USA > Pennsylvania > Lehigh County > Bethlehem > A history of Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, 1741-1892, with some account of its founders and their early activity in America > Part 30
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37 | Part 38 | Part 39 | Part 40 | Part 41 | Part 42 | Part 43 | Part 44 | Part 45 | Part 46 | Part 47 | Part 48 | Part 49 | Part 50 | Part 51 | Part 52 | Part 53 | Part 54 | Part 55 | Part 56 | Part 57 | Part 58 | Part 59 | Part 60 | Part 61 | Part 62 | Part 63 | Part 64 | Part 65 | Part 66 | Part 67 | Part 68 | Part 69 | Part 70 | Part 71 | Part 72 | Part 73 | Part 74 | Part 75 | Part 76 | Part 77 | Part 78 | Part 79 | Part 80 | Part 81 | Part 82 | Part 83 | Part 84 | Part 85 | Part 86
20 As a sample of this elaborate and intricate organization, the following array of official bodies, some executive, others merely deliberative, that existed in 1752 may be mentioned : Juenger Collegium (the highest central authority), Richter Collegium (elucidated above),
264
A HISTORY OF BETHLEHEM, PENNSYLVANIA.
It was a happy turn in season when the exotic administration and whimsical ideas that prevailed at Bethlehem from 1749 to 1751 were succeeded by the influence of men and measures less distinct from their surroundings; for developments were taking place which left Bethlehem no longer an almost isolated settlement, having no other connection with outside movements and public affairs than that which lay in its general relations to the government of the Province and to the distant Court of Bucks County at Newtown. The foundations of a neighboring town had been laid "at the point" in the Forks of the Delaware, where the plans of the Proprietors for opening up new bodies of land yet lying unoccupied in the upper part of the extensive territory included in Bucks County ; the restive desire of the Scotch- Irish people in the Forks to cut loose from the incompatible Quaker element dominant, with its German support, in the old county, and to have a seat of justice nearer home ; and the political calculations of various parties, with the growing German population of the region to be catered to or manoeuvred against as the case might be, would all have a center at which they might be promoted. The importance
Oeconomische Conferenz (conferring on general management), Diaconat's Conferenz (more strictly financial), Kinder Conferenz (department of children and schools), Chor Conferenzen (on special affairs of the several choir divisions and houses), Diener Conferenz (on various branches of service and attendance - sacristan's corps, culinary department, attention to visitors, strangers, etc.), Kranken-Waerter Conferenz (conferences of nurses, male and female), Handwerker Conferenz (heads of handicrafts), Ackerbau Conferenz (relating to the agricultural department), Helfer Conferenz (advisory to central management giving some opportunity for the representative feature in control), Gemein Rath (inore fully representative in deliberation-vox populi ), Polizei Tag (general town-meeting to statedly hear exposition of principles and regulations that concerned all, to disseminate general information on public affairs, to preserve order and correct irregularities and periodically tone up the common morale). The name Juenger Collegium applied to the central authority, being a unique term, requires some elucidation. Juenger, the well-known equivalent of Disciple in the German Bible, gave Zinzendorf one of his favorite conceptions of religious life and activity expressed by Juengerschaft (discipleship). It came into use in connection with the general directing body in Europe, which received the name Juenger Haus, literally Disciple House (corps or conference of Disciples directing the whole). The word was then attached also to the quarters occupied by this body. This fanciful term was made to imply unwarrantable spiritual prerogatives and exaggerated dignities during the abnormal period that has been described; but these were set aside, even though the name remained for a while, after the close of John Nitschmann's administration at Bethlehem. Spangenberg did not permit
himself to be called Juenger, although at the head. Later, after all this official terminology ceased, this name was exclusively applied - unofficially and harmlessly -to Zinzendorf, merely in the sense of one who lived in very close spiritual communion with his Saviour, cherishing the disposition of a John, the beloved disciple. After his death he was spoken of in reverent affection as " der selige Juenger,"-the sainted disciple.
265
1749-1755.
of the Moravian settlements was duly considered in all of these designs, from various standpoints, by men of widely different atti- tude towards them. William Parsons, the former Surveyor General of Pennsylvania, who took the leading part in founding the new town, being spoken of now as "the Father of Easton;" who repre- sented the Proprietary interests and filled various important offices at this new center during the first years, was disposed to be anti- German in general, as well as anti-Moravian in particular.21 This was very acceptable to those men of the region who had looked askance at Bethlehem from the first and now, in forming their plans, proposed to have the importance of the Moravians consist mainly in their usefulness as tax-payers. It was desirable, therefore, that
21 Mr. Parsons, with all his abilities and his energetic services in the early years of Easton which deserved better than that even his grave should be left neglected in after years, and for a time entirely lost sight of, was a man of perverse disposition, in some respects, that marred his relations to people in many directions without real occasion. Apart from the anti-German position which he thought the Proprietary interests he represented demanded of him, intensified by his irritation at being out-voted several times in the new county, his grudge against that nationality, and his prejudice against the Moravian settlements in the Forks -a prejudice which he tried to impart to Proprietor Penn - had, back of all this, a personal reason, which is not commonly known. His wife was a German woman, Johanna Christiana Zeidig, a niece of the brothers John Henry and Christian Ludwig Sprogel, well known to students of Pennsylvania history. Her almost morbidly emotional and pensive piety, with which he had neither sympathy nor patience, and which he tried to dispel by alternate ridicule and harshness, led to estrangement between them. When she joined the Moravian Church in Philadelphia, he deserted her and took with him to Lancaster County and finally to Easton, his two youngest daughters, Johanna Grace, later married to Nicholas Garrison, Jr., son of Captain Garrison, and Juliana Sarah, who became the second wife of Timothy Horsfield, Jr., son of Justice Horsfield, of Bethlehem. Both of them, as well as an older daughter, Ann Mary, familiarly known as Molly Parsons, who was married to a Moravian minister, Jacob Rogers, and another daughter, Susan, who died single in Philadelphia, were all members of the Moravian Church. His son Robert, whom he threatened to disinherit for the same reason, and a married daughter, Hanna Warral, both died young in Philadel- phia, receiving the ministrations of the Church. A bitterness possessed him in consequence of all this that became almost a mania. It is not difficult, therefore, to understand why the Moravian settlements were represented by him in an unfavorable light in official correspon- dence. He never resumed relations to his wife, who continued to live in Philadelphia until after his death, when she removed to Bethlehem, where she died. When, after he had mellowed greatly in his feelings, long recovered from his prejudice against the Moravians, come to cordial terms with them and embraced evangelical faith, his end drew near, he desired to have all his family gathered around him, but in that pathetic hour it was too late for his wife to come from Philadelphia. He died at Easton, December 17, 1757. A simple service was conducted in accordance with his request, by his son-in-law, the Rev. Jacob Rogers, at the funeral, December 19, which was attended by a number of Bethlehem people. Timothy Horsfield, Esq., was executor of his estate.
266
A HISTORY OF BETHLEHEM, PENNSYLVANIA.
well-informed men of understanding and tact as well as of integrity, patience and peaceable disposition ; men of ability and force, more- over, as well as of piety and enthusiasm, should be in control at Bethlehem.
The first reference to the new town of Easton appears in the Bethlehem records, July 27, 1751 ; a little more than a year after the first survey was made there by Parsons and Nicholas Scull, his suc- cessor in the office of Surveyor General. On that date it is stated that Scull and Dr. Thomas Graeme, Proprietary Commissioner, came to Bethlehem "on their way to the Delaware to inspect the spot and neighborhood where the new town in Bucks County is to be built, to make a draft of the place, to be submitted to Proprietor Penn for his information and consideration." The next morning they pro- ceeded on their way to the spot, accompanied, at their request, by John Okely of Bethlehem. Parsons was not with them on this occa- sion. The first allusion to the erection of the new county occurs on March 11, 1752, when it is stated that Jasper Payne and John Brown- field, of Bethlehem, while visiting their old neighbor Solomon Jen- nings, were told by him that this new county "to which Bethlehem would belong" was now to be formed and that the proposed Trustees (to purchase land and erect buildings for a county-seat at Easton) were Thomas Armstrong, Thomas Craig, John Jones, James Martin and Hugh Wilson.22 The first Court of the new county was held at Easton, June 16, (old style) 1752, and is referred to in the Bethlehem diary on the corresponding new style date, June 27. Timothy Horsfield, of Bethlehem, having, the previous day, received his com- mission as a Justice of the Peace, by the hand of William Parsons, participated in that first session. The other justices were Thomas Craig, William Craig, James Martin and Hugh Wilson.
The opening of the new county-seat led to the first recorded visit to Bethlehem by a Governor of Pennsylvania. On July 13, 1752, Governor Hamilton and his staff passed through to Easton, one of
22 At this time-new-style date-the final discussions were being concluded in the Assem- bly. The petition, after several years of agitation, was formally presented, May 11, 1751, by William Craig. The act was passed, March 6, and signed by the Governor March II, O. S., 1752. The territory included in the present Northampton, Lehigh, Carbon, Monroe, Pike, and, in part, Wayne and Susquehanna Counties and beyond to the then uncertain limits of the Province was the portion of Bucks County, thus originally cut off into Northampton County. The new county was called Northampton and the new town Easton, by direction of Proprietor Thomas Penn, after Northampton, England, the seat of his father- in-law Lord Pomfret, in that shire.
Garrison.
TIMOTHY HORSFIELD (18T)
NICHOLAS GARRISON JOSEPH OERTER
JOHN VALENTINE HAIDT
BERNHARD ADAM GRUBE
267
1749-1755.
the company intimating that his excellency would be glad to make a stop at Bethlehem if a regular invitation were given. Justice Horsfield and James Burnside, candidate for the Assembly, hastened to Easton to fulfill the formalities of the case, and word was quickly sent to Bishop Spangenberg, who was at Nazareth. The middle of the afternoon, the distinguished visitors were again in Bethlehem. The Governor alighted at Horsfield's; was then escorted about the place ; through the buildings ; to the terrace on the roof of the Breth- ren's House, where he enjoyed a view of the place and its surround- ings; into the new church, where the best music Bethlehem could produce was discoursed on the organ and on wind and stringed instruments ; and finally into the old chapel of the Community House, where the best that the larder and cellar afforded was served; the luncheon being accompanied by the dulcet tones of an improvised orchestra-harp, violins and other instruments. While this was in progress, Spangenberg returned from Nazareth to do the closing honors. The Governor was greatly pleased with this reception, with the thrift and industry manifest on every side and the beautiful appearance of the place. He said that he had not only found all the favorable descriptions of Bethlehem true, but found more that was pleasing than he expected. After a stay of two hours, the party again mounted their horses and rode away.
An incident of that first county court-day, bearing upon relations between Bethlehem and Easton, deserves mention in this connection, together with its outcome. Two of the Bethlehem officials, Nathanael Seidel and Andrew Anthony Lawatsch-a new man who had arrived from Europe in May-went to Easton on that day to take up two town lots with a view to securing, betimes, a site for a build- ing and a possible official establishment at the county-seat. It is stated that they were the first to secure the lots they selected, there being a lively scramble. These lots were on Ferry Street. On one of them a building was erected in 1761, which was to be occupied by an organization of single men, and to serve as a preaching-place. On this account it was spoken of later as a Brethren's House.23 It
23 The reasons for abandoning that foot-hold at the county seat are not clear. Captain F. Ellis - History of Northampton County, 1877 - erroneously notes this house as built " probably at least as early as 1745," and ascribes the withdrawal of the Moravians to their " strong desire to avoid contact with other communities and peoples," when it was con- cluded to establish the county seat where they had built that house. Deeds for the lot were executed in 1757, and the lines re-established, July 23. 1760. The foundation was staked off, October 8, following. The building was commenced in the spring of 1761, under the
268
A HISTORY OF BETHLEHEM, PENNSYLVANIA.
was sold by the Bethlehem authorities in 1763. They owned the other Easton lot, a "water lot," until 1793. The first election held in the new county, October 1, 1752, which tested the relative strength of the several parties which had formerly competed in Bucks County, resulted in the election of James Burnside as first assembly- man; he being a Moravian, living near Bethlehem and representing the elements which Mr. Parsons, the opposition-candidate, spoke of as the Quaker party drawing the Germans and at variance with the proprietary interests he assumed to stand for. According to published statistics, Bethlehem Township, at that time, embraced about 600 of the new county's population of about 5900. The Moravian population at the close of 1752 was 578.
During the time when these developments were taking shape, some movements of importance affecting the material interests centering at Bethlehem were quietly in progress, in anticipation of new conditions which would make it desirable to have the properties
oversight of Gottlieb Pezold, according to plans by Andrew Hoeger, the Bethlehem architect; timber and boards having been floated down the Lehigh. No Moravian organization was formed there. At the solicitation of Jost Vollert, formerly living south of the Lehigh at Bethlehem, and at this time in Easton-he helped to work at the house-Moravian preach- ing was frequently held from October 30, 1759, on through 1760, in the undenominational log school- and meeting-house, built by Mr. Parsons in 1755 on what was then Pomphret Street, with aid from the "German Society"; and after the new stone house was completed, it was continued there occasionally until the property was sold, in 1763, to John David Boehringer, formerly of Bethlehem, who appears to have established the first tannery at Easton. Boehringer bought it for the Lutheran congregation, the price being £400-so says Matthew Henry, History of the Lehigh Valley, who states that the second floor was used as a place of worship, and the lower rooms as a parsonage. Mr. Henry (1860) says the house was at the time of writing "part of the Washington Hotel." Daniel Rupp, in his History of Northampton County, says "it is now (1845) a part of Mr. John Bachman's hotel." Col. Ellis says (1877), "it stood on the site, at present occupied by the new brick and iron block on the west side of Third Street and cornering on the alley next below Ferry Street." The Rev. W. C. Reichel-Crown Inn, (1872)-quotes (p. 41) description of its site as "on a lot bounded east by Pomphret Street, south by lot No. 120, west by a twenty-foot alley, and north by Ferry Street." Frederick Schaus, referred to by Mr. Reichel as doing the mason work-he learned his trade in Bethlehem, in part-was the son of John Adam Schaus, associated with the first ferry and grist-mill at Bethlehem, and with the first tavern south of the Lehigh, who later for a while lived in the neighborhood of Hoeth's farm beyond the Blue mountains, which at one time bore the name Friedensthal; who then found his way to the new county seat, where the family name again became associated with the entertainment of travelers, Frederick keeping tavern for a season. So much in connection with the first Moravian property, members and ex-members at Easton, for the local anti- quary of the future.
269
1749-1755.
that had been acquired, secured in a satisfactory manner. Purchases had originally been made by individuals acting for the Brethren, and were held by such individuals in their own name; there being no legal corporation. After April, 1746, the 500 acres on which Beth- lehem was built, the large island in the river and some other lands had been held by three Joint Tenants, Spangenberg, Antes and David Nitschmann, Sr., to whom they had been conveyed through John Okely, Notary and Conveyancer; he having acquired them through deed (1745) from Antes the original purchaser, and given a declaration of trust. Upon consultation, when Antes removed from Bethlehem, it was concluded, for various important reasons, to change this and concentrate these holdings in the hands of one man as individual Proprietor. Father Nitschmann, one of the Joint Tenants, was selected and, the first week in October, 1750, he went to Philadelphia and took out naturalization papers, to qualify him to be a free-holder. November 21, O. S., 1751, Spangenberg and Antes, the other two Tenants, conveyed their nominal shares to him. Thus a system was introduced, in the holding of title to the lands of the Church, that was maintained for more than a hundred years. With this succession of Proprietors were eventually associ- ated Administrators to whom the Proprietors gave the necessary authority to transact business in connection with the real estate. Sometimes, as in the case of the last of the succession, the Proprietor and Administrator were the same. In connection with the beginning of the process, it may be added that in 1757, David Nitschmann executed a will and constituted Bishops Spangenberg and Boehler Executors to sell the properties for his heirs legally inheriting it. After Father Nitschmann's death, in 1758, they made such sale to Nathanael Seidel, who became the next Proprietor, assuming all debts in lieu of purchase money. Thus, at the period now treated of, all the real estate acquired and controlled by the authorities at Beth- lehem, in addition to the Barony of Nazareth, the purchase of which took place in a different manner at the start, was held by the first such Proprietor. The debts figuring in the transaction with Seidel were the incumbrances resting upon the estate in consequence of purchases on credit with security. In this a connection existed with the financial management in Europe, which now brought a new strain upon affairs of a very different kind from that described in the fore- going pages. That central financial management of the whole, called the General Diaconate, endeavoring to carry all the heavy burdens
270
A HISTORY OF BETHLEHEM, PENNSYLVANIA.
of the work in all countries with inadequate resources-the income from Zinzendorf's estates, loans by mortgage on some of them, occasional gifts by wealthy friends supplemented by the revenue derived from the several missionary societies organized-had become deeply involved and seriously embarrassed. The immense losses suffered through the disastrous end of the Herrnhaag settlement, lavish and reckless expenditures by those in charge during the period of folly just past, precarious shifts to meet pressing obligations and tide over emergencies, and over-confident manufacturing and com- mercial ventures in England, in the hope of largely increasing revenue -much of this concealed from Zinzendorf, who proceeded without comprehending the real condition of things-brought a crisis in the early part of 1753, when a Jewish banker, with whom the General Diaconate had large monetary transactions, suspended payment and a panic ensued among their creditors. In this crisis, which fully opened Zinzendorf's eyes to the condition of things and came near bringing financial ruin, he unhesitatingly stepped into the breach personally with all his property and credit. Some who could be of similar service stood by him.
In spite of the advantage taken of this crisis by hostile parties who proposed to now ruin everything, the Brethren were enabled to adjust matters and prevent a complete crash. The claims of some obdurate creditors-among them a woman who held a lien against the Barony of Nazareth and was inspired to press relentlessly, by the Rev. George Whitefield, who just at this time excitedly joined the pasquil-mongers and printed his most vigorous attack upon Zinzendorf and the Brethren-were purchased by other creditors who agreed to make terms and give the financial managers time to settle. Then the whole system of things was re-organized and put into competent hands. The debts of all kinds that finally accumulated, amounted in the aggregate to far beyond a million of dollars. Half a century was required to completely extinguish this great sum.
In March, 1753-just at the time when the crisis came-Bishop Spangenberg prepared for another journey back to Europe to help plan measures to meet the critical situation, of which he was fully aware, and in anticipation of which, the steps before described to get the real estate at Bethlehem into satis- factory order were taken. He also wished to report and consult on two important matters of 1752 which have not yet been referred to, as well as on numerous details of the general work that could
271
1749-1755.
better be treated through personal interviews than through corre- spondence. One of these matters was the survey of the immense tract of land in North Carolina secured from the Earl of Granville, which received the name Wachovia (die Wachau) from one of the Zinzendorfian estates ; and on which the Moravian settlements in that State were founded. August 25, 1752, Spangenberg had started from Bethlehem for North Carolina with his selected company to undertake the survey. Count Reuss XXVIII, commonly spoken of as Ignatius, a nephew of the Countess Zinzendorf, had been expected in America in connection with this expedition, but plans were changed and he did not come. Spangenberg was accompanied from Beth- Ichem by Timothy Horsfield, Herman Loesch, John Merck and Joseph Mueller. At Fredericktown they were joined by Henry Antes, although he had just arisen from a sick-bed, and together they proceeded on their way, making most of the journey on horseback. It required until after New Year to complete their formidable task, in the course of which much sickness, privation and hardship were experienced.
Spangenberg got back to Bethlehem, February 12, 1753. The other matter alluded to was the suspended project of building the villages of Gnadenhoeh and Gnadenstadt on the Nazareth domain, as residence-places for families, different from the kind of institutional arrangement existing at Bethlehem, Nazareth, Gnadenthal, Christiansbrunn and Friedensthal; completing thus the original scheme of six centers on the Nazareth land on a more elaborate scale than was at first proposed. The start made with founding these villages has been referred to. When Spangenberg returned from North Carolina he not only observed that the zeal for these undertakings had waned somewhat, but prudently concluded, in the light of the latest correspondence from Europe, that the financial outlook did not warrant any headlong movements. During March, 1753, there were numerous official consultations on these things and on affairs arising out of the new county organization. Antes was in Bethlehem at these meetings, March 16-24, and helped to form further plans for securing the Church property against any sudden adverse turn; to sketch a scheme for occupying the North Carolina land; and to frame a petition to the Assembly for relief from what was felt to be an oppressive principle of taxation applied to the Economy, but which the County Commissioners declined to relax, because they held that technical constraint bound them.
272
A HISTORY OF BETHLEHEM, PENNSYLVANIA.
Successive representations to the Court of Appeals were unavailing and in pursuance of legal counsel, the assessments were paid under protest and an appeal finally taken to the Assembly.2ª
Several church councils were held at which all of the communicant members were assembled to hear what it was deemed expedient to publish at that time about all of these precarious matters; to also hear the ad interim management arranged for the time of Spangen- berg's absence, the suspension of plans on the Nazareth land, and the measures urged to be able to proceed on a self-sustaining basis as nearly as possible. Spangenberg then went to New York, on March 26, preparatory to sailing for Europe. The Irene was lying at New York where Captain Garrison was getting her ready for the seventh voyage.25
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.