Abraham Witmer's bridge ..

EXCHANGE

Digitized by the Internet Archive

in 2007 with funding from

IVIicrosoft Corporation

http://www.archive.org/details/abrahamwitmersbrOOIandrich

PAPERS READ

BEFOBK THE

KRIDAY, JUNB S, 1916

** ^i^iox^ tetself, as seen in ftet oton toorfesjop/'

ABRAHAM WITMER'S BRIDGE.
MINUTES OF THE JUNE MEETING.

VOL. XX. NO. 6.
PRICE TWENTY-FIVE CENTS PER COPY

LANCASTER, PA.
1916

Abraham Witmer^s Bridge - - - - - - 155

By Judge C. I. Landis

Minutes of the June Meeting 175

Q I
E ^

2 h

< UJ

X q:

< O

Abrahai litmer's Bridge

At the period immediately succeed-
ing the Revolutionary-War, there was no
bridge along the King's Highway over
the Conestoga River, There was, how-
ever, a public fording. A fording
still exists, though now partly cover-
ed over by the tracks of the Lancaster
and Eastern Street Railway Company.
The earliest move to secure a bridge
at this point proved ineffective, as ap-
pears by the following minutes of the
County Commissioners:

"1753 — August 9. — The Commission-
ers and Assessors met according to
adjournment and settled the accounts
of the county with Peter Worral,
Treasurer, before the Justice and
Grand Jury as in Page 108, and at the
same time agreed to build two stone
bridges, one across the tail race of
William Douglass' mill, in Caernarvon
township, on the Provincial Road lead-
ing to Windsor Furnace, and the other
over Conestoga Creek, on the Provin-
cial Road leading from Lancaster to
the city of Philadelphia. Then they
adjourned until to morrow.

"August 10. — The Commissioners
and Assessors met according to ad-
journment and allowed orders from
No. 1 to No. 10, page 110. Then they
went to Conestoga Creek to view same
in order to make a plan of a bridge
necessary to be built according to
yesterday's minute."

"1754 — February 6. — The Commis-
sioners and Assessors met according
to adjournment, and having had under
their consideration that the building
of a stone bridge over Conestoga
Creek, according to their minutes of
(155)

( 156 )

the ninth of August, last, page 109,
will be a great burden on this county,
the expense whereof will, by estimation,
amount to near two thousand pounds,
therefore, they^ prepared a petition
with a plan thereof annexed, praying
the assistance of the General As-
sembly of this Province to contribute
towards the undertaking, which peti-
tion was this day signed by the Jus-
tices, Grand Jury, Commissioners and
Assessors.

"February 7. — The Commissioners
and Assessors met according to ad-
journment and appointed Isaac San-
ders, one of the Commissioners, to at-
tend the General Assembly of this
Province with petition mentioned in
yesterday's minutes, to obtain their
assistance in the premises." The Gen-
eral Assembly evidently refused the
petition, and no further action was
taken by the county authorities as
si|ch.

A little later, an attempt appears
to have been made to accomplish the
object by means of a lottery; but this
effort must also have proved futile.
The following is a copy of a ticket
issued:

"Conestoga Bridge Lottery.
"1761. Numb. 5061.

"This ticket entitles the bearer to
such /prize as may be drawn against
its /number, if demanded within six
months /after the drawing is finished;
subject to such /deduction as is men-
tioned in the scheme.

"JOSEPH SIMON."

On November 4, 1786, petitions were
presented to the General Assembly
from "a number of the inhabitants of
the borough of Lancaster, and others
residing on the east side of that part
of the said Conestogoe Creek, where
the great road leading from the bor-

(157)

rough to the city of Philadelphia
crosses the same," praying that a
law, entitled "An Act establishing a
ferry and building a bridge across
Conestogoe Creek, in the county of
Lancaster" might be passed. Abraham
Witmer at that time must have resided
on the east side of the Conestogoe. As
shown by the records, he owned con-
siderable land on that side of the
river, and his deed shows that he only
acquired the tavern property on the
west side on September 23, 1789. It
is said, in Evans' and Ellis' History of
Lancaster County, that he first pur-
chased the land on which the tavern
was built and afterwards, in 1789,
acquired an adjoining tract. But this
statement is incorrect. The convey-
ance of 1789 includes in its descrip-
tion the tavern plot, and after his
death his executor sold the whole of
this land, the tavern with four acres
and one hundred perches, to Samuel
Diller, and the balance of fourteen
acres, more or less, to John Schwartz.
An old draft in the possession of
Israel Carpenter, showing the courses
and distances of the tavern property,
conclusively proves this claim. The
petition to the Assembly was read and
ordered to lie on the table, and on
November 7, it was read a second
time, and referred to Mr. Hubley, Mr.
Lowry and Mr. Pindley, to report a
bill, if they deemed it necessary. On
November 15, the committee reported
a bill, which was duly read. At the
same time, petitions remonstrating
against the proposed act were filed.
On December 15 the bill was read a
second time, and a remonstrance of
740 inhabitants of the county was pre-
sented against it. No further action
seems to have been taken by the As-
sembly at this session.

On September 14, 1787, a like peti-
tion was read, presenting the same

(158)

bill, with the insertion of a clause for
leaving an open space where travelers
might ford the creek; and on Septem-
ber 16 and 20 it was consid-
ered and debated, and on Septem-
ber 21, it was read the second time,
was debated by paragraphs, and or-
dered to be engrossed for the purpose
of being enacted into a law. On Sep-
tember 22, 1787, it was finally passed.
The act recited that, "Whereas, it
hath been represented to this House
by the petitions of a considerable num-
ber of the inhabitants of the county of
Lancaster, that the erecting of a good
and substantial bridge across the Con-
estogoe Creek, on the great road lead-
ing from the city of Philadelphia to
the borough of Lancaster, in the
county of Lancaster, would greatly
benefit the trade and general interest
of the community, which at present
are considerably impeded by the fre-
quent rise of the waters of said creek
and the badness of the landing places
on each side, and, whereas, Abraham
Witmer, in order to effect an uninter-
rupted communication between the
city of Philadelphia and the Western
counties of this State, and at the same
time to obtain some advantages to
himself and family, is desirous of
erecting a bridge as aforesaid across
the said creek at his proper cost and
expense, and, therefore, hath prayed
the General Assembly to vest the said
bridge when built in him, his heirs and
assigns forever with liberty to demand
and receive such toll or fees from
travelers as hereinafter mentioned and
expressed, the said Abraham Witmer
engaging for himself, his heirs and
assigns, that, if, at any future day,
the Legislature shall think proper to
make the same a free bridge, he or
they shall surrender and give up their
right to receive toll for the said bridge
upon reasonable compensation for his

(159) •

trouble and expense, to be estimated
by indifferent persons chosen equally
by the parties as hereinafter is ex-
pressed and declared. And, whereas,
the plan proposed by the said Abraham
Witmer for erecting a toll bridge over
Conestogoe Creek appears to this
House to be beneficial to the public.
Therefore, be it enacted, etc.

Section 1 provided that the property
of the bridge, when built, should be in
Abraham Witmer, his heirs and as-
signs, forever, and that they might de-
mand and receive toll from travelers
and others, according to the follow-
ing rates:

For every coach, ^landau, chariot,
phaeton, wagon or other four-wheeled
carriage, the sum of 1 shilling and
6 pence.

For every chaise, riding chair, cart
or other two-wheeled carriage, the
sum of 9 pence.

For every sled the sum of 1 shilling.

For every single horse and rider,
the sum of 4 pence.

For every foot passenger the sum of
2 pence.

For every head of horned cattle,
sheep or swine the sum of 1 pence.

Section 2 authorized Abraham Wit-
ner, his heirs and assigns, to erect and
build, maintain and support, a good
and substantial bridge over and across
the said creek at the place aforesaid,
"Provided nevertheless that a pas-
senger on said road of twenty feet
wide in a direct and straight line on
the north side and at both ends, was
left free, open and clear of every in-
cumbrance."

Section 3 declared that, if Abraham
Witmer and his heirs should exact or
demand greater or other rates than
prescribed by the Act, or should ne-
glect to keep the bridge in good repair,
they should, for every offense, forfeit
£10, one-half of which should go to

( 160 )

the poor of the townships of Lancas-
ter and Lampeter in equal portions,
and the other half to the party com-
plaining, to be recovered before any
Justice of the Peace of the county.
An appeal was allowed within five
days to the next Court of Quarter Ses-
sions.

Section 4 allowed all poor persons,
who were exempt from county rates
and levies, to pass and repass the
bridge toll free.

And section 5 provided that, when-
ever the Legislature should deem it
expedient to make the bridge free, it
should appoint three Commissioners,
and Abraham Witmer, his heirs and
assigns, should also appoint three,
who, or any four, should ascertain the
compensation Abraham Witmer should
receive for his trouble and expense,
and the same should be paid to him
out of the treasury of the Common-
wealth.

At May term, 1788, of the Court of
Quarter Sessions, a petition to the
following effect was presented to the
Court (see Road Docket No. 7, 1788-
1791, pp. 33-34): "On the petition of
Abraham Witmer and others, in-
habitants of the county of Lancaster,
setting forth that the said Abraham
Witmer, pursuant to an Act of Assem-
bly of this State, is about to erect a
bridge over the Conestoga Creek on
the road leading from Lancaster to
the city of Philadelphia, but upon in-
spection of the records of the State
there does not appear any documents
which ascertain the exact place where
the said road crosses the said creek,
by reason whereof great inconven-
iences have arose to ascertain the
proper place where the said bridge is
to be erected, so as to correspond
with the road aforesaid, and praying
the Court to appoint proper persons to
view and lay out a road for the public

(161)

good, beginning at the center of the
Court House in the Borough of Lan-
caster, and extend eastwardly along
the accustomed road leading to Phila-
delphia across the said creek to such
a convenient distance as may be neces-
sary, so that the said Abraham Witmer
may properly place the said bridge
over the creek aforesaid, to answer
the purposes in the aforesaid act men-
tioned. The Court appoints James
Crawford, Abraham Buckwalter, Sr. ,
George Graeff, Adam Weaver, John
Brackbill and John Burkholder to view
the said premises and that they, or
any four of them, if they see cause,
lay out the said road by courses and
distances in a manner the most useful
for the public in general and least in-
jurious to private property and make
report to the next Court." At August
term, 1788, a return was made to this
order as follows (see Road Docket
No. 7, 1788-1791, pp. 51-52) : "The per-
sons appointed to view and lay out a
road beginning at the center of the
Court House, in the borough of Lan-
caster, and extending eastwardly
along the accustomed road leading to
Philadelphia across Conestoga Creek,
having now made report in the
words and figures following, viz.: 'To
the Worshipful Justices of the General
Court of Quarter Sessions of the Peace
to be held at Lancaster for the county
of Lancaster on the first Tuesday in
August next, we, the subscribers ap-
pointed by your Worships to view and
lay out the road within mentioned,
have, pursuant to the within order,
viewed the same, and do report that
we see cause to lay out the same ac-
cording to the courses and distances
following; viz.: Beginning at the
center of the Court House and extend-
ing along the middle of King street, in
the borough of Lancaster N. 82
E. 120 perches in the center of

(162)

said street in Adamstown, thence ex-
tending along the middle of the old
accustomed road leading to Philadel-
phia N. 80y2 E. 168 perches, thence S.
87 E. 65 perches and South 77 E. 188
perches to a post in the middle of the
road placed about three perches from
a beech tree standing to the southward
thereof, thence across Conestoga
Creek S. 78 E. computed about 20
perches, thence N. 81 E. 12 perches to
a post opposite Andrew Graeff's smith
shop, thence N. 75 E. 149 perches to a
post on the north side of a black oak
standing in Martin Graeff's land at the
distance of aiaout 33 feet, which said
road so viewed and laid out by us we
return to be of public utility and least
injurious to private property, and will
enable Abraham Witmer to place the
bridge over Conestoga Creek agree-
able to the directions of the Act of As-
sembly for that purpose enacted. In
witness whereof, we have hereunto
set our hands this 17th day of June,
Anno Domini, 1788. James Crawford,
Abraham Buckwalter, George Graeff,
Adam Weaver, John Brackbill, John
Burkholder.' " The Court thereupon
approved of and confirmed the said
road, and it was ordered that the same
should be forthwith opened, cut, clear-
ed and bridged (if necessary), of the
breadth as the Court should thereafter
direct, according to the Act of As-
sembly of this State in such case
made and provided. This order was
directed "to the Supervisors of the
roads and highways of the borough of
Lancaster and township or town-
ships through which the above de-
scribed road runs."

The bridge built by Abraham Wit-
mer under the act of 1787 was not
the present bridge. That one was
evidently a wooden bridge, and, there-
fore, a much lighter structure. When
it was erected, I cannot exactly say.

(163)

but in May, 1789, the road, leading
from the King's Highway northward
to what was known to us as Ranck's
Mill, and before that as Andrew
Graeff's Mill, was laid out, and it
began as recited in the Court pro-
ceedings "two perches west of Whit-
mer's Bridge, nearly opposite the
fourth pillar, on the west side of said
bridge and on the west side of Cones-
toga Creek," etc. This and the former
records referred to fix, therefore,
the time of its construction as be-
tween June 17, 1788, and May, 1789.

All things have their day of use-
fulness and new requirements render
changes from time to time neces-
sary. So it was with this bridge,
which was soon found unfitted to the
conditions which subsequently arose.
To meet these changes the act of
April 4, 1798, which supplemented the
former act of 1787, was passed, and in
it are to be found the reasons for a
further proposed improvement. The
act states that, "Whereas, by the act
to which this is a supplement,
Abraham Witmer, of the county of
Lancaster, was authorized to erect,
and in pursuance of that authority did
erect, a bridge over the Conestogoe
Creek on the great road leading from
the City of Philadelphia to the bor-
ough of Lancaster, and the said
Abraham Witmer has represented to
the Legislature that the said bridge,
having been built without a view to
the making of the Philadelphia and
Lancaster turnpike road, is not con-
structed of material sufficiently dur-
able, nor calculated to sustain heavy
burdens, which, since the completion
of the said road, are daily passing
over the same, and hath prayed the
Legislature to pass a law to author-
ize him to erect a bridge over the
said creek upon that permanent and
extensive plan which the importance

(164)

of the situation requires." Section 1
of this act then authorized him to
build and maintain a permanent
bridge on any unoccupied part of the
great road, immediately above and on
the north side of "his present bridge,"
provided that he should, as soon as the
new bridge was completed, remove
the old bridge and leave a passage
of twenty feet on said road on the
south side of the new bridge and at
both ends thereof for this use of all
those who might think proper to pass
and repass the creek without going
over the bridge. By section 2, the
rates of tolls and the penalties for
taking greater toll were fixed the
same as in the original act; and
by Section 3, the Legislature might,
when deemed expedient, make the
bridge free by paying Abraham
Witmer such sums of money as
it should be ascertained he was
entitled to for his right and title in
the bridge. Under the latter act the
present stone bridge was construct-
ed. It was finished on Thursday,
November 13, 1800. A notice publish-
ed in the Lancaster Journal on Wed-
nesday, November 12, 1800, reads:

Conestogoe Bridge.

It is with great pleasure
Abraham Witmer informs the pub-
lic that his new bridge will be
completed to-morrow, on which
day, at one o'clock, the inscription
stone will be fixed in the center
of the north wall of said bridge.
The friends of Abraham Witmer
and all other citizens desirous to
see the same are respectfully In-
formed thereof.

The length of the bridge is 540
feet, and the width of the roadway is
19 feet in the clear. In the middle of
it, on the north wall, is a tablet which
contains the following:

(165)

Erected by

Abraham Witmer

M.D.C.C.XC.IX-M.D.C.C.C.

A Law of an Enlightened

Commonwealth

Passed April 4, 1798,

Thomas Mifflin, Governor,

Sanctioned this Monument

of the Public Spirit

of an

Individual.

61 M. to P.

On the south side of the bridge,
carved in the stone abutment, is the
following:

This Bridge

Was Built by

Abr. Witmer

and

His Wife

in the Year

1800.

How much it cost to build, I can-
not say with accuracy, as it was a
private undertaking, and there are
no records existing that I know of
which contain that data. The subse-
quent proceedings concerning it,
however, throw some light upon that
subject, and I will briefly relate them.

The Act of April 2, 1811, P. L. 223,
declared that, "Whereas, it appears
that there is due to the Common-
wealth from the estate of William
Henry, deceased, formerly treasurer
of Lancaster county, the sum of
$12,018.34, being part of the arrears of
State tax due from the county of
Lancaster; and whereas, it appears
that the county of Lancaster has in-
curred some expense and inconven-
ience in furnishing the Legislature
with a state house and other accom-
modations for a number of years past.

(166)

Therefore (section 1) be it enacted,
etc., that, as soon as the Commission-
ers of the county of Lancaster shall
have paid unto John Joseph Henry the
sum of $1,600, then the claim of the
Commonwealth to the $12,018.34 due
from the estate of William Henry, de-
ceased, shall be relinquished to the
Commissioners of the county of Lan-
caster, for the purpose of purchasing
and making free the bridge built by
Abraham Witmer over the Conestoga
Creek in said county." In the follow-
ing year, namely, on March 27, 1812,
an Act was passed, entitled "An Act
to purchase and make free the bridge
over the River Conestoga, built by
Abraham Witmer, in the county of
Lancaster." This Act recited that,
"Whereas by the Act and its supple-
ment, authorizing Abraham Witmer
to erect and maintain a toll bridge
across the Conestogoe River, the
Legislature reserved to itself the
purchase and redemption of said
bridge; and, whereas, by an Act
passed the second day of April, one
thousand eight hundred and eleven,
the sum of ten thousand four hundred
and eighteen dollars and thirty-four
cents, arrearage of State taxes, due
from the county of Lancaster, was
granted to the Commissioners thereof
towards the purchase of said bridge;"
therefore, by Section 1, James Mc-
Farland, of the county of Schuylkill,
George Nace, of the county of York,
and John Ritchey, of the county of
Dauphin, were appointed Commis-
sioners on the part of the Common-
wealth, who in conjunction with such
Commissioners, not being of Lancaster
county, as should be named by
Abraham Witmer, should proceed to
estimate the sum or sums that the
said Abraham Witmer, his heirs and
assigns, were entitled to receive, ac-
cording to the true intent and mean-

(167)

ing of the Act of September 22, 1787,
and its supplement of April 4, 1798,
for the stone bridge across the Con-
estogoe River, built and owned by
the said Witmer. Each Commis-
sioner was to receive two dollars per
day, which was to be paid out of the
treasury of the county.

By section 2 it was stipulated that
the Commissioners appointed on be-
half of the Commonwealth, having
been notified by the County Commis-
sioners, and having fixed on a time
and place of meeting, which should
not be less that thirty days from and
after their notification, the County
Commissioners should forthwith give
notice to Abraham Witmer, his heirs
and assigns, of the time and place of
meeting; and the Commissioners ap-
pointed by this Act, as well as the
Commisisoners appointed on behalf
of Abraham Witmer, should, before
they proceed to their duties, make
oath or affirmation that they would,
with impartiality and fidelity, perform
the duties assigned to them and re-
port the proceedings under their
hands and seals to the Commissioners
of Lancaster county as soon as they
conveniently could.

By section 3, it was also stipu-
lated that, if four or more of the Com-
missioners should not agree as to the
sum which Abraham Witmer was en-
titled to receive, the county Commis-
sioners should inform the Governor,
who should thereupon appoint a suit-
able person, not being an inhabitant
of Lancaster county, and that such
person was constituted a com-
sioner, and the sum awarded by a
majority should be paid to Witmer
by the Commissioners of the county.

Under section 4, it was provided
that, if Witmer, his heirs or assigns,
should refuse or neglect to appoint
Commissioners, or should neglect or

(168)

refuse to receive the compensation
awarded, for the space of ten days
after the time fixed for the meeting or
from the tender made by the County
Commissioners of such sum, he should
he debarred from taking any toll from
and persons or persons passing said
bridge, and that, if he should take
toll contrary to the meaning of the
Act, he should pay a fine of two dol-
lars for every offense.

Under section 5, if the sum awarded
by the Commissioners exceeded $10,-
418.34, then the County Commission-
ers, after paying the whole of the
award, were authorized to erect a gate
near or contiguous to the bridge and
to receive tolls under the same regu-
lations and restrictions as Abraham
Witmer was authorized to do.

And by section 6, it became the
duty of the County Commissioners to
lay before the Court of Quarter Ses-
sions an account annually of the ex-
penses incurred in maintaining and
supporting said bridge, as well as
the amount of tolls received, and the
balance was to be appropriated to the
use of the county, and when it appear-
ed to the Court that the sum over and
above the $10,418.34, had been reim-
bursed to the county, the Court, after
due advertisement, was to declare the
bridge to be free of toll.

Abraham Witmer having received
notice from the County Commission-
ers to meet on June 25, 1812, at the
house of Samuel Slaymaker, in the
borough of Lancaster, named three
Commissioners on his part. I have
been unable to ascertain their names.
But these Commissioners, together
with the Commissioners appointed
on the part of the State, met on the
day appointed and having heard the
parties they made an award that the
sum of $58,444.44 should be paid to
Witmer. The County Commissioners

( 169 )

were dissatisfied with this result, and
they thereupon gave the following
public notice:

"Whereas, in pursuance of the Act
of Assembly for making free the
bridge over Conestogoe, the property
of Abraham Witmer, the referees ap-
pointed by the said Act have awarded
the sum of $58,444.44 to be paid to
the said Abraham Witmer, and as the
Commissioners have taken the advice
of eminent counsel with respect to the
conduct they ought to pursue and are
desirous to lay the said opinion as
well as all other matters relative to
the premises before their constituents,
the public are, therefore, respectfully
requested by the undersigned Commis-
sioners that they will at their re-
spective township meetings on Friday,
the 19th of March next, elect two
citizens of their proper townships, to
meet at the Court House in the
borough of Lancaster on Monday, the
29th of March next, then and there
to advise with and to recommend to
and instruct said Commissioners
what they ought to do and perform in
the premises. February 27, 1813.
Henry Shirk, John Bomberger." The
election took place at the time stated
in this notice, and, delegates having
been thus chosen, the County Commis-
sioners, consisting of Messrs. Shirk,
Bomberger and Christian Herr, Jr., on
March 29, 1813, attended a meeting of
these delegates of the county "relative
to Abraham Witmer's bridge." The
minutes of the Commissioners say that
"the delegates resolved as follows, to
wit: Resolved, That to draw monies
from the treasury of said county for
the payment of said bridge would be a
deviation from the original law pass-
ed on that subject: Resolved, that
the said Commissioners ought not to
pay for the same unless compelled by
due course of law;

(170)

"Resolved, That the proceedings be
signed by the Chairman and Secretary
and published in Dixon's, Hamilton's
and Grimler's papers.

"Attest, James Caldwell. J. Buchan-
an, Secretary."

The resolutions being unfavorable to
Abraham Witmer, the County Commis-
sioners refused to draw an order for
the award made by the joint Commis-
sion, and thereupon Witmer obtained
a rule from the Supreme Court, to
May term, 1813, to show cause why a
mandamus should not issue, to com-
pel them to make out an order on the
treasurer in his favor. After a hear-
ing duly had before that Court, the
rule was discharged. Tilghman, C. J.,
delivering the opinion of the Court,
said: "The Commissioners say they
ought not to draw the order, because
there is not money in the treasury
sufficient to answer it. No doubt they
speak the truth and it appears to be
cause insurmountable against issuing
the writ. Whether the Commissioners
have done wrong in not taking meas-
ures to have the money placed in the
treasury is not now the question. If
they have, we have no right to
punish them in this way. What would
it signify to draw an order on an
empty treasury? The treasurer would
refuse payment, and there the matter
would end. We know very well that
no money can come into the Treasury
but by a tax on the county; and that
tax the Commissioners cannot lay
without the co-operation of other
persons, even supposing that the Act
for the purchase of the bridge author-
izes the laying of a tax for the pur-
pose of paying Mr. Witmer. If Mr.
Witmer's object be attainable by way
of mandamus the first step must be to
order the proper persons to lay a tax;
and it must be laid for the whole sum

( 171 )

at once, for the Act for the purchase
of the bridge makes no provision for
partial payments. There can be no
apportionment of the toll; Witmer is
entitled to take it all until he receives
payment of the whole sum awarded.
In short, the payment of so large a
sum does not seem to have been an
event contemplated by the Legisla-
ture; and whether this Court would
think itself justified in compelling
the county to raise it, without an Act
of Assembly explicitly directing it, is
a point on which I have not made up
my mind. I recommend it to the
serious consideration, however, of Mr.
Witmer and his counsel before another
application is made to this Court." See
Commonwealth ex rel. Witmer v. The
Commissioners of Lancaster county,
8 Binney, 5. The counsel of the coun-
ty in this proceeding were Thomas
Duncan, Moulton C. Rogers and Wil-
liam Jenkins, Esqs., and they received
for their services the sum of $1,500.
Abraham Witmer died on July 10,
J1818, in the seventieth year of his age.
It is said that he was buried in the
graveyard of Mellinger's Mennonite
Church, on the Philadelphia turnpike.
There is, however, no mention of his
burial there in the church records, and
no stone marks his grave. His will was
proven July 28, 1818, and letters testa-
mentary on his estate were granted to
his brother, David Witmer, his broth-
er-in-law. Christian Herr, and John
Neff, the other executors, having re-
nounced. Negotiations were then
again entered into with the county
for the purchase of the bridge, but no
final conclusion was arrived at until
August 8, 1827, when David Witmer,
as executor of Abraham Witmer, de-
ceased, made a deed to Abraham Gib-
bon, Samuel Keller and Emanuel
Reigart, Commissioners of Lancaster
county, "for all that certain stone
bridge erected across the River of

(172)

Conestoga, on the turnpike road lead-
ing from the city of Lancaster to the
city of Philadelphia, situate, being
and standing across the river afore-
said, in the townships of Lancaster
and Lampeter, in Lancaster county,
aforesaid, generally known and
designated by the name of Witmer's
Bridge." The consideration named
in the deed is $26,000. As this sum
was deemed inadequate by the execu-
tor, the privilege was granted to him
to collect, if he could, by private sub-
scription, sufficient to over the al-
leged deficiency in the price. To ac-
complish that end, subscription papers
were circulated over the county,
reading as follows: "Whereas, a ma-
jority of the Commissioners of Lan-
caster county have entered into a
contract with David Witmer, executor
of Abraham Witmer, deceased, to pur-
chase and make free of toll Witmer's
Bridge, over the Conestoga River, in
Lancaster county, but have not agreed
to give the sum demanded by the said
David Witmer for the same, but have
stipulated that the said David Witmer
may try to raise by subscription such
further sum as may satisfy him for
making the said bridge free of toll;
and in order to accomplish so de-
sirable an object, we, the subscribers,
do hereby agree to pay to the said
David Witmer the several sums sub-
scribed by us, as soon as the bridge
shall be declared free of toll, and no
toll to be demanded from the sub-
scribers until a failure of the con-
tract." The amount collected in this
way, as appears by the executor's ac-
count, was $2,585.51. Some of the
amounts subscribed were as low as
fifty cents. Under the fifth and sixth
sections of the Act of 1811, it was,
as you will remember, stipulated that,
if the sum awarded for the bridge
exceeded $10,418.34, the County Com-
missioners, after paying the whole

(173 )

award, might erect a gate near the
bridge and receive toll until the
county was reimbursed; but, under the
agreement of purchase, the bridge was
made free, and from that time to this
it has been a county bridge and pre-
sumably free from toll. Whether or
not it is included in the mileage for
whicti toll is paid along the turn-
pike, I cannot say; but it should not
be, for the turnpike company does
not own an inch of it, and never did.

Immediately after the completion
of the bridge, the travel on the turn-
pike was very heavy, and continued
to be so until about the time the rail-
road superseded it as a method of
transportation. The tolls during this
period frequently amounted to from
twenty-five to thirty dollars a day.
From July, 1818, up to the time of the
sale by the executor, there was paid to
him for toll $22,060,981^. But, after
the railroad was built, the traffic on
the turnpike fell off, and the bridge
receipts would have suffered in like
measure. The proceedings which
were taken to dispose of the various
portions of the turnpike road, and how
the turnpike was thereby finally
placed under its present ownership, I
propose to fully narrate at another
meeting of the society.

Many distinguished men passed
along the turnpike and over this
bridge in early days. In June, 1800,
President John Adams made a journey
to Washington by way of Lancaster
and Frederick, and in September,
1815, Joseph Bonaparte, ex-King of
Spain, known then as the Count de
Survilliers, passed through on his
return from Washington to New York.
Daniel Webster and his wife, in their
carriage of bright yellow, with a
wooden bucket underneath, and driven
by their negro coachman, often came
this way on their road to the capital,
stopping frequently, over night, at

(174)

Gossler's Hotel, in Columbia. On one
occasion, when the Chesapeake Bay
and the lower river were impassable
on account of the ice, a large number
of Senators and Congressmen, in-
cluding Rufus Choate, took this route.

I am afraid Abraham Witmer met
the fate which falls to the lot of many-
public spirited citizens. When he
died, his estate was heavily involved.
The amount realized from the sale of
his real and personal estate, as well as
tolls, up to the year 1839, was $103,-
493.97^, and all of it was expended
in the payment of his debts. There
was even then a balance of several
thousand dollars unpaid. The heirs,
as is usually the case when disap-
pointed in their expectations, charged
his brother, David, as his executor,
with maladministration of the estate,
and in 1830, they filed exceptions to
one of the executor's accounts. These
exceptions were referred to Nathaniel
Lightner, George Musser and Israel
Carpenter, as auditors, who reported
that, outside of a small error of about
$69,76, the account was correct. The
auditors charged for their services
five dollars each. As a matter of fact,
Abraham, when he died, owned his
brother a large amount of money, for
to August term, 1817, No. 152, he con-
fessed a judgment in the latter's favor
for $10,000.

And here ends the story of Abraham
Witmer's Bridge, so far as I have been
able to ascertain it. This magnificent
structure yet stands to attest the
solditity and completeness with which
the work was done. This bridge was
one of the first of its kind in the
State, and it excites admiration to this
day. The man who conceived and
completed it is, in my judgment, en-
titled to be gratefully remembered by
our citizens and to have his name
perpetuated in the records of this
society.

Minutes of the June Meeting

Lancaster, Pa., June 2, 1916.

The regular meeting of the Lan-
caster County Historical Society was
held this evening.

The meeting was the last one of the
season and proved very interesting.
The attendance was unusually good.
The membership of the Historical So-
ciety is increasing rapidly of late.
Many new members are elected each
meeting, indicating a very commenda-
ble growth of interest in local lore on
the part of the inhabitants of The
Garden Spot. Those elected on Fri-
day evening were: D. M. Furlow, of
Lincoln; Mrs. J. F. Stoner, of Lititz;
Dr. W. H. Lefevre and John Wise, both
of Ephrata; S. O. Frantz, of Rohrers-
town; J. Harvey Buch, of Elizabeth-
town, and W. L. Heisey, of Rheems.

The following persons were propos-
ed to membership: Miss Emma Has-
tings, Miss Mary Russel, Dr. B. F. L.
Swarr, Mr. and Mrs. W. F. Lebzelter,
Dr. and Mrs. L. K. Knight, and Prof,
A. C. Wertsch, all of Lancaster; Da-
vid M. Landis, of near New Danville,
and Mr. and Mrs. Henry Boettcher, of
Neffsville.

The Librarian, Miss Bausman, pre-
sented the following report:

Bound Volumes. — History of Dau-
phin County, three volumes, from W.
H. Roland; Pennsylvania Archives
(7th Series), Vols. H., III., IV., from
the State Library; Wisconsin Histor-
ical Publications; Bureau of American
Ethnology, Bulletin 62.

Magazines and Pamphlets. — ^Amer-
ican Philosophical Society Proceed-
ings (two numbers) ; Pennsylvania
Magazine; New York State Museum
(175)

(176)

Bulletin 184; North Carolina Histor-
ical Society Publications; Lebanon
County Historical Society Proceed-
ings; Linden Hall Echo; Bulletin of
Carnegie Library, Pittsburgh; Bulletin
of New York Public Library; Bulletin
of Grand Rapids Public Library.

Newspaper clippings concerning the
history of the churches of Lancaster,
from F. R. Diffenderffer.

Badge of Dauphin Co. Delegation
for the Lancaster Convention of the
Harrison and Tyler campaign, from D,
Reah Houser; a number of pamphlets
concerning certain phases of the pres-
ent war, from Sir Gilbert Parker, of
London.

A cordial invitation was extended
the members of the Historical Society
by the Donegal Society to attend their
annual gathering at Donegal Church
on June 15.

The paper of the evening was read
by Judge Charles I. Landis. His sub-
ject was "Abram Witmer's Bt-idge," a
most interesting and able production.
The author brought out many inter-
esting new facts, not generally known,
concerning the historic structure. The
paper is a valuable contribution to
local historic lore.

Judge Landis also read the will of
John Postlethwaite, which was the
last testament of the owner of the
building where the first Courts of
Lancaster county were held. This
paper is dated 1749 and brought out
among other interesting things, the
fact that there were at least three ne-
gro slaves in his employ in the house-
hold near Rock Hill at that time. This
copy also proves a valuable contribu-
tion to the local Historical Society
possessions.

It was decided to hold the annual
outing of the Society June 24, at the
country home of Miss Daisy E. B.
Grubb, at Mt. Hope.

DFTIIDKI ^in^i ■■ A v.^.. .

RETURN TO the circulation desk of any
University of California Library
or to the
NORTHERN REGIONAL LIBRARY FACILITY
Bldg.400, Richmond Field Station
University of California
Richmond, CA 94804-4698

ALL BOOKS MAY BE RECALLED AFTER 7 DAYS

• 2-month loans may be renewed by calling
(510)642-6753

• 1-year loans may be recharged by bringing
books to NRLF

• Renewals and recharges may be made 4
days prior to due date.

DUE AS STAMPED BELOW

AUG 2 8 1999

FOI

IZOOO (11/95)

U.C.BERKELEY LIBRARIES

CD^t,D^^sD3

UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA UBRARY