According to Virginia Lewis in her book “Russell Smith, Romantic Realist, “ in 1872, the artist Russell Smith painted a replica of an 1856 entr’acte drop curtain. The drop curtain was originally installed at the Academy of Music in Baltimore, Maryland. The painting for the curtain was described by “The Philadelphia Inquirer” on Dec. 16, 1894. The article noted that although the scene was titled “Como,” the actual scene was from sketches that Smith made at the head of Lake Lugano, in Northern Italy.” The article described, “A conventional design with huge frame, the center of the lower border included a Greek bust. The scene depicted a brilliant summertime view with Italian skies above the glitter and sheen of greenish blue waters.” Lewis notes that the curtain was painted on British imported linen and the drawings were inked in with logwood, commenting it resulted in “soft atmospheric effects which could not be gotten otherwise.” The article also noted that “the colors were made by him personally, as was his custom.”
A recipe for logwood ink appeared in the 1912 publication of “The Standard Reference Work for the Home, School and Library: “Logwood ink is made easily. Logwood may be boiled in soft water, or else extract of logwood may be used. When ink of a proper consistency has been obtained, add one part in ten of ammonia or alum dissolved in boiling water. This gives a violet ink.”
Logwood is a small redwood tree indigenous to Central America, Mexico and the West Indies. Introduced in Europe during the 16th century, it is still used today in a variety of industries. The dye is contained in the heartwood of the tree, cut into small blocks and then chips for use. Logwood was inexpensive at the time when Russell Smith was using it and provided a wide color range, spanning from violet and blue to deep brown and black. Logwood was not only used for inks, but also watercolor paints.
I immediately thought back to the ink lines still visible on Smith’s 1858 drop curtain. Although water damage washes away an artist’s painting, it often reveals the original drawing beneath, such is the case with the drop curtain at Thalian Hall.
Drawing revealed after water damage. Inked lines on the 1858 Russell Smith drop curtain at Thalian Hall in Wilmington, NC.Drawing revealed after water damage. Inked lines on the 1858 Russell Smith drop curtain at Thalian Hall in Wilmington, NC.Drawing revealed after water damamge. Inked lines on the 1858 Russell Smith drop curtain at Thalian Hall in Wilmington, NC.
A variety of logwood inks appeared in the 19th century after the design of the steel pen necessitated new ink; iron-gall inks corroded the steel nibs. Chrome-logwood inks were noncorrosive and flowed freely. Cr logwood inks were among the most popular in use, reaching the market in 1848. Unfortunately, chromium caused the ink to gelatinize in the bottle and other alternatives were repeatedly sought out.
There were also alum-logwood inks and copper-logwood inks. Logwood inks were cheap, but not a perfect solution to replace the traditional and expensive black inks. Some of the early violet inks also came from logwood, with the best versions appearing as an intense blue black. Once dry, logwood inks could be wetted without smearing or spreading; a perfect application in inking scenic art compositions that would be painted over. Van Gogh also used chrome-logwood ink for many of his paintings.
It is very possible that the Smith’s inked lines, now visible in the Thalian Hall drop curtain, were made with logwood ink.
Portrait of Russell Smith by James R. Lambdin and included in “Russell Smith, Romantic Realist” by Virginia Lewis (1956).
Russell Smith (1812-1896) took pride in his nature sketches. Tromping out into the wilderness with stool, paint box and easel was a time-honored tradition for many nineteenth century scenic artists. Sketching trips provided an opportunity to gather source material for future compositions, whether placed in an art gallery or on the stage. These plein air paintings, or portions thereof, were incorporated into many settings for the stage. Twentieth century scenic artists continued this practice, long after printed sources became readily avaialble, as it was a way to hone their artistic skills. Thomas G. Moses (1856-1934) wrote of his sketching trips with fellow artists during the 1880s. His traveling companions included Henry C, Tryon, Walter Burridge, Edward Morange, John H. Young, Hardesty Marratta and many others, publishing his recollections of the outings years later. They all had ties to Russell Smith.
Scenic artists who were associated with the Düsseldorf School, such as Sosman & Landis artists David Austin Strong (1830-1911), also supported plein air painting, leaving the four walls of their studios to work from nature as it was integral to the artistic process. Strong was a contemporary of Smith who also sought training in Europe and became a prolific scenic artist in his own right. He was one of the original scenic artists for “The Black Crook” at Niblo’s garden in 1866 and later settled in Chicago, working at the Sosman & Landis studio. Strong’s work was well known throughout the United States in hundreds of theaters from New York, Boston, and Philadelphia to Chicago, Kansas and California.
I think back to Moses’ records describing the numerous sketching trips where he peacefully sat and captured the pristine beauty of mountain valleys, sunlit meadows, and babbling brooks. Their trips to the Catskills, Rocky Mountains, Canadian Rockies, New Mexico, California, and many other picturesque locations were immediately incorporated into both small-scale and large-scale projects, ranging from art exhibitions to scenic spectacles. The expansion of America’s railway system opened up possibilities for ambitious artists.
19th century sketching box sold on eBayDetail of 19th century sketching box sold on eBay
Smith discussed in detail the need for nature studies throughout his journals. Virginia Lewis included many of these remarks in her 1956 book “Russell Smith, Romantic Realist.” Of note, Smith acknowledged that some artists replicated specific engravings or paintings, while he used his own materials. Of mentioning the need for nature studies, one director responded, “Oh what’s the difference so its pretty, you’ll spend much money and time making sketching tours when you could buy something just as good or better by Calame or Harding for fifty cents.” The manager was referring to the many lithographs available at the time by Alexandre Calame (1810-1864) and James Duffield Harding (1798-1863).
Calame was a lithographer and a popular artist associated with the Düsseldorf school of painting, as Strong had been. A Swiss landscape painter, Calame’s work was featured in numerous series of lithographs depicting picturesque mountain regions. Similarly, Harding’s work was readily available in print form for scenic artists to replicate. Harding was an English landscape painter, lithographer and author of drawing manuals. Harding’s “Lessons on Art,” “Guide and Companion to Lessons on Art,” “The Principles and Practice of Art,” and “Elementary Art, or the use of the chalk and lead pencil advocated and explained,” were widely sought after.
Much more could be said of both Calame and Harding, but the main issue at hand is Smith’s identification of artists whom opted for printed sources in lieu of sketching trips. Nature studies provide training for the artistic eye, something a printed work cannot do. Although the blue in a lithograph can be replicated, it is not the same as capturing the brilliancy of a clear blue sky. There is a depth of color that is lost in translation in print form.
The difference between the artists who easily purchased prints for reference instead of creating their own can be identifiable in their painting, taking on a flat and lifeless characteristic that accentuates any overall lack of skill. Sitting outside and observing nature, trying to replicate the color of atmospheric landscapes yields different results than those who dutifully copy a print. Smith continued to describe the artists who “captured the truth.”
Near the end of his life, Smith wrote, “What I am going to say of some scene painters I knew in early life I hope may not be attributed to the general tendency of the old to praise the past at the expense of the present. There were forty or fifty years ago, some, in Philadelphia, New York and Boston, that were true artists; men who could make a fine original drawing from nature, and paint a scene possessing much truth as well as beauty; and were not content to work from print only. Robert Jones, a pupil of Stanfield’s was one of these, but seemed to aim more in the style of Turner. Then there was James and William Coyle, both of whom had painted with Marinari in Drury Lane Theatre, were excellent in Gothic and Picturesque architecture. Whilst Harry Wilkins, a pupil of Naysmith’s, the Edinburgh landscape painter, was admirable in landscape, trees and rocks. Hugh Reinagle, a brother of the Royal Academician Reinagle, was also a very fine architectural painter. So was Mr. Hilliard, well known in New York. I have preserved specimens of the work of all these painters and any good artist can see the truth of what I say. Now there is such a glut of design, in fine woodcuts, engravings, chromes, photographs, and even paintings that a young man who can copy and desires to paint scenes, can for a little money, supply himself with a collection that will enable him to furnish a scene of any subject, or a view of any remarkable place; and like all easily acquired knowledge, is very shallow. As a consequence there are a very few scene painters now who could rank as an artist-studying and bringing from Nature their skill. Many believe that the same may be said of actors in general; but of that I cannot pretend to judge.”
Smith passed away in 1896. His work remains part of the American scenic art legacy, artists who saw value and benefit in gathering source material from nature. These were also artists who worked in both small scale and large scale, each requiring a unique skill set and distinct understanding of contrast, color, and detail for each. Many artists can produce small artworks, easily transported and hung on both private and public walls. Not all are able to successfully transition their ideas to a large-scale format that is best viewed from a distance. Tightly painted and detailed artworks become fuzzy from the back of an auditorium. The stage demands the separation of color and an increased contrast that allows the audience’s eye to work and see the illusion. Smith could do it all.
The 1858 Thalian Hall drop curtain is a significant artifact within the framework of American history. It is much more than an old piece of scenery created for a theater. This signed drop curtain is a large-scale artwork painted by a nationally recognized artist, one who left a substantial written legacy. Written records of Smith’s design, painting and installation of the curtain provide additional artistic provenance for the piece. Smith’s journal entries provide an extensive historical context not only for the 1858 drop curtain, but also theatre work at the time.
Smith’s memoirs give insight into the life of the artist, his art, and the shift in American theatre practices. Many of his journal entries were interpreted by Virginia Lewis and published in the book “Russell Smith, Romantic Realist.” Of Smith, Lewis wrote, “All through life he enjoyed talking and writing about his scenery work, and liked to explain his philosophy of scene painting, writing many thoughts into his journals.”
When Russell Smith painted the drop curtain destined for Wilmington, North Carolina, he was 46 years old. A well-known and established scenic artist, by this point in his career he had worked for three decades.
Of interest to me is Russell’s studio at Edgehill in Jenkintown, Pennsylvania. He built his studio specifically for painting drops that he sometimes referred to as the “painting room for the Academy of Music.” This provided better light and a quiet environment to focus on his painting. A private studio space was preferable to the traditional one used by most artists in the theater. Most often, scenic artists painted scenery on frames that existed in the theater that they were creating scenery for at the time. However, a theater space was often busy with the hustle and bustle of rehearsals and stage preparation prior to a production. As there were fewer people watching him work, it is likely that criticisms and “suggestions” were kept to a minimum – a benefit when working off site. Smith suffered from chronic headaches throughout his entire life; to create art in the peace and quiet of his own studio must have been a relief from the noise of a commercial space.
Of Smith’s studio at Edgehill, Lewis notes that a frame structure was attached to the wing of the stone house. Smith wrote: “After the refreshment of sleep I would lie an hour and plan in my mind my day’s work – contrive the composition, dispose the masses of light, shade and color; and go over more than once, in fact, think it out; so that when I came before the canvas after breakfast, I never hesitated or lost time rubbing out, but went straight forward, and by night there would often be a finished scene. Some of the other prominent scene painters, Coyle and Jones, for instance, would express their surprise at the directness and the speed with which I pushed forward. They knew not the cause. But even that speed would not satisfy some stage managers; and I have been induced to paint three entire scenes in forty-two consecutive hours, and they were not simple scenes, like a calm sea and sly, or a quiet lake and distant hills, but represented an encampment, fortifications and a City, for ‘Edward the Black Prince.’”
Smith followed a traditional design process that is still used by many artists today, myself included. The design starts with a pencil drawing, or a simple concept sketch. This initially defines the composition. From this preliminary sketch, a quick painting or study is produced in a slightly larger format. These early works evolve into a finished picture, or scale color rendering that will be used for full scale painted drop. As today, this design process verifies the direction of the composition at every step. Ideally, it prevents a flurry of recommendations and alterations after any on site installation.
Small sketch for the Russell Smith 1858 drop curtain at Thalian Hall in Wilmington, North Carolina. It is approximately 2″ high by 3″ wide – very small. Almost like a sketch on a bar napkin!1858 drop curtain by Russell Smith shows the final composition, after it evolved during the design process.
However, beauty lies in the eye of the beholder; then, as now, the value of scenic art varies from one to another. In his memoirs, Smith commented that some perceived scenic art as “but a coarse kind of daubing, indeed an inferior trade; and no doubt much of it deserves no higher position-with its want of nature and extreme exaggeration of color. But the best poetry of the Drama justifies the grandest and most beautiful illustration; and if the audience would demand it and the painter could bring to his great canvas sufficient genius a wide experience of nature and mastery of execution, where would lie its inferiority? And how much less would his power of instructing and pleasing be than a painter who strived to do so in the space of a yard or square foot? This was always my estimate of my profession; and I ever strove to sustain it by avoiding all false color, glitter and exaggeration of every kind, whilst striving to represent the most beautiful features of nature, I could see with reverential love of truth. The material, canvas and color, I used were also genuine as that of the best oil pictures; and as I painted in my own painting room, out of town, I was freed form the injudicious dictation of prompters, stage-managers, etc., who care little for real good art and are justly blamed for their shortcomings of the Stage, but who always justify themselves by saying. ‘The business must pay, and therefore it is our duty to give to the public what they want to see.’”
I spent much of yesterday examining a drop curtain painted by William Thompson Russell Smith (1812-1896) in 1858. At the time of installation, a local newspaper placed his work alongside that of other scenic artists whose work hung in many prominent New York theaters.
The Russell Smith curtain hanging at Thalian Hall in Wilmington, North Carolina
On October 7, 1858, the “Daily Herald” in Wilmington, North Carolina, reported, “There are many theatres there [New York], but none which possesses even a decent drop curtain as a work of art. Take the great Lyric Temple on Fourteenth Street, what have we there? A large masse of elaborate drawing, a pile of impossible architecture, devoid of the poetry and charm of color, and feeble in light and shade. Again at Burton’s there is an extensive canvass, the subject the town of Miessen, Saxony, celebrated for the clay which forms the world famous Dresden china, treated in a tame and common place style. At Laura Keene’s there is another mass of incongruous architecture, with great plethoric Shakespeare in the centre, at whose feet are some figures of sitting boys holding scrolls, having the appearance of very uncomfortable seat, and dangerous liability of slipping off. At the Broadway, the subject is an allegory, something of Shakespeare-for the Bard of Avon is unmistakably there-but what is about, must ever remain as inscrutable as the Egyptian Sphinx. Then at Wallack’s and the Bowery, we have one, a view on the Hudson, the other the Falls of Niagara, neither possessing a single feature entitling them to rank as works of art. The province of art, as of poetry is to expand the mind, and prepare it for the reception and diffusion of elevated ideas and reflection. And in this respect, has Mr. Smith well chosen his subjects. There are doubtless, who would have preferred a local, or national subject for a drop curtain.
“Without desiring to ignore the beauty of American scenery, or importance of many of our historic annals, let us fairly place the picture before us in the balance, and find out what are its superior attractions and intellectual teachings.
“Americans must bear in mind, that–nationally–we are but infants. We present to the world the nucleus of a great Future, the artist has portrayed the customs and great beauties of the great Past. Therein lies the lesson.
Detail of Russell Smith’s 1858 curtainDetail of Russell Smith’s 1858 curtain
“On the banks of a beautiful river–an arm perhaps of the fair [Argean]–rises a majestic Temple of the Doric order, grand and imposing in its proportions, pure in details. On the steps of the portico a mystic ceremony is taking place. The Seers, are invoking the protection of the Gods on some favored warrior, perhaps, who is evidently about to embark on a warlike expedition, indicated by the fleet of gallies ‘peacefuly slumbering’ on the golden waters.
Detail of Russell Smith’s 1858 curtain
“When the eye has thoroughly scanned and surveyed the varied beauties of the pictures; then let the mind enquire who were those people who related such imposing edifices, sailed on such gorgeous gallies; and lived in a land of perpetual sunshine?
“As we said before, the picture is a perfect study and well worthy of an extended visit….We predict an entire success to Mr. J. F. Marchant and the new Theatre.”
The fact that this curtain still exists is unbelievable when considering that much of the original scenery was repainted over the years, and then replaced multiple times when the stage was enlarged and repeatedly renovated. The drop itself was widened, shortened and “tweaked.” Regardless of the alterations, Smith’s original design and painting radiate from the fabric.
When looking at the overall history tied to both the curtain and the theater, it is remarkable that anything remains of Smith’s painting. This significant cultural artifact disappeared and reappeared over the years, yet kept returning home. The drop curtain now permanently hangs in the lobby, greeting each new patron who arrives to see a performance at Thalian Hall.
Russell Smith’s curtain at Thalian Hall in Wilmington, North CarolinaRussell Smith’s curtain at Thalian Hall in Wilmington, North Carolina
I am going to devote the few posts to what I discovered yesterday about the drop curtain and the prolific artist who painted it. Simply put, this curtain is a national treasure.
My daily blog follows the life and times of Thomas G. Moses (1856-1934), a prolific scenic artist who worked for sixty years behind the curtain line. In 1931, he compiled a typed manuscript that recorded many of his projects over the years. In the early 1990s when I compiled an index for both this typed manuscript and Moses’ scrapbook, I vowed that one day I would go though his writing, line by line, and expand on each specific event and project mentioned by the artist. I am on year 1909.
I have examined not only his work and that of his contemporaries, but also Moses’ predecessors; scenic artists from previous generations who paved the way for the painting techniques employed not only by the artist, but also at the Sosman & Landis studio. One of Moses’ scenic art predecessors was William Thompson Russell Smith (1812-1896).
Smith was integral in the training of Moses’ one time business partner and life-long friend, Walter Burridge. At one time, Burridge worked at various Philadelphia theaters, many the old stomping grounds of Smith. It was the strong recommendation of Smith who supported Burridge’s employment at the Academy of Music, in Baltimore. Burridge was hired to paint some of the scenery for that venue during his early career.
Smith was mentioned in numerous publications over the years, including the article “Curtain and Scene Painting,” published in the “St. Louis Post-Dispatch,” 21 Jan. 1884, page 8. The article reported, “The other first-class curtain painters of the country do not number more than half-dozen. All enjoy national reputations, and their services are in demand to the other.” The article listed those they held in highest regard, including “Russell Smith, formerly of the Academy of Music, Philadelphia, makes a specialty of landscapes.”
Like Moses, Smith left a legacy that extended far beyond examples of his art for the stage or fine art galleries. Smith left a detailed written account of his life, family and projects. In 1856, Virginia E. Lewis wrote “Russell Smith, Romantic Realist.” She does a wonderful job chronicling Smith’s life while incorporating segments of his words. About a year ago, I decided that it was Smith’s scenic art career that I would explore after completing the life and times of Moses. Smith’s generation of scenic artist defined American scenic art techniques, infusing old world artistry with a new spirit. Moses’ generation further developed and shaped the field of subsequent schools of American scenic art.
I am in Wilmington, North Carolina, to give a presentation on 19th century scenic art and historical painting techniques. My trip began after a conversation with D. Anthony “Tony” Rivenbark at the League of Historic American Theater’s national conference last July. He is a nationally recognized theatre historian and Executive Director of Wilmington’s Thalian Hall. Tony shared an image of their extant drop curtain painted by Smith in 1858. Although it is no longer used during performance, the painted curtain has been conserved and is prominently displayed at the Thalian Hall Center for the Performing Arts. Here is a link to the theater: http://www.thalianhall.org/#map
Painted curtain by Russell Smith, 1858.
I am looking forward to seeing it in person today.
Sosman & Landis seldom posted want ads for labor. I have encountered only a few over the years. Often the ads were seeking individuals who possessed basic trade skills, seamstresses and carpenters to fill basic positions without any specialized interests. However, in 1909, there were numerous advertisements placed in the “Chicago Tribune” for sign painters. Here is one example from the “Chicago Tribune” on January 6, 1909 (page 4)
“WANTED-MALE HELP
Sign Painter-First Class. Up to date, on advertising curtains; good chance for young man to learn scene painting business.
SOSMAN & LANDIS CO., Scene Painting Studio, 236-238 Clinton-St.”
Ad placed in the Chicago Tribune, 6 Jan. 1909, page 14.
There are a few things to consider about in regard to the 1909 Sosman & Landis ad. The first is that 1909 is a peak period for Masonic theatre production at the Sosman & Landis Studio, even though fraternal scenery only made up about 25% of all projects. Hundreds of Scottish Rite drops, flats, set pieces, and props are being designed and manufactured in Chicago before they ship to various locations. In 1909, their main studio was swamped with work, as was their second “annex” studio. The production of Masonic scenery requires the studio’s most experienced artists to produce, leaving much other work to second-rate artists employed in the shops.
Other Studio projects included the production of massive scenic spectacles for the Ringling Brothers’ circus. As with Masonic scenery, the production of grand circus spectacles necessitated the use of topnotch artists on staff. In addition to high-end scenery for prestigious clients, there remained endless orders of stock scenery for small town opera houses, vaudeville theaters and music halls. In addition to roll drops, wings, flats, interior box sets and drop curtains, there was the continued demand for advertising curtains. Also referred to as Ad Drops, these compositions required artists to paint hundreds of characters in various fonts, filling the numerous advertising spaces. Although lettering requires skill, it was a trade mastered by many individuals at the time. Various levels of artists painted signage that ranged from commercial billboards to daily placards.
It would make no sense to place any scenic artist on a lettering project that could be completed by any sign painter, temporarily hired off of the street. Sign painting also required skilled artisans, but not with the same training and intuitive sense necessary for figure painting, draperies, landscapes, or other scenic illusions.
What the 1909 Sosman & Landis want ad also suggests is a possible spike in requests for Ad Drops. In the past, I have explored the origin and evolution of advertising curtains, especially those produced by Lee Lash in San Francisco, Philadelphia and New York (see past installments # 578-584). From 1900 through the 1920s, the design and manufacture of advertising curtains was big business that generated massive profits for many studios. For example, when Lee Lash had advertising curtains in 1700 American theatres, it resulted in an annual income of $250,000 (“Star-Gazette,” 4 March, 1973, page 7).
In many cases, studios directly collected the revenue from clients for their advertisements prior to the creation of an Ad Drop. No upfront loss for materials. This also allowed studio to place Ad Drops “free of charge” while even generating income for the theater. Free drop, free installation and possible revenue! The only requirement on the theater’s behalf was that they lower and display the advertising curtain at certain times specified in the contract. This was similar to out current advertisement slots for television programs. Furthermore, the position of advertisements in spaces, as with specific times for television and radio ads, varied in price that was dependent on placement.
In looking at the big picture of theatrical manufacturers during the early twentieth century, the increase in the demand for advertising curtains harkens back to a bustling economy and the expansion of products and services.
Scenery by Toomey & Volland, ca 1902. The scene was refurbished by Becker Bros. studio in 1927 and delivered to the Scottish Rite in Peoria, Illinois.
Scenery by Toomey & Volland, ca 1902.Scenery by Toomey & Volland, ca 1902.Scenery by Toomey & Volland, ca 1902.Scenery by Toomey & Volland, ca 1902.Scenery by Toomey & Volland, ca 1902.Scenery by Toomey & Volland, ca 1902.Scenery by Toomey & Volland, ca 1902.Scenery by Toomey & Volland, ca 1902.Scenery by Toomey & Volland, ca 1902.Scenery by Toomey & Volland, ca 1902.Scenery by Toomey & Volland, ca 1902.Scenery by Toomey & Volland, ca 1902.Scenery by Toomey & Volland, ca 1902.Scenery by Toomey & Volland, ca 1902.Scenery by Toomey & Volland, ca 1902.Scenery by Toomey & Volland, ca 1902.Scenery by Toomey & Volland, ca 1902.
The Toomey & Volland studio of St. Louis was also installing scenery and stage machinery in Scottish Rite theaters during 1909. One example was the Scottish Rite in Fort Wayne. Here is the article published in the Kansas City Kansas Republic on Dec. 2, 1909.
Illustration accompanying newspaper article about the opening of the Fort Wayne Scottish Rite, 1909
“Finest Cathedral.
Scottish Rite Temple in Fort Wayne is Dedicated.
Masons of High Degrees at Exercises Attending Opening of $200,000 Temple-Has a Fine Banquet.
Fort Wayne, Ind. –The new Scottish Rite cathedral in Fort Wayne, costing about $200,000, and said to be the finest in America, was dedicated on the evening of November 17 in the order from most of the larger cities of the far east and middle west. The dedication was preceded by a banquet-room. At which 1,000 plated were laid. The banqet-room of the cathedral fills the entire ground floor and is one of the largest and most ornate halls in the west.
Owning to the illness of Sovereign Grand Commander Samuel C. Lawrence, 33, of Boston, the master of ceremonies was Barton Smith of Toledo, 33, puissant lieutenant grand commander, assisted by John Corson Smith, 33, grand minister of the state. William Geake, 33, of this city, commander-in-chief of the Fort Wayne Sovereign Consistory, assisted in the dedication.
The dedication was held at the regular time of the fall meeting of the consistory for the Valley of Fort Wayne, and 300 took the Scottish Rite degrees. Degrees were given from the fourth to the Thirty-second. Heretofore this valley had no jurisdiction beyond the eighteenth degree, and the degrees from the 19 to 32 were conferred here for the first time. As the consistory has already nearly 1,100 members, the Fort Wayne consistory has become one of the largest in the country.
The cathedral, which was designed by Mahurin & Mahurin of Fort Wayne, is a at Clinton and Washington streets, in the residence section, with the handsome First Presbyterian church across the street. It is built of Bedford stone on all sides and is thoroughly fireproof, being finished within with concrete floors, marble stairways and wainscoting, and iron balustrades. Some rooms are finished in Cuban mahogany, but there is very little inflammable material anywhere. The heating is by steam and the lighting by electricity.
The cathedral is three stories high, with a spacious basement. The ground floor will be the banquet and ballrooms, with galleries. The social rooms are on the second floor, which is also provided with quarters for the ladies. There is also a room for the Mystic Shrine. The third floor is occupied by the consistory auditorium, which is arranged on the stadium plan with tiers of opera chairs rising steeply, so that those in the rear seats can all see the work on the large floor below. There are seats for nearly 600 in this auditorium. The organ loft is in the north and at the south end there is a spacious stage provided with scenery, the work of a St. Louis firm.
The proscenium arch is elaborate with the designs and emblems of the several degrees. The decorative design and color scheme were the work of a Chicago firm. The organ was made in Rock Island at a cost of $6,000.”
Here is a link to the Consecration and dedication of the Scottish Rite Cathedral, Valley of Fort Wayne, Indiana, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, November 16, 17, 18, 1909, on the Internet Archive:
Consecration and dedication of the Scottish Rite Cathedral, Valley of Fort Wayne, Indiana, 1909Consecration and dedication of the Scottish Rite Cathedral, Valley of Fort Wayne, Indiana, 1909
This building on the corner of Washington and Berry Streets no longer exists. In 1953, the Fort Wayne Scottish Rite bought the Mizpah Shrine building on the corner of Ewing and West Berry. Constructed in 1925, the Shrine building had a seating capacity of 2,400 that hosted a variety of non-Masonic events and has quite and interesting history. Unfortunately, the Fort Wayne Scottish Rite left this home too when St. Francis University purchased the structure in 2012. Here is an article about the Shrine building, second home to the Fort Wayne Scottish Rite: http://historycenterfw.blogspot.com/2012/01/scottish-rite-history-in-fort-wayne.html
Sosman & Landis delivered stock scenery, an asbestos curtain and a drop curtain to the Temple Theatre in Rochester, New York, in 1909. The Temple Theater was located just across the street from the popular Lyceum Theatre on Clinton Street. This was the same year that they also delivered Masonic scenery to Scottish Rite theaters in Winona, Minnesota, Kansas City, Kansas, Dallas, Texas, Atlanta, Georgia, and Memphis, Tennessee.
Postcard of the Temple Theatre in Rochester, New York.The Temple Theatre across from the Lyceum Theatre in Rochester, New York.
On September 22, 1909, and advertisement for the Cook Opera House was placed in the “Rochester Democrat and Chronicle,” noting that it was “to be succeeded in November by the Temple Theatre as Rochester’s Home of International Vaudeville” (page 16). As the Cook Theatre, it was the present home of “J. H. Moore Vaudeville” (Democrat and Chronical, 14 March 1909, page 24).
There were venues known as “Temple Theatres” across the country, many managed by the Knights of Pythias. There were many other Temple Theatres in 1909, including those in Alton, Illinois, Youngstown, Ohio, New Orleans, Louisiana, Palestine, Texas, and Detroit, Michigan, to name a few.
In regard to the new Temple Theatre in Rochester, he “Democrat and Chronicle” reported, “[the Temple Theatre] will have the most complete vaudeville house on the American continent” (25 October 1909, page 10). Architect Leon H. Lempert drew the plans and supervised the construction of the theater. Of the installation, the article continued,
“The stage scenery is from the studios of Sosman & Landis of Chicago, and a carload of scenery will arrive in the city next week, several other cars of scenery following rapidly. The asbestos, or fire curtain, will be the first to be placed so as to avoid wrinkling and the beautiful drop curtain will be the last thing.
This drop curtain will be a picture of Marie Antoinette receiving Louis XVI at Versailles. The scenic equipment itself is perhaps the most elaborately ever placed in a vaudeville theater in the world, and the subjects as well as the designs of the interior scenes were carefully selected at a conference of the artists, the owners and the architect. J. H. Moore gave carte blanche for this work. And the cost of the decorations and scenery alone is more than the cost of the average theatre.”
Of the other elaborate decorations in the new Temple Theater in Rochester included fresco work was completed by Charles S. Allen of New York. The article noted that he worked on the ceiling with “a dozen Italian artists” who were brought to this country to decorate the home of Charles M. Schwab, the steel magnate. Furthermore. The mural paintings on the soundboard above he proscenium arch were painted by Raphael Beck, an artist from Buffalo, New York. Beck had exhibited his work at the Pan-American Exposition.”
Program for the Temple Theatre in Rochester, New York.
Part 723: Kansas City Scottish Rite, 1904, 1906 and 1909
In 1909, Sosman & Landis provided a second set of scenery for the Scottish Rite in Kansas City, Kansas. The history of the Kansas City Scottish Rite is a little confusing. There were two Kansas City Scottish Rites, one in Kansas and one in Missouri. This makes it difficult when tracking down information about either one, as the same newspapers often published information without specifying the state.
In 1904, Sosman & Landis delivered a first set of scenery to the Kansa City, Kansas, Scottish Rite (see past post 692). This was the same year that the company also produced Scottish Rite scenery for Fort Scott, Kansas. The first Kansas City, Kansas, Scottish Rite was designed by architect W. W. Rose, and located at the corner of 7th and Ann Street. On April 1, 1904, The Lincoln Journal included an article on the new building, however a description of the stage area and scenery was absent. It was intentionally concealed from the public for the event, closed off with a curtain. The article only noted that the stage was “thirty-two feet deep and thirty seven feet to the gridiron and has a full equipment of scenery and appointments including a switchboard, which controls every light in the room from the stage.” Unfortunately, the stage, auditorium and building all went up in flames only two years later.
During October 1906, the three-story building caught fire during a street fair. The Iola Daily Record reported that the Masonic Temple, its entire contents, two residences adjoining the block, and half of the booths at the street fair were destroyed by fire (October 20, 1906, page 1). The cause of the fire was the explosion of a gasoline stove in the booth occupied by the ladies of the Central Christian Church. The flames spread rapidly throughout the booths, and the Masonic Temple was the first building to suffer damage on the corner of Seventh Street and Ann Avenue. All efforts to save the structure proved futile. Among the losses were Scottish Rite paraphernalia and stage settings, valued at $50,000; their insurance only covered $16,000 of the loss (Kansas City Gazette. 27 Oct. 1906, page 1). Other newspapers reported the loss paraphernalia, furniture, fixtures and stage scenery, was valued $20,000 and only insured for $6,500 (Kansas City Gazette. 27 Oct 1909, page 1). Many other Masonic bodies in the building also lost uniforms, regalia, ritual and records, including Wyandotte Lodge No. 3, the oldest Masonic lodge in Kansas.
On October 27, 1906, the Kansas City Gazette reported “The Masons Will Rebuild.” The article quoted R. J. McFarland, general secretary of the Scottish Rite, who said, “We have definitely decided on a magnificent building to be erected on our property at Seventh and Ann at a cost of $10,000. As we depend entirely on our members it must be through them that we raise the amount necessary. We will hold a meeting Wednesday evening of all Scottish Rite bodies to discuss various plans regarding funding.” Grand Commander James D. Richardson and grand secretary Frederick W. Webber, or Washington, D.C. were in attendance at the meeting.
The Scottish Rite bodies approved plans for the new Masonic Temple on June 5, 1907. Again W. W. Rose designed the new four-story structure that included a sixty-foot frontage on Seventh street and a depth of 136 feet on Ann Avenue. The exterior of the building was noted as a mixture of “Hebrew and Arabic,” with the roof being supported by “Moorish pillars” (The Weekly News, 7 June 1907, page 1). The auditorium and stage were located on the second, third and fourth floors, with the fly loft rising to the roof. The large space included a forty-foot stage and balcony with a seating capacity of 800.
Description of the new Scottish Rite Building i Kansas City, Kansas, 1909.The Kansas City, Kansas, Scottish Rite building, 1909.Aerial view of the Kansas City, Kansas, Scottish Rite building.Detail of fly loft in an aerial view of the Kansas City, Kansas, Scottish Rite building.
In 1909, the new Scottish Rite building was dedicated in Kansas City, Kansas. The Kansas City Times reported, “The Scottish Rite Temple in Kansas City, Kas., which cost $100,000, will be dedicated at 8 o’clock tonight. The ceremony will be performed by James D. Richardson, sovereign grand commander of the Scottish Rite Masonic bodies in the United States. This ceremony will close the twenty-third semi-annual reunion of the Rite in Kansas City, Kas. A class of 150 persons have taken degrees from the fourth to the thirty-second at this reunion” (19 Nov 1909, page 12). The Fall Reunion was the twenty-third for the Valley of Kansas, Orient of Kansas. On the first day of the reunion, Thomas Wentworth Harrison of Topeka, SGIG in Kansas was in attendance (Kansas City Times 18 Nov. 1909, page 1). On the second day of the reunion, the degrees of Victory Chapter Rose Croix were conferred on a class of seventy-five candidates. In the third day, the degrees from nineteen to thirty inclusive in John H. Brown Council Knight Kadosh were conferred to the candidates.
