Copyright © 2021 by Wendy Waszut-Barrett
By the end of 1923, Thomas G. Moses wrote: “On December 26th, Megan and I met Sosman and Landis Company at Richard’s office and paid our first installment for the name and good will of Sosman and Landis Company, which we now own and will operate, but for a while we will have to use our names of Moses and Megan, until the old company can liquidate. We will then get a new charter.” In the end, it cost Moses $20,000 for that “name and goodwill.”
When the Sosman & Landis Co. was liquidated, the name was purchased by Moses & Megan; the studio’s contents were purchased by the Hoyland-Lemle Co.; and Chicago Studios leased the space. In one fell swoop, Sosman & Landis was split into three parts – name, contents and address, each going to a different firm. Each of the players has a unique story. I am starting with the Hoyland-Lemle Co.
By 1923, the Hoyland-Lemle offices were listed at 6751 Sheridan Rd, but they rented various studio spaces to paint advertising curtains (ad drops). Interestingly, 6751 Sheridan Rd was the same address listed by Moses & Megan when they sent out letters to prospective clients in 1923 while Moses was still working for Sosman & Landis. Keep in mind that Chicago Studios was using the official Sosman & Landis address by late summer 1923, citing 417 S. Clinton Street – this was immediately after preliminary discussions about the closure of Sosman & Landis. At this same time, Hoyland-Lemle were actually renting the Sosman & Landis main studio at 417 S. Clinton St. To briefly recap, Chicago Studios sent out letters during the summer of 1923 to prospective Sosman & Landis clients, explaining that they were the successors to Sosman & Landis – citing the same address, 417 S. Clinton St.
Moses and Megan immediately disputed the fact that Chicago Studios was the successor to Sosman & Landis, sending out their own letters on Sosman & Landis stationary. They explained that Sosman & Landis was only moving to a better location – 6751 Sheridan Rd. in Chicago, the Hoyland-Lemle offices. This, combined with Moses’ delay in securing the new business charter, was disastrous. Moses and Megan were put in a difficult position with any future iteration of Sosman & Landis looking weak.
It was an interesting time in the theatre industry. By the 1920s scenic studios were often short-lived, opening and closing like clover plants every day. This was not especially new, but there were now many more players in Chicago. Names were changed, with scenic artists hopping from one firm to another. There were still major players, with long histories and impeccable reputations; Sosman & Landis was one of those companies, and that was something that Moses was relying upon for his own future success.
The Hoyland-Lemle Co. has an interesting, albeit short-lived, history. The company’s namesakes were Charles L. Hoyland and William Lemle. Hoyland-Lemle officially entered the scenic studio game in 1922, but really was the result of a name change, not a start-up company. Previously, the Hoyland-Lemle Co. was known as the Allardt Advertising Co., run by the Allardt Bros. who established the Allardt Circuit in the Midwest.
On May 29, 1922, the “Tulsa Daily Legal News” announced “Allardt Adv. Co, changing name to Hoyland-Lemle Co., Chicago, Ill. C. L. Hoyland, Wm Lemle, Maybelle Shearer & C. M. Hoyland, Chicago, Ill. Capital $50,000” (page 1). State business filings in 1922 listed the Hoylund-Lemle address as 417 S. Clinton Street, the same as Sosman & Landis where they were renting paint space. Hoyland-Lemle also rented frames at the newly founded Service Studios, in the renovated spaces of the old Jewel Tea Co. barns. The company provided many different addresses for various government records, such as 32 West Monroe Street, listed in the “Second Annual Report of the Tax Commission of the State of Illinois” in 1921 (page 304).
The key figure in the formation of Hoyland-Lemle was Hoyland. It was the result of Hoyland’s relationship with the Allardt Bros. He was working for them by 1910. In Jan. 9, 1911, “The South Bend Tribune reported that Hoyland was initiated into the Theatrical Mechanical Association, South Bend Lodge, No. 120. At the time, he was treasurer of the Lyric Theatre in Danville, Illinois. He was the guest of Messrs. C. J. and Louis F. Allardt of the Orpheum. The article went on to state that Danville’s Lyric Theatre was part of the Allardt Circuit (page 4). Hoyland continued to work at other Allardt venues, including the New Orpheum Theatre in Racine, Wisconsin by 1913. In 1914 Hoyland’s primary focus became the Allardt Advertising Co. Much of the Allardts’ energies were focusing on marketing. They invested in theatrical agencies, venues and advertising curtains. On Feb. 1, 1914, the “Inter Ocean” listed Charles L. Hoyland as the head of the Allardt Advertising Company, and treasurer of Allardt Bros.
Between 1914 and 1921, Hoyland remained with the Allardt company until he and William Lemle purchased the firm and changed the name. The company lasted less than five years, and by 1927, Hoyland was running the new Charles L. Hoyland Co. Much of the Hoyland-Lemle Company’s demise was due to lack of payment. Like Sosman & Landis, clients’ were not always prompt with final payments. The firm was involved in several court cases to collect money owed from clients throughout the mid-1920s.
On Sept. 8, 1926, the “Paducah Sun-Democrat” reported, “The Hoyland-Lemle company, an Illinois corporation, is the plaintiff in five suits filed against Paducahans in McCracken county circuit court yesterday afternoon. The company alleges in each suit that the defendant owes a balance on a contract price for advertising displayed on the Orpheum theater circuit curtain. The suits were brought on behalf of Hoyland-Lemle by Attorney W. A. Berry” (Paducah, Kentucky, page 2).
The advertising curtain business was extremely lucrative, but risky. Businesses would rent ad squares on a curtain, paying a monthly, or annual, fee for the space. These curtains were often placed independent of the scenery contract, front curtain or asbestos curtain. In many cases, they were painted and installed at no cost to the theatre owner. The fees collected from the businesses paid for the piece’s construction and then provided a substantial profit, as long at the curtain was used.
Advertising curtains functioned like commercials; they were contracted to be lowered at specific times during a show. Advertising companies even sent representatives to various theaters to ensure that the advertising curtains were being lowered at the appropriate times. This all worked well, unless the clients renting the ad space didn’t pay the contracted fee. This meant not only losing the anticipated income but finding a new business to rent the ad space and repainting the square. The best-case scenario was never having to repaint a square and just collecting the payments. The worst-case scenario was what happened at the Orpheum Theatre in Paducah, Kentucky. Five businesses not paying for an advertisement curtain was a significant loss. It is no wonder that 1926 was the last year of the Hoyland-Lemle Co.
When the Hoyland-Lemle Co. ended, two new studios sprung up: the Charles L. Hoyland Co. and William Lemle, Inc. In an odd twist of fate, the newly listed “spacious studio of William Lemle Inc.” was located at 417 S. Clinton St – the old Sosman & Landis main studio.
To be continued…
