F 73 .37 • T92 Copy 1 AN ANSWER TO A PAMPHLET, ENTI1 LEO, "CONSIDKRATIONS ON THE PUBLIC EXPEDIENCY OF A &8rid(ic FROM ONE PART OF BOSTON TO THE OTHER. v 4 QBo0ton: PRINTED BY E. LINCOLN, WATER STREET. 1806. 73 7 AD VER TISEME.VT. w NO apology will be considered requisite for a calm and respectful examination of" a pamphlet, " by those who are informed," that it contains a series of unfounded state- ments, and that its author has attempted to mislead the public by a suppression of material fact 1 ;. Boston, Jan. 29, 1806- An ANSWER, &c. X N a pamphlet recently issued from the press, the favourers of a Bridge from South Street to South Bos- ton, have ventured on a new and bold attempt to deceive the public, upon the merits of that enterprise. This poison they are now industriously circulating, not only among the citizens, but the members of the legislature. It is the object of the following attempt, to expose its malignant nature, and furnish an antidote to its perni- cious effects. Among the various projects for public improvement, or private aggrandizement, for which our country has been distinguished, the erection of a bridge across the harbour of a great commercial town never was contemplated, until the legislature were supplicated for that purpose by William Tudor and Gardiner Greene. In all grants of bridges over navigable wafc heretofore made, the object has been, without a single exception, to facilitate the communication through the State, upon the public post roads. But that the harbour of the greatest commercial town in New England should be blocked up, not only for its own benefit, but for the general advancement of commerce, is an absurdity which nothing but the blindest self in- terest could suggest. That such a measure will involve in it the sacrifice of immense private property, without the possible attainment of any public good ; that it would be unprecedented^ in this or any other country ; and that the principles of the constitution will warrant no such measure, are facts which no artifice can con- ceal. It might with equal propriety have been alleged, when the harbour of Boston w as heretofore blocked up assertions without foundation, and even without varnish. Of this nature is the assertion above cited. The author knew it to be without foundation ; he knew that the force of the former opposition will be augmented by argu- ments drawn from the most solemn stipulations of the applicants for the bridge, and by the decisions of the legislature. The remonstrances of the town of Roxbu- ry, and of nearly 600 freeholders of the town of Boston, are the proofs of this statement ; both of which are, or will be, presented to the legislature. And although it may comport with the policy of this writer to declare, that such is the affection of the children of Boston for its welfare, that they will sacrifice " at any altar dedicated to the common good, although it were reared by profane hands," yet decency might have taught him to recollect, that the end does not always sanctify the means ; &. that he is expressly forbidden " to do evil that good may come." "It is assumed (in the pamphlet) as a fact, that the pro. posed bridge will shorten the distance more than half a mile from the centre of the old town to the shores of the new district." This is explicitly denied. It is not true in any sense of the phrase. It is not true, if by the centre of the old town, is meant either its territorial centre, or its centre of population. It is so far from being true in any reasonable sense, that it is here assumed as a fact, capable of complete demonstration, that the public at large are now better accommodated by the present bridge from South Boston, than they possibly can be by a bridge in any other direction from that peninsula. If the gentle men of Nook Hill are nettled at this decla- ration, the first thing they are desired to recollect is, that there are a few persons in the world beside them- selves, whom the legislature will consider as proper ob- jects of their cure and protection. If the accommoda- tion is to be furnished for our country brethren, the ob- must be to lessen the distance in their travel, and in the transportation of their produce to such parts of the town, as they will natn rally be led to, by their connex- ion's and business. Probably one in ten of these might wish to enter the town by a bridge to South Street ; but the other nine would prefer to enter it at the Junction of the present bridge ; in which case the whole town, I that junction to Market Square, become their custoi in the disposal of their produce. The whole I should be taken into views and that point fix* J on, at and from which a person could go to any and ever} oth- ei part oi' the town !>\ a distance, shorter than from any other point. This point is now accurately ascertained* From the intersection of the turnpike and present bridge at South Boston to this central point is 273 lods. From said intersection over proposed bridge by the shortest rout to this central point is 385 rods, making a dilllr- ence of 112 rods in favour of the present bridge. The pretended accommodation of the public, is now to be considered in another view. By the establishment of the proposed bridge, all convenient access to a full third part of the sea front of the town, &. also to an equal por- tion of its wharves and quays, would be cutoff. It is a fact, the evidence of which is within the reach of all persons disposed to examine it, that since tho 1st day of March last, more than 1800 vessels have passed up to these wharves with their cargoes. This right of access, is, at present, common to all the citizens of the United States, and to the people of all foreign countries with whom we have commercial intercourse. Before a grant for this bridge be made for the public accommo- dation, it should be asked, can the property which will be brought into town by that avenue, be equal to I property which now is, or hereafter will be, brought to the south end, by water? The answer must be tint it cannot How then are the public to be acepmm Is it not evident that such an obstruction would be greatly detrimental $ and does not this solution of the question remove all doubt upon the subject of public accommodation ? It is further alleged, that by stinting Boston within her ancient limits, the surplus of our commercial capi- tals would find their way to the greater markets of the Southern States, ''through want of accommodation al home, to the detriment of the whole Commonwcalt] The cream of this argument is, that Boston is now stinted within her ancient limits to the detriment of the whole Commonwealth. But the answer is, that its au- thor in the very next sentence has told us, that this sub- ject is " now at rest ;" because the town of Boston is enlarged by the addition of 600 acres of land. The town then is not stinted within her ancient limits ; be- cause 600 acres of land have been " united by the right hand of fellowship with the opposite shores." Thus our surplus capitals will never find their way to the southern markets, for want of accommodation. But it is no part of the policy of the State, to aid the collections of wealth into a particular spot ; it is rather, that it should be diffused for the purposes of a general participation. Were it all accumulated in one great city, we might there have the wealth of Tyre and Sidon, but it would engender the vices and corruptions of Sodom and Gomorrah. The same policy is more strictly ap- plicable to our civil institutions. So long as our happy form of government exists, its principles can only be disseminated in small assemblies, where they can be temperately enforced and understood. Such was the policy of our ancestors in the establishment of these in- stitutions; and they have, for this reason, become the parents of all our intelligence and consequent happiness as a people. A stranger to the leaders of the Soutii Boston specu- lation will scarcely credit his senses, when he reads in their pamphlet, that the legislature, by sanctioning the annexation of Dorchester Neck have pledged themselves " to encourage its settlement, as a part of the capital.'''' Here is a direct appeal to the patronage, if not to the treasury of the Commonwealth. It is saying to the le- gislature, " You have adopted this unfortunate child of ours, and you must now comply with all our visionary schemes for its support and aggrandizement." In truth ythcy ought to be cautious how they gratify them ; for there appears to be no limits to their extravagant claims & expectations. They seem to calculate that every branch of government and every class of people, are to be influ- enced by their delirious dreams. The annexation of a tract of land from one town to another is the Occur- rence of arniosteverj week; but it was' never Defore considered as an object in the smallest degree affecting the public. A man whose farm lias been thus set off mav now adopt the reasoning of the pamphlet, and say to the go\ eminent, your sanction to my annexation "can MVff Df restricted to the mere extension of the limits of the town to which I am annexed ; it was your oi dent intention to encourage me in my settlement ; that is the only intention that can honourably be imputed to you, whatever was the intention of the parties immedi- ately concerned in effe ctin g the union, and whatever ivere the means by which it was accomplished." B<. I the government extend this sort of '* encouragement" to the visionaries of Nook Hi//, they ought to do two things ; 1st, ascertain to a moral certainty their names and associates, that there may be no more deception \\ ith respect to a compromise. 2d, Obtain an explicit statement of the nature of the patronage and lk encou- ragement" they are to afford diem. For they may adopt it as a certain rule, that when they give th< rtl an im \\, they will demand a mile; that if tin \ grant them a brid they will ask for a solid road across the harbour. A new edition will then be famished of the " little code of principles, which these gentlemen carry in their wallets," to prove that such wis the "encouragement" which the government had pledged them; and when explained by their compiler, it would appear to be of this effect; — Boston is now stinted within her ancient limits, because 600 acres of land have been added to it; — the com- merce of the town must be encouraged, by dosing up one third of the harbour; the hcalili of the town must Dt secured, by stopping the flowing of the tide, and pro- viding a reservoir for stagnant waters ; — and the privi- leges and. property of our sout^ end brethren improved and protected, by prohibiting all access to their estates. They might, and doubtless would carry their \icus still further, and telj the government, that the want of a solid road across the harbour " is the obstacle to the effectu- al success of its good intentions, wluch it is competent B 10 • to itmoYC ; and that their favourite portion of the town languishes under this- obstacle, "that notwithstanding- one bridge has been built upon the terms which they ex- plicitly agreed to," by which the two districts have been united in one, they would boldly say to the legislature, unless vou give us this road your " system must be mon- strous, and unworthy the patronage of any government ; vou have left us in a mongrel state? neither town nor country." It is further stated in the pamphlet, that the price of land in the old tawi) is so high as to amount to"a pro- hibition of public buiidmgs, shipyards," &c. The first an- swer to this is, Go over to the new tow n for these purposes. But there is no foundation for the above assertion. There are no public buildings now required or contem- plated, excepting a court-house and a meeting-house at West- Boston. As to the latter the people of that society jvant no accommodation : for their materials are now col- lecting for a new meeting-house, upon the spot where the old one stands. And with respect to a court-house, there are so mirny sates for its accommodation that the lathers of the country are at a loss which of them to se- . Thus vanishes the assertion relative to public build- ::, .;. In fact dure are so many eligible scitcs for such buildings, were they required, that even the female asy- lum might have been. accommodated in old Boston, had ;:-)i ihc hi 'Hvownce of these gentlemen suggested that WpP|JK hill was the more appropriate position. ' Jj'he absurdity of requiringa bridge for the accommoda- tion of shipyards at South Boston is apparent. A man, conversant with the common concerns of life, must laugh at the idea of transporting the materials of a ship to that place, otherwise than by water communication, unless proceed from the adjacent country. A bridge would evidently be useless for this purpose, as well as forevery (Other pertaining to shipbuilding, unless it might be con- sidered a more safe calculation to bring them to town the bridge, than to launch them into the region of flats which surround this celebrated promontory. The authority attached to the decision of " public bod- ies" upon the question of a bridge will now be examined. 11 Ft is stated without equivocation, and probably without a blush, " that the decision of every public body on the question of a stife for the bridge to South Boston, has been in favour of South Street ; that these public bodie s possess the best means of forming; a judgment, and are not influenced by the expectation of private advantage 1 '!!! Boston, Dorchester, Roxbury, and the report of a com- mittee of the General Court, are quoted for the truth of these assertions. Were they true, the party interested in opposing the bridge, might well tremble at their impend- ing danger. If they turn out to be not only essentially but ridicu- lously false, they will stand as monuments both of the folly and depravity of their author. In the winter of 1804, the projectors of this bridge made their first appeal to die people of Boston. Before this " public body," in one of their most numerous as- semblies, the parties appeared. On the part of the peti- tioners for the bridge, every art and allurement was dis- played, Which could result from the combined efforts of eloquence and intrigue. On. this side were witnessed the cruel and meretricious triumphs of wealth, oratory, power, pomp and popularity. On the other, was faint- ly heard, the still small voice of reason and just com- plaint. The result was differently anticipated by men of candour, and the men of the world. It was, howev- er, soon ascertained that no correct decision was to be expected from this tribunal ; and the disinterested and impartial spectators fled from the scene, as from the " reign of Chaos and old night." Upon the closing of this scene, so honourable to a de- liber athe "public body," other means to influence them were attempted. An offer was publicly made them, of a property in one half the bridge as the price of their vote. The subject was thereupon committed to £4 gentlemen, selected from the different wards in the town. Their report was made, and may be found in the appendix to this, though it was suppressed in the other pamphlet.* When this report was afterwards * Sec* Appendix, No. 1. 12 discussed, it appeared that the terms of it wcrt not agreeable to the petitioners. A debate ensued ; another scene of confusion was exhibited ; &. ultimately an offer in cash of 25,000 dollars was made to the town, as a com- mutation for half the bridge. By adverting to the re- port of the town's committee, and the offers of the bridge projectors, the case will appeal- to stand thus. The town say, "We will not vote for your bridge unless you give us the right to lay out such streets, public squares, and market places as we judge necessary, without any compensation for the land so appropriated. We will have two burial grounds, two school house lots, and two lots for houses of public worship, without any payment therefor. And in lieu of the offer of one half the proposed bridge, there shall be set off by a joint committee of the proprietors on the one part, and of the town on the other, upon the land to be annexed, in four different parts of the same, one tenth of all the land thereon, not used or set apart for public purposes, which shall be held at the disposal of the town of Boston. " To these demands (which the proprietors did not esteem perfectly modest) they answered ; " No ; we will not give you this price for your vote ;^ but we will pledge our- selves to the town to pay them 25,000 dollars in cash, or give you half the bridge ; and also the streets and lots for public accommodation as before proposed, and refer to the legislature the terms and conditions upon which the bridge shall be erected." The world mav now estimate the value, which ousrht to be attached to the decision of the town of Boston, as a "public body," uninfluenced by the expectation of pri- vate advantage. The right to animadvert upon the con- duct of a public body, cannot be restricted, especially to those who are attempted to be made its victims. Facts must be adhered to ; one of which is, that the price of a vote of the town upon the question of a bridge, has be- come a matter of record. The value of the property actu- ally demanded for it is more than $ 100,000. The vak ue of what was actually offered, somewhat less. But it is not susceptible of denial, that its votes and decisions upon this question have been the subject of bargrin and sale ; and that if an individual "juror, nidge or chan- cellor" should be influenced by similar motives, it would stamp his character with indelible infamy. Thus it appears, that the town, as a "public body," have been influenced ;n their decisions, " by the c\j tation of private advantage," and have even calcu> lated upon it as the mean and source of wealth and pleasure. But to relinquish this view of their proceedings, there is another in which it is most important to con- sider them. The question between the parties in this Controversy, is in its nature a question of property and right. There is no public body existing, competent to the decision of this question, which is not either judicial or legislative. To these alone have the opposers of the bridge been ardently desirous of submitting. Why then have the - leaders of the South Street bridge project feared a direct and manly appeal to the legitimate tribu- nals of public justice ? Why do such men demean them, selves by playing the demagogue? Why do they enlist the populace as the instruments of their pleasure, and then quote dicir decisions, as the rule of right, and the stand- ard of other mens' judgments? Independent of the shameless nature of the experiment, these gentlemen may hereafter find it a dangerous one. No other association in Boston would have dared to hazard, or stooped to em- ploy it. The language is plainly this ; " We have but little confidence in the merits or success of our enterprize ; we will therefore have an assembly of the people ; We will first harangue them, then dazzle them with painted and delusive prospects of wealth and pleasure ; if these do not succeed, we will purchase their influence, and pay them in land, money or bridges, as may best comport with their vanity or avarice. Applications for two other bridges from Boston arc now pending; either of which will furnish not only a new avenue to the town, but open a communication with our northern and western interior, doubly important and H extensive to that of South Street. * Why is there no appeal to a Boston town- meeting in these cases? Evi- dently for two reasons ; 1st, because the gentlemen of Nook Hill are either opposed to, or have no interest in them ; and 2d, because the petitioners for these bridges are no demagogues. Engage the Nook Hill gentlemen in these projects ; give them reasonable hopes of another harvest, and the people of Boston will again be set in mo- tion ; and another scene of riot and chaos exhibited : and the Syren's tongue, and the serpent's charm again em- ployed to please and deceive them. It is true that the town of Dorchester has decided in favour of South Street bridge ; it is also true, that an attempt was made to purchase its opinions by the offer of ■money. What other modes of corruption were practis- ed, we know not ; but w r e do know, that they were all rejected with disdain. These facts ought to be made public ; because at the same time that they justify the conduct of Dorchester, as fair and honourable, they dis- close the scandalous means by which her seduction has been attempted. In short, such is the furor with which some of the friends of the bridge seem to ^ have been seized, that they arc rendered insensible to the vile de- baucheries, which they are the means of propagating. The town of Roxbury uniformly has been, and still is opposed to the bridge. It has recently voted against it, and elected its agents to enforce their opposition be- fore the legislature. The statement, therefore, respect* ing this " public body" is groundless. The last and greatest falsehood respecting the uniform decision of " public bodies" will now be stated. Mo. ses Everett and others presented their petition for this bridge at the May session of the General Court, A. D. 1804. Notice was thereupon ordered ; remonstrances from the people of the south end and the Front Steeet Corporation were regularly made ; the subject was com - * No opinion, as to the necessity or utility of these bridges, is intended here to be given. The object of introducing them will be readily seen ; viz. to show the difference of the conduct of their promoters and the promoters of the South Street Bridge project. knitted to a most respectable committee of both HouM the parties heard, and the prayer ol the petition 14*20* imoush rejected by that committee. Their report was made at the close of the session and accepted by the Senate, and Mas referred in the House to the m which was the last winter session* It was then tak- n up, debated, and the Hon. Mouse concurred with the Senate, and thus the report was accepted by both branches of the legislature. No longer ago than the last session, the very petition which is now before the legislature, was presented : and such was the disgust and indignation at the repeated and pcr.uuting attempts to w ear out its patience, that even the ceremony of a com- mitment vias refused. It was afterwards resuscitated, at tne request of the member from Dorchester, upon the ground of his absence at the time of the diseussion. From the decisions of this il public bod} " there was no appeal; "they possessed the best means of forming 4 judgment, and they were not inlluenced in their cl< vi- sion by the expectation of private advantage." The, statement in the pamphlet thus turns out to be- so false as to defy all comment. It will therefore on- ly be followed by an assertion undeniably true, that t V; cry public body oj '\v Inch Vie have heard (Boston and Dor- chester excepted) have decided against a bridge at South- Street, si/ice the incorporation of the present bridge from South Boston and front Street. The material fads and observations which were made the basis office pompous positions in the pamphlet, arc now replied to. Unsupported by fact or argument, the) vanish " like the morning cloud," and pass away. The town and Commonwealth must doubtless perish with them ; lor according to the logic, of the pamphlet, t hi establishment of a bridge from South Street is the Only mode b_. which we can " preserve our healQi, or keep our riches within the State." In considering the objections to the bridge, thcwritci of the pamphlet alleges, that the citizens of the south quarter of the town eonstittite a great " clan or family, coming mostly from the country > of the same babitd 16 and opinions, and liable to common, and consequently to erroneous impulses ;" the meaning of which is evi- dently this ; a clan of countrymen form similar habits and opinions, and are therefore liable to common and erroneous impulses. Perhaps a more unfortunate senti- ment was never engendered by the struggles of avarice and ambition. The author, it may be readily seen, is a town born child ; but no liberal man of any party or in- terest, will thank him for this contemptible sneer upon a numerous and respectable class of citizens. The in- sincere compliment conferred upon them in a preceding sentence, is no apology for this language. It is, howev- er, a subject of rejoicing to this " clan," that their cause is ultimately to be decided by men, u coming mostly from the country ;" who can have no interest but to pro- mote the public good, and who will despise the insinua- tion that a man is liable to erroneous impulses, because he comes from the country ; that he is chargeable with inordinate attachments to his interest, and a deficiency in public spirit, because he comes from the country ; and that he is for that reason bound to lay the fruits of an industrious life at the feet of speculating pride, or hereditary wealth. It is further affirmed in the pamphlet, "that the only real, interested opposition, is the Front Street corpora- tion, or less than 30 individuals." In its subsequent pages, it is admitted, that the Front Street wharves must forever remain the principal mart for wood and lumber;" and that if the charges upon these articles should be enhanced by the impediment of a bridge, they must be paid by the customer, " as mere duties." From this abstract of the statement, the following po- sitions necessarily result. 1st, The only interested op- position is from the Front Street corporation ; 2d, the price of lumber and wood may be enhanced by a bridge ; and 3d, the additional expense upon these articles, oc- casioned by a bridge, must be paid by the consumer. It is melancholy to contemplate the absurdities into which men of talents frequently plunge themselves. If the Front Street wharves must continue to be the prin- 17 cipal marl (br lumber and wood, and the price of these articles will be enhanced by a bridg>, it undeniably ibl- Iqws, tli.it every man in Boston, rich or poor, must be interested in opposing the bridge, in die exact propor- tion its the bridge increases the price of these articles* Let us look lor a moment at the state of things which these,' facts present A lew powerful individuals, roll- ing in wealth and swimming in luxury, demand the privilege of obstructing the passage to that quarter of the town "which must forever remain the principal mart for wood and lumber." The commerce of the town is materially injured by this obstruction ; but the private fortunes of these individuals are thereby aug- mented to an immeasurable height ; the article of wood is necessary for the Upholding of life ; and without lum- ber, many of the inhabitants of the town can only be covered by the canopy of heaven ; the price of these ar- ticles of necessary consumption is to be greatly en- hanced, but the evil must be submitted to, by the poor as well as the rich ; and the enhanced price of these ar- ticles paid by way of duties, for the gratification and ag- grandizement of these powerful individuals ! The Nook Hill gentlemen have the citizens of Boston under excel- lent discipline, if they can bring them to this submission ; to obstruct the navigation, and impose a duty on the necessaries of life. But it may be some satisfaction to the poor inhabitants to learn, that the "duty upon the article of wood will never exceed 50 cents, nor be less than 30 cents per cord.*' Two other assertions are made with unblushing con- fidence ; that " bridges in DO instance have been greatly detrimental to estates situated above mem," and that this bridge "would aid instead of impeding the naviga- tion." A single fact shall suffice for the first. The wharves above Charies River bridge in Charleston n, which before the erection of that bridge were the most valuable of any in that town, are now partly covered with stables and partly with grass With re pert to the latter assertion, an appeal is also made to facts. If a bridge be extended from South Street, its direction C 18 must be oblique to the course of the channel, and run a long distance in it. At the season of the year wfien vessels most frequently visit the south harbour, the southerly and westerly winds prevail. A loaded vessel ^ therefore, must either beat through the bridge, against the wind, or abandon all attempts to reach the wharves above. The consequence is self evident. But with- out recurring to these facts, the proceedings of Bos- ton and of the legislature have recognised these impedi- ments. We pass now to an examination of the most impor- tant, if not the only branch of the subject which deserves- particular consideration. On the 18th of February, 1804, a Compromise %vas" effected between all parties co?icemed, as well those in fa~ "jour as those opposed to the proposed bridge ;\ and by this" compromise the mtercsts of the pub fie were not compro- mitted ; had they been, it would not have been sanctioned by the legislature. No apology will now be offered, either for telling the whole truth y or calling things by their proper names. This compromise was originally sought by the gen- tlemen of Nook Hill. It was readily listened to by the opponents of the bridge, who asked and wished for nothing but the peaceable enjoyment of their property, find to satisfy all claims of the public sentiment. Thev saw, in this compromise, not only the prospect of such enjoyment and satisfaction, but the termination of the controversy. How cruelly they have been deceived and disappointed will appear, by shewing, 1st, That the petitioners for the bridge, and the pe titioners for the annexation of Dorchester Neck, were all of them the real associates- of Messrs. Mason and Otis, and therefore bound by their compromise. 2d, That the stipulations of that compromise have been most perfidiously violated. It will then be shewn, 3d, That in pursuance of this compromise the faith of the legislature has been pledged, that no charter for another bridge shall now be granted. t See Appendix, No. 2 and i. 19 It should be fust remark < <1, that notwithstanding; Messrs. Mason and Otis were the prominent leaders oi the bridge party in the legislature, in the tewn-meetii and upon the exchange, their names do not ippear upon a single document, public or private, except the instru nu-tit which led to the compromise. After tketr buo. ceediog conduct, is it an uncharitable presumption that they were thus keptin reserve forthe purposes of intrigue? Such a presumption is strengthened by a remarkable < ir- cumstance. When Mr. Brown and the other members of the south end committee nut these gentlemen on the sub- ject of a compromise t the south end committee hud their Own credentials in their hands. It is an idle pretence, tin. rc- fore, that Messrs. Mason and Otis • ' did not know the con- tracting parties upon the other side." They did explic- itly declare themselves satisfied with the powers and cre- dentials of tin- committee. They were then requested to exhibit their credentials ; but they answered they had no written credentials from their associates, but would obtain them if required ; but they pledged their sacred honours they were fully authorised by Unit- associates. A suggestion was made that the conference should cease. until those gentlemen obtained written credentials. — They said, tlxjy did not even wish possession of tin commitux's credentials, and observed, that notwithstand- ing their interests and the interests of the committee bad greatly militated, they hoped the committee had not seen any thing in them during the controversy, which would justify it in withdrawing all confidence in their honour. This studied concealment oftheirpowers and parte, and their endeavours to inspire the committee with a con- fidence in their honour, would have excited no suspic- ion, had not their subsi quent conduct, and the exposition of it in the pamphlet, stamped their w hole proceedings with the marks of artifice and intrigue. Fortunateh , it is not necessarv to resort to an equitable or honourable const \ turn of their agreement, to prove the point in question. For it shall appear from the words of the agreement itself. This contract* 1 was executed between Jonathan Ma sou and H. G. Otis, on behalf of themselves and assocji • See App. No. 2. 20 ates, of the first part ; and William Brown and the 6th- er gentlemen of the committee, on the second part. In the preamble of this argreement, it is recited, "that the parties of the first part contemplate and intend to attempt to procure from the legislature of Massachusetts, an act of incorporation, authorizing them to erect a bridge from the town of Boston's landing, so called, in Orange Street, in said Boston, or from some place southerly thereof, to Dorchester point ; and also to procure, if practicable, an annexation of said point to the town of Boston." Now it is certain that the first party to this contract are those who contemplated and intended to procure an act of incor- poration to erect the bridge ; and also those, to ho intended to procure the annexation of the point to the town of Bos- ton ; it is so expressly recited in the contract. Who then are the persons thus described? It will appear, that the persons who were to erect the bridge were Messrs. Mason, Tudor, Otis and Greene ; and that those, who were to procure the annexation, were the same gentlemen, together with all the petitioners from South Boston, who subscribed the petitions for the an- nexation. The evidence of this statement will be now adverted to. On the 27th of December, 1803, William Tudor, Gardiner Greene, Moses Everett, and seventeen oth- ers, petitioned the Selectmen of Boston for its consent to the annexation of Dorchester Neck. This petition contained these words ; " we shall and do cheerfully consent to the annexation of all our lands, lying within the peninsula aforesaid, upon the single condition that the inhabitants will procure a bridge to be erected between Boston and Dorchester Neck." The identical subscrib- ers to that petition, together with seven others, preferred their petition, at the then next session of the General Court, in which last petition they pray for the annexa- tion to be granted ; however, upon condition that a bridge should be granted, connect'mg the peninsula with the town. The place for the bridge to land on the Boston side is not pointed out in either petition. Three of the subscribers to the petition, now pending before the legislature, viz. 21 Moses Everett, Mai\ C lap and Jonathan Bird, were al- so subscribers to the two former petitions for the an- nexation; and in that capacity, they, with all the other petitioners therefor, must have been the associates " of Messrs. Mason and Otis.'' Thus the associates arc dragged from behind the curtain. All connexion with them is boldly disclaimed ; and every artifice practised to conceal them. But the contract and compromise are now submitted to public examination, and the other doc- uments are among the public records. Upon a comparison of these facts and documents, an impartial examiner will see with an indignant smile, a question gravely asked in the pamphlet, " who were the parties to this agreement ?" Messrs. Mason and Otis knew perfectly well, that their associates went described in the preamble of this agreement, and that this description comprehended themselves, the petitioners for South Street bridge, and all the petitioners for the annexation. They therefore must have contemplated one of two things ; either to bind these petitioners, or conceal their intention of not binding them ; if the former, it is the point contended for ; if the latter, they arc completely detected, and have forfeited all claims to candour and confidence. The truth of the statement has been argued from the face of the instrument, compared with oth- er documents to which it refers, and which of coins-- constitute a part of it. For the purpose lure in- tended, no other examination is necessary. But it is amusing to find the writer of the pamphlet dreading and renouncing all verbal explanation on the part of his op- ponents, and yet repeatedly resorting to it hiuisclf. Un- fortunately his verbal explanation amounts to a contra- diction ; for lie verbally alleges that the only associates of Messrs. Mason and Otis w ere Messrs. Tudor and Greene, and gives as a reason, that it had been reptatedhf so an- nounced ; but the instrument discloses, that these asso- ciates were the petitioners for the bridge, and the peti- tioners for the annexation ; and so long as that instru- ment, and the public records remain, it will be useless to attempt a contrary Construction. 22 2. The facts to prove the truth of the 2d position, viz. that the stipulations of the compromise have been violated, are now to be stated. While the first petition for South Street bridge was pending, and before the report of the committee upon that petition had been acted upon, Ed- ward Tuckerman and others preferred their petition, praying leave to erect a bridge where the South Boston bridge is now built, and also to make a new street, to extend from the bridge to Essex Street. These incor- porations were requested upon a presumption expressed in the petition, and afterwards recognized by the legis- lature, that no liberty would be granted for the erection of any other bridge from Boston to Dorchester peninsula, to the northward of the place above described. Upon this peti- tion the usual notice was ordered, and the petition com- mitted to a joint committee. It was at this moment, when the South Street peti- tioners saw the inevitable fate of their project, that the compromise was by them sought for and effected. The evidence of this compromise is contained in the report of the joint committee, which is here subjoined. & The contract before examined is called, in the pamphlet, the " instrument of compromise." But it is not so ; it is the instrument which led to the compromise. The re- port of the committee last referred to, recites and sanc- tions the compromise, and is the only written evidence of its nature and existence. To the terms of this com- promise, must Messrs. Mason and Otis, and their asso- ciates, be compelled to submit. The most prominent feature in this report is the 2d article, which states, that " no leave be given to build a bridge from Bos toil to Dorchester, to the northward of the town's landing. v The compromise of the parties is made the basis of this report ; and thus we have the sol- emn stipulation of Messrs. Mason and Otis, and all the petitioners for the annexation, (as has been before shown) that no other bridge shall by them be sought for. The above report was accepted by consent of all parties ; two incorporations, one for the bridge, and the other for § See Appendix, No. 3. building Front Street, were passed in pur v. { it , and until after the final adjournment of the General Court of that year, every thing was calm, harmonious' and happy. This harmony Was first disturbed by tin inhabitants of South Boston, who, before the meeting of the new General Court of 1804, published a " formal prot against the doings of their own agents, Messrs. Oti-, and Mason, and (what was tantamount thereto) against the doings of the legislature consequent thereupon. This expedient was followed by another more serious. but equally unjustifiable ; for as soon as the new legislature convened, they pieferred their petition for an arch bridge, (as it has been termed) from South Street. This project was probably suggested to them by their arch enemy, for surely nothing human or di- vine could have dc\iscd a scheme so pregnant with fol- ly. It has been stated in a former page, that this peti- tion met the fate it deserved. But during its pendency at the last winter session, another bridge town-meeting was demanded of the selectmen of Boston. These gen- tlemen were averse to a renewal of the former scenes of recrimination and animosity. But they were told by the agents of the bridge projectors, that if they did not warn a meeting of the inhabitants, a justice of the peace would be applied to for that purpose. They were finally pre- vailed upon. A meeting was held, and the bowels of Faneuil hall groaned, and were disgorged. A houv public worship again became the theatre for the per- formance of another grand farce-. Mr. Otis spoke for himself, and " by his neighbours and his lawyers ;" and a vote was finally carried, nolens i-ole/is, by which the town in effect said, they would have a bridge in spite of the legislature. In addition to all this, it is known to all Boston, that ever since the compromise, Messrs. Masoa, Tudor, Otis and Greene have used their ut- most endeavours to obtain another bridge, though these endeavours may have been (until lately) ur through the instrumentality of lawyers, runners, and secret agents. 24 There is evidence enough in these facts to condemn the whole together. Principals and associates must re- treat before it, and hide their heads* In every instance, where an infraction of the compromise has been at- tempted or effected, the unremitting exertions of an agent, publicly known to be the instrument and tool of the bridge party, have been every where seen and re- cognized. In the town- meeting of Jan. 1805, the citi- zens were harangued by professional gentlemen, who were known from the beginning to have been employed as counsel. Indeed the mask is now thrown off, and principals and associates have all become the open ad- vocates of another bridge, both in and out of the le- gislature. How then stands the account, between these gentle- men and their consciences ? Simply thus ; they have entered into a solemn stipulation in the face of the legis- lature, that no bridge from South Street shall be granted at their request ; but from the moment of that stipula- tion to the present time, they have permitted, excited, and promoted every measure in their power to obtain it. For the better information of these gentlemen's con- sciences in future, a passage from a great moral philo- sopher* is inserted. "All promises are to be performed in that sense in iv hie h the promissor apprehended, and knew at the time, that the promissee received it, " The obligation of promises depends also upon the ex- pectations, which ivc knowingly and voluntarily excite. Consequently any action or conduct towards another, which we are sensible excites expectations in that other, is as much a promise, and creates as strict an obligation as the most express assurances. ' ' We now proceed to the third point. From the documents before referred to, it is pre- sumed enough has been shewn to jusify the opinion, that the faith of the legislature has been and still is pledged to the Front Street Corporation, and the people «f the south end, that no charter for another bridge * Paley, pages 99 and 100. 25 shall now be granted. The petitions for that incorpo- ration, and for the building of the present bridge, were proffered and granted up»n that condition. In the report of the committee upon that petition (which is one of the clearest and best drawn documents upon the files of the legislature) that condition is re nized and sanctioned ; and the government by ac- cepting that report, and carrying it into effect by two legislative acts, has thereby done every thing in its power to quiet and satisfy all parties. It would have been useless to have inserted this restriction and con- dition in those acts ; for although the legislature ot this year can bind itself, it cannot bind its successor of the next. The legislative power expires annually on the day preceding the last Wednesday in May ; and, speaking constitutionally, is revived the next day in a new body, though consisting of many of the old members. Being thus annually organized, it has the power to rescind the old, and to enact new laws. But their faithfulness is the same. No correct legislature can be above those moral obligations, which arc over all, and binding upon all, and tor the conscientious discharge of which, its members arc amenable to the Supreme Government of the universe. In the application of these principles to the case of the parties contending for and against another Bridge, every impartial member of the General Court will examine for himself into those agreements and stipulations of the parties, which have been made the basis of and incorporated with the acts and proceedings of former legislatures. He will then perceive how im- possible it is, that the opposers of another bridge can be deceived by their confidence in the faith and j tice of the government. The following observatii will discover the nature and extent ot the injui which will be suffered by the Front Street Corp* tion and other inhabitants of the south end, should it appear that this confidence h.i> been ehhi r miscon- ceived or misplaced. I) 26 A question is made whether " Front Street Corpo- ration are not gainers by the compromise ?" It is roundly asserted in the pamphlet, that they are. But it is a fact capable of the clearest demonstration, that that Corporation, even ?iow, are great losers by the compromise ', and in the event of another bridge, not only they, but many others, will suffer much greater losses than iiave been already incurred. A part of the loss, how- ever, which has been sustained, was foreseen and cal- culated, at the time the compromise was made. To- tal destruction to the business and prosperity of the south end was threatened. The inhabitants pre- ferred a partial loss to entire destruction. The sequel will show, that this loss has been suffered to promote the convenience of the public, the interests of the South Boston Association, and the other owners of the peninsula, and from motives of self preservation actuating those, the whole labour of whose lives was attempted to be grasped by the Vandal hand of specu- lation, under the imposing pretence of promoting the public good. This will be further elucidated, and placed beyond the possibility of denial. An open and avowed deni- al is solicited. The proofs on our part are ready, and we are willing to rest the whole issue on the point, (hat the Front Street Corporation, and other inhabitants of the south end, have been, are, and 'will be losers, and that the South Boston Association, and the inhabitants of the peninsula have been, are, and will be gainers by the com- promise. The south end inhabitants petitioned to be incor- porated with permission to build Front Street and the present bridge. Their motives for so doing, as expressed in their petition (a copy of which is No. 4, in the Appendix) were to make the south harbour of Boston more commodious for navigation and com- merce, and to preserve it from the destruction threat- ened by a bridge from South Street. The idea of profiting by the street was not entertained. The on< 2Y ly part of the expense to which they thus submit themselves, and for which they expected tobereim- bursed, w.is the cost of the bridg \ ; they prayed for a grant of such a toll on the bridge, as would reim- burse them for building it. But it wis mad^ a qua run by Otis and M tson, that the bridge should be transferred to them and tlu-ir associates , that is their object was solely to benefit the Dorchester land, the bridge must be placed in their hands, that they might lessen the toll at their pleasure, or make it free, to promote the settlement of Nook Hill. The whole cost of the street was given by the south end inhabitants, as the price of their redemption from the greater c^ils and losses with which they icere threatened by a bridge from South Street. To give complete and full evidence of this, if more can be required, a recurrence to the bond, which has been often ostentatiously and falsely published, as being the only paper in existence relat- ing to, or having any connexion with the compro- mise, is again necessary. If building the street promised such immense profit, as the writer of the pamphlet pretends, and which he, by tortured infer- ences from mistated facts endeavours to show, the Front Street Corporation have realised, why were they subjected to the penalty of 50,000 dollars to build it ? Were their " senses so bewildered" as to require to be put under bonds to do that, by the per- formance of which, it is pretended, they will realize more than 250,000 dollars ? But it may be asked in return, why were Mason and Otis, and their a ciates, subjected to the same penalty unless they built the bridge ? // was to compel them to the pcrformani their stipulations ; to \m to build it Street might thereby be accommodjted, but that all t fences of any nea ' futile ', and the in':. / /> their great and only \ the prevention of an: bridge, and the preservation of their commcrci. ileges. In accomplishing these purposes, the Front 28 Street Corporation have already been assessed for the street dols. 70,912-50 cents, and another assessment of one dollar per foot, amounting to S3059 will be necessary, making dol. 73,962-50. They have also made other sacrifices to nearly dol. 46,000 (See Appen- dix, No. 5.) Such have been the cost and sacrifice these people have sustained to furnish a spacious and elegant avenue to South Boston, and destroy all claims and pretences for another bridge. For whose benefit has this sacrifice of Si 20,000 been made? Not for the Front Street Corporation, for it is dem- onstrated in the Appendix to be so much lost by them. The only artifice left to ingenuity basely em- ployed is, to pretend, that the Corporation have pro- fited by what they have redeemed and saved, and have no right to count the requisition and redemp- tion money as loss. But this position would be more than monstrous. If a man, having ten dollars, were threatened to be robbed, and a compromise should be made, by which the knight of the road should consent to take five, who, but the writer of the pam- phlet, would pretend, that five dollars were not lost by the compromise ? Having thus shewn the Front Street Corporation have been and are losers under the compromise, the question remains, whether they will not be losers in the event of another bridge ? It is conceded in the pamphlet, that another bridge would destroy their commercial privileges. In that event, therefore, not only the price of their redemption, but the very objects intended to be redeemed, will be destroyed and lost. Then indeed will they be not only in a state of " exile," but poverty. That Mason, Otis, Tudor and Greene, and their associates, have been, are and will be gainers by the compromise in the event of another bridge shall now be concisely and clearly exhibited. The whole amount vested in the present bridge, by them and others interested in their speculation, is 29 not 856,000 (as pretended in the pamphlet) but 836,000, and no more, (See Appendix No. 6.) What- ever sums they may have expended on turnpikes and other objects have no relevancy to the question. They might, With the same propriety, bring their family expenses into the calculation. It is contended ID the pamphlet, that all their interest in the present bridge will be lost in the event of another, and may' be considered as a donation to Front Street. If the present bridge prove a total loss to its owners, it must arise from there being no passing over it. It being a toll bridge, passing would produce income. If there should be no passing over it, of what advantage can it pojoibly be as an avenue to Front Street ? How lib- eral would be the " donation"! ! A gift charitable and generous indeed, and if not worthy to be registered in heaven, deserves a conspicuous column in all the Boston newspapers. But for argument's sake it is supposed the 36,000 dls. will be lost. How stands the account of profit and loss with them? The whole penin- sula without a bridge is fit only for agricultural pur- poses, and may, in that view, be considered worth from 150 to 200 dls. per acre. It is known that land owned by the South Boston Association, was purchas- ed before the present bridge was built, from less than 100 to 500 dls. per acre, and that since the erection of that bridge and Front Street, land has been sold there at the rate of 25 cts. per square foot or 1 i,coo dollars per acre. The 1 50 acres said in the pamphlet to be owned by Mason, Otis, Tudor and Greene, at that rate arc worth one million six hundred and fifty thousand dollars. Allow one half this sum to be deducted for sea walls, turnpikes, presents, and other extraordinary expenses in- cident to the establishment ; there are left 8 50,000 dollars. Allow the original co>t of the 1 50 acres to have been even 1 30,OOoaoIs. How much have the poor sufferers made by expending 36,-0 dls. in the present bridge ? The small sum ot ttven hundred and fifty thousand dol- lars, only. Thus have they been and thus are they gamers by the compromise ; and in the event of another bridge, they will still be gainers; for who will pretend that their land, even in the event of another bridge, will not be benefited much more than 36,000 dols. by being con- nected, as it now is, to a populous part of the old town by a bridge short of 1600 feet in length, especially when it is considered, that a bridge to South Street would be longer by more than a thousand feet. Thus the fact of loss to Front Street Corporation and other inhabitants of the south end, and of gain to the South Boston Association arid other inhabitants and owners of the peninsula, in any event, is establish- ed beyond] the possibility of doubt. It rests on a basis which violence cannot shake nor artifice under- mine. It defies the assaults of the open and manly, and despises the low attempts of the cowardly, intrigu- ing and disguised. In the concluding paragraph of the pamphlet, its writer discloses that the measures of his party are now to be changed. We shall now no longer dread the old experiments of intrigue and deception. There is an open declaration of war ; and it is the first in- stance of frankness in his party which it has conde- scended to exhibit ; but it is also a specimen of inso- lence which will meet its merited chastisement. The threat is evidently directed both at the town and the legislature ! It marks out the ground, and points out the weapons of the combat. Our answer to the chal- lenge is this ; if another bridge is an object, which it is "impossible to relinquish" the opposition to it is an objeet which will never be relinquished. If the har- mony of the town is to be interrupted while the pur- suit of that object is continued, every exertion will be made to restore that harmony by convincing the town of the folly of being made the tool of design- ing and deceitful men. If the dignity of the legislature should be impiously assailed, the author of so nefari- ous an attempt, will be pointed out by the finger of 31 scorn ; and if " eternal jealousies and strife" arc to be the consequences of deferring the grant, their promoters will be as likely to perish in thetn, as those for whose de- struction they are excited. We have thus torn the veil and exposed some few of the most gross misrepresentations of the pamphlet, in all their nakedness. We should have turned away- disgusted with the sight, did not our duty to the pub- lic demand of us to exhibit their deformity. A good cause requires not the aid of artifice or misrepresent- ation, and a bad cause, with their aid, and the assist- ance of intelligent heads, actuated by corrupt and de- praved hearts, cannot and will not succeed with hon- est men. APPENDI X. No, ]. Refiort of the Toisn's Committee, THE Committee chosen by the several "wards, agreeable to a tote of the town of the 17th inst. to consider the conditions oh which Dorchester Neck shall be annexed to Boston, beg leavf. TO REPORT That the lands on Dorchester Neck be annexed to, and incor- porated with the town of Boston on the following conditions ;— 1st, That a good and suitable Bridge be built from South Street, of 42 feet wide, with good accommodations for foot pas- sengers, who shall pass toll free ; and having two draws, one in the channel of 32 feet wide, and one on the flats, on the norther- ly side, of 28 feet wide, with a wharf of not less than 25 feet in width to each draw, on each side the bridge, extending below the bridge 200 feet, and above it 100 feet, and having a house on the wharf at the channel draw, for persons to be at, at all hours of the day and night, to hoist the draws, for vessels to pass whenever required, and the whole bridge to be well lighted. 2d, The Proprietors of the Bridge shall pay to the owners or masters of all vessels above 20 tons, passing up above the bridge to discharge their cargoes, at and after the rate of Jive cents per ton, register measurement, but nothing returning below the bridge. 3d, That there be inserted in the act of incorporation a clause, whereby it be provided, that if the inhabitants of the town, on the southern side of the bridge, apply to the legislature at any future period to be set oft", as a separate town, or annexed to any other, without the consent of the inhabitants of the northern side, that then and as soon as they do, the charter of the bridge shall cease to the then holders, and shall enure to the sole advantage of the old town of Boston. 4th, The Proprietors of the land to be annexed, shall consent that the Selectmen of the town of Boston shall immediately lay out such streets, public squares and market places, as they shall judge necessary for the public accommodation, without any com- pensation for tlie land so appropriated. 5th, There shall be two burial grounds, two school house lots, and two lots for houses of public worship, also to be laid out with- out any payment therefor. 6th, In lieu of the offer of one half of the proposed !)ridgc, there shall be set off by a joint committee of the proprietoi the one part, and the town of Boston on the oth r pan, upon the land tu lie annexed io tour different parts of the sam< . all the land thereon, (that is DOt u->cd Of set apart for public pur- poses) which shall be held at the disposal of the town oi Boston. All which is submitted. JOSEPH RUSSELL, /ur Order. No. 2. Bond executed between Messrs. Mason, Otis and their associates, mil South Eod Committee, as a measure preparatory to the compromise, which afterwards was ratified before Committee of both Branches of tti I tature. Articles of agreement made and concluded this \8t/i day of Febru- ary, A. I). 1804, between Jonathan Ma-son and Hani ^r. Cray Otis, of Boston, Esquires, in behalf of them-sttves and associates, of the first /'art, and William Brotvn, Arnold Welles, J'..-. y-Jres, Josiah Kna/ifi and Benjamin Coddard, ATcrchants, all of Boston, in behalf of themselves and associates, of the second /iart. WHEREAS the said parties of the first part contemplate, and intend to attempt to procure from the Legislature of M sachusettS) an act of incorporation) authorising them to erect a bridge, from the town of Boston's landing, so called, in Orange- Street, in said Boston, or from some place xout/urly thereof, to Dorchester Point ; and also to procure, if practicable, the annex- ation of said fioint to t/u And whereas the said parties of the second part, with then- associates, contemplate, and intend to form and till up ■ new street) runniii id bridge to Uainsloid's-Lane, so c idled, as is hcicaltcr described. Now this agreement witnesseth : First. The said parties of the first part, for themselves, their executors and administrators) do hereby covenant and agree with the parties of the second part) their executors, administrators and aasignS) that they will apply to the l i lature of this Com- monwealth) and use their utmost endeavours to obtain an ad of in' orporatSoD) for the purpose of enabling them to build a bridge) fr nn the Town's Landing in Orange Stn outh thereof, U> Dorchester Point, and another act for annexing the- said point to the town of Boston ; and that when said II ta shall be Obtained) they will) with all reasonable dispatch, commence the building of said bridge) and complete the same. idly. The- parties of the second part, for themselves) their executors and administrator*, tlo hereby covenant with the £ 3 parties of the first part, their executors, administrators and as- signs, that they will unite in their sincere and constant endeav- ours to enable the party of the first part to obtain the said two nets of the Legislature, until the same shall be obtained : And that whenever the act authorizing the erection of sakl bridge shall have passed, and the proprietors thereof shall begin to build said bridge, they will forthwith lay out and make, at their own expense, a certain street, or public highway, which shall run from Rainsford's Lane, so called, until it comes to said bridge ; the eastern line of said street to be at such a distance from the south western corner of Deacon Brown's house in Or- ange Street, that no part of said eastern line shall be nearer than 350 feet from the eastern line of Orange Street ; said road to be at least 50 feet wide in all its parts, and a good and sufficient stone fating next the sea ; and that the same shall be completed, on or before the first day of November, A. D. 1805. And to the true performance of their respective covenants the parties hereby bind themselves to each other in the penalty o£ fifty thousand dollars. In testimony whereof the parties have hereunto set their hands and seals the day and year before written* No. 3. Report of joint committee of both Houses on the Compromise. THE committee of both houses appointed to take into consid- eration the petition of Edward Tuckerman and others, praying that they may be incorporated for the purpose of making a ne\v street from the Town's landing in or near Orange Street, to Essex Street in the town of Boston, and also of erecting, a bridge from said landing to Nook Hill in the town of Dorchester, paying however toll to a certain description of vessels ; provided how- ei'cr, that 710 leave be given for the erection of a bridge to the north-- ward of said landings beg leave to report, that the several parties, viz. the petitioners, the petitioners for a bridge from South Street, and the proprietors of Roxbury canal, have effected a com/n-omise, which your committee ask leave to make the basis of their report, viz. 1 st, That the petitioners make a new street, as they have pray- ed for in their petition. 2d, That no leave be given to build a bridge to the northward of *aid town's landing. 3d, That a bridge be built at the place they have prayed foi> subject to the payment of a. reasonable toll, to certain loaded ves- sels passing the draw of said bridge. 4fh, Thnt tlit ri;.;ht to build said bridge) with all the con conn /;, be transferred from the petitioners, to the petitioners For a bridge from South Street in Boston to Nook Hill in Dorchester. Which is submitted, Hl'./A HOWARD, per order. In Senate, Feb. 33d, iso-i, Read and Accepted. 1) \YI1) COBB, President. In.House of Representatives, Feb. 33d, 1 Read and <- oncurred. II. G. OTIS, Speaker. No. 4. South J-.tid Petition to build Front Street, and ' ' Bridge. To the Hot. Senate and //oust- of Repreeentat monweahh of Ma**ach\ General Court assembled. The subscribers humbly shew, that they, with their associat arc desirous of being incorporated into a body politic, for the pur- pose of erecting a Bridge from, at or near the town's lam place in Orange Street, in the town of Boston, to Don h< Point — and also for the purpose of making a new Street from Essex Street through Rainsford's lane, so called ; running par- allel with the main street in Boston, to the place on the Boston tide, where they propose t<> erect the said Bridge, and to con! the said street in a proper direction to the town's land on B< neck ; — -said street to be at least fifty feet wide. By the attainment of this object, a new avenue will be opened to the town of Boston, across the narrowest part of the waters ng between the town and Dorchester Point, from the south- eastern part of the Commonwealth, The petitioners would fur- ther state, that they are satisfied that this project Would occasion Impediment and obstruction to the navigation which may ; the bridge proposed to lie built ; the)' are therefore v. i thai a condition, on \\ hich they nr.iv be in< orporated, shall be, that they pay to the masters of all loaded vessels passing Up 1 c, and of more than twenty tons burthen, ten cents per ton, hs a premium to induce them to pass said bridge. Your peti- tion. . . \c that the object of their petition cnihraces many public advantages. The south harbour of H '■••ton wilt Ac made more COmmodi tvlgatlon and commerce, audits fire-sent . s will be preserved from thr destruction with which they are threatened, by the erection of another Bridge Jr . — A large part of the Huts situated at the south part of the l will be covered, and the number of lots proper foi v I This petition of your petitioners is founded upon ftiz presump- tion that no liberty will be granted for the erection of any other bridge, from Boston to Dorchester peninsula, to the northward of the place where they propose to erect the said bridge, unless at some future period the increased settlement of this part of the country should be such, that the public exigences should require the same, in which case your petitioners will be as ready as any class of their fellow citizens to submit to any sacrifices for the public interest. And we further pray, that your Honours will grant us and our associates, such a toll as will reimburse us for the expense of build- ing said Bridge, as to your Honours shall appear just and reason- able. No. 5. Calculation of the Cost of Front Street ; the Loss incurred and to be incurred by the Proprietors, ifc. Certain sales made by Mr. Ellis are brought forward in the Pam- phlet as data to show the gain of Front Street Corporation. It will now be demonstrated from the same data, that the Corpora- ■ tion have made and must make]great sacrifces. It ought not to be denied, that Mr. Ellis obtained a good price. The purchasers' object was to have a wharf whereon they could continue the business in which they had long been engaged. This purchase was made soon after the compromise, under a convic- tion that the water communication Avould be forever secured to them ; this appears from their giving $5000 for a piece of flats on the east side of the street, bounding 100 feet upon the street ; the flats on that side, are of little value for house lots. The three pieces sold by Mr. D. Ellis, on the west side of the street measure 100 feet on Front Street, and 76 deep, including the 10 feet left open by agreement, and contain 7287 square feet which were sold for §4850 being 66 1-2 cents per square foot. These three pieces, when sold by Mr. Ellis, were in one lot (though conveyed in three parcels to accommodate the pur- chaser.) And the most eligibly situated of any one upon Front Street, and worth nearly double to many in other parts of the street, because it is within a few rods of the territorial centre of the town, pleasantly fronting on two streets, viz. east on Front Street, south on Harvard Street. Notwithstanding these advan- tages, and that the payments were accommodated to the wishes of the purchaser, he having eight years to complete them in, let the price of Mr. Ellis's estate (bought by Rice and Bridge) . be the standard by which to prove our statement. In this manner it will be evinced that the I I m will suffer a sacrifice of S73962 50 (the coat ■ •! the street) and an addit* I , 40) all which is considered as so much coatri« buted to the public and those interested in the South Boston the i » 'tn nit ri ial privilege! of tin South Harbour Iron tion by another br; First] to shew the < ost of the street K)50 feet) breadtb SO feet, height averag- ing \'- feet. The nents already laid, amounting t, is 70912 so Anotl.- menl will be required) for fencing and finishing the Street, of at least one dollar per loot is 3050 Cost of Street 73962 50 which is 48 rents for each superficial square foot. liy making the street there have been cut off and shut within it, and thereby rendered useless, 130491 feet of wharf (exclusive of abutment) valued at 40 cents per square foot, is 52196 40 Add to this 3050 feet of abutment, averaging at least 60 feet in depth, which was little used but as wharves, say half the value thereof, 20 cents per foot on 183,000 square feet, is 36600 — Front Street is built so far into the sea, as to leave the western side Hats, if) be raised, at least as high as the street, which will cost, taking the cost of the Btre< t for a standard, 48 cents per square loot. Now take the width, the same as sold by Mr. Ellis, 76 I which multiplied by the length 3050 feet is 231800 square feet to be filled up, at 48 cents per foot, is 111*64 — ,4022 90 This amount must be expended before the house lots will be fit for sal--. Now give credit fbt these houselota (all ofwhii h < so pting I will be much infe- rior to that sold by Mr. Ellis for reasons before stated) at the same price Mr- Ellis sold for. The measure being 3050 feet in length and 76 feet iw width, 1^ 231,800 square feet at 66 1--! cents, is 154147 i . tin- Corporation, Si 19875 90 The cunning and deceptive call ulator, in the pamphlet, omit- ted to add to the value of Mr. Ellis' estate, any thing for the gen- eral rise. And between twenty two and twenty three thousand t dollars which he has expended upon the premises since his purchase. To demonstrate this rise, the following is submitted. Mr. Ellis in 1794 and 1796 purchased his estate, then contain- ing 22960 square feet of land for $6383 33^ which is equal to 27 cents and 8 mills per foot. Mr. Knapp in 1800 (4 years be- fore Front Street was thought of) bought a port of the same land with no building of any kind on it, and on which Mr. Ellis from the time of his purchase to the time of the sg,le to Mr. Knapp, had not expended a single cent in improvement. Mr. Knapp paid for this piece which measures 5115 square feet $2000 cash, which is equal to 39 cents and one mill per foot. Accordingly between the time of Mr. Ellis' purchase and the time of the sale to Mr. Knapp, his land had risen in value more than 40 per cent. To exhibit further evidence of the cost of filling up the flats and to show that the writer of the pamphlet meant wilfully to de- ceive in the estimate which he gave the public, the following is subjoined, being the cost per square, (of 216 cubic feet,) paid by the proprietors of South Boston bridge for filling up the abut- ment adjoining the bridge on the Boston side. The first contract for mud, brought in scows, was $3 25 per square. Another contract for gravel, brought in carts, was at the rate of $4 per square. The last contract for gravel carted, was as high as 4s. per cart load, or more than §5 dollars per square. And yet in the pretended calculation, in the pamphlet, of the cost of Front Street, the writer allows but §2 per square. No. 6. Calculations of the Cost of fireaent Bridge, and of the amount vested therein by those interesed in the South Boston Speculation. The whole amount of expenditures by the Trea- surer's accounts, was between §56,000 and 57,000, say £5 6,000 But the money received back by the proprietors, arising from sales of materials not used, and $5,288 62 cents paid back from the town, being half the amount of filling up the town's land, as per agreement, together amounted to more than §7,000, say 7,000 Cost of bridge to proprietors $49,000 which divided by J 48, the number of si nrvs. er share, gives | 20 of the 89 shares belong to members of the Front Street Corporation) and other gentlemen of the south end; 10 loan* rtheT) most of whose connexions* and family , are at that part of he town. The remaining 9 belong to a gentleman of Roxbury. Deduct therefore 813,183 from 049,000, the cost l>f the bridge, leaves S55,818, or say 036)000 disbursed for present bridge by those proprietors who may be in favour of an* other ; making a difTerence of 030,000 between the amount as- icrted to have been disbursed by them and the real sum Pot is hat il aflecial fntrfloae*" the misrepresentation and exaggeration Here made will be readily seen. LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 014 077 956 8