1 2 MORRIS COUNTY BOARD OF CHOSEN FREEHOLDERS Leanna Brown, Director Peter J. Burkhart Eileen McCoy Rodney P. Frelinghuysen Douglas H. Romaine S. Charles Garafalo Alphonse W. Scerbo

MORRIS COUNTY PLANNING BOARD

Robert N. Zakarian, Chairman Eugune H. Caille, Vice Chairman William Keitel, Secretary Leanna Brown George E. Burke Dorothy Jurgel William J. Mathews Douglas H. Romaine John Stevens

Dudley H. Woodbridge, Planning Director

3 contents

Page

Illustrations 8 Acknowledgment 9

INTRODUCTION

Section I WHY PRESERVE? 13 Philosophy 14 Pragmatism 17

Section II PRESERVATION IN CONTEXT 22 Social Preservation 23 Environmental Preservation 25 Adaptive Preservation 27

Section III WHAT TO PRESERVE 33 Criteria 34 Documentation 37

Section IV PRESERVATION TOOLS 43 Historic District Zoning 44 Landmarks Commissions 45 Supplementary Municipal Power 46 County Action 47 Acquisition Alternatives 47 Tax Relief 49

Section V PAYING FOR PRESERVATION 53 Private Initiative 54 Federal Assistance 58 The State Role 61 County and Municipal Resources 63

4 MORRIS COUNTY PLANNING BOARD STAFF

Dudley H. Woodbridge, Planning Director

Long Range Planning Section

James L. Roberts, Assistant Planning Director Raymond K. Molski, Supervising Principal Planner Raymond Zabihach, Principal Planner Robert P. Guter, Senior Planner William M. Chambers, Senior Planner William A. Fredrick, Jr., Assistant Planner Edward Matey, Assistant Planner James C. Willis, Planning Draftsman

Development Review Section

Miron C. Meadowcroft, Assistant Planning Director James D. Woodruff, Supervising Principal Planner Arne E. Goytil, Principal Planner Frank A. Marquier, Senior Planning Aide

Clerical Staff

Rhoda B. Chase Marie C. Gilmartin Rosamond M. McCarthy Evelyn Taylor

STAFF FOR THIS ELEMENT

Project Director Robert P. Guter Text and Research: Robert P. Guter Research Assistance: Jeanne Korp Editing: William M. Chambers Graphics: James C. Willis William M. Chambers

5 maps

Page

Historic Transportation Routes 65

Planning Regions 92

Site Location Maps:

REGION A Butler, Kinnelon, Lincoln Park, 101 Pequannock, Riverdale

REGION B Boonton, Boonton Township, Denville, 122 East Hanover, Hanover, Montville, Mt. Lakes, Parsippany Troy—Hills

REGION C Chatham, Chatham Township, Florham Park, 150 Madison, Passaic

REGION D Harding, Morris Plains, Morristown, 183 Morris Township

REGION E Rockaway, Rockaway Township, Jefferson 189

REGION F Dover, Mine Hill, Mt. Arlington, Randolph, 202 Roxbury, Victory Gardens, Wharton

REGION G Chester, Chester Township, Mendham, 215 Mendham Township

REGION H Mt. Olive, Netcong, Washington 227

6 Section VI GOVERNMENT PROGRAMS Page FEDERAL National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 67 Advisory Council on Historic Preservation 68 National Trust for Historic Preservation 69 National Register of Historic Places 69 National Register of Historic Landmarks 69 Historic American Buildings Survey 70 Department of Transportation Act 70 Department of Housing and Urban Development 71 National Environmental Policy Act 72 STATE Historic Sites Section, DEP 74 New Jersey Register of Historic Places 74

Section VII PRIVATE ORGANIZATIONS Local Historical Societies 76 Other Organizations 79

Section VIII CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: Municipal Action 85 County Participation 85 State Action 86 Federal Action 86

Section IX INVENTORY OF HISTORIC SITES Introduction 88 Region A 94 Region B 102 Region C 123 Region D 151 Region E 184 Region F 190 Region G 203 Region H 216

APPENDICES Appendix A Proposal for a Landmarks Commission 229 Appendix B Morris County Historical Societies 237 Appendix C Glossary of Architectural Terms 239 Appendix D Resource Bibliography 242 Appendix E Footnotes 254

7 illustrations

The line drawings which introduce each section are reduced copies of measured drawings made by the Historic American Buildings Survey. Section 10 shows a complete sample sheet from a full HABS documentation series. The buildings are identified as follows: INTRODUCTION: Hilltop Church, Mendham Section I: Lewis Pierson House, Hanover* Section II: Van Ness House, Pequannock* Section III: Jacobus Out-Kitchen, Montville* Section IV: Sayre House, Madison Section V: Dickerson Log Cabin, Parsippany* Section VI: Moses Hatfield House, Morristown* Section VII: John Jacobus House, Montville* Section VIII: Thomas Dey House, Lincoln Park* Section IX: Green—Cook House, Hanover APPENDICES: David Miller House, Washington

*Destroyed

8 acknowledgment

More than any other element of the Morris County Master Plan, this study has benefited from direct citizen participation. We would like to thank: Richard Irwin, Chairman, Historic Sites Committee, Morris County Historical Society; Terry Karschner, Historian—Curator, Historic Sites Section, New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection; and Harold Scaff, Morris County Planning Board Citizens’ Advisory Council, for their review of goals and objectives and overall comments; Virginia Harrison, Morris County Free Library; and Barbara Hoskins, Joint Free Public Library of Morristown and Morris Township, whose knowledge is as inexhaustible as their patience, for research and bibliographic assistance; and the following individuals, without whose generous contributions the inventory section of this report could never have been completed: Eleanor Bogert, James A. Bolan, Janet Boston, Barbara S. Burnet, Terry Christiano, Betty Cooke, Marjorie M. Davidson, Joseph Decker, bagai1 Fair, Alex D. Fowler, Bruce Hamblen, Hazel W. Howell, Barbara Kalata, Fran Kaminski, Margaret Keisler, Claire B. Kitchell, Christian Lanner, Jean W. Lum, Harriet Meeker, Chris Muenchinger, Susan Pariser, John Pickin, Elizabeth Raube, Muriel Rennie, Elizabeth Riggs, Swiss Schroeder, Carmen H. Smith, Mead Stapler, W. Page Taggert, Fae N. Towns, Robert Turnquist, June Waders, Malcolm Yorkston.

9 10 The obliteration of the past must not be accepted as the inevitable price of progress

Lord Duncan Sandys

This report is neither a history of Morris County nor simply a collection of site inventories and physical descriptions. The former task has been accomplished by others far better equipped to do so, and the latter is merely the means to an end which is too often mistaken for the end itself. This report has two primary goals: to make apparent the genuine value of historic preservation, and to furnish some guidance for practical action to accomplish preservation goals. Such ends stand in need of continual reevaluation because they lend themselves to misunderstanding, despite the groundswell of enthusiasm for historic preservation in the last decade. The opportunity for misunderstanding occurs largely because of the understandable human penchant for the splashy effect. Unfortunately, every important preservation victory obscures ten less impressive demolitions, which, taken in the aggregate, may be every bit as significant. It seems that we have fallen into the habit of saving monuments to put under glass, while the fabric of our daily life is worn thin by historic amnesia. This complaint is not meant to discount the need for priorities or the value of monuments per Se. We would all be poorer without Mt. Vernon, Valley Forge, and the Ford Mansion. But their value is primarily symbolic, or ceremonial. The time has come to return historic preservation to the sphere of everyday life, which has become impoverished by its absence; to pay more attention to living, usable history, the kind that enriches neighborhoods and lives; to historic sites that can function usefully in the present without apology; and to an integration of past and present that reveals our own continuity to us, so that we can know how we became who we are. This report will try to point out the specific advantages of such a comprehensively designed preservation program, at the same time that it shows

11 citizens and their local governments how to achieve practical preservation goals. The only value of a study such as this lies in the use to which it is put. In that sense it will remain unfinished until its readers transform it into action.

12 13 The fathers did not erase the past, But linked it by firm ties to the future Homer

PHILOSOPHY “Why preserve?” can be a difficult question to answer. Like all action that determines what we’ve come to think of as the quality of life, many of the values of historic preservation rely on intangibles. How can we measure the aesthetic impact of Morristown’s Green, the real significance of a piece of monumental architecture, or the importance to a town of a main street that’s “looked that way forever.” Often we fail to recognize such values until they have been destroyed — when loss sharpens our perceptions too late. Perhaps one of the most important contributions historic buildings can make is the individual ambiance they lend a place. It is difficult to imagine Washington, D.C. without its dozen most familiar buildings, or to picture Mendham without its aggregate of Main Street shops and houses. The essence of a particular place is fragile, hard to create and easy to destroy. Ironically, as all aspects of our lives become more homogenized, and we lose the old, natural distinctions of place and customs, we strive to assert individuality artificially. In his book Future Shock, Alvin Toffler suggests that our towns and cities may become so bland or so mechanistically ugly that everyone will have to be sent off for periodic bouts of rest and recuperation — to places like Sturbridge Village, Williamsburg - or Disneyland. How much better if we could halt the disintegration of our daily environment instead of reserving beauty and variety for special occasions. Psychologists have long pointed out the importance of man being able to identify his own territory as special: note the attempts of subdivision homeowners to establish individualism by painting their front door assertive colors; witness the transformation of Levittown (once the standard example of stifling conformity) after twenty—odd years of individual alterations and landscaping. This need operates on a larger scale as well. Life would be flat

14 indeed without the local and regional contrasts in architecture, landscape, politics and even cooking which differentiate areas of the United States, and which the economics of modern life are doing their best to smooth out. Contemporary architecture and urban planning needn’t contribute to this trend, but too often they do. In the face of such pressures, preservation of historic buildings and sites can supply an invaluable measure of contrast. As National Trust advisor Constance Greiff has put it, historic buildings can function as physical and psychological “benchmarks” or “sighting points” to indicate community pride, social cohesion and even political responsibility. Each of these values or activities is contingent in some degree upon being able to say “I live here”, and to be able to say that with any degree of relevance, the “here in question must possess some degree of reality different from its fellows. Historic preservation can be a deciding factor in establishing the parameters of that kind of difference. Another preservation value which has grown meaningless because it has been too often mouthed as a cliché is the value of education. Not the kind of education which implies sending school children out to gawk at some place where Washington allegedly slept, but the process of genuine learning through involvement and participation. Probably the best-known example of education related to preservation is the now world—famous Foxfire Magazine, written and produced by students of the Rabun Gap Nacoochee School, Rabun Gap, Georgia. The project was conceived when a teacher there realized that standard curricula bore little relevance for his Appalachian students. Instead of continuing to impose unlearned lessons or writing off his students as uneducable, he conceived the idea of teaching skills like writing, editing and business management by having his students turn out a journal describing the folkways of the mountain people, as explained directly to the students by the people themselves. Foxfire’s enormous human and commercial success teaches lessons which transcend the boundaries of Appalachia: the remains of earlier cultures can teach practical skills while demonstrating to people how their lives are part of an ongoing continuum, which, no matter how much it changes, always carries striking remnants of its past which can enrich present lives. Similar projects are not hard to find, and are certainly not limited to rural areas. In Bedford—Stuyvesant, where substandard housing and inadequate

15 public facilities might suggest community apathy, the discovery of several original buildings of a 19th-century black community known as Weeksville galvanized residents into rediscovering their heritage and exploring interests which made learning relevant for the first time. One observer remarked, “people said, ‘Oh, these kids can’t even sit in school two minutes quietly and learn anything’. But they were so dedicated to Project Weeksville that they worked many hours for Youth in Action, under whose aegis the project began… . . . Many of the kids had never heard the word ‘archaeologist’ before. They were turned on to all the new careers available to them — not just archaeology but all the attendant disciplines as well... . New horizons were opened up.”1 As well as discovering their own unsuspected past and gaining exposure to the value of professional disciplines, the children and adults of Weeksville learned that government can be responsive when people communicate their needs directly instead of leaving that job solely to elected representatives: at a hearing to consider designating the buildings a New York City Landmark, Weeksville school children presented supporting testimony, while parents and teachers raised money to put toward purchase. Both efforts were successful. For years, Morristown has enjoyed a project of like value in the Timothy Mills House, a cooperative effort of the Morristown Board of Education and Fairleigh Dickinson University’s American Civilization Institute of Morristown (ACIM). Students have studied the construction methods of the house itself, have accomplished archaeological work on the grounds, and have reconstructed a barn on the property. Such experience is a valuable adjunct to the kind of everything-polished-and- in—its-place restorations which are fine as aesthetic displays, but often lack the learning potential they claim for themselves. The educational value of historic preservation can also be explored, ironically, through up-to-date technology. The Joint Free Public Library of Morristown and Morris Township has utilized videotaping equipment to create a program about the Friends Meeting House in Randolph Township. The tape includes interviews with descendents of the founders, as well as views of the building’s interior and exterior details. Other libraries have begun oral history programs, making tape recordings of older residents’ invaluable recollections. It should be evident that education in the present context implies

16 more than learning battle dates and famous names. Not only can preservation of historic buildings and sites furnish the opportunity for grasping the realities of history in a way textbooks can never equal, it can also open the door to an inexhaustible array of related experiences. It can impress citizens with the importance of community action to preserve neighborhoods and values that are important to them; it can teach students that learning needn’t be an exercise grafted to their real lives; it can bring generations closer together as they make an effort to interpret their own history to each other.

PRAGMATISM The foregoing values alone should be sufficient justification for preservation. But in an age beset by economic compromise, when money for public amenities, pleasures and even some necessities is frequently rechanneled to “higher priorities,” it is well for preservationists to be armed with the hard financial answers to the hard financial questions they are likely to confront. Fortunately, the answer to “Why Pre— serve?” has another side which can prove to the most obdurate town manager, chamber of commerce or private developer that preservation is a sound investment and an integral part of enlightened planning, which can benefit individual property owners, can provide needed commercial and residential space, and can stimulate local building trades. Morris County’s municipalities, for example, share many common problems. Chief among them are a dependence on property tax ratables and the threat of new commercial development occurring outside established town centers. Experience with historic preservation across the country speaks positively to these issues. In order to provide a solid tax base, for instance, stable residential neighborhoods are desirable. But a neighborhood is a changing organism with a delicate point of balance. Throw that point of balance one way, and property values soar; another, and they may plummet. Richmond, Virginia’s experience proves the point. The Church Hill section of Richmond was a blighted neighborhood which cost the city more to service than it returned. A combination of public and private investments began to restore the Hill’s rich array of 18th-and 19th-century residences. Soon after the project was begun, a survey of assessed valuations covering restored and unrestored blocks, otherwise identical and sometimes just across the street from one

17 another, yielded comparisons like this: Before restoration, a group of houses on the north side of a particular block was assessed at $41,010. Five years later, restoration improvements had caused aggregate value to reach $96,900. In contrast, nine houses on an immediately adjacent block, only one of which was restored, enjoyed an increase in aggregate valuation of only $7,820 in the same five year period. This impressive growth was achieved through private restoration efforts, the application of uniform architectural standards and the adoption of an historic district zoning ordinance. Similar success has been enjoyed by The District of Columbia’s Georgetown, which changed rapidly from a slum to a valuable source of city income under the application of architectural renewal of historic structures. Jersey City is enjoying the beginning of a brownstone revival which promises to make a significant contribution to that city’s revitalization. These examples don’t confine their benefits to residential renewal. They can include commercial renewal as well. In fact, one of the oldest and most dramatic examples of historic preservation saving a downtown from economic decay is New Orleans’ Vieux Carre District. In 1936, New Orleans pioneered in the establishment of strict architectural controls for the historic core of the city. Rather than stifling economic incentive, those controls have been responsible for unprecedented growth. The Vieux Carre has become a prestige address for businesses, has developed into a major tourist attraction, and has successfully combated the enervating results of highway spread development. Such examples abound throughout the country: San Francisco’s Ghirardelli Square, Sante Fe’s Old Town, whole sections of Newport and New Bedford — each has used individual approaches to historic preservation to solve unique problems and to stimulate economic growth. Lest the prospects seem exaggeratedly optimistic, it must be admitted that renewal of historic districts does suffer from one grave drawback. If older neighborhoods are turned back from deteriorating units to luxury housing with luxury rents, the already meager low—and middle—income housing pool is further reduced. This has caused justifiable resentment among those whose homes are grabbed up at deflated prices only to be transformed into housing beyond their reach. Although economic class-stratification can be a by—product of

18 preservation, it needn’t be the case if urban renewal and private development goals incorporate a concern for the community as well as its architecture. One smal1--scale undertaking of the Pittsburgh History & Landmarks Foundation has proven the point. With help from local banks and the chamber of commerce, the foundation acquainted the residents of the city’s largely Victorian Birmingham section with the architectural value of their homes and guided restoration and repair efforts with loans and professional advice. Because of careful planning which worked with residents from the outset, the neighborhood was upgraded and stabilized without being wrested from the hands of its owners. So if preservation redevelopment is subject to the same abuses found everywhere else, it also enjoys the same positive potential if managed in a socially and morally responsible manner. A second major aspect of preservation economics is the lure of tourism, which estimates show is among the three largest revenue producers in every state. In New Jersey it occupies second place, with minimal promotion, especially when compared to the efforts of adjacent states to the north and south which have long cultivated tourism as a natural resource. The Virginia Travel Council has pointed out that “The great economic benefit of tourism is its infusion into an area of new money earned elsewhere and left behind to circulate through the local economy. While that dollar demands an effort on the part of the community to attract it, the investment is generally less than for the industrial dollar, which requires additional schools, housing and related services.’2 Morris County already has historic attractions which generate tourist income, chief among them Morristown National Historic Park. But development is possible in other areas as well. Not every historic building and site can or should be viewed as a commercial attraction. Most simply lack enough inherent interest to draw visitors from afar. But with proper cultivation and promotion Morris County should be able to capitalize on more of its indigenous historic values. Before leaving the topic of tourism and turning history to commercial advantage, one must answer the purists who balk at the very idea of new uses for old buildings. Responsible commercial development of historic attractions is not a task to be taken lightly. Opportunities for misuse, misinterpretation

19 and exploitation abound. Undoubtedly more examples exist of the wrong way to proceed than one likes to admit, but the challenge must be met without recourse to sentimentality. The age of large scale philanthropy is gone for good, and even our patrimony must be made to pay its own way whenever possible. Since it must be done, it’s the job of preservationists to see that it is accomplished with maximum returns and without hucksterism. Preservation has another practical value recently highlighted by the restrictions of an energy shortage whose magnitude we are just beginning to comprehend. Buildings constructed before our contemporary dependence on artificial systems (heating and cooling) often use less energy because of design features which were necessities in their time. Many buildings of the 18th, 19th, and early 20th centuries use natural materials for insulating, and are sited to take advantage of solar warmth and prevailing winds. They often employ high ceilings and attics to equalize summer and winter temperatures, and make use of built-in circulation systems operating independently of mechanical means. Contrasted with today’s prodigal use of energy—wasting materials (aluminum, for example, which takes five times more energy per pound to produce than steel) and “climate—controlled” systems (like offices where over—intensive lighting produces excess heat that takes extra energy to cool because windows can’t be opened3), buildings of the past are not only a cultural asset, but can be an energy bargain as well. As Mark Latus observed in Historic Preservation, recycling old buildings for adaptive uses can amount to considerable savings, because “the energy cost of dismantling a building must also be considered . . . . Demolition requires a crane equipped with a headace ball or clamshell bucket. Trucks must be employed to carry away the debris. A grader or bulldozer is usually necessary to fill in the foundation and smooth over the site. This machinery consumes great quantities of diesel fuel and, in the process of operation, contributes significantly to the air and noise pollution of the area.”4 Add to this the energy intensive construction techniques needed to erect a new building on the site, and you are left with a strong case in favor of preservation. Undeniably, some buildings must be destroyed for reasons of health and safety. But their number is fewer than conventional practice suggests. Too often, demolition is an unwarranted drain of resources and energy. Latus also points

20 out that the claim of functional obsolescence (a building becoming unsuitable for its intended use) is made carelessly. “Although a use or activity may outgrow a building, there is no reason why the building cannot be recycled and modified to serve a new use. Thus functional obsolescence is merely a temporary condition and should never be the basis for justifying demolition.”5 Similar arguments can be brought to bear against claims of physical and economic obsolescence. Examples of suitable adaptive use are not hard to find, and will be discussed at length in a later section. The question “Why preserve?” should only have to be answered once. Ideally, an appeal based on the value of history as an irreplaceable cultural asset should overwhelm all other considerations. But when the “practical” obtrudes, there is no reason that aesthetic, environmental, and economic requirements can’t coexist. Profit—making can actually enhance the primary values of history when handled intelligently. Sometimes, in fact, the profit— motive will be the only incentive for preservation. As long as preservation standards remain uncompromised, the methods used to achieve preservation goals are secondary.

21 22 The preservation of historic buildings and sites has now become a part of the larger job of creating and managing complex environments. Preserve one building and you preserve one building. Preserve the setting and the larger environment, and you keep open a thousand doors and opportunities for a better life for the entire community. Grady Clay Historic Preservation

Like all movements, historic preservation has been altered by changing fashions and even by changing social values. For years, preservation was the domain of those blessed with spare time and idle money — one more fashionable pastime in an era of fashionable pastimes, when old pedigrees and new fortunes fought for control of philanthropic endeavors. Today it has become equally fashionable to denigrate those times. But for all their faults, the Mt. Vernon Ladies’ Association, the Rockefellers and all the other genteel power brokers left a foundation for preservation on which we can build. Today, however, we hear talk of the “New Preservation” and we ought to be conscious of its implications. Three adjectives can serve to introduce the changes: “social,” “environmental,” and “adaptive.

SOCIAL PRESERVATION “Social Preservation” is a double—edged sword implying preservation by and for all classes of society. We have come to the belated realization that in the service of a relatively objective picture of our history, the preservation of a row of 19th—century workers’ houses is every bit as valuable as the preservation of a steel magnate’s pseudo—Gothic castle. History resides in the great and the small, the rough and the refined. The canal that floated the goods that amassed the fortunes is just as important as the great estates those fortunes built. Too often history has been written from the top down. The new preservation attempts to see history from the center out. Such a realignment of sights calls for a broadening of forces, too. Preservation for

23 all the people means encouraging community involvement so people can learn how “the heart of historic preservation will always be in our town, where we live, work, shop and mingle daily.”6 This change in preservation goals and practices is by no means complete. Power in the hands of a few will continue to be a factor, if only because preservation is often expensive, and still benefits from private largesse. But preservationists can continue to be elitist only at the risk of alienating those whose participation is essential. Grady Clay in Historic Preservation, talks about the distortions preservation suffers when controlled exclusively by one class or special interest group: As a sometime visitor—tourist and consultant reporter… . I have come away with the impression that the behavior expected by most preservationists has the following aspects: 1. Reverence or respect for the past, and especially for an Establishment version of the past. Historic places and their message systems seem to be carefully screened to give a tidy, prissy, low—key version of history with few open questions, nothing controversial. 2. The visitor-tourist is constantly told that “things work out for the best”——and that American history is largely a matter of achieved consensus. “We’re all pretty much alike, fellows” is the message that flows out. 3. Everything seems to have been run through a middle or upper class screen, as though historic preservationists were using preservation as a gimmick to induce lower class reverence for upper class taste and culture. There is a tone of “Hail, all Hail, to Chippendale,” especially in pre—Civil War restorations...... I would submit that there are many histories, not one; and that the new rise in self-identity among blacks and other racial and ethnic groups across the country offers a whole new range of motives for historic research, preservation and restoration-— not on outsiders’ terms, but on terms set by the people who live there.7

24 A practical example of the need to involve “the people who live there” can be found in Morristown, where an extensive historic district was recently named to the State and National Registers. Hopefully, that district will be preserved by people who can afford to buy and maintain the big houses with notable histories. But what about the rest of Morristown, whose residential fabric is composed of architecture which is often harmonious but rarely “important”? These are the kind of houses which create a pleasant overall impression, but probably won’t attract those seeking a prestige address. Unless people of all incomes and backgrounds can be involved in preservation, and granted the means to achieve it by all levels of government, (especially municipal) the future of Morristown and towns in similar circumstances throughout Morris County is questionable.

ENVIRONNENTAL PRESERVATION One way to generate broad social involvement is to include preservation as part of other programs, like urban renewal. This consideration leads to the second aspect of the new preservation — “Environmental Preservation”. To be effective, preservation needs not only broad social support but a realistic physical context. If viewed in a vacuum, there is ample justification for the attitude that historic preservation is an expendable luxury instead of an integral part of planning. Competent planners and environmentalists, however, realize that ecological and historical concerns are merely opposite sides of the same coin. For purposes of theoretical work, it is necessary to sort out topics like land use, water facilities, open space and preservation. But of course they cannot be separated in practice. The complementary nature of these concerns has been recognized by a number of references in federal legislation, like the 1966 Department of Transportation Act, whose provisos have been interpreted with equal strength for the benefit of both historic preservation and open space preservation. Examples abound in practice as well. Pennsylvania’s historic Brandywine River Valley has benefited since 1967 from the enlightened stewardship of a private foundation known as the Tri-County Conservancy of the Brandywine. The Conservancy not only manages open space, but directs the programs of the Brandywine River Museum, created from a 19th—century mill, and actively promotes the restoration and registration of historic sites. These activities

25 are not seen as discrete, but as different levels of a common historical/ ecological matrix. Andrew L. Johnson, executive director of the Conservancy, put it this way: The Conservancy believes that the combination of cultural and environmental activities is not only compatible but more important, a vital necessity The history of an area should be an important aspect of its planning and future growth. Historical registration provides one check on land use when federal funds are to be utilized. It is only one, however. We must closely tie in this activity with others if we are to achieve a balance between growth and quality. We do not view our activities as being against progress but, rather, hope to show how it is economically, ecologically and historically expedient to redefine progress in light of new information.”8

Another case in point is Fallingwater, the famous Frank Lloyd Wright house built over a waterfall outside Pittsburgh. When efforts to preserve the house were begun, the question naturally arose, “What is the source of the water?” From that seemingly simple question resulted the eventual acquisition of 2000 acres surrounding the house as public lands. “Thus, the ecological interdependence of house site and watershed was finally acknowledged.”9 As a negative example, to throw into high relief the whole question of what constitutes an environment, take the case of Williamsburg, where millions upon millions of dollars have been poured into a faultless (though sanitized) recreation of 18th—century life. But the welcome one receives when driving through the gentle Virginia countryside towards the best of the 18th century is, ironically, composed of the worst the 20th century can offer: the all—American strip of motels, gas stations and fried chicken joints, each stridently competing for attention. Too often, the environment judged worthy of preserving stops short of the real world. And the exercise of irony doesn’t just happen someplace else. We in Morris County have had the dubious privilege of watching the “progress” of Interstate 287, as one federal agency nearly undermines the foundation of a national landmark duly recognized and registered by another. No thought of history—in—context for the Ford Mansion, it seems, despite the existence of vocal citizens willing to remind Washington of its responsibilities. Fortunately, other levels of government are beginning to see the connection. The Morris County Park Commission’s new headquarters building

26 is a 19th-century mansion on the grounds of the Frelinghuysen Arboretum. The mansion’s character has been retained so that it can be seen as a logical extension of the landscape design which surrounds it. The Park Commission is also restoring a mill on part of its Black River property in Chester. Another project of greater scope is Patriots’ Path, a linear park along the length of the Whippany River from Mendham Township to the Whippany’s confluence with the Passaic River in East Hanover. This park will be a joint venture of the towns through which it passes, achieved with the help of New Jersey Conservation Foundation and a private organization known as Friends of Patriots’ Path. As well as protecting the Whippany from encroachment, Patriots’ Path will provide a connecting link to various historic sites, such as the Lewis Morris/Jockey Hollow area, Acorn Hall and the Frelinghuysen Arboretum. These minor victories to retain amenities in a rapidly urbanizing area suggest a new awareness that preservation is an environmental activity — one that presupposes just as much respect for the natural environment as it does for the man—made.

ADAPTIVE PRESERVATION The last aspect of the new preservation might be called “Adaptive Preservation.” Not too many years ago any building worth saving was automatically put in one of two categories: museum or residential. Today the social and environmental factors discussed previously, combined with a third factor, economy, have made such reasoning obsolete. Many historic buildings deserve preservation; we must admit that only a fraction possess the kind of value that warrants museum use. W. M. Whitehill, writing in With Heritage So Rich, put it bluntly. We already have on exhibition more historic houses and museums than we need, or are good for us as a nation. Indeed, they multiply so fast that some form of institutional contraception must soon be invented.”10 Out of this need to preserve in spite of alleged obsolescence grew the concept of adaptive use. Taken at its simplest, it means finding a new productive use for an old building. That goal appears simple enough until one is confronted with the variety of buildings demanding imaginative solutions. Sometimes the answers are obvious. Morris County has enough houses from all periods which have been converted to professional offices to prove the point. But what happens when you are confronted with something as unique as an entire city block of turn—of-the—century trolley barns? Bulldoze them for a parking

27 lot? Not if you live in Salt Lake City, Utah, where just such a problem was solved by creating a shopping center capitalizing on the genuine thematic features already present. That may appear to be an extreme example, but it emphasizes the need for imaginative and iconoclastic thinking when tackling the problems of adaptive use. The importance of adaptive use really can’t be minimized, not only because most buildings must pay their own way to survive, but because active use integrates an historic site more satisfactorily with its surroundings. Although local needs and special circumstances must govern the applications of adaptive uses, describing some successful endeavors around the country might prove stimulating. 1. The Actors Theatre of Louisville was informed in 1969 that it would have to abandon its building - an old railroad station that it had previously saved from demolition — because it stood in the path of an expressway. Searching for. new quarters, it found the 1834 Bank of Louisville (a National Historic Landmark) and an adjacent 19th—century warehouse, which combined with a new auditorium, now provides ample lobby, office and rehearsal space. Not only did downtown Louisville retain an important cultural and economic asset, but the theatre gained a building for less cost than new construction would have entailed. 2. Boston’s new City Hall, presented one major problem: what to do with the Second Empire style old City Hall it replaced. The beauty and convenience of the old building became a usual setting for private and state offices, a bank and a restaurant. 3. Like many of the rambling gingerbread hotels found along the Jersey shore, the historic Windsor Hotel in Cape May seemed to have outlived its usefulness. Appearances proved to be deceptive, according to a consultant hired by the city as part of its urban renewal program’s feasibility study. The consultant’s report advised interior modernization,and stated, “It is likely that the unique quality of the Windsor, as compared to the rather anonymous quality of the newly constructed motels on the New Jersey Shore, will make its preservation a sound business investment.” The owner agreed to follow the recommendations, so that Cape May now has a valuable tourist attraction which new construction couldn’t equal. 4. Another example of preservation achieved through urban renewal can be found in Portsmouth, N.H., where a new shopping center and office complex will include fourteen Georgian or Federal style houses built between 1715 and 1826. The private developer agreed to alter his original plans and join preservationists to create “an economically viable, tax producing example of adaptive use preservation.” The architect in charge of the project believes that this sort of development can help the urban blight and desertion caused by” …..the proliferation of strip shopping centers, widening the areas that people use and mitigating the feeling of community that is so important to human beings.” Of special interest is the fact that the new architecture makes no attempt to ape the old; both stand on their

28 own merits. 5. Countering the usual practice of turning residences into office space, a former commercial structure, the 1897 Detroit Cornice and State Company Building is being restored for use as a townhouse and studio. The owner—occupants expect to defray restoration expenses by renting the first floor as office space.11 The foregoing examples are noteworthy for the diversity of building types and for the variety of new uses to which they are being put. It is also instructive to note that one particular period is not emphasized at the expense of another, unlike the practice in Morris County, where the general public and preservationists alike are too often obsessed with “colonial” architecture. Looking around Morris County for examples of adaptive use, one may be blinded by the familiar. Drew University and Fairleigh Dickinson both utilize historic buildings originally built for different purposes. Two non—professional theatre groups make use of old churches, while St. Mark’s Lutheran Church in Convent Station occupies a mansion built to resemble an Irish castle. The General Drafting Company and Morristown’s municipal offices also put former private homes to good use. In Madison, the generous spaces of a Renaissance Revival commercial building now house a professional artist’s studio. In fact, every type of use, from restaurant to funeral home, may be discovered occupying buildings of historic or architectural note. The fault with much adaptive use, however, is its haphazard and slipshod nature. Old buildings are often used not out of recognition for their value or unique qualities, but simply because they are accessible. On the surface there is nothing wrong with such an attitude. After all, the whole point of adaptive use is keeping valuable buildings in circulation, regardless of motives. But when such use becomes casual, it can result in unnecessary changes to the site, or inappropriate renovations. Then again, adaptive use may be merely a holding action on the owner’s part until an irresistible offer makes it more desirable to bulldoze and rebuild. To combat drawbacks like these, a public education campaign is called for to highlight the practical values of adaptive use. It would be even more useful, perhaps, if preservation agencies joined forces with realty interests to bring together worthy buildings and potential users — something like a computer dating service for preservation. If this kind of formalized procedure were to replace the present hit—and—

29 miss approach, a great many more buildings might be saved for productive use. Once a building is united with an appropriate use, controls are still needed to protect it from damaging changes. This is where municipal action is imperative. Architectural review boards, landmark commissions, and historic district zoning are some measures a town can use to safeguard its historic buildings and its own economic interests simultaneously. Above all, successful adaptive use demands imagination. One must learn to examine buildings and their potential uses without preconceptions, so that the novel approach becomes commonplace. Before leaving the question of practical preservation through adaptive use, attention must be given to an intimately related practice which wreaks nearly as much havoc as uninformed renovations or willful destruction. This is 20th century “revival” architecture, which blights Morris County from border to border. The plague of “colonial” supermarkets, “colonial” gas stations, banks, town halls, ice cream shops, and furniture showrooms exhibits little sign of abating. David Poinsett, State Supervisor for Historic Sites in the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection has put the case strongly: Historic preservation is not new structures that are “colonial” in style. With 13 original colonies, each having several indigenous styles of architecture, there can be no single “colonial” style. In spite of this, we insist on red-brick, pseudo-Georgian gas stations and mini—Mount Vernon supermarkets complete with pedimented facades and the ubiquitous cupola, the latter often illuminated to attract night shoppers. At best these are bad copies; at worst they are an admission that we cannot create anything good or new ourselves. 12 Worst of all, this kind of architecture detracts from the impact of the genuine structures it often alleges to enhance. Sometimes the efforts to bypass the genuine in favor of the sham are truly dumbfounding. The recent inexplicable craze for “1890’s” restaurants, for example, has caused two of the county’s 18th—century hostelries to suffer interior renovations which reflect a style totally foreign to their architectural virtues. Banks, too, are prime offenders. Morristown’s Green offers an instructive contrast: one institution has sensitively renovated an interesting nineteenth-century building, while nearly in its shadow stands a “Georgian” neighbor built yesterday, complete with precisely the kind of “ubiquitous cupola” Mr. Poinsett decries as symptomatic of the disease. Shunning pasteboard copies in favor of contemporary architecture is no guarantee of quality, that much

30 is sure. But every age must be free enough to cultivate its own excellence, borrowing from the past just enough to create new solutions. The whole question of appropriateness is further confounded by the frequent necessity of erecting new buildings in historic districts, or of adding to a fine building, of the past. Experience has demonstrated that the surest way to destroy an eighteenth- or nineteenth—century structure, short of the bulldozer, is to flank it with well-intentioned copies. As Ada Louise Huxtable, architecture critic of The New York Times put it, “The best of the past deserves the best of the present, not make—believe muck.” Describing successes would be meaningless without illustration, but nearly any issue of the leading architectural journals displays imaginative examples of what can be achieved when competent designers manipulate parallels of scale, texture and overall conception. As architect Robert Weinberg has observed: “Attempts to honor a fine old building by extensions in slavish imitation of its original period are seldom successful. On the contrary, when a building of a style distinctive of its own age is used for some commercial or institutional purpose and an enlargement is required, the skillful architect can add a wing to it in a thoroughly contemporary manner and yet do it so imaginatively that the new blends harmoniously with the old.”13 If preservationists will only keep in mind the comprehensive environmental nature of their commitment, they will be able to better judge what complements their hard—won victories and what compromises them. Because it spends huge amounts on public facilities, government has a special responsibility to exercise sensitively in this area. The federal government has been notorious for the poor quality of its own buildings, although some progress has been made since the Kennedy administration. In the absence of national leadership, it is not surprising that other levels of government have fared little better. Sadly, the whole framework of priorities and taste has become so debased that a recent municipal master plan in Morris County could boast of honoring its town’s heritage by constructing a pseudo-colonial municipal building. Meanwhile, this same town’s unusually representative stock of genuine colonial and pre—Revolutionary structures stands unprotected by municipal ordinance. Lest this judgment appear self— righteous, it must ruefully be admitted that Morris County Buildings are some of the worst offenders to be found (the Court House annexes and the County

31 Library provide ample substantiation). One need only keep in mind that quality of design, not period, determines a harmonious neighborhood or streetscape.

32 33 A landmark, basically, is something that is important to a community. There are only a limited number of great buildings. But there are many important sites, districts or streets that are important to particular towns or neighborhoods. That really is what historic preservation is all about, not just saving mansions or architectural greatness or historical importance, but trying to preserve the quality of life in a community. James Biddle Preservation News

CRITERIA When American preservation took its first tentative steps in 1859 with the purchase of Mt. Vernon by a private group (after the federal government had failed to act), it was concerned with three overriding although unarticulated criteria. All preservation was purely “associational”, i.e. concerned only with cultivating the memory of a great man, usually a military or political figure; it insisted on drawing quasi- religious inferences, i.e. historic sites were referred to as “shrines”, and were expected to inspire patriotic fervor and abstract ideals through their mere physical presence; and finally, it was concerned only with buildings and figures of the eighteenth century. Since those parochial beginnings we have learned that preservation has different dimensions, although the Historic 2merican Buildings Survey (HBS), as late as 1934, could without apology devote itself almost entirely to eighteenth century architecture. But at least the HABS firmly established the appropriateness of architecture per se as a legitimate concern of preservation. With that hurdle out of the way, preservation continued to broaden, so that today we recognize the value of all periods, styles and uses. Although houses continue to account for a large proportion of historic sites, the absolute tyranny of domestic architecture is over. Mills, factories, railroad stations, car barns and iron foundries have diversified the preservation field. And the once exclusive politico/military category has been joined by structures and buildings associated with achievements in medicine, transportation, engineering, education, and the arts. Preservation has been pushed back to prehistory and pushed forward to the twentieth century, so that it can be seen in its full cultural and environmental context.

34 With the foregoing broad assumptions in mind, a community must sort out its assets and decide which of them reflects its identity best. Considerations of state •or national importance should not hinder local preservation initiative. Not every town can expect to have a Ford Mansion or a Vail Factory, but every town does have sites which visualize its unique identity. There are probably no more than half a dozen buildings of any single period or style which are important to the entire nation, and these usually by association. This realization should in no way discourage Montville from protecting its Dutch stone houses, Morristown its Victorian mansions, Roxbury its unique canal plane, or Madison its nineteenth—century commercial buildings. These and countless other buildings, districts and neighborhoods, are important not as museums, but as part of our everyday surroundings, as evidence that our common culture is not wholly transitory, and that experience and canons of taste can bridge generations. Local preservationists should not be hunting for isolated monuments (although some may turn up), but for remnants of a better way of doing things, clues to a more humane and human landscape and townscape. Walter Muir Whitehall succeeded in defining this contextual imperative when he said, “Preservationists should try to keep America Beautiful, rather than to create little paradises of nostalgia in an ocean of superhighways and loudspeakers, billboards, neon signs, parking lots, used car dumps and hot dog stands.’14 One of the most important factors in choosing sites is objectivity. Although all choices are filtered through a degree of human fallibility and subjectivity, personal preference should play no part in historic preservation. Everyone has preferences, of course - for certain periods, certain styles and even for specific architects. But when approaching the task of recording information or of actually preserving, all periods and styles are equal. To deny this basic axiom is to destroy two of preservation’s leading goals — knowledge and enjoyment. Even within one period, it is easy to miss potential sites through unconscious bias. Because of their associations and numerical preponderance, houses are likely to occupy first place on any inventory. But the wealth of other categories can’t be ignored. For interest and sheer beauty, it is hard to equal nineteenth—century commercial structures; warehouses, mills,

35 factories and stores all deserve more interest by preservationists in Norris County. Then there are structures and sites related to transportation — primarily railroad stations in this area, but also the Morris Canal, turnpike toll houses and inns, and even structures associated with the early history of the automobile. With the foregoing generalizations in mind, it might be useful to try and assemble a list incorporating as many specific considerations as possible. The following list is indebted to work done by the Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission. It leaves room for additions, but includes the major criteria which should inform any effort at site selection. Criteria for Selecting Sites

A. History 1. Sites and structures associated with significant cultural, political, economic, military, artistic, and social events. 2. Sites where important activities of notable people took place, especially sites connected with such people during their active careers. 3. Sites and groups of structures representing community development patterns such as: railroads and canals, agricultural centers, county seats, religious and education sites and the like. 4. Indian burial and camp grounds, military campsites and battle-fields, and others of an archaeological nature. 5. Cemeteries which are outstanding by virtue of their length of use; because of important events (battles, for example) which took place on their sites.

B. Architectural 1. Buildings by great architects or master builders, and important works by lesser masters. 2. Noteworthy examples of various styles, periods, and methods of construction. 3. Sole or rare survivors of a period, even when undistinguished per se. 4. Curiosities such as octagonal buildings. 5. Groups of buildings which are undistinguished themselves; but which together create a unified streetscape. 6. Commercial, industrial, and transportation facilities representative of particular periods and uses.

C. Setting 1. Is the building on its original site?

36 2. Is its present setting appropriate? 3. Is the structure or site subject to detrimental encroachment? 4. Is it readily accessible to public use or at least to public view?

D. Use 1. Is the building threatened with demolition? 2. If it requires restoration, is the cost economically feasible? 3. Is it suitable for adaptive use? 4. Can its owners be persuaded to cooperate with the furtherance of preservation goals?

No single building or site is likely to encompass all the values cited above, but the more values any one site incorporates, the higher on a list of priorities it might be placed. It has been suggested that once subjected to the discipline of precise criteria, sites should be weighed by being subjected to a strict mathematical rating systems: so many points assigned for so many values met; the more points, the higher the preservation priority. This method has, in fact, been used by some communities. It risks becoming a mechanistic procedure, however, which can easily ignore contextual and subjective factors. Many open space inventories employ this method and overcome the objection by assigning points for subjective factors. Perhaps the final question that should be asked about any potential site is: How valuable will its preservation be to the community, in terms of practical use or simply for its visual impact? Aside from a few exceptions which are primarily of scholarly interest, this is a useful measuring device.

DOCUMENTATION The second integral part of site selection is documentation. Factual data, properly researched and authenticated, must be secured for every site chosen for preservation. Adequate documentation can be a crucial factor in gaining financial aid and public support, and unquestionably adds to the pleasure and instructive value of any site. One way to accomplish documentation is for the state to undertake a comprehensive study. In New Jersey, this kind of program gained a start in 1960, but only in 1970 did the State Register Program begin. Since that time, the Department of Environmental Protection’s Historic Sites Section

37 has located and described 2500 buildings, structures and sites throughout New Jersey. Only a fraction of this number has been approved for the State Register. Severe budgeting restrictions have resulted in a staff which is not large enough to devote sufficient time to the necessary work. For this reason, the responsibility of recording must be shared. Even if a more realistic budget enabled the state to be more efficient, however, its perspective is necessarily broad, so some sites important locally would never appear on its list. This is a primary reason for soliciting local participation and encouraging preservation by municipalities. These considerations suggest that a supplementary source to a state’s effort might best be coordinated by counties, with the assistance of municipalities. This is logical, but practical considerations impede once more. Morris County, for instance, lacks the resources and staff to mount a full-scale inventory on its own. Out of this dilemma grew a compromise solution: this report employs the state’s master inventory (though still in progress) as a base list, supplementing it with sites suggested by municipalities, local historical societies, citizen advisory groups and individuals. The resulting inventory is included as a major component of this study. It contains a great many sites which are significant only on a local level. Hopefully, this will be a positive factor, which will encourage municipal action and community concern. Above all, it should be seen as a document—in— progress, subject to periodic revision. Just as the Morris County Inventory of Historic Sites will benefit from periodic updating, the national and state registers continue to grow. Even though they are more restrictive, they deserve support because of the prestige attached to them and because of the limited but important protection they afford. Morris County is fortunate to have an active County Historical Society through whose work many sites have been named to the New Jersey Register and then to the National Register. The Historic Sites Committee of the Morris County Historical Society is composed of a Chairman who directs the efforts of members drawn from local societies and from the county at large. Anyone interested in preservation may join the Committee’s work. Each year, the

38 Historic Sites Section of the State Department of Environmental Protection informs the Committee how many nominations for State Register status will be accepted for review. Working with that stringent numerical restriction in mind, the Committee prepares applications from a list culled by its members from the larger pool of potential sites. The completed applications (including documented data, photographs, etc.) are sent to Trenton for evaluation by DEP’s professional staff which refers them to the State Review Committee for final determination. The state, of course, is free to initiate and investigate sites on its own, and sometimes does so. But the budgetary limitations mentioned earlier keep this activity to a minimum, thus making contributions from the county vitally important. This is best exemplified by a striking case from among the 1973 nominations. The State Historic Sites Section and the County Sites Committee both agreed that the Morris Canal deserved prime consideration. Because the state lacked the immediate resources to document such a complex site, the designation of this important remnant of commercial and transportation history was doubtful. Fortunately, the County Historic Sites Committee was able to enlist the aid of a knowledgeable volunteer who had already undertaken exhaustive research for a history of the canal. The enormous research task was completed in 1973, and the canal was approved for inclusion on the New Jersey Register. This is one telling example of how local expertise can become a decisive factor in successful documentation. Those interested in working for the Historic Sites Committee of the Morris County Historical Society should write to: Chairman, Historic Sites Committee C/o Morris County Historical Society 68 Morris Avenue P.O. Box l7OM Morristown, New Jersey 07960 Additional nominations for updated editions of the Morris County Historic Sites Inventory contained in this report may be made by writing to: Historic Sites Inventory Morris County Planning Board Courthouse Morristown, New Jersey 07960 To give a better idea of the kind of information which must be available about a site (for inclusion on either the Morris County Inventory or the State Register), note the New Jersey Historic Preservation Survey Form reproduced

39 in this section. This is a short form containing the minimum amount of information sought by the County Historical Society’s Site Committee. The Morris County Planning Board also uses this form to gather information for the inventory presented here. Persons with information about a specific site, or with questions about either the Planning Board’s or the Historical Society’s preservation activities, may get in touch with either agency, since their activities are coordinated.

40 41 Suggestions for Completing New Jersey Historic Sites Survey Form The information called for on this form is the minimal amount of documentation necessary to initiate consideration for inclusion on either the New Jersey or the National Register, or the Morris County Historic Sites Inventory. Even partial completion is valuable, however, because it may aid further research on a site that might otherwise have been overlooked. Questions are largely self—explanatory, but the following clarifications may prove helpful: SECTION 1A: To avoid confusion, use the name of the present owner only if the original owner is unknown or if there is no traditional name associated with the property. Compound names are sometimes traditional or helpful, i.e., “Schuyler—Hamilton House”, “Van Saun-Van Gelder House.” SECTION 2A: Refer only to incorporated entities (“Montville”, rather than “Towaco”). SECTION 2C: Include house number if one exists. Otherwise, be as specific as possible. Location on U.S. Geologic Survey Maps is advisable (available from the Morris County Planning Board). SECTION 5A: Unless an exact date can be verified with little doubt, an approximate period is preferable. Confirm dates from more than one source whenever possible. SECTION 6: Avoid confusion between period and style. “Colonial’ (pre 1776) and “Victorian” are periods, not styles. Their use unqualified is too vague to be of much value. “Dutch Colonial,” “Federal,” or “Gothic Revival” are more useful although they should be supplemented with detailed descriptions, since styles and periods are rarely absolute. SECTION 7: Make clear the distinction among builder, architect, and original owner, if this information is known. SECTION 8A: If a building has been moved, note its original location and date of move if known. SECTION 8B: This may be specific, as in “State Highway Department,” or general, as in “Threatened by commercial zoning.” SECTION 9: When citing documentary sources, please be complete (Author, title, publisher, date of publication, and page number). Location of unpublished sources should be included. Also note here whether the site is already included in any survey or inventory, and give appropriate identification number (H1BS, NJHSI, etc.).

42 43 Ways will have to be found to let planners use the powers of the community to guide urban growth toward a clear and pleasing pattern of new and old landmarks, where people can once again feel well—oriented, exhilarated, and at home. Karl Deutsch The Future Megalopolis

Once a community has been convinced of the value of preservation, and has made some effort to judge what is preserveable, the fight has just begun. In order to pursue preservation in a rational and effective manner, certain predetermined steps must be taken, to avoid facing every fresh challenge in an atmosphere of crisis. Citizen participation is essential at this stage, government commitment equally so. Before anything of lasting value can be achieved, municipal government must consent to exercise the police power* already granted it under state legislation. This police power can be exercised in either of two primary ways.

HISTORIC DISTRICT ZONING Of the two basic options available to a town, historic district zoning is more familiar, probably because it is a clearly defined extension of regular zoning powers granted by N.J.State Enabling Legislation. If the zoning approach is chosen, a town can employ standard ordinances to regulate development within a fixed area designated by it as an historic district. All the controls exercised over any other standard zone are operable under these circumstances. The chief argument against historic district zoning is its exclusiveness. Protection is afforded only to those buildings and sites contained within the strict boundaries of a designated district. This approach has worked well in places like Newport, Nantucket, and New Orleans, where a

______*police power in this context refers to regulations in the public interest as they affect private property. Zoning, which limits the freedom of the individual (with no compensation) in favor of the public good, is the most common example.

44 homogenous “old town” can be clearly defined. In Morris County, the zoning approach to preservation is less relevant, because sites tend to be scattered. Even in places like Chatham and Morristown, where historic districts are recognizable (and have, in fact, been named to the State or National Registers), other buildings worth preserving abound outside district limits.

LANDMARKS COMMISSION To overcome such a serious drawback, landmarks commissions are a suggested alternative. Although not specifically addressed by enabling legislation, they are generally conceded to fall under the blanket of police power provisions. Such commissions (sometimes known by different names — “cultural conservation commissions,” “heritage commissions,” etc.) have been enacted with success in other parts of the country; the cities of Trenton and Jersey City have recently followed suit. The usefulness of a commission lies in its flexibility. Its provisions can include the possibility of historic districts, if relevant, but can also protect individual sites with equal efficiency. Once a town passes an ordinance establishing a landmarks commission, its operation is simple. The commission is empowered to hold hearings for the purpose of designating landmarks. It may accept suggestions from citizens or act solely on its own initiative. Once a landmark has been designated and approved by the governing body, demolition or alteration cannot be carried out until the owner’s plans have been scrutinized and subjected to possible modifications or alterations. Demolition cannot be forbidden absolutely (the owner has recourse to appeal), but the opportunity to review reasonable alternatives has proved unusually fruitful in most circumstances*. For a detailed discussion of how a commission can operate, see Appendix A, which contains a model ordinance for creation of a municipal landmarks commission. ______*For a discussion of New York City’s successful landmark commission, see John S. Pyke, Jr , Landmark Preservation, a handbook published by the Citizens Union Foundation, Inc., of the City of New York.

45 The question of individual property rights, involving the reasonable exercise of police power and sometimes of eminent domain, is one of the most delicate areas of preservation policy and practice. The proper balance between personal rights and public welfare must always be kept f ore- most in mind. It is essential to proceed with diplomacy and respect for individual rights, while at the same time realizing that unwarranted timidity can endanger the existence of a common heritage which is everyone’s right to learn from and enjoy. Recent environmental actions have helped to define this critical question of where the common good begins. Just as no individual or agency has the right to pollute the air we breathe or the water we drink, the physical evidence of our collective past deserves equal protection. As cases are brought before them, the courts will continue to provide valuable precedents for preservation action. When establishing a basis for historic district zoning or landmarks commissions one should remember that the judicial branch is more sympathetic to broadly-based measures. Despite the 1954 Supreme Court decision (Berman vs. Parker) which ruled that a city has as much right to be beautiful as it has to be safe and clean, an ordinance based solely on aesthetic concerns has little chance of survival. One citing various practical justifications as well - to stabilize and improve property values, to strengthen the local economy, to promote historic sites for the education, welfare and pleasure of citizens - will almost certainly be upheld. And these considerations, not incidentally, are an important part of what preservation is all about.

SUPPLEMENTARY MUNICIPAL POWER The value of the two primary means of preservation described above is largely contingent on a comprehensive back—up program, which should incorporate the following features: 1. All municipal master plans should include a section devoted to preservation. This serves as a formal articulation of planning goals to which citizens can refer. It can also serve as legal evidence of prior commitment when applying for state, federal or private foundation aid. 2. All departments of municipal government should be instructed to examine their programs for compatibility with published preservation goals. 3. Until passage of a uniform statewide building code, municipalities

46 have a special responsibility to see that the architectural integrity of historic buildings is not impaired by unreasonable restrictions. In the interest of public safety, certain standards are necessary, but exceptions to others may be negotiated when feasible. 4. The possibility of using general obligation and revenue bonds for financing preservation should be investigated. Municipalities should also make it clear that they are in a position to accept gifts of money or land to support preservation. Prospective donors can be deterred by apparent disinterest or lack of cooperation. Such donors will look elsewhere — there is always someone willing to accept gifts. 5. Municipalities should take every opportunity to cooperate with other levels of government in the interest of preservation. No substitute exists for a continuing program of cooperation among local historical societies, concerned individuals, and state, federal and local officials. The fruits of this kind of cooperation are well exemplified in the efforts to secure a cover over Interstate 287 as it passes the Ford Mansion in Morristown. 6. Stringent design standards should be passed to prevent blight resulting from signs and billboards located and designed without attention to the towns overall appearance. These regulations should apply to an entire town, but they have special relevance to historic sites and neighborhoods.

COUNTY ACTION Most of the points made about municipal action apply to county government as well. Both have a special responsibility to pursue excellence in the design of their own buildings, for example. Nothing is more discouraging to the cause of preservation than to see new buildings which ineptly mimic their historic prototypes. In Morris county, municipal and county administrations must make an effort to reverse this trend, as a matter of policy.

The county can see that the historic sites inventory published as part of this report is widely distributed and regularly updated, in order to provide general guidance to all interested organizations, as well as specific data for environmental impact statements. In the absence of legal protection for any of the sites listed, the county should instruct its departments and agencies to refer to the inventory to avoid whenever possible any action detrimental to a listed site or structure.

AQUISITION ALTERNATIVES Sometimes it may seem that a building can only be protected by public (or semi-public) acquisition. Usually a municipality or preservation agency lacks

47 sufficient cash or credit to purchase a property important to its interests. Outright purchase can be supplemented by several devices which entail lesser expenditures. 1. Joint Use Occasionally a public agency acquires land which also includes an historic structure incidental to the agency’s primary use. . A preservation organization might, under these circumstances, arrange to lease the historic parcel for its own purposes. 2. Easements and Development Rights These measures can be used to prohibit property owners from altering the exterior of a structure, or its setting, usually when public access is not a necessity. A fee less than purchase price compensates the owner for loss of unrestricted use. Surrendering rights in favor of historic conservation may also qualify the owner for tax benefits. 3. Tax Delinquency County and municipal governments should review tax delinquent properties for preservation suitability before offering them for general sale. Properties of historic or architectural value could be used by a local government agency or offered on a first refusal basis to a preservation organization or to an individual buyer who agrees to restore or maintain the property. This latter approach has been used by some cities as part of a redevelopment program known as “urban homesteading.” Abandoned or tax delinquent houses are offered free, or at minimal cost to anyone willing to rehabilitate them within a stated period and to assume the mortgage if one exists. 4. Condemnation and Eminent Domain Condemnation should be exercised with caution because the ill— will it produces can negate its benefits. Nevertheless, it is valuable in rare circumstances, when legitimately applied. Eminent domain is applicable most frequently in cases of urban renewal. Neither of these procedures is innovative. Their value lies simply in their suitability under certain circumstances.

48 TAX RELIEF Sometimes individuals or organizations willing to protect an historic structure are prevented from doing so by an excessive tax burden. Abatement or reduction of taxes in these circumstances can be a legitimate form of preservation support. The Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission points out that, “To be entitled to the relief, the owner would have to agree through a formal contract that the structures shall never be altered or demolished without the approval of an authorized control commission.” New Jersey already has a law (N.J.Rev. State Sec. 55:4 - 3.52), passed in 1962, which provides some recourse. It states that: “Any building and the land whereon it is erected and which may be necessary for the fair enjoyment thereof owned by a nonprofit organization and which has been certified to be an historic site to the Director of the Division of Taxation by the Commissioner of Conservation and Economic Development (now the Commissioner of the Department of Environmental Protection) as hereinafter provided shall be exempt from taxation.” Two specifications limit this law’s usefulness. First, a property must be owned by a nonprofit corporation. This leaves the vast majority of historic buildings unprotected, because they are privately owned. Since obtaining nonprofit corporate status usually means permitting public access, it is not surprising that private owners make no effort to seek eligibility. The law’s second drawback involves the necessity of property being listed on the State Register of Historic Places. Only ten nominations are accepted to that register from Morris County each year, so relief from this quarter is distinctly limited. These provisions must be extended before the law will have more than limited application. Another way to approach tax relief for historic sites is to consider reduction instead of exemption. In some instances, owners could maintain historic properties if they were fairly taxed according to actual use, rather than possible highest use. This kind of situation is exemplified by an actual case in Morris County which is by no means unique. In question is an unusually fine pre—revolutionary house, recorded by HABS and listed by the State and National Registers. Due to zoning changes, it now stands in a commercial zone, although its use remains residential. During the last six years, taxes on this

49 house have increased from $1,600 to nearly $5,000. The owners’ commitment to preserving the house has caused them to refuse considerations for commercial development, but the confiscatory nature of the taxes threatens to remove their means of support. Because they do not enjoy nonprofit corporate status, the New Jersey tax relief law does not apply. Due to the prevailing tax structure, which forces municipalities to be obsessed with land ratables, the town is not likely to give up commercial assessment of this landmark. Result: the owners must struggle along as best they can until economic pressure forces them to submit to destruction. In cases like this, it should be possible for an owner to file for a reduction in assessment which would bring his taxes back into line with actual residential use, consonant with the prevailing residential tax rate of the municipality. This approach should be more attractive to local government because it would not eliminate a ratable entirely. California recently passed a law (Senate Bill 357) incorporating precisely these measures, although it applies only to historic sites on the State and National Registers. The law allows local governments to base assessed valuation of historic properties on actual usage rather than potential highest and best economic use. In return, owners must agree to maintain or restore their property and to provide visual access as well as access for professional study. A third tax relief variation involves total exemption for a limited period. This method would be useful in cases where a substantial capital investment is necessary to restore a property or to make improvements which will stabilize a continuing preservation effort. In such instances, an owner can be granted exemption for a specified period, provided he agrees to apply the money (or part of the money) saved toward an approved preservation plan. Elements of each of these three tax relief variations can be incorporated into a state tax reform package. The supervision necessary to make such a program successful could be administered by the Historic Sites Section of the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (provided the State increased budget and staff sufficiently). The following points are integral to any tax relief program for historic sites: 1. Criteria for eligibility should not be uncritical, but application

50 should be broadened to extend below the level of State Register properties. 2. Professional guidance must insure maintenance of architectural integrity. 3. Adequate policing must be available to make certain that tax savings contribute to the goals of the program. 4. Some degree of public accessibility (at least visual) is desirable, although cases might occur in which scholarly interest alone justifies preservation. It must finally be noted that any such specific tax reforms will be best received in a context of overall tax reform. Because present tax relief laws allow a municipality thus deprived of ratables to seek refund from the state, the state has not been eager to broaden coverage. Reform of the overall tax structure making local government less dependent on property tax, would help ease the strain. Federal tax regulations do even less than New Jersey’s limited statute to encourage preservation. Preservation News reports that: “Presently, the Internal Revenue Code encourages demolition of old commercial structures regardless of their historic or architectural merit. The code allows the owner of such a building to deduct from his income the expenses of demolition and his unrecovered investment in the building. It also allows the owner accelerated depreciation on a new commercial building constructed on the cleared site.”15 The proposed Environmental Protection Tax Act (HR 5584) would remedy this state of affairs, but its write-off provisions would be applicable only to the limited number of buildings listed in the National Register of Historic Places. If the owner of a National Register building insisted on demolition, depreciation on any new building occupying the site would be limited, and deduction for demolition would be cancelled. Once again, the proposed solution aids only those structures of national landmark status, and leaves the fabric of our neighborhoods and towns threatened as before. Once again, existing laws support actions which are contrary to the expressed aims of good planning and responsible government. These laws in fact, encourage private profit at the expense of the public welfare, contribute to the disintegration of neighborhoods and aggravate the national housing crisis. Preservationists must work to find exceptions to them whenever possible, and must lobby for their eventual reform.

51 The ultimate effectiveness of all preservation tools is dependent on four interrelated factors. The first of these is citizen action. Without a healthy degree of public support for preservation, the apostles of “progress” can easily make a shambles of the most carefully documented preservation plan. The crucial back—up factor for public awareness is responsive state, and particularly local, government. An articulate citizenry may do an excellent job of making its desires known, but local government must implement goals by passing appropriate preservation laws and by enforcing existing laws which support preservation. The third factor is the compilation of adequate information to justify preservation and to establish proper criteria for site selection. Finally, sufficient funds must be procured to operate programs and restore when necessary. This last factor has actually been overemphasized in the past. If citizens and government agree on a vigorous preservation program, money can usually be found to support it. In fact, a great deal of residential and adaptive use preservation costs next to nothing. None of these factors is an insurmountable obstacle in itself. Combining them into a working mechanism requires a little more effort. The tools do exist for the most part. The real job is seeing that they don’t lie dormant.

52 53 Who Controls the Past Controls the Future. George Orwell 1984

Unlike the prevailing practice in other countries, where subsidies and actual government ownership account for a great deal of preservation, Americans have had to rely for the most part on private enterprise. For this reason, financing preservation must be approached with as much imagination as the related task of finding adaptive uses for old buildings. Recent cancellation of federal programs has made the search for new methods more urgent. Individuals, local historical societies and organizations with similar goals* should be familiar with as many methods of financial support as possible. The two simplest means of acquisition are bound to be the most unlikely under usual circumstances: outright purchase and donation. Although private buyers frequently can afford to purchase a structure for residential use, the added cost of restoration sometimes makes this method impractical. Aside from private buyers, small historical societies and other local groups rarely have sufficient cash assets to consider outright purchase. Although donation has figured prominently in the past, the demise of unlimited fortunes and the concurrent revisions in taxation have made even medium—scale cash philanthropy less common. Sometimes, however, donation of an historic property may be advantageous to its owner. In such an instance, several alternatives are possible: 1. The owner may donate the entire property at once. ______*The following discussion may be relevant to municipal government, as well, because of its limited financing capacity and its reliance on state and federal support.

54 2. The owner may donate a portion of interest in the property over a number of years. 3. The receiving agency may agree to assume all or part of the maintenance costs while the owner enjoys life—right use, the property devolving to the agency upon the donor’s death, or 4. A simple bequest may be arranged which allows the owner life occupancy without any cost to the recipient. Additional permutations of these alternatives suggest the wisdom of professional legal/financial advice. This may seem a luxury to many struggling preservationists, but the eventual dividends returned can be enormous. The Morris County Park Commission has benefited in a number of instances from donations of this nature. The experience of the Park Commission has demonstrated that tact and diplomacy can be valuable supplements to hard cash. In order to benefit from potential donations, preservation groups must make the community aware of their goals through vigorous, articulate programs and consistent action. No prospective donor is likely to be impressed by a group whose aims are shortsighted or whose commitment is occasional. Foundation aid is no panacea, but it can be valuable if handled properly. Well—known foundations like Sears Roebuck and Ford customarily interest themselves in more comprehensive undertakings than those found locally, although the Ford Foundation did make grants to aid Patriot’s Path, probably in recognition of the cooperative nature of the plan. Dozens of smaller foundations operate on state and local levels, however. The Foundation Directory, available in most libraries, should be consulted for addresses and descriptions of their special interests. Foundation interest in preservation can often be approached through other avenues, such as environmental quality or programs to encourage citizen participation. Prospects are improved whenever a proposal can be related to the special concerns of a particular foundation. The more specific the documentation and the more concrete the proposals (exactly how much money is needed for precisely what purposes, and what will it achieve) the better the chance of success. Applying traditional financing methods to historic preservation should be investigated by an organization with a serious commitment and prospects for continuity. Although seldom considered, mortgaging can work for preservation.

55 Consider the experience of a Georgetown group, described by William J. Murtagh, former director of the Department of Education for the National Trust: An alert citizen learned of this (a proposed demolition) and banded together with a few others to raise $600 through contributions for a survey to determine whether the buildings could be bought, remodeled and rented as a business venture. They formed themselves into a profit- making organization and sold shares of stock in what has become known as Historic Georgetown, Inc. Through this manner, $60,000 was raised, and the contract was signed for the purchase of the properties for $75,000. A $20,000 down-payment was made, and the buildings were mortgaged for $55,000. With $40,000 available from the sale of stock, it was decided to renovate the basements and create three shops on the first floors. Apartments were planned for the upper floors. Historic Georgetown now operates in the black with a substantial reserve fund. It has reduced its mortgage to $45,000. Preferred stock amounts to $30,000, common stock to $86,000.16 In cases where an organization may be wary of accepting a bequest for fear of being unable to maintain or restore the property, a mortgage can come to the rescue. The National Trust itself has employed this method to restore and maintain some of its properties. Revolving funds are another method which can multiply a limited initial investment. As employed by preservation groups, a revolving fund is cash or equities used for purchasing and restoring for sale, structures of historic and/or architectural significance. All profits are returned to the fund for additional use. Thus, the fund revolves. Revolving funds are important for a number of reasons. Not only do they focus an organization’s efforts, they attract donors, because their benefits are tangible and quickly perceived. Finally, as the annual report of the National Trust’s Preservation Fund expresses it, preservationists need power. ‘Without it, legislation cannot be effected and bulldozers cannot be stopped. The quickest way for an organization to gain political stature is to contribute to real estate by buying and restoring, selling and renting property.’7 With the help of a small local foundation and several private donors of limited means, the Historic Charleston Foundation, in Charleston, South Carolina, purchased several properties which it renovated. These properties were then rented or resold under stipulations which assured maintenance of their historic features. Profits from the original transaction were returned for additional purchase and renovation. Today the initial investment has done so well that the

56 Foundation is able to engage in more sophisticated consultant services, and maintenance of its own properties. Because the Foundation is an incorporated nonprofit organization, its tax deductible status encourages support; renewal of commercial and residential uses has made it a respected adjunct to Charleston’s hard—headed business community. Once the exclusive preserve of private foundations, revolving funds have recently found wider acceptance. The City of Seattle authorized $600,000 in revenue sharing funds not long ago, for just this purpose, and Utah is studying the merits of a statewide revolving fund with a grant from the National Trust. Revolving funds are versatile because they can be scaled to the needs and resources of different kinds of groups, and represent a sequential approach to funding, i.e., projects or parts of projects can be paid for one step at a time as money returns. Sometimes government monies can be utilized indirectly by private preservationists if a preservation activity can be related to an existing program. For example, Department of Housing and Urban Development funds can be made available to purchase land on which an historic site stands — if the land also qualifies as a park, or is part of an urban renewal project. HUD funds may also be used for supplementary services like street lighting and road improvements. Other agencies than HUD should also be investigated, even if their concerns seem peripheral. Citizens in Kentucky were concerned about the fate of the abandoned nineteenth—century Shaker Village at Pleasant Hill. Due to the economically depressed nature of the area, someone thought to interest the Area Redevelopment Agency of the U.S. Department of Commerce. The APA agreed that a revitalized Pleasant Hill would provide jobs and generally stimulate the local economy, so a substantial loan was approved to finance development and operation. Morris County may not seem economically depressed, but its recent design nation as a Title I area under the Federal Public Works and Economic Development Act of 1965 qualifies it for projects designed to reduce unemployment. If an historic structure or group of buildings can be related to a project eligible for EDA assistance, two ends might be achieved simultaneously. In addition to the funding methods described above, more traditional

57 means of raising money with volunteer help and minimal cash outlay should not be underestimated. Historic house tours and auctions have enriched sponsoring agencies considerably. With careful scheduling for optimum season and concurrence with other programs of interest (flower shows, classic car rallies, outdoor art exhibits), such events not only raise money but dramatize the cause of preservation. Preservation groups should also be sure to coordinate their activities with local business, civic and religious groups, which are often concerned with environmental quality, broadly interpreted. Sharing diverse perspectives may result in recognizing a common problem, which can then be attacked with concerted financial resources.

FEDERAL ASSISTANCE Discussing government assistance for preservation at this time is difficult, because federal funding programs have recently been reconstituted in different forms. On January 5, 1973, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development funds were frozen pending their incorporation into a new program. HUD funds were previously available for historic preservation under Title VII of the 1961 Housing Act, urban renewal planning assistance, and the demonstration grant program. Matching grants from HUD for historic preservation totaled $5.8 million in fiscal 1972. The mechanism designed to replace the HUD categorical grants is Title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 (HCDA), Public Law 93—383. Title I is designed to finance local projects with federal funds. This goal is to be achieved by replacing former categorical grant programs — such as urban renewal, sewer and water grants, open space (including historic preservation), neighborhood facilities, etc. — with one block grant for each community and county. Within federal guidelines, local officials will then prioritize their needs, deciding how much of the block grant money should be spent on certain projects. In practical terms, HCDA means that preservationists will be working in a smaller geographical arena (no longer competing nationally with other proposals for categorical grants) but will be competing against a broader range of other community needs. HCDA’s guidelines emphasize the interrelated nature of all program goals. The more needs any one project can serve, the greater its community impact, and the greater its likelihood for funding. For

58 preservation this means special emphasis on adaptive and diversified reuse of worthy buildings. For example, if a local group sought funds to preserve an historic building for use as a house museum, its goal would probably be viewed as tightly circumscribed. If the same building were to be preserved for use as a senior citizen center, a library or a day care center, it might have greater relevance to contemporary community needs and thus enjoy more likelihood of financial support from a municipality’s block grant apportionment. HCDA is also set up to elicit maximum public participation during the formulation of local priorities. For this reason, citizens concerned about preservation must see that their local government is supplied with the information necessary to judge the comparative merits of preservation projects. HCDA has been initially funded for three years. Each year’s program, however, must be individually planned and prioritized. Local historical societies and similar groups should lose no time in determining if their goals are compatible with HCDA funding, and in making concrete proposals to their local governing body. This should be accomplished in time to take advantage of the funding schedules for 1977 and 1978, which will end the trial funding period. In addition to the potential for funding preservation projects, HCDA must also avoid adverse environmental impact in the areas of natural and man—made resources. Specifically, section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, and Executive Order 11593 must be complied with whenever relevant. This is another reason for citizens to contribute to and monitor the progress of their local HCDA program. For further explication of this complex act, see a four—page supplement published in Preservation News, May, 1975. Because of the abolition of categorical grants formerly available for preservation through HUD, preservationists would be wise to seek aid from other federal agencies as well. The chief federal department directly concerned with preservation is the Department of the Interior, which manages funds granted to the National Park Service. The National Park Service administers the following programs: 1. The National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 Under this act, matching grants for up to fifty percent of the cost

59 of acquisition and development of historic sites may be granted to individual states or to the National Trust. Funds may also be made available to local governments and private preservation organizations, but must be administered through the State. To be eligible, a project must be part of a comprehensive statewide preservation plan. Such plans may themselves be subsidized up to the same fifty percent limit. The grantee must guarantee continued maintenance if monies are advanced for physical restoration. Funds are available for reconstruction and museum use, unlike grants under the former HUD programs. For information, write to: Chief, Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Washington, D.C. 20240 2. Recreation and Public Purposes Act: Under this act, state and local governments, and private nonprofit organizations may buy or lease federal lands at minimal cost, through the Bureau of Land Managements. Additional information may be obtained from: Bureau of Land Management U.S. Bureau of the Interior Washington, D.C. 20240 3. Land and Water Conservation Fund This program authorizes fifty percent matching grants to state and local governments to be used for outdoor recreational pro— grams. If sites of historic or archeological significance are part of a recreation site consonant with the state’s recreation master plan, they may be eligible for assistance. For information write to: Director, Bureau of Outdoor Recreation U.S. Department of the Interior Washington, D.C. 20240 Another federal agency potentially useful to preservationists is the General Services Administration, which manages the Surplus Property Act. This act enables state and local governments to acquire land, buildings and other real property no longer in federal use. For purposes of historic preservation or wildlife management, ownership of properties is transferred without charge. The GSA has recently become more aggressive in its search for obsolete properties suitable for preservation through adaptive use. Information may be obtained from: Regional Director Property Management and Disposal Service General Services Administration Washington, D.C. 20240

60 The National Trust for Historic Preservation receives funds from the Department of the Interior under the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966. In addition to many other activities, the National Trust administers grants from its National Historic Preservation Fund. More than $140,000 was distributed in 1973. The Trust describes its funding program thusly: The National Historic Preservation Fund was established by the National Trust in 1971. The fund’s principal purpose is the encouragement and assistance of private efforts at preservation by acquisition of buildings through the establishment of local revolving funds. Through the fund, the National Trust offers to its nonprofit member organizations matching grants, loans and guarantees. A small portion of the fund is also allotted to meet emergency needs; to be so considered, a property must be in imminent danger of destruction or serious impairment. Resources of the fund are not available for brick—and-mortar projects, general organizational administrative costs, educational programs or conferences. Loans are provided on matching and non—matching bases; all loans bear interest and are repayable over specified time periods. Nominal interest is charged on current or deferred basis. A limited number of matching grants are awarded to help in establishing programs or refining existing ones. For information about grants or membership, write to: The National Trust for Historic Preservation 748 Jackson Place, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20006 The National Endowment for the Arts was established as an independent Federal agency in 1965. One of its twelve program areas is the Architecture + Environmental Arts Program which frequently include grants directly related to preservation. Inquiries should be addressed to: Architecture + Environmental Arts Program National Endowment for the Arts Washington, D.C. 20506

THE STATE ROLE State funds for preservation in New Jersey have not been a high priority budget item in Trenton. The Historic Sites Section of the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection administers the State Register of Historic Places, and through this program makes limited technical advisory services available in the interest of authenticating proposed sites. Although

61 this is the only state department directly responsible for preservation, no funds are available for actual “bricks and mortar” preservation or rehabilitation. In fact, the budget of the Historic Sites Section is so limited that its comprehensive statewide preservation plan has remained unpublished for several years. The New Jersey Green Acres Program has in the past expended millions of dollars on the purchase of open space for recreation and conservation, which can include historic preservation. Grants—in—aid are made to local governments for up to fifty percent of purchase price. Because the Green Acres Program is supported by issuance of public bonds, financing capability must be periodically renewed. For this reason, it is currently dormant, until a decision is made on a new bond issue. For details of eligibility write to: Green Acres Division Department of Conservation and Economic Development Trenton, N.J. 08625 Local preservation interests sometimes find it necessary to accomplish specific research about a site or district before being able to interest local governments or outside financial support. The New Jersey Historical Commission conducts an annual research program in the history of the state which can be relevant to local research needs. Grants of up to $500 are available to academic and amateur historians to aid certain kinds of studies. To determine the nature of eligible projects and application requirements, write to: New Jersey Historical Commission State Library 185 West State Street Trenton, N.J. 08625 The New Jersey State Council on the Arts runs a variety of changing programs primarily to stimulate appreciation of a participation in all the arts. It accomplishes this partially through support of native New Jersey artists. Its programs sometimes touch on preservation—related activities, although historic preservation is not a chief goal. A local group interested in including indigenous craft production as part of restoration or fund raising, for example, might be able to solicit aid from the Council if its project were complementary to the Council’s program. Inquiries should be addressed to: New Jersey State Council on the Arts

62 State House Trenton, N.J. 08625 The New Jersey American Revolution Bicentennial Celebration Commission has been appointed to coordinate statewide activities in observance of the nation’s 200th anniversary. The purely historical aspects of its duties are almost entirely of a commemorative and ceremonial nature and to date have been of virtually no interest to practical preservationists, despite its $250,000 annual budget.

COUNTY AND MUNICIPAL PESOURCES There is a familiar paradox which effects all political entities: the branch of government most suited to solve local problems is granted the least ability to exercise financial remedies. This situation can easily be recognized when evaluating the roles of county and municipal potential for aiding preservation. Discussed elsewhere in the report are a number of important legal and procedural steps local government can take. But monetary support will undoubtedly remain thin, although application of revenue sharing monies may ease the strain somewhat in the future. At present the most direct way Morris County government contributes to preservation is through the activities of its Bicentennial Committee, whose goals are similar to the state Bicentennial Commission’s and therefore, not involved with concrete preservation. Several municipalities have bicentennial organizations as well, like Randolph Township’s ARBOR (American Revolution Bicentennial Observance Randolph). Several more townships, such as Pequannock, have begun to incorporate preservation goals into the regular duties of their professional planners. Quite understandably, financial commitments have not paralleled theoretical commitments. In cases where funding capacity is limited, it is especially important for county and municipalities to include preservation awareness as part of other regularly funded programs, like those for recreation and social services. This way, at least, minimal preservation objectives might be served without incurring extra costs. Parsippany has demonstrated the ease with which this can be accomplished by instructing its planner to investigate the adaptive use potential of historic buildings when any municipal service must be expanded.

63 If a possibility of new appropriations does arise, county government could provide an impetus to practical action by examining the virtues of a course taken by New Castle County, Delaware. Realizing that private initiative is often stifled by the difficulty of raising matching funds, New Castle County operates a program of aid to civic associates, service clubs and other groups. Grants of up to fifty percent are made available for development of scenic and historic sites. Such a plan might be supplemented or replaced by a county— sponsored revolving fund. Without knowing how well federal revenue—sharing programs will succeed, it is difficult to predict the changes local preservation funding will undergo. Whatever the changes, it is unlikely that the kind of small government units making up Morris County will suddenly find money to lavish on preservation. It is safe to say that preservationists will have to look beyond local boundaries for the foreseeable future, whenever significant projects need funding.

64 65 66 You can’t go home again these days, not because you’ve outgrown it spiritually, but because they’ve torn it down and put up a gas station or supermarket. One consequence is that, deprived of familiar and beloved sites, men turn inwards, each cultivating his own garden, losing responsibility for the community and abandoning its older sections to an infectious neglect and decay. Constance Greiff Lost America

FEDERAL Not until 1966 did the federal government provide legislation embodying a broad recognition of preservation needs. This legislation is the National Historic Preservation Act, the first federal effort to afford protection from destruction by the federal government itself. Although a number of the Act’s provisions are only policy statements, they should not be underestimated. As one critic has put it: “Congressional statements of policy may affect the conduct of officials in mission— oriented operating agencies by providing guidance supplementary to the terms of their own authorizing legislation. Such declarations may help a sympathetic official justify decisions, and even expenditures, based on considerations outside the primary mission of his agency. Policy statements, in addition, may influence courts to require agencies to consider issues which they might otherwise prefer to ignore.”18 In terms of concrete measures, the Historic Preservation Act authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to maintain and expand the National Register of Historic Places, a master list of structures, sites and objects judged significant to the history and culture of the United States. It further empowers the Secretary to establish a fund for grants to states on a matching basis, for the preservation of “properties that are significant in American history, architecture, archaeology, and culture.” Similar grants are made available to aid the work of the congressionally chartered National Trust for Historic Preservation, a quasi—governmental organization which

67 administers some properties itself, publishes material on the art of historic preservation, and serves as a coordinating agency for public and private efforts. Aside from its funding provisions, the Preservation Act’s chief contribution is creation of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation. Ten members are chosen directly by the President, eight are the heads of federal agencies; the remaining two are the Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution and the Chairman of the National Trust. The Advisory Council bears the following responsibilities: 1. As a review board, it reviews and comments on federally funded or assisted projects that might adversely affect properties which are listed in the National Register; 2. As an advisory body, it advises the President, Congress, federal, state and local agencies and private institutions and individuals on matters relating to historic preservation, including legislation; 3. As a body of experts, it recommends measures to coordinate preservation activities at all levels of government and at the private level; it also recommends studies in such areas as the adequacy of present legislation and administrative regulations relating to historic preservation and the effects of tax policies on historic preservation; and 4. As an official spokesman, it encourages public interest and participation in historic preservation and encourages training and education in that field. It may seem as if the Council is merely a paper organization, but its accomplishments can be considerable, depending in part on the prestige and aggressiveness of its members, and the willingness of Congress and the President to make use of it. The positive weight of this influence was demonstrated by the Council’s review in 1969 of the impact of the proposed New Orleans Expressway on that city’s historic Vieux Carre District. After studies and on—site hearings, the Council recommended finding a new route, or depressing the expressway below ground level. Even though its report was not binding, the Secretary of Transportation ruled that federal funds would be denied, because, “the public benefits from the proposed highway would not be enough to warrant damaging the treasured French Quarter.” Without the Council’s review, the Secretary would have had no expert consideration to inform his decision. Indicative of the need for the public interest to be represented in cases like this was the suggestion by the Federal Highway

68 Administration that addition of wrought-iron grillwork would make the expressway compatible with the historic district. Mentioned above as a recipient of grants under the National Historic Preservation Act, the National Trust for Historic Preservation was chartered by Congress in 1949. Since that time it has become the foremost source of preservation expertise and of coordination efforts. Although it benefits from some government funds, it is supported primarily through membership and private contributions. It occupies a unique position, inasmuch as it is free from direct government control but can exercise considerable influence in government circles. Recently, it has expanded its program of consultant service grants, which enable local government and private groups to study the feasibility of individual preservation projects before making extensive financial commitments. It also maintains twelve historic house museums acquired, for the most part, through bequest. Created in the same year which saw the passage of the National Historic Preservation Act, the National Register of Historic Places is a master list of significant properties recognized by the federal government, but not necessarily restored or maintained by anyone but the owner. Sites and buildings proposed to the National Register must first be accepted by a state register. In New Jersey, the State Liaison Officer who forwards appropriate nominations is the Commissioner of the Department of Environmental Protection. These nominations are reviewed by the National Park Service for accuracy and suitability, and are entered on the National Register if they meet federal criteria for significance. Inclusion on the National Register does not prevent private owners from disposing of their property in any way they choose, including inappropriate alterations and demolition. It does require that no federal aid for a specific project can be granted without prior review if the project in question will endanger a building, site or district which is on the National Register. The National Register of Historic Landmarks, an entirely separate list, is maintained by the National Park Service, subject to declaration by the Secretary of the Interior. Sites and buildings on this list are awarded certificates and bronze plaques attesting to their unique role in the history of the nation. Private owners must agree to allow periodic inspection by the

69 Park Service. Fulfilling the need for visual documentation of significant American architecture is the Historic American Buildings Survey (HABS), operative intermittently since the 1930’s. Photographs, measured drawings and descriptions are made under the direction of the Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation of the National Park Service. The permanent archive resulting from this continuing survey is maintained in the Library of Congress. When it first began recording, HABS concentrated on eighteenth- century architecture, since few architectural historians had investigated later work. Today, hampered by a limited budget, it is striving to bring its collection up to date, and has made some strides in that direction. The Historic American Buildings Survey is empowered to offer no protection to the buildings and structures it records. In fact, nearly one half of those buildings and sites have been destroyed or irreparably damaged, leading some to call the HABS a death mask for American architecture. It remains, nevertheless, an invaluable and prestigious program which can help provide justification for individual preservation efforts. In addition to the National Historic Preservation Act, 1966 also saw Congressional enactment of the Department of Transportation Act (Pub. L. No. 80—670 Stat. 931) which embodies specific references to preservation of historic sites. In fact, the references to preservation of historic sites and parklands have been described by a federal district judge as one of the primary purposes of the act.19 Unlike the National Historic Preservation Act, which in its present form allows jurisdiction to include only endangered sites already accepted by the National Register, the DOT Act requires the Secretary of Transportation to give equal consideration to state and local sites. Because of this liberal application, as well as the enormous amounts of money funneled through DOT, the potential for preservation protection through this measure is significant, especially when one remembers that the Department oversees such additional activities as the Federal Aviation Administration, the Coast Guard, the Urban Mass Transportation Administration and the Federal Railroad Administration. Recent court decisions involving the Department’s powers under this act have further bolstered its strength. In the Overton Park Case,20 the

70 court ruled specifically in the matters of parklands, but the ruling applies equally to historic preservation. It said, in part, that the DOT Act’s own language meant that protected lands “were not to be lost unless there were truly unusual factors present in a particular case or the cost of community disruption from alternative routes reached extraordinary magnitude.“ Although the DOT Act paradoxically grants broader powers through a more specific agency than does the previously mentioned National Historic Preservation Act, the two are actually complementary. Not only can the DOT Act provide protection to properties not eligible under the NHP Act, but the Department of Transportation can make use of the review expertise of the Advisory Council to define the nature of the “special effort” for preservation which section 2(b) (2) of the DOT Act demands. Since 1966, various acts (the Urban Mass Transportation Assistance Act of 1970, for example) governing activities within the jurisdiction of the Department of Transportation, have reaffirmed the federal commitment to preservation, going as far as to say that a site not yet placed on the National Register, and in an area where no local or state authorities are active, may be reviewed for suitability by the Office of History and Archaeology of the National Park Service, or by the National Trust, if threatened by projects of the Department of Transportation. An entirely different approach is found in programs carried out by the Department of Housing and Urban Development.* Since most structures of recognized historic worth are relatively old, they are often found in areas slated for slum clearance and urban renewal. This frequently puts the federal government, through HUD, in the position of destroying the very kind of structures its other programs commit it to protect. Even recommendations from the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation bear no weight on federally— sponsored housing projects affecting historic sites. ______* This discussion of HUD programs is subject to the same qualifications described in section 5.

71 Ironically, since 1966 (through the Demonstration Cities and Metropolitan Development Act) HUD has been able to support both destruction and preservation simultaneously, because of an authorization which allows it to make grants to municipalities and counties for 2/3 of the cost of historic preservation surveys. It should be noted that none of the monies in such grants are available for restoration or preservation. In addition to the grant provision, the Act amended two other laws in order to broaden the base of housing—program supported preservation efforts. Title VI of the 1966 Act allows the inclusion of historic preservation within the definitions of urban renewal plans and projects. Monies appropriated under Title VI may be used for “brick and mortar” purposes — acquisition, relocation, restoration (such as the relocation to Speedwell Village of two houses in Morristown’s urban renewal district). In a provision which amends the Housing Act of 1961, the 1966 Act also includes historic preservation as a possible category when offering direct funding for acquisition of properties in urban (though not necessarily in urban renewal)areas, for public use. To be funded under any HUD programs, structures or sites must meet criteria comparable to those employed by the National Register, but the actual selection of sites is determined by the localities involved. This degree of local control is further clarified by the House Committee Report which states that those who “treasure a building for its pleasing appearance or local sentiment do not find it less important because it lacks proper historic credentials.”21 By “proper historic credentials”, the Committee meant qualifications of National significance. This, then, represents an important recognition of local control of local sites, aided by federal funds. As a final provision, section 603 (a) of the 1966 HUD Act provides the National Trust for Historic Preservation with up to $90,000 per structure for renovation or restoration of buildings maintained. On January 1, 1970, a law was signed that put historic preservation squarely in the context of environmental preservation, the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).22 NEPA requires all government agencies to review their actions in light of possible environmental damage and to issue statements detailing such potential damage prior to initiation of the contemplated action (the so—called “environmental impact statements”). “While

72 it permits environmental damage, the requirements for a detailed advance statement provide strong incentives toward an honest search for alternatives for any public official who would prefer not to brand himself as a vandal”.23 To date, most actions under NEPA have involved strictly environmental issues (the Alaska pipeline injunction probably the most notable), but its language specifically includes the admonition to “preserve important historic, cultural, and natural aspects of our national heritage...”, so its application in these areas holds great potential, should in NEPA’s words a “major federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment” involve historic value as well, such as the New Orleans Expressway case. Recent events, however, indicate that the new Better Communities Act does not require compliance with NEPA’s provisions (or with those of the 1966 National Historic Preservation Act). This is a serious oversight which could force years of litigation unless Congress clarifies its intent. Evident from the foregoing discussion is the fact that Congress has provided a number of legal tools which can be used in the interest of historic preservation. Unfortunately, the various acts and departmental programs mix methodologies, appropriation measures and priority systems in a patchwork quilt of programs which cannot help but confuse the concerned layman on whose efforts so much local preservation action depends. While it is true that many government agencies whose programs touch historic preservation peripherally (such as DOT and HUD), require separate and specific provisos recognizing that influence, it should be pointed out to Congress that one central coordinating office for historic and cultural preservation would add immeasurably to the value of all the presently existing discrete measures, whose relationship must sometimes be puzzled out. Until that happens, preservationists must continue to play bureaucratic hopscotch on their own.

STATE Preservation in New Jersey is the responsibility of the Historic Sites Section of the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP). This agency is given the task of preparing a statewide preservation plan and site inventory. It reviews nominations for the State and National Registers of Historic Places and maintains a number of historic house museums of statewide significance.

73 Work on the state inventory of sites has been in progress only since 1970. Already information has been gathered for some 2500 sites, and research is continuing. The comprehensive preservation plan has been completed, but has never been published, due to lack of funds. The Historic Sites Section is presently unable to offer specialized consultant services because of its small staff and meager budget. The New Jersey Register of Historic Places, like the National Register, designates sites, structures and buildings representative of the Nation’s historic and cultural achievements. The Historic Sites Section of DEP, which maintains the State Register, relies on local informants to identify potential sites and supply preliminary (and sometimes final) documentation. The staff reviews a nomination for accuracy, scholarship and physical integrity, and then decides whether it meets the criteria established for inclusion on the State Register. Because of the limited resources of the Historic Sites Section, no more than ten sites per county are accepted annually for consideration. Inclusion on the State Register protects a property from alteration or demolition resulting from state, county or municipal action without prior review. Like the National Register, it affords no alternative to private destruction. The New Jersey Register of Historic Places should not be confused with the New Jersey Historic Sites Inventory. The latter (NJHSI) is merely a list of sites for which some documentation has been gathered.

74 75 But when the whole world becomes one McDonald’s Hamburger Stand after another, you too will cry out for even a scrap of integrity.

Raymond Mungo Total Loss Farm

America’s experience is unique in the world of preservation. In other developed nations, government occupies a position more in the vanguard, alerting citizens to the dangers of destruction and investing enormous sums to prevent it. Of course, bureaucratic shortsightedness crops up in London and Tokyo as well as in Washington. But the prevailing sense of official commitment to preservation by governments outside the United States creates a climate in which preservation is more easily recognized as an integral ingredient of planning and policy. Because of this difference, American preservationists have had considerable experience in organizing to press for government action (or in some cases to block it). This necessity for direct citizen involvement may, in fact, indicate that our form of government is less paternalistic and, therefore, healthier than its foreign counterparts. Whatever the implications, one .thing is certain: private leadership (professional and non—professional) must continue to convince, coerce, and when necessary, initiate legal action, to assure that government fulfills its responsibilities. In pursuit of this goal, preservation organizations fall into different categories. One of the most important is societies operating at the local level.

LOCAL HISTORICAL SOCIETIES Morris County is home to a number of historical societies devoted to investigating the history of specific localities. Some have written and published histories of their towns, most have contributed to the research needed to submit site nominations for the New Jersey Register of Historic Places, and a few have restored buildings for use as headquarters or historic

76 house museums. But actual “brick and mortar” preservation (directly, through ownership, or indirectly, through aid) has not been a primary concern of local groups. In addition to the purely local groups, the Morris County Historical Society serves a dual function. It acts as the local society for the Morristown area where it is situated, and invites county—wide membership as well. In this latter capacity, its historic sites committee has brought together representatives from local societies to provide information needed by the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection’s historic sites inventory program. The work of this committee is described in Section 3. It would be hard to minimize the contributions to site research made by local societies in the past. As a result of their efforts, Morris County possesses a good basic knowledge of what needs to be preserved, accompanied in most cases by sufficient data for authentication. This existing foundation will enable local groups and the Morris County Historical Society’s historic sites committee to continue advising the state about which sites merit priority designation. Now that the preliminary task of documentation is so far advanced, it behooves the local societies to redirect their energies toward realization of the primary goal — preservation per Se. All the years of hard work spent on gathering information can easily become an exercise in irony, if carefully documented inventories become mere epitaphs for a bulldozed past. To keep this from happening in the face of economic pressure will be no easy task. Local societies will have to abandon their accustomed low profile to become preservation activists. It is up to each local group to see that preservation issues are constantly before the community — not just crisis issues, but the mundane facts which relate preservation to land use, ecology, housing and vital services. This kind of public awareness can be stimulated by several means. Every historical society and preservation group should plan a public relations program to keep local news sources supplied with press releases and stories, to organize public meetings for discussion of community preservation issues, and to launch a program of education, perhaps in cooperation with local libraries and schools. Some of these aims can be accomplished through publications, others will require more direct

77 involvement. All of the tools for public awareness and action must be handled with professionalism. Appendix D includes a number of helpful sources. Stimulating public action incurs. the obligation to be knowledgeable oneself. To accomplish this, members of preservation organizations should familiarize themselves with local government by regularly auditing town council and planning board meetings. One of the first goals should be to press for enactment of a municipal landmarks commission, or an historic district zone without which little practical preservation can be achieved (see Appendix A). State and federal sources of aid should also be investigated. Hard—pressed municipal governments often run on a part—time basis in Morris County, and frequently lack the resources to investigate specialized subjects; expertise offered by preservationists could foster a fruitful spirit of cooperation. If a town is able to employ a full-time professional planner, his cooperation should be enlisted. The value of this approach has been demonstrated in Parsippany and in Pequannock, where volunteers have been assembling site information under direction of the township planners. Manpower lacking on one side and professional skills on the other are thus fused together into a complementary whole. Opportunities to join forces with other groups - for specific projects or on a long—term basis — should also be investigated. It cannot be overemphasized that all components of comprehensive planning are interrelated, so preservationists need to integrate their goals into the overall fabric of local government and its subsidiary special-interest groups. A good example of how different groups might combine their energies involves acceptance of the crucially important municipal landmarks commission idea. Because some Morris County localities feel they are already overburdened with committees and commissions, local action on this issue has languished. A number of towns already support active environmental commissions. Since environmental considerations encompass the man—made as well as the natural world, historic preservation might be incorporated under the aegis of existing environmental commissions. While not a universal solution, the combination could work well for some towns. It should be evident from the foregoing examination that preservation

78 successes will depend largely on active local involvement. Ninety percent of all concrete preservation — the actual physical salvation of sites and buildings - can be accomplished only by municipal power; and municipalities will only exercise that power if voters make their wishes known consistently and loudly. This need for pressure, applied intelligently, suggests the usefulness of concerted action. A dozen or so local historical societies can make limited progress. By surrendering some of their autonomy to a county—wide coordinating body, aggregate influence could become formidable. By pooling resources, such a hypothetical Morris County League of Historical Societies might be able to employ a professional director of publicity and publications, could lobby more effectively for municipal action, and might finance a revolving fund for the purchase of sites in imminent danger. Not incidentally, the dedication and foresight shown by such united action would unquestionably impress foundations and government sources of financial aid. This new power would in no way compromise the unique familiarity with local situations that gives the individual societies their present value. Organized preservation has matured enormously in recent years, to become an instrument of great sophistication, especially in large cities, where preservation laws with teeth have been enacted. Suburbia has not kept pace, perhaps because the sheer physical concentration of historic buildings is not as obvious outside the cities. Citizens and government action must take the initiative now before opportunity vanishes in the dust of irrevocable land use decisions. This means that historical societies and sympathetic organizations in Morris County must put aside old rivalries and abandon the unproductive fascination with mere nostalgia and historical sentimentality that sometimes passes for preservation. Unless preservationists join the mainstream of what Ada Louise Huxtable has characterized as the change from a cultural nicety to”.. .an environmental necessity of important sociological impact” — their efforts will become increasingly impotent.

OTHER ORGANIZATIONS In their struggle to keep philosophy and practice relevant to the real needs of preservation, the all—important local groups can look to other sources for assistance. Described below are a number of private and quasi—governmental organizations active on the state and national level which offer help:

79 1. The New Jersey Historical Commission is a State—financed organization whose professional staff is directed by a chairman and board of trustees. It publishes a monthly newsletter under the auspices of the State Library’s Department of Education. The Commission has sponsored conferences for local and county planners, administers a research grant program, and coordinates the efforts of volunteer and professional workers. Although its programs and grants are aimed primarily at historical scholarship, its newsletter reports on current topics and reviews new publications as well. For information, write to: The New Jersey Historical Commission State Library 185 West State Street Trenton, N.J. 08625 2. The New Jersey Historical Society, founded in 1845, keeps an extensive library of primary source materials, including manuscripts and newspaper files. The society sponsors student history clubs, holds two major conferences each year, and publishes two periodicals, the quarterly New Jersey History and the monthly New Jersey Messenger. Questions about membership and programs may be addressed to: New Jersey Historical Society 230 Broadway Newark, N.J. 07104 3. The League of Historical Societies of New Jersey, as its name implies, compiles information about the programs and publications of the state’s local historical societies. Its recently published directory of societies can help local agencies avoid duplication of effort. Request information from: The League of Historical Societies of New Jersey Mr. Kenneth Hirsch, Chairman 1254 W. Brook Road Newfoundland, N.J. 07435 4. The American Association For State And Local History does nationally what the preceding New Jersey League does for the State. Information about its directory and other publications can be obtained from: The American Association for State and Local History 1315 8th Avenue, S. Nashville, Tennessee 37203 5. The National Trust For Historic Preservation describes itself as “... the only nonprofit education organization chartered by Congress to encourage public participation in the preservation of districts, sites, buildings, structures and objects significant in 1rnerican history and cu1ture. It is unquestionably the single most valuable organization to local preservation groups. It administers grants-in- aid for restoration feasibility studies; offers consultant services to members; and publishes technical studies and monographs devoted to topics as mundane as how to write better press releases, and as complex as the intricacies of tax relief for historic properties. Its two periodicals, the monthly Preservation News and the quarterly Historic Preservation, belong in the library of everyone seriously

80 committed to preservation. They provide extensive coverage of current news, and do a superb job of relating preservation to other vital events in the fields of planning, government, environment and social sciences. These two publications offer a wealth of new ideas and innovative solutions to old problems which should prove stimulating to the work of local preservation volunteers. For information about membership and programs, write to: The National Trust for Historic Preservation 74—748 Jackson Place, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20006 6. The Victorian Society For America is devoted to fostering appreciation of Victorian architecture and decorative arts. It offers guidance, through workshops and publications, on the preservation and restoration of Victorian buildings. Additional information can be obtained by writing to: The Victorian Society for America The Athenaeum East Washington Square Philadelphia, Pa. 19106 The organizations described here do not constitute an exhaustive list. Preservationists should be especially alert to organizations devoted to other ends whose interests might complement theirs. Special attention should be given to various local, state and national conservation and environmental groups. For information about such groups in the Morris County area, consult the Association of New Jersey Environmental Commissions, Box 157, Mendham, N.J. 07945. The informational value of all the organizations described here is important, but secondary. Providing the average citizen with a forum for preservation action is their primary value. For the last few years, environmentalists, strictly defined, have been in the forefront of citizen action, establishing legal precedents and fighting test cases. Now, preservationists must join that fight by identifying themselves with the total environmental movement. In preservation as in other matters, taxpayers have an opportunity and an obligation to help determine how their taxes are spent. Whatever new preservation tools and organizations are created, one thing is certain: Without citizen involvement, they can’t work. This obligation to participate measures the great importance of local historical societies and related organizations. By becoming activist groups, they can help open government processes to public scrutiny, can broaden representation by serving on the advisory committees of official bodies, and can mold policy by demanding

81 development of desirable programs while bringing suit to stop others. Without engaging the political process, local historical societies may be devoted to a number of causes, but preservation won’t be one of them.

82 83 Remember the days of old, Consider the years of many generations, Ask thy father and he will show thee, Thy elders, and they will tell thee.

Deuteronomy 32:7

Historic preservation in Morris County has reached a critical point. The means are available to assure a future for the past, but time is on the side of “progress,” growth, expansion. By 1980 it is estimated that our population will have increased by more than one third from its 1970 level. Support services for this growing population mean more housing, more roads and more commercial/industrial facilities. The older transportation corridors, where so many of our historic structures stand, will feel greater pressure for improvement; our older town centers, each with its own historic identity and values, will likewise undergo transformations in population density and physical concentration; rural areas will diminish, and open space will shrink. The traditional preservation safeguards of physical isolation, limited population and limited economic growth vanished when Morris County became part of the wave of large—scale development which swept the metropolitan areas of the East Coast. The prospects for preventing repetition of past errors — careless development, uninformed land use decisions, archaic transportation policies — are not sanguine, especially in New Jersey, where the home rule tradition pits municipalities against one another so that they must ignore regional interests. If there is any hope for preservationists and planners to win some of the coming battles, it is dependent on accepting the vocabulary of progress and using that vocabulary for their own ends. Rather than running from growth, it must be embraced and tamed. This means abandoning once and for all the outmoded approach which says: save isolated buildings and make museums of them. That is antiquarianism, and no defense against the enemy. Only if preservation is recognized as an environmental factor, and historic buildings

84 as ripe for adaptive use, can change accommodate the best of the past. Such a healthy preservation climate presupposes certain reforms. The following recommendations have evolved from the ideas examined in this report, and are designed to cultivate such a climate:

A. MUNICIPAL ACTION 1. Local Government must formally incorporate preservation goals in official master plans and in the day-to-day functioning of its various departments and agencies. Existing ordinances must be examined and enforced in light of their relevance to preservation. These include building codes, tax assessment, design standards, and environmental statutes. All municipalities must enact landmarks boards or commissions, which are given the power to designate historic sites and control their alteration and demolition to the extent this is legally possible. 2. Local Historical Societies must turn their attention from documentation to active preservation. This means engaging the local political process to interpret specific preservation needs. In order to consolidate influence and economic strength, some union of local societies is called for. Such a confederation would be able to see preservation on a county—wide basis without surrendering intimate knowledge of local needs. A primary function of local historical societies must be to provide expertise to local government, through cooperation with professional planning consultants and membership on municipal landmarks commissions.

B. COUNTY PARTICIPATION 1. This report should be viewed as evidence of official commitment to preservation by the Morris County Planning Board. All County departments should be instructed to familiarize themselves with the goals expressed herein and with the sites listed in the accompanying inventory, so that any County action potentially detrimental to historic preservation can be reviewed for suitability by the Freeholders, the Planning Board and the department involved. Such review has special relevance to the Departments of Roads and Bridges, the Park Commission, the Department of Buildings and Grounds, the Shade Tree Commission, and any department contemplating capital improvements. 2. The County should establish an architectural review board to reverse the trend of constructing buildings in the ubiquitous pseudo-Georgian style which dilutes the impact of genuine historic architecture and degrades public taste. 3. The County should investigate the feasibility of establishing an historic preservation revolving fund or matching grant program to aid local government and historical societies. Such monies should be entirely reserved for the purchase, restoration and improvement of properties which can be put to productive adaptive use while maintaining their historic values. 4. The inventory section of this report should be updated periodically,

85 in cooperation with state and local agencies, to encourage awareness of sites at the local level and to stimulate additional nominations to the State and National Registers of Historic Places.

C. STATE ACTION 1. In order to make historic preservation economically feasible on a broader scale, the state should examine the suggestions for tax relief found herein and incorporate them into a statewide tax reform package which reduces the crippling dependence on the property tax. 2. Specific state enabling legislation for historic preservation should be passed so that municipalities have a clearer idea of their powers under state law. Such legislation should address itself concretely historic district zoning, municipal landmark commissions, and tax relief, if the latter is not treated separately. 3. The Historic Sites Section of the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection should be granted a realistic budget so that it can carry out its present duties more expeditiously, and can increase its staff to meet the demands made upon it. 4. The State should consider establishing a revolving fund to purchase buildings on the State Register for resale when such action is necessary for their preservation.

D. FEDERAL ACTION 1. The General Revenue Sharing Act should be clarified so that compliance with the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 and the National Environmental Protection Act is assured. 2. Federal Income Tax regulations should be revised so that demolition of historic commercial buildings is penalized instead of rewarded, as described in an earlier section of this report. 3. Overall federal appropriation for historic preservation should be increased by emphasizing the use of historic buildings for housing and social services. This can be accomplished in part by instructing all departments to investigate the adaptive use of historic buildings before approving funding for new construction. 4. Criteria for National Register Sites should be broadened to encourage inclusion of districts and areas liberally defined.

86 87 The inventory which follows is the first attempt in Morris County to develop a countywide survey of sites derived from a number of different sources. Included are sites named to the National Register of Historic Places, the New Jersey Register of Historic Places, and the Historic 1merican Buildings Survey, as well as sites not recognized by the national or state registers but important to Morris County. Taken together, these represent the minimum number of sites recommended by the Morris County Planning Board for preservation through government and private means. This inventory is not meant to be all—inclusive, so a particular site’s absence does not necessarily imply its inappropriateness. As new information is brought to our attention, the inventory will be periodically updated to reflect awareness of different sites. Some communities, like Harding and Jefferson, are even now researching additional sites for future inclusion. In addition to actual buildings and structures, a number of entries represent sites only. These fall into two categories. First are those sites which never supported structures (e.g. The French Army Encampment); second are those designations which mark the site of a building now vanished (e.g. Dickerson’s Tavern). The second category calls attention to sites which are important even without buildings, and also serves as a reminder of how many buildings have already been lost. All HABS sites which could be located are included, regardless of their present condition. Sites not registered by the state or federal government have been chosen in terms of their suitability for those registers or for their local significance. This philosophy sometimes creates obvious differences in the kinds of sites chosen from one municipality to another. Thus in Mountain Lakes, for example, where settlement and political incorporation occurred later there are a number of early 20th—century buildings important to the community which might be overlooked in towns with more venerable histories, like Mendham and Florham Park. Such differences are natural and help to

88 cultivate the special identity which each locality should strive to preserve. Emphasis on local sites and local initiative is important because only municipalities can protect historic sites from their biggest single threat - the economic pressure of private development. The scope of this report cannot encompass the many historic cemeteries found in Morris County (some associated with historic churches are included, however). Readers are referred for more specific information to the Morris County Burial Grounds Inventory, prepared by Edward J. Raser on behalf of the Genealogical Society of New Jersey (see Appendix D, Section II). The following codes are used in the inventory and may be of interest to some readers: 1. A number in the left margin is the Morris County Historic Sites Inventory reference, identifying an individual municipal site. The same number is used to locate sites on the maps which accompany each section. 2. “NJHSI” following a site’s name stands for New Jersey Historic Sites Inventory. This indicates that some information for a particular site is on file with the Historic Sites Section of the N.J. Department of Environmental Protection. It does not indicate that the site has been accepted by state or national registers. 3. “HABS” will sometimes be found following the preceding NJHSI designation, or alone. This means that the site in question has been recorded by the Historic American Buildings Survey and that measured drawings, photographs and descriptions are on file in the Library of Congress. The complete reference includes “NJ” between HABS and the number. This has been dropped for simplicity, since all entries here are part of the NJ series. 4. “NR” or “NJR” following an entry indicates that the site is on the National Register of Historic Places or the New Jersey Register of Historic Places, respectively. All sites in Morris County named to the National Register have previously been accepted by the New Jersey Register. 5. “NHL” will be found rarely. It stands for National Historic Landmark. Sites so designated are considered the elite of all national landmarks. Should a site meet established criteria, designation occurs at the request of the owner, who is then entitled to a certificate and bronze plaque, as well as technical advice on preservation and interpretation.

89 Historic Sites By Municipality And Region

MUNICIPALITY NUMBER OF SITES* REGION PAGE Boonton 8 B 79 Boonton Township 4 B 81 Butler 0 A - Chatham 8 C 99 Chatham Township 6 C 104 Chester 7 G 175 Chester Township 5 G 178 Denville 2 B 83 Dover 7 F 163 East Hanover 8 B 84 Florham Park 28 C 106 Hanover 10 B 87 Harding 12 D 126 Jefferson 2 E 161 Kinnelon 1 A 72 Lincoln Park 6 A 73 Madison 15 C 114 Mendham 22 G 180 Mendham Township 6 G 184 Mine Hill 1 F 166 Montville 19 B 88 Morris Plains 5 D 131 Morristown 42 D 133 Morris Township 20 U 149 Mt. Arlington 0 F - Mt. Olive 4 H 187 Mt. Lakes 5 B 93 Netcong 1 H 189 Parsippany - Troy Hills 11 B 95 Passaic 3 C 125 *Number of sites does not necessarily reflect the actual number of separate buildings or structures, since a district or group listed as one site may contain any number of individual buildings or structures.

90 (Historic Sites By Municipality And Region, continued)

MUNICIPALITY NUMBER OF SITES REGION PAGE Pequannock A 75 Randolph 8 F 167 Riverdale A 78 Rockaway 6 E 158 Rockaway Township 3 E 160 Roxbury 13 F 170 Victory Gardens 0 F - Washington 36 F 190 Wharton 1 F 174

The following inventory is arranged by region. The sites within each region are arranged alphabetically by municipality. Within each municipality they are arranged alphabetically by individual name. The maps included in this section were designed for maximum legibility of historic site locations. For that reason, all extraneous information was deleted, including many natural features and most local roads:

91 92 THE MORRIS CANAL Multiple Locations

Individual canal sites are singled out in the inventory by municipality. The following general description applies to all:

Conceived by George Macculloch as an economical means of uniting Pennsylvania’s anthracite coal fields with New Jersey’s iron foundries, the Morris Canal was begun in 1825. It connected Phillipsburg, Pennsylvania with Jersey City, employing a system of inclined planes, unique in this country, to overcome severe topography. Besides fostering a revolution in 1merican transportation and engineering, it created demographic and industrial explosions still felt today. By the turn of the century, rail transport had rendered it obsolete. (NR)

93 KINNELON REGION A

Al KAYHART HOUSE 240 Brook Valley Road

Frederick Gearhart was born in 1757 on a Dutch ship bound for 2merica. By about 1784 he had moved to Stony Brook (then part of Pequannock) ,had married and fathered two sons, and had changed his name to Kayhart. The family’s first dwelling on this site was a log cabin. The original part of the present house was raised between 1790 and 1800. Unlike most “added on” houses which evolve through wings and additions of various dimensions, the size of this house was doubled about 20 years later by attaching an exact duplicate, creating an unusually long six—bay facade. The result is not awkward, despite the oddly placed doors which betray the join. It is one of Kinnelon’s earliest and least altered houses.

94 LINCOLN PARK REGION A

A2 BENJAMIN HOMESTEAD 117 Main Street (Rte.202)

Owned by Benjamins since the Civil War, this farm once extended from Towaco to Pine Brook on the east and south, and into the Bog and Vly on the north. Evidence, presently inconclusive, suggests that its builder was one of the area’s prominent Dutch families. The house is 1 1/2—story, five—bay structure with high fieldstone basement, brownstone lintels and four interior chimneys. In plan and elevation it closely resembles the noted pre-Revolutionary Martin Berry House in Pequannock. Both have through center halls and gambrel roofs, features which point to relative affluence. One important difference is construction materials: fieldstone for the Berry House, brick in this case. In Morris County, brick usually implies a construction date no earlier than 1790. Thus, the Benjamin Homestead is probably about 175 years old, but may be older. Despite the addition of shed dormers, the exterior remains in excellent condition. Two unusual features, brick construction and festooned bargeboards, merit special attention. Hopefully, conversion to institutional use will not seriously damage the house and grounds.

A3 THOMAS DEY HOUSE (SITE) HABS-536 Junction of Two Bridges and Fairfield Roads

Thomas Dey built his 1 1/2—story stone house in 1779 on part of his father’s homestead land. A tannery, fur hattery, and store, also owned by Dey, stood not far away. After his death, the house passed to his daughter’s family, the Posts (another well-known local name). Like the Dodd house, it is marked on Erskine’s map. The house has been demolished. This is also the site of Two Bridges, the earliest settlement of the area now known as Lincoln Park. In 1780, the N.J. Revolutionary Army camped here and established an army post office and commissary.

A4 JOHN DODD (OR DODS) HOUSE HABS-93 11 Highland Street

Built c. 1770, this house originally stood on a farm of 200 acres. Like most Dutch houses of the 18th century, it faces south and incorporates interior chimneys, both features designed to conserve heat. Two sunburst design mantels, probably added around the period of the Revolution, are the work of a skilled woodcarver. The house is noted on a map drawn by Robert Erskine, Washington’s military surveyor. Its present condition is excellent with few alterations; even the shutters are thought to be original. (NJR)

95 LINCOLN PARK REGION A

A5 JOHN DODD (OR DODS) TAVERN 8 Chapel Hill Road

The 18th-century owner of the previously listed house operated this building as a tavern. It is identified as such in military correspondence of 1781 between Cols. Tilghman and Van Courtland, and in a 1780 letter from Van Courtland to General Washington. Whether it was constructed for commercial purposes is unknown; it differs not at all from the area’s Dutch Colonial houses intended solely for domestic use. Despite some alterations, its appearance has not been changed substantially. (NJR)

A6 FAIRBANKS FARM 7 Pinebrook Road

After the Revolution, the Dutch influence in northeastern Morris County began gradually to diminish. Built c. 1810, this house is one of the first in the area not derived from Dutch/Flemish forms Jonathan Fairbanks purchased the Farm from Henry Van Houten, one of the signers of the Committee of Safety - a citizens group formed to monitor the activities of those suspected of Loyalist leanings.

A7 PETER MEAD HOUSE, BREITINGER FARM HABS-87 612 Pinebrook Road

This 3-story farmhouse is an atypical combination of stone and wood. The first two floors are fieldstone, the full third floor is frame and clapboard, suggesting that an addition was made by raising the roof. The front facade bears the date 1793 in iron numerals. The late 19th-century porch is the only exterior change.

TWO BRIDGES (SITE) see: Thomas Dey House NJHSI-1767.1

96 PEQUANNOCK REGION A

A8 MARTIN BERRY HOUSE NJ HSI-2520.3; HZBS-546 581 Route 23 (Eastern terminus of Cedar Rd.)

The only substantially unaltered pre-Revolutionary building in Pequannock, this fieldstone house was built by Martin Berry (1693— 1784), son of the first family to settle on the Plains, and one of the first elders of the Pompton Reformed Dutch Church. In contrast to the modest farmsteads more typical of this area’s Dutch settlers, the generous proportions and fine details of this house reflect an affluent lifestyle uncommon for 18th—century Pequannock. The broad center hail with wide staircase, the several mantels, built—in cupboards, and wide floorboards are still impressive today. Some details are Greek Revival, evidently the result of an 1825 modernization. The nomination for National Register status reads in part, “Few private homes in New Jersey can compare with the workmanship and authenticity of the Martin Berry House.. . it is an important source of instruction for serious architectural historians.” The HABS report describes it as “possessing exceptional architectural interest. ..“ In 1972 it received the N.J. Historical Society’s Landmark Award. (NR)

A9 JOHN DeBOW HOUSE 150 Mountain Avenue

In a will of February 11, 1767, John DeBow divided his land and conveyed to Paulus DeBow “the rear part of a plot of land where John DeBow now lives.” The stone ground—floor section of the present house was presumably John DeBow’s dwelling at that time. Physical evidence suggests that the original house was only about twenty feet long, the present kitchen being a later addition. The wooden first and second floors are 19th—century additions, much in the manner of Lincoln Park’s Mead House. A stone house apparently represented such an investment of labor that expansion justified raising the roof if other alternatives were undesirable. Like the Berrys, Mandevilles, Van Gelders and others, the DeBows were one of the earliest Dutch families to settle the Plains. Their landholdings were frequently extensive, and their remaining houses impart a distinctive identity to Northeastern Morris County.

97 PEQUANNOCK REGION A

A10 PAULUS DEBOW PLANTATION 134 Mountain Avenue

Circumstantial evidence suggests that this house was built as early as 1790. If so, it is remarkably sophisticated for such a provincial location. Despite its Federal details, the center gable double doors and porch gingerbread are obviously Victorian additions. What makes the house worthy of interest is its double plan. Each half of the main section has a 1 1/2-story subsidiary wing, and each half is completely self—sufficient, with its own kitchen and stairs. Physical evidence supports the supposition that this is the original plan, probably designed to accommodate parents and their married songs family.

All GILES MANDEVILLE HOUSE NJHSI—2520.2 515 Newark-Pompton Turnpike (Rte. 504, M.C.—60)

The Mandeville House is 1 1/2-stories with l8”—thick brownstone walls and clapboard gable-ends. The 12/12 sash windows are finished with stone lintels. Family records give the date of construction as 1788, and indicate that the space over the kitchen served as slave quarters. The Mandeville family was descended from Gilles Jansen De Mandeville, who is said to have arrived in America in 1647, from Normandy via Holland. The house is now owned by the Reformed Church, which uses it as a parsonage.

Al2 THOMAS MANDEVILLE HOMESTEAD 679 Newark-Pompton Turnpike (Rte. 540 M.C.—60)

The center hall of this modest house has rare soot or candle— decorated plaster walls. The style is familiar as a typical small farmhouse of the first half of the 19th century. The roof of the larger wing has been extended to cover a porch, and also bears long shed dormers. It has been in possession of Mandevilles since its construction.

A13 REFORMED DUTCH CHURCH AND CHAPEL 525 Newark Pompton Turnpike (Rte. 504, M.C.-6O)

From 1771 until 1892, this church was the only house of worship in Pequannock and Butler, reflecting the hegemony of the early Dutch community. The original building has been altered and enlarged by subsequent congregations, but always with respect for its architectural integrity. In 1937 a fire necessitated restoration, which was accomplished under the direction of Hobart Upjohn, a prominent exponent of

98 PEQUANNOCK REGION A

the Colonial Revival. No other Georgian church of the 18th century has survived in Morris County. The adjacent 19th-century chapel is notable for its luxuriant gable-end gingerbread. The juxtaposition of these two buildings affords a commentary on the evolution of architectural taste.

Al4 SLINGERLAND HOMESTEAD 143 Boulevard (M.C.-19)

The land on which this house sits was once part of the Bog and Vly Meadows. In addition to being farmed, it was also used to produce industrial vinegar for surrounding iron mines. Except for its unusually wide, recessed Federal doorway, this house is unremarkable. It is, however, a good representative of the transitional “added—on” house spanning the late 18th and early 19th centuries. This fact, combined with its fine condition, makes it worthy of continued preservation, even though it is neither architecturally nor historically extraordinary.

Al5 VAN GELDER-VAN SAUN HOUSE 770 Newark-Pompton Turnpike (M.C.-6O, at Rte.23)

Although the main facade, with its large center gable, full porch and double doors unmistakably reflects the Victorian farmhouse style of the 1850’s when it was built, the rear wing is pre-Revolutionary. Its thick stone walls are typical of the Dutch style prevalent in this part of the county, and provide a striking contrast to the main house. Evidence suggests that this property, part of the highest ground on the Plains, was a favorite campsite of the Leni Lanape. The earlier section was originally owned by the Van Gelders, one of the first families (together with the Berrys, the Vanderbecks, and others) to settle the Plains. The property is a small piece of the vast land holdings of Paulus Van Der Beck, Martin Berry’s stepfather.

Al6 VAN NESS HOUSE (SITE) HABS-545 Village Road (Eastern terminus of Church Lane)

Another of Pequannock’s Dutch families lived here in a brownstone house, no traces of which remain, although it was fully documented in the 1930’s by the Historic American Buildings Survey.

99 RIVERDALE REGION A

A17 SLATER’S MILL Paterson-Hamburg Turnpike M.C.-45 (N. side at intersection of Newark- Pompton Tnpk.)

The present mill was built in 1861, and occupies the site of a number of former mills, the earliest operative in 1757 (one owned by a member of Morristown’s Ford family). During its years of peak activity, Slater’s Mill employed from six to eight people making felt from beaver pelts. The felt was used primarily for the manufacture of Stetson hats. Vacant for a number of years, the structure was allowed to deteriorate until recently tenanted once more. It is still threatened however, by projected road improvements. Stucco covers the original frame walls. The 1861 bull gear and wheelpit are extant. (NJ)

A18 RYERSON HOUSE A19 AND MILL Newark-Hamburg Turnpike (M.C.-45, 3/4 mile ± west of Newark-Pompton Tnpk.)

This and Slater’s Mill are the only remaining mills on the entire length of the Pequannock River. It was a gristmill operated by Samuel Van Ness until 1882. It now houses a restaurant. The mansion opposite was the home of the Ryersons, prominent iron- masters and property owners early in the century. The surrounding land was part of Schuyler’s Plantation, a portion of the 5,500 acre Pompton Patent purchased from Indians in 1695 by eight Dutch settlers.

A20 POST L1NE CORNER Nos. 41, 44 & 46 Post Lane

This has been called the oldest developed area in Riverdale. The structure known as the Barn (now converted to residential use, No. 46) was the area’s only general provisions store c. 1757. It was run by John Post, who also operated a tannery and gristmill. Its exterior has been considerably altered. The frame house (no. 44) and the stone house (no. 41) are also Post houses, although the sequence of ownership is unclear. The small wing of no. 44 is late 18th century. Despite the enclosure of a porch, the exterior presents a generally unaltered picture. The size of the stone house (only two bays wide) suggests it may originally have served a non—residential use. No date has been suggested for its construction.

100 101 BOONTON REGION B

B1 JAMES HOLMES HOUSE 619 Main Street (M.C.—24)

This was originally a simple Greek Revival structure, built c. 1840. Additions and alterations made between l870&1895 include the third floor with bracketed eaves. Extensive remodeling of other areas has left this floor virtually untouched. Built for commercial use, it was later the residence of James Holmes, one of Boonton’s most successful citizens. Holmes bequeathed it to the newly formed (1889) Boonton Library, which still occupies it. (NR)

B2 METHODIST CHURCH 515 Main Street (M.C.-24)

The Beers Atlas of Morris County (1868) pictures this church primarily as it stands today. The body of the building is composed of a familiar mix of Classical and Gothic details. What lifts it out of the ordinary is a handsome Italianate Tower, of a kind not often seen on churches, at least not on those executed in wood. Now occupied by the Trinity Church of God, the building and site are in neglected condition, and will soon be demolished for post office construction.

B3 MILLER-KINGSLAND HOUSE NJHSI-462.3;HABS-96 445 Vreeland Avenue

The original west wing of this house, c.l740, makes it the oldest known house in Boonton. Despite the addition of wood shingles in the 1930’s, it remains an almost ideal example of the blend of early Dutch features with the later Federal style. Much original woodwork and hardware survive. (NR)

B4 MORRIS CANAL PLANE NO. 7 EAST South of Main Street

Coal—carrying canal boats rose or fell 80 feet in Plane No.7 East. Coal and ore for the New Jersey Iron Company were delivered from the canal above the plane, and manufactured iron was shipped out.

102 BOONTON REGION B (Morris Canal, continued)

B5 LOCK NO. 12 EAST South of Main Street (M.C.—24) at Powerville Road (M.C.-11) intersection

A difference of nine feet was equalized by this lock, part of the Boonton stretch which contributed to the town’s industrial prosperity.

OCTAGON HOUSES B6 211 and B7 244 Cornelia Street

In 1848, Orson Squire Fowler, a “professor” of phrenology, wrote a book called A Home For All, or the Gravel Wall and Octagonal Mode of Building. Fowler’s book claimed that the octagon provided a healthful, economical and scientific dwelling, in contrast to the decadent, revival styles concocted for the wealthy. His thesis proved unexpectedly popular, so that within a decade of its publication, octagons were springing up throughout the East, especially in the Hudson River Valley.. Few of these houses remain. The early examples (1855-57) here are probably the only two in Morris County since the recent destruction of a third in Riverdale. They are neat expressions of the genre at its simple best, without the excesses it sometimes suffered. Except for a small addition which breaks the form of no. 224, their condition is excellent.

B8 ST. JOHN’S EPISCOPAL CHURCH Cornelia Street (N.W. Corner at Cedar St.)

No more representative example of a board—and—batten Carpenter Gothic Church exists in Morris County. Fanciful details like pierced bargeboards and the open, cross—braced bell tower do not overwhelm the total design. The main doorway, carved with trefoils and quatrefoils, and the tiny triangular dormers set deeply into the roof, further enhance the decorative scheme. The architect was Richard Upjohn, designer of New York City’s Trinity Church. The first services were held here on July 8, 1863, five days after the Battle of Gettysburg. Church records indicate that prayers of thanksgiving were offered for the Union victory. The present congregation is seeking a new location, and has offered the building for sale.

103 BOONTON TOWNSHIP REGION B

B9 DIXON FARM Rockaway Valley Road (N. side, 1800’± N.E. of Valley Rd.)

Frederick Miller (1729—1816) was the original owner of this property. It acquired its Dixon identity when Miller’s daughter Eleanor (1792— 1867) married James Dixon (1787—1844), whose father was a surgeon to the Continental Army. The oldest building on the farm is the stone house, begun c. 1790. Like the dwellings of Adam and James Miller, its north end is built into the side of a bank. Subsequent additions increased the house to its present size. About 1830 the gristmill (its original machinery still intact) and the forge keeper’s house were built. The house on the hill followed in 1857. Two large barns (1860 & 1899) complete the picture. Considering the customary fate of such buildings, their condition is unusually fine. In addition to the milling and forge operations, the large pond was a local source of ice until the late 1940’s. The Dixon property presents a comprehensive picture of a self— sufficient 18th— and l9th—century farm in a bucolic setting of exceptional appeal. In few other places has the preservation of natural and man—made features produced such an integrated result. (NJR)

B1O ADAM MILLER HOUSE NJHSI-2549.2; HABS-]93 Rockaway Valley Road (W. side at Farber Hill Road)

Adam Miller was one of Boonton Township’s first settlers. In 1767 he advertised this property for sale, describing it as:”... a good plantation containing 350 acres of land.. .about 4 miles from Hibernia Furnace (where there is a good market for all country produce) .“ When this offering failed to attract a buyer, he built the present fieldstone and frame dwelling for himself in the same year. In 1776, Miller freed his slaves, thus establishing the first recorded manumission in Morris County. Forty—eight years later, the house and 163 acres became the first poor farm in the county. Although no longer the seat of a “plantation,” the house stands today with surprisingly few alterations.

B11 JAMES MILLER HOUSE Rockaway Valley Road (N. side, at terminus of Valley Rd.)

James Miller, son of Adam, built this house c. 1800 on land which was originally part of his father’s large plantation. Not long after its construction C. 1811), Miller sold the house to James Dixon. Thus the lands ranging from the present Dixon farm through this acreage and that of the Adam Miller house share a common history relating to the Valley’s earliest settlement.

104 BOONTON TOWNSHIP REGION B

B12 WILLIAM SCOTT MANSION NJHSI-2549.l; HABS—558 Powerville Road, M.C.—11 (W. side, 1500±’ 5. of Old Denville Rd.)

Successful speculation in iron and land enabled William Scott to build this imposing house c. 1825. It is at once a summation of the colonial architectural tradition and an exponent of the Classical Revival. Notable features include a triglyph frieze below the eaves, pilastered and pedimented windows, and an unusually wide doorway. The large porch is a later addition. The mansion presently houses a nursing home.

105 DENVILLE REGION B

Bl3 EBELING HOUSE Openaki Road (W. shore of Lake Openaki)

Although nominally “Victorian” (c. 1885), this 3-story stucco house has none of the architectural excess popularly associated with that era. In fact, its unadorned lines look surprisingly contemporary. Originally built as a vacation lodge, it became the second American home of the Seeing Eye foundation from 1929 to 1931. During the 18th century, the nine—acre lake furnished power for a grist mill, and earlier still was a favorite stopping place of the Leni—Lenape. The present owners have carefully preserved the house and grounds. The interior reflects the taste of the 1890’s and early 1900’s, and suggests the influence of art collector William T. Evans, who made the property a wedding gift to his daughter Florence Ebeling in 1908.

B14 MORRIS CANAL LIFT LOCK NO. 8 EAST Intersection of Diamond Spring and Boonton Roads ( M.C.-3) ,E. side

Canal boats were lifted or lowered 7.3 feet by this lock. An adjacent lock—tender’s house also served as a general store for local people and canal personnel. One thousand feet east of the lock, the stone and timber Denville Aqueduct carried canal water and boats across the Rockaway River.

106 EAST HANOVER REGION B

Bl5 COOK’s BRIDGE (Site) NJHSI—964.4 Mt. Pleasant Avenue (M.C.-2) at East Hanover/Livingston line

On the east end of this bridge was located the last toll gate of the Newark-Mt. Pleasant Turnpike. The gate was operated until 1877 by a resident of Hanover Village, who was a surviving stockholder of the Turnpike Company and thus reserved the right to levy tolls. Cook’s Bridge also saw the crossing of stage lines which delivered newspapers weekly from New York.

B16 COXE LINE (Site) NJHS1974.5 River Road at Merry Lane

The 1715 Coxe Line was the division between lands of Coxe and Budd, drawn straight across Hanover Neck from the Whippany to the Passaic River. The 1,250 acre Coxe tract was one of the largest private holdings in Morris County at the time.

B17 JACOB GREEN HOUSE 27 Hanover Road (M.C.-2)

Jacob Green was once described as “preacher, teacher, doctor, proctor, miller and distiller.” He was the first vice-president of the College of N.J. (Princeton) in 1748, and his tract “Observations on the Reconciliation of Great Britain and the Colonies” called for independence, universal religious freedom and abolition. As might befit a man of so many accomplishments, his house (c. 1760) is commodious and well—proportioned if not grand. The long, 5—bay main wing has tiny eyebrow windows and interior gable-end chimneys; the small wing a narrow porch and broken sweep roof.

Bl8 HALF-WAY HOUSE or ELLIS COOK HOUSE NJHSI-964.l7; HABS-676 174 Mt. Pleasant Avenue (M.C.-2)

This mid-l8th--century five-bay frame building was maintained as an inn. Its owner, Colonel Ellis Cook, served in the Eastern Battalion of the Morris County Militia during the Revolution. Cook was also a member of the Committee of Correspondence, the Provincial Congress of 1776, and later a member of the State Legislature. A number of its features, including arched dormer windows, paneling and fine mantels, make this a more sophisticated example of pre—Revolutionary architecture than is usually found locally. Its name may be derived from the fact that Sussex County farmers and drovers stopped here on their way to the Newark markets. (NJR)

107 EAST HANOVER REGION B

B19 AMBROSE KITCHELL HOUSE 434 Ridgedale Avenue (M.C.-32)

Ambrose Kitchell, the son of Senator Aaron Kitchell, lived here in 1810, when this house was the largest and most pretentious in the neighborhood. Subsequent alterations have given it the appearance of a house built thirty or forty years later. Ambrose Kitchell was the grandfather of Smith Ely, Mayor of New York City (1877) and opponent of the Tammany machine.

B20 PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH OF HANOVER Mt. Pleasant Avenue (M.C.—2), Terminus of Hanover Avenue

The congregation of the First Presbyterian Church traces its roots back to 1710 when a group of settlers, attracted by iron deposits, formed a small community around the Whippanong River. The first crude meeting house was raised c.l7l8. The versatile Jacob Green (see Jacob Green House) served as pastor from 1746 to 1790. During the winter of 1777, when Washington was quartered in Morristown, the second church building was used as a smallpox hospital. The present frame building is the congregation’s third, built in 1835. Gothic and Classical Revival motifs were combined in a sophisticated manner under master builder Elijah Hopping. Two unusual features were designed to improve the view of the pulpit: a gently sloping floor and angled aisles and pew blocks.

B21 ADONIRAM PRUDEN HOUSE NJHSI-964.l3 644 Ridgedale Avenue (M.C.—59)

Built c. 1750 by Adoniram Pruden, later a soldier in the Revolution, this frac1apboard farmhouse was the seat of an extensive plantation, occupying much of the land between the Whippany and Passaic Rivers. The land holdings shrank under successive owners, but the house stands today as a reminder of that time in the 18th century when large contiguous portions of Morris County were privately owned. The pedimented dentiled doorway with sidelights and pilasters is noteworthy. The property is threatened with proposed road widening.

B22 TIDEY FARM Ridgedale Avenue, M.C.-32 (W. side, 400±’ N. of Mann Avenue)

The rear wing of this house appears to be early 18th century; the main part is considerably later. Aside from installation of modern conveniences, virtually no changes have been made. Of special interest are 12/12 pane windows on the first floor, lunette windows in the

108 EAST HANOVER REGION B TIDEY FARM, Continued.

garret, and three decorative panels on the front facade where eyebrow windows might be expected. The introduction of classical details, combined with a gambrel roof, makes this house architecturally noteworthy.

B23 MATHIAS BURNET HOUSE 212 Whippany Road (M.C.-22)

The Burnets were prosperous farmers and tradesmen throughout the 18th and 19th centuries. Mathias Burnet built this large house around 1774. Like the house of Daniel Burnet in Madison, built not long before, it suggests an uncommon degree of prosperity for its time.

B24 REVEREND EDWIN FORD HOUSE 30 Ford Hill Road (M.C.—64)

This house was built c. 1857 by Reverend Edwin Ford, a descendant of John Ford (see Old Forge, Below) to replace one built in 1732. The brownstone sills and lintels and beautifully scrolled porch brackets are noteworthy. House and grounds, both carefully preserved, present a distinctive picture of mid—Victorian rural life.

FRENCH ARMY ENCAMPMENT (SITES) NJHSI-l365.3

B25 S. of Troy Hills Road, easterly from Rte. 10; B26 S. of Reynolds Ave. near Highland Ave.; and B27 Route 10 near bridge at Whippany

Comte de Rochambeau’s troops camped here with heavy artillery and siege trains on their way to Yorktown and back (1781—1782).

B28 GREEN-COOK HOUSE HABS-639 135 Route 10

This house once marked the easterly end of the Village of Whippany, near the site of Ball’s Mills. The small (c.1790) and large c. 1830) wings tell a familiar story of rising prosperity. Like so many 18th— and 19th-century houses built close to roads for convenience, its proximity has become a liability in the 20th century.

109 HANOVER REGION B

B29 OLD FORGE (SITE) Whippany Road (M.C.-22) at Route 10 (N. side of Whippany River)

In 1710 John Budd and John Ford built the first forge in Morris or Sussex Counties. Iron later became one of Morris County’s major resources.

B30 LEWIS PIERSON HOUSE (SITE) HABS-689 Horsehill Road, near N.W. corner of Hanover Avenue

HABS documentation gives 1840 as the construction date for this house. In 1853, a Lewis Pierson (Jr.) operated a carriage—making shop in Morristown. A connection is likely but circumstantial. The house was razed about 1972 by AT&T.

B31 JOSEPH TUTTLE HOUSE HABS-469 341 Route 10

This house was built by Joseph Tuttle, a blacksmith and justice of the peace, c. 1796. Tuttle farmed or leased more than 1,000 acres, served as a colonel in the Militia, as a deacon in the Presbyterian Church, and as a county freeholder. His house is now the best preserved of the 18th century Whippany Village houses. Like the Green— Cook House, there are two wings, the larger with a fine Federal doorway. (NJR)

B32 WHIPPANY PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH NJHSI-l365.2 Route 10 (N. side, opposite Whippany Road)

The New Jersey Anti—Slavery Society was founded here on August 27, 1839, five years after this church was dedicated. Its general plan parallels that of the Presbyterian Church in East Hanover, but relies less on Classical details. Elijah Hopping supervised the construction of both. The recent addition seeks to echo the windows of the original in modern materials.

110 MONTVILLE REGION B

Montville’s unusually rich stock of 18th and early 19th century stone buildings should be viewed as a collective phenomenon which preserves a picture of Dutch settlement patterns. For that reason, some of the individual houses listed here are not of exceptional interest in themselves.

B33 HENRY BEACH HOUSE 129 Change Bridge Road (M.C.-21)

Reputedly modeled after the Ambrose Kitchell House (1810) in East Hanover, the elegant neo—classical details of this later house make such a supposition possible. It was built in 1840 by Henry Beach, who maintained the Montville post office in its lean-to section when mail still arrived by stage coach. During the Gold Rush, Beach ran a restaurant in Sacramento, California and sent his profits (in the form of gold dust) home to his wife. After his California venture, he returned to the life of a farmer in Montville, where he died in 1865.

B34 BOTT OR COOK HOUSE HABS-452 824 Main Road (Rte. 202)

Despite the late name popularly associated with it at the time of the H2BS survey in 1936, this might more properly be known as the Cook House, since records show that Henry and Ann Cook owned the property in 1796, when the house was probably built. Except for the addition of aluminum awnings, it is little altered.

B35 DEMAREST FARMHOUSE HABS-309 Change Bridge Road (E. side, 1600±’ N.E. of Horseneck Rd.)

HABS research suggested a 1.720-1730 date of construction for this house. Recent investigation uncovered a previously overlooked deed, making 1780 more likely. Like most of Montville’s Dutch houses, it is in excellent condition and has been little altered. Its flared roof and narrow stone section make it particularly evocative of early building practices, regardless of its date.

B36 CORNELIUS T. DOREMUS HOUSE 107 Change Bridge Road

In her book Early Dutch Houses and Families, Rosalie Fellows Bailey observes that, “A notable feature of the Dutch style is the

111 MONTVILLE REGION B

(CORNELIUS T. DOREMUS HOUSE, continued

combination of various building materials. . .to form a beautiful composition, with each element contributing its share and adding life and style by its individual quality.” The Doremus house, with its integration of fieldstone, sandstone, brick and shingle could serve as a textbook illustration of this quality. Cornelius, son of Thomas Doremus, acquired this land from his father c. 1812. At least part of the stone walls may have survived from a house constructed as early as 1785. It is thought that a fire, referred to in contemporary accounts, destroyed most of the first structure c. 1837, and that Cornelius had the present house built a few years later, incorporating parts of the earlier walls. Such a date makes plausible the neo—classic details (Doric columns, lunette windows) which stand out crisply against dark brick and stone.

B37 THOMAS DOREMUS HOUSE NJHSI—306l.l; HABS-488 490 Main Road (Rte.202)

This is one of the earliest stone houses in the area, as well as the least altered. Each of the two ground floor rooms has a separate entrance — a feature typical of the earliest Dutch/Flemish houses in New York and New Jersey. Its inclusion on several Revolutionary War maps, as well as in several contemporary written accounts, establishes that it was standing before 1775. Military expense accounts verify that Washington and his staff spent the night of June 24 or 25, 1780 here. One of the principal military Routes from Morristown to West Point passed this way. (NR)

B38 ABRAHAM JACOBUS OUT-KITCHEN 1ND WIDOW JACOBUS HOUSE HABS-492 Main Road (Rte 202, N.E. corner at Jacksonville Rd.)

Only the deteriorated stone walls of the kitchen remain. The adjacent house (not part of the HABS description), is of relatively late brick construction. The rear wall is stone, however, leading to the supposition that the remains of an earlier building were incorporated into the later structure. The property is for sale, so the abandoned house and the remains of the kitchen will probably be demolished in the near future.

P39 JOHN J. JACOBUS HOUSE (SITE) HABS-474 Waughaw Road (W. Side, 1000’± N. of Botts Lane)

Only the foundations remain of this HABS-recorded house. The Jacobus name appears frequently in local records.

112 MONTVILLE REGION B

B40 EFFINGHAM LOW HOUSE 101 Hook Mountain Road

This land was part of William Penn’s 1715 Hook Mountain Tract. In 1775, Penn’s heirs compelled unauthorized settlers like Effingham Low to buy their holdings for 2 per acre. Tax records show that a house was standing here in 1778, probably the one—room stone wing of the present large house, built c.l8l2.

B41 MONTVILLE SCHOOLHOUSE Taylortown Road (250’± N. of Main Rd.)

Originally a schoolhouse, this one—room brick building has served a number of other public functions since its construction in 1867. The Methodist Episcopal congregation met here for a time, as did the Temperance Society. In the 20th century it served as town hail and post office before being relinquished to the Montville Historical Society.

MORRIS CANAL

B42 INCLINED PLANE NO. 10 EAST North of Route 202 (near Osborne Lane)

This incline was called the Pompton Plane because it rose 56 feet from the Pompton (Pequannock) River.

B43 MONTVILLE CHANGEBRIDGE Route 202 at Changebridge Road

Because of changes in terrain, the canal towpath was sometimes moved from one side of the canal prism to the other. Mules and their drivers had to cross the canal in order to regain the relocated towpath. This they did by means of changebridges, one of which stood here, giving its name to the road that crossed the canal on it - Changebridge Road.

B44 INCLINED PLANE NO. 9 EAST Route 202, opposite River Road

This is the companion plane to No. 8 East, originally separated from it by a small basin.

113 MONTVILLE REGION B

B45 PLANE NO. 8 EAST South of Myrtle Avenue (E. of Boonton boundary)

This plane enabled boats to negotiate a difference in elevation of 76 feet. A small basin separated it from Plane No. 9 East.

B46 JOHANNES PARLAMAN HOUSE HABS-49 Vreeland Avenue (1000±’ E. of Boonton Town boundary)

The Parlaman family occupied this property for more than 200 years, from about 1736 when it came into the possession of Barber, mother of Jahannes Parlaman. The west section was built c. 1755, the frame additions c.1829. The exterior has not been changed since the latter date.

B47 SAMUEL STILES HOUSE Changebridge Road, M.C.-21 (S.W. corner, at Horseneck Rd.)

The apparent contradiction of a New England style house in this predominately Dutch community is explained by the Connecticut origins of its builder. The 1 1/2—story west wing is the original part, built before 1777. Early in the 19th century, it was the parsonage for the Dutch Reformed Church of Boonton, and subsequently became the home of Montville physician George Wurts and later of his successor, Dr. Ezekiel B. Gaines.

B48 VAN DUYNE-JACOBUS HOUSE 29 Change Bridge Road (M.C.-2l)

Because this is one of the few Dutch stone houses in Montville definitely ascribed to the pre—Revolutionary period, its omission from the HABS survey is puzzling. The southwest section is the original structure. Van Duyne ownership ended on May 19, 1858 when Isaac Van Duyne, great grandson of the builder, hanged himself in the barn, reportedly despondent over his daughter’s refusal to dismiss a suitor.

B49 ABRAHAM/MARTIN J. VAN DUYNE HOUSE NJHSI-2064.l; HABS-489 292 Main Road (Rte.202)

Evidence suggests that a modest house stood here prior to 1771. The north addition was probably built by Martin Van Duyne c. 1795 or later, and verifies the tenacity of the Dutch vernacular style, with its typical front sweep and overhang. Through the vigorous efforts of former owners, it was spared demolition for Interstate 287. The exterior is virtually unaltered.

114 MONTVILLE REGION B

B50 SIMON VAN DUYNE HOUSE HABS—147 58 Maple Avenue

This was another part of William Penn’s Hook Mountain Tract which attracted squatters, among them Robert Sanford, the first owner of this parcel. Circumstantial evidence has dated the house either before 1750 or c. 1788.

B51 JOHN H. VREELAND OUT-KITCHEN HABS-493 52 Jacksonville Road (M.C.—8)

Only two out—kitchens were recorded by HABS in all of Morris County. This unadorned stone structure is the sole survivor, Date of construction is c. 1790.

115 MOUNTAIN LAKES REGION B

B52 COMMUNITY CHURCH 46 Briarcliff Road

Forty—eight people were received as charter members of the Community Church in 1913, before the congregation had a building of its own. In 1914, the present neo—Gothic structure was built, using the local boulder—like stone common in the area. Like many churches of the 18th century built in pioneering communities, this church was originally unaffiliated, serving worshippers of different denominations. It thus became a cohesive social force for burgeoning Mt. Lakes, one of the first modern planned communities.

B53 JOHN GRIMES HOMESTEAD NJHSI-2108.1 45 Bloomfield Avenue

Part of this rambling wooden farmhouse is known to have existed in 1776 when it was owned by John Grimes. Later it was the birthplace of Dr. John Grimes, abolitionist and editor of the antislavery newspaper New Jersey Freeman. It was also the birthplace of Quincy Grimes, killed in the Civil War, whose letters are in the collection of Rutgers University. John Grimes’ obituary in the New Jersey Freeman of 1875 stated that the house was a station on the Underground Railroad, used to move slaves from Baxter Sayer’s Post (in what is now Florham Park) to Newfoundland, N.J. The house is endangered due to its location in a commercial zone.

B54 LAKE DRIVE SCHOOL 10 Lake Drive

Another of Mt. Lake’s early 20th-century stone public buildings, this was originally a four-room school, built at a cost of $24,000 when it opened in 1914. The large window-wall in one section imparts a surprisingly contemporary appearance. The supervising stonemason was D. Padovano, also responsible for the Mt. Lakes Railroad Station.

B55 MT. LAKES RAILROAD STATION Woodland Avenue and Midvale Road, N.W. corner

On November 16, 1912, the first train scheduled to stop at Mt. Lakes from Hoboken arrived at 1:21 A.M., greeted with a display of fireworks. The station’s cornerstone had been laid in August by Belle de Rivera, famed suffragette and local resident. In 1915 the station was destroyed by fire. The present building was completed in 1918 after eight months of work by master mason and stonecutter D. Padovano.

116 MOUNTAIN LAKES REGION B

B56 RIGHTER HOUSE 99 Pocono Road

A will of 1793 refers to this and surrounding land as the “plantation” of Gasper Righter. It was probably the first house built on the land now incorporated as Mt. Lakes. Early in the 20th century it served as an inn and tavern, when Pocono Road was a highway instead of a back road. The original 6—room structure has been considerably altered and enlarged to twelve rooms.

117 PARSIPPANY-TROY HILLS REGION B

B57 BEVERWYCK (SITE) Route 46 (S.W. corner) and South Beverwyck Road

Beverwyck is one of Morris County’s greatest preservation losses. Although it was bequeathed to the Morris County Historical Society in 1963, complications arising over the site and the relocation of Beverwyck Road made it imperative that the house be moved. Despite vigorous efforts (the State Department of Transportation even agreed to let an unopened section of Route 80 be used), local interest was not sufficient to raise the necessary funds. In 1971 a fire of undetermined origin gutted the house, making its demolition inevitable. Built about 1778, Beverwyck was the seat of a flourishing 2000— acre plantation owned by Lucas von Beverhoudt of St. Thomas, Virgin Islands. During the Revolution, Washington’s military family and distinguished guests were entertained by Beverhoudt at lavish balls. After his death, the house was owned by Boudinots and Condits, and remained in excellent condition until the end.

B58 STEPHEN CONDIT HOUSE 41 North Beverwyck Road

Both the interior and exterior of this 1870 house exhibit a degree of preservation equalled by few Victorian farmhouses. Careful proportions and handsome but restrained decoration make it representative of the best of late 19th—century 2merican rural architecture. Condits have owned this land since 1828. In the years when Route 46 was still a country road, this was a horse and dairy farm. (NR)

B59 CRAFTSMAN FARMS Route 10 (N. side, 1/4 W of Morris Plains boundary)

Craftsman Farms was the Utopian dream of Gustav Stickley (1858 — 1942) leader of the American arts and crafts movement, designer, architect and publisher of the influential magazine The Craftsman. Between 1908 and 1912, Stickley bought more than 400 acres for establishment of a “factory—farm” where - young men would learn hand craftsmanship under the direction of masters, and where the entire working community would be supported by the products of its own farm. Stickley’s intention was to counter the dehumanizing influence of modern production by reviving the ancient apprentice system. Before the grand design could be fully realized his multifarious interests drove him into bankruptcy, and in 1917 he was forced to sell Craftsman Farms. Aside from the barn, which burned a few years ago, his other stone and log buildings, merely the beginning of a great dream, survive.

118 PARSIPPANY-TROY HILLS REGION B

B60 DICKERSON LOG CABIN (SITE) HABS-644 Mt. Tabor Golf Course (N. of Park Rd.)

HABS drawings depict a small log cabin directly attached to a 3-bay, Federal dwelling. Apparently both units were demolished shortly after the survey was made. No traces of the site remain. This was the only 18th— century log house recorded by HABS in Morris County not incorporated into a later structure.

B61 GREYSTONE PARK STATE HOSPITAL ADMINISTRATION COMPLEX Between West Hanover Avenue and Grannis Avenue

Known during its history by a number of names (New Jersey State Hospital at Greystone and State Asylum for the Insane among them), Greystone was opened in 1876 as the second New Jersey State Asylum. It resulted from the same reform movement led by Dorothea Lynde Dix which had produced Trenton State Hospital some years earlier. The rural site was carefully chosen for its potential therapeutic value, and well into the 20th century the hospital maintained its own farm. Before a decade had passed, the 600- bed capacity had been exceeded and makeshift expansion was necessary. Regardless of subsequent scandals, Greystone was remarkably progressive for its time — a time when many state institutions for the “insane” were no more than poorhouses which actually profited at the expense of their inmates. By 1887 the huge plan of the central complex had been completed. Like its Trenton counterpart it was known as a “Kirkbride Hospital,” named for Dr. Thomas S. Kirkbride whose general plans were widely imitated in the latter part of the 19th century. Until the construction of the Pentagon, it was often described as the largest building under one roof in the United States. The domed main wing of the original complex follows the Second Empire style. Despite numerous interior changes, the ensemble stands much as it was built, an important milestone in American medical and social history.

B62 LIVINGSTON-BENEDICT HOUSE NJHSI-2 371.1; HABS-630 25 Parsippany Road (M.C.-30)

Because it remained a safe distance from British troops during most of the Revolution, this house served for three years as the home of William Livingston, first governor of the State of New Jersey. It was built c. 1760 by Lemuel Bowers, a tavern—keeper and merchant who served at various times as county judge, captain of militia, and commissioner of the peace. The cottage directly across the road was originally a dependency of this property. (NR)

119 PARSIPPANY-TROY HILLS REGION B

B63 ISAAC MAY HOUSE 1200 Parsippany Boulevard (Rte.22)

Typical of Parsippany’s 18th-century agricultural identity, this house is related to the early history illustrated by the Vail District. Earliest records presently available place the house in Isaac May’s possession in 1796. His tombstone in the Vail Cemetery bears the dates 1771—1807. Location of the house in an Office/Commercial zone on a busy corner imperils its future. Development and road widening appear to he imminent threats.

B64 MT. TABOR DISTRICT Route 53 on Parsippany/Denville Border

Like Drew Theological School, Mt. Tabor was founded as a direct result of the Methodist Episcopal Church’s centennial celebration in 1866. Its charter, granted by the State in 1869, made it one of two communities in New Jersey empowered to function as a municipality within a municipality. Tents and other temporary structures were adequate for the first campground revival meetings, but permanent summer cottages soon followed on small lots, with streets barely wide enough for horse and carriage. An account written during Tabor’s early years describes it in the following terms: “The tabernacle, from whose portico the sermons are delivered, is a tastefully planned and richly painted structure, which, together with the light and tent- like buildings for prayer meetings, gives an almost oriental atmosphere to the place.” By 1877, Mt. Tabor was “a unique summer colony with a moral and religious atmosphere all its own.” By 1891 the evangelical fervor had begun to fade, but a community had grown which soon became year—round, with its own school, library, church, clubhouse, hotel and golf course. Mt. Tabor was for years the most comprehensive display of Victorian vacation architecture outside of Cape May. Because the cottages were not intended as permanent homes, their designers approached them without inhibitions, resulting in a riot of scrolled, pierced, cut and applied wooden gingerbread. Renovations and winterizing alterations have by now removed or obscured most of these fanciful details. Enough remnants survive, however, to verify the picture recorded by a sheaf of early photographs, which document the evangelical era so important to the growth of Methodism.

B65 PARRITT-SMITH HOUSE HABS-562 460 S. Beverwyck Road (M.C.-37)

The central unit of this well—preserved house was probably built

120 PARSIPPANY-TROY HILLS REGION B

(PARRITT-SMITH HOUSE, continued)

between 1788 and 1801. The two wings appear to have been added in the first third of the 19th century, judging in part from their window trim, common to the Greek Revival. A three part “mansion house” of this sort became the standard plan for better class residences between the end of the Revolution and the mid-19th century.

B66 VAIL DISTRICT Route 46 (between Smith Rd. and Troy Rd.)

This area represents the remains of “Percipenny Village,” the hub of an 18th- and 19th-century farming community. The district’s most significant structure is the Presbyterian Church, one of Morris County’s only two brick churches of the period. Although the present building was dedicated in 1829, the history of the parish dates back to 1755. The Trustees’ Oath of Office, drawn up by Aaron Kitchell in 1787, reads in part, “I do swear that I do not hold myself bound to bear allegiance to the King of Great Britain. ..“ In 1814, the Rev. John Ford, who served the congregation for forty years, was the tutor of the New York—New Jersey Presbyterian Synod pilot program to train black ministers. Graduates of this program carried the gospel throughout the United States, and to Haiti and Africa. A roll call of trustees since 1755 reveals names prominent in the history of Parsippany and Morris County - Baldwin, Benedict, Condit, Crane, Farrand, Frost, and Kitchell. The district includes the following sites: Meeker Store, Presbyterian Cemetery, Presbyterian Church, Presbyterian Manse, Righter Hotel, Righter Store.

121 122 CHATHAM REGION C

C1 NATHANIEL BONNEL HOUSE 32 Watchung Avenue (The Shunpike, M.C. 46)

The Bonnels and the Days were the largest and most important pre— Revolutionary families in Chatham. Until some time after the Revolution, the Bonnels controlled all of the mills from Chatham to New Providence. The house was built c. 1750 by Nathaniel Bonnel IV, a direct descendant of Nathaniel Bonnel of Elizabethtown. It bears a number of general similarities to the Paul Day House (below) built around the same time. It appears to be the only house in Chatham where 12 over 12 window lights are preserved. Commercial use has kept the house in fair condition with few major alterations.

C2 DAVID SAYRE BOWER HOUSE 427 Main Street (Rte.24)

Solid and spacious without being extravagant, this 1865 house has carved rosettes over the windows and a bracketed porch cornice. The 15” thick foundation is hand-hewn fieldstone. Rococo ceiling medallions and stucco cornices inside complement chestnut and mahogany woodwork. Like the slightly more elaborate house of Edward Harris (see below), this represents the mid-to late-Victorian ideal of upper- middle—class convenience and beauty — a house in which the various revival fashions (notably Gothic) have been subsumed into a comfortable domestic whole.

C3 CHATHAM HISTORIC DISTRICT Main Street, Route 24 (Between Hillside Avenue and Passaic River)

The Chatham District represents a typical 18th to mid 19th- century community, essentially agrarian, with a small scale commercial identity. The district is primarily significant for the composite impression made by its individual houses, and because of the following historical associations: New Jersey’s first turnpike (now Route 24) was chartered in 1801, connecting Elizabeth with the Upper Delaware River Valley (cf. “Toll Gate,” Madison). Its stone and gravel surface represented a vast improvement over earlier dirt roads. During the Revolution, Chatham played host to many of the top officers of the Continental Army; more than a dozen letters of Washington’s military correspondence were written here. Perhaps most significant of all, New Jersey’s second newspaper, The New Jersey Journal (1779— 1783) was printed in Chatham after Shepard Kollock, its editor/ printer, fled from the British across the Passaic. Its news and propaganda in support of the colonists made an important contribution to bolstering

123 CHATHAM REGION C (CHATHAM HISTORIC DISTRICT continued)

civilian and military morale. Few of the remaining houses predate the Revolution. Most are Federal and later, A few exhibit simple Greek Revival motifs. Most are well preserved, although a number of commercial renovations, notably fake colonial bay and picture windows, have compromised the district’s architectural probity. And the intrusion of an oversize modern office building opposite Roosevelt Avenue has had an overbearing effect on the scale of the street. Despite these problems, the abundance of architectural styles and the historical associations of the Chatham District are evident. Buildings of interest include (but are not limited to) the following (designated by an asterisk). The Chatham District has been named to the New Jersey Register of Historic Places. (NJR)

* NANCY BONNEL DAY HOMESTEAD 76 Main Street

Basically an early 19th—century house, the small wing and third floor are later additions. Console brackets and rectangular panels enliven the facade. The larger section reputedly had a gambrel roof before the third floor was added, and the small wing was a doctor’s office later in the 19th— century. (NJR)

* WILLIAM DAY HOUSE NJHSI-67l.5; HABS-490 70 Main Street

During the Revolution this was the home of William Day, a captain in the Morris County Militia under Col. Sylvanus Seely. Original features include a beehive oven, 9/6 windows, and a steeply gabled roof. The original narrow width and breadth have been doubled by additions, without substantially changing the 18th-century feeling of the house. (NJR)

* DAVID MINTON HOUSE 56 Main Street

Built after 1870 on the site of The New Jersey Journal, the irregular form of this house is typical of the late Victorian period. Modern siding has obscured some details, and additions have enlarged it. (NJR)

124 CHATHAM REGION C

* JACOB MORREL HOUSE 63 Main Street

Washington probably stayed here for two or three days during the summer of 1781 while executing a diversionary maneuver to outwit British troops under Gen. Clinton. The house had been built about forty years before, and purchased during the Revolution by Jacob Morrell, a merchant. Like a number of Main Street houses, it is afflicted with a rash of modern bay windows. (NJR)

* GEORGE TOWNLEY PARROTT HOUSE 63 Main Street

The Parrott name is associated with an 1850 mill which has not survived. This house was probably built soon after the Revolution. The gambrel roof was typical of late 18th—century Chatham houses. A modern addition has left the original structure largely intact. (NJR)

* SAYRE HOUSE NJHSI-671.9; HABS-94 94 Main Street

The smaller wing with eyebrow windows and original fireplace was probably built late in the 18th century. The larger wing (pre— 1860) with Victorian double doors turns its gable end toward the street. Numerous additions to the rear do not compromise the integrity of these sections. This is a good example of adaptive use, handsomely landscaped. The present commercial name, William Pitt Inn, has no historic significance. (NJR)

* DR. PETER SMITH HOUSE 7 University Avenue (Moved from Main St.)

This is a fine example of the frame Federal style built prior to 1792. Features of interest include the main doorway with sidelights, transom and four pilasters, and the widely spaced windows on the gable end. Despite the modern porch and some minor changes, this is probably the least altered 18th-century house in the Chatham District. (NJR)

* NEHEMIAH WARD HOUSE 127 Main Street

Built late in the 18th century, this narrow frame house has a

125 CHATHAM REGION C

(NEHEMIAH WARD HOUSE continued)

delicate fanlight door. It is so well proportioned and finely detailed that it nearly succeeds in overcoming the gross affront of two picture windows added for commercial use. Montgomery Ward was born here in 1843. (NJR)

A more extensive description of these and other houses in the district can be found in Margaret Keisler’s A Saturday Stroll Down East Main Street, published in 1972 by the Chatham Historical Society.

C4 PAUL DAY HOUSE 24 Kings Road

When this house was built, around 1750, King’s Road was the main thoroughfare from Chatham to Morristown — and a primary troop route during the Revolution. Two walls are brick-filled, and two original fire—places remain. Considerable restoration work has been accomplished.

STEPHEN DAY HOUSES C5 62 Elmwood Avenue HABS125 C6 272 Main Street, Route 24 (SITE) HABS356

Stephen Day (1726—1815) was the son of Joseph Day (1695—1774) patriarch of the numerous Chatham Days, prominent since early in the 18th century. Both Stephen Day houses were situated on substantial holdings which ran from Day’s Brook probably as far as St. Paul’s Church, on the King’s Highway (Rte.24). Another 18th-century house formerly on the Day property has been moved to Florham Park, and is known as the Joanna Day Tuttle House. Stephen Day is believed to have lived in the house on King’s Highway during the Revolution, but information regarding the two houses still remains confusing, since the property at 62 Elmwood Ave. has also been identified as the Stephen Day Homestead. Since being surveyed by the Historic American Buildings Survey in the 1930’s, the Main Street house has been demolished and the other has been so altered and modernized that the exterior is no longer of an architectural interest. Both are included here because of their notation by HABS.

126 CHATHAM REGION C

C7 EDWARD C. HARRIS HOUSE 331 Main Street (Rte. 24)

Probably built between 1860-1870, this house combines a number of favorite Victorian details - exuberant bargeboard, balusters topped with finials, board-and-batten gable, carved window molding, and pedimented double doors. Present commercial use has left the exterior mostly unaltered, except for an enclosed side porch. Alice Harris became the wife of Fredrick Harvey Lum, Sr. the first mayor of Chatham Borough.

C8 BENJAMIN P. LUM, JR. HOUSE AND STABLE 295 Main Street (Rte. 24)

During the mid-l9th century Benjamin Lum operated a bustling brickyard just south of the railroad. His business accounts for the construction material used here, uncommon for surviving Main Street houses of the period. The Lums were large land owners and prominent in Borough affairs (see Edward C. Harris House, above). Few of the stables, carriage houses and other dependencies so important to the Victorian era remain, even when the houses they served have survived. Aside from removal of the large doors, this rare example is in excellent condition. A 2—story brick structure with diagonally set cupola and toothed bargeboards, it now serves a residential use. Especially valuable are the four gables, each decorated with bold star and trefoil cutouts.

127 CHATHAM TOWNSHIP REGION C

C9 BOISAUBIN NJHSI-672.1 Treadwell Avenue (W. side, 1000+’ N. of Woodland Rd.)

Built around 1800 for Amidee Boisaubin, once an officer in Louis XVI’s bodyguard, this mansion occupies a hill where the Continental Army camped. One of the columns of the 2-story pedimented portico is hollow, and contains stairs allegedly used to smuggle escaping slaves. M. Boisaubin was active in the community life of Bottle Hill, and was instrumental in founding St. Vincent’s R.C. Church. A.B. Frost, illustrator for Joel Chandler Harris’ Uncle Remus stories, lived here from 1890 to 1906. No other Federal house in Morris County equals the simple grandeur of Boisaubin, which foreshadows by twenty years the full- blown classicism of the Greek Revival. (NJR)

C1O DAVID BRANDT HOUSE 461 Green Village Road (M.C.-46)

In the eighteenth century much of the land hereabouts was held in large grant tracts. (William Penn owned a parcel nearby). The land on which this house stands was part of William Alexander, Lord Sterling’s holdings. His interest was primarily speculative and the house (c.l760) was probably built for a tenant charged with protecting the land. Sterling’s financial difficulties forced a sheriff’s sale late in the 1780’s when Great Swamp (once called Sterling Valley) lands were valuable for their timber. From 1792 until 1849 the property was owned by Brandts, after passing through the hands of Elias Boudinot and Ben-5amin Burroughs, two prominent landowners. Aside from its lack of a center chimney, the 1 1/2-story house covered with cedar shakes resembles a traditional Cape Cod design. Flooring, foundation, windows, mud plaster and other details are original. It is one of the earliest and least altered houses of its type in the Township. Proximity to the road may eventually endanger its continued existence.

C11 WILLIAM GIBBONS RACE TRACK (SITE) Noe Avenue, Overlook Drive, Sandy Hill Road area

Gibbons was the first owner of the mansion known as Mead Hall, now part of Drew University. Around 1840 he had built an ellipse for trotting horses and sulky carts — solely for his personal pleasure and that of his friends, members of the elite social world of New York and Bottle Hill. “Fashion,” one of the most famous horses to run here, is depicted in a Currier and Ives lithograph.

128 CHATHAM TOWNSHIP REGION C

C12 JOHNSON HOUSE NJHSI 671.14 805 Fairmount Avenue

The original part of this house may have been built as early as 1775. Of particular interest is a 19th—century hydraulic ram water system which supplied water to the kitchen, milk room arid attic, as well as to an artificial well on the lawn, to a barn, and uphill to a gristmill. Part of the outside system is still operative. Judging from its present appearance, the house was modernized sometime during the Victorian era with decorative brackets, porch, and other details. It is pictured in Munsell’s History of Morris County.

C13 NOE FARMHOUSE NJHSI-672.5 184 Southern Boulevard (M. C. —27)

Situated on part of a William Penn land grant, this farmhouse was the home of Lewis Noe, a soldier in the Revolutionary War. His wife, Phoebe Noe Mundy, is said to have been the first white woman in the colonies to survive amputation of a leg without anesthetic. Later additions have left a good portion of the original structure, including massive chimneys at the gable ends.

C14 RED BRICK SCHOOLHOUSE NJHSI-627.3 24 Southern Boulevard (M.C.-27)

This pre—1860 structure was used as a school until 1926. The unusual care with which it was constructed, and its two stories, make it rare for a schoolhouse. The construction features include foundations of layered stone; oak and chestnut timbers, cut locally, which support the floors from niches cut into the brick walls, using slate flag for bearing; walls of hollow construction, using stretcher brick with intervening air space; and stone pilasters supporting intermediate points of the floor. With some alterations, it presently serves as the Chatham Township Municipal Building.

129 FLORHAM PARK REGION C

The area centered around Columbia Turnpike and Ridgedale Avenue was a flourishing rural community for at least one hundred years, from about the mid-l8th century. Until 1908 it was known as Afton. Unlike Chatham, however, where the physical proximity of structures makes a district easily definable, the early Florham Park houses are scattered. For that reason, a number of those listed here may seem undistinguished in themselves, but nevertheless contribute to an understanding of their historical context.

Cl5 BENJAMIN BURROUGHS HOUSE, BOXWOOD HALL NJHSI-1132.6 9 Smithfield Lane (Facing Ridgedale Ave., M.C.-2)

This late 18th-century brick and frame mansion with gambrel roof was the home of wealthy landowner and slaveholder Benjamin Burroughs, who died in 1817. Baxter Sayre, a subsequent owner (1838) , was an ardent abolitionist. During his tenancy, this was alleged to be a stop on the Underground Railroad. The ample five—bay facade, roof balustrade, arched dormers, and handsome doorway make this one of the most notable Georgian/ Federal houses in Morris County. The house itself has been carefully preserved, although modern encroachments intrude on the grounds.

Cl6 BUDD FARM (SITE) NJHSI-1l32.5 57 Passaic Avenue (M.C.-l3)

John Budd (1670-1754) was one of the proprietors of East Jersey. His son Bernardus was a surgeon during the Revolution. A later descendant, Dr. John C. Budd, was founder of the Medical Society of New Jersey, the first such society in the United States. Budd Farm occupied land acquired in 1715, previously an Indian settlement. During the 18th century so many relatives settled near the Budd homestead that a family cemetery and schoolhouse were maintained. This was also the site of the famous Budd Freshet,” a spot in the meadows where the Passaic River periodically overflowed, producing sixty to seventy—five acres of ice in winter. Between 1920 and 1940 it was not uncommon to find 400 to 500 skaters here on a weekend, from as far away as Newark.

C17 BARZILLAI CAMPFIELD STORE NJHSI-1l32.1 2 Hanover Road (M.C.-2)

This frame house was used as a dwelling and shop when it was built early in the 19th century. The business was operated until 1820 by Barzillai Campfield, a descendent of John Campfield, one of the founders

130 FLORHAM PARK REGION C

(BARZILLAI CAMPFIELD STORE, continued)

of the town in 1715. Despite alterations inside and out it remains a tangible link to one of Florham Park’s earliest families, and a familiar local landmark in its present incarnation as the Afton restaurant.

C18 JOEL CAMPFIELD HOUSE NJHSI-l132.11 180 Crescent Road

Aside from the fact that he was a member of the popular Campfield/Canfield Clan, nothing is known about Joel Campfield, although this house has always borne his name. Like a number of 18th—century houses in Florham Park, it is representative rather than remarkable, and deserves to be preserved because it contributes to the overall historical identity, of the community. Nineteenth- century additions have contributed to the “added—on” appearance without destroying its character.

C19 DANIEL CORY HOUSE NJHSI-l132.8 30 Hanover Road (M.C.-2)

Corp. Daniel Cory commanded a cavalry company during the Revolution. His house was one of many local broom “factories.” Original woodwork, fireplaces and doors remain. This house is neither architecturally remarkable nor is it associated with a notable figure. But like many of Florham Park’s small, little-altered 18th— century dwellings, it represents the well-made vernacular architectural tradition expressing the everyday life of the common man. For this reason, and because of its fine condition, it merits continued protection. Road widening threatens it with encroachment.

C20 CRESCENT FARM NJHSI-1l32.26 110 Crescent Road (formerly 158 Columbia Turnpike)

Capt. William Canfield (also spelled Campfield) built a four— room house with peaked roof c. 1756, and in 1780 enlarged it with a gambrel—roofed addition. Many original features survive, including an Adam style mantel, a hanging staircase of maple and cherry, chair rails and wainscoting. During the Revolution, the Canfield homestead furnished food and lodgings for some of Washington’s officers and troops. The property was sold in the 19th century to Moses D. Ward, whose son Leslie, founder of the Prudential Insurance Company, was born here. Although the house is not on its original site, Crescent Road was also a pre—Revolutionary thoroughfare.

131 FLORHAM PARK REGION C

C21 ELY HOUSE 124 Columbia Turnpike (M.C.-40)

Unlike the foursquare simplicity of earlier 19th-century dwellings (the Jonathan Richards house at 1 Hanover Road, for example), the irregular plan, porches and airy porte cochere of this house reach out to embrace the landscape, exemplifying the back-to-nature Romanticism of the late Victorians. The square tower, fish—scale shingles and cutout molding at the eaves add decorative interest.

C22 FLORHAM, THE TWOMBLY ESTATE NJHSI-ll32.l8 Main Entrance on Route 24 in Madison

Completed c. 1900, the mansion at Florham is the most imposing survivor of the numerous lavish estates which made this area famous during the “Age of Opulence” around the turn—of—the— century. Its design, inspired by a wing of Henry VIII’S Hampton Court Palace, includes 100 rooms enriched with marble and rare woods. Guests arrived for weekend parties via a private railroad spur, and might be served tropical fruit raised in Florham’s own orangery. The estate was famous for its prize livestock as well (the working farm was located east of Park Avenue where Exxon Laboratories now stands). Fairleigh Dickinson University now owns the mansion and the southwestern part of the estate, where much of the English park landscape design, with its broad lawns and stately trees, survives. The name Florham is derived from those of its owners — Florence Vanderbilt and Hamilton Mckay Twombly. In honor of its benefactors, the village of Afton adopted this name itself when it incorporated in 1899.

C23 FORD’s HAMMOCK NJHSI-ll32.33 310 Columbia Turnpike (M.C.-40)

The fieldstone wing of this large house was built in 1721 by John Ford, the grandfather of Col. Jacob Ford, whose Morristown mansion served as Washington’s headquarters. Later additions were made in 1800 and 1825, including the frame wing which turns its gable end to the road. In about 1757 it became the home of Samuel Ford, Jr., known as the most artful and prolific counterfeiter of his time. With a dozen of the county’s leading citizens, he was accused of masterminding the great East Jersey Treasury Robbery in 1768. In 1773 Ford escaped from prison and fled to Virginia. He never returned to New Jersey, and was never apprehended. (NR)

132 FLORHAM PARK REGION C

C24 GENUNG FARMHOUSE NJHSI-1132.29 112 Crescent Road

Built on what was originally part of William Canfield’s land, this clapboard house of the late 18th century was at first no more than three rooms. In 1850 it became part of the Aaron Genung homestead. The Genungs were another of the area’s early settlers, whose name once served as a local place name — “Genungtown.” The remains of a dry—laid stone wall separate this property from Crescent Farms.

C25 GENUNGTOWN HOUSE 26 East Madison Avenue

This house, situated in the area called Genungtown in the 19th century, was probably built in the last decade of the 18th century. A large cooking fireplace can be found in the old kitchen at the rear of the house below street level. The east wing is an exceptionally fine example of how a carefully designed modern addition can increase the size of a simple farmhouse without destroying it architecturally.

C26 HANCOCK HOUSE, CIDER MILL C27 AND CEMETERY NJHSI-1l32.32 45 Ridgedale Avenue (M.C.-2)

John Hancock (1776—1854) was a Methodist minister who preached in the old East Madison schoolhouse and here in his home until 1843, when a Methodist Church was built in Madison. In his will he left the family cemetery as a “public burying place.” Family records give 1803 as the construction date for this 2— story frame house which still contains much original woodwork. It is now occupied by the eighth generation of Hancocks, who until recently operated the cider mill behind the house (with its original machinery intact). The house is threatened by proposed road widening.

C28 HEDGES HOUSE NJHSI-ll32.2l 225 Brooklake Road

This and the following two houses all belonged to members of the Hedges clan, emigrants from Long Island who came to Morris County in the mid—l8th century. This house, the smallest of the three, was built early in the 19th century. In 1860 it was sold by Henry Hedges to Thomas Quinlan, who moved it about 200 feet from its original site. Aside from this move, and the addition of modern windows on the main facade, it has suffered few changes.

133 FLORHAM PARK REGION C

C29 HENRY HEDGES HOUSE NJHSI-1132.35 216 Brooklake Road

This house belonged to Henry R. Hedges (b. 1802) who combined the callings of wheelwright and minister of the Methodist Church. Because Rev. Hedges was known to be an abolitionist, discovery of a tiny secret chamber in the cellar suggests that this may have been another stop on the Underground Railroad. The house, or part of it, was probably built before the Revolution.

C30 WIDOW HEDGES HOUSE NJHSI-l132.34 206 Brookdale Road

One thousand acres belonged to this house when it was purchased c. 1750 by Gidieon Hedges, who left Long Island about that time with his wife and two stepsons, Thomas and Nathan Fish. Thomas joined the Continental Army when he was sixteen, serving with Capt. Carter’s Riflemen. The front porch is decorated with spindled wooden arches, a rustic attempt at carpenter Gothic ornamentation. Descendants of the Fish family still live here.

C3l JOHN HOPPING HOUSE (SITE) NJHSI-ll32.31; HABS-692 N.E. Corner of Ridgedale Avenue at Park Street

Built c. 1769 and enlarged in 1830 to five-bay, center hall size, this HABS recorded house has been destroyed.

C32 LITTLE RED BRICK SCHOOLHOUSE NJHSI-1l32.27 Ridgedale Avenue (M.C.-2) and Columbia Turnpike (M.C.-40)

The 1866 construction bills for this schoolhouse record that William Howell, carpenter, and masons B.F. and W.E. Conklin charged a total of $2,225.00. These costs, of course, included labor and materials. Until 1905, all grades were taught here by one teacher. School use continued until 1914. The one—room schoolhouse has exerted a hold on the American imagination entirely out of proportion to its physical presence, symbolizing as it does the values of an entire era: frugality, self— reliance, community cooperation, and the transcendent value of education itself. This school and the one in Washington Valley, more than any others in Morris County, have come to represent the historical vision of such ideals. (NR)

134 FLORHAM PARK REGION C

C33 MEADOWVIEW, THE WAR]) HOMESTEAD NJHSI-1132.17 199 Brooklake Road

Originally a small farmhouse built before the Revolution, many alterations have been made during its more than two hundred years of existence, most notably the 2—story porch. Handmade nails and original window glass attest to its age. Brooklake Road was an important pre—Revolutionary thoroughfare running from Chatham to Hanover, through a section called East Madison, or Genungtown. Standing on Meadow Ridge, the house overlooks rolling meadows and the “bubbling freshets” of Spring Garden Brook.

C34 DAVID RICHARDS FARM NJHSI-1132.22 13 Hanover Road (M.C.-2)

The center part of this extended house was built sometime in the first quarter of the 18th century and occupied by David Richards and his wife Edus, whose son Samuel was killed in the Battle of Springfield in 1780. The wing to the right was added before 1800, and another addition was completed as late as 1860. Windows with hand—blown panes survive, as well as pewter door locks and a chimney constructed with clay mortar. The corn shed at the rear of the house, used for broom corn, is still in good condition.

C35 JONATHAN RICHARDS HOUSE 1 Hanover Road (M.C.-2)

Jonathan, the youngest son of David Richards (see above) , built this house c. 1800 on land that was part of his father’s homestead. In 1820 Jonathan opened a store at this crossroads. The house is a good example of how successfully the architecture of the Federal period can absorb Victorian modernizations — in this case a center gable, bracketed eaves, double doors, and some exterior paneling. It is now connected to a modern structure with little harm to its appearance, proving that old buildings can often serve practical purposes without intrusive alterations.

C36 ST. ELIZABETH, COLLEGE AND ACADEMY OF Main entrance on Route 24 in Madison (Convent Station)

The distinctive buildings of St. Elizabeth’s, easily the tallest in the vicinity, have created a familiar skyline’ for many years. Founded in 1899, the College grew out of the Academy, founded forty years

135 FLORHAM PARK REGION C (ST. ELIZABETH, COLLEGE AND ACADEMY, continued)

earlier. Principal buildings of interest date from the Civil War to the first quarter of the 20th century, and range in style from Gothic Revival to mansard. The most impressive of these, derived primarily from the Second Empire style, is executed in buff brick with lime—stone and wood trim. A columned, 3—story porch adorns the facade, and symmetrical wings support highly decorated belvederes. The campus also includes a Greek amphitheater modeled on the Theatre of Dionysius. American troops marched across this land on their way to Yorktown.

C37 TURF HOUSE NJHSI-l132.l9 6 Hanover Road (M.C. -2)

Another of the houses built by Barzallai Campfield c. 1810, this one has two interior gable—end chimneys, an exterior chimney in the later kitchen wing, and eyebrow windows. James Woodruff bought it from Campfield c. 1825. Woodruff made a living by selling peat (“turf”) he cut from the swamp. He also made brooms in this house, which he peddled throughout Morris, Somerset and Hunterdon Counties. Road widening threatens the house’s continued existence.

C38 JOANNA DAY TUTTLE HOUSE 67 Elm Street (original location, 400 Main St. Chatham)

Mathias Ward owned this house sometime after 1776. Although it follows the spacious Federal plan of five bays with center hall, the eyebrow windows suggest that it may have been built a decade or so before the Revolution. Dentil molding at the eaves adds a pleasant touch of decoration to an otherwise utilitarian design. Since 1869 when it was moved from 400 to 459 Main Street to become the home of Joanna Day Tuttle, it has been known by her name. In 1966 it was moved again, to its present location.

C39 UNNAMED HOUSE 309 Brooklake Road

Built c. 1730, this is one of the oldest houses in Florham Park. Its long, low profile bespeaks a primary concern for shelter without adornment and reflects the building’s obvious antiquity. The modified saltbox line is evident when viewed from the gable end facing the street. Back—to—back fireplaces are found in the present kitchen and dining rooms. The house was enlarged in 1880 and again more recently.

136 FLORHAM PARK REGION C

C40 YOUNG FAMILY HOUSE 42 Park Street

An unidentified member of the John Young family built this house c. 1800. Before it acquired its Victorian renovations (similar to those of the Jonathan Richards house), it must have looked remarkably like the following Young house. In fact these two, together with the Joanna Day Tuttle house, provide an instructive survey of the evolutionary course of the 5—bay, center—hall plan from pre—Revolution to post—Civil War.

C41 JOHN YOUNG HOUSE 65 Elm Street

Apparently John Young’s family or his fortune increased substantially from the time he moved into the stone house, because about 1825 he built this large, 2—story center—hall house — a fairly typical expression of moderate post colonial affluence which has survived virtually intact since its construction. The land was bought by Young from Samuel Ford of Ford’s Hammock.

C42 JOHN YOUNG STONE HOUSE 44 Elm Street

Stone houses are relatively uncommon in southeast Morris County. The stone wing of this house is thought to have been built c. 1729 by a Scotsman named Stewart. By 1772 it was occupied by another Scotsman, John Young, and his family. The north section, was built c. 1800, presumably by Young, before he erected the larger frame house not far up the road.

137 MADISON REGION C

C43 BOTTLE HILL TAVERN NJHSI-l867.l; HABS-58 117 Main Street (Rte. 24)

Lafayette was entertained here when he returned to the United States in 1825. A contemporary account reports that thirteen little girls, representing the thirteen original colonies, recited a poem composed in his honor. Opened in 1812 to serve travelers on the toll road, this was one of the first taverns built expressly for commercial purposes. Comparison with the Chester House, built in the same year, shows the remarkable similarity of these two simple Federal buildings. Mathias Burnet, carriage maker by trade, may have been its builder. He and Baxter Sayre were its first owners. In recent years the site, as well as the building have suffered from commercial renovations, which include an attempt to transform the interior into a “Gay Nineties” roadhouse. None of these changes appears to be irreparable.

C44 BRUEN HOUSE NJHSI—l867.5; HABS—529 250 Main Street (Rte.24)

This building’s reputation as the first on the Morris Turnpike puts its date of construction between 1801, when the turnpike was chartered, and 1804, when it was completed. The occupation of Jonathan Bruen, an early owner, is not recorded, but his house suggests he was at least moderately successful. Although still in sound condition itself, comparison with a 1957 photograph demonstrates how ill—conceived commercialization has blighted the site. The door on the smaller wing and the dormers are the only significant exterior features not original.

C45 BURNET HOUSE Rosedale Avenue (N.W. side, at Longview Avenue)

The absence of deeds for this property implies that Daniel Burnet acquired it on his father’s death in 1766. Although the house may have existed then, its size suggests it was probably built sometime between 1766 and Daniel’s death in 1824. The Burnet family was prominent in early Bottle Hill affairs. Mathias Burnet was one of the original owners of the Bottle Hill Tavern, and also operated a stage line on the Morris Turnpike. His similar house still stands in Hanover Township.

138 MADISON REGION C

C46 CECILHURST Route 24 at Morris Place

Early in the 20th century this was one of the estates which gave Madison Avenue the name “.Millionaires’ Row.” It was the home of Adolph deBary , whose architect modeled it after the great English country houses built in the neo—classical mode. Bayley Ellard High School, its present owner, has maintained the structure, although the overall impression has been diminished by several new buildings designed in an incompatible manner. Nevertheless, Cecilhurst stands as a representative survivor of an era whose physical exponents are today rarer in Morris County than houses of the 18th century.

C47 DREW UNIVERSITY 36 Madison Avenue

Drew was founded in 1866 on the occasion of the centenary of 2merican Methodism. Its benefactor was Daniel Drew, notorious on Wall Street as a financial manipulator. Originally chartered as a theological school of the then Methodist Episcopal Church, Drew quickly became one of the foremost theological schools in the nation, a position it enjoyed for nearly a century. In 1928, with the endowment of a College of Liberal Arts, it became a university. Originally known for its wooded beauty, the campus still holds remnants of its forest preserve, which includes a number of geologically interesting glacial punch bowls. Buildings of architectural importance include the following three, identified by asterisks:

* SAMUEL W. BONE HALL

Bowne Hall is one of the finest examples of English Gothic Revival in Morris County. Built in 1912, its main stair hall and Great Hall express a quality of craftsmanship impossible to duplicate today. Great Hall is modeled after the refectory of Christ’s Church College, Oxford. It was, in fact used as a dining hall when Drew was still a theological school. It is now used for lectures and special events. The ground floor is devoted to offices.

* HOYT-BOWNE HALL

This is one of two non—ecclesiastical Romanesque buildings in

139 MADISON REGION C (HOYT-BOWNE HALL continued) Madison. Built in 1893, when the style was enjoying the height of its popularity, Hoyt—Bowne eschews the Richardsonian fondness for massive curved forms in favor of a primarily planar facade. The Romanesque curve does appear in the stair towers and the arched doors and windows, which are accompanied by such familiar motifs as foliated stone carving and terra cotta, glazed and rough brick combined decoratively, and sandstone trim. Hoyt-Bowne is still used as a student residence.

* MEAD HALL

This unusually fine Greek Revival mansion was built in 1834 for William Gibbons, whose estate was known as “The Forest.” In his book, Architecture In New Jersey, Alan Gowans describes it as having”.. .generous (even lavish) proportions — a kind of stage for upper—class social and political life.” Across the front extends a portico with six Corinthian columns, thirty- six feet high. Portico and facade are further embellished with Greek key molding, elaborate door and window heads, and a marble floor. Inside, an oval well pierces the second story hall so that a skylight can illumine both floors. Today the mansion is used for administrative offices, but a number of rooms are furnished to approximate their mid—19th—century appearance. Original woodwork and mantels can be found throughout the main floors.

C48 ERIE-LACKAWANNA RAILROAD STATION Kings Road CE. of Green Ave.)

When the proposal was made to elevate grade crossings c. 1911, the Delaware, Lackawanna & Western (later the Erie—Lackawanna) invited the towns involved to help defray expenses. Most declined, but Madison’s response was munificent. To show its appreciation, the Railroad built this station, loosely modeled on Gothic forms. The imposing gray stone buildings provide appropriate testimony to the importance of rail transit during the first third of the 20th century.

C49 DAVID HOWELL HOUSE 47 Madison Avenue Rte. 24)

This house originally stood west of Grace Episcopal Church. Its

140 MADISON REGION C (DAVID HOWELL HOUSE continued)

oak frame is held together by oak pins, and a number of the walls are brick lined. The center part and possibly one wing were built c. 1795. Sometime between 1800—1812 the piazza and second wing were added. The final symmetrical appearance with graceful swept roof line demonstrates how the apparently casual construction of an “added on” house could result in an aesthetically integrated end product. Durest Blanchet, who owned it after Howell, was a member of the French emigre community which helped found St. Vincent’s Church.

C50 LATHROP HOUSE Madison Avenue (Rte. 24) West of Loantaka Way

During the 1850’s Alexander Jackson Davis, architect, and Andrew Jackson Downing, landscape architect, popularized the Romantic Gothic cottage set in an equally Romantic landscape. The 1857 house was obviously constructed after one of their most favored designs, characterized by huge center gable, large brackets, towering chimneys and metal porch roofs, originally painted to resemble awnings. A lithograph in Wm. Parkhust Tuttle’s Madison and Bottle Hill, 1916, shows that no changes have been made since construction.

C51 MAIN STREET DISTRICT Green Village Road, Main Street, Waverly Place Area

Madison’s Main Street District represents a direct historical progression from the neighboring Chatham District. The latter is basically an 18th—century village with an economy that was agrarian— based. A modest commercial identity evolved by the mid-l9th century; by that time the appearance of the village was largely frozen in the mold of small—scale frame structures which remain today. The Madison District reflects the next stage of the American national experience — the aggressive economic expansion and civic pride of the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Instead of the small dwellings sometimes converted for business use typical of Chatham, buildings were erected here expressly for commercial purposes. Their height rose (commonly to three stories) , and their materials changed from wood to brick or stone. Hand in hand with economic prosperity grew a desire for social and cultural amenities. These aspirations are represented in the district by the Madison Library, the Young Men’s Christian Association, and the auditorium of the James Building. The most significant buildings in the district reflect Renaissance,

141 MADISON REGION C (MAIN STREET DISTRICT, continued)

neo-c1ascica1 and Gothic/Romanesque influences. No other place in Morris County offers such a high quality and concentrated collection of commercial and public buildings of this era. They represent the link between the fading ideal of 1th—century eclecticism and the emergence of the modern building idiom first propounded by the Chicago School. Buildings of primary .interest in the district include the following, preceded by asterisks:

MAIN STREET, NORTH SIDE

* NO.14,YOUNG 1N’S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION

The Young Men’s Christian Association completes the “civic triangle” begun by the Madison Library and the James Building. The YMCA was formed in 1873, when in a progressive action for its time, it elected three women as associate members. The move to its own building 5 years later enabled the board of trustees to embark on a varied program which put the Madison Y in the forefront of community service with facilities of the most modern kind. When the new facility opened in 1908, important civic buildings were still expected to look the part. Architect H. King Conklin ably expressed this requirement in a three-story building of dark brick with bronze cornice and frieze and bronze pedimented windows. The principal entrance is capped with a third pediment enclosing a blank cartouche. Thanks to ample space and solid construction, the hull fin was suitable for adaptive use- when changing needs forced the YMCA to seek new quarters in 1962. Few exterior alterations have been made.

* NO. 60-64,BURNET BUILDING

The Burnets were among Madison’s earliest settlers, having been local farmers, craftsman and businessmen since 1740. James Burnet opened a hardware business here in l97. The 9bay length and two— color brickwork make this one of the largest and most impressive buildings in the district. Sunken panels above the windows and keystone lintels punctuate the facade. The third story is finished with a richly paneled and bracketed cornice, and a perforated balustrade. The first story, like most along Main Street, has been covered with a modern “Colonial” front. Attached to the back of this building is a 1-story hoard—and- batten structure with huge brackets beneath the eaves. This was

142 MADISON REGION C (NO. 60-64, BURNET BUILDING, continued) Originally a freight depot for the Morris and Essex Railroad, probably built after the fire of 1877, and moved here from Lincoln Place c. 1913.

* NO. 66—68, GEE BUILDING

In 1881 Stephen Paulmier had this building constructed and opened what was to become the 1st National Bank. During the 1890’s the Madison Eagle occupied half of the building. In 1924 when the bank moved to its new location, the building was sold to Anderson B. Gee, son of Charles Berriman Gee, who had opened the Madison Pharmacy in 1897 in the Burnet Building. The pharmacy was later moved to this three—story brick building. The decorative cornice appears to be stamped metal. The triangular window heads enclose an unusual ball and X design.

* NO. 70-72, NEIS BUILDING

A recent, pseudo—rustic covering on part of the first story has not obscured the Romanesque central door decorated with foliated terra cotta. This elegant detail suggests the richness that might be found behind other modern facades in the district. Six brick pilasters running down the face of the building terminate in sculptured human faces. Additional terra cotta work embellishes the window heads. In contrast to these Medieval elements is a simple wooden cornice finished with an egg and anchor molding. Construction may be as late as 1894, when the property was sold to Frederick Neis. Two other buildings on the north side of Main Street, nos. 26- 28, and no. 40, should be maintained as part of the composite streetscape, although they are of lesser architectural interest.

MAIN STREET, SOUTH SIDE

* MADISON PUBLIC LIBRARY Route 24 (S.W. Corner of Green Village Road)

Because it was used primarily for large public buildings in urban centers, the Romanesque style is not abundant in Morris County. Most of the local buildings in this style are churches, so the Library is doubly unusual. Accounts contemporary with its construction labeled it Gothic, and in fact some of its details are, but historical perspective has revealed its unmistakable Romanesque roots.

143 MADISON REGION C (MADISON PUBLIC LIBRARY, continued) When it opened on Memorial Day, 1900, the gift of D. Willis James was Madison’s first public library. Almost from the start its programs were progressive. Until 1912, a horse—drawn bookmobile carried library benefits to outlying districts — an important service not renewed until 1922 by the Morris County Library. From 1900 until 1906 a free public lecture series was sponsored. Each year one series was delivered in Italian. This, together with a substantial collection of Italian—language books, recognized the importance of Madison’s largest immigrant community. Such bilingual service was in the best tradition of large urban libraries and settlement house programs of the time. Architecturally, the Library employs the full Romanesque design vocabulary in a plan so compact that its overall conception is immediately comprehensible. A quality of miniaturization, combined with attention lavished on small details, imparts a gem-like appeal. The exterior is distinguished by an arched porch, foliated stonework, and a tower with gargoyle rainspouts. Inside can be found stenciled ceilings and walls, painted imitations of mosaic tile, oak woodwork (including a spiral staircase, homiletic stained glass and custom—made bronze hardware. The Library is now tenanted by the Museum of Early Trades and Crafts, which provides a much—needed adaptive use, however incongruous the surroundings with the artifacts on display.

* JAMES BUILDING, THE MERCANTILE BUILDING 23-27 Main Street, 2-8 Green Village Road

The James building and the library opposite enjoyed a unique symbiotic relationship early in this century, a rare example of speculation for public benefit. Built in 1899 by D. Willis James, its commercial rents were designed to finance construction of the Madison Library and furnish an endowment for its operation. This visionary plan was actually successful until the crash of 1929, which eventually wiped out the commercial revenue. Architecturally, the James Building is imposing and idiosyncratic. The curved stepped gable is obviously Dutch; the griffin which surmounts it is Gothic; the sculptured wreath framing the one remaining circular window suggests della Robbia. These and other disparate elements are unified by the use of orange glazed brick structures of this vintage, its ground floor shop fronts still approximate their original appearance.

144 MADISON REGION C (JAMES BUILDING, THE MERCANTILE BUILDING, continued) Not content to provide the community with a library, the philanthropic Mr. James included space for municipal offices in the James Building, and a third floor auditorium for public functions, complete with fine woodwork and stained glass skylight. This has been recently subdivided. Aside from the removal of some facade detail, the building is in good condition and continues to house commercial/professional tenants. Viewed together, the Library and the James Building provide a valuable picture of early 20th— century social and architectural aspirations. During the latter third of the 19th century, the Romanesque style gained wide favor in America for churches and public buildings. Henry Hobson Richardson, its chief exponent, has been called America’s first modern architect. He made the style so much his own it is frequently known as Richardsonian Romanesque. In Richardson’s hands, the Romanesque style yielded richly textured stone surfaces, massive curves, and highly concentrated, often polychromed, decoration. The Madison Library and the James Building bear striking resemblances to two of Richardson’s more notable designs, the Winn Memorial Library in Woburn, Massachusetts, and the Ames Building in Boston. Because the Library (and probably the James Building) was designed by the Boston firm of Brigham and Adden, the similarity appears to be more than coincidental. Thus, Madison is graced with two buildings reflecting the direct influence of Richardson’s personal idiom.

* NO. 29, TIGER BUILDING

J.A.Tiger & Sons ran a grocery business here early in the 20th century. The broken parapet with its dominant pediment lifts this otherwise unassuming building out of the ordinary — even when seen in the shadow of its grandiose neighbor, the James Building.

145 MADISON REGION C

* No. 45, JOHNSON BUILDING

The Madison Post Office could be found here c. 1910. The tan and buff bricks of this facade are laid in a Florentine pattern of uncommon sophistication. The deep wooden cornice is decidedly un—Renaissance, but handsome nonetheless. Here again the ground floor is faced with modern materials, although the contemporary design proves a better compromise than the more common fake Colonial used elsewhere.

* No. 53.- 55, BRITTIN BUILDING

The Brittin Building dates from 1898. The 7-bay facade of this gray brick building is a Georgian/Palladian hybrid complete with pediment, pilasters and voussoirs.

WAVERLY PLACE, WEST SIDE

In general, the Waverly Place buildings are earlier and not as impressive as those on Main Street. They do, however, constitute a unified streetscape which makes a vital contribution to the district.

* Unlike most of the district’s buildings, No. 1 (built c.l873, enlarged after a fire in 1875) has a gently pitched roof. The smooth, painted brick walls, circular window and cornice with pendants impart a vague Italianate or domestic Gothic air. The adjoining No. 3 is the smallest in the district, but even so has a bracketed cornice similar to some of its large Main Street counterparts. The top of No. 5 is embellished with decorative corbelling, and the facade is pierced with small panels of brick set diagonally. The original second and third story windows have recently been replaced with multipaned Colonial copies. The dominant feature of No. 7—9 is a curved and stepped Dutch parapet. Most of the facade has recently been covered with synthetic siding. This was originally the first Methodist Church built c. 1840. In 1870 it was sold to tinsmith Ichabod Searing, who jacked it up and installed a first floor of shops. No. 11-13 is decorated with brick panels similar to No. 5. It is five bays wide with three stories and a deeply bracketed cornice. Two like buildings at No. 15 and No. 17 are capped with a Mansard fourth floor which continues around the corner of the building along the entire south facade. Shop windows also run along this facade, facing what is now an alley. The height of this building, together with its Mansard roof and heavy bracketed cornice make it the most imposing on Waverly Place. Both were built c. 1880. The second home of the 1st National Bank (1924) is the only building on the east side of Waverly Place of any architectural value.

146 MADISON REGION C

C52 MADISON PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH, (MASONIC TEMPLE) NJHSI-1867.l0 170 Main Street (Rte.24)

This was the First Presbyterian Church from its construction in 1825 until it was rededicated to Masonic use in 1930. The distinction between designer and builder was often unclear at the time. Lewis Carter however, is listed as one of two “chief carpenters.” Since Carter is generally credited with the joint design of the Morris County Courthouse two years later, it is safe to assume that his hand was also influential here. This is one of the rare Morris County churches not built of wood during the early 19th century or before.

C53 LUKE (OR ANDRE9 MILLER HOUSE* NJHSI-1867.l1; HABS-l24 105 Ridgedale Avenue

This was one of Madison’s earliest thoroughfares when Andrew Miller, c. 1730, built what was a relatively substantial house for its time. The high fieldstone “basement”, seen at the back, actually functions as an additional story. Remains of a small forge can be found sixty feet north of the house. Local tradition affirms that officers of the Continental Army were entertained here during the Loantaka Valley encampment, and that Washington himself was a frequent guest. A modern wing and dormers have been added with respect for the building’s architectural integrity. Several smaller houses of roughly the same age can be found on Ridgedale Avenue.

*The first Miller to own this house has been a matter of dispute.

C54 ROSE GREENHOUSE (SITE) Shunpike, M.C..—46 (at Stonehedge Lane)

Roses were first grown under glass in this area c. 1856 on the Treadwell estate. By 1880, Madison claimed its first commercial rose greenhouse on this site. The early installations, termed “ranges of glass” were constructed of small panes set in heavy timbers. By 1900, Madison had earned the name “The Rose City.” By 1930, it was producing 25—million blooms annually, and was the most concentrated rose— producing area in the United States. In 1913, three nationally prominent Madison rose—growers, Messrs. Totty, Duckham, and Herrington organized the first International Flower Show, which initially benefited from Madison’s prestigious reputation.

147 MADISON REGION C

C55 EPHRAIM SAYRE HOUSE NJHSI-l867.3; HABS—146 31 Ridgedale Avenue

General “Mad” Anthony Wayne made his headquarters here while his troops were stationed at Loantaka Valley in 1777. Records show that he used the north front room for his office, while his personal bodyguard occupied the large kitchen. In correspondence dated 1936, descendants of the Sayre family stated that the house was built in 1745 by Daniel Sayre. His Son Ephraim gained the property in 1780. Ephraim’s son Baxter, one of Northern New Jersey’s first abolitionists, subsequently acquired the house. Whether he occupied it is unclear, since he also owned a mansion (the Benjamin Burroughs House) in what is now Florham Park.

C56 TOLL GATE (SITE) Main Street, Route 24 (N.E. corner of Rosedale Ave.)

The Morris Turnpike (now Rte 24), chartered in 1801 and completed in 1804, followed the old King’s Highway in Chatham to about Lafayette Avenue. It was then built in a straight line to Madison. Churchgoers and farmers on agricultural business were exempt from the toll. To avoid paying, other roads were used, hence the name “Shunpike” which still exists. With the advent of the Morris Canal (1831) and rail transport (1837), the turnpike became less important, and was eventually turned over to the municipalities through which it ran.

C57 UNITED METHODIST CHURCH 24 Madison Avenue (Rte.24)

Daniel Drew, benefactor of the University bearing his name, donated the land for this church, which was built in 1870. The square tower design with Romanesque windows was familiar since the middle of the 19th century. Executed in wood and usually bracketed, it lent domestic architecture the vague appellation “Italianate.” Here, raised to public scale and executed in brick, it is more purely and specifically Tuscan, and the only church of that style in Morris County. The Methodist congregation’s first building, now greatly altered, still stands at 7—9 Waverly Place.

148 PASSAIC REGION C

SOLOMON BOYLE HOUSES C58 47 Old Mill Road

Here and across the river a gristmill, sawmill and forge operated in the mid-18th century, owned by Solomon Boyle, who purchased 600 acres of land from the East Jersey Proprietors. The Mills built by Boyle and his children gave Millington (pre—1833) its name. This house is reputed to have served as a store and post office until c. 1902. It is well preserved and occupies an unusually picturesque spot on the river.

C59 42 Old Mill Road

This house seems to have been built around the same time as No. 47 (1735—1750), although it was enlarged during the 19th century. The precise sequence of Boyle ownership and occupancy remains unclear between these two and the following house. About 1870 it was owned but not occupied by the German-born inventor, Frederick Nishwitz, whose disc harrow helped open the West to large—scale agriculture. Both houses are mortise and tenon, clapboard construction. No. 42 has retained its beehive oven and a barn of indeterminate age.

C60 BOYLE, HUDSPETH-BENSON HOUSE 100 Basking Ridge Road (M.C.-7)

The earliest part of this rambling farmhouse may have been erected in 1732 when Irish emigrant Solomon Boyle married, and may be the earliest of the three Boyle—associated houses. Like the others, it is a good example of early mortise—and—tenon construction. Research prepared for the New Jersey Register of Historic Places states that the “. . .design, floor—plan and orientation of the building and the barn are significant in interpreting early colonial lifestyle in New Jersey.” Boyle descendents retained title to this property until the late 19th century, when it became the home of Mary Hudspeth—Benson, humanitarian and social worker, whose anonymous efforts on behalf of Jersey City’s disadvantaged eventually made her known as “the most prominent woman of the city.” (NJR)

149 150 HARDING REGION D

Dl BAILEY HOUSE Bailey’s Mill Road (W. side, 1/8 mile S. of Young’s Rd.)

The Baileys were large landowners and important to the community as millers. The date of this house is unknown, but its broad gambrel roof, interior chimneys and eyebrow windows probably place it in the late 18th or early 19th-century. The Greek Revival porch appears in late 19th- century photographs, which show how little the house has been changed since that time. The combination of architectural styles and excellent state of preservation make it one of the most valuable of early Harding houses.

D2 NICHOLAS CLOVIS GEOFFREY HOUSE Spring Valley Road, M.C.-1 (W. side, 1/2 ± mile S. of Blue Mill Rd.)

This spacious, 3—story mansard roof house was built sometime in the 1850’s and may in fact be one of the first mansard style houses in America. N.C. Geoffrey, the first owner, was a French emigrant who became a prosperous farmer and landlord. Until 1943 it remained in the Geoffrey family, during which time virtually no changes were made.

D3 GLEN ALPINE Mt. Kemble Avenue, Rte. 202 (N. side, at Tempe Wick Road)

Built in 1840, this 3-story gabled mansion is one of the most outstanding examples of Cottage Gothic architecture in New Jersey. Its massive stone walls are relieved by decorated bargeboards and fretwork ornamentation made possible, (and popular) by the introduction of mechanical saws. This combination of stone with wood decoration is by no means unique, although the great majority of Cottage style structures are built exclusively of wood. This is the original site of the Peter Kemble House.

D4 JOSHUA GUERIN HOUSE HABS-l44 Jockey Hollow Road (at Morris Township boundary)

The Guerins were Hugenots who settled in Morris County to escape religious persecution. Joshua and his brothers were employed by the New Jersey Militia as wagoners during the Revolution. Joshua Guerin

151 HARDING REGION D (JOSHUA GUERIN HOUSE , continued)

was also a blacksmith, and farmed a considerable acreage. Troops of the Continental Army camped on the property, but were not quartered in the house itself. The central part of the house, 1 1/2 stories with gambrel roof and large interior chimneys was standing in 1776. The two wings were completed by the mid—l800’s. For a house of its size the ceilings are high and the rooms large. It was extensively restored in the l930s by the National Park Service. It is not open to the public.

D5 INDIAN TRADING POST Pleasantville Road (N. side, 1± mile E. of Long Hill Road)

This house is actually two separate houses abutting one another. The older, fieldstone structure bears the date 1782, and is a 1 1/2 story building with Dutch characteristics. The clapboard house joined to it is of typical 19th-century farmhouse design - a 3—bay structure with gable—end chimney and porch. The reason for these two structures having been joined (originally with no communication between) is unknown. There is strong supposition that the stone part was a store which traded with the Leni- Lenape.

D6 JOCKEY HOLLOW ENCAMPMENT (SITE) NJHSI-l371.5 Jockey Hollow and Tempe Wick Roads

The main Continental Army of up to 10,000 men was encamped at Jockey Hollow during the winter of 1779-1780 in rude log huts scattered over the hillside. Severe snowstorms and lack of food made that winter as arduous as the more famous Valley Forge encampment. Representative buildings have been reconstructed by the National Park Service, which maintains the area as part of the Morristown National Historic Park.

D7 PETER KEMBLE MANSION NJHSI-2064.12; HABS-48 667 Mt. Kemble Avenue (Rte.202) at Old Camp Road

Peter Kemble was made a member of the Governor’s Council in 1745, and often served as chairman during the Governor’s absence. By 1765, he had completed his mansion at Mt. Kemble (which originally stood on the site now occupied by Glen Alpine, but was moved c. 1840). Kemble’s close connection with the English cause (his daughter married General Gage, Commander of the British Army in America) threatened his properties with confiscation. During the winters of 1779-1781, the Kemble

152 HARDING REGION D (PETER KEMBLE MANSION, continued) plantation was the scene of Continental Army encampments under Generals Smallwood and Wayne. Despite extensive alterations, many of the building’s original characteristics survive, including the floor plan, mantels, staircase and carved window sashes and sills. (NJR)

D8 LARZALERE’S TAVERN, THE HALF MOON (SITE) Mt. Kemble Avenue, Route 202 (opposite Old Camp Road)

Like the two other important taverns in the Morristown area associated with the Revolution (Arnolds and Dickerson’s), the Half Moon no longer exists. It was demolished for construction of Route 287. Brigadier Gen. John Stark made his headquarters at Larzalere’s during the Jockey Hollow encampment of 1779-1780.

D9 NEW VERNON VILLAGE DISTRICT Lee’s Hill Road between Long Hill Road and Glen Alpin Road; Village Road running 1,500±’ from Lee’s Hill Road

The name New Vernon is not recorded until about 1800, apparently in commemoration of Washington’s presence during the Revolution. The village’s earliest name appears to have been Passaik. During the winter of 1777, with the headquarters of the Continental Army in Morristown, troops were billeted here and in surrounding villages. The village appears to have remained primarily a small farming community throughout the 18th and 19th centuries, unlike Mendham and Chester where agriculture was supplemented by industry. Research is now underway to document the most significant of the district’s early buildings. Three of the more interesting are described below (identified by asterisks).

* JOSEPH FAIRCHILD HOUSE Lee’s Hill Road CE. Side) 1,500±’ S. of Glen Alpin Road

This house dates from the mid—l8th century and has suffered remarkably few alterations. The 1 1/2—story design with side hail and gable— end chimney is typical for the area (cf. David Brandt house, Chatham Township, among others) . Joseph Fairchild was a carpenter and, like most of his neighbors, a farmer as well. Joseph’s son Peter, who served in the Continental Army, petitioned for a pension in 1833 when he was 77. Witnesses attested to his lifelong residence, which establishes the existence of this house by at least 1756.

153 HARDING REGION D

* FIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH OF NEW VERNON Lee’s Hill & Glen Alpin Roads

Prior to 1834 when this wooden church was built, the residents of the village of New Vernon traveled to Morristown for services. During its 100th anniversary year, the church was renovated and strengthened, leaving the exterior substantially intact, but making numerous alterations inside. The building is a good example of how local craftsmen translated simple Gothic Revival elements into a distinctive American building idiom.

* NEW VERNON STORE opposite First Presbyterian Church

The earliest wing of this house was built c. 1760 making it roughly contemporary with the preceding Fairchild house. Subsequent additions enabled it to serve as a general store until 1890. In 1835 it became the manse for the Presbyterian Church and during the Civil War the rear shed extension was used for tailoring Union Army uniforms.

Dl0 PRIMROSE FARM Mt. Kemble Avenue, Route 202 (W. Side) 3100±’ S. of Post House Road

This 1 1/2-story frame dwelling with high fieldstone foundation may be the oldest house on Mt. Kemble Avenue, dating from 1730 when it was built by or for George Bockoven, a tenant farmer for prominent Tory, Peter Kemble. The large bake oven in the ground floor kitchen is said to have provided bread for the troops camped at Jockey Hollow. Its existence is later verified by inclusion on a French Military map titled “Map de Wippany a Bullion’s Tavern, 14 miles,” - showing that Rochambeau’s army passed this way in August 1781 on their march to Yorktown from Whippany. Several minor additions have not seriously impaired the house’s architectural interest. Its proximity to Route 202 may pose a future threat.

D11 REGGIO Kitchell Road (S.E. side, 1/2± mile s. of Rte.24)

A 2-story stucco and brick house in the Florentine Villa style popular in the early decades of the 20th century, this mansion was built in 1908 for Willard V. King, and reflects the taste and lifestyle of the wealthy who made Morris County estates famous. The

154 HARDING REGION D (REGGIO, continued) gardens were planned with equal care to complement the pseudo-Renaissance architecture. Three Florentine artists were reportedly in residence for eight months completing the interior decorative details.

D12 WICK HOUSE Tempe Wick Road, M.C.-46 (N. side, W. of Jockey Hollow Rd.)

Henry Wick moved to Morris County from Long Island and built this house c. 1750. During the winter of 1780 it was the headquarters of Maj. Gen. St. Clair, commander of the Pennsylvania Line. Legend has it that when St. Clair’s troops mutinied a year later, Temperance (Tempe) Wick, one of Henry’s daughters hid her horse in a bedroom to prevent its requisition by the rebellious soldiers. The house is a relatively primitive center—chimney type, more like early New England dwellings than the kind usually found in New Jersey. It has been restored by the National Park Service as part of the Morristown Historic Park. (NR)

155 MORRIS PLAINS REGION D

Dl3 JEREMIAH BETTS HOMESTEAD 21 West Hanover Avenue (14.C.—5O)

A deed of 1846 refers to this house by its present name, although it was probably built about 1810. Both wings are now shingled, and a modern porch has been added. Otherwise, the exterior is little changed. Even the Dutch oven has survived, now boxed in for protection.

Dl4 DAVID FAIRCHILD HOUSE 1 Littleton Road (Rte.-2O2)

Although the porch and large dormers are 19th century or later, the basic fabric of this well—preserved house appears to be early to mid— l8th century. Distinguished by no decoration, its clean lines and good proportions bespeak intuitive craftsmanship. No other houses of this size and vintage have survived in Morris Plains with so few alterations.

D15 SETH GREGORY HOMESTEAD 63 West Hanover Avenue (M.C.—50)

Seth Gregory was a Captain in the Revolutionary War. He built this house c. 1801, and opened a small ordinary, or tavern, which is mentioned in a Burnet Stagecoach advertisement of 1809. The small wing is distinguished by a sloping Dutch style roof and remnant of a Dutch oven. An extensive modernization late in the 19th century has left original architectural features open to question

D16 SHERMAN COTTAGE 23 West Hanover Avenue (M.C. -50)

This land was originally part of the Jeremiah Betts property. Deeds seem to indicate that the house was built sometime between 1854 and 1890, although the small windows of the main wing suggest an earlier date. Only a shed dormer mars its exterior.

Dl7 EBENEZER STILES HOUSE NJHSI-2061.l 77 Glenbrook Road

Ebenezer Stiles was a Morris County Freeholder and owner of two iron forges, one on this property. The oldest part of the house, with

156 MORRIS PLAINS REGION D

(EBENEZER STILES HOUSE, continued)

three bays and side hail, was built in 1750—1760. Additions were made in 1868. Its present good condition (aside from some boarded up windows) and pleasant park setting result from the town’s adaptive use of this building as a public library.

157 MORRISTOWN REGION D

In September, 1973, the Morristown Historic District was named to the N.J. Register of Historic Places, and Subsequently to the National Register. The boundaries of the district may be determined by referring to the detail map. Because most of the buildings in this district are known by their own names, they have been incorporated into the general alphabetical listing for easy reference. Their inclusion in the district is indicated by a marginal asterisk. According to the National Register nomination: “Within the Morristown District there are over fifty worthwhile structures... most are post Civil War; a few are twentieth century Victorian. Private residences are by far the most common, and most of these are quite substantial, reflecting the social position and affluence of their owners.” The report goes on to observe that at least four of the state’s major thematic categories (religious, military, and educational activities, and transportation) are illustrated by buildings in the district. It concludes with this admonition: “Numerous other buildings, not herein described, continue to add character and integrity to this unique section of Morristown,. Only because their owners were not so well—known, or their use public were these structures not singled out in the description. They must, nonetheless, for full feeling of the area, be included in the district.”

Dl8 ACORN HALL NJHSI-2064.2l 68 Morris Avenue (M.C.-22)

This 3-story, clapboard, Italianate house with large tower, and diverse assemblage of porches, bay and coupled windows, dormers and brackets, was built in 1853. It has been surmised that Ira Lindsley, one of the architects of the Morris County Court House, may have been responsible for its design. Both interior and exterior remain unaltered to an extraordinary degree. The Morris County Historical Society is restoring the interior and the gardens, and maintains its headquarters here. (NR)

Dl9 * ASSUMPTION CHURCH AND RECTORY Maple Avenue at Madison Street

The first task of this parish was ministering to Irish emigrants who lived in the surrounding area known as “Dublin.” The first church was a small frame building erected in 1848 not far from this spot. Assumption was the mother parish of churches and missions in Morris Plains, Basking Ridge, Mendham and Whippany. The present brick church with stone trim was built in 1872 and 1873 by Mahlon Parsons from designs of L.J. O’Connor. It bears a strong resemblance to the Church of St. Matthias designed by Sir George

158 MORRISTOWN REGION D (ASSUMPTION CHURCH AND RECTORY, continued)

Gilbert Scott, one of Victorian England’s foremost “moral Gothicists.” The adjacent rectory, built in 1890, is decorated with typical Gothic ornamentation. (NR)

D20 BELL BUILDING West Park Place, corner of Bank Street

A commercial building has stood here since 1812. In 1866 the property was sold by George King to Augustus W. Bell. The present building dates from approximately that time. Together with the Parker Building it is the most impressive remnant of Morristown’s late 19th-century mercantile prosperity. Despite alterations to the first floor facade and a plethora of signs plastered on the upper floors, its original monumentality is unmistakable. The only comparable mansard commercial building stands on Waverly Place in Madison.

D21 BLACHLEY PLACE 80—94 Blachley Place

These four buildings opposite the Morristown Railroad Station represent the most unified example remaining of Morristown’s early 20th—century commercial architecture. Regularity of fenestration, uniformity of scale and attention to small details (classical pilasters and consoles, the richly textured Flemish bond facade of No. 84) combine to form an integrated streetscape in miniature. Although none is outstanding itself, they function together remarkably well. On that basis they merit upgrading and preservation for continued productive use.

D22 * THE BOOK STORE 83 South Street (Rte. 24)

This is one of the few 18th-century buildings in the Morristown District. It is an excellent example of New Jersey’s brick Federal style, built before that style gained wide popularity. The date (1765) in the gable end is somewhat unusual for the northern part of the state. (NR)

159 MORRISTOWN REGION D

D23 CONDICT-CUTLER HOMESTEAD 21 Cutler Street

Silas Condict, freeholder, speaker of the State Assembly and member of the Continental Congress, lived here from 1799 until 1801. The marriage of his granddaughter Elizabeth to Joseph Cutler signaled the farm’s transfer to Cutler ownership. Augustus W. Cutler, son of Joseph and Elizabeth, was born here in 1827. A prominent lawyer, he was both a New Jersey Senator and a U.S. Congressman. While serving in the state Senate he drafted the original free school bill, and assured state control of riparian lands in the interest of school support. He was also a civil rights advocate, and was instrumental in creating the Department of Agriculture. From about 1880 to 1900 this was the unofficial headquarters of the Democratic Party in New Jersey. It was during Augustus Cutler’s tenancy that the large front wing was added (c.1853) which now largely obscures the simple house his father built for Silas Condict. (NR)

D24 *DR LEWIS CONDICT HOUSE NJHSI-2064.20 51 South Street

Dr. Lewis Condict (1722—1862), first president of the Morris County Medical Society, president of the Medical Association lived here around 1797. Condict was also active politically. He was, at various times sheriff, justice of the peace, state assemblyman, speaker of the State House, and congressional representative; he often acted as the speaker pro tern in the House of Representatives. This 2 1/2-story clapboard building with gambrel roof is one of the few Federal style houses remaining in the Morristown District. Its center dormer was added later in the 19th century, the porch after 1922. It now serves as the Morristown Women’s Club. (NR)

D25 * COLLES MANSION 25 Colles Avenue

This huge, 2 1/2—story house, built in 1837 for James Colles, displays modified Federal and Greek Revival features. It was designed by Martin E. Thompson, who was responsible for the Second Bank of the United States (now the south facade of the Metropolitan Museum’s American Wing). Presently owned by the Kellogg Club, it is open only to members. The interior has been extensively altered. (NR)

160 MORRISTOWN REGION D

D26 * COURTHOUSE & JAIL (SITE) NJHSI-2064.8 North Park Place, on the Green

The earliest building on this spot is presumed to have been built in 1755. The weathervane which adorned the cupola bears that date, and is now preserved in the museum of the Morristown National Historical Park. The second building to stand here, erected c. 1770, saw the first meeting held in Morris County to protest the tyrannous acts of the mother country. The Green itself, one of the few 18th- century public spaces in New Jersey based on a New England Public green model, is still owned by the Presbyterian Church which makes it available for Town use. (NR)

D27 * DAY BUILDING (SITE) 40 W. Park Place (Rte.—24)

About 1750 a building stood here owned by one Ezekiel Cheever. It was acquired in 1773 by Thomas Kenney and later used by the Continental Army for offices and munitions storage. It is alleged that a series of military balls took place here in 1780, to deceive the British about the low ebb of American morale and material. By 1794 the building was known as O’Hara’s Tavern. In 1846 it burned to the ground, and was replaced c. 1850 with a building which housed a private school, an assembly room (Washington Hall), and three stores. By 1862 it was known as the Colonial Restaurant, operated by the first of three generations of Days, who are credited with introducing commercially made ice cream to Morristown. During the Civil War the names of Union Army draftees were selected here, and Harriet Beecher Stowe delivered a public address, presumably in Washington Hall. Before striking out on his own to create what would eventually become a multi-million—dollar food conglomerate, Milton Hershey worked for the Days as a candy maker. In the 20th century, the building was acquired by Child’s Restaurant Corporation and operated as the Townhouse on the Green. In 1968 it was demolished by Epstein’s Department Store.

D28 DICKERSON’S OR NORRIS’S TAVERN (SITE) 77 Spring Street

Late in the 18th century, the intersection of Water and Spring Streets was a crossroads of considerable activity, and was, in fact, one of the first areas of Morristown to be developed. The tavern which stood here was the scene of Benedict Arnold’s court—martial in 1779—1780.

161 MORRISTOWN REGION D

D29 * FIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH & MANSE 57 East Park Place

This congregation was organized sometime around 1738, and played a significant role in Morristown’s early development, when church wardens and trustees took an important part in political as well as religious life. The present 19th—century limestone structure, built in 1893, is a modification of the Romanesque styles characterized by enormous curved expanses and richly textured facades. Its architect, J. Cleveland Cady, designed the original Metropolitan Opera House and the Museum of Natural History. Buried in the cemetery is Gen. John Doughty, third Commander-In-Chief of the U.S. Army. (NR)

D30 * FITZ—JOHN PORTER HOUSE NJHSI-2064.l6 1 Farragut Place

This late Victorian house is 2 1/2-stories, with gambrel roof and corbelled—top chimneys. The exterior carved ornamentation is noteworthy. General Porter served in the Civil War, and was later chosen to reorganize New York City’s Department of Public Works after Boss Tweed’s removal (which removal General Porter’s neighbor Thomas Nast helped achieve). (NR)

D3l FORD MANSION NJHSI—2064.l7; HABS—32 Morris Avenue, M.C.-22 (immediately E. of Rte. 1-287)

One of New Jersey’s finest Georgian buildings, this house was built for Colonel Jacob Ford, Jr., and served as Washington’s headquarters during the Jockey Hollow encampment of 1779—1780. Its walls are painted and scored to resemble masonry, much like Mt. Vernon’s. The Palladian doorway and rich cornice molding are especially noteworthy. Part of Morristown National Historical Park, it is open to the public, as is the museum behind it, which houses artifacts and a library pertinent to the period. (NHL, NR)

D32 FORT NONSENSE (SITE) Between Chestnut Street and Mt. Kemble Avenue (Rte. 202)

This vantage point is the site of earthworks constructed in 1777 at the order of Gen. Washington for the protection of military supplies and the observation of enemy troops movements. It is now maintained by

162 MORRISTOWN REGION D (FORT NONSENSE (SITE) ,continued)

the National Park Service as part of the ,Morristown National Historic Park.

D33 FRANKLIN PLACE DISTRICT Franklin Place

Because of its short length and protected location, Franklin Place long remained one of the most intact of Morristown’s late l9th—century residential streets. In the last four years three of its houses were allowed to deteriorate so badly that demolition was necessary, leaving holes in the formerly unified streetscape. A number of the remaining houses are Queen Anne, a late Victorian style employing asymmetry, wooden strapwork and shingles, spindles and widely spaced windows. Number 1 Franklin Place is a vigorous example of late Victorian eclecticism, complete with porte cochere, tower, and a massive expanse of stained glass on the north facade. Number 10 has a steeply pitched roof with clipped gables, original slate cut in contrasting shapes, pierced bargeboards and valances, and towering chimneys. The gable ends of Number 11 are decorated in typical Queen Anne fashion with shingles, strapwork and woodcarving. Number 18 was the only house dominated by a unique bracketed arch on the third story. Number 30 anchors the north end of the street as Number 1 does the south. A 2—story side porch, third floor balcony—porch, lozenge-patterned gables, and leaf—cut brackets are combined to make this one of the most imposing houses on the street.

D34 * THE GROVE 71 Macculloch Avenue

The Grove is a surviving representative of the numerous mansions which made Morristown an exemplar of the mansard style. A New York newspaper of 1860 described the fashion, which influenced not only Morristown, but most of the East Coast, in these words: “A very short time ago, nobody seemed to know that buildings had roofs... Suddenly, however, a sort of roof epidemic seemed to seize us; and now no building, great or small, can be a building without its French roof.” Of particular interest is the fact the Frederick Law Olmsted created the original landscape design. The large ginkgo tree and wisteria were brought from Japan by Commodore Perry. Among the guests entertained here were Bret Harte and Sam Riddle, owner of Man of War. The Grove has been owned by only two families since its construction in 1865. (NR)

163 MORRISTOWN REGION D

D35 * MOSES HATFIELD HOUSE (SITE) HABS-695 21 De Hart Street

This is another HABS casualty, a 1 1/2-story house with lean-to section, built between 1832 and 1836. (NR)

D36 THE IRISH HOUSE 60 Madison Street

Around 1845, when this house was built, the surrounding land was known as Dublin. Because of prejudice against Irish Catholics, they were discouraged from buying land freely, and this neighborhood grew into something of a ghetto. The narrow design and singular roof are reminiscent of Irish building styles.

D37 JAMES STREET ROW 11-15 James Street (M.C.-10)

These four frame houses are not the oldest on James Street, nor are they among the most architecturally noteworthy in Morristown. Their unusual uniformity of scale, however, combined with interesting differences (such as a variety of roof shapes), creates a harmonious streetscape in miniature, suggestive of an urbanized mid—19—century environment. The adjacent vacant lot contains several trees of specimen quality.

D38 * THE KEDGE 49 Macculloch Avenue

The first owner of this brick and shingle house was Henry Miller, grandson of George Macculloch and another of the Macculloch Avenue area’s naval officers. The first section of the house was only four rooms when it was built as a summer cottage around 1870-1880. Its wall hides an oriental garden with lily pond and pagoda-style gazebo. (NR)

D39 KING AND VOGT BUILDING 10 Washington Street

In 1872, the National Iron Bank erected this building to house its offices and professional tenants. It was the first office in Morristown to have fireproof vaults and central hot—air heating. Its typical row—house design (narrow facade, four floors, and main entrance over a high basement) is a typical urban design, but unique in Morristown.

164 MORRISTOWN REGION D

D40 LINDENWOLD 247 South Street (M.C.—1)

An impressive neo—Gothic mansion of dark stone built in 1876 for William Skidmore, Lindenwold’s stepped Dutch gables are reminiscent of early New Amsterdam buildings. Some of its decorative ironwork appears to be proto—Art Nouveau in style. A subsequent owner made the estate well— known for its horticultural displays. In 1947 it was purchased by the Peck School. Although institutional use has preserved the original building, its appearance has not been enhanced by modern additions which gave little thought to architectural integration. (cf. Cecilhurst, Madison, for a similar problem).

D41 * MACCULLOCH HALL NJHSI-2064.3; HABS-658 45 Macculloch Avenue

This Federal Mansion was built in three parts (1801—1819) by George Macculloch, who conceived and promoted the idea of the Morris Canal. The last part to be built (western section with fanlight door) served as a boys’ academy. The interior abounds in fine woodwork, mantels and other original details. Macculloch Hall has been privately restored, and is open to the public by appointment. (NR)

D42 MILLIONAIRE’S ROW (SITE) 17 and 21 Madison Avenue (from S. St. to Normandy Pkwy.)

Around the turn—of—the century, Morristown and environs were a popular summering place of the wealthy, where, according to one report, more millionaires were in residence than any other single place in the United States. Many of the “smaller” estates (those not including deer herds and polo fields) could be found along this Morristown stretch of Madison Avenue. Today they have been bulldozed for speculative office space and similar ventures of mediocre architectural quality. Two of the most interesting, if not most lavish, survivors are the houses numbered 17 and 21. Both are variations of the Shingle Style, one of the first attempts to break away from the prevailing 19th century fondness for imitating European styles. Number 21 is the more modern of the two, even though its strapwork, candle—snuffer roof and spindle—decorated porch recall earlier revival influences. Number 17, with its surface of dark shingles, shows how a “skin” of natural materials became the organic equivalent of earlier applied decoration. The impact of both houses is heightened by their setting on a rise.

165 MORRISTOWN REGION D

D43 TIMOTHY MILLS HOUSE HBS-632 27 Mills Street

This is believed to be the oldest house in Morristown on its original site. Timothy Mills, who built it c. 1740, was a prosperous farmer and Overseer of the Poor, as well as one of the first contributors to Princeton University. The Mills family also operated a tannery here - one of the most necessary though unpleasant 18th— century industries. The Mills house is especially valuable because so many of its original structural features are directly accessible for study and teaching purposes. This fact has been taken advantage of by the American Civilization Institute of Morristown, a joint project of Fairleigh Dickenson University and the Morristown school system. In addition to historic and archaeological research on the site, an 18th-century barn in the path of Route 287 was dismantled and reconstructed adjacent to the house by Morristown High School students. The house is now in need of restoration. (NR)

D44 MORRIS COUNTY COURTHOUSE NJHSI-2064.l3 Washington Street, between Court Street and Western Avenue

Lewis Carter and Joseph Lindsley designed this building in 1827. Built primarily of brick, it uses wood and brownstone trim. At a time when the Graeco—Roman revival style was becoming increasingly popular, Carter and Lindsley used its effects sparingly, and generally for minor details (the Ionic columns of the cupola, for example). The building’s overall effect is Federal, with some evidence of Georgian antecedents. The main facade includes a pediment enclosing a representation of Justice, decorative pilasters, and a wide cornice. It is generally regarded as one of the finest public buildings of its period in New Jersey, despite the poorly conceived modern additions which have destroyed some of its visual impact. The partially restored interior still houses the Morris County Courts.

D45 * MORRISTOWN LIBRARY 1 Miller Road

The main wing of this library was built in 1917, endowed by Grinnell Willis as a privately-run institution. Its designer was Edward L. Tilton, one of the foremost library architects of the period, who had previously worked for McKimm, Mead and White. Together with St. Peter’s Church on the opposite side of Miller Road, it creates a unified complex, presenting several variations of the Gothic Revival style. Generally in good condition, the handsome interior is seriously overcrowded and in need of restoration. In 1967 the library was made public under the management of Morristown and Morris Township. (NR)

166 MORRISTOWN REGION D

D46 * THOMAS NAST HOUSE, VILLA FONTANA 50 Macculloch Avenue

Lincoln called him “my best recruiting sergeant,” for his powerful Civil War illustrations; Boss Tweed called him a few things which aren’t printable. He was Thomas Nast, “father of the 3merican political cartoon,” who lived here from 1872 until 1902. Not only was he instrumental in exposing the notorious Tweed Ring, he created the Democratic donkey and the Republic elephant, and popularized the representation of Santa Clause essentially as we know it today. Nast lived at Villa Fontana during some of his most productive years, and here entertained such luminaries as Mark Twain and Ulysses S. Grant. The house itself is architecturally noteworthy, due to fine proportions and the successful manner in which it combines classical motifs (pilasters, a Paladian window) with more typically Victorian details (such as heavily bracketed eaves and hooded dormers). The interior contains many of its original embellishments, including a fireplace identifiable in a Nast drawing. (NHL, NR)

D47 PARKER BUILDING 22-23 North Park Place

Like most of Morristown’s surviving 19th—century commercial buildings, the Parker Building has seen numerous uses. In 1876 it was acquired by John E. Parker and George Laurence. How long before that the building in its present form was standing has not been determined. A recent renovation has demonstrated how successfully an interesting if not unique building can be adapted for modern use. Although the ground—floor facade has been modernized, alterations were executed in keeping with the style of the upper floors, thus enabling the Green to keep a handsome and functional link to its past.

D48 * PIERSON CARRIAGE SHOP (SITE) South Street, Route 24 (S.W. corner of Madison St.)

For a number of years prior to the Civil War the manufacture of carriages and wagons was one of Morristown’s leading industries. Lewis Pierson, Jr. opened a shop here in 1853. There were five other shops in the immediate vicinity. Because a large portion of the trade was with the South (the finished products were shipped by train), the approach of the slavery crisis contributed to the demise of this flourishing business. (NR)

167 MORRISTOWN REGION D

D49 * CHRISTOPHER RAYMOND PERRY RODGERS HOUSE 40 Macculloch Avenue

Built for Christopher Raymond Perry Rodgers around 1852, this clapboard house has a gable over the front door and a verandah running the length of the main facade. Basically a simple house, small details such as the porch latticework repeated in a fence reflect the care and taste of its builder. Rodgers was the nephew of both Oliver Hazard Perry and Commodore John Rodgers. He served as commander of all naval forces in the Pacific (1878— 1880) and was superintendent of the Naval Academy at Annapolis. CUR)

D50 * ST. PETER’S EPISCOPAL CHURCH, PARISH HOUSE AND RECTORY South Street, Route 24 (S.W. corner at Miller Road)

Directly across from the Morristown Municipal Building (Vail Mansion) stands this Gothic Revival structure designed by the renowned firm of McKim, Mead and White in the style of English parish churches of the 14th and 15th centuries. The rectory, cloistered walk and parish house, together with the church itself, create an ensemble of rare integration which harmonizes with the Gothic library across Miller Road. In addition to its overall architectural impact, St. Peter’s employs an intricate symbology carried out in small details, such as the golden cock weathervanes which allude to Peter’s betrayal of Christ, and the Weeping Beech, a symbol of mourning, near the graveyard. The church alone took 24 years to complete (1887-1911), employing eighteen stonemasons and several blacksmiths. The chapel contains a large window created in 1894 by Louis C. Tiffany. The experimental technique used was judged unsatisfactory, but proposals to remove the window were never carried out. The parish house was designed by Bertram Goodhue better known for his work in the Beaux Arts Classical mode. (NR)

D51 SYLVESTER RUSSEL HOUSE HABS-659 89 Western Avenue

If the HABS survey is correct in dating this small, 3-bay house with eyebrow windows at c. 1820, it demonstrates how older forms persisted, since there is really little to distinguish it from many 18th-century houses. Synthetic siding applied in 1974 has not improved its appearance.

168 MORRISTOWN REGION D

D52 * SANSAY HOUSE 17 DeHart Street

Built c. 1807, this was the dancing school of Monsieur Sansay, called New Jersey’s most famous dancing master. Lafayette was entertained here when he toured the United States in 1825 as “the nation’s guest.” It was later the home of Gen. Joseph Revere (cf. Revere House, Morris Twp.) from 1872 until his death in 1880. Monsieur Sansay’s ballroom has been broken up and a number of Victorian alterations have been made. Otherwise the house has survived the pressures of its commercial location surprisingly well. (NR)

D53 SAYRE HOUSE NJHSI-2064.11 217 South Street (Rte.24)

The Sayre House was formerly one of the best preserved frame structures of the Federal period in Morristown. Recent commercial alterations have made it a textbook example of what Carl Reiss, in With Heritage So Rich, calls “destruction by substitution.” “A house or church or public building is acquired and completely remodeled — so much so that almost nothing is left of the original facade. Additions are built in front or around the original structure and it finally disappears — lost somewhere behind new rooms and new exteriors.” (NJR)

D54 SCHUYLER-HAMILTON HOUSE NJHSI-2064.4; HABS-35 5 Olyphant Place

Dr. Jabez Campfield, a senior surgeon for the Continental Army, owned this house sometime before the Revolution. It was here in 1779 that Alexander Hamilton, then attached to Gen. Washington’s staff, courted Betsy Schuyler. Although not architecturally remarkable, its survival has made it one of the finest local examples of upper—middle- class architecture of the period - falling between a modest dwelling like the Timothy Mills House and the relative opulence of a house like the Ford Mansion. Despite the destruction of its original masonry when it was moved from Morris Street, it is in excellent condition. Today it is owned by the DAR and furnished as a house museum open to the public.

169 MORRISTOWN REGION D

D55 SPEEDWELL IRON WORKS (SITE) NJHSI-2064.15 Speedwell Avenue (Rte.202) at the foot of Speedwell Lake

John Johnson owned a forge here during the Revolution, and a few years later a slitting mill was built on this site. In 1807, Stephen Vail became a partner in the mill and had built up the Iron Works by 1814, when he became its sole owner. The Works was primarily a foundry and machine shop, using, but not making iron. With the help of an English designer, Vail manufactured early steam engines. In 1818 Speedwell made and installed most of the engine for the S.S. Savannah, the first steamship to cross the Atlantic. Only Stephen’s bridge, the foundation of a sawmill, and one wall of the machine shop remain today. The business was moved to New York in 1873 and the buildings burned down in 1901, just before the original dam was dismantled. The present dam dates from the late 1930’s.

D56 THE SPEEDWELL VILLAGE NJHSI-2064.23 Speedwell Avenue (Rte.202) and Cory Road

The Village is a small part of what was Stephen Vail’s homestead. In 1829, Judge Vail acquired land on the east side of Speed— well Avenue and finished off a mill there to rent as a cotton weaving factory. A year later he bought the adjoining farm from his son—in—law. Since 1968, the Speedwell Village, a non-profit corporation, has preserved the small part of the homestead with Vail’s house, farm buildings, and factory as well as several historic houses moved from the center of Morristown. The site is listed on the National Register (NR) and the Factory, where Stephen’s son Alfred Vail and Samuel F.B. Morse first demonstrated the perfected telegraph, is a National Historic Landmark (NHL).

The following buildings are now on the site: FORD COTTAGE (original location: 10 Howell Place, near the Jacob Ford Mansion in what is now the right-of-way of Route 287). Gabriel Ford Jr., grandson of Colonel Jacob Ford, Jr., probably built this modest house in the early 1800’s. Threatened by highway construction, it was moved to Speedwell in 1968. The Cottage retains many original features such as wide, untapered weatherboards and small—paned windows. L’HOMMEDIEU-GWINNUP HOUSE (Original location: 91 Spring St.) NJHSI—2064.l8 Nathaniel L’Hommedieu owned the original, Morristown site of this house in 1771. John Gwinnup, a member of the Morris County

170 MORRISTOWN REGION D (THE SPEEDWELL VILLAGE, continued)

Militia during the Revolution, was its next owner. From 1777 to 1812, his house stood on the lot and the present house was built there before 1840. Its noteworthy features include a basement kitchen, gambrel roof and recessed doorway. The floor plan has end chimneys and a central hail flanked by four rooms. Although the house still needs work before it can be opened, the restored kitchen now serves as a gift shop. MOSES ESTEY HOUSE (Original location: corner of Spring and Water Streets) NJHSI—2064.9; HABS677 Moses Estey was a Captain in the New Jersey Militia during the Revolutionary War. He built this house shortly after his first one burned down in 1786. Its floor plan resembles that of the L’Hommedieu House and its brick-filled, frame construction is like that of the Vail House. Much of the interior woodwork is original, but since the house has not been restored, it is closed to visitors. It originally stood across from the L’Homnedieu House and both were saved from Urban Renewal demolition when HUD moved them to Speedwell in 1969. CARRIAGE HOUSE Early photographs of Speedwell and a collection of wooden patterns are displayed here. The Speedwell Iron Works was a foundry and it cast iron in wet sand moulded from these patterns. The castings became parts of the Savannah’s 1818 engine, early locomotives, and the Factory’s water-wheel. Horses were once stabled in the basement of this 1808 building. The carriage House, the nearby granary built on stone piers, and two or three barns once formed the Vail farmyard. STEPHEN VAIL HOUSE This house was built in the early 1800’s and Vail’s daughters probably lived here during the 1820’s and 30’s. It is gradually being restored to its 1844 appearance, when Judge Vail renovated it for his own use. Alfred Vail, Stephen’s elder son, often had dinner here with his sister in 1837, when he was working on the telegraph. His brother, George Vail, became a partner in the Iron Works when Stephen retired.

171 MORRISTOWN REGION D (THE SPEEDWELL VILLAGE, continued)

George built the stone mansion on the opposite side of Speedwell Avenue in 1848. VAIL Factory NJHSI—2064.22 The Factory, finished off for cotton looms in 1829, was used in several ways over the years. The gristmill, which now occupies the first floor and the basement, is run by a 24 foot overshot wheel, built at Speedwell in the late 1840’s. In January 1838 however, the second floor room was available for the first public demonstration of the electromagnetic telegraph by Samuel Morse and Alfred Vail. An exhibit, with instruments from the Smithsonian and Western Union collections, shows how science, invention, and development came together at Speedwell to perfect the telegraph. (NHL)

D57 * UNITED METHODIST CHURCH 50 South Park Place

Built in 1870 of local puddingstone, this church abjures the curvilinear mass of its Presbyterian neighbor in favor of a more vertical effect sometimes labeled Norman Romanesque. S.D. Hatch, its architect, also designed the Jay Gould mansion in New York City. It was especially noted for its interior woodwork until the fire which gutted it in 1972. The front facade with towers and some of the other remaining walls have been incorporated into a modern reconstruction. The congregation’s decision to rebuild has saved the Green from losing one of its most imposing buildings. (NR)

D58 UNNAMED HOUSE NJHSI-2064.26 109 Washington Street (Rte.24)

Probably built in the second half of the 18th century, this house is representative rather than remarkable, although its careful preservation and appropriate landscaping make it one of the best maintained early houses in Morristown. The addition of a modern bay window is the kind of compromise sometimes justified if it makes the difference between adaptive use and possible neglect or demolition — especially in cases like this, in which the building is not architecturally unique, and the adaptation is sensitively handled.

172 MORRISTOWN REGION D

D59 * THEODORE VAIL MANSION South Street (Rte.24) Opposite Miller Road

Built in 1918 as a home and private museum for Theodore Vail, the founder of AT&T and Bell Laboratories, this granite and Vermont marble mansion was designed by W.W. Bosworth. The bronze doors, executed in bas— relief, depict scenes of local history, and the double stairway of self— supporting masonry is a notable example of arch construction. Many elements of the original landscape design remain, and deserve to be conserved and restored as part of the total design of the building and its site. Because it now houses municipal offices of the town of Morristown which strain its capacity, the building and its grounds have suffered some neglect, but none that could not be reversed. (NR)

D60 WILLOW HALL, THE GEORGE VAIL HOUSE NJHSI-2064.l4 330 Speedwell Avenue(Rte.202)

Constructed by English masons and carpenters, Willow Hall and its out—buildings took five years to complete, c. 1840. It is constructed of native red puddingstone (Hibernia conglomerate) with wood trim in a modified country Gothic style. It was built for George Vail, and provides an interesting contrast to his father’s house across the road (now part of Speedwell Village). The present garage originally served as slave quarters. George Vail, a partner in the Speedwell Iron Works, later entered politics and was made U.S. Consul to Glasgow in 1861.

173 MORRIS TOWNSHIP REGION D

D61 ALNWICK HALL Route 24 (S.E. corner of Canfield Rd.)

General Edward Meaney, director of AT&T had this orange brick Gothic mansion built around 1910. Its design was supposedly inspired by an Irish castle. Notable features include an octagonal oak—panelled breakfast room, a dining room of Circassian walnut, and individual room—zoned heating, an innovation for its time. Alnwick Hall is presently owned by St. Mark’s Lutheran Church.

D62 JACOB FORD POWDER MILL (SITE) Immediately N, of Morristown boundary on Whippany River.

At the outset of the Revolution the American ability to produce gunpowder and all manner of military equipment was gravely deficient. On April 22, 1776, Jacob Ford, Jr. petitioned the New Jersey Committee of Safety for a loan to help construct a powder mill not far from his mansion. The date of completion remains undiscovered, hut production commenced sometime after June 10, 1776. For security reasons, the precise location of this strategic installation was never recorded at the time. A recent study has documented the present site as the most likely. The property is now owned by the Morris County Park Commission and is on Patriot’s Path.

D63 FRELINGHUYSEN MANSION AND ARBORETUM, WHIPPANY FARM Main Entrance, East Hanover Avenue, opposite Morris County Library

This is an early and superb example of the so-called Colonial Revival which culminated around 1920. Built in 1891 as a summer home for George G. Frelinghuysen, it exhibits a profusion of neoclassical details, including garlanded window heads, Corinthian pilasters, pineapple finials, urns, balustrades and a Palladian window. All of these decorative elements are skillfully executed in wood, to designs by the Boston firm of Rotch and Tilden. The main entrance, an Ionic—columned porte cochere, is especially impressive. The mansion and grounds are inextricably hound in an example of Romantic landscape design which delighted in the subtle manipulation of organic and man made forms. Today the rolling lawns, specimen trees and formal rose garden are maintained by the Morris County Park Commission, which makes its headquarters in the mansion.

174 MORRIS TOWNSHIP REGION D

D64 GLYNALLEN Canfield Road (E. side, S. of Canfield Terr.)

When Edward Meaney built his Irish castle, Alnwick Hall, men of wealth were competing to see who could erect the most impressive house modeled on European prototypes. Not content to live in an ordinary reproduction, George Marshall Allen toured Europe hunting for architectural details that appealed to him. The ideas and artifacts he collected were incorporated into a house based on the 1481 English Manor of Compton Wyngates, Glynallen’s profusion of gargoyles, stained glass and carved woodwork have been preserved by its present owner, the General Drafting Company.

D65 JOSEPH GUERIN FARMHOUSE NJHSI-2062.6 Old Mendham Road (at S.W. corner of Reed Rd.)

Although this house was built late in the 18th century (about 1773), its vernacular design puts it in the tradition of pre-Revolutionary domestic architecture that could have been built almost any time during the century. The flooring is cherry, pine, and oak, and much of the hardware and window glass is original. The small wings are recent additions, but the exterior of the main wing is remarkably unaltered. Joseph Guerin’s brother Joshua’s house stands on Jockey Hollow Road in Harding.

D66 THE HOLT NJHSI-2062.7 Kitchell Road (W. side, N.E. of Woodland Ave.)

Several noted people have lived in this 1855 house, a 2-story frame building with massive chimneys and deep overhanging eaves. Dr. Kitchell, the first owner, was New Jersey’s first geologist. In his childhood, Theodore Roosevelt spent several summers here. Frank Stockton, who named it The Holt (a wooded glen) was a short story writer (“The Lady or the Tiger”) and editor of the popular St. Nicholas Magazine.

D67 NORMANDY PARKWAY DISTRICT Normandy Parkway

Although now interspersed with modern houses, the mansions lining this street still make a strong collective impact, due not only to their architecture (primarily neo-Georgian and Shingle Style) but also to their landscaping and deep setbacks. Of particular interest is Fairacres (#17) with its Corinthian—columned verandah

175 MORRIS TOWNSHIP REGION D (NORMANDY PARKWAY DISTRICT, continued)

reached by a flight of stairs one-story high, and the stable at the corner of Columbia Road, an individualistic dependency with lunette windows and domed cupola.

D68 PRUDENTOWN DISTRICT Mt. Kemble Avenue (Rte. 202)

During the late 18th and early 19th century, Mt. Kemble Avenue comprised a self—sufficient community named after one of the first families to settle outside of Morristown on this stretch of road. In addition to a pottery works, cider mill and distillery, the Prudens and Armstrongs operated brickyards here (the Springbrook Country Club ponds were the clay pits). More than a dozen historic houses remain in the district, most in good condition. The following list represents a selection of the most notable. Houses in the district are marked with an asterisk.

* FOUR WINDS OR MILE POST 188 Mt. Kemble Avenue

A bakeoven can still be found in the ground floor kitchen of this early 19th—century brick house, which also has interior shutters and its original hand—hewn beams. The Canadians (or “Frenchies,” as they were called), who worked in the nearby Pruden and Armstrong brickyards, were fed in this kitchen.

* HART HOUSE 257 Mt. Kemble Avenue

This stucco—covered brick house dates from the last quarter of the 18th century. It has horsehair-filled walls, wind holes at the eaves, and original glass. A brick cistern in the basement has access from the kitchen, and may have been another of the local stations on the Underground Railroad. The original owner was probably one of the Pruden brothers. The house is presently in serious disrepair.

* PETER JOIS0N HOUSE NJHSI-2062.3 129 Mt. Kemble Avenue

Probably built sometime after 1792, this 1 1/2-story frame cottage is now shingled but may originally have been clapboard. It

176 MORRIS TOWNSHIP REGION D (PRUDENTOWN DISTRICT, continued)

was built by General John Doughty, commander of the Morris Militia, to house his slaves. In his will, probated in 1826, General Doughty freed his slaves, and bequeathed the house to one of them, Peter, who took the surname Johnson.

* PETER PRUDEN HOUSE 232 Mt. Kemble Avenue

Peter Pruden is known to have moved into this house with his wife soon after their marriage in 1782. This 2 1/2-story frame structure is built on the hill, so that only one story is visible from the road. This is one of the earliest of the Prudentown houses.

* UNNAMED HOUSE 249 Mt. Kemble Avenue

A rambling clapboard and brick house (late 18th early 19th century), the brick foundation has puddingstone corners. The third floor is a later addition. There is reputed to have been a tunnel running from this house to the Hart House, next door.

* UNNAMED HOUSE 269 Mt. Kemble Avenue

Information from deeds and wills suggest that this 1800 house was added to in 1825. Shingles presently cover the original clapboards. Like most of the houses in this area, construction is mortise, tenon, and peg, with untrimmed beams. An adjacent structure, once the milkhouse for the Prudentown community, was recently demolished.

* UNNAMED HOUSE 301 Mt. Kemble Avenue

This late 18th- or early 19th—century house is one of the handsomest of the Prudentown group. The older section has a facade of flush clapboards, instead of the usual overlapping variety, and the porch pillars exhibit handmade dentil decorations. A bakeoven, hand forged hardware, pegged beams and original glass survive.

177 MORRIS TOWNSHIP REGION D

D69 PUFF’S TAVERN 214 West Hanover Avenue (M.C.-50)

Undoubtedly the oldest building in the immediate area, this was an inn or tavern before the Revolution Built on the rise of a small hill, its outstanding features are a great stone chimney and original wide floorboards. The exterior has fared less well; some modern additions and a recent skin of shingles have compromised its appearance. Additional research is warranted here to investigate the early history of the tavern.

D70 REVERE HOUSE, THE WILLOWS NJHSI-2062,7 Route 24 (W. of Kahdena Rd.)

Joseph W. Revere, son of an eminent N.Y. physician, grandson of Paul Revere, and a major in the Civil War, designed this house and supervised its construction in 1854. The carpenter was Ashbel Bruen of Chatham. Although Revere had no architectural training, his house is generally considered one of the finest examples of frame Gothic Revival in New Jersey. Revere himself painted the murals which still decorate the principal rooms. After 1872 when his health made supervision of a large estate onerous, Revere moved to the Sansay House in Morristown. Thereafter The Willows was rented - for a while to Brett Harte, who gathered material for his novel Thankful Blossom (set in Washington Valley) while living here. The Morris County Park Commission will eventually open this property to the public as a house museum and working farm exhibit. (NR)

D71 JOHN CLEVES SYMMES HOUSE (SITE) NJHSI—2062.l Sussex Avenue (M.C.—l7) at Kahdena Road (now a residential development, “Wheatsheaf Farms”)

Thought to be the first large clearing in the forest surrounding what was to become Morristown, this was the site of a private mint authorized by the New Jersey Legislature to strike horsehead pennies in 1786, prior to the establishment of a federal mint. New Jersey Chief Justice John Symmes had a house here before 1780. The same house was later run as a tavern. During the 19th century, a rambling mansion stood here, added to over the years and incorporating stylistic features of different periods. It became known as “Wheatsheaf” in 1887, when purchased by Wall Street investment banker Gustave Kissel. In 1968 the mansion was demolished to make way for the present

178 MORRIS TOWNSHIP REGION D (JOHN CLEVES SYMMES HOUSE, continued)

housing development. Before being bulldozed, the land was renowned for its rolling contours, flowering trees, and brook, all of which lent it another early name, “Solitude”. Scholars agree that archaeological investigation here is justified, not only because of the early dwelling and mint, but to investigate the existence of a reputed silver mine.

D72 THORNE ESTATE 812 Normandy Heights Road and 110 Columbia Road

This is one of the most successful local examples of the English classical style, completed in 1912 for Willard V. Schoonhoven Thorne, an engineer who standardized equipment and stock for the Southern Pacific Railroad. According to architectural historian Walter C. Kidney, the architects, Adrich and Delano “...were among the foremost designers of white—on—red Neo—Georgian houses, clubs, and churches...” A brick—walled forecourt focuses attention on the 12—bay facade with its double—pedimented entrance. Inside, many original features (paneling, marble floors and fireplaces, custom—designed hardware) are extant. An auditorium added by the present owners (Morristown Unitarian Fellowship) proves that fine architecture of the past needn’t be compromised by modern alterations. The former garage and servants’ quarters, now a residence, stands on Columbia Road next to the Eddy carriage house. The nearby curved brick wall once protected Mr. Thorne’s rose garden.

D73 VALLEY VIEW 45-51 Normandy Heights Road, and Columbia Road, 460’± W. of Normandy Heights Road

Completed in 1896 as a summer “cottage” for Jesse Leeds Eddy who made a fortune in anthracite, Valley View is a commanding crescent of granite and shingle — 20 rooms anchored by a central great hall. Although the interior is cast in a mold of classical elegance, the relatively asymmetrical plan and elevations reflect the proto-modernism of the Shingle Style at its most innovative. This is particularly evident when Valley View is compared to a house like its neighbor the Thorne mansion, an exponent of the European inspired revival architecture typical of Morristown’s Age of Opulence. Interior features include rosewood, mahogany and oak paneling, a domed music room, and a pneumatic pipe communication system. Devoted

179 MORRIS TOWNSHIP REGION D (VALLEY VIEW, continued)

care has left this monument of transitional architecture virtually unaltered. Below the house on Columbia Road stands a 2—story brick carriage house. Although the second floor, once servants quarters, has been altered, the ground floor still suggests its former use. In 1911 when carriages were supplanted by automobiles (the Eddy’s owned seven), the building was enlarged. It too is in excellent condition.

WASHINGTON VALLEY DISTRICT The center of this area is described by the rough juncture of Washington Valley Road, Schoolhouse Lane, Gaston Road, and Whitehead Road.

The pleasant aspect of this valley attracted settlers by the middle of the 18th century. Many of its early farmhouses have been altered and enlarged, but still impart a collective impression of rural life at that time. As well as farming, the Valley supported a number of agriculturally— related industries. Tanneries, mills, and limekilns were built, as well as a large number of applejack distilleries which produced the famous “Jersey Lightning.” The following buildings, marked with an * are a few of the many which give Washington Valley its unique identity.

D74 * WASHINGTON VALLEY SCHOOLHOUSE NJHSI-3230.l Washington Valley Road and Schoolhouse Lane

For more than one hundred years this simple building has served as a focal point for community affairs, providing an unbroken link between the civic and educational aspirations of two centuries. Although similar to thousands of schoolhouses built throughout the United States during the second half of the 19th century, the Gothic influenced cupola is executed with unusual skill. Comparison with the Madison Masonic Temple of 1825 demonstrates the basic similarity of much 19th—century American public architecture.

D75 * JACOB SMITH HOUSE Washington Valley Road (1/4 mile E. of Whippany River)

Tax records indicate that this property was farmed by 1794. The original house, a 2—room cottage, was built c. 1800 and was incorporated into the larger house seen today, built c. 1835. The Smiths were weavers as well as farmers.

180 MORRIS TOWNSHIP REGION D

D76 * JOHN SMITH OR 1812 HOUSE Washington Valley Road (at N.E. corner of Gaston Rd.)

In an area of frame dwellings, this brick house is conspicuous. It was built c. 1812 when the young republic had recovered sufficiently from the hardships of the Revolution to indulge a taste for architecture that went beyond necessities. This, in part accounts for the spacious rooms, fine mantels and slate roof, all of which contrast markedly with the smaller frame section built about twenty years before. About 1855 the house and land came into the possession of John H. Smith, who gained a reputation as the area’s first scientific farmer when he discovered that lime increased his wheat yield. The house was owned by Smiths until 1959. It has been carefully preserved, contains a remarkable number of original features, and has been little altered by modern improvements. (NJR)

D77 * SAMUEL ALWARD PLANTATION Schoolhouse Lane (N. side, at Mendham boundary)

Morristown Presbyterian Church records show that Samuel Alward “renewed covenant” in 1764. This house was not built until sometime around 1783. Originally it consisted of no more than four or five small rooms. A Dutch door with iron hardware may be original, and some interior doors have rare keyed wooden arches.

D78 * JACOB ARNOLD HOUSE Washington Valley Road (N. side, 300±’ W. of Gaston Rd.)

In 1747, Stephen Arnold of Whippany conveyed to his son Samuel 125 acres of land in Washington Valley. Stephen married Phoebe, sister of Col. Jacob Ford. Their son Jacob had this house built around 1789. The Arnolds remained the largest landowners and most prominent citizens of the Valley for over one hundred years. The same Jacob Arnold owned the famous Arnold’s Tavern on the Morristown Green, where Washington and his officers frequently met.

D79 * THE DISTILLERY LOTT (sic), ENOCH ROFF HOUSE Schoolhouse Lane (300±’ from intersection with Washington Valley Rd.)

The site of the present house, constructed c. 1827 by Enoch Roff, was originally part of Jacob Arnold’s property. The remains of one of the Val1eys nineteen applejack distilleries lie on the east bank of this land, near the dwelling. A 2—story distillery was built into the bank so that apples could be poured in at the top and the finished product hauled away at the bottom.

181 MORRIS TOWNSHIP REGION D

D80 * JOHN MORRIS HOUSE Washington Valley Road (1/2 mile S.W. of Schoolhouse Lane)

This house, built in the last quarter of the 18th century, was originally a saltbox. The original section has a door to the left. Renovations have been extensive. John Morris, the first owner, was a farmer renowned locally for the products of his distillery.

182 183 ROCKAWAY REGION E

El ESTILLE HOUSE 560 West Main Street (M.C.-44)

A 1762 tombstone for Mary Estille indicates that the family was an early one in this area. A one—room dwelling stood here late in the 18th or early in the 19th century, and was incorporated into the later house. The prominent Federal doorway suggests that the house had attained substantial size by the first quarter of the 19th century. The center gable and full porch were a favorite Victorian means of modernizing an older structure. Examples of alterations like this can be found throughout Morris County, and produce a good-looking, utilitarian hybrid.

E2 FIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH OF ROCKAWAY Church Street, M.C.-20 (N. side) at Academy Street

Known as the cockpit of the Revolution, this church furnished leadership, a meeting place and a public forum for patriots in Northeastern Morris County during the war for independence. Organized in 1758, it is also the mother church of various local presbyterian congregations. The present brick structure was built in 1832. Although similar to Parsippany’s Presbyterian Church, it has suffered some changes, notably alterations of windows. The cemetery’s oldest gravestone is dated 1762, although older graves exist with no headstones. Among the many Revolutionary soldiers buried here is Gen. William Winds. Buried near Gen. Winds in the cemetery’s only other raised grave is Jane Ford of the Morristown Fords.

E3 DR. JOHN JACKSON HOUSE, THE PILL DISPENSARY NJHSI-2660.3 4 West Main Street (M.C.-44)

This was the home and office of Rockaway’s first two physicians, Dr. John Darby Jackson, and his son, Dr. John Walter Jackson. The smaller wing with gambrel roof is mid-l8th century. Notable interior details include hand carved woodwork and a curving banister which rises to the third floor.

E4 JOSEPH JACKSON HOUSE NJHSI-2660.4 82 East Main Street (M.C.-44)

Built c. 1829 by Col. Joseph Jackson for his son, Stephen II, this is one of the best examples of post—colonial rural neo—classic—

184 ROCKAWAY REGION E (JOSEPH JACKSON HOUSE, continued)

ism in Central Morris County. The small wing contains kitchen and dairy room. The high basement contributes to the vertical appearance, and necessitates the flight of stairs to the main door, a feature popular in later urban townhouses. Col. Jackson was an officer in the War of 1812. He owned vast acreage in Rockaway, including several iron forges and a rolling mill for which he was dubbed the “Iron King.” In addition to serving as justice of the peace, he was appointed judge in the court of common pleas, and was prominent in Presbyterian Church affairs. The house is remarkably intact, especially the attic. It now serves as the borough’s public library. (NR)

E5 STEPHEN JACKSON HOUSE AND OUTBUILDING NJHSI-2660.7; HABS-507 East Main Street M.C.—44, (N. side) at Franklin Avenue

The earliest part of this house was in existence in 1778, when it was purchased by Stephen Jackson, a member of Washington’s personal guard. Early in the 19th century, a large wing was added, including a columned portico. What is now the rear facade has a Greek Revival porch. A partially dismantled fieldstone outbuilding was a smokehouse (now being restored).

E6 METHODIST CHURCH OF ROCKAWAY Church Street (M.C. -20), (N. side) at Mt. Hope Road

The Methodist Church in Rockaway was incorporated in 1833. The present frame building, constructed c. 1870, occupies the site of its predecessor. It is notable for its unusual plan, incorporating two symmetrical 1-story wings which form a forecourt. The domed belfry is a larger variant of the belfry of the Mt. Hope Methodist Church, suggesting a common builder.

185 ROCKAWAY TOWNSHIP REGION E

E7 FORD FAESCH MANOR HOUSE

Mt. Hope Road, N.E. side (2,200±’ S. of Picatinny Arsenal entrance) This was the home of Swiss—born John Jacob Faesch, foremost iron— master of the Revolution, who supplied the Continental Army with cannon and ordnance from the surrounding Mt. Hope Mine Tract. It was built in 1770 under the direction of Col. Jacob Ford, Jr. Although considerably less sophisticated than the Ford Mansion in Morristown, its size and floor plan are similar. Three—foot thick stone walls and massive oak beams have helped it withstand years of neglect. It is presently vacant and in need of restoration. (NR)

E8 MOUNT HOPE METHODIST CHURCH Mt. Hope Road, M.C. 66 (1/2 m.± N. of Mt. Hope Ave.)

Between 1852 and 1874, four churches were subsidized or directly built by local mining companies. Munsell’s History of Morris County states that “In 1870 the Mount Hope Mining Company erected a church at Mount Hope for the benefit of any society of Christians that might desire to worship in it. The Methodist society, being much more numerous than others in that locality, had used it regularly since its erection. . .“ Because of its relative isolation and intermittent use, the interior has been subjected to virtually no modernization — a rare state of affairs for Morris County churches. Due to the simplicity of the original decoration, the interior today suggests how even earlier churches must have appeared. This fact, coupled with the associations of the mining companies’ paternalistic “welfare systems” makes the Mt. Hope church especially worthy of preservation.

E9 SPLIT ROCK FURNACES Base of Split Rock Reservoir

A furnace was built here as early as 1803. Those now standing date from 1862, but were used for only one year before new methods made them economically obsolete. They are the last charcoal blast furnaces in Morris County; only three more are extant in New Jersey. (NR)

186 JEFFERSON REGION E

E10 DEMOUTH HOUSE Green Pond Road (M.C. -48), in the Newark Watershed, just W. of Rockaway Twp. boundary.

Thomas DeMouth, a Huguenot farmer who settled in Rockaway Valley in 1709, migrated to Newfoundland in 1730.His sons built the original part of this house three years later. In 1773 his son—in-law Peter Schuyler built a second house, and in 1820 the two were joined by new stone walls. It is one of the earliest houses in what is now Jefferson. -

Ell PETERSBURG, TOWN AND FORGE (SITE) Berkshire Valley Road (M.C.-52)/Dover-Milton Road Area

In addition to the Ringling association (below) this site is notable for its early industries and settlement. The town of Petersburg, its surrounding farmsteads and orchards, comprised the first area to be intensively settled in Jefferson. Iron was produced here as early as 1754, when the Petersburg Forge was operated by Robert Hunter Morris and James Alexander. After iron production ceased to be profitable, farming supported most local people. Gristmills, a sawmill and a plaster mill also thrived, and in 1840 Lewis Chamberlain, descendent of one of Petersburg’s first families, opened a distillery. With few changes, this was the kind of economy which lasted into the beginning of the 20th century. Farming was never easy in Jefferson’s rocky soil, however, and this may have been one reason Petersburg’s landowners were willing to sell out to Ringling.

E11 RINGLING MANOR Berkshire Valley Road at Manor Drive

Alfred T. Ringling founder of the “Greatest Show on Earth,” began preparing for construction of his Jefferson estate about 1900. He purchased the entire town of Petersburg, which he then razed to make way for the mansion, barn, carriage house, water tower and dam which still dominate the landscape. Ringling wanted to enjoy the calm and quiet of the country, but not in rustic surroundings. His 3—story mansion, built of fireproof steel, concrete and stone, included a solarium and billiard room; an organ room (with Tiffany stained glass); two ballrooms; and a private theatre where new circus acts were auditioned. Ringling’s circle of friends included artists, writers and at least one famous diva, Geraldine Farrar, who gave the estate a reputation for sparkling parties.

187 JEFFERSON REGION E (RINGLING MANOR, continued)

Circus animals and their trainers were frequently quartered here. After disembarking at the Oak Ridge train station, equipment and the smaller animals were hauled up Berkshire Valley Road in ornate wagons drawn by huge teams of matched grey draft horses, elephants following behind. All of the original accessory buildings (plus an 80’ water tower), faced with stone to match the mansion, are still standing with few alterations. Later in the century, the estate became winter headquarters for the first motorized circus. Circus practices were in a difficult transition period, however, and the experiment was not a success. (NJR)

188 189 DOVER REGION F

F1 TITUS BERRY HOUSE 301 McFarlan Street

Berry lands (a deed dates back to 1782) once included hundreds of acres from the Rockaway River to Germania Park, including most of what is now East Dover. Titus Berry (born in this house in 1823), his son Asa, and grandson Steven C. Berry farmed the land for three generations until 1910, when the property was divided among Steven’s heirs. The original part of the house was probably built c.l780. Subsequent alterations and modernizations have removed any obvious architectural merit, so that today it is significant only as the home of one of Dover’s earliest settlers.

F2 BONNEYVIEW Bonneyview Drive, Hurd Park

Owned by Edwin J. Ross from its construction in 1876 until the turn—of— the—century, Bonneyview was designed and built by a local carpenter/builder named Grover. About 1900 it was turned into a restaurant known as Pine Terrace Inn. In 1926, two wings were detached and moved to South Elk Street to serve as private dwellings. A number of decorative features make this a good example of high— victorian eclecticism — the columned porte—cochere, scalloped shingles, pierced and toothed valance moldings, and the Italianate tower. Bonneyview now serves as the home of the Dover Area Historical Society.

F3 FIRST MEMORIAL PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH Blackwell Street, M.C.—44 (at N.E. corner of Prospect Street)

This church expresses the expansive socio/religious aspirations of the turn—of—the—century, when many congregations embarked on grandiose building programs to replace earlier modest structures. This 1899 building, in modified Romanesque style, is somewhat similar to Morristown’s Presbyterian Church on the Green. Both employ pale limestone instead of the dark glazed brick or brownstone popular for Romanesque buildings a decade or so earlier. Foliated carving, the porte cochere and coffered ceiling are details worthy of note. The Presbyterian Church was organized in 1835, making this congregation Dover’s oldest. It occupied two previous buildings and played an important social as well as religious role in the town’s early history.

190 DOVER REGION F

F4 JACKSON BUILDING 82 East Blackwell Street (M.C. -44)

The board and batten Johnson Building was built around the time of the Civil War, and today is probably the oldest frame commercial structure in Dover. Originally a carpenter shop, it later became a spool factory, a warehouse and a railway express office. Since early in this century it has housed a coal and fuel business. Old photographs show that the 2-story, six-bay exterior with thick fieldstone foundation has been altered only slightly. The face of Dover has changed radically since 1850, but the Johnson Building remains, bearing witness to the appearance of a small urban center more than 100 years ago.

MORRIS CANAL F5 DOVER BASIN

Parallel to Route 46, Dover Common

At this point lay the largest of the canal’s basins. Around its banks were scattered several iron works, smithies, and a boat yard. Coal-carrying canal boats had to negotiate five locks when traveling through the town of Dover.

F6 ST. JOHN’S EPISCOPAL CHURCH 11 South Bergen Street

In 1850, Dover Episcopalians held their first full—time service in the Stone Academy. Most of the parishioners were miners and mechanics, many of British birth. By 1866, the congregation was sufficiently large to plan its own building. Ground was broken that year, but the dedication was not celebrated until 1871. The architect was Richard Upjohn, noted for his Gothic churches. Upjohn’s brother was Rector of St. John’s when construction began, but soon resigned as the church history recounts, “...because of the ‘inadequacy of the compensation tendered him’ — $400 a year, without house.” St. John’s is not as individualistic as Upjohn’s board— and-batten church for Boonton’s Episcopal congregation, but it is representative of his smaller scale work in stone.

F7 STONE ACADEMY 25 East Dickerson Street

In 1829 Blackwell and McFarland laid out the building lot plan

191 DOVER REGION F (STONE ACADEMY, continued) for the town of Dover. The Stone Academy was built that same year as the town’s first private school (a public school was not opened until 1831). It was used by Presbyterians and Episcopalians before their own facilities were completed, and served as a community center and town meeting place (probably the oldest in Dover). Modern additions have altered the front and rear facades, and a certain amount of deterioration has taken place; neither of these conditions appears to be irreversible. The Academy is, however, threatened by urban renewal.

192 MINE HILL REGION F

F8 MAHLON DICKERSON, MANSION (SITE) Canfield Road, M.C. -69 (opposite Dickerson Mine Road)

Not only was Mahlon Dickerson (1770—1853) the first New Jersey governor to succeed himself, he was also named Secretary of the Navy under Presidents Jackson and Van Buren, served as a judge of the U.S. District Court and as a U.S. Senator. In addition to his political career, his achievements as a linguist and botanist gave him a reputation as one of the best educated men of his day, Dicker— son’s mansion at Ferromonte (destroyed in 1964) was the seat of an iron—mining operation on the site of New Jersey’s oldest major iron mine c. 1713). Both the mansion and mining sites would benefit from archaeological excavation.

193 RANDOLPH REGION F

F9 BROTHERTON HOUSE 52 Center Grove Road (M.C.-70)

The Brotherton family came to Randolph (then “Mendom”) c.1756. They were active in the Society of Friends for more than 100 years, and were largely responsible for maintaining the Quaker Meeting House (see entry below). The Brotherton house now standing was built in 1876. Of special interest is the board and batten stable with cupola. The grounds, house and outbuildings still reflect their late 19th- century appearance to a large degree.

F10 D.L. BRYANT DISTILLERY NJHSI-259l.5 Sussex Turnpike, M.C.-17 (Terminus of Ironia—Succasunna Rd.)

In the second half of the 19th century, this was known as the most compact and complete cider mill, vinegar factory and apple distillery in New Jersey. Two stories of stone and a third of wood surmounted a stone foundation and cellar built into the hillside. A farmer would haul his apples to the upper end of the building and unload them into self— registering bins, from which they were conveyed to a grater and compressor. Applejack was a local industry until 1920 (and was lamented by the Society of Friends as early as 1799, according to their minutes). Residential conversion has changed the distillery substantially. (NJR)

F11 MOTT-DAVENPORT GRISTMILL Gristmill Road, S.E. side (1/4 mi. ± from Millbrook Rd.)

This is the earliest mill standing in Randolph Township, probably built between 1796 and 1810. The frame structure stands on a stone foundation with attached wheelhouse. The water wheel is missing, but millstones and original gears have been incorporated inside the house for utilitarian uses. Parts of the millrace and tailrace are evident along the stream. Joshua Mott was another of the area’s early 19th-century Quaker settlers. A number of other buildings on this section of Gristmill Road merit research.

F12 MILLBROOK METHODIST EPISCOPAL CHURCH Millbrook Road, M.C.-56 CE. side, 400±’ 5. of Rte. 10)

As early as 1800, Methodists held meetings in private homes in this area. The present building, dedicated in 1833, is the second to occupy this site. This congregation is important as the mother church of Methodism in the Dover area. It helped promote

194 RANDOLPH REGION F (MILLBROOK METHODIST EPISCOPAL CHURCH, continued)

churches in Dover, Walnut Grove, and Mt. Fern. The building itself has been so modernized and enlarged, that it is of little architectural consequence.

F13 MT. FREEDOM PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH Sussex Turnpike, M.C.—17 (N.E. side at Church Rd.)

Aside from the short pilastered bell tower with quatrefoil railing, the 1823 church follows the simplest Greek Revival form - pedimented gable-end framed with pilasters. In 1856 an eleven foot addition lengthened the rear. No exterior changes of consequence have occurred since then.

Fl4 RANDOLPH FRIENDS MEETING HOUSE NJHSI-259l.7; HABS-l45 Quaker Church Road (N.E. corner of Quaker Avenue)

Built in 1758, when Randolph was still part of “Mendom,” the two entrances and interior partition of this meeting house were designed to separate men and women worshippers. In simple buildings such as this, the Religious Society of Friends espoused women’s rights, temperance, pacifism and prison reform; as early as 1776 members who refused to free their slaves were expelled. Later this was a stop on the Underground Railroad. The interior frame, furnishings and paneling are all original. In the gallery the construction can easily be studied, since this area has never been insulated or finished. It is likely that no other 18th—century Quaker meeting house in New Jersey has an interior of such integrity. This fact makes it an invaluable resource for students of the Society of Friends, as well as for architectural historians. Buried in the cemetery is Hartshorn Fitz Randolph (d.l806) prominent Quaker for whom the township is named. (NR)

Fl5 WALNUT GROVE METHODIST CHURCH Shongum Mountain Road, M.C.—50 (S. side, 1200±’ E. of Sussex Turnpike)

Just fourteen years after the dedication of the second Mill— brook Methodist Episcopal Church, local communicants had increased sufficiently to warrant the erection of this small building on land deeded by Phillip and Ann Till. The property to the west, known as the Old Cemetery, was used as a free burying ground from

195 RANDOLPH REGION F (WALNUT GROVE METHODIST CHURCH, continued)

1847 to 1880. The arched wrought iron gate remains. The only feature distinguishing this simple church from domestic architecture is its short bell tower. Virtually no changes have been made since its construction. It is now vacant and for sale.

F16 WASHINGTON ARMS TAVERN (SITE) HABS-196 South Salem Street, M.C.-54 (S.E. corner Franklin Rd.)

This frame building dated from the second half of the 18th century and was probably built by a member of the Jackson family. Additions and alterations over the years had obscured but not destroyed the building’s architectural merit. Neglect and eventually fire necessitated its demolition in September, 1974. A stone smokehouse will be moved and restored.

196 ROXBURY REGION F

F17 HENRY ALWARD HOUSE 66 South Hillside Avenue (M.C. -25)

Henry Alward was the second white man to own this farmland. The house, built in 1832, has been carefully preserved. The staircase is a factory- made unit - the first such cargo to be shipped from Newark on the Morris Canal.

F18 SAMUEL CAREY HOUSE 208 Emmans Road

The date 1771 can be found in the chimney of this rough ashlar structure. The walls are twenty inches thick and the front room fireplace is five feet wide by three and one half feet high, carried by stone corbelling beneath. The arched doorway, deep window embrasures and stone lintels are reminiscent of Pennsylvania’s rural vernacular building style. The Continental Army is alleged to have used this as a pesthouse. Its present fine condition is the result of a recent restoration. (NJR)

Fl9 CONDIT-EYLAND HOUSE 137 Eyland Avenue

An early part of this house may be as old as 1764. It was altered in 1830 and again in 1850. The narrow tower with paired arched windows, the use of brackets, and the balustraded porch lend an Italianate aspect. Silas Condit, the original owner, was father of the two prominent Morristown Condicts (the “C” in Condict was added later). Subsequent owner George Eyland enhanced the grounds with a rustic arborvitae gazebo and hedge, unfortunately no longer extant.

F20 FIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH AND ELIZE PLATT STODDARD MEMORIAL CHAPEL NJHSI-2695.2 99 Main Street (M.C.—l7)

A deed for this property was recorded in 1756. The first building was erected in 1760, although the charter is probably several years earlier. During the Revolution, the original church served as munitions store and hospital. The present church, built in 1853, displays remnants of the Greek Revival style (columns and deep pediment) but other elements, notably the circular windows set in curved molding, prefigure the

197 ROXBURY REGION F

(FIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH AND MEMORIAL CHAPEL, continued)

high Victorian woodwork of the adjoining chapel. Built in 1887, the chapel exhibits a wealth of distinctive carved wood detail, unfortunately somewhat obscured by successive layers of paint. It is really not ecclesiastical in style, but resembles the neo-Jacobean domestic architecture of the period, with its shingled decoration and elaborate iron crestings on roof and tower. Behind the Church stands a tall shaft marking the grave of Mahlon Dickerson, governor of New Jersey and Secretary of the Navy under President Jackson.

F2l KING’S STORE 215 Main Street

For several years this was the Drakesville post office. Albert R. Riggs ran a general store here from 1838 to 1875, when Theodore King took over the business until his death in 1928. The building has been closed since 1929. Built in 1832 to profit from the newly completed Morris Canal, this may be the most substantial rural commercial building of its era in Morris County. The use of quoins, and walls scored to simulate stone suggest that the unknown architect—builder was familiar with Georgian design. The deep cornice and porch are of a subsequent date, probably 1850. At the foundation level, the walls are five feet thick, diminishing to two feet at the third floor. A beam one foot square runs the length of the building, supported on stone piers.

F22 KUNZMAN HOUSE 84 Main Street (M.C.-17)

John Kunzman, head potter at the Meeker pottery works, lived here. Because of stucco covering and two—family conversion, its Federal features (c. 1817) are obscured, although the northwest end still shows a central window with plain wooden tympanum, flanked by two quarter circle windows. The proportions of the rooms and delicacy of the mantels and moldings suggests a townhouse of some pretension.

F23 LIPPINCOTT HOUSE 111 Main Street (M.C.—l7)

A plain farmhouse with side hall and kitchen addition, this house was probably built around 1840. The principal entrance on

198 ROXBURY REGION F

(LIPPINCOTT HOUSE, continued)

Main street exhibits a relatively crude attempt at a Greek Revival doorway. Door and window trim are of the heaviest variety, used about 1855—65. The bay window is also a later addition. Reverend Lippincott was a Presiding Elder of the area’s Methodist Circuit.

MORRIS CANAL

F24 INCLINED PLANE NO. 3 EAST Opposite Kings Store, Main Street

This is the lower of the two Ledgewood planes, which had only to negotiate a rise of 4.8 feet. King’s Store, which still stands at the foot of the plane, sold general merchandise to townspeople and canal workers.

F25 INCLINED PLANE NO. 2 EAST Above Ledgewood Pond

This is the upper Ledgewood Plane, which overcame an 80—foot hill on its way to the Summit Level at Landing. Only one other plane in Morris County equalled that height - #7E in Boonton. In addition to its impressive height, #2E is the most perfectly preserved inclined plane in New Jersey. In the words of canal historian Barbara Kalata: “Where other planes have been built upon, bulldozed, or otherwise bastardized, this one retains its parallel rows of rail—receiving rock sleepers from the foot to the summit and beyond - over the brow back into the bed of the canal’s upper level. The stone lined tailrace and bypass from the summit are extant, needing only to be cleared of brush and minimal debris to be viewable. The same is true of the flume depression in the summit, the stone—vaulted wheelpit, the iron-lined standpipe, the burned-out foundation of the brakeman’s house, and the tar—pot hole, where coal fires kept pitch at a temperature suitable for tarring the 2 1/2” wire cable against rust. Even the rip—rap that lined the canal banks at the summit is intact for several feet running, and the towpath is level and well—defined.”

F26 INCLINED PLANE NO. 1 EAST Shippenport Road, E. Side

The elevation to be overcome here was 50—feet. At the head of the plane was a boat basin and a boat-building yard. This was the first inclined plane on the canal’s eastern division.

199 ROXBURY REGION F

F27 BROOKLYN GUARD LOCK AND CANAL KEEPER’S HOUSE Lake Hopatcong State Park, Landing Road (M.C.-43)

Boats passed through this lock into the Lake to load ores for delivery to iron and zinc works in Pennsylvania and northern New Jersey. Brooklyn settlement stood at the head of a navigable feeder which drew Lake Hopatcong waters into the canal at Landing. From Port Morris to Shippenport, the canal reached its highest elevation, 914 feet above sea level. From the fieldstone canal keeper’s house, built c. 1825, tolls were collected and the locks regulated. The property can be traced to a 1764 land grant made by the New Jersey Proprietors to Garrett Repalyea. The Lake Hopatcong Historical Society now operates the house as a museum,

F28 INCLINED PLANE NO. 1 WEST N. of Center Street, (M.C.-31) E. of Netcong boundary

Boats rose 58—feet on this, the first inclined plane of the canal’s western division.

F29 SILAS RIGGS HOUSE 217 Main Street

Built late in the 18th century, this simple house typifies the untutored folk architecture which developed in rural areas, where necessity took precedence over conscious design. Despite a 19th-century addition which resulted in the present saltbox profile, it remains the least altered house of its age on the Succasunny Plains. Members of the Riggs family were prominent landowners, important to the political and commercial life of the community. “Captain” Riggs ran three boats on the nearby Morris Canal. To prevent its destruction, the house was moved to its present location by the Roxbury Historical Society. Work is now underway to restore the interior. Some rooms will be furnished for exhibition, the rest will be used as the Society’s headquarters. (NJR)

200 WHARTON REGION F

MORRIS CANAL

F30 CANAL PRISM AND LOCK NO. 2 EAST W. of Pine Street on Stephen’s Brook

Canal boats were lifted or dropped eight feet by this lock. Ruins of the lock-tender’s house remain. At this point, the canal prism is fed by Stephen’s Brook, the excess water eventually flowing into the Rockaway. River, the canal’s principal feeder.

201 202 CHESTER REGION G

G1 ACADEMY HOUSE 35 E. Main Street (Rte.24)

John D. Gardner, first schoolmaster of the “Academy on the Hill” (1801) lived here, where he also operated the town’s first post office. It is actually two houses joined together, so that it appears to be an integral center—chimney saltbox. Some of the windows are an unusually narrow 4/4 panes. It has recently been restored for business use.

G2 CHESTER HOUSE HABS-6l Main Street (Rte. 24) at Hillside Road

The original brick section of this generously proportioned 3-story structure was built c. 1810, following the same simple Federal lines as the Bottle Hill Tavern in Madison. The first owner was Zephaniah Drake, proprietor of a line of stage coaches, who ran it as a hotel. Each of the original twelve rooms has its own fireplace, some with elaborately carved mantels. It has been used as a hotel/restaurant from its construction to the present, with the exception of the years 1854—1862, when it was a classical academy. Conestoga wagons stopped here on their way West, and after the Civil War it was a summer resort hotel. The pillared verandah is a modern addition. (NR)

G3 COMMUNITY PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH AND CHAPEL Main Street (Rte. 24, S.W. corner of Church St.)

Like their Congregationalist neighbors, Chester Presbyterian first worshipped in Roxiticus. About 1751 they built a small structure of logs, according to local tradition, which served until 1756. From then until 1825, the church was a frame building without spire, lathe or plaster. Because its rude construction allowed winter wind to blow through, it was sometimes called “God’s Barn.” The building seen today was constructed in 1851. Although it lacks the full columned porch of the Congregational Church, its classical details are even more sophisticated. The Ionic columns of the recessed porch have been reduced to two, with four pilasters, and a delicately scaled dentil molding above. The short tower and doors are “battered,” a device more characteristic of Egyptian Revival. Instead of the usual clapboards, the main facade employs flush boards, intended to suggest the smoothness of dressed stone. The chapel, built in 1860, has the same pilasters and smooth facade but is decorated with more modern Gothic details — beautifully executed quatrefoil fanlights and circular windows. Due to careful

203 CHESTER REGION G

(COMMUNITY PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH AND CHAPEL, continued)

workmanship and attention to scale, the juxtaposition of Gothic and Greek Revival details is perfectly harmonious.

G4 CONGREGATIONAL CHURCH Hillside Road (E. side opposite Hedges Rd.)

Before 1747, Chester families had worshipped in the Roxiticus Church. In that year the Congregationalists of Black River erected their own meeting house, which was called the oldest Congregational Church west of the Hudson River. In 1856 the present building was raised. Together with Chester’s Presbyterian Church, it is one of the purest examples of Greek Revival church architecture in Morris County. Despite the fully columned porch and massive pediment, however, the doors and windows are topped with Gothic drip molding — a reflection of the late construction date. Inside, the original tromp l’oeil decoration is in good condition. Probably done by an itinerant painter, it is thought to be one of only two remaining examples in New Jersey.

G5 ISAAC CORWIN HOUSE HABS-628 W. Main Street (Rte. 24), N.W. corner of Route 206

HABS documentation describes this as a “recognizable type of mansion house design standardized in the last decade of the 18th century.” Today, fake shutters, siding and a modern addition mar the exterior. Interior renovations for present restaurant use have generally not been of a structural nature. The second owner was James Topping, a cabinetmaker, known for the tall clock cases he constructed for New Jersey clock maker Joachim Hill. Topping also built wagons, and is credited with introducing the first spring wagon in Morris County. Topping descendants occupied the house until 1940.

G6 JOHN DRAKE HOUSE HABS-647 Main Street (Rte. 24, S. side between Collis Lane & Budd Ave.)

John Drake was a brother of Zephaniah, owner of the Chester Inn. He had this house built for his own use sometime between 1830 and 1840. The pedimented gable ends, window moldings and small, pillared porch suggest a modest attempt to employ Greek Revival features. In the 1880’s it was owned by John Van Arsdale who ran a livery stable across the road, and ran the Chester Stage. Its present condition is excellent.

204 CHESTER REGION G

G7 DR. WILLIAM WOODHULL-HEDGES HOUSE Hillside Road (W. side at Hedges Pd.)

Princeton-educated William Woodhull became Chester’s first Presbyterian minister in 1768. Known for his fiery sermons, he later opened a classical school attended by Mahlon Dickerson, one of New Jersey’s most eminent 19th— century governors. Rev. Woodhull’s descendants continued his distinguished influence in Chester. His grandson, Dr. William Woodhull Hedges (Son of Dr. Joseph Hedges) acquired this house in 1821. He probably added the large wing with center hall at about that time. William Woodhull Hedge’s son, Smith, carried on medical practice here and also had interests in local iron mines.

205 CHESTER TOWNSHIP REGION G

COOPER GRISTMILL

See Millvale or Milltown District and Nathan Cooper House

G8 HENRY COOPER HOUSE Route 24 (N. side, between Benjamin Rd. & Robinson Lane)

If the date and initials cut into the northwest facade are accurate, this house was built by Henry Cooper, Jr. in 1807. The basement bake ovens can still be seen, and the fireplace mantel- in the “best parlor” is notable for its carved decoration. The wooden slave wing at the rear was still evident in an 1897 photograph. This is one of Morris County’s few remaining brick Federal houses, and one of the few never painted. Bricks for its construction are said to have come from the Cooper brickyard, west of Route 24, south of Cooper Lane.

G9 NATHAN COOPER MANSION Route 24 (N. side, 1.7± miles W. of Mendham-Chester Twp. line)

Nathan Cooper was a general in the New Jersey Militia, and a prominent farmer, mine operator and mill owner. His house, built c. 1860, is pictured in Munsell’s History of Morris County. Now shorn of its porch, it has gained a classical appearance, further emphasized by the pediment over the main door (probably a later addition). Clues to its Victorian identity are the double doors, bracketed eaves, and curved window heads with shutters cut to fit. The builder of Cooper’s Mill was General Cooper’s uncle.

G10 JAPED HAINES HOUSE Terminus of Old Hacklebarney Road

Although local tradition claims that Washington was entertained here, the date of construction has never accurately been determined. It eventually became the house of the Hacklebarney Mine’s ironmaster, and thus the center of the mining, forging and domestic life of the Black River community. Despite its stone construction, years of abandonment have left it in deteriorating condition.

G11 HULL-BROWN TAVERN Pleasant Hill and Furnace Roads (N.W. corner)

The kitchen wing of this house may have been built as early as 1736, possibly on a different site. It is known that in 1760

206 CHESTER TOWNSHIP REGION G

(HULL-BROWN TAVERN, continued)

Trustum Hull moved to Black River from Piscataway to run a tavern here. By 1810, Hull’s son—in—law David Brown, Jr. was listed as innkeeper. The front door has original hand forged hinges with leather washers, and original cupboards can be found in the kitchen. The innkeeper’s wicket opens into the dining room, undoubtedly the former public room. The large second floor “ballroom” is decorated with dentil molding around ceiling and fireplace.

G12 MILLVALE OR MILLTOWN DISTRICT NJHSI-685.l Hacklebarney Road at Route 24 (1/2 mile S. along Black River)

This industrial community flourished through the end of the 19th century when surrounding farms created a need for mills. The foundations of a distillery, granary and woolen mill have been located. A large vein of iron ore runs through the district, and around this resource sprang up the Budd Forge and the Gulick and Hacklebarney Iron Mines. Still extant are two ice houses on the iron forge pond, and a railroad spur. The Morris County Park Commission is restoring the Cooper gristmill for use as a working exhibit. The mill has been named to the New Jersey Register of Historic Places. (NJR).

207 MENDHAM REGION G

G13 EBENEZER BLACHLEY HOUSE NJHSI-1963.4 Cory Lane (N. side at Talmadge Rd.)

Dr. Blachley, one of the founders of the New Jersey Medical Society, conducted a medical school here. The small wing may have been built in 1746, but the exterior was extensively changed when the 2 1/2—story main section was built. Basically Federal, with five bays and center hall, the doorway has sidelights and a semi—circular architrave. The interior panelling is unique for local houses of this period.

G14 MAIN STREET DISTRICT Main Street from Linden Lane to Halstead Road; Mountain Avenue from Main Street to Wilson Street; Hilltop Road from Main Street to Talmage Road

Mendham Borough’s crossroads is one of the stops on the Route 24 historic corridor which includes Chatham, Madison, Morristown, and Chester. Thanks to 20th-century growth that was largely residential and outside the village center, a large number of 18th and 19th-century buildings remain. Most are in good condition, although the familiar renovation style which adds picture windows and tries to turn Victorian into Colonial has been at work here as well. Tree-lined streets and a variety of building styles contribute to the district’s character. The following buildings (marked *) are the most important; others not specifically noted add to the district’s composite impression and are not to be excluded.

* BLACK HORSE INN NJHSI-l962.6 Main Street (Rte.24, at Mountain Ave.)

Used for many years as an inn or restaurant, this ample, 2— story building with gambrel roof was originally the farmhouse of Ebenezer Byram, one of Mendham’s founding fathers. It has been dated at approximately 1740, although its present appearance exhibits the effects of numerous later accretions. This crossroads location on an artery busy since the 18th century has proven good for business for more than two hundred years. The Black horse Inn has suffered little exterior damage from its modern commercial use, although its interior has been treated to the same kind of pseudo “Gay Nineties” decor inflicted on the Bottle Hill Tavern (Widow Brown Inn) in Madison.

208 MENDHAM REGION G

(MAIN ST. DIST., continued)

* REVEREND JOHN BYRAM HOUSE W. Main Street (N. side), 900k’ W. of Linden Lane

John Byram was the first minister to serve Mendham (then Roxiticus), and this frame house (originally much smaller) was the church’s first manse. Abigail, the Rev. Byram’s wife, was the great granddaughter of John and Priscilla Alden. Random fenestration and lack of exterior adornment attest to the great age of this house - built probably in 1748 with 1760 additions. It has been moved from its original location east of Lake Drive, and restored with great care.

* LEBBEUS DOD HOUSE 67 West Main Street (Rte.24)

Lebbeus Dod was a noted craftsman of Mendham who plied various trades. A few grandfather’s clocks known to have been made by him are still in the possession of local residents. During the Revolution he kept many of the Continental Army’s firearms in repair. His 2—story frame house has stood on Main Street since that time.

* ABNER DOUBLEDAY HOUSE (SITE) Hilltop Road (W. side) 675±’ from Main St. (Rte. 24)

A substantial 2—story frame house built in the 1880’s was the home of Abner Doubleday, inventor of the game of baseball. Sometime prior to 1937 it was acquired by the owners of the house immediately adjacent to the north, and demolished because of its physical proximity to their property. Doubleday died in Mendham in 1893.

* HILLTOP CHURCH AND CEMETERY NJHSI—1962.1; HABS-63 Hilltop Road

Hilltop congregation, organized in 1745, is one of the earliest churches chartered in Morris County. Its cemetery holds stones from 1747. Members have worshipped in three other buildings. The first was a small meeting house razed in 1816 to make way for a larger structure. This first building served as a small pox hospital for Washington’s troops encamped at Jockey Ho1low The cemetery holds a common grave for those who succumbed.

209 MENDHAM REGION G

(HILLTOP CHURCH ND CEMETERY, continued)

In 1860 the present building was erected. Its designer was Major Aaron Hudson, a local architect who popularized the Greek Revival, and later the Gothic Revival style during his long career. Hilltop Church exhibits characteristics of both. Because it combines important historical and architectural values, it is especially deserving of recognition and preservation.

* AARON D. HUDSON HOUSE NJHSI-l962; HABS-564 11 Hilltop Road

A superb example of Greek Revival architecture, the street— side facade of this house bears a 2—story portico supported by four square columns and finished with a pediment. Major Hudson had this house built for himself around 1825. Because of its associations with ancient Greek ideals, the classical style appealed strongly to the young republic. Hudson also designed Hilltop Church, St. Joseph’s Church, and the old Methodist Church (now altered and used by the Borough as a firehouse), as well as a number of other houses.

* PHOENIX HOUSE NJHSI-1962.4; HABS-62 Main Street (Rte. 24 at Hillton Rd.)

Behind its later portico (perhaps designed by Aaron Hudson) stands one of the finest examples of Federal architecture in Morris County. Over the years, the building has had many uses. In its early days, it housed a ladies’ seminary and later a classical academy. In the mid—l9th century, it served as an annex to the Black Horse Inn across the road. Today it serves as municipal offices for the Borough, having been acquired and donated by private citizens concerned with its preservation.

* ST. JOSEPH’s ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH 8 West Main Street

St. Joseph’s was built in 1860, six years after the founding of a permanent parish, which had previously been a mission of Assumption Church in Morristown. Like Hilltop Church, built in the same year, St. Joseph’s was designed by Aaron Hudson, who seems to have felt that a more purely Gothic design was appropriate for a Catholic congregation. His resultant literalism carries the carpenter Gothic style to its

210 MENDHAM REGION G

(ST. JOSEPH’S R.C. CHURCH, continued)

logical (or illogical) extreme - complete with diminutive wooden flying buttresses. Instead of board-and-batten siding, standard clapboards are used here.

* ST. MARK’S EPISCOPAL CHURCH 9 East Main Street

Built in 1872, only three years after a circuit riding priest first provided regular services, St. Mark’s is less individualistic in its details than is St. Joseph’s. Its steep gable, hoard—and- batten exterior, and tiny triangular dormers put it more in the mainstream of carpenter Gothic architecture. The exterior, with its low eaves and small windows, leaves one unprepared for the feeling of open space created by the exposed trussed ceiling inside. The plans for St. Mark’s were adapted from plans by Richard Upjohn for Grace Episcopal Church in Jersey City (c.1847), now demolished. A large modern addition somewhat compromised the original siting and vertical expression, although a more recent addition at the rear has been handled sensitively.

* DAVID THOMPSON HOUSE NJHSI-l962.ST HABS-l94 56 West Main Street (Rte. 24)

One of relatively few stuccoed buildings in the Mendham area, this 2 1/2-story, four—bay “manor house” was built in the last quarter of the 18th century. The style is essentially Federal, though not as sophisticated as the Phoenix House. The gable roof has a boxed cornice and gable— end returns. A smaller, probably earlier wing is attached. It has 1 1/2-stories, dormers, one center chimney and one interior end chimney. Tradition attributes the construction of this house to John Carey (or Cary), who came to Morristown to build the Presbyterian Church, and whose daughter married David Thompson. It contains a great deal of original woodwork, mantels, and plaster walls. The exterior remained substantially unaltered until an eruption of dormers recently marred its roof line. (NR)

* WOLFE HOUSE HABS-623 Hilltop Road (W. side, 316’ from Rte. 24)

This house has stood here since c. 1815 when Hilltop Road was known as Church Street. Modern commercial renovations have removed any facade interest.

211 MENDHAM TOWNSHIP REGION G

Gl5 BROOKSIDE DISTRICT Intersection of Main Street and Woodland Road (all of E. Main Street, 500+’ of W. Main Street (N. side), and the Southern half of Woodland Road).

Now the center of an entirely residential municipality, Brookside was an active industrial crossroads well into the 19th century. Sawmills, gristmills and fulling mills took advantage of the concentrated water power. One of the earliest, built by Jesse Smith c. 1745, was powered by Dismal Brook. Other manufacturers produced nails, glass and furniture, and processed wool and leather. Connet’s sawmill (c. 1842) on Woodland Road, now converted to residential use, is one of the few survivors.. It later made peach baskets and brush blocks. At least a dozen 18th- and 19th— century houses remain in the district, most of them sensitively restored. Research for individual sites is now being completed.

Gl6 JACOB DRAKE HOUSE, THE CLEARINGS NJHSI-1963.5 Mendham Road (Rte 24), S. side, 500+’ E. of Pitney Road

This 1½ story frame structure has an overhanging gable roof, rare for this area. The house has five bays, a center hall, and exterior horizontal board wainscoting, another unusual feature. The Greek Revival doorway has rectangular sidelights, and the windows are 6/6 sash with louvered shutters. Jacob Drake‘s name appears in records as early as 1742.

G17 DR. WILLIAM LEDDEL HOUSE NJHSI-1963.6 Tempe Wick Road, at Leddel’s Pond

Dr. William Leddel, pioneer physician of Mendham, lived here during the Revolution and operated a mill near the house. During the nineteenth century, another mill replaced the original structure, but this too has disappeared. The site is noted on Rochefontaine’s map of 1779-80. Dr. Leddel married Phebe Wick, a sister of Tempe. A gambrel roof, and the prevailing eighteenth-century plan of stair and entrance hail, with one large and two small rooms on each floor is found here. The basement has a kitchen fireplace in remarkably good condition.

212 MENDHAM TOWNSHIP REGION G

G18 NESBITT MILL Route 24, South side (3/8 m. ± W. of Roxiticus Rd.)

During the mid 19th century at least 10 Mendham distilleries produced applejack. Later in the century the most prominent survivor of these numerous local industries was the Tiger Distillery, purchased c. 1899 by Thomas J. Laughlin. In 1908 Laughlin moved the distillery from its original Bernardsville Road location to the Nesbitt Mill, where, according to local sources, he continued “. . .until the Volstead enactment closed the business.” Although untenanted for years, the 3—story stuccoed building remains one of Morris County’s most impressive mills.

G19 PITNEY FARM Route 24 at Pitney Road NJHSI—l963.l

This homestead was long the residence of a distinguished family of New Jersey lawyers and jurists. Henry Cooper Pitney was a justice of New Jersey’s Supreme Court and his son Mahlon Pitney was appointed as United States Supreme Court Associate Justice in 1912 by President Taft. The oldest section of the house, about 1760, is a 2k—story clapboard, with gable—end returns. The west end has paired gable—end chimneys. This section of the house is three bays with side hail. The windows are 9/9 sash with louvered shutters. Victorian cornice brackets have been added. Perhaps even more important than the house is the farm itself. With its long, tree—lined avenue and open fields, it remains one of the last vestiges of Mendham’s important agricultural past.

G20 RALSTON DISTRICT NJHSI-1963.2 & .3 Route 24 (N. side) at Roxiticus Road HABS—339 & 357

Under John Ralston’s management (1786-1817), this became one of New Jersey’s earliest small industrial complexes. The stone mill was probably built during the Revolution. It has been altered for residential use without appreciable damage to its 18th-century appearance. Traces of the mill race are still visible along the west side of Roxiticus Road, starting about 500 feet from Route 24.

213 MENDHAM TOWNSHIP REGION G

(RALSTON DISTRICT, continued)

The gambrel—roofed manor house has paired gable-end chimneys and a frieze below the eaves. John Ralston owned slaves, and it is probable that they were quartered in the attic. The general store once served as a stagecoach station. It is also the oldest building in the United States to have housed federal mail service. It has been restored by the Ralston Historical Association. In addition to Ralston’s industrial/commercial significance, the top of Ralston Hill, between Roxiticus and Ironia Roads is the site of Mendham’s earliest meeting house and cemetery, c. 1745. (NJR)

214 215 MOUNT OLIVE REGION H

H1 BAPTIST MEETING HOUSE Flanders—Drakestown Road (N. side at corner of Mt. Olive Rd.)

Stone from nearby mountains was carried by ox-drawn sledge for the building of this church in 1855. The severity of the stone walls and simple rectangular windows is relieved by a series of medallions under the eaves and the gingerbread gable on the small porch. This congregation’s first minister was notorious for his Royalist sympathies. He caused a local scandal on the last Sunday in 1776 when he offered a prayer of thanksgiving for British troops who had been victorious earlier that week.

H2 R. C. BARTLEY COMPANY FOUNDRY 1/3 mile W. of Bartley-Chester Road (M.c.-25) below forge pond.

At least part of this industrial complex may have been established as early as 1874, when William Bartley became the first postmaster of Bartleyville, as it was then called. The caption of a lithograph in Munsell’s 1882 History of Morris County describes the company as “Manufacturers of grist and saw—mill gearing, turbines, water—wheels and iron penstocks, steam engines,.. .corn crackers, bark mills, tire benders, etc.” The main building of stone construction, and the frame pattern shop remain, as do all the major components of the water power system, which utilizes the South Branch of the Raritan River, and includes the original head and tail races, the flume and stone tunnels. Also extent are a 25 ft.—high iron—melting cupola, a water- powered turbine, and a wooden crane in working condition, as well as a collection of the firm’s records and patterns. This appears to be Morris County’s best preserved rural industrial site of its period, notable for the diversity of its products and the high quality of its remaining equipment. It is hoped that recognition of this site will arouse interest in other industrial/ commercial sites heretofore neglected.

H3 MT. OLIVE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH Flanders-Drakestown Road (N. side, immediately W. of Mt. Olive Rd.)

This church appears to have the only full Greek Revival porch outside of Chester. Built in 1853, it stands on the site of a log church built 100 years before. Behind the four Doric columns are two battered doors with dog ear molding and dentiled, low pediments. Round arched windows are set in rectangular frames, capped with a peculiarly attenuated version of Gothic drip molding, and

216 MOUNT OLIVE REGION H

(MT. OLIVE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH, continued)

balanced with trefoil ornaments. The church is now occupied by a local theatre group called Pax 1xnicus.

H4 STONE MILL Park Place, M.C.—25 CE. side, halfway between North and Main Rds.)

Mills, tanneries, mines and plaster factories once made Flanders an active industrial crossroads. This mill is the most prominent reminder of those days. In addition to the beauty of its stonework, it is decorated with bracketed eaves and an Italianate lantern — unusual additions for a utilitarian structure of this kind.

217 NETCONG REGION H

MORRIS CANAL

H5 GUARD LOCK NO. 1 WEST Route 206 at Lake r4usconetcong

Coal—carrying canal boats entered and left Lake Musconetcong through this guard lock. The lake itself was created as a reservoir for the canal in 1848. The towpath was a narrow, slightly elevated strip of land stretching from the lock across a and through the lake to the foot of Inclined Plane No.1 West at Port Morris.

218 WASHINGTON REGION H

Washington Township is even richer in 18th- and 19th-century stone architecture than is Montville, due to its settlement by German emigrants. Many of the houses listed are not of great significance individually, but collectively they form an unusually rich picture of rural settlement patterns.

H6 ALPOCK HOUSE Route 24, north side at Valley Brook Road

This stone house with eyebrow windows was built c. 1750 by the first Alpocks to settle the Valley. Original construction is intact a spring runs through the basement.

R. C. BARTLEY COMPANY FOUNDRY The majority of this site is located in Mt. Olive. See entry for that municipality.

H7 FOUR BRIDGES MILL North Four Bridges Road (N.W. of railroad on large mill pond)

Although the mill wheel is missing, this 1830 building appears to be structurally sound. The surrounding area is now a bird sanctuary.

H8 LAURENCE HAGER HOUSE West Mill Road (Rte. 513), North side (1/16 mi. ± W. of Fairmount Rd.— M.C.-65)

Typical of the village’s mid-l8th—century houses, this stone building dates from c. 1748. Laurence Hager kept the old stone store early in the 19th century, followed by his son Jacob Miller Hager.

H9 HANN HOUSE Zeller Road, West side (1000’± S. of Pleasant Grove Rd.)

This is a representative example of the area’s unadorned stone farmhouses, little changed since its construction c. 1800. The Hanns were members of the nearby Presbyterian Church, and are buried in its cemetery.

219 WASHINGTON REGION H

H10 HUNT ESTATE Route 24, East side (between Pleasant Grove and Flocktown Rds.)

Built early in the 19th century with later additions, the main house now resembles an added—on Federal mansion. Stone guesthouse, barns and pond suggest few major changes from mid—l9th—century appearance.

H11 LONG VALLEY SCHOOLHOUSE Fairview Avenue (adjacent to Union Church ruins)

This was the area’s first public school, built in 1832. Its style is identical to the Valley’s stone domestic architecture. It now houses the Township’s public library. Vent windows in the gable end are arranged in a Palladian manner.

H12 DAVID MILLER HOUSE NJHSI-1981.l; HABS-519 West Mill Road (M.C.-33) Southeast side (opposite Middle Valley Rd

Stone and stucco, with an unusually broad gambrel end, this house has a decorative frieze, rare for stone houses in Morris County. It has been exceptionally well preserved.

H13 NAUGHTRIGHT HOMESTEAD Junction of Naughtright, Bartley and Coleman Roads.

The original part of the main Naughtright house was built early in the 18th century. By the beginning of the 19th century a number of rural industries had been established, including a distillery, a creamery, grist mill and wagon shop. The property (reduced from 1,000 to 100 acres over the years) still includes a one—room school, closed in 1928, and a former general store. It is now owned by the seventh generation of Naughtrights.

H14 JACOB W. NEIGHBOR HOUSE West Mill Road (M.C.-33) South side (1 1/8 mi. ± W. of Fairmount Ave.)

Jacob Neighbor was a brother of Leonard. His stone house still occupies a large parcel of land, reached by an avenue of trees and surrounded by cultivated fields. Relatively few changes have been made since it was built c. 1830.

220 WASHINGTON REGION H

H15 LEONARD NEIGHBOR HOUSE West Mill Road (C.-33 (1 mi. ± W. of Fairmount Ave.)

Leonard Neighbor was the progenitor of all the Valley’s Neighbors. He built his clapboard—over-brick house c. 1830. Original construction details and design are evident throughout. Like the nearby Jacob Neighbor House, this gains its distinction from a formalization of the vernacular style rather than from any application of particular design details.

Hl6 NEITZER’S BRIDGE Bridging the South Branch of the Raritan, center of Long Valley

Some sources suggest this 4—arched stone bridge was built by John Peter Neitzer as early as 1747; others claim it dates from c.1811 and the construction of the Morris—Easton Turnpike. Even the later date made it early for a surviving bridge.

H17 NEITZER HOUSE Fairview Avenue, West side (1/2 mi. ± N. of Laketown Rd.)

John Peter Neitzer, the Valley’s first storekeeper, and builder of the stone bridge, occupied this stone house in 1803. Evidence suggests that it was built c. 1740, but the original owner has not been determined.

H18 NEITZER’S TAVERN West Mill Road (M.C.-33) South side (2nd building W. of Fairmount Rd.)

John Peter Neitzer emigrated from Germany c. 1747 and promptly established himself as one of the Valley’s leading landowners and businessmen. People came from surrounding counties and from as far away as Pennsylvania to trade with their enterprising countryman. The frame and stone tavern (now a dwelling) was built c. 1750, after Neitzer’s stone store, which stood directly across the road until it was demolished in the 1930’s. In addition to the tavern and store, Neitzer owned a mill, a quarry, a tannery and much land.

H19 OCTAGONAL SCHOOLHOUSE (SITE) Bartley Road M.C.-25, (N. side) opposite South Four Bridges Road

Orson Squire Fowler’s treatise on octagonal building (see Boonton) created a rash of domestic octagons in the 1850’s. This was one of the rare examples used for public purposes, and built of stone.

221 WASHINGTON REGION H

H2O OLD FORT Route 24, South side (1/4 mi. ± E. of Fairmount Rd.)

Philip Weise built this house c. 1774 as his home. It was alleged to have been used as a storehouse during the Revolution. Victorian additions made by Louis R. Schoenheit, Sgt. at Arms at the bier of Abraham Lincoln, do not compromise its architectural interest.

H2l OLD UNION CHURCH AND CEMETERY Fairview Avenue, West side (S. of railroad tracks)

Built c. 1747 to be shared by Dutch and German settlers, the church has stood in ruins for many years, but may soon be stabilized. It is associated with the Rev. Melchior Muhlenberg, known as the Father of Lutheranism in America. The cemetery marks graves of the area’s earliest settlers (Neitzer, Welch, Dufford); many stones are inscribed in German script.

H22 PLEAS2NT GROVE PRESBYTERIAN CEMETERY Califon Road, East side (S. of Pleasant Grove Rd.)

The original stone church of 1806 has not survived, although the cemetery holds early graves of the original members, among them the Hanns, Hances, Stephens, and Honnesses.

H23 SCHOOLEY’S MOUNTAIN MINERAL SPRING RESORT DISTRICT (SITE) Intersection of Schooley’s Mt. Road and Pleasant Grove Road, North approximately one mile

The famous mineral spring was used by Indians since ancient times for medicinal purposes. It was known by white settlers at least as early as 1713. The precise location of the spring itself has been obscured by time but efforts are now underway to relocate it. During the 19th century the supposed restorative powers of the spring and the mountain air gave rise to a number of fashion— able resort hotels which have not survived.

H24 SCHOOLEY’s MOUNTAIN POST OFFICE Schooley’s Mt. Road, East side (N. of Pleasant Grove Rd.)

This simple frame structure built c. 1800 has been operated

222 WASHINGTON REGION H

(SCHOOLEY’S MOUNTAIN POST OFFICE, continued)

as a general provisions store ever since, and served for many years as the local post office. The combination of unchanged use and appearance is rare.

H25 SCHOOLEY’S MOUNTAIN PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH Heath Lane, West side (500’± N. of Pleasant Grove Rd.)

This mid-l9th-century church is a Gothicized frame building of expansive proportions with a mansard tower to the left. The large arched double doors are set under a small porch decorated with wooden gingerbread.

H26 SPRINGTOWN HOTEL Route 24, East side (1 mi. ± N. of Raritan River)

One of Washington Township’s large stone buildings, this served as a hotel until recent times.

H27 STONE BARNS West Mill Road (M.C.-33), South side (200’± W. of Fairmount Ave.)

Neither of these two stone barns has been positively dated. The first is noteworthy because of its large size. The smaller (probably c. 1750) is extremely rare because of the narrow slits known as loopholes, designed to provide light and ventilation. Similar barns were built by German pioneers in Pennsylvania; only one has been recorded in the entire Hudson River Valley.

H28 STONE HOTEL Route 24, North side (1/2 mi. ± W. of Chester Township boundary)

Built about the time of the Alpock House, this stone building was a stage coach stop on the old Washington Turnpike, much used by travelers in the area.

H29 STONE HOUSE West Mill Road, North side (1 1/2 mi. ± W. of Fairmount Ave.)

The recessed doorway with panelling, sidelights and transom reflects Federal influence consonant with the 1814 construction date of the large stone wing, which also has 12/12 windows. The

223 WASHINGTON REGION H

(STONE HOUSE , continued)

small wing may be as early as 1740. The ownership of this house has not yet been traced.

H30 TOLL HOUSE Route 24, North side (1/4 mi. ± E. of Fairmount Rd.)

Built between 1811 and 1825, this frame building is one of few toll houses remaining in Morris County.

H3l TUNIS TRIMMER HOUSE West Mill Road M.C.-33 South side (1/8 mi. ± W. of Fairmount Rd.)

A mortar-over-stone dwelling built about or before 1750, the five exterior doors are a common feature of Dutch—influenced houses. The roof beams are mortise—and—tenoned, marked with matching Roman numerals on joining beams. Two dormers added about 1850 are the only significant changes.

H32 UNNAMED HOUSE Pleasant Grove Road, North side (w. of Heath Lane)

The rear wing of this large frame house dates from the 18th century. The main wing, built before 1840, turns its classically— columned facade to the road, behind a long stone wall. Of special interest is the perfectly preserved complex of mid-l9th-century barns and stables behind the house.

H33 WASHINGTON VALLEY PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH (SITE) West Mill Road (M.C.-33) South side (3/4 mi. ± W. of Fairmount Rd.)

From 1832 until it burned in 1954, the Valley’s Presbyterian Church occupied this site, which was originally adjacent to the lands of Tunis Trimmer.

H34 JACOB WEISE HOUSE Route 24, South side (at Fairmount Rd.)

Jacob was the son of Philip Weise. His ownership of this house is conjectural, but very likely. Date of construction of the earlier part has been set as c. 1780. The main section dates from c.l800. The broad gambrel roof and careful stonework give it a more sophisticated appearance than most of the Va1leys 18th century stone houses.

224 WASHINGTON REGION H

H35 JACOB WEISE, JR. HOUSE Route 24, West side (S. of Maple Ave.)

A mortared stone house built c. 1750, its five—bay facade with eyebrow windows is more commonly found on frame dwellings. Neitzer Weise lived here in 1840.

H36 PHILIP WEISE HOUSE Route 24, East side (immediately N. of Neitzer’s Bridge)

This was another of Philip Weise’s houses. Comparison with the Jacob Weise house suggests a construction date early in the 19th century, although earlier dates are also given. Its size and design attest to Weise’s relative affluence. For some reason its stone facade is turned away from the road. No changes have marred the original design.

H37 WEISE MILL Route 24, North side (adjacent to Toll House)

Used to grind grain and saw wood, this mill was in operation by 1767, owned by Philip Weise. It was remodeled c. 1870 and continued to be used until 1925 or later. Its present condition is poor.

H38 WELSCH FARMHOUSE West Mill Road M.C.-33, South side (1/2 mi. ± W. of Fairmount Rd, set back 1/4 mi. ± from road)

Because alterations were primarily in the form of additions, most of the original 1775 stone house still stands, protected from road encroachment by its ample setback. The originator of Jim Beam Whiskey started his empire here in the 1860’s.

H39 JOHN C. WELSH HOUSE West Mill Road M.C.-33, South side (1/8 mi. ± W. of Fairmount Rd.)

Entirely unaltered since its construction in 1875, this frame

225 WASHINGTON REGION H

(JOHN C. WELSH HOUSE, continued)

house is in many ways typical of the comfortable Victorian dwelling which resulted from an amalgamation of various styles. It was the residence of John C. welsh, President of the Hackettstown National Bank.

H4O WILLIT HOUSE Route 24, E. side (immediately below Maple Aye)

E.C. Willit, a prominent local doctor, made his home in this 1870 frame house for many years. It is representative of a number of interesting wooden Victorian houses on this section of Route 24.

H4l ZION LUTHERAN CHURCH Route 24, West side (immediately N. of Neitzer’s Bridge)

This church is the home of the German congregation which shared the Old Union Church with the Dutch congregation for nearly a century, before starting its own building in 1832, the same year the Dutch built the Long Valley Presbyterian Church. Except for a modern addition, the exterior is unchanged. Stone churches of the mid—l9th century or earlier are rare in Morris County.

226 227 228 APPENDIX A MODEL FOR A MUNICIPAL LANDMARKS COMMISSION (Originally published in conjunction with the Morris County Historical Society in October, 1972.)

This model ordinance was prepared to encourage each of )Morris County’s 39 municipalities to create a landmarks commission as a first step toward preserving the County’s rich heritage. It must be stressed that this is only a model, and that each municipality must examine its unique circumstances when adapting these suggestions for its own use. Although New Jersey offers no specific enabling legislation providing for the establishment of landmark commissions, such powers are felt to be implied. “In some instances local governments have not found express state authorization necessary to initiate preservation programs. The earliest efforts of char1eston, South Carolina, to accomplish historic preservation objectives were apparently undertaken under the provisions of its general zoning ordinance. In Santa Fe, New Mexico, the Old Historic Santa Fe District was created without express legislative authority. The district was validated by the Supreme Court of New Mexico in the case of Santa Fe v. Gamble-Skogmo, Inc., in which the court found that the general statute authorizing cities to make regulations in restrictions in accordance with a comprehensive plan to promote the health and general welfare was sufficient to authorize the action taken.” This proposal was prepared after an examination of some of the more significant landmark commission and historic preservation ordinances now in operation, including those from New York City, Trenton, Philadelphia, Cam— bridge, and New Bedford, copies of which may be examined at the Morris County Planning Board. It is hereby declared as a matter of public policy that the protection, enhancement, perpetuation and use of improvements of special character or special historical or aesthetic interest or value is a public necessity, and is required in the interest of the health, safety, welfare and prosperity of the residents of ______A. Purpose. The intent of this Landmark Commission is to:

229 1. Effect and accomplish the protection, enhancement and preservation of such sites and structures which exhibit historical, architectural or cultural significance of the community’s heritage. 2. Stabilize and improve property values. 3. Strengthen the local economy. 4. Foster a sense of civic pride. 5. Promote the use of designated structures, sites and areas for the education, welfare, and pleasure of this and future generations of the residents of ______, and of Morris County as a whole. B. Definitions. As employed herein, the following terms shall mean and include: 1. ALTERATION. Any of the actions defined as an alteration by the building code of ______2. APPEALS BOARD. The Board of Adjustment of ______3. BOARD. The Planning Board of ______4. CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS. A certificate from the Landmark Commission authorizing plans for alterations, construction, removal or demolition of a landmark or an improvement on any landmark site. 5. COMMISSION. The Landmark Commission of ______6. EXTERIOR ARCHITECTURAL FEATURE. The architectural style, design, general arrangement and components of all of the outer surfaces of an improvement, as distinguished from the interior surfaces enclosed by said exterior surfaces, including but not limited to, the kind, color and texture of the building material and the type of and style of all windows, doors, lights, signs, decorative elements and other fixtures appurtenant to such improvements 7. IMPROVEMENT. Any building, structure, place, parking facility, fence, gate, wall, work of art or other object constituting a physical betterment of real property, or any part of such betterment. 8. LANDMARK. Any improvement or site which has a special character or special historical or aesthetic interest or value as part of the development, heritage, or cultural characteristics of — —, Morris County, or of the state or nation as a whole, and which has been designated as a landmark pursuant to the provisions of this Commission. 9. OWNER. Any person or persons having such right to, title to or interest in any improvement so as to be legally entitled upon obtaining the required permits and approvals from the municipal agencies having jurisdiction over building construction, to perform with respect to such property any construction, alteration, removal, demolition or other work as to which such person seeks the authorization or approval of the Landmark Commission, the Planning Board, or the Board of Adjustments.

230 10. PERSON IN CHARGE. The person or persons possessed of the freehold of an improvement or parcel of land or a lesser estate therein, a mortgagee or vendee in possession, assignee of rents, receiver, executor, trustee, lessee, agent or any other person directly or indirectly in control of an improvement or parcel of land. C. Composition. The Landmark Commission shall be composed as follows: 1. The governing body of ______shall appoint to the Commission five regular members and three alternate members. One member shall be chosen from two nominated by the local historical society (in the absence of a local historical society, from two nominated by the Morris County Historical Society); one member from two nominated by the American Institute of Architects, Newark Suburban Chapter; one member from two nominated by the local board of realtors. The above nominees are not required to be from among the membership of the nominating organizations, but such is desirable. If no nominations are made, or if they are not approved, the governing body shall at its discretion appoint a member or members to serve a one—year term while awaiting nominations or approval. The remaining members shall be chosen from the community at large at the discretion of the governing body. All members must be residents of Morris County, and the majority of members must be residents of ______2. When the Commission is first established, one member shall be appointed for a term of one year, one shall be appointed for a term of two years and three shall be appointed in like manner for three years. When the Commission is first established, one alternate member shall be appointed in like manner for a term of one year, one alternate member shall be appointed for a term of two years, one alternate member for a term of three years and their successors shall be appointed in like manner for terms of three years. 3. In the event of a vacancy during the term of a member, the governing body shall make an appointment to fill the unexpired portion of the term. The new appointee shall possess the same qualifications as the former member whose position he fills. 4. No member of the Commission shall serve more than two consecutive terms. 5. Members shall serve without remuneration. 6. Questions of organization, such as officers, quorum, etc., shall be determined by the Commission itself. D. Powers and Duties The powers and duties of the Landmark Commission shall be described in this section: 1. The Landmark Commission shall furnish an application for designation of a landmark or landmark site to any person, group of persons or association requesting such an application. In addition, the Commission on its own motion may initiate proceedings for designation of a landmark or a landmark site.

231 2. Notice that an application for designation is being considered shall be given to the owner of the parcel on which the proposed landmark is situated or which is part of the proposed landmark site. a. Such notice shall be served by the Landmark Commission by certified mail, addressed to the owner or owners at his or their last known address or addresses as the same appears in the records of the municipal tax assessor, or if there is no name on such records, such notice may be served by regular mail, addressed to “owner” at the street address of the property in question. b. Said owner or owners shall have the right to confer with the Landmark Commission prior to final action by the Commission, on the application. c. The Commission may, in addition, hold a public hearing on the proposed designation by giving notice as required by municipal regulation. 3. After such investigation by the Commission as it deems necessary, but in no case more than sixty days after the receipt of the application, or if the proceeding is initiated by the Commission, no more than sixty days after such initiation, the application for designation shall be approved or disapproved. Said approval or disapproval shall be in writing arid signed by the Chairman of the Commission, and shall state the reasons for approval or disapproval. The approval may limit itself to the proposed landmark or landmark site as described in the application or may include modifications thereof and approval as so modified. The written approval or disapproval shall be filed with the ______Planning Board and the Landmark Commission. 4. Subject to the provisions of Subdivision 5 and 6 of this section, any designation made by the Commission pursuant to Subdivision 3 above shall be in full force and effect at the time the written approval is filed in the office of the Planning Board and the Landmark Commission. Within five days after making any such designation, the Commission shall file a copy of same with the Morris County Historical Society, and the New Jersey Office of Historic Sites. 5. The Commission, on its own initiative or at the request of an aggrieved party, may modify or disapprove any such designation within ninety days after a copy thereof is filed as in Subdivision 4 of this section. The Commission, in making its decision, shall consider, among other factors, the relation of the designation to the Master Plan of ______, the zoning ordinances, projected public improvements, any plans for the renewal of the area involved, and other factors affecting the general welfare of the community. 6. If the Commission disapproves or modifies the designation, its reasons for disapproval or modification shall be put in writing. The written disapproval or modification shall be filed as in Subdivision 4 of this section.

232 7. If the Commission disapproves or modifies the designation, it shall cease to be in effect at the time the written disapproval or modification is filed as in Subdivision 4 of this section. 8. A landmark or landmark site may be amended or rescinded in the same manner as the original designation was made. The Planning Board shall have the same power to disapprove an amendment or rescission of a designation as a landmark or as a landmark site as it has to disapprove an original designation as a landmark or as a landmark site. 9. It shall be unlawful for any person in charge of a landmark or landmark site, or other person, to construct, alter, remove, or demolish any improvement constituting or which shall constitute a part of such landmark or landmark site, or to cause or permit any work which requires a permit from the municipal building inspector to be performed upon such improvement or land, unless the Landmark Commission, pursuant to the provisions of this Chapter, has previously issued a Certificate of Appropriateness or a notice to proceed authorizing such work, and it shall be unlawful for any other person to perform such work or cause same to be performed unless such certificate or notice has been previously issued. Further, no application shall be approved and no permit or amended permit for the construction, removal, demolition or alteration of any landmark or of any improvement located or to be located on a landmark site shall be issued by the municipal building inspector until the Landmark Commission shall have issued either a Certificate of Appropriateness or a Notice to Proceed pursuant to the provisions of this chapter as an authorization for such work. 10. Any application for a Certificate of Appropriateness which requires action by the Planning Board must be presented to the Landmark Commission for its written comments before the application may be considered by the Planning Board. Within forty-five days from the first meeting of the Landmark Commission at which the application is presented for comments as required by this section, the Landmark Commission shall forward the application together with written comments, to the Planning Board. After the Planning Board has acted, the Landmark Commission shall take final action on the application within the time limitation set forth in Section 11 below. 11.a. Following the receipt of an application by the Landmark Commission under Subdivision 9 above, which application respects work on a landmark or on an improvement within a landmark site, or new construction on a landmark site other than of a principal improvement, the Landmark Commission shall determine whether in its opinion the proposed work would adversely change, destroy or affect any exterior architectural feature of the improvement upon which said work is to be done, or, if it is new construction, whether it would lack harmony with the landmark site, and whether the proposed work would be appropriate for and consistent with the purposes of this chapter. If the Landmark Commission determines that the proposed work would not adversely change, destroy or affect any

233 exterior architectural feature of the improvement upon which said work is to be done, and that is would be in harmony with the landmark or other existing improvements on the landmark site, and further determines that the proposed work would be appropriate for and consistent with the purposes of these sections, it shall grant the Certificate of Appropriateness; otherwise, it shall deny said certificate. b. Upon receipt of an application respecting construction of a new improvement which is a principal improvement, the Landmark Commission will determine whether such construction would adversely affect the aesthetic quality of the site or lack harmony with the external appearance of other improvements on the site or on neighboring sites. Within forty-five days from the first meeting of the Landmark Commission at which the application is presented for final action, the Landmark Commission shall forward the application together with written recommendations, to the Planning Board. Within fifteen days after receipt of the Landmark Commission’s recommendations, the Planning Board shall decide whether to support or deny the requested Certificate of Appropriateness, and upon approval, the Landmark Commission shall so issue. If the Planning Board does not follow the recommendations of the Landmark Commission, it shall put the reasons for approving or disapproving the application in writing. Said written reasons shall be filed in the office of the Planning Board, the Landmark Commission, the Morris County Historical Society and the New Jersey Office of Historic Sites. 12. In making their decisions, the Landmark Commission and the Planning Board shall consider: a. The effect of the proposed work in creating, changing, destroying or affecting the exterior architectural features of the improvement upon which the work is to be done; and b. The relationship between such work and the exterior architectural features of improvements neighboring the landmark site; and c. Shall consider, in addition to any other pertinent matters, the factors of aesthetic, historical and architectural values and significance, architectural style, design, arrangement, texture, materials and color. 13.A Certificate of Appropriateness issued pursuant to the conditions contained herein shall relate solely to proposed plans accompanying the application or otherwise submitted for official consideration prior to issuance of the certificate. It shall be unlawful to deviate from the said plans upon which issuance was granted unless an amended Certificate of Appropriateness shall be applied for and issued by the Planning Board. 14. No permit for demolition of a principal improvement on a landmark site will be issued until a Certificate of Appropriateness has been granted by the Planning Board to proposed plans for new construction on said landmark site.

234 Special attention is here directed to the question of forced demolition due to neglect of property by its owner. Therefore, it shall further be within the power of the Landmark Commission to require the structural soundness and proper upkeep of all buildings designated landmarks. To achieve these objectives, the Landmark Commission shall have the right to file complaints against owners or managers of landmark structures or sites when such owners or managers violate the municipality’s health, fire, or building codes. 15.In any case where the Landmark Commission or the Planning Board has denied an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness, the applicant may appeal to the Board of Adjustment for a notice to proceed. A Notice to Proceed will be issued by the Landmark Commission if the applicant establishes to the satisfaction of the Board of Adjustment that there is unnecessary hardship in the strict application of the provisions of this section. A Notice to Proceed may not be granted unless the applicant provides proof that all of the following facts and conditions exist: a. The land or improvement in question cannot yield a reasonable return if the proposed construction, removal, demolition or alteration is not permitted. b. That the plight of the applicant is due to unique circumstances. c. That the proposed alteration, construction, removal or demolition will not alter the essential character of the area. d. That the hardship is the result of the application of the ordinance and is not the result of any act or omission by the applicant. A Notice to Proceed issued pursuant to these conditions shall relate solely to proposed plans accompanying the application. 16.Where it appears that the owner or person in charge of an improvement on a landmark site or a person under his direction or any other person threatens or is about to do or is doing any work in violation of this section, the Corporation Counsel of the municipality shall forthwith apply to an appropriate court for an injunction against such violation of this section. If an order of the court enjoining or restraining such violation does not receive immediate compliance, the Corporation Counsel shall forthwith apply to an appropriate court to punish said violation pursuant to law. A violation of this chapter is punishable by a fine not exceeding ______dollars, or by imprisonment not exceeding ______days, or by both such fine and imprisonment, or by a penalty of not less than ______dollars nor more than ______dollars, to be recovered by the municipality in a civil action. Every day of such violation may be held to constitute a separate offense. 17.The Commission shall have in addition to the powers and duties of a landmark commission the following further powers and duties, subject to appropriation or receipt of money gifts, and may in exercise of any of its powers or duties accept and expend such gifts and employ clerical and technical assistants, or consultants:

235 a. To conduct a survey of buildings in the municipality for the purpose of determining those of historic significance architecturally or otherwise, and pertinent facts about them, acting in collaboration with the Planning Board to the extent either may from time to time be able to undertake such work, and to maintain and from time to time revise detailed listings of historic sites and buildings, and data about them, appropriately classified with respect to national, state or local significance, to period or field of interest, or otherwise; b. To arrange for preparation and publication of maps and brochures and descriptive material about municipal historic sites and buildings, arrange for convenient walks or tours, or otherwise; c. To cooperate with and advise the Planning Board, and other municipal agencies on needs involving historic sites and buildings; d. To cooperate with and increase assistance for the municipality from the National Park Service, the National Trust for Historic Preservation, the Morris County Historical Society and any other agencies public and private concerned with historic sites and buildings; e. To advise owners of historic buildings on problems of preservation. f. To recommend to the municipal government from time to time as needed appointment of advisory committees of historians and persons experienced in architecture or other arts or in historic restoration or preservation, to assist in manner comparable to the National Park Service Advisory Board. 18.The Mayor, manager, or governing body of the municipality shall be responsible for proper identification of landmarks or landmark sites designated by the Commission. 19.Nothing herein contained shall be taken to contradict existing ordinances of the municipality. If any provisions of this Commission or the application thereof to any person or circumstances is held to be invalid, the remainder of these provisions and their application to other persons or circumstances shall not be affected thereby.

236 APPENDIX B MORRIS COUNTY HISTORICAL SOCIETIES AND COMMITTEES

Beavertown Historical Society Main Street, Lincoln Park 07035 Boonton Historical Society P.O. Box 32, Boonton 07005 Canal Society of New Jersey MacCulloch Hall, P.O. Box 737 Morristown 07960 Chatham Historical Society c/o H.E. Kilminster, President 34 Coleman Avenue East, Chatham 07928 Chester Historical Society c/o Irving Lovejoy, President Catan Drive, R.D. #1, Flanders 97836 Denville Historical Society P.O. Box 319, Denville 07834 Dover Area Historical Society P.O. Box 1722, Dover 07801 Florham Park, Historical Society of c/o Mrs. Vincent F. Healy, President 49 Orchard Road, Florham Park 07932 Lake Hopatcong Historical Society P.O. Box 668, Lake Hopatcong 07850 Madison Historical Society P. 0. Box 148, Madison 07940 Montville Township Historical Society Taylortown Road, Montville 07045 Morris County Historical Society P. 0. Box 170M, 68 Morris Avenue, Morristown 07960 Mt. Lakes Historical Society c/o Mrs. L.F. Wilson 37 Howell Road, Mt. Lakes 07046 Parsippany—Troy Hills Historical Sites Preservation Committee, do Mrs. Stanley Kaminski 19 Ser Del Drive, Parsippany 07054 Passaic Township Historical Society c/o Miss Gwendolyn Thomas, President 1690 Long Hill Road, Millington 07946

237 Pompton Lakes Historical Society c/o Mr. C.L. Vreeland 79 Hamburg Turnpike, Pompton Lakes 07442 Ralston Historical Association P. 0. Box 603, Mendham 07945 Randolph Township Landmarks Commission c/o Richard Irwin, Chairman 8 Fairfield Avenue, Dover 07801 Rockaway Borough Historical Society c/o Mrs. Ervin McElroy 107 Church Street, Rockaway 07866 Rockaway Township Historic Preservation Society P. 0. Box 100 Hibernia 07842 Roxbury Township Historical Society c/o Miss Harriet Meeker 35 North Hillside Avenue, Succasunna 07876 Washington Association of New Jersey c/o Ralph H. Cutler, Jr., President 10 Park Place, Morristown 07960 Washington Township Historical Society c/o Christian Lanner, President 358 Fairview Avenue, Wash. Twp. 07853

238 APPENDIX C GLOSSARY OF ARCHITECTURAL TERMS

ADAM — a picturesque version of neoclassicism in architecture and furniture design first introduced by the English brothers Robert and James Adam c. 1750

ASHLAR — hewn or squared stone, usually laid in regular courses

BALLOON FRAME - a method of light, nailed timber construction which replaced the cumbersome 18th—century use of mortise and tenon; precursor of modern prefabrication

BARGEBOARD - a board covering the projecting timbers of a gable, often decorated during the second half of the 19th century

BATTERED - used to describe the face of a wall or frame of a door set at less than a right angle; in effect, a truncated triangle

BAY - an external division of a building marked by fenestration

BAY WINDOW — a window projecting from a facade, either angled or curved

BELVEDERE - a small lookout tower on the roof of a building

BOARD AND BATTEN — vertical siding (boards), the joints of which are covered by thin wood strips (battens)

CARPENTER GOTHIC - see: GOTHIC

CORBEL — a short projection in stone or brick used to support a course of masonry, or simply for decoration

CORNICE — the topmost member of a classical entablature, or any horizontal molding projecting from the top of a wall

CRENELLATION - battlements, or notched parapets at the top of a building

CUPOLA — a small structure built on top of a roof, usually ornamental and often domed

DENTIL — one of series of projecting rectangular blocks resembling teeth, used under a cornice or to form a molding

DUTCH (OR FLEMISH) STYLE — characterized by a bell-shaped gambrel roof with turned up eaves, the use of stone , and in urban areas, stepped gables

ENTABLATURE - the group of horizontal members resting on columns; any upper part of a wall or story distinguished in some manner from the lower part

239 EYEBROW WINDOW - a small horizontal window used to light an upper story

FACADE - the front or principal exterior face of a building (or any of its sides)

FANLIGHT - a semicircular window capping a doorway

FEDERAL STYLE - an architecture style in use after the Revolution until c. 1820, employing classical details, lighter and more refined than the Georgian style

FENESTRATION - the arrangement of window (and door) openings in a building

GABLE - the triangular area of a wall formed by the slopes of a pitched roof

GAMBREL - a two-pitched gable roof, the lower pitch steeper than the upper

GEORGIAN - actually a dynastic term describing the reign of the four English Georges from 1714 to 1830. Commonly misused as a stylistic term to describe early 18th—century architecture employing quoins, pediments and pilasters

GOTHIC - late medieval style (13th and 14th centuries) characterized by pointed arches and vertical masses; popular in the United States throughout the second half of the 19th century. The introduction of handsaws and jigsaw made possible the imitation of stone tracery in wood, which gave rise to the term “carpenter Gothic”.

GREEK REVIVAL - an architectural style based on Greek classicism which flourished in America during the first half of the 19th century, distinguished in its purest form by the use of pediments and columns

ITALIANATE - an architectural style popular in the Victorian era, characterized by square towers, and arched windows

LIGHTS - window panes

LUNETTE - any semicircular opening or surface, primarily decorative

MANSARD — a roof having two slopes on all sides (the upper slope nearly flat, the lower steep, and sometimes curved), and thus no gable ends

MORTISE — a rectangular hole cut to receive a projecting tongue (tenon) on another piece of timber

MUNTIN - a strip separating panes of glass in a window

PALLADIAN WINDOW — three sashes grouped together, the center one higher with a round arch

240 PEDIMENT - originally the low—pitched gable area decorated with cornice and other details in classical architecture; subsequently any similar form used over a door, window or the like

PILASTER - a rectangular column projecting slightly from a wall, usually decorative rather than structural

PORTICO - strictly defined, a porch treated classically, with pediment and wide steps

QUATREFOIL — an ornament common to Medieval decoration, composed of four leaf— like shapes centered on a point

QUOIN — one of a series of heavy blocks used to accent the corner of a building

ROMANESQUE - early Medieval style (10th - 12th centuries) popular in the United States during the 1880’s and 1890’s, characterized by heavy stonework and round arches

SALTBOX - a house with its rear roof slope longer than its front roof slope

SIDELIGHT — one of several small panes of glass vertically flanking a doorway, commonly used in Federal architecture

TENON - see: MORTISE

TRANSOM - a horizontal window with small lights, over a door

TROMP L’OEIL — from Fr., “fool the eye,” applied to painting of architectural elements or still—life arrangements which mimics reality with unusual fidelity

VICTORIAN — relating to Queen Victoria’s reign (1837—1901), characterized in 2merican architecture by a Gothic-based eclecticism which later borrowed freely from French, Italian, Moorish and Oriental motifs

WAINSCOT - the timber lining of a wall; the lower three to four feet of an interior wall, treated differently from the remainder

241 APPENDIX D RESOURCE BIBLIOGRAPHY

The following bibliography is designed as a reference source for those who intend to pursue historic preservation — both documentation and physical preservation of sites. Most entries are followed by a code designating local availability: C = Morris County Free Library; N = Joint Free Public Library of Morristown and Morris Township; P = Morris County Planning Board. Local libraries will also have many of the standard references cited here, and should be consulted. Each of the three reference sources keeps vertical file materials, news clippings and publications of local historical societies which are not cited here. Both libraries also maintain genealogical sources. The Morris County Hall of Records keeps deeds and wills dating from the eighteenth century, which are invaluable for tracing land titles. Because no definitive history of Morris County or study of New Jersey architecture exists, Sections II and III also contain general material relevant by extension. Periodicals listed in Section IV are not represented by complete runs in all collections. Check source (C, M, or P) to determine which issues are available. Although the two periodicals of the National Trust are of pre—eminent value, many other periodicals cited are of occasional value and should not be ignored.

242 APPENDIX D, RESOURCE BIBLIOGRAPHY

I PRESERVATION THEORY AND PRACTICE

C,P Codman, John. Preservation of Historic Districts by Architectural Control. Chicago, Illinois: 2xnerican Society of Planning Officials, 1956. Experience of Boston’s Beacon Hill Civic Association; valuable tips on public relations and media support.

P Committee for the Preservation of Historic Courthouses. How to Save a Courthouse. Albany: N.Y. State Bar Association, n.d. Organization and publicity with general applicability

P Connecticut Historical Commission. Historic Conservation: Progress and Prospects. Hartford, 1969. Discusses problems of financing and legislative acceptance

P Costonis, John. Space Adrift: Landmark Preservation in the Market Place. Urbana, Illinois: University of Illinois Press, 1974. How to give preservation a competitive economic base through sale of air rights, etc.

P Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission. A Report on Historic Preservation. Philadelphia, 1969. One of the finest regional plans covering all aspects of preservation.

P Duke University School of Law. Law and Contemporary Problems. (Issue devoted to Historic Preservation) Durham, North Carolina (Vol. 36, No. 3), 1971. Historic Preservation and environmental law; state and federal legislation; architectural controls, etc.

P Dutchess County Planning Board. Landmarks of Dutchess County, 1683- 1867. New York: N.Y. State Council on the Arts, 1969. Excellent example of site survey; 45 pp. of photos and glossary.

P Goeldner, Paul. A Brief Bibliography for the Restoration of Historic Buildings. Washington, D.C.: National Park Service, 1971.

C,N Greiff, Constance N., ed. Lost America. Princeton, New Jersey: Pyne Press, 1971, 1972. 2v. Copiously illustrated with photos; comments on social history as well as architecture; excellent treatment of preservation principles and goals.

M Historic American Buildings Survey. Catalog of the Measured Drawings and Photographs of the Survey in the Library of Congress. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1941.

N ______. Additions to the Original Catalog. Washington, D.C.: National Park Service, 1959.

243 M ______. Data Pages for Morris County Buildings. Microfilm 2 rolls.

N ______. Selected Photographs of Morris County Buildings in Original 1941 Survey. Black and white prints,5”x 7”.

C,M Hosmer, Charles B., Jr. Presence of the Past: A History of the Preservation movement in the United States Before Williamsburg. New York: G.P. Putnam, 1965.

C Lunny, Robert M. Historic Preservation and Municipal Planning, [Federation Planning Information Report] Vol. II, No.2. Mountainside, New Jersey: New Jersey Federation of Planning Officials, March, 1967. Practical preservation powers at the municipal level.

P McKee, Harley J. Recording Historic Buildings. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1971. Principles and standards of Historic American Buildings Survey for physical documentation; comprehensive and copiously illustrated.

P Miner, Ralph W. Conservation of Historic and Cultural Resources. Report No. 244. Chicago: Planning Advisory Service, American Society of Planning Officials, March, 1969. Philosophical and practical problems, surveys and inventories; zoning, commissions and other tools.

P Montague, Robert L., III, and Tony P. Wrenn. Planning for Preservation. Chicago: American Society of Planning Officials, 1964. Concentrates on legal problems and economic benefits.

C Morrison, Jacob H. Historic Preservation Law. Washington, D.C.: National Trust for Historic Preservation, 1965.

C,M,P National Trust for Historic Preservation and Colonial Williamsburg. Historic Preservation Tomorrow: Revised Principles and Guidelines. Washington, D.C.: National Trust, 1967. Surveys, evaluations and registration of sites; education and training for restoration work.

C,P National Trust of Historic Preservation. Criteria for Evaluating Historic Sites and Buildings. Washington, D.C.: National Trust, 1969.

P ______. A Guide to Preparing Better Press Releases. Washington, D.C.: National Trust, n.d. How to get media attention for preservation.

C,M,P ______. Guide to State Programs. Washington, D.C.: National Trust, 1972.

P ______. Historic Preservation and the Tourist Industry. Washington, D.C.: National Trust, n.d. Where the tourist dollar comes from and how to get it.

244 P ______.. Member Organizations and Their Historic Properties. Washington, D.C.: National Trust, 1973. Includes AIA state preservation coordinators and foreign organizations.

P ______. National Historic Preservation Fund. Washington, D.C.: National Trust, 1974. Examples of NHPF funding and loan projects.

C National Trust for Historic Preservation. Seven Basic Steps for Preserving Historic Sites and Buildings. Washington, D.C.: National Trust, 1969.

C,P New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection. New Jersey Environmental Times (Special Historic Sites Edition). Trenton, New Jersey (Vol. 6, No 2), 1974. Programs and projects of Historic Sites Section, DEP

C,M,P New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, Historic Sites Section. NJHSI. Survey forms for Morris County sites, arranged by municipality, research from local sources.

P New York State Board for Historic Preservation. Historic Resources Survey Manual. Albany, 1972. Physical survey procedures, adaptive use, integrity of historic resources.

P Pyke, John S., Jr. Landmark Preservation. New York: Citizens Union Research Foundation, Inc., 1969. How Landmarks Preservation Commission of N.Y.C. operates and general survey of preservation goals; broad applicability.

C Roth, Frederick L., Jr. Guide to Historic Preservation, Historical Agencies and Museum Practices: A Selective Bibliography. Coopers- town, N.Y.: New York State Historical Association, 1970.

P Stephen, George, and Robert B. Rettig. Revitalizing Older Houses in Charlestown. Boston: Boston Redevelopment Authority, 1973. Concise treatment of how to renovate historic houses without destroying architectural character; useful line drawings.

P Sykes, Meredith, and Ann Falkner. Canadian Inventory of Historic Buildings. (Training manual and inventory record form) . Ottawa: National Historic Sites Service, 1971. Field recording techniques and physical details explained + architectural glossary.

P Turnbull, H. Rutherford. “Aesthetic Zoning and Property Values,” Wake Forest Law Review. March, 1971 230-253. Legal justifications for aesthetic as opposed to purely economic zoning; illustrative cases.

C,M U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service. National Register of Historic Places. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1972.

245 P ______. National Parks and Landmarks. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1970. Historical and natural areas administrated by National Parks listed by state and category with outstanding characteristics.

P . ______. National Park Service Programs. (Pamphlets describing: The Historic American Buildings Survey, 1970; The National Historic Landmarks Program, 1970; National Park Service Archeological Program, 1969; The National Register of Historic Places, 1971) Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office.

C,M United States Conference of Mayors, Albert Rains, Chairman. With Heritage So Rich. New York: Random House, 1966. Brilliant examination of all aspects of preservation by distinguished authorities; photos.

P Wall, Louis Samuel. The Feasibility of Tax Credits as Incentives for Historic Preservation. Washington, D.C.: National Trust for Historic Preservation, 1971. Inadequacies of present tax system and suggestions for reform: special attention to Puerto Rico’s Old San Juan District.

C, P White, Harry E. , Jr. A Discussion of Historic Districts Legislation. Washington, D.C.: National Trust for Historic Preservation, 1963.

C,P Wolfe, Albert B. Conservation of Historical Buildings and Areas - Legal Techniques. Proceedings of Section of Real Property, Probate and Trust Law, American Bar Association. Chicago: American Bar Center, 1963. Architectural review standards; state, federal and local action enforcement problems.

II HISTORY OF MORRIS COUNTY

C,M Bailey, Rosalie Fellows. Pre-Revolutionary Dutch Houses and Families in Northern New Jersey and Southern New York. New York: Morrow, 1936. A genealogical and architectural survey with numerous Morris County references.

C,M Barber, John W. Historical Collections of the State of New Jersey. New York: S. Tuttle, 1844.

C,M Bartenstein, Fred and Isabel. New Jersey Brigade Encampment Near Morristown, Winter of 1779-80. Mendham, New Jersey: The Authors, 1967.

C,M ______, ______. New Jersey’s Revolutionary Powder Mill. Mendham, New Jersey: The Authors, 1973. Location and Significance of Col. Jacob Ford’s powder mill; These and the following studies by Fowler and Howell are excellent models for thorough local research.

C,M Beers, Frederick W. Atlas of Morris County, New Jersey from Actual

246 Surveys. New York: Beers, Ellis, and Soule, 1868. Many buildings noted, as well as political boundaries, roads, etc.

C,M Boyer, Charles Shemer. Early Forges and Furnaces in New Jersey. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1931.

C,M Burr, Nelson R. Narrative and Descriptive Bibliography of New Jersey. Princeton, New Jersey: D. Van Nostrand, 1964. References for both historic sites and preservation.

C,M Cobbett, Frederick B. Newspaper articles written by F.B. Cobbett for the Morristown Daily Record, 1943-1954. 3 scrapbooks

C,M Cazenove, Theophile. Cazenove’s Journal, 1794: A Record of the Journey of Theophile Cazenove Through New Jersey and Pennsylvania. Hanover, Pennsylvania: Pennsylvania History Press, 1922. includes valuable post— Revolutionary views of Morris County.

C, Chastellux, Marquis de. Travels in North America in the Years 1780—82. New York: White, Gallager and White, 1827, Arnold’s Tavern mentioned, p. 75.

C,M Cunningham, John T. Railroading in New Jersey. Newark: Associated Railroads of New Jersey, 1951. Railroads as a social and economic force; station illustrations

C,M ______, ______. This is New Jersey. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1953. Chapter on Morris County; some material presented as current has already gained its own historical perspective.

C,M Drago, Harry Sinclair. Canal Days in America. New York: Clarkson N. Potter, Inc., 1972. Includes Morris Canal

C,M Federal Writer’s Project. New Jersey: A Guide. New York: Viking Press, 1939. Part of a highly acclaimed series, its Morris County section is interesting though brief.

C,M,P Fowler, Alex D. Cornelius T. Doremus House, Montville, New Jersey. Boonton, New Jersey: The Author, 1974. This and the following two research reports include genealogies, title searches and local history.

C,M,P ______, . Some Eighteenth- and Nineteenth-Century Houses of Montville, New Jersey. Boonton, New Jersey: The Author, 1974.

C,M ______, . Two Stiles Houses in Morris Plains, New Jersey. Boonton, New Jersey: The Author, 1954.

C,P Gaver, Mary Virginia, and Gerald Garant Hodges. A Selected New Jersey Bibliography. New Brunswick, New Jersey: Rutgers University Press, 1968. Brief references, soley historical rather than preservation materials.

247 C,M Gordon, Thomas F. Gazeteer of the State of New Jersey. Trenton: Daniel Fenton, 1834.

C,M History of Morris County, New Jersey. New York: Lewis Historical Publishing Co., 1914. 2v. The logical progression from Munsell and less apocryphal; photo— graphs

C,M History of Morris County, New Jersey, 1739-1882. New York: W.W. Munsell and Co., 1882. Valuable perspective for its time though not always reliable; engravings.

M Hoffman, Henry Brown. Newspaper articles from the Jerseyman and Banner, copied by Hoffman, covering 1850—1910. Microfilm: 10 reels. Indexed.

C,M Hoffman, Robert V. Revolutionary Scene in New Jersey. New York: American Historical Co., Inc., 1942.

C,N Honeyman, Abraham Van Doren, ed. Northwestern New Jersey, a History of Somerset, Morris, Hunterdon, Warren, and Sussex Counties. New York: Lewis Historical Publishing Co., 1927. 4v.

C,M Hoskins, Barbara, Caroline Foster, Dorothea Roberts and Gladys Foster. Washington Valley...Morris County, New Jersey. Ann Arbor, Michigan: Edwards Brothers, Inc., 1960. History, families and houses of the historic community.

C,M Howell, Hazel W. The Jacob Ford, Jr./John Jacob Faesch Manor House at Mt. Hope: A Research Report. Rockaway Township: Rockaway Township Preservation Society, Inc., 1973.

C,M Kaschewski, Marjorie. The Quiet Millionaires. Morristown, New Jersey: Morris County’s Daily Record, 1970. The families, fortunes and estates of Morristown’s Gilded Age.

C,M Lee, James. Morris Canal: A Photographic History. York, Pennsylvania: Canal Press, Inc., 1973.

M Morris County Freeholders, Board of Chosen. Transcripts of Minutes, 1786—1823. 3v. Indexed.

C,M Niemcewicz, Julian Ursyn. Under Their Vine and Fig Tree. Elizabeth, New Jersey: Grassmann Publishing Co., 1965. Autobiographical account of travels through America 1797-1799 and 1805.

C,M Pepper, Adeline. Tours of Historic New Jersey. Princeton, New Jersey: D. Van Nostrand Co., Inc., 1965. Pierson, Aldous H. Clippings from Morristown Daily Record concerning history of Morristown and environs, 1930—1943. 4 scrapbooks. Indexed.

C,M,P Raser, Edward J. Morris County Burial Grounds Inventory. Mendham, New Jersey: The Author, 1975. A descriptive catalogue of all known burial

248 grounds in Morris County, noting size, condition, and history.

C,M Rice, Howard C. Jr., and Ann S.K. Brown, ed. and trans. American Campaigns of Rochambeau’s Army: 1780-1783. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1972. 2v. Itineraries, maps and views, including Morris County

C,M Robinson, Robinson’s Atlas of Morris County, New Jersey. 1887. Useful in determining relative age of buildings, used in comparison with Beers Atlas, etc.

C,M Snyder, John P. The Story of New Jersey Civil Boundaries, 1606-1968. Trenton: Bureau of Geography and Topography, 1969.

C,M Society of Colonial Wars. Historic Roadsides in New Jersey. Plainfield, New Jersey: W.L. Glenney, 1928.

C,M Surdam, Charles Edward. Beautiful Homes of Morris County and Northern New Jersey. Morristown, New Jersey: The Jerseyman Press, Pierson and Surdam, n.d. Early 20th century photos document subsequent demolitions and alterations.

M Tuttle, Joseph F. Annals of Morris County. n.d. Includes Revolutionary and Centennial material and “Tales of Old Randolph”

C,M ______, . The (Early) History of Morris County. Newark: Daily Advertiser, 1870. (N.J. Historical Proceedings, 1870. Second Series, Vol. 2:15).

C,M Van Hoesen, Walter Hamilton. Crafts and Craftsman of New Jersey. Madison, New Jersey: Fairleigh Dickinson University Press, 1973.

C,M Weiss, Harry B. Early Fulling Mills of New Jersey. Trenton, New Jersey: New Jersey Agricultural Society, 1957.

C,M _____,______. Early Grist and Flouring Mills of New Jersey. Trenton, New Jersey: New Jersey Agricultural Society, 1956.

C,M _____,______. Early Sawmills of New Jersey. Trenton, New Jersey: New Jersey Agricultural Society, 1968.

C,M _____,______. Early Tanning and Currying in New Jersey. Trenton, New Jersey: New Jersey Agricultural Society, 1959.

C,M _____,______Early Woolen Industry of New Jersey. Trenton, New Jersey: New Jersey Agricultural Society, 1958.

C,M _____,______Forgotten Mills of Early New Jersey. Trenton, New Jersey: New Jersey Agricultural Society, 1958.

C,M _____,______History of Applejack or Apple Brandy in New Jersey

249 from Colonial Times to the Present. Trenton, New Jersey: New Jersey Agricultural Society, 1954.

C,M Whitehead, John. The Passaic Valley, New Jersey, In Three Centuries. N.Y. - N.J. Genealogical Co., 1901. 2v.

C Works Progress Administration, Historical Records Survey. Archives and Historical Sketch, Morris County. Morristown, N.J.: Board of Chosen Freeholders, 1937.

III ARCHITECTURAL HISTORY

C,M American Heritage. Historic Houses of America Open to the Public. New York: American Heritage Publishing Company, 1971

C,M Andrews, Wayne. Architecture, Ambition and Americans: A Social History of American Architecture. New York: MacMillan, 1964.

C,M ______, _____. Architecture in America: A Photographic History From The Colonial Period to the Present. New York: Atheneum, 1960.Bailey, Rosalie Fellows, see Section II

C Brown, Leonard E. Ford Mansion Furnishing Plan. Washington, D.C.: Office of History and Historic Architecture, Eastern Service Center, 1971.

C,M Carpenter, Ralph E. Fifty Best Historic Houses, Colonial and Federal, Now Furnished and Open to the Public. New York: Dutton, 1957. Includes Ford Mansion.

C,M Condit, Carl W. American Building: Materials and Techniques From the First Colonial Settlements to the Present. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1968.

C,M Cowley, James S. Historic New Jersey in Pictures. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1939. Livingston-Benedict house included.

C,M DeLagerberg, Lars. New Jersey Architecture, Colonial and Federal. Springfield, Mass.: W. Whittum, 1956. Brief text, photos c. 1910 of comparative value; 9 pp. on Morris County.

C,M Devlin, Harry. To Grandfather’s House We Go. New York: Parent’s Magazine Press, 1967. Introduction to American architectural styles with paintings by author; primarily for young readers but useful for all ages.

C,M Eberlein, Harold Donaldson. “Morris County Court House, Morristown, New Jersey,” Architectural Record, (September, 1927) , 233—244. Architectural analysis of original building and additions, detail drawings.

C,N Frary, I.T. Early American Doorways. Richmond, Virginia: Garrett and

250 Massie, 1937. Ford Mansion included.

C,MM Gowans, Alan. Architecture in New Jersey, A Record of American Civilization. Princeton, New Jersey: D. Van Nostrand, 1964. Best study to date, although cursory; mentions Mead Hall, Madison.

C,M ______, ______. Images of American Taste: Four Centuries of Architecture and Furniture as Cultural Expression. Philadelphia: Lippincott, 1964. Greiff, Constance. see Section I

C,M Groff, Sibyl M. New Jersey’s Historic Homes. South Brunswick, New Jersey: A.S. Barnes, 1971.

C Harris, John. Illustrated Glossary of Architecture, 850-1830. London: Faber, 1966. English perspective somewhat limits usefulness.

C Hitchcock, Henry Russell. Architecture: Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries. Baltimore: Penguin Books, 1963. Broad view, relates American to European movements.

C,M Howells, John N. Lost Examples of Colonial Architecture. New York: Dover, 1963. Destroyed and denatured buildings; useful in judging what harms a building.

C,M Ives, Mable Lorenz. Washington’s Morristown Headquarters. Upper Montclair, New Jersey: Lucy Fortune, 1932.

C Maas, John. Gingerbread Age, A View of Victorian America. New York; Rinehart and Co., 1957. Good treatment of a still neglected area.

C,M Mills, Wegmer Jay. Historic Houses of New Jersey. New York: Lippincott, 1930.

C Levin, Phyllis Lee. Great Historic Houses of America. New York: Coward McCann, 1970.

C,M Pickering, Ernest. Homes of America. New York: Bramhall House, 1951. Ford Mansion discussed.

C Pierson, William, H., Jr. American Buildings and Their Architects: The Colonial and Neo-Classical Styles. New York: Doubleday, 1970. Scholarly survey with photos.

C,M Rose, Harold Wickliffe. Colonial Houses of Worship in America Built in the English Colonies Before the Republic, 1607-1789, and Still Standing. New York: Hastings House, 1964. Randolph Friends Meeting House included.

C,M “Schuyler—Hamilton House.” Morris County’s Daily Record. (October 26, 1965) 4.

Surdani, Charles Edward. see Section II

251 C,M Torres—Reyers, Ricardo. Wick House: Morristown National Historical Park. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Office of History and Historic Architecture, Eastern Service Center, 1971.

C,M ______, ______. Wick House Furnishing Study: Morristown National Historical Park. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Office of History and Historic Architecture, Eastern Service Center,1971.

C Whiffen, Marcus. American Architecture Since 1780: A Guide to Styles. Cambridge, Mass.: M.I.T. Press, 1969.

C,M William, Henry Lionel. Guide to Old American Houses, 1700-1900. New York: A.S. Barnes, 1962.

IV PERIODICALS

A. General * American Association for State and Local History. History News. Nashville, Tenn. Monthly periodical containing technical notes for preservation and restoration.

M American Institute of Architects. Journal. Washington, D.C. Monthly periodical

N American Society of Civil Engineers. Civil Engineering. New York. Monthly periodical

C,P American Society of Landscape Architects. Landscape Architecture. Washington, D.C. Quarterly journal; excellent design features often relevant to preservation.

P American Society of Planning Officials. ASPO Newsletter. Chicago,

I11. Monthly newsletter.

C,M Antiques, New York Monthly journal.

C,M Archaeological Institute of America. American Journal of Archaeology. New York Quarterly journal for the professional

C,M ______Archaeology, New York. Quarterly journal, non—technical

P Design and Environment. New York. Quarterly journal relating planning, architecture, design, etc.

P National Association of Housing and Redevelopment Officials. Journal of Housing. Washington, D.C. 11 issues annually, treating urban homesteading and other preservation related topics.

252 M,P National Trust for Historic Preservation in the United States. Historic Preservation. Washington, D.C. Quarterly journal devoted to historic preservation.

M,P ______Preservation News. Washington, D.C. Monthly newspaper

C,M Smithsonian Institution. The Smithsonian Journal of History. Washington, D.C. Quarterly Journal

* Society of Preservation of New England .Antiquities. Olde Time New England. Boston Quarterly journal containing many articles concerned with preservation.

* Society of Architectural Historians. Journal. Philadelphia, Pa. Quarterly journal

B. Historical Newspapers

N Jerseyman 1849—1920 (not inclusive)

N Democratic Banner 1849—1914 (not inclusive)

N Morris Republican 1875—1877

N Morris County Chronicle 1898—1914

N Iron Era (Dover) 1881—1907

M Morristown Daily Record (later Morris County’s Daily Record) 1900—Present

M Morristown Topics 1920—1927

N New Jersey Journal 1779—1783

*Newark Public Library

M New Jersey Freeman 1844—1850

M Palladium of Liberty 1810—1827

253 FOOTNOTES

1. John Maynard, “Black Urban Culture,” Historic Preservation, January— March (1973), 30.

2. John L. Frisbee III, “Historic Preservation and the Tourist Industry,” National Trust for Historic Preservation information pamphlet (1971), unpaged.

3. Paul Goldberger, “Energy Crisis May Doom Era of Glass Towers,” The New York Towers, December 6, 1973, 10.

4. Mark Latus, “Preservation and the Energy Crisis,” Historic Preservation, April—June (1973), 10.

5. Ibid.

6. Terry Morton, “Fuel Shortages In Our Town,” Preservation News, December (1973), 4.

7. Grady Clay, “Townscape and Landscape. The Coming Battleground,” Historic Preservation, January-March (1972), 43.

8. Andrew L. Johnson, “Aspirations for the Brandywine;” Historic Preservation, January - Marck (1972), 6.

9. Grady Clay, 43.

10. Walter M. Whitehill, With Heritage So Rich, (New York, 1966), 55.

11. Documentation for the examples cited can be found under these titles in the following issues of Presentation News: 1. “New Life for Old Buildings,” April 1973, (centerfold supplement). 2. “From City Hall to Restaurant,” ibid. 3. “Cape May Hotel to be Restored,” February, 1973, 6. 4. “Preservationists, Developer to Build Shopping Center,” July, 1973, 1—2. 5. “From Industrial to Residential Use,” June, 1973, 2. 12. David N. Poinsett, “What is Historic Preservation,” New Jersey Historical Commission Newsletter, April (1973), 3.

13. Robert Weinberg, “Pitfalls and Plausibilities of Landmarks Preservation,” AIA Journal, July (1965), 57.

14. Walter N. Whitehill, 55.

15. Russel E. Train, “Federal officials Discuss Preservation,” Preservation News, May (1973), 1.

254 16. William J. Murtagh, “Financing Landmark Preservation, AIA Journal, March 1966 (unpaged reprint distributed by the National Trust for Historic Preservation).

17. National Trust for Historic Preservation, National Historic Preservation Fund Annual Report, 1973. 3.

18. Oscar S. Gray, “The Response of Federal Legislation to Historic Preservation,” Law and Contemporary Problems, XXXVL (1971) , 315.

19. Citizens Committee for the Hudson Valley V. Volpe, 302 F. Supp. 1083, 1090 (S.D.N.Y. 1969).

20. Citizens to Preserve Overton Park, Inc. V. Volpe, 401 U.S. 402, 413 (1971)

21. H.R. Rep. No. 1931, 89th Congress, 2nd Sess. 35 (1966).

22. 42 U.S.C. 432 —47 (1970).

23. Oscar S. Gray, 326.

24. Paul E. Wilson and H. James Winkler, II, “The Response of State Legislation to Historic Preservation,” Law and Contemporary Problems, XXXVL (1971), 336.

255