Blackwell's Island Bridge: Legislation, Legal Challenges, and Finally, a Bridge

print this page

Fully a decade after its founding, the NY & LI Bridge Co. had an engineering plan but apparently little else. And, once again, a legislative fix was required to extend the deadline for construction, that – according to the 1871 amendment – was supposed to start by 1873.(28) On April 1, 1879, William wrote of the need for an extension of the charter, and followed up with other comments about it in May, culminating with a June 1 entry that the Governor had signed the bill. (Diary, 1879-04-01, 05-27, 06-01)

The legislation to which William referred once again extended the deadlines: the bridge construction had to begin within two years and be completed by June 1, 1885. More was included, however. It also revoked an earlier provision that either New York or Queens Counties could take over the bridge by paying the company its costs plus 33.3 percent. The need not to obstruct navigation – a matter that would cause roadblocks in following years – was addressed by increasing the bridge's clearance above high tide to 150 feet from 130 feet. Clearly, the lengthy delay in bringing the project to fruition was giving the legislature opportunities to change the terms of the original charter while adjusting the deadlines.(28)

Though William's diary entries became very sporadic, with some years having no comments about the bridge and others years just a smattering, the project – under Rainey's leadership – continued. Finances, legal challenges from landowners, legislative "fixes," and concerns about the navigability of the East River if the bridge was built, were the major themes for the 1880s and 1890s.

In March 1881 the first contract was awarded for construction and work did at last begin on a pier on the Queens side of the river.(11) It was not completed, however, due to lack of money. Meantime, its twin project – the Brooklyn Bridge -- was under construction and opened on May 24, 1883.(33)

Time, once again, was running out on Rainey and the bridge advocates; and, yet again, the New York State Legislature stepped in. On May 29, 1885 – just three days before the completion deadline set in 1879 -- an amendment was passed to require that construction start by May 30, 1888. This time there was no completion deadline, but there were requirements that certain amounts of money be spent each year of construction, beginning with $100,000 in 1889. The legislature apparently was looking for financial commitment from the bridge promoters to back-up their scheme.(29)

What's more, the legislation introduced new specifications – saying that the bridge "... shall commence in the Fourth avenue ...," and that necessary approaches needed to be built to connect with the Harlem railroad, and other railroads in the city of New York. As time went on, the legislators were becoming more enmeshed in defining the phantom bridge – though those efforts did not ultimately improve the project's future.(22)

Legal Challenges

That legislation, however, was challenged in the courts.

An 1889 decision in the New York State Supreme Court found that the law under which the company was formed did not provide for a railroad bridge and that the original charter had lapsed because of the missed deadline; that the 1885 statute was unconstitutional and that the company had forfeited its new charter by failing to begin work before May 30, 1888. Legislative and legal maneuvering would continue to address these problems.(38)

The delaying effect of the legal morass was evident when in 1892 the New York State Legislature once again adopted changes to the NY & LI Bridge Co. authorizing statute. While extending the deadline for construction to begin to March 3, 1893, the amendment provided that "The supreme court shall extend the time herein allowed for the commencement or the completion of said bridge upon satisfactory proof that such commencement or the completion has been delayed by the pendency of legal proceedings ...."(30)

One contentious issue, documenting that the Blackwell's Island Bridge would not interfere with navigation, had reached a more satisfactory conclusion than the seemingly never-ending legal hurdles when, in 1887, the Secretary of War approved the plan and location of the bridge. Interestingly, the correspondence from the Army Engineers to the NY & LI Bridge Co. was addressed to the company's president -- C. A. Trowbridge – perhaps a relative of T. P. Trowbridge.(2)

While litigation droned on, the project got a new spark of life in 1893 when Austin Corbin entered the fray. The New York Times, the Evening World and the Brooklyn Eagle all announced in 1893 that Corbin had gained control of the NY & LI Bridge Co., thereby obtaining a franchise to build the Blackwell's Island Bridge, including rail lines. It was portrayed, in the World at least, as a way for Corbin to reach his goal without having to obtain a new charter. Corbin himself is quoted as saying: "A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush," when referring to acquiring the franchise.(1)(5)(12)(36)

Corbin, a railroad and real estate magnate, had taken the reins of the LIRR in 1880. He stepped in and acquired the bankrupt company. Corbin consolidated the rail properties on Long Island and ushered in what is considered the "Golden Age" of the LIRR.(4)(19)(45)

Corbin was a major landowner on the eastern end of Long Island and was involved in a variety of efforts to improve rail service to the island and develop transportation connections to Manhattan. One of those – making Fort Pond a free port – was designed to bring population and commerce to his thousands of acres of undeveloped land. The Blackwell's Island Bridge drew his attention, as it had his predecessors, as an entry for the Long Island Railroad into Manhattan, and as access from Manhattan directly to Coney Island, Rockaway and other pleasure spots. Additionally, as one of the directors of the Brooklyn Elevated Railroad, Corbin saw the potential to connect that railroad to Manhattan.(7)
(20)(21, p. 15)(24)(43)(45)

So, despite the legal challenges to the company's franchise and right to provide a rail line, control of the NY & LI was nonetheless viewed as a shortcut to building a bridge that would include rail tracks. Indeed, The New York Times article specifically stated that the "... legislation passed in 1892 gave the company the right to lay tracks and operate a railroad."(30)

That conclusion concerning the right to have a rail line on the bridge, however, was not borne out as the matter continued to be litigated. The other key issue that continued to stall progress was the right to condemn property for bridge construction. The original charter gave the company rights similar to those granted railroads to enable their construction. That did not keep landowners, however, from protesting. William himself commented on such a situation on August 22, 1894, when he wrote that "Schemehorn" had obtained an injunction. F.A. Schermerhorn was a landowner who blocked the company from excavating on his property.(6)(32)(34)

The most crucial suit, however, was brought by Lenox Smith, who owned land at 3rd Ave. and 64 St. – "ground zero" for the Manhattan side of the bridge. The outcome of this litigation, which ultimately led to a decision by the New York State Court of Appeals on February 25, 1896, confirmed the legitimacy of the company's franchise and ability to acquire the needed land.(32)

Prior to that decision and in the face of the legal challenges, construction began anew in 1894, with caissons being towed to the Long Island side of the bridge and construction for piers beginning near Blackwell's Island. William himself reported taking a boat trip to Blackwell's Island and seeing the bridge's caissons.(Diary, 1895-09-08)(14)(15)

Later that year, in William's penultimate bridge diary entry, his interest is still obvious when he comments on an article in the New-Yorker Staats-Zeitung. It is a brief report of a high-level governmental meeting where the bridge was discussed and the chief engineer talked about his "soundings." Given the reality of the project's false-starts and out-right failures, the story would seem to be a plant by supporters seeking to show that the project was still alive.(Diary, 1895-09-20)(35)

While the statutory and legal aspects of the process were a tangle, the ability of the backers to engineer legislative fixes – at times with active support and lobbying from William -- and to juggle legal challenges was formidable. But the most fundamental issue of the multi-decade effort was never resolved: funding.

Municipal financial support was never authorized; the bridge seemed to be viewed as a project for the benefit of developers and wealthy commercial interests. The legislative deadline extensions, which were essentially "private bills" passed to benefit one company, were needed because the franchise for the bridge was not accompanied by the investment required to translate it into reality.

As late as 1894 the search for capital was still underway, shown when William reported that "ex Comptroller Theo. W. Myers" had sailed to London – the financial capital of the world, presumably to seek financing for the bridge.(Diary, 1894-03-25) Myers' involvement is somewhat ironic. Earlier, in his capacity as the city's Comptroller, he attended a meeting with Rainey, the mayor and other officials concerning the value of land Rainey wanted at 64th Street and either side of Blackwell's Island. Rainey offered $1000 for all the various lots involved. Myers, in his capacity as a city official, responded that the value was $3000 for each lot. Once out of office, he apparently was representing the NY & LI Bridge Co. in its never-ending search for funds. Whatever Myers' plans, in the end the funding was not obtained, and decades of engineering, legislation and legal battles were for naught. The NY & LI Bridge Company declared bankruptcy in 1895.(3)(21, p. 9)

Despite three decades of activity, the Blackwell's Island Bridge did not come to fruition as a private project. Austin Corbin, the main power broker spearheading the effort, died in 1896, as the result of an accident in his carriage. The project essentially died with him. Dr. Rainey remained the lone public voice for the bridge. Although a broken and bankrupt man, Rainey never gave up hope and later became known as the "Father of the Bridge." In 1917 the City of New York created an East River waterfront park and named it "Rainey Park.(4)(17)(21, p. 14)(42)

Finally, a Bridge

Ultimately, it was pressure by a group formed in 1897 and called the "Committee of Forty," the emergence of the consolidated City of New York in 1898, and public funding in 1899 that led to the construction of a bridge spanning the East River at Blackwell's Island, now known as Roosevelt Island. The City began construction on the bridge in 1901. It was completed in March 1909, with the official opening ceremony attended by Dr. Rainey -- on June 18. Known as the Queensboro (or 59th Street) Bridge, it cost $20 million. It is a multi-span cantilever structure; the western span is 1182 feet and the eastern 984 feet. Including approaches it is 7449 feet long. As originally built, it did have rail tracks, which were removed by 1942, and trolley tracks, which were gone by 1958.(21, p. 9, 10)(23)(40)(42)(44)

William's nephew, Charles H. Steinway, was a member of the executive committee organized to celebrate the opening that became a truly remarkable affair. The committee produced a 96 page brochure, covering the eight days of celebratory activities from June 12 to 19. There were concerts, carnivals, two hours of fireworks and on the final day the crowning of the "Queen of the Bridge."(21, pp. 59-62)(22)

Queensboro Bridge led to a real estate boom in Queens. In only ten years the population grew from 275 thousand to half a million; by the 1950s over 200 million persons resided in Queens. Considered "a work of art" as well as a "tool of travel" the bridge has been designated a national monument, and is, according to the Greater Astoria Historical Society, "an exuberant piece of the urban fabric."(21, p. 85-86, 102)

[dl/les]

Sources:
1. "Across East River," Evening World, November 29, 1893, p. 3.
2. Annual Report of the Chief of Engineers, United States Army, To the Secretary of War, for the Year 1888. Part IV. Washington: Government Printing Office, 1888, pp 2471-72.
3. "Another Hearing For Dr. Rainey, The New York Times, February 9, 1893, p. 8.
4. "Austin Corbin Dead," The New York Times, June 5, 1896, p. 1.
5. "Austin Corbin in Control," The New York Times, November 29, 1893, p.9.
6. "Begun, to be Stopped," Evening World, August 21, 1894, p. 6.
7. "Big Boom for Long Island," The New York Times, May 12, 1895, p. 24.
8. "Big city political machines and Boss Tweed," available from Fast Track Teaching Materials Web site.
http://www.fasttrackteaching.com/burns/Unit_4_Cities/U4_Tammany_Hall_NYC.html
9. Billington, David P. "Bridge Engineering" available from Enclopædia Brittanica Web site.
http://www.britannica.com/technology/bridge-engineering#ref592341
10. "Blackwell's Island Bridge," The New York Times, March 29, 1877, p.8.
11. "The Blackwell's Island Bridge," New-York Tribune, May 1, 1881, p. 12.
12. "A Bridge over Blackwell's Island," The Brooklyn Daily Eagle, December 15, 1893, p. 10.
13. "City of New York & Boroughs: Population & Population Density from 1790," available from Demographia web site.
www.demographia.com/dm-nyc.htm
14. "Corbin's Great Bridge," The New York Times, November 25, 1894, p. 8.
15. "Daily Star January 1895," available from the Greater Astoria Historical Society Web site
http://www.astorialic.org/starjournal/1800s/1895january_p.php
16. "DOC's 'Other' Bridge Began on Blackwell's Island 100 Years Ago," available from New York Correction History Society Web site.
http://www.correctionhistory.org/html/chronicl/nycdoc/html/qnsboro2.html
17. "Dr. Thomas Rainey, Bridge Father Dead," The New York Times, May 30, 1910, p. 12.
18. "Edward Wellman Serrell," available from the World Public Library Web site
http://www.worldlibrary.org/article/whebn0022324803/edward%20w.%20serrell
19. Fischler, Stan. Long Island Rail Road. St. Paul, MN: Voyageur Press, 2007, p. 38,-39.
20. "Free Port of Entry," The New York Times, February 19, 1895, p. 7.
21. The Greater Astoria Historical Society and the Roosevelt Island Historical Society. Images of America: The Queensboro Bridge. Charleston, SC: Arcadia Publishing, 2008.
22. "Greatest Convention in Queens History," The Brooklyn Daily Eagle, October 16, 1908, p. 6.
23. "History of the New Bridge," The New York Times, June 14, 1909, p. 6.
24. "It May Boom the Elevated," The New York Times, January 5, 1894, p. 9.
25. Laws of the State of New York, Passed at the Ninetieth Session of the Legislature. Albany, NY: Banks and Brothers Law Publishers, 1867, v. 1, Chap. 395 and 399.
26. Laws of the State of New York, Passed at the Ninety-fourth Session of the Legislature. Albany, NY: 1871, The Argus Company, 1871, v. 1, Chap. 437, pp. 861-62.
27. Laws of the State of New York, Passed at the Ninety-fifth Session of the Legislature. Albany, NY: V. W. M. Brown, 1872, v. 2, Chap. 880, pp. 2164-69.
28. Laws of the State of New York, Passed at the One Hundred and Second Session of the Legislature. Albany, NY: A. Bleecker Banks, 1879, Chap. 426, p. 479.
29. Laws of the State of New York, Passed at the One Hundred and Eighth Session of the Legislature. Albany, NY: Banks & Brothers, 1885, Chap. 392, pp. 635-37.
30. Laws of the State of New York, Passed at the One Hundred and Fifteenth Session of the Legislature. Albany, NY: Banks & Brothers, 1892, v. 1, Chap. 411, p. 852-56.
31. "Local Intelligence, The Bridge to Brooklyn," The New York Times, June 27, 1867, p. 2.
32. "Long Island City's Bridge," Brooklyn Daily Eagle, April 5, 1896, page 8.
33. "May 24, 1883: Brooklyn Bridge Opens," available from History.com Web site.
http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/brooklyn-bridge-opens
34. "New Bridge Builders Enjoined," The Sun, August 22, 1894, p. 6.
35. "The New East-River Bridge," New-Yorker Staats-Zeitung, September 19, 1895, p.10.
36. "New York City," New-York Tribune, December 16, 1893, p. 12.
37. "The New-York and Long Island Bridge Company," The New York Times, June 26, 1872, p. 5.
38. "No Blackwell's Island Bridge," The New York Times, November 8, 1889, p.3.
39. "Poppenhusen Institute," available from the Forgotten New York Web site
http://forgotten-ny.com/2012/06/poppenhusen-instutute/
40. "Queensboro (59th Street) Bridge," available from the NYCRoads Web site.
www.nycroads.com/crossings/queensboro.
41. "Queensboro Bridge," available from the ASCE Metropolitan Web site.
http://www.ascemetsection.org/content/view/433/1017/
42. "Rainey Park." available from New York City Department of Parks & Recreation Web site
ww.nycgovparks.org/parks/rainey-park-q048/history
43. "Rapid Transit to Long Island," The New York Times, December 17, 1893, p. 24.
44. Reier, Sharon. The Bridges of New York. New York: Quadrant Press, 1977, pp. 42-44.
45. Schaer, Sidney C. "Riding the LIRR Together." available from the Brian Meyette Web site
http://www.meyette.us/NewsdayCorbinArticle2.htm
46. "The Second East River Bridge. Election of Directors of the New-York and Long Island Bridge Company – Description of the Enterprise," The New York Times, July 1, 1875, p. 8.
47. Trowbridge, W. P. Proposed Plan for Building a Bridge across the East River at Blackwell's Island. New York: D. Van Nostrand, 1868.
48. "What is a Truss Bridge?" available at Tennessee Dept. of Transportation web site.
https://www.tn.gov/tdot/article/trussbridges