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 73
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
677
1826-1845.
such loss being suffered by the Society for Propagating the Gospel, of which he had been the treasurer for a number of years. Other men who might have withstood the general financial depression of the time gave way under this new strain. Joseph and James Leibert, who had suffered severely from the great freshet of the previous year, were compelled to suspend operations at the tannery and that important industry lay idle for a few years. Lewis Doster's busi- ness was likewise crippled by the indirect effects of this crash, fol- lowing the devastation wrought by the water, and all the merchants and shop-keepers felt it in varying degrees, while many not engaged in business found their little hoard swept away. In consequence of these experiences, the conviction rapidly matured that, without further delay, steps towards the complete re-construction of property control and financial management must be taken by the authorities, and that everything in the existing system of Bethlehem which, in order to maintain it, compelled the further purchase of houses that men were driven to sell, must be set aside, for it had now become impracticable to continue this burdensome method. And yet, when it came to facing the final issue, the abolition of the lease-system, and with it, necessarily, the old exclusive church-village organization, there was at last more difference of opinion, both in official bodies and among the people generally, than those who clearly saw the necessity of it had expected; although by far the majority decidedly favored it.
The Supervising Board of Bethlehem-Aufseher Collegium-on February 14, 1843, appointed a committee of five to prepare an exhaustive report on plans to be proposed for further consideration. The first week in May, the report was discussed by the board and that part of it which proposed the entire abolition of the lease- system, with, of course, the abandonment of the exclusive polity- in so far as this yet existed-following upon it, was unanimously adopted as their proposition. The view prevailed that no partial steps nor gradual processes were practicable. There was a differ- ence of opinion, however, on that part of the report which dealt with plans for village and church re-organization. The report, as it left the board with no conclusion on this portion, was then referred to the Elders' Conference of the village. Their deliberations had prac- tically the same result, and then the report, with what they had to add, went before the Provincial Board. They were also divided in opinion on the measures proposed. A full report on the situation was prepared for the Unity's Elders' Conference. This body had
678
A HISTORY OF BETHLEHEM, PENNSYLVANIA.
asked for it and were entitled to it, with an opportunity to give their views, because of constitutional and financial relations. A very thorough discussion of the subject was had by the Provincial Board on July 19, 1843, after receiving the opinions of the U. E. C. The latter were inclined to regard the final step as unavoidable at Beth- lehem, because of its external location, its peculiar circumstances and its growth, numerically and otherwise, beyond the limit to which the retention of the old organization was practicable, even if the time did not seem to have come for such a change at Nazareth, Lititz and Salem. The opinion was held by the majority of the Provincial Board that even the internal, spiritual condition of the Congregation would ultimately be improved by such a complete opening up, when church membership and citizenship in the town would no longer mean one and the same thing to the minds of the people; when the former would become a voluntary union and the external complications would disappear. It may be remarked here that this important thought was shown by the outcome to be sound and true. The Church gradually became a better Church after the turmoil of re-construction subsided, leaving it an organization in the town instead of being the town, comprehending all that town meant, with men's status as residents and their business rights and privileges in the place depending upon their church-membership and consequently-for they were no longer even in theory a company of heroic Christians and enthusiastic evangelists-for many the uppermost reason why of their membership.
In discussing the very practical aspect of the question, the increase of houses and consequent increase of difficulty about transfers and sales, it was observed that in the course of fifteen to twenty years, forty-five new buildings had been erected and many old ones had been remodeled and enlarged, besides all those in what was then called South Bethlehem, of which at least seventeen had been built within nine years ; also that two entirely new streets, Broad and New Streets, had been opened and Market Street had been extended dur- ing those years, whereas during the same period not more than eight new houses had been erected at Nazareth and Lititz. The possible effects of the change upon the Young Ladies' Seminary in various ways and the probable organization and building of churches in Bethlehem by other denominations were also elements of the situ- ation that were considered. It was shown by the Administrator that the peculiar financial complications which a few years before hindered the proposed step had been solved. More than one-third
679
1826-1845.
of the debt of that time had been paid and financial relations to the Unity's Wardens had been gotten into a shape which left it possible to proceed. It was pointed out that there must be a proper, logical sequence of steps; first the abolition of the lease-system, then the legal incorporation of the village and finally the re-organization and legal incorporation of the Congregation, followed by that of the Provincial Board, to hold the estate of the Sustentation Diacony after a settlement and division of property with the Bethlehem Con- gregation. Finally, in considering the broad, general question of such a radical change in the organized form of the Congregation, it was agreed that no fundamental principle of the Church and no vital interest of the local Congregation would be sacrificed by abol- ishing the plan of colonizing in an exclusive church-village. Of this peculiar arrangement it was said "it was not an article stantis et sedentis ecclesiae nostrae." Then, on that day, July 19, 1843, a vote was taken in a meeting of the Provincial Board on the question of favoring the proposed step as expedient. The vote stood five in favor to one opposed. The Elders' Conference and the Supervising Board of Bethlehem, while not unanimous at this time on the three main questions, the abolition of the lease-system, the incorporation of the village as a borough and the incorporation of the Congrega- tion, favored these steps by a very large majority. The records do not state exactly how the vote stood in those boards. Then, in the midst of much excited discussion among the people, a temporary reaction of opinion among many was produced by arguments against the proposed course by the Warden of the Congregation, who advo- cated a different method of dealing with the situation, and it became uncertain for a while what the result of a final vote in the Congre- gation Council might be.
At this juncture the last action needed to settle the question was taken by the General Wardens in Europe. A letter was received from them in November in which they declared against any further advance of money by their agent, the Administrator, for the pur- chase of houses at Bethlehem, in order to maintain the existing system. Thus, instead of holding things back-as, under the super- ficial impression of their attitude which later prevailed among some, in the excitement of controversy, on new questions, in the next decade, they were charged with doing-they really gave the final push forward.
On January II, 1844, the Congregation Council definitely resolved in favor of the first step, to abolish the lease-system. This decision
680
A HISTORY OF BETHLEHEM, PENNSYLVANIA.
was followed by many important deliberations on new arrangements that would immediately be necessary, particularly in the matter of sales and further leases of real estate. An ad interim status, until the point of incorporating the Congregation should be reached, had to be provided for. Ground rents would now become redeemable for its members, and persons who were not members could secure lots on ground rent, which was not the case before, the intention being that when the new permanent status was reached, real estate could be conveyed in fee simple not only to members, but to any person. The proposed incorporation of a water company was favor- ably acted upon by the Congregation Council on November 28, and a revised body of rules and regulations for the Congregation, adapted to this ad interim condition, were compiled which, on December 8, were read, expounded, adopted and laid before the members for signature. As regards the new village organization, to be distinct now from that of the Congregation, the discussion, intensified among some into controversy, was no longer discussion between parties for and against retaining the old arrangements. This stage of the question was past, because everybody understood that the vote of January 11, 1844, had settled that ; for the old church- village organization disappeared necessarily with the abolition of the lease-system. This further discussion was rather such as might take place in any little town on the points involved in a proposed borough organization, such as increased taxation to run a system of borough machinery with improvements and elaborations of various kinds; discussion between those who see and those who do not see the necessity of becoming a borough; between those who are public-spirited and progressive and those who are not, or between those who have interests involved and those for whom it is immaterial. Bethlehem would now, in the first place, become simply a village, with what had remained of good government and order under the old system abolished and nothing new instituted to take its place. Some did not appreciate the force of this fact. Those who did and who understood that the large interests to be cared for would not admit of a long continuance of such a situation, were decidedly in the majority. The necessary steps were therefore taken before the close of the year to secure borough incorporation. March 6, 1845, "An Act to incorporate the village of Bethlehem, in the County of Northampton, into a Borough," was approved. Its metes and bounds were thus described: "Beginning at the River Lehigh at the fording-place immediately above Jones's Island;
JOHN KRAUSE
OWEN RICE (2ND)
JOHN CHRISTIAN LUCKENBACH
JACOB RICE
CHRISTIAN JACOB WOLLE
.
1826-1845. 681
thence up the said river to the mouth of Monocacy Creek; thence along the said creek to the stone bridge at the Hanover Township line in Northampton County; thence along the center of the upper road, leading from Allentown to Easton, to the intersection of the road leading from Nazareth to Philadelphia ; thence along the center of the road last mentioned to the River Lehigh to the place of beginning." An act, approved March 24, 1856, extended the lines to the Borough limits as they have since existed. In accordance with the provisions of the act of March 6, 1845, the voting citizens met at "the house now in the occupancy of Caleb Yohe in the said Borough"-the Eagle Hotel-on the third Friday in March-it being the day of annual township elections, Good Friday, March 21, 1845-and elected a Burgess, nine Councilmen and three Auditors. Charles Augustus Luckenbach was elected the first Burgess. The first Town Council were Ernst F. Bleck, Lewis Doster, Benjamin Eggert, Philip H. Goepp, Henry G. Guetter, Charles L. Knauss, John M. Miksch, Christian Luckenbach and William Luckenbach. They held their first session, organized and appointed sundry Borough functionaries on March 24, at the Eagle Hotel. The incor- poration of the Borough did not end the existence of the old Aufseher Collegium or Supervising Village Board, although it trans- ferred to the Town Council all those municipal functions which this board had before performed and which naturally now belonged to the Borough authorities. The Collegium continued, during the ad interim status of the Moravian Congregation, for the purpose of caring for its property and managing the laying out of town lots, opening of streets and alleys in its various blocks of real estate within the Borough limits, and, as a cabinet associated with the "Lord Pro- prietor and Administrator," as he was once facetiously called-who continued to hold the title to all the real estate until 1851-to negotiate sales and leases. The Rev. Philip H. Goepp had been both Proprietor and Administrator since October 9, 1843, when Bishop William Henry Van Vleck, as Proprietor, executed a deed for the entire estate to Goepp, thus concentrating and simplifying the situation, preparatory to the proposed changes. That Board of External Supervision con- sisted, in 1845, when the Borough was incorporated, of Philip H. Goepp, President; John C. Brickenstein, the warden; Matthew Brown, Matthew Krause, Augustus Milchsack and John F. Wolle to the end of that year; Charles D. Bishop, Henry B. Luckenbach, Jacob Luckenbach and David Weinland to the end of the next year. In December of that year four new members were elected by the
.
682
A HISTORY OF BETHLEHEM, PENNSYLVANIA.
Congregation Council in place of the one-year men. These were Ernst Lehman, Wm. Theodore Roepper, Samuel Schultz and Jedediah Weiss. Roepper had previously been secretary of the board, but not a voting member.
The exact population of Bethlehem at that time cannot be ascer- tained beyond the membership of the Moravian Church. This, at the close of 1845, given in the customary manner, was as follows: Married people 278, widowers 8, widows 54, single men 56, single women 95, older boys 32, older girls 38; under thirteen years of age, 117 boys and 130 girls; total 808. The Moravian statistics included also 100 girls from elsewhere who were boarders in the Seminary. They increased the population accurately known to 908. From various sources of information it may be estimated that about 150 other persons lived within the Borough limits as householders or in service, so that the entire population was about 1050.
FS9
BETHLEHEM FROM THE S. E., 1850 FROM THE N.W., 1851
CHAPTER XVIII.
THREE DECADES OF PROGRESS. 1846-1876.
The foregoing narrative makes it sufficiently clear that it is an erroneous impression which has the events of 1844 and 1845 in mind as a sudden crisis, and the change from church-village to borough as a stampede. It has been customary to lay so much stress upon one detail of the re-organization-the action of January, 1844, when the Congregation Council confirmed the action of the two village boards, sustained by the Provincial Board and the Unity's Elders' Conference, in favor of terminating the lease-system, as a step in the process of re-construction, and to speak of the town having then been "thrown open," that many who are not acquainted with the facts fancy the beginning and the end of the change to have lain in that vote. Some seem to have before them a kind of grotesque imaginary picture of it, like another capture of Jericho-an invading host marching around the Moravian walls until they suddenly fell, when the world got its first sight of what was inside and those inside first looked forth upon the world. Others have treated of it as if it had been like a first Oklahoma in-rush and scramble to locate claims when the supreme hour struck. Moravians themselves have been partly responsible for this impression, in their manner of speak- ing and writing about that epoch in later years. The absorbing thought of some residents was that of being able to secure owner- ship of the ground on which they lived and to buy a lot or lots, and from this point of view the situation was chiefly talked about by people. As for an imaginary rush upon the spoils from all quarters, it is a mistake to suppose that immediately after that action of Jan- uary, 1844, a new land office was opened and indiscriminate sales commenced. While ground-rents at once became redeemable and town lots purchasable in fee simple by Moravian residents ; and other persons could secure sites, as Moravians had before done, on ground rent under certain stipulations relating to the nature and use of
ยท 683
684
A HISTORY OF BETHLEHEM, PENNSYLVANIA.
buildings and other points, and all the restrictions of the old system in the matter of permission to reside or open any business at pleasure were, of course, obsolete, the final status, when such ground rents of non-Moravians all became redeemable and sales outright were made to any one, was not reached until the process of re-con- struction was completed in 1851. During the interval direct sales were made, in certain exceptional cases, to outside parties and some acquired real estate in fee simple in the town by having Moravians purchase for them. The important steps leading up to the incorpo- ration of the Moravian Congregation had to do with other elements of the situation besides merely selling town lots, and they were taken very deliberately and carefully. So broad were the connections of the process that it entered into the business of two Synods at Beth- lehem, 1847 and 1849, and even into that of a General Synod in Europe in 1848; being intimately related to the general modern- izing of the organization and government of the Moravian Church in the United States, completed ten years later by the General Synod of 1857, preceded by Synods at Bethlehem in 1855 and 1856 and followed by one in 1858. The process involved so much from which important developments at Bethlehem issued that it enters essen- tially into the history of the town. The principal features in the transit of the Moravian Congregation from the point at which the abolition of the lease-system left it, to its legal incorporation in 1851, may therefore properly be sketched in this chapter.
Up to that time, the former Bethlehem Congregation Diacony yet existed, with a warden at the head of its affairs, and the title to all of its real estate continued to be held by the Proprietor and Admin- istrator, the Rev. Philip H. Goepp. While various considerations, among others the burden of the collateral inheritance tax made it very desirable to terminate this individual proprietorship as soon as possible, the transfer of title to a corporation could not be made until important adjustments had been effected between the Beth- lehem Congregation, on the one hand, and the Unity's Wardens in Europe and the Sustentation Diacony instituted in 1771 and con- trolled by the Provincial Board at Bethlehem, on the other hand. There were thus three parties to the pending financial settlements, the Congregation, the Administration-that is, the agency of the General Wardens of the Unity-and the Sustentation-that is, the treasury which supported the government of the Church in America, excepting the North Carolina Province, and provided for the estab- lished pensions and educational privileges of the ministry and sundry
FS192
MONOCACY VIEWS
MAIN STREET, BRIDGE REAR OF TANNERY
& WATER WORKS .
BRIDGE, NEAR CANAL LOCK
685
1846-1876.
other objects. Up to 1847, the Congregation, as well as the Sus- tentation, continued to owe a large amount to the Administration, and the resources of the Sustentation, which had no endowment worth speaking of, were meagre and quite inadequate. The two most important measures planned to solve the whole situation, extricate the Congregation and clear the way for the ultimate steps, were to extinguish its indebtedness to the Administration and to discharge its obligations to the Sustentation by a liberal endowment instead of a mere annual contribution under the old contract of 1771. After this matter had been thoroughly discussed by the Synod held at Bethlehem, May 2-20, 1847-similar provisions for the Susten- tation by Nazareth and Lititz, which were made later, being also in mind-the Congregation Council at Bethlehem took favorable action, May 27, 1847, on a proposition by Administrator Goepp to sell to the Administration a body of 1,380 acres of the Bethlehem land, embracing seven farms and considerable woodland, at $75 per acre. This sale very nearly covered the debt of the Congregation. After arranging to dispose of the bulk of this land to private parties, Goepp went to Europe in the summer of 1847 to consummate the transaction with the Wardens of the Unity. He returned to Beth- lehem on November 9.
Before the next steps were taken, a change in the government of the Church in America took place which was of importance among the closely related forward movements. The Synod which met at Bethlehem in 1849, was the first of these convocations that was officially called a Synod since 1768. During all that interval, with their very limited authority, they were called merely conferences. Constitutional changes had been conceded by the General Synod of the previous year which invested them with new powers that ren- dered them properly Synods, and gave the body of American Con- gregations more character as a distinct integral Province of the Unity. Its Executive Board, called yet the Provincial Helpers' Conference, continued, to this time, to be constituted as since 1818, consisting of a Presiding Bishop, the Administrator and the Head Pastors of the three church-villages-Bethlehem, Nazareth and Lititz-all being appointees of the Unity's Elders' Conference. Now this Provincial Board consisted of three members; two elected by the Synod and holding no other office, and the Administrator ex officio. Bishop Benade, the President, had retired before the Synod of 1849 met, and the first two members of the Provincial Board elected by the Synod were Bishop John C. Jacobson and the Rev.
686
A HISTORY OF BETHLEHEM, PENNSYLVANIA.
Henry A. Shultz, associate pastor at Bethlehem. Subsequently it was called the Provincial Elders' Conference, the name by which it is constitutionally yet known, and after 1857 all of its members were elected by the Synod and chose their own President. As constituted in 1849, this board had more of the character desirable to secure for it a charter of incorporation, qualifying it to hold and control prop- erty under the laws of the Commonwealth, than before. In view of plans at Bethlehem for the Sustentation, that step was had in mind in the final settlement of affairs, as well as the incorporation of the Congregation. After further preliminary consultations and arrangements, the next distinct step in the process was taken, December 26, 1850, when the Congregation Council formally adopted three important propositions : that the Congregation should be incorporated in order to legally hold and manage its property ; that its real estate should, for the most part, be converted into cash; and that a division of property and settlement should be made with the Sustentation Diacony. A committee of seven was appointed to take the whole subject into consideration in conjunction with the Warden, John C. Brickenstein, and the Provincial Board. The com- mittee were Charles Augustus Luckenbach, the mover of the propo- sitions; Jacob Rice, John M. Miksch, James T. Borhek, Ernst F. Bleck, William Eberman and John F. Rauch. They submitted a printed report, together with a draft of an Act of Incorporation, on January 30, 1851. The report dealt with the general question of incorporation, discussed the proposed sale of real estate and set forth the plan of settlement with the Sustentation, elaborating details of the course to be taken in pursuance of the above proposi- tions. It was recommended that, following upon the incorporation and in connection with the division of property with the Sustenta- tion, the entire estate of every kind whatsoever be put into the hands of a Liquidation Committee after June 1, 1851, if the charter of incorporation had been secured. That committee was to consist of three men, one appointed by the Trustees of the incorporated Congregation, another by the Proprietor, and the third by the Pro- vincial Board. It thus represented the three parties to the settle- ment-the Congregation, the Administration and the Sustentation.
On a second reading the report was adopted, with slight altera- tions, at another meeting of the Congregation Council on February 13, and the committee was continued to carry out the plans. Admin- istrator Goepp and Ernst F. Bleck went to Harrisburg, February 19, to secure the passage of the Act of Incorporation and, at the
CHARLES FREDERICK BECKEL THEODORE FRANCIS WOLLE
CHARLES DAVID BISHOP JOHN SEBASTIAN GOUNDIE
HENRY GOTTLOB GUETTER
1846-1876. 687
same time, another act incorporating the Provincial Board. Both acts were passed. That incorporating the Provincial Board was approved, March 29, and that incorporating the Congregation, April 3, 1851. The legal title given the Provincial Board was "The Board of Elders of the Northern Diocese of the Church of the United Breth- ren1 in the United States of America." That given the Congregation was "The Congregation of United Brethren of the Borough of Beth- lehem and its Vicinity." Both corporations yet carry the load of this ponderous verbiage.1 April 14, the Congregation Council chose three men to hold the first election under the charter. They were Charles F. Beckel, Charles D. Bishop and Jedediah Weiss. The election took place, April 22. The Act of Incorporation provided for the election of six Trustees, two Elders to constitute with the pastors of the Congregation-at that time a senior and a junior minister-the Board of Elders, and three School Directors, who with the Board of Elders, were to constitute the School Board, in charge of the Parochial Schools.2 The first officers elected under the charter were the following: Elders, Charles D. Bishop, John F. Rauch; Trustees, Matthew Krause, Jacob Rice, Henry B. Luckenbach, Charles F. Beckel, Ernst F. Bleck; School Board, Philip H. Goepp, Simon Rau, Jedediah Weiss.
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.