New York City Hurricane Relief for Puerto Rico: 1899

In the song “America,” in “West Side Story,” Anita and her friends sing of Puerto Rico: “Always the hurricanes blowing/always the population growing/and the money owing...”

It may always have been that way, but in the last three years Puerto Rico has been hit with a devastating hurricane, a couple of minor ones, several earthquakes, island-wide power blackouts and a persistent financial crisis. But the deadliest hurricane in Puerto Rican history—even after Hurricane Maria devastated the island in 2017—remains Hurricane San Ciriaco, which killed more than 3,300 people as it barreled across the island in six to nine hours in 1899.

The entire storm, then known as the West Indian Hurricane or the Great Bahamas Hurricane of 1899, lasted 28 days—the longest-lived Atlantic hurricane on record—as it made its way up from Cape Verde through the Caribbean, Puerto Rico, Florida, North Carolina and finally out to sea. It lashed most of the Caribbean, but by far did the most damage and took the most lives in Puerto Rico.

The storm was so bad that it was front page news in The New York Times for several days at a time when the sensational Dreyfus Affair dominated the news—and it sparked a massive relief effort spearheaded by Washington and New York City, under Mayor Robert Van Wyck and Governor Theodore Roosevelt.

Much of the story is told in the Municipal Archives through letters and appeals for help from the Military Governor of Puerto Rico—which became a U.S. possession a year earlier as a result of the Spanish-American War—and the U.S. War Department to Van Wyck. An index to The New York Times articles about Puerto Rico from 1899 to 1930 compiled by the CUNY Centro de Estudios Puertorriquenos is very helpful.

It was spotted off Cape Verde on August 3, but it wasn’t covered by the The New York Times until the August 8 edition, which contained a small story saying that a cyclone hurricane had slammed into the Island of Guadalupe on August 7 and that “many houses had their roofs blown off and were flooded and some of them were destroyed but no fatalities were reported.”

The news soon grew ominous. In a dispatch filed on August 9th for the August 10th edition—this was, after all, decades before television, the Internet and news-as-it-happens—The Times ran a short story on Page One headlined “WEST INDIAN HURRICANE.” A sub-headline screamed: “GREAT HAVOC IN PUERTO RICO.” The story, filed from Washington, began: “Hundreds of houses have been destroyed and several persons killed by the hurricane that has swept over the West Indies...”

The story reported that military officials in San Juan said cavalry barracks had been destroyed, “many other public buildings partially demolished and hundreds of native houses wrecked; that telephone and telegraph wires are down, and that several people have been killed.” San Juan escaped with relatively minor damage compared to the south, center and west of the island as the storm made its way diagonally northwest from Guayama. 

Copy of cable from George Whitefield Davis, Military Governor of Puerto Rico, to the US War Department. Mayor Van Wyck Collection, NYC Municipal Archives.

Also on August 9, the military Governor of Puerto Rico, George Whitefield Davis, sent an urgent message to the Secretary of War in Washington D. C. It is among Van Wyck’s papers, and began: “A hurricane of extreme violence passed over Porto Rico [the American spelling at the time before it was changed back to Puerto Rico in 1931] yesterday.”

It went on to say that at least one temporary barrack had been destroyed, but that there was “no injury to shipping here save for two small local schooners, two sailors drowned and San Juan’s lights were temporarily disabled.” But it did warn that outside of San Juan “the losses by the inhabitants is very great and extreme suffering must result.” He noted that there were fears the damage would exceed that of the last big hurricane, San Felipe, in 1876, which caused a famine, and that “many thousands of families are entirely homeless and very great distress must follow."

The situation quickly became much worse. A front-page story filed from San Juan August 10th reported the grim news. “HUNDREDS DEAD IN HURRICANE.” The sub-headlines read: “PONCE A TOTAL WRECK,” and that “Gov. Davis Asks Gifts of Food, Clothing, and Money.” The story said the storm raged for nine hours over Puerto Rico and that in San Juan four “natives” had drowned, 80 homes were demolished and hundreds more unroofed.

Yet San Juan was largely unscathed compared to Ponce, The story continued: “A dispatch by cable from Ponce, sent at 10 o’clock this morning, says the town was almost destroyed. Almost all the frame buildings are down; the bridge is swept away, and there is no communication between the port and the city proper.” Early estimates put Ponce’s damage at $250,000, the equivalent of more than $7 million in today's dollars.

Reports from Humacao, Bayamon, Carolina and other cities and towns were similar, with dozens of deaths to people and livestock. Twenty-three inches of rain drenched Humacao in 24 hours and several other cities recorded similar tolls. The island’s coffee and orange crops were ruined and would not recover for years.

Copy of cable from George Whitefield Davis, Military Governor of Puerto Rico, to the US War Department. Mayor Van Wyck Collection, NYC Municipal Archives.

A cable filed by Davis from San Juan that day, which was circulated to Van Wyck’s office recounted the damage and made an urgent plea for supplies.

“Later reports show that hurricane was far more severe in interior and southern part of the island than here,” Davis reported. “Data for the number of Porto-Ricans who have lost everything is deficient but I am forced to believe the number on the island cannot fall below one hundred thousand souls and a famine is impending.... (I ask) that two and one-half million pounds of rice and beans, equal amounts of each, be immediately shipped on transports to Ponce, some here.... There have been many deaths of natives by falling walls.... Several towns reportedly entirely demolished.”

The next day, August 11, War Secretary Elihu Root wrote a letter to Mayor Van Wyck and mayors of other large cities saying that President William McKinley had sent him a telegram asking him to make a public appeal for support “for those who have suffered in Puerto Rico.”

Root wrote that at least 100,000 Puerto Ricans were homeless and destitute. “Unless immediate and effective relief is given, these unfortunate people will perish of famine. Under these conditions the President deems that an appeal should be made to the humanity of the American people… I beg that you will call upon the public-spirited and humane people of your city to take active and immediate measures.”

Appeal to Mayor Van Wyck from Secretary of War Elihu Root, August 11, 1899. Mayor Van Wyck Collection, NYC Municipal Archives.

Appeal to Mayor Van Wyck from Secretary of War Elihu Root, August 11, 1899. Mayor Van Wyck Collection, NYC Municipal Archives.

By August 12, a New York Times correspondent had arrived in Ponce and filed this report from that devastated city. The headline screamed: “2,000 DROWNED IN PONCE DISTRICT.” A subhead said: “300 Bodies of Storm Victims Already Buried… Natives Uneasy and Cavalry Patrol is Established… Villages Destroyed.”

The story said the storm had “destroyed the crops and demolished a number of houses on the higher ground, while the floods destroyed bridges and houses and caused great loss of human life.” Some major cities were destroyed and some “entire villages were swept out of existence.” In response, Van Wyck and then-New York Governor Theodore Roosevelt urged New Yorkers to contribute to the “Puerto Rican Hurricane Relief Fund.”

Appeal for aid from Randolph Guggenheimer, City Council President (and Acting Mayor of New York), August 12, 1899. Mayor Van Wyck Papers, NYC Municipal Archives.

Appeal for aid from Randolph Guggenheimer, City Council President (and Acting Mayor of New York), August 12, 1899. Mayor Van Wyck Papers, NYC Municipal Archives.

By August 13, the storm had left the Caribbean and churned on toward Florida, Cape Hatteras and the Outer Banks of North Carolina. But officials in Puerto Rico still had no idea of the exact death toll and the breadth of the devastation.

The following week, two ships, the military transport ship the McPherson and steamer Evelyn of New York and Puerto Rico, reportedly carried hundreds of millions pounds of rice, beans, green peas and bread to Puerto Rico The relief shipment included such supplies as 12,600 vests for women, 4,200 men’s undershirts, 600 pairs of pants and clothes for 215 children. Other transports followed.

Despite the efforts of relief agencies and the people of New York and other cities, the scars of San Ciriaco remained for decades. The final death toll from the entire hurricane was 3,855—with 3,369 of those in Puerto Rico alone. Total damage in Puerto Rico was estimated at $20 million—about $620 million today.

There would be other deadly hurricanes after San Ciriaco, but only Hurricane Maria came close to that death toll in 2017, when an estimated 3,000 perished on the island, though some claim the toll was higher.

Artist in Residence

Julia Weist has been in residence with the Department of Records and Information Services as part of Public Artists in Residence (PAIR), a municipal residency program that embeds artists in city government. Since pursuing a master’s degree in Library Science, New York-based artist Julia Weist’s artistic practice has centered around archives, collections and information resources. Her work has recently been exhibited at the Shed (New York City), the Queens Museum (New York City), the Hong-Gah Museum (Taipei), Witte de With Center for Contemporary Art (Rotterdam) and Rhizome, the New Museum (New York City).


On January 15, 1985 Bess Myerson (then the Commissioner of the Department of Cultural Affairs) sent a memo to Norman Steisel (then Commissioner of the Department of Sanitation) about a program that would install official Artists in Residence within various agencies of New York City government. This initiative was inspired by the great success of Mierle Laderman Ukeles, who by her own design had convinced the Department of Sanitation to name her as Artist in Residence in 1977. Myerson’s memo—which can be found at the Municipal Archives within the Department of Cultural Affairs collection—states that the Commissioner felt that 1985 was the right time to “push ahead on this idea… to enlist the support necessary to get this project off the ground.” In reality it took New York City government an additional 30 years to begin the program which launched in earnest in 2015. I was selected as the first Public Artist in Residence (PAIR) within the Department of Records and Information Services (DORIS) in 2019.

Letter from Bess Myerson, Commissioner of the Department of Cultural Affairs, to Norman Steisel, Commissioner of the Department of Sanitation, 1985. Department of Cultural Affairs Collection, NYC Municipal Archives.

The contemporary PAIR program is in many ways modeled on the pioneering work of Laderman Ukeles (who is still in residence, more than forty years later). The projects she has initiated at Sanitation are remarkable for several reasons, including the fact that she was embedded into the agency a full decade before there was a single female sanitation worker on the force. Her projects built previously unimaginable bridges around perceptions of the “san men” who maintained the city. One such effort, “Touch Sanitation” (1979–1980), involved shaking hands with every one of the 8,500 DOS workers who would accept the gesture while thanking them for “keeping the city alive.”

Since the PAIR program was launched there have been 13 artists and collectives invited into various agencies including Department for Veterans’ Services, Department of Corrections, Department for the Aging and others. The fundamental belief behind all of these placements, as articulated by the Department of Cultural Affairs, is that artists are creative problem-solvers who approach issues and processes differently than other groups and communities. This tenet has inspired much of my PAIR work at DORIS during the last year. In that time, I’ve conducted extensive research on the interaction between city government and New York City artists finding fascinating evidence of a complicated relationship stretching back centuries.

On June 12, 1663, “the wife of Hendrick Coutrie” appeared in court and was told that as she had a retail shop she needed to purchase the Burgherright. She replied that her husband was given it by General Stuyvesant for painting his portrait and some sketches of his sons. This is most likely the portrait of Stuyvesant in the New York Historical Society, attributed to Hendrick Couturier. Administrative Minutes of New Amsterdam, Vol. 2, NYC Municipal Archives.

The earliest record I encountered relevant for my research was from the Administrative Minutes of New Amsterdam, Vol. 2 (1663). These court minutes document a resident’s petition that the creation of a portrait commission should satisfy the financial obligation of the burgherright, an early form of city citizenship.

As fascinating as the Archives’ very early records are, I found myself drawn to material from the decades between 1930–1990. I noticed that materials documenting artist-government relations clustered around a few key themes. Repeatedly I encountered attempts to define the words “artist” and “artwork” along with more nuanced terms and phrases such as “aspiring artist” and “commercial artist.” Expanding outward from these base-level definitions I found a myriad of papers attempting to articulate the role that artists play in civic life. Many agencies, especially the Health and Hospitals Corporation (which runs the city’s public hospitals), have tried to articulate a clear set of rules for what art should and shouldn’t be present in various public spaces. I’m fascinated by these lists of rules and the reasons behind them, such as a restriction on “abstract imagery too referential to biological forms. We find that such work, although legitimate, does not appeal to hospital clients.” This limitation was among similar rules such as “Themes should be tasteful, no nudes.”

Each of these content areas—definitions, the role of the artist, rules for public art—have become a composition within my project. Other works in the series focus on surveillance of artists by various agencies, government rubrics for evaluating the quality of artworks and even the role that public statuary and monuments in New York City parks played in international diplomacy after the World Wars.

Julia Weist’s Rubrics (2020) from the series “Public Record.” Archival pigment print, 30x40".

Those interested in seeing the series of artworks that have resulted from my research won’t be able to experience them as traditional public works such as outdoor sculptures or murals throughout the city—although some PAIR residencies result in those outcomes. Instead, I’ve focused on the idea that the records stewarded by DORIS are a form of public space and I’ve decided to “install” my artwork among these materials.

At the federal, state and local level protocols exist that regulate which government records must be kept and made available to the public in perpetuity. The most well-known contemporary example of these regulations in action was the focus on Hillary Clinton’s missing email in the 2016 presidential election. I’ve explored the City’s protocols and, over the course of my residency, have leveraged them to ensure that the artwork I was making would become official government records subject to retention. As a result, my artwork series, entitled Public Record, can be experienced in two ways. First, the public may request to view the compositions through a Freedom of Information Law request on NYC’s Open Records Portal. Typically, this platform is used by journalist, advocates, activists, lawyers and other engaged citizens for transparency into the work of government. In the case of my project, it will be used as an exhibition space. The second way the compositions will be brought into the public realm is through their eventual move into the collection of the Municipal Archives. Every record has a retention period, during which it’s safeguarded by the agency where it originated. The retention period on my artworks will expire one year after the end of service term of the current Commissioner of DORIS, Pauline Toole. After that they will be processed, accessioned and made available to the public through the Municipal Archives. This spring a campaign will be posted on LinkNYC kiosks to announce the project and to explain these two forms of access.

One of the greatest challenges of my residency was the sheer amount of material that the government makes and preserves. During my nine months I reviewed 215 cubic feet of paper in the Archives and yet this accounts for less than 1/10 of 1% of the collection. In order to research the entire collection the length of my residency would need to increase to 1,000 years, assuming the government made no new records in that millennium. We create, we keep and we look. Here’s hoping that cycle persists for the next few centuries in New York City.

Moving the Archives

The need for a new climate-controlled space for the City’s historical records has long been recognized. In 1986, the Municipal Archives leased warehouse space in Brooklyn’s Bush Terminal complex for off-site storage of archival material. Although the waterfront area was desolate and the warehouse did not provide optimal storage conditions, the space was far superior to the previous off-site location in the Brooklyn Navy Yard. More recently, Bush Terminal has been rebranded as Industry City and the entire Sunset Park neighborhood has been revitalized.

Researchers visiting the new Municipal Archives Industry City facility will have panoramic views south and west. NYC Municipal Archives, January 2020.

Researchers visiting the new Municipal Archives Industry City facility will have panoramic views south and west. NYC Municipal Archives, January 2020.

Now, after years of planning, construction of a new facility is finally underway. Upgrading the current space while still occupying it would have been nearly impossible, so we are moving—but just a short distance, to an adjoining building in the Industry City complex. Even though the distance is not great, the task is Herculean. The tentative move-in date is September 2020.

Raw space is being cleared for construction of the Municipal Archives Industry City facility. NYC Municipal Archives, January 2020.

Raw space is being cleared for construction of the Municipal Archives Industry City facility. NYC Municipal Archives, January 2020.

The Archives’ space will be spread across three floors and is adjacent to DORIS’ Records Management Division’s storage center. Both divisions will share modern office space on the 7th floor. The facility will also include a public research room which will greatly reduce the transfers of archival materials to and from Manhattan for patron access. A digital laboratory with stations for films, videotapes, negatives and paper documents is another feature of the new space and will help facilitate the growing digitization initiatives of the Archives.

Climate-controlled storage rooms, including a walk-in cold storage vault for negatives and film, will protect the collections from the deteriorating effects of inappropriate temperature and humidity levels. State-of-the-art filters will also eliminate harmful atmospheric pollutants. A conservation lab will allow for the on-site treatment and isolation of mold-damaged or infested materials. In all the storage rooms, new custom-built, high-density shelving will help protect materials and allow for a greater storage capacity in a smaller footprint. Concentrating the materials in this manner will reduce rent costs and lessen the energy draw of the climate-control systems. But of course, the build-out is just one part of this task, the move is the other.

The concrete floors are being prepped for construction of the Municipal Archives Industry City facility. NYC Municipal Archives, January 2020.

The concrete floors are being prepped for construction of the Municipal Archives Industry City facility. NYC Municipal Archives, January 2020.

As anyone who has ever relocated from one apartment or house to another can tell you, moves are stressful. They are also an opportunity to take stock of what you have, rediscover things you’ve forgotten, and re-evaluate some of the things you’ve been hanging onto for no apparent reason. Over the past three years, municipal archivists have been surveying and re-appraising collections, and conservators have been preparing condition reports. The current facility suffers from drafty windows, peeling paint, and dust accumulated over ages. Many collections were transferred from filthy warehouses and never cleaned. Archives staff have begun the process of reboxing and cleaning every single item that needs it. It is estimated that approximately 50% of the collections will be re-boxed, a total of over 70,000 new containers. Recycling the old boxes is itself an enormous task. In addition, every single ledger on open shelves (50,000 total) will be vacuumed, and eventually every object will be barcoded. And then, the 140,000 cubic feet of historical records will be moved from one building to another.

At the end of process, we will have greater control over our collections, they will be in better storage containers and in a better storage environment, and we will have a public footprint in Brooklyn.

Construction of the Municipal Archives Industry City facility has commenced. Municipal Archives, January 2020.

Construction of the Municipal Archives Industry City facility has commenced. Municipal Archives, January 2020.

Future blog posts will update this continuing saga.

Conserving Central Park and Brooklyn Bridge Plans

The New York State Library recently awarded a grant to the Municipal Archives Conservation Unit to perform much needed treatments on large-scale drawings and plans for Central Park and the Brooklyn Bridge.

Brooklyn Approach, East River Bridge, 1892. Wilhelm Hildenbrand, Brooklyn Bridge Collection, NYC Municipal Archives.

Lindsey Hobbs pasting out a sheet of Japanese tissue with wheat paste for lining a Brooklyn Bridge drawing.

These two icons of New York are among the most important public works achievements in the city’s history. Beyond the technological and design innovations, the bridge and park have become symbols of the city itself. The more than 200 drawings that are the subject of the grant exhibit the remarkable level of detail and artistry that went into the planning and construction of each structure.

The project focuses on the largest items in each collection, some of which are 34 feet long! Conservation staff are undertaking a variety of activities to assess and stabilize these delicate materials.  These include mending and lining fragile drawings, stabilizing media, washing to remove harmful degradation products, reducing stains from mold and other sources on some of the most important drawings, as well as creating new housings for long-term storage.

The grant funding also supported the purchase of a Zeiss stereo microscope with a digital camera, and portable UV lights. This equipment allows conservation staff to analyze drawing media and supports, assess mold and other types of damage, and take high quality images of fine details, all of which will inform the treatment methods chosen. Additionally, the lab was able to purchase a large mono-stand for photographing oversized collections, both for documentation of the treatments performed as well as to provide another source of research access to these large, unwieldy objects.

Clare Manias and Sara Bone surface cleaning a Brooklyn Bridge drawing.

The Brooklyn Bridge and Central Park plans comprise some of the most treasured collections at the Archives. Dating from 1850 to 1934, the Central Park plans provide complete documentation during the critical stage of the park’s design and construction from 1850 to 1880. The collection includes renderings of everything from landmark structures like the Boathouse, Belvedere Castle, and Sheepfold to a three-level circulation pattern for people, horses, and vehicles.  The oversized drawings included in the grant project detail the design of the Metropolitan Museum of Art and the Museum of Natural History, gates and entrances to the park, paths and walkways, drainage systems, and other elaborate details.

Conservators Clare Manias and Sara Bone prepare to photograph a Brooklyn Bridge drawing.

The Brooklyn Bridge collection documents the original construction and subsequent alterations of the 1,596-foot steel suspension bridge connecting Manhattan to Brooklyn. At the time of its completion in 1883, the bridge was the longest in the world and was an important technological achievement. The total 8,706 drawings in the Bridge collection span from 1867 to 1938.  They were produced by architects and engineers who developed techniques for bridge construction that were unknown or considered unproven among their profession at that time. Many of the drawings in the collection are the work of the most celebrated American engineers and architects of the nineteenth century, such as John and Washington Roebling, George McNulty, and Wilhelm Hildebrand. The largest of these drawings is over 34 feet in length.

The drawings and plans in both the Central Park and Brooklyn Bridge collections have similar characteristics. They represent a variety of media (watercolor, graphite, inks, crayon, and photo-reproductive processes) and supports (tracing paper, watercolor paper, cloth-lined paper, and tracing cloth).  Unfortunately, improper storage and handling over the decades prior to acquisition by the Archives has led to physical damage to varying degrees in the form of acidic and deteriorated supports, flaking media, iron gall ink damage, and tears and fractures.

Clare Manias and Sara Bone photographing a Brooklyn Bridge drawings in sections.

Assistant Architect Wilhelm Hildenbrand included some delightful details in his 1877 plans for the Brooklyn Bridge. Conservation staff spotted these two almost microscopic figures enjoying themselves on the bridge. A gentleman in a top hat appears to be serenading a lady holding a parasol.

One of the greatest challenges of treating these materials is simply moving them back and forth from and within the lab. Conservators Sara Bone, Clare Manias, and I have developed a workflow for carefully shifting and transporting the drawings using light, but sturdy, foam board to support their weight. We have also refined methods for photographing, cleaning, and performing various treatments on a much larger scale than we are generally accustomed to. Planning each move in advance, and of course teamwork, are key to safely maneuvering these massive and very delicate drawings.

The ultimate goal, as with most of the work we do in Conservation, is to make the oversized drawings safer to handle, more accessible to researchers and well-preserved for the future. As the project moves forward in the coming months, we will continue to learn a great deal about the collections and further refine our treatment methods. Given the many thousands of oversized maps and drawings in the Archives’ collections, these skills will no doubt be put to use again once this project is completed. Although challenging, the work will ensure the viability of these iconic materials for many generations to come.

Indexing the Dutch Records of Kings County

Nena Huizinga, a 4th year student at the Reinwardt Academie in Amsterdam, the Netherlands, has spent the last four months at the Municipal Archives indexing Dutch colonial-era Kings County town ledgers.

Manhattan’s Dutch heritage has been long-recognized and the records of New Amsterdam have been transcribed, indexed and published. Less well-known is the Dutch origin of the towns and villages in Kings, Queens, Richmond and Westchester Counties. The Municipal Archives collection includes records of many of these communities dating to the Dutch colonial era and we have begun preserving and making them available.

This past summer, Harmen Snel and Hans Visser of the Stadsarchief, Amsterdam, visited the Municipal Archives. They examined the Kings County Dutch ledgers and took notes for an index that will greatly enhance the records value to historians.

Nena Huizinga, a 4th year student at the Reinwardt Academie in Amsterdam, the Netherlands, has spent the last four months at the Municipal Archives indexing Dutch colonial-era Kings County town ledgers. Photograph by Matthew Minor.

Kenneth Cobb recently spoke with Ms. Huizinga about her project:

KRC: Tell me about your background and how you found out about the Municipal Archives.

NH: I had originally intended to major in Cultural Heritage at the Academie. In the third year we must choose a minor, and I chose Archival Studies which was partly taught at the Hogeschool van Amsterdam (HvA) and the Reinwardt Academie. I now plan to graduate this summer with a dual degree. My work at the Municipal Archives is to fulfill my internship requirement. I had been studying about Dutch settlements and influence around the world—in Australia, Canada and the U.S. and through Mr. Snel I learned about the indexing project at the Archives.

Town of Bushwick records entry from 1663. NYC Municipal Archives.

KRC: I understand that there are two parts to your assignment—indexing the Kings County Town ledgers, and mapping a plan for future collaboration between the various institutions in New York and the Netherlands that house Dutch colonial records. Let’s start with the first part of your work here. Tell me more about your assignment and what has been the biggest challenge?

NH: I am creating an index to nine ledgers in the Archives’ collection—three from the Town of Flatbush; two each from the town of Flatlands and New Utrecht; and one from Bushwick. They date from 1646 to 1849. The biggest challenge for me is reading the old Dutch language.

KRC: Is it true that the “old” Dutch language written in these ledgers is very different from modern Dutch and difficult to read?

NH: Yes, it is very difficult to read! Even the letters are different. This past summer, before coming to the States, I took a special course to learn how to read the old Dutch. I felt like a 5-year old learning to read again!

KRC: Are there entries or passages in the ledgers that stand out?

NH: For me, the references to Native-Americans are the most interesting. There are many mentions of Native-Americans in the books, but they are usually referred to as ‘savages’ or something negative like that, but every once in a while they would write out their names and I found that very moving.

KRC: What were the interactions between Native-Americans and the colonists about?

NH: Mostly about property—usually a dispute of some kind.

Names of the Native Americans are among others given in the Flatlands book page 19: “In dato juny anno sesthien hondert sesendaertich is ten overstaen van directeur en raden van Nieuw Nederlant vercocht en getransporteert door de indianen met namen: Tenkirau, Ketamun, Arrikan, Awachkouw, Warinckekinck, Wappittawaekenis, Ghettin.” Roughly translated: “In June sixteen hundredth and thirty-six in attendance of the director and councils of New Netherland sold and transported by the Indians with the following names: Tenkirau, Ketamun, Arrikan, Awachkouw, Warinckekinck, Wappittawaekenis, Ghettin.”

KRC: How do you go about indexing the ledgers?

NH: First, I read the text to determine what sort of document it is, such as deed, or will, or petition. Then I write down the names, interesting topics and geographical places, such as Middelwout (Midwout), Schoenmakersbrug (Shoemakers bridge) and Vlackebos (Flatbush). I try to add as much as possible, but in some cases the writing is hard to read or the pages are much too faded to make any sense of it. The index will be in alphabetical order and followed by the page numbers, using the surnames first, like so: van Ekelen, Johannes, 235.

KRC: And the second part of your assignment – the collaboration plan?

NH: Yes, I am also working on a report about all the Dutch colonial records that are located in various libraries and archives in this area. Here in New York City, I have visited the New-York Historical Society and Collegiate Church which both have Dutch records. And I traveled to Albany, where they have the records of New Netherlands. I also visited Historic Hudson Valley in Tarrytown, Westchester County.

My goal is to identify areas of interest and overlap between the repositories and conduct research on how to fund and set up a collaborative network like two in Europe: Netwerk Oorlogsbronnen and Europeana. I want to draw attention to the benefits that cooperation can bring. Who is it important to? What are the advantages and disadvantages of cooperation? And I will also discuss the importance of multiple perspectives and how that can be enhanced when working together with not only repositories that have Dutch colonial records, but, for example, to try and involve people from the Native American and the African American communities to show their perspectives in the records.

KRC: What part of the Netherlands are you from?

Records of slave births in the town of Bushwick, 1814. NYC Municipal Archives.

NH: I am from a small town in Friesland, a region in the north, by the North Sea—there are only 2,000 people in the town. It is a farming area where they grow potatoes, onions and sugar beets. I moved to Haarlem for school, where I’ve lived the past three years.

KRC: We have a “Harlem” here too. What are your accommodations in NYC?

NH: I am staying in a kind of student apartment on West 46th Street, in Hell’s Kitchen. As it turns out, most of the other students in the house are also Dutch.

KRC: Had you ever visited NYC before?

NH: No. This is my first time here. I only knew New York from television and movies.

KRC: How has the reality differed from what you imagined?

NH: Well, it is less glamorous than I thought. I was a bit shocked by all the homeless people. And the streets, especially in my neighborhood, are not so clean. But all the people and the architecture of the buildings is great. And I love the museums—I’ve been to the Morgan Library, Museum of Modern Art, the Met, the Museum of the American Indian, and the Museum of Natural History.

KRC: Have you seen much evidence of our Dutch heritage in the City?

NH: Not in Manhattan, but out in Brooklyn where I recently walked around, I saw it everywhere in the street and place names. I also visited Greenwood Cemetery to look for the Dutch families I found in the ledgers, and yes, there they were!

Ms. Huizinga’s index project has included Dutch-language portion of the following Town ledgers:

-         Flatbush 1007, 1679-1819

-         Flatbush liber A 1000, 1670-1708

-         Flatlands 4000, 1674-1831

-         Flatlands Bergen, 1677-1849

-         Bushwick deeds, 1660-1825

-         New Utrecht 2001, liber A, 1659-1831

-         New Utrecht Deeds, 1646-1653

-         Flatbush 1001 Liber AA, 1676-1682

-         Flatbush No.1, 1652-1708

Look for digital copies of the ledgers to be added to the on-line gallery soon and we hope to continue the indexing project after Ms. Huizinga returns home to the Netherlands.

Official Mayoral Photographs

The photograph collections of the New York City Municipal Archives are deservedly well-known for their extensive documentation of the physical city—the buildings, streets, highways, bridges and parks. The 1940 and mid-1980s “tax” photograph collections are perhaps the best examples. But there are “people” pictures, too, most notably in the mayoral photograph collections.

Charitable organizations made sure to stop by City Hall to promote their good works. Entertainers Dean Martin and Jerry Lewis visited with Deputy Mayor Charles Horowitz on behalf of the Heart Fund. March 14, 1952. Official Mayoral Photo #724, NYC Municipal Archives.

The Municipal Archives has recently started scanning a collection known as the “Official Mayoral Photographs, 1951–1965.” The first image in the series dates from January 18, 1951—approximately two months after Vincent Impellitteri took office as mayor following a special election on November 7, 1950. Impellitteri was elected to complete the term of William O’Dwyer who had resigned on September 2, 1950. (In accordance with the succession rule in the City Charter, City Council President Impellitteri took over upon O’Dwyer’s resignation and served as acting mayor from September 2, to November 14, 1950.)

Children visiting City Hall were popular subjects for the official photographer. Deputy Mayor Charles Horowitz purchased a doughnut from Camp Fire Girls, March 12, 1951. Official Mayoral Photo #143, NYC Municipal Archives.

Mayor Impellitteri received tickets to the Press Photographers Ball from comedian Ed Wynn and June Wurster, “Queen of the Ball,” March 30, 1951. Official Mayoral Photo #212-03, NYC Municipal Archives.

The official photographer was apparently stationed in City Hall, or nearby, and was assigned to document every swearing-in ceremony, special event, and visitor. The bulk of the images are taken in the mayor’s office or other City Hall rooms. Photographs of people posing on the City Hall steps and plaza and in the Park are well-represented in the collection. The photographer also shot events at Gracie Mansion and made occasional forays to other venues such as the Municipal Building, or mid-town hotels for gala luncheons and dinners. The photographer used a 4x5 view camera and each image was numbered and captioned.

During the Cold War, City Hall frequently hosted displays of United States military readiness. Mayor Impellitteri ascended a scaffold to climb inside a U.S. Air Force FS-689-A fighter jet, May 19, 1951. Official Mayoral Photo #269-02, NYC Municipal Archives.

The “official mayoral photograph” collection serves as an almost daily photographic record of the Impelliteri administration. The official staff photographer tradition continued through Robert F. Wagner’s three terms as mayor, until December 30, 1965, his last day in office.

Champion boxer Joe Louis conferred with Mayor Impellitteri in City Hall, October 31, 1951. Official Mayoral Photo #505-1, NYC Municipal Archives. Official Mayoral Photo #505-1, NYC Municipal Archives.

Further research is needed to determine why Wagner’s successor, Mayor John V. Lindsay (1966-1973), discontinued the practice of having a staff photographer assigned to his office. The Municipal Archives does include a collection of Mayor Lindsay images, but they do not provide a detailed daily record of City Hall events. Similarly, the Abraham Beame (1974-1977) collection is an eclectic mix of photographs. It was not until Mayor Edward I. Koch took office on January 1, 1978, that City Hall would once again have a staff photographer assigned to document the daily activities of the mayor.

Scanning the estimated 10,000 images in the “Official Mayoral” collection has just started, but looking ahead to pictures from the Wagner administration finds the mayor with Cassius Clay in City Hall. Later known as Muhammad Ali, the gold-medal winning boxing champion had just returned from the Rome Olympic Games, September 9, 1960. Official Mayoral Photo #7577, NYC Municipal Archives.

The Official Mayoral photographs will be made available for research in the Archives gallery in batches as the scanning and metadata activities are completed. Look for highlights of the collection in future blogs.