place [Yonkers] whom I met today, expresses the greatest cordiality and good feeling.^ In general. Douglass boasted "that a better disposed or more rea- sonable set of landholders than those on the line of the Croton Aqueduct is very seldom found. Very soon after, however, the disposition of Westchester land- holders worsened. Word spread that additional lands were needed along the line, and the belief spread with it that Westchester prop- erties to be taken for the Aqueduct were being undervalued. Land- holding farmers refused prices offered to them by the Water Commissioners, and lumbering court proceedings replaced on-site appraisals. Douglass, who had been replaced as Chief Engineer on the pro- ject by the Water Commissioners because of political differences, bitterly complained of the management approach taken by the City in the matter of land taking: Had a proper, businesslike agent been sent up with me as I re- quested in the month of March 1836, with full powers — there can be no doubt that amicable arrangements would have been made with a large proportion of the proprietors upon the most equitable terms. figure 33, above: David B. Douglass. Land Takings Map #46: Lands of Livingston and Halsey (inciuding Zion Churcli, Dobbs Ferry), 1836. ink and watercolor on paper Courtesy Westchester County Archives, Andrew J. Spano, County Clerk Photo: J. Kennedy figure 34, left: Fayette B. Tower, Over Railroad to l\flr. Harvey's IMarbie Quarry, Hastings, c.1842. ink with watercolor wash on paper Courtesy Mrs. Helen Tower Wilson. Photo: T. Harnik Harnik Instead of this, the Board waited till July and August [1836], with a full knowledge that the people were becoming every day more and more exasperated, and then rode through the country, calling the farmers from their work in the fields to the side of the carriage to be brow beaten and overborne. If the object of the commissioners had been to create precisely the greatest amount of hostility to their purposes, they could not have adopted more effectually, means for its accomplishment.^^ Convinced that the 1834 enabling legislation did not protect their rights, a group of Westchester landholders conducted a very strong demonstration against the act at the 1836 legislative ses- sion. The identities of all protesting property holders remain elusive, but they appear to have been the more wealthy landholders. Moreover, their outspoken opposition to the plans coincided with their assumption of positions of responsibility in local government in the period following the completion of the Aqueduct. The following Aqueduct property owners, for example, were soon office holders: James Acker (Greenburgh Supervisor, 1843) Benson Ferris (Greenburgh Supervisor, 1844; Town Justice 1845) Isaac Coutant (Mt. Pleasant member, County Board of Supervisors 1845) Joseph Hunt (Ossining member. County Board of Supervisors, 1845) S. Swartout (Greenburgh Town Justice, 1845; Town Clerk 1847) P. K. Hart (Greenburgh Town Justice, 1845, 1849) Pierre Wildey (Greenburgh Supervisor 1847, 1849) Nathaniel Hyatt (Greenburgh Constable, 1847, 1849) Jacob Odell (Greenburgh Supervisor 1850-1852) If New York City citizens were going to get water for themselves out of this disruption, then these rural landowners felt they deserved greater compensation. Moreover, they proposed that whenever pos- sible, "first, legal possession and use of the land should remain with the original owners second, that if the land was not used for the aqueduct, after being paid for, it should revert back to those from whom it was obtained; third, that provision should be made to pre- vent trespasses on the property of the inhabitants; fourth, that the per- sons through whose land the aqueduct passed should have the right to use the water, by allowing reasonable compensation for it; and fifth, that the Judges of the County Courts should act as appraisers instead of Commissioners appointed by the Vice-Chancellor. "^^ To move the enormous stalled work fonvard and divert local pub- lic attention away from controversial land evaluation, the Water Commissioners replaced Major David B. Douglass in October 1836 with John B. Jen/is. Controversy would now focus on methods of construction and competition for contracting bids; a formal Commission of Appraisement was established in August 1836 to estimate the value of private Westchester lands taken for New York City's Aqueduct. But problems with Westchester landowners continued. What the Water Commissioners characterized as "unreasonable demands ... by a portion of the inhabitants of Westchester" stymied the project. By law, engineers could not begin work on any lands not purchased or appraised. Anxious to get the work started and win support of the property owners along the line, that summer the Water Com- missioners named as Commissioners of Appraisement three highly regarded Westchester men: William Jay of Bedford, Abraham Miller of North Castle, and William Nelson of Peekskill. In the fall Miller and Nelson began work, traversing the county and appraising lands in the path of the projected Aqueduct, from