Pell Lake played an early, and significant, role in the interplay between the newspaper colonies and the environment. With environmental consciousness still decades in the future, ecological concerns in the beginning years of the twentieth century were focused primarily on industrial pollution. Newspaper resort advertisements used this to advantage by promoting the developments as healthy places where families could breathe fresh air.
Even sanitary conditions were not a big concern. Outhouses were often the first structures built, but a hole in the ground with some canvas screening around it would also do. Zoning was in its infancy in the 1920s and largely confined to urban areas. In rural Wisconsin in 1924, there simply were no zoning regulations or building permit requirements for Warren Smadbeck to worry about.
A revision in the marketing terms midway through the decade implies that the Smadbecks had encountered a bump in the road. Ads for the newspaper colonies specified five lots as the most that could be purchased by any one buyer. No minimum number of lots was imposed at Pell Lake or the resorts that came before it. But after Pell Lake this changed and the reason is explained by a series of news articles.
In July of 1925 Wisconsin real estate broker licenses were denied to Ivan Bell Realty and Pell Lake Development, the respective creators of Lake Ivanhoe and Pell Lake Addition. The news item providing this information did not report the reason for the rejection.1
An article on the May 17, 1926, front page of the Wisconsin State Journal revealed that the state health department was investigating the Pell Lake subdivision regarding sanitary conditions. When this investigation began or how it came about is not specified, but apparently, local real estate agents, chafing at commissions going to out-of-state salesmen, were behind it and probably behind the license denials of the previous year. The State Journal article, titled “State Arrests 6 on Real Estate Count,” reported the arrest of R.B. Hussey and five others, all solicitors from the circulation department of the Chicago Evening Post. Their arrest was based on a warrant sworn out by an attorney for the Wisconsin Real Estate Brokers Board. The six men were charged with selling Wisconsin land without licenses. When arrested, they were peddling lots at Lake Como Beach and the news article claimed that licenses were never issued by the real estate board for the sale of Pell Lake lots.
The same day that the report of the arrests appeared in the press, the just-formed Walworth County Real Estate Board adopted, as its first order of business, a resolution denouncing the platting and selling of lots on any lakeshore property in the county with less than 40' frontage.2 The board members disapproved of the narrow lots as creating unwarranted congestion and unhealthy and unsanitary conditions. In response, the state halted the sale of 20' lots pending the outcome of the charges against the real estate salesmen.3 This action effectively suspended the sale of all Smadbeck lots in Walworth County.
Then, several things occurred on May 26, 1926. Following his arrest, R.B. Hussey, his father Frank Hussey, and Carroll Shaffer, general manager of the Chicago Evening Post, applied for a license to sell lots at Lake Como Beach. A hearing was conducted by the state real estate board to inquire into the plans for marketing and sanitary conditions at the Lake Como project. The board issued a license to R.B. Hussey with the stipulation that no less than two lots be sold to a purchaser and that sanitary conditions and the water supply meet state requirements.4 That same day ads for Lake Como Beach debuted in the Post specifying a minimum purchase of two lots.
The Wisconsin realty agents, in an effort to punish the out-of-state encroachers on their territory, actually did them a favor. The developers and their sales team now had a legitimate reason to require that buyers purchase at least two lots and two newspaper subscriptions. Newspaper colonies continued to be platted with 20' wide lots but subsequent ads for most of the resorts specified the two-lot minimum.
A resulting change also took place in deed language. Pell Lake deeds required outhouses to be suitably screened while deeds for Lake Como Beach and Interlaken prohibited the erection of outdoor privies, requiring chemical toilets instead. This left Pell Lake as the only newspaper resort in Walworth County with outhouses.
The attack on the narrow lots was prompted more by rivalries among real estate salesmen than by concerns over sanitation. Still, it effectively ended outhouses in Walworth County and made money for the sellers of chemical toilets. It did not, however, prevent sewerage from seeping or being channeled into the lakes. Today, the few outhouses that still exist in the backyards of some cottages at Pell Lake have been deactivated by filling the pits with sand or dirt and the structures repurposed for garden storage or preserved as oddities.
* * *
The modern-day movement toward environmentalism in the 1960s and 1970s was spurred on by a few prominent ecological disasters, one of which involved a Smadbeck resort. The environmental flap that consumed Times Beach had little to do with Warren Smadbeck unless he is to be blamed for not paving the roads. Through the years the development struggled economically and, even though it became a city in 1957, most of its roads remained unpaved.
In an effort to quell the dust stirred up by traffic, the community hired a local waste hauler to spray the roads with used motor oil. Unfortunately, the hauler blended the oil with chemical manufacturing waste containing dioxin, a highly toxic industrial byproduct. The Environmental Protection Agency began taking soil samples at Times Beach in 1979 and, finding high levels of dioxin, ordered the town evacuated in 1982. Bulldozers leveled Times Beach, heaping everything into one huge pile which was then incinerated and covered with soil. That grassy mound is now part of the Route 66 State Park, opened in 1999 on the site of the former colony.
Times Beach garnered much attention in the press as the first town entirely bought out by federal Superfund dollars. As such, it became the only newspaper colony to have completely disappeared. Environmentalists continue to debate the need for the extreme remedial actions imposed at Times Beach.
* * *
At some resorts the Smadbecks purposefully altered the environment by damming up rivers to create artificial lakes. Knightstown Lake and Lake Louisvilla were among the first locations where this was done. The Smadbecks exhibited either inexperience or unwillingness to pay for sound engineering when the dam at Knightstown failed almost immediately and had to be rebuilt.
Knightstown Lake property owners lost the parkland along the stream bed when it was the subject of a condemnation action brought by a conservancy district created in 1965 to monitor the Big Blue River watershed. The property owners objected to the condemnation complaint, filed in March of 1974, and the matter languished in the courts for eight years. During the course of the proceedings the court determined that the POA was dissolved as of August 19, 1976, and may have been inactive as early as 1932. The case was finally resolved in July of 1982 with an appraisal value of $5,374.22 assigned to the parkland. This amount was allocated among the lot owners with each receiving only a few dollars for his interest in the parkland.5
With a declining economy, the abandonment of many cottages, and wooded areas to provide cover, both Knightstown Lake and Lake Louisvilla came to be used as disposal sites for old tires, worn-out appliances, and other refuse. Knightstown Lake residents feared that the lake would be drained due to the debris,6 while residents at Lake Louisvilla took a different approach, purposefully causing the lake to be drained in 1969 in an effort to clean it up. When several feet of mud on the lake bottom made it impossible to bring in bulldozers, Lake Louisvilla was refilled with water, leaving most of the rubbish intact.7
* * *
It was the condition of the dams, rather than the debris, that would prompt conservationists to bring an end to Knightstown Lake and Lake Lousvilla. Both dams were found to be in disrepair by state agencies created to oversee environmental issues. In Indiana it was the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) and in Kentucky the Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Cabinet (NREPC). At both Knightstown and Louisvilla, roads had been constructed on the berms of the dams contributing to their deterioration and involving highway departments in the litigation that was to follow.
Lake Louisvilla was the first of the two lakes to come under attack when, in 1984, the NREPC found the dam in need of repair and classified it as “high hazard.” The state did not want to pay the cost of repairing the dam and planned to drain the lake. Residents, fearing a decrease in property values, joined together under the banner “Save Lake Louisvilla” and challenged the state’s right to empty the lake.
The lake had been conveyed to the Lake Louisvilla POA in 1925, an entity that ceased to exist when Lake Louisvilla became a city in the 1950s. The municipality was disincorporated in 1972 giving rise to issues of ownership of the lake and responsibility for the dam. Legal notices were placed in the newspaper but no one stepped forward to claim title to a dam in need of repair.
The dispute between the state and the residents took nearly five years to progress up the legal ladder from the circuit court to the state supreme court and back down again. It was finally concluded that the lake had been abandoned and thereby belonged to the state, clearing the way for it to do as it wished. Lake Louisvilla was drained for the second and last time in October 1989 and the backhoes again got stuck in the mud.8
Since the property owners had denied ownership of the lake, the action of the state did not constitute a compensable taking of property. At least the property owners could take solace in the fact that the state was unsuccessful in its attempt to sell the muddy lake bed to recoup the expense of draining.9
* * *
At Knightstown Lake the property owners lost the parkland in 1982 but they still had use of the lake. Then in 1994 the Indiana DNR claimed that water, trickling through cracks and crevices in the embankment, was causing a supporting arch to cave in, rendering the dam unsafe. The DNR ordered the water level lowered to five feet and the county commissioners closed the portion of Star Boulevard that spanned the berm of the dam.
Further attempts to drain the lake or repair the dam were delayed while ownership issues were sorted out, a process that would take ten years. The Conservancy District took the position that while the lake was within its watershed, it had no ownership or control of the dam itself. The Knightstown Lake POA may have owned the dam initially but that entity had long been defunct. The county claimed that the property owners nevertheless obtained ownership of the dam when they bought their lots, and the lot owners argued that the county assumed control of the dam when it constructed the road across the berm. Both the lot owners and the county wanted the dam repaired but neither had the money, or the desire, to pay for it.10
Matters were further complicated when residents formed a Save Knightstown Lake committee, the county filed a court action against 300 lot owners to determine ownership of the property, and a resident bought the property for delinquent taxes but could not claim ownership pending payment of tax liens by the undetermined owner.11 By the turn of the century nothing had been resolved and ownership of the dam was still in limbo.12 In 2004, ten years after first being declared unsafe, the DNR finally determined that the dam had been orphaned and was owned by no one. The dam was decommissioned and the lake drained to silt level.
Satellite views of Knightstown Lake and Lake Louisvilla now depict mudholes where the lakes were. These two lakes were not the only Smadbeck developments where dams had a limited life span but lacked a legal structure to ensure the availability of funds for repair.
* * *
Beach Club Lake came into existence in May of 1929 when the Smadbecks, having created a dam to enlarge Buckshutem Pond into Laurel Lake, installed another dam to create Beach Club Lake next door. This second dam failed shortly after construction,13 and with the onset of the Depression, the Beach Club Lake resort, lake, and dam were all abandoned. This presents the unusual situation of a newspaper resort having a vastly truncated life largely due to its dam.
At the adjoining resort of Laurel Lake, the city of Millville, New Jersey, took over the unsold lots by tax forfeiture in the 1940s; these lots, primarily those on the south shore of the lake and probably other property in the area as well, were purchased by Laurel Lake Development.14 In 1956 the Laurel Lake dam also failed and, through the joint efforts of the Laurel Lake and Beach Club Lake POA and the Development Company, both dams were reconstructed.15 What had been Beach Club Lake for a few short months in 1929, ultimately became Beaver Lake.
* * *
In the mid–1920s in Wisconsin, the jurisdiction over dams was assigned to the Railroad Commission. The Water Power Law of 1917 was developed to ensure that dams were safely built, operated, and maintained, and that water level and flow were properly controlled. It might be expected that this type of legislation would aid in resolving conflicts between landowners such as the long simmering feud between two of Ira Pell’s neighbors.
Since about 1870 Arthur Olden, seeking to drain water from his marshland north of the lake, would open up the southern outlet of the lake to allow lake water to flow out and be replaced with drainage from his land. This operation caused the outflow of water to flood the farmland of Marvin Acker. Acker reacted by shoveling dirt to rebuild the bank and keep the overflow off of his property. The two men argued over this situation, the conflict escalated, and in 1885 Olden and Acker resorted to a fist fight. Acker was arrested and made to pay a fine of $26.07.16 The newspaper that reported this incident suggested that the matter might be satisfactorily settled if the parties got together and shared the cost of a ditch to carry off the marsh water.
An analogous situation arose when the outlet of Pell Lake at its southern end was completely closed off by Warren Smadbeck in the spring and summer of 1924. He also blocked the inlets at the northern end in an effort to raise the level of the lake a desired thirty inches. Charles Gleason, Hattie Hibbard, and George Sitterle, all owners of marshland north of the lake, objected to Smadbeck’s operations which had effectively prevented their swamp land from draining into the lake and eventually into Nippersink Creek. Rather than engaging in a physical altercation, the land owners, joining with the Town of Bloomfield, lodged a Water Power complaint with the Railroad Commission. Smadbeck responded by petitioning for a permit to build a dam at the outlet sufficient to raise the lake level about three feet,17 an action which, in fact, he had already taken.
Since Smadbeck had constructed the dam without permission and was in the midst of actively selling lots, it was crucial that he obtain approval from the commission. To accomplish this, he acceded to the petitioners’ demands that he install a pipeline channeling the swamp water around the eastern shore of the lake to link up with the natural outlet into the creek—basically what had been suggested in 1885. Smadbeck purchased twelve carloads of tile and work on the conduit was in progress even before the two related cases were heard by the commission on October 20, 1924.18 Thus, Warren Smadbeck was able to demonstrate his good faith and have the matters postponed while he worked out the details of a settlement with the land owners. This was accomplished in the spring of 1925 and embodied in a stipulation that appears very one-sided, suggesting that Smadbeck acquiesced to every demand made by the landowners, their engineer, and their lawyer.19
The commission established a benchmark to measure the water level and the petitioners withdrew their objections. An order was issued on June 11, 1925, approving the agreement of the parties and finding that the proposed dam at Pell Lake would not materially obstruct existing navigation or violate other public rights, and would not endanger life, health or property.20
In the order granting Smadbeck’s application for the dam, the commission added a gratuitous comment,
the Commission is only performing its duty under the statutes and is not in any way passing upon the advisability of the project. It would seem that the purposes for which the dam is to be maintained can be effected only temporarily and that the permanent success of the dam in securing those ends is doubtful.
This proved to be a sage observation.
Just three years later William Kaufman, a civil engineer in Smadbeck employ,21 appeared at Pell Lake to supervise repair of the pipeline.22 These remedies were also short-lived and by the spring of 1931, the president of the Pell Lake POA, William McManus, began several years of correspondence with the Public Service Commission (PSC), the successor body to the Railroad Commission.23
McManus was concerned about the low water level in the lake and initially wanted to conduct more dredging. PSC inspections revealed that the joints in the pipeline had not been properly sealed and the piping had again settled out of position. In addition, a pump used to help drain the north marshes broke down, was disassembled, and eventually went out of commission altogether. The POA sought closure of the pipeline so the lake level would rise while the marsh owners wanted it to remain open to drain the swamps. The PSC would not allow the closure unless the tile drain was made water tight or the pump was restored to operating condition.24
When the Smadbeck agreement to maintain the pipeline proved ineffective, the two sides resorted to self-help. In August of 1933, and again in March of 1937, the PSC noted that the outlet had been filled with sand and gravel when the road was widened.25 In April of 1962 the commission reported that persons wanting a higher lake level had placed rocks and stones in the culvert while others took them out to lower the water, and that “there were several rocks inside the culvert about fifteen feet from the upstream end. They blocked about half of the culvert.”26 And so, fifty years after Acker and Olden argued over the drainage, and after a ditch had been constructed to resolve the argument, the successor owners of their marsh and riparian land were doing basically what Acker and Olden had done.
Seven water level measurements taken off the established benchmark between May of 1925 and August of 1969 indicate that the water level of the lake averaged halfway between its original level and the three-foot rise sought by Smadbeck. The remedial actions taken by the two opposing sides in the dispute resulted in a near exact compromise—the culvert was half-blocked and the water level increase was reduced by half. All in all, this was a saner resolution than resorting to petitions, lawyers, engineers, and formal hearings or a fighting bout.
While these actions impaired the function of the conduit, Warren Smadbeck’s dam endured and still exists at the southern end of Pell Lake. Nearby is another embankment. This low earthen structure, roughly the same level as the roads at either end, extends from the western terminus of Lake Road across the slough, meeting up with West Lakeshore Drive near Holly Road. It may have been created as a means of moving ice harvested from the lake onto an adjoining railroad spur. Today this berm serves as a frequent muskrat crossing and bears only occasional foot traffic. The locals have an affectionate name for it—the rubber bridge—perhaps an accidental pun for a retaining structure at a development created by a dentist.
1. Manitowoc (Wisconsin) Herald-News, July 24, 1925, 3.
2. “Form County Real Estate Board Here,” Elkhorn Independent, May 6, 1926, 1; “County Realtors Hit 20 Foot Lots,” Elkhorn Independent, May 20, 1926, 1.
3. “State Stops Sale of Small Sized Lots,” Lake Geneva News Tribune, May 27, 1926, 1.
4. “Investigate Lot Sales Plan of Chicagoans,” Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel, May 25, 1926, p. 4; “Gets License to Sell Lots on Lake Como,” Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel, May 26, 1926, 2.
5. Big Blue v. Knightstown Lake, Case No. 74 C 116, Henry County, Indiana, Clerk of Courts.
6. Eldon Pitts, “Misunderstanding: Knightstown Lake Won’t be Shut Down,” Muncie Star, May 15, 1992, 7.
7. Sheldon Shafer, “Residents of Lake Louisvilla Fear State Officials May Pull the Plug,” (Louisville) Courier-Journal, June 22, 1981, Sec. B, 3.
8. Brien Shea, “Residents Lament Loss of Lake, Drainage Mess,” Courier-Journal, October 25, 1989, p 5. Also see photo captioned “Mud Wrestling,” Courier-Journal, October 18, 1989, 10.
9. Michele Kurtz, “State to Sell Lake Louisvilla Sites; Some Leery,” Courier-Journal, July 18, 1990, 7.
10. Eldon Pitts, “Residents Want County to Take Control of Lake,” Star Press, September 28, 1996, 19.
11. Eldon Pitts, “Dispute Over Who Owns Raysville Lake in Court,” Star Press, April 11, 1997, 7.
12. “Living Dangerously: Ownership Dispute Has Stymied Repair of Knightstown Dam,” Star Press, December 28, 1999, 1.
13. Phase 1 Inspection Report, National Dam Safety Program, Beaver Dam, NJ 00077 (Department of the Army Corps of Engineers, Philadelphia, 1979), 3. This report states that the Beach Club Lake dam failed on November 14, 1927, a date that appears fallacious since lot sales at Beach Club Lake were actively promoted between May and November of 1929.
14. “Buyers Flooding City,” Millville Daily Republican.
15. “Laurel Lake Dam May Cost $30,000,” Millville Daily Republican, May 13, 1957, 1.
16. “County Items,” (Lake Geneva, Wisconsin) Herald, May 23, 1885, 1.
17. Charles B. Gleason v. Warren Smadbeck, W.P. 209; Petition of Warren Smadbeck, W.P. 211; Opinion and Decisions of the Railroad Commission of Wisconsin, v. 29 (1930), 499.
18. McHenry Plaindealer, October 16, 1924, 6; “Twelve Cases Are Scheduled Before R. R. Commission,” Wausau (Wisconsin) Daily Record-Herald, October 21, 1924, 16.
19. W.P. 211 and W.P. 209, Stipulation, WCRD, Mortgages, March 27, 1925, 147:409.
20. Opinion and Decisions of the Railroad Commission of Wisconsin, Memorandum of Decision, June 11, 1925, 499–500.
21. “Face Charges in Fatality,” Plainfield (New Jersey) Courier-News, January 24, 1952, 20.
22. DNR Water Regulations Dam Correspondence, Pell Lake Dam 64.19, Steinmetz to Railroad Commission letter, September 25, 1928, item 2102051, Wisconsin Historical Society (WHS) Archives.
23. The letters written by McManus to the PSC could not be located. Only the letters from the PSC responding to McManus’s inquiries survive. Dam Correspondence, May 16, 1931 to July 11, 1934, items 2102053 to 2102075.
24. Dam Correspondence, item 2102063, November 1, 1932.
25. Dam Correspondence, item 2102071, April 13, 1933; item 2102077, March 1, 1937.
26. Dam Correspondence, item 2102080, April 11, 1962.