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 48
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
The cemetery near by, where the remains of these men were laid to rest was, with each passing year, becoming a place of more rev- erent and tender interest to the people of Bethlehem. In 1773 special attention was bestowed upon it. The record which tells of the neat new fence which was built around it that year, and of its enlarge- ment that had become necessary, states that at that time the bodies of four hundred and eleven persons reposed there. The death-rate at Bethlehem was not as high at this period as it had prevailingly been during the first two decades. Less hardship and exposure had to be endured and the enlargement of dwelling accommodations, with other changes in the mode of living, were conducive to better health. Among occasional epidemics, small-pox among the children had again to be contended with in 1773. In connection with this new spread of the scourge, inoculation was first introduced in Bethlehem by Dr. John Matthew Otto. He proposed in an official conference
1772-1778. 433
on September 13, that the process be tried. It being a new thing at the place, it was deemed better not to proceed with the experiment without the concurrence of the whole body of parents. This was given at a consultation with them two days later, and on September 18, it was first tried on a little son of William Boehler and his wife, who were the first who expressed their willingness to have the experi- ment made in their family. The disease was soon gotten under con- trol and such a disastrous spread of it as had occurred on several previous occasions was prevented.
The year 1774 was a flourishing one in the numerous industries of Bethlehem, as well as a year of good crops and of general good health, so that the records, in summing up its local events and experi- ences, express acknowledgement of particular blessings to call forth the gratitude of the people. It was also a year notable for unusually many visits by persons of distinction from many and distant points. Among them was Baron von Repsdorf, the Danish Governor General of St. Croix, a warm friend of the Moravian missionaries on that Island. John Dickinson, the eminent jurist, and "the Swedish Herr Probst" are referred to among persons from Philadelphia who had not before been visitors to Bethlehem. In May the Sun Inn, once more before the Revolution, entertained a Proprietary Governor of Pennsylvania, who was destined also to be the last such Governor. It was John Penn, now serving his second term as Governor-or, strictly speaking, Lieutenant Governor-having been succeeded in 1771 by his brother Richard, who was also in Bethlehem this same month, and, according to current statements, was a more popular man than John, who resumed the office in September, 1773, when the complications that brought on the great conflict were rapidly becoming acute.
A little more than a month after their visit, the diary of Bethlehem refers to a conference with William Edmonds, the former Moravian Assemblyman from Northampton County, at this time again serving in that capacity, who, with John Okely, the other Moravian delegate, expected to attend the convention called for July 15. The new peril threatening the Indian mission which, as stated in the preceding chapter, had been removed in 1772 from Wyalusing in the Wyoming Valley, to "the Ohio country," was the principal sub- ject of this particular conference with Edmonds; for the spirit which had animated the attempts against Nain and Wechquetank was relentlessly pursuing the work of the gospel into the western
29
434
A HISTORY OF BETHLEHEM, PENNSYLVANIA.
wilds, where it was hoped it might be carried on in peace, at least for a while. At the same time, the precarious condition of affairs which caused that famous convention, called independently of the Governor, was referred to, and the advantage that was being taken of the issues on which public opinion was so much divided, by inimi- cal parties in the county to embarrass the people of Bethlehem in the position they were disposed to assume, led to a meeting of the smaller, or Select Council of the place, on July 7, to consider what course it would be best to pursue. The terms Whigs and Tories, in use in England, applied respectively to those who opposed and those who supported the position of Parliament, were beginning to be made use of in Pennsylvania also, and to be carried into the interior regions, with meaning broadened to embrace, respectively, all who were either for or against violent rupture and revolution. Thus, before long, the word Tory came to include, in the language of the impetuous, not only royalists, but also patriots who urged further struggle against oppression by constitutional methods in preference to precipitating war. Right in Pennsylvania this conser- vative element of the first Congress of Deputies from the colonies, held in September, 1774, in response to the proposition of the July Convention, and of subsequent meetings, was strongest, for here there were, among the leaders, more men than elsewhere of English legal training and conservative habits of thought who deprecated a hasty breach. They had back of them in the Province a large mass of people who, from various standpoints, were loath to see an open rupture, so long as it seemed possible to reach a peaceable solution of the momentous questions, and who shrank from the thought of rushing into the hazards of violent resistance. Most conspicuous and numerous among these conservative masses of Pennsylvania were, of course, the Quakers. With them were also the adherents of those several German sects which were opposed to war on general principles and were disposed also to accept the powers that be as ordained of God, and even if these powers subjected them to oppres- sion and tyranny, to make the best of it ; having no mind for the idea that the people might take the law and the government into their own hands and thus endeavor to right their wrongs. As to the Moravians, their position was not identical with that of the Quakers nor with that of the Mennonites, the Schwenkfelders, and other such German bodies. Still less were they to be placed in a mass on the same footing with those royalists who either openly or secretly oper-
435
1772-1778.
ated on the side of the King and Parliament against the aims of the colonists. After excitement ran so high that the term Tory became an offensive one, equivalent in the common mind to traitor, and was applied indiscriminately to all who did not see their way clear to favor revolution at the time when this step was believed by others to be inevitable, and to all who held non-combatant principles, no matter how innocent they might have been of any conspiracy or even sympathy with efforts inimical to the rights of the colonists, the Moravians, of course, came under the odium, in the minds of the hot- headed and precipitate, of being, in a body, Tories. That class of men in Northampton County who cherished the old prejudice and grudge against them belonged to the sort who were ever ready to rush into violent collision on any kind of a question and now eagerly seized the new opportunity to proclaim them enemies of the patriot cause and in secret conspiracy with the English Government, just as they had before proclaimed them as enemies of this Government in conspiracy against it with the French. It is not surprising, there- fore, that so soon as the first authorized move was made in the county to associate, arm and drill for the coming conflict, every available measure was advocated by such to coerce them into partici- pation. That this, on the part of some petty officials, was not so much the vehement impulse of patriotism as a mere desire to harass the Moravians, soon became so clear that it did not admit of a doubt. Reasonable and temperate men among those in control of militia organization who were disposed to show such regard for their posi- tion and principles as the circumstances permitted, found it very diffi- cult to restrain this tendency. It is not surprising, either, that when the first bodies of troops from distant places began to march through Bethlehem, many of these men, having no personal acquaintance with the place, its people and their traditions, and receiving their information about them entirely from bitterly prejudiced persons, should have been possessed of the idea that Bethlehem was a place full of dangerous Tories that deserved no kind of regard. That under these circumstances, amid the wild excitement, many of these men being undisciplined and impetuous, the Moravian town was, on the whole, treated with so much respectful consideration, is a mat- ter of astonishment. More than one such body of recruits approached the neighborhood with loud threats, but were restrained from turbu- lent demonstrations by the mere force of the impression which the appearance and general atmosphere of the place made upon them.
436
A HISTORY OF BETHLEHEM, PENNSYLVANIA.
The common modern supposition that the Moravians at Bethle- hem, Nazareth and elsewhere all stood together as a unit in their views and sentiments either at the beginning of the Revolution or later, is quite erroneous. There were decided differences of opinion among them on the main question of seeking independence, on the various involved questions and on the successive measures adopted by the Congress of the colonies, just as there were among people else- where. They were, as a rule, men of too much intelligence to all hold certain ideas or prejudices as one man, on such questions. There were, moreover, not only Germans and Englishmen and natives of other European countries, but also native-born Americans among them, and there was to some extent a corresponding variety of sym- pathy, sentiment and traditional habit of thought on political subjects. These subjects did not enter into the platform on which they had been culled out and brought together into a fraternity. Therefore, unanimity in this respect did not exist either by virtue of selection or of indoctrination. That there were Tories among them, in opinion and sentiment, just as there were in other communities, cannot be denied. That there were those who sympathized with the struggle of the colonies is certain. There were also, as in every other commu- nity, many who at first did not appreciate the righteousness of the struggle ; many who failed to rightly apprehend the issue ; many who had no conception of its magnitude and did not dream of its far- reaching results, who later saw into things better and whose views underwent a complete change. Not every man elsewhere who at the first signal was ready to shoulder his gun and march, clearly dis- cerned the real problems of the hour, and as few of the boisterous zealots who thought the Moravians should all be compelled to join the militia as of these Moravians looked out through the mazy future with the eye of a seer and foresaw all that a few years later became so plain.
There was also wide difference of opinion among the people of Bethlehem on the question of adhering to the old principle in the matter of bearing arms in active warfare and engaging in military drill. Some made this an essential as much as did the Quakers. Others merely took the ground of consistency with the original mis- sionary purpose of the settlement, in pursuance of which the Church had sought and obtained exemption from such duty for its member- ship, with the understanding that they would do their duty for the maintenance and protection of the State by paying such sums as
437
1772-1778.
might be required of them in lieu of bodily service of that kind. Such were more ready to recognize emergencies in which it might become their duty to also shoulder a musket. Yet others, especially among the younger men, if they had been left to act individually, would have followed the call to arms-some because they believed this to be a patriotic duty, some to escape the odium and petty per- secution to which they were subjected, some also because their scruples on this point were not as strong as their objection to pay- ing the exorbitant fines imposed upon them, one time after the other, when this process had been gotten into systematic operation in the county.3 When it was finally concluded to all stand together in this ยท matter, to all decline to engage in active military service and all pay the fines, however unreasonable the amounts demanded, and all help each other to bear the burden, this conclusion simply meant that
3 Bishop Nathanael Seidel, in May, wrote a letter to Dr. Franklin, congratulating him on his safe return from England, and setting forth the straits they were in at Bethlehem in con- nection with military drill. In reply he received the following letter from Franklin :
Philada. June 2nd 1775. Reverend & Dear Sir,
I am much obliged by your kind congratulations on my Return ; and I rejoice to hear that the Brethren are well and prosper. I am persuaded that the Congress will give no encouragement to any to molest your people on account of their Religious Principles ; and tho' much is not in my Power, I shall on every Occasion exert myself to discountenance such infamous Practices. Permit me however to give a little hint in point of Prudence. I remember that you put yourselves in a good Posture of Defence at the Beginning of the last War when I was in Bethlehem; and [ then understood from my very much Respected Friend Bp. Spangenberg, that there were those among the Brethren who did not hold it unlaw- ful to arm in defensive Warfare. If there be still any such among your young Men, perhaps it would not be amiss to permit them to learn the Military Discipline among their Neighbors, as this might conciliate those who at present express some resentment ; and having Arms in Readiness for all who may be able and willing to use them, will be a general Means of Protection against enemies of all kinds. But a Declaration of your Society, that tho' they cannot in conscience compell their young Men to learn the Use of Arms, yet they do not restrain such as are disposed, will operate in the Minds of People very greatly in your Favour.
Excuse my Presumption in offering Advice, which indeed may be of little Value, but proceeds from a Heart filled with Affection and Respect for a Society I have long highly esteemed, and among whom I have many valuable Friends.
I am with great Regard
& Veneration, Rev'd Sir, Your most obedient humble servant, B. FRANKLIN.
438
A HISTORY OF BETHLEHEM, PENNSYLVANIA.
whatever the personal opinions and sentiments of one and another might be, all would cling together consistently on the ground form- erly taken. Those who had no such scruples engaged to stand by those who had, and, as for differing views on the great struggle, these did not then assert themselves to the extent of causing an open breach in the bond of brotherhood which held them together. There can be no doubt that the resolution to thus make common cause and stand together was, under Divine Providence, what saved Beth- lehem through all the critical ordeals that came ; for there were times when, if it had been a house divided against itself, it would not have stood. The higher and better class of minds among both the civil and military authorities became convinced that no danger to the patriot cause was to be feared from the Moravians. In the dire dis- tress of the most critical times the resources derived from the place were no mean consideration, and were perhaps of more real value than the full quota of armed men from Bethlehem would have been. The men who insisted that the Moravians should be compelled to do military duty were not those upon whom the responsibility for finding ways and means rested, and they were not inclined, therefore, to appreciate the value of what was derived from them, as from other non-combatants and "Tories," in other ways.+ Even a little act like the contribution of a quantity of linen rags by the women of Beth- lehem for dressing the wounds of soldiers was considered deserving of formal record and thanks, as early as May 1, 1776, by the Com- mittee of Safety at Philadelphia. When, furthermore, the value of Bethlehem as a place of refuge for so many sick and wounded of the patriot army, and the readiness of its people to do what they could for the sufferers in the great extremity became clear, and even the Continental Congress found a retreat there and discovered it to be almost the only spot in reach that was not utterly demoralized, and visions came to Congressmen and Generals of further possible use to which the fine place, with its commodious buildings, its mills and work- shops and its sober, steady-going people running them might be put if preserved intact, the highest authorities of the new-born Nation became its champions and protectors against the riotous fanatics who would have found satisfaction in the mere spectacle of its destruction, even if no good whatever, but rather harm to the Nation's cause, had been the result.
4 Eminent authority of the time (Dr. Rush) has been cited in support of the estimate that "three-fourths of the taxes by which the war was supported in Pennsylvania were paid by non-combatants or Tories." Pa. Mag., XV, p. 16.
439
1772-1778.
In further pursuing these preliminary remarks on the attitude of the Moravians and the position of Bethlehem during the Revolution, it may be added that the differences of opinion which prevailed among the people, the same as at all other places, did not run with any particular differences of class or station. Some who have writ- ten on the subject have represented that the clergy, as a class, were Tories and held such of the people who took that side by personal influence or under the threat of expulsion.5 Some of the clergy were decidedly opposed to the Revolution in the beginning, but adopted quite different views later. The most striking instance is that of John Ettwein, who became the most conspicuous and important man in Bethlehem long before he was made a bishop, was generally the representative of the place and of the Moravian Church in dealings with the civil and military authorities during the war, was more widely known among public men than any other Moravian and, not- withstanding his outspoken disapproval of revolutionary steps betore he was politically converted, commanded the general respect and confidence of high officials by his stalwart honesty, dauntless courage and unassuming simplicity of deportment. Among the Moravian ministers generally, the most decided Tory of whose utterances the records of the time preserve specimens, was the Rev. Gustavus Shewkirk, pastor of the New York Church and later a missionary bishop in the West Indies, whose diary is probably one of the most complete chronicles of conditions and events in that city during the period it covers, to be found in any one source. Other ministers at Bethlehem and elsewhere, while preserving their characteristic quiet caution in reference to public questions, and endeavoring to hold the people, so far as possible, to the old position of orderly subjection to the authorities of the time and non-participation in political agita- tions, and then, when war actually came, to consistency with the avowed principles of the Church in the matter of bearing arms, by no means spoke against the struggle undertaken by the colonies. Some were disposed to recognize the hand of God stretched forth in the clouds to overrule and direct events for the higher good of the country, and to believe, from the beginning, that He was on the side of those who were struggling against oppression. As a rule
5 So Matthew S. Henry in his History of the Lehigh Valley. Mr. Henry could not have found any contemporaneous documentary evidence in support of this version which reflects sentiments towards the Moravian clergy, as a class, which were not uncommon among some, at the time when his history was written, and which the author seems to have shared, as appears in other parts of his work.
440
A HISTORY OF BETHLEHEM, PENNSYLVANIA.
they considered it incumbent upon them, as representatives of a Church which formed one Unity compactly bound together, with its congregations and missions in many places under British dominion, and enjoying peculiar guaranteed privileges under that govern- ment, not, in any hour of revolt in one of these countries, when the issue was very uncertain, to suddenly renounce that allegiance to it which their brethren in other lands faithfully maintained. It was not possible for them to view the situation as men viewed it who did not consider, and were not supposed to consider, any kind of con- nections or obligations outside of those which presented themselves to their minds as citizens of their respective colonies. This, their peculiar position, brought on the most serious tribulation of all that fell to the lot of the Moravians, when the ordeal of the several test acts came to be applied. Men found it hard to understand the refusal of so many of them to "take the test," coming after their insistence upon their scruples against bearing arms, to mean anything else than a compact in Toryism, pure and simple.
In the first stage of the conflict there were some among the busi- ness men of Bethlehem who gave unguarded expression to adverse sentiments and opinions which were remembered against them. Sometimes the unfortunate remark of one man, heard at the tavern, shop or mill, was carried about the country as the talk of all the Moravians. Few of them, however, were such rabid and indiscreet Tories as John Francis Oberlin, the store-keeper, a valuable but crochety and often troublesome man, with whom the authorities of the place more than once came into unpleasant conflict about various matters, and who is credited with saying that he had rope enough in his store to hang the entire Congress. A speech like that repeated about the neighborhood could do not a little harm, for much more attention was paid to it, as coming from a Moravian, than was given to similar and even harsher utterances by hundreds of other men. When the first agitation in the direction of raising a company of troops in Northampton County commenced, soon after the news of the battle of Lexington, in April, 1775, the Brethren appealed to the exemption from bearing arms granted them by the act of Parliament in 1749. Matters had not yet progressed far enough for them to realize that this would be treated with contempt and could not be expected to avail them in any wise under circumstances of revolt against that Government. It soon became clear to them, however, that this was of no use and that they had to meet the question on a
441
1772-1778.
new basis on which there was as yet no authoritative declaration or provision to meet their case. It is stated that on May 22, a meeting of the County Committee was held at Easton, at which it was vehem- ently insisted upon that they must either turn out and drill or appease the people by a public declaration of their principles.
A week later a deputation waited upon Justice Jacob Arndt with the statement, to be made a matter of official record, that while they desired the good of the country and had no intention to place them- selves in opposition to the course of events, they claimed the liberty given them in all countries of exemption from military service, but would willingly bear their part of the public burden otherwise. On June 16, a declaration of principles, such as had been demanded, was adopted by a committee of the Common Council of the village, signed in behalf of that body and put in the hands of John Okely to be sub- mitted to the County Committee. This Committee resolved, on June 22, that, while they did not propose to force any one to drill, those who had scruples about it must nevertheless appear at the drill-ground or each time pay a fine in cash. An act of Assembly, providing for fines in lieu of military duty, had, meanwhile, been passed, and therefore those members of the Committee who had favored coercion were, in so far, thwarted, and more than that reso- lution set forth could not be demanded. Thus the first perplexity was met and the ground established on which the matter of militia duty was adjusted, if all should conclude to regularly pay the fines rather than drill.
The excitement of the people in the neighborhood was intensified by the sight of numerous troops marching through towards Boston, during July and August, 1775. With few exceptions they touched Bethlehem, for it lay right in the line of march, on the highway of travel from the lower parts of Pennsylvania and from regions to the south of this Province up into New York. The first such company, one from York, Pa., came on July 8. Three companies of mounted rifle- men arrived on the 21st and halted several hours. Several of their officers remained over night and attended the evening service. On the 24th came two more such companies. The diarist of Bethlehem notes that one of the privates was expelled in disgrace for gross mis- behavior. In the evening a company arrived from Virginia, in com- mand of Captain Morgan. They remained over night and, by request, Ettwein preached a sermon to them in the evening. The chronicle states that they were so quiet and orderly that it was
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.