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 65
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
598
A HISTORY OF BETHLEHEM, PENNSYLVANIA.
and Lueders in November, 1812, it appeared that the excess of liabilities, as shown by the books, was $11,447, but should really be put down at more than $16,000, because the buildings were booked much too high. Lueders was of the opinion that, among the industries yet controlled by the Brethren's House diacony, the oil- mill, the tobacco-factory and the slaughter-house might be made decidedly profitable under competent and conscientious manage- ment; but that the defective wording of the leases, as then drawn, placed the diacony at a disadvantage and enabled those who were so disposed to deal unfairly with it. Thus matters dragged on into 1813. In January of that year, an even more startling presentation was made by Cunow, who was for pressing the issue. He declared that if. the creditors became urgent the diacony would be bankrupt, and that it should immediately go into liquidation.
Two courses were considered. One was that the Warden of the Congregation simply assume the estate and let it then transpire to what extent the Board of General Wardens in Europe would stand for the liabilities. The other was to appoint assignees, either the General Wardens, or the Bethlehem Warden, or both in conjunction ; if jointly, the latter to administer for the former as agent, if the latter became assignee alone, the Warden of the Brethren's House to administer, but in any case private parties who held claims, and not the Unity's Wardens who held the chief claim, to be preferred creditors. The first of these plans was eventually adopted. Cunow, in further pressing action, had a proposition entered in the minutes of the General Helpers' Conference on February 16, 1813, to close out the Brethren's House diacony by June I, of that year, and not await an answer from the General Wardens of the Unity, inasmuch as it was highly improbable that they would assume the heavy liabili- ties except by direction of a General Synod. He had meanwhile written to them, strongly urging this position. Thus he moved to crowd the burden upon the Bethlehem Congregation diacony. When the objection was made that another interview ought first to be had with Stadiger and Lueders, he had a paragraph added to the entry, to the effect that such a further interview with them was not deemed necessary. Although the closing out did not take place, June I, because it was held by all, excepting Cunow, to be too early a date, he thus prepared for the position he afterwards assumed, by putting himself on record as totally opposed to the continuance of the establishment after that time. In October the question of the
JOHN SCHROPP (2ND)
JOHN FREDERICK STADIGER
LOUIS DAVID DE SCHWEINITZ
WILLIAM HENRY VAN VLECK
JOHN CHRISTOPHER BRICKENSTEIN
599
1807-1825.
disposition to be made of the large Brethren's House was more specifically discussed. There were three plans. One was to convert it into a second hotel. Misgivings about its proximity to the church were answered by the opinion that probably guests at a hotel would not create more disturbance during hours of service than some occupants of the Brethren's House were in the habit of doing. This indicated a state of affairs not much to the credit of the Single Brethren of that time. Another plan was to retain a section of it as a mere dwelling for those occupants who wished to remain together, they simply paying a stipulated rental, and to fit up the remainder of the building to be let to families. The third was that finally adopted, to move the boarding-school into the building and make use of that occupied by the school for family homes and day-school rooms.
February 3, 1814, a meeting of the single men was called at which the final decision concurred in by the General Helpers' Conference, the local Elders' Conference and the village Board of Supervision, was communicated. Even the idea of giving them quarters in the old Economy House on Main Street had been abandoned because there seemed to be no way of raising the necessary rent of $80 a year. Some of the single men who were earning wages cared too little about the matter, and others did not realize that the end had really come, and that the generous practice of the financial authorities in Europe to pay their debts for the sake of maintaining their insti- tution, largely as a mere matter of sentiment, had ceased. Some true- hearted, good men among them deplored this culmination of things and some of the older men who were ill-adapted to any other mode of life, were much dismayed at the prospect ; but official assurance was given that the personal situation of each one would be duly considered and the aged and infirm would be properly cared for. During the last week in February, Bishop Reichel and the wardens Stadiger and Lueders had a special consultation on further arrange- ments with those of them who were of age, and, the first week in March, had an interview with the fathers and masters of those who were minors, in reference to their board and lodging. On April 9, the closing service was held in the chapel of the building by Bishop Reichel. The associations of the occasion were in pathetic contrast to those of the dedication and first occupation of it, sixty-six years before. By April 16, the moving out was completed, and thus ended the history of the Single Brethren's House at Bethlehem.
600
A HISTORY OF BETHLEHEM, PENNSYLVANIA.
On June 28, 1814, Cunow presented a plan-which was officially approved-of the necessary alterations to the building for the purposes of the boarding-school. Some principal items of the plan were, to increase the height of the windows in front and at the gable-ends ; to fit up a dining-room in the north-west section on the first floor, and construct a stairway leading up to this from the kitchen in the basement; to remove the stairway running up in the center of the house and, instead of this, build stairways at both ends for increased convenience and greater safety in case of fire. New floors were laid throughout the house and there was much work for carpenters and joiners, plasterers, painters and glaziers in connection with all the details of renovation and fitting up, both inside and outside of the building, while the grounds in the rear received the attention needed to prepare them for their new use. The work proceeded with the characteristic deliberateness of the time, and it was late in the autumn of 1815, before everything was ready for the transfer of the school to its new quarters. This took place on November 10, of that year. There was a formal procession from the vacated building to the more imposing one now to be occupied. It was headed by Cunow, as temporary Principal, and his wife, with sundry clergy of Bethlehem and Nazareth. They were greeted, on their approach, by the music of the trombones from the belvedere or roof-terrace of the building. A processional hymn was sung by the clergy, tutoresses and pupils as they filed in, and when all had assem- bled in the large room which was to serve as a chapel, a formal but simple dedicatory service was held, after which the distribution of the room-companies and other internal arrangements were pro- ceeded with. Thus began the history of the occupation of that interesting building by what may now be called in these pages, no longer the boarding-school, but the Young Ladies' Seminary; this latter name having never been associated with the institution in its former quarters, but having been first adopted in the course of the new period now opened.4
The vacated building, the erection and the ultimate fate of which have been treated of in the preceding chapter, had very little subse-
4 The total number of persons connected with the school on this occasion was 132. There were 80 boarders and 10 " day-scholars" connected with the boarding-school proper; 24 in the day-school for girls organized in a separate room with its own teachers-an arrangement which continued many years-and 18 adults ; teachers, stewardess and matron. The record states that the whole number enrolled in the boarding-school proper, beginning with the first from outside of Bethlehem in 1786, to this time was 965.
601
1807-1825.
quent history associated with it, of a kind that got on record. As already stated, its school character did not become entirely obsolete, for, besides affording dwellings for various successive occupants, it was in part made use of at various periods by a section of the boys' school of the village, in its latter years by part of the town-school for girls for a while, and at one time also by a primary school for girls. While the regular day-school for girls was, during the most of the period prior to 1858, appended to the Young Ladies' Semi- nary-the history of which has long been before the public in the well-known "Souvenir"-the boys' school of Bethlehem, from the Revolutionary period up to 1823, had an irregular and at intervals obscure and unsatisfactory character. It was at times somewhat neglected, left in charge occasionally of unsuitable and incompetent persons for whom some kind of employment had to be found, and filled such an unimportant place that the records contain very little concerning it. Then again times came when the authorities and citizens of the village were stirred to improve it and render it more efficient ; re-organization took place and more competent teachers were put in charge. Much of its unsatisfactory character at some periods was due to the fact that, because of the lack of resources from which to properly salarize men, many, even of the more com- petent teachers, had to combine this with other duties, or were employed, as a mere temporary make-shift, while sojourning at Bethlehem recruiting their health or awaiting appointment to other positions. The provisions for the education of boys at Bethlehem lost much of their earlier importance after the re-establishment of Nazareth Hall in 1785, for then the few boys who were to receive a more thorough education were sent to that institution, either as boarders or as "day-scholars" living with relatives at Nazareth. This disadvantage under which the majority of the Bethlehem boys who could not be sent to the Hall were placed, continued for some years, even after the people of the village began to discuss the need of remedying it. The charge occasionally made, at one period, was perhaps not entirely groundless, that the clerical officials and a few leading men who controlled the situation, because they either enjoyed ex-officio privileges at Nazareth Hall or were financially able to send their sons to that institution, were not disposed to properly bestir themselves in the interest of those who were less fortunate.
The chief difficulty, however, lay in the fact that so many of the people of Moravian villages were not trained to pay for what they
602
A HISTORY OF BETHLEHEM, PENNSYLVANIA.
received or wanted, and many were willing to be satisfied with an ordinary common-school like those of neighboring villages if some- thing better meant increased expense for them. The former superior advantages, under which people were accustomed to regard them- selves as mere beneficiaries, had ceased under financial pressure, and the modern large benefits of the principle established in the financial settlement of 1771, that the cause of education should have the benefit of a part of the estate that fell to the share of Bethlehem, did not begin to be substantially realized until a period long subse- quent to that covered by this chapter.
As a rule, during the entire time from the re-organization after the Revolution up to the building of the first modern school-house for boys, the school was kept in two divisions, one for the little boys and another for those who were older; sometimes together in one building and again separate at different places. During most of the time one of these divisions was domiciled in the stone house on Main Street. For a number of years the older boys had their school-room in the Brethren's House. For some years after the erection of the new church, the south-west room of that edifice was used as a school-room. At various times an evening school was kept during the winter months for boys who had to work at trades as regular
apprentices, or at ordinary labor. Besides the common-school branches and regular religious instruction, music, both vocal and instrumental, always entered into the school plan, and there were at all times proficient instructors having boys in training to recruit the musical ranks in the service of the Congregation. Among those who served as teachers of the common branches and of music, from the close of the Revolution to the completion of the church-besides the chaplains of the Brethren's House and sundry of their assistants, whose names were given in the preceding chapter-were John Chris- tian Till, John George Weiss, Abraham Levering, John Caspar Frei- tag, Paul Weiss, and especially John Christopher Eilerts. During the first decade of the new century, Matthew Eggert and David Peter Schneller were conspicuous, both serving for a number of years, at intervals. In 1811, appears the name of Benjamin Haven, the mis- sionary, and, in 1812, that of Adam Haman, who taught until 1815. In 1813, Samuel Reinke took charge of the first class, but after a few months had to resign on account of illness. The same year David Moritz Michael, an accomplished performer on the violin and other instruments, became the musical instructor of the boys. The
603
1807-1825.
successor of Reinke was Jacob Rauschenberger, until September, 1814, when he was called as minister to Gnadenhuetten, Ohio. Then John Beck, later the famous school-master of Lititz, Charles Joseph Levering, John Caspar Freitag, the former teacher, who at this time closed his discouraging labors as minister of the dying congre- gation at Gnadenhuetten on the Mahoning, and William Henry Van Vleck were all under discussion as teacher of the first class, the second being yet in charge of Haman. A temporary arrangement was made until, in January, 1816, Van Vleck was called to Bethle- hem as pastoral overseer of the single men and boys and secretary of the General Helpers' Conference.
While Thomas Christian Lueders was the last superintendent of the Brethren's House, William Henry Van Vleck was the last of the succession of men who were appointed to the special pastoral care of the single men-Bruederpfleger-at Bethlehem. He took the boys' school in hand and again brought it up to a better standard. Now John Christian Till again appears upon the scene as a school-master, in addition to his duties as organist of the church, which he assumed in July, 1813, after the death of John Frederick Peter. He suc- ceeded Haman in 1815 in charge of the second class of boys. He also taught the evening school for a while. He dropped out of the corps of pedagogues in 1819, but remained organist until 1841, when he was succeeded by Ernst F. Bleck-likewise famous both as organist and teacher-of whom there will be more to record. At the time when William Henry Van Vleck commenced his duties, Eilerts, the former proficient school-master, who was evidently fond of little children, was devoting his attention to a primary school. Van Vleck was called to duties elsewhere in August, 1817, but the boys' school did not again retrogade.
A new impetus was given to educational activity in Bethlehem generally by the accession to the Elders' Conference of the village, in February, 1816, of the scholarly and devoted new Principal of the Young Ladies' Seminary, the Rev. Henry Steinhauer. Although his career was brief, ending with his lamented death, July 22, 1818, the impress of his presence remained, extending beyond the par- ticular institution he had been called to direct. Another man, already mentioned, who joined the the corps of leaders at Bethlehem on Sep- tember 28, 1817, devoted special attention to fostering the school work. This was the Rev. Charles Frederick Seidel, who was called from Nazareth to become the associate pastor and regular preacher
604
A HISTORY OF BETHLEHEM, PENNSYLVANIA.
of Bethlehem. One of his duties, in this position, was the special oversight of the day-schools of the place. The death of Steinhauer also unexpectedly brought him into his first connection with the Young Ladies' Seminary as Principal, temporarily until 1819.
In 1818 there were special deliberations by the Congregation Council on improving the boys' school. A special committee was appointed to secure the best possible teacher. Daniel Steinhauer, a man of superior attainments, who had come from England to visit his brother, the Principal, during his illness, was engaged tempo- rarily. In 1819, John Jacob Kummer removed to Bethlehem from North Carolina, and soon after his arrival, negotiations began with him to take charge of the first class; and thus another of the more prominent old-time school-masters of Bethlehem took a place in the succession. David Peter Schneller, a veteran in the service, was associated with him some time as teacher of the second class.
Among the important steps forward in 1817, was that which brought a special School Board into existence. At a meeting of parents, masters and guardians, on November II, 1817, to discuss measures for improving the boys' school, a committee of seven was appointed to thoroughly consider the subject and report. January 21, 1818, a general meeting was held to hear the report, which went into the subject exhaustively under the three heads of general prin- ciples, financial resources, and management. It recommended the creation of a School Board of seven, the associate minister as general School Inspector, the Warden of the Congregation and the Prin- cipal of the Seminary to be ex-officio members, and the other four to be elected by the voting members of the Congregation. The first election was held on March 10, 1818, and resulted in the choice of Samuel Luckenbach, John Frederick Rauch, Joseph Rice and Samuel Steup. Seidel became president and Rauch secretary of the board. The needed increase of revenue had been provided for by arranging with the Young Ladies' Seminary to let half of the former sum- £80 Pa .- agreed upon for accommodating the day-school for girls in that institution, and now considered rather high, go to the benefit of the boys' school, besides slightly increasing the tuition fees. Thus a needed additional amount of $200 was secured. The four mem- bers of the board chosen at the next election, March, 1819, were Charles David Bishop, John Frederick Rauch, Joseph Rice and Owen Rice, Jr. On October 18, 1819, a special winter evening school for apprentices and other boys who could only attend in the evening
605
1807-1825.
was commenced, eighteen young men having arranged to take turns as instructors in various branches.
In 1821, the subject of building a suitable school-house for boys began to be discussed during the incumbency of John Frederick Rauch, Joseph Rice, Owen Rice, Jr., and Charles Schneller as the elected members of the board. In July, 1822, there were several joint meetings of the Elders' Conference, the Board of Supervisors and the Board of School Directors on further improving the school, which then consisted of upwards of thirty boys. A new teacher of the second class, Charles William Lilliencron, supposed to be a specially capable man, was chosen, but his term of service was brief, for in August, 1823, he left Bethlehem to return to Sweden, his native country. At the same time the building of the new school house was determined by a meeting of voting members in Congre- gation Council, on July 5, several members having expressed their willingness to advance the necessary money at four per cent. interest and, together with others, to make considerable contributions out- right. It was decided to build a two-story brick house, forty by thirty-three feet in dimensions, at an estimated cost of $1800-this was exceeded somewhat-and to use the second story as a concert hall so long as it was not required for school purposes. Plans were drawn, a building committee consisting of Charles David Bishop, John Jacob Jundt and John Frederick Rauch was elected, and on July 26, 1822, it was commenced. It was completed soon after the following New Year and, on January 12, 1823, was dedicated with a brief service and a musical performance in the concert hall. This is the building on Cedar Street fronting south on the green, after 1858 used for many years as a dwelling for the Superintendent of the Parochial School, and in 1890 remodeled to be used again for school purposes. When the school was re-organized in this new building, Jacob Kummer was teacher of the first class and David Peter Schneller, re-employed after Lilliencron left, had charge of the second class, while the religious instruction was in charge of the pastors, and special instructors in vocal and instrumental music were employed.
To complete this cursory survey of the school situation at Beth- lehem up to the epoch associated with the completion and occupa- tion of the new school-house for boys, it may be added that the principalship of the Young Ladies' Seminary passed out of the hands of Seidel in 1819 into those of the Rev. John Frederick Frueauff,
: 606
A HISTORY OF BETHLEHEM, PENNSYLVANIA.
who, in 1821,was succeeded temporarily by the Rev. Lewis David deSchweinitz until, in 1822, Seidel was appointed Principal again and filled the position until 1836. The women who taught in that insti- tution in 1823, when the new period of the boys' school opened with two regular teachers, were seventeen in number, including several who left in that year and others who entered. Some of them merely taught music and others fancy needle work, plain sewing, or other special things, and did not belong in the ranks of regular tutoresses ; yet the contrast between the two institutions was thus very great. The faculty of the Seminary corresponded in number rather to those of Nazareth Hall and the Bethlehem boys' school combined.
The mention of two new names among the clergy and executive officials of Bethlehem, Frueauff and de Schweinitz, leads back to the more general course of events after the closing of the Brethren's House. The financial difficulties of the time, together with the growing revolt against the prevailing regime which appeared openly in the complications of 1809, and could not again be suppressed, finally brought on the most acute crisis of the period embraced in this chapter. A proper connection of affairs leading to this crisis requires a reference to discussions prior to the closing out of the Brethren's House diacony. In September, 1811, the General Board of Wardens in Europe, replying to a communication of the Elders' Conference of Bethlehem on the financial situation, decidedly favored the proposed sale of a thousand acres, or about one-fourth of the land which, in the settlements of 1771, the Bethlehem Diacony acquired from the previously existing General Diacony of the Unity. The title deeds were held, as explained in a previous chapter, by the so-called Proprietor in fee simple, but as a trust for the Bethlehem Congregation, although no formal declaration of trust was issued. The active business connected with all land thus held, was transacted by the so-called Administrator under power of attorney from the Proprietor. Hence it will be seen that, while the Bethlehem Congre- gation claimed, of course, to be the real owner of the land held for it by the nominal Proprietor, sales or conveyances of any kind had to be made by the Administrator, acting for the Proprietor. At the same time, in accordance with the diacony combine between all the congregations of the Unity, with the General Wardens in Europe standing financially at the head of the whole-the arrangement estab- lished in 1775-such a proposed sale was subject to the approval of these General Wardens, whose agent at Bethlehem was the afore- said Administrator.
607
1807 -- 1825.
That diacony combine involved reciprocal obligations between the whole and each of its parts; hence between the Wardens of the Unity and the Bethlehem diacony, as well as each of the special choir diaconies. They were each under obligation to help the whole and the whole likewise to help each of them. It was under this arrangement that the European General Wardens of the whole were furnishing such considerable sums, from year to year, to help the diaconies at Bethlehem out of trouble, for which in the last instance they would have to be responsible. Therefore, it was a natural and proper arrangement that such a proposed sale of Beth- lehem land should be subject to their concurrence; although, if the Bethlehem Congregation had chosen to break faith and take a revol- utionary step, and the Proprietor through the Administrator had been willing to co-operate in making the required deeds, the General Wardens could not have prevented such a sale, but would have been helpless, beyond legally pressing their claims against Bethlehem if they had chosen and found means available to do so. The only persons who could effectually thwart the will of the Bethlehem authorities in such a case were the Proprietor, Jacob Van Vleck, of Salem, N. C., and the Administrator, Cunow, or really, under his power of attorney, the latter alone. The object of the proposed sale of land, which the General Wardens approved, was to pay off all indebtedness at Bethlehem and stop the heavy drain for interest on loans. At the beginning of 1812, when the letter of approval from the Wardens of the Unity was first under consideration in a meeting of the General Conference of Helpers at Bethlehem, the uncovered liabilities of the Congregation were reported as amounting to $12,541.6334 and the debt on the church building was $37,105.831/3. It was calculated that the sale of the thousand acres would extinguish this and put a balance into the treasury. Cunow, the Administrator, strongly opposed the project and induced his colleagues in the General Helpers' Conference to take an adverse position.
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.