« Stribling Sells Herself Two Penthouses at 1BBP Domino Sugar Factory To Be Considered by LPC »
May 21, 2007
Underground Railroad Hearing Set For Tomorrow
The clock is ticking over on Duffield Street, where the city wants to use eminent domain to seize several houses with strong connections to the Underground Railroad of the 19th Century in order to create a parking lot and public plaza. To review, the ESDC hired consulting firm AKRF to produce a report refuting preservationists' claims that slaves were once spirited through tunnels (like this one in Lewis Greenstein's basement) in the basements of the houses at numbers 223 through 235 Duffield Street. The report's flaws have been reported ad nauseum, to the point that it's hard to believe the city hasn't just tossed it in the garbage. All the controversy will come to a head tomorrow at a HPD hearing at the Klitford Auditorium of City College of Technology at 285 Jay Street at 10 am. Those fighting to save the houses are seeking prominent historians and African American leaders to assist in the cause. Anyone interested in helping or testifying can contact Barbara Skinner at barbara_skinner AT hotmail DOT com.
Photo by no land grab
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.brownstoner.com/mte/mt-tb.cgi/1209
Comments
I have a personal stake in not wanting to see Duffield swallowed in high-rises (my church, St. Boniface, is down the stret). But there's one major reason for my skepticism about the 'Underground RR' claim: It is supported by none other than Charles "Even Nastier than Sharpton" Barron. His very involvement makes me suspicious that these houses are set to become the Tawana Brawleys of preservation. (The debate has already been framed as a racism litmus test, although I don't know how many people are buying that.) Normally, I'd say, what the hell, anything that keeps an old house standing and frustrates a greedy developer must be good...but not when this nut-job hater is making it a showcase for his political muscle. His very involvement means that truth is permanently out the window, and the entire debate has moved to the Kabuki theater that Rev. Al once termed (re l'affaire Brawley) "the emotional truth."
Posted by: Brenda from Flatbush at May 21, 2007 11:32 AM
Brenda, STFU!
Posted by: Anonymous at May 21, 2007 11:54 AM
What makes the houses worthy of preservation? That there was a cluster of abolitionists who lived on that block and 3 Churches that were hotbeds of abolitionist feelings located there is enough reason. The history of Resistance to Slavery there is incontestable! Also AKRF's peer review Historians broke with AKRF and want the Houses preserved!
Posted by: Jacob Morris at May 21, 2007 12:04 PM
Sorry. That's absolutely not enough reason.
Posted by: Anonymous at May 21, 2007 12:15 PM
These houses were built well after the abolition of slavery. Where is the argument for their preservation?
This shouldn't even be an issue.
Posted by: Abe at May 21, 2007 12:18 PM
So every house where an abolitionist lived should be permanently preserved?
Posted by: Anon at May 21, 2007 12:21 PM
I guess the institution of slavery and its attendant movements is of little importance because it involves black people.
But the holocaust is forced fed us ad naseum! What double standards!
Posted by: Anonymous at May 21, 2007 12:29 PM
I wouldn't call for the preservation of every home of the German citizens who opposed the holocaust, either.
Posted by: Anon at May 21, 2007 12:33 PM
As the commentaries and sentiments on this blog indicate, abolitionists is indeed a rare breed of civilized individuals who are an endangered species and we ought to preserve whatever memories remain of their existence.
Posted by: Anonymous at May 21, 2007 12:36 PM
"These houses were built well after the abolition of slavery."
Indeed - 223 Duffield was built circ. 1899, if I'm not mistaken. And at least according to Property Shark, 233 Duff. was built around 1915.
I don't know about the others, but it can be found out easily.
Posted by: Anonymous at May 21, 2007 12:37 PM
Are there any leper colonies that is threatened by development...?
Posted by: Anonymous at May 21, 2007 12:40 PM
The abolitionist movement was a high point of moral development in America, which judging from the comments here we may never attain to again...
Posted by: j at May 21, 2007 12:42 PM
Property Shark lists any house built before 1900 as 1899.
Posted by: Brownstoner at May 21, 2007 12:58 PM
"Property Shark lists any house built before 1900 as 1899."
OK, but it also lists several of the houses at issue as being built bet. 1915-1920 (see, e.g., 233 and 235 Duffield). How could those homes be part of the abolitionist movement?
Posted by: Anon at May 21, 2007 1:13 PM
You can't date houses in brooklyn from Property Shark. They are almost always bogus dates. They often list houses as 1901 too. Instead, go look for the address in the Daily Eagle, or get an architect inside and look in some walls. Actually, you should do both.
Posted by: Anonymous at May 21, 2007 1:43 PM
can I suggest that using property shark in this context is an example of why school students should not be allowed to use computers but should actually be forced to go to libraries? (Oh, no I can't? Sorry. Continue with your well-founded discussion.)
Posted by: Anonymous at May 21, 2007 1:45 PM
Placing a fake historical significance on buildings in an effort to stop development only serves to make it more difficult to preserve actual historic structures.
Posted by: David at May 21, 2007 2:08 PM
If you tood propshark dates seriously (which are the same as city will say als) almost everything into miles of downtown Brooklyn was built 1899, 1900.
Which of course is not the case.
It is lack of documents that city puts down 1899.
Posted by: Anonymous at May 21, 2007 2:11 PM
Is it lack of documents that causes other dates, such as 1920, as well?
Honestly, I just want to know how this is done. The 1899 thing makes sense - no one knows, so put *something* in the box. But even if they're guessing at 1915, 1920, there must be a reason they picked those dates and not just falling back on 1899. Right?
Posted by: Anonymous at May 21, 2007 2:17 PM
e.m.i.n.e.n.t. d.o.m.a.i.n is being used to destroy these homes (does anyone see a correlation)? brenda from flatbush is a troll.
Posted by: Anonymous at May 21, 2007 2:17 PM
THe houses in question date to the 1840's. Naturally the storefronts and other additions are of a later in date.
Posted by: anonymous at May 21, 2007 2:24 PM
Brenda made some good points - although I can't stand Barron or Sharpton, who never met a media hype he didn't like- it's possible the opposite is true. Barron got involved because there is truth to the historical issue and he wants good press.
To the whiner comparing the Holocaust and slavery- funny, I'm sick and tired of hearing that white people have to make restitution for something that happened 400 years ago, and it might also benefit you to remember that slavery was outlawed in the States duirng the Civil War. It still exists today in parts of the world, including Africa. would you like to compare double standards?
For the record, I think it is hugely important to preserve the houses on Duffield St.- not for the houses but for the underground tunnels and the important of the Underground Railway to American history. You either get it or you don't. Same thing for the ignoramus who doesn't understand the importance of the Holocaust. If you're too stupid to get it, your loss.
As far as the dates of the houses- isn't it possible or probable that some were built on existing foundations of the original Underground railway homes?
Which of course goes back to the problem with unfettered use of eminent domain- for a parking lot and public plaza? Homeowners and taxpayers who actually contribute to the community and economy should lose their homes to that? So much for rights in this country- you can carry a gun but not keep your house. Yeah- makes perfect sense.
Posted by: resident of at May 21, 2007 2:25 PM
Regardless of the status of these homes vis-a-vis the abolitionist movement, I can't help but completely agree that the use of eminent domain here is ridiculous. The scope of what falls within the ambit of eminent domain has gotten way out of control, and that's something any property owner anywhere should be concerned about.
Posted by: EJ at May 21, 2007 2:34 PM
From page 11 of the report: "Based on property deeds from the Brooklyn City Register, tax assessment records from the New York City Municipal Archives, various historical maps available at the Brooklyn Public Library, New York Public Library, and the Brooklyn City Clerk’s office, and indexed online records of the New York City Department of Buildings (actual files could not be located by the Department of Buildings), all of the buildings on Duffield Street appear to have been constructed between 1846 and 1850. The building on Gold Street/Albee Square appears to have been constructed
between 1855 and 1865."
1:45, there is nothing wrong with on-line research except for the laziness of the researcher. The report is linked above and anybody who actually wanted to know when the buildings were constructed could have found it in a couple minutes. Conjecture and innuendo takes only seconds, however.
Posted by: Anonymous at May 21, 2007 5:16 PM
The commments by resident are confusing: if you support the importance of remembering the history of slavery, why the comment, "I'm sick and tired of hearing that white people have to make restitution for something that happened 400 years ago"? Slavery ended not even 150 years ago. And that is not that long ago in an historical sense (not to mention that the following 100 years were worse for black people in America in many ways). The "whiner" wasn't saying the holocaust is unimportant, but rather, considering the vastly larger number of Africans who died during the slave trade, the memory of those who were affected deserves more of our collective attention.
Posted by: Drew at May 21, 2007 5:17 PM
I am most assuredly not a "mythical Scandinavian figure who lives in a cave or under a bridge," although parts of my home might suggest otherwise. I am, however, dead serious about seeing the involvement of Messr. Barron as a red flag in this debate and a blow to its credibility. If the houses are indeed set atop remnants of the URR [an argument whose merits I have not studied], it is a shame that they are being used for cheap and divisive political capital by one of the city's least savory public servants.
Pardon me now, my cave needs a good spring cleaning.
Posted by: Brenda from Flatbush at May 21, 2007 5:19 PM
If these homes were a nesting place for some rare bird, there would be more outrage at losing them to emminent domain than the fact that they were probably used by abolitionists on the "underground railroad." We find it easier to empathize with animals than with people, whether they are Black, Jewish, or other. No one is asking anyone here to apoligize for slavery which only ended 142 years ago or the holocaust. I am in my early 40's and can remember when it was legal to discriminate against Blacks and others in transportation, housing, jobs, etc. We have come far but have so far to go. We all inherited the legacy of our forefathers. Some of us reap the benefits whether we choose to acknowledge it or not and some of us the detriments whether we choose to get over it or not.
Posted by: Anonymous at May 21, 2007 8:41 PM
In answer to the question of why Property Shark, and even ACRIS show most of Brooklyn to be built in 1899 - there was a large fire that year, and thousands of records were lost - really. When the city reconstructed the records,anything they couldn't document otherwise was put in as 1899. I think they had another SNAFU later, as well, or else they were just lazy, because the year 1915 seems to show up alot too on buildings that obviously are older. My house, which actually was built in 1899, I have the documents to prove it, is listed as 1934 on my mortgage. I was told not to bother getting it changed, as it was more trouble than it was worth, and didn't really affect anything.
Posted by: Anonymous at May 21, 2007 11:59 PM
If these houses were waystations on the underground railroad, then they should be preserved, no question. How many buildings do we have in Brooklyn, or even NYC that are? To raze them with the help of eminent domain is just wrong. For a parking lot? They are unique and rare survivors anyway, and provide a glimpse of life in the mid 1800's in downtown Bklyn. Why is there even a question? We save lesser buildings for lesser reasons.
The underground railroad, as j mentions above, was one of the more significant moral highgrounds of the 19th century. People of conscience, both white and black, free and slave, circumvented the law of the land, and in an amazingly organized and secretive way, smuggled thousands of slaves from the South through the North to freedom. With great danger to all concerned, citizens of this country decided that the law was wrong, and that their consciences dictated that they do something about it. Any remainder of that effort should be preserved and celebrated. It's important, not only for black history, but for everyone's history. How many people today would put home, property and personal freedom on the line for strangers? Let's preserve a small piece of that heritage for the future.
Posted by: Brower Park at May 22, 2007 12:15 AM
Drew- my temper got the better of me. But I do stand by my interpretation of "whiner's" holocaust comment. first of all, there was no reason to bring up the issue, and his comment "ad nauseum" was offensive. He claims we have a double standard- unfortunately we do. But so does he. Slavery still exists in many parts of the world, including Africa. It is well documented that some African tribes profited immensely by the slave trade. But only rarely have I heard that fact mentioned. Slavery was not only a white institution. By the same token, there were Jews who collaborated with the Nazis- we can all point fingers. and 150 years isn't all that long ago- I also remember Black people being refused service in a chain restaurant in NJ when i was a child. It was horrible and I never forgot it. But there are still many victims of Hitler's camps alive today- not all of them Jewish. these people are living history. whiner says he is being force fed the Holocaust- my comment was to make a rebuttal point, his was to vent his anti-semitism.
All of that said, it would be criminal to tear down those houses and their history should be properly verified. The Underground Railroad is far too important of American history to be forgotten.
Posted by: resident of at May 22, 2007 2:40 AM
Underground railroad or no, downtown Brooklyn does NOT need another parking lot. For that reason alone, the project should be stopped.
Posted by: ABG at May 22, 2007 8:43 AM
I think it could be a nice museum, similar to the LES tenement museum, but maybe not as nice?
Posted by: Azman at May 22, 2007 10:24 AM
Azman, what in the world does that mean?
Posted by: Anonymous at May 22, 2007 11:47 AM
just so you understand the department of finance aassing unit gave the ironious date to most houses in a special make work program in 1937 most building if they look very old they were given 1899 if the building look old but in good condition then the instructions were to date them 1915 there is nocorelation to actual age. if you go to cityregister and look up the dead history you will find that all the houses currently left on duffield street were built between 1848-1850
Posted by: Lewis Greenstein at June 10, 2007 7:27 AM
in july of 2004 only one city councilman stood up to the developer who were about to grab all these historical houses on duffield street by Eminent Domain Abuse. that was Charles Baron It appears that he was was not getting money from the developersto go along with the rest of the good old boys
Posted by: Lewis Grenstein at June 10, 2007 7:34 AM
227 Duffield Street was once owned by Thomas and Harriet Lee Truesdell.
An Abolitionist Underground Railroad conductor and Cotton broker. They were contributors to the anti slavery society. Harriet Lee-Truesdell and Juliana Tappen were almost killed in Philadelphia Pennsylvania at a Underground Railroad convention in 1838 that Harriet help plan. This is documented.
I’m not here to try to change anyone’s opinion about Councilman Charles
Barron. I just want to set the record straight. Mr. Barron was the only one
who didn’t vote to have our houses taken away from us.
Also this house 227 Duffield was built in 1848 and I have the papers to
prove it. Mr. Lewis Greenstein and myself has open these homes for
people such as yourselves to view.
And for your information in the early 1900’s Black people in this country
where still enslaved.
All we would like to see is a Museum at these locations to mark what happen to Blacks in America. New York was the second largest slave
Owning state in the nation- South Carolina was the first.
Don’t the African Americans in this state deserve to have the only houses
Left, standing as a testament to what happen in the time of slavery?
Posted by: Joy Chatel at June 13, 2007 12:40 AM
Post a comment
Please be patient while your comment is published. It may take a moment.