Alexander Hamilton’s final resting place at Trinity Church cemetery, in lower Manhattan.

A segment of the wooden water pipes, at Trinity Church.

New York’s growing, crowded population had choked what little sewer and water supply systems existed. A group of concerned citizens, believing that yellow fever was spread through swampy water, got together and proposed the formation of a water pipe system to bring in fresh water from the Bronx River. Alexander Hamilton chaired the group. Also in the group was Aaron Burr, grandson and son of the illustrious Reverends Jonathan Edwards of Northampton, Massachusetts and Aaron Burr, Sr., president of College of New Jersey in Newark (later to become Princeton College). Burr was serving as an assemblyman for the New York State Legislature at the time. He wrote a charter to form The Manhattan Company, a water utility company, and pushed the bill for the charter through New York government. Buried deep within the charter for the utility company was a section that allowed the water company to divert excess profits to “any activity not inconsistent with the Constitution.” The entire venture seemed so philanthropic, didn’t it? But this water utility charter was not invented to help poor, sickly New Yorkers get fresh water, not exactly. Burr chose the “activity” to be a bank, The Bank of the Manhattan Company– a bank essentially controlled by the “Jeffersonians,” those “anti-Federalists” in the new American government led by Vice President Thomas Jefferson. This move was a political scheme, an underhanded attempt to gain power and squash President Washington’s and Alexander Hamilton’s growing Federalist government. This scenario went far, far deeper than a simple water pipe. It epitomizes the rancor and hate the two parties had for each other.

Alexander Hamilton raged against Burr for such underhandedness. He claimed the bank was created by “intrigue” and the water system was merely a front for the formation of the new bank, a bank created solely as a rival for Manhattan’s first bank, the Bank of New York, and for the Federalists in the national government. And you can probably guess who had founded the Bank of New York and was leader of the Federalist party: Alexander Hamilton.

“I have been present when he [Burr] has contended against Banking Systems with earnestness and with the same arguments that Jefferson would use. Yet he has lately by a trick established a Bank, a perfect monster in its principles; but a very convenient instrument of profit and influence.” “The Papers of Alexander Hamilton,” vol 25, p. 321 (Ed. Syrett & Cooke)

I have very little love for Thomas Jefferson. He is regaled as a great master of the Constitution when in fact he had nothing to do with its formulation and ratification. Worse still, Jefferson was a sneaky man. Historians like to call him “contradictory,” because what Jefferson WROTE about himself and his intentions and what Jefferson actually DID were often two opposing things. He used other men to attack his political opponents (such as sending reports to newspaper editors to attack Hamilton and Washington) while posing as a dedicated member of Washington’s cabinet, and other such underhanded actions. I know I know, my opinions are an assault on the current Jefferson worship that commences to this day. But Jefferson was a sneaky, devious man and he had no problem sending his cronies to get their hands dirty while he looked like a knight in shining armor. Thus entered Aaron Burr.

Jefferson wanted more power and support in New York, and promised Burr a position in the federal government as a reward. Burr was no angel, either. He was one of the rare anti-Federalists (Jeffersonians) in the northern states, and Jefferson encouraged Burr to generate support in the state legislature. Burr was also a master at political maneuvering and campaigning. He essentially created Tammany Hall (a group that wreaked untold corruption in New York’s state government). Later, after killing Alexander Hamilton in the 1804 duel in Weehawken, Burr traveled west and attempted a coup to create his own country with himself as great leader. Burr was placed on trial for treason, but was acquitted for lack of overt evidence. Oddly enough, Jefferson threw all his weight against Burr to no avail. There is evidence that Burr was involved in other seditious plots from foreign governments. Some historians speculate that Burr may have been a patsy in the duel with Hamilton, as Burr received large amounts of money or favors from wealthy tycoons (such as John Jacob Astor) for leases that he didn’t own (see the second source link, below). Many, many people wanted Hamilton out of the way. Once Burr’s usefulness was over, he was essentially thrown out by the Jeffersonians.

Now, I apologize– I do not intend this article to be a slanderous attack on Jefferson and Burr. These points are historically accurate and they do illustrate the motivations of the men involved. Surely, Hamilton and the Federalists were no perfect angels, either. While serving as Secretary of the Treasury, Hamilton was engaged in a disgusting adulterous relationship with an immoral woman, and then blackmailed by her husband. This situation was used against Hamilton later, as he was accused of bilking federal money from the treasury to fund his blackmailer’s purse (a false accusation). Some historians think the woman and her husband were a plant, to bring Hamilton down and bring down the Federalist faction with him. But George Washington remained on Hamilton’s side, and — to her amazing graciousness and honor — so did Hamilton’s longsuffering wife, Eliza. In my opinion, she is the true hero.

So back to the wooden water pipes at Trinity. Such a seemingly unimportant and dull artifact behind that chunk of glass means much more now. The Manhattan Company water pipes were a dismal failure. To save precious money, the pipes were made of wood and not cast iron. The pumps were generated by horses! The water was brackish and residents complained of stomach ailments when the water was available. The only benefit to the pipes was the availability of water in case of fire, as the pipes were only buried four feet deep. Several of the pipes were unearthed recently. Check the sources links at the end of this post to view photos and learn more about the water system and their discovery — it’s absolutely amazing! The entire system, before construction was ceased, probably extended only 25 miles. But the Burr bank lives on.

The Bank of the Manhattan Company continued to do business until it merged in 1955 with Chase National Bank to become Chase Manhattan Bank. Chase Manhattan Bank begins it’s history with The Manhattan Company and its water pipe venture. Chase Bank and the Bank of New York were rivals for over 200 years until 2006. That year, Chase swallowed up the retail banking division of the Bank of New York. The BNY was then swallowed up by Mellon Financial based in Pittsburgh, PA. And here’s more trivia for you:

• The Chase Bank used an image of Oceanus as their bank’s logo, representing the Greek Titan god of water that encircles the world.
• The modern Chase Manhattan Bank logo? It is a stylized representation of those water pipes that started the whole thing.
• The Manhattan Company helped to underwrite and finance the Erie Canal project of 1825. The Erie Canal was the greatest engineering project of its time (and perhaps of all time). The Canal opened up the western United States to commerce and settlement.
• The dueling pistols used by Burr and Hamilton in 1804? They are owned by the Chase Manhattan Bank at 383 Madison Avenue in Manhattan. The pistols are on display in the lobby.

• On a personal note, I was a young student living in Manhattan — 25 yeras ago! — when I opened my very first bank account at Chase Manhattan Bank on 383 Madison Avenue. I remember seeing the pistols in the lobby, and wondering why they were there. Back then, I had no education in history and knew nothing about Hamilton and Burr. How the times have changed.

Sources:
“Alexander Hamilton,” by Ron Chernow, 2005.
Executive Intelligence Resource; “The Case of Alexander Hamilton” by Nancy Spannaus (PDF file)
Alexander Hamilton, Patriot, accessed October 2011
The History of JP Morgan Chase & Company, 2008. (PDF file)
The Foundation Forum: Let an Association Be Formed – Part 2
Columbia University MAAP: Manhattan Company
Archaeology: Excavating Beekman – Area 1
Aquaduct.org: Water Pipes Unearthed

Burr, Hamilton, Chase Bank and the Wooden Water Pipes

New York Traveler.net This post is from New York Traveler.net and is copyrighted material.

It’s an experience of extremes. The streets are hot and smelly and loud, filled with honking horns and diesel traffic and the deafening noises of subway trains moving below our feet, of millions of feet shuffling over the concrete Manhattan jungle…. but once you spot the iron gate, and climb the ruddy sandstone steps, and cling to the ancient wrought iron rail for balance, and walk up onto an enchantingly emerald hill several feet above the crowded sidewalks, it’s as if you’ve entered the Woods Between the Worlds. It is quiet. A whisper of a cool breeze blows over the stony tombstones and lightly tickles the honeylocust leaves.

Crowds of people mingle here, too. People are ubiquitous in Manhattan, without people there would be no Manhattan. It would be like no grasshoppers in the hot summer Upstate meadows, no mud in the Upstate creeks, no blackflies in the Upstate forests….

…but these people here are different. They are quiet. Maybe the lush green moss carpeting muffles the sounds. But even the chattering children and the businessmen eating lunch while chatting on cellphones seem quiet.

We meandered around the grounds as I described in Part 1. For this post, we venture inside the church.

The bronze doors make a good first impression. Weighty and ornate, they speak of Trinity’s past with a solidity not seen in modern architecture and art.

I’m a “ceiling person.” I look up and am awed. I stop to take photos, not caring if I block the entryway momentarily. Oddly enough, people wait. When I say, “Excuse me,” THEY SMILE. Trinity Church works wonders in Manhattan, indeed!

The church is very dark. My photos are pitifully blurry, I apologize. Plus, my hands would not stop trembling. I can’t figure if it is the heat of the day, the long walk or the joy of returning to the church. Last summer, the day (and the church) was horribly hot and humid. My camera had photographed grotesque clouds of haze and humidity above the altar. This time, the place was deliciously cool. I sat down in a pew– partly from reverence, partly from exhaustion.

Tourists mingle in and out. Some people kneel in the pews, quiet in prayer. Others noisily wander around the vestibule. We are behind a small group of Chinese tourists, chattering in their native tongue. One boy, about the age of 12, restlessly pushes ahead of the group. An alert security guard speaks up, “Take off your hat,” she says to the boy. He stares at her, puzzled. “Take off your hat, please,” she repeats, more forcefully. An older Chinese gentleman, perhaps the boy’s father, removes the boy’s hat. I am impressed. The guards are not here only to keep the candles from thievery, but to enforce respect for the church. Some of the Chinese children run past us, straight up to the altar where the gold glitters on the sacrament table. Another guard pipes up, “Please get down from there.” The boy gives a blank look. Again, one of the adult tourists waves the little boy down. I find the events rather amusing– not in a funny way, but just interesting. The children do not know how to conduct themselves in a church. It’s not limited to foreign children, by any means. I feel a little melancholy when I think about it.

My attention is turned to my daughter, who nudges me and whispers, “This is it. This is where Hammy sat with his family.” Hammy is our little nickname for Alexander Hamilton, our hero. My daughter knows everything there is to know about Hamilton and his wife, Eliza. We sit reverently in the pew #92.

We wander the sanctuary, taking terrible photos because of the poor lighting and my poorer photography skills. The building is so beautiful.

My daughter nudges me again, “There’s a museum down here.”

What?! “Where?!” I whisper incredulously.

“Down here,” she repeats.

I have been to this church twice and never knew there was a hallway that led to a museum. Of course, she’s the expert– she knows the history of this church like the back of her hand. She leads me toward the museum… I’ll have to make a Part 3 for this part of our adventure, as there is much to tell!

Trinity Church, New York, NY: Part 2

New York Traveler.net This post is from New York Traveler.net and is copyrighted material.

Sir William Cosby, loyal subject of the British crown. Served a New York’s royal governor for four long years, from 1732 to 1736. He was born in Ireland, worked his way up into the British military, married a wealthy women with connections to Buckingham Palace. Before his appointment as NY governor by King George II, Cosby made a great name for himself by illegally seizing a Portuguese ship and taking the cargo of snuff for himself.

Andrew Hamilton, Esquire, a Scotsman by birth (1676) and emigrated to the American colonies in 1697. He studied law and settled in Philadelphia. He became the 18th Speaker of the Pennsylvania House of Representatives, serving two terms, one in 1729 to 1732 and a second in 1734 to 1738. Hamilton made the phrase “Philadelphia lawyer” famous, as used in the old proverb “Only a Philadelphia lawyer could have done it!”

The Story

In 1734 before the American colonies became independent states, John Peter Zenger published anonymously-written, highly critical articles about Governor William Cosby. Outraged, Cosby tried to organize a public bonfire of Zenger’s paper, The New York Weekly Journal. When that didn’t work out, Cosby sued Zenger for seditious libel, and Zenger was jailed. Cosby “stacked” the deck in his own favor by appointing a hand-picked court to sentence Zenger and had Zenger’s bail set so high that Zenger couldn’t possibly see the light of day again. When Zenger’s lawyers criticized Governor Cosby’s court appointments and high bail, they were disbarred from practicing law!

Zenger seemed to take the entire fiasco like the typical cocky New Yorker. He publicly apologized to his readers that his paper had skipped a week, as he explained that he was in jail without supplies. The excessive bail prevented him from freedom, and he was forced to dictate his newspaper instructions through a small hole in the jail wall to his hapless wife and servants. Zenger remained in jail for 8 months.

The case got extra-colonial attention, garnering even the intervention of fellow printer, Benjamin Franklin. Franklin realized Zenger would need a new (and brilliant) attorney, so he persuaded young Andrew Hamilton from Philadelphia to take Zenger’s case. Hamilton did on a pro bono basis, receiving no payment for his efforts.

The court case was wrought with as much excitement, corruption, and sensational media attention as modern cases today. During the proceedings, the prevailing judge instructed the New York jurors to resist the slanderous defense that Andrew Hamilton was sure to give, and dole a guilty verdict for the malicious, libelous Zenger.

Hamilton’s defense centered on the fact that while Zenger’s newspaper did indeed publish very critical and harsh statements, the statements were all TRUE and therefore not libelous. Hamilton probably drew from an article that Zenger had published over a year previously regarding libel and freedom of the press. According to the February edition of The New York Weekly Journal, a writer named “Cato” proclaimed that the word “libel”:

…only holds true as to private and personal failings; and it is quite otherwise when the Crimes of Men come to Affect the Publick. Every Crime against the publick, is a great crime…

…The exposing therefore of Publick Wickedness, as it is a Duty which every Man owes to the Truth and his Country, can never be a Libel in the Nature of Things.

…almost all over the Earth, the People for one Injury they do their Governor, receive Ten Thousand from them. Nay, in some Countries it is made Death and Damnation, not to bear all the Oppression and Cruelties, which Men made Wanton by Power inflict upon those that gave it them.”

The trial slogged through the hot summer of Manhattan here at the site of Federal Hall National Memorial. But finally, on August 5, 1735, the jurors reached their decision and submitted the verdict.

NOT GUILTY.

The ramifications of the verdict exploded throughout the colonies, ringing aloud that truth is an absolute defense against libel.

Zenger, like any good newspaperman, later published an account of the trial in his pamphlet A Brief Narrative of the Case and Trial of John Peter Zenger. This case is considered a landmark case that paved the way for the First Amendment right “freedom of the press.”

The Result

Many of America’s founding fathers point to this case and the many printed publications contained within the Weekly Journal as the impetus for the growing sentiment of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness– of a government of the people, by the people, for the people. Morris called Hamilton the “day-star of the American Revolution” and Hamilton was hailed across the country and in England as a defender for the common rights of man.

Andrew Hamilton was honored by New York City for his eloquent and gracious service. The Common Council of New York City gave him the “freedom of the city,” recognition with great honors. A group of New Yorkers gave Hamilton a gold box engraved with Latin phrases from Cicero, translated to say: “For let the laws be never so much overborne by some one individual’s power, let the spirit of freedom be never so intimidated, still sooner or later they assert themselves” and “Acquired not by money but by virtue.”

Fifty-six years later, the United States of America granted liberty by law– freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, the right of the people to assemble peacefully and our right to petition the government for grievances:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Of course, man is man. Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely, eh? The First Amendment does not guarantee that government (men in power) will never attempt to silence critics. But the First Amendment gives the people teeth to proclaim these encroaches as unjust and the power to fight back when need be.

Sources:
The Trial Of John Peter Zenger
Peter Zenger and the Freedom of the Press
John Peter Zenger Trial 1735

Federal Hall: John Peter Zenger and The Bill of Rights

New York Traveler.net This post is from New York Traveler.net and is copyrighted material.

While the National Women’s Rights Hall of Fame honors various American women, the Women’s Rights National Park honors the women’s rights movement. The movement officially began in 1848, when a large group of 300 women assembled on this corner to petition for equality of women in society and business.

The museum is filled with displays. When you first walk in, you see a group of life-like statues by the information desk. It’s very impressive.

I am not familiar with the ladies, but that looks like the great abolitionist Frederick Douglas in the center.

Most of the displays are either all visual or textual. There were large portions of wall space dedicated to posters of the plight of women before equal rights and after.

I have read various biographies of notable women. One of the best was a biography of Elizabeth Blackwell (I don’t remember the author, as I read it as a child). Elizabeth Blackwell was from England but emigrated to America as a child. She became very concerned about the deplorable conditions of women in society. It was once said that the only three employment positions for women that men encouraged were governess, seamstress and prostitute. Blackwell would visit women in the slums who had been abandoned by drunkard husbands; these women often resorted to prostitution to keep food on the table. Blackwell began a series of social reforms to enable women to work honorably, and she also became a doctor (woman to graduate from medical school!) to help these women.

The museum showed both sides of the spectrum– the poor women trapped in her poverty, and the rich woman trapped in society’s demands. One very interesting display showed the detrimental effects of the corset.

Women died in childbirth all too frequently during the “corset” age. Lord, that’s just terrible.

The museum had dozens upon dozens of displays, most of them very large billboards for reading. We could easily have spent the entire day reading everything. I didn’t have that kind of time, unfortunately, so I read displays and snapped photos of the things that caught my eye.

In 1871, women’s rights activist and friend of Susan B. Anthony, Pauline Kellogg Wright Davis wrote a book about the history of the women’s rights movement. She said that the women’s rights was a direct result of the religious revivals by Charles Finney in Upstate New York. Finney allowed women to pray and preach to mixed-gender groups; he also encouraged women’s social rights and abolition. Some say the revivals of the Second Great Awakening entirely altered American society and government– where a person should LIVE out his Christian faith not just on Sundays but throughout his entire life (the totality of Christ) throughout society by ensuring justice for all.

Black women slaves such as Harriet Tubman and Sojourner Truth (born as Isabella Baumfree) were very outspoken about slavery and women’s rights. This display on Truth was very haunting. Slavery was bad enough, but if you were also a woman, it was a very bleak life indeed.

The Women’s Rights National Park is free admission. It’s a marvelous place to take children, too. There are few hands-on displays, but the history is just oozing out of the walls. It all makes for a very good history lesson.

Women’s Rights National Park, Seneca Falls, NY

New York Traveler.net This post is from New York Traveler.net and is copyrighted material.

PETERBORO, N.Y. – 1861 marked the beginning of the American Civil War. The 19th Annual Peterboro Civil War Weekend Committee plans to include programs that reflect the 150th anniversary of that conflict.

Among the plans in the works: President Lincoln will share his thoughts and feelings upon his March 4 inauguration, a relative of Edmund Ruffin (the man who fired the first shot at Fort Sumter) will share that history, and the Saturday evening concert will include references to 1861.

The annual event will be held in Peterboro Saturday and Sunday, June 11 and 12, 2011.

We are definitely making it to this celebration!

I have written about Gerrit Smith, famed philathropist and abolitionist several times. Smith was THE man most responsible for the abolition movement in Upstate New York, inspired by the preachings of Charles Grandison Finney to “love one another” regardless of skin color and financial situation. It was a remarkable movement for it’s time. You can read about our stop by the estate in Peterboro here. You can read more about his passion here, and Smith’s mysterious admittance to the Lunatic Asylum in Utica here. We also visited the old home of the Higinbotham home in Oneida, NY, close friends of his. Of course, the Civil War was not about slavery exactly (it was about state’s rights, a very relevant issue to this day); slavery was the impetus for the struggle between the states.

According to WKTV, hours for the Saturday, June 11 are 10am to 5pm, and Sunday, and 10am to 4pm for June 11. Admission is $7 for adults, $3 for ages 6-12, and free for children under 6 years of age. Admission to the to the special Civil War concert at 8 p.m. may be paid at the door. Parking is free!

Peterboro Prepping For Civil War Weekend

New York Traveler.net This post is from New York Traveler.net and is copyrighted material.

I had become greatly interested in the history of the Oneida Community after discovering and reading A Yankee Saint: John Humphrey Noyes and the Oneida Community by Robert A. Parker, years ago. Still curious, I had read Pierrepont Noyes’ My Father’s House: an Oneida Boyhood. The two books presented two vastly different views of this so-called utopian society. The book on John Noyes, founder the Community and father of Pierrepont, cast a glowing light on the Oneida Community. Pierrepont’s book was quite the opposite. It was written from the viewpoint of the child, forcibly bereft of maternal love and raised as cattle in an experiment hailed by leaders around the world (and socialists like H.G. Wells and Arthur Conan Doyle).

Pierrepont’s is quite the book about the dark side of socialism, particularly hard for the more vulnerable members of the group (i.e., young women and children). Needless to say, when John Noyes died, the Community fell apart. The children of “stirpiculture” had no desire to continue the eugenic socialist experiment of their fathers.

Pierrepont, the “black sheep” of the community, grew up to rescue the family’s business and made it into the world-renowned Oneida flatware company that we know today. I understand that Pierrepont Noyes was a generous CEO, giving his employees fair pay for fair work (compared to the other misers of that era), offering no-interest loans for employees to buy houses, and hosting company picnics and outings. The area of Sherrill and Oneida are quite prosperous to this day. Streets are clean and houses are beautiful. There remains a sense of community and cleanliness in these small towns.

Although the Community was a bit nutty when it came to Biblical doctrine, there is something to be said for their Yankee ingenuity and work ethic. They built an entire culture upon these acres of former Indian land. I was especially awed by the grand style of architecture.

The house is Empire style, which was popular in the mid-1800′s. The French mansard roof sets it off nicely. The slate shingles, if you can see them in the picture below (or click the picture for a larger photo), are different colors and set in pleasing patterns. The detail of the work is most admirable. Apparently, the Community members did all the work themselves. John Noyes routinely sent out his young men to places like Italy, to learn the art of fresco and sculpting for example, and the young men would return to apply what they had learned at the Community.

A lovely courtyard is at the back of the complex. The cafeteria-like dining hall and kitchen are back here, separate from the living quarters.

Each member of the Community had his or her own small room, similar to a dormitory room like colleges have today. A large shared living room, dining room, and a two-story theatre-room (where they often held recitals and plays for their entertainment) are in the main complex. Pierrepont Noyes recalled in his book that as a child, he never noticed the uniqueness of a kitchen built separately from the living quarters of a house. (Although, this is common in the south and southwest of the country, where the problem of cold weather doesn’t affect it as much). It was only as an adult, when he began visiting with others in the town (the “Gentiles” as the Community called the townsfolk), that he entered a house and was bombarded with the stale smells of cooking from the kitchen off the parlor room. I don’t know why I so particularly remember this part of the book. Perhaps it is because I don’t like kitchen smells in any room besides the kitchen.

At any rate, the kids and I wandered the grounds around the house, and I continued to give them some brief history of the Community.

Here’s a door into the lower part of the house. I love doors like this (under a porch). It looks so adventurous and secretive!

Here’s the front door, the front hall, and a snapshot of the interior.

The Mansion House offers tours of the complex (I had been through once before so I didn’t do it this time). Visitors can see the Jesse Kinsley Braiding Room for free, though, so we went into that.

Jesse Kinsley was raised in the Community. She was a gifted craftswoman, and created beautiful rugs, wall coverings, and linens. Some of these creations and some of her furniture is on display.

The Mansion House is now a high-end apartment building. It is nice to see that the place is being kept up and still has the lovely herb garden in the front yard.

If you’d like to learn more, check out AroundCNY. They have some good information.

Oneida Community Mansion House, Sherrill, NY

New York Traveler.net This post is from New York Traveler.net and is copyrighted material.

Who knew what “leatherstocking” referred to, anymore?

That’s what makes it sad.

Greater Utica Area officially renamed “Central New York” *[see my note below]

Assemblywoman RoAnn Destito said, “The Finger Lakes, The Hudson Valley** and the Adirondacks** [see my notes below] are designations that clearly define regions of New York State. White (sic) James Fenimore Cooper’s Leatherstocking Tales is an important part of our history, the Central Leatherstocking designation never really created an identity for our region’s tourism industry. The new name, Central New York, will help us do this, and it will greatly improve our ability to market and promote tourism in our region.”

Senator Griffo said, “The new name will simply better identify our geographic region. While it may seem trivial today – changing the name of the area was a huge step for the region.”

I grew up in the 1980s; and I have lived in the Central Leatherstocking region Central New York region most of my life. Even as a kid, I had NO IDEA why my region was called “Leatherstocking.”

You see, that’s what makes it so sad. Kids are not taught their history, their heritage, their culture. I think this is purposeful of the government school education: a whole populace educated about our history and heritage of constitutionalism and freedom can’t be counted on to kowtow Washington’s every whim, now can it?

“Leatherstocking” comes from the James Fenimore Cooper stories. I never knew of them as a kid. I found out much, much later as an adult, when I decided to become more educated about our history and heritage.

It’s a weird term, I admit. It’s outdated. And I wish I could say that Cooper’s books are riveting stories of passion and adventure. They are real snoozers, they are. But Cooper wrote them about our region, back when this was all wilderness, when brave men and women were forging houses in the woods and the glorious seeds of self-government in their hearts. Men were valiant, women were moral, children were eager, and God was revered.

Some will say I’m making too much of the name change. It’s *just* a name change. Ah, but words MEAN things; names MEAN things. When we mention the “Adirondack region,” we visualize pointed pines on rugged mountains that burn our noses with their tangy fresh air**. When we mention “Finger Lakes” or “Thousand Islands,” we visualize the geographic majesty of New York’s blue waters contorted into unusual shapes, twisted around emerald isles or in between languishing green hilltops.

But “Central New York” is so cold and utilitarian. We have no pointy pines or long lakes or bejeweled islands here. All we had was our history, that last thread of leatherstocking history that showed the other regions that we were of good stock: scrappy, industrious, and valiant. Now all we are is a central blob on the map. And what distinguishes us from all the other regions? Nothing, except that we are wedged between them.

I think it would have been much better to educate New Yorkers about their history than to change their name from under them.

P.S.
*We are not the “Greater Utica area,” either, journalists!

** The Adirondack tourism department successfully crafted an association with their unusual name, why couldn’t “Central New York”? I mean, Adirondack means “bark eaters”! But to most, it means the largest national park in the world. Why isn’t the Adirondack Region getting a name change? Answer: because they successfully created an association with their name. Same with the Hudson Valley. Central New York failed to do so, it’s not that the “identity didn’t work.” It’s just sad.

Central Leatherstocking Region Name Changed to “Central New York”: My Opinion

New York Traveler.net This post is from New York Traveler.net and is copyrighted material.

This area of the Mohawk Valley is home to a large number of Russian immigrants, most of whom emigrated to America during times of religious persecution under Joseph Stalin (hiss, hiss). My stepfather was Russian Jewish, so I have a natural interest in Russian history. (My step-dad also said Russian monks made the best wines, and I think he was in part of some kind of Russian wine of the month club, lol).

The monastery was founded in 1928. You can read more of its history and view some gorgeous aerial pictures here.

We had hoped to be able to enter the church and look inside. But a sign at the gate forbad women wearing pants to enter. Nuts. We drove around the front and snapped a few pictures. I got a shot of a beautiful mosaic over the doors. The halos above the apostles’ heads are made of gold mosaic tile. Click the photo to see a larger one with more detail.

More colorful mosaics were to be found beyond this exquisite gate. I was not bold enough to enter through the gate, but I took this picture.

I also took a quick snapshot of the glorious golden onion dome, so typical of the orthodox style.

It was a nice visit, even though we did not get to go in the buildings. The kids and I are currently studying ancient world cultures and Church History. We have just finished reading about the fall of the Roman Empire and the invasion of the Northern tribes, and started learning about the formation of the Catholic and Orthodox Churches. It is good to see their artwork and religious style first-hand, rather than relying only on pictures in books.

We drove further down the road and came to the monastery’s cemetery. I took a few pictures. The cemetery chapel reminded me of Taj Mahal.

On our way back to the main thoroughfare (i.e., Jordanville Rd.) we spotted a swath of signs denouncing the Iraq War. All along his property, a farmer had large signs such as the one below, protesting the war as a “blood for oil” contest.

Not all appreciated the farmer’s signs, and defaced the property with spray paint.

Who knew tiny Jordanville was a hotbed of seething political passions? Then again, this is America.

The Russian Orthodox Monastery in Jordanville, NY

New York Traveler.net This post is from New York Traveler.net and is copyrighted material.

“The known propensity of a democracy is to licentiousness which the ambitious call, and ignorant believe to be, liberty.”

– Fisher Ames (speech in the Massachusetts Ratifying Convention, 15 January 1788)

Fisher Ames

New York Traveler.net This post is from New York Traveler.net and is copyrighted material.

Here’s a magnificent video clip of an argument he presents.

Hat tip: The Well-Drained Mind. This video and the thought behind it uncannily coincides with a blog post I read and with which have been participating: Pushing the Political Easy Button. Unfortunately but not surprisingly, the biggest dissent is over the definition of words. You’ll have to visit the post for a full and better idea of what is going on– I dare not try a synopsis here for fear of making the issue long in tooth. But it’s a good post.Today, young people (and, granted, older people as well, although this is found less frequently) desire to define themselves. They often take long-established terms and redefine them according to their own experiences and insights. I believe this is unfavorable. It makes the topic of discussion too slippery and leaves one with more universal skepticism than a solid conviction of truth to be discovered. I’ll take the leisure of posting just a small bit from the blog post to which I referred:

Anarchy is not just a desire to eliminate the State: it is a moral commitment to voluntary interactions and non-violent principles. The Anarchist is a person committed to helping his fellow man, not hurting him through either political means or more mundane criminal means…

The reason we lack freedom is the government, plain and simple. But in order to move towards a free society we need to do so much more than remove government. We need to reeducate as many people as possible into understanding that government is the one thing standing in the way of freedom. As long as the general populace continues to see government as the solution instead of the problem we will continue to be slaves.

That’s what all of my posts on anarchy are about: educating as many as possible. Showing them the truth that government is standing in the way of their freedom and is incapable of doing anything but constricting it.

I found much error in this. My response:

I don’t understand how one could eliminate government. Where there are two people, there’s government. Government is the system whereby it enacts and enforces rules so a group can interact with each other, essentially… I’m sorry, I don’t think this constitutes anarchy. Anarchy is defined as a state of society without government or law. “Helping fellow man” is something completely different. If one’s political purpose is to “help fellow man” that immediately constitutes a form of government– a rule of law whereby one helps another– and cannot be defined as anarchy.

The reply, in brief:

Your assumptions are faulty, Mrs. Mecomber, although widely accepted as fact. There can (and often are) two (or more) people coexisting without government. To claim otherwise is to deny the evidence all around us. Children play with each other sans rules constantly. Couples do not always have an authority figure.

While you are correct that government enacts and enforces rules, your assumption that such a body is necessary remains unproven. There have been countless societies throughout history that existed and prospered without a central authority figure.

And my response, again, edited for brevity:

no, I don’t think my logic is faulty. Children playing with each other DO have rules. The rule is to 1) play with each other, 2) play peacefully. If one child is hitting the other, haven’t the rules been broken? Or perhaps the rules are to hit each other.. then, playing peacefully rule is broken. One does not need an authority figure to have a government– self-rule is a rule.

I think perhaps you are confusing a central authority figure as a form of government? This does not matter. The authority of the law constitutes authority (i.e., a form of governing) just as much as a figure, or figurehead.

You are denying the existence of something that you need to be existing in order to deny it. See?

In case you haven’t noticed, I am talking about government as one of the laws of nature (see Locke’s writings). I am talking about the essence of government, based upon the necessity of law itself, which is inherent of nature and of life.

Therefore, it seems the big hang-up is over what is “anarchy” and what is “government.” Anarchy is defined as rejecting a state or form of government, yet anarchy is a form of government– it is a form of government that rejects forms of government. If you took the time to watch the video clip in this post, Ravi Zacharias makes the same point about atheism:

“If you’re an atheist, what are you denying?”

You cannot deny nothing that is there. How can you make a moral judgment in an amoral universe? It’s like C.S. Lewis said: “Atheism makes no sense. If the universe has no meaning, we never should have found out that it has no meaning.”

Update: The comments on the post just kept flowing. I made my final point and could not make it any clearer:

I’m sorry, but self-rule is a form of government. Self-rule is not an amorphous karmic philosophy that will naturally occur as soon as mean old men get out of the way.

“Philathropism” is a philosophic gesture, which perhaps defines your point much more than the “rejection” of government. There have to be “checks and balances” that protect self-rule, because of the corruption of human nature. Therefore, self-rule must be enforceable, even if everyone desires self-rule, because humans will at some point deny someone else’s own self-rule to gain something for his own self. To deny this is truly delusional, as history and experience provides.

An intervening commenter named Francois (about whom the post was written, actually) interjected with this mind-whirling post:

Government is not an evolution. It is a devolution. It is a corruption of morality in the name of dominance and hierarchy. Once we take down government, humans will once again live in relative peace, instead of the state of war we live in today.

Holy cow! This betrayed all intent. A kum-bay-yah lovefest of holding hands in perfect harmony is not the whole picture here. Flabbergasted, all I could say was:

Wow, reminds me of Citizen Genet.

Francois, you said: “Once we take down government…” what if OUR self-rule says we do NOT want government taken down? See what I mean! You become our tyrants, and what’s worse, you think you impose your tyranny on us for our own good! Hypocrite!

What illogical, ridiculous, nonsensical blather!

It’s been an interesting and turgid discussion. The anarchists didn’t seem to agree, but then again– these are anarchists! They are going to reject anything that is said to them anyway! lol.

A Lesson About Denial

New York Traveler.net This post is from New York Traveler.net and is copyrighted material.