The Lost Henry Hudson Memorial - Riverside Drive at 72nd Street

A lush flower bed surrounded the lamppost memorial by the time this photo was taken.  To the far right is the Angie Booth mansion at No. 4 Riverside Dr., and the massive Charles Schwab chateau just beyond it.  photo from the collection of the Library of Congress.

In 1905, with the the 300th anniversary of Henry Hudson's discovery of the Hudson River and the 100th anniversary of Robert Fulton's successful steamboat nearing, a group of industrialists including Andrew Carnegie and J. Pierpont Morgan conceived of a massive Hudson-Fulton Celebration.  The two-week event would be held from September 25 to October 9, 1909 and was, in reality, less a celebration of Hudson and Fulton as it was an international marketing ploy to promote New York City as a major metropolis.

Scores of committees were formed to plan parades, events, and spectacles.   Social, political and recreational groups joined in the fervor.  Not to be left out was the Colonial Dames of America.  On February 28, 1909 The New York Times noted that the organization "will hold a large exhibit of the relics of Robert Fulton during the coming Hudson-Fulton Celebration, in September and October, in the new building of the New York Historical Society."  The Colonial Dames asked anyone willing to loan artifacts to notify the Relic Committee.

Their Fulton exhibition would pale in comparison to their efforts to honor Henry Hudson, however.  The Colonial Dames had commissioned sculptor Allen G. Newman to design a bronze memorial to the explorer.   Born in New York City in 1875, Newman had studied under renowned sculptor John Quincy Adams Ward from 1897 to 1901.  Nearly all his commissions were memorials; but this one would be like no other.

Newman created what Edgar R. Harlan in the 1915 Annals of Iowa called a "colossal bronze sculptured electric light standard."   The monument, perhaps unexpectedly, took the form of a street lamp.  Sitting on a granite base two feet tall, the bronze shaft rose 16 feet to the milk glass globe that nested in delicate bronze garlands.  The cost of the memorial-lamp was $7,500; more than $200,000 today.

The unveiling took place at noon on September 30, 1909.  The New-York Tribune reported "There was a great fanfare of trumpets, a little woman in a pongee suit pulled a cord and ran from under, the Stars and Stripes came down, the Dutch colors followed, and the tall bronze and granite shaft erected at 72d street and Riverside Drive by the Colonial Dames of America, in commemoration of the discovery of the Hudson River stood revealed."

The choir of women from the Old First Presbyterian Church was accompanied by a small orchestra.  They sang a 300-year old Dutch anthem in Dutch, and American patriotic airs like "America" and "God of our Fathers."

The Tribune pointed out that "Ten policemen were detailed to look out for the crowds, but were not needed, for the only rampageous individual in the landscape was a large bulldog, led by a small boy.  He--the dog--wanted to assist in the unveiling, but was gently persuaded away."

Newman had designed a three-sided base to the shaft.  On one a bas-relief of Hudson's ship the Half-Moon was depicted approaching the shores of the New World.  The Tribune described "two Indians, kneeling on the banks, peer out at the ship."  (The New-York Observer was less politically correct, saying it "pictured in low relief [is] the Red Man's surprise at the rigging of the Dutchman's craft.")

The immense size of the memorial is evidenced by the two men leaning on its base.  A. B. Bogart snapped this photograph shortly after the unveiling.  from the collection of the New York Public Library.

The other two sides bore inscriptions.  One depicted the seal of the East India Company, under which was written "To commemorate the discovery of the Hudson River by Henry Hudson, in the year 1609."  On the last was the seal of the Colonial Dames and the words "Presented to the city of New York by the Colonial Dames of America, 1909."

Newman incorporated maritime iconography into the work.  Three fearsome-looking fish creatures framed the base, and the bottom of the shaft was formed by three intricate seahorses.

The location overlooking the Hudson River was, of course, appropriate.  Earlier that summer the great Henry Hudson Bridge had been opened.  Accepting the memorial for the city, Patrick McGowan noted that its light "will shine on the mariners as they sail up and down the Hudson."

Newman's handsome granite base was visible during its earliest years.  But by around 1912, when this photo was shot, at least one of the seahorses had been decapitated and the bronze garlands below the globe had been vandalized.  photo by Wurts Bros. from the collection of the Museum of the City of New York

Manhattan statues and monuments suffered vandalism at mid-century, as chunks of bronze were sawed or pried off for their scrap value.  But the Henry Hudson memorial seems to have been a much earlier target.  Before World War I photographs show pieces missing from the seahorses and the loss of the dainty garlands around the globe.

And then at some point, with little apparent notice or public concern, the unique monument disappeared.  It may have fallen victim to Franklin D. Roosevelt's 1942 program to scrap bronze statues and recycle their metal into weapons of war.  He told reporters on August 7 that many bronze memorials "would serve a more useful purpose if junked."

The vacant spot where the Henry Hudson memorial had stood was filled in 1996 with the bronze statue of Eleanor Roosevelt; the first New York City statue to an American-born woman.

The Franz Sigel Monument - Riverside Park at 106th Street

When the Sigel Monument was unveiled in 1907 Riverside Drive was still lined with handsome mansions around 106th Street.  from the collection of the New York Public Library

When the German Revolution, sometimes called the March Revolution, erupted in 1848 the revolutionaries had a valuable ally in Franz Peter Sigel.  He had graduated from the Karlsruhe Military Academy in 1843 and served as a lieutenant in the Baden Army.

Sigel rose to Minister of War and commander-in-chief of the revolutionary republican government of Baden; but when the revolution was defeated, he fled to England.  Among the other exiled rebels in London was Dr. Rudolph Dulon, former pastor of the Dutch Reformed Church of Werban, and his family.  The minister's 20-year old daughter, Elise, had often heard of the brave military leader and in 1853 the two met.

Any hope for romance seemed to have been dashed when Dulon moved his family to America shortly after that meeting.  But before long Siegel, too, arrived in New York and in 1854 the couple was married.

After briefly teaching in the New York City public schools, Sigel moved to St. Louis in September 1858 where he became a professor at the German-American Academy.  But as had been the case in his homeland, his passion for social equity was soon evident.  He lobbied German immigrants into the Union and antislavery causes and vocally supported both.

When war broke out Sigel was commissioned colonel of the Third Missouri Infantry.  He was promoted to brigadier general on August 7, 1861, endorsed by Abraham Lincoln.

But other generals did their best to steal the credit for Sigel's accomplishments.  In his 1862 book, Heroes and Martyrs, historian Frank Moore explained that in October through December 1861, "while all was movement, life, and triumph around him, he fretted in compulsory inactivity, till it seemed that he was forgotten, or that there was an intention to ignore his past services."  A friend of Sigel later remarked "For a long time things have looked as though the intention were to trifle with him."

General Franz Sigel -- from the collection of the Library of Congress

Sigel tendered his resignation.  But the other generals had underestimated his immense popularity and support.  On January 9, 1862 The New York Times reported "A statement that Gen. Franz Sigel, of Missouri fame, has been driven by neglect and ill-treatment to resign his command in the United States service, is producing the greatest excitement among the German American population of the entire North."

The following week The Rebellion Record reported on a massive New York City assembly.  "The great meeting in favor of Gen. Franz Sigel, which took place at the Cooper Institute, was attended by more than ten thousand of the most respectable and solid adopted citizens of German birth, and was characterized by most enthusiastic speeches and resolutions."   A committee was formed to go to Washington and demand that Congress investigate the causes of the general's resignation.

The nationwide outrage at Sigel's treatment prompted a response from the Abraham Lincoln himself.  The Rebellion Record reported the President was determined that "he should decline the acceptance of Gen. Sigel's resignation" and added "His Excellency the President took further occasion to express his sincere satisfaction with the patriotism shown by the adopted citizens of German birth during this unholy rebellion, and particularly acknowledged the so well known and meritorious services of Gen. Franz Sigel."

With the ordeal behind him, Sigel returned to action.  His leadership in the Battle of Pea Ridge on March 8, 1862 was his greatest triumph.   Sigel was given various duties throughout the remainder of the war, suffering a notable defeat in the Battle of New Market on May 15, 1864.  It did little to tarnish his reputation among German Americans and he emerged from the war a bigger-than-life figure.

He and Elise had four sons, Robert, Rudolph, Franz and Paul, and a daughter Leila.  The family moved briefly to Baltimore where Rudolph Dulon ran the Socialist newspaper The Baltimore Wrecker.  Both Franz and Elise worked for the newspaper.  The New York Times later remarked "Mrs. Sigel, having inherited the literary ability from her father...became widely known through the articles she wrote for this publication."

The Sigels moved back to New York in 1869 as Franz planned his campaign for Secretary of State of New York.  They were staying in the house of "Mr. Otterberg" on East 17th Street when the general's popularity was made obvious on the night of March 8 that year.

The Times reported "The friends and countrymen of General Franz Sigel assembled in considerable numbers last evening at the Steuben House, in the Bowery, for the purpose of organizing a serenading party to compliment the General on the occasion of the seventh anniversary of the Battle of Pea Ridge."   A procession through the streets arrived at the Otterberg house.  "After the performance of a number of airs by the orchestra, the General appeared and responded in a few remarks, which were enthusiastically cheered."

Sigel was defeated in his run for Secretary of State.  But he remained highly involved in the political and social activities of New York.   When the Franco-Prussian War broke out in 1870, reporters came to him for military and political insight.  And in 1873, when the city was debating on the best means of public transportation for the rapidly increasing population, Sigel was one of the speakers in the discussion at the Cooper Institute on February 18.  He proved that in addition to his skills in educating, writing and military planning, he understood engineering as well and provided his proposal for an elevated railroad.

Franz Sigel's proposal for an elevated railroad included arched girders similar to those seen in contemporary train sheds.  from the collection of the Museum of the City of New York

Sigel's popularity was exhibited again in November 1888 when he traveled to Pennsylvania to attend a meeting of the German Democrats.  The Philadelphia Record wrote on October 28 "Although years have passed by since he sheathed his sword and settled own to a peaceful life in his adopted country, and the shadows of age are now falling around him, he still retains much of the fiery spirit which made him victorious on many a well-fought field, and his utterances have about them a simple directness and a fervid eloquence which not only awaken enthusiasm but carry conviction."

At the time of that article Sigel held the position of United States Pension Agent in New York City.   It was a trusted position that meant that hundreds of pension checks passed through his hands before being distributed to their beneficiaries.  The accessibility to the checks was a temptation too great for Sigel's son, Robert, to resist.

On March 27, 1889 the Colorado newspaper, the San Louis Valley Courier, reported "Robert Sigel, son of General Franz Sigel, who pleaded guilty to forging pension checks, has been sentenced in the United States Court to six years' imprisonment at hard labor."

Humiliated, Sigel stepped down from his position.  On April 18 The Times reported "He had not been asked to resign, but he did not wish to embarrass the Administration or stand in the way of the appointment of an agent of like political faith with the powers of be."

Robert had not only ruined his own life, but that of his parents.  Two years later, on January 8, 1891 the Committee of Pensions petitioned the United States Senate to approve a pension for Sigel, saying "the beneficiary, whose distinguished service is known to all, is now old and poor and without means of support."  The House Report added "it is but an act of simple justice to care for this old hero in his old age and poverty."

Sigel died in his Bronx home "of general debility" according to The Evening World, on August 21, 1902, at the age of 78.  The tributes flowed in immediately.  The New York Times said "He was a meritorious man, and he embodied, in a high degree, the qualities which make all reasonable Americans proud of their fellow-citizens of German birth...and his memory deserves to be honored by all Americans."

The streets were thronged with civilians and uniformed military personnel on the day of Sigel's funeral.  photographer unknown, from the collection of the Museum of the City of New York

Later that year attention was turned to Elise.  President Theodore Roosevelt received a telephone call from Karl Kapff, a German-American resident of New York on December 12, asking for his help in securing a pension for the widow.  The Times reported "A bill has been introduced in the House by Representative Lessler to give Mrs. Sigel $2,000 a year...Gen. Sigel's widow is now seventy years old and dependent, so that a strong appeal is being made in her behalf."  The pension bill, equal about $57,600 a year today, was passed in January 1903.

On March 17, 1907 the New York Times printed a full-page article announcing that a memorial to Franz Sigel was being sculpted by the esteemed artist Karl Bitter.  The article noted "He has imagined Gen. Sigel as he appeared during the early years of the civil war, erect and vigorous, on the back of an exceptionally large and powerful horse, overlooking the scene of a battle."  The newspaper reported that the "fine monument" would look down Riverside Park and the Hudson River.

The completed statue, over 11 feet high, stood on a granite pedestal designed by architect William Welles Bosworth.  The dedication ceremonies on October 19 began with a parade of described by the Columbia Spectator as "a long procession of United States troops, the National Guards of the State, the Naval Militia, the Grand Army and Spanish War Veterans, and a large division of civilians."  The New-York Tribune estimated that 8,000 members of the regular army and navy, and 5,000 veterans marched.

A massive parade accompanied the unveiling ceremonies.  from the collection of the New York Public Library

The "handsome bronze statue" was unveiled by Sigel's son, Franz.  But what should have been a dignified, military affair had been tainted by infighting among him and his siblings.

Hours before the event The Times reported "The children and grandchildren of the late Gen. Franz Sigel are squabbling over the comparative prominence each of them is to have to-day at the unveiling."  The vicious quarreling was explained by Rudolph's wife who told a reporter "this disturbance was caused by Franz, who was entirely too officious and who had seen to it that she and Mrs. Paul were slighted."

The Times said "The family row got so hot that last Monday Mrs. Rudolph Sigel was summoned to the Morrisania Court."  The magistrate heard the complaints behind closed doors and dismissed them.  But the night before the ceremony, according to the newspaper, "Mrs. Rudolph Sigel said...that when she had asked for seats in the stand for to-day's unveiling she received but two which included no seat for her mother."

Nevertheless, thousands of onlookers were there and the New-York Tribune called it "an ideal day."  The Governor of New York opened the ceremony.

A horrific side story occurred two years later.  Paul Sigel's daughter, Elise (known familiarly as Elsie), was 22 years old and worked in a Christian mission downtown.  Newspaper readers the world over were shocked when her body was found stuffed in a trunk.  On June 22, 1909 the Australian newspaper The Bunbury Herald ran the headline "Chinatown Horror" and reported "The body of Elsie Sigel, who was engaged in missionary work and Sunday-school teaching in Chinatown, New York, has been found in a trunk in a room over a Chinese restaurant in that quarter of the city.  The occupier was a Chinaman, who is supposed to have murdered her."

At the time the condition of Franz's widow was serious.  The Los Angeles Herald wrote in January 23, 1910 "Since the death of her husband, six years ago, she has suffered three strokes of paralysis."  Her family was concerned that the news of Elsie's death would worsen Elise's condition.  The Los Angeles Herald explained "Elsie had visited her grandmother with regularity, and when her visits ceased and her parents were unable to offer a plausible excuse for her absence, the aged woman became alarmed."

Finally she was told that Elsie had gone away to a boarding school.  Soon, however, Elise became "piqued" that the girl had left without saying good-bye.  She also wanted to know why her granddaughter never wrote, but was never given a good explanation.  Finally, after yet another stroke, Elise Sigel died on January 17, 1910 at the age of 75.

Apartment buildings to the north now form a backdrop to the restored Sigel Monument.  photo via the New York Parks and Recreation Department.

On November 16, 1924 about 2,000 persons attended ceremonies at the base of the Sigel Monument to commemorate the general's 100th birthday.  It was most likely the last event held in the shadow of the statue.  Sigel, like so many heroes once so important in the minds of those who erected statues, eventually faded from memory.

photo via the New York Parks and Recreation Department.

In 1941 the statue's bronze sword had become dislodged.  It was repaired by Parks conservators, but was later removed entirely and put into storage.  The statue was cleaned in 1980 and recently the sword has been restored.

The Firemen's Memorial - Riverside Park at 100th Street

Fifth Avenue's St. Thomas's Church at 53rd Street was the scene of the impressive funeral of Deputy Fire Chief Charles W. Kruger on February 16, 1908.  An estimated 25,000 persons crowded the avenue, extending as far as Columbus Circle.  The beloved firefighter had died in a Canal Street fire a few days earlier, drowning in the water-filled sub-cellar after the floor gave way.

The Elmira, New York newspaper, The Summary, reported "Bishop Henry C. Potter put aside the custom of the Church in refraining from eulogies during services for the dead, and in an address from the pulpit advocated the building of a monument to the memory of the man who was known by the fire fighters under him as "Big-Hearted Charley."

Potter said, in part, "Shall the honor we are paying his memory here end with this service?  New York is adorned with monuments to soldiers and statesmen, and it should have a monument to typify the splendid heroism of this department."

Within one week of the funeral a committee had been formed to manage "the Kruger and Firemen's Memorial Fund."  On February 24 The New York Times reported "It is the purpose of the committee not only to erect a memorial to Deputy Chief Kruger and other firemen who have lost their lives in the performance of their duty, but to raise a fund large enough to provide for the care of such firemen's widows and the education of the children, supplementing the pension fund of the Fire Department."

Bishop Potter was appointed chairman of the committee.  Public response was overwhelming.   On February 27 the committee received a $1,000 check from J. P. Morgan--a significant donation equaling about $27,000 today.  The gift may have produced a bit of peer pressure, for on March 17 John D. Rockefeller sent his $1,000 check, followed by Andrew Carnegie's identical amount six days later.

Benefit events included the gala performance at the Metropolitan Opera House in April.   Celebrities donated their services for the star-studded evening.  Patrons paid between $1 and $3 for seats to see acts by George M. Cohan, Eddie Foy, Joe Weber and his company, Otis Skinner and his players, Anna Held and others.  Music was provided by the combined orchestras of the New Amsterdam, New York, and Liberty Theatres.

W. H. Crane, the composer of The Merry Widow, presented an act from that play.   And so did Joe Weber.  The Times noted "The particular novelty of the bill will be the entire second act of "The Merry Widow," followed by Joe Weber's company in their burlesque of the same act.  It is claimed that this will be the first time in New York that an act of a popular success and a burlesque of it have been presented on the same stage and in the same bill."

The benefit brought in an additional $12,000 for the fund.

Bishop Potter died three months later, on July 21.  His post as chairman of the memorial committee was taken by Isidor Straus, a founder of Macy's department store.

The questions of what form the monument would take and where it would be placed were seriously considered.  One group wanted a dramatic "huge statue of a fireman with a rescued baby swung aloft in one hand and a fainting woman tucked under the other arm," according to the New-York Tribune on January 9, 1910.  But, the article said, that idea "at last yielded to those who believed that something lower in tone and more classic in design would have a more permanent value."

The committee chose architect H. Van Buren Magonigle and sculptor Attillio Piccirilli to design the monument.  The pair was currently at work on another project, the imposing Maine Memorial to be placed at the southwest entrance to Central Park.  Magonigle had recently designed the William McKinley Memorial in Canton, Ohio.  Piccirilli was one of the six Piccirrilli Brothers, responsible for monumental sculptures like the later New York Public Library lions.

Magonigle told reporters "The monument proper is in the form of a votive tablet about 25 feet long, 22 feet high and 8 feet thick, flanked by two statues symbolical of Duty and Sacrifice."  An 18-foot long bronze tablet would feature a bas relief of "a dash to a fire and the elements of a scene familiar to every New Yorker."  Below it would be an "ample bowl of running water for horses."

The artist had chosen Knoxville marble for the material.  The Tribune noted its "warm slightly pink tone" had "been a factor in making Mr. Morgan's library in 36th street one of New York's chief delights."  Piccirilli's grouping of Duty would depict a "woman with a dead fireman lying across her knees," and Sacrifice would be represented by "a fireman's widow reciting to her child the story of his father's death."  As he did for the Maine Memorial, Piccirilli chose the highly-popular model Audrey Munson to pose for both women.

In January 1910 Magonigle released a rudimentary sketch of the memorial as it would appear in Union Square.  New-York Tribune January 9, 1910 (copyright expired)

When the Parks Department announced the site for the Firemen's Memorial in January 1910--the northern end of Union Square--the fire department balked.   On April 9, 1910 Chief Croker told reporters he "could not think of a site in Manhattan less suitable," and one reporter added "it is said he speaks for practically every man in the department."  The New York Times noted "If a Riverside Drive site is chosen, it is his idea to have the memorial placed at the foot of one of the streets, as the Sigel and Soldiers' and Sailors' monuments are situated."

The Parks Commissioners and the memorial committee listened.   At the November 27, 1910 committee meeting it was announced that Magonigle's plans and specifications were competed as were Attilio Piccirilli's sketches, and the Board of Estimate and Apportionment had appropriated $40,000 to add to the fund (bringing the total raised to date to nearly $100,000).  And a new site in Riverside Park at 100th Street above Riverside Drive had been approved.  The New-York Tribune reported the following day "It is expected that the first sod will be turned some day this week."

The upper roadway behind the monument, today a spur of Riverside Drive, was known as Property Road.  The completed memorial backed up almost to the curb of that narrow street.  Here an inscription read "To the Men of the Fire Department of the City of New York Who Died At The Call Of Duty.  Soldiers in A War That Never Ends."  (That last phrase was a quotation from Bishop Potter's 1908 eulogy of Chief Kruger.)

If a visitor was not overly impressed with the Property Road side of the memorial, he would be dazzled by the Riverside Drive elevation.  A grand, wide staircase from the Drive rose to a balustraded plaza.  Although Magonigle's fountain and pool could no longer be used as intended--to quench the thirst of weary horses--it provided a dramatic and beautiful element to the design.

Sacrifice was represented by a widowed mother and her child.  Piccirilli placed a fire hydrant by her side.

The completed monument cost $90,500 (more than $2.3 million today), and while millionaires and the city had provided around half that amount, common New Yorkers had donated unselfishly.

To represent Duty, the sculptor depicted a grieving woman with a deceased firefighter across her lap.

The New-York Tribune noted on January 9, 1910 that most of the $52,000 in public donations was "contributed in small sums.  Twenty-five and 50-cent pieces were common offerings, and these often came from 'Johnny's bank' and 'Little Mary's candy money.'  Many children in Harlem got up fairs to raise dollars."

The unveiling of the memorial came on September 5, 1913 during the Convention of the International Association of Fire Engineers.  The ceremonies began with a parade of 1,500 regular firemen and 2,000 volunteers who marched up Fifth Avenue, starting from 57th Street.   Forty pieces of fire apparatus were in the parade, viewed by thousands of persons along the three-mile route.

The Sun reported that 1,200 fire chiefs from all parts of the world (in town for the convention) were among the 4,000 dignitaries in the viewing stands.  Noticeably absent was the committee chairman, Isidore Straus.  He and his wife, Ida, had died on the RMS. Titanic in April 1912.

The unveiling was emotional and dramatic.  The Sun reported "Ten thousand persons stood with uncovered heads while four little girls, daughters of firemen who lost their lives fighting the flames, pulled aside the American flags veiling the monument as the band played 'The Star Spangled Banner.'  Fifty-three other girls, whose fathers died in fires, assisted as the ceremony.  All were dressed in white and wore bouquets of roses donated by the Park Department."

The dramatic sweep of the staircase and the imposing location of the memorial plaza can be seen in this 1925 photo.  Note the bronze lamp posts at the base of the stairs, later stolen for scrap.  from the collection of the New York Public Library

The Firemen's Memorial became the site of the Fire Department's annual October memorial services.  But in 1917 they ceased due to the department's resources being spread thin when so many firefighters left to fight the war overseas.  They did not resume until 1920.

The dangers and sacrifice required by the job were evidenced in the October 5, 1935 services at the memorial.  Both Mayor Fiorello La Guardia and Fire Commissioner McElligott spoke to the nearly 2,000 firefighters assembled that day.  The Times mentioned that "During the past year eight firemen have died in the line of duty."

Like all Manhattan monuments and public artwork, the Firemen's Memorial suffered abuse.  In the winter of 1935 youngsters sledding down the hill used the bowl of the fountain to built a fire to warm themselves.  The New York Times reported on the subsequent damage on August 23, 1936, saying "stone difficult to match was cracked and destroyed." The damage sparked a conservation of the monument sponsored by the Work Progress Administration.

Piccirilli's bas relief of galloping steeds pulling a fire truck to a blaze was a scene "familiar to every New Yorker."

By mid-century vandals were harvesting bronze from public artworks for scrap.  A bronze plaque had been pried off the Soldiers' and Sailor's monument several years earlier, and in the early 1950s Piccirilli's stunning tablet of the galloping fire truck was stolen.  The tablet seen today is a replica cast in the 1950s.

Perhaps even more audacious was the theft of the bronze lamp posts that flanked the base of the staircase.  They were first noticed missing in 1974.   John Tauranac, writing in New York Magazine on November 15 1976 mentioned the lost lamp posts and complained "These dodgers are stealing us blind.  And they are not just stealing second base, they are robbing us of some decent urban amenities and our heritage."  Tauranac placed the scrap value of bronze at the time at about 35 cents a pound.

By the early 1990s the monument itself was in disrepair.  Not only had the fountain not flowed in decades, there were severe structural problems.  On February 24, 1991 The Times reported "Water had seeped between the marble and the brick foundation, causing the stone to bulge and shift."  Park Administrator Charles McKinney deemed it "the most deteriorated monument in Riverside Park."

An $2 million city-funded restoration was initiated in 1991, headed by architect Richard Pieper.   During the dismantling of the monument, a copper box was discovered within the foundation.  The Times reported that it contained "letters from the architect, as well as the badge and firebox key of the city fire chief who saw his deputy die in 1908 in a fire on Canal Street that inspired the monument."

Water once again flows into the basin.

The restoration of the monument was completed before the most tragic and poignant day in Fire Department history.  On September 11, 2001 the Fire Department lost 343 firefighters in the terrorist attack on the World Trade Center--the worst loss of life ever in a single day for the department.  The Firemen's Memorial became a shrine for the lost heroes and for weeks it was the site of vigils.

photographs by the author

The Soldiers' & Sailors' Monument -- Riverside Drive and 89th Street

In 1869, five years after the end of the Civil War and acting on requests of the Central Park Commissioners, the New York State Legislature approved the erection of a Soldiers’ and Sailors’ Monument.  A decade later, on May 22, 1879 nothing had been accomplished.  Five prominent New Yorkers wrote an open letter, published a week later in The New York Times hoping to kick start the project.

The group, composed of General H. W. Slocum, Levi P. Morton, John R. Brady, Lloyd Aspinwall, James McQuade, John T. Hoffman and E. D. Morgan, proposed the formation of a “Soldiers’ and Sailors’ Monument Association.”  Its purpose would be to “undertake to erect a suitable monument in this City to commemorate the services of the Union soldiers and sailors of the late war of the rebellion.”

It was a commendable move.  But the gentlemen would have a long wait.

Four years later, still little had been done and, as a matter of fact, the committee lost two of its most prestigious members—Judge John T. Hoffman and General H. W. Slocum had resigned.  General Slocum stepped down “based on the ground that as the citizens of Brooklyn were endeavoring to erect a soldiers and sailors’ monument, he thought his services properly belonged there,” reported The New York Times on March 29, 1883. 

By 1894 Civil War memorials had been erected throughout the country.  Even small towns had prominent monuments to its servicemen.  Brooklyn’s magnificent Soldiers’ and Sailors’ Arch had been dedicated in 1892.  But the Manhattan memorial was still mired in squabbles over its design and location.  When the Albany Legislature appropriated money for the project, it called it “the Memorial Arch.”  And the Legislature neglected to earmark funds for the “preliminary expenses,” like notices to sculptors and architects and the conducting of a competition.

“That omission caused the project to fall into oblivion, until it as recently recalled by a gentleman interested in the adornment of the city who has no axe to grind, but happens to be a member of the Sculpture Society,” reported The New York Times on January 7, 1894.

The Sculpture Society, the Architectural League and the municipal Art Society joined forces to get the monument back on track.  And the first thing they dealt with was the “Memorial Arch” designation.  The Commissioners of Parks announced that there was no place in Central Park for an arch.   Various locations for a triumphal arch were suggested.  The two favorites were the intersection of Broadway and Fifth Avenue at 23^rd Street and the sea wall of the Battery near the New York Aquarium.  A newspaper noted, “With a flight of steps leading to it from the water, it would furnish a splendid point of departure for processions in which naval brigades figure or companies of soldiers arriving in the city by water.”

Almost two years later there had been no decisions and no progress.  Many New Yorkers pushed for a monumental arch at the entrance of Central Park, on the Fifth Avenue plaza.  But the Fine Arts Federation fought back, saying it “is a very bad site for a monument, especially for a lofty monument such as the committee has decided to erect.”  The Federation firmly felt that the monument should be “placed at some point of the water front, where it will be visible from water as well as from the land.”

A new location had recently been proposed—Riverside Drive.  The New York Times noted on December 15, 1895, “At one end of the drive Grant’s tomb is already rising.  If the other end were bounded by a military and naval monument visible from afar and easily accessible from close at hand…the border of the drive between these two terminal monuments would become the fitting repository of the monuments of individual military and naval heroes.”

The committee was back to square one in June 1896.  Following a meeting with the Mayor on June 10, Madison Square was again the front-runner.  The “small triangular block bounded by Broadway, Fifth Avenue, and Twenty-second Street” (the future site of the Flatiron Building) was deemed “advantageous.”   Newspaper readers were told that the 59^th Street plaza at Central Park was now ruled out; and Riverside Drive had been deemed “out of the way.”

To the surprise of most New Yorkers and despite the vehement opposition of military and arts groups, on July 17, 1897 the Mayor and the Parks Commissioners announced their choice of locations—the Central Park plaza at Fifth Avenue and 59^th Street.   The New York Times was clear in its opinion.  “The thing is absurd and monstrous, and it is greatly to be hoped that the commission may yet show itself disposed to listen to reason.”

The public was quick to respond and on July 18 a Civil War veteran William Henry Shelton, added his opinion to the letters arriving on the desk of the editor of The New York Times.  After pointing out that the old servicemen were getting on in years, he presented an eloquent case for Riverside Drive.  His letter said in park “The winding course of the stately avenue, with its many hills and knolls and great, sloping lawns, will lend itself to monumental treatment on a great scale.”

Later that year, at last, on October 16, 1897 the six architectural submissions for the monument were displayed in the Central Park Arsenal.  Surprisingly, only one was an arch.  The others were soaring columns adorned with sculpture—highly similar to the Columbus monument erected at the Columbus Circle entrance to Central Park five years earlier.   On November 12 the winning design was announced—the 125-foot column on a terraced pedestal by brothers Arthur A. and Charles W. Stoughton.  The sculptures would be executed by Frederick Macmonnies and it would be placed at the 59^th Street entrance to Central Park; a near-matching bookend to the Columbus shaft.

Stoughton & Stoughton's winning design -- The New York Times November 24, 1897 (copyright expired)

Almost immediately, however, John Quincy Adams Ward, President of the National Sculpture Society, blocked the project.  By law no monument could be erected on land belonging to the City of New York without the sanction of the National Sculpture Society president.  And Ward refused to approve the plaza location.  “It is, therefore, evident that the proposed monument cannot be put on the Plaza while Mr. Ward lives,” reported The New York Times on November 24.

And so everyone went back to the drawing board.

Ward, the Civil War veterans, and the artistic societies got their way when a month later the Riverside Drive site was approved.  But now another problem arose—the shaft design of the monument.

The heroic column was not appropriate for the new location.  Civil War General Rush C. Hawkins made his opinion known in a letter on April 13, 1898.  He said in part that the committee that selected the design “proves that its members were quite incapable of discriminating between the truly artistic and the commonplace of the period meretricious…The design is so inharmonious and trifling in its relation to suggestion of heroic deeds, and generally so much like a piece of ornate window confectionery in its sculptural details, as to render it entirely unfit for the expression of the object intended.  In short, it is quite devoid of nobility of form and expression, and has none of that solemn grandeur of outline which the events it ought to commemorate and express demand.”

The General called the $250,000 set aside for the monument a “vicious waste of good money” and hoped “some authority” would “prevent the erection of this monument in a city already too much afflicted with bad statues and hideous monuments.”

William Rudolf O’Donovan added his opinion on New Year’s Day, 1900.  He said after a serious of misfortunes that had changed the location six times, “the condition seems worse now than ever before.”  While the Riverside Drive site was considered “a good one” by landscape experts; it was not right “for the approved design which was made for another place.”  O’Donovan felt that erecting the Stoughtons’ shaft would end in “perpetual evidence of the neglectfulness or incompetency of the Municipal Art Commission.”

Rather surprisingly, the commission paid attention.  Arthur and Charles Stoughton were sent back to the drawing board.  With French architect Paul Emile Marle Duboy, they came up with a vastly different monument: a white marble structure based on the ancient Choragic Monument of Lysicrates near the Acropolis in Athens.  The classic building would stand on a circular plaza girded by marble walls and balustrades.  The interior was lit by an oculus within a mosaic-decorated rotunda.

On December 15, 1900—more than three decades after the project began—the cornerstone of the Soldiers’ and Sailors’ Monument was laid by then-Governor Theodore Roosevelt.  More than 1,000 Civil War veterans were there.  General Albert D. Shaw said in part “The monuments we raise to our Union heroes are not memorials of conquest.”  The soldiers, he said, “faced death for a cause they held dear, and died like brave men in the defense of what they believed to be their precious rights.”

The monument was dedicated on Memorial Day 1902.  A procession of veterans, 2,000 school children and other dignitaries marched from Fifth Avenue and 47^th Street to the site.  Old soldiers carried the flag that waved over the cutter McClelland in New Orleans on January 29, 1861 which prompted Major General John A. Dix to order “If any one attempts to haul down the American flag, shoot him on the spot.”

The Soldiers’ and Sailors’ Monument was the focal point of Memorial Day observations for decades to come.  But civic monuments and statues were plagued by neglect and a lack of funds to maintain them.  Only five years after the monument was dedicated, it was in horrific condition.

On March 26, 1907, Mayor George McClellan held a hearing on a bill introduced by Senator Saxe at Albany to appropriate $20,000 for repairing the monument.  A committee of veterans urged him to sign the bill.   The New York Times reported that the structure “is in such bad repair that there is danger of some of the marble slabs falling from their places and being broken on the floor below.  Three slabs have already been broken.”

 

One veteran, Dennis Farrell, reported, “The interior of the monument had sweated, causing a disintegration of the cement between the marble slabs.”  He told the Mayor that pieces of masonry were “continually falling from the walls and ceiling.”  On the floor inside the monument, were pools of water that dripped from the dome.

Like the front, the rear, or northern elevation, is approached by a dramatic terrace and stairs.

Following World War I, sculptor Salvatore E. Florio was commissioned to add a bronze panel to the door of the Soldiers’ and Sailors’ Monument.  The base relief work, about two by three feet, was a tribute “to the men who died overseas” and included the inscription “A Donation to My Comrades—To those who live beyond, our hearts offer tribune, as our memory of their sacrifice grows ever vivid in esteem and love.  Humanity will remember the heroes who fought for Democracy and Justice.”

Not everyone felt so patriotic, however.  On June 24, 1922 someone noticed that the bronze plaque had been stolen—no doubt for its scrap value.  Officials said “When it was stolen is not known.”

More than 80 years later a blank scar marks the place of the stolen bronze plaque.  Note the gray paint on the marble flanking the doorway.

And by 1939 the Stoughtons’ classic monument had fallen from critical favor.  The Works Progress Administration’s New York City Guide described it saying, “The monument, more sculpture than architecture to many, lacks the clarity of form and simplicity of some of the better American memorials.”

Riverside Drive and the Soldiers' and Sailors Monument on a 1950 postcard.

The once-glorious white marble monument did not fare any better during the next seven decades.  By 2015 the interior space had been locked for years for safety reasons.  The few city officials who entered were required to wear hard hats to protect themselves from falling masonry.  The Riverside Park Conservancy hoped to raise $50,000 that year to study the deterioration and necessary repairs.  As had been the case in 1907, pools of water stood on the floor inside and the walls were water stained and crumbling.

Graffiti has stained the white marble, while a close look at the cornice shows deteriorating masonry.

Civic memory, it has been said, is short.  The marble monument to Civil War veterans which took so many decades to complete sits humiliated and decaying on Riverside Drive.  While preservationists scramble to discover the extent of the damage and plot a restoration; the memorial remains a shameful testament to civic indifference.

 photographs by the author

The Hamilton Fountain -- Riverside Drive and 76th Street

Robert Ray Hamilton came from one of New York City’s most esteemed families.  His father was the highly-lauded Civil War and Mexican War veteran General Schuyler Hamilton; his grandfather was the historian and attorney John Church Hamilton; and his great-grandfather was Alexander Hamilton.

Robert Ray Hamilton -- The New York Times August 30, 1889 (copyright expired)

An attorney, Robert had attended both Columbia College and Columbia Law School.  In 1881 he was elected to the New York State Assembly and remained in office until 1889.  Like the rest of his respected family members, he led an untainted life—until his last year in politics.

Hamilton had begun an affair with Evangeline L. Steele in 1886.   Unbeknownst to him, as The Sun later said, she had led “a disreputable life.”  What he also did not know was that she was already married, to “Josh” Mann.  Popularly known as Eva, she recognized the financial opportunity the affair presented and she laid plans to ensnare her lover. 

Newspapers called Evangeline Steele "a notorious woman."  photo The Evening World, December 7, 1904 (copyright expired)

In December 1888 Eva and Josh traveled to Elmira, New York.  The Evening World later reported “They decided that Eva should get a baby, and make Mr. Hamilton believe it was his.  If they succeeded they knew he would not suffer the little innocent to go through life unnamed.”  On December 17 they paid $10 for an unwanted newborn.

Hamilton believed the child was his; but Eva’s demands that he marry her were temporarily halted when the baby became ill and died.  The death certificate listed the child’s name as “Alice Mann, daughter of George and Alice Mann,” and stated the cause of death was “want of breast milk.”  Eva, who had never been pregnant, was unable to nurse the infant and it died of starvation.

Before the baby was buried, according to court testimony later, a replacement baby was purchased (also for $10).  Josh Mann’s mother, “Grandmother” Anna Swinton, moved in with the couple to ensure this one would not die. 

“Hamilton knew nothing of the death of the first one, and yielding to the persistence of Eva he married her in Paterson, N. J. on the 7^th of January last,” explained The Evening World.  In February Hamilton took an apartment in the Marshall Flats on West 15^th Street.  Joshua Mann rented a flat on the same street and when Hamilton was not around, he and Eva lived together as man and wife.  And she provided him with large sums of Hamilton’s money to live on.

Because Hamilton was still serving in the Assembly, he was often out of town.  The New-York Tribune reported “Before she married Hamilton, he agreed to give her $6,000 a year for pin money and to defray her expenses at home.”  A quarrel over that allowance brought an end to the marriage and to Hamilton’s reputation.

On August 26, 1889 the couple was summering in Atlantic City.   Eight months earlier, just after Hamilton learned of the baby, he had hired a nurse, Mary Anne Donnelly, to care for the child.  Donnelly traveled with the family, accompanying them to California earlier that year.

But that morning, after Evangeline repeatedly pressed Hamilton that they should live permanently in Manhattan; he told her that he would reduce her allowance if they did.  “Quick-tempered and passionate, she began to quarrel with him and threatened to leave him forever,” said the New-York Tribune a few days later.   Hamilton refused to budge on the subject.

At one point Mary Anne Donnelly tried to intervene, but she was told to leave the room.  Eva did not like the nurse and already had instructed her husband to fire her.  She demanded that Mary Anne leave the cottage.   When she was unable to move her husband, Eva turned to the whiskey bottle.

At 11:30 a. m. the nurse returned.  Now Eva upbraided her for leaving the child alone, they argued, and Eva fired Mary Anne Donnelly.  Within earshot of Hamilton the nurse took her last shot, denouncing Eva “as a faithless woman.”

A physical confrontation followed, during which Mary Anne proved to be a better street fighter than Eva.  “Mary was as strong as a bull and had the fight lasted much longer Mrs. Hamilton would have been beaten insensible,” reported the Tribune.  Hearing the battle, Hamilton rushed into the room just in time to see Eva thrust a knife into the heart of the nurse.  In trying to break up the fight he was cut in two places.  Mary ran from the room and died on the parlor sofa.

Astonishingly, Evangeline blamed the death on Hamilton.  As she was taken away she said “You know I told you before I left New-York that if you did not discharge that nurse there would be murder committed.”

The scandalous details of the affair came out during the trial.  Newspaper readers nationwide learned of the purchased baby, the other husband, and the plot to get Hamilton to leave his fortune to the baby Beatrice.   His lawyer described him as “outraged and indignant.  When he remembers all he sacrificed for that woman he can hardly restrain himself.”

Eager to escape the scandal, Robert Ray Hamilton went into partnership with John Dudley Sargent, a stage coach driver in the Rocky Mountains who proposed establishing a tourist resort in Yellowstone Park.  Hamilton funded the plan and Sargent acted as the “experience.”  They built a luxurious hotel and lodge on Jackson’s Lake in June 1890.

Three months later Hamilton was dead.  He was found drowned in the Snake River under suspicious circumstances.  He was quickly buried and when investigators from New York later disinterred his body, it was found forced into a too-small wooden crate.  The Sun reported on October 15, 1891, “Strangers found his body, and those who could not appreciate his worth knocked a few rough boards together for a coffin, wrapped the body in a dirty and ragged tarpaulin, loaded it into the box, and so without a tear or a prayer dumped it into a hole on a desolate hillside…A loyal friend, a true gentleman, and a brave man was Robert Ray Hamilton, but hundreds of dogs have been more decently interred by their master than was he by the friends to whom he was loyal.”

Sargent was arrested for his murder, but was later sent to an insane asylum. 

Hamilton’s will included the clause “I direct my executors…to expend the sum of ten thousand dollars in the purchase and erection of an ornamental fountain which I give and bequeath to…New York City, provided that such fountain may be erected in one of the streets, squares or public places in said city.”

Scandal and controversy would follow Hamilton even in his death.  His generous bequest was fought by the family.  On April 22, 1891 The New York Times ran the headline “Let Him Be Forgotten,” and explained that the Hamilton and Schuyler families petitioned the City to ignore his wishes.  “Such a memorial as the will designates would, they believe, perpetuate a name that brought dishonor to the family.”

The battle would last for years.  In the meantime Evangeline Mann had been released from prison.  She had received a settlement of $10,000 from Hamilton’s will.  But she died penniless on November 23, 1904 in St. Vincent’s Hospital.  The Evening World reported that “the body was buried in the common plot in Mount Olivet Cemetery, there being but one mourner present.”

The Park Board accepted the design for the fountain, submitted by architects Warren & Wetmore, on December 30, 1903.  Two months earlier it had approved the location—on Riverside Drive at 76^th Street.  The architects’ baroque fountain featured a spread-winged eagle above a coat of arms and a shell-shaped basin fed by a dolphin.   Water from the basin spilled into a large pool.  The entire Tennessee marble fountain formed part of the stone wall separating the Drive from Riverside Park.  Along the rim of the pool was the inscription “Bequeathed to the people of New York by Robert Ray Hamilton"

Far beneath the fountain, at the base of the wall on the Park side, was a marble bowl that served as a horse trough for thirsty, passing carriage horses.  In reporting on the installation of the Hamilton Fountain, newspapers said it was “for man and beasts.” 

The marble horse fountain, seen here in 1935, was the "beast" portion.  It was eventually covered by feet of dirt and debris. photo Alajos Schuszler/New York City Parks Photo Archive 

By the second half of the 20^th century the horse trough in the park was buried by accumulated soil—a total of 10 to 12 feet deep by the new century.  With the parkside marble bowl long forgotten, the “man and beast” comment resulted in the lavish ornamental fountain on the Drive being termed a “horse trough;” a reputation it still carries.  In fact, Hamilton’s will does not mention the "ornamental fountain" being used by horses, and its positioning makes that improbable.  Carriage drivers would have to direct their horses onto the sidewalk to take a drink.

Throughout the 20^th century the marble fountain suffered vandalism and neglect.  The eagle’s beak was smashed off and the inscription was eroded to nearly illegibility.  Riverside Drive residents did their best, planting flowers in the no longer functioning basin. 

Then in 2008 the Riverside Park Fund and a small maintenance endowment initiated a $150,000 restoration.  The eagle’s beak was replaced, the stone restored, and the plumbing repaired.  And in November an archeological dig of sorts was undertaken to find the old marble horse trough.  It was successful.  Parks Commissioner Adrian Benepe said, on December 1, “the basin might be excavated and reused elsewhere, perhaps as a dog fountain” or “perhaps it will be amply documented and then simply left in place.  That will allow another parks commissioner in another era to find it again.”

In the meantime, the stunning marble fountain continues to be deemed a horse trough--an ironic similarity to the memory and reputation of its donor.

photographs by the author