ShareThis Page

Oyler discusses Whiskey Rebellion

| Wednesday, Aug. 1, 2018, 3:33 p.m.

For history buffs in this area, July is Whiskey Rebellion month — 224 years ago this month farmers in Western Pennsylvania initiated the first real resistance to our new federal government.

This year there were major celebrations of these events in Washington, Pa., at the Oliver Miller Homestead in South Park, and at Woodville Plantation.

We went to Washington for their festival the first weekend and to the Miller Homestead the second weekend.

Washington’s Festival was staged at two venues – downtown Washington and at Washington Park (Schneider’s Fort).

We went to the downtown celebration and had an excellent experience there. They re-enacted a number of Whiskey Rebellion incidents using Maiden Street between Strawberry and Maiden as a stage.

We especially enjoyed the re-enactment of Albert Gallatin’s well-known speech to a convention of the rebels at Parkison’s Ferry (now Monongahela) on Aug. 14, 1794, in which he persuaded them to reject David Bradford’s pleas for violence in favor of negotiating with the federal officials. The gentleman re-enacting Gallatin was excellent as were the folks in his audience.

Our tour of the David Bradford House was an eye-opener. If John Neville was the wealthiest man the area, Bradford must have been a close second. The handsome stone house must have been a sharp contrast to its log cabin neighbors. And the magnificent interior furnishings further emphasize that contrast.

Unfortunately we didn’t have time to visit the Schneider’s Fort site and the military re-enactments there; next year we will go there first!

The following weekend we went to the Oliver Miller Homestead and witnessed another impressive re-enactment, the attempt of federal Marshall David Lenox to serve a writ on farmer William Miller that required him to appear in Federal court in Philadelphia for failing to pay the excise tax on his still.

This re-enactment seemed even more relevant when we were able to see the actual still that was involved and to appreciate the consequence of the excise tax on the average farmer. We were told that Miller’s still had a capacity of thirty gallons and that the tax was three dollars a month for each month the still was operated. This apparently was a significant burden for the Millers and their neighbors.

It is easy to understand the farmers’ anger, which was compounded by the general opinion that the federal government was not doing enough to protect them against the hostile Indians. It is also easy to understand the collapse of their resistance when the large federal army finally arrived.

I have had very little success determining if any of the settlers in our immediate region were involved in the revolt. We know Christian Lesnett stayed out of it, because of his respect for John Neville. So far I have been unable to get a copy of the list of sixty farmers to whom Marshall Lenox served writs; that would be of some help.

We are indeed fortunate to live in an area with such a rich historical heritage and which is peopled with so many people committed to preserving and celebrating it.

John Oyler is a Tribune-Review contributing writer. He can be reached at 412-343-1652 or . Read more from him at .

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.

click me