
Category: Architects of Atlanta and the Southeast
-
George A. Noble House – Anniston, Alabama (1887)
George A. Noble House – Anniston, Alabama (1887) – designed by G.L. Norrman -
L.B. Wheeler in Anniston, Alabama
Crowan Cottage – Anniston, Alabama (1886) – designed by L.B. Wheeler Lorenzo B. Wheeler (1854-1899), professionally known as L.B. Wheeler, was an architect who practiced in Atlanta from 1883 to 1890. Of his many projects in Atlanta, only his interior design work for the Edward C. Peters House (1883)1 2 may still survive, although it’s unclear how much of that can be credited to him and not the home’s architect, G.L. Norrman.
Wheeler came to Atlanta from New York in 1883 to design the Kimball House Hotel,3 the first atrium hotel in the city and possibly the United States (no, Atlanta, it wasn’t the Hyatt Regency).
Vintage postcard view of the Kimball House Hotel, Atlanta – designed by L.B. Wheeler (1885, demolished 1959) Before his time in the Southeast, Wheeler worked with Hugh Lamb from 1877-1881, and a handful of buildings by Lamb & Wheeler still survive in New York.
In Atlanta, Wheeler first partnered with H.I. Kimball,4 owner of the Kimball House, a prototypical Atlanta huckster who marketed himself as an architect and engineer — he was neither.
Wheeler was the first Atlanta architect to specialize in interior design. In the 1880s, much of his work involved decorating Peachtree Street mansions, including many designed by other architects. In 1885 and 1886, he wrote a series of articles on home decoration for The Atlanta Constitution, which will be published here soon.
In 1885, Kimball & Wheeler partnered with W.H. Parkins, Atlanta’s first legitimate architect.5 One surviving work from the Kimball, Wheeler & Parkins firm remains: the Randolph County Courthouse (1886) in Cuthbert, Georgia, primarily credited to Parkins.6
Kimball left the firm in 18867, and Parkins & Wheeler were associated for a brief period between 1886 and 1887,8 with one project from the firm surviving: the Oglethorpe County Courthouse (1887) in Lexington, Georgia, also credited to Parkins.9
Wheeler practiced independently from 1887 to 1890, and while he wasn’t an exceptional designer, his work was a little more skillful and interesting than most Atlanta architects of the era. His designs demonstrated an understanding of national architectural trends, and it appears he was particularly influenced by the work of H.H. Richardson.
In the late 1880s, Wheeler secured extensive work in several Alabama boomtowns, and 2 homes in Anniston, Alabama, are the only known extant works from his solo period.
Crowan Cottage10 (1886, pictured above) and Noble Cottage (1887, pictured below) are a pair of picturesque Queen Anne-style residences designed for Samuel Noble. Despite the homes’ nearly identical designs, Crowan Cottage has been ludicrously attributed to Stanford White,11 who never designed a damn thing in the Southeast.
Noble Cottage – Anniston, Alabama (1887) – designed by L.B. Wheeler Wheeler quickly fell out of favor with Atlanta’s ever-fickle elite, and in 1890, he relocated to Memphis, Tennessee, after securing the commission for the Cossitt Library 12 13(1893, demolished 1958), a beautiful Romanesque creation that could easily be considered his finest work.
Vintage photograph of Cossitt Library – Memphis, Tennessee (1893, demolished 1958) – designed by L.B. Wheeler Wheeler moved to St. Louis in the 1890s, where he worked in 2 different partnerships14 15before seemingly disappearing from the public eye by 1898. Following a brief illness, he died at his father’s home in Connecticut at the age of 45,16 with his death barely noted in newspapers outside of Atlanta.
Described as “quiet and reserved”, Wheeler reportedly owned many “rare and very expensive” books, with his library said to be “the finest collection of architectural works in the South.” After his death, The Atlanta Constitution claimed:
“His room at the Kimball contained only two chairs, his bed and a dresser, but it was so crowded with books that one experienced difficulty in moving about.”17
It somehow seems fitting that so few traces of Wheeler’s work remain.
- “Some New Buildings”. The Atlanta Constitution, July 12, 1885, p. 9. ↩︎
- “Southern Architecture”. The Atlanta Journal, January 1, 1886, p. 1. ↩︎
- “Mr. Kimball’s Projected Suburb”. The Atlanta Constitution, October 21, 1883, p. 8. ↩︎
- ibid. ↩︎
- “A Card.” The Atlanta Constitution, March 19, 1885, p. 5. ↩︎
- “Personal.” The Atlanta Journal, March 18, 1886, p. 4. ↩︎
- “Notice.” The Atlanta Constitution, July 1, 1886, p. 8. ↩︎
- “Notice of Dissolution.” The Atlanta Constitution, April 1, 1887, p. 5. ↩︎
- “Personal.” The Atlanta Journal, March 18, 1886, p. 4. ↩︎
- National Register of Historic Places Inventory – Nomination Form – Noble Cottage ↩︎
- National Register of Historic Places Inventory – Nomination Form – Crowan Cottage ↩︎
- “To Begin Work.” The Memphis Daily Commercial, April 6, 1890, p. 5. ↩︎
- “Another Big Building.” Memphis Avalanche, September 13, 1890, p. 1. ↩︎
- “Dissolution Notices”. St. Louis Daily Globe-Democrat, October 2, 1894, p. 7. ↩︎
- “The Holland Building.” St. Louis Daily Globe-Democrat, February 9, 1896, p. 30. ↩︎
- “Death of Mr. L.B. Wheeler”. The Atlanta Constitution, March 7, 1899, p. 2. ↩︎
- ibid. ↩︎
-
W.W. Goodrich House – Inman Park, Atlanta (1890)
W.C. Hale House – Inman Park, Atlanta (1890) – designed by W.W. Goodrich The W.W. Goodrich House, located at 177 Elizabeth Street NE in Atlanta’s Inman Park neighborhood, is the city’s only known extant work designed by William Wordsworth Goodrich (1841-1907), professionally known as W.W. Goodrich, an architect who practiced in Atlanta between 1889 and 1893.
Firm biographical details for Goodrich are difficult to find, as he was, by all indications, a pathological liar who fabricated much of his backstory. He was born in New York1 and began practicing in Kingston, New York, circa 1875,2 before moving to Denver, Colorado, circa 1879,3 leaving in 1881 after he was arrested for check fraud and larceny.4
In the 1880s, Goodrich spent short stints in Boise, Idaho;5 Seattle;6 San Francisco,7 and Oakland, California.8 In 1883, he was arrested in both Los Angeles and Boston for check fraud. 9 10
Goodrich’s career in Atlanta was unremarkable, and based on his feeble attempt at the Eastlake style with his own home, he had equally mediocre design skills. Only 2 other works from Goodrich’s Atlanta years are known to survive: the Leslie Dallis House (1891)11 12 in LaGrange, Georgia, and Yonah Hall (1893)13 14 15 at Brenau University in Gainesville, Georgia, both uninspired designs.
The Goodrich family didn’t stay long in this home, which was built in early 1890.16 17 18 In November 1891, the city marshal auctioned off the property for Goodrich’s failure to pay taxes,19 and the home was purchased by W.C. Hale.
In 1893, Goodrich moved to Norfolk, Virginia,20 apparently relocated his practice to Baltimore around 1895,21 and finally ended up in Oregon by 1904,22 where he died in 1907. As one newspaper obituary said, in part: “…he had his faults, as all mortals have…”23
A better storyteller than an architect — although he wasn’t good at either — Goodrich managed to get many of his outlandish tales published in newspapers, some of which will appear here in due time.
Vintage photograph of W.W. Goodrich House, circa 189024 References
- United States Census, 1850, William Goodrich, Harmony, Chautauqua, New York, United States. ↩︎
- Advertisement. The Daily Freeman (Kingston, New York), October 5, 1875, p. 1. ↩︎
- Advertisement. Rocky Mountain News, May 24, 1879, p. 2. ↩︎
- “Held to Answer”. Rocky Mountain News, March 26, 1881, p. 2. ↩︎
- “Architect”. Idaho Tri-Weekly Statesman, March 14, 1882, p. 3. ↩︎
- Advertisement. Seattle Daily Post-Intelligencer, September 29, 1882, p. 2. ↩︎
- “Brevities”. Seattle Daily Post-Intelligencer, July 25, 1883, p. 3. ↩︎
- “A New Architect”. Oakland Daily Evening Tribune, July 23, 1885, p. 2. ↩︎
- “A Worthless Check”. The Boston Herald, November 27, 1883, p. 1. ↩︎
- “An Old Fraud Heard From”. Los Angeles Herald, March 16, 1884, p. 4. ↩︎
- “Building in LaGrange.” The Atlanta Constitution, December 13, 1890, p. 3. ↩︎
- Downtown Walking Tour, Historic LaGrange, GA ↩︎
- “A Great School for Gainesville.” The Atlanta Constitution, May 25, 1893, p. 3. ↩︎
- “An Elegant Building.” The Atlanta Journal, June 22, 1893, p. 1. ↩︎
- “Gainesville Gossip.” The Atlanta Constitution, June 23, 1893, p. 3. ↩︎
- “Growing Atlanta.” The Atlanta Constitution, January 13, 1890, p. 4. ↩︎
- “The City In Brief.” The Atlanta Constitution, January 24, 1890, p. 5. ↩︎
- “Street Railroad Extension.” The Atlanta Journal, May 7, 1890, p. 5. ↩︎
- “City Marshal’s Sales”. The Atlanta Constitution, October 26, 1891, pp. 9-10. ↩︎
- Advertisement. Norfolk Virginian, April 4, 1893, p. 8. ↩︎
- “That Building Disaster.” The Sun (New York), August 14, 1895, p. 2. ↩︎
- Advertisement. The Oregon Daily Journal (Portland, Oregon), August 1, 1904, p. 13. ↩︎
- “Capt. Goodrich”. St. John’s Review (St. John’s, Oregon), February 15, 1907, p. 1. ↩︎
- Atlanta Historical Society. Atlanta in 1890: “The Gate City”. Macon, Georgia: Mercer University Press, 1986. ↩︎
-
In the Words of G.L. Norrman: On His Life Story (1896)
The background: Long an artful dodger when it came to details of his personal life, here, G.L. Norrman wrote his own autobiographical sketch while essentially saying nothing at all.
The sketch appeared in the 1895 publication The Cotton States and International Exposition and South, Illustrated.
G.L. Norrman, circa 1895 Mr. G.L. Norrman (Architect),
Atlanta, Ga.“I was born in Sweden in about the same manner as all other Swedes. Nothing of any note happened at the event. Everything went along in much the same manner as the day before.
The only sensation that my coming into this world created was a little stir among some old aunts and other lady friends of the family, who found it difficult to decide whom I looked like, but they finally came to the conclusion that I resembled my great-grandmother. I suppose that they came to this decision on account of my being bald-headed, wrinkled in the face, and of a very unsettled disposition.
A very charming young lady solicited my picture for this volume, and assured me that it would be a most excellent means for securing business, and she told me that the public was not only interested in my appearance, but was greatly interested in knowing all about me, and the publishers were interested fifteen dollars’ worth. So, in giving an account of myself, I thought I would be very explicit, and would begin with the beginning.
Nothing of any moment has occurred since. I have been engaged in my profession for many years. I hope that the public will pardon me for not stating how long, as I am still a bachelor, and hope that if my picture does not bring me any business it will call the young ladies’ attention to the opportunity of securing a most exemplary husband, and if they knew how long I had been in business they might not be so greatly interested.
At any rate, I have been in business long enough to have had considerable experience, and if anyone is interested in one way or another, let me know, and I’ll give a more detailed account of myself.”
-
C. D. Hurt House – Inman Park, Atlanta (1893)
C. D. Hurt House – Inman Park, Atlanta (1893) – designed by G.L. Norrman Hiding in plain sight in Atlanta’s Inman Park neighborhood, the C. D. Hurt House isn’t conspicuous, nor does it appear especially significant.
Located at 36 Delta Place NE, this rambling 2-story, eclectic-style home is primarily Colonial Revival in influence, with its wood shingles, steep gables, overhanging second floor, and assortment of oddly-shaped windows recalling the vernacular designs of coastal New England architecture.
It’s good to have a little doubt when attributing buildings to architects, but in this case, there’s no need: the home can be indisputably credited to G.L. Norrman.
C. D. Hurt House – Inman Park, Atlanta (1893) – designed by G.L. Norrman Often erroneously dated to 1891 or 1892, the home was built in 1893, based on an April 1893 report from The Atlanta Constitution1 and another from The Atlanta Journal in May 18932 — both stated that the home was then in the course of construction.
Dr. Charles D. Hurt was the brother of Joel Hurt, president of the East Atlanta Land Company, which owned and developed the Inman Park suburb. Norrman appears to have been Joel Hurt’s preferred architect at the time, completing as many as 8 projects for his companies and family in the late 1880s and early 1890s, so he would have been an obvious choice to design the home.
The Design
Beyond circumstantial evidence, the Hurt house can be handily attributed to Norrman based on specific elements that it shares with 2 residences designed by his firm in the same period: the R.O. Barksdale House (1893) in Washington, Georgia, which still exists, and the Paul Romare House in Atlanta (1892, demolished).
R.O. Barksdale House – Washington, Georgia (1893) – designed by G.L. Norrman Similarities between the Hurt House and the Barksdale House:
- The facades of both houses feature a prominent bay with 2 windows on the second floor and a Palladian window on the first, topped by a hip roof.
- Both houses share the same chimney designs, slightly tapered at the top, with distinctive dentilled string courses.
- Both houses originally featured a tall, exposed chimney on the front porch as a central focal point.
- Both houses include porches with dentilled cornices and Norrman’s trademark Tuscan columns.
Paul Romare House – Atlanta (1893) – designed by G.L. Norrman. Illustration drawn by W.L. Stoddart. Similarities between the Hurt House and the Romare House:
- Both houses were topped with a steeply pitched hip roof.
- Both houses included an oval window, also featured in Norrman’s design for the Thomas W. Latham House in Inman Park.
- Both houses included an exposed chimney as a focal point, each embedded with the same classically styled niche (illustrated below)
Illustration of chimney niche on C. D. Hurt House Similarities between the Hurt House and other Norrman projects:
- The Hurt house’s dormer windows are of the same design as those on the Edward C. Peters House (1883) in Atlanta, a confirmed Norrman work, and the Atlanta & Edgewood Street Railway Shed (1889), also located in Inman Park and attributed to Norrman.
- The Hurt house’s second-floor bay window is the same used in the Atlanta & Edgewood Railway Shed, attributed to Norrman.
An Evolution
Although fairly unremarkable in appearance, the Hurt house represents a major shift in Norrman’s residential designs.
In the 1880s and early 1890s, many of Norrman’s larger home plans included a rear service wing that contained the kitchen and servants’ quarters — a prime example can be seen in the W.W. Duncan House in Spartanburg, South Carolina (1886, pictured below).
View of service wing on W.W. Duncan House – Spartanburg, South Carolina (1886) – designed by G.L. Norrman The service wing was visually distinct from the main house and was typically capped with a low-slung hip roof, denoting its modest, utilitarian status.
For the Hurt house, the hip-roofed wing was moved from the back to the front, the first time this appears to have been implemented in one of Norrman’s plans. It was a bold and avant-garde choice, signalling a shift in taste toward less fussy and unpretentious styles that took hold in the 1890s.
Norrman produced refined versions of the design into the 20th century, including the W.L. Reynolds House (1897, pictured below) and the Leon D. Lewman House (1901, demolished, pictured below) in Atlanta.
By the late 1890s, Norrman fully embraced lower roof lines, but in the Hurt house, the main portion of the structure still included a fantastically high roof — undoubtedly topped with decorative finials — a holdover from his 1880s work.
W.L. Reynolds House – Midtown, Atlanta (1897, altered) – designed by G.L. Norrman The Hurt house’s 13-room floor plan evolved from the plan used in Norrman’s design for the John T. Taylor House (1892) in Americus, Georgia.
The Taylor house appears to have been planned on a simple four-square grid, with the entry room and stairway occupying the lower left quadrant. In the Hurt house, however, the introduction of the front wing meant the entry room and stairwell had to be pushed slightly back, opening up space for an additional room to the left of the front door.
Otherwise, the plans for the two houses are largely identical, right down to the separate exterior entrance in each master bedroom.
Illustration of Leon D. Lewman House – Atlanta (1901, demolished) – designed by G.L. Norrman3 A Question of Credit
I suspect much of the Hurt house was designed by one or more of Norrman’s employees, possibly C. Walter Smith, Norrman’s longtime draughtsman and later chief assistant.
Smith began working for Norrman in 1887, remaining as a draughtsman for over 5 years, before he left to start his own practice in March 1893.4 Smith returned to Norrman’s employment within a year as his chief assistant,5 but left to start his business again in April 1896,6 working independently until 1907.
Based on his few surviving works, Smith was not an exceptional designer on his own: he clearly lacked whatever combination of ingredients made Norrman such an outstanding architect. However, it appears that Norrman likely delegated many of his residential projects to Walter Smith in the 1890s.
The Constitution all but said as much in 1896, when Smith embarked on his second solo attempt:
“The work that he did even before he branched out for himself had gained for him a distinction that few people have won in a lifetime,” the newspaper noted. “Mr. Smith has designed and superintended the construction of many of the most elegant residences in the city…”7
If you compare a typical Norrman residence from the 1880s to one from the 1890s, it’s clear that the latter projects didn’t receive nearly as much of his attention.
Norrman’s career reached its commercial and creative peak between 1890 and 1893, and he increasingly spent much of his time crossing the Southeastern United States by train, securing commissions, and attending to building projects.
With a packed schedule and an office full of assistants, Norrman undoubtedly began focusing most of his attention on large-scale or prestige commissions: the Windsor Hotel (1892) in Americus, Georgia, for instance, or the J.C. Simonds House (1893) in Charleston, South Carolina.
J.C. Simonds House – Charleston, South Carolina (1893) – designed by G.L. Norrman Because Walter Smith left to form his practice when the Hurt house was under construction, it’s also possible that he started the project, and another assistant was tasked with completing it, which could explain the uneven design.
W.L. Stoddart, for instance, was also employed by Norrman in 1893, still fresh from his training at Columbia University. When Norrman hired him in March 1892, the Journal claimed Stoddart would be his chief assistant,8 although he was listed as a draughtsman in city directories.9
Every architect’s approach is different, but Norrman may have roughed out the preliminary plans for the project, leaving a draughtsman or assistant to fill in the details, while lending just enough of his finesse to claim the design as his own.
A Messy Composition
If Norrman didn’t give the Hurt design much scrutiny, that might explain its frankly sloppy configuration: the 3 bay windows of varying sizes on the north side, for example, and the hodge-podge of incongruent elements borrowed from other projects.
Part of the imbalance can be explained by the home’s vernacular inspiration, but that doesn’t excuse its incoherent composition. Stand on one side of the Hurt house, and it looks like a completely different home from the other. The design feels clunky, slapdash, and pure kitchen sink, as if everything but was thrown into it.
It should be noted that Norrman also disliked the then-fashionable Colonial style, stating in 1890 that it had “at best, a number of absurdities”, and that “there are few who carry the style out well”. As a designer who excelled in the Romanesque and preferred the classical, he may have been admitting to his own lack of proficiency in the style.
Despite the Hurt house’s shortcomings, it’s entirely characteristic of Norrman’s 1893 residential designs, which stand out in his oeuvre as especially freewheeling and audacious. He was the most celebrated and sought-after architect in the Southeast at that point, and clearly felt emboldened to take risks.
When the risk-taking worked, the results were spectacular: the Simonds House, for example. When it didn’t? Well, you can see the results here.
North side of C. D. Hurt House Construction and History
The Hurt House’s history is as messy as its design, chock-full of the sort of macabre and pathetic tales one expects from an Atlanta home.
A Whole Lotta Hurt
C. D. Hurt and his family moved to the city from Columbus, Georgia, in October 1892.10 11 Until their own “elegant and roomy residence”12 was completed, the Hurts temporarily lived in the spec house at 56 Euclid Avenue13 (now 882 Euclid Avenue NE), which Norrman designed for the East Atlanta Land Company in 1890.
Photograph of C.D. Hurt14 Curiously, while Hurt’s home was still being built in April 1893, it was also the site of a wedding for his niece, Lucy Hurt McTyere.15
Hurt had 5 children with his wife, Mary, although it appears only his daughters Louise and Maude still lived with them in 1893, when he was 50 and she was 46.
Hurt worked as a medical surgeon and opened an office in Atlanta’s Equitable Building,16 which his brother owned. He was also on the payroll of his brother’s street railway company as a “medical advisor” — with whatever legitimate duties that must have entailed — in addition to being a staff member at Grady Memorial Hospital and the Atlanta School of Medicine.17 18
There have been claims that Hurt operated his office from his home, but that appears to be inaccurate based on city directories and newspaper reports.
Hurt’s daughter Louise was married in January 1895, and the reception was held at the Hurt house.19 20 Assuming it was a happy occasion, the wedding was a singular bright spot preceding a long line of tragedies in the home:
- On July 5, 1896, Hurt’s 8-month-old grandson, Charles, died in the home after a bout with malaria.21
- On July 19, 1898, Hurt’s youngest daughter, Maude, died in the home at 6:45 p.m., following a 10-day illness.22 Only 17 years old, Maude’s death was described by the Constitution as “one of the saddest deaths that have clouded this city in years…”23
- In September 1899, Charles and Joel Hurt’s brother, E.F. Hurt, died on an extended visit from New York, and his funeral was held in the Hurt house.24
- After a 2-year illness, Mary Hurt died on October 22, 1902, “when death crept softly into the home”, according to the Journal. 25 26 Poetic, no?
- Wasting little time, C.D. Hurt married his second wife, Annie Louise Miller, in Hendersonville, North Carolina, on October 6, 1903. Annie was described as an “accomplished and attractive young woman”, 27 and the couple had an unnamed infant son when Hurt himself died in the home on August 12, 1906, following an 8-month illness.28 29
After collecting on Hurt’s $15,000 life insurance policy,30 his accomplished and attractive young wife seemingly disappeared from Atlanta, and the home was presumably sold, ending the Hurts’ run of the house after 13 years.
Detail of oval window on C.D. Hurt House Dwindling Fortunes
Never the prestigious enclave Joel Hurt intended it to be, Inman Park had become quite passe by the early 1900s.
Most of Atlanta’s prominent citizens continued to build their mansions on Peachtree Street, migrating further north of the city each year. Ansley Park was quickly becoming the fashionable new residential section, mostly because of its proximity to Peachtree Street.
The Inman Park residences designed by Norrman and other architects in the previous decade were already quaint relics of another era. With the United States emerging from a years-long financial depression, even the wealthy preferred more subdued home designs, and the gaudy mansions of the Gilded Age were seen as oversized, ostentatious, and out of fashion.
Inman Park’s original homes had spent most of their lives vacant or on the market — scan newspaper classified ads from the 1890s and early 1900s, and you’ll consistently find listings for “good as new” Inman Park homes for sale or rent, often reduced in price.
The remaining lots in Inman Park were auctioned off en masse by the East Atlanta Land Company in 1904,31 and the neighborhood was filled out with mostly smaller, cheaper houses over the next decade.
As the Journal deftly noted in 1908: “The Inman Park of the present time…has almost forgotten the story of its origin–which now seems like ancient history…”32
Detail of second-floor bay window on C.D. Hurt House Life As a Boarding House
The large, antiquated Inman Park houses were really only viable as rental properties, so it’s no surprise that in December 1907, newspaper classifieds began requesting boarders for the former Hurt house. Terse but descriptive, the first ads touted: “Beautiful views, splendid board, country air, not far out.”33
A January 1908 ad sought “Two or three young men for large front room; also couple for beautiful room”,34 while an October 1908 ad noted the home’s “Suite beautiful rooms, with private bath…”35
In November 1908, ads described “Four connecting rooms, unfurnished…private entrance”,36 which likely referred to the home’s original master bedroom. In 1909, the entire house was listed for rent by Edwin P. Ansley‘s real estate agency for $50 a month.37
On March 25, 1909, a 68 mph “hurricane” ripped across Atlanta, cutting a path from West End through Downtown to Inman Park. In a lengthy list of damaged buildings, the Journal reported that “In Inman Park at Edgewood avenue and Delta Place a chimney was blown down.”38
This may have been the tall chimney at the front of the house, which was removed at some point in the structure’s history. A photograph from the 1970s shows that a chunk of one chimneystack was also missing, possibly a result of the same storm.
Detail of chimney on C.D. Hurt House In February 1910, the home was owned by C. Horace McCall when a “daring porch climber” broke the window of a second-floor bathroom.
“Mrs. Turner“, apparently a boarder in the house, screamed upon hearing the shattered window, scaring off the intruder. The Constitution noted ominously that “A dark shadow was seen in the distance…but no clews [sic] were obtained.”
The report added: “This section of the city has been infested with burglars recently, and several citizens have made complaint of inadequate police protection.”39
In July 1918, McCall and his wife still lived in the home when thieves robbed their backyard hen house, swiping their entire collection, including 20 “frying-size chickens”. The stolen property totalled $30.40
Mrs. McCall died in the house on February 28, 1923,41 and it appears the property was sold shortly thereafter. In July 1924, another infant died in the home: the son of two boarders, Mr. and Mrs. J.B. McMillam.
Detail of bay windows on north side of C.D. Hurt House By the 1920s, Atlanta had rapidly grown past Inman Park’s borders, and the former suburb was fully absorbed into the city. One mile northeast of the neighborhood, Druid Hills opened in 1908 (Norrman designed its first home), and many of Inman Park’s prominent residents — notably members of the Candler family — migrated to the outlying development for the next several years.
As Inman Park fell into decades-long decline, the old Hurt home passed through a succession of owners, always operating as a boarding house, and apparently attracting the caliber of people one associates with such establishments. A few incidents from those years are intriguing:
- In 1925, the house was owned by the estate of the late John W. White when a 36-year-old boarder, Mrs. W.T. Hooks, was arrested for attempted arson. On May 4 of that year, fire crews were called to the home at 4 a.m., where they found a burning pile of kindling wood in Hooks’ closet, with Hooks “fully dressed and all her trunks completely packed”. The state accused Hooks of attempting to burn down the home for insurance money, but she was acquitted of the charges in June 1925.42 43 44 45 46
- In 1929, a 31-year-old occupant of the home named T.M. Bates was treated at Grady Memorial Hospital for wounds received from a “vicious rat” that reportedly bit Bates twice as he was going to sleep, after which he “jumped on top of a dresser to escape further injury”.47
- In January 1931, Fanny Jolly operated the boarding house when “the careless handling of an oil lamp” led to a fire breaking out in the kitchen, causing the home’s 11 occupants to “flee in their night clothing”. One boarder was knocked unconscious when he jumped 15 feet from his second-story window, while another received severe cuts on his legs from crawling out a different window.48 49
In 1945, W.A. and Gertrude Croft bought the home from Harry Beerman.50 Real estate ads described the home as an “excellent rooming house” and “convenient to stores and cars”, concluding rather cynically that “This is a money-maker”.51
This may have been when the home received its most significant alterations. In August 1946, classified ads from the address listed a “Monarch coal cook stove, gas cook stove…2 practically new glass paneled doors, 2 used windows” for sale.52 Sounds like they were tearing the place up, doesn’t it?
An image from the 1970s (pictured below) shows that at some point, the home’s front porch had been partially filled in and screened, rooms had been clumsily added to the porch roof, and original windows were moved and replaced. I suspect those alterations could be attributed to the Crofts.
Vintage photograph of C.D. Hurt House, circa mid-1970s53 Inman Park was in the nascent stages of a rebirth in the 1970s, when affluent young professionals began restoring its old homes and joined forces to quash a proposed interstate highway that would have cut through the heart of the neighborhood.
Rundown and crime-ridden, “most people avoided the area”, the Constitution said in 1975, and not everyone was convinced the neighborhood was worth saving.54
A skeptical article from 1971 described Inman Park as “a festering little carbuncle on the hide of big old Atlanta”, with residents detailing the precarious condition of the area. One homeowner stated:
“If you’ve got a sense of humor, it’s a great place to live. Over here, when people shoot guns they usually aim into the ceiling. There’s a lot of drug traffic in the neighborhood with the kids. They are very wise, like New York street children. I took one little girl to Grady while she was on a bad LSD trip. She was in the middle of the street screaming and everybody else was afraid to do anything. Hard drugs are apparently very available.”55
Little wonder that the old Hurt house remained a target for crime — in January 1975, the home was burglarized again, with the thief swiping a tape recorder, clock, liquor, and 8 cartons of cigarettes.56
Despondency seems to have been the way of life in the home, and in August 1976, a 47-year-old boarder at the address died in the most Atlanta way possible: jumping from the top of the Hyatt Regency atrium.57
Return to Form
In 1981, the home was once again listed for sale, remaining on the market for nearly 2 years under two different agencies.
A succession of real estate advertisements sounded increasingly desperate, first promoting the house as “Single family OR townhouse. Partially restored. Clean & livable” with “POOL & wine cellar”. 58 Later ads proclaimed the home had “suburban amenities”.59
An ad for an open house breathlessly hyped: “13 Fireplaces, antique brass & beveled glass, arches, millwork & pocket doors!”60 Norrman always did like pocket doors.
A May 1982 ad claimed that “Practical people will love the close-in convenient location and the fact that it can be used for rental units.”61 That was oddly out of step with the changing character of the neighborhood, however — it wasn’t practical people who were buying in Inman Park at that point, but those invested in its resurgent vision.
Detail of Palladian window on C.D. Hurt House By the 1990s, Inman Park had completed its dramatic revitalization, drawing national acclaim, and the Hurt house finally returned to its intended use as a private dwelling.
The home has been fully renovated, with the mid-20th-century accretions on the front removed, and the porch and facade returned to a reasonable facsimile of its original appearance.
Inman Park is now one of the most exclusive and desirable neighborhoods in intown Atlanta, with homes like the Hurt house valued in the millions. More than a century after its conception, Joel Hurt’s development is finally a success.
And as for his brother’s house — well, it’s more significant than it appears.
References
- “City Notes.” The Atlanta Constitution, April 2, 1893, p. 23. ↩︎
- “Flowers Are A-Blooming.” The Atlanta Journal, May 5, 1893, p. 3. ↩︎
- “New Lewman Residence On Peachtree Place.” The Atlanta Constitution, October 6, 1901, p. 5. ↩︎
- “A Card”. The Atlanta Constitution, March 1, 1893, p. 10. ↩︎
- Atlanta City Directory Co.’s Greater Atlanta (Georgia) city directory (1894) ↩︎
- “Out For Himself.” The Atlanta Constitution, April 19, 1896, p. 20. ↩︎
- ibid. ↩︎
- “A Trifle Gossipy.” The Atlanta Journal, March 25, 1892, p. 1. ↩︎
- Atlanta City Directory Co.’s Greater Atlanta (Georgia) city directory (1893) ↩︎
- “Personal Mention.” The Atlanta Journal, September 12, 1892, p. 1. ↩︎
- “Senator Gordon.” The Atlanta Journal, September 24, 1892, p. 1. ↩︎
- “Flowers Are A-Blooming.” The Atlanta Journal, May 5, 1893, p. 3. ↩︎
- Atlanta City Directory Co.’s Greater Atlanta (Georgia) city directory (1893) ↩︎
- Marr, Christine V. and Sharon Foster Jones. Inman Park. Arcadia Publishing: Charleston, South Carolina, 2008. ↩︎
- “Society”. The Atlanta Journal, April 19, 1893, p. 2. ↩︎
- Atlanta City Directory Co.’s Greater Atlanta (Georgia) city directory (1893) ↩︎
- “Dr. Chas. Hurt Yields to Death”. The Atlanta Constitution, August 13, 1906, p. 1. ↩︎
- “Dr. C.D. Hurt Dead: Ill 8 Months”. The Atlanta Journal, August 13, 1906, p. 5. ↩︎
- “Carlton-Hurt” The Atlanta Constitution, February 15, 1895, p. 3. ↩︎
- “Today’s Talk in Society”. The Atlanta Journal, January 23, 1895, p. 7. ↩︎
- “Little Child’s Death.” The Atlanta Journal, July 6, 1897, p. 5. ↩︎
- “Death of Miss Hurt.” The Atlanta Constitution. July 20, 1898, p. 55. ↩︎
- “In Memory of Miss Mary Maude Hurt.” The Atlanta Constitution, July 24, 1898, p. 15. ↩︎
- “Death Has Come to Mr. E.F. Hurt”. The Atlanta Journal, September 18, 1899, p. 3. ↩︎
- “Mrs. Mary Hurt Is Dead After Years of Illness” The Atlanta Journal, October 23, 1902, p. 7. ↩︎
- “Miss Mary Hurt Is Dead After Long Illness”. The Atlanta Journal, October 22, 1902, p. 8. ↩︎
- “Miss Miller of N.C. Weds Dr. C.D. Hurt.” The Atlanta Journal, October 6, 1903, p. 10. ↩︎
- “Dr. Chas. Hurt Yields to Death”. The Atlanta Constitution, August 13, 1906, p. 1. ↩︎
- “Dr. C.D. Hurt Dead; Ill 8 Months”. The Atlanta Journal, August 13, 1906, p. 5. ↩︎
- “Wil of Dr. Hurt Has Been Probated”. The Atlanta Journal, August 16, 1906, p. 5. ↩︎
- “Big Auction Sale May 31.” The Atlanta Constitution, May 22, 1904, p. 8. ↩︎
- “Inman Park, Atlanta’s First Suburb, Has Developed Into One of the City’s Most Beautiful Resident Sections”. The Atlanta Journal, April 26, 1908, p. H5. ↩︎
- “Wanted–Boarders.” The Atlanta Constitution, December 8, 1907, p. 3D. ↩︎
- “Wanted–Boarders.” The Atlanta Constitution, January 5, 1908, p. 4. ↩︎
- “Wanted–Boarders.” The Atlanta Constitution, October 1, 1908, p. 10. ↩︎
- “For Rent–Rooms”. The Atlanta Journal, November 8, 1908, p. H9. ↩︎
- “For Rent by Edwin P. Ansley”. The Atlanta Constitution, March 14, 1909, p. 3. ↩︎
- “Scenes of Havoc Wrought By Last Night’s Wind”. The Atlanta Journal, March 25, 1909, p. 1. ↩︎
- “Burglar Visits Inman Park Home”. The Atlanta Constitution, February 7, 1910, p. 7. ↩︎
- “C.H. McCall’s Chickens Are Taken By Thieves”. The Atlanta Journal, July 2, 1918, p. 12. ↩︎
- “Mortuary”. The Atlanta Constitution, March 1, 1923, p. 24. ↩︎
- “Woman Is Indicted On Arson Charges After Fire in Atlanta”. The Atlanta Journal, June 5, 1925, p. 36. ↩︎
- “Arson Is Charged To Mrs. W.T. Hooks In Indictment”. The Atlanta Constitution, June 6, 1925, p. 7. ↩︎
- “Woman’s Trial Begins In Superior Court On Charge of Arson.” The Atlanta Journal, June 25, 1925, p. 5. ↩︎
- “Woman Is Freed On Arson Charge In Fulton Court”. The Atlanta Constitution, June 26, 1925, p. 3. ↩︎
- “Woman Is Acquitted On Charge of Setting Fire to House Here”. The Atlanta Journal, June 26, 1925, p. 20. ↩︎
- “Atlantian Scales Dresser To Escape Vicious Rat”. The Atlanta Journal, September 9, 1929, p. 4. ↩︎
- “11 Persons Escape, Two Are Injured As House Burns”. The Atlanta Journal, January 7, 1931, p. 14. ↩︎
- “Two Injured in Fire, Eleven Flee Building”. The Atlanta Constitution, January 8, 1931, p. 6. ↩︎
- “Adams-Cates Reports $62,600 August Sales”. The Atlanta Journal, August 12, 1945, p. 7-D. ↩︎
- “Homes for Sale, N.E.” The Atlanta Constitution, May 18, 1945, p. 23. ↩︎
- “Household Goods”. The Atlanta Constitution, August 24, 1946, p. 6. ↩︎
- Marr, Christine V. and Sharon Foster Jones. Inman Park. Arcadia Publishing: Charleston, South Carolina, 2008. ↩︎
- Tyson, Jean. “Rebirth: Old Neighborhoods Come Alive Again”. The Atlanta Journal and Constitution, April 20, 1975, p. 1-G. ↩︎
- Sparks, Andrew. “Turmoil Among the Turrets”. The Atlanta Journal and Constitution Magazine, March 7, 1971, p. 25. ↩︎
- “Crime Report”. The Atlanta Constitution, January 3, 1975, p. 4-C. ↩︎
- “Two Persons Leap to Deaths Here”. The Atlanta Constitution, August 22, 1976, p. 6-A. ↩︎
- “Bud Bailey Realty”. The Atlanta Constitution, April 29, 1981, Classified p. 12. ↩︎
- “Downtown Properties”. The Atlanta Constitution, April 4, 1982, Classified p. 16. ↩︎
- “Open House”. The Atlanta Journal, October 17, 1982, p. 30-J. ↩︎
- “Downtown Properties”. The Atlanta Journal, May 2, 1982, Classified p. 17. ↩︎
-
“Impressions of An Architect at the Fair” (1893) by E.G. Lind
The following letter was originally published in the October 1893 edition of The Southern Architect, and was written by Edmund George Lind (1829-1909), professionally known as E.G. Lind, a British-born architect who spent most of his life and career in Baltimore but practiced in Atlanta from 1883 to 1893.
Here, Lind reported on his visit to the annual convention of the American Institute of Architects in Chicago, held in July 1893, when the city was also hosting the massive World’s Columbian Exposition.
Chicago was then emerging as the epicenter for modern architecture in the United States — led by Burnham & Root, Louis Sullivan, and Frank Lloyd Wright — and the exposition became a watershed moment for the industry, ushering in the classically-inspired Beaux Arts style that dominated American architecture for decades.
Detail of ornament on Bayard Building – New York (1899) – designed by Louis Sullivan As Lind noted, the exposition was largely planned by John Wellborn Root, an architect who was born and raised in rural Georgia and practiced in Chicago with D.H. Burnham. Root pioneered the modern steel-framed skyscraper, and his only work in Georgia was the 8-story Equitable Building that was Atlanta’s first “skyscraper” when it opened in 1892.
In the early 1890s, architecture in the Southeast was still embarrassingly behind the rest of the country, and of the dozen or so architects then based in Atlanta, only Lind and G.L. Norrman are known to have visited the Chicago exposition.
Lind retired shortly after his Chicago visit, but Norrman immediately began incorporating elements of Chicago architecture into his designs and produced several strikingly modern buildings directly inspired by the Beaux Arts style and the works of Louis Sullivan and Burnham & Root.
Coming from the overgrown backwater of Atlanta, Lind was clearly dazzled by the bustling city of Chicago, at the time the second largest in the United States. Here he references his visit to Burnham & Root’s 21-story Masonic Temple — then the tallest building in Chicago — and Sullivan’s Auditorium Building, then the largest building in the United States.
For a man of the 19th century, Lind took a surprisingly progressive attitude toward women, praising the unnamed “lady architectress” of the Women’s Building (Sophia Hayden), at a time when the first wave of female architects prompted fierce opposition in the industry. Lind also noted that the women of Chicago were as “pushing and independent as the men”, concluding rather cheekily: “I like them.”
And just to prove that some things never change: Lind marvelled that Chicago actually buried its “unsightly” telegraph lines — Atlanta still refuses to bury its utility lines.
“Impressions of An Architect at the Fair”
The Editor of Southern Architect:
“When I left Atlanta for Chicago I fully intended transmitting you a prompt and faithful report of the proceedings of twenty seventh annual Convention of the A.I.A. and the World’s Congress of Architects, as well as some particulars of the World’s Fair and the city itself, but I have been in such a constant state of wonderment and weariment since my arrival, that I have felt equal to nothing except resting and getting nothing of that.
The fact is, anyone coming to Chicago and expecting to live on in the old fashioned way will be surprised to find he has got to do two days’ work in one all the year round or he will soon be nobody and nowhere. Everything here goes with a rush. It is worse than New York. Even the women go ahead as no other women can, if they do have big feet, which I have failed to notice; they make use of them, and are quite as pushing and independent as the men if not more so. I like them.
About the convention. I was greatly disappointed in finding so small an attendance of architects. I had expected hundreds where tens only were visible, and felt sure the great fair would bring such an abundance of architects from all parts of the world that a chance would be given of meeting many old friends, but the attendance was really slimmer than usual, while the foreign element was almost entirely wanting. One Englishman alone representing Great Britain, and a Japanese, Japan. France and Germany had representatives somewhere, but did not come within my ken. Many papers had been forwarded for reading to the convention which will be published with the proceedings in due course of time.
Monday, the 31st of July, President Edward H. Kendall of New York, opened the convention with an address. General business was transacted, and at an adjournment the members were lunched by the Illinois Chapter, and afterwards carried around the city in four splendid tallyho coaches. With a short stop for lunch on the return trip, this outing consumed a good four hours which were enjoyed immensely, as a good opportunity was afforded of viewing the best part of the city and boulevards. These latter are as beautiful as they are abundant, no expense being spared in the decoration and maintenance. I have never seen anywhere landscape gardening in such beauty and perfection.
Tuesday, 1st of August, at 10 a.m., another meeting of the institute was held and business closed. At 2 p.m., same day, the formal opening of the Congress of Architects took place, Mr. D.H. Burnham, chairman, reading a paper, “The Organization of the World’s Exposition,” in which he gave his deceased partner, Mr. Root, all the credit for the conception and arrangement of the buildings and general plan of the whole. More than once Mr. Root’s name was mentioned during the congress, and each time with the greatest of praise.
Wednesday more papers and more entertaining, concluding with an excursion on the Lake to Lincoln Park. Returning later in the evening to the World’s Fair, we witnessed from the boat a grand display of fireworks, which, with the brilliant electric lighting of the Fair buildings and grounds, made a perfect fairyland of the place.
By 10 o’clock we reached the wharf at the foot of Van Buren street, well filled for one day with lunches and sightseeing, and quite ready for rest till the morrow.
The next three days were filled in with reading papers on various subjects relating to architecture, to very small, but appreciative audiences. Then the “World’s Congress of Architects” closed forever.
Why is it architects display so little interest in the profession they practice and profess to love so well? Surely no other body of professional men would have manifested as much indifference as was displayed in this World’s Congress of Architects? To my mind it was both disheartening and humiliating.
The Convention and Congress over, I felt at liberty to indulge in the World’s Fair to my heart’s content and indulged accordingly, winding up each evening by being thoroughly wound up, and retiring at night too weary even for dreams.
It is not surprising one should become fatigued wandering about the Fair grounds, when we are reminded of the fact that Jackson Park and the Midway Plaisance, on which the buildings stand, contain over six hundred acres of land. This is no small surface to cover, and when you come to add to this the wandering in and out and up and down the various buildings, the fatigue encountered is immense.
To attempt even a slight description of the grounds and various buildings composing the Fair would fill a volume and then fall short of conveying an adequate idea of the immensity and beauty of the whole. No expense or labor has been spared, and the results achieved probably surpass any effort ever before made in a like direction. It is fairyland, it is Aladdin’s Palace eclipsed, it is perfection, and America can afford to feel proud.
The sight of the buildings alone was worth coming many miles to see, and I shall never feel sufficiently thankful that for once my bump of economy was overcome by my organ of extravagance, and I was led to visit this land of delectable delights, and spend time and money to so good a purpose.
One cannot fail to be struck with the care and attention bestowed upon the grounds and shrubbery; they are kept in beautiful condition and the floral designs are splendid. I was told $4,000,000 had been laid out on these grounds previous to their selection for the Exposition, and altogether they had cost $5,000,000.
The water front is about two miles in extent, beautifully adorned architecturally, presenting a magnificent appearance seen from Lake Michigan. In various parts throughout the grounds beautiful sheets of water are provided, symmetrically or naturally formed, adding greatly to the charm of the whole, and as some of these have boats and gondolas plying on them, the scene is bright and lively in the extreme.
When it is considered how many architects were employed to design the various buildings composing the Exposition, it is remarkable that so much harmony should prevail as a whole. No less than ten architects (three from New York, one from Boston, one from Kansas, and five from Chicago) and architectress has fingers in this glorious architectural pie, the lady architectress being the author of the very beautiful Woman’s building, or rather ther very beautiful building for women. If any one had a doubt before of woman’s fitness for the calling of architecture, let him doubt no longer.
On these buildings have been expended about $35,000,000. They cover twice the area of the Paris Exposition of 1889, and cost twice as much. The supply of electricity alone cost $1,000,000, furnishing 17,000 horse power for electric lighting. The supply of 24,000 horse power of steam is furnished by the largest and best arranged set of boilers ever seen, and one of the engines, the “Allis,” is twice the size of the celebrated Corliss engine used at the Centennial Exposition.
In short, the Fair is a wonder of wonders. At every turn the eye and mind are kept going, and it only requires a sufficient number of visit for the eye and mind to be gone altogether. Just fancy, in the matter of fine art alone there are thousands and thousands of pictures, acres upon acres, which would take a connoisseur twelve months at least to examine, and yet a few days has to suffice to run them over; and here let me say while I think of it, that the United States comes out ahead in art as she has done in everything else. Only a few years ago America was nowhere from an artistic standpoint; now she is in it to stay. Some people think she will some day take the lead, I think she has already done so.
It may be worthy of remark that more people are to be found outside the buildings than inside. The truth is the exhibits attract far less attention than the buildings and grounds. A bicyclist might ride up and down the corridors of all the buildings except the one devoted essentially to art, all day long, without inconveniencing the visitors, so few are there.
The propriety of erecting such expensive temporary buildings for exhibition purposes may be justly subjected to criticism, since the very beauty of the former detracts from the worth of the latter; indeed it is doubtful whether in the near future exhibitions will be found in sufficient number, to furnish an exposition that will be worth visiting if this practice is adhered to. I think it is equally doubtful whether such institutions as the “Midway Plaisance” are at all helpful to the progress of arts and sciences.
No visitor to the World’s Fair can fail to be struck with the immense crowds always to be found on the Plaisance, attracted by the numerous side shows and exhibitions with which that place abounds, most of them merely catch-penny “fakes,” and all making large draughts upon the time and purse of the sightseer. These international fairs were never intended to include such stuff, and it ought not to form any part of them, but they are there, people like it and pay for it; meanwhile the ambitious inventor and exhibitor is left out in the cold.
I cannot close this letter without a word for the city of Chicago proper. It is a wonder, both on account of its size and the magnitude and costliness of its buildings; everything is on such a large and magnificent scale that one doesn’t begin to appreciate what he sees until he sees it in detail. After going over the floor and ascending to the top of a few such buildings as the Masonic Temple and Auditorium, he feels their bigness, and ceases to wonder that there are millions in ’em.
Then the streets are straight and wide, and as a rule very clean for so large a city, while the principle ones are freed from those disfiguring telegraph poles so unsightly in most big cities, the telegraph wires being all put underground. The street car service is abundant and generally good, though to a Southerner, too little respect is paid to the comfort and safety of the passengers in the way of getting on and off, but one doesn’t expect everything. Then too, one is often puzzled to learn the names of the various streets for want of proper signs, which is a great evil in a city where people are in too great a hurry to stop and answer questions, and police are too invisible to be found when wanted, but will these drawbacks the visitor leaves the Windy City of the West with pleasant memories, and a thankful heart that he has escaped alive and whole, and with sufficient funds to carry him back home.”
E.G.L.
-
W.W. Abbot House – Louisville, Georgia
W.W. Abbot House – Louisville, Georgia – built before 1860; circa 1902 renovation designed by W.F. Denny Willis Franklin Denny II (1874-1905), professionally known as W.F. Denny, was an architect who practiced in Atlanta and the Southeastern United States in the late 19th and early 20th centuries.
Denny was born and raised in Louisville, Georgia (pronounced Lewis-ville), and studied architecture at Cornell University in New York. Unlike most Atlanta architects, Denny had actual talent. Like so many Atlanta architects, however, Denny died tragically — at the age of 31, following a “severe attack of pneumonia”.
Although his brief career lasted less than 10 years, Denny was prolific. His surviving projects can be found across Georgia, with at least one work outside the state: the Theisen Building in Pensacola, Florida.
Seven of Denny’s works still exist in Louisville, Georgia, including the Abbot House (pictured above) on Mulberry Street.
The Abbots were the ruling family of Louisville at the time, and their name is still found on every other building in the town. Denny remade the antebellum Abbot residence with the fine Neoclassical design seen today, although a definitive date for the project is elusive.
My best guess is that the Abbot house was renovated circa 1902, since Denny used the same design for the Fleming duBignon House (demolished, pictured below) in Atlanta, built on the corner of Peachtree and 14th Streets in 1902.
So, which came first: the Abbot design or the duBignon design? That’s a mystery yet to be solved.
Fleming duBignon House – Atlanta (1902) – designed by W.F. Denny -
Joel Chandler Harris House, “The Wren’s Nest” – West End, Atlanta (1883)
Joel Chandler Harris, “The Wren’s Nest” – West End, Atlanta (1883) – designed by Humphries & Norrman -
“Protection Against Fire” (1893) by E.G. Lind
The following article was originally published in the May 1893 edition of The Southern Architect , and was written by Edmund George Lind (1829-1909), professionally known as E.G. Lind, a British-born architect who spent most of his life and career in Baltimore, but practiced in Atlanta from 1883 to 1893.
Here, Lind offered his ideas for the prevention of building fires, a chief concern for both architects and the general public in the late 19th century, when dangerous wood-burning fireplaces were the primary method of heating, and deadly fires were tragically common.
Architects of the era were always eager to employ “fireproof” design solutions, and Lind specifically recommended the use of terra cotta flue liners in chimneys. Flue liners are now considered essential for fire prevention, yet as Lind noted, they were not in common use at the time, and would not be widely adopted until mandated by national building codes in the 20th century.
In early 1890s Atlanta, when construction was almost entirely unregulated, the city’s leading architects frequently called for greater government oversight of the building process, due in large part to fire safety concerns. In 1890, Thomas H. Morgan, a partner of the architectural firm Bruce & Morgan complained to a reporter of The Atlanta Constitution:
“Why take the matter of defective flues. Chief Joyner [W.R. “Cap” Joyner, Atlanta’s first fire chief] reports that last year forty-two of the fires were caused by defective flues, and the loss was $18,000. This sort of thing would be stopped if we had the right kind of building law. There has hardly been a board of building inspectors in the last five years that has not recommended to the council some sort of building law, but none was ever adopted and the thing goes on in this careless fashion. Time and again in my work of supervision I have had to make them take joists out of chimneys.”1
In the same news article, another Atlanta architect, G.L. Norrman, offered his own design solution for the construction of safer chimneys:
“There should always be eight inches of brick around flues where the brick touches the woodwork. It takes more brick, but it is the only safe way to build a chimney, and I always put it in the specifications. Architects, as a rule, do not build chimneys large enough. Usually they only put four inches of brick between a flue and woodwork. That is not sufficient.”1
In this article, Lind recommended that the local government hire a ramoneur to examine and clean every chimney in the city on an annual basis. Appealing to Atlanta’s pathological need to compare itself to other municipalities, Lind noted: “The plan is in operation in other cities, and Atlanta cannot well afford to be ‘out of the swim.’”
The city finally hired its first real building inspector in 1895 and began issuing construction permits that same year; it did not, however, hire a chimney inspector.
“Protection Against Fire“
“It is worthy of remark that more fires occur at the commencement and close of the cold winter months than at any other period of the year. This may be accounted for from the fact that the accumulated soot of the preceding winter, having been driven by wind and rain into corners and crevices of the chimney flue conveniently left by the bricklayer, as if “on mischief bent,” readily takes fire upon the first warming up, ending ofttimes in widespread conflagration.
A clean chimney flue would obviate all this, but how to clean it is the question.
It is perhaps not commonly known that zinc chips or scraps of zinc plate burned in a stove will readily cleanse the stove-pipe of all accumulated soot. The same cleansing process might be applied to ordinary fireplaces, but in the absence of all such precautionary measures, and as a valuable auxiliary, I would suggest the creation of a new officer to our city staff – that of chimney sweeper, or “Ramoneur,” which sounds better whose duty it shall be to examine every house and public building in the city during the summer months, and have each chimney flue properly swept and cleansed at a charge to the owner or tenant of say fifteen or twenty-five cents for each flue, the soot to be removed by the operator and used as a fertilizer on the neighboring farm lands, thus preventing fire consumption on the one hand and raising food for man’s consumption on the other.
This plan is in operation in other cities, and Atlanta cannot well afford to be “out of the swim.”
The sweeping can be readily effected by a round brush of whalebone or split rattan fitted to a bamboo rod three or four feet in length furnished with a screw joint, to which other rods may be attached, thus gradually forcing the brush up the whole length of the flue, first enclosing the fireplace opening after adding the second length of rod by means of close fitting canvas, in the center of which is a small hole for passing in the different sections of rod and operating the brush.
When the top of the chimney is reached, which may be readily ascertained by the Ramoneur or his assistant watching outside, by working the brush well around the flue all loose soot will be detached and the brush may be gradually lowered, disjointed and packed away for future use. The soot brought down to be put into close canvas sack and removed from the premises with little or no inconvenience to the tenant.
In some cities a wire brush is used, weighted with lead or iron, and let down from the top of the flue, instead of starting at the bottom as here recommended, but the great objection to this method is the roughness of the apparatus, which frequently detaches mortar from the sides of the flues, and opens the way for future mischief by exposing defective joints. In this connection we would remark that the best shape for all flues is a circle, and the best material for building them is vitrified clay or terra-cotta. These pipes may be made without collars or socks, should be glazed on the inside, and as they are put in place and enclosed with the brickwork they can be protected from falling mortar by a wooden mandrel or covered core, which may be removed as each fresh joint of pipe is fitted and then replaced.
The use of terra-cotta pipe for smoke flues is no new thing. The writer, in common with many other architects, has availed himself of them for years, and it would be well if their adoption was as common as the reverse is now the case. Little or no soot can cling to a glazed surface, and the joints are so few – less than one-eighth the number in a brick flue – that risk of fire from defective work, as well as the certainty of avoiding a smoky chimney would be almost obliterated.”
E.G.L.
References
- “Eight Millions More”, The Atlanta Constitution, April 13, 1890, p. 7.
-
First Baptist Church – Greensboro, Georgia (1904)
First Baptist Church – Greensboro, Georgia (1904) – designed by C. Walter Smith