Manchester Democrat. [volume] (Manchester, Iowa) 1875-1930, 1906-02-28
A BOSTON LANDMARK
HISTORY OF A FAMOUS OLD ELM
DESTROYED BY THE WIND.

DESTROYED BY THE WIND.
This Celebrated Tree, Believed to
Have Existed Before the Settlement
of the City, Was Blown Down In
the Great Storm of 1876,
Feb. 10, 1876, was sad day for To-
cal historians in Boston, for the news
papers announced the next day that at
about 4 O'Clock the previous evening
the old elm on Boston Common had
been destroyed by great storm which
swept over the city at that time. So
many eulogies, both oral and written,
We're delivered OIL this most ancient of
Boston's landmarks, and 1t was real
lied that Il connecting link with the
remote past was gone forever.
1t is not known when the tree began
to grow, but an old Boston tradition
was that the wife Of Thomas Hancock,
the eminent merchant, who was Lydia
Henchman before her marriage, claim
ed that her grandfather, Hezekiah
Henchman, planted the tree when he
was boy. This would have made the
tree just 200 years old at the time of
Its destruction.
1t is probable that some Of the many
persons on record us being publicly
executed on Boston Common looked on
the fair world for the last time when
standing beneath its branches, for it
was one Of the largest trees, if not the
largest, in the town, and it stood on
its outskirts, and also in 1922 it must
have been prominent object in Bos-
ton, for Bonner's map of the town,
published in that year, shows it as n
feature.
In 1926 the first recorded measure
ment of the old elm showed its di.
mansions to be as follows: Height, Go
feet; circumference, 21 feet inches at
2 feet 6 inches from the ground, and
the extreme diameter Of the branches
was Sc feet. AT this time it was said
Of the tree that this pride Of our Com
mon is pronounced by judges to be as
handsome in form as it is large in size
and venerable in age, and it may be
worth the remark, Notwithstanding all
storms and hurricanes for more than
century, its original beauty and sym
metry have not been impaired, al
though it has at times lost many of its
branches
The tree was accurately measured by
the city engineer of Boston in 1855, and
| it was found that it was considerably
lorpnr fhnn In,
figured at seventy-fve feet. This
showed that it was still growing in its
extreme old age.
The first serious damage the tree re-
ceived was in 1882, when the largest of
Its limbs was SO rent aSunder that
three branches rested on the ground,
but at much cost and labor they were
replaced in their former positions and
held together by iron rods and bolts.
The great gale in June, 1860. injured
the tree to such an extent that its for
mer symmetry was destroyed, and at
this time the cavity in the trunk was
filled with several loads of material.
On one Of the branches which We're
torn off at the time 100 rings We're
NoadlSuS lllC SECul uSc
Of the tree.
The opening of the centennial year of
the republic, 1876, found the tree alive,
but decrepit, and 1t would probably
have been decorated on Evacuation
day and the Fourth of July, but, as
stated at the beginning Of this article,
Feb. 15 saw its destruction.
The old elm fell at 7:17 o'clock in the
evening, its trunk pointing toward the
Park Street church, and the force of
the fall shattered the trunk, while the
branches We're scattered in every d.
rection. The melancholy news spread
like wildfire through the city, and soon,
despite the storm, the fallen monarch
was surrounded by relic hunters. Arm
ed with saws, hatchets and knives,
they quickly detached pieces of the
branches to preserve as souvenirs. Per-
sons We're seen in the theaters laden
with boughs, and it was common
sight that evening to see men in the
streets carrying limbs several feet in
length and as large around MS n stove