CHAPTER FOUR:
The Park Commission Triumphs
The Valley Forge Park Commission found a powerful
friend in Governor Samuel W. Pennypacker. In his inaugural speech,
Pennypacker boldly stated:
No people are ever really great who are neglectful of
their shrines and have no pride in their achievements. . . . The good
example set by Philadelphia in its care of Independence Hall and
Congress Hall should be followed by the State. The fields of Fort
Necessity, where Washington first became known, of Bushy Run, where
Bouquet won his important victory, and the camp ground of Valley Forge
should be tenderly cared for and preserved. [1]
Samuel W. Pennypacker had been born in nearby
Phoenixville in 1843. Instead of attending Yale, he had chosen to fight
in the Civil War. He had studied law with a Philadelphia attorney,
becoming a lawyer himself and later a judge. Though largely
self-educated, he was known as the "Sage of Schwenksville" and
considered something of an expert on the history of the Pennsylvania
Dutch. Pennypacker had been the one who had guided Henry Armitt Brown
around Valley Forge in preparation for his famous speech in 1878. As
governor, Pennypacker made frequent trips to Valley Forge. In 1904, a
Philadelphia newspaper reported on one excursion at which "the governor
was the life as well as the leader of the party. His enthusiasm over the
preservation of the sacred camp was more obvious than that of any other
of those present." [2]
It was Governor Pennypacker who finally got the park
commission the cash it needed to put Valley Forge on a firm financial
footing and make vast improvements at the park. In 1905, he signed a
bill appropriating money for the purchase of additional land at Valley
Forge, the building of roads, the erection of an observation tower, and
the placement of markers to indicate the campsites of the Continental
Army's various brigades. In 1906, the Daily Local News observed:
"Within the last two years the Valley Forge Park Commission has done
much to beautify the old campgrounds, and its work is not one-half
completed. The commission was created in 1893, but the work of improving
Valley Forge did not begin until about two years ago." [3] In 1908, after Pennypacker had been replaced
by another governor, the same paper noted that of the total $261,000 the
state had so far spent on Valley Forge, $219,000 had been appropriated
during Pennypacker's four-year term. [4]
The revitalization of the park commission made
possible by Governor Pennypacker also raised the question of whether
this organization should be the sole custodian of the physical Valley
Forge and the primary arbiter of what happened at the place. The
governor certainly helped the park commissioners put an end to a threat
that had loomed large enough at the turn of the century to threaten
their very existence.
During the final quarter of the nineteenth century,
preservation became a legitimate function of the federal government.
Federally funded monuments on the battlefields of the Civil War and the
American Revolution had been the first step in this direction. In the
1890s, Congress went further and created several national military
parks, including Gettysburg; which became a national military park in
1895. By the end of the nineteenth century, those with hallowed ground
worth preserving were clamoring for more federal dollars.
As early as 1883, voices had been raised in favor of
making Valley Forge a national park. Senator David Vorhees of Indiana
visited Valley Forge. Immediately upon his return to Washington, he
introduced a resolution authorizing the Committee on Military Affairs to
look into making Valley Forge a national park. [5] His efforts were perhaps premature, and
nothing came of them.
The timing was better in December 1900, when no less
than seventeen historic and patriotic organizations met at Independence
Hall in Philadelphia to pursue the idea of a national park at Valley
Forge. The Philadelphia Press gave itself credit for prompting
this meeting. [6] The Daughters of the
American Revolution had also made a resolution some three years earlier
to work toward a national reservation at Valley Forge, [7] and the DAR was among the organizations
represented at Independence Hall. They were joined by the Colonial
Dames, the Society of the War of 1812, the Society of Colonial Wars, the
Brotherhood of the Union, the Patriotic Order Sons of America, various
Chester and Montgomery county historical societies, and the Centennial
and Memorial Association of Valley Forge. [8]
Their chief complaint was that Valley Forge had been
neglected. True, the park commission had acquired land, but this was
only a fraction of the soil on which Washington's troops had spent the
winter of 17771778. Without other state appropriations, which did
not seem to be forthcoming at the time, the park could acquire no more
land, nor could it do anything with the property it already owned.
Because private owners had once protected the graves, the earthworks and
the other historic spots on their own property, Valley Forge seemed
worse off under the park commission than it had been before its
creation.
The December 19 meeting at Independence Hall
continued that evening, featuring patriotic speeches that were
frequently interrupted by bursts of enthusiastic applause. Dr. George
Edward Reed, president of Dickinson College, voiced the earliest
recorded suggestion that the Valley Forge story might be useful to help
Americanize new immigrants. By the 1890s, it was estimated that fully 15
percent of the nation's population was foreign-born, causing other
Americans to become increasingly concerned about whether the newcomers
could learn American values and be absorbed into American society. Reed
said, "One of the necessities of our time is to keep the spirit of
patriotism alive in the hearts of all our people, a specially important
duty in a country like ours, which has grown so rapidly and whose
population is composed of so many different nationalities." [9] U.S. Senator Boies Penrose received much
applause for his promise, "I am here to pledge my earnest effort toward
the accomplishment of this project until the field shall have been
formally set apart by Congress as a memorial of the heroism of the
Continental Army." [10]
Efforts to create a national park at Valley Forge
were unsuccessful in 1901, but enthusiasm did not seem to lag. Senator
Penrose found the House Committee on Military Affairs unwilling to
report any more bills for national parks that session, but his movement
found a champion in President McKinley, who went on record in favor of
federal acquisition of Valley Forge. [11]
The movement's leaders, who started calling themselves the National Park
Association, sent out form letters to raise money acknowledging their
initial setback but promising to present the issue in Congress again.
[12] By the end of the year, Senator Penrose
joined forces with Congressman Irving P. Wanger, who hailed from nearby
Norristown, and the two men jointly sought an appropriation of $200,000
for the purchase of Valley Forge. [13]
Late in January 1902, the National Park Association
decided to send a massive delegation to Washington. An assassin's bullet
had robbed them of their friend in the White House, but they planned to
present a memorial to his successor, President Theodore Roosevelt.
Leaders of the movement lunched with the President. [14] The following day, members of the National
Park Association explained their patriotic purpose to the Senate
Committee on Military Affairs. From ten o'clock in the morning until
late in the afternoon, the committee rooms were packed, and it was
reported that not one voice was raised against the proposition. [15]
The Valley Forge Park Commissioners, who opposed the
movement, stayed home. The general feeling among these gentlemen was
that Pennsylvania should finish what it had begun. All the park
commission needed was money. Samuel W. Pennypacker became the
commission's spokesman during his campaign for governor:
I think it would be a great mistake to take the
Valley Forge campground out of the hands of the State of Pennsylvania. .
. . The State is abundantly able to take care of Valley Forge, and it
will preserve in a most fitting manner the Revolutionary Camp. [16]
As governor, Pennypacker successfully squelched the
movement with a letter to Senator Penrose. The park commission was doing
well, he proclaimed, it needed cooperation and money, not redirection
from groups like the DAR. "We want to do everything we can to help [the
park commission] and to prevent the interference which comes from
persons outside the State and certain well-meaning but ill-advised women
within it." Pennypacker enlisted Penrose's aid: "Should the matter come
up in Congress, I rely upon you to help me. Should a bill be presented,
you can probably kill it easily by having added to it that the
Government also take Bunker Hill from Massachusetts and Stony Point from
New York." [17]
The movement for a national park at Valley Forge was
never launched again during Pennypacker's lifetime. In 1916, the
Phoenixville Daily Republican created a contest soliciting
letters both for and against a national park at Valley Forge. The letter
of a Fred A. Tencate stated:
In conversation with the ex-Governor [Pennypacker]
within the past year he advised me not to try to ever have Valley Forge
Park transferred from the State to the Nation, and whilst I realized
that he did so purely out of State pride, I could not coincide with his
views and since his lamented death, I have again begun the agitation.
[18]
This later movement too went nowhere. In his history
of the Centennial and Memorial Association, Henry J. Stager reported
that Anna Morris Holstein and Theodore W. Bean had both "repeatedly
urged" that Valley Forge be made a national park. [19] If this encouraged the park commission to
view the Centennial and Memorial Association as a threat, it may have
helped hasten the demise of this organization.
When the park commission was first established in
1893, there seemed to be no reason why it could not cooperate with the
Centennial and Memorial Association. Within a week of the park
commission's first meeting, the commissioners received a cordial message
from the Centennial and Memorial Association offering them the use of
Washington's Headquarters for their meetings. The park commission
acknowledged the offer but continued to meet in Philadelphia, perhaps
simply because it was geographically more convenient for most of the
members. [20] While the agitation for a
national park continued, the Norristown Times Herald urged
cooperation between the three entities that would potentially exist at
Valley Forge. "The three proprietors need not clash," it advised. "Each
would have its own sphere of action and all would be working for a
common purpose." [21] Even the national
publication Harper's Weekly hoped that "under the control of the
government the various interests would be unified for the good of the
entire campground." [22]
Though the Centennial and Memorial Association
reported that the takeover of Washington's Headquarters had been an
unpleasant surprise, there were early indications of trouble. Stager's
history reported that as early as June 19, 1894, it was known that the
park was contemplating annexing the Headquarters to its property. "This
the Board of Directors prepared to dispute," the association minutes
read. [23] In a pamphlet, A Brief Review
of Valley Forge and Its Environments, Stager flatly stated: "The
Headquarters are not for sale." He suggested that the park commission
acquire the structures that had been quarters of Washington's generals
and protect the earthworks they already owned. [24] In 1900, the Centennial and Memorial
Association's minutes noted that state officials, particularly those at
the state capitol, were not giving proper credit to their organization
or to the work of the POS of A. [25]
With Pennypacker in office as governor, money in the
park treasury, and the national park movement successfully diverted,
perhaps it seemed that the time was right for a decisive attack on the
Centennial and Memorial Association. The park commissioners' official
justification for seeking to eliminate this organization appeared in the
commission report published at the end of 1904. The report admitted that
Washington's Headquarters was in admirable condition and that the
building's attractive furnishings and surroundings made it a mecca for
tourists and picnickers. However, entrance to the building cost each
visitor 10 cents.
Should this be? [the park commission asked] Is it not
rather humiliating to require the payment of a small sum of a visitor
when we realize that all of the Headquarters of Washington throughout
the country, which are preserved and open, are free to the visitors? [26]
Another reason was perhaps suggested by a 1900
guidebook to Valley Forge, which commented: "Washington's Headquarters
is the chief object of interest beyond the line of fortifications." [27] The park commission owned a lot of
overgrown heaps of earth, the Centennial and Memorial Association had a
valuable tourist attraction. The underlying question was whether that
attraction properly belonged in private hands or in public hands.
Hearing the call of the park commission, the
Pennsylvania legislature took action at their next session, amending the
act that had created the park by striking the phrase that had always
protected the Centennial and Memorial Association's property.
Association members heard about this at their annual meeting on
Evacuation Day in 1905. They received a visit from a delegation from the
park commission who quoted the amended act and proposed the immediate
takeover of the building. According to Stager's history, the park sought
"a friendly agreement with the Association as to the price to be paid."
Recorded in the association's minutes for that day were the words "The
Association did not consider it had been fairly treated by the State."
[28]
The association tried to thwart this hostile takeover
by naming a price so high that the park would not be able to pay it.
They resolved on a seemingly unreachable $25,000, [29] and might have gone even higher as they
managed to find real-estate experts who valued their property between
$35,000 and $50,000. [30] As they had during
the land confiscation of ten years before, the press seemed to take the
part of the park commission. A query to Philadelphia's Public
Ledger asked what was a fair price for Washington's Headquarters?
The answer came that the state should set the price. This was not a case
where private individuals wanted to tear it down or divert the property
to another use. If the state was ready to assume the care of the
building, the Centennial and Memorial Association should step aside and
let them do so. [31]
When the state proposed to arrive at a price through
the assessment of an independent jury of view, the Centennial and
Memorial Association sought an injunction restraining the park
commission. The Montgomery County Court of Common Pleas denied their
injunction, and they decided not to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court,
fearing that the state would in the meantime enact some other
legislation that would render any expensive and time-consuming efforts
ultimately futile. [32]
When the jury of view awarded the association
$18,000, its members decided to accept the offer rather than appeal.
Their conditions were that the state would allow them an additional $200
for their personal property at the Headquarters and permit them to place
a plaque in the building attesting to their role in acquiring and
restoring the structure. [33]
At their annual meeting the following year, members
of the Centennial and Memorial Association discussed the prospect of
dissolving their organization. The park commission had denied them
permission to meet at Washington's Headquarters, so they gathered at the
nearby Washington Inn, where they could probably see their beloved
building from the windows. Their treasurer acknowledged receipt of
$18,000.00 which would leave them with $16,486.27 in cash after their
legal expenses were paid. They resolved to defer the question of
dissolution for one year while members considered how to distribute
these funds. [34]
It was actually 1910 before the Centennial and
Memorial Association petitioned a local court for legal dissolution
because in 1907 a new question arose concerning their money. Meeting
again at the Washington Inn that June, the association received a
proposal from the park commission that they give funds back to the park.
The association scornfully acknowledged receipt of this letter, sending
back word that "the [Centennial and] Memorial Association knows of no
warrant in law to pay over the money and respectfully declines to do
it." Association members scratched their heads over how the park
commissioners figured that the sum they had paid for Washington's
Headquarters should now be handed back. [35]
In 1912, the park commission won this odd debate. The
matter was resolved by an independent auditor appointed to hear all
concerned parties and decide on the legal issues. The auditor's report
summarizing the conclusions at law was included in Stager's history of
the Centennial and Memorial Association. It was decided that the
association had been organized to act as a charity, and its funds were
held in trust for public use. Because it had never been operated for the
profit of its members, its funds could not be distributed among those
members, nor could they be returned to the individuals who had purchased
its decorative stock certificates. Association funds legally belonged to
whoever would carry out the original mission of the organization. [36] It seemed absurd and incredible, but the
very body that had confiscated Washington's Headquarters was the only
organization then in a position to carry out the objective of preserving
this building. The park commission essentially got Washington's
Headquarters for free.
The auditor's conclusions ended with glowing words
implying that there had actually been a spirit of cooperation between
the Centennial and Memorial Association and the park commission and that
the association had been meekly willing to give its property to the
park. "The luster of this proud achievement [the preservation of
Washington's Headquarters] should not be dimmed by even a suggestion
that the donors would undo it, and no such suggestion has come from any
of them." [37] Despite these words, the
association appealed the decision, but it was upheld by the Common Pleas
Court of Montgomery County and the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.
The auditor's conclusions ended with glowing words
implying that there had actually been a spirit of cooperation between
the Centennial and Memorial Association and the park commission and that
the association had been meekly willing to give its property to the
park. "The luster of this proud achievement [the preservation of
Washington's Headquarters] should not be dimmed by even a suggestion
that the donors would undo it, and no such suggestion has come from any
of them." [37] Despite these words, the
association appealed the decision, but it was upheld by the Common Pleas
Court of Montgomery County and the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.
That the association's relationship with the park had
long ceased to be amicable is witnessed by the controversy that
persisted for four years over the small sum of $200 that the park had
promised the association for their personal property at headquarters.
This property included the souvenirs the association had been selling
there. The park commission had originally agreed to pay the association
a total of $18,200, but then the commissioners decided they had allowed
too much for personal property when they discovered that some objects
had already been marked "sold." In 1906, the park commission offered a
check for $113.84 but failed to pay this amount until April 1910, by
which time they were deeply involved in campaigning for the rest of the
association's money. [38]
Nor was the park commission especially cooperative in
allowing the association to place their plaque in Washington's
Headquarters. At the end of 1905, the park declared that such a plaque
must carry no individual names and must not be placed on the walls of
the Headquarters lest it "desecrate" that building. [39] By 1907, an association committee was
lobbying the Pennsylvania legislature for their support on the plaque
issue, and later they made it known that they would not even consider
formally dissolving their organization until the park agreed to the
plaque. In 1908, they were told that they would be allowed to place
their plaque at the headquarters providing the park commission approved
its wording. [40] The plaque, with the
simple words "This tablet commemorates the patriotic service rendered by
the Centennial and Memorial Association of Valley Forge aided by the
Patriotic Order of the Sons of America in acquiring, restoring and
preserving these headquarters, 18781906," was finally mounted in
the entry hall at the Headquarters in 1909. [41] The park superintendent reported that there
was "no ceremony attached to the erection of this tablet." [42]
|