Facts and Figures Concerning the Hoosac Tunnel

by John J. Piper

In the meantime the company had contracted with Messrs. Haupt and Cartwright to construct the road and tunnel. The first named gentleman was one of the most eminent and experienced engineers in the country. Under the administration of the State engineers, Messrs Lincoln and Stevenson, the existing location was approved, and certain prices were established, upon the basis of which contracts were made for labor and material, and rapid progress was made with the work. Upon the accession of Governor Andrew in 1851, Mr. Stevenson was summarily removed, and Mr. William S. Whitwell appointed in his place. This gentleman at once proceeded to change the entire basis of work as established by his predecessors, reduced the prices under which extensive contracts had already been made, and cut down the estimates, so as to compel an entire suspension of the work. More than a thousand laborers and mechanics were discharged. Mr. Haupt states that at the time of this suspension, "the graduation of the whole line could have been completed in a few weeks. The iron and nearly all the ties and bridge material had been delivered; but little remained to be done except finishing the bridge and laying the track."

After a warm and protracted discussion of the subject in the Legislature of 1862, an act was passed, providing that the State should take possession of the road, tunnel, and all the property of the Troy and Greenfield Company. A commission was also authorized to examine the work, ascertain the feasibility of completing it, and report to the next Legislature. The commissioners appointed under this act, by Governor Andrew, were Messrs. J. W. Brooks and Alexander Holmes, of Massachusetts, and Mr. S. M. Felton, of Pennsylvania, two of them being eminent civil engineers, and all three gentlemen of large experience in railroad affairs. They entered upon the duties of their commission at once, and having dispatched Mr. Storrow to Europe to examine the tunnels there, proceeded to take possession of the road and property of the Company, which was surrendered to them in September of the same year.

The elaborate and exhaustive report of the Commissioners was submitted to the Legislature in the latter part of February, 1863. The closing paragraph expresses their "opinion that the work should be undertaken by the Commonwealth, and completed as early as it can be, with due regard to economy." The result of another discussion in the Legislature was the adoption of the recommendation of the Commissioners, and the responsibility of completing the tunnel and road was assumed by the State, in April of 1863, operations having been suspended nearly three years.

Since that time, the work has been conducted by the Commissioners, under the immediate superintendence of Mr. Thomas Doane, chief engineer, in such manner and with such progress as to give very general satisfaction to the friends of the enterprise, and promise its completion within a reasonable time. A very considerable portion of the labor and expenditures, since the operations were resumed, have been applied to preparing buildings and machinery, to the construction of a dam across the Deerfield river, in order to secure power to operate the tunneling apparatus, and to an enlargement and an alteration of the grade of the Eastern end of the tunnel, which had been excavated by Haupt and Cartwright.

But before proceeding to consider the present condition and prospects of the Tunnel, it is necessary to revert to the legislation of 1862 and 1863, in order to note the tactics of its enemies, who had by no means been idle, nor had in any degree relaxed their opposition. In fact, it was through this opposition that the act of 1862 was effected, the bill being a substitute for that reported by the committee, and generally regarded as a compromise between the friends and foes of the enterprise, though the latter believed they had, at last achieved a triumph, and exultingly whispered that the great Hoosac Tunnel scheme had received its death blow. They certainly did play their game with boldness and skill. While the contractors, Messrs. Haupt & Co., had actually applied all their private means, to the extent of more than $200,000, to carry on the work, it was asserted that they were swindling the State and pocketing its funds to the tune of $300,000. They proclaimed that they were in favor of the Tunnel, and only desired to take the work from the hands of swindling contractors and the control of a bankrupt and irresponsible corporation, in order that it might be assumed and prosecuted by the Commonwealth; but they were secretly confident, and not without reason, that a board of commissioners would be appointed who would report against the prosecution of the work by the State. Of the three gentlemen appointed, not one had expressed an opinion in favor of the enterprise, and Mr. Brooks, the president, was known to be opposed to it. Both of the two resident members were from localities where the prevailing sentiment was against the Tunnel. But this adroitness of the opposition was baffled, and its confident hope disappointed by the integrity and fairness of Mr. Brooks and his associates. The latter had no prejudices to conquer, and Mr. Brooks had not applied himself many weeks to the duties of his commission, before he was convinced of the feasibility of the work, and satisfied that the State ought to assume and complete it. When their report was made to the Legislature in 1863, the old opposition manifested itself with more intensity than ever, and the same honest gentlemen, who, the year before, were so friendly to the enterprise, and only wanted to transfer it from the hands of rapacious contractors and a bankrupt corporation, to the fostering care of the Commonwealth, threw off their masks, resorted to their old tricks and arts, and renewed their old clamor, against the "Tunnel swindle;" yet, vainly, as the result proved.

The name of Mr. F. W. Bird, of Walpole, has been once or twice mentioned in this article, and not improperly, since he has gained that equivocal notoriety in connection with the Hoosac Tunnel, which attaches to the enemies of all great and noble undertakings. This gentleman has informed the public, that in 1847 and 1848, when he was in the Legislature, he "voted for everything that the friends of the Tunnel asked for." This action cannot have greatly embarrassed Mr. Bird during his subsequent career, since the only thing asked for by the friends of the Tunnel, during those two years, was the charter, granted in 1848. Mr. Bird further informs the public, that "in 1862, we were overruled by the committee, but we defeated them before the Legislature. In 1863, we were defeated, and the Legislature sanctioned the resumption of the work." Mr. Bird also boasts that, while a member of the Executive Council, he "did resist the assumption by the chairman of the commission, of irresponsible control over the work, and did something to prevent the building of the road from Greenfield to the mountain."

In 1862, Hon. W. D. Swan represented the opposition to the Tunnel in the Senate. Mr. Bird, in a communication to the Boston Journal of Nov. 3, 1862, says:--

"The Tunnel fight was organized and directed by three members of the Third House.

The Tunnel matter came before the Senate late in the session, when many important questions demanded the attention of the Senate and rendered it very difficult for them to make personal investigations.

As to Mr. Swan, he very frankly declared that the whole subject was so new to him that he must rely upon us for his materials.