fifty years. Public Grounds and Parks. 123 The Common and other public grounds remained in charge of a separate city department, but the commis- sion, established in 1875, continued the great work of developing the park system, improving the lands al- ready purchased, and adding to them. Loans to the amount of a million dollars for purchase of lands were authorized in 1888, and for park lands in Chariest own a loan of $200,000 was granted in 1890. These loans were outside the debt limit, and it was owing to the ease with which legislative permission for such loans was obtained that the development of the park system could proceed at a rapid pace. Thus, in 1 89 1, $3,500,000 were borrowed outside the debt limit in instalments of $700,000 a year for the extension and improvement of parks. But even this annual sum was not found sufficient to carry out the elaborate plans already formulated; and in 1893 the restriction where- by loans could not be contracted for more than $700,000 a year was abolished. The expectation that the above mentioned loan would suffice to complete the park system as originally planned did not materialize. The land taken had cost more than anticipated, and an additional loan of $1,000,000 was authorized in 1894. Meanwhile, the Fenway, Jamaica Park, the Arboretum and the con- necting driveways had been completed and opened to the public. For some time the heavy drains on the city treasury on account of loans had created uneasiness. Mayor Matthews, in his valedictory ad- dress of 1894, went on record as opposed to any future loans for park purposes outside of the debt limit. Mayor Curtis expressed himself to the same effect, advising that no more land be purchased. That sub- sequently loans were issued outside the debt limit was in large part due to the demands upon the city for the payment of its share of the cost of the Metropolitan parks, to be referred to below. Much work had been done to beautify the land laid out for parks and in planting trees and shrubs, all of which added greatly to the cost. In the meantime a new development had taken place through the establishment of public play- grounds, both within and outside of the park system. 124 I 8 22 — Boston — 1922. Por sonic time it had been recognized that the parks were too distant to serve the children in many of the crowded sections of the city. From 1891 on, a few playgrounds had been taken into use, but when Mayor Quincy came into office in 1896, a definite policy in regard to this new venture for the public good was adopted. He wished every ward to have a playground and called attention to what other cities had done to provide space in which children could play under decent conditions. The project found immediate favor ; the Park Commissioner approved it; and the requisite legislation was obtained in 1898 under which the Park Commissioners were authorized "for the purpose of establishing a comprehensive system of playgrounds . . . to purchase, with the approval of the Mayor of said city, land for playgrounds in such different locations not exceeding twenty in number, as they may be best adapted for such purposes." A loan of $500,000 to carry out the plan was authorized at the same time, but not more than $200,000 could be spent in one year. Since then, the number of separate play- grounds has risen to 43, with a total of 324 acres, while there are 13 playgrounds in the parks themselves. The cost of Boston's own parks began to decline after 1897, but from now on the expenditure on account of the Metropolitan park system grew. Under an Act of 1893, a district containing thirty-seven cities and towns was established as the Metropolitan Park Dis- trict. The purpose was the gradual construction of parks and parkways, all to be connected so far as possible and to form one complete system. The huge undertaking was placed in charge of a commission of five persons, appointed by the Governor for terms of five years. The funds needed were to be provided by the Commonwealth through loans; but the cost of maintenance, as well as requirements for interest and sinking funds were to be paid by the cities and towns within the Metropolitan district. It is not in place to discuss fully the development of the ambitious plans for the Metropolitan parks. The larger part of the area included in the Metropolitan park system lies outside of Boston, arid the city's Public Grounds and Parks. 125 responsibility for it is purely financial. There are, however, within the city limits 950 acres of Metropol- itan parks and parkways. Perhaps the most notable is the Stony Brook Reservation in West Roxbury which contains over 400 acres of "wild forested land and dale with many rocky knolls and an extensive view of the Charles river valley and beyond." Another Metropolitan undertaking of more direct importance to the city, and involving a great piece of engineering, was the construction of the Charles River Basin with its embankment and park on the Boston side. Legislative authority had been obtained for building a dam across the Charles River, to include the construction of a new bridge between Boston and Cambridge for the damways and to serve as a highway. The dam keeps the water level constant and thus creates a sizeable lake between Cambridge and Boston. The mudflats which formerly offended the eye at low tide have disappeared under a sheet of water affording every opportunity for sports and capable of infinite development as a place of recreation and beauty. Since the Metropolitan Park Commission came into being, more than one-half of the expenditures for parks has been on account of the Metropolitan outlay over which the city has no control. Here is another example of the substitution of state for municipal administration, but in this instance it will probably be conceded that it has been for the common good. Boston has today twenty-four large parks aside from the many public grounds, squares, etc., the area of which is measured in square feet rather than in acres. The total park area belonging to Boston covers 2,685 acres. The main park system, so-called, contains the Boston Common, the Public Garden, the Fens, the Arnold Arboretum and Bussey Park, and Franklin Park, besides some of smaller dimensions and the connecting parkways. Aside from the Common and Public Garden, the principal parks of the main system are the Arnold Arboretum and Bussey Park with their wonder- ful collection of flowering shrubs and trees collected from all parts of the globe, and Franklin Park of 527 126 iS22- — Boston — 1922. acres, containing a zoological garden, golf course, many miles of beautiful walks — a playground of rare beauty and utility because of its accessibility from all parts of the city. The Marine Park system is of later development, but it is a fine example of the utilization of waterfronts for common recreation. The Marine Park was the first to be opened and to it was added an aquarium in 19 1 2. Castle Island, with its 104 acres, was made a part of the system some years later. The crowning feature of the Marine Park system has been the construction of the Strandway. The project had been under consideration as early as 1890, but nothing was done until 19 13 when a joint commission was authorized by the General Court to make the nec- essary studies and report plans for betterments. In 1 91 6, the City of Boston was authorized to improve the shore flats and channels of the part of Dorchester Bay known as Old Harbor, an appropriation of $599,000 being granted for the undertaking. The whole area to be improved was in a deplorable condition, the sewage from South Boston and Dorchester emptying on the flats constituting a menace to health at all times and especially in summer. Furthermore, the shores of Old Harbor had been used as a general dumping ground. The purpose of the Strandway project was to re- move the sewage nuisance; to provide bathing facil- ities ; to make the basin suitable for yachting purposes ; to create an athletic field, and to make a park on the reclaimed area. This most ambitious plan is not fully completed, but the work done has more than justified the hopes of its sponsors. The large portion already finished shows that the original objects will be realized, and that the city is adding to its park system one of the most beau- tiful, wholesome and useful parkways in the entire city. Aside from this, the great value of the 265 acres of reclaimed land is a feature rarely combined with park undertakings. Among the miscellaneous parks deserving special mention are Governor's Island, about one mile north of Public Grounds and Parks. 127 City Point, owned by the United States, but used as a park under authority of Congress, and Wood Island Park, East Boston, containing a total of 211 acres. The total cost of the park system of Boston to 1920- 21 has been $23,314,765. The cost of maintaining it during 1920-21 was $1,286,046. The great bequest in 1908 by George F. Parkman, valued at between $5,000,000 and $6,000,000, the income of which is used for the maintenance and improvements of the older parks, offsets the annual outlay. The will of Mr. Parkman provides that the income from his bequest be expended for the maintenance and improvement of the Common and such parks as were in existence January 12, 1887, and that no part of it is to be used for the purchase of additional land for park purposes. The bequest was accepted by the City Council in 1909, since which time most of the realty has been sold and the proceeds invested. On February 1, 1 92 1, the principal of the fund in the custody of the City Treasurer amounted to $5,377,877. The interest from the fund during the fiscal year 1920-21 was $194,690. The total valuation of city properties dedicated to recreation is more than $69,000,000, which is far in excess of that of any other city except New York. A natural sequence of the extension of the park sys- tem along the waterfront was the development of bathing facilities. The first of all public baths was the L Street seaside bath in South Boston, opened in 1866, and, so far as known, the first municipal bath estab- lishment in the country. At the present time, the city maintains 9 beach baths, — ■ 3 in South Boston, 2 in Dorchester, 1 in the North End, 1 in East Boston, 1 in Charlestown and 1 in Neponset. In addition, there are 7 so-called floating baths for men and women. The policy of establishing bath houses open all the year began in 1898 with the erection of the Dover Street bath house. This was followed in 1905 by the Cabot Street bath house in Roxbury, another in Charlestown, and, finally, the North Bennet Street bath house, in the North End. These four "main bath houses," with 128 1S22 — -Boston — 1922. the exception of the one on Dover street, contain gym- nasia and one of them a swimming pool, in addition to other conveniences. The latest phase in the development of public recrea- tion has been to establish baths and gymnasia in certain municipal buildings, which are used also for other pur- poses. Thus, 6 municipal buildings, some of them recently erected, contain shower baths and swimming pools, while others have gymnasia connected with them, and 2 buildings are used exclusively as gymnasia. One of the latter, at East Boston and recently erected, stands on the site of the first in-door municipial gymnasium in the United States; it was opened to the public in 1897. Some of the municipal buildings utilized for baths and gymnasia also contain branches of the public library, ward rooms, etc. No other city in the United States has shown greater generosity than Boston in providing such utilities for the public through parks, public baths and gym- nasia; it has been a pioneer in this branch of municipal activities. The public baths and gymnasia are under the direct control of the Park Department, although the Depart- ment of Public Buildings has control of municipal buildings in which baths and gymnasia are located. EAST BOSTON GYMNASIUM AND BATH. Public Lands. 129 PUBLIC LANDS. /Originally Boston contained about 780 acres of land, an area far too restricted to provide homes even for a town much smaller than Boston was at the time of the adoption of the first city charter. It had become expedient, therefore, to increase the area by filling in parts of the harbor. In 1822, the so-called common lands of Boston consisted chiefly of the "Neck," a stretch of marsh connecting Boston with Roxbury. By extensive filling and grading this land was eventually made fit for sale. Under Mayor Otis, the lands adja- cent to the "Neck" were surveyed and made ready for sale, and the office of Superintendent of Public Lands was established, under the direction of a committee of the City Council. For about twenty years after Boston became a city, the average income from the sale of public lands was about $40,000 a year. Hitherto, the city had been in the habit of selling its lands practically unimproved, but was obliged to grade them afterwards at public expense.. Mayor Josiah Quincy, Jr., insisted that all lands should be placed on the market in a finished condition (1847). To meet the increasing demand for lands on the "Neck," the City Council had purchased some 237,000 feet bordering on the South Bay, as it was called. There a sea wall was built and a contract made for filling in the marsh. There was a great deal of trouble over the sea wall due to faulty construction, so that expenditures greatly exceeded the original estimates and finally amounted to more than a million dollars. This transaction proved a distinct loss to the city, for it entailed a heavy cost to grade the lands and lay out streets, especially because it was required that all streets should be raised to a grade of not less than 15 feet above low water mark. The General Court and the city were far from being in accord in regard to taking over and improving public 130 1S22 — Boston — 1922. lands. The city had sought in vain to obtain title to the flats belonging to the Commonwealth, between South Boston and the harbor. The land commissioners thought that the policy involved would result in the loss of land necessary to protect the harbor, and there were other points of disagreement. When the South Bay betterments had been com- pleted, the improvement of city land for sale practically came to an end. The next undertaking was raising the low level of the territory adjacent to the Back Bay. This had become necessary in order to obtain proper drainage. The real estate owners in the district claimed that the city should bear the entire cost of the improvement, and Mayor Norcross in 1867 advised the City Council to assume "a reasonable, — perhaps liberal proportion of the cost." The Legislature was accordingly petitioned to give the city authority to raise the Church Street district, the cost to be assessed upon the estates adjoining. This was granted. The city took possession of the land in question; placed the task of raising it to proper grade in the hands of certain commissioners; and the work was completed in 1869 so successfully that 13 acres of land were raised, and the value of surrounding real estate increased from 50 to 100 per cent. The new grade was 18 feet above the water, for streets and ways, and 12 feet above cellars, yards and vacant lots, so that proper drainage was secured. The net cost of this improvement was about $900,000. It has been stated authori- tatively that while the work was in progress, the inhabi- tants who continued to live in their homes were in many cases "compelled for months to reach their tenements over ladders, in some instances to a height of 17 feet." Part of the improved land was sold and part recon- veyed to the former owners. Under the authority of the same act (1867), similar improvements were made further to the southward, in what was known as the Suffolk Street district, and at an expenditure of $1,600,000 or $750,000 less than the original estimate. The city thereby obtained 31 acres of properly drained territory. This piece of work was Public Lands. 131 begun in 1870 and completed in 1872. The success of the venture was immediate, for the real estate values rose in that section about 124 per cent. The improvements hitherto made had been so valuable in increasing the valuation of property and bettering the health and comfort of the citizens, that the city continued them toward Roxbury, in the district between Northampton and Eustis streets. This was done under a new act of legislature, in 1873, obliging owners of real estate to raise the land to a grade of 12 feet above the average low water. In case of refusal within a stated time, the city had authority to perform the work and to assess the cost upon the owners of the improved property. The city already owned 200 acres of Back Bay land laid out in streets and provided with sewers. Under Mayor Wightman the streets and alleys were paved and their maintenance became a charge upon the city. This gave the city an additional large area of taxable pro- perty without great expense. How valuable this particular section of the city has since become is a matter of general knowledge. Now the outlay for public lands nearly came to an end. There remained only one considerable project — that of filling the Old Roxbury Canal. This was done primarily to remove a nuisance, although it was hoped to gain enough land to recover the cost of the improvement. The Roxbury Canal, 50 feet in width, had been built in 1795 in order to save a land carriage of about two and one half miles. It reached from South Bay to Eustis street. By the middle of the seventies the canal served chiefly for the reception of sewage and had become such a nuisance that the Board of Health insisted upon steps being taken to fill it up. The work was done between 1878 and 1880, at a net cost to the city of $274,000. The undertaking was kept within the original estimate, but the returns brought by the sale of new land were disappointingly small. After 1880, the land held by the city had so far shrunk as to make the office of Superintendent of Public Lands superfluous; and the remaining bits of 132 1S22 — Boston — 1922. public lands were given into the custody of the Street Commissioners. As a dealer in real estate, the city of Boston was at first quite successful; during the first twenty odd years of its existence as a municipality, the sales of property gave it an average income of almost $40,000 a year net. In 1845 no less than $401,667 was brought into the city treasury by the sale of land. The following year was also one of very heavy land transac- tions. The policy had been followed of improving public lands on a large scale and making the purchasers pay an additional price on account of the improve- ments which the city formerly had made at its own expense after selling the land. But those who expected that income from this source would suffice to pay off the city debt were disappointed. Mayor Josiah Quincy, Jr., was among them. Thereupon a new policy was adopted which had the desired effect of increasing land sales. After all, a greater question than enlarged re- ceipts was to provide land on which people could build homes, and thereby increase the assessable property of the city. Mayor Quincy himself favored selling lands "at reasonable prices to all who desired to build." In other words, the policy of selling for revenue was replaced by that of disposing of land in order to build up the city. The succeeding Mayor, Bigelow, also favored reducing the price of land and thus "induc- ing citizens to settle within the limits of Boston and add to the taxable property." Still more liberal terms to purchasers were offered in 1852 by a committee which had been appointed to consider how the demand for city lands could be stimulated. This committee, in its report, made a statement which has its application even at the present time. It fol- lows: "While our foreign population is rapidly aug- menting, our native population is in greater ratio diminishing. Many streets formerly occupied by some of our wealthiest and most respectable citizens are now wholly surrendered to foreigners in the older parts of the city, rents are exorbitant and it is with extreme difficulty that a comfortable tenement can be obtained. Many citizens have erected houses in the neighboring Public Lands. 133 cities and villages, and increasing the taxable property in these places from the profits of business transacted within our limits." Indeed, suburban life had begun to attract many citizens a decade earlier; and by 1850 the improved means of transportation, mainly omnibuses and special trains which offered a cheap annual rate to commu- ters, caused an exodus to Roxbury, Cambridge, Chelsea and Dorchester, as can easily be determined from the rapid growth of the population of these places year by year. There were supposed to be more than 3,000 persons having a place of business in Boston who lived in surrounding towns. So far as the sale of land might serve as an inducement to citizens to remain in Boston, it did not help to check the movement of the popu- lation to the suburbs. The sale of lands continued to be disappointing. It did not mend conditions that a Board of Land Commissioners was placed in charge, for although the sales of land increased somewhat, it was recommended in 1854 that land be sold to builders at still lower prices, without any payment in cash and on a long credit. Mayor Smith held that the public lands had been rated above their true marketable value and expressed himself thus in his second inaugural (1855): "Gentle- men of sound judgment long since advanced an opinion that, had the improved lands of the 'Neck' been given away twenty years ago to persons obliged to build, the city would have gained incalculably by the scheme." Then began the policy of auctioning off land regard- less of price, and the sales increased accordingly. It was required, however, that purchasers should build within a short time. The wisdom of the policy may be seen from the fact that in 1855 no less than 350 build- ings were erected on land sold by the city. From i860 to 1873 not far from two million dollars had been received from the sale of public lands. According to Mayor Matthews, in his valedictory address of 1894, the city had received a net profit of $3,026,000 from the sales of land disposed of for a direct fiscal purpose. The other policy, which con- sisted of selling improved land properly graded and 134 X S22 — Boston — 1922. provided with sewers, etc., cost the city $4,037,000. On the whole, the land ventures of the city may be said to have been successful for, beside the revenue, it made it possible for citizens to build homes at reason- able prices and thereby in the end adding vastly to the taxable property of the city. It should be noted that by the middle of the seven- ties Boston had really sold nearly all of its public land. Necessarily the administrations since that time have been obliged to purchase land for street and other improvements. But subsequently the sales of city property have been a small factor in the total city re- ceipts, for what there was on hand to sell consisted mostly of property no longer Usable for public purposes, but of value as business was extended into different sections of the city. Charitable and Correctional Institutions. 135 CHARITABLE AND CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS. ■Boston has always been notable for the care and thought bestowed on the unfortunate classes in the community. /Indeed, provision for the poor was one of the first concerns of Boston as a town, and the ex- penditure for this purpose ranked with that for streets and schools.' The usual method was to dispense out- door relief; but it was not altogether satisfactory, and the expenditures seemed to be incommensurate with the results. There was also an almshouse in which not only the worthy poor but also the vagrant and vicious were gathered, especially in winter. Similar conditions prevailed in other parts of the Common- wealth. Special committees were appointed by the General Court as well as by Boston Town to study the subject. The prevailing system of out-door relief was condemned as wasteful, and the establishment of houses of industry was recommended in which the able-bodied could be kept at work. In order to carry out this recommendation, the town government of Boston in 1821 made an appropriation of $41,000 for a house of industry. It was located in South Boston where 63 acres of land had been purchased. Shortly after the inauguration of the municipal government, the new structure was turned over to the city (in September, 1822); and it was finally made ready for occupancy in 1823. A singular delay intervened. Hitherto the Overseers of the Poor had been elected by the voters. For some reason, the city charter did not give the Mayor and Aldermen complete authority over the expenditures for poor relief, although they controlled almost all other items of expense. The City Council took occasion to limit the independence of the Overseers of the Poor. By a special legislative act, which was passed in 1823, 136 1822 — Boston — -1922. the Council secured power to appoint every year ' ' nine discreet and suitable citizens" to be directors of the House of Industry, which hitherto had been managed by the Overseers. The latter did not give up willingly and a struggle ensued lasting until 1825, when their activities were restricted to out-door relief; but they came perilously near losing their powers even in this respect. In 1824, the House of Correction was established on the same tract of land occupied by the House of In- dustry. When it was finally built at a cost of $5,000, it stood idle for more than twelve months for lack of money to make it suitable for occupancy. The city debt had risen and it was necessary to economize. Meanwhile the inmates for whom it was intended were taken care of in a special structure erected in the yard of the jail on Leverett street. In 1826, a part of the House of Correction was used as a house of reforma- tion for juvenile offenders, under the management of the directors of the House of Industry. -^These novel improvements took place under Mayor Josiah Quincy, the second Mayor of Boston, who from the days of town government had led the fight for the better care of the poor and the delinquent. It was not until 1832 that appropriations were made to complete the equipment of the House of Correction at South Boston. But the transfer of prisoners from the Leverett Street Jail necessitated a new institution for the House of Reformation. This was built between 1834 and 1837 at a cost of $50,000. Not long afterward South Boston received its third institution, namely, a hospital for the insane, which had been recommended by Mayor Eliot in his inaugural address of 1837. Hitherto, the insane had largely been taken care of in penal institutions, for an act of 1836 required every county in connection with its House of Correction to maintain "a suitable and convenient apartment or receptacle for idiots or insane persons." At a cost of $32,000, a separate hospital for the insane was erected, which for many years housed not only the insane of Boston but also those of other towns. Pre- viously, insane persons had been sent to the insane Charitable and Correctional Institutions. 137 asylum at Worcester. In general, the care bestowed on these unfortunates was lamentably inadequate. While these improvements were in process, the quarrel between the Overseers of the Poor and the city government went on merrily. The City Council sought time and again to gain control of the appoint- ment of the Overseers of the Poor. The root of the contention was in reality who should spend the money for relief. It was declared that the Overseers drew money from the City Treasury without rendering any account, and that they had besides an independent income from various trust funds and spent it without supervision. The Overseers were also accused of being unduly liberal givers. The alms were distributed by wards and by men who gave very little time to the work, while, according to the contention of the Council, it was a matter requiring expert direction. It is re- lated that in the winter time, numerous beggars sought refuge in Boston because of the reputed liberality of the Overseers of the Poor. Notwithstanding the great improvements and build- ing of institutions in the period between 1828 and 1843, the cost of poor relief and institutions, which had formed about 16 per cent of the annual expenditure in the years immediately preceding the adoption of the .charter, was now but 13 per cent of the total annual expenditures. To offset the cost, there were certain sources of income thrqugh the payment made by the Commonwealth and tiowns for the support of their poor in Boston and also from the labor of the inmates of institutions. At the very beginning, the city govern- ment adopted the policy of placing all inmates who were capable of work at some useful occupation; and they turned out some products which were profitably sold. There is no account of the total income from these sources in earlier years; but in 1841 it amounted to $25,000. Furthermore, the Commonwealth at that time was without almshouses, the one at Boston being the only one in which paupers could be boarded out; and the city received as much as one half of the total amount paid by the Commonwealth for the maintenance of paupers. 138 1S22 — Boston — 1922. The immediately ensuing years were not so encour- aging in the history of Boston's charitable and institu- tional experiments. The expenditures increased stead- ily, and there were other causes for dissatisfaction. The amount spent on paupers was regarded as too liberal and as occurring under a lax system. In truth, the Commonwealth had more liberal poor laws than the neighboring states which gave no support to per- sons who could not claim settlement in some town. Massachusetts regarded such persons as state paupers, which was equivalent to inviting homeless persons to seek help in Massachusetts, particularly in Boston, and more especially in times of depression. ^ The recently begun emigration to this country added new burdens. Already in 1824, the foreign born admitted to the House of Industry were numerous ; but in 1834 their number was almost double that of the 'native Americans. In his inaugural of 1835, Mayor Lyman called attention to the situation. The alien passenger law enacted did not greatly mend it. -~ By an Act of 1830, the city and town authorities were empowered to require a three-year bond from the trans- portation companies that an immigrant should not become a public charge. Instead of a bond the city might demand a payment of $5. During the first year, the collections from this source were slight, but in 1837 a new law made it obligatory to require a bond for ten years from all persons likely to become public burdens, and a payment of a head tax of $2 by all others. The income from this source did not for long benefit the towns and cities, as an Act of 1840 com- pelled them to turn the surplus, after making payments for the maintenance of alien passengers, into the state treasury. The constitutionality of the alien passenger law was denied by the Supreme Court. Thereupon the laws were revised (1850), and the Commonwealth took over the task of collecting the head tax. The most trying institutional period was during the Irish famine when shiploads of starving people came to Boston, especially in 1847 and 1848. The famine- stricken people did not come to Massachusetts wholly on their own initiative, for the New England Relief Charitable and Correctional Institutions. 139 Committee, which had sent food and other necessaries across the ocean, brought Irish men and women back in great numbers. This was not the beginning of Irish immigration to Boston, but the largest hitherto. "Once more Boston's bread cast upon the waters re- turned after many days; in the stomachs of brawny Irishmen who came to build her railroads, tend her looms, and control her politics." In two months during 1847, no less than four hundred of these immigrants were received at the House of Industry, and temporary quarters had to be erected on Deer Island. A great part of the cost had to be borne by Boston, through addition to its institutions. Meanwhile the institutions themselves had not fared well. They did not operate under a consistent plan of management. The House of Reformation was com- bined with the. House of Industry in 1841 because the Courts would not permit the admission of children to' the former, and its numbers declined in consequence. The House of Industry was not found adequate for its purposes, and the question was being considered of providing a better plant. But before definite conclu- sions were reached, a new complication arose which gave a different turn to' affairs. South Boston had several strong grievances against the city government, chief among them being that their section had been made "the Botany Bay of the city into which, could* be thrust those establishments which the city 'fathers would con- sider nuisances in the neighborhood of their own pri- vate dwellings." There were also several other com- 1 plaints, and, in its memorial to the City Council, South Boston actually threatened to declare its independence of the municipality. Among the recommendations made to the city government, the one particularly per- tinent at this point was that the city institutions should be placed on one of the islands of the.--harbor. But the inhabitants of South Boston had to wait until 1849 for authorization of the transfer of the House of Indus- try to Deer Island. "The new almshouse was erected on Deer Island be- tween 1849 and 1852 at a cost of $184,000. But Bos- ton had not reckoned on the probability that the Com- 140 1S22 — Boston — 1922. mon wealth would undertake to care for its own paupers. It began to do so in 1854. I n consequence, to the city institutions, which at that time housed about thirteen hundred inmates, had been added a costly building for which there were almost no inmates. At first the city authorities wished to make the almshouse into a house of correction and spent much money to that end. The paupers were meanwhile to be sheltered in tem- porary wooden buildings. But the project was not carried out until later. Meanwhile the Boston House of Correction was enlarged. In order to make some use of the new structure, Mayor Rice recommended in 1857 that part of the building on Deer Island should be made ready for occupancy of paupers and inmates of the House of Reformation. He also desired to place the House of Correction, the Houses of Industry and Reformation and the Hospital for the Insane under one manage- ment. At the time, these institutions were under three distinct boards which did not always act in harmony. Under a special act, the City Council was authorized to elect annually twelve men as directors of the Depart- ment of Institutions. The House of Reformation and the House of Industry were placed under the same roof at Deer Island. The old buildings in South Boston were sold and the land placed in the hands of the Land Commissioners. The first attempt to secure the establishment of a City Hospital was made in 1849, when a cholera epi- demic had shown the necessity of such an institution. The project remained dormant until 1857; it was revived by Mayor Rice, and supported by a memorial from leading physicians. In the following year, the General Court authorized the city to establish and main- tain "a hospital for the reception of persons, who by misfortune or poverty may require relief during tem- porary sickness." The building of the hospital was in part made possible by the gift of Elisha Goodnow who had left the city $25,000 for a hospital, provided it was established in South Boston or at the South End. A portion of the public lands in what was then known as the South Bay territory was chosen as the MRS. ANN WHITE VOSE. (Benefacto'r of the City Hospital.) THOMAS T. WYMAN. Benefactor of the City Hospital.) Charitable and Correctional Institutions. 141 site. There was obviously great need of this institu- tion in a city so large as Boston, and the Civil War in- creased the pressure for medical service. But the hos- pital was not completed until 1864. By a city ordi- nance of 1862, the government of the hospital was to consist of a board of trustees elected by the City Council, two of them to be aldermen, three members of the City Council, and three citizens at large. How great a need the hospital was destined to fill is shown by the fact that in half a dozen years its facilities had been outgrown. To allow for the increased demands on the City Hos- pital, an appropriation of $190,000 was made and ex- pended in the years 1875 and 1876. The hospital was not incorporated until 1880, because the City Council believed that by so doing the management would get beyond its control, although Mayor Prince had recom- mended the step as a means of securing more efficient management and a larger number of donations. The smallpox epidemic in 1872 had demonstrated the neces- sity of special buildings for the care of patients suffering from epidemic diseases. During; the -period of the Civil War and the years immediately following it showed a tremendous increase in the outlay of public institutions. -From i860 to 1865, the expenditures more than doubled as the result of the establishment of the City Hospital and the relief given to the families of soldiers. Later on, a rapid increase in the population necessitated corre- sponding increases in appropriations for the care of the poor, the insane and criminal. The institutions were crowded "beyond the capacity which health, comfort and safekeeping demand." The status of the Overseers of the Poor was finally settled in 1864 by substituting for the old ward system of election the choice by the City Council of twelve residents of Boston, who were to hold office for three years and to be chosen at large. The alleged wasteful methods of the old Overseers have already been noted. A climax seems to have been reached in t862 when they expended more than $90,000 and exceeded their appro- priation. In the following year, the City Council 142 1S22 — Boston — 1922. forced the Board of Overseers to do its work for $39,000. How strong the feeling had run in this controversy- is evidenced by the statement of Mayor Lincoln in 1865 that henceforth "the swarm of beggars, who in the winter time took up their abode with us to live upon our alms, will be forced to labor for their living." The conditions under which the Overseers worked were greatly improved by the establishment of a cen- tral office building on Hawkins street at a cost, includ- ing the land, of about $200,000. Part of the money was provided by subscriptions from private sources. The new building also sheltered many private chari- table organizations and served as a temporary home for the destitute. By a charter amendment of 1885, the appointment of the Overseers was transferred to the Mayor, subject to the approval of the Aldermen. The question of the proper classification of inmates in institutions had long been agitated. In the House of Industry were found both paupers and criminals. Apart of the responsibility of this vicious condition lay in the laws themselves, which gave the city permission to send minor offenders either to the House of Industry or the House of Correction. Boston had taken advan- tage of this law to such an extent that in 1862 much more than half the inmates of the House of Industry were serving sentences. To mend the situation, it was found necessary to erect a new building, and in 1870 an appropriation for an almshouse on Deer Island, to contain paupers only, was actually made. But con- struction was delayed, for the question of separating paupers and criminals would not down. A partial re- lief was found by removing male paupers to Rainsford Island. Finally, the so-called Austin Farm in West Roxbury was chosen as a place for the new almshouse, in 1873. Meanwhile the new House of Reformation had been completed which permitted a better classi- fication of juvenile offenders. Boston had hitherto clung to the principle of caring for her insane in the Lunatic Hospital, so-called, erected in 1839 at South Boston, in order that the inmates might be near their families. But that institution had become utterly inadequate by i860, and it was planned Charitable and Correctional Institutions. 143 at great cost to erect a suitable building for the insane in the town of Winthrop, the City Council authorizing the necessary expenditure. The land required was actually purchased ; but when the time came for appro- priating money for the building, — it was to be a very elaborate structure — Mayor Norcross vetoed it, hold- ing that in a time of inflation (1865) the expenditure would be very much larger than anticipated. The Mayor's veto was overridden by the Aldermen and came very near suffering defeat at the hands of the Common Council. But saner thought prevailed. In 1873, the General Court was petitioned for an allow- ance equal to the amount assessed on the city for the support of the insane, or for the establishment of a hos- pital near Boston. The outcome was that the Com- monwealth provided for the erection of a hospital for the insane at Dan vers. The income from institutional labor was self -evi- dently not sufficient to meet the outgo. Several at- tempts had been made to render the House of Cor- rection self-supporting; and its receipts from labor in 1859 were about $25,000, but in the following years, which include those of the Civil War, it was difficult to find a market for the products of this institution. At the close of the war, the receipts grew materially through the introduction of the manufacture of shoes, so that from 1869 until 1872 the House of Correction became nearly self-supporting. The opportunity for the employment of female pris- oners had also been improved through the introduction of sewing machines. During the period of depression, in 1873, the receipts fell off again. In these hard times, the jealousy of free labor toward institutional products became manifest for the first time. Indeed it became so pronounced that the appointment of a committee of the City Council was called for to consider ' ' whether the present mode of employing criminals in city insti- tutions has the effect of reducing wages of workmen or depriving them of employment." So far as known the committee did not answer the question, since it held that matters of employment were in the hands of the Board of Directors of Public Institutions. Of the 144 l & 22 — Boston — 1922. receipts from remunerative labor from the other insti- tutions, little need be said. Mayor Lincoln had advo- cated the development of the agricultural resources on Long Island and to some purpose. Then, too, stone- cutting had been introduced and increased the receipts from the House of Industry. There was also income from the Austin Farm and a very considerable increase in receipts from the board of patients at the Boston City Hospital. During the period 1874 to 1886, the expenditure for institutions rose gradually in all its branches, with an exceptional year intervening. The cost of out-door relief advanced, partly, because of newly annexed terri- tory and, partly, owing to the outlay for physicians and medicines through the service of the Boston Dispen- sary. Another reason was the adoption of a stricter settlement law that had the effect of reducing the num- ber of state paupers, which meant increased burdens to the individual towns and cities. Deer Island became crowded, and there was need at once of securing accommodations elsewhere. Austin Farm, purchased in 1873, had not been utilized, but finally buildings were completed in 1877, and the female paupers housed there were transferred to them from Deer Island. Other changes made were the utili- zation of the old Roxbury Almshouse on Marcella street for destitute and neglected boys, and the refitting of the Charlestown Almshouse for aged paupers. Shortly after, in 1879, a home for girls was erected on Marcella street. The makeshift policy which hitherto maintained could not endure for long. The city was compelled once more to find adequate shelter for some of its institutions, accordingly Long Island was pur- chased and the necessary money provided for the erection of buildings to shelter about five hundred paupers. The expense for the care of paupers in- creased from $209,000 in 1874 to more than $343,000 in 1886. The number of inmates had grown mean- while from 1,500 to 2,378. In spite of the continued protest and ill-feelings over the presence of the House of Correction at South Bos- ton, which had been voiced at different periods, it still remained in the old place. Charitable and Correctional Institutions. 145 The erection of the Danvers State Hospital made available accommodations for more than four hundred patients. There was much insistence that the city should build a new hospital for the insane of its own. The local institution continued to be filled regardless of transfers to Danvers, and the city was accordingly obliged to send larger and larger numbers to state insti- tutions. By 1885, Boston had 622 insane in state asylums. The pressure on the state institutions grew, and the General Court insisted that the municipality should provide better facilities for her own insane. The Department of Public Institutions continued to be under the management of a Board of Directors until 1885, but with the enactment of a new charter, which prohibited members of the Council to serve on the executive board, the number cf directors was reduced to nine, to be appointed by the Mayor, subject to the confirmation of the Aldermen. The work of the Overseers of the Poor went on with little variation except that occasioned by the changing times. At every period of depression the expenditures rose, only to fall off again when better times ensued. The difficulty was to get sufficient money to meet emer- gencies. Thus, during the hard times in the early nineties, one effort after another to have the city make special appropriations for the relief of the poor, either by direct expenditure or by finding employment, failed. Under the statute, there was no other channel for the expenditure of city money for poor relief than the Overseers of the Poor. Conditions proved so bad that in 1894 Mayor Matthews issued an appeal to citizens to aid in overcoming the distress; and a relief com- mittee was formed which, among other things, carried out work on streets, parks and sewers during the winter months, the expenditures being borne in part by pri- vate contributions. There is no indication of waste on the part of the Overseers; they were rather economical in their management, but unable to meet a distressful condition. It was not until 1905 that the Overseers required light work from all able-bodied men in return for shelter and food. The question of the management of the correctional and charitable institutions in Boston had always given 146 iS22 — Boston — 1922. rise to a variety of opinion and to much contention. These institutions, as they grew up, were not at first placed under the same management. Naturally, this made for lack of understanding and co-operation, and was considered wasteful, especially in the matter of purchasing supplies. The first experiment in uniting the institutions under an unpaid board was not success- ful. The next experiment was to transfer the control of the various institutions to paid directors, to be appointed by the Mayor subject to the confirmation of the Board of Aldermen. This innovation was actu- ally carried out in 1889, but did not give the antici- pated satisfaction. The succeeding change was to place the whole department under the control of a single commissioner. The entire trend of depart- mental work had been toward substituting a single head for boards. But under Mayor Quincy, the last of his name, rad- ical changes in institutional government were proposed and carried out. In 1897, authority was obtained for separate departments to take charge of children, pau- pers, the insane and criminals. The criminals were placed under the management of a paid commissioner, to be appointed by the Mayor without confirmation of the Board of Aldermen. The children, paupers and the insane were placed under separate boards of trus- tees, one for each class, who served without pay for terms of five years and were appointed by the Mayor without confirmation of the Board of Aldermen. Mayor Quincy was very strongly imbued with the value of unpaid boards for institutions, and recommended them unhesitatingly in his inaugurals of 1896 and 1897. At his instigation also they were later adopted in other departments. One object to be obtained by the new departure was a better classification of inmates. Mayor Quincy's plans were put in operation in 1897 and neces- sitated many changes both in the location of institu- tions and their capacity. Among the plans for carry- ing out his ideas was the construction of a new institu- tion to be known as the Suffolk County Reformatory, which was to receive, ultimately, all the inmates of the South Boston institution. SILAS DURKEE, M. D, (Benefactor of the City Hospital.) Charitable and Correctional Institutions. It was not until November, 1902, that the HonSe of Correction at South Boston was emptied and the inmates transferred to their new home on Deer Island. But already in 1908, Deer Island had be- come overcrowded, in spite of the erection of the new reformatory. The cost of the Paupers' Institutions Department increased very greatly during the new regime instituted by Mayor Quincy. The trustees had charge of the almshouses at Long Island and Chariest own. The first mentioned was in the nature of a hospital, the alms- house at Charlestown being reserved for aged couples. The almshouse at Long Island had been relieved from many of its former objectionable inmates who, under the vagrant law of 1898, were committed to the State Farm at Bridgewater. The name of the department was changed in 1908 to the Infirmary Department, which implied a clear recognition of the character of its service. The old Charlestown Almshouse, containing 105 inmates, was sold to the Boston Elevated Railway Com- pany in 191 1 for $72,000, a location for the railway through the property having been granted by the Gen- eral Court. These inmates were eventually trans- ferred to the Long Island Almshouse where additional dormitories were erected. By 1 916, the average population at Long Island was 954 and the per capita expenditure $4.14 per week. After the completion of the new buildings, the value of the real estate belonging to the institution amounted to $1,386,100. By an ordinance of 1920, the Infirmary Department was merged with Children's Institutions, Institutions Registration, and the Penal Institutions, forming the Institutions Department. Lender the trustee system of government, the Chil- dren's Institutions Department grew rapidly, also in cost, but better care was given the young wards of the city. The policy was adopted of placing pauper chil- dren in homes in the country, which soon permitted the closing of the Marcella Street Home. Early in 19 14, Mayor Cu rley recommended _ Jhe abolition of the Parental SchoolJnWest Roxbury and, 148 1S22 — Boston- — 1922. t he Suffo l k School for Boys on Ramsfo rd JslanH, hpl W- mg it to" be harmful to house new iuvenile offenders with the older and more or less vicious. In the sa me year T the Parental School was abolished, t he 104 boys re turning to their homes, thereat ter to atte ncL_dis^ Tjj pli'nary day sch ools in c harge of the School Committee. The Parental School buildings were eventually occu - pied by a branch ot the City Hospital, called the West Derjajdment- The Suffolk School for Boys was closed^ in 1920. Of its inmates, 306 were placed on probation and others were transferred to state training schools. By the ordinances of 1920, the Children's Institutions Department became the Child Welfare Division of the new Institutions Department. ^ At the House of Correction on Deer Island, the average daily population in 1909 was 1,479, the largest since 1905. By 191 1, that average had dropped to 1,100. This decline continued steadily because of the increased application of the probationary fine and sus- pended sentence laws. Under the Uniform Desertion Act, the Master of the House of Correction was re- quired to pay to the probation officer, and he, in turn, to the wife or dependent of the prisoner, fifty cents for each day's work performed by him. This law, apply- ing to men imprisoned for nonsupport, was so success- ful that it brought about the equally salutary Depend- ent Parents' Act. In 191 8 the average population at Deer Island had fallen to 379. The Massachusetts Prison Commission had transferred 340 men to State Prison camps, and the commitments for drunkenness had diminished by 54 per cent. In the same year a prison school was established with classes in English, American history, civics, arithmetic, drawing, type- writing, etc. Hundreds of books from the Public Library were supplied, debating and community sing- ing exercises encouraged and extreme severity in dis- cipline dropped. The advance in the morale of the inmates improved markedly. By January 1, 1920, there were only 242 inmates of the House of Correc- tion, and it was believed that consolidation with other similar institutions would become necessary in the interest of economy. The number of female inmates Charitable and Correctional Institutions. 149 was so small that on January 1 they were removed to the Suffolk County Jail, and no further commitments of women to Deer Island were made. The number of employees there was reduced from 90 to 77. The Hospital for the Insane had been continuously enlarged and was destined soon to take on an entirely different character. In 1887, there had been estab- lished a home for chronic and mild cases of insanit}^ in the buildings at Austin Farm vacated by the re- moval of female paupers to Long Island. At the end of 1 891, no less than 427 insane were cared for by the city in its own institution. In the following year, the so-called Pierce Farm, adjacent to Austin Farm, was bought, and five years later, after an expenditure of nearly $500,000 in the erection of new buildings, the old lunatic hospital at South Boston was abandoned. Meanwhile, the cost of caring for Boston's insane in state institutions had grown considerably, so that Mayor Quincy was able to remark that it would be greater economy for Boston to re-assume all responsibility for the care of her insane. But the Commonwealth wished to assume the entire cost of looking after the insane, beginning with January 1, 1904, and legislated accord- ingly. A law of 1900 prescribed that all insane not in state institutions should be transferred to them, but made an exception of the Boston Insane Hospital. The city was allowed $3.25 a week for every free patient, but between 1901 and 1905 it became neces- sary to make large improvements to provide for the growing number of insane, and more than $400,000 were expended for this purpose. At the end of 1906, there were 700 patients, but the institution was crowded. Finally, it became evident that from every point of view the city would be more fortunately placed by having the Commonwealth take over the entire charge of the care of the insane. The Finance Commission had so recommended. Mayor Hart was in sympathy with the proposal, and under an Act of 1908, the Com- monwealth took possession of the insane hospital, which was henceforth to be known as the Boston Insane Asylum. The city was reimbursed by the Common- wealth to the amount of $1,000,000 for the property. 150 1S22 — Boston — 1922. The maintenance of the institution had cost the city from $160,000 to $170,000 a year. The City Hospital had grown apace, necessitating an almost continual expenditure for the enlargement of the plant. Thus, from 1893 to 1898, $1,200,000 were spent on new buildings which almost doubled the capacity of the hospital. The plan of construction adopted was to erect additional pavilions and to con- nect them with the central structure. This allowed for a great concentration of patients and a lower cost for their maintenance. In the year 1908, the outlay for the City Hospital amounted to $909,000, or ex- ceeding four times the amount expended in 1887. From this time on the activities of the hospital have been extended in different directions as may be seen from a few figures. The number of beds in the main hospital and south departments increased from 995 to 1,128 in 1920. During the same time, the number of patients, exclusive of out-patient departments, in- creased from 15,251 in 1910 to 20,328 in 1920. Owing to the facilities offered elsewhere, the number of persons applying to the out-patient department has shown a decrease since 19 10. All in all, since the City Hospital was first opened in 1864, over half a million house patients have been treated in the various departments up to February, 1 92 1, and there have been nearly two million out- patients treated. The cost of maintenance of the City Hospital increased from $535,873 in 1910 to $1,239,291 in 1920. The figures for the year last mentioned were offset by income from pay patients amounting to $167,009. Under the Hospital Department is also the Con- valescent Home, the Haymarket Square Relief Station, the East Boston Relief Station, and the so-called West Department in West Roxbury, which at present is leased to the United States Government. The Hospital Department holds trust funds to the amount of $97,750, the interest for which is available for specific objects. The most important bequest in recent years is one of $200,000 to be used for the erec- tion of the Thorndike Memorial Building for X-ray work, etc. LAMONT G. BURNHAM. (Benefactor of the City Hospital.) CONSUMPTIVES' HOSPITAL, MATTAPAN. Charitable and Correctional Institutions. 151 The city government was authorized to borrow $150,000 to add to the bequest so that a suitable build- ing may be assured. The latest addition to the charitable institutions under the control of the City of Boston is a hospital for consumptives. The trustees for this institution were appointed in 1906 and had charge of the expenditure of $514,000, raised by loans, for the land, buildings and equipment of the hospital. They purchased the Con- ness estate, fifty-five acres, in Mattapan, where they since have erected three ward buildings, four cottage wards and the children's ward, as well as the domestic administration building. The care and management cf the institution are entrusted to the trustees, who have the power to make all necessary rules and regulations. Only bona fide residents of Boston are admitted to the hospital. The institution supplies a great want in the fight against tuberculosis. The tremendous burden of affording proper facilities for the care of the sick of Boston would have been vastly added to but for the establishment from time to time of special and general hospitals under private auspices; but their story, like that of other institu- tions and organizations of benevolence, is not a part of this sketch of Boston's activities through its municipal administration . 152 r822 — Boston — 1922. STREET BETTERMENT. The town had done little in the last years of its exist- ence to widen its wandering and narrow streets and thus bequeathed to the city the task of adapting the highways to the needs of a rapidly growing city. How the highways of Boston in its older parts even now seem to ramble on at will, like the cow paths of old, is still a cause of bewilderment to the stranger and of annoyance to some inhabitants who lack the sense of locality. The problem of laying out and improving the city streets has been a bone of great contention and a source of enormous expenditure in the course of 100 years. The charter of 1822 gave the Board of Mayor and Aldermen power to widen, lay out, and discontinue streets. The care of the streets was also transferred to this board by a special act of 1822. Later on, the greater part of street work was done by a committee of the board; but in 1837 the board itself was supplanted by the office of a Superintendent of Streets. In the following decade, streets of special importance at the time, such as Broad, Commercial, Prince and Tremont streets, were greatly extended. Blackstone street was laid out at the extraordinary cost of $80,000 because it extended over the site of Mill Creek, which formerly divided the town. As the city grew rapidly, the cost of paving and repairing increased in proportion. Mayor Lyman mentions the fact that the increase in city trade had brought a crowd ' ' of heavy laden wagons upon our pavement." There was one important element lacking in pro- viding for the extension and improvement of streets: that of power to levy special assessments on the prop- erty to be benefited. If Boston had been given author- ity to do this, a heavy burden would have been saved, and the streets would have been in a much better con- dition today. Mayor Josiah Quincy, Jr., realized this Street Betterment. 153 and sought legislation authorizing the city to levy assessments for street betterments. The bill intro- duced for this purpose was defeated, according to the city committee on finance, "by the exertions of inter- ested men and by the operations of some of the local representatives of the city." A source of waste of city money for street purposes was the system of purchas- ing land at a very high rate. It was common knowl- edge at the time, as Mayor Lincoln said in his inau- gural of 1885 that "interested individuals frequently sought improvements of streets which did not benefit the public, but helped to raise the value of particular estates at the expense of the public." By the middle of the forties, the expense for street purposes had already become a great drain on the city treasury, which could only be met by loans since the city had no power of assessment for street- widening purposes. Many citizens were content with the pre- vailing order of things and found support in conserva- tives like Mayor Bigelow, who thought the streets were wide enough for all needful uses and even recommended omitting the ordinary annual appropriation for the extension and widening of the streets. He held that it was enough to enforce the law against street obstruc- tion in order to permit traffic to go on unhindered. His vigorous fight for retrenchment had some effect as the expenditures for widening streets were soon re- duced by more than one-fifth. He saved the pennies and forced those who came after him to spend the pounds. From 1822 to 1859, a total of $3,788,087 had been spent for widening and extending streets. At the same time, the maintenance of streets, paving, etc., rose in proportion. Indeed, as an annual expenditure it became quite as important to the city treasury as as the more fluctuating expenditure for widening and extending streets. Retrenchment for street purposes became necessary during the Civil War and demanded postponement of many plans for improvement, al- though the congestion had grown, and there was a constant demand for wider steets as well as for exten- sions in several directions. 154 1S22 — Boston — 1922. There followed a period (from 1867 to 1873) in which street projects of great magnitude were carried on. The first was the reduction of Fort Hill which had long stood in the way of street improvements. This hill, of about twenty acres in area, topped by a pleasant park known as Washington square, was long the abode of many wealthy citizens. But they had been crowded out by the pressure of business, so that Fort Hill at the time under consideration was tenanted by the poorest inhabitants. When the city secured the nec- essary authority from the General Court for the reduc- tion of Fort Hill, it stood covered by ugly tenements and was a serious obstacle to the spread of the whole- sale district of the city. Fortunately, under the Act of 1865, the city could take private property and assess damages on the abutting estates in proportion to value, as appraised by the Mayor and Aldermen; or, the owner might accept the valuation named by the Mayor and Aldermen before damages were esti- mated. The act even provided for a jury trial by owners who might be aggrieved by the decision of the municipal authorities. The city made good use of this power in dealing with Fort Hill. It took about six years to reduce Fort Hill to the proper level. The work was finally finished in 1872. The inhabitants of this one time fashionable eminence did not leave their homes willingly. It is said that some of them remained in their houses "until the roofs were taken off and the rooms laid open to the sky." At first great difficulty was found in disposing of the 540,000 cubic yards of earth which had to be carried off. But when Atlantic avenue had been constructed, the earth could be dumped at the docks. The cost of reducing Fort Hill had been estimated at half a million dollars, but in the end it amounted to about a million dollars. In return, Boston had added twenty acres to its business area. Incidental to the work of reduc- ing the hill, the city had taken a considerable area of land, which had been surrendered by its owners and later on was sold by the city. At the time Fort Hill was leveled, the district from Rowe's Wharf to the East Street Betterment. 155 Boston Ferry consisted of "a ragged fringe of streets with its old-fashioned wharves reaching out here and there to deep water." The next big street undertaking was to replace this fringe by a broad street running down the waterfront and named Atlantic avenue. It took about four years to complete this project, which had been decided upon in 1868 and included filling in some of the old docks, so as to add land for building purposes and provide a better approach to the wharves. The total cost was about two and one half million dollars. This time the city had the co-operation of the abutters as to damages and betterments, for the General Court had at last given the Board of Aldermen full power to take over land for street purposes and assess the abutters to the amount of not more than one half of the benefit ad- judged. The General Court was, evidently, reluctant to give the City Council this much power in laying out, widening and improving the streets of Boston. The law was modified later on, so that the city might assess upon the abutting property its proportionate share of the cost up to one half of the special benefit to be de- rived, as determined by the Board of Aldermen. It was easy to foresee the numerous advantages to the city of this law. Mayor Norcross at once expressed his opinion that "if this law shall be judiciously admin- istered, it will correct defects which have long been felt to exist and tend to equalize the burden conse- quent upon the widening of our narrow streets." South Boston, which had long complained of being treated as a step-child by the administration, at last had its share of street improvements through the ex- penditure of nearly a million dollars, in 1869, for the extension of Broadway and widening Federal street, formerly the principal thoroughfare to the peninsula. In 1873, the city almost doubled its appropriations for the extension and widening of streets on account of the large area laid waste by the Great Fire. Mayor Pierce said in his inaugural of 1873, "The best form in which we can commemorate the great disaster which has overtaken us is by establishing wider streets in the district covered by fire, and improved methods in the 156 iS22 — Boston- — 1922. construction of buildings throughout the city." As the administration could not give a clear title to some of the land forming the old streets and which had been taken for street purposes, it was obliged to content itself with widening and straightening the existing thoroughfares at a cost of about five million dollars. The street improvements at the time included the laying-out of Columbus avenue and Dartmouth streets, which was done without cost to the city, for the land was contributed by the owners of the property bene- fited. So far the street work had been in charge of the Board of Aldermen, which had not been equal to the amount of work required, and was too prone to look after special interests. It was, therefore, recommended that it be replaced by a board of street commissioners (1869). The General Court passed a law the following year, at the request of the City Council, requiring the election of three men, one to be selected annually, who should constitute the Board of Street Commissioners. The new board also had power to order improvements to the value of not exceeding $25,000 in any one year on a single street. To place such enormous respon- sibility in a board which was independent of the administration many regarded as a dangerous expe- dient. Several efforts were made to modify the act, and the powers of the Street Commissioners were sub- sequently controlled to some extent, so that they no longer dominated the entire situation. The pace set for improvements after the Great Fire could not be maintained indefinitely. As Mayor Cobb said, it was "time to pause for a while in this magnifi- cent but costly career of street widening and wait for better times." But in 1879 began another period of expansion in street work, especially in the suburbs. The methods pursued in the outlying districts of the city were the same that had made improvements within the city proper so expensive. No systematic plan was followed looking to the future; streets were laid out at haphazard; and the Street Commissioners confined themselves largely to the acceptance or rejec- tion of private ways already laid out. They evidently Street Betterment. 157 did not think of planning the streets with due regard to the growth and movement of the population. As the Park Commissioners remarked, " The growth of Boston from its infancy (as shown in its streets) has, until within a very few years, been without method and dependent chiefly upon the individual fancy or convenience of property owners instead of being regu- lated by municipal authorities." Mayor O'Brien also voiced his sentiments as late as 1888 by saying that during the previous twenty-five years Boston had "ex- pended millions of dollars for widening and extending streets that could have been saved if some systematic plan had been adopted." The Charter Commission of 1885 had demanded a "comprehensive plan of pro- spective streets and ways in the outlying sections of the city," stating that for lack of such a plan "a vast amount of property in buildings has been destroyed in the change of street lines and grades ' ' ; but it was not until a board of survey was established in 1891 that Boston began systematic street work in the suburbs. Meanwhile, it was impossible to resist for long the strong demand for immediate construction of streets already laid out. The retrenchment had gone too far, and by the year 1890 the expenditure for street pur- poses suddenly rose and continued to increase until 1897. Hitherto streets had been laid out generally by pri- vate owners, subject to the acceptance or rejection by the administration. The result was deplorable, with- out system, and entailed an extraordinary cost. Mayor Matthews had set his face against additional outlay for street purposes until a better plan had been devised, and it was at his instigation that the legislature passed an Act in 1891 for the appointment of a board of survey by the Mayor, subject to the confirmation of the Aldermen. The board, consisting of three men, was given practically free hands in planning street work. Although appointed for a term of three years, the board continued until 1897. The Street Commis- sioners, however, were not to lay out any prospective streets until petitioned to do so by a majority of the owners within a certain distance of the proposed loca- 158 1S22 — Boston — 1922. tions, or until authorized by the City Council. The privilege of special assessment for strict betterment was greatly increased by this act. But it was hardly given a fair trial. The large real estate owners united in bitter opposition. The assessment plan ran counter to privileges they had long enjoyed. They were able to secure several amendments to the act which reduced the assessable cost in various ways. The Act of 1891 was declared unconstitutional in 1892 by the Supreme Court, with a consequent loss to the city estimated at forty million dollars. Additional legislation was sought but did not benefit Boston. The amounts actually assessed were only to the extent of the supposed benefit. In spite of the adverse action of the General Court, Boston had to go on with the long delayed street im- provements. For the greater part, the money needed came from loans, most of which were first raised out- side of the debt limit. Finally, in 1906 the General Court passed a law under which all future improvements should be paid for from taxes or from loans within the debt limit "except those ways constructed under some special act in which a contrary provision is made." Under these circumstances, Boston was seriously handi- capped in all its work relating to streets. Much needed work could not be done ; more than once the city was obliged to allow street surfaces to wear out completely so that their renewal might be deemed an extraordinary expenditure to be met, under the law, by borrowing. To place the entire blame for the costliness and un- systematic procedure in street work on the General Court and its constant interference would not be wholly fair. The city administrations were frequently at fault through wasteful and careless methods. Thus, the custom had obtained for a number of years of appro- priating money for construction work in equal sums for the different wards, regardless of actual local needs. Then, too, the habit of granting contracts without competition involved at times a great extravagance. Finally, the Street Department as late as in 1897 had hired men by the day or for the time during which their services were needed. The force had always Street Betterment. 159 been under political pressure, especially prior to the passage of the civil service law in 1884 and the charter reform of 1885. Mayor Martin had said on this sub- ject that "the loss to the city for employment of un- skilled foremen and inefficient workmen, billeted upon the heads of the departments, cannot be measured by the current expense of a single year." Mayor O'Brien, in his inaugural of 1886, expressed the belief that the Street Department was no longer a political machine, but that politics continued to disturb the effectiveness of the department in later years cannot be doubted. The Finance Commission went so far in 1907 as to estimate that 20 per cent of the money appropriated for streets was wasted on account of lax methods of administration. It had always been a great question how to deal with aged employees of the Street Department. Adequate relief was given through the passage of the law of 191 1 by the General Court, under which street laborers, in common with others who were physically incapaci- tated, may, upon request, be retired, provided they have served the city for twenty-five years, on a pen- sion equal to one half of their pay for the last year of their services. It will be remembered that in the early days the care of the streets was entrusted to a superintendent acting under the Mayor and Aldermen. He was superseded by an elective board of street commissioners in 1870. The Street Commissioners became an appointive body under the Charter of 1909, and are still known by their old designation, but the department in charge is offici- ally called the Street Laying-Out Department. It has the power to lay out, alter or discontinue by-ways, to order repairs and the construction of sewers, to take lands, etc., needed for construction. It always levies the betterment assessments and makes award of dam- ages. This board, therefore, takes the place of the Board of Survey, which was discontinued in 1895. It also licenses street stands for the sale of merchandise and may grant or withhold permits for the erection of garages, or make rules relating to projections over i6g 1S22 — Boston — 1922. public highways. It may further name streets and perform various other duties too numerous to men- tion. But the active work of constructing and main- taining all public streets, together with other authority, has been transferred to the Highway Division under the Public Works Department, which was established through the consolidation of different departments in 1911. Sewer Improvements. I/161 SEWER IMPROVEMENTS. L/In the days of the town, the sewers in Boston were built and maintained by private individuals. It was an extremely primitive system for a place having more than forty thousand inhabitants and frequently a serious detriment to public health. Moreover, while it prevailed, the city had difficulty in exercising proper control of the streets, and there were frequent disputes between the owners of main sewers and those who wished to make new entries. This system could not last, and already in 1823 the Mayor and Aldermen were authorized to construct all common sewers and to assess the residents who wished to connect with them. The sewers were municipalized with great success. The city spent large sums for better drainage, and greater efficiency was secured by the appointment, in ^1837, of a Superintendent of Sewers. Previously the work had been in charge of the Superintendent of Streets. As the city gradually acquired more and more land, the provision for sewer construction grew in propor- tion. It was "especially desirable to get an adequate outlet for the receiving basin on Back Bay which had come to be used as a cesspool." After much discus- sion, a large sewer was constructed to enter the South Bay at Dover street. It was built between 1850 and 1852, but proved inadequate. Whenever rain set in, water would flood the cellars, and the low level pre- vented a discharge into the harbor except for a few hours a day. The building of a new sewer on Dedham street in 1857 did not bring the expected relief. Threats of heavy expenses for damages gave an impetus to the great undertaking of raising the level of many of the city lands. Then, too, the increase in mortality was so great on account of defective sewers that the city physician advocated having all drains taken over by the municipality; he especially pointed out the danger from sewers emptying into shore waters in the vicinity of the docks. 162 1S22 — Boston — 1922. A further improvement was made in 186-5 by build- ing outlet sewers at South and East Boston and from the Back Bay territory. The Boston Water Power Company contributed $50,000 to the cost of the Back Bay sewer, and the Commonwealth equipped its terri- tory in the Back Bay with sewers. When Roxbury was annexed in 1868, the cost of the Sewer Depart- ment doubled; and by 1873 it had reached the sum of about $228,000 a year. Still Boston was not safe from danger through the sewers which emptied into tide water on every side of the city. The Board of Health again called attention to the need of a better system and attributed the prevalence of summer diseases to the lack of it. Finally, the City Council appointed a commission to investigate the whole subject. In its presentation, im- mediate action was called for, and plans were proposed for a new system of sewers. It was shown that the death rate had not been excessive until the discharge of the sewage became a menace to the growing popu- lation. There were thirty-two independent drainage districts in the city proper, with as many separate out- lets. To mend the condition, the system of intercept- ing sewers around the borders of the city was recom- mended, which were to empty into a main sewer dis- charging to a pumping station at Dorchester; then it was to be brought across the bay to Moon Island, whence it could be discharged into the lower harbor. To make surveys and estimates for this undertaking, the sum of $40,000 was appropriated, and in 1877 the undertaking itself was financed, the appropriation being $713,000. The new work had been authorized by the General Court in 1876; construction began in 1877 and was practically finished by the end of 1884, at a cost of about five million dollars, the excess over the orig- inal estimates being due to the rise in cost of materials and labor. The benefit to the city was immediate; the death rate diminished; the waters at the docks were no longer polluted ; the offensive odors had disappeared ; and the cellars were no longer periodically flooded. Another problem was that of preventing the nuisance connected with Stony Brook which for a long time had Sewer Improvements. 163 discharged the sewage of the Roxbury district into the Charles River by way of the Back Bay flats. The construction of intercepting sewers stopped this nui- sance, but it required an extraordinary expenditure to prevent Stony Brook from endangering the surround- ing territory by periodic overflows. The city of Rox- bury as well as the town of West Roxbury had experi- mented with improvement of Stony Brook quite unsuc- cessfully. At last Boston took a hand, and when, finally, the necessary improvements had been made, they had cost the city $370,000. It looked as if the work had been successfully done, but when a freshet of unusual magnitude occurred in 1886, the city was made defendant in many damage suits. Mayor O'Brien regarded the money spent on Stony Brook as being largely wasted and called the work, "a most faulty piece of engineering." To meet the emergency, the construction of a new channel was recommended, to be continued at a later time as far as West Roxbury. All in all, the work pro- jected called for an expenditure in excess of two million dollars; but when the improvement had been con- tinued as far as to Jamaica Plain station, Stony Brook had cost the city two million and a half dollars. For general expenditures the Sewer Department had a very limited amount of money at its disposition until 1897. In consequence, the city could not deal ade- quately with the ever-pressing sewerage problem. The discontent with the situation resulted in efforts to have the General Court transfer the entire control of the sewer work to the newly created Metropolitan Board of Sewerage Commissioners, on the ground that the city had proved incapable of managing its own system. The administration was thus compelled to investigate anew what could and should be done, and subsequently (1897) secured the passage of an act granting the city permission to issue bonds for sewer work outside the debt limit to the amount of $1,000,000 a year. During the twelve years following this loan, the expenditures for sewers, including the Metropol- itan assessments, amounted to about twenty million dollars, but two-thirds of it was obtained by loans. 164 1822 — Boston — 1922. One of the most difficult questions with which the Sewer Department had to deal was that of surface water, w T hich could not be carried off by existing drains in periods of heavy rains. The overflow to a large extent was carried into the harbor and constituted a formidable menace to public health. Many cities had adopted the plan of installing an entirely separate sys- tem for carrying off surface water, and Boston was compelled to follow their example. By means of this system surface drainage could be discharged into the harbor without polluting it, and the strain of the regular sewerage system lessened. There was one special reason for resorting to this expedient, namely, the improvements relating to the Charles River. A new basin had been provided for, and it was essential to exclude sewage from it. Since the Metropolitan Sewerage System was to include the drainage district of the Charles River, the city was obliged to expend a great deal of money for a separate system of sewerage in the Charles River Basin district. The Metropolitan sewerage district, whose assess- ments increased expenditures for sewers in Boston, was established in 1889 and placed in charge of a commis- sion of three men, appointed by the Governor, who had the task of building and maintaining the sewers within the district. This board was later merged with the water board. One part of the district to be served by metropolitan sewers contained cities and towns north of the Charles River and parts of Boston. The other contained cities and towns principally to the south of the Charles River and parts of Boston. Later on, a third system was added, the so-called Neponset Valley system, which also included a part of Boston. With- out attempting to describe in detail the alterations and cost of the Metropolitan Sewerage System, it will suffice to say that Boston's share of the Metropolitan sewer debt in 1920 was over four million dollars. The Metro- politan assessment on Boston for sewers amounts to over $400,000 annually, exclusive of the assessment on account of the Charles River Basin. Street Lighting. 165 STREET LIGHTING. A hundred years ago the question of lighting the new city of Boston apparently did not worry the municipal authorities very greatly. Oil was the prin- cipal source of light in the old days, and from time to time there was some trouble about the price to be paid for it. The city was, of course, badly lighted, so that it became necessary, periodically, to increase the num- ber of lamps. A committee charged with the study of the lighting question reported in 1834 that the "lamps were very ill distributed and gave a feeble light. " ; It recommended that gas be substituted for oil. This was done and effected a small saving as well as better light- ing, but the change had to be brought about gradually. Even as late as in 1840, the city paid about equal amounts for oil and gas consumed in street lighting. When a decade had passed (1851), there were still more oil lamps than gas lamps in use; but two years later the gas lamps finally gained ascendency. People were slow in taking advantage of the use of gas, for already in 1823 a company had been formed to supply gas for street lighting. Under Mayor Josiah Quincy, Jr., the ques- tion arose whether the city should take over the owner- ship of the gas works. He distinctly stated that the gas works, which enjoyed a monopoly in the city, had been conducted "in a manner entirely satisfactory to the public," but he hinted at the undesirability of giving up a partial control of the streets. There the question of municipal ownership of gas works rested for the time being. As the city grew, the expenditures for lighting neces- sarily increased in proportion. 4n 1830, Boston was lighted at an annual expense of about $15,000, but by 1873 the amount had grown to nearly $400,000 per annum. The available land within the city limits had become more and more built up, the annexed terri- tories had their needs, and there was a general demand for a better lighting service. It seems curious to us of i66 1822 — Boston — 1922. the present time that a city committee of 1865 should state that the citizens could no longer content them- selves with the service which had satisfied Boston as a town, but demanded that "the streets should be lighted throughout every night of the year." An order to extend the time for street lighting was passed by the Board of Aldermen the next year, but the Common Council refused to concur. In 1867, however, the lamps were kept burning at night during the winter months. The entire work connected with lighting and caring for the street lamps had been let by contract until 1868, when it was placed under the superintendent of the Lighting Department. The question of the municipal ownership of gas again came to the fore. There was distinct objection to having gas sold to the city at a profit and to permit the manufacture of it by private corporations. But the cost of material and labor stood in the way of taking decisive steps. Yet the question of establishing a municipal gas plant continued to be agitated. There was a general dissatisfaction with the price of gas among the consumers. Mayor Cobb men- tioned this in 1875; but he would rather regulate the price of gas than have it manufactured by the munic- ipality. The upshot was the appointment of a special commission which reported in favor of having a single company in Boston distribute gas and concluded that the Boston Gas Light Company offered its commodity for a lower price than obtained in most American cities, considering the quality of the gas. The committee would, however, have the City Council seek authority to erect separate gas works as a means of bringing the private company to better terms! The impression was and remained that the city paid too much for street lighting. As a result, lighting contracts were constantly lowered, but probably not in proportion to the decrease in the cost of manufac- ture; and the administrations were persistently called upon to consider the alternative of a municipal lighting plant. A legislative act of 1891 gave cities and towns permission to manufacture gas or electricity for their own use and for private distribution, but it required Street Lighting. 167 an affirmative vote of two thirds of the members of the City Council, the approval of a Mayor in two consecutive years, and a referendum to the voters before a municipal gas or electric lighting plant could be established. Had the question been solely of permitting the city to establish a plant for its own use, there is reason to believe that it might have been adopted; but the neces- sary legislative changes were not secured. A com- mittee of 1896 reported against municipal lighting. There was also an uncertainty in regard to the best methods of street lighting owing to constant improve- ment through new inventions. So the city contented itself with experimenting with different kinds of lights, and the question of establishing municipal ownership in this respect is still in abeyance. Turning again to the question of lighting with the means at hand, one may note the constant outcry against the cost. Mayor Prince, in 1879, complained that the expenditure was greater in Boston "than that of any other city of its size in the country." He re- duced the cost by substituting three-foot burners for the four-foot burners, but the result was inferior service. The four-foot burner was restored, and a slight relief gained through a reduction in the price of .gas. Yet the amount expended for lighting purposes was less than $400,000 a year at the time, and by 1886 had only in- creased to $524,000. In the meantime, wooden lamp posts had replaced those formerly made of iron; and in 1882 the city had begun experimenting with electric lights, which at first proved a very expensive luxury, though they gave a better service. The substitution of the electric arc light for the gas lamp and of improved gas lamps are matters of recent date. The city might be said still to be experimenting with both. The lighting service is in charge of the Highway Divi- sion of the Public Works Department. The cost of street lighting in 1920 was $499,392 for electric lights and $206,474 for gas lights. i6S 1822 — Boston — 1922. RAPID TRANSIT. The congestion in the narrow streets of Boston was so acute in the early part of the eighties that some means of remedy became imperative. Suggestions of all kinds to provide relief were made ; but the plan receiving the greatest public favor was to build an elevated railroad and a subway. Financial interests took up the ques- tion and fought for the privilege of controlling the situ- ation. The West End Street Railway Company had received authority from the General Court to build a subway, but neglected to take advantage of it. Other interests sought a charter for a combined subway and elevated railroad. The West End Company obtained a charter for an elevated railroad in 1890, but once more hesitated to build because of the great cost of the under- taking. It became evident that little was to be hoped for from these unpleasant struggles between opposing finan- cial interests, and so the city itself took a hand. Mayor Matthews, in his first inaugural, had recommended the establishment of a commission of experts, to be ap- pointed by him, for the purpose of investigating the entire situation. An order providing for such a com- mission was readily obtained, and later in the year it was enlarged by adding to it members appointed by the Governor. The commission in its report, made in 1892, recommended that an elevated railroad be built from the city to the suburbs and a subway in the busi- ness center. The General Court passed two measures; one provided for the appointment of a commission by the Governor, to be known as the Metropolitan Transit Commission, with authority to take the necessary land through the center of the city, from Causeway street to Franklin Park, for the use of subways and elevated roads as the commission should see fit, and provided that the commission might authorize the West End Company to build a subway for its street railway tracks. Rapid Transit. 169 Bids for the right to construct and operate an elevated road for a term not exceeding fifteen years were to be invited. The railroad should become the property of the city at the end of this period, or, in case bids were not accepted, the commission itself, with the approval of the City Council, might build the elevated road and turn it over to the city. This act was referred to the voters of Boston and rejected by a small majority. The alternative presented by the General Court called for the appointment by the Mayor of three com- missioners, to be known as the Board of Subway Com- missioners, with authority to build a subway for street railway purposes from Tremont and Pleasant streets to Scollay square. It would also have power to com- pel the street cars of any line to be run through the proposed subway. This measure was adopted by the city; and as the municipal administration was at the same time authorized to issue bonds to a value not exceeding two million dollars for the new construction, Boston thereby adopted a policy of keeping the sub- ways within the city in its possession and embarked upon a new experiment in municipal ownership. Thus a small beginning had been made to meet the ever-growing congestion; but in the meantime the re- quirements of the city became more and more pressing. However, the solution of the rapid transit problem was not to be decided by the city government. The Gen- eral Court took up the cause, and Governor Green- halge said in his inaugural of 1894, "Should the Legis- lature of 1894 succeed in solving this great problem by practical legislation, it will have earned for itself an enviable record in this great Commonwealth where so much has been accomplished for the comfort and con- venience of its citizens." A very comprehensive plan for rapid transit was evolved by the legislature of that year through an act which incorporated the Boston Elevated Railway Com- pany and gave it the right to build an elevated road in Boston and vicinity, with the power to "lease, pur- chase, run and operate any lines of street or elevated railway which may be or become tributary to its lines." But no lease or purchase was to be made without the 170 1S22 — Boston — 1922. approval of the Board of Commissioners. This act marked the beginning of the consolidated system of the Boston Elevated Railway Company. For the purpose of building a subway in Boston, the Governor was to appoint "two discreet persons" who, together with the three commissioners appointed by the Mayor of Boston, should constitute the Boston Transit Commission. The commission was empowered to build the Tremont Street Subway, the East Boston Tunnel, and the Charlestown Bridge. It also had executive authority in regard to the removal of car tracks from the different streets. On September 3, 1898, the subway from Shawmut avenue and Tremont street to the North Station was opened. Mayor Quincy said that it "fully answered the expectations of its advocates. It has at least assisted very materially in the problem of rapid tran- sit for passengers through the central part of the city." The next big undertaking was the construction of "the tunnel to East Boston. The work was not to be begun until the Boston Elevated had been authorized to begin the building of its railroad. The tunnel was to be constructed by the Transit Commission and leased to the Boston Elevated. It was completed and opened to traffic in December of 1904 after vexatious delays caused by legal considerations. Already previous to the completion of the East Bos- ton Tunnel, that of Washington Street had been pro- vided for. The legislative act authorizing this sub- way the voters accepted by a large majority. The Washington Street Tunnel was completed in 1908 and leased to the Boston Elevated for the use of its trains. The Cambridge Subway, from Park street to Grove street, near the Cambridge Bridge, was opened in 1912. The Boylston Street Subway, connecting with the Tremont Street Subway, was completed in 19 14. The Dorchester Tunnel, from Park street to South Boston, was opened in 19 16 as far as the South Station; in 19 1 7, to Broadway, South Boston, and in 191 8 to its terminal, in Andrew square. The total cost of all subways and tunnels, includ- ing several connections and spurs not enumerated Rapid Transit. 171 above, was about $36,995,000, against which a sinking" fund of nearly six million dollars had been accumulated from the revenue, and payable in forty years from the^ date of each loan. All these underground ways, to the total extent of about eight miles in all, were leased to the Boston Ele- vated Railway Company for a term of twenty-five years (the Tremont Street Subway, for twenty years), at an annual rental of 4 J to 4! per cent of the net cost, except the East Boston Tunnel rental which was at three eighths of 1 per cent of the annual gross re- ceipts. In 191 1 the leases were extended to July 1, 1936, at a rental of 4! per cent of net cost after the first term leases had expired. The Boston Transit Commission ended its official life in 191 8 after the original term had been extended seven times. At the same time all the powers of the Transit Commission were transferred to the Mayor, Commis- sioner of Public Works and City Treasurer, or such persons as the Mayor might appoint. Finally, in the same year, the Transit Department was established as a regular city department, to be in charge of three com- missioners appointed by the Mayor. Boston, by building the so-called Tremont Street Subway, became the owner of the first, municipal sub- way in the United States, and thereby embarked upon an enterprise which is not yet completed, for the con- gestion still continues, growing with the increase in population and the multiplication of the ubiquitous automobile; but it can at least be said the policy fol- lowed in order to cure congestion has been an en- lightened one and faithfully administered by those in charged 172 1822 — Boston — 1922. THE FERRY SERVICE. Mayor Matthews declared flatly in his valedictory address that Boston's experiment in ownership of the Ferry Service had been a failure. The city began it in 1858-59 by buying the docks and approaches of two ferry companies operating between East Boston and the city. The transaction was really in the nature of subsidy to the companies which could not make the returns allowed by their charters without charging high rates. East Boston had at that time about 20,000 inhabitants who were much dissatisfied with the high cost of transportation. In return for the purchase by Boston of their wharves and approaches, the ferry companies agreed to accept a schedule of tolls to be fixed by the Board of Aldermen. The property was bought at a low valuation and leased to the companies, with the proviso that the latter keep them in repair. The plan was not successful ; the com- panies showed annual deficits, and raised their tolls beyond previous figures, although for a brief period they lived up to their agreement with the city. Later they paid no attention whatever to the schedule of tolls established by the Board of Aldermen. One of the companies (The Peoples' Ferry Com- pany) found that it could not go on even with further subsidy from the city, and was forced to liquidate. This left only one ferry operated by the East Boston Company, but it had added so greatly to its capacity that for a while it seemed as if the requirements of the city might be met. Mayor Norcross said publicly that the troublesome ferry question had at last been settled. The company had agreed to operate a second ferry, utilizing the old slips of the Peoples' Ferry Com- pany, provided the city would put them in repair. The city did so, leasing the approaches and slips to the East Boston Ferry Company for a small sum (1868). But from the end of this year the company demanded The Ferry Service. 173 an increase in its traffic tolls and actually obtained it by resorting to legal pressure. Thus Mayor Norcross' prediction was disappointed, and his successor, Mayor Shurtleff, asked for municipal ownership of the ferries on the petition of many citizens, including large busi- ness firms in all parts of Boston. The General Court authorized the city to buy out the East Boston Ferry Company, and in 1870, on the payment of $275,000, the city became the owner of the East Boston ferries. The property was not in good condition and cost much for upkeep. The new experiment in public ownership showed con- tinued deficits. Hitherto the ferries had been operated under a board of directors consisting of five members against which charges of incompetence and misman- agement were freely made. An investigation by a city committee sustained the charges so far as to say that the administration of the ferries had been careless and wasteful because it lacked a responsible head. Mayor O'Brien (1886) would abolish the Board of Directors and placed the ferries under a superintendent. The City Council refused to concur, and the Mayor was compelled to appoint a new board. At a large outlay, the inadequate ferry service was improved in the latter part of the eighties. In 1 89 1, the Board of Directors was finally supplanted by a superintendent. Four years later the department of ferries was abolished and their management placed in charge of the Superintendent of Streets. Upon the establishment of the Public Works Department, it took over the ferry system. Boston now owns and operates two ferry lines, — the South Ferry and the North Ferry, ■ — -and maintains seven steam ferryboats; two built of steel were placed in commission in 1921. There has been much agitation for a free ferry serv- ice. The city has stuck to the policy of maintaining the ferry service for public convenience rather than for gain. By 1904, the foot passengers on the ferry were carried at the rate of 1 cent for transportation and other charges were cut in proportion. But when the East Boston Tunnel was completed, the patrons of the North Ferry diminished to about two thirds of their 174 1822 — Boston — 1922. former number, while the much less important South Ferry continued to carry as many passengers as before. The total deficits on account of the ferry system since 1858 have been continuous, running from $39,000 in 1899, the lowest figures, to $738,636 in 1920-21. A large part of the last mentioned sum was due to new construction and repairs. Bridges. 175 BRIDGES. The important place of bridges in the annual budget of the City of Boston may be gathered from the number of brid.ges owned wholly or in part by the municipality. Those maintained wholly by Boston number sixty-two and those partly maintained by the city forty-nine, i/ There were no public bridges until 1828, when an appropriation was made to complete the bridge to South Boston, which had been partially constructed by owners of land across the channel. The city paid $3,500 for this new venture, and it cost an equal amount to put it in order. Except for the care of a few small bridges, there was no important construction until 1856, when the Albany Street Bridge to South Boston was begun. It cost $80,000 before it was opened; at the same time, large sums were paid for the acquisition of the East Boston free bridge. Between 1870-73, a bridge on Mt. Washington avenue was undertaken, and two iron bridges were constructed over the railroad tracks in the Back Bay. South Boston, which had hitherto received a large part of the benefit of the expenditure for bridges, continued to be accommodated, for in 1874-75 the Broadway Bridge was rebuilt and the so-called Eastern Avenue Bridge constructed. At the same time, a new Cam- bridge bridge was called for between West Boston and the Cottage Farm bridges. Mayor O'Brien urged this project, and the act authorizing it provided that the cost should be borne equally by Boston and Cambridge, but Boston delayed doing its share until the end of the eighties. The bridge service continued to be inadequate, for it was not only necessary to replace the old wooden struc- tures by modern ones but to build new bridges. The first great bridge to be opened was Harvard Bridge over the Charles river, the cost as well as the maintenance to be divided between the two cities. 176 i§22 — Boston — 1922. Boston paid $260,000 for its share, practically all of which was met by a loan outside the debt limit. The Charlestown Bridge, to be used by the Boston Elevated Railroad, was built between 1896-99 by the Boston Transit Commission, at a cost of a million and a half dollars. Hitherto nearly all the bridges constructed under the authority of the city were noted for their ugliness as well as for their serviceableness ; the only exception being the West Boston Bridge over the Charles river to Cambridge, which replaced the old structure ; it combines beauty with the greatest amount of usefulness. Since it was constructed in order that the Boston Elevated Company might run its subway trains across it, the company had to pay its propor- tionate share of the cost, besides paying for the con- struction of the railroad, both elevated and surface, across the bridge. This magnificent piece of engineer- ing was completed under a commission consisting of the mayors of Boston and Cambridge and a third per- son appointed by them. Boston's share of the cost was about a million and a half dollars, met by a loan outside the debt limit. Public Markets. 177 PUBLIC MARKETS. When Boston was a town it made a number of at- tempts to reduce the cost of the necessaries of life, both by maintaining public markets and by seeking to regu- late prices. Since it became a city, it has attempted little and accomplished less toward lowering the cost of living within its borders. Generally speaking, Boston has always had a system of public markets erected in different parts of the city. The principal market was the one at the head of Town Dock, where Peter Faneuil offered to build a market house, (1740) provided the town would maintain it. The town accepted the offer somewhat grudgingly, the building was named after the donor, and has since become of historic fame. After its destruction by fire, before the War of the Revolution, it was rebuilt and added to. When the so-called "New" Faneuil Hall Market, better known as the Quincy Market, was opened in 1826, the stalls under Faneuil Hall were dis- continued many years and were not reopened for market purposes until 1858. The first Mayor Quincy evolved the scheme of build- ing what was officially known as the Faneuil Hall Ex- tension, but popularly called the Quincy Market. He labored steadily on the project in the face of a deter- mined opposition for two years, and it is a great tribute to his ability and persistency that he persuaded the citizens of Boston to accept his plans which involved a gross expenditure of $1,000,000, at the time a huge sum. The plans he presented to his conservative fel- low citizens did not merely include the erection of a suitable building, but the purchase of many estates so as to afford ample space around the new market house and also for the purpose of widening the streets about it. There was bitter animosity toward this "mammoth project of the Mayor," which was regarded as the beginning of a city debt, "which neither the iyS 1822 — Boston — 1922. present inhabitants of Boston nor their posterity would be able to pay." But the necessary legislative author- ity was obtained, and the Council appointed a joint committee, of which Mayor Quincy was chairman, to carry out the great plan. On April 27, 1825, the corner stone of the new market was laid; in the next year it was opened for public use. The total amount of money expended was $1,141,- 272, but of this sum only a small amount had been used in building the market house ($166,935). The rest had been spent in purchasing land surrounding the new edifice. Part of this land had been sold for cash to the amount of more than half a million dollars, so that the debt on the market, for which city stock had been issued, was but $608,475. More than that, this debt was offset by notes in favor of the city to the amount of more than $219,709 and by unsold land which was estimated to be worth about $200,000. Thus, after all, the city made a very good bargain, and the establish- ment of an adequate market section became an im- portant factor in the growth of the city as a distribut- ing center for food products. The Quincy Market was the finest of its kind and erected at a time when Boston numbered 56,000 inhabitants. As a municipal enterprise, the Quincy Market has been steadily profitable, for it has yielded a net rental of about $4,500,000 since its erection. The Faneuil Hall Market yields from $15,000 to $16,000 per year net. Both markets are under the direction of a super- intendent who has charge of the two buildings, with authority to lease stalls at rentals not less than those established by the City Council. The market police are under the control tff the Police Commissioner and appointed by him. Beyond the enterprise mentioned, the city has not done much toward affording better market facilities, except to assign places in different parts of the city where, during the summer season, open markets can be held by the farmers from round about Boston. Licenses and the License Board. 179 LICENSES AND THE LICENSE BOARD. - The policy of imposing licenses on certain occupa- tions as a means of revenue had long been in vogue under the old town government. After 1822, licensing was extended more for the purpose of regulation than for the sake of income. The innholders were licensed by the Mayor and Aldermen and proved a most produc- tive source of income. A tax was also levied on theat- rical shows and other exhibitions. The auditor's report for 1823 has the following entry: "Edward Everett, lectures on antiques and exhibition of pic- tures connected therewith, $15." There were licenses for cows and dogs, chimney sweepers, junk dealers, etc. Later on, intelligence offices, pawn brokers and keepers of second-hand shops had to be licensed, as well as drivers of public conveyances. As a matter of curiosity it may be mentioned that in 1856 a com- mittee recommended a discrimination against tran- sient theatrical companies because they took money out of the city. In subsequent years a special charge was made, for recording mortgages on personal property and an increase in rate of license fees all round. No liquor licenses had been issued in the late forties and could not be under the prohibition law enacted in 1852. This law caused great trouble to the police who were powerless to prevent illicit sales; there were few convictions for violating the law and a lively demand for the old license system. Mayor Wightman said in his inaugural of 1862 that "to insist upon a law re- maining upon the statute books which is absurd in its provisions ; is disregarded by its own agents,- — and is not pretended to be enforced in our courts, — refusing all legislation by which it may be regulated, is unworthy of a Massachusetts Legislature." The attempt to se- cure enforcement through the state police had not been successful. But in 1868 Boston departed from the policy of prohibition and issued licenses for the sale of 180 1S22 — Boston — 1922. liquor. The consequent income was, of course, very considerable and grew quickly a few years later (1875) under a law which permitted shops to sell liquor for consumption off the premises. By 1886, the income from this source alone amounted to more than $900,000. The authority to grant liquor licenses remained in the hands of the Board of Police until 1906, when an inde- pendent licensing board was established for the pur- pose of granting this class of licenses and certain others. Meanwhile, receipts from liquor licenses became of growing importance and averaged one million and a half from 1903 to 1906, a quarter of this amount being paid to the state. The restriction placed by the Legis- lature on the number of places at which liquor might be sold was answered by arranging higher fees, so that receipts from this source became even greater than before and continued, until the advent of national pro- hibition, to constitute a very important element in the receipts of the city. Among the different sources of revenue from licenses in recent years have been charges for storage-buildings, and sale of merchandise on the public streets. The minimum fee was $5 and the maximum was $100. Boston is said to have been the first city to issue licenses of this kind. Soldiers' Relief. 181 SOLDIERS' RELIEF. At the beginning of the Civil War, the City of Bos- ton began to appropriate monthly payments for those who were dependent upon soldiers and sailors engaged in the great conflict. Under the law governing out- lay for this purpose, the Commonwealth had agreed to reimburse the towns and cities for the money expended. In 1864, Boston appropriated $293,987 for dependents of soldiers and sailors, practically all of which was repaid by the Commonwealth. Later (1866), the law was modified so as to provide monthly payments for those who were disabled in the service and to widows and minors, reimbursement to be made by the Com- monwealth. The expenditures of the municipality fell in consequence; and from 1869 to 1889 the outlay for soldiers' relief kept at a pretty constant level, varying only from $75,000 a year to $109,000. All distribution of state and city aid to soldiers and sailors in the City of Boston was originally made by the direction of the Mayor and Board of Aldermen, under different legislative acts; but in 1897, likewise under authority from the Commonwealth, the Sol- diers' Relief Department was created as a department of the city and placed in charge of a commissioner appointed by the Mayor. From 1893 to the period of the World War, the expenditures for soldiers' relief showed a considerable increase over other years, chiefly due to the changes in legislation, but since the ter- mination of the Great War the outlay has amounted to extraordinary figures. The net expenditures for soldiers' relief for the past five years, subtracting the receipts from the state, amounted to $1,835,752. In 1921 the net expenditure was $971,777. 1S2 1S22 — Boston — 1922. THE FINANCE COMMISSION. On the recommendation of Mayor Curtis, a commis- sion of citizens was appointed in 1 895 to investigate the city finances and make a report within a few months. This commission chiefly addressed itself to questions of finance, offered many suggestions of value, and was unsparing in its criticism. The Boston Finance Commission, which must not be confused with its predecessor of 1895, was established by the City Council in 1907 and instructed to "examine into all matters pertaining to the finances of the city." The commission was to consist of seven citizens recom- mended to the Mayor for appointment by organiza- tions representing various business and other interests in the city. The commissioners, who served without pay during the next year and a half were, Nathan Matthews, chairman, Randall G. Morris, George U. Crocker, George A. O. Ernst, John F. Kennedy, John F. Moors and John A. Sullivan. Under legislative act of the same year, the Commission was given authority "to summons witnesses and enforce their attendance, to order the production of books, papers, agreements and administer oaths." The powers of the commission were better defined in an Act of 1908, which also ordered it to report its findings and recommendations to the General Court as a basis for legislation. The Finance Commission of 1907 made many inves- tigations of city affairs with great thoroughness and fearless condemnation of every weakness in municipal administration coming under its observation. Among its findings were severe strictures on the conduct of the City Council, particularly for interference with con- tracts, the employment of labor, and the importuning heads of departments to favor their political supporters and constituents. It complained of excessive salaries paid city employees and their superfluous numbers. The commission held, however, that these evils reached The Finance Commission. 183 back over a period of thirty years, but had only be- come of wide importance since 1895. The first Finance Commission covered a large range in its investigations. To enumerate in detail the sub- jects it has had under consideration would far exceed our limit of space, but its disclosures made evident the need of revising the city charter, and to this task it addressed itself with great care, and, as has been stated elsewhere, its charter recommendations were accepted by the voters. The new charter contained a provision for a permanent finance commission to consist of five persons, qualified voters of the city, for terms of five years, with a paid chairman. The Finance Commission has the duty of investi- gating all matters relating to the finances of the City of Boston or the County of Suffolk and other investi- gations as may seem to be required, and to make annual reports to the Mayor, the City Council, the Governor and the General Court. The commission is authorized to employ expert counsels and other assistants as may seem necessary, but not at a cost exceeding $25,000 a year. The findings and recom- mendations of the Finance Commission are embodied in voluminous documents accessible to the public. 184 i§22 — Boston — 1922. SUFFOLK COUNTY. The relation between the City of Boston and the County of Suffolk has in certain respects always been anomalous and the cause of much irritation. To put this relationship briefly, disputes continually arose over the expenditure of money, Boston being called upon to bear county expenses without having proper control over their disbursement. Although at the time of the incorporation of Boston as a city, the Court of Quarter Sessions had been abol- ished, officers of the county courts still retained certain powers, among them the right to expend money for the courts and for the keep of prisoners. Boston had agreed to assume all the expenditures of Suffolk County, but the officers in question could draw without limit upon the city treasury. The result of this state of affairs was that Chelsea, the only other town in the county, escaped paying her just proportion of the taxes. While Chelsea remained a village it did not matter so much, but when increasing expenditures were demanded for the town, Boston assumed the new burden with a good deal of grumbling. In 1 83 1, Chelsea gave up to Boston her claim to county property, a welcome change, for it afforded the city better control over the affairs of a county whose limits practically coincided with those of Boston. But various court officers continued to have the privilege of paying for court proceedings and the maintenance of prisoners out of money appropriated by Boston. In short, they contracted the greater part of the ordi- nary expenditures of the county. The county pay- ments were divided into two groups. The first in- cluded those made on requisition of the Mayor and the second those made on demand by the County Board of Accounts, consisting of the Judge of Probate, the Jus- tice of the Police Court, and the Judge of the Munic- ipal Court. As the so-called "Mayor's Drafts" totaled Suffolk County. 185 only one sixth of the whole county expenditure, it will be seen that the greater part of it was beyond the con- trol of the Mayor and the City Council. The County Board of Accounts controlled the amounts paid to jurors, witnesses and constables and several other items, the most important being for the maintenance of prisoners. How dissatisfied the municipal government was be- cause it could not exercise supervision of county expenditures may be gathered from the following state- ment by the Boston City Auditor, who said in his report of 1898, "It is not easy to perceive the reason that its expenditures should not be brought under the same examination and subjected to the same revision as expenditures accruing in every other department of the city government." Some twenty odd years later, the City Auditor said, "Of the county expense the city has no control except in fixing the salaries of the officers of the police court and a small portion (say $6,000 to $8,000 annually) required to keep the county build- ings in repair." But Boston was liable for all county expenses, whether controlled by it or not. About the middle of the fifties, the City Council had additional reasons for dissatisfaction, for Boston was called upon to pay county expenses without the limits of the city. The unreasonableness of the situation had been carried to an extreme by a legislative act which transferred certain powers over highways in Chelsea, that had been exercised by the Mayor and Aldermen of Boston, to the county commissioners of Middlesex, while Boston was obliged to pay the bills. Mayor Rice, in his inaugural of 1856, said that since 183 1, when the relations between Boston and Chelsea were adjusted, Chelsea "has been twice divided and now embraces the thriving towns of Chelsea, North Chelsea and Winthrop with an aggregate population of some 20,000 people, all looking to Boston for county privileges, and yet no one of these towns pays a dollar for defraying the county expenses." At Mayor Rice's instigation, a joint committee was appointed to confer concerning the expediency of re- ducing county expenses and obligations. In i860 i86 1822 — Boston — 1922. Chelsea contained one twelfth of the total population of the county. The county expenses had meanwhile mounted to considerable sums. Shortly after the or- ganization of the city government they constituted 1 1 per cent of the total expenditure of Boston and in the early forties about 8 per cent, or an average of nearly $50,000. By 1859, county expenses had risen to $207,478, or about 7 per cent of the total municipal expenditures. Thereupon they fell off for a time. Boston had also been required to pay for highways which had been laid out by the county commissioners of Middlesex County. The matter had been brought before the General Court, in order to afford Boston relief (1861), but it took no action. Ten years later, the county commissioners of Middlesex again demanded a large payment for the same purpose. The General Court authorized it, with the proviso that in the future no expenditures for streets and bridges in Chelsea and Winthrop should fall upon the County of Suffolk or the City of Boston. Toward the end of the sixties, Boston had secured a better control of the county expenditures, as all the accounts of the jail and police court were from now on to be passed on by the Aldermen. In 1879, the county expenditures amounted to $296,140; after that they rose steadily and were greatly added to by the cost of constructing a new court house, so that by 1886 they reached nearly one million dollars, or about 5 per cent of the total expenditures of the city government. In 1879, the City Auditor of Boston was also made the auditor for Suffolk County, and thus, finally, the city obtained the right of adjust- ing all claims of the county. The need of a new court house had been evident for many years, but the Board of Aldermen had never been able to agree upon a site, although they had been given power to take the land needed. An act of the General Court in 1880 required that if the Aldermen should not have selected a site before December 1 of that year, the Supreme Court, through the appoint- ment of commissioners, should make its own selection. The Aldermen thereupon selected the so-called reser- Suffolk County. 187 voir lot on Beacon Hill. Five years later they obtained legislative authority to take land with the consent of the Mayor and to build a new court house. They decided to locate the structure on Pemberton square, and took the necessary estates for which payment was made through a loan of $850,000. The new court house was occupied in 1891 and has cost $3,800,000, or a sum within the limit fixed by the General Court. The first Finance Commission had drawn attention to the steadily increasing county expenditures, which in 1907 had reached a total of one and a half million dollars. This represented an advance from 1892 of about 97 per cent. The Finance Commission found that the cost of administration in Suffolk County was grossly excessive. One reason for this was that Boston had been made to bear an undue proportion of the cost of litigation. Mayor Matthews refers, in his vale- dictory address, to the law governing the venue of cases, remarking that attorneys preferred to bring their cases into Suffolk County in order to facilitate the transac- tion of business and because the damage awards by juries were expected to be greater. The system of estimates and of appropriating money for county pur- poses was lax, according to the Finance Commission, and without any check on the increase of salaries and on establishing new salaried places. The City Council of Boston acts as county commis- sioners for Suffolk County. In addition to the offices common to all counties, that of Suffolk has to pay for the services of certain officials doing the work of the Commonwealth, or at least a part of it. Thus, there is a clerk for the County of Suffolk attached to the Supreme Judicial Court, the largest part of whose salary comes from the county. Likewise, some offi- cials of the Superior Court receive their compensation from the county. The municipal courts, including courts of the same jurisdiction in seven districts of the city, the Boston Juvenile Court, and the probation officers attached to them, self- evidently are paid for by the county. The expenditures for penal institu- tions are also reckoned as a county charge. Finally, i88 1S22 — Boston — 1922. the two medical examiners for Suffolk County, together with their associates, are county officials. The actual expenses on account of the County of Suffolk in 1921- 22 was $2,424,290.07. The entire relationship between the city and county and, one might add, to the Com- monwealth so far as the county is concerned, is con- fusing and has resulted in an undue proportion of taxes being settled upon the rate payers of Boston. Suffolk County. 189 - z P 02 C Ph OQ < H 55 H O ~ Ph w 55 o H <1 P - P 55 x H 3 t> Q H Ph H H x — 55" O 1— 1 E-| ^ P - - of W P3 CO "# CM ,_, H.3 I> T« 1> 1— Ph cd ■* c4 ,-H r-i O OS co O O co OS "sri lO O O C OS T— 1 IO _o CD CD tj5 tH i — 1 £0 '-(3 CO O 10 t^ c3 I> CO H 10 ,_: ' OS 06 00 CO o3 OS t# CN > >o ee §© 00 10 t^ O •«-2 00 "# OS t^ O Ph v O 00 00 ■* co CM O O 'O O (M 00 CM CM OS OS r- r^ s £ iq co CN co lO .H-S I> OS cd co EjB O co PT CN CM co t^ lO iC O h£ 10 t^ (X) O Ph 02 00 to co 1—1 O O O Th co LO CM CO 00 CM iC CM O 00 TH lO o'-+3 0<6 co 06 IC lO ^H ■* CM CO l> 00 Ph O 00 C CN O h-g ■* j> c (X O 05 fi Ph cd O CM co CM O 00 O ■* i> CN CO t^ CO "tf 10 > 1 -^ P -. *& C +2 e c +: a 1 9- a > C PC C a PC S igo 1S22 — Boston — 1922. BOSTON AND ITS COMMERCE. Nature has given Boston the inestimable asset of an excellent harbor hard by the open sea. By utilizing this advantage the city grew in population and wealth chiefly through foreign and coastwise commerce. Prior to the beginning of Boston's history as a municipality, the smaller sea ports in Massachusetts had sought to rival Boston in sea-borne traffic, but gradually their foreign trade slipped away, and they together with the villages along the great rivers became manufacturing centers. /In shipping and foreign trade, Boston's only maritime rival in her earlier days as a city was New York, de- spite the natural advantage of Philadelphia, Balti- more and New Orleans in having ample raw products for export. In the thirties of the last century, the yearly average of vessels entering Boston from foreign ports reached nearly 1,500. At the same time the average size of the vessels had grown. The coastwise trade had developed enormously, so that by 1844 no less than fifteen vessels entered and left Boston Harbor every day in the year:' In the Boston business directories towards the end of the forties, one reads at the head of the long list of merchants that they were principally ship owners and importers of "cargoes of Russia, South American, Cal- cutta, Canton, European and West India goods." Boston had not been fortunate in her ventures with trans-Atlantic packet lines because of her inability to furnish return cargoes. For several years there had been talk of establishing a trans- atlantic steamship line from Boston, but the project had to wait until Samuel Cunard founded his North American Royal Steam Packet Company in 1839, with Boston as its terminus in the United States. To encourage his plans, a wharf and docks at East Boston were leased to him rent free. In the meanwhile, several coastwise steamship lines Boston and Its Commerce. 191 had been established, but in trans- atlantic enterprises Boston had only a small share, and steam navigation played an insignificant part in her commerce. The railroads which were built subsequent to 1825 proved a great aid to Boston, especially through con- nections with other New England centers of manu- facture. Boston's only connection with the West, the Western Railroad, sent very little freight to Boston docks until after the Civil War. The sailing packets proved to be more important as distributing agencies than the railroads. Aside from the numerous packet sloops, plying between Boston and other New England places, there were coastwise packet lines to the nearby Atlantic ports and as far south as New Orleans. New York was the only formidable rival of Boston in shipping and commerce, but while New York exports advanced, those of Boston remained stationary for lack of goods for export. By 1845, New York had a greater merchant fleet than Massachusetts; but this was in large part due to the migration of ship builders and merchants from Boston to New York. Besides, a very large part of New York's commerce was car- ried in vessels owned in Boston. "One third of the commerce of New York, from 1839 to 1842, was car- ried either upon Massachusetts' account or in Massa- chusetts vessels." Boston's shipping enabled her to compete successfully with other American ports. Her merchants "still owned a large part of the American merchant marine, and their ability to earn freights, gather in cargoes from all parts of the world, and to find the right markets, lay at the root of Boston's success." Boston also at that time had better dock facilities, which distinguished "this port from other principal ports of our country." Boston's maritime development culminated with the clipper ship era, 1850-57. The discovery of gold in California, the repeal of the British Navigation Acts, the necessity of keeping pace with the growing wealth and population, and the competition for certain foreign trade, called for more, bigger and faster vessels. The clipper ship was evolved to meet the new demands. "Never, in these United States, has the brain of man 192 1S22 — Boston — 1922. so conceived, or the hand of man fashioned so perfect a thing as the clipper ship." The master builder was Donald McKay, who began his career at Newburyport, later transferring his activities to East Boston where he turned out his greatest maritime wonders. He died almost in poverty; yet his name was carried to the uttermost seas by clipper ships sprung from his creative and ever fertile brain. "Throughout the clipper ship era, nearly all the traditional lines of Massachusetts' maritime commerce continued to expand, and new ones were created." Boston's commercial prosperity reached its antebellum height by 1857. Even previous to this year, the clipper ships proved to be less profitable than anticipated; steam navigation gradually supplanted them, and be- fore the end of the fifties they had become almost phantoms of the sea. The financial crash of 1857, followed by years of depression and, later, by the great upheaval of the Civil War brought the supremacy of Boston's maritime ventures to an unavoidable end. Boston failed to substitute steam for sail, and this fact more than any other accounted for the loss of her old preeminence. "The sea ports of Massachusetts have turned their backs to the element that made them great, save for play and for fishing; Boston alone is still in the deep-sea game. But all her modern docks and terminals and dredged channels will avail nothing, if the spirit perish that led her founders to ' trye all ports.' ' These remarks on the growth and decay of Boston's merchant marine are so far within the scope of our municipal history as the city government has from time- to time been called upon to help revive the commerce of the city, and now at last is making a concerted effort to that end. Under Mayor Matthews' administration, more than seven hundred of the most prominent citizens in busi- ness firms asked the city government to petition the legislature for authority to establish public docks; and the City Council requested the Mayor to send such a petition to the General Court. But he thought the scheme would necessitate the expenditure of millions, DONALD McKAY, MASTER BUILDER. Boston and Its Commerce. 193 and that it was altogether doubtful whether by a modern system of docks the languishing commerce of Boston could be resuscitated. He cited the example of Mayor Otis who had endeavored to persuade the municipality to build railroads. Mayor Otis had taken the ground, in 1829, that "the state and city must be up and doing, or the streams of our prosperity will seek new channels." He wanted railroads to be con- structed on public account or by means of public contributions, "to save the state and city from insig- nificance and decay." The people actually voted, in 1830, to request the General Court that it authorize the city to subscribe for $1,000,000 of railroad stocks. Yet it is history that Massachusetts secured a rail- road system without city or state aid, and that later railroad speculations on part of the state proved both expensive and useless. The plans for improving the port facilities of Boston lay dormant until the establishment of a waterfront commission during Mayor Fitzgerald's first adminis- tration. This commission did not accomplish much, but may have helped to move the General Court to a realization of the need of new docks and terminal facilities. At any rate, a board of commissioners for the port of Boston was created by legislative act in 191 1 (consolidated in 1916 with the Harbor and Land Commission), and an adequate system of docks was built by the Commonwealth. Later, through the es- tablishment of the Army Supply Base by the Federal Government (191 8), with its immense wharf, shed and other facilities, the harbor has become amply supplied with docks to take care of shipping for some years to come. On the harbor itself, the Federal Government has expended upward of $12,000,000 in improving the channels and making them deep enough to allow access to docks of the largest vessels. It is another and different problem to remove the obstacles which prevent the port of Boston from being utilized to its natural extent. The higher freight rates between western points and Boston than between the West and Philadelphia and Baltimore, for instance, have operated entirely to the disadvantage of Boston. This 194 !822 — Boston — 1922. discrimination must be removed before Boston can come into its own ; and then there still remains the work of inducing shippers to take advantage of the shorter ocean route offered by Boston, and to provide better local facilities for handling railroad freight, etc. The city has from time to time had considerable to do with the question of railroad terminals, and has co- operated in many of the changes and improvements made, but not always with great foresight and success. With the advent of the second century of Boston's existence as a city, a new municipal policy has been inaugurated for the purpose of stimulating and building up Boston's commerce, and with it, that of the whole of New England. The task can be done successfully if the spirit of the early fathers of Boston is followed which led them too "trye all ports." GEORGE ROBERT WHITE. The George Robert White Fund. 195 THE GEORGE ROBERT WHITE FUND. The many gifts bestowed upon the City of Boston during the hundred years culminated in the bequest of George Robert White, valued at about $5,000,000. Mr. White was a citizen of Boston the greater part of his life. As a boy he worked in the office of the Weeks and Potter Drug Company. In the course of time he became the president and practically the owner of the concern and changed the name of the corporation to that of the Potter Drug and Chemical Company. He was a man of quiet, unostentatious character and habit, a bachelor who devoted most of his days to business and finance and had little taste for publicity and politics. He doubtless always had in mind the project which materialized in his great bequest to the city of his home. His will was a plain simple document. It made cer- tain gifts and bequests to the persons and interests near and dear to him, but devised the rest and residue to the City of Boston, expressing the desire that "the same be held a permanent charitable fund to be known as the 'George Robert White Fund'; the net income only to be used for creating public utility and beauty and for the use and enjoyment of the inhabitants of the City of Boston." p Continuing, the will says, "It is my intention that no part of said income, however, shall be used for a religious, political, educational, or any purpose which it shall be the duty of the city in the ordinary course of events to provide." The management of the White fund and the disburse- ment of its income is placed in the hands of a board of five trustees, consisting of the Mayor of Boston as chairman, the President of the City Council, the City Auditor, the President of the Chamber of Commerce, and the President of the Boston Bar Association. The trustees have power to fill vacancies. The city must, 196 1S22 — Boston — 1922. however, at all times be officially represented by a majority of the board of trustees. The business of the fund is to be transacted through the regular depart- ments of the city. Mr. White was eager to safeguard the fund through publicity and therefore directed "that at least once a year the trustees shall cause to be published in most, if not all, of the papers of general circulation in Boston a full and comprehensive report duly audited, signed and sworn to by at least three of their number, setting forth the receipts, disbursements and investments of the fund." The donor did not wish hasty or unconsidered action in the expenditure of the income from the fund, and therefore proposed that no "substantial expenditure should be made for any purpose until it shall have been under consideration by the trustees for at least three months." Mr. White did not attempt to give explicit directions in regard to the objects for which the income from the fund might be used. He said in his will, however, "While I think that Boston has now few, if any, superiors in beauty and in the many privileges it affords to its citizens, yet I believe it has greater possi- bilities for the future, and there are several public blessings among those afforded by other cities, — such as a zoological garden and handsome buildings there- for, an aquarium, a forum of substantial proportions for public gatherings, etc. — which we do not possess. It is with such things as these in mind that I have established the foregoing trust fund." Mr. White was solicitous that the fund should not be used for "small and comparatively unimportant needs." He regarded the use of it for such purposes as contrary to his intention. "Its income, accumulated if need be for a time long enough to make it sufficient, should be used only for important civic improvements." The board of trustees provided for under Mr. White's will has organized and chosen for its manager George E. Phelan. At this writing, it is not wholly deter- mined what disposition shall be made of the income so far accrued. Among other things, the establishment of health units in the city has received much attention. The Population or Boston. 197 THE POPULATION OF BOSTON. Its Composition and Characteristics. The growth of the population of Boston, by ten-year periods, from the year of its incorporation to the present time is shown in an appended table. But the mere statement of absolute figures does not tell the real growth in numbers of those who work and have their being within the municipal boundaries, though they may sleep elsewhere. The inhabitants contained in what is diversely called the Metropolitan District and Greater Boston numbers 1,658,936. For this huge aggregation of human beings Boston is the veritable hub. Of far greater consequence than a knowledge of numbers is an understanding of the portentous changes that have taken place in Boston's population during a hundred years, and especially in the later decades. This may be summed up by saying that Boston has largely ceased to be the home of inhabitants of pure colonial stock. At the United States Cerisus of January 1, 1920, the city had 748,060 inhabitants (this official figure must be used, although the correctness of it is in dispute). Of the whole population, 65.71 per cent are rated as native white; 31.94 per cent as foreign-born white; with 2.19 per cent negroes and 0.16 Chinese, Japanese, etc. Subdividing the native-born white according to parentage, it is found that only 24.30 per cent were of native parentage, as against 31.05 per cent of foreign parentage, and 9.56 per cent mixed parentage. In other words, only about a quarter of the entire popu- lation of Boston is made up of native whites of native parentage; and were one to go two or three or more generations back, it would be found that the propor- tion of native white of native parentage, in the sense of coming from colonial stock, approaches the van- 198 1S22 — Boston — 1922. ishing point. Thus, while Boston's white inhabitants of native birth are in the majority, the racial stock that predominated in Revolutionary days has become a minute minority. The distribution of Boston's population by sex shows a slight preponderance of females. This is true of the native and foreign-born whites, but not of the negroes. In regard to illiteracy, the foreign-born white, of course, contributes the most significant percentage (9.90 per cent), with the negroes next (2.24 per cent), the few Chinese not being counted. The illiteracy among the native white ten years of age and over is about 0.14 per cent of the whole population. If one confines the question of illiteracy to persons twenty-one years of age and over, it is found that only 4.82 per cent of the foreign born white do not know how to read and write. Illiteracy is not a question of morals or intelligence; it is a matter of opportunity. Massachusetts gives to the children of the alien the educational opportunities denied him or unavailable in his European lands of origin. Details in regard to the distribution of population by race, meaning thereby also the distribution relative to country of birth of the inhabitants of different racial stocks represented in the population, are not as yet available through the last census enumeration. Present City Government. 199 PRESENT CITY GOVERNMENT. OFFICERS ELECTED BY THE PEOPLE. Officers. How Created. Term. Salary. City Council (Nine Members) School Committee (Five Mem- bers) Statute. Four years. Begins 1st Monday in February. Three years . . $10,000 per annum. $1,500 per annum. None. Included on his staff is the license clerk and the editor of City Record. Three members are elected each year. The City Council elects the City Clerk, City Messenger and Clerk of Committees. OFFICERS IN CHARGE OF THE EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENTS. The following is a list of the executive departments showing the manner in which the officers in charge are appointed or elected, the time of appointment or election, the term of office as prescribed by statute, ordinance, or both, and the salary received by each. Heads of departments and members of municipal boards appointed by the Mayor are subject to approval by the Massachusetts Civil Service Commission. Appointed or Elected. Term. Officers. How Created. Salary. By Whom. When. Begins. Length of. Assessors (Three) Statute Mayor Annually, one ! April 1 1 Three years, i$4,500 Ord « Quadren- nially. . . . Annually, one or two, May 1 " 1 Four years. . Five years. . Boston Sanatorium Trustees (Seven) .... 7,000 None. Budget Commissioner. . " " .... Quadren- nially .... " 1 Four years . . $6,000 Building Commissioner. Statute " Quadren- nially .... " 1 - " .. 6,000 City Clerk Citv Planning Board (Five) Ord City Council Mayor Triennially, Annually, one 1st Monday in Feb May 1 Three years, Five years . . 6,000 None. Statute " Quadren- nially .... " 1 Four years.. $6,000 Corporation Counsel. . . Ord Quadren- nially .... " 1 « - .. 9,000 i Chairman, 86,000. 200 1822 — Boston — 1922. Ol 1 [I 1 RS How ( 'rented. Appointed or Elected, By Whom. When. Term. Begins. Length of. Salary. Election Commissioners (Four) Fire Commissioner. Health Commissioner. . Hospital Trustees (Five) Institutions Commis- Library Trustees (Five), Markets, Superintend- ent of Statute. Orel .... Statute. Ord.... Overseers of the Public Welfare (Twelve) Park Commissioners (Three) Printing, Superintend- ent of Public Buildings, Super- intendent of Public Works, Commis- sioner of Registrar, City Schoolhouse Commis- sioners (Three) Sinking Funds Commis- sioners (Six) Soldiers' Relief Commis- sioner Statistics Trustees (Five) Street Commissioners (Three) Supplies, Superintend- ent of Transit Commissioners (Three) Treasurer. Vessels, Weighers of . . . Weights and Measures, Sealer of Statute. Ord. Statute. Ord.... Statute. Ord .... Statute. Mayor. Annually, one. . . . Quadren- nially . . Quadren- nially . . Annually, one. . . . Quadren- nially . . Annually, one Quadren- nially . . Annually, four. . . . Annually, one Quadren- nially . . Quadren- nially . . Quadren- nially. . Quadren- nially . . Annually, one Annually, two. . . . Quadren- nially . Annually, one . . . Annually, one Quadren- nially . . Annually. Quadren- nially . . Annually, two Quadren- nially. April 1 May 1 " 1 " 1 " 1 " 1 " 1 " 1 " 1 " 1 " 1 " 1 " 1 June 1 May 1 " 1 " 1 1st Monday in Feb . . . May 1 8 1 " 1 " 1 . . . . " 1 . . . . Four years. Five years . . Four years. . Five years . . Four years. . Three years Four years.. Three years Four years. Five years . Three years Four years. One year . . Four years, 1 Chairman, $4,500. 2 Chairman, $7,000; others, none. 3 Chairman, $500 additional. 4 Chairman, $2,500 additional. Present City Government. 201 OTHER CITY OFFICERS. The following table shows the manner in which officers connected with the city, other than the regular city department heads, are appointed, the time of appoint- ment, the term of office, and the salary, if any, of each officer. Appointments by the Mayor marked with a * are subject to approval by the State Civil Service Commission. How Created. Appointed or Elected. Term. By Whom. When. Begins. Length of. Statute.. Mayor . . . Governor 1 « 1 Supreme Court . . Governor 1 Annually, one. May, 1898. May 1. Aug. 1. Five years. Indefinite.. Five years. Six years... 2 Boston and Cambridge Bridges Annually, one. Biennially, one. As vacan- 3 Licensing Board (three) Managers of the Franklin Fund * $3,500 Five years. $8,000 1 W T ith the advice and consent of the Executive Council. 2 Salary, $10 per day, but not to exceed $1,000 per year. 3 Chairman, $5,000; other members none. 4 Chairman, $500 additional. CHAIRMEN OF THE BOARD OF ALDERMEN, 185 5-1 909. (The Board was abolished by Amended City Charter of 1909.) Name. Place and Date of Birth. Died. Years of Service. Lyme, N. H Oct. 7,1808 Pembroke Feb. 21, 1802 Boston Oct. 19, 1812 Scituate Feb. 15, 1793 Westhampton Mar. 3, 1S06 (See above) Lynn Mar. 31, 1803 Boston Aug. 16, 1812 Boston Nov. 2, 1811 ; George W. Messinger Boston Feb. 5, 1813 : William Washburn 1 Pelham Bonney : Joseph Milner Wightman . : Silas Peirce : Otis Clapp ; Silas Peirce : Thomas Phillips Rich Thomas Coffin Amory, jr. ; Otis Norcross Oct. 30, 1890 April 29, 1861 Jan. 25, 1885 Aug. 27, 1879 Sept. 18, 1$86 (See above) . . . Dec. 11, 1875 Oct. 10, 1899 Sept. 5, 1882 April 27, 1870 1855 1856-57 1858 1859 1860 1861 1862 1863 1864 1865-66 * Deceased. Note. — The Mayor was ex officio Chairman of the Board of Aldermen from the incor- poration of the City until 1855; from 1855 a Chairman was elected annually. 202 1822 — Boston — 1922. N V.MK. Place and Date of Birth. Died. Years of Service. * Charles Wesley Slack * George W. Messinger * Benjamin James * Newton Talbot * Charles Edward Jenkins . . * Samuel Little * Leonard R. Cutter * John Taylor Clark * Solomon Bliss Stebbins . . . * Hugh O'Brien * Solomon Bliss Stebbins . . . * Hugh O'Brien * Charles Varney Whitten. . * Charles Hastings Allen . . . * Patrick John Donovan. . . . * Charles Hastings Allen . . . * Homer Rogers William Power Wilson .... * Herbert Schaw Carruth. . . John Henry Lee Alpheus Sanford John Henry Lee t Perlie Appleton Dyar f Joseph Aloysius Conry. . . . * David Franklin Barry. . . . * Michael Joseph O'Brien.. . James Henry Doyle Daniel A. Whelton t Charles Martin Draper. . . t Edward L. Cauley William Berwin * Louis M. Clark * Fredrick J. Brand Boston Feb. 21, (See above) Scituate Aug. 22, Stoughton Mar. 10, Scituate July 29, Hingham Aug. 15, Jaffrey, N. H July 1, Sanbornton, N. H. .Sept. 19, Warren Jan. 18, Ireland July 13, (See above) (See above) Vassalboro, Me May 10 Boston June 14 Charlestown April 9 (See above) Sudbury Oct. 11 Baltimore, Md Nov. 15 Dorchester Feb. 15 Boston April 26 North Attleboro' . . . July 5 (See above) Lynn Mar. 26 Brookline Sept. 12 Boston Feb. 29 Ireland Feb. 11 Boston June 17 Boston Jan. 21 Dedham Nov. 1 Charlestown Aug. 8 New Orleans, La . . . Dec. 16 Dorchester Dec. 14 Plainville, Conn Feb. 3 1814 1815 1817 1827 1825 1825 1830 1827 1829 1828 1848 1840 1852 1855 1846 1856 April 11, 1885 (See above) . . , April 13, 1901 Feb. 3, 1904 Aug. 1, 1882 Dec. 21, 1906 July 13, 1894 Oct. 29, 1880 June 8, 1910 Aug. 1, 1895 (See above) . . . (See above) . . . Mar. 18, 1891 Mar. 31, 1907 Sept. 18, 1912 (See above) . . . Nov. 10, 1907 Dee. 27, 1917 1857 1868 1852 1855 1867 1872 1869 1870 1858 1858 1S61 July 23, 1911 April 5, 1903 Mar. 15, 1914 Mar. 16, 1912 1867 1868 1869 1870 1871 1872 1S73 1874-77 1S78 1879-81 1882 1883 1884-85 1886 18S7 1888 1889 1890 1891 1892-93 1894-95 1896 1S97-98 1898 1899 1900 1901-04 1905 1906 1906 1907 190S 1909 * Deceased. t Perlie A. Dyar from January 25, 1898, to April 1, 1S9S, and October 1, 1S98, to end of year. Joseph A. Conry from April 1, 1898, to October 1, 1898. % Charles M. Draper from February 28, 1906, to September 10, 1906. Edward L. Cauley from September 10, 1906, to end of year. Presidents of the Common Council. 203 PRESIDENTS OF THE COMMON COUNCIL, 1822-1909. (The Common Council was abolished by Amended City Charter of 1909.) Name. Place and Date of Birth. Died. Years of Service. * William Prescott * John Welles * Francis Johonnot Oliver. . . * John Richardson Adan . . . * Eliphalet Williams * Benj. Toppan Pickman. . . * John Prescott Bigelow. . . . * Josiah Quincy, jr * Philip Marett * Edward Blake * Peleg Whitman Chandler. . * George Stillman Hillard . . . * Benjamin Seaver * Francis Brinley * Henry Joseph Gardner.. . . * Alex. Hamilton Rice * Joseph Story * Oliver Stevens * Samuel W. Waldron, jr. . . * Josiah Putnam Bradlee . . . * Joseph Hildreth Bradley. . * Joshua Dorsey Ball * George Silsbee Hale * Wm. Bentley Fowle, jr . . . * Joseph Story * Weston Lewis * Charles Hastings Allen . . * William Giles Harris * Melville Ezra IngaUs * Matthias Rich * Marquis Fayette Dickin- son, jr * Edward Olcott Shepard. . . * Halsey Joseph Boardman. . * John Q. A. Brackett * Deceased. Pepperell Aug. 19, 1762 Boston Oct. 14, 1764 Boston Oct. 10, 1777 Boston Jqly 8,1793 Taunton Mar. 7, 1778 Salem Sept. 17, 1790 Groton Aug. 25, 1797 Boston Jan. 17, 1802 Boston Sept. 25, 1792 Boston Sept. 28, 1805 N. Gloucester, Me., Apr. 12, '16 Machias, Me Sept. 22, 1808 Roxbury April 12, 1795 Boston Nov. 10, 1800 Dorchester June 14, 1818 Newton Aug. 30, 1813 Marblehead Nov. 11, 1822 Andover June 22, 1825 Portsmouth, N. H, Oct. 24, 1828 Boston June 10, 1817 Haverhill Mar. 5,1822 Baltimore, Md July 11, 1828 Keene, N. H Sept. 24, 1825 Boston July 27, 1826 Marblehead Nov. 11, 1822 Hingham April 14, 1834 Boston June 14, 1828 Revere May 15, 1828 Harrison, Me Sept. 6, 1842 Truro June 8, 1820 Amherst Jan. 16, 1840 Hampton, N. H.. . .Nov. 25, 1835 Norwich, Vt May 19, 1834 Bradford, N. H June 8, 1842 Dec. 8 Sept. 26 Aug. 21 July 4 June 12 Mar. 22 July 4 Nov. 2 Mar. 22 Sept. 4 May 28 : Jan. 21 Feb. 14 June 14 July 19 July 22 June 22 Aug. 23 Aug. 24 Feb. 2 Oct. 5 Dec. 18 July 27 Jan. 21 June 22 April 6 Mar. 31 Oct. 29 July 11 Dec. 13 Sept. 18 April 27 Jan. 15 April 6 1844 1855 1858 1849 1855 1835 1872 1882 1869 1873 1889 1879 1856 1889 1892 1895 1905 1905 1882 1887 1882 1892 1897 1902 1905 1893 1907 1897 1914 1914 1822 1823 1824-25 1826-28 1829 1830-31 1832-33 1834-36 1837-40 1841-43 1844-45 1846-471 18472-49 1850-51 1852-53 1854 1855 1856-57 1858 1859-60 1861 1862 1863-64 1865 1866 1867 1868 1869 1870 1871 1915 1872 1903 I 1873-74 1900 1918 1875 1876 i To July 1. 2 From July 1. 204 iS22 — Boston — 1922. Name. Place and Date of Birth. Died. Year of Service. * Benjamin Pope * William H. Whitmore. . Harvey Xewton Shcpard. Andrew Jackson Bailey.. . * Charles Edward Pratt . . * James Joseph Flynn . . . . * Godfrey Morse John Henry Lee Edward John Jenkins. . . . * David Franklin Barry . . * Horace Gwynne Allen. . * David Franklin Barry . . * Christopher Francis O'Brien Waterford, Ire Jan. 13, 1829 Dorchester Sept. 0,1836 Boston July 8, 1S50 Chariest own July 18, 1840 Vassalboro, Me. . . .Mar. 13, 1S45 St. John, N. B 1S35 Wachenheim, Ger., May 17, 1846 Boston April 26, 1846 London, Eng Dec. 20, 1854 Boston Feb. 29, 1852 Jamaica Plain July 27, 1855 (See above) Joseph Aloysius Conry Timothy Lawrence Con- nolly Daniel Joseph Kiley Arthur Walter Dolan William John Barrett Leo F. McCullough * George Cheney McCabe. Boston Feb. 17, 1869 Brookline Sept. 12, 1868 Boston Oct. 5, 1871 Boston July 27, 1874 Boston Sept. 22, 1876 Boston June 24, 1872 Boston July 1,1882 Carmel, N. Y July 5, 1873 Sept. 24, 1879 June 14, 1900 Aug. 20, 189S Mar. 26, 18S4 June 20, 1911 July 23, 1911 Feb. 12, 1919 (See above) . . . April 25, 1S99 Dec. 27, 1917 1877-78 1S79 1880 18811 1881 2-82 1883 3 1883 « 1884 1885-86 1887-88 1889-90 1891-93 1894-95 1896-97 1898 1899-1901 1902-05 1906-07 190S 1909 * Deceased. l To October 27. 2 From October 27. 3 To June 11. « From June 14. PRESIDENTS OF THE CITY COUNCIL,* 1910-1922. Name. Place and Date of Birth. Died. Year of Service. Walter Ballantyne Walter Leo Collins John Joseph Attridge. . . . Thomas Joseph Kenny. . . Daniel Joseph McDonald. George W. Coleman Henry E. Hagan James J Storrow Walter Leo Collins Francis J. W. Ford James T. Moriarty James A. Watson David J. Brickley Hawick, Scotland, March 17, 1855 Boston April 7, 187S Boston Feb. 8, 1878 Boston Nov. IS, 1S63 Chelsea Aug. 14, 1S73 Boston June 16, 1867 St. John, N. B Feb. 26, 1865 Boston Jan. 21, 1S64 (See above) Boston Dec. 23, 1882 Amesbury Sept. 22, 1876 Boston June 24, 1870 Boston M.r. 14, 1889 1910 1911 1912 1913 1914 191.3 1916 1917 1918 1919 1920 1921 1922 Single el Iier, established in l'.HO (See Chap. 486, Acts of 1909, Sects. 48-51). Growth of Population, Etc. 205 GROWTH OF POPULATION, AREA, POLLS, TAX RATE AND PROP- ERTY TAX, CITY OF BOSTON, IN 100 YEARS, 1822-1921, INCLU- SIVE, BY 10-YEAR PERIODS. Year. Population. Boston Proper. Annexed Districts. Total. Total Area (Acres). Polls. Tax Rate. Property Tax Assessed. 1822 1832 1842 1852 1862 1872 1882 1892 1902 1912 1921 41,407* 56,982 76,475 112,561 133,563 138,781 147,075 161,330 167,257 193,274 230,134 1,891 4,410* 7,926 24,320 44,277 111,745 215,764 287.147 393,635 477,311 591,773 43,298 61,392 84,401 136,881 177,840 250,526 362,839 448,477 560,892 670,585 821,907 s 3,422 11,472 23,085 23,707 27,297 30,295 30,598 8,800 $7 30 14,184 8 20 19,636 5 70 28,983 6 40 34,159 10 50 67,221 11 70 102,594 15 10 136,375 12 90 171,516 14 80 202,422 16 40 236,082 24 70 $307,623 553,618 608,325 1,201,152 2,900,278 7,987,871 10,150,722 11,532,286 17,630,676 24,301,895 39,414,702 * Estimated. Note. — The figures for population are from the National Censuses of 1820 and each tenth year thereafter, except 1840 (State Census instead) and 1920 (U. S. Census incorrect). The figures under Total Area are not exact but approximate. Boston Proper includes the territory known as the North End, West End, Back Bay to Brighton and Brookline boundaries, and South End to South Boston and Roxburv lines. 2o6 1822 — Boston — 1922. RECEIPTS AND EXPENDITURES, CITY OF BOSTON, IN 100 YEARS, 1822-1921, INCLUSIVE, BY 10-YEAR PERIODS. Receipts. Total Expenditures. Excess ( + ) Year. Taxes and Other Revenue. Loans. Total. or Defi- ciency ( — ) of Receipts. 1822 $222,102 $32,365 $254,467 $264,721 —10,254 1832 386,864 266,728 653,592 531,168 + 122,424 1842 791,742 791,742 680,122 + 111,620 1852 1,920,695 ( 399,643 / 1,949,711* [ 4,270,049 2,120,602 +2,149,447 1862 4,165,318 1,604,850 5,770,168 5,203,706 +566,462 1872 10,122,663 2,934,000 13,056,663 15,174,396 —2,117,733 1882 13,342,157 2,646,000 15,988,157 15,576,146 +412,011 1892 16,720,470 3,734,000 20,454,470 21,451,404 —996,934 1902 24,134,734 9,367,651 33,502,385 31,495,962 +2,006,423 1912 33,786,059 4,775,000 38,561,059 39,336,607 —775,548 1921 56,862,445 5,469,500 62,331,945 63,066,243 —734,298 * Loan for Water Works obtained from London bankers. GROWTH OF PUBLIC DEBT AND ASSESSED VALUATION, CITY OF BOSTON, IN 100 YEARS, 1822-1922, BY 10- YEAR PERIODS. Years. Gross Debt. Sinking Funds, Etc. Net Debt. Assessed Valuation. Per Cent Net Debt to Valuation. 1822, Apr. 30 . . $71,185 $71,185 $42,140,200 0.17 1832, " " . . 817,124 $175,735 641,389 67,514,400 0.95 1842, " 1,594,700 88,931 1,505,769 106,723,700 1.41 1852, " " . . 7,110,680 489,065 6,621,615 187,6S0,000 3.53 1862, " 9,031,208 851,659 8,179,549 276,217,000 2.96 1872, " . 28,628,536 12,849,159 15,779,377 682,724,300 2.31 1882, " . 40,079,312 15,901,650 24,177,662 672,497,962* 3.60 1892, Jan. 31 . . 56,003,997 25,569,706 30,434,291 893,975,704 3.40 1902, " " . . . 79,953,972 32,801,887 47,152,085 1,191,274,616 3.96 1912, " . 117,042,089 43,567,857 73,474,232 1,481,819,920 4.96 1922, " " . . . 124,700,951 44,787,940 79,913,011 l,677,861,774f 4.76 * Valuation 1S82 much reduced by Act of 1881 exempting real estate mortgages, t This aggregate considerably reduced by exemption of intangible personalty since 1917. I N DEX. Adams, Samuel . . Albany Street Bridge Aldermen, Board of .... 10-14,29,31,41,6 69, 146,155,156,166, American Federation of Labor Anti-Slavery agitation Area of Boston, growth in 100 years Armstrong, Samuel Turrel, Mayor Army Supply Base Arnold Arboretum Assessed Valuation, growth in 100 years Assessors, Board of . Atlantic Avenue, construction of Austin Farm, West Roxbury . Back Bay Park . Back Bay, reclaiming of Baldwin, Col. Loammi Bates, Joshua Baths and Gymnasia Bigelow, John Prescott, Mayor Boston and its commerce Boston and the Commonwealth Boston Common Boston Elevated Railway Company Boston Gas Light Company . Boston Harbor, improvement of Boston Juvenile Court Boston-Roxbury Company Boston Transit Commission Boston Water Power Company Boston's growth Boston's maritime development Boylston Street Subway . Bradlee, Nathaniel J. Bridges Brighton, annexation of . Brimmer, Martin, Mayor British Navigation Acts . Broad Street Riot Broadway Bridge Brown, John, anniversary Budget, Segregated, established Bunker Hill, battle of, 100th anniversary (207) 118 142, Page 6 175 1,67,68 186, 201 84 78 205 24 193 122 206 16, 199 154,155 144, 149 42, 122 118, 119 • 23,94 115 127, 128 3o 3 3i,i53 190-194 . 16-18 ,119,123, 125, 127 169,170,171 166 34,193 187 119 170,171 119 205, 206 191,192 170 42 175,176 40 27 191 25,76 175 78 63 41 20S Index. Burns, Anthony, riot over Bussey Park .... Cambridge Bridge Cambridge Connection (subway) Castle Island .... Channing, William F. Chapman, Jonathan, Mayor . Charitable and Correctional Institutions Charles River Basin . Charlestown, annexation of Charlestown Almshouse . Charlestown Bridge . Charter, winning of the . Charter Amendments of 18S5 Charter Commission of 1885 Charter of 1822 . Charter of 1854 . Charter of 1909 . Chelsea, town of. Chestnut Hill Reservoir Children's Institutions Department City Council (new) .... City Council (old) : Board of Health, controlled by. Cochituate Water Board, elected by Finance Commission of 1907, established by Overseers of Poor, quarrelled with . Park Commissioners, appointed by Police Commissioners, removable by Powers of School Committee, differences with Sewer system, commission to investigate South Bay lands, purchase of . Water, power to fix prices for . Water Commissioners appointed by City Government, present City Hall Annex, new building City Hospital City Officers elected by the people City Officers in charge of executive departments City Planning Board City Record, re-established Civic Center of Boston Civil Service Commission Civil Service Law enacted Civil War, period of . Cobb, Samuel Crocker, Mayor Cochituate Water Supply Codman, Col. Charles R. Page 78 125 I75>i76 170 126 88 . 26, 27 I3S-ISI 56,57»i 6 4 40 144, 147 170 6 12, 13 iS7 9-1 1 11, 12 13-15 184-186 36,97)99 147 14, 61, 62, 204 67 96 182 I35-I37 120 So 10-14 no 162 129 100 95 199-201 62 140, 141, 150 199 199, 200 62,199 60 66 14 81 34,35.7S, 79 141, 143, 181 . 40,42 • 29, 94-97 43 Index. 209 Collins, Patrick Andrew, Mayor Commerce and Industry, Bureau of Common Council Commonwealth of Mass. : Back Bay, agreement for improving Boston, controlled by Boston Waterworks, purchased by Court officials of, partly paid by County Docks, built by . Insane, care by . Metropolitan parks, funds for, provided by Paupers of, cared for by Boston Soldiers' Relief, reimbursed by Constitutional Convention of 1820 Consumptives' Hospital . Coolidge, Calvin, Governor Correction, House of Coulthurst, John A. . County Board of Accounts County Commissioners Court House, Old Stone . Court House, Pemberton square Court of Common Pleas . Court of Quarter Sessions. Craigie Bridge .... Cunard, Samuel .... Curley, James Michael, Mayor Curtis, Edwin Upton, Mayor . Curtis, Edwin Upton, Police Commissioner Danvers State Hospital Davis, Thomas Aspinwall, Mayor Death Rate, reduction of . Debt of City, growth in 100 years Dorchester, annexation of Dorchester Heights . Dorchester Tunnel Draft Riot in 1863 East Boston Ferry Company East Boston Tunnel . Election Commissioners . Eliot, Samuel Atkins, Mayor . Employment Bureau, Municipal English High and Latin Schools Everett, Edward Expenditures of city in 100 years Faneuil Hall .... Faneuil Hall (or Quincy) Market Page • • • • 57,53 • • • • 65 10,31,61, 143, 166, 203 13 6 , 144, 2, 63 119, 120 16-18 99 187 193 149 124 137,138 181 8 151 84 142,143 147,148 60 184,185 187 22 5i, 187 8 . 8,184 122 190 66, 147 53, 182 84 145 . 27, 28 73 204 38, 105 118 170 79 172, i73 170, 173 53, 83, 200 25 65 103 114 206 20, 31, 177 177, 178 65, 52, 2IO Index. Faneuil, Peter Farm School for Boys, Thompson's Island Federal Government .... Fenway Ferry Service Finance Commission of 1907 . Fire (Great) of 1872 . Fire Alarm, telegraphic system adopted Fire Department .... Fire Protection Fitzgerald, John Francis, Mayor Fort Hill, leveling of . Franklin Fund Franklin Park Franklin Union Page 177 24 34, 193 123 172-174 *3> 14, 182, 183 • 39, 89, 90 88 §7, 93 85, 93 , 61, 62 iS4 12, 201 122 112 58, 59 45, 1 Garbage and refuse disposal Garrison, abolitionist, mobbed Gaston, William, Mayor . General Court (State Legislature) : Back Bay land, annexation authorized Board of Street Survey, authorized Boston, controlled by, resented Boston, incorporation of . Boston, charter amendments of 1854 enacted by Boston, charter amendments of 1885 enacted by Boston, charter of 1909 enacted by Boston, special acts concerning Church Street district level raised under authority by City Hospital in Boston authorized Cities, incorporation of Finance Commission, powers of ... . Fire Commissioner of Boston authorized by Fort Hill, leveling off, authorized .... Laborers, law for retirement of ... . Library, establishment authorized by Liquors, sale of, restricted by Metropolitan waterworks established by Parks, purchase of land for, authorized Parks, loans for, authorized Port Commissioners created by ... Rapid Transit, construction approved by Sewers, intercepting system authorized . Sewers, bonds for construction of, authorized Street Commissioners, elective board of, authorized, Street Improvements, law of 1906 .... Governor of Massachusetts: Court of quarter sessions, judges, appointed by . Greenhalge, Governor, on rapid transit problem . Metropolitan Park Commissioners appointed by Police Commissioner appointed by ... 72 24 3^, 39 34 157 82 9 12 12, 13 14 18 13° 140 8 182 92 154 i59 114 180 98 120 122 193 68, 169 162 163 156 158 8 169 124 81 Index. Governor of Massachusetts: Rapid Transit Commissioners appointed by Washburn, Governor, and the Great Fire Water Commissioners appointed by Governor's Island .... "Greater Boston" .... Green, Samuel Abbott, Mayor Harbor and Land Commission Harris, Samuel D. Hart, Thomas Norton, Mayor Harvard Bridge Harvard University .... Health, Board of .... Hibbard, George Albee, Mayor Home rule taken away from Boston Hospital Department Hyde Park, annexation of . Independence League Industry, House of ... Infirmary Department Insane Hospital Institutions Department . Institutions Registration Department Introductory Jail, County, completed in 185 1 Jamaica Pond Aqueduct Company Lafayette, General Land Commissioners, Board of Leverett Street Jail . Licenses and the Licensing Board Lighting Department Lincoln, Frederic Walker, Jr., Mayor Long Island Almshouse Lowell, James Russell Lunatic Hospital, South Boston Lyman, Theodore, Jr., Mayor Lyman School for Boys McKay, Donald Mann, Horace .... Marcella Street Home Marine Park .... Martin, Augustus Pearl, Mayor Massachusetts Prison Commission Matthews, Nathan, Jr., Mayor Page 168, 170 90 98 126, 127 65. 197 45 193 87 49, 55, 57 175 22, 102, 122 9, 10, 16, 67, 74 . 60, 61 16-18, 48, 50, 51, 56, 82 150 62 60 136, 138, J 39, x 40, 142, 144 i47 149 64, 65, 147 147 5 30 94 21 32 136 179, 180 166 33, 34, 35, 36 144, 147 • ■ 96 142 • 22, 23, 24 24 192 103, 104 144, 147 122, 126 • 46, 47 148 17, 49, 52, 66, 71, 81, 122 133, !45, 157, 172, 192 212 Index. Mayor: Board of Health appointed by Finance Commission (first) appointed by Fire Commissioners appointed by Officials appointed by Park Commissioners appointed by Police appointed by . Public Library trustees appointed by School Committee, relation to Term and salary of . Mayors of Boston, summary of Medical Examiners for Suffolk County Metropolitan Debt, inquiry about Metropolitan Park District Metropolitan Sewerage Board Metropolitan Water Board Metropolitan Water System Moon Island, sewer outlet Mt. Washington Avenue Bridge Muddy River .... Municipal buildings . Mystic Waterworks . Native American Party Norcross, Otis, Mayor North End, revolt in North Ferry O'Brien, Hugh, Mayor . Old Harbor improvement Old State House Otis, Harrison Gray, Mayor . Palmer, Albert, Mayor Park Commission Park system, Main, Marine, etc. Parkman, George F., bequest of Parental School, West Roxbury Pauper Institutions Department People's Feny Company . Penal Institutions Department Peters, Andrew James, Mayor. Phelan, George E. Phillips, John, Mayor Pierce Farm, West Roxbury Pierce, Henry Lillie, Mayor Police Department . Police Pension System Police Protection Police Strike in 1919 56 Page 69 182 . 91, 92 199, 201 121 . 72, So 117 109, no 199 66 iSS 55 124 . 163 ,98,99, 100 98-101 162 i75 121, 122 128 98 27,28 36,37 79 173 47>48 126 66 19,21,22, 193 • 45>46 121 125-127 127 147, 148 147 172 147 63-65,84 196 • 9>*9 149 39>4°, 43 20,25,33,51 75,84,180 82 • • 75-84 . . 84 Index. 213 Poor, Overseers of Population of Boston Population, growth in 100 years Prince, Frederick Octavius, Mayor Printing Department Public Garden . Public Health . Public Lands Public Library . Public Library, Sunday opening of Public Library Trustees . Public Markets .... Public Parks and Recreation . Public Schools .... Public Works Department Quarantine Station . Quincy, Josiah (first), Mayor . Quincy, Josiah, Jr., Mayor Quincy, Josiah (third), Mayor. Ouincv Market .... Rapid Transit .... Real Estate, sales of by city Receipts of City in 100 years, by 10-year periods Reformation, House of Registrar, City .... Rice, Alexander Hamilton, Mayor Roxbury, annexation of . Roxbury Canal .... Page 135-142, 145 • 21,30,197 198,205 .' 205 42,43^44 55 120, 125 • 67-74 129-134 113-117 40 117 177, 178 118-12S 102-111 61, 160 73 9, 11, 19, 20, 21, 22,67,68 75,86, 94, 103, 136, 177 27,28,29 53-55,72 177,178 168-171 J 32-i34 206 1 3 6 , 139, 140, 142 50 33 37, 105, 162 131 School Centers established School Committee Schools, Evening, established . Schoolhouse Department established Seaver, Benjamin, Mayor. Sewer Department Sewer Improvements Sewers, Superintendent of Shaw, Lemuel .... Shurtleff, Nathaniel Bradstreet, Mayor Smith, Jerome Van Crowninshield, Mayor Soldiers' Relief .... Soldiers' Relief Department South Bay, lands bordering South Ferry .... Statistics Department established Stebbins, Solomon B. Stony Brook sewer ,16 56,102- 112 112, 199 106 56 31,32 164 161-164 161 9 37,38 32,33 181 65,182 129,130 173 55 44 163 214 Index. Stony Brook Reservation Strandway, construction of Street Betterment .... Street Commissioners, Board of Street Department . Street Laying-Out Department Street Lighting Stuart Street, important new highway Suffolk, County of ... . Suffolk County Jail .... Suffolk School for Boys Sullivan, James Sullivan, William .... Supreme Judicial Court . Survey, Board of ... Tax Limit, raising of ... Tax on Property, growth in ioo years Tax Rate, growth in ioo years Town meeting, the last, 1822 . Transit Department .... Treadwell, Prof. Daniel Tremont Street Subway . Tukey, Francis, City Marshal Uniform Desertion Act United States Census of Boston United States Engineer Corps United States Public Health Service Ursuline Convent, destruction of . Vattemare, Nicholas A. . Washington Street Tunnel Water Front Commission Water Supply Water Supply System, sale to State Webster, Daniel .... Wells, Charles, Mayor West Boston Bridge .... Westboro Reform School . West End Street Railway Company Western Railroad opened West Roxbury, annexation of . Whelton, Daniel A., Acting Mayor White, George Robert, Fund . Wightman, Joseph Milner, Mayor . Winthrop, Robert C. . . . Winthrop, town of ... . Wood Island Park .... World War Page 125 126 152-160 156 158,159 159 165-167 ',22, 5i,i 58, 84, 189 149 I48 6 22 86, 187 159 64 205 205 9, 10 171 94 70, 171 29, 3° 3°> J 97 34 73 24, 76 113, "4 170 59 94-101 56 • 9, 3i 22, 23, 75 175, 176 24 168 26 40 58 95> 196 34, 35 114 185, 186 122 181 Boston Centennial Celebration April 19, 1922 and May 1, 1922 Commemorating the One Hundredth Anniversary of the Organization and Inauguration of Boston's First City Government, May 1 , 1 822 INTRODUCTION. That the anniversary of the organization of Boston's first city government should be fittingly observed was first broached in a letter from the clerk of the Bostonian Society, Mr. Charles F. Read, in April, 192 1, addressed to the president of the Public Celebration Association of Boston, Mr. Addison L. Winship. After consideration of the project at an Association meeting called for that purpose in May, 192 1, a letter was sent to the then Mayor, Hon. Andrew J. Peters, recommending that a proper observance of the anni- versary be held, and that a temporary committee of the Association be appointed to outline a tentative program of events for the occasion. Mr. Peters responded by immediately appointing such a committee, consisting of Messrs. Addison L. Winship, Frank Leveroni and E. B. Mero, which held several meetings, resulting in the submission of a pro- posed program and organization recommendations, whereupon Mayor Peters, selecting Mr. George W. Coleman as chairman, announced the Boston Centen- nial Committee personnel as follows: Chairman, George W. Coleman. Secretary, E. B. Mero. Vice-Chairmen: Allan Forbes, Thomas F. Anderson, E. Fred Cullen. Charles A. Coolidge. Michael J. Murray. Henry V. Cunningham. Mrs. William L. Putnam. Carl Dreyfus. Charles F. Read. David A. Ellis. Mrs. Frances E. Slattery. Mrs. Susan W. FitzGerald. Edward R. Warren. Frank Leveroni. Addison L. Winship. This committee was formally organized on December 12, 192 1, and after soliciting and receiving suggestions from all available sources, presented to the Mayor alternate plans, involving a three-day celebration in one instance, and a single day's observance in the other. While these plans were under consideration, a city 217 218 1S22 — Boston — 1922. election had taken place, resulting in the choice of Hon. James M. Curley as Mayor, who upon his induction into office promptly confirmed the selections of his predecessor, requesting that the committee continue its work without change of personnel. Mayor Curley urged upon the committee, however, that because of the serious unemployment conditions then existing, and the rapidly mounting municipal expenditures, it might be better that the centennial observance create no special holiday, but that the official exercises be conducted in conjunction with the historic celebration of Patriots' Day, April 19, with suitable exercises for the chronological observance on May 1. Concurring with the Mayor, this plan was followed, and a program finally adopted which re- sulted in a fitting and appropriate centennial celebra- tion. The newspapers generally lent willing co-operation in impressing the significance of the event upon the public, of notable importance being the series of special articles and illustrations in the Boston Transcript, and a special number of the Boston Globe with full-page reproduction of the Boston Patriot and Daily Mercan- tile Advertiser of April 19, 1822. Several of the banking, industrial and public service institutions including the State Street Trust Co., issued interesting brochures and pamphlets upon Boston's history, and the Boston Athenaeum, the Bostonian Society and the Public Library prepared special historical exhibits which were continued until May 1 and were well attended by the public. April iqth Celebration. 219 APRIL 19, 1922. The first official exercises, on Patriots' Day, Wednes- day, April 19, at 2.30 o'clock p. m., held in Faneuil Hall, attracted an audience comprising representatives of official, social, industrial, civic and religious Boston, which, with uniformed delegations from the Ancient and Honorable Artillery Company, and the Fusilier Veteran Association, completely filled the historic structure. Of particular interest in these exercises was the presence of Mrs. Andrew J. Peters, wife of the recent Mayor and granddaughter of Boston's first Mayor, John Phillips, to whom Mayor Curley presented a memento of the occasion. An inspiring incident was the introduction of ex- Mayor Thomas N. Hart, ninety- three years of age, who thrilled the assemblage with a forceful, patriotic exhortation. The day's exercises were concluded by an open-air celebration on Boston Common, consisting of a band concert, brief addresses by the Mayor and other officials, motion pictures, flag ceremony and community singing. The official Faneuil Hall program follows: Hon. James M. Curley, Mayor of Boston, Presiding. Orchestral Selections 2.30 to 3 Opening Prayer . . Rev. Edward A. Hcrton, D. D., Chaplain Anthem, "America" . .... Audience Hon. Harvey N. Shepard Oration Selection Centennial Poem Address " Star-Spangled Banner ' ' Orchestra Nathan Haskell Dole Rabbi Harry Levi . Audience 1S22 — Boston — 1922. OPENING PRAYER. Sovereign Ruler of the Centuries: We bring our devout offering, a people's gratitude and praise. One century ago deep civic foundations were laid, from which the beacon light of Boston has steadily shone over the land. Her altar fires have ever burned with religion's holy aspirations; her firesides, sources of character and citizenship, have been blest with happiness; her fervid patriotism has inspired generation after generation. Her sons and daughters have opened paths of progress and prosperity the continent over; while prophet leaders in great causes have inspired some of the Republic's noblest achievements in peace and in war. The glory of her literature, educational ideals, manifold humanities has crowned her name with lustrous honors. Lovers of freedom and justice from distant lands have sought her shores, and by loyalty and zeal have imparted uplifting and expanding life to her welfare. O Source of all blessings, help our thankful hearts to honor this great past by fulfilling it, in succeeding years of progressive life, laws and civilization. May the twentieth century find our beloved city a source of high enterprises, wide vision, and perennial youth, making New England a national power for liberty, justice and fraternity. And to Thee, God of our Fathers and God of our present life, shall be our praise and service, in His Holy Name, Amen! April 19TH Celebration. 221 ORATION. A little book in our Public Library, entitled, "Selec- tions from the Chronicle of Boston," published in 1822, contains upon its second page these words : ' ' forasmuch as the whole body of the people could not leave their several callings to oversee and conduct the public business, the special government of the town was com- mitted to the elder and experienced men, who were designated by the name of Selectmen, annually elected by the people assembled in one place. Now after this government had continued for 192 years, even from the first settlement of the country, some men of Boston began to desire a change. For they said: Is not this the capital of a great state? Is it not rich and populous? Why should it not possess such advantages as Phila- delphia, as New York, or as Paris, or London, or any of the capitals of a state or country? Shall our munic- ipality be not otherwise distinguished from that of Hull, which contains but twenty voters, than by the number of its members? So they drew up a list, of the evils endured under the present system of Town government, and a list of the benefits to be derived from a City government. For they said: 'We are wise men and cunning, and we will work upon the fears, the hopes, the indolence, the curiosity, and the proverbial notion- ality of the people, exaggerating both the evil and the good, and thus produce a general excitement.' " Seemingly the author did not altogether approve the change from a town to a city; and it is quite certain that many of the good people of Boston did not. For over forty years after the adoption of the constitution of the Commonwealth in 1780 affairs were conducted in the same simple and democratic way as formerly, although there were several attempts to make the change. In May, 1784, on the petition of a large num- ber of the inhabitants, a committee of thirteen, selected with great care from among the most influential and 222 1822 — Boston — 1922. popular citizens, and including Samuel Adams and James Sullivan, was appointed "to consider the expedi- ency of applying to the General Court for an act to form the town of Boston into an incorporated city"; and June 4 it reported two plans, which were printed and distributed to each house, the town meeting adjourning to the 17th. At this meeting, on the ques- tion of making any alterations in the form of govern- ment, there was "an unabated roaring," with cries of "No corporation — No Mayor — No innovations " ; and the records state: "the impatience of the inhab- itants for the question being immediately put, pre- vented any debate thereon, and it passed in the negative by a great majority." In December, 1791, there was raised a large committee of inhabitants of leading influence in both the political parties, including John Quincy Adams, Charles Bulfinch and James Sullivan, and the committee, after long deliberation, made a report, which was printed and distributed in handbills. The town meeting then adjourned until January 26, when it was discussed at great length. But the people thought themselves very well off as they were, and the proposal was rejected. An historian of Boston has said that at no other period in its history did the town have a more zealous and devoted body of citizens; and that the long war had not exhausted their energies or resources. In January, 1804, another large com- mittee, equally selected from both political parties, and elected by the wards, was instructed to report any alteration in the town government it deemed expedient. It had frequent meetings, and in March reported a system of municipal government. But the attachment to town government was not diminished; and, after a warm and tumultuous debate, the result was a decided negative. In October, 18 15, a city form of government under the title "The Intendant and Municipality of the Town and City of Boston" came near to success, being rejected by only a majority of thirty-one. It was apparent however that, with a population of 40,000 and 7,000 qualified voters, it was impossible calmly to deliberate and act; and six years later on the 226. of October John Phillips, William Sullivan, Charles Jack- April 19TH Celebration. 223 son, Josiah Quincy, William Prescott, William Tudor, George Blake, Henry Orne, Daniel Webster, Isaac Winslow, Lemuel Shaw, Stephen Codman and Joseph Tilden were appointed a committee to report to the town "a complete system relating to the administra- tion of the town and county, which shall remedy the present evils." When though this committee made its report, December 10, 1821, it only recommended that forty-one assistants should be chosen annually in the wards, who with the selectmen should form a town council, and that the town should be a county by itself, so as to reduce the expenses and reform cer- tain abuses in the courts. After considerable debate, Major Benjamin Russell, a soldier in the Revolution, distinguished for his activity and influence, editor of the Columbus Centinel, popular in the politics of the town, and a leader among the mechanics, declared that the committee "had not gone far enough in its alterations, and," in his opinion, ' ' a great change had been affected in the minds of the inhabitants on the subject of city government"; and he moved "that the report should be recommitted to the same committee, with the addition of one person from each ward of the town, with instructions to report a system for the government of the town, with such powers, privileges and immunities as are contemplated by the amendment of the constitution of the common- wealth, authorizing the General Court to constitute a city government." This motion was adopted, and twelve persons were added to the former committee, the most prominent being Mr. Russell, who had been one of the delegates from Boston to the Constitutional Convention of 1820. On Monday, the last day of the year, the committee made its report, written by Lemuel Shaw T , then senator from Suffolk County: That there should be an executive board of seven persons, called the selectmen, to be elected by the inhabitants on a general ticket; a chief executive, called the intendant, to be elected by the selectmen; and a Board of Assist- tants, consisting of four persons from each of twelve wards. Faneuil Hall was thronged on that and the two following days with a noisy and excited assembly, 224 l % 22 — Boston — -1922. which debated with much heat, but with general good humor, the various provisions of the report. "At times," says an eye witness, "a stranger would almost fancy himself in Bedlam, and that the moon had come nearer the earth than she was wont, and had made some men mad." The word intendant, perhaps taken from Canada or perhaps from Charleston, S. C, where the city was divided into thirteen wards, each of which selected a warden, and the thirteen wardens then elected the intendant, had in those days a peculiar fasci- nation for Bostonians. Many of the orators vented their sarcasm on the word mayor, called mare, and one declared that "a mare is a horse and he had as lief be called a horse or an ass as a mare." President was the word preferred by some as being more dignified; but mayor finally carried the day. The name of selectmen was changed to aldermen and the name of the Board of Assistants to the Common Council. Whether Boston should be called a town or a city was the occasion of prolonged debate. Mr. Russell argued in favor of the word city on the ground that the people of Boston could not be called citizens if they were inhabitants of a town. ' ' The word citizens, ' ' he insisted several times, "was derived from the term city." City was agreed upon by a small majority. The amended report was submitted to the inhabitants and was adopted. Application was made to the General Court by a "Committee authorized and instructed by the Town of Boston." There was much delay, however, in the General Court, and it was only by the persistent efforts of the friends of the charter, particularly William Tudor, that on the very last day and in the closing hour of the session it was passed; and February 23, 1822, the Governor signed the act establishing the City of Boston. The administration of all the fiscal, prudential and municipal concerns of the city was vested in the mayor and aldermen as one board, and the common council as another board to be exercised by concurrent vote, each board having a negative upon the other. At a meeting of the inhabitants in Faneuil Hall, March 4, 1S22, the question "Will you accept the charter?" was decided in the affirmative by a vote of 2,797 to April 19TH Celebration. 225 1,881, and the result was announced formally three days later by a proclamation from Governor Brooks. From this time to the second Monday of April, the day fixed by the charter for the choice of the new government, the chief question was: "Who shall be mayor? " The ward meetings were opened with prayer at nine o'clock. There was no fixed hour for closing the polls and this was done at the option of the ward officers. The votes were 3,708, chiefly divided between Harrison Gray Otis and Josiah Quincy, neither having a majority, and Mr. Otis and Mr. Quincy each then declined being a candidate. The friends of Mr. Otis were particularly aggrieved, because Mr. Quincy had been one of the chief opponents of the charter. He had said, "The pure democracy of a town meeting was more suited to the character of the people of New Eng- land and less liable to abuse and corruption than a more compact government." His opinions on this subject, when he became mayor, underwent radical modification. John Phillips, a graduate with honor from Harvard College, Fourth of July orator before the inhabitants of the town, member of the General Court, member of the Constitutional Convention of 1820, chairman of the committee which reported the charter, familiar with public business, honest, discreet, and of sound judg- ment, after a few days of greater excitement was then elected mayor with great unanimity, receiving 2,500 out of 2,650 votes. The new government was organized on Wednesday, May 1, 1822, with a solemnity adapted to the occasion, when the town fathers should lay down their sceptre and the new officials take up the reins of government, and the town meetings of Boston should be ended for- ever. Faneuil Hall "was filled to excess, and many went away unable to obtain seats or to stand, and the galleries were filled with ladies, the number estimated at 1,200." A platform was raised at the west end, with seats for the mayor, aldermen and common coun- cil, a notable body of men; the selectmen of the past year, with other town authorities ; and the chief officers of the Commonwealth. The charter, inclosed in a silver case, was laid upon a table in front of the council. 226 1822 — Boston — 1922. After prayer by the venerable Thomas Baldwin, D. D., the oldest settled clergyman in Boston, an indefatigable worker within and without the church, the oaths of allegiance and of office were administered to John Phillips, the mayor-elect, by Isaac Parker, Chief Justice of the Commonwealth; and afterwards, by the mayor to the aldermen and councilmen. The chairman of the selectmen, Eliphalet Williams, then rose and addressed the meeting, stating the grant of a city charter to the inhabitants of Boston; their acceptance of it ; their election of the executive and the members of the legislative boards; and the presence of these persons. In conformity, therefore, with the will of the inhabitants of Boston, and in behalf of the selectmen of the ancient town, he delivered into the charge of the new authorities the town records from the year 1634 and the title deeds, "documents and evidences of the real and personal estate belong- ing to the inhabitants," and the act establishing the city. Mayor Phillips, after paying "a just tribute to the wisdom of our ancestors as displayed in the institu- tions for the government of the town, under which for nearly two centuries so great a degree of prosperity had been attained, and during which the great increase of the population of the place had alone made this change in the administration of its affairs essential" also said in respect to those "who encouraged hopes which could never be realized, and of those who indulged unreasonable apprehensions in regard to the city charter, that they would derive benefit from reflecting how much social happiness depended on other causes than the provisions of a city charter. Purity of manners, general diffusion of knowledge, and strict attention to the education of the young, and above all a firm practical belief of that divine revelation which has affixed the penalty of increasing anguish to vice and promised to virtue rewards of interminable dura- tion, will counteract the evils of any form of govern- ment." Thus was established the new order in a period of calm, in marked contrast to the fierceness of the previous storms, after everybody had been heard April 19TH Celebration. 227 and very few had refrained from speaking, and the will of the majority had prevailed. Retiring from the hall, the mayor and aldermen and the councilmen met in separate rooms, and the council chose their president and clerk, and then both boards assembled in convention and unanimously elected Samuel Foster McCleary city clerk. They then in their separate chambers, proceeded to establish rules regulating the intercourse between the two boards ; and passed orders continuing in force the by-laws of the late town. Mr. McCleary, who was born on Charter street in the North End, had been clerk of the Senate since 18 13 and resigned that office to become city clerk at the request of his friend, Mayor Phillips, who then was president of the Senate. Mr Phillips had made it a condition of his acceptance of the mayoralty that the clerk of the Senate should be translated to the city clerkship, an office which was second only in importance and dignity to that of the mayor. Mr. McCleary continued to be city clerk, by the almost unanimous votes of twenty-nine successive city councils, until 1852, when his failing health compelled him to decline a re-election. He was followed by his son of the same name, who held the office for thirty-one years. The holding of an office, which depends upon election rather than upon appointment, does not always mean frequent changes. Faneuil Hall, where the people had gathered for so many years to administer their affairs, the place of the ending of town government and of the beginning of a new and untried system, is the most widely known building ever given to any town or city in the United States ; and it was the gift of an alien in faith and race from those who received it. Sixty years after the com- ing of the Puritans a little party of Hugenots impelled by similar motives, left their homes in Rochelle, France, and crossed the ocean to these shores. Among them, or coming soon after, was Andrew Faneuil, whose busi- ness ventures in Boston made him a rich man. His death in February, 1738, was an occasion of great im- portance in the town and province. His nephew and 228 1822 — Boston — 1922. heir, Peter Faneuil, was careful, we are told, that every propriety of the occasion should be observed without stint. Three thousand pairs of gloves were distributed at the funeral, and later two hundred mourning rings were given to the nearer friends. Peter Faneuil was thirty-eight years of age when he came into possesions of his uncle's fortune, which, added to his own accumu- lations, made him the merchant prince of his time. His mansion was on Tremont street, in the midst of extensive gardens, opposite King's Chapel Burial Ground. Seeing the disadvantage under which trade was con- ducted, with no market house as a center of exchange "and people forced to go out upon the neck and spend a great part of the day in providing necessaries for their families," he offered to give the town a building for a market; and 347 citizens petitioned the selectmen to bring his plan before the town, setting forth that Peter Faneuil has been generously "pleased to Offer at his Own proper cost and Charge, to Erect and Build a noble and complete Structure or Edifice to be Improved for a Market for the sole use, Benefit and advantage of the town." July 4, 1740, the selectmen issued a warrant calling a town meeting to be held ten days later. So numerous were the voters that, as on former occasions, an adjournment was taken to the Brattle Street Meet- ing House, after voting "That the Thanks of the Town be given to Peter Faneuil for his Generous Offer." At the adjourned meeting in the afternoon a "considerable debate" ensued; and the yeas had it by a majority of only seven votes ; and his offer would have been refused had there not been added to the proposal: "and we would humbly propose that, notwithstanding the said building should be encouraged and come to effect, yet that the market people should be at liberty to carry their marketing wheresoever they please about the town to dispose of it." The meeting instructed the selectmen to "Wait upon Peter Faneuil Esquire, and to Present the Thanks of this Town to Him, as Voted in the Forenoon; and also to Acquaint Him, that the Town have, by their Vote, come to a Resolution to Accept of his Generous Offer of Erecting a Market House on Dock Square, According to his Proposal." April 19TH Celebration. 229 When the building was finished and the keys deliv- ered to the selectmen, and a meeting, September 13, 1742, was held in the town house, there was a unanimous agreement "to accept this most generous and noble benefaction for the use and intention they are designed for," and to put upon record that Peter Faneuil had "Erected a Noble Structure far exceeding his first Pro- posal, inasmuch as it contains not only a large and Sufficient Accommodation for a Market place, but has also Superadded a Spacious and Most Beautiful Town Hall over it, and Several other Convenient Rooms, which may prove very Beneficial to the Town." The meeting also appointed a committee "to wait upon Peter Faneuil, Esq., and in the name of the town to render him their most hearty thanks for so bountiful a gift, with their prayers that this and other expressions of his bounty and charity may be abundantly recom- pensed with the divine blessing." And it was further voted, on motion of Thomas Hutchinson, later royal governor, "that in testimony of the town's gratitude to the said Peter Faneuil Esq., and to perpetuate his memory, the hall over the market place be named Faneuil Hall, and at all times hereafter be called and known by that name." And then a "Motion was made by Mr. William Price that as a further Testimony of the Towns Gratitude to the said Peter Faneuil Esq., The Picture of the said Peter Faneuil Esq., may be drawn in full length and placed in the said Hall, at the Expense of the Town. Which was also Unanimously Voted in the Affirmative." This picture perhaps was carried away when Boston was evacuated by the British troops, though another account says it was destroyed by some of the citizens in resentment because several of the Faneuil family, who were Loyalists, left the town when the British sailed away. The great-hearted donor did not live long after his gift was accepted, as he died in the following March at the age of forty-two, greatly lamented by his fellow citizens. Schoolmaster John Lovell of the Boston Latin School pronounced his eulogy in the hall, March 14, 1743, the first public use of the building. With prophetic forecast he concluded his eulogy: "May Liberty always spread its joyful wings over this place." 230 1S22 — Boston — -1922. The market did not become popular for some time, being often closed for longer or shorter periods but the hall above was in constant use. Until then the people had been dependent upon the courtesy of the pew holders for the use of their meeting houses, when, as was often the case, the town hall was not large enough. One of the earliest gatherings in the hall was October 10, 1744, to celebrate the king's coronation day "with a concert of music." In May, 1747, a series of concerts were given there, and on election day the governor and council dined there, inaugurating the long series of banquets for which the hall has been famous. In 1760 it was illuminated to celebrate the conquest of Canada ; and when the Stamp Act was repealed the town voted, March 18, 1767, that the hall should again be illum- inated, and that the selectmen should make provision for the people to drink the king's health. After the passage of the Port Bill, which closed the harbor to commerce, when not a fishing boat could land, or a gundalow float down the Charles or Mystic, with provisions for the distressed people, when contribu- tions of food were arriving from every one of the thirteen colonies, the committee made their distribu- tion from Faneuil Hall. Israel Putnam, who had fought for King George at Ticonderoga, drove a flock of sheep all the way from Connecticut into the market place around the hall. In the summer of 1778 John Hancock gave here an elaborate entertainment to the officers of the French fleet under D'Estaing, when toasts were drunk to the French King, Congress, Washington, the Army, and the Alliance of the two countries. In 178 1, when the fleet under DeGrasse entered the harbor, the merchants of Boston gave a sumptuous banquet in the hall. In 1784 a banquet was given by the merchants in honor of Lafayette. A re- markable occasion in Faneuil Hall was the civic festival in January, 1793, in commemoration of the successes of their French brethren, in their glorious enterprise for the establishment of equal liberty. "An elegant and sump- tuous Entertainment was provided, at which near three hundred partook, citizen S. Adams acting as President, and the citizen Letombc, as Vice President." At the west end of the hall over the head of the president, April 19TH Celebration. 231 "arose an obelisk, bearing in front the figure of Liberty, her left hand supporting her insignia, and her extended right hand displaying The Rights of Man - - Under her feet, the badges of Civil and Ecclesiastical Despotism, a crown, sceptre, mitre and chains, broken in pieces - Over her head, a descending cherub presented in its right hand a wreath, as The Reward of Virtue, and in its left hand, The Palm of Peace. ... A garter annexed, emphatically expressed: Thus we go to the stars. Over the whole, the benign Eye of Providence appeared to view with approbation the scene, and to express I guard the faithful. The right side of the Obelisk displaved the American, and the left the French flags." We come to an historic evening in 1837. In Alton in Illinois a mob, inflamed against an abolitionist news- paper, had destroyed three printing presses. Citizens of Boston petitioned for the use of Faneuil Hall, the Rev. Dr. William Ellery Channing heading the petition, to denounce this assault upon the freedom of the press. The petition at first was refused, but subsequently was granted. Several speeches had been made, the speakers dwelling upon the great principle involved, when the Attorney- General of the Commonwealth, sitting in the front gallery, rose and said that the people of Alton had as much right to break Lovejoy's printing press and throw it into the river as the people of Boston had to throw the detested tea into the harbor; and he was applauded loudly by a portion of the audience. When he had finished, a tall young man, a graduate of Harvard, who had studied law, but who had not had much practice, Wendell Phillips by name, son of our first mayor, walked up the steps to the platform and said : ' ' When I heard the gentleman lay down principles placing the murderers, incendiaries and rioters of Alton side by side with Otis and Hancock, with Quincy and Adams," pointing to their portraits, "I thought those pictured lips would have broken into voice to rebuke the recreant American, the slanderer of the dead. " In 1848 William H. Seward, then the rising statesman of the Empire State, and a tall and ungainly man with a homely countenance, unknown to fame, Abraham Lincoln by name, made speeches in this hall. The 232 i&22 — Boston — 1922. most impressive of all the scenes ever witnessed here was that in October, 1852, when the hall was draped in black upon the death of Webster; and there is almost no eulogistic oratory to be compared with that which then fell from the lips of Edward Everett. There is no other hall in the country so notable for the men who have gathered upon its platform; names illustrious in the history of the Commonwealth and of the Republic: Samuel Adams, Joseph Warren, John Adams, Lafayette, Isaac Hull, captain of the frigate "Constitution," lovingly christened "Old Ironsides," who destroyed the British frigate "Guerriere," and arrived in our harbor with his prisoners; James Law- rence, whose dying words were, "Don't give up the ship"; Monroe, Jackson, Daniel Webster, Charles Sumner, John A. Andrew, Charles Francis Adams, Caleb Cushing, Rufus Choate, George S. Hi] Hard, Louis Kossuth, William Lloyd Garrison, Theodore Parker. A destructive fire, January 13. 176 1, broke out in a shop on Dock square, and "crossed the street to that stately edifice, Faneuil Hall Market, the whole of which was soon consumed, excepting the brick walls which are left standing." Two years later the work of rebuilding without change in its original dimen- sions, 100 feet by 40, was so far completed that the townspeople met in the hall March 14, 1763, when James Otis, moderator of the meeting, delivered an appropriate address. A large part of the cost of re- building was raised by the sale of lottery tickets, some of which bear the signature of John Hancock. What a curious thing it is that the Puritans allowed money to be raised for almost every object, charitable, educa- tional and philanthropic, by the now denounced method of lotteries. In 1806 the building was doubled in width by removing the north side, while the south side was not disturbed, it being as firm as when erected in 1742. The walls were carried to a greater height to admit of the galleries, which, resting upon Doric columns, were added on three sides at the level of the old ceiling. This building, completed according to the plans of Charles Bulfinch, remained substantially the same April 19TH Celebration. 233 until the summer of 1898, when it was reconstructed with fireproof material. Although but a small portion of the Faneuil Hall, which gratified the eye of the generous townsman who gave it to Boston, is still standing, it yet is Faneuil Hall, with all its sacred asso- ciations, as "Old Ironsides" after its many changes is the same frigate with its story of heroic deeds. Would time permit it would be both interesting and profitable to consider how the people of Boston admin- istered their affairs as a town for nearly two hundred years. They realized that a government of the people could be maintained only by a free discussion of every question affecting their interests; and no other town was more keenly alive to its rights and liberties. Our Supreme Judicial Court has said that it was an "inde- pendent democracy." It was its own master; and it chose for itself what it would or would not do ; and its powers were limited only ' ' by the opinion of the inhabit- ants as to what was best to be done." It determined who could reside within its limits and where, how much the grocer and the butcher should ask for their goods, what wages should be paid in the shipyards, whether Thomas Brown could bring a suit against John Smith, and indeed "in regard to all such affairs as concerned none but themselves." In 1763 the General Court advised Boston to build a sea wall as a protection against the approach of an enemy by sea; and, as happened more than once, the town was unwill- ing to acquiesce, voting "not to carry on so extensive an undertaking." In 1773, in a great gathering in Faneuil Hall, after a report by Samuel Adams, vindi- cating the right of the town to manage its own affairs, the people unanimously declared that the town meeting would consider as town affairs whatever provision of the General Court touched the town, and would act accord- ingly. They believed that no matter either of politics or religion was beyond the bounds of their right and duty. It was in these times that the little town fear- lessly entered upon one of the most memorable struggles of history, that between Boston on the one hand and George III., king of England, on the other. In Faneuil Hall the people voted to abstain wholly from the use 234 I § 22 — Boston — 1922. of tea; and after the Boston Massacre to demand of the royal governor the instant removal of the British troops; and that most important step in bringing into existence a new nation; the appointment of a Com- mittee of Correspondence "to state the rights of the colonists as men and as Christians; and to communi- cate and public the same to the several towns and to the world." The town meetings often voted instructions to their selectmen and also to their representatives in the General Court. The instructions of 1764 to the rep- resentatives inform them that the townsmen "have delegated to you the power of acting in their publick Concerns in general as your own prudence shall direct you. Always reserving to themselves the Constitu- tional Right of expressing their mind and giving you such Instruction upon particular Matters as they at any time shall Judge proper." To their selectmen they said: That a "meeting be held by you, at least monthly, seriously to consider these things, for the good of the town, Glory of God, and establishing truth and love among us." The selectmen, or town's men as they were called at first, in the earliest times at least received no pay for their services and also paid their own expenses. But in 1637 it was agreed that the charges for the meetings of the town's men should be borne by the town, and they soon found it convenient to "refresh" themselves after their arduous duties; and a custom arose which was followed long after Boston became a city. It is to the credit of the town that during all this long period, whenever a debt was incurred, it was paid as quickly as possible; so that, when Boston became a city, it would have begun with no outstanding debt of any kind had not a small sum just been borrowed by the county treasurer toward the cost of a courthouse and jail. Boston is the largest community which ever main- tained the town organization, and also the most able and intelligent. No other town ever played so con- spicuous a part in connection with important events; and in all history there has been no other so interesting manifestation of the activity of the people's control. April igxH Celebration. 235 The people themselves constituted the government; and they surrendered with reluctance the management of their concerns, which they had maintained for nearly two centuries. They clung to the town, says Mr. Quincy in his History of Boston, because "In town meetings their measures of opposition to the preten- tions of Great Britain had been originated, being agitated and adopted, and the affection of the inhab- itants to the forms under which their efforts had been crowned with success, increased. The name and character of town became identified with the idea of popular power and civil liberty." Naturally there- fore they watched with jealousy the measures of the new authorities; and their feelings are shown in the motto adopted for the municipal seal, devised by John Davis, Judge of the United States Court for the Dis- trict of Massachusetts, adapted from the invocation by Solomon, King of Israel, at the dedication of the Temple: Sicut patribus, sit Deus nobis, as God was with our fathers, so may he be with us. The novel experiment was begun by our first mayor with circumspection and respect for ancient precedents, and he succeeded in overcoming most of the prejudice against the new form of government. "His aim was to allure, not to compel, to reconcile by gentle reform, not to revolt by startling innovation so that while he led us into a new and fairer creation, we felt ourselves sur- rounded by the scenes and comforts of home." Since towards the expiration of his term of service, his health began to fail, he declined a re-election, and May 29, 1823, he was stricken by disease of the heart, in the fifty-third year of his age. Public honors were paid by all parties to his memory. He lived in stormy times, yet such was the elevation of his character and the kind- ness of his heart, that he stands a model for that high "office which his wisdom, prudence, virtue, integrity and eloquence adorned." His successor, Josiah Quincy, chosen almost unani- mously, could take a bolder course. He believed the hour had arrived for more radical change and more permanent improvements, to develop the resources of the city ; and since he felt it desirable that he should be 236 1822 — Boston — 1922. conversant with every part of the business of the city he made himself chairman of every one of the commit- tees of the board of aldermen and took the laboring oar into his own hands. The novelty of the office, the diversity of opinions relative to its powers, and his extensive public improvements and many new institu- tions, rendered his administration one of peculiar trial and difficulty. It was, however, powerfully supported, and to general satisfaction, as was shown by six succes- sive elections. But beneath there was growing dis- content, and the complaint grew louder: "the mayor assumes too much upon himself. He places himself at the head of all committees. He prepares all reports. He permits nothing to be done but by his agency. No place but what is vexed by his presence." He failed of re-election; and January 5, 1829, there began a new administration. It is interesting to note that the first change in the charter, to provide that the elections should take place in December and the year commence the first Monday of January, was made by the General Court only after a meeting of the inhabitants had been called and a vote passed by them authorizing the application for this purpose. It is not for me now to go further in the account of successive administrations of our city government. They were tried again and again by great events; and the verdict of history must be that they stood the trial well and successfully. There have been many changes in form; and doubtless there are many still to come. For a hundred years we have been a city. The record is closed, and nothing we now can say or do will alter it. The present is ours, and the immediate future will be of our making. To you, Mr. Mayor, by the will of the people has been committed the superintendence of the affairs of this city; and happily you already have shown that you are not insensible to the obligations which rest upon you. Boston does not hold the exalted position it ought to hold, and it now is your high privilege to lead us onward and upward. It is no mean city. It rightly is proud of its glorious record and it has loyally pre- served its historic landmarks; many of its public April 19TH Celebration. 237 edifices, its churches, its business blocks, its residences are among the best in our country; our fire and police protection, the regulation of traffic in our streets, our park system, our library and its branches and many other things, needless for me to name, are admirable; and yet there is one thing lacking, essential above all to the dignity of a great city: complete and untram- melled home rule. No community of free men can secure from sources outside a better government than it can make of itself. Whatever temporary relief may be had the only kind of government with which we ought to be satisfied must be our own government. Whether the choice of the people be wise or unwise, the right to make it is theirs; and no sincere believer in a government by the people should tolerate any system which hampers or impairs the full exercise of this right. Boston has not suffered greatly in material prosperity from its domination by the state; for it is one of the best governed cities in the country. But it does suffer in its self-respect. A competent and friendly student has said: "Boston is said to get good results from its state commissions that exercise municipal functions in the community constituting Greater Boston. But the effect upon the self-governing capacities Of the people of Boston would seem to an outsider to be demoraliz- ing. In the absence of the larger responsibilities such functions as are left to the city itself are likely to be performed less and less efficiently, with the inevitable result that the state, in the interest of immediate good government, must undertake to do directly more and more of the work of the municipality." Boston should be a free city, master of its own destiny, in full control of its own affairs, its streets, its docks, its parks, and its franchises. Are the people of Boston less capable of furnishing and administering their own water supply, for instance, than are the people of New York; or are they so much less intelligent than the people of Detroit that they are incapable of managing the franchises for the use of their streets? I have no patience with the plea that the presence of a large foreign element in Boston interferes with this 238 1S22 — Boston — 1922. method of administration. There is a large foreign element in Glasgow, and it is one of the best governed cities in the world. Experience at home is equally against this contention. St. Louis is full of Germans, Minneapolis of Scandinavians, Pittsburgh of Scotch. Each of them is subject to far less thraldom than is Boston. Let us also give up the false notion that the common people are not to be trusted. It is the poor who from poverty itself are compelled to endure the greater part of the evils of misrule. Show them this, and they will be found ready to compel, through their votes, the changes which the lives of their children and the decency of their homes demand. If Boston were secure against outside interference, at liberty to work out its own welfare in its own way, the very necessity of the case would develop an enlightened public opinion and good government. It is only by democratic methods that good city government can be achieved or maintained. Mr. Justice Brewer of the Supreme Court of the United States has said: ' ' Thoughtful men more and more see that the wise thing is to cast upon each community full responsibility for the management of its local affairs, and that the great danger to free government is in the centralization of power." It was one of the best of the governors of the Commonwealth, Governor Crane, who said twenty years ago: "Cities and towns should be let alone to work out their own municipal problem." And in keeping with this sound principle, in the same year he returned four acts relative to Boston, without his sanc- tion, because they were "based upon the petition of pri- vate citizens, without the official endorsement of the mayor and city council." Boston, in all its history, has been conspicuous for patriotism and devotion to liberty and for sacrifice in its behalf. It was the first to protest against the tyranny of the British Crown; and it was in this hall that the Revolution was organized which achieved our independence. It ever has been foremost in those humanities which mark the progress of civilization: benevolent institutions, free schools, and moral culture. Through the enterprise and the integrity of its people April 19TH Celebration. 239 it has attained great material prosperity; and it is still, in moral and intellectual influence, upon which all things hang in a free country, what Cotton Mather said it was: "The great metropolis of all America." As Emerson has said: "Boston is not an accident, nor a windmill, nor a railroad station, nor an army bar- racks grown up by time and luck to a place of wealth, but a seat of humanity, of men of principle, obeying a sentiment and marching loyally whither that should lead them." Let us strive that these virtues may ever abide with us. May the sacred fire of liberty, kindled by the founders of Boston, receive always the constant and watchful care of its people ; and when the work of the coming century is reviewed, may it be the record of increased usefulness and of faithful steward- ship, worthy of our historic past. As God was with our fathers so may he be with us. A grateful people lift to Thee their prayer: Lord God of Hosts be with us yet. ?4o 1822 — Boston — 1922. BOSTON CITY.* I. To the town of his birth the heart of a man ever turns As a son to the Mother who bore him, who nurst him, who taught him ; The torch of his love that was kindled by hers ever burns Undimmed by what fog of forgetfulness Life may have brought him ; He may wander afar, but as drawn by a star how he yearns To win back to his home with all that his Fate may have wrought him! If his quest after wealth has been blest, he will lavish his gains That his name and his fame may be dear in remembrance forever ; If his life meet with shipwreck and nothing of virtue remains, With his last fading powers, with his remnant of will, he endeavors To crawl back to the scenes of his childhood, forgetting his pains, That distance his dust from the dust of his Sires may not sever ! And the Town, like a Mother, takes into her generous heart All the children of others to foster and comfort and nourish; Shares their pleasures and griefs, in their triumphs and failures takes part; She gives aid in affliction; unjealous, is glad when they flourish : And these sons by Adoption bring Eloquence, Industry, Art, And they vie with their native-born brothers their Mother to cherish. II. We are gathered together this day to acclaim The Century-plant of our City's fair fame! She has grown through the years in a splendor of glory And our hearts thrill with pride at the stride of her story. If we look to the Past, when her hills crowned with wood — Save by eagle-eyed sachem, unvisited stood, It must seem like the palace Aladdin's djinns furnished When the black tarnished lamp in his hovel he burnished; * This poem was read by its author, Nathan Haskell Dole, in Faneuil Hall. April 19TH Celebration. 241 Such a Town to create from the marsh and the bay — With magnificent avenues rolling away, With her marble-white towers, her noble museums, With her forest of churches — -incarnate "Te Deums," Her bazaars crammed with wealth, her luxurious homes, With her libraries holding the rarest of tomes, With her hospitals kindling new hope for the curable Or making Old Age and its trials endurable, With her culture enshrined in bronze and in stone — What a pile from the hut of lone Blaxton has grown ! Here's a roster of names for our offspring to cherish: Whose works and whose deeds from the Earth shall not perish: Princely merchants who live in munificent gifts; Fiery orators showing the Truth that uplifts; Great leaders in Causes whose prospects of winning Seemed hopeless indeed in their feeble beginning — The champions bold of the down-trodden slave And Womanhood's knights glad derision to brave, With women among them ■ — what name blazes brighter Than Julia Ward Howe, Wit, Poet and Fighter! ■ — Parker, Garrison, Phillips and Sumner, whose words Went forth from their mouths like glittering swords. This sacrosanct Hall has rocked with the thunders Of plaudits evoked by the soul-stirring wonders Of Eloquence voicing the needs of the Hour, When the weak became strong and the Word grew to power. Famous poets their songs to all nations have carried: Here Emerson, Longfellow, Lowell have tarried; Here Holmes flashed his wit without malice or sting, And O'Reilly and Joyce brought their genius to sing, With Whittier, Lyrics of Freedom — Defenders, (Now haloed with Victory's star-blazoned splendors) Of suffering peoples all over the world, Wherever the challenge of battle was hurled. Here first from the scalpel — the tender flesh rifted — The hideous terror of mortals was lifted And a calm Anesthesia bent to bestow Her mercy in place of an agonized woe ! What city gives more to those thirsting for knowledge? Sweet fountains of solace, the popular college, The perfume of Music, the marvels of Art, The freedom of Nature for all set apart, With the joy of the hills and the sea's boundless reaches, The forests and flowers and the wave-beaten beaches ! In the heart of the Town glows the Common, where cows Of our Puritan Forefathers once used to browse, And the Pond where they drank still hallows the hollow And the paths that they made are the malls that we follow; 242 1822 — Boston — 1922. And the hill where the Patriots' dauntless young sons Defied General Gage and the Britishers' guns Si ill rings with the shouts of the sturdy West-enders Who startle the frogs with their "tiddlcdybenders," While the bright golden dome of the State House looks down On the City grown great as it looked on the Town ! Who can tell in a volume the fame of our City, Condense all its Century-deeds in a ditty? The poet, the orator hints at the tale, And the wings of his flight must falter and fail — 'Tis the ray of the Sun in a pool by a river, 'Tis a fragment of plume in an arrow-full quiver ! III. Yet a chaplet of praise we would ardently lay at the feet Of this excellent Mother of ours as a symbol and token Of love, consecration, and sacrifice as it is meet In return for the blessings she gives in her largess unbroken, And a prayer from our hearts which our lips can with fervor repeat As the prayer of a child at the knee of his parent is spoken: May we serve thee, City we love, so that over the land Our example may shine to inspire a high emulation, That honor and probity, industry, virtue, expand Like a tide sweeping wide through the populous towns of the nation, Like a Fire Pentecostal by God's spirit kindled and fanned That flames in all hearts with a deep and a fine consecration ! Boston, fair City enthroned like a radiant Queen, From thy hills looking down on the ship-teeming plain of the Ocean, May thy future be bright, thy skies beam with light all serene, Ensured by thy sons' and thy daughters' unselfish devotion! May thy glory increase as the tale of thy glory has been, Which to read or to hear swells the heart with a sacred emotion! May ist Celebration. 243 MAY 1, 1922. The chronological observance of Boston's Centennial on May 1, 1922, intended by the Mayor and committee as the occasion for simple ceremonies marking the presentation and dedication of the memorial tablet to be placed in Faneuil Hall commemorating this historic event, and the reading of appropriate original essays by high school pupils chosen by the School Com- mittee of -Boston, proved to be of great interest and importance, finally developing into a splendid and spectacular celebration and attracting to Faneuil Hall an even greater throng than on April 19. A motion picture record of the event was made, all the national film news weeklies having representatives present for this purpose, as well as the official city photographer. Again the newspapers gave fitting and generous publicity to the importance of the event, and many of the mercantile establishments gave interesting window displays of rare old costumes and wearing apparel of 100 years ago, or prints and pictures of that period. The Mayor's suggestion that the occasion presented an opportunity for a more general use of the official city flag, followed by an appeal by the committee to business establishments, hotels, clubs and newspapers, resulted in a widespread flying of this beautiful civic emblem, together with the national colors, all over the city. Another stirring feature of the day's exercises was the general ringing of fire and church bells at eleven o'clock a. m., continuing for ten minutes and followed by the pealing of church chimes. On Sunday, April 30, many of the churches throughout the city gave special attention to the city's birthday and its signifi- cance, in their regular services. Previous to the Faneuil Hall exercises, which were held at noon, there was an official flag raising at City 244 X S22 — Boston — 1922. Hall, where the national and city flags were flung to the breeze before a large and representative crowd, while the Mayor, surrounded by the committee and city officials, briefly addressed the assemblage after presen- tation by Chairman George W. Coleman. A unique feature of these exercises was the " Pledge to the Flag" by a group of Boy Scouts from the North End, who executed their military evolutions to the accompaniment of a Chinese Boy Scout Fife and Drum Corps. One of the largest audiences ever gathered in Faneuil Hall greeted the Mayor and his distinguished guests upon their arrival for the noon exercises, during which the memorial tablet was unveiled by the Mayor's daughter, and the following program conducted: Hon. James M. Curley, Mayor oj Boston, presiding. Orchestral Selections 11.30 to 12 Opening Prayer . Rt. Rev. Mons. Arthur T. Connolly, Chaplain Anthem, "America" Audience Essay, "Inauguration Day," Mary Spurgeon, Girls' High School Selection Orchestra Essay, "Some Aspects of Boston in 1822," Paul G. Kirk, English High School Presentation of Permanent Memorial Tablet, George W. Coleman, Committee Chairman Unveiling Miss Mary Curley Address of Acceptance .... Mayor James M. Curley "Star-Spangled Banner" Audience The Director of Public Celebrations, J Philip O'Connell, Master oj Ceremonies EXERCISES AT CITY HALL. May ist Celebration. 245 PRAYER. We have assembled at the invitation of our honorable Mayor to unveil a bronze tablet commemorative of the centenary year of the inauguration of our beloved Boston as a chartered city. It is but meet and right that we should first of all render sincere and heartfelt thanks to the omniscient, omnipresent and eternal God whom angels worship and all Christian men justly revere, for His fatherly protection and heav- enly blessings showered upon us. When asked by men while He dwelt upon earth how they should pray, He answered them in the words of the old but beautiful prayer that we have all been taught at the knee of our ever to be revered and beloved mother. This prayer is called the "Lord's Prayer." In this prayer, then, we shall address Him today: "Our Father, Who art in heaven, hallowed be Thy name: Thy kingdom come; Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread; and forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us ; and lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil, Amen." O Lord of Hosts, Father of Light, our supplica- tions hear! Thou Covenant God, Thy promises we claim. 'We plead no merit, but we fearless come today, and ask a continuance of Thy blessings through our Saviour's name. We one and all beseech Thee: 11 Sicut patribus, sit Deus nobis." Amen. 246 1822 — Boston — 1922. ESSAY — INAUGURATION DAY. What a memorable day that was in the history of Boston! After an agitation which had lasted for over a hundred years, the incorporation of Boston as a city was voted for and became a fact in 1821. Her first Mayor was inaugurated in Faneuil Hall May 1, 1822. If such an event rouses our interest, let us peep, for a few minutes into the diary of a gentleman of that period who visited Boston for the first time on the very day of this historic event. He is by name Thomas Hutchinson, and his companion, men- tioned in the diary as Dick, is Richard De Witt of New York. "Rose betimes. Dick and myself decided to take a stroll before breakfast, and dine at one of the town inns on our return. Knowing naught of the streets of Boston we followed our noses through an intricate maze of narrow, crooked lanes till we found we had been led just where we most desired to go. Before us was the busy market place, the center of which is Faneuil Hall, serving as both market and assembly hall. At that hour, scarce five o'clock, the square was thronged with tradesmen, farmers, and merchants who were busily employed in setting out their wares, before the day's customers began to arrive. From fragments of conversation about us, we gathered that some political event was to take place this day, and. upon inquiring as to the nature of the forthcoming event, from a round-faced, good-natured farmer, he looked us up and down and then scratched his head reflectively. " 'Not Boston folk, be ye?' he asked, gazing upon us as if undecided about the balance of our minds. I assured him with some asperity that we could not claim that honor, whereupon his face assumed its natural expression, and he hastened to explain. " 'No offence intended, sir, but that ye should be May ist Celebration. 247 of Boston, and know naught of the oath of office to be given our Mayor this day, seemed past belief. 'Tis to be done over yonder this afternoon,' and he pointed toward Faneuil Hall. As we gazed at the building for a moment my eyes encountered the form of my old friend Adrian Barkus hastening toward us through the crowd. After greeting each other to our mutual satisfaction, we proceeded to the 'Inn of the Green Dragon,' there to breakfast. While partaking with satisfaction of a good meal my friend reminded us of the historic events connected with the inn. 'Here during the days just preceding the Revolution were held numerous political gatherings. During the siege of Boston it was used as a hospital. Here, too, were hatched some of the most successful plots of the patriots. Several of the inmates of the Green Dragon were proven to have taken part in the Boston tea party, and here under this same roof,' added our friend, 'Paul Revere met with a committee of some thirty odd, to report on the doings of the tories and the British soldiery.' After the war another notable gathering took place under this roof to discuss the question of the adoption of the Federal Constitution. 'Tis true that 'Once in politics never easy,' for the innkeepers of the Green Dragon for decades have shared with their customers the vicissitudes of the times. The present keeper, a burly, round-faced in- dividual, appeared to serve the breakfast with his head done up like a Turk, having been the victim of some dissatisfied voters some weeks before. Having satisfied our appetites to the full, we proceeded to view the wharves under the guidance of our friend. What a bewildering scene was there presented! Ves- sels loading and unloading quantities of foreign ma- terial and home-grown produce. There were piles of grain in sacks waiting to be slung into the holds of outgoing ships by numerous lusty dock men; quanti- ties of fine stuffs from several foreign looking ships which were rocking at their ease near the wharves. Men ran hither and thither, on errands of great im- port, while we three alone stood watching, the only spectators in the company. We visited the historic 248 iS22 — Boston — 1922. Rowe's wharf, the scene of the famous 'tea party,' which has always been to my thinking a deep disgrace to our land, for it was neither polite, honest nor economical, and the people of New England claim to possess these qualities in abundant measure. At T Wharf we encountered a group of sailors gathered about a well for which said wharf is famous. The water is excellent, for we tasted of it. My young friend Dick was most reluctant to leave this scene of activities so fascinating to him, but at last after much persuasion, we lured him away on the promise of see- ing the inauguration of Mayor Phillips in the after- noon. Our friend Adrian Barkus proffered a most kind invitation to luncheon which we gladly accepted, he promising to conduct us to Faneuil Hall at a later hour. The remainder of the time we spent in freshen- ing our clothes, for being from the city of New York, it behooved us to do credit in clothes as well as manners to our birthplace. "After a brief repast we set out all three for the hall, as hastily as the gathering crowd would permit. Inside, the assembly room was filled, the galleries being reserved for the ladies, who, taking advantage of the privilege, filled them to overflowing. Upon the plat- form in the center sat the officials, among whom I recognized several prominent lawyers and a noted Boston minister, whose name escapes my remembrance. A trifle to the left of the platform, a group of solemn- faced men clothed in formal black arrested my atten- tion. Upon asking my friend concerning them, he smiled and remarked drily, " 'There is sufficient reason for solemnity on their part. They are the selectmen, whose duty it is to pre- sent the Mayor with the city documents, until now intrusted to their keeping. But yonder comes the Mayor, so the ceremony will soon begin. ' I looked with great interest at Mr. Phillips when I fear my attention should have been upon the prayer delivered by the before-mentioned divine. The Mayor is of pleasing personality, and of ready address, as he proved when he delivered his short but well chosen inaugural address, after a brief speech on the part of the chairman of the May ist Celebration. 249 body of selectmen. He spoke 'wisely and well,' too mild I fear for my friend Adrian's liking, for he pounded my knee unmercifully several times during the address, unfortunately mistaking it for his own. However, he cooled his vexation half an hour after the ceremony was over in the tap room of the Sun- Tavern, whence the three of us repaired to quench our thirst. I can give testimony to the effect that the inn sign is not over ardent in its own praise when it states in faded gilt lettering that one can find 'The Best Ale and Porter Under the Sun.' "Our day in Boston ended appropriately with a walk to the Common which marks the limits of the city proper. From a vantage point on Beacon Hill we watched the cows being driven home from their pasture on the Common by small boys who made as much noise as the discordant jangling of the bells with which each cow was equipped. Far off beyond the treetops we saw the marsh lands which have not yet been filled in, and to the west as the day declined we watched the sun setting in golden splendor across the Charles, and seem- ing to turn the water to a dazzling pathway bright with promise for the future. Somewhat of this fancy must have entered young Dick's head, for he said half dreamily as we turned to retrace our steps : " T see a great city which is to rise in later years. It will be famous for its learning and its art. It will grow as all great cities do, but one quality will it retain forever — its individuality. ' ' ' 1822 — Boston — 1922. ESSAY — SOME ASPECTS OF BOSTON IN 1822. It is my part in the commemorative exercises today to render an account of Boston as it was in the year when the government of the city supplanted that of the town. Compared to the enterprising metropolis which we know today, the Boston of 1822, with its pump-water system, its crudely paved streets, and its pasture ground on the Common, might appear to be a quaint and unprogressive town. But the Boston of a century ago provided the impulse, set the pace, and established the broad and firm foundation for the Greater Boston of 1922. It was then, as it still is today, the birthplace of advanced political thought and the home of culture and learning. Much of the greatness as a municipality which Boston now boasts she may trace back to the time when the thriving town by the sea was granted a city charter by the Legislature of the Commonwealth. When, one hundred years ago today, John Phillips was administered the oath of office, he undertook a difficult task. The agitation for city government had not been without opposition, and there were many who predicted failure. The pure democracy of the town had been outgrown, and the representative democracy of the city, with its complex system of government, replaced it. Boston's first Mayor, therefore, adopted a cautious and conservative policy. His cannot be called a productive administration. Few of the effec- tive changes expected by the business men had been made, and yet the administration of John Phillips was an invaluable contribution to the development of our city. He organized the city government, gave it a sound basis, and sent forth Boston upon a course which has resulted in such remarkable prosperity and growth. The zeal, integrity, and civic interest of the men who guided the destinies of Boston in its first year are exemplified by the fact that the Board of Aldermen May ist Celebration. 251 served without pay, and that there was no corruption in the city administration, although the Common Council had the power of expenditure as well as of appropriation. In the course of her one hundred years of life, Boston has had many benefactors to whom she is deeply grateful; but there are none who have earned the everlasting gratitude of her people more than those founders of our native city who freely gave their time and services in the interests of her future. In 1822 Boston was ascending to the height of her national political importance — a height which she has not since attained. In the cabinet of the president and in the councils of the nation her sons were foremost. She called forth from retirement the most illustrious son of New England, gave to the nation its most re- nowned orator and to the Constitution its most ardent defender — when Daniel Webster was returned to Congress. In the stormy years that were to come, when the character and patriotism of New England were bitterly and unmercifully assailed in the National Senate, the eyes of the nation were fixed upon Massa- chusetts and the world awaited a reply. The un- answerable response came in the voice of Daniel Webster. Rewarded beyond measure did Boston feel for her action in 1822, when the representative of her choice rose, wholly equal to the occasion, and with statesmanlike dignity, making every heart throb with emotion, delivered his masterful vindication of the pride, and honor, and patriotism of Old Bay State! Boston was united in her support of John Quincy Adams, then Secretary of State, for the impending presidential campaign. She had the gratification of seeing him, the second of her native citizens, suc- ceed to the highest office in the land. John Quincy Adams was the last Bostonian to serve as President of the United States. Here in Boston, where the principle of American liberty had its origin, the stage was being set for the greatest political drama that ever took place on the American continent. Webster had denounced slavery as a terrible evil, Adams had expressed his disapproval, and slowly the people of Boston were forcing the 2$2 1S22 — Boston — 1922. issue into national politics. The task remained for the generation that was rising — for Phillips, for Sumner and for Garrison, who were then in the public schools — to agitate the question of human slavery and to bring about the greatest reform in the nation's history. When the citizens of the newly-formed City of Boston thus brought to the attention of the Union the evils that threatened its destruction, they were but imitating the benign example of the inhabi- tants of the good little town that preceded her. While Boston men were taking a leading part in the affairs of the nation, there were those' who, with equal enterprise, were proving to the world the genius of her commerce, the supremacy of her ships, and the courage and skill of her seamen. The wharves of Boston were dotted with the now bygone counting houses, the shore echoed with the sound of the calker's maul as the sturdy craft were constructed on the ways, and the harbor was alive with ships heavily laden with cargo from all parts of the world. With forty- three thousand inhabitants, Boston held second place among the citizens of western hemisphere. Not con- tent with the European trade alone, her merchantmen rounded the Cape of Good Hope and established a lasting and profitable trade with China. A con- temporary merchant, giving an account of the China trade, stated that the Boston brigs were the acknowl- edged sovereigns of the Pacific. On many of the long and arduous voyages the Boston ships established speed records which were not broken until the dawn of the clipper-ship era, when Boston rose still higher as a center of commerce. Nothing served to arouse more excitement in the city of Canton than the cry that a Boston vessel was in port. The hardy Boston mariners who turned the prows of their barks into the boundless Pacific conducted a trade of honor with the people of the Far East and not, like many of their rivals in other lands, an unholy and an unfair traffic in drugs. To those men of rugged and honest charac- ter is due, in no small degree, the present relations of mutual confidence and good will that exist between our own country and the Republic of China. May ist Celebration. 253 The transatlantic commerce of Boston in the year 1822 was second to none. The Boston and Liver- pool Packet Company, the first international ship company in America, was in that year established. The best ship that ever bore the flag of that company, and which was still seaworthy twenty years ago, was a product of the Boston shipyards. An observer of the times reported that in eight months of the year 1822, of the one hundred American ships to enter the Baltic ports alone, fifty were from Massachusetts and thirty-eight of the fifty from their home port of Boston. These ships, though numerous, were small, it is true; but the lessons which we should learn today are these: They were constructed in the docks at Boston; they were manned by Boston men; their home port was at Boston, and finally, the only flag from which they ever sought protection or which was ever hoisted to their topmasts was the starry emblem of the American Union ! At the time of the inauguration of the city govern- ment the famous frigate "Old Ironsides," the mother of the American navy, was about to leave Boston Harbor for the last time. Constructed, equipped and manned by Boston men, she sailed from port amid the cheers of the public. It was but a few years later that the same venerable ship returned, pronounced unsea- worthy, to remain forever among those whose fathers had fought upon her decks. Today she is Boston's only relic of naval triumphs long past, and the cherished man-o'-war is now moored beside the great modern ironclads of that same navy to which she gave prestige and renown. Geographically, the Boston of a century ago was far different from that of today. Where we now have the beautiful Public Garden there was a repulsive and unhealthful swamp. Water flowed over what is now the Back Bay. A narrow strip of land, known as Boston Neck, connected the newly-born city to the mainland. On State and Commercial streets were the business districts where were situated the counting houses of the merchantmen. The fine old residences of the prominent citizens were situated on Beacon, 254 I S22 — -Boston — 1922. Summer and Tremont streets. Beyond Beacon Hill, in the West End district, was the chief center of popula- tion. Farmers from the neighboring towns daily brought their produce to the market district about Faneuil Hall. It was a flourishing community, possessed with a spirit of local pride and interest that made a police force unnecessary during the day. There was no organized fire department, as every Bostonian con- sidered himself a servant of the public and was ready to offer himself for service to the community whenever the occasion arose. With the lapse of a century, the world has seen extensive and rapid improvements, and, changing with the times, the most historic city in America has grown and flourished far beyond the fondest anticipations of the progressive men who founded her. The virtues and culture of Boston have expanded with the growth of the nation and have extended even to the Pacific coast, which bears abundant evidence of the beneficent influences of the many sons who have left her to seek new fields. Whether or not our native city goes on, as we hope she will, in the path of progress and prosperity, her children in all time to come may turn to and review with pride that period in her history when the town became the city, when her sons stood first in the eyes of the nation, when her ships carried the seal of Boston into every harbor on the globe, and when the name Bostonian was synonymous with civic spirit, bringing a worthy and merited distinction upon him who bore it. GEORGE W. COLEMAN. May ist Celebration. 255 PRESENTATION OF MEMORIAL TABLET. Seven years ago, on another historic day, the Fourth of July, when the Mayor of the city was absent on the Pacific coast, it fell to my lot, as President of the City Council and Acting Mayor, to raise flags, lead pro- cessions, make speeches and dedicate a monument on the Public Garden. Once again I find myself in offi- cial relationship to this same Mayor, Hon. James M. Curley, now at the beginning of his second adminis- tration. The Boston Centennial Committee enjoys the double distinction of having been appointed by Mayor Peters of the preceding administration and of receiving the generous confirmation of the present Mayor, without the change or addition of a single individual. The Centennial Committee wishes to express to you, Mr. Mayor, our appreciation of your courtesy and good will. We heartily wish that more favorable circumstances might have permitted us to render you and the city a much larger service. It has been our feeling that this celebration would not be complete unless it left behind some permanent memorial of the event. We are happy in presenting to the city, through you, a tablet which will find a permanent place on the wall of this sacred building. It will commemorate the anniversary we are now cele- brating and will abide here as long as Faneuil Hall shall stand. Your committee sincerely trusts and earnestly hopes that your second administration, marking the begin- ning of the city's second century, will make a record in high accomplishment, progressive development and material growth such as will be well worth celebrating a hundred years hence. We are proud and happy in having the assistance of your daughter, Mary, to unveil the memorial tablet on our behalf. 256 1S22 — Boston — 1922. MAYOR'S ACCEPTANCE. In accepting for the City of Boston this tablet which commemorates the 100th anniversary of the organiza- tion of our first city government, and which brings to our minds the realization of the labor and sacrifice involved in the building of our fair civic structure by those who have preceded us, it is fitting that in con- sidering the history and accomplishments of the past we now take counsel as to plans for the future. The Boston of a century ago and of a century and one half ago was the heart of America, from which was radiated the thought and inspiration that paved the way for the establishment of free government in this country, through which was given to the world the American Republic and our national emblem Old Glory. From the very beginning of the movement for liberty down to the present hour, Boston's contribution, either in the hour of peace or in the hour of trial, has been service and idealism. Our contribution of a material character has been limited; our contribution of those worth-while agencies that endure, that benefit mankind and that cannot be measured in terms of money ex- ceeds the contribution of any municipality in America. The opportunity for leadership in the work of service is as great in our day as it has ever been in the past. The fathers and founders of our government in their wisdom gave to America and the world a Constitution whose compass has been so perfect that it has seldom been necessary to consider adjusting it in 146 years. The message that Boston sends forth to the world today is a plea for the preservation of the principles enunciated in the Constitution of the United States and set forth in the Declaration of Independence to the end that, through equal and exact justice to all men without regard to race, creed or color, we may be enabled to steer the ship of state free of the shoals of industrial disputes which tend to divide man and man and free our country of the piratical flag behind which muster those who would scuttle the ship through racial and religious hatreds. May ist Celebration. 257 COLOR BEARERS AND USHERS. The following commissioned officers from the Boston Latin School Cadets officiated as color bearers and ushers on April 19 and May 1: James M. Curley, Jr. George C. Richard. M. James Flynn. B. J. Cummin gs. Robert M. Nelson. Leo E. O'Hearn. Vincent R. Panico. C. B. Taft. James F. Collins. John J. Barry, Jr. Edmund J. Gallahue. John L. Keefe, John L. Fitzpatrick. Paul N. Holland. 7806 068 DATE DUE J AN 18 2 )05 m m i r 2M. ^LlA^lflg ti i 1 uo OE C 1 9 z m UNIVERSITY PRODUCTS, INC. #859-5503 BOC INC. FEB 1 1984 100 ;ZET BOSTON COLLEGE 3 9031 01021562 2