This is just the beginning! Our collection holds over 300 years of history, including rare newspapers, obituaries, marriage records, birth records, and so much more—most of which you won’t find anywhere else!
This newspaper page contains 36 articles. Subscribers can read the full text of each article.
Newspaper
Boston Post
Location
Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America
Date
Jul 23, 1894
Page
5
A letter page collects resident opinions on a proposed rapid transit plan. Voters named Bertram, Chute, Blaisdell, Carey, Wellington, Sawyer, Coleman, Porter express support or opposition, citing concerns about surface roads, car blocking, and potential impact on businesses. Edward T. Harrington and A A Miner conclude the piece with cautious final votes.
The Post distributed 200 return postal cards Friday afternoon to gauge public opinion on the bill. The drive sought views from residents and officials, aiming to measure support and opposition amid ongoing debate.
A reader questions the Meigs system describing it as queer untried bowlegged and asks if it is safe or pretty, raising concerns about its practicality and appearance. The remark frames the system as both unusual and potentially unsafe while inviting evaluative judgment.
Boston businessmen express opposition to the rapid transit act. Postal card replies and random interviews show about three quarters intend to vote no, deeming the bill an outrage that multiplies outsiders’ profits at the city’s expense. Jesse M. Gove denounces the measure as harmful to Boston.
A speech argues the bill grants excessive latitude and delays quick voting. It questions options for elevated roads tunnels and subways to East Boston and warns that voting for or against all is wiser than endorsing a poorly stated measure that could burden citizens.
A speaker declares opposition to an elevated railway measure, arguing the subway option is an costly experiment with limited lasting value and only temporary utility. The remark frames the bill as politically risky while spotlighting concerns over long term public utility and expense.
Citizens press for rapid transit amid a heated council discussion. Opponents criticize the Meigs system while advocates urge faster service, citing congestion and growth. Officials warn of costs and feasibility.
Wallace L. Pierce urges Boston voters to reject the Meigs bill and back an electric elevated road. He argues the bill’s last minute passage creates a rushed, mongrell scheme and that rapid transit should rely on electricity only.
Joseph Comer and Son oppose the rapid transit act urging Boston voters to reject it. They argue streets in the business center are too narrow and congested and that the act would impose huge costs, cause real estate damages, and raise taxes with little relief.
A vocal statement argues against the Boston elevated plan. It lists six reasons: fraud taint, profit-driven scheming, belief in the current system with improvements possible, preservation of city streets, opposition to corporate privilege, and claim that Yes voters are mere tools.
W Read & Sons at 107 Washington street and W J Ellis of 178 Washington street Boston urge rapid transit. Ellis argues the plan will develop suburbs, raise real estate values, and advocates a quick vote to prevent a worse plan later. The letter supports a yes for rapid transit and urges others to do the same.
James P. Prince of Boston writes July 21, 1894 arguing that municipal control of street railroads could solve transit problems, and, citing the rapid transit act, says he would vote against private control without clearer guidance.
A letter argues against a subway bill and favors a city owned elevated road. The author condemns Mayor Matthews lobbying, fears a seven to ten million dollar subway, and urges a future legislative bill for an elevated line with better air and speed. Signed by John B. Moran from 22 Court Street.
A. S. Morss argues that Boston can sustain its large, healthy growth for longer through a better plan than any currently offered, provided the populace stays united. He frames the viewpoint as a fifty year observer of the city’s development.
In a strong opinion piece ED S. Hayes urges disinterested citizens to vote No. He argues the Meigs portion of the act remains impractical since 1834 and that the subway plan is fatally expensive. Hayes warns it could become another burden on already taxed the public.
Alice Parker argues that granting franchises to private firms for public needs endangers the state and urges transit be publicly owned. She cannot vote and advises a No vote, expressing preference for transit owned by the people.
A. A. Gleason argues Boston should vote No on the rapid transit bill. He faults hurried passage, lack of dual option between elevated and subway, undefined subway provisions, and alleged encroachment on the Common, urging residents to oppose in Tuesday’s election.
A reporter notes objections to adopting the Meigs system. The piece outlines several key rationales including the likelihood of formal adoption and related consequences. Details remain fragmentary, but the discussion centers on procedural and policy implications and the stance against immediate acceptance.
A survey of voters outside shops along Tremont Winter and Bromfield streets reveals varied positions on an elevated transit plan. Several businessmen oppose subway plans while supporting elevated routes. others favor the bill, or plan to abstain. Concerns include street disfigurement, health, and city vitality.
The Citizens Association objects to the Meigs portion of the rapid transit bill while endorsing the Tremont street subway if built cheaply. It warns of costly add ons including tunnels, a land strip to Franklin Park, and a new bridge, estimating city costs at about 15.3 million dollars and urging careful vote on July 24.
L Guy Dennett expresses strong disapproval of a subway bill and a transit act. He argues the measure will not solve rapid transit, fixes the minimum fare at five cents for twenty years, and entrusts vast power to an arbitrary corporation. He urges the public to oppose the proposal.
Francis A. Perry argues that expanding the Meigs portion and adding a subway and alley route will relieve congestion, divert patrons from Washington and Tremont streets, shorten stops, and create a new street from Franklin Park to the North End, offering a cheaper, quicker relief.
The members of our firm are divided on the bill with part in favor and part opposing. NEAL MORSE & CO., 657 Washington Street.
W T Miller and Henry F Miller & Sons Piano Co urge the city to approve the rapid transit act at the upcoming vote. They argue the bill offers fair terms and public benefits, warning that defeating it could delay essential development Boston longs for after long waiting.
W E Barton pastor Shawmut Church urges lawmakers to vote against the act for rapid transit, asserting the bill is rushed and costly. He calls for returning the matter to the next Legislature with a demand for public control and profits for the treasury. He warns against private corporate profits funded by the people.
Paine's Furniture Company urges a Yes vote to secure a subway as the only practical rapid transit solution for congested districts. An elevated road would be a sad disfigurement and constant nuisance.
E T Capen of 113 Devonshire Street urges readers to vote No arguing a coal burning, cinder-flying system harms city beauty and comfort. He warns against rushing subway funding and favors waiting five years or electing a new Legislature before embracing municipal ownership or Meigs bill adjustments.
Citizens urge defeat of elevated road plan citing ruined streets and worsening surface conditions in Boston. Petition signed by Crowninshield and Beal of 23 Congress Street.
The letter argues against the Meigs act claiming it delays rapid transit by preserving franchise rights and stalling elevated roads. It notes that similar systems were rejected in many cities and that the act bars construction of the two rail Manhattan system, urging opposition.
The letter criticizes the Meigs act noting steam as the sole motive power worsens smoke and cinder damage to neighboring properties. Charles F. Kittredge of 27 School Street signs the correspondence.
G Wells argues against an elevated rail in Boston, saying a subway with surface aid could be improved, but an elevated is unnecessary and costly. He urges a No vote, contending damages would surpass the city’s needs.
In a Boston letter William C. Durkee argues against the rapid transit act, claiming it spends public funds for private gain. He warns that after tracks extend, the railroad could block further development, and that proposed propulsion may cause noise and smoke damage. He contends the state treasurer deposit is insufficient to cover damages.
Interviews with numerous business figures reveal split views on the elevated and subway options. Advocates cite faster transit and street access, while opponents warn of disruption and financial risk, urging public scrutiny before July 24.
An Old Reader argues against rushing the Meigs subway bill, urging widening streets in congested Boston districts and proposing above ground rapid transit. He favors a general plan with belt lines and holding cars outside the core to benefit labor and capital, promising a brighter future with parks and diverse landscapes.
A speaker argues that practical Meigs system merits support by voters but condemns the combined subway plan as extravagant and foolhardy. W. M. presses for a clear yes or no on Meigs alone, urging sober public judgment.
A dignified statesman demands a ringing address while the great man, weary, scribbles a card and hands over a memorandum from the shop of the city’s best bell hanger, Washington item.
We want people to find what they are looking for at NewspaperArchive. We are confident that we have the newspapers that will increase the value of your family history or other historical research. With our 7-day free trial, you can view the documents you find for free.
People find the most success using advanced search. Try plugging in keywords, names, dates, and locations, and get matched with results from the entire collection of newspapers at NewspaperArchive!
You can also successfully find newspapers by these browse options. Explore our archives on your own!
Browse by location and discover newspapers from all across the world.
Browse by date and find publications for a specific day or era.
Browse old newspaper publications to find specific newspapers.