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 66
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
It was argued that there was no necessity for such a step because the income of the Bethlehem diacony for the previous fiscal year had met current expenses and interest, with a prospect of improve- ment; that the situation was not as bad as represented because the land assets were booked too low, had greatly increased in value and would at a proper valuation cover the apparent excess of liabilities together with the church debt; that it would be difficult to safely and at the same time profitably invest the money of those who held
608
A HISTORY OF BETHLEHEM, PENNSYLVANIA.
the notes of the Bethlehem warden, which would have to be redeemed if, by such a sale of land, the obligations of the Bethlehem diacony, then serving as a sort of bank for many persons, were paid off-the stocks of corporations being an insecure investment in those times of war. It was proposed to cover the apparent excess of liabilities by adding $3.10 per acre to the valuation of the Bethlehem land, which increase would yet leave it booked below its real value. The congregation authorities at Bethlehem declined to recede from their purpose, and controversy ensued. In January, 1813, Cunow declared his opposition more clearly and emphatically in a pro memoria, in which he set forth his conviction that such a sale of a large tract would violate the agreements of 1771; that, in any case, the concur- rence of the owner in law, the Proprietor, must be had through the Administrator and they could not be ordered to act against their will; that the Bethlehem Congregation-and on this point the subse . quent contention turned-really held the land only on perpetual lease and could not sell it; that the Bethlehem diacony only had a stipulated right to the revenues of the land, to meet its own neces- sities and its obligations to the Sustentation Diacony controlled by the General Helpers' Conference; the surplus above this was at the disposal of the General Wardens of the Unity, according to a resolution of the General Synod. In the following April, he secured the endorsement of his colleagues in the General Helpers' Con- ference to a letter he had written to the General Wardens of the Unity, so presenting the matter as to persuade them to withdraw, for the time being, their concurrence in the proposd sale. This aroused much indignation in Bethlehem against him and those who supported him, and, together with other causes of irritation, produced a state of disaffection that was disturbing to the internal peace of the village. Although no steps were further attempted until 1815, contention increased and grew bitter.
Circumstances attending the closing of the Brethren's House, and the position taken by Cunow that the situation must be controlled by repression through a stricter enforcement of regulations and exercise of discipline, aggravated things until at last an official and personal rupture took place between him and the Bethlehem officials. In September, 1815, the question of 1811, in reference to selling land to clear off indebtedness was again agitated. Cunow had been mainly instrumental in bringing about the assumption of the liabilities of the Brethren's House by the Bethlehem diacony, and
1807-1825. 609
it was thought that, in view of this, he would cease to obstruct the measure. At that time the debts of the Congregation diacony amounted to $26,463.94, and those of the defunct Brethren's House diacony to $15,672.74, which made a burden of $42,136.68, that was being carried and drawing interest, besides the church-building debt. Some strongly objected to the large credit system that had been instituted both by the Bethlehem treasury and by the Susten- tation Diacony, while Cunow favored and fostered this kind of a banking arrangement by which loans were taken from individuals. The result of the renewed agitation was that Cunow went to Europe early in 1816, to personally present all the features involved in the situation, as he viewed them, to the Unity's Elders' Conference and particularly to urge his arguments on the question of selling land upon the Unity's Wardens in that board. Decided differences of opinion had now arisen between him and some of his colleagues in the Conference of Helpers, especially in the matter of enforcing the yet unaltered regulations of the old system in all details, which some of them, like the Elders' Conference at Bethlehem, regarded as no longer possible. They had also broken away from him in his view that the Bethlehem land, as an inherited trust, could only be held on perpetual lease and could not be sold, a view in which he was not sustained by the General Wardens of the Unity after a second consideration of the whole subject. The Unity's Elders' Conference, after hearing his presentation of matters and considering a written statement sent by his colleagues, brought about an adjustment of differences for the time being, and took measures to institute more particular inquiry into the demoralization of discipline at Bethlehem set forth by Cunow, while the larger questions involved were left to be dealt with by the General Synod of the Church which, after the lapse of seventeen years, it was now proposed to convene. Cunow returned to Bethlehem and a truce was effected even with the boards of the Bethlehem Congregation, and in April, 1817, he was formally invited by the Elders' Conference and the Board of Supervisors to again attend their sessions and to again participate in conducting services, neither of which things he had done for a considerable time.
Meanwhile the agitations at Bethlehem and the other church villages, extending over a wider range of subjects, were at last given opportunity to issue in some regular action in the direction of desired changes and reforms. February 16, 1817, a circular of the General Conference of Helpers convoking a Provincial Conference in June,
40
610
A HISTORY OF BETHLEHEM, PENNSYLVANIA.
preparatory to a General Synod to be held at Herrnhut in 1818, was publicly read at Bethlehem. It was the first such convocation in ten years and the first since 1768 in which lay-deputies participated, and which in its organization and methods deserved to be called a Synod. It consisted of two sections, one representing the exclusive settle- ments of the Church-Bethlehem, Nazareth and Lititz-and the other representing the town and country congregations. The ses- sions of both were held at Bethlehem and were presided over by Bishop Charles Gotthold Reichel. He yet filled a position very try- ing under the circumstances, as President of the General Helpers' Conference and Head Pastor at Bethlehem, but was soon to vacate these offices and return to Europe. The section of the Synod which represented the church-villages consisted of twelve ministers as ex officio members, composing the Elders' Conferences of the several places, together with eight women of these Conferences also entitled to ex officio seats, and thirteen lay delegates elected by the voting membership. The delegates from Bethlehem were Christian Eggert, Sebastian Goundie, Joseph Oerter, John Frederick Rauch, Jacob Rice, Owen Rice, Jr., and John Christian Till. Goundie and the two Rices represented more particularly the desire for reform in business regulations and property conditions, and the two last named were from among the younger citizens of the place; Owen Rice being at that time thirty and Jacob Rice only twenty-four years old. All of them were men who were au fait in all the important matters that came under consideration, so far as the various interests of the vil- lage were concerned, and each of them was selected as a specialist in some department. The section representing the exclusive church villages began its sessions on June 9, continued until the 21st, adjourned to August 4 and finally finished its work on August 6. The other section, representing the city and country congregations, consisted of eighteen ministers and eleven delegates and held ses- sions from June 26 to 28. The former had fifty-five and the latter eleven sittings.
Prior to the convening of this Conference or Synod, it was pro- posed by some of the leading laymen, not only at Bethlehem, but also at Nazareth and Lititz, to have preliminary meetings of voting communicant members to discuss and formulate points to be brought forward. The Conference of General Helpers would have quietly let this take its course, but Cunow interposed strenuous objections to the exercise of this liberty and constrained his colleagues to express disfavor. As all sensible men appreciated the desirability of
6II
1807-1825.
preserving amicable relations just then, such formal meetings which would have accomplished much preparatory work and expedited business were not held.
Among the vexed questions of the time, the official discussions that preceded the Synod reveal those which were most prominent. One was the modification of the use of the lot in connection with appointments to office and in routine government, and its total abolition in connection with finally deciding the question of proposed marriages in the church settlements. Another was legal incorpor- ation, advocated by some to enable the Church general and the Congregation or village to hold and convey real estate. The chief motive was not fear of dishonesty on the part of the Proprietor, who held the title in fee simple, but the desire to escape from further experience of arbitrary domination on the part of the Administrator. The wish was that the Congregation might be in a position to control its own property. A third was that of abolishing the so-called "Lease System" under which residents of the village could only hold posses- sion of real estate on ground rent. There was a strong desire on the part of many to own the ground on which their houses stood as well as the buildings.
Related to this was a long-standing grievance at Bethlehem and Nazareth which it was decided to have removed if the Lease System were retained. This was the old "limitation clause" in the house leases which those at Lititz and Salem, as it seems, did not have attached. The leases contained a proviso to which the builder of a house agreed, that if he vacated either by voluntarily removing or by forfeiting his right to live in the place under the agreement which he had signed, and received a quit notice; or if the heirs of a deceased house-owner were not members of the Church, and the Administrator, representing the owner of the ground, had to buy the house-as frequently happened-in order to keep control of the premises, and disagreement arose about the price, a valuation was to be put upon it by three disinterested men, but this valuation must not exceed a maximum sum named in the lease. This was the "lim- itation clause." It was designed originally to be a safeguard against collusion to extort an exorbitant sum, but was now regarded as very unjust to many owners of houses because the leases were old and the figure named did not nearly represent the value of the houses, as property was now rated. It was desired that this limitation clause should be omitted.
612
A HISTORY OF BETHLEHEM, PENNSYLVANIA.
Another wish strongly expressed, especially by many who were engaged in business, was that the principle of the Church which restrained members from resorting to the civil courts in complica- tions with other members, to collect debts or get redress for injuries, might be modified. The Conference of General Helpers had to admit that the character and relations of citizens of the church-vil- lages were so far from the ideal pre-supposed by the old require- ment that only the church authorities be resorted to in such mat- ters, that the position was no longer tenable. It was acknowledged that these authorities could no longer adequately deal with offenders, for there were those who would not be amenable to moral suasion and some for whom the threat of expulsion had lost its former effect. It was admitted also that the laws framed and the courts instituted to protect the persons and property of people were a product of Christian civilization, and therefore the words of Scripture about brother going to law with brother, in the days when this meant an appeal by Christians to heathen magistrates, did not invariably apply.
Another change desired by the great majority was that the regu- lations which restrained men, regardless of their personal convic- tions, from performing militia service at the call of the Government be abolished. This troublesome matter, which had occasioned so much hardship, odium and expense during the Revolution, had now come into some prominence again during the second war with Eng- land. So far as can be ascertained only one Moravian, Joseph Rose, among those who had joined militia companies, was called out into service-September 25 to December 24, 1814, in camp at Marcus Hook-but much irritation was occasioned by the effort to enforce the inhibition, because there were at this time far fewer at Bethlehem and Nazareth than in former times who had scruples in the matter, and far fewer who were disposed to pay money for themselves or others, in preference to merely turning out to drill. The question referred to the Unity's Elders' Conference whether a man could be held to necessarily forfeit membership if he voluntarily joined the militia, was answered in the negative. The General Helpers' Con- ference finally agreed that it was not prohibited by Scripture ; that they could not prevent a man from doing what the Government called upon him to do as a public service, and in reference to which the laws of Christianity gave him personal liberty ; that the old rule could no longer be strictly maintained. All agreed to this position excepting Cunow, who appealed to the letter of the synodical enact-
613
1807-1825.
ment not yet repealed, and urged that discipline be exercised upon all who transgressed. In December, 1814, the board received answers from the Elders' Conferences of the three church-villages to their question on this point. The answer from Bethlehem was: it is impossible to further continue the arrangement to combine in pay- ing for substitutes, and the question of drilling ought to be left to the option of the individual. That from Nazareth was: nothing can be done in the matter. The young men who are so inclined simply go to drill, rule or no rule, and flatly refuse to stand the expense of maintaining what they call an antiquated regulation that ought to be considered obsolete. From Lititz, where, as formerly, narrower con- servative views in such matters yet prevailed, and Benade, the sup- porter of Cunow in uncompromising adhesion to the old system, was at the head of affairs, came the opinion that militia service was con- trary to the fundamental principles of the Church and that the rule requiring the payment of fines instead of going to drill should be enforced. Nevertheless, the tendency to break away from it carried the day, relief from the regulation was afforded in 1818, by a revision of the synodical enactment on the subject, in response to the request of 1817, and then this ceased to be a trouble to the people.
It may be added here that, beyond the renewed difficulties about the requirements of the militia law-but to a far less degree than during the Revolution-and the general financial and economic effects which were experienced in the country generally, Bethlehem felt nothing of the War of 1812, but on February 22, 1815, engaged in a special celebration of Washington's birthday in view of the ratification of the Treaty of Ghent. There was a general illumina- tion of the town in the evening, during which two choirs of trom- bonists, one stationed at the open windows in the organ loft of the church and the other in front of Sebastian Goundie's house, alter- nated in performing festive chorales. On April 13, solemn services were held in observance of the Peace Jubilee proclaimed by the President.
Turning back from this digression in connection with the final reference to the subject of militia service, two more prominent mat- ters are found figuring in the discussions of 1817. One was the desire to have the so-called monopolies in the various branches of trade and industry in the village abolished, or at least to have the regulations so relaxed that what was believed would be a legitimate and beneficial competition in business might become possible, and a
614
A HISTORY OF BETHLEHEM, PENNSYLVANIA.
larger measure of liberty which was believed to. be a natural right ot the citizens in the matter of establishing trades might be enjoyed. What was originally intended to be a protection to those who leased one after another of the "Branchen" from the Congregation Diacony -regulating the number of trades so that each one might be assured a living by means of it, and adjusting the supply to the demand-had become, in the opinion of many, a system of oppressive restriction. In some cases it was looked upon as a petty tyranny exercised by the village fathers. There were frequent jealousies and contentions and occasional charges of partiality, unfair discrimination, protec- tion of favorites, barring out those who happened not to stand in the good graces of the village authorities or to enjoy the prestige of influential connections. Young men were sometimes compelled, under the rigid arrangements, to betake themselves to an occupation not to their liking, in order to merely gain a livelihood, because there was declared to be a scarcity in that particular line and ample pro- vision in the other which they preferred, and there was no appeal from the decision. It not infrequently happened that a young man had served a full apprenticeship at a trade or had devoted some years to learning a certain business-perhaps almost under coercion and quite contrary to his inclinations, because just then apprentices happened to be needed in those particular places-which he was afterwards not permitted to follow except by consenting to transfer his residence to another church settlement, where there was need of one to ply his particular trade, or by going out to hunt a location for himself.
The contagion of progress and expansion was in the atmosphere. General activity in opening up new trade and traffic and starting all manner of internal improvements spread through the States after the second war with England. Some energetic and enterprising men of Bethlehem foresaw that the place had a future and even then believed that there was trade enough for several mercantile estab- lishments, room for another hotel, prospect of success in starting new manufacturing industries, warrant in laying foundations for larger operations generally than the village regulations then made possible or those in control who preferred to see all things remain in the narrow, beaten track, could contemplate with peace of mind. Hence the growing desire to have the church-village system so relaxed and modified that there might be freer action in business affairs.
Yet another feature of the existing system, one already referred to, was given special consideration, and the strongly-felt need of a
1807-1825. 615
remedy for various hampering and even oppressive effects of it that had been experienced was put into formal propositions. This was the interlinked organization of official bodies under the close regime of the previous three decades which created too much identity between the general executive body, the General Helpers' Confer- ence, on one hand, and the local village boards on the other, and gave too much opportunity for one little group of men or even one man like the Administrator to exercise a dominant influence in all of them. To a very great extent, as has been observed, interviews of the General Helpers' Conference with the Bethlehem Elders' Conference had been really but interviews with themselves. For
some time merely the Wardens of the Congregation and the Breth- ren's House did not hold double official positions. Therefore, when -as was often the case-only the Bethlehem contingent of the Gen- eral Board was in session deliberating, and they wished to have an interview with the Bethlehem Elders' Conference, they merely had to call in the two wardens-and after 1814 only the one warden-in order to become a joint body, and could then have the interview with themselves as thus augmented. Some were beginning to regard it as oppressive and some looked upon it as almost grotesque to have Cunow as Administrator discuss with Cunow as a member of the General Helpers' Conference, then with Cunow as a member of the Bethlehem Elders' Conference and finally with Cunow as a mem- ber of the village Board of Supervision, whether the Bethlehem people might do something to which Cunow in all these capacities was opposed. Some were also beginning to think that when the President of the General Helpers' Conference had occasion to com- municate with the President of the Bethlehem Elders' Conference on points of controversy between the two boards, these Presidents ought to be two different men, especially when, as one and the same man, he was to so great an extent dominated at both ends by the Administrator.
This desire for the re-construction of organization extended to three other features. One, purely local, was the constitution of the Gemeinrath or Common Council of the village, which, under the existing system, as was pointed out in the preceding chapter, con- sisted so largely of ex officio members and of certain predetermined classes of citizens and functionaries, for the time being, who held their places to a great extent by the choice and appointment of the Elders' Conference, that it was very much of a close corporation. The number in it whose membership expressed the free choice of
616
A HISTORY OF BETHLEHEM, PENNSYLVANIA.
the people was next to nothing, and that many looked upon it as a "packed" body made up by the Elders' Conference is not surprising. That some refused to be comforted under their close grip by the extensive use of the lot in making choice from candidates is also not surprising, for there were many ways of controlling and restricting the foregoing election of candidates, and the regulations of the time even permitted the Elders' Conference to ignore a candidate occa- sionally in drawing names or settling the question yes or no, if to their minds there was sufficient reason for doing so. The movement at this time was in favor of not merely reducing the ex officio mem- bership of the Council and the number of positions which, as such, were necessarily represented in it by their incumbents selected by the Elders' Conference, but to again have it consist of all the adult male population who were communicant members in good standing, as was the case under the more democratic organization of fifty years before.
Another feature in which re-construction was advocated was the standing of the General Conference of Helpers administering the affairs of all the American settlements, congregations and missions, and its relation to the Unity's Elders' Conference in Europe. There was a strong desire to restore more authority and freedom of action to this board; to give it more of the character of an Executive Board supervising the whole as an integral, organized body of work, instead of being only a conference of the agents, appointed in the three settlements by the U. E. C. to act for them in the care of these places as merely individual congregations, together with the few city and country congregations which yet existed. It was a move towards the creation of a proper Provincial organization with a Pro- vincial Executive Board and a Provincial Synod. Yet another feature that came under discussion lay even closer to the central and fundamental character of the whole system. It was desired that in the composition of the U. E. C. there might be provision for one member from America or at least one thoroughly conversant, through previous residence in the country, with the American situation; and for giving the Elders' Conference of the American church settle- ments a vote in helping to fill vacancies in the general governing body in Europe.
Numerous lesser matters at the same time received attention, and the opportunity was embraced to formally seek release from the obligation to conform to various antiquated requirements in ritual and church .routine, some of which were utterly foreign to the genius
617
1807-1825.
of the age and the country and were distasteful and burdensome to most people. A few such observances had, without formal abolition, become obsolete, while sticklers for punctilious conformity, among those in control, harassed the people by urging the letter of the regulations in all particulars and reproaching them with insubor- dination and unfaithfulness. One minor feature of the general struggle came to prominence in 1815, which was interesting and somewhat amusing. It showed how the martinet is more easily baffled by women than by men; how the stern regulator of customs is at his wits' end when he encounters rebellion in the domain of feminine attire ; how even Moravian women of nearly a century ago knew how to make short work of a matter by an application of what has been said to be the woman's way-to jump to a conclusion and then argue from the conclusion. For some time there had been a growing sentiment among the women at Bethlehem, Nazareth, and even at Lititz, against the old regulation that required them to wear the uniform "Schneppel Haube"5 to church, or on all formal or dress occasions, in the exclusive settlements-it was not obligatory in the city and country congregations- and here and there one ventured to discard it and don a more popular, conventional style of in-door head covering, in quite extensive use outside of Moravian circles in those days, distinguished from the other, in Moravian parlance, as the "Englische Haube." Quietly, plans for an open rebellion were formed, with Nazareth again the headquarters of venturesome pro- gress. Suddenly, in February, 1815, the General Helpers' Confer- ence received a message from the women at Nazareth that, while they intended to further respect the principle of uniform head-attire among high and low, rich and poor alike in the sanctuary, and the several colors worn with it distinguishing the choir divisions, they did not propose to longer wear the Schneppel Haube, but had agreed together and concluded to appear in church the following Sunday wearing the Englische Haube. They did not first ask the fathers whether they approved; did not give them an opportunity to first examine the law, discuss the question, perhaps write to the Unity's Elders' Conference for counsel and then return answer. They simply
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.