Most early covered bridges were built by entrepreneurs hoping to turn a profit by charging tolls. This necessitated having a toll booth on one end and hiring someone to collect the money. (NSPCB Archives, R. S. Allen Collection)
Although the Cornish-Windsor Bridge spanning the Connecticut River is mostly within New Hampshire and belongs to the Town of Cornish, its earliest toll booth stands on the Windsor, Vermont, side. (A. Chester Ong, 2010)
Although government responsibility for building bridges developed slowly, the National Road, started in 1811, was exceptional because of extensive federal investment. Wernwag’s bridge over the Ohio River at Wheeling, built in 1818 as a key section of the National Road, was discussed in Chapter 1. When the National Road reached Zanesville, Ohio, in 1830, the federal government was still funding the project, but within four years, in 1834, they decided to delegate the funding for the project to the individual states. The most unusual bridge on this route, which later became US 40, was the “Y Bridge” in Zanesville, so-called because it crossed the Muskingum River at its confluence with the Licking River, offering travelers a choice of left or right turns at the center.
The National Road had to cross two rivers in Zanesville, Ohio, where the Muskingum River meets the Licking River. Pictured is the third Y Bridge, built in 1832. The first, in 1813, was an open trestle, but the second, of 1819, was covered. (Ohio Historical Society Archives)
The covered wooden Y Bridge (background) in Zanesville, Ohio, carried the National Road US 40 until 1900 when it was replaced by a concrete bridge. The steel rail bridge in the foreground is no longer in existence either. (Van Tassel, 1901)
The earliest bridge at this site was built by Rufus Scott in 1813, long before the National Road, as a simple trestle bridge. Short-lived, the bridge was damaged by a flood in 1815 and then succumbed to rot, falling into the river in 1818. A second bridge was built in 1819, this time a timber truss bridge with—according to an engraving on a Muskingum Bank of Zanesville five dollar bill—an arch-like shape, suggesting a design akin to those used by Palmer. Built by a private company about which little is known, the bridge continued to serve the now established and increasingly busy National Road. When ice damaged the structure during the winter of 1831, one of the owners, Ebenezer Buckingham, joined his son Catharinus to form a new company. Young Catharinus, only twenty-five, designed a double-lane bridge using multiple kingpost trusses. To overcome concerns about his design, Catharinus built a model, placed 500 pounds on it, then had someone stand on the model as well, thereby winning the contract.
Using newly built piers, construction proceeded during the summer of 1832. On August 20, when young Catharinus was ill with cholera, his father told him that one of the new spans had shifted about six inches. The next day, August 21, while Ebenezer was inspecting the structure, they only realized that the trusses had shifted to the old pier when, according to Norris F. Schneider, “About 3 o’clock the span fell, taking nine men with it. Ebenezer Buckingham and one other man were killed in the fall” (1958: 12). Catharinus successfully completed the bridge, and the company prospered from its relatively expensive tolls. Indeed, by 1849 citizens were complaining about the tolls and the company’s 18 percent dividends, but it was not until 1868 that the state and city jointly agreed to purchase the bridge and relieve the citizens of tolls.
Most toll bridges crossed substantial rivers, and travelers were willing to pay the required tolls to avoid hazardous alternatives. In the case of more modest bridges crossing ordinary streams, the old method of fording might remain an option when water was low, with the result that travelers could avoid tolls. Various patterns developed to get bridges erected. Yet, without a comprehensive history of this aspect of bridge building, we have only anecdotal evidence and a general understanding. These ranged from local initiative with no government involvement to projects that included contributions from local government. There is no consistent pattern. Though all states were divided into counties, the divisions of government below that and their individual responsibilities varied widely. These patterns affected both how bridges came to be erected and how records were kept, the latter being a key source for anyone writing history today. For example, New York State was, and still is, governed by “home rule,” a practice in which local governments may pass laws and ordinances peculiar to their own jurisdictions. As a result, bridges in New York State were usually initiated, financed, and built through local efforts, with or without state approval or financing, and often with minimal record keeping. Thus, it was common in New York for a group of local landowners to band together to finance and build—sometimes themselves—a needed bridge. In other states, mostly farther west, such as Ohio, county government came to control and finance bridge projects. In the case of a state like Oregon or the Canadian province of New Brunswick, where most covered bridges were built after the time of their obsolescence in the east, the highway departments were usually in charge and, as a result, imposed standard designs.
It was customary for county officials to publish a “notice to contractors” when taking bids for a new bridge. This one was published in Coshocton County, Ohio, in 1865, for the Croy’s Mill Bridge. (Terry E. Miller Collection)
Companies, hoping to receive invitations to bid on bridges, advertised in newspapers and magazines. T. H. Hamilton of Toledo, Ohio, was still offering Howe truss bridges in 1885 near the end of the wooden truss era. (Kemp, 2005: 28)
As seen in the County Commissioners’ Journals from 1874, these are the handwritten bids for both superstructure and masonry of the Jacobsport Bridge in Coshocton County, Ohio. The bridge was bid by the lineal foot and stonework by the perch. (Terry E. Miller Collection)
Drawn by Master of Bridges and Buildings, David Hazelton (1832–?), this rare example of a Plan and Elevation blueprint shows a Section drawing for a Town lattice covered rail bridge on the White Mountain Division of the Boston and Lowell Railroad at Warren, New Hampshire. (NSPCB Archives, George B. Pease Collection)
Builders typically used truss models when making their proposals to company managers or officials. This one was made by Theodore Burr to promote his now-familiar truss. (NSPCB Archives, R. S. Allen Collection)
Based on research in Ohio, we know that during the earlier nineteenth century the group wishing to build a local bridge might petition the county commissioners for financial assistance in order to erect a “free bridge.” In these cases, the county might contribute as little as $100 or perhaps $300 towards the effort, the rest of the money being “subscribed” by members of the bridge committee.
A particularly complex case occurred when the citizens of Coshocton in east-central Ohio sought a bridge over the Walhonding River on Hill Street between Roscoe and Coshocton. Though the Ohio Legislature initially authorized the commissioners to