Area History: Watson's Annals of Philadelphia and Pennsylvania, 1857, Vol I: Chapters 34 - 39 Contributed for use in USGenWeb Archives by EVC. USGENWEB NOTICE: Printing this file by non-commercial individuals and libraries is encouraged, as long as all notices and submitter information is included. Any other use, including copying files to other sites requires permission from the submitters PRIOR to uploading to any other sites. We encourage links to the state and county table of contents. ____________________________________________________________ WATSON'S ANNALS of PHILADELPHIA and PENNSYLVANIA Vol. I Written 1830 - 1850 Chapter 34. THE DRAWBRIDGE AND DOCK CREEK As early as the year 1691, it appears from "the petition of the inhabitants of Philadelphia to the Governor and Council", signed by thirty-two inhabitants, that there was then a request made that the open area of Dock swamp, &c., might be for ever left open as a public highway for the general benefit of the citizens. The petition appears to have been occasioned by Jeremiah Elfreth, and others, attempting to build on some parts of it. I abstract the pith of the reading in the words following, to wit: "Whereas, Philadelphia was located because of its natural advantages of easy landing and contiguous coves, that by little labour might be made safe and commodious harbours for vessels, safe from winter and storms. [This alludes to Dock swamp, and probably the area from Green street to Kensington Point Pleasant.] Accordingly the first settlers, invited by those conveniences, seated them there, in the year 1682, and landed their goods at that low sandy beach, since called the Blue Anchor --- [tavern]. [This beach means the lot of one hundred feet breadth on Front street, in front of Budd's row, (as then called), being the first ten houses north of the drawbridge, and extending two hundred and fifty feet into the river). Since then all persons have used it as a common free landing for stones, logs, hay, lumber, and such other goods as could not with like ease and safety be landed at any other wharf and place --- We, the inhabitants, to our great grief, have been informed that some persons, obtaining a grant from the Commissioners, have encroached on a part of that public flat sandy beach, and thus diminishing the common landing --- and knowing no landing is so convenient, we beseech the Governor and council would be pleased to order the bounds and breadth of the same." "And we also further beg, that all, or at least so much of the cove, at the Blue Anchor, [the house now Garrett's tobacco store, north-west corner of Front and Dock streets], as possible, may be laid out for a convenient harbour, to secure shipping against ice or other dangers of the winter --- there being no other place by nature so convenient for the ends proposed." Signed by --- Humphrey Murrey, [called "Mayor], John Holme [Surveyor General], David Lloyd [Speaker of Assembly and Clerk of Court], Thomas Budd [owner of the row], William Bradford [the first printer, and who was printer of the New York government for fifty years], James Fox, Nathaniel Allen, Philip Howell, William Say, Thomas Griffith, Andrew Griscom, Philip Richards, and twenty others. It appears that a meeting of the Governor and Council was accordingly convened on the 3d of 6mo., 1691. --- Present, Thomas Lloyd, Deputy Governor, and John Simcock, John Delavall, Thomas Duckett, Griffith Owen, William Stockdale and John Bristow, --- and they proceed to decree and order, "that in consequence of the application of the Mayor, Humphrey Murrey, in behalf of the said city", praying them "to regulate the landing place, the end of the street, near the Blue Anchor, being the only cartable landing place to serve the south end of the town, and has been so used and enjoyed, till of late it was granted away by the Commissioners of Property, whereupon it is ordered, that the said Mayor and Aldermen [of course it is probable the preceding petition, signed by thirty-two inhabitants, were they] have notice to attend the Governor and council, to view the same --- [which was done accordingly]. And upon the subject of a harbour for shipping, &c., near where the Blue Anchor stood, the Governor and Council duly weighing the powers granted by the King to Governor Penn for erecting keys, harbours and landings, it is hereby declared and ordered, that there shall be left a vacancy between the north side of John Austin's frame of a house, upon the bank, and Society Hill, extending about four hundred feet in breadth towards the point of said hill, for a public landing place and harbour for the safety of ships and other vessels, and the same so to continue, until the proprietary's pleasure be known to the contrary, (which it is certain he never did signify, and more especially as his city charter of 1701, did confirm this very area), notwithstanding any encroachments, grants or patents made of the said vacancy by the Commissioners of Property to any person whatsoever". "And it is further ordered, that Jeremiah Elfreth, and all other persons concerned, pretending to have any title or right to the said vacancy or landing place, [meaning in front of Budd's row and north of the Drawbridge] shall desist and forbear encumbering the same --- but that they be repaid for their materials put upon the same." It appears, respecting the premises, that the Commissioners of Property, who had granted the above invasions, became dissatisfied with the above supreme decree of the Council --- they, therefore, did what they could, by a nugatory protest, under date of the 19th of 11 mo., 1691, to wit : Captain William Markham, Robert Turner and John Goodson, saying, "Whereas, complaint was made to us by William Salloway, Griffith Jones and Jeremiah Elfreth, that Thomas Lloyd (Governor), Humphrey Murrey (Mayor), and others, did often last summer come on their bank lots, and commanded their workmen to desist, to their delay and damage; and whereas, William Salloway was refused by David Lloyd, Clerk of Court, to have his patent recorded --- all which enormities we consider to infringe on the rights of the proprietary to dispose of all lots and lands within this province, &c., by his commission to us; therefore, we do in his name assert the patents granted by us to the above-named persons to be good and sufficient to them". It now becomes a question which are the places referred to above; I should judge that John Austin's frame house must have stood on the area, now open north of the Drawbridge on the east side of Front street; and that the four hundred feet was to extend from the north side of that house, down town, southward, to the extreme projecting point (towards the river) of Society Hill, (which lay below Spruce street) and had its boundary northward, about the sixth house below Spruce, in Front street, and thence it inclined south-eastward, over Water street, to the river, having its margin watered by the Dock swamp. We ought, therefore, by this grant, to have had now an open view, from about the late Hamilton's wharf and store, down towards Pine street, of as much extent, as it now is, from Front to Second street, which is so near four hundred feet as to be three hundred and ninety-six feet. I infer, that what was called "the sandy beach" before Budd's row, was called also the bank lots, because it was in the line of Front street, which are, and were, so called; and especially because the complaints of Elfeth and others, who encroached on the beach, said they were molested on their bank lots. In the year 1701, October 25, William Penn grants the charter of the city of Philadelphia, and therein ordains, that the landing place now and hereafter used at the Penny-pot house (Vine street), and the Blue anchor, (Drawbridge) saving to all persons their just and legal rights and properties in the land so to be open; as also the swamp, between Budd's buildings and the Society Hill, shall be left open and common for the use and service of the said city and all others, with liberty to dig docks and make harbours for ships and vessels in all or any part of said swamp. "The first house, (says R. Proud) was built by George Guest, and not finished at the time of the proprietor's arrival". This house of Guest's was in Budd's row, and was kept by him as a tavern, called the Blue Anchor --- the same afterwards called the Boatswain and Call, and lately superseded by a new building as a large tobacco - house, by Garrett. Robert Turner, in his letter of 1685 to William Penn, says John Wheeler from New England is building a good brick house by the Blue Anchor --- Arthur Cook is building him a brave brick house, near William Trampton's on the Front street --- and William Trampton has since built a good brick house by his brewhouse and bakehouse, and let the other for an ordinary. Mrs. Lyle, an ancient inhabitant, seen by Charles Thomson, who had come out with William Penn, said they chose to locate on the Dock creek as a place of business, because of its convenient and beautiful stream, which afforded them the means of having vessels come up close under their bakehouse, located below Second street. The ancient Mrs. Claypole too, who lived on the north side of Walnut street, east of Second street, spoke much of the beautiful prospect before their door, down a green bank to the pretty Dock creek stream. Henry Reynolds, of Nottingham, (Md.) a public Friend, lived to the age of 94 years, and at his 84th year came to Philadelphia with his grandson Israel, who since told me of it. He there showed him an old low hipped-roof house in Front street, above the Drawbridge, (western side) at which place he said he had often cultivated corn. He said he often used to sit in a canoe in Dock creek, at the back end of that lot, (which belonged to him) and there caught many and excellent fish. He told him also of many occasions in which he was in the company and converse of William Penn, both before and after his leaving Chichester in England, from which said Henry came. What is curious in the above case is, that the above - described lot of Henry Reynolds, which ran from Front to Second street quite across the creek, was at first so little regarded by him, (who had gone to his lands of 1000 acres, at Nottingham, near the line, and deemed at the time as within Penn's province) that he took no measures nor pains to exclude the city squatters. It was assumed by others; and the pacific principles of the owner would not allow him to contend for it. The holders had procured a fictitious title, from two maiden women of the name, in Jersey, but they were not relatives, and had made no claim ! The present Israel Reynolds of Nottingham, and other heirs, where the family is numerous, tried the case of ejectment some years ago before Judge M'Kean, who charged the jury not to allow such long unmolested possession to lapse, as a necessary means of preventing numerous other contentions; for in truth, many of the country settlers who became entitled to corresponding city lots, so little regarded their value, as to utterly neglect them --- or at best, they leased them for a trifle for one hundred years, which they then deemed equivalent to an eternity; but which now, in several cases I am told, is becoming an object to reclaim by unexpected heirs, or more properly, by sordid persons with no better titles than their knowing the defects in the titles of present and long undisputed occupants. In 1699, the only two tanyards, then in the city, were then on Dock creek, viz.: Hudson's and Lambert's and but few houses near them; and yet, from those few houses, many died of yellow fever, communicated from Lambert, who sickened and died in two days ! "In 1704, the Grand Jury present "the bridge, going over the dock at the south end of the town", as insufficient and dangerous to man and beast. It was for a while before used as a ferry place. In 1706, the Grand Jury again speak of the place of the bridge, saying they have viewed the same, and found the bridge had been broken down, and carried away by storm, and recommend it to be rebuilt. They present also the wharves between Anthony Morris' brewhouse (above the bridge) and John Jones', as very injurious to the people along King street --- (now Water street). In 1712, they again present the public kennel there as full of standing water. In 1713, they present, as not passable, the Drawbridge (the first time so named !) at the south side of Front street, and the causeway at the end of said bridge. And again, they say, "the bridge at the dock mouth", and the causeway betwixt that and Society Hill, want repair --- so also the bridge over the dock and Second street. In 1739, the citizens present a petition that the six tanners on dock creek shall be obliged to remove their yards out of the town, and as being nuisances and choking up the dock, which used to be navigable formerly as high as Third street. They compromise, by agreeing to pave their yards, &c., and not thereafter to burn their tan on the premises, so as to smoke up the neighborhood. [Note : tan = new hides converted into leather by treatment with an infusion of tannin-rich bark] In 1739, Hamilton's fine new buildings near the bridge [the same place lately bearing his name, on the north side of the dock] took fire, and were called a great loss, as an ornament to the town --- they had been used for a dancing room. They were consumed before they were finished. Only three years before, Budd's long row took fire, but was extinguished. In 1740, --- A stone bridge was erected over Dock creek at Third street --- the mason work done by Thomas Hallowell for 28 Pounds, and the stone and lime costing 51 Pounds. The original account of which, in the handwriting of Andrew Hamilton, Esq., is in my possession. In 1741, the Grand Jury present the streets laid out along each side of the dock between Second and Third streets, as well as the said dock, as much encumbered by laying great heaps of tan therein. In High street the water-course, from the widow Harman's to the common-shore across High street, is very much gullied and dangerous. Thus intimating, as I conceive, that there was then a common-shore or landing for wood, &c., as high up Dock creek as to the corner of Fourth and High streets. In 1742, John Budd, as heir to "Budd's long row", claims the ends of the lots bordering on the dock, and publicly proposes to convey "the whole swamp" (the present Dock street) to any who will buy his titles. In 1747, the Grand Jury present that it is the univeral complaint of all the neighbours adjacent to the dock, that a swamp, near it, for want of cleansing, &c., [by not draining along Spruce street, I presume] has been of fatal consequence to the neighbourhood in the last summer. In 1747 --- October --- On a representation made to the Common Council, that "the swamp between Budd's row and Society Hill", as it now lies, is a great nuisance, and injurious to the health of those near it, it was resolved to appoint Benjamin Franklin, William Logan, &c., as a committee to consider of the best means of removing the nuisance, and of improving the said swamp --- [laying along on the north side of Spruce street, where is now the city lot]. At the same time an address was moved to the proprietor on the same occasion. Afterwards, in February, 1748, the committee report, that there shall be a convenient dock of sixty feet wide as far as the said swamp extends westwards, --- a branch of thirty feet wide on the south-west, and forty feet wide on the north-west, to be left open for the reception of flats, boats, and other small craft --- that the remainder ought to be filled up above the side, and walled in with a stone wall, and made landing places for wood, &c. --- that the said dock be dug out, so deep that the bottom may always be covered with water --- that the common sewer on the south-west branch (Little Dock street now) be continued to the dock. They further add, that the owners, adjoining to the dock, have agreed to dig out their respective shares, provided the city bear the expense of the floodgates at the several bridges. In 1748, Secretary Peters, in writing to the proprietaries, speaks of filling up the dock swamp ground on the northern side of Spruce street, by using the ground from the neighbouring hills. As the Dock creek, by neglect, was suffered to fill up and so have its bottom exposed to the eye and to the sunbeams, it was deemed by some likely to be pernicious to health. Such physicians as were unfriendly to its continuance openly declared it pernicious. Doctor Bond, for instance, asserted that fewer ounces of bark would be used, after its filling up, than pounds before ! Doctor Rush, after him, in later time, gave his influence to have it filled up, by exciting the people to an alarm for their health; for some time he stood quite unsupported. On the other hand, those who thought a stream of water, changing with the tide, an ornament to the city, (among whom Tench Francis appeared as a leader and a writer) were strenuous in endeavouring to preserve the original creek. In the present day, we are aware that a dredge could keep it deep enough, and the rich deposit for the use of land might defray the expense. In 1750, they present the arch over the Dock creek, on Chestnut street, as fallen down and dangerous, and --- In 1751, they present that part of Front street southward of the Drawbridge, and opposite to the city lots, as impassable for want of filling up, &c. --- and In 1753, they present Spruce street, from Front to near Second street, as impassable. In 1753, "The Mayor and Commonalty of Philadelphia" propose to let the lot of ground of one hundred feet in breadth on the east side of Front street, north of the Drawbridge, thence two hundred and fifty feet into the river. In consequence of this, the Wardens, Commissioners, Assessors, and Overseers of the poor, at the request of the Freemen of this city, present a memorial to the Mayor and Commonalty, assembled on the 16th of February, 1753; an abstract of which read, to wit : "That by the mutual consent of our worthy proprietary and the inhabitants, the two public landing places, at the Penny-pot house and Blue Anchor, were appointed to be left open and common, for the use of the inhabitants, and as much so as any of the streets". "That the landing place at the Blue Anchor, was at first very large and commodious, and of much greater extent then it is at present. That in or about the year 1689, the proprietary commissioners made grants to several persons for lots on the river Delaware, which were a part of the said landing place." --- "That the Mayor and inhabitants, knowing these grants were an infraction of their rights in the same, petitioned the Governor and Council for redress; that therefore, the said Governor and council decreed the removal and clearance of materials from the same, so as to restore the same to the original design of a public and common - landing; that therefore, the landing place remained free and open upwards of sixty years --- that the charter of 1701 ordained the said landing places to be left open and common. That by long experience, the said landings appear to be of great service, affording landing for fire-wood, charcoal, bark, timber, boards, stones. That the inhabitants are much dissatisfied with the proposal to let the said landing place on ground-rent for ever, and therefore hope they will rescind their Resolutions to let the same." It was not let. In 1764 the Common Council resolve to build a fish-market, "for the purpose of filling up the vacancy between the new stone bridge on Front street and the wooden bridge on King street (Water street). The stone bridge was built the year preceding. About this time parts of Front and Water streets were paved. The same building which was the fish market was standing, in altered condition, as a store until lately. It was raised chiefly by subscription. The present aged Colonel A. J. Morris told me he remembered, in his youth, seeing men digging for the foundation of the Second street bridge over Dock creek, to make a bridge of stone. There he saw the Irish diggers rejoicing, and saying they had dug up pure Irish turf ! He saw lumps, from a great depth, having a congeries of black roots. This agrees with the fact of having to drive piles for the Insurance Office on the north-east corner, and also with the fact of having to dig seventeen feet for the foundation of F. West's house in Dock street, where at twelve to thirteen feet, they came to complete turf. {Note : congeries = collection or aggregate} 1667 --- The Walnut street and Third street bridges, across the Dock creek, existed as late as this time, because both are publicly referred to then, in relation to a bill of sale for ground there. Very lately, too, remains of the Third street bridge were found under ground in digging near Girard's Bank. The aged Charles Thomson, Secretary of the Congress, told me he remembered an acquaintance who came out at the first settlement with Penn, and wintered his vessel at the lower part of Dock harbour, as a security against the ice. He also told me that he had, himself, seen sloops and schooners loading and unloading flour, grain, &c., in all the length of Dock creek, up to Second street bridge. The foot-pavements of Dock street are much higher now than then, probably as much as four to five feet. Some of the old houses lately in Dock street would prove this, by going down steps to the first floor, where they originally were up a step or two above ground. The making of a great tunnel through Dock creek, and filling up so much earth, was a labour of great magnitude, in the year 1784, when it was executed. Tanyards on Third street, south of Girard's Bank, adjacent to Dock creek, remained there until a few years ago, resting full three feet lower than the level of Third street. I am much indebted to the intelligence and observation of the late Samuel Richards, a long resident of "Budd's row", for his accurate knowledge of facts and occurrences in his neighbourhood. He was a silversmith --- of the Society of Friends --- died in September, 1827, in his 58th year. I connect his communications with the following facts, to wit : Budd's row was formerly ten houses in all. Five houses on the west side of Front street nearest to the Drawbridge, on the north end, were built first; then five more in continuation and further north. They were the first built houses in Philadelphia --- (that is, the first five; and the "sixth house" was the house, now down, the second door north of Walnut street, on the west side of Front street). The houses of Budd's row were all two stories, were first framed of heavy timber and filled with bricks; the wood, however, was concealed, and only showed the lintels or plate pieces over the windows and doors, which were covered with mouldings; the uprights for windows and doors were grooved into that cross timber, and looked like ordinary door and window-frames. The whole buildings were founded under ground on a layer of sap slab-boards, and yet, strange to tell, when some of them were taken up, twenty-two years ago, by Richards, to build his present three-story brick house, No. 136, they were all hard and sound; but after a week's exposure to the sun and air, crumbled into dust ! This "row" of houses was so much lower than the present Front street, that for many years (I remember it) the paved carriage-street was from three to four feet higher towards the Drawbridge than the foot-pavement along the row, and therefore, there was at the gutter-way a wall of defence, to keep the pebble-pavement from falling in on the foot-pavement, and a line of post and handrail also protected it. At the south end of the foot-pavement, to ascend up into Dock street, there was a flight of four steps and a handrail --- this was before the old tavern, then called the Boatswain and Call, but which was originally Guest's "Blue Anchor", the first built house in Philadelphia, and where William Penn first landed from Chester. The houses numbered 126 and 128, were the only houses lately remaining of the original row, and they were of the second row. They had heavy girders exposed along the ceiling overhead, and have had their lower floors raised, and they are still below the street; they were very respectable looking houses, now modernised with large bulk window. The whole row of ten houses went up to the "stone house" of Andrew Dow, now plastered over. All the houses once had leaden framed windows, of diagonal squares, and all the cellars were paved, and used to have water in them occasionally. The houses on the east side of Front street, too, of the first day, were all lower than the street, and had also a wall of defence; the descent of Front street began at the "stone house" on the west; and on the east side as high up as the present high observatory house --- (probably the tenth house from the present south end). Morris' malthouse was there, and his brewhouse was on the east side of Water street. In one of these the Baptists, in 1700, kept their Meeting. Dock street was left open, forming a square (oblong) at the Drawbridge, so as to be dug out, down to Spruce street, for ships; but while it was in a state of whortleberry swamp (or unchanged from that, its original state) old Benjamin Loxley, who died in 1801, at the age of 82, filled it up, when a young man, for his board-yard. Old John Lownes (who lived in Budd's row) told Richards that he often gathered whortleberries in the swamp, on the north side of Spruce street. He and others told Richards too, that Dock creek, before directed out under the present bridge, used to, more naturally, or at least equally so, go out to the river across Spruce, west of Front street, and then traversed Water street, north of Sims' house. Samuel Richards, when digging down the old cellar to lay a deeper foundation to build his present house, (No. 136) at the depth of ten feet, came to the root or stump of a tree, eighteen inches in diameter, and in its roots, at their junction with the stump, he found a six-pound cannon ball, of which he made me a present --- it was not imbedded, but appeared to have been shot into the cluster of roots. At the house, No. 132, Front street, where John Crowley lately lived, which was built up in 1800, and Budd's house taken down, for Judge Mark Wilcox, near the first cellar wall, and deeper than the first foundation, (below the slabs) they came to an entire box of white pipes ! Richards saw them. Richards' father, and others, often told him that tidewaters used to go as high up Little Dock street as to St. Peter's church. The tunnel now goes there in the old bed, and under the lot which was Parson Duche's house. They also told Richards, that when Penn first came to the city, he came in a boat from Chester, and landed at Guest's Blue Anchor tavern --- this was an undoubted tradition, and was then, no doubt, the easiest means of transportation or travelling. [Guest was a Friend, and was in the first Assembly.] When Richards was a boy (and before his time) the Blue Anchor was kept by three Friends in succession --- say, Rees Price, Peter Howard, and Benjamin Humphreys --- they told of Penn's landing there. In rebuilding Garrett's house, on the site of the Blue Anchor inn, they had to drive piles thirty to forty feet deep to get a solid foundation; they cost $800. [Does not this indicate a much deeper original creek in Dock street than is generally remembered !] A foot-bridge used to cross Dock creek, from the west end of Garrett's stores, (on the south end of Dock street) over to near Hollingworth's stone house. It was a bridge with handrails, and was very high to permit vessels to pass under it. In the cellar door area of Levi Hollingsworth's stone house, there was formerly a very celebrated spring, which was much resorted to; and John Townsend, when aged 78, an uncle of Richards, told me he often drank excellent water from it --- it still exists, and is covered over in Hollingworth's cellar. Formerly there was a frame house directly in front of the stone house --- both were owned by William Brown, a noted public Friend. A little north of this spring stood a high mast-pole, surmounted at the top with what was called "the nine-gun battery", being a triangle, on each angle of which were three wooden guns, with their tomkins in, &c. Isaac Vannost was a pumpmaker, and this was his sign; before his yard lay many pine logs floating in the dock. The lots appertaining to Budd's row all run out to Dock street, and now one of the ancient houses remain there, a two-story brick; which is three feet below the pavement. Mr. Menzies, a watchmaker, at the south-west corner of Spruce and Front streets, and Paul Freno, a neighbour, told me that Loxley told them, that about thirty years ago, at digging the pump-well in Spruce street, before B. Graves' door, the diggers dug into something like the stern part of a vessel, and that the blue earth which came up, when dried and put to the fire, inflamed like gunpowder, which he believed it was. Menzies seemed to discredit this; but Freno believed, and so did the sisters of Loxley, (son of the old Captain Loxley), whom I consulted, and who said they saw the blue earth, and heard it said that it would inflame. These stories, being somewhat current, induced a belief that when Graves, some sixteen years ago, took down the old buildings along Spruce street there, to rebuild his present three houses, that he should probably find some remains of a vessel, and also that it would prove a boggy foundation. He therefore, prepared large flat stones to found his foundation upon; but to his surprise, it was not necessary, and he found at a proper depth good sand. But as the imagination was active, some of the workmen, whom I saw, told me they had actually come to the deck of a vessel ! But I am satisfied it was merely the remains of a kind of tanyard, which had sunk hogsheads and such slender vats for limepits, as Mr. Graves assured me he was satisfied they were. Some of the boards there they took for a deck ! There is direct evidence that the river came, in some early day, up Spruce street, probably to Little Dock street, because all the houses on the south side of Spruce street now to have very shallow cellars, and as high up as P. Freno's house, No. 28, (three doors west of Graves') water sill occasionally overflows his shallow cellar. Graves' cellars are all very shallow. The houses on both sides of Front street, below Spruce street, to the fifth house on the west, and to the sixth house on the east, have all water in their cellars, and some have sink wells, and others have wells and pumps in them. The bakehouse, No. 146, (an old house on the west side) is now emptied every morning of some water, and the house at the south-east corner of Spruce and Front streets is pumped out every day. None of these houses on the east side of Front street have any privies in their cellars, because of the inability to dig them there. The house on the east side of Water street, No. 135, at the corner of the first alley below Spruce street, has a drain, running down that alley (Waln's) to the river. It was discovered by Mr. P. Freno, thirty years ago, while he lived there; he told me he found the pebble pavement to cave in just in front of the sill of his cellar door, and he had the curiosity to dig down to it : at two feet below the cellar level, he found a wooden trunk of two and a half feet square, somewhat decayed; before he came to it, he could distinctly hear the flapping of fish in it from the river; he believed it traversed Water street, &c. Other persons tell me that that alley has since several times caved in and been filled up, but without digging down to examine the cause. I expect the wharf has now cut off the drain. Mr. Freno told me, that in laying the water pipes they found in Spruce street, near Graves', small brick tunnels, as if intended for drains originally from the houses; and at the corner of Spruce and Front streets there appear two or three drains of flat stones, inclining towards the river. At about the sixth house in Front below Spruce street, the gravel hill of Society hill begins to show itself in digging to lay the water pipes. Mrs. Jones, and Mrs. Reese, daughters of old Captain Benjamin Loxley, who died in 1801, at 82 years of age, related to me that they were told by their father, that when he built the row of three three-story brick houses in which they dwell, called Loxley's Court, (probably one hundred and thirty feet back from the south side of Spruce street) he built it near the margin of Society Hill, and there were then no houses in advance of him on Spruce street, as there are now. His court yard, now of thirty feet depth, in which used to be a fine green bank and beautiful fruit trees, (which the British cut down) went to the extreme margin of the original swamp ground. His houses were cut into the hill, for the garden of his house in the rear is full five feet higher than the front lot yard. He told his daughters that all the open square on the north side of Spruce street, from Front up to Little Dock street, he had filled up at great expense, and with many thousand loads of earth, for the use of the area for a term of years for a lumber yard. (I find he advertises lumber there for sale in 1755) He told them it was all a whortleberry swamp before he began to fill it up. He told them he had gone in a boat up the south-west branch of the dock water, in high tides, up as high as Union and Third street. He told them he had heard Whitfield preach from the balcony of his house, No. 177 south Second street, at the corner of Little Dock street, and that there was a spring open then opposite, at the foot of a rising ground, on the lot where Captain Cadwallader lived, and where Girard has since built four large houses. He had to drive piles to make the foundation over the spring. Samuel Coates confirmed this same fact to me of the spring, and Whitfield's preaching there. Some amusing traits of old Captain Loxley's usefulness as an artillery man, to defend the city against the Paxtang boys, is told by Graydon in his memoirs. He was made a lieutenant of artillery, in 1756, on the alarm of Braddock's defeat the year before. Mr. Thomas Wood told me he remembered Dock street water --- the sides of the water passage were all of hewn stone, and had several steps occasionally down to the water. He remembered several tanyards on the western side, near to the southern end, viz : Morris', Rutherford's, Snowden's; and next to these was Isaac Vannost's pump and block shop, having many pine logs laying before it in the water. At Thomas Shield's house, No. 13 Dock street, in digging for a foundation, they came to a regular hearth and chimney; the hearth lay one and a half feet below spring tide mark. It might be questioned whether tides rose so high formerly. The streets verging to Dock street had formerly a very considerable descent --- thus down Walnut street from Third street, was once a hill, and the same could be said of its going down hill from Walnut street towards Girard's Bank. Where little Dock street joins to Second street some of the houses, still there, show that the street has been raised above them fully four feet; there was originally a hollow there. Mr. Samuel Richardson told me he saw the laying of the first tunnel (in 1784) along the line of Dock creek --- it is laid on logs framed together and then planked, and thus the semicircular arch rests upon that base. He thinks nothing remarkable was seen or dug out, as they did not go deeper than the loose mire required. He said boys were often drowned there before it was filled up. Much of the earth used in filling it up was drawn from Pear street hill, and from Society Hill --- from that part of it which lay on the west side of Front street, between Lombard and South streets. It was there ten feet higher than the present street. While digging there the bank fell in and smothered four boys in their play. An old bakehouse, at the south-west corner of Dock and Second streets, of large size, was occupied by Middleton in war times; and there a friend of mine has seen shallops bring flour --- they had falling masts to pass under the Second street bridge. Another bakehouse was just below Second street, on the east side, and is mentioned, because it was celebrated then for baking family dishes. The dock was then bare at low tide. Floods at the corner of Fourth and High streets were frequent. Houses near the corner had cellar drains, and guard walls before cellar windows two or three feet high; even the doors had a sliding board to fit tight to exclude floods. All this was indispensable before the tunnel was made, and proves the natural rush of waters along "the deep valley" once there, and along the Dock creek, down to Chestnut and Third streets. On the 1st of July, 1842, a sudden and heavy rain, which could not find sufficient passage in the culvert, there flooded all the basement stores of the buildings at the north-west corner of Fourth and High streets. An elderly gentleman has given me his recollections and opinions of Dock creek, and what he deems sufficient reason for filling it up and leaving only a tunnel there. He says, "few people at the time regretted the dock being arched over; a dredge would have had constant employ. It was bare at half tide; at high water great patches of green mud floated on it. The fish kept out of it, except suckers, and they soon floated belly up, gasping. Several privies are still emptied into it. Raynal's "European Settlement" gives a description of the dock as "a beautiful stream, bordered with rows of trees, and between the trees benches". As early as he could remember, it was a nuisance from Walnut street to the river. A few refugee whale boats (prizes) used to be in it, which were used by the boys. I have been in one of them under the arch from Walnut street towards Third street, covered over before my time. Towards the end of the war, a large number of the boys embodied and had regular parades on Saturdays. They formed a kind of fortification in the dock, near the end of Pear street, by raising the mud so as to be above the usual high water, mounted with cannon, of which many an old fashioned pewter dish and plate formed the metal. When the dock was arched over from Walnut street to the drawbridge, there were several openings left in different places. One, I well remember, thirty or forty feet from the north-east corner of Dock and Second. It was four or five feet square, and had a strong plank cover on hinges. The raising this door, and letting it suddenly fall was a great amusement to the boys, and became an annoyance to the neighbourhood. It sounded loud as a cannon; they were closed when Dock street was paved over. For making the arch, two large logs were bedded in the mud, and on them a stone wall was built two or three feet, and then the arch of brick. The floor was of thick pine plank, or sleepers of the same, and made dishing. The old arch, from Walnut to Third street, was not I think, disturbed. From Third it was continued to Fourth street, and then brought down from High street to join it, and another branch went up to the jail wall, passing under a house near Fifth, afterwards built by B. W. Morris. In the middle of Dock street, nearly in a range with the alley on the south side of the Bank of Pennsylvania, was a sink hole fenced round. It was there Governeur Morris met with the accident which cost him his leg. He was driving in his phaeton, and ran against the posts of the sink and upset, and broke his leg. He was carried to a house close by, and had his leg amputated with great courage and composure, holding his own leg with both hands, and saying, `make haste, gentlemen'. The arch gave way not long after it was finished, between Second and Walnut streets, but was soon repaired. I believe that was the only place in the new arch". [ In 1830 it required to be repaired twice near there, say exactly in the centre of Walnut and Dock streets.] The Merchants' Exchange being now an edifice of grandeur, and of general public interest, I have set down some special facts concerning it. In digging for the foundation of the new Exchange, to build which they took down several brick houses, they came beneath their foundations to the remains of numerous tan vats, in sound condition; saw the traces of a run or brook leading into Dock creek. The vegetable remains in it had formed a kind of peat, which was capable of burning. An old stone was found with an inscription of a name and date, which has been worked into the wall in the cellar of the Exchange, and may be seen. In the time of my youth its site was wholly occupied, except for necessary yards, by newly built three storied brick houses, at the triangular corner formed at the south-easternmost end, with bulk windows, and showy, for stores and dwellings, (never in much repute as stands) and about four houses on Walnut street, finished as merchants' warehouses, with hoisting tackle, &c., outside. The houses from thence along Walnut to Third street were good creditable brick three-storied houses, built before my observation. The corner house, at the north-east corner of Third and Walnut streets, was a very good looking house. The buildings along Third street, up to Dock street, were small two-storied frames, very old; when originally built, were on a descending hill, of inclined plane, down to the original Dock creek, except that at the north-west corner of Third and Dock streets, where now stands M'Gowan's three-storied brick wine store, there was before, an old brick house, pretty good, of two stories. Along Dock street there was a yard and fence from that corner house to the next house, a three-storied brick tavern, by Gebler, and then again a yard and fence, being the rear yards of two houses on Walnut street, from it to the next six houses in the aforesaid line of new houses on Dock street to the south-easternmost corner. The new exchange was estimated to cost 160,000 dollars for its building. The area of its ground cost 75,000 dollars by the purchase of the stockholders, and subject to 1375 dollars a year in ground rents, (the probable first value of the ground, when first taken up for original buildings). Now, it is estimated to produce in rents 15,000 dollars a year. The whole of the Dock street side of the area was originally taken up, and used for numerous years, as a collection of tanyards; and considerable of their remains, (such as posts, rail fence, &c.) could be traced in the yards, when digging down for the foundations and cellars of the Exchange. There is some entertainment to the mind, when in contemplating the present marble edifice, to consider its former state and character; and also, to contemplate, in comparison, the smallness now of the once big "Old London Coffee House", at the south-west corner of Front and High streets. Some of the houses built along Dock street, about the time of the revolution, as then seen by my informant, were constructed of logs at the bottom, and the frame work filled in with stone and mortar, to prevent their sinking more than ten or twelve inches afterwards. Chapter 35. THE OLD COURT HOUSE AND FRIENDS' MEETING The old court House, long divested of its original honours by being appropriated during the years of the present generation to the humble purposes of offices and lumber rooms for city watchmen and clerks of the markets, &c., had long been regarded by many as a rude and undistinguished edifice. But this structure, diminutive and ignoble as it may have appeared to our modern conceptions, was the `chef-d'oeuvre' and largest endeavour of our pilgrim fathers. Assessments, gifts and fines, were all combined to give it the amplitude of the "Great Towne House", or "Guild Hall", as it was occasionally at first called. In the then general surrounding waste, (having a duck pond on its northern aspect) it was deemed no ill-graced intrusion to place it in the middle of the intended unencumbered and wide street; -- an exception, however, to which it became in early days exposed, by pamphlets, pasquinades, &c., eliciting on one occasion "the second (angry) address of Andrew Marvell", &c. {Note : pasquinade = satirical writing or a lampoon posted in a public place.} Before its erection, in 1707, its place was the honoured site of the great town bell, erected upon a mast, whence royal and provincial proclamations, &c., were announced. That bell, the centenary incumbent of the cupola, could it rehearse its former doings, might, to our ears "a tale unfold" of times and incidents by-gone, which might wonder-strike our citizens ! --- "Twould tell of things so old, that history's pages Contain no records of its early ages !" Among the relics which I have preserved of this building, is a picturesque view, as it stood in primitive times, having a pillory, prison cage, &c. on its eastern side, and the "Great Meeting house" of Friends on the south, secluded within its brick wall-enclosure, on ground bestowed by the Founder "for truth's and Friends' sake". I have, too, an original MS paper giving in detail the whole expenses for the same, and showing, in that day, a loss of "old currency" of one-third, to reduce it to new -- and withal, presenting a curious exhibit of the prices of materials and labour in that early day -- such as bricks at 29s. 6d. per m., and bricklaying at 14s. per m., making in all, an expense of 616 Pounds. Samuel Powell, who acquired so much wealth by city property, was the carpenter. The window casements were originally constructed with little panes set in leaden frames -- and the basement story, set on arches, had one corner for an auction room, and the remainder was occupied by the millers and their meal, and by the linen and stocking makers from Germantown. Without the walls on the western side stood some moveable shambles, until superseded, in 1720, by a short brick market house. {Note: shambles = vendor's tables} The meal market was kept afterwards at the end next Third street. It was built something like the under part of the old court house. It was pulled down and made uniform with the other part of the market. We have long since transfered our affections and notices to its successor, the now celebrated "Hall of Independence" (i.e. our present State-house) now about to revive its fame under very cheering auspices -- but, this Town House was once the National Hall of legislation and legal learning. In its chambers sat our Colonial Assemblies; there they strove nobly and often for the public weal; and though often defeated in their enactments by royal vetos or the Board of Trade, returning to their efforts under new forms and titles of enactments, till they worried kingly or proprietary power into acquiescence or acknowledgment. Within those walls were early cherished those principles of civil liberty, which, when matured, manifested themselves in the full spirit of our national Independence. Here David Lloyd and Sir William Keith agitated the Assemblies as leaders of the opposition, combining and plotting with their colleagues, and forming cabals that were not for the good of the people nor for the proprietaries. Here Isaac Norris was almost perpetually President, being for his popularity and excellence, as necessary an appendage of colonial enactments as was the celebrated Abram Newland to the paper currency of England. Here came the Governors in state to make their "speeches". On some occasions they prepared here great feasts to perpetuate and honour such rulers, making the tables, on which they sometimes placed their squibs and plans of discord, become the festive board of jocund glee and happy union. From the balcony in front, the newly arrived or installed Governors made their addresses to the cheering populace below. On the steps, depending formerly from the balcony on either side, tussled and worried the fretted Electors; ascending by one side to give in their votes at the door at the balcony, and thence descending southward on the opposite side. On the adjacent ground occurred "the bloody Election" of 1742 -- a time when the sailors, coopers, &c., combined to carry their candidates by exercise of oaken clubs, to the great terror and scandal of the good citizens -- when some said Judge Allen set them on, and others that they were instigated by young Emlen; but the point was gained -- to drive "the Norris partisans" from "the stairs" where, as they alleged, they "for years kept the place" to the exclusion of other voters. I have in my possession several caricatures, intended to traduce and stigmatize the leaders in those days. Two of them, of about the year 1765, give the Election groupes at the stairs and in the street; and appended to the grotesque pictures, pro and con, are many verses : -- One is called "the Election Medley and Squire Lilliput" and the other is "the Counter Medley and Answer to the Dunces". In those we see many of the ancestors of present respectable families portrayed in ludicrous and lampooned characters. Now the combatants all rest in peace, and if the scandal was revived, it would be much more likely to amuse than to offend the families interested. Then arrests, indictments and trials ensued for the inglorious "riot", which kept "the towne" in perpetual agitation ! A still greater but better disposed crowd surrounded that balcony, when Whitfield, the eloquent pulpit orator, stirred and affected the hearers, raising his voice "to be readily heard by boatmen on the Delaware!" -- "praising faith" and "attacking works" and good Bishop Tillotson; and incensing the papists among us greatly. The Friends, in many instances, thought him "not in sober mood" -- and among themselves, imputed much of his influence on the minds of the unstable "to priestcraft, although in himself a very clever conversable man". From the same stand, stood and preached one Michael Welfare, "one of the Christian philosophers of Conestoga" having a linen hat, a full beard, and his pilgrim staff, declaring himself sent to announce the vengeance of the Almighty against the guilty province ! and selling his "warning voice" for 4d. Such were the various uses to which this Town House was appropriated, until the time of "the new State House, erected in 1735; and before the venerated hall was supplanted and degraded to inferior purposes; but long, very long, it furnished the only chambers for the courts of the province. There began the first lawyers to tax their skill to make "the worst appear the better cause" -- enrolling on its first page of fame the names of David Lloyd, Samuel Herset, Mr. Clark, Patrick Robinson, the renter of the first "hired prison", and Mr. Pickering, for aught we now know, the early counterfeiter. Then presided judges "quite scrupulous to take or administer oaths" and "some, for conscience sake" refusing Penn their services after their appointment. In aftertimes John Ross and Andrew Hamilton divided the honours of the bar -- the latter in 1735, having gone to New York to manage the cause of poor Zenger, the persecuted printer (by the Governor and Council there), gave such signal satisfaction to the city rulers and people, that the corporation conferred on him the freedom of the city, in an elegant golden snuff-box, with many classical allusions. Descending in the scale to later times, and before the Revolution, we find such names, there schooled to their future and more enlarged practice, as Wilson, Sergeant, Lewis, Edward Biddle, George Ross, Reed, Chew, Galloway, &c. This last had much practice -- became celebrated in the war for his union to Sir William Howe when in Philadelphia, suffered the confiscation of his estate, and when in England, wrote publicly to disparage the inefficient measures of his friend the general, in subduing "the unnatural rebellion" of his countrymen. These men have long since left their renown and "gone to their reward", leaving only as a connecting link with the bar of the present day, such men as the late Judge Peters and William Rawle, Esq., to give us passing recollections of what they may have seen most conspicuous and interesting in their manners or characters as public pleaders. Finally, "the busy stir of man" and the rapid growth of the "busy mart" has long since made it a necessary remove of business from the old court house. Surrounding commerce has "choked up the loaded street with foreign plenty". But, while we discard the venerable pile from its former ennobling services, let us strive to cherish a lively remembrance of its departed glory, and with it associate the best affections due to our pilgrim ancestors -- though disused, not forgotten. The following facts will serve still further to enlarge and illustrate the leading history of the building, to wit : High street, since called Market street, was never intended for a market place by Penn. Both it and the court house, and all public buildings, as we are told by Old Mixon, were intended to have been placed at the Centre square. When the court house was actually placed at Second and High streets, it was complained of by some as an infraction of the city scheme, and as marring its beauty. Proud calls it and the market buildings "a shameful and inconvenient obstruction". In the year 1705 the Grand Inquest resolved to recommend a tax of 1d. (per Pound) to be levied, to build a court house on pillars where the bell now stands. They also present the market place as a receptacle for much rainwater. On another occasion they present a dirty place in Second street over against the "Great Meeting-house", and a low dirty place in High street over against the free pump, near Doctor Hodgson's house. As early as the year 1684, (1st of 2d mo.) William Penn and council determined there should be a Provincial Court, of five judges, to try all criminal cases, and titles to land, and to be a Court of Equity, to decide all differences upon appeals from the county courts. Soon after the first judges were appointed to wit : Nicholas Moore, Chief Justice; William Welsh, William Wood, Robert Turner and John Eckley. In the year 1717, the court house being then ten years built, the Grand Jury present the county and city court house as very scandalous for want of being finished; and whereas the several sums heretofore raised, for bridges, &c., have not been enough, they recommend a further tax, for those objects and to complete the court house, of 1d. per Pound. In the year 1736, Mr. Abel preached, on Monday, from the court house steps, to a large congregation standing in Market street, on the subject of keeping the Sabbath. In the same year Michael Welfare appeared there to give his "warning voice". What was done by the celebrated Whitfield in his way will be found under his proper name. In the year 1740, the Gazette describes "the customary feast at the court house, at the expiration of the Mayoralty", at which were present -- the Governor and council, the corporation, and many of the citizens. In 1742, on the vacation of the office of "Public Vendue, formerly held under the court house in Second street", John Clifton proposes to pay for it 110 Pounds and Reese Meredith proposes to give 100 Pounds per annum, to be allowed to enjoy the privilege. [*The vendue room in the north-west corner, was rented by Council to Patrick Baird, in 1730, at 8 Pounds per annum.] This office seems to have been in the north-west corner. The general vacancy was a meal market; and in the south-east corner, in Timothy Matlack's time, they had a temporary prison under the steps; in the north-east corner, in T. Bradford's early days, was the stocks. [** This place under the steps, in Second street, was originally constructed by an order of the City Council, of the year 1711, "for a shop, to be let out to the best advantage".] Both of these were under the stairs on Second street, depending on either side from the balcony over the arch, making an angle at the corner, so as to land the people in High street. On page 328 of my MS Annals in the Historical Society is an original manuscript, showing the first cost of materials, &c., employed in the construction of the court hose, to wit : 616 Pounds. The aged Robert Venable, a black man who died in 1834, aged 98, told me he remembered all the courts there, and such Judges as John Kinsey, Growden, William Allen, Stedman, &c., -- and also such lawyers there as Ross, Molden, and Francis. These were deemed the first in character. Old Lawyer Hamilton figured before his time, but was called great and acute. He told a story of his cunning in saving a criminal who had stolen a hog and was seen in the act by the owner. He got the felon to bring him half of the animal quickly, and then he testified in court against the evidence of the seer, that he mistook the man "for he had no more of the hog than he had !" Such a story, more at large, rung his fame among the commonalty. This primitive building was demolished in March and April 1837, with far less expressions of regret, than could have been wished. Some few wrote against the measure in the public journals, but they were only ridiculed by the unpoetic and sordid utilitarians. Americans -- as a people, have few or no sympathies with the antique and venerable. They, however, like well enough whatever is imposing in grandeur, costliness and show. To show out in greater things, they are willing to demolish any thing associated with the memory of their forefathers. It seems to give much more general satisfaction to sit as worshippers in new and splendid churches, where their vanity and self-importance may be felt and indulged, than to assemble in any ancient Temple, where they may contemplate the remembrance of a long line of forefathers, as once the occupants of the same seats, and the active vocal worshippers, within the same walls. Exactly the same love of "new" and "spendid", induces families to change all their furniture every few years, for newer fashions. This however is a passion of modern years only. Before the year 1800, none ever dreamed of any change, even in a whole life, not even among the rich. Even the plain, unchanging Friends, have been "pulling down to build greater", and only Christ church remains in internal structure a relic of the olden time. Yet hardly so either; for it has lately changed its former brick paved aisles, for boarded and carpeted passages; -- its straight high-backed seats are also changed; -- and its old organ is supplanted by another, of modern fabric. All these reflections have been induced, by the fact of the demolition just now of the old Court house in High street. It was vain in me to try to resist its fall -- it had been too long degraded to inferior purposes, and therefore lost its former characteristics in the consideration of the mass of the people. Some lament its fall ! but they are only some. I might mention a fact to show how little sympathy I might expect to excite by whining or fretting about a contrary spirit in others to my own. One of my nearest and dearest friends, who has often expressed a sincere gratification at any occasional public approval of my olden time affection and researches, has been so unconscious of the loss of "the venerable Towne house and Guild hall" as to have actually passed the place of destruction and removal twice or thrice within two or three days, and never missed the absent Towne Hall ! It makes me smile while I write, to think how very blank that friend looked, when I inquired how the area looked since the demolition ! [I have preserved some of the wood of its steeple and joist.] "The Great Meeting House" of Friends, at the south-west corner of Second and High streets, was originally constructed in 1695; and "great" as it was in the ideas of the primitive population, it was taken down in 1755, to build greater. That, in time, became so shut in, and disturbed by the street-noise of increased population, that it was deemed expedient to sell off the premises; in the year 1808, and construct the large Meeting on their Arch street ground. This "Market street Meeting" as it was often called, had its original lot through the gift of George Fox. "for truth's and Friends' sake", he giving at the same time the lot at Fairhill for a like purpose. His idea was, that it might be located in the centre of the town, and have as much as two acres as a ground to put their horses in ! The land itself was due to him under some promise of William Penn, and it is known that Penn was reluctant to have it chosen where it was, saying he was not consulted on the occasion by his commissioners, &c. In the final sale of it, for the present dozen houses which stand upon the original site along High street and Second street, it produced a large sum of money to the Society. The first meeting-house was surmounted on the centre of its four-angled roof, by a raised frame of glass work, so constructed as to pass light down into the Meeting below, after the manner of the former Burlington meeting-house. The few facts concerning this house, in some instances, have fallen into other portions of this work. Only one anecdote remains to offer here : When the Friends were rebuilding in 1755-6, for the purpose of enlargement, one Davis, who had been expelled, seeing the work progressing, waggishly observed to the overseers : -- "Only continue to weed the garden well, and you may not yet find room enough !" At another time the poll parrot belonging to the adjoining house in High street, came into the meeting, calling out "Hannah Roberts, poll wants her breakfast !" She had been neglected, and sought her mistress there. Chapter 36. HIGH STREET PRISON AND MARKET SHAMBLES "The gloomy jail where misery moans, --- Spotted with all crimes." ---------------------- In primitive times, when culprits were few, and society simple and sincere, the first prisons were small and of but slender materials. There was at first a small cage for offenders -- next a hired house with bars and fetters -- then a brick prison on the site of the present Jersey market, fronting towards the old court house, at one hundred feet of distance. The facts are these, viz : Year 1682 -- 16th of 11 mo. -- The Council ordered that William Clayton, one of the Provincial Council, should build a cage against the next council-day, of seven feet long by five feet broad. 1685 -- The High Sheriff declared in court, that the hired house of Patrick Robinson, [the clerk of the Provincial Council, &c.,] used by him as a prison, was refitting, and that, with the fetters and chains, &c., and his own attendance and deputies, he has a sufficient gaol; and if any escapes occurred he would not blame the county, for want of a gaol, nor for the insufficiency of said house; whereupon, at the request of said Robinson, the yearly rent began this day for said house. It became a matter of curiosity in modern times to learn the primitive site of such a hired prison. No direct testimony could be found; but several facts establish the idea that it occupied the ground on the western side of Second street, between High street and the Christ Church -- for instance, Mr. C. Graff, the present owner of the house on the north-west corner of Second and High streets, (the premises first owned by Arthur Cook) has a patent of the year 1684 which speaks of the prison on his northern line, to wit: "I, William Penn, proprietary, &c. Whereas, there is a certain lot of land in said city, containing in breadth fifty feet, and in length one hundred and two feet, bounded northward with the prison, eastward with the vacant lot &c." -- Then grants the same to Arthur Cook, by patent dated "6mo. 14th, 1684. -- Signed William Penn. The foregoing prison is confirmed by some modern facts : -- Some years ago, when pulling down an old house which stood upon Second street, on the site on which S. North, druggist, built the house No. 14, north Second street, they discovered the party walls, as they supposed, of the old jail -- it was of four inch poplar plank, dove-tailed at the corners. Old Isaac Parrish, who told this and witnessed the disclosure, was pleased to add, that as he was showing it to Judge M'Kean, the latter remarked : -- Times are changed indeed -- formerly wood was sufficient for confinement ; but now, stone itself is no match for the rogues ! On searching the original patent for North's lot, it appears to have been granted by Penn on the 1st of December 1688, and makes no reference to a prison. Mr. North has informed me that in digging along the northern line of his yard, he has found, under ground, a very thick stone wall, such as might have been a prison wall. As late as the year 1692, we have facts to evince that there was a prison held within a private dwelling-house, -- for at that time it appears in George Keith's Journal, that William Bradford, the first printer, and John Macomb, were then its inmates, for Keithien measures, and they refusing to give securities in their case, Keith says, their opponents pretended they were not so imprisoned, but that he, to make out an affecting story for them, went to the porch of the prison to sign and date a paper of complaint against the Quakers, just as if he had been its inmate ! To repel this, he adduces the paper of their Samuel Jennings, to show that he there admits that they, Bradford and Macomb, "signed a paper from the prison, when they signed it in the entry common to the prison and the next house". Thus evincing, as I presume, that in the hired house of Patrick Robinson, the prison was held on one side of a common entry, and the family lived on the other side of it. George Keith proceeds to say, that the real facts were, that as Bradford and Macomb were delayed to be brought to trial, the jailer, after some time, granted them "the favour to go home, -- and as they were still prisoners, when they wished to petition for their trial at the next sessions, they then went to the prison to write and sign it there; but it happened the jailer was gone abroad and had the key of the prison with him; so as they could not get in, they signed that paper in the entry or porch !" Such was the simple character and state of the first prison used in Philadelphia. Something more formidable is about to be told of the PRISON ON HIGH STREET, to wit : -- It seems that something more imposing than the hired house was desired as early as the year 1685, and was afterwards, from time to time, laid aside, till its execution about the year 1695. In 1685, the Court of the Quarter Sessions receives a report on the subject of building a prison, to wit : Samuel Carpenter, H. Murray, and Nathaniel Allen, &c., report that they have treated with workmen about the many qualities and charges of a prison, and have advised with Andrew Griscomb, carpenter, and William Hudson, bricklayer, about the form and dimensions, which is as followeth : The house twenty feet long and fourteen feet wide in the clear, two stories high, -- the upper seven feet, and the under six and a half feet, of which four feet under ground, with all convenient lights and doors, and casements -- strong and substantial, with good brick, lime, sand and stone, as also floors and roofs very substantial; a partition of brick in the middle through the house, so that there will be four rooms, four chimneys, and the cock-loft, which will serve for a prison; and the gaoler may well live in any part of it, if need be -- the whole to cost 140 Pounds. The late aged Miss Powell, a friend, told me her aged mother used to describe to her that prison as standing once in the middle of High street, eastward of the court house on Second street. On the 3d of February, 1685-6, the Grand Jury present the want of a prison. In 1702 the Grand Jury present the prison house and prison yard, as it now stands in the High street, as a common nuisance. In 1703 the Court of Quarter Sessions appoints four persons to report the cost of a new prison and court house. In 1705, July, the Common Council order that Alderman Carter, and John Parson, do oversee the repairs of the old cage, to be converted into a watch-house, for present occasion. They had before ordered, in December 1704, that a watch-house should be built in the market place, of sixteen feet long and fourteen feet wide. In September 1705, the same Alderman Carter is continued by the Council to see the repairs of the watch-house, and is also appointed to take care of the building a pair of stocks, with a whipping post and pillory, with all expedition. In 1706 a petition of forty-four poor debtors, (some of them imprisoned) all wrote in their proper hands in good easy free style, is offered to Governor John Evans, stating their great objections to the fee bill for debts under 40 shillings, creating an expense in case of sheriff's execution, of 17 shillings each, which was formerly, when in the magistrate's hand, but 3 shillings; and "some of your poor petitioners (say they) have been kept in the common jail until they could find persons to sell themselves unto for a term of years to pay the same, and redeem their bodies !!" See act of Assembly in the case. It might surprise many moderns, who see and hear of so many now-a-days, who "break" with indifference, to learn that sixty years ago, it was the custom to sell single men for debt; and it had then a very wholesome restraint on prodigals -- few then got into jail, for then those who saw their debts burthensome would go betimes and seek a friendly purchaser, and so pay off their debts. In 1707 the Grand Jury present the jail of this city; in that the upper and middle windows of the said jail are not sufficient. And they present the want of a pair of stocks, whipping post and pillory. In 1712 the Grand Jury present "as a nuisance the prison and wall standing in the High street, and the insufficiency of the county jail not fit to secure prisoners". This latter clause might seem to intimate two characters of prisons at once. The words "common jail" in the following paragraph might intimate some one different from that of "county jail". In 1716 the Grand Jury "present the common jail as insufficient, and concur and agree with the County Grand Jury that the same be removed from the place it now stands upon; and we do all concur with the County Grand Jury in laying a tax of one penny per pound, to be assessed and levied on the inhabitants -- April 4th, 1716". Two years after this the act for a big prison, on the corner of Third and High street was passed. In the year 1717 sundry persons offered large subscriptions for erecting a new prison at the new site. The Grand Jury present at this time (1717) the great need of a ducking stool, saying that, whereas it has been frequently and often presented by several former Grand Juries, the necessity of a ducking stool and house of correction for the just punishment of scolding drunken women, as well as divers other profligate and unruly persons, who are become a public nuisance, -- they therefore, earnestly pray the court it may no longer be delayed. I have never understood that it was adopted. In 1719 the Grand Jury present "the prison and dead walls in the street ". In 1722 April, it was ordered by the Common Council "that the old prison be sold to the highest bidder " &c. Perhaps there are houses at this day in the use of part of those materials ! At or about the year 1723, the new prison at the south-west corner of Third and High streets, was finished, and about the same time the grand Jury present "the old prison much in the way and spread over the street". As appointment to the High street prison, there stood the market shambles, on the site of the present Jersey market. [Note : shambles = vendor's tables] They were at first moveable, and were not placed there in the line of the prison till about ten years after the town had erected the permanent brick market at the western end of the court house. The facts are these, to wit: In 1729 January, the Common Council agreed to erect twenty stalls, for the accommodation of such as bring provisions from the Jerseys -- to be erected between the court house and the river, at one hundred feet eastward from the court house and In October 1740, the Council agreed to place moving stalls on the east side of the court house as far as Laetitia court, and it is ordered that the middle of the street, from the pillory to the said Laetitia court, be forthwith posted and gravelled, to the breadth of twenty feet. Mr. Davenport Merrot, an aged person, told me the permanent Jersey market, when finally built about the year 1765, was many years without a foot-pavement on the inside of it. In May 1763, the Common Council having put the Market street, eastward from the Second street, under regulation and pavement, the former wooden stalls of the "Jersey market" being ruinous, they order that they shall be pulled down and their place supplied with stalls, brick pillars, and roofed -- the eastern end to serve the purpose for greens and roots, as a "green market", and also at the end thereof an exchange; and that the sum of 500 Pounds be applied out of the "Exchange Stock" to defray the expense. The latter, however, was not attempted -- but the fund was applied afterwards to the City Hall. Chapter 37. THE STONE PRISON Southwest corner of Third and High streets "There see the rock-built prison's dreadful face." Makin's Poem 1729 As the city enlarged its bounds by increase of population, it became necessary to seek out a new prison establishment of greater dimensions, and with more room about it -- such as could be then found well out of the town. All those advantages were deemed sufficiently attained when they accomplished this stone prison, under the act of Assembly of 1718. As it was a very popular measure, it appears that in the year 1717, sundry persons offered large subscriptions towards defraying the expense of it, and "to be made upon the ground intended for that use" -- besides this, the Grand Jury joined in recommending a tax on the city and county for effecting the same. When finished, about the year 1723, the pile consisted of a two-story stone building, fronting on High street, for the debtor's jail, and another two story similar building, fronting on Third street, for the criminals, called the workhouse -- the latter some distance from the former, but joined to it by a high wall forming a part of the yard enclosure. The buildings were of hewn stone; half of the cellar story was above ground; the roofs were sharp pitched, and the garrets furnished rooms for prisoners. As population increased, even this place was found too much in the town, and another remove had to be made to the Walnut street prison by Sixth street. This was done in 1784 -- the year in which the prisons spoken of in this article were demolished. The aged Mrs. Shoemaker, who died in 1825, at the age of 95 years, told me that when she was a girl she could easily, from Third street near the prison, look over to Fourth street, so as to see the people walking the streets -- meaning thereby, there were not houses enough then built up to intercept the view. The Dock creek was also open then, and showed a considerable gully. There were also several paths by which to make a short cut across the square. I observe several evidences on the old houses on the northern side of High street, near this prison, to indicate that the former grounds in this neighborhood were originally three feet higher than now. As early as the year 1708, it was complained of by the Grand Jury, as having no proper water-passage then, so that the crossing there was much impeded "by a deep dirty place where the public water gathers and stops for want of a passage, to the great damage of the neighbourhood". In 1729, a city poet has given some graphic touches of the neighbourhood, to wit : "Thence half a furlong west, declining pace, And see the rock-built prison's dreadful face, Twixt and beyond all these, near twice as far, As from a sling a stone might pass in air, The forging shops of sooty smiths are set -- And wheelwrights' frames -- with vacant lots "to let" A neighborhood of smiths, and piercing dins From trades -- from prison grates -- and public inns !" Kalm, who was here in 1748, speaks of those furnaces, saying, "they have several about the town for melting iron out of ore". The barbarous appendages of whipping-post, pillory and stocks were placed full in the public eye, hard by, on High street directly in front of the market, and on the eastern side of Third street. The last remembered exhibition there was that of a genteel storekeeper, -- quite as clever as several who now escape. He had made too free with other names to support his sinking credit, and there made his amends, by having his face pelted with innumerable eggs, and his ears clipt adroitly by the "delicate pocket scissors" of the sheriff -- he holding up his clippings to the gaze and shouts of the populace ! These barbarous measures of punishment were not in accordance with the spirit and feelings of our forefathers, who early aimed at commuting work and confinement for crime; but the parent country, familiar with its sanguinary code, always revoked the laws formed upon our schemes of reformation. They, therefore, generally prevailed till the time of our self-government, when measures were speedily taken, first by societies of citizens, and afterwards by the legislature, to introduce those reforms into prison discipline, &c., which have made our city and state to be celebrated for its early "Penitentiary System". The measure pursued by the Society formed in 1787, "for alleviating the miseries of public prisons" form already a small history, which may be profitably read in the book called "Notices of the Prison", by Roberts Vaux, Esq. Chapter 38. MARKET HOUSES Philadelphia has long been distinguished for its long range of market buildings, and equally so for the general excellence of its marketing. It is not much known, however, that it was not according to the original plan of the city to have such an extended market house, and still less to have had it located in High street. Penn expected it to have been placed at the Centre square, in the event of settling the chief population there. We shall see, in the course of the present notice, that objections were from time to time made against the extension of markets in High street; and Proud has called it "a shameful and inconvenient obstruction". The first notice of a permanent market house, appears in the minutes of City Council in July 1709, to wit : -- "The new market house being thought to be of great service to the town, 'twas put to the vote how money should be raised for the doing thereof, and voted that every Alderman shall contribute and pay double what the Common Council-men should do". And in May 1710, it was unanimously agreed that it should be built up with all expedition. It appeared that the members severally subscribed the fund necessary as a loan, to be repaid to them out of the rents from the butchers. The market so made, extended from the court house to about half way to Third street. In January 1729, the Council agreed to erect twenty stalls on the site of the present Jersey market, for the accommodation of such as brought provisions from the Jerseys. In 1737 the Clerk of the market complained to the Council of several nuisances -- "that of persons who blow their meat -- selling goods -- bringing empty carts and lying of horses in the market place". In a poetic description of High street, in 1729, the court house and market house are thus described, to wit : "An yew bow's distance from the key-built strand Our court house fronts Caesura's pine tree land. Through the arch'd dome, and on each side, the street Divided runs, remote again to meet. Here, eastward, stand the traps for obloquy And petty crimes -- stocks, posts and pillory : And, twice a week, beyond, light stalls are set, Loaded with fruits, and flowers, and Jersey's meat. Westward, conjoin, the shambles grace the court, Brick piles their long extended roof support. Oft, west from these, the country wains are seen To crowd each hand, and leave a breadth between." At a subsequent period the market was extended up to Third street, where for many years, its Third street front was marked with the appendages of pillory, stocks and whipping-posts. About the year 1773, the subject was agitated for constructing another market, to extend in continuation from Third to Fourth street -- a measure much opposed by property-holders along High street, who preferred an open wide street. In some of the paper discussions, which appeared in print at that time, it was proposed to take the market out of High street altogether, and to locate it in the centre of the square from High street to Chestnut street, and from Third to Fourth street, {*the place of Dr. Franklin's mansion} leaving the dwelling-houses still on the front streets, on Third and Fourth streets; to pull down the stone prisons on the south-west corner of Third and High streets, and to erect there a court house, town house, &c. In time, however, the advocates for the market prevailed, and the building went on daily; but a measure, not forseen, occurred every night : -- The housekeepers who lived along the line of the market, employed persons in the night time to pull down the mason-work of the day. This being persevered in for some time excited considerable interest. Something like a similar excitement occurred about the year 1749, when the older market was extended from Bank alley up to Third street. While some then pulled down by night what was set up by day, Andrew Marvell's addresses came out to the people, denouncing the building thereof, saying in his second address, that "the persons who before bought lots on High street, because of its superior width, were thus to have their expectations and interests ruined thereby, by creating a greater grievance than they remove". He adds, that "the advice of several eminent counsel in the law has satisfied the people that an opposition is not only legal and justifiable, but also their duty; for the lawyers have assured them the corporation has no right, either in charter, laws, or custom, to sustain the building of shambles in any street of the city; but, on the contrary, have pointed out some laws which limit and restrict their power in this instance." We have all hears of "Fairs" once held in our markets before the Revolution, but few of the present generation have any proper judgment of what manner of things they were. A few remarks on them shall close this article, to wit: A fair was opened by oral proclamation in these words, (Vide a city ordinance of 1753) saying "O yez ! &c. Silence is commanded while the Fair is proclaiming, upon pain of punishment ! A. B. Esq., Mayor of the city of Philadelphia, doth hereby, in the King's name, strictly charge and command all persons trading and negotiating within the Fair to keep the King's peace, and that no person presume to set up any booth or stall for the vending of strong liquors within this Fair -- that none carry any unlawful weapon, or gallop or strain horses within the built parts of the city. And if any person be hurt by another, let him repair to the Mayor here present. God save the King!" The fair-times in our market were every May and November, and continued three days. In them you could purchase every description of dry goods, and millinery of all kinds, cakes, toys and confectionaries, &c. The stalls were fancifully decorated, and inclosed with well made patchwork coverlets. The place was always thronged, and your ears were perpetually saluted with toy trumpets, hautboys, fiddles and whistles, to catch up the attention of the young fry who on such occasions crowded for their long - promised presents at fair-time. They were finally discontinued, by an Act of the Legislature, somewhere about the year 1787. It is really surprising they should ever have been adopted in any country where regular stores and business is ordinarily found sufficient for all purposes of trade ! Chapter 39. THE ARCH STREET BRIDGE AT FRONT STREET The tradition of such a bridge, over a place where there was no water, (taken down about the year 1721) had been so far lost, that none among the most aged could be found to give a reason for Mulberry street, over which the bridge or arch stood, being called "Arch street". My MS. Annals in the City Library, pages 24, 31, and 46, show three several reasons given by the most aged citizens for the change of name to Arch street, all of which were erroneous. The truth is, I should not have known the cause but by perceiving it was implied in the presentments of the Grand Juries, &c. The facts were, that in the neighbourhood of Front and Mulberry streets was originally a hill or knoll, rising above the common elevation of the river bank. In opening the street down Mulberry street to the river as a necessary landing place, they found the Front street on each side of it so high, that in preference to cutting it down, they constructed a bridge there so as to make the passage up and down Front street over the Mulberry street. As they usually called such a bridge an arch, and that arch was a notable enterprise then, all things in the neighbourhood was referred to it, so that the street itself where stood "the great arch", became subject to its name, i.e. the Arch street. The neighbourhood was made conspicuous too, by the house of Robert Turner, (still standing) constructed of brick as a pattern model for others, and also by two of those early houses, whose flat roofs, by the primitive regulations, were not to intercept the river prospect along the eastern side of Front street. The following facts will serve to illustrate and confirm the preceding introduction, to wit : Robert Turner in his letter, of 1685, to William Penn, says : "Since I built my brick house, [at the north-east corner of Front and Arch streets] the foundation of which was laid at my doing, which I design after a good manner to encourage others, and that from not building with wood; it being the first, many take example, and some that built wooden houses are sorry for it. Brick building is said to be as cheap, and bricks are exceeding good, and better and cheaper than when I built, say now at 16s. English per thousand, and many good brick buildings are going up, with good cellars". "I am building another brick house by mine, [on the east side of Front street, No. 77] which is three large stories high, besides a good large brick cellar under it of two bricks and a half thickness in the wall, and the next [i.e. Front street first story] half under ground. The cellar has an arched door [still visible there] for a vault to go to the river, and so to bring in goods or deliver out." The first story "half under ground", -- now no longer so, was doubtless owing to the highness of the ground then in the street, and intended afterwards to be cut down. Gabriel Thomas in his account of the city, as he saw it before the year 1698, thus speaks of his impressions, saying, "they have curious wharfs and large timber yards, especially before Robert Turner's great and famous house, where are built ships of considerable burthen -- they cart their goods from that wharf into the city under an arch, over which part of the street is built". In 1704, the Grand Jury present Edward Smout, sawyer of logs, &c., for encumbering "the free wharf, used as a landing, on the east end of Mulberry street, with his logs and timber left too long there". In the same report it is stated to be for "encumbering the street and wharf near the arch". Patty Powell, an aged Friend, told me that her mother told her of seeing the arch, and that it was so high that carts, &c., passed under it to the river, so that those who went up and down Front street went over it. At a Common Council held at "the Coffy House", December 1704, a committee was appointed to view the arch in the Front street, and to report how to repair the same &c., -- found to be 12 Pounds; whereupon it was ordered that the ground on each side of the arch, fronting King street, (Water street now) be built upon by such persons as shall be willing to take the same on ground-rent. In the year 1712, the Grand Jury present "that it is highly necessary to repair the arch, by paving the same, and fencing it on either side above". Another Grand Jury, at the next session, present the passage down under the arch, for that it is worn in holes and gullies, and is not passable -- it wants a fence upon the walls of the said arch -- it being dangerous in the night both to man and beast. At another session, they present the want of walls to secure the street in the going down to the arch, also two fences (palisades) on the top of it to secure people from falling down. In 1713, they again present the arch in the Front street, for that it is very dangerous for children in the day time, and for strangers in the night; neither is it passable underneath for carriages. In 1717, the Grand Jury present "the great arch" in the Front street -- the arch in Second street -- as insufficient for man and beast to pass over. The pump at the great arch, being now out of use and standing much in the street, ought to be removed. King street, as a cart-way, they recommend to be kept thirty feet wide. In 1718, they present the arch at the east end of Mulberry street, as so much out of repair as to endanger life, and as injurious to the neighbourhood, by stopping the channels from descending to the river; and they therefore recommend, as most advantageous to the handsome prospect of the Front street, [of course it must have been high and conspicuous] to pull down the said arch, and to regulate the two streets there. In 1720, December, it was fully debated in Common Council whether to pull down the arch. The parties aggrieved being then again heard, and the charges of continual repairs considered, it is the opinion it will be for the general good to take it down -- even to those who then petition against the same. In 1723 the Grand Jury present deep gullies from Front street, "where the arch stood, to the arch wharf". Thus intimating that the arch had been taken away. In April 1723, the Common Council, in ordering the old prison to be sold, determine the money shall be applied to making good the Arch street and wharf, as far as the same will go. They state as a reason, that the end of Mulberry street, from the east side of the Front street to the river, since the arch was removed, had been very ruinous, by reason of the late great rains, for want of a free passage for the water. It being thought impracticable then to lay a tax on that and other needful things, the Mayor, James Logan, with great liberality (to prevent further damage) presented the corporation with 20 Pounds, to be laid out there -- which was accepted with hearty thanks, and workmen to be ordered to pave the channel and to set posts, &c. The same generous Mayor invites the company of the board to a public dinner with him, provided at the Plume of Feathers. In 1727, the Grand Jury present two ponds of water "in Arch street", [the first time I have seen it so named] between Front and Second streets. In 1736 a ship near Arch street wharf took fire within, as they were burning her bottom without, occasioned by a flaw in one of her planks. This was not perhaps a ship-yard then, but used as a careening place. {Note : careen = 1. to cause a boat to lean over on one side ; 2. to clean, caulk, or repair (a boat) in this position} The former high elevation of the grounds near "the arch" are even now peculiarly marked. The house No. 10, Arch street, on the south side, two doors west of Front street, presents a clear evidence that the second story as once the level of the street there, and that the present first story, which goes up several steps, was originally so much cellar part under ground. It is proved by showing now the lines and marks in the second story of the side alley once there, and afterwards filled up ! J. P. Norris, Esq., told me it was so explained to him in his youth, by aged persons who remembered the facts. The present three-story house there was, therefore, originally but a two-story house. The present north-west corner house there had its door out of the present second story; the Friend's Meeting House near there, though originally on a high level, was left on a bank of ten feet elevation; and we know, by an ordinance of 1713, that the gutters were then declared, by law, as running from Arch street down to High street ! I had an opportunity in April 1825, to witness unexpectedly a relic of the primitive manner of topping the Water street bank side houses, as originally constructed, when intended not to intercept the view of the river from the Front street. The very ancient brick house in Water street (part of the block of two two-story old frame houses on Front street above Arch street, Nos. 83 and 85) has now the original flat roof with which it was originally covered. It has been well preserved, by having since constructed over it, at one story additional elevation, a cedar roof -- by this act the first roof was made a floor of small descent. I found it made of two inch yellow pine plank, laid on white pine boards -- the planks are caulked with oakum, with deep grooves near the seams to bear off the water, and the whole has now much remains of the original pitch which covered the whole. The elevation of this floor roof is about eight feet above the present Front street; and as the street there has been cut down full six feet or more, it proves the former elevation of that roof. The general aged appearance of the premises, now about to be pulled down, indicate a very early structure. It is said there was once a ship-yard here about. I have observed other curious facts in digging out the cellars of the two houses adjoining them on the northern side, to wit : No. 87 and 89. In digging down to the level of Water street, in the Front street bank, (which is of fine red gravel) they came, at about twelve feet from the line of Front street, to a regular stone wall of sixteen inches thickness, eight feet high, and of twelve feet square; (all this was below the former cellar there) in a corner of the wall it appeared smoked, as if the remains of a chimney. I thought it indicated an original cave. The area of the square was nearly filled up with loose stones, a considerble part of which were of flat slabs of marble one inch thick, smoothed on one surface, and broken into irregular fragments of one to two feet width. In clearing away these stones, they came to a grave head-stone, standing somewhat declined; on which were engraved, "Anthony Wilkinson -- London -- died 1748". The stone is about fourteen inches by two and a half feet high -- [some small bones also found there]. On further inquiry I learn, that Anthony Wilkinson was an early and primitive settler on that spot. The Cuthbert family are descended from him, and one of them is now named Anthony Wilkinson Cuthbert. Mr. T. Latimer, merchant, near there, claims the headstone as a relative, and says old Mr. Cuthbert, who died when he was a boy, told him and others of the family that old Anthony Wilkinson had his cabin once in this bank, which got blown up by a drunken Indian laying his pipe on some gunpowder in it. Next : SHIPPEN'S HOUSE