HAPPENINGS 
 
 BEFORE AND AFTER 
 
 STATEN ISLAND 
 
 BECAME PART OF 
 
 GREATER NEW YORK 
 
 AS NOTED 
 BY 
 
 DAVID J. TYSEN 
 
 AT THE REQUEST OF A NUMBER OF CITIZENS 
 OF 
 
 STATEN ISLAND 
 
 1924 
 
 PUBLISHED BY 
 
 THE STATEN ISLAND CHAMBER OF COMMERCE 
 
Avery Architectural and Fine Arts Library 
 Gift of Seymour B. Durst Old York Library 
 
HAPPENINGS 
 
 BEFORE AND AFTER 
 
 STATEN ISLAND 
 
 BECAME PART OF 
 
 GREATER NEW YORK 
 
 AS NOTED 
 BY 
 
 DAVID J. TYSEN 
 
 AT THE REQUEST OF A NUMBER OF CITIZENS 
 OF 
 
 STATEN ISLAND 
 
 1924 
 
 PUBLISHED BY 
 
 THE STATEN ISLAND CHAMBER OF COMMERCE 
 
F 
 
 11?. 
 H5l>2 
 
 Digitized by the Internet Archive 
 in 2014 
 
 https://archive.org/details/happeningsbeforeOOtyse 
 
The Chamber of Commerce, in presenting this History of 
 important happenings to our beloved Staten Island — First will 
 thank Mr. Tysen for doing this service to the Community, 
 giving an inside view of the conception and consummation of 
 much that doubtless otherwise would have been lost to the 
 Public. 
 
 No one so well informed as Mr. Tysen to do this — as he 
 was in many cases the inception, cause and principal actor in 
 many of the important matters herein recorded. 
 
 Mr. Tysen has passed the allotted four score years, but still 
 takes a lively interest in all public matters, especially those 
 affecting his beloved native Island. 
 
 A. L. SCHWAB 
 
 PRESIDENT STATEN ISLAND 
 CHAMBER OF COMMERCE 
 
THE COUNTY ROAD LAW 
 
 In the fall of (the year I cannot recall) I went to Elizabeth, 
 New Jersey, to spend the week end with a friend. On Sunday 
 morning he suggested that we take a ride — in the evening he in- 
 vited some friends in for dinner, after dinner in conversation 
 with a Lawyer, Mr. Julius Fay, speaking of my ride in the morn- 
 ing with my host, Mr. Oscar D. Kremm, remarked he was 
 ashamed of the roads. I told him they were no worse than those 
 of Staten Island. He stated that they were seeking a remedy 
 and were holding meetings every week, at neighbors houses, to 
 decide upon some plan, and at the last meeting they had decided 
 to go to the legislature and ask for a law to compel each town 
 to build at least one-half mile of macadam road each year. I told 
 Mr. Fay that I thought he was on the wrong track, that I had 
 given the matter of road improvement considerable thought, and 
 had concluded that the Town was too small a unit to have con- 
 trol of road improvement; that in my county we had five towns, 
 that you could start from Castleton Corners and go thence via 
 Manor Road, Egbert Avenue, Saw-Mill Road to Egbertville, 
 thence by Richmond Road to Richmond and from thence a little 
 farther west to GifFords Lane, a little more than three miles all 
 told, tapping all five towns — thus having five different construc- 
 tions in that short distance. As each town would be a law to 
 itself, one would build a road 12 feet wide, another 14 feet, an- 
 other 16 feet, etc. One would build 4 inches depth of macadam 
 another 6 inches and another 8 inches. One would build of trap 
 rock and another of lime stone. One would top dress with fine 
 stone as a binder and roll the road, and another would not ; thus 
 havipg a Crazy Quilt of road construction. Again, I said Staten 
 Island about 16 miles long and on the south-east side are two 
 towns Southrield and Westfield. If such a law was in force, 
 Southfield would build its first half mile near Clifton, where 
 the population is greatest and Westfield at Tottenville where the 
 population is greatest and thus if they continue to build on the 
 main roads connecting Tottenville and Clifton, they would build 
 one mile a year and it would be 16 years before they had a com- 
 pleted roadway — that then the first miles would probably be out 
 of repair, that there would always be contention as to the town 
 rights — and responsibilities on roads between towns — and in fact 
 interminable disputes and trouble. That the town was too small 
 a unit for improved road building, the control should be by 
 
 E 
 
County at least — with the right of the Board of Supervisors (in 
 New Jersey the Board of Freeholders) to take entire charge, 
 with the right to bond the County, employ a competent engineer, 
 with the character of improvement stated in the Law, so that no 
 section should get a different or more costly improvement than 
 other sections. 
 
 Mr. Fay at once saw the weakness of his proposed manner of 
 improvement and said that he saw the advantage of the County 
 Road System, that it had never occurred to any of those who 
 were acting with him in the matter, and he would bring it up at 
 the next meeting, and he was sure it would be approved, for he 
 said it was so obvious as to be sure of success. He thanked me 
 for my suggestions ; and said it was most fortunate that we had 
 met, and he was sure the proposition would be approved, and 
 they would go to the Legislature as soon as it convened and get 
 such a law passed. He did. And the New Jersey County Road 
 Law was passed and Mr. Fay sent me a copy. 
 
 I had intended to do the same, but meanwhile one of the Van- 
 derbilts died and in taking the body from Clifton to the Moravian 
 Cemetery, the family were disgusted by the condition of the Rich- 
 mond Road — and shortly thereafter I understood they intended 
 to build a fine road from Clifton to New Dorp and I understood 
 Mr. George Vanderbilt acting for the family commenced buying 
 land along the route to widen the Richmond Road — thus matters 
 went on until one evening I received from Nathaniel Marsh, 
 Supervisor of the Town of Southfield, a copy of a Law 
 which Mr. James McNamee had had passed by the State Senate 
 and which had been sent down to the Assembly and a copy had 
 been sent to Mr. Marsh by Hon. Daniel T. Cornell, then Member 
 of Assembly. This law by coincidence proposed to do what Mr. 
 Fay's Committee intended to do in New Jersey. Compel each of 
 the five towns of Richmond to build mile of macadam road 
 each year. 
 
 With this situation confronting me, 1 could not wait longer for 
 the Vanderbilt improvement, and so got in touch with Supervisor 
 Marsh. I took with me the Copy of the Jersey Law which Mr. 
 Fay had sent me. I went over the matter with Mr. Marsh, and 
 requested him to ask the Supervisors and Assemblyman Cornell 
 and Mr. McNamee to meet at his New York Office on the fol- 
 lowing Saturday afternoon, and that I would invite some sub- 
 stantial Citizens from different parts of the County to meet and 
 go over the matter as it was of the very first importance to Rich- 
 mond that no mistake should be made. Mr. Marsh willingly con- 
 sented to do this : so the next Saturday afternoon the Super- 
 visors and Assemblyman Cornell and about 15 prominent citizens 
 including Mr. McNamee the sponsor of the law which had passed 
 the Senate. 
 
 5 
 
We organized the meeting by making Gen. Satterlee, Chairman 
 and Edward P. Doyle, Supervisior of Northfield, Secretary. I 
 explained to the meeting the object of the call and went over 
 the ground practically the same as I did with Mr. Fay, and read 
 to them the Jersey County Road Law, that New Jersey was then 
 operating under, in improving the highways and showed them 
 that Mr. McNamee's bill would do just what New Jersey had 
 steered clear of. 
 
 Every one in the room seemed pleased with the proposition ex- 
 cept Mr. McNamee who said his Bill had passed the Senate, and 
 he was assured it would pass the Assembly, and our substitute 
 was too radically ultra and the people would not stand for such 
 drastic change, etc. Mr. McNamee was alone in this conten- 
 tion. The result was that a Committee of three, Mr. George J. 
 Greenfield, Mr. David Wilcox and Mr. McNamee were appointed 
 a Committee to draft a County Road Law similar to the New 
 Jersey Law ; and report to a meeting to be held at the same place 
 the next Saturday afternoon. Unfortunately, Mr. Wilcox had 
 to go to Washington on important business, and Mr. McNamee 
 somewhat disgruntled refused to assist in drafting the law, and 
 Mr. Greenfield asked me to assist him. He had already prepared 
 a tentative draft, which we altered only by putting in a provision 
 to protect the rural sections of the County, by a Clause which 
 provided that all roads costing at the rate of more than ten thou- 
 sand dollars per mile ; the excess should be paid by the town or 
 village in which such road was located. 
 
 We met pursuant to adjournment at the same place the follow- 
 ing Saturday, with a full attendance, for all saw the importance 
 of action. Mr. Greenfield read his proposed bill, and as before 
 all were heartily in favor, except Mr. McNamee. After much 
 discussion he said he would take it home and think it over, at 
 once there were objections to delay, and many were so persistent 
 against delay, some saying we could wait and give him all the 
 time he wanted to consider it, seeing we were determined he took 
 the draft aside and after spending a few minutes he said he would 
 like a change of two or three words. The change was left to Mr. 
 Greenfield, who decided it would not affect the draft, and so the 
 County Road Law as now finally enacted was approved by the 
 meeting unanimously and a committee consisting of George J. 
 Greenfield, Henry T. Metcalf, James McNamee, I. K. Martin, 
 David J. Tysen and Mr. Eugene Outerbridge was appointed. 
 
 The Committee was instructed to co-operate with Assemblyman 
 Cornell and have the County Road Bill as proposed substituted 
 for the McNamee Bill which had passed the Senate. The Com- 
 mittee all went to Albany the next Monday morning, and ar- 
 ranged with Mr. Cornell's help to have the County Road Bill as 
 prepared, substituted for the McNamee Bill. We then paid our 
 
respects to Gov. David B. Hill, and went over the matter with 
 him; told him how important it was to us, and got his promise 
 to help us by signing the Bill if when it came to him there were 
 no constitutional grounds to object. The Bill was passed as pre- 
 pared by Mr. Greenfield, and in due time signed by the Governor, 
 and thus the greatest boon of all improvements before or since 
 came to Richmond. 
 
 When the Bill became a law the supervisors got busy imme- 
 diately, and voted to bond the county for $100,000 to begin with, 
 and road improvement commenced and when we went into the 
 City of New York most of our important highways were im- 
 proved and had it not been for the County Road Law — we would 
 have been stuck in the mud until this day — for much of the prop- 
 erty of the rural sections, outside of the villages would not have 
 been able to stand assessment under the City; it would have in 
 many cases amounted virtually to confiscation, and without our 
 road improvement, growth in population would have been im- 
 possible and there would have been no advancement so it is no 
 exaggeration to say that if it had not been for the County Road 
 Law, we would be stuck in the mud — in most of the County — 
 to this day. 
 
 THE SOUTHFIELD BOULEVARD 
 
 In going over my father's papers, I came across a petition 
 which he had prepared in 1841, for a public road, 50 feet wide 
 along the southside of the Island, about where the Boulevard is 
 now located. That petition had several names of land owners 
 who had agreed to give their lands for such a road, but others 
 refusing my father became disgusted, and abandoned the enter- 
 prise. 
 
 I had long known the great need of a road in this section, as 
 there was no public highway between the Richmond and the 
 Amboy Roads, and the beach or bay for many miles, which 
 made connection between neighbors and towns very circuitous. 
 So after mature deliberation, with a full comprehension of the 
 rebuff's, disappointments, and difficulties I would meet I de- 
 termined to promote the construction of a wide road, through 
 this arear. My idea was to begin at the Finger-board Road, so 
 the first man I called upon was Mr. Cameron. Mr. Cameron was 
 very decided against such a road through his property. He would 
 not have a public highway dividing his farm and homestead, he 
 was so pronounced in his opposition that I did not trouble him 
 again; for the success of my project depended largely upon 
 getting lands donated for the road. The next owner I called 
 upon was David Runph, who owned a farm on the Old Town 
 Road, which he used for market gardening. I was prepared for 
 
 t 
 
opposition from him, for it was no trifling matter in those days 
 to ask a farmer to give a roadway through a farm, necessitating 
 fencing and disarranging his field lay out, so I was not disap- 
 pointed when I proposed to him to give land the entire length 
 of his farm for a 100 foot road. He said you don't think I am 
 crazy to do such a foolish thing, besides what do you want of a 
 100 foot road 50 feet is wide enough. So after some more talk 
 I passed him for the time being. I had already signed the peti- 
 tion giving the 100 feet through my several farms amounting to- 
 gether to about \y 2 miles. The next owner I called upon was 
 Mr. L. E. Seaver — who represented his mother and family as 
 owners of a large farm — between Dongan Hills and Grant City — 
 after several very satisfactory conferences I received the promise 
 of the necessary land 100 feet wide through their farm. 
 
 The next man I encountered was Mr. Cornelius Cole, who 
 owned quite a stretch along the line I desired to build the road. 
 He also thought it was foolish to build such a wide road, thought 
 40 or 50 feet in width was ample, that a road 100 feet besides 
 taking much unnecessary land would be more expensive to make, 
 and more expensive to keep in repair, that he would give for the 
 road 50 feet wide; if it was laid out in front of his house (where 
 the Boulevard now runs) but that he would not have a road 
 cutting his farm at the back of his house. 
 
 The next party was another Mr. Cole a relative of the former 
 Mr. Cole, who had no very clear idea of the road or its ad- 
 vantages, but said he would do what his neighbors did. The 
 next one approached was Mr. John J. Crooke, one of the best 
 and most progressive citizens, who had made a large fortune 
 in New York City, and lost it in silver mining in the West. He 
 met me in the most friendly spirit, and said he would not object 
 giving land for a 100 foot boulevard, but that he would like to 
 have it go through the middle of his farm or homestead, a little 
 south of his residence. This I knew was impossible for Mr. 
 Cornelius Cole, who was a most determined and decided character 
 had aosolutely refused to let it go back of his house. So I went 
 along down the line and after interviewing some rather small 
 owners with various success or rebuffs — I called on Mr. David 
 Bennett King, who was trustee for creditors of Erastus Wiman. 
 Mr. King who from the first was much interested in the pro- 
 posed Boulevard, and in fact took a very intelligent interest in 
 all matters affecting the Island, very willingly consented to give 
 the land 100 feet wide if it was laid out straight through his 
 land — but as a consciencious trustee, he doubted whether he 
 would be justified to give the land if the boulevard was run 
 diagonally through the Wiman property. The next party seen, 
 was Mr. Robinson, who owned a large farm adjoining the Erastus 
 Wiman property. Mr. Robinson also a Public Spirited Citizen, 
 
 9 
 
thought the Boulevard would be a good improvement, but wanted 
 it to go straight and not diagonally through his property. The 
 next owner was Major Clarence F. Barrett. Mr. Barrett who had 
 had large experience as a landscape architect immediately ap- 
 proved of the project, and said he would give 100 or 125 feet. 
 Put it as near the centre of his place as I could, but take it any 
 where necessary. The next was a Mr. Roberts who resided in 
 Brooklyn and had his Country residence along the southwest side 
 of the Eltingville Road (Seaside Avenue) running from near the 
 Amboy Road down to the Fishing Club property, a distance of 
 nearly y 2 mile. When approached about giving 100 feet for a 
 boulevard he was indignant. He would have no public highway 
 dividing his property, that was his private country home and he 
 wanted it private, etc., etc. So that was the situation in the be- 
 ginning, not a very encouraging outlook, but I was not daunted. 
 I had a hard task ahead, but there was no credit in doing as easy 
 thing, and so I worked on these men, first one and then the 
 other for two years, never relinquishing my erfbrts, many nights 
 out till nearly midnight, until Mrs. Tysen became discouraged 
 and thought it would be loves labor lost; for she said everyone 
 said I could not succeed. I kept pegging away always hoping 
 and sometimes making gains, and knowing first that I could not 
 get through Cameron, without a fight, which was out of the ques- 
 tion—second, that I could not persuade Mr. Cole to change his 
 determination not to have it go back of his house, and also that 
 it would be impossible to get through Roberts without a legal 
 struggle. I eliminated these obstructions from my efforts. 
 
 After many talks with Mr. King, high minded and public 
 spirited citizen, I succeeded in satisfying him to cut the Wiman 
 property somewhat on the diagonal, while not as beneficial as 
 where he desired the road to run, that it would greatly enhance 
 the value of his property, when once he could see it in that light 
 he consented with alacrity, and this made it easier to treat with 
 Mr. Robinson, whom I finally prevailed upon to allow the Boule- 
 vard to go somewhat diagonally through his farm. This was 
 necessary in order to meet a narrow road between Robert's prop- 
 erty and the Fishing Club property, as it was the only way to get 
 to the Woods of Arden and so on to the Westfield line; for I 
 knew if I had to have enough land condemned from the Robert's 
 property to widen this road to 100 feet the damages would be 
 trivial, so Mr. King's acquiescence was the key to the situation at 
 this end of the route, as David Rumph was at the other end and 
 he was a hard nut to crack. I used the influence of many of 
 Rumph's friends but with little success, and finally one night I 
 had a long talk with him, stated he was the only one standing in 
 the way of success and finally I agreed to have two ponds on his 
 farm filled up, that I knew and appreciated its importance, as I 
 
 10 
 
had given so much of my property and had spent so much time, 
 that I felt it would be an outrage to have it fail, and that he 
 could not afford to incur the displeasure of so many of his neigh- 
 bors by laying himself across the path and preventing this much 
 needed improvement and so I finally got his reluctant promise to 
 give the land necessary. This practically ended my endeavors 
 in this direction, but right here I was confronted by another and 
 very serious situation. The supervisors had been so active in 
 selling County Bonds and building County Roads that they had 
 about reached the Bonding Limit of the County, which was 10 
 per cent, of the assessed valuation, so I had to cast about to get 
 the necessary funds to improve the Boulevard, and condemn 
 some small lots along the line. 
 
 BONDING THE TOWNS 
 
 I concluded to try to get the towns to bond for road improve- 
 ment. I made a call at the Town Board of Middletown, which 
 was my home town, at their first meeting, told them the object 
 of my mission and was met by the statement from the Super- 
 visor Dr. John L. Feeny, Chairman of the Board, that that was 
 impossible as Mr. Sidney F. Rawson, their Counsel, who was 
 also Counsel for the Town Board of Northfield, had given the 
 latter town board an opinion that all bonds issued at this time 
 would be a charge upon the town issuing them. This surprised 
 me, and I told Dr. Feeny I was sure Mr. Rawson was wrong, 
 that I was familiar with the charter in this matter, but if they 
 would make an adjournment for a couple of days I would get an 
 opinion from Mr. George J. Greenfield, who was on the Charter 
 Commission. The board consented to do this and adjourned for 
 a couple of days. The next day I called upon Mr. Greenfield, 
 told him of Rawson's opinion, which was holding up important 
 improvements and he was astonished, said Rawson was wrong, 
 and if he had looked into the matter he knew better. I asked 
 him to give me a short and emphatic opinion on the matter of 
 liability for the bonds, which he did, stating in a few words, that 
 all bonds issued before consolidation, whether of School, Village, 
 Town or County, if legally issued, became a charge upon the 
 City, the City taking the property, and assuming the responsibil- 
 ity. This opinion I took to the Town Board at the time to which 
 they had adjourned, they were all pleased with the opinion, as 
 they all saw the value of the improvements sought, but Mr. 
 Feeny said while he was inclined to agree with Mr. Greenfield 
 and myself, he could not see what they could do, except to have 
 the matter tested in the Courts or get another Counsel. I told him 
 I thought it better to ask Mr. Rawson for a written opinion as I 
 was quite sure he had not taken much interest in the matter, and 
 
 11 
 
that he was too good a lawyer to go upon record for what seemed 
 to me an unwarranted position. This they agreed to do and 
 while I was there they passed a Resolution asking Mr. Rawson 
 for a written opinion (to be delivered as soon as possible) on this 
 point, and enclosed it with a copy of Greenfield's opinion and 
 dispatched a messenger with it without delay. The next morning 
 (Mr. Greenfield later told me) Mr. Rawson stopped at Mr. 
 Greenfield's office which was on Broadway near his own office, 
 and said to Mr. Greenfield, "Counsellor it seems we differ upon 
 the Construction of the Charter." Greenfield answered there is 
 no room for difference in the construction, for the Charter is 
 very plain upon that point, and you are too good a lawyer to 
 subscribe to any such ridiculous view. Rawson laughed, went out 
 and in the afternoon sent around to Mr. Greenfield's office a copy 
 of the opinion which he had prepared and a foot note by way of 
 pleasantry in pencil. "What does the Honorable Court think 
 of the opinion?" Mr. Greenfield wrote under it: "The Court 
 agrees with the learned Counsel." The opinion reached the Town 
 Board that day and at the meeting of the following day the Town 
 Board voted to Bond the Town to the legal limit for money for 
 road improvement. 
 
 Mr. Marsh, Supervisor of Southfield — the Town in which the 
 Boulevard was located — was extra careful in his procedure, fear- 
 ing if peradventure any mistakes were made the officers of the 
 Town might be responsible, preferred before acting, to have a 
 Town Meeting to consider the matter, so I got him to call the 
 Town Meeting at the large hall at Bachman's Brewery, and I 
 immediately interested several citizens who were interested in 
 the matter to canvass the town and get out as large a number of 
 taxpayers as possible for I was sure upon a good understanding, 
 the meting would approve of the sale of the Bonds. I sought 
 the aid of Hon. Daniel T. Cornell, and Mr. Robert W. Nelson, 
 an able and forceful man residing at Giffords to be present to 
 aid me if any serious opposition arose, but on arriving at the 
 Hall which was quite well filled, we found general unanimity, in 
 favor of the bonding, as all had become quite well informed upon 
 the matter. Mr. Marsh as Supervisor of the Town, presided, 
 stated the object of the meeting and I offered the resolution, that 
 it was the sense of the meeting to bond the town to the limit 
 for road improvement and ordered the town board to take such 
 action. The resolution was passed unanimously — seeing every- 
 thing favorable I thought it a good time to settle the disposition 
 of the money resulting from the sale, which as I remember, would 
 be about $300,000. I offered a resolution that $120,000 of this 
 money should go for the improvement of the Southfield Boule- 
 vard, and the balance to be spent in improving such highways 
 in the town as the Highway Commissioners of the Town desig- 
 
 12 
 
nated, with the improvement to be under the Control of the 
 Board of Supervisors, as under the County Road Law, and the 
 supervision of the work to be by the County Road Engineer, who 
 was Henry P. Morrison. This passed unanimously. The other 
 towns got into line and followed suit. And thus we got $800,000 
 of good road improvement, which at this time would cost at 
 least $2,000,000 — which we would not have had if some one had 
 not persisted in urging the Bonding of the Towns. This fairly 
 well completed the net work of all the important roads of the 
 County. 
 
 GREATER NEW YORK 
 
 The first I learned of Andrew H. Green's pi an of consolidation 
 for a Greater City was through the Press. The area as stated 
 in the published newspapers did not include Staten Island. This 
 I deemed a mistake for many reasons, and so I determined to call 
 upon Mr. Green — who was rightly termed (Father of Greater 
 New York) I knew Mr. Green very well back from the days 
 when he and Fred Law Olmstead (who lived on Staten Island 
 on the shore near Eltingville) planned the Central Park, so I 
 made my way to Mr. Green's office on Broadway, Manhattan, 
 and on entering after greetings he pointed to the map of pro- 
 posed Greater New York hanging on the wall, I did not enthuse 
 very much and he exclaimed apparently somewhat disappointed: 
 "Why don't you approve ?" I said : "Yes, but you have left out 
 the best part." "What do you mean Staten Island?" And at 
 that moment before discussion had commenced Col. Waring 
 came in and after greetings Mr. Green turned to Col. Waring 
 and said : "Mr. Tysen thinks we should have taken Staten Island 
 into the proposed Greater City." "Ha, Ha, Staten Island is too 
 far down the Bay," exclaimed the Colonel — "about 50 years 
 hence, when you have much larger population, and much fewer 
 mosquitoes you may consistently ask to be included in the City — 
 Ha, Ha, Ha." The Colonel stayed but a few minutes, and when 
 he left I told Mr. Green that the including Staten Island in the 
 proposed Greater City was what I came to see him about, and so 
 the discussion commenced. Mr. Green deeply interested in his 
 plan, and anxious to make no mistake was a very attentive 
 listener while I recounted the many advantages Staten Island 
 would bring to the Greater City. After quite a long talk, Mr. 
 Green thanked me for calling and said I had opened up to him 
 important matters connected with consolidation, which gave him 
 food for thought, and said he intended to go over the matter 
 thoroughly, and asked me to call again in a few days. When I 
 called as I entered his office he pointed with much enthusiasm to 
 his map of Greater New York with Staten Island taken in, 
 naturally I felt much pleased. In a short time the public became 
 
 u 
 
aware of the change in the scope of the plan, and there was much 
 opposition on the Island to becoming a part of the Greater 
 City. In a short time consolidation was submitted to a vote of 
 the people of the territory to be included. There were two sides 
 to the question — and naturally I felt anxious about the result of 
 the referendum. I took an active part in favor of going into the 
 city — acting with Dr. Eccleston of St. John's Church — Hon. Dan- 
 iel T. Cornell — Robert W. Nelson — Henry T. Metcalfe — Charles 
 Griffith — Jacob Houseman — General Satterlee — I. K. Martin — 
 Judge Benedict and others. We made a lively canvass with the 
 result that Richmond County gave a larger majority in favor of 
 consolidation (proportioned to its population) than any other 
 of the Civic sections included in the proposed Greater City. Con- 
 solidation was approved by a large majority and Greater New 
 York was born. Immediately important questions affecting the 
 Greater City forced attention upon the residents and taxpayers. 
 Among others was the question of better ferry facilities, between 
 Staten Island and Manhattan. The franchise for the Staten 
 Island and New York Ferry was shortly to terminate and a 
 struggle for control cropped out, with the Baltimore and Ohio 
 Railroad owners of the ferry boats and the Staten Island Rapid 
 Transit on the one side and H. H. Rogers owner of the Midland 
 Trolley System on the other. Our experience with the Baltimore 
 and Ohio had not been very re-assuring — they being very long of 
 promises and very short of performances — the people generally 
 took sides with the Roger's interest. 
 
 Mayor Low who was deeply interested in the welfare of 
 Staten Island invited a delegation of the Staten Island Chamber 
 of Commerce to meet him at his home to discuss the ferry ques- 
 tion. The Chamber accepted and a large committee of the 
 Chamber headed by Mr. Gaugy Irving, Chairman and Cornelius 
 G. KolfT, Secretary had a most satisfactory discussion upon the 
 ferry question, and found the Mayor deeply interested, and at his 
 suggestion a committee of three of the Chamber were named 
 for future conferences. The Chamber named Mr. Irving, Mr. 
 George J. Greenfield and David J. Tysen as such Committee and 
 said Committee remained in active participation during the whole 
 of the future contest over the ferry. 
 
 The Committee soon got into communication with Mr. Rogers 
 and found him desirous and willing to do a fair thing for Staten 
 Island in giving it better ferry facilities. After several meetings 
 upon which the ferry question was freely discussed in all its 
 branches, we got Mr. Roger to agree practically to all our re- 
 quests — which included building five new large boats — making 
 the trip in 20 minutes a 3 cent fare — and the building of new 
 suitable ferry buildings at both St. George at foot of Arrietta 
 Street and South Ferry, New York. 
 
 14 
 
Numerous meetings were held pursuant to the call of the Com- 
 mittee, in different places (mostly along the easterly shore of the 
 Island — from Clifton to Port Richmond) and the citizens seemed 
 quite unanimous in favor of the Rogers proposition which in- 
 cluded a new terminal at the foot of Arrietta Street and a ferry 
 to Port Richmond. The only serious opposition came from the 
 Staten Island Club at St. George, where the Manager of the 
 Baltimore & Ohio and Russell Bleeker, Secretary of the Dock 
 Commissioner made their headquarters — and these two, very ac- 
 tive in support of the Old Ferry Company seemed to dominate 
 the Staten Island Club. Thus matters went on until one evening 
 I got a phone message to the effect that the Dock Commissioner 
 would like to meet our Committee at the Staten Island Club at 
 8 o'clock that evening and that notice had been sent to Mr. 
 Greenfield and Mr. Irving. I agreed to be there. On arriving 
 at the Club I found Mr. Irving and Mr. Greenfield present, and 
 after waiting for Mr. Careere and Mr. Davenport to finish their 
 dinner we were invited by the President of the Club, Mr. Careere, 
 to their directors room upstairs. Instead of the Dock Commis- 
 sioner, his assistant was present. So we were seated around the 
 directors' table, and Mr. Davenport arose and stated we were 
 present largely at his request which was occasioned by a meeting 
 with the Dock Commissioner, who handed him what he called 
 (after reading) the ultimatum of the Pennsylvania Railroad Co. 
 He expaciated long and eloquently about the great Pennsylvania 
 Railroad Co. and said the interest of Staten Island would be best 
 served by accepting their proposals, etc. This led to a somewhat 
 acrimonious debate, which ended without result and the efforts 
 of our worthy friends of the Staten Island Club were abortive. 
 A few days after this meeting, Mr. Careere came to me on the 
 ferry boat and said I was making a mistake to oppose the 
 Pennsylvania Railroad Co. and Baltimore & Ohio, that it would 
 be impossible to defeat the two large corporations with their great 
 influence, etc., etc. Thus matters went on without much change 
 in favor of either party to the controversy — until one evening 
 Mr. Gaugy Irving of the Committee and Mr. Cornelius G. Kolff 
 called at my house. Mr. Irving had with him a printed phamplet, 
 — the recommendation of a Franchise to the Baltimore & Ohio 
 R. R. the then occupants and operators of the ferry offering much 
 better terms than ever before — including the building of 3 new 
 boats, and putting in good condition 2 or 3 of the old boats — to 
 make the trip in 25 minutes and 5 cent fare, and some reduction 
 on fares for teams and pay to the City the present rentals for 
 the slips at St. George and Manhattan, etc. — but did not offer 
 a 3 cent fare — as per Rogers offer. This offer being as Mr. 
 Irving said so good and near to the Rogers offer, that it would 
 be hard to get the City to change and put the Baltimore & Ohio 
 
out. Mr. Irving was much perturbed, and fearful that we would 
 loose our main contention for the 3 cent fare. We spent the 
 evening talking over the matter and I assured Mr. Irving the 
 battle was not yet lost and asked him to leave me the printed 
 recommendation of McDougal Hawks, Dock Commissioner — the 
 lease and franchise of the ferry to the Baltimore and Ohio. 
 
 The meeting of the Board of Sinking Fund Commission was 
 called for the next day at 10 o'clock at the City Hall and after 
 requesting my visitors to get as many there as possible. I took to 
 the study of the proposed lease — I found ear marks that the 
 lease had been prepared by an astute corporation lawyer in the 
 interest of the Baltimore and Ohio R. R. and not in the interest 
 of the City of New York or the Borough of Richmond. I found 
 many things objectionable in the proposed lease — but fearing the 
 influence of the Railroad and political influence of the Dock Com- 
 missioner, who was appointed on recommendation of Senator 
 Piatt I concluded to do what I had long considered the best — 
 to strike over the whole contention for a municipally owned and 
 operated ferry. Having acted with Mr. Rogers so far in the 
 ferry matter, and having been met by him in a fair and liberal 
 spirit, I deemed it but fair I should advise him of the determina- 
 tion to ask for a Municipal Ferry. Knowing that Mr. Rogers 
 generally got to his office quite early I took an early boat in order 
 to see him before going to the meeting. Mr. Rogers was punctual 
 as usual and I had his ear immediately and he at ance acquiesced 
 in the Municipal Ferry proposition as he stated that he per- 
 sonally was only concerned in securing a good approach to the 
 ferry for his Railroad and did not want to be shut out by his 
 competitors who were, as he stated acting selfish and mean, — so 
 the meeting came on and the McDougal Hawk's proposed lease 
 was read and discussed and vigorously supported by Mr. Board- 
 man of Tracy, Boardman & Piatt — and I was introduced as the 
 Representative of the Chamber of Commerce by its Chairman, 
 Mr. Irving to speak in opposition. I began by claiming that it 
 was an outrage to compel the people of Richmond to pay rent 
 for the terminals, especially at South Ferry, to pay I said for 
 putting our feet on the soil of Manhattan. I paid my respects 
 to the Dock Commissioner and criticized the proposed lease, 
 showing that in many respects especially in the building of three 
 boats only instead of five and the asking for a 5 cent fare in- 
 stead of 3 cents offered by Mr. Rogers, and on I think 14 differ- 
 ent points I claimed the proposed lease was defective in protect- 
 ing the interest of the people and then to the consternation of 
 everyone present I launched my demand for a Municipal Ferry 
 — immediately I was asked to desist by Mr. Edward Lauterbach, 
 Attorney for Mr. Rogers and Mr. Allen the Confidential Agent 
 of Mr. Rogers — but when I told them I had seen Mr .Rogers and 
 
he acquiesced they ceased opposition — and I went on with my 
 argument that it was the City's duty to furnish us a good con- 
 nection with the other Boroughs and since the ferry was our 
 only connection it was their bounden duty to furnish us the best 
 ferry possible. That when we consider the vast amount the City 
 has spent in bridges and tunnels to connect the other boroughs 
 and give them a five cent fare practically from the limits of 
 each of the 4 Boroughs to the limits of the others — and that, 
 Richmond was paying as much if not more than the other Bor- 
 oughs and they get the benefits for all these great improvements 
 and we didn't, it would be a burlesque upon justice to deny to 
 Richmond the cost of a good ferry. 
 
 What I asked has Brooklyn and Queens, Manhattan or Bronx 
 to say against this proposition, when the people of Richmond 
 are taxed to pay as much if not more on every dollar of assess- 
 ment for all the facilities furnished by the City at great expense 
 — what in justice have they against giving this comparatively 
 small amount to Richmond. This and many other arguments, 
 which since have become quite hackeneyed were shot at the 
 Board. The Board seemed interested paying strict attention — and 
 then when I charged that the proposed lease was the work of an 
 astute Corporation Lawyer and in the interest of the Baltimore & 
 Ohio R. R. and not in the interests of New York or the Borough 
 of Richmond the controller asked McDougal Hawks, the Dock 
 Commissioner, if the Corporation Counsel had approved the pro- 
 posed lease, and Hawks said he had sent him a copy. Has he ap- 
 proved it insisted Mr. Grout, and Hawks had to say : "No." "Then 
 you should not have presented it here". Their plumes dropped — 
 the handwriting was on the wall, they were whipped : the hearing 
 was closed, among the many who congratulated me was Henry 
 P. Morrison, who came beaming, saying: "they have met their 
 Waterloo and I congratulate you upon the victory". I was not so 
 sanguine of victory, knowing the tenacity of soulless corpora- 
 tions, but he was right — for nothing more was ever heard of the 
 lease to the Baltimore & Ohio R. R. In the hall after the hear- 
 ing I met the Mayor and he asked me to call at his office the 
 next afternoon — I went, and was received very cordially by the 
 Mayor, who said he had been much interested in my argument the 
 day before, and said I could count on getting free terminals both 
 at St. George and at South Ferry and that he would do his best 
 to give us a good ferry, but he thought the City was not pre- 
 pared to embark upon Municipal ownership, and operation of the 
 Ferry — I asked him why? He said: "Judging from intimations 
 dropped by the Controller, who lived in Brooklyn, that Borough 
 would be very strongly opposed to Municipal ownership and op- 
 eration of the ferry — that every ferry in Brooklyn was being 
 operated at a loss — their earnings having been seriously impaired 
 
 17 
 
by the bridges and tunnels, and that if the City should take over 
 the Staten Island Ferry every Ferry Company in Brooklyn would 
 strike to have the City relieve them of their burden. I remember 
 I became quite indignant that Brooklyn should take this selfish 
 stand, and came back with the statement that that position was 
 ridiculous, because Brooklyn had received much better facilities 
 in bridges and tunnels as City charge, it was a far cry for them 
 to oppose a good ferry to Staten Island. Give us bridges and 
 tunnels and we will let the ferry take care of itself, and much 
 more along the same lines. When Mayor Low turned to me and 
 said those arguments are unanswerable, and I will support the 
 Municipal proposition, if after a fair trial, we cannot get the 
 two contending parties to agree to work together and give us a 
 good ferry such as I think the City should provide for Staten 
 Island. I think it but fair to give them a fair chance, etc. I told 
 him I was sure they would not come together, but a trial could 
 do no harm. We talked over the best way of procedure to ac- 
 complish this result, and the Mayor thought it best to have a 
 committee of three of the Sinking Fund Commission to consider 
 and report on the Staten Island Ferry. I told him I thought that 
 would be a mistake. That it would be much better for him to 
 ask to be appointed a Committee of one to consider and report 
 on the Ferry matters, as with a Committee of one there could 
 be no disagreement, and no jealously and the people of Staten 
 Island would be pleased to have the matter in his hands — and 
 after discussion he concluded he would ask to be made a com- 
 mittee of one on the Staten Island Ferry — at the next meeting 
 he was appointed a Committee of one on the Staten Island Ferry 
 to report at an early meeting of the board. The Mayor requested 
 me to call again in a few days as he thought he would like some 
 information on several points. I called and found that he had 
 prepared what he termed a tentative report — which upon read- 
 ing I found liberal, just and fair. I did not suggest any change, 
 but a few additions — I told him of the lack of overhead space in 
 the team gangways of the old boats, that teams coming down 
 loaded too high were not allowed to go aboard — that a man with 
 a measuring rod stood ready to measure the height of loads, etc., 
 and this was a great handicap and injury to the Island, that the 
 team passage ways were some four feet less in height than those 
 of the Pennsylvania R. R. ferries — also that I thought it wise to 
 include in his report that boats and slips should be built to take 
 passengers at both decks, as this would facilitate loading and un- 
 loading and save much time, and that this was especially im- 
 portant as there were only two slips at the South Ferry available 
 for the Staten Island business — and that double deck loading and 
 unloading would largely increase the capacity and value of the 
 slips. 
 
 18 
 
The Mayor agreed with me that it would be wise to include 
 these two suggestions in his report — at an early meeting of the 
 Sinking Fund Commission the Mayor's report was unanimously 
 adopted. 
 
 The following is a copy of the Mayor's report : 
 
 April 1, 1903. 
 
 To the Honorable the Commissioners of the Sinking Fund: 
 
 On the 19th of March I received from Mr. C. S. Sims, Vice- 
 President of the Staten Island Rapid Transit Railway Company, 
 the letter which is hereto attached. By this communication the 
 company offers to "convey the property in question at St. George 
 (857 feet of water front) for the consideration named in our 
 communication to the Commissioner of Docks and Ferries dated 
 February 9, 1903, which consideration, we understand, has al- 
 ready been approved by the Comptroller's appraiser, subject, be- 
 fore making conveyance, to the following conditions." 
 
 The conditions are important, if a lease were to be made with 
 either railroad company on the lines that have been heretofore 
 under discussion. I think, however, that the letter justified the 
 City in assuming that it can command the ownership of the 
 terminals at both ends of the Staten Island Ferry and that the 
 City is now, therefore, for the first time, in a position to con- 
 sider what sort of a lease it desires to make, in view of all the 
 circumstances of the case and without particular regard to the 
 terms that have heretofore been offered. 
 
 Taking up the question from this point of view, the first thing 
 to be remembered is that the lease now to be made is to run for 
 twenty-five years. It is not too much to say that a lease running 
 for this length of time will determine the destiny of the Borough 
 of Richmond for the whole quarter of a century. I am of the 
 opinion, therefore, that The City of New York should now say 
 what sort of a ferry service Staten Island ought to have, and that 
 whatever lease the City makes should be conditioned upon the 
 giving of such service. When it is considered that every other 
 borough of the City is soon to receive the benefit of vast out- 
 lays for municipal subways and for bridges built at the public 
 expense, I think that is a matter of the utmost importance to 
 secure for the Borough of Richmond substantially as good service 
 by ferry, in point of frequency of trips as is now given by the 
 ferries between Manhattan and Brooklyn, and, in point of fares, 
 the rates now prevailing upon the Brooklyn Bridge; that is to 
 say, for passengers the rates upon the bridge railroad, and for 
 vehicles the rates upon the bridge company. In other words, in 
 
 is 
 
my judgment, there ought to be during all the busy hours of 
 the twenty-four a ferry service to St. George every ten minutes, 
 so that Staten Islanders need not be compelled to consult a time- 
 table. The fare on the Brooklyn Bridge railroad is 3 cents, with 
 ten tickets for 25 cents. The rates for vehicles on the bridge 
 roadway range from 3 cents for a single horse, led, to 10 cents 
 for a pair of horses or an automobile. There should also be 
 freight ferries to Stapleton and Port Richmond, running as often 
 as may be necessary, and with low fares. 
 
 It would be the height of folly, it seems to me, to enter upon 
 a twenty-five year lease with the expectation that any of the 
 boats in the present service, except the "Robert Garrett" and the 
 "Castleton", should be used for a day longer than is necessary 
 to replace them. The "Robert Garrett" and the "Castleton" 
 should be rebuilt so as to provide as much headroom for vehicles 
 as the Pennsylvania Railroad ferry boats on the North River. 
 At the present time, I am told, the upper decks of these boats 
 are some four feet lower than the Pennsylvania Railroad stand- 
 ard. These boats, also, should be modernized in every respect. 
 1 estimate that six new boats, of the best pattern, will be neces- 
 sary to give the service that seems to me called for. 
 
 If these premises are accepted as sound, several conclusions 
 follow inevitably : 
 
 A. That with such a ferry service the increase of population 
 upon the island will be very rapid, and consequently that the 
 assessed value of the Borough will similarly increase. 
 
 B. That, in particular, both of the railroad companies in- 
 terested in transit upon Staten Island will profit greatly from 
 such service; (1) because of the increase of travel, coming from 
 Staten Island's growth in population; (2) because of the de- 
 velopment of the island, for business purposes, certain to follow 
 a modernized ferry service that gives to the island both frequency 
 of trips and low rates of fare; and (3) because of the increase 
 in the value of their real estate, of which both companies own a 
 great deal. 
 
 C. That both the City and the railroad companies, being all 
 interested in bringing about these results, should co-operate in 
 making such a ferry service possible. 
 
 It must be assumed, I suppose, that during the first few years 
 of such a ferry service the expense account will outrun the in- 
 come. I think it may be taken for granted, however, that within 
 ten years, and, perhaps, in a much shorter period a ferry giving 
 such service will meet its running expenses, including all neces- 
 sary charges, and interest on the cost of the new boats, and pro- 
 vision for a sinking fund to liquidate the bonds issued for their 
 purchase. 
 
 20 
 
I submit herewith, therefore, an outline of the essential terms 
 of a proposed lease, based upon these ideas. This lease con- 
 templates the formation of an operating company, by both of the 
 railroads, concerned, which shall not be expected to pay divi- 
 dends, but whose expense and income account shall be balanced 
 every year. It contemplates the expenditure by the City of $925,- 
 000, more or less, for the purchase and improvement of terminals, 
 including terminals at Stapleton and Port Richmond, and that 
 the City shall waive any charge for interest upon this outlay, 
 or for the use of slips, or for the franchise privileges, until it 
 is earned by the ferry. On the other hand, it contemplates the 
 payment to the City, by each railroad company, of }^c. for each 
 passenger carried to or from the ferry at St. George. This pay- 
 ment is to be made without any regard to the outcome of running 
 the ferry ; but if at the end of any year there is a deficiency on 
 account of the operation of the ferry, one-third of the deficiency 
 may be deducted from this sum, and the remainder of the de- 
 ficiency is to be borne equally by the two railroad companies. 
 The lease also contemplates that when the ferry company earns 
 a profit — as it is likely to do long before the expiration of the 
 lease — the profits shall be used, first of all, to make good any of 
 the deficiencies which have been thus incurred, and, afterwards, 
 that the profits shall go to the City, as payment on account of 
 rents, slips and franchise. 
 
 The terms of the proposed lease, herewith submitted, are ex- 
 pressed in layman's phrase, but the Corporation Counsel informs 
 me that such a lease can easily be put in legal form, if this Board 
 approves the plan, and the railroads, whose co-operation is neces- 
 sary, will agree to co-operate. 
 
 The railroads on Staten Island last year collected, together, 
 about thirteen million single fares. Of this number, I estimate 
 that six millions were fares of passengers going to and from the 
 ferry. On this basis, the contribution asked for from the rail- 
 roads is a little less than J^c. per fare, taking the local and ferry 
 travel together. It is apparent, also, that the growth of popula- 
 tion on Staten Island certain to follow upon such a ferry service 
 will increase the local business of these roads quite as much as 
 it will the ferry business, and probably more. I believe, there- 
 fore, that the proposition is essentially a just one, and that the 
 railroads should not hesitate to accept it, in consideration of the 
 fact that the City proposes to make an out-lay of nearly a million 
 dollars in order to improve the terminal facilities, and also to 
 waive, until it is earned, the payment of a sum for rent and 
 franchise that may fairly be estimated at $75,000 a year, even at 
 the low rates at which the City borrows money. 
 
 It goes without saying that the terminal arrangements at St. 
 George must be made in such a way as to be just to both railroad 
 
 21 
 
companies; and it will be perceived that if either one secures a 
 larger proportion of the travel than the other, that one, in paying 
 y 2 c. per passenger, will pay to the Gity proportionately more than 
 the other. In other words, each railroad will pay for access to 
 the ferry in proportion to the number of passengers that it car- 
 ries to and fro. 
 
 If the Board of Sinking Fund Commissioners approves of this 
 proposition I suggest that the matter be referred back to the Dock 
 Commissioner, in connection with the Mayor, for the negotiation 
 of a lease as nearly as possible on the line indicated. 
 
 Seth Low, Mayor. 
 
 Proposed plan for a lease of the Staten Island ferry, Upon the 
 Assumption that the City owns the Terminals at both ends. 
 
 The City wants — 
 
 1. A ferry to St. George. 
 
 2. A freight ferry to Stapleton. 
 
 3. A freight ferry to Port Richmond. 
 
 1. As to St. George: Between Whitehall and St. George the 
 City wants trips every ten minutes, from 6 a. m., to 7.30 p. m. ; 
 from 7.30 p. m. to 1 a. m., trips every half hour ; from 1 a. m. to 
 6 a. m. trips every hour. 
 
 Between Whitehall and St. George the passenger fares to be 
 charged upon the ferry to be those now prevailing on the railroad 
 on the Brooklyn Bridge, viz: 
 
 Single fares for passengers (10 tickets to 
 
 be sold for 25 cents) 3 cents 
 
 For vehicles, etc., the rates prevailing on the Brooklyn Bridge 
 roadway : 
 
 Single horse, led 3 cents 
 
 Single horse and wagon 5 cents 
 
 Teams 10 cents 
 
 Automobiles of any kind 10 cents 
 
 2. As to Stapleton : The City wants fifteen round trips a day, 
 and more as the traffic may demand them; hours to be fixed by 
 agreement between the operating company and the City. 
 
 The fares upon this ferry, for passengers, to be 8 cents for a 
 single ticket, or 75 cents for ten tickets. For vehicles, etc., the 
 same fares as to St. George. 
 
 3. As to Port Richmond: The City wants trips and fares 
 on the same basis as to Stapleton. 
 
 22 
 
BOATS 
 
 All boats in the present service to be replaced by new as 
 rapidly as possible, except the "Robert Garrett" and the "Castle- 
 ton", and these two to be rebulit so as to provide as much head- 
 room for teams as the Pennsylvania Railroad ferry boats on the 
 North River give, and to be modernized in every respect. The 
 old boats to be sold as soon as possible. All new boats to have 
 a speed great enough to make twenty minutes to St. George the 
 average running time in all weathers. 
 
 PROPOSED TERMS OF LEASE 
 
 In order to accomplish these results, the City will lease the 
 ferry to a company representing both the Baltimore and Ohio 
 and the trolleys equally, with the Dock Commissioner to repre- 
 sent the City, conditioned upon giving the service above outlined 
 upon the following terms : 
 
 1. The City to construct suitable terminals at Stapleton and 
 Port Richmond, and to improve the terminals at both St. George 
 and Whitehall and adapt them for double-deck ferry boats, and 
 to arrange the St. George terminal so as to give satisfactory 
 accommodation to both railroads. 
 
 2. The City to make no charge, either for the ferry slips or 
 for the franchise until payments on these accounts can be made 
 out of the net earnings. 
 
 3. On the other hand, each railroad company to pay to the 
 City one-half cent per passenger, both coming and going, for 
 access to the ferry at St. George. 
 
 4. The company operating the ferry shall be an operating 
 company only, its income and expenses to be balanced in the 
 manner outlined below : 
 
 (A) The new boats needed are to be bought by the ferry 
 company, and at the end of the lease, if the lease is not renewed, 
 the City is to buy the boats at their then book value ; boats that are 
 retained by the ferry company for immediate use to be valued, 
 and interest to be charged on the valuation by the operating com- 
 pany, together with a deterioration of . . per cent., to be marked 
 off each year. 
 
 (B) The company operating the ferry to keep its books open 
 at all times to inspection by the City and by both railroad com- 
 panies. It shall be permitted to charge 2y 2 per cent, on all op- 
 erating expenses as an operating commission to be divided equally 
 between the two railroads. It shall charge this and all other 
 actual expenses, including interest on bonds to be issued for cost 
 of boats and a suitable sum for a sinking fund, for repairs to 
 slips and terminals, for dredging, etc., to an "Income and Ex- 
 
 23 
 
pense Account," to which also, it shall credit the earnings. All 
 items of expense to be generally approved by both railroads and 
 by the Dock Commissioner on behalf of the City. 
 
 (C) If at the end of the year their is a debit balance in the 
 "Income and Expense Account", one-third of the amount may 
 be deducted from the sum due the City on account of the pay- 
 ment of one-half cent per passenger from the two railroads; 
 the remainder to be divided equally between the two roads. 
 When there is a credit balance at the end of the year, said bal- 
 ance shall be used (a) to make good, pro rata, the losses that 
 may have been shared by the two railroad companies and the 
 sum that may have been deducted from the payment to the City 
 of one-half cent per passenger; (b) to pay the City its customary 
 charge for the ferry slips and its usual franchise tax; (c) as 
 additional payment to the City against the risk it runs of receiving 
 no return at all on account of slips or franchises. 
 
 On motion, the report was accepted and the matter referred 
 back to the Dock Commissioner, in connection with the Mayor, 
 for negotiation of a lease as nearly as possible on the lines indi- 
 cated. 
 
 N. Taylor Phillips, Secretary. 
 
 After several meetings and much negotiating between the 
 Mayor and the two interested contestants for the Ferry Fran- 
 chise, the Mayor said to me that he had come to the conclusion 
 that I was right and that no satisfactory arrangement could be 
 made with the Baltimore and Ohio and the Rogers interests, and 
 that he was ready to stand for a City owned and operated Ferry 
 — as Roosevelt would say, I was de-light-ed. 
 
 We then discussed the best way to proceed. The Mayor 
 thought it best for him to take the matter up with the Controller 
 as he was probably the strongest objector to the Municipal Ferry 
 proposition, we would keep our own counsels, and for me to call 
 again in a few days. To my delight the Mayor said after a long 
 and serious discussion with Mr. Grout — he persuaded him it was 
 his duty to support Richmond in its demand for a Municipal 
 Ferry. 
 
 He told me he had an appointment with Mr. Fornes, Chairman 
 of the Board of Aldermen, to go over the matter with him, and 
 he expected there would be no serious opposition on the part of 
 Fornes, and if everything went as he expected we could reason- 
 ably count on our City owned Ferry. 
 
 I called again in a few days and the Mayor assured me that 
 in his judgment success was assured. 
 
 In due course of time it was concluded by the Board of Sink- 
 ing Fund to take over the Old Ferry Boats and the terminals 
 and to operate the Ferry along the lines of Mayor Low's report 
 and thus the Municipal Ferry was launched. 
 
 24 
 
BUILDING OF NEW FERRY BOATS 
 
 The Committee of the Staten Island Chamber of Commerce 
 then urged the building of new Ferry Boats, and the Board re- 
 quested A. Cary Smith, a noted Naval Architect, who at that time 
 was receiving favorable notice in the public press for what was 
 called the splendid boats that Smith had planned for the N. Y. 
 and Long Branch service. They were certainly splendid types, 
 and are much admired to this day, as they plow the waters of 
 the upper and lower bays on their way to the Highlands — Smith 
 was so obsessed with the idea of perfection of these boats that 
 he proposed to plan similar Boats for the Staten Island Ferry. 
 These boats were what are known as single enders, with little 
 or no accommodation for teams, and had to back out and turn 
 around on leaving their slips and were practically unsuited for 
 double deck loading and unloading. 
 
 Mr. Smith never deigned to discuss with me the merits of his 
 single end boats for the Staten Island service, but once, and that 
 was in answer to my assertion that it would be extra hazardous 
 to turn around at the Battery in the very vortex of water craft 
 activity — when he blurted out : "Rot, we are doing it every 
 day". I returned : "Rot, you are not doing it every day — Rot, 
 you are only turning half way round, and Rot, only a couple of 
 times a day instead of every few minutes as will be necessary 
 in the Staten Island Ferry service. Rot, in no such congestion 
 as at the Battery — Rot, your proposed boats are entirely unsuited 
 for the Staten Island Service for many reasons, and a little 
 common sense would tell you so — good day". This was my last 
 meeting with Mr. Smith. If he had taken a lesson from Frank- 
 lin, who said : "Anybody can learn something from anybody 
 else". I am not sure I am quoting poor Richard correctly — the 
 meaning intended to be conveyed was that the learned can learn 
 from plain people. The sum of human knowledge is so illimit- 
 able that after the Solomons and Solons and Cary Smiths had 
 absorbed to their amplitude, there would be a large "left over" 
 held in trust by just ordinary folks. Mr. Smith was so obsessed 
 with his own importance that he resented any opposition to his 
 propositions, he seemed to act as if it were impertinent for an 
 outsider, not an Architect, to question his creations, and as the 
 saying goes — "The King can do no wrong", so his highness, A 
 Cary Smith could make no mistake — it was "lese majestie" to 
 question the wisdom of his determinations — and of course, I was 
 at great disadvantage in appealing to the Mayor — a Farmer and 
 Real Estate owner to question a successful and renowned boat 
 designer, an architect selected at the Mayor's instance, however, 
 I persisted in my opposition and made some impression on the 
 Mayor and Comptroller and held the matter up until vacation 
 
 26 
 
time coming on gave some respite, and then the Elections follow- 
 ing Mayor Low was defeated for re-election, and though he had 
 about two months to act upon the Ferry matter, he, the good and 
 fair man took the ground that the incoming administration hav- 
 ing to shoulder the responsibility of building and running the 
 Ferry should have the determination of the size and character 
 of the Ferry Boats — and so we had to begin de-novo — with the 
 new administration. 
 
 Realizing the great disadvantage as a rank outsider in treating 
 with a professional overzealous of his calling and standing in 
 his profession, I determined to steer clear of that mistake by 
 seeking an ally of professional standing to add strength and 
 emphasis to my position. In casting about for such aid, I was 
 fortunate in thinking of Mr. Walter C. Kerr, resident in the 
 Country Club Colony of Dongan Hills — I got in touch with Mr. 
 Kerr at his New York office, stated to him my troubles and 
 enlisted his aid. Mr. Kerr was from the first much interested, 
 and soon became enthusiastic in the subject, and it did not take 
 long to satisfy him that the single enders of the Long Branch 
 Ferry type were not suitable or adapted to the service required 
 on the Staten Island Ferry. Mr. Kerr was a member of engi- 
 neering firm of Westinghouse, Church & Kerr — he had the ad- 
 vantage of large experience in general engineering and the pres- 
 tige that came from membership in a distinguished engineering 
 firm. We took the matter of the boats to the new administration 
 with the result that A. Cary Smith was dropped as designer, and 
 a new firm (Messrs. Millard and Maclean) was appointed — get- 
 ting in touch with the new naval architects, Mr. Kerr was suc- 
 cessful in satisfying them that the type of boat favored by 
 Smith was entirely unsuited for our ferry and thus the most 
 important point was won. We then set to work studying change 
 and improvements in the boats that we thought necessary. First, 
 we took up getting rid of the smoke, noise and disagreeableness 
 that came to the upper saloon from the men's cabin and planned 
 the stairways outside the cabin, thus eliminating the cabins from 
 the upper saloon — as now in the new boats — so that today one 
 sitting in the upper cabin, so far as any disagreeableness is con- 
 cerned, one would not know a men's cabin existed. 
 
 Next we considered the ventilation of the lower cabins to 
 get rid of the noxious air that came to the upper saloon, espe- 
 cially in the closed season, and those who remember the fetid, 
 foul atmosphere that came up the stairway, vitiating the air in 
 the upper saloon, can appreciate the great change. Next we 
 considered increasing the height of the gang ways for teams, as 
 per the recommendation in Mayor Low's report — also that the 
 boats and docks should be arranged to receive and discharge 
 passengers from both decks, as also recommended by Mayor Low. 
 
 26 
 
Next we sought to improve the heating system. Cold and 
 windy days the boats were very uncomfortable, and the old slid- 
 ing windows made it very unpleasant in windy weather. 
 
 Next we asked that the bridges on the docks at both levels 
 should be lengthened considerably, so as to make it easier for 
 both passengers and teams, especially at high and low water. 
 Other minor details as to seat arrangement were suggested. All 
 of the recommendations were included in the plans and specifi- 
 cations, in fact, everything that we suggested, except additional 
 horse power, Mr. Kerr deemed necessary to enable the boats to 
 keep their schedule in very bad windy weather. Mr. Kerr did 
 not insist upon this however. He said the architects were broad 
 minded and always agreeable. Mr. Kerr had nothing but praise 
 for the new naval architects, and hence today we have a highly 
 satisfactory, if not the best ferry in the world. Much of this is 
 due to Mr. Kerr, for his diplomatic manner and forceful and able 
 presentation was largely responsible for our success. Mr. Kerr 
 has passed away — gone to his reward — left a vacancy hard to 
 fill — and the people of Staten Island, especially those who use 
 the ferry should hold him in grateful remembrance. 
 
 TRANSFERS WITH THE INTERBOROUGH. 
 
 Thinking it very dubious about any help from a tunnel — I cast 
 about for some other help for the transportation interests of our 
 Islanders, and finally decided to try for transfers from our 
 Municipal Ferry and the Interborough City lines. As a prelimi- 
 nary I had several men to count the passengers on the Ferry 
 Boats, going to New York for different hours on different days 
 and to count the number of such passengers taking the elevated 
 lines, the subway, and the surface street lines, thus determining 
 the number of those who walked, etc. I then informed myself 
 as to the result of the commission hour travel and the Sunday 
 concession of a 5 cent fare, and also the result of a straight 5 
 cents fare on the elevated lines. Thus prepared I sought an in- 
 terview with Mr. Shonts, the President of the Interborough 
 Lines. After stating the object of my visit, I gave him the result 
 of my count of passengers, etc., and expressed to him my opinion 
 judging from the experience of Jay Gould, who previously owned 
 or dominated the elevated systems in New York, that it would 
 be a good paying proposition for the Interborough to agree to 
 transfers upon the basis of three cents to his Company and 2 cents 
 to the City lines. He heard me with patience and then requested 
 that I call again in about a week. In the meantime, he would 
 check up the proposition and would be prepared to consider the 
 matter more intelligently. I called at the time appointed, and 
 Mr. Shonts said he had in connection with Mr. Hedley, the Vice- 
 President, gone somewhat into the matter and could not see any 
 
 27 
 
I 
 
 advantage of such an arrangement of transfers as I had proposed ; 
 that his lines all met the boats at South Ferry, and if any of our 
 passengers wanted to go north they had to take his lines, and it 
 did not seem good business to give up 2 cents per passenger un- 
 necessarily. I had given him a synopsis of the benefits of the 
 transfers with my reasons, which were balancing the traffic on 
 his lines, and that he got more per resident in Richmond than 
 from those of any other borough. I asked him if he had fully 
 considered the balancing of the traffic on his lines, and he said 
 that he had, and that they had concluded that the tunnel to 
 Brooklyn which was under construction and the tunnels to New 
 Jersey would balance the traffic. I told him I thought he was 
 mistaken — that the tunnel to Brooklyn would only balance the 
 traffic on the tunnel system and would not affect in the least, 
 his elevated system, or his street level lines, and that as far as 
 the New Jersey lines helping to balance the traffic, I thought 
 upon mature reflection that they, upon the whole, would increase 
 the unbalanced condition. I said the Courtlandt Street and the 
 Morton Street tunnels probably would not affect it much one way 
 or the other but that the Pennsylvania tunnel at 34th Street would 
 affect the condition adversely, that a large majority of the pas- 
 sengers coming into the City most of them were for the down 
 town sections and hence would crowd into cars already loaded 
 going down in the morning thus very largely exaggerating the 
 unbalanced condition — he made no answer. I told him the effect 
 of the Commission hours and the cutting the rate to 5 cents by 
 Gould, etc. I then asked him if he had considered the question 
 that patrons on Staten Island were worth more to him than those 
 from the other Boroughs, and he smiling said he had not. I 
 told him that was a very, if not the most important feature of the 
 whole subject. I asked him if he knew what proportion of the 
 regular traffic that came to Manhattan from Brooklyn were 
 patrons of his lines; he said that he did not. I told him that I 
 had looked into that phase of the question. That I had taken 
 the pains to ascertain at the different ferries and at the Brooklyn 
 Bridge, and as near as I could determine not more than twenty- 
 five per cent of the passengers reaching Manhattan from Brook- 
 lyn, took his north and south lines. I told him in connection with 
 live, careful men we had at different hours in the day estimated 
 as near as possible the passengers coming over the Brooklyn 
 Bridge and found but few going down to the subway or up to 
 the elevated lines and the great horde coming over the bridge 
 walked directly to their places of business, and that was true 
 of all the ferries, for I found the great mass coming to Manhat- 
 tan took those lines in Brooklyn in connection with ferry taking 
 them near their destination in Manhattan to save an extra fare, 
 while if transfers were given as proposed, practically every pas- 
 
 28 
 
senger coming to the City from Staten Island would take his 
 lines, that all the passengers come to South Ferry, and all would 
 take his lines, and that he would practically own the Staten 
 Island traffic. And hence, on an average, every passenger com- 
 ing to the City from Staten Island would be worth four or five 
 from the other sections. He seemed dazed at this phase of the 
 problem, and said he would like to look further into the matter, 
 and asked me to call again in a week from that time. I did so 
 and Mr. Shonts said that he believed that the transfers would be 
 a good business proposition for his Company, and he would favor 
 them, but that it was a matter for the Directors to decide, and 
 that he would take it up with the Board. I considered this tanta- 
 mount to a victory, as Mr. Shonts seemed to have his own way 
 pretty generally in determining the general management of the 
 Interborough Lines. I then took the matter up with the Mayor, 
 arranged for an appointment with Mayor Gaynor, and in pre- 
 senting the matter he was a good listener until I came to the 
 proposed division of the 5 cents — 3 cents to the Interborough and 
 2 cents to the City, when he in indignation spoke out, the City 
 will not stand for that — that the ferry was now being run at a 
 loss, and the best the City should be asked to do was an equal 
 division of the nickle. 
 
 I told him that it was a victory to get the Interborough to agree 
 to the proposed division, as there was no power to coerce the 
 Company to give the transfers, and that they would get no other 
 benefits except the money received while the City would get the 
 increase in assessed values, and that it was no more than fair as 
 Richmond was paying her share for all the increase transportation 
 facilities to the other Boroughs — he turned and said that was 
 true and he would approve of the division as proposed. I then 
 thought it time to see Mr. Cromwell and acquaint him with what 
 had happened — told him I was not in Politics and that I would 
 turn the matter over to him, and he could have the honor and 
 the prestige of the securing the transfers would bring — and I 
 suggested that I arrange a meeting with Mr. Shonts, and I did 
 so, and we went together to Mr. Shonts' office, and Mr. Shonts 
 said what he had told me — that he deemed the transfers as pro- 
 posed a good business proposition, but that the matter was one 
 for the Directors to decide, and on leaving he requested me to 
 send him a synopsis of the arguments I had used, to refresh his 
 memory at the Board meeting — later I did this, and sent a copy 
 to Mr. Cromwell, who was off on his vacation. Mr. Cromwell 
 acknowledged the receipt and said it was most satisfactory, and 
 that he would take up the matter on his return and push it 
 through. Mr. Cromwell was one of the Committee, with Mr. 
 McAneny, and Borough President Miller, of the Bronx, appointed 
 by the Board to arrange with the Interborough the terms of the 
 
 29 
 
dual subway contract. And my object was to get the transfers 
 included in the contract. Mr. Cromwell returned and after a 
 few weeks, not hearing from him, I called on him, and he said 
 he had brought the matter up at one of their meetings and that 
 McAneny, Chairman of the Committee, said it was not the 
 psychological time, and that he had not further urged it then. 
 I said to Mr. Cromwell, that the Committee, as I learned from 
 the Press, was meeting every day, and he said yes, and the 
 evening also, as they were anxious to get the matter settled. I 
 said it seemed to be the psychological time for the other four 
 Boroughs, and that I would not be put off in that way — I would 
 let them know there was a man at the helm on Staten Island, 
 and a lot more which it is unnecessary to repeat here. Suffice 
 it to say that nothing was done ; no mention of the transfers were 
 put into the dual subway contract, and thus an opportunity to 
 help his constituents seldom offered to any man was lost; prac- 
 tically allowed to go by default, as Shonts had virtually agreed 
 to it, also the Mayor, and the Committee, who had expressed 
 itself willing to aid Richmond but could not see its way clear, as 
 it could not get a tenant to operate the tunnel extension as per 
 the dual subway agreement at a 5 cents fare ; but this would not 
 require any security or the sale of any corporate stock, in fact 
 no liability for the City, only the scratch of a pen — and to see it 
 all fail after what I had done was exasperating in the extreme. I 
 never received from Mr. Cromwell any explanation — and never 
 knew what sinister power prevented the success of this move. 
 
 Mr. Cromwell, whom I had previously supported, was beaten 
 in the race for re-election. 
 
 It is sometimes as necessary and important to oppose incon- 
 siderate and unwise movements, as to foster and approve those 
 desirable, and I have thought perhaps it would be interesting to 
 note some of these. 
 
 Shortly before Consolidation, Mr. William A. Johnston, a 
 most amiable, conscientious and worthy citizen, a member of the 
 Chamber of Commerce thought a topographical map of Staten 
 Island should be made, and offered a resolution at the meeting 
 of the Chamber to that effect. The matter was discussed and 
 it seemed the consensus of opinion that the Chamber favored the 
 motion, I felt that any money spent for that purpose would be 
 practically thrown away. I waited for some one else to raise 
 an objection, as I disliked to be the first to enter protest to Mr. 
 Johnston's motion, but as I deemed the matter too important to 
 allow it to pass I protested against such action, and said the City 
 would pay no notice to any map which we might make, and that 
 it would be money thrown away, which was much needed for 
 road improvements, as the City would recognize only its own 
 topographical maps for its street layout and sewer system which 
 
 30 
 
would cost hundreds of thousands of dollars, and probably years 
 to complete, the Chamber became satisfied, of the unwisdom of 
 the movement, as it would complicate matters and divert money 
 from the highway improvement and the Chamber could not afford 
 to use its influence in that direction, the resolution was laid upon 
 the table and nothing more ever came of it. Years afterward 
 Mr. Johnston thanked me, for the part I had taken, as he had 
 become convinced that it would have been a useless expenditure 
 of money to put it into a survey which he was satisfied then the 
 City would not adopt. 
 
 MOVE TO GET WATER FROM NEW JERSEY 
 
 After Consolidation, dissatisfaction with the water supply for 
 Richmond became quite urgent. It was charged that the water 
 supplied by the City was insufficient, dirty and so briny as to be 
 entirely unfit for steam boiler purposes, as the salt in the water 
 destroyed the pipes, boilers, etc., and these facts became known to 
 a New Jersey Corporation, (whose Corporate name I cannot 
 recall) engaged in various economical pursuits, especially the sup- 
 plying of water to many of the towns in New Jersey. The said 
 Corporation opened negotiations with the City to supply Rich- 
 mond Borough with water. 
 
 I took the trouble to investigate the said Corporation and my 
 opinion from what I learned, impressed me that it would be bad 
 policy for the City to become entangled with the New Jersey Cor- 
 portaion — that the service rendered in New Jersey was not sat- 
 isfactory. They would put mains only on streets well built up, 
 where the service would immediately pay, and that in short it 
 was a grasping, and selfish Company, in business strictly for its 
 own pocket. The Company had many friends on Staten Island 
 who favored arrangement by the City with the Company for a 
 water supply, and a meeting was called by the Board of Esti- 
 mate to consider the question. 
 
 Mr. Sidney F. Rawson was strenuously opposed to the propo- 
 sition of the making of a contract with the New Jersey Cor- 
 poration ; and as I had often told Mr. Rawson, that I knew there 
 was ample supply of water on Staten Island, he requested me 
 to come to the meeting, and a very interesting, though somewhat 
 acrimonious discussion, followed, those favorable to the Cor- 
 poration taking the ground that no supply of any consequence 
 could be had on Staten Island and that the only hope was with 
 the New Jersey Company. 
 
 Some one present had a copy of an opinion by Professor Hal- 
 lock of Columbia, that the water supply on Staten Island was very 
 limited, as it was shut off from any water from New Jersey by a 
 trap dike running through the Island into New Jersey, etc. I 
 
 31 
 
heard all that was urged in favor of the New Jersey Corpora- 
 tion and then told the Board that I knew there was ample supply 
 on Staten Island, and told them that I knew the opinion of Pro- 
 fessor Hallock and that I took the pains to go to Dr. Hallock's 
 home and discuss the matter with him. Dr. Hallock, on account 
 of the trap dike said that he was satisfied that no considerable 
 amount of water could come in through New Jersey. I asked 
 him the size and direction of the trap dike and he replied that 
 it was from the Palisades, dipped under Jersey City and Bayonne, 
 cropping out at Graniteville, and again at Linoleumville, thence 
 across the Sound and so on to Plainfield and beyond, that this 
 was bed rock going to the bowels of the earth, was impervious to 
 water, etc. 
 
 I told him so far I agreed with him, but what was to prevent 
 the water coming into Staten Island from New Jersey through 
 the Cretaceous formation, south of the tongue of trap rock or 
 north of said tongue. He at once saw the force of the con- 
 tention and admitted that the Cretaceous formation being par- 
 ticularly favorable for carrying water, that no doubt considerable 
 water came into Staten Island from New Jersey. I also told the 
 Board that the year before I had hired a large pump with seven 
 inches discharge and a boiler and engine set up on my property 
 between New Dorp and Grant City, and bored a well fifty feet 
 deep near a brook to take off the water pumped, and that I had 
 that pump going night and day for two weeks, with the result 
 that I had made no appreciable lowering of the water in that 
 area from test pipes driven 200 feet from the pump. I insisted 
 that I knew there was ample supply, of good potable water on 
 Staten Island and though not absolutely free from brackishness 
 caused by some seeping from the sea, yet better and purer than 
 that now being served to the people, and it would be wiser for 
 the City to get its supply from that source to tide us over until 
 such time as we could get water from the Catskills which I said 
 was sure to come, than to become entangled with the New Jersey 
 Corporation, the result was that the meeting adjourned without 
 action, and immediately Mr. John E. Bowe, then Deputy Com- 
 missioner of Water Supply got busy — got in touch with Professor 
 Halleck, and had him select places on the south side of the island 
 for four pumping stations. Professor Halleck, to save City 
 expense chose the line of Southfield Boulevard where City mains 
 were and four pumping stations were installed and ample supply 
 of water secured, and thus the City was saved from entering 
 into a contract what might have proven expensive and injurious 
 to the City, and probably retarding our connection with the Cat- 
 skills, etc., and Richmond secured sufficient very good water, 
 though not as soft as desirable until we finally got water from 
 the Catskills via Brooklyn. 
 
 32 
 
TRYING TO STEAL SLIP. 
 
 A villainous attempt to steal the use of one of the two piers 
 at Whitehall, South Ferry for the use of what was called the 
 "Blue Line" of the Jersey Central Railroad. A meeting was 
 called by McDougal Hawks, Dock Commissioner, at his office, 
 Pier 1, North River, to consider the question. The New Jersey 
 Central Railroad was represented by Mr. Boardman, a member 
 of the firm of Tracy, Boardman & Piatt. Mr. Piatt was a son 
 of Thomas Piatt, the Republican leader in the State. There was 
 a large meeting as this was very important to Staten Island as 
 there were only two piers at South Ferry available for the Staten 
 Island service. The meeting was opened by the Dock Commis- 
 sioner who stated the object of the meeting, etc. 
 
 Then Mr. Boardman, in high feather, told the meeting in a 
 very patronizing way the leasing of the pier would not injure the 
 Island service, and a lot of platitudes unworthy of a lawyer 
 occupying a respectable position in the profession, until Mr. 
 Howard R. Bayne, asked for an explanation how it came that 
 the counsel for the Staten Island Rapid Transit, should be here 
 advocating the leasing of this pier to the Jersey Central which 
 seemingly would injure the Staten Island Rapid Transit. When 
 Mr. Boardman replied, the gentleman (meaning Mr. Bayne) 
 was mistaken that he was not and had not been counsel for the 
 Staten Island Rapid Transit for over two years. It then occurred 
 to me that I had noticed in the Press that Mr. Boardman' s firm 
 had been retained by the Rapid Transit Commission to look after 
 the interest of the City in matters affecting the activities of that 
 commission, so I asked Mr. Boardman if he was counsel for 
 the Rapid Transit Commission — he said that he was — I asked him 
 if he had been retained, he said that he had — I said this was 
 astonishing — that the Rapid Transit Commission as I understood 
 it, was organized by the Legislature, to give better transit facili- 
 ties between the various Boroughs of the greater City, of which 
 Richmond is one, and that I had supposed that it was not only 
 the duty of the Commissioners and of the engineers, and lawyers 
 as well to aid and abet in every possible way better transit facili- 
 ties between the various Boroughs, and I could not understand 
 the ethics of professional propriety that would justify our lawyer 
 with our money in his pocket, coming here as the paid attorney 
 for a foreign corporation and stab the Borough of Richmond in 
 its very vitals on this important question of transit facilities. 
 
 This seemed a knockout blow, for Boardman never got on his 
 feet again, made no response, the meeting was adjourned, and 
 nothing more was ever heard of this monstrous outrage of taking 
 from the use of Statten Island Ferry one of the two slips which 
 had been in the use of that ferry from time immemorial. 
 
PROPOSAL TO BUILD A SUBWAY 
 
 TO STATEN ISLAND VIA NEW JERSEY 
 
 A committee of the Staten Island Chamber of Commerce and 
 the Civic League proposed the novel achievement of building a 
 direct tunnel from Manhattan to St. George by way of detour to 
 New Jersey. The members of this committee was composed of 
 leading and influenial citizens whose commanding position was 
 such, that many needed no other guarantee of the wisdom of their 
 proposition than their endorsement. A public meeting was called 
 at the Borough Hall with much flourish and much advertisement 
 by circulars and leaflets, and a large meeting was the result. I 
 had not, on account of my health, attended former meetings on 
 this subject, but one of the circulars with map of route, etc., 
 fell into my hands. After perusing this propaganda I deemed 
 it my duty to attend and oppose the novel, if not preposterous 
 proposition. The meeting was somewhat beligerent, but the 
 outcome was that no action was taken and nothing more was 
 ever heard of this novel proposition of building a direct subway 
 from Manhattan to St. George, Staten Island via New Jersey. 
 The following letter written at the time at the request of the 
 Staten Island Advance will give better understanding of the pro 
 and con of this controversy than anything I could now write. 
 To the Editor of the Daily Advance : 
 
 Connection of Richmond by tunnel with other boroughs is of 
 great importance. Conditions now seem favorable for this de- 
 sirable consummation. Unfortunately, in my judgment a most 
 injudicious and unwarranted position has been taken by the 
 committee acting supposedly in the interest of Richmond. They 
 (the committee) have planned and recommended two routes, 
 both of which are almost entirely in the State of New Jersey, 
 where the City has no authority to build or even spend its money 
 to survey a route; also this committee by propaganda has taken 
 strong ground against the route which has been considered de- 
 sirable for all the years since the organization of the old Rapid 
 Transit Commission, and has been presented and urged at all 
 meetings both of the Rapid Transit Commission, the Public 
 Service Commission and the Board of Estimate, by the Cham- 
 ber of Commerce and leading citizens generally. 
 
 Not content with favoring two impossible routes, but by propa- 
 ganda in public press and by leaflet with map and sketches, state 
 
 34 
 
that the people of Richmond were unanimously in favor of the 
 two routes, and were unanimously against the Bay Ridge route, 
 both of these statements were absolutely false, and the leaflet cir- 
 culated ostensibly by the committee containing many false state- 
 ments, in order to support and aid this outrageous deception. 
 
 On account of my health I had not attended public meetings 
 lately, but when I received this leaflet honey-combed with false 
 and misleading statements, I deemed it my duty to go to the 
 meeting and denounce the outrage. As a Staten Islander I could 
 not stand to be put in such a false, foolish and unjust position. 
 I considered it an impeachment of my manhood and an insult 
 to my intelligence. 
 
 The Bay Ridge route has been for all the long years the one 
 route urged as feasible and possible until these new and enter- 
 prising financiers whose horoscope is so wonderful and the 
 prospect so alluring that one would think they only had to strike 
 a rock Moses-like and a golden stream would gush forth. They 
 talk of millions with a fluency and eclat that would be becoming 
 to Morgan or Rockefeller. 
 
 The relative value of the several routes, with the prospect of 
 securing them, is what interest Staten Islanders. First, what 
 obstacles, if any, are in the way of securing any route ? Secondly, 
 if secured, which would be best for Richmond, and the City? 
 Thirdly, which is the most likely to be secured. 
 
 The two routes advocated by the committee, being mostly in 
 New Jersey I will call them New Jersey routes. Route A starts 
 from Tompkinsville, passes St. George under the hill and Kill 
 von Kull with slight detour to the northern side of Ellis Island, 
 thence under the North River to the Battery, with no connection 
 and an extra fare — for by no stretch of reason or imagination 
 could this route, in another State, never contemplated, be con- 
 sidered an extension of either the dual subway systems, and by 
 any process of reasoning could we expect these or other lines to 
 grant free transfers. 
 
 Route B passes through the oil tank region of Constable Hook, 
 thence along the bulkhead line of the extensive freight yards of 
 two trunk line railroads with no prospect of passengers except 
 from Staten Island and Constable Hook section, and depending 
 upon the Central Railroad of New Jersey to furnish the pas- 
 sengers from New Jersey to justify the cost, thence by tunnel to 
 the Battery without connection, same as Route A. 
 
 The few passengers from Staten Island and Constable Hook 
 would not be sufficient to warrant going through the tunnel to 
 the Battery without change, hence this would be only a shuttle 
 connection with the Jersey Central. And the great flourish of 
 connection with five railroads dwindles to connection with the 
 freight yards of two and the passenger system of one. It gives 
 
 36 
 
no better connection with the Baltimore & Ohio than we have 
 now. 
 
 These two routes, being mostly in New Jersey, would not only 
 require legislation in both States, but passing most of the way over 
 private property would require the securing of the right of way 
 over same, which would be long and tedious negotiations, hence 
 long delays before such routes would be available. 
 
 The "right of way" via Bay Ridge connecting with the dual 
 subway system is clear, unobstructed and indisputable. 
 
 The connection with the dual subway system means connections 
 southerly with Coney Island, Bay Ridge, yacht and athletic clubs, 
 Prospect Park and places on connecting lines of the system. 
 Easterly and northerly along near the waterfront, now rapidly 
 improving, including the famous Bush Terminal region, to At- 
 lantic Avenue, connecting with many systems throughout Brook- 
 lyn and Long Island, Borough Hall, Court House, Post Office, 
 City Offices, the hotel, department stores and theatre sections, by 
 local trains to the Municipal Building, Manhattan, and by express 
 to Canal Street and up Broadway to Union Square, passing 
 through the wholesale dry goods district, thence up Broadway 
 and Seventh Avenue to the Pennsylvania Railroad depot (and 
 by free transfers to the Grand Central Station), thence to Forty- 
 second Street and Times Square, thence to Fifty-ninth Street and 
 Central Park to the hotel, theatre and automobile centers, thence 
 along Fifty-ninth Street and Central Park to Queensborough 
 Bridge (or by tunnel) to Queens, and up Roosevelt Avenue. Also 
 by change at Pacific Street, Brooklyn, taking the tunnel (which 
 is nearly completed) to Whitehall Street to the Post Office, Cus- 
 tom House and Produce Exchange, up through Church Street, to 
 Rector, Courtlandt Street at the Hudson Tunnels, thence to 
 Broadway at City Hall, thence to Canal Street and so on up 
 Broadway. Again, when the route from Whitehall Street through 
 Broad and Nassau Streets is finished you will go through the 
 heart of the financial district and insurance district, with sta- 
 tions at Broad and Wall Streets, at the sub-treasury and the 
 Stock Exchange, and within easy reach of the Consolidated and 
 Cotton Exchanges, and on through Nassau Street to Park Row, 
 to Post Office and Municipal Building, passing through the great 
 newspaper section, thence through Centre and McDougal Streets 
 to Williamsburg Bridge and over into Queens and up Broadway. 
 Also connecting with the numerous lines of the system; all at a 
 single fare, at present 5 cents. 
 
 The time which it will take over this system from Tompkins- 
 ville is easily determined, by adding five minutes to 59th Street, 
 Brooklyn from there by local to the Municipal Building, Man- 
 hattan, 22 minutes by express to Canal Street, 14 to 15 minutes 
 
 31 
 
and to Union Square 19 minutes and to 42nd Street, 23 to 24 
 minutes — and from Union Square to Whitehall Street, 10 min- 
 utes. 
 
 The express is not running above Union Square and the road 
 is not running above 42nd Street. 
 
 This is the Big Elephant, the enterprising committee were 
 afraid they would have on their hands in the Bay Ridge route. 
 Well it looks like a good large, healthy and useful specimen, 
 compared to the weak stunted, mongrel specimen of the com- 
 mittee which has no reason for its existence, and of which its own 
 progenitors will be ashamed. 
 
 I understand the projectors of the two New Jersey routes, 
 expect, or rather say they expect, to connect with the Inter- 
 borough at Bowling Green. This is inconceivable. To cross the 
 whole northern side of Battery Park from the river near Pier A 
 to connection near Bowling Green is simply ridiculous. It would 
 be a perpetual barrier for all future tunnels from South Brooklyn 
 and Staten Island through the park up through Manhattan. New 
 York, through a great city, is still in its infancy. Within 30 or 
 40 years all tunnels must be duplicated or at least their carrying 
 capacity doubled ; the Battery is the natural entrance to Man- 
 hattan by tunnel from South Brooklyn and Staten Island. A 
 tunnel across the north side of Battery Park would effectively 
 preclude any future tunnel from the south to and through Man- 
 hattan. Nothing that could be devised would be a greater per- 
 manent injury to South Brooklyn and Staten Island. 
 
 Staten Island and South Brooklyn in the years to come will 
 need many subways to Manhattan, and the Battery should be 
 reserved exclusively for them, and the Central of New Jersey 
 should do as McAdoo did, buy a terminal in the city, and not try 
 to use Staten Island to get an entrance via the Battery. 
 
 For many a long year (in my judgment) the only hope for 
 Staten Island for connection through the other Boroughs for a 
 5 cent fare on the same basis as the other Boroughs, is by way 
 of Brooklyn, connecting with the dual system. 
 
 If it were possible to induce the city to make the great outlay 
 for a direct route there are three routes which should be con- 
 sidered — one from Battery Park to and along Governors Island 
 to Tompkinsville, passing the Bell Buoy for ventilating shaft. 
 Second from Battery Park under Governors' Island to Red Hook, 
 Brooklyn, thence to Tompkinsville via Bell Buoy. Third (all 
 things considered, I consider best) Battery Park to Hamilton 
 Avenue, Brooklyn and up that avenue to Van Brunt Street and 
 down that street to Red Hook, thence to Tompkinsville via Bell 
 Buoy. 
 
 This latter route would be a little shorter than the committee's 
 route A. Would give about three stations in Brooklyn in a sec- 
 
 37 
 
tion much in need of rapid transit and easily connected with the 
 Dual System, would give much business to help pay for the great 
 outlay, and would appeal to the city authorities hence I believe 
 this is the only direct or nearly direct route possible at this time. 
 In the years to come, when our population is much larger, or 
 great railroad and shipping terminals demand it, then we can 
 consistently ask for a direct tunnel. A little business sense is 
 worth more for the attainment of this object, than great volume 
 of wishy washy pretence or flambuoyant declamation. 
 
 Some of our most estimable and worthy citizens oppose the 
 tunnel for what might be termed esthetic reasons. They depre- 
 cate the ruthless hand of man in despoiling our beautiful Island. 
 I truly sympathize with them. I appreciate their honest senti- 
 ments. I, too, love the country, the "orchard, the meadow and 
 the deep tangled wild wood," have their wooing charms, but we 
 are in the greatest city of the continent, progressing at a pro- 
 digeous rate, its momentum cannot be stopped, and Richmond is 
 destined to be the greatest shipping and railroad terminal on the 
 continent. The contest for the markets of the world, and our 
 coming again into active participation in the carrying trade will 
 perforce of inexorable economic laws demand that the make- 
 shifts of the past shall make way for the best possible terminals 
 for handling both freight and passengers. Staten Island's water- 
 front (according to most competent authority), is not only the 
 best in the harbor of New York, but "the eastern coast of the 
 United States does not offer a site its equal" it is also the only 
 place in the harbor where all the railroads can "meet the ton- 
 nage of the world" with ample room for all necessary auxiliaries. 
 Given these conditions, it does not need a prophet to forecast 
 the outcome. 
 
 The corollary of these conditions means great warehouse and 
 manufacturing centers. All this may come sooner than expected 
 for economic pressure will impel at a tremendous rate. Other 
 nations are alive to the situation ; the contest for the markets of 
 the world is on, it will be a war to the finish with the survival 
 of the fittest. To oppose would be folly — it is wisdom to accept 
 the inevitable. 
 
 Those who take the position of a direct tunnel or none, are 
 so far from the pale of reason, that words would be lost, to 
 such I would say "Ephraim is joined to idols, let him alone." 
 
 The committee has made mistakes. We all make mistakes. 
 It is human to err. Putting our differences behind us. Let 
 us then, man fashion, "all together" pull a good stroke for a 
 tunnel. 
 
 Dongan Hills, April 10, 1919. 
 
 D. J. Tysen. 
 
 38 
 
TUNNEL TO STATEN ISLAND VIA BROOKLYN 
 
 Many meetings on Staten Island and before the Rapid Transit 
 Commission for tunnel connection with the other Boroughs have 
 been held during all the years since consolidation with redundancy 
 of argument and volume of rhetoric with no appreciable suc- 
 cess, until the advent of the present administration, since which 
 progress has been made and hope heartens us that in the near 
 future we will realize this much desired consummation. Noth- 
 ing more remains to be said at this time — my views on this sub- 
 ject will be best given by the following letter to the Rapid Transit 
 Commission : 
 
 The Public Service Commission, 
 154 Nassau Street, 
 New York City. 
 
 Gentlemen : 
 
 Transit facilities and interborough communication are most im- 
 portant questions affecting the interest of the great City. Lower 
 Manhattan being the business and financial centre — is the Mecca 
 to which all routes must lead. Populations of cities flow along 
 the lines of least resistance; transit facilities largely control the 
 trend of population. Ten miles south by tunnel can be made as 
 quickly as the same distance can be made in any other direction. 
 
 The present traffic of the north and south lines in Manhattan 
 is lopsided — unbalanced. To balance this traffic and increase the 
 earnings of these lines is of the greatest importance. 
 
 North of Canal Street in Manhattan and the Bronx there are 
 now upwards of two millions of people; they are — we will assume 
 — reasonably well accommodated by the existing north and south 
 lines in Manhattan, two millions more in South Brooklyn and 
 Staten Island would be equally as well accommodated by the same 
 lines, with the same equipment, with little or no extra cost ; while 
 two millions more to the north will require the expenditure of 
 at least one hundred and fifty million dollars in Manhatttan to 
 accommodate them. 
 
 As many fares would come to the lines of Manhattan per 
 capita from those south as from those north, and the average 
 haul would be shorter. Double the earnings of the north and 
 
 39 
 
south lines in Manhattan and save this large expenditure by 
 building the Fourth Avenue and Staten Island tunnel. The 
 tunnels to New Jersey and those leading out to Long Island will 
 help in balancing this traffic, but not to the extent that the tunnel 
 to Staten Island via South Brooklyn would. Besides, the former 
 benefit more particularly sections outside the city. 
 
 The commercial supremacy of this city is of the first im- 
 portance. Excessive lighterage charges and lack of dock and 
 pier accommodation have driven shipping trade to other ports 
 and our ocean steamers to dock in New Jersey. If we would 
 retain our commercial supremacy, better pier, dock and shipping 
 facilities must be provided. 
 
 The United States Government has refused to allow piers to 
 be further extended into the Hudson. The piers in Manhattan 
 on either side are too short to accommodate ships now in sight, 
 and much larger ships doubtless will follow. Where can you 
 look for accommodation for these except to Staten Island ? Here 
 you can have piers of ample length, with ample depth of water, 
 and ample room for vessels of the largest size to warp into dock 
 without inconvenience or extra expense. Often stress of weather, 
 fog or ice, compels vessels to lie at Quarantine over night ; dock- 
 ing at Clifton would obviate this, and with proper tunnel facili- 
 ties, passengers could reach their homes within the city long be- 
 fore they could dock at Hoboken on the Chelsea section under the 
 most favorable circumstances. 
 
 Staten Island has more waterfront than any of the other 
 Boroughs, and more that is unimproved than all the other 
 Boroughs combined. When the barge and coast canals are com- 
 pleted, the Kill von Kull and Staten Island Sound, approximately 
 about twenty miles in length, will be one of the greatest freight 
 routes in the world. Manufacturing establishments have been 
 forced to leave Manhattan and Brooklyn owing to high taxes 
 and excessive cost in handling their products. This twenty miles 
 of waterway will offer to such interests the most desirable fac- 
 tory and storehouse sites possible. With tunnel connection with 
 Manhattan, subsidiary lines would soon make these available. 
 From Mariners' Harbor to Clifton, about ten miles, a double 
 track trunk railroad skirts the shore making direct connection 
 possible with all piers and warehouses on the waterfront. Here 
 you have the solution and guarantee of commercial supremacy. 
 No other sections in the greater city, can offer you as much. 
 Here the outgoing and incoming freight, as well as passengers, 
 can be handled at the least possible cost, and, as has been aptly 
 said: "The products of a continent meet the tonnage of the 
 world." Should our ocean steamers be forced to dock in New 
 Jersey and our carrying trade be forced to seek other ports, when 
 with proper tunnel connections we have the very best conditions 
 
 40 
 
for both services within our own borders? A tunnel to bring 
 the Custom House, the Produce Exchange and the business and 
 financial centres within easy reach of this most valuable water- 
 front will be to the city a valuable asset and security. 
 
 The late Austin Corbin's dream of a great passenger and 
 freight terminal at the east end of Long Island may prove a 
 veritable nightmare to this Metropolis if our city fathers sleep 
 until the great Pennsylvania Railroad makes another Newport 
 News, about as far eastward as Philadelphia is southward, and 
 our city my be made, to some extent, a way station. It is not 
 wise to belittle the consequences of this proposition; many able 
 men deem it feasible. The tunnel to Staten Island, the Staten 
 Island waterfront, and the Ambrose Channel are the potent fac- 
 tors to ward off this threatening blow. The Battery is the front 
 door to Manhattan, all other entrances are side door.s. From 
 the Battery you may go, practically, to any part of Manhattan 
 without changing; other entrances are largely local, requiring 
 changes to reach other sections. The Battery also presents the 
 most favorable conditions for the city to build tunnels and ter- 
 minals, without cost for fee or easement, and without detriment 
 to the park. 
 
 Manhattan has nearly reached its maximum population. In 
 the near future, it will decrease in numbers, each year probably 
 at an increased ratio, demands for business purposes driving many 
 to seek new homes. Those bordering on the business section 
 must soon shift. Where shall they go? The Bronx is prac- 
 tically out of their reach, owing to high land values. This will 
 soon be true of Brooklyn and Queens. If you would keep them 
 within the city. Staten Island is the only hope. There you have 
 as fair a land as the sun shines on, and the health reports show 
 it to be among the most healthful, the lines of drainage are short 
 and the grades ample, and natural conditions made this a veritable 
 land of promise to the home seeker, just across the Bay from 
 Manhattan, and just across the narrow water way from what will 
 soon be the most populous of the Boroughs, by tunnel ten to 
 fifteen minutes from the business and financial centres via the 
 front door at the Battery. 
 
 Business centres shift with the trend of population, the great 
 business quarter of the city — lower Manhattan — represents vast 
 realty value. This is practically at one side of the present pop- 
 ulation. Continued growth northward and not southward exag- 
 gerates this condition, and under this condition what guarantee 
 of value is there in realty in lower Manhattan ? There is no sure 
 guarantee in values in lower Manhattan except a population to 
 the south to centralize the business and financial sections ; a small 
 per cent of depreciation in property below City Hall would build 
 many tunnels to Staten Island, and all New York is interested 
 in maintaining values in lower Manhattan. 
 
 41 
 
There has been much comment lately in the press as to the 
 ability of the routes selected by your Board, viz. : the Lexington 
 and Fourth Avenue tunnels, to pay. 
 
 The expenditure of public money where resultant benefits are 
 unequal, and especially where deficit is probable, has led to much 
 controversy in the past and has been the bugbear and scarecrow 
 standing across the path of progress since the foundation of gov- 
 ernment by taxation. Happily, however, the evolution of prog- 
 ress tends to more liberal views. I will illustrate by a few 
 examples. 
 
 For fifty years or more the battle for public schools was stub- 
 bornly contested in this State. Those having no children and 
 those who preferred to educate their children in private schools, 
 and the non-resident taxpayers, rebelled against the proposition 
 that they must go down into their pockets and assist in the edu- 
 cation of their neighbors' children — as well ask to help feed and 
 clothe them. It was also contended that public operation would 
 lead to corruption, be expensive and less efficient, and would be 
 controlled largely by political favoritism. The fifty years or 
 more of trial has proven the fallacy of all those fears. Wiser 
 and more liberal views finally prevailed, and the "boarding round" 
 and the "rate bill" became matters of history and now the 
 proudest monument that breaks the sky in all the land is the dome 
 and gable of the public school, yet it is all deficit, all on one 
 side of the ledger, and no "revenue," no return, except better 
 equipped citizenship. This marked a long step along the path 
 of progress and civilization. 
 
 So with the public highways. Sixty years ago in "all the region 
 round about" there was not, outside of the cities, a public high- 
 way improved by general taxation. Every improved pike, plank 
 or macadam road was controlled by private capital; the toll gate 
 was in evidence everywhere, and those who used the road paid, 
 and those who didn't use didn't pay, and when it was proposed to 
 build improved roadways by general taxation there was general 
 rebellion. The vast majority who had no horses insisted it was 
 robbery to compel them to pay for costly roadways for others' 
 use. Here also wiser and more liberal views finally prevailed, 
 and today state vies with state, county with county, and town 
 with town, in building improved highways by taxation and the 
 toll gate is of the past. And we are all happy, notwithstanding 
 it is all deficit, no "revenue," all on one side of the ledger. 
 
 The postal service presents a striking example of the progress 
 made in this direction. For many years after "Independence" 
 graded rates of postage obtained. Every year there was a deficit, 
 and in every Congress debate and contention arose as to the 
 rates. Those, if I remember rightly, ranged from four to thirty 
 cents. Much of the deficit was occasioned in the South, and the 
 
 42 
 
Middle and Eastern States rebelled against paying it. This led 
 to acrimonious debate, partaking somewhat of a sectional char- 
 acter ; the Northern States insisting that every section should pay 
 rates somewhat commensurate with the cost. Here also in the 
 evolution of progress a more liberal policy prevailed and a uni- 
 form rate was finally adopted, and it now costs no more to send 
 a letter across the Continent than across the street. This marked 
 another step along the path of progress and civilization and 
 though the deficit is yearly present, it goes into the budget without 
 protest. 
 
 The history of our bridges presents another example of growth, 
 of liberal and progressive sentiment. When the two cities de- 
 cided to build the "Brooklyn Bridge" the solicitude was general 
 as to how to make the bridge pay. Once built, the anxiety to 
 have it pay was soon lost in the solicitude to have it accommo- 
 date the public. It never paid, never will pay, it is almost free 
 and finally will be free. And so when the second bridge is built 
 no one expects it to pay, and so with the third, etc. Sentiment 
 has changed. These will all ultimately be free, and you can no 
 more stop this result than you could change the tides of the 
 ocean or the laws of gravity. Public sentiment will soon come 
 to regard the ferries and tunnels from the same standpoint, not- 
 withstanding this ghost of Banquo "Deficit" rises ever and anon 
 to intimidate the weak and timid. 
 
 I would not have it inferred that I favor free transit by ferries 
 or tunnels any more than I do free postage, but that the City 
 Government should direct its efforts toward a uniform rate of 
 fare within the limits of the City. 
 
 We can see no difference in principle whether the City's money 
 shall be used to build a bridge over the water, a ferry on the 
 water, or a tunnel under the water for interborough communica- 
 tion, and the public must come to take a like view of this mat- 
 ter. Revolutions are never backward. To justify the position 
 that the ferries and tunnels operated by the City must pay, is 
 going back to the dead past, to the "boarding round," the "rate 
 bill," the "toll gate" the "graded postal rates," and to be con- 
 sistent we must insist that the bridge, the recreation piers, the 
 parkways, and the expensive speedway, costing many millions for 
 a favored few, must pay. This is impossible; you cannot go 
 backward. 
 
 If, however, your Board should deem it necessary that "reve- 
 nue" shall be a dominant factor in determining tunnel routes, we 
 would point to our long stretch of sandy beaches, within easy 
 reach of the dense population of the city, where the toiling mil- 
 lions may find amusement and recreation by the sea. This would 
 be a great source of revenue. The largely increased population 
 of Richmond and the very considerable numbers in the neigh- 
 
 43 
 
boring cities and villages of New Jersey who would find this tun- 
 nel a short and convenient way to Coney Island and other places 
 of amusement and recreation in Brooklyn and Queens, would 
 doubtless add many fares to the tunnel receipts ; also the connec- 
 tion of these sections with the great and growing Borough of 
 Brooklyn, from a business viewpoint, would lead to much travel 
 via this tunnel; it would make possible a short route to the 
 numerous towns and citizens along the Jersey coast, and would 
 give them a short and popular route to Manhattan, via the front 
 door at the Battery, leading to any part without change. This 
 would also largely augment the earnings. And finally the reve- 
 nue that would accrue to the City from increased assessments, 
 would soon recoup the City for the whole outlay. 
 
 We are especially pleased to note the change made by you in 
 the size of the Fourth Avenue tunnel to admit the larger cars 
 of the suburban roads. It assures us of your appreciation of 
 the demands of the future. 
 
 We deem it fortunate that a body so admirably constituted as 
 your Board to intelligently solve the complex problem involved 
 in the City's transit facilities and interborough connection, has 
 been provided ; and we are confident that consistent and compre- 
 hensive consideration will satisfy your Board that the City can- 
 not afford to delay the building of the Staten Island tunnel, and 
 that when finished, all things considered, it will be to the City, 
 proportionate to its cost, the most valuable tunnel that will ever 
 be built within its borders. 
 
 Respectfully submitted, 
 
 D. J. Tysen. 
 
 Dongan Hills, June 20th, 1908. 
 
 Since this letter was written, the Secretary of War, in order 
 to meet an emergency, has consented to a conditional, temporary 
 extension of some piers in the Chelsea section. The increasing 
 water traffic and the increasing size of ocean steamers will surely 
 demand a change to some other section in the near future. 
 
 GARBAGE PLANT 
 
 The outrageous attemt to instal a garbage rendering plant for 
 the whole City on Staten Island, and the specious reasons, and 
 the insolence and unwarranted action of Mayor Mitchel are a 
 dirty chapter in the History of Mitchel's Administration. 
 
 Mitchel, who had much natural ability, and considerable ex- 
 perience in City affairs, commanded the respect and esteem of 
 his constituents, but his treatment and the reasons, or want of 
 reasons for his action in this matter deserves the severest censure. 
 
 44 
 
The impelling motive was generally attributed to his friendship 
 for Ex-Senator Reynolds, who it is supposed, desired for selfish 
 reasons to get rid of the Garbage Plant on Barren Island. 
 
 "Friendship rarest gem on earth," 
 
 "Who ere hath found the jewel his." 
 
 Is a most charming, alluring and noble attribute — but no friend- 
 ship, however pure and unalloyed, justifies a high official to 
 violate the spirit of his oath of office or immunes him from cen- 
 sure for insulting a delegation of thousands of his constituents, 
 when assembled at a meeting, over which he presided, by his in- 
 solent disrespect and insulting manner. He has gone to his 
 reward. His friend was indicted for alleged infraction of the 
 law while acting as Mayor of Long Beach. Under this indict- 
 ment he was tried before Judge Cropsey of the Supreme Court 
 and convicted. An appeal is now pending for reversal of judg- 
 ment of conviction. 
 
 It remained for Mayor Hylan, whose sense of right and 
 justice paved the way, and to Health Commissioner Dr. Cope- 
 land (now U. S. Senator) with the sense of justice and courage, 
 and professional ability to declare the plant a nuisance, and abate 
 it — and to District Attorney Fach for his energy and ability in 
 calling meetings and securing the facts and assembling the testi- 
 mony into shape, to justify the action of the Health Officer. 
 
 In handling you the enclosed plain statements "Unvarnished 
 tale" I wish to say there is no pretense that various statements 
 are the verbatim expression of the various persons named as 
 such would be impossible as all happened 15 to 30 years ago. 
 But the essential facts and conclusions are correct as stated. 
 There may also be some discrepancy in the order of the hap- 
 penings. Doubtless it will seem very tame at this date and with- 
 out the smoke and fire — grape and shrapnel incidental to a wordy 
 conflict. 
 
 During the time of the consideration of all these important 
 subjects the Staten Island Chamber of Commerce exerted a great 
 and wholesome influence in promoting the best interest of the 
 Borough of Richmond, and much credit for this is due to Mr. 
 Kolff, the energetic, tactful and resourceful Secretary of the 
 Chamber for many years. 
 
 I hope this will prove measurably satisfactory, if not wholly, 
 and that it may be the source of some pleasure to the idle curious 
 as well as of some service to the more serious minded to learn 
 the history of important happenings on Staten Island shortly be- 
 
 45 
 
fore and after she changed from a beautiful rural suburb to an 
 important integral part of a great Cosmopolitan City. We still 
 had the same soil beneath our feet, the same range of grand 
 hills, "whose lofty peaks proudly propped the sky" and the same 
 blue etheral overhead, but at the stroke of 12 o'clock midnight 
 on December 31st, 1897, our government was radically changed, 
 this was resented by some, as they thought it inimical to the best 
 interests of the island. Happily this feeling has long since passed 
 away. 
 
 This story exemplifies the truth of the saying — Eternal vigi- 
 lance is the price of victory — also of success. 
 
 And now one word to my fellow citizens — by the inexorable 
 law of Nature I am relegated to a back seat — out of commission ; 
 but to you who are vigorous in mind and body, there is a re- 
 sponsibility which, as public spirited citizens, you should assume. 
 There is always something happening in a large city that needs 
 public attention. The Mayor or President of the Borough can- 
 not see everything. Their thoughts are centered on the thou- 
 sand and one things demanding immediate attention, something 
 deserving and important, some premature and some impossible. 
 You should assist them. Partisanship should play no part. 
 
 There is at this time an important question that should receive 
 your attention. The Borough of Richmond is militated against 
 in its ferry facilities. The outrageous position is taken that our 
 ferry should pay interest on initial cost, upkeep and operation. 
 No other of the interborough connections are expected to pay, 
 but we are continually reminded that our ferry does not pay and 
 this is frequently urged when other improvements are sought, 
 but nothing is ever said about facilities of the other boroughs. 
 These are a city charge and Richmond pays its share as well as 
 the other boroughs but when it comes to our ferry, forsooth, 
 that is different. Here the ferry tolls for passengers and teams 
 must pay the whole bill, interest on initial cost, upkeep and 
 operating expenses, etc. This is an outrage. This is a city 
 matter and it is justly a city charge. No different in principal 
 from the bridges and tunnels in which the city has invested hun- 
 dreds of millions of dollars and of which Richmond pays her 
 share. These are practically free, treated as streets for inter- 
 borough connection, and our ferry by the same token should also 
 be practically free. This, however, we do not ask since that 
 policy would defeat the object and purposes of the ferry, which 
 is to furnish the people of Staten Island connection with the 
 other boroughs. The Staten Island ferry being a long ride, and 
 especially in the warm weather a delightful ride, would soon be- 
 come a free excursion to many of the millions of the city — 
 some would doubtless spend most of the day on the boats if they 
 were free of cost to them — but some reasonable arrangement of 
 
 41 
 
fares should be made to insure a rate satisfactory to Staten Is- 
 landers. Perhaps the regular fare should remain as it is, but a 
 commutation rate by month or quarter, a mere nominal cost for 
 passengers and teams. 
 
 This, with a Mayor just and equitable, who has shown during 
 his whole term a disposition to do the right thing by the island 
 and a Borough President always on the job, never sleeping on 
 his post, never letting the grass grow under his feet. This ac- 
 complishment should be easy. So get alongside of the Mayor and 
 Borough President and push this to success. Don't undertake it 
 unless you intend to go to the end — remember the horse that quits 
 on the homestretch never wins — also that defeat only makes it 
 harder for any subsequent attempt. Once embarked, take the 
 lead, give the word "Forward" and remember the fate of Lot's 
 wife and never look back. 
 
 Respectfully, 
 
 DAVID J. TYSEN. 
 
 October 16, 1924.