Fight over the battlefield [Princeton]

Princetonian ^ | Tuesday, February 20, 2007 | Michael Scharff

[Pharmboy]

This is the battlefield I visit most often. It should not be violated.

In the picture above, you are looking from the British lines in what was an apple orchard toward the charging Americans.

[Dog Gone]

The owners are pretty much entitled to do with it as they want. If some society wants to dictate its use, it should buy it.

I think our Founding Fathers would have agreed with that.

[Pharmboy]

The Flag of the Grand Union, 1775-1777.

The Red Cross of St. George and the White Cross of St. Andrew with 13 red/white stripes.

The short list for the RevWar/Colonial History/Gen. Washington ping list. For the more esoteric and/or local stories. Freepmail me to get ON or OFF the BIG or Short list.

[Pharmboy]

Perhaps you missed this point:

Critics of the planned development say the Institute, situated on over 500 acres of wooded and open property, has plenty of land to build on without compromising the small tract adjacent to the eastern edge of the battlefield, which is now a state park.

[george76]

do you have a map ?

[Clemenza]

Let's not forget the oak where General Mercer was mortally wounded.

I frequently walk around the battlefield, as it is very close to my apartment.

[Dog Gone]

I think you're reading it wrong. They want to control the tract which is outside but adjacent to the state park.

[Pharmboy]

Here's a good one:

In the map, the area between Mahwood, Mercer and Sullivan is the area of the current Battlefield State Park. I am not quite sure of the area under dispute, but I think it is just a bit north of "Sullivan." And, BTW, he is the Sullivan that "Sullivan Street" in Greenwich Village in NYC is named for.

[Pharmboy]

Well, that oak went down. But, as you know, they have replanted a young tree on the spot.

[Pharmboy]

"Members of the Princeton Battlefield Society — a volunteer group dedicated to preserving the Revolutionary War site — claim that the parcel is part of the original battlefield and must be saved."

Perhaps you are reading this wrong.

[Dog Gone]

No, I read that right. If they want the tract to be preserved or perhaps added to the state park, they should buy it instead of insisting that the owners treat it as if it's part of the state park.

[Clemenza]

I know. I was lucky enough to see it when it was still there. When I moved here back in November, however, I went looking for it, then was told the news by a fellow visitor.

I like to think of the oak as "eternal" in spirit, which is kind of pagan, but appropriate for the circumstances.

[Pharmboy]

Oh please...there's plenty of land that they have that they can use away from the battlefield. If they do not want to be reasonable about one of the most hallowed pieces of land in this country, then the hell with them.

And if you have no understanding of what this place means to Americans, then learn about it or go pound sand. G'bye...

[Cagey]

Thanks for the head's up, Pharmboy. I'm putting this battlefield on my must visit list and I hope it remains as it is now.

[Dog Gone]

You want the right to control other people's property. For free.

If that 25 acres is so hallowed, then BUY it you cheapskate.

[Pharmboy]

Go back to wherever your kind goes, you crossdressing pervert.

[Dog Gone]

Really? My suggestion that you should pay to control someone else's private property makes me a cross-dressing pervert?

How about I say that your house was the site of a sacred Indian battle, and you should get the hell off of it?

Does that make you a cross-dresser?

[Pharmboy]

Nope...not at all. I just saw your home page. And I apologize...cross-dressing mook is what I meant to say.

[Pharmboy]

From your home page:

"I moved to Tom DeLay's congressional district, joined Free Republic, abandoned the cute cheerleader outfit, and the rest is history."

Yecch.

[Dog Gone]

You apologized so you could insult me again. That is so clever and so responsive to my arguments about private property.