Letter to Editor: Response to “Chestertown Armory: ‘Out of Place. Out of Time.'”

I wish to respond to Victor Evans’ “Chestertown Armory: ‘Out of Place. Out of Time.’”

Mr. Evans’ father is to be commended for his brave service to our country. All of our veterans deserve the utmost respect. My father may have been one of the medics who tended to him and helped save his life, all while under the barrage of enemy fire. I do not understand why Mr. Evans did not proudly identify him – I take every opportunity to share my father’s name and accomplishments. 1Sgt. Edward ‘Ringgold’ Elburn was one of the ‘Chestertown Medicos’ of the famed 29^th Division, landing on Omaha Beach on D-Day. After the war, he re-upped with the Maryland Army National Guard as Company Clerk and gave a total of 42 years to our country – all of them served in the Chestertown Armory, now the subject of much debate. My father was probably one of the most well-known soldiers who walked through those massive front doors. Did Mr. Evans share the story of his father as an opening to draw a sympathetic reaction from the readers only to follow it with convoluted misleading statements and contradictions?

You do not have to be a scholar to research the history of the Armory. I am only a non-accredited genealogist who has been researching for over 20 years. I am also the Registrar of my DAR chapter. Many of those years have been spent researching the Armory with the intent of documenting it someday.

Mr. Evans believes the Armory should be demolished because it is in a FEMA flood plain, then goes on to tell us what should be erected on the same flood plain. Huh? He proposes a ‘public Armory Memorial Garden’ as a tribute to the lives of those who served in the Armory. Is that going to be a water garden? I guess ‘garden’ sounds lovely compared to the initially proposed ‘pub’ in a boutique hotel! No other Maryland Armory was built on a flood plain because they are inland. Our forefathers obviously had a reason for designating the location of the Armory. At the time it was their obvious choice that it belonged on the outskirts of town.

What detrimental effects would the total demolition of the Armory, with the ensuing release of mold-laden dust and particles, have on the beautiful yet fragile Chester River?

Mr. Evans continues to insist that neglect is not the cause of the Armory’s condition. That suggestion continues to remain ludicrous. The Armory was in good condition when ownership was passed to the Historic District Commission and Washington College. Neither of these entities did anything to secure the building. “All old buildings… rarely endure if they lack on-going utility.” The lack of utility of the Chestertown Armory can be placed squarely on the shoulders of the HDC and WC. The flip of a switch turned on the electricity to the building, but no one even made an attempt to keep the dehumidifiers and sump pumps running. That is blatant neglect. Of course, there was a hurricane, but afterwards did anyone try to counter the flood damage? I saw that climate change is thrown in as part of the reason for the Armory’s present condition – an exhausted, stereotyped excuse.

The Armory does have options for future utility. Thomas Kocubinski has done an excellent job of promoting what the armory could, and should, become. Reference the posts on the Repurpose the Chestertown Armory FB page.

The Armory’s architecture does have significance per the National Register of Historic Places. It is only an ‘eyesore’ and ‘an embarrassment’ because of said neglect. Washington College bought the building with plans to use it – yet they did nothing. They could not even close windows that were partially open. What excuse do they have for that? If that is not neglect, I would like them to explain to me what it is.

To say that the Chestertown Armory is the least notable of the Maryland National Guard Thematic Group is very misleading. The Armories built earlier (1913-1926) do have more fortress-like architecture; however, the Chestertown Armory (1931) and the Denton Armory (1938) are not quite as elaborate but the two are very similar. They are still part of the thematic group, and that group would be compromised if any of the Armories were lost. This sort of thinking that one Armory is less suited to the theme and is worthless is why the Chestertown Armory was determined to be threatened by Preservation Magazine.

Mr. Evans claims there is a 50 year life span for major buildings… tell that to the Customs House and other colonial structures that comprise one of the gems of the Eastern Shore!

Loss of the Amory does equate to loss of history. History is not just words. It is criminal to state that more history of the Armory will be known if it is demolished. Say what? Just point at the water garden and say, ‘Yup! That’s where it was.’ Now that will be quite an attraction!

‘The story of the Armory’s unfortunate but necessary demolition will add to its history.’ Again, say what? How can that be? Once something is gone – a building, a person, a statue – its memory fades away. And words can never equate. How many times have you read of an historic site and gone to see it, only to find empty land where you wish the edifice remained? History is found in ‘failed’ buildings. A visual always enhances the words.

I would like to know where Mr. Evans lives. I have asked but no one seems to know. According to him, if he’s less than 50 miles away from the Armory, he’s not an expert. If he’s more than 50 miles away and not from Chestertown, is it really any of his business?

I guess I am just not ‘culturally engaged’ and I am one of the ‘few who doggedly’ want the Armory preserved and repurposed. Bringing life back to the Chestertown Armory will serve as a reminder to all of the courage displayed and the hardships endured by those who stormed the beaches in France on that fateful day, 6 June 1944. All will be reminded of the vital role played by those courageous men from Chestertown who participated in that great crusade.

Respectfully,

Joan Elburn Farley