Wharf Building Of a Century and
More Ago*
By Edwin W. Small, Superintendent, Salem Maritime National Historic
Site, Salem, Massachusetts.
WHARVES appear to have been regarded as common place
by our predecessors and their construction as an ordinary occurrence.
It is much more difficult, therefore, to obtain information about them
than to find out about the more exceptional things, for, when compared
to the building of such a direct means to a livelihood as a ship, the
construction of a wharf must have appeared incidental and definitely of
less concern and interest. Yet wharves were essential to the use of
ships, and today their ruins are sometimes the only physical indication
of past maritime activity. The ships which brought wealth and prosperity
to Salem disappeared long ago, but here and there along the
waterfront the remains of old wharves survive as witnesses to the heyday
of sailing ship commerce.
Salem Customhouse (1819), from a
drawing by Samuel O. Stuart.
|
Notable survivals on Salem Harbor are Derby Wharf and
Central Wharf, now part of the area of more than 6 acres comprising
Salem Maritime National Historic Site, Massachusetts. The National Park
Service has made extensive repairs to both these wharves. In that
connection attention has been directed in general to old time wharves
and every effort has been made to get as much information as possible
from the scanty sources bearing upon them.
The first detailed reference to wharf building which
has been found appeared in 1840 in the Merchants' Magazine and
Commercial Review, edited by Freeman Hunt.1 It is an article
describing the manner of constructing wharves along the New York
waterfront. Briefly, the type described is a pile bulkhead formed by
rows of wooden piles driven close to each other, then backfilled with
earth and covered with plank. Wood appears to have been used to the
exclusion of other building materials, the explanation being offered
that "Wood is so plentiful in America that to repair, or even
construct, works in which timber is the only material employed is
generally regarded as a very light matter. . ." The same type of
pile-lined wharf, with "more attention . . . by the builders to the
durability of the work,"
is attributed to Boston. But Boston also had wharves constructed of
timber cribs, timber bulkheads, and walls of stone. In fact, wharves
using these structural devices may have been the rule rather than the
exception. A paper published in the Transactions of the American
Society of Civil Engineers in 1923,2 which touches on the early
wharves of Boston, includes descriptions of timber cribs, timber
bulkheads, and granite walls, but makes no mention of close-set piling
as a prevailing type of bulkhead or wall construction.
This certificate of membership in
the Salsem Marine Society, issued in 1797, shows Salem harbor as it
had appeared the year before. Part of Derby Wharf, with warehouses,
is seen at the left, and the end of Central Wharf (then Forrester's
Wharf) appears at the extreme left corner.
|
The type of wharf made of timber cribs or more
specifically described in the above cited technical paper as "built of
stone-filled timber cribs enclosing areas which were filled with
earth," it is thought corresponds to what Dr. William Bentley, the
indefatigable diarist, knew at Salem in 1819 as a "cobb" wharf. Bentley
says that stone wharves which were beginning to be built about that time
were a great improvement over "our other wharves of Cobb & liable to
be hurt by every sea."3 The "other wharves," he relates in another
connection, "are built of wood, and sunken by rocks."4 How the name
"cobb" came to connote a wharf of timber cribs held down by rocks
cannot be explained readily, unless it was derived from the use of cob
or cobblestones to sink the timber cribs. Although Dr. Bentley observed that
stone wharves were being built at Salem by 1819, they most likely were
constructed of beach or cobblestone and not quarry-cut stone. Wharves
with walls of quarry-cut stone were not built much before 1830 at the
earliest. Up to that time the stone used even in building construction
appears to have been worked only from rock which lay on the surface of
the ground. The deposits of Quincy granite had not been touched. All
stone taken from Quincy or Braintree until then had come mainly from
glacial boulders in the town commons. Quarries had not yet
been opened because artisans had not devised tools that would work into
the rock effectively. Charles Francis Adams, in his History of
Quincy, says this problem was solved in 1803 when three men in the
north precinct of Braintree succeeded in splitting a large stone by
using iron wedges. After the effective use of the iron wedge had been
demonstrated, quarries were opened in Quincy, but the new age of stone
did not begin to flower until the Granite Railway was built in 1826.
Derby Wharf as painted by Porter
Brown in 1879. The arrow indicates a timber platform built over
a dislocated sea wall.
|
The Derby Wharf in existence during the business
career (1762?-1799) of the great merchant, Elias Hasket Derby, was
without doubt one of the "cobb" wharves which Dr. Bentley said in 1819
were the common type at Salem. A good part of Derby Wharf and the end of
Central Wharf, then called Forrester's Wharf, are depicted in a scene
dating from 1796. Both wharves appear to be entirely of wood, with
fender piles resting against a facing of timber cribs (see upper
illustration in certificate).
Although this pictorial evidence points to a
structure with facing built completely of wood, there are indications
that stone also was used as facing on Derby Wharf before the days of
granite quarries. In 1784, for instance, Bentley says Derby employed
Joshua Phippen to finish the east wall of his wharf in stone at the
bottom for a distance of 667 feet; and again, in 1800, 569 feet of the
western side was repaired and faced with that material.5 If these
figures are correct, most of the length of the wharf that existed in
1800 had some stone on both sides, for an inventory of the estate of
Elias Hasket Derby taken the previous year gives the total length of the
wharf as only 760 feet and the width as 52 feet.
At the top is seen Derby Wharf
before its reconstruction by the National Park Service. The view
at bottom was made after completion of work.
|
After the death of Elias Hasket Derby in 1799, the
wharf came into the possession of his seven children. A plan of the lots
on Derby Wharf drawn in 1805 shows the line of a pier running 1,124 feet
from the south end of the wharf to the channel of the South River.
Between 1806 and 1809 the proprietors of the wharf replaced this pier
with a solid wharf at a cost of $45,000, thus making the wharf almost
three times as long as it had been before. The reason for extending it,
as explained in a petition from the proprietors to the General Court,
was "want of sufficient depth of water," and the expectation that the
extension "would be highly beneficial to the trade of Salem and probably
would lead to other important improvements."6
It is in the extension made between 1806 and 1809
that original walls, if any, survive in the wharf today. For a
distance of 200 feet or more in the base of both the east and west
walls, pieces of split boulders and beach rock still are to be found.
These boulders were split by fire or by wetting down wooden pegs or
wedges inserted into the crevices of the natural rock. The stone
obtained in this manner is distinguished readily by masons and keen
observers from the irregular blocks of quarried granite that were
introduced later to build up the sea walls and as materials for other
repairs.
Study of evidence uncovered during the late
reconstruction operations sheds some light on the methods of
construction used when facing walls of stone were introduced. For the
foundations of the walls large rafts were made of hewn timbers, 14 to 16
inches square and 30 to 50 feet long, fastened together with cross
pieces of oak pins. The rafts were then decked over with 8-inch round
timbers laid transversely and floated into position at high tide. Guide
piles driven into the mud flats held the rafts in proper alignment and
wall construction was started, the rafts settling into the mud as the
wall increased in height and weight. The operation necessarily was slow
and fortunately so, for by the time the wall had been built up to final
grade, settlement of the foundation rafts most likely had ceased or
reached a point where the burden of the wall could be borne safely.
It was not always possible, however, to hold in line
the foundation rafts and the walls resting upon them. In some cases
they floated away from their guide piles and settled out of position.
Occurrences of this sort, it is believed, account for much of the
irregularity now evident in the line of Derby Wharf. Sometimes, also,
after a section of wall had been completed and the filling of earth
placed behind it, the foundation slid outward because of the pressure of
the fill against its back. A wall damaged by such movement was
unsatisfactory as a berthing wail for ships, it being impossible to lay
a vessel close enough to the top of the wall to load or discharge a
cargo conveniently. To correct this condition, piles were driven just
outside the dislocated foundation and a timber platform erected, one
side resting on the wharf wall and the other carried by the piles. Two
sections on the west wall, each more than 100 feet in length,
were affected by movement of their foundations in the above manner and,
as indicated in a painting of the wharf done by Porter Brown in 1879
(see illustration), they were planked over in the way described. The
type of structure thus evolved was not in any sense the product of
planned construction; it was one of Yankee ingenuity faced with a bad
situation.7
Cross section of stone wall on sunken
raft and (at right) a platform built over a dislocated wall.
|
Cross section of cobb wharf.
|
Timber cribs, formed by laying up timbers in
alternate rows of headers and stretchers, have been mentioned as typical
of the "cobb" wharves of Dr. Bentley's time. They were used in Derby
Wharf and during reconstruction operations a year ago their remains were
found frequently as buried obstructions back of the set walls. Evidence
was found to indicate that the stone used to sink these cribs was
sometimes secured to the bottom of headers by nails or wire, but
probably it more often was simply loaded on top of the headers as fill
back of the stretchers. After the face of the wharf was laid up in
quarried stone, much of the older timber cribbing disappeared from view,
but new cribbing was used in many locations as capping for new sea
walls. This "cap cribbing" was less durable but lighter than stone
and was, therefore, preferable as capping where walls rested on
unsteady foundations or were not strong enough to carry a heavier
capping. Unlike the earlier cribs, the later cap cribs were not always
sunk with rocks but were nailed down with spikes and partly covered with
the backfill of earth.
Central Wharf, built originally by the merchant Simon
Forrester in 1791, offers none of the complex problems of construction
and later changes of Derby Wharf. Disintegrated timber cribs lie
buried behind the present wharf's timber bulkheads and beneath the
hearting of earth. It was without doubt one of the "other wharves of
Cobb" in Salem to which Bentley made reference in 1819. Like Derby
Wharf, it did not escape changes and improvements; but instead of
receiving sea walls of granite, it was given a facing of planks laid up
against piling and held in position by tie rods running from side to
side.
NOTES
1April 3, 1840, 313-314, 316.
2"Shore Protection and Harbor
Development Work on the New England Coast," LXXXVI (1923).
3Diary, IV, 625-626.
4"Description of Salem," Collections
of the Massachusetts Historical Society, 1st series, VI (1799), 228.
5Diary, I, 128; II, 469;
Derby Family Papers, IX, 51.
6Massachusetts Archives,
Resolves1805, Ch. 118.
7For conclusions reached in the above and preceding paragraph the writer
is especially indebted to Completion Report, Derby Wharf, F. P. No.
706, prepared December 1938, by Oscar S. Bray, Associate Engineer,
National Park Service.
* From The Regional Review (National Park
Service, Region One, Richmond, Va.), Vol. III, No. 6, December 1939,
pp. 8-13.
|