Here in New England we are blessed with so many interesting historical features standing where they were abandoned. Some examples are old stone walls to demarcate boundaries or breached stone dams with their identifiable raceways, whose waterpower powered mills to manufacture lumber, textiles, and many other items. They are a treat to visit, observe, and reminisce about our past and reconstruct their operation through research.

Close to my home is a historical feature that dates back to 1844. It is the abandoned remains of one of the footings that supported a former wooden railroad bridge. Next to it stands its replacement, a nearly 150-year-old stone arch bridge, which is an active historical feature. It was built in 1867, is on the National Register of Historic Places, and is the largest of its kind in New England (NPS72001334). Today it carries a daily schedule of Amtrak and freight trains across the Farmington River in Windsor.

The remains of this abandoned footing are shown in Photo 1, below and to the right of its Stone Arch Bridge successor.

The wooden pilings that surround this artificial island have survived because they are submerged below water most of the year, except during the dry summer months. With the absence of oxygen, their decay is greatly delayed. The wooden bridge that once stood here was built by the Hartford and Springfield Rail Road (RR) to join up with the completed Hartford and New Haven RR. The Hartford and New Haven RR was completed in 1841 and the Hartford and Springfield RR was not completed until 1844. They were separate railroads until they merged as one in 1847 to become the Hartford and New Haven RR. In 1872 this RR became the New York, New Haven and Hartford RR until 1959. Thereafter it became the Penn Central, for a few short years, then Conrail and finally today, part of Amtrak (OldRailHistory.com).

Using this historical feature of the former wooden bridge as a stimulus, I would like to take you on an historical trip through the historical archives of the Hartford Daily Courant (HDC). I thank those builders of the past who left this feature for us and allow us to quench our historical curiosity and relive its past and make connections relative to it. Therefore, much of what I will talk about below is not dealing directly with the wooden bridge but relates to the building, operating, and upkeep of the RR of which it was a part. Before the railroad, one could only travel north from Hartford by beast of burden over land, or by boat on the Connecticut River. A regular schedule of steamships came to Hartford daily from New York, but if you wanted to go on upriver to Springfield, for example, it depended on the river's water level, as can be seen in the case when Charles Dickens visited this area in 1842. "Mr. Dickens, on his first trip through the United States, visited this city... The river was open, being to a great and unusual freshet, which carried off the ice and enabled the steamboats - stern-wheel affairs - to ply between this city and Springfield, the railroad between the two cities not being in existence" (HDC Feb. 7, 1842). Therefore, the River was usually suitable for transporting people and goods as far as Hartford, but points north were at the mercy of the weather to provide a reliable schedule.

Therefore, the Hartford and Springfield RR was proposed and chartered in 1839; investment in its capital stock opened in 1841. Editorials in the Hartford Daily Courant spoke of the merits of the building of this rail line from Hartford to Springfield. One of them spoke of the estimated cost of $400,000 being low as compared to other rail road ventures, and said the increased business and enhanced real estate values were motives enough to built the line (HDC Mar. 5, 1841). They were promoting the RR and encouraging people who would buy stock in it. Another editorial, "Will the proposed road prove a profitable investment to the stockholders?" signed A CITIZEN (HDC April 19, 1841) questioned whether the estimated cost of the railroad would repay itself in the additional business it would stimulate. A few days later a response to the above raised a concern from A MERCHANT who felt that in A CITIZEN's editorial the ascent of passenger transportation over freight was a misconception and that one should realize that transportation of goods by rail would be very attractive to business. "The transportation of freight is therefore of vital importance to the owners of the Hartford and Springfield Rail Road..." (HDC Apr. 28, 1841). This merchant's views on freight traffic would hold true as seen below.

In late 1844, the rail line opened, and evidently with much fanfare, as seen from the following excerpts. "On Friday we passed over the road for the first time, and were much pleased with the ride... The cars were one hour and five minutes on the upward trip, and an hour and ten minutes in returning. The distance is 26-miles... The Company have two new air-spring Passenger Cars on the road... A person may go from this to Springfield in the coldest weather, with as much comfort as it would take in his own parlor...the obstacles to winter travel ... have been done away... The road to Springfield is through a beautiful country, and a good part of the way within sight of the Connecticut River... the travel and freight offering being much greater than anticipated" (HDC Dec. 23, 1841). Thus, unlike other forms of transportation, the RR could still operate on schedule during inclement weather, especially during the winter months, and as A MERCHANT had predicted, the freight business was more than expected.

The speed at which one could travel by rail in those days was very impressive for that period, and faster than any other form of travel. An article described how passengers who took the steamboat from New York City to Hartford and then embarked onto the 26-mile train trip to Springfield, took only 52 minutes, including stops. This equates to 30 miles an hour (HDC Dec. 21, 1844). It was a remarkable experience for the passengers. An even more impressive speed was recorded in 1848: "Says the Hartford, Ct. Times: 'A railroad train with a new engine, having 5½ feet driving wheels, ran from Springfield to Hartford with five passenger cars and 250 passengers, in the short space of 33 minutes. The distance is 26 miles - or a rate of 50 miles an hour'" (1998 Railway Age, p.66).

By 1854, the Hartford and New Haven RR was one of the few railroads that were essentially double tracked, 56 out of 61½ miles, from New Haven to Springfield (HDC June 10,1854). With double track they could carry train traffic simultaneously in both directions. However, the wooden bridge over the Farmington River was a single track and wouldn't be double until the 1867 Stone Arch Bridge was built.

Finally, it was announced in 1866 that the wooden Farmington River Bridge would be replaced by a stone bridge, erected a few feet away. The article goes on to say that the New Haven Railroad Co. "...seem determined to have the bridges on this road bear the wear and tear of travel, and resist the ravages of time and fire" (HDC Feb. 12, 1866). "It will be the largest stone railroad bridge in New England, consisting of 7 broad arches, and will open for (illegible) in the autumn" (HDC Apr. 1867). But building the new stone arch bridge didn't come without tragedy. Sadly, a laborer, Tom Fox, was killed when one of the two-ton stone components of the bridge fell on him. His wife and three children were dependent upon his support. (HDC June 28, 1866).

I am surprised not to find a formal announcement or dedication of the bridge's opening in the newspaper. But this replacement stone arch bridge has certainly survived wear and tear; it is nearly 150 years old, and a dramatic improvement to its predecessor. From Photo 1 you can see four of its seven beautiful and well-structured arches. It has stood up not only to the weight of the many trains that have crossed but also to the many floods that have occurred under it. One last note, in 1876 the RR tried to recover money it paid in taxes to the U.S. Government, contending that they were unfairly and incorrectly taxed on the building of the new Farmington River Bridge. "The company contended below that the expenditures were not for 'construction' but for repairs, as the bridge was to replace an old unsafe structure." The RR lost; the court ruled that the bridge was an entirely new structure, making the property more valuable (HDC Nov.17, 1876).

I am sure that you share the same feelings I do when you encounter a historical artifact or feature. The feature and some research can take you on a wonderful visit to the past. Though some of your researches on the subject may drift from its direct purpose - as mine have - they still relate and connect to its history. These connections add background and a better understanding of the period when this feature was a functioning piece of the past.

Further, I encourage all of you to share with us any historical artifacts and features you may come across in Connecticut or anywhere else. There is always room and interest in our Newsletter to read about them.

References:
• Hartford Courant. ICONN.org - Newspapers - Hartford Courant - Historical (1764-1922) (Provided by ProQuest).
• "150 Years Ago in American Railroad Journal," Railway Age (Oct. 1, 1998): 66.
• Improvement In Railroad Speed (October 1848).
• ICONN.org - Gale Power Search - National Park Service National Register form 72001334 "Farmington River Railroad Bridge."
• OldRailHistory.com