Monday, 19 February 2018

1886--08-23eePolice Budget

On Friday, August 20, 1886, Hamilton Police Chief A. D. Stewart, his wife and two young daughters had been in a row boat on the Hamilton bay when a sudden movement by one of the girls capsized the boat.

It was almost a major disaster but at first the chief, and later with the help of two rescuers, everyone was saved. The very next morning, the chief had to attend a meeting of the Hamilton Police Commissioners where the budget estimates for the year’s operations were to be presented for approval.

There were three police commissioners, the Mayor Alex. McKay, the Police Magistrate Cahill and Wentworth County Judge Sinclair. Judge Sinclair was unable to attend the meeting, but the mayor and the police magistrate voted to accept the following budget:


          One police magistrate ……………………. $2,000.00

          One chief constable …...…………………. $1,600.00

          Three sergeants ………………...…………$ 2,175.12

          Four acting sergeants……………….....…$ 2,500.16

          Two detectives..........................................$ 1,450.08

          Two acting detectives ……………….…...$ 1,250.08

          Thirty-three constables…………….……$19, 273.32

          One clerk to the police commissioners…. $150.00

          One police court clerk ……………………...$ 100.04


          Fuel and light……………………………..…...$800.00

          Keep of two horses ……..……...……………$250.00

          Books and stationery…...............................$200.00

          Printing and advertising……………………...$90.00

          Photographing prisoners ……...…………….$20.00


          Telephone service ……………..…………….$192.00

          Incidental expenses …………………………$500.00


          Once the estimates were accepted, Chief Stewart immediately started to campaign for more resources:

          ““The chief suggested that the force should be increased. More men are wanted badly. The city is growing so rapidly that the present force cannot begin to meet the demands upon it. Some of the men are very old and unable to do regular duty.”1

                1  “The Police Commissioners.”

Hamilton Spectator     August  23, 1886.

          There followed a brief discussion on the chief’s request. The mayor, a frequent adversary of the chief, argued against the chief’s request :

          “The commissioners decided not to do anything at present. The mayor said the force was a good one and the citizens are satisfied with it. With the patrol wagon and telephone facilities the men are managing to keep the city comparatively free from crime and surely they could continue it for another year. A great deal of money has to be laid out at once for important public works. This will increase the taxes, and under the present circumstances it is well to run the city departments as economically as possible.”1

                Very shortly afterwards, the ongoing hostility between Mayor McKay and Chief Stewart would boil over.

Wednesday, 14 February 2018

1886-08-21 Chief Stewart and Family Nearly Drowned

August 20, 1886 had been a steamy hot day in Hamilton. Late in the afternoon, Police Chief A. D. boarded his wife, his two daughters on a train for a short trip to the Beach.
Catching the 4:10 North and Northwestern train at the station on King street east, all the Stewarts were excited to escape the noise, dust and smells of the city and take in the cooling breezes beside the lake and bay:
The bay was smooth and the afternoon delightful – a model day for an hour’s rowing – and being an expert boatman and a great lover of the pleasures of boating, Chief Stewart engaged a boat and took his family out on the bay.”1
1 Hamilton Spectator.  August 21, 1886.
The pleasant outing on the bay soon turned very unpleasant :
“At about 5:30, Capt. Campbell and Robert Curtiss went out in a strong row boat to pick up a buoy about a mile from the pier. They were engaged at the buoy when they saw a small boat about a quarter of a mile away from them, nearer to the piers, and as they watched it the boat capsized.
“Captain Campbell is a handy man about the water, and knows just what to do in such a case. His companion is something of the same cut. They bent to their oars without any delay and were soon alongside the upturn skiff, which they discovered to be that in which Chief Stewart had embarked with his family. The two children had gone down and were under the boat.”1
1 “In Hamilton’s Waters : Chief Stewart, His Wife and Family, Nearly Drowned : Their Boat is Capsized Nearly a Mile from Land – Captain Campbell and Robert Curtiss the Rescuers”
Hamilton Spectator     August  21, 1886.
It was a desperate scene as the police chief struggled to save his wife, his children and himself :
“The chief is known to be one of the best swimmers in Canada, and he would have no difficulty in saving himself, but his first thought was to save his wife.
          “He had managed to keep afloat and support her, but his strength was fast failing. The weight of water in their clothes was enough to test the strength of the strongest, while the loose skirts of Mrs. Stewart clung to his limbs, making his efforts almost unavailing. The thought of his children, who, for all he knew were drowning while he was unable to help them must have added doubly to the agony of his position, yet he struggled manfully.”1
                Captain Campbell, the lighthouse keeper, had been involved in many water rescues, and Curtiss, his companion, knew what to do as well:
Mrs. Stewart’s head was two feet under water. Captain Campbell caught her by the skirts, raised her head above water, and held her as scientifically as circumstances would admit until life began to show itself.
          “When first raised above the water, she was quite unconscious, her face being a deep purple in color and breath having ceased to come. The rescuers got the all-but-drowned family into their boat and pulled to the beach.”1
                The rescued family were taken to the biggest hotel on the Beach strip:
          “At the Ocean house, everything possible was done for Mrs. Stewart and the two children, and before long, Dr. Richardson, of Burlington, was in attendance.
“For a time, it was a question whether or not Mrs. Stewart would recover. Her health has not been as strong as might have been desired for a year past, and the terrible shock and exposure, it was feared, might prove too much for her. She began to improve, however, after being brought to consciousness and it is now believed that no serious results will be the outcome of the accident.”1
Back in Hamilton, news of the near-tragedy had arrived but the exact details were unknown :
“Word was sent to friends in this city and changes of clothing were sent down. The occurrence was not generally known of in the city, but what reports did reach here were very much exaggerated and many sympathetic friends were kept in agonizing suspense until the facts were ascertained. Too much praise cannot be given to the rescuers.”
A reporter for the Spectator managed to reach Chief Stewart by telephone, and received a brief statement from him on the incident:
““In talking to the Spectator by telephone, Chief Stewart said that but for the prompt action of Captain Campbell, he feared they all would have been drowned. The capsize, he said, was caused by the children changing their seats and happened so suddenly that it was impossible to prevent it or to take any precaution in the way of saving the lives of those in the boat.””1
The next day, Chief Stewart was back in the city and on duty:
““Chief Stewart returned to the city from the Beach Saturday morning, and was kept busy shaking hands with and receiving the congratulations of his hundreds of friends. He was able to inform all those who inquired, and everyone showed a great deal of anxiety, that Mrs. Stewart was improving and that the little girls were all right.”2
2 “Their Narrow Escape : Chief Stewart’s Experience While in the Waters of the Bay”
Hamilton Spectator     August  23, 1886.
The chief was able to give a full account of the near-tragedy, filling in many details :
“To a Spectator reporter he stated that the report of the occurrence which appeared in the morning’s issue was quite correct but that which occurred from the time of the capsize until the arrival of Captain Campbell had not been mentioned. Just before the capsize, the two little girls, being in one end of the boat wished to go to their mother who was seated in the other. They were told that they must not do so, but in a minute or two they were both attempting to pass their father on the same side of the boat. The upset the boat and the chief went down  immediately. In sinking he saw Mrs. Stewart trying catch the side of the boat, but fail. When he came to the surface, the two children threw their arms around his neck, and prevented him from doing anything to save them. Mrs. Stewart was then four or five yards away from the upturned boat. The chief sank with the two children, but rising immediately he forced them to loosen their hold and then placed them across the keel of the boat, telling them to hold on and keep still until he went to their mother’s rescue. As soon as he turned away, however, they tried to catch hold upon him, and in doing so, went down again. Again he turned to their rescue and brought them to the surface again. This time he managed to right the boat and put the children in it. It was full of water however, and again went over. He then saw a boat but could not tell whether it was coming to them or not. He got the children into the boat again, and by that time he recognized Captain Campbell and knew he was coming to the rescue. Shouting to him to take the children, he turned to his wife, who with deathlike face and purple lips was sinking for the last time. He reached the spot where she had disappeared , and he dove for her, bringing her to the surface by the time Captain Campbell and Curtiss arrived. He aided the captain to raise her into the boat and took care of himself. As soon as he had turned from the children, the boat had turned over again, and the little girls were under it when the captain arrived. Their efforts to attract his attention had upset them.
“ ‘I seemed to have lived a lifetime of agony while in the water,’ said the chief; ‘my wife was on one side of me and my children on the other. When I turned one way to go to my wife’s assistance, I saw my children sink before I could do anything. The thought had just struck me that I might possibly get the three of them on my back when I saw the boat approaching. It arrived none too soon. If the captain had 30 yards further to pull, someone must have been drowned. It was most fortunate that I was a good swimmer and that the rescuers knew exactly what to do under the circumstances.’ ”2
Fully recovered from the shock of the near loss of his wife, daughters and even himself, Chief Stewart was walking through the Hamilton market when he saw a man known to him through that man’s frequent appearances in the prisoner’s dock at the Police Court.  The chief managed to surreptitiously listen to a conversation between that man and a companion :
 “ ‘Nearly drowned, eh ? Well. Well. And the missus and the little ones too ? And Captain Campbell saved them , eh ? Dear me ! And the chief was saved too ? Too bad, too bad.’ ”3
3  “Overheard in the Market.”
Hamilton Spectator     August  25, 1885.

Monday, 12 February 2018

1886-05-29 Baseball Rivalry

For Hamilton baseball fans in the spring of 1886, it was a new season in a new league. The International league had been formed via the merger of two leagues, the New York League and the Ontario League.

Consisting of teams from Syracuse, Utica, Rochester, Oswego, Binghamton and Buffalo, the only Canadian cities represented in the International League were Hamilton and Toronto. The passion for the sport of baseball was high as High in the Canadian cities represented as it was among the American communities. The deep-seated rivalry between Hamilton and Toronto was certainly seen to be a plus for the new league.

As the end of May, 1886, the Hamiltons had a won-lost record of 3-10, while the Torontos had fared better with a record of 8-11.

The 1885 champions of the National League, the Detroit Wolverines, were barnstorming in May 1886, and an exhibition game against the Torontos had resulted in a Toronto victory.

The Torontos were scheduled to play a home game against the Hamiltons soon after their victory over the major league champions. The Toronto newspapers were boastful that the Hamiltons were sure to be humiliated.

The players with the Hamilton were not impressed with that victory over the Detroit Wolverines, aware that the team fielded was not the complete major roster.

The Hamilton Spectator coverage of the May 28, 1886 game in Toronto was extensive beginning as follows :

“”Hamilton’s team of baseball players took a run to Toronto yesterday to see what sort of stuff Toronto had scraped together into her team, and to find out just what sort of team had beaten Detroit’s sub-second nine.

“Toronto had made splendid preparations for the meeting. Her strongest team was decked out in its very prettiest uniform, the coon mascot had an extra polish on his face and had rubbed his head on all the Toronto bats for good luck in hitting.”

1“The World of Sport : The Hamiltons Give the Torontos a Few Pointers on How to Play Ball”

Hamilton Spectator     May 29, 1886.

The game proved to be an embarrassment to the Torontos and their fans, with Hamilton dominating and winning with a score of 13-2:

““The Hamiltons made no superfluous show and didn’t say much, but started to play when the umpire called play. They played so well that the Torontos soon began to feel sorry that they had ever run up against Hamilton. The Hamiltons commenced by hitting Veach, Toronto’s pet pitcher, very hard, but, for four innings they, unluckily, hit straight to the fielders. In the fifth inning, they began to place the ball – to line it out for singles, two-baggers, three-baggers and the like.

“The heads of the Torontos began to shrink about that time. The swelling went down suddenly. The reaction was so great that the Torontos became rattled. The Hamiltons kept on batting, and the Torontos kept on making errors until seven men had travelled the circuit of the bases. Realizing that this was likely to give the Toronto scorers more than they could handle, the boys stopped and gave the Torontos a chance to catch up. But Toronto could not strike a fast enough clip, and had to content herself with shuffling through the game in a half-spirited sort of way.

“The Hamiltons fielded splendidly. Outside of the battery’s four errors, there was only one error made. The Torontos could not bat Morrison to any alarming extent, and could not play a fielding games like that of Hamilton.”1

It was a triumphant victory for the underdogs from the Ambitious City, and the Spectator reporter took great glee in touting the Hamiltons in his notes to the game: “Toronto should have kept last year’s team.

           The Hamilton team is just getting into working shape.

           Thirteen long runs ! How tired our poor boys must be.

           There will probably been a few people at Dundurn park today.

           A game like yesterday’s counts as double. Hamilton wins – Toronto loses.

           The Torontos should have died immediately after the game with the Detriots.

          The person who told the Torontos that they could play ball deserves to be severely thought of.

          The team that beat the team that beat all the world has changed its name to the Muddy Yorks.

          The soreheads that have been croaking around Hamilton for the last week or so are respectfully invited to go away somewhere and kick themselves.

Toronto’s committee appointed for the purpose of making that city attractive for visitors is considering how it may keep the Hamiltons away from the place.

It is to be hoped that no Toronto person, influenced by the things he read in the Toronto papers, was foolish enough to put Toronto money on the Toronto team.

If the Toronto papers will humbly apologize for the manner in which they have slandered the Hamiltons, the latter will let the Torontos win a game sometime this summer.”1

The reporter also penned a satirical poem to celebrate the victory. The traveler in the poem was a well-known Toronto ‘sport’ named Lem Fletcher, a saloon owner known to attend baseball games, betting heavily on the Toronto side:


          And the traveler stoppeth he,

            ‘By thy diamonds and high silk hat

          Now wherefore stoppeth thou me?

          ‘The Railway train waiteth near

             And I am fain to go,

          Hold off, hold off, thy jeweled hand –

             Dost hear the whistle blow?’

          He holds him with deadly grip –

            He cannot choose but hear,

          And thus spoke that wild-eyed sport

            Into the travellere;

          ‘Lem Fletcher, traveler, is my name,

            Thou mayest have heard of me;

          The foamy beer I am won to serve

            To thirtsy companie.

          ‘O listen while I tell to you

            The troubles that befall

          All weak confiding sporting men

            Who monkey with baseball.

          “I thought our team invincible

            When but two days ago

          They met the champion Wolverines

            And pulverized them so.

          ‘The Rochesters and Buffalos

            For them have proved by pie,

          And we have been all up on them,

            And no one more than I.

          ‘And now – and now, O traveler,

            Down comes our dearest foe –

          At whom we laughed with lofty scorn,

            For whom we’ve laid full low –

          “This very day that hated nine –

            (O pardon if I cuss)

          From Hamilton comes gaily down

            And paralyzes us.

          ‘Like one insane I walk the streets

            To cool my fevered brain;

          The boodle I had thought to rake

            I ne’er shall see again.

          ‘O traveler, traveler, tell to me,

            Dost thou not understand

          The pain of one who holds a flush

            Against a well-filled hand?’

          The sporting man with diamonds bright

            And face beckoning pain

          Is gone; and now the traveler hastes

            In time to miss the train.”

The much-lauded victory was the first game of a home and home series, between the Hamiltons and the Torontos, the second tilt to take place in the ball yard in Hamilton’s Dundurn Park.

There was much interest in the game and the grandstand at Dundurn was full, in addition to a large crowd surround the field, often crowding into the outfield.

The hometown fans were not disappointed :

“Yesterday was the sort of game which all those who understand baseball like to see, and as all Hamilton people understand the game, it was one which pleased them very much. The Hamiltons, by superior fielding and batting, got a small early in the game and maintained it throughout.”2

2 “The World of Sport : Toronto Downed Again by Hamiltons”

Hamilton Spectator     May 30, 1886.

The Spectator reprinted the following comments from the Toronto press concerning Hamilton’s baseball dominant performances :



“The Toronto nine received no presents yesterday.

“Manager Humphries and the Mascot fell out yesterday, and they sat at opposite ends of the bench.

“Hamilton has the big head today. This is the first increase in size that Hamilton has experienced for a long time.

“The proverb that ‘pride goes before a fall’ has been amended by the Toronto club so as to read that pride goes before a ball. At least their pride vanished yesterday before the ball of the Hamilton pitcher.


 “The statement that Captain Collins, of the Hamilton team, is a kicker must have very little foundation. He never disputed the umpire after the fifth inning in yesterday’s Toronto-Hamilton game, and was altogether a very genial and amiable gentleman.”

The Toronto team’s mascot, a raccoon, was the focus of the Spectator sports writer’s poetic summation of the second game of the May, 1886 home and home series between the nines from Hamilton and Toronto:


‘Twas on a warm May evening,

          The baseball game was done,

And Humphreys at the tavern door,

          Gazed sadly  at the sun,

And near him, whistling low a tune,

Nestled the dusky mascot, coon.

The mascot said, in wistful voice,

          ‘O manager, I pray,

How came these blokes of Hamilton

          To win the game today?

Was it our errors settled it,

Or cause our fellers couldn’t hit?

“ ‘Twas not my fault; I stayed right through

          And didn’t stir at all,

And every time I got a chance

          I spit upon the ball.

But after all, do what I may,

The luck don’t seem to come my way.

“ Was it your fault, or was it mine,

          That we’ve been left so bad?”

Then Humphreys sadly gazed at him,

          This dusky mascot lad –

“Nay, boy, I cannot tell,’ said he,

“But ‘twas a famous victory.”2

Sunday, 21 January 2018

1885-03-14 Coasting Incident

The late winter season of 1885 in Hamilton had been tough in terms of prolonged cold temperatures and plenty of snow. By the middle of March, when everyone’s thoughts were turning towards what they hoped was an impending arrival of spring, Hamilton still was in the grip of winter.

On March 12, 1885, both Hamilton newspapers were informed that one of the city’s leading citizens Mr. William Hendrie had some news winter sports enthusiasts :

       “Mr. William Hendrie, who has always been a thorough patron and advocate of all legitimate sports and pastimes for sports’ sake, has introduced a capital precedent and opened his spacious grounds (Homestead) to the public, that they may enjoy that good old form of Canadian outdoor winter amusement, bob-sleigh coasting.”1

1 “Mr. Hendrie Caters to Coasters”

Hamilton Times. March 12, 1885.

The Hendrie mansion, and its extensive grounds occupied the full block, Macnab to Park streets, Duke to Bold streets. The main entrance for carriages into Holmsted was from Bold street, opposite the southernmost end of Charles street.

The Times described the scene on Charles street, running north from the grounds of Holmsted, during the first night of coasting after the announcement from Mr. Hendrie :

“ About 200 people, equipped with at least 80 trim-built and speedy-looking bobs, kept Charles street in a very merry mood from 7 to 10 last night. Mr. Hendrie had several strong reflecting lights placed at intervals along the coasting line, and over the large front gates, through which the coasters passed, was an arch formed of Chinese lanterns. A number were also hung among the shrubbery, the whole looking very picturesque.

“During the evening, large numbers of spectators visited the slide, drawn thither by the numerous horns, bells, flashing lights and attractive illuminations. Mr. Hendrie very kindly extends these privileges as long as the good weather and slipping permits.”1

The night-time coasting experience along the brightly-lighted street from the Holmsted all the way to King street was a delight. Every evening large number of young people, and a few older types, were enjoying the thrill of speeding down the hill, with lights on the track. In the Spectator’s Diurnal Epitome column of March 16, 1885 noted the fun that was happening at the location:

Coasters had a gala time on the Charles street hill Saturday night. The street from Mr. Hendrie’s house to Main street was a blaze of light, a large headlight at Mr. Hendrie’s residence and numerous lesser lights as well as light at Mr. Gillespie’s residence making the scene one of brilliancy and animation that was well worth beholding. The many coasters’ hearts  were full of joy, and they keenly appreciated the generosity of their kind-hearted benefactors.”2

2 “The Diurnal Epitome : What Goeth In and About the City : Items of Local News Gathered By Spectator Reporters And Presented in Attractive Form for the Interested Reader. ”

Hamilton Spectator     March 16, 1885.

Unfortunately the joy of the coasting slide can to an abrupt end Wednesday evening, March 16, 1885:

“For the past ten days, Mr. Hendrie has opened his grounds to the young people who patronized the bobsleighs, and scores of heavy loads have gone whizzing down the hill gaining fresh impetus at every travelled yard. Last night fully two hundred people were thus engaged, and the slide was full of sleighs”3

When a line of coasters was already underway heading down the Charles street hill, a carter’s lorry, driven by Robert McQuillan was seen driving eastward along Hunter street:

“Mr. Waddell, Mr. Burrows and Chief Stewart, seeing that a frightful collision was imminent, called to him to stop, the latter gentleman going in front of the horse to prevent its progress. McQuillan, however, deliberately drove on and a bob with six persons on it came crashing into its wheels. The force of the collision threw the driver to the off, and the occupants of the sleigh were scattered senseless on the ground.”3

3 "Coasting Disaster : Collision of a ‘Bob’ With a Lorry Last night : Three Persons Seriously Hurt”

Weekly Times. March 19, 1885.

A reporter for the Hamilton Spectator had been at the Charles street hill and witnessed the incident firsthand:

          “All went well until about half-past 8, when the accident occurred, which summarily stopped the coasting for the night.

“All the bob sleighs went down the incline together, a procession of some 40 or 50 bobs, each carrying from 3 to 7 persons. As the head of the line approached Hunter street, the crowd on the corner saw a horse and lorry coming east at a brisk pace along Hunter street, and several persons raised a warning cry to the driver, but that person either did not hear or heed the cry and pressed on. The danger now became apparent to everyone who saw the situation.

“Chief Stewart, who was in the crowd, ran out into the road and held up his hands in front of the horse; but the driver urged the animal on until it ran against the chief, who stepped aside to save himself, and the horse and cart passed on.

“By this time the leading bob in the line had reached the corner. It was steered by one of Mr. Hendrie’s sons, who had two ladies behind him. He saw the danger in time to steer out of the way, but almost grazed the lorry in flying past.

“On the second bob were half a dozen persons. It was steered by Mr. Wm. Moore, of 134 main street east, and immediately behind him sat Miss Isabel and Miss Beatrice Burrows, daughters of John C. Burrows, of 36 Hunter street west. Mr. Moore did not see the danger in time to avert it, and his bob crashed into the rear wheel of the lorry.

 “The coasters were hurled to the ground or against the lorry, and the force of the collision was so great that the lorry was driven half way round and the driver was thrown to the ground. The horse proceeded on its way down Hunter street, and the driver picked himself up and ran after it without troubling himself about the unfortunate coasters, who were all stunned, and lay prostrate on the ground.

“All but three, however, were able to rise and walk away, though none of them escaped without bruises.

“The three who were seriously injured were Mr. Moore and Misses Burrows. Fortunately for the gentleman, he had instinctively thrust his feet before him and thus broke the force of the collision; if it had not been for this, he would have been killed. As it was, his face was dashed against the hub of the wheel and was terribly cut and bruised.

“Miss Beatrice Burrows was also thrown against the wheel, and her sister against the side of the lorry. The former was carried to her home nearby, and her sister and Mr. Moore were borne to R. R. Waddell’s house, where their injuries were attended to by Dr. Husband and Dr. Bingham. They were conveyed home later in the evening.

“Mr. Moore’s head and face are so badly cut and bruised that he is likely to be disfigured for life. Miss Isabel Burrows, who is a teacher in the Central school, is not cut, but received several painful bruises on the body as well as on her head and face. Miss Beatrice Burrows’ injuries are more serious. Her nose was broken and her face gashed and bruised cruelly. She also had a hip so severely strained that it may prove troublesome.”4

4 "Serious Coasting Accident : Three Persons Badly Injured By a Collision on Charles Street”

Hamilton Spectator  March 17, 1885.

The carter, McQuillan, made no effort to stop and see what had happened, but continued to drive away:

“Immediately after the accident, Chief Stewart and Constable Johnston went in search of the carter who was mainly responsible for the accident. His name is Robert McQuillan. He was found at his father’s house, 110 West avenue north, and arrested on a charge of malicious injury. He was drunk when taken into custody, and so far from expressing regret at what had occurred, he stoutly declared that he had a greater right to the road than the coasters had.”4

McQuillan spent the night in the police cells and was brought before Magistrate Cahill the next day:

“At the Police Court this morning, McQuillan’s name was entered opposite a charge of malicious injury to persons. Chief Stewart said that the injured persons were not able to appear and he would have to ask for an adjournment.

          “Mr. Sadlier appeared for the defence. He said ; ‘McQuillan was driving along the public street, as he had lawful rights to do, and those who are injured ran into him. It would have been the act of a humane man to stop when he was told, but I doubt very much if he is criminally responsible. He didn’t run into them. They ran into him. I have no objection to an adjournment.’

          “Constable Johnston was called and said that McQuillan had been warned not to cross Charles street.

          “Chief Stewart pointed out that McQuillan was not in charge of his horse when the animal first appeared. It crossed Hunter street and was taken in charge by two boys, who brought it back to Mr. Waddell’s house, and it was tied up there. When McQuillan came along he got in and wheeled around, driving east on Hunter street. Mr. Waddell, Mr. Burrows and the Chief warned him of the danger, and the Chief attempted to stop his horse, but McQuillan drove the animal against him.

          “McQuillan said that the horse had been tied in front of a house on Hunter street, and had got away by breaking the line by which it was fastened. When he found it at Mr. Waddell’s and got in the wagon he could not stop the horse, on account of having but one line. He did not see the coasters until the first sleigh had passed him, and then he shouted to the horse, hoping to get out of their way. He denied being drunk and said he had not taken any liquor.”3

          McQuillan was not granted bail immediately and had to spend another two nights in jail before he was released. It was decided to sent case to a higher court to be tried at the upcoming spring assizes.

As for coasting along Charles street, that experience had come to an end:

“The coasters’ slide on Charles street was not like a private toboggan slide. It was open to all comers, and was patronized by people not only from the immediate vicinity, but from all parts of the city. Mr. Wm. Hendrie, whose residence, Holmstead, is at the head of the street, had very kindly thrown open his grounds and illuminated the slide with locomotive headlights. He was quite willing that coasters should have the use of his property to make the slide complete, but he did not wish to interfere with any person doing business on the streets, and as soon as he found that McQuillan thought his rights were interfered with by the maintenance of the slide, it was closed and the lights extinguished.

          “There is not likely to be any more coasting on Charles street.”3

                Police Chief Stewart came to a decision unilaterally that coasting on public streets was too dangerous to allow it to be continued:

“It is likely that this accident will have the effect of putting a stop to coasting in this city – at least on Charles street. Chief Stewart said last night that he would endeavor to prevent it in this locality during the remainder of the season.”4
 Above, top, detail from 1876 Bird's Eye View map, below an undated photo of Holmsted.