Carnegie Hill Neighbors - On Waldron Farm Update

On January 31, 2010, I posted a blog about the misinformation that this website had posted. I sent an email message via the contact me link at the website.

The message I sent read:

On the page accessed from http://www.carnegiehillneighbors.org/history/index.htm you refer to a Baron Resolved Waldron. This person is the grandson of Barent Nagel after whom he was named. Your Baron Resolved Waldron is actually named Barent Resolveert Waldron. It is not a title but a common given name. His father was Resolved (Resolveert) Waldron. Typical of the time in which Barent Waldron was born people were identified with a patronym. In this case, Resolved (Resolveert).

I couple of weeks ago, I received the following message:

Dear Ms. Kline,

Thank you for the corrections you sent to Carnegie Hill Neighbors regarding the names of two early residents of our neighborhood.

I compiled the history section on our website using a number of sources. The references you mention are taken from an article in our Carnegie Hill News in 1990, written by an elderly gentleman who was somewhat of a historian. He lived in a wooden house built in 1871 and had a treasure of old maps and historical information, much handwritten. Twenty years ago, we accepted what he wrote without reservation. With your incentive, I have checked the names on Internet sources and see that you are quite right.

Quite incidentally, the president of our organization now is of Dutch origin, and he said independently that your corrections make sense. We will have them made this week.

Can you tell us how you came to our website?

Thank you for your interest and corrections.

Barbara Coffey

I replied to the her message. The site was updated. However, a few errors still exist.

Haym Salomon, American Patriot

My cousin regularly sends me messages with religious undertones. A recent message had to do with the number 13, a lucky or unlucky number. It focused on the backside of the US dollar bill and the number of items in which there are 13, such as, 13 steps on the pyramid, 13 arrows, etc.

She forwarded a message from Dr. Martin Weissman (whom I believe to be Martin J. Weissman, a urologist in Orange, California) that claimed that the 13 stars in the seal on the right side of the dollar were configured in the shape of the Star of David. The message stated that this was ordered by George Washington at the request of Hayim Solomon (sic), a wealthy Philadelphia Jew.

The message from Dr. Martin Weissman included a link that I assumed had something to do with the source of his information. When I clicked on the link the site was all about Australian sheep dogs. There are lots of pictures of cute dogs but nothing about Haym Salomon and the one dollar bill. In spite of this small diversion, I was still intrigued about Haym Salomon.

This man actually existed. I found several articles about him and his financing of the American Revolution. His son filed a claim with the US Senate to recover $353,729.43 that his father financed plus interest. Bill S. 263 was introduced in 1860. However, the family was never successful at recovering any money.

Index to the Reports of the Committees of the Senate of the United States for the First Session of the Thirty-sixth Congress) includes a 10-page report of March 9, 1860 by Mr. Durkee to accompany the bill under Rep. Com. No. 127 Part of the evidence (on page 7) includes a letter, dated September 21, 1848 from J. Hockley, Cashier of the Bank of North America, that showed payments to Robert Morris from Mr. Salomon's account of at least $76,000. The report shows that he financed another $100,000 payable to representatives of the French crown. My sleuthing revealed that he died in January of 1785 leaving his wife and 4 young children financially ruined.

Haym Salomon was born in 1740 in what is now Poland. He came to the British colonies in North America shortly before the beginning of the revolution.

I was suspicious of the part of Dr. Weissman's message that claims George Washington ordered 13 stars be arranged in the form of the Star of David because Haym Salomon asked that he wanted something for his people. I just didn't believe it. I found an image of the first US Great Seal approved by Congress of the Confederation in 1782. The star pattern seems to be random. A pamphlet about the Great Seal of the United States printed by the US Department of State indicates these stars are a constellation surrounded by clouds.

This seal was designed by Charles Thompson. Robert Scot is believed to be the engraver who created the brass die. The constellation and the clouds in the final seal take the shape that we all recognize. As the die became too worn, another was created. Over time several dies were made and in several instances the engraver took the liberty to modify the seal. In 1841, the eagle held six arrows and not 13 as in the original. In 1885, the positions of the arrows and olive branch were switched.

I doubt that Haym Salomon and George Washington had a conversation about the Great Seal. The seal was under the province of the Second Continental Congress in 1776. George Washington was not a member of that congress nor was he a member of the Congress of the Confederation that ultimately approved the design of the seal in 1782. George Washington was busy fighting a war.

The Great Seal has two sides, obverse with the eagle and reverse with the pyramid and eye of Providence. The first time that the two sides appeared on the one dollar bill was in 1935. There were some paper currencies printed during the Revolutionary War. I found one such paper of1776 in which the front side included "Mind your business" and the back side stated "We are one."

Coins of gold and silver were the accepted currency of the period following the signing of the Treaty of Paris in 1783. The next time that paper money appeared was in 1861 during the Civil War. Since that time, we have accepted paper. The words "In God we trust" did not appear until 1955-56.

The 1960 U. S. Census

I subscribe to the free version of Dick Eastman's Online Genealogy Newsletter. Most mornings I find a message in my inbox with a list of articles and links to them. This morning the list started with "1960 U.S. Census Myths and Facts."

This particular article was a "teaser" article that provided a few paragraphs. To see the remainder of the article, I need to have a paid subscription.

Mr. Eastman had mentioned in previous issues of his newsletter about the "lost" 1960 Census data. This census is not lost in the same sense as the 1890 Census of which much was destroyed by fire, water and man. Instead, as the story goes, the data is lost because it was stored on 7-track magnetic tapes and the equipment to read such tapes is obsolete.

I have experience in a couple of areas (computers and research) that permit me to say with confidence "the 1960 Census data is not lost."

The 1960 Census data was collected on census schedules printed on paper. The data on the magnetic tapes was created from transcription of the schedules. Since the National Archives had been microfilming records prior to 1960, I have no reason to believe that the 1960 US Census was not been microfilmed.

The story of the census data stored on 7-track magnetic tapes being lost is also not true for several reasons.

First, the purpose of recording the census data on magnetic tape was for research purposes. Many institutions and governmental agencies analyze census data. The electronic data is available to qualifying groups as soon as possible. Thus, multiple tapes were made to satisfy the demand by these entities.

Second, research using census data from any given decade continues years after the data becoming available. By 1964, 9-track tapes were introduced and thus emerged the need for recording the data on 9-track tapes. As data storage devices and data delivery mechanisms evolved over time, I expect to find the 1960 Census data recorded in a variety of formats.

Third, it is possible to read a 7-track tape today. Even if you were to assume that there were no working 7-track tape drives, the knowledge of how to build one is not lost. In fact, I know of a working 7-track tape drive in Silicon Valley.

As of 2009, the Computer History Museum in Mountain View, California, had operational IBM 729 tape drives attached to a working IBM 1401 computer. Several companies manufactured 7-track tape drives, Hewlett-Packard Company being one. The HP Computer Museum in Australia collects HP equipment with the goal to have working examples. The museum has on exhibit several models of HP 7-track tape drives.

There are other computer museums that collect old equipment. I even found a company, Sunstar Company in Los Angeles, that as of 2010 sells refurbished 9-track tape drives manufactured by many different computer hardware companies.

The National Archives was established in 1934 and its building opened in 1935. Professional archivists have been employed the National Archives for decades. Knowing something about archiving, I found the alleged story of the "lost" 1960 US Census insulting to the archivists.

A visit to the National Archives Website revealed an article written in the Prologue Magazine, Winter 2000, Vol. 32, No. 4, "Myths and Realities About the 1960 Census" by Margaret O. Adams and Thomas E. Brown. The article confirmed my belief that the 1960 US Census is not lost.

To read the article, click on this link at the National Archives.

Although I have not read Mr. Eastman's complete article, however, based on the title, I believe that his article contains similar conclusions.

Carnegie Hill Neighbors - On Waldron Farm

Here I go again.

I have found many references to Baron Resolved Waldron on the Internet. I was particularly disappointed when I came across a website www.carnegiehillneighbors.org that included a history of the Carnegie Hill area of New York City. The site included sentence that said, "The area was known as Waldron Farm after a Dutch patent conveyed the land to Baron Resolved Waldron, who owned it until he died in 1705."

I sent the following email message to the organization:

On the page accessed from http://www.carnegiehillneighbors.org/history/index.htm you refer to a Baron Resolved Waldron. This person is the grandson of Barent Nagel after whom he was named. Your Baron Resolved Waldron is actually named Barent Resolveert Waldron. It is not a title but a common given name. His father was Resolved (Resolveert) Waldron. Typical of the time in which Barent Waldron was born people were identified with a patronym. In this case, Resolved (Resolveert).

After sending the message, I noticed another glaring error in the first paragraph under the heading "On Waldron Farm." It refers to a Peter Van Ogliensis. I sent a message to inform the organization that Peter's name is written in the records of the time as van Oblinus or van Oblenus.

Although, I was alarmed that the organization made an erroneous reference to a Baron Waldron, I did not include the fact the Barent Waldron was not the individual who was granted the land patent as the site claims. It was Barent's father, Resolved Waldron who received the land patent along with several others. This patent is known as the Harlem Patent and this patent and those included in the patent are well documented.

In a future blog entry, I will discuss the alleged Lady Tanneke Nagel and Baron Rudolph Von Waldron.