Copyright © 2022 by Wendy Waszut-Barrett
David H. Hunt was associated with Sosman & Landis from approximately 1894 until 1923. He encouraged the firm’s founders, Joseph Sosman and Perry Landis, to diversify their interests, expanding into the field of theatrical management in the 1890s. By 1894 he was managing Sosman, Landis & Hunt. Later in 1910, Hunt moved to New York to establish New York Studios, an eastern affiliate of Sosman & Landis. Hunt is quite an elusive character. I have tracked his life in both historical records and newspaper accounts, but am still left with many more questions than answers. His story is complex, and a little shady at times. As with other Sosman & Landis employees, I am going to start with his parents, Patrick and Anna Ella Hunt.
Patrick Hunt was born in March 1851 in Ireland. He purportedly emigrated to the United States as a child during the 1860s, likely between 1861 and 1863. By 1869 he was living in Detroit, Michigan, and married a woman named Anna (b. 1848). I have yet to locate any official immigration records or marriage certificate for the couple. This means, I have no idea what Anna’s maiden name was or when she traveled from Ireland to America in 1863, marrying Patrick five years later.
In September 1869, the young couple celebrated the birth of their first child, David Henry Hunt. Anna would go on to have eight more pregnancies, with three children surviving to adulthood by 1900. The couple’s only surviving children were David Henry Hunt (b. 1869), James Joseph Hunt (b. 1881), and Francis John Hunt (b. 1886). The Hunt Family lived in Detroit from 1870-1900.
The 1870 US Federal Census listed Patrick, “Annie”, and their infant son, David, as living in Detroit. At the time, Patrick’s occupation was simply listed as “laborer.” He would later secure employment with the railroad in Detroit as a switchman. The 1900 Census listed Patrick, Anna, and their three adult sons all living at home, their residence listed as 151 18th Street in Detroit. They had lived at this address since the mid-1880s. Between 1900 and 1910, all of the boys moved out, leaving Anna and Patrick alone, still residing at the same address, now known as 151 Porter Street.
I have yet to discover how David H. Hunt became involved in the theatre business, or exactly when he was introduced to Sosman and Landis. 1886 Detroit Directory listed David H. Hunt as a cashier at W. P. Rend & Co., boarding at 151 18th. [W. P. Rend & Co. is the name of a coal company located west of Benton about five miles.] The 1887 Detroit Directory again listed David H. Hunt as a clerk at W. P. Rend & Co., boarding at his parents’ home at 151 18th. Between 1888-1889 I have yet to locate any information about Hunt, but in 1890 and 1891 Hunt was working as a clerk at Fletcher, Jenks & Co., again boarding at 151 18th. [Fletcher, Jenks & Co. was a gun and rifle manufacturer].
This means that sometime between 1891 and 1893, Hunt became associated with Sosman & Landis. It is during this same period that Sosman & Landis begin diversify and invest in other business endeavors. The mid 1890s were a time of transition for Sosman & Landis, and the began setting their sights beyond the theatre supply industry. By 1893, Sosman & Landis were listed as theatrical managers for two electric scenic theatres on the rooftop of the Masonic Temple. That same year, Hunt was visiting Chicago and associated with the theatre industry. On June 4, 1893, the “Detroit Free Press,” reported that Hunt was managing a benefit performance, “Caste” at the St. Boniface and Jesuit churches new auditorium (page 15). On June 20, 1893, the “Detroit Free Press” reported that the production featured Harry C. Barton of the Warde-James combination, Una Abel of the Rhea Company, Henry Wilkinson, Mrs. T Kennedy and W. H. Powers Jr. of the Nora Machree Company, and both Adelaide Cushman and John P. Barrett of the Glen-da-Lough Company. This was not a show that simply featured local amateurs. The article also commented on Hunt’s managerial role, stating “Manager David H. Hunt has returned from Chicago where he made arrangements for special scenery to be used throughout, and promises excellent staging.” Within the next year, Hunt convinced Sosman & Landis to invest in a new theatrical management form – Sosman, Landis & Hunt, and takes charge of the Pike Opera House in Cincinnati, Ohio. Thus was a well-respected venue with long history.
Over the course of three years, Hunt transitioned from a clerk at Fletcher, Jenks & Co. in Detroit, to a theatre manager in Cincinnati, Ohio. Keep in mind, that at this time Sosman and Landis also helped found the American Reflector & Lighting Company, each becoming an officer at the new firm. By 1894, their scenic studio had also delivered painted settings to 4000 stages across the country and their catalogues featured American Reflector & Lighting Company equipment. Their hands were full. Maybe this meant they let their guard down and started taking too many risks. Yet, I am still amazed that a young clerk from Detroit could convince two successful businessmen from Chicago to invest in a theatrical management firm, especially one run by an individual with virtually no experience in the theatre industry. By the age of twenty-five, Hunt was managing the Pike Opera House and would soon also manage the Grand Opera House in Indianapolis, Indiana.
Sosman, Landis & Hunt primarily managed big vaudeville theaters, while also establishing touring stock companies. In addition to large houses, and touring shows, the firm also leased four summer theaters, located in both Atlantic City and Asbury Park.
During this time, Hunt continued to list his permanent residence in Detroit with his parents. The 1896 Detroit Directory listed David H. Hunt as a manager, still boarding at 151 18th. By the late 1890s, Hunt began keeping a separate room in Cincinnati.
Although he worked in Cincinnati, the 1897 the Detroit Directory listed David H. Hunt as a “travel agent,” still living with his parents. 1897 was a year of transition for Hunt, he became increasingly associated with Cincinnati’s Pike Opera House. That year he led the remodeling and redecorating the Pike Theater in Cincinnati, representing an early project for Sosman, Landis & Hunt. The firm hired Chicago theatric architect Sidney R. Lovell for the renovation. Lovell was J. M. Wood’s business partner (Link to my post on Wood & Lowell: https://drypigment.net2019/01/09/tales-from-a-scenic-artist-and-scholar-part-610-theatre-architects-col-j-w-wood-and-sidney-lovell/). The Pike Opera House project was just prior to Wood’s work on the Temple Theatre in Detroit, another Sosman & Landis project.
On Dec. 13, 1897, the “Cincinnati Enquirer” reported, “Combination. The Pike to Have Both Legitimate and Vaudeville.” (page 7). The article continued, “It has been definitely determined by the management of the Pike to make a partial change to the characters of its entertainments an to install a stock company for the production of standard plays in connection with first-class vaudeville.
“Yes, it is true,” said Manager D. H. Hunt. Then approached in regard to the subject last night by an Enquirer representative. “Negotiations have been completed, and the contracts will be signed on Monday or Tuesday. I do not exactly know the date upon which the company will give its initial performance, but that also will be settled within a few days. It must not be supposed that vaudeville will be abandoned entirely. The management believes that there is a large number of theatre-goers in Cincinnati who will never tire of more refined type of vaudeville, and not to overlook the class of pleasure-seekers altogether, we will continue to have a number of first-class vaudeville acts each week in connection with the stock company’s productions.”
“It is true that Mrs. John D. Hopkins, of Chicago, will manage the company?” was asked. “No,” Mr. Hunt said, “that is a mistake. Mr. Hopkins will not be interested in stock company or the theatre in any way whatever. The leading man and manager of the stock company will be James Neil, a well-known and capable actor, and previous to that with William H. Crane. He will bring with him practically the same company that he had in St. Paul and Minneapolis last summer, and I do not hesitate to say that as a stock company it has no superior in the country. The character of the plays will be such standard productions as “The Charity Ball,” “held by the Enemy,” “Aristocracy,” “Diplomacy,” “Jim the Penman,” and other social and melodramatic play of that class, and, although this will be an expensive innovation, you may say that the management will not advance. The process of admission, but, in some sections of the house, may find it possible to lower them.” This move of the management of the Pike was foreshadowed some weeks since. Connected with it were rumors that the house would be remodeled, but this Mr. Hunt denies. The truth is that vaudeville has been overdone in Cincinnati. There is not enough so-called high-class or star materials to keep the Pike supplied. The syndicates are in a measure responsible for this condition of affairs, to say nothing of the return of many of the stars to the legitimate. This new arrangement will give the management the desired opportunity to weed out the light-weight materials”
On September 18, 1898, “The Cincinnati Enquirer” reported, “Manager D. H. Hunt of the Pike Opera House, is expected to arrive here tom-morrow to look after the advance work and pave the way for the regular opening of that theatre next Sunday with the popular Neill Stock Company in “Mr. Barnes of New York.” The members of the company are expected to arrive about Wednesday or Thursday of this week and several rehearsals of the play have been called, although they are almost unnecessary, owning to the play having been produced this summer by the company during the Minneapolis engagement. Sosman & Landis, the Chicago firm that controls the Pike, will also put a stock company in at the Grand Opera House, Indianapolis, to be managed by Mr. J. J. Murdock, formerly stage manager at the Pike. This enterprising firm has surrendered its lease upon the Masonic Temple Roof Garden, in Chicago, which it has operated successfully for the past several seasons, and contemplates building a new theatre in the Windy City which can be operated as a summer roof garden and then be enclosed as a perfect music hall for vaudeville performances. The promoters have not selected a site, but they announce that when completed the new theatre will be the finest of its kind in the West” (page 17).
In 1899, the “Chicago Inter Ocean” reported, “David H. Hunt of Cincinnati, a member of the firm of Sosman, Landis & Hunt, the well-known theatrical managers, says: “Chicago can’t compare with New York as a theatrical town” (16 July 1899, page 14). Another article, entitled “How the Stock System Pays” was published in the “Los Angeles Herald” that year. It provided a little more insight into Hunt’s roll at Sosman, Landis & Hunt. Hunt was interviewed and explained the success of the stock company. He was quoted:
“The growth of the stock company idea in the west would surprise you easterners,” said David H. Hunt, of Sosman, Landis & Hunt, the other day. “I have charge of the Pike opera house In Cincinnati, and we are making more money with a stock company than we did when the house was given over to vaudeville and variety was the society fad. A haphazard stock venture will not succeed, but properly managed the scheme is a huge success, and the companies are now so plentiful that it has become a matter of difficulty to obtain players who are not only willing but capable of doing leading stock work. The lesser people are not hard to get hold of, for there will always be an excess of players, but to get good names to head the company is constantly becoming more difficult because of the advance of the idea. We have a big company, and not only get good plays, but we try to give for seventy-five cents as good a production as is provided by a visiting company for double the money. We have two scene painters and two assistants always at work, and we never use a rag of scenery for more than one play.”
The two scene painter were Thomas G. Moses and Fred McGreer, both Sosman & Landis employees at the time. McGreer is Sosman & Landis Employee No. 13. Here is the link: https://drypigment.net2021/04/10/sosman-landis-shaping-the-landscape-of-american-theatre-employee-no-13-fred-mcgreer/] Although Moses moved onto other projects, eventually leaving Sosman & Landis in 1900 to found Moses & Hamilton, McGreer remained on site as the scenic artist at the Pike Opera House until 1900.
The 1899 “Los Angeles Herald” article continued, “We give the property man money enough to hire really good furniture and we have as good a stage manager as we can get, for we very early awoke to the fact that we could save money on this department of the work. A competent man will get all there is that is good in an actor, while an incompetent one will spoil a good player. Then we have found that we must spend a little money in royalties. It is a nice thing to have the old plays to fall back on, but a season which lists a succession of ‘East Lynne’ and ‘A Celebrated Case,’ with ‘Leah’ and similar plays to follow, will not be a remunerative one in the west, and we find that by laying out four or five hundred dollars for the use for one week of a play like ‘The Prisoner of Zenda,’ we cannot only get back the money we pay out, but enough more to make it worth our while to get the best. Of course, there is the constant study to be urged against the stock system, but to offset this, there is the avoidance of the discomforts of travel and to be able to settle down in a flat for a season instead of alternating between the one night stands and the sleeping cars, is a sufficient attraction too many to offset the fact that they will have to get up a new play each week instead of one or two for the season.”
Manager D. H. Hunt was also associated with the Grand Opera House in Indianapolis at this time. On September 9, 1899, “The Indianapolis News” published an article entitled, “The Grand Stock Company” (page 32). Here is the article in its entirety as it provides some context for the scope of production produced by the stock company at this time:
“From now until the opening of the Grand Stock Company’s season, Monday, September 18, the members of that organization will be kept busy rehearsing ‘Jim, the Penman,’ the play with which the season begins. Manager D. H. Hunt and the entire company have arrived from New York, where they have already had some days of rehearsal under the direction of the new stage manager. Mr. Waiter Jewett Craven. Mr. Hunt, in a letter a few days ago, said that the company, was already well up in the play, so that the coming week will be devoted to the work of putting the final polish to the various parts. Miss Shannon will, of course, be seen again as Mrs. Ralston, wife of the skillful forger; the other parts are not yet fully announced though it is pretty certain Geoffrey Stein, the successor to the parts played last year by Mr. Sheldon, will play Baron Hardfelt. Geoffrey Stein, who is to do the character work this season, is a capable actor. He has been a member of the Frawley Stock Company, the Schubert Stock Company, and other good companies of this character. Before settling down to stock work he was with Marie Wainwright one season; was in the original New York production of Joseph Arthur’s ‘The Cherry Pickers,’ and played other important engagements. It can be seen how his acting impressed the critics from the following quotation form the Rochester Standard’s review of “Sweet Lavender,” when played by the Schubert Stock Company: ‘Geoffrey Stein, as Richard Phenyl, the bibulous barrister, easily carried off the honors of the production. The impersonation of the lovable old vagabond was in his hands quaintly forcible. He fully conceived the tenderness which underlies its drollery and made a teardrop follow the ripple of laughter. While in Washington with the Frawley Stock Company, the Washington Capitol, referring to Mr. Stein’s appearance in “The Wife,’ said: ‘Geoffrey Stein, as Silas Truman, scored another hit, You must watch this young actor’s career. He has great talent, and moreover. Is a hard student. I predict great things for him.” Numerous other newspaper notices of his work give him high praise.
Among the plays to be produced by the stock company during the present season are ‘The Dancing Girl,’ ‘Men and Women,’ ‘Lord Chumley,’ ‘Alabama,’ ‘Held by the Enemy,’ ‘The Crust of Society,’ ‘Brother John,’ ‘His Wife’s Father,’ ‘Sweet Lavender,’ ‘Saints and Sinners,’ ‘ Young Mrs. Winthrop,’ ‘The Butterflies’ and other successes. A few of the most popular plays seen last season may be given again.”
On Nov. 6, 1899, “The Indianapolis Journal,” reported, “Manager D. H. Hunt, of the Pike and the Grand Stock companies, is back from a trip to New York, and will arrive here this afternoon to see the opening production of “The Charity Ball,” to-night, While in New York, he secured some strong plays for the Grand Stock company, among them “Madam sans Gene” and “The Masqueraders” (page 3). In 1899, Hunt was certainly a mover and shaker, zipping from one town to the next. It was this same year that a young actress named Angela Dolores was part of the Pike’s stock company. Both Dolores and Hunt were lodging at the Burnet House in Cincinnati. Hunt had been a fixture at the boarding house since 1897, when it was first listed as his residence in the Cincinnati Directory. Both would continue to live at the boarding house util their marriage.
Despite a positive outlook, Hunt soon made a misstep that would cause the eventual closure of Sosman, Landis and Hunt. On April 6, 1900, the “New York Times” reported that Manager David H. Hunt was one of the gentlemen interested in the production of the Jeanette Gilder’s version of “Quo Vadis” (page 2). In New York, “Sosman, Landis & Hunt” later produced Gilder’s “Quo Vadis,” but ignored a few of the contractual stipulations. On Nov. 19, 1902, the “New York Times” published and article entitled, “Miss Gilder Goes to Law” (page 1). The problem was that Sosman, Landis & Hunt failed to produce Gilder’s version of ” Quo Vadis ” for five weeks each in two years at their various theatres, including the Pike Theatre Opera House. A series of lawsuits were filed against Sosman, Landis & Hunt around this time. Hunt didn’t quite follow the rules laid out in various contracts, and both actors and authors contended that the firm violated agreements and took their cases to court. To date, this was the only negative press that I have ever uncovered about Sosman & Landis, and it must have been quite embarrassing. The immediate solution was to remove their association with the theatrical management and solely credit Hunt. “David H. Hunt’s Pike Theater company” is soon advertised in the papers. Sosman and Landis may have remained investors, but their names were no longer linked to the Pike. It was as if Sosman, Landis & Hunt never existed. Interestingly, in 1901, various newspaper articles indicated that Hunt’s stock company had been in existence for nearly seven years, during which time it had played over 250 different plays and had appeared in almost 2,400 performances. Sosman & Landis were not mentioned at all.
On April 15, 1901, the “Detroit Free Press” described Manager David H. Hunt in an article about the Pike Stock Company’s production of “Charity Ball.” The article reported, “The organizer and manager of this enterprise is David H. Hunt, a young man whose ideals are high and whose mental attitude toward the theater is not merely sordid. By this it is not meant that his work is entirely altruistic. There is a necessary commercial side of art, and Mr. Hunt knows that in order to continue along the lines he has followed since the beginning of his managerial career the support that comes only through the box office is essential. But he also knows that while he is a frankly confessed merchant of theatrical wares, it behooves him to offer the best, and to present them in an attractive manner. The public is well enough acquainted with his way of doing business to feel justified in expecting another season of honorable achievement on his part. It is quite within the limits of conservatism to say that the re-advent of his company is a distinct public gain, for it may fairly be assured that what is known as the popular-price theater can boast no better balanced combination of players than the cast that Mr. Hunt gave us last evening.”
On March 30, 1902, the “Cincinnati Commercial” reported, “The Pike Theatre Company’s season in Cincinnati will close next Saturday evening. On the following day, the organization will open in Detroit for the summer. During its engagement the company will put on its most successful productions, four car-loads of scenery, for which will be carried North with it. Those who will be included in the organization will be Messrs. Douglas, Farren, Waldron, Maher, Everham, Reynolds, Hall, Hackett and Witte, Misses Collier, Dolores, Melville, McCaul and Roland, Manager David H. Hunt, Business Manager A. C. Robinson, Scenic Artist Slipper, Master Carpenter Eckert and several assistants” (page 46).
The Pike Opera Company also began to travel with its own scenic artist. Hunt’s marketing of the company was quite something. Just as McGreer’s work for the Pike had made headlines from 1898-1900,his replacement did the same.
On May 26, 1901, the “Detroit Free Press” published an article entitled, “The Illusion of Scenery” (page 44). The article interviewed the Pike Stock Company scenic artist, a man known as Mr. Slipper. The article reported:
“People are just commencing to realize that good plays are frequently as dependent upon good scenery as good actors,” said Scenic Artist Slipper, of the Pike Company, “and it is certainly true that a play without the embellishment of scenery even though it be of the most meager and unpretentious sort, would be a burlesque upon the modern methods of management. We are told that Shakespeare’s plays were first produced without scenery, but we are not informed they were great success, except as lectures or monologues of rare literary merit. The success of the drama depends upon the illusion it creates; acting is an illusion – that, is, it excites the auditor to tears over a situation which does not exist, or moves to mirth with an incident that is purely imaginary. So, too, is scenery an illusion. We show you a landscape in a production at the Lyceum which seems to the spectator in front to stretch away for miles, whereas it is but a few rods distance from the eye and perhaps no more than three feet away from the house, or the shrubbery, or the forest which seems so near you. Thus, if the actor deceives your ear with a cry which seems to have it in tones all the attributes of heart-felt sorrow and tragedy, the artist deceives the eye by producing an impression simply by a few touches of the brush and the proper combination of colors something akin to that produced by the hand of nature herself, as revealed in the far-stretching landscape, or as is shown in the more artificial work of the man as applied to the architecture and the furnishing of apartments.”
1902 was not without tragedy, however. The newspaper article about Slipper may have been strategically released to distract local audiences from the fire at the Pike. On March 30, 1902, Hunt made news when there was a fire started in the basement and destroyed much of the auditorium. At the time, the Pike stock company was playing its closing week in Cincinnati. The story made news across the country, yet Hunt managed to feature himself in a positive light, despite the tragedy.
On April 1, 1902,Racine, Wisconsin’s “Racine Journal” reported on the fire at the Pike Opera House on March 30 (page 8). The article reported, “The matinee performance was in progress before a crowd that filled all the seats and most of the standing room when flames were discovered. The fire started in the basement. The theater is on the second floor, with two stairways leading to the fourth. There is also a stairway from the stage leading to Backer alley in the rear. The curtain had been raised for the first act of “Sag Harbor” by the Pike Stock company and the play had been in progress about ten minutes, when the portieres between the corridors and the north aisle were seen to be ablaze. With great presence of mind Manager D. H. Hunt addressed the crowd in an effort to quiet their fears, and his staff, quickly taking positions about the auditorium began to direct the general movement toward the exits. The burning portieres were snatched from their hangings and quickly trampled underfoot. This prevented the immediate spread of the fire withing the theater, but did not materially lessen the danger, for the smoke by this time was pouring up from the lower floor, where the flames had gained great headway…(there is much more, page 8).” The “Democrat and Chronicle” of Rochester, on March 31, 1902, (page 1) reported, “The only thing burned in the auditorium was a portier. Scenery stored in the lower part of the building was damaged to the extent of $10,000. Members of the company saved all their costumes and baggage…Thirty six years ago the Pike building of the same site was destroyed by fire. The damage to-day was between $20,000 and $60,000” (page 1). Despite the loss, plans for the company to begin its summer season in Detroit continued (“Inter Ocean,” 31 March 1902, page 3).
Hunt continued to make headlines despite the tragedy, toting his past successes in a series of article aimed at building up his own reputation. On 13 Sept. 1902, “The Evening Star” of Washington, D. C. reported, “Stock was a new thing when Mr. David H. Hunt decided that vaudeville was not a success at his Cincinnati theater, and installed the first stock company there since the famous old days when Davenport, McCullough and other old-time stars had appeared with the ante-bellum stock companies in the smoky city. Mr. Hunt was a young man, his company contained players who were themselves little known, and with the development that followed hard work and success the organization was brought to a standard of perfection. Mr. Hunt early decided that pecuniary success would only result from artistic success. He set about obtaining good plays and good players, with the result that people in Cincinnati accord the Pike Theater Company both consideration and affection. For several years the company played entirely in Cincinnati, then tried Minneapolis and St. Paul for spring engagements, next added Detroit to their list of cities and now adds Washington, New York and Baltimore” (page 22).
Despite the law suits and fire, Hunt continued to make good press for himself. In 1903, Hunt married Miss Angela Dolores, an actress with the Pike Theatre Co. That year, his birthplace was listed as Pennsylvania, her father Spanish, and her mother Irish.
Their relationship and impending marriage were published on May 21, in the “Detroit Free Press” (page 12). In 1903, Hunt was known as “ D. H. Hunt, manager of the Pike Theatre Company…a well-known theatrical gentleman from Detroit.” On March 21, 1902, the “Detroit Free Press” described Hunt as “a Detroit man and widely known in the theatrical profession of the middle west as a hustling manager” (page 12). The last line of the article noted, “In line with this announcement is another which concerns a former member of the Pike stock company. This is Miss Angela McCaull, who was leading ingenue last year. She is the daughter of the late Co. McCaull and is to be married to Lionel Barrymore, now making a hit in the character part with his uncle John Drew in ‘The Mummy and the Humming Bird.’ Miss McCaull also very popular in Detroit.”
[image of couple}
The article noted that their romance sprung up while she was under his management, with her forte being dramatic roles. It also suggested that Dolores had been living with a sister in New York for quite some time, with Hunt trying to keep their relationship secret. Not quite, as both Hunt and Dolores had been listed in the Cincinnati Directory from 1899-1902 as living in the Burnet House. On March 21, 1902, the “Detroit Free Press” described Hunt as “a Detroit man and widely known for his theatrical profession of the middle west as a hustling manager” (“Detroit Free Press,” 21 May 1903, page 12). Dolores continued to perform under her maiden name.
In 1905, the couple celebrated the birth of their daughter, Anna. It is around this time that the Hunts move Chicago and Hunt resumes his position at the Sosman & Landis scenic studio. In 1905, Thomas G. Moses wrote, “Went to Baraboo to see Ringling Bros. Hunt went with me. I don’t know why, as I had to do all the talking and make the sketching for ‘The Field of the Cloth of Gold.’ We got the contract for $3,500.00.” Hunt remains in the Windy City and soon lands the management position at the Grand Opera House. Of this endeavor, “Inter Ocean,” reported, “David H. Hunt who has considerable experience in this particular branch of amusement business, will assume active management, and he has made definite arrangements with important Eastern managers whereby he will offer their successes at popular prices” (19 August 1906, page 26).
On Aug. 26, 1906, the “Decatur Daily Review” announced “Chicago to Have Stock Company” (page 20). The article continued, “For the past few months persistent rumors have connected the Chicago Opera House with stock company organizations. No statement was ever made by the management until the past week, when an authorized announcement proclaims that a dramatic stock company will take possession on Sept. 9. David H. Hunt, who has had a world-wide experience in this line of entertainment will assume active management of the new policy. He has completed some arrangements with large eastern producers whereby Chicago will receive the benefit of all the important dramatic offerings at popular prices. Mr. Hunt when seen at the opera house stated, ‘It is our purpose to assemble an organization of dramatic stars at the Chicago Opera House with a view to presenting standard offerings at popular prices. There is a great demand for a stock company of strength in the loop district, and we aim to provide one unequaled anywhere. The original scenic and costume display will be used with the original manuscript, and I will put on a new offering every Sunday evening. We shall play seven evening performances and present bargain matinees on Sunday, Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday afternoons, charging prices ranging up to 50 cents for the best seats. I am not ready to announce any more plans in detail relating to the company or the list of attractions. I expect to offer Mrs. Leffingwell’s Boots for the initial play.”
In 1907, Hunt was again at the scene of another fire, this time at the Chicago Grand Opera House. On June 29, 1907, the “Chicago Tribune” reported that there was a small fire after a projector exploded (page 3). The article interviewed Hunt who again minimized the danger and damager:
“There was no panic except a slight alarm among those in the gallery,” said Manager D. H. Hunt. “The lights were turned on at once after the explosion. This is a standing order for our employees, for the fuses often blow out and if the theatre were left in darkness at such times alarm would develop and alarm would develop among the audience. The operator was burned slightly on his right hand, but no one else was hurt” (page 3). And this pretty much ended his association with the opera by 1908.
On April 12, 1908, the Minneapolis “Star Tribune” announced, “Variety prints a statement to the effect that D. H. Hunt has been engaged to head the producing department to be inaugurated by the Orpheum Circuit company. Mr. Hunt, who is now manager of the Chicago Opera House, is not unknown in Minneapolis, where he managed the Pike Stock company through three summer season, a fact recalled by the engagement of his wife, Angeles Dolores, at the Orpheum last week” (page 25).
And yet this endeavor didn’t quite pan out either. His wife returned to the stage and Hunt began functioning as her manager. The touring production included William Duvre and Harry English (“Cincinnati Enquirer,” 30 August 1908, page 26). For the next few years, newspaper article repeatedly report that her tour remained under the personal direction of Hunt, promoting his wife as the “best known stock leading lady” (“Fort Wayne Daily News,” 16 Feb 1911, page 5). Despite his interest in theatrical management, Hunt remains associated with the Sosman & Landis studio. The 1910 Census listed a David H. Hunt’s occupation as a “manager” in the “studio” industry. At the time, his household included his 30 yrs. old wife and 6 yrs. old daughter, all living at 1128 E 43rd Street. He was managing the Sosman & Landis studio, primarily working in the office.
In 1910, tensions were high between Moses and Hunt, a feud that escalated to a peak when Sosman left on a 15-week European tour. At the time, both Moses and Hunt were left in charge of the studio. Hunt was the company secretary and treasurer, whereas Moses was responsible for the design, construction and installation of all projects. Of this time, Moses wrote, “Mr. Hunt was secretary and treasurer, and expected to run the business, but I wouldn’t allow it. Mr. Hunt kept on the road most of the time.” After Sosman returned and assessed the studio’s state of affairs, Moses wrote, “I heard some reports as to what Hunt had reported to Sosman about my treatment towards him. I got mad and wanted to quit. Sosman wouldn’t listen to me. I finally got cooled.” Moses took a little time of and then returned to the studio, writing, “I arrived June 25th. Sosman had his doubts as to my coming back.” About this same time, Hunt sets his sights on the eastern seaboard and another business venture, again partially funded by Sosman. Smart move, as it was beginning to appear that Chicago was not big enough for both Moses and Hunt.
New York Studios listed Adelaide A. Hunt as the President, Edward A. Morange as the vice president, and David H. Hunt, as the Treasurer. The company’s starting capital was $40,000, and listed the following directors: Edward A. Morange, Adelaide A. and David H. Hunt, with offices located at 325 W 29th Street, New York. Business listings noted that theatrical equipment was the primary product produced by the company.
To establish the New York Studios in 1910, Hunt relocated his family to New York. This move also instigated a name change for his wife. Her stage name was Angela Dolores, but “Angela” was her middle name. Adelaide was her first name. By 1919, Adelaide A. Hunt was listed as president of New York Studios, with Edward Morange as Vice-President and David H. Hunt as treasurer, still supplying theatrical goods. Office locations varied between 29th, 39th and 95th Streets. This meant a large pool for artists to draw upon for any project that came along. Many Sosman & Landis scenic artists had worked for New York Studios over the years, including John H. Young, William F. Hamilton, Victor Higgins, William Smart, Art Rider, Al Dutheridge, John Hanny, and Otto Schroeder, just to name a few. Hunt’s establishment of New York Studios is the beginning to the eventual demise of Sosman & Landis. Keep in mind that Sosman was a scenic artist; Hunt was not. Based on Moses’ description of Hunt and newspaper articles. Hunt reminds me a bit of a salesman selling any pyramid scheme, hoping for maximum returns with minimal investments; it is all based on the underlings beneath him doing the work. Hunt relied heavily on the main studio in Chicago as a support network for both labor and materials.
Between 1910 and 1912, Hunt and New York Studios were repeatedly mentioned in newspaper articles across the country. One particular article concerned an electrical apparatus that enabled a single individual to handle sixty-five drops. Hunt was part of a group interviewed about the stage innovation. At the time of the interview, Hunt was chumming around with Martin Beck (manager of the Orpheum Theatre), A. C. Carson (manager of the Denver Orpheum), and Fred W. Vincent (New York booking offices). Hunt was a genius at social networking and always falling in with the right crowd. I am including an excerpt from the interview. On Dec. 18, 1910, the “Lincoln Star” quoted Beck, “‘I have just inspected the invention of Seth Bailey, stage manager of the Orpheum in Denver,’ said Mr. Beck. ‘He has devised an electrical appliance which makes it possible for one man to handle sixty-five drops. It operates everything from the stage curtain to the back, gives absolute fire protection and does the work of an average of twenty stagehands. One man can operate it. It looks good to me, and if further tests prove it as successful as the indications are here, we will install in all the Orpheum Theatres. ‘The apparatus for handling drops, consisting of ropes and counterweights, has been the same for 200 years,’ said A. C. Carson, manager of the Denver Orpheum house. ‘Mr. Bailey has perfected, the first invention, bringing the stage mechanism up to date. It has been a field neglected by inventors.’ To add a little context, on Feb 18, 1911, the “Wilkes-Barre Times Leader,” reported, “Theatrical men and others in Denver have organized a $500,000 corporation to manufacture a mechanical device, which, it claimed, will reduce the number of stage hands needed in a theatre by three-fourths, at least. The new corporation is called the Bailey Fly Rail Machine Company. It is incorporated under the laws of Colorado. Seth Bailey, stage carpenter at the Denver Orpheum, is the inventor of the device. He worked on it several years before he announced that it was successful. About two months ago Martin Beck, M. Meyerfeld Jr., John W. Considine and other vaudeville managers, met in Denver and saw a demonstration of the apparatus. They appeared to be highly pleased with it. The names of A. C. Carson, manager of the Denver Orpheum; Fred W. Feldwich and Frank Bancroft appear at the prime movers in the matter of incorporation. Mr. Bancroft is an attorney. The device is operated by electricity (page 11). Other than patents, the stage carpenter and company seem to have vanished into thin air, as did Hunt’s association with the endeavor. However, the two article add credence to the previously-mentioned Minneapolis “Star Tribune” from 1908 that reported, “Variety prints a statement to the effect that D. H. Hunt has been engaged to head the producing department to be inaugurated by the Orpheum Circuit company” (page 25). Throughout the durations of his career, Hunt continued to juggle a series of projects.
From 1912-1914, David H. Hunt was listed as a manager in the New York City Directory, working at 1001 Times building. His was still splitting his time between Chicago and New York. In 1912, Thomas G. Moses wrote, “Sosman left for the south on a vacation. My work doubles. We are doing a lot of work for the New York Studios – not much profit in it for us, as Hunt seems to think we should be satisfied with a small profit. I have made a number of designs for him which I am pleased to do as long as we get the work.”
By 1915, David H. Hunt was listed in the New York City Directory was listed as the manager of New York Studios, while lodging at the Great Northern Hotel. It was this same year that Joseph Sosman passed away and the Sosman & Landis Board of Directors elected Thomas G. Moses president of the Co. Moses’ role as president for the firm effectively changing the dynamic with New York Studios. No more were special arrangements in terms of regional jurisdictions and non-compete agreements.
By 1917, the New York Studios was incorporated, and the New York City Directory listed the business location as 1475 Broadway. Hunt was still listed as manager of the firm. It was a difficult time, the a world war raging and the demand for painted theatre scenery declining.
Unfortunately, on September 1, 1918, Moses resigned as president at Sosman & Landis and began working for Hunt at New York Studios. Unfortunately, his brief departure provided and opening for Hunt at Sosman & Landis. Moses really should have known better by this point in his career. By this point in his career. Moses really should have known better. Leaving was a mistake, and by the end of 1918, Moses wrote, “I am afraid that I will not be satisfied with my new deal.” Part of the problem was Moses’ trying to secure a suitable studio space. Nothing was satisfactory, so Moses began looking for other work in warmer climates.
During the fall of 1918 Moses hoped to line up a few projects in California and possibly move there, writing, “If I could only get a financial settlement with Sosman and Landis Company, we would go to California this winter.” Needless to say, he remained in Chicago for the winter. His New York Studios projects ended up being built and painted in the Peltz & Carsen shops. Of the experience, Moses wrote, “…rather hard to do in the Peltz and Carsen Studio on account of the low ceilings, being obliged to paint one part on the upper floor and the balance on the lower floor. The studio was always warm and dry; in fact, too warm at times, which was almost as bad as not being warm enough.” Yet, Moses continued to look for a better space that spring, writing, “We looked at several buildings for a studio, but none seemed right to fill the bill. The only way to get one and have it right is to build one.”
By summertime 1919, Moses wrote, “A new contract was entered into between the Chicago Studios [Sosman & Landis main studio in Chicago] and myself for one year. I hope it will prove to be a paying one in which I participate in the profits and a raise in salary, which means my old salary of $100.00 and a bonus.” Moses had returned to Sosman & Landis, but now Hunt was solely in charge and Moses was working on contract. Over the years, Hunt caused many of Moses co-workers and friend’s to leave the studio, starting with John H. Young. There was not even a brief honeymoon period after Moses return and soon he wrote, “We have lost John Hanny and Otto Schroeder, our two best men. They do not want to stay with Hunt. He is such an awful fault finder. Larson quit us on October 24th, and Hunt insisted on my doing everything…”
The exodus of scenic artists from Sosman & Landis including five men who left to open a completing firm known as Service Studios. With competitors who intimately new the bidding and manufacture of scenery, it soon became apparent that Sosman & Landis would fold. Talk of closure began and a liquidation of assets was planned. However, issues began when both Moses and Hunt considered themselves “heir apparent” to the Sosman & Landis legacy.
Here is where it starts to get interesting, although a little bit complicated. In 1923, Sosman & Landis began to close its doors and liquidate all assets. The liquidation would continue into the beginning of 1924. Although Moses continued to paint for the firm during 1923, he also partnered with Fred R. Megan. The two planned to purchase the Sosman & Landis name and start a second iteration of the company. Until Sosman & Landis was completely liquidated, however, Moses and Megan could not officially begin their new business venture under the Sosman & Landis name. Therefore, they temporarily conducted business as “Moses & Megan.”
While waiting to secure the Sosman & Landis name, Moses recorded that they leased the “old Fabric Studio,” adding that they plenty of work in sight, but intended to “hustle for more.” This meant that they rented the fabric studio in the Sosman & Landis shop on S. Clinton street. They were simply biding their time until the liquidation process was completed. Other plans were brewing with Hunt as he silently backed the establishment of a new firm called The Chicago Studios. By 1922, officers of The Chicago Studio on file with the State of Illinois were A. A. Hunt of 328 N. 39th St, New York, New York, and Frank Cain of 139 N. Clark St., Chicago. A. A. Hunt was Hunt’s wife, Adelaide Angela Dolores Hunt. In 1922, Chicago Studios was located at 15 W. 20th St. Cain stared as a paint foreman, paint manager, and moved to sales by 1920.
So in 1924, after Sosman & Landis was completely closed, Chicago Studios moved into the old Sosman & Landis building at 417-419 South Clinton St. During the liquidation of Sosman & Landis assets, studio contents were purchased by Charles L. Hoyland and William Lemle of the Hoyland-Lemle Company. This made sense, as Hoyland-Lemle had leased the South Clinton space for over a year.
During 1923, Moses also mentioned trying to get Hoyland and Lemle “out” as he and Megan wanted to rent the space, continuing the second iteration of Sosman & Landis at the same address. There was also a third entity wanting to rent the space – The Chicago Studios. At the time, Moses wrote “D.S. Hunt is also bobbing about for the lease of the studio.” This is not surprising. Keep in mind that Hunt was part of the negotiations that requested Moses wait until the company was liquidated before he officially started working under the Sosman & Landis name. He also tried to get Moses on board with his own endeavor; asking him to stay in the studio.
Moses wrote, “Hunt wants me to remain in the studio, but I can’t see it.” In hindsight, this meant that Hunt wanted Moses to work for Chicago Studios and not pursue purchasing the Sosman & Landis name. If Moses and Megan opened a new “Sosman & Landis Company” they would directly compete with Chicago Studios. Otherwise, Hunt retained control over both Chicago and New York.
In short, Moses and Hunt were seeking to acquire the Sosman & Landis legacy. Each was planning to use their institutional memory of the company to succeed in landing future projects. It was never a fair contest. By the fall of 1923, The Chicago Studios began advertising that they were continuing Sosman & Landis under a new name. The Chicago Studios sent out letters and estimates, courting past Sosman & Landis clients, well in advance of the studio final liquidation. This made the announcement of any new iteration of Sosman & Landis appear fraudulent and weak.
Moses & Megan immediately disputed the information circulated by The Chicago Studios, sending out letters of their own, but it was too late. Moses’ letters tried to explain that firm had not closed, just moved to a new, and better, location.
On November 13, 1923, Moses and Megan sent out a series of letters. One still existed in the office archives at the Salina Scottish Rite in 2010. There was a stamp at the top of the Sosman & Landis letterhead in red ink: “MOVED Executive Offices. Now located at 6751 Sheridan Road.”
In the letter, Moses and Megan wrote:
“Dear Sir:
It has recently some to our attention that a certain studio is advertising our old customers that they have bought the Sosman & Landis Company and are now operating same, combining it with their original company. We wish to assure you this is not a fact and that our original organization is intact, but our studio has been moved to better quarters.”
This was likely the beginning to every client, before taking on something personal. For the Salina Scottish Rite, the letter continued:
“Mr. Thomas G. Moses, our Art Director would like the opportunity of meeting with your scenery committee to submit our designs and specifications covering your requirements. You will perhaps recall that we were favored with your original scenery order, working through the M. C. Lilley Co, and therefore, it is not necessary for us to give you any reference to our ability and quality of our workmanship.”
In the end it was impossible to make the address change look good. Keep in mind that the main studio on Clinton Street had remained the official Sosman & Landis address for over thirty years. It’s reputation as being the best scenic studio in North America had been toted for years. This created a very awkward situation, as there is no way to state leaving the Sosman & Landis “home” to a better location. The studio was well known as one of the best in the country. It cast a negative light on all potential business dealings. In short, it looked like they were downsizing due to lack of work. Moses never stood a chance to win in the long run.
Now let’s backtrack to the Hunts in New York and the beginning of the 1920s. The 1920 census listed that David, Angela and Anna Hunt were still living in Chicago, now at Oakwood Blvd. Hunt was listed as a commercial salesman in the Scenic Studio industry. And yet, there was an identical Hunt family listed in New York directories at the time, suggesting that they were keeping two residences. By 1922, A. A. Hunt was listed as an officer for The Chicago Studio, with her residence at 328 N. 39th St., New York, NY.
In 1924, Moses purchases the Sosman & Landis name. Meanwhile, David H. Hunt ran both New York Studios and Chicago Studios; it just doesn’t appear that way on paper. The Hunts permanent residence remained in New York, and by 1925, the Hunts were living in Plandome, Nassau County, New York. And this is where everything gets a little weird. At this point, Adelaide A. Hunt’s birth year is listed as 1891. At age fifteen, Anna has moved out, and the household now includes their 4-yrs. old daughter Patricia. A son, David H. Hunt Hr., is born the following year, and by 1930, the Hunt household in Plendome includes David, Adelaide, Patricia and David Jr. By now, the family also has a live-in servant named Jennie Crosswell who is 23 yrs. old.
In regard to New York Studios, the firm was still placing advertisements in 1927. That year, one ad in the “Scenic Artist” still listed the firm as the eastern affiliate of Sosman & Landis. It was as if Moses and Hunt were connected as magnets and realized that the firms were stronger when associated with one another despite their differences. I often things of the statement, “keep your friends close and your enemies closer” when considering the long-term association of Moses and Hunt.
Moses passed away in 1934, with Hunt following only two years later. On Feb. 4, 1936, “The Miami Herald” reported, “David Hunt, 67, interior decorator, died in his home, 1515 Pennsylvania avenue, Miami Beach. He was a visitor from Long Island and leaves the widow, Mrs. Adelaide Hunt. His body was sent yesterday by the W. H. Combs Funeral Home to Brooklyn, N. Y.” (page 29).
To be continued…
