Dear Editor,

The Ministry of Education, Culture, Youth and Sport extends its deepest respect, admiration and gratitude to Dr. Clinita Arnsby Ford for her unwavering commitment, exceptional contributions and profound impact on both current and past St. Maarten students in Tallahassee. Dr. Ford passed away on March 14, 2025 at the age of 96. Dr. Ford, through The Tallahassee (FL) Chapter of The Links, Inc. dedicated her life to making St. Maarten students feel at home in Tallahassee via the Moms Away from Home programme. This programme left an indelible mark on both the lives of parents, students, and our island as a whole.

Dr. Ford’s exemplary career, marked by her passion for education, healthcare, and social advocacy, has shaped the future of many generations. Her dedication to service, leadership, and the academic development of St. Maarten students has truly exemplified the core values of compassion, integrity, and excellence. Whether in her work as a trailblazer in education or as an advocate for those in need, Dr. Ford has consistently demonstrated a commitment to the betterment of her fellow citizens.

Her professional achievements, coupled with her selfless contributions to community well-being, have set a benchmark for future generations of leaders in our society. Dr. Ford’s ability to inspire and bring about positive change is a testament to her character, perseverance, and love for the people of St. Maarten.

As we honour Dr. Clinita Arnsby Ford’s legacy, the Ministry recognizes not only her extraordinary accomplishments but also her role as a beacon of hope, strength, and progress. Her legacy will continue to inspire us all, guiding us towards a brighter future.

Ministry of Education, Culture, Youth and Sport

~ Reflecting on the Partition Treaty ~

Dear Editor,

The Partition Treaty, or Treaty of Concordia, purportedly signed on March 23, 1648, divided the Caribbean island of St. Martin between French and Dutch imperial, slaveholding and colonial interests.

According to articles 5 and 6 of the Treaty of Concordia, the majority of the people, the enslaved African men, women, and children of St. Martin, were, based on the French and Dutch laws of the day, property of the European slave owners.

The Black people were neither the “inhabitants” nor the “persons” referred to in what was significantly a business agreement to facilitate the exploitation of the salt and other material resources (art 5) in the two colonial territories.

That the enslaved people would have been ordered to pick, carry, and pile the stones that marked the supposed spot or location on Concordia hill where the treaty was said to have been signed, may be explored as legend or as our actual lot.

Such an exercise could be done with the same power that we pursue critical knowledge of the merciless, unreparated labor in the great ponds, building of the fortifications, mansions and mills, and the hewing, hauling, sowing, picking, and harvesting on the plantations and from the salt marshes by our ancestors, driven as beasts under the slavers’ lash.

Know about the Concordia treaty as a historical marker, yes; but beyond that it might best be left as a simple historical curiosity, along the same lines as Peter Stuyvesant losing part of his right leg during his being part of the Dutch military leadership of the 1644 attack on the Spanish occupiers of St. Martin.

The Treaty of Concordia is not a festive day for the emancipated St. Martin nation.

And how would this accord be maintained as a “national” day in an independent St. Martin – beyond the adjusted autonomy authorized by France and the Netherlands respectively in 2007 and 2010 for the North and South of our island?

The Partition Treaty is neither a founding text nor a seminal constitution of the truly liberated St. Martin nation. To our humanity this would be unmanly and detestable; and the French and Dutch nationality cannot absolve or solve what is the inherent evil at the very cornerstone of the Treaty of Concordia, and that is the dehumanization of the African or Black people of St. Martin as expressed, reinforced, and never corrected in that European accord.

The Partition Treaty of 1648 is not a thing of love, nor a celebration of the unity that was nurtured and consolidated most during the Traditional Period (1848-1963) by the people, individuals and families of the villages and towns of the St. Martin nation.

The Concordia treaty is not the foundation of this fraternal and familial unity of the St. Martin nation; a unity whose indivisibility we should be duty bound to honor, live, and fight for if needs be; a unity that is invariably forged best by all of the people – past, present, and the evolving future – of the South and North of our beloved Caribbean island, which is in the 21^st century still a colony, by various names, of the Dutch Kingdom and the French Republic.

By Lasana M. Sekou

The above is an abstract version from an unfinished paper. © by Lasana M. Sekou.

Dear Editor,

Respect seems to be the trending topic, so I can’t help but comment on MP Jensen-Webster’s concern about of the budget’s lack of respect for St. Maarten’s MPs’ airline seating.

The other day I was at the courthouse annex (the former Parliament building on Back Street) and noticed what appears to be a serious lack of respect for St. Maarten’s Judiciary. Their building needs powerwashing to remove pigeon dirt, its eaves are broken and in need of repainting, the front door latch is missing, the door itself requires re-varnishing.

Tourists have eyes. The government should be far more cognizant of those than of MPs’ “seats.”

Pamela Sims

Dear Editor,

I am not certain if I would have written that letter from miss Joslyn Morton concerning Dimar Labega to you. I believe it is too personal (in a positive sense). Because it is a great teaching moment for, and I dare say, all the members of Parliament. I would have written that letter via you to all the members of Parliament in general. Because it continues to be proven that by blindly voting along party lines one will continue to be a follower, I sincerely hope that all members of Parliament will take that advice to MP Dimar Labega personally and retain it.

With the same breath I would like to add that had MP Roseburg asked a little further, she too would have known that the police as well as government has a history concerning DUI since 2000. I stand corrected but at that time there were already talks by the then government about a special machine which would cost Fls. 250,000.

Also that Holland was prepared to give instructions to those who would be selected to apply the DUI tests.. No disrespect meant, but this is part of the reason why I find myself reacting to those persons who would like be respected as leaders.

To lead, one has to consist of leaders material. I would be the last person to think I know it all, and I will never venture to contest something that I am not well versed in. I believe in asking questions.

Russell A. Simmons