Tuesday, November 24, 2009

A rose among thorns: The legacy of Dutch rule in America



Presented to the Club by Albert E. Easton on November 23, 2009



The First Church in Albany was founded in 1642. The chancel of that church contains the seventeenth century pulpit and the hour glass that the pastors, who were called “Dominies” used to time their sermons. On the wall there appears a seal with these words: “Like a rose among thorns is my love among the daughters.” Those words, from what seventeenth century Calvinists called the book of Canticles, were chosen as a motto because Albany, in those days, was a tiny enclave of European civilization in what was perceived as a vast wilderness. The words, of course, are not in English, but in Dutch, a reminder that Albany was part of a Dutch colony, which made New York different in important ways from the other twelve original colonies. That fact had consequences for the state, and even for the nation that it became a part of. My purpose tonight is to explore those differences and how they came about.



The first step in understanding this is to review the history of England and the Netherlands in the seventeenth century. The political and religious aspects of that history were so deeply intertwined as to be almost the same thing. Elizabeth I, who had restored the Anglican church in England, died in 1603, and her successor, James I continued this tradition. The Anglican church in those days followed most of the rite and ritual of the Roman Catholic church, rejecting only the authority of the pope.



The Netherlands, along with a good deal of the rest of western Europe, were a part of the Hapsburg empire in the sixteenth century, ruled from Spain. In 1568, a revolt led by William of Orange broke out, and by 1579, the seven northern provinces, of which Holland was the largest, formed a union called the United Provinces of the Netherlands. The government of this new nation was a republic, an unusual form in the sixteenth century. This republic, while nominally Roman Catholic was tolerant of all religions, and this resulted in a huge influx of Calvinist and Lutheran believers, who were generally not welcome in those provinces that remained under Spanish rule.



Foreign trade was beginning to be an immense source of wealth in this era. Often, it was undertaken by private companies who received extremely valuable monopoly rights from the government. In the Netherlands, the Dutch East India Company owned the exclusive right to Asian trade, including the Dutch outpost of Batavia, as it was then called (Jakarta today). Fur trading was important to the English, and they had chartered the Muscovy Company, with exclusive rights to Russian trade.



Henry Hudson was an English gentleman adventurer who fancied that he might add his name to those of Magellan, DaGama and Columbus. With that thought in mind, he approached the Muscovy Company about the possibility of an exploratory voyage to find an easier sea route to Asia than the long voyage around the Cape of Good Hope. Residents of northern Scandinavia were certainly aware that the climate became colder as one went farther north, but a theory existed in those days that the north pole, since it received six solid months of sunlight, must be quite tropical in late summer. Thus, there were those who believed that after a certain point, the weather got warmer in late summer as you sailed North. In 1607, Hudson was successful in convincing the Muscovy Company to back a voyage around Scandinavia and Russia to the east using their ship, the Hopewell. He actually got within 600 miles of the north pole before he (wisely) turned back. He even convinced the Company to back a second voyage in the Hopewell the following summer. This trip too was, of course, unsuccessful.



The Muscovy Company did not allow Hudson a third voyage. Almost as soon as he was refused a third voyage by that company, he was approached by the Dutch East India Company to undertake a voyage on their behalf. (Apparently, adventurers willing to do such things were in short supply. Besides, Hudson had more experience than anyone else they could have approached.) So Hudson sailed for Amsterdam in the late autumn of 1608 to meet with the directors of the Dutch East India Company.



In the spring of 1609, Hudson set sail again in a new ship, the 85-foot Halve Maen (Half Moon), purchased and owned by the Dutch East India Company. His instructions from the Company were to once again explore the route around Scandinavia. Having failed twice at that, Hudson probably urged them to try the route to the west, but they were insistent. Fortunately for posterity, Hudson completely ignored instructions and set out to the west. In those days, the coast of what is today the United States was largely unexplored, and of course the full size of the North American continent was unknown. Hudson actually believed that there might be a route to Asia through what we now know is a 3000 mile wide continent. Therefore, he sailed directly for Newfoundland and turned south.



He got as far south as Chesapeake Bay, which he recognized as the Jamestown settlement in Virginia, headed by his friend John Smith. But since he was sailing for a Dutch concern, he did not think it appropriate to visit an English settlement, and headed back north, where he became the first European to sail into Delaware Bay. Here he encountered shoals and sand bars, and decided this could not possibly be the way to Asia. So he headed north again.



This time, he found a more promising spot. Entering New York Harbor, he anchored and went ashore. People appeared. The story entered the legend of the Delaware Indians that “something like a house” had appeared on the water, with men in it. Hudson recorded that this was “a fair harbor for all winds”. This passage was deep and navigable. Could this be the passage to Asia? The Hudson River is level and tidal to about ten miles above Albany, and offers a deep channel all the way. Hudson sailed as far north as he could, and sent out scouts to explore the area. But it was October, and time to turn back. Unfortunately, he did not return directly to Amsterdam, but put in to Dartmouth, England. There, his ship was seized by the maritime authority.



We can only imagine how this news was received by the Dutch East India Company. Not only had he ignored their instructions to sail northeast, but he had managed to place their ship in the hands of a foreign government. But they made the best of it. They had been hoping for some time to secure some rights to the fur trade on the North American continent, and this placed it in their hands. They began planning how to exploit this opportunity. (By the way, they got their ship back, a year later. In that year, Hudson sailed again in a different ship, this time with English sponsors, and lost his life when abandoned by his crew in the bay that bears his name in Northern Canada.)



The Netherlands, in the early seventeenth century, had a form of government that was unique to Europe. It was a republic. There was no king, no dictator. There were nobility, but they held no governing power. Power was vested in the States-General, a sort of congress where each state held one vote. It is hard to say whether the feelings of the Dutch at the time led to this form of government, or vice versa, but nevertheless Dutch society in general, and Amsterdam in particular, was very open and liberal at the time. It became a haven for all the religious refugees of the continent, especially the Calvinist Walloons, who were welcomed neither in Catholic France or Lutheran Germany. It was no coincidence that the Puritans who settled in Plymouth came there from the Netherlands. It was the only country allowing anything close to religious freedom.



In 1610, the year after Hudson’s discovery, a small band of Dutch adventurers, led by Captain Adrian Block crossed the Atlantic to establish fur trading with the Indians in the area that came to be known as New Netherland. This wasn’t so much a colony as a beachhead, since none of them expected to stay permanently, but it was a beginning. This was strictly a business enterprise. The closest modern comparison would be the offshore oil drilling rigs.



In 1614, the States-General chartered the New Netherland Company, primarily to exploit the fur trade, which was becoming lucrative, and in 1623 this was replaced by the well capitalized Dutch West India Company. The Dutch West India Company actually began colonization of New Netherland, but it wasn’t easy to find colonists. Amsterdam, and the Netherlands in general was a wonderful place to live in those days, and there was not a lot of appeal to living on the other side of a great ocean, far from civilization. The Dutch West India Company finally rounded up thirty families – mostly French speaking Belgians known as “Walloons”, who were willing to undertake colonization. Eight of the families stayed at the southern end of the Dutch settlement (i. e. in Manhattan) and the others traveled up the river to the beaver trading post at Fort Orange. (today called Albany)



The directors of the Dutch West India Company were really not satisfied with this first group of colonists. They weren’t Dutch, and they wanted this to be a Dutch colony. So in 1628, they decided to offer an incentive to anyone willing to start a colony of at least 50 people – naming them a patroon, beneficiary of huge land grants to be known as “patroonships”. .



The first to step forward was Kiliaen van Rensselaer, one of the directors of the Company. In fact, he may have been the one proposing the land grants. He certainly was a strong supporter. Van Rensselaer had been born in 1580, and by 1628 was a well established diamond and pearl merchant in Amsterdam. He was also a very civic minded individual. He chose for his land the area around the northern fur trading outpost and then set out to enlarge his holding by treaties with the Indians. He wound up with most of what is today Albany and Rensselaer counties – a total of about 700,000 acres. The beaver trading post established on the Hudson had been known as Beverwyck, and the Patroonship was called Rensselaerwyck. Protecting both was the Dutch military out post Fort Orange



Kiliaen was the first patroon, and the only patroon of Rensselaerwyck who never visited the new world, relying instead on agents to exercise control of his patroonship. While most of the directors of the company were focused on short term profits from the fur trade, van Rensselaer quite rightly realized that there was much more potential for profit in a strong farming economy in the new colony, and set to work to establish that. Recruiting colonists was difficult. Each potential colonist was offered a contract. In return for agreeing to stay at least three years, he and his family were given passage to America, and rights to land for which he would pay a rent based on the amount produced.



But recruiting went slowly, and even when families could be found who were willing to give colonization a try, many did not stay past the required three years. Fewer than two hundred people had settled in Rensselaerwyck in its first fourteen years, and by 1641, only about one hundred remained. Several things took place about this time that had a material effect on the colony.



The first thing that happened in 1640 was that the directors of the Dutch West India Company decided to relinquish their trade monopoly in the port of New Amsterdam, and declared it a free port. The effect was electric. Anyone in Amsterdam who was willing to brave an ocean voyage could become a trader. This vastly increased the traffic to the New Netherland colony, and not just among the Dutch. Ships of all nations were free to trade.



The second important event of 1640 resulted from a letter that Adrian van der Donck, a young lawyer in Leiden sent to van Rensselaer inquiring about an administrative post in Rensselaerwyck. Leiden at the time was perhaps the most cosmopolitan and tolerant city in Europe. We New Englanders recall that it was home for many years to the English Puritans who later settled in Plymouth. Van Rensselaer appointed van der Donck to the post of “Schout”, an office that combined the duties of sheriff and administrator.



Any jurisdiction profits immensely from having law enforcement that is fair, diligent and intelligent, and van der Donk was all of these. Colonists began to pour into Rensselaerwyck, and among them was Reverend Johannes Megapolensis, who became dominie of the First Church of Albany. Megapolensis was at first tolerant of all religions, and even helped Roman Catholic priests escape from the Mohawks. Later, he was persuaded by Peter Stuyvesant, governor of the New Amsterdam colony, to allow no public worship except Dutch Calvinist, but by then the settlement had substantial numbers of German Lutherans, Anglicans, and even Roman Catholics.



All of this fit well with van der Donck’s views. He had absorbed the spirit of Leiden during his years there, and he found that he loved the new world. Unfortunately, he became so enamored of the area that he began attempting to acquire large tracts of land for himself. This did not fit well with van Rensselaer’s ideas of best behavior for his Schout. He was fired, but did eventually succeed in acquiring a very large tract of land a few miles north of Manhattan. He had become known as “The Yonker” which translates as the young squire, and of course his land holdings were referred to as Yonkers.



Historians sometimes make their points by emphasizing only those events that fit their thesis. I would prefer not to do that. It’s true the Dutch colonies were more diverse than some of the others. And they had a mother country that was a republic in government, and tolerant of different religions. But, it was the seventeenth century. No one had yet even had the thought, let alone expressed it, that all men were created equal, or endowed with any rights other than what they could seize on their own. The Dutch colonies tolerated slavery, as well as indentured servitude, because it was accepted in the seventeenth century.



In analyzing the events in the European outposts in the new world during the seventeenth century, we need to keep in mind what was going on in the old. In England, the monarchy had been overthrown, and the country was ruled by parliament. This led to an enormous growth in the English colonies, as political and religious refugees poured in. And England was suddenly in the hands of the Calvinist Puritans who had been outlawed only a few years before.



We who live in a culture where religious tolerance is both law and custom may find it difficult to realize what a rare thing this is in human history. Most cultures permit (at most) only freedom of conscience, that is, allowing individuals to believe as they wish, but not advocate for their non-conforming religion. The book of Deuteronomy prescribes the death penalty to Israelites who advocate other gods.



It would also be wrong to say that only in the Dutch colonies was there religious tolerance. After all, the Rhode Island colony was founded by religious dissidents. Roger Williams felt free to follow his Baptist beliefs in Providence, and William Codington and my own ancestor Nicholas Easton practiced as Quakers in Newport. Anne Hutchinson had her own religious views that fit no organized church. And it is no coincidence that first Jewish congregation on this continent was located in Newport.



As most of us know, Dutch rule ceased in 1664, accomplished by the arrival of four battleships in New Amsterdam harbor. This was effective because Peter Stuyvesant, the Dutch Governor, thought England and the Netherlands were at peace at the time. But the English rule that replaced it was much different than that under which the earlier English colonies had been founded, and not all that different from the Dutch rule that preceded it. Charles II had been restored to the throne, but realized he had to listen to the will of Parliament. And he walked a narrow tightrope on the religious issue, tolerating much more diversity than some earlier monarchs. Also, it would have been all but impossible to enforce the Anglican Church in the colony, since only a tiny minority were adherents to that faith. Most of the colony still spoke Dutch in 1664, and over half followed the Calvinist Dutch Reformed tradition, with German and Scandinavian Lutherans a close second.



King Charles assigned the newly seized colonies to his brother James (who later became King James II) who was Duke of York and Albany, and New Amsterdam and Beverwyck were renamed after his British Duchy. Unfortunately, James II did not prove to be as able at compromise as his brother, and was deposed in 1689 by William of Orange (a Dutchman whose mother was the sister of James II, and whose wife was his daughter).



In the new world, the Dutch customs and even some of the laws remained in place. Dutch inheritance laws were followed well into the eighteenth century, not English, and the great Manor of Rensselaerwyck remained in the hands of the van Rensselaer patroons even after the colonies became independent. The great saga of the anti-rent wars that took place in Albany and Rensselaer counties during the 1840’s could form the basis of another paper. And the tradition of religious tolerance that grew out of the Dutch heritage helped to light the sparks that inspired the founders of our nation.
Read More

Church and State: The wall of separation



Presented to the Club by Harold I. Salzmann on June 8, 2009. Illustration: Statue of Roger Williams in the U. S. Capitol Building.





“Freedom’s a thing that has no ending …”



As all of us know, this Monday Evening Club of ours was founded almost 140 years ago at the home of the grandfather of our recently deceased member, Thomas Plunkett. That founding took place on Wednesday evening, November 11, 1869. By an unrelated coincidence, my own congregation, Temple Anshe Amunim (“People of Faith”) was founded just a few days later, on a Sunday evening, November 14. I have been researching this latter history for some time – not incidental to our congregation’s similar observance this November of its 140th celebratory observance.



One of the intriguing questions that concerned me, at the outset of my inquiry into the beginning of our congregation here in the Berkshires was why our beginnings here were only in the middle of the 19th century. Our congregation is one of the oldest in New England. But American Jewish history goes back actually to the discovery of America itself, beginning with Columbus. Luis Torres, the navigator’s official interpreter, was a converso/marrano, the first white man actually to set foot on the soil of the New World. And there is a school of scholars – non-Jewish and Spanish at that – who have theorized that Columbus himself was of Jewish origins.



But undisputed American Jewish history begins with the arrival on the Dutch brig St. Charles in New Amsterdam in 1654 of 23 refugees from Recife, Brazil – much to the upset of Peter Stuyvesant, the Dutch governor of the colony. Incidentally, our Club member Robert Newman, of blessed memory, had a first cousin, Harmon Hendricks Goldstone, whose ancestry traced back to one of those arrivals on the St. Charles. Stephen Birmingham’s “The Grandees” makes mention of him and his mother, Mrs. Lafayette Lewis Goldstone, who was married to Bob Newman’s uncle on his mother’s side.



The Jewish population here in the United States in the mid-19th century was concentrated mainly in New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Connecticut and Georgia. Massachusetts, our state, had very few Jews despite the fact that it was one of the oldest settlements in the Americas. The average individual thinks of our Commonwealth as being quite liberal, but this was not so for the most part of its history. This was hostile territory not only for Jews but for Catholics, Baptists, Quakers and all other non-Puritan religious groups. The Puritans – despite their own history of being a persecuted movement back in England – were just as intolerant of other religious groups as their English religious enemies had been to them. In the 17th century it was a crime to be a Quaker in New England. A Quaker who refused to leave Massachusetts could be whipped in public for a first refusal, have an ear cut off for a second, and be executed for a third.



There is the case of Mary Dyer of Boston, who along with some other people started a Bible class in her home, offering up different interpretations from those held by the established Congregational Church. Her minister, finding out about the sessions, accused her of heresy. Then when she opted to become a Quaker, she was banished from Boston. But she kept coming back because she believed in the truth of her beliefs. On October 27, 1659, she and two of her Quaker friends were tried and convicted of defying the banishment order and were sentenced to death by hanging. She was present at the snapping of her friends’ necks but she was given a last-minute reprieve. A year later she defied the banishment order again and was brought before the General Court with John Endicott, the governor, presiding. Found guilty this second time, there was no reprieve and she was executed on June 1, 1660 by the Holy Commonwealth of Masschusetts – the very government established by the Puritans who had fled England to avoid religious persecution. It is recorded that drum beaters lined the execution route, prepared to drown out her words if she attempted to protest her innocence to the crowd that watched her procession to the gallows.



With such intolerant beginnings, it is not so difficult to understand why, even after the establishment of the United States, Jewish settlement in New England was somewhat late in development. Individual Jews had come, of course, to the Bay State from time to time and had settled here, but not in numbers sufficient to create a viable and permanent Jewish community. Jews were not allowed, for example, a basic necessity – burial rights in the Commonwealth. At death, bodies had to be sent to Newport, R. I., the closest Jewish cemetery. Illustrative of these Jewish difficulties was the case of Aaron Lopez. He had come to the Bay Colony many years before the Revolution. During the war he had encouraged a number of co-religionists to settle in Leicester. A man of considerable substance and (according to Ezar Styles, president of Yale College) one of the most successful merchants in all the Americas. Nevertheless, he was refused naturalization in 1762 by the Supreme Court of Massachusetts.



It is estimated that several hundred Jews must have come to the Bay Colony over the decades, but as noted before, because of Puritan prejudice and intolerance, either left or became converts, as in the case of Judah Monis in 1722, who became an instructor of Hebrew at Harvard College.



The 1900 edition of the Jewish Encyclopedia attributes the fact that so many Protestant families in the Boston area have distinctly Jewish names to the “convert or get out” stance of the Puritan milieu. One of the most famous and egregious examples of this prejudice is that of Moses Michael Hays, who came to Boston from Newport, bringing with him his two nephews, Abraham and Judah Touro. Hays was a successful insurance underwriter and despite civic disabilities (not being allowed naturalization rights) served, nevertheless, as Grand Master of the Masonic Grand Lodge of Massachusetts for four years. His nephew, Abraham Touro, at his death left $10,000 to the Massachusetts General Hospital and $5,000 each to the Asylum for Indigent Boys, the Massachusetts Humane Society and the Boston Female Society. His other nephew, Judah, fed up with Bostonian prejudice, left the Commonwealth for New Orleans, but later helped finance the Bunker Hill Monument.



The first Jewish congregation in Massachusetts was established only in 1842 in Boston. The members met in what (interestingly enough for Berkshirites) had been the home of the Oliver Wendell Holmes family. So, if our local Jewish community did not develop until the middle 1850s, we have some understanding of why this was so: Massachusetts was, because of its Puritan beginnings, not a friendly venue for Jewish settlement in the 19th century.



Massachusetts was not the only intolerant colony before the Revolution. So, too, were most of the other colonies. Baptists were persecuted throughout the Americas, most intensely in northern Virginia, where later James Madison, George Washington and Thomas Jefferson had their origins. Officials of the Anglican Church unleashed a wave of persecution against area Baptists, throwing them in jail for preaching their own gospel. This trampling on “liberty and conscience” had a profound impact on Madison, who later became the nation’s most zealous champion of religious freedom.



But long before Madison and Jefferson’s time, there was one champion of religious tolerance who pioneered the concept of religious liberty, even originating the idea of a “wall of separation between Church and State,” a phrasing which subsequently was attributed to Thomas Jefferson. That individual was Roger Williams, who founded the colony of Rhode Island. Williams was born in 1603 in England. Though born into the Church of England, he was a precocious youngster, becoming a Puritan at the age of 11 to his father’s upset. Born into a family of substance, he was educated at Charterhouse and also at Pembroke College at Cambridge. He had an unusual gift for languages, mastering Latin, Greek, Dutch and French. He gave John Milton lessons in Dutch in exchange for Milton teaching him Hebrew. On graduation, Williams took orders in the Church of England and accepted a chaplaincy at Otes in Essex. But a year later an event took place which so disturbed Williams that he made the decision to leave England for what he believed was a more sane and tolerant living venue, Massachusetts. The cause for that decision: a leading Puritan reformer in 1630 was placed in pillory in London. One of his ears was cut off and a side of his nose was split open. And for good measure, his face was then branded with the letters SS, short for “sower of sedition.” And, in addition, he was sentenced to life imprisonment. Williams had already had his fill of the Church of England’s intolerant orthodoxy, and as a consequence of this atrociously inhumane event, he took leave of England.



At first Williams was warmly received by Massachusetts Bay authorities, but Boston soon found his views about individual conscience too radical, and he took a congregation to Salem. By 1635-36 Boston found his preaching and teaching too radical for its liking and authorities there ordered his arrest. Tipped off in advance, Williams fled south to what is now Rhode Island, founding a settlement in Providence. In 1643, while sailing back to England to secure a charter for his new colony, he wrote a book entitled The Bloudy Tenent of Persecution. It was his philosophical defense of what he had decreed for his new Rhode Island colony where he had provided safe haven for people who, because of their religious ideas and practices, were not tolerated elsewhere. Baptists, Quakers and other dissidents joined his Puritan dissenters. In 1658, four years after the St. Charles had sailed into New Amsterdam with its Jewish refugees from Brazil, 15 Portuguese Jewish families arrived in Newport. And they, amazingly, enjoyed the same religious liberty granted to others – an astonishing matter when you realized that Jews in England were given similar civil liberties only some 200 years later, well past the middle of the 19th century. (In 1858, to be exact.) In one of his letters – Williams was a prodigious writer of books, letters and pamphlets – he uses the famous phrasing “wall of separation” between religious and political institutions, which more than a century later became part of Thomas Jefferson’s thinking. Without question, then, Roger Williams must be acknowledged as the first great contributor to the idea of religious liberty in the new American world.



There were others, too, such as Thomas Paine and George Washington who made their contributions to the cause of religious freedom in the New World. But if we were to choose the most important figures, they would be Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, the third and fourth presidents of the U. S.



Some hold Thomas Jefferson, our third president, who elevated reason above all other virtues, to be a secularist, but that is not so. Jefferson held that reason was so important because it would actually lead one to believe in a Supreme Being. Jefferson wrote that “the mind was the only miracle that heaven gave us.” Jefferson was convinced that Virginia needed religious reform – a break with the established Anglican Church of this largest, at the time, of all the American colonies. Interestingly enough, his chief opponent was Patrick Henry, who favored state support for the teachers of the Christian religion. Jefferson’s bill would separate the Church from the State, take the clergy off the public payroll and exempt the people of Virginia from paying taxes to support the Anglican Church. In 1786 the Virginia Assembly passed the Statute of Religious Freedom and James Madison, Jefferson’s closest friend, wrote him that “thus was extinguished forever the ambitious hope of making laws for the human mind.” Jefferson, incidentally, considered this achievement one of the three most major in his life’s work. He included it in his epitaph, which he wrote himself, for his tombstone: “Here was buried Thomas Jefferson, author of the Declaration of American Independence, of the Statute of Virginia for Religious Freedom, and Father of the University of Virginia.”



And James Madison, our fourth president, Jefferson’s successor, continued the effort to create this wall of separation between Church and State. Madison had witnessed personally the Anglican Church’s persecution in his local area against Baptists, throwing them into jail simply for preaching their own gospel. This subjugation of “liberty of conscience” had a profound effect on Madison, who, possibly even more than Jefferson, became in time the most zealous champion of religious freedom. Yet, it should be recognized that his struggle to erect a “wall of separation” was to promote, not to discourage, religion. His crusade for religious liberty for all promoted religion by leaving it stand on its own, resulting consequently in religious freedom for all Americans. Interestingly enough, it was the evangelical Christians of Madison’s and Jefferson’s time that were “foot soldiers in the drive for religious liberty….They aimed to stop the persecutions of the established church which were preventing them [the evangelicals] from praying the way they wanted.” (The words of Stephen Waldman in his recent  book Founding faith: Providence, politics and the birth of religious freedoms in America. [Random House, 2008]) Present day evangelicals might take note. And Madison, called the “Father of the Constitution,” in 1791 drafted the first ten amendments to the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, the first of which, in 45 words, guaranteed freedom of religion for all, guaranteeing that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”



At first several states in the new national federation did not take seriously this first amendment of the Bill of Rights, concerning free practice of religion. In several New England states, Protestant Christianity was established by state laws, and even the right to vote was restricted on religious grounds. But in time, the Federal Constitution came to prevail and freedom or religion and freedom from religion came to be accepted as a legal right for all.



And yet, while giving lip service to this right, there are still, as we can note, those who seem to have difficulty understanding this. There is currently a situation at the Air Force Academy where violations of the First Amendment clause seem to exist either out of ignorance of the Constitution or deliberately so, on the part of the military complex whose oath is to “uphold and defend the Constitution.” There is seemingly, on the part of certain members of the Supreme Court, a tendency to take rather questionable positions on the impregnability of the “wall of separation.” The recent Berkshire Eagle item about a bill being submitted to our state legislature on the use of “Year of our Lord” wording on state documents is only a minor example of such Constitutional infractions.



And yet, we must all understand that a conviction that there must be a separation between Church and State is not indicative of being a secularist or being anti-religious. Roger Williams, Thomas Jefferson and James Madison and those who supported them among the founding fathers of our nation would have made no such distinctions. These were high-minded, truly religious personalities who believed that religious faith and practice was more favorably positioned in a social setting where the state was fundamentally neutral and liberty of conscience was legally guaranteed.



There are those who may take issue with some of what I have said here, but let me conclude by noting that some 50 years ago the composer Millard Lampell and lyricist Earl Robinson collaborated on a ballad, most popular at the time, called “The Lonesome Train.” Some of you may still remember the lines: “Freedom’s a thing that has no ending/ It needs to be cared for, it needs defending.” And when freedom of religion, of speech, of peaceable assembly, or the right to petition the ruling authority for the redress of grievances is questioned or threatened, as not infrequently has been the case over the years, these lyrics of Lampell and Robinson’s “The Lonesome Train” should ever be most seriously kept in mind: “Freedom’s a thing that has no ending/ It needs to be cared for, it needs defending.”
Read More

Sunday, November 1, 2009

The Club's historic membership roster, part IV: Members joining 1885-1900



This is the fourth post in a series on the historic membership roster of the Club. These posts may be updated as additional biographical information on the members is uncovered. Research by Martin C. Langeveld, incorporating research by Harold L. Hutchins for a paper given to the Club in 1993. The photo at left is of William Stanley, Jr., who joined in 1892.



1885



Rev. Isaac Chipman Smart — 1859-1931; born in Shoreham, Vt.; graduated from Amherst College in 1881; editor of the Pittsfield Evening Journal, 1881-1882; graduated from Union Theological Seminary in 1885, ordained 1885 and became pastor of South Congregational Church, Pittsfield and served until 1906; became pastor of College Street Congregational Church, Burlington, Vt. in 1906; died in Burlington.



1886



Harlan Hoge Ballard — 1853-1934; born in Athens, Ohio; graduated from Williams College in 1874 and became principal of the Lenox, Mass. High School; appointed principal of the Lenox Academy in 1880, where he founded the Agassiz Association, a national organization for the study of natural object that eventually had more than 1,000 chapters worldwide; became librarian at the Berkshire Athenaeum; authored books of poetry, novels and translations from Latin. One of his books, The Tiler's Jewel, a Masonic novel, is still in print. His mother, Julia Perkins Pratt Ballard (1824-1894) was a noted nature writer and author of popular science books for children.



Charles Edmund Hibbard — 1844-1922; born in Farmington Falls, Maine; graduated from Amherst College in 1867; studied law in Woodstock, Vt.; admitted to the bar in Boston in 1869; practiced in Tama, Iowa from 1869 to 1873 and in Boston from 1873 to 1881; opened a law practice in Lee in 1881 (lived earlier in Iowa City, Iowa); moved his practice to Pittsfield in 1887; first mayor of Pittsfield (elected 1891); served as district attorney for six years; served as delegate to the Massachusetts Constitutional Convention of 1917-1918; died in Pittsfield.



Henry Colt, Jr. — born in Pittsfield in 1856; graduated from Williams College in 1878 and from Harvard Medical School in 1881; physician, associated medical director of the Berkshire Life Insurance Company, medical examiner for Berkshire County, chairman of the medical and surgical board of the House of Mercy Hospital, trustee of the Berkshire Athenaeum, director of the Pittsfield National Bank and the Berkshire Loan and Trust Company; died in Pittsfield in 1931 (193 South Street).



Marcus H. Rogers — born in Mill River (village in New Marlborough) about 1835 (where he published a paper called the Rising Sun as a teenager; publisher and editor of the Berkshire Courier 1865-1879 and later the Berkshire County Eagle 1887-1889; spent more than 60 years in newspaper publishing; retired in Florida; died 1925 at the age of 90.



Rev. Orville Coats — pastor of the First Baptist Church; served later in Somerville and Lowell, Mass.



1887



Rev. William Wallace Fenn — 1862-1932; graduated from Harvard College in 1884 and Harvard Divinity School in 1887; served as pastor in Pittsfield at the Unity Church, later organized as the Unitarian Universalist Church of Pittsfield 1887-1890; then served for 11 years as pastor of the First Unitarian Society of Chicago; became professor of theology at Harvard Divinity School in 1901; served as Dean of the School from 1906 to 1922; author of a number of books of theology; died and was buried in Weston, Vt.



John B. Welsh —teacher at Pittsfield High School.



1889



Joseph Edward Peirson — born in Pittsfield 1861; principal and owner of the Preparatory School for Boys



Rollin Hillyer Cooke — 1843-1904; born in Winsted, Conn.; came to Pittsfield to form the banking firm  Burns & Cooke (a brief association with James M. Burns); he then became a Berkshire historian who transcribed more than 50 volumes of primary source material now at the New England Historic Genealogical Society; he published genealogical works on the Bradford and Phelps families and served as editor of Historic Homes and Institutions and Genealogical and Personal Memoirs of Berkshire County, Massachusetts (1906); died in Pittsfield in 1904 as a result of burns from an oil lamp that fell to the floor and exploded.



1892



William Stanley, Jr. — 1858-1916; born in Brooklyn, N. Y.; attended Yale College with the intent to go into law, but abandoned schooling in 1879 and headed for New York; worked in various electrical enterprises and then was hired by George Westinghouse to assist in the development of the transformer; moved to Great Barrington, Mass. in 1885 on account of this health, and there developed the first complete system of high voltage alternating current transmission, including generators, transformers and high-voltage transmission lines; with Westinghouse installed the first commercial multiple-voltage alternating current system in Great Barrington in 1886; founder of the Stanley Electric Manufacturing Company in Pittsfield (1890); the business was sold to the General Electric Company in 1903. Stanley was granted 193 patents during his lifetime.



J. E. C. Sawyer — pastor of the Methodist Episcopal Church; also served at Pittsford, Vt. and Troy, N.Y.; and as editor of the Northern Christian Advocate.



1893



Walter F. Hawkins — born in Pittsfield 1863; attorney; graduated from Williams College in 1884; mayor of Pittsfield 1896-1897; vice president of Pittsfield National Bank; vice president and general counsel to Berkshire Life Insurance Company (1913).



1894



William Vail Wilson Davis —1851-1910; born in Wilson, N.Y.; graduated from Amherst College in 1873; immediately traveled to Constantinople on a teaching assignment at Robert College; returned to Amherst to teach and married Rebecca Frances Stearns, the daughter of Dr. W. A. Stearns, the college president; received theological training at Andover Theological Seminary; became pastor of the Franklin Street Congregational Church in Manchester, N.H. in 1877; moved on to the Euclid Avenue Presbyterian Church in Cleveland, Ohio in 1882; became pastor of the Union Congregational Church in Worcester, Mass. in 1887; became pastor of the First Church of Christ in Pittsfield in 1894 and served for 17 years. He was killed at Bash Bish Falls when he fell into the ravine while trying to hitch up his team of horses during an outing there. During his pastorate in Pittsfield, the church's parish house was expanded to its current configuration, and the Pilgrim Memorial Church was organized as an outgrowth of one of First Church's adult education programs. One of the stained-glass windows at First Church is in memory of Davis. Davis was an early advocate of cleaning up rivers such as Pittsfield's Housatonic, as well as of better treatment of Native Americans and nurturing of Native American culture.



Charles A. Bryam — principal of Pittsfield High School; succeeded Eugene Bouton (who joined the Club in 1899) as superintendent of schools in 1904 when Bouton moved on to Glen Ridge, N.J.



1896



Rev. James Grant — pastor of the Morningside Baptist Church



Lawrence C. Swift — 1852-1905; physician and surgeon; born in Geneva, N. Y.; graduated in 1878 from the College of Physicians and Surgeons in New York; moved to Pittsfield in 1887; served as assistant medical examiner for Central Berkshire; died in Pittsfield of meningitis. He was one of the physicians who responded to the March 1904 "double ripper" sled accident in Lenox that inspired Edith Wharton to write her novel Ethan Frome. Swift's grandfather, Gen. Joseph Gardner Swift, was the first graduate of West Point Military Academy and later served as its superintendent.



John F. Noxon — 1856-1936; born in Great Barrington, Mass.; studied law in the office of Justin Dewey in Great Barrington; was admitted to the bar in 1881; Pittsfield city solicitor; partner with John Crawford Crosby in the firm Crosby & Noxon from 1894 to 1905; died in Pittsfield, lived at 262 South St.  (His son, John F. Noxon Jr., also an attorney, was handed a death sentence (later commuted to life imprisonment and ultimately to six years) for electrocuting his infant son, who had Downs Syndrome, in 1914.)d



1899



Eugene Bouton — 1850-1951; born in Jefferson, N.Y.; graduated from Yale College in 1875 and went on to earn a master's degree from Yale in 1881 and a Ph.D. from Syracuse University in 1884; was a teacher in Norwich, Sherbourne an Albany, N. Y., the first principal of the New Paltz (N.Y.) State Normal School, and then superintendent of schools in Bridgeport, Conn., Pittsfield (through 1904) and Glen Ridge, N.J.; died in Bloomfield, N.J. at the age of 100. He was an amateur historian and genealogist, and in 1947 at the age of 96 he was designated the oldest living graduate of Yale.



William Augustus Whittlesey — 1849-1906; born in Danbury, Conn.; graduated from Marietta College, Ohio, in 1879; joined a wholesale woolen business with his brother in Detroit; came to Lebanon, N.Y. in 1872 to run the "literary department" of the Henry A. Tilden Company; married the owner's daughter, Caroline Benton Tilden, in 1874; in 1877 returned to Detroit and then to Florence, Wisconsin, where he was active in the lumber business; came to Pittsfield in 1887 to head the Pittsfield Illuminating Company, which merged in 1889 with the Pittsfield Electric Light Company to become the Pittsfield Electric Company, with Whittlesey as treasurer and general manager; was elected to two terms in the Massachusetts Senate; was a deacon of the First Church for twelve years and president of the YMCA for seven years; helped launch the Stanley Electric Manufacturing Co. (with William Stanley, Jr., who joined the Club in 1892); resigned in 1896; died in Pittsfield. In 1906 he purchased the Pittsfield house earlier occupied by Club member Thaddeus Clapp, but he died the same year. He also maintained a residence in Washington, D.C.



1900



Rev. Thomas White Nickerson, Jr. — 1858-1938; born in Boston; graduated from Harvard University in 1880 and from the General Theological Seminary of the Protestant Episcopal Church in New York in 1884; ordained in the Episcopal priesthood in 1885; served as assistant at Calvary Church, New York from 1884 to 1887; rector of St. Paul's Church in Paterson, N. J. from 1887 to 1895; rector of the Church of the Messiah, Boston from 1895 to 1898; rector of St. Stephen's Episcopal Church beginning in 1900; died in Edinburgh, Scotland.



Dr. Frederic A. C. Perrine — born in Freehold, N.J.; graduated from Princeton University in 1883 and earned a Doctor of Science degree there in 1885; the first professor of electrical engineering at Stanford University, serving from 1893 to 1900; came to Pittsfield to serve as president of the Stanley Electric Manufacturing Company, which was sold to General Electric in 1903, whereupon he became a consulting engineer in New Jersey; died of Bright's Disease in Plainfield, N.J. in 1908 at the age of 46.
Read More