David McCullough’s “The Great Bridge”

          The Brooklyn Bridge at the time it was being built was a major undertaking.  Its plans called for engineering feats never attempted before.  It was also a time when many amazing industrial accomplishments were being made around the world; the Suez Canal was nearly complete, engineers were starting a tunnel through the Alps, people were stretching their imagination around the world.

          Sometimes referred to as the Great Bridge, the Brooklyn Bridge was the largest suspension bridge being built.   The engineer who designed the bridge, John A. Roebling, built the Smithfield Street Bridge that crossed the Allegheny River, the Centennial Bridge in Ohio, and the two level Niagara Falls suspension bridge before he proposed the Brooklyn Bridge.  The bridge was to connect Brooklyn to New York City across the East River, a span of 1600 feet from tower to tower and more than 5800 from one end of the bridge to the other.  The bridge had to be tall enough for ships to cross underneath it.  It also had to hold more than 18,000 tons, including trains with passengers, a road for horses and buggies, livestock, and a walkway with pedestrians.  Roebling believed this was six times stronger than it needed to be. 

           While deciding the location of the bridge, J. Roebling was involved in an accident; his foot was crushed between a boat and a beam.   Some of his toes had to be amputated and tetanus set in.  He refused to do as the doctors instructed, and as a result got lockjaw and passed away shortly after that.  The Bridge Company had invested a lot of trust in J. Roebling based on his previous accomplishments, now they were at a quandary over choosing a new engineer.  After much debate the job was continued by his son Washington Roebling, who was an engineer graduate from Troy, where they applied theoretical and practical science.  When he was a soldier he designed and built a couple of bridges and even a tunnel.  Washington also had other bridge building experience; he had helped his father with the bridge in Cincinnati.  John Roebling had sent his son to Europe to learn about pneumatic caissons, which later played a major role in the building of the Brooklyn Bridge. 

           The caissons required for the Brooklyn Bridge would be much larger than anything he experienced in Europe.  The caissons for the Brooklyn Bridge were a half a city block in size.  It was difficult lowering the caisson in a level way as the river rushed by.  When the caisson finally touched the river bottom, workers lowered it evenly through the rock, sand, and gravel.  Removing boulders was very difficult; they had to be blasted into workable pieces.  While putting the caissons into place, workers experienced the bends or “caisson disease”.  Men complained that they felt numb, or they would have difficulty breathing.  Dr. Andrew Smith was hired; he requested men to rest before coming up and out of the caissons.  The time he requested was not long enough, however, and the request was often dismissed by the workers.  Men were willing to risk their lives when working on the caissons.  It was dark without the use of their lime light lamps.  The average temperature in the caisson was 80°F, and the air was humid.  Many men got sick working in the severe conditions and would get colds, bronchitis, and pneumonia.  Men worked around the clock in eight hour shifts.  There was a large turnover.

           The Brooklyn caisson was sunk first, then New York’s, which had to go much deeper.  When the caisson reached 71 feet the first death from the bends occurred and more followed.   After reaching 78’6’ Washington decided to risk leaving the caisson on unlevel rock; the sand and gravel was so compacted it was nearly rock itself.  Washington suffered from another attack of the bends around this time and would never fully recover.  Martin would continue to work in the field and Washington would supervise from home. Emily, Washington’s wife, had become very involved in the building of the bridge by this time.  She took notes, clipped newspaper articles, relayed messages, and kept Washington informed on the day-to-day progress of the bridge.

            The towers went up in the same order; Brooklyn’s first then New York’s.  This was the first sign to the citizens that construction of the bridge was actually going on, as much of the previous work in the caissons was not visible. Thousands of people watched the raising of the first wires from Brooklyn to New York.  The wires formed a belt more than a mile in length.  People were entertained by E. F. Farrington as he was the first to cross in a boatswain chair.  He waved and blew kisses on his way from Brooklyn to New York.  There were bells and whistles celebrating the major accomplishment.  People finally believed the bridge would become a reality.  Every 50 feet of steel wire was lashed together by twine to the first wire hanging across the bridge.   People again gathered to see the ties cut free.  Henry Supple finished cutting the ties in record time.  Soon there was a foot bridge; this showed further progress of the reality of a bridge.  Many people crossed on the foot bridge after obtaining a pass.  Forty miles of wire were laid a day.  Nineteen strands of wires were clamped together every 15 inches.  Wires were tested from multiple producers; the wire had to be strong (hold 3400 pounds) and straight.  When a brittle wire from the Haigh wire mill broke, the project continued with Roebling wire.  Varying temperatures and sunlight made it difficult to regulate the length of the wires.

           Roebling substituted steel for iron in the trusses, making the bridge almost made entirely of steel.  Next, a five foot wide walkway stretched across the East River.  Emily, Washington’s wife, and twelve more crossed.  She later would be the first to ride a carriage across the bridge since Washington was unable to do so himself. 

            During the building of the bridge the local newspapers reported on the varying accidents:  a fire in a caisson, W. Roebling’s illness, an arch from a tower crushing a man to death, the shredding of a cable that injured two men and killed another.  The newspapers also placed doubts in the citizen’s minds when it reported the collapse of a bridge in Scotland.  Newspapers also reported that funds had been mishandled and that more money was needed to finish the bridge.  There were reports of stockholders being overpaid.  Roebling responded to the reasons it was costing more than first predicted:  increased size, elevation and problems while digging the New York caisson.  No mismanagement of funds was found by auditors, but the public remained suspicious. 

           Steam engine trains were installed that used a continuous cable to pull the trains from side to side.  As one train left the Brooklyn side, another would be leaving the New York side.  Each train would have 10 cars that would hold 100 people each. The trip would cost each passenger 5¢.  It would cost 5¢ to ride a horse or buggy across, but a mere penny would allow someone to walk across.  During the building of the bridge Edison had invented the electric bulb.  Lights were strung along its length; it was the first bridge to be lit by electricity!

           The bridge was fist estimated to cost $6,000,000, but in the end it would cost more than $15,000,000.  It took 13 years to complete the bridge, nearly three times longer than projected.  It cost 22 lives, including the designer’s.  It also cost the health of many men.   The towers stood 276’6” tall and weighed 6,000 tons each. The bridge used 6.8 million pounds/3400 tons of steel.   When finished the Brooklyn Bridge was an amazing accomplishment.  It was made almost entirely of steel and stone, yet it was beautiful.  On its opening day tens of thousands came to celebrate; the President (Arthur), Grover Cleveland and other guests were invited to the event.  There were fireworks, decorations, music, and speeches.   Built to endure by Irish, Italian, and German immigrant labor, the Brooklyn Bridge was one of the first sights of America seen by immigrants as they entered this country.

“The Island at the Center of the World”

           Henry Hudson arrived in the Delaware Bay area in 1609 and sailed north into the Staten Island area, taking notes and making maps of the area.  Shortly after his exploration the Dutch government made claim to the area; the Dutch and the West India Company soon offered free land in exchange for 6 years of service to refugees willing to settle the New Netherlands wilderness.  The area had fertile soil, fresh water and meat sources.  In the beginning the colonists had no legal system; instead they were employees of the West India Company. Peter Minuit was elected officer of the province in May of 1626 and purchased Manhattan from the local Indian with 60 guilders of goods (worth about $24).  It was a major trade area with the Indians and the entrance into its bay did not freeze in the winter.  The Indians continued to use the land and the settlers depended on them for their trapping ability.  Minuit was soon replaced by Bastiaen Krol who made peace with the Mohawks, thus furthering trade in furs, and establishing Manhattan as the capital.   Krol bought land around Fort Orange, today known as Albany; it became the second trading post for fur trade. 

          People of every sort poured into North America, many through the harbor of Manhattan, starting the great melting pot of America.  The Dutch, who settled New Netherlands in the early 1600s, brought with them their tolerance of religion and nationality.  Russell Shorto describes it more like “Putting up with” (p.125) than tolerance. Manhattan experienced additional growth when New England started prosecuting witches.  William Kieft, the governor of New Netherlands, allowed people of differing backgrounds, religions, and nationalities into the Dutch settlements; he allowed them to practice their own religion and granted them land.  Not much was known about these Dutch settlements of New Netherlands until Charles Gehring started sifting through documents in the New York State Library that archived different events following Henry Hudson’s voyage in 1609.  He found that the Dutch had a large influence in the personality of what became American.  The area settled by the Dutch spread from Albany, NY to the Delaware Bay. 

             The Dutch dressed very simply and it was not obvious who belonged in the upper class.  The Dutch believed you achieved status through hard work, which was more important than birthright.  The Dutch settlers of New Amsterdam brought with them a new way of thinking.  One such thinker was Adrian van der Donck, a graduate from the University of Leiden.  When he was attending law school, the age of individual and “nation” was being redefined, and right and wrong was determined through human reasoning.  Democratic and Republican ideas about government were developing, there was a lack of censorship, and religious freedom was promoted.  Grotius, an intellectual thinker in natural law, stated that peace was a natural state of a mature civilized nation (p210); this thinking played a role in the development of American government.    

            Van der Donck was first attracted to the area of New Amsterdam by Kiliaen van Rensselaer, who needed a sheriff in his governorship.  Rennselaer’s place was 150 miles up the Hudson River from New Amsterdam.  Van der Donck was to stop the black market trade and hunt down settlers who had fled before fulfilling their contract.  When he could, Van der Donck traveled into the mountains where he spent time with the Mohawks and Mahicans.  He learned their language, their beliefs of right from wrong, and their policy on land.  After Rennselaer died Van der Donck turned south to make his home in New Amsterdam where he began petitioning the West India Company for political rights.  Van der Donck loved America and believed it would become a place where citizens had control over their own destiny.

            Manhattan residents started a legal complaint against William Kieft and the West India Company.  The colony needed money and Kieft decided to tax beaver and bear pelts, however, many people had lost their homes due to a war with the Indians that Kieft had started and lacked the ability to pay the tax .  As a result the West India Company sent Peter Stuyvesant to Manhattan to help Kieft in the war and to bring order to the territory.  Kieft was told to work out a treaty with the Indians, and he needed someone like Van der Donck who knew the territory and the language.  Kieft arrived at the Indian camp butt had no gift for the negotiations and had to borrow from Van der Donck.  Kieft later returned the loan to Van der Donck in the form of 24,000 acres near Manhattan, today known as Brown and South Westchester County.  Van der Donck built his home and became a Jonker; a gentleman of property.   More and more individuals of New Amsterdam, of many different backgrounds received similar status growth and were given the title of burgher; a sign of upward mobility.  Instead of referring to one of higher status as lord or master, the Dutch called them “boss”.  Americanism took root; citizens gained upper status with hard work.  America had become the land of opportunity. 

             Van der Donck helped Stuyvesant with several issues and was elected as the head of the representative committee when positions came open for reelection.  The board of representatives appealed to Stuyvesant with complaints and suggestions on how to run things. Residents of Manhattan wanted a more Dutch-like republic and wanted to get rid of the West India Company and Stuyvesant.  The citizens believed they should be “… in charge of their own destiny-“(171) and complained that Stuyvesant hadn’t allowed the board of representatives to act independently.  In the Netherlands people’s opinions about how the government was run were heard, and Van der Donck saw the need to change the structure of the government in New Amsterdam to be more like the homeland.  Van der Donck interviewed the colonists and put together a document that listed their grievances.   Stuyvesant illegally confiscated the document Van der Donck had prepared and had him arrested for treason.  Van der Donck was released and was elected to represent the colonists in their desire for economic freedom at The Hague.  Van der Donck wrote the “Remonstrance” of New Netherland to be presented in the homeland; it showed the great resources that were available and stated, “The tradition of tolerance, will populate the colony, increasing its multiethnic flavor and its strength and vigor” (252). 

            Van der Donck presented the document of complaints along with a map, samples of beaver pelts, and a drawing of New Amsterdam.  The States General was ready to take trade control away from The West India Company, but had a more pressing issue when the Prince of Orange’s son married the daughter of Charles I who had been beheaded.  When the Prince of Orange died, Willem took his place on the throne and prepared to attack New Netherlands.  Meanwhile, people had been reading the “Remonstrance” and wanted to seek fortunes in Manhattan.  Many people headed to Manhattan, where the States General had promised a government where residents had a voice.  Van der Donck’s family left for Manhattan as well, but Van der Donck got held up in the Netherlands.  Van der Donck was allowed to return later with the promise not to seek any political office.  In 1650 the States General said it would establish a municipal government in Manhattan and Stuyvesant was to return to the Netherlands, but the decision was revised due to altercations between the Dutch and English that led to the Navigation Act, thus putting the West India Company and Stuyvesant back in control of Manhattan. 

            The English believed they were the destined people and wanted control of the New World.  The English wanted control of Manhattan and the trade it represented.  Stuyvesant knew all along that the real threat to Manhattan was the English and not the Swedes who had forts nearby.  Stuyvesant feared the English wanted control of the Delaware River that started 300 miles north of Manhattan.  He sought more land from the Indians and resupplied the forts along the river.  He needed the citizens on his side and elected a board of nine representatives to try to collect enough money to purchase the land from the Indians. While Stuyvesant focused efforts north, the English worked on a plan of their own.  John Winthrop, cousin of George Downing the English ambassador, had information about troops and forts in Manhattan and traded this information for a charter that included Manhattan.  Stuyvesant had earlier asked the West India Company to send troops, but no troops were sent.  Charles, of England, then made a gift of New York to his brother James, the Duke of York.  While Stuyvesant was away in Ft. Orange the English came into Manhattan with a small army.  Stuyvesant returned and was ready to fight, but the citizens were not, so an agreement was made; the people of Manhattan were to retain rights in trade and politics as long as they swore loyalty to the king.  The English took over in 1664 and renamed the area New York after the Duke of York.  In 1673 the Dutch attacked and retook New York and renamed it New Orange.  Willem, the new king of England, and the Dutch fought over Manhattan for another 30 years.  In the end the colony had taken on the personality of the Dutch; it was multi-ethnic, people practiced freedom of religion, a republic political structure existed, people of varying ethnic background were intermarried, and people had competent and assertive attitudes.  The area had become a great melting pot of culture, language, food, and attitude; it had become American.

Joseph Mitchell’s “Up in the Old Hotel”

                Joseph Mitchell brings characters to life in his book and tells the history of New York through his detailed stories and conversations with people from all walks of life.  He brings to life their personalities and the human conditions they lived in during the early-mid 20^th century.   He explains how these people lived and interacted with one another in such detail, you feel as though you can see them and their surroundings – he paints a picture through his words.  I chose several stories that I felt were the most interesting from the book:  “The Old House at Home”, “Professor Seagull” with small parts of “Joe Gould’s Secret” and “King of the Gypsies”; they explain New York from the view of a bar owner, a homeless writer, and gypsies. 

                “The Old House at Home”          McSorley’s Old Ale House is a local bar in New York City.  Its owner built the bar to remind him of a pub back home in Ireland; it had a simplistic design and a homey atmosphere and service.  The bar still exists today and still there is no cash register; change is kept in bowls and bills are kept in a box.  Its primary customers were working class clientele from the neighborhood; mostly Irish and German decent who had been coming to the bar since they were young.  The original owner, John McSorley or “Old John”, knew many prominent men as well that came to his establishment; including Peter Cooper of Cooper Union who gave him a portrait of himself to add to the bar walls.  The bar served as a place to meet friends and talk about old times; Old John was a major topic of conversation, especially after his death.  Women customers were frowned upon – only a peanut peddler, Mother Fresh-Roast, was welcomed on occasion.  Old John claimed men could not drink in peace with women around.  Old John served his customers ale, a free lunch of crackers, onions and cheese, along with a pipe of tobacco.  He visited with his regulars, and they knew each other well.  Old John’s bar walls were covered with souvenirs; strings of wishbones from holiday feast turkeys, shackles from the Civil War, autographs from people he had come in contact with, political posters which depicted major events in history, and items that linked him to his Irish ancestry.  Portraits of our country’s assassinated presidents – Lincoln, Garfield and McKinley hung proudly with a caption about the “Sulking Dogs” that committed the atrocities.  When Old John died his son, Bill, took over the business; he wanted to keep the bar just like his father had left it.  He made only a few subtle changes; he hung a painting of his father above the bar and had it lit, he repaired the sinking bar, repainted the ceiling, and added a phone.  Bill had a quirky personality that took some getting used to, but the regulars quickly accepted him.  Bill carried on one of his father’s traditions; he bought everyone in the bar a final round of drinks before closing for the evening.  Bill was able to sell ale even through the Prohibition period and was never arrested, perhaps due to the politicians and police officers that frequented the establishment.  Bill sold the property to one of the regulars, Daniel O’Connell, a retired police officer.  He too made few changes – even the cobwebs that hung from the ceiling remained.  O’Connell died four years later leaving the bar to his daughter Dot.  Dot honored the “no women” request and hired her uncle to manage the place.  Her uncle, however, did not pass the personality test of the regulars, so he was soon replaced by her husband Harry Kiran.  Kiran gave the bar staff raises, but everything else remained much the same.  Kiran was the perfect fit.  People from all over came to McSorley’s to read, reminisce about old times, watch out the window, drink warm ale (if that’s how they liked it), eat crackers, cheese and onions, and relax.  The regulars felt more at home in their bar than they did at home.  Sloan’s paintings of the place brought attention to McSorley’s and its homey appeal; the place hasn’t changed but its clientele might be a bit different today due to the strangers it has attracted.

                “Professor Sea Gull” and “Joe Gould’s Secret”                 Joe Gould was a quirky bohemian Yankee character who graduated from Harvard.  The only reason he attended the college is because his father and grandfather went to school there.  They were physicians and Gould was expected to follow in their footsteps.  Gould had no interest in becoming a doctor, and explored other interests; he studied the eugenics of Indians for a while which was funded by his mother first before his father lost money in the market and then by the Carnegie Institute.  He enjoyed being with the Indians; they danced, hooted, and hollered which fit Gould’s chaotic personality.  Money for the eugenic project ran out and he decided his purpose in life was to write “An Oral History of Our Times” and he moved to Greenwich Village.  He worked on his manuscripts everywhere he went recording his thoughts, recording interviews, and events.  Gould had a wonderful memory and could remember conversations almost word for word.  He claimed he had worked on the manuscript for twenty-six years and had filled 270 composition books; each page filled from front to back and corner to corner, or at least this is what he led people to believe.  Upon his death he wanted two thirds of the Oral History to go to the Harvard Library and one third of it to go to the Smithsonian upon his death.  Many people believed Gould was a writer of history and poetry; however, he was not allowed to join the Raven Poetry Circle; his poetry was too rude for their taste.  Only a few things written by Gould were published and the money he made was quickly spent.  His mother left him money after her death – he went through it quickly buying people drinks; he felt possessions were a burden and wanted to be rid of the money quickly.  He existed on others who had the possessions he required:  money, food, shelter, and clothes.  He called the donations contributions to the “Joe Gould Fund”.  He existed off of people throughout Greenwich Village; the poets, restaurant owners, the painters, the writers, the publishers, and many more.  He jotted from place to place asking for food and a drink; he favored gin but would accept ale if that was all they offered.  Gould had a small group of friends that regularly funded his habits.  He claimed to be shy regardless of his bold, annoying, and eccentric outward behavior.  He earned the nickname Professor Sea Gull because of a loony dance he performed; he would flap his arms and make squawking noises and claimed he could talk “Sea Gull”.  He accepted money, food, and or drink because he felt he earned it entertaining the people.  He didn’t believe he was a bum, but he also knew others looked at him as one.  Gould was also a party crasher; he would listen to people talking around town and would attend a party without an invitation.   If people rudely asked him to leave he caused a scene and his temper flared. 

               Joe Gould gave interview upon interview to Joseph Mitchell who wrote about him and his Oral History in The New Yorker.  Mitchell read parts of The Oral History of what Gould called the “essay” chapters; these spoke only of Gould’s past.  When Mitchell asked about the “oral” chapters Gould claimed they were stored in a friend’s cellar for safe keeping.  Gould, after many excuses of not being able to get the “oral” chapters, recalled them from memory.  Gould told story after story about:   a mermaid, priests, a religious fanatic, a Hungarian woman who had been married and widowed three times before becoming a madam, hospital employees, seamen, gamblers, an insane asylum, and flophouses.  After Mitchell published Gould’s profile, letters arrived at the magazine from people interested in the Oral History, some included money which interested Gould a great deal.  Mitchell would take the letters to the Minetta, a local restaurant, where Gould acted like the residential bohemian attraction and spoke about the Oral History to tourists in return for a meal.  Mitchell became perturbed with Gould when he stopped unannounced at his office to pick up mail and ask for money; he thought if he could pawn Gould off to a publisher he could pawn the pest onto someone else.  One publisher, Charles Pearce, seemed interested and came by Mitchell’s office while Gould was there.  Pearce asked if he could read some of the Oral History, Gould replied he would have to read it all or nothing, Pearce replied he would do that, Gould replied there’s too much of it to carry, Pearce replied he’d read part and exchange it for unread parts, or that a limousine would drive out to get it from the woman’s cellar, Gould replied he didn’t want it in New York because it wouldn’t be safe, Pearce replied he would keep it in a safe – excuse after excuse was made.  Pearce left frustrated and Mitchell was infuriated and came to the conclusion that the Oral History didn’t exist.  This put distance between Gould and Mitchell that never really healed.  An unknown donor took care of Gould’s room and board for several years so that he could continue to work on the so-called Oral History.  Mitchell had some letters for Gould and dropped them off at his room; the room was unlocked so Mitchell entered saw opened composition books on a table.  Mitchell looked the composition books over realizing Gould just continued to revise the same stories over and over again about his own past from his “essay” chapters.  Gould eventually ended up in a psychiatric hospital and died there – his Oral History was never found.  I saw New York in Gould’s vividly distorted way – past his many digressions there were glimpses into the lives of those in his world including the writer that interviewed him.

                “King of the Gypsies”    King Cockeye Johnny, also known as Johnny Nikanov – age unknown was a self proclaimed gypsy king.  Johnny liked to drink and disliked work.  His wife, Mrs. Looba Johnny Nikavov, took on the responsibility of making the money.  She was a dukkerers, or a fortuneteller known as Madame Johnson.  She sported a kerchief which indicated she was married, multiple rings on multiple fingers, and a necklace made of coins she claimed was worth thousands.  Johnny controlled thirty-eight families who were Americans of Russian descent; they had all changed their Russian names into American names.  One of Johnny’s roles was to bail tribe members out of trouble with the law, another was to take up a collection for the deceased and arrange funerals.  The only time the gypsies went to church was for a funeral and at Easter.  There were between seven and twelve thousand gypsies in New York City, two thirds received relief of one sort or another.  They lived in the poorest neighborhoods and slept on the floor, most were illiterate and disliked education – probably due to their transient ways.  Most spoke Russian, Rumanian, Romany and English.  Children married in their teens.  They sported two names – a travelling name and a home name.  Women added their husband’s first name as their second name.  Gypsies held a variety of jobs:  coppersmiths, horse-traders, mechanics, beggars, illegal Egyptian fortune-tellers, and pickpockets to name a few.  People feared them; they thought gypsies could put a spell on you.  Fortune-tellers preyed mostly on insecure middle-aged women who needed advice and needed their money ridded of evil.  Johnny blamed the automobile and private property for the demise of the gypsy; they no longer lived in wagons, travelled from place to place or lived off the land.  The Depression added a new dimension as gypsies took gold and turned it into worthless currency.  Finally they had trouble finding work in carnivals and turned to large cities like New York where they could adapt to their current way of existence; they lived in crowded rooms with family members and moved as soon as the law was on their heels.

                Mitchell’s stories range from small snippets to particular details of people and how they lived before, during, and after the Great Depression.  He allowed us to see how the Italian, French, English, Dutch, Scandinavian, Portuguese, German, Trinidadian, and others made contributions to the personality of New York and how they embedded their cultures into the American way of life.  In his stories you learn about their jobs, their languages, their foods, their religions or lack or religions.  Mitchell interviewed people from many walks of life, not limited to:  the bar owner, the gifted child and her interracial parents, the homeless, the fishermen, the deaf-mutes, a bearded lady, barroom regulars, and the gypsies.  He wrote these stories all the while giving glimpses of Joseph Mitchell, the New Yorker.  Most of the stories he told were factual, but even the fictional stories had glimpses into the lives and places of what became New York City.

“Generous Enemies” by Judith Van Buskirk

Prior to the American Revolution, people saw New York City as one of the most resourceful and beautiful places in the colonies. The British navy hit the shores in 1776 forcing many New York City residents from their homes. Most fled due to British occupation, others fled because they sided with the Whigs. Even residents who remained neutral found it difficult to stay, so they fled to avoid the war. People, who moved out of their New York City homes, were sometimes lucky enough to have country estates to move to. Even then they were sometimes required to move again to keep their family away from the war. The wealthy had the help of slaves during the moves and sometimes slaves were left behind to watch over the vacated properties. Residents continued to leave the city due to living conditions as well; soldiers had plundered and taken whatever they wished. British soldiers turned the city into a military zone and requested the help of all the men who remained to build a fortress. The poor who had no family or friends outside of the city stayed and gained employment from the British and sometimes even earned a wage for their labor. As more soldiers arrived, more citizens were displaced from their homes and businesses, even churches were taken over.
People began to develop networks and did whatever was necessary to survive, even if it meant crossing enemy lines to seek the help of family and friends. Patriots and Loyalists both crossed enemy lines during the war for personal reasons, especially in New York where the boundary lines were blurred. Patriots who had lived in the New York Bay area before the start of the American Revolution knew the land well and still had economic and social connections there. The New York Bay area did not experience total war, but residents did experience demands from both the Continental Army and the British Army. Both sides plundered the civilians for shelter, food, and medicine. Some residents in the area were able to take advantage of the changes; prostitutes and merchants are examples.
Many individuals had family or friends on the other side. People crossed for different reasons; family, supplies, financial or legal matters, to pass correspondence, or to gather information. Women had an easier time crossing enemy lines; they were seen as weak and helpless and posed little threat. Men crossed as well, but with less frequency. Male spies even dressed as women due to their ease of access. Both sides began to issue laws against crossing enemy lines and requested people to acquire passes. Laws became stricter as the war continued, but many people crossed without permission. William Livingston, a Patriot, was stricter when considering reasons for passes; he gave women few passes seeing them as an infiltration threat. He also limited his own family and friends to only the severest needs to pass. When battles intensified fewer passes were issued. William Smith’s wife, a Loyalist relative of Livingston’s, was especially gifted in obtaining information from the other side and passing messages on through her network of acquaintances and family. Another example is the poetry society that smuggled writings and letters illegally to friends and family.
Residents were not the only people moving between the sides, so did the military. A code of conduct existed for prisoners of war. It is believed this code of conduct dates back to King Gustavus Adolphus who treated his captives with care. If one side heard about their soldiers being mistreated the favor might be returned; a kind of quid pro quo game. Many times soldiers were paroled, and were trusted to return to his captives if an exchange could be obtained. If they broke parole their honor was shamed. On occasion the parolee would return if no exchange could be found. If prisoners escaped because of unfair treatment or unfair confinement, his name was cleared; otherwise the captive was expected to serve his time. Officers were treated much better then enlisted men. Often they were treated better than those that housed them. Captive officers celebrated holidays, got married, and read novels. When news about poor treatment of officers was brought to one’s attention, treatment improved because of quid pro quo. General Charles Lee is one such example; he was allowed to wander the streets of New York City and shop for British goods and mingle among acquaintances within an eight mile radius. Officers were allowed to cross enemy lines to collect personal belongings and then return. Information about British troops and movement was gathered by American officers held in the tight confinement of the city and when released they took the information with them. This was one reason for parole. The code of conduct was not always carried out; take for example the Benedict Arnold – John André event. Arnold, the American hero from the Battle of Saratoga, turned traitor when he betrayed America when giving military intelligence to André, Henry Clinton’s chief aide. Arnold fled to the British side, but André was caught and had in his possession American military plans. George Washington tried to work out an exchange for Arnold to no avail. People had differing opinions when it came to the execution of André. Americans had been hanged for lesser crimes: spying, plundering, and forgery. Why shouldn’t André be hanged? In the end no exchange was made for André, and he was hanged.
Enlisted men were not treated as kindly; they were imprisoned and were fed poor rations unless the Americans won battles and more British captives were taken as trade bait. Captive soldiers were sometimes allowed to work, but most succumbed to bad and crowed conditions in sugar houses and on ships and experienced poor treatment in hospitals. Sometimes soldiers from the other side were treated better than one’s own soldiers; after the American victory at the Battle of St. John’s, the British captives were allowed to collect their baggage in front of the poorly equipped and poorly clothed American soldiers due to the code of conduct.
Trade was yet another reason for movement between sides. Trade occurred between sides regardless of the trade regulations that were in place. There were many reasons why people wanted to trade goods with the enemy; some individuals felt the little trading they did could not hurt. Others claimed everyone was doing it, while some claimed it was the only way they would survive, and did it for the benefit of their family. Some did it to increase their profits; business men saw the war as an opportunity to make money selling to the military. American merchants sold flour, a necessity to the British, at huge profits. Liberty was often seen as the availability of free trade, even if it meant trading with the enemy. Whether residents sold their goods to the Americans or had them taken by the British, they suffered a total loss since the continental was worthless, so people did what was best for their pockets.
Britain did not let Loyalists import or export goods in New York unless it benefitted the British war effort, and then the British set the prices and demanded portions of essential merchandise for the military. As a result of these restrictions, merchants established privateer networks; enemy ships were plundered and the booty was sold at cheap prices, making it hard for the legitimate merchants to stay in business. Merchant ships were held at dock due to importation agreements, while at other times regulations were violated and merchants set sail anyway. The military tried to stop illegal trade with little success, so the newspapers began to report the great injustices, claiming merchants were willing to line their pockets “at the expense of their country” (120).
A New Jersey resident wrote a friend stating “the People will risk anything to enjoy the cheapest market and if we may judge from their conduct, they conceive it no violation of the Rights of Conscience to transgress the penal statutes on the head” (124). It was not just merchants who traded illegally so did the citizens. Many American yearned for the frivolous items from Europe: linens, buttons, handkerchiefs, and wine and then they rationalized that these items could not harm the war effort. Before the war colonists had boycotted British goods, so when New York merchants opted to trade with the British for the money it caused bad feelings with Patriots. Americans did not favor trade with British or their trade hub in the Caribbean but felt business was separate from the war and were willing to take the chance for profit.
Much like women, African Americans were not seen as threats and could move about more freely. The movement of black men allowed for the movement of military information which allowed both side to gain valuable information. Slaves had new opportunities during the war; they were given the promise of freedom if they joined the British side and if the British won the war the opportunity of remaining free was great. The British declared any rebel black man who was captured could be sold into slavery in an attempt to encourage black men to side with the British. Blacks put this opportunity for freedom above the politics of war. As the war came closer to the end the British began pushing for black military units. The units were not armed for long when a group killed a slave owner who was trying to sell one of the refugee’s wife. Some chose to help the American cause believing their efforts might be rewarded with freedom. Slave owners began to see a change in the attitudes of their slaves; they were becoming argumentative, confident, and disobedient and were insisting to have rights. If the owners did not give into some of the demands, they might risk the slave running away. Slaves who were left to watch over property could easily run away. Surnames were given to slaves, making it difficult to tell the difference between the free and the enslaved. Blacks were also transforming their looks; they began to dress like their masters and adopt their mannerisms.
African Americans made up 14% of the population in New York and held a variety of jobs: chimney sweeps, shoe cobblers, carriage drivers, dock workers, privateers, and drivers for the army to name a few. Any non-working blacks in the city were threatened to be sent out of the city. Many female Blacks were unable to join the work effort and were at greater risk of being sold so to avoid bondage ran away. New York became a hodgepodge of African Americans: runaways, slaves to Loyalists, slaves of rebels left behind to watch over property, and freemen.
The war looked to be in the British favor after winning battles in two decisive cities; Savannah and Charleston. In the end the rebels put a huge dent in the war effort with their victory at Yorktown. This put the Loyalists in a precarious light. King George granted the colonies their liberty on the promise Loyalists would be safe and the states would return lost property. Family and friend connections became vital as Loyalists were looked upon as traitors. Individuals justified living in the British territory of New York in a variety of ways; it was the only way to find work and support them and the job they took was no advantage to the British. Others claimed they had to look after family property and still others stayed to be near family. Wealthy Loyalists that remained in New York City and worked for the British were not in good standing with Americans. One such man, William Walton, reached out to his wealthy aunt explaining he had watched over the family property and her money. Cornelia Beckman, the aunt, asked for back rent from her nephew as well as the payment from her annuities that was to go to the slaves who remained in New York. She then asked William to vacate her mansion so it could be rented to Governor Clinton. William chose not to leave New York City in the hopes of being accepted by his family. Samuel Shoemaker also remained in New York City, justifying himself through the communication he had sent family throughout the war and his efforts in releasing rebels from British jails. Most Patriots wanted the Loyalists out of their city, but men like Alexander Hamilton believed many good citizens would be lost with the departure of wealthy Loyalists. New York City Whigs began to return to their homes in the city, where there were reunions of families and friends. To control the flow of people passports were required. Americans wanted to be reimbursed by Loyalists for rent of their property, for missing furniture, and for repairs.
Trade of goods in and out of the city returned quickly. Merchants tried to stock up on supplies believed to be most needed by the fleeing Loyalist, yet they didn’t always guess right. The Loyalists that were preparing to leave the city found it difficult to gather supplies as prices shot up. Many Loyalists and British immigrants left for Britain, the Bahamas, and Nova Scotia. Slaves of Loyalist were usually sold if they hadn’t run away, or some left the city with their masters. Americans were concerned about the loss of slave labor. Remaining Loyalists were threatened if they did not leave. There was a huge gap between the feelings of the poor Patriots and the wealthy Loyalists. Loyalists who left tried to sell their property, usually at a great loss. Homes of the Loyalists were sold to new owners. Laws allowed Loyalist to buy back the home and a few did. Loyalists who remained were not allowed to vote or hold public office. “Tories finally got what they had always wanted – taxation without representation” (188). Sons of Liberty allowed residents to stay if they could show they had no other choice “…the victors of the Revolution will live and let live” (192). Many residents were tired of British controls and were ready to become American. They began to function as a whole although resentments were often revived. People began to rebuild networks that existed before the conflict.
There was a lot of interaction between the Americans and British during the war; unlike what is frequently thought, there was no defined border. The lines of war were blurred with connections between family and friends who felt it was important to stay in touch with one another regardless of the side of war they were on. Maria Ogden had two sons on the Whig side and one son was a Loyalist. Daughters married soldiers from opposing sides, sisters had husbands from opposing sides, Tory sons visited captured Whig fathers in jail, and a New Jersey mother visited her dying Loyalist son and took care of his property. Gouverneur Morris’s mom lived behind enemy lines, and his brother was a general for the British. William Alexander, from the Continental Army, was married to a Loyalist. John Jay’s brother was a Loyalist. General Horatio Gate’s brother-in-law was in the British army. Love and family trumped the politics of war. Even the Loyalists who fled New York for England and Canada had Whig family members. At the end of the war there were no grudges; family was separate from the political arena of war.