On the morning of October 31, 1888, Dr. Himes addressed the students before leaving for Philadelphia¹.  Dr. Himes was the acting president of the college until a replacement could be found for the previous president, James McCauley, who had retired in June of that year².  Himes told the students how he hated the old picket fence along the north end of campus, and had finally received enough money to replace it with a nicer iron one.  Therefore, when he would return on Monday, he hoped to see the old fence gone, no questions asked.  However, he warned the students to “keep within bounds in your celebration.”³  The students, “in accordance with their usual methods of disposing of superfluous lumber, decided to cremate the fence.”⁴

The students did burn the fence around eleven o'clock that night, in a campus bonfire that resulted in a fight between the college, and the town firemen and other residents.  The details of the struggle vary according with source.  Understandably, the event became the talk of the town, and the Carlisle Herald had to print off extra copies of the paper covering the fire.⁵  Apparently, a press association spread a distorted version of the “bloody fray... in which several were severely wounded and many missing” across the country.  One especially sensational paper created a “heart rending account of the battle, in which several lives were lost.”⁶

The first published account of the incident appeared in the Herald on the next morning.  According to the article, the firemen were roused from their much needed sleep by a fire alarm.  No one knew where the fire was until they got to the scene.  There was no danger of the fire spreading, but they still had to put it out.  The men tried entering the campus with the fire hose, but the students drove them back and threw the hose over the wall.  The firemen tried again, and after a “tussle”, retained control of the hose.  At this point the students threw rocks into the gathered crowds outside the gates.  Soon everyone started throwing stones.  The spectators began to flee for cover, while the firemen sprayed the students with water.  Forty-five minutes after the firemen arrived at the college, they were finally able to put out the fire, which had mostly burned out by now.⁷

The Herald then analyzed the event, placing the blame squarely upon the students.  Borough Ordinance No. 118 said that it was illegal to make a fire in any square or lot in the town.  They had heard that the students claimed that they had permission from Chief of Police Zimmerman to create the bonfire.  Zimmerman denied even speaking to the students regarding a bonfire.  Whether he did or not, the Herald argues, permission from a police chief does not allow the violation of a borough ordinance; he does not have that authority.  Zimmerman did, however, try to prevent the firemen from plugging in their hose at the corner of Main and West streets, and had to be bodily removed.  Zimmerman explained his actions by saying that he knew the students would react violently, and that “he wished to prevent a fight”.  The Herald went on to describe how firemen have frequently arrived at campus at late hours of the night to find “they were hoaxed and imposed upon by the thoughtlessness of a lot of rattle-brained students.”  Therefore, the firemen have “openly avowed that they will never run to a fire at the College.”  The article concludes that the “majority of good thinking citizens” will support the actions of the “reputable citizens” of the fire department, while the students should be “censured” for their “outrageous” behavior.⁸

The Daily Evening Sentinel of November 1st also had an article regarding the “long looked for encounter between the Carlisle Fire Department and the students”.  This article was less inflammatory than the Herald's, but still maintained the fact that the students were breaking a city ordinance, one that the “chief burgess early in the fall gave special orders to the police” to enforce, and that the firemen had the right to enter private property to put out the fire.  The article mainly dealt with the hostility firefighters held towards the college, including that they have “often threatened vengeance.”⁹

The next night's Sentinel contained a letter from a Dickinson student giving his side of the story as an “observing non belligerent”.  He claimed that Zimmerman had seen the boys piling up the fence pickets, and “instead of attempting to dissuade them from the enterprise, as he should and would have done had he believed it unlawful,” he told the students to “go ahead”.  They did, and fifteen minutes later, the fire alarm went off, and the fire department attached their hose and entered the campus.  The student felt that this was not necessary, as the fire was dying down, and there was no chance of any property damage, as the Herald admitted.  He felt that the firemen knew the situation from the time the alarm sounded, and they came to the college “looking for a row with the college boys, as they had often threatened to do before.”  The students drove back the firemen, who retaliated by throwing stones from the railway at them.  The author points out that it was the firemen that threw stones first, the students could not have because there were no stones in the campus.  The firemen were reinforced with men getting off the train from Mechanicsburg and “recruits from the roughest element in town.”  The students retreated within a building, which was also stoned.  Finally, the firemen put out the fire.  The author concluded that the ordinance had not been enforced in years, and there have been daily bonfires before.  Therefore, it was a “dead letter”, and not a law.¹⁰

The Sentinel contained a few responses to the student's letter.  The first, given in the same issue, said that the firemen had the right to put out fires in Carlisle.  It also brought up the students' history of false alarms¹¹.  The next night's issue contained a letter from the fire department saying that the firemen did not know the nature or location of the fire until they got there, contrary to the student's letter's allegations.¹²

The November issue of Dickinson's newspaper, The Dickinsonian, gave a similar account of the night as the student's letter to the Sentinel, but with a little new information.  Somehow the author knew that when the firemen learned where the fire was on route, “the cooler-headed members advised a return to the engine house.  Those who had imbibed too freely of the bacchanalian bowl before leaving Mechanicsburg [many of the firemen were at a political parade there], declared their determination to 'go up and wash the d----d students out'."  The author points out the fact that the chief of police tried stopping the firemen, but was physically removed.  Finally, the article criticized Carlisle's papers of “childish partisanship”; they should be loyal to the truth, not the firemen.¹³

An editorial in the same Dickinsonian issue reflects some of the anti-town sentiments present in the student body.  The letter lists the reasons why Carlisle is indebted to the college.  Dickinson's cultural and economic contributions are some examples.  The author then complains that instead of being grateful, the town treats students and the college poorly.  “Woe to that student who has the temerity to break out in a hearty Hip-Rah-Bus-Bis... Carlisle's policemen have special orders to keep a sharp lookout for student singers on the streets.”  The author is also bitter about the lack of town attendance at college athletic matches.¹⁴

Thus, neither side agreed on who was to blame for the riot, nor the details of fight.  The students claim that the firemen were intoxicated, and were looking for trouble with the students.  They also argue that the borough ordinance against bonfires has never been enforced before, and that the police chief had given them permission, anyway.  The town claims that the firemen were awakened by the alarm, and did not know where the fire was until they got there.  The fire department was obligated to put out the fire, regardless of its harmless nature, and they should not have been interfered with in carrying out their duty.  Furthermore, the papers concluded, the students deserved it, because of all the trouble they have caused the firemen over the years with frequent false alarms.  It is curious, however, that Chief Zimmerman tried to stop the firemen.  This suggests that he had given the students permission, despite denying it later, probably to save his reputation in the town.
 
 

1)   “Hallow E'en Excitement”, The Dickinsonian, November, 1988, XVI, 2, Archives and Special Collections, Dickinson College, Carlisle, PA, p 7.

2)  Charles Coleman Sellers, Dickinson College, A History (Middletown, Connecticut: Wesleyan University Press, 1973), 285.

3)  George Van Derveer Morris, A Man For A' That (New York: Eaton and Mains, 1902), 272.

4)  “A Student's Opinion of Wednesday Night's Riot”, Daily Evening Sentinel, 2 November 1888, VII, 279, Carlisle Historical Society, Carlisle, PA, p 1.

5)  Carlisle Herald, 2 November 1888, III, 38, Carlisle Historical Society, Carlisle, PA, p 2, 4.

6)  Morris, 266-277

7)  “Fire and Fight”, Carlisle Herald, 1 November 1888, III, 37, Carlisle Historical Society, Carlisle, PA, p 1.

8)  “Fire and Fight”, 1

9)  “Fracas Between Town and College”, Daily Evening Sentinel, 1 November 1888, VII, 278, Carlisle Historical Society, Carlisle, PA, p 1.

10)  “A Student's Opinion of Wednesday Night's Riot”, p 1

11)  Daily Evening Sentinel, 2 November 1888, VII, 279, Carlisle Historical Society, Carlisle, PA, p 4.

12)  “The Firemen Did Not Know Where the Fire Was” Daily Evening Sentinel, 3 November 1888, VII, 280, Carlisle Historical Society, Carlisle, PA, p 1.

13)  “Hallow E'en Excitement”, The Dickinsonian.  November, 1988, XVI, 2, Archives and Special Collections, Dickinson College, Carlisle, PA,  p 7.

14)  The Dickinsonian, November, 1888, XVI, 2, Archives and Special Collections, Dickinson College, Carlisle PA, p 5-6.

“A Student's Opinion of Wednesday Night's Riot”.  Daily Evening Sentinel.  2 November 1888.  VII, 279.  Carlisle
        Historical Society, Carlisle, PA.  p 1.

Carlisle Herald.  2 November 1888.  III, 38.  Carlisle Historical Society, Carlisle, PA.  p 2, 4.

Daily Evening Sentinel.  2 November 1888.  VII, 279. Carlisle Historical Society, Carlisle, PA.  p 4.

“Fire and Fight”.  Carlisle Herald.  1 November 1888.  III, 37.  Carlisle Historical Society, Carlisle, PA.  p 1.

“Fracas Between Town and College”.  Daily Evening Sentinel.  1 November 1888.  VII, 278. Carlisle Historical Society, Carlisle, PA.  p 1.

“Hallow E'en Excitement”.  The Dickinsonian.  November, 1988.  XVI, 2.  Archives and Special Collections, Dickinson College, Carlisle, PA.  p 7.

Morris,  George Van Derveer.  A Man For A' That.  New York: Eaton and Mains, 1902.  271-277.

Sellers,  Charles Coleman.  Dickinson College, A History.  Middletown, Connecticut: Wesleyan University Press, 1973.  285

The Dickinsonian.  November, 1888.  XVI, 2.  Archives and Special Collections, Dickinson College, Carlisle PA.  p 5-6.

“The Firemen Did Not Know Where the Fire Was”.  Daily Evening Sentinel.  3 November 1888.  VII, 280.  Carlisle Historical Society, Carlisle, PA.  p 1.