• TABLE OF CONTENTS
HIDE
 Front Cover
 Traffic control in early Miami
 Not a shot fired: Fort Chokonikla...
 Richmond naval air station,...
 Notes on south Florida place names:...
 Aftermath of the Brown decision:...
 List of members
 Back Cover






Title: Tequesta
ALL VOLUMES CITATION PDF VIEWER THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00101446/00037
 Material Information
Title: Tequesta
Physical Description: Serial
Language: English
Creator: Historical Association of Southern Florida
Publisher: (multiple)
Publication Date: 1977
Copyright Date: 2010
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00101446
Volume ID: VID00037
Source Institution: Florida International University: Florida History and Heritage
Holding Location: Historical Museum of Southern Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier: oclc - 2096319
lccn - 42015131
issn - 0363-3705

Downloads

This item has the following downloads:

PDF ( 23 MBs ) ( PDF )


Table of Contents
    Front Cover
        Page 1
        Page 2
    Traffic control in early Miami
        Page 3
        Page 4
        Page 5
        Page 6
        Page 7
        Page 8
        Page 9
        Page 10
        Page 11
        Page 12
        Page 13
        Page 14
        Page 15
        Page 16
        Page 17
        Page 18
    Not a shot fired: Fort Chokonikla and the "Indian War" of 1849-1850
        Page 19
        Page 20
        Page 21
        Page 22
        Page 23
        Page 24
        Page 25
        Page 26
        Page 27
        Page 28
        Page 29
        Page 30
        Page 31
        Page 32
        Page 33
        Page 34
        Page 35
        Page 36
        Page 37
    Richmond naval air station, 1942-1961
        Page 38
        Page 39
        Page 40
        Page 41
        Page 42
        Page 43
        Page 44
        Page 45
        Page 46
        Page 47
        Page 48
        Page 49
        Page 50
    Notes on south Florida place names: Norris cut
        Page 51
        Page 52
        Page 53
        Page 54
        Page 55
        Page 56
        Page 57
        Page 58
        Page 59
        Page 60
        Page 61
    Aftermath of the Brown decision: The politics of interposition in Florida
        Page 62
        Page 63
        Page 64
        Page 65
        Page 66
        Page 67
        Page 68
        Page 69
        Page 70
        Page 71
        Page 72
        Page 73
        Page 74
        Page 75
        Page 76
        Page 77
        Page 78
        Page 79
        Page 80
        Page 81
        Page 82
    List of members
        Page 83
        Page 84
        Page 85
        Page 86
        Page 87
        Page 88
        Page 89
        Page 90
        Page 91
        Page 92
        Page 93
        Page 94
    Back Cover
        Page 95
        Page 96
Full Text



r e nes d THE JOURNAL OF THE HISTORICAL
ASSOCIATION OF SOUTHERN FLORIDA
Editor
Charlton W. Tebeau
Associate Editors
Arva Moore Parks Dr. Thelma P Peters

NUMBER XXXVII 1977



CONTENTS


Traffic Control in Early Miami 3
By Paul S. George


Not A Shot Fired: Fort Chokonikla and
the "Indian War" of 1849-1850 19
By Michael G. Schene


Richmond Naval Air Station, 1942-1961 38
By David A. MacFie


Notes on South Florida Place Names: Norris Cut 51
By Roland Chardon


Aftermath of the Brown Decision: The Politics of
Interposition in Florida 62
By David R. Coleburn and Richard K. Scher


List of Members 83



COPYRIGHT 1977 BY THE HISTORICAL ASSOCIATION OF SOUTHERN FLORIDA

is published annually by the Historical Association of Southern
Ir eietAt^- Florida. Communications should be addressed to the Corresponding
I Secretary of the Society, 3290 South Miami Avenue, Miami, Florida
33129. The Association does not assume responsibility for statements of fact or opinions
made by contributors.









Historical Association of Southern Florida, Inc.


FOUNDED 1940-INCORPORATED 1941


R. Layton Mank
President
Marie W. Anderson
First Vice President
Finlay B. Matheson
Second Vice President
Mrs. Thomas J. Cogswell
Recording Secretary
Mrs. James S. Wooten
Corresponding Secretary

Lewis M. Kanner
Treasurer


Charlton W. Tebeau, Ph. D.
Editor Tequesta
Ms. Arva Moore Parks
Associate Editor Tequesta
Thelma Peters, Ph. D.
Associate Editor Tequesta
Barbara E. Skigen
Editor Update
Randy E Nimnicht
Museum Director


DIRECTORS


Samuel J. Boldrick
Louis J. Botifoll
William F Brown, Jr.
Boyce E Ezell, III
Joseph H. Fitzgerald, M.D.
Donald C. Gaby
Sue Goldman
Hazel Reeves Grant
John C. Harrison
John C. Harrison Jr.


Marcia J. Kanner
Sherrill Kellner
Stephen A. Lynch, III
Da"id Mesnekoff
Charles P Munroe
Joseph N. Pero, Jr.
William M. Stokes, Ph. D.
Jonathan A. Thompson
Woodrow W. Wilkins
lone S. Wright, Ph. D.








Traffic Control in Early Miami


Paul S. George*




Traffic congestion has been an intractable problem in urban American
history. The narrow, garbage-strewn roads which hosted as many ani-
mals and pedestrians as vehicles during the early years of the republic
became the site of epic traffic snarls in the bustling period following the
Civil War. The advent of the automobile at the beginning of the twentieth
century exacerbated traffic congestion while creating more difficult
problems.
Miami's emergence as a city paralleled this revolution in urban
transportation.1 From the outset the fledgling city experienced acute
traffic problems caused in part by the automobile. The response of the
police and other municipal officials to these problems during Miami's
first generation of corporate existence provides an interesting commen-
tary on a function of municipal government which grew increasingly
important in Florida and the nation as this century unfolded.
Miami's downtown sector, the city's business and traffic hub in its
early years, is surrounded on three sides by the bluish-green waters of
the Miami River and Biscayne Bay. Until the 1920's, persons entering
this quarter from the east, west, and south, had to cross one of three
narrow bridges. Additional obstacles to smooth vehicular access to
downtown arose from the city's narrow, unpaved thoroughfares and slow
moving trains which stopped on Twelfth Street, the chief east-west
artery, causing tremendous congestion daily.2
Once a motorist entered downtown, he found his mobility further
restricted by trolley cars on Twelfth Street, improperly parked vehicles,
ubiquitous jaywalkers, and drivers who ignored the city's traffic ordi-
nances.
These conditions, along with a spiraling population, caused Miami
to become by the 1920's one of the nation's most congested cities. This
problem reached its climax in 1925-1926 when, with the great South

*Dr. George is an instructor in History at South Georgia College.





4 TEQUESTA


Florida land and construction boom at its peak, Miami contained up-
wards of 175,000 persons and 25,000 automobiles). In many areas of the
city traffic came to a standstill for long periods. "Everything was
immovable," complained one visitor, who insisted that Miami's traffic
jams "made the worse congestion of London or New York child's play
by comparison."'
Although Miami's police possessed the authority to enforce traffic
laws, they failed to manage this responsibility effectively. But the
possibility of a complete breakdown in the city's transportation network
in 1925 forced the Miami Police Department (MPD) to shift a major
portion of its emphasis and resources to the problem of traffic control.
For the remainder of the decade, therefore, a large percentage of the
police force was engaged in traffic activities?
The spectre of thousands of automobiles using Miami's streets
would have startled the city fathers. A generation earlier, the first city
council inserted articles governing traffic in the original city ordinances,
but failed to mention the nascent automobile. These ordinances, instead,
provided small fines or brief imprisonment for persons "racing any
horse or horses upon the streets of Miami," "driving a (horse-drawn)
vehicle in a disorderly or dangerous manner," and traveling "with a
bicycle on the streets of Miami without having thereon a bell, gong, or
whistle with which to warn pedestrians and drivers of vehicles at the
street crossings"''
In 1896 and in ensuing years, Miami's dirt roads contained under-
brush and even tree stumps in some places. Livery stables, water
troughs, and "no hitching" signs hanging from kerosene lampposts
lined the sides of many roads. Operators of bicycles, horses, mules, and
horse-drawn carts used any part of these crude streets to reach their
destination.
Traffic control was correspondingly primitive. City Marshal Young
E Gray and his immediate successors virtually ignored the traffic portion
of the city ordinances, concentrating instead on violations of the crimi-
nal code.7 Accordingly, routine violations of traffic laws and a rash of
accidents plagued early Miami, prompting the Miami Metropolis, the
city's lone newspaper, to decry "scorching" (reckless bicycle riding),
and horse racing." At the same time, the Metropolis warned parents to
keep their children off of the streets.'
After 1900, automobiles, trolley-cars, and motorcycles appeared in
growing numbers. Not surprisingly, Miami's primitive roads were a poor
medium for these faster and more dangerous vehicles; accidents became
more prevalent, and congestion developed. At several downtown loca-





Traffic Control in Early Miami 5


1~





ft S
I I
P~*' Ii u


Htt.lfot t AAssocititon o/ Soulheirn Florida
The thoroughfares of early Miami were used by both vehicles and pedestrians.
In this photograph of 1897, many Miamians were proceeding along Twelfth
Street toward Biscayne Bay.


Hi torit a Asw cwrion of Soiuern/ Forndau
The primitiveness of early Miami's streets is apparent in this photograph of
Avenue D and Northwest First Street in 1898. Note the underbrush and tree
stump in the road.





6 TEQUESTA


tions, particularly the busy intersection of Avenue D and Twelfth Street,
traffic became prohibitively dense.0
Despite increasing traffic problems, police enforcement of the
antiquated traffic code was sporadic because the tiny force continued to
concentrate primarily on criminal activity. The city council, moreover,
failed to update the traffic ordinances. Some officials, however, includ-
ing Mayor John Sewell, the city's executive officer from 1903-1907,
expressed increasing concern for the problems caused by automobiles.
After receiving numerous complaints of reckless driving and reports of
serious accidents, Sewell, in 1904, pressed the council for an ordinance
regulating the speed of automobiles.' 11 In the ensuing months, the coun-
cil created Miami's first automobile ordinance, a comprehensive law
establishing a speed limit of eight miles per hour, while requiring all
automobiles to possess licenses, horns, and lights.12
Other automobile ordinances followed in the years immediately
after the passage of this pioneer legislation. They provided for an
increase in the speed limit to ten miles per hour, the relief of traffic
congestion by prohibiting vehicles from stopping on main streets for
more than a few minutes, and a reduction in the din created by noisy
gasoline engines. But traffic problems continued, because traffic control
remained near the bottom of police priorities."3
Speeding, reckless driving, a heavy reliance on horns in lieu of
hand signals, U-turns at intersections and right turns across a portion of
the sidewalk were additional practices characteristic of Miami's 300
automobile operators in 1911.14 The situation clearly called for radical
measures before a complete breakdown occurred.
The threat of this approaching crisis moved city officials in 1911 to
institute the most ambitious effort up to that time to meet the vexing
traffic problem. They were assisted by the fledgling Miami Auto and
Good Roads Association, a small group of automobile enthusiasts
deeply concerned over the deteriorating traffic situation. By November,
1911, the automobile association had presented the city council with a
bill aimed at clearing downtown of unnecessary congestion and provid-
ing safer streets for drivers and pedestrians. The bill required all vehicles
to proceed only on the right hand side of the road, refrain from turning
around at the busiest intersections, and limited the period allowed for the
discharge of passengers. In addition, this proposal provided for a speed
limit of twelve miles per hour in the daytime and ten miles per hour at
night.15
While the new council considered this bill, Mayor S. Rodman
Smith appointed, in December, 1911, a special policeman for Saturday





Traffic Control in Early Miami 7


duty (and at other times when necessary) at the teeming intersection of
Twelfth Street and Avenue D. This official, the first policeman con-
cerned solely with traffic, employed hand signals in directing traffic
from the center of the intersection.'
At the same time, the new police chief, Robert Ferguson, followed
up his promise to take "immediate action against the speed law villains"
with the arrest of numerous traffic violators, particularly speeders.17
By the end of 1911, the council had passed an ordinance containing
the majority of the Miami Auto and Good Road Association's proposals.
The law established a speed limit of twelve miles per hour in the daytime
and ten at night, banned U-turns at the busiest intersections, and re-
stricted all vehicular movement to the right hand side of the road.1
If Miamians viewed the new traffic ordinance and the initial efforts
by police to enforce it as evidence that the traffic problem was under
control, subsequent events and trends during the remainder of the decade
proved otherwise. Despite numerous laws that increased the speed limit,
prohibited left turns and U-turns at busy intersections, limited engine
noise, and restricted parking in downtown Miami, traffic conditions
worsened.'9
Many factors, including the rapid proliferation of automobiles, the
myopia of the city council, the torpor of the police, and an egregious
disregard of traffic laws by motorists and pedestrians contributed to this
problem. Even if municipal authorities had been more diligent, smooth
vehicular movement would have been hindered by the presence of
several thousand automobiles, numerous bicycles, and ponderous
horse-drawn carts on the city's narrow streets. Furthermore, the council
waited until 1920 before prohibiting parking on the city's busiest
thoroughfares, thereby maximizing space for moving vehicles. Unlim-
ited diagonal parking, therefore, was the rule up to 1920. Twelfth Street,
the city's busiest thoroughfare, even provided parking along a center
lane! With trolley car tracks also present on Twelfth Street, east-west
traffic was confined to narrow corridors on each side of it.2
The city council was guilty of faulty judgement in other ways too.
By failing to abolish an old ordinance permitting trains to back up across
Twelfth Street for up to five minutes at a time, the lawmakers contri-
buted significantly to giant snarls.21
The police were equally irresponsible. After an initial display of
enthusiasm for enforcing the new traffic code in 1912, the MPD quickly
lapsed into its old ways. Accordingly, motorists began ignoring traffic
regulations again. Periodic outcries against speeding and reckless driv-
ing from concerned citizens, the county grand jury, local newspapers,






8 TEQUESTA


and public officials, as well as the onset of new police leadership, led to a
stringent police campaign to enforce the traffic laws. But this effort was
quickly followed by a lengthy period of police lassitude which led to
increasingly dangerous conditions for motorists and pedestrians.2
To be sure, the police were severely handicapped in enforcing the
municipal traffic code by a dearth of personnel. The MPD had less than
five men assigned to this detail until a departmental reorganization in
1918 provided a traffic squad of eight officers. Several policemen were
assigned to direct traffic at the main downtown intersections and
bridges, and two motorcycle officers were instructed to pursue speeders
and reckless drivers.23
But new problems arose. Since the traffic squad was concentrated
in the downtown sector, the police were unable to meet increasing
demands for traffic supervision in other parts of the rapidly growing city.
Furthermore, traffic policemen reduced their effectiveness by their
tendency to engage in lengthy conversations with motorists over traffic
laws.4
The MPD attempted periodically to modernize its approach to
traffic problems. Pressure from Police Chiefs Robert Ferguson and
Raymond Dillon led to council authorization in 1912 and 1918 of two
motorcycles for the department.25 In 1915, traffic policemen, now
stationed under umbrellas in the center of an intersection, received white
gloves to increase their visibility to oncoming motorists." Two years
later, the MPD equipped its traffic officers with semaphores which
permitted them to direct traffic while seated by displaying a sign in-
structing traffic to "stop" or "go."27 In 1919, the MPD began issuing
booklets containing the municipal traffic ordinances to all motorists."
Jaywalkers, as well as motorists, flagrantly disregarded traffic laws
during this period. Despite the passage of an anti-jaywalking law in
1918, the practice continued.29
As mentioned earlier, Miami's traffic problems worsened as the
1920s unfolded At the outset of the decade, the city contained nearly
10,000 automobiles, with almost 900 cars moving through its busiest
intersection hourly.0 With 25,000 automobiles in Miami in 1925 and
traffic at an impasse, Police Chief H. Leslie Quigg lamented that "traffic
is the most difficult problem for the police.""' If land was the triumphant
symbol of the boom, the automobile, with its ubiquitous traffic snarls,
was its Achilles heel.
In addition to a great increase in automobiles, the exacerbation of
earlier traffic problems, along with the appearance of new ones, led to
this quagmire. The narrow streets became even more difficult to






Traffic Control in Early Miami 9


Downtown Miami c. 1920.

negotiate during the boom owing to an ambitious paving program and
the construction of new trolley car tracks. The installation of gas and
water lines caused the closing of many streets to traffic. A massive
building program created additional traffic obstacles as trucks blocked
traffic while unloading building materials. In many instances, these
materials remained on the side of the street for lengthy periods, causing
additional congestion.3
Another factor contributing to the traffic snarl was the understaffed
police department. Although the MPD continued to increase the size of
its traffic detail, it was still too small to meet ever-increasing demands.
The overwhelming majority of traffic policemen continued to operate
downtown; other sections of Miami remained without traffic supervi-
sion. To bolster the traffic force, Quigg and City Manager Frank Whar-
ton pleaded, throughout the early 1920s, for additional policemen. Their
requests were only partially granted."3
Trains of the Florida East Coast Railroad (FEC), frequently switch-
ing tracks, continued to block Flagler Street daily. In the boom years this
practice created massive daily bottlenecks that hampered the flow of
traffic for lengthy periods.34
Like the FEC's trains, jaywalkers caused considerable problems for






10 TEQUESTA


Historical Association of Southern Florida
Heavy pedestrian and automobile traffic, along with segments of streets torn
open for the installation of gas and water lines, exacerbated traffic congestion
during the boom. This photograph of East Flagler Street and First Avenue in the
summer of 1925 dramatizes each of these obstacles to easy vehicular flow.

motorists. Numerous accidents, near misses, and the constant din from
automobile horns aimed at jaywalkers by exasperated motorists moved
Wharton, in 1925, to characterize the former as "Miami's greatest traffic
problem."35 Joining jaywalkers in obstructing traffic were many real
estate speculators who often operated in the streets."6
To overcome these problems, the city commission, the city man-
ager, and the MPD devoted an increasing amount of time and resources
to traffic. At the outset of the 1920s, the lawmakers passed a comprehen-
sive traffic ordinance containing "rules of the road," speed limits (now
twenty miles per hour in all parts of the city except downtown, where it
remained fifteen miles per hour), and parking regulations; this law also
set standards for automotive equipment and established stringent penal-
ties for traffic violations.37
During the first half of the 1920s, subsequent ordinances provided
for information road signs, restricted downtown parking, while provid-
ing for parallel parking in some areas, and created additional space for






Traffic Control in Early Miami 11

2,500 automobiles in Bayfront Park. The commission also limited the
time that jitneys (a combination bus-taxicab) could stop to discharge and
acquire passengers. As the problem of pedestrian traffic worsened, the
commission prohibited street crossing anywhere except at an intersec-
tion. Initially, these measures were effective, but soon the appearance of
thousands of additional automobiles mitigated their impact?
Officials also discussed but rejected proposals for a towing system
to clear the streets of illegally parked vehicles, widening of the main
thoroughfares, a system of one-way streets for downtown, construction
of a viaduct at Flagler Street over the FEC tracks, and a significantly
larger police traffic detail. Only radical innovations such as these,
combined with the moderate steps that were actually taken, could have
ameliorated significantly Miami's deteriorating traffic conditions.
In 1923, the commission authorized City Manager Wharton to take
any actions he considered necessary for ameliorating traffic conditions.
Wharton continued to work closely with Police Chief Quigg (who even
undertook a lengthy examination in 1924 of traffic control systems in
several other cities) and the MPD in this realm39
Actually, since Quigg's appointment as chief of police in 1921, the
MPD's involvement in traffic control had increased significantly. In
addition to ambitious roundups of traffic violators, the police also
distributed to motorists booklets containing the municipal traffic ordi-
nances, and extended protection to children crossing the street at each of
the city's public schools:
Furthermore, the dramatic increase in automobiles led to the ap-
pearance of traffic officers at each of the major downtown intersections
and bridges. Employing whistles as signal devices, traffic officers oper-
ated in alternate hourly shifts between 6:00 A.M. and 10:00 PM. daily.
During each hour away from his "station," a traffic policeman worked
with the parking detail in enforcing parking regulations.41
Throughout this period, the MPD increased its traffic detail until, at
the beginning of 1925, three-fourths of the eighty-man force was en-
gaged in traffic operations.42 By this time the police were eagerly
awaiting the installation of traffic lights at each of the busiest downtown
intersections. But numerous problems delayed their implementation
until spring. By then the monthly influx of thousands of speculators,
many of whom arrived by automobile, had virtually negated the energet-
ic police effort to keep traffic moving. With downtown traffic at a
standstill for lengthy periods daily, this sector faced the alarming pros-
pect of drowning in a sea of automobiles. From this crisis came the most
ambitious scheme yet for traffic control.43






12 TEQUESTA


HiWwnrica Assocarin of SoutlenT Fforida
Electric traffic lights and one-way streets were operational by the latter half of
1925. Both of these features are evident in this photograph of the intersection of
Miami Avenue and Flagler Street in 1925.

This program was the product of a desperate campaign by Wharton,
Quigg, several civic organizations, and a blue-ribbon committee of one
hundred prominent Miamians, during the early part of 1925, for a
radically different approach to the deepening traffic crisis4. By April all
parties involved in this project had agreed on a program featuring
one-way streets in downtown Miami, zones for trucks discharging
cargo, rigid enforcement of the anti jaywalking ordinance, streetcar
loading platforms, and a traffic bureau within the MPD to coordinate
traffic operations.45
Wharton selected H. H. (Honk-Honk) Arnold as director of the
traffic bureau which began operations on June 1, 1925. The new traffic
chief, a member of the MPD since 1923, had distinguished himself as a
motorcycle policeman, detective, and desk sergeant. For the duration of
the 1920s, Arnold remained the chief traffic officer. During this time,
Arnold gave Miami an efficient system of traffic control."
The success of the traffic bureau, however, came only after a
difficult inaugural period. The traffic bureau received authorization
from the city commission to use any means at its disposal to overcome
the traffic quagmire. The bureau, accordingly, quickly established traffic
lights at eighteen intersections, converted twenty-nine thoroughfares
into one-way streets and zealously enforced anti-jaywalking and parking
ordinances through the arrest and impoundment of hundreds of persons






Traffic Control in Early Miami 13

and automobiles. But traffic conditions worsened despite this effort,
because the number of fortune seekers entering Miami increased sig-
nificantly in the summer of 1925.7
Faced with the necessity for more radical traffic measures, Arnold,
in the latter part of 1925, called for the immediate construction of
additional bridges into downtown, a railroad trestle over Flagler Street,
licensing of all automobile operators to remove incompetent drivers
from the city's streets, construction of multi-story parking garages ("au-
tomobile hotels"), inspection of all motor vehicles for safety defects,
and a vast increase in the number of traffic policemen. The commission
eventually provided for the majority of these proposals, but, initially,
assented only to the final demand."'
In spite of Arnold's failure to obtain the immediate enactment of all
of these measures, the traffic situation had improved significantly by the
beginning of 1927, owing primarily to a mass exodus of boomers
following the abrupt collapse of the boom in 1926 and vigilant enforce-
ment of the municipal traffic laws by a traffic bureau, whose rapid
maturation gave Miami, by 1927, an integrated and highly functional
traffic system. Now each policeman involved with traffic detail received
rigorous training in all phases of traffic at the new police school;
motorcycle policemen, as well as the foot patrol, kept the streets clear of
illegally parked vehicles; the installation of automatic traffic signals in
1927 not only expedited the flow of traffic, but also freed many police-
men for duty in sectors of the city which had not previously hosted a
regular traffic officer. Signs informing motorists of everything from the
speed limit (now twenty miles per hour throughout the city) to "no
parking" zones graced the edges of every thoroughfare. Under Arnold's
direction, the police also undertook periodic automobile inspections,
and administered written and manual examinations to chauffeurs, as
well as operators of buses and jitneys, before granting them operators'
permits.'
Despite this overall improvement, the traffic squad soon encoun-
tered new problems, as speeding and reckless and drunken driving
increased appreciably during 1927, causing a sharp rise in the niomrber of
automobile accidents and fatalities. By 1928, Miami found itsel ranked
second nationally in the number of fatal automobile accidents. The
mounting gravity of this problem caused the traffic bureau and its
successor, the traffic division, to devote greater attention to these evils."
Accordingly, mass arrests of reckless and drunken drivers occurred
frequently in 1928. But the number of automobile accidents remained
high. After three persons died in separate automobile accidents during






14 TEQUESTA


one week in May, 1928, City Manager Welton Snow instructed Arnold to
arrest all traffic violators. Soon the MPD, in conjunction with the Dade
County Sheriffs Department, initiated a "drastic campaign" against
traffic violators. These agencies received assistance from the area's
judiciary after county and municipal authorities agreed in September,
1929, to try a traffic violator in both the municipal and county courts
since the alleged violator, in almost every case, had broken a county as
well as a city ordinance.51
This campaign was successful, leading to a sharp decrease in the
number of traffic accidents by the end of 1928. But the indiscriminate
arrest of all traffic violators, along with an overtaxing of police resources
(the police were required to accompany each violator to headquarters,
formally charge him with the offense and, subsequently, make bond),
moved the city commission to authorize a new system in January, 1929.
Hereafter, the police would issue a summons to a traffic violator to
appear within forty-eight hours at the traffic division, where he could
acknowledge his guilt through payment of a fine, or secure a hearing in
Municipal Court and contest the charge.52
At the end of the decade, a reorganization of the department of
public safety led to the removal of the traffic bureau from the MPD and
its elevation to division status, along with fire and police, within this
department. The traffic division, like its predecessor, oversaw the entire
program of traffic control. Arnold remained as its head and also served
as director of public safety.53
But Arnold's' days as traffic chief were numbered, for his success
brought with it a national reputation, and offers from other police
departments to direct their traffic operations. After rejecting earlier
offers from Akron, Ohio, Arnold agreed, in December, 1929, to become
its director of public safety at an annual salary of $10,000?'
Arnold left Miami with an efficient and progressive system of
traffic control which contrasted sharply with the absence of a program in
the city's early years and the chaos of the boom era. By 1930 Miami's
traffic program compared favorably with the most advanced systems in
the country. Periodic improvements and innovations, including addi-
tional one-way streets, experienced and carefully trained traffic police-
men, written and manual tests for all drivers, automobile inspection,
improved road surfaces and additional roads and bridges enabled it to
serve Miami efficiently in the ensuing decades until a new and heavier
influx of migrants settled in the area.







Traffic Control in Early Miami 15

NOTES

1. Transcript of the Proceedings of the Meeting Held July 28, 1896, for the
Incorporation of the City of Miami, Florida. The office of the Clerk of the City of Miami
at City Hall has a copy of this document. Miami Metropolis, July 31, 1896: Nixon
Smiley, Yesterday's Miami (Miami. 1973), p. 24. Miami grew from a village numbering
but a few families in 1895 to a burgeoning settlement of 3,000 in the following year.
Henry Flagler's decision to bring his Florida East Coast Railroad to Miami was the
reason tor the meteoric growth. The railroad's arrival in April, 1896, ushered in a period
of heavy migration and frenetic development for Miami. In July, 1896, an overwhelming
majority of Miami's 502 registered voters decided to incorporate it as a city. At the same
time, the electorate selected the first officials for the new city's government. Not
surprisingly, the new government was dominated by representatives of the Flagler
enterprises who were now building a city around the railroad.
2. Miami Herald, April 15, 1918. A city ordinance allowed Florida East Coast
Railroad cars to switch tracks for up to five minutes at a time at the intersection of
Twelfth Street and the railroad tracks near the western boundary of downtown Miami.
Miami's downtown sector consisted of five blocks in an east-west direction and seven
blocks in a north-south direction. Although this area is small, it comprised a major
segment of early Miami, whose original boundaries included fourteen blocks between
the Miami River on the south and First Street on the north, and five blocks between
Avenue A, bordering Biscayne Bay on the east, and Avenue E, adjacent to the Florida
East Coast Railroad tracks on the west. The city built two additional bridges in the 1920s,
linking downtown with other parts of Miami.
3. Works Projects Administration, American Guide Series, Guide to Miami andits
Environs (Northport, New York, 1941), pp. 88-89: Miami City Directory for 1926
(Jacksonville, 1926), p. 9: Miamian, VII (August 1926): 26:.MiamiDailyNews, July 26,
1925; Miami Herald, June 26, 1925: January 25, 1970: Miami News, November 10,
1957; New York Times, August 10, 1924: Frederick Lewis Allen, Only Yesterday, An
Informal History of the 1920's (New York, 1939), p. 226.
4. There Weigall, Boom in Paradise (New York, 1932), p. 50.
5. The MPD varied dramatically in size in the 1920s. At the beginning of the
decade, the police force contained thirty-seven members. By 1926, it consisted of 350
policemen. At that time over two-thirds of the force was engaged in traffic control. The
collapse of the boom in 1926 caused a sharp decline in the city's population and, along
with a concomitant deterioration of economic conditions, resulted in a police force of
just 160 members in 1929.
6. City Council of Miami, Florida, Ordinances of the City of Miami, 1896, .Article
XVI, Sections 18, 19, 20, and 32, pp. 58-61. During the latter part of 1896, the city
council distributed pamphlets containing the original city ordinances to the citizenry.
The Florida Room of the Miami Public Library has acopy of this pamphlet. The office of
the Clerk of the City of Miami possesses a copy of every city ordinance.
7. Gray was Miami's lone policeman until the summer of 1898.
8. Miami Metropolis, May 31, 1897. On one occasion, a "pretty girl" on a bicycle
ran over a pedestrian at Twelfth Street and Avenue D. After the startled victim "picked
himself up," he was "run over" by another bicycle.
9. Ibid., May 21, 1897: June 18, 1897: July 23, 1897: December 3, 1897. During this
period, the Metropolis reported that "Miami has bicycle fever" with over "one hundred
wheels here."
10. Minutes of the City Council (hereafter cited as MCC), Vol. I, September 1,
1904, p. 424: John Kofoed, Moon Over Miami (New York, 1955), p. 8. Minutes of the
city council and its successor, the city commission, are located in the office of the Clerk
of the City of Miami.






16 TEQUESTA


11. Miami Metropolis, July 8, 1904. July 15, 1904.
12. MCC, Vol. 1, September 1, 1904, p. 424: Miami Metropolis, September 9,
1904: January 6, 1905.
13. MCC, Wol. II. March 15, 1906, p. 259: April 5, 1906, p. 262; April 23, 1906, p.
283: Vol. IV, February 2, 1911, pp. 272-273: Miami Herald, March 4, 1912: Miami
Metropolis, April 27, 1906: February 22, 1907: December 18, 1908; October 19, 1909:
December 21, 1910. The city council passed several ordinances between 1911 and 1913,
requiring engine mufflers for automobiles. The Miami Herald was very critical of the
police for its failure to enforce the traffic code more effectively. In March, 1912, the
Herald charged that the MPD had traditionally confined its "activities only to the
running in and out of simple drunks, without attempting to enforce those very necessary
regulations with regard to traffic on the street."
14. Miami Herald, April 11, 1911:June 30, 1911: July 17, 1911: August 26, 1911.
15. MCC, Vol. IV, December 11. 1911, p. 441: Miami Herald, October 8, 1911:
January 27, 1912: Miami Metropolis. October 7, 1911; December 18, 1911.
16. Miami Herald, November 26, 1911: November 27, 1911: Miami Metropolis.,
November 24, 1911.
17. Miami Herald, November 24, 1911: Miami Metropolis, November 25, 1911.
18. MCC. Vol IV, December 11, 1911, p. 441.
19. MCC, Vol. V, September 18, 1913, p. 292: Vol. VII, October 15, 1914, p. 174:
January 9, 1915, p. 304: Vol. VIII, March 23, 1916, p. 246: Miami Herald, April 17,
1912: June 10, 1912: December 14, 1912; July 29, 1913; July 28, 1914; April 14, 1915:
May 21, 1916: January 14, 1917: October 31, 1917: August 6, 1918; December 21, 1918:
May 8, 1919: Miami Metropolis, September 12, 1917: October 31, 1919.
20. Miami Herald. March 8, 1914: March 11, 1914: January 25, 1916. The proclivity
of many tourists to ignore traffic laws exacerbated traffic problems.
21. Ibid., December 22, 1916: Arpil 5, 1918.
22. Ibid., December 15, 1912: May 3, 1913: December 27, 1914: January 19, 1915:
April 14, 1915: October 31, 1916: December 23, 1917: May 21, 1918; April 17, 1919. The
periodic failure to enforce the traffic laws resulted in an epidemic of speeding. In 1915,
some motorists reportedly were streaking north on Biscayne Drive (later Biscayne
Boulevard) at speeds from eighty to one hundred miles per hour.
23. Ibid., June 24, 1918. Traffic policemen were now stationed at the intersection of
Twelfth Street and Avenue D and at the bridges which connected each of these arteries to
other parts of Miami.
24. MCC, Vol. VII, April 15, 1915, p. 443: July 2, 1915, p. 539: Miami Herald,
August 11, 1917: June 24, 1918.
25. MCC, Vol. V, August 15, 1912, p. 63: Vol. IX, September 26, 1918, p. 460;
Miami Herald, September 12, 1912.
26. Miami Herald, August 11, 1915.
27. Miami Metropolis, August 11, 1917: September 12, 1917.
28. Ibid., December 17, 1919.
29. Miami Herald, December 21, 1918: July 15, 1919.
30. Ibid., September 11, 1921.
31. Miami Herald, August 20, 1925: Miami Daily News, July 26, 1925: American
Guide Series, Guide to Miami, pp. 88-89: Weigall, Boom, p. 45.
32. Kenneth Ballinger, Miami's Millions, The Dance of the Dollars in the Great
Florida Land Boom of 1925 (Miami, 1936), p. 15: Miami Herald, October 29, 1924.
33. Miami Herald, July 23, 1920: December 20, 1922: November 21, 1924; Feb-
ruary 13, 1925. By 1925, the MPD had sixty policemen on traffic detail.
34. Ibid., January 29, 1925. Twelfth Street became Flagler Street in 1921, after the
city adopted a new system for naming and numbering its streets.
35. Ibid., March 1, 1925.






Traffic Control in Early Miami 17

36. Allen, Only Yesterday, p. 226. Allen contended that Miami contained 25,000
real estate agents during the frenetic summer of 1925.
37. MCC, Vol. X, January 15, 1920, pp. 213-218: MiamiMetropolis, June 12, 1920.
A city commission replaced the city council as the legislative branch of government
shortly after Miami adopted a commission-manager government in 1921.
38. MCC, Vol. 1, May 28, 1920, pp. 306-307; Vol. XI, January 28, 1921, p. 174:
Vol. XII, February 7, 1922, p. 243: City Council and the City Commission of Miami,
Ordinances of the City of Miami, Book One, February 7, 1922, p. 54; Miami Herald,
October 12, 1920; September 1, 1921: August 30, 1922: December 12, 1924; Miami
Metropolis, May 29, 1920.
39. Minutes of the City Commission (hereafter cited as CCOM), Vol. XVII,
November 24, 1927, p. 398, from the manuscript collection of H. Leslie Quigg (Miami,
Florida): Miami Herald, November 8, 1923; July 30, 1924.
40. Miami Herald, November 25, 1924: January 1, 1925. The city charier of 1921
authorized the city manager, with the consent of the city commission, to appoint a chief
of police. Quigg was the first police chief under the new charter. He served in this
capacity until his indictment for first degree murder in the death of a prisoner forced his
dismissal in 1928. Quigg was later acquitted of this charge.
41. Ibid., March 5, 1922. Traffic policemen continued to direct traffic from the
center of an intersection beneath an umbrella.
42. Charles Fowler, "Detroit's Struggle with the Traffic Problem:' The American
City Magazine, XXX (June 1924)): 612-615. The percentage of policemen in Miami
assigned to traffic duty compared favorably with other cities. For example, Detroit had
only seven percent of its 1,975 policemen on its traffic detail in the mid-1920s.
43. Miami Herald, January 1, 1925; March 23, 1925; Frederick S. Lawrie,
"Mechanical Devices for Highway Traffic Regulation," The American City Magazine,
XXIX (December 1923): 634; W. W. Brent, "Traffic Congestion and Accidents Greatly
Reduced,' The American City Magazine, XXXII (January 1925): 58: John Walrath,
"Effective System of Traffic Control in Syracuse," The American City Magazine.
XXXII (June 1925): 641-643: "Another Advantage of Traffic Signal Lights;' The
American City Magazine, XXXIII (August 1925): 149; D. H. Lilley, "A Gift of Control
Devices;' The American City Magazine, XXXIII (August 1925: 185-186; Fred Harper,
"Signal Lights Handle Traffic Effectively," The American City Magazine, XXXIII
(August 1925): 187. By the middle of the 1920s, several American cities possessed
electric traffic lights. The majority of these systems were manually operated by a
policeman in a tower at the side of an intersection or at street level. The style and location
of traffic lights varied. Some were attached horizontally to poles, while others were
attached vertically to a post. In a few cities, traffic lights hung from wires over the center
of an intersection. All of them possessed red and green lights which then, as now,
signaled the motorist to "stop" or "go."
44. Clarence Snethen, "Los Angeles Making Scientific Study to Relieve Traffic
Congestion," The American City Magazine, XXXI (September 1924): 196-197. Los
Angeles provided Miami with a precedent here. In 1922, Los Angeles civic and business
leaders organized a traffic commission to study the city's rapidly deteriorating traffic
situation, resulting from acute congestion in its downtown sector, and offer suggestions
for its amelioration. In 1924, this commission completed its study and produced a
comprehensive plan, calling for the construction of viaducts to carry automobiles over
the downtown zone, opening of additional streets and the widening of many existing
thoroughfares, synchronized traffic signals, and restrictions on downtown parking. The
city adopted most of these proposals in January, 1925.
45. Miami Herald, January 1, 1925: March 4, 1925: April 8, 1925: May 22, 1925;
Miamian, IX (April 1928): 7.
46. Miami Herald, December 12, 1929: "Traffic and Parking Regulation in the






18 TEQUESTA


Down Town District of Cleveland," The American City Magazine, XXXIlI (July 1925):
73: "Traffic Board Established in New York Police Department," The American City
Magazine, XXXV (August 1926): 219: "Jaywalker Abolished: Traffic Facilitated: Pay
as you Violate Traffic Bureau Established," The American Ciry Magazine, XXXV
(October 1926): 549. Other cities, including New York, Cleveland and Columbus, Ohio,
had traffic bureaus by the middle of the 1920s.
Arnold visited several cities to study their traffic systems. Many of the patterns he
observed were eventually incorporated into Miami's traffic system. Arnold's most
ambitious tour occurred in July, 1926, when he visited twenty-eight municipalities and
consulted with traffic officials in each of them.
47. Paul Wilcox (ed.), City Manager's Report to the City Commission otn Five Years
of Commission Manager Government for the City of Miami (Miami, 1926), pp. 111-112.
Policemen perched on observation towers at the edge of several intersections operated
the traffic lights. Electric traffic lights, as well as one-way streets, yielded impressive
results. Traffic officials attributed a sharp reduction in automobile accidents downtown
to the operation of traffic lights. Prior to the establishment of one-way streets, 9,000
vehicles passed through Miami's busiest intersection in a ten hour period. Several
months after their introduction, 22,000 vehicles passed through this intersection in the
same ten hour period.
48. CCOM, Vol. XV, December 7, 1925, p. 139: Miami Daily News, July 26, 1925:
Miami Herald, June 19, 1925: June 23, 1925: June 24, 1925: November 26, 1925: April
17, 1926: J. R. Bibbins, "The Function of One Way Streets," The American City
Magazine, XXX (June 1924): 441: "Decreasing the Discontent of Traffic Officers," The
American Citv Magazine, XXXII (May 1925): 494-496: Charles H. Spear, "Vehicular
Tunnel Relieves Congestion at Ferry and Street Car Terminal," The American City
Magazine, XXXIV (January 1926): 77-78: "Traffic Board Established in New York
Police Department," The American City Magazine, XXXV (August 1926): 219;
"Jaywalker Abolished: Traffic Facilitated: Pay as You Violate Traffic Bureau Estab-
lished," The American City Magazine, XXXV (October 1926): 545. Ubiquitous traffic
congestion led many American cities besides Miami to adopt innovative schemes for
traffic control in the 1920s. Several municipalities adopted electric traffic lights, traffic
schools for violators, one-way streets, loading zones for commercial vehicles, viaducts
and tunnels, restrictions on left turns, parking prohibitions and traffic bureaus.
49. Wilcox, City Manager's Report, pp. 111-112; Miami Herald, April 17, 1926;
September 2, 1926: October 6, 1927; Miamian, VIII (May 1927): 18: City Commission,
Ordinances, Book One, June 21, 1926, pp. 425-458; July 23, 1927, pp. 448-489; Book
Two, January 2, 1928, pp. 8-9.
50. Miami Herald, Febiuary 27, 1928: May 27, 1928; August 6, 1928; September 5,
1928.
51. Ibid., May 30, 1928: September 8, 1928: December 25, 1928.
52. Department of Public Safety, First Annual Report (Fiscal Year July 1, 1928-
June 30, 1929) (Miami, 1929), pp. 4-5: CCOM, Vol. XVIII, November 5, 1928, pp.
513-514. City Commission, Ordinances, Book Two, January 14, 1929, pp. 63-65.
53. Department of Public Safety, First Annual Report, pp. 6, 40; Miami Herald,
July 3, 1928, p. 7.
54. Miami Herald, March 28, 1929: January 15, 1930,










Not a Shot Fired:

Fort Chokonikla and the "Indian War"

of 1849-1850


By Michael G. Schene*




As the Second Seminole War continued to drag on, draining the gov-
ernment treasury and alarmingly depleting the ranks of the regular army,
officials in Washington reluctantly concluded that they could not force
the red men to leave Florida and that their only course of action was to
negotiate a treaty with the Indians that would confine them to the watery
wilds of South Florida. Some of the Seminoles did agree to stop fighting
at this time and consented to move on to a reservation which was
located in a desolate part of the peninsula.1
Many of the warring Indians did not recognize the treaty, however,
and continued to attack whites whenever it was feasible. When a band of
these warriors ambushed a detachment of soldiers on the banks of the
Caloosahatchee River in 1839, the government decided to resume its
efforts to drive the pernicious savages out of the territory.2
After three more years of ineffectual campaigning, the government
decided to end the conflict and began to withdraw its troops from
Florida. At the same time authorities told the Seminoles that they wanted
them to join the rest of their tribe in Arkansas and gave each emigrating
warrior a cash payment, a rifle, and rations for a year. Those Indians who
were adamant about remaining were allowed to do so and were advised
that they could live on the tract of land designated earlier for them?
The land selected for the Indians was a swampy, piney-woods tract
that was flooded for much of the year.4 Most of the Seminoles had been
residing in this area for several years and were inured to living in this
*Mr. Schene is a research historian for the National Park Service and currently on
assignment in Colorado. He wishes to acknowledge his indebtedness to the Florida
Division of Archives, History and Records Management and the Florida Division of
Recreation and Parks for the support which he received in compiling the research data for
this article.






20 TEQUESTA


inhospitable land coping also with the harassing presence of the
military until the end of the war. As soon as the Indians learned of the
government agreement, they moved from the recesses of the Everglades
and the Big Cypress Swamp to the banks of the Caloosahatchee River,
establishing small villages at the latter point. By the mid-1840s most of
them had settled near the Lake Okeechobee side of this river.'
Captain John Sprague an Indian agent serving in Florida -
estimated that there were 360 Indians living on the reservation in 1847.
Of this figure 120 were adult males. And besides the Seminoles, who
were the most numerous, there were Muskogee-speaking Creeks,
Uchees, and Choctaws.7 They were led by Billy Bowlegs- known to the
Indians as Holatter Micco- who was elected chief in 18427:
People were beginning to settle near the reservation, encouraged by
the government policy of granting land to anyone willing to live near the
unpredictable red men." Some hardy frontiersmen settled on both sides
of the Manatee River, but in the first years after the war no one ventured
beyond this points" Gradually, though, land-hungry whites began to
encroach on the fringes of the reservation which the Indians would
eventually resist with arms." Whites, of course, would welcome the
opportunity to annihilate the Seminoles and finally free themselves of
the constant "fear of the scalping knife." 2
The increasingly volatile situation was rendered even more explo-
sive by the presence of an unknown number of Spanish fishermen who
regularly anchored in Charlotte Harbor. The Indians gave them access to
the reservation and traded furs for contraband goods principally
whiskey. Besides this undesirable commerce the Spaniards probably
encouraged the red men to kill their oppressors."
To eliminate this trade the government decided to establish its own
store for the Indians. Authorities also intended to use the post as a point
where they could regularly meet the Indians and try to persuade them to
leave the state. A trading outlet established within the reservation would
also eliminate the necessity of the Seminoles having to bring their goods
all the way to Fort Brooke (now the modern city of Tampa).1'
By the fall of 1845 Captain John Sprague had completed a survey of
the area around Charlotte Harbor and decided that the most advantage-
ous spot for a store would be near the mouth of the Caloosahatchee
River. So on the north bank of the river- a few miles from the Gulf of
Mexico Sprague and a few soldiers erected several rude structures,
completing them some time before the end of the year.15
Somewhat before the buildings were finished, General William J.
Worth overall commander in Florida notified the Indians that they






Not a Shot Fired 21


would not be permitted "to resort to Tampa for trade or other purposes,
nor to approach the settlements" after the beginning of November.1"
Selected to operate the Caloosahatchee River trading post was the
Tampa merchant Thomas Pugh Kennedy. He arrived at Fort Brooke
during the Second Seminole War and was appointed post sutler. Besides
furnishing the soldiers with needed dry goods, Kennedy illegally sold
them liquor. This latter enterprise eventually brought him into conflict
with the post commander, Captain John H. Winder, who wanted the
Kennedy store closed and the irascible merchant moved from the fort.17
The prospect of losing his store at Tampa and the possibility of
profiting from the Indian trade probably convinced Kennedy to accept
the government offer and move to the Caloosahatchee River, which was
done by January 1846.'" The new Indian trader knew that the Seminoles
were most interested in manufactured goods, especially arms and am-
munition, and so he kept his store well stocked with these items. The
Seminoles, on their part, traded with valuable furs and food crops, both
of which were transported to market in the twelve-ton sloop Julia Ann."1
Kennedy soon acquired a partner, John Darling- a former army officer
and veteran of the Second Seminole War- who contributed the thirty-
two ton schooner Rosella.2" Business was seemingly good and the firm
prospered until a fire destroyed the trading post some time in 1848.21
After this holocaust, the partners met with government officials,
and both agreed to reopen the store at some other point. The Indian
agent. Major William W. Morris, apparently wanted the facility located
closer to Tampa, probably because of the distance involved. He finally
decided to place the new facility on the south bank of an unnamed
tributary of the Peace River, which was near the western boundary of the
reservation. There, in March 1849, he advised his superiors that he had
"granted Messrs. Kennedy and Darling permission, under restrictions,
to open an establishment for the purpose of trading with the Indians."22
The firm seemingly erected its own buildings. There was one fairly
large structure built to store the firm's merchandise and used also as a
dwelling by the people living on the site. Nearby there were probably
several crude log huts, used to house excess goods. At the creek bank a
wharf was constructed. A narrow, wooden bridge was erected across the
stream later known as Payne Creek, which eliminated the unpleasant
chore of fording this body of water." The first months were peaceful and
the Indians regularly came to trade. But as the warmth of summer
descended on the trading post events were about to unfold that would
irrevocably destroy this tranquility and bring the Seminoles to the
precipice of disaster.






22 TEQUESTA


The crisis was precipitated by five disgruntled Indians one of
whom had recently been outlawed by the tribe- who attacked a small
band of settlers living near Fort Pierce. With the whites clamoring for
revenge and the Seminoles increasingly worried about the deteriorating
situation, the sub-chief Assinwar was sent to capture the troublesome
warriors"4 Before he could find them, however, the renegades had
crossed the peninsula and perpetrated another depredation.
On July 17, four of them arrived at the Kennedy and Darling trading
post about one-half hour before sunset. They told the store employees-
Captain George S. Payne, Dempsey Whiddon, and William McCol-
lough that they had a bundle of skins on the opposite side of the river.
Since they did not intend to bring the skins to the store uqtil the next
morning, they asked if they could sleep in the store, but the proprietors
declined this request. The Indians seemed to accept this decision with
equanimity and retired to the front porch of the store. As the residents of
the trading post were preparing to eat their evening meal a short time
later, however, the murderous Seminoles directed a withering fusillade
on them, immediately killing Captain Payne and Dempsey Whiddon.
The other employee, William McCollough, was wounded in the shoul-
der, but managed to escape from the store with his wife and child. The
Indians pursued them and wounded William again- this time in the leg
- but he succeeded in hiding his family in some thick foliage and
eventually made his way to the safety of a nearby settlement.25
A somewhat erroneous version of the incident was subsequently
transmitted to authorities at Fort Brooke. The post commander, Major
Morris, responded by sending Lieutenant John Gibbon to investigate the
situation. The latter left Tampa on July 20 and later that same day met
McCollough at the home of Jocky Wheedon. After his conversation with
the still convalescing settler, Gibbon hastily rode back to Tampa and
reported to his superior that an unknown number of Indians had de-
stroyed the Peace River trading post.2"
Morris immediately wrote his superiors about the infamous Indian
raid and also dispatched infantry Lieutenant Robert Garland to the Peace
River. At the site of the recent Indian massacre the young officer found
that the "trading house with its out buildings" had been burned and a
"small bridge, near by, partially destroyed." The raiding seminoles, of
course, took all valuable merchandise- including a number of guns and
a substantial supply of ammunition. In a dreary ceremony, the bodies of
Payne and Wheedon were interred in nearby graves.27
As news of the incident spread along the frontier, already worried
settlers became convinced that the Indian had again taken to the warpath






Not a Shot Fired 23


and barricaded themselves in hastily constructed forts, demanding also
that the government protect them from the scalping savages. Although
authorities did not know how many Indians were involved in the recent
depredations, they feared further massacres, and so to quell the rebelli-
ous red men they decided to send an experienced campaigner along
with a substantial number of soldiers into Florida. General David
Twiggs- a veteran of the earlier Seminole wars was selected for this
less than enviable assignment in early August and ordered to leave for
the troubled state as soon as possible. Since officials did not know if a
general Indian uprising had occurred, they gave Twiggs broad discretion
in dealing with the still uncertain situation.2
Twiggs finally reached Tampa at the beginning of September and
reported that much of Florida was an armed camp. "There seems," he
added, "a general determination not to return until the Indians are
removed." And he tended to agree with the beleaguered whites that the
"outrages... had been perpetrated by the Indian nation." The somewhat
disgusted commander mentioned that he was trying to deploy his few
available troops but had been frustrated because of the lack of "public
transportation and the exorbitant prices asked for the country wagons
and carts" 29
After some vacillation the government finally decided that the
unpredictable red men could no longer be allowed to remain in Florida.
Secretary of War George Crawford wrote Twiggs near the end of August
that he should first try to persuade the Indians to leave their homes before
using any force. Crawford hoped that western chiefs and the power of
the purse would eventually convince the Seminoles to emigrate. But if
these negotiations failed Twiggs was to begin the Indians "forcible
removal from Florida, or what may be more disagreeable their partial or
entire extermination."30
The Indians, meanwhile, realized that their position was precarious
and hastened to arrange a meeting with white leaders. The Seminole
chief Bowlegs advised them of his wish to parley by fastening a specially
decorated white flag on the door of John P Bermundez a Spaniard
living at the still unfounded site of Sarasota. Bermundez found the flag,
notified the military, and a message was left at the same location for
Bowlegs. This communication advised the Indian leader that officials
would meet him near Sarasota at the beginning of September.3'
Captain John C. Casey, the current Indian agent, sailed for Sarasota
at this time and anchored offshore to await the arrival of the Seminoles-
who suddenly appeared on the third of the month. A meeting was
arranged for the next day. At that time the Indians told Casey that the






24 TEQUESTA


recent depredations had been committed by five young warriors -
"without the sanction or knowledge of the nation." The tribe earnestly
desired peace, the Seminole emissaries explained to the Indian agent,
and their chief wanted to do everything necessary to reestablish
"friendly relations." It was agreed that the chiefs and the white com-
mander would meet on the eighteenth of September at the site of the first
trading post (located near Charlotte Harbor).32
Three days before the scheduled meeting, Twiggs, Casey, and a
small guard left Tampa in the steamer Colonel Clay arriving at
Charlotte Harbor later that same day. As agreed, the Indians appeared on
the eighteenth and somewhat reluctantly consented to hold the
scheduled conference on board the white vessel. Bowlegs brought with
him three of the culprits and the severed hand of a fourth- killed while
trying to escape. The fifth outlaw had escaped but was being earnestly
pursued by the tribe. Bowlegs told the white general that the "nation had
nothing to complain of on the part of the whites- were desirous of peace,
and [were] determined not to allow peaceful relations to be disturbed by
the acts of individuals'" He returned the next day with the now decrepit
sub-chief Sam Jones, who repeated what Bowlegs had said the day
before.
Twiggs had earlier said that he would not mention Indian emigra-
tion at this meeting, but he seemingly changed his mind and told the
assembled warriors that as long as they remained in Florida there would
be no peace for them. He reminded them that "beyond the Mississippi,
hunting grounds awaited them, and there the far greater portion of their
people were anxious to receive them"33 Nothing was decided, however,
and Twiggs returned to begin preparations for a possible campaign.
In early October Twiggs wrote his superiors a long letter detailing
his campaign strategy.

I would propose a line of posts from the Manatee [River] to [the] Indian
River, passing between [the] Kissimee [sic] on the south, and Cypress
Lake on the North. On this line of 200 miles, posts, of 2 companies each,
10 miles apart, would be required, making 40 companies. Also Dep6ts at
Miami, New and Indian Rivers, St. Johns on the east. Manatee, Charlotte
Harbor and Caloosahatchee, on the western side of the Peninsula- with
an aggregate garrison of 13 companies, and a mounted force of 300, to be
drawn from the footmen to act as escorts, gather information, and to
protect isolated settlements in the rear of the line from marauding parties.
..- With this line thus guarded, the settlements might be protected, and the
Indians confined to the Southern portion of the Peninsula. With Dep6ts
thus established, I should be prepared to penetrate this still large district:






Not a Shot Fired 25


200 miles in length and of an average width of 130. The Indians probably
would at first be embodied and give battle, on advantageous ground, with
their whole force, stated in my letter of Sept. 1st at 300 [warriors]. No
party of less than 500 should then be thrust into their strongholds. It is not
enough to beat them from their ground. To crush, or after battle to be
strong enough to guard your wounded and still pursue, can alone produce
good results. Two such bodies, making two regiments, is the smallest
number with which in so large a country, I might hope, to find, pursue,
and harass the enemy. After the first brush, if defeated, the Indians would
break into smaller parties and seek safety in concealment. The number of
the pursuing parties would then be increased, their strength diminished to
increase the active force. In addition the everglades [sic] and lake [s] must
be penetrated and swept by parties in boats.

Twiggs told the military hierarchy that 4,150 soldiers- almost one-half
of the army would be required for this assignment.34 While military
leaders pondered this astounding figure, Twiggs began to implement the
first part of his plan.
One of the first points selected for a fort was the recently destroyed
site of the Kennedy and Darling store- known now by a variant spelling
of the Indian word for burned house, Chokonikla. The site had probably
been selected because it could be used to supply troops campaigning in
the upper sections of the reservation and, too, Indian agents could easily
communicate with the Seminoles who were accustomed to visiting the
site. Twiggs sent Captain Casey to Chokonikla about the middle of
October and instructed him "to endeavor to open communications with
the Indians.'35 At the same time the commanding general ordered Major
William Morris and three companies of the 4th Artillery Regiment to
erect a fortification somewhere in the same vicinity.36
Morris arrived at the site on October 26 and immediately began
surveying the tract for the most suitable spot to locate a fort. He finally
selected some pinewoods, elevated land, which was about one-half mile
due north of the burned trading post37 The 102 men of the command
were quickly divided into work parties, guard details, and camp work-
ers, and somewhat reluctantly set about accomplishing their assigned
tasks?" In addition Morris hired several area carpenters to assist in the
construction. Bartholomew Leonardi only worked for a few days and
then quit, which greatly distressed Morris, and he was relieved when
Arthur H. Morse agreed to work for him?9
The veteran campaigner probably chose to erect a square-shaped
palisade, perhaps with blockhouses at opposing ends. In the construction
of the picket work, thick, straight trees were selected and marked for






26 TEQUESTA


cutting. The most experienced woodsmen would then fell the tree and
remove the bark and lower branches. Other men would then laboriously
drag it back to camp. There the log would be split about in the middle,
placed in a waiting post hole, and dirt packed around it. Next wooden
braces were nailed to the flat inside surface of the log and gave it lateral
support. The top of the unshaped timber was then hacked into a rough
point and holes were cut through each piece about 7 or 8 feet from the
ground. Construction was completed by fastening a wooden firing
platform around the inside perimeter of the palisade.
One or more blockhouses were probably built along the palisade.
The construction of these structures was comparatively easy and in-
volved hewing a shallow cut in the timber at both ends. The logs were
next placed on each other in a crisscross pattern, creating a sturdy joint.
A pine-shingle roof was probably added when the timbers reached the
required height. Supplemental work included installing floors, caulking
the sizeable cracks, and hanging doors.
The officers of the command were always delighted when the
blockhouses were completed and quickly began to transform them into
comfortable quarters. The enlisted men naturally complained about this
special privilege, especially when they were assigned to the cold, damp,
second-story sentry post.
Just outside the emerging palisade other soldiers were busily en-
gaged in erecting commodious storehouses. They were built like the
blockhouses, but without the amenities and of considerably larger di-
mensions.0 While all this activity was taking place at the fort site, other
members of the command were struggling to construct a bridge and
blockhouse near the confluence of the Peace River and the small stream
subsequently known as Payne Creek.
Major Morris probably decided to erect a trestle bridge, which was
well suited for a narrow, shallow body of water like the Peace River.
Following the instructions of the first carpenter, Bartholomew Leonardi,
and later Arthur Morse, troops labored in the emerging chill of
November to build several trestles. When they were finished the trestles
were ferried to designated points in the river and firmly planted in the
bottom. They were held in place by anchors or by cables stretched across
the river. Roughly finished planks were laid between the trestles and
were supported underneath and on the sides by beams of varying
thickness. The nailing of the railing into place signaled the end of
construction and was a joyous moment for all concerned."? Nearby, a
blockhouse was constructed at the same time, from which soldiers could
fire upon any Indians trying to destroy the bridge.2





Not a Shot Fired 27


As the fort neared completion additional troops were sent there. On
November 10, General Twiggs sent Colonel Edward Steptoe and Cap-
tain George Getty with two artillery companies known in the field as
"red-legged infantry"-to Fort Chokonikla.43 The arrival of these forces
increased the effective garrison to 166 troops. At the same time, though,
some 153 of the soldiers assigned to the post were either under arrest, on
detached duty, or sick.44 Still, most of the expanded garrison had to camp
outside the picket work, and parallel lines of tents rapidly became a
regular feature around the fort.45
The damp, chilly weather soon produced an alarming amount of
sickness, and during the first two months that the fort was in operation
some 149 soldiers were ill. Many were incapacitated by a high, long-
lasting fever known as Febris Intermittens Tertiana. Their mounting
numbers kept the post surgeon Lafayette Guild constantly occupied and
he was grateful for the presence of Orsemus Bannor and his wife
Catherine, both of whom were civilian employees assigned to
Chokonikla when it was first established. Their combined skills were
still unable to prevent the death of Private John Murphy, who became the
first casualty at Fort Chokonikla. The hospital was a makeshift facility,
consisting of several hospital tents, which were made slightly more
comfortable by the addition of flooring and stoves.46
Other posts were established near Chokonikla. In the waning days
of October, Captain Joseph Roberts and one company of the 4th Infantry
Regiment were dispatched from the Manatee River toward Chokonikla.
About ten miles form the former point the small force constructed some
type of fortification, designated on completion Fort Crawford. At the
same time the men hacked a primitive trail through the dense forest
vegetation, which was subsequently extended into the interior.47 In early
November Twiggs ordered the erection of a fortified supply depot
several miles up the Manatee River- calling it Fort Hamer."
Meanwhile Major Gabriel Rains of the 7th Infantry Regiment had
left Fort Brooke and was proceeding to Chokonikla, where he had been
ordered to commence the construction of a road to Fort Hamer. Lieuten-
ant George Meade, a topographical engineer, was to assist Rains by
surveying the country between the two forts and then recommend the
best route for the proposed road.49
Rains first marched into the interior- opening a narrow path on his
line of travel- and at Myakka Creek he built the first of several bridges.
A primitive log stockade appropriately designated Fort Myakka- was
erected on the east bank of the creek and was probably constructed to
guard the bridge against a possible Indian attack.50





28 TEQUESTA


Work on the road continued into December and it was not until the
middle of the month that the section between Fort Myakka and Crawford
was completed. On this stretch of the route alone it was necessary to
construct 11 bridges and 2 causeways. Near the end of the month Rains
proudly advised his superiors at Tampa that he had completed the section
between Chokonikla and Myakka, which opened communication be-
tween Fort Hamer and the Peace River post.1
Another road was built north from Chokonikla and intersected
several miles from the fort with an already existing east-west road that
terminated at Fort Brooke.52 As soon as the former section was com-
pleted, heavily-laden supply wagons began to make regular trips to
Chokonikla and by the end of November a wagon train was daily being
sent to the Peace River." Each train was handled by one of several
wagonmasters, hired by the government for this job. The entire opera-
tion was handled by another government employee, Jesse Carter?4 The
vehicle used was either a spring or draft wagon -which had a light body
and high wheels-and was pulled by a two- or four-animal team.55
In December the troops stationed at Chokonikla swelled to 223
men. Included in this figure were members of the 4th Artillery Regiment
band, who arrived at the post on December 10.6 The increase in forces
and the presence of a regimental band were probably arranged for the
benefit of the Indians, who were supposed to appear at Chokonikla for a
scheduled conference on the fifteenth. About a week before the meeting,
however, Kapiklsootsee a sub-chief of the Mikasuki appeared at the
fort and told Indian agent Casey that he was sure that the other chiefs
would not come to the fort. Kapiklsootsee did tell Casey that he was
willing to emigrate and would try to persuade his followers to join him.57
General Twiggs apparently still decided to visit Chokonikla and
had his headquarters there for at least part of December. By this time he
had constructed a line of forts across the peninsula which were
connected by a network of roads and had been sent some 1,736
soldiers."X Still, the experienced Indian fighter was unwilling to begin
hostilities and again agreed to meet the Indians.
On January 19, 1850, chief Bowlegs and the principal sub-chiefs of
the tribe arrived at Chokonikla for a conference scheduled two days
later. On the latter date (January 21), General Twiggs and the Seminole
leaders discussed their possible emigration from Florida. As Twiggs
advised his superior the next day, Bowlegs and the sub-chiefs had
"finally expressed their willingness to emigrate, and their determination
to use all efforts to persuade as many as possible of their people to
accompany them." The Indians departed, promising to meet Captain





Not a Shot Fired 29


Casey in two or three weeks at the Caloosahatchee River trading post.59
The soldiers at Chokonikla were probably somewhat amused by the
Indians and they certainly relished an interruption in their otherwise
monotonous routine. Yet, soon after the gaily-clad warriors had de-
parted, the garrison was again struggling with the boring pattern of camp
life. Drill, meals, and housekeeping chores consumed only a portion of
the day, leaving the men idle for long periods of time. Some men used
their free moments to fish and hunt, providing them with a welcome
respite from the deadly regularity of army fare. Those who could write
composed long, florid letters to friends or relatives. A few read available
newspapers, magazines, or books. But many soldiers spent their free
moments drinking or gambling, both of which usually resulted in some
mischief. For all his hard work, deprivation, and sometimes danger, an
army private received the small sum of $7 a month. Thus it is not
surprising that only chronic failures, foreigners, or adventurers were
willing to join the army".
Near the end of January the 88 soldiers at Chokonikla received the
good news that some 48 Indians had appeared at Tampa and indicated
that they were willing to leave the state.6 In early February Twiggs
wrote Secretary of War George Crawford that a band of 60 Indians had
presented themselves to authorities at Fort Arbuckle- situated near Lake
Arbuckle and that 24 more were expected to arrive shortly. Twiggs
then jubilantly related that Seminole leaders had met Captain Casey as
promised and told the agent that they would emigrate. "It is believed by
them," Twiggs added, "that the rest of their people will in due time
follow their example. Thus far, C'uJ., '-,ig gives promise of good suc-
cess.""62
Twiggs was further encouraged by the early March departure of 74
Indians, who sailed from Tampa in the steamer Fashion. He im-
mediately notified the secretary of war of the Indians departure and also
told his civilian superior that he was going to exert pressure on Bowlegs
and his people to leave the state.63
Before Twiggs could take any action, however, the Seminoles
began to melt into the dense forest vegetation. The Florida commander
anxiously notified Crawford of this development in late March. "I look
upon the flight of the Indians," he said, "as an indefinite postponement
of peaceable emigration, if not destruction of all hope of attaining this
desirable result.'64
Indian agent Casey was immediately sent to confer with the
Seminoles and determine their intentions. On April 11 Casey met Bow-
legs at Fort Myers (situated several miles up the Caloosahatchee River).





30 TEQUESTA


The Seminole chief told the startled captain that "he could not go west,
nor could he induce his people to go." Casey asked Bowlegs why he had
earlier expressed his willingness to emigrate. The latter responded that
he was afraid that the whites would have seized him if he had raised an
objection to removal. Casey returned to Tampa and reported to General
Twiggs that he saw "no hope of inducing these people to go west in a
body by any pecuniary temptation.""
Twiggs agreed with his subordinate and notified the War Depart-
ment in mid-April that "all hopes for the peaceful emigration of the
Indians are at an end, and it is folly to talk with them any longer on the
subject." Without any hesitation Twiggs relinquished his command, and
in his final report suggested that if the government decided to keep any
troops in Florida that one company should be stationed at Chokonikla.""
The small command at Chokonikla- which had been reduced in
February to just two artillery companies received the disheartening
news about the Indians and exchanged their blue-wool winter uniforms
for white cotton jackets and trousers- preparing to remain in Florida for
an indefinite period of time."7 The soldiers at Chokonikla were also
instructed to construct palmetto-thatched or shingle-covered sheds,
which would afford them needed protection from the harsh sun and
intermittent rain. Some of the more fortunate were probably able to
secure some lumber and used it to build a platform, which relieved them
of having to sleep on the damp ground. '" The death of John Wilmot on
April 7 saddened everyone and he was buried with full military honors in
the nearby Payne Creek ceremony."
After considerable delay a general court-martial was convened at
Chokonikla on April 19 and several enlisted men were tried at that time.
One minor case involved William H. Kendrick a private in the 4th
Artillery Regiment- who was charged with sleeping on duty Kendrick
readily admitted his guilt and his sentence involved forfeiture of pay and
hard labor for two months.7"
Several men were tried for desertion- a much more serious offense
found guilty, and sentenced to loss of pay and hard labor for three
months. The court was extremely lenient, considering that the ultimate
penalty for desertion was death and that many courts punished the culprit
with bizarre forms of corporal punishment.71
The most interesting case involved Private Edward Parker. The
delinquent soldier had been incarcerated for various offenses since he
had arrived in Florida in June of the previous year. Parker was brought
before the court on a charge of "utter worthlessness" and even though






Not a Shot Fired 31


he offered a spirited defense was found guilty and immediately
discharged from the service.72
As the summer heat began to envelope the soldiers at Chokonikla,
they began to wonder if they would ever leave this inhospitable land.
Many of them were suffering from the debilitating effects of overexpo-
sure, poor food, inadequate sanitation facilities, and germ-infested
drinking water. The number of troops hospitalized increased tremend-
ously in the months of May and June. In the latter month about seventy
percent of the command were ill, and the men were again saddened by
the death of another one of their comrades, Private William Lowrey.73
The increasing sickness finally prompted the post surgeon,
Jonathan Letterman, to write the commanding officer at Chokonikla a
long letter on this subject on July 1.

The prevailing sickness is caused by malarious exhalations, and is chiefly
in the form of Intermittent and Remittent fevers, which are in a majority
of cases, irregular, and accompanied, frequently with excessive vomiting,
owing to an inflammation of the inner coat of the stomach, which is often
difficult to allay. There are but few men, among those that have been
stationed here for any length of time, who have not been attacked with
Intermittent or Remittent fever. And although none have died, yet, from
constant exposure to the exciting cause of the diseases, they are continu-
ally relapsing- and, as a consequence thereof, there are but few of these
men capable of performing duty requiring much exertion or exposure.
From the situation of this post, surrounded on three sides by a marsh... it
is my opinion that these fevers will increase with the progress of the
season and terminate in congestive and severe Remittent fevers, and that
the troops stationed here will be unfitted for active duty.

The worried physician ended his long letter with a request that
Chokonikla "be abandoned, at least for the present, unless there be an
urgent necessity for its occupation"74
When his first letter seemingly went unheeded, Letterman again
wrote the post commander, Major Francis Octavas Wyse.

The unhealthiness of this post continues to increase, both in the number of
cases, and in the severity of attacks. Men are attacked at any and all hours
of the day, whether on duty or not. And a day but seldom passes without
some men, varying from one to four or five, being taken sick, who were,
apparently, in perfect health in the morning. The health of the command is
becoming seriously impaired by these renewed attacks of Intermittent and





32 TEQUESTA


Remittent fevers, for no cure is permanent, exposed as the command is to
the causes of these diseases.

And as in his earlier correspondence, the increasingly agitated surgeon
recommended the immediate evacuation of Chokonikla.75 About a week
after this letter, Major Wyse decided that he would have to remove his
men from the Peace River site, and on July 18 he notified his superiors
that the fort had been "broken up in consequence of sickness," and the
troops were being transferred to Fort Meade.6 As known, the fort was
never used again and gradually the forest reclaimed the site. Today,
young pine trees cover what was once great activity and some hope.


NOTES

1. Major General Alexander Macomb, General Orders, May 18, 1839, in John T.
Sprague, The Origin, Progress, and Conclusion of the Florida War (New York: D.
Appleton & Company, 1848; reprint ed., Gainesville, Fla.: University of Florida Press,
1964), pp. 228-229; John K. Mahon, History of the Second Seminole War, 1835- 1842
(Gainesville, Fla.: University of Florida Press, 1967), pp. 256-258.
2. Captain George H. Griffin to Lieutenant W. K. Hanson, July 29, 1839, in
Sprague, Origin, Progress, and Conclusion of Florida War, pp. 223-234; Mahon,
History of Second Seminole War, pp. 261-262.
3. Minutes of a Talk Held at Fort Brooke, Florida, July 21, 1842, by Colonel
[William] Worth, with Fosse Hadjo... ,Florida Indians, Message from the President of
the United States Transmitting Report of the Secretary of War, Relative to Indians
Remaining in Florida, House Documents, 28th Cong., 1st sess., no. 82, p. 8. In 1842 the
reservation had the following boundaries: "From the mouth of... Peace Creek, up the left
bank of that stream to the fork of the southern branch, and following that branch to the
head, or northern edge of Lake Istakpga [sic]; thence down the eastern margin of that
lake to the stream which empties from it, into the 'Kissimmee' river, following the left
bank of said stream and river to where the latter empties into 'Lake Okeechobee;' thence
due south through said lake, and the Everglades to Shark river, following the right bank
of that river to the Gulf; thence along the Gulf-shore to the place of beginning, excluding
all islands lying between 'Punta Rassa' and the head of Charlotte harbor.'" Worth, Order
27, August 11, 1842, Message from the President of the United States, Communicating
Information in Answer to a Resolution of the Senate, Relative to Hostilities Committed
by the Seminole Indians in Florida during the Past Year, Their Removal, & C., Senate
Executive Documents, 31st Cong., 1st sess., no. 49, p. 100. An additional 20 mile
perimeter was added in May 1845. Sprague to St. Augustine Herald [sic], September 16,
1845, in Sprague, Origin, Progress, and Conclusion of Florida War, p. 509.
4. Sprague, Origin, Progress, and Conclusion of Florida War, p. 513.
5. Ibid.; Kenneth W. Porter, "Billy Bowlegs (Holata Micco) in the Seminole Wars,"'
Part I, Florida Historical Quarterly 45 (January 1967):226.
6. Sprague to William Medill, commissioner of Indian affairs, February 4, 1847,
Letters Received by the Office of Indian Affairs, 1824-1881, Records of the Bureau of
Indian Affairs, Record Group 75, National Archives Microfilm Publication M234, Roll
801 (hereafter cited as Letters Received by the Office of Indian Affairs).
7. Sprague to [General Roger] Jones, [adjutant general], January 11, 1847, Letters
Received by the Office of Indian Affairs, Roll 801.





Not a Shot Fired 33


8. Porter, "Billy Bowlegs," p. 228; Sprague to Jones, January 11, 1846, Letters
Received by the Office of the Adjutant General (Main Series), 1822-1860, Records of the
Adjutant General's Office, Record Group 94, National Archives Microfilm Publication
M567, Roll 325 of 1846 (hereafter cited as Letters Received Adjutant General's Office).
9. James W. Covington, "The Armed Occupation Act of 1842," Florida Historical
Quarterly 40 (July 1961):41-52. A list of the people claiming land under the "Armed
Occupation Act" can be found in Report of the Commissioner of the General Land
Office, Communicating an Abstract of Permits Granted Under the Acts for the Armed
Occupation of Florida, Senate Executive Documents, 30th Cong., 1st sess., no. 39,
following page 39.
10. General W. J. Worth to the Adjutant General, August 19, 1844, Territorial
Papers of the United States, Florida, Vols, 22-26, ed. Clarence Carter (Washington:
Government Printing Office, 1956-1962), 26:948 (hereafter cited as Territorial Papers).
11. Sprague to Jones, April 3, 1847, Letters Received Adjutant General's Office,
Roll 358 of 1847.
12. Margaret 0. Marshall to Mary E. W. Palmes, June 19, 1852, George Palmes
Papers, Perkins Library, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina.
13. Worth to Adjutant 'General, August 19, 1844, Territorial Papers, 26:948;
Sprague to Jones, July 30, 1846, Letters Received Adjutant General's Office, Roll 330 of
1846; Sprague to Jones, October 19, 1846, Letters Received by the Office of Indian
Affaris, Roll 801.
14. Sprague to St. Augustine Herald [sic], September 16, 1845, Sprague, Origin,
Progress, and Conclusion of Florida War, p. 511.
15. Sprague to T. H. Crawford, commissioner of Indian affairs, September 15,
1845, Letters Received by the Office of Indian Affairs, Roll 289; Society for the
Diffusion of Useful Knowledge, Map of Florida, 1846, "North America, XIV, Florida,"
J. and C. Walker, cartographers, at Manning J. Strozier Library, Florida State University,
Tallahassee, Florida.
16. General W. Worth, Special Order 17, September 1, 1845, Letters Received by
the Office of Indian Affairs, Roll 289.
17. Thomas P Kennedy to Major Whiting, June 9, 1846, Captain [John] H. Winder
to Jones, Letters Received Adjutant General's Office, Roll 329 of 1846; James W.
Covington, "The Florida Seminoles in 1847;" Tequesta 24(1964):51n; Anthony P Pizzo,
Tampa Town, 1824- 1886, Cracker Village with a Latin Accent (Miami, Fla.: Hurricane
House Publishers, Inc., 1968), p. 23.
18. Sprague to Winder, January 10, 1846, Letters Received by the Office of Indian
Affairs, Roll 801.
19. Sprague to Jones, January 11, 1847, Letters Received by the Office of Indian
Affairs, Roll 801; Works Progress Administration (Historical Records Survey), "Record
Book of Hillsborough County, Territory of Florida, 1838-1846," Vol. 3, pp. 402-403,
Florida Historical Society Library, University of South Florida, Tampa. Florida (hereaf-
ter cited as "Record Book of Hillsborough County").
20. John Darling to General Thomas S. Jesup, January 26, 1841, Quartermaster
Consolidated Correspondence File, Records of the Office of the Quartermaster General,
Record Group 92, National Archives Building, Washington, D.C. (hereafter cited as
Quartermaster Consolidated Correspondence File); "Record Book of Hillsborough
County," Vol. 3, p. 454; Darling to [William L.] Marcy, secretary of war, October 1,
1848, Letters Received by the Office of Indian Affairs, Roll 801.
21. Covington, "Seminoles in 1847," p. 51n.
22. [Major] W [illiam] W [alton] Morris, Indian agent, to Jones, March 10, 1849,
Letters, Reports, and Orders Received and Other Records, 1848-1849, Letters, Reports,
and Orders received and Other Records, 1848-1852, [5th Military Department], Records
of United States Army Continental Commands, 1821-1920, Record Group 393, National





34 TEQUESTA


Archives Building, Washington, D.C. (hereafter cited as Letters, Reports, and Orders
Received, 5th Military Department).
23. Deposition of William and Nancy McCollough, August 11, 1849, given to
Judge Simon Turman, Hillsborough County, Senate Executive Documents, 31st Cong.,
1st sess., no. 49, p. 161 (hereafter cited as McCollough Deposition); Plat and field notes
of section survey of Township 33 South, Range 25 East, April 1855, Records of the
Internal Improvement Fund, Elliott Building, Tallahassee, Florida (hereafter cited as
Surveyor's Field Notes); Jacksonville The News, August 11, 1849.
24. Captain John Casey to Major William W Mackall, assistant adjutant general,
September 6, 1849, Message From the President of the United States to the Two Houses
of Congress, Senate Executive Documents, 31st Cong., 1st sess., no. 1, p. 121; Porter,
"Billy Bowlegs," Part 1, p. 229; James W. Covington, "The Indian Scare of 1849,"
Tequesta 21(1961):54.
25. McCollough Deposition.
26. Morris, Order 105, July 20, 1849, Morris to Jones, July 21, 1849, Letters
Received Adjutant General's Office Roll, 411 of 1849.
27. Morris to Jones, July 25, 1849, Kennedy and Darling to Morris, Letters
Received July 22, 1849, 1848 (Dec.) and (Jan.-July), Letters Received, 1830 and
1848-53, Western Division and Department, 1820-1854, Records of United States Army
Continental Commands, 1821-1920, Record Group 393, National Archives Building,
Washington, D.C. (hereafter cited Letters Received, Western Division and Department);
Jacksonville The News, August 4, 11, 1849.
28. Morris to Jones, July 25, 1849, Jones to Major General David Twiggs, Letters
Received 1848 (Dec.) and 1849 (Jan.-July), Letters Received, Western Division and
Department; Jacksonville The News, August 4, 1849.
29. Twiggs to Lieutenant Colonel [William G.] Freeman (assistant adjutant gen-
eral), September I, 1849, Message from the President of the United States to the Two
Houses of Congress, House Executive Documents, 31st Cong., 1st sess., no. 5, pp.
119-120.
30. George Crawford, secretary of war, to Twiggs, August 31, September 21, 1849,
Letters Received, 1849 (Aug.-Dec.), Letters Received, Western Division and Depart-
ment.
31. Casey to Jones, August 20, 1849, Letters Received Adjutant General's Office,
Roll 403 of 1849; Morris to Jones, August 20, 1849, Letters Received, 1849 (Aug.-Dec.),
Letters Received, Western Division and Department.
32. Casey to MacKall, September 4, 6, 1849, Letters Received, 1849 (Aug.-Dec.),
Letters Received, Western Division and Department; Casey to Jones, September 9,
1849, Letters Received Adjutant General's Office, Roll 403 of 1849.
33. Twiggs to Freeman, September 6, 23, October 19, 1849, Letters Sent by the
Commanding General, July 1848-Dec. 1850, Western Division and Department, 1820-
54, Records of United States Army Continental Commands, 1821-1920, Record Group
393, National Archives Building, Washington, D.C. (hereafter cited as Letters Sent by
Commanding General, Western Division and Department); Colonel [John Lane] Gard-
ner to Jones, September 17, 1849, Letters Sent, July-Aug. 1848 and Nov. 1848-Nov. 1852,
[5th Military Department], Records of United States Army Continental Commands,
1821-1920, Record Group 393, National Archives Building, Washington, D.C. (hereaf-
ter cited as Letters Sent, 5th Military Department).
34. Twiggs to Freeman, October 3, 1849, Letters Sent by Commanding General,
Western Division and Department, Russell E Weigley, History of the United States Army
(New York: The Macmillan Company, 1967), p. 567.
35. J. Clarence Simpson, A Provisional Gazetteer of Florida Place-Names of
Indian Derivation, ed. Mark F Boyd, State of Florida, State Board of Conservation and






Not a Shot Fired 35


Florida Geological Survey Special Publication No. 1 (Tallahassee, Fla.: State of Florida,
1956), p. 46; MacKall, Order 32, October 19, 1849, Letters, Reports, and Orders
Received and Other Records, 1848-1849, Letters, Reports, and Orders Received, 5th
Military Department. The site name was also spelled Chokkonikla. Military Map of the
Peninsula of Florida South of Tampa Bay, compiled by Lieutenant J. C. Ives, April 1856,
"Headquarters Map File;'," Cartographic Records, 1790-1968, Records of the Office of
the Chief of Engineers, Record Group 77, National Archives Building, Washington,
D.C. (hereafter cited as Ives Map).
36. Morris to Jones, October 26, 1849, Letters Received Adjutant General's Office,
Roll 412 of 1849.
37. Morris to MacKall, October 26, 1849, Letters, Reports and Orders Received
and Other Records, 1848-1849, Letters, Reports, and Orders Received, 5th Military
Department; Surveyor's Field Notes.
38. Post Returns for the month of October 1849, submitted by Major William W.
Morris, U.S. Army Commands/Returns from United States Military Posts, 1800-1916,
Records of the Adjutant General's Office, Record Group 94, National Archives Mic-
rofilm Publication M617, Roll 1503 (hereafter cited as Post Returns).
39. Report of Persons (Employed) at Fort Chokkonikla, Florida during the Month
of October 1849, submitted by Lieutenant A[lbert] L. Magilton, Reports of Persons and
Articles Hired, 1849, H-S, Records of the Office of the Quartermaster General, Record
Group 92, National Archives Building, Washington, D.C. (hereafter cited as Reports of
Persons Employed at Chokonikla); Morris to Captain A[lbion] P Howe, Ocotber 28,
1849, Letters, Reports, and Orders Received, 5th Military Department.
40. On the construction of Second Seminole War forts, see Michael G. Schene,
"History of Fort Foster," mimeographed (Tallahassee, Fla.: Division of Archives,
History, and Records Management, 1974), pp. 25-83, passim, copy on file at the Florida
Department of State, Division of Archives, History, and Records Management, and
idem, "Fort Foster: A Second Seminole War Fort," Florida Historical Quarterly
54(January 1976):319-339. For a general treatment on field fortifications by the out-
standing authority at this time, see Denis Hart Mahan, A Complete Treatise on Field
Fortification (New York: Wiley and Long, 1836; reprint ed., New York: Greenwood
Press, 1968).
41. Mahan, Complete Treatise on Field Fortification, pp. 187-190.
42. Surveyor's Field Notes.
43. Twiggs, Order 42, November 10, 1849, Orders, July 1848-Nov. 1853, Orders
and Special Orders Issued, Feb. 1820-Nov. 1853, [Western Division and Department],
Records of United States Army Continental Commands, 1821-1920, Record Group 393,
National Archives Building, Washington, D.C. (hereafter cited as Orders and Special
Orders Issued, Western Division and Department). The term "red-legged infantry" is
derived from the red stripe that was sewn on the outer seam of each trouser leg.
44. Post Returns for the month of November 1849, submitted by Morris, Post
Returns.
45. Twiggs, Order 40, November 7, 1849, Orders and Special Orders Issued,
Western Division and Department. This order provided that each company in the field
was allowed to have 2 wall tents and 10 common tents.
46. Quarterly Report of the Sick and Wounded at Fort Chokkonikla, Florida, for the
Quarter ending December 31, 1849, Medical Reports, "Mexican War-Florida," Fort
Chokkonikla, Muster Roll of Stewards, Wardmasters, Cooks, Nurses, and Matrons
Attached to the Hospital of the Army in Florida from the Thirty-First day of August 1849
... to the Thirty-First day of October 1949, Fort Chokkonikla, Muster Rolls, Hospital
Corps, Florida, Records of the Adjutant General's Office, Record Group 94, National
Archives Building, Washington, D.C.; Major J[ames] L. Donaldson to Magilton,





36 TEQUESTA


November 27, 1849, Letters Sent, April 1847-Nov. 29, 1849, Records of the Office of the
Quartermaster General, National Archives Building, Washington, D.C. (hereafter cited
as Letters sent- Quartermaster).
47. Lieutenant Colonel Richard H. Ross to "Major," October 20, 1849, Captain
Joseph Roberts to Lieutenant J[ohn] C. Booth, October 21, 1849, Letters Received, 1849
(Aug.-Dec.), Letters Received, Western Division and Department. Fort Crawford was
apparently so designated to honor Secretary of War George Crawford.
48. Twiggs to Freeman, November 12, 1849, Letters Sent by Commanding Gener-
al, Western Division and Department.
49. Twiggs, Order 41, November 7, 1849, Orders and Special Orders Issued,
Western Division and Department.
50. Major [Gabriel J.] Rains to [Major William T. H.] Brooks, November 1849,
Letters Received, 1849 (Aug.-Dec.), Letters Received, Western Division and Depart-
ment.
51. Major W[illiam] P Bainbridge to Booth, December 13, 1849, Rains to MacKall,
December 15, 27, 1849, Letters Received, 1849 (Aug.-Dec.), Letters Received, Western
Division and Department.
52. Twiggs, Order 43, November 17, 1849, Orders and Special Orders Issued,
Western Division and Department; Morris to Brooks, November 24, 1849, Letters
Received, 1849 (Aug.-Dec.), Letters Received, Western Division and Department;
Major Theophilus H. Holmes to Howe, November 30, 1849, MacKall to Bainbridge,
December 21, 1849, Letters, Reports, and Orders Received, 5th Military Department.
53. Instruction to Wagon Masters and Others in Charge of Trains, Donaldson,
November 27, 1849, Letters Sent Quartermaster.
54. Ibid.; "Orders," Donaldson, December 5, 1849, Letters Sent- Quartermaster.
55. Major J[ames] A. Haskin to MacKall, October 31, 1849, [Report of Means of
Transportation, Forage & C. on Hand at Fort Brooke, Florida, 31st October 1849],
Letters Received, 1849 (Aug.-Dec.), Letters Received, Western Division and Depart-
ment. General information on wagons of this period can be found in United States
Quartermaster Department, Specifications for Means of Transportation, Paulins,
Stoves, and Ranges, .. .for use in the United States Army (Washington: Government
Printing Office, 1882). Pertinent chapters of this work are on file at the Florida Division
of Archives, History and Records Management, Tallahassee, Florida.
56. Post Returns for the month of December 1849, submitted by Major William W.
Morris, Post Returns.
57. Casey, to Twiggs, December 8, 1849, Letters Received, 1849 (Aug.-Dec.),
Letters Received, Western Division and Department.
58. Field Returns of United States Troops in the State of Florida, December 31,
1849, Expedition Returns, [Florida], "C-K," Returns of "Expeditions," 1806-1916,
Records of the Office of the Adjutant General, Record Group 94, National Archives
Building, Washington, D.C.
59. Twiggs to Crawford, January 22, 1850, Letters Sent by Commanding General,
Western Division and Department.
60. Robert M. Utley, Frontiersmen in Blue; The United Army and the Indian,
1848-1865 (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1967), pp. 36, 46; Schene, "History of
Fort Foster," pp. 50n, 79n.
61. Post Returns for the month of January 1850, submitted by Morris, Post Returns;
Twiggs to Crawford, Senate Executive Documents, 31st Cong., 1st sess., no, 49, p. 82.
62. Twiggs to Crawford, February 12, 1850, Senate Executive Documents, 31st
Cong., 1st sess., no. 49, p. 83.
63. Twiggs to Crawford, March 1, 1850, Letters Sent by Commanding General,
Western Division and Department.





Not a Shot Fired 37


64. Twiggs to Crawford, March 27, 1850, Letters Sent by Commanding General,
Western Division and Department.
65. Casey to Twiggs, April 15, 1850, Senate Executive Documents, 31st Cong., 1st
sess., no. 49, p. 96.
66. Twiggs to Crawford, April 15, 1850, Letters Sent to Commanding General,
Western Division and Department.
67. Post Returns for the months of February, March, and April, 1850, submitted by
Morris, Post Returns.
68. Twiggs, October 27, April 9, 1850, Orders and Special Orders Issued, Western
Division and Department; Alexander S. Webb, "Campaigning in Florida, 1855,"' Jour-
nal of the Military Service Institution of the United States (November-December
1909):398.
69. Quarterly Report of the Sick and Wounded at Fort Chokkonikla, Florida, for the
Period ending June 25, 1850, Medical Reports, "Mexican War-Florida," Fort Chok-
konikla, Records of the Office of the Adjutant General, Record Group 94, National
Archives Building, Washington, D.C. (hereafter cited as Quarterly Report of Sick).
70. Court-Martial of William H. Kendrick, held at Fort Chokkonikla, Florida, April
12, 1850, pursuant to Order 28, Records of the Office of the Judge Advocate General
(Army), Record Group 153, National Archives Building, Washington, D.C. (hereafter
cited as Records of Judge Advocate General).
71. Twiggs, Order 33, April 25, 1850, Orders and Special Orders Issued, Western
Division and Department; Utley, Frontiersmen in Blue, pp. 38-39.
72. Court-Martial of Edward Parker, held at Fort Chokkonikla, Florida, April 12,
1850, pursuant to Order 28, Records of Judge Advocate General.
73. Post Returns for the months of May and June 1850, submitted by Morris and
Major F 0. Wyse, Post Returns; Quarterly Report of Sick for Period ending June 25,
1850.
74. Assistant Surgeon [Jonathan] Letterman to Major F[rancis] 0. Wyse, July 1,
1850, Letters Received, 1850 Letters Received, 1850 (A-W and Unentered), Letters
Received, Western Division and Department.
75. Letterman to Wyse, July 12, 1850, Letters Received, 1850 (A-W and Unenter-
ed), Letters Received, Western Division and Department.
76. Wyse to Jones, July 18, 1950, Letters Received Adjutant General's Office, Roll
439 of 1850.









Richmond Naval Air Station,

1942-1961


David Macfie*




On September 15, 1942 a small cadre of service personnel assembled
about the administration building of a partially constructed Naval Air
Station in a remote wooded area of South Dade County. Its commission
became official as a representative of Rear Admiral James L. Kauffman,
U.S.N., Commandant of Seventh Naval District and Commander of
Gulf Sea Frontiers, read the letter of the Secretary of Navy directing
establishment of the base. Captain Charles Maguire read the orders
placing him in command, made a brief address, and directed the raising
of the colors. With this brief exercise in naval ritual, a colorful, inani-
mate character in Dade County history came into existence. Its 30 year
legacy was destined to include the world's largest blimp base, a univer-
sity campus and research center, CIA headquarters, and a cageless
zoological park.
Richmond Naval Air Station's establishment marked the comple-
tion of a chain of Lighter Than Air (LTA) bases functioning in a
supportive capacity along convoy lines of the entire Atlantic Seaboard.
Sister bases of Richmond included the Glynco Naval Air Station near
Brunswick, Georgia, and the main training center at Lakehurst Naval
Air Station, New Jersey. The Department of the Navy later enlarged
NAS Richmond's sphere of operation to encompass the Caribbean
region, the Gulf of Mexico and South America.
The 2107 acre site, named for the small sawmill community of
Richmond, which it displaced, lies 19 miles southwest of the central
business district of Miami and several miles west of the Miami-Key
West Highway (U.S. I). In addition to its strategic location on the
southern end of the continent and proximity to the Atlantic Ocean, the
primary reasons for the site's selection, the excellent year-round flying
*David Macfie, 23, is a Senior at Florida International University, Miami, Florida,
majoring in English. He is a native Miamian.






Richmond Naval Air Station 39


weather and flat contours of the surrounding landscape of NAS
Richmond enhanced its reputation as the Country Club of Lighter Than
Air Bases.1
Though officially commissioned in September, 1942, construction
actually began on the $60,126 site on April 20, 1942, under the direction
of the Smith, Jacob & Langston Construction Company of Jacksonville.
Net cost as specified in the cost-plus contract for construction of base
facilities was $11,896,187, but climbed to slightly over $13,000,000 with
the addition of contracts for Public Works projects. Weekly payroll at the
height of activity during this period exceeded $125,000.2
Planners conceived Richmond NAS, like so many other bases, as a
fully independent, self-sufficient entity; a city within a city. Among the
facilities, fully functional on the date of commission, were the mess hall,
officers' and enlisted men's quarters, recreational and administration
building, firehouse, incinerator, main gate house, observation tower,
storage and maintenance facilities and a three-well water system. Con-
struction crews completed the sewage treatment plant several months
later. A 30-bed dispensary, fully staffed and equipped, opened October
1. On the date of commission, the base was staffed by eight Naval
officers, seven enlisted Navy men and the 71 enlisted marines who were
to function as security personnel during the Navy's three-year tenure
there. By the end of the month, seven more officers had joined the staff
in time for Captain Maguire's first personnel inspection.
Although the basic operational directions set forth in a Pre-
Commissioning Directive Memo on April 7, 1942 would not be altered
during the war, specific operational objectives were in a state of seem-
ingly perpetual flux. Although originally conceived as the home base for
a six-unit squadron of blimps, as well as a center for all phases of
maintenance including overhaul of air frames and engines, the Bureau of
Aeronautics announced the projected maintenance operation would not
include overhaul of air frames and engines. In October, 1942, however,
the Board reversed its earlier decision and approved the construction of
an additional hangar for the overhaul operations.
On October 14, 1942, the first LTA airship landed at Richmond,
initiating the formation of Airship Squadron 21. Another airship arrived
two weeks later and the squadron was officially commissioned under
Commander Gerald D. Zurmuehlen. Use of the base for HTA (Heavier
Than Air) craft began on December 8, 1942, with the landing of a PBY
(Patrol Bomber Reconnaissance) from NAS Banana River. These craft
continually used base facilities for the duration of the war.
As a recreational diversion in mid-December, the Base Athletic





40 TEQUESTA


Officer formed a basketball team for competition within the Seventh
Naval District. The first practice held in the Redlands High School Gym
was well attended by officers, enlisted men and marines. The following
year, the program expanded with construction of a field house adjacent
to the athletic field and installation of a boxing ring and a rowing
machine. Since there was no swimming pool, the Base Athletic Depart-
ment furnished transportation to Matheson Hammock. Early in 1943, a
group of 17 Negro enlisted men, many of whom held musician's ratings,
reported for duty along with Band Master H. W. Williams. According to
official Navy documents, the band organized by Williams became very
well known throughout the district.
By March, 1943, Richmond NAS embodied three separate com-
mands, including Fleet Airship Group Two, Airship Squadron 21, and
the station itself. Work on the large helium tanks with a combined
capacity of 480,000 cu. ft. at 60 PSI had been completed, and an LTA
school, staffed by Squadron 21 officers and station personnel, readied
itself lor the first contingent of trainees.
Work crews completed perhaps the most significant phase of the
construction during March. Blimp Hangar No. 1, the first of three such
hangars, took its place as the largest existing wooden structure in the
world.2 Built of Oregon Douglas fir, a wood compatible with the humid,
subtropical south Florida climate, the hangars rose from the landing mat
some 16.5 stories and measured over 1,000 feet in length. A railroad
track ran the length of each of the 270-foot wide structures to aid in the
maneuverability of the obstinately cumbersome blimps.
With the seven airships of Squadron 21, Richmond NAS quickly
became the most active of the Navy's airship stations. Airships from
Richmond flew both day and night missions, with many ships averaging
only 2 hours on the ground for refueling and maintenance for every 24
hours in the air. According to a civilian employee of the base. German
submarines downed an airship over the Caribbean, but available Navy
documents do not confirm the incident.
On July 17, 1943, the airship K-30 experienced engine failure and
the crew was forced to effect an emergency landing in a wooded area six
miles east of the base. No serious injuries were reported. A similar
incident involving a PBY occurred when ground crews, probably
exhausted from the long shifts, neglected to fuel the plane scheduled for
takeoff. It passed just beyond the boundaries of the base and had to make
an emergency landing near what is now the intersection of Coral Reef
Drive and S.W. 117 Avenue.4
The quality and speed of construction of the Richmond base, as






Richmond Naval Air Station 41


well as the incorporation of the latest tactical, technical and operational
innovations, made the base somewhat of a showcase, of which the Navy
made perpetual use. A pleasant diversion, enthusiastically received by
any dignitary prominent enough to be offered it, included a short blimp
ride and tour of the base. Among the visitors in August, 1943, was a
party of more than 500 Mexicans headed by Airforce General Gustavo
Salinas, but only the general enjoyed a blimp ride. The base command
also extended a similar welcome to an important Brazilian aeronautics
official.
Princes Amir Feisal and Mair Kahlid of Saudi Arabia and their
royal entourages made what would be the most colorfully unusual visit
paid Richmond NAS by visiting dignitaries during the war. The princes,
splendidly bedecked in native costume and accompanied by two heavily
armed bodyguards, conducted an inspection of base facilities and, not
surprisingly, completed their visit with a blimp ride.
During the NAS's first year of operation a major obstacle in the
attainment of the original goal of self-sufficiency had been lack of
helium processing and purification facilities. By August, 1943, three
compressors had been installed for this purpose and had an operative
rating. That month, a Helium Plant Operators School opened for the
purpose of training officers and enlisted men in the use of portable
helium processing equipment. Personnel trained at the Richmond school
worked primarily at airship bases outside the limits of the Continental
United States.
Near the end of August, Captain Maguire received orders transfer-
ring him to the Navy Department in Washington, D.C. Captain Maurice
Bradley of Airship Fleet Two assumed temporary command until the
arrival of Captain Frank Worden, who would command the base until its
deactivation in 1946.
In January, 1944, as workers completed the last of the structural
facilities included in the original conception of the base (including three
hangars), base officers welcomed more trainees who filled the Helium
Operators Training School to capacity. In accordance with the Navy
Manpower Survey, the commanding officer formally promulgated the
"mission" of NAS Richmond. New objectives alluded to by the captain
established the base as one of three serving the 55 to 60 airships in the
Gulf-Caribbean region, and as a major point of supply for LTA material.
The following month saw the establishment of the WAVES bar-
racks when workmen received a contract authorizing the removal of the
contractor's building from the southeast corner of the landing mat to a
site adjacent to the Mess Hall and Recreational Building. Workmen






42 TEQUESTA


followed all recommendations set out by the Women's Reserve bulletin
for conversion, making the most complete set of barracks on the base. A
small contingent of WAVES, consisting of 12 enlisted WAVES and one
officer, reported for duty the next month.
Though the Richmond NAS was, in one sense, a showcase to
foreign emissaries, it catered to domestic curiosity as well. In October,
1944, a Richmond contingent played an integral role in the observance
of Navy Day in Miami. A blimp, platoons of WAVES and marines, and
an exhibition of carrier pigeons participated in the commemorative
activities.
One of the problems inherent in structural design in the Caribbean
area is the probable incidence of hurricanes. As an extension of research
conducted at the University of St. Louis in 1938 regarding the purported
relationship between microseisms (minute oscillations representing
movement of the earth's crust) and varying degrees of atmospheric
pressure, NAS Richmond became one member of a triangular network
of seismographic stations. Prior studies established a marked correlation
between microseisms and hurricanes in the area of Puerto Rico. A public
works contract for $9,467 initiated the construction of six subterranean
instrument vaults for the studies.
Although the course of the conflict in the Atlantic theatre had
reached a point of eminent predictability by the spring of 1945, escala-
tion of base activities is perhaps indicative of the Navy's permanent
regard for the base. An intensive training program for nocturnal torpedo
bomber teams had reached the height of its operational capacity in the
spring. Also, in March, 1945, the House Naval Affairs Committee opted
for Navy Housing projects for Richmond NAS. The original conception
of the project included 40 low cost housing units and 10 trailer units
(later expanded to 30 units). The first of the trailer units (part of 200-unit
allotment for Florida) arrived in early May. NAS Richmond also re-
ceived consideration as the site of a missile center. The Committee's post
inspection recommendations for the project, however, are not available.
From the initial inception in 1942, during the frantic though
meticulous construction period and throughout subsequent phases of
expansion, engineers and contractors at Richmond continually made
concessions to the reality of tropical hurricanes. Each structural unit
comprising the totality of Richmond, particularly the hangars, was
conceived and maintained with this as the primal force to be reckoned
with. Hangars, theoretically capable of retaining structural integrity in
the face of winds exceeding 100 mph, lost their skylights to preceptive
structural revisions. The intricate automatic sprinkling system served,
no doubt, as a striking example of technical overkill.5






Richmond Naval Air Station 43


During the second week of September, 1945, 1,500 base personnel
braced themselves for the probable land contact of a storm moving
northerly through the Caribbean, the third such storm since 1942. As the
possibility of deviation in the storm's course grew increasingly remote,
officials of the Opa Locka airfield in North Dade and private aircraft
owners fervently sought refuge for their equipment. Civilian planes
stored in the hangars numbered 153, including 40 from Chapman Field
and 12 owned by the Embry Riddle Co. of Miami. Sixty-one torpedo
bombers arrived on September 14 from Opa Locka, bringing the total of
military aircraft stored within the hangars to 313. All HTA craft, both
civilian and military, competed for space with the 25 k-type blimps (11
dismantled) moored inside the purportedly hurricane-proof structure.
Space for 150 private and military automobiles soon vanished
On September 14, the violent periphery of the storm passed over the
South Florida coast as personnel made the last frantic efforts to secure
the base. Sustained wind velocity reached 94 mph at 5:00 PM., ripping
the tarpaper from the roofs of the hangars. Steadfastly true to Navy
regulations in the face of all collective opinion to the contrary, Captain
Worden ordered all "hatches" tightly battened. "Without an opening on
the lee side of the hangars to equalize the tremendous pressure exerted
by the storm, the structure could theoretically burst," the Captain was
warned. At 5:30 the roof of Hangar # 1 blew off, only to be followed by
the automatic drenching by the sprinkler system a minute later. No sign
of fire had been observed. Fifteen minutes later, however, Hangar #1
was ablaze, as were its sister hangars. Base personnel made a laudable
but vain attempt to squelch flames fanned by 126 mph gusts. A civilian
witness to the catastrophe who lived just beyond the west gate of the base
later reported, "A long, tapering sheet of flame reached from the hangars
for more than a quarter mile to my house, so hot I couldn't hold my hand
against the windowpane I was peeping out:' Debris blown from the
hangars by the wind and explosions lay scattered blocks from the site of
the blaze. Employees of University of Miami facilities at the base in the
50's recall the charred skeleton of a blimp gondola resting peacefully just
outside the main entrance of the base. The two mobile pumpers of the
base fire department and the individual hangar pumps dependent on the
storm-damaged water system of the base functioned only at partial
capacity. Blocked and flooded roads prevented fire equipment and
medical aid from arriving until 9:40 P.M., in time to administer a token
dousing to thousand-foot piles of smoldering wreckage.
Where hours before had stood the largest wooden structures in the
world, worth an estimated $30,000,000, lay piles of debris. The fire was
categorically claimed to be the worst within the Continental United






44 TEQUESTA


States in 1945 and unequivocally asserted to be one of the most cata-
clysmic blazes in the nation's history. Officials declared the hangars and
equipment stored within them a total loss. The K-type Navy blimps
valued at $250,000 each and the $125,000 loss incurred by the Embry
Riddle Co. amounted to $7,000,000 of the total loss. While initial
estimates of injuries ranged as high as 100, the official account later lists
50, all of them minor.7 Investigators found the body of Fire Chief Harry
Shulze, the only fatality of the disaster, amid the wreckage of some small
trucks where timbers had fallen on him.'
Naturally, witnesses and investigators advanced a variety of seem-
ingly plausible explanations for the disaster. According to some, static
electricity ignited the fires, though officials dismissed this theory as
untenable. Dade County Patrolman R. E. Ivo attributed the cause of the
blaze to an explosion that occurred as a strong gust broke the mooring
ties of a small private plane on the runway, hurling it into the side of one
of the hangars. Navy and Fire Department officials summarily dismissed
this theory as a viable cause. The hurricane's obvious intensification of
the severity of the blaze banished hopes for the discovery of an officially
acknowledged cause. E W. Wiggins, operations manager for Embry
Riddle, succinctly phrased the most popular theory for Miami Herald
reporters the following day. "As the structures collapsed from the 126
mph winds," said Wiggins, "sparks from falling debris and severed
powerlines ignited the gasoline from ruptured fuel tanks."9
Thus ended the active strategic and tactical role played by
Richmond NAS in the Navy's elaborate defense system. Despite the
emphatic exhortations of Naval Affairs Committee member Sen. C. 0.
Andrews for the refurbishing and preservation of the base in light of its
strategic importance, the systematic clean-up and deactivation of the
base began at once. The damage to the base created by a sequence of
events as unusual as those of the September 15 hurricane and fire could
be expected to manifest itself in an unusual way. As the structures
exploded, burned and were blown about by the winds, the tons of nails
that affixed tarpaper to roofs and wooden support struts to their main
members littered almost the entire base. So immediate were the prob-
lems caused by this, that large make-shift electromagnets mounted on
Navy trucks slowly scoured the roads and runways to make travel
through the base possible. As late as 1958, University personnel had to
rake these rusty remnants from the roadways after a hard rain.1 I
As the Navy's intentions regarding the relegation of NAS
Richmond to the status of deactivated surplus property became apparent,
administrative officials of the small but ebullient University of Miami






Richmond Naval Air Station 45


began to ponder the feasibility of a satellite campus at Richmond. The
expected flood of discharged servicemen seeking higher education and
the Navy's expected termination of the Miami International Air Depot,
then housing male students, made the decision to seek transfer on the
base to the University an extremely judicious one." A committee ap-
pointed by university president Dr. Bowman F Ashe began preliminary
negotiations for the base before its official deactivation in February,
1946. The negotiations continued through the summer and concluded on
October 4, 1946, when Dr. Ashe formally accepted NAS Richmond.
Terms of the 50-year lease placed not only the base, but responsibil-
ity of base maintenance under university control. The degree of neces-
sary maintenance would, for several years following the transfer, be a
point of contention between university and Navy officials. The well-
constructed runways were in excellent repair at the time of transfer, and
Navy planes landed occasionally, often bringing the Naval inspector,
who insisted the grass adjacent to the runways be mowed regularly. The
university quite naturally demurred, such a requirement falling well
outside the budget."2
Classes on the new satellite campus opened November 1, under the
direction of Dean Elmer V. Hjort, who was succeeded by his associate
Dr. J. Ralph Murray when Dr. Hjort's health failed. The campus offered a
wide variety of freshman level courses, and complete housing and
recreational facilities for 1,100 first-year students. Male students oc-
cupied the enlisted men's barracks, women occupying the more affable
bachelor officers' quarters."' Facilities at the campus had been well-
maintained during the Navy's tenure and were fully adequate to fill the
needs placed upon them. The water and sewage systems, laundry
facilities, incinerator and dispensary remained in operation throughout
the two years the university used the "South" Campus for freshmen
classes. The cafeteria continued service as did the snack bar in the
Recreation Hall, which boasted a hardwood floor gymnasium and a
four-lane bowling alley. Freshmen attended most classes on the South
Campus, but regularly scheduled transportation to and from the main
campus existed in the form of a fleet of surplus Navy buses.
Despite the rather unique nature of Richmond as a university
campus, students disliked it from the beginning, considering it too
remote and inaccessible." Many of the students came from northern
families in urban communities and found university life in the midst of
an undeveloped farming area antithetic. Students at the remote campus
of course discovered a variety of ways to amuse themselves. One of the
more unusual diversions was that of a female student who found inciner-






46 TEQUESTA


ation of the closets of her classmates to be an intensely thrilling pastime.
University firemen extinguished more than half a dozen such fires
before officials apprehended the girl.15
During this period, the university established a series of research
programs on the base which would soon encompass a wide spectrum of
scientific disciplines. These programs constituted the first real research
undertaken by the university. In response to a directive from university
president Dr. Ashe, John Lynch and Dr. Arthur Stahl selected 350 acres
in the southeast corner of the base and, after the termination of freshmen
classes, the dispensary for what was to be the most extensive and
versatile of the research programs undertaken: Tropical Food Research.
In addition to the 350-acre experimental farm and laboratory, the prog-
ram, at the height of activity, included two large greenhouses, two slat
sheds, each over 150 feet in length, and a miniature, though fully
functional commercial fruit and vegetable packaging facility. Dr. E Gray
Butcher directed an entomology research program as.a corollary to work
conducted by the Tropical Food Research team.
Project directors established the farm for the study of the horticul-
ture of tropical and subtropical fruits and to supply samples to the
Tropical Food Laboratory for analysis and commercial processing. Pro-
ject personnel grew and bred most varieties of common subtropical
fruits such as mangoes, avocados and all varieties of citrus including
shattuck, a primitive grapefruit, and rough lemon, a preferred root stock.
Researchers also maintained a small grove of lychee trees for study. The
propagation of barbados cherries, however, resulted in perhaps the most
successful experiment undertaken at the farm in both a scientific and
commercial respect. The barbados cherry is a small, moderately sweet
fruit with a much higher vitamin C content than oranges. Researchers
kept complete records on the growth and breeding of each of the 500 to
1,000 barbados seedlings planted, eventually culminating in the de-
velopment of the Florida Sweet, the most common commercial variety
of barbados cherry. Guavas received extensive attention, ultimately
directed toward the development of a type of guava suitable for eating as
picked from the tree. Success, however, eluded those efforts.
In the mid-fifties the farm assumed an autonomous position of
sorts, its efforts directed solely at tropical and subtropical horticulture.
The staffs of both farm and laboratory, however, maintained an informal
cooperative research arrangement.
One of the most significant bits of applied research and develop-
ment came as a result of a collaborative effort between the university
staff and local lime growers. The project concluded with the production






Richmond Naval Air Station 47


of the first commercially feasible frozen limeade concentrate. Growers
supplied limes for research in the Tropical Food Laboratory and con-
verted the laundry building into a juice processing plant. Once under-
way, university personnel acted in a supervisory capacity to ensure
proper quality control.
By this time, a complete soil analysis laboratory had begun to assist
the farm and food laboratory and a complete machine shop worked to
produce the specialized equipment needed for agricultural experimenta-
tion now supervised by farm manager Roy Nelson.
Extensive as the work conducted on the farm grew to be, however,
the Tropical Food Laboratory did not limit its activities strictly to
specimens grown on the farm. Though established simultaneously, the
farm took several years to mature to a point where it became an
important source of supply to laboratory work. Activities independent of
the farm included the study of packaging, handling and preservation of
tropical foods, resulting in development of numerous recipes and for-
mulas, such as those for orange jelly. An enticing variety of tropical fruit
wines grew from some of the laboratory work, including citrus wine.
Few were ever commercially successful. The corollation between this
work and the consistently pleasant disposition of South Campus staff
suggests that these efforts held some promise.
The Tropical Food Laboratory made a major contribution to the
budding field of Food Technology with the development of frozen,
fully-cooked portion-packed foods. This work involved courtesy
agreements between the university, DuPont and Alcoa, who sent the
most recently developed samples of plastic and aluminum packaging
material for research. The development of mylar plastic, a transparent,
heat resistant material, proved to be a boon for the project. The labora-
tory also had to its credit the development of several highly-specialized
pieces of miniature research equipment. A complete high-vacuum, low-
temperature juice concentrator, which enabled the original research on
frozen pineapple juice, and the only laboratory size homogenizer in the
South are among them.
As in any large research program, not all the directions followed
can be even remotely considered to lead to success. Several experiments
with the preservation of ripe tomatoes proved disappointing, as did an
experiment involving ripe bananas dipped in a wax-like preservative
solution. Another project invovling the use of calamondin juice as a
substitute for bitters had a similar fate.
The type of refrigeration that researchers used so extensively was
consistent with many of the projects in its unique form and applications.






48 TEQUESTA


Laboratory personnel, working in what had been the base dispensary,
found the surplus mortuary boxes to be ideal for storage of samples and
specimens. Student research assistants found them an ideal place to lie
peacefully in repose for the "amusement" of unwary visitors inspecting
laboratory facilities.
In 1961 the university eliminated the work of the Tropical Food
Laboratory and that of the experimental farm rather suddenly, a fate
shared by all South Campus research programs not externally funded
and self-sufficient. The laboratory and experimental farm remained
intact for one year, the university hoping industrial interests would
provide the funds needed for reactivation.
The work conducted at the farm and Tropical Food Laboratory in no
way overshadowed the other research programs being conducted simul-
taneously at the South Campus. In addition to the entomology research
of Dr. F Gray Butcher, private entomological research conducted on the
upper floor of the administration building intrigued many university
personnel. The project's director, known to university staff as the "Mad
Russian," experimented with the electronic decimation of insects at a
distance.
Biomedical research became an important item in the university's
research budget. The cancer research team of Dr. Wilhemina Dunning
and Dr. Maymie Curtis, the first scientists to produce cancer cells in
embryonic chicks, handled their experiments in what had been the base
brig. These experiments successfully produced cancer in vitro (laborato-
ry conditions under glass). Dr. Dunning is currently involved in cancer
research at the University of Miami Medical School.
The South Campus also served as the home of two independent
polio research projects in the early 1950's. Dr. Donald Butz's program
concerned itself with different types of blood as they reacted with the
polio virus. His frequent requests for blood samples from campus
personnel earned him the affectionately intended nickname of Vampire.
At the same time, Dr. Murray Sanders became involved with therapeutic
research, shocking nerves deadened by polio back to sensitivity through
the use of toxic reptile and insect venom. When the school terminated all
polio research programs with the discovery of the Salk vaccine, Dr.
Sanders and his staff were faced with the problem of disposal of the large
assortment of venom samples accumulated, including minute vials of
black widow spider venom. The staff finally burned the dangerous
specimens."
One facet of Dr. Sanders' work unintentionally provided South






Richmond Naval Air Station 49


Campus personnel with a comic though costly display of animal in-
genuity. A shipment of 28 rhesus monkeys for Dr. Sanders' research
invaded the campus when one of the prodigious primates opened the
cages containing them. George Macfie, a research professor, recalls an
instance when it seemed that all the monkeys staged an organized raid on
the Tropical Food Laboratory, no doubt in search of food. Nine of them
were seated on the roof and hood of his car when he left one afternoon. In
their search for food, however, the monkeys wreaked havoc on the
Experimental Farm, their practice being to taste one fruit, discard it and
taste another. Campus personnel eventually caught most of the maraud-
ing monkeys.
The Industrial Research program, begun in 1950 and directed by
Dr. W. 0. Walker, and the Housing Research Laboraory, begun in the
same year and directed until 1955 by Dr. H. Horton Shelton, take their
places at the opposite extremity of the university's spectrum of research.
Concerned primarily with the chemistry of the interior of a sealed
refrigeration system, Dr. Walker's research found numerous sponsors in
manufacturers of refrigeration components. Aaron Sakhnovsky, for-
merly of Dr. Walker's laboratory, assumed the directorship of the Hous-
ing Research Laboratory from Dr. Shelton in 1955. Also externally
funded, this laboratory conducted tests of windows required by the Dade
County Building Codes. The laboratory's scope later enlarged to include
tests for wall systems of multi-story buildings."7
Though the University of Miami assumed control of Richmond
NAS in the 1946 lease, the government maintained a portion of the tract
for military purposes. Token military presence had been maintained
since 1946 through the rather inconspicuous Naval Observatory. The Air
Force 644 Radar Unit established a tracking station at Richmond in
1957-58," which was modified in April, 1960 for SAGE, low altitude
radar. Air Force technicians made these modifications to guard against
low altitude, mid-air collisions and to track missiles from Eglin Air
Force Base.19 Two months later, the House Armed Services Committee
in Washington approved a plan to apportion 474 acres of Richmond
among the four branches of the service."'
During the years following 1961, the various tenants of the base
maintained its unusual and controversial character. It hosted the largest
CIA nerve center outside the agency's headquarters in Langley, Virginia
under the name Zenith Technological Services.2' It received considera-
tion as a private airport,22 automobile test track and race track,2 and
highway patrol headquarters.24 Upon revocation of the lease from the







50 TEQUESTA


University of Miami in 1970, Dade County acquired the property from
the General Services Administration for use as a cageless zoological
park.25



NOTES

1. Interview with Mrs. Gaye Tripp, Secretary and Cashier for Smith, Jacobs and
Langston Co., U.S. Navy and University of Miami.
2. Tripp interview.
3. Naval Historical Foundation, Washington, D.C. Excerpt from Study: The Conti-
nental Bases 1947 p. 256.
4. Tripp interview,
5. Naval Historical Foundation. Chronology of Base 1942-1945.
6. Miami Herald, September 15, 1945.
7. MiamiHerald, September 16, 1945,
8. Smiley, Nixon, Knights of the Fourth Estate, E. A. Seemann Pub. Inc. Miami,
1974 pgs. 212-216.
9. Miami Daily News, September 16, 1945.
10. Interview with George B. Macfie, former Assistant Professor of Food Technol-
ogy, University of Miami.
11. Interview with Eugene Cohen, University of Miami Administrator.
12. Cohen interview.
13. Tebeau, Charlton W., The University of Miami: A Golden Anniversary History
- 1926-1976, Coral Gables, Fla., University of Miami Press, 1976, p. 120.
14. Ibid p. 121.
15. Tripp interview.
16. Macfie interview.
17. Interview with Aaron Sakhnovsky, Director of Housing Research, University
of Miami.
18. Tripp interview.
19. Miami Herald, April 3, 1960.
20. Miami Herald, June 10, 1960.
21. Miami Herald, March 9, 1975.
22. Miami Herald, February 6, 1973.
23. Miami Herald, April 13, 1971.
24. Miami Herald, August 28, 1971.
25. Miami Herald, March 9, 1975.









Notes on South Florida Place Names:

Norris Cut'


By Roland Chardon*




South Florida is liberally sprinkled with exotic place names. They recall
past scenes ranging from spots of haunting natural beauty to the most
ordinary of geographical features. Visions are evoked of the struggles
and imprints of humans as they settled on the land or were wrecked on
reefs, and of the sweeps of history which caught the region changing
hands frequently among Indians, Spaniards, Englishmen, and Ameri-
cans. Captiva Island and Immokalee in the west, the Everglades and
Cape Sable in the center, and Fort Lauderdale, Perrine, and Black
Caesar's Creek in the east all have a special meaning to those who know
about them.
If Norris Cut sounds a little drab in comparison with these and
other, more artful place names, at least it is not without its historic and
cultural interest. For this presently rather obscure tidal inlet (illustration)
got its name not, as might be expected, due to someone's exploratory,
pioneering, or building activities, but because of the way varying local
pronunciations were eventually resolved into one written place name.
The naming of Norris Cut thus reflects both specific cultural influences
in the Biscayne Bay area at the time the inlet was formed, as well as what
can happen linguistically when outsiders transcribe a piece of folk
terminology onto a map.
Historical maps persuasively suggest that Norris Cut was created
sometime between 1829 and 1838 A.D. due to natural causes,2 and quite
possibly by the South Florida Hurricane of September 14-16, 1835. As
settlement expanded along upper Biscayne Bay in the latter 1800s, boats
coming from the north and heading for the Miami River often entered the
Bay through Norris Cut. Once Government Cut was opened in 1905,
however, it became the preferred entry route, and, though Norris Cut has
*Dr. Chardon is Associate Professor of Geography at the Louisiana State Univer-
sity, Baton Rouge, Louisiana.







52 TEQUESTA


Location of Norris Cut today. Also shown are Government Cut and Bear Cut, as
well as where Boca Ratones opened into the Atlantic Ocean in 1770, and the
outlet of Boca Ratones when it closed in 1822.

been considerably widened and part of its channel deepened by human
activity in the 20th century, it is rarely used as a water passage today.
Just how or when Norris Cut received its name is not known with







Norris Cut 53


certainty. This may be partly because, due to an error, Boca Ratones (or
Rattones) was the first name given the Cut in the mid-1800s, soon after
its creation. And part of the mystery may be due to the various other
names for Norris Cut which have been recorded in several documents.
During the 19th century, Norris Cut was also called Narrows Cut,
Narrow Cut, Narres's Cut, and Norez Cut. As it happens, the first
recorded instance of the name "Norris Cut" is on a U.S. Coast Survey
map of northern Biscayne Bay, drawn in 1867.4 Since then, this is the
name which has been consistently used on official nautical charts to this
day.
On the Coast Survey's first reconnaissance chart of southeastern
Florida, however, Norris Cut was called "Narrows Cut."' This sketch
map, drawn in 1849, carries the same place name in a contemporary
Coast Survey report, which reads:6

The mainland of Florida, above said cape [i.e., Cape Florida], runs down
into a sharp point, from the head of Key Biscayne bay to Narrows cut,
which separates it from Virginia Key, the most northern of the Florida
islands.

But the U.S. Coast Survey was not the first to identify Norris Cut as
Narrows Cut, for this latter name had already been given to a Biscayne
Bay inlet north of Bear Cut, on the 1841 and 1845 editions of Blunt's
famous charts.7 In 1852, the U.S. Coast Survey also identified the Cut as
"Narrow Cut,"" and either Narrow, or, more generally, Narrows Cut was
used for Norris Cut by several people writing for years afterward?
That the name "Norris" may have evolved from "Norez" is possi-
bly implied in a report, written in 1883, relating Coast Survey activities
along the coast. The official surveyor writes:10

On Monday the 19th we left Biscayne Bay going out through Norris Cut
(originally Norez Cut) and shortly after noon we reached New River
Inlet....

And even later, a traveller, describing Biscayne Bay in 1894, gave
Norris Cut the name Narres's Cut, saying:11

The eastern boundaries of the bay are the narrow spur of the mainland
which ends at Narres's Cut and Virginia Key, and Key Biscayne lying just
below in the same line,...

We therefore have no less than six recorded names applied to Norris
Cut; there may have been more. It is of course difficult to say when each






54 TEQUESTA


of these names (or variations) was first introduced for the new inlet, but
the sequence by which each appears to have been first recorded is:
Boca Ratones 1839
Narrows Cut 1841 (Blunt); 1849 (U.S. Coast Survey)
Narrow Cut 1852
Norris Cut 1867
Norez Cut 1883 (but specifically referring
to earlier years)
Narres's Cut 1894
I have seen no document which explains the naming of Norris Cut,
though several suggestions for its toponymic origin have been offered by
interested Miami area residents, during informal discussions with this
writer. One is that the Cut may have been named for an individual,
presumably a Mr. Norris, who might either have lived in the Biscayne
Bay area, or first reported the inlet to others. The cut was once identified
as Norris' Cut on an 1883 Coast and Geodetic map,12 but I cannot find
references to such a person for the 1860s, the general period in which
Norris Cut is recorded for the first time.'1
A second suggestion has been that Norris may have developed as a
corruption of a Spanish "Nariz Cut," implying that the Spaniards were
the first to give the inlet a name. One reason for this may lie in the
references to Norez Cut and Narres's Cut already noted. These would, to
those who do not know Spanish well, appear similar to "Nariz" and,
with other obviously Spanish place names common in the area, provide a
plausible rationale for a Spanish origin for "Norris."
It is true that a Spanish name- Boca Ratones- was the first name I
have seen given to Norris Cut, in 1839."4 The practice of so naming the
Cut persisted for some years, but it was largely limited to military maps
or others derived from them.1' However, calling Norris Cut "Boca
Ratones" very probably resulted from a confusion between two geog-
raphically quite distinct tidal inlets several miles apart. Further, when
one of the inlets (Boca Ratones) existed, the other (Norris Cut) did not.
And after Norris Cut was formed in the 1830s, the old inlet at Boca
Ratones was almost always closed. It is a somewhat confusing story, but
can be sorted out by careful inspection of the maps of the times.
This inspection shows that Boca Ratones, legitimately named by
Spanish navigators and sometimes known by the English as White River
Inlet, at one time connected northern Biscayne Bay with the ocean. The
location of Boca Ratones, however, was some miles north of present
Norris Cut; in the 1770s, for example, Boca Ratones entered the Atlantic
Ocean somewhere near present 46th Street in Miami Beach (illustra-






Norris Cut 55


tion).16 Due to prevailing currents, Boca Ratones moved progressively
south, until sand accumulation closed it off by 1822, at about 25th Street
(illustration);17 today, Indian Creek is what remains of Boca Ratones.
Not until several years later (between 1829 and 1838) was Norris Cut
formed as a separate natural feature, almost 31/ miles south of and
totally distinct from Boca Ratones. The two inlets should not, therefore,
be associated with each other in a physical sense.
On the other hand, placing the name Boca Ratones where Norris
Cut is located, as the military cartographers of the times did, is an
understandable error, since Boca Ratones had closed and Norris Cut was
open. But it was an error just the same, and Norris Cut was not called
Boca Ratones for very long, nor by many people. In any case, the name
Norris Cut could not have evolved linguistically from Boca Ratones, and
in fact no one makes that claim. As we have seen, what is often
suggested is that Norris is a corruption of "Nariz." In Spanish, "nariz"
means "nose," and Norris Cut does, with some imagination, appear to
look like a nose on some of the maps of the latter half of the 1800s.
But, spelling and cartographic similarities notwithstanding, the
evidence against a Spanish origin for the name Norris Cut is considera-
bly stronger than the evidence for it. First, the inlet was created several
years after Florida had been transferred from Spain to the United States
in 1821. It does not seem likely that a new Spanish name would have
been given to a natural feature which appeared "ex post facto," as it
were, and especially in a foreign region already being settled by
English-speaking people. As noted above, a Spanish name was initially
given to Norris Cut, but that name was Boca Ratones (or Rattones), in
recognition of the prior existence of the original Boca Ratones during
Spanish times. Thus, had a Spanish place name been retained for Norris
Cut, it almost certainly would have been Boca Ratones.
A second argument against a close linguistic connection between
Norris and Nariz concerns syllable stress. In the English word "Norris,"
the stress is heavier on the first syllable (Norris), whereas the opposite
occurs in the Spanish word "nariz" (nariz). These syllabic stress differ-
ences make it quite unlikely that "Nariz" could have been a possible
source for "Norris."
A third reason why Norris Cut is probably not of Spanish derivation
focuses on the accompanying use of the term "Cut" in the place name.
"Nariz Cut" sounds strange indeed, and even if an uncharacteristic (for
the Spaniards) name like Nariz had been given to an inlet, the full place
name would have included the word "Boca." There is, however, no
suggestion that Norris Cut was ever named Boca Nariz. "Cut," in this






56 TEQUESTA


connotation, is an English Caribbean term used to describe certain
narrow water passages- in particular tidal inlets (such as, for example,
Bear Cut, between Virginia Key and Key Biscayne). This implies that
Bahamian seamen or wreckers, who for perhaps a century had been
frequenting this part of Florida, introduced the word "cut" to apply to
the narrow inlet at Norris Cut. Again, this raises the possibility that
Norris Cut was named for a presently unknown Bahamian, and this may
be so; but, as has been mentioned, no such person is recorded and, as we
shall see, another simple explanation can also be advanced.
In view of all this, and given the added factors of American and
Bahamian settlement on the mainland opposite Norris Cut and an
American lighthouse on Key Biscayne,"' it seems one should look for a
non-Spanish, and probably American or Bahamian, origin for the nam-
ing of Norris Cut. And indeed, a more likely alternative is that Norris Cut
is a modification, not of a Spanish Nariz Cut, but of Narrows Cut, and
there is documentary and linguistic evidence to support this view.
The first English name for Norris Cut was Narrows Cut, identified
on the 1841 and 1845 Blunt charts and on the first U.S. Coast Survey map
- a preliminary reconnaissance map of south Florida.? The applica-
tion of the name 'Narrows" to some tidal inlets crossing the long barrier
beaches along the east coast of Florida was not unknown, and certainly
Norris Cut was narrow at the time. But there may be an additional reason
why this particular opening was named Narrows Cut.
Before Boca Ratones closed in 1822, and prior to the creation of
Norris Cut a few years later, the land on which Miami Beach is presently
located was one long, narrow island, ending at Bear Cut to the south.2"
This island was very accurately surveyed in the 1760s by William
Gerard DeBrahm, a British surveyor who appropriately enough gave it
the name of "Narrow Island."2" Since Gauld's Observations (footnote
21), and therefore DeBrahm's place name, were available to at least some
people sailing along the coast, it is quite possible that Narrows Cut was a
logical name to give to the new inlet, based on the Narrow Island through
which the inlet had been created. It is, however, equally possible that
Narrows Cut, like so many others, was named due to its narrowness.
In either case, an American, Bahamian, or even a Britisher could
have coined the name. At present I happen to lean toward a Bahamian
origin, partly because Bahamian settlers lived around Biscayne Bay,
partly because of the association of "Narrows" with "Cut," partly
because the first use of the name Narrows Cut is on an 1841 chart derived
from British surveys (cf. footnote 7), and partly because American army






Norris Cut 57


cartographers at first used "Boca Ratones" to identify the Cut in 1839
(implying that "Narrows Cut" was not an American innovation).
Regardless of how Narrows Cut was initially named, this was the
official name first given to Norris Cut by the U.S. Coast Survey in 1849,
and it was used frequently in later descriptions of the inlet.22 There is also
no doubt that, for some reason, the name had been changed, on later
Coast Survey maps, to Norris Cut-officially retained to the present day.
The question then becomes: Why and how was Narrows Cut changed to
Norris Cut? The answer is not yet known, but I suggest a linguistic
modification, whereby "Narrows" was orally pronounced, by certain
English-speaking groups around Biscayne Bay, so that "Norris" was
heard by others, even though the meaning was still "Narrows."
The most numerous and dominant settlers in the Biscayne Bay area
in the early and mid-1800s apparently came from the Bahamas, or from
Bahamian-descended people from the keys." Later, possibly in the
1850s and certainly in the 1870s, others came from sections of the United
States, such as Tennessee and Georgia, sometimes described as "Upland
South" culture areas?4 Both groups, as well as those coming from
elsewhere, pronounce the word "narrows" somewhat differently from
each other. For example, my own experiences, and those with whom I've
discussed the question, indicate that people from the "Upland South"
tend to pronounce "narrows" in such a way that someone like myself,
coming from the northeastern United States, would transcribe the word
as naress" (narez, phonetically).
Even more interestingly, many English-speaking Caribbean
peoples, including many from the Bahamas and probably the Florida
Keys, tended to pronounce "narrows" almost as "norruz" or "norez"
(narez, phonetically). This, according to Dr. E G. Cassidy, noted author-
ity on American English and folk etymology, is because the sounds of
"o" in "hot" and "a" in "hat' are identical: a vowel in between the two?5
Thus, "Narrows Cut," pronounced by Bahamian folk people, comes
very close to being heard as "Norris Cut" by someone not from that
culture. In this way, I suggest that the words "Narrows Cut," originally
and correctly transcribed by the Blunts in 1841, and by the U.S. Coast
Surveyors in 1849, either on the basis of their understanding that "nor-
ruz" meant "narrows," or for some other reason, were retranscribed by
later U.S. Coast Surveyors, working in the field in the 1860s and without
benefit of the 1849 chart. These latter surveyors heard "Norris Cut," and
wrote it thus to conform more closely with local pronunciation at that
time, as they understood it.






58 TEQUESTA


In later years, the Upland South added its contribution to the
pronunciation of "narrows." I do not know just when the first rendering
of "Narrows Cut" as "Narres's Cut" occurred, but it seems to have taken
place later than "Norris Cut" perhaps as late as the 1880s, for I have
not yet found any reference to "Narres's Cut" prior to the early 1890s.
Following the hypothesis suggested, the original Narrows Cut was
recognized as the true name of the inlet by all three human groups
involved- that is, by Bahamians, Upland South folk, and Northerners.
But Narrows Cut was pronounced differently by each group, and the
variations were heard and dutifully recorded by several Northern writ-
ers. In this way Narrows Cut became variously Norez Cut (Bahamian
pronunciation), Norris Cut (also Bahamian), and Narres's Cut (Upland
South), depending on who talked to whom.
Indeed, Dr. Cassidy says that these pronunciations are in fact closer
than they appear, to those who later try to reconstruct their sounds from
printed words, as I am doing here.2 There could, for that matter, have
been many other variations in pronunciation of "Narrows,"' which in
turn might have been transcribed differently. But the three transcriptions
outlined here seem to have "stuck," at least for some years. Noted
accordingly (mostly by Northerners) in the various written records
naming the Cut, the divergence continued through the latter half of the
19th century and into the 20th. Ultimately, the place name Norris Cut
emerged, partly because this became its official name on charts and
maps, and partly because the 19th century settlers were soon culturally
overwhelmed by the great 20th century influx of Miami immigrants,
unaware of the original "Narrows Cut," and exposed to the official
"Norris Cut'."
In summary, while it is not yet possible to prove how Norris Cut got
its name, it is highly unlikely to have been a corruption of a Spanish
"Nariz Cut," nor to have been named after an individual. Norris Cut
presently appears rather to have derived from a transformation by
surveyors of a Bahamian oral rendition of Narrows Cut, pronounced
very much like Norris Cut to outsiders, and so transcribed. The sur-
veyors' local contacts for their transformation may have been Bahamian
settlers on the shores of Biscayne Bay, or Bahamian seamen who visited
the area during or shortly after the Cut was formed, or the Keeper of the
Cape Florida Light House at the time the 1867 detailed Coast Survey was
made.27 What is somewhat surprising is that the U.S. Coast Survey itself,
having left Norris Cut unnamed on its maps and charts for 18 years after
1849, did not check back to its own initial place name of Narrows Cut.
But, whatever the reason, once the name Norris Cut was officially







Norris Cut 59


adopted by the Coast Survey, and thus also by Miami residents who
looked at the Coast Survey maps in later years, Narrows Cut perma-
nently became Norris Cut. In truth, however, it remains Narrows Cut-
only now it is spelled differently.





NOTES


1. The author expresses grateful aphreciation to Dr. E G. Cassidy, Professor of
English at the University of Wisconsin (Madison), for his help and critical evaluation. I
am also indebted to Drs. Jay Edwards and Miles Richardson, Department of Geography
and Anthropology, Louisiana State University (Baton Rouge), for their assistance and
comments, as well as for the phonetic spellings, provided by Dr. Edwards, identified in
this paper.
2. Chardon, R., 1977, "Cartographic analysis of coastal change: natural and urban,"
in H. J. Walker, ed., Research techniques in coastal environments. Geoscience and Man
Series, vol. 18 (Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge) (in press).
3. Chardon, R., 1976, "The Formation of Norris Cut," Ms.
4. U.S. Coast Survey, 1867, "Head of Key Biscayne Bay, Florida." Surveyed June,
1867, by C. T. lardella. Register No. 1049. Ms. topographic map, Archives of the
National Ocean Survey, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Dept.
of Commerce, Rockville, Maryland.
See also: Report of the Superintendent of the U.S. Coast Survey, showing the
progress of the Survey during the year 1867. House of Representatives, Executive
Document No. 275, 40th Congress, 2nd Session (Government Printing Office,
Washington, 1869), p. 31. In this report, Norris Cut, due to a typographical error, is
misspelled "Morris Cut." On the map, however, it is correctly spelled.
5. "Sketch F, showing the progress in Section no. VI, U.S. Coast Survey, in 1849 &
50: Reconnaissance of Florida Keys, Biscayne Bay & Card's Sound," accompanying the
Report of the Superintendent oj the Coast Survey.for the years 1849-50. U.S. Senate,
Exec. Doc. No. 5, 31st Congress, ls( Session.
6. "Extract from the report of assistant E G. Gerdes to the U.S. Coast Survey
Superintendent, on the reconnaissance of the Florida Keys &c. 11. The Florida Keys," p.
107, Appendix 23, Report of the Superintendent of the Coast Survey, showing the
progress of thai work during the year ending November, 1850. U.S. Senate, Exec. Doc.
No. 7, 31st Cong., 2nd Sess.
7. "Blunt's new chart of the West Indies, and Gulf of Mexico from the Spanish,
English, French, & Danish surveys,' corrected to 1841 (E. & G. W. Blunt, New York,
1841). Also, "Chart of the Gulf of Mexico, West Indies, and Spanish Main" (E. & G. W.
Blunt, New York, 1845).
The "Narrows Cut" identified on these two Blunt charts is actually misplaced. It is
located where the former Boca Ratones had existed in the late 1700s and early 1800s (see
p. 54 below). But there is no doubt that the Narrows Cut referred to applied to the then
recently created Norris Cut. Both the 1841 and the 1845 Blunt charts also erred with
respect to the location of Fort Dallas, which was placed a few miles north of the Miami
River on these two charts (to bring the fort in line opposite Norris Cut), instead of on the
river's north bank. What concerns us specifically here, however, is the Blunt charts'
designation for the only inlet shown opening into Biscayne Bay north of Bear Cut.






60 TEQUESTA


8. Report of the Superintendent of the Coast Survey, showing the progress of the
Survey during the year 1852. Sen. Exec. Doc. No. 58, 32nd Cong., 2nd Sess. (Robert
Clarke, Washington, 1853), p. 10.
9. Henshall, James A., 1884, Camping and cruising in Florida (Robert Clarke &
Co., Cincinnati), p. 168. He also writes, on p. 104 (while describing Biscayne Bay):
"The bay is entered through channels running between the keys, the principal ones being
Bear Cut and Narrows Cut, opposite Miami,..:' Henshall's map of the Peninsula of
Florida (frontispiece) shows Narrows Cut where Norris cut is presently located.
See also Hugh M. Smith, 1895, who refers to "... Norris or Narrow Cut,..." on p.
170 of his "Notes on Biscayne Bay, Florida, with reference to its adaptability as the site
of a marine hatching and experiment station," Appendix 2, Report of the U.S. Commis-
sioner offish and Fisheries for 1895 (Washington).
See also Henry J. Wagner, 1949, "Early pioneers of South Florida,"' Tequesta 9, p.
69.
10. Letter 0. H. Tittman to J. E. Hilgard, Superintendent of the U.S. Coast Survey,
March 29, 1883. National Archives and Records Service (NARS), Record Group (RG)
23: Records of the Coast and Geodetic Survey, Washington.
11. Dodge, Charles Richard, 1894. "Subtropical Florida;' Scribner's 15(3), p. 360.
12. U.S. Coast and Geodetic Survey, 1883, "Additional Soundings off Miami
River, Key Biscayne Bay, Florida." Register No. 1545. NARS, RG 23.
13. There is no record of a person named Norris living in the Biscayne Bay area in
the middle of the 19th century (Arva Moore Parks, 1976, personal communication). Nor
is anyone named Norris mentioned in Thelma Peters, 1976, Lemon City: Pioneering on
Biscayne Bay, 1850-1925 (Banyan Books, Inc., Miami). Concerning the possibility that a
Mr. Norris might have been a Bahamian, the author checked the Nassau (Bahamas)
telephone directory to see how many Norrises would be listed there; only one was listed.
While certainly not conclusive, this indicates that there is very little evidence for the
existence of a man named Norris anywhere near Norris Cut when it was first so named.
14. Mackay, Capt. John, and Lieut. J. E. Blake, 1839, "Map of the Seat of War in
Florida;'," NARS, RG 77: Records of the Office of the Chief of Engineers.
'15. Several maps drawn in the 1850s, including the famous "lves Map," show
Norris Cut as Boca Ratones or Rattones (e.g. Lieut. J. C. Ives, 1856, "Military Map of
the Peninsula of Florida south of Tampa Bay," in U.S. Senate Doc. No. 89, 62nd Cong.,
Ist Sess.). Even the U.S. Coast Survey, on one of its general coastal charts, once named
Norris Cut "Boca Rattones" ("Atlantic Coast of the United States (in four sheets): Sheet
No. IV: Mosquito Inlet to Key West; 1863." Sketch 21, accompanying the Report.. .of
the Coast Survey. during the year 1863). Also, the 1852edition of Blunt's 1845 "Chart
of the Gulf of Mexico..." (op. cit.) shows Norris Cut correctly located, but it is called
"Boca Ratones."
16. Chardon, R., 1975, "Northern Biscayne Bay in 1776:'," Tequesta 35, pp. 51-54.
17. Ibid., pp. 52-53.
18. Parks, Arva Moore, 1975, "Miami in 1876," Tequesta 35, pp. 91-92.
19. See footnotes 5 and 7 above.
20. Chardon, R., 1975, "Northern Biscayne Bay in 1776," Tequesta 35, pp. 51-53.
21. Gauld, George, 1796. Observations on the Florida Keys, Reefs and Gulf...,
printed for W. Faden (London), p. 18.
22. See footnotes 5, 7, and 9 above.
23. Parks, op. cit., pp. 91, 110-111; see also George E. Merrick, 1941, "Pre-Flagler
influences on the Lower Florida East Coast," Tequesta 1: 1-10.
24. Merrick, op. cit., pp. 6 and 10. On the other hand, Arva Parks, after careful
analysis, has so far found no documentation for Upland South, or "Cracker," settlers
until the 1870s (Parks, 1976, personal communication). Similarly, in the area of upper
Biscayne Bay, no Upland South settlers are identified until at least the mid-1870s- a time






Norris Cut 61

when descendants of Bahamians were relatively numerous (Thelma Peters, 1976, Lemon
City, op. cit., pp. 1-51 passim). Henry J. Wagner states that many homesteaders
apparently "lived on sowbelly and grits" (Wagner, 1949, "Early pioneers of South
Florida," Tequesta 9, p. 61): however, this diet could point to either a Bahamian or
Upland South cultural origin.
25. F G. Cassidy, 1976, personal communication. See also E G. Cassidy and R. B.
LePage (editors), 1967, Dictionary ofJamaican English (University Press, Cambridge),
p. xlix.
26. E G. Cassidy, 1976, personal communication.
27. It is interesting to note that there were different Keepers of the Cape Florida
Lighthouse when Coast Surveyors made their initial Key Biscayne surveys in 1849-50
and 1855, to establish a triangulation base line. But in the years 1866-68, Temple Pent, a
Bahamian, was Keeper of the Light (Parks, 1975, "Miami in 1876," Tequesta 35, p. 135).
It was in 1867 that the first detailed survey of northern Biscayne Bay was made by the
U.S. Coast Survey. In its records, as we have seen, Norris Cut was "Narrows Cut" in
1849, but "Norris Cut" in 1867. The connection may be coincidental, but it is also
provocative.











Aftermath of the Brown Decision:

The Politics of Interposition in Florida


David R. Colburn*
and Richard K. Scher**

Southern reaction to the decision of the United States Supreme Court in
the Brown case [347 U.S. 483 (1954)] was generally swift and angry.
With the exception of Florida, public officials in most of the states of the
deep South reacted with indignation and hostility to the Court's ruling
that ended the tradition of legally sanctioned school segregation. For
example, Georgia's Governor Herman Talmadge declared that the Court
"by its decision had reduced our constitution to a mere scrap of paper."
Mississippi's Senator James Eastland was scarcely less vitriolic when he
said: "The South will not abide by nor obey this legislative decision by a
political court." South Carolina's Governor James Byrnes said he was
"shocked," although he counseled the South to "exercise restraint."'
In Florida, however, reaction was substantially different, and by
comparison with other southern states it was mild. Most newspaper
editors and the few pronouncements issued by public officials urged
calm and restraint. For example, Florida's senior Senator Spessard
Holland said he hoped the decision would be met with "patience and
moderation,"' and that there would not be any "violent repercussions" in
the state.2 State School Superintendent Thomas Bailey felt the Court's
action called for "sober and careful thinking together with planning
untainted by hysteria."' In an editorial the Tampa Morning Tribune held
that the Brown decision was inevitable and should be accepted, even
while calling it "deplorable" because it overturned law, custom, and
social order in states maintaining segregation.4 By and large, however,
Floridians seemed to have relatively little to say about the decision in the
days and weeks immediately following it.
The reasons for this mild response are to be found in the state's
*Dr. Colburn is Associate Professor of History and Social Science, University
College, University of Florida.
**Dr. Scher is Associate Professor of Social Science and Political Science, Univer-
sity College, University of Florida.






The Politics of Interposition 63


social and economic structure. Florida had a relatively small percentage
of blacks (21. 8/c in 1950) when compared to its southern neighbors. As
V. 0. Key, Jr., pointed out in Southern Politics in State and Nation the
smaller the percentage of blacks in a state's population the less chance
there was for intense racial animosity. In addition, the diversity of
Florida's population, with many immigrants from the northeast and
midwest settling in the urbanized, southern region of the state, tended to
moderate racial hostility. Florida's heavy economic dependence on
tourism also provided a steadying influence that helped explain the mild
response to the Court's decision.
But this is not to say that the Brown decision had little impact in
Florida. Indeed, in the spring of 1954 Florida was one of only four states
with no school integration whatsoever, and thus the decision had grave
implications for the state's traditional pattern of public education.' Not
surprisingly, therefore, Floridians joined with their southern neighbors
in searching for alternatives to the Brown decision
By early 1956, southern criticism of the Brown edict had been
supplemented by direct .political action. Two old, tradition- and time-
honored southern tactics called "interposition" and "nullification," last
seen in the days prior to the Civil War, were removed from their dusty
corners in the South's political arsenal. They became, for a brief period,
important weapons in what Virginia Senator Harry Byrd was to charac-
terize as the South's "massive resistance" against the Brown decision.'
Events moved rapidly in the South during the next few months. On
February 1, the Virginia legislature passed an interposition resolution.
South Carolina followed shortly thereafter. Governor Marvin Griffin
and the legislature of Georgia were not content with interposition;
Griffin requested and the legislature passed a nullification resolution in
mid-February. At the same time Governor Luther Hodges of North
Carolina said he would recommend that the legislature pass a resolution
"protesting" the Supreme Court decisions. By the end of February the
Mississippi legislature had unanimously adopted an interposition resolu-
tion. Early in March Governor Allan Shivers of Texas said he was
planning a national campaign designed to have an interposition plank
written into the Democratic National Platform during the following
summer. In a significant move at the national level, on March 11, 1956,
96 members of Congress 19 senators and 77 representatives signed
a "Declaration of Constitutional Principles;' frequently referred to as
the "Southern Manifesto"' which pledged them to use "all lawful
means" to reverse the Court's decisions on school segregation. Late in
the spring, the Louisiana legislature adopted an interposition resolution?





64 TEQUESTA


Florida was ihe last southern state to pass a resolution condemning
the Brown decision. In large measure, Florida's delayed response was
due to the progressive, farsighted leadership of Governor LeRoy Col-
lins. Through his direction, Florida avoided the "massive resistance"
and inflammatory rhetoric which characterized much of the South's
response to the Brown decision. In addition, he pursued a program
which helped erode a dual school system without disrupting the state's
traditional values and culture, and without generating intense racial
animosities.? Indeed, Collins was one of the few southern governors
who was committed to improving race relations in his state.11 He- was
also one of the few public leaders who realized that whites throughout
the South would have to adapt to a new way of life. The interposition
resolution passed by the Florida legislature in 1957 was his only major
defeat on racial issues during his six year administration.
Although LeRoy Collins ran as a moderate segregationist candidate
in his gubernatorial campaigns of 1954 and 1956, his emphasis on
upholding the law suggested that he was far more flexible on racial
issues than were many of his political opponents. Beginning in the
spring of 1956, Collins tried to establish a different climate of race
relations in Florida than existed elsewhere in the South. It was precisely
at this time that other southern states were embracing interposition and
nullification. While Collins sought to reassure white Floridians that he
would do his best to maintain segregation, he also was determined not to
pursue policies which would further polarize the races in Florida.
On March 21, 1956, Collins called a meeting of the state cabinet,
the Board of Control, legislative leaders, and the presidents of the State
Universities ostensibly to discuss means of preventing Virgil Hawkins,
a black, from enrolling in the University of Florida's College of Law. The
United States Supreme Court had ordered that Hawkins be admitted.
Collins renewed his commitment to appeal Hawkins' admission and to
retain segregated schools. While deploring what he perceived to be a
worsening of race relations in Florida, Collins promised to call a special
session of the legislature, if necessary, to preserve school segregation.
More importantly, however, he refused to support either interposition,
nullification, or militant segregationist legislation. Instead, he said he
was appointing a blue-ribbon committee, later called the Fabisinski
Committee, after its chairman, Judge J. L. Fabisinski of Pensacola, to
study ways of legally maintaining segregation in Florida.12
It was in conjunction with the report of the Fabisinski Committee
that Collins had his first brush with an interposition resolution. In July,
1956, the Committee issued its recommendations, which Collins en-





The Politics of Interposition 65


dorsed completely. It suggested a four-point program to deal with school
segregation: permitting county school boards to assign pupils to schools
on the basis of individual needs; regulating the assignment of teachers;
giving the governor power to promulgate and enforce rules relating to
the use of public parks, buildings, and other facilities needed to maintain
law and order, and to prevent domestic violence; and clarification of the
governor's power to declare an emergency." It was the first of these
proposals that was the most crucial for preserving school segregation; it
would permit local school officials to maintain segregation on the basis
of intellectual ability, scholastic achievement, or psychological factors,
any one of which might simply serve as a surrogate for racial discrimina-
tion.
Collins called a special legislative session in mid-July, 1956, to take
up the Fabisinski recommendations. He made it clear to the legislature
that he would not accept any laws on segregation except those which the
Committee, and he were proposing." Some legislators, such as Rep-
resentative Prentice Pruitt, wanted to follow in the path of other southern
states and pass stronger anti-integration laws. Pruitt, and others, felt
Collins' proposals were only half-hearted and would ultimately prove
ineffectual in maintaining segregation. Furthermore, a number of legis-
lators, including Pruitt, and Representatives Kenneth Bollinger and
Frank Allen, strongly resented the idea that they could consider and
debate only those bills which Collins proposed during the session.'
The bills on segregation which Collins requested were quickly
passed, but such legislators as Pruitt, Marion Knight, and Fred Petersen
persisted in considering more stringent measures. Collins feared that the
legislative debates would increase racial polarization in the state. He felt
that if the debates went unchecked the legislature might adopt stronger
segregation measures than he was prepared to accept. Accordingly, on
August 1, he notified legislative leaders that he was planning to adjourn
the session immediately. He used as his justification a little-known
constitutional provision empowering the governor to adjourn the legisla-
ture when both houses could not agree on a time for adjournment.'6
Collins' decision to end the session came at the best possible
moment from his point of view. When news of his action reached the
floor of the legislature, Representative C. Farris Bryant of Ocala, later
governor of Florida, was in the middle of a speech in the House
introducing an interposition resolution similar to those passed in other
southern states. It was precisely this kind of measure Collins wanted to
avoid. The prosegregationist legislators bitterly denounced Collins' ac-
tion; Representative Knight even accused him of being "dictatorial""7





66 TEQUESTA


During the fall of 1956 Collins expanded his efforts to maintain a
moderate course on race relations in the state. His inaugural address on
January 8, 1957, established a new tone in Florida, and, perhaps,
throughout the South, on racial issues. Collins told Floridians that
integration was coming, and the state would do well to accept it grace-
fully. He said he was committed to preserving segregation as long as
possible, but "The Supreme Court decisions are the law of the land." He
stated that whites must "face up to the fact that the Negro does not now
have equal opportunity" and that blacks are "morally and legally enti-
tled to progress more rapidly." Collins admitted that he did not have all
the answers to racial questions, but said "Haughtiness, arrogance, the
forcing of issues will not produce the answer. Above all, hate is not the
answer" Collins appealed to the rest of the nation not to judge the South
harshly as it struggled with its race problems. It is unreasonable, he
argued, to expect generations of attitudes to change overnight.'
The speech met with a mixed reaction. Many legislators such as
Senators Harry Stratton and Tom Adams, registered immediate disap-
proval of Collins' address. On the other hand, the speech was well
received outside the South after being televised on the national news.
Mrs. Franklin Delano Roosevelt, for example, congratulated Collins for
his "extremely courageous" message. In addition, even newspapers in
Florida, such as the Tampni Tribune, as well as outside the state,
applauded Collins for the high quality of his "moral leadership." 1'
Collins continued his theme of racial moderation when he opened
the regular session of the legislature in April. 1957 In his speech he
called for the establishment of a biracial advisory group to ease racial
tensions in the state. He also urged the legislature not to consider any
other bills on segregation or race. He argued that the laws adopted the
previous summer, especially the pupil placement law, provided Florida
with sufficient legal resources to deal with segregation.2-
Members of the legislature, however, had other ideas. When the
session was barely three days old, on April 5, 54 representatives intro-
duced into the House an interposition resolution similar to the one which
Bryant had submitted the previous summer. Through a motion the rules
were suspended and House Concurrent Resolution No. 174 was read a
second time. Opponents of the measure attempted to delay further
consideration, but their efforts were in vain. A motion to defer lost on a
roll call vote by 29 to 59. A final voice vote on the concurrent resolution
was then taken on the same day that it was introduced: it passed by an
overwhelming margin2'
The interposition resolution adopted by the House was a lengthy





The Politics of Interposition 67


document, the full text of which can be found in Appendix A. It
condemned not only the Supreme Court decisions on race, but also
subsequent decisions concerning labor unions and right to work laws,
criminal proceedings, teacher loyalty, and espionage and subversive
activities among public employees. In invoking the doctrine of interposi-
tion, the resolution stated that Florida had "... at no time surrendered to
the General Government its right to exercise its powers in the field of
labor, criminal procedure, and public education, and to maintain racially
separate public schools and other public facilities.. .."2 The Supreme
Court, however, had taken upon itself the power to regulate in these
areas which rightfully belonged to the states. Thus, "...a question of
contested power has arisen; the Supreme Court of the United States
asserts... that the States did in fact prohibit unto themselves the power to
regulate ... public education and to maintain racially separate public
institutions and the State of Florida... asserts that it and its sister States
have never surrendered such rights.... "' Accordingly, "... the Legisla-
ture of Florida asserts that whenever the General Government attempts
to engage in the deliberate, palpable and dangerous exercise of powers
not granted to it, the States... have the right, and are in duty bound, to
interpose for arresting the progress of the evil, and for maintaining,
within their respective limits, the authorities, rights and liberties apper-
taining to them... ."24
While the House resolution called the Supreme Court decisions
"null, void, and of no effect,"'25 it did not refer to them as illegal. The
resolution viewed the Court's action as much in political as in legal
terms. Thus, there is considerable emphasis on delineating the struggle
between the states and the Court regarding these powers "reserved to the
States respectively, or to the people";2" the resolution actually quotes the
10th Amendment on this point. The Florida resolution was as much
concerned with redressing the balance of power within the traditional
view of the American federal system of shared powers and overlapping
functions and jurisdictions as it was in decrying what the Court did?7 It is
doubtful, however, that at the time the proposal was debated either its
proponents or its opponents stopped to consider the political philosophy
inherent in the measure. Feelings and emotions were running too high to
allow for such subtle, academic discussions.
Action in the Senate on interposition took more time, and the
politics involved were more complicated than they were in the House. At
the same moment that the House was considering its resolution, Senate
President William A. Shands of Alachua County and Senator Joe Eaton
of Dade County introduced a strongly worded resolution which recog-





68 TEQUESTA


nized the rulings of the Supreme Court as legally binding on Florida, but
asked the Court for more time to solve Florida's racial problems without
federal interference."S
Three days later opponents of the House resolution in the Senate
scored a minor victory when the Senators voted 22-15 against immediate
consideration of the measure. Instead, they sent it to the Committee on
Governmental Reorganization, which was examining two other resolu-
tions, including the one prepared by Shands and Eaton. Senator Doyle
Carlton, one of Collins' allies in the Senate, argued persuasively that
"... the best interests of this body could be served if this committee would
be given an opportunity to study these three documents. I don't see why
only this measure should be given preferential treatment.""
Nevertheless, in spite of this victory, both supporters and opponents
saw that it was at best a holding action. Senator Verle Pope, another of
Collins' allies, noted that "Many who voted to refer it to Committee will
vote for it on the floor."0' Pope realized that the public wanted action on
this matter and the senators were not going to jeopardize their positions
by opposing the measure. Moreover, Shands, who opposed the House
version of the resolution, refused to allow it to become a test of his
Senate leadership: he was content to work quietly against it behind the
scenes.:1 Even Governor Collins failed to take vigorous action opposing
the House version. He and his aides regarded its passage as inevitable.
As one aide later explained, "It would be foolish to burn up all our
energy on that [issue] right at the start of the session."32 Collins had
presented an ambitious, multifaceted program to the legislature, and he
was unwilling to jeopardize all or major parts of it over the interposition
resolution. Clearly it was simply a matter of time before the House
version also passed the Senate.
On April 15 the Senate Committee on Governmental Reorganiza-
tion held afternoon and evening hearings on the interposition resolu-
tions. Judge J. L. Fabisinski and John T. Wigginton, two men who had
helped draw up the legislation on segregation passed the previous
summer and who apparently represented Governor Collins' position on
interposition, spoke in opposition to the House version. Fabisinski
argued that an interposition resolution might seriously jeopardize the
constitutionality of the pupil placement law. He noted that a suit had
already been filed against the law, but that in preliminary remarks the
presiding judge had indicated that he felt the law was constitutional:
Fabisinski thought the resolution might persuade the judge to change his
mind. Wigginton, a prominent Tallahassee attorney, claimed that propo-
nents of interposition were only deluding themselves by their faith in the






The Politics of Interposition 69


"magical powers" of the resolution, and he expressed other concerns
similar to those of Judge Fabisinski. During his appearance Wigginton
antagonized several of the senators when he remarked that many would
vote for interposition on the theory that "... it is better to be a live
politician in Tallahassee than a dead statesman back home."''
Attorney General Richard Ervin spoke in favor of the measure
before the Committee. He argued that an interposition resolution would
not hurt the state's position on segregation in any way: nor, he felt, would
it jeopardize the constitutionality of the pupil placement law. Also
testifying in support of the House measure was Sumter Lowry, Collins'
principal opponent in the 1956 gubernatorial election and an ardent
segregationist from Tampa. He held that Collins view of interposition
was "not legally sound" and "not fair" for the state."4 Assisting Lowry
in his lobbying efforts on behalf of the resolution was Ed Ball, an
influential figure in Florida politics.35 Ball was head of the DuPont
interests in Florida, and had been an active supporter of Lowry in the
1956 campaign. He had sent several aides to Tallahassee to help Lowry
secure passage of the resolution.
After hearing and considering this testimony the Senate committee
voted 11-2 in favor of the House version. Only Senators Pope and
Carlton voted against it. In a second vote, the committee killed the other
resolutions, including the one prepared by Shands and Eaton".
On April 18 the resolution came to the Senate floor for final debate
and a vote. Collins, who continued to exercise restraint in opposing the
resolution, and his Senate allies made one final effort to prevent or stall
further Senate action on it. A plan was devised in which the whole
Senate would consider a motion to refer the resolution to another
committee, where it would be subject to additional hearings, and
perhaps killed altogether. However, on April 18, when the Senate
opened debate on the resolution, the strategem failed: a motion to
recommit lost by two votes. A last ditch attempt was made to stall further
action until the following week. When this move also failed, opposition
to the resolution collapsed. As Senator Pope later noted, "It would have
been futile to fight further. It would only have created more bitterness."-7
Perhaps he also recognized that unless Collins had been willing to use all
of his resources to stop the measure, it was impossible for the opponents
to match the strength of its supporters in the Senate and among the
lobbyists. in action lasting less than a minute, the Senate by voice vote
passed the House version of the interposition resolution. Only a handful
of nays could be heard when the vote was taken.:" Florida had thus taken
its place beside its southern neighbors in opposing the Brown decision.






70 TEQUESTA


Attorney General Ervin immediately praised the Senate's action,
remarking that it reflected the majority of Floridians' thinking on race."
Governor Collins, however, denounced the decision. He said the resolu-
tion stultifiess our state... It will do no good whatever and those who say
it can perpetrate a cruel hoax on the people." "
The next day, April 19, Collins released a lengthy statement on the
interposition resolution. It is worth quoting in part because it denoted
Collins' realization that interposition was a misguided step which would
certainly not rescind the Brown decision and would only serve to
embarass Florida publicly.

This resolution of interposition is meaningless, and yet it means
everything.
It means nothing in that it has absolutely no legal efficacy, and this
was brought out repeatedly by the finest legal minds in this State.
It means everything, for it is an expression before the nation, before
the entire world, of the sense of the Florida Legislature which can only
cause it to be held up to ridicule by men who know the law and in
disrepute by all citizens who know better in their hearts.
As I stated in my second inaugural address, the United States
Supreme Court decisions are the law of the land. This nation's strength-
and Florida's strength- are bottomed upon the basic reverse premise that
ours is a land of the law.
It is a preposterous hoax, almost laughable, to suggest that any State
can remain in the Union and yet, as if by some alchemy, isolate and
quarantine itself against the effect of a decision of the United States
Supreme Court.4"

As strong as this statement was, Collins' most significant act of
protest against the interposition resolution came on May 2, 1957, when
the measure finally reached his desk for his signature. Under the terms of
the resolution, copies had to be mailed to members of Congress, the
President, Justices of the Supreme Court, and all governors and state
legislatures. As Collins noted in his earlier statement, he had no power to
veto a concurrent resolution. However, he wrote the following message
across the face of the resolution:

This concurrent resolution of "Interposition" crosses the Governors
[sic] desk as a matter of routine. 1 have no authority to veto it. I take this
means however to advise the student of government, who may examine
this document in the archives of the State in the years to come, that the
Governor of Florida expressed open and vigorous opposition thereto. I
feel that the U.S. Supreme Court has improperly usurped powers reserved
to the States under the Constitution. I have joined in protesting such and in
seeking legal means of avoidance. But if this resolution declaring deci-





The Politics of Interposition 71


sions of the Court to be "null and void" is to be taken seriously, it is
anarchy and rebellion against the nation which must remain "indivisible,
under God" if it is to survive. Not only will I not condone "Interposition"
as so many have sought me to do, I decry it as an evil thing, whipped up by
the demogogues and carried on the hot and erratic winds of passion,
prejudice, and hysteria. If history judges me right this day, I want it known
that I did my best to avert this blot. If I am judged wrong, then here in my
own handwriting and over my signature is the proof of guilt to support my
conviction.2

In the end, of course, Collins was vindicated. In late June, 1958, he
observed that the order of a federal court to the University of Florida to
admit black students at the graduate level demonstrated that the interpos-
ition resolution had been a failure.: At a press conference in May, 1960,
he again noted that he still considered the interposition resolution a "lie
and a hoax," and his principal regret was that he did not have the power
to veto it.4
LeRoy Collins' administration was notable for the moderate, sensi-
ble leadership he provided on race at a time when demogogery and
"massive resistance" were common courses of action by southern
politicians. While the passage of the interposition resolution was a major
defeat for his racial policies, it was his only one, and he never allowed it
to deter him from his efforts to lead Florida in the direction which he
thought best promoted the interest of the entire state, and all of its
citizens.
Collins' efforts to improve race relations in Florida and to promote
greater equality for blacks appear to have come from his own personal
feelings and values. He began his governship as a moderate seg-
regationist, but came to realize that traditional attitudes were no longer
appropriate to changes taking place in Florida and throughout the
South.45 Politically, Collins' position on race relations was far ahead of
most of his constituents'. While he received considerable national atten-
tion and praise for his leadership on race, and was even considered a
possible Democratic nominee for the Vice-Presidency in 1960, he en-
countered severe criticism in his own state. Collins was in the vanguard
of the southern part of the growing civil rights movement during the late
1950's, but his leadership in this cause won him few, if any, additional
admirers in Florida, and, in fact, probably undercut some of his support
among state officials and the general population. His racial policies cost
him the United States senatorial contest in 1968.
It was the force of his own convictions and his desire to do what he
felt was morally right that caused him to protest so dramatically the
interposition resolution in 1957 For these same reasons he consistently






72 TEQUESTA


sought to improve race relations during the remainder of his administra-
tion. He himself was fully conscious of the political costs he paid for his
leadership. But he was also aware of the gains made in Florida. Perhaps
Collins' own assessment, written shortly before leaving office in 1961,
best expresses his accomplishments in this area:

No state ever "arrives" or comes to full maturity. But I feel that the
years just past in Florida will always deserve to be known as maturing
years- a time when our state crossed the threshold and got a good view of
a much-broadened horizon of greatness.
The barriers of provincialism and defeatism, the suffocating cloak of
prejudice and greed were pushed back. And I believe Floridians became
better aware of their own strength, and more deeply committed to higher
goals, and concerned with rewards far more enobling and enduring than
the usual products of pork-an-pie politics.4



NOTES

1. Florida Times-Union, May 18, 1954, p. 1.
2. The Congressional Quarterly, May 21, 1954, p. 637.
3. Joseph Tomberlin, "Florida Whites and the Brown Decision of 1954," The
Florida Historical Quarterly, LI (July, 1972), p. 33.
4. Tampa Tribune, May 19, 1954, p. 10.
5. Florida's southern neighbors had a much larger black population in 1954. For
instance, blacks made up 32% of the population in Alabama, 39% in South Carolina,
46% in Mississippi, and 31'( in Georgia. Census of Population: 1950. Vol. II
(Washington, 1952). Volumes on Alabama, Georgia, Florida, Mississippi, and South
Carolina.
6. Helen L. Jacobstein, The Segregation Factor in the Florida Democratic Primary
of 1956, University of Florida Social Sciences Monograph Series, Number 47 (Gaines-
ville, 1972), p. 8.
7. The federal government actually facilitated Florida's efforts to buy time because
it made no immediate effort to force dismantling of dual school systems. Even after the
second Brown decision in 1955 [349 US 294 (1955)], virtually no pressure was applied
by the Eisenhower administration to enforce the decree. As a result, no desegregation
occurred in Florida or in other states of the deep South. See Harrell R. Rodgers, Jr., "The
Supreme Court and School Desegregation," Political Science Quarterly, LXXXIX,
(Winter, 1974-75), pp. 751-756.
8. New York Times, February 26, 1956, p. 1.
9. New York Times, February 2, 1956, p. 17; Ibid., February 14, 1956, p. 16; Ibid.,
February 19, 1956, IV, p. 7: Ibid., March 1, 1956, p. 67: Ibid., March 6, 1956, p. 25:
Ibid., March 12, 1956, p. 1: Ibid., May 24, 1956, p. 23; Ibid., July 13, 1956, p. 20.
10. Ibid., July 6, 1957, p. 7: Ibid., May 5, 1957, p. 46: Southern School News, Vol.
Ill, No. 11, May, 1957, p. 1.
11. For an analysis of the campaign rhetoric of southern governors on race in the
years following the 1954 Brown decision, see Earl Black, "Southern Governors and
Political Change: Campaign Stances on Racial Segregation and Economic Develop-
ment," Journal ofPolitics, XXXIX (August, 1971), pp. 703-734.








The Politics of Interposition 73


12. LeRoy Collins Papers, 1955-1961; University of South Florida, Tampa, Florida.
Statement of LeRoy Collins to Conference on Segregation, March 21, 1956, Box (8d) 3;
Tampa Tribune, March 22, 1956, p. 1: Miami Herald, March 22, 1956, p. 1-a.
13. Tampa Tribune, July 17, 1956, p. 1; Miami Herald, July 17, 1956, pp. 1-a and
12-a.
14. Interview with Governor LeRoy Collins, Tallahassee, February 11, 1975;
Tampa Tribune, July 19, 1956, p. 1; Miami Herald, July 19, 1956, p. 1-a; Tampa Tribune,
July 21, 1956, p. 1; Collins Papers, 1955-1961; Speeches, Message to Legislature -
Extraordinary Session, July 23, 1956, pp. 33-34, Box (8d) 3; Miami Herald, July 23,
1956, p. 1-c.
15. Tampa Tribune, July 22, 1956, pp. 1 and 2; Miami Herald, July 22, 1956, p. 1-a.
Under the Florida constitution at that time, Collins had the exclusive right to determine
the agenda for special legislative sessions, and the legislature could deal only with issues
of his choosing except by a % vote of each House.
16. Tampa Tribune, July 24, 1956, p. 1; Miami Herald, July 24, 1956, p. I-a;
Tampa Tribune, July 25, 1956, p. 1; Miami Herald, July 25, 1956, p. I-a; Tampa
Tribune, July 27, 1956, p. 1: Miami Herald, July 27, 1956, p. 9a; Tampa Tribune, july 28,
1956, p. 1; Miami Herald, July 28, 1956, p. 1-b; Tampa Tribune, August 2, 1956, p. 1;
Miami Herald, August 2, 1956, p. 1-a; interview with Governor LeRoy Collins,
Tallahassee, February 11, 1975.
17. Tampa Tribune, August 2, 1956, p. I.
18. Collins Papers, 1955-1961; Speeches, January 8-April 2, 1956, Box 1, Inaugural
Address, January 8, 1957, pp. 10 and 12.
19. Tampa Tribune, January 9, 1957, pp. 1 and 12; Miami Herald, January 9, 1957,
p. 6-a; Tampa Tribune, January 10, 1957, p. 1.
20. Collins Papers, 1955-1961; Speeches, January 8-April 2, 1957; Box 1, Message
to the Legislature, April 2, 1957, p. 14.
21. St. Petersburg Times, April 5, 1957, p. 9-a; Miami Herald, April 5, 1957, p.
10-a; Journal of the House of Representatives, April 5, 1957, pp. 69 and 70; Tampa
Tribune, April 6, 1957, p. 1; St. Petersburg Times, April 6, 1957, p. 9.
22. House Concurrent Resolution No. 174, Journal of the House of Representa-
tives, p. 69 (hereafter cited as HCR).
23. HCR, p. 69.
24. HCR, p. 69.
25. HCR, p. 70.
26. HCR, p. 69.
27 Two important statements on this conception of American federalism can be
found in Morton Grodzins, "The Federal System," in Aaron Wildavsky, American
Federalism in Perspective (Boston: Little-Brown and Company, 1967), pp. 256-277; and
Daniel J. Elazor, American Federalism: A View from the States (New York: Thomas T.
Crowell Company, 1966).
28. St. Petersburg Times, April 6, 1957, p. 9; Ibid., April 9, 1957, pp. I and 19.
29. St. Petersburg Times, April 9, 1957, pp. I and 19; Miami Herald, April 9, 1957,
p. 10-a.
30. St. Petersburg Times, April 9, 1957, p. 1.
31. Ibid., April 19, 1957, p. I.
32. Ibid., April 9, 1957, p. 1.
33. Ibid., April 16, 1957, p. 17: Miami Herald, April 16, 1957, p. 2-a.
34. St. Petersburg Times, April 16, 1957, p. 17; Miami Herald, April 16, 1957, p.
2-a.
35. St. Petersburg Times, April 19, 1957, p. 1.
36. Ibid., April 16, 1957, p. 17: Miami Herald, April 16, 1957, p. 2-a.
37. St. Petersburg Times, April 19, 1957, p. 1.







74 TEQUESTA

38. Ibid., April 19, 1957, p. 1; Miami Herald, April 19, 1957, p. 1-a:Journalof the
Senate, april 18, 1957, pp. 184-185.
39. New York Times, April 19, 1957, p. 15.
40. Tampa Tribune, April 19, 1957, p. 1: New York Times, April 19, 1957, p. 15:
Miami Herald, April 19, 1957, p. 1-a.
41. Typescript Statement, Florida State Archives, Accession 68-02, Part 9, Box
336.
42. House Concurrent Resolution No. 174, April 5, 1957: From the records of the
Bureau of Laws, Florida Department of State.
43. Tampa Tribune, June 20, 1957, p. 1; St. Petersburg Times, June 20, 1958, p. 7-a.
44. Tampa Tribune, May 18, 1960, p. 15; Collins Papers, 1955-1961; Speeches, Box
No. 4, Speeches April 20-June 20, 1960: Transcript of New Conference, May 20, 1960,
pp. 6-8.
45. Interview with Governor LeRoy Collins, Tallahassee, February 11, 1975.
46. Tampa Tribune, January 1, 1961, p. 10-a: see also Miami Herald, January 1,
1961, p. 6-a.






The Politics of Interposition 75


APPENDIX

The Interposition Resolution of the Florida House of
Representatives, April 5,1957


H. C. R. No. 174 A resolution to declare the United States
Supreme Court decisions usurping the powers reserved to the States and
relating to education, labor, criminal procedure, treason and subversion
to be null, void and of no effect; to declare that a contest of powers has
arisen between the State of Florida and the Supreme Court of the United
States; to invoke the doctrine of interposition; and for other purposes.
Be It Resolved by the House of Representatives of the State of
Florida, the Senate Concurring:
That the Legislature of Florida doth hereby unequivocally express a
firm and determined resolution to maintain and defend the Constitution
of the United States, and the Constitution of this State against every
attempt, whether foreign or domestic, to undermine and destroy the
fundamental principles, embodied in our basic law, by which the liberty
of the people and the sovereignty of the States, in their proper spheres,
have been long protected and assured;
That the Legislature of Florida doth explicitly and preemptorily
declare that it views the powers of the Federal Government as resulting
solely from the compact, to which the States are parties, as limited by the
plain sense and intention of the instrument creating that compact;
That the Legislature of Florida asserts that the powers of the
Federal Government are valid only to the extent that these powers have
been enumerated in the compact to which the various States assented
originally and to which the States have assented in subsequent amend-
ments validly adopted and ratified;
That the very nature of this basic compact, apparent upon its face, is
that the ratifying States, parties thereto, have agreed voluntarily to
surrender certain of their sovereign rights, but only certain of these
sovereign rights, to a Federal Government thus constituted; and that all
powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor
prohibited by it to the States, have been reserved to the States respec-
tively, or to the people;






76 TEQUESTA


That the State of Florida has at no time surrendered to the General
Government its right to exercise its powers in the field of labor, criminal
procedure, and public education, and to maintain racially separate public
schools and other public facilities;
That the State of Florida, in ratifying the Fourteenth Amendment to
the Constitution, did not agree, nor did the other States ratifying the
Fourteenth Amendment agree, that the power to regulate labor, criminal
proceedings, public education, and to operate racially separate public
schools and other facilities was to be prohibited to them thereby;
And as evidence of such understanding as to the inherent power and
authority of the States to regulate public education and the maintenance
of racially separate public schools, the Legislature of Florida notes that
the very Congress that submitted the Fourteenth Amendment for ratifi-
cation established separate schools in the District of Columbia and that
in more than one instance the same State Legislatures that ratified the
Fourteenth Amendment also provided for systems of racially separate
public schools;
That the Legislature of Florida denies that the Supreme Court of the
United States had the right which it asserted in the school cases decided
by it on May 17, 1954, the labor union case decided on May 21, 1956, the
cases relating to criminal proceedings decided on April 23, 1956, and
January 16, 1956, the anti-sedition case decided on April 2, 1956, and the
case relating to teacher requirements decided on April 9, 1956, to
enlarge the language and meaning of the compact by the States in an
effort to withdraw from the States powers reserved to them and as daily
exercised by them for almost a century;
That a question of contested power has arisen; the Supreme Court
of the United States asserts, for its part, that the States did in fact prohibit
unto themselves the power to regulate labor matters, criminal proceed-
ings and public education and to maintain racially separate public
institutions and the State of Florida, for its part, asserts that it and its
sister States have never surrendered such rights;
That these assertions upon the part of the Supreme Court of the
United States, accompanied by threats of coercion and compulsion
against the sovereign States of this Union, constitute a deliberate,
palpable, and dangerous attempt by the Court to prohibit to the States
certain rights and powers never surrendered by them;
That the Legislature of Florida asserts that whenever the General
Government attempts to engage in the deliberate, palpable and danger-
ous exercise of powers not granted to it, the States who are parties to the
compact have the right, and are in duty bound, to interpose for arresting






The Politics of Interposition 77


the progress of the evil, and for maintaining, within their respective
limits, the authorities, rights and liberties appertaining to them;
That failure on the part of this State thus to assert its clear rights
would be construed as acquiescence in the surrender thereof; and that
such submissive acquiescence to the seizure of one right would in the
end lead to the surrender of all rights, and inevitably to the consolidation
of the States into one sovereignty, contrary to the sacred compact by
which this Union of States was created:
That the question of contested power asserted in this resolution is
not within the province of the Court to determine because the Court itself
seeks to usurp the powers which have been reserved to the States, and,
therefore, under these circumstances, the judgment of all of the parites to
the compact must be sought to resolve the question. The Supreme Court
is not a party to the compact, but a creature of the compact and the
question of contested power should not be settled by the creature seeking
to usurp the power, but by the parties to the compact who are the people
of the respective States in whom ultimate sovereignty finally reposes;
That the Constitution of the State of Florida provides for full
benefits to all its citizens with reference to educational facilities and
under the Laws of Florida enacted by the Legislature through the
Minimum Foundation Program its citizens under states' rights, all are
being educated under the same general law and all teachers are being
employed under identical educational qualifications and all are certified
by the State Board of Education alike, which enables the people, them-
selves, in Florida to provide an educational establishment serviceable
and satisfactory and in keeping with the social structure of the state. The
people of Florida do not consent to changing state precedents and their
rights by having doctrines thrust upon them by naked force alone, as
promulgated in the school cases of May 17, 1954, and May 31, 1955;
That the doctrines of said decisions and other decisions denying to
the States the right to have laws of their own dealing with subversion or
espionage, and criminal proceedings, and denying the States the right to
dismiss individuals from public employment who refuse to answer
questions concerning their connections with communism by invoking
the Fifth Amendment, and denying the States the right to provide for
protective "right to work" laws, should not be forced upon the citizens
of this State for the Court was without jurisdiction, power or authority to
interfere with the sovereign powers of the State in such spheres of
activity.
That the Court in its decisions relating to public education was
without jurisdiction because (1) the jurisdiction of the Court granted by






78 TEQUESTA


the Constitution is limited to judicial cases in law and equity, and said
cases were not of a judicial nature and character, nor did they involve
controversies in law or equity, but, on the contrary, the great subjects of
the controversy are of a legislative character, and not a judicial character,
and are determinable only by the people themselves speaking through
their legislative bodies; (2) the essential nature and effect of the proceed-
ings relating exclusively to public schools operated by and under the
authority of States, and pursuant to State laws and regulations, said cases
were suits against the States, and the Supreme Court was without power
or authority to try said cases, brought by individuals against States,
because the Constitution forbids the Court to entertain suits by individu-
als against a State unless the State has consented to be sued;
That if said Court had had jurisdiction and authority to try and
determine said cases, it was powerless to interfere with the operation of
the public schools of States, because the Constitution of the United
States does not coner upon the General Government any power or
authority over such schools or over the subject of education, jurisdiction
over these matters being reserved to the States, nor did the States by the
Fourteenth Amendment authorize any interference on the part of the
Judicial Department or any other department of the Federal Government
with the operation by the States of such public schools as they might in
their discretion see fit to establish and operate;
That by said cases the Court announces its power adjudge State
laws unconstitutional upon the basis of the Court's opinion of such laws
as tested by rules of the inexact and speculative theories of psychological
knowledge, which power and authority is beyond the jurisdiction of said
Court;
That if the Court is permitted to exercise the power to judge the
nature and effect of a law by supposed principles of psychological
theory, and to hold the statute or Constitution of a State unconstitutional
because of the opinions of the Judges as to its suitability, the States will
have been destroyed, and the indestructible Union of Indestructible
States established by the Constitution of the United States will have
ceased to exist, and in its stead the Court will have created, without
jurisdiction or authority from the people, one central government of total
power:
That implementing its decision relating to public education of May
17, 1954, said Court on May 31, 1955 upon further consideration of said
cases, said: "All provisions of Federal, State, or local law... must yield"
to said decision of May 17, 1954: said Court thereby presuming arrog-
antly to give orders to the State of Florida;







The Politics of Interposition 79


That it is clear that said Court has deliberately resolved to disobey
the Constitution of the United States, and to flout and defy the Supreme
Law of the Land:
That the State of Florida, as is also true of the other sovereign states
of the Union, has the right to enact laws relating to subversion or
espionage, criminal proceedings, dismissing public employees who
refuse to answer questions concerning their connections with com-
munism and "right to work" protection, and has the right to operate and
maintain a public school system utilizing such educational methods
therein as in her judgment are conducive to the welfare of those to be
educated and the people of the State generally, this being a governmental
responsibility which the State has assumed lawfully, and her rights in
this respect have not in any wise been delegated to the Central Govern-
ment, but, on the contrary, she and the other States have reserved such
matters to themselves by the terms of the Tenth Amendment. Being
possessed of this lawful right, the State of Florida is possessed of power
to repel every unlawful interference therewith;
That the duty and responsibility of protecting life, property and the
priceless possessions of freedom rests pon the Government of Florida as
to all those within her territorial limits. The State alone has this responsi-
bility. Laboring under this high obligation she is possessed of the means
to effectuate it. It is the duty of the State in flagrant cases such as this to
interpose its powers between its people and the effort of said Court to
assert an unlawful dominion over them; THEREFORE,
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE HOUSE OF REP-
RESENTATIVES OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA, THE SENATE
CONCURRING:
Section 1. That said decisions and orders of the Supreme Court of
the United States denying the individual sovereign states the power to
enact laws relating to espionage or subversion, criminal proceedings, the
dismissal of public employees for refusal to answer questions concern-
ing their connections with communism, "right to work" protection, and
relating to separation of the races in the public institutions of a State, are
null, void and of no force or effect.
Section 2. That the elected representatives of the people of Florida
do now seriously declare that it is the intent and duty of all officials, state
and local, to observe, honorably, legally and constitutionally, all approp-
riate measures available to resist these illegal encroachments upon the
sovereign powers of this State.
Section 3. That we urge firm and deliberate efforts to check these
and further encroachments on the part of the Federal Government, and







80 TEQUESTA


on the part of said Court through judicial legislation, upon the reserved
powers of all the States' powers never surrendered by the remotest
implication but expressly reserved and vitally essential to the separate
and independent autonomy of the States in order that by united efforts
the States may be preserved.
Section 4. That a copy of this Resolution be transmitted by His
Excellency The Governor to the Governor and Legislature of each of the
other States, to the President of the United States, to each of the Houses
of Congress, to Florida's Representatives and Senators in the Congress,
and to the Supreme Court of the United States for its information.
was read the first time in full.
Mr. Daniel moved that the rules be waived and House Concurrent
Resolution No. 174 be read the second time in full.
The motion was agreed to by a two-thirds vote and House Concur-
rent Resolution No. 174 was read the second time in full.
Mr. Daniel moved the adoption of the concurrent resolution.
Pending consideration thereof-
Mr. Herrell moved that further consideration of House Concurrent
Resolution No. 174 be temporarily deferred.
A roll call was demanded.
When the vote was taken on the motion the result was:
Yeas:
Askins Hollahan Orr Turlington
Barron Hopkins Papy Weinstein
Beasley Karl Patton Westberry
Carney Land Porter Youngberg
Crews Livingston Ryan Zelmenovitz
Gibbons Maness Shaffer
Harris Mann Smith, R.J.
Herrell Musselman Sweeney
Nays:
Alexander Griffin, J.J., Jr. Muldrew Smith, S.C.
Anderson Grimes O'Neill Stewart, C.D.
Arrington Hathaway Peacock Steard, E.L.
Ayres Home Peavy Stone
Beck Inman Peters Strickland
Blank Jones Petersen Surles
Chaires Kimbrough Pratt Sutton
Chappell Lancaster Putnal Usina
Cleveland Manning Roberts, C.A. Wadsworth







The Politics of Interposition 81


Costin
Cross
Daniel
Duncan
Frederick
Griffin, B.H., Jr.
Yeas- 29
Nays- 59


Marshburn
Mathews
Mattox
Mitchell, R.O.
Mitchell, Sam
Moody


Roberts, E.S.
Roberts, H.W.
Rowell, E.C.
Rowell, M.H.
Russ
Saunders


Walker
Williams, B.D.
Williams, G.W.
Williams, J.R.A.
Wise


The motion that further consideration of House Concurrent Resolu-
tion No. 174 be temporarily deferred was not agreed to.
The question recurred on the adoption of the concurrent resolution.






This Page Blank in Original
Source Document














LIST OF MEMBERS


Members of the Historical Association of Southern Florida enjoy the
ongoing program of the Association, the special events, meetings,
program series and two publications, the bi-monthly Update and the
annual Tequesta. They have the use of the research library and the
archives located in the Historical Museum.
Membership revenues benefit the public service and educational
programs and projects of the Association.
The roster below is made up of the names of those persons and
institutions that have paid dues since September 30, 1976. Those joining
after September 30, 1977 will have their names on the 1978 roster.
Sustaining members, (Ss) paid ten dollars annually, this category
has been discontinued.
"Patron,"' single, (P), pay fifteen dollars per year, "Subscriber,"
(Sb), pay a minimum of fifteen dollars, "Donor," (D), twenty-five,
"Contributor," (C), fifty, "Sponsor," (Sp), one hundred, "Benefactor,"
(B), two hundred and fifty or more, "Life," (L), one thousand. Honorary
Life Membership (HL), is voted by the Board of Directors to recognize
special services to the Association. The symbol ** indicates Founding
Member and the symbol indicates Charter Member.


Aberman, Mr. & Mrs. James,
Miami (D)
Adams, Mrs. Adam G., Coral
Gables (D)
Adams, Mr. & Mrs. Alto, Jr.,
Fort Pierce (P)
Adams Mrs. Flagner,
Homestead (D)
Adams, Eugene C., Miami (P)
Adams, Mr. & Mrs. Nate L. 11,
Coral Gables (D)
Adams, Mrs. Richard B.,
Miami (Ss)
Adams, Wilton L., Miami (P)
Adderly, Mrs. Elaine, Miami
(Ss)
Admire, Jack G., Coral Gables
(D)
Admire, Mrs. Jack G., Coral
Gables (D)


Agan, Mrs. Madeleine, Miami
(Ss)
Akerman, Mr. & Mrs. John,
Coral Gables (D)
Albury, Mrs. Calvin, Key
Largo (P)
Albury, Dr. Paul, Nassau,
Bahamas (D)
Aldrich, Mr. & Mrs. Roy L,,
Jr., Miami (P)
Alexander, David L., Sidney,
OH (D)
Alexander, Dr. & Mrs. Julius,
Miami (Sp)
Allen, Mrs. Eugenia, Miami
(P)
Allen, Mrs. Leffler, Coral
Gables (Ss)
Allen, Raymond, Miami (P)
Allston, Mrs. William E,
Miami (P)


Altmayer, M. S., Miami (D)
American Bibliographical
Center, Santa Barbara,
CA. (Sb)
Amerkan, Mrs. Susie, Coral
Gables (P)
Ames, Mrs. Theron W., Coral
Gables (P)
Anania, Mr, & Mrs. Francis,
Miami (D)
Anderson, Marie, Miami (C)
Anderson, Phillip R., Miami
(P)
Anderson, Mrs. W. R., Miami
(Ss>
Andrews, Mrs, Carmele L.,
Miami (P)
Angus, Mrs. W. S., Miami (P)
Ansbaugh, Mrs. Fay X.,
Jonesboro, TN (P)







84 TEQUESTA


Ansin, Mr. & Mrs. Edmund,
Coral Gables (D)
Apthorp, Mr. & Mrs. James,
Miami (D)
Archer, Ben, Homestead (P)
Arel, Mr. & Mrs. Armand G.,
Coral Gables (P)
Aschman, David C.. Coral
Gables (P)
Ashe, Miss Barbara Rose,
Coral Gables (P)
Atherton, Laurine E., Coral
Gables (Ss)
Atkinson, Judge Edith M.,
Miami (Ss)
Atwood, Mrs. Charles F,
Miami (P)
Aufort, Mrs, Nina P., Coral
Gables (P)
Aurell, Mrs. John K., Coral
Gables (Ss)
Averbrook, Daniel Z., Miami
(Ss)
Ayars, Erling E., Coral Gables
(P)
Ayer, John H., Miami (Ss)

Bachmann, Dr. & Mrs. Albert
E. J.. Coral Gables (P)
Bacon, Mrs. Jones, Miami (P)
Baden, Mrs. Thomas, Miami
Shores (P)
Badgett, H. Sue, North Miami
(P)
Baggs, Mrs. L., Jr., Coral
Gables (D)
Bagley, Mrs. G. W., Miami (P)
Baker, Charles H., Jr., Naples
(P)
Baldwin, C. Jackson, Miami
(Ss)
Balfe, Mrs. E. Hutchins,
Miami (P)
Ball, Mrs. Ivan E., Miami
Shores (P)
Banks, Charlotte, Miami
Springs (P)
Banks, Col. & Mrs. Richard,
Miami (P)
Barkdull, Thoms H. Jr., Miami
(Ss)
Bames, Col. Francis H.,
Miami (P)
Barrett, Sue, Miami (P)
Bartow, Nevett S., Miami (P)
Bates, Franklin W, Miami
(Ss)
Battle, Mr. & Mrs. Benjamin,
Miami (D)


Battles, Mr. & Mrs. Nicholas,
Miami (P)
Baucom, Mrs. Ruth Kaune, Ft.
Myers (P)
*Baxter, John M., Miami (Ss)
Baya, George J., Esq., Miami
(P)
Beal, Mrs. K. Malcolm,
Miami (P)
Beare, Mrs. Richard, Miami
(P)
Beauor, Ralph, Miami (P)
Beckham, W. H., Jr., Coral
Gables (D)
Beddall, Mrs. James J., Miami
(D)
Beem, Mr. & Mrs. William,
Miami (P)
Beeman, Mrs, Charles, Coral
Gables (P)
Beilinson, Les D., Miami
Beach (P)
Bell, Liseile A., Miami (P)
Bell-Thomson, Rosanna,
Miami (P)
Beriaull, John G., Naples (P)
Berkowitz, Dr. & Mrs.
Samuel, Coral Gables (P)
Bemdt, Mrs. Charles F,
Miami (P)
Biedron, Mrs. Stanley, Coral
Gables (Dy
Biewala, R. A.,Miami (P)
Biggane, Dr. & Mrs. Charles
E, Jr., (P)
Biggs, V. Jean, Miami (Ss)
Biglin, Mrs.W. A., Ft.
Lauderdale (D)
Bills, Mrs. John T., Miami (D)
Black, George Robison,
Miami (D)
Black, Mr. & Mrs. Leon, Jr.,
Coral Gables (D)
Black,Mrs. Martha Miami (D)
Blackburn, Elmer E., Miami
(D)
Blanc, Lodovico, Miami (P)
Blanch, Dr. & Mrs. William,
Miami (P)
Blankenship, Gerry, Miami (P)
Bloomberg, Robert L. Miami
(P)
Blue, Mrs. R.L., Miami
Shores (D)
Blue Lakes Elementary
PT.A., Miami (Sb)
Blumberg,Mr. & Mrs. David,
Coral Gables (D)


Boccard, Mrs. Mathew L.,
Miami (Ss)
Bohan, Brent Alan, Boynton
Beach (P)
Bolderick, Samuel J., Miami
(P)
Bonovia, Patricia & Paul,
Miami (P)
Bonowit, O. J, Miami (P)
Botta, Vincent J., South
Miami (P)
Bouterse, Donald, Miami (P)
Bowen, Forest, Miami (P)
Bower, Robert S., North
Miami Beach (P)
Bowker, Mrs. Gordon, Miami
(P)
Braddock, Mrs. G. Holmes,
Miami (P)
Bradford, Mrs. S. A., Coral
Gables (P)
Brandt, Mr. & Mrs. Kenneth,
Miami (P)
Brannen,H. S.,Miami Springs
(P)
Breeze, Mrs, K. W, Miami
Shores (P)
Bremer, Barbara, Miami (Ss)
Brickman, Richard, Miami
(Ss)
Brimson, Mr. & Mrs. W.G.,
Sr., Coral Gables (D)
Brinker, Richard, Miami (D)
Brogan, Mr. & Mrs. Frank D.,
Miami (P)
*Brookfield, Charles, Miami
(P)
Brooks, J. R., Tavemier (P)
Broward County
Archeological Society,
Hollywood (Sb)
Broward County Historical
Commission, Ft.
Lauderdale (Sp)
Brown, Mrs. Andrew G.,
Miami (P)
Brown, Mr. & Mrs. Bowman,
Coral Gables (P)
Brown, Maida F. Miami (P)
Brown, Mrs. Sylvia G., Miami
(Ss)
Brown Univershy Library,
Providence, RI (Sb)
Browne, Jefferson L., Coral
Gables (Ss)
Bruce, Betty M., Key West (P)
Brunelle, Mrs. Gaylord, A.,
Coral Gables (P)








Members 85


Brunstetter, Mrs. Roscoe,
Coral Gables (P)
Budenz, Mrs. Margaret R.,
Miami (Ss)
Buhler, Mr. & Mrs. Jean E.,
Vero Beach (P)
Buhler, Sylvia, Coral Gables
(Ss)
Buker, Charles E., Sr., Miami
(D)
Burkart, David P, Coral
Gables (P)
Burkett, Mrs. Charles W., Jr.,
Miami Beach (D)
Burkhardt, Sue Pope, West
Palm Beach (P)
Burnett, Mrs, Robert L., Jr.,
Miami Lakes (P)
Bums,Edward B., Las Cruces,
NM (P)
Burr, Mrs. Raymond 0.,
Miami (P)
Burrus, E. Carter, Jr., Miami
(P)
Burt, AI, Hawthorne (P)
Burton, Mrs. Robert A., Jr.,
Miami (P)
Byrd, Mrs. David T, Miami
(C)

Cadwallader, Florence H.,
Miami (P)
Callahan, Mrs. K. W., Coral
Gables (Ss)
Cameron, D. Pierre G., Miami
(P)
Cameron, Joanna M., Miami
(P)
Campbell, Jack, Miami (Sp)
Carden, Marguerite, Miami
(P)
Carllon, Mrs. Patricia P., Ft.
Lauderdale (P)
Carman, Carol L., Miami (Ss)
Carney, Mr. & Mrs. Harry K.,
North Miami (P)
Carr, Mrs. A. Marvin, Miami
(P)
Carrol, Mrs. J. Lawrence,
Miami (P)
Cartee, Mrs. Horace L., Coral
Gables (P)
Casanave, Charles L., Miami
(P)
Cassano, Mrs. E E, Miami (P)
Cassidy, Owen J., Miami (D)
Caster, Mrs. George B., Coral
Gables (D)


Castillo, Robert, Miami (P)
*Catlow, Mr. & Mrs. William
R.,Jr, (D)
Cayton, Leona Peacock (P)
Chandler, Mrs. Winifred,
Miami (P)
Chaille, Joseph H. North
Miami (D)
Chaille, Mrs. Josiah, Miami
(P)
Chalfant, Helen C., Miami (P)
Chaplin, Mrs. Katherine D.,
Coral Gables (P)
Chapman, Arthur A., Miami
(P)
Chapman, Stella Tuttle,
Homestead (P)
Chardon, Roland E., Baton
Rouge, LA (C)
Chase, C.W., Jr., Miami Beach
(Ss)
Chastain, Dixie, Miami (P)
Chastain, R. B., Miami (P)
Cheatham, Mrs. John H., Jr.,
Coral Gables (P)
Childress,L. C., Coral Gables
(P)
Chillis, Mrs. J. Aranha,Miami
(P)
Chowning, John S., Coral
Gables (D)
Christensen, Mrs. Charlotte
C., Miami (P)
Clarenden, David P, Miami
(Ss)
Clark, Bemal E., Miami (P)
Clark, Betty Carman, Goulds
(P)
Clark, Mrs. H. L., Miami
Shores (C)
Clark, Mrs. Mae Knight, Coral
Gables (C)
Clay, Dana, Coral Gables (P)
Clearwater Public Library,
Clearwater (Sb)
Coates, Miss Beatrice, Coral
Gables (P)
Cobb, Lillian S., Miami (P)
Coconut Grove Library,
Miami (Sb)
Cogswell, Mr. & Mrs. T. J.,
Coral Gables (D)
Cole, R. B., Miami (P)
Coleman, Mrs. Florence B.,
Miami (Ss1
Coleman, Hannah 2, Miami
(P)
Collier County Historical
Society, Naples (Sb)


Collier County Museum &
Archives, Naples (Sb)
Collier Free Public Library,
Naples (Sb)
Colsky, Dr. & Mrs. Jacob &
Family, Miami (P)
Colson, Bill, Miami (D)
Combs, Walter, Miami (P)
Compton, Mrs. Lucretia C.,
Miami (Ss)
Conklin, Miss Dallas M.,
Long Beach, CA (L)
Conlon, Frank C., Hollywood
(P)
Conlon, Lyndon C.,
Hollywood (P)
Cook, Miss Mary C.,
Crownpoint, NM (Ss)
Cool, Stephen E., Cooper City
(Ss)
Cooney, Mrs. Robert, Miami
Shores (P)
Cooper, Mr. & Mrs. W. Worth,
Miami (P)
Coplan, Dr. Milton M., Coral
Gables (Ss)
*Coral Gables Public Library,
Coral Gables (Sb)
Corliss, Carlton J., Tallahassee
(P)
Cormack, Elroy Calvin, El
Portal (P)
Corson, Dr. & Mrs. Richard,
Miami (P)
Corwin, Dr. William, Coral
Gables (P)
Costello, Mrs. Gertrude,
Miami (P)
Costello, Mr. James, Miami
(P)
Cothron, Pat, Goulds (P)
Covington, Dr. James W.,
Tampa (P)
Cox, Harold PR,Miami (D)
Cox, Dr. William E., Jr.,
Chagrin Falls, OH (P)
Crane, Mrs. Francis V.,,Center
Lovell, ME (P)
Crane, Raymond E. & Ellen E
Foundation, Miami (B)
Cranshaw, Mr. & Mrs.
George, Islamorada (Ss)
Criswell, Col. Grover C., Citra
(P)
Creel, Earl M., Melbourne (P)
Creel, Joe, Coral Gables (P)
Cross, J. Alan, Miami (P)
Crow, Lon Worth, Jr., Coral
Gables (D)








86 TEQUESTA


Crow, Mrs. Mary Graham,
Palos Verdes Estates, CA
(D)
Crowder, Mrs. James F Jr.,
Coral Gables (P)
Crum, Mary Cooney, Fort
Lauderdale (P)
Cuevas, Elba J., Key Biscayne
(P)
Culburtson, Mr. & Mrs W W.,
Miami (P)
Cullom, Mrs. Caryl J., Miami
(P)
Culmer, Mrs. John E., Miami
(Ss)
Culpepper, Mrs. Kay M.,
Miami (P)
Cunningham, Doty, Miami
(Ss)
Curry, Miss Lamar Louise,
Coral Gables (P)
Curwood, Mr. & Mrs. W. J.,
Miami (P)
*Cushman, Dr. Laura, Miami
(P)

Dager, H. J., Jr., Miami (Sp)
Dade Heritage Trust, Miami
(Sp)
D'Alemberte, Mrs. Sandy,
Miami (D)
Daly, Mrs. John P, South
Miami (Ss)
Daniel, Mr. & Mrs. W. A., Jr.,
Coral Gables (P)
Danielson,J. Deering, Coral
Gables (C)
D A.R., Coral Gables Chapter
(C)
Davenport, Dr. & Mrs. 0. W.,
Miami (D)
Davidson, Mrs. Robert M.,
Miami (P)
Davis, Mrs. Carl H., Miami
(P)
Davis, Mr, & Mrs. Frank C.,
Miami (D)
Davis, Rube Thigpen, Miami
Shores (P)
Davis, Hal D., Coral Gables
(D)
Davis, Jean McArthur
(McArthur Foundation),
Miami (B)
Dean, Kate Stirrup, Miami (D)
DeBoe, Mrs. M. P, Coral
Gables (Ss)
DeCarion, George H., Miami
(D)


Decker, Elroy L., Miami (D)
Dee. Mr & Mrs. William E.,
Miami Springs (P)
Dekle, Linda N., Miami (Ss)
DeNies, Charles F, Hudson,
MI (D)
Detroit Public Library,
Detroit, Ml (Sb)
Dibble, Dr. Ernest, Coral
Gables (P)
Dickey, Dr. Robert, Coral
Gables (D)
*Dismukes, William Paul,
Coral Gables (P)
Donovan, James Maitland, Jr.,
Miami (P)
Dom, Mrs. Robert, Miami (P)
* Dorothy, Mrs. Caroline,
Miami (P)
Dorsey, Mrs. Mary C., Coral
Gables (P)
Dotson, Mary Jo, Miami (D)
Dougherty,Mr. & Mrs. Jas. C.,
Miami (PM
Douglas, Marjory Stoneman,
Miami (P)
Dupuch, Sir Etienne, OBE,
Nassau,Bahamas (D)
DuPuis, John G Jr., Miami
(D)
Dusman, Gilbert, Coral
Gables (P)
Dusman, Florence R, Coral
Gables (Ss)
Douns, Mrs. Dorothy, Miami
(P)
Duvall, Mrs. John E., Miami
(Ss)
Dowlen, Dr. L. W., Jr., Coral
Gables (D)
DuBois, Bessie Wilson,
Jupiter (D)
Duffy, Mr. & Mrs. E. Hugh,
Coral Gables (P)
Dugas, Mrs. Faye, Coral
Gables (D)
Dumas, Ernest M., Jupiter (Ss)
Dunan, Mrs. G. V. R., Miami
(D)
Dunan, Mrs. Otis E.Coral
Gables (D)
Duncan, Marvin L., Miami
(Ss)
Duncan, Norman, Coral
Gables (Ss)
Dunlop, Mrs. Donald D.,
Miami (P)
Dunn, Hampton, Tampa (P)


Dunty, R. P, Jr, Lake Placid
(P)
Dunwody, Atwood, Miami (D)
Durkal7, Miss Deya, Miami
Beach (P1

Edelen, Ellen, Miami (P)
Edelson, Michele, Miami (P)
Edward, Jim, Boynion Beach
(D)
Edwards, Robert V.. M.D.,
Coral Gables (D)
Eggert. Jim C, Miami (Ss)
Ellenburg, Mr. & Mrs. James,
Miami (D)
Elliot, Donald L, Miami (P)
Ellis, Mrs. Howard N., Miami
IP)
El Portal Womens Club,
Miami (P)
Engel, Mrs. Anne P. Miami
(D)
Eppes, William D, Coral
Gables/New York City (P)
Erickson, Douglas, Miami (P)
Erickson, Mrs. Melville A.,
Coral Gables (P)
Errera, Mrs. Dorothy, Miami
(P)
Essner, Mrs. & Mrs. Gene,
Miami (D>
Everglades Natural History
Assn., Homestead (P)
Ewell, Mrs. A.Travers, South
Miami (Ss)
Eyster, J, R., Islamorada (Ssj
Ezell, Mr.& Mrs. Boyce E Il1,
Miami (Sp)

Fagin, Judith Eve, Miami (D)
Farina, Mr. & Mrs. Joseph P.,
Miami Shores (C)
Fascell, Dante B.,
Washington, DC (P)
Fenner, Patricia Larkins,
Miami (P)
Ferendino, Andrew J., Coral
Gables (D)
Ferguson, Mrs. Milton,
Boynton Beach (P)
Ferre, Mayor & Mrs. Maurice,
Miami (P)
Field, Captain & Mrs.
Benjamin P, Lantana (P)
Fields, Mrs. Eddie, Miami (Ss)
Filer, Mrs. Frank E., Miami
(Ss)
Finlay, James N., Miami (P)








Members 87


Firestone, Senator George,
Miami (D)
Fischer, Mr. & Mrs. E. E,
Miami (P)
Fitzgerald, Dr. Joseph H,.
Miami (Sp)
Fitzgerald-Bush, Frank S.,
OpaLocka (P)
Fleeger, Don R., North Miami
(P)
Fleming, Joseph Z., Miami (P)
Flinn, Mrs. Gene, Miami (D)
Florence, Robert S., Miami (P)
Florida Atlantic University,
Boca Raton (Sb)
Florida International
University, Miami (Sb)
Florida Southern College,
Lakeland (Sb)
Florida Technical University,
Orlando (Sb)
Floyd, Shirley P., Jupiter (Ss)
Fogg, Mrs. A. S. Jr., Coral
Gables (P)
Forde, Nicholas Clive deB,
Barbados, W. 1. (Ss)
Ft. Lauderdale Historical
Society, Ft. Lauderdale
(Sb)
Fortner, Ed, Ocala (P)
Foss, George B., Jr., Esq.,
Miami (D)
Foundation of Jewish
Philanthropies, Miami (B)
Fowler, Mrs. Walter H., North
Miami (P)
Fox, Chief & Mrs. Kenneth,
Miami (D)
Franklin, Mitchell, New
Brunswick, Canada (P)
Franklin, Mrs. Sandra, Miami
(P)
Frates, Mr. & Mrs. William,
Coral Gables (D)
Frazer, Col. Fred J., USMC
(ret), Miami (D)
Frazier, James C., Miami (D)
Frederick Mr. John M.,
Homestead (Ss)
Freed, Mr. & Mrs. Owen,
Coral Gables (D)
Freiden, Ms. Ellen, Miami (D)
Fricke, Mr. & Mrs. W. E,
Miami (P)
Friend,The Reverend Wm. B.,
Mobile, AL (Ss)
Frisbie, Mr. & Mrs. Loyal,
Bartow (D)


Frohock, Mrs. Jack, North
Miami (P)
Frohring, Mr. & Mrs. Paul,
Key Biscayne (D)
Fuchs, Richard W, Naranja
(P)
Fullerton, Mr. & Mrs. John P,
Coral Gables (P)
Furman, Rose Mary, Miami
(Ss)
Fussell, Mr. & Mrs. J. E.,
Miami (P)
Gabler, Mrs. George E.,
Miami (D)
Gaby, Donald C., Miami (C)
Gallogly, Ms. Vera, Coral
Gables (P)
Gannaway, Mrs. K. C., Key
Largo (P)
Gardner, Mrs. Dick B., Miami
(P)
Gardner, Mr. & Mrs. Robert J.,
Coral Gables (C)
Garrison, MarthaGatti, Miami
(Ss)
Gart Urban Associates, Coral
Gables (C)
Gaulier, Redmond Bunn,
Miami (P)
Gentle, Edgar, Birmingham,
AL(P)
George, Paul S.,Tallhasseee
(Ss)
Gerace, Mrs. Terence, Coral
Gables (D)
German, Mr. & Mrs. Trent,
Miami (D)
Gibson, John N., Pearsall, TX
(Ss)
*Gifford, Mrs. John C., Miami
(P)
Godown, Marian B., Ft. Myers
(Ss)
Goldman, Sue S., Miami (P)
Goldstein, Charles, Miami (P)
Goldstein, Harvey L., Miami
(P)
Goldweber, S., Perrine (P)
Gooding, Naomi Cornell,
Miami (P)
Goodlett, Mr. & Mrs. R. 0.,
Miami (D)
Goodlove, Mrs. William,
Coral Gables (P)
Gordon, Mr. & Mrs. Howard,
Coral Gables (P)
Gorman, Ms. Sharon,
Pompano Beach (D)


Gorman, Mr. & Mrs. William
C., Coral Gables (D)
Gottlieb, Julie, Miami (Ss)
Gowin,Dr. & Mrs. Thomas
Skaggs, Miami (Sp)
Goza, William M., Clearwater
(P)
Grafton, Mr. & Mrs. Edward,
Coral Gables (C)
Graham, D. Robert, Miami
(Sp)
Graham, Dorothy W., Miami
(P)
Graham, Mr. & Mrs.William
C., Miami Lakes (D)
Grant, Hazel Reeves, Miami
(Ss)
Green, Mrs. Lonsdale B.,
Miami Beach (P)
Greenan, Mr. & Mrs. Gary,
Miami (P)
Greer, Mr. & Mrs. Alan, Coral
Gables (D)
Griley, Victor P., Miami (Ss)
Griley, Mr, & Mrs, Victor P,
Jr., Miami (Ss)
Grose, Esther N., Miami (P)
Gross, Dr. Zade Bernard,
Largo (P)
Gubbins, John M., North
Miami (P)
Gulfstream Park, Hallandale
(B)
Guthrie,J. Michael, Miami (P)

Haas, Mr. & Mrs. Ronald,
Coral Gables (P)
Hamilton,Mr. & Mrs. Clinton,
Miami (D)
Hamlin, Miss Betsy Belle,
Miami (Ss)
Hampton, Mrs. John,
Baltimore, MD (P)
Han, Marilyn, Key Biscayne
(Ss)
Hance, Nancy V., Miami (P)
Hancock, Eleanor Stone,
Miami (D)
Hancock, Eugene A., Jr.,
Miami (D)
Hancock, Mrs. James T,
Jacksonville Beach (P)
Hannau, Dr. Hans & Ilse,
Miami Beach (D)
Hardie, George B.,Jr., South
Miami (D)
Hardin, Henry C., Jr., M.D.,
Coral Gables (D)







88 TEQUESTA


Harding. Mrs Henry K.,
Boynton Beach (Ss)
Harper, Florence. E, Miami
(Ss)
Harrington, Frederick H.,
Hialeah (P)
Harris, Robert, Miami (P)
Harrison, Mrs. A. D., Miami
(Ss)
Harrison, Mrs. Crutcher Field,
Miami (P)
Harrison, John C., Miami (L)
Harrison, Mr. & Mrs. John C.,
Jr., Coral Gables (D)
Harrison, Mr. & Mrs. Joseph
R., Jr., Miami (D)
Harrison, Mr. & Mrs. M. R.,
Jr.. Miami (P)
Harvard College Library,
Cambridge, MA (Sb)
Harwood, Mrs. Manton E.,
Coral Gables (Ss)
Hatfield, Bruce, Miami (Ss)
Hatfield, Mr. & Mrs. M. H.,
North Miami (D)
Hauser, Mr. & Mrs. Leo A.,,
Carrollton, GA (P)
Hayes, Emmie S., Miami (P)
Rutherford B. Hayes Library,
Freemont, OH (Sb)
Head-Beckham Insurance
Agency Inc., Miami WP)
Heatley, Mrs. Timothy K ,
South Miami (P)
Hector, Louis J., Miami (D)
Hector, Mr. & Mrs. Robert C.,
Miami (P)
Hector, Mrs. Robert C., Jr.,
Miami (Ss)
Heini, Mrs. J. L. 111, Miami
(P)
Helmke, Ms. Wilma, Miami
(D)
Hendry, Judge Norman,
Miami (P)
*Herin, Thomas D., Miami
(Ss)
Herin, Judge William A.,
Miami (P)
Herreshoff, Mrs. Rebecca,
Miami (P)
Hialeah, Library Division,
Hialeah (Sb)
Hibbard, R. W., Miami (P)
Hicks, William M., Miami (D)
Hiers, J. B., Jr., Miami (P)
Highleyman, Daly, Miami (D)


Highleyman. Katherine D.,
Miami (P)
Hildreth, Robert R., Coral
Gables (D)
Hill, Herbert, Miami (P)
Hillbauer, Mrs William C.,
Sr., Miami (P)
Hills, Lee, Miami (D)
Hinkley, Mrs. Edward, Miami
(Ss)
Historical Society of Palm
Beach County, Palm
Beach (Sb)
Hictoric Key West
Preservation Board, Key
West (Sb)
Hobbs, J, C., Coral Gables (P)
Hodges, Mr. T. K,, Miami (P)
Hodsden, Mrs. Harry E.,
Miami (P)
Hoeffel, Mrs. Kenneth, Chevy
Chase, MD (D)
Hoffman. Nancy, Miami (P)
Hofstetter, Mrs. Ronald.
Miami (Ss)
Hogan, Mrs. Thomas D., IlI,
Miami (P)
Holcomb. Lyle D., Jr., Coral
Gables (P)
Holland, George Russell,
Miami (P)
Holmberg, Rowland, Miami
(P)
Holsenbeck, Mrs. J. M..
Marathon (Di
Hoskins, Mrs. Eddie, Miami
(P)
Houser, Roosevelt C., Coral
Gables (P)
Howard, Emily P, Miami (Ss)
Howe, Mrs. Elden L., Coral
Gables (D)
Howell, Mrs. Roland M.,
Miami (P)
Hoyt, Robert L, Miam; (P)
Hudson, Mr. & Mrs. JamesA.,
Ashville, NC (P)
Hughes, Kenneth, Miami (P)
Hume, Mrs. Charles Lea,
Coral Gables (S)
Hume, David, Miami (D)
Hunter, Duncan, Tavernier
(Sb)
Henry E. Huntington Library
& Art Gallery, San
Marino, CA (Sb)
Huston, Mrs. Tom. Coral
Gables (P)


Hutchens, Paul. Boca Raton
(P1
Hutchinson, Mrs. Robert,
Coral Gables (P)

Indian River Community
College, Fort Pierce (Sb)

Jackson, Mrs. Nan, Miami (P)
Jacobstein, Dr. Helen L., Coral
Gables (P)
James, Mary Crofts, Miami
(P)
Johnson, Cookie, Miami (Ss)
Johnson, Frederick L.. Miami
(P)
Johnson, Jane M., Miami (P)
Johnson, Kay, Coral Gables
(Ss)
Johnson, Mrs, Myron A.,C.,
Miami (D)
Johnson, S. H., M.D., Miami
(D)
Johnson, Mrs. Weslerdahl,
Miami (P)
Johnson, Whittington B.,
Miami (P)
Johnston, Mr. & Mrs. Thomas
McE.. Coral Gables (D)
Jones, A. Tillman, Naranja (P)
Jones, Mr. & Mrs. Clarke,
Miami (P)
Jones, Mrs. Edgar Jr., Coral
Gables (P)
Jones, Susan, Miami (D)
Jones, Thompson V., Miami
(P)
Jordan, Mrs. B. B., Miami (P)
Joyce, Hortense H., Coral
Gables (P)
Jude, Dr. James R., Coral
Gables (P)
Junkin, Mr. & Mrs. John E.,
Ill, Coral Gables (Sp)
Junkin, Mrs. Stella B.,
Micanopy (P)
Jureit, Mrs. L E., Coral
Gables (D)

Kammer, Mrs. Barbara,
Miami (P)
Kanner,Mr. & Mrs. LewisM.,
Coral Gables (C)
Karcher, Mr, & Mrs. David P,
Miami (P)
Kassewitz, Jack, Jr, Coral
Gables (P)







Members 89


Kattel, G. Edward, Key
Biscayne (P)
Kaufman, Mrs. James M.,
Coral Gables (Ss)
Keep, Oscar J., Key Largo (P)
Keith, Mr. William V., Ft.
Lauderdaie (Ss)
Kellner, Mr. & Mrs. Stewart,
Coral Gables (D)
Kelly, Mr. & Mrs. J. Terrance,
Coral Gables (D)
Kelly, Mr. & Mrs. Loyd G.,
Miami (Sp)
Kelly, Minnie Pierce, Miami
(P)
Kemper, Marlyn, Ft.
Lauderdale (P)
Kent, Mrs. Frederick A., Coral
Gables (D)
Kent, Olga, Coral Gables (P)
Key West Art & Historical
Society, Key West (P)
Kimen, Mr. & Mrs. Thomas,
Jr., Key Biscayne (P)
Kincaid, Gretchen Hand,
Miami (D)
Kinsman, George, Miami (P)
Kislak, Jay I, Miami (D)
Kistler, Robert S., Miami (C)
Knight, Mrs. Annie, Miami
(D)
Knight, John S., Miami (D)
Kniskem, Kenneth E, Miami
(C)
Knott, Judge James R., West
Palm Beach (P)
Kobelin, Joel, Miami (P)
Knotis, Tom, Yankeetown (P)
Koger, Grace D., Miami (P)
Kollish, Mrs. Joseph M.,
Miami (P)
Korray,Mary E., North Miami
(P)
Kunde, Mr. & Mrs. George,
Miami (P)

La Croix, Mrs. Aerial C.,
Miami (P)
LaGodna, Martin M., Tampa
(Ss)
Lake Worth Public Library,
Lake Worth (Sb)
Langley, Wright, Key West (P)
Larrabee, Charles, Jr., Miami
(P)
LaRoue, Samuel D., Jr.
Miami (P)


Lassman, Mrs. Harold, Miami
(Ss)
Lawrence, Mary Winton,
Miami (Ss)
Larkin, Mrs. Daniel F, Coral
Gables (P)
Laxson, Dan D., Hialeah (P)
*Leary, Lewis, Chapel Hill,
NC (Ss)
Leenhouts, Laura N., Miami
(P)
**Leffler, Miss Cornelia,
Miami (Ss)
Lehman, Ms. Joan, Dania (P)
Lehman,Richard L., Dania (P)
Leigh, Mrs. Charles N., Coral
Gables (D)
Leonardy, Dr. Herberia,
Miami (P)
Leslie, Mr. & Mrs. Richard
M., Coral Gables (D)
Levin, Mr. & Mrs. Robert B.,
North Miami (P)
Lewin, Robert, Miami (D)
Licht, Dr. & Mrs. Sidney,
Coral Gables (D)
Liles, Debra J., Coral Gables
(P)
Lindgren, Mrs. M. E., Miami
Shores (P)
Lindsey, James B., Miami (P)
Lindsley, Mrs. A. R., Miami
Beach (P)
Linehan, Mrs. John, Lantana
(P)
Link, E. A., Ft. Pierce (C)
Lipsky,Bernie & Terry, Miami
(D)
Lipp, Morris N.,Miami Beach
(P)
Lippert, W. K., Miami (Ss)
Livingston, Mr. & Mrs.
Robert, Miami (P)
Lloyd, J. Harlan, Miami (P)
Locke, R. R., Miami (P)
Longshore, Frank, Miami (D)
Lopaz, Conch ita, Coral Gables
(Ss)
Ludington, Mr, & Mrs. F W,
Miami (P)
Loxahatchee Historical
Society, Jupiter (Sb)
Lummus, J. N., Jr., Miami (D)
Lunsford, Dr. & Mrs. E. C.,
Coral Gables (P)
Lynch, Mr. & Mrs. Stephen
A., I11, Coral Gables (P)


Lyons, Eugene, Vero Beach
(P)

Mac Intyre, Mr & Mrs. A. C.,
Miami (C)
McAliley, Mr. & Mrs. Thomas
W., Miami (P)
McAdam, Joanne E, Bal
Harbour (P)
Mc Arthur, Mrs. J. N., Miami
(P)
McCabe, Dr. Robert H., Coral
Gables (D)
McCabe, Mrs. Robert H.,
Coral Gables (D)
McCall, Mrs. Howard, Boca
Raton (P)
McCormick, Mr. & Mrs. C.
Deering, Miami (C)
McCorquodale, Mrs. Donald,
Jr., Miami (P)
McCreary, Ms. Jane, Coral
Gables (D)
McCrimmon, C. T., South
Miami (D)
McDonough, John C., Miami
(P)
Melver, Stuart, Lighthouse
Point IP)
McKay, John G,, Jr., Key
Biscayne (P)
McKeller, Mrs. James D.,
Miami (Ss)
McKenna, Mrs. R. A., Coral
Gables (D)
McKey, Mrs. R. M., Coral
Gables (P)
McLean, Lenore, Miami (P)
McNaughton, M. D., Miami
(P)
McNaughton, Dr. Robert A.,
Miami (P)
McNeill, Robert E., Jr.,
Windemere (D)

Machin, Lynn C., Coral
Gables (D)
Malafronte, Anthony F,
Miami (Ss)
Malcomb, Mr. & Mrs. John,
Coral Gables (P)
Malone, Randolph A., Coral
Gables (P)
Maltby, Mr. & Mrs. L. A.,
Miami (P)
Mangels, Dr. Celia C., Miami
Shores (P)







90 TEQUESTA


Mank, Mr. & Mrs. Philip J.,
Sr., Little Switzerland, NC
(D)
Mank, Mr. Philip J., Jr., Vero
Beach (P)
Mank, Mr. & Mrs. R. Layton,
Coral Gables (C)
Manley, Miss Marion I, Miami
(P)
Manley, Mr. & Mrs. Robert,
Miami (D)
Manly, Grace, Miami (P)
Marathon Public Library,
Marathon (Sb)
March, Mrs. John, Miami (P)
Marks, Henry S., Huntsville,
AL (P)
Marks, Mr. & Mrs. Paul, Coral
Gables (D)
Martin County Public Library,
Stuart (Sb)
Martin, James 0., Miami (P)
Martin, Mrs. Kirby A., New
York, NY (D)
Martin, Mrs. Sylva G., South
Miami (P)
Martinez-Ramos, Alberto,
Miami (P)
Matheson, Mr. & Mrs. Finlay,
Miami (D)
Matheson, Mr. & Mrs. Finlay
L., South Miami (C)
Matheson, Mr. & Mrs.
Michael, Miami (P)
Matheson, R. Hardy, Coral
Gables (D)
Matthews, Janet, Sarasota (P)
Mathews, Lucinda Nowland,
Springfield, VA (P)
Mattucci, Mr. Donald, Hialeah
(P)
Matusek, Mrs, Virginia G.,
Miami (Ss)
Moure, Mrs. Edwin P, Coral
Gables (P)
Maxted, E J., Jr., Coral Gables
(D)
Maxwell, Mrs. Arline, Miami
(Ss)
Mead, D. Richard, Miami (D)
Megee, Mrs. B. L., Miami (D)
Mercer, Mr. & Mrs. John H.,
Jr., Miami (D)
Mercer, Mattie J., Miami (P)
Merrick, Mrs. Eunice P, Coral
Gables (P)
Merritt, Mrs. Leslie R.,
Fairfax, VA (P)


Merritt, Mrs. Ward, Miami (P)
Mesnekoff, Mr. & Mrs. David,
Miami (D)
Metz, Martha J., North Miami
(C)
Miami Beach Public Library,
Miami Beach (Sb)
Miami Central Sr. High
School, Miami (Sb)
Miami Dade Community
College South, Miami (Sb)
Miami Jackson High School,
Miami (Sb)
*Miami Public Library,Miami
(Sb)
The Miami Times, Miami (Sb)
Millar, Mrs. Gavin S., Key
Biscayne (D)
Millege, Sarah F, Miami (D)
Miller, Miss Bessie, South
Miami (P)
Miller, Mr. & Mrs. Dale,
Hialeah (D)
Miller, Mr. & Mrs. Dean R.,
Miami (D)
Miller, Irving E., Miami (Ss)
Miller, Mr. William Jay, Key
Biscayne (P)
Minear, Mrs. L. V., Jupiter (P)
Mincy, Mrs. Evlyne, Miami
(P)
Mitman, Earl T., Miami (D)
Mizrach, Mr. Larry, Miami
(D)
Molinari, Dr. & Mrs. Robert
L., Key Biscayne (P)
Monk, J.Floyd, Miami (P)
Monroe County Public
Library, Key West (Sb)
Montague, Mrs. Charles H.,
North Miami (D)
Monticno, Mrs. Alma, Miami
(P)
Moore, Mrs. Jack, North
Miami (Ss)
Mordant, Hal, Coral Gables
(P)
Morris, Mr. & Mrs. C. C.,
Miami (P)
Mosely, William H., Delray
Beach (P)
Mott, Carol C., Ph.D., Miami
(P)
Moylan, E. B., Jr., Miami (P)
Mudd, Dr. Richard D.,
Saginaw, MI (P)
Mueller, Edward A.,
Jacksonville


Muir, Mr. & Mrs. William
Whalley, Miami (P)
Muller, David, Miami (P)
Mullins, Joann, Key Biscayne
(D)
Munroe, Mr. & Mrs. Charles
P, Coral Gables (DI
Munroe, Mrs. Wirth M.,
Miami (D)
Muraro, Mr. & Mrs. Robert,
Miami (P)
Murray, Miss Mary Ruth,
Coral Gables (D)
Mustard, Alice Isabel, Coral
Gables (P)
Mustard, Margaret Jean, Coral
Gables (P)

Nance, Judge Clayton, Ft.
Lauderdale (P)
Napier, Mr. & Mrs. Harvey,
Coral Gables (P)
Nathan, Calvin & Marva,
Miami (P)
National Railroad Historical
Society, Miami Chapter
(D)
Nelson, Theodore R., Miami
Beach (P)
Nettleton, Danforth H., Miami
(D)
Newberry Library, Chicago,
IL (Sb)
Newell, Ms. Barbara T.,
Miami (P)
Nicholson, Mr. & Mrs. Don
G., Miami (C)
Nicolet, Mrs. Robert A., Key
Biscayne (D)
Nimnicht, Mary Jo, Miami
(Ss)
Nolan, Mr. & Mrs. Vincent,
Miami (P)
Nordt, Mr. & Mrs. John C.,
Miami (D)
Norman, Dr. & Mrs. Harold
G., Jr., Coral Gables (P)

O'Kell, Mrs. George S., Coral
Gables (D)
Old Island Restoration
Foundation, Key West (D)
Oliver, Dr. & Mrs. Robert M.,
Jr., Key Biscayne (P)
Oren, Dr. & Mrs. Benjamin
G., Miami (P)
Orlando Public Library,
Orlando (Sb)







Members 91


Orseck, Robert, North Miami
Beach (P)
O'Steen, Mrs. Edna, Miami
(P)
Ostrenko, Witold, Jr, Miami
(P)
Oswald, Mrs. M. J., Miami (P)
Otto, Mrs. Thomas Osgood,
Miami Beach (P)
Outlaw, Mrs. Grace, Miami
(Ss)
Overstreet, Estelle C., Miami
(D)
Owens, Mrs. Bradley, Miami
Shores (P)

Padgett, Inman, Coral Gables
(P)
Pancoast, Alice A., Miami
(Ss)
Pancoast, John Arthur,
Pompano Beach (Ss)
Pancoast, Katherine French,
Miami (D)
Pancoast, Mr. & Mrs. Lester
C., Miami (D)
Pancoast, Peter Russell,
Miami (Ss)
Pappas,Ted & Cal, Miami (Sp)
Pardo,Mrs. Ramiro V., Miami
(HL)
Pardue,-Leonard G., Miami
(P)
Park, Dabney, Jr., Miami (P)
Parker, Alfred B., Miami (P)
Parker, Robin E., Miami (P)
Parks, Merle, Miami (P)
Parks, Mr, & Mrs. Robert L.,
Coral Gables (B)
Pames, Dr. & Mrs. Edmund I.,
Miami (D)
Patron, Dan 0., Miami (P)
Pawley, Miss Anita, Coral
Gables (D)
Payne, Mrs. R. W., Jr, Coral
Gables (D)
Peacock, Mrs. Albert, Jr.,
Miami (P)
Peacock, Arthur, Jr., Miami
(P)
Peacock, Mr. & Mrs.
Lawrence, Miami (D)
Peacock, Mr. R. C, Miami
(Ss)
Pearce, Mrs. A. Dixon, Miami
(P)
Pearce, Dr. Frank H., Coral
Gables (P)


Pearson, Mr. & Mrs. Wilbur,
Miami (P)
Peckham, Mr. & Mrs. George,
Miami (D)
Pederson, Phillip E, Miami (P)
Peeler, Miss Elizabeth, Coral
Gables (Ss)
Peeples, Vernon, Punta Gorda
(Sb)
Pepper, Senator Claude,
Miami Beach (D)
Perkins, Mr. & Mrs. Daniel L.,
Miami (P)
Pemer, Mrs. Henry, Hialeah
(P)
Pero, Jos. H., Miami (Sp)
Perry, Roy A., Miami (P)
Peters, Gordon H., Miami
Shores (P)
Peters, John S., Orlando (P)
*Peters, Dr. Thelma, Coral
Gables (D)
Peters, Mrs. Wirt, Coral
Gables (D)
Peterson, Mr. & Mrs. Albert,
Coral Gables (D)
Peterson, Stuart J., Biscayne
Park (P)
Pettigrew, Richard, Miami (D)
Pfaff, Robert M., Miami (P)
Pfleger, Mr. & Mrs. H. S., Jr.,
Miami (P)
Phifer, John, Miami (D)
Philbrick,W. L. Coral Gables
(P)
Pierce, Harvey E, Miami (P)
Pierce, Mrs. J. B., Jr., Miami
(P)
Pierce, J. E., Miami (D)
Pimm, Mr. & Mrs. Gordon,
Coral Gables (P)
Pinellas County Historical
Museum, Largo (Sb)
Pirie, Mrs. L. M., Miami (P)
Pizzo, Tony, Tampa (Ss)
Plimpton, Colonel John A.,
Juno Beach (Ss)
Plummer, Richard B., Miami
(D)
Polk County Historical
Library, Bartow (Sb)
Poole, John Lindsley, Miami
(Ss)
Post, Howard M., Miami
Springs (D)
Potter, Robert E., Hialeah (S)
Potts, Mr. & Mrs. Joseph,
Miami (D)


Prahl, William, Miami (P)
Preston, J. E., Coral Gables (P)
Proby,Mrs. Lucien,Jr., Miami
(P)
Proenza, Mrs. Morris, Miami
(P)
Provenza, Dr. Eugene, Miami
(P)
Pruitt, Mr, Peter, Miami (D)
Prunty, Mr. & Mrs. John,
Miami (P)
Purvis, Mrs. Hugh E, Coral
Gables (P)

Quarles, Julian, South Miami
(Ss)
Quentel, Mr. & Mrs. Albert
D0, Key Biscayne (D)
Quesenberry, William F.,
Coral Gables (D)
Quillian, Dr. Warren 11, Coral
Gables (P)
Quinan, Edward B., Coral
Gables (P)
Quinton, Mr. & Mrs. A. E.,Jr.,
Miami (P)

Ransom Everglades School,
Miami (Sb)
Rappaport, Edward, Coral
Gables (P)
Rash, Mrs. Harold H., Coral
Gables (P)
Rasmussen, Geraldine, Ft.
Lauderdale (P)
*Rast, Mrs. J. Lawton, Miami
(HL)
Rast, J, Lawton, Miami (D)
Ratner, Mr. Nat, Miami Beach
(P)
Read, Mrs. Albert Cushing,
Miami (Sp)
Reed, Miss Elizabeth Ann,
Ocean Ridge (P)
Reed, Richard, Miami (P)
Reid, Frances York, Coral
Gables (D)
Reiger, Dr. John, Coral Gables
(Ss)
Reinhardt, Miss Blanche E.,
Miami (Ss)
Renick, Ralph, Miami (P)
Rennell, Dr. & Mrs. Phillip,
Miami (P)
Reno, Mrs. Jane, Miami (P)
Reno, Attorney Janet, Miami
(C)
Resnick, Larry, Miami (P)







92 TEQUESTA


Rice, Sister Eileen, O.P,
Miami (P)
Rice, Mr. & Mrs. Ralph E.,
Key Biscayne (D)
Rice, R H., Jr., South Miami
(Ss)
Rich, Louise, Miami (D)
Richmond Heights Junior
High School, Miami (Sb)
Rider, Mr. & Mrs. Eugene,
Miami Beach (P)
Rieder, W. Thomas, Miami
(Ss)
Riley, Paul, Miami Springs (D)
Riley, Sandra, South Miami
(Ss)
Rivas, Mrs. Mary JaneTigert,
Miami (P)
Rivera, Leslie, Miami (P)
Riviera Beach Public Library,
Riviera Beach (Sb)
Robbins, Mrs. Lawrence J.,
Miami (D)
Robbins, Charlene, Coral
Gables (Ss)
Robbins, Mr. & Mrs. William
R., Jr., Miami (P)
Robinson, Mrs. Bruce R.,
Miami Springs (D)
Rogers, Mrs. Charles 0.,
Miami (P)
Rogers, Mrs. Walter S. C.,
Coral Gables (P)
Roller, Mrs. Phillip, Coral
Gables (P)
Rollins College, Winter Park
(Sb)
Rosborough, Dr. Melanie R.,
Miami (P)
Rosendorf, Mr. & Mrs.
Howard S., Coral Gables
(P)
Rosinek, Jeff, Miami (Ss)
Ross, Helen, Benton Harbor,
MI (Ss)
Ross, Mrs. Richard E, Delray
Beach (P)
Ross, Rosita, Miami (P)
Ross, Mrs. Stanley E., Coral
Gables (C)
Rothra, Mrs. Elizabeth, Miami
(P)
Rowell, Donald, Miami (P)
Rozynes, Stephen, Miami (P)
Russell, Sabrina, Miami (P)
Russell, T Trip, Miami (P)
Ryan, Mrs. J. H., Miami
Beach (D)


Sacher, Mr. & Mrs. Charles P,
Miami (D)
Sadler, Margaret A., Miami
(D)
St. Augustine Historical
Society, St. Augustine (Sb)
St. Lucie County Museum, Ft.
Pierce (Sb)
Samel, Alvin M., Miami (P)
Sands, Harry B., Nassau,
Bahamas (P)
Satin, David, Bay Harbor
Islands (P)
Scarborough, Mrs. Chaffee,
Miami (P)
Schafer, Mr. & Mrs. George,
Coral Gables (P)
Schelberg, Mrs. Richard,
Miami (P)
Scher, Mr. & Mrs. Frederick
R., Coral Gables (P)
Schliefer, Mrs. Elizabeth, Va
Gardens (P)
Schober, Warren, Miami (P)
Schreffler, Mrs. Forrest R.,
Miami (P)
Schwartz, Judge & Mrs. Alan,
Miami (D)
Schwartz, Elsa, Miami (P)
Segal, Mrs. Natalie, Miami (P)
Seitz, Patricia, Miami (D)
Selby Public Library, Sarasota
(Sb)
Seley, Ray B., Miami (P)
Serkin, Manuel, Coral Gables
(P)
Shank, H. W., Coral Gables (P)
Shapiro, Mr. & Mrs. Robert,
Coral Gables (P)
Sharer, Cyrus J., Rosemont,
PA (Ss)
Sharp, Harry Carter, Miami
(C)
Shaw, Henry Overstreet, Coral
Gables (P)
Shaw, Dr. Luelle, Coral Gables
(D)
Shaw, Mrs.W. F, South Miami
(P)
Shearston, Evelyn R., Miami
(PI
Shenandoah Jr, High School,
Miami (Sb)
Shenstone, Tiffin
Highleyman, Princeton,
NJ (P)
Sherman, Mrs. Ethel
Weatherly, Miami (P)


Sherman, Virginia C., Coral
Gables (D)
Shipley, Zannie May, Coral
Gables (P)
Shiver, Otis W., Miami (P)
Shiverick, Mrs. Thomas
Tobey, Miami (P)
Sibert, Mr J. D.,Miami (Ss)
Siegal, Loretta, Miami (Ss)
Simmonite,Col. Henry G.,
Coral Gables (P)
Simmons, Mr. & Mrs. Glen,
Homestead (P)
Simms, John G., Jr.,Miami (P)
Simon, Mr. & Mrs. Edwin 0.,
Miami (C)
Simpson, Richard D.,
Pompano Beach (P)
Sisselman, Mr. & Mrs.
Murray, North Miami
Beach (P)
Skelly, Charles W., Cocoa (Ss)
Skigen, Dr. & Mrs. Jack,
Miami (Sp)
Smather, Frank, Jr., Miami
(Ss)
Smiley, Dr. & Mrs. Karl,
Miami (P)
Smiley, Nixon, Miami (P)
Smith, Mrs. Avery C., Jr.,
Miami (P)
Smith, Mr. & Mrs. John E.,
Miami (D)
Smith, Mr. & Mrs. Luton,
Miami (P)
Smith, McGregor, Miami (D)
Smith, Mr. & Mrs. Robert L.,
Miami (P)
Smith, Walter P, Miami (Ss)
Smith, Mrs. William Burford,
Miami (P)
Smyser, Michael L., Miami
(P)
Snare, Rose Tower, Miami (P)
Snodgrass, Miss Dena,
Jacksonville (Ss)
Snyder, Mrs. Frederick R.,
Miami (P)
Southern Bell Tel. & Tel. Co.,
Miami (C)
Southern Illinois University,
Carbondale, IL (Sb)
South Florida Growers
Association, Goulds (D)
Souviron, Dr. R. R., Coral
Gables (D)
Spector, Mr. & Mrs. J.
Bernard, Miami Beach (P)







Members 93


Spinks, Mrs. Elizabeth, Miami
(P)
Stafford, Robert C., Miami (P)
Stamey, Ernest M., Hialeah
(D)
Stanbach, James C.,
Alexandria, VA (P)
Stanford, Dr Henry King,
Coral Gables (D)
Stanford University Library,
Stanford, CA (Sb)
Statewide Appraisal Services,
Miami (P)
Steams, Frank E, Miami (Ss)
Steams, Mrs. R. M., Miami
(P)
Steel, William C., Miami (Dl
Stembler, Mrs. William, Coral
Gables (P)
Stephens, RADM 1. J. (ret),
Miami (B)
Stephens, Mr. & Mrs. William,
Coral Gables (Sp)
Stetson University, Deland
(Sb)
Stevens, Mrs. Elizabeth,
Miami (P)
Stevens, Mr. & Mrs. Jack,
Miami (D)
Stewart, Mr. & Mrs. Chester
B., Miami (D)
Stewart, Dr. Harris B.. Jr.,
Coral Gables (P)
Stiles,Wade, Palm City (P)
Stimson, Mrs. Miriam M.,
Miami (P)
Stokes,Thomas J., Miami (P)
Stone, Mrs. A. J., Miami (P)
Stoneage Antiques, Miami (Pj
Straight, Dr. & Mrs. Jacob,
Miami (D)
Straight, Dr. William M.
Miami (P)
Stripling Insurance Agency,
Hialeah (D)
Sullivan, Catherine B., Bal
Harbour (Ss)
Sutcliffe, William H., Coral
Gables (Ss)
Sutton, Mrs. Norman E.,
Goulds (Ss)
Swan, Dr. John D., Miami (Ss)
Sweeney, Mrs. Edward C.,
Miami (Sp)
Sweet, George H., Miami (P)
Swenson, Dr. & Mrs. E C.,
Coral Gables (P)
Syskind, Mr. & Mrs. Eric,
Hallandale (P1


Tampa Public Library, Tampa
(Sb)
Tardif, Robert G., Miami (P)
Tartak, Mr. & Mrs. N,, Coral
Gables (P)
Tashiro, Joe, North Miami
Beach (P)
Taylor, Mrs. E A. S Miami
(D)
Taylor, Henry H., Miami (P)
Taylor, Mrs. Nina, Coral
Gables (Ss)
Teasley, T. H,, Coral Gables
(P)
*Tebeau, Dr. Charlton W..
Springfield, GA (HL)
Tebeau, Mrs. Violet H.,
Springfield, GA (D)
Telleria, John Michael, Ill,
Miami (P)
Tennessee State Library &
Archives, Nashville, TN
(Sb)
Tennis, Mrs. Ann, Miami (Ss)
*Tharp, Dr. Charles Doren,
South Miami (P)
Thatcher, John, Miami (P)
Thomas, Mr. & Mrs. Lowell.
Miami (P)
Thomas, Wayne, Tampa (P)
Thompson, Mr. & Mrs. Jon,
Miami (D)
Thompson, Kil. Coral Gables
(Ss)
Thompson, Mrs. Roberta,
Miami IP)
Thomson, Mrs. Parker, Coral
Gables (D)
Thoin. Dale A., Miami (P)
Thorpe, Fran Hutchings,
Miami P)
Thrift, Dr. Charles T.
Lakeland (P)
Tillotson, Mrs. John, Coral
Gables (P)
Todd, Eva, Miami (Ss)
Tongay, Mrs. Betty, Miami (P)
Toltenhoff, Mrs. J. R., Coral
Gables (D)
Town, Miss Eleanor F., Coral
Gables (D)
Trager, Mr. & Mrs. Joe, Miami
(P)
Traer, Mrs. /illa P, Miami (P)
Tralins. Robert. North Bay
Village (Ss)
Trammell, Mr. & Mrs. Wilson,
Miami (D)


Tranchida, Michael A., North
Miami (P)
Traurig, Robert, Miami (B)
Tribble, Byrd B., Miami (P)
TheTribune, Nassau, Bahamas
(C)
Trybus, Mr. & Mrs, John B.,
Key Biscayne (P)
Turner, Mr. & Mrs. Jack, Coral
Gables (P)
Turner, Mrs. Lawrence 0., Jr.,
Miami (P)
Tweed, Mrs. Carleton, Coral
Gables (Ss)
Twing, G. S., Coral Gables (D)

University of South Florida,
Tampa (Sb)
University of FLorida,
Gainesville (Sb)
University of Iowa, Iowa City,
]A (Sb)
University of Miami, Coral
Gables (Sb)
University of West Florida,
Pensacola (Sb)
University of Pennsylvania,
Philadelphia, PA (Sb)
Upshaw, Mrs. Florence Akin,
Miami (P)

Van Buren, Michael,
Marathon (P)
Vance, Mrs. Herbert 0., Coral
Gables (SpI
Van Dencnd, Mrs. Herbert,
Hawthorne. NJ (P)
Van Orsdel, C. D., Coral
Gables (D)
Vaughn, Bonnie, Coral Gables
(Ss)
Venney, Mr. & Mrs. R, E.,
Coral Gables (D)
Vergara, Dr. & Mrs. George,
Miami (P)
The Villagers, Coral Gables
(Sp)

Wakeman, Mrs. Charles H.,
Jr., Miami (P)
WaldbergMr. & Mrs. Abbott,
Miami (P)
Waldron, Mr. & Mrs. Edward
J.. Coral Gables (D)
Walker, Evan B., Miami (Pi
Walker, Mr. & Mrs Thomas.
Coral Gables (D)
Wallace, George R., Miami
Beach (D)






94 TEQUESTA


Ware, Mrs. JohnD.,Tampa(P)
Ware, Mrs.Willard M..Miami
Beach (P)
Warner, Susan, Miami (P)
Washington Federal Savings
& Loan Association,
Miami Beach (C)
Waters. Fred M., Jr., Coral
Gables (HL)
Watson. Ms. Amber, Fort
Myers Beach (Ss
Watson, Miss Hattie, Miami
(P}
Wegerdt, Mrs. Theodore,
Miami (P)
Weinkle, JulianT.. Coral
Gables (D)
Weintraub, Mrs. Sidney,
Miami (P)
Weinreb, Ann Henry, Miami
(D)
Weller, Mr. & Mrs. Arthur B..
Coral Gables (P)
Wenck, James H.. Miami (Dl
Wepman, Warren S., Miami
(D)
Werbiow, Dr. & Mrs. S. C..
Miami Beach (P)
West, Mr. & Mrs. Everett GC,
Ft. Lauderdale (D)
West, Ms. Patsy. Ft.
Lauderdale (P)
West Palm Beach Public
Library, West Palm Beach
(Sb)
Whigham, Mrs. Florence R.,
Miami (P)


White, Richard M.. Miami (P)
Whitlock, Mary, Coral Gables
ID)
Whitmer, Dr. Kenneth S.,
Miami (P)
Whittelsey, Katharine. Miami
(Ssl
Whitten, George E., Miami
Beach (P)
Wilkins, Woodrow Wilson,
Miami (D)
Wilkinson, Lawrence S.,
Miami Beach (D)
Willey, Reverend Seaver A.,
Miami (P)
Williams, Gordon L.. Miami
(P)
Wilson. Mrs. Gaines R.,
Miami (P)
Wilson. Nell G., Black
Mountain, NC (C)
*Wilson,Peyton L., Miami (P)
Wilson, Robert L., Miami (P)
Wimbush, Paul, Miami Beach
(P)
Winebrenner. L. M., Opa
Locka (P)
Winkelmann, Mr. Nikola,
Miami (P)
Wipprecht, Mrs. Marion,
Coral Gables (D)
Wirkas, Mr. & Mrs. Leonard
V., Miami (D)
Wisconsin State Historical
Society, Madison,Wl (Sb)
Withers, James G., Coral
Gables (HL)


Withers Van Line of Miami,
Miami (C)
Withers, Wayne E., Coral
Gables (HL)
Wolf, Mr. & Mrs. Gerald L.,
Miami (P)
Wolfe, Miss Rosalie, Miami
(P)
Wolfe, Thomas L.. Coral
Gables (C)
Wolfson,Col. Mitchell,
Miami (C)
Woodmansee, Mrs. R. B.,
Miami (P)
Woods, Dr. & Mrs. Frank M..
Miami (D)
*Woore, Mrs. A. Meredith,
Miami (P)
Wooten, Eudora Lyell, Miami
(D)
Wooten, James S., Miami (D)
Wright, Mrs. Edward, Miami
jP)
Wright, Dr. lone S Miami
Shores (D)
Wulf. Karline, Miami (Di

Young, Mr. & Mrs. J. H., Coral
Gables (P)
Young, Mary E.. Jupiter (P)
Young, Montgomery L.,
Miami (D)

seller, Mrs. Leila, Miami (P)
Zimmerman, Mr. & Mrs,
Louis, Miami Shores (P)
Zwerner, Mrs. Carl. Miami (P)




University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs