Among the brightest and most sparkling jewels of all is Coralie Runyon Jones. I guess it is no surprise that I would include her among people who have made remarkable contributions to the town where we live. And indeed, she certainly has.
Coralie was born in western Kentucky. Her father was a lawyer and a Presbyterian Minister (curious combination) and her mother, a concert pianist. Coralie would play under the grand piano while her mother practiced, which was a daily routine. Somehow, the proximity of all that music infected Coralie's soul, and she has been one of music's most ardent missionaries.
Coralie came to Maysville around 1940 as a freshly college-graduated teacher. She went to work for the Mason County school board and her assignment was to teach music, of all things, at Orangeburg school. In Orangeburg, at the time, singing was relegated, privately, to the shower, and publicly, to church on Sunday morning. That state of affairs was not long to be.
One of the things which has distinguished Coralie Runyon Jones is that she is very assertive and she brought that quality with her when she first arrived on our scene. Almost all of the boys at Orangeburg hoped to be a basketball star; few of them ever thought they'd wind up in a choral group under the direction of the newest staff/teacher in the school. But wind up they did. And soon, they, along with the girls, were loving every minute. There was no slacking off. The music was classical and difficult. And the execution, precise. She would have it no other way.
It wasn't long until her choir was noticed by the Maysville School System, always thought to be the superior educational opportunity in our area. Shortly, Coralie was recruited to preside over the music program of the Maysville schools. Here, she worked wonders with students at all levels. She had met John Farris in college and prevailed on the administration to offer him a job directing the high school band. They worked together for years and Maysville's band was the envy of the state. Coralie always took groups of singers to the Morehead contest and consistently received superior ratings with almost every entry. In short, Coralie and John Farris introduced Maysville to good music and it has thrived ever since.
I can't remember what grade I was in, but it was announced that any student who wanted to go to the Good Friday service would be excused from school for the afternoon. Well, you know, any excuse to get out of school, particularly on a lazy spring afternoon. I left the school and went down town to the Presbyterian Church for the service. Everything had been removed from the chancel, including the pulpit, the lecturn, the altar and the organ. Filling the organ and choir loft, as well as the chancel were the members of the Maysville Civic Chorus, an organization created and directed by Coralie Runyon. There was a lady named Mrs. Calvert, Charlie Calvert's great aunt, who played the organ and another lady, brought in by Coralie, who played the harp. The sanctuary was full to overflowing, but I had a seat where my grandmother had always sat. The music was The Seven Last Words by a French composer, duBois. And it began. . . .
I sat there mesmerized. I didn't stir. And what started as an excuse to skip school became an experience so enlightening that I have never forgotten that day. It was the beginning of my lifelong love affair with classical music and with the phenomenon of Coralie Runyon, not yet Jones. The music lasted maybe 45 minutes to an hour, maybe not that long, but I don't remember breathing once from beginning to end. It was sublime.
Actually, I was frightened of Coralie for years and years after that experience. I loved music, but I regarded her as so far superior to anything I could ever achieve that I simply couldn't approach her. By this time, she was no longer teaching at Maysville; perhaps she was teaching at Ripley, wherever.
One evening at a cocktail party given by Bill and Zoe Chamness, I, with the aid of libation, got up my nerve to talk to Coralie, and found her delightful; still powerful and demanding, but simply delightful. I asked her if she could teach me to play Schubert's Ave Maria and she looked at me and said, "Of course I can. That wouldn't be any trouble at all." And so, during the next four to five years, with a piano lesson every week, I learned the Ave Maria and some other pieces as well, as you might imagine.
What Coralie did with the Maysville Civic Chorus, she did years later with the Maysville Community College Choir. The first time I heard them was at a practice session, again at the Presbyterian Church. This time, Jim Clarke was playing the organ, and the sound of the music was etherial. The acoustics in that church are superb, and the music she made there was better. She took the group to Lexington to sing in the Singletary Center, and the chairman of the UK music department required his faculty to attend so that they would know what could be done with a local choir under the right direction.
Coralie Runyon Jones continues, at 87 years of age, to present quality music, both vocal and string, to the public on a regular basis. Her next undertaking will involve the melding of the Limestone Chorale (her singers) with the UK Symphony Orchestra, an event you should be looking forward to.
So, how should we sum up this most sparkling jewel of Maysville? Each of you remembers a few exceptional teachers in high school, and, perhaps, college. I remember Flossie Jones, Dean Turnipseed, Bob Hellard, Bob Wilcox and Orville Hayes, every one of them now dead. But they, like Coralie, were gifted teachers, endowed with the ability to teach and explain in a way students didn't forget. Each brought a certain moral authority, a self confidence and a love of what they did to their respective jobs. Coralie always exemplified these rarest of qualities and, like the others, went beyond the job description in everything she undertook. If you will allow me one more anecdote, Coralie, when she taught at Mason County High School, took her choir to Europe during the summer on several occasions. Prior to the trips, there was music to be learned (perfectly); there was money to be raised to help choir members whose families were struggling; there were travel arrangements to be made, including transportation, hotels and singing engagements. These trips were monumental undertakings. And, as always, Coralie went the extra mile; she set formal dinner place-settings in the cafeteria, showing every student what each fork, spoon and knife were for, and when to use them. She discussed appropriate dress. She prepared lesson plans regarding the sites the students would see and explained why those sites were significant. The trip was a learning experience in every sense, and she did not want any of her students to be embarrassed, nor did she want the group as a whole to be embarrassed by what might appear to be a lack of polish. And those kids, long since adults, always reflected a bright light on their teacher and their home. And, but for their singing for Coralie, they learned things that they would never have conceived.
God richly bless Coralie Runyon Jones for her light held high these many years; we, ourselves, have already been blessed by her presence and work in the home we call Maysville.
Wednesday, October 28, 2009
Thursday, October 22, 2009
Expanding the Sin to Collect the $$$
Cincinnati television is saturated with ads regarding Issue No. 3. Some favor establishing casinos in Cincinnati and Columbus; some oppose. Regardless, lots of money is being spent! In Kentucky, there are proposals to permit video gambling at the racetracks. When the current House Speaker, Greg Stumbo, was Attorney General, he opined that the Kentucky Constitution permitted the Legislature to enact gambling legislation to help the thoroughbred industry and the racetracks. The republican-controlled Senate has thus far refused to cooperate in passing such a law. Now, Senate republicans are proposing a vote at the next general election amending the Constitution to permit such gambling, primarily because polls show that no such amendment would pass.
Much of the advertising in Ohio is deceptive. One ad depicts a bus load of people taking a trip "out of state" to a casino destination and reasoning that, if casinos were allowed at home, all that money would stay in Ohio. Another ploy is the creation of jobs, while still another ad says that casinos actually kill jobs. Who's right? I don't really know.
What I do wonder is who is putting up the money for these very expensive ads. I suspect most of it paying for the "pro" ads is coming from out of state; I have no idea where it's coming from to pay for the "anti" ads.
In the 1960's, the United States had (and probably still has) a huge Airforce base in Guam. Most of the B-52 bombing raids over Viet Nam were staged from there. Guam is a U. S. possession. When the commanding general decided to permit slot machines in the officer and enlisted clubs, during the first week, sales in the commissary (military term for grocery store) dropped $800,000. That was (and is) a huge amount of money. The Navy rules did permit slot machines in Navy O and enlisted clubs, but required that the machines return 96 cents of every dollar gambled. The navy was the smallest service on Okinawa and the O club there was in a quonset hut. Mixed drinks were $0.15 each and, during happy hour (everyday from 4 to 6:30) they were a nickle. Steak dinners were $2.50 and lobster was slightly higher. The slot machines, returning 96% to the gambler, paid the expenses and subsidized the food and drink costs.
The point is that there is phenomenal money involved with gambling. Those huge hotels in Las Vegas didn't just drop out of the sky. Casino profits paid for them in a very short time, and the rest is profit.
In Kentucky, any adult is free to gamble. Poker games are legal if played by a group of friends, all taking the same risk. The general rule is that gambling is illegal only when the "house" takes a cut. Exceptions to that general rule are racetracks (pari-mutuel betting) and licensed charitable gaming (bingo games). In both cases, the gambling is sponsored and the sponsor takes a cut. The biggest exception is, of course, the "Lottery."
As a rule, I think people should be reasonably free to do what they want; to make the choices they want to make. That said, both the federal and state governments have always taxed "sin." There are taxes on cigarettes, liquor, beer, wine and, in Kentucky, gambling on the ponies. The state of Nevada lives on its taxes derived from Las Vegas and Reno and is joined, more recently, by New Jersey. These are traditions imbedded in the governmental philosophy of America.
I guess gambling, smoking and drinking are characterized as "sins" because, as some believe, they are prohibited by the Bible. More likely these days, it involves the social injury done to self and family from excessive practices involving those things. Regardless of your viewpoint, there is no doubt that gambling can have a deleterious effect on a parent's ability to provide for his or her children, a husband for his wife, and a debtor for his creditor. When grocery store sales drop $800,000 because, all of a sudden, slot machines are permitted, that has to say something about misplaced priorities. And, these sins fall with disproportionate weight on people with limited means. A wealthy person can afford to lose several hundred dollars a week without affecting lifestyle; a poor person cannot and he, along with his dependents suffer for it. Another trusim is, unfortunately, that there are many, many more poor people than rich.
I have a problem with the government, state or federal, initiating or expanding "sin" for the purpose of collecting more revenue. Other than teen-agers, who do you suppose would favor dropping the legal drinking age in order to collect more money for the government? What if we allowed children 12 and over to smoke? These questions are absurd, of course, but the effects of gambling can be just as devasting and all of the effort to legalize casinos and add slots to racetracks clearly are aimed at starting or expanding gambling.
In the final analysis, government-permitted and sponsored gambling (the Lottery for schools) are just an exercise in the abdication of responsibility of legislators who will do anything to get re-elected and, thus, anything to avoid raising taxes. Under our system, government operates no program, provides no benefit, nor spends any money unless approved by the legislators we elect. It is their responsibility to raise the money to pay the cost; and, in my opinion, increasing the "sin" is a damned poor way of doing it.
Much of the advertising in Ohio is deceptive. One ad depicts a bus load of people taking a trip "out of state" to a casino destination and reasoning that, if casinos were allowed at home, all that money would stay in Ohio. Another ploy is the creation of jobs, while still another ad says that casinos actually kill jobs. Who's right? I don't really know.
What I do wonder is who is putting up the money for these very expensive ads. I suspect most of it paying for the "pro" ads is coming from out of state; I have no idea where it's coming from to pay for the "anti" ads.
In the 1960's, the United States had (and probably still has) a huge Airforce base in Guam. Most of the B-52 bombing raids over Viet Nam were staged from there. Guam is a U. S. possession. When the commanding general decided to permit slot machines in the officer and enlisted clubs, during the first week, sales in the commissary (military term for grocery store) dropped $800,000. That was (and is) a huge amount of money. The Navy rules did permit slot machines in Navy O and enlisted clubs, but required that the machines return 96 cents of every dollar gambled. The navy was the smallest service on Okinawa and the O club there was in a quonset hut. Mixed drinks were $0.15 each and, during happy hour (everyday from 4 to 6:30) they were a nickle. Steak dinners were $2.50 and lobster was slightly higher. The slot machines, returning 96% to the gambler, paid the expenses and subsidized the food and drink costs.
The point is that there is phenomenal money involved with gambling. Those huge hotels in Las Vegas didn't just drop out of the sky. Casino profits paid for them in a very short time, and the rest is profit.
In Kentucky, any adult is free to gamble. Poker games are legal if played by a group of friends, all taking the same risk. The general rule is that gambling is illegal only when the "house" takes a cut. Exceptions to that general rule are racetracks (pari-mutuel betting) and licensed charitable gaming (bingo games). In both cases, the gambling is sponsored and the sponsor takes a cut. The biggest exception is, of course, the "Lottery."
As a rule, I think people should be reasonably free to do what they want; to make the choices they want to make. That said, both the federal and state governments have always taxed "sin." There are taxes on cigarettes, liquor, beer, wine and, in Kentucky, gambling on the ponies. The state of Nevada lives on its taxes derived from Las Vegas and Reno and is joined, more recently, by New Jersey. These are traditions imbedded in the governmental philosophy of America.
I guess gambling, smoking and drinking are characterized as "sins" because, as some believe, they are prohibited by the Bible. More likely these days, it involves the social injury done to self and family from excessive practices involving those things. Regardless of your viewpoint, there is no doubt that gambling can have a deleterious effect on a parent's ability to provide for his or her children, a husband for his wife, and a debtor for his creditor. When grocery store sales drop $800,000 because, all of a sudden, slot machines are permitted, that has to say something about misplaced priorities. And, these sins fall with disproportionate weight on people with limited means. A wealthy person can afford to lose several hundred dollars a week without affecting lifestyle; a poor person cannot and he, along with his dependents suffer for it. Another trusim is, unfortunately, that there are many, many more poor people than rich.
I have a problem with the government, state or federal, initiating or expanding "sin" for the purpose of collecting more revenue. Other than teen-agers, who do you suppose would favor dropping the legal drinking age in order to collect more money for the government? What if we allowed children 12 and over to smoke? These questions are absurd, of course, but the effects of gambling can be just as devasting and all of the effort to legalize casinos and add slots to racetracks clearly are aimed at starting or expanding gambling.
In the final analysis, government-permitted and sponsored gambling (the Lottery for schools) are just an exercise in the abdication of responsibility of legislators who will do anything to get re-elected and, thus, anything to avoid raising taxes. Under our system, government operates no program, provides no benefit, nor spends any money unless approved by the legislators we elect. It is their responsibility to raise the money to pay the cost; and, in my opinion, increasing the "sin" is a damned poor way of doing it.
Monday, October 19, 2009
The Nobel Peace Prize and Barack Obama
(Perhaps an explanatory note. I began this comment last Monday, October 12, so if it seems somewhat dated, it is.)
The Talking Heads went wild this past week-end over the news that the Committee had awarded Barack Obama the Nobel Peace Prize. The almost universal reaction was why. Obama has certainly achieved some notable accomplishments , e.g. becoming the first African American to be elected President, but being elected president has not heretofore qualified anyone else for the prize. Thomas Friedman, of the New York Times said in his column this morning that perhaps relief by Obama of the angst caused in European capitals by his predecessor was primary in the committee's thinking. In any event, if there is any fault in the award, it is certainly not that of Obama, who was as surprised as anyone by the news.
I don't know why we are so concerned with this matter. The prize is not an American one. I don't think we have a representative on the committee. Neither do I know for sure if there are binding regulations or rules prescribing what must characterize the award. It is simply nice on occasion to hear our Chief Magistrate, whoever he or she might be, complimented and appreciated, rather than denigrated and held in derision.
On the subject of Obama, I have thought him as charismatic as any president we have had since John Kennedy. His victories in the primaries, his nomination, his rhetoric and his overwhelming defeat of his opponent in the general election were all astounding. Most astounding was (and is) his appeal to people who have not heretofore really participated in the political process. It has been a very long time since five and ten dollar political contributions turned into millions, indeed, a sufficient amount to finance a presidential bid. Oh, I'm sure when it began to be obvious that he was going to get the nomination, Barack then began to garner some gifts from the heavy hitters. But until that time, he was the candidate of the little fellow, and I don't think he has changed.
But there is a hugh difference between the politics of election and the politics of governance. Even though the polls say he has dropped in popularity with the people in this country, I suspect those ratings will rise again after the negative ballyhoo subsides regarding health reform. But it is in conjunction with the effort to accomplish his priorities that Obama will ultimately be judged when the history of the early 21st century is penned. In the politics of governance, whether in Washington, the state capitals or on the local scene, the arena is ugly and the stakes are high. Figuratively, those arenas are just as fierce as those of the Colisseum in Rome 2000 years ago. There are lions and tigers everywhere; toga draped men carry long daggers in the folds of their garments, and delight in the swift plunge at the jugular. This is, no less, the political game which always surfaces after the election and the one with which Obama finds himself surrounded.
The test of Obama's presidency will depend on his ability to get his way. That's a very simple statement of a profound truth and it is, in fact, the measure of the success of presidents from the first to the last. If Obama can prevail in fashioning a health care bill which truly reforms the system; if he can drag out of Congress a bill which provides real change regarding our enviromental habits; and, finally, if he can get his way by reforming the Wall Street does business, then his presidency will be a profound success. If he can't, he's wasting our time. There are an awful lot of very powerful people who have a large stake in the status quo and they won't give up easily. Most of them hate what he stands for and will fight him with every weapon in their armory. It remains to be seen who'll come out on top!
You will remember, perhaps, that President Kennedy was a charismatic person, young, very bright, loved sparring with the press, and they with him. And most people liked and looked up to him. But Jack Kennedy accomplished very little, actually. His main feat was to make us feel good about ourselves and about the New Frontier. But on the day he was murdered, his lasting contributions were very few. His death assured his prominent place in history.
We, who listened to Obama's inaugural address, felt the same optimism for the country's future. God forbid his murder merely to obtain a chair next to Jack Kennedy! God forbid it for any reason!
God speed, Barack Obama!
The Talking Heads went wild this past week-end over the news that the Committee had awarded Barack Obama the Nobel Peace Prize. The almost universal reaction was why. Obama has certainly achieved some notable accomplishments , e.g. becoming the first African American to be elected President, but being elected president has not heretofore qualified anyone else for the prize. Thomas Friedman, of the New York Times said in his column this morning that perhaps relief by Obama of the angst caused in European capitals by his predecessor was primary in the committee's thinking. In any event, if there is any fault in the award, it is certainly not that of Obama, who was as surprised as anyone by the news.
I don't know why we are so concerned with this matter. The prize is not an American one. I don't think we have a representative on the committee. Neither do I know for sure if there are binding regulations or rules prescribing what must characterize the award. It is simply nice on occasion to hear our Chief Magistrate, whoever he or she might be, complimented and appreciated, rather than denigrated and held in derision.
On the subject of Obama, I have thought him as charismatic as any president we have had since John Kennedy. His victories in the primaries, his nomination, his rhetoric and his overwhelming defeat of his opponent in the general election were all astounding. Most astounding was (and is) his appeal to people who have not heretofore really participated in the political process. It has been a very long time since five and ten dollar political contributions turned into millions, indeed, a sufficient amount to finance a presidential bid. Oh, I'm sure when it began to be obvious that he was going to get the nomination, Barack then began to garner some gifts from the heavy hitters. But until that time, he was the candidate of the little fellow, and I don't think he has changed.
But there is a hugh difference between the politics of election and the politics of governance. Even though the polls say he has dropped in popularity with the people in this country, I suspect those ratings will rise again after the negative ballyhoo subsides regarding health reform. But it is in conjunction with the effort to accomplish his priorities that Obama will ultimately be judged when the history of the early 21st century is penned. In the politics of governance, whether in Washington, the state capitals or on the local scene, the arena is ugly and the stakes are high. Figuratively, those arenas are just as fierce as those of the Colisseum in Rome 2000 years ago. There are lions and tigers everywhere; toga draped men carry long daggers in the folds of their garments, and delight in the swift plunge at the jugular. This is, no less, the political game which always surfaces after the election and the one with which Obama finds himself surrounded.
The test of Obama's presidency will depend on his ability to get his way. That's a very simple statement of a profound truth and it is, in fact, the measure of the success of presidents from the first to the last. If Obama can prevail in fashioning a health care bill which truly reforms the system; if he can drag out of Congress a bill which provides real change regarding our enviromental habits; and, finally, if he can get his way by reforming the Wall Street does business, then his presidency will be a profound success. If he can't, he's wasting our time. There are an awful lot of very powerful people who have a large stake in the status quo and they won't give up easily. Most of them hate what he stands for and will fight him with every weapon in their armory. It remains to be seen who'll come out on top!
You will remember, perhaps, that President Kennedy was a charismatic person, young, very bright, loved sparring with the press, and they with him. And most people liked and looked up to him. But Jack Kennedy accomplished very little, actually. His main feat was to make us feel good about ourselves and about the New Frontier. But on the day he was murdered, his lasting contributions were very few. His death assured his prominent place in history.
We, who listened to Obama's inaugural address, felt the same optimism for the country's future. God forbid his murder merely to obtain a chair next to Jack Kennedy! God forbid it for any reason!
God speed, Barack Obama!
Friday, October 9, 2009
Hot Button Issues and Elective Office
When Bernard Hargett and I began practicing law together, his father, Newell Hargett, then Postmaster, would drop by the office once in a while. He gave us a lot of good advice (which we sorely needed) and among the things he said, never to be forgotten, was, "Boys, don't ever get involved in a school fight or a church fight!" He simply meant that, regardless of the outcome, the lawyer(s) involved will make a ton of people mad as hell!
I didn't worry a whole lot about things when I was circuit judge, but there was one thing that kept me awake at night. Oh, not every night, of course, but I did spend a good deal of time thinking about what I would do if somebody filed a suit in my court challenging the hanging of the Ten Commandments in some government building, mayble the courthouse. It never happened and I was very grateful that the cup passed me by.
I remember when I first heard about the Supreme Court banning prayer in school. At first, I thought it was a terribly wrong ruling. After all, when I was in school, we all began the day with a short prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance and roll call. Bob Wilcox, one of Maysville's very best teachers, always wrote a different Bible verse on his black board every day, and he read it to us, in case we hadn't noticed it. People were always praying at ball games, in club meetings and at almost every other school activity you could name. And so, I wondered what those justices were thinking about.
When I found out a little bit more about it, it turned out that the case arose in a large metropolitan area where the majority of people were Christian, but there were substantial numbers of followers of other religions. Apparently, the saying of Christian prayers or New Testament Bible readings in school offended some of the children of the Jewish persuasion. In that context, the ruling made a little more sense to me.
It's now been thirty-five or forty years since the Supreme Court decided the landmark decision in this area of the law, but the passage of time has in no way quelled the rancor that has sprung up around the case. For many people, the Supreme Court was and remains a Godless den of heathens and infidels, bent on destroying the nation and depriving us of God's merciful beneficence. You might be interested that I have recently heard, although I cannot vouch for its truthfulness, that the ACLU is suing to have all religious symbols in national cemeteries (tombstone Crosses and Stars of David) removed. I doubt they'll get very far with that, but who knows.
Most people really don't understand exactly what the rationale of the decisions is. It all begins with the First Amendment to the Constitution which, where religion is concerned, bans both (a) the interference of the private practice of religion, and (b) the establishment of any religion by the government. These court opinions, of course, go on for page after page after page, but they always come back to these two clauses of the first amendment. I can't quote them exactly, and it's not important for these purposes; but all they really require is that the government cannot regulate, close, or in any way impede your church or your worship, if you choose to worship. By the same token, the government cannot endorse, promote or establish any religion whatever. When these things were written, the memory of the European and English wars over religion were much fresher in people's minds than today. Mary Queen of Scots, a Roman Catholic, was executed by her cousin, Queen Elizabeth I, an Anglican; and while the latter was afraid that the former was after her throne, it all had its roots in religious swells. Henry VIII executed lots of people over religion, his versus theirs. And, if you will remember, the Colony of Maryland was populated principally by people who wanted to be free to practice Roman Catholicism without the interference and prejudice they had suffered in England.
So, in the United States after the Bill of Rights passed the Congress, the Marylanders could continue to practice their religion freely, as could any other American, regardless of the brand.
But it is the other clause, the "Establishment" clause that is causing the trouble today. When the Ten Commandments are posted in the Courthouse, the Judeo-Christian religious tradition is being promoted. Somebody in that government building wants the world to know that this or that county believes in God and follows God's laws. And it's not that God is being promoted above other religious traditions or faiths, it is that He is being promoted at all in the courthouse. The Constitution forbids it, and it always has!
Again, the government, state, local, or federal, cannot prohibit anyone from posting the Ten Commandments on the front of his or her home; nor can it stop Ford Motor, GE, Du Pont or any other private company from endorsing the Ten Commandments. All of that is permissible as long as it doesn't appear on public, government property or promoted by government agencies of any kind.
Now, having said that, do religious values come into play in the halls of government, the Congress, the Supreme Court or the local courthouse. Of course they do. Name a couple of the Ten Commandments.
"Thou shalt not steal." "Thou shalt not murder." "Thou shalt not bear false witness." These written commandments become our values, our sign posts of life. They teach and instruct our forebears, just as they do ourselves. And so, I submit that when you enter the courthouse as a juror, you're not required to check your values at the door. If you enter as a witness, you know what "false witness" means when you take the stand and swear to tell the truth.
The populace becomes so upset and vengeful at the idea that the Ten Commandments may not, under law, be posted in the Courthouse. But every person who subscribes to the Ten Commandments can carry them in his mind and heart into the courthouse; and no one, no one will stop him. Why this doesn't seem to be understood is a mystery to me.
If the case had come up while I was judge, I think I know what I would have done; but it would have taken one hell of a lot of courage.
I didn't worry a whole lot about things when I was circuit judge, but there was one thing that kept me awake at night. Oh, not every night, of course, but I did spend a good deal of time thinking about what I would do if somebody filed a suit in my court challenging the hanging of the Ten Commandments in some government building, mayble the courthouse. It never happened and I was very grateful that the cup passed me by.
I remember when I first heard about the Supreme Court banning prayer in school. At first, I thought it was a terribly wrong ruling. After all, when I was in school, we all began the day with a short prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance and roll call. Bob Wilcox, one of Maysville's very best teachers, always wrote a different Bible verse on his black board every day, and he read it to us, in case we hadn't noticed it. People were always praying at ball games, in club meetings and at almost every other school activity you could name. And so, I wondered what those justices were thinking about.
When I found out a little bit more about it, it turned out that the case arose in a large metropolitan area where the majority of people were Christian, but there were substantial numbers of followers of other religions. Apparently, the saying of Christian prayers or New Testament Bible readings in school offended some of the children of the Jewish persuasion. In that context, the ruling made a little more sense to me.
It's now been thirty-five or forty years since the Supreme Court decided the landmark decision in this area of the law, but the passage of time has in no way quelled the rancor that has sprung up around the case. For many people, the Supreme Court was and remains a Godless den of heathens and infidels, bent on destroying the nation and depriving us of God's merciful beneficence. You might be interested that I have recently heard, although I cannot vouch for its truthfulness, that the ACLU is suing to have all religious symbols in national cemeteries (tombstone Crosses and Stars of David) removed. I doubt they'll get very far with that, but who knows.
Most people really don't understand exactly what the rationale of the decisions is. It all begins with the First Amendment to the Constitution which, where religion is concerned, bans both (a) the interference of the private practice of religion, and (b) the establishment of any religion by the government. These court opinions, of course, go on for page after page after page, but they always come back to these two clauses of the first amendment. I can't quote them exactly, and it's not important for these purposes; but all they really require is that the government cannot regulate, close, or in any way impede your church or your worship, if you choose to worship. By the same token, the government cannot endorse, promote or establish any religion whatever. When these things were written, the memory of the European and English wars over religion were much fresher in people's minds than today. Mary Queen of Scots, a Roman Catholic, was executed by her cousin, Queen Elizabeth I, an Anglican; and while the latter was afraid that the former was after her throne, it all had its roots in religious swells. Henry VIII executed lots of people over religion, his versus theirs. And, if you will remember, the Colony of Maryland was populated principally by people who wanted to be free to practice Roman Catholicism without the interference and prejudice they had suffered in England.
So, in the United States after the Bill of Rights passed the Congress, the Marylanders could continue to practice their religion freely, as could any other American, regardless of the brand.
But it is the other clause, the "Establishment" clause that is causing the trouble today. When the Ten Commandments are posted in the Courthouse, the Judeo-Christian religious tradition is being promoted. Somebody in that government building wants the world to know that this or that county believes in God and follows God's laws. And it's not that God is being promoted above other religious traditions or faiths, it is that He is being promoted at all in the courthouse. The Constitution forbids it, and it always has!
Again, the government, state, local, or federal, cannot prohibit anyone from posting the Ten Commandments on the front of his or her home; nor can it stop Ford Motor, GE, Du Pont or any other private company from endorsing the Ten Commandments. All of that is permissible as long as it doesn't appear on public, government property or promoted by government agencies of any kind.
Now, having said that, do religious values come into play in the halls of government, the Congress, the Supreme Court or the local courthouse. Of course they do. Name a couple of the Ten Commandments.
"Thou shalt not steal." "Thou shalt not murder." "Thou shalt not bear false witness." These written commandments become our values, our sign posts of life. They teach and instruct our forebears, just as they do ourselves. And so, I submit that when you enter the courthouse as a juror, you're not required to check your values at the door. If you enter as a witness, you know what "false witness" means when you take the stand and swear to tell the truth.
The populace becomes so upset and vengeful at the idea that the Ten Commandments may not, under law, be posted in the Courthouse. But every person who subscribes to the Ten Commandments can carry them in his mind and heart into the courthouse; and no one, no one will stop him. Why this doesn't seem to be understood is a mystery to me.
If the case had come up while I was judge, I think I know what I would have done; but it would have taken one hell of a lot of courage.
Wednesday, October 7, 2009
Maysville JEWEL - Robert D. Vance
Well over twenty-five years ago, I met Bob Vance when he first arrived in town. I think it was 1972. When he first got here, Bob had an old blue Chevrolet car and otherwise, as he later told me, barely enough money to pay his first month's rent. He was married and had a very young child. He had attended and graduated from the University of Kentucky, sold Ford cars for Paul Miller in Lexington, had been trained as a stock broker for Bache & Company, and worked in the Cleveland Federal Reserve District as a Bank Examiner of trust departments. At one time or another, he had examined the trust department at the State National Bank, where he met Trust Officer Viola Owens and Bank President Douglas P. Newell.
Mr. Newell was getting along in years, and although his mind was very acute, he was beginning to have some physical problems. Even so, he worked like a mad man in his massive vegetable garden for 12 hours every Wednesday and Saturday and 8 hours most other days. Anyway, Mr. Newell and Mrs. Owens sought out and hired Bob Vance as Vice President of the bank.
For the first several years he lived here, Bob worked assiduously at his job. He got to know every bank employee and what they did and almost every bank customer, particularly if they banked in the downtown bank lobby. In two or three years, Mr.Newell and Bob had differences over some bank matter, and Mr. Newell threatened to fire him, indeed was fully intent on doing so. I never knew exactly what happened, but the firing was called off and Bob Vance, then Executive Vice President, became President of the State National Bank and Mr. Newell, the Chairman of its Board. By whatever title, Mr. Newell remained the boss until his death on January 1, 1976.
Bob was named a director of the Hayswood Hospital in about 1974, and he and Bob Zweigart carried the lion's share of the fight against the Steelworker's Union (I think) which was trying to unionize the hospital. There had earlier been union activity at various manufacturing companies in Maysville, so that the fight wasn't brand new to the area. But basically, in a union fight, management seeks to convince the labor force that they would be better off without a union. Some ugly things can happen during union organizing and many wouldn't have the gumption for the fight. Not so with Bob Vance or Bob Zweigart. They spent hours and hours a week talking to employees and determining their grievances. Finally, when the vote was taken, the union lost the election, not by a whole lot, but nonetheless, it was a loss. Then the Board of Directors began addressing the employees' grievances and fired the administrator; there was never another attempt to organize the hospital.
It wasn't long after that the idea of a local YMCA began to percolate through the community. This project became a cause celebre for Bob Vance, Bob Zweigart and Bob Blake. The three Bobs, as the fundraisers knew them, met daily before work at Bob Zweigart's office strategizing the fund raising effort. Those three men, with a little help from other volunteers, raised $3 million and the YMCA, once a dream, became a reality. The facility remains one of the most outstanding in the state, and is an incredible accomplishment for a community this size.
Continuing his career vector, Bob Vance decided to attend Rutger's University working toward a Masters Degree in Banking. It was one of those schools where you were given assignments, one per month, and you had to send in your work product by a certain date. My description might make it sound easy, but it certainly wasn't. The assignments entailed vast amounts of work after work, so to speak, and the submission of the work was often voluminous. Then for about two weeks every year, the student traveled to Rutgers for lectures, labs and whatever else you study at banking school. It's my recollection that the effort lasted three years. I do know that a final thesis was required, as well as a defense of the thesis before a jury of professors at the school.
While Bob Vance went through this rigorous training, he learned several things. First, he could read and interpret financial statements of individuals and corporations, a skill which few people possess. He could also assess a loan application and, from the information furnished by the prospective debtor, could analyze the prospects of re-paying the loan if made. Finally, Bob Vance learned to analyze a bank, using very sophisticated financial formulae and ratios, so that he could accurately assess the health of the bank he worked for as well as the health of his competitors, not to mention banks which might be purchased. Finally, and most important, Bob Vance understood debt and how to use it to his advantage.
Things went along pretty smoothly for several years after Mr. Newell died. The bank countined to prosper and to pay dividends. Deposits grew substantially, and everything was going well. It was then that Bob Vance noticed the Farmers and Traders Bank in Mt. Olivet. Using the knowledge he had gained at Rutgers, he first studied bank's financial statements, which are available at the Federal Reserve. He then arranged financing with a Lexington Bank and approached the president of the bank about selling it to him. His name has escaped me for the moment, but he apparently agreed to help Bob convince the bank's board of directors. With the help of Larry Banks, a Lexington corporate lawyer, Bob completed the purchase of the bank and immediately re-organized it. In this process, he met Norma Linville, then the cashier at Farmers and Traders, and they formed an association in the banking business which has lasted to this day. Norma was put in charge of the Mt. Olivet bank.
In those days, and perhaps today as well, the method by which one acquires a bank or, for that matter, any company, is to buy the bank and let the bank's profits pay off the acquisition loan to the financing bank. Because of the tax code, it is infinitely better to have the purchased bank restructure its capital into stock and bonds. The bonds pay interest, which the bank can deduct for tax purposes, and the holder of the bonds uses the interest to pay his debt to the financing bank. Since Bob held almost all of the bonds (and, for that matter, the stock) of the bank, the bank's profits were paid to him as interest so that the bank paid almost no income tax. Of course, Bob had to pay tax on the interest, but there was still enough left over to pay on his loan to the Lexington bank. This worked so well that Bob used the strategy to buy several other banks.
One of the reasons that his strategies worked so well was because of his attitude toward the regulators. The State National Bank was a bank chartered by the federal government (a national bank). All national banks were examined by the federal reserve bank as well as the FDIC. Most bankers despise bank examiners because they are looking for bankers' mistakes. Some mistakes are small infractions; some are major problems and all can be dealt with by the examiners with the most draconian means, should they be necessary. Bob always welcomed examiners, believing them to present learning opportunities. He forged a wonderful relationship with the Cleveland Federal Reserve, which proved most beneficial to his later banking acquisitions.
All the while, Bob had been accumulating State National Bank stock and became its largest shareholder.
He did not, however, own enough stock to control the bank. When Bob tried to utilize some synergies to cut costs both for the State National and the Farmers and Traders Bank (which he largely owned), some of the directors at State got very upset and thought he was scheming to have State pay expenses which would inure to the benefit of Farmers and Traders. None of this was true, but a real rift developed between those directors and the directors who supported Bob. And so, as the Annual Meeting of Stockholders date approached, the anti-Vance group was gathering proxies from shareholders everywhere. They were successful in keeping these activities a secret, so that when the day for the meeting arrived, they had almost enough proxies to elect a majority on the board, that majority being committed to firing Vance; and Bob entered the building that morning completely unaware.
The meeting was a furious event; the judges were deciding which proxies were valid and which weren't. Adding machines were clacking as each entry moved the score a little closer to "for Vance" or "against Vance." Telephone calls were received cancelling proxies and granting proxies. Attorneys were baring their teeth at one another. It was the ugliest business conflict I have ever seen in Maysville, Ky. As I recall, there were about 120,000 shares to be voted. Late in the day, the final talley favored Vance by only a few votes, but it was nonetheless a triumph and victory for him..
Perhaps a month later, Bob, nevertheless, resigned as President of the Bank, realizing that a split board was inimical to the bank's best interest. It became one of the most fortunate days of his life. With the changes in state and federal banking laws, bank were allowed to have branches across county lines and, ultimately, across state lines. Bob and Steve Beshear, the greatest of friends and compatible in every respect, began to slowly expand their bank activities. Banks in Warsaw, Kentucky, May's Lick, Kentucky, Ripley, Ohio and other small communities around the state were acquired. Bob Vance became literally famous among Kentucky bankers as the most agressive and smartest banker in the state. Bob may have once been President of the Kentucky Banker's Association, but was definitely involved in its most important activities. He began a banking school, not unlike the one he attended at Rutgers, teaching there frequently.
The association between Bob and Steve Beshear, now Governor of Kentucky, propelled Bob into the limelight once more. He had decided to retire about the same time Beshear decided to run. Beshear was elected by a large majority, defeating Ernie Fletcher who ran for a second term. Steve asked his friend to come along and nominated him as Secretary of the largest cabinet in state government. Later, under Bob's leadership, the cabinet was reduced in size and responsibility, and is now called the Cabinet for Public Protection. Maybe that's not the full name, but it's close. Anyway, Bob supervises the Department of Insurance, the Department of Banking, the Horse Racing Commission, and lots of other things all of you would recognize. By all accounts, he has done a superior job and continues to do so. He comes home to Maysville each week-end. If you didn't know him and met him on the street, you would have no idea of how important this man is!
Why a jewel? Well, Bob Vance started at the bottom rung in Maysville, Kentucky. He worked very hard and, more importantly, very smart. I would argue that he, on his own, has been far more successful in the business world than anybody else living in Maysville, Ky. today. And finally, his success was obtained honestly and honorably. Bob Vance has lived the American dream; he's played the American game -- and won!
Mr. Newell was getting along in years, and although his mind was very acute, he was beginning to have some physical problems. Even so, he worked like a mad man in his massive vegetable garden for 12 hours every Wednesday and Saturday and 8 hours most other days. Anyway, Mr. Newell and Mrs. Owens sought out and hired Bob Vance as Vice President of the bank.
For the first several years he lived here, Bob worked assiduously at his job. He got to know every bank employee and what they did and almost every bank customer, particularly if they banked in the downtown bank lobby. In two or three years, Mr.Newell and Bob had differences over some bank matter, and Mr. Newell threatened to fire him, indeed was fully intent on doing so. I never knew exactly what happened, but the firing was called off and Bob Vance, then Executive Vice President, became President of the State National Bank and Mr. Newell, the Chairman of its Board. By whatever title, Mr. Newell remained the boss until his death on January 1, 1976.
Bob was named a director of the Hayswood Hospital in about 1974, and he and Bob Zweigart carried the lion's share of the fight against the Steelworker's Union (I think) which was trying to unionize the hospital. There had earlier been union activity at various manufacturing companies in Maysville, so that the fight wasn't brand new to the area. But basically, in a union fight, management seeks to convince the labor force that they would be better off without a union. Some ugly things can happen during union organizing and many wouldn't have the gumption for the fight. Not so with Bob Vance or Bob Zweigart. They spent hours and hours a week talking to employees and determining their grievances. Finally, when the vote was taken, the union lost the election, not by a whole lot, but nonetheless, it was a loss. Then the Board of Directors began addressing the employees' grievances and fired the administrator; there was never another attempt to organize the hospital.
It wasn't long after that the idea of a local YMCA began to percolate through the community. This project became a cause celebre for Bob Vance, Bob Zweigart and Bob Blake. The three Bobs, as the fundraisers knew them, met daily before work at Bob Zweigart's office strategizing the fund raising effort. Those three men, with a little help from other volunteers, raised $3 million and the YMCA, once a dream, became a reality. The facility remains one of the most outstanding in the state, and is an incredible accomplishment for a community this size.
Continuing his career vector, Bob Vance decided to attend Rutger's University working toward a Masters Degree in Banking. It was one of those schools where you were given assignments, one per month, and you had to send in your work product by a certain date. My description might make it sound easy, but it certainly wasn't. The assignments entailed vast amounts of work after work, so to speak, and the submission of the work was often voluminous. Then for about two weeks every year, the student traveled to Rutgers for lectures, labs and whatever else you study at banking school. It's my recollection that the effort lasted three years. I do know that a final thesis was required, as well as a defense of the thesis before a jury of professors at the school.
While Bob Vance went through this rigorous training, he learned several things. First, he could read and interpret financial statements of individuals and corporations, a skill which few people possess. He could also assess a loan application and, from the information furnished by the prospective debtor, could analyze the prospects of re-paying the loan if made. Finally, Bob Vance learned to analyze a bank, using very sophisticated financial formulae and ratios, so that he could accurately assess the health of the bank he worked for as well as the health of his competitors, not to mention banks which might be purchased. Finally, and most important, Bob Vance understood debt and how to use it to his advantage.
Things went along pretty smoothly for several years after Mr. Newell died. The bank countined to prosper and to pay dividends. Deposits grew substantially, and everything was going well. It was then that Bob Vance noticed the Farmers and Traders Bank in Mt. Olivet. Using the knowledge he had gained at Rutgers, he first studied bank's financial statements, which are available at the Federal Reserve. He then arranged financing with a Lexington Bank and approached the president of the bank about selling it to him. His name has escaped me for the moment, but he apparently agreed to help Bob convince the bank's board of directors. With the help of Larry Banks, a Lexington corporate lawyer, Bob completed the purchase of the bank and immediately re-organized it. In this process, he met Norma Linville, then the cashier at Farmers and Traders, and they formed an association in the banking business which has lasted to this day. Norma was put in charge of the Mt. Olivet bank.
In those days, and perhaps today as well, the method by which one acquires a bank or, for that matter, any company, is to buy the bank and let the bank's profits pay off the acquisition loan to the financing bank. Because of the tax code, it is infinitely better to have the purchased bank restructure its capital into stock and bonds. The bonds pay interest, which the bank can deduct for tax purposes, and the holder of the bonds uses the interest to pay his debt to the financing bank. Since Bob held almost all of the bonds (and, for that matter, the stock) of the bank, the bank's profits were paid to him as interest so that the bank paid almost no income tax. Of course, Bob had to pay tax on the interest, but there was still enough left over to pay on his loan to the Lexington bank. This worked so well that Bob used the strategy to buy several other banks.
One of the reasons that his strategies worked so well was because of his attitude toward the regulators. The State National Bank was a bank chartered by the federal government (a national bank). All national banks were examined by the federal reserve bank as well as the FDIC. Most bankers despise bank examiners because they are looking for bankers' mistakes. Some mistakes are small infractions; some are major problems and all can be dealt with by the examiners with the most draconian means, should they be necessary. Bob always welcomed examiners, believing them to present learning opportunities. He forged a wonderful relationship with the Cleveland Federal Reserve, which proved most beneficial to his later banking acquisitions.
All the while, Bob had been accumulating State National Bank stock and became its largest shareholder.
He did not, however, own enough stock to control the bank. When Bob tried to utilize some synergies to cut costs both for the State National and the Farmers and Traders Bank (which he largely owned), some of the directors at State got very upset and thought he was scheming to have State pay expenses which would inure to the benefit of Farmers and Traders. None of this was true, but a real rift developed between those directors and the directors who supported Bob. And so, as the Annual Meeting of Stockholders date approached, the anti-Vance group was gathering proxies from shareholders everywhere. They were successful in keeping these activities a secret, so that when the day for the meeting arrived, they had almost enough proxies to elect a majority on the board, that majority being committed to firing Vance; and Bob entered the building that morning completely unaware.
The meeting was a furious event; the judges were deciding which proxies were valid and which weren't. Adding machines were clacking as each entry moved the score a little closer to "for Vance" or "against Vance." Telephone calls were received cancelling proxies and granting proxies. Attorneys were baring their teeth at one another. It was the ugliest business conflict I have ever seen in Maysville, Ky. As I recall, there were about 120,000 shares to be voted. Late in the day, the final talley favored Vance by only a few votes, but it was nonetheless a triumph and victory for him..
Perhaps a month later, Bob, nevertheless, resigned as President of the Bank, realizing that a split board was inimical to the bank's best interest. It became one of the most fortunate days of his life. With the changes in state and federal banking laws, bank were allowed to have branches across county lines and, ultimately, across state lines. Bob and Steve Beshear, the greatest of friends and compatible in every respect, began to slowly expand their bank activities. Banks in Warsaw, Kentucky, May's Lick, Kentucky, Ripley, Ohio and other small communities around the state were acquired. Bob Vance became literally famous among Kentucky bankers as the most agressive and smartest banker in the state. Bob may have once been President of the Kentucky Banker's Association, but was definitely involved in its most important activities. He began a banking school, not unlike the one he attended at Rutgers, teaching there frequently.
The association between Bob and Steve Beshear, now Governor of Kentucky, propelled Bob into the limelight once more. He had decided to retire about the same time Beshear decided to run. Beshear was elected by a large majority, defeating Ernie Fletcher who ran for a second term. Steve asked his friend to come along and nominated him as Secretary of the largest cabinet in state government. Later, under Bob's leadership, the cabinet was reduced in size and responsibility, and is now called the Cabinet for Public Protection. Maybe that's not the full name, but it's close. Anyway, Bob supervises the Department of Insurance, the Department of Banking, the Horse Racing Commission, and lots of other things all of you would recognize. By all accounts, he has done a superior job and continues to do so. He comes home to Maysville each week-end. If you didn't know him and met him on the street, you would have no idea of how important this man is!
Why a jewel? Well, Bob Vance started at the bottom rung in Maysville, Kentucky. He worked very hard and, more importantly, very smart. I would argue that he, on his own, has been far more successful in the business world than anybody else living in Maysville, Ky. today. And finally, his success was obtained honestly and honorably. Bob Vance has lived the American dream; he's played the American game -- and won!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
