we will and do denounce any man as
sycophant, who has, or shall, ask permission of James F.
Cooper to visit the Point in question.

It was said that the meeting resolved to take Cooper's books from the
Library and burn them at a public bonfire, but if so, this proposal did
not appear in the resolutions as finally drafted.

The actual point at issue in this controversy was soon settled. In a
letter to the _Freeman's Journal_ Cooper showed that his father's will,
drawn up in 1808, made a particular devise of Three-Mile Point. The
words of the document were explicit: "I give and bequeath my place,
called Myrtle Grove [Three-Mile Point], on the west side of the Lake
Otsego, to all my descendants in common until the year 1850; then to be
inherited by the youngest thereof bearing my name."

But the results of the controversy were far-reaching. The quarrel gave
rise to Cooper's unfortunate book _Home as Found_, to new controversies,
and to the long series of libel suits.

_Home as Found_ was intended to set forth in the course of a story the
principles involved in the dispute about Three-Mile Point. It gave the
author an opportunity also to enlarge upon his criticisms of America,
and particularly of New York City. For this purpose the story brought
upon the scene an American family long resident in Europe whom the
writer called the Effinghams. Against the vulgar background of American
life the members of this family were intended to personify all the
accomplishments of culture and social refinement.

Cooper's own attitude was astonishing in his failure to realize that in
the Effinghams he would be supposed to be representing himself and his
own family. The intimation was sufficiently obvious. The family returned
from residence abroad; the removal to the village of "Templeton," with
direct reference to _The Pioneers_; the story of the Three-Mile Point
controversy--the inference seemed to follow from the parallel that the
Effinghams were the Coopers. But Cooper's general unwillingness to
acknowledge that any of his characters were drawn from life was here
carried to the last extreme. It was evident that he was honestly
unconscious of any such inference; his purpose was to deal with
principles, not persons. When the name of Effingham was derisively
applied to him, he resented the imputation.

The controversy between Cooper and his critics had now reached a degree
of violence that was grotesque. To stand alone, as