Scenic Artists – Page 18

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 463 – Patrick J. Toomey of Noxon & Toomey

Part 463: Patrick J. Toomey of Noxon & Toomey

Patrick J. Toomey, from the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, 2 April 1896, page 5

In 1896, the St. Louis Post-Dispatch featured Patrick J. Toomey, including a brief biography and illustration. The article reported, “Patrick J. Toomey was born in Limerick, Ireland in 1854 and came to St. Louis with his parents as an infant. He received his education at the Christian Brothers’ College and in the public schools. His first employment was in the retail grocery trade. After a few years he found this work uncongenial and apprenticed himself to scenic art under Mr. Thomas C. Noxon at Deagle’s Varieties. With his tutor, four years later, he formed the partnership of Noxon & Toomey, continuing in the same line ever since. In connection with Mr. Noxon, Mr. Toomey has been the scenic artist at the Olympic Theater and Grand Opera House for over twenty years. In 1886, he married Miss May Vogt, a daughter of Dr. Wm. Vogt of Iowa City, Iowa” (St. Louis Post-Dispatch, 2 April, 1896). The couple’s only child was named Noxon Toomey, who grew up to become a doctor.

Patrick J. Toomey’s wife, Mary Vogt, 1908

Noxon Toomey, the only child of Patrick J. Toomey and Mary Vogt. 1908.

I was curious about the venue where Toomey apprenticed himself to Noxon – Deagle’s Variety Theater. George Deagle’s Varieties Theater introduced musical comedy to St. Louis with “The Black Crook” in 1867 and briefly took the lead as one of St. Louis’ five theaters at that time. Various documents placed the location of the venue at Sixth Street near Locust. Little is known of Deagle’s Varieties Theater, and there are only a handful of advertisements for shows from 1876. Interestingly, an article from 1882 mentions that Deagle managed the only variety and spectacular house in pre-Civil War St Louis “then located where the present Grand Opera House now stands” (St. Louis Post-Dispatchm 20 March 1882, page 5). It appears that Deagle managed the St. Louis Opera House from 1865 until 1872, when he set his sites on another venue. In 1872 he rented the Olympic Theatre of St. Louis for a production of “Uncle Tom’s Cabin.”

The Buffalo Courier reported that George Deagle (1822-1908) was “the oldest theatrical manager in the country, who many years ago owned the Deagle Varieties Theater” (Buffalo Courier 14 Oct. 1900, page 17). Deagle later managed the People’s Theatre in Chicago too.

As an interesting side note, his granddaughter Ann Murdock took to the stage in 1908 at the age of 17, making her debut in “The Offenders.” She noted that her grandfather, George Deagle, was the manager of Deagles Varieties in St. Louis fifty years ago (New York Times 29 Oct. 1908, page 9), placing the establishment’s origin in the 1850s. Ann Murdock’s mother, Terese Deagle was also an actress, and one of the first leading women employed by Charles Frohman. Her father was a manager for many years at the American Theatrical Exchange (The St. Louis Post-Dispatch 12 June 1921, page 3). I became fascinated with this theatre family, but back to Toomey.

In 1922, the St. Louis Post-Dispatch placed Toomey’s birthdate in 1851 and reported that Toomey was “considered one of the pioneer scenic painters of St. Louis” (St. Louis Post-Dispatch, 13 March 1922, page 14). Toomey was best known, however, for his creation of the first floats for the Veiled Prophet’s parade and continued this sort of work for 25 years, only giving it up shortly before his death. Toomey was famed as an “electrical float builder” known also for his work at the Mardi Gras parade in New Orleans and the Milwaukee Carnival (Wichita Daily Eagle, 13 July 1900, page 6). He did most of the scene painting for the old theatres in St. Louis, including Pope’s the Olympic and the Century. At one time, he also painted for the Knickerbocker Theatre in New York City.

To be continued…

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 462- Thomas C. Noxon of Noxon & Toomey

Part 462: Thomas C. Noxon of Noxon & Toomey

The founding dates for Noxon and Toomey seem to vary when one looks at a variety of printed material and public records. Some sources place the firm starting in 1867, while others place the establishment around 1869. The firm lasted until Noxon’s passing in 1898.

Thomas C. Noxon was an extremely well-known scenic artist during the nineteenth century. Born in Montreal, Canada, during 1829, he came to the United States as a child. Initially living in Zanesville and in Millerburg, Ohio, Noxon attended public schools. For a time he lived in Detroit, and that was where he entered the theatrical profession. At the age of sixteen in 1845, he moved to St. Louis and studied art.

Noxon was married twice. He married his first wife, Ann Hazzard, on April 14, 1853 when he was twenty-four years old. The couple had three daughters, but only two were living at the time of his death, Mrs. Samuel Wilson and Mrs. Harry Belden, both of whom acted on the stage. The daughter that predeceased Noxon, Libbie, was also an actress, performing as Blosson in Ben Maginely’s “Square Man” during 1882. She passed away in 1894 after a long illness (St. Louis Post-Dispatch, 27 May 1894, page 31). A “Miss Noxon, the daughter of Thomas C. Noxon,” also performed with the Olympic stock company and reported to be married to the comedian Harry Harwood in 1883; this may have been Libbie (St. Louis Post-Dispatch, 1 Sept. 1883, page 8). In 1885, Noxon married for a second time to a “Mrs. Selvers.”

There are a few interesting tidbits that I uncovered about this somewhat evasive artist. In 1880, Noxon was working with the stage machinist Mr. S. I. Gates to create the scenery for “Cymbeline” at the Olympic (St. Louis Post-Dispatch, 5 Jan. 1880, page 8). In 1882, he was mentioned as the scenic artist of the Grand Opera House. In 1884, Noxon was credited as being both the scenic artist for the Grand Opera House and Olympic Theaters in St. Louis (St. Louis Post-Dispatch, 21 Jan. 1884, page 8).

*The Grand Opera House in St. Louis, Missouri, where Thomas C. Noxon worked as a scenic artist.*

*The Olympic Theatre in St. Louis, Missouri, where Thomas C. Noxon worked as a scenic artist.*

Later, Noxon’s business partner P. J. Toomey would remain at the Olympic, using the studio room for Toomey & Volland. This space was destroyed by fire in 1922. In 1884, the St. Louis Post-Dispatch reported, “Mr. Noxon stands in front rank of curtain and scene painters, and for special features like Mardi Gras and Veiled Prophet pageants, is recognized throughout the Mississippi Valley as the most competent man in the profession” (St. Louis Post-Dispatch, 21 Jan. 1884, page 8). At the time of his passing in 1898, the “Dramatic Mirror” reported, “His name appears on the corner of theatrical curtains in almost every large city in the country, and is also seen in the theatres of Europe” (2 July 1898, page 6).

Noxon worked as both a scenic artist and a decorative painter, heading four theatrical painting firms during his life: Noxon & Strauss, Noxon, Halley & Toomey, Noxon, Albert & Toomey, and finally Noxon & Toomey.

My research suggests that Noxon joined forces with Patrick Joseph Toomey to establish the Noxon & Toomey Painting Studio of St. Louis between 1867 and 1869. Noxon was the senior partner and is reported to have managed the studio from its inception until his illness in 1896. This is where history gets a bit fuzzy around the edges. The business remained opened after Albert left Noxon & Toomey in 1891, but Toomey also established the Knox & Toomey Scenic Art Company at that same time. Knox & Toomey also specialized in float construction and electric pageant wagons, the same kind that Noxon & Toomey specialized in since 1878. Their creations dominated the pageant market all over the country.

Like many men of his generation, Noxon joined a variety of social clubs and fraternal organization. In addition to being a prominent member of several Masonic orders, he was also a charter member for the Benevolent and Protected Order of Elks. The Elks were an American fraternal order founded during 1868 in New York City. It was initially a social club for minstrel show performers, called the “Jolly Corks.” Some historical records suggest that the group was formed as a private club to elude laws governing the restrictive hours for public taverns. After a member’s death that left his wife and children without funds, the organization took on a more charitable mission.

*It’s sad when all that remains of this remarkable scenic artist is a tombstone. I am still searching for images of painted settings produced by Thomas C. Noxon.*

Noxon passed away from nephritis, on June 20, 1898, after a long illness. His remains are interred in “Elks Rest,” the Elks section of Bellfontaine Cemetery in St. Louis (block 70, lot 1043). At the time of his death, Noxon was living at 2010 Rutger Street. The St. Louis Post-Dispatch reported, “Mr. Noxon for years had been considered one of the foremost scenic painters in the country and his work can be seen in almost every prominent theater in the United States” (21 June 1898, page 7). When he passed away, Toomey was in Wisconsin, superintending Milwaukee Carnival Floats. The “Weekly Wisconsin” reported, “Mr. Toomey received a telegram this morning announcing his partner’s death, and at once arranged to leave for St. Louis to attend the funeral. ‘Mr. Noxon was the greatest scenic artist this country has produced,’ said Mr. Toomey. ‘He was 69 years of age and had done work for the leading theaters of the country, besides what he did in way of pageantry. He leaves a wife and two daughters, one of whom is on the stage. Mr. Noxon had been ill for a year and a half, and had been confined to his bed for the last six months” (The Weekly Wisconsin, 25 June 1898, page 4).

Toomey’s only child was named Noxon Toomey.

To be continued…

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 449: R. M. Shurtleff and the Civil War

Part 449: R. M. Shurtleff and the Civil War

In 1903, Thomas G. Moses studied fine art with Roswell Morse Shurtleff (1838-1915). A few years earlier, the newspapers published an article about Shurtleff’s art during the Civil War. The story first appeared in the “New York Sun,” and later republished in newspapers all over the country. Here is “Designed Confederate Button” from the Lindsbourg Record in Kansas (Lindsbourg, Kansas, 13 July 1900, page 4).

“Of the many former confederate veterans who wear the button of the confederate veteran’s association very few know that the design of the button was first drawn by a union officer. The designer was Lieut. R. M. Shurtleff and he drew the original design without any idea that it would ever be officially adopted by the confederate army. This is how the matter came about, as Lieut. Shurtleff tells the story:

A few days before the first battle of Bull Run he was sent out on a small scouting expedition with a small party of men of the naval brigade Ninety-ninth New York volunteers, union coast guard, in which organizations he was the first lieutenant. He was to make a report on the condition of the country in front of the union forces. While reconnoitering with his party he was surprised and attacked by a much larger force of confederates, and after being shot through the body and arm, was captured with all his men. The small union flag which the artillery carried was used to bind up the leader’s wounds, and today Lieut. Shurtleff has in his possession, the officer who captured him having sent it to him with his compliments many years after the close of the war. For a time his condition was very serious, but his captors gave him the best care they could and as soon as possible he was sent to Richmond where he had hospital care. At that time the confederates were not well furnished with prison quarters for captives. Libby prison not having been opened, and the lieutenant eventually brought up in the Richmond poorhouse, where he had little to eat, but was treated very kindly.

Still weak from the effects of his wounds, he was unable to walk about and spend much of his time while lying on his cot in making drawings for his own amusement and for he edification of the soldiers. The officers got paints and brushes for him and he made water color sketches which he presented to them. One day one of the officers who had been very kind to him came to his cot and said, “I wonder if you could design a sort of patriotic emblem for me. ‘I might,’ replied the prisoner smiling, ‘but I suspect that your idea and mine of what a patriotic emblem is wouldn’t quite be identical.” “Very likely not,” agreed the other, “but this isn’t anything that you need to trouble your conscience about. Gen. Beauregard’s little daughter is a great chum of mine, and I promised her I’d get up some sort of a painting of a confederate flag for her to hang on her wall. I’ve been trying to think up something, but as a designer I’m no use. So it occurred to me that you might help me out.” “Why, of course, I’ll be glad to do whatever I can,” said Lieut. Shurtleff. Give me a few days’ time, and I’ll get something done in water colors.”

Getting out his paints, he set to work to sketch, and presently, with the instinct of an artist, became deeply absorbed in the manner of the design, working all that day and getting up early the next morning to continue the task, discarding one idea after another until he finally hit upon a design that suited him. This was the St. Andrew’s cross in blue on a red ground with minor ornamentation of stars. He finished it up handsomely in watercolors and turned it over to his confederate friend, who was much pleased with it and brought back word that little Miss Beauregard was highly delighted, and was going to importune her father to let the Yankee gentleman who made it go back north. Shortly afterward Lieut. Shurtleff was transferred to Libby prison, and in 1862 was exchanged.

He forgot about the design for the time. A year or so later it was called to his attention in rather a startling way as he saw a captured confederate flag consisting of his design almost exactly as he had painted it. Still later he saw an official flag of the confederate states of America, and there was another repetition of the design, for it formed the entire corner of the ensign. Naturally, the artist was not pleased with his friend, the confederate officer, who had put him in the position of furnishing flag designs for enemies of his country. From what he has since learned, however, Lieut. Shurtleff is inclined to believe that the officer was not in fault.

It seems that Gen. Beauregard saw the painting which had been given to his daughter, and on asking her about it was told that it was a flag of her country and belonged to her personally. He suggested that she present it to her country, and after some consideration she agreed, stipulating that the original be returned to her after copies had been made. The flag was then produced in cloth and Gen. Beauregard had it adopted as the battle flag of the confederacy. Just how it came to be incorporated into the official flag Lieut. Shurtleff doesn’t know. At the close of the war the southern association of veterans adopted the original battle flag design for their button, and all the confederate veterans’ associations now wear that design with some slight modifications or additions. Meantime Lieut. Shurtleff would be interested in finding out the exact steps by which the adoption of his watercolor as the basis of the national flag of the confederacy was brought about. There is probably some one still living who could enlighten him, but he doesn’t know how to come at the information.”

To be continued…

This confederate flag was listed for auction. The flag had been made by William Lumsden’s wife, Annie Suter Lumsden, during the Siege of Petersburg, and that Mrs. Lumsden had displayed the flag from the house that the Lumdsens then occupied, in Petersburg, in support of the Confederate troops. Lumsden would, after the war, become a successful businessman, working with a fellow ex-Confederate solider, William Tappey, to form Tappey, Lumsden & Company, in Petersburg; this company fabricated machinery for the textile industry. Lumsden, who died in 1886, is buried in the famed Blandford Cemetery Confederate Soldier’s section, in Petersburg, Va. The link is: http://perryadamsantiques.com/shop/rare-confederate-citizens-flag-from-petersburg/

Travels of a Scenic Artist and Scholar: Reflections on the Tabor Opera House and Royal Gorge, June 20

We left Leadville, Colorado, and headed to Taos, New Mexico, on the morning on June 20. My plan was to stop by the Salida Opera House on our way down. By the sixth day of our trip, I was just about burned out on historic scenery. Over the course of five days, I had documented over 200 backdrops, 18 painted borders, 60 set pieces and a dozen wings. I needed a day off before arriving at the Santa Fe Scottish Rite theatre.

Instead of the Salida Opera House, we opted to go to Royal Gorge. My incentive was not only the inspirational vista, but also Eveleyn E. Livingston Furman’s mention of Royal Gorge as a subject for one of the 1879 opera house settings. In “The Tabor Opera House: A Captivating History,” Livingston mentioned that one of the original settings for the Tabor Opera House depicted Royal Gorge; the expense for this sole scene was $1000.

The last time I visited Royal Gorge was on my way to USITT for the “Theatre of the Fraternity” touring exhibit and conference at Long Beach during 1998. I traveled part of the way with my father and my daughter Isabelle, who was less than a year old at the time. In Arizona, I picked up my husband from the Phoenix airport. This was the last time we were able to wind our way through the western United States. At the time, we only gazed at the gorge from the parking lot as I held my daughter in her baby carrier. This was my last glimpse of the old park, as it was destroyed during a fire in 2013. Since then, the entire site has been rebuilt; it is stunning and well laid out. It was well worth the side trip yesterday!

We rode the gondola that crosses Royal Gorge.

Me and my travel companions for the trip, Andrew and Aaron

The bridge at Royal Gorge. During the fire, only a few of the timbers for the walkway were singed.

A view from the walking bridge at Royal Gorge

Now back to the scenery at the Tabor Opera House in Leadville. According to Furman, the original scenery for the 1879 Tabor Opera House was credited to J. B. Lamphere. Furman recorded that Lamphere provided ten sets of scenery, including a drop curtain, a forest scene, a mountain waterfall, a view of the Royal Gorge, a street scene, a formal garden scene, a Palace scene, a “Light Fancy,” a plain chamber scene, a new England kitchen scene and a Baronial Hall. She also noted that each scenes had three sets of wings.

I decided to track down this scenic artist and the technical specifications for the original 1879 venue. My first historical source was Harry Miner’s American Dramatic Directory for the season of 1884-1885. Miner’s provided a variety of details about the 1879 stage in Leadville. At this time, the town was listed as having 20,000 residents. The seating capacity for the theater was listed as 800. The stage measured 34×60; the size of the proscenium opening, 17×23; height from the stage to grooves, 16; the height from the stage to rigging loft, 19. The depth under the stage 4 1/2, traps, 3; number of scenery sets, 12. The space was illuminated with gas. In 1896-1899, however, Julius Cahn’s Official Theatrical Guide noted that the Tabor Opera House had five grooves.

Harry Miner’s American Dramatic Directory listed the scenic artist for the painted settings at the Tabor Opera House in Leadville as “Burkey, of Tabor Grand, Denver.” To clarify, these dramatic directories did not always list the scenic artists for a particular year, just those responsible for the painted settings at the venue. I noticed this aspect of the touring guides as I traced the venues that listed Thomas G. Moses, as well as Sosman & Landis, scenery and their names as the “scenic artist” for the venue. Dozens of theatres would list Moses as their scenic artist while he was working elsewhere in the country and years after he had painted the scenery. The designation of “scenic artist” in this context was to advertise who painted the stage scenery, not necessarily who was on staff.

So for the Tabor Opera House in Leadville Colorado, “Burckey” was credited as the creator of the painted scenery. Burckey is also noted in Harry Miner’s Directory as the scenic artist of the Tabor Grand in Denver. This credits Burckey with the scenery for both Tabor theatres, constructed within the space of a year.

I was curious to discover more about the scenic artist named Burckey. First of all, Burckey is also published as “Berkey” and “Burcky.” I have encountered this in the past with “Sosman & Landis” as “Sausman & Landes,”among many other variations. I believe that the scenic artist who created the scenery for the 1879 Tabor Opera House was Henry E. Burcky, also known as H. E. Burcky. Interestingly, the 1890 Ballenger & Richards annual of the Denver City Directory still listed Harry E. Burcky as the scenic artist for the Tabor Opera House. Again, they would still be using the stock scenery painted by Burcky.

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 442: -James E. Fennessy and the Empire Circuit

Part 442: James E. Fennessy and the Empire Circuit

James E. Fennessy (1856-1925) was introduced yesterday as a theatrical manager who hired Thomas G. Moses in 1902 to paint the setting for “The Charity Nurse.” Fennessy partnered with George E. Heuck, to form the theatrical management firm of Fennessy & Heuck; they were also major players in the Empire Circuit Company – the Western Wheel of the burlesque circuit, also known as the Empire Association.

Picture of Col.James E. Fennessy reading “The Book of the Law” at his winter home in St. Petersburg, Florida. Published in “The Cincinnati Enquirer,” 6 April 1924, page 127.

At the turn of the twentieth century, a successful burlesque producer had forty possible weeks of engagements during a season on the combined circuit, or “wheel” as they were called in burlesque. The agenda for individual circuits was to provide a booking system, establish territorial limits, minimize unprofitable gaps between engagements, and stand in unity against contract violators. That being said, the Eastern, or Columbia Wheel regarded itself as an association of “clean” burlesque, meaning slightly less offensive than what appeared in many western venues.

The Empire Circuit was a group of western burlesque theatrical managers and producers, formed on 18 October 1897. The Empire Circuit operated theatres in Baltimore, Birmingham, Buffalo, Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago, Detroit, Memphis, Milwaukee, Minneapolis, New Orleans, Pittsburgh, Philadelphia, St. Louis, St. Paul, Toledo, and Washington, D.C. Their business offices were located in Cincinnati, Ohio, but they also had offices in New York as some of the influential leader resided there.

Since 1900, the officers of the Empire Circuit company consisted of James J. Butler, president; Hubert Heuck, vice-president; James E. Fennessy, secretary; John H. Whalen, treasurer; and board members consisting of James L. Kernan, Harry W. Williams, W. T. Campbell, and George W. Rife. Butler was also a member of Congress at the time, residing in St. Louis, Missouri.

In 1905, the Billboard included an article titled “The Burlesque Situation,” reporting, “There seems to be no concessions to be made on either side in the burlesque war which originated in that little Boston affair some time since.” The article continued, “The managers of the Eastern Circuit met in Cincinnati in the offices of Messrs. Heuck & Fennessy at the People’s Theatre. It was their regular annual business meeting at which time they met for the discussion of matters relating to the circuit; however, it was the most important gathering of that body in years. It is said that if the Empire managers are worried they did nothing that would in any manner show their anxiety either before, at, or after the meeting. One of the managers who attended the meeting gave the expression to the assertion that as far as the Empire Circuit’s houses are concerned they are prepared to take care of all shows that are entitled to bookings in their various theatres. Harmony prevailed throughout the entire meeting. Important parts of the program for the coming season were considered, also the relations of the association to the Eastern Circuit” (May 13, 1905). The article reported that at the meeting James A. Butler was elected president of the Eastern Circuit Association, with Hubert Heuck as first vice-president and James E. Fennessy as secretary. The Eastern Circuit was not to be confused with the Columbia Circuit, only the Empire Circuit expanding east.

In 1905, “The Scranton Truth” reported, “This year will witness a big change in the burlesque business as there are now two ‘wheels,’ the Empire Circuit and the Columbia Amusement Company fighting each other in the east. Previously these two organizations divided territory of the east and west, but they split and the battle royal is on. The Star Theatre still admits its allegiance to the Columbia Amusement Company. Where heretofore there have been forty burlesque companies, there will be seventy this season. The will play week instead of three day stands in this city” (27 July 1905, page 3).

The Empire Circuit was expanding its territory, planning to construct the “largest and most important circuit of theatres ever combined for this department of the theatrical business.” In 1905, their holdings were thirty-two theaters that covered the best paying burlesque fields in the country. Their acquisitions included the Trocadero of Philadelphia, Monumental of Baltimore, Lyceum of Washington, Academy of Music of Pittsburgh, People’s of Cincinnati, Buckingham of Louisville, Empire of Indianapolis, Standard of St. Louis, New Century of Kansas City, Folly of Chicago, Trocadero of Chicago, Star of Milwaukee, Dewey of Minneapolis, Star of St. Paul, Smith’s Opera House of Grand Rapids, Avenue of Detroit, Star of Cleveland, LaFayette Square of Buffalo, Majestic of Toronto, Theatre Francaise of Montreal, Columbia Music Hall of Boston, Miner’s Eighth Avenue of New York, Miner’s Bowery of New York, London of New York and the Bon Ton of New Jersey. They were negotiating the inclusion of theatres in New Orleans, Memphis and Nashville that were dependent on railroad facilities and several other theatres in the eastern fields. The Billboard summed up the situation in 1905, commenting, “To use a wall street phrase, it would appear that the fight has resulted in one faction being long on theaters and short on attractions, and the other the reverse. Developments will be watched with interest, and we hope in the near future to be able to publish an agreement between the two factions. This country may be large enough for two wheels, but one big wheel with a solid hub, long spokes and tight rim surrounded by a strong tire of superiority and quality will be greatly desired by the burlesque loving contingent” (13 May 1905, page 10). By 1911, the Empire Circuit controlled 37 theaters nationwide.

In 1912, the report of the Interstate Commerce Commission listed a court case: the United States v. Harry J. Rhein, James E. Fennessy, the Heuck Opera House Co., the Empire Circuit, and the Big Four Railroad Co. (district court, northern Illinois). The aforementioned were charged with “indictment for conspiracy to refund portion of the legal transportation charges paid by various burlesque companies for transportation over New York Central Lines, the refunds being paid under the guise of compensation for advertising earned in certain theatrical programs (5 counts).”

By 1913, the Empire Circuit was absorbed by the Columbia Amusement Company and by 1914 nearly 80 shows were touring in 81 theaters that stretched from New York to Omaha, entertaining 700,000 customers annually (Vaudeville Old & New: an Encyclopedia of Variety Performances in America, page 164)

This occurred only a few years after Fennessy retired from all theatrical business. In 1910 Fennessy suffered from a severe injury exercising at the Cincinnati Gymnasium; he fell over a ladder in the swimming area (Cincinnati Enquirer, 20 July 1925, page 3). In 1925 while undergoing a minor operation to repair damage from the 1910 accident, Fennessy died unexpectedly while recovering at home.

To be continued…

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 414 – William F. Hamilton and the Sterling Opera House in Derby, Connecticut

Part 414: William F. Hamilton and the Sterling Opera House in Derby, Connecticut

In 1899 William F. Hamilton was listed as the scenic artist at the Columbia Theatre in Boston. He was working along the East Coast when he reconnected with Thomas G. Moses in New York City. Julius Cahn’s Official Theatrical Guide of 1899-1900 listed “W. F. Hamilton” as the scenic artist at the Sterling Opera House in Derby, Connecticut.

On a whim, I decided to see if I could locate any images or postcards of the Sterling Opera House. Imagine my surprise when I stumbled across a whole series of current pictures by Darren Ketchum in an online article – “Sterling Opera House – Under Renovation.”

The Sterling Opera House proscenium opening and backstage. Photograph by Darren Ketchum’s “Sterling Opera House – Under Renovation.” Here is the link: https://darrenketchumphotography.wordpress.com/tag/derby/

View of the auditorium from the stage. Photograph by Darren Ketchum.

I was especially thrilled to find two images that depicted the backstage area with some of the original stage machinery – and a CLEAT rail! When I noticed the cleat rail, instead of a pin rail, I immediately contacted Rick Boychuk to share this discovery.

Notice the cleat rails on the stage left side. Detail in photograph by Darren Ketchum.

Here is a little information about this old opera house, now a mere shadow of its former glory. The building was constructed in 1889 on 104 Elizabeth St, across from the town green. The venue was designed by H. Edwards Fickens, co-designer of the famous Carnegie. The doors opened to the public on April 2, 1889, and remained open until 1945, when the curtain closed for the last time. The building was added to the National Register of Historic places on November 8, 1968, and there has been continued discussions about various renovations since 2011; anticipated restoration costs remaining a primary deterrent. U.S. Representative Rosa DeLauro received a grant for $150,000 thousand dollars to go towards cleaning up the interior. Possible future plans include public tours and relocating City Hall back to the building.

The Sterling Opera House was also the setting for a 2011 episode of “Ghost Hunters.” This was the moment that really brought the old theater back into the public’s focus. “Ghost Hunters” was an American television series about paranormal activities that ran from 2004 to 2016. The Sterling Opera House hauntings reported on the show were like many covered in a variety of old theaters across the country. The examination of paranormal activities in old opera houses has also been a way to advertise these historic venues. During my recent visit to appraise a painted drop in Toledo, Iowa, I learned that the Wieting Opera House was included as a chapter in Adrian Lee’s publication “Mysterious Midwest: Unwrapping Urban Legends and Ghostly Tales from the Dead.” The opera house in Toledo was reported as being home to forty ghosts.

In Derby, local citizens reported witnessing un-explainable things in the opera house, such as shadowy figures and orbs of light. All though there were no deaths or tragedies recorded during the operation of the theatre, some believe that the haunting is the spirit of Charles Sterling, namesake of the opera house. Other sightings involved a little boy named “Andy” who played with a soccer ball in the balcony area. Throughout the building, people have reported a variety of children’s toys that periodically move or disappear. Why there were still toys scattered throughout an abandoned theater is anyone’s guess.

The Sterling Opera House is a second-floor theater with a seating capacity of 1,470; a combination of fixed and temporary seats. Julius Cahn’s Official Theatrical Guide reported that the proscenium measured 30 feet by 30 feet with a stage depth of 34 feet. The height to the rigging loft was 40 feet with a groove height of 18 feet. There were five grooves on each side of the stage; all could be taken up flush with the gallery. There was also one movable bridge above the stage. The depth under the stage was 8 feet, with four traps. Interestingly, there was also a jail beneath the stage. This might have come in handy during some productions. The two lower levels of the building, along with the basement, functioned as the town’s City Hall and police station. Almost as convenient as having a theatre building connected to a fire station!

Auditorium seating at the Sterling Opera House in Derby, Connecticut. Photograph by Darren Ketchum.

Some temporary seating at the Sterling Opera House, in Derby, Connecticut. Photograph by Darren Ketchum.

To be continued…

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 413 – William F. Hamilton

Part 413: William F. Hamilton

Thomas G. Moses partnered with William F. Hamilton in 1900; they set up their new studio at Proctor’s 125^th Street Theatre, a variety theatre in New York City that included a scene room.

Little is known about “Will” Hamilton beyond that recorded by Moses in his memoirs. For years, I have tried to piece together Hamilton’s background and story. With the advent of online research capabilities, I have been able to discover a little more about this primarily unknown scenic artist.

Hamilton was born in Oil City, Pennsylvania – the exact date is unknown – but newspaper articles refer to him as scenic artist who started out as an “Oil City Boy.” Oil City, Pennsylvania was located in Verango County, at the confluence of the Allegheny River and Oil Creek in the foothills of the Appalachian Mountains. It became a central site to the petroleum industry, the first oil wells being drilled in 1861. The city later became the hosting headquarters for the Penzoil, Quaker State, and Wolf’s Head Motor Oil Companies.

The first mention of Hamilton’s connection to the theatre is mentioned during 1884; this is eight years before meeting Moses. An 1884 issue of the “Oil City Derrick” reported that three members of the Oil City Exchange had bought the interest of C. S. Mark in the South Side Rink and that, along with the other owner, W. F. Hamilton, were planning to convert the space into an opera house (September 25, 1884). The article announced that October 8, 1884, was the last night the building would operate as a rink. Meanwhile the scenic artist Frank H. Johnson had arrived and planned to complete his work in a short time, and the carpenters were expected to finish their work within twelve days. So, Hamilton was getting involved in theater, but not necessarily painting yet. Another “Derrick” article from November 13, 1884, described the extensive remodeling of the skating rink. The new auditorium was 53 feet by 73 feet with a ceiling that arched from 12 feet high on the sides, to 23 feet high at the apex. The floor of the auditorium was raked, with the back 3 feet higher than the front. The ceiling was covered with canvas and painted to appear as “substantial and elegant plaster.” Other murals included a “beautiful landscape showing the Kinzua bridge in the foreground” (page 228). Nothing is reported of the scenery, or Frank H. Johnson’s work.

Eight years later, Hamilton met Moses in 1892 when they were both hired to design a model and paint the scenery for the “Ben Hur,” the pantomime tableaux (see past installment 256). After this project, Hamilton’s whereabouts remain unknown for the next three years. It is likely that he was working throughout the country on various theatre projects.

By 1896, The “Wilmington Morning Star” reports, “Mr. F. C. Peckham, of New York, assistant to Mr. W. F. Hamilton, scenic artist and stage manager of the Standard Theatre, arrived in the city yesterday and will commence work on the scenery and a new drop curtain at the Opera House (Wilmington, NC, 26 August, 1896, page 1). By 1897, Wilmington, North Carolina’s, Opera House was advertise to include a variety show featuring “Edison’s Projectoscope, Producing Life Size Animated Pictures, The Worlds Latest Invention” the following year (Wilmington Star, 14 March 1897).

An advertisement for the Edison Projectoscope from the “Los Angeles Herald,” 30 Sept 1898.

By 1899, Hamilton appears in print again and is listed as the scenic artist for the Columbia Theatre in Boston. The “North Adams Transcript” reported, “The trustees of the F.M.T.A. society met last evening, and decided on several matters of importance in connection with the rebuilding of the theater. Two representatives of scene painting firms were present and the contract was awarded to W. F. Hamilton, scenic artist of the Columbia Theatre in Boston, to do the work. He has an excellent reputation, and will provide a complete set of scenery, with drop and fire proof curtains. It is expected that some of the scenes will be more elaborate than anything the house has had. It was also decided in the rebuilding to put in an exit on one side of the theatre provided for a fire escape. Work on the building is progressing in good shape. The alteration in the height of the stage will enable it to accommodate almost any piece of scenery” (North Adams, Mass.,10 March 1899).

At this time, Hamilton also returned to his hometown, verifying his work as a scenic artist in Boston. The “Oil City Derrick” reported, “Another Oil City boy to visit us was Will Hamilton, brother-in-law to Lieutenant Scribner, who is now a scenic artist of some prominence with head quarters in Boston. (8 March 1899, page 8).

To be continued…

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 401 – “A Gossip about Scenery and Scene-Painters,” 1866, fifth section

Part 401: “A Gossip about Scenery and Scene-Painters,” 1866, fifth section

The article “A Gossip about Scenery and Scene-Painters,” was published in “The Era” on February 4, 1866. Here is the fifth of five installments.

“The late David Roberts, who made his debut in London as a scene-painter at Drury-lane, where he commenced his career in 1822, was also famous for his dioramas, but he never produced works which equalled Stanfield’s moving diorama of Alpine scenery, or the memorable views of Windsor and the neighbourhood, which included the sparkling tableau of Virginia Water, wherein the real element was so effectively introduced.

The principal Covent-garden artists at this time (1828) were David Roberts and the famous scenic triumvirate, Messrs. Grieve, and T. and W. Grieve. Mr. Roberts, who only died recently, was a fine architectural scenic draughtsman, and the drop scene he painted for this Theatre, the Interior of a Temple to Shakespeare, consisting of fluted Corinthian Sienna columns, supporting a soffite dome, the perspective terminating with a monumental group introducing the immortal Bard, with St. Paul’s Cathedral in the distance, will be vividly remembered by the mature playgoer. The Grieves had long been famous for their Pantomime scenery, and in the brilliancy of their style, the strong feeling of reality which they communicated to the spectator, and in the taste and artistic beauty of their landscape compositions, they have since had few rivals, and have never been excelled. The Covent-garden Pantomime of Aladdin, this year, shows that Mr. T. Grieve has still the right to wear the laurelled crown. The last scene of The Master of Ravenswood, at the Lyceum with the storm effects introduced, may be cited as a fine specimen of this artist’s powers.

At the present time the stage is richly supplied with scenic artists whose reputation needs no better security than the productions they have this year given to the public. With a cherished remembrance of the old days of Tomkins and Pitt at the Adelphi, of Philip Phillips at the Surrey and of the clever artist, Brunning, who died a mere youth, and yet figured conspicuously among the scenic corps of twenty years ago, we may pass confidently to the catalogue of our present distinguished representatives of the scenic art.

Mr. William Beverley, on his own ground at Drury is the unrivalled delineator of the fanciful region in which fairies may be imagined to dwell. Mr. William Galleon is a richly-endowed and skillful artist, whose “Transformation Scenes” have long won for him a special celebrity, and whose latest triumphs of pictorial ingenuity, as exhibited at the Alhambra, would suffice to establish his name as a highly-original producer of peculiar “effects.”

Mr. O’Connor at the Haymarket, Mr. Lloyd at the Princess’s, Mr. Charles James at the Prince of Wales’s Theatre, Mr. Hawes Craven at the Olympic, Messrs. Brew at Astley’s, Mr. Gates at the Surrey, Mr. Frederick Fenton at the Victoria, and his brother, Mr. Charles Fenton at the Strand, have severally produced works of Art which will long keep their names vividly impressed on the memory of the playgoer. Nor should those who have so successfully laboured for the Theatres we have not here named be passed over in silence. In the ample accounts we have rendered of the last Christmas novelties they will find, however, the fullest recognition of their respective merits. Mr. Marshall, though not now so much before the public as a scenic artist, is not likely to be forgotten by those who can appreciate the services he has rendered to this important department of the stage; and Mr. Telbin has so distinguished himself by the triumphs he has achieved in the highest region of the Scenic Art that it is only to be regretted, for the sake of playgoers, his pencil is not now as frequently employed as heretofore for their gratification.”

End of the article.

To be continued…

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 399 – “A Gossip about Scenery and Scene-Painters,” 1866, third section

Part 399: “A Gossip about Scenery and Scene-Painters,” 1866, third section

While researching the English scene painting families, I came across an interesting article from 1866. It seems an appropriate time to share this article, as my house is full of friends for the Helios Masonic Symposium in St. Cloud today. It is the perfect time to examine how the history of scenic art was presented during the mid-nineteenth century in the United Kingdom.

The article “A Gossip about Scenery and Scene-Painters,” was published in “The Era” on February 4, 1866. Here is the third of five installments.

“Great improvements in the scenic department were made at the beginning of the last century, when Rich, who was Manager of the playhouse in Lincoln’s Inn-fields, denominated the new Theatre, and set up in rivalry, of Drury Lane, designed a series of spectacular entertainments, which drew the audiences from the old house, although it retained a strong company under the management of Wilkes, Booth, and Cibber. Italy had long been famous for its scene painters and the splendour of its Pantomimic representations. Canaletti, the great painter, designed the scenery for the Venetian stage. Some of these foreign artists were employed by Rich, and then it was the English first beheld the delightful effect of the picturesque as viewed through a splendid proscenium on a lengthened stage.

The Managers of Drury, in self defense, were compelled to attempt the same kind of entertainment, and they pressed into their service a celebrated scene-painter, named Devoto, and a ballet-master, Monsieur Thermond, who projected a Pantomime of which Jack Sheppard was the hero. This set the wits of the town on the Managers, who, with the scene-painter, were dragged to the satiric whipping-post. On these Pantomimic pieces they were lavish of expense, as the scenery and machinery were the principal attractions.

When Rich removed his dramatic corps from Lincoln’s Inn-fields to the newly-erected Theatre in Covent-garden, Hogarth caricatured the whole house moving in procession across the market-place in front of the piazza, not forgetting to have a hit at his friend George Lambert, whose scenes he piled in a wagon wherein the thunder and lightning were made conspicuous. Lambert, who had been joint scene-painter at Lincoln’s Inn, was appointed principal in that department at Covent-garden, and it was in the scene-room here that he founded the Beef-steak Club. Harvey, a landscape painter, and Amiconi, who painted the fine groups on the upper part of the staircase at old Buckingham House, executed the decorations of the proscenium, an allegory of Shakespeare, Apollo, and the Muses. John Laguerre, the historical painter, occasionally designed the scenes for Lincoln’s Inn stage, and the curious scene-cloth representing the Siege of Troy, depicted in Hogarth’s “Southwark Fair,” is from his design. Michael Angelo Rooker, whimsically Italianized himself into Signor Rookerini, and who was at once painter, Harlequin, Scaramouch, and engraver, was principal scene-painter to the elder Colman at his Theatre in the Haymarket.

John Richards, the old Secretary of the Royal Academy, painted many years for the stage. His rural scenery for “The Maid of the Mill” is perpetuated in two line engravings, which are in the portfolios of all our old-fashioned Collectors of English prints.

The first scene of “The Maid of the Mill,” designed by John Inigo Richards. Painting by John Inigo Richards (1731-1810)

The first scene of “The Maid of the Mill,” designed by John Inigo Richards. Richards was a noted scenic artist, machinist and theatre designer. Engraving by William Woollett (1735-1785) after the painting by John Inigo Richards (1731-1810). 1768. Here is the link to the image: https://www.lubranomusic.com/pages/books/29668/samuel-arnold/the-first-scene-of-the-maid-of-the-mill-as-designed-by-mr-richards-fine-large-engraving-by-william

De Loutherbourg who for some time delighted and astonished the town by his interesting dioramic exhibition, which he called “The Eidophusikon,” was the first to increase the effect of scenery by lighting from above the proscenium, and using coloured glasses for the lamps. Many ingenious devices, now familiar, in their effects at least, to a playgoing public, owe their adoption to the dashing, vigorous Flemish battle-painter, whose appearance was as martial as his pictures, and whom Jack Bannister nicknamed “Field-Marshal Leatherbags.”

Another distinguished artist of this period was Mr. Greenwood, father of Mr. T. L. Greenwood, so long associated with the management of Sadler’s Well’s Theatre.

Sadler’s Wells Theatre, ca. 1745-1750. For additional history on the Sadler’s Wells Theatre and this image, see: http://www.british-history.ac.uk/survey-london/vol47/pp140-164

For many years the scenery of the Royal Circus (now the Surrey Theatre) was painted by Mr. Greenwood, who invested the ballets and senior musical spectacles brought out there by Mr. J. C. Cross with remarkable scenic attractions, and, when the artist was transferred to Drury-lane he became even more prominent. Byron, in his “English Bards and Scottish Reviewers,” speaks of “Greenwood’s gay designs” as being then the chief support of the Drama at that period.

To be continued…

Tales from a Scenic Artist and Scholar. Part 395 – William Telbin and Henry Telbin

In 1863, William Telbin and his son Henry painted scenes for a panorama about the tour made in the East by the Prince of Wales. At that same time, Francis Bedford created a photographic exhibition of the same tour. Here is an article about the Telbins’ project that was published in Art Journal (May 1863, Vol. 2, No. 5, page 101).

Description of the Panorama of the Tour of the Prince of Wales, 1863. This was recently listed for sale and I was fortunate enough to get a screen shot of the cover.

“Minor Topics of the Month. Panorama of the Prince of Wales’s Tour.”

“The Easter novelty at the Haymarket Theatre is the production of a series of panoramic views, illustrative of the tour made in the East by the Prince of Wales. To ensure the utmost accuracy, Mr. Buckstone sent his scene-painters—Mr. Telbin and his son—the same journey, and the result has been a series of pictures of singular fidelity and beauty. The series begins at Cairo and ends at Constantinople, including the sacred Island of Philae on the Nile, Jerusalem, the Jordan, the Dead Sea, Nazareth, Mount Hormon, Damascus, Beyrout, and other interesting localities. It is an especial merit in these pictures that they are quite free of all conventionalism, and the artist has boldly delineated the atmospheric and topographical peculiarities of the Holy Land.

The glaring sunlight, the arid desert, the deep green foliage, the gorgeously tinted sunsets, the brilliant moonlights, the sky studded with lamp-like stars, is all reproduced in these clever pictures. We may especially note the grand and comprehensive view of Cairo as an admirable day-scene, and that of the Dead Sea as an equally good picture of evening in the East. The deep shadows and blood-red lights from the setting sun, the fleecy clouds of rosy hue in a sky of gold, could only be painted by an Eastern traveller, and certainly not appreciated by any one who knows no other than an English autumn evening.

The beauty of Mr. Telbin’s work will appeal to all, but his true critics must be few—the few who have travelled where he has travelled. In truth, to the large mass of theatre-goers the whole series may have little attraction; indeed the interest of many of these views depends on associations, which render them more fitted for a lecture-room, in which we some day hope to see them, with more views added, and a sensible description in place of the dramatic trash that now introduces them so unfitly. It is due, however, to the public to say, that they fully appreciated what they entirely understood; and the wonderful reality of the water in the scene on the river Jordon was rapturously applauded; it was almost impossible to divest the mind of the idea that the eye rested on glass.

The night entertainment in a Turkish kiosk on the banks of the river, near Damascus, was also a great popular success; here the combined effects of lamplight and moonlight were most happily given. It was a veritable Arabian night’s entertainment, and for the moment the spectator was fairly carried away by the illusion of the scene. The intended grand climax—the marriage scene at Windsor—was flat after all this; it was “of the stage—stagey,” and had not the truth and freshness of the Eastern series.”

To be continued…