For some years ending about 1930, when a new High School Building to which the still-standing gymnasium was later added, a two-story red brick school house locate 100 yds or so west of the present gym, served as Bogata's elementary school. Someone will have to remind me where high school classes were meeting. The red brick school house had four classrooms on the ground floor, one on each corner: 1st grade on the SW, second on the SE, 3rd on the NE, and 4th on the SE. A central hall ran north and south, with the door on the south end handling traffic to the outdoor sanitary (?) facilities on the SW corner of the school ground. Each of the classrooms had a "cloakroom" adjoining it, with a potbellied coal stove surrounded by a vertical metal baffle that dispersed the heat upwards and downwards located at the "outside" end of the cloakroom. Each classroom had a blackboard that was actually black rather than green. To ask teacher's permission to visit the outdoor inconveniences, a child held up one or two fingers, according to need; if the matter were urgent, the child could stand up while raising the signal, ready for a quick dash when the teacher nodded. Upstairs there was an auditorium and two more classrooms. Can anyone out there supply a picture of this school house? I would particularly value a photo that shows the north door with its brass doorknob. If anyone happens to own that doorknob, please check to see if a patch of the skin of my tongue is still attached. During a freezing spell in the winter of '32-'33, A. D. Stephenson told me that icy brass tasted funny and I should taste the doorknob with the tip of my tongue. A. D. can not remember this incident----- Original Message ----- From: <drew-slate@charter.net> To: "jhowison" <jhowison@1starnet.com> Sent: Monday, March 31, 2003 8:37 PM Subject: Re: [TXREDRIV] just talk > John, > First let me say that I respect your views and appreciate your help on this > matter. > > The problem I have is this is not a case of eminent domain in the way that > it has been explained to me. My initial issue was with the Army Corp of > Engineers doing this, thus a govt agency taking the land of owners without > their consent. Since then, I have been told this is being done by PRIVATE > companies and organizations. Is this correct or not? If it is then Eminent > Domain shouldn't apply because eminent domain is the act of the govt taking > land and giving some compensation according to the Constitution, Article 5 I > believe. Sidenote, compensation is not explained or defined at any place in > the said document. This doesn't scare you? > > Also, everyone that has been in some kind of favor for this keeps talking > in dreams to me about the economy of the county and all of the mountains of > money it will produce. This is nothing more than a dream. This area will > not grow until the larger metro areas grow out to it. Simply look at the > surrounding counties of DFW. Some of them were very very bad off until > Dallas and Fort Worth started booming in the 90s because of the economy. I > saw my mother's hometown go from a 3A to a middle sized 5A high school in a > few short years. I have seen communities of a few hundred go to tens of > thousands over the last 10 years. Why? Because the larger town couldn't > hold it and the people wanted to be spread out a little more. There are > still no major companies in these smaller communities and alot of the > utilities they get come from Dallas or Fort Worth. Believe me on this one, > I have been researching it for the last 3 years trying to figure out where I > can buy some land and a new home without going in the hole $250K. > > Yes, there have been times in the past that the small guy loses but there > have also been just as many that the small guy wins. Just recently, > Wal-Mart tried in two locations in the metroplex to force people to move and > also endanger certain wildlife. Both situation they lost and built in a > different location that was more pleasing to the community. We have these > fights constantly around here and the results are pretty well split. There > was an old lady that keep her house on S. Cooper in Arlington for about 5 > years until she died, it was sitting in front of the brand new mall they > built at the time. She wouldn't move the town people backed her. > > Also, I doubt very very seriously that this lake project would ripple > effect 100,000s of jobs. This quite a big step since FW only has a few > hundred thousand and it is the 4 or 5th largest city in the state. I can > see the county maybe tripling in size and that would be good, but nothing to > produce what some people are thinking. There is nothing wrong with dreaming > until it is time to make the decision. Then reality sets in and that is > what is happening in this project I believe. > > Bottom line: WE have the power to do what it RIGHT. What is right is > leaving the dead to rest in peace and working around them. > > Thanks for the stimulating discussion. Most people back off and run away > when someone disagrees with them. You are the only one that has continued > the conversation when I question the opposite view. Actually, I am not sure > what is "best" for the county since I don't know it that well, but I know > making people rethink their view helps everyone. > > Drew > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "jhowison" <jhowison@1starnet.com> > To: <drew-slate@charter.net> > Sent: Monday, March 31, 2003 6:09 PM > Subject: Re: [TXREDRIV] just talk > > > > Drew, you might want to "Google" for "eminent domain" to find that there > are > > those you will agree with and those not. The doctrine evolved as a way > the > > good of the many could be served with minimum injury to the few. History > > suggests to me that when hundreds of thousands of jobs are balanced > against > > my family homesite and the removal of my family graves to a new site, I am > > going to lose; and that it will be the same for those who want no damage > to > > the environment vs. minimal damage to the environment. > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: <drew-slate@charter.net> > > To: "jhowison" <jhowison@1starnet.com> > > Sent: Sunday, March 30, 2003 9:41 PM > > Subject: Re: [TXREDRIV] just talk > > > > > > > Hi John, > > > > > > Thanks for the input. I am beginning to get a grasp on some of this. > > The > > > problem I have though is this little section that you wrote about... > > > > > > The Marvin Nichols site, not yet defined in detail, will indeed flood > some > > > > > gravesites and other "heritage"sites, including ones in Red River > > > County. > > > > > The Authority will have to pay for the graves' relocation, the > amount > > > > > varying according to the expense of the move. Just as in the case > of > > > > > highway construction, the land of private owners whose land will be > > > > covered or "mitigated" for the project will be bought from them by > > > time-honored > > > > > procedures, on the "eminent domain" principle. Your dictionary can > > > > define this phrase better than I can. > > > > > > Honestly, this is deeply disturbing to me. Allowing our government and > > > large companies to eliminate our history is quite a big problem that has > > > been happening for years. This needs to stop. These type of projects > > > justify their proposals by things like estimated revenues and progress. > > > Well, take it from someone that lives in a fairly large town, Fort > Worth, > > > this is not always true. Not to long ago, Dallas had a similar issue > with > > > an expansion of a major road. After all of the news stations got > involved > > > and many many citizens a cemetery was moved the proper way but under > MAJOR > > > protest. To bad really, but that is done in the name of progress. > > > > > > The problem is, the land owners get their money and rightfully so, but > > what > > > do those that can't defend themselves get. They get moved from the > place > > > they wanted to be their final resting place. If someone can't see the > > > problem with that I would ask them if they would like it if their > parents > > or > > > grandparents were dug up and moved for the purpose of someone else to > make > > > money. Not to mention historical sites that will never be able to be > > > visited by the next generation. I know I wouldn't be happy if it was > the > > > Slate or Bluff Cemeteries in danger. I would bet Jim Giddens wouldn't > > like > > > it if the Concord Cemetery was in danger. > > > > > > I don't know how big of a history buff you are, but I am a huge one and > > love > > > to visit old sites and battlefields. This is becoming harder and harder > > > because our society today doesn't care about this sort of thing. They > are > > > more worried about money and progress. Well, that is all fine and good, > > but > > > I have been all over this country and there are plenty of places that > have > > > no historical value or any other value for that matter that could be > > > developed for these type of needs, lakes, power plants, urban areas, > etc. > > > The reason they are not is because of two things, greed and closeness. > We > > > all want to have it all and within a few miles of each other. A great > > > example of this sort of situation is Civil War battlefields throughout > the > > > South. Some states protect them tremendously, some don't. > > > > > > I am not trying to cause any problems with my questions or comments, > just > > > trying to get people to wake up and see that this hobby that we love so > > much > > > is being threatened for what, money. Yes, it would probably help the > > > economy of the county, but it isn't going to put it back to where it was > > 100 > > > years ago. There are 100 counties just like RR over the state that > > struggle > > > every year and they seem to get by for the next. Big companies just > don't > > > come to a county because of one thing, ask Jack Co. about that one. > There > > > has to be a very solid infrastructure built up first and that takes > time. > > > You are correct though that water is a big part of this though, so keep > it > > > in the county and not sell it to an area that has more than enough now > and > > > many ways to expand it. There is nothing wrong with trying to improve > > one's > > > county or area, but not at the price of what other's fought and died > for. > > > > > > A little more of our history dies everyday in the name of progress. > Well, > > > it is time for those of us who are trying to preserve it a little, stand > > up > > > and say enough is enough. We can be more something without giving up > our > > > morals and sense of right and wrong. > > > > > > One last thing to keep in mind...DFW has plenty of lakes and water right > > > now. They are always improving this capacity. Why are they asking > > someone > > > else to build this lake? Because they don't want to do it in their own > > > backyard, bottom line. I live here, I know the people, believe me, they > > > don't do anything to help others, it's all about me me me. Welcome to > > > Dallas! > > > > > > Thanks for the input and information. It has been very helpful. Sorry > > > about the soapbox... > > > > > > Drew > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "jhowison" <jhowison@1starnet.com> > > > To: <drew-slate@charter.net> > > > Sent: Sunday, March 30, 2003 8:58 PM > > > Subject: Fw: [TXREDRIV] just talk > > > > > > > > > > I sent this to the group, but it apparently never appeared. If you > have > > > > already seen it, I apologize for the duplication. > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > From: "jhowison" <jhowison@1starnet.com> > > > > To: <TXREDRIV-L@rootsweb.com> > > > > Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2003 3:21 PM > > > > Subject: Re: [TXREDRIV] just talk > > > > > > > > > > > > > Drew, this one is not a Corps of engineers lake -- theirs are flood > > > > control > > > > > projects, and the Marvin Nichols lake is a water resources project, > > > under > > > > > the control of the Sulphur River Basin Authority (SRBA)a body of > > > (unpaid) > > > > > local representatives appointed by the governor. I was a member of > > the > > > > > board a few years ago, so have some acquaintance with the project. > It > > > is > > > > > not expected to be built for a couple of decades, more or less. All > > > water > > > > > in Texas belongs to the State, not the landowners, and has been > > > developed > > > > > when required to meet the water needs of Texas' growing industry and > > > > growing > > > > > population. > > > > > > > > > > The Marvin Nichols site, not yet defined in detail, will indeed > flood > > > some > > > > > gravesites and other "heritage"sites, including ones in Red River > > > County. > > > > > The Authority will have to pay for the graves' relocation, the > amount > > > > > varying according to the expense of the move. Just as in the case > of > > > > > highway construction, the land of private owners whose land will be > > > > covered > > > > > or "mitigated" for the project will be bought from them by > > time-honored > > > > > procedures, on the "eminent domain" principle. Your dictionary can > > > > define > > > > > this phrase better than I can. > > > > > As has always been the experience throughout Texas, the water > > > impounded > > > > > will be a tremendous economic and fiscal boon to the area. > Professors > > > at > > > > > North Texas State University estimate that even at today's prices > the > > > > > economic benefit to the area, conservatively estimated, will be well > > up > > > in > > > > > the $Nine-figure range. Red River County's 80-year economic decline > > > will > > > > be > > > > > reversed. > > > > > Naturally some affected landowners (particularly heirs of the folks > > > listed > > > > > in Lawrence and Sue Dale's Red River County cemetery book) are up in > > > arms > > > > . > > > > > For some reason, lake projects always arouse a lot more vocal > > opposition > > > > of > > > > > this kind than do highway projects, which often involve much more > > > private > > > > > land. > > > > > Fortunately, the law creating the SRBA gives control over the > > > arrangements > > > > > for financing the project (which will cost up in ten figures) to the > > > > Region. > > > > > After water is reserved for the needs of the area, the DFW > metroplex, > > > > which > > > > > will buy or market most of the SRBA bonds, will be the principal > user > > of > > > > the > > > > > impounded water. > > > > > > > > > > If anyone is interested, I could post SRBA's address so that > questions > > > can > > > > > be more authoritatively answered. > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > > From: "DREW SLATE" <drew-slate@charter.net> > > > > > To: <TXREDRIV-L@rootsweb.com> > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2003 8:35 AM > > > > > Subject: Re: [TXREDRIV] just talk > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Is this new lake the one that will be over on the > > > > > > Bowie/Red River county line? I have spoken with Lawrence > > > > > > about a new lake that is going to cause some serious > > > > > > cemetery problems. It appears in present plans that there > > > > > > will be a few cememteries that will be UNDER water. > > > > > > Anyone have any information on this? I will dig up the > > > > > > last email I got my Lawrence on it and maybe that will > > > > > > help. If I remember correctly it will in the SE area of > > > > > > the county. > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > Drew Slate > > > > > > Fort Worth, Tx > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, 26 Mar 2003 04:55:12 -0600 > > > > > > "jhowison" <jhowison@1starnet.com> wrote: > > > > > > >Thanks, Sam, for the reminder. The "Main Street" project > > > > > > >is really an > > > > > > >upper. Becky Hale is the Honcho, and doing a super job. > > > > > > > Any alums visiting > > > > > > >Clarksville will be glad they stopped by her "shop" on > > > > > > >the north side of the > > > > > > >square. > > > > > > >Unfortunately, Clarksville's economy won't turn around > > > > > > >until they build > > > > > > >Marvin Nichols lake, but that is some years in the future > > > > > > >-- some folks > > > > > > >oppose the lake anyway. But we can hope that the > > > > > > >county's economy has > > > > > > >already "bottomed out." > > > > > > >----- Original Message ----- > > > > > > >From: "sam embrey" <sembrey@cox-internet.com> > > > > > > >To: <TXREDRIV-L@rootsweb.com> > > > > > > >Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2003 3:03 AM > > > > > > >Subject: [TXREDRIV] just talk > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> I feel sure that many of you know already, but in case > > > > > > >>you don't, pull up > > > > > > >the Paris News on your computer, and you will find it > > > > > > >full of Clarksville > > > > > > >happenings. Also, for a change, most of it seems good, > > > > > > >and GOD knows it is > > > > > > >time some of the bad stuff is not the main issues. Who > > > > > > >knows, the old girl > > > > > > >might be on it's way back, at least we can hope so. > > > > > > >> Sam > > > > > > >> Paris > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >