Drypigment.net

Copyright © 2020 by Wendy Waszut-Barrett

Yesterday’s post explored the Oak Park Theater, a venue with entertainment managed by Jones, Linick & Schaefer. This theatrical management firm was featured in Frederic Hatton’s article “A Romance of Chicago Theatricals” for the “Chicago Daily Tribune” (30 Dec, 1916, page 22). This is a fascinating article that provides insight into not only the theatre industry, but also many Chicago theaters:

 “The rise of Jones, Linick & Schaefer if Chicago’s most recent commercial romance. The rapidity with which success has waited upon them dims many a tale of fortune in Chicago’s earlier days, days which were once considered to have been much more pregnant of opportunity than the present.

One can hear J., L. & S. on the loop street breeze now. The brief firm formula has a catchy ring. It drops easily from the tongue and it is so much in Rialto speech that it comes out now as if planted with a rubber stamp. Yet a few years ago no one except a few vaudeville men could tell you anything about this firm. It was known to have successfully planted a new brand of vaudeville in a few playing houses, but with the acquisition of McVicker’s and the Colonial at the end of the season these men leaped into the spotlight, as it were, fully made up as metropolitan managers. Their entrance to the loop stage was sudden and dramatic. Now you can hear the wildest sort of gossip as to how much money a day the form makes and how sudden it is to gobble up the entire theatrical business.

Bent on the discovery of these new phenomenons [sic.], we traced them down to their offices over the Orpheum Theatre on State Street. On the third floor there you can find a very accurate reproduction of scenes, which are supposed to be current in America only along Broadway. There your will find actor waiting in abundance without the rail which admits the privileged; there you will find non-resident managers in plenty arranging for bills and acts. Within the gates there are further signs of productive theaterdom – busy agents, stenographers, routing men. Booking directors and skillful executives. Playing the vaudeville game on a big scale is a bit like chess. It is all a matter of moves, and he who moves first has the offensive and the advantage. Jones, Linick & Schaefer have shown themselves masters of the quick, decisive move. They are not announcers of plans; they believe in coming up to a condition and then acting instantly.

In the innermost office of all the Orpheum you will find Messrs. Jones, Linick & Schaefer at triplet desks, one in the window, and another at each side of the room. Mr. Jones, the president of the firm, is short, dark, slender and very alert. He is a bundle of nervous energy. Mr. Schaefer is rather his opposite, being of serene, jovial, and easy-going presence, while Mr. Linick differs from both the others in being tall, wiry and rather soldierly. All seem to be in thorough harmony, which is perhaps the secret of their success.

All modestly disclaim being theatrical magnates or any other sort of bugaboo, being anxious to convey the impression that they had been lucky and their only credit lies in being strictly business.”

The paper then listed the theaters
First in amusement, in price, in the hearts of Chicago Playgoers.”

The article also went on to describe each of the firm’s venues:

THE RIALTO- Chicago’s handsomest theatre with perfect ventilation. The first month of the year 1917 will become the birth month of the Rialto Theatre, built at a cost exceeding $600,000 by Jones, Linick & Schaefer. Within a few weeks it will open its doors with high class, popular priced vaudeville, with a policy similar to McVicker’s. Marshall & Fox are the architects and Fleishmann Construction Company are the builders. Its location, on State Street, between Jackson and Van Buren, in the heart of the loop.

MCVICKER’S THEATRE – located on Madison Street near State, is the most popular continuous vaudeville house in Chicago. It was built by James H. McVicker in 1854, burned to the ground twice and remodeled recently at a cost of many thousands of dollars. Performances are continuous from 11 A.M. to 11 P.M.

LA SALLE THEATRE – The La Salle Theatre, located in the very heart of the loop on Madison Street and Clark, gained renown throughout America as the birthplace of musical comedy. For many years the most popular of the lighter musical plays were originated and produced at the La Salle, but at present the house is given over to the exhibition of motion pictures. Mary Pickford in “The Pride of the Clan” now occupies its screen, where performances are given continuously from 9 A.M. to 11 P. M.

ORPHEUM THEATRE – The Orpheum Theatre, on State Street opposite the Palmer House, is really the nucleus of the Jones, Linick & Schaefer string of houses. Here their first great success was made and the Orpheum Theatre today stands alone as the only First Run, Daily Change, motion picture house in Chicago. Its performances are continuous from 8:30 A. M. to midnight.

LYRIC THEATRE – The Lyric Theatre is in a class by itself being the only twenty-four hour theatre in the world. Several years ago the key was thrown away and since that time three shifts of employes [sic.] have presented motion pictures every twenty-four hours out of every day, and three hundred and sixty-five days every year motion pictures are offered.

BIJOU DREAM – The Bijou Dream stands directly next door to the Orpheum on State Street near Monroe and is given over principally to long runs of feature pictures. Here the very best art of the motion picture photographer is shown to tremendous crowds all the time. It is a beautiful little play house.

STUDEBAKER THEATRE – The Studebaker Theatre on Michigan Boulevard near Van Buren has been on of the foremost Chicago Theatres for the past decade. The attraction occupying this theatre at present is Annette Kellermann in Wm. Fix’s film spectacle “The Daughter of the Gods,” a marvelous motion picture of novelty and sensation. Performances are given twice daily.

COLONIAL THEATRE – The Colonial Theatre on Randolph Street near State Street is probably Chicago’s greatest play house and had one of the most beautiful lobbies of any play house in the world, built in the Romantic period style. At present it is devoted to two daily performances of “Intolerance,” D. W. Griffith’s marvelous spectacle depicting Love’s struggle throughout the years.

THE BROADWAY THEATRE – The Broadway Theatre will be the newest addition to the Jones, Linick & Schaefer chain and is the only playhouse announced in the outlying district of Chicago attached to this string. The Broadway will be complete by September 1^st, 1917. High Class Vaudeville will be installed, with a policy similar to the “Rialto” and “McVicker’s” Theatres.

To be continued…

Copyright © 2020 by Wendy Waszut-Barrett

In 1916, Thomas G. Moses wrote, “The Oak Park Theatre gave me $825.00 contract for vaudeville scenery.”

The Oak Park Theatre opened on October 20, 1913 and was a combination house, featuring both live vaudeville acts and silent films. Their advertisements promised continuous high-class vaudeville and first run motion pictures. Vaudeville acts for the venue were booked by Jones, Linick & Schaefer, the same firm that handled entertainment for McVickers Theatre, the Colonial Theatre, the Wilson Theatre and many others around Chicago.

Of the Oak Park Theatre, the “Historical American Building Survey” suggested that there was architectural evidence that the building was greatly enlarged in 1915.  This coincides with Sosman & Landis delivering new vaudeville scenery in 1916; new scenery would have been ordered during the renovation. The original building structure had a footprint of 67 feet by 112 feet; the enlarged size after 1915 was 67 feet by 168 feet.

The Oak Park Theatre was located on Wisconsin Street, but the address later changed to 120 S. Marion Street. The venue was at the heart of Oak Park’s entertainment district and near Moses’ home. Many scenic artists and architects settled in Oak Park. The benefit to Oak Park residents was living a short train ride away from downtown Chicago.

There were three theaters in close proximately to one another– Oak Park’s Warrington Opera House (1902 stock theatre), the Oak Park Playhouse (1913 combination house) and the Oak Park Theatre (1913 combination house). The 800-seat Oak Park Theatre was adjacent to the Warrington Opera House, and promised “perfect ventilation.” This meant that the auditorium air was changed every ten minutes. In addition to many “fireproof” features, each seat boasted a “perfect view of the stage.”

In 1917, the “Chicago Eagle” reported, “Lubliner & Trinz” owned and operated the following high class theaters all over the city: Artcraft Theatre at Devon and Clark Streets, Biograph Theatre at 2433 Lincoln Ave, Covent Garden Theatre at 2655 North Clark Street, Knickerbocker Theatre at 6225 Broadway, Michigan Theatre at 55^th and Michigan Boulevard, Paramount Theatre at 2648 Milwaukee Ave., Vitagraph Theatre at 3133 Lincoln Ave, West End Theatre, at No. Cicero and West End Avenues, and the Oak Park Theatre in Oak, Park, Illinois (22 Dec. 1917, page 7). Lubliner & Trinz was operated by Harry M. Lubliner and Joseph Trinz, whose offices were at 510 Westminster Building.

In 1930, the Oak Park Theatre was remodeled and renamed the Lamar Theater. The marquee was added in 1929, the lobby remodeled in 1930 and the stairs relocated in 1936.The new name reflected its location on Lake Street and South Marion Street. Now advertisements forcused on “truly perfect sound” in this “new wonder talkie theatre.” Unfortunately, this Art Deco theater has did not last and was razed in 1988.

To be continued…

Copyright © 2019 by Wendy Waszut-Barrett

In 1916 Sosman & Landis delivered a picture setting to Indianapolis’ Strand Theatre. The studio took out an advertisement in the “Indianapolis Star” when the theater opened, announcing, “Designed, built and painted the elaborate picture setting for the new Strand Theatre listing their contribution. In 1916, studio president Thomas G. Moses recorded projects for picture sets in Fort Wayne, Indiana, and Pittsburg, Pennsylvania, too. The first picture set mentioned by Moses at all in his diaries was during 1915; a $1500 picture set for Fred Ingersoll in Detroit, Michigan. Here is the link for that post: https://drypigment.net2020/01/17/tales-from-a-scenic-artist-and-scholar-part-904-thomas-g-moses-and-frederick-ingersoll-1915/

The term “picture set,” or “picture setting,” had two meanings at the time. The first identified the painted scenery (leg drops and backdrop) that created a lovely setting with a center projection area. The backdrops in these picture sets were also termed “picture sheets.”

Of Fort Wayne project, Moses wrote, “Went to Fort Wayne to stage picture set at the Empress Theatre.” The $1300 project was for painted scenes that framed a projection screen placed within a painted composition. The new scenery was needed for the reopening of the venue as the Empress theater reopened as a combination house, featuring vaudeville acts and the latest three-reel films and serials..The Empress Theatre reopened under new management on June 16, 1916. The “Fort Wayne Sentinel” reported, “EIGHT BIG ACTS OF SUPREME VAUDEVILLE…This theatre, now under the management of large Eastern Circuit and will at all times give the public the best obtainable in from eight to ten acts of Vaudeville and High Class Musical Comedy.”

In 1916 “Picture set” also identified a setting for film production. Newspaper articles suggest that his was a relatively new practice in 1916. These new types of “picture sets” received a substantial amount of publicity. They were even referred to as a “new stunt” in filming (“Hobart Republican,” Hobart, Oklahoma, 17 Feb, 1916, page 7). The “Jackson Daily News” reported, “The use of a big theatre as a motion picture set is a new scheme and proved to be a very effective one” (8 Feb 1916, page). Here is the context…the Republic Theatre was used as a film set for a 1916 Florence Reed picture. Of the film, newspapers reported,  “As soon as the curtain was rung down at 11 o’clock on ‘Common Clay,’ Producer Fitzmaurice with his star, Florence Reed and many extras, came in and took possession of the theatre. Special lights were installed and some twenty scenes taken in jig time….In order to carry out the realism the floor of the theatre was crowded with extras, and friends of various Pathe officials. Mr. Woods himself was present and gave many valuable hints as to detail. The picture is New York,” an adaptation of the one of Mr. Wild’s theatrical productions”  (Jackson Daily News. 8 Feb 1916, page).

In 1916, Moses mentioned another movie picture set, writing, “In March we did a picture set for a suburban town near Pittsburg,” later adding, “We sent two of our picture set models to the Art Institute with the Palette and Chisel Club exhibit, and they received as much attention as some of the pictures.” These were movie set models that were on display for the exhibit instead of models that depicted a central projection screen.

Of the Palette & Chisel Club Exhibit, the “Chicago Tribune” reported, “New Exhibit at Institute. A unique event in the life of the Palette and Chisel Club in Chicago will take place on Tuesday evening, April 25, at the Art Institute. For twenty years the club has been holding its annual exhibitions at its own clubrooms. Tuesday night all precedent and tradition will be violated and its large and interesting collection of the last year’s activities along art lines will be shown at the Art Institute of Chicago. It is to be an extremely comprehensive exhibit, including in its scope not only paintings and sculpture, but the work of some master craftsman as well, men who apply their artistic talents to the usable things of life, incurring thereby the lasting gratitude of the practical masses.”

For the exhibit Gustave Bauman showed his wood block prints and book decorations, while Oswald Cooper, Fred Bersch and B. A. Kleboe exhibited various booklets and interesting examples of fine printing designed by them.  John Carlsen showed special wall paper designs and Watkins Williams exhibited some stage designs.  Williams was noted as a Sosman & Landis scenic artist.  The newspaper article noted Williams as the artist who “designed and painted the scenery for the immortal Sarah Bernhardt on her last American tour.” 

Williams worked at Sosman & Landis. Sosman & Landis models for movie sets would have been an asset to this diverse group, especially in light of Watkins.

One final picture set mentioned by Moses in 1916 was for the Studebaker Theatre in Chicago. Of it, he wrote, “Our big picture set at the Studebaker made a big hit, quiet and dignified.” This was likely another film set, as “quiet and dignified” seems an unusual way to describe a picture sheet.

To be continued…

Copyright © 2020 by Wendy Waszut-Barrett

In 1916, Thomas G. Moses wrote, “May 1^st was my first in six months at painting attempt in the studio.  Models and sketches take up all my time.”

He was now the president of Sosman & Landis.  A partnership had made the firm a success, and now Moses was pretty much on his own. In the beginning, Landis was on the road securing contracts followed by Sosman painting the projects. Moses was their first hire in 1880, assisting Sosman on many of their early projects before the staff grew, yet Sosman maintained artistic control while Landis headed sales. When Landis left in 1902, Sosman appointed Moses vice-president two years later. At this time it was David H. Hunt who focused on sales. By 1916, however, Sosman was gone and Hunt had started his own studio. Moses was left to pick up the pieces and please the shareholders, in addition to competing with Hunt for the same clientele.

Moses was attempting to both secure and supervise projects in the main studio and annexes. His statement, “Models and sketches take up all of my time,” emphasized his workload for sales that year.

He later wrote,  “October 10^th I was re-elected president of the company, Mrs. Sosman vice president and Lester Landis secretary and treasurer…Sosman and Landis Company enjoyed a good year.  We have all been very busy.  I have not done as much as I would like to do in the way of pictures, but I guess I did fairly well.”  Moses then added a sentence that starts to show the wear and tear of his artistic soul, “I live on year to year, hoping, always hoping, for a little more time to gratify my ambition to paint if only one picture that I could really fell was worth while and all the years I have tried to do this were not spent in vain.”

At the beginning of 1916, everything seemed possible. The firm delivered scenery for the Strand Theatre in Indianapolis. Sosman & Landis took out an advertisement in the “Indianapolis Star” in support, announcing, “Designed, built and painted the elaborate picture setting for the new Strand Theatre listing their contribution. “Producers of Quality Scenery” listed Thos. G. Moses as “President and Designer” with P. L. Landis as “Secretary and Treasurer.” The advertisement also noted that the firm was established in 1877. An article also announced “Strand Scenery Excellent,” adding “Thomas G. Moses, president of the Sosman & Landis Company, producers of theatrical scenery, superintended the arrangement of the elaborate setting for the Strand Theatre. Mr. Moses has done a great deal of scenery work in the different theaters of Indianapolis dating back to the first production of Ben-Hur at English’s Theater. Mr. Moses has designed and painted productions in nearly every city in the country. In the Strand stage settings the possibilities for excellent lighting are obvious, and are taken advantage of by the Strand’s electrician, Mr. Dalton” (Indianapolis Star, January 15, 1916, page 9).

Moses started doing something new in 1916; Moses now took credit for his own designs work when Sosman & Landis manufactured it. In other words, programs and newspaper article now differentiated “designed by Thomas Moses” and “built by Sosman & Landis.”   For example, on April 15, 1916, the “Rock Island Argus” reported “[Around the Town] was built in its entirety by the Sosman & Landis scenic company from special designs made by Thomas Moses” (15 April 1916, page 8). Another instance was for the Boston English Opera’s production of “Martha.” Newspaper advertisements reported, “Scenery Designed by Thomas Moses and Built by Sosman and Landis Studios” (The McPherson Daily Republican, 21 Oct 1916, page 5). T was too little too late, as the names of designers were no longer a driving that attracted attention.

All of Moses’ talents and experience wouldn’t help him in the end.  The studio would soon begin to crumble. Times were changing; there was a new game with new rules and a war overseas.  So many things began happen simultaneously and the supply for painted scenery began to outpace the demand.  A new movement was in the making for the stage, and it concerned the rejection of painted scenery on the stage in lieu of fabric setting and motion picture. Moses would become the proverbial fish out of water, with Sosman & Landis floundering. The company would not survive the next seven years.

To be continued.

Copyright © 2020 by Wendy Waszut-Barrett

In 1916, Thomas G. Moses wrote, “Our business relations with the New York Studios are a bit strained, and we have notified them that hereafter there would be no restricted district for us, and we did not care what they did.  Pennsylvania and New York used to be our very best states, and we were going after them again.”  To fully understand Moses’ sentiment, we need to look at Moses relationship with the founder of New York Studios, David H. Hunt.  First of all, Moses never cared for Hunt.

After establishing the unsuccessful theatrical management firm of Sosman, Landis & Hunt in 1894, Hunt convinced Sosman to invest in another scenic studio in 1910, New York Studios. The new company was promoted as the eastern affiliate of Sosman & Landis, well… kind of. Since the 1880s, Sosman & Landis maintained regional offices across the country, but these were mutually beneficial relationships. For example, in 1887 Sosman & Landis established a branch in Kansas City, Missouri, under the direction of Lemuel L. Graham; it was known as the Kansas City Scenic Co., but Lem also did business under his own name too. In the late 1880s Sosman & Landis also established a regional office in New York City.  Multiple locations were the key to success. Just like we hear “shop local,” that sentiment held true in the late-nineteenth and early twentieth century for theatrical projects. Visiting a studio in a nearby town was far better than hiring the unknown firm from a distant studio.

The real issue was that Hunt’s business plans, first and foremost, benefitted Hunt and not his investors or affiliates. In other words, New York Studios gained a massive support network such as Sosman & Landis staff, connections, materials and studio space. I have yet to figure out if there was really any added benefit for Sosman & Landis, but for whatever reason, Sosman had a soft spot for Hunt and went along with many of his schemes. When Sosman passed away in 1915 and Moses was elected president of Sosman & Landis, Hunt no longer had an advocate at the Chicago studio and the gravy train abruptly halted. So, when Moses wrote, “Pennsylvania and New York used to be our very best states, and we were going after them again,” he really threw down the gauntlet at Hunt and a feud began, . The two studios would now wrestle over territories. Moses previously played by an old set of rules, based on respect and gentlemen’s agreements; he was unprepared for the next generation of studio owners as the playing field changed. Hunt was ruled by a different set of motivators – his own self-interest.  In all appearances, Hunt was a slick talker and salesman. So, here is the background between Moses and Hunt…

Moses first met Hunt in 1893, and the two soon paired off on quite a few projects by 1894. In 1897, however,  Moses and Hunt began to disagree. That year Moses recorded an event that concerned Edith Chapman’s production of “Charity Ball.” This is the beginning of a truly unhappy relationship. Here is what Moses wrote:

Mr. Hunt found fault with my neutral coloring and said one day, “Why don’t you make some positive color decoration like pink or green?”

I had the first act of “Held by the Enemy” on the frame – a southern interior. 

I said, “Alright, I will make this a pink wall and cream colored woodwork.”

“Fine,” said he.  I did so.  I did not consult Miss Chapman as usual. The scene was set.  I was in front as usual during the performance.  Miss Chapman entered.  I saw her look up the scene and almost fall back.  She had on a shell pink, deep flounced and a very full hoop skirt. 

I nearly fainted.  I was sick.  I rushed back at the close of the act and found her in tears.  As soon as she saw me, she said, “Oh, why did you do it – didn’t you know I was going the limit on my dress?”  She had forgotten that I did not consult her as  I usually did.  I pointed to Mr. Hunt.  “There is the one I tried to please.”  Hunt then realized he was wrong, and I had been right all season.  I painted out the wall color the next morning, for it simply killed Miss Chapman’s dress, as there was so much of it.”

That same season Moses continued, “The different newspapers gave our work splendid notice every week. For one paper on which Mr. Montgomery Phister was the critic, and his son was the artist, I made a heading for each week’s article on the play at the Pyke – drawing in ink the principal scenes.  Hunt never knew that I did it – he flattered himself the paper was doing it.  Phister had been a scenic artist in his young days and was in full sympathy with the artist. 

One day he said to Hunt for a joke – “I think Moses uses too much raw umber.”

Hunt repeated this to me as his own idea.  I was sure someone that knew color had been at Hunt, so I said, “Raw Umber!  What kind of color is that?  I don’t use it at all.” 

He was stumped and didn’t know what to say.  He went back to Phister, who in turn told me.  We had a hearty laugh over it.” 

I bet they did, and then the battles increased in intensity. The war began in earnest during one of Sosman’s absences from the studio in 1910, likely prompting the establishment of New York Studios.

That year, Moses wrote, “Mr. Sosman went to Europe on January 30^th for an extended trip…He had a good bookkeeper, and I depended on him a great deal.  I did some hustling while he was away.  Mr. Hunt was secretary and treasurer, and expected to run the business, but I wouldn’t allow it.  Mr. Hunt kept on the road most of the time… I heard some reports as to what Hunt had reported to Sosman about my treatment towards him.  I got mad and wanted to quit.  Sosman wouldn’t listen to me…Hunt remained away from the studio for some time, before going back home.”  This is when Hunt establishes New York Studios, partially funded by Sosman. I have to wonder if Sosman only invested in Hunt to separate the two, attempting to keep peace. Of the company, Moses wrote, “Hunt had started a New York studio in New York City, and he expected us to do a great deal of work, as he had Sosman invest a small amount.” But there were other contingencies, including the restricted districts that in 1916 Moses chose to ignore. So when one reads Moses 1916 entry, “Our business relations with the New York Studios are a bit strained, and we have notified them that hereafter there would be no restricted district for us, and we did not care what they did,” it takes on a whole new meaning.

In the end, Moses may have picked the wrong man to do battle with that year.

To be continued…

Copyright © 2020 by Wendy Waszut-Barrett

In 1916, Thomas G. Moses wrote, “Pausback went to the 20th Street studio, part of which we rented for a couple of months.  We put plenty of help with Pausback to rush the work through, and I think he will be able to pull it out, as we are too busy at Clinton street to take much of it.”

Sosman & Landis’ main studio was on Clinton Street. Over the years, the firm would lease additional studio spaces that were referred to as “annex studios.”  The 20^th Street Studio was an annex studio.  For years, any annex studio was under the direct supervision of Moses, unless he was called away – which was a lot. Since 1904, Moses was in charge of all design, construction, painting and installation of projects at Sosman & Landis.  This was not a first-time that Moses moved staff from one building to another. Since 1908, Pausback has bounced back and forth between the main studio and various annexes, he was a shop manager.

Nicholas “Nick” John Pausback Jr. was a scenic artist, described as a tall, slender man with grey eyes and dark brown hair.

Pausback was born on May 5, 1881; this makes him twenty-five years younger than Moses. The Registry of Births for the city of St. Louis, Missouri, lists that Nick Pausback was born at Rappahannock St.  and his parents were to Nicholas and Caroline Pausback. He was one of seven children; his siblings were Maria (b. 1879), Joseph (b. 1883), Eva (b. 1884), August (b. 1885), Stella (b. 1888), and Clara (b. 1889).

The 1900 US Census lists the nineteen-year-old Pausback as living with his family at 3113 Magnolia in St. Louis, Missouri. At the time, his occupation was noted as “artist – painting.” He was the only one in the family that entered theatre industry. His siblings worked as milliners, salesmen in clock stores, clerks in a mill and saloon employees. Pausabck’s mother even worked at a grocery store. Interestingly, his little brother became an boxer, making headlines after ca collapse in the ring during a 1906 match at the Broadway A.C. in St. Louis (“St. Louis Globe-Democrat,” 18 April 1906, page 13). Brother Joe was in the 125-pound class and reported to be a “youngster with a record for having the stiffest punch of any boy of his weight in the city” (St. Louis Globe-Democrat, 16 April 1906, page 11). I have not tried to track down the other siblings at this time.

In 1902, there was a newspaper announcement about Nick Pausback’s twenty-first birthday party (St. Louis Republic, 11 May 1902, page 17). Quite a few people attended, including fellow scenic artist Armbruster. Although no first name was given, my best guess is Otto, as he was working for Moses at the time.

By 1905, Pausback was credited with fully equipping the new Grand Theatre in Owensboro, Kentucky. The “Messenger-Inquirer” reported, “Mr. Nicholas Pausback of St. Louis is the artist employed. He has painted several of the scenes and is now at work on the others. There will  be twenty hanging scenes and about seventy-five all told. The greater part of these will be in frames…When the work is completed the Grand will have one of the very best equipped of stages. The two ‘tormentors’ painted by Mr. Pausback have been placed and they are receiving favorable criticism of all who see them.” The project also included a heavy asbestos curtain with “beautiful Venetian scene” (Messenger-Inquirer, 18 July 1905, page 6). Other pieces mentioned included two drop curtains and a fancy parlor scene painted in a Japanese pattern.

That same year, Pausback was also engaged to paint new scenery for the new opera house in Central City (Messenger-Inquirer, 26 July 1905, page 8). The venue would become known as the Gish Opera House. By the way, Central City is halfway between Louisville and Nashville; I had to look. Only four years later, the opera house went up in flames; the fire started during commencement exercises for the Central City School’s music class. The music teacher and children ranging from ages 5-12 were the main victims, perishing in a tragedy locals termed the “Opera House Holocaust” (Cincinnati Enquirer, 26 May 1909, page 1).

Pausback did marry and start a family in St. Louis too. His bride was Ottilia (also Otilia) Groebl (b. 1883), a German immigrant who arrived in 1898. The couple celebrated the birth of six children, three girls and three boys: Nicholas (B. 1905), Elvira (b. 1906), Raymond (b. 1908), Mary (b. 1912), Lawrence (b. 1922) and Therese (b. 1927). Only the first two children were born in St. Louis.

It was in 1907 that Pausback and his family moved from St. Louis to Chicago, and I wonder employment at Sosman & Landis prompted the move. That year, he started to work for the firm as their paint shop foreman. Moses, wrote, “I depended a great deal on Pausback to look after the work while I was away.”

Pausback did not consistently work at Sosman & Landis, however, as he also worked for a variety of other firms. Like many scenic artists of the time, Pausback picked up work wherever he could find it. During the late-nineteenth and early twentieth century, scenic artists accepted extra work even when working full-time positions. Demand for scenic art outweighed the supply and a great deal of money could be made in a relatively short period of time for any ambitious artist.  The phrase “make hay while the sun shines” certainly comes to mind.  

The 1910 US census listed Pausback as an advertiser in the “Packing Co.” industry, still working as a scenic artist though. He would provide this same information for the 1920 census too which makes me wonder what the Packing Co. delivered. There are too many packing companies to even hazard a guess at this time. In 1911, Moses again records that Pausback took charge of the 20^th Street studio.

By 1916, Pausback was back at the 20^th Street studio and also installed a few shows in New York. At the time he was working with the stage carpenter Harry Nailer. Then everything changes.  My guess is World War I and a redistribution of labor. The next year Pausback was working in the advertising department at Swift & Co., located in Chicago’s Union Stock Yards. Keep in mind that many scenic artists were snatched up by the military; camouflage painting was in its infancy and would draw heavily on the expertise of stage painters, those who were skilled at painting for a distance. A decade later, Pausback established his own studio.

In 1927, he founded Pausback studios and ran the firm for twenty years, retiring only six years before his passing in 1953. His scenery company was located at 3727 Cottage Grove Ave., Chicago (Chicago Tribune 2 Dec. 1928, page 2). In 1928 Pausback also wrote a book on stage craft (Dec. 17, 1928). He was in his late forties and seems to have been hitting his stride. Things were continuing to look up, work was plentiful, and there was a new and insatiable client – academic theater.

Educational and academic institutions became a primary client for Pausback Studios, as well as many theatrical supply firms of the time. Public schools were in a constant state of demand, with an ever-growing need for rigging, draperies, and scenic options. Publications focused on how amateur productions could forgo the need of any theatrical expert – “do it yourself” became a popular approach; you just needed enthusiasm and an instructional manual to produce a show.  Part of me wonders if this was the beginning of the end for the professional scene painter, hence the mass migration to Hollywood where an advanced skill set was still required to produce magic.

Of Pausback’s children, only his daughter Alvera (b. 1907) was working for the company after the market crash in 1929. She remained a clerk, possibly the result of labor reduction. Pausback Scenery Co. also provided properties for “Wings of a Century,” a feature at the 1933 world fair in Chicago. In the 1930s, Pausback studio made a huge splash with oversized Christmas tree ornaments. Towards the end of his career, Pausback worked with Arthur “Art” W. Oberbeck, another former Sosman & Landis employee (“Blue Island Sun Standard,” 15 June 1944, Page 6). Oberbeck started as a paint boy at the Sosman & Landis studio in 1904, just a few years before Pauysback joined the staff.

Interestingly, Pausback was also an amateur magician. As a member of the International Brotherhood of Magicians and the American Society of Magicians, he was known as “Nicodemus, the Magician” (Chicago Tribune  14 May 1953, page 36).https://newspaperarchive.com/blue-island-sun-standard-jun-15-1944-p-6/

Overall, Pausback’s obituary listed that he was in the theatrical scenery business for 45 years and did not retire until 1947. It was a little longer than that, according to my calculations. Pausback passed away at the age of 72 in 1953. He is buried in St. Mary Catholic Cemetery and Mausoleum in Evergreen Park, Illinois (Section 1, lot 764). This is now on my “to visit” list, as I track across country and pay homage to those who came before me. 

I end with this: His obituary remembers, “Nicholas J. Pausback, 72, of 1000 S. Rhodes av., retired theatrical scenery contractor, died yesterday in his home. Mr. Pausback, who retired six years ago, supplied amateur and professional theatrical scenery for 45 years, the last 20 years as owner of Pausback Scenic studios. An amateur magician, he was a member of the International Brotherhood of Magicians and the American Society of Magicians. Surviving are his widow, Otilia, three daughters, Mrs. Elvira Pausback Howard, Mrs. Mary Crescentia Welsh and Mrs. Therese Curtis, and three sons, the Very Rev. Gabriel of the Carmelite Order, Raymond Joseph and Lawrence” (Chicago Tribune, 14 May 1953, page 36).

Pausback’s obituary also credited him as a “scenic artist de luxe”(Chicago Tribune  14 May 1953, page 36). Life goes by too fast, and we are too quick to summarize another’s life in a few sentences. Kudos to the families that did more. I am desperately trying to preserve our past and pay tribute to those unsung theatrical geniuses.

In the end, Pausback Studios merged with Acme and Carsen in 1957 to form the Acme Carsen Pausback Studio. See past post 566 for more information about Acme and Carsen of Chicago; it is quite a story.

To be continued…

Copyright © 2020 by Wendy Waszut-Barrett

In 1916, Thomas G. Moses wrote, “A new kitchen and dining room at the camp adds a little more worry and expense to the financial committee, but we are all very happy over the fact that the club really owns the home in the woods.” Moses was referring to the Fox Lake Camp used by members of the Palette & Chisel Club during the hot summer months. The group had started out with large tent in 1906. Moses personally donated a small structure for the land, effectively replacing the tent.

There is a point when “roughing it” loses a certain appeal; much has to do with one’s comfort and ability to sleep on the ground. When my husband and I were first married, we went on family canoeing trips to the Boundary Waters in Minnesota. We portaged from lake to lake with our canoes and gear, setting up camp in a designated spot and cooking the fish we caught over a fire. During one trip, we joked that my dad had brought along a foam pad to sleep on. As active twenty-something, we didn’t find any discomfort sleeping on the ground, complete with all its branches and rocks. My dad was in his sixties and I look back in amazement that he was willing to sleep on the ground at all, even with a one-inch foam pad; heartier stock, I guess.

Moses had “roughed it” quite a bit in his youth, but in 1916 he was sixty years old, and camping in a tent was less appealing. It’s not that he had never camped outdoors or “roughed it” in the wilderness; he had on multiple sketching trips during his youth. In 1884, Moses and three other scenic artists traveled to the Rocky Mountains with minimal supplies, finding shelter wherever they could on their sketching trip. At the time he was twenty-eight years old and had never seen the mountains; it was all a big adventure.  His traveling companions were John H. Young (26 yrs.), Edward A. Morange (19 yrs.), and Hardy C. Maratta (20 yrs.). The four artists travelled to Breckenridge and Moses recalled, “On our return trip we looked like a bunch of tramps, happy and ready for our old work.”

Of the camping near Breckenridge, Moses wrote, “We had the tent pitched very quickly, some pine boughs cut and laid for our spring bed, over which we laid our four army blankets, two over and two under us. The delicate odor from the pine was very refreshing.  We must have made a mistake in cutting the boughs and twigs, for they were more like branches and trunks… As I was the fat one in my party I had more grooves in my back and arms, from the so-called pine twigs that composed our springs, than anyone in the party.”

Over two decades later Moses participated in early camping adventures with the Palette & Chisel club at Fox Lake. By 1906 “tent camping” was already losing its appeal. Moses wrote, “June 1^st, I made my first trip to the Palette and Chisel Club camp at Fox Lake, Ill.  Helped to put up the tent.  A new experience for me, but I enjoyed it.  I slept well on a cot.  Made a few sketches.  A very interesting place.  I don’t like the cooking in the tent and there should be a floor in the tent.  I saw a great many improvements that could be made in the outfit and I started something very soon.” By 1908, Moses wrote, “I bought the portable house that we built years ago and at that time we received $300.00 for it.  I finally got it for $50.00, some bargain.  It cost $25.00 to remove it and we will put it up at Fox Lake in the spring.  It has been used in Forest Park all summer to show “The Day in the Alps.” The next year Moses wrote, “As we had put up the portable house in Fox Lake, I was better contented to go up.  I gave the camp a portable kitchen and it was some class.  I felt sure I would manage to get a camp outfit worth while and the boys all fell in line with me.”

So by 1916, when Moses wrote, “A new kitchen and dining room at the camp adds a little more worry and expense to the financial committee, but we are all very happy over the fact that the club really owns the home in the woods.” By this time, it was no longer camping; they were staying at a lake home.  Understandably so, as Moses was now 60 years old, he had entered the same decade when my dad decided to use a foam pad while camping. I know that at this point in my life I have no intention of sleeping on the ground.  Maybe I have become a little soft, too used to the modern luxuries of camping cots, air mattresses, and memory foam.

To be continued…

Copyright © 2020 by Wendy Waszut-Barrett

In 1916, Thomas G. Moses wrote, “Sold Hoffman of Detroit $725.00 of old scenery from Saginaw.” Sosman & Landis had previously provided scenery to East Saginaw’s Academy of Music. The refurbishment and resale of old scenery to a new venue was commonplace at this time.

On March 26, 1916, the “Detroit Free Press” announced, “Amusement Place of Large Capacity Takes Site Where Stands Old Abandoned House of Worship.” C. A. Hoffman and Graham Hoffman were pictured next to the proposed Colonial Theatre. The article continued, “Amusement place with capacity for 2,289 is to be opened October 1. To build the first large-modern theater in the near down-town section of Woodward avenue, the Detroit-Colonial Theater company has been organized by the Hoffman brothers, vaudeville managers and producers, and incorporated with an authorized capital of $200,000.

“A 30-year lease has been obtained of the northwest corner of Woodward avenue and Sibley street on which now stands the abandoned Woodward avenue Congregational church, a landmark in that section.

“C. Howard Crane, architect, has been engaged to draw plans for the theater and has completed the specifications embodying a number of innovations. The theater will have no gallery; but there will be a spacious balcony. Something new to Detroit will be a larger open well on what is to be a mezzanine floor, giving the auditorium under the balcony the appearance of great height. This feature is found in the Strand theater, New York. The capacity will be 2,289 including 204 box chairs. The style of architecture will be colonial carried out in exterior and interior details, giving opportunity for striking beauty and simplicity.

There will be a stage adequate in size for any act on the large vaudeville circuits. There are to be 15 dressing rooms, besides special quarters for musicians, electricians, and carpenters, and lounging rooms and shower baths for stage performers.

The name Colonial has been chosen for the theater because it is the pioneer showhouse of the district in which it is to be located, because of the style of architecture desired an because as the promoters declare, ‘It’s a good old American. – strictly American name.”

Clare A. Hoffman will be president and general managers of the company, and Graham Hoffman secretary and treasurer. These young men of long experience, in various capacities, with the theatrical and amusement business, built and have managed the Palace Theatre of this city. They are the management in the Hoffman Brothers theater enterprises including the new Palace theater of Saginaw. The vice-president of the Colonial Theater company is Harry J. Dingeman. The three named with Julius L. Krimmel and Mortimer Hoffman are the company’s directors.”

On Feb. 26, 1916, “The Moving Picture World” announced, “Clare A. Hoffman has succeeded A. I. Marenette as president of the Palace Theater Cp., of Detroit. Graham Hoffman continues as secretary. Harry J. Dingeman has been elected vice-president and Frederick H. Mears treasurer. These, with Mr. Marentette, form the directorate.

It was announced at the director’s meeting held recently that the company, which has been paying 1 per cent, monthly on a $200,000 full subscribed capital, will go to 2 per cent. March 1, with the company practically free from debt. C. A. Hoffman has also been chosen president, Mr. Dingeman vice-president and Graham Hoffman secretary of the Hippodrome Amusement Co., of Saginaw, Mich., which has practically completed the financing of a theater being erected on Gennessee avenue and to be opened about March 15. The Hoffman Brothers Theatrical Enterprises has recently opened offices at 1437 Dime Bank building. They propose to erect other theaters in Michigan” (page 1330).

Sosman & Landis had been doing business with the Hoffmans since 1914. On Feb. 15 of that year, the firm delivered scenery to the Palace Theatre in Detroit (see past post #879). The Hoffman brothers were the managers for the venue. Other Palace theaters with scenery by Sosman & Landis included those in Chicago (1912), Minneapolis (1914) and Fort Wayne (1914). To be continued…

Copyright © 2020 by Wendy Waszut-Barrett

In January 1916, Thomas G. Moses wrote, “I had a fool’s errand to Dayton, Ohio.  They wanted a plush curtain and telephoned for me to come immediately.  The National Cash Register Company.  They didn’t even apologize.” Well, the company may have been a bit busy that January defending themselves in an anti-trust suit. On Feb. 2, 1916, “The Times Recorder” reported, “The anti-trust suit against the National Cash Register Company was dismissed in U.S. court here today, the defendants agreeing to do all except to dissolve the company. The company is enjoined from  using any trade secrets or from intimidating a competitor or acquiring control of a company except on permission of the court”(Zanesville, Ohio, 2 Feb 1916, page 1).

Of the National Cash Register project mentioned by Moses, it may have concerned auditorium.

In 1916, the National Cash Register City Club Auditorium opened in Dayton, Ohio, on Dec. 2, 1916. Located at First and Ludlow Street, over two thousand employees and their families gathered to celebrate the event.  Although no formal program was planned for the opening, company president J. H. Patterson, and the officers of the company held an open house and formed a reception line. The “Dayton Daily News” reported, “the organization at the factory had grown to such an extent that it was impossible for the officials to have the close contact with the employees that is possible in the small organization, and that in order that all might have the opportunity to meet each other, this club has been established” (3 Dec 1916, page 48). Patterson outlined the purposes of the education features that were to be part of club activities, “saying that every man in the employ of the company will have an opportunity to improve his efficiency if he desires.”

The open house was held for two weeks. In the evening, the N.C.R. film “The Troubles of a Storekeeper” was shown, depicting the troubles of a merchant who used antiquated methods in business, and how he remedied them with a cash register. This film has been shown in numerous cities across the country. All merchants and clerks in Dayton were specially invited to attend a showing at the N. C. R. City Club Auditorium.

The new auditorium, or ‘Little Theater” as it was sometimes called, was constructed of red brick and the interior finished in gray. The floor of the auditorium was not raked, intended to be used for not only dramatics, but also dancing and gymnastics. The small stage included one interior and one exterior setting for amateur theatrics. The intent was to share the auditorium with various societies and organizations. Newspaper articles reported that the purpose of the club was to provide “a down-town social center for employees of the company, where they may gather for events of importance during the winter season.” Each Saturday night, cider and doughnuts were furnished free of charge.

Continuing education was also offered, with classes in advertising, bookkeeping, free hand drawing, business letter writing, public speaking, printing, salesmanship and shop mathematics. The classes were taught by N. C. R. employees and were not meant to interfere with other educational institutions of Dayton. The “Dayton News” commented, “The N. C. R. City Club accomplishes a two-fold purpose: It not only provides a place for amusement and recreation, but also gives N. C. R. employes an opportunity to better their present positions.” All employees were eligible for membership in the club.

In addition to the classes, talks were given by officials of the National Cash Register Co., and others, on various topics. Motion pictures and stereopticon entertainments periodically scheduled.

To be continued…

Copyright © 2020 by Wendy Waszut-Barrett

In 1916, Thomas G. Moses wrote, “On February 15^th, closed with the German Red Cross Kirmiss contract for $7,500.00.” Moses was referring to the big Red Cross Society drive that took the form of a German Street Fair in the Chicago Coliseum on April 2. In 1916, charitable events were held throughout the United States for the German Red Cross, with many using street fetes as a vehicle. I have uncovered very little about the Chicago event, but it was similar to the one held in Cincinnati the year before. “The Cincinnati Enquirer” described the event at the Music Hall on November 18, 19 and 20 in 1915, reporting, “It will be a faithful reproduction of the famous old German city of Nuremburg on the occasion of a typical Kirmiss, the proceeds of the undertaking to be for the benefit of the German-Austro-Hungarian Red Cross fund. The unusual attractiveness of the affair will consist in placing in the north wing of Music Hall a replica of the old city of Nuremberg, with its quaint tiled-roof houses and its famous ‘Bratwurst Gloeklein.”

Baltimore’s “Der Deutsche Correspondent” included a history of the German Red Cross on 23 Nov. 1916 (page 4):

“The German Red Cross is an old established institution, which has given capable services in times of peace whenever natural or industrial calamities have compelled earnest and systematic relief action…At the outbreak of the war, the German Red Cross, complete as it already was for conditions then existing, was amplified and expanded into the magnificent organization to which all classes of social life in the German Empire have been proud to contribute, The advice and services of the greatest authorities in the sciences of medicine and surgery at its command.

            The responsibilities of the German Red Cross are stupendous and the daily continuation of the war in all its varied phases and territories has causes a corresponding increase of suffering and of pitiful conditions for the relief of which additional funds are urgently required and earnestly solicited.

            Contrary to general belief, the German Red Cross concerns itself not only with the succor and care of the wounded and convalescent soldiers, but also with the relief of innocent victims, reaching out a helping hand to the uttermost limits to those who have borne the brunt of the war’s hardships. This includes not only the soldier who has been disabled during outpost duty on the farthest front, but also his dependent wife and children at home, who must be clothed, fed, educated and provided with medical attention.

Thousands of volunteer workers who had received instruction in first aid, together with a legion of highly trained nurses have taken up the work of mercy in relieving the wounded, whether friend of former foe, and in many homes today fervent gratitude is being voiced to the German Red Cross for its skilled assistance in restoring loved ones to the families’ bosoms; husbands and fathers and brothers who might have succumbed to their wounds on the battlefield but for its timely aid.

The most advanced practices in restoring to health the wounded and convalescent are employed. The facilities of sanitariums and institutions for teaching the blind, the crippled and partially helpless and the hopelessly invalided, have become available for these unfortunates, Special training schools are maintained for those who have had to use artificial limbs, so that they may not become totally incapacitated, thus giving them an opportunity of again becoming useful and independent members of society.

By Nov. 16, Chicago’s “Day Book” reported, “Berlin. – German Red Cross and the Ass’n of Patriotic Ladies have received $50,000 from the U.S. branch for relief to families of soldiers” (page 31). At the end of 1916, the German Red Cross Society received $200,000. This figure was included in a December 30 article in the “Chicago Tribune.” The article included a list of gifts and bequests during 1916 by Chicagoans:

“It is not an exaggeration that the donations and bequests to charity, educational and religious institutions, art music and the public welfare in general in the United States during the year 1916 will reach nearly a billion dollars. Among the items which will help to make up this huge total are large sums raised by Americans for relief to war sufferers and help for war makers. It is estimated that nearly $5,000,000 have been sent through the principle agencies in New York and Boston, but to this sum should be added those sent through other agencies in various parts of the country and the numerous contributions, which have been made direct, and not through any special fund. Supplies worth millions of dollars have also been collected and sent in addition to cash donations. Of these war gifts Belgium has received about $11,000,000, France nearly $4,000,000, Germany about $9,000,00, Poland $2,300,000, England 1,125,000, Jewish sufferers $6,500,000, Serbia $320,000, Russia $160,000, Armenians and Syrians $2,565,000, Lithuanians $138,000, Balkan fund $500,000, Japan $11,000, Christmas gifts $400,000, Roumania $3,200, Australia $30,000, Italy $62,000, and several smaller amounts have been sent for ambulances, artists, surgical dressings, education, hospitals, etc. These sums represent those sent by the Red Cross and larger relief organizations. The increase of wages and bonuses paid by corporations to their employees amount at least $400,000,000. Christmas charitable organizations and God Fellows have added about $80,000,000 more to the grand total. The American board of commissioners for foreign missions has broken all records with receipts of $1,207,000 and $550,000 have been expended upon work among troops on the Mexican border. As to personal contributions it is impossible to form any estimate, except in a few prominent cases. John D. Rockefeller has donated to different objects about $9,500,000; Andrew Carnegie, $3,000,000; Julius Rosenwald $1,600,000, and Mrs. Russell Sage $525,000. The donations and bequests for various purposes in this country have amounted to $764,077.99, these including only large sums, which have been publicly announced. Of this total donations have been $623,262,002; bequests, $140,815,797. The objects of this beneficence are as follows: Charities, $657,042,700; educational institutions $72,612,619; religious institutions, $20,243,735; museums, art galleries and municipal benefits, $11,479,295; libraries, $2,717,450.”

To be continued…