Drypigment.net

Travels of a Scenic Artist and Scholar: CITT August 15, 2018

I am taking a brief break from my tales concerning the life and times of Thomas G. Moses to focus on CITT. This year
CITT is in St. Catharine’s, Ontario; this is the Canadian equivalent of USITT (United Institute of Theatre Technology). My company, Historic Stage Services LLC, was co-sponsoring a  scene painting class with Rosco paint to explore foliage painting techniques. The class consisted of a diverse group of theatre practitioners interested in painting techniques. The class was scheduled from 9AM-5PM on August 15 and 9AM-12PM.

Part 480: Chicago is My Kind of Town

In 1904 Thomas G. Moses returned to Chicago. That same year, he was finally accepted into the prestigious “Salmagundi Club” in New York City. R. M. Shurtleff has sponsored his membership into this fine art society and Moses was eager to continue with his artistic studies. In addition to making inroads into the world of fine art, the scenic studio of Moses & Hamilton was doing very well. This meant that it was very hard for Moses to walk away from future projects in New York, as well as his business partner Will Hamilton. Moses wrote, “When I had to tell Hamilton, I almost gave in to stay with him, for he was awfully broken up over it, as he saw his meal ticket slipping away.” Since the beginning, Moses was the heart and soul of the company. Even five years later, Hamilton would still advertise his previous partnership with Moses as “formerly of Moses & Hamilton.”

Of Moses & Hamilton, Moses wrote, “Our work was rather pleasant and we received good prices. I sometimes think I should have stayed as our business was increasing each year. Our fiscal year was June 1^st and I remained at [Coney] Island up to the last.” They had just opened “War of the Worlds” at Luna Park that season. They received $2,900.00 on this work and made a profit of $2,200.00, as they painted it in less that one half the time they thought it would take. Moses commented, “The show was a big hit.” It was hard for Moses to leave his success to become one of many painters in a studio, even if her were in charge.

But he would not be welcomed with open arms by everyone at Sosman & Landis. Moses wrote about his return to Sosman & Landis that year, “When Mr. Sosman announced to the ‘gang’ that I was coming back and would take charge of all the work, there was much dissention among a few.” In particular, one lead scenic artist resented Moses’ return to a supervisory role. Moses continued, “Fred Scott tried to start a mutiny and went as far as he could by quitting, hoping the others would follow. But none did, and he came back and asked for a job. I put him on for he was a clever painter.” Scott was still working at Sosman & Landis in 1911. Very little is known about this scenic artist other than a few brief comments in Moses’ memoir.

Moses continued to describe his return to Sosman & Landis, “I fell in line with the old work rather quickly. It lacked the interest of production work, but after all, what is the difference? There is no glory to be had in the painting of a production – all the honor goes to the stage manager or director.” In some ways Moses’ return to Sosman & Landis broke his spirit; he was settling, possibly abandoning his dream of fine art. I believed that Moses recognized that his own artistic growth would become stagnant while employed at Sosman & Landis. This was why he yearned to be a fine artist; at the end of the day, you are in charge of the end product and how it will appear before the audience. Fine art is often treasured, whereas backdrops are often perceived as mere backings, regardless of how fine the painting.

Moses also commented on Landis’ failing health, writing, “We found Mr. Landis in bad shape. While he seemed to know Ella and myself, he couldn’t talk at all, yet appeared to be awfully glad to see us.” Moses might have painted side by side with Sosman over the years, but there was unique loyalty to Landis and his family.

To be continued…

Part 479: Bring Him Home

Thomas G. Moses excelled in New York from 1901 until 1904. He was succeeding in business with his partner Will Hamilton as they operated Moses & Hamilton. In fact, they had more work than they could handle, while even expanding into the amusement park business at Luna Park. Moses & Hamilton produced scenery for Broadway and amusement park attractions ranging from “A Trip to the Moon” to “20,000 Leagues Under the Sea.” Moses was at the top of his game and soaring in the world of fine art, having finally been accepted into membership at New York’s famed Salmagundi Club. He hoped to someday leave the hard grind of the studio for receptions at a fine art gallery.

What Moses didn’t plan on was his wife’s desire to return to their home in Illinois. Tom and Ella Moses were raised in Sterling and moved to Chicago early in their marriage. Their family and network of support remained in the Chicago area. Regardless of artistic opportunities for Moses, he felt his wife’s “pull” to return to the Midwest. There were only a few things that could cause his return from a successful life in New York – family and loyalty. His former employer played the loyalty card in the high stakes game of studio poker while his wife asserted her hopes to return to their Midwest relatives.

During 1904, Thomas G. Moses wrote, “Previous to this spring, I had heard from Mr. Sosman several times, wanting me to return to Chicago. Finally he and Mr. Hunt called on me, and agreed to give me $5,000.00 per year and $5,000.00 in stock and to give me full charge of the studio work, painting, designing and the construction.” What is significant about this statement in Moses’ memoirs is that he would have “full charge of the studio work, painting, designing and the construction.” This means that the design, painting and construction of work produced by Sosman & Landis after 1904 is being guided by Moses. There may be other artists in charge of the actual painting, by Moses now takes responsibility for the work that leaves the studio destined for a variety of performance venues.

Moses continued, “I was really in hopes that [Sosman] would not accept my proposition as Hamilton and I had a good business established, and didn’t want to give that up. But Ella and the children were keen on going back, and after my terms were accepted, I got in the humor myself.” Be careful what you wish for. Moses had to talk himself into all of the positive aspects of his return to Chicago. It would be a step down, no matter how he sized up the future. In New York, he was in command, in Chicago, he would remain at the whims of the company; never having complete control again. He was settling for a secure income, and this greatly unsettled him; it was the beginning of the end for Moses. He would die a slow death until for the next three decades.

Masonic business was booming, but Landis was ill and Sosman needed his “ace painter” back in the shops. Moses was known for his tremendous speed and ability to crank out work, but could he continue to do this amount of work while supervising all aspects of construction?

To be continued…

Part 478: Thomas G. Moses and “The Red Café” and “Mazeppa”

In 1903 Moses & Hamilton produced the scenery for “The Red Café” and “Mazeppa.” Little is known of the specific shows with which they were associated, but they are worth mention as they are just two examples of over two-dozen projects that they worked on during that season The plots of each featured the trials and tribulations of foreign characters; one set in Russia and one set in Poland.

“The Red Café” was advertised as a melodramatic spectacle in five acts. The play was an adaptation of Matthew Brennan’s novel “Zetka,” telling the story of a soldier to the Czar and his efforts to marry the woman he loves. “The Boston Globe” reported, “The play, telling the story of Russian life, has many thrilling scenes which keep the audience at a high pitch. The scene in the czar’s palace at St. Petersburg, where the sentence of exile to Siberia is read, is excellently staged and very interesting. The uprising of the serfs and the quelling mob with the arrival of the czar in the second act is another highly picturesque scene” (The Boston Globe 29 Sept 1903, page 8). Little else is known of this production other than that it traveled with two carloads of special scenery and effects produced by Moses & Hamilton.

The same year, Moses & Hamilton produced scenery for another foreign story – “Mazeppa.” The well-known tale had been performed for decades by 1903 and is often cited the first equestrian dramatic spectacle. “Mazeppa; or, the Wild Horse of Tartary,” was a play adapted from Byron’s 1819 poem. It is based on a popular legend about the early life of Ivan Mazepa (1639–1709), who later became Hetman (military leader) of Ukraine.   In the poem Mazeppa has an affair with a young Polish Countess while serving as a page at the Court of King John II Casimir Vasa. The count punishes Mazeppa by tying him naked to a horse and letting the horse run wild. Much of the poem described the traumatic ride of the young man strapped to the horse.

“Mazeppa” was first adapted for the stage by H. H. Milner and performed at Astley’s during 1831. It remained a popular show for the next thirty years, but in 1863 Adah Isaacs Mencken (1835-1868) became the first woman to portray the Tartar Prince. Menken caused a sensation when she wore a nude-colored outfit on stage; it created the illusion of nudity as she rode the horse. In previous productions performers used a “dummy steed,” but Menken allowed herself to be bound to a real horse for the thrilling ride.

The production that Moses & Hamilton likely created settings for was the 1903 tableaux version. “The Philadelphia Inquirer” reported, “the Mazeppa Tableaux is being exhibited at one of the popular theaters,” after a local reader inquired about the history of Ivan Mazeppa (7 Oct. 1903, page 8). I have not been able to locate any information pertained to the painted settings for the tableaux.

When I think to the process to design and paint scenes for dozens of productions over the course of one year, my mind whirls a bot. Many of the settings that I have located depict elaborate compositions, such as a Russian Czar’s palace or the palatial home of a Polish Count. Moses & Hamilton were creating complex painted compositions that also needed to travel; it was a daunting task to be sure.

To be continued…

Part 477: Thomas G. Moses and “Scout’s Revenge”

In 1903 Moses & Hamilton created the scenery for “Scout’s Revenge,” a four-act melodrama written by Hal Reid. Reid also wrote “The Night Before Christmas,” another 1903 show with scenery by Moses & Hamilton. James Halleck “Hal” Reid (1863-1920) was a playwright and stage actor who eventually transitioned to film, becoming a screen actor, director and writer in Hollywood. He worked with his teenage son, Wallace Reid who was a screen actor and starred in many of Hollywood’s silent film era.

The story of “Scout’s Revenge” portrayed life on the western plains. A homeless boy is murdered and Buck Henshawe, the U. S. government marshal and scout, is notified to investigate the case. The scout sets out to find the guilty party and those responsible for the many robberies that have recently terrorized Sherman. During his investigation, Henshaw meets Olive Benton. Benton is the daughter of Col. Benton, a millionaire ranch owner. The two fall in love. The villain of this melodrama is Wilfred Castro who is also on love with Olive. Castro is related to the Benton family, but leads a double life, as he is also the leader of the outlaws – ‘Captain Wildfire.’ Castro to force Olive to marry him, but she knows he is a villain and repeatedly refuses his matrimonial offers. In the end, the villain is killed and the hero gets the girl.

The story was described in many local newspapers as an attempt to draw in a large audience, such as the Star-Gazette (Elmira, New York, 29 Dec. 1903, page 6). The article reported, “The Scout’s Revenge, which is not quite so full of blood and thunder as might be imagined from its name, is altogether better than the average run of western shows. There is, however, ample opportunity for lots of shooting, but possible objection to this offset in a measure by a good plot and a wealth of pretty scenery. Then, too, there are certain distinct parts of the piece which are characteristic of the quiet, wholesome home life of a Texas ranch. It is a pretty play, depicting life in Southern Texas with a strain of comedy and love running through it. The story of the play deals with the double life led by Wilfred Castro, who poses as a prospector, but in serious business is Captain Wildfire, leader of the band of outlaws. This band of renegades murder a little friend of Buck Hanshaw, a government scout, who has determined to bring Wildfire to justice. Hanshaw swears revenge. From that point to the end the story tells how he got it and the situations and climaxes are thrilling and full of excitement.”

“The Chicago Tribune” commented about the author’s formulaic approach in “Scout’s Revenge.” He wrote, “Villains always plot in the first act. They plot out loud so that the comic friend can hear them and tell the hero, thereby enabling him to get to the spot where the crime is to be committed at the right moment to be blowed up, or shot, or thrown in real water, or something like that just as the curtain goes down in the second act. Wilfred is plotting in the first act of ‘Scout’s Revenge.’ He is the confidential friend of Col Adial Benton, whose bewitching daughter, Olive, the villain is going to marry ‘Cu-urse her, she loves Buck Henshaw.’ Of course, Col. Benton, as the rich and fond parent, is determined to marry his daughter off to the villain, and insists that Buck Henshaw is a low down horsetheif. That’s the way fond parents always do in the first act. Some day some stage parent is going to turn on the villain in the first act and drive him from the house instead of his daughter” (20 Sept. 1903, page 52).

The article describes the scene of Olive’s departure when she says, “Nev-air; I shall not become the wife of yon villain.” Her father responds, “Well, me proud be-u-ty, where will you go?” At this point Buck Henshaw clasps the heroine in his arms and says, “She shall go with me as my wife,” and the act curtain falls. Although this may sound a little bit much, it harkens back to the wild tales of Thomas Moses running away to the big city and his secret correspondence with his future wife Ella, before “rescuing” her from Sterling, Illinois!

In the final act of “Scout’s Revenge,” the “Chicago Tribune” explains, “the villain, disguised as a Mexican, appears at the colonel’s house, for what purpose nobody seems to know except that it is the fourth and last act and the poor villain had to come around and get killed. The funeral is postponed, while the comic friend makes love to the soubrette. Then Buck appears and jerks off the villain’s false mustache and wig and the execution takes place. There is a small battle and as the smoke drifts away and the frantic gallery quiets down Wilfred rolls over two or three times and says that he is dying and that he deserved to be killed, as he was really a bad sort. He then rolls over and over again, and sticking his head in the footlights, dies, and the curtain comes down, just missing the villain, who is dragged back by the heels. Thus do virtue and true love again win their way over conspiracy and dark deeds”

“Scout’s Revenge” was still touring four years later in 1907 (The Morning Journal Courier, 16 Dec. 1907).

To be continued…

Part 476: Thomas G. Moses and “The Wayward Son”

After a brief exploration of Masonic activities during the first decade of the twentieth century, I return to the life and times of Thomas G. Moses in 1903. As Scottish Rite scenery production was on the rise in the Midwest, Moses continued designing and painting scenery in the East. In addition to providing the 1903 stage setting for “Old Sleuth,” “The Ramblers,” Lost in the Desert,” “Reaping the Whirlwind,” “As you like it,” “Lost in the Desert,” “That’s All,” Scout’s Revenge,” “Mazeppa,” “The Night Before Christmas,” “The Red Café,” and “Peg Woffington,” Moses & Hamilton designed and painted the scenery for “Wayward Son.”

The “Buffalo Evening Enquirer reported that there was a “wealth of scenic splendor” in “Wayward Son.” The article continued, “The play is presented with scenic accessories, rarely equaled in variety and magnificence. The great locomotive scene, is an especially fine example of stagecraft” (22 Dec. 1903, page 9). Another article commented, “while many organizations are provided with a full scenic equipment, few companies, even in these days of managerial extravagance, carry such an elaborate scenic outfit” (17 Dec. 1903, page 20).

Newspapers published that the show gained the indisputable right to use the subtitle “A Whirlwind Success” for its mechanical and electrical effects. The technical feature that made “Wayward Son” the “talk of the town” was the scenic illusion in the third act. There was a great locomotive rescue scene that took place in the midst of a driving snowstorm. “The Buffalo Courier” reported, “In this thrilling stage picture the highest art of the scenic artist, the stage mechanician and the electrical expert is represented, the cast of this one scene alone reaching a larger figure than that expended for the entire scenic equipment of many pretentious productions” (13 Dec 1903, page 46). Another article also commented, “Besides its dramatic value, this scene is acknowledged to be one of the most beautiful and lifelike ever presented on the stage” (17 Dec. 1903, page 20).

This comedy drama written by Neil Twomey told the “fascinating story of home life, in which the hero, Tom Hanford, suffers almost every hardship possible to conceive” Star-Gazette (Elmira, New York, 31 Dec. 1903, page 6). The locomotive scene was described in the Star-Gazette article as “the sensational rescue of the hero, Tom Hanford, who is imprisoned in a baggage car by his brother and a confederate, who is no less a person than the chief of police himself. At the moment when the conspirators feel that they have their victim at their mercy the heroine of the play, Martha Barnard, a young secret service detective, dashes onto the stage in a locomotive, which her faithful colored ally, ‘Sleepy Bill,’ quickly couples to the hero’s temporary prison, and, with throttle thrown wide open, the engine dashes forward, to the great discomfiture of the conspirators, bearing the helpless hero to a place of safety” (26 Dec. 1903, page 6).

The “happy-go-lucky” Tom Hanford was played by the author Neil Twomey and the show opened at the Grand Opera House on October 12, 1903. The production enjoyed a long run at the Grand Opera House before touring across the country during 1904 to 1905.

To be continued…

Part 475: Brown’s Special Counterweighted System

 M. C. Lilley’s western sales representative, Bestor G. Brown, subcontracted Sosman & Landis for the painted scenery, props, and stage machinery for their large Scottish Rite Theatre contracts. By 1912, many of the counterweight rigging systems installed in Scottish Rite theaters by Sosman & Landis were referred to as “Brown’s Special Counterweighted,” such as the one at the Santa Fe Scottish Rite.

So what do we know of the system referred to as “Brown’s Special Counterweighted” style of installation and how many are left? There are still examples of Brown’s Special Counterweighted System, however, some are slowly being removed and replaced with other rigging system. I first came across the designation in a series of letters between Bestor G. Brown, and the Austin Scottish Rite representative of Austin William G. Bell. Brown used the Dallas Scottish Rite as one example.

Let me provide a little context for why the counterweight system came up in their discussion. Brown was trying to explain the intricacies of the installation process to a client who was completely unfamiliar with theatre. The Austin Scottish Rite was in the process of purchasing some of the Guthrie Scottish Rite’s old drops. Guthrie had been returned the old drops for credit on the purchase of new scenery when their stage was enlarged in the first building. M. C. Lilley had approximately 70 used Guthrie drops on hand to sell to another venue; they measured 15 feet high by 30 feet wide. A $1400.00 credit was given for the return of their 1901 scenery. The scenery collection was originally purchased for $8,000; today’s monetary equivalent is approximately $250,000, a significant purchase at the time.

On January 23, 1913, Brown also reported, “The [used] scenery is in very good shape – infinitely better that the average theatrical scenery used on the road. The writer personally went over the scenery at the studio last week. While our contract does not contemplate it, we are touching up some of the scenery and if it be properly lighted, you will have a handsome set of scenery that we would not undertake to paint and install for less than, at least, $8,000.00.”

The Austin Scottish Rite was initially interested in purchasing fourteen of the used drops, but wanted a definitive price for installation before determining the final number. Reading several letters of correspondence between Brown and Bell, it is obvious that Brown’s patience was wearing very thin as he had to repeatedly explain the final installation cost was based on the number of drops purchased. The continued correspondence, however, provides a wealth of information pertaining to the manufacture and installation of Scottish Rite scenery.

As Brown negotiated, the Valley of Austin was purchasing and renovating the old 1821 Turner Hall. Brown mailed a scene plat to the Austin Scottish Rite. This was to reference while determining the final arrangement of scenes. Of this process, Brown wrote, “The arrangement of drops is one of the most difficult things.” Brown further explained that they would arrange the used scenery so that it could be “properly adapted to the different Degrees and the sequence of Degrees.” However, he warned that even after careful preparation, some modifications would still need to occur once the scenery was hanging. This was all an art of the haggling between the Austin Scottish Rite and M. C. Lilley. Bell, representing Austin wanted to pay as little as possible for the used scenery. The process was taking longer than expected and Brown was trying to get the Austin Scottish Rite to contractually commit so that the project could be scheduled. Finally, the Austin Scottish Rite committed to the purchase, but wanted an unrealistic timeframe. At this time, a much larger project was driving M. C. Lilley’s installation schedule – the Santa Fe Scottish Rite. Santa Fe’s new building, stage and scenery were delaying all other installations, such as the Austin Scottish Rite

Part of the initial delay was caused by the Austin Scottish Rite, not M. C. Lilley; this concerned the ongoing negotiation pertaining to the estimated expenses of the final installation. The Austin Scottish Rite wanted M. C. Lilley to provide a firm number for the installation cost without specifying the number of drops that they were purchasing from M. C. Lilley. Brown explained that the final expense was directly tied to the number of drops purchased to be installed. The carpenter’s expense of transportation and maintenance were figured from the time he left home until he returned. So, if he were to install only fourteen drops, that part of the expense would be proportionately greater than if he were to install twice that number of drops. Brown also explained that there was a difference in transportation charges directly relating to number of drops purchased and installed, either a full carload of scenery or less than a carload lot.   Brown also explained that M. C. Lilley could also furnish the hardware, such as pulley blocks and counterweight frames if the Scottish Rite wanted the installation done locally; this was the salesman trying to be accommodating.

There was another complication; Brown noted that they had only one specific carpenter who was sent to direct a Scottish Rite installation which was why multiple installations could not simultaneously occur; this individual was actually a Sosman & Landis employee as they installed their scenery. Brown commented that the one who would be “superintending the installation” for the Austin project was currently occupied in Santa Fe at the Scottish Rite, installing an entirely new stage there. This necessitated that their expert stay on site for approximately three weeks. Shortly after Brown’s correspondence with Bell, Brown wrote that their superintendent and installation expert had died from an accident, causing another delay. Brown explained that this employee was the “only one thoroughly familiar with the special method of installing Scottish Rite scenery.” Brown wrote, “We do not mean that it is impossible to follow the same methods as heretofore, but it will take a longer time to do it because of a lack of familiarity with the work.” Thomas G. Moses also mentions the death of their head stage carpenter, writing, “Mr. Brown, our foreman carpenter” died very suddenly.

 

As Brown later explained, M.C. Lilley used only one employee who specialized in Scottish Rite scenery installation. I believe that this individual was the stage carpenter who Thomas G. Moses referred to in his memoirs – Brown. In 1892, the “Carlisle Weekly” reported that a “Stage Carpenter Brown” worked for the Metropolitan Opera House at the time it burned (Carlisle, Pennsylvania, 1 Sept. 1892, page 4). This may have been the same individual before he became associated with Sosman & Landis, as this is the same time when additional staff was added to Sosman & Landis’ studio for Columbian Exposition and other large projects.

 

Stage carpenter Brown was likely the individual who developed the counterweight system, and that the salesman Brown was mistaken for the namesake of the design. Newspapers would therefore erroneously refer to Bestor G. Brown as a “Masonic stage Carpenter.” In 1903 one article noted that Brown “created and developed the application of modern scenic properties to the dramatic presentation of all Masonic degrees and in this work is almost invariably consulted everywhere throughout the United States.” My findings suggest that “Brown’s Special Counterweighted” was credited to the salesman of the product and not the actual designer; this is understandable if they both shared the same last name.

 

In the end, the Austin Scottish Rite Bodies purchased 64 drops, not 14, on February 25, 1913, from M. C. Lilley. Thomas G. Moses would list the Austin scenery as one of the collections that he supervised while working at Sosman & Landis. The price for these used drops and their later installation was $1,650. The contract specified that a third of the amount was due upon installation (cash), a third due the following year, and the final third due in two years. Surprisingly, this financing was standard for Scottish Rite Theaters. Brown wrote, “In fact, if we had not been able to carry the Bodies in the Southern Jurisdiction as we have, we believe that fully one half of the development of the past ten years would not have been possible.” This is big as it presents how Scottish Rites were able to purchase state-of-the-art scenery, props, lighting and costumes – they were buying everything on credit and only had to pay a third upon receipt of goods. To pay off the rest meant increasing membership numbers that would generate even more income.

Brown died in 1917 at the Battle Creek Sanitorium after a relapse following an operation for kidney complications. At the time Brown was 56 years old and survived by his daughter, Mrs. Dana L. Davis of Topeka. It is sad to think, that a mere 14 years earlier he was a soaring star in both the Fraternity and fraternal supply business. Change can come so quickly.

To be continued…

Part 473: Staging the Third Degree

Yesterday I began exploring the increased sales of Masonic regalia and paraphernalia across the country at the beginning of the twentieth century. Part of the development of theatrically staged Masonic degrees was establishing a need for elaborate stages, complete with painted settings, props, costumes and lighting systems. As the western sales representative for M. C. Lilley and Co., Brown increased the visibility of the fraternal supply company by not only joining numerous Masonic orders and fraternal organizations, but also by ascending to high offices in each order.

A key period becomes 1903 to 1904. By this time, M. C. Lilley had secured the theater contracts for several Southern Jurisdiction Scottish Rite stages, including Little Rock, Arkansas; Oakland, California; Wichita, Kansas; Salina, Kansas; McAlester, Oklahoma; Guthrie, Oklahoma; Portland, Oregon; Duluth, Minnesota and Fort Scott, Kansas. I am sure that there are more, but these are the ones that I have positively identified.

In 1903, Bestor G. Brown became Grand Master of the Grand Lodge of Kansas, placing him in a regional spotlight. He was provided with a unique opportunity to market his vision, especially pertaining to the staging of degree work. This included staging the first three degrees of Freemasonry (Blue Lodge). The Topeka Daily Capital reported, “Good Program is Arranged. Masons will have great meeting tomorrow” (14 February 1904, page 6). Masons from all over Kansas gathered in Topeka for “the forty-eight annual communication of the most worshipful grand lodge of the A.F. and A.M., the thirty-ninth annual convocation of the most exalted grand chapter of the Royal Arch Masons and the thirty-sixth annual assembly of the most illustrious grand council of the Royal and Select Masters.” What this means is that 600 to 700 of the top Masons in Kansas, as well as other visiting dignitaries, would be gathered both for both public and Private meetings; many would be exposed to the theatrical interpretation of degree work for the first time.

If one were to pitch a new idea, this is the time and place to promote it. Here is what Brown did, he promoted his company and staged the third degree of Masonry in full costume. The “Topeka Daily Capital” reported that the Grand Officers, together with a team selected from the local lodges, would stage the third degree of Masonry “in full costume” in the Representative Hall. This space was fitted up to function like the early stages in Masonic Halls. Masonic Halls were the precursor to a formal Scottish Rite stage. A rectangular room, similar to a banquet hall, was slightly altered to include an elevated stage on one end of the room; sometimes the stages were temporality constructed for a specific event. Some even included a proscenium arch, front curtain, and a few roll drops to establish the appropriate environment. In cases were roll drops were not rigged for the performance, wings, shutters, book flats, or profile pieces were temporarily positioned to provide the painted backings for early degree productions.

Interestingly, at the end of this event, the Scottish Rite Masons of Topeka hosted a banquet and musical program for all visiting Masons in the Masonic Hall. There is something to be said about the visual impact of a staged scene. During the same event, a special assembly was held in the Masonic Hall to confer the high degrees of Royal, Select, and Super-Excellent Master. The article reported, “This council has not only a state, but a national reputation, and will present the beautiful degrees of Cryptic Masonry with its complete equipment and paraphernalia.”

To be continued…

Part 472: Back to Bestor G. Brown in 1903

In 1903 Thomas G. Moses was living in Mount Vernon, New York, and maintaining a studio in New York City. His firm, Moses & Hamilton, employed a small staff, using the paint frames at the American Theatre. While Moses was busy creating a variety of settings for Broadway, touring productions, and outdoors amusements, the Masonic scenery market started to surge.

This brings us to the point of the theatrical manufacturers and suppliers who were outfitting Masonic theaters. Business alliances start to form, including that between M. C. Lilley & Sosman & Landis in Chicago. At this same time that Masonic business increases, Landis retires from the company due to poor health. This leaves Sosman overwhelmed with the combined duties of running both the shops and completing all necessary administrative duties. Landis was in charge of sales and marketing, whereas Sosman controlled the manufacturing end of the business.

Enter, Bestor G. Brown, Mason and salesman for M. C. Lilley. Bestor G. Brown (1861-1917) was a key individual in the development of Masonic stages during the late-nineteenth and early-twentieth centuries; an instrumental figure in the promotion of Scottish Rite degree productions across the country. Brown entered Masonic regalia and paraphernalia sales in 1892, working as a traveling salesman with his home residence in Chicago from 1892 to 1898. The potential for future sales offered during the Columbian Exposition was a major incentive for Brown to leave Kansas and head to Illinois. In 1899, Brown moved to Topeka, Kansas, and then Kansas City in 1904, relocating to this central hub as the western sales manager of M. C. Lilley Company. The need for a regional office in 1904 was a direct result of sales skyrocketing in the western region. Brown was in the right place at the right time. For more information about Brown, see past installments #351-353.

Brown’s involvement with Freemasonry extended to the Scottish Rite, York Rite, Midian Shrine, and Order of the Eastern Star. This brings us to 1903, when Brown became the Grand Master of Kansas. He was also the Past High Priest of the Grand Chapter, Royal Arch Masons of Kansas; Past Master (and one of the first members initiated) of Siloam lodge, No. 225, A.F. and A.M.; Past Grand Master of the Grand Council; Past Grand Commander of Knights Templar in Kansas; General Grand Scribe of the General Grand Chapter of Royal Arch Masons; a Past Grand Sovereign of the Grand Imperial Council of the Red Cross of Constantine; and an officer in the national Grand Council. Brown also had the distinction of having sat at the Royal Lodge in London when King Edward presided (Fort Scott Daily Tribune, 12 July 1917, page 2). Other fraternities that Brown joined included the Odd Fellows, Knights of Pythias and the Psi Upsillon Fraternity, of which he organized several chapters.

Here is the section titled “Masonic” that appeared in“The Portsmouth Herald” on June 12th 1893 (page 3). I am posting the section in its entirety, as it is a wonderful snapshot into Masonic activity and Brown’s level of fraternal involvement.

 

“Masonic.

 

The new grand master of Kansas, Bestor G. Brown, has been unusually active in lodge, chapter and council work since his admission to the fraternity in 1884 and is noted for his devotion to Masonry. Mr. Brown is called the only Masonic stage carpenter in the country. He created and developed the application of modern scenic properties to the dramatic presentation of all Masonic degrees and in this work is almost invariably consulted everywhere throughout the United States. He was grand high priest of the grand chapter of Kansas in 1893, grand master of the grand council in 1891 and has held many other high offices. Mr. Brown was born in 1861 and is one of the best ritualists in the United States.

 

There are 110 lodges in Connecticut with a membership of 18,500, an increase of 784 for the past year.

 

At the recent session of the grand lodge of New York all of the officers of last year were unanimously re-elected.

 

Mecca temple, Nobles of the Mystic Shrine, of New York city now has a membership of 4,925.

At the last session of the grand lodge of New Mexico the grand secretary reported membership in that jurisdiction of 1,146.

 

A magnificent new Masonic temple will be erected in Phillipsburg, Kan.

 

There is talk of erecting a new Masonic temple in Schnectady, N.Y., to cost $100,000.

 

Membership reports read at the fiftieth annual conclave of the grand commandery of Pennsylvania showed good gains for the year. There are about 15,000 Knights Templar in the jurisdiction now, an increase of nearly 1,000 since the last conclave.

 

An application has been received from American Masons in Tientsin, China, for the establishment of a lodge there.

 

The Masonic home of Manchester, N. H., was recently dedicated by Grand Master Harry M. Cheney.”

 

Masonic activities abounded and Brown would be the perfect person to market the theatrical interpretation of degree work. He would subcontract Sosman & Landis for the scenery; Sosman would need help and this is where Moses would factor in again. Sosman needed Moses back in Chicago to supervise the shop.

 

To be continued…