Cynthia Brenwall
Happy Birthday, Calvert Vaux!
Kenneth Cobb
Demonstrations, Disturbances, and a Papal ...
Robert Garber
Tracts, Farms, and the Great Reindexing Project ...
NYC Municipal Archives
Happy Thanksgiving
Kenneth Cobb
Birthday Greetings, Verrazano-Narrows Bridge!

Grog, Punch and Wine: New Yorkers Celebrate Independence Day

New Yorkers have been celebrating Independence Day since July 4, 1777.  Or, have they?  Municipal Archives collections are extensive and said to provide documentation on any topic in New York City history. However, there is one notable gap in the holdings. Municipal government was suspended during the period of British occupation from 1776, until the last troops left from the Battery on November 25, 1783. The existence and/or whereabouts of any administrative records for that period has been the subject of speculation ever since. For the Record examined the subject in The Missing Common Council Records of the Revolutionary War.

City Hall, Valentine’s Manual, 1852. NYC Municipal Archives

Researchers are not entirely without information about the city during the first decades of the new republic. The six-volume Iconography of Manhattan Island, by Isaac Newton Phelps Stokes, helps fill the documentation gap. Stokes relied on newspaper accounts and other sources, as well as the Minutes of the Common Council, to write a daily chronicle of key events in city history from 1498 to 1909. 

Federal Hall, 1789, Valentine’s Manual 1849. NYC Municipal Archives

The Municipal Library collection includes the Iconography and looking at entries during the Revolutionary War period reveals that Philadelphia celebrated the first “Anniversary of the Independence of the United States of America,” in 1777.  It is possible to imagine that at least some New Yorkers also managed to celebrate Independence Day, quietly, but Stokes makes no mention of festivities in New York City during the occupation.

Municipal government reconstituted in 1784, and the re-convened Common Council held its first meeting on February 10. When municipal government restarted, so too, did record-keeping in the form of the Minutes of the Common Council. The Minutes and the related series, Common Council papers, are two of the most essential collections in the Municipal Archives.   

There is a useful cumulative index to Minutes of the Common Council covering the period 1784 through 1832. Reviewing the entries for “Fourth of July,” shows the first mention of a celebration in 1785: “…That Alderman Broome & Bayard & Mr. Lawrence and Mr. Ten Eyck be a Committee to report the Measures proper to be taken by this Corporation on the Fourth of July; being the 9th anniversary of the Independence of this State.” (Common Council Minutes, 22 June 1785.)

The Committee to Report the proper manner of celebrating the 4th of July next (partial text), Minutes of the Common Council, June 21, 1796. NYC Municipal Archives

The Council established similar committees, on an annual basis, through at least the first several decades of the 19th century. In 1786, the appointed committee reported to the Council on the arrangements for Independence Day: “That at sunrise the day be announced by a display of colors, a discharge of 13 Cannon & the ringing of all the public Bells for one Hour. That at 12 O’clock there be a Procession of this Board & other public Officers & the Citizens from the City Hall down Broad Street & through Queens Street to the Residences of their Excellencies the Governor & the President of the United States and thence by way of Beekman Street to the City Tavern where a Collation be provided…” (Common Council Minutes, 28 June 1786.) 

Warrant to Daniel Phoenix, Treasurer, for payment of twelve Pounds for the ringing of the bells on the 4th of July, 1795. Common Council papers. NYC Municipal Archives.

Warrant to Daniel Phoenix, Treasurer, for payment of twenty-five Pounds for illuminations and fireworks on the 4th of July, 1795. Common Council papers. NYC Municipal Archives.

In 1789, according to Stokes, “The presence of [President George] Washington in New York makes the celebration of Independence Day especially noteworthy.” Unfortunately, as Stokes reports, Washington had been suffering an illness which “…Deprived the troops of the honor and satisfaction of being reviewed by him in the field.” But later in the day “…they passed the house of the President… who appeared at his door in a suit of regimentals, and was saluted by the troops as they passed.”  In the afternoon, a concert in St. Paul’s church was “honored by the presence of the First Lady and Family of the President, his indisposition (the inconvenience of which thanks be to Heaven, are nearly surmounted) prevents his personal attendance.”

The related series, Common Council papers, also provides information about Independence Day celebrations. The series consists of documents written by or presented to the Council. The date span of the entire series is from 1670 to 1934. However, the material after 1870 consists primarily of resolutions with little supporting documentation. From 1800 to 1831, the documents are separated by year into folders generally pertaining to the standing and special committees created by the Council, e.g. Arts, Sciences & Schools, Charity & Almshouse, Fire & Water, Lamps & Gas, Police, Watch, Prison, Streets, Wharves, etc. The folders are arranged alphabetically. With funding from the National Endowment for the Humanities, the Municipal Archives processed and microfilmed the Common Council papers.

Invoice for payment for punch, grogg, wine, etc., July 4, 1793. Common Council papers. NYC Municipal Archives

The papers helpfully include warrants for payment to vendors who supplied services for Fourth of July celebrations. In 1795, Captain Bauman’s bill for “…illuminations & fireworks… on the celebration of the late anniversary of American Independence,” amounted to twenty-five pounds.

In 1793, John Simmons’ bill for four large bowls of punch, nine bowls of grog, thirty bottles of wine, plus coffee, crackers, etc. came to twenty-six pounds, nine shillings and six pence.  What is less clear is who consumed the beverages. Perhaps this is typical of the “collation” referred to in the 1786 Minutes. In any case we will assume they enjoyed the celebration. 

From For the Record, wishing everyone a happy Fourth of July!

New York City Celebrates Pride

On Sunday, June 26th, New York City will host Gay Pride, the yearly celebration of the LGBTQ community. The first parade took place on June 28th, 1970, on the one-year anniversary of the uprising at the Stonewall Inn which galvanized the modern gay rights movement. Since then, New York has staged an annual Pride march—one of the largest in the world—typically during the last weekend of June.

After last year’s largely virtual affair, this NYC Pride celebration promises to be a mix of both in-person and virtual events. The parade route will kick off at noon on 5th Avenue at 26th Street, then proceed downtown before heading west on 8th Street. After crossing over 6th Avenue, it will continue on Christopher Street passing the Stonewall National Monument. It will then turn north on 7th Avenue, passing the New York City AIDS Memorial, before ending at 16th Street and 7th Avenue.

Before you head out to the parade, take a moment to review a gallery of photographs from the 2019 parade. That year, an estimated 150,000 marchers celebrated the 50th anniversary of Stonewall.  

All photographs by Aburaihan Rahman, External Affairs Associate, Department of Records and Information Services, June 30, 2019.

LGBTQ+ Teachers, Parents and Children

As queer people have increasingly asserted their visibility in public life and sought equal treatment, opponents of LGBTQ+ rights have consistently expressed their view that queer teachers or role models might have a negative impact on children or the notion of families in general. Undoubtedly, these views existed long before any kind of large LGBTQ+ rights movement. Since queer people have more aggressively pushed for equal treatment under the law, these fears have been given more specific and explicit form, shaped into arguments meant to defeat or support legislation. The ongoing digitization of the Municipal Archives’ WNYC-TV collection makes available video content that sheds light on the thinking of both supporters and opponents of such legislation in late 20th century America, echoed by the same arguments still playing out today.

Starting in 1971, the New York City Council repeatedly considered a so called ‘gay civil rights bill’ that would have added sexual orientation to anti-discrimination laws already on the books. Doing so would have protected the livelihoods, living situations and access to public spaces of gay, lesbian and bisexual New Yorkers- but essentially excluded trans people from these same protections. As covered in a July 2020 For the Record post, The Battle for Gay Rights, this effort narrowly failed again and again until it finally passed in 1986. Before then, an array of powerful groups in New York City formed coalitions to defeat the legislation, often citing threats to traditional family structures and children.

District Attorney Robert Morgenthau and Deputy Governor Mary Anne Krupsak supported the ‘gay civil rights bill,’ while Councilmember Anthony R. Gaeta did not. REC0047_01_3447, September 11th, 197.5 WNYC-TV Collection. NYC Municipal Archives.

In 1975, councilmember Anthony R. Gaeta expressed the fears of many New Yorkers at the time. He was afraid that gay teachers specifically, or just the basic presence of openly gay people more generally, would have an ‘adverse effect’ on young children. Hearing his argument, some might find it possible to see how the word ‘gay’ could just as easily be replaced with the word ‘Jewish’ or ‘foreign’ or ‘black’ and similar arguments were made in favor of maintaining other discriminatory laws. Although Gaeta did not go into further detail in the interview, many other opponents of expanding civil rights laws to include sexual orientation made it clear that they believed that gay or lesbian or bisexual people would influence the sexuality of children, turning them into  members of a group seen as undesirable in some communities. For example, the 1978 Briggs Initiative in California, that Harvey Milk campaigned against, would have required any openly gay teacher to be fired under Briggs’ belief that all gay teachers intended to abuse their students.

Openly gay teacher Linda Levy describes the positive impact she believes openly gay, lesbian or bisexual teachers can have on all of their students, regardless of sexual orientation. REC0047_2_013_0230, 1991, WNYC-TV Collection. NYC Municipal Archives.

To be sure, teachers play a vital role in the lives of their students and can be some of the most influential role models a child will have. But some students like Mayumi Passenant never had any openly gay teachers, did not see any teacher as a role model and found support from straight teachers when opening up about her sexuality. And openly queer teachers bring value to more than just LGBTQ+ students by being open. Their openness expands the world their students live in and what is possible in it. Allowing teachers to be open also helps them teach better by not forcing them to lie or mislead their students. In a world where teachers already struggle with a lack of resources, hobbling LGBTQ+ teachers only further harms the children who depend on them for a good education and to do well later in life.

Legal Director of the LAMBDA Legal Defense Fund Paula Ettelbrick and Co-Chair of Center Kids Wayne Steinman rejected the idea that same sex parents cannot provide sufficient role modelling for their children. REC0047_2_013_0229 June 5th, 1991 WNYC-TV Collection. NYC Municipal Archives.

What’s more, the notion that someone can define the sexuality of another through social pressures, or that gay people are especially likely to abuse children, is a hateful and shameful scapegoating myth that undermines efforts to protect children from real abuse. Any link between sexual orientation and childhood abuse has been repeatedly dismissed by experts, even at the Department of Justice as early as 1978. Today, sexual orientation is seen by researchers as the result of a wide variety of subtle biological factors and not something that is engineered in the way one is raised or taught. While the source of one’s sexual orientation is internal, the discrimination one might face is entirely external and within our control as a society. Protecting children from abuse means also protecting gay, lesbian, bisexual and trans children from abuse and remembering that every gay, lesbian, bisexual and trans adult today was once a gay, lesbian, bisexual or trans child.

New mothers Miriam Frank and Desma Holcomb describe the joys of new motherhood and the considerate way they raise their daughter Ruth. REC0047_2_013_0229 June 5th, 1991, WNYC-TV Collection. NYC Municipal Archives.

The Puerto Rican Study

On June 12, 2022, after a two- year hiatus due to COVID, New York City will host the 65th National Puerto Rican Day parade. This week, For the Record will feature a resource available in the Municipal Archives to research the history of Puerto Ricans in New York City. The focus is on the extensive Board of Education collection.

Puerto Rican Day Parade, June 7, 1970. NYPD Special Investigations Unit photograph collection. NYC Municipal Archives.

In the 1950s, the advent of air travel enabled many Puerto Rican families to move to New York City. The new immigrants impacted numerous aspects of New York City. Faced with this big population, many of whom spoke little to no English, the leaders of the City’s school system realized they needed to create programs to help the children of the new residents.

One program established by the Board of Education was called the Puerto Rican Study.  It was created to develop policies, curricula, and programs for the increasing number of students arriving from Puerto Rico. At three and a half cubic feet, the Puerto Rican Study collection is filled with draft letters, general correspondence, reports and subject files all detailing the different ways the study impacted newly arrived Puerto Rican children and, on a broader scale, the New York City school system itself.

The collection, housed at the Archives’ Chambers Street location, is a treasure trove of resources about this lesser-known aspect of NYC Puerto Rican history. The first half of the collection contains early drafts of reports and studies, as well as correspondence, including a letter from Mayor Robert Wagner concerning the Committee on Puerto Rican Affairs and the Mayor’s Commission on Inter-Group Relations.

Mayor Wagner to Dr. Clare C. Baldwin, Assistant Superintendent of Schools, page 1 of 2, January 6, 1956. Board of Education collection. NYC Municipal Archives.

Mayor Wagner to Dr. Clare C. Baldwin, Assistant Superintendent of Schools, page 2 of 2, January 6, 1956. Board of Education collection. NYC Municipal Archives.

The second half is filled with curriculum notes and reports. The curricula were extensive and detailed; there are series titled Resource Unit, Language Guide and other related materials.

Curriculum Materials Prepared by the Puerto Rican Study, 1956-1957. Board of Education Collection. NYC Municipal Archives.

The resource units were based on New York City social studies guides but were intended to help teachers in classes with pupils who were recent arrivals from Puerto Rico. These resource units were organized by themes designed to help Puerto Rican students appreciate and assimilate into American culture. Examples of potential assignments included visiting the Statue of Liberty and “playing musical instruments found in Puerto Rico: maracas, guitar.” Below is an example of some of the resource unit themes:

Resource Unit, 6th Grade, cover. Board of Education collection. NYC Municipal Archives.

There were also units created to teach map skills, as well as how to appreciate technology designed to make life easier. The map skills assignments were connected to United States history, with examples such as having students locate Georgia, and then relate this knowledge to Eli Whitney and the cotton gin. The general theme of these resource units was to provide students the life skills to live in New York City and, more broadly, the United States itself. Other topics included transportation, how to navigate the subway system, and learning how to use a telephone. All of these were designed to create a group of students that could fully assimilate into American culture.

The Puerto Rican Study resulted in a large, bound comprehensive report covering the years 1953 to 1957, published in 1958 by the Board of Education.

The Puerto Rican Study, 1953-1957, cover. Board of Education collection. NYC Municipal Archives.

The Puerto Rican Study, 1953-1957, table of contents. Board of Education collection. NYC Municipal Archives.

The book, The Puerto Rican Study defines itself as a “four-year inquiry into the education and adjustment of Puerto Rican pupils in the public schools of the City of New York.” On a macro level, it describes school authorities’ efforts to “establish on a sound basis a city-wide program for the continuing improvement of the educational opportunities of all non-English-speaking pupils in the public schools.”

Resource Unit, Theme 3, Transportation. Board of Education collection. NYC Municipal Archives.

Did the Puerto Rican Study succeed? As a study, it never claimed to be able to solve the “Puerto Rican problem,” but it did succeed in bringing a level of awareness to the task of assimilating non-English speakers in public school systems in a way that had never been done before. Reviewing the report and related documents in the Municipal Archives collection highlights the thought and effort put into the report, as well as providing numerous examples of the way the project was implemented.

Puerto Ricans established themselves as a major and permanent part of New York City, and with the Puerto Rican Study, the future of those Puerto Rican children seemed brighter. According to the 2010 Census, Puerto Ricans make up 8.9 percent of the population of New York, and it is the state with the highest population of Puerto Ricans. The history of Puerto Ricans in New York City can be found everywhere in the Municipal Archives—from the NYPD surveillance collection to the mayoral collections. The Board of Education collection, and specifically the Puerto Rican Study, is simply one small part in a broader story, one that I, as a fellow Puerto Rican, am excited to keep celebrating.

The Blue Riband: New York City and the Superliners

The Normandie on the Hudson River, 1935. WPA Federal Writers’ Project photograph collection. Photographer: Bofinger. NYC Municipal Archives.

“Millions Greet Normandie Here” read the headline in the New York Daily Mirror on June 4, 1935. Considered by many to be the most beautiful ocean liner to ever ply the seas, the French luxury ship Normandie won the Blue Riband for her record-breaking transatlantic maiden voyage to New York, arriving in four days, eleven hours, forty-two minutes and two seconds. The Blue Riband is an unofficial honor awarded to the fastest passenger liner crossing the Atlantic Ocean.   

Cunard ocean liner Queen Mary at Pier 90. The tremendous speed of the superliner during its transatlantic maiden voyage scraped paint from its hull along the water line, June 2, 1936. Manhattan Borough President photograph collection. NYC Municipal Archives.

One year later, on June 1, 1936, throngs of New Yorkers again cheered as another new ocean liner on her maiden voyage, the Queen Mary, slid into a berth at Pier 90, on Manhattan’s West Side. Although heavy fog delayed the British Cunard ship, the Queen Mary would wrest the Blue Riband from the Normandie in another transatlantic voyage just two months later, on August 24, 1936. 

The huge press attention to the arrival of these new superliners, and the massive official receptions coordinated by the Mayor’s Office attest to the importance of maritime activities for the city’s economy. 

By the mid-19th century, the port of New York handled more goods and passengers than all other ports in the country combined, and by 1912 it became the busiest in the world. The Department of Docks photograph collection includes numerous large-format glass-plate negatives that depict the intense commercial activity along both the East and North (Hudson) River waterfronts. West Street, ca. 1890. Department of Docks Collection. NYC Municipal Archives.

In July 2020, the blog New York's Working Waterfront introduced some of the collections that document the city’s investment in its port and harbor facilities. This week, For the Record will continue to identify useful resources in the Municipal Archives and Municipal Library for researching this essential topic in New York City history.    

The Normandie docked at Pier 88 at West 48th Street, and the Queen Mary at Pier 90, at 50th Street. Along with Pier 92, at 52nd Street, these facilities had been constructed specifically to accommodate the new superliners arriving from Europe. The piers later became known as “luxury liner row.”

Pier 56, Chelsea Section, 1908. Department of Docks and Ferries photograph collection. NYC Municipal Archives.

Chelsea Section Piers nearing completion, 1908. Department of Docks and Ferries photograph collection. NYC Municipal Archives.

Correspondence in Mayor LaGuardia’s papers helps tell the story. In a letter to the Mayor dated June 3, 1935, Percy Magnus, President of the New York Board of Trade wrote, “You may recall that for many years the City made efforts to revise the pier-head line in the North [Hudson] River. We knew at that time that France, England, Germany and Italy all planned to build new superliners, and we also knew that the length of the Chelsea piers was totally inadequate. The City was forced to face the disconcerting fact that its Port facilities were not modern.”

What Mr. Magnus did not mention was that the Chelsea Piers he referenced had also been specially constructed to accommodate the first generation of big new ocean liners coming from Europe after 1900.  Sometimes referred to as the “Titanic-class,” these new ships quickly dominated the lucrative transatlantic market. To maintain its competitive edge, the City built a series of new piers along the Hudson River waterfront from West 17th to West 23rd Streets.

Chelsea Section Piers, typical elevation of piers 54 and 56, 1908. Department of Docks drawings collection. NYC Municipal Archives.

Ocean liner Olympic arriving at Pier 59, Chelsea Section, June 22, 1911. Department of Docks and Ferries photograph collection. NYC Municipal Archives.

The Municipal Archives’ collection of architectural drawings from the Department of Docks, and related photograph series, provide extensive visual documentation of the construction of the Chelsea Piers. The architectural flourishes on the pier sheds (designed by Warren & Wetmore, architects of Grand Central Terminal), were lost during “modernization” work in the 1970s and 80s.  But their original facades can be seen in photographs taken by the Department of Docks staff during construction – all digitized and viewable in the Archives gallery. 

United States War Department regulations restricted the City from building pier structures too far into the Hudson River. Consequently, the Chelsea Piers, and later the new piers between West 48th and West 52nd Streets required digging into Manhattan land to accommodate their extra length. The resulting alteration to the waterfront is visible in another important collection in the Municipal Archives, the Waterfront Survey Maps. New York City is an archipelago of islands and the waterfront series provides incredibly detailed surveys of every inch of the city’s 520-mile shoreline. The entire series has been digitized and is available to research in the gallery.

The Waterfront Survey Maps were created by the Department of Docks beginning in the 1870s and updated to the mid-20th century. Plan of North River Improvement Between W. 46th St. and W. 58th St., Borough of Manhattan, 1931. Waterfront Survey Map collection. NYC Municipal Archives

Piers 88, 90 and 92, 1936. Department of Docks and Ferries photograph collection. NYC Municipal Archives.

Construction of the piers needed for the second generation of superliners almost didn’t happen. The Department of Docks Annual Reports in the Municipal Library pick up the story. The 1934 report (submitted to the Mayor in 1935), began by noting that “ ...the year 1934 saw the resumption of work on the Trans-Atlantic Pier Terminals... which was  temporarily delayed in 1933, due to a lack of appropriations. The new Administration was quick to realize the importance of completing this Terminal for the accommodation of the new superliners of the British, French and Italian Lines, and thereupon immediately opened negotiations with the Federal Government to secure the necessary funds. These negotiations resulted in the approval of the project by the Public Works Administration.”

Press attention surrounding the arrival of the Queen Mary included tracking progress of the liner’s entry into New York Harbor from the air. William S. Paley, President, Columbia Broadcasting System, to Mayor Fiorello LaGuardia, May 26, 1936. Mayor LaGuardia collection. NYC Municipal Archives.

In other words, President Roosevelt’s New Deal came to the rescue with funding through the federal Public Works Administration (PWA). The 1935 Docks Department report explained that “…great efforts had to be extended to have this pier [88] in readiness” for the maiden voyage of the Normandie and concluded “… the efforts of the Department of Docks in this connection earned the commendation of the high officials of the French Line.”

The Dock Department reports and correspondence in the Mayor LaGuardia papers provide descriptions of all the new features of the new pier facilities. Part of the impetus for the new structures was to enable steamship companies to unload and reload these massive ships as quickly as possible. A memorandum to Mayor LaGuardia dated May 23, 1935, is illustrative: “The pier and shed structures are modern in every particular and provided with office enclosures, passenger waiting rooms, baggage and passenger elevators, sprinkler systems, heating, plumbing, water supply and electrical appliances, escalators and baggage conveyors.”

Turning again to Mayor Fiorello LaGuardia’s papers, the substantial volume of material regarding the preparations to welcome the new super liners also reflect the importance of maritime activities. Planning for the arrival of the Queen Mary generated three fat folders in LaGuardia’s subject files, and another folder holds the correspondence for the Normandie reception. In both instances, the Mayor organized welcoming committees of prominent New Yorkers: Jay P. Morgan, John D. Rockefeller, and Cornelius Vanderbilt received invitations to the Queen Mary celebrations. As the arrival date for the Queen Mary grew closer, however, the Mayor’s office let the committee members know that “Because the British people are still in mourning for the death of the late King George V., there will be no official representative of the British government aboard the ship. For that reason there will be no official banquet by the City of New York on this occasion.”

The banquet planned to celebrate the arrival of the Queen Mary was canceled, but Mayor LaGuardia did accept an invitation to dine aboard the Queen Mary, 1936. Mayor LaGuardia Collection. NYC Municipal Archives.  

As noted in several For the Record posts featuring Mayor LaGuardia’s papers, his correspondence is not only voluminous, but also rewarding in what it reveals about his work ethic and attention to detail. It is apparent that he read, and answered, most letters received in his office. The files regarding the Queen Mary reception are no exception. Carefully preserved in folder no. three is a letter from Mrs. W. S. Hilles, of Wilmington, Delaware. On May 24, 1936, Mrs. Hilles wrote to Mayor LaGuardia to ask why no women were appointed to the Mayor’s Reception Committee for the Queen Mary. On June 10, LaGuardia replied: “Your point is well taken. I certainly agree with you that women are as capable of serving upon committees of all kinds as are men.” He added, “But in the naming of this particular committee there were certain practical reasons why women could not be named, which were insurmountable because they were not of our making.” LaGuardia explained that the function of the committee was to go aboard the Queen Mary to greet the captain. However, “…Federal rules do not permit women to board a liner from a cutter because of the danger involved. He concluded: “It so happened that because of the great height of the Queen Mary the Federal rule against women boarding liners from cutters was somewhat justified by the fact that the committee members had to climb a twenty foot rope ladder to reach the lowest open hatch of the liner. I hope you will understand the situation.”

There was not a reply from Mrs. Hilles. 

The Normandie at Pier 88, 1935. Department of Docks and Ferries photograph collection. NYC Municipal Archives.

Take a moment to view the photographs and maps in the Municipal Archives gallery, and explore the Collection Guide to learn more about the City and its maritime history.

Dog Licenses in the Old Town Records

Dog owners in New York City will be familiar with the process of registering and licensing their pets. The Department of Health requires owners to pay a fee and fill out a form that includes the dog’s name, breed, gender, color, and vaccination and spaying/neutering status. This has been standard procedure for well over a century: the first dog licensing law in New York State was passed in 1894. The Municipal Archives collections are notably diverse and comprehensive so it should come as no surprise that dog licensing records can be found in its holdings.   

Old Town Records Collection* NYC Municipal Archives.

The place to look is the Old Town records collection. With a grant from the National Historical Publications and Records Commission (NHPRC), the Municipal Archives has been processing the collection during this past year. It is comprised of records created in the villages and towns that were eventually consolidated into the Greater City of New York in 1898. They date back to the 1600s and consist of deeds, minutes from town boards and meetings, court records, tax records, license books, enumerations of enslaved people, school district records, city charters, information on the building of sewers and streets and other infrastructure.

The collection provides documents that are crucial to understanding when the towns and villages were purchased—or sometimes wrested—from the indigenous inhabitants, how the land was divided and sold, who governed the communities, and essentially, a fascinating record of daily life in the communities that made up what became the five boroughs of New York City after 1898.

For the Record recently highlighted the collection and the processing project.  It described records from the Board of Health, pertaining to slavery in the villages, records about taxes and school districts and town meetings and basic infrastructure and court proceedings. The Old Town collection also contains eleven ledgers related to dog licensing, all from towns and villages in Queens County.

Old Town Records Collection* NYC Municipal Archives.

Old Town Records Collection* NYC Municipal Archives.

While these ledgers provide documentation of an important function of the Board of Health and the history of this practice, it is also simply fun to look through the license books and see what kinds of dogs past inhabitants of the city owned—and what they named them.

Old Town Records Collection* NYC Municipal Archives.

The dog license ledger from the Village of Far Rockaway, dated 1896 to 1897, only a couple of years after the state law was passed, shows how the information required to register a dog with the government remains largely unchanged. Just as it does today, the registration asks for the owner’s name and the dog’s breed, description, and name. The price for registering seems to range between $1 and $2 per year (compared to $8.50 today). 

Old Town Records Collection* NYC Municipal Archives.

Old Town Records Collection* NYC Municipal Archives.

One can see that popular dog breeds were spaniels, poodles, and pugs, among others. Owners seemed to favor royalty-inspired names such as Prince and Duke.

New York City today is a dog-loving city, and it is clear from these records that this has been the case for a very long time. Look for future blogs that describe the rich and fascinating content of the Old Town collection. 

 *All photos are from: Old Town Records Collection, MS 0004, Subgroup 4, Series 6, Subseries 3, Vol. 28: License Book, Dogs, 301-601, 1896 July 1-1897 July 8

We’ll assume Mr. and Mrs. Clinton B. Nichols, of Queens County, obtained a license for their dog, ca. 1890. Borough President Queens photograph collection. NYC Municipal Archives.

 

Archival processing and digitization of the Colonial Old Town Records is made possible by the National Historical Publications and Records Commission.