On Operators and OperationsOn Operators and OperationsPart 1 - An informal look at Chicago bridge tending in the 19Part 1 - An informal look at Chicago bridge tending in the 19thth and 20 and 20thth Centuries Centuries

byby

James S. PhillipsJames S. PhillipsOctober 2009October 2009

Introduction

From the beginnings of Chicago, bridges crossing the branches of the Chicago River have been

movable. Whether these bridges were floating, center pier swing, or bascule, there was a need for

bridge operators or tenders to move the bridges to allow waterborne traffic to navigate the river and

land traffic to cross the river.

Today, it seems that the bridge tender and his work is generally admired by most citizens. There is

something idyllic about a job steeped in the maritime history of the city, and few jobs make the

impression that raising thousands of tons of steel does.

Admiration was not always given to the bridge tender or his bridge. Chicago has always been a

busy city, but in the late 19th and early 20th centuries there was vigorous competition between land

travel and waterborne travel. In this competition, those on water had the upper hand. Through

maritime tradition, and by federal law, water traffic was given priority and bridges were required to

open on demand, 24/7, regardless of what was happening on land. Any watercraft too tall to sail

underneath the closed span could call for the bridge to draw with just a toot of its horn.

The fact that bridges could, and did, go up at any time, caused high levels of frustration and anger

in citizens attempting to cross the river. Anger was vented at federal law, boat captains, bridge tenders

and the movable bridges themselves. This conflict continued off and on throughout the 20th century.

Today, the frustration is limited mostly to scheduled times on Wednesdays and Saturdays during the

From the lower deck of the N. Michigan Ave. bridge

2

sailboat migration seasons.

This article is an informal look at bridge tending in Chicago as documented in the newspapers. In

the addendum are two job descriptions from the mid and late 20th Century and an abridged version of

the current drawbridge operation regulations of the U.S. Coast Guard. The next installment will

provide a current view of bridge tending supplemented by stories from current bridge men.

The 19 th Century

“Just why a bridgetender's essential qualifications should consist of black-guardism, the use of foul language, and a determination to discommode the public whenever he can find the opportunity is a question which has not yet been solved. ... the average bridgetender is about as low and contemptible a specimen of humanity as can possibly exist.” (“Where Do the Bridgetenders Come From?”, July 10, 1883, The Chicago Daily Tribune)

This less than complimentary description of bridge tenders was somewhat typical of the era. In the

19th Century, “bridge tender” was a title given to the overseer of an individual bridge. The operation

and maintenance of the bridge was performed by a crew of bridge men who were hired by the bridge

tender. Bridge tenders were given the job not on their technical skills nor their moral character, but on

their political affiliations. The system was summarized thusly:

“Instead of hiring so many men to look after a bridge, the city employs one man, paying him a large salary and letting him select his help. The result is that a saloonkeeper or some other ward striker gets the job for from $1,500 to $3000 a year, and hires one, two, or three men at $10 or $12 a week and pockets the difference for bossing the work.” (“Investigating the Bridgetenders,” June 28, 1885, The Chicago Daily Tribune)

There are many examples of the corruption and abuse when city jobs are meted out in a patronage

system. Its implementation in bridge tending proved no different. More often than not bridge tenders

hired political allies to staff the bridge. Problems documented during the era include: bridge men too

preoccupied with women guests to respond to boat signals; public inebriation while on the job; leaving

bridges open long after boats had passed; and hooliganism used to “encourage” the general citizenry to

vote to keep their bosses in power.

Even with the corruption, a number of the bridge men provided good service. There are ample

stories of the bravery of the bridge men in rescues, suicide prevention, and capture of criminals. Some

of these accounts are found in the “Stories” section.

One story of valor in the system occurred in the 1890's. The bridge tender at the Adams St. bridge

died, leaving his wife and sons destitute. In desperation, his widow applied for his job but was refused

because “it would be illegal, too great a breach of precedent, or something of the kind for a woman to

3

be appointed bridge-tender.” (“Ever on the Swing,” August 27, 1893, The Chicago Daily Tribune).

A politically connected lodge brother of the deceased tender came to the rescue by applying for and

receiving the bridge-tending job. He subsequently hired the dead man's sons to be the bridge men and

signed their salaries over to their mother.

By the end of the century, there was pressure to take bridge-tending out of the patronage system and

into the merit system.

The 20 th Century

Serious efforts to move the bridge tenders from the patronage system began in 1901. The battle

continued until 1907 when the city council finally voted to hire bridge operations personnel using the

civil service examination. This step led to a more professional and efficient crew of bridge men for the

city.

However, this, didn't change the legal mandate that bridges open for waterborne traffic on demand

or the landlubbers' complaints. Many newspaper articles were devoted to finding a more equitable

approach to bridge operation, from advanced notice from shipping interests of their intent to sail the

river to elimination of movable bridges altogether. These proposals made little progress during the first

half of the century.

Commercial shipping began migrating away from the Chicago River to the Calumet Harbor early in

the 20th century. Even so, there was still a relatively large number of vessels on the river. In 1920, its

first year of operation, the Michigan Avenue bridge was operated 3,377 times. During the 1930's the

annual number of lifts was still measured between1000 and 2000. In the 1960's, the annual bridge lifts

numbered in the hundreds and by the end of the century, the Michigan Avenue bridge was raised less

than a hundred times each year.

Even though commercial river traffic dropped as the century progressed, on demand bridge lifts

were still required. For financial reasons, the city began looking for more efficient ways to staff the

bridges. In 1941, a roving system was introduced on a select number of bridges. This reduced the

number of resident tenders and the number of bridges staffed 24 hours. In the 1950's, all bridges were

modified to lift from one of the bridge houses to further reduce the manpower required. As the years

passed, additional bridges were lifted by roving teams rather than resident bridge tenders.

This reduction in the number of bridges manned 24 hours forced a decline in the number of bridge

tenders. In 1937 there were 392 tenders. The number dropped to 360 in 1948. Even though some

4

bridges in the Loop were still manned in 1980's and bridge tenders were on the job 24 hours a day, the

number of bridge tenders was 144. By the start of the 1990's there were only 94. Today the number is

less than 50.

The hours of operation for bridges began to change in the 1980's. By this point, river traffic that

required bridge lifts were the masted pleasure craft and the occasional large cruise boat. Landlubbers

began to resent the special privilege granted to a few at the expense of the many. It was in this decade

that the city began the ban on bridge lifts during morning and evening rush hours.

In the middle 1990's, a big push was made by the city to further limit the operation of the bridges to

scheduled times rather than the on demand approach. The city lobbied the Coast Guard to restrict lifts

to between 7 AM and 7 PM on weekends; 6:30 PM to midnight on Tuesdays and Thursdays; and

Wednesdays from 9:30 AM to 3 PM. In addition, boats were to be in flotillas of 5 or more and required

to give 24 hours notice. This rankled the boaters, they sued and the proposed rules reverted back to on

demand though not during rush hours. The chaos that ensued eventually provided the city with the

proof it needed to convince the Coast Guard of the need for the rule change. Today, boats arrange their

trips on the river within the guidelines provided in the Code of Federal Regulations (see an abridged

version in the addendum).

By the end of the 20th century the movable bridges on the Calumet River were the only ones still

operated on demand. The lifts for the bridges on the Chicago River were scheduled. The bridges were

operated by roving crews of six, leap frogging bridges as the sail boats migrated to and from Lake

Michigan. The makeup of these crews, two operators, two electricians, and two machinists, was

designed to efficiently handle problems that could arise during lifts. Additional personnel were used as

spotters/traffic control to insure that pedestrians and vehicles were clear of the bridge as it operated.

This procedure is still used today.

5

Stories

The following stories are taken from the pages of the Chicago Tribune of the 19th and 20th Centuries.

“...'Honest and deserving beggars visit us sometimes,' said one bridgetender. 'Of course you'll admit there are such in the world, but you'll wonder how we know they're strictly honest and deserving. It's the way: No professional beggar would have so little common sense as to apply to a city bridgetender for alms. 'Why,' he would think to himself, 'I'd have to be a fool to tackle a bridgetender, 'cause he'd have me run in quick, as a cop is always within call.' And so, whenever a man, woman, or child comes to us begging we set it down for a case of out and out honest 'last resort.' They don't find me very often, but whenever anybody comes he gets either a bite from my lunch-basket or a nickel to get him a sandwich. ...” (“Ever on the Swing,” August 27, 1893, The Chicago Daily Tribune)

“...From another old tender was gathered the fact that some of the biggest business-men and most notable divines in all Chicago have many a time found themselves without car fare about the time they would get to the bridge, and, seeming to regard the bridgetender as a man who should never get so low financially as not to have car fare and who for some unfathomable reason ought to supply capital for others, they have no hesitancy about asking the necessary loan. 'I've got so as regards one big popular pulpit orator,' said the bridgetender, 'that I make a practice of going to hear him preach every now and then just to get even with him on the car fares he borrows of me and never thinks of again.'...” (“Ever on the Swing,” August 27, 1893, The Chicago Daily Tribune)

“... Often a bridge, closed in the nick of time, saves a carriage load of people from being dashed against the 'protection' and into the river. Martin Casey, the nestor of Chicago bridges saved the life of Mrs. H. C. Stover, her sister, and two boys once by closing the Lake street bridge. The women and children were thrown upon the bridge, the carriage went into the river, and the horse ran on. ... ...But if the bridgetender keeps people away from the Coroner, he also sends some to the grand jury. Casey once threw Lake street bridge so suddenly that he threw two notorious thieves into the penitentiary. The thieves were coming up on Lake street in a buggy, with two deputy sheriffs with drawn revolvers behind them and a large course of West-siders in full cry in the distance. Casey was wise in his generation and waited until the buggy had passed Canal street. Then he opened the bridge, and the thieves were trapped. ...” (“Part of River Life,” November 8, 1896, The Chicago Daily Tribune)

“... “In the afternoon, the river seemed deserted. Now and then a tug went with a row of mud scows and two or three vessels passed, but not enough to keep a bridgeman busy. Jim went over to the shanty at the end of the bridge, where the harbormaster's representative sits and keeps in touch with the various parts of the river by telephone. Casey being off duty till 3 o'clock, dropped in, and a few old river men gathered, and soon a game of pitch was started. That is the regular afternoon feature on the bridge and on many another bridge along the river, and it whiled away the hour well, with a dash of political gossip, a word about one or two vessels, and stories of many sorts. Sometimes Hartley had to resign his hand to go out and open the bridge, but such interuptions were infrequent. At 5 o'clock his working day was finished ...” (“A Day With a Wage Earner – No. 18 – The Bridge Tender,” September 2, 1901, The Chicago Daily Tribune)

“What interesting experience have you had as a bridge tender?... Frank Mangan,... A car ferry was going thru the river. In the process of raising the bridge, the bridgehouse foundation tumbled into the river, tossing bridge tender and all into the water. It was my station, but I wasn't on duty when it happened. The other bridge tender lived through the ordeal. ...... Ed Bailey, ... One cold night a wild duck settled on the river to sleep. During the night the water froze and trapped the duck on the river. It attracted quite a bit of sympathy from passers-by and so many of them told us about it that we had to get an ax and chop the bird out of the ice.” (“The Inquiring Camera Girl by Maryon Zylstra,” July 31, 1948, The Chicago Daily Tribune)

“... Frank Ward, 61, called the 'father of the bridges' because of his tenure of service, reminisced about his 30 years of work at the Clark st. bridge. 'It's either love, liquor, or finance that cause people to jump into the river,' he said. 'Most of our work is talking them out of it, rather than the actual saving of lives.' Ward could not give an accurate figure of the number of persons who had jumped from his bridge but estimated that at least two persons make the attempt every week. ...” (“Bridge Tenders Have Dual Job As Life Savers,” November 25, 1945, The Chicago Daily Tribune)

6

“Frank R. Ward who has worked for the city for 34 years, will retire tomorrow. ... 'My toughest, most embarrassing moment was about seven years ago,' Ward said. 'I spotted a girl – you get so you can spot a would-be suicide – on the bridge late at night. I got to her as she was climbing the railing and jerked her back. She turned on me like a wildcat and ripped my shirt to ribbons. She finally broke my belt and my trousers slipped down to my ankles.' A passing motorist saved the day, Ward recalled. The two of them turned her over to police.” (“Bridgetender for 34 Years to Quit Tomorrow,” November 29, 1949, The Chicago Daily Tribune)

“A northwest sider who has experienced a lot of ups and downs is William A. Harvey ... The most unusual sight Harvey ever witnessed was the time a bank director hurrying to a board meeting in the Loop drove his car through the lowered gate of the Randolph st. bridge. The car climbed the bridge as it was opening, leaped over the space between the two leaves, and sped down the other side, crashing into the base of the bridge. Altho the bridge was at a 40 degree angle as the car descended, the driver was uninjured, but the car, a big heavy model, was badly damaged.” (“Bridge Tender Shuts Span of 38 Years' City Service,” James M. Gavin, June 27, 1954, The Chicago Daily Tribune)

“Harry R. English has seen the world. ... Assigned to the Michigan avenue bridge ... 'Try the next bridge – the water's a little warmer there,' English said to the woman in the tattered coat, a shopping bag full of stones tied to her wrist, whom he found staring into the icy river the night before Christmas a few years ago. He talked to her and found she was 'just lonely.' She'd been a widow 18 years, her children were dead, and for a month her only home had been the Dearborn Station. With the help of police and others, she found a job and a home.” (“He Has Window on the World,” Mary Pakenham,November 10, 1960, The Chicago Daily Tribune)

“The red light on the control panel went out the other night. 'No...no...,' mumbled Charles Sebesta as he grabbed the emergency power switch. 'Not now, it's been such a nice, quiet day.' Sebesta, operator of the north half of the Michigan avenue bridge, watched the power signal fade and leave the bridge closed – but not locked. It's unsafe to raise the barriers and let cars and pedestrians cross when the bridge won't lock. Frantically he worked the manual controls – but they didn't help. By now he could hear the horns honking and the grumbling of pedestrians waiting to cross. In his mind he was thinking what any bridge tender would think: 'You double-deck, double-leaf, trunnion, bascule, 8 million dollar piece of scrap metal – close.' Then he made a mistake. He did what his boss, John Manely, director of the seaport of Chicago, told his men not to do: 'If your bridge gets stuck, don't look out of your tower window at the pedestrians and drivers – you'll feel guilty.'” (“Tender Is Not Tender When His Bridge Fails,”Marvin Kupfer, November 1, 1964, The Chicago Tribune)

“What I like most about this job is all the interesting things you can see from this window. The sailboats are beautiful, and I never get tired of looking at them. I always like to be at work on St. Patrick's Day because then I get to see them turn the river green. They pour a powdered vegetable dye into the river from a boat, and the movement of the boat churns up the river and mixes the dye into the river. I saw a lady out in the middle of the bridge once, just after sunrise on a beautiful summer morning. She was worshiping the sun. I can't really describe it much more, but let's just say she was real serious about how she was worshiping the sun. I'm afraid you can't print all the things I've seen from up here.”-- Frank Oboikovitz, (“First Person,” July 14, 1985, The Chicago Tribune)

7

ADDENDUM

Job Descriptions

“What does a bridge tender do?” I was able to find two job descriptions – one from 1958 and one

from 1991.

1958 Characteristics of Class: Under supervision, operates, maintains and makes minor emergency repairs to machinery of

an electrically operated lift bridge; and does related work as required.

Example of Duties: Opens and closes bridges for passage of vessels; inspects bridge and working parts at the beginning of

the shift and after each lift to see that bridge is in operating condition; oils, cleans, and cares for bridge machinery and

equipment; places and maintains navigation lights; keeps simple records and makes reports on bridge operations; cleans and

maintains bridge house, orders supplies for the maintenance and operation of bridge house and machinery.

1991 Duties: Under supervision, operates an assigned bridge or travels from bridge to bridge along an assigned waterway,

raising and lowering electrically operated drawbridges to permit passage of waterway traffic. Operates controls that activate

signals and alarms and lower gates to halt street traffic. Operates controls that fasten and unfasten the bridges heel locks

which secure the bridge in the lowered position. Observes and monitors waterway traffic and communicates with vessels by

radio. Operates controls that raise and lower the drawbridge. Inspects bridge pits for flooding and activates sump pumps to

drain pits. Maintains records of the number and time of bridge lifts, duration of lifts and the name and direction of vessels

passing. Prepares reports of accidents occuring on or to drawbridges. May drive an automobile to travel between bridges.

Performs related duties as required.

8

Drawbridge Operation Regulations for the Chicago River

CFR Title 33, Part117, Subsection 117.391

The following is a portion of the current federal regulations concerning the operation of the

drawbridges on the Chicago River. The regulation is a far cry from the days of the sound of a boat horn

commanding a bridge to open. It is also interesting to note that the city bears the cost of operating

bridges for the scheduled runs to and from the boat yards. However, the cost of the “special” lifts are

borne by the requester.

(a) For commercial vessels, all bridges shall open on signal if at least 12-hours advanced notice is

provided to the Chicago City Bridge Desk prior to the intended time of passage; except that, from

Monday through Friday between the hours of 7 a.m. and 9:30 a.m., and between the hours of 4 p.m. and

6:30 p.m., except for Federal holidays, the draws need not open for vessels.

(b) For recreational vessels:

(1) From April 1 through November 30—

(i) The draws shall be scheduled to open, before 1 p.m., twice on Saturdays and twice on Sundays

if requests for passage have been received at least 20 hours in advance. If the bridges have been

authorized to remain closed for portions of a Saturday or Sunday to accommodate special events,

openings shall be scheduled after 1 p.m. as necessary to provide two openings per day.

(ii) The draws shall open on Monday and Friday, after 6:30 p.m. Each opening requires notice

that has been given at least 6 hours in advance of a vessel's requested time of passage.

(iii) The draws shall open on Wednesdays at 10 a.m., or as soon thereafter as practical, if a

request for passage has been given at least 20 hours in advance.

(iv) The draws shall open at times in addition to those listed in paragraphs (b)(1)(i) through (b)

(1)(iii) of this section, after notice has been given at least 20 hours in advance requesting

passage for a flotilla of at least five vessels. However, the bridges need not open Monday through

Friday from 7 a.m. to 9:30 a.m., and 4 p.m. to 6:30 p.m., except for Federal holidays.

(2) From December 1 through March 31, the draws shall open on signal if at least 48 hours notice is

given. However, the bridges need not open Monday through Friday from 7 a.m. to 9:30 a.m., and 4

p.m. to 6:30 p.m., except for Federal holidays.

All newspaper articles retrieved through ProQuest Historical News Papers Chicago Tribune (1849-1986)