Drypigment.net

Part 576: C. B. Harmount’s production of “Uncle Tom’s Cabin” with scenery by M. Armbruster & Sons Studio, 1915

Theatre collections are an extremely valuable resource, not only to theatre historians and practitioners, but also to the general public. Whether designs or backdrops, many holdings were associated with public entertainment and popular culture; much is now lost. Today’s installment continues with examining the scenery created by M. Armbruster & Sons scenic studio of Columbus, Ohio. This scenic studio created thousands of settings for touring shows, many painted with aniline dyes. Scenery for one of the touring productions with scenery produced by Armbruster Studio was for C. B. Harmount’s “Uncle Tom’s Cabin.” Here are a  few:

Twelve extant drops from the Harmount Company’s touring show are now part of the Harmount Collection at the Jermone Lawrence and Robert E. Lee Theatre Research Institute. It is part of the Ohio State University Libraries Special Collections.

This Harmount collection compliments the Armbruster Scenic Studio Collection, also part of the Jermone Lawrence and Robert E. Lee Theatre Research Institute. Very little is available online, however, but there is an extremely detailed description of the collection’s contents; each folder is described in detail. Little is available as high-resolution scans. Fortunately, some images from the Harmount and Armbruster collections have been posted to other websites, such as “Uncle Tom’s Cabin & American Culture” (http://utc.iath.virginia.edu/sitemap.html). I stumbled upon this particular site while researching M. Armbruster & Sons Studio. The Harmount collection even included a letter to C. B. Harmount from Emil Armbruster. This site was created by Stephen Railton, and somewhat associated with University of Virginia.

“Uncle Tom’s Cabin & American Culture” site included a page that was labeled “Scenic Drops.” The page included photographs of twelve drops produced by M. Armbruster & Sons for C. B. Harmount’s touring production of “Uncle Tom’s Cabin.” The date of creation was likely 1915. The post credits the twelve drops as belonging to Ohio State University. There is nothing quite like getting into a collection through the back door.

There were also some images posted of correspondence describing the sale of the Armbruster scenery for “Uncle Tom’s Cabin.” One letter described the technical specifications of the show and scenic inventory. It was sent ahead to theatre managers in the towns that C. B. Harmount wanted to play. A letter dated May 3, 1915 notes, “I am carrying a company of 25 people, band and orchestra, colored quartette and drum corps, 22 special drops put up by the Armbruster Co. of Columbus, O., electrical snow and ice scenes, which not other Tom Show carries and which is a very essential feature to the correct production, also beautiful electrical transformation of allegorical scene, big street parade, and the finest pack of dogs with any UNCLE TOM’S CABIN SHOW – my cast is all select.”

Another 1915 letter from Emil Armbruster to C. B. Marmount discusses creating a second scenic outfit for another Uncle Tom’s Cabin production. The price of the first collection was included with the information in the letter; fourteen drops priced at $33.33 per drop. This amount was a “special price” due to the large order of fourteen drops, even though certain scenes were more expensive to produce at the time, ranging from $40 to $50 (July 1, 1915).

The “Uncle Tom’s Cabin & American Culture” website notes that the Armbruster scenic drops “provide a good sense of the look of a touring ‘Tom Show,’ especially the kind of effect aspired to at the conclusion, in what most companies referred to as ‘The Grand Allegorical Transformation Scene,’ during which Tom dies on stage and theater-goers are transported into the realm of the blessed, perhaps with the help of Eva dressed as an angel and suspended on wires from the flies.”

To be continued…

Part 575: M. Armbruster & Sons Scenic Studio

The 1901-1902 Columbus Directory lists that M. Armbruster & Sons studio was located at 247-253 South Front Street. Matthias, Otto H., Albert E. and Emil G. were all listed as part of the firm in the city directory. Interestingly, Otto H. was working in New York for Moses & Hamilton during this same time. The home address for each of the men was noted as 247 S. Front Street.

The main studio building included offices and a property storage room. Wooden sheds provided extensions that provided additional storage for larger scenic pieces. By 1904, a journalist for the “Columbus Sunday Dispatch” described the interior layout of Armbruster’s studio. The first floor housed the carpenter’s shop, sewing room and storage areas. There was also a paper maché workroom on this level. It was in this room that a variety of set pieces were manufactured, including mantels, statuary, ornaments, and stage food for dining scenes.

The second floor of the building afforded the best light for the paint shop. This area was 64 feet long, 62 feet wide, and 58 feet high. The Sunday Dispatch article described, “The canvas is stretched on frames, the largest of which there are two in number, extends almost the entire length of the floor as to permit of their being lowered, to accommodate the artist… A feature of the movable frames is that they are sort of set out from the wall, a sufficient distance to permit working behind. This is necessary in painting stained glass windows, where colors must not be seen until thrown through the canvas form lights behind.” The article continued, “In the center of the room are two large stationary frames, close together, between which is a platform which may be elevated or lowered as desired.” Each large movable paint frame was approximately 40 feet by 50 feet. The standard paint frame used by Armbruster artists was only 30 feet by 50 feet. The gridiron in the studio accommodated two standard frames lashed together, allowing the final size to measured 60 feet in length.

The painting process for the studio was also described in detail, “The palette, for use in mixing the paints, is a table about ten feet long that can be pushed wherever needed. It has a separate compartment for brushes and for a number of pails of paint…The colors are taken from the cans and mixed on the flat surface of the palette or table.”

To be continued…

Part 573: Otto Armbruster, 1908

In 1908, Thomas G. Moses wrote, “August 16^th, heard of Otto Armbruster’s death by suicide. It was an awful shock as we were such close friends. The German way of getting out of trouble, but he had no trouble, plenty of money and a good business. No one seems to know just what the cause of the rash act was.” Newspapers suggested various causes for Armbruster’s suicide, including a lack of studio work and the intense summer heat.

Armbruster was a colleague and friend of Moses during his time in New York when he worked for Moses & Hamilton. During the spring of 1900, Thomas G. Moses and William F. Hamilton opened the scenic studio of Moses & Hamilton at Proctor’s 125^th Street Theater. That year, Moses’ wrote, “Otto Armbruster was with us and he was a very valuable man. He and [Ed] Loitz worked at 125^th Street most of the time.”

Otto Herman Armbruster came from a well-known scene painting family in Columbus, Ohio, a son born to Mathias Armbruster (1839-1920), the founder of Armbruster Scenic Studios (est. 1875).

Born in Cincinnati, Ohio, on August 28, 1865. He was trained as a scenic artist under the tutelage of his father, Mathias. Unlike his other brothers, Otto moved away from the family business at the age of twenty to strike off on his own as a freelance scenic artist in New York. He was soon associated with the Broadway Theatre and also became an illustrator for decorator magazines. Like Moses, Otto was also a member of the Salmagundi Club in New York, and joined the Kit-Kat Club.

The “Cincinnati Enquirer” reported on Armbruster’s suicide and suggested that lack of work was the cause (16 Aug. 1908, page 1). In a special dispatch to the Enquirer in Columbus, Ohio, on August 15, the article reported on the suicide of “a former resident of Columbus, and one of the best-known scenic artists in the country.” The article continued that one of Armbruster’s brothers received a letter from him a month ago, in which he complained of lack of work.”

The “New York Times,” provided a little more detail about the suicide and suggesteed another cause – “ARTIST A HEAT SUICIDE. Driven Insane by High Temperature, Otto H. Armbruster Shoots Himself.” The article noted, “Mamaronek, N. Y., Aug. 15 – Driven insane by the intense heat, Otto H. Armbruster, a New York scenic artist, committed suicide at his home in Mamaroneck early this morning by sending a bullet into his right temple. He was taken to the New Rochelle Hospital, where he died while the doctors were probing for the bullet. Mr. Armbruster, who was 43 years old, came home yesterday and told his wife he could not endure the intense heat. He had been working hard in New York on some scenery, and was greatly fatigued. This morning, Mrs. Armbruster left her husband in the bedroom while she went downstairs to have breakfast prepared. She had been on the lower floor only a few minutes when she heard the report of a revolver, and on going to her husband’s room found him of the bed with a bullet hole in his temple. Mr. Armbruster came from Columbus, Ohio. He had lived in Mamaroneck about eight months. Mrs. Armbruster told Coronoer Wiesendanger that last summer her husband’s mind was affected by the heat” (16 Aug. 1908, page 1).

Starting tomorrow, I will examine one of the major competitors to Sosman & Landis – Armbruster Studios of Columbus, Ohio.

To be continued…

Part 572: The Majestic Theatre in Indianapolis

In 1907, Thomas G. Moses wrote, “We had more work for the Majestic Theatre also for Indianapolis.” The Majestic Theatre opened on September 2, 1907. It was located on South Illinois Street and West Maryland Streets. The “Indianapolis Star” advertised the venue as “Indiana’s Coziest Playhouse” (Indianapolis Star, 27 Oct. 1907, page 35).

The seating capacity was 1675 (orchestra -675, first balcony – 500, second balcony – 500). Within the first decade of its existence, the Majestic Theatre became associated with burlesque. By December 25, 1919, the Majestic Theater became known as the Broadway, soon changing its names again to become the Mutual Theatre seven years later. Like many vaudeville theaters this one-time vaudeville house solely featured movies. The building was closed and then demolished during June 1955.

In 1916, the “Indianapolis Star” included an interesting article about an upcoming burlesque performance at the Majestic Theatre (26 Nov. 1916, page 52). As the article’s 102^nd anniversary is very near, I thought that I would include it in today’s post.

Charles  Robinson and his “Parisian Flirts” Company seemed to be ushering in the holiday season in Indianapolis that year. Here is the article in its entirety:

“Majestic – Burlesque

Charles Robinson and his ‘Parisian Flirts” Company, will be the attraction at the Majestic Theatre next week.

Manager Robinson claims to have one of the best attractions playing the circuit. The books are from the pen of Ed Hanford, the famous actor-playwright, and are considered his best efforts. The musical numbers are of the tuneful sort that make you whistle and go home in a happy frame of mind. In the cast are: Charles Robinson, the famous tramp comedian; the Harmonists Four, May Bernhardt and Mabel Lee, Harry S. LeVan, Charles E. Edwards, Al Turpee, William Mack, Gertrude Sommers, Freda Lehr and the Dancing Hawaiians.

The company is large, mostly girls, who have made burlesque famous. There are many novelties in the show, and the lyrics are full of smart witticisms.”

It was hard not to read this article without thinking of “You Gotta Have a Gimmick” from the musical Gypsy. Here is the link to one of my favorite versions (1962): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gFRSawe33sA.

Have a Happy Thanksgiving – I am taking the next two days off to enjoy my family.

To be continued

Part 571: Streets of Paris in St. Paul, Minnesota

In 1907, Thomas G. Moses wrote, “In April I went to St. Paul to put up the show ‘Streets of Paris’ in the Auditorium. It fitted alright and looked well.”

The show was given by the Junior Pioneers and held in the St. Paul Auditorium. The Auditorium, built by popular subscription, had been recently completed and turned over to the city only a few weeks prior to the event. 50,000 people attended “Streets of Paris” that spring. One of the display booths was a reproduction of the Eiffel Tower by an electric company. It was located in the center of the hall as part of an area arranged to replicate the streets of Paris. This type of project continued to offer opportunities to scenic studios as themed booths required creative construction methods and scenic art.

Events such as the “Streets of Paris” became increasingly popular during the first decade of the twentieth century. They offered local companies an indirect method of securing business throughout their area and region. Food fairs, electric shows, advertising shows, automobile exhibits and other popular public events drew thousands of people together in metropolitan areas every years, providing visibility for a variety of products.

The National Electric Light Association Convention even included the presentation of a paper about noting the benefits of the “Streets of Paris” and a previous show at the St. Paul armory in 1907. Prior to the Streets of Paris, the St. Paul Lodge of Elks held a pure-food show and home industrial carnival at the armory. The event provided St. Paul Gas Light Company with an opportunity to present the many sanitary and other reasons to use electricity for cooking, heating, lighting and ventilating, showing the possibilities of improved electric appliances. For the “Streets of Paris” there were demonstration with electric coffee percolators and electric cooking appliances.

As with the armory, the St. Paul Auditorium was well adapted to reach a large number of people at the same time. It was an ideal advertising opportunity for many local businesses. These grand scale events subsequently provided work for scenic studios throughout the region to supplement their income. There was more work than any one studio could handle, so studios outside of the area were brought in to create a variety of display booths and exhibits.

To be continued…

Part 570: Cleopatra at Kansas City’s Electric Park

In 1907, Thomas G. Moses wrote that he did one project “outside in the Electric Park.” He noted that it was a small Cleopatra production.

The Electric Park that Moses worked at was the second amusement park constructed by Joseph, Michael, and Ferdinand Jr. Heim, of Heim Brothers Brewery. It opened to the public May 19, 1907, and remained in operation until 1925 when it burned to the ground. The first Electric Park in Kansas City constructed by the Heim Brothers was built next to the Heim Brewery in 1899. At the time, Heim Brothers Brewery was the largest brewery in the world.

The first Electric Park was open from 1899-1906. When the first park closed, some of the attractions were moved to the second Electric Park. Both parks were known for their illuminated buildings and considered trolley parks.

Known as Kansas City’s Coney Island, the second Electric Park was served by the Troost Avenue, Woodland Avenue, and Rockhill lines of the Metropolitan Street Railway Company. The park featured band concerts, vaudeville theatre, a natatorium (outdoor swimming area), boat tours, soda fountains and ice cream shops. A variety of attractions included, an electric fountain, a ballroom, a German Village, and alligator farm, boat tours, and old mill ride, a scenic railway, a shooting gallery, ice cream shops, an air gun gallery, Chutes, Dips Coaster, Norton Slid, Hale’s Tour of the World, a Temple of Mirth, Flying Lady, Double Whirl, a carousel, pool room, penny parlors, Casino 5 Cent Theatre, fortune telling, palmistry, a covered promenade and horseless buggy garage.

In 1911, one million people visited Electric park, averaging 8000 visitors a day during the season. It was the second Electric Park, however, that would prove inspirational to Walt Disney when he designed Disneyland.

When the park burned to the ground in 1925, a young Walter Cronkite witnessed the event. In his 1996 memoirs, “A Reporter’s Life” he wrote, “Our hill overlooked, a half dozen blocks away, Electric Park…One night after closing it burned in a spectacular fire. The Ferris wheel seemed to turn as the flames climbed up its sides. The grease caught fire on the two parallel tracks of the Greyhound Racer roller coaster, and twin blazes raced up and down with the speed of the cars that once toured the Disorderly conduct tumultuous circuit…”

To be continued…

Part 569: Thomas G. Moses and “Lucky Jim”

In 1907, Thomas G. Moses wrote, “I made a big mountain set for Charles Forrester for “Lucky Jim.” It was a very effective set. Stage settings produced by Moses for the production included “a picturesque mountain scenery with Jim’s lovely cabin on the side of a ravine” (The Winnipeg Tribune, 3 1907, page 7). The description reminded my of the Hermitage composition that he painted for Masonic degree work produced at Sosman & Landis. I have attached some images of this York Rite setting.

“Lucky Jim” was a tabloid melodrama in two acts. Set in the Sierra Nevadas, Charles Forrester played the lead role of Jim Hamilton. Hamilton was featured in the production with his wife, Jane Courthope.

Of “Lucky Jim,” the “Winnipeg Tribune” described the show: “The locale is in the Sierra Nevadas and the opening scene shows Jim Hamilton and his dog Christmas Eve seated in his mountain cabin. Hamilton is about to put an end to his own and his dog’s existence, when a young boy comes in, starving and nearly frozen to death. Hamilton feeds the boy and in attempting to put him to bed, a neat line of comedy occurs. Finally the youngster tells of brutal treatment he received in a former camp, and they enter into a partnership to search for gold during the ensuing year.

“The second scene, a year later, shows a path leading to Jim’s camp, where Alice Staffard appears, telling a tale of her former marriage, of her husband stealing the child and leaving for parts unknown. Arriving at Hamilton’s camp, she discovers her boy, and during the talk between mother and son, Jim appears and in Jim she discovered an old lover whom she jilted years before. Old love is rekindled and a pretty comedy finish is made. Fifty pieces of special scenery are used in this act, and the electrical effects are said to be perfect” (30 Nov. 1907, page 14)

The “Morning Oregonian” reported, “The scenic effects are particularly worthy of mention” (15 Sept. 1908, page 9). Until 1900, it was common for the production reviews to list an artist by name, or even a specific studio. About 1905, there is a distinct shift where the scenery might receive mention in the newspaper, but detailed descriptions and the artists who created the scenery begin to diminish. As with “Lucky Jim,” the scenery is mentioned, but not Thomas G. Moses or Sosman & Landis. My stance is that this is point in time where the perception of scenery begins to be identified as simply “backings.” Of course there are exceptions, but there is a notable shift in public perception of stage scenery. The appreciation for scenic illusion and the reverence the public held for the scenic artist starts to fade; scenic artists begin their gradual disappearance behind the scenes.

To be continued…

Part 568: Chicago Industrial Exhibit at Brook’s Casino, 1907

In 1907, Thomas G. Moses recorded that one of his projects was “Brook’s Casino Exhibit of the sanitary and unsanitary workrooms in Chicago,” noting that it was “ some stunt.” He wrote, “I had to go among some awful places to get some sketches for the work and not far from the studio.” He was talking about the Chicago Industrial Exhibit held at Brooke’s Casino from March 11-17 in 1907.

In 1905, the Chicago Woman’s Club held a conference on Women in Modern Industry. Two years later they sponsored the Chicago Industrial Exhibit. This event was held to depict current industrial conditions, representing the labor that fed and clothed the “modern” world. There were many displays that contrasted sanitary shops with insanitary shops and unacceptable conditions. Moses helped create displays that revealed the hard and material side of life that occurred in factories and workshops. One of the objects of the overall exhibit was to influence legislation to investigate of the conditions of working women and children at the time.

There were “Process Exhibits in Modern Industry” that showed groups of young men and girls working in their trades, depicting shop conditions, the hours of work, how workers are paid by the piece and not the hour, the speed, the skill and the overall youth. There were booths that depicted, “A Night Scene in a Glass Factory in Pennsylvania,” “The Coal-breakers,” “Boy miners three miles from daylight,” “Stogie-making in Pittsburg,” “Rag-stripping,” “The Custom Tailor Shop,” and “Cash Girls and Delivery Boys.” Other areas depicted boot and shoe making, glove making, printing/bookbinding, candy wrapping, bakeshops, woodworking factories, laundry facilities, and much more.

There was a handbook that accompanied the Chicago Industrial Exhibit including many photographs of the displays. Here is the link: https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=wu.89058507294;view=1up;seq=9 It is a very insightful publication that depicted the “sweated industries” of the time, women in industry, protected machinery and occupational diseases.

During the conference, presentations discussions “The Child in Industry,” “Risks in Industry,” “The Power of the Consumer Over Industrial Conditions,” “The Immigrant in Industry,” “Women’s Fitness For Industrial Life,” “Women in Industry – Special Problems,” “Industrial Education,” “Women in Industry – Remedies,” and “Demonstrations in the Evolution of Textile Processes.”

In the “Sweated Industries” area a group of typical Chicago tenement houses were constructed so that the contents of several rooms were clearly seen from without. The purpose of the exhibit was to promote remedial legislation covering sweating in food and clothes products, and to improve conditions tending to lower the health and morals of the workers in the sweated trades, by attracting the attention of the public to the conditions as they existed.

There was also an exhibit of an “Insanitary Tenement Sweatshop- old-fashioned foot-power shop.” The handbook noted, “In a room such as this a child with scarlet fever was recently found sleeping in a pile of sweatshop clothing. Several members of the family were finishing pants in this room when discovered. In this particular case the place was closed by a Factory Inspector, and the clothing disinfected by the Health Department. How largely the recent epidemic of scarlet fever in Chicago was due to the fact that the clothing is manufactured in tenement houses under such conditions as these is a matter of conjecture. This shop is shown in opposition to the sanitary clothing shop with mechanical power.”

In this brochure there were some interesting statistics that provides a little peak into the history of working women:

-Of married women, 5.6% were gainfully employed

-Of gainfully employed women, 14.5% were married.

-There was a noted lack of occupation opportunity for women. In 1840, there were 140 employments open to women. By 1907, women were employed in 295 occupations, but over 86% were found in only 18 of these occupations.

The handbook stated, “Men seem to be crowding women out.”

Similarly, we remember why child labor laws were instituted. In 1907, the National Child Labor Committee called attention to the fact that there were no less than 450,000 children under 16 years of age at work in manufacturing and mechanical pursuits in the United States. This number did not include the thousands of children under ten years of age who sold newspapers and merchandise in the streets, nor the children classed as agricultural workers. The handbook included the statement, “The vast army of children, deprived of educational opportunities, stunted in growth, subjected too often to immoral influences, is a constantly increasing menace to our civilization.” In the history of the United States, that is really not that long ago.

To be continued…

Part 567: Thomas G. Moses and the McAlester Masonic Job, 1907

In 1907, Thomas G. Moses wrote, “South McAlister Oklahoma was a good Masonic job.” He was referring to the second scenery installation delivered to the Scottish Rite in McAlester, Oklahoma by Sosman & Landis. Moses was also involved with the delivery of the first and third installation to the McAlester Scottish Rite. For me, everything gets exciting at this point in Moses’ diary as many of the Scottish Rite installations that he worked on are still hanging in theaters across the country.

The used McAlester Scottish Rite scenery collection from 1907 is now used in Salina, Kansas. The drops are clearly marked with the original delivery location of “So. McAlister,” or sometimes, “McAllister;” the same misspelling that Moses used in his diary.  Other charcoal notations on the scenery note the original size of 18 feet high by 36 feet wide.

Here is the story of the three scenery installations for McAlester – 1901, 1907 and 1929. In 1901, Sosman & Landis delivered the first scenery installation to “South McAllister.” By 1907, there was the construction of a second theater that necessitated the purchase of a new scenery collection for McAlester, Oklahoma. As with many first-generation Scottish Rite scenery collections, it was returned to the studio for credit on a new purchase to be refurbished and sold to another venue.

The first 1901 collection was sold to the Scottish Rite in Santa Fe, New Mexico during the planning phase for their 1912 building. The purchase of the used scenery was requested by the SGIG (Sovereign Grand Inspector General) of New Mexico, Harper S. Cunningham. Cunningham was previously the SGIG to Oklahoma and instrumental in integrating theatrical productions as part of Scottish Rite degree work. He was known as the “Temple Builder.” When Cunningham requested that the Santa Fe Scottish Rite Bodies purchase the used McAlester scenery collection, he intended that the purchase old McAlester scenes would prepare the members for their new theatre; they would understand the logistics of theatrically staging degree productions.

At the time of the used scenery purchase, the Santa Fe Scottish Rite Masons met in a standard lodge room – the Masonic Hall on Water Street near the center of town. Like many Masonic meeting rooms, it was located in an upper-level space and was rectangular in format. In 1908, the hall was renovated to include a small stage for the McAlester, Scottish Rite scenery – this was also common practice at the time.

I made this discovery while doing research for the book “The Santa Fe Scottish Rite Temple: Freemasonry, Architecture and Theatre” (Museum of New Mexico Press, 2018). I recognized the drop curtain in a few historic photographs that were being used in another chapter. The drop matched images that I took of a historic McAlester Scottish Rite photograph. I compared the two sets of historic photographs and realized that they matched! The first-generation scenery is no longer in existence, with the exception of a possible grand drape piece that was rolled up and stored in wardrobe.

As with McAlester, both the first-generation and second-generation scenery collections for the Santa Fe Scottish Rite were produced by Sosman & Landis, a subcontracted project from M. C. Lilley & Co. Bestor G. Brown, western sales manager for M. C. Lilley, would contract all of the theatre work for a Scottish Rite theater and then subcontract portions of it, such as the scenery to Sosman & Landis and the lighting to Frank Adam electric.

When the third McAlester Scottish Rite stage was planned, their second scenery collection was sold to the Scottish Rite in Salina, Kansas, for their new building during 1927.

In Moses’ scrapbook, he pasted a newspaper clipping about the used McAlester Scottish Rite scenery collection that was purchased by the Salina Scottish Rite in 1927. The article reported, ”The one hundred and seventeen drops of scenery that has been in use on the old stage for twenty-five years, has been sold to the Scottish Rite Bodies of Salina, Kansas, and it has been shipped to them. There was nearly a carload of it. Brother John T. Leibrand, 33°, Wise Master of South McAlester Chapter of Rose Croix, negotiated the sale to the Salina brethren who came to McAlester to inspect it. The scenery was painted by Brother Tom Moses under the direction of that great Scottish Rite Mason and student Bestor G. Brown, and was said to be the finest in the Southern Jurisdiction at the time. Brother Tom Moses is painting the scenery for our new stage settings. He is also building stage properties, and all will be the last thing in that line. The brother that does not see this great stage and these wonderful properties at our Fall Reunion will miss something. The Salina brethren are negotiating with Brother John G. Redpath, who had charge of the old stage for years, to superintend the hanging of the drops in their temple.”

To be continued…